| A/73/10 1813644E.docx (ENGLISH) | A/73/10 1813644C.docx (CHINESE) |
| A/73/10 | A/73/10 |
| United Nations | 联 合 国 |
| Report of the International Law
Commission | 国际法委员会报告 第七十届会议 |
| Seventieth session (30 April–1 June and 2
July–10 August 2018) | (2018年4月30日至6月1日和7月2日至8月10日) |
| General Assembly | 大 会 |
| Official Records Seventy-third Session
Supplement No. 10 (A/73/10) | 正式记录 第七十三届会议 补编第10号(A/73/10) |
| A/73/10 | A/73/10 |
| General Assembly | 大 会 |
| Official Records | 正式记录 |
| Seventy-third Session | 第七十三届会议 |
| Supplement No. 10 | 补编第10号(A/73/10) |
| Report of the International Law
Commission | 国际法委员会的报告 |
| Seventieth session (30 April–1 June and 2 July–10 August 2018) | 第七十届会议 (2018年4月30日至6月1日和7月2日至8月10日) |
| United Nations • New York, 2018 | 联合国·纽约，2018 |
| 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 2018. | 委员会报告的排版本将载入《2018年国际法委员会年鉴》第二卷第二部分。 |
| Chapter I Introduction | 第一章 导言 |
| 1. The International Law Commission held the first part of its seventieth session from 30 April to 1 June 2018 in New York and the second part from 2 July to 10 August 2018 at its seat at the United Nations Office at Geneva. | 1. 国际法委员会于2018年4月30日至6月1日在纽约举行了第七十届会议第一期会议，于2018年7月2日至8月10日在联合国日内瓦办事处委员会所在地举行了第二期会议。 |
| The session was opened by Mr. Georg Nolte,
Chair of the sixty-ninth session of the Commission. | 本届会议由委员会第六十九届会议主席格奥尔格·诺尔特先生主持开幕。 |
| 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. Patrícia 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. 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) |
| Mr. Evgeny Zagaynov (Russian Federation) | 耶夫格尼·扎加伊诺夫先生(俄罗斯联邦) |
| B. Casual vacancy | B. 临时空缺 |
| 3. At its 3391st meeting on 1 May 2018,
the Commission elected Mr. Evgeny Zagaynov (Russian Federation) to fill the
casual vacancy occasioned by the resignation of Mr. Roman A. Kolodkin. | 3. 在2018年5月1日举行的第3391次会议上，委员会选举耶夫格尼·扎加伊诺夫先生(俄罗斯联邦)填补罗曼·科洛德金先生辞职造成的临时空缺。 |
| C. Officers and the Enlarged Bureau | C. 主席团成员和扩大的主席团 |
| 4. At its 3390th meeting, on 30 April
2018, the Commission elected the following officers: | 4. 在2018年4月30日举行的第3390次会议上，委员会选出了下列主席团成员： |
| Chair: | 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) |
| First Vice-Chair: | 第一副主席： |
| Mr. Pavel Šturma (Czech Republic) | 帕维尔·斯图尔马先生(捷克共和国) |
| Second Vice-Chair: | 第二副主席： |
| Mr. Hong Thao Nguyen (Viet Nam) | 阮洪滔先生(越南) |
| Chair of the Drafting Committee: | 起草委员会主席： |
| Mr. Charles Chernor Jalloh (Sierra Leone) | 查尔斯·切尔诺·贾洛先生(塞拉利昂) |
| Rapporteur: | 报告员： |
| Ms. Patrícia Galvão Teles (Portugal) | 帕特里夏·加尔旺·特莱斯女士(葡萄牙) |
| 5. The Enlarged Bureau of the Commission
was composed of the officers of the present session, the previous Chairs of
the Commission and the Special Rapporteurs. | 5. 委员会扩大的主席团由本届会议主席团成员、委员会前任主席 和特别报告员组成。 |
| 6. At its 3390th meeting on 30 April
2018, the Commission set up a Planning Group composed of the following
members: Mr. Pavel Šturma (Chair), Mr. Yacouba Cissé, Ms. Concepción Escobar
Hernández, Mr. Juan Manuel Gómez Robledo, Mr. Claudio Grossman Guiloff, Mr.
Hussein A. Hassouna, Mr. Mahmoud D. Hmoud, Mr. Huikang Huang, 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. Ernest Petrič, Mr. Aniruddha
Rajput, Mr. August Reinisch, Mr. Juan José Ruda
Santolaria, Mr. Gilberto Vergne Saboia, Mr. Dire D. Tladi, Mr. Eduardo
Valencia-Ospina, Mr. Marcelo Vázquez-Bermúdez, Sir Michael Wood, Mr. Evgeny
Zagaynov and Ms. Patrícia Galvão Teles (ex officio). | 6. 委员会在2018年4月30日举行的第3390次会议上设立了由下列委员组成的规划组：帕维尔·斯图尔马先生(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、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、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、埃内斯特·彼得里奇先生、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、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、耶夫格尼·扎加伊诺夫先生和帕特里夏·加尔旺·特莱斯女士(当然成员)。 |
| D. Drafting Committee | D. 起草委员会 |
| 7. At its 3391st, 3395th, 3401st, 3409th,
3413th, 3431st and 3435th meetings, on 1, 4, 11, 22 and 29 May and on 17 and
24 July 2018, the Commission established a Drafting Committee, composed of
the following members for the topics indicated: | 7. 委员会在分别于2018年5月1日、4日、11日、22日和29日、7月17日和24日举行的第3391、3395、3401、3409、3413、3431和3435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) Peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens): Mr. Charles Chernor Jalloh (Chair), Mr. Dire D. Tladi (Special Rapporteur), Mr. Carlos J. Argüello Gómez, Mr. Yacouba Cissé, Ms. Concepción Escobar Hernández, Mr. Juan Manuel Gómez Robledo, Mr. Claudio Grossman Guiloff, Mr. Mahmoud D. Hmoud, Mr. Huikang Huang, Ms. Marja Lehto, Mr. Shinya Murase, Mr. Sean D. Murphy, Mr. Georg Nolte, Mr. Hong Thao Nguyen, Ms. Nilüfer Oral, Mr. Hassan Ouazzani Chahdi, Mr. Ki Gab Park, Mr. Ernest Petrič, Mr. Aniruddha Rajput, Mr. August Reinisch, Mr. Juan José Ruda Santolaria, Mr. Gilberto Vergne Saboia, Mr. Pavel Šturma, Mr. Marcelo Vázquez-Bermúdez, Sir Michael Wood, Mr. Evgeny Zagaynov and Ms. Patrícia Galvão Teles (ex officio). | (a) 一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)：查尔斯·切尔诺·贾洛先生(主席)、迪雷·特拉迪先生(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、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、黄惠康先生、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、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、埃内斯特·彼得里奇先生、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、马塞洛·巴斯克斯－贝穆德斯先生、迈克尔·伍德爵士、耶夫格尼·扎加伊诺夫先生和帕特里夏·加尔旺·特莱斯女士(当然成员)。 |
| (b) Subsequent agreements and subsequent practice in relation to the interpretation of treaties: Mr. Charles Chernor Jalloh (Chair), Mr. Georg Nolte (Special Rapporteur), Mr. Bogdan Aurescu, Mr. Yacouba Cissé, Mr. Juan Manuel Gómez Robledo, Mr. Claudio Grossman Guiloff, Mr. Mahmoud D. Hmoud, Mr. Shinya Murase, Mr. Sean D. Murphy, Mr. Hong Thao Nguyen, 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 Ms. Patrícia Galvão Teles (ex officio). | (b) 与条约解释相关的嗣后协定和嗣后实践：查尔斯·切尔诺·贾洛先生(主席)、格奥尔格·诺尔特先生(特别报告员)、波格丹·奥雷斯库先生、雅库巴·西塞先生、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、村濑信也先生、肖恩·墨菲先生、阮洪滔先生、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·伍德爵士和帕特里夏·加尔旺·特莱斯女士(当然成员)。 |
| (c) Identification of customary international law: Mr. Charles Chernor Jalloh (Chair), Sir Michael Wood (Special Rapporteur), Mr. Carlos J. Argüello Gómez, Mr. Bogdan Aurescu, Mr. Juan Manuel Gómez Robledo, Mr. Claudio Grossman Guiloff, Mr. Mahmoud D. Hmoud, Mr. Huikang Huang, Ms. Marja Lehto, Mr. Shinya Murase, 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. Gilberto Vergne Saboia, Mr. Dire D. Tladi, Mr. Marcelo Vázquez-Bermúdez and Ms. Patrícia Galvão Teles (ex officio). | (c) 习惯国际法的识别：查尔斯·切尔诺·贾洛先生(主席)、迈克尔·伍德爵士(特别报告员)、卡洛斯·阿圭略·戈麦斯先生、波格丹·奥雷斯库先生、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、黄惠康先生、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、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、迪雷·特拉迪先生、马塞洛·巴斯克斯－贝穆德斯先生和帕特里夏·加尔旺·特莱斯女士(当然成员)。 |
| (d) Provisional application of treaties: Mr. Charles Chernor Jalloh (Chair), Mr. Juan Manuel Gómez Robledo (Special Rapporteur), Mr. Carlos J. Argüello Gómez, Mr. Bogdan Aurescu, Mr. Yacouba Cissé, Ms. Concepción Escobar Hernández, Mr. Claudio Grossman Guiloff, Mr. Huikang Huang, Ms. Marja Lehto, Mr. Sean D. Murphy, Mr. Hassan Ouazzani Chahdi, Mr. Ki Gab Park, Mr. Aniruddha Rajput, Mr. August Reinisch, Mr. Juan José Ruda Santolaria, Mr. Pavel Šturma, Mr. Marcelo Vázquez-Bermúdez, Sir Michael Wood, Mr. Evgeny Zagaynov and Ms. Patrícia Galvão Teles (ex officio). | (d) 条约的暂时适用：查尔斯·切尔诺·贾洛先生(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、波格丹·奥雷斯库先生、雅库巴·西塞先生、康塞普西翁·埃斯科瓦尔·埃尔南德斯女士、克劳迪奥·格罗斯曼·吉洛夫先生、黄惠康先生、玛丽亚·莱赫托女士、肖恩·墨菲先生、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、马塞洛·巴斯克斯－贝穆德斯先生、迈克尔·伍德爵士、耶夫格尼·扎加伊诺夫先生和帕特里夏·加尔旺·特莱斯女士(当然成员)。 |
| (e) Protection of the atmosphere: Mr. Charles Chernor Jalloh (Chair), Mr. Shinya Murase (Special Rapporteur), Mr. Bogdan Aurescu, Mr. Claudio Grossman Guiloff, Mr. Huikang Huang, 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. Marcelo Vázquez-Bermúdez, Sir Michael Wood and Ms. Patrícia Galvão Teles (ex officio). | (e) 保护大气层：查尔斯·切尔诺·贾洛先生(主席)、村濑信也先生(特别报告员)、波格丹·奥雷斯库先生、克劳迪奥·格罗斯曼·吉洛夫先生、黄惠康先生、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、马塞洛·巴斯克斯－贝穆德斯先生、迈克尔·伍德爵士和帕特里夏·加尔旺·特莱斯女士(当然成员)。 |
| (f) Protection of the environment in relation to armed conflicts: Mr. Charles Chernor Jalloh (Chair), Ms. Marja Lehto, (Special Rapporteur), Mr. Bogdan Aurescu, Mr. Yacouba Cissé, Ms. Concepción Escobar Hernández, Mr. Juan Manuel Gómez Robledo, Mr. Claudio Grossman Guiloff, Mr. Mahmoud D. Hmoud, Mr. Huikang Huang, Mr. Shinya Murase, Mr. Sean D. Murphy, Mr. Hong Thao Nguyen, Ms. Nilüfer Oral, Mr. Ki Gab Park, Mr. Aniruddha Rajput, Mr. Juan José Ruda Santolaria, Mr. Gilberto Vergne Saboia, Sir Michael Wood and Ms. Patrícia Galvão Teles (ex officio). | (f) 与武装冲突有关的环境保护：查尔斯·切尔诺·贾洛先生(主席)、玛丽亚·莱赫托女士(特别报告员)、波格丹·奥雷斯库先生、雅库巴·西塞先生、康塞普西翁·埃斯科瓦尔·埃尔南德斯女士、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、黄惠康先生、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、朴基甲先生、阿尼鲁达·拉吉普特先生、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·伍德爵士和帕特里夏·加尔旺·特莱斯女士(当然成员)。 |
| (g) Succession of States in respect of State responsibility: Mr. Charles Chernor Jalloh (Chair), Mr. Pavel Šturma (Special Rapporteur), Mr. Carlos J. Argüello Gómez, Mr. Bogdan Aurescu, Ms. Concepción Escobar Hernández, Mr. Claudio Grossman Guiloff, Mr. Sean D. Murphy, Mr. Georg Nolte, Ms. Nilüfer Oral, Mr. Ki Gab Park, Mr. Ernest Petrič, Mr. Aniruddha Rajput, Mr. August Reinisch, Mr. Juan José Ruda Santolaria, Sir Michael Wood, Mr. Evgeny Zagaynov and Ms. Patrícia Galvão Teles (ex officio). | (g) 国家责任方面的国家继承：查尔斯·切尔诺·贾洛先生(主席)、帕维尔·斯图尔马先生(特别报告员)、卡洛斯·阿圭略·戈麦斯先生、波格丹·奥雷斯库先生、康塞普西翁·埃斯科瓦尔·埃尔南德斯女士、克劳迪奥·格罗斯曼·吉洛夫先生、肖恩·墨菲先生、格奥尔格·诺尔特先生、尼吕费尔·奥拉尔女士、朴基甲先生、埃内斯特·彼得里奇先生、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、迈克尔·伍德爵士、耶夫格尼·扎加伊诺夫先生和帕特里夏·加尔旺·特莱斯女士(当然成员)。 |
| 8. The Drafting Committee held a total of 32 meetings on the seven topics indicated above. | 8. 起草委员会就上列七项专题一共举行了32次会议。 |
| E. Working Groups | E. 工作组 |
| 9. At its 3394th meeting, on 3 May 2018, the Commission established a Working Group on protection of the environment in relation to armed conflicts: Mr. Marcelo Vázquez-Bermúdez (Chair), Ms. Marja Lehto (Special Rapporteur), Mr. Yacouba Cissé, Mr. Claudio Grossman Guiloff, Mr. Mahmoud D. Hmoud, Mr. Charles Chernor Jalloh, Mr. Shinya Murase, Mr. Sean D. Murphy, Mr. Hong Thao Nguyen, Ms. Nilüfer Oral, Mr. Hassan Ouazzani Chahdi, Mr. Aniruddha Rajput, Mr. Juan José Ruda Santolaria, Mr. Gilberto Vergne Saboia, Sir Michael Wood and Ms. Patrícia Galvão Teles (ex officio). | 9. 委员会在2018年5月3日举行的第3394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)、玛丽亚·莱赫托女士(特别报告员)、雅库巴·西塞先生、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、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、阿尼鲁达·拉吉普特先生、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·伍德爵士和帕特里夏·加尔旺·特莱斯女士(当然成员)。 |
| 10. At its 3404th meeting, on 16 May 2018, the Commission established a Working Group on identification of customary international law: Mr. Marcelo Vázquez-Bermúdez (Chair), Sir Michael Wood (Special Rapporteur), Mr. Carlos J. Argüello Gómez, Mr. Yacouba Cissé, Mr. Claudio Grossman Guiloff, 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. Aniruddha Rajput, Mr. August Reinisch, Mr. Juan José Ruda Santolaria, Mr. Gilberto Vergne Saboia and Ms. Patrícia Galvão Teles (ex officio). | 10. 委员会在2018年5月16日举行的第3404次会议上设立了习惯国际法的识别工作组：马塞洛·巴斯克斯－贝穆德斯先生(主席)、迈克尔·伍德爵士(特别报告员)、卡洛斯·阿圭略·戈麦斯先生、雅库巴·西塞先生、克劳迪奥·格罗斯曼·吉洛夫先生、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、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·萨博亚先生和帕特里夏·加尔旺·特莱斯女士(当然成员)。 |
| 11. The Planning Group established the following Working Groups: | 11. 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 (Chair), Mr. Bogdan Aurescu, Mr. Yacouba Cissé, Ms. Concepción Escobar Hernández, Mr. Juan Manuel Gómez Robledo, Mr. Claudio Grossman Guiloff, Mr. Hussein A. Hassouna, Mr. Huikang Huang, 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. Chris Maina Peter, 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, Mr. Amos S. Wako, Sir Michael Wood, Mr. Evgeny Zagaynov and Ms. Patrícia Galvão Teles (ex officio). | (a) 长期工作方案工作组：马哈茂德·哈穆德先生(主席)、波格丹·奥雷斯库先生、雅库巴·西塞先生、康塞普西翁·埃斯科瓦尔·埃尔南德斯女士、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、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、克里斯·马伊纳·彼得先生、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、阿莫斯·瓦科先生、迈克尔·伍德爵士、耶夫格尼·扎加伊诺夫先生和帕特里夏·加尔旺·特莱斯女士(当然成员)。 |
| (b) Working Group on methods of work: Mr. Hussein A. Hassouna (Chair), Mr. Bogdan Aurescu, Mr. Yacouba Cissé, Ms. Concepción Escobar Hernández, Mr. Claudio Grossman Guiloff, Mr. Huikang Huang, 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. Ernest Petrič, Mr. Aniruddha Rajput, Mr. August Reinisch, Mr. Juan José Ruda Santolaria, Mr. Gilberto Vergne Saboia, Mr. Pavel Šturma, Mr. Dire D. Tladi, Marcelo Vázquez-Bermúdez, Mr. Sir Michael Wood, Mr. Evgeny Zagaynov and Ms. Patrícia Galvão Teles (ex officio). | (b) 工作方法工作组：侯赛因·哈苏纳先生(主席)、波格丹·奥雷斯库先生、雅库巴·西塞先生、康塞普西翁·埃斯科瓦尔·埃尔南德斯女士、克劳迪奥·格罗斯曼·吉洛夫先生、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、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、埃内斯特·彼得里奇先生、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、耶夫格尼·扎加伊诺夫先生和帕特里夏·加尔旺·特莱斯女士(当然成员)。 |
| F. Secretariat | F. 秘书处 |
| 12. Mr. Miguel de Serpa Soares, Under-Secretary-General for Legal Affairs and United Nations Legal Counsel, represented the Secretary-General. | 12. 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 and Ms. Jessica Elbaz, Principal Legal Officers, served as Principal Assistant Secretaries to the Commission. | 首席法律干事阿诺德·普龙托先生和杰西卡·艾尔贝兹女士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·齐敏巴先生担任委员会高级助理秘书。 |
| Mr. David Nanopoulos and Mr. Francesco Messineo, Legal Officers, and Ms. Christiane Ahlborn and Mr. Bart Smit Duijzentkunst, Associate Legal Officers, served as Assistant Secretaries to the Commission. | 法律干事戴维·纳诺波利斯先生和弗朗切斯科·梅西内奥先生以及协理法律干事克里斯蒂安·阿尔伯恩女士和巴尔特·施密特·杜依赞特库恩斯特先生担任委员会助理秘书。 |
| G. Agenda | G. 议程 |
| 13. At its 3390th meeting, on 30 April
2018, the Commission adopted an agenda for its seventieth session consisting
of the following items: | 13. 委员会在2018年4月30日举行的第3390次会议上通过了第七十届会议议程，包括下列项目： |
| 1. Organization of the work of the
session. | 1. 会议工作安排。 |
| 2. Filling of casual vacancies. | 2. 填补临时空缺。 |
| 3. Immunity of State officials from
foreign criminal jurisdiction. | 3. 国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免。 |
| 4. Subsequent agreements and subsequent
practice in relation to the interpretation of treaties. | 4. 与条约解释相关的嗣后协定和嗣后实践。 |
| 5. Provisional application of treaties. | 5. 条约的暂时适用。 |
| 6. Identification of customary
international law. | 6. 习惯国际法的识别。 |
| 7. Protection of the environment in
relation to armed conflicts. | 7. 与武装冲突有关的环境保护。 |
| 8. Protection of the atmosphere. | 8. 保护大气层。 |
| 9. Peremptory norms of general
international law (jus cogens). | 9. 一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)。 |
| 10. Succession of States in respect of
State responsibility. | 10. 国家责任方面的国家继承。 |
| 11. Commemoration of the seventieth
anniversary of the Commission. | 11. 纪念委员会成立七十周年。 |
| 12. Programme, procedures and working
methods of the Commission and its documentation. | 12. 委员会的方案、程序和工作方法以及文件。 |
| 13. Date and place of the seventy-first
session. | 13. 第七十一届会议的日期和地点。 |
| 14. Cooperation with other bodies. | 14. 与其他机构的合作。 |
| 15. Other business. | 15. 其他事项。 |
| Chapter II Summary of the work of the
Commission at its seventieth session | 第二章 委员会第七十届会议工作概况 |
| 14. With respect to the topic “Subsequent
agreements and subsequent practice in relation to the interpretation of
treaties”, the Commission had before it the fifth report of the Special
Rapporteur (A/CN.4/715), as well as comments and observations received from
Governments (A/CN.4/712 and Add.1). | 14. 关于“与条约解释相关的嗣后协定和嗣后实践”专题，委员会收到了特别报告员的第五次报告(A/CN.4/715)，以及各国政府提出的评论和意见(A/CN.4/712和Add.1)。 |
| The fifth report addressed the comments
and observations made by States on the draft conclusions and commentaries
adopted on first reading and made recommendations for each draft conclusion. | 第五次报告阐述了各国就一读通过的各项结论草案及评注提出的评论和意见，并就每一项结论草案提出了建议。 |
| 15. The Commission adopted, on second
reading, a set of 13 draft conclusions, together with commentaries thereto,
on subsequent agreements and subsequent practice in relation to the
interpretation of treaties. | 15. 委员会二读通过了关于与条约解释相关的嗣后协定和嗣后实践的一套结论草案，共13项，包括评注。 |
| In accordance with article 23 of its
statute, the Commission recommended that the General Assembly take note in a
resolution of the draft conclusions on subsequent agreements and subsequent
practice in relation to the interpretation of treaties, annex the draft
conclusions to the resolution, and ensure their widest dissemination; | 委员会根据其《章程》第23条建议大会在一项决议中表示注意到关于与条约解释相关的嗣后协定和嗣后实践的结论草案，将结论草案作为该决议附件，并确保将其尽可能广泛传播； |
| and commend the draft conclusions,
together with the commentaries thereto, to the attention of States and all
who may be called upon to interpret treaties (chap. IV). | 还提请各国以及所有可能被要求解释条约的人注意这些结论草案及其评注(第四章)。 |
| 16. With regard to the topic
“Identification of customary international law”, the Commission had before it
the fifth report of the Special Rapporteur (A/CN.4/717), which addressed the
comments and observations made by States on the draft conclusions and
commentaries adopted on first reading, as well as ways and means for making
the evidence of customary international law more readily available. | 16. 关于“习惯国际法的识别”专题，委员会收到了特别报告员的第五次报告(A/CN.4/717)，其中阐述了各国就一读通过的各项结论草案及评注提出的评论和意见，以及使习惯国际法证据更易于查考的方法和手段。 |
| 17. The Commission also had before it an
updated bibliography on the topic contained in an addendum to that report
(A/CN.4/717/Add.1), the comments and observations received from Governments
(A/CN.4/716), and the memorandum by the Secretariat on ways and means for
making the evidence of customary international law more readily available
(A/CN.4/710). | 17. 委员会还收到了该报告的一项增编(A/CN.4/717/Add.1)所载关于该专题的订正文献目录，并收到了各国政府提出的评论和意见(A/CN.4/716)以及秘书处关于使习惯国际法的证据更易于查考的方法和手段的备忘录(A/CN.4/710)。 |
| 18. The Commission adopted, on second
reading, a set of 16 draft conclusions, together with commentaries thereto,
on identification of customary international law. | 18. 委员会二读通过了关于习惯国际法的识别问题的一套结论草案，共16项，包括评注。 |
| In accordance with article 23 of its
statute, the Commission recommended that the General Assembly, inter alia,
take note in a resolution of the draft conclusions on identification of
customary international law, annex the draft conclusions to the resolution,
and ensure their widest dissemination; | 委员会根据其《章程》第23条建议大会除其他外，在一项决议中表示注意到关于习惯国际法的识别的结论草案，将结论草案作为该决议附件，并确保将其尽可能广泛传播； |
| commend the draft conclusions, together
with the commentaries thereto, to the attention of States and all who may be called
upon to identify rules of customary international law; | 提请各国以及所有可能被要求识别习惯国际法规则的人注意这些结论草案及其评注； |
| and follow up the suggestions in the
Secretariat memorandum (chap. V). | 以及跟进秘书处备忘录中的建议(第五章)。 |
| 19. With respect to the topic “Protection
of the atmosphere”, the Commission had before it the fifth report of the
Special Rapporteur (A/CN.4/711), which was devoted to questions concerning
implementation, compliance and dispute settlement. | 19. 关于“保护大气层”专题，委员会收到了特别报告员的第五次报告(A/CN.4/ 711)，其中专门讨论了执行、遵约和争端解决方面的问题。 |
| 20. Following the debate in plenary, the
Commission decided to refer the three draft guidelines, as contained in the
Special Rapporteur’s fifth report, to the Drafting Committee. | 20. 委员会在全体会议辩论之后，决定将特别报告员第五次报告所载的三条指南草案转交起草委员会。 |
| As a result of its consideration of the
topic at the present session, the Commission adopted, on first reading, a
draft preamble and 12 draft guidelines, together with commentaries thereto,
on the protection of the atmosphere. | 在本届会议审议了该专题后，委员会一读通过了关于保护大气层的序言草案和12项指南草案及其评注。 |
| The Commission decided, in accordance
with articles 16 to 21 of its statute, to transmit the draft guidelines,
through the Secretary-General, to Governments and international organizations
for comments and observations, with the request that such comments and observations
be submitted to the Secretary-General by 15 December 2019 (chap. VI). | 委员会根据其《章程》第16至21条，决定通过秘书长向各国政府和国际组织转发这些指南草案，征求评论和意见，并要求在2019年12月15日前向秘书长提交这种评论和意见(第六章)。 |
| 21. With regard to the topic “Provisional
application of treaties”, the Commission had before it the fifth report of
the Special Rapporteur (A/CN.4/718), which continued the analysis of views
expressed by Member States, provided additional information on the practice
of international organizations, and addressed the topics of termination or suspension
of the provisional application of a treaty as a consequence of its breach,
and formulation of reservations and amendments. | 21. 关于“条约的暂时适用”专题，委员会收到了特别报告员的第五次报告(A/CN.4/718)，其中继续分析了会员国发表的看法，提供了关于国际组织的实践的补充资料，阐述了条约因违约而终止或暂停暂时适用、提具保留和修正案等专题。 |
| It also provided a bibliography on the
topic contained in an addendum to the report (A/CN.4/718/Add.1). | 该报告的一项增编(A/CN.4/718/Add.1)载有关于该专题的文献目录。 |
| In addition, the Commission had before it
the memorandum by the Secretariat reviewing State practice in respect of
treaties (bilateral and multilateral), deposited or registered in the last 20
years with the Secretary-General, that provide for provisional application,
including treaty actions related thereto (A/CN.4/707). | 此外，委员会还收到秘书处编写的备忘录(A/CN.4/707)，其中回顾了过去20年向秘书长交存或登记的载有暂时适用规定的(双边和多边)条约方面的国家实践，包括有关的条约行动。 |
| 22. Following the debate in plenary, the
Commission decided to refer the draft guidelines and model clauses proposed
by the Special Rapporteur, as well as the draft guidelines previously adopted
by the Commission, to the Drafting Committee. | 22. 在全体会议辩论之后，委员会决定将特别报告员提出的指南草案和示范条款以及委员会以前通过的指南草案转交起草委员会。 |
| Upon consideration of the report of the
Drafting Committee, the Commission adopted on first reading a set of 12 draft
guidelines, with commentaries thereto, entitled “Guide to Provisional
Application of Treaties”. | 在审议起草委员会的报告后，委员会一读通过了一套题为“条约的暂时适用指南”的指南草案，共12项，包括评注。 |
| The Commission decided, in accordance
with articles 16 to 21 of its statute, to transmit the draft guidelines,
through the Secretary-General, to Governments and international organizations
for comments and observations, with the request that such comments and
observations be submitted to the Secretary-General by 15 December 2019 (chap.
VII). | 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和国际组织转发这些指南草案，征求评论和意见，并要求在2019年12月15日前向秘书长提交这种评论和意见(第七章)。 |
| 23. With respect to the topic “Peremptory
norms of general international law (jus cogens)”, the Commission had before
it the third report of the Special Rapporteur (A/CN.4/714 and Corr.1), which
set out the previous consideration of the topic in the Commission and the
Sixth Committee, and discussed the consequences of peremptory norms of
general international law (jus cogens) in general, for treaty law and for the
law of State responsibility, as well as other effects of peremptory norms of
general international law (jus cogens). | 23. 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三次报告(A/CN.4/714和Corr.1)，其中说明了委员会和六委以往审议该专题的情况，讨论了一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)对条约法和国家责任法产生的总体后果以及一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的其他影响。 |
| The Commission subsequently decided to
refer draft conclusions 10 to 23 proposed in the report to the Drafting
Committee. | 委员会遂决定将报告中提出的结论草案10至23转交起草委员会。 |
| The Commission took note of the interim
reports of the Chair of the Drafting Committee on draft conclusions 8 and 9,
as well as 10 to 14, provisionally adopted by the Committee, which were
presented to the Commission for information only (chap. VIII). | 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8和9以及结论草案10至14的临时报告。
这些临时报告提交委员会仅供参考(第八章)。 |
| 24. With respect to the topic “Protection
of the environment in relation to armed conflicts”, the Commission had before
it the first report of the Special Rapporteur (A/CN.4/720 and Corr.1), which
addressed the protection of the environment in situations of occupation. | 24. 关于“与武装冲突有关的环境保护”专题，委员会收到了特别报告员的第一次报告(A/CN.4/720和Corr.1)，其中阐述了在占领局势下保护环境的问题。 |
| The report offered a general introduction
to the protection of the environment under the law of occupation and
addressed the complementarity between the law of occupation, international
human rights law and international environmental law. | 报告对依据占领法保护环境问题作了一般性介绍，并阐述了占领法、国际人权法与国际环境法之间的互补性。 |
| The report contained three draft
principles relating to the protection of the environment in situations of
occupation. | 报告载有有关在占领局势下保护环境的三项原则草案。 |
| Following the debate in plenary, the
Commission decided to refer the draft principles, as contained in the report
of the Special Rapporteur, to the Drafting Committee. | 在全体会议辩论之后，委员会决定将特别报告员报告所载原则草案转交起草委员会。 |
| The Commission subsequently received the
report of the Drafting Committee, and took note of draft principles 19 to 21,
provisionally adopted by the Drafting Committee. | 委员会后来收到起草委员会的报告，并注意到起草委员会暂时通过的原则草案19至21。 |
| Furthermore, the Commission provisionally
adopted draft principles 4, 6 to 8, and 14 to 18, which had been
provisionally adopted by the Drafting Committee at the sixty-eighth session,
together with commentaries thereto (chap. IX). | 此外，委员会还暂时通过了起草委员会在第六十八届会议上暂时通过的原则草案4、6至8以及14至18及其评注(第九章)。 |
| 25. With respect to the topic “Succession
of States in respect of State responsibility”, the Commission had before it
the second report of the Special Rapporteur (A/CN.4/719), which addressed the
legality of succession, the general rules on succession of States in respect
of State responsibility, and certain special categories of State succession
to the obligations arising from responsibility. | 25. 关于“国家责任方面的国家继承”专题，委员会收到了特别报告员的第二次报告(A/CN.4/719)，其中阐述了继承的合法性、关于国家责任方面的国家继承的一般规则以及责任所致义务方面的国家继承的特殊类别。 |
| Following the debate in plenary, the
Commission decided to refer draft articles 5 to 11, as contained in the
report of the Special Rapporteur, to the Drafting Committee. | 在全体会议辩论之后，委员会决定将特别报告员报告所载第5至第11条草案转交起草委员会。 |
| The Commission subsequently took note of
the interim report of the Chair of the Drafting Committee on draft article 1,
paragraph 2, and draft articles 5 and 6 provisionally adopted by the
Committee, which was presented to the Commission for information only (chap.
X). | 委员会后来注意到起草委员会主席关于起草委员会暂时通过的第1条第2款和第5条及第6条草案的临时报告。
该临时报告提交委员会仅供参考(第十章)。 |
| 26. With regard to the topic “Immunity of
State officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction” the Commission had before
it the sixth report of the Special Rapporteur (A/CN.4/722), which was devoted
to addressing procedural aspects of immunity from foreign criminal
jurisdiction, in particular, analysing the way in which procedural aspects
had been dealt with previously in the work of the Commission, how such
procedural aspects fit within the overall boundaries of the present topic and
the approach which the Special Rapporteur intended to follow when further
analysing procedural aspects; | 26. 关于“国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免”专题，委员会收到了特别报告员的第六次报告(A/CN.4/722)，其中专门阐述了外国刑事管辖豁免的程序问题，特别分析了之前委员会工作中对程序问题的处理方法，这种程序问题如何纳入本专题的总体范围，以及特别报告员在进一步分析程序问题时打算采用的办法； |
| and providing an analysis of three
components of procedural aspects related to the concept of jurisdiction,
namely: (a) timing; | 并分析了与管辖权概念有关的程序问题的三项内容，即：(a) 时间； |
| (b) kinds of acts affected; | (b) 受影响的行为种类； |
| and (c) the determination of immunity. | (c) 豁免的确定。 |
| There were no draft articles proposed for
consideration at the present session. | 没有提出供本届会议审议的条文草案。 |
| The debate of the Commission on the sixth
report was partial and will be completed next year (chap. XI). | 委员会关于第六次报告的辩论只进行了一部分，将于明年完成(第十一章)。 |
| 27. Concerning the seventieth anniversary
of the Commission, it held commemorative events, in New York on 21 May 2018,
and in Geneva on 5 and 6 July 2018, under the theme “70 years of the
International Law Commission — Drawing a balance for the future”. | 27. 关于国际法委员会成立七十周年，委员会于2018年5月21日在纽约、2018年7月5日和6日在日内瓦举行了纪念活动，主题为“国际法委员会70年――总结过去，展望未来”。 |
| The commemorative events in both New York
and Geneva consisted of two segments, a solemn part, followed by a series of
panels discussions. | 纽约和日内瓦的纪念活动都分为两部分，第一部分为庄严仪式，随后为一系列小组讨论。 |
| The keynote address in New York was
delivered by Mr. Nico Schrijver, Professor of Public International Law,
Grotius Centre for International Legal Studies, Leiden University, and
President of the Institute of International Law. | 在纽约由莱顿大学格劳修斯国际法研究中心国际公法教授、国际法学会主席尼科·斯赫雷弗发表主旨演讲； |
| The keynote address in Geneva was
delivered by Mr. Abdulqawi Ahmed Yusuf, President of the International Court
of Justice (chap. XII). | 在日内瓦由国际法院院长阿布杜勒卡维·艾哈迈德·优素福先生发表主旨演讲(第十二章)。 |
| 28. As regards “Other decisions and
conclusions of the Commission”, the Commission decided to include the topic
“General principles of law” in its programme of work and to appoint Mr.
Marcelo Vázquez-Bermúdez as Special Rapporteur for the topic (chap. XIII,
sect. A). | 28. 关于“委员会的其他决定和结论”，委员会决定将“一般法律原则”专题列入工作方案，并决定任命马塞洛·巴斯克斯－贝穆德斯先生为该专题特别报告员(第十三章A节)。 |
| 29. The Commission re-established a
Planning Group to consider its programme, procedures and working methods,
which in turn decided to re-establish the Working Group on the long-term
programme of work, chaired by Mr. Mahmoud D. Hmoud, and the Working Group on
methods of work, chaired by Mr. Hussein A. Hassouna (chap. XIII, sect. C). | 29. 委员会重新设立了一个规划组，以审议委员会的方案、程序和工作方法，规划组又决定重新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)(第十三章C节)。 |
| The Commission decided to include in its
long-term programme of work the topics (a) Universal criminal jurisdiction
and (b) Sea-level rise in relation to international law (chap. XIII, sect.
C.1, and annexes A and B). | 委员会决定在长期工作方案中列入以下专题：(a) 普遍刑事管辖权； (b) 海平面上升与国际法有关的问题(第十三章C.1节及附件A和B)。 |
| 30. The Commission continued its
traditional exchanges of information with the Inter-American Juridical
Committee and the Committee of Legal Advisers on Public International Law of
the Council of Europe. | 30. 委员会继续与美洲法律委员会和欧洲委员会国际公法法律顾问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. XIII, sect. E). | 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(第十三章E节)。 |
| 31. The Commission decided that its
seventy-first session would be held in in Geneva from 29 April to 7 June and
from 8 July to 9 August 2019 (chap. XIII, sect. D). | 31. 委员会决定其第七十一届会议于2019年4月29日至6月7日及7月8日至8月9日在日内瓦举行(第十三章D节)。 |
| Chapter III Specific issues on which
comments would be of particular interest to the Commission | 第三章 委员会特别想听取意见的具体问题 |
| 32. The Commission would welcome any
information on the following issues, by 31 December 2018, in order for it to
be taken into account in the respective reports of the Special Rapporteurs. | 32. 委员会欢迎在2018年12月31日之前就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. Peremptory norms of general
international law (jus cogens) | A. 一般国际法强制性规范(强行法) |
| 33. The Commission considers as still
relevant the request for information contained in chapter III of the report
of its sixty-seventh session (2015) on the topic “Peremptory norms of general
international law (jus cogens)”, and would welcome any additional
information. | 33. 委员会认为，第六十七届会议(2015年)报告关于“一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)”专题的第三章中所载的资料征集请求 仍然具有相关性，并欢迎提供任何补充资料。 |
| B. Immunity of State officials from
foreign criminal jurisdiction | B. 国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免 |
| 34. The Commission would welcome any
information that States could provide on their national legislation and
practice (of a judicial, administrative or any other nature) concerning
procedures for dealing with immunity, in particular the invocation and waiver
of immunity, as well as on mechanisms for communication, consultation,
cooperation and international judicial assistance that they may use in
relation to situations in which the immunity of State officials from foreign
criminal jurisdiction is being or may be examined by their national
authorities. | 34. 委员会欢迎各国提供资料，说明其处理豁免的程序办法、特别是援引和放弃豁免方面的国内法律和做法(司法、行政和其他措施)，以及在国家当局正在审议或可能审议国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免问题的情况下可资利用的交流、协商、合作和国际司法协助机制。 |
| Similarly, it would be useful to have any
information that international organizations could provide on international
cooperation mechanisms which, within their area of competence, may affect
immunity of State officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction. | 同样，若国际组织能够提供资料，说明在其职权范围内可能影响国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免的国际合作机制，也将有所裨益。 |
| C. Protection of the environment in
relation to armed conflicts | C. 与武装冲突有关的环境保护 |
| 35. The Commission considers as still
relevant the request for information contained in chapter III of the report
of its sixty-seventh session (2015) on this topic, and would welcome any
additional information in this regard. | 35. 委员会认为，第六十七届会议(2015年)报告关于本专题的第三章中所载的资料征集请求 仍然具有相关性，并欢迎就此提供任何补充资料。 |
| Furthermore, the Commission would
appreciate receiving any information States may be in the position to provide
concerning responsibility, liability or reparation for harm caused to the
environment in relation to armed conflict, inter alia case law or agreements
or arrangements between the parties. | 此外，委员会希望各国能够提供资料，说明因武装冲突而对环境造成的损害方面的责任、义务和补偿情况，例如判例法或当事方之间的协议或安排等。 |
| D. Succession of States in respect of
State responsibility | D. 国家责任方面的国家继承 |
| 36. The Commission would appreciate being
provided by States with information on their practice relevant to the
succession of States in respect of State responsibility. | 36. 委员会希望各国提供资料，说明其与国家责任方面的国家继承有关的做法。 |
| The Commission would particularly
appreciate receiving examples of: | 委员会特别希望收到以下方面的实例： |
| (a) treaties, including relevant
multilateral and bilateral agreements; | (a) 条约，包括相关的多边和双边协定； |
| (b) domestic law relevant to the topic,
including legislation implementing multilateral or bilateral agreements; | (b) 与本专题有关的国内法律，包括执行多边或双边协定的国内法律； |
| (c) decisions of domestic, regional and
subregional courts and tribunals addressing issues involving the succession
of States in respect of State responsibility. | (c) 国内、区域和次区域法院和法庭在处理涉及国家责任方面的国家继承有关事宜过程中发布的决定。 |
| E. New topics | E. 新专题 |
| 37. The Commission decided to include in
its long-term programme of work two new topics, namely (a) Universal criminal
jurisdiction; | 37. 委员会决定在长期工作方案中纳入两个新的专题，即：(a) 普遍刑事管辖权； |
| and (b) Sea-level rise in relation to
international law. | 及(b) 海平面上升与国际法有关的问题。 |
| In the selection of its 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。 |
| 38. 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. | 38. 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。 |
| Chapter IV Subsequent agreements and
subsequent practice in relation to the interpretation of treaties | 第四章 与条约解释相关的嗣后协定和嗣后实践 |
| A. Introduction | A. 导言 |
| 39. The Commission, at its sixtieth
session (2008), decided to include the topic “Treaties over time” in its
programme of work and to establish at its following session a Study Group on
the topic. | 39. 委员会第六十届会议(2008年)决定将“条约随时间演变”专题列入其工作方案，并决定在下一届会议上设立一个专题研究组。 |
| At its sixty-first session (2009), the
Commission established the Study Group on treaties over time, chaired by Mr.
Georg Nolte. | 委员会第六十一届会议(2009年)设立了条约随时间演变专题研究组，由格奥尔格·诺尔特先生担任主席。 |
| At that session, the Study Group focused
its discussions on the identification of the issues to be covered, the
working methods of the Study Group and the possible outcome of the
Commission’s work on the topic. | 在该届会议上，研究组的讨论侧重于确定要涵盖的问题、研究组的工作方法和委员会关于该专题的工作可能产生的成果。 |
| 40. From the sixty-second to the
sixty-fourth session (2010–2012), the Study Group was reconstituted under the
chairmanship of Mr. Georg Nolte. | 40. 从第六十二届至第六十四届会议(2010年至2012年)，委员会都重新设立了研究组，由格奥尔格·诺尔特先生任主席。 |
| The Study Group examined three reports
presented informally by the Chair, which addressed, respectively, the
relevant jurisprudence of the International Court of Justice and arbitral
tribunals of ad hoc jurisdiction; | 研究组审查了主席非正式提交的三份报告，这些报告分别讨论了国际法院和具有特别管辖权的仲裁法庭的相关判例； |
| the jurisprudence under special regimes
relating to subsequent agreements and subsequent practice; | 在特殊制度下与嗣后协定和嗣后实践有关的判例； |
| and the subsequent agreements and
subsequent practice of States outside judicial and quasi-judicial
proceedings. | 以及在司法和准司法程序外的国家嗣后协定和嗣后实践。 |
| 41. At the sixty-fourth session (2012),
the Commission, on the basis of a recommendation of the Study Group, decided:
(a) to change, with effect from its sixty-fifth session (2013), the format of
the work on this topic as suggested by the Study Group; | 41. 在第六十四届会议上(2012年)，委员会根据研究组的建议 决定：(a) 按照研究组的建议，自第六十五届会议(2013年)起改变此专题的工作方式； |
| and (b) to appoint Mr. Georg Nolte as
Special Rapporteur for the topic “Subsequent agreements and subsequent
practice in relation to the interpretation of treaties”. | (b) 任命格奥尔格·诺尔特先生为“与条约解释相关的嗣后协定和嗣后实践”专题特别报告员。 |
| 42. From its sixty-fifth (2013) to
sixty-eighth sessions (2016), the Commission considered the topic on the
basis of four successive reports submitted by the Special Rapporteur. | 42. 从第六十五届会议(2013年)到第六十八届会议(2016年)，委员会在特别报告员接连提交的四份报告的基础上审议了这一专题。 |
| 43. At its sixty-eighth session (2016),
the Commission adopted on first reading a set of 13 draft conclusions on
subsequent agreements and subsequent practice in relation to the
interpretation of treaties, together with commentaries thereto. | 43. 在第六十八届会议(2016年)上，委员会一读通过了一套关于与条约解释相关的嗣后协定和嗣后实践的结论草案，共13项，包括评注。 |
| It decided, in accordance with articles
16 to 21 of its statute, to transmit the draft conclusions, through the
Secretary-General, to Governments for comments and observations. | 委员会根据其《章程》第16至第21条决定，通过秘书长向各国政府转发这些结论草案，征求其评论和意见。 |
| B. Consideration of the topic at the
present session | B. 本届会议审议此专题的情况 |
| 44. At the present session, the
Commission had before it the fifth report of the Special Rapporteur
(A/CN.4/715), as well as comments and observations received from Governments
(A/CN.4/712 and Add.1). | 44. 委员会本届会议收到了特别报告员的第五次报告(A/CN.4/715)以及各国政府提交的评论和意见(A/CN.4/712和Add.1)。 |
| 45. At its 3390th, 3391st and 3393rd to
3396th meetings, from 30 April to 7 May 2018, the Commission considered the
fifth report of the Special Rapporteur and instructed the Drafting Committee
to commence the second reading of the entire set of draft conclusions on the
basis of the proposals of the Special Rapporteur, taking into account the
comments and observations of Governments and the debate in plenary on the
Special Rapporteur’s report. | 45. 在2018年4月30日至5月7日举行的第3390、第3391以及第3393至第3396次会议上，委员会审议了特别报告员的第五次报告，并指示起草委员会根据特别报告员的建议开始对整套结论草案进行二读，同时考虑各国政府的评论和意见，以及全体会议上对特别报告员的报告进行的辩论情况。 |
| 46. The Commission considered the report
of the Drafting Committee (A/CN.4/L.907) at its 3406th meeting, held on 18
May 2018, and adopted the entire set of draft conclusions on subsequent
agreements and subsequent practice in relation to the interpretation of
treaties on second reading (sect. E.1 below). | 46. 委员会在2018年5月18日举行的第3406次会议上审议了起草委员会的报告(A/CN.4/L.907)，并二读通过了关于与条约解释相关的嗣后协定和嗣后实践的整套结论草案(下文E.1节)。 |
| 47. At its 3444th to 3448th meetings,
from 6 to 8 August 2018, the Commission adopted the commentaries to the
aforementioned draft conclusions (sect. E.2 below). | 47. 委员会在2018年8月6日至8日举行的第3444至第3448次会议上，通过了上述结论草案的评注(下文E.2节)。 |
| 48. In accordance with its statute, the
Commission submits the draft conclusions to the General Assembly, together
with the recommendation set out below. | 48. 委员会根据其《章程》向大会提交该结论草案以及下述建议。 |
| C. Recommendation of the Commission | C. 委员会的建议 |
| 49. At its 3448th meeting, on 8 August
2018, the Commission decided, in accordance with article 23 of its statute,
to recommend that the General Assembly: | 49. 在2018年8月8日举行的第3448次会议上，委员会根据其章程第23条，决定建议大会： |
| (a) take note in a resolution of the
draft conclusions on subsequent agreements and subsequent practice in
relation to the interpretation of treaties, annex the draft conclusions to
the resolution, and ensure their widest dissemination; and | (a) 在一项决议中注意到关于与条约解释相关的嗣后协定和嗣后实践的结论草案，在决议中附上该结论草案，并确保对其进行最广泛的传播； |
| (b) commend the draft conclusions,
together with the commentaries thereto, to the attention of States and all
who may be called upon to interpret treaties. | (b) 提请各国及所有可能受命解释条约者注意该结论草案及其评注。 |
| D. Tribute to the Special Rapporteur | D. 向特别报告员表示感谢 |
| 50. At its 3448th meeting, held on 8
August 2018, the Commission, after adopting the draft conclusions on
subsequent agreements and subsequent practice in relation to the
interpretation of treaties, adopted the following resolution by acclamation: | 50. 在2018年8月8日举行的第3448次会议上，委员会在通过了关于与条约解释相关的嗣后协定和嗣后实践的结论草案之后，以鼓掌方式通过了以下决议： |
| “The International Law Commission, | “国际法委员会， |
| “Having adopted the draft conclusions on
subsequent agreements and subsequent practice in relation to the
interpretation of treaties, | “通过了关于与条约解释相关的嗣后协定和嗣后实践的结论草案， |
| “Expresses to the Special Rapporteur, Mr.
Georg Nolte, its deep appreciation and warm congratulations for the
outstanding contribution he has made to the preparation of the draft
conclusions through his tireless efforts and devoted work, and for the
results achieved in the elaboration of the draft conclusions on subsequent
agreements and subsequent practice in relation to the interpretation of
treaties.” | “向特别报告员格奥尔格·诺尔特先生表示深挚感谢和热烈祝贺，感谢并祝贺他以不懈的努力和专注的工作为起草结论草案做出杰出贡献，并使关于与条约解释相关的嗣后协定和嗣后实践的结论草案的拟订工作取得成果。 |
| E. Text of the draft conclusions on
subsequent agreements and subsequent practice in relation to the
interpretation of treaties | ” E. 关于与条约解释相关的嗣后协定和嗣后实践的结论草案案文 |
| 1. Text of the draft conclusions | 1. 结论草案案文 |
| 51. The text of the draft conclusions
adopted by the Commission, on second reading, at its seventieth session is
reproduced below. | 51. 委员会第七十届会议二读通过的结论草案案文载录如下。 |
| Subsequent agreements and subsequent
practice in relation to the interpretation of treaties | 与条约解释相关的嗣后协定和嗣后实践 |
| Part One Introduction | 第一部分 导言 |
| Conclusion 1 Scope | 结论1 范围 |
| The present draft conclusions concern the
role of subsequent agreements and subsequent practice in the interpretation
of treaties. | 本结论草案涉及嗣后协定和嗣后实践在条约解释中的作用。 |
| Part Two Basic rules and definitions | 第二部分 基本规则和定义 |
| Conclusion 2 General rule and means of
treaty interpretation | 结论2 条约解释通则和资料 |
| 1. Articles 31 and 32 of the Vienna
Convention on the Law of Treaties set forth, respectively, the general rule
of interpretation and the recourse to supplementary means of interpretation. | 1. 《维也纳条约法公约》第三十一和第三十二条分别规定了解释条约的通则和补充的解释资料的使用。 |
| These rules also apply as customary
international law. | 这些规则也作为习惯国际法适用。 |
| 2. A treaty shall be interpreted in good
faith in accordance with the ordinary meaning to be given to its terms in
their context and in the light of its object and purpose, as provided in
article 31, paragraph 1. | 2. 如第三十一条第一款之规定，条约应按照其用语按上下文所具有的通常含义并参照该条约的目的和宗旨善意地予以解释。 |
| 3. Article 31, paragraph 3, provides,
inter alia, that there shall be taken into account, together with the
context, (a) any subsequent agreement between the parties regarding the
interpretation of the treaty or the application of its provisions; | 3. 第三十一条第三款除其他外规定，应与上下文一并考虑到的还有：(a) 缔约方之间嗣后所订关于条约的解释或其规定的适用的任何协定； |
| and (b) any subsequent practice in the
application of the treaty which establishes the agreement of the parties
regarding its interpretation. | 和(b) 在条约适用方面确定各缔约方对条约的解释意思一致的任何嗣后实践。 |
| 4. Recourse may be had to other
subsequent practice in the application of the treaty as a supplementary means
of interpretation under article 32. | 4. 可将条约适用方面的其他嗣后实践作为第三十二条所指的补充的解释资料加以使用。 |
| 5. The interpretation of a treaty
consists of a single combined operation, which places appropriate emphasis on
the various means of interpretation indicated, respectively, in articles 31
and 32. | 5. 条约的解释是单一的综合行动，这一行动对第三十一和第三十二条分别载明的各种解释资料各给予适当的强调。 |
| Conclusion 3 Subsequent agreements and
subsequent practice as authentic means of interpretation | 结论3 以嗣后协定和嗣后实践作为作准的解释资料 |
| Subsequent agreements and subsequent
practice under article 31, paragraph 3 (a) and (b), being objective evidence
of the understanding of the parties as to the meaning of the treaty, are
authentic means of interpretation, in the application of the general rule of
treaty interpretation reflected in article 31. | 第三十一条第三款(a)和(b)项所指的嗣后协定和嗣后实践是缔约方对条约含义理解的客观证据，因而是适用第三十一条所反映的条约解释通则时的作准的解释资料。 |
| Conclusion 4 Definition of subsequent
agreement and subsequent practice | 结论4 嗣后协定和嗣后实践的定义 |
| 1. A subsequent agreement as an authentic
means of interpretation under article 31, paragraph 3 (a), is an agreement
between the parties, reached after the conclusion of a treaty, regarding the
interpretation of the treaty or the application of its provisions. | 1. 嗣后协定作为第三十一条第三款(a)项之下作准的解释资料是指缔约方在条约缔结后达成的关于解释条约或适用条约规定的协定。 |
| 2. A subsequent practice as an authentic
means of interpretation under article 31, paragraph 3 (b), consists of
conduct in the application of a treaty, after its conclusion, which
establishes the agreement of the parties regarding the interpretation of the
treaty. | 2. 嗣后实践作为第三十一条第三款(b)项之下作准的解释资料是指条约缔结后确定各缔约方对条约的解释意思一致的适用条约的行为。 |
| 3. A subsequent practice as a
supplementary means of interpretation under article 32 consists of conduct by
one or more parties in the application of the treaty, after its conclusion. | 3. 嗣后实践作为第三十二条之下的补充的解释资料是指条约缔结后一个或多个缔约方适用条约的行为。 |
| Conclusion 5 Conduct as subsequent
practice | 结论5 作为嗣后实践的行为 |
| 1. Subsequent practice under articles 31
and 32 may consist of any conduct of a party in the application of a treaty,
whether in the exercise of its executive, legislative, judicial or other
functions. | 1. 第三十一和第三十二条所指的嗣后实践可包括某一缔约方的任何适用条约的行为，不论此行为是行使行政、立法、司法还是其他职能。 |
| 2. Other conduct, including by non-State
actors, does not constitute subsequent practice under articles 31 and 32. | 2. 其他行为，包括非国家行为体的行为，不构成第三十一和第三十二条所指的嗣后实践。 |
| Such conduct may, however, be relevant
when assessing the subsequent practice of parties to a treaty. | 然而此种行为在评估条约缔约方的嗣后实践时可能相关。 |
| Part Three General aspects | 第三部分 一般方面 |
| Conclusion 6 Identification of subsequent
agreements and subsequent practice | 结论6 嗣后协定和嗣后实践的识别 |
| 1. The identification of subsequent
agreements and subsequent practice under article 31, paragraph 3, requires,
in particular, a determination whether the parties, by an agreement or a
practice, have taken a position regarding the interpretation of the treaty. | 1. 为识别第三十一条第三款所指的嗣后协定和嗣后实践，尤其须确定缔约方是否通过协定或实践就条约的解释采取了立场。 |
| Such a position is not taken if the
parties have merely agreed not to apply the treaty temporarily or agreed to
establish a practical arrangement (modus vivendi). | 如果缔约方只是商定暂不适用条约，或商定确立一种实际安排(临时协议)，便没有采取这种立场。 |
| 2. Subsequent agreements and subsequent
practice under article 31, paragraph 3, may take a variety of forms. | 2. 第三十一条第三款所指的嗣后协定和嗣后实践可能具有各种形式。 |
| 3. The identification of subsequent
practice under article 32 requires, in particular, a determination whether
conduct by one or more parties is in the application of the treaty. | 3. 为识别第三十二条所指的嗣后实践，尤其须确定一个或多个缔约方的行为是否处在适用条约过程之中。 |
| Conclusion 7 Possible effects of
subsequent agreements and subsequent practice in interpretation | 结论7 嗣后协定和嗣后实践可能对解释产生的影响 |
| 1. Subsequent agreements and subsequent
practice under article 31, paragraph 3, contribute, in their interaction with
other means of interpretation, to the clarification of the meaning of a
treaty. | 1. 第三十一条第三款所指的嗣后协定和嗣后实践经与其他解释资料互动，有助于澄清条约的含义。 |
| This may result in narrowing, widening,
or otherwise determining the range of possible interpretations, including any
scope for the exercise of discretion which the treaty accords to the parties. | 这可导致可能的解释范围、包括条约给予缔约方行使自由裁量权的任何范围变窄、变宽或受到另外的影响。 |
| 2. Subsequent practice under article 32
may also contribute to the clarification of the meaning of a treaty. | 2. 第三十二条所指的嗣后实践也可能有助于澄清条约的含义。 |
| 3. It is presumed that the parties to a
treaty, by an agreement or a practice in the application of the treaty,
intend to interpret the treaty, not to amend or to modify it. | 3. 可以推定，条约缔约方在适用条约方面达成协定或采用一种实践，其用意是为了解释条约，而不是修正或修改条约。 |
| The possibility of amending or modifying
a treaty by subsequent practice of the parties has not been generally
recognized. | 缔约方通过嗣后实践修正或修改条约的可能性尚未得到普遍认可。 |
| The present draft conclusion is without
prejudice to the rules on the amendment or modification of treaties under the
Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties and under customary international
law. | 本条结论草案不影响《维也纳条约法公约》和习惯国际法关于修正或修改条约的规则。 |
| Conclusion 8 Interpretation of treaty
terms as capable of evolving over time | 结论8 能够随时间演变的条约用语的解释 |
| Subsequent agreements and subsequent
practice under articles 31 and 32 may assist in determining whether or not
the presumed intention of the parties upon the conclusion of the treaty was
to give a term used a meaning which is capable of evolving over time. | 第三十一和第三十二条所指的嗣后协定和嗣后实践可协助确定缔约方在缔结条约之时的推定意图是不是赋予用语以能够随时间演变的含义。 |
| Conclusion 9 Weight of subsequent
agreements and subsequent practice as a means of interpretation | 结论9 嗣后协定和嗣后实践作为解释资料的权重 |
| 1. The weight of a subsequent agreement
or subsequent practice as a means of interpretation under article 31,
paragraph 3, depends, inter alia, on its clarity and specificity. | 1. 嗣后协定或嗣后实践作为第三十一条第三款所指的解释资料的权重，除其他外，取决于其清晰性和特定性。 |
| 2. In addition, the weight of subsequent
practice under article 31, paragraph 3 (b), depends, inter alia, on whether
and how it is repeated. | 2. 此外，第三十一条第三款(b)项所指的嗣后实践的权重，除其他外，还取决于该实践是否以及如何重复出现。 |
| 3. The weight of subsequent practice as a
supplementary means of interpretation under article 32 may depend on the
criteria referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2. | 3. 嗣后实践作为第三十二条所指的补充的解释资料的权重可取决于第1和第2段所述标准。 |
| Conclusion 10 Agreement of the parties
regarding the interpretation of a treaty | 结论10 与条约解释有关的缔约方协定 |
| 1. An agreement under article 31,
paragraph 3 (a) and (b), requires a common understanding regarding the
interpretation of a treaty which the parties are aware of and accept. | 1. 第三十一条第三款(a)和(b)项所指的协定必须是各缔约方知悉并接受的关于条约解释的共同理解。 |
| Such an agreement may, but need not, be
legally binding for it to be taken into account. | 这种协定要得到考虑，可以但不必具有法律约束力。 |
| 2. The number of parties that must
actively engage in subsequent practice in order to establish an agreement
under article 31, paragraph 3 (b), may vary. | 2. 为确立第三十一条第三款(b)项所指的协定而必须积极从事嗣后实践的缔约方数目可能不尽相同。 |
| Silence on the part of one or more
parties may constitute acceptance of the subsequent practice when the
circumstances call for some reaction. | 在有关情况要求作出某种反应时，一个或多个缔约方的沉默可能构成对嗣后实践的接受。 |
| Part Four Specific aspects | 第四部分 具体方面 |
| Conclusion 11 Decisions adopted within
the framework of a Conference of States Parties | 结论11 在缔约国大会框架内通过的决定 |
| 1. A Conference of States Parties, under
these draft conclusions, is a meeting of parties to a treaty for the purpose
of reviewing or implementing the treaty, except where they act as members of
an organ of an international organization. | 1. 为本结论草案的目的，缔约国大会指缔约国为了审查或执行条约而举行的会议，但缔约国作为国际组织机关成员行事的情况不在此列。 |
| 2. The legal effect of a decision adopted
within the framework of a Conference of States Parties depends primarily on
the treaty and any applicable rules of procedure. | 2. 在缔约国大会框架内通过的决定所具有的法律效力主要取决于条约和任何可适用的议事规则。 |
| Depending on the circumstances, such a
decision may embody, explicitly or implicitly, a subsequent agreement under
article 31, paragraph 3 (a), or give rise to subsequent practice under
article 31, paragraph 3 (b), or to subsequent practice under article 32. | 根据情况，这种决定可明确或间接地体现第三十一条第三款(a)项所指的嗣后协定，或产生第三十一条第三款(b)项或第三十二条所指的嗣后实践。 |
| Decisions adopted within the framework of
a Conference of States Parties often provide a non-exclusive range of
practical options for implementing the treaty. | 在缔约国大会框架内通过的决定通常为执行条约提供了非排他性的一系列可行选择。 |
| 3. A decision adopted within the
framework of a Conference of States Parties embodies a subsequent agreement
or subsequent practice under article 31, paragraph 3, in so far as it
expresses agreement in substance between the parties regarding the
interpretation of a treaty, regardless of the form and the procedure by which
the decision was adopted, including adoption by consensus. | 3. 在缔约国大会框架内通过的决定只要表达了缔约国之间就条约的解释达成的实质性协议，则不论决定以何种形式和程序通过，包括经协商一致通过，均构成第三十一条第三款所指的嗣后协定或嗣后实践。 |
| Conclusion 12 Constituent instruments of
international organizations | 结论12 国际组织的组成文书 |
| 1. Articles 31 and 32 apply to a treaty
which is the constituent instrument of an international organization. | 1. 第三十一条和第三十二条适用于作为国际组织组成文书的条约。 |
| Accordingly, subsequent agreements and
subsequent practice under article 31, paragraph 3, are, and subsequent
practice under article 32 may be, means of interpretation for such treaties. | 因此，第三十一条第三款所指的嗣后协定和嗣后实践是这类条约的解释资料，第三十二条所指的嗣后实践可以作为这类条约的解释资料。 |
| 2. Subsequent agreements and subsequent
practice of the parties under article 31, paragraph 3, or subsequent practice
under article 32, may arise from, or be expressed in, the practice of an
international organization in the application of its constituent instrument. | 2. 第三十一条第三款所指的缔约方嗣后协定和嗣后实践或第三十二条所指的嗣后实践可以出自国际组织适用其组成文书的实践，或体现在这类实践中。 |
| 3. Practice of an international
organization in the application of its constituent instrument may contribute
to the interpretation of that instrument when applying articles 31 and 32. | 3. 在适用第三十一和第三十二条时，国际组织适用其组成文书的实践可以有助于解释该文书。 |
| 4. Paragraphs 1 to 3 apply to the
interpretation of any treaty which is the constituent instrument of an
international organization without prejudice to any relevant rules of the
organization. | 4. 第1至3段适用于对作为国际组织组成文书的任何条约的解释，但不妨碍该组织的任何有关规则。 |
| Conclusion 13 Pronouncements of expert
treaty bodies | 结论13 专家条约机构的声明 |
| 1. For the purposes of these draft
conclusions, an expert treaty body is a body consisting of experts serving in
their personal capacity, which is established under a treaty and is not an
organ of an international organization. | 1. 为本结论草案的目的，专家条约机构指根据一项条约设立且不是国际组织机关的、由以个人身份任职的专家组成的机构。 |
| 2. The relevance of a pronouncement of an
expert treaty body for the interpretation of a treaty is subject to the
applicable rules of the treaty. | 2. 专家条约机构的声明对条约解释的相关性取决于该条约的适用规则。 |
| 3. A pronouncement of an expert treaty
body may give rise to, or refer to, a subsequent agreement or subsequent
practice by parties under article 31, paragraph 3, or subsequent practice
under article 32. | 3. 专家条约机构的声明可产生或提及第三十一条第三款所指的缔约方嗣后协定或嗣后实践，或第三十二条所指的嗣后实践。 |
| Silence by a party shall not be presumed
to constitute subsequent practice under article 31, paragraph 3 (b),
accepting an interpretation of a treaty as expressed in a pronouncement of an
expert treaty body. | 缔约方的沉默不应推定为构成第三十一条第三款(b)项所指的、接受专家条约机构声明中表达的对相关条约的解释的嗣后实践。 |
| 4. This draft conclusion is without
prejudice to the contribution that pronouncements of expert treaty bodies
make to the interpretation of the treaties under their mandates. | 4. 本条结论草案不妨碍专家条约机构的声明有助于其任务范围内条约的解释。 |
| 2. Text of the draft conclusions and
commentaries thereto | 2. 结论草案案文及其评注 |
| 52. The text of the draft conclusions,
together with commentaries thereto, adopted by the Commission on second
reading, is reproduced below. | 52. 委员会二读通过的结论草案案文及其评注载录如下。 |
| Subsequent agreements and subsequent
practice in relation to the interpretation of treaties | 与条约解释相关的嗣后协定和嗣后实践 |
| Part One Introduction | 第一部分 导言 |
| Conclusion 1 Scope | 结论1 范围 |
| The present draft conclusions concern the
role of subsequent agreements and subsequent practice in the interpretation
of treaties. | 本结论草案涉及嗣后协定和嗣后实践在条约解释中的作用。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) As is always the case with the
Commission’s output, the draft conclusions are to be read together with the
commentaries. | (1) 与委员会以往工作成果一样，本结论草案应结合评注来解读。 |
| (2) The present draft conclusions aim at
explaining the role that subsequent agreements and subsequent practice play
in the interpretation of treaties. They are based on the Vienna Convention on
the Law of Treaties of 1969 (hereinafter, “1969 Vienna Convention”). | (2) 本结论草案旨在说明嗣后协定和嗣后实践在条约解释中发挥的作用，并立足于1969年《维也纳条约法公约》(下称“1969年《维也纳公约》”)。 |
| The draft conclusions situate subsequent
agreements and subsequent practice within the framework of the rules of the
Vienna Convention on interpretation by identifying and elucidating relevant
aspects, and by addressing certain questions that may arise when applying those
rules. | 这些结论草案将嗣后协定和嗣后实践置于《维也纳公约》所载解释规则的框架之内，指出并阐明了有关的方面，讨论了在适用上述规则的过程中可能产生的某些问题。 |
| (3) The draft conclusions do not address
all conceivable circumstances in which subsequent agreements and subsequent
practice may play a role in the interpretation of treaties. | (3) 本结论草案并未论及嗣后协定和嗣后实践可在条约解释过程中发挥作用的所有可能的情况。 |
| For example, one aspect not dealt with
generally is the relevance of subsequent agreements and subsequent practice
in relation to treaties between States and international organizations or
between international organizations. | 例如，总体上未作讨论的一个方面是：嗣后协定和嗣后实践对国家与国际组织之间或国际组织相互间缔结的条约的相关性。 |
| The practice of international
organizations is only addressed to a limited extent in draft conclusion 12,
paragraph 3. | 结论草案12第3段只有限地述及国际组织的实践。 |
| The draft conclusions also do not address
the interpretation of rules adopted by an international organization, the
identification of customary international law or general principles of law. | 本结论草案没有处理国际组织通过的规则的解释问题、习惯国际法的识别或一般法律原则问题。 |
| They are without prejudice to the other
means of interpretation under article 31, including paragraph 3 (c),
according to which the interpretation of a treaty shall take into account any
relevant rules of international law applicable in the relations between the
parties. | 本草案不妨碍第三十一条、包括其第三款(c)项所指的其他解释资料。 根据第三款(c)项，对条约的解释应考虑到适用于缔约方之间关系的任何有关国际法规则。 |
| (4) The draft conclusions aim to
facilitate the work of those who are called on to interpret treaties. Apart
from international courts and tribunals, they offer guidance for States, including
their courts, and international organizations, as well as all others who are
called upon to interpret treaties. | (4) 本结论草案旨在便利受命解释条约者的工作，其指导对象除国际性法院和法庭外，还有各国(包括各国法院)、国际组织，以及所有受命解释条约的其他方。 |
| Part Two Basic rules and definitions | 第二部分 基本规则和定义 |
| Conclusion 2 General rule and means of
treaty interpretation | 结论2 条约解释通则和资料 |
| 1. Articles 31 and 32 of the Vienna
Convention on the Law of Treaties set forth, respectively, the general rule
of interpretation and the recourse to supplementary means of interpretation. | 1. 《维也纳条约法公约》第三十一和第三十二条分别规定了解释条约的通则和补充的解释资料的使用。 |
| These rules also apply as customary
international law. | 这些规则也作为习惯国际法适用。 |
| 2. A treaty shall be interpreted in good
faith in accordance with the ordinary meaning to be given to its terms in
their context and in the light of its object and purpose, as provided in
article 31, paragraph 1. | 2. 如第三十一条第一款之规定，条约应按照其用语按上下文所具有的通常含义并参照该条约的目的和宗旨善意地予以解释。 |
| 3. Article 31, paragraph 3, provides,
inter alia, that there shall be taken into account, together with the
context, (a) any subsequent agreement between the parties regarding the
interpretation of the treaty or the application of its provisions; | 3. 第三十一条第三款除其他外规定，应与上下文一并考虑到的还有：(a) 缔约方之间嗣后所订关于条约的解释或其规定的适用的任何协定； |
| and (b) any subsequent practice in the
application of the treaty which establishes the agreement of the parties
regarding its interpretation. | 和(b) 在条约适用方面确定各缔约方对条约的解释意思一致的任何嗣后实践。 |
| 4. Recourse may be had to other
subsequent practice in the application of the treaty as a supplementary means
of interpretation under article 32. | 4. 可将条约适用方面的其他嗣后实践作为第三十二条所指的补充的解释资料加以使用。 |
| 5. The interpretation of a treaty
consists of a single combined operation, which places appropriate emphasis on
the various means of interpretation indicated, respectively, in articles 31
and 32. | 5. 条约的解释是单一的综合行动，这一行动对第三十一和第三十二条分别载明的各种解释资料各给予适当的强调。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Draft conclusion 2 situates
subsequent agreements and subsequent practice as a means of treaty
interpretation within the framework of the rules on the interpretation of
treaties set forth in articles 31 and 32 of the 1969 Vienna Convention. | (1) 结论草案2规定，嗣后协定和嗣后实践为在1969年《维也纳公约》第三十一和第三十二条所述的条约解释规则框架范围内的条约解释资料。 |
| The title “General rule and means of
treaty interpretation” signals two points. | 标题“条约解释通则和资料”表明两点。 |
| First, article 31, as a whole, is the
“general rule” of treaty interpretation. | 第一，第三十一条整体为解释条约的“通则”。 |
| Second, articles 31 and 32 together list
a number of “means of interpretation”, which shall (article 31) or may
(article 32) be taken into account in the interpretation of treaties. | 第二，第三十一条和第三十二条共同列出了一些在条约解释中应予(第三十一条)或可予(第三十二条)考虑的“解释资料”。 |
| Paragraph 1, first sentence —
relationship between articles 31 and 32 | 第1段第一句――第三十一条和第三十二条之间的关系 |
| (2) Paragraph 1 of draft conclusion 2
emphasizes the interrelationship between articles 31 and 32, as well as the
fact that these provisions, together, reflect customary international law. | (2) 结论草案2第1段强调第三十一和第三十二条之间的相互关系，以及这些规定共同反映了习惯国际法的事实。 |
| The reference to both articles 31 and 32
clarifies from the start the general context in which subsequent agreements
and subsequent practice are addressed in the draft conclusions. | 将第三十一和第三十二条一并提及，这等于从一开始就明确了结论草案处理嗣后协定和嗣后实践的总体背景。 |
| (3) Whereas article 31 sets forth the
general rule and article 32 the recourse to supplementary means of
interpretation, these rules must be read together as they constitute an
integrated framework for the interpretation of treaties. | (3) 第三十一条载有通则，而第三十二条则涉及解释的补充资料的使用，这两项规则
必须一并阅读，因为它们构成解释条约的整体框架。 |
| Article 32 includes thresholds between
the application of the primary means of interpretation according to article
31, all of which are to be taken into account in the process of
interpretation, and “supplementary means of interpretation” set forth in
article 32. | 第三十二条含有分界点，区分出以下两者：一是在解释过程中依照第三十一条均必须考虑的主要解释资料的适用， 二是第三十二条规定的“解释之补充资料”的适用。 |
| Recourse may be had to the supplementary
means of interpretation, either in order to confirm the meaning resulting
from the application of article 31, or to determine the meaning when the
interpretation according to article 31 leaves the meaning of the treaty or
its terms ambiguous or obscure or leads to a result that is manifestly absurd
or unreasonable. | 为确定因适用第三十一条而产生的意思，或依照第三十一条解释而条约意义或其用语仍属不明或难解时或所获结果显属荒谬或不合理时，为确定意思起见，可使用补充解释资料。 |
| Paragraph 1, second sentence — the Vienna
Convention rules on interpretation and customary international law | 第1段第二句――《维也纳公约》解释规则与习惯国际法 |
| (4) The second sentence of paragraph 1 of
draft conclusion 2 confirms that the rules set forth in articles 31 and 32
reflect customary international law. | (4) 结论草案2第1段第二句确认第三十一条和第三十二条所述规则反映了习惯国际法。 |
| International courts and tribunals have
acknowledged the customary character of these rules. This is true, for
example, for the International Court of Justice, the International Tribunal
for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS), inter-State arbitral tribunals, the Appellate
Body of the World Trade Organization (WTO), the European Court of Human
Rights, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, the Court of Justice of the
European Union, and international investment tribunals, including those
established by the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes
(ICSID) under the Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes between
States and Nationals of Other States. | 各种国际性法院和法庭均承认这些规则的习惯性质，例如国际法院、国际海洋法法庭(“海洋法法庭”)、国家间仲裁法庭、世界贸易组织(世贸组织)上诉机构、欧洲人权法院、美洲人权法院、欧洲联盟法院 和国际投资法庭，包括《关于解决国家和他国国民之间投资争端公约》 之下的解决投资争端国际中心
所设各法庭。 |
| Hence, the rules contained in articles 31
and 32 apply as treaty law in relation to those States that are parties to
the 1969 Vienna Convention, and as customary international law between all
States, including to treaties which were concluded before the entry into
force of the Vienna Convention for the States parties concerned. | 因此，第三十一和第三十二条所载规则在1969年《维也纳公约》的缔约国之间作为条约法适用，并在所有国家之间，包括在《维也纳公约》对所涉缔约国生效前缔结的条约缔约国之间作为习惯国际法适用。 |
| (5) Article 33 may also be relevant for
draft conclusions on the topic of “Subsequent agreements and subsequent
practice in relation to the interpretation of treaties”. | (5) 第三十三条也可能与“与条约解释相关的嗣后协定和嗣后实践”专题的结论草案相关。 |
| A “subsequent agreement” under article
31, paragraph 3 (a), for example, could be formulated in two or more
languages, and there could be questions regarding the relationship of any
subsequent agreement to different language versions of the treaty itself. | 例如，第三十一条第三款(a)项之下的“嗣后协定”可能以两种或多种语文拟订，从而可能出现任何嗣后协定与条约本身不同语文文本之间关系的问题。 |
| The Commission nevertheless decided not
to address such questions, including the question of how far article 33
reflects customary international law. | 尽管如此，委员会决定目前暂不处理这类问题，包括第三十三条在多大程度上反映了习惯国际法的问题。 |
| Paragraph 2 — article 31, paragraph 1 | 第2段――第三十一条第一款 |
| (6) Paragraph 2 of draft conclusion 2
reproduces the text of article 31, paragraph 1, of the 1969 Vienna Convention
given its importance for the topic. | (6) 鉴于1969年《维也纳公约》第三十一条第一款对于本专题的重要性，结论草案2第2段沿用了该款的案文。 |
| Article 31, paragraph 1, is the point of
departure for any treaty interpretation according to the general rule
contained in article 31 as a whole. | 按照第三十一条整条所载的通则，第三十一条第一款是任何条约解释的出发点。 |
| The reference to it is intended to ensure
the balance in the process of interpretation between an assessment of the
terms of the treaty in their context and in the light of its object and
purpose, on the one hand, and the considerations regarding subsequent
agreements and subsequent practice in the present draft conclusions, on the
other. | 提到该款是为了确保在解释过程中平衡以下两方面，一是根据上下文以及结合条约目的和宗旨评估条约用语，二是本结论草案中关于嗣后协定和嗣后实践的考虑。 |
| The reiteration of article 31, paragraph
1, as a separate paragraph, is not, however, meant to suggest that this
paragraph, and the means of interpretation mentioned therein, possess a
primacy in substance within the context of article 31 itself. | 但是，将第三十一条第一款作为单独一款予以重申，并不意味着表明该款及其中所述解释资料在第三十一条本身的范围内实质上处于首位。 |
| All means of interpretation in article
31, including the elements of context mentioned in paragraph 2, are part of a
single integrated rule. | 第三十一条中的所有解释资料，包括第2段提及的上下文要素均为单一的综合规则的一部分。 |
| Paragraph 3 — article 31, paragraph 3 | 第3段――第三十一条第三款 |
| (7) Paragraph 3 reproduces the language
of article 31, paragraph 3 (a) and (b), of the 1969 Vienna Convention, in
order to situate subsequent agreements and subsequent practice, as the main
focus of the topic, within the general legal framework of the interpretation
of treaties. | (7) 第3段沿用了1969年《维也纳公约》第三十一条第三款(a)项和(b)项的措辞，以便将作为本专题主要核心的嗣后协定和嗣后实践置于条约解释的一般法律框架之内。 |
| Accordingly, the chapeau of article 31, paragraph
3, “[t]here shall be taken into account, together with the context”, is
maintained in order to emphasize that the assessment of the means of
interpretation mentioned in paragraph 3 (a) and (b) of article 31 are an
integral part of the general rule of interpretation set forth in article 31. | 因此，保留了第三十一条第三款起首部分“应与上下文一并考虑者尚有”的措辞，以突出表明，评估第三十一条第三款(a)项和(b)项所述解释资料是第三十一条所述解释通则的组成部分。 |
| Paragraph 4 — subsequent practice under
article 32 | 第4段――第三十二条所指的嗣后实践 |
| (8) Paragraph 4 clarifies that subsequent
practice in the application of the treaty, which does not meet all criteria
of article 31, paragraph 3 (b), nevertheless falls within the scope of
article 32. | (8) 第4段说明了不符合第三十一条第三款(b)项的所有标准、但是在第三十二条范围之内的条约适用方面的嗣后实践。 |
| Article 32 includes a non-exhaustive list
of supplementary means of interpretation. | 第三十二条列入了一个非详尽无遗的补充解释资料清单。 |
| Paragraph 4 borrows the language
“recourse may be had” from article 32 to maintain the distinction between the
mandatory character of the taking into account of the means of
interpretation, which are referred to in article 31, and the discretionary
nature of the use of the supplementary means of interpretation under article
32. | 第4段借用了第三十二条的“得使用”的措辞，以维持需考虑第三十一条提到的考虑解释资料的强制性和使用第三十二条所指补充解释资料的自由裁量性质之间的区分。 |
| (9) In particular, subsequent practice in
the application of the treaty, which does not establish the agreement of all
parties to the treaty, but only of one or more parties, may be used as a
supplementary means of interpretation. | (9) 特别是，条约适用方面的嗣后实践，若并非条约所有缔约方、而仅仅是一个或数个缔约方的协定，则可用作补充解释资料。 |
| This was stated by the Commission, and
has since been recognized by international courts and tribunals, and in the
literature (see in more detail paragraphs (23) to (35) of the commentary to
draft conclusion 4). | 这一点委员会曾指出过， 并自此得到各国际性法院和法庭的承认， 在文献中 也得到承认(详见结论草案4的评注第(23)至第(35)段)。 |
| (10) The Commission did not, however,
consider that subsequent practice which is not “in the application of the
treaty” should be dealt with, in the present draft conclusions, as a
supplementary means of interpretation. | (10) 但是，委员会认为，不应在本结论草案中处理非“条约适用方面”的嗣后实践作为补充解释资料的问题。 |
| Such practice may, under certain
circumstances, also be a possible supplementary means of interpretation. | 在特定情况下，这种实践也可以作为可能的补充解释资料。 |
| But such practice is beyond what the
Commission now addresses under the present topic, except insofar as it may
contribute to “assessing” relevant subsequent practice in the application of
a treaty (see draft conclusion 5 and accompanying commentary). | 但除了可能有助于“评估”条约适用方面的相关嗣后实践之外，此类实践超出了委员会目前在本专题之下处理的范围(见结论草案5及其评注)。 |
| Thus, paragraph 4 of draft conclusion 2
refers to any subsequent practice “in the application of the treaty”, as does
paragraph 3 of draft conclusion 4, which defines “subsequent practice under
article 32”. | 因此，结论草案2第4段如界定“第三十二条之下的嗣后实践”的结论草案4第3段一样，提到“条约适用方面”的任何嗣后实践。 |
| Paragraph 5 — “a single combined
operation” | 第5段――“单一的综合行动” |
| (11) The Commission considered it
important to end draft conclusion 2 by emphasizing in paragraph 5 that,
notwithstanding the structure of draft conclusion 2, moving from the general
to the more specific, the process of interpretation is a “single combined
operation”, which requires that “appropriate emphasis” be placed on various
means of interpretation. | (11) 委员会认为，应在作为结论草案2结束的第5段 中强调：尽管结论草案2的结构是从一般到具体，但解释过程是一个“单一的综合行动”，要求“适当强调”各种解释资料。 |
| The expression “single combined
operation” is drawn from the Commission’s commentary to the 1966 draft
articles on the law of treaties. | “单一的综合行动”这一表述取自委员会对1966年条约法条款草案的评注。 |
| There, the Commission also stated that it
intended “to emphasize that the process of interpretation is a unity”. | 委员会还在评注中表明，希望“强调解释过程是一个整体”。 |
| (12) Paragraph 5 of draft conclusion 2
also explains that appropriate emphasis must be placed, in the course of the
process of interpretation as a “single combined operation”, involving the
various means of interpretation, which are referred to in articles 31 and 32
of the 1969 Vienna Convention. | (12) 结论草案2第5段还解释了，在作为“单一的综合行动”的解释过程中，必须对1969年《维也纳公约》第三十一条和第三十二条提到的各种解释资料各给予适当强调。 |
| The Commission did not, however, consider
it necessary to include a reference, by way of example, to one or more
specific means of interpretation in the text of paragraph 5 of draft
conclusion 2. | 但是，委员会认为，在结论草案2第5段的案文中，没有必要以举例方式提到一种或多种具体的解释资料。 |
| This avoids a possible misunderstanding
that any one of the different means of interpretation has priority over
others, regardless of the specific treaty provision or the case concerned. | 这就避免了一种可能的误解，即无论条约的具体规定或案件情况如何，认为不同的解释资料中有一种优先于其他。 |
| (13) Paragraph 5 uses the term “means of
interpretation”. | (13) 第5段使用了“解释资料”一语。 |
| This term captures not only the
“supplementary means of interpretation”, which are referred to in article 32,
but also the elements mentioned in article 31. | 这一用语不仅涵盖第三十二条所提及的“解释之补充资料”，而且涵盖第三十一条所提到的各个要素。 |
| Whereas the Commission, in its commentary
to the draft articles on the law of treaties, used the terms “means of
interpretation” and “elements of interpretation” interchangeably, for the
purpose of the present topic the Commission retained the term “means of
interpretation” because it also describes their function in the process of
interpretation as a tool or an instrument. | 在对条约法条款草案的评注中，委员会交替使用“解释资料”和“解释要素”，而为了本专题的目的，委员会保留了“解释资料”这一用语，因为它还描述了其作为工具或手段在解释过程中的作用。 |
| The term “means” does not set apart from
each other the different elements, which are mentioned in articles 31 and 32.
It rather indicates that these elements each have a function in the process
of interpretation, which is a “single”, and at the same time a “combined”,
operation. | “资料”一词并没有将第三十一条和第三十二条中提到的不同要素分开，而是说明，这些要素在解释过程中各有其作用，解释过程既是“单一”的同时又是“综合”的行动。 |
| Just as courts typically begin their
reasoning by looking at the terms of the treaty, and then continue, in an
interactive process, to analyse those terms in their context and in the light
of the object and purpose of the treaty, the precise relevance of different
means of interpretation must first be identified in any case of treaty
interpretation before they can be “thrown into the crucible” in order to
arrive at a proper interpretation, by giving them appropriate weight in
relation to each other. | 正如法院推理通常首先是看条约的用语，继而在一个互动进程中， 结合上下文并根据条约的目的和宗旨，分析这些用语， 在条约解释的任何情况下，必须首先确定不同解释资料确切的相关性，然后才能将其“扔进熔炉”， 相应地予以适当权重，以作出适当的解释。 |
| (14) The obligation to place “appropriate
emphasis on the various means of interpretation” may, in the course of the
interpretation of a treaty in specific cases, result in a different emphasis
on the various means of interpretation depending on the treaty or treaty
provisions concerned. | (14) 在具体案件的条约解释过程中，对“各种解释资料各给予适当的强调”的义务，可能因有关条约或条约条款的具体情况而导致对各种解释资料有不同的强调。 |
| This is not to suggest that a court or
any other interpreter is more or less free to choose how to use and apply the
different means of interpretation. | 这并不是说法院或任何其他解释者多少能够自由选择如何使用和应用不同的解释资料。 |
| The interpreter needs to identify the
relevance of different means of interpretation in a specific case and
determine their interaction with the other means of interpretation by placing
a proper emphasis on them in good faith, as required by the treaty rule to be
applied. | 解释者需要确定不同解释资料在具体案件中的相关性，并通过善意地予以适当强调，确定这些解释资料与其他解释资料的互动关系，正如拟适用的条约规则所要求的那样。 |
| Draft conclusion 9 on the weight of
subsequent agreements and subsequent practice as a means of interpretation,
and the commentary thereto, provide some guidance for the required
evaluation. | 关于嗣后协定和嗣后实践作为解释资料的权重的结论草案9就要求作出的评价提供了一些指导。 |
| (15) Draft conclusion 2 does not refer to
the “nature” of the treaty as a factor that would typically be relevant in
determining whether more or less weight should be given to certain means of
interpretation. | (15) 结论草案2没有提到以条约的“性质”作为在确定给予某些解释资料的权重时通常应考虑的一个因素。 |
| The jurisprudence of different
international courts and tribunals nevertheless suggests that the nature of
the treaty may sometimes be relevant for the interpretation of a treaty. | 但各国际性法院和法庭的判例表明，条约的性质有时可能与条约的解释相关。 |
| The concept of the nature of a treaty is
not alien to the 1969 Vienna Convention (see, for example, article 56,
paragraph 1 (a)) and a reference to the nature of the treaty or of treaty
provisions has been included in other work of the Commission. | 条约性质的概念对1969年《维也纳公约》而言并不陌生(例如见第五十六条第一款(a)项)，委员会的其他工作也提到了条约或条约条款的性质。 |
| The Commission, however, decided that the
draft conclusion should not refer to the nature of the treaty in order to
avoid calling into question the unity of the interpretation process and to
avoid any categorization of treaties. | 但是，委员会决定，本条结论草案不应当提到条约的性质，以免影响解释过程的统一性，并避免对条约进行任何分类。 |
| It is, in any case, difficult to
distinguish the “nature of the treaty” from the object and purpose of the
treaty. | 无论如何，很难将“条约的性质”与条约的目的和宗旨相区分。 |
| Conclusion 3 Subsequent agreements and
subsequent practice as authentic means of interpretation | 结论3 以嗣后协定和嗣后实践作为作准的解释资料 |
| Subsequent agreements and subsequent
practice under article 31, paragraph 3 (a) and (b), being objective evidence
of the understanding of the parties as to the meaning of the treaty, are
authentic means of interpretation, in the application of the general rule of
treaty interpretation reflected in article 31. | 第三十一条第三款(a)和(b)项所指的嗣后协定和嗣后实践是缔约方对条约含义理解的客观证据，因而是适用第三十一条所反映的条约解释通则时的作准的解释资料。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) By characterizing subsequent
agreements and subsequent practice under article 31, paragraph 3 (a) and (b),
of the 1969 Vienna Convention as “authentic” means of interpretation, the
Commission indicates why they have an important role in the interpretation of
treaties. | (1) 通过将1969年《维也纳公约》第三十一条第三款(a)项和(b)项所指的嗣后协定和嗣后实践定性为“作准的”解释资料，委员会指出了为什么这些资料在条约解释中起到重要作用。 |
| The Commission thereby follows its 1966
commentary on the draft articles on the law of treaties, which described
subsequent agreements and subsequent practice under article 31, paragraph 3
(a) and (b), as “authentic means of interpretation” and which underlined
that: | 这样，委员会就遵循了其1966年对条约法条款草案的评注，该评注将第三十一条第三款(a)项和(b)项所指的嗣后协定和嗣后实践描述为“作准的解释资料”，其中强调： |
| The importance of such subsequent
practice in the application of the treaty, as an element of interpretation,
is obvious; | 作为解释的一个要素，此种嗣后实践在适用条约方面的重要性十分明显； |
| for it constitutes objective evidence of
the understanding of the parties as to the meaning of the treaty. | 因为它构成有关缔约国对条约意义的理解的客观证据。 |
| (2) Subsequent agreements and subsequent
practice under article 31, paragraph 3 (a) and (b), are, however, not the
only “authentic means of interpretation”. | (2) 但是，第三十一条第三款(a)项和(b)项所指的嗣后协定和嗣后实践并非唯一“作准的解释资料”。 |
| As the Commission has explained: | 正如委员会所解释的： |
| the Commission’s approach to treaty
interpretation was on the basis that the text of the treaty must be presumed
to be the authentic expression of the intentions of the parties, … making the
ordinary meaning of the terms, the context of the treaty, its objects and
purposes, and the general rules of international law, together with authentic
interpretations by the parties, the primary criteria for interpreting a
treaty. | 委员会处理条约解释问题的方法系以条约约文必须假定为缔约国意向的作准表示…以用语的通常意义，条约的上下文关系，条约的目的及宗旨，国际法的一般规则以及缔约国的作准解释作为解释条约的主要标准。 |
| The term “authentic” thus refers to
different forms of “objective evidence” or “proof” of conduct of the parties,
which reflects the “common understanding of the parties” as to the meaning of
the treaty. | 因此，“作准”一词是指缔约国行为不同形式的“客观证据”或“证明”，反映了“缔约国”对条约意义的“共同理解”。 |
| (3) By describing subsequent agreements
and subsequent practice under article 31, paragraph 3 (a) and (b), as
“authentic” means of interpretation, the Commission recognizes that the
common will of the parties, which underlies the treaty, possesses a specific
authority regarding the identification of the meaning of the treaty, even
after the conclusion of the treaty. | (3) 通过将第三十一条第三款(a)项和(b)项所指的嗣后协定和嗣后实践描述为“作准的”解释资料，委员会承认，作为条约之基础的缔约国的共同意愿在确定条约的意义方面具有特定的权威性，甚至在条约缔结之后也是如此。 |
| The 1969 Vienna Convention thereby
accords the parties to a treaty a role that may be uncommon for the
interpretation of legal instruments in some domestic legal systems. | 因此，1969年《维也纳公约》赋予条约缔约国一种可能在某些国内法律制度中不常见的解释法律文书的作用。 |
| (4) The characterization of subsequent
agreements and subsequent practice of the parties under article 31, paragraph
3 (a) and (b), as “authentic means of interpretation” does not, however,
imply that these means necessarily possess a conclusive effect. | (4) 但是，将第三十一条第三款(a)项和(b)项所指的缔约方嗣后协定和嗣后实践定性为“作准的解释资料”并不意味着这些资料必然具有决定性。 |
| According to the chapeau of article 31,
paragraph 3, subsequent agreements and subsequent practice shall, after all,
only “be taken into account” in the interpretation of a treaty, which
consists of a “single combined operation” with no hierarchy among the means
of interpretation that are referred to in article 31 (see draft conclusion 2,
paragraph 5). | 按照第三十一条第三款起首部分，嗣后协定和嗣后实践毕竟只应在解释条约方面纳入“考虑”，而条约的解释是一个“单一的综合行动”，在第三十一条所指的所有解释资料中，没有等级之分(见结论草案2第5段)。 |
| For this reason, and notwithstanding the
suggestions of some commentators, subsequent agreements and subsequent
practice that establish the agreement of the parties regarding the
interpretation of a treaty are not necessarily legally binding. | 因此，尽管某些评论者提出了一些意见， 但确定缔约国对条约解释一致意思的嗣后协定和嗣后实践并非必然具有法律约束力。 |
| This is confirmed in draft conclusion 10,
paragraph 1. | 结论草案10第1段确认了这一点。 |
| Thus, when the Commission characterized a
“subsequent agreement” as representing “an authentic interpretation by the
parties which must be read into the treaty for purposes of its
interpretation”, it did not go quite as far as saying that such an interpretation
is necessarily conclusive in the sense that it overrides all other means of
interpretation. | 因此，委员会将“嗣后协定”定性为代表“解释条约时必须考虑的缔约国的作准解释”， 但并没有说嗣后协定高于所有其他解释资料，必然是决定性的。 |
| (5) This does not exclude that the
parties to a treaty, if they wish, may reach a binding agreement regarding
the interpretation of a treaty. | (5) 这不排除条约缔约国在愿意的情况下，就条约的解释达成一项具有约束力的协定。 |
| The Special Rapporteur on the law of
treaties, Sir Humphrey Waldock, stated in his third report that it may be
difficult to distinguish subsequent practice of the parties under what became
article 31, paragraph 3 (a) and (b) — which is only to be taken into account,
among other means, in the process of interpretation — and a later agreement
that the parties consider to be binding: | 条约法问题特别报告员汉弗雷·沃尔多克爵士在其第三次报告中说，在解释过程中，可能难以区分构成后来成为第三十一条第三款(a)项和(b)项的条款所指的缔约国嗣后实践――仅应在解释过程中与其他资料一并考虑――和缔约国认为具有约束力的后来的协定： |
| Subsequent practice when it is consistent
and embraces all the parties would appear to be decisive of the meaning to be
attached to the treaty, at any rate when it indicates that the parties
consider the interpretation to be binding upon them. | 如果前后一致并包括所有缔约国，嗣后实践看来在确定条约应有的意义方面具有决定性，无论如何，在其表明缔约国认为解释对其有约束力之时是如此。 |
| In these cases, subsequent practice as an
element of treaty interpretation and as an element in the formation of a
tacit agreement overlap and the meaning derived from the practice becomes an
authentic interpretation established by agreement. (emphasis added) | 在这些情况下，作为条约解释的一个要素，以及作为形成默示同意重叠和源自该实践的意义的一个要素，嗣后实践成为一项由协定确立的作准的解释。 (强调是后加的) |
| (6) The possibility of arriving at a
binding subsequent interpretative agreement is expressly recognized in some
treaties. | (6) 一些条约明确确认了达成有约束力的嗣后解释性协定的可能性。 |
| Article 1131, paragraph 2, of the North
American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), for example, provides that: “An
interpretation by the [inter-governmental] Commission of a provision of this
Agreement shall be binding on a Tribunal established under this Section. | 例如，《北美自由贸易协定》第1131条第2款规定，“[政府间]委员会对本协定条款的解释对依本条所设法庭具有约束力”。 |
| ” The existence of such a special
procedure or an agreement regarding the authoritative interpretation of a
treaty that the parties consider binding may or may not preclude additional
recourse to subsequent agreements or subsequent practice under article 31,
paragraph 3 (a) and (b), of the 1969 Vienna Convention. | 此种缔约国认为对其有约束力的有关条约权威解释的特别程序或协定的存在，可能排除也可能不排除额外使用1969年《维也纳公约》第三十一条第三款(a)项和(b)项所指的嗣后协定和嗣后实践。 |
| (7) The Commission has continued to use
the term “authentic means of interpretation” in order to describe the not
necessarily conclusive, but authoritative, character of subsequent agreements
and subsequent practice under article 31, paragraph 3 (a) and (b). | (7) 委员会继续采用“作准的解释资料”一词，以描述第三十一条第三款(a)项和(b)项所指的嗣后协定和嗣后实践不一定具有的决定性但却具有的权威性。 |
| The Commission has not employed the terms
“authentic interpretation” or “authoritative interpretation” in draft
conclusion 3 since these concepts are often understood to mean a necessarily
conclusive, or binding, agreement between the parties regarding the
interpretation of a treaty. | 委员会在结论草案3中没有采用“作准解释”或“权威解释”的说法，因为这些概念常常被理解为是指缔约国之间有关条约解释的必然具有决定性或有约束力的协定。 |
| (8) Domestic courts have sometimes
explicitly recognized that subsequent agreements and subsequent practice
under article 31, paragraph 3 (a) and (b), are “authentic” means of interpretation. | (8) 国内法院有时明确承认，第三十一条第三款(a)项和(b)项所指的嗣后协定和嗣后实践是“作准的”解释资料。 |
| They have, however, not always been
consistent regarding the legal consequences that this characterization
entails. | 但是，关于这一分类所产生的法律后果，各国内法院的意见并非始终一致。 |
| Whereas some courts have assumed that
subsequent agreements and practice by the parties under the treaty may
produce certain binding effects, others have rightly emphasized that article
31, paragraph 3, only requires that subsequent agreements and subsequent
practice “be taken into account”. | 一些法院认为条约缔约方的嗣后协定和嗣后实践可产生特定的约束效果，另一些法院则强调，第三十一条第三款仅要求“考虑”嗣后协定和嗣后实践，事实也的确如此。 |
| (9) The term “authentic means of
interpretation” encompasses a factual and a legal element. | (9) “作准的解释资料”包含事实和法律要素。 |
| The factual element is indicated by the
expression “objective evidence”, whereas the legal element is contained in
the concept of “understanding of the parties”. | 事实要素体现在“客观证据”这一表述中，而法律要素则体现在“缔约国的理解”这一概念中。 |
| Accordingly, the Commission characterized
a “subsequent agreement” as representing “an authentic interpretation by the
parties which must be read into the treaty for purposes of its
interpretation”, and stated that subsequent practice “similarly … constitutes
objective evidence of the understanding of the parties as to the meaning of
the treaty”. | 因此，委员会将“嗣后协定”定性为代表“解释条约时必须考虑的缔约国的作准解释”， 并说明，嗣后实践“同样…构成缔约国对条约意思的理解的客观证据”。 |
| Given the character of treaties as
embodiments of the common will of their parties, “objective evidence” of the
“understanding of the parties” possesses considerable authority as a means of
interpretation. | 鉴于条约的特性是体现其缔约国的共同意愿，“缔约国的理解”的“客观证据”作为解释资料具有相当的权威性。 |
| (10) The distinction between any
“subsequent agreement” (article 31, paragraph 3 (a)) and “subsequent practice
… which establishes the agreement of the parties” (article 31, paragraph 3
(b)) does not denote a difference concerning their authentic character. | (10) “嗣后协定”(第三十一条第三款(a)项)与“嗣后…确定各当事国对…之协定之实践”(第三十一条第三款(b)项)之间的区分并不意味着二者权威性的不同。 |
| The Commission rather considers that a
“subsequent agreement between the parties regarding the interpretation of the
treaty or the application of its provisions” ipso facto has the effect of
constituting an authentic interpretation of the treaty, whereas a “subsequent
practice” only has this effect if it “shows the common understanding of the
parties as to the meaning of the terms”. | 不过，委员会认为，“当事国嗣后所订关于条约之解释或其规定之适用之任何协定”当然具有构成条约作准解释的效力，而“嗣后实践”仅在其“表明当事国对用语含义的共同理解”时才具有这一效力。 |
| Thus, the difference between a
“subsequent agreement between the parties” and a “subsequent practice … which
establishes the agreement of the parties” lies in the manner of establishing
the agreement of the parties regarding the interpretation of a treaty, with
the difference being in the greater ease with which an agreement is
established. | 因此，“当事国之嗣后协定”与“嗣后…确定各当事国对…之协定之实践”之间的区别在于确定当事国对条约解释的一致意思的方式，在于确定一致意思的难易程度。 |
| (11) Subsequent agreements and subsequent
practice as authentic means of treaty interpretation are not to be confused
with interpretations of treaties by international courts, tribunals or expert
treaty bodies in specific cases. | (11) 不应当将作为作准的条约解释资料的嗣后协定和嗣后实践与各国际性法院、法庭或专家条约机构在具体案件中对条约的解释相混淆。 |
| Subsequent agreements or subsequent
practice under article 31, paragraph 3 (a) and (b), are “authentic” means of
interpretation because they are expressions of the understanding of the
treaty by the parties themselves. | 第三十一条第三款(a)项和(b)项所指的嗣后协定和嗣后实践是“作准的”解释资料，因为它们表示当事国本身对条约的理解。 |
| The authority of international courts,
tribunals and expert treaty bodies derives from other sources, including from
the treaty that is to be interpreted. | 各国际性法院、法庭和专家条约机构的权威有其他来源，包括所要解释的条约。 |
| Judgments and other pronouncements of
international courts, tribunals and expert treaty bodies, however, may be
indirectly relevant for the identification of subsequent agreements and
subsequent practice as authentic means of interpretation if they reflect,
give rise to or refer to such subsequent agreements and practice of the
parties themselves. | 但是，各国际性法院、法庭和专家条约机构的判决和其他声明如果反映、产生或提到当事国本身的此种嗣后协定和实践，则可能间接地有助于识别作为作准的解释资料的嗣后协定和嗣后实践。 |
| (12) Draft conclusions 2 and 4
distinguish between “subsequent practice” establishing the agreement of the
parties under article 31, paragraph 3 (b), of the 1969 Vienna Convention, on
the one hand, and subsequent practice (in a broad sense) by one or more, but
not all, parties to the treaty that may be relevant as a supplementary means
of interpretation under article 32. | (12) 结论草案2和4区分了1969年《维也纳公约》第三十一条第三款(b)项所指确定当事国一致意思的“嗣后实践”，以及第三十二条之下作为补充解释资料可能相关的条约一个或多个、但并非所有当事国(广义上的)嗣后实践。 |
| Such subsequent practice under article 32
that does not establish the agreement of all the parties cannot constitute an
“authentic” interpretation of a treaty by all its parties and thus will not
possess the same weight for the purpose of interpretation (see draft
conclusion 9). | 此种并不确定所有当事国一致意思的第三十二条之下的嗣后实践不能构成条约所有当事国对条约的“作准”解释，因此，就解释目的而言，不具有相同的权重(见结论草案9)。 |
| (13) The last part of draft conclusion 3
makes it clear that any reliance on subsequent agreements and subsequent
practice as authentic means of interpretation should occur as part of the
application of the general rule of treaty interpretation reflected in article
31 of the 1969 Vienna Convention. | (13) 结论草案3最后一部分清楚地表明，以嗣后协定和嗣后实践作为作准的解释资料，应当是适用1969年《维也纳公约》第三十一条所反映的条约解释通则的一部分。 |
| Conclusion 4 Definition of subsequent
agreement and subsequent practice | 结论4 嗣后协定和嗣后实践的定义 |
| 1. A subsequent agreement as an authentic
means of interpretation under article 31, paragraph 3 (a), is an agreement
between the parties, reached after the conclusion of a treaty, regarding the
interpretation of the treaty or the application of its provisions. | 1. 嗣后协定作为第三十一条第三款(a)项之下作准的解释资料是指缔约方在条约缔结后达成的关于解释条约或适用条约规定的协定。 |
| 2. A subsequent practice as an authentic
means of interpretation under article 31, paragraph 3 (b), consists of
conduct in the application of a treaty, after its conclusion, which
establishes the agreement of the parties regarding the interpretation of the
treaty. | 2. 嗣后实践作为第三十一条第三款(b)项之下作准的解释资料是指条约缔结后确定各缔约方对条约的解释意思一致的适用条约的行为。 |
| 3. A subsequent practice as a
supplementary means of interpretation under article 32 consists of conduct by
one or more parties in the application of the treaty, after its conclusion. | 3. 嗣后实践作为第三十二条之下的补充的解释资料是指条约缔结后一个或多个缔约方适用条约的行为。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| General aspects | 一般方面 |
| (1) Draft conclusion 4 defines the three
different “subsequent” means of treaty interpretation that are mentioned in
draft conclusion 2, paragraphs 3 and 4, namely “subsequent agreement” under
article 31, paragraph 3 (a), “subsequent practice” under article 31,
paragraph 3 (b), and “subsequent practice” under article 32. | (1) 结论草案4定义了结论草案2第3和第4段中提到的三种“嗣后”条约解释资料，即第三十一条第三款(a)项下的“嗣后协定”、第三十一条第三款(b)项下的“嗣后实践”以及第三十二条下的“嗣后实践”。 |
| (2) In all three cases, the term
“subsequent” refers to acts occurring “after the conclusion of a treaty”. | (2) 在所有三种情况下，“嗣后”一词均指在“一项条约缔结后”发生的行为。 |
| This point in time is often earlier than
the moment when the treaty enters into force (article 24 of the 1969 Vienna
Convention). | 这个时间点常常早于条约生效的时刻(1969年《维也纳公约》第二十四条)。 |
| Various provisions of the 1969 Vienna
Convention (for example, article 18) show that a treaty may be “concluded”
before its actual entry into force. | 1969年《维也纳公约》各项条款(例如第十八条)表明，一项条约可在它实际生效之前“缔结”。 |
| For the purposes of the present topic,
“conclusion” is whenever the text of the treaty has been established as
definitive within the meaning of article 10 of the Vienna Convention. | 为本专题的目的，只要条约案文确定为《维也纳公约》第十条意义范围内的定本，即为“缔结”。 |
| It is after conclusion, not just after
entry into force, of a treaty when subsequent agreements and subsequent
practice can occur. | 嗣后协定和嗣后实践可发生在条约缔结之后，而不仅仅发生在生效之后。 |
| Indeed, it is difficult to identify a
reason why an agreement or practice that takes place between the moment when
the text of a treaty has been established as definitive and the entry into
force of that treaty should not be relevant for the purpose of
interpretation. | 的确，很难找出理由说明，为什么在一项条约的案文最后确定与条约生效之间达成的协定或实践不能用于对条约的解释。 |
| (3) Article 31, paragraph 2, of the 1969
Vienna Convention provides that the “context” of the treaty includes certain
“agreements” and “instruments” that “are made in connection with the
conclusion of the treaty”. | (3) 1969年《维也纳公约》第三十一条第二款规定，条约的“上下文”包括若干“协定”和“文书”， 这些“协定”和“文书”是“因缔结条约所订”。 |
| The phrase “in connection with the
conclusion of the treaty” should be understood as including agreements and instruments
that are made in a close temporal and contextual relation with the conclusion
of the treaty. | “因缔结条约”这一短语应理解为包括在与缔结条约密切相关的那段时间里或背景下订立的协定和文书。 |
| If they are made after this period, then
such “agreements” and agreed upon “instruments” constitute “subsequent
agreements” or subsequent practice under article 31, paragraph 3. | 如果是在这段时间之后订立的，则这种“协定”和议定的“文书”即为第三十一条第三款下的“嗣后协定”或嗣后实践。 |
| Paragraph 1 — definition of “subsequent
agreement” under article 31, paragraph 3 (a) | 第1段――对第三十一条第三款(a)项下“嗣后协定”的定义 |
| (4) Paragraph 1 of draft conclusion 4
provides the definition of a “subsequent agreement” under article 31,
paragraph 3 (a). | (4) 结论草案4第1段规定了第三十一条第三款(a)项下“嗣后协定”的定义。 |
| The term “the parties” indicates that
such an agreement must be reached between all the parties to the treaty. | “缔约方”一词表明，这种协定必须是在条约所有缔约方之间达成的。 |
| (5) Article 31, paragraph 3 (a), uses the
term “subsequent agreement” and not the term “subsequent treaty”. | (5) 第三十一条第三款(a)项使用了“嗣后协定”一词，而非“嗣后条约”。 |
| A “subsequent agreement” is, however, not
necessarily less formal than a “treaty”. | 但“嗣后协定”不一定不如“条约”正式。 |
| Whereas a treaty within the meaning of
the 1969 Vienna Convention must be in written form (article 2, paragraph 1
(a)), the customary international law on treaties knows no such requirement. | 虽然1969年《维也纳公约》意义下的条约必须是书面形式的(第二条第一款(a)项)，但关于条约的习惯国际法则没有这种要求。 |
| The term “agreement” in the 1969 Vienna
Convention and in customary international law does not imply any particular
degree of formality. | 1969年《维也纳公约》之下的“协定”一词 和习惯国际法下的“协定”一词并不意味着任何特定的正式程度。 |
| Article 39 of the 1969 Vienna Convention,
which lays down the general rule according to which: “[a] treaty may be
amended by agreement between the parties”, has been explained by the
Commission to mean that: “An amending agreement may take whatever form the
parties to the original treaty may choose. | 1969年《维也纳公约》第三十九条列出了一般规则：“条约得以当事国之协议修正之”，委员会对此的解释是，“作出修正的协议可采取原条约缔约方所选择的任何形式”。 |
| ” In the same way, the Vienna Convention
does not envisage any particular formal requirements for agreements and
practice under article 31, paragraph 3 (a) and (b). | 同样，《维也纳公约》并未对第三十一条第三款(a)和(b)项下的协定和实践设定任何具体的形式要求。 |
| (6) While every treaty is an agreement,
not every agreement is a treaty. | (6) 虽然所有条约都是协定，但并非每项协定都是条约。 |
| Indeed, a “subsequent agreement” under
article 31, paragraph 3 (a), “shall” only “be taken into account” in the interpretation
of a treaty. | 实际上，第三十一条第三款(a)项下的“嗣后协定”“应”在条约的解释上予以“考虑”。 |
| Therefore, it is not necessarily binding. | 因此，它不一定具有约束力。 |
| The question is addressed more
specifically in draft conclusion 10. | 结论草案10对这一问题作了更具体的说明。 |
| (7) The 1969 Vienna Convention distinguishes
a “subsequent agreement” under article 31, paragraph 3 (a), from “any
subsequent practice … which establishes the agreement of the parties
regarding its interpretation” under article 31, paragraph 3 (b). | (7) 1969年《维也纳公约》对第三十一条第三款(a)项下的“嗣后协定”与第三十一条第三款(b)项下“嗣后…确定各当事国对条约解释之协定之任何实践”作了区分。 |
| This distinction is not always clear and
the jurisprudence of international courts and other adjudicative bodies shows
a certain reluctance to assert it. | 这种区分并不总是十分清楚，一些国际性法院和其他仲裁机构的判例也显示出某种不愿明言的态度。 |
| In Territorial Dispute (Libyan Arab
Jamahiriya v. Chad), the International Court of Justice used the expression
“subsequent attitudes” to denote both what it later described as “subsequent
agreements” and as subsequent unilateral “attitudes”. | 在领土争端案(阿拉伯利比亚民众国诉乍得)中，国际法院使用了“嗣后态度”的表述，来表示它后来所说的“嗣后协定”和嗣后单方面“态度”这两重意义。 |
| In the case concerning Sovereignty over
Pulau Ligitan and Pulau Sipadan, the International Court of Justice left open
the question whether the use of a particular map could constitute a
subsequent agreement or subsequent practice. | 在利吉丹岛和西巴丹岛的主权归属案中，国际法院对使用某一份地图是否可以作为嗣后协定或嗣后实践的问题没有下定论。 |
| WTO Panels and the Appellate Body have
also not always distinguished between a subsequent agreement and subsequent
practice under article 31, paragraph 3 (a) and (b). | 世贸组织的专家组和上诉机构也并非总是对第三十一条第三款(a)和(b)项下的嗣后协定和嗣后实践作出区分。 |
| (8) The Tribunal established pursuant to
the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) in CCFT v. United States,
however, has addressed this distinction. | (8) 但根据《北美自由贸易协定》设立的法庭在CCFT诉美国案中 作出了这一区分。 |
| In that case the United States of America
asserted that a number of unilateral actions by the three NAFTA parties
could, if considered together, constitute a subsequent agreement. | 在该案中，美利坚合众国声称，《北美自由贸易协定》的三个缔约国采取的一些单方面行动，如果联系起来看，可以构成嗣后协定。 |
| In a first step, the Tribunal did not
find that the evidence was sufficient to establish such a subsequent
agreement under article 31, paragraph 3 (a). | 最初，该法庭认为证据不足以确定第三十一条第三款(a)项之下的嗣后协定。 |
| In a second step, however, the Tribunal
concluded that the very same evidence constituted a relevant subsequent
practice that established an agreement between the parties regarding the
interpretation: | 但进入第二阶段，法庭认为，同样这些证据构成了确定缔约方就解释达成一致的相关嗣后实践： |
| The question remains: is there
“subsequent practice” that establishes the agreement of the NAFTA Parties on
this issue within the meaning of article 31 (3) (b)? | 问题仍然是：是否有一个“嗣后实践”，确定《北美自由贸易协定》缔约国在这个问题上存在第三十一条第三款(b)项意义下的一致性？ |
| The Tribunal concludes that there is. | 法庭认为这是肯定的。 |
| Although there is, to the Tribunal,
insufficient evidence on the record to demonstrate a “subsequent agreement
between the parties regarding the interpretation of the treaty or the
application of its provisions,” the available evidence cited by the
Respondent demonstrates to us that there is nevertheless a “subsequent
practice in the application of the treaty which establishes the agreement of
the parties regarding its applications”. | 尽管法庭认为没有充分的记录在案的证据，表明存在‘缔约方之间关于条约解释或条约规定适用方面的嗣后协定’，但回答这个问题的国家所举出的现有证据向我们表明，“在条约适用方面确实存在确定缔约方对条约适用的一致性的嗣后实践…”。 |
| (9) This reasoning may suggest that one
difference between a “subsequent agreement” and “subsequent practice” under
article 31, paragraph 3, lies in the different manifestations of the
“authentic” expression of the will of the parties. | (9) 这一论证可能表明，第三十一条第三款之下的“嗣后协定”和“嗣后实践”之间的一个区别，在于体现缔约方意愿的作准表述的不同形式。 |
| Indeed, by distinguishing between “any
subsequent agreement” under article 31, paragraph 3 (a), and “subsequent
practice … which establishes the understanding of the parties” under article
31, paragraph 3 (b), of the 1969 Vienna Convention, the Commission did not
intend to denote a difference concerning their possible legal effect. | 实际上，委员会在1969年《维也纳公约》第三十一条第三款(a)项下的“任何嗣后协定”与第三十一条第三款(b)项下“确定各当事国…理解的嗣后实践”之间作出区分，并不是想表示两者可能产生的法律效果上的区别。 |
| The difference between the two concepts,
rather, lies in the fact that a “subsequent agreement between the parties”
ipso facto has the effect of constituting an authentic means of
interpretation of the treaty, whereas a “subsequent practice” only has this
effect if its different elements, taken together, show “the common
understanding of the parties as to the meaning of the terms”. | 这两个概念的区别在于“缔约方之间的嗣后协定”自动具有作准的解释资料的作用，而“嗣后实践”只是在其不同内容联系在一起能够表明“缔约方对用语的意义的共同理解”时，方才具有这种效果。 |
| (10) Subsequent agreements and subsequent
practice under article 31, paragraph 3, are hence distinguished based on
whether an agreement of the parties can be identified as such, in a common
act or undertaking, or whether it is necessary to identify an agreement
through separate acts that in combination demonstrate a common position. | (10) 因此，区分第三十一条第三款之下的嗣后协定与嗣后实践的依据是，是可以在缔约方的共同行动或承诺中确定这种协定，还是必须通过综合起来可以表明一个共同立场的若干单独行动来确定缔约方的一致。 |
| A “subsequent agreement” under article
31, paragraph 3 (a), must therefore be “reached” and presupposes a deliberate
common act or undertaking by the parties, even if it consists of individual
acts by which they manifest their common understanding regarding the
interpretation of the treaty or the application of its provisions. | 因此，第三十一条第三款(a)项下的“嗣后协定”必须是由缔约方在一次有意的共同行动或承诺中“达成”的、表明它们对条约解释或条约规定适用的共同理解(即便包括单独的行动)。 |
| (11) “Subsequent practice” under article
31, paragraph 3 (b), on the other hand, encompasses all (other) relevant
forms of subsequent conduct by the parties to a treaty that contribute to the
identification of an agreement, or “understanding”, of the parties regarding
the interpretation of the treaty. | (11) 而第三十一条第三款(b)项下的“嗣后实践”则囊括了条约缔约方所有(其他)形式的相关嗣后行为，这些行为可帮助确定缔约方在条约解释方面的一致性或“理解”。 |
| It is, however, possible that “practice”
and “agreement” coincide in specific cases and cannot be distinguished. | 然而，在特定情况下“实践”和“协定”可能是一回事，无法区分。 |
| This explains why the term “subsequent
practice” is sometimes used in a more general sense, which encompasses both
means of interpretation that are referred to in article 31, paragraph 3 (a)
and (b). | 这就解释了为什么“嗣后实践”一词有时在一般意义上使用，同时包含第三十一条第三款(a)和(b)项所指的解释资料。 |
| (12) A group of separate subsequent
agreements, each between a limited number of parties, but which, taken
together, establish an agreement between all the parties to a treaty
regarding its interpretation, is not necessarily “a” subsequent agreement
under article 31, paragraph 3 (a). | (12) 一系列单独的嗣后协定，每项均在部分缔约方之间缔结，但把这些协定综合起来，便可确定条约所有缔约方对于条约解释的一致意见，这种情况不一定属于第三十一条第三款(a)项下的“一项”嗣后协定。 |
| The term “subsequent agreement” under
article 31, paragraph 3 (a), is limited to a common act or undertaking
between all the parties (see paragraph (10) above). | 第三十一条第三款(a)项下“嗣后协定”的意思仅限于所有缔约方之间的共同行动或承诺 (见上文第(10)段)。 |
| Different later agreements between a limited
number of parties that, taken together, establish an agreement between all
the parties regarding the interpretation of a treaty constitute subsequent
practice under article 31, paragraph 3 (b). | 少数缔约方之间嗣后签订的不同协定，若综合起来可确定所有缔约方对于条约解释的一致意见，则构成第三十一条第三款(b)项下的嗣后实践。 |
| Various such agreements between a limited
number of parties that, even taken together, do not establish an agreement
between all the parties regarding the interpretation of a treaty may have
interpretative value as a supplementary means of interpretation under article
32 (see below at paragraphs (23) and (24)). | 少数缔约方之间嗣后签订的各种协定，即使综合起来也不能确定所有缔约方对于条约解释的一致意见，则作为第三十二条之下的补充解释资料，可具有解释上的价值(见下文第(23)段和(24)段)。 |
| (13) A subsequent agreement under article
31, paragraph 3 (a), is an agreement “regarding” the interpretation of the
treaty or the application of its provisions. | (13) 第三十一条第三款(a)项下的嗣后协定，是“关于”条约解释或适用条约规定的协定。 |
| The parties must therefore intend,
possibly among other aims, to clarify the meaning of a treaty or how it is to
be applied. | 因此，缔约方必须除其他可能的目的外，力求澄清一项条约的含义，或应如何适用。 |
| (14) Whether an agreement is one
“regarding” the interpretation or application of a treaty can sometimes be
determined by some reference that links the “subsequent agreement” to the
treaty concerned. | (14) 一项协定是不是“关于”条约解释或适用的协定，有时可以通过其中使用的一些将“嗣后协定”与相关条约联系起来的语句来确定。 |
| Such a reference may be explicit, but may
also be comprised in a later treaty. | 这类语句可能是明确的，但也可能见于之后的条约。 |
| In the Jan Mayen case between Denmark and
Norway, for example, the International Court of Justice appears to have
accepted that a “subsequent treaty” between the parties “in the same field”
could be used for the purpose of the interpretation of the previous treaty. | 例如，在丹麦与挪威的Jan Mayen案中，国际法院似乎已认可当事国之间“在同一领域”的一项“嗣后条约”可用于解释前一项条约的目的。 |
| In that case, however, the Court
ultimately declined to use the subsequent treaty for that purpose because it
did not in any way “refer” to the previous treaty. | 但在该案中，法院最终还是拒绝使用嗣后条约用于该目的，因为嗣后条约丝毫没有“提到”之前的那项条约。 |
| (15) The Court of Final Appeal in Hong
Kong, China, has provided an example of a rather strict approach when it was
called upon to interpret the Sino-British Joint Declaration in the case of Ng
Ka Ling and Others v. Director of Immigration. | (15) 在吴嘉玲等人诉入境事务处处长案 中，中国香港终审法院在解释《中英联合声明》时采用了较为严格的做法。 |
| In this case, one party alleged that the
Sino-British Joint Liaison Group, consisting of representatives of China and
the United Kingdom under article 5 of the Joint Declaration, had come to an
agreement regarding the interpretation of the Joint Declaration. | 该案的当事一方主张，《联合声明》第五条下的中英联合联络小组――由中国和联合王国的代表组成――就《联合声明》的解释达成了一致。 |
| As evidence, the party pointed to a
booklet that stated that it was compiled “on the basis of the existing
immigration regulations and practices and the common view of the British and
Chinese sides in the [Joint Liaison Group]”. | 该当事方提到的依据是一本声称“基于现行移民条例和实践以及[联合联络小组]中英双方的共同意见”编写的小册子。 |
| The Court, however, did not find that the
purpose of the booklet was to “interpret or to apply” the Joint Declaration
within the meaning of article 31, paragraph 3 (a). | 但法院不认为小册子的目的是第三十一条第三款(a)项意义下的“解释或适用”《联合声明》。 |
| Paragraph 2 — definition of subsequent
practice under article 31, paragraph 3 (b) | 第2段――对第三十一条第三款(b)项下“嗣后实践”的定义 |
| (16) Paragraph 2 of draft conclusion 4
does not intend to provide a general definition for any form of subsequent
practice that may be relevant for the purpose of the interpretation of
treaties. | (16) 结论草案4第2段并不是要对可能用于条约解释目的的任何形式的嗣后实践作出一般性定义。 |
| Paragraph 2 is limited to subsequent
practice as a means of authentic interpretation that establishes the agreement
of all the parties to the treaty, as formulated in article 31, paragraph 3
(b). | 第2段只涉及作为作准解释资料的嗣后实践，即第三十一条第三款(b)项所述、确定各缔约方对条约解释一致性的嗣后实践。 |
| Such subsequent practice (in a narrow
sense) is distinguishable from subsequent practice (in a broad sense) under
article 32 of the 1969 Vienna Convention by one or more parties that does not
establish the agreement of the parties, but which may nevertheless be
relevant as a subsidiary means of interpretation (see draft conclusion 4,
paragraph 3). | (狭义上的)这种嗣后实践有别于1969年《维也纳公约》第三十二条下(广义上的)一个或多个缔约方的其他“嗣后实践”，后者并未确立缔约方的一致意见，但可以作为辅助解释资料(见结论草案4第3段)。 |
| (17) Subsequent practice under article
31, paragraph 3 (b), may consist of any “conduct”. | (17) 第三十一条第三款(b)项下的嗣后实践可以包括任何“行为”。 |
| The word “conduct” is used in the sense
of article 2 of the Commission’s articles on responsibility of States for
internationally wrongful acts. | 使用的“行为”一词，与委员会关于国家对国际不法行为的责任条款第二条同义。 |
| It may thus include not only acts, but
also omissions, including relevant silence, which contribute to establishing
agreement. | 因此，它不仅可以包括有助于确定一致意见的行为，也包括不作为，如相关沉默。 |
| The question under which circumstances
omissions, or silence, can contribute to an agreement of all the parties
regarding the interpretation of a treaty is addressed in draft conclusion 10,
paragraph 2. | 至于在什么情况下不作为或沉默可能促成所有缔约方就条约的解释达成一致，结论草案10第2段作出了说明。 |
| (18) Subsequent practice under article
31, paragraph 3 (b), must be conduct “in the application of the treaty”. | (18) 第三十一条第三款(b)项下的嗣后实践，必须是“适用条约”的行为。 |
| This includes not only official acts at
the international or at the internal level that serve to apply the treaty,
including to respect or to ensure the fulfilment of treaty obligations, but
also, inter alia, official statements regarding its interpretation, such as
statements at a diplomatic conference, statements in the course of a legal
dispute, or judgments of domestic courts; | 这不仅包括在国际上或在国内为适用条约――包括为遵守或确保履行条约义务――采取的官方行为，除其他外，也包括关于条约解释的官方声明，如外交会议上的发言、法律争端过程中的声明，或国内法院的判决； |
| official communications to which the
treaty gives rise; | 条约产生的官方函件； |
| or the enactment of domestic legislation
or the conclusion of international agreements for the purpose of implementing
a treaty even before any specific act of application takes place at the
internal or at the international level. | 或为执行条约颁布国内法或缔结国际协定，即使是在国内或在国际上实际采取任何具体适用条约的行动之前。 |
| (19) It may be recalled that, in one
case, a NAFTA Panel denied that internal legislation can be used as an
interpretative aid: | (19) 不妨一提的是，在一起案件中，《北美自由贸易协定》的一个专家组否定了国内法可用来帮助作出解释： |
| Finally, in light of the fact that both
Parties have made references to their national legislation on land
transportation, the Panel deems it appropriate to refer to article 27 of the
Vienna Convention, which states that ‘A party may not invoke the provisions
of its internal law as justification for its failure to perform a treaty. | 最后，鉴于双方都提到他们本国有关陆路运输的法律，专家组认为应当提及《维也纳公约》第二十七条，该条规定：“一当事国不得援引其国内法规定为理由而不履行条约。 |
| ’ This provision directs the Panel not to
examine national laws but the applicable international law. | ”这项规定指示本专家组无须审议国家法律，而只需研究适用的国际法。 |
| Thus, neither the internal law of the
United States nor the Mexican law should be utilized for the interpretation
of NAFTA. | 因此，不论是美国的国内法还是墨西哥的国内法，都不能用来解释《北美自由贸易协定》。 |
| To do so would be to apply an
inappropriate legal framework. | 这样做无异于适用一套不相干的法律框架。 |
| Whereas article 27 of the 1969 Vienna
Convention is certainly valid and important, this rule does not signify that
national legislation may not be taken into account as an element of
subsequent practice in the application of the treaty. | 虽然1969年《维也纳公约》第二十七条肯定是有效而且重要的，但这项规则并不意味着国内法在条约适用上不能作为嗣后实践的一个要素加以考虑。 |
| There is a difference between invoking
internal law as a justification for a failure to perform a treaty, on the one
hand, and referring to internal law for the purpose of interpreting a
provision of a treaty law, on the other. | 援引国内法为不履行条约辩解，和为解释一项条约法规定而提及国内法，这两者之间是有区别的。 |
| Accordingly, international adjudicatory
bodies, in particular the WTO Appellate Body and the European Court of Human
Rights, have recognized and regularly distinguished between internal
legislation (and other implementing measures at the internal level) that
violates treaty obligations, and internal legislation or other measures that
can serve as a means to interpret the treaty. | 因此，国际裁判机构，特别是世贸组织上诉机构和欧洲人权法院都承认违反条约义务的国内法(和其他国内执行措施)不同于可用来解释条约的国内法或其他措施，并经常对二者作出区分。 |
| It should be noted, however, that an
element of good faith is necessary in any “subsequent practice in the
application of the treaty”. | 然而，应当指出，“善意”这个要素在任何“适用条约方面的嗣后实践”中都是必要的。 |
| A manifest misapplication of a treaty, as
opposed to a bona fide application (even if erroneous), is therefore not an
“application of the treaty” in the sense of articles 31 and 32. | 因此，明显滥用条约而不是善意地履行条约(即便有失误)，不能视为第三十一条和第三十二条意义上的“适用条约”。 |
| (20) The requirement that subsequent
practice in the application of a treaty under article 31, paragraph 3 (b),
must establish an agreement “regarding its interpretation” has the same
meaning as the parallel requirement under article 31, paragraph 3 (a) (see
paragraphs (13) and (14) above). | (20) 第三十一条第三款(b)项下适用条约方面的嗣后实践必须确立“关于条约解释的”协定，这一要求与第三十一条第三款(a)项下的平行要求含义相同(见上文第(13)和第(14)段)。 |
| It may often be difficult to distinguish
between subsequent practice that implies a contribution to the interpretation
of a treaty and other practice “in the application of the treaty”. | 有助于解释条约的嗣后实践与“适用条约”方面的其他实践之间，常常很难作出区分。 |
| (21) The question under which
circumstances an “agreement of the parties regarding the interpretation of a
treaty” is actually “established” is addressed in draft conclusion 10. | (21) 至于在什么情况下“缔约方对条约解释的一致”实际得到“确定”，结论草案10作出了说明。 |
| (22) Article 31, paragraph 3 (b), does
not explicitly require that the practice must be the conduct of the parties
to the treaty themselves. | (22) 第三十一条第三款(b)项并没有明确要求“实践”必须是条约缔约方自己的行为。 |
| It is, however, the parties themselves,
acting through their organs, or by way of conduct in the application of the
treaty, who engage in practice that may establish their agreement. | 然而，首先是缔约方自己，通过它们的机构行事， 或通过具体践行条约的行为，才可能确定它们的一致。 |
| The question of whether other actors can
generate relevant subsequent practice is addressed in draft conclusion 5. | 至于其他行为方是否能够产生相关的嗣后实践，结论草案5作出了说明。 |
| Paragraph 3 — subsequent practice under
article 32 | 第3段――第三十二条之下的嗣后实践 |
| (23) Paragraph 3 of draft conclusion 4
addresses subsequent practice under article 32, that is subsequent practice
other than that referred to in article 31, paragraph 3 (b). | (23) 结论草案4第3段论及第三十二条之下的嗣后实践，即第三十一条第三款(b)项中没有提到的嗣后实践。 |
| This paragraph concerns “subsequent
practice in the application of the treaty as a supplementary means of
interpretation under article 32”, as mentioned in paragraph 4 of draft
conclusion 2. | 这一段论及结论草案2第4段中提到的“条约适用方面的其他嗣后实践作为第三十二条所指的补充的解释资料”。 |
| This form of subsequent practice, which
does not require the agreement of all the parties, was originally referred to
in the commentary of the Commission to the draft articles on the law of
treaties as follows: | 这种形式的嗣后实践不要求所有缔约方一致同意，委员会在条约法条款草案的评注中最初是这样讲的： |
| But, in general, the practice of an
individual party or of only some parties as an element of interpretation is
on a quite different plane from a concordant practice embracing all the
parties and showing their common understanding of the meaning of the treaty. | 但一般而论，以个别当事国的实践或只是若干当事国的实践作为解释要素与所有当事国所一致共有并表示它们对条约意义有共同了解的实践自不可同日而语。 |
| Subsequent practice of the latter kind
evidences the agreement of the parties as to the interpretation of the treaty
and is analogous to an interpretative agreement. | 后面这种后来实践证明当事国对条约的解释一致同意，不啻为一种解释协定。 |
| For this reason the Commission considered
that subsequent practice establishing the common understanding of all the
parties regarding the interpretation of a treaty should be included in
paragraph 3 [which became article 31, paragraph 3, of the 1969 Vienna
Convention] as an authentic means of interpretation alongside interpretative
agreements. | 基于此种理由，委员会认为，确定全体当事国对解释条约的共同了解的后来实践应该列入第三项[后来成为1969年《维也纳公约》第三十一条第三款]内作为与解释协定相并立的作准解释方法。 |
| The practice of individual States in the
application of a treaty, on the other hand, may be taken into account only as
one of the “further” means of interpretation mentioned in article 70 [which
became article 32]. | 在另一方面，个别国家适用条约的实践仅可作为第七十条[后来成为第三十二条]所称“其他”解释方法之一。 |
| (24) Paragraph 3 of draft conclusion 4
does not enunciate a requirement, like that in article 31, paragraph 3 (b),
that the relevant practice be “regarding the interpretation” of the treaty. | (24) 结论草案4第3段并没有提出像第三十一条第三款(b)项中的那样一项要求，即相关实践必须是“关于条约解释的”。 |
| Thus, for the purposes of the third
paragraph, any practice in the application of the treaty that may provide
indications as to how the treaty is to be interpreted may be a relevant
supplementary means of interpretation under article 32. | 因此，就第3段而言，在适用条约方面的任何实践，只要能够表明条约应如何解释，便可作为第三十二条下的相关补充解释资料。 |
| (25) Subsequent practice under article 32
has since the adoption of the 1969 Vienna Convention been recognized and
applied by international courts and other adjudicatory bodies as a means of
interpretation (see paragraphs (26) to (32) below). | (25) 自1969年《维也纳公约》通过后，第三十二条下的嗣后实践已被各国际性法院和其他裁判机构作为一种解释资料予以承认并适用(见下文第(26)段至(32)段)。 |
| It should be noted, however, that the WTO
Appellate Body, in Japan — Alcoholic Beverages II, has formulated a
definition of subsequent practice for the purpose of treaty interpretation
that seems to suggest that only such “subsequent practice in the application
of the treaty” “which establishes the agreement of the parties regarding its
interpretation” can at all be relevant for the purpose of treaty
interpretation and not any other form of subsequent practice by one or more
parties: “subsequent practice in interpreting a treaty has been recognized as
a ‘concordant, common and consistent’ sequence of acts or pronouncements
which is sufficient to establish a discernible pattern implying the agreement
of the parties regarding its interpretation”. | 然而，应当指出，世贸组织上诉机构在日本－酒精饮料案(二)中， 为条约解释的目的提出了一个嗣后实践的定义，该定义似乎认为，只有“确定了缔约方对条约解释的一致”的条约适用方面的这种嗣后实践，才能用于条约解释的目的，而不是任何其他形式的、一个或多个缔约方的嗣后实践：用于解释条约的嗣后实践，公认应当是‘协调、共同和一致的’系列行为或声明，足以确立一种明确的模式，表明缔约方对条约解释的一致。 |
| However, the jurisprudence of the
International Court of Justice and other international courts and tribunals,
and even that of the WTO Dispute Settlement Body (see paragraphs (31) and
(32) below), demonstrates that subsequent practice which fulfils all the
conditions of article 31, paragraphs 3 (b), of the 1969 Vienna Convention is
not the only form of subsequent practice by parties in the application of a
treaty that may be relevant for the purpose of treaty interpretation. | 然而，国际法院和其他国际性法院和法庭的判例，乃至世贸组织争端解决机构的判例(见下文第(33)和(34)段)都表明，符合1969年《维也纳公约》第三十一条第三款(b)项所有条件的嗣后实践，就条约解释目的而言，并不是缔约方在适用条约方面唯一的嗣后实践形式。 |
| (26) In the case of Kasikili/Sedudu
Island, for example, the International Court of Justice held that a report by
a technical expert that had been commissioned by one of the parties and that
had “remained at all times an internal document”, while not representing
subsequent practice that establishes the agreement of the parties under
article 31, paragraph 3 (b), could “nevertheless support the conclusions”
that the Court had reached by other means of interpretation. | (26) 例如，在卡西基里/塞杜杜岛案中，国际法院认为，一个缔约方委托一位技术专家编写的报告“始终是一份国内文件”， 虽然不能代表第三十一条第三款(b)项下确定各缔约方一致意见的嗣后实践，但仍可为国际法院根据其他解释资料得出的结论“提供支持”。 |
| (27) The European Court of Human Rights
held in Loizidou v. Turkey that its interpretation was “confirmed by the
subsequent practice of the Contracting Parties”, that is “the evidence of a
practice denoting practically universal agreement amongst Contracting Parties
that [a]rticles 25 and 46 … of the Convention do not permit territorial or
substantive restrictions”. | (27) 欧洲人权法院在Loizidou诉土耳其一案中裁定，该法院的解释“得到各缔约方嗣后实践的确认”， 即“有证据显示存在一种实践，表明缔约方几乎普遍认为《公约》第二十五条和第四十六条…不允许作出领土或实质上的限制”。 |
| More often the European Court of Human
Rights has relied on — not necessarily uniform — subsequent practice of the
parties by referring to national legislation and domestic administrative
practice, as a means of interpretation. | 欧洲人权法院经常――并不一定总是――将缔约方的嗣后实践作为依据，为此援引国家法律或国内行政实践作为解释资料。 |
| In the case of Demir and Baykara v.
Turkey, for example, the Court held that “[a]s to the practice of European
States, it can be observed that, in the vast majority of them, the right for
public servants to bargain collectively with the authorities has been
recognised” and that “[t]he remaining exceptions can be justified only by
particular circumstances”. | 例如，在Demir和Baykara诉土耳其一案中，法院裁定，“关于欧洲国家的实践，可以说，绝大多数欧洲国家都承认公务员与主管机关进行集体谈判的权利，” “其余的例外只能以特殊情况作为理由”。 |
| (28) The Inter-American Court of Human
Rights, when taking subsequent practice of the parties into account, has also
not limited its use to cases in which the practice established the agreement
of the parties. | (28) 美洲人权法院在考虑到缔约方的嗣后实践时，也没有将其使用仅限于实践确定了缔约方一致意见的情况。 |
| Thus, in the case of Hilaire, Constantine
and Benjamin et al. v. Trinidad and Tobago the Inter-American Court of Human
Rights held that the mandatory imposition of the death penalty for every form
of conduct that resulted in the death of another person was incompatible with
article 4, paragraph 2, of the American Convention on Human Rights
(imposition of the death penalty only for the most serious crimes). | 例如，在Hilaire、Constantine和Benjamin等人诉特里尼达和多巴哥一案中，美洲人权法院裁定，对造成他人死亡的所有行为形式一律强制判处死刑不符合《美洲人权公约》第四条第2款(只对最严重的犯罪判处死刑)。 |
| In order to support this interpretation,
the Court held that it was “useful to consider some examples in this respect,
taken from the legislation of those American countries that maintain the
death penalty”. | 为了支持这一解释，法院认为，“不妨在这方面考虑从维持死刑的美洲国家的立法中摘取的几个例子”。 |
| (29) The Human Rights Committee
established by the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights is
open to arguments based on subsequent practice in a broad sense (under
article 32 of the 1969 Vienna Convention) when it comes to the justification
of interferences with the rights set forth in the Covenant. | (29) 根据《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》设立的人权事务委员会在处理干涉《公约》所赋权利的理由时，对根据(1969年《维也纳公约》第三十二条之下)广义上的嗣后实践提出的论点持开放态度。 |
| Interpreting the rather general terms
contained in article 19, paragraph 3, of the Covenant (permissible
restrictions on freedom of expression), the Committee observed that “similar
restrictions can be found in many jurisdictions”, and concluded that the aim
pursued by the contested law did not, as such, fall outside the legitimate
aims of article 19, paragraph 3, of the Covenant. | 委员会在解释《公约》第十九条第3款(可允许对言论自由实行的限制)中较为笼统的规定时，指出“在很多管辖区都可以找到类似的限制，” 委员会的结论是，存在争议的法律所追求的目的，本身并没有超出《公约》第十九条第3款规定的合理目的。 |
| (30) The International Criminal Tribunal
for the former Yugoslavia, referring to the Convention on the Prevention and
Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, noted in the Jelisić
judgment that: | (30) 前南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭在Jelisić案的判决中提到《防止及惩治灭绝种族罪公约》，指出： |
| the Trial Chamber … interprets the
Convention’s terms in accordance with the general rules of interpretation of
treaties set out in articles 31 and 32 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of
Treaties. | 审判分庭…根据《维也纳条约法公约》第三十一和第三十二条规定的条约解释通则解释《灭绝种族罪公约》的条款。 |
| … The Trial Chamber also took account of
subsequent practice grounded upon the Convention. | …审判分庭还考虑到了根据该公约形成的嗣后实践。 |
| Special significance was attached to the
Judgments rendered by the Tribunal for Rwanda. | 分庭特别考虑到卢旺达问题国际刑事法庭作出的裁决。 |
| … The practice of States, notably through
their national courts, and the work of international authorities in this
field have also been taken into account. | …此外还考虑了各国的实践，特别是通过其国内法院形成的实践，以及该领域的国际主管机构开展的工作。 |
| (31) The WTO dispute settlement bodies
also occasionally distinguish between “subsequent practice” that satisfies
the conditions of article 31, paragraph 3 (b), and other forms of subsequent
practice in the application of the treaty that they also recognize as being
relevant for the purpose of treaty interpretation. | (31) 世贸组织的解决争端机构有时也对满足第三十一条第三款(b)项条件的“嗣后实践”和适用条约方面其他形式的嗣后实践作出区分，认为其他形式的嗣后实践也与条约解释目的有关。 |
| In US — Section 110(5) Copyright Act (not
appealed), for example, the Panel had to determine whether a “minor
exceptions doctrine” concerning royalty payments applied. | 例如，在美国版权法第110(5)节条款案 (未上诉)中，专家组必须确定有关支付版权费的“轻微例外原则”是否适用。 |
| The Panel found evidence in support of
the existence of such a doctrine in several member States’ national
legislation and noted: | 专家组发现有证据表明在几个成员国的国内法中确有这种原则存在，并指出： |
| we recall that [a]rticle 31 (3) of the
Vienna Convention provides that together with the context (a) any subsequent
agreement, (b) subsequent practice, or (c) any relevant rules of
international law applicable between the parties, shall be taken into account
for the purposes of interpretation. | 我们忆及《维也纳公约》第三十一条第三款规定，为解释目的应与上下文一并考虑的还有：(a)
任何嗣后协定、(b) 嗣后实践或(c) 在缔约方之间适用的任何有关国际法规则。 |
| We note that the parties and third
parties have brought to our attention several examples from various countries
of limitations in national laws based on the minor exceptions doctrine. | 我们注意到，缔约方和第三方提请我们注意不同国家根据“轻微例外原则”在国内法中实行限制的一些例子。 |
| In our view, [S]tate practice as
reflected in the national copyright laws of Berne Union members before and
after 1948, 1967 and 1971, as well as of WTO Members before and after the
date that the TRIPS Agreement became applicable to them, confirms our
conclusion about the minor exceptions doctrine. | 我们认为，鉴于1948年、1967年和1971年之前和之后反映在伯尔尼联盟成员国的版权法中的国家实践，以及《与贸易有关的知识产权协定》对世贸组织成员国适用之前和之后反映在这些国家版权法中的国家实践，我们有关轻微例外原则的结论得到证实。 |
| And the Panel added the following
cautionary footnote: “By enunciating these examples of [S]tate practice we do
not wish to express a view on whether these are sufficient to constitute
‘subsequent practice’ within the meaning of [a]rticle 31 (3) (b) of the
Vienna Convention.” | 专家组为谨慎起见又添加了以下脚注： “我们阐述这些国家实践的例子，并非想对这些例子是否足以构成《维也纳公约》第三十一条第三款(b)项含义内的‘嗣后实践’表达意见。 ” |
| (32) In European Communities — Customs
Classification of Certain Computer Equipment, the WTO Appellate Body
criticized the Panel for not having considered decisions by the Harmonized
System Committee of the World Customs Organization (WCO) as a relevant subsequent
practice: | (32) 在欧洲共同体－某些计算机设备的关税分类案中，世贸组织上诉机构批评专家组没有将世界海关组织(海关组织)统一制度委员会的决定视为相关的嗣后实践： |
| A proper interpretation also would have
included an examination of the existence and relevance of subsequent
practice. | 适当的解释还应包括对嗣后实践的存在和相关性的研究。 |
| We note that the United States referred,
before the Panel, to the decisions taken by the Harmonized System Committee
of the WCO in April 1997 on the classification of certain LAN equipment as
ADP machines. | 我们注意到美国曾向专家组提到世界海关组织统一制度委员会1997年4月关于将某些局域网设备归类为自动数据处理机器的决定。 |
| Singapore, a third party in the panel
proceedings, also referred to these decisions. | 新加坡作为专家组审理程序中的第三方，也提到这些决定。 |
| The European Communities observed that it
had introduced reservations with regard to these decisions. | 欧洲共同体指出，它已对这些决定提出保留。 |
| … However, we consider that in
interpreting the tariff concessions in Schedule LXXX, decisions of the WCO
may be relevant. | …然而，我们认为，在解释附表八十中的关税减让时，海关组织的决定可能是相关的。 |
| Thus, on closer inspection, the WTO
dispute settlement bodies also recognize the distinction between “subsequent
practice” under article 31, paragraph 3 (b), and a broader concept of
subsequent practice (under article 32) that does not presuppose an agreement
between all the parties of the treaty. | 因此，在经过认真研究之后，世贸组织各争端解决机构也承认第三十一条第三款(b)项下的“嗣后实践”与(第三十二条之下)更广义的嗣后实践概念之间的区别，即后者并不要求所有条约缔约方之间的一致。 |
| (33) In using subsequent practice by one
or more, but not all, parties to a treaty as a supplementary means of
interpretation under article 32 one must, however, always remain conscious of
the fact that “the view of one State does not make international law”. | (33) 在采用一个或几个缔约方，但不是所有条约缔约方的嗣后实践作为第三十二条下解释的补充资料时，必须始终牢记，“一个国家的意见不成其为国际法”。 |
| In any case, the distinction between
agreed subsequent practice under article 31, paragraph 3 (b), as an authentic
means of interpretation, and other subsequent practice (in a broad sense)
under article 32, implies that a greater interpretative value should be
attributed to the former. | 无论如何，第三十一条第三款(b)项下达成一致的嗣后实践――作为作准的解释资料，与第三十二条之下(广义)的其他嗣后实践，两者之间的区别意味着应给予前者更大的解释权重。 |
| Domestic courts have sometimes not clearly
distinguished between subsequent agreements and subsequent practice under
article 31, paragraph 3, and other subsequent practice under article 32. | 国内法院有时不明确区分第三十一条第三款下的嗣后协定和嗣后实践及第三十二条下的其他嗣后实践。 |
| (34) The distinction between subsequent
practice under article 31, paragraph 3 (b), and subsequent practice under
article 32 also contributes to answering the question of whether subsequent
practice requires repeated action with some frequency or whether a one-time
application of the treaty may be enough. | (34) 区分第三十一条第三款(b)项下的嗣后实践与第三十二条之下的嗣后实践，也有助于回答一个问题，即嗣后实践是需要一定频率的重复行动，
还是只要有一次用于条约的适用就够了。 |
| In the WTO framework, the Appellate Body
has found: | 在世贸组织框架内，上诉机构认为： |
| An isolated act is generally not
sufficient to establish subsequent practice; it is a sequence of acts
establishing the agreement of the parties that is relevant. | “一个孤立的行为通常不足以形成嗣后实践，必须是确定了缔约方之间一致的一系列行动，方为有效。 ” |
| If, however, the concept of subsequent
practice as a means of treaty interpretation is distinguished from a possible
agreement between the parties, frequency is not a necessary element of the
definition of the concept of “subsequent practice” in the broad sense (under
article 32). | 然而，如果要在作为条约解释资料的嗣后实践概念与缔约方之间可能的一致之间做出区分，频率并不是界定 (第三十二条下)广义的“嗣后实践”概念的一个必要要素。 |
| (35) Thus, “subsequent practice” in the
broad sense (under article 32) covers any application of the treaty by one or
more (but not all) parties. | (35) 因此，(第三十二条下)广义的“嗣后实践”涵盖一个或多个(但并非所有)缔约方的任何适用条约的行为。 |
| It can take various forms. | 它可能有各种形式。 |
| Such “conduct by one or more parties in
the application of the treaty” may, in particular, consist of a direct
application of the treaty in question, conduct that is attributable to a
State party as an application of the treaty, a statement or a judicial
pronouncement regarding its interpretation or application. | 具体而言，这种“一个或多个缔约方适用条约的行为”可包括直接适用有关条约，即一种可归属于某一缔约方适用条约的行为，或关于条约解释或适用的声明或司法宣示。 |
| Such conduct may include official
statements concerning the treaty’s meaning, protests against non-performance
or tacit acceptance of statements or acts by other parties. | 这种行为可包括关于条约含义的官方声明，对不履行条约提出的抗议，或对其他缔约方声明或行为的默许。 |
| Conclusion 5 Conduct as subsequent
practice | 结论5 作为嗣后实践的行为 |
| 1. Subsequent practice under articles 31
and 32 may consist of any conduct of a party in the application of a treaty,
whether in the exercise of its executive, legislative, judicial, or other
functions. | 1. 第三十一和第三十二条所指的嗣后实践可包括某一缔约方的任何适用条约的行为，不论此行为是行使行政、立法、司法还是其他职能。 |
| 2. Other conduct, including by non-State
actors, does not constitute subsequent practice under articles 31 and 32. | 2. 其他行为，包括非国家行为体的行为，不构成第三十一和第三十二条所指的嗣后实践。 |
| Such conduct may, however, be relevant
when assessing the subsequent practice of parties to a treaty. | 然而此种行为在评估条约缔约方的嗣后实践时可能相关。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Draft conclusion 5 addresses the
question of possible authors of subsequent practice under articles 31 and 32
of the 1969 Vienna Convention. | (1) 结论草案5涉及第三十一和第三十二条所指的嗣后实践的可能主体问题。 |
| The phrase “under articles 31 and 32”
makes it clear that this draft conclusion applies both to subsequent practice
as an authentic means of interpretation under article 31, paragraph 3 (b),
and to subsequent practice as a supplementary means of interpretation under
article 32. | “第三十一和第三十二条所指”说明本条结论草案既适用于作为1969年《维也纳公约》第三十一条第三款(b)项所指的作准解释资料的嗣后实践，也适用于作为第三十二条所指的补充解释资料的嗣后实践。 |
| Paragraph 1 of draft conclusion 5 defines
positively whose conduct in the application of the treaty may constitute
subsequent practice under articles 31 and 32, whereas paragraph 2 states
negatively which conduct does not, but which may nevertheless be relevant
when assessing the subsequent practice of parties to a treaty. | 结论草案5第1段以肯定句式界定了条约适用中谁的行为可能构成第三十一条和第三十二条所指的嗣后实践，而第2段以否定句式说明了哪些行为不构成第三十一条和第三十二条所指的嗣后实践，但在评估条约缔约方的嗣后实践时可能相关。 |
| Since the draft conclusions do not deal
specifically with treaties between States and international organizations or
between international organizations, the practice of international
organizations is addressed only to a limited extent in draft conclusion 12,
paragraph 3, but not in draft conclusion 5. | 由于本结论草案不具体涉及国家和国际组织之间或国际组织相互间的条约，因此只在结论草案12第3段有限述及国际组织的实践，而在结论草案5中没有涉及。 |
| Paragraph 1 — conduct constituting
subsequent practice | 第1段――构成嗣后实践的行为 |
| (2) Paragraph 1 of draft conclusion 5, by
using the phrase “any conduct of a party”, borrows language from article 2
(a) of the articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful
acts. | (2) 结论草案5第1段采用的 “某一缔约方的任何行为”一语借用了国家对国际不法行为的责任条款第2条(a)项的措辞。 |
| Accordingly, the term “any conduct”
encompasses actions and omissions. | 相应地，“任何行为”包括作为和不作为。 |
| It is not limited to conduct of the
organs of a State, but may also cover conduct of private actors acting under
delegated public authority. | 它不限于一国国家机关的行为，还可涵盖代表指定公共机构行事的私人行为方的行为。 |
| The expression “whether in the exercise
of its executive, legislative, judicial, or other functions” focuses on the
functions of a State, rather than on its organs. | “不论此行为是行使行政、立法、司法还是其他职能”一语侧重于国家而不是其机关的职能。 |
| The relevant conduct must be “in the
application of a treaty”. | 相关行为必须是“适用条约”的行为。 |
| The borrowing of language from the
articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts does
not, however, extend to the concept of attribution and to the requirement
that the conduct in question be “internationally wrongful”. | 不过，借用的国家对国际不法行为的责任条款中的措辞并不延及“归属”概念和关于相关行为应是“国际不法”行为的要求。 |
| Since the concept of “application of the
treaty” requires conduct in good faith, a manifest misapplication of a treaty
falls outside this scope. | 由于“适用条约”这一概念要求善意的行为，因而明显的滥用条约不在这一范围之内。 |
| (3) An example of relevant conduct that
arises only indirectly from the conduct of the parties, but nevertheless may
give rise to State practice, has been identified by the International Court
of Justice in the Kasikili/Sedudu Island case. | 。 (3) 国际法院在卡西基里/塞杜杜岛案中确认了这样一个实例：一种行为仅间接源于缔约方的行为，但仍可能形成国家实践。 |
| There the Court considered whether the
regular use of an island on the border between Namibia (former South-West
Africa) and Botswana (former Bechuanaland) by members of a local tribe, the
Masubia, could be regarded as subsequent practice in the sense of article 31,
paragraph 3 (b), of the Vienna Convention. | 国际法院在该案中考虑了当地马苏比亚部落的成员对纳米比亚(前西南非洲)和博茨瓦纳(前贝专纳兰)边界上一个岛屿的经常使用可否视为《维也纳公约》第三十一条第三款(b)项所指的嗣后实践。 |
| The Court concluded that subsequent
practice could be found if such conduct: was linked to a belief on the part
of the Caprivi authorities that the boundary laid down by the 1890 Treaty
followed the southern channel of the Chobe; | 法院得出结论认为，这种行为可以认定是嗣后实践，条件是它：与卡普里维当局的这一观点相关：1890年条约规定的边界是沿乔贝河的南河道划定的； |
| and, second, that the Bechuanaland
authorities were fully aware of and accepted this as a confirmation of the
Treaty boundary. | 而且贝专纳兰当局完全了解这种使用并予以认可，以此作为对条约边界的确认。 |
| (4) By referring to any conduct of a
party in the application of the treaty, however, paragraph 1 does not imply
that any such conduct necessarily constitutes, in a given case, subsequent
practice for the purpose of treaty interpretation. | (4) 第1段述及某一缔约方适用条约的行为，但这并不意味着任何这种行为必定在给定案件中构成条约解释意义上的嗣后实践。 |
| The use of the phrase “may consist” is
intended to reflect this point. | 使用“可包括”一语就是为了体现这一点。 |
| This clarification is particularly
important in relation to conduct of State organs that might contradict an
officially expressed position of the State with respect to a particular
matter and thus contribute to an equivocal conduct by the State. | 对于国家机关的行为可能违反该国在某一事项上的官方表述立场，从而导致国家行为模棱两可的情况，这种说明尤为重要。 |
| (5) Given the significant differences in
the internal organization of States, it is difficult to determine the conditions
under which the conduct of lower State organs is relevant subsequent practice
for purposes of treaty interpretation. | (5) 由于各国国内组织的巨大差异，很难确定在哪些情况下，下级国家机关的行为构成条约解释意义上的相关嗣后实践。 |
| The relevant criterion is less the
position of the organ in the hierarchy of the State than its function in
interpreting and applying any particular treaty. | 与机关在国家等级制度中的位置相比，相关标准更重视它在解释和适用特定条约中的职能。 |
| (6) Subsequent practice of States in the
application of a treaty may certainly be performed by the high-ranking
government officials mentioned in article 7 of the 1969 Vienna Convention. | (6) 国家在适用条约方面的嗣后实践当然可以由1969年《维也纳公约》第七条所指高级政府官员实施。 |
| Yet, since most treaties typically are
not applied by such high officials, international courts and tribunals have
recognized that the conduct of lower authorities may also, under certain
conditions, constitute relevant subsequent practice in the application of a
treaty. | 但是，由于大部分条约通常不是由高级政府官员适用，各国际性法院和法庭认识到，低级主管机关的行为在某些情况下也可以构成适用条约方面的嗣后实践。 |
| Accordingly, the International Court of
Justice recognized in the Case concerning rights of nationals of the United
States in Morocco that article 95 of the General Act of the International
Conference of Algeciras (1906) had to be interpreted flexibly in light of the
inconsistent practice of local customs authorities. | 因此，国际法院在摩洛哥境内美国国民权利案中承认，鉴于当地海关当局不一致的实践，应灵活解释1906年《阿尔赫西拉斯国际会议总议定书》 第95条。 |
| The jurisprudence of arbitral tribunals
confirms that relevant subsequent practice may emanate from lower officials. | 各仲裁法庭的判例确认，相关嗣后实践可来自下级官员。 |
| In the German External Debts decision,
the Arbitral Tribunal considered a letter of the Bank of England to the
German Federal Debt Administration as relevant subsequent practice. | 在德国外债案的裁决中，仲裁法庭将英格兰银行致德国联邦债务管理局的一封信作为相关嗣后实践。 |
| And in the case of Tax regime governing
pensions paid to retired UNESCO officials residing in France, the Arbitral
Tribunal accepted, in principle, the practice of the French tax
administration of not collecting taxes on the pensions of retired UNESCO
employees as being relevant subsequent practice. Ultimately, however, the
Arbitral Tribunal considered some contrary official pronouncements by a
higher authority, the French Government, to be decisive. | 在关于居住在法国的教科文组织退休职员所领退休金的征税制度案中，仲裁法庭原则上认可，法国税务部门不对教科文组织退休职员的退休金征税的实践是相关嗣后实践，但最终认为上级机关，即法国政府的一些相反的官方声明具有决定作用。 |
| (7) The practice of lower and local
officials may thus be subsequent practice “of a party in the application of a
treaty” if this practice is sufficiently unequivocal and if the Government
can be expected to be aware of this practice and has not contradicted it
within a reasonable time. | (7) 因此，下级和地方官员的做法可以成为某一缔约方“适用条约”的嗣后实践，前提是该做法足够明确，并且政府应该知道该做法而没有在合理时间内反对这种做法。 |
| Paragraph 2 — conduct not constituting
subsequent practice | 第2段――不构成嗣后实践的行为 |
| (8) Paragraph 2 of draft conclusion 5
comprises two sentences. | (8) 结论草案5第2段由两句话组成。 |
| The first sentence indicates that conduct
other than that envisaged in paragraph 1, including by non-State actors, does
not constitute subsequent practice under articles 31 and 32. | 第一句说明第1段所设想以外的行为，包括非国家行为体的行为，不构成第三十一和第三十二条所指的嗣后实践。 |
| The phrase “other conduct” was introduced
in order clearly to establish the distinction between the conduct
contemplated in paragraph 2 and that contemplated in paragraph 1. | 使用“其他行为”一词是为了明确区分第2段和第1段所述行为。 |
| At the same time, conduct not covered by
paragraph 1 may be relevant when “assessing” the subsequent practice of
parties to a treaty. | 同时，第1段未涵盖的行为在“评估”条约缔约方的嗣后实践时可能相关。 |
| (9) “Subsequent practice in the
application of a treaty” will be brought about by those who are called to
apply the treaty, which are normally the States parties themselves. | (9) “条约适用方面的嗣后实践”将由受命适用条约者(通常是缔约国本身)提出。 |
| The general rule has been formulated by
the Iran-U.S. Claims Tribunal as follows: | 伊朗－美国索赔法庭制定的一般规则如下： |
| It is a recognized principle of treaty
interpretation to take into account, together with the context, any
subsequent practice in the application of an international treaty. | 条约解释的一个公认原则是，要结合上下文一并考虑某项国际条约适用方面的任何嗣后实践。 |
| This practice must, however, be a
practice of the parties to the treaty and one which establishes the agreement
of the parties regarding the interpretation of that treaty. | 不过，这种实践必须是条约缔约方的实践，并且确定了各缔约国关于条约解释的一致。 |
| Whereas one of the participants in the
settlement negotiations, namely Bank Markazi, is an entity of Iran and thus
its practice can be attributed to Iran as one of the parties to the Algiers
Declarations, the other participants in the settlement negotiations and in
actual settlements, namely the United States banks, are not entities of the
Government of the United States, and their practice cannot be attributed as
such to the United States as the other party to the Algiers Declarations. | 尽管解决方案谈判的参加者之一――伊朗中央银行是伊朗的一个实体，因而其实践可归于作为《阿尔及尔宣言》缔约方之一的伊朗，但解决方案谈判和实际解决方案的其他参加者，即几家美国银行，并非美国政府的实体，因而它们的实践不能如此归于作为《阿尔及尔宣言》另一缔约方的美国”。 |
| (10) The first sentence of the second
paragraph of draft conclusion 5 is intended to reflect this general rule. | (10) 结论草案5第2段的第一句旨在反映该一般规则。 |
| It emphasizes the primary role of the
States parties to a treaty who are the masters of the treaty and are ultimately
responsible for its application. | 它强调了条约缔约国的主要作用，缔约国是条约的主人，并最终对条约的适用负责。 |
| This does not exclude that conduct by
non-State actors may constitute a form of application of the treaty if it
amounts to an exercise of executive or other functions of a State party. | 这并不排除一种可能，即如果非国家行为体的行为相当于行使某一缔约国的行政或其他职能，则可能构成适用条约的一种形式。 |
| For example, a State party may be acting
through private entities, whether State-owned or not, or authorizing them to
exercise governmental authority with respect to the implementation of a
treaty. | 例如一缔约国可能通过私人实体(无论是否为国有)行事，或授权它们在执行条约方面行使政府权力。 |
| (11) “Other conduct” in the sense of
paragraph 2 of draft conclusion 5 may be that of different actors. | (11) 结论草案5第2段所述的“其他行为”可是不同行为体的其他行为。 |
| Such conduct may, in particular, be
practice of parties that is not “in the application of the treaty” or
statements by a State that is not party to a treaty about the latter’s
interpretation, or a pronouncement by an independent treaty monitoring body
in relation to the interpretation of the treaty concerned, or acts of
technical bodies that are tasked by Conferences of States Parties to advise
on the implementation of treaty provisions, or different forms of conduct or
statements of non-State actors. | 具体而言，这些行为可包括缔约方并非“适用条约”的行为、非条约缔约方的国家关于条约解释的声明、 独立条约监督机构与解释所涉条约有关的声明、 受缔约国大会委派就条约条款的落实提供咨询意见的技术机构的行为或非国家行为体不同形式的行为或声明。 |
| (12) The phrase “assessing the subsequent
practice” in the second sentence of paragraph 2 should be understood in a
broad sense as covering both the identification of the existence of a
subsequent practice and the determination of its legal significance. | (12) 第2段第二句中的“评估嗣后实践”应从广义上理解为既包括查明嗣后实践的存在，也包括确定其法律意义。 |
| Statements or conduct of other actors,
such as other States, international organizations or non-State actors, can
reflect, or initiate, relevant subsequent practice of the parties to a
treaty. | 其他国家、国际组织或非国家行为体等其他行为体的声明或行为有可能反映缔约方的相关嗣后实践或成为其肇始者。 |
| Such reflection or initiation of
subsequent practice of the parties by the conduct of other actors should not,
however, be conflated with the practice by the parties to the treaty
themselves. | 但这种由其他行为体的行为反映或肇始的缔约方嗣后实践不应并入条约缔约方本身的实践。 |
| Activities of actors that are not parties
to a treaty may, however, be relevant when assessing subsequent practice of
the States parties to a treaty. | 然而，非条约缔约方的行为体的活动在评估条约缔约方的嗣后实践时可能相关。 |
| (13) Decisions, resolutions and other
practice by international organizations can be relevant for the
interpretation of treaties in their own right. | (13) 国际组织的决定、决议和其他实践本身就可能与条约的解释相关。 |
| This is recognized, for example, in
article 2 (j) of the 1986 Vienna Convention, which mentions the “established
practice of the organization” as one form of the “rules of the organization”. | 例如，1986年《维也纳公约》第2条(j)项就确认了这一点，其中提及“确立的实践”，将其作为“组织的规则”的一种形式。 |
| Draft conclusion 5 only concerns the
question of whether the practice of international organizations may be
relevant when assessing the subsequent practice by States parties to a
treaty. | 结论草案5仅涉及国际组织的实践在评估条约缔约国的嗣后实践时是否相关的问题。 |
| The practice of international organizations
in the application of their constituent instruments is addressed in draft
conclusion 12, paragraph 3. | 国际组织适用其组成文书的实践在结论草案12第3段中述及。 |
| (14) Reports by international
organizations, which are prepared on the basis of a mandate to provide
accounts on State practice in a particular field, may be very important when
assessing such practice. | (14) 国际组织根据授权为说明某一特定领域国家实践而编写的报告在评估这种实践方面可能十分重要。 |
| For example, the Handbook and Guidelines
on Procedures and Criteria for Determining Refugee Status under the 1951 Convention
and the 1967 Protocol relating to the Status of Refugees of the Office of the
United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (hereinafter “UNHCR Handbook”)
is an important work that reflects and thus provides guidance for State
practice. | 例如，《难民署根据关于难民地位的1951年公约和1967年议定书确定难民身份的程序和标准手册》(下称“《难民署手册》”)是一部重要出版物，反映了国家实践，因而也提供了相关指导。 |
| The same is true for the so-called 1540
Matrix, which is a systematic compilation by the United Nations Security
Council Committee established pursuant to resolution 1540 (2004) of 24 April
2004 on implementation measures taken by Member States. | 同样的还有所谓的1540汇总表，该表是根据2004年4月24日第1540(2004)号决议设立的联合国安全理事会委员会对会员国所采取的执行措施的系统汇编。 |
| As far as the Matrix relates to the
implementation of the 1972 Convention on the Prohibition of the Development,
Production and Stockpiling of Bacteriological and Toxin Weapons and on their
Destruction, as well as to the 1993 Convention on the Prohibition of the
Development, Production, Stockpiling and Use of Chemical Weapons and on their
Destruction, it constitutes evidence for and an assessment of subsequent
State practice to those treaties. | 该汇总表涉及1972年《关于禁止发展、生产和储存细菌及毒素武器和销毁此种武器的公约》
以及1993年《关于禁止发展、生产、储存和使用化学武器及销毁此种武器的公约》执行的部分， 构成了这两项条约嗣后国家实践的证据，以及对这些实践的评估。 |
| (15) Other non-State actors may also play
a role when assessing subsequent practice of the parties in the application
of a treaty. | (15) 其他非国家行为体也可在评估缔约方适用公约的嗣后实践时发挥作用。 |
| A pertinent example is the International
Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC). | 红十字国际委员会(红十字委员会)就是一个这样的例子。 |
| Apart from fulfilling a general mandate
conferred on it by the Geneva Conventions for the protection of war victims
and by the Statutes of the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement,
ICRC occasionally provides interpretative guidance on the 1949 Geneva
Conventions and the Additional Protocols on the basis of a mandate from the
Statutes of the Movement. | 除了完成关于保护战争受难者的日内瓦四公约和《国际红十字与红新月运动章程》赋予的一般性任务， 红十字委员会还不时就1949年日内瓦四公约 及各项附加议定书 的解释提供指导，这是《运动章程》规定的任务。 |
| Article 4, paragraph 1 (g), of the
Statutes of the International Committee of the Red Cross, and article 5,
paragraph 2 (g), of the Statutes of the International Red Cross and Red
Crescent Movement provide that the role of the International Committee is: | 《国际红十字委员会章程》第4条第1款第(7)项和《国际红十字与红新月运动章程》第5条第2款第(7)项规定，该国际委员会的职责是： |
| to work for the understanding and
dissemination of knowledge of international humanitarian law applicable in
armed conflicts and to prepare any development thereof. | 为了解和传播适用于武装冲突的国际人道法知识而努力工作，并为发展该法做好准备。 |
| On the basis of this mandate, ICRC, for
example, published in 2009 an Interpretative Guidance on the Notion of Direct
Participation in Hostilities under International Humanitarian Law. | 2009年，红十字委员会根据这项任务发布了《关于根据国际人道主义法直接参与敌对行动概念的解释指南》。 |
| The Interpretative Guidance is the
outcome of an “expert process” based on an analysis of State treaty and
customary practice and it “reflect[s] the ICRC’s institutional position as to
how existing [international humanitarian law] should be interpreted”. | 该解释指南是基于有关国家条约和习惯做法的一项“专家进程”的成果，“反映了红十字委员会关于如何解释现行国际人道主义法的机构立场”。 |
| In this context it is, however, important
to note that States have reaffirmed their primary role in the development of
international humanitarian law. | 但在这方面应当指出，各国重申了它们在发展国际人道主义法方面的主要作用。 |
| Resolution 1 of the 31st International
Conference of the Red Cross and Red Crescent (2011), while recalling “the
important roles of the [ICRC]”, “emphasiz[es] the primary role of States in
the development of international humanitarian law”. | 2011年第31届红十字与红新月国际大会第1项决议在回顾“[红十字委员会]的重要作用”的同时，“强调各国在发展国际人道主义法方面的主要作用”。 |
| (16) Another example of conduct of
non-State actors that may be relevant when assessing the subsequent practice
of States parties is the Landmine and Cluster Munition Monitor, an initiative
of the International Campaign to Ban Landmines-Cluster Munitions Coalition. | (16) 在评估缔约方嗣后实践时可能相关的非国家行为体行为的另一实例是国际禁止地雷运动――集束弹药联盟的一项联合举措――地雷和集束弹药监测组织。 |
| The Monitor acts as a de facto monitoring
regime for the 1997 Convention on the Prohibition of the Use, Stockpiling,
Production and Transfer of Anti-Personnel Mines and on their Destruction
(Ottawa Convention) and the 2008 Convention on Cluster Munitions (Oslo
Convention). | 该监测组织 充当了1997年《关于禁止使用、储存、生产和转让杀伤人员地雷及销毁此种地雷的公约》(《渥太华公约》) 和2008年《集束弹药公约》(《奥斯陆公约》) 事实上的监测机制。 |
| The Monitor lists pertinent statements
and practice by States parties and signatories and identifies, inter alia,
interpretative questions concerning the Oslo Convention. | 监测组织列出了缔约国和签署国的相关声明和实践，并除其他外指出了涉及《奥斯陆公约》的各种解释性问题。 |
| (17) The examples of ICRC and the Monitor
show that non-State actors can provide valuable information about subsequent
practice of parties, contribute to assessing this information and even
solicit its coming into being. | (17) 红十字委员会和监测组织的实例说明，非国家行为体可以提供关于缔约方嗣后实践的宝贵信息，促进对这种信息的评估，甚至促使信息形成。 |
| However, non-State actors can also pursue
their own goals, which may be different from those of States parties. | 但非国家行为体也可以追求其自身的目标，而这些目标可能不同于缔约国的目标。 |
| Their documentation and their assessments
must thus be critically reviewed. | 因此对它们的文件和评估意见需要严加审查。 |
| (18) The text of draft conclusion 5 does
not refer to “social practice” as an example of “other conduct … which may be
relevant when assessing the subsequent practice of parties to a treaty”. | (18) 结论草案5的案文没有提及“社会实践”，作为“在评估条约缔约方的嗣后实践时可能相关…的其他行为”的一个例子。 |
| The European Court of Human Rights has
occasionally considered “increased social acceptance” and “major social
changes” to be relevant for the purpose of treaty interpretation. | 欧洲人权法院有时认为，“社会接受程度增加” 和“重大社会变化” 就条约解释目的而言具有相关性。 |
| The invocation of “social changes” or
“social acceptance” by the Court, however, has ultimately remained linked to
the practice of States parties. | 但该法院援引“社会变化”或“社会接受”的做法最终仍与缔约国的实践有关。 |
| This is true, in particular, for the
leading cases of Dudgeon v. the United Kingdom and Christine Goodwin v. the
United Kingdom. | Dudgeon诉联合王国案 和Christine
Goodwin诉联合王国案 等主要案件尤为如此。 |
| In Dudgeon v. the United Kingdom, the
Court found that there was an “increased tolerance of homosexual behaviour”
by pointing to the fact “that in the great majority of the member States of
the Council of Europe it is no longer considered to be necessary or
appropriate to treat homosexual practices of the kind now in question as in
themselves a matter to which the sanctions of the criminal law should be
applied” and that it could therefore not “overlook the marked changes which
have occurred in this regard in the domestic law of the member States”. | 在Dudgeon诉联合王国案中，欧洲人权法院认定社会“对同性恋行为的宽容度增加”，指出
“欧洲委员会大多数成员国认为，将当前所讨论的这种同性性行为当作一种本身应适用刑法制裁的事项来处理不再必要，也不再适当”，因此法院不能“忽视成员国国内法在这方面发生的显著变化”。 |
| The Court further pointed to the fact
that “in Northern Ireland itself, the authorities have refrained in recent
years from enforcing the law”. | 该法院还指出，“在北爱尔兰本国，当局近年来也不再执行该法”。 |
| And in Christine Goodwin v. the United
Kingdom, the Court attached importance “to the clear and uncontested evidence
of a continuing international trend in favour not only of increased social
acceptance of transsexuals but of legal recognition of the new sexual
identity of post-operative transsexuals”. | 在Christine Goodwin诉联合王国案中，该法院重视“明确、无可争议的证据所表明的一个持续的国际趋势，这一趋势不仅支持社会增加对变性者的接受度，而且支持从法律上承认手术后变性者的新性别身份。 |
| (19) The European Court of Human Rights
thus verifies whether social developments are actually reflected in the
practice of States parties. | ” (19) 欧洲人权法院因此证实了社会发展是否已实际体现在缔约国的实践中。 |
| This was true, for example, in cases
concerning the status of children born out of wedlock and in cases that
concerned the alleged right of certain Roma people to have a temporary place
of residence assigned by municipalities in order to be able to pursue their
itinerant lifestyle. | 例如，在涉及非婚生儿童地位问题的案件 以及关于宣称罗姆人有权由市政当局指定一个临时居住地，以便保持其居无定所的生活方式的案件
便是如此。 |
| (20) It can be concluded that mere
(subsequent) social practice, as such, is not sufficient to constitute
relevant subsequent practice of the parties in the application of a treaty. | (20) 可以断定，仅是 (嗣后)社会实践本身不足以构成缔约方适用条约的相关嗣后实践。 |
| Social practice has, however,
occasionally been recognized by the European Court of Human Rights as
contributing to the assessment of State practice. | 但欧洲人权法院有时承认社会实践有助于评估国家实践。 |
| Part Three General aspects | 第三部分 一般方面 |
| Conclusion 6 Identification of subsequent
agreements and subsequent practice | 结论6 嗣后协定和嗣后实践的识别 |
| 1. The identification of subsequent
agreements and subsequent practice under article 31, paragraph 3, requires,
in particular, a determination whether the parties, by an agreement or a
practice, have taken a position regarding the interpretation of the treaty. | 1. 为识别第三十一条第三款所指的嗣后协定和嗣后实践，尤其须确定缔约方是否通过协定或实践就条约的解释采取了立场。 |
| Such a position is not taken if the
parties have merely agreed not to apply the treaty temporarily or agreed to
establish a practical arrangement (modus vivendi). | 如果缔约方只是商定暂不适用条约，或商定确立一种实际安排(临时协议)，便没有采取这种立场。 |
| 2. Subsequent agreements and subsequent
practice under article 31, paragraph 3, may take a variety of forms. | 2. 第三十一条第三款所指的嗣后协定和嗣后实践可能具有各种形式。 |
| 3. The identification of subsequent
practice under article 32 requires, in particular, a determination whether
conduct by one or more parties is in the application of the treaty. | 3. 为识别第三十二条所指的嗣后实践，尤其须确定一个或多个缔约方的行为是否处在适用条约过程之中。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) The purpose of draft conclusion 6 is
to indicate how subsequent agreements and subsequent practice, as means of
interpretation, are to be identified. | (1) 结论草案6的目的是要表明如何识别作为解释资料的嗣后协定和嗣后实践。 |
| Paragraph 1, first sentence — the term
“regarding the interpretation” | 第1段第一句――短语“就条约的解释” |
| (2) The first sentence of paragraph 1
recalls that the identification of subsequent agreements and subsequent
practice for the purposes of article 31, paragraph 3 (a) and (b), requires
particular consideration of the question of whether the parties, by an
agreement or a practice, have taken a position regarding the interpretation
of a treaty or whether they were motivated by other considerations. | (2) 第1段第一句提到，为了第三十一条第三款(a)项和(b)项的目的而识别嗣后协定和嗣后实践，要求特别考虑这样的问题：有关各方是否通过协议或实践已就条约的解释采取了立场，或者它们是否受其他考虑的驱动。 |
| (3) Subsequent agreements under article
31, paragraph 3 (a), must be “regarding the interpretation of the treaty or
the application of its provisions” and subsequent practice under article 31,
paragraph 3 (b), must be “in the application of the treaty” and thereby
establish an agreement “regarding its interpretation”. | (3) 第三十一条第三款(a)项所指的嗣后协定必须是“关于条约之解释或其规定之适用”的，第三十一条第三款(b)项所指的嗣后实践必须是“在条约适用方面”的，从而确定了“对条约的解释”的一致。 |
| The relationship between the terms
“interpretation” and “application” in article 31, paragraph 3, is not
clear-cut. | 在第三十一条第三款中，“解释”和“适用”两个用语之间的关系并非一目了然。 |
| “Interpretation” is the process by which
the meaning of a treaty, including of one or more of its provisions, is
clarified. | “解释”是澄清条约含义包括其中一项或多项条款的含义的过程。 |
| “Application” encompasses conduct by
which the rights under a treaty are exercised or its obligations are complied
with, in full or in part. | “适用”包括全部或部分地行使条约权利或履行条约义务的行为。 |
| “Interpretation” refers to a mental
process, whereas “application” focuses on actual conduct (acts and
omissions). | “解释”是指心理过程，而“适用”侧重于实际的行为(作为或不作为)。 |
| In this sense, the two concepts are
distinguishable, and may serve different purposes under article 31, paragraph
3 (see paragraphs (4) to (6) below) but they are also closely interrelated
and build upon each other. | 从这个意义上说，这两个概念是有区别的，可用于第三十一条第三款之下的不同用途(见下文第(4)至(6)段)，但它们也密切相关，互以对方为基础。 |
| (4) Whereas there may be aspects of
“interpretation” that remain unrelated to the “application” of a treaty,
application of a treaty almost inevitably involves some element of
interpretation — even in cases in which the rule in question appears to be
clear on face value. | (4) 虽然有些“解释”问题可能一直与条约的适用无关， 但条约的适用几乎必然涉及某种解释因素――即使在有关规则从表面看来一目了然的情况下。 |
| Therefore, an agreement or conduct
“regarding the interpretation” of the treaty and an agreement or conduct “in
the application” of the treaty both imply that the parties assume a position
regarding the interpretation of the treaty. | 因此，“关于条约之解释”的协定或行为以及“条约适用方面”的协定或行为都意味着各方就条约的解释采取了立场。 |
| Whereas in the case of a “subsequent
agreement between the parties regarding the interpretation of the treaty”
under article 31, paragraph 3 (a) (first alternative), the position regarding
the interpretation of a treaty is specifically and purposefully assumed by
the parties, this may be less clearly identifiable in the case of a “subsequent
agreement … regarding … the application of its provisions” under article 31,
paragraph 3 (a) (second alternative). | 在第三十一条第三款(a)项(第一项选择)“关于…条约规定之适用的嗣后协定”的情况下，对条约解释的立场是各方具体并有目的地采取的，而在第三十一条第三款(a)项(第二项选择)“关于条约之适用的嗣后协定”的情况下，这一点不那么容易辨认出来。 |
| Assuming a position regarding
interpretation “by application” is also implied in simple acts of application
of the treaty under articles 31, paragraph 3 (b), that is, in “every measure
taken on the basis of the interpreted treaty”. The word “or” in article 31,
paragraph 3 (a), thus does not describe a mutually exclusive relationship
between “interpretation” and “application”. | 根据第三十一条第三款(b)项进行的一些简单的适用行为即“根据所解释的条约而采取的每一项措施”也隐含着“通过适用”就解释采取的立场， 因此，第三十一条第三款(a)项中的“或”字并不是描述“解释”和“适用”之间的互相排斥关系。 |
| (5) The significance of an “application”
of a treaty, for the purpose of its interpretation, is, however, not limited
to the identification of the position that the State party concerned thereby
assumes regarding its interpretation. | (5) 然而，“适用”条约的意义，就解释条约的目的而言，并不限于识别有关缔约国由此而就条约的解释采取的立场。 |
| Indeed, the way in which a treaty is
applied not only contributes to determining the meaning of the treaty, but
also to the identification of the degree to which the interpretation that the
States parties have assumed is “grounded” and thus more or less firmly
established. | 事实上，适用条约的方式不仅有助于确定条约的意义，而且有助于识别缔约国所采取的解释在多大程度上是“有根据的”，从而或多或少是稳固确立的。 |
| (6) It should be noted that an
“application” of the treaty does not necessarily reflect the position of a
State party that such application is the only legally possible one under the
treaty and under the circumstances. | (6) 应该指出的是，条约的“适用”并不一定反映缔约国有这样的立场，即这种适用是根据条约在当时情况下在法律上唯一可能的适用。 |
| Further, the concept of “application”
does not exclude certain conduct by non-State actors which the treaty
recognizes as forms of its application and which can hence constitute
practice establishing the agreement of the parties. | 而且，“适用”的概念并不排除非国家行为体的某些行为：条约承认这些行为是适用的形式，因而可构成确定缔约方之间一致性的实践。 |
| Finally, the legal significance of a
particular conduct in the application of a treaty is not necessarily limited
to its possible contribution to interpretation under article 31, but may also
contribute to meeting the burden of proof or to fulfilling the conditions of
other rules. | 最后，在适用条约时的某一特定行为的法律意义不局限于其可能根据第三十一条对解释作出的贡献，而且可能对履行举证责任 或满足其他规则的条件
作出贡献。 |
| (7) Subsequent conduct that is not
motivated by a treaty obligation is not “in the application of the treaty” or
“regarding” its interpretation, within the meaning of article 31, paragraph
3. | (7) 不受条约义务驱动的嗣后行为，不是第三十一条第三款意义内的“适用条约”的行为，或“关于”条约解释的行为。 |
| In the Certain Expenses of the United
Nations case, for example, some judges doubted whether the continued payment
by the Member States of the United Nations of their membership contributions
signified acceptance of a certain practice of the Organization. | 例如，在关于联合国某些费用案的咨询意见中，一些法官怀疑联合国会员国继续缴纳会费是否等于接受该组织的某些做法。 |
| Judge Fitzmaurice formulated a well-known
warning in this context, according to which “the argument drawn from
practice, if taken too far, can be question-begging”. | 菲茨莫里斯法官在这方面提出了一个著名的警告，他说，“从实践中得出的论点，如果走得太远，则会招来问题”。 |
| According to Fitzmaurice, it would be
“hardly possible to infer from the mere fact that Member States pay, that
they necessarily admit in all cases a positive legal obligation to do so”. | 菲茨莫里斯认为，“从会员国缴费这个单纯的事实推断出它们必然在所有情况下都承认存在着缴费的实在法义务，这几乎是不可能的”。 |
| (8) Similarly, in the Maritime
Delimitation and Territorial Questions between Qatar and Bahrain case, the
International Court of Justice held that an effort by the parties to the
Agreement of 1987 (on the submission of a dispute to the jurisdiction of the
Court) to conclude an additional Special Agreement (which would have
specified the subject matter of the dispute) did not mean that the conclusion
of such an additional agreement was actually considered by the parties to be
required for the establishment of the jurisdiction of the Court. | (8) 同样，国际法院在审理卡塔尔和巴林海洋划界和领土问题案时认为，1987年协议(关于将争端提交国际法院管辖的协议)的当事方努力缔结一项附加的特别协定(该协定将说明争端所涉的事项)并不意味着当事方实际上将缔结这样的附加协定视为确立国际法院管辖权的必要条件。 |
| (9) Another example of a voluntary
practice that is not meant to be “in application of” or “regarding the
interpretation” of a treaty concerns “complementary protection” in the
context of refugee law. | (9) 另有一个其本意不是为了“适用”条约，也不是“关于条约的解释”的自愿做法的例子，它涉及难民法方面的“补充保护”问题。 |
| Persons who are denied refugee status
under the Convention relating to the Status of Refugees are nonetheless often
granted “complementary protection”, which is equivalent to that under the
Convention. | 未获《关于难民地位的公约》所规定的难民地位者往往会获得相当于《公约》中难民地位的“补充保护”。 |
| States that grant complementary
protection, however, do not consider themselves as acting “in the application
of” the Convention or “regarding its interpretation”. | 然而给予补充保护的国家并不认为自己的行为是在“适用”该公约或涉及该公约的“解释”。 |
| (10) It is sometimes difficult to
distinguish relevant subsequent agreements or subsequent practice regarding
the interpretation or in the application of a treaty under article 31,
paragraph 3 (a) and (b), from other conduct or developments in the wider
context of the treaty, including from “contemporaneous developments” in the
subject area of the treaty. | (10) 有时很难将第三十一条第三款(a)项和(b)项涉及条约的解释或适用的有关嗣后协定或嗣后实践与条约更大范围内的其他行为或发展，其中包括在条约主题事项领域的“同时代发展”加以区分。 |
| Such a distinction is, however, important
since only conduct regarding interpretation by the parties introduces their
specific authority into the process of interpretation. | 然而这样的区分是重要的，因为唯有缔约方就解释做出的行为才能使它们对解释过程产生特定权威。 |
| The general rule seems to be that the
more specifically an agreement or a practice is related to a treaty the more
interpretative weight it can acquire under article 31, paragraph 3 (a) and
(b). | 一般的规则似乎是，协定或实践与条约的关联性越具体，它就能根据第三十一条第三款(a)项和(b)项获得越多的解释性权重。 |
| (11) The characterization of a subsequent
agreement or subsequent practice under article 31, paragraph 3 (a) and (b),
as assuming a position regarding the interpretation of a treaty often
requires a careful factual and legal analysis. | (11) 对第三十一条第三款(a)项和(b)项下的嗣后协定或嗣后实践加以定性，也就是就条约的解释采取了立场，往往需要谨慎的事实分析和法律分析。 |
| This point can be illustrated by examples
from judicial and State practice. | 从司法实践和国家实践中摘取的例子可以说明这一点。 |
| (12) The jurisprudence of the
International Court of Justice provides a number of examples. | (12) 国际法院的案例提供了若干例子。 |
| On the one hand, the Court did not
consider the “joint ministerial communiqués” of two States to “be included in
the conventional basis of the right of free navigation” since the “modalities
for co-operation which they put in place are likely to be revised in order to
suit the Parties”. | 一方面，国际法院不认为两国“部长级联合公报”包括在“自由航行权传统的基础”之内，因为“公报设立的合作模式很可能被修正以适合双方需要。 |
| The Court has also held, however, that
the lack of certain assertions regarding the interpretation of a treaty, or
the absence of certain forms of its application, constituted a practice that
indicated the legal position of the parties according to which nuclear
weapons were not prohibited under various treaties regarding poisonous
weapons. | ” 但该法院还认为，如果对条约的解释无特定主张，条约的适用亦无特定形式，这本身就构成一种实践，表明缔约方持有一种法律立场，根据这种立场，关于有毒武器的各项条约是不禁止核武器的。 |
| In any case, the exact significance of a
collective expression of views of the parties can only be identified by a
careful consideration as to whether and to what extent such expression is
meant to be “regarding the interpretation” of the treaty. | 无论如何，只能通过认真考虑缔约方集体意见之表达是否以及在何种程度上意在涉及“条约的解释”，才能确定这一表达所具有的确切意义。 |
| Accordingly, the Court held in the
Whaling in the Antarctic case that “relevant resolutions and Guidelines [of
the International Whaling Commission] that have been approved by consensus
call upon States parties to take into account whether research objectives can
practically and scientifically be achieved by using non-lethal research
methods, but they do not establish a requirement that lethal methods be used
only when other methods are not available”. | 因此，国际法院在南极捕鲸案中认为，缔约国以协商一致方式核可的[国际捕鲸委员会]的有关决议和准则要求缔约国考虑能否通过使用非致命性研究方法实际和科学地实现研究目标，但这些决议和准则并没有确立一项要求，即只有当其他方法不可用时才能使用致命的方法。 |
| (13) When the Iran-United States Claims
Tribunal was confronted with the question of whether the Claims Settlement
Declaration obliged the United States to return military property to Iran,
the Tribunal found, referring to the subsequent practice of the parties, that
this treaty contained an implicit obligation of compensation in case of
non-return: | (13) 伊朗－美国索赔法庭曾面对过这样的问题：《索赔解决声明》是否要求美国将军事财产归还伊朗。
该法庭提及缔约方的实践，认定这一条约含有默示义务，必须在不归还财产的情况下给予补偿： |
| 66. … Although Paragraph 9 of the General
Declaration does not expressly state any obligation to compensate Iran in the
event that certain articles are not returned because of the provisions of
U.S. law applicable prior to 14 November 1979, the Tribunal holds that such
an obligation is implicit in that Paragraph. | 66. …虽然总声明的第9段并没有明确说一旦因1979年11月14日之前适用的美国法律规定而某些物品不能归还时则有补偿伊朗的任何义务，但法庭认为，这样的义务隐含在该段里。 |
| 68. Moreover, the Tribunal notes that the
interpretation set forth in paragraph 66 above is consistent with the
subsequent practice of the Parties in the application of the Algiers Accords
and, particularly, with the conduct of the United States. | 68. 此外，法庭注意到，载于上文第66段的解释与缔约方适用《阿尔及尔协定》的嗣后实践，特别是与美国的行为是一致的。 |
| Such a practice, according to article 31
(3) (b) of the Vienna Convention, is also to be taken into account in the
interpretation of a treaty. | 这样的实践，根据《维也纳公约》第三十一条第三款(b)项，在解释条约时也应考虑到。 |
| In its communication informing Iran, on
26 March 1981, that the export of defense articles would not be approved, the
United States expressly stated that “Iran will be reimbursed for the cost of
equipment in so far as possible”. | 美国在1981年3月26日致函伊朗，告知它国防物品的出口将不予批准时，明确表示，“对伊朗在设备方面的成本将尽可能给以赔偿”。 |
| This position was criticized by Judge
Holtzmann in his dissenting opinion: | 霍尔茨曼法官在反对意见中批评了这一立场： |
| Subsequent conduct by a State party is a
proper basis for interpreting a treaty only if it appears that the conduct
was motivated by the treaty. | 缔约国的嗣后行为只有在显然受条约驱动时，才能成为解释条约的适当基础。 |
| Here there is no evidence, or even any
argument, that the United States’ willingness to pay Iran for its properties
was in response to a perceived obligation imposed by Paragraph 9. | 这里没有证据表明也没有人认为，美国对伊朗财产予以赔偿的意愿依据的是据信第9段所规定的义务。 |
| Such conduct would be equally consistent
with a recognition of a contractual obligation to make payment. | 这种行为就相当于承认合同中的付费义务。 |
| In the absence of any indication that
conduct was motivated by the treaty, it is incorrect to use that conduct in
interpreting the treaty. | 如果没有迹象表明行为受条约驱动，就不应当用该行为来解释条约。 |
| Together, the majority opinion and the
dissent clearly identify the need to analyse carefully whether the parties,
by an agreement, or a practice assume a position “regarding the
interpretation” of a treaty. | 多数意见和反对意见结合起来表明，必须认真分析缔约方是否通过协定或行为“就条约的解释”采取了立场。 |
| (14) The fact that States parties assume
a position regarding the interpretation of a treaty may sometimes also be
inferred from the character of the treaty or of a specific provision. | (14) 有时也可从条约或某一具体规定的性质推断出缔约国就条约的解释采取了立场这一事实。 |
| Whereas subsequent practice in the
application of a treaty often consists of conduct by different organs of the
State (executive, legislative, judicial or other) in the conscious
application of a treaty at different levels (domestic and international), the
European Court of Human Rights, for example, does not, for the most part,
explicitly address the question of whether a particular practice establishes
an agreement “regarding the interpretation” of the Convention. | 适用条约方面的嗣后实践往往包括不同国家机关(行政、立法、司法或其他机关)在不同层面(国内和国际)自觉适用条约的行为，而欧洲人权法院等机构则通常不明确处理某一特定实践是否确立“关于解释”《公约》 的协定这一问题。 |
| Thus, when describing the domestic legal
situation in the member States, the Court rarely asks whether a particular
legal situation results from a legislative process during which the possible
requirements of the Convention were discussed. | 因此，在说明成员国国内法律状况时，该法院很少问及某一种特定法律状况是否产生于讨论《公约》可能所作规定的立法程序。 |
| The Court rather presumes that the member
States, when legislating or otherwise acting in a particular way, are
conscious of their obligations under the Convention and that they act in a
way that reflects their understanding of their obligations. | 相反，法院推定成员国在制定立法或以某种方式采取其他行动时，了解《公约》对其规定的义务，并在采取行动时体现对其自身义务的理解。 |
| The Inter-American Court of Human Rights
has also on occasion used legislative practice as a means of interpretation. | 美洲人权法院有时也使用立法实践作为一种解释资料。 |
| Like the International Court of Justice,
the European Court of Human Rights has occasionally even considered that the
“lack of any apprehension” of the parties regarding a certain interpretation
of the Convention may be indicative of their assuming a position regarding
the interpretation of the treaty. | 与国际法院一样，欧洲人权法院有时甚至认为，缔约方对《公约》的某一特定解释“缺乏任何理解”，可能表示它们就条约的解释采取了立场。 |
| (15) Article 118 of the Geneva Convention
relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War provides that: “Prisoners of
war shall be released and repatriated without delay after the cessation of
active hostilities. | (15) 《关于战俘待遇之日内瓦公约》 第一一八条规定：“实际战事停止后，战俘应即予释放并遣返，不得迟延。 |
| ” The will of a prisoner of war not to be
repatriated was intentionally not declared to be relevant by the States
parties in order to prevent States from abusively invoking the will of
prisoners of war in order to delay repatriation. | ”为防止有些国家滥用战俘意愿拖延遣返，缔约国刻意没有宣布战俘不想被遣返的意愿具有关联性。 |
| ICRC has, however, always insisted as a
condition for its participation that it may independently ascertain the will
of a prisoner of war to be repatriated. | 然而红十字委员会始终坚持将其可独立确定战俘不被遣返的意愿作为参与条件。 |
| This approach, as far as it has been
reflected in the practice of States parties, suggests that article 118 does
not impose an absolute obligation to repatriate. | 这种做法已经反映在缔约国的实践之中，表明第一一八条没有规定绝对的遣返义务。 |
| It does not necessarily mean, however,
that article 118 should be interpreted even more restrictively as demanding
that the repatriation of a prisoner of war must not happen against his or her
will. | 然而这并不一定意味着第一一八条应更严格地解释为要求不得违反战俘意愿遣返他们。 |
| The ICRC study on customary international
humanitarian law carefully notes in its commentary on rule 128 A: | 红十字委员会关于习惯国际人道主义法的研究报告中在对第128 A条规则的评注中审慎指出： |
| According to the Fourth Geneva
Convention, no protected person may be transferred to a country ‘where he or
she may have reason to fear persecution for his or her political opinions or
religious beliefs’ [article 45, paragraph 4, of the Geneva Convention
relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War]. | 根据《日内瓦第四公约》，不得将任何被保护人移送至“因其政治意见或宗教信仰有恐惧迫害之理由”的国家[《关于战时保护平民之日内瓦公约》第四十五条第四款]。 |
| While the Third Geneva Convention does
not contain a similar clause, practice since 1949 has developed to the effect
that in every repatriation in which the ICRC has played the role of neutral
intermediary, the parties to the conflict, whether international or
non-international, have accepted the ICRC’s conditions for participation,
including that the ICRC be able to check prior to repatriation (or release in
case of a non-international armed conflict), through an interview in private
with the persons involved, whether they wish to be repatriated (or released). | 《日内瓦第三公约》不包含类似的条款，但自1949年以来形成的实践表明，在红十字委员会发挥中立调解人作用的每一次遣返行动中，无论是国际还是非国际冲突，冲突各方都接受红十字委员会的参与条件，包括红十字委员会能够在遣返(或在非国际性武装冲突时则为释放)之前，通过私下约谈当事人来查验他们是否愿意被遣返(或被释放)。 |
| (16) This formulation suggests that
States have accepted that there be an inquiry as to the will of the prisoner
of war in cases in which ICRC is involved and in which the organization has
formulated such a condition. | (16) 这一措辞表明，各国接受在红十字委员会参与且提出了尊重战俘意愿这一条件的情况下，应当询问战俘的意愿。 |
| States have drawn different conclusions
from this practice. | 各国从这一实践中得出了不同结论。 |
| The 2004 United Kingdom Manual provides
that: | 2004年《联合王国手册》规定： |
| A more contentious issue is whether
prisoners of war must be repatriated even against their will. | 较有争议的问题是，是否即便违背战俘本人的意愿，也必须将其遣送回国。 |
| Recent practice of [S]tates indicates
that they should not. | 最近的国家实践表明，不应这么做。 |
| It is United Kingdom policy that
prisoners of war should not be repatriated against their will. | 联合王国的政策是，不应违背战俘意愿将其遣送回国。 |
| (17) This particular combination of the
words “must” and “should” indicates that the United Kingdom, like other
States, considers the subsequent practice as demonstrating an interpretation
of the treaty according to which the declared will of the prisoner of war
may, but need not necessarily, be respected. | (17) 专门将“必须”和“应”二词同时使用，说明联合王国同其他国家一样，认为嗣后实践反映了可以但不是必须尊重战俘公开宣称的意愿这种条约解释。 |
| (18) The preceding examples from the case
law and State practice substantiate the need to identify and interpret
carefully subsequent agreements and subsequent practice, in particular to ask
whether the parties, by an agreement or a practice, assume a position regarding
the interpretation of a treaty or whether they are motivated by other
considerations. | (18) 源自判例和国家实践的上述例子证明，有必要审慎识别和解释嗣后协定和嗣后实践，特别是要问清，缔约方是否通过协定或实践就条约的解释采取了立场，或者是否有其他考虑。 |
| Paragraph 1, second sentence — temporary
non-application of a treaty or modus vivendi | 第1段第二句――暂不适用条约或临时协议 |
| (19) The second sentence of paragraph 1
is merely illustrative. | (19) 第1段第二句只起说明作用。 |
| It specifically refers to two types of
cases that need to be distinguished from practice regarding the
interpretation of a treaty, and leaves room for other such cases. | 该句具体提到两类需要与关于条约解释的实践作出区分的情况，而给其他此类情况留下了空间。 |
| (20) A common subsequent practice does
not necessarily indicate an agreement between the parties regarding the
interpretation of a treaty, but may instead signify their agreement
temporarily not to apply the treaty, or an agreement on a practical arrangement
(modus vivendi). | (20) 缔约方拥有共同嗣后实践不一定表明缔约方就条约的解释达成了协议，也可能意味着缔约方商定暂不适用条约，
或商定确立一种实际安排(临时协议)。 |
| The following example is illustrative. | 以下例子起说明作用。 |
| (21) Article 7 of the 1864 Geneva
Convention for the Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded in Armies in
the Field provides that: “A distinctive and uniform flag shall be adopted for
hospitals, ambulances and evacuation parties. | (21) 1864年《改善战地武装部队伤员境遇日内瓦公约》第七条规定，“医院、救护车和疏散队应采用特殊的统一旗帜。 |
| … [The] flag … shall bear a red cross on
a white ground. | …[这一]…旗帜应绘以白底红十字。 |
| ” During the Russo-Turkish War of
1877–1878, the Ottoman Empire declared that it would in the future use the
red crescent on a white ground to mark its own ambulances, while respecting
the red cross sign protecting enemy ambulances and stated that the
distinctive sign of the Convention “‘had so far prevented Turkey from
exercising its rights under the Convention because it gave offence to the Muslim
soldiers’”. | ” 1877-1878年俄土战争期间，奥斯曼帝国宣布，未来将以白底红新月作为救护车标志，同时尊重保护敌方救护车的红十字标志，并表示《公约》的特殊标志“‘迄今一直让土耳其无法行使《公约》规定的权利，因为这一标志冒犯了穆斯林士兵’”。 |
| This declaration led to a correspondence
between the Ottoman Empire, Switzerland (as depositary) and the other
parties, which resulted in the acceptance of the red crescent only for the
duration of the conflict. | 因为这一声明，奥斯曼帝国、瑞士(作为保存国)和其他缔约方经通信商定，接受红新月标志，但仅限冲突期间。 |
| At The Hague Peace Conferences of 1899
and 1907 and during the 1906 Conference for the Revision of the Geneva Convention
of 1864, the Ottoman Empire, Persia and Siam unsuccessfully requested the
inclusion of the red crescent, the red lion and sun, and the red flame in the
Convention. | 在1899年和1907年海牙和平会议上以及1906年举行的1864年《日内瓦公约》修约会议期间，奥斯曼帝国、波斯和暹罗要求将红新月、红狮与日以及红焰标志加入《公约》未果。 |
| The Ottoman Empire and Persia, however,
at least gained the acceptance of “reservations” that they formulated to that
effect in 1906. | 不过在1906年，奥斯曼帝国和波斯至少使两国为此提出的“保留”得到了接受。 |
| This acceptance of the reservations of
the Ottoman Empire and Persia in 1906 did not mean, however, that the parties
had accepted that the 1864 Geneva Convention had been interpreted in a
particular way prior to 1906 by subsequent unopposed practice. | 但是，1906年奥斯曼帝国和波斯的保留获得接受，并不意味着各缔约方认可在1906年之前，通过未受异议的嗣后实践以特定方式解释了1864年《日内瓦公约》。 |
| The practice by the Ottoman Empire and
Persia was seen rather, at least until 1906, as not being covered by the 1864
Geneva Convention, but it was accepted as a temporary and exceptional measure
that left the general treaty obligation unchanged. | 至少到1906年，奥斯曼帝国和波斯的实践都不被视为1864年《日内瓦公约》的内容，只是将其作为不改变一般条约义务的暂行特例措施予以接受。 |
| Paragraph 2 — variety of forms | 第2段――各种形式 |
| (22) The purpose of paragraph 2 of draft
conclusion 6 is to acknowledge the variety of forms that subsequent
agreements and subsequent practice can take under article 31, paragraph 3 (a)
and (b). | (22) 结论草案6第2段的目的在于，承认第三十一条第三款(a)项和(b)项所指的嗣后协定和嗣后实践可能具有各种形式。 |
| The Commission has recognized that
subsequent practice under article 31, paragraph 3 (b), consists of any
“conduct” in the application of a treaty, including under certain
circumstances, inaction, which may contribute to establishing an agreement
regarding the interpretation of the treaty. | 委员会已承认第三十一条第三款(b)项所指的嗣后实践包括适用条约过程中任何可能有助于确定对该条约解释的一致意见的“行为”，包括某些情况下的不作为。 |
| Depending on the treaty concerned, this
includes not only externally oriented conduct, such as official acts,
statements and voting at the international level, but also internal
legislative, executive and judicial acts, and may even include conduct by
non-State actors on behalf of one or more States parties and that falls
within the scope of what the treaty conceives as forms of its application. | 根据所涉条约的情况，这不仅包括对外行为，例如国际一级的正式行动、声明和投票，还包括国内的立法、行政和司法行为，甚至可能包括代表一个或多个缔约方并在该条约认为属于其适用形式范围内的非国家行为体的行为。 |
| Thus, the individual conduct that may
contribute to a subsequent practice under article 31, paragraph 3 (b), need
not meet any particular formal criteria. | 因此，可能催生第三十一条第三款(b)项所指的嗣后实践的个人行为无需满足任何特定形式标准。 |
| (23) Subsequent practice at the
international level need not necessarily be joint conduct. | (23) 国际一级的嗣后实践不一定是联合行为。 |
| A parallel conduct by parties may
suffice. | 各方有平行的行为即可。 |
| It is a separate question whether
parallel activity actually articulates a sufficient common understanding
(agreement) regarding the interpretation of a treaty in a particular case
(see draft conclusion 10, paragraph 1, below). | 至于并行活动是否在实际上表达了某特定案件中对某项条约解释的共同理解(协定)，则是另一个单独的问题(见下文结论草案10第1段)。 |
| Subsequent agreements can be found in
legally binding treaties as well as in non-binding instruments like
memorandums of understanding. | 嗣后协定既见于有法律约束力的条约，亦见于谅解备忘录等没有约束力的文书。 |
| Subsequent agreements can also be found
in certain decisions of a conference of States parties (see draft conclusion
11, paragraphs 1, 2 and 3, below). | 嗣后协定还见于缔约国大会的某些决定(见下文结论草案11, 第1、第2和第3段)。 |
| Paragraph 3 — identification of
subsequent practice under article 32 | 第3段――识别第三十二条所指的嗣后实践 |
| (24) Paragraph 3 of this draft conclusion
provides that in identifying subsequent practice under article 32, the
interpreter is required to determine whether, in particular, conduct by one
or more parties is in the application of the treaty. | (24) 本条结论草案第3段规定，识别第三十二条所指的嗣后实践时，解释者尤其须确定一个或多个缔约方的行为是否处在适用条约过程之中。 |
| The Commission decided to treat such
subsequent practice under article 32 (see draft conclusion 4, paragraph 3) in
a separate paragraph for the sake of analytical clarity (see draft conclusion
7, paragraph 2, and draft conclusion 9, paragraph 3, below), but it does not
thereby call into question the unity of the process of interpretation. | 委员会决定在单独的一段中论述第三十二条之下的嗣后实践(见结论草案4, 第3段)， 是为了分析上清晰起见(见下文结论草案7第2段和结论草案9第3段)，但并不因此对解释过程的整体性提出质疑。 |
| The considerations that are pertinent for
the identification of subsequent agreements and subsequent practice under
article 31, paragraph 3 (a) and (b), also apply, mutatis mutandis, to the
identification of subsequent practice under article 32. | 识别第三十一条第三款(a)项和(b)项所指的嗣后协定和嗣后实践的有关考虑因素亦比照适用于第三十二条之下嗣后实践的识别。 |
| Thus, agreements between less than all
parties to a treaty regarding the interpretation of a treaty or its
application are a form of subsequent practice under article 32. | 因此，某条约非全体缔约方之间就该条约的解释或适用达成的协定是第三十二条之下的嗣后实践的一种形式。 |
| (25) An example of a practical
arrangement involving fewer than all of the parties to a treaty is the
Memorandum of Understanding between the Department of Transportation of the
United States of America and the Secretaría de Comunicaciones y Transportes
of the United Mexican States on International Freight Cross-Border Trucking
Services of 6 July 2011. | (25) 一个涉及条约非全体缔约方的实际安排的例子是美利坚合众国运输部与墨西哥合众国通信和运输部2011年7月6日签订的《关于国际跨境卡车货运服务的谅解备忘录》。 |
| The Memorandum of Understanding does not
refer to Canada, the third party of the North American Free Trade Agreement
(NAFTA), and specifies that it “is without prejudice to the rights and
obligations of the United States and Mexico under NAFTA”. | 该谅解备忘录并未提及《北美自由贸易协定》(《北美自贸协定》)的第三方加拿大，而是指出，备忘录“不损害美国和墨西哥在《北美自贸协定》下的权利和义务”。 |
| These circumstances suggest that the
Memorandum of Understanding does not claim to constitute an agreement
regarding the interpretation of NAFTA under articles 31, paragraph 3 (a) or
(b), and 32, but that it rather remains limited to being a practical
arrangement between a limited number of parties. | 这些情况表明，该谅解备忘录不声称构成第三十一条第三款(a)或(b)项及第三十二条意义上对《北美自贸协定》的解释协议，而是仅限于作为有限数目的当事方之间的实际安排。 |
| Conclusion 7 Possible effects of
subsequent agreements and subsequent practice in interpretation | 结论7 嗣后协定和嗣后实践可能对解释产生的影响 |
| 1. Subsequent agreements and subsequent
practice under article 31, paragraph 3, contribute, in their interaction with
other means of interpretation, to the clarification of the meaning of a
treaty. | 1. 第三十一条第三款所指的嗣后协定和嗣后实践经与其他解释资料互动，有助于澄清条约的含义。 |
| This may result in narrowing, widening,
or otherwise determining the range of possible interpretations, including any
scope for the exercise of discretion which the treaty accords to the parties. | 这可导致可能的解释范围、包括条约给予缔约方行使自由裁量权的任何范围变窄、变宽或受到另外的影响。 |
| 2. Subsequent practice under article 32
may also contribute to the clarification of the meaning of a treaty. | 2. 第三十二条所指的嗣后实践也可能有助于澄清条约的含义。 |
| 3. It is presumed that the parties to a
treaty, by an agreement or a practice in the application of the treaty,
intend to interpret the treaty, not to amend or to modify it. | 3. 可以推定，条约缔约方在适用条约方面达成协定或采用一种实践，其用意是为了解释条约，而不是修正或修改条约。 |
| The possibility of amending or modifying
a treaty by subsequent practice of the parties has not been generally
recognized. | 缔约方通过嗣后实践修正或修改条约的可能性尚未得到普遍认可。 |
| The present draft conclusion is without
prejudice to the rules on the amendment or modification of treaties under the
1969 Vienna Convention and under customary international law. | 本条结论草案不影响《维也纳条约法公约》和习惯国际法关于修正或修改条约的规则。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| Paragraph 1, first sentence —
clarification of the meaning of a treaty | 第1段第一句――澄清条约的含义 |
| (1) Draft conclusion 7 deals with the
possible effects of subsequent agreements and subsequent practice on the
interpretation of a treaty. The purpose is to indicate how subsequent
agreements and subsequent practice may contribute to the clarification of the
meaning of a treaty. | (1) 结论草案7涉及嗣后协定和嗣后实践可能对条约解释产生的影响，旨在说明嗣后协定和嗣后实践可以如何有助于澄清条约的含义。 |
| Paragraph 1 emphasizes that subsequent
agreements and subsequent practice must be seen in their interaction with
other means of interpretation (see draft conclusion 2, paragraph 5). | 第1段强调嗣后协定和嗣后实践必须与其他解释资料互动(见结论草案2, 第5段)。 |
| They are therefore not necessarily in
themselves conclusive. | 因此，它们本身未必具有决定性。 |
| (2) Subsequent agreements and subsequent
practice, like all means of interpretation, may have different effects on the
interactive process of interpretation of a treaty, which consists of placing
appropriate emphasis in any particular case on the various means of
interpretation in a “single combined operation”. | (2) 嗣后协定和嗣后实践与所有解释资料一样，可能对条约解释这一互动过程产生各种影响，这一过程包括在任何具体案件中，对“单一的综合行动”中的各种解释资料各给予适当强调。 |
| The taking into account of subsequent
agreements and subsequent practice under articles 31, paragraph 3, and 32 may
thus contribute to a clarification of the meaning of a treaty in the sense of
a narrowing down (specifying) of possible meanings of a particular term or
provision, or of the scope of the treaty as a whole (see paragraphs (4), (6),
(7), (10) and (11) below). | 因此，考虑第三十一条第三款和第三十二条所指的嗣后协定和嗣后实践，可以通过缩小(具体说明)某个用语或条款的可能含义，或整个条约的范围(见下文第(4)、第(6)、第(7)、第(10)和第(11)段)，帮助澄清条约的含义。 |
| Alternatively, such taking into account
may contribute to a clarification in the sense of confirming a wider
interpretation. | 另一方面，这种考虑也可以通过证实更广义的解释，帮助澄清条约的含义。 |
| Finally, it may contribute to
understanding the range of possible interpretations available to the parties,
including the scope for the exercise of discretion by the parties under the
treaty (see paragraphs (12) to (15) below). | 最后，它有助于理解缔约方可作出的可能解释的范围，包括缔约方根据条约行使自由裁量权的范围(见下文第(12)至(15)段)。 |
| (3) International courts and tribunals
usually begin their reasoning in a given case by determining the “ordinary
meaning” of the terms of the treaty. | (3) 国际性法院和法庭通常在具体案件的论证过程中首先确定条约用语的“通常含义”。 |
| Subsequent agreements and subsequent
practice mostly enter into their reasoning at a later stage when courts ask
whether such conduct confirms or modifies the result arrived at by the
initial interpretation of the ordinary meaning (or by other means of
interpretation). | 法院大多在审理的稍后阶段，即考虑某项行为是证实还是更改了最初对通常含义的解释(或通过其他解释资料)得出的结果时，才考虑嗣后协定和嗣后实践。 |
| If the parties do not wish to convey the
ordinary meaning of a term, but rather a special meaning in the sense of
article 31, paragraph 4, subsequent agreements and subsequent practice may
also shed light on this special meaning. | 如果缔约方不想表达用语的通常含义，而想表达第三十一条第四款意义上的特殊含义，那么嗣后协定和嗣后实践也可能有利于说明该特殊含义。 |
| The following examples illustrate how
subsequent agreements and subsequent practice as means of interpretation can
contribute, in their interaction with other means in the process of
interpretation, to the clarification of the meaning of a treaty. | 以下例子 显示了嗣后协定和嗣后实践作为解释资料，如何可在解释过程中通过与其他资料的互动，协助澄清条约的含义。 |
| (4) Subsequent agreements and subsequent
practice can help identify the “ordinary meaning” of a particular term by
confirming a narrow interpretation among different possible shades of meaning
of the term. | (4) 嗣后协定和嗣后实践可以通过从某个用语的多重含义中确认一个狭义的解释，来帮助确定该用语的“通常含义”。 |
| This was the case, for example, in the
Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons Advisory Opinion where the
International Court of Justice determined that the expressions “poison or
poisonous weapons”: | 例如， 国际法院在关于以核武器进行威胁或使用核武器的合法性的咨询意见中确认，短语“毒药或有毒武器”： |
| have been understood, in the practice of
States, in their ordinary sense as covering weapons whose prime, or even
exclusive, effect is to poison or asphyxiate. | 在国家实践中通常被理解为主要、甚至唯一作用是使人中毒或窒息的武器。 |
| This practice is clear, and the parties
to those instruments have not treated them as referring to nuclear weapons. | 这个实践十分明确，相关文书的缔约方并没有将该词理解为指核武器。 |
| (5) On the other hand, subsequent
practice may avoid limiting the meaning of a general term to just one of
different possible meanings. | (5) 另一方面，嗣后实践也可以避免将一般用语限定为只有某个特定含义，而否认其他可能的含义。 |
| For example, in the Case concerning
rights of nationals of the United States of America in Morocco, the Court
stated: | 例如，国际院法在摩洛哥境内的美利坚合众国公民权利案中称： |
| The general impression created by an
examination of the relevant materials is that those responsible for the
administration of the customs … have made use of all the various elements of
valuation available to them, though perhaps not always in a consistent
manner. | 检查相关材料给人的一般印象是，海关工作人员…已利用他们能够获得的一切评估材料，虽然利用方式可能不尽一致。 |
| In these circumstances, the Court is of
the opinion that Article 95 lays down no strict rule on the point in dispute. | 在这种情况下，法院认为第95条没有对争议问题订立严格规则。 |
| It requires an interpretation which is
more flexible than either of those which are respectively contended for by
the Parties in this case. | 该条需要一个比本案中当事双方各自的主张更为灵活的解释。 |
| (6) Different forms of practice may
contribute to both a narrow and a broad interpretation of different terms in
the same treaty. | (6) 不同形式的实践可能导致对同一条约中的某些用语作出狭义的解释，而对另一些用语作出宽泛的解释。 |
| (7) A treaty shall be interpreted in
accordance with the ordinary meaning of its terms “in their context” (article
31, paragraph 1). | (7) 条约应依其用语在“上下文”中具有的通常含义加以解释(第三十一条第一款)。 |
| Subsequent agreements and subsequent
practice, in interaction with this particular means of interpretation, may
also contribute to identifying a narrower or broader interpretation of a term
of a treaty. | 嗣后协定和嗣后实践通过与这一具体解释资料的互动，也可以有助于对条约中的用语作出较狭义或较广义的解释。 |
| In the Inter-Governmental Maritime
Consultative Organization Advisory Opinion, for example, the International
Court of Justice had to determine the meaning of the expression “eight …
largest ship-owning nations” under article 28 (a) of the Convention on the
International Maritime Organization (IMO) since this concept of “largest
ship-owning nations” permitted different interpretations (such as
determination by “registered tonnage” or by “property of nationals”), and
since there was no pertinent practice of the organization or its members
under article 28 (a) itself, the Court turned to practice under other
provisions in the Convention and held: | 例如，在关于政府间海事协商组织的咨询意见中，国际法院不得不确定《国际海事组织(海事组织)公约》 第28(a)条下“八个…最大船主国”一词的含义。 鉴于“最大船主国”的概念可以有不同解释(例如按“登记吨位”或“国民财产”计算)，且该组织及其成员没有第28(a)条下的相关实践，法院转而参照公约其他条款下的实践，提出： |
| This reliance upon registered tonnage in
giving effect to different provisions of the Convention … persuade[s] the
Court to view that it is unlikely that when [article 28 (a)] was drafted and
incorporated into the Convention it was contemplated that any criterion other
than registered tonnage should determine which were the largest shipping
owning nations. | 鉴于执行《公约》的各项条款都是基于登记吨位…法院因此认为，在起草[第28(a)条]并将之纳入《公约》时，不太可能考虑以登记吨位以外的其他标准来确定最大船主国。 |
| (8) Together with the text and the
context, article 31, paragraph 1, accords importance to the “object and
purpose” for its interpretation. | (8) 除用语和上下文外，第三十一条第一款还强调“目的及宗旨”对条约解释的重要性。 |
| Subsequent agreements and subsequent
practice may also contribute to a clarification of the object and purpose of
a treaty or reconcile invocations of the “object and purpose” of a treaty
with other means of interpretation. | 嗣后协定和嗣后实践也可有助于澄清条约的目的及宗旨， 或协调条约的“目的及宗旨”与其他解释资料的运用。 |
| (9) In the Maritime Delimitation in the
Area between Greenland and Jan Mayen and Oil Platforms cases, for example,
the International Court of Justice clarified the object and purpose of
bilateral treaties by referring to subsequent practice of the parties. | (9) 例如，在格陵兰和扬马延间区域海洋划界案 和石油平台案 中，国际法院通过提到缔约方的嗣后实践，澄清了双边条约的目的及宗旨。 |
| And in the Land and Maritime Boundary
between Cameroon and Nigeria case, the Court held: | 在喀麦隆和尼日利亚间陆地和海洋疆界案中，国际法院主张： |
| From the treaty texts and the practice
analysed at paragraphs 64 and 65 above, it emerges that the Lake Chad Basin
Commission is an international organization exercising its powers within a
specific geographical area; | 从条约案文和上文第64和65段分析的实践来看，乍得湖流域委员会是一个在特定地理区域内行使职权的国际组织； |
| that it does not however have as its
purpose the settlement at a regional level of matters relating to the
maintenance of international peace and security and thus does not fall under
Chapter VIII of the Charter. | 但是其宗旨不是在区域一级处理与维持国际和平及安全有关的事务，因此不属于《宪章》第八章规定的情况。 |
| Paragraph 1, second sentence — narrowing
or widening or otherwise determining the range of possible interpretation | 第1段第二句――可能的解释范围变窄或变宽或受到另外的影响 |
| (10) State practice confirms that
subsequent agreements and subsequent practice not only contribute to
specifying the meaning of a term in the sense of narrowing the possible
meanings of the rights and obligations under a treaty, but may also indicate
a wider range of possible interpretations or a certain scope for the exercise
of discretion that a treaty grants to States. | (10) 国家实践证实，嗣后协定和嗣后实践不仅有助于通过缩小条约下权利和义务的可能含义的范围，来具体说明一个用语的含义，也可表明一个更大的可能解释范围，或表明条约赋予各国的自由裁量权的特定范围。 |
| (11) For example, whereas the ordinary
meaning of the terms of article 5 of the 1944 Convention on International
Civil Aviation does not appear to require a charter flight to obtain
permission to land while en route, long-standing State practice requiring such
permission has led to general acceptance that this provision is to be
interpreted as requiring permission. | (11) 例如，虽然按照1944年《国际民用航空公约》
第5条用语的通常含义，似乎没有要求包机必须获得许可才能在飞行途中降落，但长期以来的国家实践都要求这类许可，因此该条被普遍理解为要求许可。 |
| Another case is article 22, paragraph 3,
of the 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, which provides that
the means of transport used by a mission shall be immune from search,
requisition, attachment or execution. | 另一个案例是1961年《维也纳外交关系公约》第二十二条第三款， 其中规定使馆交通工具免受搜查、征用、扣押或强制执行。 |
| While police enforcement against
diplomatic premises or by stopping and searching means of transport will
usually be met with protests by States, the towing of diplomatic cars that
have violated local traffic and parking laws generally has been regarded as
permissible in practice. | 虽然警方对外交房舍采取的或以拦截和搜查交通工具的方式实施的强制行为通常会遭到国家的抗议， 但是将违反当地交通和停车法规的外交车辆拖走这一做法，在实践中基本上被认为是允许的。 |
| This practice suggests that, while
punitive measures against diplomatic vehicles are forbidden, cars can be
stopped or removed if they prove to be an immediate danger or obstacle for
traffic and/or public safety. | 这种实践显示，虽然禁止对外交车辆采取处罚措施，但是如果发现外交车辆对交通和/或公共安全构成直接危险或障碍，则可以拦下或拖走。 |
| In that sense, the meaning of the term
“execution” — and, thus, the scope of protection accorded to means of
transportation — is specified by the subsequent practice of parties. | 从这个意义上来看，缔约方的嗣后实践明确说明了“强制执行”一词的含义，并进而明确了交通工具受保护的范围。 |
| (12) Another example concerns article 12
of Protocol II to the 1949 Geneva Conventions, which provides: | (12) 另一个例子是《一九四九年日内瓦四公约第二议定书》 第十二条，其中规定： |
| Under the direction of the competent
authority concerned, the distinctive emblem of the Red Cross, Red Crescent or
Red Lion and Sun on a white ground shall be displayed by medical and
religious personnel and medical units, and on medical transports. | 在有关主管当局指导下，医务和宗教人员以及医疗队和医务运输工具应展示白底红十字、红新月或红狮与太阳的特殊标志。 |
| It shall be respected in all
circumstances. | 在任何情形下，该特殊标志均应受尊重。 |
| It shall not be used improperly. | 该特殊标志不应用于不正当的用途。 |
| Although the term “shall” suggests that
it is obligatory for States to use the distinctive emblem for marking medical
personnel and transports under all circumstances, subsequent practice
suggests that States may possess some discretion with regard to its application. | 虽然“应”字表示国家在任何情况下都有义务使用特殊标志来标识医务人员和医务运输工具，但嗣后实践表明国家在适用该条时可拥有一定的自由裁量权。 |
| As armed groups have in recent years
specifically attacked medical convoys that were well recognizable due to the
protective emblem, States have in certain situations refrained from marking
such convoys with a distinctive emblem. | 鉴于武装团体近年来专门袭击因有保护标志而特别容易辨认的医疗车队，国家在某些情况下不再对这类车队露做特殊标记。 |
| Responding to a parliamentary question on
its practice in Afghanistan, the Government of Germany has stated that: | 德国政府在回答议会关于其在阿富汗的做法的提问时指出： |
| As other contributors of ISAF
contingents, the Federal Armed Forces have experienced that marked medical
vehicles have been targeted. | 与国际安全援助部队的其他分队一样，德国联邦国防军也经历过医疗车队遭到袭击的情况。 |
| Occasionally, these medical units and
vehicles, clearly distinguished as such by their protective emblem, have even
been preferred as targets. | 这些医疗单位和车队因其保护标志而容易辨认，甚至成为特定的袭击对象。 |
| The Federal Armed Forces have thus, along
with Belgium, France, the United Kingdom, Canada and the United States,
decided within ISAF to cover up the protective emblem on medical vehicles. | 因此，德国联邦国防军在国际安全援助部队内部与比利时、法国、联合王国、加拿大及美国共同决定遮住医疗车队上的保护标志。 |
| (13) Such practice by States may confirm
an interpretation of article 12 according to which the obligation to use the
protective emblem under exceptional circumstances allows a margin of
discretion for the parties. | (13) 这种国家实践证实了对第十二条的解释，即使用保护标志的义务 在例外情况下容许缔约方有一定的自由裁量权。 |
| (14) A treaty provision that grants
States parties an apparently unconditional right may raise the question of
whether their discretion in exercising this right is limited by the purpose
of the rule. | (14) 赋予缔约国明显不带条件的权利的条约规定可能会引起行使该权利的自由裁量权是否受到该条规定的宗旨限制的问题。 |
| For example, according to article 9 of
the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, the receiving State may notify
the sending State, without having to give reasons, that a member of the
mission is persona non grata. | 例如，根据《维也纳外交关系公约》第九条，接受国可通知派遣国某使馆人员为不受欢迎人员而不必说明理由。 |
| States mostly issue such notifications in
cases in which members of the mission were found or suspected of having
engaged in espionage activities or of having committed other serious
violations of the law of the receiving State or caused significant political
irritation. | 各国一般在发现或怀疑使馆人员从事间谍活动，或实施其他严重违反接受国法律的行为或造成严重政治骚乱的情况下发出这类通知。 |
| However, States have also made such
declarations in other circumstances, such as when envoys caused serious
injury to a third party, or committed repeated infringements of the law, or
even to enforce their drink-driving laws. | 不过，各国也在其他情况下发出过这类通知，例如使节对第三方造成严重伤害， 或是屡次违法， 甚至为了执行关于酒后驾车的法律发出这类通知。 |
| It is even conceivable that declarations
are made without clear reasons or for purely political motives. | 有些国家甚至没有给出明确理由，纯粹出于政治动机而发出这类通知。 |
| Other States do not seem to have asserted
that such practice constitutes an abuse of the power to declare members of a
mission as personae non gratae. | 其他国家似乎不认为这种做法构成对宣布使馆人员为不受欢迎人员的权力的滥用。 |
| Thus, such practice confirms that article
9 provides an unconditional right. | 因此，这类实践表明，第九条规定了无条件的权利。 |
| Paragraph 2 —subsequent practice under
article 32 | 第2段――第三十二条所指的嗣后实践 |
| (15) Paragraph 2 of draft conclusion 7
concerns possible effects of subsequent practice under article 32 (see draft
conclusion 4, paragraph 3), which does not reflect an agreement of all
parties regarding the interpretation of a treaty. | (15) 结论草案7第2段涉及第三十二条之下的嗣后实践的可能影响(见结论草案4, 第3段)，这类嗣后实践不反映所有缔约方就条约解释达成的协定。 |
| Such practice, as a supplementary means
of interpretation, can confirm the interpretation that the interpreter has
reached in the application of article 31, or determine the meaning when the
interpretation according to article 31 leaves the meaning ambiguous or
obscure or leads to a result that is manifestly absurd or unreasonable. | 这类实践，作为解释的补充资料，可证实适用第三十一条所作之解释，或在依第三十一条所作解释意义不明或难解，或所获结果显然荒谬或不合理时，确定其含义。 |
| Article 32 thereby makes a distinction
between a use of preparatory work or of subsequent practice to confirm a
meaning arrived at under article 31 and its use to “determine” the meaning. | 因此，第三十二条区分了利用准备工作或嗣后实践证实根据第三十一条得出的含义与利用它们来“确定”含义这两种情况。 |
| Hence, recourse may be had to subsequent
practice under article 32 not only to determine the meaning of the treaty in
certain circumstances, but also — and always — to confirm the meaning
resulting from the application of article 31. | 因此，可以利用第三十二条之下的嗣后实践，这不仅是为了确定某些情况下条约的含义，而且也用来――并且总是可以用来――证实适用第三十一条得出的含义。 |
| (16) Subsequent practice under article 32
may contribute, for example, to reducing possible conflicts when the “object
and purpose” of a treaty as a whole appears to be in tension with specific
purposes of certain of its rules. | (16) 当整个条约的“目的及宗旨”似乎与其某些规定的具体宗旨不符时，第三十二条所指的嗣后实践可有助于减少可能的冲突。 |
| In the Kasikili/Sedudu Island case, the
International Court of Justice emphasized that the “parties sought both to secure
for themselves freedom of navigation on the river and to delimit as precisely
as possible their respective spheres of influence”. | 在卡西基里/塞杜杜岛案中，国际法院强调，“缔约方既努力确保各自在河上的通航自由，又尽可能精确地划定各自的势力范围。 |
| The Court thereby might be regarded as
reconciling a possible tension by taking into account a certain subsequent
practice by only one of the parties. | ” 因此不妨视为该法院通过考虑仅其中一方的某项嗣后实践而化解了可能的紧张局势。 |
| (17) Another example of subsequent
practice under article 32 concerns the term “feasible precautions” in article
57, paragraph 2 (ii), of Protocol I to the 1949 Geneva Conventions. | (17) 第三十二条所指的嗣后实践的另一个例子涉及《一九四九年日内瓦四公约第一议定书》
第57条第2款第(二)项下的“可行的预防措施”一词。 |
| This term has been used in effect by
article 3, paragraph 4, of the Protocol on Prohibitions or Restrictions on
the Use of Mines, Booby-Traps and Other Devices (Protocol II) of 10 October
1980, which provides that: “Feasible precautions are those precautions which
are practicable or practically possible taking into account all circumstances
ruling at the time, including humanitarian and military considerations. | 1980年10月10日《禁止或限制使用地雷、诱杀装置和其他装置的议定书》(第二议定书)第3条第4款使用了该用语，
其中规定：“可行的预防措施是指顾及当时存在的一切情况，包括人道和军事考虑以后所采取的实际可行或实际可能的预防措施。 |
| ” This language has come to be accepted
by way of subsequent practice in many military manuals as a general definition
of “feasible precautions” for the purpose of article 57, paragraph (2) (ii),
of Protocol I to the 1949 Geneva Conventions. | ”这一定义逐渐通过嗣后实践被接受，作为《一九四九年日内瓦四公约第一议定书》第57条第2款第(二)项下“可行的预防措施”的一般定义出现在许多军事手册中。 |
| (18) The identification of subsequent
practice under articles 31, paragraph 3 (b), and 32 has sometimes led
domestic courts to arrive at broad or narrow interpretations. | (18) 对第三十一条第三款(b)项和第三十二条之下的嗣后实践进行识别，使国内法院有时作出广义或狭义的解释。 |
| For example, the United Kingdom House of
Lords interpreted the term “damage” under article 26, paragraph 2, of the
Warsaw Convention as more generally including “loss”, invoking the subsequent
conduct of the parties. | 例如，联合王国上议院援引缔约方嗣后行为，将《华沙公约》第二十六条第(2)款所述“损害”一词解释为亦包含“损失”。 |
| On the other hand, the United States
Supreme Court, having regard to the subsequent practice of the parties,
decided that the term “accident” in article 17 of the 1929 Warsaw Convention
should be interpreted narrowly in the sense that it excluded events that were
not caused by an unexpected or unusual event. | 另一方面，美国最高法院考虑到缔约方的嗣后实践，决定对1929年《华沙公约》第十七条所述“事故”一词作狭义解释，即不包括非由意外或异常事件造成的事件。 |
| Another example for a restrictive
interpretation is a decision in which the Federal Court of Australia interpreted
the term “impairment of dignity” under article 22 of the Vienna Convention on
Diplomatic Relations as only requiring the receiving State to protect against
breaches of the peace or the disruption of essential functions of embassies,
and not against any forms of nuisance or insult. | 另一个限制性解释的例子是澳大利亚联邦法院在裁决中将《维也纳外交关系公约》第二十二条所述“损害尊严”一词解释为仅要求接受国提供保护，防止破坏和平或扰乱使馆基本职能的行为，而不涉及任何形式的骚扰或侮辱。 |
| (19) Domestic courts, in particular,
sometimes refer to decisions from other domestic jurisdictions and thus
engage in a “judicial dialogue” even if no agreement of the parties can
thereby be established. | (19) 国内法院有时尤其会参考其他国内法域的裁决，并从而开展“司法对话”，即使无法由此确定缔约方的共识。 |
| Apart from thereby applying article 32,
such references may add to the development of a subsequent practice together with
other domestic courts. | 这种参考除了适用第三十二条外，还有助于同其他国内法院一起制定嗣后实践。 |
| Lord Hope of the United Kingdom House of
Lords, quoting the Vienna rules of interpretation, has provided a general
orientation when he stated: | 上议院Hope勋爵援引维也纳解释规则而提供了一个总方向，他说： |
| In an ideal world the Convention should
be accorded the same meaning by all who are party to it. | 在理想的世界中，该《公约》的所有缔约方应赋予公约相同的含义。 |
| So case law provides a further potential
source of evidence. | 所以判例提供了进一步的可能证据来源。 |
| Careful consideration needs to be given
to the reasoning of courts of other jurisdictions which have been called upon
to deal with the point at issue, particularly those which are of high
standing. | 需要认真考虑被要求处理所涉问题的其他法域法院，特别是高级别法院的推理。 |
| Considerable weight should be given to an
interpretation which has received general acceptance in other jurisdictions. | 对获得其他法域普遍接受的解释应予以很大的权重。 |
| On the other hand, a discriminating
approach is required if the decisions conflict, or if there is no clear
agreement between them. | 另一方面，如果裁决相互矛盾，或裁决之间没有达成明确一致，则须采取区别对待的方法。 |
| (20) It may be appropriate, in a case in
which the practice in different domestic jurisdictions diverges, to emphasize
the practice of a representative group of jurisdictions and to give more
weight to the decisions of higher courts. | (20) 当不同国内法域的实践存在差异时，应着重于更具代表性的法域集团的实践，并将更大权重赋予更高级法院的裁决。 |
| Paragraph 3 — interpretation versus
amendment or modification | 第3段――解释与修正或修改 |
| (21) Paragraph 3 of draft conclusion 7
addresses the question of how far the interpretation of a treaty can be
influenced by subsequent agreements and subsequent practice in order to
remain within the realm of what is considered interpretation under article
31, paragraph 3 (a) and (b). | (21) 结论草案7第3段讨论了嗣后协定和嗣后实践可以在多大程度上影响条约解释，但又不超出第三十一条第三款(a)项和(b)项意义内的解释范围。 |
| The paragraph reminds the interpreter
that agreements may serve to amend or modify a treaty, but that such
subsequent agreements are subject to article 39 of the 1969 Vienna Convention
and should be distinguished from subsequent agreements under article 31,
paragraph 3 (a). | 第3段提醒解释者，协定可能可以修正或修改条约，但是这类嗣后协定是1969年《维也纳公约》第三十九条所指协定，应当与第三十一条第三款(a)项所指嗣后协定加以区分。 |
| The second sentence, while acknowledging
that there are examples to the contrary in case law and diverging opinions in
the literature, stipulates that the possibility of amending or modifying a
treaty by subsequent practice of the parties has not been generally
recognized. | 第二句承认判例中可能存在反例，文献中可能有不同意见，但指出缔约方通过嗣后实践修正或修改条约的可能性尚未得到普遍认可。 |
| (22) Article 39 of the 1969 Vienna
Convention provides: “A treaty may be amended by agreement between the
parties. | (22) 1969年《维也纳公约》第三十九条规定：“条约得以当事国之协议修正之”。 |
| ” Article 31, paragraph 3 (a), on the
other hand, refers to subsequent agreements “between the parties regarding
the interpretation of the treaty and the application of its provisions”, and
does not seem to address the question of amendment or modification. | 另一方面，第三十一条第三款(a)项提到“当事国嗣后所订关于条约之解释或其规定之适用之任何协定”，似乎不涉及修正或修改条约的问题。 |
| As the WTO Appellate Body has held: | 正如世贸组织上诉机构所称： |
| the term “application” in Article 31 (3)
(a) relates to the situation where an agreement specifies how existing rules
or obligations in force are to be “applied”; | 第三十一条第三款(a)项下的“适用”一词涉及协定具体规定如何“适用”当前规则或义务的情况； |
| the term does not connote the creation of
new or the extension of existing obligations that are subject to a temporal
limitation. | 该词不包含创造新义务或是延长受时间限制的当前义务的意思。 |
| (23) Articles 31, paragraph 3 (a), and
39, if read together, demonstrate that agreements that the parties reach
subsequently to the conclusion of a treaty can interpret and amend or modify
the treaty. | (23) 第三十一条第三款(a)项和第三十九条一并解读表明，缔约方在条约缔结后达成的协定可解释、修正或修改条约。 |
| An agreement under article 39 need not
display the same form as the treaty that it amends. | 第三十九条所指协定不必采取与其修正的条约同样的形式。 |
| As the International Court of Justice has
held in the Pulp Mills on the River Uruguay case: | 正如国际法院在乌拉圭河沿岸纸浆案中指出的： |
| Whatever its specific designation and in
whatever instrument it may have been recorded (the [Administrative Commission
of the River Uruguay] minutes), this “understanding” is binding on the
Parties, to the extent that they have consented to it and must be observed by
them in good faith. | 不论具体名称是什么，也不论记录在什么文书中([乌拉圭河行政委员会会议]记录)，这种“谅解”只要是双方同意的，即对缔约方具有约束力，缔约方必须本着诚信遵守。 |
| They are entitled to depart from the
procedures laid down by the 1975 Statute, in respect of a given project
pursuant to an appropriate bilateral agreement. | 就适当的双方协定所确定的具体项目而言，它们有权不遵守1975年规约规定的程序。 |
| (24) It may sometimes be difficult to
draw a distinction between agreements of the parties under a specific treaty
provision that attributes binding force to subsequent agreements, simple
subsequent agreements under article 31, paragraph 3 (a), which are not
binding as such, and, finally, agreements on the amendment or modification of
a treaty under articles 39 to 41. | (24) 有时可能很难区分缔约方根据条约具体规定达成的赋予嗣后协定约束力的协定、第三十一条第三款(a)项所指不具有约束力的嗣后协定以及第三十九至第四十一条所指修正或修改条约的协定。 |
| There do not seem to be any formal
criteria other than those set forth in article 39, if applicable, apart from
the ones that may be provided for in the applicable treaty itself, which are
recognized as distinguishing these different forms of subsequent agreements. | 除所适用的条约本身可能作出的规定外，似乎没有第三十九条(如果适用的话)以外的任何区分不同形式嗣后协定的正式标准。 |
| It is clear, however, that States and
international courts are generally prepared to accord parties a rather wide
scope for the interpretation of a treaty by way of a subsequent agreement. | 不过，很明显，各国和国际性法院基本都愿意给予缔约方相当大的通过嗣后协定解释条约的空间。 |
| This scope may even go beyond the
ordinary meaning of the terms of the treaty. | 这种空间甚至可以超出条约用语的通常含义。 |
| The recognition of this scope for the
interpretation of a treaty goes hand in hand with the reluctance by States
and courts to recognize that an agreement relating to the application of a
treaty actually has the effect of amending or modifying the treaty. | 国家和法院认可条约的解释空间，却不太愿意认可与适用条约相关的协定实际具有修正或修改条约的效果。 |
| An agreement to modify a treaty is thus
not excluded, but also not to be presumed. | 因此，不排除协定对条约的修改，但也不假定具有这种效果。 |
| (25) Turning to the question of whether
the parties can amend or modify a treaty by a common subsequent practice, the
Commission originally proposed, in its draft articles on the law of treaties,
to include the following provision in the 1969 Vienna Convention, which would
have explicitly recognized the possibility of a modification of treaties by
subsequent practice: | (25) 关于缔约方是否可以通过共同的嗣后实践修正或修改条约，委员会最初在条约法条款草案中提议将以下条款纳入1969年《维也纳公约》，这本可明确认通过嗣后实践修改条约的可能性： |
| Article 38. Modification of treaties by
subsequent practice | 第三十八条 通过嗣后实践修改条约 |
| A treaty may be modified by subsequent
practice in the application of the treaty establishing the agreement of the
parties to modify its provisions. | 嗣后在条约适用方面确定各当事国对修改条约规定之协定的实践可修改条约。 |
| (26) This draft article gave rise to an
important debate at the Vienna Conference. | (26) 该条款草案在维也纳会议上引起了重要争论。 |
| An amendment to delete draft article 38
was put to a vote and was adopted by 53 votes to 15, with 26 abstentions. | 删除第三十八条草案的修正案付诸表决，以53票赞成、15票反对、26票弃权通过。 |
| After the Vienna Conference, the question
was discussed whether the rejection of draft article 38 meant that the
possibility of a modification of a treaty by subsequent practice of the
parties had thereby been excluded. | 维也纳会议后，讨论了这一问题：否决第三十八条草案是否意味着排除了缔约方通过嗣后实践修改条约的可能性。 |
| Many writers came to the conclusion that
the negotiating States simply did not wish to address this question in the
1969 Vienna Convention and that treaties can, as a general rule under the
customary law of treaties, indeed be modified by subsequent practice that
establishes the agreement of the parties to that effect. | 许多著述者得出结论称，谈判国只是不想在1969年《公约》中讨论该问题，而按照习惯法的一般规则，确定缔约方对修改条约达成一致的嗣后实践的确可以修改条约。 |
| International courts and tribunals, on
the other hand, have since the adoption of the 1969 Vienna Convention mostly
refrained from recognizing this possibility. | 不过，自1969年《维也纳公约》通过以来，国际性法院和法庭通常避免承认这种可能性。 |
| (27) In the case concerning the Dispute
regarding Navigational and Related Rights, the International Court of Justice
has held that “subsequent practice of the parties, within the meaning of
Article 31, paragraph 3 (b), of the Vienna Convention, can result in a
departure from the original intent on the basis of a tacit agreement”. | (27) 在关于航行权和相关权利的争端案中，国际法院主张：“《维也纳公约》第三十一条第三款(b)项意义内的缔约方嗣后实践可能导致违背基于默认同意的初始意图”。 |
| It is not entirely clear whether the
Court thereby wanted to recognize that subsequent practice under article 31,
paragraph 3 (b), may also have the effect of amending or modifying a treaty,
or whether it was merely making a point relating to the interpretation of
treaties, as the “original” intent of the parties is not necessarily
conclusive for the interpretation of a treaty. | 不是很清楚国际法院这样说是想承认第三十一条第三款(b)项所指的嗣后协定也可以具有修正或修改条约的效果，还是只是就条约解释发表意见，因为缔约方的“初始”意图未必对条约解释具有决定性。 |
| Indeed, the Commission recognizes in
draft conclusion 8 that subsequent agreements and subsequent practice, like
other means of interpretation, “may assist in determining whether or not the
presumed intention of the parties upon the conclusion of the treaty was to
give a term used a meaning which is capable of evolving over time”. | 事实上，委员会在结论草案8中确认，嗣后协定和嗣后实践与其他解释资料一样，“可协助确定缔约方在缔结条约之时的推定意图是不是赋予用语以能够随时间演变的含义”。 |
| The scope for “interpretation” is
therefore not necessarily determined by a fixed “original intent”, but must
rather be determined by taking into account a broader range of
considerations, including certain later developments. | 因此，“解释”的范围未必由固定的“初始意图”确定，而必须考虑到广泛的因素，包括某些后来的发展。 |
| This somewhat ambiguous dictum of the
Court raises the question of how far subsequent practice under article 31,
paragraph 3 (b), can contribute to “interpretation” and whether subsequent
practice may have the effect of amending or modifying a treaty. | 国际法院这一较含糊的判词提出了第三十一条第三款(b)项所指的嗣后实践可以在多大程度上有助于“解释”，以及嗣后实践可否具有修正或修改条约的效果的问题。 |
| Indeed, the dividing line between the
interpretation and the amendment or modification of a treaty is in practice
sometimes “difficult, if not impossible, to fix”. | 事实上，在实践中，条约的解释与条约的修正或修改之间的界线有时“很难确定，即便有可能确定”。 |
| (28) Apart from raising the question in
its dictum in Dispute regarding Navigational and Related Rights, the
International Court of Justice has not explicitly recognized that a
particular subsequent practice has had the effect of modifying a treaty. | (28) 除了在关于航行权和相关权利的争端案的判词中提出这一问题外，
国际法院再没有明确确认某项嗣后实践具有修改条约的效果。 |
| This is true, in particular, for the
Namibia Advisory Opinion as well as for the Wall Advisory Opinion, in which
the Court recognized that subsequent practice had an important effect on the
determination of the meaning of the treaty, but stopped short of explicitly
recognizing that such practice had led to an amendment or modification of the
treaty. | 在纳米比亚案的咨询意见和隔离墙案的咨询意见中尤为如此，法院在意见中承认嗣后实践对确定条约的含义有重要影响，但是没有明确承认这类实践导致了对条约的修正或修改。 |
| Since these opinions concerned treaties
establishing an international organization it seems difficult to derive a
general rule of the law of treaties from them. | 鉴于这些意见涉及设立国际组织的条约，似乎很难从中得出条约法的一般规则。 |
| The questions of subsequent agreements
and subsequent practice relating to constituent instruments of international
organizations are addressed in draft conclusion 12. | 与国际组织组成文书有关的嗣后协定和嗣后实践问题在结论草案12中阐述。 |
| (29) Other important cases in which the
International Court of Justice has raised the issue of possible modification
by the subsequent practice of the parties concern boundary treaties. | (29) 国际法院遇到缔约方可能通过嗣后实践修改条约问题的其他重要案件涉及边界条约。 |
| As the Court said in the case concerning
the Land and Maritime Boundary between Cameroon and Nigeria: | 正如该法院在喀麦隆和尼日利亚间陆地和海洋疆界案中指出的： |
| Hence the conduct of Cameroon in that
territory has pertinence only for the question of whether it acquiesced in
the establishment of a change in treaty title, which cannot be wholly
precluded as a possibility in law. | 喀麦隆在该领土内的行为只牵涉到它是否默认对条约的修改的问题，法律上不能完全排除修改条约的可能性。 |
| (30) The Court found such acquiescence in
the case concerning the Temple of Preah Vihear, where it placed decisive
emphasis on the fact that there had been clear assertions of sovereignty by
one side (France), which, according to the Court, required a reaction on the
part of the other side (Thailand). | (30) 国际法院在柏威夏寺案中认定存在这种默认，强调一方(法国)明确声称主权，因此另一方(泰国)需要作出反应。 |
| This judgment, however, was rendered
before the adoption of the Vienna Convention and thus, at least implicitly,
was taken into account by States in their debate at the Vienna Conference. | 不过，该判决是在《维也纳公约》通过前作出的，因此至少可以推测维也纳会议的辩论上考虑过该判决。 |
| The judgment also stops short of
explicitly recognizing the modification of a treaty by subsequent practice as
the Court left open whether the line on the French map was compatible with
the watershed line that had been agreed upon in the original boundary treaty
between the two States — although it is often assumed that this was not the
case. | 该判决也没有明确承认嗣后实践对条约的修改，因为关于法国地图上的分界线与两国最初的边界条约商定的分水岭是否一致这个问题，虽然通常认为是不一致的，但国际法院没有下定论。 |
| (31) Thus, while leaving open the
possibility that a treaty might be modified by the subsequent practice of the
parties, the International Court of Justice has so far not explicitly
recognized that such an effect has actually been produced in a specific case. | (31) 因此，虽然国际法院留下了缔约方通过嗣后实践修改条约的可能性，但是迄今没有明确确认在具体案例中实际产生过这种效果。 |
| Rather, the Court has reached
interpretations that were difficult to reconcile with the ordinary meaning of
the text of the treaty, but which were in line with the identified practice
of the parties. | 确切地说，该法院得出了与条约案文的通常含义不太一致，但是与确认的缔约方实践相一致的解释。 |
| Contrary holdings by arbitral tribunals
have been characterized either as an “isolated exception” or rendered before
the Vienna Conference and critically referred to there. | 仲裁法庭相反的裁决或是被视为“个别特例”，或是在维也纳公约会议之前作出而已被该会议作为重要参考。 |
| (32) The WTO Appellate Body has made
clear that it would not accept an interpretation that would result in a
modification of a treaty obligation, as this would not be an “application” of
an existing treaty provision. | (32) 世贸组织上诉机构明确表示不接受导致修改条约义务的解释，因为这不是“适用”现有的条约规定。 |
| The Appellate Body’s position may be
influenced by article 3, paragraph 2, of the Understanding on Rules and
Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes, according to which:
“Recommendations and rulings of the [Dispute Settlement Body] cannot add to or
diminish the rights and obligations provided in the covered agreements.” | 上诉机构的立场可能受到《关于争端解决规则与程序的谅解》第3条第2款的影响，其中规定“[争端解决机构]的建议和裁决不得增加或减少所涉协定规定的权利和义务”。 |
| (33) The European Court of Human Rights
has occasionally recognized the subsequent practice of the parties as a
possible source for a modification of the Convention. | (33) 欧洲人权法院偶尔承认缔约方的嗣后实践是修改公约的可能来源。 |
| In the Öcalan v. Turkey case, the Court
confirmed: | 在Öcalan诉土耳其案中，该法院确认： |
| that an established practice within the
member States could give rise to an amendment of the Convention. | 成员国既定的实践可能导致修正《公约》。 |
| In that case the Court accepted that
subsequent practice in national penal policy, in the form of a generalised
abolition of capital punishment, could be taken as establishing the agreement
of the Contracting States to abrogate the exception provided for under
Article 2 § 1 and hence remove a textual limit on the scope for evolutive
interpretation of Article 3 (ibid., pp. 40–41, § 103). | 在该案中，法院认为，国家刑法政策中普遍废除死刑的嗣后实践可以视为确认缔约国就废除第2条第1款规定的例外情况达成了一致，因此取消了案文对第3条的演进性解释的范围限制(同上，第40-41页，第103段)。 |
| (34) Applying this reasoning, the Court
came to the following conclusion in Al-Saadoon and Mufdhi v. the United
Kingdom: | (34) 运用这种推理，该法院在Al-Saadoon和Mufdhi诉联合王国案中得出以下结论： |
| It can be seen, therefore, that the Grand
Chamber in Öcalan did not exclude that Article 2 had already been amended so
as to remove the exception permitting the death penalty. | 因此可以看出，大审判庭在Öcalan案中并未否认第2条已被修正，以取消允许死刑的例外情况。 |
| Moreover, as noted above, the position
has evolved since then. | 此外，如上所述，这种立场从那以来逐渐形成。 |
| All but two of the member States have now
signed Protocol No. 13 and all but three of the States which have signed have
ratified it. | 只有两个成员国尚未签署第13号议定书，所有签署国中只有三个国家尚未批准。 |
| These figures, together with consistent
State practice in observing the moratorium on capital punishment, are
strongly indicative that Article 2 has been amended so as to prohibit the
death penalty in all circumstances. | 这些数字，再加上一贯的暂停执行死刑的国家实践，明确显示第2条已被修正，以禁止在任何情况下执行死刑。 |
| Against this background, the Court does
not consider that the wording of the second sentence of Article 2 § 1
continues to act as a bar to its interpreting the words ‘inhuman or degrading
treatment or punishment’ in Article 3 as including the death penalty (compare
Soering, cited above, §§ 102-04). | 在这种背景下，法院认为第2条第1款第二句的措辞不再阻碍其将第3条下的“不人道或有辱人格的待遇或处罚”一词解释为包括死刑(比照Soering案，上文引用，第102-104段)。 |
| (35) The case law of international courts
and tribunals allows the following conclusions: the WTO context suggests that
a treaty may preclude the subsequent practice of the parties from having a
modifying effect. | (35) 从国际性法院和法庭的判例中可以得出以下结论：世贸组织的情况显示，条约本身可阻止缔约方的嗣后实践具有修改作用。 |
| Conversely, the European Court of Human
Rights cases suggest that a treaty may permit the subsequent practice of the
parties to have a modifying effect. | 相反，欧洲人权法院的案件显示，条约可以允许缔约方的嗣后实践具有修改作用。 |
| Thus, ultimately, the treaty itself
governs the question in the first place and much depends on the treaty or on
the treaty provisions concerned. | 因此，最终主要还是条约本身决定这一问题，并在很大程度上取决于条约或相关条约规定。 |
| (36) The situation is more complicated in
the case of treaties for which such indications do not exist. | (36) 如果条约中没有这类表示，则情况更加复杂。 |
| No clear residual rule for such cases can
be discerned from the jurisprudence of the International Court of Justice. | 国际法院的判例中不太能找到针对这种情况的明确的补充规则。 |
| The conclusion could perhaps be drawn,
however, that the Court, while finding that the possibility of a modification
of a treaty by subsequent practice of the parties “cannot be wholly precluded
as a possibility in law”, considered that finding such a modification should
be avoided, if at all possible. | 不过，也许可以得出这一结论：国际法院虽然认定“法律中不能完全排除”缔约方通过嗣后实践修改条约的可能性， 但是认为只要有可能，就应避免这类修改。 |
| Instead, the Court seems to prefer to
accept broad interpretations of the ordinary meaning of the terms of the
treaty. | 相反，该法院似乎倾向于接受对条约用语通常含义的宽泛解释。 |
| (37) This conclusion from the
jurisprudence of the International Court of Justice is in line with certain
considerations that were articulated during the debates among States on draft
article 38 of the 1969 Vienna Convention. | (37) 从国际法院的判例中得出的这一结论符合各国在关于1969年《维也纳公约》第三十八条草案的辩论中提出的一些考虑因素。 |
| Today, the consideration that amendment
procedures that are provided for in a treaty are not to be circumvented by
informal means seems to have gained more weight in relation to the equally
true general observation that international law is often not as formalist as
national law. | 如今，虽然普遍认为国际法不像国内法那样死板(的确如此)，但是不应以非正式途径规避条约中规定的修正程序这种观点似乎越来越得到认同。 |
| The concern that was expressed by a
number of States at the Vienna Conference, according to which the possibility
of modifying a treaty by subsequent practice could create difficulties for
domestic constitutional law, has also since gained in relevance. | 许多国家在维也纳会议上提出的关切，即嗣后实践修改条约的可能性有可能给国内宪法造成问题，也越来越受到重视。 |
| And, while the principle pacta sunt
servanda is not formally called into question by an amendment or modification
of a treaty by subsequent practice that establishes the agreement of all the
parties, it is equally true that the stability of treaty relations may be
called into question if an informal means of identifying agreement as subsequent
practice could easily modify a treaty. | 虽然条约必须遵守原则并没有因确定了所有缔约方一致意见的嗣后实践对条约的修正或修改而正式受到质疑，但是如果像嗣后实践这样的非正式方式能够轻易修改一项条约，那么的确可能对条约关系的稳定性造成问题。 |
| (38) In conclusion, while there exists
some support in international case law that, absent indications in the treaty
to the contrary, the agreed subsequent practice of the parties theoretically
may lead to modifications of a treaty, the actual occurrence of that effect
is not to be presumed, and the possibility of amending or modifying a treaty
by subsequent practice has not been generally recognized. | (38) 总之，虽然国际判例中有人认为只要条约中没有相反的表示，则理论上缔约方达成一致的嗣后实践就可以修改条约，但是不应假定实际出现了这种效果，通过嗣后实践修正或修改条约的可能性也未得到普遍承认。 |
| Conclusion 8 Interpretation of treaty
terms as capable of evolving over time | 结论8 能够随时间演变的条约用语的解释 |
| Subsequent agreements and subsequent
practice under articles 31 and 32 may assist in determining whether or not
the presumed intention of the parties upon the conclusion of the treaty was
to give a term used a meaning which is capable of evolving over time. | 第三十一和第三十二条所指的嗣后协定和嗣后实践可协助确定缔约方在缔结条约之时的推定意图是不是赋予用语以能够随时间演变的含义。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Draft conclusion 8 addresses the role
that subsequent agreements and subsequent practice may play in the context of
the more general question of whether the meaning of a term of a treaty is
capable of evolving over time. | (1) 结论草案8涉及在条约用语的含义是否能够随时间演变这个更一般性问题的背景下，嗣后协定和嗣后实践可以发挥的作用。 |
| (2) In the case of treaties, the question
of the so-called intertemporal law has traditionally been put in terms of
whether a treaty should be interpreted in the light of the circumstances and
the law at the time of its conclusion (“contemporaneous” or “static”
interpretation), or in the light of the circumstances and the law at the time
of its application (“evolutive”, “evolutionary”, or “dynamic”
interpretation). | (2) 在涉及条约时，所谓时际法 的一般问题历来是这样提出的：条约是应当根据其缔结时的情况和法律来解释(“当时意义”或“静态”解释)，还是应当根据适用之时的情况和法律来解释(“演进性”、“演变性”或“动态性”解释)。 |
| Arbitrator Max Huber’s dictum in the
Island of Palmas case according to which “a judicial fact must be appreciated
in the light of the law contemporary with it” led many international courts
and tribunals, as well as many writers, to generally favour contemporaneous
interpretation. | 当初，仲裁官Max Hubert在帕尔马斯岛案中的判词是“必须根据当时的法律来审视案件事实”， 导致许多国际性法院和法庭以及许多法学家普遍赞成“注重当时意义的解释”方法。 |
| At the same time, the Arbitral Tribunal
in the Iron Rhine case asserted that there was, “general support among the
leading writers today for evolutive interpretation of treaties”. | 与此同时，仲裁法庭在莱茵铁路案中声称，“今天，主流法学家普遍支持对条约的演进性解释”。 |
| (3) The Commission, in its commentary on
the draft articles on the law of treaties, considered in 1966 that “to
attempt to formulate a rule covering comprehensively the temporal element
would present difficulties” and it, therefore, “concluded that it should omit
the temporal element”. | (3) 1966年，委员会在条约法条款草案的评注中认为，“试图制定一项全面涵盖时间因素的通则会产生难题”，因此，委员会“得出结论认为，应忽略时间因素”。 |
| Similarly, the debates within the
Commission’s Study Group on fragmentation led to the conclusion in 2006 that
it is difficult to formulate and to agree on a general rule that would give
preference either to a “principle of contemporaneous interpretation” or to
one that generally recognizes the need to take account of an “evolving
meaning” of treaties. | 同样，通过委员会不成体系问题研究组内的辩论，委员会在2006年得出结论认为，难以制定并商定一条通则，从而要么偏向于“当时意义解释原则”，要么偏向于大体上承认有必要考虑条约“不断演变的含义”的原则。 |
| (4) Draft conclusion 8 should not be read
as taking any position regarding the appropriateness of a more
contemporaneous or a more evolutive approach to treaty interpretation in
general. | (4) 结论草案8不应视为就一般条约解释宜采取当时意义办法还是演进办法这一问题采取了任何立场。 |
| Draft conclusion 8 rather emphasizes that
subsequent agreements and subsequent practice, as any other means of treaty
interpretation, can support both a contemporaneous and an evolutive
interpretation (or, as it is often called, evolutionary interpretation),
where appropriate. | 结论草案8强调的是，与任何其他条约解释资料一样，嗣后协定和嗣后实践在适当情况下，既可支持当时意义解释，也可支持演进性解释(或通常所称的演变性解释)。 |
| The Commission, therefore, concluded that
these means of treaty interpretation “may assist in determining whether or
not” an evolutive interpretation is appropriate with regard to a particular
treaty term. | 因此，委员会的结论是，这些条约解释资料“可协助确定”演进性解释对某特定条约用语是否适合。 |
| (5) This approach is confirmed by the
jurisprudence of international courts and tribunals. | (5) 各国际性法院和法庭的判例确认了这一办法。 |
| The various international courts and
tribunals that have engaged in evolutive interpretation — albeit in varying
degrees — appear to have followed a case-by-case approach in determining,
through recourse to the various means of treaty interpretation that are
referred to in articles 31 and 32, whether or not a treaty term should be
given a meaning capable of evolving over time. | 采用演进性解释办法――尽管程度不同――的各国际性法院和法庭，看来都采用逐案处理的办法，通过第三十一条和第三十二条提到的各种条约解释资料，确定是否应当赋予条约用语以能够随时间演变的含义。 |
| (6) The International Court of Justice,
in particular, is seen as having developed two strands of jurisprudence, one
tending towards a more “contemporaneous” and the other towards a more
“evolutionary” interpretation, as Judge ad hoc Guillaume has pointed out in
his Declaration in Dispute regarding Navigational and Related Rights. | (6) 特别是，国际法院被视为发展出了两套判例，一套偏向于“当时意义”解释，一套偏向于“演变性”解释，专案法官纪尧姆在其关于航行权和相关权利的争端案的声明中就指出了这一点。 |
| The decisions that favour a more
contemporaneous approach mostly concern specific treaty terms
(“water-parting”; “main channel or Thalweg”; names of places; | 他认为，倾向于当时意义办法的法院裁决大多涉及专门的条约用语(“分水岭”、“主航道或河流最深线”、地名、“河口”)。 |
| and “mouth” of a river). On the other
hand, the cases that support an evolutive interpretation seem to relate to
more general terms. | 另一方面，支持演进性解释的案件似乎涉及更一般的用语。 |
| This is true, in particular, for terms
that are by definition evolutionary, such as “the strenuous conditions of the
modern world”, “the well-being and development of such peoples”, and “sacred
trust” in article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations. | 对从定义上就具备演变性的用语而言尤为如此，例如《国际联盟盟约》第二十二条中“现代世界的艰难条件”、“这些人民的福祉和发展”或“神圣的信任”。 |
| The International Court of Justice, in
its Namibia Advisory Opinion gave “sacred trust” an evolving meaning so as to
conclude “that the ultimate objective of the sacred trust was the
self-determination and independence of the peoples concerned”. | 国际法院在纳米比亚案的咨询意见中，对“神圣的信任”赋予不断演变的含义，认为“神圣信任的最终目标是有关人民的自决和独立”。 |
| The “generic” nature of a particular term
in a treaty and the fact that the treaty is designed to be “of continuing
duration” may also give rise to an evolving meaning. | 条约某个用语具有“非特定”性质，以及条约旨在“长期有效”，也可催生不断演变的含义。 |
| (7) Other international judicial bodies
sometimes also employ an evolutive approach to interpretation, though
displaying different degrees of openness towards such interpretation. | (7) 其他国际司法机构有时也采用演进性解释办法，不过对此种解释表现出了不同的开放程度。 |
| The WTO Appellate Body has only
occasionally resorted to evolutive interpretation. | 世贸组织上诉机构仅偶尔采用演进性解释。 |
| In a well-known case it has, however,
held that “the generic term ‘natural resources’ in article XX(g) is not
‘static’ in its content or reference but is rather ‘by definition,
evolutionary’”. | 但是，在一桩众所周知的案件中，该上诉机构裁定，“第20条(g)项中‘自然资源’这一普通用语在内容和指代范围上并不是‘静止’的，而是‘从定义上就具备演变性’”。 |
| The ITLOS Seabed Disputes Chamber has
held that the meaning of certain obligations to ensure “may change over
time”, and has emphasized that the rules of State liability in the United
Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea are apt to follow developments in
the law and are “not considered to be static”. | 海洋法法庭海底争端分庭认为，某些“确保…的义务”的含义“会随着时间而变化”， 并强调，《联合国海洋法公约》中关于国家责任的规则会随着法律的发展而发展，而“不会被认为是静止的”。 |
| The European Court of Human Rights has
held more generally “that the Convention is a living instrument which … must
be interpreted in the light of present-day conditions”. | 欧洲人权法院更笼统地指出，“《公约》是一项活的文书…必须依照当今的情况来解释”。 |
| The Inter-American Court of Human Rights
also more generally follows an evolutive approach to interpretation, in
particular in connection with its socalled pro homine approach. | 美洲人权法院也更常采用演进性解释办法，特别是结合其所谓人道的办法。 |
| In the Iron Rhine case, the continued
viability and effectiveness of a multidimensional cross-border railway
arrangement was an important reason for the Arbitral Tribunal to accept that
even rather technical rules may have to be given an evolutive interpretation. | 在莱茵铁路案中，多方面跨境铁路安排的持续存在和效力是一个重要理由，促使仲裁法庭同意，即便对于技术性相当强的规则，也可以予以演进性的解释。 |
| (8) In the final analysis, most
international courts and tribunals have not recognized evolutive
interpretation as a separate form of interpretation, but instead have arrived
at such an evolutive interpretation in application of the various means of
interpretation that are mentioned in articles 31 and 32 of the 1969 Vienna
Convention, by considering certain criteria (in particular those mentioned in
paragraph (6) above) on a case-by-case basis. | (8) 归根到底，大多数国际性法院和法庭并未将演进性解释作为一种单独的解释形式，而是通过在个案的基础上考虑某些标准(特别是以上第(6)段提到的标准)，在使用1969年《维也纳公约》第三十一条和第三十二条中所提到的各种解释资料中作出此种演进性解释。 |
| Any evolutive interpretation of the
meaning of a term over time must therefore result from the ordinary process
of treaty interpretation. | 因此，对用语随时间变化的意义的任何演进性解释，必须产生于正常的条约解释过程。 |
| (9) The Commission considers that this
state of affairs confirms its original approach to treaty interpretation: | (9) 委员会认为，这种情况确认了其最初对条约解释采用的办法： |
| the Commission’s approach to treaty
interpretation was on the basis that the text of the treaty must be presumed
to be the authentic expression of the intentions of the parties, and that the
elucidation of the meaning of the text rather than an investigation ab initio
of the supposed intentions of the parties constitutes the object of
interpretation … making the ordinary meaning of the terms, the context of the
treaty, its object and purpose, and the general rules of international law,
together with authentic interpretations by the parties, the primary criteria
for interpreting a treaty. | 委员会处理条约解释问题的方法系以条约约文必须假定为缔约国意向的作准表示，又解释的目的为阐明约文意义而不从头研究缔约国的假定意向为根据。 …以用语的通常意义，条约的上下文关系，条约的目的及宗旨，国际法的一般规则以及缔约国的作准解释作为解释条约的主要标准。 |
| Accordingly, draft conclusion 8, by using
the phrase “presumed intention”, refers to the intention of the parties as
determined through the application of the various means of interpretation
that are recognized in articles 31 and 32. | 因此，结论草案8通过使用“推定意图”一语，提到通过应用第三十一条和第三十二条承认的各种解释资料所确定的当事国的意图。 |
| The “presumed intention” is thus not a
separately identifiable original will, and the travaux préparatoires are not
the primary basis for determining the presumed intention of the parties, but
they are only, as article 32 indicates, a supplementary means of
interpretation. | 因此，“推定意图”并非一个可单独确定的最初意愿，准备工作并非确定当事国推定意图的主要基础，而是如第三十二条所示，仅仅是补充解释资料。 |
| And although interpretation must seek to
identify the intention of the parties, this must be done by the interpreter
on the basis of the means of interpretation that are available at the time of
the act of interpretation and that include subsequent agreements and
subsequent practice of parties to the treaty. | 虽然解释必须设法确定当事国的意图，但解释者必须根据进行解释之时现有的解释资料予以确定，其中包括条约当事国的嗣后协定和嗣后实践。 |
| The interpreter thus has to answer the
question of whether parties can be presumed to have intended, upon the
conclusion of the treaty, to give a term used a meaning that is capable of
evolving over time. | 因而解释者须回答这样的问题：是否可推定当事国在缔结条约时有意使所用的用语具有可随时间演变的含义。 |
| (10) Draft conclusion 8 does not take a
position regarding the question of the appropriateness of a more
contemporaneous or a more evolutive approach to treaty interpretation in
general (see above commentary, at paragraph (4)). | (10) 结论草案8没有就一般条约解释宜采取当时意义办法还是演进性办法这一问题采取任何立场(见上文评注，第(4)段)。 |
| The conclusion should, however, be
understood as indicating the need for some caution with regard to arriving at
a conclusion in a specific case whether to adopt an evolutive approach. | 但是，本条结论应当被理解为表明，在是否对具体案件采取演进办法得出结论时，需要慎重一些。 |
| For this purpose, draft conclusion 8
points to subsequent agreements and subsequent practice as means of
interpretation that may provide useful indications to the interpreter for
assessing, as part of the ordinary process of treaty interpretation, whether
the meaning of a term is capable of evolving over time. | 为此目的，结论草案8提到嗣后协定和嗣后实践，认为其作为解释资料，可有助于解释者在正常的条约解释过程中，评估用语的含义是否能够随时间演变。 |
| (11) This approach is based on and
confirmed by the jurisprudence of the International Court of Justice and
other international courts and tribunals. | (11) 这一办法以国际法院及其他国际性法院和法庭的判例为基础并为其所确认。 |
| In the Namibia Advisory Opinion, the
International Court of Justice referred to the practice of United Nations
organs and of States in order to specify the conclusions that it derived from
the inherently evolutive nature of the right to self-determination. | 在纳米比亚案的咨询意见中，国际法院援引了联合国机构和一些国家的实践，以具体说明其从自决权固有的演进性质中得出的结论。 |
| In the Aegean Sea case, the Court found
it “significant” that what it had identified as the “ordinary, generic sense”
of the term “territorial status” was confirmed by the administrative practice
of the United Nations and by the behaviour of the party that had invoked the
restrictive interpretation in a different context. | 在爱琴海案中，国际法院认为“重要”的是，联合国的行政实践和当事国的行为确认了它认定的“领土地位”这一用语的“一般和通常意义”，尽管当事国在另一处上下文中援用了限制性的解释。 |
| In any case, the decisions in which the
International Court of Justice has undertaken an evolutive interpretation
have not strayed from the possible meaning of the text and from the presumed
intention of the parties to the treaty, as they had also been expressed in
their subsequent agreements and subsequent practice. | 无论如何，国际法院采取演进性办法的裁定并未偏离案文可能具有的含义，并未偏离――如其嗣后协定和嗣后实践中也表示的――条约当事国的推定意图。 |
| (12) The judgment of the International
Court of Justice in Dispute regarding Navigational and Related Rights
illustrates how subsequent agreements and subsequent practice of the parties
can assist in determining whether a term has to be given a meaning that is
capable of evolving over time. | (12) 关于航行权和相关权利的争端案的国际法院判决显示了缔约方的嗣后协定和嗣后实践如何能够帮助确定某一用语是否具有能够随时间演变的含义。 |
| Interpreting the term “comercio” in a
treaty of 1858, the Court held: | 国际法院在解释1858年一项条约中的“comercio”一词时认定： |
| On the one hand, the subsequent practice
of the parties, within the meaning of article 31 (3) (b) of the Vienna
Convention, can result in a departure from the original intent on the basis
of a tacit agreement between the parties. | 一方面，《维也纳公约》第三十一条第三款(b)项的意义下的当事国的嗣后实践可能导致偏离缔约方默认的原有意图。 |
| On the other hand, there are situations
in which the parties’ intent upon conclusion of the treaty was … to give the
terms used … a meaning or content capable of evolving, not one fixed once and
for all, so as to make allowance for, among other things, developments in
international law. | 另一方面，在有些情况中，当事国缔结条约时的意图是…赋予所用用语…一种能够演变的含义或内容，而不是一种一旦确定即永不改变的含义或内容，以便除其他外，为国际法的发展留出余地。 |
| The Court then found that the term
“comercio” was a “generic term” of which “the parties necessarily” had “been
aware that the meaning … was likely to evolve over time” and that “the treaty
has been entered into for a very long period”, and concluded that “the
parties must be presumed … to have intended” this term to “have an evolving
meaning”. | 该法院随后认定，“comercio”一词是一个“普通用语”，其“当事国必然意识到其含义…很可能随时间演变”，意识到“缔结的条约要持续很长时间”，并得出结论认为“必须推定当事国…意图使”这一用语“具有不断演变的含义”。 |
| Judge Skotnikov, in a Separate Opinion,
while disagreeing with this reasoning, ultimately arrived at the same result
by accepting that a more recent subsequent practice of Costa Rica related to
tourism on the San Juan River “for at least a decade” against which Nicaragua
“never protested” but rather “engaged in consistent practice of allowing
tourist navigation” and concluded that this “suggests that the parties have
established an agreement regarding its interpretation”. | 斯科特尼科夫法官在个别意见中虽然不同意这一推理，但最终得出了同样的结果，他承认，对于哥斯达黎加最近“至少十年”有关圣胡安河旅游的嗣后实践，尼加拉瓜“从未抗议”，而是“采取允许旅游航行的一贯做法”，并得出结论认为，这“表明当事国就其解释达成了一致”。 |
| (13) The International Criminal Tribunal
for the former Yugoslavia has sometimes taken more general forms of State
practice into account, including trends in the legislation of States that, in
turn, can give rise to a changed interpretation of the scope of crimes or
their elements. | (13) 南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭有时考虑到更普遍的国家实践形式，包括国家立法趋势，这反过来又可能改变对犯罪范围或犯罪要件的解释。 |
| In Prosecutor v. Furundžija,
for example, the Trial Chamber of the International Criminal Tribunal for the
former Yugoslavia, in search of a definition for the crime of rape as
prohibited by article 27 of the Geneva Convention relative to the Protection
of Civilian Persons in Time of War, article 76, paragraph 1, of the first
Additional Protocol (Protocol I) and article 4, paragraph 2 (e), of the
second Additional Protocol (Protocol II), examined the principles of criminal
law common to the major legal systems of the world and held: | 例如，在检察官诉Furundžija案 中，前南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭的审判分庭为界定《关于战时保护平民之日内瓦公约》第二十七条、《第一附加议定书》(《第一议定书》)第七十六条第一款 和《第二附加议定书》(《第二议定书》)第四条第二款(五)项 所禁止的强奸罪，研究了世界各主要法律制度通用的刑法原则，认为： |
| that a trend can be discerned in the
national legislation of a number of States of broadening the definition of
rape so that it now embraces acts that were previously classified as
comparatively less serious offences, that is sexual or indecent assault. | “可以看出，一些国家的立法工作存在这样一个趋势，即扩大强奸罪定义的范围，把先前定为较轻犯罪的行为也纳入进来，包括性侵犯或非礼行为。 |
| This trend shows that at the national
level States tend to take a stricter attitude towards serious forms of sexual
assault. | 这种趋势表明，在国家一级，各国倾向于更严格地对待严重的性侵犯形式。 |
| (14) The “living instrument” approach of
the European Court of Human Rights is also based, inter alia, on different
forms of subsequent practice. | (14) 欧洲人权法院的“活的文书”的办法除其他外，也是基于不同形式的嗣后实践。 |
| While the Court does not generally
require “the agreement of the parties regarding its interpretation” in the
sense of article 31, paragraph 3 (b), the decisions in which it adopts an
evolutive approach are regularly supported by an elaborate account of
subsequent practice. | 尽管该法院并不一般要求第三十一条第三款(b)项意义上的“当事国对其解释的一致意思…”，但其采取演进办法的裁定往往辅之以对嗣后实践的详细叙述。 |
| (15) The Inter-American Court of Human
Rights, despite its relatively rare mentioning of subsequent practice, has
frequently referred to broader international developments, an approach that
falls somewhere between subsequent practice and other “relevant rules” under
article 31, paragraph 3 (c). | (15) 美洲人权法院尽管相对而言很少提到嗣后实践，但该法院常常提到更广泛的国际发展，这一办法介于嗣后实践和第三十一条第三款(c)项之下其他“相关规则”之间。 |
| In the case of Mayagna (Sumo) Awas Tingni
Community v. Nicaragua, for example, the Court pointed out that: | 例如，在Mayagna (Sumo) Awas Tingni社区诉尼加拉瓜案中，美洲人权法院指出： |
| human rights treaties are live
instruments [“instrumentos vivos”] whose interpretation must adapt to the
evolution of the times and, specifically, to current living conditions. | 人权条约是活的文书[“instrumentos vivo”]，其解释必须适应时代的演变，具体而言，适应目前的生活条件。 |
| (16) The Human Rights Committee has also
on occasion adopted an evolutive approach that is based on developments of
State practice. | (16) 人权事务委员会偶尔也曾采用基于国家实践发展的演进性办法。 |
| Thus, in Judge v. Canada, the Committee
abandoned its repeated pronouncements based on Kindler, elaborating that: | 因此，在法官诉加拿大案中，人权事务委员会放弃了其基于Kindler案
一再作出的声明，阐述说： |
| The Committee is mindful of the fact that
the above-mentioned jurisprudence was established some 10 years ago, and that
since that time there has been a broadening international consensus in favour
of abolition of the death penalty, and in States which have retained the
death penalty, a broadening consensus not to carry it out. | 委员会意识到，上述判例是大约10年以前做出的，自那时起，国际上就废除死刑达成了更广泛的共识，而在保留死刑的国家中，不执行死刑的共识也在不断扩大。 |
| In Yoon and Choi, the Committee stressed
that the meaning of any right contained in the International Covenant on
Civil and Political Rights evolved over time and concluded that article 18,
article 3, now provided at least some protection against being forced to act
against genuinely held religious beliefs. | 在Yoon和Choi案中，委员会强调，《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》
所载任何权利的含义都随时间演变，并得出结论认为，《公约》第十八条第3款现在至少提供了某种保护，使人不致被迫违背自己真心持有的宗教信仰而行动。 |
| The Committee reached this conclusion
since “an increasing number of those States parties to the Covenant which
have retained compulsory military service have introduced alternatives to
compulsory military service”. | 委员会得出这一结论是因为，“越来越多保持义务兵役制度的《公约》缔约国实行了义务兵役的替代办法”。 |
| (17) Finally, the tribunals established
under the auspices of the International Centre for the Settlement of
Investment Disputes have emphasized that subsequent practice can be a
particularly important means of interpretation for such provisions that the
parties to the treaty intended to evolve in the light of their subsequent
treaty practice. | (17) 最后，解决投资争端国际中心下设的法庭着重指出，对于条约当事国意图根据其嗣后条约实践而演变的这种条款，嗣后实践可能是特别重要的解释资料。 |
| (18) The jurisprudence of international
courts and tribunals and pronouncements of expert treaty bodies thus confirm
that subsequent agreements and subsequent practice under articles 31 and 32
“may assist in determining” whether or not a “term” shall be given “a meaning
which is capable of evolving over time”. | (18) 因此，各国际性法院和法庭的判例以及专家条约机构的声明确认，第三十一和第三十二条所指的嗣后协定和嗣后实践“可协助确定”是否应向某一“用语”赋予“能够随时间演变的含义”。 |
| The expression “term” is not limited to
specific words (like “commerce”, “territorial status”, “rape” or
“investment”), but may also encompass more interrelated or cross-cutting
concepts (such as “by law” (article 9 of the International Covenant on Civil
and Political Rights) or “necessary” (article 18 of the Covenant), as they
exist, for example, in human rights treaties). | “用语”一语并不限于具体措辞(如“商业”、“领土地位”、“强奸”或“投资”)，而是还可能包含更为相互关联和相互交叉的概念(如“依照法律”(《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》第九条)或“必需”(《公约》第十八条)等在各项人权条约中存在的概念)。 |
| Since the “terms” of a treaty are
elements of the rules which are contained therein, the rules concerned are
covered accordingly. | 条约的“用语”是条约所载规则的要素，因此涵盖相关规则。 |
| (19) In a similar manner, subsequent
practice under articles 31, paragraph 3 (b), and 32 has contributed to whether
domestic courts arrive at a more evolutive or static interpretation of a
treaty. | (19) 同样，第三十一条第三款(b)项和第三十二条所指的嗣后实践也对国内法院决定采取演进性办法还是静止办法解释条约作出了贡献。 |
| For example, in a case concerning the
Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction, the New
Zealand Court of Appeal interpreted the term “custody rights” as encompassing
not only legal rights, but also “de facto rights”. | 举例而言，在一宗涉及《国际儿童拐骗事件的民事问题公约》 的案件中，新西兰上诉法院将“监护权”解释为不仅包括法定权利，也包括“事实权利”。 |
| On the basis of a review of legislative
and judicial practice in different States and referring to article 31,
paragraph 3 (b), the Court reasoned that this practice “evidence[d] a
fundamental change in attitudes”, which then led it to adopt a modern
understanding of the term “custody rights” rather than an understanding
“through a 1980 lens”. | 该法院回顾了不同国家的立法和司法实践，并提到第三十一条第三款(b)项，分析指出这一实践“证明态度上发生了根本性改变”，并因此随后对“监护权”采取了现代理解，而非“1980年的理解”。 |
| The German Federal Constitutional Court,
in a series of cases concerning the interpretation of the North Atlantic
Treaty in the light of the changed security context after the end of the Cold
War, also held that subsequent agreements and subsequent practice under
article 31, paragraph 3 (b), “could acquire significance for the meaning of
the treaty” and ultimately held that this had been the case. | 德国联邦宪法法院在一系列涉及在冷战结束后已改变的安全局势下解释《北大西洋公约》 的案件中，也认定第三十一条第三款(b)项所指的嗣后协定和嗣后实践“可对条约的含义产生重大意义”，并最终裁定，嗣后协定和嗣后实践在所涉案件中确实对条约含义产生了重大意义。 |
| (20) Other decisions of domestic courts
have confirmed that subsequent agreements and subsequent practice under
articles 31, paragraph 3, and 32 do not necessarily support evolutive
interpretations of a treaty. | (20) 国内法院的其他决定证实，第三十一条第三款和第三十二条所指的嗣后协定和嗣后实践不一定支持对条约的演进性解释。 |
| In Eastern Airlines, Inc. v. Floyd et
al., for example, the United States Supreme Court was confronted with the
question of whether the term “bodily injury” in article 17 of the Warsaw
Convention of 1929 covered not only physical but also purely mental injuries. | 例如，在美国东方航空公司诉Floyd等人案中，美国最高法院面临的问题是，1929年《华沙公约》 第17条中“人身伤害”这一用语是否不仅包括身体伤害，也包括纯心理伤害。 |
| The Court, taking account of the
“post-1929 conduct” and “interpretations of the signatories”, emphasized
that, despite some initiatives to the contrary, most parties had always
continued to understand that the term covered only bodily injuries. | 该法院考虑到“1929年后做法”和“签字国的解释”，强调尽管有些举措反其道而行之，但大部分缔约国一直将这一用语理解为只包括身体伤害。 |
| Conclusion 9 Weight of subsequent
agreements and subsequent practice as a means of interpretation | 结论9 嗣后协定和嗣后实践作为解释资料的权重 |
| 1. The weight of a subsequent agreement
or subsequent practice as a means of interpretation under article 31,
paragraph 3, depends, inter alia, on its clarity and specificity. | 1. 嗣后协定或嗣后实践作为第三十一条第三款所指的解释资料的权重，除其他外，取决于其清晰性和特定性。 |
| 2. In addition, the weight of subsequent
practice under article 31, paragraph 3 (b), depends, inter alia, on whether
and how it is repeated. | 2. 此外，第三十一条第三款(b)项所指的嗣后实践的权重，除其他外，还取决于该实践是否以及如何重复出现。 |
| 3. The weight of subsequent practice as a
supplementary means of interpretation under article 32 may depend on the
criteria referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2. | 3. 嗣后实践作为第三十二条所指的补充的解释资料的权重可取决于第1和第2段所述标准。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Draft conclusion 9 identifies some
criteria that may be helpful in determining the interpretative weight to be
accorded to a specific subsequent agreement or subsequent practice in the
process of interpretation in a particular case. | (1) 结论草案9列出了一些标准，可能有助于确定在具体情况下进行解释时对某一特定嗣后协定或嗣后实践作为解释资料给予多少权重。 |
| Naturally, the weight accorded to
subsequent agreements or subsequent practice must also be determined in
relation to other means of interpretation (see draft conclusion 2, paragraph
5). | 当然，对嗣后协定或嗣后实践给予的权重也必须取决于其他解释资料(见结论草案2, 第5段)。 |
| Paragraph 1 — weight: clarity,
specificity and other factors | 第1段――权重：清晰性、特定性和其他因素 |
| (2) Paragraph 1 addresses the weight of a
subsequent agreement or subsequent practice under article 31, paragraph 3,
thus dealing with both subparagraphs (a) and (b) from a general point of
view. | (2) 第1段讨论第三十一条第三款下的嗣后协定或嗣后实践的权重，因此是从总体上同时涉及(a)项和(b)项。 |
| Paragraph 1 specifies that the weight to
be accorded to a subsequent agreement or subsequent practice as a means of
interpretation depends, inter alia, on its clarity and specificity. | 第1段明确指出，嗣后协定或嗣后实践作为解释资料的权重，除其他外，取决于其清晰性和特定性。 |
| The use of the term “inter alia”
indicates that these criteria should not be seen as exhaustive. | 使用“除其他外”一语，就表明不应将这些标准视为唯一标准。 |
| Other criteria may relate to the time
when the agreement or practice occurred, the emphasis given by the parties to
a particular agreement or practice, or the applicable burden of proof. | 其他标准可能涉及到协定或实践发生的时间、缔约方对特定协定或实践的重视或者适用的举证责任。 |
| (3) The interpretative weight of
subsequent agreements or practice in relation to other means of
interpretation often depends on their clarity and specificity in relation to
the treaty concerned. | (3) 相对于其他解释资料而言，嗣后协定或实践作为解释资料的权重常常取决于其清晰性以及对于有关条约的特定性。 |
| This is confirmed, for example, by
decisions of the International Court of Justice, arbitral awards and reports
of the WTO Panels and Appellate Body. | 例如，国际法院的裁决、世贸组织的专家组及上诉机构的仲裁裁决和报告都表明了这一点。 |
| The award of the ICSID Tribunal in Plama
Consortium Limited v. Republic of Bulgaria is instructive: | 解决投资争端国际中心的法庭对Plama联合有限公司诉保加利亚共和国案的裁决具有启示意义： |
| It is true that treaties between one of
the Contracting Parties and third States may be taken into account for the
purpose of clarifying the meaning of a treaty’s text at the time it was
entered into. | 确实，为了澄清条约文本生效时的含义，可以考虑一个缔约国与第三国之间的条约。 |
| The Claimant has provided a very clear
and insightful presentation of Bulgaria’s practice in relation to the
conclusion of investment treaties subsequent to the conclusion of the
Bulgaria-Cyprus BIT in 1987. | 原告对于保加利亚在1987年缔结保加利亚—塞浦路斯双边投资条约之后缔结投资条约的实践做了非常清楚和深入的介绍。 |
| In the 1990s, after Bulgaria’s communist
regime changed, it began concluding BITs with much more liberal dispute
resolution provisions, including resort to ICSID arbitration. | 1990年代保加利亚的共产主义制度改变之后，该国缔结的双边投资条约采用了大为开放的争端解决条款，包括诉诸解决投资争端国际中心进行仲裁。 |
| However, that practice is not
particularly relevant in the present case since subsequent negotiations
between Bulgaria and Cyprus indicate that these Contracting Parties did not
intend the MFN provision to have the meaning that otherwise might be inferred
from Bulgaria’s subsequent treaty practice. | 但是，这一实践对本案并没有很大的关联，因为保加利亚和塞浦路斯嗣后的谈判表明，缔约国并不想要最惠国待遇条款具有可通过保加利亚嗣后条约实践而引申出来的含义。 |
| Bulgaria and Cyprus negotiated a revision
of their BIT in 1998. | 保加利亚和塞浦路斯于1998年谈判修订双边投资条约。 |
| The negotiations failed but specifically
contemplated a revision of the dispute settlement provisions … It can be
inferred from these negotiations that the Contracting Parties to the BIT
themselves did not consider that the MFN provision extends to dispute
settlement provisions in other BITs. | 谈判没有成功，但专门考虑到了修订争端解决条款…从这些谈判中也可以得出结论，即双边投资条约的缔约国本身并未考虑将最惠国待遇条款扩大至其他双边投资条约中的争端解决条款。 |
| (4) Whereas the International Court of
Justice and arbitral tribunals tend to accord more interpretative weight to
rather specific subsequent practice by States, the European Court of Human
Rights often relies on broad comparative assessments of the domestic
legislation or international positions adopted by States. | (4) 尽管国际法院和各个仲裁法庭倾向于对特定性较强的国家嗣后实践作为解释资料给予更多权重，但欧洲人权法院常常依靠于对国内法律或国家采取的国际立场作出广泛的比较性评估。 |
| In this latter context, it should be borne
in mind that the rights and obligations under the Convention for the
Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (hereinafter, “European
Convention on Human Rights”) must be correctly transformed, within the given
margin of appreciation, into the law, the executive practice and
international arrangements of the respective State party. | 对于后一种情况，应当铭记，《欧洲保护人权与基本自由公约》(下称“《欧洲人权公约》”) 下规定的权利和义务必须在留出一定判断余地的前提下，正确地转化为有关国家的法律、行政机构实践和国际安排。 |
| For this purpose, sufficiently strong
commonalities in the national legislation of its States parties can be
relevant for the determination of the scope of a human right or the necessity
of its restriction. | 为此，其缔约国国内法律之间如果存在足够强的共同点，可有助于确定一项人权的范围或限制这项人权的必要性。 |
| In addition, the character of certain
rights or obligations sometimes speaks in favour of taking less specific
practice into account. | 此外，鉴于某些权利或义务的特点，有时更宜考虑特定性不那么强的实践。 |
| For example, in the case of Rantsev v.
Cyprus, the Court held that: | 例如，在Rantsev诉塞浦路斯案中，该法院认为： |
| It is clear from the provisions of these
two [international] instruments that the Contracting States … have formed the
view that only a combination of measures addressing all three aspects can be
effective in the fight against trafficking … Accordingly, the duty to
penalise and prosecute trafficking is only one aspect of member States’
general undertaking to combat trafficking. | 这两份[国际]文书的条款清楚表明，缔约国…形成的观点是，只有将涉及所有三个方面的举措结合起来，才能有效打击贩运人口活动…因此，惩罚和起诉贩运人口活动只是成员国打击贩运人口活动总体事业的一个方面。 |
| The extent of the positive obligations
arising under Article 4 [prohibition of forced labour] must be considered
within this broader context. | 对第4条[禁止强迫劳动]下产生的积极义务的范围必须放到这个广义的背景下加以考虑。 |
| (5) On the other hand, in the case of
Chapman v. the United Kingdom, the Court observed “that there may be said to
be an emerging international consensus amongst the Contracting States of the
Council of Europe recognising the special needs of minorities and an
obligation to protect their security, identity and lifestyle”, but ultimately
said that it was “not persuaded that the consensus is sufficiently concrete
for it to derive any guidance as to the conduct or standards which
Contracting States consider desirable in any particular situation”. | (5) 另一方面，在Chapman诉联合王国案中，该法院指出，“或许可以说，欧洲委员会缔约国之间正在形成国际共识，承认少数群体的特殊需要及保护其安全、身份认同和生活方式的义务”， 但最后又指出“本院并不认为该共识已足够具体，使本院能够得出任何指导意见，来确定缔约国在任一特定情况下视为可取的行为或标准”。 |
| Paragraph 2 — weight: repetition of a
practice and other factors | 第2段――权重：实践的重复出现和其他因素 |
| (6) Paragraph 2 of draft conclusion 9
deals only with subsequent practice under article 31, paragraph 3 (b), and
specifies that, in addition to the criteria mentioned in paragraph 1, the
weight of subsequent practice also depends, inter alia, on whether and how it
is repeated. | (6) 结论草案9第2段仅涉及第三十一条第三款(b)项所指的嗣后实践，并明确规定，除了第1段提到的标准，嗣后实践的权重除其他外还取决于该实践是否以及如何重复出现。 |
| This formula “whether and how it is
repeated” brings in the elements of time and of the character of a
repetition. | “是否以及如何”这一表述引入了时间和重复性这两个因素。 |
| It indicates, for example, that,
depending on the treaty concerned, something more than just a technical or
unmindful repetition of a practice may contribute to its interpretative value
in the context of article 31, paragraph 3 (b). | 它表明，举例来说，如果有关实践的重复不仅仅是技术性的或者无意的，则可能会增加其在第三十一条第三款(b)项范围下的解释性价值——具体视所涉条约而定。 |
| The elements of time and the character of
the repetition also serve to indicate the “grounding” of a particular
position of the parties regarding the interpretation of a treaty. | 时间因素和重复性因素也有助于表明缔约方对条约解释所持特定立场的“根据”。 |
| Moreover, the non-implementation of a
subsequent agreement may suggest a lack of its weight as a means of
interpretation under article 31, paragraph 3 (a). | 此外，嗣后协定未得到执行也可能说明其不具备作为第三十一条第三款(a)项下解释资料的权重。 |
| (7) The question of whether “subsequent
practice” under article 31, paragraph 3 (b), requires more than a one-off
application of the treaty was addressed by the WTO Appellate Body in Japan —
Alcoholic Beverages II: | (7) 对于第三十一条第三款(b)项中的“嗣后实践” 是否要求条约不仅是一次性适用的问题，世贸组织上诉机构在日本－酒精饮料案(二)中进行了讨论： |
| subsequent practice in interpreting a
treaty has been recognized as a “concordant, common and consistent” sequence
of acts or pronouncements which is sufficient to establish a discernible
pattern implying the agreement of the parties regarding its interpretation. | 用于解释条约的嗣后实践，公认应当是‘协调的、共同的和一致的’系列行为或声明，足以确立一种明确的模式，表明缔约方对条约解释的一致。 |
| (8) This definition suggests that
subsequent practice under article 31, paragraph 3 (b), requires more than one
“act or pronouncement” regarding the interpretation of a treaty; rather
action of such frequency and uniformity that it warrants a conclusion that
the parties have reached a settled agreement regarding the interpretation of
the treaty. | (8) 这一定义表明，第三十一条第三款(b)项下的嗣后实践所要求的是不仅仅就条约的解释作出一次“行为或声明”，而是此种行动的次数和统一性达到一定程度，使人们可以认定缔约方已就条约的解释达成了稳定的一致。 |
| Such a threshold would imply that
subsequent practice under article 31, paragraph 3 (b), requires a
broad-based, settled and qualified form of common practice in order to
establish agreement among the parties regarding interpretation. | 这一门槛就意味着，第三十一条第三款(b)项下的嗣后实践要求存在基础广泛、稳定和合格的共同实践模式，才能确认缔约方就解释达成了一致。 |
| (9) The International Court of Justice,
on the other hand, has applied article 31, paragraph 3 (b), more flexibly,
without adding further conditions. This is true, in particular, for its
judgment in the case of Kasikili/Sedudu Island. | (9) 另一方面，国际法院则较为灵活地适用了第三十一条第三款(b)项，而没有增加进一步的条件，特别是在卡西基里/塞杜杜岛案的判决中。 |
| Other international courts have mostly
followed the approach of the International Court of Justice. | 其他国际性法院大多遵循国际法院的办法。 |
| This is true for the Iran-United States
Claims Tribunal and the European Court of Human Rights. | 伊朗—美国索赔法庭 和欧洲人权法院 都是如此。 |
| (10) The difference between the standard
formulated by the WTO Appellate Body, on the one hand, and the approach of
the International Court of Justice, on the other, is, however, more apparent
than real. | (10) 但实际上，世贸组织上诉机构制订的标准与国际法院采取的办法之间的区别并没有表面看起来那么大。 |
| The WTO Appellate Body seems to have
taken the “concordant, common and consistent” formula from a publication that
stated that “the value of subsequent practice will naturally depend on the
extent to which it is concordant, common and consistent”. | 世贸组织上诉机构采用的“协调、共同和一致”的表述似乎来自一部出版物，这本书称，“嗣后实践的价值自然取决于它协调、共同和一致的程度”。 |
| The formula “concordant, common and
consistent” thus provides an indication as to the circumstances under which
subsequent practice under article 31, paragraph 3 (b), has more or less
weight as a means of interpretation in a process of interpretation, rather
than require any particular frequency in the practice. | 因此，“协调、共同和一致”的表述是要指出在哪些情况下，第三十一条第三款(b)项所指的嗣后实践在解释过程中作为解释资料具有较多或较少的权重，而不是要提出实践中具体的次数要求。 |
| The WTO Appellate Body itself on occasion
has relied on this nuanced view. | 世贸组织上诉机构自己也曾采取这种细致入微的态度。 |
| (11) The Commission, while finding that
the formula “concordant, common and consistent” may be useful for determining
the weight of subsequent practice in a particular case, also considers it as
not being sufficiently well established to articulate a minimum threshold for
the applicability of article 31, paragraph 3 (b), and as carrying the risk of
being misconceived as overly prescriptive. | (11) 委员会认为“协调、共同和一致”的表述可能有助于确定嗣后实践在某一具体情况下的权重，同时也认为这一规定并没有得到充分确立，不足以构成适用第三十一条第三款(b)项的一个最低门槛，并有可能被错误地认为规定性过强。 |
| Ultimately, the Commission continues to
find that: “The value of subsequent practice varies according as it shows the
common understanding of the parties as to the meaning of the terms. | 最终，委员会仍然认为，“嗣后实践的价值取决于其在多大程度上体现了缔约方对用语含义的共同理解。 |
| ” This implies that a one-time practice
of the parties that establishes their agreement regarding the interpretation
needs to be taken into account under article 31, paragraph 3 (b). | ” 这就意味着，缔约方就解释达成协定的一次性实践也需要在第三十一条第三款(b)项下考虑进来。 |
| (12) The weight of a subsequent practice
may also (“inter alia”) depend on other factors, such as consistency and
breadth. | (12) 嗣后实践的权重(“除其他外”)也可取决于其他因素，例如一致性和广度。 |
| A subsequent practice is more or less
consistent depending on whether and how far conduct exceptionally deviates
from the otherwise established pattern of practice. | 嗣后实践的一致性的高低，取决于是否有行为在例外情况下偏离了既定的实践模式，也取决于有关行为偏离既定模式的程度。 |
| The breadth of a practice refers to the
number of parties which engage in it and by which the agreement of all the
parties is established. | 实践的广度指参与实践并确立所有缔约方达成协定的缔约方的数量。 |
| Paragraph 3 — weight of subsequent
practice under article 32 | 第3段――第三十二条所指嗣后实践的权重 |
| (13) Paragraph 3 of draft conclusion 9
addresses the weight that should be accorded to subsequent practice under
article 32 (see draft conclusion 4, paragraph 3). | (13) 结论草案9第3段述及的问题是，对于第三十二条所指的嗣后实践，应予以多大的权重(见结论草案4第3段)。 |
| It does not address when and under which
circumstances such practice can be considered. | 该段并不涉及可在什么时候和哪些情况下考虑这种实践的问题。 |
| The WTO Appellate Body has emphasized, in
a comparable situation, that those two issues must be distinguished from each
other: | 世贸组织上诉机构在面对相似情况时曾强调指出，对这两个问题必须加以区别： |
| we consider that the European Communities
conflates the preliminary question of what may qualify as a ‘circumstance’ of
a treaty’s conclusion with the separate question of ascertaining the degree
of relevance that may be ascribed to a given circumstance, for purposes of
interpretation under Article 32. | 我们认为，就第三十二条之下的解释而言，哪些情况才能算作缔结条约的“背景情况”属于初步问题，至于确定特定背景情况的相关程度的高低，则是另一个问题，而欧洲共同体将这两个问题混为了一谈。 |
| The Appellate Body also held that: | 上诉机构还认为， |
| first, the Panel did not examine the
classification practice in the European Communities during the Uruguay Round
negotiations as a supplementary means of interpretation within the meaning of
Article 32 of the Vienna Convention; | 首先，专家组并未将欧洲共同体在乌拉圭回合谈判期间的分类实践作为《维也纳公约》第三十二条意义内的补充解释资料予以审查； |
| and, second, the value of the
classification practice as a supplementary means of interpretation. | 第二，未审查该分类实践作为补充解释材料的价值。 |
| In order to determine the “relevance” of
such subsequent practice, the Appellate Body referred to “objective factors”: | 为了确定这类嗣后实践的“相关性”，上诉机构提到了“客观因素”： |
| These include the type of event,
document, or instrument and its legal nature; | 这些因素包括有关事件、文件或文书的类型及其法律性质； |
| temporal relation of the circumstance to
the conclusion of the treaty; | 背景情况与缔结条约的时间联系； |
| actual knowledge or mere access to a
published act or instrument; | 确实了解还是只能查阅某项出版的法案或文书； |
| subject matter of the document,
instrument, or event in relation to the treaty provision to be interpreted; | 涉及待解释条约条款的文件、文书或事件的主题； |
| and whether or how it was used or
influenced the negotiations of the treaty. | 以及这项文件、文书或事件是否或如何在条约谈判中得到了使用或施加了影响。 |
| (14) Whereas the Appellate Body did not
use the term “specificity”, it referred to the criteria mentioned above. | (14) 上诉机构书虽然并未使用“特定性”一词，但提到了上文所述的标准。 |
| Instead of clarity, the Appellate Body
spoke of “consistency” and stated that consistency should not set a benchmark
but rather determine the degree of relevance. | 上诉机构没有提到清晰性，而是使用了“一致性”，并称不应将一致性用来设定基准，而是应将之用于确定有关实践的相关程度。 |
| “Consistent prior classification practice
may often be significant. | “一致的过往实践常常可能具有重要意义。 |
| Inconsistent classification practice,
however, cannot be relevant in interpreting the meaning of a tariff
concession”. | 但是，在解释关税减让的含义时，不一致的分类实践不可能具有相关性”。 |
| (15) A further factor that helps
determine the relevance under article 32 may be the number of affected States
that engage in that practice. | (15) 另一个有助于确定第三十二条下相关性的因素或许是参与这一实践的受影响国家的数目。 |
| The Appellate Body has stated: | 上诉机构指出： |
| To establish this intention, the prior
practice of only one of the parties may be relevant, but it is clearly of
more limited value than the practice of all parties. | 为确立这种意向，仅仅一个缔约方的过往实践可能也具有相关性，但相对于全体缔约方的实践而言，其价值显然大打折扣。 |
| In the specific case of the
interpretation of a tariff concession in a Schedule, the classification
practice of the importing Member, in fact, may be of great importance. | 具体到对减让表中某项关税减让的解释，进口成员的分类实践实际上可能非常重要。 |
| At the same time it is true that | 与此同时，应当指出 |
| [i]t would be quite novel and potentially
raise due process concerns in investment arbitration cases if a subsequent
unilateral statement by one State could be given substantial, let alone
decisive, weight. | 在投资仲裁案件中，如果对一国的嗣后单边声明予以较大权重，则不仅有违常例，还可能引发正当程序方面的关切，更不用说对这种声明予以决定性权重了。 |
| Conclusion 10 Agreement of the parties
regarding the interpretation of a treaty | 结论10 与条约解释有关的缔约方协定 |
| 1. An agreement under article 31,
paragraph 3 (a) and (b), requires a common understanding regarding the
interpretation of a treaty which the parties are aware of and accept. | 1. 第三十一条第三款(a)和(b)项所指的协定必须是各缔约方知悉并接受的关于条约解释的共同理解。 |
| Such an agreement may, but need not, be
legally binding for it to be taken into account. | 这种协定要得到考虑，可以但不必具有法律约束力。 |
| 2. The number of parties that must
actively engage in subsequent practice in order to establish an agreement
under article 31, paragraph 3 (b), may vary. | 2. 为确立第三十一条第三款(b)项所指的协定而必须积极从事嗣后实践的缔约方数目可能不尽相同。 |
| Silence on the part of one or more
parties may constitute acceptance of the subsequent practice when the
circumstances call for some reaction. | 在有关情况要求作出某种反应时，一个或多个缔约方的沉默可能构成对嗣后实践的接受。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| Paragraph 1, first sentence — “common
understanding” | 第1段第一句――“共同理解” |
| (1) The first sentence of paragraph 1 sets
forth the principle that an “agreement” under article 31, paragraph 3 (a) and
(b), requires a common understanding by the parties regarding the
interpretation of a treaty. | (1) 第1段第一句提出了一项原则，即第三十一条第三款(a)项和(b)项所指的“协定”必须是缔约方关于条约解释的共同理解。 |
| In order for that common understanding to
have the effect provided for under article 31, paragraph 3, the parties must
be aware of it and accept the interpretation contained therein. | 要使共同理解具有第三十一条第三款规定的效力，缔约方必须知悉并接受其中包含的解释。 |
| While the difference regarding the form
of an “agreement” under subparagraph (a) and subparagraph (b) has already
been set out in draft conclusion 4 and its accompanying commentary, paragraph
1 of draft conclusion 10 intends to capture what is common in the two
subparagraphs, which is the agreement between the parties, in substance,
regarding the interpretation of the treaty. | 在结论草案4及其评注 中已经说明了(a)项和(b)项所指“协定”形式的不同，而结论草案10第1段旨在找出这两项的共同之处，即缔约方就条约解释在实质上达成的协定。 |
| (2) The element that distinguishes
subsequent agreements and subsequent practice as authentic means of
interpretation under article 31, paragraph 3 (a) and (b), on the one hand,
and other subsequent practice as a supplementary means of interpretation under
article 32, on the other, is the “agreement” of all the parties regarding the
interpretation of the treaty. | (2) 区分作为第三十一条第三款(a)项和(b)项所述作准解释资料的嗣后协定和嗣后实践与第三十二条所述作为补充解释资料的嗣后实践 的一个要素是所有缔约方就条约解释达成的“协定”。 |
| It is this agreement of the parties that
provides the means of interpretation under article 31, paragraph 3, their
specific function and weight for the interactive process of interpretation
under the general rule of interpretation of article 31. | 正是缔约方的这种协定使第三十一条第三款所述的解释资料 对于第三十一条下解释通则的互动解释进程具备了特定的功能和权重。 |
| (3) Conflicting positions regarding
interpretation expressed by different parties to a treaty preclude the
existence of an agreement. | (3) 不同缔约方就解释表达的相互冲突的立场，会排除协定的存在。 |
| This has been confirmed, inter alia, by
the Arbitral Tribunal in the case of German External Debts, which held that a
“tacit subsequent understanding” could not be derived from a number of
communications by administering agencies since one of those agencies, the
Bank of England, had expressed a divergent position. | 除其他外，仲裁法庭在德国外债案中的裁决就确认了这一点，仲裁法庭认为，无法从管理机构的一系列函件中得出“默认的嗣后理解”，因为其中一家机构即英格兰银行表达了不一样的立场。 |
| (4) However, agreement is only absent to
the extent that the positions of the parties conflict and for as long as
their positions conflict. | (4) 但是，仅在缔约方的立场相互冲突的范围内、仅在缔约方立场冲突持续的时间内，协定才不存在。 |
| The fact that parties apply a treaty
differently does not, as such, permit a conclusion that there are conflicting
positions regarding the interpretation of the treaty. | 从缔约方以不同方式适用条约这一事实本身，并不能得出在条约解释方面存在相互冲突的立场这一结论。 |
| Such a difference may indicate a
disagreement over the one correct interpretation, but it may also simply
reflect a common understanding that the treaty permits a certain scope for
the exercise of discretion in its application. | 这种不同可能说明对一个正确的解释存在不同意见，但也可能仅仅反映出一种共同理解，即条约允许在适用时行使一定范围的自由裁量权。 |
| Treaties relating to human rights, for
example, tend to aim at a uniform interpretation but also to leave room for
the exercise of discretion by States. | 例如，关于人权的条约往往意在有一个统一的解释，但也会为各国行使自由裁量权留出空间。 |
| (5) Whereas equivocal conduct by one or
more parties will normally prevent the identification of an agreement, not
every element of the conduct of a State that does not fully fit into a
general picture necessarily renders the conduct of that State equivocal. | (5) 一个或多个缔约方模棱两可的行为通常使人无法确认存在协定，但是，并不是一国行为中不符合总体情况的每个要素都必然导致该国行为具有模糊性。 |
| The Court of Arbitration in the Beagle
Channel case, for example, found that although at one point the parties had a
difference of opinion regarding the interpretation of a treaty, that fact did
not necessarily establish that the lack of agreement was permanent: | 例如，仲裁法院在比格尔海峡案中认为，尽管缔约方曾经对条约的解释有过不同意见，但这一事实并不必然意味着不存在协定的状况是永久性的： |
| In the same way, negotiations for a
settlement, that did not result in one, could hardly have any permanent
effect. | 同样，为解决争端而进行的谈判虽然没有成功，但不太可能造成任何永久的影响。 |
| At the most they might temporarily have
deprived the acts of the Parties of probative value in support of their
respective interpretations of the Treaty, insofar as these acts were
performed during the process of the negotiations. | 谈判事宜至多可能暂时使缔约方的有关行为失去证明价值，无法佐证各自的条约解释，因为这些行为是在谈判期间作出的。 |
| The matter cannot be put higher than
that. | 谈判事宜不可能产生更大的影响。 |
| (6) Similarly, in Loizidou v. Turkey, the
European Court of Human Rights held that the scope of the restrictions that
the parties could place on their acceptance of the competence of the Commission
and the Court was “confirmed by the subsequent practice of the Contracting
Parties”, that is, “the evidence of a practice denoting practically universal
agreement amongst Contracting Parties that Articles 25 and 46 … of the
Convention do not permit territorial or substantive restrictions”. | (6) 与此相似，在Loizidou诉土耳其案中，欧洲人权法院认为，“缔约方的嗣后实践确认”了缔约方可以对接受委员会和法院职能作出限制的范围，即“有证据显示一种实践，表明缔约方基本普遍同意《公约》…第25和第46条不允许作出领土或实质性的限制”。 |
| The Court, applying article 31, paragraph
3 (b), described “such a State practice” as being “uniform and consistent”,
despite the fact that it simultaneously recognized that two States possibly
constituted exceptions. | 该法院在适用第三十一条第三款(b)项时将“这种国家实践”称为“统一和一贯的”，但同时也指出有两个国家可能属于例外。 |
| The decision suggests that interpreters,
at least under the European Convention, possess some margin when assessing
whether an agreement of the parties regarding a certain interpretation is
established. | 这一裁决表明，解释者(至少在《欧洲公约》下)在评估缔约方就某项特定解释是否达成协定时有一定的斟酌余地。 |
| (7) The term “agreement” in the 1969
Vienna Convention does not imply any particular requirements of form,
including for an “agreement” under article 31, paragraph 3 (a) and (b). | (7) 1969年《维也纳公约》中的“协定”一词 并不意味着任何具体的形式要求， 包括第三十一条第三款(a)项和(b)项所指的“协定”。 |
| The Commission, however, has noted that,
in order to distinguish a subsequent agreement under article 31, paragraph 3
(a), and a subsequent practice that “establishes the agreement” of the
parties under article 31, paragraph 3 (b), the former presupposes a “common
act”. | 但是，委员会注意到，为了区分第三十一条第三款(a)项所指嗣后协定和第三十一条第三款(b)项所指“确定协定”的嗣后实践，前者预先假定有一次“共同的行动”。 |
| There is no requirement that an agreement
under article 31, paragraph 3 (a), be published or registered under Article
102 of the Charter of the United Nations. | 没有要求第三十一条第三款(a)项所指的协定要公布或按《联合国宪章》第一百零二条的规定进行登记。 |
| (8) For an agreement under article 31,
paragraph 3 (a) and (b), to be “common”, it is sometimes sufficient that the
parties reach the same understanding individually, but sometimes necessary
that the parties have a mutual awareness of a shared understanding. | (8) 第三十一条第三款(a)和(b)所指的协定若要成为“共同”协定，有时缔约方各自达成相同的理解就足以满足条件，有时则要求缔约方彼此知晓各方理解一致。 |
| In the Kasikili/Sedudu Island case, the
International Court of Justice required that, for practice to fall under
article 31, paragraph 3 (b), the “Bechuanaland authorities were fully aware
of and accepted the” interpretation of the Caprivi authorities with respect
to the treaty boundary. | 国际法院在卡西基里/塞杜杜岛案中指出，只有“贝专纳当局充分意识到并接受”卡普里维当局对条约边界的解释，有关实践才属于第三十一条第三款(b)项规定的范围。 |
| In certain circumstances, the awareness
and acceptance of the position of the other party or parties may be assumed,
particularly in the case of treaties that are implemented at the national
level. | 在有些情况下，可以推定有关缔约方已知悉和接受其他缔约方的立场，尤其是对于在国家层面实施的条约而言。 |
| Paragraph 1, second sentence — possible legal
effects of agreement under article 31, paragraph 3 (a) and (b) | 第1段第二句――第三十一条第三款(a)项和(b)项所指协定可能的法律效力 |
| (9) The aim of the second sentence of
paragraph 1 is to reaffirm that “agreement”, for the purpose of article 31,
paragraph 3, need not, as such, be legally binding, in contrast to other
provisions of the 1969 Vienna Convention in which the term “agreement” is
used in the sense of a legally binding instrument. | (9) 第1段第二句的目的是重申就第三十一条第三款而言，“协定”本身无需具有法律约束力， 这与1969年《维也纳公约》其他条款相反，在其他条款中，“协定”是有法律约束力的文书。 |
| (10) This is confirmed by the fact that
the Commission, in its final draft articles on the law of treaties, used the
expression “any subsequent practice which establishes the understanding of
the parties”. | (10) 这一点也得到委员会的确认，委员会在条约法条款的最后草案中使用了“确立缔约方谅解的任何嗣后实践”这一说法。 |
| The expression “understanding” indicates
that the term “agreement” in article 31, paragraph 3, does not require that
the parties thereby undertake or create any legal obligation existing in
addition to, or independently from, the treaty. | “谅解”一词是说，第三十一条第三款所指“协定”并不要求缔约方由此承担或创造任何在条约之上或独立于条约之外的法律义务。 |
| The Vienna Conference replaced the
expression “understanding” by the word “agreement” not for any substantive
reason but “related to drafting only” in order to emphasize that the
understanding of the parties was to be their “common” understanding. | 维也纳会议以“协定”一词取代“谅解”，并没有实质性的原因，而“仅仅涉及措辞问题”，用以强调缔约方的谅解是他们的“共同”理解。 |
| An “agreement” under article 31,
paragraph 3 (a), equally need not be legally binding. | 第三十一条第三款(a)项所指“协定”同样不需要具有法律约束力。 |
| (11) It is thus sufficient that the
parties, by a subsequent agreement or a subsequent practice under article 31,
paragraph 3, attribute a certain meaning to the treaty or, in other words,
adopt a certain “understanding” of the treaty. | (11) 因此，缔约国通过嗣后协定或第三十一条第三款所指的嗣后实践对条约赋予一定含义，或者换句话说，对条约采取一种特定的“谅解” 就足够了。 |
| Subsequent agreements and subsequent
practice under article 31, paragraph 3 (a) and (b), even if they are not in
themselves legally binding, can thus nevertheless, as means of
interpretation, give rise to legal consequences as part of the process of
interpretation according to article 31. | 第三十一条第三款(a)项和(b)项所指的嗣后协定和嗣后实践即使本身不具有法律约束力，但作为解释资料，它们仍然可以根据第三十一条的规定，作为解释过程的组成部分，产生法律影响。 |
| Accordingly, international courts and
tribunals have not required that an “agreement” under article 31, paragraph
3, reflect the intention of the parties to create new, or separate, legally
binding undertakings. | 据此，国际性法院和法庭不要求第三十一条第三款所指“协定”反映缔约方有创立新的或另外的具有法律约束力的承诺的意向。 |
| Similarly, memoranda of understanding
have been recognized, on occasion, as “a potentially important aid to
interpretation” — but “not a source of independent legal rights and duties”. | 与此相似，有时谅解备忘录被承认为“有可能非常有助于解释”，但“不是独立的法律权利和义务的来源”。 |
| Paragraph 2 — forms of participation in
subsequent practice | 第2段――参与嗣后实践的形式 |
| (12) The first sentence of paragraph 2
confirms the principle that not all the parties must engage in a particular
practice to constitute agreement under article 31, paragraph 3 (b). | (12) 第2段第一句确认了一项原则，即并非所有缔约方都必须参与某一特定实践，才能形成第三十一条第三款(b)项所指的协定。 |
| The second sentence clarifies that
acceptance of such practice by those parties not engaged in the practice can
under certain circumstances be brought about by silence or inaction. | 第二句澄清说明，在特定情况下，未参与这一实践的缔约方的沉默或不作为可构成对这一实践的接受。 |
| (13) From the outset, the Commission has
recognized that an “agreement” deriving from subsequent practice under
article 31, paragraph 3 (b), can result, in part, from silence or inaction by
one or more parties. | (13) 从一开始，委员会就承认，通过第三十一条第三款(b)项所指嗣后实践形成的“协定”可部分地源于一个或多个缔约方的沉默或不作为。 |
| Explaining why it used the expression
“the understanding of the parties” in draft article 27, paragraph 3 (b)
(which later became “the agreement” in article 31, paragraph 3 (b) (see
paragraph (10) above)) and not the expression “the understanding of all the
parties”, the Commission stated that: | 委员会在解释为何在第二十七条第三款(b)项中使用“缔约方的谅解”一语(后来成为第三十一条第三款(b)项中的“协定”)(见上文第(10)段)而没有使用“全体缔约方的谅解”的说法时指出： |
| It considered that the phrase ‘the
understanding of the parties’ necessarily means ‘the parties as a whole’. | 委员会认为，“缔约方的谅解”一语自然是指“全体缔约方”。 |
| It omitted the word ‘all’ merely to avoid
any possible misconception that every party must individually have engaged in
the practice where it suffices that it should have accepted the practice. | 不加上“全体”一词只是为了防止被误解为每个缔约方都必须各自参与这种实践，其实只要每个缔约方接受有关实践就足够了。 |
| (14) The International Court of Justice
has also recognized the possibility of expressing agreement regarding
interpretation by silence or inaction by stating, in the case concerning the
Temple of Preah Vihear, that “where it is clear that the circumstances were
such as called for some reaction, within a reasonable period”, the State
confronted with a certain subsequent conduct by another party “must be held
to have acquiesced”. | (14) 国际法院也承认有可能经由沉默或不作为表示对解释的同意，该法院在柏威夏寺案中称，一国在面对另一方某种嗣后行为的情况下，“如果显然当时情况要求在合理期限内作出某种反应”，则“必须认定该国已经默认了”。 |
| This general proposition of the Court
regarding the role of silence for the purpose of establishing agreement
regarding the interpretation of a treaty by subsequent practice has been
confirmed by later decisions, and is generally supported by writers. | 国际法院关于在通过嗣后实践确立条约解释协定方面沉默的作用的这一总体立场在后来的裁决中也得到了确认，并得到大多数法学著作的支持。 |
| The “circumstances” that will “call for
some reaction” include the particular setting in which the States parties
interact with each other in respect of the treaty. | “要求作出某种反应”的“情况”包括缔约方就条约进行互动的具体背景。 |
| (15) The Court of Arbitration in the
Beagle Channel case dealt with the contention by Argentina that acts of
jurisdiction by Chile over certain islands could not be counted as relevant
subsequent conduct, since Argentina had not reacted to these acts. | (15) 仲裁法院在比格尔海峡案 中讨论了阿根廷的主张，即智利对某些岛屿的管辖行为不能作为相关的嗣后行为，因为阿根廷未对这些行为作出反应。 |
| The Court, however, held: | 但该法院认为： |
| The terms of the Vienna Convention do not
specify the ways in which “agreement” may be manifested. | 《维也纳公约》中并未明确“协定”可以采取的表现形式。 |
| In the context of the present case the
acts of jurisdiction were not intended to establish a source of title
independent of the terms of the treaty; | 在本案中，管辖的行为不是为了确立独立于条约规定之外的所有权来源； |
| nor could they be considered as being in
contradiction of those terms as understood by Chile. | 也不能像智利的理解，认为其违反了这些规定。 |
| The evidence supports the view that they
were public and well-known to Argentina, and that they could only derive from
the Treaty. | 证据支持的观点是，这些行为是公开的，为阿根廷所熟知，它们只能来自于《条约》。 |
| Under these circumstances the silence of Argentina
permits the inference that the acts tended to confirm an interpretation of
the meaning of the Treaty independent of the acts of jurisdiction themselves. | 在这种情况下，阿根廷的沉默就允许得出结论，认为这些行为旨在确认独立于管辖行为本身之外的对条约含义的解释。 |
| In the same case, the Court of Arbitration
considered that: | 在同一案件中，仲裁法院认为： |
| The mere publication of a number of maps
of (as the Court has already shown) extremely dubious standing and value
could not — even if they nevertheless represented the official Argentine view
— preclude or foreclose Chile from engaging in acts that would,
correspondingly, demonstrate her own view of what were her rights under the
1881 Treaty — nor could such publication of itself absolve Argentina from all
further necessity for reaction in respect of those acts, if she considered
them contrary to the Treaty. | (如本院业已表明的那样)，仅仅是印制一些地位和价值极其令人怀疑的地图(尽管其确实代表阿根廷的官方观点)不能够排除或阻止智利采取一些行动，显示该国对自身根据1881年条约所具有权利的观点――如果阿根廷认为这些行动违反条约的话，仅靠出版地图本身也不能免除阿根廷就智利的行动作出反应的必要性。 |
| (16) The significance of silence also
depends on the legal situation to which the subsequent practice by the other
party relates and on the claim thereby expressed. | (16) 沉默的作用的大小也取决于另一方的嗣后实践所涉及的法律情形以及由此表达的主张。 |
| Thus, in the case concerning the Land and
Maritime Boundary between Cameroon and Nigeria, the International Court of
Justice held that: | 因此，在喀麦隆和尼日利亚间陆地和海洋疆界案中，国际法院认为： |
| Some of these activities — the
organization of public health and education, policing, the administration of
justice — could normally be considered to be acts à titre de souverain. | 其中有些活动――开展公共保健和教育、治安、司法――通常可视为“主权”行为。 |
| The Court notes, however, that, as there
was a pre-existing title held by Cameroon in this area, the pertinent legal
test is whether there was thus evidenced acquiescence by Cameroon in the
passing of the title from itself to Nigeria. | 但是，本院注意到，因喀麦隆在本地区有事先存在的所有权，法律上要作的相关考查是是否有证据显示喀麦隆默认将所有权移交给尼日利亚。 |
| (17) This judgment suggests that in cases
that concern treaties delimiting a boundary the circumstances will only very
exceptionally call for a reaction with respect to conduct that runs counter
to the delimitation. | (17) 这一判决表明，在涉及边界划定的条约案中，只有在非常特殊的情况下才要求针对违反边界划定的行为作出反应。 |
| In such situations, there appears to be a
strong presumption that silence or inaction does not constitute acceptance of
a practice. | 在这种情况下，似乎有一种强有力的推定，即沉默或不作为不构成对实践的接受。 |
| (18) The relevance of silence or inaction
for the establishment of an agreement regarding interpretation depends to a
large extent on the circumstances of the specific case. | (18) 沉默或不作为在确立解释协定方面的相关性的高低，很大程度上取决于具体案件的具体情况。 |
| Decisions of international courts and
tribunals demonstrate that acceptance of a practice by one or more parties by
way of silence or inaction is not easily established. | 国际性法院和法庭的裁决显示，通过沉默或不作为来接受一方或多方的实践并不能很容易地得到确立。 |
| (19) International courts and tribunals
have, for example, been reluctant to accept that parliamentary proceedings or
domestic court judgments be considered as subsequent practice under article
31, paragraph 3 (b), to which other parties to the treaty would be expected
to react, even if such proceedings or judgments had come to their attention
through other channels, including by their own diplomatic service. | (19) 例如，国际性法院和法庭不太愿意接受以下观点，即议会程序或国内法庭判决应被视为第三十一条第三款(b)项所指的嗣后实践，条约的其他缔约方即便已通过包括本国外交部门在内的其他渠道注意到这些程序和判决，仍需要对这些程序和判决作出反应。 |
| (20) Further, even where a party, by its
conduct, expresses a certain position towards another party (or parties)
regarding the interpretation of a treaty, this does not necessarily call for
a reaction by the other party or parties. | (20) 此外，即使当一方通过行动就条约解释对另一方(或几方)表达特定立场时，这也不一定要求另外一方或几方作出反应。 |
| In the Kasikili/Sedudu Island case, the
International Court of Justice held that a State that did not react to the
findings of a joint commission of experts, which had been entrusted by the
parties to determine a particular factual situation with respect to a
disputed matter, did not thereby provide a ground for the conclusion that an
agreement had been reached with respect to the dispute. | 在卡西基里/塞杜杜岛案中，国际法院认为，对于接受各方委任就某一争端事项确定特定事实情况的联合专家委员会的结论，如果一国没有对其作出反应，并不能由此作为依据，认定有关方面已就争端达成协定。 |
| The Court found that the parties had
considered the work of the experts as being merely a preparatory step for a
separate decision subsequently to be taken at the political level. | 该法院认为，当事方认为专家的工作仅仅是一个准备阶段，以便今后在政治层面上另外作出决定。 |
| At a more general level, the WTO
Appellate Body has held that: | 就更一般的情况而言，世贸组织上诉机构认为： |
| in specific situations, the “lack of
reaction” or silence by a particular treaty party may, in the light of
attendant circumstances, be understood as acceptance of the practice of other
treaty parties. | “在特定情况下，根据当时的具体情形，可以将条约特定缔约方的“没有反应”或沉默理解为接受了条约其他缔约方的实践。 |
| Such situations may occur when a party
that has not engaged in a practice has become or has been made aware of the
practice of other parties (for example, by means of notification or by virtue
of participation in a forum where it is discussed), but does not react to it. | 某个没有参与有关实践的缔约方主动或被动地知悉其他缔约方的实践(如经过通知或参加某个讨论了有关实践的论坛)而没有对此作出反应时，就可以视为上述的一种情况。 |
| The International Tribunal for the Law of
the Sea has confirmed this approach. | 国际海洋法法庭确认了上述办法。 |
| Taking into account the practice of
States in interpreting articles 56, 58 and 73 of the United Nations
Convention on the Law of the Sea, the Tribunal stated: | 该法庭考虑到各国解释《联合国海洋法公约》第五十六、第五十八和第七十三条的实践，称： |
| The Tribunal acknowledges that the
national legislation of several States, not only in the West African region,
but also in some other regions of the world, regulates bunkering of foreign
vessels fishing in their exclusive economic zones in a way comparable to that
of Guinea-Bissau. | 本庭承认，不仅在西非地区，还有世界其他一些地区，有些国家的国内法对在本国专属经济区捕鱼的外国船只的装载量作出了规定，与几内亚比绍相似。 |
| The Tribunal further notes that there is
no manifest objection to such legislation and that it is, in general,
complied with. | 本庭还注意到，对于此类法律并没有明示的反对意见，而且这些法律一般上都得到遵守。 |
| (21) Decisions by domestic courts have
also recognized that silence on the part of a party to a treaty can only be
taken to mean acceptance “if the circumstances call for some reaction”. | (21) 国内法院的裁决还确认，只有在“相关情况要求做出某些反应”时，方可将缔约方的沉默理解为接受。 |
| Such circumstances have sometimes been
recognized in certain cooperative contexts, for example under a bilateral
treaty that provides for a particularly close form of cooperation. | 这种情况有时体现在特定的合作环境中，如规定了特别密切的合作形式的双边条约。 |
| This may be different if the cooperation
that is envisaged by the treaty takes place in the context of an
international organization whose rules preclude using the practice of the
parties, and their silence for the purpose of interpretation. | 如果条约设想的合作形式属于国际组织范围之内，而该组织规定不得将缔约方的实践及其沉默用作解释目的，情况则有所不同。 |
| (22) The possible legal significance of
silence or inaction in the face of a subsequent practice of a party to a
treaty is not limited to contributing to a possible underlying common
agreement, but may also play a role for the operation of non-consent-based
rules, such as estoppel, preclusion or prescription. | (22) 面对条约某一缔约方的某项嗣后实践保持沉默或不作为，在法律上可能产生重要的意义，不仅可能促成一项潜在的共同协定，还可能导致多项非基于同意的规则发挥作用，如禁止反言规则、排除规则或时效规则。 |
| (23) Once established, an agreement
between the parties under article 31, paragraph 3 (a) and (b), can eventually
be terminated. | (23) 第三十一条第三款(a)项和(b)项所指缔约方之间的协定在确立后，将来也可能终止。 |
| The parties may replace it by another
agreement with a different scope or content under article 31, paragraph 3. | 缔约方可根据第三十一条第三款用另一个具有不同范围或内容的协定加以取代。 |
| In this case, the new agreement replaces the
previous one as an authentic means of interpretation from the date of its
existence, at least with effect for the future. | 在这种情况下，新协定自达成之日起取代旧协定成为作准的解释资料，至少在未来具有效力。 |
| Such situations, however, should not be
lightly assumed as States usually do not change their interpretation of a
treaty according to short-term considerations. | 但是，不应仅凭推测就认定存在这种情况，因为国家通常不会出于短期考虑因素而改变其对条约的解释。 |
| (24) It is also possible for a
disagreement to arise between the parties regarding the interpretation of a
treaty after they had reached a subsequent agreement regarding such
interpretation. | (24) 缔约国就条约解释达成嗣后协定后，也有可能出现不同意见。 |
| Such a disagreement, however, normally
will not replace the prior subsequent agreement, since the principle of good
faith prevents a party from simply disavowing the legitimate expectations
that have been created by a common interpretation. | 但是，这种不同意见通常不能取代前述嗣后协定，因为善意原则使缔约方不能简单地抵赖通过共同解释所产生的合法预期。 |
| On the other hand, clear expressions of
disavowal by one party of a previous understanding arising from common
practice “do reduce in a major way the significance of the practice after
that date”, without, however, diminishing the significance of the previous
common practice. | 另一方面，一个缔约方如果明确表示推翻以前通过共同实践产生的谅解，“确实会在很大程度上削弱此后有关实践的重要性”，但不会削弱以前的共同实践的重要性。 |
| Part Four Specific aspects | 第四部分 具体方面 |
| Conclusion 11 Decisions adopted within
the framework of a Conference of States Parties | 结论11 在缔约国大会框架内通过的决定 |
| 1. A Conference of States Parties, under
these draft conclusions, is a meeting of parties to a treaty for the purpose
of reviewing or implementing the treaty, except where they act as members of
an organ of an international organization. | 1. 为本结论草案的目的，缔约国大会指缔约国为了审查或执行条约而举行的会议，但缔约国作为国际组织机关成员行事的情况不在此列。 |
| 2. The legal effect of a decision adopted
within the framework of a Conference of States Parties depends primarily on
the treaty and any applicable rules of procedure. | 2. 在缔约国大会框架内通过的决定所具有的法律效力主要取决于条约和任何可适用的议事规则。 |
| Depending on the circumstances, such a
decision may embody, explicitly or implicitly, a subsequent agreement under
article 31, paragraph 3 (a), or give rise to subsequent practice under
article 31, paragraph 3 (b), or to subsequent practice under article 32. | 根据情况，这种决定可明确或间接地体现第三十一条第三款(a)项所指的嗣后协定，或产生第三十一条第三款(b)项或第三十二条所指的嗣后实践。 |
| Decisions adopted within the framework of
a Conference of States Parties often provide a non-exclusive range of
practical options for implementing the treaty. | 在缔约国大会框架内通过的决定通常为执行条约提供了非排他性的一系列可行选择。 |
| 3. A decision adopted within the
framework of a Conference of States Parties embodies a subsequent agreement
or subsequent practice under article 31, paragraph 3, in so far as it
expresses agreement in substance between the parties regarding the interpretation
of a treaty, regardless of the form and the procedure by which the decision
was adopted, including adoption by consensus. | 3. 在缔约国大会框架内通过的决定只要表达了缔约国之间就条约的解释达成的实质性协议，则不论决定以何种形式和程序通过，包括经协商一致通过，均构成第三十一条第三款所指的嗣后协定或嗣后实践。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Draft conclusion 11 addresses a
particular form of action by States that may result in a subsequent agreement
or subsequent practice under article 31, paragraph 3, or subsequent practice
under article 32, namely, decisions adopted within the framework of
Conferences of States Parties. | (1) 结论草案11述及国家采取的可能达成第三十一条第三款所指嗣后协定或嗣后实践或第三十二条所指嗣后实践的行动的一种具体形式，即在缔约国大会框架内通过的决定。 |
| Paragraph 1 — definition of Conferences
of States Parties | 第1段――缔约国大会的定义 |
| (2) Conferences of States Parties are a
form of action for the continuous process of multilateral treaty review and
implementation. | (2) 缔约国大会是多边审查和执行条约的持续进程的一种行动方式。 |
| Such Conferences can be roughly divided
into two basic categories. | 这种大会可粗略地分为两个基本类别。 |
| First, some Conferences are actually an
organ of an international organization within which States parties act in
their capacity as members of that organ (for example, meetings of the parties
of the World Trade Organization, the Organization for the Prohibition of
Chemical Weapons or the International Civil Aviation Organization). | 第一，有些大会事实上是国际组织的一个机关，缔约国在大会中以机关成员的身份采取行动(如世界贸易组织、禁止化学武器组织或国际民用航空组织的缔约方会议)。 |
| Such Conferences do not fall within the
scope of draft conclusion 11, which does not address the subsequent practice
of and within international organizations. | 此类大会不属于结论草案11的范畴，结论草案11不涉及国际组织的和国际组织内的嗣后实践。 |
| Second, other Conferences of States
Parties are convened with respect to treaties that do not establish an
international organization; rather, the treaty simply provides, or allows,
for more or less periodic meetings of the parties for their review and
implementation. | 第二，其他缔约国大会是就有关条约召集的，这些条约没有规定设立国际组织，而是仅仅规定或允许缔约国较为定期地举行会议，以便开展审查和执行工作。 |
| Such review conferences are frameworks
for parties’ cooperation and subsequent conduct with respect to the treaty. | 此类审查会议是缔约国就条约进行合作和开展嗣后行动的框架。 |
| Either type of Conference of States
Parties may also have specific powers concerning amendments and/or the
adaptation of treaties. | 这两种缔约国大会都可能具有修正和/或调整条约的特定权力。 |
| Examples include the review conference
process of the 1972 Biological Weapons Convention, the Review Conference
under article VIII, paragraph 3, of the 1968 Non-Proliferation Treaty, and
Conferences of the Parties established by international environmental
treaties. | 例如，1972年《生物武器公约》审查会议进程、1968年《不扩散条约》第八条第3款规定的审查会议 和国际环境条约所设立的缔约方大会。 |
| The International Whaling Commission
under the International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling is a
borderline case between the two basic categories of Conferences of States
Parties and its subsequent practice was considered in the judgment of the
International Court of Justice in the Whaling in the Antarctic case. | 依照《国际捕鲸管制公约》成立的国际捕鲸委员会 是界于上述两个基本类别之间的缔约国大会的一个例子，国际法院在南极捕鲸案的判决中考虑了该委员会的嗣后实践。 |
| (3) Since Conferences of States Parties
are usually established by treaties they are, in a sense, “treaty bodies”. | (3) 缔约国大会通常由条约设立，因此在某种意义上属于“条约机构”。 |
| However, they should not be confused with
bodies that are comprised of independent experts (see draft conclusion 13) or
bodies with a limited membership. | 但是，不应将缔约国大会与由独立专家组成的机构(见结论草案13)或成员数量有限的机构混为一谈。 |
| Conferences of States Parties are more or
less periodical meetings that are open to all of the parties of a treaty. | 缔约国大会是向有关条约的全体缔约方开放、较为定期举行的会议。 |
| Conferences of States Parties may be
established by treaties with a universal membership, as well as by treaties
with a more limited membership. | 得到普遍加入的条约和成员数量较为有限的条约均可设立缔约国大会。 |
| (4) In order to acknowledge the wide
diversity of Conferences of States Parties and the rules under which they
operate, paragraph 1 provides a broad definition of the term “Conference of
States Parties” for the purpose of these draft conclusions, which only
excludes action of States as members of an organ of an international
organization (which will be the subject of a later draft conclusion). | (4) 为了承认缔约国大会及其运作规则的广泛多样性，第1段为本结论草案的目的，对“缔约国大会”这一用语作了宽泛的定义，仅将缔约国作为国际组织机关成员行事的情况排除在外(这是后面另一条结论草案的主题)。 |
| The term thus also includes conferences
of the parties to a treaty whose parties are not only States. | 因此，该用语也包括有非国家参与缔约的条约的缔约方大会。 |
| Paragraph 2, first sentence — legal
effect of decisions | 第2段第一句――决定所具有的法律效力 |
| (5) The first sentence of paragraph 2
recognizes that the legal significance of any acts undertaken by Conferences
of States Parties depends, in the first instance, on the rules that govern
the Conferences of States Parties, notably the constituent treaty and any
applicable rules of procedure. | (5) 第2段第一句承认，缔约国大会采取的任何行动的法律意义首先取决于规范缔约国大会的规则，最主要的是组织条约和任何适用的程序规则。 |
| Conferences of States Parties perform a
variety of acts, including reviewing the implementation of the treaty,
reviewing the treaty itself and decisions under amendment procedures. | 缔约国大会开展各种行动，包括审查条约的执行情况、审查条约本身，并根据修正程序作出决定。 |
| (6) The powers of a Conference of States
Parties can be contained in general clauses or in specific provisions, or
both. | (6) 缔约国大会的权力可以载于通则或具体条款中或两者兼有。 |
| For example, article 7, paragraph 2, of
the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change begins with the
following general language, before enumerating 13 specific tasks for the
Conference, one of which concerns examining the obligations of the Parties
under the treaty: | 例如，《联合国气候变化框架公约》第七条第2款首先做了下面的总体论述，然后阐述了该缔约方会议的十三项具体任务，其中一条涉及审查缔约方在条约下的义务： |
| The Conference of the Parties, as the
supreme body of this Convention, shall keep under regular review the
implementation of the Convention and any related legal instruments that the
Conference of the Parties may adopt, and shall make, within its mandate, the
decisions necessary to promote the effective implementation of the
Convention. | 缔约方会议作为本公约的最高机构，应定期审评本公约和缔约方会议可能通过的任何相关法律文书的履行情况，并应在其职权范围内作出为促进本公约的有效履行所必要的决定。 |
| (7) Specific provisions contained in
various treaties refer to the Conference of the Parties proposing
“guidelines” for the implementation of particular treaty provisions or
defining “the relevant principles, modalities, rules and guidelines” for a
treaty scheme. | (7) 不同条约中所载具体条款请缔约方大会提出实施条约具体条款的“准则” 或确定条约机制 “相关的原则、方式、规则和指南”。 |
| (8) Amendment procedures (in a broad
sense of the term) include procedures by which the primary text of the treaty
may be amended (the result of which mostly requires ratification by States
parties according to their constitutional procedures), as well as tacit
acceptance and opt-out procedures that commonly apply to annexes, containing
lists of substances, species or other elements that need to be updated
regularly. | (8) (广义的)修正程序包括条约主要案文的修正程序(修正结果大多要求缔约国按照组织程序加以批准)以及默认接受和选择退出程序，后两者通常适用于附件，其中载有需定期更新的物质、物种或其他要素清单。 |
| (9) As a point of departure, paragraph 2
provides that the legal effect of a decision adopted within the framework of
a Conference of States Parties depends primarily on the treaty in question
and any applicable rules of procedure. | (9) 首先，第2段规定，在缔约国大会框架内通过的决定所具有的法律效力主要取决于有关条约和任何可适用的议事规则。 |
| The word “primarily” leaves room for
subsidiary rules “unless the treaty otherwise provides” (see for example,
articles 16, 20, 22, paragraph 1, 24, 70, paragraph 1, and 72, paragraph 1,
of the 1969 Vienna Convention). | “主要”一词为辅助规则“除条约另有规定外”(例见1969年《维也纳公约》第十六条、第二十条、第二十二条第一款、第二十四条、第七十条第一款和第七十二条第一款)留出了余地。 |
| The word “any” clarifies that rules of
procedure of Conferences of States Parties, if they exist, will apply, given
that there may be situations where such conferences operate with no
specifically adopted rules of procedure. | “任何”一词是澄清说明，缔约国大会如有议事规则的话也将适用，因为可能有一些这样的情形，即缔约国大会在没有专门通过的议事规则的情况下运作。 |
| Paragraph 2, second sentence — decisions
as possibly embodying a subsequent agreement or subsequent practice | 第2段第二句――决定可能体现嗣后协定或嗣后实践 |
| (10) The second sentence of paragraph 2
recognizes that decisions of Conferences of States Parties may constitute
subsequent agreement or subsequent practice for treaty interpretation under
articles 31 and 32 of the 1969 Vienna Convention. | (10) 第2段第二句承认，缔约国大会的决定可构成1969年《维也纳公约》第三十一条和第三十二条所述用于条约解释的嗣后协定或嗣后实践。 |
| Decisions adopted within the framework of
Conferences of States Parties can perform an important function for
determining the Parties’ common understanding of the meaning of the treaty. | 在缔约国大会框架内通过的决定可履行一个重要职能，即确定缔约国对条约含义的共同理解。 |
| (11) Decisions of Conferences of States
Parties, inter alia, may constitute or reflect subsequent agreements under
article 31, paragraph 3 (a), by which the parties interpret the underlying
treaty. | (11) 缔约国大会的决定除其他外，可构成或体现第三十一条第三款(a)项所指的嗣后协定，缔约国通过这些协定来解释基本的条约。 |
| For example, the Biological Weapons
Convention Review Conference has regularly adopted “understandings and
additional agreements” regarding the interpretation of the Convention’s
provisions. | 例如，《生物武器公约》审查会议定期就《公约》规定的解释通过“谅解和进一步协议”。 |
| These agreements have been adopted by
States parties within the framework of the review conferences, by consensus,
and they “have evolved across all articles of the treaty to address specific
issues as and when they arose”. | 这些协议由缔约国在审查会议框架内经协商一致通过，“从条约的所有条款发展出来，解决可能出现的具体问题”。 |
| Through these understandings, States
parties interpret the provisions of the Convention by defining, specifying or
otherwise elaborating on the meaning and scope of the provisions, as well as
through the adoption of guidelines on their implementation. | 通过这些谅解，缔约国界定、具体说明或阐述《公约》规定的含义和范围，以此来解释这些规定，此外还会通过关于执行这些规定的准则。 |
| The Biological Weapons Convention
Implementation and Support Unit defines an “additional agreement” as one
which: | 《生物武器公约》执行支助股 将“进一步协议”定义为： |
| (i) Interprets, defines or elaborates the
meaning or scope of a provision of the Convention; | (一) 解释、界定或阐述《公约》某一规定的含义或范围的协议； |
| or | 或 |
| (ii) Provides instructions, guidelines or
recommendations on how a provision should be implemented. | (二) 就如何执行某一规定提供指示、准则或建议的协议。 |
| (12) Similarly, the Conference of States
Parties under the Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping
of Wastes and Other Matter (London Dumping Convention) has adopted
resolutions interpreting that Convention. | (12) 与此相似，《防止倾倒废物及其他物质污染海洋的公约》(《伦敦倾倒公约》) 之下的缔约国大会也通过了多项解释《公约》的决议。 |
| The IMO Sub-Division for Legal Affairs,
upon a request from the governing bodies, opined as follows in relation to an
“interpretative resolution” of the Conference of States Parties under the
London Dumping Convention: | 海事组织法律事务处应管理机构的请求，就《伦敦倾倒公约》之下缔约国大会的“解释性决议”提出了以下意见： |
| According to article 31 (3) (a) of the
Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties … subsequent agreements between the
Parties shall be taken into account in the interpretation of a treaty. | 根据《维也纳条约法公约》第三十一条第三款(a)项，…应在解释条约时考虑缔约方之间的嗣后协定。 |
| The article does not provide for a
specific form of the subsequent agreement containing such interpretation. | 这一条没有规定载有这种解释的嗣后协定的特定形式。 |
| This seems to indicate that, provided its
intention is clear, the interpretation could take various forms, including a
resolution adopted at a meeting of the Parties, or even a decision recorded
in the summary records of a meeting of the Parties. | 这似乎是说，只要意向是明确的，解释可采取各种形式，包括在缔约方会议上通过的决议，甚至是在缔约方会议简要记录中记录下来的一项决定。 |
| (13) In a similar vein, the World Health
Organization (WHO) Legal Counsel has stated in general terms that: | (13) 同样，世界卫生组织(世卫组织)法律顾问在一般意义上指出： |
| Decisions of the Conference of the
Parties, as the supreme body comprising all Parties to the FCTC, undoubtedly
represent a “subsequent agreement between the Parties regarding the
interpretation of the treaty,” as stated in Article 31 of the Vienna
Convention. | 缔约方会议是由《烟草控制框架公约》所有缔约方构成的最高机构，其作出的决定无疑是《维也纳公约》第三十一条所述的“当事国嗣后所订关于条约之解释之协定”。 |
| (14) Commentators have also viewed
decisions of Conferences of States Parties as being capable of embodying
subsequent agreements and have observed that: | (14) 也有评论者认为缔约国大会的决定能够体现嗣后协定，并指出： |
| Such declarations are not legally binding
in and of themselves, but they may have juridical significance, especially as
a source of authoritative interpretations of the treaty. | “此类声明本身不具有法律约束力，但可以具有法律上的重要意义，特别是作为条约的作准解释来源。 |
| (15) The International Court of Justice
has held with respect to the role of the International Whaling Commission
under the International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling: | ” (15) 国际法院就《国际捕鲸管制公约》设立的国际捕鲸委员会的作用指出： |
| Article VI of the Convention states that
“[t]he Commission may from time to time make recommendations to any or all
Contracting Governments on any matters which relate to whales or whaling and
to the objectives and purposes of this Convention”. | 《公约》第六条写道，“委员会可不定期地就涉及鲸或捕鲸以及本公约目标和宗旨的任何事项向任何或全体缔约国政府提出建议”。 |
| These recommendations, which take the
form of resolutions, are not binding. | 这些建议采取决议的形式，不具有约束力。 |
| However, when they are adopted by
consensus or by a unanimous vote, they may be relevant for the interpretation
of the Convention or its Schedule. | 但是，如果它们经由协商一致或一致投票而获得通过，则对于解释《公约》或其《附录》可能具有相关性。 |
| (16) The following examples from the
practice of Conferences of States Parties support the proposition that
decisions by such Conferences may embody subsequent agreements under article
31, paragraph 3 (a). | (16) 以下来自缔约国大会实践的实例支持了这样的主张，即此类大会的决定可能体现第三十一条第三款(a)项所指的嗣后协定。 |
| (17) Article I, paragraph 1, of the
Biological Weapons Convention provides that States parties undertake never in
any circumstances to develop, produce, stockpile or otherwise acquire or
retain: | (17) 《生物武器公约》第一条第一款规定，缔约国承诺在任何情况下决不发展、生产、储存或以其他方法取得或保有： |
| microbial or other biological agents, or
toxins whatever their origin or method of production, of types and in
quantities that have no justification for prophylactic, protective or other
peaceful purposes. | 凡类型和数量不属于预防、保护或其他和平用途所正当需要的微生物剂或其他生物剂或毒素，不论其来源或生产方法如何。 |
| (18) At the third Review Conference
(1991), States parties specified that the prohibitions established in this
provision relate to “microbial or other biological agents or toxins harmful
to plants and animals, as well as humans”. | (18) 缔约国在第三次审查会议(1991年)上明确指出，上述条款规定的禁令涉及“对植物和动物以及人类有害的微生物剂或其他生物剂或毒素”。 |
| (19) Article 4, paragraph 9, of the
Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer has given rise
to a debate about the definition of its term “State not party to this
Protocol”. | (19) 《关于消耗臭氧层物质的蒙特利尔议定书》 第4条第9款引发了关于“非本议定书缔约国的国家”定义的一场辩论。 |
| According to Article 4, paragraph 9: | 根据第4条第9款： |
| For the purposes of this Article, the
term “State not party to this Protocol” shall include, with respect to a
particular controlled substance, a State or regional economic integration
organization that has not agreed to be bound by the control measures in
effect for that substance. | 为本条的目的，“非本议定书缔约方的国家”一词，以任何特定的控制物质而言，应包括尚未同意受当时对该物质生效的控制措施约束的每一国家或区域经济一体化组织。 |
| (20) In the case of hydro
chlorofluorocarbons, two relevant amendments to the Montreal Protocol impose
obligations that raised the question of whether a State, in order to be “not
party to this Protocol”, has to be a non-party with respect to both amendments. | (20) 关于氢氟氯化碳，《蒙特利尔议定书》两项相关修正 规定的义务引发了一个问题，即一国是否必须没有加入这两项修正案，才能成为“非本议定书缔约方的国家”。 |
| The Meeting of the Parties decided that: | 缔约方会议决定： |
| The term “State not party to this
Protocol” includes all other States and regional economic integration
organizations that have not agreed to be bound by the Copenhagen and Beijing
Amendments. | “非本议定书缔约方的国家一语包括所有尚未同意受《哥本哈根修正》和《北京修正》约束的其他国家和区域经济一体化组织。 |
| (21) Whereas the acts that are the result
of a tacit acceptance procedure are not, as such, subsequent agreements by
the parties under article 31, paragraph 3 (a), they can, in addition to their
primary effect under the treaty, under certain circumstances imply such a
subsequent agreement. | (21) 默认接受程序导致的行为 本身虽然不是第三十一条第三款(a)项所指缔约方的嗣后协定，但它们除了条约规定的主要效力外，在有些情况下可以暗示存在这样一种嗣后协定。 |
| One example concerns certain decisions of
the Conference of the Parties to the London Dumping Convention. | 有一个例子涉及《伦敦倾倒公约》缔约方会议的某些决定。 |
| At its sixteenth meeting, held in 1993,
the Consultative Meeting of Contracting Parties adopted three amendments to
annex I by way of the tacit acceptance procedure provided for in the
Convention. | 在1993年举行的第十六次会议上，缔约方磋商会议以《公约》规定的默认接受程序通过了对附件一的三项修正。 |
| As such, these amendments were not
subsequent agreements. | 这样的话，这些修正并非嗣后协定。 |
| They did, however, also imply a
wide-ranging interpretation of the underlying treaty itself. | 但是，它们确实包含了对基本条约本身的广泛的解释。 |
| The amendment refers to and builds on a
resolution that was adopted by the Consultative Meeting held three years
earlier, which had established the agreement of the parties that: “The London
Dumping Convention is the appropriate body to address the issue of low-level
radioactive waste disposal into sub-sea-bed repositories accessed from the
sea. | 有关修正提到并立足于一项三年前举行的磋商会议所通过的决议，其中确立了缔约方的以下协定：“《伦敦倾倒公约》是处理向通过海洋进入的海床下处置库倾倒低放射性废物问题的适当机构。 |
| ” The resolution has been described as
“effectively expand[ing] the definition of ‘dumping’ under the Convention by
deciding that this term covers the disposal of waste into or under the seabed
from the sea but not from land by tunnelling”. | ” 该决议被称为“实际扩展了《公约》下‘倾倒’的定义，决定该词涵盖从海上而不是通过管道从陆地向海床中或海床下倾倒废物的做法”。 |
| Thus, the amendment confirmed that the
interpretative resolution contained a subsequent agreement regarding the
interpretation of the treaty. | 如此，有关修正证实，该项解释性决议包含了一项关于条约解释的嗣后协定。 |
| (22) The Basel Convention on the Control
of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal provides in
Article 17, paragraph 5, that: “Amendments … shall enter into force between
Parties having accepted them on the ninetieth day after the receipt by the
Depositary of their instrument of ratification, approval, formal confirmation
or acceptance by at least three-fourths of the Parties who accepted [them] … | (22) 《控制危险废物越境转移及其处置的巴塞尔公约》 第17条第5款规定，“修正…应于保存人接得至少四分之三接受[修正]的缔约国的批准、核准、正式确认或接受文书之后第九十天…开始生效”。 |
| ”. Led by an Indonesian-Swiss initiative,
the Conference of the Parties decided to clarify the requirement of the
acceptance by three fourths of the Parties, by agreeing: | 缔约方会议参考印度尼西亚—瑞士的一项倡议，决定澄清要求修正得到四分之三缔约方接受的规定，商定： |
| without prejudice to any other
multilateral environmental agreement, that the meaning of paragraph 5 of
Article 17 of the Basel Convention should be interpreted to mean that the
acceptance of three-fourths of those parties that were parties at the time of
the adoption of the amendment is required for the entry into force of such
amendment, noting that such an interpretation of paragraph 5 of Article 17
does not compel any party to ratify the Ban Amendment. | 在不影响任何其他多边环境协定的前提下，《巴塞尔公约》第17条第5款的含义应被解释为指修正只有得到其通过时四分之三的缔约方接受才能生效，同时指出对第17条第5款的这一解释不要求任何缔约方批准《关于禁令的修正》。 |
| The parties adopted this decision on the
interpretation of article 17, paragraph 5, by consensus, with many States
Parties underlining that the Conferences of States Parties to any convention
are “the ultimate authority as to its interpretation”. | 缔约方以协商一致方式通过了这项关于第17条第5款的解释的决定，当时许多缔约国强调指出，任何公约的缔约国大会是“关于公约解释的最高机构”。 |
| While this suggests that the decision
embodies a subsequent agreement of the parties under article 31, paragraph 3
(a), the decision was taken after a debate about whether a formal amendment
of the Convention was necessary to achieve this result. | 虽然这意味着此项决定体现了第三十一条第三款(a)项所指的缔约方嗣后协定，但在作出这一决定前也进行了辩论，即是否必须对《公约》作出正式修正才能达成这一结果。 |
| It should also be noted that the
delegation of Japan, requesting that this position be reflected in the
Conference’s Report, stated that it “supported the current-time approach to
the interpretation of the provision of the Convention regarding entry into
force of amendments, as described in a legal advice provided by the United
Nations Office of Legal Affairs as the Depositary, and had accepted the
fixed-time approach enunciated in the decision on the Indonesian-Swiss
country-led initiative only in this particular instance.” | 还应指出，日本代表团要求将这一立场写入会议报告，称该国“在解释《公约》关于修正生效的规定的问题上，支持按照保存人联合国法律事务厅的法律咨询意见所述，采取现时办法，并且仅在此次具体情况下接受关于印度尼西亚—瑞士国家牵头倡议的决定中阐述的定时办法。 |
| (23) The preceding examples demonstrate
that decisions of Conferences of States Parties may embody under certain
circumstances subsequent agreements under article 31, paragraph 3 (a). | ” (23) 前述例子表明，缔约国大会的决定可能在特定情形下体现第三十一条第三款(a)项所指的嗣后协定。 |
| Such decisions may also give rise to
subsequent practice under articles 31, paragraph 3 (b), or to other
subsequent practice under article 32 if they do not reflect agreement of the
parties. | 这些决定也可能产生第三十一条第三款(b)项下所述的嗣后实践，如果不反映缔约方的协定，也可能产生第三十二条所指的其他嗣后实践。 |
| The respective character of a decision of
a Conference of States Parties, however, must always be carefully identified. | 一项缔约国大会决定到底具有哪种性质，必须始终予以仔细确定。 |
| For this purpose, the specificity and the
clarity of the terms chosen in the light of the text of the Conference of
States Parties’ decision as a whole, its object and purpose, and the way in
which it is applied, need to be taken into account. | 为此目的，应结合缔约国大会决定的总体案文、其目的和宗旨及适用方式来考虑所选择用语的特定性和明确性。 |
| The parties often do not intend that such
a decision has any particular legal significance. | 缔约方通常不希望此类决定具有任何特定的法律意义。 |
| Paragraph 2, third sentence — decisions
as possibly providing a range of practical options | 第2段第三句――决定可能提供一系列可行的选择 |
| (24) The last sentence of paragraph 2 of
draft conclusion 11 reminds the interpreter that decisions of Conferences of
States Parties often provide a range of practical options for implementing
the treaty. | (24) 结论草案11第2段最后一句提醒解释者，缔约国大会通过的决定通常为执行条约提供一系列可行的选择。 |
| Those decisions may not necessarily
embody a subsequent agreement or subsequent practice for the purpose of
treaty interpretation, even if the decision is adopted by consensus. | 这些决定即便是缔约国协商一致通过的，也不一定体现用于条约解释目的的嗣后协定或嗣后实践。 |
| Indeed, Conferences of States Parties
often do not explicitly seek to resolve or address questions of
interpretation of a treaty. | 事实上，缔约国大会常常并不以解决或处理条约解释问题为明确目的。 |
| (25) A decision by the Conference of
States Parties to the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control provides an
example. | (25) 世卫组织《烟草控制框架公约》缔约国大会的决定就是一例。 |
| Articles 9 and 10 of the Convention deal,
respectively, with the regulation of the contents of tobacco products, and
with the regulation of the disclosure of information regarding the contents
of such products. | 该公约第9和第10条分别涉及烟草制品成分的管制和对于披露此类制品成分信息的管制。 |
| Acknowledging that such measures require
the allocation of significant financial resources, the States Parties agreed,
under the title of “practical considerations” for the implementation of
articles 9 and 10, on “some options that Parties could consider using”, such
as: | 缔约国承认实施此类措施需要大量的财政资源，故而在执行第9和第10条的“实际考虑”的标题下商定了“缔约国可考虑使用的一些选择”，如： |
| (a) designated tobacco taxes; | (a) 指定的烟草税； |
| (b) tobacco manufacturing and/or
importing licensing fees; | (b) 烟草生产和/或进口许可费； |
| (c) tobacco product registration fees; | (c) 烟草产品登记费； |
| (d) licensing of tobacco distributors
and/or retailers; | (d) 烟草批发商和/或零售商许可证制度； |
| (e) non-compliance fees levied on the
tobacco industry and retailers; | (e) 对烟草行业和零售商征收的违规罚款； |
| and | 和 |
| (f) annual tobacco surveillance fees
(tobacco industry and retailers). | (f) 每年的烟草管理费(烟草业和零售商)。 |
| This decision provides a non-exhaustive
range of practical options for implementing articles 9 and 10 of the
Convention. | 该决定提供了执行《公约》第9和第10条的一系列并非详尽无遗的可行选择。 |
| The parties have thereby, however,
implicitly agreed that the stated “options” would, as such, be compatible
with the Convention. | 但是，缔约方据此默示商定，所述的“选择”是与《公约》相符的。 |
| Paragraph 2 as a whole | 整个第2段 |
| (26) It follows that decisions of
Conferences of States Parties may have different legal effects. | (26) 因此，缔约国大会的决定可以具有不同的法律效力。 |
| Such decisions are often not intended to
embody a subsequent agreement under article 31, paragraph 3 (a), by
themselves because they are not meant to be a statement regarding the
interpretation of the treaty. | 此类决定无意成为关于条约解释的声明，因而其本身往往并不为体现第三十一条第三款(a)项所指的嗣后协定。 |
| In other cases, the parties have made it
sufficiently clear that the Conference of State Parties decision embodies
their agreement regarding the interpretation of the treaty. | 在另外一些案例中，缔约方足够明确地指出，缔约国大会的决定体现了缔约方就条约解释达成的协定。 |
| They may also produce an effect in
combination with a legal duty to cooperate under the treaty, “and the parties
thus should give due regard” to such a decision. | 这些决定还可能产生一种效力，使缔约方根据条约规定承担合作的法律责任，“因此缔约国应适当考虑”这种决定。 |
| In any case, it cannot simply be said
that because the treaty does not accord the Conference of States Parties a
competence to take legally binding decisions, their decisions are necessarily
legally irrelevant and constitute only political commitments. | 无论是何种情况，都不能简单地认为，由于条约没有赋予缔约国大会作出有法律约束力的决定的职能，其决定就一定不具有法律意义，只能构成政治承诺。 |
| (27) Ultimately, the effect of a decision
of a Conference of States Parties depends on the circumstances of each
particular case and such decisions need to be properly interpreted. | (27) 归根结底，缔约国大会决定的效力取决于每个具体案例的具体情况，对这些决定也需要加以正确的解释。 |
| A relevant consideration may be whether
States parties uniformly or without challenge apply the treaty as interpreted
by the Conference of States Parties’ decision. | 缔约国是否一致或无人质疑地按照缔约国大会决定的解释来适用条约，可能是相关的考虑因素之一。 |
| Discordant practice following a decision
of the Conference of States Parties may be an indication that States did not
assume that the decision would be a subsequent agreement under article 31,
paragraph 3 (a). | 如果在缔约国大会作出决定之后仍然出现做法不一致的情况，则可能说明各国并没有认为有关决定属于第三十一条第三款(a)项所指的嗣后协定。 |
| Conference of States Parties’ decisions
that do not qualify as subsequent agreements under article 31, paragraph 3
(a), or as subsequent practice under article 31, paragraph 3 (b), may
nevertheless be a subsidiary means of interpretation under article 32. | 但是，不构成第三十一条第三款(a)项所指嗣后协定或第三十一条第三款(b)项所指嗣后实践的那些缔约国大会的决定仍有可能构成第三十二条所述的补充的解释资料。 |
| Paragraph 3 — an agreement regarding the
interpretation of the treaty | 第3段――关于条约解释的协定 |
| (28) Paragraph 3 sets forth the principle
that agreements among all the parties regarding the interpretation of a
treaty under article 31, paragraph 3, must relate to the content of the
treaty. | (28) 第3段列出了一项原则，即第三十一条第三款所述所有缔约方关于条约解释的协定必须涉及条约的内容。 |
| Thus, what is important is the substance
of the agreement embodied in the decision of the Conference of States Parties
and not the form or procedure by which that decision is reached. | 因此，重点在于缔约国大会的决定所体现的协定的内容，而非达成这一决定的形式或程序。 |
| Acts that originate from Conferences of
States Parties may have different forms and designations and they may be the
result of different procedures. | 源自缔约国大会的行为可能具有不同的形式和名称，并且可能由不同的程序产生。 |
| Conferences of States Parties may even
operate without formally adopted rules of procedure. | 缔约国大会甚至可能在没有正式通过的议事规则的情况下开展工作。 |
| If the decision of the Conference of
States Parties is based on a unanimous vote in which all parties participate,
it may clearly embody a “subsequent agreement” under article 31, paragraph 3
(a), provided that it is “regarding the interpretation of the treaty”. | 缔约国大会的决定如果是全体缔约方一致投票得出的，则可能明确体现第三十一条第三款(a)项所指的“嗣后协定”，前提是这是一项“关于条约之解释”的决定。 |
| (29) Conference of States Parties’
decisions regarding review and implementation functions, however, are
normally adopted by consensus. | (29) 但是，缔约国大会有关审查和执行职能的决定通常会以协商一致的方式通过。 |
| This practice derives from rules of
procedure that usually require States parties to make every effort to achieve
consensus on substantive matters. | 这种做法源于议事规则，议事规则通常要求缔约国尽一切努力就实质性事项达成协商一致。 |
| An early example can be found in the
Provisional Rules of Procedure for the Review Conference of the Parties to
the Biological Weapons Convention. | 早期的一个例子见《生物武器公约》缔约方会议审查会议的议事规则。 |
| According to rule 28, paragraph 2: | 规则28第2段规定： |
| The task of the Review Conference being
to review the operation of the Convention with a view to assuring that the
purposes of the preamble and the provisions of the Convention are being
realized, and thus to strengthen its effectiveness, every effort should be
made to reach agreement on substantive matters by means of consensus. | 审查会议的任务是审查《公约》的实施情况，以期确保《公约》序言和条款的宗旨得到实现。 因此，为加强《公约》的效力，应尽一切努力以协商一致的办法就实质性事项达成一致意见。 |
| There should be no voting on such matters
until all efforts to achieve consensus have been exhausted. | 除非为取得协商一致已经用尽一切努力，否则不应在这种事项上采取投票的办法。 |
| This formula, with only minor variations,
has become the standard with regard to substantive decision-making procedures
at Conferences of States Parties. | 这种表述业已成为关于缔约国大会实质性决策程序的标准表述，各种表述只有细微的差异。 |
| (30) In order to address concerns
relating to decisions adopted by consensus, the phrase “including adoption by
consensus” was introduced at the end of paragraph 3 in order to dispel the
notion that a decision adopted by consensus would necessarily be equated with
agreement in substance. | (30) 为解决对于以协商一致方式通过决定的关切，在第3段的中间加入了“包括经协商一致通过”一语，以消除一种观念，即通过协商一致通过的决定必然等同于实质性的一致意见。 |
| Indeed, consensus is not a concept that
necessarily indicates any particular degree of agreement on substance. | 事实上，协商一致这一概念并不必然表明就实质事项达成任何程度上的协定。 |
| According to the Comments on Some
Procedural Questions issued by the Office of Legal Affairs of the United
Nations Secretariat in accordance with General Assembly resolution 60/286 of
8 September 2006: | 按照联合国秘书处法律事务厅依照联合国大会2006年9月8日第60/286号决议发布的“关于某些程序性问题的评论”： |
| Consensus is generally understood as a
decision-taking process consisting in arriving at a decision without formal
objections and vote. | 协商一致通常被理解为一个决策进程，以没有正式反对意见也不通过正式投票的方式作出决定。 |
| It may however not necessarily reflect
“unanimity” of opinion on the substantive matter. | 但是，协商一致并不一定反映实质性事项上意见的“完全统一”。 |
| It is used to describe the practice under
which every effort is made to achieve general agreement and no delegation
objects explicitly to a consensus being recorded. | 协商一致是用来说明一种做法，即为取得总体一致意见而尽一切努力，并且没有代表团明确反对所记录下来的协商一致意见。 |
| (31) It follows that adoption by consensus
is not a sufficient condition for an agreement under article 31, paragraph 3
(a) or (b) to be established. | (31) 因此，以协商一致通过并非第三十一条第三款(a)项或(b)项所指协定的充分条件。 |
| The rules of procedure of Conferences of
States Parties do not usually give an indication of the possible legal effect
of a resolution as a subsequent agreement under article 31, paragraph 3 (a),
or a subsequent practice under article 31, paragraph 3 (b). | 缔约国大会议事规则通常并不表明决议作为第三十一条第三款(a)项所指嗣后协定或第三十一条第三款(b)项所指嗣后实践的可能的法律效力。 |
| Such rules of procedure only determine
how the Conference of States Parties shall adopt its decisions, not their
possible legal effect as a subsequent agreement under article 31, paragraph
3. | 这种议事规则只能决定缔约国大会应如何通过其决定，而不能确定这些决定作为第三十一条第三款所指嗣后协定可能具有的法律效力。 |
| Although subsequent agreements under
article 31, paragraph 3 (a), need not be binding as such, the 1969 Vienna
Convention attributes them a legal effect under article 31 only if there
exists agreement in substance among the parties concerning the interpretation
of a treaty. | 尽管第三十一条第三款(a)项所指嗣后协定本身并不需要具备约束力，但1969年《维也纳公约》规定，这种嗣后协定可以具有第三十一条下的法律效力，前提是缔约方必须就条约解释达成了实质性协定。 |
| The International Court of Justice has
confirmed that the distinction between the form of a collective decision and
the agreement in substance is pertinent in such a context. | 国际法院已经确认，在这种情况下，应注意集体性决定这一形式与实质性协定之间的区别。 |
| (32) That certain decisions, despite
having been adopted by consensus, cannot represent a subsequent agreement
under article 31, paragraph 3 (a), is especially true when there exists an
objection by one or more States parties to that consensus. | (32) 有些决定虽然是经协商一致通过的，但不能作为第三十一条第三款(a)项所指的嗣后协定，尤其是在有一个或多个缔约方反对这种协商一致的情况下。 |
| (33) For example, at its Sixth Meeting in
2002, the Conference of States Parties to the Convention on Biological
Diversity worked on formulating guiding principles for the prevention,
introduction and mitigation of impacts of alien species that threaten
ecosystems, habitats or species. | (33) 例如，《生物多样性公约》缔约国大会在2002年举行的第六次会议上着手拟订了《关于对生态系统、生境或物种构成威胁的外来物种的预防、引进和减轻其影响问题的指导原则》。 |
| After several efforts to reach an
agreement had failed, the President of the Conference of States Parties
proposed that the decision be adopted and the reservations that Australia had
raised be recorded in the final report of the meeting. | 几次争取达成一致意见未果后，缔约国大会主席建议通过决定，在会议最后报告中记录澳大利亚提出的保留。 |
| The representative of Australia, however,
reiterated that the guiding principles could not be accepted and that “his
formal objection therefore stood”. | 但是，澳大利亚的代表重申，无法接受指导原则，“因此坚持其正式的反对意见”。 |
| The President declared the debate closed
and, “following established practice”, declared the decision adopted without
a vote, clarifying that the objections of the dissenting States would be
reflected in the final report of the meeting. | 主席宣布辩论结束，并“根据既定做法”，宣布该项决定未经投票获得通过，并澄清说将把持异议的国家的反对意见反映在会议最后报告中。 |
| Following the adoption, Australia
reiterated its view that consensus is adoption without formal objection and
expressed concerns about the legality of the adoption of the draft decision. | 在决定得到通过后，澳大利亚重申其观点，即协商一致是指在没有正式反对意见的情况下通过文件，并对通过该决定草案的合法性表示关切。 |
| As a result, a footnote to decision VI/23
indicates that “one representative entered a formal objection during the
process leading to the adoption of this decision and underlined that he did not
believe that the Conference of the Parties could legitimately adopt a motion
or a text with a formal objection in place”. | 因此，第VI/23号决定的一个脚注指出“有一名代表在本决定通过过程中提出了正式反对意见，并强调指出，他并不认为缔约方大会可以合法地在有正式反对意见的情况通过一项动议或案文”。 |
| (34) In this situation, the Executive
Secretary of the Convention on Biological Diversity requested a legal opinion
from the United Nations Legal Counsel. | (34) 在这种情况下，《生物多样性公约》执行秘书请联合国法律顾问提供法律意见。 |
| The opinion by the Legal Counsel
expressed the view that a party could “disassociate itself from the substance
or text … of the document [,] indicate that its joining in the consensus does
not constitute acceptance of the substance or text of parts of the
document[,] and/or present any other restrictions on its Government’s
position on substance or text of … the document”. | 法律顾问的意见 表达了这样一种观点，即一个缔约方可以“不参与文件的实质或案文[，]表示其加入协商一致并不等于接受文件部分内容的实质或案文[，]和/或对该国政府关于文件…实质或案文的立场提出任何其他限制”。 |
| Thus, it is clear that a decision that
was adopted by consensus can occur in the face of rejection of the substance
of the decision by one or more of the States parties. | 因此显然，即便有一个或多个缔约国反对决定的实质内容，决定仍然可能经协商一致通过。 |
| (35) The decision under the Convention on
Biological Diversity, as well as a similar decision reached in Cancún in 2010
by the Meeting of the Parties to the Kyoto Protocol to the Climate Change
Convention (Bolivia’s objection notwithstanding), raise the important
question of what “consensus” means. | (35) 在《生物多样性公约》下作出的决定和2010年《〈气候变化公约〉京都议定书》缔约方会议在坎昆达成的一项类似决定(尽管有玻利维亚的反对意见)， 提出了“协商一致”是指什么的重要问题。 |
| However, this question, which does not
fall within the scope of the present topic, must be distinguished from the
question of whether all the parties to a treaty have arrived at an agreement
in substance on matters of interpretation of that treaty under article 31,
paragraph 3 (a) and (b). | 但是，对于不属于本专题讨论范围的这个问题，必须将其与条约全体缔约方是否就第三十一条第三款(a)项和(b)项所述条约解释的事项达成实质性一致意见的问题区分开来。 |
| Decisions by Conferences of States
Parties that do not reflect agreement in substance among all the parties do
not qualify as agreements under article 31, paragraph 3, although they may be
a form of “other subsequent practice” under article 32 (see draft conclusion
4, paragraph 3). | 凡是不体现缔约国大会全体缔约方就实质问题达成一致意见的决定，不能作为第三十一条第三款所指的协定，但也许可以成为第三十二条所指“其他嗣后实践”的一种形式(见结论草案4第3段)。 |
| (36) A different issue concerns the legal
effect of a decision of a Conference of States Parties once it qualifies as
an agreement under article 31, paragraph (3). | (36) 另一个不同的问题是，缔约国大会的决定如果符合条件，属于第三十一条第三款下所指的协定，那么具有什么样的法律效力？ |
| In 2011, the IMO Sub-Division for Legal
Affairs was asked to “advise the governing bodies […] about the procedural
requirements in relation to a decision on an interpretative resolution and,
in particular, whether or not consensus would be needed for such a decision”. | 2011年，海事组织法律事务处被要求“向理事机构[…]提供询意见，以说明就某项解释性决议作出决定的程序性要求，具体而言，是要说明作出这样的决定是否需要协商一致”。 |
| In its response, while confirming that a
resolution by the Conference of States Parties can constitute, in principle,
a subsequent agreement under article 31, paragraph 3 (a), the IMO
Sub-Division for Legal Affairs advised the governing bodies that even if the
Conference were to adopt a decision based on consensus, that would not mean
that the decision would be binding on all the parties. | 法律处在答复中确认缔约国大会的决议原则上可以构成第三十一条第三款(a)项所指的嗣后协定，同时告知理事机构，即便缔约方大会经协商一致通过一项决定，也不意味着有关决定对全体缔约方有约束力。 |
| (37) Although the opinion of the IMO
Sub-Division for Legal Affairs proceeded from the erroneous assumption that a
“subsequent agreement” under article 31, paragraph 3 (a), would only be
binding “as a treaty, or an amendment thereto”, it came to the correct
conclusion that even if the consensus decision by a Conference of States
Parties embodies an agreement regarding interpretation in substance it is not
(necessarily) binding upon the parties. | (37) 尽管海事组织法律处的意见源自一个错误的假设，即第三十一条第三款(a)项所指“嗣后协定”仅在“作为一项条约或其修正案”时有约束力，但法律处得出的结论是正确的：即缔约国大会协商一致的决定即便体现了关于解释的实质性协定，也不(必然)对全体缔约方有约束力。 |
| Rather, as the Commission has indicated,
a subsequent agreement under article 31, paragraph 3 (a), is only one of different
means of interpretation to be taken into account in the process of
interpretation. | 相反，正如委员会指出的那样，第三十一条第三款(a)项所指的嗣后协定只是在解释过程中可以考虑的不同的解释资料中的一项。 |
| (38) Thus, interpretative resolutions by
Conferences of States Parties, even if they are not legally binding as such,
can nevertheless be subsequent agreements under article 31, paragraph 3 (a),
or subsequent practice under article 31, paragraph 3 (b), if there are
sufficient indications that that was the intention of the parties at the time
of the adoption of the decision or if the subsequent practice of the parties
establishes an agreement on the interpretation of the treaty. | (38) 因此，缔约国大会的解释性决议即便本身不具有约束力，仍可成为第三十一条第三款(a)项所指的嗣后协定或第三十一条第三款(b)项所指的嗣后实践，条件是有充分的情况表明这是缔约方在通过决定时的意向，或缔约方的嗣后实践确立了一项关于条约解释的协定。 |
| The interpreter must give appropriate
weight to such an interpretative resolution under article 31, paragraph 3 (a)
and (b), but not necessarily treat it as legally binding. | 对于第三十一条第三款(a)和(b)项下的这种解释性决议，解释者应予以适当的权重，但不一定要将之视为有法律约束力的文件。 |
| Conclusion 12 Constituent instruments of
international organizations | 结论12 国际组织的组成文书 |
| 1. Articles 31 and 32 apply to a treaty
which is the constituent instrument of an international organization. | 1. 第三十一条和第三十二条适用于作为国际组织组成文书的条约。 |
| Accordingly, subsequent agreements and
subsequent practice under article 31, paragraph 3, are, and subsequent
practice under article 32 may be, means of interpretation for such treaties. | 因此，第三十一条第三款所指的嗣后协定和嗣后实践是这类条约的解释资料，第三十二条所指的嗣后实践可以作为这类条约的解释资料。 |
| 2. Subsequent agreements and subsequent
practice of the parties under article 31, paragraph 3, or subsequent practice
under article 32, may arise from, or be expressed in, the practice of an
international organization in the application of its constituent instrument. | 2. 第三十一条第三款所指的缔约方嗣后协定和嗣后实践或第三十二条所指的嗣后实践可以出自国际组织适用其组成文书的实践，或体现在这类实践中。 |
| 3. Practice of an international
organization in the application of its constituent instrument may contribute
to the interpretation of that instrument when applying articles 31 and 32. | 3. 在适用第三十一和第三十二条时，国际组织适用其组成文书的实践可以有助于解释该文书。 |
| 4. Paragraphs 1 to 3 apply to the
interpretation of any treaty which is the constituent instrument of an
international organization without prejudice to any relevant rules of the
organization. | 4. 第1至3段适用于对作为国际组织组成文书的任何条约的解释，但不妨碍该组织的任何有关规则。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| General aspects | 一般方面 |
| (1) Draft conclusion 12 refers to a
particular type of treaty, namely constituent instruments of international
organizations, and the way in which subsequent agreements or subsequent
practice shall or may be taken into account in their interpretation under
articles 31 and 32 of the 1969 Vienna Convention. | (1) 结论草案12涉及一种特定的条约，即国际组织的组成文书，以及根据1969年《维也纳公约》第三十一条和第三十二条解释此类条约时应该或可以考虑嗣后协定和嗣后实践的方式。 |
| (2) Constituent instruments of international
organizations are specifically addressed in article 5 of the 1969 Vienna
Convention, which provides: | (2) 1969年《维也纳公约》第五条专门针对国际组织的组成文书，该条规定： |
| The present Convention applies to any
treaty which is the constituent instrument of an international organization
and to any treaty adopted within an international organization without
prejudice to any relevant rules of the organization. | “本公约适用于为一国际组织组织约章之任何条约及在一国际组织内议定之任何条约，但对该组织任何有关规则并无妨碍。 ” |
| (3) A constituent instrument of an
international organization under article 5, like any treaty, is an
international agreement “whether embodied in a single instrument or in two or
more related instruments” (article 2, paragraph 1 (a)). | (3) 第五条所述国际组织的组成文书同其他条约一样，属于国际协定，“不论其载于一项单独文书或两项以上相互有关之文书内”(第二条第一款(a)项)。 |
| The provisions that are contained in such
a treaty are part of the constituent instrument. | 此类条约所包含的规定是组成文书的一部分。 |
| (4) As a general matter, article 5, by
stating that the 1969 Vienna Convention applies to constituent instruments of
international organizations without prejudice to any relevant rules of the
organization, follows the general approach of the Convention according to
which treaties between States are subject to the rules set forth in the
Convention “unless the treaty otherwise provides.” | (4) 一般来说，第五条通过规定1969年《维也纳公约》适用于国际组织组成文书而不妨碍该组织相关规则，
遵循了《公约》的一般原则，即“除条约另有规定外”，缔约国间的条约应遵循《公约》所载的规则。 |
| (5) Draft conclusion 12 only refers to
the interpretation of constituent instruments of international organizations. | (5) 结论草案12仅涉及国际组织组成文书的解释。 |
| It therefore does not address every
aspect of the role of subsequent agreements and subsequent practice in
relation to the interpretation of treaties involving international
organizations. | 因此本条结论不完全涵盖嗣后协定和嗣后实践对国际组织条约解释作用的所有方面。 |
| In particular, it does not apply to the
interpretation of treaties adopted within an international organization or to
treaties concluded by international organizations that are not themselves
constituent instruments of international organizations. | 特别是，本条结论不适用于解释国际组织内部通过的条约，也不适用于解释国际组织缔结的本身不属于国际组织组成文书的条约。 |
| In addition, draft conclusion 12 does not
apply to the interpretation of decisions by organs of international
organizations as such, including to the interpretation of decisions by
international courts or to the effect of a “clear and constant jurisprudence”
(“jurisprudence constante”) of courts or tribunals. | 此外，结论草案12不适用于解释国际组织机关的决定本身， 包括不适用于解释各国际性法院的裁决，
也不适用于解释法院或法庭“明确一贯的判例” (“一贯判例”)的效果。 |
| Finally, the conclusion does not
specifically address questions relating to pronouncements by a treaty
monitoring body consisting of independent experts. | 最后，本条结论没有专门述及由独立专家组成的条约监督机构的声明的有关问题。 |
| The latter are addressed in draft
conclusion 13. | 此类问题由结论草案13论述。 |
| Paragraph 1 — applicability of articles
31 and 32 | 第1段――第三十一条和第三十二条的适用性 |
| (6) The first sentence of paragraph 1 of
draft conclusion 12 recognizes the applicability of articles 31 and 32 of the
1969 Vienna Convention to treaties that are constituent instruments of
international organizations. | (6) 结论草案12第1段第一句确认1969年《维也纳公约》第三十一条和第三十二条适用于作为国际组织组成文书的条约。 |
| The International Court of Justice has
confirmed this point in its Advisory Opinion on the Legality of the Use by a
State of Nuclear Weapons in Armed Conflict: | 国际法院在其关于国家在武装冲突中使用核武器的合法性的咨询意见中已确认这一点： |
| From a formal standpoint, the constituent
instruments of international organizations are multilateral treaties, to
which the well-established rules of treaty interpretation apply. | “从形式上看，国际组织组成文书是多边条约，而公认的条约解释规则适用于多边条约。 |
| (7) The Court has held with respect to
the Charter of the United Nations: | ” (7) 关于《联合国宪章》，该法院认为： |
| On the previous occasions when the Court
has had to interpret the Charter of the United Nations, it has followed the
principles and rules applicable in general to the interpretation of treaties,
since it has recognized that the Charter is a multilateral treaty, albeit a
treaty having certain special characteristics. | 本院曾多次不得不解释《联合国宪章》，在这些场合下，本院一直遵循一般适用于条约解释的原则和规则，因为本院确认《宪章》是一项多边条约，尽管是一项具有某些特殊特征的条约。 |
| (8) At the same time, article 5 suggests,
and decisions by international courts confirm, that constituent instruments
of international organizations are also treaties of a particular type that
may need to be interpreted in a specific way. | (8) 同时，第五条表明并且各国际性法院的判决也确认的是，国际组织组成文书也是一种特定类型的条约，可能需要以特别的方式加以解释。 |
| Accordingly, the International Court of
Justice has stated: | 因此，国际法院表示： |
| But the constituent instruments of
international organizations are also treaties of a particular type; | 但国际组织的组成文书也是特定类型的条约； |
| their object is to create new subjects of
law endowed with a certain autonomy, to which the parties entrust the task of
realizing common goals. | 其目的是组建具有一定自主权的新的法律主体，该法律主体受各缔约方的委托负责实现共同的目标。 |
| Such treaties can raise specific problems
of interpretation owing, inter alia, to their character which is conventional
and at the same time institutional; | 此类条约由于除其他外同时具有公约性和创设性特征，会引起具体的解释问题； |
| the very nature of the organization
created, the objectives which have been assigned to it by its founders, the
imperatives associated with the effective performance of its functions, as
well as its own practice, are all elements which may deserve special
attention when the time comes to interpret these constituent treaties. | 所设组织的性质、创设者赋予的目标、与有效行使其职能相关的规则、以及其自身实践，这些都是在需要解释组成条约时值得特别重视的要素。 |
| (9) The second sentence of paragraph 1 of
draft conclusion 12 more specifically refers to elements of articles 31 and
32 that deal with subsequent agreements and subsequent practice as means of
interpretation and confirms that subsequent agreements and subsequent
practice under article 31, paragraph 3, are, and other subsequent practice
under article 32 may be, means of interpretation for constituent instruments
of international organizations. | (9) 结论草案12第1段第二句更具体地说明了第三十一条和第三十二条涉及用嗣后协定和嗣后实践作为解释资料的一些要素，并确认第三十一条第三款所指的嗣后协定和嗣后实践属于国际组织组成文书的解释资料，第三十二条所指的其他嗣后实践则有可能成为国际组织组成文书的解释资料。 |
| (10) The International Court of Justice
has recognized that article 31, paragraph 3 (b), is applicable to constituent
instruments of international organizations. | (10) 国际法院确认第三十一条第三款(b)项适用于国际组织组成文书。 |
| In its Advisory Opinion on the Legality
of the Use by a State of Nuclear Weapons in Armed Conflict, after describing
constituent instruments of international organizations as being treaties of a
particular type, the Court introduced its interpretation of the Constitution
of WHO by stating: | 该法院在关于国家在武装冲突中使用核武器的合法性的咨询意见中，首先表示国际组织组成文书是一种特定类型的条约，然后谈到对世卫组织《组织法》的解释： |
| According to the customary rule of
interpretation as expressed in Article 31 of the 1969 Vienna Convention on
the Law of Treaties, the terms of a treaty must be interpreted ‘in their
context and in the light of its object and purpose’ and there shall be ‘taken
into account, together with the context: | 按照1969年《维也纳条约法公约》第三十一条表述的习惯解释规则，条约的条款必须“按其上下文并参照条约之目的及宗旨”来解释，而且应“与上下文一并考虑者尚有： |
| “(b) any subsequent practice in the
application of the treaty which establishes the agreement of the parties
regarding its interpretation”. | “(b) 嗣后在条约适用方面确定各当事国对条约解释之协定之任何实践”。 |
| Referring to different precedents from
its own case law in which it had, inter alia, employed subsequent practice
under article 31, paragraph 3 (b), as a means of interpretation, the Court
announced that it would apply article 31, paragraph 3 (b): | 该法院援引其自身判例中把第三十一条第三款(b)项所述嗣后实践作为解释资料的各种先例，然后宣布第三十一条第三款(b)项： |
| in this case for the purpose of
determining whether, according to the WHO Constitution, the question to which
it has been asked to reply arises ‘within the scope of [the] activities’ of
that Organization. | 将在本案中同样适用，以便裁定根据世卫组织《组织法》，本院要作出答复的问题是否属于该组织“活动范畴内”产生的问题。 |
| (11) The Land and Maritime Boundary
between Cameroon and Nigeria case is another decision in which the Court has
emphasized, in a case involving the interpretation of a constituent instrument
of an international organization, the subsequent practice of the parties. | (11) 喀麦隆和尼日利亚间陆地和海洋疆界案是一个涉及国际组织组成文书解释的案件，国际法院在对该案的裁决中再次强调各缔约方的嗣后实践。 |
| Proceeding from the observation that
“Member States have also entrusted to the Commission certain tasks that had
not originally been provided for in the treaty texts”, the Court concluded
that: | 该法院指出“成员国还将条约案文中原本没有规定的某些任务委托给了该委员会”，由此得出结论： |
| From the treaty texts and the practice
[of the parties] analysed at paragraphs 64 and 65 above, it emerges that the
Lake Chad Basin Commission is an international organization exercising its
powers within a specific geographical area; | 从上文第64段和第65段所分析的条约案文和[缔约方]实践看，乍得湖流域委员会是一个在特定地域范围内行使权力的国际组织； |
| that it does not however have as its
purpose the settlement at a regional level of matters relating to the
maintenance of international peace and security and thus does not fall under
Chapter VIII of the Charter. | 然而，该委员会的宗旨不包括在区域一级解决维护国际和平与安全方面的问题，因此不属于《宪章》第八章适用的范畴。 |
| (12) Article 31, paragraph 3 (a), is also
applicable to constituent treaties of international organizations. | (12) 第三十一条第三款(a)项也适用于国际组织的组成条约。 |
| Self-standing subsequent agreements
between the member States regarding the interpretation of constituent
instruments of international organizations, however, are not common. | 但是，成员国之间关于国际组织组成文书解释问题的单独嗣后协定很少见。 |
| When questions of interpretation arise
with respect to such an instrument, the parties mostly act as members within
the framework of the plenary organ of the organization. | 此类文书产生解释问题时，缔约方通常在该组织的全体机关框架内以成员身份行事。 |
| If there is a need to modify, to amend,
or to supplement the treaty, the member States either use the amendment
procedure that is provided for in the treaty or they conclude a further
treaty, usually a protocol. | 如果需要对条约进行修改、修订或补充，成员国或者会使用条约中规定的修订程序进行修订，或者会另外订立一个条约，通常是议定书。 |
| It is, however, also possible that the
parties act as such when they meet within a plenary organ of the respective
organization. | 但是，缔约方在相关组织的全体机关内开会时也有可能以缔约方身份行事。 |
| In 1995: | 在1995年： |
| The Governments of the 15 Member States
[of the European Union] have achieved the common agreement that this decision
is the agreed and definitive interpretation of the relevant Treaty
provisions. | [欧洲联盟]15个成员国的政府已经达成共同协定，认为这项决定是对《条约》有关条款已经商定的最终解释。 |
| That is to say that: | 也就是说： |
| the name given to the European currency
shall be Euro. | 欧洲货币的名称定为欧元。 |
| … The specific name Euro will be used
instead of the generic term “ecu” used by the Treaty to refer to the European
currency unit. | …将使用欧元这个具体名称，而不是《条约》中用来指称欧洲货币单位的通用术语“ecu”。 |
| This decision of the “Member States
meeting within” the European Union has been regarded, in the literature, as a
subsequent agreement under article 31, paragraph 3 (a). | 欧洲联盟“内开会的成员国”作出的这一决定在文献里被视为第三十一条第三款(a)项所指的嗣后协定。 |
| (13) It is sometimes difficult to
determine whether “Member States meeting within” a plenary organ of an
international organization intend to act in their capacity as members of that
organ, as they usually do, or whether they intend to act in their independent
capacity as States parties to the constituent instrument of the organization. | (13) 有时很难确定在国际组织全体机关“内开会的成员国”是打算像通常那样以该机关成员的身份行事，还是以该组织组成文书缔约国的身份行事。 |
| The Court of Justice of the European
Union, when confronted with this question, initially proceeded from the
wording of the act in question: | 欧洲联盟法院在面对这个问题时首先考察了所涉行动的措辞： |
| It is clear from the wording of that
provision that acts adopted by representatives of the Member States acting,
not in their capacity as members of the Council, but as representatives of
their governments, and thus collectively exercising the powers of the Member
States, are not subject to judicial review by the Court. | 该条款的措辞明确显示，如果成员国的代表不是以理事会成员的身份而是以其政府代表的身份行事，以此方式集体行使成员国的权力，则此等行动不受法院的司法审查。 |
| Later, however, the Court accorded
decisive importance to the “content and all the circumstances in which [the
decision] was adopted” in order to determine whether the decision was that of
the organ or of the member States themselves as parties to the treaty: | 但该法院后来还是认为，在确定所涉决定是机关的决定还是成员国本身作为条约缔约方的决定时，“[决定]的内容及其通过时的全部情形”具有决定性的意义： |
| Consequently, it is not enough that an
act should be described as a “decision of the Member States” for it to be
excluded from review under Article 173 of the Treaty. | 因此，将一项行动说成是“成员国的决定”，不足以将其排除在《条约》第173条所规定的审查之外。 |
| In order for such an act to be excluded
from review, it must still be determined whether, having regard to its
content and all the circumstances in which it was adopted, the act in
question is not in reality a decision of the Council. | 为了将一项决定排除在审查范围外，仍须参考该决定的内容及其通过时的全部情形，确定所涉行动是否确实不属于理事会的决定。 |
| (14) Apart from subsequent agreements or
subsequent practice that establish the agreement of all the parties under
article 31, paragraph 3 (a) and (b), subsequent practice by one or more
parties under article 32 in the application of the constituent instrument of
an international organization may also be relevant for the interpretation of
that treaty. | (14) 除了第三十一条第三款(a)项和(b)项所指的确立全体缔约方协定的嗣后协定和嗣后实践之外，第三十二条所指的一个或多个缔约方在适用国际组织组成文书时的嗣后实践也可能与该条约的解释相关。 |
| Constituent instruments of international
organizations, like other multilateral treaties, are, for example, sometimes
implemented by subsequent bilateral or regional agreements or practice. | 例如，国际组织组成文书有时像其他多边条约一样，是通过嗣后双边或区域协定或实践执行的。 |
| Such bilateral treaties are not, as such,
subsequent agreements under article 31, paragraph 3 (a), if only because they
are concluded between a limited number of the parties to the multilateral
constituent instrument. | 此类双边条约本身并不是第三十一条第三款(a)项所指的嗣后协定，单纯是因为这种条约只是在多边组成文书的一部分缔约方之间缔结的。 |
| They may, however, imply assertions
concerning the interpretation of the constituent instrument itself and may
serve as supplementary means of interpretation under article 32. | 但是，这些条约可能默示了缔约方关于组成文书本身的解释的主张，有可能成为第三十二条所指的补充解释资料。 |
| Paragraph 2 — subsequent agreements and
subsequent practice of States parties as “arising from” or “being expressed
in” the practice of an international organization | 第2段――“出自”或“体现在”一国际组织实践中的缔约国嗣后协定和嗣后实践 |
| (15) Paragraph 2 of draft conclusion 12
highlights a particular way in which subsequent agreements and subsequent
practice of States parties under articles 31, paragraph 3, and 32 may arise
or be expressed. | (15) 结论草案12第2段强调了第三十一条第三款和第三十二条所指的缔约国嗣后协定和嗣后实践可能产生或被体现的一种具体方式。 |
| Subsequent agreements and subsequent practice
of States parties may “arise from” their reactions to the practice of an
international organization in the application of a constituent instrument. | 缔约国的嗣后协定和嗣后实践可“出自”其对国际组织适用组成文书的实践的反应。 |
| Alternatively, subsequent agreements and
subsequent practice of States parties to a constituent agreement may be
“expressed in” the practice of an international organization in the
application of its constituent instrument. | 或者，该组成协定的缔约国的嗣后协定和嗣后实践可被“体现在”国际组织适用其组成文书的实践中。 |
| “Arise from” is intended to encompass the
generation and development of subsequent agreements and subsequent practice
by States parties, while “expressed in” is used in the sense of reflecting
and articulating such agreements and practice. | “出自”是指产生和发展出缔约国嗣后协定和嗣后实践的情形，而“体现在”则是指反映和表达这种协定和实践的情形。 |
| Either variant of the practice in, or
arising from, an international organization may be relevant for the
identification of subsequent agreements or subsequent practice by the States
parties to the constituent instrument of the organization (see draft conclusion
4). | 国际组织的实践或出自国际组织的实践都可能与该组织组成文书缔约国的嗣后协定或嗣后实践的识别有关(见结论草案4)。 |
| (16) In its Advisory Opinion on the
Legality of the Use by a State of Nuclear Weapons in Armed Conflict, the
International Court of Justice recognized the possibility that the practice
of an organization may reflect an agreement or the practice of the Member
States as parties to the treaty themselves, but found that the practice in
that case did not “express or amount to” a subsequent practice under article
31, paragraph 3 (b): | (16) 国际法院在其关于国家在武装冲突中使用核武器的合法性的咨询意见中确认，国际组织的实践有可能反映成员国作为条约缔约国本身的协定或实践，但认为该案中的实践并不“体现或等同于”第三十一条第三款(b)项所指的嗣后实践： |
| Resolution WHA46.40 itself, adopted, not
without opposition, as soon as the question of the legality of the use of
nuclear weapons was raised at the WHO, could not be taken to express or to
amount on its own to a practice establishing an agreement between the members
of the Organization to interpret its Constitution as empowering it to address
the question of the legality of the use of nuclear weapons. | 使用核武器的合法性问题在世卫组织被提出来后，第WHA46.40号决议立即就在不无反对的情况下得到了通过。
该决议独立来看，不能被认为体现或等同于以下实践，即在该组织各成员之间确立了解释《组织法》的协定，认为《组织法》赋予该组织处理使用核武器合法性问题的权力。 |
| (17) In this case, when considering the
relevance of a resolution of an international organization for the
interpretation of its constituent instrument, the Court considered, in the
first place, whether the resolution expressed or amounted to “a practice establishing
agreement between the members of the Organization” under article 31,
paragraph 3 (b). | (17) 在该案中，国际法院在考虑国际组织决议对解释其组成文书的相关性时，首先考虑了该决议是否体现或等同于第三十一条第三款(b)项所指的“确立该组织成员间协定的实践”。 |
| (18) In a similar way, the WTO Appellate
Body has stated in general terms: | (18) 同样，世贸组织上诉机构也概括指出： |
| Based on the text of Article 31 (3) (a)
of the Vienna Convention, we consider that a decision adopted by Members may
qualify as a ‘subsequent agreement between the parties’ regarding the
interpretation of a covered agreement or the application of its provisions
if: (i) the decision is, in a temporal sense, adopted subsequent to the
relevant covered agreement; | 根据《维也纳公约》第三十一条第三款(a)项的案文，我们认为，成员国通过的决定可能有资格成为用于解释相关协定或适用协定条款的“当事国之间的嗣后协定”，条件是：(一) 在时间上，该决定是在相关协定之后通过的； |
| and (ii) the terms and content of the
decision express an agreement between Members on the interpretation or
application of a provision of WTO law. | 和(二) 该决定的规定和内容体现了成员国之间对解释或适用世贸组织法律条款达成的协定。 |
| (19) Regarding the conditions under which
a decision of a plenary organ may be considered to be a subsequent agreement
under article 31, paragraph 3 (a), the WTO Appellate Body held: | (19) 关于在什么条件下全体机关的决定才可被视为第三十一条第三款(a)项所指的嗣后协定，世贸组织上诉机构认为： |
| 263. With regard to the first element, we
note that the Doha Ministerial Decision was adopted by consensus on 14
November 2001 on the occasion of the Fourth Ministerial Conference of the
WTO. … | 263. 关于第一项要素，我们注意到《多哈部长级会议决定》是2001年11月14日在世贸组织第四次部长级会议上以协商一致方式通过的。 |
| With regard to the second element, the
key question to be answered is whether paragraph 5.2 of the Doha Ministerial
Decision expresses an agreement between Members on the interpretation or
application of the term “reasonable interval” in Article 2.12 of the TBT
Agreement. | …关于第二项要素，所需回答的关键问题是：《多哈部长级会议决定》第5.2段是否表明成员国之间对《技术性贸易壁垒协定》第2.12条中“合理间隔”的解释或适用达成了协定？ |
| 264. We recall that paragraph 5.2 of the
Doha Ministerial Decision provides: | 264. 我们回顾《多哈部长级会议决定》第5.2段规定： |
| Subject to the conditions specified in
paragraph 12 of Article 2 of the Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade,
the phrase “reasonable interval” shall be understood to mean normally a
period of not less than 6 months, except when this would be ineffective in
fulfilling the legitimate objectives pursued. | 在符合《技术性贸易壁垒协议》第2条第12款所述条件的前提下，“合理间隔”一词应当理解为通常不少于6个月的期间，但不能有效实现所争取之合法目标的情形除外。 |
| 265. In addressing the question of
whether paragraph 5.2 of the Doha Ministerial Decision expresses an agreement
between Members on the interpretation or application of the term “reasonable
interval” in Article 2.12 of the TBT Agreement, we find useful guidance in
the Appellate Body reports in EC — Bananas III (Article 21.5 — Ecuador II)/EC
— Bananas III (Article 21.5 — US). | 265. 至于《多哈部长级会议决定》第5.2段是否体现了成员国之间对《技术性贸易壁垒协定》第2.12条中“合理间隔”一语的解释和适用达成的协定，我们在上诉机构关于欧共体－香蕉案(三)(第21.5条—厄瓜多尔(二))/欧共体－香蕉案(三)(第21.5条—美国)等案件的报告中找到了有益的指引。 |
| The Appellate Body observed that the
International Law Commission (the “ILC”) describes a subsequent agreement
within the meaning of Article 31 (3) (a) of the Vienna Convention as “a
further authentic element of interpretation to be taken into account together
with the context”. | 上诉机构指出，国际法委员会把《维也纳公约》第三十一条第三款(a)项所述嗣后协定称为“应与上下文一并考虑的另一项作准的解释要素”。 |
| According to the Appellate Body, “by
referring to ‘authentic interpretation’, the ILC reads Article 31 (3) (a) as
referring to agreements bearing specifically upon the interpretation of the
treaty. | 上诉机构指出，“国际法委员会通过使用‘作准的解释’，把第三十一条第三款(a)项解读为是指对条约解释产生具体影响的各项协定。 |
| ” Thus, we will consider whether
paragraph 5.2 bears specifically upon the interpretation of Article 2.12 of
the TBT Agreement. | ”因此，我们将考虑第5.2段是否对《技术性贸易壁垒协定》第2.12条的解释产生具体影响。 |
| 268. For the foregoing reasons, we uphold
the Panel’s finding … that paragraph 5.2 of the Doha Ministerial Decision
constitutes a subsequent agreement between the parties, within the meaning of
Article 31 (3) (a) of the Vienna Convention, on the interpretation of the
term “reasonable interval” in Article 2.12 of the TBT Agreement. | 268. 综上所述，我们支持小组的结论…即：《多哈部长级会议决定》第5.2段构成《维也纳公约》第三十一条第三款(a)项含义范畴内的缔约方之间就《技术性贸易壁垒协定》第2.12条中“合理间隔”一语的解释达成的嗣后协定。 |
| (20) The International Court of Justice,
although it did not expressly mention article 31, paragraph 3 (a), when
relying on the General Assembly Declaration on Friendly Relations between
States for the interpretation of Article 2, paragraph 4, of the Charter,
emphasized the “attitude of the Parties and the attitude of States towards
certain General Assembly resolutions” and their consent thereto. | (20) 国际法院在依据大会关于各国友好关系的宣言来解释《宪章》第二条第四项时虽然没有明确提及第三十一条第三款(a)项，但强调了“各方及各国对大会某些决议的态度”及对这些决议表示的同意。 |
| In this context, a number of writers have
concluded that subsequent agreements within the meaning of article 31,
paragraph 3 (a), may, under certain circumstances, arise from or be expressed
in acts of plenary organs of international organizations, such as the General
Assembly of the United Nations. | 在这方面，若干著述者得出的结论是，在某些情形下，第三十一条第三款(a)项所指的嗣后协定可出自或体现在国际组织全体机关的行动中，
例如联合国大会的行动。 |
| Indeed, as the WTO Appellate Body has
indicated with reference to the Commission, the characterization of a
collective decision as an “authentic element of interpretation” under article
31, paragraph 3 (a), is only justified if the parties of the constituent
instrument of an international organization acted as such and not, as they
usually do, institutionally as members of the respective plenary organ. | 事实上，正如世贸组织上诉机构提到国际法委员会时所表示的， 只有在国际组织组成文书缔约方以缔约方身份行事，而非像通常那样在体制上仅以各全体机关成员的身份行事时，才可根据第三十一条第三款(a)项将集体决定定为“作准的解释要素”。 |
| (21) Paragraph 2 refers to the practice
of an international organization, rather than to the practice of an organ of
an international organization. | (21) 第2段指的是国际组织的实践，而非国际组织某一机关的实践。 |
| Although the practice of an international
organization usually arises from the conduct of an organ, it can also be
generated by the conduct of two or more organs. | 虽然国际组织的实践常常出自某一机关的实践，但也可能产生于两个或多个机关的行为。 |
| (22) Subsequent agreements and subsequent
practice of the parties, which may “arise from, or be expressed in” the
practice of an international organization, may sometimes be very closely
interrelated with the practice of the organization as such. | (22) 缔约方的嗣后协定和嗣后实践可能“出自或体现在”国际组织的实践中，有时可能与该组织的实践本身存在密切联系。 |
| For example, in its Namibia Advisory
Opinion, the International Court of Justice arrived at its interpretation of
the term “concurring votes” in Article 27, paragraph 3, of the Charter of the
United Nations as including abstentions primarily by relying on the practice
of the competent organ of the organization in combination with the fact that
this practice was then “generally accepted” by Member States: | 例如，国际法院在纳米比亚案的咨询意见中，对《联合国宪章》第二十七条第三项中“同意票”用语所作的解释包括弃权，这主要是依据了该组织有关机关的实践，同时考虑到该实践当时被会员国“普遍接受”： |
| the proceedings of the Security Council
extending over a long period supply abundant evidence that presidential
rulings and the positions taken by members of the Council, in particular its
permanent members, have consistently and uniformly interpreted the practice of
voluntary abstention by a permanent member as not constituting a bar to the
adoption of resolutions. | 安全理事会长期以来的会议纪要提供了大量证据，表明主席的裁决以及安理会理事国、特别是常任理事国采取的立场，已经连贯一致地将一个常任理事国采取的自愿弃权做法解释为并不阻碍决议的通过。 |
| This procedure followed by the Security
Council, which has continued unchanged after the amendment in 1965 of Article
27 of the Charter, has been generally accepted by Members of the United
Nations and evidences a general practice of that Organization. | 安全理事会采用的这一程序自1965年修订《宪章》第二十七条以来一直未变，已为联合国会员国普遍接受，并表明了该组织的一种一般实践。 |
| In this case, the Court emphasized both
the practice of one or more organs of the international organization and the
“general acceptance” of that practice by the Member States and characterized
the combination of those two elements as being a “general practice of the
organization”. | 国际法院在该案中既强调了国际组织一个或多个机关的实践，又强调了会员国对该实践的“普遍接受”，并将这两种因素的结合称为“该组织的一般实践”。 |
| The Court followed this approach in its
Advisory Opinion regarding Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall
in the Occupied Palestinian Territory by stating that: | 该法院在关于在巴勒斯坦被占领土修建隔离墙的法律后果的咨询意见中沿用了这种做法，指出： |
| The Court considers that the accepted
practice of the General Assembly, as it has evolved, is consistent with
Article 12, paragraph 1, of the Charter. | 本院认为大会已获接受的有所演变的实践符合《宪章》第十二条第一项。 |
| By speaking of the “accepted practice of
the General Assembly”, the Court implicitly affirmed that acquiescence on
behalf of the Member States regarding the practice followed by the
organization in the application of the treaty permits to establish the agreement
regarding the interpretation of the relevant treaty provision. | 通过使用“大会已获接受的实践”这一说法，
该法院即默示确认，如果就该组织在适用条约时遵循的实践代表会员国作出默许。 就是允许就相关条约规定的解释确立协定。 |
| Similarly, the Court of Justice of the
European Union, in its judgment Europäische Schule München, held that “[t]he
case-law of the Complaints Board of the European Schools … should be
considered a subsequent practice in the application of the Convention
defining the Statute of the European Schools within the meaning of article
31(3)(b) of the Vienna Convention”. | 同样，欧洲联盟法院在慕尼黑欧洲学校案的判决中认定，“欧洲学校申诉委员会的判例…应被视为《维也纳公约》第三十一条第三款(b)项意义内的适用《欧洲学校条例确定公约》的嗣后实践”。 |
| Since that practice “has never been the
subject of challenge by the parties to that convention”, “[t]he absence of
any challenge by those parties must be regarded as reflecting their tacit
agreement to such a practice.” | 鉴于这项实践“从未受到该公约缔约国的质疑”，“必须将这些缔约国未提出任何质疑的情况视为反映了他们对此种实践的默许。 |
| (23) On this basis it is reasonable to
consider “that relevant practice will usually be that of those on whom the
obligation of performance falls”, in the sense that “where [S]tates by treaty
entrust the performance of activities to an organization, how those
activities are conducted can constitute practice under the treaty; | ” (23) 因此，可以合理地认为，“相关实践通常是指承担执行义务的那一方的实践”， 这意味着“如果国家通过条约委托一个组织执行某些活动，则执行这些活动的方式可以构成有关条约之下的实践； |
| but whether such practice establishes
agreement of the parties regarding the treaty’s interpretation may require
account to be taken of further factors”. | 但这种实践是否确立了缔约方关于条约解释的协定，可能还需要考虑其他因素”。 |
| (24) Accordingly, in the Whaling in the
Antarctic case, the International Court of Justice referred to (non-binding)
recommendations of the International Whaling Commission (which is both the
name of an international organization established by the Convention for the
Regulation of Whaling and that of an organ thereof), and clarified that when
such recommendations are “adopted by consensus or by a unanimous vote, they
may be relevant for the interpretation of the Convention or its Schedule”. | (24) 同样，在南极捕鲸案中，国际法院提到国际捕鲸委员会(既是《国际捕鲸管制公约》设立的国际组织名称 ，也是该组织一个机关的名称)的(无约束力)建议，澄清说这些建议如果经“协商一致或一致表决获得通过，则可能对《公约》或其《附录》的解释相关”。 |
| At the same time, however, the Court also
expressed a cautionary note according to which: | 然而，该法院同时也作出了谨慎的表示： |
| Australia and New Zealand overstate the
legal significance of the recommendatory resolutions and Guidelines on which
they rely. | “澳大利亚和新西兰夸大了其所依据的建议性决议和导则的法律意义。 |
| First, many IWC resolutions were adopted
without the support of all States parties to the Convention and, in
particular, without the concurrence of Japan. | 首先，国际捕鲸委员会的许多决议都是在未得到《公约》全体缔约国支持，尤其是未得到日本同意的情况下通过的。 |
| Thus, such instruments cannot be regarded
as subsequent agreement to an interpretation of Article VIII, nor as
subsequent practice establishing an agreement of the parties regarding the
interpretation of the treaty within the meaning of subparagraphs (a) and (b),
respectively, of paragraph (3) of Article 31 of the Vienna Convention on the
Law of Treaties. | 因此，这些文书既不能被视为第八条解释方面的嗣后协定，也不构成《维也纳条约法公约》第三十一条第三款(a)项和(b)项分别所指的确定缔约方关于条约解释的协定的嗣后实践。 |
| (25) This cautionary note does not,
however, exclude that a resolution that has been adopted without the support
of all member States may give rise to, or express, the position or the
practice of individual member States in the application of the treaty under
article 32. | (25) 然而，这一谨慎表示并不排除未获全体成员国支持而通过的决议可能会产生或表明个别成员国在适用条约方面的第三十二条所指的立场或实践。 |
| The practice of an international
organization itself | 国际组织自身的实践 |
| (26) Paragraph 3 of draft conclusion 12
refers to another form of practice that may be relevant for the
interpretation of a constituent instrument of an international organization:
the practice of the organization as such, meaning its “own practice”, as
distinguished from the practice of the member States. | (26) 结论草案12第3段提及可能对解释国际组织的组成文书相关的另一个实践形式：组织自身形成的实践，即“自己的实践”，有别于成员国的实践。 |
| The International Court of Justice has in
some cases taken the practice of an international organization into account
in its interpretation of constituent instruments without referring to the
practice or acceptance of the member States of the organization. | 在一些案例中，国际法院在解释国际组织的组成文书时就考虑了这些组织自身的实践，而没有提及该组织成员国的实践或成员国是否接受。 |
| In particular, the Court has stated that
the international organization’s “own practice … may deserve special
attention” in the process of interpretation. | 该法院特别指出国际组织“自己的实践”…在解释过程中“可能值得特别关注”。 |
| (27) For example, in its Advisory Opinion
on the Competence of the General Assembly regarding Admission to the United
Nations, the Court stated that: | (27) 例如，国际法院在关于联合国大会接纳国家加入联合国的权限的咨询意见中指出： |
| The organs to which Article 4 entrusts
the judgment of the Organization in matters of admission have consistently interpreted
the text in the sense that the General Assembly can decide to admit only on
the basis of the recommendation of the Security Council. | 根据第四条的委托负责决定本组织准入事项的各机关对该案文的一贯解释是，大会只有根据安全理事会的建议才能决定接纳。 |
| (28) Similarly, in Applicability of
Article VI, Section 22, of the Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of
the United Nations, the Court referred to acts of organs of the organization
when it referred to the practice of “the United Nations”: | (28) 同样，在《联合国特权和豁免公约》第六条第二十二节的适用案中，该法院在提到“联合国”的实践时，是在指该组织各机关的行动： |
| In practice, according to the information
supplied by the Secretary-General, the United Nations has had occasion to
entrust missions — increasingly varied in nature — to persons not having the
status of United Nations officials. … | 实践中，根据秘书长提供的信息，联合国确曾在特定情况下把性质越来越多样化的特派任务托付给不具备联合国官员身份的个人。 |
| In all these cases, the practice of the
United Nations shows that the persons so appointed, and in particular the
members of these committees and commissions, have been regarded as experts on
missions within the meaning of Section 22. | …在所有这些情况下，联合国的实践表明，得到此类任命的人，尤其是此类委员会的成员，都被视为第二十二节所指的特派专家。 |
| (29) In its Inter-Governmental Maritime
Consultative Organization Advisory Opinion, the International Court of
Justice referred to “the practice followed by the Organization itself in
carrying out the Convention” as a means of interpretation. | (29) 在关于政府间海事协商组织的咨询意见中，国际法院提到了“该组织本身在履行《公约》过程中遵循的实践”可以作为解释资料。 |
| (30) In its Advisory Opinion on Certain
Expenses of the United Nations, the Court explained why the practice of an
international organization, as such, including that of a particular organ,
may be relevant for the interpretation of its constituent instrument: | (30) 在关于联合国的某些开支的咨询意见中，该法院解释了为什么国际组织本身的实践，包括其下属机关的实践，对国际组织组成文书的解释可能相关： |
| Proposals made during the drafting of the
Charter to place the ultimate authority to interpret the Charter in the
International Court of Justice were not accepted; | 在起草《宪章》过程中提出的将《宪章》的最终解释权授予国际法院的建议未被接受； |
| the opinion which the Court is in course
of rendering is an advisory opinion. | 因此本院现在提供的意见是咨询意见。 |
| As anticipated in 1945, therefore, each
organ must, in the first place at least, determine its own jurisdiction. | 于是，正如1945年预见的那样，各机关必须至少先行确定自身的管辖范围。 |
| If the Security Council, for example,
adopts a resolution purportedly for the maintenance of international peace
and security and if, in accordance with a mandate or authorization in such
resolution, the Secretary-General incurs financial obligations, these amounts
must be presumed to constitute “expenses of the Organization”. | 例如，如果安全理事会通过一项旨在维护国际和平与安全的决议，而根据该决议规定的任务或授权，秘书长发生了债务，则必须推定这些债务构成“本组织的开支”。 |
| (31) Many international organizations
share the same characteristic of not providing for an “ultimate authority to
interpret” their constituent instrument. | (31) 许多国际组织都有相同的特点，即没有规定由一个“最终权威来解释”其组成文书。 |
| The conclusion that the Court has drawn
from this circumstance is therefore now generally accepted as being
applicable to international organizations. | 因此，该法院由这一情况得出的结论目前一般被认为适用于国际组织。 |
| The identification of a presumption, in
the Certain Expenses Advisory Opinion, which arises from the practice of an
international organization, including by one or more of its organs, is a way
of recognizing such practice as a means of interpretation. | 在某些开支案的咨询意见中，发现一种出于国际组织(包括其一个或多个机关)的某项实践的前提假定，是确认这种实践可作为解释资料的方法之一。 |
| (32) Whereas it is generally agreed that
the interpretation of the constituent instruments of international
organizations by the practice of their organs constitutes a relevant means of
interpretation, certain differences exist among writers about how to explain
the relevance, for the purpose of interpretation, of an international
organization’s “own practice” in terms of the Vienna rules of interpretation. | (32) 虽然目前公认，按照国际组织机关的实践来解释该组织的组成文书是相关的解释资料，
但各著述者对于如何按《维也纳公约》的解释规则来说明国际组织“自己的实践”对解释的相关性，有一些不同的理解。 |
| The International Court of Justice,
referring to acts of international organizations that were adopted against
the opposition of certain member States, has recognized that such acts may
constitute practice for the purposes of interpretation, but not a (more
weighty) practice that establishes agreement between the parties regarding
the interpretation and that would fall under article 31, paragraph 3. | 国际法院援引了国际组织在一些成员国反对的情况下通过的一些行动， 确认了这类行动可能构成以解释为目的的实践，但不构成各方就解释达成协定且属于第三十一条第三款规定范围内(更有份量的)实践。 |
| It is largely agreed, however, that the
practice of an international organization, as such, will often also be
relevant and thus may contribute to the interpretation of that instrument
when applying articles 31 and 32. | 但基本公认的是，国际组织自身形成的实践往往也具有相关性，从而可能帮助在适用第三十一和第三十二条时解释有关文书。 |
| (33) The Commission has confirmed, in its
commentary to draft conclusion 2, that given instances of subsequent practice
and subsequent agreements contribute, or not, to the determination of the
ordinary meaning of the terms in their context and in the light of the object
and purpose of the treaty. | (33) 委员会在结论草案2评注中确认，具体的嗣后实践和嗣后协定有的能够，有的则不能够帮助确定有关用语在其上下文中以及根据条约的目标和宗旨而具有的通常含义。 |
| These considerations also apply, mutatis
mutandis, to the practice of an international organization itself. | 这些考虑也比照适用于国际组织自身的实践。 |
| (34) The possible relevance of an
international organization’s “own practice” can thus be derived from articles
31 and 32 of the 1969 Vienna Convention. | (34) 因此，国际组织“自己的实践”可能具有的相关性可以出自1969年《维也纳公约》第三十一和第三十二条。 |
| Those rules permit, in particular, taking
into account practice of an organization itself, including by one or more of
its organs, as being relevant for the determination of the function of the
international organization concerned. | 具体而言，根据这些规定，在确定有关国际组织的职能时，可以考虑到该组织自身(包括其一个或多个机关)的实践。 |
| It is clear, however, that the practice
of an international organization is not a subsequent practice of the parties
themselves under article 31, paragraph 3 (b). | 但明确的是，国际组织的实践并不是第三十一条第三款(b)项所指的缔约方自身的嗣后实践。 |
| (35) Thus, article 5 of the 1969 Vienna
Convention allows for the application of the rules of interpretation in
articles 31 and 32 in a way that takes account of the practice of an
international organization, in the interpretation of its constituent
instrument, including taking into account its institutional character. | (35) 因此，根据1969年《维也纳公约》第五条，在适用第三十一和第三十二条的解释规则来解释国际组织的组成文书时，可以考虑到该组织的实践，包括考虑到其组成特性。 |
| Such elements may thereby also contribute
to identifying whether, and if so how, the meaning of a provision of a
constituent instrument of an international organization is capable of
evolving over time. | 此类要素可能还有助于查明：国际组织组成文书的某一项规定的含义能否与时俱进？ 若能，又是如何与时俱进的？ |
| (36) Paragraph 3, like paragraph 2,
refers to the practice of an international organization as a whole, rather
than to the practice of an organ of an international organization. | (36) 像第2段一样，第3段针对国际组织作为一个整体的实践，而非国际组织内某一机关的实践。 |
| The practice of an international
organization in question can arise from the conduct of an organ, but can also
be generated by the conduct of two or more organs. | 国际组织的有关实践可出自一个机关的行为，但也可能产生于两个或多个机关的行为。 |
| It is understood that the practice of an
international organization can only be relevant for the interpretation of its
constituent instrument if that organization has acted within its competence,
since it is a general requirement that international organizations do not act
ultra vires. | 由于目前普遍要求国际组织不得越权，有一种理解是国际组织只有在其职权范围内行事的情况下，其实践才对组成文书的解释具有相关性。 |
| (37) Paragraph 3 of draft conclusion 12
builds on draft conclusion 5, which addresses “subsequent practice” by parties
to a treaty in the application of that treaty, as defined in draft conclusion
4. | (37) 结论草案12第3段基于结论草案5, 其中论及结论草案4中定义的条约缔约方适用条约时的“嗣后实践”。 |
| Draft conclusion 5 does not imply that
the practice of an international organization, as such, in the application of
its constituent instrument cannot be relevant practice under articles 31 and
32. | 结论草案5并不意味着国际组织自身适用其组成文书的实践不能属于第三十一和第三十二条所指的有关实践。 |
| Paragraph 4 — without prejudice to the
“rules of the organization” | 第4段――不妨碍“组织规则” |
| (38) Paragraph 4 of draft conclusion 12
reflects article 5 of the Vienna Convention and its formulation borrows from
that article. | (38) 结论草案12第4段体现了《维也纳公约》第五条并且其行文也借鉴了该条。 |
| The paragraph applies to the situations
covered under paragraphs 1 to 3 and ensures that the rules referred to
therein are applicable, interpreted and applied “without prejudice to any
relevant rules of the organization”. | 该段适用于第1至3段所述情形并确保第1至3段所指的规则可以适用而且进行解释和适用时“不妨碍该组织的任何有关规则”。 |
| The term “rules of the organization” is
to be understood in the same way as in article 2, paragraph 1 (j), of the
1986 Vienna Convention, as well as in article 2 (b) of the articles on
responsibility of international organizations of 2011. | “该组织的规则”一词应按照1986年《维也纳公约》第二条第一款(j)项和2011年关于国际组织的责任条款第二条(b)项作相同理解。 |
| (39) The Commission has stated in its
general commentary to the 2011 draft articles on the responsibility of
international organizations: | (39) 委员会在其2011年关于国际组织的责任的条款草案总评注中表示： |
| There are very significant differences
among international organizations with regard to their powers and functions,
size of membership, relations between the organization and its members,
procedures for deliberation, structure and facilities, as well as the primary
rules including treaty obligations by which they are bound. | “各国际组织在下列方面相互之间有很大的不同：在其权力和职能、成员国数目、该组织与成员的关系、辩论程序、结构和设施以及国际组织受其约束的主要规则包括条约义务等。 |
| (40) Paragraph 4 implies, inter alia,
that more specific “relevant rules” of interpretation that may be contained
in a constituent instrument of an international organization may take
precedence over the general rules of interpretation under the 1969 Vienna
Convention. | ” (40) 第4段暗示，除其他外，国际组织组成文书中可能包含的更具体的“有关解释规则”可能优先于1969年《维也纳公约》所规定的一般解释规则。 |
| If, for example, the constituent
instrument contains a clause, such as article IX, paragraph 2, of the Marrakesh
Agreement establishing the World Trade Organization, according to which the
interpretation of the instrument is subject to a special procedure, it is to
be presumed that the parties, by reaching an agreement after the conclusion
of the treaty, do not wish to circumvent such a procedure by reaching a
subsequent agreement under article 31, paragraph 3 (a). | 例如，如果组成文书包含一项类似于《马拉喀什建立世界贸易组织协定》第9条第2款的条款，规定解释有关文书需要遵循特别程序，则应推定，缔约方在订立条约之后达成协定，即表示无意通过达成第三十一条第三款(a)项所指的嗣后协定来规避上述程序。 |
| The special procedure under the treaty
and a subsequent agreement under article 31, paragraph 3 (a), may, however,
be compatible if they “serve different functions and have different legal
effects”. | 但是，如果条约规定的特别程序和第三十一条第三款(a)项所指的嗣后协定“具备不同的职能和具有不同的法律效力”，则可能相互兼容。 |
| Few constituent instruments contain
explicit procedural or substantive rules regarding their interpretation. | 组成文书很少含有关于其解释的明确的程序性或实质性规则。 |
| Specific “relevant rules” of
interpretation need not be formulated explicitly in the constituent
instrument; | 具体的“有关解释规则”无需在组成文书中写明； |
| they may also be implied therein, or
derived from the “established practice of the organization”. | 这些规则也可以隐含在组成文书中，或出自“该组织已确立的实践”。 |
| The “established practice of the
organisation” is a term that is narrower in scope than the term “practice of
the organization”. | “该组织已确立的实践”从含义范围上说比“该组织的实践”要窄。 |
| (41) The Commission has noted in its
commentary to article 2 (j) of the 1986 Vienna Convention that the
significance of a particular practice of an organization may depend on the
specific rules and characteristics of the respective organization, as
expressed in its constituent instrument: | (41) 委员会在对1986年《关于国家和国际组织间或国际组织相互间条约法的维也纳公约》第二条(j)项的评注中指出，一个组织的某项实践的重要性可能取决于相关组织组成文书所表述的该组织的特定规则和特征： |
| It is true that most international
organizations have, after a number of years, a body of practice which forms
an integral part of their rules. | “确实，大多数国际组织若干年后会形成一套实践，作为其规则的组成部分。 |
| However, the reference in question is in
no way intended to suggest that practice has the same standing in all
organizations; | 但是，这里提到实践，绝不表示实践在所有组织中享有相同的地位； |
| on the contrary, each organization has
its own characteristics in that respect. | 相反，每个组织在这方面各有其特点。 ” |
| (42) In this sense, the “established
practice of the organization” may also be a means for the interpretation of
constituent instruments of international organizations. | (42) 在此意义上，“该组织已确立的实践”也可能成为国际组织组成文书的一种解释资料。 |
| Article 2, paragraph 1 (j), of the 1986
Vienna Convention and article 2 (b) of the draft articles on the
responsibility of international organizations recognize the “established
practice of the organization” as a “rule of the organization”. | 1986年《维也纳公约》第二条第一款(j)项和关于国际组织的责任的条款草案 第二条(b)项，都将“该组织已确立的实践”认定为“该组织的规则”。 |
| Such practice may produce different legal
effects in different organizations and it is not always clear whether those
effects should be explained primarily in terms of traditional sources of
international law (treaty or custom) or of institutional law. | 这种做法在不同组织中可能产生不同的法律效力。 应该主要按国际法传统渊源(条约或习惯)还是按机构法的渊源来解释这种效力，这一点并不始终明确。 |
| As far as the constituent treaties of the
European Union (European Union primary law) are concerned, for example, the
Court of Justice of the European Union has never discussed or applied
subsequent practice of the parties under article 31, paragraph 3, of the 1969
Vienna Convention, explaining on one occasion that even an agreement among
all member States to defer implementation of a particular provision of the
respective treaty was not sufficient to override its object and purpose. | 例如，就欧洲联盟的组成条约(欧盟基本法)而言，欧洲联盟法院从未讨论或适用过1969年《维也纳公约》第三十一条第三款所指的缔约方的嗣后实践，该法院曾在某场合解释称，即便是所有成员国达成的推迟执行特定条约某项条款的协定，也不足以凌驾于其目标和宗旨之上。 |
| But even if it is difficult to make
general statements, the “established practice of the organization” usually
encompasses a specific form of practice, one which has generally been
accepted by the members of the organization, albeit sometimes tacitly. | 但是，即便很难作出概括性描述，“该组织已确立的实践”通常会包含一种具体形式的实践， 这种实践已得到该组织成员的普遍接受，尽管有时是默示接受。 |
| Conclusion 13 Pronouncements of expert
treaty bodies | 结论13 专家条约机构的声明 |
| 1. For the purposes of these draft
conclusions, an expert treaty body is a body consisting of experts serving in
their personal capacity, which is established under a treaty and is not an organ
of an international organization. | 1. 为本结论草案的目的，专家条约机构指根据一项条约设立且不是国际组织机关的、由以个人身份任职的专家组成的机构。 |
| 2. The relevance of a pronouncement of an
expert treaty body for the interpretation of a treaty is subject to the
applicable rules of the treaty. | 2. 专家条约机构的声明对条约解释的相关性取决于该条约的适用规则。 |
| 3. A pronouncement of an expert treaty
body may give rise to, or refer to, a subsequent agreement or subsequent
practice by parties under article 31, paragraph 3, or subsequent practice
under article 32. | 3. 专家条约机构的声明可产生或提及第三十一条第三款所指的缔约方嗣后协定或嗣后实践，或第三十二条所指的嗣后实践。 |
| Silence by a party shall not be presumed
to constitute subsequent practice under article 31, paragraph 3 (b),
accepting an interpretation of a treaty as expressed in a pronouncement of an
expert treaty body. | 缔约方的沉默不应推定为构成第三十一条第三款(b)项所指的、接受专家条约机构声明中表达的对相关条约的解释的嗣后实践。 |
| 4. This draft conclusion is without
prejudice to the contribution that pronouncements of expert treaty bodies
make to the interpretation of the treaties under their mandates. | 4. 本条结论草案不妨碍专家条约机构的声明有助于其任务范围内条约的解释。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| Paragraph 1 — definition of the term
“expert treaty body” | 第1段――“专家条约机构”这一用语的定义 |
| (1) Some treaties establish bodies,
consisting of experts who serve in their personal capacity, which have the
task of monitoring or contributing in other ways to the application of those
treaties. | (1) 一些条约会设立机构，由以个人身份任职的专家组成，负责监测这些条约的适用情况，或以其它方式为适用这些条约作出贡献。 |
| Examples of such expert treaty bodies are
the committees established under various human rights treaties at the
universal level, for example, the Committee on the Elimination of Racial
Discrimination, the Human Rights Committee, the Committee on the Elimination
of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, Committee on the Rights of
Persons with Disabilities, the Committee on the Rights of the Child and the
Committee against Torture. | 在各项全球性人权条约之下设立的委员会就是这种专家条约机构的例子， 例如消除种族歧视委员会、人权事务委员会、消除对妇女歧视委员会、残疾人权利委员会、儿童权利委员会
和禁止酷刑委员会。 |
| Other expert treaty bodies include the
Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf under the United Nations
Convention on the Law of the Sea, the Compliance Committee under the
Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-making
and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters (Aarhus Convention), and the
International Narcotics Control Board under the Single Convention on Narcotic
Drugs. | 其他专家条约机构包括：《联合国海洋法公约》之下的大陆架界限委员会、《在环境问题上获得信息、公众参与决策和诉诸法律的公约》(《奥胡斯公约》)遵约委员会 和《麻醉品单一公约》之下的国际麻醉品管制局。 |
| (2) Paragraph 1 defines the term “expert
treaty body” only “for the purposes of these draft conclusions”. | (2) 第1段对“专家条约机构”这一用语的定义仅仅是“为本结论草案的目的”。 |
| (3) The term “serving in their personal
capacity” means that the members of an expert treaty body are not subject to
instructions when they act in that capacity. | (3) “以个人身份任职”这一用语意味着专家条约机构的成员履职行事时不受指示约束。 |
| Draft conclusion 13 is not concerned with
bodies that consist of State representatives. | 结论草案13不涉及由国家代表组成的机构。 |
| The output of a body that is composed of
State representatives, and that is not an organ of an international
organization, is a form of practice by those States that thereby act
collectively within its framework. | 由国家代表组成、不属于国际组织机关的机构的产出，是借此在其框架内集体行动的这些国家的一种形式的实践。 |
| (4) Draft conclusion 13 also does not
apply to bodies that are organs of an international organization. | (4) 结论草案13也不适用于属于国际组织机关的机构。 |
| The exclusion of bodies that are organs
of international organizations from the scope of draft conclusion 13 has been
made for reasons of consistency, since the present draft conclusions are not
focused on the relevance of the practice of international organizations for
the application of the rules of interpretation of the Vienna Convention
except as far as the interpretation of their constituent instruments is
concerned (see draft conclusion 12, in particular paragraph 3). | 之所以将属于国际组织机关的机构排除在结论草案13的范围之外，是出于一致性方面的考虑，因为本结论草案的重点并不是国际组织实践对适用《维也纳公约》解释规则的相关性，而是涉及对其组成文书的解释问题(见结论草案12, 特别是第3段)。 |
| This does not exclude that the substance
of the present draft conclusion may apply, mutatis mutandis, to
pronouncements of independent expert bodies that are organs of international
organizations. | 这不排除本结论草案的实质性内容可能比照适用于属于国际组织机关的独立专家机构的声明。 |
| (5) The expression “established under a
treaty” means that the establishment or a competence of a particular expert
body is provided under a treaty. | (5) “根据一项条约设立”这一表述指某具体的条约专家机构的设立或职权是由一项条约规定的。 |
| In most cases it is clear whether these
conditions are satisfied, but there may also be borderline cases. | 大多数情况下，可以清楚地看出这些条件是否满足，但也可能存在模棱两可的情况。 |
| The Committee on Economic, Social and
Cultural Rights, for example, is a body that was established by a resolution
of an international organization, but which was later given the competence to
“consider” certain “communications” by the Optional Protocol to the
International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. | 例如，经济、社会及文化委员会是由国际组织的一项决议设立的机构， 但后来被《经济、社会及文化权利国际公约任择议定书》赋予了“审议”某些“来文”的职权。 |
| Such a body is an expert treaty body
within the meaning of draft conclusion 13 as a treaty provides for the
exercise of certain competences by the Committee. | 这一机构属于结论草案13意义内的专家条约机构，因为该委员会行使某些职权是依照一项条约的规定。 |
| Another borderline case is the Compliance
Committee under the Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention
on Climate Change, the establishment of which — by a decision of the
Conference of the Parties — is implicitly envisaged in article 18 of the
Protocol. | 《联合国气候变化框架公约京都议定书》遵约委员会是另一个模棱两可的例子。 该机构是由缔约方会议的一项决定设立的，但《议定书》第十八条也暗示了要设立该机构。 |
| Paragraph 2 — primacy of the rules of the
treaty | 第2段――条约规则的优先地位 |
| (6) Treaties use various terms for
designating the forms of action of expert treaty bodies, for example,
“views”, “recommendations”, “comments”, “measures” and “consequences”. | (6) 各项条约采用不同的用语来指称专家条约机构不同形式的行动，例如，“意见”、“建议”、“评论”、“措施”和“后果”。 |
| Draft conclusion 13 employs, for the
purpose of the present draft conclusion, the general term “pronouncements”. | 为本结论草案的目的，结论草案13采用了“声明”这一一般性用语。 |
| This term covers all relevant factual and
normative assessments by expert treaty bodies. | 该用语涵盖了专家条约机构所有有关的事实性和规范性评估。 |
| Other general terms that are in use for
certain bodies include “jurisprudence” and “output”. | 对某些机构使用的其他一般性用语包括“判例” 和“产出”。 |
| Such terms are either too narrow, suggesting
a particular legal significance of the output of such a body, or too broad,
covering any act of an expert treaty body, to be appropriate for the purpose
of this draft conclusion, which applies to a broad range of expert treaty
bodies. | 这些用语有的太狭隘，给这类机构的产出赋予了特定的法律意义，有的则太宽泛，涵盖了专家条约机构的任何行为，均不适合本结论草案的目的，本结论草案旨在适用于范围广泛的各类专家条约机构。 |
| (7) Paragraph 2 serves to emphasize that
any possible legal effect of a pronouncement by an expert treaty body
depends, first and foremost, on the specific rules of the applicable treaty. | (7) 第2段强调，凡是专家条约机构的声明，其所具有的任何可能的法律效果均首先取决于适用的条约本身的具体规则。 |
| Such possible legal effects may therefore
be very different. | 因此，这种可能的法律效果可能非常不同。 |
| They must be determined by way of
applying the rules on treaty interpretation set forth in the Vienna
Convention. | 必须通过适用《维也纳公约》所载的条约解释规则来确定法律效果。 |
| The ordinary meaning of the term by which
a treaty designates a particular form of pronouncement, or its context,
usually gives a clear indication that such pronouncements are not legally
binding. | 一项条约用来指称某具体形式的声明的用语的一般意义或其上下文通常会明确显示，这种声明并不具有法律约束力。 |
| This is true, for example, for the terms
“views” (article 5, paragraph 4, of the Optional Protocol to the International
Covenant on Civil and Political Rights), “suggestions and recommendations”
(article 14, paragraph 8, of the International Convention on the Elimination
of All Forms of Racial Discrimination) and “recommendations” (article 76,
paragraph 8, of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea). | 例如，“意见”(《公民权利和政治权利国际公约任择议定书》第五条第4款)、“意见与建议”(《消除一切形式种族歧视国际公约》第十四条第八款)和“建议”(《联合国海洋法公约》第七十六条第8款)等用语就属于这种情况。 |
| The words “the treaty” may refer to the
treaty establishing the expert treaty body, as well as to the treaty being
interpreted. | “条约”一词可以指设立专家条约机构的条约，也可以指正被解释的条约。 |
| These can be two different instruments,
and expert treaty bodies may thus sometimes be authorized to interpret
treaties other than those under which they are established. | 这二者可以是两项不同的文书，因此，专家条约机构有时会被授权解释设立该机构的条约之外的其他条约。 |
| (8) It is not necessary, for present
purposes, to describe the competences of different expert treaty bodies in
detail. | (8) 为当前目的，没有必要对不同专家条约机构的职权作出详细描述。 |
| Pronouncements of expert treaty bodies
under human rights treaties, for example, are usually either adopted in
reaction to State reports (for example, “concluding observations”), or in
response to individual communications (for example, “views”), or regarding
the implementation or interpretation of the respective treaties generally (for
example, “general comments”). | 例如，各人权条约之下的专家条约机构的声明往往是针对国家报告(例如“结论性意见”)或针对个人来文(例如，“意见”)通过的，或者涉及各自条约的一般性执行或解释(例如，“一般性意见”)。 |
| Whereas such pronouncements are governed
by different specific provisions of the treaty that primarily determine their
legal effect, they often, explicitly or implicitly, interpret the treaty in a
way that raises some general issues that draft conclusion 13 seeks to
address. | 条约的不同具体条款对这种声明予以规范，主要是确定其法律效果，但这种声明也往往会明确或含蓄地对条约进行解释，这种解释方式会产生一些一般性问题，结论草案13就是试图解决这些问题。 |
| Paragraph 3, first sentence — “may give
rise to, or refer to, a subsequent agreement or a subsequent practice” | 第3段第一句――“可产生或提及…嗣后协定或嗣后实践” |
| (9) A pronouncement of an expert treaty
body cannot as such constitute a subsequent agreement or subsequent practice
under article 31, paragraph 3 (a) or (b), since this provision requires an
agreement of the parties or subsequent practice of the parties that establishes
their agreement regarding the interpretation of the treaty. | (9) 专家条约机构的声明本身不能构成第三十一条第三款(b)项所指的嗣后协定或嗣后实践，因为该条款规定，必须有缔约方协定或缔约方嗣后实践确定各缔约方对条约解释的协定。 |
| This has been confirmed, for example, by
the reaction of States parties to a draft proposition of the Human Rights
Committee according to which its own “general body of jurisprudence”, or the
acquiescence by States to that jurisprudence, would constitute subsequent
practice under article 31, paragraph 3 (b). | 人权事务委员会一项提议草稿引发的缔约国反响就是一例佐证。 人权事务委员会在提议中表示，其自身的“全体判例”或各国对这些判例的默认，可构成第三十一条第三款(b)项所指的嗣后实践。 |
| The proposition of the Human Rights
Committee was: | 人权事务委员会提议的主张是： |
| In relation to the general body of
jurisprudence generated by the Committee, it may be considered that it
constitutes “subsequent practice in the application of the treaty which
establishes the agreement of the parties regarding its interpretation” within
the sense of article 31(3)(b) of the Vienna Convention on the Law of
Treaties, or, alternatively, the acquiescence of States parties in those determinations
constitutes such practice. | 就本委员会产生的全体判例而言，可认为这些判例构成在《维也纳条约法公约》第三十一条第三款(b)项意义内的“嗣后在条约适用方面确定各缔约方对条约解释之协定之实践”，或可认为缔约国对这些裁定的默认亦构成这种实践。 |
| (10) After this proposition was
criticized by some States, the Committee did not pursue its proposal and
adopted its general comment No. 33 without a reference to article 31,
paragraph 3 (b). | (10) 这一主张受到一些国家批评后， 委员会便没有继续推动这一提议，通过的第33号一般性意见没有提及第三十一条第三款(b)项。 |
| This confirms that pronouncements of
expert treaty bodies cannot as such constitute subsequent practice under article
31, paragraph 3 (b). | 这件事证明，专家条约机构的声明本身并不能构成第三十一条第三款(b)项所指的嗣后实践。 |
| (11) Pronouncements of expert treaty
bodies may, however, give rise to, or refer to, a subsequent agreement or a
subsequent practice by the parties which establish their agreement regarding
the interpretation of the treaty under article 31, paragraph 3 (a) or (b). | (11) 但是，专家条约机构的声明可能会产生或提及第三十一条第三款(a)项或(b)项所指的缔约方的嗣后协定或者确立缔约方关于条约解释的协定的嗣后实践。 |
| This possibility has been recognized by
States, by the Commission and also by the International Law Association and
by a significant number of authors. | 各国、委员会、国际法协会 许多著述者 都承认了这种可能性。 |
| There is indeed no reason why a
subsequent agreement between the parties or subsequent practice that
establishes the agreement of the parties themselves regarding the
interpretation of a treaty could not arise from, or be referred to by, a
pronouncement of an expert treaty body. | 的确，缔约方之间的嗣后协定或确立缔约方本身就条约解释达成的协定的嗣后实践没有理由不能出自专家条约机构的声明或被这种声明所提及。 |
| (12) Whereas a pronouncement of an expert
treaty body can, in principle, give rise to a subsequent agreement or a
subsequent practice by the parties themselves under article 31, paragraph 3
(a) and (b), this result is not easily achieved in practice. | (12) 虽然一个专家条约机构的声明在原则上可产生第三十一条第三款(a)项和(b)项所指的缔约方本身的嗣后协定或嗣后实践，但在实践中，取得这种结果并非易事。 |
| Most treaties that establish expert
treaty bodies at the universal level have many parties. | 大多数在国际层面设立专家条约机构的条约都具有很多缔约方。 |
| It will often be difficult to establish
that all parties have accepted, explicitly or implicitly, that a particular
pronouncement of an expert treaty body expresses a particular interpretation
of the treaty. | 往往很难证明所有缔约方都已明确或含蓄地接受以下情况，即某专家条约机构的某项具体声明表达了对条约的特定解释。 |
| (13) One possible way of identifying an
agreement of the parties regarding the interpretation of a treaty that is
reflected in a pronouncement of an expert treaty body is to look at
resolutions of organs of international organizations as well as of
Conferences of States Parties. | (13) 要想识别出专家条约机构声明所反映的缔约方关于条约解释的协定，审视国际组织以及缔约国大会的决议不失为一种方法。 |
| General Assembly resolutions may, in
particular, explicitly or implicitly refer to pronouncements of expert treaty
bodies. | 联合国大会的决议尤其可能明确或含蓄地提到专家条约机构的声明。 |
| This is true, for example, for two
resolutions of the General Assembly on the “protection of human rights and
fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism”, which expressly refer to
general comment No. 29 (2001) of the Human Rights Committee on derogations
from provisions of the Covenant during a state of emergency. | 例如，大会关于“反恐活动中保护人权和基本自由”的两项决议 就是这种情况，其中明确提到了人权事务委员会关于紧急状态期间克减执行《公约》条款的第29号一般性意见(2001年)。 |
| Both resolutions reaffirm the obligation
of States to respect certain rights under the International Covenant on Civil
and Political Rights as non-derogable in any circumstances and underline the
“exceptional and temporary nature” of derogations by way of using the terms
used in general comment No. 29 when interpreting and thereby specifying the
obligation of States under article 4 of the Covenant. | 两项决议都重申各国有义务在任何情况下尊重《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》下的某些权利，不得克减，并使用第29号一般性意见解释和具体说明缔约国在《公约》第四条之下的义务时所用的措辞，强调了克减的“非常性和临时性”。 |
| These resolutions were adopted without a
vote by the General Assembly, and hence would reflect a subsequent agreement
under article 31, paragraph 3 (a) or (b), if the consensus constituted the
acceptance by all the parties of the interpretation that is contained in the
pronouncement. | 这两项决议未经表决获大会通过； 如果协商一致意见体现出所有缔约国接受上述声明所载的解释，则这些决议反映了第三十一条第三款(a)项或(b)项所指的嗣后协定。 |
| (14) The pronouncement of the Committee on
Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, in its general comment No. 15 (2002),
according to which articles 11 and 12 of that Covenant imply a human right to
water, offers another illustration of the way in which an agreement of the
parties may come about. | (14) 经济、社会及文化权利委员会在第15号一般性意见(2002年)中的声明是另一个反映了缔约方协定的可能产生方式的例子，这项声明指出，《公约》第十一条和第十二条暗示了水权是一项人权。 |
| After a debate over a number of years,
the General Assembly on 17 December 2015 adopted a resolution, without a
vote, that defines the human right to safe drinking water by using the
language that the Committee employed in its general comment No. 15 in order
to interpret the right. | 大会经过数年辩论之后，于2015年12月17日未经表决通过了一项决议，使用经济、社会及文化权利委员会第15号一般性意见中为解释获得安全饮用水的人权而采用的措辞，界定了这项权利。 |
| That resolution may refer to an agreement
under article 31, paragraph 3 (a) or (b), depending on whether the consensus
constituted the acceptance by all parties of the interpretation that is
contained in the pronouncement. | 这项决议可能提到了一项第三十一条第三款(a)项或(b)项所指的协定，取决于协商一致意见是否构成所有缔约方对声明所载解释的接受。 |
| (15) Other General Assembly resolutions
explicitly refer to pronouncements of expert treaty bodies or call upon
States to take into account the recommendations, observations and general
comments of relevant treaty bodies to the topic on the implementation of the
related treaties. | (15) 大会也有其他决议明文提及专家条约机构的声明 或呼吁各国考虑有关条约机构对相关条约执行情况的建议、评论和一般性意见。 |
| Resolutions of Conferences of States
Parties may do the same, as with regard to recommendations of the Compliance
Committee under the Aarhus Convention. | 缔约国大会的决议也可以发挥同样的作用，例如提及或呼吁各国考虑《奥胡斯公约》遵约委员会的建议。 |
| Such resolutions should, however, be
approached with caution before reaching any conclusion as to whether they
imply a subsequent agreement or subsequent practice of the parties under
article 31, paragraph 3 (a) or (b). | 不过，在断定这类决议是否意味着第三十一条第三款(a)项或(b)项所指的嗣后协定或嗣后实践之前，必须谨慎对待这类决议。 |
| (16) Even if a pronouncement of an expert
treaty body does not give rise to, or refer to, a subsequent agreement or a
subsequent practice that establishes the agreement of all parties to a
treaty, it may be relevant for the identification of other subsequent
practice under article 32 that does not establish such agreement. | (16) 即使专家条约机构的声明不产生或不提及嗣后协定或确立条约所有缔约方协定的嗣后实践，也可以有助于识别第三十二条所指的、不确立上述协定的其他嗣后实践。 |
| There are, for example, resolutions of
the Human Rights Council that refer to general comments of the Human Rights
Committee or of the Committee on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights. | 例如，人权理事会的一些决议提到了人权事务委员会或经济、社会及文化权利委员会的一般性意见，就属于此类。 |
| Even if the membership of the Council is
limited, such resolutions may be relevant for the interpretation of a treaty
as expressing other subsequent practice under article 32. | 即使人权理事会成员数目有限，这些决议也可以通过表明第三十二条所指的其他嗣后实践，有助于条约的解释。 |
| Another example concerns the International
Narcotics Control Board. | 另一个例子涉及国际麻醉品管制局。 |
| A number of States have engaged in
subsequent practice under article 32 by disagreeing with the proposals of the
Board regarding the establishment of so-called safe injection rooms and other
harm reduction measures, criticizing the Board for following too rigid an
interpretation of the drug conventions and as acting beyond its mandate. | 一些国家反对麻管局关于设立所谓安全注射室以及其他减少危害措施的建议， 批评麻管局过于死板地解释禁毒公约并越权行事， 从而参与了第三十二条所指的嗣后实践。 |
| (17) Paragraph 3, first sentence, circumscribes
the ways in which a pronouncement by an expert treaty body may be relevant
for subsequent agreements and subsequent practice of parties to a treaty by
using the terms “may give rise to” and “or refer to”. | (17) 第3段第一句通过“可产生”和“或提及”这两个用语限定了专家条约机构的声明可与条约缔约方的嗣后协定和嗣后实践发生关联的方式。 |
| The expression “may give rise to”
addresses situations in which a pronouncement comes first and the practice
and the possible agreement of the parties occur thereafter. | “可产生”这一表述涉及先有声明、而后出现缔约方的实践和可能的协定的情况。 |
| In this situation, the pronouncement may
serve as a catalyst for the subsequent practice of States parties. | 在这种情况下，声明可以作为缔约国嗣后实践的催化剂。 |
| The term “refer to”, on the other hand,
covers situations in which the subsequent practice and a possible agreement
of the parties have developed before the pronouncement, and where the
pronouncement is only an indication of such an agreement or practice. | “提及”一词则涵盖先有缔约方的嗣后实践和可能的协定、后有声明的情况，在这种情况下，声明只是指向这一协定或实践。 |
| Paragraph 3 uses the term “refer to”
rather than “reflect” in order to make clear that any subsequent practice or
agreement of the parties is not comprised in the pronouncement itself. | 第3段使用了“提及”而不是“反映”，是为了明确表示缔约方的任何嗣后实践或协定并非包含于声明本身之中。 |
| This term does not, however, require that
the pronouncement refer to such subsequent practice or agreement explicitly. | 不过，“提及”一词并不要求声明明文提到这类嗣后实践或协定。 |
| Paragraph 3, second sentence —
presumption against silence as constituting acceptance | 第3段第二句――沉默不应推定为接受 |
| (18) An agreement of all the parties to a
treaty, or even only a large part of them, regarding the interpretation that
is articulated in a pronouncement is often only conceivable if the absence of
objections could be taken as agreement by State parties that have remained
silent. | (18) 通常，如果有的缔约国保持沉默，则只将无异议视为同意，才能认为条约的所有缔约方(甚至只是大部分缔约方)对声明中表述的解释达成协定。 |
| Draft conclusion 10 , paragraph 2,
provides, as a general rule: “Silence on the part of one or more parties can
constitute acceptance of the subsequent practice when the circumstances call
for some reaction. | 结论草案10第2段作为一般规则规定：“在有关情况要求作出某种反应时，一个或多个缔约方的沉默可构成对嗣后实践的接受。 |
| ” Paragraph 3, second sentence, does not
purport to recognize an exception to this general rule, but rather intends to
specify and apply this rule to the typical cases of pronouncements of expert
bodies. | ” 第3段第二句不是要确认上述一般规则的例外情况，而是旨在作出说明并将这一规则适用于专家机构声明的典型情况。 |
| (19) This means, in particular, that it
cannot usually be expected that States parties take a position with respect
to every pronouncement by an expert treaty body, be it addressed to another
State or to all States generally. | (19) 具体而言，这意味着，通常不能指望缔约国就专家条约机构的每一项声明表明立场，不论是针对另一个国家的声明，还是针对所有国家的普遍声明。 |
| On the other hand, State parties may have
an obligation, under a duty to cooperate under certain treaties, to take into
account and to react to a pronouncement of an expert treaty body that is
specifically addressed to them, or to individual communications regarding
their own conduct. | 另一方面，根据某些条约规定的合作责任，缔约国可能有义务对专家条约机构专门针对它们的声明 或关于本国行为的单独来文加以考虑并作出反应。 |
| Paragraph 4 — without prejudice to other
contribution | 第4段――不妨碍其他贡献 |
| (20) Draft conclusion 13 only addresses
the possible contribution of expert treaty bodies to the interpretation of a
treaty by giving rise to, or referring to, subsequent agreements or
subsequent practice of the parties themselves under articles 31, paragraph 3
(a) and (b), and 32. | (20) 结论草案13只述及专家条约机构通过产生或提及第三十一条第三款(a)项和(b)项及第三十二条所指的缔约方本身的嗣后协定或嗣后实践而可能有助于条约解释的问题。 |
| Paragraph 4 provides that this draft
conclusion is without prejudice to the contribution that such bodies make to
the interpretation of treaties under their mandates. | 第4段规定，本结论草案不妨碍专家条约机构的声明有助于其任务范围内条约的解释。 |
| (21) The International Court of Justice
has confirmed, in particular in the Ahmadou Sadio Diallo case, that
pronouncements of the Human Rights Committee are relevant for the purpose of
the interpreting of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights,
irrespective of whether such pronouncements give rise to, or refer to, an
agreement of the parties under article 31, paragraph 3: | (21) 国际法院已经确认，尤其是在艾哈迈杜·萨迪奥·迪亚洛案中确认，人权事务委员会的声明对于解释《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》具有相关性，无论此类声明是否产生或提及第三十一条第三款所指的缔约方协定： |
| Since it was created, the Human Rights
Committee has built up a considerable body of interpretative case law, in
particular through its findings in response to the individual communications
which may be submitted to it in respect of States parties to the first
Optional Protocol, and in the form of “General Comments”. | 人权事务委员会自设立以来，已积累了大量解释性判例，特别是就其收到的针对《第一任择议定书》缔约国的个人来文做出的调查结果，以及以“一般性意见”形式形成的判例。 |
| Although the Court is in no way obliged,
in the exercise of its judicial functions, to model its own interpretation of
the Covenant on that of the Committee, it believes that it should ascribe
great weight to the interpretation adopted by this independent body that was
established specifically to supervise the application of that treaty. | 虽然本院在行使司法职能时绝无义务参照该委员会对该《公约》的解释来解释《公约》，但本院认为，对于专门为监督该条约的适用情况而设立的这一独立机构所做的解释，应予以高度重视。 |
| The point here is to achieve the
necessary clarity and the essential consistency of international law, as well
as legal security, to which both the individuals with guaranteed rights and
the States obliged to comply with treaty obligations are entitled. | 关键在于，要实现国际法必要的明确性和至关重要的一致性，还要实现其法律上的安全性，权利受到保障的个人和有义务遵守条约义务的国家都应享有这种法律上的安全性。 |
| (22) Regional human rights courts and
bodies have also used pronouncements of expert treaty bodies as an aid for
the interpretation of treaties that they are called on to apply. | (22) 区域人权法院和机构也曾使用专家条约机构的声明，帮助解释其被要求适用的条约。 |
| Various domestic courts have considered
that pronouncements of expert treaty bodies under human rights treaties,
while not being legally binding on them as such, nevertheless “deserve to be
given considerable weight in determining the meaning of a relevant right and
the determination of a violation”. | 不同国内法院认为，人权条约所设专家条约机构的声明，虽然本身不具法律约束力， 但“在确定相关权利的含义和确定违约行为时，值得给予相当的重视”。 |
| (23) The Commission itself, in its
commentary to the Guide to Practice on Reservations to Treaties, addressed
the question of the relevance of pronouncements of expert treaty bodies under
human rights treaties with respect to reservations. | (23) 国际法委员会本身在《对条约的保留实践指南》 的评注中论述了人权条约所设专家条约机构的声明对于保留所具有的相关性问题。 |
| (24) Court decisions have not always
fully explained the relevance of pronouncements by expert treaty bodies for
the purpose of the interpretation of a treaty. | (24) 各个法院的判决并没有总是充分解释专家条约机构的声明对于条约解释的相关性。 |
| In the Advisory Opinion on Legal
Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian
Territory, the International Court of Justice referred to the “constant
practice of the Human Rights Committee” in order to support its own
interpretation of a provision of the International Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights. | 国际法院在关于在巴勒斯坦被占领土修建隔离墙的法律后果的咨询意见中，提到了“人权事务委员会的一贯做法”，以支持该法院本身对《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》一项条款的解释。 |
| This suggests that pronouncements of
expert treaty bodies are to be used in the discretionary way in which article
32 describes supplementary means of interpretation and that they also
“contribute to the determination of the ordinary meaning of the terms in
their context and in light of the object and purpose of the treaty”. | 这说明，可按照第三十二条描述补充解释资料时的规定，酌情使用专家条约机构的声明， 并且这些声明还“有助于确定用语在其上下文并参照条约目的和宗旨的一般含义”。 |
| Whereas pronouncements of expert treaty
bodies are not practice of a party to the treaty, they are nevertheless
conduct mandated by the treaty the purpose of which is to contribute to the
treaty’s proper application. | 专家条约机构的声明虽然并不是条约缔约方的实践，但也是条约所授权的行为，其目的在于促进对条约的正确适用。 |
| Assuming that “different activities of
[treaty] bodies cut across the different sources”, reference has also been
made to Article 38, paragraph 1 (d), of the Statute of the International
Court of Justice, thereby characterizing the legal significance of their
pronouncements as “subsidiary means for the determination of the rules of
law”. | 假定“[条约]机构的不同活动会涉及不同的渊源”，还提到了《国际法院规约》第三十八条第一款(卯)项，从而认定这些机构的声明具有法律意义，是“确定法律规则的补充资料”。 |
| (25) The expression “under their
mandates” reaffirms paragraph 2 of draft conclusion 13, which specifies that
the relevance of a pronouncement of an expert treaty body for the
interpretation of a treaty is subject to the applicable treaty rules under
which such bodies operate. | (25) “其任务范围内”这一表述重申了结论草案 13第2段的规定，即专家条约机构的声明对条约解释的相关性取决于该机构开展工作所要遵循的适用的条约规则。 |
| Paragraph 4 applies in principle to all
treaty expert bodies. | 第4段原则上适用于所有条约专家机构。 |
| However, the extent to which
pronouncements of expert treaty bodies contribute to the interpretation of
the treaties “under their mandates” will vary, as indicated by the use of the
plural. | 但是，此处英文本使用了复数，以表明各专家条约机构的声明有助于“其任务范围内”条约解释的程度会有所差异。 |
| Chapter V Identification of customary
international law | 第五章 习惯国际法的识别 |
| A. Introduction | A. 导言 |
| 53. At its sixty-fourth session (2012),
the Commission decided to include the topic “Formation and evidence of
customary international law” in its programme of work and appointed Sir
Michael Wood as Special Rapporteur. | 53. 委员会第六十四届会议(2012年)决定将“习惯国际法的形成与证据”专题列入工作方案，并任命迈克尔·伍德爵士为特别报告员。 |
| In paragraph 7 of its resolution 67/92 of
14 December 2012, the General Assembly noted with appreciation the decision
of the Commission to include the topic in its programme of work. | 大会在2012年12月14日第67/92号决议第7段中赞赏地注意到委员会决定将此专题列入其工作方案。 |
| At its sixty-fifth session (2013), the
Commission decided to change the title of the topic to “Identification of
customary international law”. | 委员会第六十五届会议(2013年)决定将专题标题改为“习惯国际法的识别”。 |
| 54. From its sixty-fifth (2013) to
sixty-eighth sessions (2016), the Commission considered four reports by the
Special Rapporteur, as well as two memorandums by the Secretariat. | 54. 自第六十五届会议(2013年)至第六十八届会议(2016年)，委员会审议了特别报告员的四份报告，以及秘书处的两份备忘录。 |
| 55. At its sixty-eighth session (2016),
the Commission adopted, on first reading, a set of 16 draft conclusions on
identification of customary international law, together with commentaries
thereto. | 55. 委员会第六十八届会议(2016年)一读通过了一套共16条关于习惯国际法的识别的结论草案及其评注。 |
| It decided, in accordance with articles
16 to 21 of its statute, to transmit the draft conclusions, through the
Secretary-General, to Governments for comments and observations. | 委员会根据其《章程》第16至第21条决定，通过秘书长将这些结论草案转交各国政府，征求其评论和意见。 |
| B. Consideration of the topic at the
present session | B. 本届会议审议此专题的情况 |
| 56. At the present session, the Commission
had before it the fifth report of the Special Rapporteur (A/CN.4/717), an
addendum to that report providing an updated bibliography on the topic
(A/CN.4/717/Add.1), as well as comments and observations received from
Governments (A/CN.4/716). | 56. 委员会本届会议收到了特别报告员的第五次报告(A/CN.4/717)及载有此专题最新文献书目的报告增编(A/CN.4/717/Add.1)，以及各国政府提交的评论和意见(A/CN.4/716)。 |
| The Commission also had before it a
memorandum by the Secretariat on ways and means for making the evidence of
customary international law more readily available (A/CN.4/710). | 委员会还收到了秘书处关于使习惯国际法的证据更易考察的方法和手段的备忘录(A/CN.4/710)。 |
| 57. The Commission considered the fifth
report of the Special Rapporteur at its 3396th to 3402nd meetings from 7 to
14 May 2018. | 57. 委员会在2018年5月7日至14日举行的第3396至第3402次会议上审议了特别报告员的第五次报告。 |
| At its 3402nd meeting, held on 14 May
2018, the Commission referred draft conclusions 1 to 16 to the Drafting
Committee, with the instruction that the Drafting Committee commence the
second reading of the draft conclusions on the basis of the proposals of the
Special Rapporteur, taking into account the comments and observations of
Governments and the debate in plenary on the Special Rapporteur’s report. | 在2018年5月14日举行的第3402次会议上，委员会将结论草案1至16转交起草委员会，并指示起草委员会根据特别报告员的建议开始对结论草案进行二读，同时考虑各国政府的评论和意见，以及全体会议上对特别报告员的报告进行的辩论情况。 |
| 58. The Commission considered the report
of the Drafting Committee (A/CN.4/L.908) at its 3412th meeting, held on 25
May 2018, and adopted the entire set of draft conclusions on identification
of customary international law on second reading (sect. E.1 below). | 58. 委员会在2018年5月25日举行的第3412次会议上审议了起草委员会的报告(A/CN.4/L.908)，二读通过了关于习惯国际法的识别的整套结论草案(见下文E.1节)。 |
| 59. At its 3402nd meeting, on 14 May
2018, the Commission decided to establish a working group, to be chaired by
Mr. Marcelo Vázquez-Bermúdez, to assist the Special Rapporteur in the
preparation of the draft commentaries to the draft conclusions to be adopted
by the Commission. | 59. 委员会在2018年5月14日举行的第3402次会议上，决定设立一个工作组，由马塞洛·巴斯克斯－贝穆德斯先生任主席，协助特别报告员编写将供委员会通过的结论草案的评注草案。 |
| The working group held two meetings
between 3 and 4 May 2018. | 2018年5月3日至4日，工作组举行了两次会议。 |
| 60. At its 3441st to 3443rd meetings,
from 2 to 3 August 2018, the Commission adopted the commentaries to the
aforementioned draft conclusions (sect. E.2 below). | 60. 委员会在2018年8月2日至3日举行的第3441至第3443次会议上，通过了上述结论草案的评注(下文E.2节)。 |
| 61. At its 3441st meeting, held on 2
August 2018, the Commission requested that the memorandum by the Secretariat
on ways and means for making the evidence of customary international law more
readily available (A/CN.4/710) be reissued to reflect the text of the draft
conclusions and commentaries adopted on second reading. | 61. 委员会在2018年8月2日举行的第3441次会议上，请求重新印发秘书处关于使习惯国际法的证据更易考察的方法和手段的备忘录(A/CN.4/710)，以反映二读通过的结论草案案文和评注。 |
| 62. In accordance with its statute, the
Commission submits the draft conclusions to the General Assembly, together
with the recommendation set out below. | 62. 委员会根据其《章程》向大会提交该结论草案以及下述建议。 |
| C. Recommendation of the Commission | C. 委员会的建议 |
| 63. At its 3444th meeting, on 6 August
2018, the Commission decided, in accordance with article 23 of its statute,
to recommend that the General Assembly: | 63. 在2018年8月6日举行的第3444次会议上，委员会根据其《章程》第23条决定建议大会： |
| (a) take note in a resolution of the
draft conclusions on identification of customary international law, annex the
draft conclusions to the resolution, and ensure their widest dissemination; | (a) 通过一项决议注意到关于习惯国际法的识别的结论草案并将结论草案附在该决议之后，并确保尽可能予以广泛传播； |
| (b) commend the draft conclusions,
together with the commentaries thereto, to the attention of States and all
who may be called upon to identify rules of customary international law; | (b) 请各国和可能需要识别习惯国际法规则的所有各方注意该结论草案及其评注； |
| (c) note the bibliography prepared by the
Special Rapporteur (A/CN.4/717/Add.1); | (c) 注意特别报告员编写的参考书目(A/CN.4/717/Add.1)； |
| (d) note the Secretariat memorandum on
ways and means for making the evidence of customary international law more
readily available (A/CN.4/710), which surveys the present state of evidence
of customary international law and makes suggestions for its improvement; | (d) 注意秘书处关于使习惯国际法的证据更易考察的方法和手段的备忘录(A/CN.4/710)，备忘录概括介绍了习惯国际法证据问题的现状，并就如何改善提出了建议； |
| (e) follow up the suggestions in the
Secretariat memorandum by: | (e) 通过以下方式后续落实秘书处备忘录中的建议： |
| (i) calling to the attention of States
and international organizations the desirability of publishing digests and
surveys of their practice relating to international law, of continuing to
make the legislative, executive and judicial practice of States widely
available, and of making every effort to support existing publications and
libraries specialized in international law; | (一) 提请各国和国际组织注意有必要发表其国际法相关实践的摘要和概述，继续使各国的立法、行政和司法实践便于考察，并尽一切努力支持现有的国际法专业出版物和文献； |
| (ii) requesting the Secretariat to
continue to develop and enhance United Nations publications providing
evidence of customary international law, including their timely publication; | (二) 请秘书处继续开发和加强提供习惯国际法证据的联合国出版物，包括及时出版这些出版物； |
| and (iii) also requesting the Secretariat
to make available the information contained in the annexes to the memorandum
on ways and means for making the evidence of customary international law more
readily available (A/CN.4/710) through an online database to be updated
periodically based on information received from States, international
organizations and other entities concerned. | (三) 又请秘书处通过在线数据库提供关于使习惯国际法的证据更易考察的方法和手段的备忘录(A/CN.4/710)附录所载资料，并依据各国、国际组织和其他有关实体提供的信息定期更新数据库。 |
| D. Tribute to the Special Rapporteur | D. 向特别报告员表示感谢 |
| 64. At its 3444th meeting, held on 6
August 2018, the Commission, after adopting the draft conclusions on
identification of customary international law, adopted the following
resolution by acclamation: | 64. 委员会在2018年8月6日举行的第3444次会议上，在通过关于习惯国际法的识别的结论草案后，以鼓掌方式通过了以下决议： |
| “The International Law Commission, | “国际法委员会， |
| “Having adopted the draft conclusions on
identification of customary international law, | 通过了关于习惯国际法的识别的结论草案， |
| “Expresses to the Special Rapporteur, Sir
Michael Wood, its deep appreciation and warm congratulations for the
outstanding contribution he has made to the preparation of the draft
conclusions through his tireless efforts and devoted work, and for the
results achieved in the elaboration of the draft conclusions on
identification of customary international law.” | 向特别报告员迈克尔·伍德爵士表示深挚感谢和热烈祝贺，感谢并祝贺他以不懈的努力和专注的工作为起草结论草案做出杰出贡献，并使关于习惯国际法的识别的结论草案的拟订工作取得成果。 |
| E. Text of the draft conclusions on
identification of customary international law | ” E. 关于习惯国际法的识别的结论草案案文 |
| 1. Text of the draft conclusions | 1. 结论草案案文 |
| 65. The text of the draft conclusions
adopted by the Commission, on second reading, at its seventieth session is
reproduced below. | 65. 委员会第七十届会议二读通过的结论草案案文载录如下。 |
| Identification of customary international
law | 习惯国际法的识别 |
| Part One Introduction | 第一部分 导言 |
| Conclusion 1 Scope | 结论1 范围 |
| The present draft conclusions concern the
way in which the existence and content of rules of customary international
law are to be determined. | 本结论草案涉及如何确定习惯国际法规则的存在及内容。 |
| Part Two Basic approach | 第二部分 基本方法 |
| Conclusion 2 Two constituent elements | 结论2 两个构成要素 |
| To determine the existence and content of
a rule of customary international law, it is necessary to ascertain whether
there is a general practice that is accepted as law (opinio juris). | 要确定一项习惯国际法规则的存在及内容，必须查明是否存在一项被接受为法律(法律确信)的一般惯例。 |
| Conclusion 3 Assessment of evidence for
the two constituent elements | 结论3 两个构成要素的证据评估 |
| 1. In assessing evidence for the purpose
of ascertaining whether there is a general practice and whether that practice
is accepted as law (opinio juris), regard must be had to the overall context,
the nature of the rule, and the particular circumstances in which the
evidence in question is to be found. | 1. 为查明是否存在一项一般惯例及该惯例是否被接受为法律(法律确信)而对证据进行评估时，必须考虑到总体背景、规则的性质以及有关证据被发现时的具体情况。 |
| 2. Each of the two constituent elements
is to be separately ascertained. | 2. 两个构成要素中的每一要素必须单独予以确定。 |
| This requires an assessment of evidence
for each element. | 这就要求评估每一要素的证据。 |
| Part Three A general practice | 第三部分 一般惯例 |
| Conclusion 4 Requirement of practice | 结论4 惯例的要求 |
| 1. The requirement of a general practice,
as a constituent element of customary international law, refers primarily to
the practice of States that contributes to the formation, or expression, of
rules of customary international law. | 1. 作为习惯国际法的一个要素所要求存在的一般惯例，主要指的是有助于习惯国际法规则的形成或表述的国家实践。 |
| 2. In certain cases, the practice of
international organizations also contributes to the formation, or expression,
of rules of customary international law. | 2. 在某些情况下，国际组织的实践也有助于习惯国际法规则的形成或表述。 |
| 3. Conduct of other actors is not
practice that contributes to the formation, or expression, of rules of
customary international law, but may be relevant when assessing the practice
referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2. | 3. 其他行为体的行为不是有助于习惯国际法规则形成或表述的实践，但在评估第1和第2段所指的实践时可能相关。 |
| Conclusion 5 Conduct of the State as
State practice | 结论5 作为国家实践的国家行为 |
| State practice consists of conduct of the
State, whether in the exercise of its executive, legislative, judicial or
other functions. | 国家实践由国家行为构成，不论该行为是行使行政、立法、司法职能，还是行使其他职能。 |
| Conclusion 6 Forms of practice | 结论6 实践的形式 |
| 1. Practice may take a wide range of
forms. It includes both physical and verbal acts. | 1. 实践可有多种形式，既包括实际行为，也包括言语行为。 |
| It may, under certain circumstances,
include inaction. | 在某些情况下，还可包括不作为。 |
| 2. Forms of State practice include, but
are not limited to: diplomatic acts and correspondence; | 2. 国家实践的形式包括但不限于：外交行为和信函； |
| conduct in connection with resolutions
adopted by an international organization or at an intergovernmental
conference; | 与国际组织通过的或在政府间会议上通过的决议有关的行为； |
| conduct in connection with treaties; | 与条约有关的行为； |
| executive conduct, including operational
conduct “on the ground”; | 行政部门行为，包括“实地”作业行为； |
| legislative and administrative acts; | 立法和行政行为； |
| and decisions of national courts. | 各国法院的判决。 |
| 3. There is no predetermined hierarchy
among the various forms of practice. | 3. 各种不同形式的实践之间没有预先确定的等级。 |
| Conclusion 7 Assessing a State’s practice | 结论7 评估国家实践 |
| 1. Account is to be taken of all
available practice of a particular State, which is to be assessed as a whole. | 1. 应考虑特定国家的所有已知的实践，作为一个整体进行评估。 |
| 2. Where the practice of a particular
State varies, the weight to be given to that practice may, depending on the
circumstances, be reduced. | 2. 如果特定国家的实践不一致，可根据情形减少赋予该实践的权重。 |
| Conclusion 8 The practice must be general | 结论8 惯例必须具备一般性 |
| 1. The relevant practice must be general,
meaning that it must be sufficiently widespread and representative, as well
as consistent. | 1. 有关惯例必须具备一般性，即必须足够广泛和有代表性，还必须是一贯的。 |
| 2. Provided that the practice is general,
no particular duration is required. | 2. 只要惯例具备一般性，就不要求特定存续时间。 |
| Part Four Accepted as law (opinio juris) | 第四部分 被接受为法律(法律确信) |
| Conclusion 9 Requirement of acceptance as
law (opinio juris) | 结论9 被接受为法律(法律确信)的要求 |
| 1. The requirement, as a constituent
element of customary international law, that the general practice be accepted
as law (opinio juris) means that the practice in question must be undertaken
with a sense of legal right or obligation. | 1. 关于一般惯例须被接受为法律(法律确信)的要求作为习惯国际法的构成要素，意味着有关惯例的采用必须带有一种法律权利或义务感。 |
| 2. A general practice that is accepted as
law (opinio juris) is to be distinguished from mere usage or habit. | 2. 被接受为法律(法律确信)的一般惯例不同于单纯的常例或习惯。 |
| Conclusion 10 Forms of evidence of
acceptance as law (opinio juris) | 结论10 被接受为法律(法律确信)的证据形式 |
| 1. Evidence of acceptance as law (opinio
juris) may take a wide range of forms. | 1. 被接受为法律(法律确信)的证据可有多种形式。 |
| 2. Forms of evidence of acceptance as law
(opinio juris) include, but are not limited to: public statements made on
behalf of States; | 2. 被接受为法律(法律确信)的证据形式包括但不限于：以国家名义发表的公开声明； |
| official publications; | 官方出版物； |
| government legal opinions; | 政府的法律意见； |
| diplomatic correspondence; | 外交信函； |
| decisions of national courts; | 各国法院的判决； |
| treaty provisions; | 条约规定； |
| and conduct in connection with
resolutions adopted by an international organization or at an
intergovernmental conference. | 与国际组织通过的或在政府间会议上通过的决议有关的行为。 |
| 3. Failure to react over time to a practice
may serve as evidence of acceptance as law (opinio juris), provided that
States were in a position to react and the circumstances called for some
reaction. | 3. 在有关国家有能力做出反应并且有关情况也要求做出某种反应的情况下，对一种惯例经过一定时间而没有做出反应，可用作已接受其为法律(法律确信)的证据。 |
| Part Five Significance of certain
materials for the identification of customary international law | 第五部分 某些材料对于识别习惯国际法的意义 |
| Conclusion 11 Treaties | 结论11 条约 |
| 1. A rule set forth in a treaty may
reflect a rule of customary international law if it is established that the
treaty rule: | 1. 条约所载的规则可反映习惯国际法规则，条件是能够确定该条约规则： |
| (a) codified a rule of customary
international law existing at the time when the treaty was concluded; | (a) 将条约缔结时已经存在的一项习惯国际法规则编纂成法； |
| (b) has led to the crystallization of a
rule of customary international law that had started to emerge prior to the
conclusion of the treaty; | (b) 将条约缔结之前开始形成的一项习惯国际法规则具体化； |
| or (c) has given rise to a general
practice that is accepted as law (opinio juris), thus generating a new rule
of customary international law. | (c) 形成了一项被接受为法律(法律确信)的一般惯例，从而产生了一项新的习惯国际法规则。 |
| 2. The fact that a rule is set forth in a
number of treaties may, but does not necessarily, indicate that the treaty
rule reflects a rule of customary international law. | 2. 一项规则在多项条约中出现，可能但并不一定表明该条约规则反映了一项习惯国际法规则。 |
| Conclusion 12 Resolutions of
international organizations and intergovernmental conferences | 结论12 国际组织和政府间会议的决议 |
| 1. A resolution adopted by an
international organization or at an intergovernmental conference cannot, of
itself, create a rule of customary international law. | 1. 国际组织通过的或在政府间会议上通过的决议本身并不能创立一项习惯国际法规则。 |
| 2. A resolution adopted by an
international organization or at an intergovernmental conference may provide
evidence for determining the existence and content of a rule of customary
international law, or contribute to its development. | 2. 国际组织通过的或在政府间会议上通过的决议可为确定一项习惯国际法规则的存在及内容提供证据，或促进其发展。 |
| 3. A provision in a resolution adopted by
an international organization or at an intergovernmental conference may
reflect a rule of customary international law if it is established that the
provision corresponds to a general practice that is accepted as law (opinio
juris). | 3. 如果能够确定国际组织通过的或在政府间会议上通过的决议中的某项规定与一项被接受为法律(法律确信)的一般惯例相一致，则该规定可反映一项习惯国际法规则。 |
| Conclusion 13 Decisions of courts and
tribunals | 结论13 法院和法庭的判决 |
| 1. Decisions of international courts and
tribunals, in particular of the International Court of Justice, concerning
the existence and content of rules of customary international law are a subsidiary
means for the determination of such rules. | 1. 国际性法院和法庭特别是国际法院涉及习惯国际法规则的存在及内容的判决，是确定此类规则的辅助手段。 |
| 2. Regard may be had, as appropriate, to
decisions of national courts concerning the existence and content of rules of
customary international law, as a subsidiary means for the determination of
such rules. | 2. 也可酌情考虑将各国法院涉及习惯国际法规则的存在及内容的判决用作确定此类规则的辅助手段。 |
| Conclusion 14 Teachings | 结论14 学说 |
| Teachings of the most highly qualified
publicists of the various nations may serve as a subsidiary means for the
determination of rules of customary international law. | 各国最权威的国际法专家的学说可用作确定习惯国际法规则的辅助手段。 |
| Part Six Persistent objector | 第六部分 一贯反对者 |
| Conclusion 15 Persistent objector | 结论15 一贯反对者 |
| 1. Where a State has objected to a rule
of customary international law while that rule was in the process of
formation, the rule is not opposable to the State concerned for so long as it
maintains its objection. | 1. 如果一国在一项习惯国际法规则的形成过程中对其表示反对，只要该国坚持其反对立场，则该规则不可施用于该国。 |
| 2. The objection must be clearly
expressed, made known to other States, and maintained persistently. | 2. 反对立场必须明确表示，向其他国家公开，并始终坚持。 |
| 3. The present draft conclusion is
without prejudice to any question concerning peremptory norms of general
international law (jus cogens). | 3. 本结论草案不影响任何关于一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的问题。 |
| Part Seven Particular customary
international law | 第七部分 特别习惯国际法 |
| Conclusion 16 Particular customary
international law | 结论16 特别习惯国际法 |
| 1. A rule of particular customary
international law, whether regional, local or other, is a rule of customary
international law that applies only among a limited number of States. | 1. 特别习惯国际法规则，不论是区域的、地方的还是其他层面的，都是仅在数量有限的国家之间适用的习惯国际法规则。 |
| 2. To determine the existence and content
of a rule of particular customary international law, it is necessary to
ascertain whether there is a general practice among the States concerned that
is accepted by them as law (opinio juris) among themselves. | 2. 要确定一项特别习惯国际法规则的存在及内容，必须查明有关国家之间是否存在一项被接受为法律(法律确信)的一般惯例。 |
| 2. Text of the draft conclusions and
commentaries thereto | 2. 结论草案案文及其评注 |
| 66. The text of the draft conclusions,
together with commentaries thereto, adopted by the Commission on second
reading, is reproduced below. | 66. 委员会二读通过的结论草案案文及其评注载录如下。 |
| Identification of customary international
law | 习惯国际法的识别 |
| General commentary | 总评注 |
| (1) As is always the case with the
Commission’s output, the draft conclusions are to be read together with the
commentaries. | (1) 与委员会以往工作成果一样，本结论草案应结合评注来解读。 |
| (2) The present draft conclusions concern
the methodology for identifying rules of customary international law. | (2) 本结论草案论及习惯国际法规则的识别方法。 |
| They seek to offer practical guidance on
how the existence of rules of customary international law, and their content,
are to be determined. | 这些草案试图就确定习惯国际法规则的存在及内容的方法提供实际指导。 |
| This is not only of concern to specialists
in public international law: others, including those involved with national
courts, are increasingly called upon to identify rules of customary
international law. | 这不仅令国际公法专家们关注：其他人员，包括参与国内法院工作的人员，也越来越多地被要求识别习惯国际法规则。 |
| In each case, a structured and careful
process of legal analysis and evaluation is required to ensure that a rule of
customary international law is properly identified, thus promoting the
credibility of the particular determination as well as that of customary
international law more broadly. | 需要逐案开展条理清楚且细致的法律分析，以确保妥善识别习惯国际法规则，从而提高具体判定以及更广泛的习惯国际法的可信度。 |
| (3) Customary international law is
unwritten law deriving from practice accepted as law. | (3) 习惯国际法是源自被接受为法律的惯例的不成文法。 |
| It remains an important source of public
international law. | 习惯国际法仍然是国际公法的重要渊源。 |
| Customary international law is among the
sources of international law listed in Article 38, paragraph 1, of the
Statute of the International Court of Justice, which refers, in subparagraph
(b), to “international custom, as evidence of a general practice accepted as
law”. | 习惯国际法是《国际法院规约》第三十八条第一款所列的国际法渊源之一，《规约》该款(丑)项提到了“国际习惯，作为通例之证明而经接受为法律者”。 |
| This wording reflects the two constituent
elements of customary international law: a general practice and its
acceptance as law (the latter often referred to as opinio juris). | 这一措辞反映了习惯国际法的两个构成要素：一项一般惯例，以及该惯例被接受为法律(后者常称为“法律确信”)。 |
| (4) The identification of customary
international law is a matter on which there is a wealth of material,
including case law and scholarly writings. | (4) 习惯国际法的识别这一事项有着丰富的相关材料，包括判例和学术著作。 |
| The draft conclusions reflect the
approach adopted by States, as well as by international courts and
organizations and most authors. | 结论草案反映了各国、国际性法院、国际组织和大多数著述者采取的做法。 |
| Recognizing that the process for the
identification of customary international law is not always susceptible to
exact formulations, the draft conclusions aim to offer clear guidance without
being overly prescriptive. | 结论草案承认，识别习惯国际法的程序并不总是能够精确地描述，结论草案旨在提供明确的指导，而不做出过于硬性的规定。 |
| (5) The 16 draft conclusions are divided
into seven parts. | (5) 16条结论草案分为七个部分。 |
| Part One deals with scope and purpose. | 第一部分论及范围和目的。 |
| Part Two sets out the basic approach to
the identification of customary international law, the “two-element”
approach. | 第二部分阐述习惯国际法的基本识别方法，即“两要素”方法。 |
| Parts Three and Four provide further
guidance on the two constituent elements of customary international law,
which also serve as the criteria for its identification: “a general practice”
and “acceptance as law” (opinio juris). | 第三和第四部分就习惯国际法的两个构成要素提供进一步指导，这两个构成要素也是习惯国际法的识别标准，即“一项一般惯例”和“被接受为法律”(法律确信)。 |
| Part Five addresses certain categories of
materials that are frequently invoked in the identification of rules of
customary international law. | 第五部分论及在识别习惯国际法规则时频繁援引的某些类别的材料。 |
| Whereas rules of customary international
law are binding on all States, Parts Six and Seven deal with two exceptional
cases: the persistent objector; and particular customary international law
(rules of customary international law that apply only among a limited number
of States). | 虽然习惯国际法规则对所有国家具有约束力，第六和第七部分论及两种例外情况：一贯反对者和特别习惯国际法(仅在数量有限的国家之间适用的习惯国际法规则)。 |
| Part One Introduction | 第一部分 导言 |
| Part One, comprising a single draft
conclusion, defines the scope of the draft conclusions, outlining their
function and purpose. | 第一部分只包括一条结论草案，该部分确定了结论草案的范围，同时扼要说明了结论草案的功能和目的。 |
| Conclusion 1 Scope | 结论1 范围 |
| The present draft conclusions concern the
way in which the existence and content of rules of customary international
law are to be determined. | 本结论草案涉及如何确定习惯国际法规则的存在及内容。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Draft conclusion 1 is introductory in
nature. | (1) 从本质上而言，结论草案1是介绍性的。 |
| It provides that the draft conclusions
concern the way in which rules of customary international law are to be
determined, that is, the legal methodology for undertaking that exercise. | 该条规定，各条结论草案涉及习惯国际法规则的确定方法，即在开展确定工作时使用的法律方法。 |
| (2) The term “customary international
law” is used throughout the draft conclusions, being in common use and most
clearly reflecting the nature of this source of international law. | (2) 结论草案均采用了“习惯国际法”这一术语，该术语较为常用，且最能清楚地反映这一国际法渊源的性质。 |
| Other terms that are sometimes found in
legal instruments, in case law and in scholarly writings include “custom”,
“international custom”, and “international customary law” as well as “the law
of nations” and “general international law”. | 法律文书、判例和学术著作中有时使用的其他术语包括“习惯”、“国际习惯”和“国际习惯法”以及“万国法”和“一般国际法”。 |
| (3) The reference to “rules” of customary
international law in the present draft conclusions and commentaries includes
rules of customary international law that may be referred to as “principles”
because of their more general and more fundamental character. | (3) 本结论草案和评注提到习惯国际法“规则”时，所指对象包括那些因为具有更加通用、更加基本的特点而可能被称为“原则”的规则。 |
| (4) The terms “identify” and “determine”
are used interchangeably in the draft conclusions and commentaries. | (4) “识别”与“确定”这两个术语在本结论草案及评注中可以互换。 |
| The reference to determining the
“existence and content” of rules of customary international law reflects the
fact that while often the need is to identify both the existence and the
content of a rule, in some cases it is accepted that the rule exists but its
precise content is disputed. | 草案提到了要确定习惯国际法的“存在及内容”，这反映出，虽然往往既需要识别规则是否存在也需要识别规则有何内容，但有时也会仅承认规则存在，但对其具体内容仍有争议。 |
| This may be the case, for example, where
the question arises as to whether a particular formulation (usually set out
in texts such as treaties or resolutions) does in fact correspond precisely
to an existing rule of customary international law, or whether there are
exceptions to a recognized rule of customary international law. | 例如，当各方就某特定表述(往往是条约或决议等案文中的表述)是否事实上与一项现行习惯国际法规则完全一致的问题，或是就某项公认的习惯国际法规则是否存在例外情况的问题提出疑问时，就可能出现上述情况。 |
| (5) Dealing as they do with the
identification of rules of customary international law, the draft conclusions
do not address, directly, the processes by which customary international law
develops over time. | (5) 结论草案在论及习惯国际法规则的识别时，并未直接论及习惯国际法随时间发展的过程。 |
| Yet in practice identification cannot
always be considered in isolation from formation; | 但在实践中，并不能始终将习惯国际法的识别与其形成分隔开来； |
| the identification of the existence and
content of a rule of customary international law may well involve
consideration of the processes by which it has developed. | 要识别习惯国际法规则的存在及内容，很可能涉及对其发展过程的考虑。 |
| The draft conclusions thus inevitably
refer in places to the formation of rules of customary international law. | 因此，结论草案不可避免地在多处提到了习惯国际法规则的形成。 |
| They do not, however, deal systematically
with how such rules emerge, change, or terminate. | 但是，草案并未系统论述这些规则是如何产生、改变或终止的。 |
| (6) A number of other matters fall
outside the scope of the draft conclusions. | (6) 还有若干其他事项不属于结论草案的范围。 |
| First, they do not address the substance
of customary international law: they are concerned only with the
methodological issue of how rules of customary international law are to be
identified. | 首先，结论草案没有论及习惯国际法的实质内容：它们仅涉及习惯国际法的识别方法问题。 |
| Second, no attempt is made to explain the
relationship between customary international law and other sources of
international law listed in Article 38, paragraph 1, of the Statute of the
International Court of Justice (international conventions, whether general or
particular, and general principles of law); | 第二，结论草案没有试图解释习惯国际法与《国际法院规约》第三十八条第一款所列的国际法的其他渊源(不论普通或特别国际协约以及一般法律原则)之间的关系； |
| the draft conclusions touch on the matter
only in so far as is necessary to explain how rules of customary
international law are to be identified. | 只有在为了解释习惯国际法规则的识别方法而必须谈到这一问题时，才予以述及。 |
| Third, the draft conclusions are without
prejudice to questions of hierarchy among rules of international law,
including those concerning peremptory norms of general international law (jus
cogens), or questions concerning the erga omnes nature of certain
obligations. | 第三，结论草案并不影响国际法规则之间的等级问题，包括涉及一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的问题，或某些义务的普遍适用性的问题。 |
| Fourth, the draft conclusions do not
address the position of customary international law within national legal
systems. | 第四，结论草案没有论及习惯国际法在各国法律体系内部的地位问题。 |
| Finally, the draft conclusions do not
deal in general terms with the question of a possible burden of proof of
customary international law. | 最后，结论草案没有概括处理习惯国际法可能的举证责任问题。 |
| Part Two Basic approach | 第二部分 基本方法 |
| Part Two sets out the basic approach to
the identification of customary international law. Comprising two draft
conclusions, it specifies that determining a rule of customary international
law requires establishing the existence of two constituent elements: a
general practice, and acceptance of that practice as law (opinio juris). | 第二部分阐述习惯国际法的基本识别方法，包括两条结论草案，指出确定一项习惯国际法规则需要确定存在两个构成要素：一项一般惯例以及该惯例被接受为法律(法律确信)。 |
| This requires a careful analysis of the
evidence for each element. | 这要求对每一要素的证据进行认真分析。 |
| Conclusion 2 Two constituent elements | 结论2 两个构成要素 |
| To determine the existence and content of
a rule of customary international law, it is necessary to ascertain whether
there is a general practice that is accepted as law (opinio juris). | 要确定一项习惯国际法规则的存在及内容，必须查明是否存在一项被接受为法律(法律确信)的一般惯例。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Draft conclusion 2 sets out the basic
approach, according to which the identification of a rule of customary
international law requires an inquiry into two distinct, yet related,
questions: whether there is a general practice, and whether such general
practice is accepted as law (that is, accompanied by opinio juris). | (1) 结论草案2阐明了基本方法，即识别习惯国际法的规则需要调查两项独立而相关的问题：是否存在一项一般惯例，及该惯例是否被接受为法律(即伴有法律确信)。 |
| In other words, one must look at what
States actually do and seek to determine whether they recognize an obligation
or a right to act in that way. | 换言之，必须审视各国实际上是怎么做的，并试图确定它们是否承认存在着这样做的义务或权利。 |
| This methodology, the “two-element
approach”, underlies the draft conclusions and is widely supported by States,
in case law, and in scholarly writings. | “两要素法”是结论草案的基础，也得到各国、判例和学术著作的广泛支持。 |
| It serves to ensure that the exercise of
identifying rules of customary international law results in determining only
such rules as actually exist. | 该方法旨在确保识别习惯国际法规则的工作只确定实际存在的此类规则。 |
| (2) A general practice and acceptance of
that practice as law (opinio juris) are the two constituent elements of
customary international law: together they are the essential conditions for
the existence of a rule of customary international law. | (2) 一项一般惯例和该惯例被接受为法律(法律确信)是习惯国际法的两个构成要素：这两个要素共同构成习惯国际法规则存在的必要条件。 |
| The identification of such a rule thus
involves a careful examination of available evidence to establish their
presence in any given case. | 因此，要识别这一规则，就必须仔细研究可用证据，确定在任何给定案件中均存在这两项要素。 |
| This has been confirmed, inter alia, in
the case law of the International Court of Justice, which refers to “two
conditions [that] must be fulfilled” and has repeatedly laid down that “the
existence of a rule of customary international law requires that there be “a
settled practice” together with opinio juris”. | 这一点在国际法院判例等处得到了证实，国际法院判例提到“必须满足两项条件”，并反复指出“要确定存在一项习惯国际法规则，除法律确信外，还须存在着‘既定惯例’”。 |
| To establish that a claim concerning the
existence or the content of a rule of customary international law is
well-founded thus entails a search for a practice that has gained such
acceptance among States that it may be considered to be the expression of a
legal right or obligation (namely, that it is required, permitted or
prohibited as a matter of law). | 因此，要证实某项关于习惯国际法规则存在或内容的主张具有充分的依据，就需要寻找一项已在各国获得一定接受度乃至可被视为表现了一项法律权利或义务(即被法律所要求、允许或禁止)的惯例。 |
| The test must always be: is there a
general practice that is accepted as law? | 考察的内容必须始终是：是否存在一项被接受为法律的一般惯例？ |
| (3) Where the existence of a general
practice accepted as law cannot be established, the conclusion will be that
the alleged rule of customary international law does not exist. | (3) 若无法证实存在一项被接受为法律的一般惯例，则结论是不存在所称的习惯国际法规则。 |
| In the Asylum case, for example, the
International Court of Justice considered that the facts relating to the
alleged existence of a rule of (particular) customary international law
disclosed: | 例如，在庇护权案中，国际法院认为，与所称存在的(特别)习惯国际法规则有关的事实显示： |
| so much uncertainty and contradiction, so
much fluctuation and discrepancy in the exercise of diplomatic asylum and in
the official views expressed on various occasions, there has been so much
inconsistency in the rapid succession of conventions on asylum, ratified by
some States and rejected by others, and the practice has been so much
influenced by considerations of political expediency in the various cases,
that it is not possible to discern in all this any constant and uniform
usage, accepted as law, with regard to the alleged rule of unilateral and
definitive qualification of the offence. | 纵观外交庇护的使用方式以及多种不同场合表达的官方意见，其中存在太多不确定与矛盾之处，也存在太多变动与差异之处，就被一些国家所批准而被另一些国家所拒绝的各项庇护公约的快速继承而言，存在太多不一致，且所涉惯例过于受到种种案件中政治权宜考虑的影响，因此，无法从中分析出任何与所称的单方面确定犯罪性质的规则有关的恒定、统一、可被接受为法律的做法。 |
| (4) As draft conclusion 2 makes clear,
the presence of only one constituent element does not suffice for the
identification of a rule of customary international law. | (4) 正如结论草案2所明确指出的，仅具备一个构成要素不足以识别习惯国际法规则。 |
| Practice without acceptance as law
(opinio juris), even if widespread and consistent, can be no more than a
non-binding usage, while a belief that something is (or ought to be) the law
unsupported by practice is mere aspiration; | 未被接受为法律(没有法律确信)的惯例，即便被广泛和一致地使用，也只能是没有约束力的做法，而在没有惯例支撑的情况下认为某项规定是(或应当是)法律，则仅仅属于愿望； |
| it is the two together that establish the
existence of a rule of customary international law. | 只有二者合一方能证实存在一项习惯国际法的规则。 |
| While writers have from time to time
sought to devise alternative approaches to the identification of customary
international law, emphasizing one constituent element over the other or even
excluding one element altogether, such theories have not been adopted by
States or in the case law. | 虽然不时有学者试图设计识别习惯国际法的其他方法，强调其中的某个构成要素比另一个更加重要，乃至完全排除某个要素，但这种理论并未被各国或判例所采用。 |
| (5) The two-element approach is often
referred to as “inductive”, in contrast to possible “deductive” approaches by
which rules might be ascertained other than by empirical evidence of a
general practice and its acceptance as law (opinio juris). | (5) 两要素法经常被称为“归纳”法，与可能的“演绎”法相对，根据演绎法，规则可通过存在一般惯例及其被接受为法律(法律确信)的经验证据之外的方式确定。 |
| The two-element approach does not in fact
preclude a measure of deduction as an aid, to be employed with caution, in
the application of the two-element approach, in particular when considering
possible rules of customary international law that operate against the
backdrop of rules framed in more general terms that themselves derive from
and reflect a general practice accepted as law, or when concluding that
possible rules of international law form part of an “indivisible regime”. | 两要素法事实上并未排除在适用两要素法时作为辅助手段谨慎使用演绎法，特别是在审查以下两种可能的习惯国际法规则时：源自表述更为宽泛的其他规则、以这些规则为背景发挥作用并反映了被接受为法律的一般惯例的规则；
或得出结论认为可能的国际法规则构成“不可分割的制度”的一部分。 |
| (6) The two-element approach applies to
the identification of the existence and content of rules of customary
international law in all fields of international law. | (6) 两要素法适用于在国际法的所有领域识别习惯国际法规则的存在及内容。 |
| This is confirmed in the practice of
States and in the case law, and is consistent with the unity and coherence of
international law, which is a single legal system and is not divided into
separate branches with their own approach to sources. | 这一点已得到各国惯例以及判例的证实，也符合国际法的统一性和一贯性，国际法是一个单一的法律系统，并非分为几个各有确定其渊源方法的独立分支。 |
| While the application in practice of the
basic approach may well take into account the particular circumstances and
context in which an alleged rule has arisen and operates, the essential
nature of customary international law as a general practice accepted as law
(accompanied by opinio juris) must always be respected. | 在实际情况下，适用基本方法时很可能会考虑到所称规则产生和发挥作用的具体情况和背景， 但必须始终尊重习惯国际法作为被接受为法律(伴有法律确信)的一般惯例的基本性质。 |
| Conclusion 3 Assessment of evidence for
the two constituent elements | 结论3 两个构成要素的证据评估 |
| 1. In assessing evidence for the purpose
of ascertaining whether there is a general practice and whether that practice
is accepted as law (opinio juris), regard must be had to the overall context,
the nature of the rule and the particular circumstances in which the evidence
in question is to be found. | 1. 为查明是否存在一项一般惯例及该惯例是否被接受为法律(法律确信)而对证据进行评估时，必须考虑到总体背景、规则的性质以及有关证据被发现时的具体情况。 |
| 2. Each of the two constituent elements
is to be separately ascertained. | 2. 两个构成要素中的每一要素必须单独予以确定。 |
| This requires an assessment of evidence
for each element. | 这就要求评估每一要素的证据。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Draft conclusion 3 concerns the
assessment of evidence for the two constituent elements of customary
international law. | (1) 结论草案3涉及习惯国际法两个构成要素的证据评估。 |
| It offers general guidance for the
process of determining the existence and content of a rule of customary
international law from the various pieces of evidence available at the time
of the assessment, which reflects both the systematic and rigorous analysis
required and the dynamic nature of customary international law as a source of
international law. | 它就如何根据评估时掌握的各种证据确定习惯国际法规则的存在及内容提供了总体指导，这一评估过程既反映了所要求的系统和严谨分析，也反映了习惯国际法作为国际法渊源的动态本质。 |
| (2) Paragraph 1 sets out an overarching
principle that underlies all of the draft conclusions, namely that the
assessment of any and all available evidence must be careful and contextual. | (2) 第1段阐述了所有结论草案所立足的总原则，即评估任何及所有可用证据时都必须认真并考虑背景。 |
| Whether a general practice that is
accepted as law (accompanied by opinio juris) exists must be carefully
investigated in each case, in the light of the relevant circumstances. | 调查是否存在被接受为法律(伴有法律确信)的一般惯例时，必须考虑到有关情况，逐案认真调查。 |
| Such analysis not only promotes the
credibility of any particular decision, but also allows the two-element
approach to be applied, with the necessary flexibility, in all fields of
international law. | 这种分析不仅能提高任何具体决定的可信度，还能将两要素方法以具备必要灵活性的方式适用于国际法的所有领域。 |
| (3) The requirement that regard be had to
the overall context reflects the need to apply the two-element approach while
taking into account the subject matter that the alleged rule is said to
regulate. | (3) 考虑总体背景这一要求反映出，需要在适用两要素方法的同时考虑所称的规则据称所规范的主体事项。 |
| This implies that in each case any underlying
principles of international law that may be applicable to the matter ought to
be taken into account. | 这意味着，在每种情况下，必须将可适用于所涉事项的任何国际法基本原则均纳入考虑。 |
| Moreover, the type of evidence consulted
(and consideration of its availability or otherwise) depends on the
circumstances, and certain forms of practice and certain forms of evidence of
acceptance as law (opinio juris) may be of particular significance, according
to the context. | 此外，所查阅的证据的类型(以及审议是否存在可用证据的工作)取决于具体情况，某些形式的惯例和某些形式的被接受为法律(法律确信)的证据依背景情况，可能具有尤为重要的意义。 |
| For example, in the Jurisdictional
Immunities of the State case, the International Court of Justice considered
that | 例如，在国家的管辖豁免案中，国际法院认为： |
| [i]n the present context, State practice
of particular significance is to be found in the judgments of national courts
faced with the question whether a foreign State is immune, the legislation of
those States which have enacted statutes dealing with immunity, the claims to
immunity advanced by States before foreign courts and the statements made by
States, first in the course of the extensive study of the subject by the
International Law Commission and then in the context of the adoption of the
United Nations Convention [on Jurisdictional Immunities of States and Their
Property]. | 就本案而言，意义尤为重要的国家实践见于：各国法院在面对他国是否享有豁免的问题时作出的判决、已颁布豁免法规的国家的立法、各国向他国法院提出的豁免主张，以及各国在国际法委员会对该主题进行广泛研究时以及后来在通过《联合国[国家及其财产管辖豁免]公约》时发表的声明。 |
| Opinio juris in this context is reflected
in particular in the assertion by States claiming immunity that international
law accords them a right to such immunity from the jurisdiction of other
States; | 本案中，特别能反映法律确信的有：提出豁免主张的国家声称国际法向本国赋予了这种豁免他国管辖的权利的声明； |
| in the acknowledgment, by States granting
immunity, that international law imposes upon them an obligation to do so; | 批准豁免的国家承认国际法对其施加了批准豁免的义务的声明； |
| and, conversely, in the assertion by
States in other cases of a right to exercise jurisdiction over foreign
States. | 与此相反，还有其他案件中当事国声称本国有权对他国行使管辖的声明。 |
| (4) The nature of the rule in question
may also be of significance when assessing evidence for the purpose of
ascertaining whether there is a general practice that is accepted as law
(accompanied by opinio juris). | (4) 在评估证据以确定是否存在被接受为法律(伴有法律确信)的一般惯例时，所涉规则的性质也可具有重要意义。 |
| In particular, where prohibitive rules
are concerned, it may sometimes be difficult to find much affirmative State
practice (as opposed to inaction); | 特别是，在涉及禁止性规则时，有时可能难以找到许多(与不作为 相反的)肯定性国家实践； |
| cases involving such rules are more
likely to turn on evaluating whether the inaction is accepted as law. | 对涉及这种规则的案件，很可能取决于评价这种不作为是否被接受为法律。 |
| (5) Given that conduct may be fraught
with ambiguities, paragraph 1 further indicates that regard must be had to
the particular circumstances in which any evidence is to be found; | (5) 鉴于行为可能充斥着不明晰之处，第1款进一步指出，对任何证据，均必须考虑到其被发现时的具体情况； |
| only then may proper weight be accorded
to it. | 只有这样做之后，方能对证据赋予适当的权重。 |
| In the United States Nationals in Morocco
case, for example, the International Court of Justice, in seeking to
ascertain whether a rule of (particular) customary international law existed,
said: | 例如，在摩洛哥境内美国国民案中，国际法院在试图确定是否存在一项(特别)习惯国际法规则时表示： |
| There are isolated expressions to be
found in the diplomatic correspondence which, if considered without regard to
their context, might be regarded as acknowledgments of United States claims
to exercise consular jurisdiction and other capitulatory rights. | 外交信函中有一些零星的表述，如果脱离上下文予以考虑，可能会将之视为对美国行使领事管辖权和其他领事裁判权的主张予以承认。 |
| On the other hand, the Court can not
ignore the general tenor of the correspondence, which indicates that at all
times France and the United States were looking for a solution based upon
mutual agreement and that neither Party intended to concede its legal
position. | 另一方面，法院不能无视信函的主旨，这一主旨表明法国和美国始终试图找到双方同意的解决办法，且双方均无意就自身的法律立场作出让步。 |
| Similarly, when considering legislation
as practice, what may sometimes matter more than the actual text is how it
has been interpreted and applied. | 同样，在将立法作为惯例予以考虑时，有时立法被解释和适用的方式可能比实际案文更加重要。 |
| Decisions of national courts will count
less if they are reversed by the legislature or remain unenforced because of
concerns about their compatibility with international law. | 各国法院的判决若被立法机关撤销或因为担心与国际法不一致而未予执行，则重要性会降低。 |
| Statements made casually, or in the heat
of the moment, will usually carry less weight than those that are carefully
considered; | 就份量而言，即兴或一时激动下作出的声明通常低于认真考虑作出的声明； |
| those made by junior officials may carry
less weight than those voiced by senior members of the Government. | 低级官员的声明可能低于政府高级成员的声明。 |
| The significance of a State’s failure to
protest will depend upon all the circumstances, but may be particularly
significant where concrete action has been taken, of which that State is
aware and which has an immediate negative impact on its interests. | 若当事国不抗议，则不抗议的重要性取决于所有具体情况，若对方已经采取了具体的行动、当事国知晓这种行动且这种行动对其利益有直接不利影响，则该国不抗议的做法可能尤为重要。 |
| Practice of a State that goes against its
clear interests or entails significant costs for it is more likely to reflect
acceptance as law. | 若一国的某项实践不符合其显然利益，或者会给该国带来不小的代价，则更有可能反映出该项惯例已被接受为法律。 |
| (6) Paragraph 2 states that to identify
the existence and content of a rule of customary international law each of
the two constituent elements must be found to be present, and explains that
this calls for an assessment of evidence for each element. | (6) 第2段指出，只有确定两个构成要素均存在，方能识别习惯国际法规则的存在及内容，并解释称，这要求对每一要素的证据进行评估。 |
| In other words, while practice and
acceptance as law (opinio juris) together supply the information necessary
for the identification of customary international law, two distinct inquiries
are to be carried out. | 换言之，虽然惯例和被接受为法律(法律确信)一起方能提供识别习惯国际法所必需的信息，但需要开展两项单独的调查。 |
| The constituent elements may be
intertwined in fact (in the sense that practice may be accompanied by a
certain motivation), but each is conceptually distinct for purposes of
identifying a rule of customary international law. | 两个构成要素可能事实上相互交织(惯例背后可能伴随着某种动机)，但就识别习惯国际法规则的目的而言，每一个要素在概念上都是单独的。 |
| (7) Although customary international law
manifests itself in instances of conduct that are accompanied by opinio
juris, acts forming the relevant practice are not as such evidence of
acceptance as law. | (7) 虽然习惯国际法表现在伴有法律确信的行为的具体实例上，但构成有关惯例的行动本身并不是被接受为法律的证据。 |
| Moreover, acceptance as law (opinio
juris) is to be sought with respect not only to those taking part in the
practice but also to those in a position to react to it. | 此外，被接受为法律(法律确信)不仅涉及惯例的参与方，还涉及有能力对惯例作出反应的各方。 |
| No simple inference of acceptance as law
may thus be made from the practice in question; | 因此，仅从所涉惯例并不能推断出被接受为法律； |
| in the words of the International Court
of Justice, “acting, or agreeing to act in a certain way, does not of itself
demonstrate anything of a juridical nature”. | 用国际法院的话说，“以某种方式行动或同意以某种方式行动，本身并不能证明任何法律性质的结论”。 |
| (8) Paragraph 2 emphasizes that the
existence of one element may not be deduced merely from the existence of the
other, and that a separate inquiry needs to be carried out for each. | (8) 第2段强调，不可仅从一个要素的存在而推断出另一个要素的存在，需要对每个要素开展单独的调查。 |
| Nevertheless, the paragraph does not
exclude that the same material may be used to ascertain practice and
acceptance as law (opinio juris). | 尽管如此，该段并不排除同一材料可既用于查明惯例，又用于查明被接受为法律(法律确信)。 |
| A decision by a national court, for
example, could be relevant practice as well as indicate that its outcome is
required under customary international law. | 例如，国内法院的一项判决可能既是有关实践，又能表明其结果是习惯国际法的要求。 |
| Similarly, an official report issued by a
State may serve as practice (or contain information as to that State’s
practice) as well as attest to the legal views underlying it. | 同样，一国发表的官方报告可作为实践(或载有关于该国实践的资料)，并表明其所依据的法律观点。 |
| The important point remains, however,
that the material must be examined as part of two distinct inquiries, to
ascertain practice and to ascertain acceptance as law. | 但重点依然是，必须将该材料作为两项单独调查的一部分予以研究，以查明惯例和查明被接受为法律的情况。 |
| (9) While in the identification of a rule
of customary international law the existence of a general practice is often
the initial factor to be considered, and only then is an inquiry made into
whether such general practice is accepted as law, this order of examination
is not mandatory. | (9) 在习惯国际法规则的识别过程中，是否存在一般惯例往往是首先考虑的因素，只有确定这个问题之后才开始调查这种一般惯例是否被接受为法律，但这一审查顺序并不是强制的。 |
| Thus, the identification of a rule of
customary international law may also begin with appraising a written text
allegedly expressing a widespread legal conviction and then seeking to verify
whether there is a general practice corresponding to it. | 因此，识别习惯国际法规则也可先评估据称表达了普遍法律信念的书面案文，之后再试图验证是否存在与之相对应的一般惯例。 |
| Part Three A general practice | 第三部分 一般惯例 |
| As stated in draft conclusion 2, above,
the indispensable requirement for the identification of a rule of customary
international law is that both a general practice and acceptance of such
practice as law (opinio juris) be ascertained. | 如上文结论草案2所述，既确定存在一项一般惯例又确定这一惯例被接受为法律(法律确信)，是识别习惯国际法规则的必不可少的要求。 |
| Part Three offers more detailed guidance
on the first of these two constituent elements of customary international
law, “a general practice”. | 第三部分就习惯国际法两个构成要素中的第一个――“一项一般惯例”提供了更加详细的指导。 |
| Also known as the “material” or
“objective” element, it refers to those instances of conduct that (when
accompanied by acceptance as law) are creative, or expressive, of customary
international law. | 该要素又称“实质”或“客观”要素， 指(在被接受为法律的同时)能创立或表述习惯国际法的行为的实例。 |
| A number of factors must be considered in
evaluating whether a general practice does in fact exist. | 在评估一项一般惯例是否实际存在时，必须考虑若干因素。 |
| Conclusion 4 Requirement of practice | 结论4 惯例的要求 |
| 1. The requirement of a general practice,
as a constituent element of customary international law, refers primarily to
the practice of States that contributes to the formation, or expression, of
rules of customary international law. | 1. 作为习惯国际法的一个要素所要求存在的一般惯例，主要指的是有助于习惯国际法规则的形成或表述的国家实践。 |
| 2. In certain cases, the practice of
international organizations also contributes to the formation, or expression,
of rules of customary international law. | 2. 在某些情况下，国际组织的实践也有助于习惯国际法规则的形成或表述。 |
| 3. Conduct of other actors is not
practice that contributes to the formation, or expression, of rules of
customary international law, but may be relevant when assessing the practice
referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2. | 3. 其他行为体的行为不是有助于习惯国际法规则形成或表述的实践，但在评估第1和第2段所指的实践时可能相关。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Draft conclusion 4 specifies whose
practice is to be taken into account when determining the existence and
content of rules of customary international law. | (1) 结论草案4具体说明了在确定习惯国际法规则的存在及内容时，应考虑来自哪方的实践。 |
| (2) Paragraph 1 makes clear that it is
primarily the practice of States that is to be looked to in determining the
existence and content of rules of customary international law: the material
element of customary international law is indeed often referred to as “State
practice”. | (2) 第1段明确指出，在确定习惯国际法规则的存在及内容时，主要应审视国家实践；
确实，习惯国际法的实质要素常常被称为“国家实践”。 |
| Being the primary subjects of the
international legal system and possessing a general competence, States play a
pre-eminent role in the formation of customary international law, and it is
principally their practice that has to be examined in identifying it. | 作为具有一般性权能的国际法体系主要主体，国家在习惯国际法的形成中发挥着突出重要作用。 在习惯国际法的识别过程中，应主要审查国家的实践。 |
| Indeed, in many cases, it will only be
State practice that is relevant for determining the existence and content of
rules of customary international law. | 事实上，在许多情况下，确定习惯国际法规则的存在及内容仅与国家实践相关。 |
| As the International Court of Justice
stated in Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua, in
order “to consider what are the rules of customary international law
applicable to the present dispute … it has to direct its attention to the
practice and opinio juris of States”. | 正如国际法院在尼加拉瓜境内和针对尼加拉瓜的军事和准军事活动案中所述，要“审议有哪些习惯国际法规则适用于本争端…必须关注各国的实践和法律确信”。 |
| (3) The word “primarily” serves a dual
purpose. | (3) “主要”一词具有双重目的。 |
| In addition to emphasizing the primary
role of State practice in the formation and expression of rules of customary
international law, it serves to refer the reader to the other practice that
contributes, in certain cases, to the formation, or expression, of rules of
customary international law, which is the subject of paragraph 2. | 除了强调国家实践在习惯国际法规则的形成和表述中的主要作用，它还请读者参阅在某些情况下对习惯国际法规则的形成和表述做出贡献的其他实践，这些实践是第2段的主题。 |
| (4) Paragraph 2 indicates that “[i]n
certain cases”, the practice of international organizations also contributes
to the formation and expression of rules of customary international law. | (4) 第2段表明，“在某些情况下”，国际组织的实践也有助于习惯国际法规则的形成或表述。 |
| While international organizations often
serve as arenas or catalysts for the practice of States, the paragraph deals
with practice that is attributed to international organizations themselves,
not practice of States acting within or in relation to them (which is
attributed to the States concerned). | 虽然国际组织经常作为国家实践的平台或促进者，但该段论及的是属于国际组织本身的实践，而不是国家在国际组织内行事的实践或国家与国际组织有关的实践(这种实践属于所涉国家)。 |
| In those cases where the practice of
international organizations themselves is of relevance (as described below),
references in the draft conclusions and commentaries to the practice of
States should be read as including, mutatis mutandis, the practice of
international organizations. | 在国际组织本身的实践具有相关性的情况下(如下文所述)，结论草案和评注中提到国家实践时应被解读为包括比照适用的国际组织实践。 |
| (5) International organizations are not
States. | (5) 国际组织不是国家。 |
| They are entities established and
empowered by States (or by States and/or other international organizations)
to carry out certain functions, and to that end have international legal
personality, that is, they have their own rights and obligations under
international law. | 国际组织是由国家(或由国家和/或其他国际组织)设立和赋权以履行某些职能，并为此具有国际法律人格(即根据国际法具有自身的权利和义务)的实体。 |
| The practice of international
organizations in international relations (when accompanied by opinio juris)
may count as practice that gives rise or attests to rules of customary
international law, but only those rules (a) whose subject matter falls within
the mandate of the organizations, and/or (b) that are addressed specifically
to them (such as those on their international responsibility or relating to
treaties to which international organizations may be parties). | 国际组织在国际关系中的实践 (在伴有法律确信时)，可算作产生或证明习惯国际法规则的实践，但仅限于以下情况：(a) 规则的主题属于国际组织的任务范围，和/或(b) 专门针对国际组织的规则(例如关于国际组织的国际责任或涉及国际组织可能加入的条约的规则)。 |
| The words “in certain cases” in paragraph
2 indeed serve to indicate that the practice of international organizations
will not be relevant to the identification of all rules of customary
international law, and further that it may be the practice of only some, not
all, international organizations that is relevant. | 第2段中“在某些情况下”一语的作用是说明，国际组织的实践将不会与所有习惯国际法规则的识别相关，而且，相关的可能是部分而非所有国际组织的实践。 |
| (6) Within this framework, the practice
falling under paragraph 2 arises most clearly where member States have
transferred exclusive competences to the international organization, so that
the latter exercises some of the public powers of its member States and hence
the practice of the organization may be equated with the practice of those
States. | (6) 在此框架内，产生第2段所指实践的最明显的情况是，成员国将专属的权能转移给国际组织，以便后者行使其成员国的一部分公共权力。 |
| This is the case, for example, for
certain competences of the European Union. | 例如，欧洲联盟的某些权能便属于这种情况。 |
| Practice within the scope of paragraph 2
may also arise where member States have not transferred exclusive
competences, but have conferred competences upon the international
organization that are functionally equivalent to powers exercised by States. | 若成员国并未将专属权能转移，但向国际组织赋予了在职能上与国家权力相等的权能，在这种情况下也可产生第2段所指范围内的实践。 |
| Thus the practice of international
organizations when concluding treaties, serving as treaty depositaries, in
deploying military forces (for example, for peacekeeping), in administering
territories, or in taking positions on the scope of the privileges and
immunities of the organization and its officials, may contribute to the
formation, or expression, of rules of customary international law in those
areas. | 因此，国际组织在缔结条约、作为条约保存方、部署军队(例如维和部队)、管辖领土或就本组织及其官员的特权和豁免范围发表立场时的实践可有助于形成或表述这些领域的习惯国际法规则。 |
| (7) At the same time, caution is required
in assessing the weight of the practice of an international organization as
part of a general practice. | (7) 与此同时，评估一国际组织的实践作为一般惯例的一部分的的权重时需要慎重。 |
| International organizations vary greatly,
not just in their powers, but also in their membership and functions. | 国际组织之间差异很大，不仅权力存在差异，在成员情况和职能方面也存在差异。 |
| As a general rule, the more directly a
practice of an international organization is carried out on behalf of its
member States or endorsed by them, and the larger the number of such member
States, the greater weight it may have in relation to the formation, or
expression, of rules of customary international law. | 一般规则是，越是直接代表成员国实施或越是直接经成员国核可实施的国际组织实践，且上述成员国数量越多，在习惯国际法规则的形成或表述方面就可能具有更大的权重。 |
| Among other factors that may need to be
considered in weighing the practice are: the nature of the organization; | 除其他外，在衡量实践的权重时可能需要考虑的因素有：该组织的性质； |
| the nature of the organ whose conduct is
under consideration; | 行为接受审议的机关的性质； |
| whether the conduct is ultra vires the
organization or organ; | 该行为是否逾越了该组织或机关的职权； |
| and whether the conduct is consonant with
that of the member States of the organization. | 以及该行为是否与该组织成员国的行为一致。 |
| (8) Paragraph 3 makes explicit that the
conduct of entities other than States and international organizations — for
example, non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and private individuals, but
also transnational corporations and non-State armed groups — is neither
creative nor expressive of customary international law. | (8) 第3段指明，国家和国际组织以外的实体的行为，例如非政府组织(NGOs)和个人的行为以及跨国公司和非国家武装团体的行为，既不能创立也不能表达习惯国际法。 |
| As such, their conduct does not
contribute to the formation, or expression, of rules of customary
international law, and may not serve as direct (primary) evidence of the existence
and content of such rules. | 因此，这些实体的行为无助于形成或表述习惯国际法规则，也不能作为证明习惯国际法规则存在及内容的直接(主要)证据。 |
| The paragraph recognizes, however, that
such conduct may have an indirect role in the identification of customary
international law, by stimulating or recording the practice and acceptance as
law (opinio juris) of States and international organizations. | 但是，该段承认，这种行为可规定或记录国家和国际组织的实践及其被接受为法律(法律确信)的情况，从而在识别习惯国际法的工作中发挥间接作用。 |
| For example, the acts of private
individuals may sometimes be relevant to the formation or expression of rules
of customary international law, but only to the extent that States have
endorsed or reacted to them. | 例如，个人的行为有时可能与习惯国际法规则的形成或表达相关，但仅仅是在国家核可此种个人行为或对之作出反应的意义上相关。 |
| (9) Official statements of the
International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), such as appeals for and
memorandums on respect for international humanitarian law, may likewise play
an important role in shaping the practice of States reacting to such
statements; | (9) 红十字国际委员会的正式声明，例如有关尊重国际人道主义法的呼吁和备忘录，在塑造国家应对这种声明的实践方面可能同样发挥着重要的作用； |
| and publications of the ICRC may assist
in identifying relevant practice. | 红十字国际委员会的出版物也可有助于识别相关惯例。 |
| Such activities may thus contribute to
the development and determination of customary international law, but they
are not practice as such. | 因此这种活动可能有助于习惯国际法的发展和确定，但本身并不属于实践。 |
| Conclusion 5 Conduct of the State as
State practice | 结论5 作为国家实践的国家行为 |
| State practice consists of conduct of the
State, whether in the exercise of its executive, legislative, judicial or
other functions. | 国家实践由国家行为构成，不论该行为是行使行政、立法、司法职能，还是行使其他职能。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Although in their international
relations States most frequently act through the executive branch, draft
conclusion 5 explains that State practice consists of any conduct of the
State, whatever the branch concerned and functions at issue. | (1) 国家在国际关系中通过行政机关行事最为常见，但结论草案5说明的是，国家实践包括国家的任何行为，不论所涉及的是哪个机关，也不论所涉及的是哪种职能。 |
| In accordance with the principle of the
unity of the State, this includes the conduct of any organ of the State
forming part of the State’s organization and acting in that capacity, whether
in exercise of executive, legislative, judicial or “other” functions, such as
commercial activities or the giving of administrative guidance to the private
sector. | 按照国家统一原则，这包括构成国家组织的一部分并以此身份行事的任何国家机关的行为，不论该机关是在行使行政、立法、司法职能，还是在行使“其他”职能，例如商业活动或向私营部门提供行政指导。 |
| (2) To qualify as State practice, the
conduct in question must be “of the State”. | (2) 所涉行为必须是“国家的”，方能构成国家实践。 |
| The conduct of any State organ is to be
considered conduct of that State, whether the organ exercises legislative,
executive, judicial or any other functions, whatever position it holds in the
organization of the State, and whatever its character as an organ of the
central government or of a territorial unit of the State. | 任何国家机关的行为，都应被视为该国的行为，不论该机关行使的是立法、行政、司法或任何其他职能，不论该机关在国家的组织中具有何种地位，也不论该机关在性质上属于中央政府机关还是国家地方机关。 |
| An organ includes any person or entity
that has that status in accordance with the internal law of the State; | 机关包括依该国国内法具有此种地位的任何人员或实体； |
| the conduct of a person or entity
otherwise empowered by the law of the State to exercise elements of
governmental authority is also conduct “of the State”, provided the person or
entity is acting in that capacity in the particular instance. | 以其他方式经该国法律授权行使政府权力要素的人员或实体，其行为也是“国家”行为，前提是该人或实体在所涉具体实例中是以上述身份行事。 |
| (3) The relevant practice of States is
not limited to conduct vis-à-vis other States or other subjects of
international law; | (3) 国家的有关实践不限于对其他国家或其他国际法主体的行为； |
| conduct within the State, such as a
State’s treatment of its own nationals, may also relate to matters of
international law. | 国家内部的行为，例如该国对待本国国民的方式，也可与国际法事项有关。 |
| (4) State practice may be that of a
single State or of two or more States acting together. | (4) 国家实践可以是单一国家的实践，也可以是两个或两个以上国家共同行事的实践。 |
| Examples of practice of the latter kind
may include joint action by several States patrolling the high seas to combat
piracy or cooperating in launching a satellite into orbit. | 后一种实践的实例可包括若干国家在公海巡逻以打击海盗或合作发射卫星进入轨道的联合行动。 |
| Such joint action is to be distinguished
from action by international organizations. | 应将这种联合行动与国际组织的予以区分。 |
| (5) In order to contribute to the
formation and identification of rules of customary international law,
practice must be known to other States (whether or not it is publicly
available). | (5) 实践必须被其他国家知晓(无论公开与否)， 方能有助于习惯国际法规则的形成和识别。 |
| Indeed, it is difficult to see how
confidential conduct by a State could serve such a purpose unless and until
it is known to other States. | 确实，除非及直至国家的保密行为被其他国家知晓，否则难以理解该行为如何能够实现上述目标。 |
| Conclusion 6 Forms of practice | 结论6 实践的形式 |
| 1. Practice may take a wide range of
forms. It includes both physical and verbal acts. | 1. 实践可有多种形式，既包括实际行为，也包括言语行为。 |
| It may, under certain circumstances,
include inaction. | 在某些情况下，还可包括不作为。 |
| 2. Forms of State practice include, but
are not limited to: diplomatic acts and correspondence; | 2. 国家实践的形式包括但不限于：外交行为和信函； |
| conduct in connection with resolutions
adopted by an international organization or at an intergovernmental conference; | 与国际组织通过的或在政府间会议上通过的决议有关的行为； |
| conduct in connection with treaties; | 与条约有关的行为； |
| executive conduct, including operational
conduct “on the ground”; | 行政部门行为，包括“实地”作业行为； |
| legislative and administrative acts; | 立法和行政行为； |
| and decisions of national courts. | 各国法院的判决。 |
| 3. There is no predetermined hierarchy
among the various forms of practice. | 3. 各种不同形式的实践之间没有预先确定的等级。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Draft conclusion 6 indicates the
types of conduct that are covered under the term “practice”, providing
examples thereof and stating that no form of practice has a priori primacy
over another in the identification of customary international law. | (1) 结论草案6举例说明了“实践”这一术语所涵盖的行为的种类，并指出，在识别习惯国际法时，没有任何一种实践形式相对其他实践具有先验的优先地位。 |
| It refers to forms of practice as
empirically verifiable facts and avoids, for present purposes, a distinction
between an act and its evidence. | 该条结论草案指出，不同形式的实践是可以从经验上核实的事实，并且为了当前目的，没有区分行为与行为的证据。 |
| (2) Given that States exercise their
powers in various ways and do not confine themselves only to some types of
acts, paragraph 1 provides that practice may take a wide range of forms. | (2) 各国会采取多种不同的形式行使权力，且不会局限于几种行为，有鉴于此，第1段规定，实践可采取多种广泛的形式。 |
| While some have argued that it is only
what States “do” rather than what they “say” that may count as practice for
purposes of identifying customary international law, it is now generally
accepted that verbal conduct (whether written or oral) may also count as
practice; | 有些人认为，为了识别习惯国际法的目的，能算作实践的只有国家的“行动”，而不是国家的“言语”，但是，现在人们普遍接受，言语行为(无论书面还是口头)也可算作实践； |
| indeed, practice may at times consist
entirely of verbal acts, for example, diplomatic protests. | 事实上，实践有时可能完全由言语行为组成，例如外交抗议。 |
| (3) Paragraph 1 further makes clear that
inaction may count as practice. | (3) 第1段进一步指明，不作为也可算作实践。 |
| The words “under certain circumstances”
seek to caution, however, that only deliberate abstention from acting may
serve such a role: the State in question needs to be conscious of refraining
from acting in a given situation, and it cannot simply be assumed that
abstention from acting is deliberate. | 但是，“在某些情况下”这几个字旨在提醒，只有蓄意不采取行动方可起到这一作用：所涉国家需要有意识地在某给定情况下不采取行动，而且不能仅凭推断认为不采取行动是蓄意的。 |
| Examples of such omissions (sometimes
referred to as “negative practice”) may include abstaining from instituting
criminal proceedings against foreign State officials; | 这种不作为(有时称为“消极实践”)的例子可包括：不对外国国家官员提起刑事诉讼； |
| refraining from exercising protection in
favour of certain naturalized persons; | 不对某些入籍人员予以保护； |
| and abstaining from the use of force. | 以及不使用武力。 |
| (4) Paragraph 2 provides a list of forms
of practice that are often found to be useful for the identification of
customary international law. | (4) 第2段列出了常见的有益于识别习惯国际法的多种形式的实践。 |
| As the words “but are not limited to”
emphasize, this is a non-exhaustive list: given the inevitability and pace of
change, both political and technological, it would be impractical to draw up
an exhaustive list of all the forms that practice might take. | “但不限于”这几个字强调，所列形式并非详尽无遗；
考虑到政治和技术变化的不可避免性和步伐，要拟出涵盖实践可采取的所有形式的详尽清单是不切实际的。 |
| The forms of practice listed are no more
than examples, which, moreover, may overlap (for example, “diplomatic acts
and correspondence” and “executive conduct”). | 所列出的实践形式只是例子，此外，这些例子也可能出现重叠(例如“外交行为和信函”与“行政部门行为”)。 |
| (5) The order in which the forms of
practice are listed in paragraph 2 is not intended to be significant. | (5) 第2段列出了各种实践形式，但对其顺序无意赋予任何重要意义。 |
| Each of the forms listed is to be
interpreted broadly to reflect the multiple and diverse ways in which States
act and react. | 对所列的每种形式，都应予以广泛地解释，以反映国家行动和反应的多种不同方式。 |
| The expression “executive conduct”, for
example, refers comprehensively to any form of executive act, including
executive orders, decrees and other measures; | 例如，“行政部门行为”这一表述泛指行政部门任何形式的行为，包括行政命令、法令和其他措施； |
| official statements on the international
plane or before a legislature; | 在国际层面或对立法机关作出的正式声明； |
| and claims before national or
international courts and tribunals. | 以及向国家或国际法院和法庭提出的主张。 |
| The expression “legislative and
administrative acts” similarly embraces the various forms of regulatory
disposition effected by a public authority. | 同样，“立法和管理行为”涵盖由公共主管部门实施的各种形式的规管处置。 |
| The term “operational conduct ‘on the
ground’” includes law enforcement and seizure of property as well as
battlefield or other military activity, such as the movement of troops or
vessels, or deployment of certain weapons. | “‘实地’作业行为”一语包括执法和没收财产以及战地或其他军事活动，例如调动部队或舰船，或部署某些武器。 |
| The words “conduct in connection with
treaties” cover acts related to the negotiation and conclusion of treaties,
as well as their implementation; | “与条约有关的行为”这几个字涵盖与谈判、缔结以及执行条约有关的行为； |
| by concluding a treaty a State may be
engaging in practice in the domain to which the treaty relates, such as
maritime delimitation agreements or host country agreements. | 一国缔结一项条约即可能参与条约相关领域的实践，例如海洋划界协定或东道国协定。 |
| The reference to “conduct in connection with
resolutions adopted by an international organization or at an
intergovernmental conference” likewise includes acts by States related to the
negotiation, adoption and implementation of resolutions, decisions and other
acts adopted within international organizations or at intergovernmental
conferences, whatever their designation and whether or not they are legally
binding. | 同理，“与国际组织通过的或在政府间会议上通过的决议有关的行为”包括各国在国际组织内或政府间会议上与谈判、通过和执行决议、决定以及通过的其他文件有关的行动，不论其名称为何及是否具有法律约束力。 |
| Whether any of these examples of forms of
practice are in fact relevant in a particular case will depend on the
specific rule under consideration and all the relevant circumstances. | 在具体情况中，这些实践形式的任何实例是否确实具有相关性，这取决于正在审议的具体规则以及所有相关情形。 |
| (6) Decisions of national courts at all
levels may count as State practice (though it is likely that greater weight
will be given to the higher courts); | (6) 各国各级法院的判决均可算作国家实践 (不过对级别更高的法院可能予以更高的权重)； |
| decisions that have been overruled on the
particular point are generally not considered relevant. | 在具体要点上被推翻的判决通常不被视为具有相关性。 |
| The role of decisions of national courts
as a form of State practice is to be distinguished from their potential role
as a “subsidiary means” for the determination of rules of customary
international law. | 应将各国法院的判决作为一种国家实践形式的作用与其作为确定习惯国际法规则的“辅助手段”的潜在作用区分开来。 |
| (7) Paragraph 2 applies mutatis mutandis
to the forms of practice of international organizations in those cases where,
in accordance with draft conclusion 4, paragraph 2, above, such practice
contributes to the formation, or expression, of rules of customary
international law. | (7) 第2段比照适用于上文结论草案4第2段所述有助于习惯国际法规则的形成和表述的国际组织实践形式。 |
| (8) Paragraph 3 clarifies that no form of
practice has a higher probative value than others in the abstract. | (8) 第3段澄清，没有任何一种实践形式在理论上比其他形式具有更高的证明价值。 |
| In particular cases, however, as
explained in the commentaries to draft conclusions 3 and 7 above, it may be
that different forms (or instances) of practice ought to be given different
weight when they are assessed in context. | 但是在具体情况中，如上文结论草案3和7的评注中所解释的，在结合情境评估不同的实践形式(或实例)时，应当赋予它们不同的权重。 |
| Conclusion 7 Assessing a State’s practice | 结论7 评估国家实践 |
| 1. Account is to be taken of all
available practice of a particular State, which is to be assessed as a whole. | 1. 应考虑特定国家的所有已知的实践，作为一个整体进行评估。 |
| 2. Where the practice of a particular
State varies, the weight to be given to that practice may, depending on the
circumstances, be reduced. | 2. 如果特定国家的实践不一致，可根据情形减少赋予该实践的权重。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Draft conclusion 7 concerns the
assessment of the practice of a particular State in order to determine the
position of that State as part of assessing the existence of a general
practice (which is the subject of draft conclusion 8, below). | (1) 结论草案7论及评估某特定国家的实践以确定该国立场的工作，这是评估是否存在一般惯例的工作的一部分(下文结论草案8的主题)。 |
| As the two paragraphs of draft conclusion
7 make clear, it is necessary to take account of and assess as a whole all
available practice of the State concerned on the matter in question,
including its consistency. | 结论草案7的两个段落明确指出，必须考虑到所涉国家在所涉事项上的所有已知实践，作为一个整体进行评估，包括其一致性。 |
| (2) Paragraph 1 states, first, that in
seeking to determine the position of a particular State on the matter in
question, account is to be taken of all available practice of that State. | (2) 第1段指出，首先，在试图确定某特定国家在所涉事项上的立场时，应考虑到该国的所有已知实践。 |
| This means that the practice examined
should be exhaustive (having regard to its availability) and include the
relevant practice of all of the State’s organs and all relevant practice of a
particular organ. | 这意味着审视的案例应详尽无遗(考虑到是否已知)，并包括该国所有机关的有关实践和某特定机关的所有有关实践。 |
| The paragraph also makes it clear that
relevant practice is to be assessed not in isolation but as a whole; | 该段还说明，有关实践应作为一个整体进行评估，不应孤立评估； |
| only then can the actual position of the
State be determined. | 只有这样才能确定该国的实际立场。 |
| (3) The need to assess available practice
“as a whole” is illustrated by the Jurisdictional Immunities of the State
case, in which the International Court of Justice took note of the fact that
although the Hellenic Supreme Court had decided in one case that, by virtue
of the “territorial tort principle”, State immunity under customary
international law did not extend to the acts of armed forces during an armed
conflict, a different position was adopted by the Greek Special Supreme
Court; | (3) 国家的管辖豁免案就体现了“作为一个整体”评估所有已知实践的必要性。 在该案中，国际法院注意到，虽然希腊最高法院曾在一宗案件中裁定，依照“属地侵权原则”，习惯国际法规定的国家豁免不涵盖武装部队在武装冲突期间的行动，但希腊特别最高法院采取了不同的立场； |
| by the Government of Greece when refusing
to enforce the Hellenic Supreme Court’s judgment, and in defending this
position before the European Court of Human Rights; and by the Hellenic
Supreme Court itself in a later decision. | 希腊政府在拒绝执行希腊最高法院的判决时也采取了上述不同立场并曾在欧洲人权法院为这种立场辩护，希腊最高法院在后来的一项判决中也采取了这种立场。 |
| Assessing such practice “as a whole” led
the Court to conclude “that Greek State practice taken as a whole actually
contradicts, rather than supports, Italy’s argument” that State immunity
under customary international law does not extend to the acts of armed forces
during an armed conflict. | 国际法院将这种实践“作为一个整体”予以评估，得出结论，“将希腊的国家实践作为一个整体来看，实际上是反对而非支持意大利的论点”，即习惯国际法规定的国家豁免不涵盖武装部队在武装冲突期间的行动。 |
| (4) Paragraph 2 refers explicitly to
situations where there is or appears to be inconsistent practice of a
particular State. | (4) 第2段明确指出了一个特定国家的实践存在或似乎存在不一致的情况。 |
| As just indicated, this may be the case
where different organs or branches within the State adopt different courses
of conduct on the same matter or where the practice of one organ varies over
time. | 如上文所述，若一国内部的不同机关或部门就同一事项采取了不同的行政方针，或者同一个机关的实践随着时间发生变化，就可能出现这种情况。 |
| If in such circumstances a State’s
practice as a whole is found to be inconsistent, that State’s contribution to
“a general practice” may be reduced. | 如果在这种情况下，认为一国的实践作为一个整体并不一致，则该国对“一般惯例”的贡献可能降低。 |
| (5) The words “may, depending on the
circumstances” in paragraph 2 indicate that such assessment needs to be approached
with caution, and the same conclusion would not necessarily be drawn in all
cases. | (5) 第2段中“可根据情形”一语说明，这样的评估需要审慎地进行，并且不一定所有情况下都能得出同样的结论。 |
| In the Fisheries case, for example, the
International Court of Justice held that “too much importance need not be
attached to the few uncertainties or contradictions, real or apparent … in
Norwegian practice. | 例如，国际法院在渔业案中认定：“不必过分重视…在挪威的实践中发现的少数不确定或矛盾之处，无论是真实的还是表面上的。 |
| They may be easily understood in the
light of the variety of facts and conditions prevailing in the long period. | 这种不确定或矛盾之处很容易理解，毕竟在那么长的时间内，占主导地位的事实情况和条件也发生了多种变化”。 |
| ” Thus, a difference in the practice of
lower and higher organs of the same State is unlikely to result in less
weight being given to the practice of the higher organ. | 因此，若同一国低级机关与高级机关的实践存在差异，则高级机关的实践不太可能因此而降低权重。 |
| Practice of organs of a central
government will usually be more significant than that of constituent units of
a federal State or political subdivisions of the State. | 中央政府机关的实践通常会比联邦国家组成单位的实践或国家次级政府机关的实践具有更加重要的意义。 |
| The practice of the executive branch is
often the most relevant on the international plane and thus has particular
weight in connection with the identification of customary international law,
though account may need to be taken of the constitutional position of the
various organs in question. | 行政机关的实践往往在国家层面最为相关，因此在识别习惯国际法方面具有特殊重要性，但可能也需要考虑到各所涉机关的宪法地位。 |
| Conclusion 8 The practice must be general | 结论8 惯例必须具备一般性 |
| 1. The relevant practice must be general,
meaning that it must be sufficiently widespread and representative, as well
as consistent. | 1. 有关惯例必须具备一般性，即必须足够广泛和有代表性，还必须是一贯的。 |
| 2. Provided that the practice is general,
no particular duration is required. | 2. 只要惯例具备一般性，就不要求特定存续时间。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Draft conclusion 8 concerns the
requirement that the practice must be general; it seeks to capture the
essence of this requirement and the inquiry that is needed in order to verify
whether it has been met in a particular case. | (1) 结论草案8论及惯例必须具备一般性这一要求，力求说明该要求的本质，以及核实某具体案件中该要求是否得到满足所需要开展的调查。 |
| (2) Paragraph 1 explains that the notion
of generality, which refers to the aggregate of the instances in which the
alleged rule of customary international law has been followed, embodies two
requirements. | (2) 第1段解释了一般性的概念，即遵循所称的习惯国际法规则的实例的集合，包括了两项要求。 |
| First, the practice must be sufficiently
widespread and representative. | 第一，该惯例必须足够广泛且具有足够代表性。 |
| Second, the practice must exhibit
consistency. | 第二，该惯例必须表现出一致性。 |
| In the words of the International Court
of Justice in the North Sea Continental Shelf cases, the practice in question
must be “both extensive and virtually uniform”: it must be a “settled
practice”. | 用国际法院在北海大陆架案中的话说，所涉惯例必须既“广泛并基本上统一”：它必须是一项“既定惯例”。 |
| As is explained below, no absolute
standard can be given for either requirement; | 如下文所解释的，这两项要求中的任何一项都无绝对的标准； |
| the threshold that needs to be attained
for each has to be assessed taking account of context. | 每项要求需要达到的标准都必须结合实际情况予以评估。 |
| In each case, however, the practice
should be of such a character as to make it possible to discern a virtually
uniform usage. | 但是，在每一种情况下，惯例必须具有这样一种特质，使人们可以观察出某种基本上统一的常例。 |
| Contradictory or inconsistent practice is
to be taken into account in evaluating whether such a conclusion may be
reached. | 在评价是否可得出这一结论时，要考虑到相矛盾或不一致的惯例。 |
| (3) The requirement that the practice be
“widespread and representative” does not lend itself to exact formulations,
as circumstances may vary greatly from one case to another (for example, the
frequency with which circumstances calling for action arise). | (3) 对惯例“广泛和有代表性”的要求，不宜予以精确的公式化定论，因为具体情况可能存在很大差异(例如，出现需要采取行动的情况的频率)。 |
| As regards diplomatic relations, for
example, in which all States regularly engage, a practice may have to be
widely exhibited, while with respect to some other matters, the amount of
practice may well be less. | 举例而言，所有国家都定期参与外交关系，因此在外交关系方面，惯例必须普遍存在方能满足本要求，而在其他一些事项方面，惯例的数量很可能较少。 |
| This is captured by the word
“sufficiently”, which implies that the necessary number and distribution of
States taking part in the relevant practice (like the number of instances of
practice) cannot be identified in the abstract. | “足够”一词体现了这一点，暗指无法(像惯例的实例数量一样)抽象地确定参与有关惯例的国家的必要数量和分布。 |
| It is clear, however, that universal
participation is not required: it is not necessary to show that all States
have participated in the practice in question. | 但是，普遍参与并不必要：没有必要证明所有国家都参与了所涉惯例。 |
| The participating States should include
those that had an opportunity or possibility of applying the alleged rule. | 参与国应包括有机会或有可能适用所称规则的国家。 |
| It is important that such States are
representative, which needs to be assessed in light of all the circumstances,
including the various interests at stake and/or the various geographical
regions. | 这些国家必须具有代表性。 评估代表性时，有必要参考所有情形，包括所涉的各种利益和/或各地理区域。 |
| (4) Thus, in assessing generality, an
indispensable factor to be taken into account is the extent to which those
States that are particularly involved in the relevant activity or are most
likely to be concerned with the alleged rule (“specially affected States”)
have participated in the practice. | (4) 因此，在评估一般性时，必须要考虑到的一个因素是，特别参与有关活动或最有可能关注所称规则的国家(特别受影响国家)在多大程度上参与了惯例。 |
| While in many cases all or virtually all
States will be equally affected, it would clearly be impractical to
determine, for example, the existence and content of a rule of customary
international law relating to navigation in maritime zones without taking
into account the practice of relevant coastal States and flag States, or the
existence and content of a rule on foreign investment without evaluating the
practice of the capital-exporting States as well as that of the States in which
investment is made. | 虽然在许多情况下，所有国家或几乎所有国家都会受到同等影响，但举例而言，若不考虑相关沿海国家和船旗国的惯例，要确定某项涉及海区航行的习惯国际法规则的存在及内容显然不切实际；
若不考虑资本出口国以及投资所在国的惯例，要确定某项关于外国投资的规则的存在及内容显然也不切实际。 |
| It should be made clear, however, that
the term “specially affected States” should not be taken to refer to the
relative power of States. | 但应明确指出，“特别受影响国家”这一术语不应被理解为指各国的相对权力。 |
| (5) The requirement that the practice be
consistent means that where the relevant acts are divergent to the extent
that no pattern of behaviour can be discerned, no general practice (and thus
no corresponding rule of customary international law) can be said to exist. | (5) 关于惯例必须具有一贯性的要求意味着，若有关行动的差异过大，无法观察到行为模式，则无法认定一般惯例的存在(因此也就不存在对应的习惯国际法规则)。 |
| For example, in the Fisheries case, the
International Court of Justice found that “although the ten-mile rule has
been adopted by certain States … other States have adopted a different limit. | 例如，国际法院在渔业案中认定：“尽管某些国家采用了10海里规则…但其他国家采用了不同的限值。 |
| Consequently, the ten-mile rule has not
acquired the authority of a general rule of international law”. | 因此，10海里规则没有获得国际法一般规则的地位。 ” |
| (6) In examining whether the practice is
consistent it is of course important to consider instances of conduct that
are in fact comparable, that is, where the same or similar issues have arisen
so that such instances could indeed constitute reliable guides. | (6) 在审查惯例是否一贯时，当然必须考虑在事实上可比较的行为实例，即考虑在何处曾发生过相同或类似的问题，以便这种实例可以确实构成可靠的指导。 |
| The Permanent Court of International
Justice referred in the Lotus case to “precedents offering a close analogy to
the case under consideration; | 常设国际法院在“莲花号”案中提到：“与所审案件近似的先例； |
| for it is only from precedents of this
nature that the existence of a general principle [of customary international
law] applicable to the particular case may appear”. | 只有从这一性质的先例中才能发现适用于具体所审案件的[习惯国际法]一般原则的存在。 |
| (7) At the same time, complete
consistency in the practice of States is not required. | ” (7) 与此同时，并不要求各国实践完全一致。 |
| The relevant practice needs to be
virtually or substantially uniform, meaning that some inconsistencies and
contradictions are not necessarily fatal to a finding of “a general
practice”. | 相关实践只需要基本上或实质上一致，这意味着，即便存在一些不一致和矛盾之处，也不一定不能认定“一项一般惯例”的存在。 |
| In Military and Paramilitary Activities
in and against Nicaragua, the International Court of Justice held that: | 在尼加拉瓜境内和针对尼加拉瓜的军事和准军事活动案中，国际法院认定： |
| [i]t is not to be expected that in the
practice of States the application of the rules in question should have been
perfect … The Court does not consider that, for a rule to be established as
customary, the corresponding practice must be in absolutely rigorous
conformity with the rule. | 不应期望所涉规则在各国实践中的适用情况是完美的…本法院并不认为，要确定某项规则是习惯规则，所对应的实践必须与该规则绝对严格地保持一致。 |
| In order to deduce the existence of
customary rules, the Court deems it sufficient that the conduct of States
should, in general, be consistent with such rules … | 本法院认为，各国的行为只要大体上与这种规则一致，就足以推导出习惯规则的存在… |
| . (8) When inconsistency takes the form
of breaches of a rule, this, too, does not necessarily prevent a general
practice from being established. This is particularly so when the State
concerned denies the violation or expresses support for the rule. | (8) 若不一致是以违反规则的形式出现，也不一定妨碍一般惯例的确定，尤其是在所涉国家不承认违反规则或对该规则表示支持的情况下。 |
| As the International Court of Justice has
observed: | 正如国际法院所述： |
| instances of State conduct inconsistent
with a given rule should generally have been treated as breaches of that
rule, not as indications of the recognition of a new rule. | 国家行为与某给定规则不一致的实例，通常应视为对该规则的违反，而非视为承认一项新规则的表现。 |
| If a State acts in a way prima facie
incompatible with a recognized rule, but defends its conduct by appealing to
exceptions or justifications contained within the rule itself, then whether
or not the State’s conduct is in fact justifiable on that basis, the
significance of that attitude is to confirm rather than to weaken the rule. | 若某国的行动方式表面上与某项承认的规则不符，但该国援引该规则内规定的例外情况或理由为自己的行为辩护，则不论该国行为据此事实上是否合理，这种态度的意义恰恰是确认该规则，而非削弱该规则。 |
| (9) Paragraph 2 refers to the time
element, making clear that a relatively short period in which a general
practice is followed is not, in and of itself, an obstacle to determining
that a corresponding rule of customary international law exists. | (9) 第2段提到了时间要素，指明若某项一般惯例得到遵循的时间相对较短，这本身并不妨碍确定存在着对应的习惯国际法规则。 |
| While a long duration may result in more
extensive practice, time immemorial or a considerable or fixed duration of a
general practice is not a condition for the existence of a customary rule. | 虽然较长的存续时间可能产生更加广泛的惯例，但习惯规则的存在并不需要一般惯例存续了久远或较长或固定的时间。 |
| The International Court of Justice
confirmed this in the North Sea Continental Shelf cases, holding that “the
passage of only a short period of time is not necessarily, or of itself, a
bar to the formation of a new rule of customary international law”. | 国际法院在北海大陆架案中证实了这一点，认定“所过时间较短这一点本身并不妨碍一项习惯国际法新规则的形成”。 |
| As this passage makes clear, however,
some period of time must elapse for a general practice to emerge; | 但也正如该段所指明的，一项一般惯例的出现必须经过一些时间； |
| there is no such thing as “instant
custom”. | 不存在“速成习惯”。 |
| Part Four Accepted as law (opinio juris) | 第四部分 被接受为法律(法律确信) |
| Establishing that a certain practice is
followed consistently by a sufficiently widespread and representative number
of States does not in itself suffice in order to identify a rule of customary
international law. | 证明某种惯例被足够广泛和有代表性的一些国家一贯遵守，就其本身而言并不足以识别习惯国际法规则。 |
| Part Four concerns the second constituent
element of customary international law, sometimes referred to as the
“subjective” or “psychological” element, which requires that in each case, it
is also necessary to be satisfied that there exists among States an
acceptance as law (opinio juris) as to the binding character of the practice
in question. | 第四部分涉及习惯国际法的第二个构成要素，常常被称为“主观”或“心理”要素，这一要素要求在每种情况下，还必须满足这样的条件，即各国接受有关惯例的约束性，将之接受为法律(法律确信)。 |
| Conclusion 9 Requirement of acceptance as
law (opinio juris) | 结论9 被接受为法律(法律确信)的要求 |
| 1. The requirement, as a constituent
element of customary international law, that the general practice be accepted
as law (opinio juris) means that the practice in question must be undertaken
with a sense of legal right or obligation. | 1. 关于一般惯例须被接受为法律(法律确信)的要求作为习惯国际法的构成要素，意味着有关惯例的采用必须带有一种法律权利或义务感。 |
| 2. A general practice that is accepted as
law (opinio juris) is to be distinguished from mere usage or habit. | 2. 被接受为法律(法律确信)的一般惯例不同于单纯的常例或习惯。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Draft conclusion 9 seeks to
encapsulate the nature and function of the second constituent element of
customary international law, acceptance as law (opinio juris). | (1) 结论草案9试图概括习惯国际法第二个构成要素即被接受为法律(法律确信)的性质和作用。 |
| (2) Paragraph 1 explains that acceptance as
law (opinio juris), as a constituent element of customary international law,
refers to the requirement that the relevant practice must be undertaken with
a sense of legal right or obligation, that is, it must be accompanied by a
conviction that it is permitted, required or prohibited by customary
international law. | (2) 第1段解释说，作为习惯国际法的一个构成要素，被接受为法律(法律确信)述及一项要求，在采用有关惯例时必须带有一种法律权利或义务感，即必须伴有关于此种惯例被习惯国际法所允许、要求或禁止的信念。 |
| It is thus crucial to establish, in each
case, that States have acted in a certain way because they felt or believed
themselves legally compelled or entitled to do so by reason of a rule of
customary international law: they must have pursued the practice as a matter
of right, or submitted to it as a matter of obligation. | 因此，必须逐案证明国家以某种方式行事是因为它们感觉或相信，它们因一项习惯国际法规则而在法律上必须或有权利如此行事：它们必须作为一项权利采用这项惯例，或作为一项义务遵守这项惯例。 |
| As the International Court of Justice
stressed in the North Sea Continental Shelf judgment: | 国际法院在北海大陆架案的判决中强调： |
| Not only must the acts concerned amount
to a settled practice, but they must also be such, or be carried out in such
a way, as to be evidence of a belief that this practice is rendered
obligatory by the existence of a rule of law requiring it. | 有关行为不仅要构成既定惯例，而且其本身或其实施方式须能够佐证一种看法，即有规则要求采用这种惯例，因此该惯例具有强制性。 |
| The need for such a belief, i.e., the
existence of a subjective element, is implicit in the very notion of the
opinio juris sive necessitatis. | 这样一种信念的必要性，即主观因素的存在，包含在‘法律必要确信’的概念中。 |
| The States concerned must therefore feel
that they are conforming to what amounts to a legal obligation. | 因此，有关国家必须感到它们是在遵守相当于法律义务的东西。 |
| (3) Acceptance as law (opinio juris) is
to be distinguished from other, extralegal motives for action, such as
comity, political expediency or convenience: if the practice in question is
motivated solely by such other considerations, no rule of customary
international law is to be identified. | (3) 被接受为法律(法律确信)须与其他法律以外的行动动机区别开，如礼让、政治权宜之计或便利； 如果该惯例的动机仅是这类其他考虑因素，将不能识别习惯国际法规则。 |
| Thus in the Asylum case the International
Court of Justice declined to recognize the existence of a rule of customary
international law where the alleged instances of practice were not shown to
be, inter alia: | 因此，在庇护权案中，国际法院在所声称的惯例实例未被证明属下列情况时拒绝承认存在习惯国际法规则： |
| exercised by the States granting asylum
as a right appertaining to them and respected by the territorial States as a
duty incumbent on them and not merely for reasons of political expediency. …
considerations of convenience or simple political expediency seem to have led
the territorial State to recognize asylum without that decision being
dictated by any feeling of legal obligation. | 由给予庇护之国作为属于该国的一项权利行使并由领土所属国作为其有责任履行的义务予以遵守，而非仅出于政治权宜之计。 …领土所属国承认庇护似乎出于便利或简单的政治权宜，而非任何法律义务感。 |
| (4) Seeking to comply with a treaty
obligation as a treaty obligation, much like seeking to comply with domestic
law, is not acceptance as law for the purpose of identifying customary
international law: practice undertaken with such intention does not, by
itself, lead to an inference as to the existence of a rule of customary
international law. | (4) 出于条约义务试图遵守一项义务与试图遵守国内法很像，就识别习惯国际法目的而言不是被接受为法律：以此种意图采用的惯例本身不能据以推断存在一项习惯国际法规则。 |
| A State may well recognize that it is
bound by a certain obligation by force of both customary international law
and treaty, but this would need to be proved. | 一国很可能承认它同时根据习惯国际法和条约受到某种义务的约束； 但这种情况需要得到证明。 |
| On the other hand, when States act in
conformity with a treaty provision by which they are not bound, or apply
conventional provisions in their relations with non-parties to the treaty,
this may evidence the existence of acceptance as law (opinio juris) in the
absence of any explanation to the contrary. | 另一方面，当国家遵守一项对其不具约束力的条约条款，或在其与该条约非缔约方的关系中适用公约条款，在不存在任何相反的解释时，这可证明存在被接受为法律(法律确信)。 |
| (5) Acceptance as law (opinio juris) is
to be sought with respect to both the States engaging in the relevant
practice and those in a position to react to it, who must be shown to have
understood the practice as being in accordance with customary international
law. | (5) 应面向实施有关惯例的国家和能够对惯例做出反应的国家查证被接受为法律(法律确信)。 必须证明这些国家知道该惯例符合习惯国际法。 |
| It is not necessary to establish that all
States have recognized (accepted as law) the alleged rule as a rule of
customary international law; | 没有必要证明所有国家都承认(被接受为法律)所声称的规则为习惯国际法规则； |
| it is broad and representative acceptance,
together with no or little objection, that is required. | 需要的是广泛和有代表性的接受以及没有反对或很少反对。 |
| (6) Paragraph 2 emphasizes that, without
acceptance as law (opinio juris), a general practice may not be considered as
creative, or expressive, of customary international law; | (6) 第2段强调，在没有被接受为法律(法律确信)的情况下，一般惯例不可被认为创立或表达了习惯国际法； |
| it is mere usage or habit. | 它只是常例或习惯。 |
| In other words, practice that States
consider themselves legally free either to follow or to disregard does not
contribute to or reflect customary international law (unless the rule to be
identified itself provides for such a choice). | 换言之，各国认为它们可依法自由选择遵循或置之不理的惯例不会促进或反映习惯国际法(除非要识别的规则本身规定可以做出此种选择)。 |
| Not all observed regularities of
international conduct bear legal significance: diplomatic courtesies, for
example, such as the provision of red carpets for visiting heads of State,
are not accompanied by any sense of legal obligation and thus could not
generate or attest to any legal duty or right to act accordingly. | 并非所有观察到的常规国际行为都具有法律意义：例如，为来访国家元首准备红地毯之类的外交礼仪不伴有法律义务感，因此也不产生或表明任何采取相应行动的法律义务或权利。 |
| Conclusion 10 Forms of evidence of
acceptance as law (opinio juris) | 结论10 被接受为法律(法律确信)的证据形式 |
| 1. Evidence of acceptance as law (opinio
juris) may take a wide range of forms. | 1. 被接受为法律(法律确信)的证据可有多种形式。 |
| 2. Forms of evidence of acceptance as law
(opinio juris) include, but are not limited to: public statements made on
behalf of States; | 2. 被接受为法律(法律确信)的证据形式包括但不限于：以国家名义发表的公开声明； |
| official publications; | 官方出版物； |
| government legal opinions; | 政府的法律意见； |
| diplomatic correspondence; | 外交信函； |
| decisions of national courts; | 各国法院的判决； |
| treaty provisions; | 条约规定； |
| and conduct in connection with
resolutions adopted by an international organization or at an
intergovernmental conference. | 与国际组织通过的或在政府间会议上通过的决议有关的行为。 |
| 3. Failure to react over time to a
practice may serve as evidence of acceptance as law (opinio juris), provided
that States were in a position to react and the circumstances called for some
reaction. | 3. 在有关国家有能力做出反应并且有关情况也要求做出某种反应的情况下，对一种惯例经过一定时间而没有做出反应，可用作已接受其为法律(法律确信)的证据。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Draft conclusion 10 concerns the
evidence from which acceptance of a given practice as law (opinio juris) may
be ascertained. | (1) 结论草案10涉及可从中查明特定惯例被接受为法律(法律确信)的证据。 |
| It reflects the fact that acceptance as
law may be made known through various manifestations of State behaviour,
which should be carefully assessed to determine whether, in any given case,
they actually reflect a State’s views on the current state of customary
international law. | 它反映的事实是，被接受为法律这一点可通过国家行为的各种表现形式公布出来，应予以仔细审议，以确定这些表现形式是否在任何特定情况下都确实反映一国对习惯国际法现况的观点。 |
| (2) Paragraph 1 sets forth the general
proposition that acceptance as law (opinio juris) may be reflected in a wide
variety of forms. | (2) 第1段提出了一项一般主张，即被接受为法律(法律确信)可有多种体现形式。 |
| States may express their recognition (or
rejection) of the existence of a rule of customary international law in many
ways. | 国家可以多种方式表示承认(或拒绝)一项习惯国际法规则的存在。 |
| Such conduct indicative of acceptance as
law supporting an alleged rule encompasses, as the subsequent paragraphs make
clear, both statements and physical actions (as well as inaction) concerning
the practice in question. | 随后段落明确说明，支持所声称规则、表明被接受为法律的此种行为包含与该惯例有关的声明和实际行动(以及不作为)。 |
| (3) Paragraph 2 provides a non-exhaustive
list of forms of evidence of acceptance as law (opinio juris), including
those most commonly resorted to for such purpose. | (3) 第2段提出了被接受为法律(法律确信)的证据形式的非详尽清单，包括为此类目的最常采用的形式。 |
| Such forms of evidence may also indicate
lack of acceptance as law. | 此种证据形式也可表明不存在被接受为法律。 |
| There is some common ground between the
forms of evidence of acceptance as law and the forms of State practice
referred to in draft conclusion 6, paragraph 2 above; | 被接受为法律的证据形式和上文结论草案6第2段所述的国家实践的形式之间存在一些共同点； |
| in part, this reflects the fact that the
two elements may at times be found in the same material (but, even then,
their identification requires a separate exercise in each case). | 这在一定程度上反映出一个事实，即两个要素有时可能出现于同一材料之中(但是即使在那样的情况下，仍需要逐案对两要素进行单独识别)。 |
| In any event, statements are more likely
to embody the legal conviction of the State, and may often be more usefully
regarded as expressions of acceptance as law (or otherwise) rather than
instances of practice. | 无论如何，声明更有可能体现国家的法律信念。 而且将声明作为接受为法律(或相反)的表示，而不是作为惯例的实例，可能往往更有实际意义。 |
| (4) Among the forms of evidence of
acceptance as law (opinio juris), an express public statement on behalf of a
State that a given practice is permitted, prohibited or mandated under customary
international law provides the clearest indication that the State has avoided
or undertaken such practice (or recognized that it was rightfully undertaken
or avoided by others) out of a sense of legal right or obligation. | (4) 在被接受为法律(法律确信)的证据形式中，以国家名义发表的关于习惯国际法允许、禁止或要求一项特定惯例的明确公开声明最清楚地说明该国出于法律权利或义务感，避免或采用了这种惯例(或承认其他国家正当地采用或避免了该惯例)。 |
| Similarly, the effect of practice in line
with the supposed rule may be nullified by contemporaneous statements that no
such rule exists. | 同样，符合所谓规则的惯例的效力，可被声称不存在此类规则的同时期声明抵消。 |
| Either way, such statements could be
made, for example, in debates in multilateral settings; | 无论是哪种情况，都可在如下场合发表此类声明：在多边场合的辩论中； |
| when introducing draft legislation before
the legislature; | 在向立法机构提出立法草案时； |
| as assertions made in written and oral
pleadings before courts and tribunals; | 作为向法院和法庭提出的书面和口头陈述中的主张； |
| in protests characterizing the conduct of
other States as unlawful; | 在宣称其他国家的行为非法的抗议中； |
| and in response to proposals for
codification. | 作为对编纂法律的提议的响应。 |
| They may be made individually or jointly
with others. | 声明可由一国单独发表，或与其他国家联合发表。 |
| (5) The other forms of evidence listed in
paragraph 2 may also be of particular assistance in ascertaining the legal
position of States in relation to certain practices. | (5) 第2段中所列其他证据形式也可能特别有助于确定各国对某些惯例的法律立场。 |
| Among these, the term “official
publications” covers documents published in the name of a State, such as
military manuals and official maps, in which acceptance as law (opinio juris)
may be found. | 其中，“官方出版物”一词涵盖了以国家名义发布的文件，如军事手册和官方地图，其中可找到被接受为法律(法律确信)。 |
| Published opinions of government legal
advisers may likewise shed light on a State’s legal position, though not if
the State declined to follow the advice. | 同样，政府法律顾问公开发布的意见也可说明一国的法律立场，但如果该国拒绝采用其意见则另当别论。 |
| Diplomatic correspondence may include,
for example, circular notes to diplomatic missions, such as those on
privileges and immunities. | 外交信函可包括，例如，向外交使团发出的通知照会，如关于特权和豁免的通知照会。 |
| National legislation, while it is most
often the product of political choices, may be valuable as evidence of
acceptance as law, particularly where it has been specified (for example, in
connection with the passage of the legislation) that it is mandated under or
gives effect to customary international law. | 国家立法虽往往是政治选择的产物，但作为被接受为法律的证据，特别是在明确说明(例如与该立法通过有关的明确说明)该立法依据或履行习惯国际法时，可能是有价值的。 |
| Decisions of national courts may also
contain such statements when pronouncing upon questions of international law. | 各国法院的判决对国际法问题发表意见时，也可能包含此类声明。 |
| (6) Multilateral drafting and diplomatic
processes may afford valuable and accessible evidence as to the legal
convictions of States with respect to the content of customary international
law, hence the reference to “treaty provisions” and to “conduct in connection
with resolutions adopted by an international organization or at an
intergovernmental conference”. | (6) 多边草案和外交进程可提供关于各国在习惯国际法内容方面的法律信念的宝贵和可获得的证据。
因此结论草案10提及“条约规定”和“与国际组织通过的或在政府间会议上通过的决议有关的行为”。 |
| Their potential utility in the
identification of rules of customary international law is examined in greater
detail in draft conclusions 11 and 12, below. | 下文结论草案11和12对它们在识别习惯国际法规则方面的潜在效用进行了更详细的研究。 |
| (7) Paragraph 2 applies mutatis mutandis
to the forms of evidence of acceptance of law (opinio juris) of international
organizations. | (7) 第2段比照适用于国际组织的被接受为法律(法律确信)的证据形式。 |
| (8) Paragraph 3 provides that, under
certain conditions, failure by States to react, within a reasonable time, may
also, in the words of the International Court of Justice in the Fisheries
case, “[bear] witness to the fact that they did not consider … [a certain
practice undertaken by others] to be contrary to international law”. | (8) 第3段规定，在某些情况下，国家未能在合理时间内做出反应，也可如国际法院在渔业案中指出的那样，“证明了这样一个事实，即它们不认为…[其他国家采用的某种惯例]与国际法相矛盾”。 |
| Tolerance of a certain practice may
indeed serve as evidence of acceptance as law (opinio juris) when it
represents concurrence in that practice. | 如果容忍某种惯例代表着对这种惯例的赞同，这种容忍的确可能成为被接受为法律(法律确信)的证据。 |
| For such a lack of open objection or
protest to have this probative value, however, two requirements must be
satisfied in the circumstances of each case in order to ensure that such
inaction does not derive from causes unrelated to the legality of the practice
in question. | 然而，为使这种没有公开反对或抗议的情况具有此种证明价值，每种情况的情形必须符合两个要求，以确保这种不作为并非出于与该惯例的合法性无关的原因。 |
| First, it is essential that a reaction to
the practice in question would have been called for: this may be the case,
for example, where the practice is one that affects — usually unfavourably —
the interests or rights of the State failing or refusing to act. | 首先，至关重要的是，已有对该惯例做出反应的要求： 例如，如果这种惯例通常对没有或拒绝做出反应的国家的利益或权利产生不利影响，即可能是此种情况。 |
| Second, the reference to a State being
“in a position to react” means that the State concerned must have had
knowledge of the practice (which includes circumstances where, because of the
publicity given to the practice, it must be assumed that the State had such
knowledge), and that it must have had sufficient time and ability to act. | 第二，提及一国“有能力做出反应”意味着，有关国家必须已知悉该惯例(包括由于对该惯例的宣传，必须推定该国已有所知悉)，且该国必须有足够的时间和能力采取行动。 |
| Where a State did not or could not have
been expected to know of a certain practice, or has not yet had a reasonable
time to respond, inaction cannot be attributed to an acknowledgment that such
practice was mandated (or permitted) under customary international law. | 如果一国未知悉或不能认为该国知悉某惯例，或尚未有合理时间做出反应，则不能将不作为归因于承认这种做法是习惯国际法所要求(或允许)的。 |
| A State may also provide other
explanations for its inaction. | 一国也可就其不作为提供其他解释。 |
| Part Five Significance of certain
materials for the identification of customary international law | 第五部分 某些材料对于识别习惯国际法的意义 |
| (1) Various materials other than primary
evidence of alleged instances of practice accepted as law (accompanied by
opinio juris) may be consulted in the process of determining the existence
and content of rules of customary international law. | (1) 在确定习惯国际法规则的存在及内容时，除了惯例被接受为法律(伴有法律确信)的宣称实例这种主要证据以外，还可以参考各种材料。 |
| These commonly include written texts
bearing on legal matters, in particular treaties, resolutions of international
organizations and intergovernmental conferences, judicial decisions (of both
international and national courts), and scholarly works. | 通常包括有关法律问题的书面文本，特别是条约、国际组织和政府间会议的决议、(国际性法院和各国法院的)司法判决以及学术著作。 |
| Such texts may assist in collecting,
synthesizing or interpreting practice relevant to the identification of
customary international law, and may offer precise formulations to frame and
guide an inquiry into its two constituent elements. | 这些文本可协助收集、综合或解释与识别习惯国际法有关的做法，并可提供准确的表述来为针对两个构成要素的调查提供框架和指导。 |
| Part Five seeks to explain the potential
significance of these materials, making clear that it is of critical
importance to study carefully both the content of such materials and the
context within which they were prepared. | 第五部分试图解释这些材料的潜在重要性，并说明仔细研究这类材料的内容和编写这些材料时的背景情况至关重要。 |
| (2) The output of the International Law
Commission itself merits special consideration in the present context. | (2) 在目前背景下，国际法委员会工作成果本身应得到特殊考虑。 |
| As has been recognized by the
International Court of Justice and other courts and tribunals, a
determination by the Commission affirming the existence and content of a rule
of customary international law may have particular value, as may a conclusion
by it that no such rule exists. | 正如国际法院和其他法院及法庭已经确认的， 委员会对一项习惯国际法规则的存在及其内容的认定具有特别重要的价值； 委员会认为不存在这样一项规则的结论亦是如此。 |
| This flows from the Commission’s unique
mandate, as a subsidiary organ of the United Nations General Assembly, to
promote the progressive development of international law and its
codification; | 这源自委员会作为联合国大会的附属机构而承担的促进国际法的逐渐发展和编纂的独特任务； |
| the thoroughness of its procedures
(including the consideration of extensive surveys of State practice and
opinio juris); | 其程序的充分性(包括对国家实践和法律确信广泛调查结果进行审议)； |
| and its close relationship with the
General Assembly and States (including receiving oral and written comments
from States as it proceeds with its work). | 及其与联大和各国的紧密联系(包括在着手开展工作的同时收到各国的口头和书面评论)。 |
| The weight to be given to the
Commission’s determinations depends, however, on various factors, including
the sources relied upon by the Commission, the stage reached in its work, and
above all upon States’ reception of its output. | 不过，委员会作出的认定的权重取决于各种因素，其中包括委员会所依赖的资料来源，其工作所进行到的阶段，最重要的是取决于各国对其工作成果的接受程度。 |
| Conclusion 11 Treaties | 结论11 条约 |
| 1. A rule set forth in a treaty may
reflect a rule of customary international law if it is established that the
treaty rule: | 1. 条约所载的规则可反映习惯国际法规则，条件是能够确定该条约规则： |
| (a) codified a rule of customary
international law existing at the time when the treaty was concluded; | (a) 将条约缔结时已经存在的一项习惯国际法规则编纂成法； |
| (b) has led to the crystallization of a
rule of customary international law that had started to emerge prior to the
conclusion of the treaty; | (b) 将条约缔结之前开始形成的一项习惯国际法规则具体化； |
| or (c) has given rise to a general
practice that is accepted as law (opinio juris), thus generating a new rule
of customary international law. | (c) 形成了一项被接受为法律(法律确信)的一般惯例，从而产生了一项新的习惯国际法规则。 |
| 2. The fact that a rule is set forth in a
number of treaties may, but does not necessarily, indicate that the treaty
rule reflects a rule of customary international law. | 2. 一项规则在多项条约中出现，可能但并不一定表明该条约规则反映了一项习惯国际法规则。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Draft conclusion 11 concerns the
significance of treaties for the identification of customary international
law. | (1) 结论草案11涉及条约对于识别习惯国际法的意义。 |
| The draft conclusion does not address
conduct in connection with treaties as a form of practice, a matter covered
in draft conclusion 6 above, nor does it directly concern the treaty-making
process or draft treaty provisions, which may themselves give rise to State
practice and evidence of acceptance as law (opinio juris) as indicated in
draft conclusions 6 and 10 above. | 本条不涉及作为一种惯例形式的与条约有关的行为。 此事在结论草案6中已涉及。
本条也不直接涉及条约制订过程或条约条款草案，它们本身可形成上文结论草案6和10中所指出的国家实践和被接受为法律(法律确信)的证据。 |
| (2) While treaties are, as such, binding
only on the parties thereto, they “may have an important role to play in
recording and defining rules deriving from custom, or indeed in developing
them”. | (2) 尽管条约本身仅对缔约方有约束力，但它们“在记录和界定，甚至发展源于习惯的规则方面可发挥重要作用”。 |
| Their provisions (and the processes of
their adoption and application) may shed light on the content of customary
international law. | 其条款(以及通过和实施这些条款的过程)可有助于阐明习惯国际法的内容。 |
| Clearly expressed treaty provisions may
offer particularly convenient evidence as to the existence or content of
rules of customary international law when they are found to be declaratory of
such rules. | 表述清晰的条约条款，如果宣示了习惯国际法规则，可为这些规则的存在或内容提供特别适当的证据。 |
| Yet the words “may reflect” caution that,
in and of themselves, treaties cannot create a rule of customary
international law or conclusively attest to its existence or content. | 然而，“可能反映”这种措辞提请注意，条约本身无法创立习惯国际法规则或绝对证明习惯国际法规则的存在及内容。 |
| (3) The number of parties to a treaty may
be an important factor in determining whether particular rules set forth therein
reflect customary international law; | (3) 一项条约的缔约方数量可能是确定该条约所载具体规则是否体现习惯国际法的重要因素； |
| treaties that have obtained
near-universal acceptance may be seen as particularly indicative in this
respect. | 在这方面，已经几乎获得普遍接受的条约可被视为特别具有指示性。 |
| But treaties that are not yet in force or
which have not yet attained widespread participation may also be influential
in certain circumstances, particularly where they were adopted without
opposition or by an overwhelming majority of States. | 但尚未生效，或尚未获得普遍参与的条约在特定情况下也可具有重要影响，尤其是当它们获得通过时没有反对意见，或获得绝大多数国家支持而通过时。 |
| In any case, the attitude of States not
party to a widely ratified treaty, both at the time of its conclusion and
subsequently, will also be of relevance. | 在任何情况下，非缔约国对于一项广泛批准的条约的态度，包括在条约缔结时和缔结后的态度，也将具有相关性。 |
| (4) Paragraph 1 sets out three
circumstances in which rules set forth in a treaty may be found to reflect
customary international law, distinguished by the time when the rule of
customary international law was (or began to be) formed. | (4) 第1段规定了条约中提出的规则可以被视为反映习惯国际法的三种情况，由习惯国际法规则形成(或开始形成)的时间区分。 |
| The use of the term “rule set forth in a
treaty” seeks to indicate that a rule may not necessarily be contained in a
single treaty provision, but could be reflected by two or more provisions
read together. | 使用“条约中提出的规则”这种措辞，试图说明一条规则可能未必载于某单一条约条款，而是可能在一并解读的两条或多条条款中得到反映。 |
| The words “if it is established that”
make it clear that establishing whether a conventional rule does in fact
correspond to an alleged rule of customary international law cannot be done
just by looking at the text of the treaty: in each case the existence of the
rule must be confirmed by practice (together with acceptance as law). | “条件是能够确定”这种措辞明确了仅仅靠条约的案文并不能确定条约中的一项规则是否确实与宣称的习惯国际法规则相一致；
规则的存在必须逐例由惯例(连同被接受为法律)来印证。 |
| It is important that States can be shown
to engage in the practice not (solely) because of the treaty obligation, but
out of a conviction that the rule embodied in the treaty is or has become a
rule of customary international law. | 重要的是可以证明各国对惯例的参与并非(仅)由于条约义务，而是由于确信条约中所载规则是或已成为一项习惯国际法规则。 |
| (5) Subparagraph (a) concerns the
situation where it is established that a rule set forth in a treaty is
declaratory of a pre-existing rule of customary international law. | (5) (a)分段涉及能够确定条约中提出的规则宣示了已经存在的一项习惯国际法规则的情况。 |
| In inquiring whether this is the case
with respect to an alleged rule of customary international law, regard should
first be had to the treaty text, which may contain an express statement on
the matter. | 在调查一项宣称的习惯国际法规则是否符合这种情况时，应首先考虑条约案文，因为案文可能包含关于此事的明确声明。 |
| The fact that reservations are expressly
permitted to a treaty provision may suggest that the treaty provision does
not reflect customary international law, but is not necessarily conclusive. | 明文允许对某一条约条款有所保留可能表明该条款不反映习惯国际法，但这不一定具有决定性。 |
| Such indications within the text,
however, may be lacking, or may refer to the treaty in general rather than to
any specific rule contained therein; | 然而，这种案文中的说明可能不存在，或可能是一般性地提及条约，而不是条约所载的任何具体规则； |
| in such case, resort may be had to the
treaty’s preparatory work (travaux préparatoires), including any statements
by States in the course of the drafting process that may disclose an
intention to codify an existing rule of customary international law. | 在这种情况下，可查看条约的准备工作(travaux préparatoires)，
包括在起草过程中各国作出的可能透露将一项已经存在的习惯国际法规则编纂成法的意愿的任何声明。 |
| If it is found that the negotiating
States had indeed considered that the rule in question was a rule of
customary international law, this would be evidence of acceptance as law
(opinio juris), and would carry greater weight the larger the number of
negotiating States. | 如果发现谈判国确实认为所涉规则是一项习惯国际法规则，这将是被接受为法律(法律确信)的证据，而且谈判国的数量越多，权重就越大。 |
| There would, however, still remain a need
to consider whether sufficiently widespread and representative, as well as
consistent, instances of the relevant practice supported the existence of a
rule of customary international law (as distinct from a treaty obligation). | 但是，仍然有必要考虑是否有具备充分普遍性和代表性以及连贯性的相关惯例的实例来支持习惯国际法规则(不同于条约义务)的存在。 |
| This is both because the fact that the
parties assert that the treaty is declaratory of existing law is no more than
one piece of evidence to that effect, and because the rule of customary
international law underlying a treaty text may have changed or been
superseded since the conclusion of the treaty. | 这是因为各方声称该条约宣示了现有法律的事实只是这方面的单一证据，还因为自条约缔结以来，条约案文所依据的习惯国际法规则可能已经发生变化或被取代。 |
| In other words, relevant practice will
need to confirm, or exist in conjunction with, the opinio juris. | 换言之，相关惯例必须能够确认法律确信，或与法律确信同时存在。 |
| (6) Subparagraph (b) concerns the case
where it is established that a general practice that is accepted as law
(accompanied by opinio juris) has crystallized around a treaty rule
elaborated on the basis of only a limited amount of State practice. | (6) (b)分段涉及能够确定根据数量有限的国家实践拟订的条约规则将一项被接受为法律(伴有法律确信)的一般惯例具体化的情况。 |
| In other words, the treaty rule has
consolidated and given further definition to a rule of customary
international law that was only emerging at the time when the treaty was
being drawn up, thereby later becoming reflective of it. | 换言之，该条约规则巩固了一项在条约起草时刚刚开始出现的习惯国际法规则，并给予其进一步的定义，因此之后开始反映这项规则。 |
| Here, too, establishing that this is
indeed the case requires an evaluation of whether the treaty formulation has
been accepted as law and does in fact find support in a general practice. | 在此，确定情况确实如此也需要评估条约表述是否被接受为法律，并确实得到一般惯例的支持。 |
| (7) Subparagraph (c) concerns the case
where it is established that a rule set forth in a treaty has generated a new
rule of customary international law. | (7) (c)分段涉及能够确定条约中提出的规则产生了一项新的习惯国际法规则的情况。 |
| This is a process that is not lightly to
be regarded as having occurred. | 这一过程不能轻率地视为已经发生。 |
| As the International Court of Justice
explained in the North Sea Continental Shelf cases, for it to be established
that a rule set forth in a treaty has produced the effect that a rule of
customary international law has come into being: | 正如国际法院在北海大陆架案中所解释的那样，要确定条约中提出的规则产生了习惯国际法规则已经形成的效果： |
| [i]t would in the first place be
necessary that the provision concerned should, at all events potentially, be
of a fundamentally norm creating character such as could be regarded as
forming the basis of a general rule of law. | 其必要前提是，相关条款应在任何潜在情况下均具备根本的规范制订性质，能被视为构成一般法律规则的基础； |
| … [A]n indispensable requirement would be
that within the period in question, short though it might be, State practice,
including that of States whose interests are specially affected, should have
been both extensive and virtually uniform in the sense of the provision
invoked; — and should moreover have occurred in such a way as to show a
general recognition that a rule of law or legal obligation is involved. | …一个不可或缺的条件是，即便所涉及的期间非常短暂，国家实践，包括那些利益特别受到影响的国家的实践，应在所援引条款的意义上达到广泛而且基本统一，而且其发生方式也表明，所涉法律规则或法律义务得到普遍承认。 |
| In other words, a general practice
accepted as law (accompanied by opinio juris) “in the sense of the provision
invoked” must be observed. | 换言之，必须看到一般惯例“在所援引条款的意义上”被接受为法律(伴有法律确信)。 |
| Given that the concordant behaviour of
parties to the treaty among themselves could presumably be attributed to the
treaty obligation, rather than to acceptance of the rule in question as
binding under customary international law, the practice of such parties in
relation to non-parties to the treaty, and of non-parties in relation to
parties or among themselves, will have particular value. | 鉴于条约缔约方之间的一致行为可以假定为源于条约义务，而不是接受所涉规则根据习惯国际法具有的约束力，此类缔约方与非条约缔约方有关的惯例，以及非缔约方与缔约方有关或非缔约方之间的惯例，都将具有特别的价值。 |
| (8) Paragraph 2 seeks to caution that the
existence of similar provisions in a number of bilateral or other treaties,
thus establishing similar rights and obligations for a possibly broad array
of States, does not necessarily indicate that a rule of customary
international law is reflected in such provisions. | (8) 第2段试图提醒，在一些双边或其他条约中存在类似的条款，从而为可能范围广泛的国家确定了类似的权利和义务，但并不一定表明这些条款反映了一项习惯国际法规则。 |
| While it may indeed be the case that such
repetition attests to the existence of a corresponding rule of customary
international law (or has given rise to it), it “could equally show the contrary”
in the sense that States enter into treaties because of the absence of any
rule or in order to derogate from an existing but different rule of customary
international law. | 虽然这种重复确实可能证明存在相应的习惯国际法规则(或形成了这样一项规则)，这“同样可以证明事实正好相反”，因为各国缔结条约是由于不存在任何规则，或是为了减损一项存在却不同的习惯国际法规则。 |
| Again, an investigation into whether
there are instances of practice accepted as law (accompanied by opinio juris)
that support the written rule is required. | 同样，需要调查是否存在某种被接受为法律(伴有法律确信)的惯例实例来支持书面规则。 |
| Conclusion 12 Resolutions of international
organizations and intergovernmental conferences | 结论12 国际组织和政府间会议的决议 |
| 1. A resolution adopted by an
international organization or at an intergovernmental conference cannot, of
itself, create a rule of customary international law. | 1. 国际组织通过的或在政府间会议上通过的决议本身并不能创立一项习惯国际法规则。 |
| 2. A resolution adopted by an
international organization or at an intergovernmental conference may provide
evidence for determining the existence and content of a rule of customary
international law, or contribute to its development. | 2. 国际组织通过的或在政府间会议上通过的决议可为确定一项习惯国际法规则的存在及内容提供证据，或促进其发展。 |
| 3. A provision in a resolution adopted by
an international organization or at an intergovernmental conference may
reflect a rule of customary international law if it is established that the
provision corresponds to a general practice that is accepted as law (opinio
juris). | 3. 如果能够确定国际组织通过的或在政府间会议上通过的决议中的某项规定与一项被接受为法律(法律确信)的一般惯例相一致，则该规定可反映一项习惯国际法规则。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Draft conclusion 12 concerns the role
that resolutions adopted by international organizations or at
intergovernmental conferences may play in the determination of rules of
customary international law. | (1) 结论草案12涉及国际组织通过的或在政府间会议上通过的决议在确定习惯国际法规则方面可发挥的作用。 |
| It provides that, while such resolutions,
of themselves, can neither constitute rules of customary international law
nor serve as conclusive evidence of their existence and content, they may
have value in providing evidence of existing or emerging law and may
contribute to the development of a rule of customary international law. | 该条规定，尽管这类决议本身既不构成习惯国际法规则，也不能作为证明习惯国际法规则的存在及其内容的确凿证据，但它们在为现有或正在形成的法律提供证据方面有其价值，可以促进一项习惯国际法规则的发展。 |
| (2) As in draft conclusion 6, the word
“resolution” refers to resolutions, decisions and other acts adopted by
international organizations or at intergovernmental conferences, whatever
their designation and whether or not they are legally binding. | (2) 与结论草案6中一样，“决议”一词指国际组织或政府间会议通过的决议、决定和其他文件，而无论其名称如何，
也无论它们是否具有法律约束力。 |
| Special attention should be paid in the
present context to resolutions of the General Assembly, a plenary organ of
the United Nations with virtually universal participation, that may offer
important evidence of the collective opinion of its Members. | 在此，应特别关注联大的决议，因为联大是联合国一个几乎获得普遍参与的全体机构，可提供其会员集体意见的重要证据。 |
| Resolutions adopted by organs (or at
conferences) with more limited membership may also be relevant, but their
weight in identifying a rule of customary international law is likely to be
less. | 成员较为有限的机构(或会议)通过的决议也可能相关，但它们在识别习惯国际法规则方面的重要性很可能较小。 |
| (3) Although resolutions of organs of
international organizations (unlike resolutions of intergovermental
conferences) emanate, strictly speaking, not from the States members but from
the organization, in the context of the present draft conclusion what is
relevant is that they may reflect the collective expression of the views of
such States: when they purport (explicitly or implicitly) to touch upon legal
matters, the resolutions may afford an insight into the attitudes of the
member States towards such matters. | (3) 尽管严格而言，国际组织各机构的决议(与政府间会议的决议不同)源自这些组织，而非成员国，但在本结论草案的范围内，重要的是它们可反映这些国家意见的集体表达：当决议意在(明示或暗示)处理法律问题时，它们可有助于了解其成员国在这类问题上的态度。 |
| Much of what has been said of treaties in
relation to draft conclusion 11, above, applies to resolutions; | 上文结论草案11中对条约的大部分说明都适用于决议； |
| however, unlike treaties, resolutions are
normally not legally binding documents, and generally receive less legal
review than treaty texts. | 但是，与条约不同，决议通常不是具有法律约束力的文件，并且一般得到的法律审查要比条约案文少。 |
| Like treaties, resolutions cannot be a
substitute for the task of ascertaining whether there is in fact a general
practice that is accepted as law (accompanied by opinio juris). | 和条约一样，决议不可以替代确定是否确实存在被接受为法律(伴有法律确信)的一般惯例的工作。 |
| (4) Paragraph 1 makes clear that
resolutions adopted by international organizations or at intergovernmental
conferences cannot independently constitute rules of customary international
law. | (4) 第1段明确了国际组织通过的或在政府间会议上通过的决议不可独立构成习惯国际法规则。 |
| In other words, the mere adoption of a
resolution (or a series of resolutions) purporting to lay down a rule of
customary international law does not create such law: it has to be
established that the rule set forth in the resolution does in fact correspond
to a general practice that is accepted as law (accompanied by opinio juris). | 换言之，意在制订一项习惯国际法规则的一项决议(或一系列决议)仅仅获得通过并不能创立这类法律：必须能够确定决议中提出的规则确实与被接受为法律(伴有法律确信)的某项一般惯例相一致。 |
| There is no “instant custom” arising from
such resolutions on their own account. | 不存在此类决议本身产生的“速成习惯”。 |
| (5) Paragraph 2 states, first, that
resolutions may nevertheless assist in the determination of rules of customary
international law by providing evidence of their existence and content. | (5) 第2段首先指出，决议仍可通过为习惯国际法规则的存在及其内容提供证据来协助确定习惯国际法规则。 |
| The word “may” seeks to caution that not
all resolutions serve such a role. | “可”字试图提醒，并非所有决议都有这样的作用。 |
| As the International Court of Justice has
observed, resolutions “even if they are not binding … can, in certain
circumstances, provide evidence important for establishing the existence of a
rule or the emergence of an opinio juris”. | 正如国际法院指出的那样，决议“纵无约束力…在某些情况下，可以作为重要的证据来确定有一个规则存在或有一种法律确信刚刚出现”。 |
| This is particularly so when a resolution
purports to be declaratory of an existing rule of customary international
law, in which case it may serve as evidence of the acceptance as law of such
a rule by those States supporting the resolution. | 当一项决议意在宣示一项现有的习惯国际法规则时尤其如此，这时它可以作为这项规则被支持决议的各国接受为法律的证据。 |
| In other words, “[t]he effect of consent
to the text of such resolutions … may be understood as an acceptance of the
validity of the rule or set of rules declared by the resolution”. | 换言之，“对这些决议案文予以同意所产生的影响…，可以将其理解为…接受该决议所宣布的一项或一套规则的有效性”。 |
| Conversely, negative votes, abstentions
or disassociations from a consensus, along with general statements and
explanations of positions, may be evidence that there is no acceptance as
law. | 反过来，否决票、弃权或不赞成共识，连同一般声明和解释立场的发言一起，可用作表明不存在被接受为法律的证据。 |
| (6) Because the attitude of States
towards a given resolution (or a particular rule set forth in a resolution),
expressed by vote or otherwise, is often motivated by political or other
non-legal considerations, ascertaining acceptance as law (opinio juris) from
such resolutions must be done “with all due caution”. | (6) 因为各国通过投票或其他方式对特定决议(或某一决议中提出的特定规则)表达的态度往往出于政治考虑或其他非法律考虑，所以通过这类决议确定被接受为法律(法律确信)的工作必须“以应有的谨慎态度”进行。 |
| This is denoted by the word “may”. | 这一点通过“可”字得到体现。 |
| In each case, a careful assessment of
various factors is required in order to verify whether indeed the States
concerned intended to acknowledge the existence of a rule of customary
international law. | 应逐例对各种因素进行仔细的评估，以核实所涉国家是否确实意在确认一项习惯国际法规则的存在。 |
| As the International Court of Justice
indicated in Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons, “it is
necessary to look at [the resolution’s] content and the conditions of its
adoption; | 正如国际法院在以核武器进行威胁或使用核武器的合法性案中指出的那样：“需要审视[决议的]内容和通过[决议]时的状况； |
| it is also necessary to see whether an
opinio juris exists as to its normative character. | 还需审视是否有一种法律确信存在，认为这项决议具有规范的性质。 |
| Or a series of resolutions may show the
gradual evolution of the opinio juris required for the establishment of a new
rule. | 有时一系列决议可能体现出确立一项新规则所需的法律确信的逐渐演变。 |
| ” The precise wording used is the
starting point in seeking to evaluate the legal significance of a resolution; | ” 所使用的确切措辞是寻求评价某一决议之法律重要性的出发点； |
| reference to international law, and the
choice (or avoidance) of particular terms in the text, including the
preambular as well as the operative language, may be significant. | 对国际法的提及，以及在案文，包括在序言和执行部分中选择(或避免)特定用语，都可能具有重要意义。 |
| Also relevant are the debates and
negotiations leading up to the adoption of the resolution and especially explanations
of vote and similar statements given immediately before or after adoption. | 同样相关的还有通过决议前的辩论和谈判，特别是在通过决议前后短时间内作出的对投票的解释和类似发言。 |
| The degree of support for the resolution
(as may be observed in the size of the majority and where there are negative
votes or abstentions) is critical. | 决议所获支持程度(可见于多数票的规模以及否决票和弃权票的情况)至关重要。 |
| Differences of opinion expressed on
aspects of a resolution may indicate that no general acceptance as law
(opinio juris) exists, at least on those aspects, and resolutions which
attract negative votes or abstentions are unlikely to be regarded as
reflecting customary international law. | 就一项决议的不同方面表达的不同意见可表明不存在一般性的被接受为法律(法律确信)，至少在那些方面不存在，而获得否决票和弃权票的决议不太可能被视为反映习惯国际法。 |
| (7) Paragraph 2 further acknowledges that
resolutions adopted by international organizations or at intergovernmental
conferences, even when devoid of legal force of their own, may sometimes play
an important role in the development of customary international law. | (7) 第2段进一步确认国际组织通过的或在政府间会议上通过的决议，即便本身缺乏法律效力，有时仍可在习惯国际法的发展方面发挥重要作用。 |
| This may be the case when, as with a
treaty, a resolution (or a series of resolutions) provides inspiration and
impetus for the growth of a general practice accepted as law (accompanied by
opinio juris) conforming to its terms, or when it crystallizes an emerging
rule. | 与一项条约一样，当一项(或一系列)决议为一项与其案文相符、被接受为法律(伴有法律确信)的一般惯例的发展提供灵感和推动力时，或当一项决议将某条正在出现的规则具体化时，便可能是这种情况。 |
| (8) Paragraph 3 makes it clear that
provisions of resolutions adopted by an international organization or at an
intergovernmental conference cannot in and of themselves serve as conclusive
evidence of the existence and content of rules of customary international
law. | (8) 第3段明确表示，国际组织通过的或在政府间会议上通过的决议规定本身不能作为证明习惯国际法的存在及其内容的确凿证据。 |
| This follows from the indication that,
for the existence of a rule to be demonstrated, the opinio juris of States,
as may be evidenced by a resolution, must be borne out by practice; | 这是因为已经指出，要证明一项规则的存在，可由一项决议作为证据的各国的法律确信必须得到惯例的验证； |
| other evidence is thus required, in
particular to show whether the alleged rule is in fact observed in the
practice of States. | 因此需要其他证据，尤其是表明所宣称的规则确实在各国的实践中得到遵守。 |
| A provision of a resolution cannot be
evidence of a rule of customary international law if practice is absent,
different or inconsistent. | 如果不存在惯例，或惯例有所不同或不统一，一项决议规定便不能成为一项习惯国际法规则的证据。 |
| Conclusion 13 Decisions of courts and
tribunals | 结论13 法院和法庭的判决 |
| 1. Decisions of international courts and
tribunals, in particular of the International Court of Justice, concerning
the existence and content of rules of customary international law are a
subsidiary means for the determination of such rules. | 1. 国际性法院和法庭特别是国际法院涉及习惯国际法规则的存在及内容的判决，是确定此类规则的辅助手段。 |
| 2. Regard may be had, as appropriate, to
decisions of national courts concerning the existence and content of rules of
customary international law, as a subsidiary means for the determination of
such rules. | 2. 也可酌情考虑将各国法院涉及习惯国际法规则的存在及内容的判决用作确定此类规则的辅助手段。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Draft conclusion 13 concerns the role
of decisions of courts and tribunals, both international and national, as an
aid in the identification of rules of customary international law. | (1) 结论草案13涉及国际性和各国法院和法庭的判决在协助识别习惯国际法规则方面的作用。 |
| It should be recalled that decisions of
national courts may serve a dual role in the identification of customary
international law. | 应回顾，各国法院的判决在识别习惯国际法方面可发挥双重作用。 |
| On the one hand, as the above draft
conclusions 6 and 10 indicate, they may serve as practice as well as evidence
of acceptance as law (opinio juris) of the forum State. | 一方面，正如上文结论草案6和10所指出的样，它们可作为法院地国的惯例及被接受为法律(法律确信)的证据。 |
| Draft conclusion 13, on the other hand,
indicates that such decisions may also serve as a subsidiary means (moyen
auxiliaire) for the determination of rules of customary international law
when they themselves examine the existence and content of such rules. | 另一方面，结论草案13指出，当这类判决本身对习惯国际法规则的存在及其内容作了审查时，它们也可用作确定习惯国际法规则的辅助手段(moyen auxiliaire)。 |
| (2) Draft conclusion 13 follows closely the
language of Article 38, paragraph 1 (d), of the Statute of the International
Court of Justice, according to which, while decisions of the Court have no
binding force except between the parties, judicial decisions are a subsidiary
means for the determination of rules of international law, including rules of
customary international law. | (2) 结论草案13严格遵循《国际法院规约》第三十八条第一款(卯)项的用语，该条款规定，虽然法院之判决除对于当事国外无拘束力，但司法判例是确定国际法规则，包括习惯国际法规则的“辅助手段”。 |
| The term “subsidiary means” denotes the
ancillary role of such decisions in elucidating the law, rather than being
themselves a source of international law (as are treaties, customary
international law and general principles of law). | “辅助手段”的措辞表明了这类判决在阐明法律方面的补充作用，而并非(像条约、习惯国际法或一般法律原则那样)本身就是国际法的渊源。 |
| The use of the term “subsidiary means”
does not, and is not intended to, suggest that such decisions are not
important for the identification of customary international law. | “辅助手段”一词的使用不是表明也无意表明这类判决对于习惯国际法的识别不重要。 |
| (3) Decisions of courts and tribunals on
questions of international law, in particular those decisions in which the
existence of rules of customary international law is considered and such
rules are identified and applied, may offer valuable guidance for determining
the existence or otherwise of rules of customary international law. | (3) 各法院和法庭关于国际法问题的判决，尤其是考虑了习惯国际法规则的存在，并识别和适用了这类规则的判决，可为确定习惯国际法规则存在与否提供宝贵的指南。 |
| The value of such decisions varies
greatly, however, depending both on the quality of the reasoning (including
primarily the extent to which it results from a thorough examination of
evidence of an alleged general practice accepted as law) and on the reception
of the decision, in particular by States and in subsequent case law. | 不过，这类判决的价值大不相同，取决于推理过程的质量(主要包括判决在多大程度上经过了对某项宣称被接受为法律的一般惯例之证据的彻底审查)，尤其是各国和随后的判例对判决的接受程度。 |
| Other considerations might, depending on
the circumstances, include the nature of the court or tribunal; | 其他考虑因素可酌情包括法院或法庭的性质； |
| the size of the majority by which the
decision was adopted; | 判决通过时所获多数赞成的规模； |
| and the rules and the procedures applied
by the court or tribunal. | 以及法院或法庭适用的规则和程序。 |
| It needs to be borne in mind, moreover,
that judicial pronouncements on customary international law do not freeze the
law; | 此外，还必须铭记，关于习惯国际法的司法裁决不会使法律停滞不前； |
| rules of customary international law may
have evolved since the date of a particular decision. | 自具体判决发布之日起，习惯国际法规则可能已经有所演变。 |
| (4) Paragraph 1 refers to “international
courts and tribunals”, a term intended to cover any international body
exercising judicial powers that is called upon to consider rules of customary
international law. | (4) 第1段提到“国际性法院和法庭”，这种措辞意在涵盖任何被提请审查习惯国际法规则的行使司法权的国际机构。 |
| Express mention is made of the
International Court of Justice, the principal judicial organ of the United
Nations whose Statute is an integral part of the Charter of the United
Nations and whose members are elected by the General Assembly and Security
Council, in recognition of the significance of its case law and its
particular position as the only standing international court of general jurisdiction. | 认识到国际法院判例的重要性，和其作为具有一般管辖权的唯一常设国际性法院的特殊地位，该法院被明确提及。 它是联合国的主要司法机关，其规约是《联合国宪章》的组成部分，其成员由大会和安理会选举产生。 |
| In addition to the predecessor of the
International Court of Justice, the Permanent Court of International Justice,
the term “international courts and tribunals” includes (but is not limited
to) specialist and regional courts, such as the International Tribunal for
the Law of the Sea, the International Criminal Court and other international
criminal tribunals, regional human rights courts and the World Trade
Organization Dispute Settlement Body. | 除了国际法院的前身常设国际法院，“国际性法院和法庭”这一说法还包括(但不限于)专门法院和区域法院，例如，国际海洋法法庭、国际刑事法院和其他国际刑事法庭、区域人权法院和世界贸易组织争端解决机构。 |
| It also includes inter-State arbitral
tribunals and other arbitral tribunals applying international law. | 它还包括国家间仲裁庭和其他适用国际法的仲裁庭。 |
| The skills and the breadth of evidence
usually at the disposal of international courts and tribunals may lend
significant weight to their decisions, subject to the considerations
mentioned in the preceding paragraph. | 国际性法院和法庭通常可利用的技能和广泛的证据可使其判决具有重要分量，但需取决于上一段提及的那些考虑因素。 |
| (5) For the purposes of this draft
conclusion, the term “decisions” includes judgments and advisory opinions, as
well as orders on procedural and interlocutory matters. | (5) 为本结论草案的目的，“判决”一词包括判决和咨询意见以及关于程序事项和中间事宜的指示。 |
| Separate and dissenting opinions may shed
light on the decision and may discuss points not covered in the decision of
the court or tribunal, but they need to be approached with caution since they
reflect the viewpoint of the individual judge and may set out points not
accepted by the court or tribunal. | 个别意见和不同意见可有助于理解判决，并可能讨论到法院或法庭的判决中没有涵盖的要点； 但必须对它们持有谨慎态度，因为它们反映个别法官的观点，或可能提出未被法院或法庭接受的要点。 |
| (6) Paragraph 2 concerns decisions of
national courts (also referred to as domestic or municipal courts). | (6) 第2段涉及各国法院(也被称为国内法院)的判决。 |
| The distinction between international and
national courts is not always clear-cut; | 国际性法院和各国法院之间的区别并不总是那么明确； |
| in these draft conclusions, the term
“national courts” includes courts with an international composition operating
within one or more domestic legal systems, such as “hybrid” courts and
tribunals involving mixed national and international composition and
jurisdiction. | 在这些结论草案中，“各国法院”一词包括在一个或多个国内法律体系内运作的具有国际性人员构成的法院，例如具有本国和国际混合人员构成和混合管辖权的“混合性”法院和法庭。 |
| (7) Some caution is called for when
seeking to rely on decisions of national courts as a subsidiary means for the
determination of rules of customary international law. | (7) 试图依据各国法院的判决作为确定习惯国际法规则的辅助手段时需要采取审慎态度。 |
| This is reflected in the different
wording of paragraphs 1 and 2, in particular the use of the words “[r]egard
may be had, as appropriate” in paragraph 2. | 第1段和第2段的不同措辞便体现出这一点，特别是第2段中使用的“可酌情考虑”的说法。 |
| National courts operate within a
particular legal system, which may incorporate international law only in a
particular way and to a limited extent. | 各国法院是在一个特定的法律体系中运作的，该体系可能仅以特殊和有限的方式反映国际法。 |
| Their decisions may reflect a particular
national perspective. | 各国法院的判决可反映特定的国家观点。 |
| Unlike most international courts,
national courts may sometimes lack international law expertise and may have
reached their decisions without the benefit of hearing argument advanced by
States. | 与大多数国际性法院不同，各国法院有时可能缺乏国际法方面的专业知识，并可能在作出判决时未能听取各国提出的论点。 |
| Conclusion 14 Teachings | 结论14 学说 |
| Teachings of the most highly qualified
publicists of the various nations may serve as a subsidiary means for the
determination of rules of customary international law. | 各国最权威的国际法专家的学说可用作确定习惯国际法规则的辅助手段。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Draft conclusion 14 concerns the role
of teachings (in French, doctrine) in the identification of rules of
customary international law. | (1) 结论草案14涉及学说(法文为doctrine)在识别习惯国际法规则方面的作用。 |
| Following closely the language of Article
38, paragraph 1 (d), of the Statute of the International Court of Justice, it
provides that such works may be resorted to as a subsidiary means (moyen
auxiliaire) for determining rules of customary international law, that is to
say, when ascertaining whether there is a general practice that is accepted
as law (accompanied by opinio juris). | 草案严格遵循《国际法院规约》第三十八条第一款(卯)项的用语，规定这类著作可作为辅助手段(moyen auxiliaire)，用以确定习惯国际法规则，也就是说，用来确定是否存在被接受为法律(伴有法律确信)的一般惯例。 |
| The term “teachings”, often referred to
as “writings”, is to be understood in a broad sense; | “学说”一词也常常被称作“论著”，应予以广泛的解读； |
| it includes teachings in non-written
form, such as lectures and audiovisual materials. | 它包括非书面形式的学说，例如讲座和视听材料。 |
| (2) As with decisions of courts and
tribunals, referred to above in draft conclusion 13, writings are not
themselves a source of international law, but may offer guidance for the
determination of the existence and content of rules of customary international
law. | (2) 与上文结论草案13提到的法院和法庭的判决一样，论著本身不是国际法的渊源，但可为确定习惯国际法规则的存在及其内容提供指南。 |
| This auxiliary role recognizes the value
that teachings may have in collecting and assessing State practice; | 这种辅助作用承认了学说在下列领域可能具备的价值：收集并评估国家实践； |
| in identifying divergences in State practice
and the possible absence or development of rules; | 识别国家实践的差异和规则的可能缺失或发展； |
| and in evaluating the law. | 评估法律。 |
| (3) There is need for caution when
drawing upon writings, since their value for determining the existence of a
rule of customary international law varies: this is reflected in the words
“may serve as”. | (3) 在借鉴论著时必须保持警惕，因为它们在确定某项习惯国际法规则存在方面的价值可能有差异：“可用作”这一措辞即反映了这种提醒。 |
| First, writers sometimes seek not merely
to record the state of the law as it is (lex lata) but to advocate its
development (lex ferenda). | 首先，著述者有时不仅试图记录法律的现状(现行法)，还设法支持其发展(拟议法)。 |
| In doing so, they do not always
distinguish (or distinguish clearly) between the law as it is and the law as
they would like it to be. | 在这么做时，他们并不总是区分(或清楚地区分)法律的现状和他们所设想的法律的状况。 |
| Second, writings may reflect the national
or other individual viewpoints of their authors. | 其次，论著可反映著述者的本国观点或其他个人观点。 |
| Third, they differ greatly in quality. | 第三，论著的质量参差不齐。 |
| Assessing the authority of a given work
is thus essential; | 因此，评估特定著述的权威性至关重要； |
| the United States Supreme Court in the
Paquete Habana Case referred to: | 美国最高法院在Paquete Habana案中提到： |
| the works of jurists and commentators who
by years of labor, research and experience have made themselves peculiarly
well acquainted with the subjects of which they treat. | 法学家和法律评论家的著作――他们通过多年的劳动、研究和经验，特别熟悉其所研究的主题。 |
| Such works are resorted to by judicial
tribunals, not for the speculations of their authors concerning what the law
ought to be, but for trustworthy evidence of what the law really is. | 司法法庭求助于这些著作，不是为了了解其著述者关于法律应当是什么的猜测，而是为了求得关于法律实际上是什么的可靠证据。 |
| (4) The term “publicists”, which comes
from the Statute of the International Court of Justice, covers all those
whose writings may elucidate questions of international law. | (4) “国际法专家”一词源自《国际法院规约》，涵盖了其论著可阐明国际法问题的所有人。 |
| While most such writers will, in the
nature of things, be specialists in public international law, others are not
excluded. | 虽然其中大多数著述者必然是国际公法专家，但其他人也没有被排除在外。 |
| The reference to “the most highly
qualified” publicists emphasizes that attention ought to be paid to the
writings of those who are eminent in the field. | “最权威的”国际法专家的提法强调应该关注该领域知名者的论著。 |
| In the final analysis, however, it is the
quality of the particular writing that matters rather than the reputation of
the author; | 但是在最终的分析中，重要的是特定论著的质量，而不是著述者的声望； |
| among the factors to be considered in
this regard are the approach adopted by the author to the identification of
customary international law and the extent to which his or her text remains
loyal to it. | 在这方面应该考虑的因素有，著述者在识别习惯国际法方面采取的方法，以及其文字忠于这种方法的程度。 |
| The reference to publicists “of the
various nations” highlights the importance of having regard, so far as
possible, to writings representative of the principal legal systems and
regions of the world and in various languages when identifying customary
international law. | “各国”国际法专家的提法，着重指出在识别习惯国际法时务必尽可能考虑可代表各主要法律体系和全球各区域以及各种语言的论著。 |
| (5) The output of international bodies
engaged in the codification and development of international law may provide
a useful resource in this regard. | (5) 参与编纂和发展国际法的国际机构的工作成果可在这方面提供有用的资源。 |
| Such collective bodies include the
Institute of International Law (Institut de droit international) and the
International Law Association, as well as international expert bodies in
particular fields and from different regions. | 这类集体机构包括国际法学会(Institut de droit
international)和国际法协会，以及不同专门领域和来自不同地区的国际专家机构。 |
| The value of each output needs to be
carefully assessed in the light of the mandate and expertise of the body
concerned, the extent to which the output seeks to state existing law, the
care and objectivity with which it works on a particular issue, the support a
particular output enjoys within the body, and the reception of the output by
States and others. | 必须参照以下因素，仔细评估每一项工作成果的价值：所涉机构的任务授权和专业知识、工作成果在多大程度上试图阐述现有法律、其在特定问题上所开展工作的仔细程度和客观性、特定工作成果在机构内部获得的支持以及各国和其他各方的认可程度。 |
| Part Six Persistent objector | 第六部分 一贯反对者 |
| Part Six comprises a single draft
conclusion, on the persistent objector rule. | 第六部分只包含一条关于一贯反对者规则的结论草案。 |
| Conclusion 15 Persistent objector | 结论15 一贯反对者 |
| 1. Where a State has objected to a rule
of customary international law while that rule was in the process of
formation, the rule is not opposable to the State concerned for so long as it
maintains its objection. | 1. 如果一国在一项习惯国际法规则的形成过程中对其表示反对，只要该国坚持其反对立场，则该规则不可施用于该国。 |
| 2. The objection must be clearly
expressed, made known to other States, and maintained persistently. | 2. 反对立场必须明确表示，向其他国家公开，并始终坚持。 |
| 3. The present draft conclusion is
without prejudice to any question concerning peremptory norms of general
international law (jus cogens). | 3. 本结论草案不影响任何关于一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的问题。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Rules of customary international law,
“by their very nature, must have equal force for all members of the
international community, and cannot therefore be the subject of any right of
unilateral exclusion exercisable at will by any one of them in its own
favour”. | (1) 习惯国际法的规则，“就其本质而言，必须对国际社会的全体成员具有平等效力，因而不得受制于其中任何一方出于有利于自身的目的、任意行使的任何单方面排除的权利”。 |
| Nevertheless, when a State has
persistently objected to an emerging rule of customary international law, and
maintains its objection after the rule has crystallized, that rule is not
opposable to it. | 尽管如此，一国若对一条开始形成的习惯国际法规则持续表示反对并且在该规则具体化以后保持反对，则该规则不可施用于该国。 |
| This is sometimes referred to as the
persistent objector “rule” or “doctrine” and not infrequently arises in
connection with the identification of rules of customary international law. | 这有时被称为一贯反对者“规则”或“原则”，在与习惯国际法规则的识别有关的情况中并不少见。 |
| As the draft conclusion seeks to convey,
the invocation of the persistent objector rule is subject to stringent
requirements. | 正如本结论草案试图表达的那样，援引一贯反对者规则须满足严格的条件。 |
| (2) The persistent objector is to be
distinguished from a situation where the objection of a significant number of
States to the emergence of a new rule of customary international law prevents
its crystallization altogether (because there is no general practice accepted
as law). | (2) 要把一贯反对者同为数众多的国家反对一条习惯国际法新规则的出现并因而使该规则完全无法具体化(因不存在被接受为法律的一般惯例)的情况区分开来。 |
| (3) A State objecting to an emerging rule
of customary international law by arguing against it or engaging in an
alternative practice may adopt one or both of two stances: it may seek to
prevent the rule from coming into being; | (3) 一国通过不认可一条开始形成的习惯国际法规则或采取其他做法，从而对该规则表示反对的，可能采取以下两种姿态中的一种或两种：该国可寻求阻止这条规则的产生； |
| or it may aim to ensure that, if it does
emerge, the rule will not be opposable to it. | 或旨在确保如果这条规则产生，将不可对该国施用。 |
| An example would be the opposition of
certain States to the then-emerging rule permitting the establishment of a
maximum 12-mile territorial sea. | 一个例子是，某些国家反对当时开始出现的、允许划定最大12海里领海的规则。 |
| Such States may have wished to
consolidate a three-, four- or six-mile territorial sea as a general rule,
but in any event were not prepared to have wider territorial seas enforced
against them. | 这些国家可能希望把三海里、四海里或六海里领海统一成一条一般规则，但无论如何不准备接受其被执行宽度更大的领海。 |
| If a rule of customary international law
is found to have emerged, it will be for the State concerned to establish the
right to benefit from persistent objector status. | 如果一条习惯国际法规则被认定已产生，应由有关国家确立从一贯反对者地位获利的权利。 |
| (4) The persistent objector rule is not
infrequently invoked and recognized, both in international and domestic case
law as well as in other contexts. | (4) 一贯反对者规则在国际和国内判例 以及在其他情况 中被援引和承认的情况并不少见。 |
| While there are differing views, the
persistent objector rule is widely accepted by States and writers as well as
by scientific bodies engaged in international law. | 虽然存在不同观点，但一贯反对者规则受到国家和著述者以及从事国际法工作的科学机构的广泛认可。 |
| (5) Paragraph 1 makes it clear that the
objection must have been made while the rule in question was in the process
of formation. | (5) 第1段明确表示，反对必须是在所涉规则形成过程中提出的。 |
| The timeliness of the objection is
critical: the State must express its opposition before a given practice has
crystallized into a rule of customary international law, and its position
will be best assured if it did so at the earliest possible moment. | 及时提出反对至关重要：该国必须在某一特定做法具体化、成为一条习惯国际法规则之前表示其反对； 如果该国在尽可能早的时间如此行事，其立场将最有保障。 |
| While the line between objection and
violation may not always be an easy one to draw, there is no such thing as a
subsequent objector rule: once the rule has come into being, an objection
will not avail a State wishing to exempt itself. | 虽然反对同违反的界限不常易于区分，但不存在所谓的嗣后反对者规则：一旦规则形成，反对将无助于希望免受约束的国家。 |
| (6) If a State establishes itself as a
persistent objector, the rule is not opposable to it for so long as it
maintains the objection; | (6) 如果一国将其确立为一贯反对者，只要其坚持反对立场，则该规则不可施用于该国； |
| the expression “not opposable” is used in
order to reflect the exceptional position of the persistent objector. | 使用“不可施用”这一表述是为了反映一贯反对者的例外立场。 |
| As the paragraph further indicates, once
an objection is abandoned (as it may be at any time, expressly or otherwise),
the State in question becomes bound by the rule. | 本段进一步说，一旦放弃反对立场(反对立场可随时明确或以其他方式加以放弃)，当事国就受该规则的约束。 |
| (7) Paragraph 2 clarifies the stringent
requirements that must be met for a State to establish and maintain
persistent objector status vis-à-vis a rule of customary international law. | (7) 第2段明确了一国确立并维持对一条习惯国际法规则的一贯反对者地位所必须满足的严格要求。 |
| In addition to being made before the
practice crystallizes into a rule of law, the objection must be clearly
expressed, meaning that non-acceptance of the emerging rule or the intention
not to be bound by it must be unambiguous. | 反对立场除必须在该做法具体化成为法律规则前提出外，还必须明确表示出来，这意味着不接受开始形成的规则或不受其约束的意图必须毫不含糊。 |
| There is, however, no requirement that
the objection be made in a particular form. | 然而，不要求以特定形式提出反对立场。 |
| A clear verbal objection, either in
written or oral form, as opposed to physical action, will suffice to preserve
the legal position of the objecting State. | 以书面或口头形式明确提出的反对言辞(即相对于实际行动)足以维持反对国的法律立场。 |
| (8) The requirement that the objection be
made known to other States means that the objection must be communicated
internationally; it cannot simply be voiced internally. | (8) 必须向其他国家公开反对立场的要求，意味着这一反对立场必须向国际社会传达，不能仅在内部发出声音。 |
| It is for the objecting State to ensure
that the objection is indeed made known to other States. | 应由反对国确保该反对立场确实为其他国家所知。 |
| (9) The requirement that the objection be
maintained persistently applies both before and after the rule of customary
international law has emerged. | (9) 必须始终坚持反对立场的要求，在习惯国际法规则出现之前和之后均适用。 |
| Assessing whether this requirement has
been met needs to be done in a pragmatic manner, bearing in mind the
circumstances of each case. | 需要用现实的方式评估这一要求是否得到满足，并牢记每起案件的实际情况。 |
| The requirement signifies, first, that
the objection should be reiterated when the circumstances are such that a
restatement is called for (that is, in circumstances where silence or
inaction may reasonably lead to the conclusion that the State has given up
its objection). | 这一要求意味着，首先，当情况要求重申反对立场时(也就是说，在沉默或不作为可合理得出该国已放弃其反对立场的结论的情况下)则应重申。 |
| It is clear, however, that States cannot
be expected to react on every occasion, especially where their position is
already well known. | 然而，明显不能期待国家在每个场合作出反应，尤其是在其立场已广为知晓的情况下。 |
| Second, such repeated objections must be
consistent overall, that is, without significant contradictions. | 第二，再次重复的反对立场必须总体一致，即无重大矛盾。 |
| (10) Paragraph 3 provides expressly that
draft conclusion 15 is without prejudice to any question concerning
peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | (10) 第3段明确规定，结论草案15不影响任何关于一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的问题。 |
| The commentary to draft conclusion 1
already makes clear that all of the present draft conclusions are without
prejudice to questions of hierarchy among rules of international law,
including those concerning peremptory norms of general international law (jus
cogens), or questions concerning the erga omnes nature of certain
obligations. | 结论草案1的评注已明确指出，现有的所有结论草案并不影响国际法规则之间的等级问题，包括涉及一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的问题，或某些义务的普遍适用性的问题。 |
| Part Seven Particular customary
international law | 第七部分 特别习惯国际法 |
| Part Seven consists of a single draft
conclusion, dealing with particular customary international law (sometimes
referred to as “regional custom” or “special custom”). | 第七部分只包含一条结论草案，处理特别习惯国际法(有时被称为“区域习惯”或“特殊习惯”)的问题。 |
| While rules of general customary international
law are binding on all States, rules of particular customary international
law apply among a limited number of States. | 一般习惯国际法规则对所有国家有约束力，而特别习惯国际法规则在数量有限的国家之间适用。 |
| Even though they are not frequently
encountered, they can play a significant role in inter-State relations,
accommodating differing interests and values peculiar to only some States. | 特别习惯国际法规则虽然并不十分常见，但照顾到了不尽相同的、仅某些国家特有的利益和价值观，因而在国与国关系中发挥着重要作用。 |
| Conclusion 16 Particular customary
international law | 结论16 特别习惯国际法 |
| 1. A rule of particular customary
international law, whether regional, local or other, is a rule of customary
international law that applies only among a limited number of States. | 1. 特别习惯国际法规则，不论是区域的、地方的还是其他层面的，都是仅在数量有限的国家之间适用的习惯国际法规则。 |
| 2. To determine the existence and content
of a rule of particular customary international law, it is necessary to
ascertain whether there is a general practice among the States concerned that
is accepted by them as law (opinio juris) among themselves. | 2. 要确定一项特别习惯国际法规则的存在及内容，必须查明有关国家之间是否存在一项被接受为法律(法律确信)的一般惯例。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) That rules of customary international
law that are not general in nature may exist is undisputed. | (1) 可能存在不具一般性的习惯国际法规则，这一点毫无争议。 |
| The case law of the International Court
of Justice confirms this, having referred, inter alia, to customary
international law “particular to the Inter-American Legal system” or “limited
in its impact to the African continent as it has previously been to Spanish
America”, “a local custom”, and customary international law “of a regional
nature”. | 国际法院的判例确认这一点，除其他外，曾经提到“特别适用于美洲国家法系的” 或“影响仅限于非洲大陆，正如以前仅限于西班牙语美洲的” 习惯国际法、“地方习惯” 以及“区域性”习惯国际法。 |
| Cases where the identification of such
rules was considered include the Asylum case and the Right of Passage case. | 有的案件审理了明确此类规则的问题，包括庇护权案 和通行权案。 |
| The term “particular customary
international law” refers to these rules in contrast to rules of customary
international law of general application. | “特别习惯国际法”这一术语指的是与一般适用的习惯国际法规则相对的规则。 |
| It is used in preference to “particular
custom” to emphasize that the draft conclusion is concerned with rules of
law, not mere customs or usages; | 选用这一术语而不用“特别习惯”，目的在于强调本结论草案关心的是法律规则，而不单单是习惯或惯例； |
| there may well be “local customs” among
States that do not amount to rules of international law. | 各国之间很可能存在不构成国际法规则的“地方习惯”。 |
| (2) Draft conclusion 16 has been placed
at the end of the set of draft conclusions since the preceding draft
conclusions generally apply also in respect of the determination of rules of
particular customary international law, except as otherwise provided in the
present draft conclusion. | (2) 结论草案16被放在整套结论草案的最后，是因为前面的结论草案总体上也适用于特别习惯国际法规则的确定，除本条结论草案另作规定的地方以外。 |
| In particular, the two-element approach
applies, as described in the present commentary. | 尤其是正如本评注描述的那样，两要素法是适用的。 |
| (3) Paragraph 1, which is definitional in
nature, explains that particular customary international law applies only
among a limited number of States. | (3) 第1段具有定义的性质，解释特别习惯国际法仅在数量有限的国家之间适用。 |
| It is to be distinguished from general
customary international law, that is, customary international law that in
principle applies to all States. | 应该把它同一般习惯国际法区分开来，也就是同原则上适用于所有国家的习惯国际法区分开来。 |
| A rule of particular customary
international law itself thus creates neither obligations nor rights for
third States. | 因此，特别习惯国际法规则本身不为第三国创设义务或权利。 |
| (4) Rules of particular customary
international law may apply among various types of groupings of States. | (4) 特别习惯国际法规则可能适用于不同类型的国家集团形式。 |
| Reference is often made to customary
rules of a regional nature, such as those “peculiar to Latin-American States”
(the institution of diplomatic asylum commonly being cited). | 经常提到的是区域性的习惯规则，例如“特别适用于美洲国家法系的”规则(外交庇护制度常被援引)。 |
| Particular customary international law
may cover a smaller geographical area, such as a sub-region, or even bind as
few as two States. | 特别习惯国际法可能涵盖一个较小的地域，例如一个次区域，或者甚至约束少至两个国家。 |
| In the Right of Passage case the
International Court of Justice explained that: | 在通行权案中，国际法院解释称： |
| It is difficult to see why the number of
States between which a local custom may be established on the basis of long
practice must necessarily be larger than two. | 很难理解为什么必须要在两个以上的国家之间才能根据长期实践确立地方惯例。 |
| The Court sees no reason why long continued
practice between two States accepted by them as regulating their relations
should not form the basis of mutual rights and obligations between the two
States. | 法院认为两国之间长期持续的、被其接受用于规范相互关系的惯例没有理由不应成为这两个国家之间相互权利和义务的根据。 |
| Cases in which assertions of such rules
of particular customary international law have been examined have concerned,
for example, a right of access to enclaves in foreign territory; a
co-ownership (condominium) of historic waters by three coastal States; a
right to subsistence fishing by nationals inhabiting a river bank serving as
a border between two riparian States; | 一些案件审理了对此类特别习惯国际法规则的主张，例如涉及以下问题：进入外国领土上飞地的权利， 由三个沿海国共有(共管)历史水域， 居住在两个沿岸国之间界河上的国民出于生计而捕鱼的权利，
跨国或国际过境免于移民手续的权利， 以及就管理两国界河上的发电问题达成协议的义务。 |
| a right of cross-border/international
transit free from immigration formalities; and an obligation to reach
agreement in administering the generation of power on a river constituting a
border between two States. | (5) 虽然适用特别习惯国际法规则的国家之间往往存在某种地理关系，但未必总是如此。 |
| (5) While some geographical relationship
usually exists between the States among which a rule of particular customary
international law applies, that may not necessarily be the case. The
expression “whether regional, local or other” is intended to acknowledge that
although particular customary international law is mostly regional,
subregional or local, there is no reason in principle why a rule of
particular customary international law could not also develop among States
linked by a common cause, interest or activity other than their geographical
position, or constituting a community of interest, whether established by
treaty or otherwise. | “不论是区域、地方还是其他层面的”这一表述的目的是承认虽然特别习惯国际法大多是区域、次区域或地方性的，但原则上没有理由认为由共同的事业、利益或活动(而非其地理位置)联系起来或构成一个利益共同体的国家间不能发展出一条特别习惯国际法规则，不论是通过条约还是其他方式加以确立的。 |
| (6) Paragraph 2 addresses the substantive
requirements for identifying a rule of particular customary international
law. | (6) 第2段讨论明确特别习惯国际法规则的实质性要求。 |
| In essence, determining whether such a
rule exists consists of a search for a general practice prevailing among the
States concerned that is accepted by them as governing their relations inter
se. | 从根本上说，判断这一规则是否存在，就是要寻找一条当事国之间通行、被其接受、规范其相互关系的一般惯例。 |
| The International Court of Justice in the
Asylum case provided guidance on this matter, holding with respect to the
argument by Colombia as to the existence of a “regional or local custom
particular to Latin-American States” that: | 国际法院在庇护权案中就此事提供了指导意见，对于哥伦比亚关于存在一个“拉丁美洲国家特有的区域或地方习惯”的主张，法院认定： |
| The Party which relies on a custom of
this kind must prove that this custom is established in such a manner that it
has become binding on the other Party. | 依据此种习惯的当事方必须证明，这一习惯建立的方式使之对另一当事方也已具有约束力。 |
| The Colombian Government must prove that
the rule invoked by it is in accordance with a constant and uniform usage
practised by the States in question, and that this usage is the expression of
a right appertaining to the State granting asylum and a duty incumbent on the
territorial State. | 哥伦比亚政府必须证明其援引的规则符合有关国家采用的恒定、统一的惯例，并且这种惯例体现了属于给予庇护国的一项权利和领土所属国负有的一项义务。 |
| This follows from Article 38 of the
Statute of the Court, which refers to international custom “as evidence of a
general practice accepted as law”. | 这源于《国际法院规约》第三十八条，其中称国际习惯为“作为通例之证明而经接受为法律者”。 |
| (7) The two-element approach requiring
both a general practice and its acceptance as law (opinio juris) thus also
applies in the case of identifying rules of particular customary
international law. | (7) 因此，既要求有一项一般惯例、又要求其被接受为法律(法律确信)的两要素法也适用于识别特别习惯国际法规则的情况。 |
| In the case of particular customary
international law, however, the practice must be general in the sense that it
is a consistent practice “among the States concerned”, that is, all the
States among which the rule in question applies. | 然而，对于特别习惯国际法而言，惯例必须具有一般性的意思是，它必须是“各当事国之间”(也就是在所涉规则适用的所有国家中)的一致惯例。 |
| Each of these States must have accepted
the practice as law among themselves. | 其中每一国都必须已经接受该惯例为这几国之间的法律。 |
| In this respect, the application of the
two-element approach is stricter in the case of rules of particular customary
international law. | 就此而言，两要素法在特别习惯国际法规则的情况中适用得更为严格。 |
| Chapter VI Protection of the atmosphere | 第六章 保护大气层 |
| A. Introduction | A. 导言 |
| 67. At its sixty-fifth session (2013),
the Commission decided to include the topic “Protection of the atmosphere” in
its programme of work, subject to an understanding, and appointed Mr. Shinya
Murase as Special Rapporteur. | 67. 委员会第六十五届会议(2013年)决定在遵守一项谅解的前提下将“保护大气层”专题列入工作方案，并任命村濑信也先生为特别报告员。 |
| 68. The Commission received and
considered the first report of the Special Rapporteur at its sixty-sixth
session (2014); the second report at its sixty-seventh session (2015); the
third report at its sixty-eighth session (2016); | 68. 委员会第六十六届会议(2014年)收到并审议了特别报告员提交的第一次报告，第六十七届会议(2015年)、第六十八届会议(2016年)、第六十九届会议(2017年)分别收到并审议了第二、第三和第四次报告。 |
| and the fourth report at its sixty-ninth
session (2017). On the basis of the draft guidelines proposed by the Special
Rapporteur in the second, third, and fourth reports, the Commission
provisionally adopted nine draft guidelines and eight preambular paragraphs,
together with commentaries thereto. | 委员会在特别报告员第二、第三和第四次报告提出的指南草案基础上，暂时通过了九条指南草案和八个序言段以及评注。 |
| B. Consideration of the topic at the
present session | B. 本届会议审议此专题的情况 |
| 69. At the present session, the
Commission had before it the fifth report of the Special Rapporteur
(A/CN.4/711), in which the Special Rapporteur, first, addressed the question
of implementation of the draft guidelines at the national level. | 69. 委员会本届会议收到了特别报告员的第五次报告(A/CN.4/711)。 特别报告员先是处理了指南草案在国家一级的执行问题。 |
| In that regard, he underlined the various
modes of such implementation depending on the nature of the obligations
concerned, and extraterritorial application of national law in certain
situations. | 在这方面，他强调依有关义务的性质，存在着各种执行模式，并强调了在某些情况下域外适用国内法的问题。 |
| Second, he examined the situations in
which there was a failure to implement the obligations concerned. | 其次，他探讨了未履行有关义务的情况。 |
| Turning to the question of compliance at
the international level, the Special Rapporteur explained that he favoured
cooperative compliance mechanisms, meant to give assistance to a
non-compliant party, over punitive or enforcement mechanisms, which were
based on the responsibility of States and intended to place penalties on the
non-compliant party. | 谈到国际一级的遵守问题，特别报告员解释说，他赞成合作遵约机制，意在协助不遵守的当事方，而不是惩罚性或强制执行的机制，这种机制基于国家责任，意在对违规方进行处罚。 |
| Third, the Special Rapporteur considered
the question of dispute settlement. | 第三，特别报告员考虑了解决争端的问题。 |
| In that connection, he emphasized both
the need for the peaceful settlement of disputes and the need to take into
account the science-dependent and fact-intensive character of environmental
disputes, which led to a requirement to assess scientific evidence and ensure
that adequate rules of procedure applied to such disputes. | 在这方面，他强调，既有必要以和平方式解决争端，也有必要考虑到环境争端依赖科学和涉及大量事实的特点，因此需要对科学证据进行评估并确保有充分的程序规则适用于此类争端。 |
| 70. Based on his analysis, the Special
Rapporteur proposed three additional draft guidelines concerning
implementation (draft guideline 10), compliance (draft guideline 11) and
dispute settlement (draft guideline 12). | 70. 特别报告员根据自己的分析，提出了另外三项指南草案，分别涉及执行(指南草案10)、遵约(指南草案11)和解决争端(指南草案12)。 |
| Furthermore, the Special Rapporteur
expressed the hope to conclude the first reading of the draft guidelines at
the current session. | 此外，特别报告员希望在本届会议上完成对指南草案的一读。 |
| 71. The Commission considered the fifth
report of the Special Rapporteur at its 3405th and 3409th to 3413th meetings,
on 17, 22 to 25 and 29 May 2018, respectively. | 71. 委员会在分别于2018年5月17日、22至25日和29日举行的第3405次和第3409次至第3413次会议上审议了特别报告员的第五次报告。 |
| 72. Following its debate on the report,
the Commission, at its 3413th meeting, on 29 May 2018, decided to refer draft
guidelines 10 to 12, as contained in the Special Rapporteur’s fifth report, to
the Drafting Committee, taking into account the debate in the Commission. | 72. 对该报告进行辩论后，委员会在2018年5月29日举行的第3413次会议上，决定根据委员会的辩论情况，将特别报告员第五次报告所载的指南草案10至12转交起草委员会。 |
| 73. At its 3417th meeting, on 2 July
2018, the Commission received and considered the report of the Drafting
Committee (A/CN.4/L.909), and provisionally adopted the draft guidelines on
the protection of the atmosphere on first reading (see section C.1, below). | 73. 在2018年7月2日举行的第3417次会议上，委员会审议了起草委员会的报告(A/CN.4/L.909)，并一读暂时通过了关于保护大气层的指南草案(见下文C.1节)。 |
| 74. At its 3448th to 3450th meetings, on
8 and 9 August 2018, the Commission adopted the commentaries to the draft
guidelines (see section C.2, below). | 74. 在2018年8月8日和9日举行的第3448次至第3450次会议上，委员会通过了指南草案的评注(见下文C.2节)。 |
| 75. At its 3450th meeting, on 9 August 2018,
the Commission expressed its deep appreciation for the outstanding
contribution of the Special Rapporteur, Mr. Shinya Murase, which had enabled
the Commission to bring to a successful conclusion its first reading of the
draft guidelines on the protection of the atmosphere. | 75. 在2018年8月9日举行的第3450次会议上，委员会向特别报告员村濑信也先生深表感谢，由于他的杰出贡献，委员会得以圆满结束对关于保护大气层的指南草案的一读。 |
| 76. At its 3450th meeting, on 9 August
2018, the Commission decided, in accordance with articles 16 to 21 of its
statute, to transmit the draft guidelines on the protection of the atmosphere
(see section C below), through the Secretary-General, to Governments and
international organizations for comments and observations, with the request
that such comments and observations be submitted to the Secretary-General by
15 December 2019. | 76. 在2018年8月9日举行的第3450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保护大气层的指南草案(见下文C节)转交给各国政府和各国际组织征求评论和意见，要求在2019年12月15日之前向秘书长提交此类评论和意见。 |
| C. Text of the draft guidelines on the
protection of the atmosphere, together with preamble, adopted by the
Commission on first reading | C. 委员会一读通过关于保护大气层的指南草案及序言案文 |
| 1. Text of the draft guidelines, together
with preamble | 1. 指南草案及序言案文 |
| 77. The text of the draft guidelines on
the protection of the atmosphere, together with preamble, adopted by the
Commission on first reading is reproduced below. | 77. 委员会一读通过的关于保护大气层的指南草案及序言案文载录如下。 |
| Preamble | 序言 |
| Acknowledging that the atmosphere is
essential for sustaining life on Earth, human health and welfare, and aquatic
and terrestrial ecosystems, | 承认大气层是维持地球上的生命、人类健康和福祉以及水生和陆地生态系统所不可缺少的， |
| Bearing in mind that the transport and
dispersion of polluting and degrading substances occur within the atmosphere, | 铭记污染物质和引起退化的物质的输送和扩散发生在大气层内， |
| Noting the close interaction between the
atmosphere and the oceans, | 注意到大气层与海洋的密切相互作用， |
| Recognizing therefore that the protection
of the atmosphere from atmospheric pollution and atmospheric degradation is a
pressing concern of the international community as a whole, | 因此认识到保护大气层免遭大气污染和大气层退化是整个国际社会面临的紧迫关切问题， |
| Aware of the special situation and needs
of developing countries, | 认识到发展中国家的特殊情况和需要， |
| Aware also, in particular, of the special
situation of low-lying coastal areas and small island developing States due
to sea-level rise, | 又尤其意识到低地沿海地区和小岛屿发展中国家因海平面上升而面临的特别处境， |
| Noting that the interests of future
generations of humankind in the long-term conservation of the quality of the
atmosphere should be fully taken into account, | 指出应当充分考虑到人类子孙后代在长期保护大气层质量方面的利益， |
| Recalling that the present draft
guidelines are not to interfere with relevant political negotiations,
including those on climate change, ozone depletion, and long-range
transboundary air pollution, and that they also neither seek to “fill” gaps
in treaty regimes nor impose on current treaty regimes legal rules or legal
principles not already contained therein, | 忆及本指南草案不会影响有关的政治谈判，包括关于气候变化、臭氧层消耗、远距离跨界空气污染的政治谈判，也不会试图“弥补”条约制度中存在的缺陷，或是给现行条约制度强加条约制度尚不具有的法律规则或法律原则， |
| Guideline 1 Use of terms | 指南1 用语 |
| For the purposes of the present draft
guidelines, | 为了本指南草案的目的， |
| (a) “Atmosphere” means the envelope of
gases surrounding the Earth; | (a) “大气层”指环绕地球的气体圈层； |
| (b) “Atmospheric pollution” means the
introduction or release by humans, directly or indirectly, into the
atmosphere of substances contributing to deleterious effects extending beyond
the State of origin of such a nature as to endanger human life and health and
the Earth’s natural environment; | (b) “大气污染”指人类直接或间接向大气层引入或释放某些物质，产生的有害影响超出来源国，危及人类生命和健康以及地球自然环境的现象； |
| (c) “Atmospheric degradation” means the
alteration by humans, directly or indirectly, of atmospheric conditions
having significant deleterious effects of such a nature as to endanger human
life and health and the Earth’s natural environment. | (c) “大气层退化”指人类直接或间接改变大气状况，产生重大有害影响，危及人类生命和健康以及地球自然环境的现象。 |
| Guideline 2 Scope of the guidelines | 指南2 指南的范围 |
| 1. The present draft guidelines concern
the protection of the atmosphere from atmospheric pollution and atmospheric
degradation. | 1. 本指南草案涉及保护大气层免遭大气污染和大气层退化。 |
| 2. The present draft guidelines do not
deal with, but are without prejudice to, questions concerning the
polluter-pays principle, the precautionary principle, common but
differentiated responsibilities, the liability of States and their nationals,
and the transfer of funds and technology to developing countries, including
intellectual property rights. | 2. 本指南草案不处理、但也不妨碍以下问题：污染者付费原则、谨慎原则、共同但有区别的责任、国家及其国民的赔偿责任，以及向发展中国家转让资金和技术，包括知识产权。 |
| 3. The present draft guidelines do not
deal with specific substances, such as black carbon, tropospheric ozone and
other dual-impact substances, which are the subject of negotiations among
States. | 3. 本指南草案不涉及具体物质，例如国家之间正在谈判的黑碳、对流层臭氧以及其他双重影响物质。 |
| 4. Nothing in the present draft
guidelines affects the status of airspace under international law nor
questions related to outer space, including its delimitation. | 4. 本指南草案中的任何内容都不影响国际法规定的空气空间的地位，也不影响与外层空间，包括外层空间划界有关的问题。 |
| Guideline 3 Obligation to protect the
atmosphere | 指南3 保护大气层的义务 |
| States have the obligation to protect the
atmosphere by exercising due diligence in taking appropriate measures, in
accordance with applicable rules of international law, to prevent, reduce or
control atmospheric pollution and atmospheric degradation. | 各国有义务保护大气层，履行应尽义务，按照适用的国际法规则采取适当措施，防止、减少或控制大气污染和大气层退化。 |
| Guideline 4 Environmental impact
assessment | 指南4 环境影响评估 |
| States have the obligation to ensure that
an environmental impact assessment is undertaken of proposed activities under
their jurisdiction or control which are likely to cause significant adverse
impact on the atmosphere in terms of atmospheric pollution or atmospheric
degradation. | 对于在本国管辖或控制下拟议开展的活动，凡可能对大气层造成大气污染或大气层退化等重大不利影响的，各国有义务确保进行环境影响评估。 |
| Guideline 5 Sustainable utilization of
the atmosphere | 指南5 可持续利用大气层 |
| 1. Given that the atmosphere is a natural
resource with a limited assimilation capacity, its utilization should be
undertaken in a sustainable manner. | 1. 考虑到大气层是一种吸收能力有限的自然资源，应当以可持续的方式加以利用。 |
| 2. Sustainable utilization of the
atmosphere includes the need to reconcile economic development with
protection of the atmosphere. | 2. 可持续利用大气层包括需要兼顾经济发展和大气层保护。 |
| Guideline 6 Equitable and reasonable
utilization of the atmosphere | 指南6 公平合理利用大气层 |
| The atmosphere should be utilized in an
equitable and reasonable manner, taking into account the interests of present
and future generations. | 应当考虑到今世后代的利益，以公平合理的方式利用大气层。 |
| Guideline 7 Intentional large-scale
modification of the atmosphere | 指南7 有意大规模改变大气层 |
| Activities aimed at intentional
large-scale modification of the atmosphere should be conducted with prudence
and caution, subject to any applicable rules of international law. | 应当在遵守任何适用的国际法规则前提下，审慎和谨慎地开展旨在有意大规模改变大气层的活动。 |
| Guideline 8 International cooperation | 指南8 国际合作 |
| 1. States have the obligation to
cooperate, as appropriate, with each other and with relevant international
organizations for the protection of the atmosphere from atmospheric pollution
and atmospheric degradation. | 1. 各国有义务就保护大气层免遭大气污染和大气层退化，酌情与其他国家或有关国际组织合作。 |
| 2. States should cooperate in further
enhancing scientific knowledge relating to the causes and impacts of
atmospheric pollution and atmospheric degradation. | 2. 各国应当就进一步增进关于大气污染和大气层退化的原因与影响的科学知识开展合作。 |
| Cooperation could include exchange of information
and joint monitoring. | 合作可包括信息交流和联合监测。 |
| Guideline 9 Interrelationship among
relevant rules | 指南9 相关规则之间的相互关系 |
| 1. The rules of international law
relating to the protection of the atmosphere and other relevant rules of
international law, including, inter alia, the rules of international trade
and investment law, of the law of the sea and of international human rights
law, should, to the extent possible, be identified, interpreted and applied
in order to give rise to a single set of compatible obligations, in line with
the principles of harmonization and systemic integration, and with a view to
avoiding conflicts. | 1. 在确定、解释及适用关于保护大气层的国际法规则和其他相关的国际法规则，尤其是国际贸易和投资法规则、海洋法规则以及国际人权法规则时，应当依照协调原则和体系整合原则及为了避免冲突，尽可能产生单一一套相互兼容的义务。 |
| This should be done in accordance with
the relevant rules set forth in the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties
of 1969, including articles 30 and 31, paragraph 3 (c), and the principles
and rules of customary international law. | 在这样做时应当遵守载于1969年《维也纳条约法公约》的相关规则，包括其第三十条和第三十一条第三款(丙)项以及习惯国际法的原则和规则。 |
| 2. States should, to the extent possible,
when developing new rules of international law relating to the protection of
the atmosphere and other relevant rules of international law, endeavour to do
so in a harmonious manner. | 2. 各国在制定关于保护大气层的国际法新规则和其他相关的国际法规则时，应当尽可能采用协调的方式。 |
| 3. When applying paragraphs 1 and 2,
special consideration should be given to persons and groups particularly
vulnerable to atmospheric pollution and atmospheric degradation. | 3. 在适用第1和第2段时，应当特别考虑到特别易受大气污染和大气层退化影响的个人和群体。 |
| Such groups may include, inter alia,
indigenous peoples, people of the least developed countries and people of
low-lying coastal areas and small island developing States affected by
sea-level rise. | 这些群体除其他人外，可能包括土著人民、最不发达国家的人民和受海平面上升影响的低地沿海地区和小岛屿发展中国家的人民。 |
| Guideline 10 Implementation | 指南10 执行 |
| 1. National implementation of obligations
under international law relating to the protection of the atmosphere from
atmospheric pollution and atmospheric degradation, including those referred
to in the present draft guidelines, may take the form of legislative,
administrative, judicial and other actions. | 1. 各国在执行与保护大气层免遭大气污染和大气层退化有关的国际法规定的义务、包括本指南草案中所述的义务时，采取的形式可包括立法、行政、司法和其他行动。 |
| 2. States should endeavour to give effect
to the recommendations contained in the present draft guidelines. | 2. 各国应当努力落实本指南草案所载的各项建议。 |
| Guideline 11 Compliance | 指南11 遵约 |
| 1. States are required to abide with
their obligations under international law relating to the protection of the
atmosphere from atmospheric pollution and atmospheric degradation in good
faith, including through compliance with the rules and procedures in the
relevant agreements to which they are parties. | 1. 各国须善意地遵守与保护大气层免遭大气污染和大气层退化有关的国际法规定的义务，包括为此遵守它们所加入的相关协定中所载的规则和程序。 |
| 2. To achieve compliance, facilitative or
enforcement procedures may be used, as appropriate, in accordance with the
relevant agreements: | 2. 为实现遵约，可根据相关协定酌情采用促进性程序或强制执行程序： |
| (a) facilitative procedures may include
providing assistance to States, in cases of non-compliance, in a transparent,
non-adversarial and non-punitive manner to ensure that the States concerned
comply with their obligations under international law, taking into account
their capabilities and special conditions; | (a) 促进性程序可包括在出现不遵约情况时，以透明、非对抗和非惩罚性方式向各国提供援助，确保当事国遵守国际法为其规定的义务，同时考虑到其能力和特殊情况； |
| (b) enforcement procedures may include
issuing a caution of non-compliance, termination of rights and privileges
under the relevant agreements, and other forms of enforcement measures. | (b) 强制执行程序可包括发布不遵约警告、终止根据相关协定享有的权利和特权以及采取其他形式的强制执行措施。 |
| Guideline 12 Dispute settlement | 指南12 争端解决 |
| 1. Disputes between States relating to
the protection of the atmosphere from atmospheric pollution and atmospheric
degradation are to be settled by peaceful means. | 1. 与保护大气层免遭大气污染和大气层退化有关的国家间争端应通过和平手段加以解决。 |
| 2. Given that such disputes may be of a
fact-intensive and science-dependent character, due consideration should be
given to the use of technical and scientific experts. | 2. 鉴于此类争端可能涉及大量事实并依赖科学，应当适当考虑使用技术和科学方面的专家。 |
| 2. Text of the draft guidelines, together
with preamble, and commentaries thereto | 2. 指南草案及序言以及评注案文 |
| 78. The text of the draft guidelines,
together with preamble, and commentaries thereto, adopted by the Commission
on first reading at its seventieth session is reproduced below. | 78. 委员会第七十届会议通过的指南草案及序言以及评注案文载录如下。 |
| Protection of the atmosphere | 保护大气层 |
| General commentary | 总评注 |
| (1) As is always the case with the
Commission’s output, the draft guidelines are to be read together with the
commentaries. | (1) 与委员会以往工作成果一样，本指南草案应结合评注来解读。 |
| (2) The Commission recognizes the
importance of being fully engaged with the international community’s
present-day needs. | (2) 委员会认识到充分照顾国际社会当前需要的重要性。 |
| It is acknowledged that both the human
and natural environments can be adversely affected by certain changes in the
condition of the atmosphere mainly caused by the introduction of harmful
substances, causing transboundary air pollution, ozone depletion, as well as
changes in the atmospheric conditions leading to climate change. | 人们承认，人类环境和自然环境都可能因大气层条件的某些改变而受到不利影响，这些改变主要由引入有害物质所致，造成跨界空气污染、臭氧层消耗，以及最终导致气候变化的大气层条件改变。 |
| The Commission seeks, through the
progressive development of international law and its codification, to provide
guidelines that may assist the international community as it addresses
critical questions relating to transboundary and global protection of the
atmosphere. | 委员会意在通过国际法的逐渐发展和编纂提供指南，协助国际社会处理与跨界和全球大气层保护有关的关键问题。 |
| In doing so, the Commission does not
desire to interfere with relevant political negotiations, including those on
long-range transboundary air pollution, ozone depletion and climate change,
seek to “fill” gaps in treaty regimes nor to impose on current treaty regimes
legal rules or legal principles not already contained therein. | 委员会做这项工作，不会影响有关的政治谈判，包括关于气候变化、臭氧层消耗、远距离跨界空气污染的政治谈判，也不会试图“弥补”条约制度中存在的缺陷，或是给现行条约制度强加条约制度尚不具有的法律规定或法律原则。 |
| Preamble | 序言 |
| Acknowledging that the atmosphere is
essential for sustaining life on Earth, human health and welfare, and aquatic
and terrestrial ecosystems, | 承认大气层是维持地球上的生命、人类健康和福祉以及水生和陆地生态系统所不可缺少的， |
| Bearing in mind that the transport and
dispersion of polluting and degrading substances occur within the atmosphere, | 铭记污染物质和引起退化的物质的输送和扩散发生在大气层内， |
| Noting the close interaction between the
atmosphere and the oceans, | 注意到大气层与海洋的密切相互作用， |
| Recognizing therefore that the protection
of the atmosphere from atmospheric pollution and atmospheric degradation is a
pressing concern of the international community as a whole, | 因此认识到保护大气层免遭大气污染和大气层退化是整个国际社会面临的紧迫关切问题， |
| Aware of the special situation and needs
of developing countries, | 认识到发展中国家的特殊情况和需要， |
| Aware also, in particular, of the special
situation of low-lying coastal areas and small island developing States due
to sea-level rise, | 又尤其意识到低地沿海地区和小岛屿发展中国家因海平面上升而面临的特别处境， |
| Noting that the interests of future
generations of humankind in the long-term conservation of the quality of the
atmosphere should be fully taken into account, | 指出应当充分考虑到人类子孙后代在长期保护大气层质量方面的利益， |
| Recalling that the present draft
guidelines are not to interfere with relevant political negotiations,
including those on climate change, ozone depletion, and long-range
transboundary air pollution, and that they also neither seek to “fill” gaps
in treaty regimes nor impose on current treaty regimes legal rules or legal
principles not already contained therein, | 忆及本指南草案不会影响有关的政治谈判，包括关于气候变化、臭氧层消耗、远距离跨界空气污染的政治谈判，也不会试图“弥补”条约制度中存在的缺陷，或是给现行条约制度强加条约制度尚不具有的法律规则或法律原则， |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) On previous occasions, preambles have
been prepared once the Commission has concluded work on a particular topic. | (1) 在以往情况下，委员会在结束某个专题的工作时拟订序言部分。 |
| In the present case, however, due to the
way in which the guidelines have evolved, a draft preamble has been
elaborated during the drafting process. | 然而这次的情况不同，因指南发生变化，序言草案在拟订指南的过程中就形成了。 |
| The Commission, for example, referred
draft guideline 3 (on the common concern of humankind), as contained in the
Special Rapporteur’s second report, to the Drafting Committee, for
consideration in the context of a possible preamble. | 例如，委员会将特别报告员第二份报告 所载指南草案3 (人类的共同关切)转交给了起草委员会，与可能拟订的序言一并审议。 |
| (2) The preamble seeks to provide a
contextual framework for the draft guidelines. | (2) 序言部分是要为指南草案提供一个背景框架。 |
| The first preambular paragraph is
overarching in acknowledging the essential importance of the atmosphere for
sustaining life on Earth, human health and welfare, and aquatic and
terrestrial ecosystems. | 第一序言段是总括性的，承认大气层是维持地球上的生命、人类健康和福祉以及水生和陆地生态系统所不可或缺的。 |
| The atmosphere is the Earth’s largest
single natural resource and one of its most important. | 大气层是地球最大的单一自然资源，也是最重要的自然资源之一。 |
| It was listed as a natural resource —
along with mineral, energy and water resources — by the former Committee on
Natural Resources of the Economic and Social Council, as well as in the 1972
Declaration of the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment
(hereinafter, “Stockholm Declaration”) and in the 1982 World Charter for
Nature. | 原联合国自然资源委员会、 1972年《斯德哥尔摩宣言》 及1982年《世界自然宪章》 将之与矿物、能源和水资源并列，视为自然资源。 |
| The atmosphere provides renewable “flow
resources” essential for human, plant and animal survival on the planet, and
it serves as a medium for transportation and communication. | 大气层为人类、植物和动物在地球上生存提供了至关重要的可再生的“流动资源”； 它还被用作运输和传播的媒介。 |
| As a natural resource, the atmosphere was
long considered to be non-exhaustible and non-exclusive, since it was assumed
that everyone could benefit from it without depriving others. | 作为一种自然资源，大气层过去长期被视为无限、非专属的资源，因为存在一种认为人人可在不剥夺他人的情况下从中受益的假设。 |
| That view is no longer held. | 人们如今不再持有这种看法。 |
| It must be borne in mind that the
atmosphere is a limited resource with limited assimilation capacity. | 必须牢记，大气层是一种吸收能力有限的有限资源。 |
| (3) The second preambular paragraph
addresses the functional aspect of the atmosphere as a medium through which
transport and dispersion of polluting and degrading substances occur. | (3) 第二序言段指出大气层作为污染物质和引起退化的物质输送和扩散媒介的功能方面。 |
| The Commission considered it appropriate
to refer to this functional aspect in the preamble. | 委员会认为宜在序言部分提及这个功能方面。 |
| This decision reflects a concern that the
inclusion of the functional aspect as part of the definition, as originally
proposed, may suggest that this transport and dispersion is desirable, which
is not the intention of the Commission. | 这一决定反映了一种关切，即如按原先提议，将功能方面包括在定义之中，可能暗示这种输送和扩散是所希望的，但这不是委员会的意向。 |
| Long-range transboundary movement of
polluting and degrading substances is recognized as one of the major problems
of the present-day atmospheric environment, with the Arctic region being
identified as one of the areas most seriously affected by the worldwide
spread of deleterious pollutants. | 污染物质和引起退化的物质的远距离跨界输送被视为当今大气环境的主要问题之一， 北极地区被认为是受有害污染物世界范围扩散影响最为严重的地区之一。 |
| (4) The third preambular paragraph
acknowledges the “close interaction” that arises from, as a factual matter,
the physical relationship between the atmosphere and the oceans. | (4) 第三序言段承认大气层与海洋的“密切相互作用”，这一作用事实上产生于二者之间的物理关系。 |
| A significant proportion of the pollution
of the marine environment from or through the atmosphere originates from
land-based sources, including from anthropogenic activities on land. | 大部分来自或通过大气层的海洋环境污染源于陆地，包括陆上人类活动。 |
| Scientific research shows that human
activities are also responsible for global warming, which causes a rise in
temperature of the oceans and in turn results in extreme atmospheric
conditions of flood and drought. | 科学研究表明，人类活动还应为全球变暖负责，全球变暖造成海洋水温上升，而海洋水温上升又进而导致洪水和干旱等极端大气状况。 |
| In its resolution 71/257 of 23 December
2016, the General Assembly confirmed the effect of climate change on oceans
and stressed the importance of increasing the scientific understanding of the
oceans-atmosphere interface. | 大会2016年12月23日第71/257号决议确认了气候变化对海洋的影响，并强调必须增进对海洋大气界面的科学了解。 |
| (5) In 2015, the First Global Integrated
Marine Assessment (first World Ocean Assessment) was completed as a
comprehensive, in-depth study on the state of the marine environment
including a chapter addressing in part the substances polluting the oceans
from land-based sources through the atmosphere. | (5) 2015年完成了第一次全球海洋综合评估(第一次世界海洋评估)，这是对海洋环境状况进行的一项全面深入研究，其中有一章部分述及来自陆地并经由大气层而污染海洋的物质。 |
| The summary of the report was approved by
the General Assembly at its seventieth session. | 大会第七十届会议核准了该报告的摘要。 |
| (6) Among the various human activities
that have an impact on the oceans, greenhouse gas emissions from ships
contribute to global warming and climate change. | (6) 在对海洋有影响的各种人类活动中，船只产生的温室气体排放加剧了全球变暖和气候变化。 |
| The 2009 study by the International
Maritime Organization (IMO) on greenhouse gas emissions classified such
emissions from ships into four categories, namely: emissions of exhaust
gases, cargo emissions, emissions of refrigerants and other emissions. | 国际海事组织(海事组织)2009年关于温室气体排放的研究报告将船只产生的温室气体排放分为四大类，即废气排放、货物排放、制冷剂排放和其他排放。 |
| Research indicates that excessive
greenhouse gas emissions from ships change the composition of the atmosphere
and climate, and cause a negative impact on the marine environment and human
health. | 研究表明，船只的温室气体过度排放改变了大气成分和气候，对海洋环境和人类健康造成不利影响。 |
| (7) The General Assembly has continued to
emphasize the urgency of addressing the effects of atmospheric degradation,
such as increases in global temperatures, sea-level rise, ocean acidification
and the impact of other climate changes that are seriously affecting coastal
areas and low-lying coastal countries, including many least developed
countries and small island developing States, and threatening the survival of
many societies. | (7) 大会继续强调亟需解决大气层退化的影响，例如全球温度上升、海平面上升、海洋酸化和其他气候变化产生的影响，这些影响正在严重波及沿海地区和低地沿海国家，包括许多最不发达国家和小岛屿发展中国家，并危及许多社会的生存。 |
| (8) The third preambular paragraph is
also linked to paragraph 1 of draft guideline 9 in the sense that the
physical linkage that exists between the atmosphere and the oceans forms the
physical basis of the interrelationship between the rules on the protection
of the atmosphere and the rules of the law of the sea. | (8) 第三序言段也与指南草案9第1段存在联系，因为大气与海洋之间存在的物理联系构成了保护大气层的规则与海洋法规则之间的相互关系的物理基础。 |
| (9) The fourth preambular paragraph
pronounces, bearing in mind the importance of the problems relating to the
atmosphere, as aforementioned, that the protection of the atmosphere from
atmospheric pollution and atmospheric degradation is a “pressing concern of
the international community as a whole”. | (9) 第四序言段，在铭记上述与大气层有关的问题的重要性的前提下，申明保护大气层免遭大气污染和大气层退化是“整个国际社会面临的紧迫关切问题”。 |
| While a number of treaties and literature
demonstrate some support for the concept of “common concern of humankind”,
the Commission decided not to adopt this language for the characterization of
the problem, as the legal consequences of the concept of common concern of
humankind remain unclear at the present stage of development of international
law relating to the atmosphere. | 虽然一些条约和文献表明对于“人类的共同关切”概念存在一定程度的支持， 但委员会决定不用这个词语为问题定性，因为共同关切概念的法律后果在关于大气层的国际法发展的当前阶段尚不清楚。 |
| It was considered appropriate to express
the concern of the international community as a matter of a factual
statement, and not as a normative statement, as such, of the gravity of the
atmospheric problems. | 据认为，以事实性陈述来表述大气层问题的严重性这个国际社会关心的问题较妥，不宜用某种规范性的词句来表述。 |
| In this context, therefore, the
expression “a pressing concern of the international community as a whole” has
been employed. | 因此，在这方面采用了“整个国际社会面临的紧迫关切问题”这个表述。 |
| This is an expression that the Commission
has frequently employed as one of the criteria for the selection of new
topics for inclusion in its long-term programme of work. | 委员会常用这种表述作为选择新专题纳入长期工作方案的判断标准之一。 |
| (10) The fifth preambular paragraph,
having regard to considerations of equity, concerns the special situation and
needs of developing countries. | (10) 序言部分插入第五段是顾及公平问题，并考虑到发展中国家的特殊情况和需要。 |
| One of the first attempts to incorporate
such a principle was the Washington Conference of the International Labour
Organization in 1919, at which delegations from Asia and Africa succeeded in
ensuring the adoption of differential labour standards. | 纳入公平原则的首次尝试是亚洲和非洲代表团在1919年国际劳工组织华盛顿会议上成功促使会议通过了差异性劳工标准。 |
| Another example is the Generalized System
of Preferences elaborated under the United Nations Conference on Trade and
Development in the 1970s, as reflected in draft article 23 of the
Commission’s 1978 draft articles on most-favoured-nation clauses. | 另一个例子是1970年代联合国贸易和发展会议拟订的普遍优惠制，如委员会1978年最惠国条款草案第23条草案所反映的那样。 |
| (11) The need for special consideration
for developing countries in the context of environmental protection has been
endorsed by a number of international instruments, such as the 1972 Stockholm
Declaration, the 1992 Rio Declaration on Environment and Development
(hereinafter, “Rio Declaration”), and the 2002 Johannesburg Declaration on
Sustainable Development. | (11) 在环境保护方面需要给予发展中国家特别考虑，这一点已得到一些国际文书的认可，如1972年《联合国人类环境会议斯德哥尔摩宣言》(下称“《斯德哥尔摩宣言》”)、1992年《关于环境与发展的里约宣言》(下称“《里约宣言》”) 和2002年《约翰内斯堡可持续发展宣言》。 |
| Principle 12 of the Stockholm Declaration
attaches importance to “taking into account the circumstances and particular
requirements of developing countries”. | 《斯德哥尔摩宣言》原则12强调应“考虑发展中国家的国情和具体需求”。 |
| Principle 6 of the Rio Declaration
highlights “the special situation and needs of developing countries,
particularly the least developed and those most environmentally vulnerable”. | 《里约宣言》原则6重点指出“发展中国家，尤其是最不发达国家和在环境方面最易受伤害的发展中国家的特殊需要”。 |
| The Johannesburg Declaration expresses
resolve to pay attention to “the developmental needs of small island
developing States and least developed countries”. | 《约翰内斯堡宣言》表示决心注意“小岛屿发展中国家和最不发达国家的发展需要”。 |
| The principle is similarly reflected in
article 3 of the 1992 United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change
and article 2 of the 2015 Paris Agreement under the United Nations Framework
Convention on Climate Change (hereinafter, “Paris Agreement”). | 1992年《联合国气候变化框架公约》 第三条和2015年《巴黎协定》 第二条也反映了这一原则。 |
| (12) The formulation of the fifth
preambular paragraph is based on the seventh paragraph of the preamble of the
1997 Convention on the Law of the Non-navigational Uses of International
Watercourses. | (12) 第五序言段的行文是参照1997年《国际水道非航行使用法公约》
序言部分第七段拟订的。 |
| (13) The sixth preambular paragraph
addresses one of the most profound impacts of atmospheric degradation for all
States, that is the sea-level rise caused by global warming. | (13) 第六序言段阐述了大气层退化对所有国家最深刻的影响之一，即全球变暖造成的海平面上升。 |
| It draws particular attention to the
special situation of low-lying coastal areas and small island developing
States due to sea-level rise. | 这一段特别提请注意低地沿海地区和小岛屿发展中国家因海平面上升而面临的特别处境。 |
| The Fifth Assessment Report of the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change estimates that the global mean
sea-level rise is likely to be between 26 cm and 98 cm by the year 2100. | 政府间气候变化专门委员会第五次评估报告估计，到2100年，全球平均海平面上升可能达到26厘米至98厘米之间。 |
| While exact figures and rates of change
still remain uncertain, the report states that it is “virtually certain” that
sea levels will continue to rise during the twenty-first century, and for
centuries beyond — even if the concentrations of greenhouse gas emissions are
stabilized. | 虽然准确的数字和变化速度仍然未确定，但该报告指出，即使温室气体浓度稳定下来，“几乎可以肯定”的是，海平面将在21世纪和今后几个世纪内继续上升。 |
| Moreover, sea-level rise is likely to
exhibit “a strong regional pattern, with some places experiencing significant
deviations of local and regional sea level change from the global mean
change”. | 此外，海平面上升可能展现“一个显著的区域模式，相对于全球平均变化，一些地方将出现差异巨大的地方和区域海平面变化”。 |
| That degree of change in sea levels may
pose a potentially serious, maybe even disastrous, threat to many coastal
areas, especially those with large, heavily populated and low-lying coastal
areas, as well as to small island developing States. (14) The sixth
preambular paragraph is linked to the interrelationship between the rules of
international law relating to the protection of the atmosphere and the rules of
the law of the sea addressed in paragraph 1 of draft guideline 9. | 这种程度的海平面变化可能会给许多沿海地区带来潜在的严重甚至是灾难性威胁，特别是那些拥有大面积、人口稠密的低地沿海地区的国家，以及小岛屿发展中国家。 |
| This preambular paragraph is also linked
to the special consideration to be given to persons and groups in vulnerable
situations, which are referred to in paragraph 3 of draft guideline 9. | (14) 第六序言段与指南草案9第1段所述的关于保护大气层的国际法规则与海洋法规则之间的相互关系有关。 |
| The words “in particular” are intended to
acknowledge specific areas without necessarily limiting the list of
potentially affected areas. | 本序言段还与指南草案9第3段所述的特别考虑到容易受到影响的个人和群体有关。 |
| (15) The seventh preambular paragraph
emphasizes the interests of future generations, including with a view to
human rights protection. | “尤其”一词旨在确认一些特定地区，同时又不限定潜在受影响地区的清单。 |
| The goal is to ensure that the planet
remains habitable for future generations. | (15) 第七序言段强调子孙后代的利益，包括促进人权保护。 |
| In taking measures to protect the
atmosphere today, it is important to take into account the long-term
conservation of the quality of the atmosphere. | 其目标是确保我们的星球一直适合子孙后代居住。 |
| The 2015 Paris Agreement, in its
preamble, after acknowledging that climate change is a common concern of
humankind, provides that parties should, when taking action to address
climate change, respect, promote and consider, among other things, their
respective obligations on human rights, as well as intergenerational equity. | 2015年《巴黎协定》在序言中承认气候变化是人类共同关心的问题，之后规定缔约方在采取行动应对气候变化时，应当尊重、促进和考虑，除其他外，它们各自对人权和代际公平的义务。 |
| The importance of “intergenerational”
considerations was already expressed in principle 1 of the 1972 Stockholm
Declaration. | “代际”考虑的重要性在1972年《斯德哥尔摩宣言》的原则1中已有表述。 |
| It also underpins the concept of
sustainable development, as formulated in the 1987 Brundtland Report, Our
Common Future, and informs the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. | 这种考虑还是1987年《布伦特兰报告：我们共同的未来》 所提出的可持续发展概念的基础，并为《2030年可持续发展议程》 提供了参考。 |
| It is also reflected in the preamble of
the Convention on Biological Diversity of 1992, and in other treaties. | 它在1992年《生物多样性公约》的序言 和其他条约 中也有所体现。 |
| Article 3, paragraph 1, of the United
Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change of 1992 provides that:
“Parties should protect the climate system for the benefit of present and
future generations of humankind”. | 1992年《联合国气候变化框架公约》第三条第1款规定：“各缔约方应当为人类当代和后代的利益保护气候系统。 |
| The International Court of Justice has
noted, in its 1996 Advisory Opinion in the Nuclear Weapons case with respect
to such weapons, the imperative to take into account “in particular their …
ability to cause damage to generations to come”. | ”国际法院1996年关于核武器问题的咨询意见指出，对于这类武器，必须考虑到“特别是其…对后代造成伤害的能力”。 |
| (16) The Commission opted for the term
“interests” rather than “benefit” under the seventh preambular paragraph. | (16) 在第七序言段中，委员会选择使用“利益”一词，而不是“福利”。 |
| A similar formulation is used in draft
guideline 6 which refers to the interests of future generations in the
context of “equitable and reasonable utilization of the atmosphere”. | 指南草案6也使用了类似表述，在“公平合理利用大气层”方面提及后代的利益。 |
| (17) The eighth preambular paragraph
reproduces the 2013 understanding of the Commission on the inclusion of the
topic in its programme of work at its sixty-fifth session in 2013. | (17) 第八序言段取自委员会在2013年就本专题纳入第六十五届会议工作方案达成的谅解。 |
| Guideline 1 Use of terms | 指南1 用语 |
| For the purposes of the present draft
guidelines, | 为了本指南草案的目的， |
| (a) “Atmosphere” means the envelope of
gases surrounding the Earth; | (a) “大气层”指环绕地球的气体圈层； |
| (b) “Atmospheric pollution” means the
introduction or release by humans, directly or indirectly, into the
atmosphere of substances contributing to deleterious effects extending beyond
the State of origin of such a nature as to endanger human life and health and
the Earth’s natural environment; | (b) “大气污染”指人类直接或间接向大气层引入或释放某些物质，产生的有害影响超出来源国，危及人类生命和健康以及地球自然环境的现象； |
| (c) “Atmospheric degradation” means the
alteration by humans, directly or indirectly, of atmospheric conditions
having significant deleterious effects of such a nature as to endanger human
life and health and the Earth’s natural environment. | (c) “大气层退化”指人类直接或间接改变大气状况，产生重大有害影响，危及人类生命和健康以及地球自然环境的现象。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) The Commission has considered it
desirable, as a matter of practical necessity, to provide a draft guideline
on the “Use of terms” in order to have a common understanding of what is
covered by the present draft guidelines. | (1) 委员会认为，出于实际需要，最好提供一项关于“用语”的指南草案，以便就本指南草案的涵盖范围达成共同的理解。 |
| The terms used are provided only “for the
purposes of the present draft guidelines”, and are not intended in any way to
affect any existing or future definitions of any such terms in international
law. | 提供这些用语仅是“为了本指南草案的目的”，无意影响这些词语在国际法中的任何现有或未来定义。 |
| (2) No definition has been given to the
term “atmosphere” in the relevant international instruments. | (2) 有关国际文书中没有“大气层”一语的定义。 |
| The Commission, however, considered it
necessary to provide a working definition for the present draft guidelines,
and the definition given in paragraph (a) is inspired by the definition given
by a working group of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. | 然而，委员会认为有必要为本指南草案提供一个工作定义。 (a)项所载定义参考了政府间气候变化专门委员会(气专委)工作组给出的定义。 |
| (3) The Commission considered it
necessary that its legal definition be consistent with the approach of
scientists. | (3) 委员会认为，其使用的法律定义有必要与科学家们使用的定义保持一致。 |
| According to scientists, the atmosphere
exists in what is called the atmospheric shell. | 据科学家认为，大气层存在于所谓的大气壳层当中。 |
| Physically, it extends upwards from the
Earth’s surface, which is the bottom boundary of the dry atmosphere. | 干大气层从其底部分界线即 地球表面向上延伸。 |
| The average composition of the atmosphere
up to an altitude of 25 km is as follows: nitrogen (78.08%), oxygen (20.95%),
together with trace gases, such as argon (0.93%), helium and radiatively
active greenhouse gases, such as carbon dioxide (0.035%) and ozone, as well
as greenhouse water vapour in highly variable amounts. | 海拔25千米以下的大气层的平均组成状况如下：氮(78.08%)、氧(20.95%)和若干痕量气体，诸如氩(0.93%)、氦以及二氧化碳(0.035%)和臭氧等辐射活跃的温室气体，还有数量变化不定的水蒸气。 |
| The atmosphere also contains clouds and
aerosols. | 大气层中还有云和气溶胶。 |
| The atmosphere is divided vertically into
five spheres on the basis of temperature characteristics. | 大气层按照温度特性被垂直分为五层。 |
| From the lower to upper layers, these
spheres are: troposphere, stratosphere, mesosphere, thermosphere, and the
exosphere. | 从最下层至最上层分别为：对流层、平流层、中间层、热层、散逸层。 |
| Approximately 80 per cent of air mass exists
in the troposphere and 20 per cent in the stratosphere. | 约有80%的大气层质量位于对流层，20%的大气层质量位于平流层。 |
| The thin, white, hazy belt (with a
thickness of less than 1 per cent of the radius of the globe) that one sees
when looking at the earth from a distance is the atmosphere. | 从一定距离以外遥望地球时看到的薄薄一层白色雾带(厚度不到地球半径的1%)就是大气层。 |
| Scientifically these spheres are grouped
together as the “lower atmosphere”, which extends to an average altitude of
50 km, and can be distinguished from the “upper atmosphere”. | 在科学上，这些气层一起组成“低层大气”，它往上延伸至平均海拔50千米的高度，以此可与“高层大气”区别开来。 |
| The temperature of the atmosphere changes
with altitude. | 大气层的温度随高度变化而变化。 |
| In the troposphere (up to the tropopause,
at a height of about 12 km), the temperature decreases as altitude increases
because of the absorption and radiation of solar energy by the surface of the
planet. | 在对流层(至海拔12千米的对流层顶)，因为地球表面吸收和反射太阳能，温度随着高度的上升而下降。 |
| In contrast, in the stratosphere (up to
the stratopause, at a height of nearly 50 km), temperature gradually
increases with height because of the absorption of ultraviolet radiation by
ozone. | 反之，在平流层(至约50千米的平流层顶)，因为臭氧吸收紫外线辐射，所以温度随着高度而逐渐上升。 |
| In the mesosphere (up to the mesopause,
at a height of above 80 km), temperatures again decrease with altitude. | 在中间层(至海拔超过80千米的中间层顶)，温度再次随着高度上升而下降。 |
| In the thermosphere, temperatures once
more rise rapidly because of X-ray and ultraviolet radiation from the sun. | 在热层，来自太阳的X射线和紫外线辐射使温度再次快速上升。 |
| The atmosphere “has no well-defined upper
limit”. | 大气层“没有明确的上层界限”。 |
| (4) The definition, in paragraph (a), of
the “atmosphere” as the envelope of gases surrounding the Earth represents a
“physical” description of the atmosphere. | (4) (a)项中将大气层界定为环绕地球的气体圈层，是对大气层的“物理”描述。 |
| There is also a “functional” aspect,
which involves the large-scale movement of air. | 此外还有一个“功能”层面，涉及空气的大规模移动。 |
| The atmospheric movement has a dynamic
and fluctuating feature. | 大气移动具有动态的、变幻不定的特点。 |
| The air moves and circulates around the
Earth in a complicated formation called “atmospheric circulation”. | 空气以一种所谓“大气环流”的复杂形态环绕着地球移动。 |
| The Commission has decided, as noted
earlier in the commentary to the preamble, to refer to this functional aspect
of the atmosphere in the second paragraph of the preamble. | 正如上文序言部分评注里所说，委员会决定在序言第二段里提及大气层的这一功能方面。 |
| (5) It is particularly important to
recognize the function of the atmosphere as a medium within which there is
constant movement as it is within that context that the “transport and
dispersion” of polluting and degrading substances occurs. | (5) 尤为重要的是，要认识到大气层作为内部不停地在运动的媒介的功能，因为正是在这个背景下发生污染物质和引起退化的物质的输送和扩散。 |
| Indeed, the long-range transboundary
movement of polluting substances is one of the major problems for the
atmospheric environment. | 事实上，污染物质的远距离跨界转移是大气环境的主要问题之一。 |
| In addition to transboundary pollution,
other concerns relate to the depletion of the ozone layer and to climate
change. | 除了跨界污染以外，其他令人关切的问题与臭氧层消耗和气候变化有关。 |
| (6) Paragraph (b) defines “atmospheric
pollution” and addresses transboundary air pollution, whereas paragraph (c)
defines “atmospheric degradation” and refers to global atmospheric problems. | (6) (b)项界定了“大气污染”，提及跨界空气污染，而(c)项界定了“大气层退化”，提及全球大气层问题。 |
| By stating “by humans”, both paragraphs
(b) and (c) make it clear that the draft guidelines concern “anthropogenic”
atmospheric pollution and atmospheric degradation. | (b)、(c)两项都用了“人类”一词，意在指明本指南草案所针对的是“人为”大气污染和大气层退化。 |
| The Commission is aware that the focus on
human activity, whether direct or indirect, is a deliberate one, as the
present guidelines seek to provide guidance to States and the international
community. | 委员会意识到，将重点放在直接和间接的人类活动方面是故意的，因为本指南是要为各国和国际社会提供指导意见。 |
| (7) The term “atmospheric pollution” (or,
air pollution) is sometimes used broadly to include global deterioration of
atmospheric conditions such as ozone depletion and climate change, but the
term is used in the present draft guidelines in a narrow sense, in line with
existing treaty practice. | (7) “大气污染”(或“空气污染”)一语有时广义使用，包括大气层状况的全球性恶化，诸如臭氧层消耗和气候变化，
但是，这个词语在本指南草案中是狭义使用，与现有条约实践一致。 |
| It thus excludes the global issues from
the definition of atmospheric pollution. | 这样，该词语将全球性问题排除在大气污染定义之外。 |
| (8) In defining “atmospheric pollution”,
paragraph (b) uses the language that is essentially based on article 1 (a) of
the 1979 Convention on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution, which provides
that: | (8) 为界定“大气污染”，(b)项所用词语基本依据1979年《远距离越境空气污染公约》第1条(a)项， 其中规定： |
| “[a]ir pollution” means “the introduction
by man, directly or indirectly, of substances or energy into the air
resulting in deleterious effects of such a nature as to endanger human
health, harm living resources and ecosystems and material property and impair
or interfere with amenities and other legitimate uses of the environment, and
‘air pollutants’ shall be construed accordingly.” | “空气污染”指“由人类直接或间接将物质或能量引入空气的现象，所致有害影响的性质包括危害人的健康、破坏生物资源和生态系统及物质财产，并损害或干扰舒适度及对环境的其他合理使用，而对‘空气污染物’应作相应理解”。 |
| It may also be noted that article 1,
paragraph 1 (4), of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea
defines the term “pollution” for the purposes of the marine environment as
meaning “the introduction by man, directly or indirectly, of substances or
energy into the marine environment, including estuaries, which results or is
likely to result in such deleterious effects as harm to living resources and
marine life, hazards to human health”. | 或许还可以指出，《联合国海洋法公约》 第一条第1款第(4)项将“污染”一词界定为指“人类直接或间接把物质或能量引入海洋环境，其中包括河口湾，以致造成或可能造成损害生物资源和海洋生物、危害人类健康”。 |
| The deleterious effects arising from an
introduction or release have to be of such a nature as to endanger human life
and health and the Earth’s natural environment, including by contributing to
endangering them. | 引入或释放所致有害影响的性质须达到危害人类健康和地球自然环境的程度，包括有助于造成这种危害。 |
| (9) While article 1 (a) of the Convention
on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution and article 1, paragraph 1 (4), of
the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea provide for “introduction
of energy” (as well as substances) as part of the “pollution”, the Commission
has decided not to make an explicit reference to the term “energy” in the
text of paragraph (b) of the draft guideline. | (9) 《远距离越境空气污染公约》第1条(a)项和《联合国海洋法公约》第一条第1款第(4)项规定，把(物质和)“能量引入”大气层是“污染”的一部分，但委员会决定在本条指南草案的(b)项中不采用“能量”这个词。 |
| It is the understanding of the Commission
that, for the purposes of the draft guidelines, the word “substances”
includes “energy”. | 委员会的理解是，为了本指南草案的目的，“物质”一词包含“能量”。 |
| “Energy” is understood to include heat,
light, noise and radioactivity introduced and released into the atmosphere
through human activities. | “能量”理解为包括通过人类活动引入和释放到大气层中的热、光、噪音和放射能。 |
| (10) The expression “effects extending
beyond the State of origin” in paragraph (b) clarifies that the draft
guidelines address the transboundary effects in the sense provided in article
1 (b) of the 1979 Convention on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution that: | (10) (b)项中“影响超出来源国”一语澄清指南草案要处理的是1979年《远距离越境空气污染公约》第1条(b)项规定意义上的跨界影响，即： |
| “[l]ong-range transboundary air
pollution” means air pollution whose physical origin is situated wholly or in
part within the area under the national jurisdiction of one State and which
has adverse effects in the area under the jurisdiction of another State at
such a distance that it is not generally possible to distinguish the
contribution of individual emission sources or groups of sources. | “远距离跨界空气污染”指其物理来源完全或部分位于属于一国国家管辖范围之内的空气污染，对另一国所管辖范围内的地区产生不利影响，之间相差的距离通常使人无法区分单独排放源或集体排放源的作用。 |
| (11) Since “atmospheric pollution” is
defined narrowly in paragraph (b), it is necessary, for the purposes of the
draft guidelines, to address issues other than atmospheric pollution by means
of a different definition. | (11) 由于(b)项的“大气污染”是狭义界定，因此，为了本指南草案的目的，有必要借助于另一个不同的定义处理非大气污染问题。 |
| For this purpose, paragraph (c) provides
the definition of “atmospheric degradation”. | 为此，(c)项提供了“大气层退化”的定义。 |
| This definition is intended to include
problems of ozone depletion and climate change. | 这个定义意在包含臭氧层消耗和气候变化问题。 |
| It covers the alteration of the global
atmospheric conditions caused by humans, whether directly or indirectly. | 定义涵盖人类直接或间接改变全球大气状况。 |
| These may be changes to the physical
environment or biota or alterations to the composition of the global
atmosphere. | 这些改变既可以是自然环境或生物区系的改变，也可以是全球大气层组成状况的改变。 |
| The 1985 Vienna Convention for the
Protection of the Ozone Layer provides the definition of “adverse effects” in
article 1, paragraph 2, as meaning “changes in the physical environment or
biota, including changes in climate, which have significant deleterious
effects on human health or on the composition, resilience and productivity of
natural and managed ecosystems, or on materials useful to mankind. | 1985年《保护臭氧层维也纳公约》 在第1条第2款中规定“不利影响”是指“自然环境或生物区系内发生的，对人类健康或自然的和受管理的生态系统的组成、恢复力和生产力或对人类有益的物质造成重大有害影响的变化，包括气候变化”。 |
| ” Article 1, paragraph 2, of the United
Nations Framework Convention on Climate defines “climate change” as “a change
of climate which is attributed directly or indirectly to human activity that
alters the composition of the global atmosphere and which is in addition to
natural climate variability observed over comparable time periods”. | 《联合国气候变化框架公约》第一条第2款把“气候变化”界定为“除在类似时期内所观测的气候的自然变异之外，由于直接或间接的人类活动改变了地球大气的组成而造成的气候变化”。 |
| (12) The term “significant deleterious
effects” is intended to qualify the range of human activities to be covered
by the draft guidelines. | (12) “重大有害影响”一语意在限定指南草案要涵盖的人类活动的种类。 |
| The Commission has frequently employed
the term “significant” in its previous work. | 委员会在以前的工作中经常使用“重大”一词。 |
| The Commission has stated that
“significant is something more than ‘detectable’ but need not be at the level
of ‘serious’ or ‘substantial’. | 委员会曾指出“…‘重大’的程度超过‘可察觉’，但不必达到‘严重’或‘显著’的程度。 |
| The harm must lead to real detrimental
effects [and]… such detrimental effects must be able to be measured by
factual and objective standards”. | 损害必须是会导致真实的有害影响的[而且]…这些有害影响必须是可以用事实或客观标准加以衡量的”。 |
| Moreover, the term “significant”, while
determined by factual and objective criteria, also involves a value
determination that depends on the circumstances of a particular case and the
period in which such determination is made. | 此外，“重大”一语要根据事实和客观标准确定，但也涉及一种价值判断，取决于具体情况和作出判断的时间段。 |
| For instance, a particular deprivation at
a particular time might not be considered “significant” because at that time
scientific knowledge or human appreciation did not assign much value to the
resource. | 例如，一段特定时间内(某种资源)的一个特定损失或许不被视为“重大”，因为当时的科学知识或人类认知水平尚未对该资源赋予很大价值。 |
| The question of what constitutes
“significant” is more of a factual assessment. | 究竟什么是“重大”，这主要是应根据事实确定的问题。 |
| (13) While with respect to “atmospheric
pollution” the introduction or release of substances has to contribute only
to “deleterious” effects, in the case of “atmospheric degradation” the
alteration of atmospheric conditions must have “significant deleterious
effects”. | (13) 就“大气污染”而言，物质的引入或释放只须有助于造成“有害”影响，而就“大气层退化”而言，改变大气层状况必须具有“重大有害影响”。 |
| As is evident from draft guideline 2, on
the scope of the guidelines, the present guidelines are concerned with the
protection of the atmosphere from both atmospheric pollution and atmospheric
degradation. | 关于本指南适用范围的指南2草案表明，本指南涉及保护大气层免遭大气污染和大气层退化。 |
| As noted in paragraph (11) above,
“adverse effects” in the Vienna Convention for the Protection of Ozone Layer
(art. 1, para. 2) refers to changes, which have significant deleterious
effects. | 如以上第(11)段所述，《保护臭氧层维也纳公约》第1条第2款中“不利影响”一语指具有重大有害影响的变化。 |
| The word “deleterious” refers to
something harmful, often in a subtle or unexpected way. | “有害”一词指某事物往往存在不甚明确或意料之外的害处。 |
| Guideline 2 Scope of the guidelines | 指南2 指南的范围 |
| 1. The present draft guidelines concern
the protection of the atmosphere from atmospheric pollution and atmospheric
degradation. | 1. 本指南草案涉及保护大气层免遭大气污染和大气层退化。 |
| 2. The present draft guidelines do not
deal with, but are without prejudice to, questions concerning the
polluter-pays principle, the precautionary principle, common but
differentiated responsibilities, the liability of States and their nationals,
and the transfer of funds and technology to developing countries, including
intellectual property rights. | 2. 本指南草案不处理、但也不妨碍以下问题：污染者付费原则、谨慎原则、共同但有区别的责任、国家及其国民的赔偿责任，以及向发展中国家转让资金和技术，包括知识产权。 |
| 3. The present draft guidelines do not
deal with specific substances, such as black carbon, tropospheric ozone and
other dual-impact substances, which are the subject of negotiations among
States. | 3. 本指南草案不涉及具体物质，例如国家之间正在谈判的黑碳、对流层臭氧以及其他双重影响物质。 |
| 4. Nothing in the present draft
guidelines affects the status of airspace under international law nor
questions related to outer space, including its delimitation. | 4. 本指南草案中的任何内容都不影响国际法规定的空气空间的地位，也不影响与外层空间，包括外层空间划界有关的问题。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Draft guideline 2 sets out the scope
of the draft guidelines in relation to the protection of the atmosphere. | (1) 指南草案2规定了指南草案在保护大气层方面的范围。 |
| Paragraph 1 describes the scope in a
positive manner, indicating what the guidelines are concerned with, namely
the protection of the atmosphere from atmospheric pollution and atmospheric
degradation, while paragraphs 2 and 3 are formulated in a negative way,
specifying what is not covered by the present draft guidelines. | 第1段以肯定的方式描述了范围，写明指南涉及的是保护大气层免遭大气污染和大气层退化，而第2和第3段采用否定措词，具体写明本指南草案不涵盖什么。 |
| Paragraph 4 contains a saving clause on
airspace and outer space. | 第4段是关于空气空间和外层空间的保留条款。 |
| (2) Paragraph 1 deals with questions of
the protection of the atmosphere in two areas, atmospheric pollution and
atmospheric degradation. | (2) 第1段从两方面处理保护大气层的问题，即大气污染和全球大气层退化。 |
| The draft guidelines are concerned only
with anthropogenic causes and not with those of natural origins such as
volcanic eruptions and meteorite collisions. | 指南草案仅涉及人为肇因，不涉及自然因素，诸如火山爆发和陨石撞击。 |
| The focus on transboundary pollution and
global atmospheric degradation caused by human activity reflects the current
realities, which are supported by the science. | 着重于人类活动造成的跨界大气污染和全球大气层退化是反映当前现实，这已得到科学的支持。 |
| According to the Intergovernmental Panel
on Climate Change, the science indicates with 95 per cent certainty that
human activity is the dominant cause of observed warming since the
mid-twentieth century. | 根据政府间气候变化专门委员会，科学以95%的把握表明，人类活动是20世纪中叶以来所观察到的暖化的主导原因。 |
| The Panel has noted that human influence
on the climate system is clear. | 气专委指出，人类对气候系统的影响是很清楚的。 |
| Such influence has been detected in
warming of the atmosphere and the ocean, in changes in the global water
cycle, in reductions in snow and ice, in global mean sea-level rise, and in
changes in some climate extremes. | 从大气层和海洋变暖、全球水循环变化、冰雪减少、全球平均海平面上升和某些气候极端情况的变化中都测到了这种影响。 |
| The Panel has further noted that it is
extremely likely that more than half of the observed increase in global
average surface temperature from 1951 to 2010 was caused by the anthropogenic
increase in greenhouse gas concentrations and other anthropogenic “forcings”
together. | 气专委还指出，观察到的1951年到2010年全球表面平均温度上升值的一半以上极有可能是人类引起的温室气体浓度上升和其他人为“强迫”共同造成的。 |
| (3) The guidelines will also not deal
with domestic or local pollution. | (3) 本指南也不涉及一国内部或局部的污染。 |
| It may be noted however that whatever
happens locally may sometimes have a bearing on the transboundary and global
context in so far as the protection of the atmosphere is concerned. | 然而或许可以指出，局部发生的一切，就大气层保护而言，有时可能具有跨界和全球影响。 |
| Ameliorative human action, taken
individually or collectively, may need to take into account the totality of
the atmosphere, hydrosphere, biosphere and geosphere and their interactions. | 追求改善的人类行动，不论是个别采取还是集体采取，都可能需要考虑到大气层、水圈、生物圈和地圈的整体及其相互作用。 |
| (4) Sulphur dioxide and nitrogen oxides
are the main sources of transboundary atmospheric pollution, while climate
change and depletion of the ozone layer are the two principal concerns
leading to atmospheric degradation. | (4) 二氧化硫和氮氧化物是跨界大气污染的主要来源， 而气候变化和臭氧层消耗是导致大气层退化的两大因素。 |
| Certain ozone depleting substances also
contribute to global warming. | 某些臭氧消耗物质也是造成全球变暖的因素。 |
| (5) Paragraphs 2 and 3, as well as the
fourth preambular paragraph, reflect the 2013 understanding of the Commission
reached when the topic was included in the programme of work of the
Commission at its sixty-fifth session in 2013. | (5) 第2和第3段以及序言部分第四段反映了委员会在2013年第六十五届会议上将本专题纳入工作方案时达成的谅解。 |
| It should be emphasized that the decision
of the Commission not to address the questions in paragraph 2 in no way
indicates a view as to the legal status of these questions. | 应当强调，委员会决定不处理第2段中的问题绝不表示对这些问题的法律地位的意见。 |
| Moreover, the view was expressed that the
Commission ought to have addressed these questions. | 此外，有人认为，委员会应该处理这些问题。 |
| (6) Paragraph 4 is a saving clause that
the draft guidelines do not affect the status of airspace under international
law. | (6) 第4段是一个保留条款，意在说明指南草案不影响适用的国际法所规定的空气空间的地位。 |
| The atmosphere and airspace are two
entirely different concepts, which should be distinguished. | 大气层和空气空间是两个截然不同的概念，应予区分。 |
| Airspace is a static and spatial-based
institution over which the State, within its territory, has “complete and exclusive
sovereignty”. | 空气空间是静态的、基于空间的规范概念，国家在其领土范围内对空气空间“具有完全的和排他的主权”。 |
| For instance, article 1 of the Convention
on International Civil Aviation, provides that “every State has complete and
exclusive sovereignty over the ‘airspace’ above its territory”. | 例如，《国际民用航空公约》第1条规定：“每一国家对其领土之上的‘空气空间’具有完全的和排他的主权”。 |
| In turn, article 2 of the same Convention
deems the territory of a State to be the land areas and territorial waters
adjacent thereto under the sovereignty, suzerainty, protection or mandate of
such State. | 相应地，该公约第2条认为一国的领土是在该国主权、宗主权、保护或委任统治下的陆地区域及与其邻接的领水。 |
| The airspace beyond the boundaries of
territorial waters is regarded as being outside the sovereignty of any State
and is open for use by all States, like the high seas. | 领水边界以外的空气空间被视为处于任何国家的主权之外，像公海一样，开放供所有国家使用。 |
| On the other hand, the atmosphere, as an
envelope of gases surrounding the Earth, is dynamic and fluctuating, with
gases that constantly move without regard to territorial boundaries. | 另一方面，大气层作为环绕地球的气体圈层，是动态的、变化不定的，气体不断流动，与领土边界无关。 |
| The atmosphere is invisible, intangible
and non-separable. | 大气层是不可见的、无形的和不可分割的。 |
| (7) Moreover, while the atmosphere is
spatially divided into spheres on the basis of temperature characteristics,
there is no sharp scientific boundary between the atmosphere and outer space. | (7) 此外，尽管大气层根据温度特点被在空间上划成若干圈层，但大气层与外层空间之间没有科学上的明确界线。 |
| Beyond 100 km, traces of the atmosphere
gradually merge with the emptiness of space. | 海拔100千米以上，稀薄的大气层逐渐与空旷的宇宙融为一体。 |
| The Treaty on Principles Governing the
Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, including the
Moon and Other Celestial Bodies, is silent on the definition of “outer
space”. | 《关于各国探索和利用外层空间包括月球与其他天体活动所应遵守原则的条约》没有“外层空间”的定义。 |
| The matter has been under discussion
within the context of the Legal Sub-Committee of the Committee on the
Peaceful Uses of Outer Space since 1959, which has looked at both spatial and
function approaches to the questions of delimitation. | 1959年以来，这个问题一直在和平利用外层空间委员会法律小组委员会讨论范围内，对划界问题从空间和功能两个角度都进行了探讨。 |
| (8) Accordingly, the Commission elected,
in paragraph 4, to indicate that the draft guidelines do not affect the legal
status of airspace nor address questions related to outer space. | (8) 因此，委员会选择在第4段里表明，指南草案既不影响空气空间的法律地位，也不处理与外层空间有关的问题。 |
| Moreover, the reference to outer space
reflects of the 2013 understanding of the Commission. | 此外，关于外层空间的提法反映了委员会2013年的谅解。 |
| Guideline 3 Obligation to protect the
atmosphere | 指南3 保护大气层的义务 |
| States have the obligation to protect the
atmosphere by exercising due diligence in taking appropriate measures, in
accordance with applicable rules of international law, to prevent, reduce or
control atmospheric pollution and atmospheric degradation. | 各国有义务保护大气层，履行应尽义务，按照适用的国际法规则采取适当措施，防止、减少或控制大气污染和大气层退化。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Draft guideline 3 is central to the
present draft guidelines. | (1) 指南草案3是本指南草案的核心。 |
| In particular, draft guidelines 4, 5 and
6, below, flow from this guideline; | 具体地说，下文的指南草案4、5和6都是从这条指南中派生出来的。 |
| these three draft guidelines seek to
apply various principles of international environmental law to the specific
situation of the protection of the atmosphere. | 这三条指南草案试图将各种国际环境法原则适用于保护大气层的具体情况。 |
| (2) The draft guideline refers to both
the transboundary and global contexts. | (2) 本条指南草案提到了跨界和全球两个背景。 |
| It will be recalled that draft guideline
1 contains a “transboundary” element in defining “atmospheric pollution” (as
the introduction or release by humans, directly or indirectly, into the
atmosphere of substances contributing to deleterious effects “extending
beyond the State of origin”, of such a nature as to endanger human life and
health and the Earth’s natural environment), and a “global” dimension in
defining “atmospheric degradation” (as the alteration by humans, directly or
indirectly, of atmospheric conditions having significant deleterious effects
of such a nature as to endanger human life and health and the Earth’s natural
environment). | 可以回顾，指南草案1包含用以界定“大气污染”的“跨界”要素(“大气污染”指人类直接或间接向大气层引入或释放某些物质，产生的有害影响超出来源国，危及人类生命和健康以及地球自然环境的现象)和用以界定大气层退化的“全球”要素(“指人类直接或间接改变大气状况，产生重大有害影响，危及人类生命和健康以及地球自然环境的现象”)。 |
| Draft guideline 3 delimits the obligation
to protect the atmosphere to preventing, reducing and controlling atmospheric
pollution and atmospheric degradation, thus differentiating the kinds of
obligations pertaining to each. | 指南草案3将保护大气层的义务界定为防止、减少和控制大气污染和大气层退化，从而对与之相关的各类义务进行区分。 |
| The formulation of the present draft
guideline finds its genesis in principle 21 of the Stockholm Declaration,
which reflected the finding in the Trail Smelter arbitration. | 指南草案的行文来自《斯德哥尔摩宣言》原则21, 其中反映了“特雷尔冶炼厂仲裁案”的裁决。 |
| This is further reflected in principle 2
of the 1992 Rio Declaration. | 此外，也可在1992年《里约宣言》原则2中找到相关论述。 |
| (3) The reference to “States” for the
purposes of the draft guideline denotes both the possibility of States acting
“individually” and “jointly”, as appropriate. | (3) 为了本条指南草案的目的，提及“各国”是表明国家可能酌情采取“单独”行动和“联合”行动。 |
| (4) As presently formulated, the draft
guideline is without prejudice to whether or not the obligation to protect
the atmosphere is an erga omnes obligation in the sense of article 48 of the
articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts, a
matter on which there are different views. | (4) 按目前行文，本条指南草案不妨碍保护大气层义务是否属于“国家对国际不法行为的责任”条款第48条
意义上的普遍义务问题，对于这一问题有不同的看法。 |
| While there is support for recognizing
that the obligations pertaining to the protection of the atmosphere from
transboundary atmospheric pollution of global significance and global
atmospheric degradation are obligations erga omnes, there is also support for
the view that the legal consequences of such a recognition are not yet fully
clear in the context of the present topic. | 有人支持保护大气层不受全球性跨界污染和全球性大气层退化影响的义务属于普遍义务，但也有人支持这种承认的法律后果在本专题下还不完全明确的观点。 |
| (5) Significant adverse effects on the
atmosphere are caused, in large part, by the activities of individuals and
private industries, which are not normally attributable to a State. | (5) 对大气层造成重大不利影响的主要是个人和私营工业的活动，这些活动通常不可归咎于国家。 |
| In this respect, due diligence requires
States to “ensure” that such activities within their jurisdiction or control
do not cause significant adverse effects. | 在这方面，应尽义务要求国家“确保”其管辖或控制下的这些活动不造成重大不利影响。 |
| This does not mean, however, that due
diligence applies solely to private activities since a State’s own activities
are also subject to the due diligence rule. | 然而，这并不意味着应尽义务仅仅适用于私营活动，因为国家自己的活动也受制于应尽义务规则。 |
| It is an obligation which entails not
only the adoption of appropriate rules and measures, but also a certain level
of vigilance in their enforcement and the exercise of administrative control
applicable to public and private operators, such as the monitoring of
activities undertaken by such operators, to safeguard the rights of the other
party. | 为履行这项义务，不仅需要采取适当的规则和措施，还需要在执行过程中以及对公共和私营运营商进行行政控制时保持一定程度的警觉，例如监测这些运营商开展的活动。 |
| It also requires taking into account the
context and evolving standards of both regulation and technology. | 还需要考虑到监管和技术的背景及不断发展的标准。 |
| Therefore, even where significant adverse
effects materialize, that does not automatically constitute a failure of due
diligence. | 因此，即使造成了重大不利影响，并不自动构成未能履行应尽义务。 |
| Such failure is limited to the State’s
negligence to meet its obligation to take all appropriate measures to
prevent, reduce or control human activities where these activities have or
are likely to have significant adverse effects. | 这种未能履行限于国家在履行义务方面的疏忽，也就是没有采取一切适当措施防止、减少或控制人类活动，而这些活动已经或可能造成重大不利影响。 |
| The States’ obligation “to ensure” does
not require the achievement of a certain result (obligation of result) but
only requires the best available efforts so as not to cause significant
adverse effects (obligation of conduct). | 国家的“确保”义务不要求取得某个结果(结果义务)，而是仅仅要求其作出最大努力避免造成重大不利影响(行为义务)。 |
| (6) The reference to “prevent, reduce or
control” denotes a variety of measures to be taken by States, whether
individually or jointly, in accordance with applicable rules as may be
relevant to atmospheric pollution on the one hand and atmospheric degradation
on the other. | (6) “防止、减少或控制”的提法表示国家应按照与大气污染和与大气层退化相关的适用规则，单独或联合采取各种措施。 |
| The phrase “prevent, reduce or control”
draws upon formulations contained in the United Nations Convention on the Law
of the Sea and the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. | “防止、减少或控制”一语借鉴自《联合国海洋法公约》
和《联合国气候变化框架公约》。 |
| (7) Even though the appropriate measures
to “prevent, reduce or control” apply to both atmospheric pollution and
atmospheric degradation, the reference to “applicable rules of international
law” signals a distinction between measures taken, bearing in mind the
transboundary nature of atmospheric pollution and global nature of
atmospheric degradation and the different rules that are applicable in
relation thereto. | (7) 即使“防止、减少或控制”的适当措施同时适用于大气污染和大气层退化，但提及“适用的国际法规则”旨在表明所采取措施之间的差别，需要铭记大气污染的跨界性质和大气层退化的全球性质以及对二者适用的不同规则。 |
| In the context of transboundary
atmospheric pollution, the obligation of States to prevent significant
adverse effect is firmly established as customary international law, as
confirmed, for example, by the Commission’s draft articles on prevention of
transboundary harm from hazardous activities and by the jurisprudence of
international courts and tribunals. | 在跨界大气污染情况下，各国防止重大不利影响的义务已确立为习惯国际法，例如已得到委员会预防危险活动的跨界损害条款草案 和各国际性法院及法庭判例
的确认。 |
| However, the existence of this obligation
is still somewhat unsettled for global atmospheric degradation. | 然而，对于全球大气层退化而言，这项义务是否存在仍是一个未决问题。 |
| The International Court of Justice has
stated that “the existence of the general obligation of States to ensure that
activities within their jurisdiction and control respect the environment … of
areas beyond national control is now part of the corpus of international
law”, and has attached great significance to respect for the environment “not
only for States but also for the whole of mankind”. | 国际法院指出，“各国履行一般义务以确保在其管辖和控制范围内的活动尊重…国家控制范围以外地区的环境，目前已成为国际法典的一部分，” 并十分重视对环境的尊重，“不仅对国家，也对全人类而言”。 |
| The Tribunal in the Iron Rhine Railway
case stated that the “duty to prevent, or at least mitigate [significant harm
to the environment] … has now become a principle of general international
law”. | 该法院在莱茵铁路案中，法庭指出，“防止或至少减轻[对环境的重大损害]…现已成为一般国际法原则”。 |
| At the same time, the views of members
diverged as to whether these pronouncements may be deemed as fully supporting
the recognition that the obligation to prevent, reduce, or control global
atmospheric degradation exists under customary international law. | 然而，对于这些说法可否视为完全支持承认国际习惯法中存在防止、减少或控制大气污染和大气层退化这一义务，委员们意见不一。 |
| Nonetheless, such an obligation is found
in relevant conventions. | 不过，这一义务见于某些有关公约。 |
| In this context, it should be noted that
the Paris Agreement, “acknowledging” in the preamble that “climate change is
a common concern of humankind”, states “the importance of ensuring the
integrity of all ecosystems, including oceans, and the protection of
biodiversity”. | 在这方面，应当指出的是，《巴黎协定》在序言中“承认气候变化是人类共同关心的问题”，指出“必须确保包括海洋在内的所有生态系统的完整性并保护生物多样性”。 |
| Guideline 4 Environmental impact
assessment | 指南4 环境影响评估 |
| States have the obligation to ensure that
an environmental impact assessment is undertaken of proposed activities under
their jurisdiction or control which are likely to cause significant adverse
impact on the atmosphere in terms of atmospheric pollution or atmospheric
degradation. | 对于在本国管辖或控制下拟议开展的活动，凡可能对大气层造成大气污染或大气层退化等重大不利影响的，各国有义务确保进行环境影响评估。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Draft guideline 4 deals with
environmental impact assessment. | (1) 指南草案4涉及环境影响评估。 |
| This is the first of three draft
guidelines that flow from the overarching draft guideline 3. | 这是从总括性指南草案3中派生出来的三条指南草案的第一条。 |
| In the Construction of a Road in Costa
Rica along the San Juan River case, the International Court of Justice
affirmed that “a State’s obligation to exercise due diligence in preventing
significant transboundary harm requires that State to ascertain whether there
is a risk of significant transboundary harm prior to undertaking an activity
having the potential adversely to affect the environment of another State. | 国际法院在哥斯达黎加圣胡安河沿线修建道路案中指出，“国家对防止重大跨界损害履行应尽义务，要求一国在开展可能对另一国环境造成不利影响的活动之前，必须确定是否有造成重大跨界损害的可能。 |
| If that is the case, the State concerned
must conduct an environmental impact assessment”. | 如果存在这种可能，有关国家必须开展环境影响评估”。 |
| In the above-mentioned case, the Court
concluded that the State in question “ha[d] not complied with its obligation
under general international law to perform an environmental impact assessment
prior to the construction of the road”. | 在上述案件中，国际法院判定，该国“未履行一般国际法规定的在建造道路之前开展环境影响评估的义务”。 |
| In a separate opinion, Judge Owada noted
that “an environmental impact assessment plays an important and even crucial
role in ensuring that the State in question is acting with due diligence
under general international environmental law”. | 小和田恒法官在个人意见中指出，“环境影响评估对确保有关国家根据一般国际环境法规定采取行动，履行应尽职责，具有重要甚至关键性作用”。 |
| In 2010, in the Pulp Mills case, the
Court stated that “the obligation to protect and preserve, under Article 41
(a) of the Statute, has to be interpreted in accordance with a practice which
in recent years has gained so much acceptance among States that it may now be
considered a requirement under general international law to undertake an
environmental impact assessment”. | 国际法院2010年在纸浆厂案中指出，“《规约》第四十一条(a)款所指的保护和保全的义务必须按照惯例来解释，这种惯例必须为近年来已被各国广泛接受，以至于进行环境影响评估现在可能被认为是一项一般国际法要求”。 |
| Moreover, in 2011, the Seabed Disputes
Chamber of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea in its Advisory
Opinion on the Responsibilities and obligations of States regarding
activities in the Area held that the duty to conduct an environmental impact
assessment arises not only under the Law of the Sea Convention, but is also a
“general obligation under customary international law”. | 此外，国际海洋法法庭海底争端分庭2011年关于“国家对区域内活动的责任和义务”的咨询意见认为，进行环境影响评估的义务不仅是《海洋法公约》规定的义务，也是“习惯国际法规定的一般义务”。 |
| Similarly, the International Court of
Justice in the Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros Project case alluded to the importance of
environmental impact assessment. | 同样，国际法院在加布奇科沃－大毛罗斯项目案中间接指出了环境影响评估的重要性。 |
| (2) The draft guideline is formulated in
the passive tense — “States have the obligation to ensure that an
environmental impact assessment is undertaken” as opposed to “States have an
obligation to undertake an appropriate environmental impact assessment” — in
order to signal that this is an obligation of conduct and given the broad
nature of economic actors the obligation does not necessarily attach to the
State itself to perform the assessment. | (2) 指南草案使用被动语态――“各国有义务确保进行环境影响评估”，是相对于“各国有义务进行适当的环境影响评估”而言，表明这是一项行为义务。 由于经济行为者的广泛性，这项义务不一定要求国家本身进行环境影响评估。 |
| What is required is that the State put in
place the necessary legislative, regulatory and other measures for an
environmental impact assessment to be conducted with respect to proposed
activities. | 所要求的是国家为进行环境影响评估采取必要立法、监管和其他措施，以便对拟议活动进行环境影响评估。 |
| Notification and consultations are key to
such an assessment. | 通知和协商是评估的关键。 |
| (3) The phrase “of proposed activities
under their jurisdiction or control” is intended to indicate that the
obligation of States to ensure that an environment impact assessment is
undertaken is in respect of activities under their jurisdiction or control. | (3) “在本国管辖或控制下拟议开展的活动”一语旨在表明，各国确保进行环境影响评估的义务是针对其管辖或控制下的活动的。 |
| Since environmental threats have no
respect for borders, it is not precluded that States, as part of their global
environmental responsibility, take decisions jointly regarding environmental
impact assessments. | 由于环境威胁不分边界，不排除各国可以作为其全球环境责任的一部分，就环境影响评估做出联合决定。 |
| (4) A threshold was considered necessary
for triggering the environmental impact assessment. | (4) 阈值被认为是开展环境影响评估所必要的。 |
| The phrase “which are likely to cause
significant adverse impact” has accordingly been inserted. | 因此添加了“可能造成重大不利影响”一语。 |
| It is drawn from the language of
principle 17 of the Rio Declaration. | 这句话来自《里约宣言》原则17。 |
| Moreover, there are other instruments,
such as the Espoo Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment in a
Transboundary Context, that use a similar threshold. | 其他一些文书也使用了类似的阈值，如《关于跨界环境影响评估的埃斯波公约》。 |
| In the Pulp Mills case, the Court
indicated that an environmental impact assessment had to be undertaken where
there was a risk that the proposed industrial activity may have a
“significant adverse impact in a transboundary context, in particular, on a
shared resource”. | 国际法院在纸浆厂案中指出，如果拟议工业活动具有造成“重大跨界不利影响的风险，特别是在共有资源上”，就必须进行环境影响评估。 |
| (5) By having a threshold of “likely to
cause significant adverse impact”, the draft guideline excludes an
environmental impact assessment for an activity whose impact is likely to be
minor. | (5) 使用“可能造成重大不利影响”的阈值，指南草案排除了对影响可能轻微的活动的环境影响评估。 |
| The impact of the potential harm must be
“significant” for both “atmospheric pollution” and “atmospheric degradation”. | 潜在危害的影响在“大气污染”和“大气层退化”方面必须都是“重大”的。 |
| What constitutes “significant” requires a
factual not a legal determination. | 何为“重大”需要作出事实判定，而不是法律判定。 |
| (6) The phrase “in terms of atmospheric
pollution or atmospheric degradation” was considered important as it relates
the draft guideline to the two main issues of concern to the present draft
guidelines as regards protection of the atmosphere, namely transboundary
atmospheric pollution and atmospheric degradation. | (6) “在大气污染或大气层退化方面”一语被认为十分重要，因为它将本条指南草案与本套指南草案关注的两个主要环境保护问题联系起来，即跨界大气污染和大气层退化。 |
| While the relevant precedents for the
requirement of an environmental impact assessment primarily address transboundary
contexts, it is considered that there is a similar requirement for projects
that are likely to have significant adverse effects on the global atmosphere,
such as those activities involving intentional large-scale modification of
the atmosphere. | 虽然环境影响评估要求的相关先例主要涉及跨界污染，但人们认为可能对全球大气层造成重大不利影响的项目也需遵守类似要求，如有意大规模改变大气层活动。 |
| As regards the protection of the
atmosphere, such activities may carry a more extensive risk of severe damage
than even those causing transboundary harm, and therefore the same considerations
should be applied a fortiori to those activities potentially causing global
atmospheric degradation. | 与保护大气层相比，这些活动可能甚至比跨界损害在更大范围内造成严重损害； 因此，相同规则更有理由适用于可能造成全球大气层退化的活动。 |
| Thus, the Kiev Protocol on Strategic
Environmental Assessment to the Convention on the Environmental Impact in the
Transboundary Context encourages “strategic environmental assessment” of the
likely environmental, including health, effects, which means any effect on
the environment, including human health, flora, fauna, biodiversity, soil,
climate, air, water, landscape, natural sites, material assets, cultural
heritage and the interaction among these factors. | 鉴此，《越境环境影响评估公约关于战略环境评估的基辅议定书》鼓励对可能的环境影响包括健康影响进行“战略环境评估”，这是指对环境，包括人类健康、动物、植物、生物多样性、土壤、气候、空气、水、景观、自然遗产、物质资产、文化遗产的影响以及这些因素之间的相互作用。 |
| (7) While it is acknowledged that
transparency and public participation are important components in ensuring
access to information and representation, it was considered that the parts
dealing with procedural aspects of an environmental impact assessment should
not be dealt with in the draft guideline itself. | (7) 人们承认透明和公众参与是获得信息和保障代表性的重要内容，但也有人认为指南草案本身不应该涉及环境影响评估的程序方面。 |
| Principle 10 of the 1992 Rio Declaration
provides that environmental issues are best handled with the participation of
all concerned citizens, at the relevant level. | 1992年《里约宣言》原则10规定，环境问题最好在有关一级，在所有有关公民的参与下加以处理。 |
| This includes access to information, the
opportunity to participate in decision-making processes, and effective access
to judicial and administrative proceedings. | 这包括获得信息； 有机会参与决策； 有效诉诸司法和行政程序。 |
| The Convention on Access to Information,
Public Participation in Decision-making and Access to Justice in
Environmental Matters also addresses these issues. | 《在环境问题上获得信息、公众参与决策和诉诸法律的公约》 也论述了这些问题。 |
| The Kiev Protocol on Strategic
Environmental Assessment encourages the carrying out of public participation
and consultations, and the taking into account of the results of the public
participation and consultations in a plan or programme. | 《关于战略环境评估的基辅议定书》鼓励公众参与和协商，并在计划或方案中考虑公众参与和协商的结果。 |
| Guideline 5 Sustainable utilization of
the atmosphere | 指南5 可持续利用大气层 |
| 1. Given that the atmosphere is a natural
resource with a limited assimilation capacity, its utilization should be
undertaken in a sustainable manner. | 1. 考虑到大气层是一种吸收能力有限的自然资源，应当以可持续的方式加以利用。 |
| 2. Sustainable utilization of the
atmosphere includes the need to reconcile economic development with
protection of the atmosphere. | 2. 可持续利用大气层包括需要兼顾经济发展和大气层保护。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) The atmosphere is a natural resource
with limited assimilation capacity. | (1) 大气层是一种吸收能力有限的自然资源。 |
| It is often not conceived of as
exploitable in the same sense as, for example, mineral or oil and gas
resources are explored and exploited. | 人们常常认为，就勘探和开发利用矿物或油气等资源的意义上而言，大气层是无法开发利用的。 |
| In truth, however, the atmosphere, in its
physical and functional components, is exploitable and exploited. | 但事实是，大气层在物质成份和功能成份上均可以开发利用，并且受到开发利用。 |
| The polluter exploits the atmosphere by
reducing its quality and its capacity to assimilate pollutants. | 污染方会通过降低大气层的质量及其吸收污染物的能力而开发利用大气层。 |
| The draft guideline draws analogies from
the concept of “shared resource”, while also recognizing that the unity of
the global atmosphere requires recognition of the commonality of interests. | 指南草案类比“共有资源”的概念，同时确认，全球大气层的整体性要求承认各方利益的共同性。 |
| Accordingly, this draft guideline proceeds
on the premise that the atmosphere is a resource with limited assimilation
capacity, the ability of which to sustain life on Earth is impacted by
anthropogenic activities. | 相应地，指南草案所立足的前提是，大气层是吸收能力有限的自然资源，其维持地球生命的能力会受到人类活动的影响。 |
| In order to secure its protection, it is
important to see it as a resource that is subject to exploitation, thereby
subjecting the atmosphere to the principles of conservation and sustainable
use. | 为了使大气层得到保护，必须将大气层视为可开发利用资源，从而对之适用保护原则和可持续利用原则。 |
| Some members expressed doubts whether the
atmosphere could be treated analogously as transboundary watercourses or
aquifers. | 有些委员对可否将大气层类比为跨界水道或含水层而加以对待表示怀疑。 |
| (2) It is acknowledged in paragraph 1
that the atmosphere is a “natural resource with a limited assimilation
capacity”. | (2) 第1段承认，大气层是“吸收能力有限的自然资源”。 |
| The second part of paragraph 1 seeks to
integrate conservation and development so as to ensure that modifications to
the planet continue to enable the survival and wellbeing of organisms on
Earth. | 第1段第二部分试图将保护与开发结合起来，确保对地球的改造不会妨碍地球上生物的存续和福祉。 |
| It does so by reference to the
proposition that the utilization of the atmosphere should be undertaken in a
sustainable manner. | 这样做是援引了利用大气层应采取可持续方式这一主张。 |
| This is inspired by the Commission’s
formulations as reflected in the Convention on the Law of the
Non-navigational Uses of International Watercourses, and the articles on the
law of transboundary aquifers. | 此句受到了《国际水道非航行使用法公约》 和跨界含水层法中反映的委员会措词方式的启发。 |
| (3) The term “utilization” is used
broadly and in general terms evoking notions beyond actual exploitation. | (3) “利用”一词取广义，包含实际开发利用之外的其他概念。 |
| The atmosphere has been utilized in
several ways. | 人们已通过若干方式利用了大气层。 |
| Likely, most of these activities that
have been carried out so far are those conducted without a clear or concrete
intention to affect atmospheric conditions. | 迄今为止开展的大多数活动可能并无影响大气状况的明确或具体意图。 |
| However, there have been certain
activities the very purpose of which is to alter atmospheric conditions, such
as weather modification. | 但是，也有某些活动，其目的就是改变大气状况，例如人工影响天气。 |
| Some of the proposed technologies for
intentional, large-scale modification of the atmosphere are examples of the
utilization of the atmosphere. | 提出的有意大规模改变大气层 的技术中，有些就是利用大气层的实例。 |
| (4) The formulation “its utilization
should be undertaken in a sustainable manner” in the present draft guideline
is simple and not overly legalistic, which well reflects a paradigmatic shift
towards viewing the atmosphere as a natural resource that ought to be
utilized in a sustainable manner. | (4) 本条指南草案中“应当以可持续的方式加以利用”的措词简明而不过于注重法律细节，很好地反映了将大气层视为应得到可持续利用的自然资源这一范式转变。 |
| It is presented more as a statement of
international policy and regulation than an operational code to determine
rights and obligations among States. | 其行文方式更贴近国际政策和规范的声明，而非确定各国权利和义务的操作守则。 |
| (5) Paragraph 2 builds upon the language
of the International Court of Justice in its judgment in the Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros
Project case, in which it referred to the “need to
reconcile environmental protection and economic development”. There are other
relevant precedents. | (5) 第2段立足于国际法院加布奇科沃－大毛罗斯项目案判决中的用语，国际法院在其中提到，“需要协调环境保护与经济发展”， 还有其他有关先例。 |
| The reference to “protection of the
atmosphere” as opposed to “environmental protection” seeks to focus the
paragraph on the subject matter of the present topic, which is the protection
of the atmosphere. | 提到“大气层保护”而非“环境保护”，是为了使该段侧重于本专题的主旨，即保护大气层。 |
| Guideline 6 Equitable and reasonable
utilization of the atmosphere | 指南6 公平合理利用大气层 |
| The atmosphere should be utilized in an
equitable and reasonable manner, taking into account the interests of present
and future generations. | 应当考虑到今世后代的利益，以公平合理的方式利用大气层。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Although equitable and reasonable
utilization of the atmosphere is an important element of sustainability, as
reflected in draft guideline 5, it is considered important to state it as an
autonomous principle. | (1) 如指南草案5所反映的，公平合理地利用大气层是可持续性的一项重要要素，但必须将之单列为一项自主原则。 |
| Like draft guideline 5, the present
guideline is formulated at a broad level of abstraction and generality. | 同指南草案5一样，本指南措词较为抽象而宽泛。 |
| (2) The draft guideline is formulated in
general terms so as to apply the principle of equity to the protection of the
atmosphere as a natural resource that is to be shared by all. | (2) 指南草案措词宽泛，以便对保护大气层这一世界共有自然资源的工作适用公平原则。 |
| The first part of the sentence deals with
“equitable and reasonable” utilization. | 该句第一部分论及“公平合理”的利用。 |
| The formulation that the “atmosphere
should be utilized in an equitable and reasonable manner” draws, in part,
upon article 5 of the Convention on the Law of the Non-navigational Uses of
International Watercourses, and article 4 of articles on the law of
transboundary aquifers. | “应当…以公平合理的方式利用大气层”这一表述部分参考《国际水道非航行使用法公约》第5条以及跨界含水层法第4条。 |
| It requires a balancing of interests and
consideration of all relevant factors that may be unique to either
atmospheric pollution or atmospheric degradation. | 该句要求平衡各种利益并考虑大气污染或大气层退化可能独有的所有有关因素。 |
| (3) The second part of the formulation
addresses questions of intra- and intergenerational equity. | (3) 该句第二部分论及代内和代际公平问题。 |
| In order to draw out the link between the
two aspects of equity, the Commission elected to use the phrase “taking into
account the interests of future” instead of “and for the benefit of present
and future generations of humankind”. | 为了说明公平的这两个方面之间的关系，委员会选择使用“考虑到…后代的利益”这一短语，而非“为人类当代和后代的福利”。 |
| The words “the interests of”, and not
“the benefit of”, have been used to signal the integrated nature of the
atmosphere, the “exploitation” of which needs to take into account a
balancing of interests to ensure sustenance for the Earth’s living organisms. | 使用“利益”一词而非“福利”以显示大气层的一体性，“开发利用”大气层需要考虑平衡各方利益，以确保地球生物的存续。 |
| Guideline 7 Intentional large-scale
modification of the atmosphere | 指南7 有意大规模改变大气层 |
| Activities aimed at intentional
large-scale modification of the atmosphere should be conducted with prudence
and caution, subject to any applicable rules of international law. | 应当在遵守任何适用的国际法规则前提下，审慎和谨慎地开展旨在有意大规模改变大气层的活动。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Draft guideline 7 deals with
activities the very purpose of which is to alter atmospheric conditions. | (1) 指南草案7论及旨在改变大气状况的活动。 |
| As the title of the draft guideline
signals, it addresses only intentional modification on a large scale. | 如指南草案标题所示，它仅涉及有意的大规模改变。 |
| (2) The term “activities aimed at
intentional large-scale modification of the atmosphere” is taken in part from
the definition of “environmental modification techniques” that appears in the
Convention on the Prohibition of Military or any Hostile Use of Environmental
Modification Techniques, which refers to techniques for changing — through
the deliberate manipulation of natural processes — the dynamics, composition
or structure of the Earth, including its biota, lithosphere, hydrosphere and
atmosphere, or of outer space. | (2) “旨在有意大规模改变大气层的活动”一语源自《禁止为军事或任何其他敌对目的使用改变环境的技术的公约》 所载的“改变环境的技术”的定义，“改变环境的技术”指通过蓄意操纵自然过程改变地球(包括其生物区系、岩石圈、水圈和大气层)或外层空间的动态、组成或结构的技术。 |
| (3) These activities include what is
commonly understood as “geo-engineering”, the methods and technologies of
which encompass carbon dioxide removal and solar radiation management. | (3) 这些活动包括通常被理解为“地球工程”的活动，其方法和技术包括二氧化碳清除和太阳能辐射管理。 |
| Activities related to the former involve
the ocean, land and technical systems and seek to remove carbon dioxide from
the atmosphere through natural sinks or through chemical engineering. | 与前者有关的活动涉及海洋、陆地和技术系统，试图通过天然碳汇或化学工程从大气层清除二氧化碳。 |
| Proposed techniques for carbon dioxide
removal include: soil carbon sequestration; carbon capture and sequestration;
ambient air capture; | 提出的二氧化碳清除技术包括：土壤固碳、碳捕获和固存、环境空气捕获、海洋肥化、海洋碱度提升，以及加强风化。 |
| ocean fertilization; ocean alkalinity
enhancement; and enhanced weathering. | 实际上，造林一直被用于减少二氧化碳。 |
| Indeed, afforestation has traditionally
been employed to reduce carbon dioxide. (4) According to scientific experts,
solar radiation management is designed to mitigate the negative impacts of
climate change by intentionally lowering the surface temperatures of the
Earth. | (4) 科学专家指出，太阳能辐射管理旨在有意降低地球表面温度从而减缓气候变化的不利影响。 |
| Proposed activities here include: “albedo
enhancement”, a method that involves increasing the reflectiveness of clouds
or the surface of the Earth, so that more of the heat of the sun is reflected
back into space; | 此处提出的活动包括：“反照率提升”，该方法涉及提高云层或地球表面的反射性，以便将更多的太阳热量反射回太空； |
| stratospheric aerosols, a technique that
involves the introduction of small, reflective particles into the upper
atmosphere to reflect sunlight before it reaches the surface of the Earth; | 平流层气溶胶，该技术涉及将微小的反射性颗粒注入高层大气层，以便在太阳光到达地球表面之前予以反射； |
| and space reflectors, which entail
blocking a small proportion of sunlight before it reaches the Earth. | 太空反射镜，该方法涉及在太阳光到达地球表面之前阻断一部分太阳光。 |
| (5) As noted above, the term “activities”
is broadly understood. | (5) 如上文所述，对“活动”一词，应取广义。 |
| However, there are certain other
activities that are prohibited by international law, which are not covered by
the present draft guideline, such as those prohibited by the Convention on
the Prohibition of Military or any Hostile Use of Environmental Modification
Techniques and Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions of 1949. | 然而，某些其他活动被《禁止为军事或任何其他敌对目的使用改变环境的技术的公约》 和《一九四九年日内瓦四公约第一议定书》
等国际法所禁止，不属于本指南草案的范围。 |
| Accordingly, the present draft guideline
applies only to “non-military” activities. | 因此，本指南草案只适用于“非军事”活动。 |
| Military activities involving deliberate
modifications of the atmosphere are outside the scope of the present
guideline. | 涉及蓄意改变大气层的军事活动不属于本指南的范围。 |
| (6) Likewise, other activities will
continue to be governed by various regimes. | (6) 同样，其他活动将继续处于各种体制的规范之下。 |
| For example, afforestation has been
incorporated in the Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention
on Climate Change regime and in the Paris Agreement (art. 5, para. 2). | 例如，造林已被纳入《〈联合国气候变化框架公约〉京都议定书》 体制和《巴黎协定》(第五条第二款)。 |
| Under some international legal
instruments, measures have been adopted for regulating carbon capture and
storage. | 在一些国际法律文书下，已经采取了规范碳捕获和封存的措施。 |
| The 1996 Protocol (London Protocol) to
the 1972 Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of
Wastes and Other Matter now includes an amended provision and annex, as well
as new guidelines for controlling the dumping of wastes and other matter. | 《1972年〈防止倾倒废物及其他物质污染海洋的公约〉 1996年议定书》(《伦敦议定书》)
载有一项经过修正的条款和附件，以及关于控制废物和其他物质倾倒的新准则。 |
| To the extent that “ocean iron
fertilization” and “ocean alkalinity enhancement” relate to questions of
ocean dumping, the 1972 Convention and the London Protocol thereto are
relevant. | “海洋铁肥化”和“海洋碱度提升”与海洋倾倒问题有关，因此1972年《公约》及其《伦敦议定书》也是有关文书。 |
| (7) Activities aimed at intentional
large-scale modification of the atmosphere have a significant potential for
preventing, diverting, moderating or ameliorating the adverse effects of
disasters and hazards, including drought, hurricanes, tornadoes, and
enhancing crop production and the availability of water. | (7) 旨在有意大规模改变大气层的活动具有极大潜力，可以防止、转移、调节或缓解干旱、飓风、旋风等灾害和危害的不利影响，并提高作物产量和水的供应。 |
| At the same time, it is also recognized
that they may have long-range and unexpected effects on existing climatic
patterns that are not confined by national boundaries. | 同时，人们也认识到，这些活动可能对当前的气候格局产生长远和意料之外的影响，而且不受国境的局限。 |
| As noted by the World Meteorological
Organization with respect to weather modification: “The complexity of the
atmospheric processes is such that a change in the weather induced
artificially in one part of the world will necessarily have repercussions
elsewhere … . Before undertaking an experiment on large-scale weather
modification, the possible and desirable consequences must be carefully
evaluated, and satisfactory international arrangements must be reached.” | 如世界气象组织就人工影响天气所述：“大气过程是非常复杂的过程，以至于以人工方式导致世界某一处发生的天气变化很有可能对别处产生影响…在开始大规模人工影响天气的实验之前，必须认真评估可能的结果和理想的结果，并且必须达成令人满意的国际安排”。 |
| (8) It is also not the intention of the
present draft guideline to stifle innovation and scientific advancement. | (8) 本条指南草案也无意抑制创新和科学进步。 |
| Principles 7 and 9 of the Rio Declaration
acknowledge the importance of new and innovative technologies and cooperation
in these areas. | 《里约宣言》原则7和原则9承认了新技术和创新技术以及在此领域开展合作的重要意义。 |
| At the same time, this does not mean that
those activities always have positive effects. | 然而，这并不意味着这些活动的影响总是正面的。 |
| (9) Accordingly, the draft guideline does
not seek either to authorize or to prohibit such activities unless there is
agreement among States to take such a course of action. | (9) 因此，本条指南草案并不试图授权或禁止这种活动，除非各国达成协定，要采取这种行动步骤。 |
| It simply sets out the principle that
such activities, if undertaken, should be conducted with prudence and
caution. | 指南草案仅仅是指出了以下原则，即如果要开展这种活动，应当审慎和谨慎地开展。 |
| The reference to “prudence and caution”
is inspired by the language of the International Tribunal for the Law of the
Sea in the cases of Southern Blue Fin Tuna, the Case of Mox Plant, and the
Case concerning Land Reclamation. | “审慎和谨慎”的提法受到国际海洋法法庭在南方蓝鳍金枪鱼案、混合氧化物核燃料厂案
和填海案 中用语的启发。 |
| The Tribunal stated in the last case:
“Considering that, given the possible implications of land reclamation on the
marine environment, prudence and caution require that Malaysia and Singapore
establish mechanisms for exchanging information and assessing the risks or
effects of land reclamation works and devising ways to deal with them in the
areas concerned. | 该法庭在上述最后一个案件中指出：“有鉴于此，考虑到填海造地可能对海洋环境造成的影响，审慎和谨慎原则要求马来西亚和新加坡建立相关机制，交流信息和评估填海造地工程的风险或影响，并制定在相关地区应对这些风险或影响的方式”。 |
| ” The draft guideline is cast in
hortatory language, aimed at encouraging the development of rules to govern
such activities, within the regimes competent in the various fields relevant
to atmospheric pollution and atmospheric degradation. | 指南草案使用了劝告性的语言，旨在鼓励在与大气污染和大气层退化有关的各种领域的主管体制内，制订规则以规范这些活动。 |
| (10) The last part of the guideline
refers to “subject to any applicable rules of international law”. | (10) 指南前半部分提到“在遵守任何适用的国际法规则前提下”。 |
| It is understood that international law
would continue to operate in the field of application of the draft guideline. | 理解是，在指南草案的适用方面，国际法将继续发挥作用。 |
| (11) It is widely acknowledged that such
an activity should be conducted in a fully disclosed and transparent manner,
and that an environmental impact assessment provided for in draft guideline 4
may be required for such an activity. | (11) 广为承认的是，这种活动应当以充分公开和透明的方式进行，而且可能需要进行指南草案4所规定的环境影响评估。 |
| It is considered that a project involving
intentional large-scale modification of the atmosphere may well carry an
extensive risk of severe damage, and therefore that a fortiori an assessment
is necessary for such an activity. | 有人认为，涉及有意大规模改变大气层的项目很可能伴有造成严重损害的巨大风险，因此尤其有必要对这种活动进行评估。 |
| (12) A number of members remained
unpersuaded that there was a need for a draft guideline on this matter, which
essentially remains controversial, and the discussion on it was evolving, and
is based on scant practice. | (12) 有些委员仍然认为无需拟订有关这一事项的指南草案，因为本质上对此事项仍有争议，这方面的讨论不断变化，而且可依据的实践很少。 |
| Other members were of the view that the
draft guideline could be enhanced during second reading. | 另一些委员认为，可在二读期间加强本条指南草案。 |
| Guideline 8 International cooperation | 指南8 国际合作 |
| 1. States have the obligation to
cooperate, as appropriate, with each other and with relevant international
organizations for the protection of the atmosphere from atmospheric pollution
and atmospheric degradation. | 1. 各国有义务就保护大气层免遭大气污染和大气层退化，酌情与其他国家或有关国际组织合作。 |
| 2. States should cooperate in further
enhancing scientific knowledge relating to the causes and impacts of
atmospheric pollution and atmospheric degradation. | 2. 各国应当就进一步增进关于大气污染和大气层退化的原因与影响的科学知识开展合作。 |
| Cooperation could include exchange of
information and joint monitoring. | 合作可包括信息交流和联合监测。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) International cooperation is at the
core of the whole set of the present draft guidelines. | (1) 国际合作位于关于保护大气层的整套指南草案的核心。 |
| The concept of international cooperation
has undergone a significant change in international law, and today is to a
large extent built on the notion of common interests of the international
community as a whole. | 国际合作概念在国际法中有很大的变化， 今日在很大程度上依托整个国际社会的共同利益概念。 |
| The fourth paragraph of the preamble to
the present draft guidelines recognizes this in stating that the protection
of the atmosphere from atmospheric pollution and degradation is “a pressing
concern of the international community as a whole”. | 本指南草案序言部分第四段承认这一点，故言明保护大气层免遭大气污染和大气层退化是“整个国际社会面临的紧迫关切问题”。 |
| (2) In this context, paragraph 1 of the
present draft guideline, provides the obligation of States to cooperate, as
appropriate. | (2) 在此背景下，本指南草案第1段规定了各国酌情合作的义务。 |
| In concrete terms, such cooperation is
with other States and with relevant international organizations. | 具体而言，要与其他国家和有关国际组织进行这种合作。 |
| The phrase “as appropriate” denotes a
certain flexibility for States in carrying out the obligation to cooperate
depending on the nature and subject matter required for cooperation. | “酌情”一词为国家视所要求的合作性质和主题事项履行合作义务留出一定的灵活性。 |
| The forms in which such cooperation may
occur may also vary depending on the situation and allows for the exercise of
a certain margin of appreciation of States. | 这种合作的形式也可根据情况而有所不同，并给各国留出一定的斟酌空间。 |
| It may be at the bilateral, regional or
multilateral levels. | 合作可以是双边的、区域的或多边的。 |
| States may also individually take
appropriate action. | 各国也可自行采取适当行动。 |
| (3) In the Pulp Mills case, the
International Court of Justice emphasized linkages attendant to the
obligation to inform, cooperation between the parties and the obligation of
prevention. | (3) 在纸浆厂案中，国际法院强调了告知义务、缔约国间的合作以及预防义务的联系。 |
| The Court noted that, “it is by
cooperating that the States concerned can jointly manage the risks of damage
to the environment … so as to prevent the damage in question”. | 法院指出，“正是通过合作，有关国家才能联合管理给环境造成损害的风险…以便实际预防有关损害”。 |
| (4) International cooperation is found in
several multilateral instruments relevant to the protection of the
environment. | (4) 在若干有关环境保护的多边文书中已规定了国际合作。 |
| Both the Stockholm Declaration and the
Rio Declaration, in principle 24 and principle 27, respectively, stress the
importance of cooperation, entailing good faith and a spirit of partnership. | 《斯德哥尔摩宣言》和《里约宣言》分别在原则24和原则27内强调了合作的重要性，要求善意和伙伴精神。 |
| In addition, among some of the existing
treaties, the Vienna Convention for the Protection of the Ozone Layer (1985)
provides, in its preamble, that the Parties to this Convention are “[a]ware
that measures to protect the ozone layer from modifications due to human
activities require international co-operation and action”. | 此外，在一些现有条约中，《保护臭氧层维也纳公约》(1985)的序言部分写明，公约缔约方“意识到保护臭氧层使不会因人类活动而发生变化的措施需要国际间的合作和行动”。 |
| Furthermore, the preamble of the United
Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (1992) acknowledges that “the
global nature of climate change calls for the widest possible cooperation by
all countries and their participation in an effective and appropriate
international response …”, while reaffirming “the principle of sovereignty of
States in international cooperation to address climate change”. | 此外，《联合国气候变化框架公约》(1992年)序言部分承认“气候变化的全球性要求所有国家…尽可能开展最广泛的合作，并参与有效和适当的国际应对行动”，同时重申“在应付气候变化的国际合作中的国家主权原则”。 |
| (5) Paragraph 1 of article 8 of the
Convention on the Law of the Non-navigational Uses of International
Watercourses, on the general obligation to cooperate, provides that: | (5) 《国际水道非航行使用法公约》关于一般合作义务的第8条第1款规定： |
| [W]atercourse States shall cooperate on
the basis of sovereign equality, territorial integrity and mutual benefit in
order to attain optimal utilization and adequate protection of an
international watercourse. | 水道国应在主权平等、领土完整和互利的基础上进行合作，使国际水道得到最佳利用和充分保护。 |
| (6) In its work, the Commission has also
recognized the importance of the obligation to cooperate. | (6) 委员会在工作中也认识到合作义务的重要性。 |
| The draft articles on prevention of
transboundary harm from hazardous activities (2001) provide in draft article
4, on cooperation, that: | “预防危险活动的跨界损害条款草案”(2001年)在关于合作的条款草案4中规定： |
| States concerned shall cooperate in good
faith and, as necessary, seek the assistance of one or more competent
international organizations in preventing significant transboundary harm or
at any event in minimizing the risk thereof. | 有关国家应本着诚意进行合作，并在必要时寻求一个或多个主管国际组织的协助，以预防重大跨界损害或无论如何尽量减小这方面的风险。 |
| Further, the draft articles on the law of
transboundary aquifers provide in draft article 7, General obligation to
cooperate, that: | 此外，“跨界含水层法条款草案”在关于合作的一般义务的条款草案7中规定： |
| 1. Aquifer States shall cooperate on the
basis of sovereign equality, territorial integrity, sustainable development,
mutual benefit and good faith in order to attain equitable and reasonable
utilization and appropriate protection of their transboundary aquifers or
aquifer systems. | 1. 含水层国应在主权平等、领土完整、可持续发展、互利和善意的基础上进行合作，使跨界含水层或含水层系统得到公平合理利用和适当保护。 |
| 2. For the purpose of paragraph 1,
aquifer States should establish joint mechanisms of cooperation. | 2. 为了第1款的目的，含水层国应设立联合合作机制。 |
| (7) Finally, the articles on the protection
of persons in the event of disasters (2016) provide, in draft article 7, a
duty to cooperate. | (7) 最后，“发生灾害时的人员保护条款草案”(2016年)在条款草案7中规定了合作的责任。 |
| (8) Cooperation could take a variety of
forms. | (8) 合作可采取多种形式。 |
| Paragraph (b) of the draft guidelines stresses,
in particular, the importance of cooperation in enhancing scientific
knowledge relating to the causes and impacts of atmospheric pollution and
atmospheric degradation. | 本指南草案第2段尤其强调就增进关于大气污染和大气层退化的原因与影响的科学知识开展合作的重要性。 |
| Paragraph (b) also highlights the
exchange of information and joint monitoring. | 第2段还着重指出了信息交流和联合监测。 |
| (9) The Vienna Convention for the
Protection of the Ozone Layer provides, in its preamble, that international
cooperation and action should be “based on relevant scientific and technical
considerations”, and in article 4, paragraph (1), on cooperation in the
legal, scientific and technical fields, there is provision that: | (9) 《保护臭氧层维也纳公约》序言部分写明，国际合作和行动应当“依据有关的科学和技术考虑”，并在关于法律、科学和技术方面的合作的第4条第1款中规定： |
| The Parties shall facilitate and
encourage the exchange of scientific, technical, socio-economic, commercial
and legal information relevant to this Convention as further elaborated in
annex II. Such information shall be supplied to bodies agreed upon by the
Parties. | 各缔约方应促进和鼓励附件二里详细说明的、与本公约有关的科学、技术、社经、商业和法律资料的交换。 |
| Annex II to the Convention gives a
detailed set of items for information exchange. | 该公约附件二详细列出了信息交流的全套事项。 |
| Article 4, paragraph 2, provides for
cooperation in the technical fields, taking into account the needs of
developing countries. | 第4条第2款规定在考虑到发展中国家需要的前提下进行技术领域的合作。 |
| (10) Article 4, paragraph 1, of the
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, regarding commitments,
provides that: | (10) 《联合国气候变化框架公约》关于承诺的第四条第1款规定： |
| All Parties … shall (e) Cooperate in
preparing for adaptation to the impacts of climate change; | 所有缔约方，…应(e) 合作为适应气候变化的影响做好的准备； |
| … (g) Promote and cooperate in
scientific, technological, technical, socio-economic and other research,
systematic observation and development of data archives related to the
climate system and intended to further the understanding and to reduce or
eliminate the remaining uncertainties regarding the causes, effects,
magnitude and timing of climate change and the economic and social
consequences of various response strategies; | …(g) 促进和合作进行关于气候系统的科学、技术、工艺、社会经济和其他研究、系统观测及开发数据档案，目的是增进对气候变化的起因、影响、规模和发生时间以及各种应对战略所带来的经济和社会后果的认识，和减少或消除在这些方面尚存的不确定性； |
| (h) Promote and cooperate in the full,
open and prompt exchange of relevant scientific, technological, technical,
socio-economic and legal information related to the climate system and
climate change, and to the economic and social consequences of various response
strategies; | (h) 促进和合作进行关于气候系统和气候变化以及关于各种应对战略所带来的经济和社会后果的科学、技术、工艺、社会经济和法律方面的有关信息的充分、公开的迅速的交流； |
| (i) Promote and cooperate in education,
training and public awareness related to climate change and encourage the
widest participation in this process, including that of non-governmental
organizations. | (i) 促进和合作进行与气候变化有关的教育、培训和提高公众意识的工作，并鼓励人们对这个过程最广泛参与，包括鼓励各种非政府组织的参与。 |
| (11) The obligation to cooperate also
includes, inter alia, the exchange of information. | (11) 合作义务除其他以外，还包括信息交流。 |
| In this respect, it may also be noted
that article 9 of the Convention on the Law of the Non-navigational Uses of
International Watercourses has a detailed set of provisions on exchange of
data and information. | 在这方面，或许可以指出，《国际水道非航行使用法公约》第9条详细列出了整套关于交换数据和资料的规定。 |
| Moreover, the Convention on Long-Range
Transboundary Air Pollution provides in article 4 that the Contracting
Parties “shall exchange information on and review their policies, scientific
activities and technical measures aimed at combating, as far as possible, the
discharge of air pollutants which may have adverse effects, thereby
contributing to the reduction of air pollution including long-range
transboundary air pollution”. | 此外，《远距离越境空气污染公约》第4条规定，缔约方应“就旨在尽可能防治可能具有不利影响的空气污染的政策、科学活动和技术措施交换信息并进行审查，以利减少空气污染，包括远距离跨界空气污染”。 |
| The Convention also has detailed
provisions on cooperation in the fields of research and development (art. 7); | 该公约还载有关于以下事项的详细规定：研究与发展领域合作(第7条)； |
| exchange of information (art. 8); | 交换信息(第8条)； |
| and implementation and further
development of the cooperative programme for the monitoring and evaluation of
the long-range transmission of air pollutants in Europe (art. 9). | 执行和进一步发展合作方案，以便在欧洲监测和评估空气污染物的远距离传输情况(第9条)。 |
| Similarly, the Eastern Africa Regional
Framework Agreement on Air Pollution (Nairobi Agreement, 2008) and the West
and Central Africa Regional Framework Agreement on Air Pollution (Abidjan
Agreement, 2009) have identical provisions on international cooperation. | 同样，《东非空气污染区域框架协定》(《内罗毕协定》，2008年) 和《西部和中部非洲空气污染区域框架协定》(《阿比让协定》，2009年) 也载有类似关于国际合作的规定。 |
| The parties agree to: | 缔约方同意： |
| 1.2 Consider the synergies and
co-benefits of taking joint measures against the emission of air pollutants
and greenhouse gases; | 1.2 考虑采取联合措施减少空气污染物和温室气体排放的协同作用和共同效益； |
| 1.4 Promote the exchange of educational
and research information on air quality management; | 1.4 促进交换关于空气质量管理的教育和研究信息； |
| 1.5 Promote regional cooperation to
strengthen the regulatory institutions. | 1.5 促进区域合作，以加强管制机构。 |
| (12) The second sentence of draft article
17, paragraph 4, of the draft articles on the law of transboundary aquifers
provides that: “Cooperation may include coordination of international
emergency actions and communications, making available emergency response
personnel, emergency response equipment and supplies, scientific and
technical expertise and humanitarian assistance”. | (12) “跨界含水层法条款草案”第17条第4款第二句规定：“合作可包括协调处理紧急情况的国际行动和通信，提供应急人员、应急设备和物资、科技专业知识和人道主义援助。 |
| In turn, the draft articles on the
protection of persons in the event of disaster, provides in draft article 9,
that “[f]or the purposes of the present draft articles, cooperation includes
humanitarian assistance, coordination of international relief actions and
communications, and making available relief personnel, equipment and goods,
and scientific, medical and technical resources”. | ”相应地，“发生灾害时的人员保护条款草案”在条款草案第9条中规定：“为本条款草案的目的，合作包括提供人道主义援助，协调国际救灾行动和通信，提供救灾人员、救灾设备和物资以及科学、医学、技术资源。 |
| Further, draft article 10 (Cooperation
for risk reduction) provides that “[c]ooperation shall extend to the taking
of measures intended to reduce the risk of disasters”. | ”而且，条款草案第10条(减少灾害风险的合作)规定：“合作应扩展至采取旨在减少灾害风险的措施。 |
| (13) In the context of protecting the
atmosphere, enhancing scientific knowledge relating to the causes and impacts
of atmospheric pollution and atmospheric degradation is considered key by the
Commission. | ” (13) 就保护大气层而言，委员会认为重点是增进有关大气污染和大气层退化的原因和影响的科学知识。 |
| Guideline 9 Interrelationship among
relevant rules | 指南9 相关规则之间的相互关系 |
| 1. The rules of international law
relating to the protection of the atmosphere and other relevant rules of
international law, including, inter alia, the rules of international trade
and investment law, of the law of the sea and of international human rights
law, should, to the extent possible, be identified, interpreted and applied
in order to give rise to a single set of compatible obligations, in line with
the principles of harmonization and systemic integration, and with a view to
avoiding conflicts. | 1. 在确定、解释及适用关于保护大气层的国际法规则和其他相关的国际法规则，尤其是国际贸易和投资法规则、海洋法规则以及国际人权法规则时，应当依照协调原则和体系整合原则及为了避免冲突，尽可能产生单一一套相互兼容的义务。 |
| This should be done in accordance with
the relevant rules set forth in the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties
of 1969, including articles 30 and 31, paragraph 3 (c), and the principles
and rules of customary international law. | 在这样做时应当遵守载于1969年《维也纳条约法公约》的相关规则，包括其第三十条和第三十一条第三款(丙)项以及习惯国际法的原则和规则。 |
| 2. States should, to the extent possible,
when developing new rules of international law relating to the protection of
the atmosphere and other relevant rules of international law, endeavour to do
so in a harmonious manner. | 2. 各国在制定关于保护大气层的国际法新规则和其他相关的国际法规则时，应当尽可能采用协调的方式。 |
| 3. When applying paragraphs 1 and 2,
special consideration should be given to persons and groups particularly
vulnerable to atmospheric pollution and atmospheric degradation. | 3. 在适用第1和第2段时，应当特别考虑到特别易受大气污染和大气层退化影响的个人和群体。 |
| Such groups may include, inter alia,
indigenous peoples, people of the least developed countries and people of
low-lying coastal areas and small island developing States affected by
sea-level rise. | 这些群体除其他人外，可能包括土著人民、最不发达国家的人民和受海平面上升影响的低地沿海地区和小岛屿发展中国家的人民。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Draft guideline 9 addresses
“interrelationship among relevant rules” and seeks to reflect the relationship
between rules of international law relating to the protection of the
atmosphere and other relevant rules of international law. | (1) 指南草案9涉及“相关规则之间的相互关系”， 试图反映关于保护大气层的国际法规则与其他相关的国际法规则之间的相互关系。 |
| Paragraphs 1 and 2 are general in nature,
while paragraph 3 places emphasis on the protection of groups that are
particularly vulnerable to atmospheric pollution and atmospheric degradation. | 第1和第2段具有一般性，而第3段强调保护特别易受大气污染和大气层退化影响的群体。 |
| Atmospheric pollution and atmospheric
degradation are defined in draft guideline 1 on the use of terms. | 关于用语的指南草案1对大气污染和大气层退化作了界定。 |
| Those terms focus on pollution and
degradation caused “by humans”. | 这两个术语侧重“人类”造成的污染和退化。 |
| That necessarily means that human activities
governed by other fields of law have a bearing on the atmosphere and its
protection. | 这必然意味着其他法律领域管辖的人类活动与大气层及其保护有关。 |
| It is therefore important that conflicts
and tensions between rules relating to the protection of the atmosphere and
rules relating to other fields of international law are to the extent
possible avoided. | 因此，必须尽可能避免关于保护大气层的规则与关于其他领域的国际法规则之间的冲突和紧张关系。 |
| Accordingly, draft guideline 9 highlights
the various techniques in international law for addressing tensions between
legal rules and principles, whether they relate to a matter of interpretation
or a matter of conflict. | 因此，指南草案9着重指出了国际法中处理法律规则和原则间的紧张关系，包括与解释问题和冲突问题相关的紧张关系的各种技巧。 |
| The formulation of draft guideline 9
draws upon the conclusions reached by the Commission’s Study Group on
fragmentation of international law: difficulties arising from the
diversification and expansion of international law. | 指南草案9的表述参考了委员会关于“国际法不成体系问题：国际法多样化和扩展引起的困难”的研究小组得出的结论。 |
| (2) Paragraph 1 addresses three kinds of
legal processes, namely the identification of the relevant rules, their
interpretation and their application. | (2) 第1段涉及三种法律进程，即相关规则的确定、解释及适用。 |
| The phrase “and with a view to avoiding
conflicts” at the end of the first sentence of the paragraph signals that
“avoiding conflicts” is among one of the principal purposes of the paragraph. | 本段第一句中的“及为了避免冲突”短语表示，“避免冲突”是本段的主要目的之一。 |
| It is, however, not the exclusive purpose
of the draft guideline. | 然而，这并不是本条指南草案的唯一目的。 |
| The paragraph is formulated in the
passive form, in recognition of the fact that the process of identification,
interpretation and application involves not only States but also
international organizations, as appropriate. | 本段以被动式表述，并承认了一个事实，即确定、解释及适用进程不仅涉及各国，还酌情涉及国际组织。 |
| (3) The phrase “should, to the extent
possible, be identified, interpreted and applied in order to give rise to a
single set of compatible obligations” draws upon the Commission’s Study Group
conclusions on fragmentation. | (3) “在确定、解释及适用…时，应当…尽可能产生唯一一套相互兼容的义务”这一表述参考了委员会研究组关于不成体系问题的结论。 |
| The term “identified” is particularly
relevant in relation to rules arising from treaty obligations and other
sources of international law. | “确定”一词对条约义务和国际法其他渊源所产生的规则而言特别相关。 |
| In coordinating norms, certain
preliminary steps need to be taken that pertain to identification, for
example, a determination of whether two norms address “the same subject
matter”, and which norm should be considered lex generalis or lex specialis
and lex anterior or lex posterior, and whether the pacta tertiis rule
applies. | 在协调各种规范时，需要采取与确定有关的某些初步步骤，例如，确定两项规范是否涉及“同一事项”，确定哪一规范应当被视为一般法或特别法、前法或后法，以及对第三者的约定规则是否适用等。 |
| Moreover, when resorting to rules of
customary international law for the purposes of interpretation, caution is
required in identifying customary international law. | 此外，当为解释目的采用习惯国际法规则时，识别习惯国际法需要谨慎。 |
| (4) The first sentence also makes
specific reference to the principles of “harmonization and systemic
integration”, which were accorded particular attention in the conclusions of
the work of the Study Group. | (4) 第一句还具体提及“协调”原则和“体系整合”原则，研究组工作的结论中对这些原则给予了特别关注。 |
| As noted in conclusion (4) on
harmonization, when several norms bear on a single issue they should, to the
extent possible, be interpreted so as give rise to “a single set of
compatible obligations”. | 正如关于协调的结论(4)指出的那样，当若干规范同时涉及一项问题时，应当尽可能作出能够产生“单一一套相互兼容的义务”的解释。 |
| Moreover, under conclusion (17), systemic
integration denotes that “whatever their subject matter, treaties are a
creation of the international legal system”. | 此外，根据结论(17)，体系整合意味着“无论事项为何，条约是国际法律制度的产物”。 |
| They should thus be interpreted against
the background of other international rules and principles. | 因此，应当以其他国际规则和原则为背景对条约进行解释。 |
| (5) The second sentence of paragraph 1
seeks to locate the paragraph within the relevant rules set forth in the
Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties of 1969, including articles 30 and
31, paragraph 3 (c), and the principles and rules of customary international
law. | (5) 第1段第二句试图将该款置于1969年《维也纳条约法公约》 所载的相关规则范围内，包括第三十条和第三十一条第三款(丙)项以及习惯国际法的原则和规则范围内。 |
| Article 31, paragraph 3 (c), is intended
to guarantee a “systemic interpretation”, requiring “any relevant rules of
international law applicable in the relations between the parties” to be
taken into account. | 第三十一条第三款(丙)项意在保证“系统解释”，要求将“适用于当事国间关系之任何有关国际法规则”纳入考虑。 |
| In other words, article 31, paragraph 3
(c), of the 1969 Vienna Convention emphasizes both the “unity of
international law” and “the sense in which rules should not be considered in
isolation of general international law”. | 换言之，1969年《维也纳公约》第三十一条第三款(丙)项既强调了“国际法的统一”，又强调了“不应抛开一般国际法来考虑规则”。 |
| Article 30 of the 1969 Vienna Convention
provides rules to resolve a conflict, if the above principle of systemic
integration does not work effectively in a given circumstance. | 1969年《维也纳公约》第三十条规定了上述体系整合原则在特定情况下无法有效发挥作用时的冲突解决规则。 |
| Article 30 provides for conflict rules of
lex specialis (para. 2), of lex posterior (para. 3) and of pacta tertiis
(para. 4). | 第三十条规定了关于特别法(第二款)、后法(第三款)和对第三者的约定(第四款)的冲突规则。 |
| The phrase “principles and rules of
customary international law” in the second sentence of paragraph 1 covers
such principles and rules of customary international law as are relevant to
the identification, interpretation and application of relevant rules. | 第1段第二句中的“习惯国际法原则和规则”一语涵盖与确定、解释及适用相关规则有关的习惯国际法原则和规则。 |
| (6) The reference to “including inter
alia the rules of international trade and investment law, of the law of the
sea and of international human rights law” highlights the practical
importance of these three areas in their relation to the protection of the
atmosphere. | (6) 提及“尤其是国际贸易和投资法规则、海洋法规则以及国际人权法规则”着重指出了与保护大气层有关的这三个领域的重要性。 |
| The specified areas have close connection
with the rules of international law relating to the protection of the
atmosphere in terms of treaty practice, jurisprudence and doctrine. | 具体指出的这些领域在条约实践、判例和理论方面与关于保护大气层的国际法规则有着密切联系。 |
| Other fields of law, which might be
equally relevant, have not been overlooked and the list of relevant fields of
law is not intended to be exhaustive. | 其他可能同样相关的法律领域并没有被忽视，相关法律领域的清单并不是要做到详尽无遗。 |
| Furthermore, nothing in draft guideline 9
should be interpreted as subordinating rules of international law in the
listed fields to rules relating to the protection of the atmosphere and vice
versa. | 此外，指南草案9的任何内容都不应被解释为将所列领域国际法规则的地位排在与保护大气层有关的规则之后，或者相反。 |
| (7) With respect to international trade
law, the concept of mutual supportiveness has emerged to help reconcile that
law and international environmental law, which relates in part to protection
of the atmosphere. | (7) 关于国际贸易法，相辅相成概念的出现是为了帮助协调该法与国际环境法，而国际环境法在一定程度上与保护大气层有关。 |
| The Marrakesh Agreement establishing the
World Trade Organization of 1994 provides, in its preamble, that its aim is
to reconcile trade and development goals with environmental needs “in
accordance with the objective of sustainable development”. | 1994年《马拉喀什建立世界贸易组织(世贸组织)协定》 序言规定，其目的是“依照可持续发展的目标”，使贸易和发展目标与环境需求相调和。 |
| The WTO Committee on Trade and
Environment began pursuing its activities “with the aim of making
international trade and environmental policies mutually supportive”, and in
its 1996 report to the Singapore Ministerial Conference, the Committee
reiterated its position that the WTO system and environmental protection are
“two areas of policy-making [that] are both important and … should be
mutually supportive in order to promote sustainable development”. | 世贸组织贸易和环境委员会开始开展各项活动，“旨在使国际贸易和环境政策相辅相成”， 委员会在1996年提交新加坡部长级会议的报告中重申了自己的立场，即世贸组织系统和环境保护是“都重要的两个决策领域…应相互支持，以促进可持续发展”。 |
| As the concept of “mutual supportiveness”
has become gradually regarded as “a legal standard internal to the WTO”, the
2001 Doha Ministerial Declaration expresses the conviction of States that
“acting for the protection of the environment and the promotion of
sustainable development can and must be mutually supportive”. | 随着“相辅相成”概念逐渐被视为“世贸组织内部的法律标准”，
2001年《多哈部长宣言》表示，各国相信，“为保护环境和促进可持续发展而采取的行动是能够而且必须是相互支持的”。 |
| Mutual supportiveness is considered in
international trade law as part of the principle of harmonization in
interpreting conflicting rules of different treaties. | 在国际贸易法中，相辅相成被视为协调原则的一部分，用于解释不同条约相互冲突的规则。 |
| Among a number of relevant WTO dispute
settlement cases, the United States — Standards for Reformulated and
Conventional Gasoline case in 1996 is most notable in that the Appellate Body
refused to separate the rules of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade
from other rules of interpretation in public international law, by stating
that “the General Agreement is not to be read in clinical isolation from
public international law” (emphasis added), strongly supporting the
interpretative principle of harmonization and systemic integration. | 在一系列相关的世贸组织争端解决案件中，1996年美国―新配方汽油和常规汽油标准案最引人注意，因为上诉机构拒绝将《关税及贸易总协定》规则与国际公法的其他解释规则区分开，指出“不能机械地抛开国际公法来解读《总协定》”(强调是后加的)， 从而大力支持解释的协调原则和体系整合原则。 |
| (8) Similar trends and approaches appear
in international investment law. | (8) 国际投资法中也存在类似趋势和方法。 |
| Free trade agreements, which contain a
number of investment clauses, such as the North American Free Trade
Agreement, and numerous bilateral investment treaties also contain standards
relating to the environment, which have been confirmed by the jurisprudence
of the relevant dispute settlement bodies. | 《北美自由贸易协定》 和许多双边投资条约 也包含与环境有关的标准，这些标准得到了相关争端解决机构判例的确认。 |
| Some investment tribunals have emphasized
that investment treaties “cannot be read and interpreted in isolation from
public international law”. | 一些投资问题法庭强调，投资条约“不能脱离国际公法解读和解释”。 |
| (9) The same is the case with the law of
the sea. | (9) 海洋法也是同样的情况。 |
| The protection of the atmosphere is
intrinsically linked to the oceans and the law of the sea owing to the close
physical interaction between the atmosphere and the oceans. | 由于大气层与海洋间存在密切的物理相互作用，保护大气层与海洋和海洋法有着内在的联系。 |
| The Paris Agreement notes in its preamble
“the importance of ensuring the integrity of all ecosystems, including
oceans”. | 《巴黎协定》的序言部分指出，“必须确保包括海洋在内的所有生态系统的完整性”。 |
| This link is also borne out by the United
Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea of 1982, which defines the
“pollution of the marine environment”, in article 1, paragraph 1 (4), in such
a way as to include all airborne sources of marine pollution, including
atmospheric pollution from land-based sources and vessels. | 这种联系也得到了1982年《联合国海洋法公约》的支持， 该公约第一条第1款第(4)项对“海洋环境污染”的界定包括所有空气传播的海洋污染来源，包括来自陆地来源和船只的大气污染。 |
| It offers detailed provisions on the
protection and preservation of the marine environment through Part XII, in
particular articles 192, 194, 207, 211 and 212. | 该公约在第十二部分第一九二、第一九四、第二百零七、第二百一十一和第二百一十二条中作出了关于海洋环境的保护和保全的详细规定。 |
| There are a number of regional
conventions regulating marine pollution from land-based sources. | 存在一些管理来自陆地来源的海洋污染的区域公约。 |
| IMO has sought to regulate vessel-source
pollution in its efforts to supplement the provisions of the Convention and
to combat climate change. | 海事组织一直致力于管理来自船只的污染，以努力补充《公约》规定 并应对气候变化。 |
| The effective implementation of the
applicable rules of the law of the sea could help to protect the atmosphere. | 有效执行适用的海洋法规则可帮助保护大气层。 |
| Similarly, the effective implementation
of the rules on the protection of the environment could protect the oceans. | 同样，有效执行关于保护大气层的规则也可保护海洋。 |
| (10) As for international human rights
law, environmental degradation, including air pollution, climate change and
ozone layer depletion, “has the potential to affect the realization of human
rights”. | (10) 对于国际人权法而言，环境退化，包括空气污染、气候变化和臭氧层消耗，“有可能影响实现人权”。 |
| The link between human rights and the
environment, including the atmosphere, is acknowledged in the practice. | 人权与包括大气层在内的环境间的联系在实践中得到承认。 |
| The Stockholm Declaration recognizes, in
its principle 1, that everyone “has the fundamental right to freedom,
equality and adequate conditions of life in an environment of a quality that
permits a life of dignity and well-being”. | 《斯德哥尔摩宣言》原则1承认人人“拥有在有尊严和福祉的生活环境中享有自由、平等和适当生活条件的基本权利”。 |
| The Rio Declaration of 1992 outlines, in
its principle 1, that “[h]uman beings are at the centre of concerns for
sustainable development”, and that “[t]hey are entitled to a healthy and
productive life in harmony with nature”. | 1992年《里约宣言》原则1指出，“人类处于可持续发展问题的中心”，“有权享有与自然和谐共处的健康和富有成效的生活”。 |
| In the context of atmospheric pollution,
the Convention on Long-range Transboundary Air Pollution recognizes that air
pollution has “deleterious effects of such a nature as to endanger human
health” and provides that the parties are determined “to protect man and his
environment against air pollution” of a certain magnitude. | 关于大气污染，《远距离越境空气污染公约》承认空气污染产生“有害影响，足以危害人类健康”，并规定，各方决心“保护人类与人类环境不受”一定规模的“空气污染”。 |
| Likewise, for atmospheric degradation,
the Vienna Convention for the Protection of the Ozone Layer contains a
provision whereby the parties are required to take appropriate measures “to
protect human health” in accordance with the Convention and Protocols to
which they are a party. | 同样对于大气层退化问题，《保护臭氧层维也纳公约》载有一项条款，其中规定缔约国必须根据该公约和加入的议定书采取适当措施，“保护人类健康”。 |
| Similarly, the United Nations Framework
Convention on Climate Change deals with the adverse effects of climate
change, including significant deleterious effects “on human health and
welfare”. | 同样，《联合国气候变化框架公约》述及气候变化的不利影响，包括“对人类的健康和福利”的重大有害影响。 |
| (11) In this regard, relevant human
rights are “the right to life”, “the right to private and family life” and
“the right to property”. | (11) 这方面的有关人权为“生命权”、“私人生活和家庭生活权” 及“财产权”。 |
| Where a specific right to environment
exists in human rights conventions, the relevant courts and treaty bodies
apply them, including the right to health. | 如果人权公约中存在某项具体的环境权，包括健康权，有关法院和条约机构即适用这些公约。 |
| In order for international human rights
law to contribute to the protection of the atmosphere, however, certain core
requirements must be fulfilled. | 然而，若要使国际人权法促进保护大气层，还必须满足某些核心要求。 |
| First, as international human rights law
remains “a personal-injury-based legal system”, a direct link between
atmospheric pollution or degradation that impairs the protected right and an
impairment of a protected right must be established. | 首先，因为国际人权法仍然是“一个基于个人伤害的法律制度”， 所以必须证明减损受保护权利的大气层污染或退化与一项受保护权利的被减损之间存在直接联系。 |
| Second, the adverse effects of
atmospheric pollution or degradation must attain a certain threshold if they
are to fall within the scope of international human rights law. | 其次，大气污染或退化的不利影响必须达到某个界限，才能纳入国际人权法的范畴。 |
| The assessment of such minimum standards
is relative and depends on the content of the right to be invoked and all the
relevant circumstances of the case, such as the intensity and duration of the
nuisance and its physical or mental effects. | 对这种最低标准的评估是相对的，取决于所援引权利的内容和案件的所有相关情况，例如损害的强度和持续时间及其对身体和精神的影响。 |
| Third, and most importantly, it is
necessary to establish the causal link between an action or omission of a
State, on the one hand, and atmospheric pollution or degradation, on the
other hand. | 第三，也是最重要的一点，必须证明某国的作为或不作为与大气污染或退化之间存在因果联系。 |
| (12) One of the difficulties in the
interrelationship between the rules of international law relating to the
atmosphere and human rights law is the “disconnect” in their application. | (12) 关于大气层的国际法规则与人权法之间相互关系中的一个难点在于两者在适用上的“脱节”。 |
| While the rules of international law
relating to the atmosphere apply not only to the States of victims but also
to the States of origin of the harm, the scope of application of human rights
treaties is limited to the persons subject to a State’s jurisdiction. | 尽管关于大气层的国际法规则不仅适用于受害者所属国，也适用于伤害的源头国，但人权条约的适用范围仅限于受一国管辖的个人。 |
| Thus, where an environmentally harmful
activity in one State affects persons in another State, the question of the
interpretation of “jurisdiction” in the context of human rights obligations arises.
In interpreting and applying the notion, regard may be had to the object and
purpose of human rights treaties. | 因此，当一国境内的对环境有害的活动影响到另一国民众的权利时，就产生了结合人权义务解释“管辖权”的问题，在解释和适用这一概念时，可能需要考虑人权条约的目标和宗旨。 |
| In its Advisory Opinion on the Legal
Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian
Territory, the International Court of Justice pronounced, when addressing the
issue of extraterritorial jurisdiction, “while the jurisdiction of States is
primarily territorial, it may sometimes be exercised outside the national
territory. | 国际法院在关于在巴勒斯坦被占领土修建隔离墙的法律后果的咨询意见中声明：在处理域外管辖权问题时，“尽管各国管辖权主要是在境内，但有时也可在国家领土之外行使。 |
| Considering the object and purpose of the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, it would seem natural
that, even when such is the case, State parties to the Covenant should be
bound to comply with its provisions”. | 考虑到《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》的目的和宗旨，即使是在这种情况下，《公约》缔约国也应当有义务遵守其规定，这似乎是顺理成章的”。 |
| (13) One possible consideration is the
relevance of the principle of non-discrimination. | (13) 一个可能的考虑因素是不歧视原则的相关性。 |
| Some authors maintain that it may be
considered unreasonable that international human rights law would have no
application to atmospheric pollution or global degradation and that the law
can extend protection only to the victims of intra-boundary pollution. | 一些作者认为，断定国际人权法不适用于大气污染和全球退化，并且法律只能向边界内污染的受害者提供保护，这是不合理的。 |
| They maintain that the non-discrimination
principle requires the responsible State to treat transboundary atmospheric
pollution or global atmospheric degradation no differently from domestic
pollution. | 他们认为，不歧视原则要求责任国如同处理国内污染一样处理跨界大气污染或全球大气退化。 |
| Furthermore, if and insofar as the
relevant human rights norms are today recognized as either established or
emergent rules of customary international law, they may be considered as
overlapping with environmental norms for the protection of the atmosphere,
such as due diligence (draft guideline 3), environmental impact assessment
(draft guideline 4), sustainable utilization (draft guideline 5), equitable
and reasonable utilization (draft guideline 6) and international cooperation
(draft guideline 8), among others, which would enable interpretation and
application of both norms in a harmonious manner. | 此外，如果并且只要许多人权准则今天得到承认，成为公认的或正在形成的习惯国际法规则， 它们即可被视为与保护大气层的环境准则相互重叠，例如应尽义务(指南草案3)、环境影响评估(指南草案4)、可持续利用(指南草案5)、公平合理利用(指南草案6)和国际合作(指南草案8)等，因此将能够以协调一致的方式予以解释和适用。 (14) 第1段涉及的是确定、解释和适用，相比之下，第2段涉及各国制定新规则的情况。 |
| (14) In contrast to paragraph 1, which
addresses identification, interpretation and application, paragraph 2 deals
with the situation in which States wish to develop new rules. | 该段规定“各国在制定关于保护大气层的国际法新规则和其他相关的国际法规则时，应当尽可能采用协调的方式”。 |
| The paragraph signals a general desire to
encourage States, when engaged in negotiations involving the creation of new
rules, to take into account the systemic relationships that exist between
rules of international law relating to the atmosphere and rules in other
legal fields. | 该段表示了一种一般性意愿，鼓励各国在进行涉及建立新规则的谈判时，考虑到关于大气层的国际法规则与其他法律领域的规则之间的体系关系。 |
| (15) Paragraph 3 highlights the plight of
those in vulnerable situations because of atmospheric pollution and
atmospheric degradation. | (15) 第3段着重说明特别易受影响群体因大气污染和大气层退化而面临的困境。 |
| It has been formulated to make a direct
reference to atmospheric pollution and atmospheric degradation. | 其表述直接提及大气污染和大气层退化。 |
| The reference to paragraphs 1 and 2
captures both the aspects of “identification, interpretation and
application”, on the one hand, and “development”, on the other hand. | 其中提到第1段和第2段，一方面体现了“确定、解释及适用”，另一方面体现了“制定”。 |
| The phrase “special consideration should
be given to persons and groups particularly vulnerable to atmospheric
pollution and atmospheric degradation” underlines the broad scope of the
consideration to be given to the situation of vulnerable groups, covering
both aspects of the present topic, namely “atmospheric pollution” and
“atmospheric degradation”. | “应当特别考虑到特别易受大气污染和大气层退化影响的个人和群体”一语强调了对易受影响群体给予考虑的广泛范围，涵盖本专题的两个方面，即“大气污染”和“大气层退化”。 |
| It was not considered useful to refer in
the text to “human rights”, or even to “rights” or “legally protected
interest”. | 在案文中提及“人权”，甚至“权利”或“受法律保护的利益”被认为没有帮助。 |
| (16) The second sentence of paragraph 3
gives examples of groups that may be found in vulnerable situations in the
context of atmospheric pollution and atmospheric degradation. | (16) 第3段第二句列举了在大气污染和大气层退化背景下可能易受影响的群体。 |
| The World Health Organization has noted
that: “All populations will be affected by a changing climate, but the
initial health risks vary greatly, depending on where and how people live. | 世界卫生组织指出：“所有人口将受到气候变化的影响，但初步的健康风险大不相同，取决于人口居住的地点和生活方式。 |
| People living in small island developing
States and other coastal regions, megacities, and mountainous and polar
regions are all particularly vulnerable in different ways. | 生活在小岛屿发展中国家和其他沿海地区、特大城市、山区和极地地区的人们，都以不同的方式变得尤其脆弱。 |
| ” In the Sustainable Development Goals
adopted by the General Assembly in its 2030 Agenda for Sustainable
Development, atmospheric pollution is addressed in Goals 3.9 and 11.6, which
call, in particular, for a substantial reduction in the number of deaths and
illnesses from air pollution, and for special attention to ambient air
quality in cities. | ” 在大会通过的《2030年可持续发展议程》的可持续发展目标中，目标3.9和目标11.6涉及大气污染问题，尤其呼吁大幅度减少空气污染导致的死亡和患病人数，并呼吁特别关注城市的环境空气质量。 |
| (17) The phrase in the second sentence of
paragraph 3 “may include, inter alia” denotes that the given examples are not
necessarily exhaustive. | (17) 第3段第二句的“除其他人外，可能包括”一语表示列举并非详尽无遗。 |
| Indigenous peoples are, as was declared
in the Report of the Indigenous Peoples’ Global Summit on Climate Change,
“the most vulnerable to the impacts of climate change because they live in
the areas most affected by climate change and are usually the most
socio-economically disadvantaged”. | 正如《土著人民气候变化全球峰会报告》中宣布的那样，“由于土著人民生活在受气候变化影响最严重的地区，在社会经济意义上通常处于最弱势地位，他们最容易受到气候变化的影响”。 |
| People of the least developed countries
are also placed in a particularly vulnerable situation as they often live in
extreme poverty, without access to basic infrastructure services and to
adequate medical and social protection. | 最不发达国家人民也被认为特别易受影响，因为他们常常生活在极端贫困中，得不到基本的基础设施服务以及适当的医疗和社会保护。 |
| People of low-lying areas and
small-island developing States affected by sea-level rise are subject to the
potential loss of land, leading to displacement and, in some cases, forced
migration. | 受海平面上升影响的低地地区和小岛屿发展中国家的人民有可能会丧失土地，这会导致流离失所，在某些情况下会导致强迫移民。 |
| Inspired by the preamble of the Paris
Agreement, in addition to the groups specifically indicated in paragraph 3 of
draft guideline 9, other groups of potentially particularly vulnerable people
include local communities, migrants, women, children, persons with
disabilities and also the elderly, who are often seriously affected by
atmospheric pollution and atmospheric degradation. | 受《巴黎协定》序言的启发，除了指南草案9第3段具体列出的群体，其他可能特别弱势的群体包括当地社区、移民、妇女、儿童、残疾人和老年人，他们往往受到大气污染和大气层退化的严重影响。 |
| Guideline 10 Implementation | 指南10 执行 |
| 1. National implementation of obligations
under international law relating to the protection of the atmosphere from
atmospheric pollution and atmospheric degradation, including those referred
to in the present draft guidelines, may take the form of legislative,
administrative, judicial and other actions. | 1. 各国在执行与保护大气层免遭大气污染和大气层退化有关的国际法规定的义务、包括本指南草案中所述的义务时，采取的形式可包括立法、行政、司法和其他行动。 |
| 2. States should endeavour to give effect
to the recommendations contained in the present draft guidelines. | 2. 各国应当努力落实本指南草案所载的各项建议。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Draft guideline 10 deals with
national implementation of obligations under international law relating to
the protection of the atmosphere from atmospheric pollution and atmospheric
degradation. | (1) 指南草案10涉及各国执行与保护大气层免遭大气污染和大气层退化有关的国际法规定的义务。 |
| Compliance at the international level is
the subject of draft guideline 11. | 国际层面的遵约是指南草案11的主题。 |
| The term “implementation” is used in the
present draft guideline to refer to measures that States may take to make
treaty provisions effective at the national level, including implementation
in their national laws. | 本指南草案使用“执行”一词，指各国为使条约规定在国家层面生效而可能采取的措施，包括国家法律中的执行措施。 |
| (2) Draft guideline 10 consists of two
paragraphs, which address, on one hand, existing obligations under
international law, and on the other hand, recommendations contained in the
draft guidelines. | (2) 指南草案10由两段组成，一段论及国际法规定的现有义务，另一段论及指南草案所载建议。 |
| (3) The draft guidelines refer to
relevant obligations of States under international law relating to the
protection of the atmosphere from atmospheric pollution and atmospheric
degradation, namely, the obligation to protect the atmosphere (draft
guideline 3), the obligation to ensure that an environmental impact
assessment is carried out (draft guideline 4) and the obligation to cooperate
(draft guideline 8). | (3) 指南草案提到国际法规定的与执行与保护大气层免遭大气污染和大气层退化有关的相关国家义务，即保护大气层的义务(指南草案3)、确保进行环境影响评估的义务(指南草案4)和合作的义务(指南草案8)。 |
| Given that States have these obligations,
it is clear that they need to be faithfully implemented. | 鉴于各国负有这些义务，它们显然有必要忠实履行这些义务。 |
| (4) The term “[n]ational implementation”
denotes the measures that parties may take to make international agreements
operative at the national level, pursuant to the national constitution and
legal system of each State. | (4) “各国在执行”一词指缔约方为使国际协定在国家层面生效而根据各国的国家宪法和法律制度规定可能采取的措施。 |
| National implementation may take many
forms, including “legislative, administrative, judicial and other actions”. | 国家执行可采取许多形式，包括“立法、行政、司法和其他行动”。 |
| The word “may” reflects the discretionary
nature of the provision. | “可”一词，反映这一规定的自由裁量性质。 |
| The reference to “administrative” actions
is used, rather than “executive” actions, as it is more encompassing. It
covers possible implementation at lower levels of governmental
administration. | 使用“行政”行动而不是“行政部门”行动，这是由于“行政”被认为范围更广，因为它也涵盖了下级政府行政部门可能执行的行动。 |
| The term “other actions” is a residual
category covering all other forms of national implementation. | “其他行动”一词是涵盖国家执行的所有其他形式的剩余类别。 |
| The term “national implementation” also
applies to obligations of regional organizations such as the European Union. | “国家执行”一词也适用于欧洲联盟等区域组织的义务。 |
| (5) The use of the term “obligations” in
paragraph 1 does not refer to new obligations for States, but rather refers
to existing obligations that States already have under international law. | (5) 在第1段中使用“义务”一词，指的不是各国应承担的新的义务，而是指各国根据国际法已承担的现有义务。 |
| Thus, the phrase “including those
[obligations] referred to in the present draft guidelines” was chosen, and
the expression “referred to” highlights the fact that the draft guidelines do
not as such create new obligations and are not dealing comprehensively with
the various issues related to the topic. | 因此，选择了“包括本指南草案中所述的[义务]”一语，而“所述”一词着重指出，这些指南草案本身并不创造新的义务，也没有全面阐述与本专题有关的各种问题。 |
| (6) The reference to “the recommendations
contained in the present draft guidelines” in paragraph 2 is intended to
distinguish such recommendations from “obligations” as referred to in
paragraph 1. | (6) 第2段中提到“本指南草案所载的各项建议”是为了将这些建议与第1段中提到的“义务”区分开来。 |
| The expression “recommendations”, was
considered appropriate as it would be consistent with the draft guidelines,
which use the term “should”. This is without prejudice to any normative
content that the draft guidelines have under international law. | “建议”一词被认为是适当的，因为它符合整个指南草案，指南草案中使用了“应当”一词，这并不妨碍指南草案在国际法上的任何规范性内容。 |
| Paragraph 2 provides that States should
endeavour to give effect to the recommendations contained in the draft
guidelines. | 第2段规定，各国应当努力落实本指南草案所载的各项建议。 |
| (7) The Commission decided not to include
a draft guideline on the responsibility of States for internationally
wrongful acts as originally proposed by the Special Rapporteur. | (7) 委员会决定不像特别报告员原先提出的那样，列入一条关于国家对国际不法行为的责任的指南草案。 |
| In the main, it was considered that the
secondary rules of responsibility were a subject that the Commission had
already dealt with, adopting in 2001 the articles on responsibility of States
for internationally wrongful acts. | 一般认为，责任的次要规则是委员会已经阐述过的一个主题，委员会于2001年通过了《国家对国际不法行为的责任条款》。 |
| Those articles are equally applicable in
relation to environmental obligations, including protection of the atmosphere
from atmospheric pollution and atmospheric degradation. | 这些规则同样适用于环境义务，包括保护大气层免受大气污染和大气退化。 |
| (8) Moreover, even though States
sometimes resort to extraterritorial application of national law to the
extent permissible under international law, the Commission did not consider
it necessary to address the matter for the purposes of the present draft
guidelines. | (8) 此外，尽管各国有时会在国际法允许的范围内诉诸域外适用国内法，
但委员会认为没有必要为了本指南草案的目的阐述这个问题。 |
| The Commission considered that the matter
of extraterritorial application of national law by a State raised a host of
complex questions with far-reaching implications for other States and for
their relations with each other. | 委员会认为，一国在域外适用国内法的问题引发了对其他国家及其这些国家的相互关系具有深远影响的一系列复杂问题。 |
| Guideline 11 Compliance | 指南11 遵约 |
| 1. States are required to abide with
their obligations under international law relating to the protection of the
atmosphere from atmospheric pollution and atmospheric degradation in good
faith, including through compliance with the rules and procedures in the
relevant agreements to which they are parties. | 1. 各国须善意地遵守与保护大气层免遭大气污染和大气层退化有关的国际法规定的义务，包括为此遵守它们所加入的相关协定中所载的规则和程序。 |
| 2. To achieve compliance, facilitative or
enforcement procedures may be used, as appropriate, in accordance with the
relevant agreements: | 2. 为实现遵约，可根据相关协定酌情采用促进性程序或强制执行程序： |
| (a) facilitative procedures may include
providing assistance to States, in cases of non-compliance, in a transparent,
non-adversarial and non-punitive manner to ensure that the States concerned
comply with their obligations under international law, taking into account
their capabilities and special conditions; | (a) 促进性程序可包括在出现不遵约情况时，以透明、非对抗和非惩罚性方式向各国提供援助，确保当事国遵守国际法为其规定的义务，同时考虑到其能力和特殊情况； |
| (b) enforcement procedures may include
issuing a caution of non-compliance, termination of rights and privileges
under the relevant agreements, and other forms of enforcement measures. | (b) 强制执行程序可包括发布不遵约警告、终止根据相关协定享有的权利和特权以及采取其他形式的强制执行措施。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Draft guideline 11, which complements
draft guideline 10 on national implementation, refers to compliance at the
level of international law. | (1) 指南草案11是对关于国家执行的指南草案10的补充，提到国际法层面的遵约。 |
| The use of the term “compliance” is not
necessarily uniform in agreements, or in literature. | “遵约”一词在各种协定或文献中的用法未必统一。 |
| The term “compliance” is used in the
present draft guideline to refer to mechanisms or procedures at the level of
international law that verify whether States in fact adhere to the
obligations of an agreement or other rules of international law. | 本指南草案中使用的“遵约”一词是指在国际法层面核查各国是否实际遵守一项协定或其他国际法规则规定的义务。 |
| Paragraph 1 reflects, in particular, the
principle pacta sunt servanda. | 第1段特别反映了条约必须遵守原则。 |
| The purpose of the formulation
“obligations under international law” relating to the protection of the
atmosphere is to harmonize the language used, in paragraph 1, with the
language used throughout the draft guidelines. | 与保护大气层有关的“国际法规定的义务”这一措辞的目的是使第1段使用的措辞形式与指南草案全文所使用的语言相一致。 |
| The broad nature of the formulation
“obligations under international law” was considered to also better account
for the fact that treaty rules constituting obligations may, in some cases,
be binding only on the parties to the relevant agreements, while others may
reflect or lead to the crystallization of rules of customary international
law with consequent legal effects for non-parties. | “国际法规定的义务”这一措辞的广泛性也被认为可以更好地反映了这样一个事实，即构成义务的条约规则在某些情况下可能仅对有关协定的缔约方具有约束力，而另一些义务可能反映或促成习惯国际法规则的具体化，从而对非缔约方产生法律效力。 |
| The phrase “relevant agreements” to which
the States are parties has been used to avoid narrowing the scope of the
provision only to multilateral environmental agreements, when such
obligations can exist in other agreements. | 缔约国加入的“相关协定”一词被用来避免将规定的范围缩小到仅包括多边环境协定，这种义务也可能存在于其他协定中。 |
| The general character of paragraph 1 also
appropriately serves as an introduction to paragraph 2. | 第1段的一般性质也适当地引出了第2段。 |
| (2) Paragraph 2 deals with the
facilitative or enforcement procedures that may be used by compliance
mechanisms. | (2) 第2段论及遵约机制可采用的促进性程序或强制执行程序。 |
| The opening phrase of the chapeau “[t]o
achieve compliance” provides a purposive positive approach, with its wording
aligned with formulations in existing agreements addressing compliance
mechanisms. | 起首部分的开头语“为实现遵约”提供了一种有目的的积极方法，其措辞与阐述遵约机制的现有协定的表述相一致。 |
| The phrase “may be used, as appropriate”
emphasizes the differing circumstances and contexts in which facilitative or
enforcement procedures could be deployed to help foster compliance. | “可…酌情使用”这一短语强调了可以采用促进性程序或强制执行程序帮助促进遵约的不同情况和背景。 |
| The disjunctive word “or” indicates that
facilitative or enforcement procedures are to be considered as alternatives
by the competent organ established under the agreement concerned. | 区别连词“或”表示，促进性程序或强制执行程序应被根据有关协定设立的主管机关视为二择其一的办法。 |
| The phrase “in accordance with the
relevant agreements” is used at the end of the chapeau, so as to emphasize
that facilitative or enforcement procedures are those provided for under
existing agreements to which States are parties, and that these procedures
will operate in accordance with such existing agreements. | 起首部分使用了“根据相关协定”一语，以强调促进性程序或强制执行程序是各国加入的现有协定规定的程序，并且这些程序将根据这些现有协定发挥作用。 |
| (3) Besides the chapeau, paragraph 2
comprises two subparagraphs, (a) and (b). | (3) 除起首部分外，第2段还包括(a)和(b)两个分段。 |
| In both subparagraphs, the word “may” has
been used before “include” to provide States and the competent organ
established under the agreement concerned with flexibility to use existing
facilitative or enforcement procedures. | 在这两个分段中，在“包括”之前都使用了“可”一词，以便使各国和根据有关协定设立的主管机关能够灵活地使用现有的促进性程序或强制执行程序。 |
| (4) Subparagraph (a) employs the phrase
“in cases of non-compliance” and refers to “the States concerned”, avoiding
the expression “non-complying States”. | (4) (a)分段使用了“在出现不遵约情况时” 这一短语，并提及“当事国”，而避免使用“不遵约国家”的说法。 |
| Facilitative procedures may include
providing “assistance” to States, since some States may be willing to comply
but unable to do so for lack of capacity. | 促进性程序可包括向各国提供“援助”，因为一些国家可能愿意遵约，但由于能力不足而无法这样做。 |
| Thus, facilitative measures are provided
in a transparent, non-adversarial and non-punitive manner to ensure that the
States concerned are assisted to comply with their obligations under
international law. | 因此，以透明、非对抗和非惩罚性方式提供促进性措施，以确保协助当事国遵守国际法为其规定的义务。 |
| The last part of that sentence, which
references “taking into account their capabilities and special conditions”,
was considered necessary, in recognition of the specific challenges that
developing and least developed countries often face in the discharge of
obligations relating to environmental protection. | 该句末尾提到“同时考虑到其能力和特殊情况”，这被认为是必要的，它承认发展中国家和最不发达国家在履行与环境保护有关的义务时经常面临的具体挑战。 |
| This is due to, most notably, a general
lack of capacity, which can sometimes be mitigated through the receipt of
external support enabling capacity-building to facilitate compliance with
their obligations under international law. | 这种情况主要是由于普遍缺乏能力所致，有时可以通过获得外部支助得到缓解，这些外部支助利用能力建设促进这些国家遵守国际法为其规定的义务。 |
| (5) Subparagraph (b) speaks of
enforcement procedures, which may include issuing a caution of
non-compliance, termination of rights and privileges under the relevant
agreements, and other forms of enforcement measures. | (5) (b)分段述及强制执行程序，强制性程序可包括发布不遵约警告、终止根据相关协定享有的权利和特权以及采取其他形式的强制执行措施。 |
| Enforcement procedures, in contrast to
facilitative procedures, aim to achieve compliance by imposing a penalty on
the State concerned in case of non-compliance. | 与促进性程序不同，强制执行程序的目的是在出现不遵约情况时通过对当事国实施处罚实现遵约。 |
| At the end of the sentence, the term
“enforcement measures” was employed rather than the term “sanctions” in order
to avoid any confusion with the possibly negative connotation associated with
the term “sanctions”. | 该句末尾使用的术语为“强制执行措施”，而不是“制裁”，以避免与“制裁”一词可能具有的负面含义相混淆。 |
| The enforcement procedures referred to in
subparagraph (b) should be distinguished from any invocation of international
responsibility of States, hence these procedures should be adopted only for
the purpose of leading the States concerned to return to compliance in
accordance with the relevant agreements to which they are party as referred
to in the chapeau. | (b)分段所指的强制执行程序应区别于任何援引国家的国际责任的情况，因此，采取这些程序的唯一目的是促使当事国重新如起首部分所述遵守它们所加入的有关协定。 |
| Guideline 12 Dispute settlement | 指南12 争端解决 |
| 1. Disputes between States relating to
the protection of the atmosphere from atmospheric pollution and atmospheric
degradation are to be settled by peaceful means. | 1. 与保护大气层免遭大气污染和大气层退化有关的国家间争端应通过和平手段加以解决。 |
| 2. Given that such disputes may be of a
fact-intensive and science-dependent character, due consideration should be
given to the use of technical and scientific experts. | 2. 鉴于此类争端可能涉及大量事实并依赖科学，应当适当考虑使用技术和科学方面的专家。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Draft guideline 12 concerns dispute
settlement. | (1) 指南草案12涉及争端解决。 |
| Paragraph 1 describes the general
obligation of States to settle their disputes by peaceful means. | 第1段阐述了各国通过和平手段解决争端的一般义务。 |
| The expression “between States” clarifies
that the disputes being referred to in the paragraph are inter-State in
nature. | “国家间”一词澄清，该段所指的争端具有国家间性质。 |
| The paragraph does not refer to Article
33, paragraph 1, of the Charter of the United Nations, but the intent is not
to downplay the significance of the various pacific means of settlement
mentioned in that provision, such as negotiation, enquiry, mediation,
conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement, resort to other peaceful
means that may be preferred by the States concerned, nor the principle of
choice of means. | 该段并未提及《联合国宪章》第三十三条第一项，但用意并不在于淡化该条款中提到的谈判、调查、调停、和解、仲裁、司法解决、当事国可能倾向采用的其他和平手段等各种和平解决手段的重要性，也不在于淡化选择手段原则。 |
| Paragraph 1 is not intended to interfere
with or displace existing dispute settlement provisions in treaty regimes,
which will continue to operate in their own terms. | 第1段的目的不是干涉或取代条约制度中现有的争端解决规定，这些规定将继续以自己的方式发挥作用。 |
| The main purpose of the present paragraph
is to reaffirm the principle of peaceful settlement of disputes and to serve
as a basis for paragraph 2. | 本段的主要目的是重申和平解决争端的原则， 并作为第2段的基础。 |
| (2) The first part of the sentence of
paragraph 2 recognizes that disputes relating to the protection of the
atmosphere from atmospheric pollution and atmospheric degradation would be
“fact-intensive” and “science-dependent”. | (2) 第2段这句话的前半部分承认，与保护大气层免遭大气污染和大气层退化有关的国家间争端会“涉及大量事实”并“依赖科学”。 |
| As scientific input has been emphasized
in the process of progressive development of international law relating to
the protection of the atmosphere, likewise, more complicated scientific and
technical issues have been raised in the process of international dispute
settlement in recent years. | 与保护大气层有关的国际法的逐渐发展过程一直强调科学投入， 同样，近年来国际争端解决过程中也提出了更加复杂的科学和技术问题。 |
| Thus, the cases brought before
international courts and tribunals have increasingly focused on highly
technical and scientific evidence. | 因此，提交国际性法院和法庭的案件越来越侧重技术性和科学性很强的证据。 |
| Thus, those elements, evident from the
experience with inter-State environment disputes, typically require
specialized expertise to contextualize or fully grasp the issues in dispute. | 因此，这些因素在国家间环境争端的经历中显而易见，它们通常需要专门知识，以便认识到争端问题的来龙去脉并充分理解这些问题。 |
| (3) There has been a noticeable change in
the attitude of States and the International Court of Justice in recent cases
involving the science-dependent issues of international environmental law,
which reflect, directly or indirectly, specific features of the settlement of
disputes relating to the protection of the atmosphere. | (3) 在最近的涉及依赖科学的国际环境法问题的案件中，各国和国际法院的态度发生了明显变化，这直接或间接反映了解决与保护大气层有关的争端的具体特点。 |
| For this reason, it would be necessary
that, as underlined in paragraph 2 “due consideration” be given to the use of
technical and scientific experts. | 为此，正如第2段所着重指出的那样，有必要“适当考虑”使用技术和科学方面的专家。 |
| The essential aspect in this paragraph is
to emphasize the use of technical and scientific experts in the settlement of
inter-State disputes whether by judicial or other means. | 本段的主要内容是强调在通过司法或其他方法解决国家间争端时使用技术和科学方面的专家。 |
| (4) In the context of judicial or
arbitral processes of settling disputes relating to the protection of the
atmosphere, the principles of jura novit curia (the court knows the law) and
non ultra petita (not beyond the parties’ request) may be relevant, since the
relationship between law and fact is a pertinent issue relating to scientific
evidence. | (4) 在解决与保护大气层有关的争端的司法或仲裁过程中，jura novit curia(法官知法)和non ultra petita (不超出诉讼请求)等原则可能具有相关性，因为法律与事实之间的关系是一个与科学证据相关的问题。 |
| The Commission however decided to
maintain a simple formulation, and not to address these issues in the draft
guideline. | 但是，委员会决定保留一个简单的提法，不在指南草案中阐述这些问题。 |
| Chapter VII Provisional application of
treaties | 第七章 条约的暂时适用 |
| A. Introduction | A. 导言 |
| 79. At its sixty-fourth session (2012),
the Commission decided to include the topic “Provisional application of
treaties” in its programme of work and appointed Mr. Juan Manuel Gómez
Robledo as Special Rapporteur for the topic. | 79. 委员会在第六十四届会议(2012年)上，决定将“条约的暂时适用”专题列入工作方案，并任命胡安·曼努埃尔·戈麦斯·罗夫莱多先生为专题特别报告员。 |
| In its resolution 67/92 of 14 December
2012, the General Assembly subsequently noted with appreciation the decision
of the Commission to include the topic in its programme of work. | 大会随后在2012年12月14日第67/92号决议中赞赏地注意到委员会决定将此专题列入其工作方案。 |
| 80. The Special Rapporteur submitted four
reports from 2013 to 2016, which the Commission considered at its sixty-fifth
to sixty-eighth sessions (2013–2016), respectively. | 80. 特别报告员从2013年至2016年提交了四次报告， 委员会分别在第六十五至第六十八届会议(2013至2016年)上审议了这些报告。 |
| The Commission also had before it three
memorandums, prepared by the Secretariat, which were submitted at the
sixty-fifth (2013), sixty-seventh (2015) and sixth-ninth sessions (2017),
respectively. | 委员会还分别在第六十五届会议(2013年)、第六十七届会议(2015年)和第六十九届会议(2017年)上各收到了一份秘书处编写的备忘录。 |
| 81. On the basis of the draft guidelines
proposed by the Special Rapporteur in the third and fourth reports, the
Commission, at its sixty-eighth session (2016), took note of draft guidelines
1 to 4 and 6 to 9, as provisionally adopted by the Drafting Committee. | 81. 委员会在特别报告员第三和第四次报告提出的准则草案的基础上，在第六十八届会议(2016年)上注意到起草委员会暂时通过的准则草案1至4和6至9。 |
| Owing to a lack of time, it was decided
to consider draft guidelines 5 and 10 at the next session. | 由于时间所限，委员会决定在下一届会议上审议准则草案5和10。 |
| 82. At its sixty-ninth session (2017),
the Commission referred draft guidelines 1 to 4 and 6 to 9, provisionally
adopted by the Drafting Committee in 2016, back to the Committee, with a view
to finalizing a consolidated set of draft guidelines. | 82. 委员会在第六十九届会议(2017年)上将起草委员会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，以便最终确定一套合并的准则草案。 |
| The Commission subsequently provisionally
adopted draft guidelines 1 to 11, as presented by the Drafting Committee at
the same session, with commentaries thereto. | 随后，委员会暂时通过了起草委员会在该届会议上提出的准则草案1至11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 |
| 83. At the present session, the
Commission had before it the fifth report of the Special Rapporteur
(A/CN.4/718), and an addendum to that report providing a bibliography on the
topic (A/CN.4/718/Add.1). | 83. 在本届会议上，委员会收到了特别报告员的第五次报告(A/CN.4/718)及载有该专题参考文献的报告增编(A/CN.4/718/Add.1)。 |
| In his fifth report, the Special
Rapporteur analysed the comments made by States and international
organizations on the 11 draft guidelines provisionally adopted by the
Commission at its sixty-ninth session, provided additional information on the
practice of international organizations, and submitted two new draft
guidelines, 5 bis and 8 bis, concerning reservations and termination or
suspension, respectively, as well as eight draft model clauses. | 特别报告员在第五次报告中分析了各国和国际组织就委员会第六十九届会议暂时通过的准则草案提出的意见，提供了关于国际组织的实践的补充资料，并提交了两条新的准则草案：关于保留的准则草案5之二和关于终止或中止的准则草案8之二，以及8条示范条款草案。 |
| The Commission also had before it the
third memorandum prepared by the Secretariat (A/CN.4/707), reviewing State
practice in respect of treaties (bilateral and multilateral), deposited or
registered in the last 20 years with the Secretary-General, that provide for
provisional application, including treaty actions related thereto. | 委员会还收到了秘书处编写的第三份备忘录(A/CN.4/707)，备忘录回顾了过去20年向秘书长交存或登记的载有暂时适用规定的(双边和多边)条约方面的国家实践，包括与这些条约有关的条约行动。 |
| 84. At its 3402nd to 3406th and 3409th
meetings, from 14 to 18 and on 22 May 2018, the Commission considered the
fifth report of the Special Rapporteur and the third memorandum of the
Secretariat. | 84. 在2018年5月14日至18日和22日举行的第3402至第3406次和第3409次会议上，委员会审议了特别报告员的第五次报告和秘书处的第三份备忘录。 |
| At its 3409th meeting, on 22 May 2018,
the Commission decided to refer draft guidelines 5 bis and 8 bis and the
eight draft model clauses to the Drafting Committee, and instructed it to
complete the first reading of the entire set of draft guidelines, including
those adopted provisionally at the sixty-ninth session (2017), taking into
account the comments and observations of Governments and the debate in
plenary on the Special Rapporteur’s report. | 委员会在2018年5月22日举行的第3409次会议上决定将准则草案5之二和准则草案8之二以及8条示范条款草案交送起草委员会，并指示起草委员会参考关于特别报告员报告的各国政府评论和意见及全体会议辩论，完成包括第六十九届会议(2017年)暂时通过的准则草案在内的整套准则草案的一读。 |
| 85. The Commission considered the report
of the Drafting Committee (A/CN.4/L.910) at its 3415th meeting, held on 31
May 2018, and adopted draft guidelines 6 [7], 7 [5 bis], 9, 10, 11 and 12. | 85. 委员会在2018年5月31日举行的第3415次会议上审议了起草委员会的报告(A/CN.4/L.910)，并通过了准则草案6 [7]、7 [5之二]、9、10、11和12。 |
| The Commission then proceeded to adopt
the entire set of draft guidelines on provisional application of treaties, as
the draft Guide to Provisional Application of Treaties, on first reading (see
section C.1 below). | 委员会随后一读通过了作为条约的暂时适用指南草案的关于条约的暂时适用的整套准则草案(见下文C.1节)。 |
| The Commission further took note of the
recommendation of the Drafting Committee that a reference be made in the
commentaries to the possibility of including, during the second reading, a
set of draft model clauses, based on a revised proposal that the Special
Rapporteur would make at an appropriate time, taking into account the
comments and suggestions made during both the plenary debate and in the
Drafting Committee. | 委员会还注意到起草委员会的建议，即在评注中提及有可能在二读期间，根据特别报告员在适当时候提出的订正提案并参考在全体会议辩论和起草委员会上提出的意见和建议，列入一套示范条款草案。 |
| 86. At its 3435th, 3437th, 3440th and
3441st meetings, on 24, 27 and 31 July and 2 August 2018, the Commission
adopted the commentaries to the aforementioned draft guidelines (see section
C.2 below). | 86. 在2018年7月24日、27日、31日和8月2日举行的第3435、第3437、第3440和第3441次会议上，委员会通过了上述准则草案的评注(见下文C.2节)。 |
| 87. At its 3441st meeting, on 2 August
2018, the Commission further expressed its deep appreciation for the
outstanding contribution of the Special Rapporteur, Mr. Juan Manuel Gómez
Robledo, which had enabled the Commission to bring to a successful conclusion
its first reading of the draft Guide to Provisional Application of Treaties. | 87. 在2018年8月2日举行的第3441次会议上，委员会向特别报告员胡安·曼努埃尔·戈麦斯·罗夫莱多先生深表感谢，由于他的杰出贡献，委员会得以圆满结束对条约的暂时适用指南草案的一读。 |
| 88. At its 3441st meeting, on 2 August
2018, the Commission decided, in accordance with articles 16 to 21 of its
statute, to transmit the draft guidelines (see section C below), through the
Secretary-General, to Governments and international organizations for
comments and observations, with the request that such comments and
observations be submitted to the Secretary-General by 15 December 2019. | 88. 在2018年8月2日举行的第3441次会议上，委员会根据其章程第16至第21条，决定通过秘书长将准则草案(见下文C节)转交给各国政府和各国际组织征求评论和意见，要求在2019年12月15日之前向秘书长提交此类评论和意见。 |
| C. Text of the draft Guide to Provisional
Application of Treaties, adopted by the Commission on first reading | C. 委员会一读通过的条约的暂时适用指南草案案文 |
| 1. Text of the draft Guide to Provisional
Application of Treaties | 1. 条约的暂时适用指南草案案文 |
| 89. The text of the draft Guide to Provisional
Application of Treaties adopted by the Commission, on first reading, is
reproduced below. | 89. 委员会一读通过的条约的暂时适用指南草案案文载录如下。 |
| Guide to Provisional Application of
Treaties | 条约的暂时适用指南 |
| Guideline 1 Scope | 准则1 范围 |
| The present draft guidelines concern the provisional
application of treaties. | 本准则草案涉及条约的暂时适用。 |
| Guideline 2 Purpose | 准则2 目的 |
| The purpose of the present draft
guidelines is to provide guidance regarding the law and practice on the
provisional application of treaties, on the basis of article 25 of the Vienna
Convention on the Law of Treaties and other rules of international law. | 本准则草案的目的是，在《维也纳条约法公约》第二十五条和其他国际法规则的基础上，就关于条约的暂时适用的法律和实践提供指导。 |
| Guideline 3 General rule | 准则3 一般规则 |
| A treaty or a part of a treaty may be
provisionally applied, pending its entry into force between the States or
international organizations concerned, if the treaty itself so provides, or
if in some other manner it has been so agreed. | 如条约本身如此规定，或以其他方式协议如此办理，条约或条约之一部分可于条约在有关国家或国际组织之间生效前暂时适用。 |
| Guideline 4 Form of agreement | 准则4 协议形式 |
| In addition to the case where the treaty
so provides, the provisional application of a treaty or a part of a treaty
may be agreed through: | 除条约规定的情况外，条约或条约之一部分的暂时适用可以下述形式协议： |
| (a) a separate treaty; | (a) 一项单独的条约； |
| or | 或 |
| (b) any other means or arrangements,
including a resolution adopted by an international organization or at an
intergovernmental conference, or a declaration by a State or an international
organization that is accepted by the other States or international
organizations concerned. | (b) 任何其他办法或安排，包括国际组织通过的或在政府间会议上通过的决议，或由一国或一国际组织作出并被其他有关国家或国际组织所接受的声明。 |
| Guideline 5 Commencement of provisional
application | 准则5 暂时适用的开始 |
| The provisional application of a treaty
or a part of a treaty, pending its entry into force between the States or
international organizations concerned, takes effect on such date, and in
accordance with such conditions and procedures, as the treaty provides or as
are otherwise agreed. | 条约在有关国家或国际组织之间生效前，条约或条约之一部分的暂时适用按条约规定的或另经协议的日期、条件和程序开始。 |
| Guideline 6 Legal effect of provisional
application | 准则6 暂时适用的法律效果 |
| The provisional application of a treaty
or a part of a treaty produces a legally binding obligation to apply the
treaty or a part thereof as if the treaty were in force between the States or
international organizations concerned, unless the treaty provides otherwise
or it is otherwise agreed. | 除条约另有规定或另经协议外，条约或条约之一部分的暂时适用产生适用该条约或条约之一部分的具有法律约束力的义务，犹如该条约已在有关国家或国际组织之间生效。 |
| Guideline 7 Reservations | 准则7 保留 |
| 1. In accordance with the relevant rules
of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, applied mutatis mutandis, a
State may, when agreeing to the provisional application of a treaty or a part
of a treaty, formulate a reservation purporting to exclude or modify the
legal effect produced by the provisional application of certain provisions of
that treaty. | 1. 根据比照适用的《维也纳条约法公约》相关规则，一国可在同意暂时适用条约或条约之一部分时提出保留，其目的在于排除或更改暂时适用该条约某些规定所产生的法律效果。 |
| 2. In accordance with the relevant rules
of international law, an international organization may, when agreeing to the
provisional application of a treaty or a part of a treaty, formulate a
reservation purporting to exclude or modify the legal effect produced by the
provisional application of certain provisions of that treaty. | 2. 根据国际法相关规则，一国际组织可在同意暂时适用条约或条约之一部分时提出保留，其目的在于排除或更改暂时适用该条约某些规定所产生的法律效果。 |
| Guideline 8 Responsibility for breach | 准则8 违约责任 |
| The breach of an obligation arising under
a treaty or a part of a treaty that is provisionally applied entails
international responsibility in accordance with the applicable rules of
international law. | 根据适用的国际法规则，违反暂时适用的条约或条约之一部分产生的义务引起国际责任。 |
| Guideline 9 Termination and suspension of
provisional application | 准则9 暂时适用的终止和中止 |
| 1. The provisional application of a
treaty or a part of a treaty terminates with the entry into force of that
treaty in the relations between the States or international organizations
concerned. | 1. 条约或条约之一部分的暂时适用，于该条约在有关国家或国际组织之间的关系中生效时终止。 |
| 2. Unless the treaty otherwise provides
or it is otherwise agreed, the provisional application of a treaty or a part
of a treaty with respect to a State or international organization is
terminated if that State or international organization notifies the other
States or international organizations between which the treaty or a part of a
treaty is being applied provisionally of its intention not to become a party
to the treaty. | 2. 除条约另有规定或另经协议外，暂时适用条约或条约之一部分的国家或国际组织如果通知相互间也正暂时适用条约或条约之一部分的其他国家或国际组织其无意成为条约缔约方，则暂时适用对该国或该国际组织终止。 |
| 3. The present draft guideline is without
prejudice to the application, mutatis mutandis, of relevant rules set forth
in part V, section 3, of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties or
other relevant rules of international law concerning termination and
suspension. | 3. 本条准则草案不妨碍比照适用《维也纳条约法公约》第五编第三节规定的相关规则或涉及终止和中止的其他国际法相关规则。 |
| Guideline 10 Internal law of States and
rules of international organizations, and the observance of provisionally
applied treaties | 准则10 各国国内法和国际组织规则与暂时适用的条约的遵守 |
| 1. A State that has agreed to the
provisional application of a treaty or a part of a treaty may not invoke the
provisions of its internal law as justification for its failure to perform an
obligation arising under such provisional application. | 1. 同意暂时适用条约或条约之一部分的国家不得援引其国内法规定作为不履行此种暂时适用所产生的义务的理由。 |
| 2. An international organization that has
agreed to the provisional application of a treaty or a part of a treaty may
not invoke the rules of the organization as justification for its failure to
perform an obligation arising under such provisional application. | 2. 同意暂时适用条约或条约之一部分的国际组织不得援引该组织的规则作为不履行此种暂时适用所产生的义务的理由。 |
| Guideline 11 Provisions of internal law
of States and rules of international organizations regarding competence to
agree on the provisional application of treaties | 准则11 各国国内法关于同意暂时适用条约的权限的规定和国际组织关于同意暂时适用条约的权限的规则 |
| 1. A State may not invoke the fact that
its consent to the provisional application of a treaty or a part of a treaty
has been expressed in violation of a provision of its internal law regarding
competence to agree to the provisional application of treaties as
invalidating its consent unless that violation was manifest and concerned a
rule of its internal law of fundamental importance. | 1. 一国不得援引其同意暂时适用条约或条约之一部分的表示违反了该国国内法关于同意暂时适用条约的权限的规定为理由主张其同意无效，但违反情事明显且涉及其具有根本重要性的国内法规则时不在此限。 |
| 2. An international organization may not
invoke the fact that its consent to the provisional application of a treaty
or a part of a treaty has been expressed in violation of the rules of the
organization regarding competence to agree to the provisional application of
treaties as invalidating its consent unless that violation was manifest and
concerned a rule of fundamental importance. | 2. 一国际组织不得援引其同意暂时适用条约或条约之一部分的表示违反了该组织关于同意暂时适用条约的权限的规则为理由主张其同意无效，但违反情事明显且涉及其具有根本重要性的规则时不在此限。 |
| Guideline 12 Agreement to provisional
application with limitations deriving from internal law of States and rules
of international organizations | 准则12 关于在源自各国国内法和国际组织规则的限制之下暂时适用的协议 |
| The present draft guidelines are without
prejudice to the right of a State or an international organization to agree
in the treaty itself or otherwise to the provisional application of the
treaty or a part of the treaty with limitations deriving from the internal
law of the State or from the rules of the organization. | 本准则草案不妨碍一国或一国际组织在条约中或以其他方式同意在源自该国国内法或该组织规则的限制之下暂时适用条约或条约之一部分的权利。 |
| 2. Text of the draft Guide to Provisional
Application of Treaties and commentaries thereto | 2. 条约的暂时适用指南草案案文及其评注 |
| 90. The text of the draft Guide to
Provisional Application of Treaties adopted by the Commission, on first
reading, together with commentaries thereto, is reproduced below. | 90. 委员会一读通过的条约的暂时适用指南草案案文及其评注转载如下。 |
| Guide to Provisional Application of
Treaties | 条约的暂时适用指南 |
| General commentary | 总评注 |
| (1) As is always the case with the
Commission’s output, the draft guidelines are to be read together with the
commentaries. | (1) 与委员会以往工作成果一样，本准则草案应结合评注来解读。 |
| (2) The purpose of the Guide to
Provisional Application of Treaties is to provide assistance to States,
international organizations and other users concerning the law and practice
on the provisional application of treaties. | (2) 条约的暂时适用指南的目的是就关于条约的暂时适用的法律和实践向各国、国际组织及其他使用方提供协助。 |
| States, international organizations and
other users may encounter difficulties concerning, inter alia, the form of
the agreement to provisionally apply a treaty or a part of a treaty, the
commencement and termination of such provisional application, and its legal
effect. | 各国、国际组织和其他使用方可能会在暂时适用条约或条约之一部分的协议的形式、这种暂时适用的开始和终止及其法律效果等方面遇到种种困难。 |
| The objective of the Guide is to direct
States, international organizations and other users to answers that are
consistent with existing rules and most appropriate for contemporary
practice. | 指南的目标是引导各国、国际组织和其他方找到与现行规则相符和最适合当代实践的答案。 |
| (3) Provisional application is a
mechanism available to States and international organizations to give
immediate effect to all or some of the provisions of a treaty prior to the
completion of all internal and international requirements for its entry into
force. | (3) 暂时适用是一个可供各国和国际组织使用的机制，用来在某一条约生效所需的所有内部和国际要求满足之前使该条约的所有规定或某些规定立即具有效力。 |
| Provisional application serves a
practical purpose, and thus a useful one, for example, when the subject
matter entails a certain degree of urgency or when the negotiating States or
international organizations want to build trust in advance of entry into
force, among other objectives. | 暂时适用具有实用的目的，因此能发挥实际作用，例如在所涉专题具有某种紧急性，或者在谈判国或参与谈判的国际组织希望在生效之前建立信任
等情况下发挥作用。 |
| More generally, provisional application
serves the overall purpose of preparing for or facilitating the entry into
force of the treaty. | 广义而言，暂时适用的总体目的是为条约生效做准备或为条约的生效提供便利。 |
| It must, however, be stressed that
provisional application constitutes a voluntary mechanism which States and international
organizations are free to resort to or not, and which may be subject to
limitations deriving from the internal law of States and rules of
international organizations. | 但必须强调，暂时适用是一种自愿性机制，各国和国际组织可自愿加以利用或不予利用，同时也可能受国内法和国际组织规则的限制。 |
| (4) Although the draft guidelines are not
legally binding as such, they elaborate upon existing rules of international
law in the light of contemporary practice. | (4) 本准则草案本身虽然没有法律约束力，但结合当代实践阐述了现行的国际法规则。 |
| The draft guidelines are mainly based on
article 25 of both the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties of 1969
(hereinafter, “1969 Vienna Convention”) and the Vienna Convention on the Law
of Treaties between States and International Organizations or between
International Organizations of 1986 (hereinafter, “1986 Vienna Convention”),
which they try to clarify and explain, and on the practice of States and
international organizations on the matter, without prejudice to other rules
of international law. | 本准则草案主要参考了1969年《维也纳条约法公约》(下称“1969年《维也纳公约》”)
和1986年《关于国家和国际组织间或国际组织相互间条约法的维也纳公约》(下称“1986年《维也纳公约》”)
第二十五条，并试图对该条加以澄清和解释，此外，还参考了各国和国际组织在这个问题上的实践，但不妨碍其他的国际法规则。 |
| (5) It is of course impossible to address
all the questions that may arise in practice and to cover the myriad of
situations that may be faced by States and international organizations. Yet,
a general approach is consistent with one of the main aims of the present
draft guidelines, which is to acknowledge the flexible nature of the
provisional application of treaties and to avoid any temptation to be overly
prescriptive. | (5) 当然，本准则草案不可能述及实践中可能出现的所有问题并涵盖各国和国际组织可能面临的各种情况，但其笼统的行文方法与其主要目的之一相符，即承认条约暂时适用的灵活性，
避免做出过于硬性的规定。 |
| In line with the essentially voluntary
nature of provisional application, which always remains optional, the Guide
recognizes that States and international organizations may set aside, by
mutual agreement, the solutions identified in the draft guidelines if they so
decide. | 暂时适用始终是任选的，本质上具有自愿性质。 根据这一点，本指南承认各国和国际组织如另有决定，可通过相互间的协议排除准则草案中述及的处理方案。 |
| (6) The Guide should also help to promote
the consistent use of terms and therefore avoid confusion. | (6) 本指南还应有助于促进术语的统一使用，从而避免混淆。 |
| The extensive use of certain terms, such
as “provisional entry into force” as opposed to definitive entry into force,
has led to confusion regarding the scope and the legal effect of the concept
of the provisional application of treaties. | 某些术语，如“暂时生效”(相对于“确定生效”)的广泛使用，造成了条约的暂时适用这一概念在范围和法律效力方面的混淆。 |
| In the same vein, quite frequently,
treaties do not use the adjective “provisional”, but speak instead of
“temporary” or “interim” application. | 同样，条约往往不用“暂时”这一形容词，而是提到“临时”或“过渡”适用。 |
| Consequently, the framework of article 25
of the 1969 and 1986 Vienna Conventions, while it constitutes the legal basis
of the matter, has been criticized as difficult to understand and lacking
legal precision. | 因此，1969年和1986年《维也纳公约》第二十五条的框架虽然是这个问题的法律依据，
但一直被批评为难以理解， 并缺乏法律准确性。 |
| The intention of the present draft
guidelines is to provide greater clarity in that regard. | 准则草案的目的是在这方面提供更大的明确性。 |
| (7) To provide assistance to States and
international organizations in their practice on provisional application, it
is anticipated that this Guide will also include draft model clauses, which
are to be reproduced in an annex. | (7) 为了在暂时适用做法上向各国和国际组织提供协助，预计本指南也将包含示范条款草案，将载于附件。 |
| Those draft model clauses would reflect
best practice with regard to the provisional application of both bilateral
and multilateral treaties. | 这些示范条款草案将反映双边和多边条约暂时适用的最佳做法。 |
| They are in no way intended to limit the
flexible and voluntary nature of provisional application of treaties, and
they do not pretend to address the whole range of situations that may arise. | 这些条款草案无意限制条约暂时适用的灵活性和自愿性，也不自诩能涵盖所有可能出现的各类情况。 |
| Guideline 1 Scope | 准则1 范围 |
| The present draft guidelines concern the
provisional application of treaties. | 本准则草案涉及条约的暂时适用。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Draft guideline 1 is concerned with
the scope of application of the draft guidelines. | (1) 准则草案1涉及本准则草案的适用范围。 |
| The provision should be read together
with draft guideline 2, which sets out the purpose of the draft guidelines. | 应将这一规定与述及准则草案目的的准则草案2一并解读。 |
| (2) The word “concern” was considered
more suitable for a text aimed at providing guidance to States and international
organizations than other formulations, such as “applies to”, which is more
frequently found in texts laying down rules applicable to States and other
subjects of international law. | (2) 本案文旨在向各国和国际组织提供指导，有人认为“涉及”一词比“适用于”等其他提法更加适合，“适用于”更多见于对国家和其他国际法主体规定适用规则的案文。 |
| (3) The Commission decided not to include
a further qualification limiting the scope ratione personae of the draft
guidelines to States. | (3) 委员会决定，不添加其他限定词将本准则草案的属人范围局限于国家。 |
| Instead, the draft guidelines also
pertain to international organizations, as is evident from the references to
both States and international organizations in draft guidelines 5 to 7 and 9
to 12. | 实际上，本准则草案也涉及国际组织，准则草案5至7、9至12既提到国家也提到国际组织就说明了这一点。 |
| That accords with the fact that the
provisional application of treaties is envisaged in article 25 of both the
1969 and the 1986 Vienna Conventions. | 1969年和1986年《维也纳公约》第二十五条均设想了暂时适用条约的情况，亦与上述论断一致。 |
| Guideline 2 Purpose | 准则2 目的 |
| The purpose of the present draft
guidelines is to provide guidance regarding the law and practice on the
provisional application of treaties, on the basis of article 25 of the Vienna
Convention on the Law of Treaties and other rules of international law. | 本准则草案的目的是，在《维也纳条约法公约》第二十五条和其他国际法规则的基础上，就关于条约的暂时适用的法律和实践提供指导。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Draft guideline 2 concerns the
purpose of the draft guidelines and follows the practice of the Commission of
including such a provision in its texts with a view to clarifying the purpose
of the text in question. | (1) 准则草案2涉及准则草案的目的，这符合委员会的惯例，即在案文中加入这一规定以澄清所涉案文的目的。 |
| In the present case, the purpose of the
draft guidelines is to provide guidance to States and international
organizations regarding the law and practice on the provisional application
of treaties. | 本准则草案的目的是就条约暂时适用的法律和实践向各国和国际组织提供指导。 |
| (2) Draft guideline 2 is intended to
underline that the guidelines are based on the 1969 Vienna Convention and
other rules of international law, including the 1986 Vienna Convention. | (2) 准则草案2意在强调，本准则参考了1969年《维也纳公约》和其他国际法规则，包括1986年《维也纳公约》。 |
| The reference to “or other relevant rules
of international law” is primarily intended to extend the scope of the
provision to the provisional application of treaties by international
organizations. | 提到“和其他国际法规则”的主要目的是扩大这项规定的范围，涵盖国际组织暂时适用条约的情况。 |
| It acknowledges that the 1986 Vienna
Convention has not yet entered into force, and accordingly should not be
referred to in the same manner as its 1969 counterpart. | 准则草案2承认1986年《维也纳公约》尚未生效，因此其提法应有别于1969年《维也纳公约》。 |
| (3) Draft guideline 2 serves to confirm
the basic approach taken throughout the draft guidelines, namely that article
25 of the 1969 and the 1986 Vienna Conventions does not necessarily reflect
all aspects of contemporary practice on the provisional application of
treaties. | (3) 准则草案2旨在确认整套准则草案所持的基本态度，即1969年和1986年《维也纳公约》第二十五条不一定反映了关于条约暂时适用的当代实践的所有方面。 |
| That is suggested by the decision to
include a reference to both “the law and practice” on the provisional
application of treaties. | 委员会决定提及条约暂时适用的“法律和实践”两个方面就表明了这种态度。 |
| Such an approach is also alluded to in
the reference to “other rules of international law”, which reflects the
understanding within the Commission that other rules of international law,
including those of a customary nature, may also be applicable to the
provisional application of treaties. | 这一态度还体现在“其他国际法规则”的提法中，这种提法表明，委员会认为其他的国际法规则，包括习惯性质的规则也可适用于条约的暂时适用。 |
| (4) At the same time, notwithstanding the
possibility of the existence of other rules and practice relating to the provisional
application of treaties, the draft guidelines recognize the central
importance of article 25 of the 1969 and the 1986 Vienna Conventions. | (4) 与此同时，虽然有可能存在与条约暂时适用有关的其他规则和实践，但本准则草案确认了1969年和1986年《维也纳公约》第二十五条的核心重要性。 |
| The reference to “on the basis of”, and
the express reference to article 25, is intended to indicate that this
article serves as the basic point of departure of the draft guidelines, even
if it is to be supplemented by other rules of international law in order to
obtain a full appreciation of the law applicable to the provisional
application of treaties. | 提到“基于”并明确提到第二十五条，是为了表明该条是本准则草案的基本出发点，不过为了充分地了解适用于条约的暂时适用的法律，需以其他国际法规则作为补充。 |
| Guideline 3 General rule | 准则3 一般规则 |
| A treaty or a part of a treaty may be
provisionally applied, pending its entry into force between the States or
international organizations concerned, if the treaty itself so provides, or
if in some other manner it has been so agreed. | 如条约本身如此规定，或以其他方式协议如此办理，条约或条约之一部分可于条约在有关国家或国际组织之间生效前暂时适用。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Draft guideline 3 states the general
rule on the provisional application of treaties. | (1) 准则草案3指出了关于条约的暂时适用的一般规则。 |
| In so doing, the Commission deliberately
sought to follow the formulation of article 25 of the 1969 Vienna Convention,
so as to underscore that the starting point for the draft guidelines is
article 25. | 委员会这样做是为了特意仿照1969年《维也纳公约》第二十五条的规定，以强调本准则草案的出发点是第二十五条。 |
| That is subject to the general
understanding referred to in paragraph (3) of the commentary to draft
guideline 2, namely that the 1969 and the 1986 Vienna Conventions do not
necessarily reflect all aspects of contemporary practice on the provisional
application of treaties. | 但这以准则草案2的评注第(3)段所述的一般理解为前提，即1969年和1986年《维也纳公约》不一定反映了关于条约暂时适用的当代实践的所有方面。 |
| (2) The opening phrase confirms the
general possibility that a treaty, or a part of a treaty, may be
provisionally applied. | (2) “条约或条约之一部分可…暂时适用”确认了条约或条约之一部分暂时适用的一般可能性。 |
| The formulation follows that found in the
chapeau to paragraph 1 of article 25 of the 1969 and the 1986 Vienna
Conventions, while it uses the word “may” to underline the optional character
of provisional application. | 行文沿用了1969年和1986年《维也纳公约》第二十五条第一款起首部分的措辞，“可”字则用来强调暂时适用的任择性。 |
| (3) The Commission also considered how to
best capture in the text the States or international organizations that could
provisionally apply a treaty, and the States or international organizations
whose agreement is required in order for such provisional application to take
place, and therefore retained a more general formulation. | (3) 委员会还审议了如何在案文中最好地表述哪些国家或国际组织可暂时适用条约以及为了这种暂时适用需要征得哪些国家或国际组织的同意的问题，因此保留了更笼统的措辞。 |
| Unlike in article 25, which alludes, in
paragraph 1 (b), to an agreement to provisionally apply a treaty or a part of
a treaty among “negotiating States” or “negotiating States and negotiating
organizations”, no reference is made in draft guideline 3 to which States or
international organizations may provisionally apply a treaty. | 第二十五条第一款(b)项提到，“谈判国”或“谈判国和谈判组织”可在彼此间协议暂时适用条约或条约之一部分，准则草案3与之不同，没有提到哪些国家或国际组织可以暂时适用条约。 |
| In the process of considering whether to
align the present formulation with that found in article 25, by qualifying
the applicability of the general rule to a particular group of States or
international organizations, the Commission acknowledged the possibility,
arising from contemporary practice, that provisional application may be
undertaken by States or international organizations that are not negotiating
States or negotiating organizations of the treaty in question. | 委员会曾审议过是否将一般规则的适用限于某些特定的国家或国际组织、从而使当前行文与第二十五条一致的问题，但在审议过程中，委员会承认，在当代实践中，不是有关条约谈判国或谈判组织的国家或国际组织也可暂时适用该条约。 |
| The question as to whether the term
“negotiating States” in article 25, paragraph 1 (b), would prevent
non-negotiating States or non-negotiating international organizations from
entering into an agreement on provisional application could not be clearly
answered based on the multilateral treaties taken into consideration. | 对于第二十五条第一款(b)项中“谈判国”一词是否会妨碍非谈判国或非谈判国际组织缔结暂时适用协议的问题，尚无法根据已研究过的多边条约做出明确回答。 |
| Furthermore, the need to distinguish
between different groups of States or international organizations, in terms
of their connection with the treaty, was considered less apposite in the
context of bilateral treaties, which constitute the vast majority of treaties
that historically have been provisionally applied. | 此外，对于是否有必要根据与条约的关系来区分不同国家集团或国际组织的问题，委员会认为在双边条约的情况下不宜做此区分，而历史上暂时适用的条约中绝大多数都是双边条约。 |
| However, relevant practice was identified
by examining certain commodity agreements that had never entered into force
but whose provisional application was extended beyond their termination date. | 不过，委员会研究了一些从未生效但在终止日期之后仍在暂时适用的商品协定，从中发现了相关的实践。 |
| In such cases, such an extension was also
understood as applying to States that had acceded to the commodity agreement,
thus demonstrating the belief that those States had also been provisionally
applying the agreement. | 在上述情况下，这种延长的暂时适用被认为也适用于已加入所涉商品协定的国家，从而说明这些国家据信也在暂时适用该协定。 |
| (4) The distinction between provisional
application of the entire treaty, as opposed to a “part” thereof, originates
in article 25. | (4) 对暂时适用整个条约及其“一部分”的区分源于第二十五条。 |
| The Commission, in its work on the law of
treaties, specifically envisaged the possibility of what became referred to
as provisional application of only a part of a treaty. | 委员会在条约法工作中特别设想了后来所称的暂时适用条约之一部分的可能性。 |
| In draft article 22, paragraph 2, of the
1966 draft articles on the law of treaties, the Commission confirmed that the
“same rule” on what it then termed “provisional entry into force” applied to
“part of a treaty”. | 在1966年条约法条款草案第22条草案第2款中，委员会确认，关于当时所称的“暂时生效”的“同一规则”也适用于“条约一部分”。 |
| In the corresponding commentary, it was
explained that: “[n]o less frequent today is the practice of bringing into
force provisionally only a certain part of a treaty in order to meet the
immediate needs of the situation”. | 相应的评注解释说，“如今，同样常见的做法是仅使条约中的某一部分暂时生效，以满足当时情况的即时需要”。 |
| The possibility of provisional
application of only a part of a treaty also helps overcome the problems
arising from certain types of provisions, such as operational clauses
establishing treaty monitoring mechanisms, that may be less amenable to
provisional application. | 可以只暂时适用条约的一部分，还有助于克服可能不宜暂时适用的某些类型的规定所引起的问题，如建立条约监督机制的执行条款所引起的问题。 |
| The provisional application of a part of
a treaty is accordingly reflected in the formula “provisional application of
a treaty or a part of a treaty”, which is used throughout the draft
guidelines. | 因此，条约一部分的暂时适用反映在整套准则草案使用的“条约或条约之一部分的暂时适用”一语中。 |
| (5) The second phrase, namely “pending
its entry into force between the States or international organizations
concerned”, is based on the chapeau of article 25. | (5) “在有关国家或国际组织之间生效前”参考了第二十五条的起首部分。 |
| The Commission considered the possible
ambiguity in the reference to “entry into force”. | 委员会考虑了“生效”的提法可能存在的歧义。 |
| While the expression could be referring,
on the one hand, to the entry into force of a treaty itself, examples exist
of provisional application continuing for some States or international
organizations after the entry into force of a treaty itself, when the treaty
had not yet entered into force for those States and international
organizations, as is the case for multilateral treaties. | 虽然这一表述一方面可指条约本身生效， 但也有这样的例子：在条约本身生效后但尚未对一些国家或国际组织生效之前，这些国家和国际组织继续暂时适用条约，多边条约就属于这种情况。 |
| The reference to “entry into force” in
draft guideline 3 is therefore to be understood in accordance with article 24
of the 1969 and 1986 Vienna Conventions on the same subject. | 因此，准则草案3中提及的“生效”应根据1969年和1986年《维也纳公约》关于同一主题的第二十四条加以理解。 |
| It deals with both the entry into force
of the treaty itself and the entry into force for each State or international
organization concerned. | 该条涉及条约本身生效和条约对每个有关国家或国际组织生效。 |
| The reference at the outset to “pending
its entry into force” is also meant to underscore the role played by
provisional application in preparing for or facilitating such entry into
force, even if it may pursue other objectives. | 开头提及“在条约生效前”也旨在强调暂时适用对于为条约生效做准备或便利条约生效的作用，即使暂时适用可能还有其他目的。 |
| (6) The third and fourth phrases (“if the
treaty so provides, or if in some other manner it has been so agreed”)
reflect the two possible bases for provisional application recognized in
paragraph 1 (a) and (b) of article 25. | (6) “如条约本身如此规定，或以其他方式协议如此办理”反映了第二十五条第一款(a)和(b)项所确认的暂时适用的两个可能依据。 |
| The possibility of provisional
application on the basis of a provision in the treaty in question is well
established, and hence the formulation follows that found in the 1969 and
1986 Vienna Conventions. | 根据有关条约的规定予以暂时适用，是完全可能的， 因此沿用了1969年和1986年《维也纳公约》中的措辞。 |
| (7) A modified, more general formulation
was adopted for the alternative scenario of provisional application on the
basis of a separate agreement. | (7) 对于另外一种情形，即依据某一单独协定而暂时适用，委员会采用了经修改的、更加笼统的措辞。 |
| Unlike in the 1969 and 1986 Vienna
Conventions, no specific mention is made of a particular group of States or
international organizations, acknowledging the contemporary practice that has
included cases of provisional application being agreed to either by only some
negotiating States or by non-negotiating States that subsequently signed or
acceded to the treaty. | 与1969年和1986年《维也纳公约》中不同，没有具体提到某一特定国家集团或国际组织，而是承认当代实践既包括仅有谈判国协议暂时适用的情况，也包括后来签署或加入条约的非谈判国协议暂时适用的情况。 |
| Furthermore, the draft guideline
envisages the possibility of a third State or international organization,
completely unconnected to the treaty, provisionally applying it after having
agreed in some other manner with one or more States or international organizations
concerned. | 此外，本条准则草案还设想到这种可能性：与条约完全无关的第三国或国际组织在以其他方式与一个或多个有关国家或国际组织达成协议后暂时适用条约。 |
| That explains the more neutral drafting
of draft guideline 3, in the passive form, which simply restates the basic
rule. | 这就是为什么准则草案3采用了比较中性的措辞和被动语态，只重述了基本规则。 |
| (8) Draft guideline 3 should be read
together with draft guideline 4, which provides further elaboration on
provisional application by means of a separate agreement, thereby explaining
the meaning of the agreement “in some other manner”. | (8) 准则草案3应与准则草案4一并解读，准则草案4进一步阐述了以一项单独协定的方式暂时适用的情况，从而解释了“以其他方式”协议适用的含义。 |
| Guideline 4 Form of agreement | 准则4 协议形式 |
| In addition to the case where the treaty
so provides, the provisional application of a treaty or a part of a treaty
may be agreed through: | 除条约规定的情况外，条约或条约之一部分的暂时适用可以下述形式协议： |
| (a) a separate treaty; | (a) 一项单独的条约； |
| or | 或 |
| (b) any other means or arrangements,
including a resolution adopted by an international organization or at an
intergovernmental conference, or a declaration by a State or an international
organization that is accepted by the other States or international
organizations concerned. | (b) 任何其他办法或安排，包括国际组织通过的或在政府间会议上通过的决议，或由一国或一国际组织作出并被其他有关国家或国际组织所接受的声明。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Draft guideline 4 deals with forms of
agreement, on the basis of which a treaty, or a part of a treaty, may be
provisionally applied, in addition to when the treaty itself so provides. | (1) 准则草案4涉及除条约本身规定的情况外，可暂时适用条约或条约一部分的协议形式。 |
| The structure of the provision follows
the sequence of article 25 of the 1969 and 1986 Vienna Conventions, which
first envisages the possibility that the treaty in question might expressly
permit provisional application and, second, provides for the possibility of
an alternative basis for provisional application, when the States or the
international organizations “in some other manner” so agreed, which typically
occurs when the treaty is silent on the point. | 这项规定的结构采用了1969年和1986年《维也纳公约》第二十五条的顺序，首先设想了有关条约明确允许暂时适用的可能性，其次规定了当国家或国际组织“以其他方式”协议如此办理时(这通常发生在条约对暂时适用未予提及的情况下)，暂时适用的其他可能依据。 |
| (2) As previously indicated, draft
guideline 4 explains the reference to “in some other manner it has been so
agreed” at the end of draft guideline 3, which is envisaged in article 25,
paragraph 1 (b). | (2) 如前所述，准则草案4解释了第二十五条第一款(b)项所设想的、载于准则草案3中的“以其他方式协议如此办理”的提法。 |
| That is confirmed by the opening phrase
“[i]n addition to the case where the treaty so provides”, which is a direct
reference to the phrase “if the treaty itself so provides” in draft guideline
3. | 这一点从开头句“除条约规定的情况外”中可以看出，它直接参照了准则草案3中的“如条约本身如此规定”。 |
| That follows the language of article 25. | 这也是第二十五条中的措辞。 |
| Two categories of additional methods for
agreeing the provisional application are identified in the subparagraphs. | (a)、(b)两项指出了约定暂时适用的其他两类方法。 |
| (3) Subparagraph (a) envisages the
possibility of provisional application by means of a separate treaty, which
should be distinguished from the treaty that is provisionally applied. | (3) (a)项设想了通过单独的条约暂时适用的可能性，这种条约应与暂时适用的条约区分开来。 |
| (4) Subparagraph (b) acknowledges the
possibility that, in addition to a separate treaty, provisional application
may also be agreed through “other means or arrangements”, which broadens the
range of possibilities for reaching agreement on provisional application. | (4) (b)项承认了如下可能性：除单独的条约外，也可通过“其他办法或安排”约定暂时适用，这就扩大了就暂时适用达成协议的可能性的范围。 |
| The Commission viewed such an additional
reference as confirmation of the inherently flexible nature of provisional
application. | 委员会认为，额外提到这一点确认了暂时适用具有内在的灵活性。 |
| By way of providing further guidance,
reference is made to two examples of such “means or arrangements”, namely
provisional application agreed by means of a resolution adopted by an
international organization or at an intergovernmental conference, or a declaration
by a State or an international organization that is accepted by the other
States or international organizations concerned. | 为提供进一步的指导，提到了这种“办法或安排”的两个例子，即以国际组织通过的或在政府间会议上通过的决议，或由一国或一国际组织作出并被其他有关国家或国际组织所接受的声明的方式，商定暂时适用。 |
| (5) While the practice is still quite
exceptional, the Commission was of the view that it was useful to include a
reference to the possibility that a State or an international organization
could make a declaration to the effect of provisionally applying a treaty or
a part of a treaty, in cases where the treaty remains silent or when it is
not otherwise agreed. | (5) 虽然这种做法仍然十分特殊， 但委员会认为，在条约不予提及或未以其他方式约定的情况下，提到一国或一国际组织可以作出暂时适用条约或条约之一部分的声明，是不无助益的。 |
| However, the declaration must be
verifiably accepted by the other States or international organizations
concerned, as opposed to mere non-objection. | 但必须可以核实其他国家或有关国际组织接受这一声明，而不仅仅是不予反对。 |
| Most of the existing practice reflects
the acceptance of provisional application in written form. | 从现有实践来看，对暂时适用的接受大多采用书面形式。 |
| The draft guideline retains a certain
degree of flexibility to allow for other modes of acceptance on the condition
that it is expressed. | 本条准则草案保留了一定程度的灵活性，允许其他的接受形式，条件是接受必须表示出来。 |
| The Commission avoided the use of the
word “unilateral” before “declaration” in order not to confuse the rules governing
the provisional application of treaties with the legal regime of the
unilateral acts of States. | 委员会未在“声明”之前加上“单方面”一词，以免将关于条约暂时适用的规则与国家单方面行为的法律制度相混淆。 |
| Guideline 5 Commencement of provisional
application | 准则5 暂时适用的开始 |
| The provisional application of a treaty
or a part of a treaty, pending its entry into force between the States or
international organizations concerned, takes effect on such date, and in
accordance with such conditions and procedures, as the treaty provides or as
are otherwise agreed. | 条约在有关国家或国际组织之间生效前，条约或条约之一部分的暂时适用按条约规定的或另经协议的日期、条件和程序开始。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Draft guideline 5 deals with the
commencement of provisional application. | (1) 准则草案5涉及暂时适用的开始。 |
| The draft guideline is modelled on
article 24, paragraph 1, of the 1969 and 1986 Vienna Conventions, on entry
into force. | 本条准则草案借鉴了1969年和1986年《维也纳公约》关于生效的第二十四条第一款。 |
| (2) The first clause reflects the
approach taken in the draft guidelines of referring to the provisional
application of the entire treaty or a part of a treaty. | (2) “条约或条约之一部分”反映了本准则草案采用的提及整个条约或条约之一部分的暂时适用的做法。 |
| (3) The second clause has two components. | (3) “在有关国家或国际组织之间生效前”包含两个要素。 |
| The reference to “pending its entry into
force” follows the formulation found in draft guideline 3, whereby “entry
into force” refers to the entry into force between the States or
international organizations concerned. | “在…生效前”采用了准则草案3中的措辞，其中“生效”指条约在有关国家或国际组织之间的生效。 |
| As indicated in the commentary to draft
guideline 3, such considerations are pertinent primarily in the context of
the provisional application of multilateral treaties. | 如准则草案3的评注所述，这种考虑主要与多边条约的暂时适用有关。 |
| The Commission decided to retain the
general reference to “entry into force”, as already indicated in the commentary
to draft guideline 3. | 如准则草案3的评注所已经指出的， 委员会决定保留对“生效”的笼统提法。 |
| (4) The second component is the inclusion
of the reference to both States and international organizations. | (4) 第二个要素则是既提及国家也提及国际组织。 |
| That reflects the position taken by the
Commission, referred to in paragraph (3) of the commentary to draft guideline
1, whereby the scope of the draft guidelines should include treaties between
States and international organizations or between international
organizations. | 这反映了准则草案1评注第(3)段提到的委员会的立场，即本准则草案的范围应包括国家与国际组织之间的条约，或国际组织相互间的条约。 |
| The reference to entry into force
“between” the States or international organizations was rendered in general
terms in order to cover the variety of possible scenarios, including, for
example, provisional application between a State or international
organization for which the treaty has entered into force and another State or
international organization for which the treaty has not yet entered into
force. | 笼统地提到在国家或国际组织“之间”生效，是为了涵盖各种可能的情形，例如条约已对之生效的某一国家或国际组织与条约尚未对之生效的另一国家或国际组织之间暂时适用的情况。 |
| (5) The phrase “takes effect on such
date, and in accordance with such conditions and procedures” defines the
commencement of provisional application. | (5) “按…日期、条件和程序开始”一语对暂时适用如何开始下了定义。 |
| The text is based on that adopted in
article 68 of the 1969 Vienna Convention, which refers to “takes effect”. | 此案文参考了1969年《维也纳公约》第六十八条，其中提及“发生效力”。 |
| The phrase confirms that what is being
referred to is the legal effect in relation to the State or international organization
electing to apply the treaty provisionally. | 这一短语证实，此处所指的是对选择暂时适用条约的国家或国际组织的法律效果。 |
| The Commission decided not to refer
expressly to the various modes of expressing consent to be bound by a treaty,
in order to retain a more streamlined provision. | 委员会决定不明文列出表示同意受条约约束的各种方式，以便使规定更为简洁。 |
| (6) The concluding phrase “as the treaty
provides or as are otherwise agreed” confirms that the agreement to
provisionally apply a treaty or a part of a treaty is based on a provision
set forth in the treaty that is provisionally applied, on a separate treaty,
whatever its particular designation, or on other means or arrangements that
establish an agreement for provisional application, and is subject to the
conditions and procedures established in such instruments. | (6) “按条约规定的或另经协议的”一语表明，暂时适用条约或条约一部分的协定是基于暂时适用的条约中的规定、单独的条约――无论其具体名称如何――或约定暂时适用的其他办法或安排，并须遵守这些文书规定的条件和程序。 |
| Guideline 6 Legal effect of provisional
application | 准则6 暂时适用的法律效果 |
| The provisional application of a treaty
or a part of a treaty produces a legally binding obligation to apply the
treaty or a part thereof as if the treaty were in force between the States or
international organizations concerned, unless the treaty provides otherwise
or it is otherwise agreed. | 除条约另有规定或另经协议外，条约或条约之一部分的暂时适用产生适用该条约或条约之一部分的具有法律约束力的义务，犹如该条约已在有关国家或国际组织之间生效。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Draft guideline 6 deals with the
legal effect of provisional application. | (1) 准则草案6涉及暂时适用的法律效果。 |
| Two types of “legal effect” might be
envisaged: the legal effect of the agreement to provisionally apply the
treaty or a part of it, and the legal effect of the treaty or a part of it
that is being provisionally applied. | 可以设想两种“法律效果”：一是暂时适用条约或条约一部分的协议的法律效果，二是被暂时适用的条约或条约之一部分的法律效果。 |
| (2) The draft guideline begins by stating
that the legal effect of provisional application of a treaty or a part of a
treaty is to produce a legally binding obligation to apply the treaty or part
thereof as if the treaty were in force between the States or international
organizations concerned. | (2) 本条准则草案首先指出，条约或条约之一部分的暂时适用产生适用该条约或条约之一部分的具有法律约束力的义务，犹如该条约已在有关国家或国际组织之间生效。 |
| In other words, a treaty or a part of a
treaty that is provisionally applied is considered as binding on the parties
provisionally applying it from the time at which the provisional application
commenced. | 换言之，暂时适用的条约或条约之一部分被视为自暂时适用开始之时，对暂时适用的各方具有约束力。 |
| Such legal effect is derived from the
agreement to provisionally apply the treaty by the States or the
international organizations concerned, which may be expressed in the forms
identified in draft guideline 4. | 这种法律效果源于有关国家或国际组织暂时适用条约的协议，这种协议可采用准则草案4所述的形式。 |
| In cases in which that agreement is
silent on the legal effect of provisional application, which is common, the
draft guideline provides that the provisional application produces a legally
binding obligation to apply the treaty or part thereof as if the treaty were
in force. | 在该协议没有提及暂时适用的法律效果的情况下(这种情况很常见)，本条准则草案规定，暂时适用产生适用该条约或条约之一部分的具有法律约束力的义务，犹如该条约已经生效。 |
| (3) The general position is qualified by
the concluding phrase “unless the treaty provides otherwise or it is
otherwise agreed”, which confirms that the basic rule is subject to the
treaty or another agreement, which may provide an alternative legal outcome. | (3) 本一般立场有一个限定语，即“除条约另有规定或另经协议外”，这表明基本规则受到可能产生另一种法律结果的条约或其他协议的约束。 |
| Such an understanding, namely a
presumption in favour of the creation of a legally binding obligation to
apply the treaty as if it were in force, subject to the possibility that the
parties may agree otherwise, is reflected in existing State practice. | 这种理解是假定暂时适用即确立适用条约的具有法律约束力的义务，犹如条约已经生效，但当事方可能另有协议。 现有国家实践反映了这一理解。 |
| (4) The opening phrase “[t]he provisional
application of a treaty or a part of a treaty” follows draft guideline 5. | (4) “条约或条约之一部分的暂时适用”仿照了准则草案5的措辞。 |
| The phrase “a legally binding obligation
to apply the treaty or part thereof as if the treaty were in force”, which is
central to the draft guideline, refers to the effect that the treaty would
produce were it in force for the State or the international organization
concerned and to the conduct that is expected from States or international
organizations that decide to resort to provisional application. | “适用该条约或条约之一部分的具有法律约束力的义务，犹如该条约已…生效”是本条准则草案的核心内容，指的是假设条约生效将对有关国家或国际组织产生的效果，以及期望已决定采取暂时适用的国家或国际组织做出的行为。 |
| The reference to “between the States or
international organizations concerned” was inserted in order to align the
draft guideline with draft guideline 5. | 提到“在有关国家或国际组织之间”，是为了使本条准则草案与准则草案5相一致。 |
| The concluding clause, “unless the treaty
provides otherwise or it is otherwise agreed”, indicates the condition on
which the general rule is based, namely that the treaty does not provide
otherwise. | “除条约另有规定或另经协议外”表明了这项一般规则的成立条件，即条约没有另外规定。 |
| (5) Nonetheless, an important distinction
must be made. | (5) 然而，必须作出重要的区分。 |
| As a matter of principle, provisional
application is not intended to give rise to the whole range of rights and
obligations that derive from the consent by a State or an international
organization to be bound by a treaty or a part of a treaty. | 原则上，暂时适用并不是为了引起一国或一国际组织同意受条约或条约之一部分约束所产生的全部权利和义务。 |
| Provisional application of treaties
remains different from their entry into force, insofar as it is not subject
to all rules of the law of treaties. | 条约的暂时适用与其生效仍然是不同的，因为暂时适用不受所有条约法规则的约束。 |
| Therefore, the formulation that
provisional application “produces a legally binding obligation to apply the
treaty or part thereof as if the treaty were in force” does not imply that
provisional application has the same legal effect as entry into force. | 因此，关于暂时适用“产生适用该条约或条约之一部分的具有法律约束力的义务，犹如该条约已…生效”的措辞并不意味着暂时适用与生效具有相同的法律效果。 |
| The reference to a “a legally binding
obligation” is intended to add more precision in the depiction of the legal
effect of provisional application. | 提及“具有法律约束力的义务”是为了更加确切地描述暂时适用的法律效果。 |
| (6) The Commission considered the
possibility of introducing an express safeguard so that the provisional
application of a treaty could not result in the modification of the content
of the treaty. | (6) 委员会审议了是否可能增添明确的保障措施使条约的暂时适用不可能导致修改条约内容的问题。 |
| However, the formulation adopted for
draft guideline 6 was considered to be sufficiently comprehensive to deal
with the point, since provisional application is limited to producing a
legally binding obligation to apply the treaty or part thereof as if the
treaty were in force. | 但委员们认为，准则草案6的行文在这一点上已足够全面，因为暂时适用仅能产生适用该条约或条约之一部分的具有法律约束力的义务，犹如该条约已经生效。 |
| Implicit in the draft guideline,
therefore, is the understanding that the act of provisionally applying the
treaty does not affect the rights and obligations of other States or
international organizations. | 因此，本条准则草案暗含的一种理解是，暂时适用条约的行为不影响其他国家或国际组织的权利和义务。 |
| Furthermore, draft guideline 6 should not
be understood as limiting the freedom of States or international
organizations to amend or modify the treaty that is provisionally applied, in
accordance with part IV of the 1969 and the 1986 Vienna Conventions. | 此外，准则草案6不应被理解为限制国家或国际组织根据1969年和1986年《维也纳公约》第四编修正或修改暂时适用的条约的自由。 |
| Guideline 7 Reservations | 准则7 保留 |
| 1. In accordance with the relevant rules
of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, applied mutatis mutandis, a
State may, when agreeing to the provisional application of a treaty or a part
of a treaty, formulate a reservation purporting to exclude or modify the
legal effect produced by the provisional application of certain provisions of
that treaty. | 1. 根据比照适用的《维也纳条约法公约》相关规则，一国可在同意暂时适用条约或条约之一部分时提出保留，其目的在于排除或更改暂时适用该条约某些规定所产生的法律效果。 |
| 2. In accordance with the relevant rules
of international law, an international organization may, when agreeing to the
provisional application of a treaty or a part of a treaty, formulate a
reservation purporting to exclude or modify the legal effect produced by the
provisional application of certain provisions of that treaty. | 2. 根据国际法相关规则，一国际组织可在同意暂时适用条约或条约之一部分时提出保留，其目的在于排除或更改暂时适用该条约某些规定所产生的法律效果。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Draft guideline 7 deals with the
formulation of reservations, by a State or an international organization,
purporting to exclude or modify the legal effect produced by the provisional
application of certain provisions of a treaty. | (1) 准则草案7涉及一国或一个国际组织为摒除或更改暂时适用条约某些条款产生的法律效果的目的提具保留的问题。 |
| (2) Owing to the relative lack of
practice on the matter and the fact that reservations in the case of
provisional application were not addressed in the 2011 Guide to Practice on
Reservations to Treaties, the Commission is only at the initial stage of
considering the question of reservations in relation to the provisional
application of treaties. | (2) 鉴于这方面的实践相对较缺乏，并鉴于2011年《对条约的保留实践指南》 没有述及暂时适用情况下的保留问题，委员会对条约暂时适用情况下的保留问题的审议仅处于初步阶段。 |
| Different and quite divergent views were expressed
in the Commission as to whether it was appropriate or necessary to include a
provision on reservations in the context of provisional application of a
treaty or a part thereof in the Guide, although it was generally believed
that, as a matter of principle, nothing prohibits the possibility of
formulating reservations related to provisional application. | 对于是否适当或有必要在案文中加上一项规定，述及在暂时适用条约或条约之一部分的情况下的保留问题，各位委员发表了差异很大的不同意见，不过委员们普遍认为，就暂时适用提出保留的可能性在原则上没有任何障碍。 |
| (3) Although States have made
interpretative declarations in conjunction with agreeing to provisional
application, such declarations must be distinguished from reservations. | (3) 各国在同意暂时适用时发表过解释性声明，但必须将这种声明与保留区分开。 |
| Nor do declarations to opt out of
provisional application constitute reservations in the sense of the law of
treaties. | 停止暂时适用的声明也不构成条约法含义内的保留。 |
| (4) Paragraph 1 begins with the phrase
“[i]n accordance with the relevant rules of the Vienna Convention on the Law
of Treaties, applied mutatis mutandis”. This phrase is meant to indicate the
application of some, but not necessarily all, of the rules of the 1969 Vienna
Convention applicable to reservations in case of provisional application. | (4) 第1款开头语是“根据比照适用的《维也纳条约法公约》相关规则”，意思是此处采用了1969年《维也纳公约》适用于暂时适用情况下的保留的一些规则，但不一定采用了全部规则。 |
| The phrase was placed at the beginning of
the paragraph to clearly indicate that the relevant rules of the Vienna
Convention being referred to are those that qualify the formulation of
reservations, and not those that relate to the provisional application of
certain provisions of the respective treaty. | 该短语置于该款之首，用以清楚说明所提及的《维也纳公约》相关规则是关于提出保留的规则，而不是关于暂时适用相关条约某些规定的规则。 |
| (5) The phrase “a State may, when
agreeing to the provisional application of a treaty or a part of a treaty,
formulate a reservation purporting to exclude or modify the legal effect
produced by the provisional application of certain provisions of that treaty”
is based on articles 2, paragraph 1 (d), and 19 of the Vienna Convention. | (5) “一国可在同意暂时适用条约或条约之一部分时提出保留，其目的在于排除或更改暂时适用该条约某些规定所产生的法律效果”一语参考了《维也纳公约》第二条第一款(d)项和第十九条。 |
| The reference to the legal effect
“produced by the provisional application” underlines the intrinsic link
between draft guideline 6 and draft guideline 7. | 提及“暂时适用…产生的”法律效果，突出了准则草案6和准则草案7之间的内在联系。 |
| The formulation is considered to be
neutral on the question as to whether reservations exclude or modify the
legal effect arising from the provisional application of the treaty, or that
of the agreement between the parties to provisionally apply the treaty as
such. | 在保留是否排除或更改条约暂时适用产生的法律效果的问题上，或在当事方之间暂时适用条约的协议的问题上，这一措辞被认为是中立的。 |
| (6) Paragraph 2 provides for the
formulation of reservations by international organizations to parallel the
situation of States envisaged in paragraph 1. | (6) 第2款对国际组织提出保留的问题作了规定，与第1款所述国家提出保留的情况平行。 |
| Paragraph 2 replicates paragraph 1, with
the necessary modifications. | 除必要调整外，第2款复制了第1款的用语。 |
| The opening phrase “[i]n accordance with
the relevant rules of international law”, is to be understood broadly to
include primarily the rules of the law of treaties, but also those pertaining
to the rules of international organizations. | 开头语“根据国际法相关规则”应予广义理解，主要包括条约法规则，但也涉及国际组织的规则。 |
| Guideline 8 Responsibility for breach | 准则8 违约责任 |
| The breach of an obligation arising under
a treaty or a part of a treaty that is provisionally applied entails
international responsibility in accordance with the applicable rules of
international law. | 根据适用的国际法规则，违反暂时适用的条约或条约之一部分产生的义务引起国际责任。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Draft guideline 8 deals with the
question of responsibility for breach of an obligation arising under a treaty
or a part of a treaty that is being provisionally applied. | (1) 准则草案8涉及违反暂时适用的条约或条约之一部分产生的义务所引起的责任问题。 |
| It reflects the legal implication of
draft guideline 6. | 它反映了准则草案6的法律影响。 |
| Since the treaty or a part of a treaty
being provisionally applied produces a legally binding obligation, then a
breach of an obligation arising under the treaty or a part of a treaty being
provisionally applied necessarily constitutes a wrongful act giving rise to
international responsibility. | 鉴于暂时适用的条约或条约之一部分会产生具有法律约束力的义务，违反暂时适用的条约或条约之一部分产生的义务，必然构成引起国际责任的不法行为。 |
| The Commission considered whether it was
necessary to have a provision on responsibility at all. | 委员会审议了是否有必要在案文中加入一项关于责任的规定的问题。 |
| The inclusion of the present draft
guideline was deemed necessary since it deals with a key legal consequence of
the provisional application of a treaty or a part of a treaty. | 委员会认为，本条准则草案涉及暂时适用条约或条约之一部分的一项重要法律后果，因此有必要写入案文。 |
| Article 73 of the 1969 Vienna Convention
states that its provisions shall not prejudge any question that may arise in
regard to a treaty from the international responsibility of a State and
article 74 of the 1986 Vienna Convention provides similarly. | 1969年《维也纳公约》第七十三条指出其规定不妨碍国家所负国际责任引起的关于条约的任何问题，1986年《维也纳公约》第七十四条也有类似的规定。 |
| The scope of the draft guidelines is not
limited to that of the two Vienna Conventions, as stated in draft guideline
2. | 如准则草案2所述，本准则草案的范围不限于两项《维也纳公约》的范围。 |
| (2) The Commission decided to retain the
reference to “a part” of a treaty in order to specify that when a part of a
treaty is being provisionally applied, it is only a breach of that part of
the treaty that is susceptible to giving rise to international
responsibility. | (2) 委员会决定保留条约之“一部分”的提法，以明确说明，当暂时适用条约的某一部分时，只有违反条约的那一部分才会引起国际责任。 |
| (3) The draft guideline was aligned with
the articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts of
2001 and with the articles on responsibility of international organizations
of 2011, to the extent that they reflect customary international law. | (3) 本条准则草案与2001年关于国家对国际不法行为的责任的条款
和2011年关于国际组织的责任的条款 相一致，这些条款草案反映了习惯国际法。 |
| Accordingly, the reference to “an
obligation arising under” and the word “entails” were consciously drawn from
those draft articles. | 因此，委员会有意地从中借鉴了“产生的义务”和“引起”这两个表述。 |
| Likewise, the concluding phrase “in
accordance with the applicable rules of international law” is intended as a
reference, inter alia, to those draft articles. | 同样，之所以采用“根据适用的国际法规则”这一表述，也主要是为了引述这些条款草案。 |
| Guideline 9 Termination and suspension of
provisional application | 准则9 暂时适用的终止和中止 |
| 1. The provisional application of a
treaty or a part of a treaty terminates with the entry into force of that
treaty in the relations between the States or international organizations
concerned. | 1. 条约或条约之一部分的暂时适用，于该条约在有关国家或国际组织之间的关系中生效时终止。 |
| 2. Unless the treaty otherwise provides
or it is otherwise agreed, the provisional application of a treaty or a part
of a treaty with respect to a State or international organization is
terminated if that State or international organization notifies the other
States or international organizations between which the treaty or a part of a
treaty is being applied provisionally of its intention not to become a party
to the treaty. | 2. 除条约另有规定或另经协议外，暂时适用条约或条约之一部分的国家或国际组织如果通知相互间也正暂时适用条约或条约之一部分的其他国家或国际组织其无意成为条约缔约方，则暂时适用对该国或该国际组织终止。 |
| 3. The present draft guideline is without
prejudice to the application, mutatis mutandis, of relevant rules set forth
in Part V, Section 3, of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties or
other relevant rules of international law concerning termination and
suspension. | 3. 本条准则草案不妨碍比照适用《维也纳条约法公约》第五编第三节规定的相关规则或涉及终止和中止的其他国际法相关规则。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Draft guideline 9 concerns the
termination and suspension of provisional application. | (1) 准则草案9涉及终止和中止暂时适用问题。 |
| The provisional application of a treaty
or a part of a treaty by a State or an international organization typically
ceases in one of two instances: first, when the treaty enters into force for
the State or international organization concerned or, second, when the
intention not to become a party to the treaty is communicated by the State or
international organization provisionally applying the treaty or a part of a
treaty to the other States or international organizations between which the
treaty or a part of a treaty is being provisionally applied. | 一国或一国际组织对条约或条约之一部分的暂时适用通常在以下两种情形下停止：一是当条约对有关国家或国际组织生效时，二是当暂时适用条约或条约之一部分的国家或国际组织将其不欲成为缔约方的意图通知也正暂时适用条约或条约之一部分的其他国家或国际组织时。 |
| The possibility of other, less common,
means of terminating provisional application is not excluded. | 不排除也可能存在其他较不常见的终止暂时适用的方式。 |
| (2) Paragraph 1 addresses termination of
provisional application upon entry into force. | (2) 第1款规定暂时适用在条约生效之时终止。 |
| Entry into force is the most frequent way
in which provisional application is terminated. | 条约生效是暂时适用终止的最常见的方式。 |
| That the provisional application of a
treaty or a part of a treaty can be terminated by means of the entry into
force of the treaty itself is implicit in the reference in draft guidelines 3
and 5 to “pending its entry into force”, which is based on article 25 of the
1969 and 1986 Vienna Conventions. | 条约或条约之一部分的暂时适用可通过条约本身生效而终止，这点隐含在准则草案3和5中的“在条约生效前”这一表述中，这一表述参考了1969年和1968年《维也纳条约》第二十五条。 |
| In accordance with draft guideline 5,
provisional application continues until the treaty enters into force for the
State or international organization provisionally applying the treaty or a
part of a treaty in relation to the other States or international
organizations provisionally applying it or a part of it as well. | 根据准则草案5, 暂时适用条约或条约之一部分的国家或国际组织，其暂时适用持续到相对于暂时适用同一条约或条约之一部分的其他国家或国际组织而言，条约对该国或该国际组织生效时为止。 |
| (3) The phrase “in the relations between
the States or international organizations concerned” was included to
distinguish the entry into force of the treaty from the provisional
application by one or more parties to the treaty. | (3) 之所以使用“在有关国家或国际组织之间的关系中”一语，是为了将条约生效的情况与一个或多个条约方暂时适用条约的情况区分开。 |
| This was viewed as being particularly
relevant in the relations between parties to a multilateral treaty, where the
treaty might enter into force for a number of the parties but continue to be applied
only provisionally by others. | 对多边条约当事方的关系而言，这一点尤为重要，因为有关条约可能只对部分当事方生效，其他当事方仍在继续暂时适用该条约。 |
| This phrase is thus intended to capture
all the possible legal situations that may exist in that regard. | 因此，该短语意在涵盖这方面可能存在的所有法律情况。 |
| (4) Paragraph 2 reflects the second
instance mentioned in paragraph (1) of the commentary to the present draft
guideline, namely the case in which the State or international organization
gives notice of its intention not to become a party to a treaty. | (4) 第2款反映准则草案评注第(1)段述及的第二种情形，即国家或国际组织通知其无意成为条约缔约方的情形。 |
| It follows closely the formulation of
paragraph 2 of article 25 of the 1969 and 1986 Vienna Conventions. | 这贴近1969年和1986年《维也纳公约》第二十五条第二款的措辞。 |
| (5) The opening phrase of paragraph 2
“[u]nless the treaty otherwise provides or it is otherwise agreed” omits the
reference to such an alternative agreement only being concluded between the
“negotiating” States and international organizations, which can be found in
the 1969 and 1986 Vienna Conventions. | (5) 第2款开头语“除条约另有规定或另经协议外”并未像1969年和1986年《维也纳公约》那样提到这种另外的协议只能在各“谈判”国和国际组织之间缔结。 |
| The formulation “or it is otherwise
agreed” continues to refer to the States or international organizations that
had negotiated the treaty, but it may also include States and international organizations
that were not involved in the negotiation of the treaty. | “或另经协议”一语的指代对象仍然是谈判条约的国家或国际组织，但也可包括未参加条约谈判的国家和国际组织。 |
| Given the complexity of concluding modern
multilateral treaties, contemporary practice supports a broad reading of the
language the Vienna Conventions, in terms of treating all negotiating States
or international organizations as being on the same legal footing in relation
to provisional application, out of recognition of the existence of other
groups of States or international organizations whose agreement on matters
related to the termination of provisional application might also be sought. | 鉴于缔结现代多边条约的复杂性，当代实践支持更广义地解读《维也纳公约》的措辞，即在暂时适用方面将参与谈判的所有国家或国际组织视为具有同等法律地位，并承认还存在其他的国家集团或国际组织，与终止暂时适用有关的事务可能要征得这些国家集团或国际组织的同意。 |
| (6) The Commission was also concerned
with identifying which States or international organizations should be
notified of another’s intention to terminate the provisional application of a
treaty or a part of a treaty. | (6) 委员会关切的另一个问题是，要确定一国或一国际组织终止暂时适用条约或条约之一部分的意图应通知哪些国家或国际组织。 |
| The final phrase in the draft guideline,
“notifies the other States or international organizations between which the
treaty or a part of a treaty is being applied provisionally”, clarifies that
point. | 本条准则草案中的“通知相互间也正暂时适用条约或条约之一部分的其他国家或国际组织”对此予以了明确。 |
| (7) The Commission decided not to
introduce a safeguard in relation to unilateral termination of provisional
application by, for example, applying mutatis mutandis the rule found in
paragraph 2 of article 56 of the 1969 and 1986 Vienna Conventions, which establishes
a notice period for denunciation of or withdrawal from a treaty containing no
provision regarding termination, denunciation or withdrawal. | (7) 委员会决定不在案文中加上一项单方面终止暂时适用的保障措施，例如比照适用1969年和1986年《维也纳公约》第五十六条第二款所述规则，规定在条约未载有关于终止、解除或退出的规定的情况下解除或退出条约的通知期限。 |
| The Commission declined to do so out of
concern for the flexibility inherent in article 25 and in view of
insufficient practice in that regard. | 委员会之所以没有这样做，是因为顾及第二十五条固有的灵活性，并考虑到了这方面实践的不足。 |
| (8) Paragraph 3 confirms that draft
guideline 9 is without prejudice to the application, mutatis mutandis, of
relevant rules set forth in part V, section 3, of the 1969 Vienna Convention
or other relevant rules of international law concerning termination and
suspension. | (8) 第3款确认准则草案9不妨碍1969年《维也纳公约》第五编第三节相关规则或关于终止和中止的其他国际法相关规则的比照适用。 |
| Despite an apparent lack of relevant
practice and notwithstanding the fact that article 25, paragraph 2, of the
Vienna Convention provides a flexible way to terminate provisional
application, the Commission considered it useful to include a provision
relating to termination and suspension in the Guide to address a number of
possible scenarios not covered by paragraphs 1 and 2. | 尽管显然缺乏相关实践，尽管《维也纳公约》第二十五条第二款提供了终止暂时适用的灵活方式，但委员会还是认为有必要在本指南中加入一个关于终止和中止条约的条款，以应对第1款和第2款没有涵盖的一些可能出现的情形。 |
| For example, a State or international
organization may only wish to terminate provisional application, but still
intend to become a party to the treaty. | 例如，一国或一国际组织可能仅仅希望终止暂时适用，但仍然有意成为条约缔约方。 |
| Another conceivable scenario is that in
situations of material breach, a State or international organization may only
seek to terminate or suspend provisional application vis-à-vis the State or
international organization that has committed the material breach, while still
continuing to provisionally apply the treaty in relation to other parties. | 另一种可以想象的情形是，一国或一国际组织在发生严重违约时可能仅仅想对严重违约的国家或国际组织终止或中止暂时适用条约，但仍继续对其他当事方暂时适用条约。 |
| The State or international organization
affected by the material breach may also wish to resume the suspended
provisional application of the treaty after the material breach has been
adequately remedied. | 受严重违约影响的国家或国际组织也可能希望在严重违约情况得到充分纠正后再恢复原已中止的暂时适用。 |
| (9) The formulation of paragraph 3 as a
“without prejudice” clause is intended to preserve the possibility that
provisions pertaining to termination and suspension in the 1969 Vienna
Convention may be applicable to a provisionally applied treaty. | (9) 第3款行文采用“不妨碍”条款的形式，意在保留一种可能性，即1969年《维也纳公约》关于终止和中止的规定可能适用于暂时适用的条约。 |
| However, the provision does not aspire to
definitively determine which grounds in section 3 might serve as an
additional basis for the termination of provisional application, or in which
scenarios and to what extent those grounds would be applied. | 但这一规定并不想清楚确定第三节所列的哪些理由可作为终止暂时适用的补充依据，也不想确定在哪些情形下及在何种程度上这些理由将得到利用。 |
| Instead, the rules of the Vienna
Convention are to be “applied mutatis mutandis” depending on the
circumstances. | 相反，应根据具体情形“比照适用”《维也纳公约》规则。 |
| (10) The reference to “or other relevant
rules of international law” is primarily intended to extend the scope of the
provision to the provisional application of treaties by international
organizations, but the reference also makes clear that the provision is
without prejudice to other methods of terminating provisional application
more generally. | (10) 提及“或其他国际法相关规则”主要是为了扩展这一规定的范围，使其涵盖国际组织暂时适用条约的情况，但这一提法也清楚表明，更广泛地来说，此项规定不妨碍终止暂时适用的其他方法。 |
| (11) The scope of the provision is
limited to section 3 of part V of the 1969 Vienna Convention to avoid any
legal uncertainty that might have resulted from a general reference to part
V. Similarly, the specific reference to section 3 serves to exclude the
applicability of section 2 of part V of the Vienna Convention, on invalidity. | (11) 这项规定的范围限于1969年《维也纳公约》第五编第三节，以避免一般提及第五编时可能造成的法律不确定性。
同样，具体提及第三节可排除《维也纳公约》第五编关于条约之失效的第二节的适用性。 |
| The Guide addresses invalidity in draft
guideline 11. | 本指南在准则草案11中述及了无效性问题。 |
| Guideline 10 Internal law of States and
rules of international organizations, and the observance of provisionally
applied treaties | 准则10 各国国内法和国际组织规则与暂时适用的条约的遵守 |
| 1. A State that has agreed to the
provisional application of a treaty or a part of a treaty may not invoke the
provisions of its internal law as justification for its failure to perform an
obligation arising under such provisional application. | 1. 同意暂时适用条约或条约之一部分的国家不得援引其国内法规定作为不履行此种暂时适用所产生的义务的理由。 |
| 2. An international organization that has
agreed to the provisional application of a treaty or a part of a treaty may
not invoke the rules of the organization as justification for its failure to
perform an obligation arising under such provisional application. | 2. 同意暂时适用条约或条约之一部分的国际组织不得援引该组织的规则作为不履行此种暂时适用所产生的义务的理由。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Draft guideline 10 deals with the
observance of provisionally applied treaties and their relation with the
internal law of States and the rules of international organizations. | (1) 准则草案10涉及遵守暂时适用的条约及其与各国国内法和国际组织规则的关系。 |
| Specifically, it deals with the question
of the invocation of internal law of States, or in the case of international
organizations the rules of the organization, as justification for failure to
perform an obligation arising under the provisional application of a treaty
or a part of a treaty. | 具体而言，本条准则草案涉及各国援引国内法或者国际组织援引其组织规则作为不履行暂时适用一项条约或条约之一部分所产生义务的理由。 |
| The first paragraph concerns the rule
applicable to States and the second the rule applicable to international
organizations. | 第一段涉及适用于各国的规则，第二段涉及适用于国际组织的规则。 |
| (2) The provision follows closely the
formulation contained in article 27 of both the 1969 and 1986 Vienna
Conventions. Therefore, it should be considered together with those articles
and other applicable rules of international law. | (2) 这项规定十分贴近1969年
和1986年《维也纳公约》第27条的措辞，因此应与这些条款的内容和其他适用的国际法规则一并考虑。 |
| (3) The provisional application of a
treaty or a part of a treaty is governed by international law. | (3) 暂时适用一项条约或条约之一部分时须遵守国际法。 |
| Like article 27, draft guideline 10
states, as a general rule, that a State or an international organization may
not invoke the provisions of its internal law or rules as a justification for
its failure to perform an obligation arising under such provisional
application. | 与第27条一样， 准则草案10指出，一般规则是，一国或一国际组织不得援引自身的国内法或内部规则为理由，不履行这种暂时适用所产生的义务。 |
| Likewise, such internal law or rules
cannot be invoked so as to avoid the responsibility that may be incurred for
the breach of such obligations. | 同样，也不得援引这种国内法或内部规则来逃避违反这种义务可能产生的责任。 |
| However, as indicated in draft guideline
12, the States and international organizations concerned may agree to
limitations deriving from such internal law or rules as a part of their
agreement on provisional application. | 不过，如准则草案12所述，有关国家和国际组织可作为其暂时适用协议的一部分，同意源自该国国内法或该组织内部规则的限制。 |
| (4) While it is true that each State or
international organization may decide, under its internal law or rules,
whether to agree to the provisional application of a treaty or a part of a
treaty, once a treaty or a part of a treaty is provisionally applied, an
inconsistency with the internal law of a State or of the rules of an
international organization cannot justify a failure to provisionally apply
such a treaty or a part thereof. | (4) 诚然，每个国家或国际组织可按照其国内法或内部规则决定是否同意暂时适用一项条约或条约之一部分，
但一旦暂时适用条约或条约之一部分，就不得以违反国内法或国际组织规则为由而不暂时适用有关条约或条约之一部分。 |
| Consequently, the invocation of those
internal provisions in an attempt to justify a failure to provisionally apply
a treaty or a part thereof would not be in accordance with international law. | 因此，援引此类内部规定，据此为不暂时适用条约或条约之一部分的行为辩护，不符合国际法。 |
| (5) A failure to comply with the
obligations arising from the provisional application of a treaty or a part of
a treaty with a justification based on the internal law of a State or rules
of an international organization will engage the international responsibility
of that State or international organization. | (5) 以一国国内法或一国际组织的规则为由不履行条约或条约之一部分的暂时适用所产生的义务，将导致有关国家或国际组织背负国际责任。 |
| Any other view would be contrary to the
law on State responsibility, according to which the characterization of an
act of a State or an international organization as internationally wrongful
is governed by international law and such characterization is not affected by
its characterization as lawful by internal law. | 任何其他观点将违背关于国家责任的法律，根据该法，由国际法负责将一国或一国际组织的行为定性为国际不法行为，这种定性不受国内法将其定性为合法之影响。 |
| (6) The reference in the draft guideline
to the “internal law of States and rules of international organizations”
stands for any provision of this nature, and not only to the internal law or
rules specifically concerning the provisional application of treaties. | (6) 本条准则草案中提到的“各国国内法和国际组织规则”指的是此种性质的任何规定，而不仅仅是专门涉及暂时适用条约问题的国内法或规则。 |
| (7) The phrase “obligation arising under
such provisional application”, in both paragraphs of the draft guideline, is
broad enough to encompass situations where the obligation flows from the
treaty itself or from a separate agreement to provisionally apply the treaty
or a part of a treaty. | (7) 本条准则草案两段中的“此种暂时适用所产生的义务”一语足以涵盖这一义务从条约本身产生，或从暂时适用该条约或条约之一部分的单独协定产生的情况。 |
| This is in accordance with the general
rule of draft guideline 6, which states that the provisional application of a
treaty or a part of a treaty produces a legally binding obligation to apply the
treaty or a part thereof as if the treaty were in force between the States
and the international organizations concerned. | 这符合准则草案6, 该条准则草案指出，暂时适用条约或条约之一部分产生适用该条约或条约之一部分的具有法律约束力的义务，犹如该条约已在有关国家或国际组织之间生效。 |
| Guideline 11 Provisions of internal law
of States and rules of international organizations regarding competence to
agree on the provisional application of treaties | 准则11 各国国内法关于同意暂时适用条约的权限的规定和国际组织关于同意暂时适用条约的权限的规则 |
| 1. A State may not invoke the fact that
its consent to the provisional application of a treaty or a part of a treaty
has been expressed in violation of a provision of its internal law regarding
competence to agree to the provisional application of treaties as
invalidating its consent unless that violation was manifest and concerned a
rule of its internal law of fundamental importance. | 1. 一国不得援引其同意暂时适用条约或条约之一部分的表示违反了该国国内法关于同意暂时适用条约的权限的规定为理由主张其同意无效，但违反情事明显且涉及其具有根本重要性的国内法规则时不在此限。 |
| 2. An international organization may not
invoke the fact that its consent to the provisional application of a treaty
or a part of a treaty has been expressed in violation of the rules of the
organization regarding competence to agree to the provisional application of
treaties as invalidating its consent unless that violation was manifest and
concerned a rule of fundamental importance. | 2. 一国际组织不得援引其同意暂时适用条约或条约之一部分的表示违反了该组织关于同意暂时适用条约的权限的规则为理由主张其同意无效，但违反情事明显且涉及其具有根本重要性的规则时不在此限。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Draft guideline 11 deals with the
effects of the provisions of the internal law of States and the rules of
international organizations on their competence to agree to the provisional
application of treaties. | (1) 准则草案11涉及各国国内法关于同意暂时适用条约的权限的规定或国际组织关于同意暂时适用条约的权限的规则的影响。 |
| The first paragraph concerns the internal
law of States and the second the rules of international organizations. | 第一段涉及各国的国内法，第二段涉及国际组织的规则。 |
| (2) Draft guideline 11 follows closely
the formulation of article 46 of both the 1969 and 1986 Vienna Conventions. | (2) 准则草案11十分贴近1969年和1986年《维也纳公约》第四十六条的措辞。 |
| Specifically, the first paragraph of the
draft guideline follows paragraph 1 of article 46 of the 1969 Vienna
Convention, and the second, paragraph 2 of article 46 of the 1986 Vienna
Convention. | 具体而言，本条准则草案第一段沿用了1969年《维也纳公约》第四十六条第一款；
第二段沿用了1986年《维也纳公约》第四十六条第二款。 |
| Therefore, the draft guideline should be
considered together with those articles and other applicable rules of
international law. | 因此，该准则草案应与这些条款和其他适用的国际法规则一并考虑。 |
| (3) Draft guideline 11 provides that any
claim that the consent to provisional application is invalid must be based on
a manifest violation of the internal law of the State or the rules of the
organization regarding their competence to agree to such provisional
application and, additionally, must concern a rule of fundamental importance. | (3) 准则草案11规定，任何声称同意暂时适用是无效的主张必须基于明显违反该国或该组织关于同意这种暂时适用的权限的国内法或规则，此外，必须涉及一项具有根本重要性的规则。 |
| (4) A violation of that type is
“manifest” if it would be objectively evident to any State or any
international organization conducting itself in the matter in accordance with
the normal practice of States or, as the case may be, of international
organizations and in good faith. | (4) 此种违反情事如对按照国家和视情况按照国际组织的通常惯例善意地对待此事的任何国家或任何国际组织客观明显时，即为“明显”。 |
| Guideline 12 Agreement to provisional
application with limitations deriving from internal law of States and rules
of international organizations | 准则12 关于在源自各国国内法和国际组织规则的限制之下暂时适用的协议 |
| The present draft guidelines are without
prejudice to the right of a State or an international organization to agree
in the treaty itself or otherwise to the provisional application of the
treaty or a part of the treaty with limitations deriving from the internal
law of the State or from the rules of the organization. | 本准则草案不妨碍一国或一国际组织在条约中或以其他方式同意在源自该国国内法或该组织规则的限制之下暂时适用条约或条约之一部分的权利。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Draft guideline 12 relates to the
limitations of States and international organizations that could derive from
their internal law and rules when agreeing to the provisional application of
a treaty or a part of a treaty. | (1) 准则草案12涉及各国和国际组织在同意暂时适用条约或条约之一部分时可能受到的源自其国内法和内部规则的限制。 |
| It acknowledges that such limitations may
exist and, consequently, recognizes the right of States and international
organizations to agree to provisional application subject to limitations that
derive from internal law or rules of the organizations, and reflecting them
in their consent to provisionally apply a treaty or a part of a treaty. | 本条草案承认这类限制可能存在，进而确认各国和国际组织有权同意在遵守源自国内法或组织规则的限制的情况下暂时适用，并在同意暂时适用条约或条约之一部分时反映这些限制。 |
| (2) Notwithstanding the fact that the
provisional application of a treaty or part of a treaty may be subject to
limitations, the present draft guideline recognizes the flexibility of a
State or an international organization to agree to the provisional
application of a treaty or a part of a treaty in such a manner as to
guarantee that such an agreement conforms with the limitations deriving from
their respective internal provisions. | (2) 虽然暂时适用条约或条约之一部分可能受到限制，但本条准则草案承认一国或一国际组织有这种灵活性：即在同意暂时适用一项条约或条约之一部分时，可确保此种同意符合源自其内部规定的限制。 |
| For example, the present draft guideline
provides for the possibility that the treaty may expressly refer to the
internal law of the State or the rules of the international organization and
make such provisional application conditional on the non-violation of the
internal law of the State or the rules of the organization. | 例如，本条准则草案规定了以下可能性：条约可明确提及国家的国内法或国际组织的规则，并使此种暂时适用以不违反国家国内法或国际组织的规则为条件。 |
| (3) The word “agreement” in the title of
the draft guideline reflects the consensual basis of the provisional
application of treaties, as well as the fact that provisional application
might not be possible at all under the internal law of States or the rules of
international organizations. | (3) 本条准则草案标题中的“协议”一词反映了暂时适用条约以相互同意为基础，并反映出也有可能暂时适用根据国内法或国际组织规则完全不可行。 |
| (4) The draft guideline should not be
interpreted as implying the need for a separate agreement on the
applicability of limitations deriving from the internal law of the State or
the rules of the international organization concerned. | (4) 本条准则草案不应被解释为它意味着需要有一项关于从有关国家的国内法或国际组织的规则中产生的限制的适用性的单独协定。 |
| The existence of any such limitations
deriving from internal law needs only to be sufficiently clear in the treaty
itself, the separate treaty or in any other form of agreement to
provisionally apply a treaty or a part of a treaty. | 任何此种从国内法产生的限制的存在，只要在条约本身、单独的条约或在关于暂时适用条约或条约之一部分的任何其他形式协议中足够明显即可。 |
| Chapter VIII Peremptory norms of general
international law (jus cogens) | 第八章 一般国际法强制性规范(强行法) |
| A. Introduction | A. 导言 |
| 91. At its sixty-seventh session (2015),
the Commission decided to include the topic “Jus cogens” in its programme of
work and appointed Mr. Dire Tladi as Special Rapporteur for the topic. | 91. 委员会第六十七届会议(2015年)决定将“强行法”专题列入工作方案，并任命迪雷·特拉迪先生为专题特别报告员。 |
| The General Assembly subsequently, in its
resolution 70/236 of 23 December 2015, took note of the decision of the
Commission to include the topic in its programme of work. | 大会随后在2015年12月23日第70/236号决议中注意到委员会决定将此专题列入工作方案。 |
| 92. At its sixty-eighth session (2016)
and sixty-ninth session (2017), the Commission considered the first and
second reports of the Special Rapporteur, respectively. | 92. 委员会第六十八届会议(2016年)和第六十九届会议(2017年)分别审议了特别报告员的第一和第二次报告。 |
| Following the debates on those reports,
the Commission decided to refer the draft conclusions contained in those
reports to the Drafting Committee. | 对报告进行讨论后，委员会决定将其中所载的结论草案转交草委员会。 |
| The Commission heard interim reports from
the Chairs of the Drafting Committee on peremptory norms of general
international law (jus cogens) containing the draft conclusions provisionally
adopted by the Drafting Committee at the sixty-eighth and the sixty-ninth
sessions, respectively. | 委员会分别在第六十八届和第六十九届会议上听取了起草委员会主席关于一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的临时报告，其中载有起草委员会暂时通过的结论草案。 |
| 93. At its sixty-ninth session, following
a proposal by the Special Rapporteur in his second report, the Commission
decided to change the title of the topic from “Jus cogens” to “Peremptory
norms of general international law (jus cogens)”. | 93. 委员会第六十九届会议按照特别报告员第二次报告的建议，决定将专题的标题从“强行法”改为“一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)”。 |
| B. Consideration of the topic at the
present session | B. 本届会议审议此专题的情况 |
| 94. At the present session, the
Commission had before it the third report of the Special Rapporteur
(A/CN.4/714 and Corr.1), which considered the consequences and legal effects
of peremptory norms of general international (jus cogens). | 94. 委员会本届会议收到了特别报告员的第三次报告(A/CN.4/714和Corr.1)，这份报告审议了一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的后果和法律效力。 |
| On the basis of his analysis, the Special
Rapporteur proposed 13 draft conclusions. | 特别报告员以其分析为基础，提出了13项结论草案。 |
| 95. The Commission considered the third
report at its 3414th to 3421st, and 3425th meetings, on 30 May and 1 June
2018, and from 2 to 4 and on 9 July 2018. | 95. 委员会在2018年5月30日和6月1日及7月2日至4日和9日举行的第3414至第3421次和第3425次会议上，审议了第三次报告。 |
| 96. At its 3425th meeting, on 9 July
2018, the Commission referred draft conclusions 10 to 23, as contained in the
Special Rapporteur’s third report, to the Drafting Committee on the
understanding that draft conclusions 22 and 23 would be dealt with by means
of a “without prejudice” clause. | 96. 委员会在2018年7月9日举行的第3425次会议上，将特别报告员第三次报告所载的结论草案10至23 转交起草委员会，但有一项谅解，即结论草案22和23将以“不妨碍”条款的方式加以处理。 |
| 97. At its 3402nd meeting, on 14 May
2018, the Chair of the Drafting Committee presented an interim report of the
Drafting Committee on “Peremptory norms of general international law (jus
cogens)”, concerning draft conclusions 8 and 9 that it had provisionally
adopted at the seventieth session. | 97. 在2018年5月14日举行的第3402次会议上，起草委员会主席提交了起草委员会关于“一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)”的临时报告，涉及委员会第七十届会议暂时通过的结论草案8和9。 |
| At its 3434th meeting, on 20 July 2018,
the Chair of the Drafting Committee presented a further interim report of the
Drafting Committee, concerning draft conclusions 10 to 14 that it had
provisionally adopted at the seventieth session. | 在2018年7月20日举行的第3434次会议上，起草委员会主席提交了起草委员会的另一份临时报告，涉及委员会第七十届会议暂时通过的结论草案10至14。 |
| Both reports were presented for
information only, and are available on the website of the Commission. | 两份报告均仅供参考，可在委员会网站上查阅。 |
| 1. Introduction by the Special Rapporteur
of the third report | 1. 特别报告员介绍第三次报告 |
| 98. In providing a review of the debate
in the Sixth Committee, the Special Rapporteur recalled that, while States
had generally agreed with the criteria for the identification of norms of jus
cogens provisionally adopted by the Drafting Committee, a few had recommended
the inclusion of additional elements, such as non-derogation, fundamental
values of the international community, and practice. | 98. 特别报告员回顾了第六委员会的辩论，在此过程中指出，虽然各国已普遍同意了起草委员会暂时通过的强行法规范的识别标准，但也有少数国家建议加入一些其他要素，例如不可克减、国际社会的基本价值观和实践。 |
| He noted the call for greater clarity
concerning the concept of “acceptance and recognition”. | 他指出，有人呼吁对“接受和承认”的概念予以更明确的澄清。 |
| Many States had agreed that there should
be a “a very large majority” of States accepting and recognizing the
peremptory character of a norm. | 许多国家同意有关规范的强制性应得到“大多数”国家的接受和承认。 |
| Some States preferred a more stringent
qualifier that would not be seen just from the perspective of numbers but
also from the representative character of the group of States. | 一些国家倾向于采用更为严格的限定语，不仅考察接受和承认的国家的数量，还要考察这些国家是否具有代表性。 |
| He also recalled the divergence in views
concerning the sources of law that could form the basis of a peremptory norm,
but noted that there was near-universal agreement that customary
international law was the most common basis for jus cogens norms. | 特别报告员还指出，对于哪些法律渊源可构成强制性规范的基础，各国也存在不同意见，但他表示，各国已近乎普遍认可习惯国际法是强行法规范最常见的基础。 |
| 99. The Special Rapporteur then
introduced his proposed draft conclusions contained in section IV of the
third report. | 99. 特别报告员随后介绍了第三次报告第四节所载的拟议结论草案。 |
| He noted that draft conclusions 10, 11
and 12 were based on provisions of the Vienna Convention on the Law of
Treaties of 1969 (hereinafter, “1969 Vienna Convention”), with the exception
of paragraph 3 of draft conclusion 10, which provides that a treaty be
interpreted in a manner consistent with peremptory norms., The Special
Rapporteur considered this to be a necessary consequence of article 31, paragraph
3 (c), of the 1969 Vienna Convention requiring the relevant rules of
international law to be taken into account in the interpretation of treaties. | 他表示，结论草案10、11和12参照了1969年《维也纳条约法公约》(下称“1969年《维也纳公约》”)的条款，结论草案10第3段除外，该段规定条约的解释应符合强制性规范。 特别报告员认为这是1969年《维也纳公约》第三十一条第三款(c)项的必然结果，该项要求在解释条约时考虑国际法的相关规则。 |
| Moreover, he noted that there was a
significant amount of practice in support of the content of paragraph 3 of
draft conclusion 10. | 此外，特别报告员指出，有大量实践可以佐证结论草案10第3段的内容。 |
| 100. Draft conclusion 13 concerning the
effects of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) on
reservations to treaties was based principally on the guideline 4.4.3 of the
Guide to Practice on Reservations to Treaties, adopted by the Commission in
2011. | 100. 结论草案13述及一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)对条约保留的影响，主要参照了委员会于2011年通过的《对条约的保留实践指南》 指南4.4.3。 |
| 101. Draft conclusion 14 contained a
recommended procedure regarding settlement of disputes involving conflict
between a treaty and a norm of jus cogens. | 101. 结论草案14载有关于解决条约与强行法规范之间抵触所涉争端的建议程序。 |
| The Special Rapporteur recalled the
fundamental importance of article 66 of the 1969 Vienna Convention for the
application of articles 53 and 64 thereof. | 特别报告员表示，1969年《维也纳公约》第六十六条对其第五十三和第六十四条的适用具有至关重要的意义。 |
| Nonetheless, in his view it was difficult
to incorporate the procedure therein into a set of non-binding draft
conclusions. | 但在他看来，难以将第六十六条所载的程序纳入这套不具约束力的结论草案。 |
| Instead, he considered that his proposal
for draft conclusion 14 would, for cases in which article 66 of the 1969
Vienna Convention did not apply (e.g., because the States concerned were not
parties to the Convention), serve as encouragement for parties to submit
their disputes to judicial settlement, including by the International Court
of Justice. | 反之，他认为自己提出的结论草案14可在1969年《维也纳公约》第六十六条不适用(例如因为当事国没有加入《公约》而不适用)的情况下，鼓励各方将争端提交司法解决，包括提交国际法院解决。 |
| 102. As regards draft conclusion 15, the
Special Rapporteur noted that paragraph 1 was based on a number of decisions
of national courts in which jus cogens norms were held to prevail over the
rules of customary international law. | 102. 关于结论草案15, 特别报告员指出第1段参照了各国法院一系列认定强行法规范高于习惯国际法规则的裁决。 |
| In his view, such findings necessarily
implied that existing norms of jus cogens would invalidate customary
international law rules or prevent them from coming into being. | 在他看来，这种裁决结论必然意味着现有的强行法规范会使与之抵触的习惯国际法规则无效或无法产生。 |
| The second paragraph of draft conclusion
15, concerning the conflict of a customary international law rule with a new
jus cogens norm, was inspired by article 64 of the 1969 Vienna Convention,
and had been supported by States and by judgments of the European Court of
Justice. | 结论草案15第二段述及习惯国际法规则与新出现的强行法规范抵触的情况，该段受1969年《维也纳公约》第六十四条的启发，不仅得到了各国的支持，并有欧洲法院的判决为佐证。 |
| The Special Rapporteur further noted that
paragraph 3, concerning the non-application of the persistent objector rule
to jus cogens norms, was consistent with the universal nature of jus cogens
and had been accepted in State practice, including in the decisions of
national and regional courts. | 特别报告员还指出，关于一贯反对者规则对强行法规范不适用的第3段符合强行法的普遍性，已在国家实践中得到接受，包括在国内和区域法院的裁决中得到接受。 |
| 103. With regard to draft conclusion 16,
on the invalidity of a unilateral act in conflict with a norm of jus cogens,
the Special Rapporteur noted that the use of the phrase “is invalid” tracked
guiding principle 8 of the Guiding Principles applicable to unilateral
declarations of States capable of creating legal obligations, adopted by the
Commission in 2006. | 103. 结论草案16述及与强行法规范抵触的单方面行为无效的问题，关于这条草案，特别报告员指出，使用“无效”一词参考了委员会于2006年通过的《适用于能够产生法律义务的国家单方面声明的指导原则》中的指导原则8 。 |
| 104. Draft conclusion 17 concerned the binding
resolutions of international organizations. | 104. 结论草案17述及国际组织有约束力的决议。 |
| The Special Rapporteur noted that the
proposition, contained in the first paragraph, that binding resolutions of
international organizations did not establish binding obligations if they
conflicted with a norm of jus cogens, was supported by a significant amount
of literature and public statements by States maintaining that Security
Council resolutions were subject to norms of jus cogens, as well as by
decisions of domestic, regional and international courts. | 特别报告员指出，第一段主张国际组织具有约束力的决议如与强行法规范抵触，则不创设有约束力的义务，这一主张有大量文献和各国表示安全理事会决议要遵守强行法规范的公开声明为佐证，也得到了国内、区域和国际性法院裁决的支持。 |
| He also noted that, similar to paragraph
3 of draft conclusion 10, paragraph 2 of draft conclusion 17 contained an
interpretative presumption indicating that, to the extent possible,
resolutions of international organizations were to be interpreted in a manner
consistent with norms of jus cogens. | 特别报告员还表示，结论草案17第2段与结论草案10第3段类似，载有一项解释性推定，指出对国际组织的决议应尽可能以符合强行法规范的方式予以解释。 |
| Such assertion found support in
statements by States in various contexts and in the judgments of the European
Court of Justice. | 不同场合下的各国声明和欧洲法院的判决都支持这种主张。 |
| 105. As regards draft conclusion 18, the
Special Rapporteur maintained that it was virtually universally accepted that
jus cogens norms established erga omnes obligations. | 105. 关于结论草案18，特别报告员指出，强行法规范创设普遍义务这一点已几乎得到普遍公认。 |
| 106. Draft conclusions 19, 20 and 21
concerned aspects of international responsibility. | 106. 结论草案19、20和21述及国际责任的多个方面。 |
| Draft conclusion 19, drawn from draft
article 26 of the draft articles on responsibility of States for
internationally wrongful acts, adopted in 2001 (hereinafter, “articles on
State responsibility”), confirmed in paragraph 1 that the circumstances
precluding wrongfulness under general international law did not apply to
breaches of obligations arising from jus cogens norms. | 结论草案19参考了2001年通过的国家对国际不法行为的责任条款草案 (下称“国家责任条款”)第26条草案，该草案第1段确认，一般国际法之下解除不法性的情况不适用于违反强行法规范所产生义务的行为。 |
| The second paragraph sought to prevent
responsibility arising retroactively where a norm of jus cogens emerged
subsequent to the commission of an act in breach of that norm. | 第2段则旨在防止对在强行法规范产生之前发生的违反该规范的行为追溯追责。 |
| 107. Draft conclusion 20 concerned the
duty to cooperate to bring to an end through lawful means any serious breach
of a jus cogens norm. | 107. 结论草案20述及进行合作以通过合法手段制止任何严重违反强行法规范的行为的义务。 |
| The first paragraph was based on
paragraph 1 of draft article 41 of the articles on State responsibility. | 第1段参照了国家责任条款第41条草案第1款。 |
| The duty to cooperate was a
well-established principle of international law. It had been codified by the
Commission in the draft articles on the protection of persons in the event of
disasters, adopted in 2016, and had found support in the Wall Advisory Opinion
of the International Court of Justice and the La Cantuta case in the
Inter-American Court of Human Rights. | 合作义务是一项已明确确立的国际法原则，已明文写入委员会2016年通过的发生灾害时的人员保护条款草案，并在国际法院隔离墙案咨询意见
和美洲人权法院La Cantuta案 中获得了支持。 |
| 108. Draft conclusion 21, providing for a
duty not to recognize as lawful a situation created by a breach of a jus
cogens norm and not to give aid or assistance in the maintenance of such a
situation, was based on paragraph 2 of draft article 41 of the articles on
State responsibility. | 108. 结论草案21规定各国有义务不承认违反强行法规范所致状况的合法性，也有义务不援助或协助以维持这种状况，该项草案参照了国家责任条款第41条草案第2款。 |
| The Commission, in 2001, had recognized
that the duty enjoyed a customary international law status, as confirmed by
the International Court, in the Namibia and the Wall Advisory Opinions, as
well as in resolutions of the Security Council and the General Assembly. | 委员会已于2001年承认这一义务具有习惯国际法地位，这一点在国际法院纳米比亚案
和隔离墙案的咨询意见中得到确认，安全理事会和大会的决议也予以了证实。 |
| He also pointed out that, differing from
draft conclusion 20, draft conclusion 21 was not limited to “serious” breaches,
since the duty of non-recognition or non-assistance was based on the
peremptoriness of the norm and not the seriousness of its breach. | 特别报告员还指出，结论草案21与结论草案20不同，并不限于“严重”违反行为，因为不承认或不协助的义务的基础是所涉规范的强制性，而非违反规范的行为的严重性。 |
| He noted, in that regard, that neither
the Namibia or the Wall Advisory Opinions, had specified the seriousness as a
threshold in the case of the duty not to recognize or give assistance. | 他指出，在这方面，纳米比亚案和隔离墙案的咨询意见均未将严重性列为产生不承认或不协助义务的门槛。 |
| Moreover, since that duty, unlike the
duty to cooperate, did not require positive conduct, and was thus less
onerous, the lowered threshold was justified. | 此外，这一义务与合作义务不同，并不要求直接作为，义务条件较不繁苛，因此采用较低门槛是合理的。 |
| 109. Draft conclusion 22, on the
establishment of jurisdiction over crimes prohibited by norms of jus cogens,
was based on draft article 7 of the draft articles on crimes against
humanity, adopted by the Commission on first reading in 2017, albeit in a
more simplified formulation. | 109. 结论草案22述及对强行法规范所禁止的犯罪确立管辖权的问题，参照了委员会于2017年一读通过的关于危害人类罪的条款草案 第7条草案，但行文更加简略。 |
| Paragraph 2 adopted the same approach to
the question of universal jurisdiction as had been done in paragraph 3 of
draft article 7, as the practice in this area was less settled. | 第2段在述及普遍管辖权问题时采取了与第7条草案第3款相同的方法，因为这方面的实践不太确定。 |
| 110. Draft conclusion 23 concerned the
irrelevance of official position and the non-applicability of immunity
ratione materiae. | 110. 结论草案23述及公职的无关性以及不适用属事豁免的问题。 |
| Paragraph 1, providing that a person’s
official capacity did not constitute a ground excluding responsibility, was
inspired by draft article 6, paragraph 3, of the draft articles on crimes
against humanity adopted on first reading in 2017, and was generally accepted
as being part of customary international law. | 第1段规定担任公职不构成排除责任的理由，参考了2017年一读通过的关于危害人类罪的条款草案第6条草案第3款，已被普遍公认为习惯国际法的一部分。 |
| Paragraph 2, providing for the
non-applicability of immunity ratione materiae in the case of offences
prohibited by jus cogens norms, was based principally on draft article 7 of
the draft articles on the immunity of State officials from foreign criminal
jurisdiction, adopted provisionally by the Commission in 2017. | 第2段规定，对强行法规范所禁止的罪行，不适用属事豁免，该段主要参照了委员会于2017年暂时通过的国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免条款草案 第7条草案。 |
| Despite the criticism that draft
provision had received, including that there existed State practice
contradicting the exception, the Special Rapporteur pointed out that such
contradictory practice was typically based on cases concerning civil
proceedings and proceedings against States, which were not meant to serve as
precedent for immunities in a criminal context, as suggested by several
judicial decisions, including that of the International Court of Justice in
the Jurisdictional Immunities of the State (Germany v. Italy: Greece
intervening) case. | 虽然这项规定草案受到了一些批评，包括有国家实践与之相悖，但特别报告员指出，与之相悖的实践通常涉及民事诉讼和针对国家的诉讼，从几项司法裁决来看，包括从国际法院在国家的管辖豁免(德国诉意大利：希腊参加诉讼)案中的裁决来看，此类诉讼并不会被视为刑事豁免的判例。 |
| 2. Summary of debate | 2. 辩论摘要 |
| (a) General comments | (a) 一般评论 |
| 111. Members generally welcomed the third
report on peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 111. 委员们普遍对关于一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的第三次报告表示欢迎。 |
| Several members commended the Special
Rapporteur for attempting to address all the possible consequences of jus
cogens, beyond the law of treaties and that of State responsibility, the two
main areas in which the Commission had previously made extensive codification
efforts. | 对于特别报告员突破条约法和国家责任法这两个委员会先前已开展广泛编纂工作的领域、述及强行法所有可能后果的尝试，几位委员表示称赞。 |
| Some members noted that the consequences
of jus cogens, for example, for international criminal law, customary
international law and Security Council resolutions, presented important
practical problems and generated debate in the academic literature, and that
the divergent views in case law should not prevent the Commission from
dealing with those issues. | 一些委员指出，强行法的后果，例如对国际刑法、习惯国际法和安全理事会决议的后果，已产生了重要的实践问题，并在学术文献中引发了讨论，判例法方面的多方不同意见不应妨碍委员会处理这些问题。 |
| 112. Several members supported the
Special Rapporteur’s practical approach to the examination of the topic, as
opposed to taking a doctrinal or excessively theoretical approach. | 112. 特别报告员在研究这一专题时采取了务实的方法，而没有从学说着手或过于关注理论，对此几位委员表示支持。 |
| The challenge posed by the lack of
practice and the relative complexity of the political and moral elements
involved was further pointed to. | 还有人指出，这一专题缺少相关实践，涉及的政治和道德因素也相对复杂，给有关工作带来了挑战。 |
| It was emphasized that the Commission
should take a cautious approach and examine all aspects of the consequences
of jus cogens in a balanced manner and on the basis of the existing law and
established practice. | 有人强调，委员会应采取谨慎的方法，以现行法律和既定惯例为基础，均衡地研究强行法后果的所有方面。 |
| It was suggested that the characteristics
of jus cogens were intertwined with the consequences of their breach and the
two should be considered together. | 有人表示，强行法的各项特征与违背强行法的后果密不可分，应将二者一同审议。 |
| The concern was expressed that the
Special Rapporteur was attaching legal significance to what were essentially
descriptive elements, such as non-derogability, which was a criterion for
identification of jus cogens norms, not a legal consequence thereof. | 有人关切地指出，特别报告员对本质上为描述性的要素赋予了法律意义，例如不可克减，它是强行法规范的识别标准，而不是强行法规范的法律后果。 |
| It was suggested that a study of the
negotiating history of articles 53, 64 and 66 (a) and other relevant
provisions of the 1969 Vienna Convention and the Vienna Convention on the Law
of Treaties between States and International Organizations or between
International Organizations of 1986 be undertaken. | 有人建议研究1969年《维也纳公约》和1986年《关于国家和国际组织间或国际组织相互间条约法的维也纳公约》第五十三条、第六十四条、第六十六条(a)款和其他相关条款的谈判历史。 |
| 113. Satisfaction was expressed with the
fact that most of the draft conclusions proposed by the Special Rapporteur
were based on relevant provisions of the 1969 Vienna Convention, and other
instruments adopted by the Commission. | 113. 委员们表示满意的是，特别报告员提出的大多数结论草案都参照了1969年《维也纳公约》和委员会通过的其他文书的相关规定。 |
| The lack of a parallel structure in the
draft conclusions dealing with the consequences of conflict with jus cogens
for various sources of international law was, however, questioned. | 但有人质疑地指出，述及国际法各种渊源与强行法抵触的后果的结论草案并未参照上述规定。 |
| Some members would prefer that the same
structure as that in articles 53 and 64 of the 1969 Vienna Convention be
applied to the consequences of jus cogens for sources of international law
other than treaties. | 一些委员倾向于在述及强行法对条约之外的国际法渊源的后果时采用与1969年《维也纳公约》第五十三条和第六十四条相同的结构。 |
| They further stressed the need to set out
procedures for ascertaining the invalidity of a particular rule of
international law owing to conflict with jus cogens. | 他们强调，需要制定有关程序，用于查证某一特定的国际法规则是否与强行法抵触而无效。 |
| 114. Several members agreed that the
draft conclusions could be grouped into different parts according to their
context and be organized in a coherent, concise and effective manner, closely
following the structure of the existing instruments. | 114. 几位委员同意，可以按照背景将结论草案分为几组，以连贯、简明和有效的方式予以组织排列，紧密贴合现有文书的结构。 |
| The view was expressed that the
Commission should reconsider the appropriateness of having draft
“conclusions” as the outcome of its consideration of the topic. | 有人表示，委员会应重新考虑将“结论”草案作为其审议该专题的成果是否合适。 |
| 115. It was noted that the Special
Rapporteur had not proposed a draft conclusion relating to general principles
of law, which implied that a general principle of law in conflict with a jus
cogens norm may nevertheless be valid. | 115. 有人指出，特别报告员没有提出一项关于一般法律原则的结论草案，这意味着与强行法规范抵触的一般法律原则仍可能有效。 |
| Some members supported such non-inclusion
on the ground that no conflict could possibly be conceived of in the case of
general principles of law. | 一些委员支持不将一般法律原则写入结论草案，理由是一般法律原则不可能与强行法发生抵触。 |
| The view was also expressed that the
Commission should strive to bring new elements to the topic, beyond those of
its previous work. | 还有人表示，除了委员会过往工作涉及的要素之外，委员会还应将新的要素引入该专题。 |
| 116. The view was expressed that,
throughout the draft conclusions, the use of terms such as “consequences”,
“legal effects”, “void”, “invalid” and others should be consistent with the
usage in existing instruments. | 116. 有人表示，贯穿整套结论草案，“后果”、“法律效力”、“无效”(void)、“无效”(invalid)等术语的使用应与现有文书的用法一致。 |
| It was suggested that the notion of
“conflict” used in the draft conclusions should be clarified to provide
guidance or criteria to States when deciding whether a treaty or act was, as
a matter of law, in conflict with a norm of jus cogens. | 有人建议，应澄清结论草案中使用的“抵触”这一概念，以便在决定一项条约或行为在法律上是否与强行法规范抵触时向各国提供指导或标准。 |
| (b) Specific comments on the draft
conclusions | (b) 对结论草案的具体评论 |
| (i) Draft conclusion 10 | (一) 结论草案10 |
| 117. Some members noted that the first
sentence of paragraph 1 replicated article 53 of the 1969 Vienna Convention,
and suggested that the second sentence, providing that treaties in conflict
with jus cogens did not create any rights or obligations, be further
clarified in the commentary. | 117. 一些委员指出第1段第一句重复了1969年《维也纳公约》第五十三条，并建议在评注中对第二句作进一步说明，该句规定，与强行法抵触的条约不产生任何权利或义务。 |
| It was also suggested that the second
sentence more closely track the formulation of article 71, paragraph 2 (a),
of the Convention. | 还有人建议，第二句的行文应更紧密地贴合《公约》第七十一条第二款(a)项。 |
| It was also suggested that the second
sentence was superfluous. | 还有人认为第二句是多余的。 |
| 118. Recognizing that direct conflict of
treaties with jus cogens was extremely rare, some members supported the
inclusion of paragraph 3, providing that treaties should be interpreted in a
manner consistent with jus cogens norms, as interpretative guidance for
States. | 118. 一些委员承认条约与强行法直接抵触的情况极为罕见，支持在该项结论草案中加入第3段，规定应以符合强行法规范的方式解释条约，以此作为对各国的解释指导。 |
| It was suggested that the commentary clarify
that the provision should not override the rules of interpretation in the
1969 Vienna Convention and customary international law. | 有人建议在评注中表明这一规定不应凌驾于1969年《维也纳公约》和习惯国际法中的解释规则之上。 |
| The view was expressed that the issue of
interpretation would presumably be pertinent to all sources of international
law and was better addressed in a separate draft conclusion. | 有人表示，解释问题很可能关乎于国际法的所有渊源，最好在一项单独的结论草案中予以论述。 |
| Several drafting suggestions aimed at
improving the clarity of the provision were made. | 还有人提出了几项旨在使该项规定更加明晰的起草建议。 |
| (ii) Draft conclusion 11 | (二) 结论草案11 |
| 119. Some members welcomed paragraph 1,
which confirmed that no part of a treaty, which at the time of its conclusion
was in conflict with a jus cogens norm, could be separated. | 119. 一些委员对第1段表示欢迎，该段确认，在缔结时就与强行法规范抵触的条约的任何一部分均不可分离。 |
| A preference was expressed for a
structure whereby the separability approach contained in paragraph 2 would be
presented as the general rule, with non-severability (currently in paragraph
1) presented as a special rule applicable to the case of article 53 of the
1969 Vienna Convention. | 有人表示，宜在结构上将第2段所载的可分离性列为一项一般规则，而将(现载于第1段的)不可分割性列为适用于1969年《维也纳公约》第五十三条所述情形的一项特殊规则。 |
| A more detailed consideration of the
justification for applying different legal consequences to such situations
was called for. | 有人呼吁对此种情形适用不同法律后果的依据予以更详细的审议。 |
| The view was expressed that the draft
conclusion could also cover acts of international organizations that create
obligations for States. | 还有人表示，该项结论草案还可涵盖创设国家义务的国际组织行为。 |
| It was further suggested that paragraph 1
be redrafted to be consistent with paragraph 1 of draft conclusion 10, and
that it should highlight the absoluteness of non-separability of treaty
provisions in conflict with existing jus cogens norms. | 另外有人建议，可重写第1段，使之与结论草案10第1段一致，并且该段应当着重指出，与现有强行法规范抵触的条约条款绝对不可分离。 |
| (iii) Draft conclusion 12 | (三) 结论草案12 |
| 120. The view was expressed that the
phrase “any act performed in reliance of the provision of the treaty”, at the
end paragraph 1 of draft conclusion 12, was too broad to describe the
relationship between the treaty and the act and could be replaced by “any act
performed as a result of the implementation of the treaty”. | 120. 有人认为，结论草案12第1段段末“依据…条约条款实施的任何行为”一语过于宽泛，无法描述条约与行为之间的关系，可改为“因执行条约而实施的任何行为”。 |
| It was also suggested that the qualifier
“as far as possible”, which appeared in article 71 of the 1969 Vienna
Convention, be included in paragraph 1 to ensure the practicability of the
provision, or that an explanation be included in the commentaries as to why
the formulation of the provision differed slightly from article 71. | 还有人建议，应在第1段中仿照1969年《维也纳公约》第七十一条加入“尽量”这一限定语，以确保该项规定的实用性，或者，应在评注中解释为什么该段的行文与第七十一条略有不同。 |
| It was further suggested that a new
paragraph be inserted between paragraphs 1 and 2 tracking paragraph 1 (b) of
article 71, to the effect that States must also bring their mutual relations
into conformity with jus cogens. | 还有人建议，应在第1和第2段之间新增一段，参照第七十一条第一款(b)项，规定各国还应使其相互关系符合强行法。 |
| A further suggestion was to align the
formulation of paragraph 2 with that of article 71, paragraph 2 (b), in
particular by including a reference to the “maintenance” of rights,
obligations or situations. | 另外有人建议第2段行文与第七十一条第二款(b)项一致，特别是应提到权利、义务或情势的“维持”。 |
| The view was expressed that the draft
conclusion should also have included the provisions of articles 69 and 70 of
the 1969 Vienna Convention, dealing with invalidity or termination of
treaties in all situations, including on account of conflict with jus cogens. | 有人认为，本应在该项结论草案中加入1969年《维也纳公约》第六十九和第七十条的条文，述及所有情势下的条约无效或终止的问题，包括因与强行法抵触而无效或终止的情况。 |
| 121. Since draft conclusion 12 dealt with
the consequences of invalidity or termination of a treaty, it was also
suggested that the provision was better placed after draft conclusion 14. | 121. 由于结论草案12涉及条约无效或终止的后果，还有人建议，最好将该项规定放在结论草案14之后。 |
| (iv) Draft conclusion 13 | (四) 结论草案13 |
| 122. The view was expressed that
paragraph 2 of draft conclusion 13 was of relevance to the field of human
rights treaties, and reference was made to the general comment of the Human
Rights Committee on reservations to the International Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights, to the effect that reservations contrary to peremptory
norms in such a human rights treaty would not be compatible with its object
and purpose. | 122. 有人认为结论草案13第2段与人权条约领域相关，并提到了人权事务委员会关于对《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》的保留的一般性意见，指出对这一人权条约的保留如果违反强制性规范则不符合其目标和宗旨。 |
| The view was expressed that the very
existence of norms of jus cogens in a treaty did not mean that any
reservation to the treaty, for example a reservation to a compromissory
clause, was invalid. | 还有人认为，条约中存在强行法规范本身并不意味着对该条约的任何保留(例如对仲裁条款的保留)均属于无效。 |
| It was also suggested that the provision
be located elsewhere in order to avoid any misunderstanding that disputes
over reservations to a treaty were also subject to the recommended judicial
settlement procedure contained in draft conclusion 14. | 还有人建议将这项规定移至其他位置，以免有人误认为关于条约保留的争端也要遵循结论草案14所载的建议的司法解决程序。 |
| (v) Draft conclusion 14 | (五) 结论草案14 |
| 123. Support was expressed for the
proposed “recommended dispute settlement procedure”, which was aimed at
facilitating a final decision on the invalidity of a treaty based on conflict
with jus cogens. | 123. 有人表示支持“解决争端的建议程序”，该程序旨在提供便利，帮助最终决定有关条约是否因与强行法抵触而无效。 |
| While some members were of the view that
the disputes to be submitted to the International Court of Justice under the
provisions should be limited to disputes concerning the invalidity of a
treaty on account of conflict with norms of jus cogens, other members
supported the extension of the procedure to disputes concerning the existence
of a conflict between a treaty and a norm of jus cogens, as well as the
consequences of invalidity. | 有些委员认为，可根据该项规定提交国际法院的争端应仅限于涉及条约因与强行法规范抵触而无效的争端，但其他委员会支持扩大该程序的适用范围，也涵盖关于条约是否与强行法规范抵触的争端，以及关于无效后果的争端。 |
| It was recalled that, while the
Commission’s 1966 draft articles had only included a reference to all means
of dispute settlement, the States participating in the United Nations
Conference on the Law of Treaties (the Vienna Conference) had deliberately
included a special mechanism with respect to disputes concerning jus cogens,
namely what became article 66, subparagraph (a), of the 1969 Vienna
Convention. | 有人指出，委员会1966年的条款草案仅仅提到所有争端解决手段，但参加联合国条约法会议(维也纳会议)的国家有意设立了一个处理强行法相关争端的特殊机制，即后来的1969年《维也纳公约》第六十六条(a)项。 |
| At the same time, some members questioned
how the strong reluctance by States to accept judicial settlement in such
circumstances, as evidenced by the significant number of reservations to
article 66 of the Convention, could be overcome. | 与此同时，一些委员提出不少国家对《公约》第六十六条提出了保留，说明各国在这种情况下颇不愿意接受司法解决，询问如何才能克服这一问题。 |
| The concern was also expressed that the
resort to arbitration entailed a higher risk of inconsistency, which could
run counter to the aim of consolidating the international legal system and
achieving legal certainty. | 还有人担心诉诸仲裁会提高不一致风险，从而可能与统一国际法律体系和实现法律确定的目标背道而驰。 |
| It was also queried whether the decision
of the International Court of Justice, or of an arbitral tribunal, would lead
to the invalidation or termination of the treaty, or whether it would be
merely declaratory. | 还有人询问，国际法院或某个仲裁法庭的决定是会导致条约无效或终止，还是仅仅具有宣告意义。 |
| 124. Some members considered that the
characterization of the procedure as being “recommended” had the effect of
diluting the legally binding obligation on States Parties to the 1969 Vienna
Convention to submit their disputes concerning the invalidity of a treaty
owing to conflict with norms of jus cogens to the International Court of
Justice. | 124. 一些委员认为，将该程序称为“建议”程序，会削弱1969年《维也纳公约》缔约国承担的有法律约束力的义务，即将其涉及条约因与强行法规范抵触而无效的争端提交国际法院的义务。 |
| Such an outcome could risk leaving no
definitive process for determining the invalidity of a treaty conflicting
with jus cogens, and would create precisely the problem that States had
sought to avoid when they included article 66 in the 1969 Vienna Convention. | 这种结果可能导致没有最终程序来确定条约是否与强行法抵触，从而恰恰可能产生各国当初将第六十六条纳入1969年《维也纳公约》所旨在避免的问题。 |
| It was suggested, instead, that a
unilateral assertion by a State as to the invalidity of a treaty due to its
conflict with jus cogens could be the subject of another procedure, such as
that contained in article 65 of the 1969 Vienna Convention; | 反之，有人建议，如果一国单方面宣称某项条约因与强行法抵触而无效，可以由另一项程序处理，例如1969年《维也纳公约》第六十五条所载的程序； |
| even if a national or regional court had
already declared that a treaty violated a norm of jus cogens. | 即便国内或区域法院已宣布条约违反强行法规范，也可照此处理。 |
| In this connection, it was pointed out
that the International Court of Justice had noted that articles 65 to 67 of
the 1969 Vienna Convention “if not codifying customary law, at least
generally reflect customary international law and contain certain procedural
principles which are based on an obligation to act in good faith”. | 在这方面，有人提到，国际法院曾指出，1969年《维也纳公约》第六十五至第六十七条“即使没有编纂习惯法，至少也总体反映了习惯国际法，并载有某些以诚信行事义务为基础的程序原则”。 |
| It was also suggested that State consent
to the jurisdiction of the International Court was not necessary when it came
to a dispute regarding jus cogens. | 还有人建议，对于涉及强行法的争端，不一定需要国家同意国际法院的管辖权。 |
| In terms of another proposal, a new
paragraph could be added providing for the resort to the advisory
jurisdiction of the International Court or to other amicable procedures for
dispute settlement. | 另一项建议是，可新增一段，规定可诉诸国际法院的咨询管辖权或其他友好的争端解决程序。 |
| 125. Other members questioned the
necessity of including the draft conclusion in its entirety, since it was
ultimately for States to choose the appropriate procedure for the resolution
of disputes, and there was no hierarchy per se between the different methods
listed in Article 33 of the Charter of the United Nations. | 125. 其他委员对整项结论草案的必要性提出了质疑，因为归根结底只有各国才能选择解决争端的适当程序，而《联合国宪章》第三十三条所列的不同方法之间并没有本质上的高低之分。 |
| The view was also expressed that the
provision did not correspond with the approach of the Commission when
developing draft conclusions, namely to reflect existing international law,
since the Special Rapporteur had himself acknowledged that the provision did
not reflect existing international law and had been included only as a
recommended procedure. | 还有人认为，委员会拟订结论草案的方针是结论草案要反映现行国际法，而该项规定并不符合这一方针，特别报告员自己已经承认，该项规定并不反映现行国际法，只是作为一种建议的程序列入草案。 |
| (vi) Draft conclusion 15 | (六) 结论草案15 |
| 126. Support was expressed for the first
two paragraphs concerning the consequences of jus cogens for customary international
law, which followed the same approach as that applied to treaty law. | 126. 委员们表示支持关于强行法对习惯国际法影响的头两段，这两段采用的方法与述及条约法时采用的方法相同。 |
| At the same time, the view was expressed
that the Commission should not circumvent the question of what made jus
cogens norms different from rules of customary international law, since State
consent was not the exclusive basis for jus cogens. | 与此同时，有人认为，鉴于国家同意并不是强行法的唯一依据，委员会不应回避以下问题，即是什么使强行法规范有别于习惯国际法？ |
| 127. In terms of proposals for
modifications, it was recalled that draft conclusions 3 and 5, as
provisionally adopted by the Drafting Committee, had confirmed that a norm of
jus cogens could be modified by a subsequent norm having the same character,
and that customary international law was the most common basis for a norm of
jus cogens, respectively. | 127. 有人提出修改意见，指出起草委员会暂时通过的结论草案3和5已经分别确认，强行法规范可被嗣后具有同样性质的规范所更改，而习惯国际法是形成强行法规范的最常见的基础。 |
| Accordingly, it was suggested that draft
conclusion 15 could indicate the possibility that a rule of customary
international law in conflict with a norm of jus cogens may still arise, so
long as that new customary rule was accepted and recognized as a norm from
which no derogation was permitted. | 据此建议，结论草案15应表明，与强行法规范抵触的习惯国际法规则仍然可能产生，前提是这项新的习惯规则必须被接受和承认为不容克减的规范。 |
| Another suggestion was to include the
words “not of a jus cogens character” in paragraph 1, as had been done in
paragraph 2, in order to maintain the possibility of a replacement of one
norm of jus cogens by another. | 另一项建议是仿照第2段在第1段中加入“不具有强行法性质的”几个字，以保留由新强行法规范替代旧规范的可能性。 |
| It was suggested that the first paragraph
be amended to indicate that practice and opinio juris cannot give rise to a
norm of customary law if they conflict with jus cogens, instead of assuming
that the rule of customary law already exists at the time of the conflict. | 还有人建议修改第1段，表明实践和法律确信如果与强行法抵触则不能产生习惯法规则，而不是假定在抵触发生时就已经存在习惯法规则。 |
| 128. Several members expressed their
satisfaction with paragraph 3, which excluded the applicability of the
persistent objector rule with regard to norms of jus cogens, which, in their
view, accorded with the without prejudice clause inserted in the draft
conclusions on identification of customary international law, adopted by the
Commission on second reading, at the present session. | 128. 第3段规定一贯反对者规则对强行法规范不适用，几位委员对此表示满意，认为这符合委员会本届会议二读通过的关于习惯国际法的识别的结论草案中的“不妨碍”条款。 |
| It was pointed out that a norm of jus
cogens implied acceptance and recognition by a very large majority of States
representing all regions and all legal systems. | 有人指出，一项规范成为强行法规范，就意味着得到了代表所有区域和所有法律制度的大多数国家的接受和承认。 |
| 129. Nonetheless, some members were of
the view that the proposed paragraph 3 did not fully reflect the complexity
of the issue, which concerned the relationship between the superior status of
jus cogens norms and the principle of State consent. | 129. 但仍有一些委员认为，拟议的第3段没有充分反映这一问题的复杂性，问题的关键在于强行法规范的优先地位与国家同意原则之间的关系。 |
| The question was raised as to whether the
status of a persistent objection, recognized at the stage of the formation of
a rule of customary international law, should be denied if the customary rule
subsequently attained the status of jus cogens. | 有人询问，如果某项习惯国际法规则后来获得强行法地位，那么是否应当剥夺在这项习惯规则的形成阶段确认的一贯反对地位。 |
| It was also suggested that there be
further consideration given to the distinction between objections to an
existing norm of jus cogens and objections raised during the formation of a
norm of jus cogens. | 还有人建议，应进一步审议对强行法现有规范的反对与在强行法规范形成过程中提出的反对之间的区别。 |
| Another suggestion was that the question
of persistent objection could be dealt with in the commentaries. | 另一项建议是，可将一贯反对的问题放到评注中论述。 |
| (vii) Draft conclusion 16 | (七) 结论草案16 |
| 130. Several members emphasized the need
to clarify the meaning of the term “unilateral act”, as presented in the
draft conclusion, for example by instead using the term “unilateral
commitments”, in order to emphasize that the draft conclusion related only to
formal unilateral acts that created legal obligations. | 130. 几位委员强调，有必要澄清结论草案中“单方面行为”一语的含义，例如可改为“单方面承诺”，以强调该项结论草案仅涉及产生法律义务的正式单方面行为。 |
| A suggestion was made to classify
unilateral acts into three categories. | 有人建议将单方面行为分为三类。 |
| It was queried whether the draft
conclusion should also apply to international organizations. | 有人询问，该项结论草案是否也应适用于国际组织。 |
| It was also suggested that the
commentaries could clarify the distinction between unilateral acts and
reservations. | 还有人建议，可在评注中澄清单方面行为与保留之间的区别。 |
| (viii) Draft conclusion 17 | (八) 结论草案17 |
| 131. Several members concurred with the
position taken in draft conclusion 17 that binding obligations derived from
resolutions of international organizations, including Security Council
resolutions, should be invalid if they run counter to jus cogens norms. | 131. 一些委员同意结论草案17采取的立场，即包括安全理事会决议在内的国际组织决议所创设的具有约束力的义务如果违反强行法规范，就应当无效。 |
| The view was expressed that the draft
conclusions should address all resolutions of international organizations,
including General Assembly resolutions concerning the maintenance of peace
and security adopted in cases where the Security Council was unable to take a
decision. | 有人认为，结论草案应述及所有国际组织决议，包括大会在安全理事会无法作出决定的情况下通过的关于维护和平与安全的决议。 |
| It was also noted that other acts of
international organizations, such as the regulations, directives and
decisions taken by the European Union or acts by an intergovernmental
conference, may also create legal obligations and should be addressed in the
draft conclusions. | 还有人指出，国际组织的其他行为，例如欧洲联盟的条例、指令和决定或某政府间会议的行为，也可能创设法律义务，应在结论草案中予以述及。 |
| Notwithstanding the remoteness of the
possibility of a direct conflict between a Security Council resolution and a
jus cogens norm, some members still considered it important to specify
Security Council resolutions. | 虽然安全理事会决议与强行法规范直接抵触的可能性很小，但一些委员仍然认为应专门提到安全理事会的决议。 |
| They felt this to be necessary, given the
unique status of such resolutions and their legal consequences for States in
diverse fields of international law under Chapter VII of the Charter of the
United Nations and the application of Article 103 of the Charter of the
United Nations. | 他们考虑到这些决议根据《联合国宪章》第七章和因《联合国宪章》第一百零三条的适用而具有的独特地位以及在国际法各领域对各国的法律后果，认为这种专门提及是必要的。 |
| 132. Other members did not consider that
a specific reference to the resolutions of the Security Council would be
appropriate in the present project, which was aimed at formulating general
rules. | 132. 其他委员认为本项工作的目的是制定一般规则，不宜专门提到安全理事会的决议。 |
| Concern was expressed as to its potential
negative impact on the effectiveness of Security Council resolutions, and the
collective security system established by the Charter of the United Nations. | 有人关切地表示，这样做可能给安全理事会决议的效力和《联合国宪章》建立的集体安全制度带来负面影响。 |
| It was suggested that the draft
conclusion could instead focus on the role of jus cogens norms as a reference
for States when adopting resolutions within international organizations. | 有人建议，本结论草案应改变重点，述及强行法规范对各国在国际组织内通过决议时的参考作用。 |
| 133. It was suggested that the provision
should indicate that not only would the resolutions in violation of jus
cogens no longer be binding, but they would also be invalid. | 133. 有人建议，该项规定应表明，违反强行法的决议不仅不再具有约束力，而且也将无效。 |
| Other suggestions included: making it
clear that the consequences for international organizations should also
include the duty of non-recognition and all other legal consequences arising
from the conflict with a jus cogens norm, and that the possibility of
separability be considered in relation to the invalidity of resolutions of
international organizations, as in the case of the invalidity of treaties. | 其他建议包括：明确指出对国际组织的影响还应包括不予承认的义务以及与强行法规范抵触所产生的所有其他法律后果，并且同条约无效时一样，在国际组织决议无效时也应考虑可分离性的可能。 |
| (ix) Draft conclusion 18 | (九) 结论草案18 |
| 134. While supporting the proposition
that jus cogens norms established obligations erga omnes, some members
suggested that the commentaries should clarify the point that not all
obligations erga omnes arose from jus cogens norms. | 134. 一些委员虽然支持强行法规范确立普遍义务的主张，但建议评注应阐明并非所有普遍义务都源于强行法规范。 |
| A doubt was expressed as to whether it
was correct to say that jus cogens norms “establish” obligations erga omnes. | 有人质疑强行法规范“创设”普遍义务的说法是否正确。 |
| Some members suggested rephrasing the
provision to better reflect the relationship between jus cogens norms and
obligations erga omnes, as well as the consequences arising from them. | 一些委员建议改写该项规定，以更好地反映强行法规范与普遍义务之间的关系以及产生的后果。 |
| It was also suggested that the
formulation follow that of article 48, paragraph 1, of the articles on State
responsibility. | 还有人建议，该项规定应沿用关于国家责任的条款第48条第1款的措辞。 |
| Another view expressed was that the draft
conclusion should be limited to serious breaches of obligations arising under
jus cogens norms, in line with articles 40 and 41 of the articles on State
responsibility. | 另一种观点认为，结论草案应仅限于严重违反强行法规范所产生义务的情况，以符合关于国家责任的条款第40和第41条。 |
| The view was also expressed that the
relationship between jus cogens and obligation erga omnes was complex and
deserved more thorough and in-depth consideration, in order to present a
broader perspective on the issue and to reflect recent developments, such as
the discussion as to whether obligations erga omnes could arise from rules
relating to environmental protection. | 还有人认为，强行法与普遍义务之间关系复杂，需要进行更彻底和深入的审议，以便就这一问题提出更广阔的视角并反映最近的事态发展，例如反映关于普遍义务是否可能产生于环境保护相关规则的讨论。 |
| (x) Draft conclusion 19 | (十) 结论草案19 |
| 135. General agreement was expressed in
relation to draft conclusion 19, which was based on article 26 of the
articles on State responsibility. | 135. 普遍对结论草案19表示同意，该结论草案依据的是关于国家责任的条款第26条。 |
| At the same time, it was suggested that
the provision follow the formulation of article 26 more closely. | 同时，有人建议该项规定应当更加贴近第26条的措辞。 |
| It was also proposed that the draft
conclusions cover circumstances precluding wrongfulness in the context of the
responsibility of international organizations. | 还有人提议，该结论草案应包括在国际组织的责任范围内解除不法性的情况。 |
| The view was further expressed that the
draft conclusions could also cover countermeasures. | 另有人认为，该结论草案也可以涵盖反措施。 |
| (xi) Draft conclusion 20 | (十一) 结论草案20 |
| 136. It was suggested that draft
conclusion 20, paragraph 1, more closely follow the text of the Namibia
Advisory Opinion of the International Court of Justice by indicating that
States were “under obligation” to cooperate to bring to an end any serious breach
of jus cogens. | 136. 有人建议，结论草案20第1段应更贴近国际法院纳米比亚案咨询意见的案文，指出各国“有义务” 进行合作，以制止任何严重违反强行法的行为。 |
| The view was also expressed that it was
not clear whether a duty to cooperate reflected existing law, nor what
precise obligations would flow from such duty. | 还有人表示，不清楚合作义务是否反映了现行法律，也不明确这种合作义务将产生哪些具体的义务。 |
| 137. It was suggested that paragraph 2 be
aligned with paragraph 2 of article 40 of the articles on State
responsibility, so as to read: “[a] breach of such an obligation is serious
if it involves a gross or systematic failure by the responsible State to
fulfil the obligation”. | 137. 有与会者建议使第2段与关于国家责任的条款第40条第2款保持一致，改为：“违背此类义务如涉及责任国严重或系统性不履行该义务，则为严重违约行为”。 |
| 138. Some members questioned the
necessity of paragraph 3, regarding forms of cooperation, not least because
the provision made no reference to the collective security mechanism of the
United Nations, including the Security Council. | 138. 一些委员质疑关于合作形式的第3段的必要性，尤其是因为该项规定没有提到联合国集体安全机制，包括安全理事会。 |
| Another view expressed was that paragraph
3 was an effort to progressively develop the operationalization of the
obligation to cooperate through institutions or in an ad hoc manner, which
was welcome and to be supported. | 另一种观点认为，第3段旨在通过制度性合作或特别合作的方式逐步落实合作的义务，这是受欢迎的，应得到支持。 |
| (xii) Draft conclusion 21 | (十二) 结论草案21 |
| 139. While draft conclusion 21 was
generally supported, several members questioned the omission of the qualifier
“serious” before “breach”, as contained in article 41, paragraph 2, of the
articles on State responsibility, since it expanded the principle beyond what
was provided for in those articles. | 139. 虽然结论草案21得到普遍支持，但若干委员表示质疑的是，“违反”之前的限定词“严重”被省略，而关于国家的责任条款第41条第2款中有这个限定词，省略该词导致该原则超出了这些条款规定的范围。 |
| In particular, it was observed that the
reasons advanced by the Special Rapporteur for the omission of the words
“serious” could apply equally to the duty to cooperate. | 特别是，有人指出，特别报告员提出省略“严重”一词的理由同样适用于合作的义务。 |
| Another view was that, while there was a
strong legal and policy basis for confining the duty to cooperate to serious
breaches of jus cogens (as per draft conclusion 20), the same was not true
with regard to the duties not to recognize and not to render assistance to a
breach. | 另一种观点认为，有强大的法律和政策依据将合作义务限制在严重违反强行法的情况下(根据结论草案20)，但关于对违反行为不予承认或不提供协助的义务，却没有这样的依据。 |
| In that regard, it was observed the
Commission should engage in progressive development in that area. | 在这方面，有人指出，国际法委员会应致力于该领域的逐渐发展。 |
| 140. It was proposed that a further
paragraph be added indicating that the non-recognition should not
disadvantage the affected population and that relevant acts, such as the
registration of births, deaths and marriages, ought to be recognized. | 140. 有人提议添加一段，表明不予承认不应使受影响人口处于不利地位，有关的行为，例如对出生、死亡和婚姻的登记应得到承认。 |
| (xiii) Draft conclusions 22 and 23 | (十三) 结论草案22和23 |
| 141. Different views were expressed as to
the propriety of dealing with the questions of individual criminal
responsibility and immunity ratione materiae (draft conclusion 23) within the
draft conclusions being developed. | 141. 关于在正在制定的结论草案中处理个人刑事责任和属事豁免问题(草案结论23)的适当性，委员们表达了不同意见。 |
| Several members expressed support for
addressing both issues in the context of a study on the consequences of the
breach of jus cogens, and thus supported their inclusion in the draft
conclusions. | 若干委员支持在关于违反强行法的后果的研究中处理这两个问题，所以支持将它们纳入结论草案。 |
| Several other members were of the view
that draft conclusions 22 and 23 addressed primary rules of international
criminal law regarding criminal prosecution under national jurisdiction and
the effects of a specific subset of rules of jus cogens, namely those
prohibiting international crimes. | 其他几位委员认为，结论草案22和23处理了关于依国家管辖进行刑事起诉的国际刑法主要规则和强行法的一套子规则(即禁止国际罪行规则)的影响。 |
| Such approach, it was maintained,
deviated from the scope of the topic, which was to be limited to secondary
rules of international law, and focusing on the general effect of all rules
of jus cogens. | 有委员认为，这种做法偏离了该专题范围，该专题仅限于国际法的次要规则，并侧重于强行法所有规则的一般影响。 |
| 142. As regards paragraph 1 of draft
conclusion 22, several members noted that the third report provided ample
evidence in both treaty and case law to support the existence of a legal duty
for States to establish jurisdiction over crimes prohibited by jus cogens,
which derived from the prohibition of international offences and the
obligation of States to cooperate in order to put an end to the serious
violation of jus cogens. | 142. 关于结论草案22第1段，几位委员指出，第三次报告提供了充分的条约和判例法证据，证明各国有法律义务对强行法所禁止的犯罪确立管辖权，这源于禁止国际罪行和各国为制止严重违反强行法的行为而进行合作的义务。 |
| Some members regretted that the provision
excluded the principle of passive nationality, and suggested addressing the
issue of conflict of jurisdiction in the commentaries. | 一些委员感到遗憾的是，该规定排除了被动国籍原则，他们建议在评注中处理管辖权冲突问题。 |
| 143. Other members were of the view that
the third report did not sufficiently demonstrate that State practice
supported the existence under international law of a duty for every State to
exercise national criminal jurisdiction over all offences prohibited by jus
cogens when committed on its territory or by its nationals. | 143. 另一些委员认为，第三次报告没有充分证明国家实践支持国际法的一项规定，即各国有义务对在其领土上实施或该国国民实施的、为强行法所禁止的所有罪行行使管辖权。 |
| On the contrary, the fact that half or
even the majority of States had no statute on crimes prohibited by jus
cogens, such as crimes against humanity, the crime of apartheid and the crime
of aggression, evinced the lack of general belief that such a duty existed
under international law. | 相反，半数甚至大多数国家都没有关于强行法所禁止的罪行的法规，例如危害人类罪、种族隔离罪和侵略罪，这表明普遍不认为国际法规定了此义务。 |
| It was further maintained that the
examples provided in the third report of States exercising national criminal
jurisdiction in implementing a treaty did not necessarily substantiate the
claim being made in paragraph 1. | 委员们还认为，第三次报告列举的国家在执行条约时行使国家刑事管辖权的例子不一定证实了第1段提出的主张。 |
| 144. Several members supported retaining
paragraph 2 in the form of a without prejudice clause, so as to allow for the
potential expansion of the exercise of domestic jurisdiction on the basis of
universal jurisdiction. | 144. 若干委员支持保留第2段的不妨碍规定，以便允许基于普遍管辖权扩大国内管辖权的行使范围。 |
| It was suggested that the phrase “in
accordance with international law” be inserted to acknowledge the current
ambiguous state of the international law as regards universal jurisdiction. | 有人建议添加“根据国际法”这一短语，以承认目前国际法在普遍管辖权问题上的模糊状态。 |
| 145. As regards paragraph 1 of draft
conclusion 23, the view was expressed that the rule of the irrelevance of
official position was well established. | 145. 关于结论草案23第1段，有人认为，公务职位无关性规则已牢固确立。 |
| 146. With regard to paragraph 2, several
members were of the view that the Special Rapporteur had approached the issue
in a comprehensive manner by examining practice, both in support and in
opposition, of the non-applicability of immunity ratione materiae to jus
cogens crimes, and correctly concluded that the balance of authorities was in
favour of the non-applicability of immunity ratione materiae to an offence
committed in contravention of a jus cogens norm. | 146. 关于第2段，若干委员认为，特别报告员通过考察支持和反对将属事豁免适用于强行法罪行的做法，全面审查了这个问题，正确地得出结论认为，多数判例支持不对违反强行法规范的罪行适用属事豁免。 |
| Support was also expressed for drawing a
distinction between criminal and civil jurisdiction when addressing the issue
of the exceptions to immunity ratione materiae. | 还有人表示支持在处理属事豁免例外问题时区分刑事和民事管辖权。 |
| It was suggested that it be clarified, in
the draft conclusions or the commentaries, to which crimes such exceptions
would apply. | 有人建议在结论草案或评注中说明这种例外所适用的具体罪行。 |
| 147. Other members were of the view that
the practice cited by the Special Rapporteur in his third report did not
support the draft conclusions he proposed. | 147. 其他委员认为，特别报告员在其第三次报告中提到的惯例不支持他提出的结论草案。 |
| It was noted that draft conclusion 23, as
proposed, was potentially even broader than draft article 7 of the draft
articles on the immunity of State officials from foreign criminal
jurisdiction, adopted at the sixty-ninth session in 2017. | 有人指出，拟议的结论草案23可能比2017年第六十九届会议通过的关于国家官员外国刑事管辖豁免的条款草案第7条的范围更广泛。 |
| The concern expressed was that draft
conclusion 23 could make it more difficult for the Commission to reach
agreement on the draft articles on immunity of State officials from foreign
criminal jurisdiction, as well for the draft articles on crimes against humanity
to succeed as a convention. | 有人表示关切的是，结论草案23可能使委员会更难以就关于国家官员外国刑事管辖豁免的条款草案达成一致意见，也会使关于危害人类罪的条款草案
更难以成为一项公约。 |
| 148. Another view was that both positions
in the Commission could be accommodated by narrowing the scope of the draft
conclusion, including by developing a list of applicable crimes, and
stressing the exceptional nature of the non-applicability of immunity ratione
materiae in the commentary. | 148. 另一种意见是，委员会内的两种立场可以通过缩小结论草案的范围来调和，包括制定适用的罪行清单，并在评注中强调不适用属事豁免的例外性。 |
| Still others proposed leaving the
provision in abeyance until the conclusion of the work on immunity of State
officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction and crimes against humanity. | 还有一些人提议将该条款暂时搁置，先完成关于国家官员外国刑事管辖豁免和危害人类罪的工作。 |
| (xiv) Future work | (十四) 今后的工作 |
| 149. Some members expressed regret about
the procedure being followed, whereby draft conclusions were left pending in
the Drafting Committee, without being considered by the plenary on an annual
basis with accompanying commentaries, until the conclusion of the first
reading of the entire set of draft conclusions, and without giving States the
opportunity to comment on a considered position of the Commission. | 149. 一些委员对目前采用的程序表示遗憾，按照目前的程序，结论草案留在起草委员会处理，直至对整套结论草案完成一读，而不是由委员会全体会议每年对负有评注的结论草案进行审议，也没有给各国就委员会的某一审议立场发表评论的机会。 |
| Another view expressed was that the
procedure being followed was not a real impediment, since States were able to
react in the Sixth Committee to the reports of the Special Rapporteur and his
proposed draft conclusions, as well as the oral interim reports of the
respective Chairs of the Drafting Committee. | 另一种意见认为，所采用的程序并非真正的障碍，因为各国可以在第六委员会对特别报告员的报告及其拟议的结论草案以及起草委员会各主席的临时口头报告作出反应。 |
| 150. Support was expressed for the
development of an illustrative list of jus cogens norms. | 150. 有人表示支持制定一份强行法规范的说明性清单。 |
| It was suggested that the list could draw
from jus cogens norms identified in the previous work of the Commission. | 有人建议，该清单可以借鉴国际法委员会以往工作中确定的强行法规范。 |
| It was stressed that it was important to
take as much account as possible of the comments received from States on what
norms should be included in such a list. | 有人强调，必须尽可能考虑到各国就该清单应包含的规范提出的意见。 |
| Others expressed caution, since the
Commission might take a long time to agree on even an illustrative list. | 其他人提醒，委员会可能需要很长时间才能就一份说明性清单达成一致意见。 |
| 151. It was noted that the possibility of
regional jus cogens had attracted some support from States in the Sixth
Committee, and it was suggested that the existence and relationship of
regional jus cogens norms to universally applicable jus cogens norms be
studied. | 151. 有人指出，确立区域强行法的可能性得到第六委员会一些国家的支持，有人建议对区域强行法规范的存在及其与普遍适用的强行法规范之间的关系进行研究。 |
| Others doubted the existence of regional
jus cogens and warned that any discussion on regional jus cogens might
undermine the integrity of, and be contrary to, the notion of jus cogens
being norms “accepted and recognized by the international community as a
whole”. | 另一些人质疑区域强行法的存在，并提醒道，任何关于区域强行法的讨论都可能会损害强行法概念(即整个国际社会接受和承认的规范)的完整性，并可能与这一概念背道而驰。 |
| 152. While support was expressed for the
Special Rapporteur’s intention to conclude the first reading of the draft
conclusions at the next session of the Commission, a view was expressed that
the Commission should not unduly rush to conclude its work on the topic. | 152. 虽然有人表示支持特别报告员在国际法委员会下届会议上结束对结论草案的一读，但另一种观点认为，委员会不应过于匆忙地完成有关该专题的工作。 |
| 3. Concluding remarks of the Special
Rapporteur | 3. 特别报告员的总结 |
| 153. The Special Rapporteur noted that
the Commission had been generally supportive of the approach taken in his
third report, and of the proposed draft conclusions. | 153. 特别报告员指出，国际法委员会普遍支持他的第三次报告中采取的方法和拟议的结论草案。 |
| He shared the views of members as to the
importance of a proper exposition of the consequences of jus cogens norms for
the stability of the international legal system. | 他同意其他委员的意见，即必须适当阐明强行法规范对国际法律体系稳定性的后果。 |
| He agreed with the concerns expressed as
to the potential risk of not including appropriate and responsible
safeguards. | 他认同委员们表达的关切，即如果不包括适当和负责任的保障措施，可能有潜在风险。 |
| He reiterated the purpose of the topic,
which was not to develop new rules but to make existing rules more accessible
and understandable. | 他重申该专题的目的不是制定新规则，而是使现有规则更易于使用和理解。 |
| He admitted that the relative dearth of
State practice presented a challenge, but maintained that it was not an
insurmountable obstacle, nor should it justify a conservative approach to the
topic. | 他承认国家实践的相对缺乏是一个挑战，但他认为这并非不可逾越的障碍，也不应作为对该专题采取保守方法的理由。 |
| Rather, he emphasized that the
Commission’s role should be to faithfully assess the practice, together with
other sources on which the Commission normally relied, in order to come to
the most accurate description of existing international law. | 相反，他强调委员会的作用应该是如实地评估这种做法，结合委员会通常依赖的其他来源，以便对现有国际法作出最准确的描述。 |
| He pointed out that many of his proposed
draft conclusions contained formulations drawn from the 1969 Vienna
Convention. | 他指出，他提议的许多结论草案都包含1969年《维也纳公约》中的措辞。 |
| At the same time, it was worth recalling
that the structure of the Convention was not designed with only jus cogens
norms in mind. | 同时，值得回顾的是，制定《公约》的结构时并非只考虑了强行法规范。 |
| 154. Turning to the proposed draft
conclusions, the Special Rapporteur thanked members for their various
comments and proposals for amendments, which could be discussed in the
Drafting Committee or be reflected in the commentary. | 154. 关于拟议的结论草案，特别报告员感谢委员们提出的各种意见和修正建议，这些可在起草委员会讨论或反映在评注中。 |
| Members had generally agreed with draft
conclusions 10 to 13. | 委员们普遍同意结论草案10至13。 |
| The first two paragraphs of draft conclusion
10, read together, provided the principal consequence arising from treaties
conflicting with jus cogens norms, namely such a treaty would either be void
at the time of conclusion or would become void owing to the later emergence
of the jus cogens norm. | 结论草案10的前两段(一并解读)阐述了条约与强行法规范抵触的主要后果，即这种条约可能在缔结时无效，或因之后出现的强行法规范而无效。 |
| Both paragraphs were drawn from the 1969
Vienna Convention. | 这两段都源于1969年《维也纳公约》。 |
| He concurred with the proposal to
formulate a single draft conclusion containing a general rule regarding
interpretation, based on his proposal for draft conclusion 10, paragraph 3,
which would be applicable to all sources of international law. | 他同意一项提议，即基于他对结论草案10第3段的提议，拟订一条载有解释之通则的结论草案，该草案将适用于所有国际法渊源。 |
| The corresponding commentary would
clarify that such rule should conform with the rules of interpretation in the
1969 Vienna Convention. | 相应的评注将阐明此通则应符合1969年《维也纳公约》的解释之通则。 |
| He also agreed that good faith was the
central basis for such interpretative rule, which was captured by the
qualification “as far as possible” and could be further explained in the
commentaries. | 他还认同，善意是这种解释通则的核心基础，“尽可能”这个限定词就体现了这一点，而且可在评注中进一步解释。 |
| The principle of pacta sunt servanda was
a significant reason for the coherent and integrationist approach to treaty
interpretation, and, where it was possible to be consistent with jus cogens,
such approach would always be more preferable than the invalidation of the
treaty. | 鉴于条约必须遵守原则，解释条约时要采用一致和融合的方法，况且在可能符合强行法的情况下，这种方法总是比条约失效更可取。 |
| 155. The Special Rapporteur shared the
concerns raised by some members about the absoluteness of the
non-severability rule in cases of a treaty conflicting with an existing norm
of jus cogens, as reflected in draft conclusion 11, paragraph 1, but found it
difficult to depart from the provisions of the 1969 Vienna Convention without
a coherent legal basis drawn from State practice. | 155. 如结论草案11第1段所反映的，条约与现行强行法规范抵触时，不可分割规则具有绝对性，一些委员对此表示关切，特别报告员赞同这种关切，但特别报告员认为，没有来自国家实践的一致的法律依据，就难以偏离1969年《维也纳公约》的规定。 |
| He did not support the suggestion that
reference be made in draft conclusion 12 to articles 69 and 70 of the
Convention, since they were not concerned with specific consequences of jus
cogens. | 他不支持关于在结论草案12中提及《公约》第六十九条和第七十条的建议，因为这两条并不涉及强行法的具体后果。 |
| 156. On draft conclusion 14, concerning a
recommended dispute settlement procedure, the Special Rapporteur was not
opposed to inserting a new paragraph drawing from article 65 of the 1969
Vienna Convention if it was generally agreed by members. | 156. 关于解决争端的建议程序的结论草案14, 如果委员普遍同意，特别报告员并不反对插入源于1969年《维也纳公约》第六十五条的一个新段。 |
| He, however, doubted the appropriateness
of subjecting the consequences of breaches of jus cogens norms to agreements
concluded through negotiations by two or more States. | 但是，他质疑的是，违反强行法规范的后果取决于两个或两个以上国家通过谈判达成的协定，这种做法是否适当。 |
| He reiterated that draft conclusion 14
did not seek to impose anything on any State, or to address jurisdictional
issues or standing. Nor, did it downplay the legally binding obligations of
States Parties to the 1969 Vienna Convention. | 他重申，结论草案14并不试图对任何国家施加任何规定，也不处理管辖权问题或立场，也没有淡化1969年《维也纳公约》缔约国具有法律约束力的义务。 |
| He agreed to expand the range of options
for settlement of disputes, and to reformulate the second paragraph into a
without prejudice clause. | 他同意扩大解决争端的备选办法，并将第二段改写为“不妨碍”条款。 |
| He further explained that the placement
of draft conclusion 14 at the end of the first cluster of draft conclusions
did not minimize the importance of a procedure for the settlement of
disputes, but rather was intended to illustrate that such procedure was
linked to the draft conclusions concerning the conflict between treaties and
jus cogens norms. | 他进一步解释道，将结论草案14置于第一组结论草案结尾处并非尽量弱化解决争端程序的重要性，而是为了说明这种程序同涉及条约与强行法规范抵触的结论草案相关。 |
| 157. To address the concern of some
members as to the logic underlying draft conclusion 15, paragraph 1, the
Special Rapporteur suggested reformulating the paragraph to read: “[a]
customary international law rule does not arise if the practice on which it
is based conflicts with a peremptory norm of general international law (jus
cogens)”. | 157. 一些委员对结论草案15第1段所依据的逻辑表示关切，为此特别报告员建议将该段改写为：“习惯国际法规则所依据的惯例如与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)抵触，则不会形成”。 |
| He further agreed that the Drafting
Committee could insert the phrase “not of a jus cogens character” in
paragraph 1 to resolve the issue concerning the modification of a peremptory
norm by a subsequent peremptory norm. | 他还同意起草委员会在第1段中插入“不具有强行法性质”，以解决通过嗣后强制性规范来修改一项强制性规范的问题。 |
| As regards paragraph 3, he did not have
any objection to drawing a link between the effect of persistent objection
during the formation of customary international law and the non-applicability
of persistent objection once a norm had acquired the status of jus cogens. | 关于第3段，他并不反对在以下两者之间建立联系：习惯国际法形成期间一贯反对的影响，以及一旦规范获得强行法地位后不再适用一贯反对。 |
| 158. The Special Rapporteur agreed with
those members who had maintained that it was appropriate to specifically
single out Security Council resolutions in draft conclusion 17, because the
discussion on the effects of jus cogens norms on acts of international
organizations often took place in the context of Security Council decisions,
given the unique power of the Council as well as Article 103 of the Charter
of the United Nations. | 158. 有委员坚持认为在结论草案17中专门提及安全理事会决议是恰当的，特别报告员同意这一点，因为鉴于安理会的独特权力和《联合国宪章》第103条的规定，关于强行法规范对国际组织行为的影响的讨论通常是在安全理事会决议的范围内进行。 |
| 159. The Special Rapporteur opposed
inserting the qualifier “serious” in draft conclusion 18, which, according to
him, found no support in the articles on State responsibility and did not
appropriately capture the relationship between norms of jus cogens and
obligations erga omnes. | 159. 特别报告员反对在结论草案18中添加限定词“严重”，他指出，这在关于国家责任的条款中找不到依据，而且加入该词也未能适当反映强行法规范与普遍义务之间的关系。 |
| At the same time, he had no objection to
consider, in the Drafting Committee, aligning the text of draft conclusion 18
on the relevant passage in the Barcelona Traction judgment. | 同时，他不反对在起草委员会审议期间考虑使结论草案18的案文与巴塞罗那电车公司案判决中的相关段落保持一致。 |
| He further sought to explain the omission
of the same qualifier in draft conclusion 21, by noting that it would be
wrong to suggest that it was lawful for States to recognize or even assist in
breaches of jus cogens that “were not serious”. | 他还试图解释为何在结论草案21中省略限定词“严重”，他指出，暗示各国可以承认甚至协助“不严重”的违反强行法的行为，是不对的。 |
| 160. The Special Rapporteur also agreed
that draft conclusions 18 to 21 should apply not only to States but also to
international organizations. | 160. 特别报告员也认同，结论草案18至21不仅适用于国家，也适用于国际组织。 |
| 161. The Special Rapporteur conceded that
draft conclusions 22 and 23 were different from other draft conclusions in
that they concerned primary rules while the rest of the draft conclusions
addressed methodological issues. | 161. 特别报告员承认，结论草案22和23不同于其他结论草案，因为它们涉及主要规则，而其余结论草案述及方法问题。 |
| He stated that this might provide a
cogent reason for not including these draft conclusions. | 他说这或许可以为不列入这些结论草案提供一个令人信服的理由。 |
| However, he pointed out that the issue of
the effect of jus cogens norms on immunities had been explicitly referred to
in paragraph 17 of the syllabus to the topic prepared at the time of the
decision to include the topic in the long-term programme of work of the
Commission. | 但是，他指出强行法规范对豁免的影响问题已在该专题提纲第17段中明确提到，该专题提纲是在决定将该专题列入委员会长期工作方案时编写的。 |
| The issue had not drawn any objection at
the time of its consideration by the Commission, nor had the exclusion of
immunities from the topic been suggested by States or members of the
Commission at the time. | 在委员会审议期间，没有人对这一问题提出任何异议，当时也没有会员国或委员会委员提议将豁免从该专题中排除。 |
| He noted, as also indicated by some
members, that there was abundant practice in support of both draft
conclusions, and that the Commission had previously adopted important draft
conclusions based on more scant practice. | 他和一些委员都指出，有大量的惯例支持这两项结论草案，而且委员会以前甚至基于更少的惯例通过了重要的结论草案。 |
| He was not convinced by the argument that
the inclusion of the two draft conclusions would result in no agreement being
reached on other topics being considered by the Commission. | 有人称列入这两项结论草案将导致委员会正在审议的其他专题无法达成一致意见，他认为这种论点无法令人信服。 |
| He, similarly, did not accept that there
was insufficient practice to support draft conclusion 23. | 同样，他也不认同没有足够的惯例来支持结论草案23。 |
| He recalled that cases concerning civil
proceedings, such as Jurisdictional Immunities of the State (Germany v.
Italy: Greece intervening), that were often advanced to justify the view that
there were no exceptions to immunity for international crimes of a jus cogens
nature declared that they were not an authority for exceptions in cases
related to criminal proceedings. | 他指出，提到有关民事诉讼的案件，如国家管辖豁免案(德国诉意大利：希腊参加诉讼)，往往是为了证明一种观点，即对具有强行法性质的国际罪行的豁免没有例外，这些案件申明，在与刑事诉讼有关的案件中，它们不能作为例外的权威理由。 |
| While noting that these two draft
conclusions enjoyed broad support from the Commission, he noted that, with a
view to finding a way forward, both from a substantive point of view and from
the perspective of attaining consensus in the Commission, the Commission
might wish to address the issues mentioned by means of a without prejudice
clause. | 虽然注意到这两项结论草案得到了委员会的广泛支持，但他指出，为了找到前进的方向，无论从实质性角度还是从委员会达成共识的角度而言，委员会不妨通过一项“不妨碍”条款来处理上述问题。 |
| In that context, he proposed that the
Drafting Committee replace the two draft conclusions with a single without
prejudice clause, which would read: “[t]he present draft conclusions are
without prejudice to the consequences of specific/individual/particular
peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens)”. | 在这方面，他建议起草委员会用一项“不妨碍”条款取代这两项结论草案，该条款的内容如下：“本结论草案不妨碍具体/个别/特定一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的后果”。 |
| The corresponding commentary would
indicate that immunity ratione materiae was one such issue implicated by the
provision and would be drafted in a non-prejudicial matter. | 相应的评注将表明，属事豁免属于该条款所涉及的此类问题，并将以不具妨碍的方式起草。 |
| 162. As regards the comments on the
working method of keeping texts within the Drafting Committee, without the
preparation of commentaries, the Special Rapporteur noted that such a working
method had been previously agreed to by the Commission, as a compromise. | 162. 关于对将案文留在起草委员会、不编写评注的工作方法的意见，特别报告员指出，委员会先前已同意这种工作方法，以此作为一种折衷办法。 |
| He recalled further that the topic had,
each year, been considered during the second half of the session with
insufficient time for the preparation and adoption of commentaries. | 他进一步回顾称，每年都在届会第二期审议该专题，没有足够的时间编写和通过评注。 |
| Nonetheless, he undertook to produce a
full set of commentaries for consideration by the Commission, on the
understanding that the topic would be considered during the first half of the
2019 session. | 尽管如此，他承诺编写一套完整的评注，供委员会审议，但有一项谅解，即在2019年届会第一期会议审议该专题。 |
| 163. Finally, the Special Rapporteur
assured members that he would consider carefully all their comments regarding
future work when preparing his fourth report. | 163. 最后，特别报告员向委员们保证，在编写第四次报告时，他将仔细考虑他们对未来工作的所有意见。 |
| He agreed with various suggestions in
that regard, such as the inclusion of a bibliography and the need for
consistency on the use of terms, as well as that general principles should
also be covered in the project. | 他同意这方面的各种建议，例如列入参考书目，需要保持术语使用的一致性，以及项目中也应涵盖一般原则等。 |
| Chapter IX Protection of the environment
in relation to armed conflicts | 第九章 与武装冲突有关的环境保护 |
| A. Introduction | A. 导言 |
| 164. At its sixty-fifth session (2013),
the Commission decided to include the topic “Protection of the environment in
relation to armed conflicts” in its programme of work, and appointed Ms.
Marie G. Jacobsson as Special Rapporteur for the topic. | 164. 国际法委员会第六十五届会议(2013年)决定将“与武装冲突有关的环境保护”专题列入工作方案，并任命玛丽·雅各布松女士为该专题特别报告员。 |
| 165. The Commission received and
considered three reports from its sixty-sixth session (2014) to its
sixty-eighth session (2016). | 165. 从第六十六届会议(2014年)至第六十八届会议(2016年)，委员会收到并审议了三份报告。 |
| At its sixty-sixth session (2014), the
Commission considered the preliminary report of the Special Rapporteur. | 在第六十六届会议(2014年)上，委员会审议了特别报告员的初步报告。 |
| At its sixty-seventh session (2015), the
Commission considered the second report of the Special Rapporteur and took
note of the draft introductory provisions and draft principles, provisionally
adopted by the Drafting Committee, which were subsequently renumbered and
revised for technical reasons by the Drafting Committee at the sixty-eighth
session. | 在第六十七届会议(2015年)上，委员会审议了特别报告员的第二次报告，
并注意到起草委员会暂时通过的导言部分规定草案和原则草案，起草委员会后来在第六十八届会议上出于技术原因对这些草案作了重新编号和修订。 |
| Accordingly, the Commission provisionally
adopted draft principles 1, 2, 5 and 9 to 13, and commentaries thereto, at
that session. | 因此，委员会在该届会议上暂时通过了原则草案1、2、5、9和13以及评注。 |
| At the same session, the Commission also
considered the third report of the Special Rapporteur, and took note of draft
principles 4, 6 to 8, and 14 to 18 provisionally adopted by the Drafting
Committee, without provisionally adopting any commentaries. | 在同一届会议上，委员会还审议了特别报告员的第三次报告， 并注意到起草委员会暂时通过的原则草案4、6至8和14至18, 未暂时通过任何评注。 |
| 166. At its sixty-ninth session (2017),
the Commission established a Working Group to consider the way forward in
relation to the topic, as Ms. Jacobsson was no longer with the Commission. | 166. 在第六十九届会议(2017年)上，由于雅各布松女士已不再担任委员会委员，委员会设立了一个工作组，以考虑此专题今后的方向。 |
| The Working Group, chaired by Mr.
Vázquez-Bermúdez, had before it the draft commentaries prepared by the
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, and taken note of by the Commission at
the same session. | 马塞洛·巴斯克斯－贝穆德斯先生担任工作组主席，尽管特别报告员雅各布松女士已不再担任委员会委员，但工作组收到了她编写的关于起草委员会第六十八届会议暂时通过的原则草案4、6至8和14至18的评注草案，委员会在同一届会议上注意到这些原则草案。 |
| The Working Group recommended to the Commission
the appointment of a new Special Rapporteur for the topic to assist with the
successful completion of its work on the topic. | 工作组建议委员会为本专题任命一名新的特别报告员，以协助顺利完成关于本专题的工作。 |
| Following an oral report by the Chair of
the Working Group, the Commission decided to appoint Ms. Marja Lehto as
Special Rapporteur. | 在工作组主席作出口头报告后，委员会决定任命玛丽亚·莱赫托女士为特别报告员。 |
| B. Consideration of the topic at the
present session | B. 本届会议审议此专题的情况 |
| 167. At the present session, the
Commission established, at its 3390th meeting, a Working Group, chaired by
Mr. Vázquez-Bermúdez, to assist the Special Rapporteur in the preparation of
the draft commentaries to draft principles 4, 6 to 8, and 14 to 18. | 167. 在本届会议上，委员会在第3390次会议上设立了一个工作组，由巴斯克斯－贝穆德斯先生担任主席，协助特别报告员编写原则草案4、6至8和14至18的评注草案。 |
| The Working Group held two meetings, on 3
and 4 May 2018. | 工作组于2018年5月3日和4日举行了两次会议。 |
| 168. At its 3426th meeting, on 10 July
2018, the Commission provisionally adopted draft principles 4, 6 to 8, and 14
to 18, which had been provisionally adopted by the Drafting Committee at the
sixty-eighth session (see section C.1 below). | 168. 在2018年7月10日第3426次会议上，委员会暂时通过了经第六十八届会议上起草委员会暂时通过的原则草案4、6至8和14至18(见下文C.1节)。 |
| 169. At the same meeting, the Commission
began its consideration of the first report of Special Rapporteur Ms. Marja
Lehto (A/CN.4/720 and Corr.1). | 169. 在同次会议上，委员会开始审议特别报告员玛丽亚·莱赫托女士的第一次报告(A/CN.4/720和Corr.1)。 |
| The Commission continued its
consideration of the first report at its 3427th to 3431st meetings, from 11
to 17 July 2018. | 委员会在2018年7月11日至17日第3427至3431次会议上继续审议第一次报告。 |
| 170. In her first report, the Special
Rapporteur addressed the protection of the environment in situations of
occupation. | 170. 特别报告员在其第一份报告中阐述了占领局势下的环境保护。 |
| The report offered a general introduction
to the protection of the environment under the law of occupation and
addressed the complementarity between the law of occupation, international
human rights law and international environmental law. | 报告概述了占领法所指的保护环境，并讨论了占领法、国际人权法和国际环境法之间的互补性。 |
| The Special Rapporteur proposed three
draft principles relating to the protection of the environment in situations
of occupation, to be included in a separate part (Part Four). | 特别报告员提出了将列入一个单独部分(第四部分)的关于在占领局势下的环境保护的三项原则草案。 |
| She also made some suggestions for the
future programme of work on the topic. | 她还就这一专题今后的工作方案提出了一些建议。 |
| 171. At is 3431st meeting, on 17 July
2018, the Commission referred draft principles 19 to 21, as contained in the
first report of the Special Rapporteur, to the Drafting Committee. | 171. 在2018年7月17日第3431次会议上，委员会将特别报告员第一次报告所载原则草案19至21提交起草委员会。 |
| 172. At its 3436th meeting, on 26 July
2018, the Chair of the Drafting Committee presented the report of the
Drafting Committee on “Protection of the environment in relation to armed
conflicts”, containing draft principles 19, 20 and 21 provisionally adopted
by the Drafting Committee at the seventieth session (A/CN.4/L.911), which can
be found on the website of the Commission. | 172. 在2018年7月26日第3436次会议上，起草委员会主席提交了起草委员会关于“与武装冲突有关的环境保护”的报告，其中载有起草委员会在第七十届会议上暂时通过的原则草案19、20和21(A/CN.4/L.911)。
该报告可在委员会网站上查阅。 |
| The Commission took note of the draft
principles as presented by the Drafting Committee. | 委员会注意到起草委员会提交的原则草案。 |
| It is anticipated that the Commission
will take action on the draft principles and commentaries thereto at the next
session. | 预期委员会将在下届会议上就原则草案及其评注采取行动。 |
| 173. At its 3451st meeting, on 9 August
2018, the Commission adopted the commentaries to the draft principles
provisionally adopted at the present session (see section C.2 below). | 173. 在2018年8月9日举行的第3451次会议上，委员会通过了本届会议暂时通过的原则草案的评注(见下文C.2节)。 |
| 1. Introduction by the Special Rapporteur
of her first report | 1. 特别报告员介绍其第一次报告 |
| 174. The Special Rapporteur recalled the
background of the topic, noting that it had been under active consideration
by the Commission based on three reports submitted by her predecessor. | 174. 特别报告员回顾了该专题的背景，指出委员会已根据其前任提交的三份报告对该专题进行过积极审议。 |
| She also emphasized the continued
interest of States in the topic as well as the importance of consultations
with the United Nations Environment Programme and the International Committee
of the Red Cross. | 她还强调了各国对这一专题的持续兴趣，以及与联合国环境规划署和红十字国际委员会协商的重要性。 |
| Her first report, which built on previous
reports, did not set forth a new methodology and sought to ensure coherence
with the work completed thus far. | 她的第一份报告以以前的报告为基础，没有提出新的方法，力求确保与迄今完成的工作保持一致。 |
| The report proposed three new draft
principles on an issue that the Commission had identified for further
consideration, namely, the protection of the environment in situations of
occupation. | 报告就委员会确定供进一步审议的一个问题提出了三项新的原则草案，即占领局势下的环境保护。 |
| The Special Rapporteur reiterated the
temporal scope of the topic, which covered the whole conflict cycle and
allowed the review of the law of armed conflict, international human rights
law and international environmental law. | 特别报告员重申了这一专题的时间范围，涵盖整个冲突周期，并为审查武装冲突法、国际人权法和国际环境法留出了空间。 |
| 175. The law of occupation constituted a
distinct legal regime, primarily based on the 1907 Hague Regulations and the
1949 Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time
of War (Convention IV). | 175. 占领法是一个独特的法律体系，其主要依据是1907年《海牙章程》和1949年《关于战时保护平民之日内瓦公约》(《日内瓦第四公约》)。 |
| While these instruments provided only
indirect protection to the environment, relevant concepts such as the notions
of “civil life” and “usufruct” lend themselves to evolutive interpretation. | 虽然这些文书只提供了对环境的间接保护，但“公民生活”和“用益权”等相关概念易于演进式解释。 |
| Furthermore, the law of occupation had to
be interpreted in the light of circumstances of the occupation, in particular
its stability and duration. | 此外，必须结合占领的情形，特别是其稳定性和持续时间来解释占领法。 |
| The Special Rapporteur recalled that,
generally, an occupied territory is expected to be administered for the
benefit of the occupied population, not the occupying State. | 特别报告员回顾说，一般而言，管理被占领土应该是为了被占领人民的利益，而不是占领国的利益。 |
| 176. The report addressed the
relationship between international human rights law, international
environmental law and the law of occupation as lex specialis. | 176. 报告讨论了国际人权法、国际环境法和作为特别法的占领法之间的关系。 |
| International jurisprudence confirmed
that human rights law applied alongside the law of occupation, while the
exact content of the obligations depended on the nature and duration of the
occupation. | 国际判例证实，人权法与占领法同时适用，而义务的确切内容取决于占领的性质和持续时间。 |
| The report focused on the right to health
as an example of how human rights law may contribute to environmental
protection in the case of occupation. | 报告侧重阐述健康权，作为人权法如何可在占领情况下促进环境保护的一个例子。 |
| Customary and conventional environmental
law also played a role in situations of occupation, particularly in relation
to transboundary or global issues. | 习惯环境法和协议环境法在占领局势中也发挥作用，特别是在跨界问题或全球问题方面。 |
| The Special Rapporteur emphasized that
such environmental obligations protected a collective interest and were owed
to a wider group of States than those involved in an armed conflict or
occupation. | 特别报告员强调，这种环境义务保护集体利益，应由比武装冲突或占领所涉国家范围更广的一些国家承担。 |
| 177. The report contained proposals for
three new draft principles. | 177. 报告载有关于三项新的原则草案的建议。 |
| The Special Rapporteur proposed to place
those in a new Part Four, as they could be relevant to armed conflicts as
well as the post-conflict phase, depending on the nature of the occupation. | 特别报告员建议将这些问题列入新的第四部分，因为它们可能与武装冲突以及冲突后阶段有关，这取决于占领的性质。 |
| 178. Draft principle 19 embedded the
obligation of the occupying State to protect the environment in the general
obligation to take care of the welfare of the occupied territories. | 178. 原则草案19将占领国保护环境的义务列入维护被占领人民福祉的一般义务。 |
| The text of paragraph 1, for which the
Special Rapporteur had proposed a reformulation during her introduction,
found support in international human rights law and in the jurisprudence of
international courts and tribunals. | 特别报告员在介绍报告时建议重新拟订第1段的案文，该段案文得到了国际人权法和国际法院和法庭判例的支持。 |
| The relevant obligations covered land
territory as well as adjacent maritime areas and superadjacent airspace. | 相关义务涵盖陆地领土以及毗邻海域和上方空域。 |
| Paragraph 2 reiterated the obligation of
the occupying State to respect, unless absolutely prevented, the legislation
of the occupied territory pertaining to the protection of the environment. | 第2段重申，占领国除非万不得已，否则应尊重被占领土的环境保护立法。 |
| 179. Draft principle 20 was based on the
principle of usufruct as found in article 55 of the 1907 Hague Regulations
while it also drew on the principle of sustainable use as its modern
equivalent. | 179. 原则草案20以1907年《海牙章程》第五十五条中的用益权原则为基础，同时也借鉴了可持续利用原则作为相对应的现代概念。 |
| It provided that the occupying State
should exercise caution in the exploitation of non-renewable resources and
exploit renewable resources in a way that ensured their long-term use and
capacity for regeneration. | 该原则规定，占领国在开发利用不可再生资源时应谨慎行事，并以确保长期使用和再生能力的方式开发利用可再生资源。 |
| The practical application of the
principle would depend on the nature and duration of the occupation. | 这项原则的实际应用将取决于占领的性质和持续时间。 |
| The wording of draft principle 20 was
based on article 54, paragraph 1, of the Berlin Rules on Water Resources as
adopted by the International Law Association. | 原则草案20的措辞以国际法协会通过的《柏林水资源规则》第54条第1款为基础。 |
| 180. Draft principle 21 incorporated the
principle not to cause harm to the environment of another State. | 180. 原则草案21纳入了不对另一国的环境造成损害的原则。 |
| A central principle in international
environmental law, the “no harm” principle applied to situations of
occupation, as confirmed in international jurisprudence and Commission’s
earlier work. | 不损害原则是国际环境法的一项核心原则，适用于占领局势，这一点已在国际判例和委员会以前的工作中得到确认。 |
| The wording was derived from the judgment
of the International Court of Justice in Pulp Mills on the River Uruguay. | 措辞源自国际法院对乌拉圭河纸浆厂案的判决。 |
| The words “at its disposal” notably allow
for flexibility depending on the prevailing circumstances. | “其所拥有的”一语特别为根据当时的情况灵活处理留出了空间。 |
| 181. The Special Rapporteur further
explained that the principles in Part One and Part Two applied to situations
of occupation, and proposed to clarify in the commentary to draft principles
15 to 18, contained in Part Three, that they were also relevant to situations
of occupation. | 181. 特别报告员进一步解释说，第一部分和第二部分的各项原则适用于占领局势，建议在第三部分所载的原则草案15至18的评注中澄清，这些原则也与占领局势有关。 |
| 182. As to future work, the Special
Rapporteur expressed the intention to address in her next report certain
questions relating to the protection of the environment in non-international
armed conflicts, questions relating to responsibility and liability for
environmental harm in relation to armed conflicts, and issues related to the
consolidation of a complete set of draft principles. | 182. 关于今后的工作，特别报告员表示打算在下一次报告中讨论某些与非国际性武装冲突中保护环境有关的问题、与武装冲突有关的环境损害所涉责任和赔偿责任有关的问题以及与合并一整套原则草案有关的问题。 |
| 2. Summary of the debate | 2. 辩论摘要 |
| (a) General comments | (a) 一般性评论 |
| 183. Members supported the continuation
of the methodology adopted by the previous Special Rapporteur, in particular
the temporal approach to the topic. | 183. 委员们支持沿用前任特别报告员采用的方法，特别是采用分时段办法处理这一专题。 |
| At the same time, it was reiterated that
a strict temporal division might not always be feasible. | 同时，有人重申，严格的时间划分可能不总是可行的。 |
| A number of members agreed with the
Special Rapporteur that the Commission should not seek to change
international humanitarian law relating to occupation, but rather to fill
gaps relating to environmental protection. | 若干委员同意特别报告员的意见，即委员会不应寻求改变与占领有关的国际人道主义法，而应填补与环境保护有关的空白。 |
| 184. Some members supported the addition
of a separate Part Four, dealing specifically with occupation. | 184. 一些委员支持增加一个单独的第四部分，专门阐述占领问题。 |
| Some others insisted that occupation fell
exclusively within the armed conflict phase (Part Two), while yet others
maintained it related to the post-armed-conflict phase (Part Three). | 另一些委员坚持认为占领完全属于武装冲突阶段(第二部分)，还有一些委员坚持认为占领与武装冲突后阶段(第三部分)有关。 |
| Several members supported the proposal of
the Special Rapporteur to extend the application of certain draft principles
already provisionally adopted by the Commission to the situation of
occupation and noted that this should be indicated in the commentaries. | 几位委员支持特别报告员提出的关于将委员会已经暂时通过的某些原则草案的适用范围扩大到占领局势的建议，并指出应在评注中予以说明。 |
| It was proposed by some members to
indicate in a separate draft principle that the draft principles in Parts
One, Two and Three applied mutatis mutandis to situations of occupation. | 一些委员建议，在一项单独的原则草案中说明，第一、第二和第三部分的原则草案比照适用于占领局势。 |
| 185. Some members held that the report
presented little State practice to bolster its findings, while others called
for the inclusion of State practice from a wider variety of regions. | 185. 一些委员认为，该报告几乎没有提出支持其结论的国家惯例，而另一些委员则要求纳入更多不同区域的国家惯例。 |
| Some members called for a definition of
the concept of occupation, either in the commentary or in the text of the
draft principles. | 一些委员要求在评注或原则草案案文中对占领概念作出定义。 |
| Others maintained that providing a
definition would not be necessary, while recognizing that situations of
occupation may vary in nature and duration. | 另一些委员认为没有必要提供定义，同时他们承认占领局势在性质和持续时间上可能各不相同。 |
| It was also suggested by some members to
take into consideration the legality or illegality of the occupation and to
exclude the applicability of the occupation law to situations resulted from
unlawful use of force. | 一些委员还建议考虑占领合法还是非法，不将占领法适用于非法使用武力造成的局势。 |
| 186. Several members suggested addressing
the issue of the applicability of the law of occupation to international
organizations in the draft principles or in the commentaries. | 186. 一些委员建议在原则草案或评注中阐述占领法对国际组织的适用性问题。 |
| While some members suggested that
international organizations could exercise functions similar to those of an
Occupying Power, other members questioned this proposition. | 一些委员建议国际组织可以行使类似占领方的职能，但其他委员对这一建议提出质疑。 |
| It was noted by some members that the
international administration of a territory by an international organization
was very different in nature to a belligerent occupation. | 一些委员指出，国际组织对某一领土的国际管理在性质上与交战占领大不相同。 |
| 187. Several members suggested replacing
the term “occupying State” with a more general reference to “Occupying
Power”, which was the term used in the relevant treaties. | 187. 几位委员建议用相关条约中使用的更笼统的术语“占领方”取代“占领国”。 |
| 188. Several members noted that, while
the law of armed conflict predated international environmental law, the
former had to be interpreted so as to incorporate elements of the latter. | 188. 几位委员指出，虽然武装冲突法早于国际环境法，但对前者进行解释必须纳入后者的内容。 |
| Others did not favour an evolutionary
interpretation of the law of armed conflict. | 其他委员不赞成对武装冲突法进行演变式解释。 |
| 189. Members noted that the law of
occupation was a subset of the law of armed conflict, which only offered
“indirect” protection to the environment. | 189. 委员们指出，占领法是武装冲突法的一个子集，它只向环境提供“间接”保护。 |
| Members generally agreed that
international human rights law and international environmental law continued
to apply in situations of occupation, while the specificities of the law of
armed conflict were to be taken into account. | 委员们普遍同意，国际人权法和国际环境法继续适用于占领局势，同时应考虑到武装冲突法的特殊性。 |
| According to some members, international
humanitarian law, as lex specialis, could set aside those bodies of law if
the situation of occupation so required. | 一些委员认为，如果根据占领局势有必要的话，国际人道主义法作为特别法可以使这些法律无效。 |
| Other members maintained that, in
situations of occupation, military necessity did not override — but had to be
balanced against — international human rights law and international
environmental law obligations. | 其他委员认为，在占领局势下，军事必要性并非凌驾于国际人权法和国际环境法义务之上，而是必须与国际人权法和国际环境法义务相平衡。 |
| 190. Several members emphasized that the
application of international human rights law and international environmental
law depended on the type of occupation, its nature and duration. | 190. 几位委员强调，国际人权法和国际环境法的适用取决于占领的类型、性质和持续时间。 |
| In this regard, some members proposed
drawing a distinction between different forms of occupation, such as
“belligerent” or “military” occupation and “pacific” or “prolonged”
occupation, or “colonial” occupation. | 在这方面，一些委员建议区分不同形式的占领，例如“交战”或“军事”占领和“和平”或“长期”占领，或“殖民”占领。 |
| Other members pointed out that the focus
of the report was on belligerent occupation and that such a distinction was
therefore not necessary in this context. | 其他委员指出，报告的重点是交战占领，因此在此背景下没有必要进行这种区分。 |
| 191. Some members questioned the link
drawn by the Special Rapporteur between the protection of property rights in
situation of occupation and the protection of the environment. | 191. 一些委员对特别报告员在占领局势下保护财产权与保护环境之间建立关联表示质疑。 |
| It was pointed out that harm to public or
private property could not necessarily be equated to damage to the
environment. | 有人指出，对公共或私人财产的损害不一定可与对环境的损害相提并论。 |
| Others maintained that the protection of
the environment had become a core task of the modern State, and that the
concept of “usufruct” could be interpreted in the current legal context to
accommodate environmental considerations. | 另一些委员认为，保护环境已成为现代国家的一项核心任务，“用益权”概念可在当前的法律背景下加以解释，以涵盖环境考虑。 |
| 192. A number of members also noted that,
while a significant part of the report dealt with international human rights
law, the Special Rapporteur had not proposed a draft principle on that basis. | 192. 若干委员还指出，虽然报告的很大一部分涉及国际人权法，但特别报告员没有在此基础上提出一项原则草案。 |
| Several members suggested the addition of
a new draft principle, or a new paragraph, addressing the relevance of
international human rights law, while some members were doubtful about the
proposal and saw it as beyond the scope of the topic. | 几位委员建议增加一项新的原则草案或一个新的段落，阐述国际人权法的相关性，但另一些委员对该建议表示怀疑，认为它超出了本专题的范围。 |
| 193. While agreeing that the right to
health was relevant to the protection of the environment, several members
encouraged the Special Rapporteur to extend her analysis to include other
human rights, such as the right to life, the right to water and the right to
food. | 193. 几位委员虽然同意健康权与环境保护相关，但鼓励特别报告员扩大分析范围，将生命权、水权和食物权等其他人权纳入其中。 |
| A suggestion was made to focus on
particularly vulnerable populations. | 有人建议把重点放在特别脆弱的人群上。 |
| (b) Comments on draft principle 19 | (b) 关于原则草案19的评论 |
| 194. Members generally expressed support
for the oral revision of paragraph 1 of draft principle 19 made by Special
Rapporteur during her introduction of the report, while some members asked
for further clarification of the proposed formulation. | 194. 委员们普遍表示支持特别报告员在介绍报告时对原则草案19第1段所作的口头订正，但一些委员要求对拟议措辞作进一步澄清。 |
| In particular, several members called for
clarification of certain terms, including “general obligation”,
“environmental considerations” and “administration”, or for reconsideration
of the use of the words “territorial State” and “sovereign rights”. | 具体而言，几位委员要求澄清某些术语； 包括“一般义务”、“环境因素”和“管理”，或重新考虑使用“领土国”和“主权权利”这两个词。 |
| 195. Some members questioned the
reference to the maritime areas and airspace of the occupied territory. | 195. 一些委员质疑提及被占领土的海域和空域。 |
| Other members maintained that the
authority was limited to the areas over which the occupying State had
established its authority and exercised effective control. | 其他委员认为，该权力仅限于占领国建立权力和行使有效控制的地区。 |
| 196. With regard to paragraph 2, members
supported the position of the Special Rapporteur that an occupying State had
a general obligation to respect the legislation of the occupied territory
with regard to environmental protection. | 196. 关于第2段，委员们支持特别报告员的立场，即占领国有尊重被占领土环境保护立法的一般义务。 |
| A number of members suggested that the
Occupying Power enjoyed greater latitude to alter environmental legislation
than the wording of paragraph 2 permitted, particularly to enhance the
protection of the population. | 若干委员认为，占领方在修改环境法律方面享有的自由度比第2段的措辞所允许的更大，特别是在加强对人口的保护方面。 |
| The view was expressed that in such cases
the local population had to be consulted. | 有一种意见认为，在这种情况下，必须征求当地居民的意见。 |
| 197. It was suggested that, apart from
domestic legislation, occupying States should respect the international
obligations pertaining to the protection of the environment that were
incumbent on the occupied territory. | 197. 有人建议，除了国内法律之外，占领国还应尊重被占领土负有的环境保护方面的国际义务。 |
| It was also suggested that an occupying
State was bound to its own obligations under international law. | 还有人认为，占领国还受自身根据国际法应承担的义务的约束。 |
| 198. Several drafting suggestions were
made with regard to draft principle 19, including the addition of a further
paragraph to the draft principle to reflect the role of international human
rights law. | 198. 有人就原则草案19提出了一些起草建议，包括在该原则草案中增加一段，以反映国际人权法的作用。 |
| (c) Comments on draft principle 20 | (c) 关于原则草案20的评论 |
| 199. With regard to draft principle 20,
some members supported the term “sustainable use”, while a view was expressed
that the term should be clarified. | 199. 关于原则草案20, 一些委员支持“可持续利用”一词，但有一种意见认为，该词应加以澄清。 |
| Other members expressed the view that the
principle of sustainable use constituted a policy objective, rather than a
legal obligation, and questioned its application to situations of occupation. | 其他委员认为，可持续利用原则是一项政策目标，而不是一项法律义务，并对将该原则适用于占领局势提出质疑。 |
| Some members also questioned the link
with the concept of usufruct, and how this concept applied to different
categories of property, including private property, public goods and natural
resources. | 一些委员还质疑与用益权概念的关联，并询问这一概念如何适用于不同类别的财产，包括私有财产、公共物品和自然资源。 |
| Other members stressed that occupying
States ought to consider sustainability in the administration and
exploitation of natural resources. | 其他委员强调，占领国应考虑自然资源管理和开发利用的可持续性。 |
| 200. In this regard, a number of members
emphasized the importance of the principles of permanent sovereignty over
natural resources and of the self-determination of peoples for the draft
principles, while other members questioned the relevance of these principles. | 200. 在这方面，若干委员强调了对自然资源的永久主权原则和人民自决原则对于原则草案的重要性，而其他委员质疑这些原则的相关性。 |
| 201. Members emphasized that the
Occupying Power should act for the benefit of the people under occupation,
not for its own benefit. | 201. 委员们强调，占领方的行动应当是为了被占领人民的利益，而不是为了自己的利益。 |
| A suggestion was made to broaden the principle
to apply to economic and social development of the occupied State more
generally. | 有人建议扩大这项原则，使其更广泛地适用于被占领国的经济和社会发展。 |
| 202. Some members also questioned the
term “minimize” environmental harm, while a view was expressed that “prevent”
would be more appropriate. | 202. 一些委员还质疑“将环境损害减少至最低限度”一语，有一种意见认为“防止”一词更合适。 |
| The view was expressed that in situations
of occupation, the focus was on eliminating and repairing environmental
damage, in light of the draft principles contained in Part Three, rather than
on the administration of natural resources. | 有一种意见认为，在占领局势下，重点是根据第三部分所载各项原则草案消除和修复环境损害，而不是管理自然资源。 |
| 203. Several drafting proposals were made
with regard to draft principle 20. | 203. 对原则草案20提出了一些起草建议。 |
| (d) Comments on draft principle 21 | (d) 关于原则草案21的评论 |
| 204. Members generally expressed support
for the inclusion of the no-harm or due diligence principle in draft
principle 21, although a view was expressed that the principle had no place
in the project. | 204. 委员们普遍表示支持在原则草案21中纳入不损害或应尽职责原则，但有一种意见认为该原则不应被纳入本项目。 |
| A suggestion was made to include therein
the obligation to cooperate to prevent, reduce and control transboundary
environmental pollution. | 有人建议在其中列入合作防止、减少和控制跨界环境污染的义务。 |
| 205. Certain drafting suggestions or
clarifications were proposed, including with regard to the phrases “all the
means at its disposal”, “significant damage” and “areas beyond national
jurisdiction”. | 205. 会上提出了一些起草建议或澄清说明，包括关于“其所拥有的一切手段”、“重大损害”和“国家管辖范围以外的地区”等短语的建议或说明。 |
| It was also suggested that the no-harm
principle be extended to situations of armed conflict beyond occupation. | 还有人建议，不损害原则的范围应延伸至占领以外的武装冲突局势。 |
| (e) Future work | (e) 今后的工作 |
| 206. Support was expressed for the
proposals by the Special Rapporteur regarding future work on the topic. | 206. 有人表示支持特别报告员关于这一专题今后工作的建议。 |
| It was suggested that, in her next
report, the Special Rapporteur address the extent to which the draft
principles apply to non-international armed conflicts; enforcement measures;
compensation for environmental damage; | 有人建议特别报告员在下一次报告中讨论原则草案在多大程度上适用于非国际性武装冲突、强制执法措施、环境损害赔偿以及责任和赔偿责任问题。 |
| and questions of responsibility and
liability. The Special Rapporteur was also encouraged to clarify the role and
obligations of non-State actors. | 还鼓励特别报告员澄清非国家行为体的作用和义务。 |
| A suggestion was made to elaborate on the
relevance of the precautionary and “polluter pays” principles with regard to
the topic, although opposition to this proposal was expressed. | 有人建议详细说明预防原则和“污染者付费”原则与本专题的相关性，但也有人反对这项建议。 |
| 207. Support was also expressed for
completing the first reading on the topic in 2019, although it was noted that
this was an ambitious goal. | 207. 还有人表示支持在2019年完成关于该专题的一读，但有人指出这一目标要求过高。 |
| 3. Concluding remarks of the Special
Rapporteur | 3. 特别报告员的总结 |
| 208. Regarding the applicability of the
law of occupation to international organizations, the Special Rapporteur
noted that such law may have relevance to the administration of a territory,
in particular to United Nations missions, provided that they entail the
exercise of functions and powers over a territory that are comparable to
those of an occupying State under the law of armed conflict. | 208. 关于占领法对国际组织的适用性，特别报告员指出，此类法律可能与领土管理有关，特别是与联合国特派团有关，条件是它们需要对一块领土行使的职能和权力类似于武装冲突法下占领国的职能和权力。 |
| The Special Rapporteur pointed out that,
even considering that the law of occupation could complement the mandate laid
down in the relevant Security Council resolutions, there was very little
actual practice of having recourse to the law of occupation for such purpose. | 特别报告员指出，即使考虑到占领法可以补充安全理事会相关决议中规定的任务，也很少有为此目的诉诸占领法的实际做法。 |
| This remained a theoretical possibility,
and the issue was not mature enough to be addressed in the draft principles. | 这仍然是一种理论上的可能性，这个问题还不够成熟，不应在原则草案中予以阐述。 |
| The Special Rapporteur proposed to
replace the term “occupying State” in the draft principles by the expression
“Occupying Power”. which could leave the door open for further developments
in this regard. | 特别报告员建议将原则草案中的“占领国”改为“占领方”。 这可以为这方面的进一步发展保留可能性。 |
| 209. The Special Rapporteur stressed that
the distinction between belligerent occupation and pacific occupation had
lost much significance, and that the presence of armed forces based on an
agreement were already largely covered by draft principles 7 and 8. | 209. 特别报告员强调，现在已经不太重视交战占领和和平占领之间的区别，原则草案7和8已经基本涵盖了基于协定的武装部队的驻扎。 |
| She reiterated that the focus of the
report and of the draft principles was on belligerent — or military —
occupation. | 她重申，报告和原则草案的重点是交战占领或军事占领。 |
| In addition, the Special Rapporteur
considered that no distinction between different forms of occupation was needed,
since the law of armed conflict did not distinguish between different types
of occupation. | 此外，特别报告员认为，不需要区分不同形式的占领，因为武装冲突法没有区分不同类型的占领。 |
| At the same time, the Special Rapporteur
pointed out that the obligations of the occupying State under the law of
occupation were to a certain extent dependent on the prevailing situation,
and that a certain flexibility was thus recognized in its implementation. | 同时，特别报告员指出，占领国根据占领法承担的义务在一定程度上取决于当时的情况，因此在执行时承认一定的灵活性。 |
| 210. With respect to the interplay of
different areas of international law, the Special Rapporteur indicated that
the requirements of the law of occupation as lex specialis, as well as the
concrete realities of the situation, affected the extent to which other areas
of international law, such as international human rights law and
international environmental law, may complement the law of armed conflict. | 210. 关于不同领域的国际法之间的相互作用，特别报告员指出，占领法作为特别法的要求，以及具体的实际局势，影响着国际人权法和国际环境法等其他领域的国际法可在多大程度上补充武装冲突法。 |
| This did not mean that humanitarian
principles, human rights and environmental considerations could be ignored,
as the jurisprudence of the International Court of Justice made clear. | 正如国际法院的判例所表明的那样，这并不意味着人道主义原则、人权和环境考虑因素可以被忽视。 |
| The question therefore was not whether
certain peacetime rules applied in situations of armed conflict or
occupation, but how they applied. | 因此，问题不是某些和平时期规则是否适用于武装冲突或占领局势，而是这些规则如何适用。 |
| 211. On the general issue of the legality
or illegality of occupation, the Special Rapporteur noted that the law of
armed conflict applied whenever the criteria of armed conflict were
fulfilled, regardless of the reasons of the conflict. | 211. 关于占领合法还是非法这一一般性问题，特别报告员指出，无论冲突的原因如何，只要符合武装冲突的标准，武装冲突法就适用。 |
| She stressed that occupation law, from
the perspective of international humanitarian law, applied equally to all occupations,
whether or not they were the result of force used lawfully within the jus ad
bellum. | 她强调，从国际人道主义法的角度来看，占领法同样适用于所有占领，无论这些占领是否是在诉诸战争权范围内合法使用武力的结果。 |
| 212. The Special Rapporteur indicated
that, although the first report focused on the right to health, other human
rights were relevant from the point of view of environmental protection. | 212. 特别报告员指出，尽管第一次报告以健康权为重点，但从环境保护的角度来看，其他人权也是相关的。 |
| She concluded that such rights could
usefully be addressed in the commentary. | 她认为，评注中论述这些权利可能会有所帮助。 |
| The Special Rapporteur suggested that the
relationship between the draft principles proposed in the first report and
the draft principles already adopted by the Commission be clarified in the
commentary. | 特别报告员建议在评注中澄清第一次报告中的拟议原则草案与委员会已经通过的原则草案之间的关系。 |
| 213. The Special Rapporteur noted that
the reformulation proposed in her introduction was generally supported. | 213. 特别报告员指出，她在导言中提出的重新表述得到了普遍支持。 |
| She added that the term “general
obligation” was used in reference to article 43 of the Hague Regulations,
which set forth the obligation of the occupying State to restore and maintain
public order and civil life. | 她补充说，“一般义务”一词是参照《海牙章程》第四十三条使用的，该条规定了占领国恢复和维持公共秩序和公民生活的义务。 |
| Such an obligation must be interpreted in
light of current circumstances, including the importance of environmental
concerns as an essential interest of all States and taking into account the
development of international human rights law. | 解释这种义务时必须参考当前情况，包括环境问题作为所有国家根本利益的重要性，并考虑到国际人权法的发展。 |
| She also indicated that the term
“environmental considerations” were context-dependent and evolving, as
indicated in the commentary to draft principle 11. | 她还指出，如原则草案11的评注所示，“环境因素”一词视具体情况而定，并不断演变。 |
| The Special Rapporteur also indicated that
latter part of paragraph 1, concerning the territorial scope of draft
principle 19, could be addressed in the commentary. | 特别报告员还表示，关于原则草案19第1段关于领土范围的部分可以在评注中阐述。 |
| Regarding the second paragraph of draft
principle 19, the Special Rapporteur acknowledged the usefulness of making
reference to the international obligations of the occupied State, in addition
to its legislation. | 关于原则草案19第2段，特别报告员承认，除了提及被占领国的立法之外，提及被占领国的国际义务也是有益的。 |
| Finally, the Special Rapporteur expressed
her agreement with the proposal made by several members to include a
provision related to the human rights obligations of the occupying State. | 最后，特别报告员表示同意几位委员的建议，即列入一项与占领国的人权义务有关的规定。 |
| 214. As regards draft principle 20, the
Special Rapporteur noted that the first issue concerned the limits of the
Occupying Power’s right to administer and use the resources of the occupied
territory. | 214. 关于原则草案20, 特别报告员指出，第一个问题涉及对占领方管理和利用被占领土资源的权利的限制。 |
| In that respect, she indicated that the
proposal to add wording, either in the draft principle or the commentary,
along the lines of the Institute of International Law’s Bruges Declaration on
the Use of Force, could be useful. | 在这方面，她表示，关于在原则草案或评注中添加类似国际法学会《关于使用武力的布鲁日宣言》 的措辞的建议可能有所帮助。 |
| She added that the principle of permanent
sovereignty over natural resources was also to be taken into account. | 她补充说，应考虑到对自然资源的永久主权原则。 |
| Regarding the mention of “minimizing
environmental harm”, the Special Rapporteur stressed that the purpose of
draft principles, as indicated in draft principle 2, was to enhance “the
protection of the environment in relation to armed conflict, including
through preventive measures for minimizing damage to the environment during
armed conflict”. | 关于“将对环境的损害减少至最低限度”的提法，特别报告员强调，如原则草案2所示，原则草案的宗旨是“通过将武装冲突期间对环境损害减少至最低限度的预防措施”，加强“与武装冲突有关的环境保护”。 |
| Further, the Special Rapporteur recalled
that draft principle 20 was grounded on article 55 of the Hague Regulations,
which is binding as customary international law and should be interpreted to
involve environmental aspects. | 此外，特别报告员回顾说，原则20草案以《海牙章程》第五十五条为基础，该条作为习惯国际法具有约束力，应被解释为包含环境方面。 |
| In addition, the concept of
sustainability, in particular in the context of sustainable use of natural
resources, was well established, as reflected in the adoption by the General
Assembly of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the 17
Sustainable Development Goals. | 此外，可持续性概念，特别是在可持续利用自然资源背景下，已经得到明确确立，大会通过《2030年可持续发展议程》和17个可持续发展目标 即体现了这一点。 |
| 215. The Special Rapporteur indicated
that draft principle 21 had met with broad agreement. | 215. 特别报告员指出，原则草案21获得了广泛同意。 |
| In addition to the current language, two
alternatives were supported deriving either from the Advisory Opinion of the
International Court of Justice concerning the Legality of the Threat or Use
of Nuclear Weapons or from the Commission’s draft articles on the prevention
of transboundary harm from hazardous activities. | 除了目前的措词之外，两种备选案文得到了支持，一种来自国际法院关于使用或威胁使用核武器的合法性的咨询意见， 另一种来自委员会“预防危险活动的跨界损害条款草案”。 |
| 216. Regarding future work on the topic,
the Special Rapporteur clarified that her intention was to address
non-international armed conflicts, as well as the questions of responsibility
and liability, in the context of the topic and not to give a comprehensive
presentation of these two areas. | 216. 关于这一专题的今后工作，特别报告员澄清说，她打算在这一专题的背景下阐述非国际武装冲突以及责任和赔偿责任问题，而不是全面地说明这两个领域。 |
| She noted that it would not be advisable
to expressly limit the draft principles to one type of armed conflict given
that the development of customary international law had a tendency to
progressively reduce the importance of the distinction between international
and non-international armed conflicts. | 她指出，鉴于习惯国际法的发展趋势是逐渐淡化国际与非国际武装冲突之间区别，明确将原则草案限制在一种类型的武装冲突是不可取的。 |
| This was also in line with the approach
taken by the Commission on the topic so far. | 这也符合委员会迄今为止在这一专题上采取的办法。 |
| C. Text of the draft principles on
protection of the environment in relation to armed conflicts provisionally
adopted so far by the Commission | C. 委员会迄今为止暂时通过的与武装冲突有关的环境保护原则草案案文 |
| 1. Text of the draft principles | 1. 原则草案案文 |
| 217. The text of the draft principles
provisionally adopted so far by the Commission is reproduced below. | 217. 委员会迄今为止暂时通过的原则草案案文载录如下。 |
| Protection of the environment in relation
to armed conflicts | 与武装冲突有关的环境保护 |
| Principle 1 Scope | 原则1 范围 |
| The present draft principles apply to the
protection of the environment before, during or after an armed conflict. | 本原则草案适用于武装冲突之前、期间和之后的环境保护。 |
| Principle 2 Purpose | 原则2 宗旨 |
| The present draft principles are aimed at
enhancing the protection of the environment in relation to armed conflict,
including through preventive measures for minimizing damage to the
environment during armed conflict and through remedial measures. | 本原则草案旨在通过将武装冲突期间对环境损害减少至最低限度的预防措施以及通过补救措施，加强与武装冲突有关的环境保护。 |
| Part One General principles | 第一部分 一般原则 |
| Principle 4 Measures to enhance the
protection of the environment | 原则4 加强环境保护的措施 |
| 1. States shall, pursuant to their
obligations under international law, take effective legislative,
administrative, judicial and other measures to enhance the protection of the
environment in relation to armed conflict. | 1. 各国应依照国际法规定的义务，采取有效的立法、行政、司法或其他措施，加强与武装冲突有关的环境保护。 |
| 2. In addition, States should take
further measures, as appropriate, to enhance the protection of the
environment in relation to armed conflict. | 2. 此外，各国应当酌情采取进一步措施，加强与武装冲突有关的环境保护。 |
| Principle 5 [I-(x)] Designation of
protected zones | 原则5 [一-(十)] 指定受保护区 |
| States should designate, by agreement or
otherwise, areas of major environmental and cultural importance as protected
zones. | 国家应当以协议或其他方式，指定具有重大环境和文化意义的区域为受保护区。 |
| Principle 6 Protection of the environment
of indigenous peoples | 原则6 保护土著人民的环境 |
| 1. States should take appropriate
measures, in the event of an armed conflict, to protect the environment of
the territories that indigenous peoples inhabit. | 1. 各国应当采取适当措施，在发生武装冲突时保护土著人民所居住领土的环境。 |
| 2. After an armed conflict that has
adversely affected the environment of the territories that indigenous peoples
inhabit, States should undertake effective consultations and cooperation with
the indigenous peoples concerned, through appropriate procedures and in
particular through their own representative institutions, for the purpose of
taking remedial measures. | 2. 如武装冲突对土著人民所居住领土的环境造成有害影响，各国应当在冲突结束后借助适当程序，特别是通过土著人民自身的代表机构，同有关土著人民开展有效的协商与合作，以便采取补救措施。 |
| Principle 7 Agreements concerning the
presence of military forces in relation to armed conflict | 原则7 与武装冲突有关的驻军协议 |
| States and international organizations
should, as appropriate, include provisions on environmental protection in
agreements concerning the presence of military forces in relation to armed
conflict. | 各国和国际组织应当酌情将环境保护条款纳入与武装冲突有关的驻军协议。 |
| Such provisions may include preventive
measures, impact assessments, restoration and clean-up measures. | 此种条款可包括预防措施、影响评估、恢复和清理措施。 |
| Principle 8 Peace operations | 原则8 和平行动 |
| States and international organizations
involved in peace operations in relation to armed conflict shall consider the
impact of such operations on the environment and take appropriate measures to
prevent, mitigate and remediate the negative environmental consequences
thereof. | 各国和国际组织参加与武装冲突有关的和平行动，应考虑这些行动对环境的影响，并采取适当措施，防止、减轻和补救其负面的环境后果。 |
| Part Two Principles applicable during
armed conflict | 第二部分 武装冲突期间适用的原则 |
| Principle 9 [II-1] General protection of
the natural environment during armed conflict | 原则9[二-1] 武装冲突期间对自然环境的总体保护 |
| 1. The natural environment shall be
respected and protected in accordance with applicable international law and,
in particular, the law of armed conflict. | 1. 应按照适用的国际法，特别是武装冲突法，尊重和保护自然环境。 |
| 2. Care shall be taken to protect the
natural environment against widespread, long-term and severe damage. | 2. 应注意保护自然环境免遭广泛、长期和严重的损害。 |
| 3. No part of the natural environment may
be attacked, unless it has become a military objective. | 3. 除非自然环境成为军事目标，否则任何一部分都不得受到攻击。 |
| Principle 10 [II-2] Application of the
law of armed conflict to the natural environment | 原则10[二-2] 对自然环境适用武装冲突法 |
| The law of armed conflict, including the
principles and rules on distinction, proportionality, military necessity and
precautions in attack, shall be applied to the natural environment, with a
view to its protection. | 应对自然环境适用武装冲突法，包括关于区分、相称性、军事必要性和攻击中采取预防措施的原则和规则，以期保护环境。 |
| Principle 11 [II-3] Environmental
considerations | 原则11[二-3] 环境因素 |
| Environmental considerations shall be
taken into account when applying the principle of proportionality and the
rules on military necessity. | 适用相称性原则和军事必要性规则时，应考虑环境因素。 |
| Principle 12 [II-4] Prohibition of
reprisals | 原则12[二-4] 禁止报复 |
| Attacks against the natural environment
by way of reprisals are prohibited. | 禁止作为报复而对自然环境进行攻击。 |
| Principle 13 [II-5] Protected zones | 原则13[二-5] 受保护区 |
| An area of major environmental and
cultural importance designated by agreement as a protected zone shall be
protected against any attack, as long as it does not contain a military
objective. | 以协议指定为受保护区的具有重大环境和文化意义的地区，只要不包含军事目标，应保护其不受任何攻击。 |
| Part Three Principles applicable after an
armed conflict | 第三部分 武装冲突后适用的原则 |
| Principle 14 Peace processes | 原则14 和平进程 |
| 1. Parties to an armed conflict should,
as part of the peace process, including where appropriate in peace
agreements, address matters relating to the restoration and protection of the
environment damaged by the conflict. | 1. 武装冲突各方应当作为和平进程的一部分，处理与遭冲突损害的环境的恢复和保护有关的问题，包括酌情在和平协议中处理此事。 |
| 2. Relevant international organizations
should, where appropriate, play a facilitating role in this regard. | 2. 有关国际组织应当酌情在这方面发挥协助作用。 |
| Principle 15 Post-armed conflict
environmental assessments and remedial measures | 原则15 武装冲突后的环境评估与补救措施 |
| Cooperation among relevant actors,
including international organizations, is encouraged with respect to
post-armed conflict environmental assessments and remedial measures. | 鼓励包括国际组织在内的有关行为方在武装冲突后的环境评估与补救措施方面开展合作。 |
| Principle 16 Remnants of war | 原则16 战争遗留物 |
| 1. After an armed conflict, parties to
the conflict shall seek to remove or render harmless toxic and hazardous
remnants of war under their jurisdiction or control that are causing or risk
causing damage to the environment. | 1. 武装冲突后，冲突各方应争取消除其管辖或控制下造成或可能造成环境破坏的有毒和危险的战争遗留物，或使之无害。 |
| Such measures shall be taken subject to
the applicable rules of international law. | 应根据适用的国际法规则采取此类措施。 |
| 2. The parties shall also endeavour to
reach agreement, among themselves and, where appropriate, with other States
and with international organizations, on technical and material assistance,
including, in appropriate circumstances, the undertaking of joint operations
to remove or render harmless such toxic and hazardous remnants of war. | 2. 各方还应争取相互并酌情同他国和国际组织就技术与物资援助达成协议，包括在适当情况下开展联合行动，消除这种有毒和危险的战争遗留物或使之无害。 |
| 3. Paragraphs 1 and 2 are without
prejudice to any rights or obligations under international law to clear,
remove, destroy or maintain minefields, mined areas, mines, booby-traps,
explosive ordnance and other devices. | 3. 第1和第2段不妨碍国际法规定的任何清除、移除、销毁或维护雷场、雷区、地雷、诱杀装置、爆炸性弹药和其他装置之权利和义务。 |
| Principle 17 Remnants of war at sea | 原则17 海上战争遗留物 |
| States and relevant international
organizations should cooperate to ensure that remnants of war at sea do not
constitute a danger to the environment. | 各国和有关国际组织应当开展合作，确保海上战争遗留物不对环境构成危险。 |
| Principle 18 Sharing and granting access
to information | 原则18 共享与准许获取信息 |
| 1. To facilitate remedial measures after
an armed conflict, States and relevant international organizations shall
share and grant access to relevant information in accordance with their
obligations under international law. | 1. 为便利武装冲突后采取补救措施，各国和有关国际组织应按国际法规定的义务，共享并准许获取相关信息。 |
| 2. Nothing in the present draft principle
obliges a State or international organization to share or grant access to
information vital to its national defence or security. | 2. 本原则草案中并无任何内容要求一国或国际组织必须共享和准许获取对其国防或安全至关重要的信息。 |
| Nevertheless, that State or international
organization shall cooperate in good faith with a view to providing as much
information as possible under the circumstances. | 但国家或国际组织应诚意合作，根据具体情况提供尽可能多的信息。 |
| 2. Text of the draft principles and
commentaries thereto provisionally adopted by the Commission at its
seventieth session | 2. 委员会第七十届会议暂时通过的原则草案及其评注案文 |
| 218. The text of the draft principles and
commentaries thereto provisionally adopted by the Commission at its
seventieth session is reproduced below. | 218. 委员会第七十届会议暂时通过的原则草案及其评注案文载录如下。 |
| Protection of the environment in relation
to armed conflicts | 与武装冲突有关的环境保护 |
| Principle 4 Measures to enhance the
protection of the environment | 原则4 加强环境保护的措施 |
| 1. States shall, pursuant to their
obligations under international law, take effective legislative,
administrative, judicial and other measures to enhance the protection of the
environment in relation to armed conflict. | 1. 各国应依照国际法规定的义务，采取有效的立法、行政、司法和其他措施，加强与武装冲突有关的环境保护。 |
| 2. In addition, States should take
further measures, as appropriate, to enhance the protection of the
environment in relation to armed conflict. | 2. 此外，各国应当酌情采取进一步措施，加强与武装冲突有关的环境保护。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Draft principle 4 recognizes that
States are required to take effective measures to enhance the protection of
the environment in relation to armed conflict. | (1) 原则草案4确认，各国须采取有效措施，加强与武装冲突有关的环境保护。 |
| Paragraph 1 recalls obligations under
international law and paragraph 2 encourages States voluntarily to take further
measures. | 第1段回顾了国际法规定的义务，第2段鼓励各国自愿采取进一步措施。 |
| The phrase “to enhance the protection of
the environment”, included in both paragraphs, corresponds to the purpose of
the set of draft principles. | 这两段中均包含的“加强环境保护”一语与本套原则草案的目的相对应。 |
| Similarly, the phrase “in relation to
armed conflict”, also inserted in both paragraphs, is intended to underline
the connection of environmental protection to armed conflict. | 同样，两段中“与武装冲突有关的”一语是为了强调环境保护与武装冲突的关系。 |
| (2) Paragraph 1 reflects that States have
obligations under international law to enhance the protection of the
environment in relation to armed conflict and addresses the measures that
States are obliged to take to this end. | (2) 第1段反映出各国根据国际法有义务加强与武装冲突有关的环境保护，并述及各国为此须采取的措施。 |
| The obligation is denoted by the word
“shall”. | 这项义务通过“应”字来体现。 |
| The requirement is qualified by the
expression “pursuant to their obligations under international law”,
indicating that the provision does not require States to take measures that
go beyond their existing obligations. | 该款有一个限定语“依照国际法规定的义务”，表明该款不要求各国采取超出其现有义务范围的措施。 |
| The specific obligations of a State under
this provision will differ according to which relevant obligations under
international law it is bound. | 一国根据该规定承担的特定义务将有所不同，具体取决于其受国际法下的哪些相关义务约束。 |
| (3) Consequently, paragraph 1 is
formulated broadly in order to cover a wide range of measures. | (3) 因此，第1段措辞笼统，以涵盖各种措施。 |
| The provision includes examples of the
types of measures that can be taken by States, namely, “legislative,
administrative, judicial and other measures”. | 该款列出了各国可采取的措施类型，即“立法、行政、司法和其他措施”。 |
| The examples are not exhaustive, as
indicated by the open category “other measures”. | 如“其他措施”这一开放性类别所示，这些例子并不是详尽无遗的。 |
| Instead, the examples aim to highlight
the most relevant types of measures to be taken by States. | 事实上，它们是为了强调各国应采取的最相关的措施类型。 |
| (4) The law of armed conflict imposes
several obligations on States that directly or indirectly contribute to the
aim of enhancing the protection of the environment in relation to armed
conflict. | (4) 武装冲突法对直接或间接为加强与武装冲突有关的环境保护这一目标做出贡献的国家规定了一些义务。 |
| The notion “under international law” is
nevertheless broader and covers also other relevant treaty-based or customary
obligations related to the protection of the environment before, during or
after an armed conflict, whether derived from international environmental
law, human rights law or other areas of law. | 但“国际法的规定”这一概念的范围更广，还涵盖与武装冲突之前、期间或之后的环境保护有关的其他相关条约义务或习惯义务，无论这些义务是源于国际环境法、人权法还是其他法律领域。 |
| (5) As far as the law of armed conflict
is concerned, the obligation to disseminate the law of armed conflict to
armed forces and, to the extent possible, also to the civilian population
contributes to the protection of the environment. | (5) 就武装冲突法而言，向武装部队并尽可能向平民等各方传播武装冲突法的义务有助于保护环境。 |
| A relevant provision to this end is
article 83 of Additional Protocol I, which provides that the High Contracting
Parties are under the obligation to disseminate information on, among other
provisions, articles 35 and 55 to their forces. | 这方面的一个相关条款是《第一附加议定书》第八十三条，其中规定缔约方有义务向其部队传播第三十五条和第五十五条 等条款。 |
| This obligation can also be linked to
common article 1 of the Geneva Conventions, in which States Parties undertake
to respect and ensure respect for the Conventions in all circumstances. | 这项义务还可与日内瓦公约四公约共同的第一条相联系，在该条中，缔约国承诺在所有情况下尊重和确保尊重这些公约。 |
| Such dissemination can take place for
instance through the inclusion of relevant information in military manuals,
as encouraged by the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC)
Guidelines for Military Manuals and Instructions on the Protection of the
Environment in Time of Armed Conflict. | 可通过将有关信息纳入军事手册来进行这种传播， 如红十字国际委员会(红十字委员会)《关于武装冲突中的环境保护的军事手册和指南准则》所鼓励的那样。 |
| (6) Common article 1 is also interpreted
to require that States, when they are in a position to do so, exert their
influence to prevent and stop violations of the Geneva Conventions by parties
to an armed conflict. | (6) 共同的第一条还被解释为要求各国在有能力时发挥影响力，防止和制止武装冲突各方违反日内瓦四公约的行为。 |
| As far as the protection of the
environment is concerned, this could entail, for instance, sharing of
scientific expertise as to the nature of the damage caused to the natural
environment by certain types of weapons, or making available technical advice
as to how to protect areas of particular ecological importance or fragility. | 就保护环境而言，举例来说，这可能涉及分享某些类型武器对自然环境造成的损害性质方面的科学专业知识，或就如何保护具有特殊生态重要性或脆弱性的地区提出技术建议。 |
| (7) A further obligation to conduct “a
weapons review” is found in article 36 of Additional Protocol I. According to
this provision, a High Contracting Party is under an obligation to determine
whether the employment of a new weapon would, in some or all circumstances,
be prohibited by Additional Protocol I or by any other applicable rule of
international law. | (7) 《第一附加议定书》第三十六条还规定了进行“武器审查”的进一步义务。 根据这项规定，缔约方有义务断定，在某些或所有情况下，新武器的使用是否为《第一附加议定书》或适用的任何其他国际法规则所禁止。 |
| It is notable that the obligation covers
the study, development, acquisition or adoption of all means or methods of
warfare: both weapons and the way in which they can be used. | 值得注意的是，这项义务涵盖一切作战手段或方法的研究、发展、取得或采用：包括武器及其使用方式。 |
| According to the ICRC commentary on the
Additional Protocols, article 36 “implies the obligation to establish
internal procedures for the purpose of elucidating the issue of legality”. | 根据红十字委员会关于各项附加议定书的评注，第三十六条“意味着为阐明合法性问题而建立内部程序的义务”。 |
| A number of States, including States not
party to Additional Protocol I, are known to have established such
procedures. | 一些国家，包括非《第一附加议定书》缔约国在内，已经建立了这种程序。 |
| (8) The obligation to institute “a
weapons review” binds all High Contracting Parties to Additional Protocol I.
The reference to “any other rule of international law” makes it clear that
the obligation goes beyond merely studying whether the employment of a
certain weapon would be contrary to the law of armed conflict. | (8) 开展“武器审查”的义务对《第一附加议定书》的所有缔约国都有约束力。 “任何其他国际法规则”一语表明，该义务不仅仅在于研究某种武器的使用是否会违反武装冲突法。 |
| This means, first, an examination of
whether the employment of a new weapon, means or method of warfare would, in
some or all circumstances, be prohibited by Additional Protocol I, including
articles 35 and 55, which are of direct relevance to the protection of the
environment. | 这意味着首先要审查新的武器、作战手段或方法的使用在某些或所有情况下是否为《第一附加议定书》，包括第三十五条和第五十五条所禁止，这两条与环境保护直接相关。 |
| Second, there is a need to go beyond
Additional Protocol I and analyse whether any other rules of the law of armed
conflict, treaty or customary, or any other areas of international law might
prohibit the employment of a new weapon, means or method of warfare. | 其次，有必要超出《第一附加议定书》的范围，分析武装冲突法、无论是条约法还是习惯法的任何其他规则或任何其他国际法领域是否可能禁止使用新的武器、作战手段或方法。 |
| Such examination will include taking into
account any applicable international environmental law and human rights
obligations. | 这种审查将包括考虑到任何适用的国际环境法和人权义务。 |
| (9) While Additional Protocol I applies
only to international armed conflict, the weapons review provided for in
article 36 also promotes the respect for the law in non-international armed
conflicts. | (9) 虽然《第一附加议定书》仅适用于国际性武装冲突，但第三十六条规定的武器审查也可促进在非国际性武装冲突中遵守法律。 |
| Furthermore, the use of weapons that are
inherently indiscriminate and the use of means or methods of warfare that are
of a nature to cause superfluous injury or unnecessary suffering are
prohibited under customary international law. | 此外，习惯国际法禁止使用本质上具有滥杀滥伤作用的武器，以及会造成过分伤害或不必要痛苦的作战手段或方法。 |
| These rules are not limited to
international armed conflict. | 这些规则不限于国际性武装冲突。 |
| It follows that new weapons as well as
methods of warfare are to be reviewed against all applicable international
law, including the law governing non-international armed conflicts, in
particular as far as the protection of civilians and the principle of
distinction are concerned. | 因此，应根据所有适用的国际法，包括有关非国际性武装冲突的法律，审查新的武器和作战方法，特别是在保护平民和区分原则方面。 |
| The obligation not to use inherently
indiscriminate weapons, means or methods of warfare has the indirect effect
of protecting the environment in a non-international armed conflict. | 不使用本质上具有滥杀滥伤作用的武器、作战手段或方法的义务在非国际性武装冲突中具有保护环境的间接作用。 |
| Furthermore, the special treaty-based
prohibitions of certain weapons (such as biological and chemical weapons)
that may cause serious environmental harm must be observed. | 另外，必须遵守禁止可能造成严重环境损害的某些武器(如生物和化学武器)的特殊条约规定。 |
| (10) States also have the obligation to effectively
exercise jurisdiction and prosecute persons suspected of certain war crimes
that have a bearing on the protection of the environment in relation to armed
conflict, to the extent that such crimes fall within the category of grave
breaches of the Geneva Conventions. | (10) 各国还有义务有效行使管辖权，起诉涉嫌犯下与武装冲突中的环境保护有关、严重违反日内瓦四公约的某些战争罪行的人。 |
| Examples of grave breaches, the
suppression of which provides indirect protection to certain components of
the natural environment, include wilfully causing great suffering or serious
injury to body or health and extensive destruction and appropriation of
property, not justified by military necessity and carried out wantonly and
unlawfully. | 严重违反的例子包括故意造成重大痛苦或对身体或健康的严重伤害，以及广泛破坏和占用财产，这些行为并非出于军事必要性，而是肆意和非法的，对它们的禁止可为自然环境的某些组成部分提供间接保护。 |
| (11) Yet another treaty-based obligation
is for States to record the laying of mines in order to facilitate future
clearing of landmines. | (11) 另一项基于条约的义务是各国应记录地雷埋设情况，以便于今后清除地雷。 |
| (12) Paragraph 2 of the draft principle
addresses voluntary measures that would further enhance the protection of the
environment in relation to armed conflict. | (12) 原则草案第2段涉及进一步加强与武装冲突有关的环境保护的自愿措施。 |
| This paragraph is therefore less
prescriptive than paragraph 1 and the word “should” is used to reflect this
difference. | 因此，该段的规定性比第1段要弱，使用了“应当”一词来反映这种差异。 |
| The phrases “[i]n addition” and “further
measures” both serve to indicate that this provision goes beyond the measures
that States shall take pursuant to their obligations under international law,
which are addressed in paragraph 1. | “此外”和“进一步措施”这两个短语都表明，该段超出了第1段述及的各国应依照国际法规定的义务采取的措施范围。 |
| Like the measures referred to in
paragraph 1, the measures taken by States may be of legislative, judicial,
administrative or other nature. | 与第1段所述措施一样，各国采取的措施可具有立法、司法、行政或其他性质。 |
| Furthermore, they could include special
agreements providing additional protection to the natural environment in
situations of armed conflict. | 此外还可包括在武装冲突情况下为自然环境提供额外保护的特别协定。 |
| (13) In addition to encouraging States to
take voluntary measures to enhance the protection of the environment in
relation to armed conflict beyond their current obligations under
international law, the paragraph captures the recent developments in the practice
of States to this end. | (13) 除了鼓励各国采取超出其现有国际法义务范围的自愿措施来加强与武装冲突有关的环境保护外，该段还反映了各国在这方面实践的最新发展情况。 |
| One example of how States can continue
this development is through providing more explicit guidelines on
environmental protection in their military manuals. | 关于各国如何继续这种发展，一个例子是在其军事手册中规定更加明确的环境保护准则。 |
| Such guidelines may, for instance, aim to
ensure training of military personnel involved in peace operations on the
environmental aspects of the operation, as well as the conduct of
environmental assessments. | 例如，这些准则的目的可以是确保对参与和平行动的军事人员进行关于该行动环境方面和开展环境评估的培训。 |
| Other measures that should be taken by
States can aim at enhancing cooperation, as appropriate, with other States,
as well as with relevant international organizations. | 各国应当采取的其他措施可酌情以加强与其他国家和有关国际组织的合作为目的。 |
| (14) The overall development that
paragraph 2 aims to capture and encourage has its basis also in the practice
of international organizations. | (14) 第2段旨在反映和鼓励的总体发展还以国际组织的实践为基础。 |
| One example of such practice is the
United Nations initiative “Greening the Blue Helmets”, which aims to function
as an environmental, sustainable management programme. | 这种实践的一个例子是旨在作为一个可持续环境管理方案的联合国“绿动蓝盔”倡议。 |
| A further example of this development is
the joint environmental policy developed by the United Nations Department of
Peacekeeping Operations and Department of Field Services. | 另一个例子是联合国维持和平行动部和外勤支助部制定的联合环境政策。 |
| The policy includes obligations to
develop environmental baseline studies and adhere to a number of multilateral
environmental agreements. | 该政策包含开展环境基线研究和遵守一些多边环境协定的义务。 |
| References are made to treaties and
instruments, including the Declaration of the United Nations Conference on
the Human Environment (Stockholm Declaration), the World Charter for Nature,
the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and
Flora, the Convention on Biological Diversity and the Convention on Wetlands
of International Importance especially as Waterfowl Habitat (Ramsar
Convention), as standards to be considered when a mission establishes its
environmental objectives and procedures. | 其中提到以各种条约和文书，包括《联合国人类环境会议宣言》(《斯德哥尔摩宣言》)、《世界自然宪章》、《濒危野生动植物种国际贸易公约》、《生物多样性公约》 和《关于特别是作为水禽栖息地的国际重要湿地公约》(《拉姆萨尔公约》) 作为特派团制定其环境目标和程序时应当考虑的标准。 |
| Principle 6 Protection of the environment
of indigenous peoples | 原则6 保护土著人民的环境 |
| 1. States should take appropriate
measures, in the event of an armed conflict, to protect the environment of
the territories that indigenous peoples inhabit. | 1. 各国应当采取适当措施，在发生武装冲突时保护土著人民所居住领土的环境。 |
| 2. After an armed conflict that has
adversely affected the environment of the territories that indigenous peoples
inhabit, States should undertake effective consultations and cooperation with
the indigenous peoples concerned, through appropriate procedures and in
particular through their own representative institutions, for the purpose of taking
remedial measures. | 2. 如武装冲突对土著人民所居住领土的环境造成有害影响，各国应当在冲突结束后借助适当程序，特别是通过土著人民自身的代表机构，同有关土著人民开展有效的协商与合作，以便采取补救措施。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Draft principle 6 recognizes that
States should, due to the special relationship between indigenous peoples and
their environment, take appropriate measures to protect such an environment
in relation to an armed conflict. | (1) 原则草案6认识到，由于土著人民与其环境之间的特殊关系，各国应当采取适当措施，在武装冲突中保护这种环境。 |
| It further recognizes that where armed
conflict has adversely affected the environment of indigenous peoples’
territories, States should attempt to undertake remedial measures. | 该原则进一步认识到，如武装冲突对土著人民领土的环境造成有害影响，各国应当尝试采取补救措施。 |
| In light of the special relationship
between indigenous peoples and their environment, these steps should be taken
in a manner that consults and cooperates with such peoples, respecting their
relationship and through their own leadership and representative structures. | 鉴于土著人民与其环境之间的特殊关系，采取这些措施时应当通过土著人民自身的领导机构和代表机构与之进行协商与合作，从而尊重这种关系。 |
| (2) The special relationship between
indigenous peoples and their environment has been recognized, protected and
upheld by international instruments such as the Indigenous and Tribal Peoples
Convention, 1989 (No. 169) of the International Labour Organization and the
United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, as well as in
the practice of States and in the jurisprudence of international courts and
tribunals. | (2) 土著人民与其环境之间的特殊关系在国际文书，如国际劳工组织1989年《土著和部落人民公约》(第169号)和《联合国土著人民权利宣言》 以及各国的实践和国际性法院和法庭的判例中得到承认、保护和支持。 |
| To this end, the land of indigenous
peoples has been recognized as having a “fundamental importance for their
collective physical and cultural survival as peoples”. | 为此，土著人民的土地被认为“对他们作为人民的集体实际生存和文化生存具有根本重要性”。 |
| (3) Paragraph 1 is based, in particular,
on article 29, paragraph 1, of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights
of Indigenous Peoples, which expresses the right of indigenous peoples to
“the conservation and protection of the environment and the productive
capacity of their lands or territories and resources”, and article 7,
paragraph 4, of ILO Indigenous and Tribal Peoples Convention, 1989 (No. 169),
which recognizes that “Governments shall take measures, in co-operation with
the peoples concerned, to protect and preserve the environment of the territories
they inhabit”. | (3) 第1段特别基于《联合国土著人民权利宣言》第29条第1款，其中指出土著人民有权“养护和保护其土地或领土和资源的环境和生产能力”， 以及劳工组织1989年《土著和部落人民公约》(第169号)第七条第4款，该条确认“各政府应与有关民族合作，采取措施保护并保持他们居住领土的环境”。 |
| (4) The specific rights of indigenous
peoples over certain lands or territories may be the subject of different
legal regimes in different States. | (4) 土著人民对某些土地或领土的特定权利可能是不同国家不同法律制度的主题。 |
| Further, in international instruments
concerning the rights of indigenous peoples, various formulations are used to
refer to the lands or territories connected to indigenous peoples, and over
which they have various rights and protective status. | 此外，在关于土著人民权利的国际文书中，采用了不同措辞来提及与土著人民有关联的土地或领土，他们对这些土地或领土拥有各种权利和保护地位。 |
| (5) Armed conflict may have the effect of
increasing existing vulnerabilities to environmental harm or creating new
types of environmental harm on the territories concerned and thereby
affecting the survival and well-being of the peoples connected to it. | (5) 武装冲突可能会增加易受环境危害影响的现有脆弱性，或在有关领土造成新的环境危害，从而影响到与之有关联的人民的生存和福祉。 |
| Under paragraph 1, in the event of an
armed conflict, States should take appropriate measures to promote the
continuation of the relationship that indigenous peoples have with their
ancestral lands. | 根据第1段，在发生武装冲突时，各国应当采取适当措施，促进土著人民与其祖传土地之间关系的继续。 |
| The appropriate protective measures
referred to in paragraph 1 may be taken, in particular, before or during an
armed conflict. | 可采取第1段所述的适当保护措施，特别是在武装冲突之前或期间。 |
| The wording of the paragraph is broad
enough to allow for the measures to be adjusted according to the
circumstances. | 该段的措辞足够广泛，从而可根据具体情况调整相关措施。 |
| (6) For example, the concerned State
should take steps to ensure that military activities do not take place in the
lands or territories of indigenous peoples unless justified by a relevant
public interest or otherwise freely agreed with or requested by the
indigenous people concerned. | (6) 例如，有关国家应当采取步骤，确保不在土著人民的土地或领土上进行军事活动，除非是基于相关公共利益有理由这样做，或经有关的土著人民自由同意，或应其要求这样做。 |
| This could be achieved through avoiding
placing military installations in indigenous peoples’ lands or territories,
and by designating their territories as protected areas, as set out in draft
principle 5. | 这可以通过避免在土著人民的土地或领土上安装军事设施，以及如原则草案5所规定的那样将其领土划为保护区来实现。 |
| In general, the concerned State should
consult effectively with the indigenous peoples concerned prior to using
their lands or territories for military activities. | 总的来说，有关国家应当在使用有关土著人民的土地或领土进行军事活动前与他们进行有效协商。 |
| During an armed conflict, the rights,
lands and territories of indigenous peoples also enjoy the protections
provided by the law of armed conflict and applicable human rights law. | 在武装冲突期间，土著人民的权利、土地和领土还享有武装冲突法和适用的人权法所提供的保护。 |
| (7) Paragraph 2 focuses on the phase
after an armed conflict has ended. | (7) 第2段侧重于武装冲突结束后的阶段。 |
| The purpose of this provision is to
facilitate the taking of remedial measures in the event that an armed
conflict has adversely affected the environment of the territories that
indigenous peoples inhabit. | 这项规定的目的是为了便利在武装冲突对土著人民所居住领土的环境产生不利影响时采取补救措施。 |
| In doing so, it seeks to ensure the
participatory rights of indigenous peoples in issues relating to their
territories in a post-conflict context, while focusing on States as the
subjects of the paragraph. | 该段通过这一点，力求确保土著人民在冲突后环境下，在与其领土有关的问题上享有参与权，同时把重点放在作为该段主题的国家上。 |
| (8) In such instance, the concerned
States should undertake effective consultations and cooperation with the
indigenous peoples concerned, through appropriate procedures and, in
particular, through their own representative institutions. | (8) 在这种情况下，有关国家应当借助适当程序，特别是通过土著人民自身的代表机构，与有关土著人民进行有效的磋商与合作。 |
| In doing so, States should consider the
special nature of the relationship between indigenous peoples and their
territories — in its social, political, spiritual, cultural and other
aspects. | 在此过程中，各国应当考虑土著人民与其领土之间关系的特殊性――在社会、政治、精神、文化等方面。 |
| Further, States should consider that this
relationship is often of a “collective” nature. | 此外，各国还应当考虑到，这种关系往往具有“集体”性质。 |
| (9) The need to proceed through
appropriate procedures and representative institutions of indigenous peoples
has been included to acknowledge the diversity of the existing procedures
within different States that allow for effective consultation and cooperation
with indigenous peoples, and the diversity of their modes of representation
in order to obtain their free, prior and informed consent before adopting
measures that may affect them. | (9) 列入借助适当程序和通过土著人民代表机构的必要性，是为了确认不同国家可藉以与土著人民进行有效磋商与合作的现有程序的多样性，以及土著人民代表模式的多样性，以便在采取可能影响到他们的措施之前，事先征得他们的自由知情同意。 |
| Principle 7 Agreements concerning the
presence of military forces in relation to armed conflict | 原则7 与武装冲突有关的驻军协议 |
| States and international organizations
should, as appropriate, include provisions on environmental protection in
agreements concerning the presence of military forces in relation to armed
conflict. | 各国和国际组织应当酌情将环境保护条款纳入与武装冲突有关的驻军协议。 |
| Such provisions may include preventive
measures, impact assessments, restoration and clean-up measures. | 此种条款可包括预防措施、影响评估、恢复和清理措施。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Draft principle 7 addresses
agreements concluded by States among themselves and between States and
international organizations, concerning the presence of military forces in
relation to armed conflict. | (1) 原则草案7涉及各国之间以及国家和国际组织之间订立的与武装冲突有关的驻军协议。 |
| The phrase “in relation to armed
conflict” underlines the purpose of the draft principles: to enhance the
protection of the environment in relation to armed conflict. | “与武装冲突有关的”一语强调了本套原则草案的目的，即加强与武装冲突有关的环境保护。 |
| Consequently, the provision does not
refer to situations in which military forces are being deployed without any
relation to an armed conflict, since such situations are outside the scope of
the topic. | 因此，这项规定没有提到武装部队的部署同武装冲突没有任何关系的情况，因为这种情况超出了本专题的范围。 |
| (2) The draft principle is cast in
general terms to refer to “agreements concerning the presence of military
forces in relation to armed conflict”. | (2) 本条原则草案一般性地提及“与武装冲突有关的驻军协议”。 |
| The specific designation and purpose of
such agreements can vary, and may, depending on the particular circumstances,
include status of forces and status of mission agreements (SOFAs and SOMAs). | 这些协议的具体名称和目的可能会有所不同，根据具体情况，可包括部队地位协议和特派团地位协议。 |
| The purpose of the draft principle is to
reflect recent developments whereby States and international organizations
have begun addressing matters relating to environmental protection in
agreements concerning the presence of military forces concluded with host
States. | 本原则草案的目的是反映最新动态，即各国和国际组织已开始在与东道国缔结的驻军协议中处理与环境保护有关的事项。 |
| The word “should” indicates that this
provision is not mandatory in nature, but rather aims at acknowledging and
encouraging this development. | “应当”一词，表明这一规定不是强制性的，而是为了确认和鼓励这一动态。 |
| (3) Examples of environmental provisions
in agreements concerning the presence of military forces in relation to armed
conflict include the United States-Iraq agreement on the withdrawal of the
United States from Iraq, which contains an explicit provision on the
protection of the environment. | (3) 在驻军协议中列入环境条款的例子包括美国与伊拉克之间关于美国从伊拉克撤军的协议，其中包含关于环境保护的明确规定。 |
| Another example is the status of forces
agreement between the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and
Afghanistan, in which the parties agree to pursue a preventative approach to
environmental protection. | 另一个例子是北大西洋公约组织(北约)与阿富汗之间的部队地位协议，其中双方同意采取预防性做法来保护环境。 |
| The status of mission agreement under the
European Security and Defence Policy also makes several references to
environmental obligations. | 欧洲安全和防卫政策下的特派团地位协议也多次提到环境义务。 |
| Relevant treaty practice includes also
the agreement between Germany and other NATO States, which states that
potential environmental effects shall be identified, analysed and evaluated,
in order to avoid environmental burden. | 有关的条约实践还包括德国与北约其他国家之间的协议，其中规定应对潜在的环境影响进行识别、分析和评估，以免造成环境负担。 |
| Moreover, the memorandum of special
understanding between the United States and the Republic of Korea contains
several provisions on environmental protection. | 此外，美国与大韩民国之间的特别谅解备忘录载有若干关于环境保护的规定。 |
| Reference can further be made to
arrangements applicable to short-term presence of foreign armed forces in a
country for the purpose of exercises, transit by land or training. | 还可参考适用于在一个国家短期驻扎的外国军队进行演习、陆上过境或训练的安排。 |
| (4) Reference can also be made to other agreements,
including those concerning the presence of military forces with a less clear
relation to armed conflict, such as the status of forces agreement between
the United States and Australia, which contains a relevant provision on
damage claims, and the Enhanced Defence Cooperation Agreement between the
United States and the Philippines, which contains provisions seeking to
prevent environmental damage and provides for a review process. | (4) 也可参考其他协议，包括与武装冲突的关系不太明确的驻军协议，例如美国与澳大利亚的部队地位协议(其中载有关于损害索赔的相关规定)， 以及美国与菲律宾的加强防务合作协议，其中包含旨在防止损害环境的条款，并规定了审查程序。 |
| (5) The draft principle also provides a
non-exhaustive list of provisions on environmental protection that may be
included in agreements concerning the presence of military forces in relation
to armed conflict. | (5) 本原则草案还提供了一份非详尽无遗的清单，其中列出了可纳入与武装冲突有关的驻军协议的环境保护条款。 |
| Thus the second sentence of the draft
principle mentions “preventive measures, impact assessments, restoration and
clean-up measures” as examples of what provisions of environmental protection
may address. | 因此第二句提到“预防措施、影响评估、恢复和清理措施”，作为环境保护条款可涉内容的例子。 |
| The presence of military forces may risk
having an adverse impact on the environment. | 驻军可能会给环境造成不利影响。 |
| In order to avoid such adverse impact to
the extent possible, measures of a preventive nature are of a great
importance. | 为了尽可能避免这种不利影响，预防性措施非常重要。 |
| Impact assessments are necessary to
determine the kind of restoration and clean-up measures that may be needed at
the conclusion of the presence of military forces. | 影响评估是确定驻军结束时可能需要采取的恢复和清理措施所必要的。 |
| (6) The measures referred to in the draft
principle may address a variety of relevant aspects. | (6) 原则草案中提到的措施可能涉及各种相关方面。 |
| Some precise examples that deserve
specific mention as reflected in treaty practice are: the recognition of the
importance of environmental protection, including the prevention of pollution
on facilities and areas granted to the deploying State, an understanding that
the agreement will be implemented in a manner consistent with protecting the
environment, cooperation and sharing of information between the host State
and the sending State regarding issues that could affect the health and
environment for citizens, measures to prevent environmental damage, periodic
environmental performance assessments, review processes, application of the
environmental laws of the host State or, similarly, a commitment by the
deploying State to respect the host State’s environmental laws, regulations
and standards, a duty to respect international norms regarding the
sustainable use of natural resources, the taking of restorative measures
where detrimental effects are unavoidable, and the regulation of
environmental damage claims. | 条约实践中所反映的、应特别提及的一些具体例子有：承认环境保护的重要性，包括防止对准许部署国使用的设施和区域造成污染；
关于将以和保护环境相一致的方式执行协议的谅解； 东道国与派遣国之间就可能影响公民健康和环境的问题进行的合作和信息共享； |
| (7) The phrase “as appropriate” signals
two different considerations. | 防止环境损害的措施； 定期的环境绩效评估； 审查程序； |
| First, agreements on the presence of
military forces in relation to armed conflict are sometimes concluded under
urgent circumstances in which it may not be possible to address issues of
environmental protection. | 适用东道国的环境法； 或与此相类似，部署国承诺遵守东道国的环境法律、法规和标准； 遵守关于可持续利用自然资源的国际准则的义务； |
| Second, sometimes it may be especially
important that the agreement contains provisions on environmental protection. | 在不利影响不可避免的情况下采取恢复措施； 以及就环境损害索赔作出规定等。 (7)
“酌情”一词显示了两个不同的考虑。 |
| One such example is provided by a
protected zone at risk of being affected by the presence of military forces. | 首先，与武装冲突有关的驻军协议有时是在紧急情况下订立的，可能无法处理环境保护问题。 |
| The phrase “as appropriate” therefore
provides nuance to this provision and allows it to capture different
situations. | 其次，在协议中包含环境保护条款有时可能特别重要。 其中一个例子是可能会受到驻军影响的保护区。 |
| Principle 8 Peace operations States and
international organizations involved in peace operations in relation to armed
conflict shall consider the impact of such operations on the environment and
take appropriate measures to prevent, mitigate and remediate the negative
environmental consequences thereof. | 因此，“酌情”一词为本条文平添了几分微妙性，使其能够顾及不同情形。
原则8 和平行动 各国和国际组织参加与武装冲突有关的和平行动，应考虑这些行动对环境的影响，并采取适当措施，防止、减轻和补救其负面的环境后果。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Peace operations can relate to armed
conflict in multiple ways. | (1) 和平行动可以多种方式与武装冲突有关。 |
| Previously, many peace operations were
deployed following the end of hostilities and the signing of a peace
agreement. | 以前，许多和平行动是在敌对行动结束和签署和平协议后部署的。 |
| As the High-level Independent Panel on
Peace Operations noted, today many missions operate in environments where no
such political agreements exist, or where efforts to establish one have
failed. | 如和平行动问题高级别独立小组所指出的，如今许多特派团是在没有这种政治协议的环境中，或在订立这种协议的努力失败的环境中行动。 |
| Moreover, modern United Nations
peacekeeping missions are multidimensional and address a range of peacebuilding
activities, from providing secure environments to monitoring human rights, or
rebuilding the capacity of a State. | 此外，现代联合国维和特派团是多层面的，涉及一系列的建设和平活动，从提供安全环境到监测人权，或重建一个国家的能力。 |
| Mandates also include the protection of
civilians. | 其任务还包括保护平民。 |
| Draft principle 8 intends to cover all
such peace operations that may relate to multifarious parts or aspects of an
armed conflict, and may vary in temporal nature. | 原则草案8意在涵盖可能涉及武装冲突的多个部分或方面，并可能具有不同时间性的所有此类和平行动。 |
| (2) The words “in relation to armed
conflict” delineate the scope of the draft principle. | (2) “与武装冲突有关的”一语确定了本条原则草案的范围。 |
| They make clear the connection to armed
conflict so as to ensure that the obligations are not to be interpreted too
broadly (i.e. as potentially applying to every action of an international
organization related to the promotion of peace). | 它明确指出了与武装冲突的联系，以确保对这些义务的解释不会过于宽泛(即可适用于国际组织与促进和平有关的每一项行动)。 |
| While the term is to be understood from a
broad perspective in the context of the draft principle, it is recognized
that not all such operations have a direct link to armed conflict. | 虽然应结合原则草案的内容从广泛角度对其加以理解，但应当认识到，并非所有此类行动都与武装冲突有直接联系。 |
| (3) The present draft principle covers
operations where States and international organizations are involved in peace
operations related to armed conflict and where groups of multiple actors may
be present. | (3) 本原则草案涵盖国家和国际组织参加的与武装冲突有关、可能有多个行为方参与的和平行动。 |
| All these actors will have some effect on
the environment. | 所有这些行为方都会对环境产生一些影响。 |
| For example, the Department of
Peacekeeping Operations and the Department of Field Support recognize the
potential damage by peacekeeping operations to the local environment. | 例如，维持和平行动部和外勤支助部认识到维持和平行动可能对当地环境造成的损害。 |
| (4) The environmental impact of a peace operation
may stretch from the planning phase through its operational part, to the
post-operation phase. | (4) 和平行动对环境的影响可能从规划阶段一直延伸到行动的执行阶段，再到行动后阶段。 |
| The desired goal is that peace operations
should undertake their activities in such a manner that the impact of their
activities on the environment is minimized. | 预期目标是和平行动应当尽可能减小其活动对环境的影响。 |
| The draft principle thus focuses on
activities to be undertaken in situations where the environment would be
negatively affected by a peace operation. | 因此，本原则草案侧重于在环境会受到和平行动不利影响的情况下开展的活动。 |
| At the same time, it is understood that
“appropriate” measures to be taken may differ in relation to the context of
the operation. | 同时，应采取的“适当”措施被理解为可根据行动背景而有所不同。 |
| The relevant considerations may include,
in particular, whether such measures relate to the pre-, in-, or post- armed
conflict phase, and what measures are feasible under the circumstances. | 相关考虑可特别包括：这类措施是与武装冲突前、冲突期间还是冲突后阶段有关，以及在具体情况下可采取哪些措施。 |
| (5) The draft principle reflects the
growing recognition on the part of States and international organizations
such as the United Nations, the European Union, and NATO, to consider the
environmental impact of peace operations and to take necessary measures to
prevent, mitigate and remediate negative impacts. | (5) 本原则草案反映出各国以及联合国、欧洲联盟 和北约 等国际组织日益认识到应考虑和平行动对环境的影响，并采取必要措施预防、减轻和补救其负面影响。 |
| For example, some United Nations field
missions have dedicated environmental units to develop and implement
mission-specific environmental policies and oversee environmental compliance. | 例如，一些联合国外地特派团有专门的环境部门来制定和执行具体特派团的环境政策并监督环境合规情况。 |
| (6) There is no clear or definitive
definition for “peace operation” or “peacekeeping” in existing international
law, and the current draft principle is intended to cover broadly all such
peace operations that relate to armed conflict. | (6) 现行国际法中没有“和平行动”或“维持和平”的明确或确切定义，本原则草案意在广泛涵盖与武装冲突有关的所有此类和平行动。 |
| The Agenda for Peace highlighted that
“peacemaking” was action to bring hostile parties to agreement, especially
through peaceful means; | 《和平纲领》强调，“建立和平”是采取行动，特别是通过和平手段，使敌对两方达成协议； |
| “peacekeeping” was the deployment of a
United Nations presence in the field, involving military and/or police
personnel, and frequently civilians as well; | “维持和平”是实地部署联合国人员，通常是联合国军事人员和/或警察人员，往往也包括文职人员； |
| while “peacebuilding” was to take the
form of cooperative projects in a mutually beneficial undertaking to enhance
the confidence fundamental to peace. | 而“建设和平”则是以合作项目的形式从事互利的事业，以加强和平所必不可少的互信。 |
| The report of the High-level Independent
Panel on Peace Operations includes, for its purposes, “a broad suite of tools
… from special envoys and mediators; | 和平行动问题高级别独立小组的报告涵盖“一系列广泛手段…包括：特使和调解人； |
| political missions, including
peacebuilding missions; | 政治特派团，包括建设和平特派团； |
| regional preventive diplomacy offices; | 区域预防外交办事处； |
| observation missions, including both
ceasefire and electoral missions; | 观察团，包括停火观察团和选举观察团； |
| to small, technical-specialist missions
such as electoral support missions; | 小型技术专家特派团，例如选举支助团； |
| multidisciplinary operations”. | 复合特派团”。 |
| The term “peace operations” is thus aimed
to cover all these types of operations, and operations broader than United
Nations peacekeeping operations, including peace enforcement operations and
operations by regional organizations. | 因此，“和平行动”这一用语旨在涵盖所有这些类型的行动以及比联合国维和行动更广泛的行动，包括执行和平行动和区域组织的行动。 |
| There is no reference in the text to
“multilateral” peace operations, as it was considered unnecessary to address
this expressly in the draft principle. | 案文中没有提到“多边”和平行动，因为认为没必要在本原则草案中明确涉及这一问题。 |
| The general understanding of the term
“peace operations” is nevertheless that it concerns multilateral operations. | 但对“和平行动”一词的一般理解是它涉及多边行动。 |
| (7) “Prevent” has been used in
acknowledgement of the fact that peace operations are not isolated in nature,
and that in planning their actions, actors should plan or aim to minimize
negative environmental consequences. | (7) “预防”一词的使用确认了一个事实，即和平行动本质上不是孤立的，各行为方在规划行动时，应当计划或着眼于尽量减少对环境的负面后果。 |
| While the prevention obligation requires
action to be taken at an early stage, the notion of “mitigation” refers to
reduction of harm that has already occurred. | 预防义务要求在早期阶段采取行动，“减轻”的概念则是指减少已经发生的危害。 |
| The notion of “remediation”, in turn, has
been used in the same sense as “remedial measures” in draft principle 2,
encompassing any measure that may be taken to restore the environment. | “补救”的概念与原则草案2中的“补救措施”意义相同，包括可能为恢复环境采取的任何措施。 |
| (8) Draft principle 8 is distinctly
separate in character from draft principle 7 and entails different
obligations from those contained in the latter. | (8) 原则草案8的性质与原则草案7明显有别，而且所涉义务与后者不同。 |
| Peace operations, unlike agreements
concerning the presence of military forces in relation to armed conflict, do
not necessarily involve armed forces or military personnel. | 和平行动不同于与武装冲突有关的驻军协议，不一定涉及武装部队或军事人员。 |
| Other types of actors such as civilian
personnel and various types of specialists may also be present and covered by
such operations. | 此类行动还可能包括其他类型的行为方，如文职人员和各类专家。 |
| Draft principle 8 is also intended to be
broader and more general in scope, and to direct focus on the activities of
such peace operations. | 原则草案8的预期范围也更广、更具一般性，并把重点放在这类和平行动的活动上。 |
| (9) It is understood that the draft
principle also encompasses reviews of concluded operations that would
identify, analyse and evaluate any environmentally detrimental effects of
those operations on the environment. | (9) 本原则草案还被理解为包括审查已完成的行动，以确定、分析和评估这些行动对环境造成的任何负面影响。 |
| This would be a “lessons learned” type of
exercise to seek to avoid or minimize the negative effects of future peace
operations on the environment and ensure that mistakes are not repeated. | 这是一种“吸取经验教训”的做法，旨在避免未来和平行动对环境的负面影响或将这种负面影响减少至最低限度，并确保不再重犯错误。 |
| Principle 14 Peace processes | 原则14 和平进程 |
| 1. Parties to an armed conflict should,
as part of the peace process, including where appropriate in peace
agreements, address matters relating to the restoration and protection of the
environment damaged by the conflict. | 1. 武装冲突各方应当作为和平进程的一部分，处理与遭冲突损害的环境的恢复和保护有关的问题，包括酌情在和平协议中处理此事。 |
| 2. Relevant international organizations
should, where appropriate, play a facilitating role in this regard. | 2. 有关国际组织应当酌情在这方面发挥协助作用。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Draft principle 14 aims to reflect
that environmental considerations are, to a greater extent than before, being
taken into consideration in the context of contemporary peace processes,
including through the regulation of environmental matters in peace
agreements. | (1) 原则草案14旨在表明在当代和平进程的背景下，环境考量比以前更受重视，包括通过在和平协议中就涉及环境的问题作出规定。 |
| (2) Including the term “peace process” in
the draft principle is intended to broaden its scope to cover the entire
peace process, as well as any formal peace agreements concluded. | (2) 在原则草案中列入“和平进程”一词，意在扩大其范围，以涵盖整个和平进程以及所缔结的任何正式和平协议。 |
| Modern armed conflicts have a variety of
outcomes that do not necessarily take the form of formal agreements. | 现代武装冲突有各种结果，不一定采取正式协议的形式。 |
| For example, at the end of an armed
conflict, a ceasefire agreement, an armistice or a situation of de facto
peace with no agreement could be reached. | 例如，在武装冲突结束时，可以达成停火协议、停战协议或无法达成协议情况下事实上的和平局面。 |
| A peace process may also begin well
before the actual end of an armed conflict. | 和平进程也可能在武装冲突实际结束之前开始。 |
| The conclusion of a peace agreement thus
represents only one aspect, which, if at all, may take place several years
after the cessation of hostilities. | 因此，缔结和平协议只是一个方面，即使缔结，也可能是在停止敌对行动几年之后。 |
| For this purpose, and to also avoid any
temporal lacuna, the words “as part of the peace process” have been employed. | 为此，并为了避免任何时间上的空白，使用了“作为和平进程的一部分”一语。 |
| The outcome of a peace process often
involves different steps and the adoption of a variety of instruments. | 和平进程的结果往往涉及不同步骤和通过不同文书。 |
| (3) The phrase “[p]arties to an armed
conflict” is used in paragraph 1 to indicate that the provision covers both
international and non-international armed conflicts. | (3) 第1段使用“武装冲突各方”一语来表示该段既涵盖国际性武装冲突，也涵盖非国际性武装冲突。 |
| This is in line with the general understanding
that the draft principles apply to international, as well as
non-international armed conflicts. | 这符合一般理解，即这套原则草案适用于国际性和非国际性的武装冲突。 |
| (4) The word “should” is used to reflect
the normative value of the obligation, while also recognizing that it does
not correspond to any existing legal obligation. | (4) “应当”一词用于反映这项义务的规范意义，同时也认识到它并不对应于任何现有的法律义务。 |
| (5) The draft principle is cast in
general terms to accommodate the wide variety of situations that may exist
after an armed conflict. | (5) 原则草案措辞笼统，是为了顾及武装冲突后可能存在的各种情况。 |
| The condition of the environment after an
armed conflict can vary greatly depending on a number of factors. | 武装冲突后的环境状况可能因许多因素而有很大差异。 |
| In some instances, the environment may
have suffered serious and severe damage which is immediately apparent and which
may need to be addressed as a matter of urgency; | 在一些情况下，环境可能遭受严重损害，这种损害立即显现，可能需要紧急处理； |
| whereas, in others, the damage the
environment has suffered may not be so significant as to warrant urgent
restoration. | 而在另一些情况下，环境受到的损害可能不那么大，不需要紧急恢复。 |
| Some environmental damage may only become
apparent months or even years after the armed conflict has ended. | 有些环境损害可能在武装冲突结束后几个月甚至几年才会变得明显。 |
| (6) The draft principle aims to cover all
formal peace agreements, as well as other instruments or agreements concluded
or adopted at any point during the peace process, whether concluded between
two or more States, between State(s) and non-State armed group(s), or between
two or more non-State armed group(s). | (6) 本原则草案旨在涵盖所有正式的和平协议，以及在和平进程的任何时间缔结或通过的其他文书或协议，无论是在两个或两个以上国家之间、国家和非国家武装团体之间、还是在两个或两个以上的非国家武装团体之间缔结的。 |
| Such agreements and instruments may take
different forms, such as sub-agreements to formal peace agreements, informal
agreements, declarations, communiqués, joint public statements resulting from
informal talks, agreed accounts of meetings between parties, as well as
relevant legislation, acts and decrees that constitute an agreement between
parties and/or were the outcome of peace negotiations. | 这些协议和文书可以采取不同的形式，如正式和平协议的子协议、非正式协议、声明、公报、非正式会谈产生的联合公开声明、各方会议的商定报告、以及构成各方之间协议和/或和平谈判结果的相关立法、法律和法令。 |
| (7) Some modern peace agreements contain
environmental provisions. | (7) 一些现代和平协议包含环境条款。 |
| The types of environmental matters that
have been addressed in the instruments concluded during the peace process or
in peace agreements include, for example, obligations for or encouragement to
parties to cooperate regarding environmental issues, and provisions that set
out in detail the authority that will be responsible for matters relating to
the environment, such as preventing environmental crimes and enforcing
national laws and regulations on natural resources and the sharing of
communal resources. | 例如，和平进程期间所缔结的文书或和平协议中涉及的环境问题类型包括：关于各方就环境问题进行合作的义务或鼓励； 以及详细列明由哪个当局负责环境相关问题的条款，这些问题包括防止环境犯罪和执行关于自然资源和公共资源共享的国家法律法规。 |
| The present draft principle aims to
encourage parties to consider including such provisions in the agreements. | 本原则草案的目的在于鼓励各方考虑在协议中纳入这些条款。 |
| (8) Paragraph 2 aims to encourage
relevant international organizations to take environmental considerations
into account when they act as facilitators in peace processes. | (8) 第2段旨在鼓励有关国际组织在促进和平进程中时考虑到环境因素。 |
| The wording of the paragraph is intended
to be broad enough to cover situations where Chapter VII resolutions of the
United Nations Security Council have been passed, as well as situations where
relevant international organizations play a facilitating role at the consent
of the relevant State or parties to an armed conflict in question. | 该段的措辞是为了足够广泛，以涵盖联合国安全理事会根据《宪章》第七章通过的决议所涉及的情况，以及有关国际组织在有关国家或武装冲突各方同意下发挥协助作用的情况。 |
| (9) Paragraph 2 refers to “relevant
international organizations” to signal that not all organizations are suited
to address this particular issue. | (9) 第2段提到“有关国际组织”，表明并非所有组织都适合处理这一特定问题。 |
| The organizations that are envisioned as
being relevant in the context of this draft principle include those that have
been recognized as playing an important role in the peace processes of
various armed conflicts in the past, inter alia, the United Nations and its
organs in particular, as well as the African Union, the European Union and
the Organization of American States. | 本原则草案中的有关组织包括被公认为在过去各种武装冲突的和平进程发挥了重要作用的组织，特别是联合国及其机构，以及非洲联盟、欧洲联盟、东南亚国家联盟和美洲国家组织。 |
| The draft principle also includes the
words “where appropriate” to reflect the fact that the involvement of
international organizations for this purpose is not always required, or
wanted by the parties. | 原则草案还包括“酌情”一词，以反映一个事实，即国际组织以此为目的的参与并非总是为各方所要求或希望。 |
| Principle 15 Post-armed conflict
environmental assessments and remedial measures | 原则15 武装冲突后的环境评估与补救措施 |
| Cooperation among relevant actors,
including international organizations, is encouraged with respect to
post-armed conflict environmental assessments and remedial measures. | 鼓励包括国际组织在内的有关行为方在武装冲突后的环境评估与补救措施方面开展合作。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) The purpose of draft principle 15 is
to encourage relevant actors to cooperate in order to ensure that
environmental assessments and remedial measures can be carried out in post-conflict
situations. | (1) 原则草案15的目的是鼓励有关行为方进行合作，以确保在冲突后局势下进行环境评估和采取补救措施。 |
| The draft principle is closely linked to
draft principle 8. | 本原则草案与原则草案8密切相关。 |
| (2) The reference to “relevant actors”
includes both State and non-State actors. | (2) “有关行为方”一词包括国家和非国家行为体。 |
| Not only States, but also a wide range of
actors, including international organizations and non-State actors, have a
role to play in relation to environmental assessments and remedial measures. | 不仅是国家，包括国际组织和非国家行为体在内的各种广泛的行为方均可在环境评估和补救措施方面发挥作用。 |
| The phrase “are encouraged” is hortatory
in nature and is to be seen as an acknowledgment of the scarcity of practice
in this field. | “鼓励”一词具有督促性，并被认为是对这一领域缺乏实践的确认。 |
| (3) The term “environmental assessment”
is distinct from an “environmental impact assessment”, which is typically
undertaken ex ante as a preventive measure. | (3) “环境评估”一词不同于“环境影响评估”，通常是事先采取的预防措施。 |
| Such assessments play an important role
in the preparation and adoption of plans, programmes, and policies and
legislation, as appropriate. | 这种评估在制定和通过计划、方案、政策和立法方面发挥着重要作用。 |
| This may involve the evaluation of the
likely environmental, including health, effects, in a plan or programme. | 其中可涉及在计划或方案中评价可能的环境影响，包括健康影响。 |
| (4) It is in this context that a
post-conflict environmental assessment has emerged as a tool to mainstream
environmental considerations in the development plans in the post-conflict
phase. | (4) 在这种情况下，冲突后环境评估已成为将环境考虑纳入冲突后阶段发展计划的工具。 |
| Such assessments are typically intended
to identify major environmental risks to health, livelihoods and security and
to provide recommendations to national authorities on how to address them. | 此类评估通常旨在确定对健康、生计和安全造成的重大环境风险，并就如何解决这些风险向国家当局提供建议。 |
| A post-conflict environmental assessment
is intended to meet various needs and policy processes, which, depending on
the requirements, are distinct in scope, objective and approach. | 冲突后环境评估旨在满足各种需求和政策进程，这些进程根据需要，在范围、目标和方法上各不相同。 |
| Such post-conflict environmental
assessment, undertaken at the request of a State, may be take the form of:
(a) a needs assessment; | 这种在一国要求下进行的冲突后环境评估可采取以下形式：(a) 需求评估； |
| (b) a quantitative risk assessment; | (b) 定量风险评估； |
| (c) a strategic assessment; | (c) 战略评估； |
| or (d) a comprehensive assessment. | 或(d) 综合评估。 |
| The comprehensive assessment of Rwanda,
for example, involved a scientific expert evaluation and assessment, covering
a range of activities, including scoping, desk study, field work,
environmental sampling, geographic information system modelling, analysis and
reporting and national consultations. | 例如，卢旺达的综合评估涉及科学专家的评价和评估，涵盖范围界定、案头研究、实地工作、环境抽样、地理信息系统建模、分析和报告以及全国协商等一系列活动。 |
| It is readily acknowledged that
“conflicts often have environmental impacts, direct or indirect, that affect
human health and livelihoods as well as ecosystem services”. | “冲突通常会对环境产生直接或间接影响，影响到人类健康和生计以及生态系统服务”， 这一点很容易得到承认。 |
| (5) Such assessments are encouraged
because, if the environmental impacts of armed conflict are left unattended,
there is strong likelihood that they may lead to “further population
displacement and socio-economic instability”, thereby “undermining recovery
and reconstruction in post-conflict zones” and “triggering a vicious cycle”. | (5) 鼓励进行这种评估，是因为如果不注意武装冲突对环境的影响，很可能会导致“进一步的人口流离失所和社会经济不稳定”，从而“影响冲突后地区的恢复和重建和”并“造成恶性循环”。 |
| (6) In order to align the text with other
draft principles, in particular draft principle 2, the term “remedial” is
used in the present principle even though “recovery” has a more prominent
usage in the practice. | (6) 为了使案文与其他原则草案特别是原则草案2相一致，在本原则中使用了“补救”一词，尽管“恢复”在实践中用得更多。 |
| Once an assessment is completed, the
challenge is to ensure that environmental recovery programmes are in place
that aim at strengthening the national and local environmental authorities,
rehabilitate ecosystems, mitigate risks and ensure sustainable utilization of
resources in the context of the concerned State’s development plans. | 评估完成后，所面临的挑战是确保制定环境恢复计划，以加强国家和地方环境部门，恢复生态系统，减少风险并确保在有关国家的发展计划中可持续地利用资源。 |
| The term “remedial measures” has a more
limited remit than “recovery”. | “补救措施”一词的范围比“恢复”更有限。 |
| Principle 16 Remnants of war | 原则16 战争遗留物 |
| 1. After an armed conflict, parties to
the conflict shall seek to remove or render harmless toxic and hazardous
remnants of war under their jurisdiction or control that are causing or risk
causing damage to the environment. | 1. 武装冲突后，冲突各方应争取消除其管辖或控制下造成或可能造成环境损害的有毒和危险的战争遗留物，或使之无害。 |
| Such measures shall be taken subject to
the applicable rules of international law. | 应根据适用的国际法规则采取此类措施。 |
| 2. The parties shall also endeavour to
reach agreement, among themselves and, where appropriate, with other States
and with international organizations, on technical and material assistance,
including, in appropriate circumstances, the undertaking of joint operations
to remove or render harmless such toxic and hazardous remnants of war. | 2. 各方还应争取相互并酌情同他国和国际组织就技术与物资援助达成协议，包括在适当情况下开展联合行动，消除这种有毒和危险的战争遗留物或使之无害。 |
| 3. Paragraphs 1 and 2 are without
prejudice to any rights or obligations under international law to clear,
remove, destroy or maintain minefields, mined areas, mines, booby-traps,
explosive ordnance and other devices. | 3. 第1和第2段不妨碍国际法规定的任何清除、移除、销毁或维护雷场、雷区、地雷、诱杀装置、爆炸性弹药和其他装置之权利和义务。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Draft principle 16 aims to strengthen
the protection of the environment in a post-conflict situation. | (1) 原则草案16旨在加强冲突后局势中的环境保护。 |
| It seeks to ensure that toxic and
hazardous remnants of war that are causing or that may cause damage to the
environment are removed or rendered harmless after an armed conflict. | 它力图确保在武装冲突后消除造成或可能造成环境损害的有毒和危险的战争遗留物，或使之无害。 |
| This draft principle covers toxic and
hazardous remnants of war on land, as well as those which have been placed or
dumped at sea, as long as they fall under the jurisdiction or control of a
former party to the armed conflict. | 本原则草案涵盖了陆地上有毒和危险的战争遗留物以及在海上放置或倾倒的这类遗留物――只要它们在前武装冲突一方的管辖或控制范围之内。 |
| The measures taken shall be subject to
the applicable rules of international law. | 所采取的措施应遵守适用的国际法规则。 |
| (2) Paragraph 1 is cast in general terms. | (2) 第1段是一般性条款。 |
| Remnants of war take various forms. | 战争遗留物的形式各异。 |
| They consist of not only explosive
remnants of war but also other hazardous material and objects. | 它们不仅包括战争遗留爆炸物，还包括其他危险物质和物体。 |
| Some remnants of war are not dangerous to
the environment at all or may be less dangerous if they remain where they are
after the conflict is over. | 有些战争遗留物对环境根本没有危险，或者在冲突结束后如留在原处，可能危险较小。 |
| In other words, removing the remnants of
war may in some situations pose a higher environmental risk than leaving them
where they are. | 换言之，消除战争遗留物在某些情况下可能比将它们留在原地造成更大的环境风险。 |
| It is for this reason that the draft
principle contains the words “or render harmless”, to illustrate that in some
circumstances it may be appropriate to do nothing, or to take measures other
than removal. | 正因为如此，原则草案中包含“或使之无害”的字样，以说明在某些情况下，什么也不做或采取移除以外的措施，可能才是适当的。 |
| (3) The obligation to “seek to” is one of
conduct and relates to “toxic and hazardous remnants of war” that “are
causing or risk causing damage to the environment”. | (3) “争取”的义务是行为义务，与“造成或可能造成环境损害的有毒和危险的战争遗留物”有关。 |
| The terms “toxic” and “hazardous” are
often used when referring to remnants of war which pose a danger to humans or
the environment, and it was considered appropriate to use the terms here. | 在提及对人类或环境构成危险的战争遗留物时，经常使用“有毒”和“危险”两个术语，它们在这里的使用被认为是适当的。 |
| The term “hazardous” is somewhat wider
than the term “toxic”, in that all remnants of war that pose a threat to
humans or the environment may be considered hazardous, but not all are toxic. | “危险”的含义比“有毒”宽泛一点，因为所有对人类或环境构成威胁的战争遗留物都可能被认为是危险的，但并非都是有毒的。 |
| The term “toxic remnants of war” does not
have a definition under international law, but has been used to describe “any
toxic or radiological substance resulting from military activities that forms
a hazard to humans and ecosystems”. | “有毒的战争遗留物”一词在国际法中没有定义，但一直被用来指“军事活动产生的对人类和生态系统构成危险的任何有毒或放射性物质”。 |
| (4) The reference to “jurisdiction or
control” is intended to cover areas within de jure and de facto control even
beyond that established by a territorial link. | (4) “管辖或控制”的提法意在涵盖法律上和事实上控制的地区，甚至超出领土关系所确定的范围。 |
| The term “jurisdiction” is intended to
cover, in addition to the territory of a State, activities over which, under
international law, a State is authorized to exercise its competence and
authority extraterritorially. | “管辖”一词除一国的领土外，还涵盖根据国际法国家有权在域外行使其权限和权力的活动。 |
| The term “control” is intended to cover
situations in which a State (or party to an armed conflict) is exercising de
facto control, even though it may lack de jure jurisdiction. | “控制”意在涵盖一个国家(或武装冲突一方)行使事实上的控制权的情况，尽管它可能缺乏法律上的管辖权。 |
| It therefore “refers to the factual
capacity of effective control over activities outside the jurisdiction of a
State”. | 因此该词“是指有效控制一国管辖范围以外活动的事实能力”。 |
| (5) The present draft principle is
intended to apply to international as well as non-international armed
conflicts. | (5) 本原则草案旨在适用于国际性和非国际性武装冲突。 |
| For this reason, paragraph 1 addresses
“parties to a conflict”. | 为此，第1段述及“冲突各方”。 |
| The phrase “party to a conflict” has been
used in various provisions of law of armed conflict treaties in the context
of remnants of war. | 在关于战争遗留物的各种武装冲突法条约中，都使用了“冲突方”一语。 |
| It was considered appropriate to use the
term in the present draft principle as it is foreseeable that there may be
situations where there are toxic or hazardous remnants of war in an area
where a State does not have full control. | 在本原则草案中使用该词被认为是适当的，因为可以预见，有些情况下，在一个国家没有完全控制权的地区，可能存在有毒或危险的战争遗留物。 |
| For example, a non-State actor may have
control over territory where toxic and hazardous remnants of war are present. | 例如，非国家行为体可能控制存在有毒和危险的战争遗留物的地区。 |
| (6) Paragraph 2 should be read together with
paragraph 1. | (6) 第2段应结合第1段理解。 |
| It aims to encourage cooperation and
technical assistance amongst parties to render harmless the remnants of war
referred to in paragraph 1. | 其目的是鼓励各方之间的合作和技术援助，使第1段所述的战争遗留物无害。 |
| It should be noted that paragraph 2 does
not aim to place any new international law obligations on parties to
cooperate. | 应当指出的是，第2段并不打算在合作方面对各方规定任何新的国际法义务。 |
| However, it is foreseeable that there may
be situations where an armed conflict has taken place and a party is not in a
position to ensure that toxic and hazardous remnants of war are rendered
harmless. | 但可以预见的是，可能会出现发生武装冲突而一方无法确保使有毒和危险的战争遗留物无害的情况。 |
| It was thus considered valuable to
encourage parties to cooperate in this regard. | 因此认为鼓励各方在这方面进行合作十分重要。 |
| (7) Paragraph 3 contains a without
prejudice clause that aims to ensure that there would be no uncertainty that
existing treaty or customary international law obligations prevail. | (7) 第3段载有一项不妨碍条款，其目的是确保在以现有条约或习惯国际法义务为准方面没有不确定性。 |
| There are various laws of armed conflict
treaties that regulate remnants of war, and different States thus have
varying obligations relating to remnants of war. | 有各种关于战争遗留物的武装冲突条约法，因此不同国家对战争遗留物有不同的义务。 |
| (8) The words “clear, remove, destroy or
maintain”, as well as the specific remnants of war listed, namely
“minefields, mined areas, mines, booby-traps, explosive ordnance and other
devices”, were specifically chosen and are derived from existing law of armed
conflict treaties to ensure that the paragraph is based on the law of armed
conflict as it exists at present. | (8) “清除、移除、销毁或维护”等词，以及所列出的特定战争遗留物，即“雷场、雷区、地雷、诱杀装置、爆炸性弹药和其他装置”，是经特别选定的，并源于现有的武装冲突法条约，以确保该段以目前存在的武装冲突法为基础。 |
| (9) It should be noted that the draft
principle does not directly deal with the issue of responsibility or
reparation for victims on purpose. | (9) 应当指出的是，本原则草案的目的不是直接处理责任或受害人赔偿问题。 |
| This is because responsibility to clear,
remove, destroy or maintain remnants of war is already regulated to some
extent under the existing law of armed conflict, at least in the sense that
certain treaties identify who should take action. | 这是因为清除、移除、销毁或维护战争遗留物的责任在现有的武装冲突法中已有规定，至少在某些条约指明谁应采取行动的意义上是如此。 |
| The draft principle is without prejudice
to the allocation of responsibility and questions of compensation. | 本原则草案不妨碍责任分配和赔偿问题。 |
| Principle 17 Remnants of war at sea | 原则17 海上战争遗留物 |
| States and relevant international
organizations should cooperate to ensure that remnants of war at sea do not
constitute a danger to the environment. | 各国和有关国际组织应当开展合作，确保海上战争遗留物不对环境构成危险。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Unlike the broader draft principle
16, which deals with remnants of war more generally, draft principle 17 deals
with the specific situation of remnants of war at sea including the
long-lasting effects on the marine environment. | (1) 与措辞更笼统、更一般性地涉及战争遗留问题的原则草案16不同，原则草案17涉及海上战争遗留物的具体情况，包括对海洋环境的长期影响。 |
| Draft principle 17 has added value as
draft principle 16 only covers remnants of war under the jurisdiction or
control of a former party to an armed conflict, which means that it is not
wide enough to cover all remnants of war at sea. | 原则草案17具有附加价值，因为原则草案16只涵盖前武装冲突一方管辖或控制下的战争遗留物，这意味着它的范围不够宽，无法涵盖所有海上战争遗留物。 |
| This draft principle expressly encourages
international cooperation to ensure that remnants of war at sea do not
constitute a danger to the environment. | 本原则草案明确鼓励开展国际合作，确保海上战争遗留物不对环境构成危险。 |
| (2) Owing to the multifaceted nature of
the law of the sea, a particular State could have sovereignty, jurisdiction,
both sovereignty and jurisdiction, or neither sovereignty nor jurisdiction,
depending on where the remnants are located. | (2) 由于海洋法的多面性，特定国家可以拥有主权、管辖权、主权和管辖权，或既无主权也无管辖权，具体取决于遗留物所在地点。 |
| It is therefore not surprising that
remnants of war at sea pose significant legal challenges. | 因此，海上战争遗留物构成重大法律挑战这一点并不令人惊讶。 |
| For example, the parties to the armed
conflict may have ceased to exist, the coastal State may not have the
resources to ensure that the remnants of war at sea do not constitute a
danger to the environment, the coastal State may not have been a party to the
conflict, but the cooperation of that State may still be needed in efforts to
get rid of remnants. | 例如，武装冲突各方可能已不复存在，沿海国可能没有资源确保海上战争遗留物不对环境构成危险，沿海国可能不是冲突一方，但为努力消除遗留物，可能仍然需要该国的合作。 |
| Another foreseeable challenge is that the
party that left the remnants may not have been in violation of its
international law obligations at the time when that happened but these
remnants now pose environmental risk. | 另一个可预见的挑战是，留下遗留物的一方在当时可能没有违反其国际法义务，但这些遗留物现在构成了环境风险。 |
| (3) Accordingly, draft principle 17
addresses States generally, not only those which have been involved in an
armed conflict. | (3) 因此，原则草案17一般性地涉及各国，而不仅是卷入武装冲突的国家。 |
| It aims to encourage all States, as well
as relevant international organizations, to cooperate to ensure that remnants
of war at sea do not constitute a danger to the environment. | 其目的是鼓励所有国家和有关国际组织 进行合作，确保海上战争遗留物不对环境构成危险。 |
| The reference to “international
organizations” is qualified with the word “relevant”, in the light of the
fact that the issues involved tend to be specialized. | 鉴于所涉问题往往是专业化问题，因此“国际组织”用“有关”一词来限定。 |
| (4) The words “should cooperate” rather
than the more prescriptive “shall cooperate” were considered appropriate,
given that this is an area where practice is still developing. | (4) 由于这是一个实践仍在发展的领域，“应当开展合作”被认为是适当的，而不是规定性更强的“应开展合作”。 |
| Cooperation is an important element
concerning remnants of war at sea, as the coastal States negatively affected
by remnants of war at sea may not have the resources and thus not be capable
of ensuring that remnants of war at sea do not pose environmental risks. | 合作是战争遗留物方面的一个重要因素，因为受海上战争遗留物负面影响的沿海国可能没有资源，因此无法确保海上战争遗留物不构成环境风险。 |
| (5) There are various ways in which
States and relevant international organizations can cooperate to ensure that
remnants of war at sea do not pose environmental risks. | (5) 各国和有关国际组织可通过多种方式进行合作，确保海上战争遗留物不构成环境风险。 |
| For example, they could survey maritime
areas and make the information freely available to the affected States, they
could provide maps with markers, and they could provide technological and
scientific information and information concerning whether the remnants pose
risks or may pose risks in the future. | 例如，它们可以进行海域勘测，向受影响国免费提供相关信息，可以提供带有标记的地图，并可提供技术和科学信息以及关于遗留物现在或今后是否构成风险的信息。 |
| (6) There is increasing awareness
concerning the environmental effects of remnants of war at sea. | (6) 人们日益认识到海上战争遗留物对环境的影响。 |
| Dangers posed to the environment by
remnants of war at sea could have significant collateral damage to human
health and safety, especially of seafarers and fishermen. | 海上战争遗留物对环境构成的危险可能会对人类，特别是海员和渔民的健康和安全造成重大的附带损害。 |
| The clear link between danger to the environment
and public health and safety has been recognized in several international law
instruments, and it was thus considered particularly important to encourage
the cooperation amongst States and international organizations to ensure that
remnants of war at sea do not pose danger. | 环境危险与公共健康和安全之间的明确联系已得到一些国际法律文书的承认，因此，鼓励各国和国际组织合作确保海上战争遗留物不构成危险被认为特别重要。 |
| (7) Draft principle 17 intentionally does
not deal with the any issues concerning the allocation of responsibility or
compensation for damages regarding of remnants of war at sea. | (7) 原则草案17有意未涉及关于海上战争遗留物所造成损害的责任分配或赔偿的任何问题。 |
| Determining which party has the primary
obligation to ensure that remnants of war at sea do not pose environmental
risks is a very complex and delicate issue to define, especially considering
the varied legal nature of the law of the sea, ranging from internal waters
to the high seas. | 确定哪一方负有确保海上战争遗留物不构成环境风险的主要义务，是一个非常复杂和棘手的问题――尤其是考虑到海洋(从内水到公海)法的不同法律性质。 |
| Principle 18 Sharing and granting access
to information | 原则18 共享与准许获取信息 |
| 1. To facilitate remedial measures after
an armed conflict, States and relevant international organizations shall
share and grant access to relevant information in accordance with their
obligations under international law. | 1. 为便利武装冲突后采取补救措施，各国和有关国际组织应按国际法规定的义务，共享并准许获取相关信息。 |
| 2. Nothing in the present draft principle
obliges a State or international organization to share or grant access to
information vital to its national defence or security. | 2. 本原则草案中并无任何规要求一国或国际组织必须共享和准许获取对其国防或安全至关重内容的信息。 |
| Nevertheless, that State or international
organization shall cooperate in good faith with a view to providing as much
information as possible under the circumstances. | 但国家或国际组织应诚意合作，根据具体情况提供尽可能多的信息。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) Draft principle 18 refers generally
to “States”, as this term is broader than “parties to an armed conflict”. | (1) 原则草案18一般性地提到“各国”，因为这一用语比“武装冲突各方”更加广泛。 |
| States not parties to an armed conflict
may be affected as third States, and may have relevant information useful for
the taking of remedial measures that could usefully be provided to other
States or international organizations. | 非武装冲突方的国家可能会作为第三国受到影响，并可能掌握有助于采取补救措施的相关信息，将这些信息提供给其他国家或国际组织可能十分有益。 |
| This obligation applies to States, even
though non-State actors are addressed in other draft principles, and the set
of draft principles covers both international and non-international armed
conflicts. | 尽管其他原则草案涉及非国家行为体，而且本套原则草案涵盖国际性和非国际性武装冲突，但这一义务适用于各国。 |
| (2) While States are typically the most
relevant subjects, the draft principle also refers to international organizations,
with the addition of the qualifier “relevant”. | (2) 虽然各国通常是最相关的对象，但本原则草案还提到国际组织，并以“有关”一词来限定。 |
| The specific term “national defence”
applies only to States. | “国防”一词只适用于国家。 |
| For some international organizations,
confidentiality requirements may also affect the extent of information that
they can share or grant access to in good faith. | 对于一些国际组织而言，保密要求也可能影响到它们本着诚意共享或准许获取的信息的范围。 |
| (3) Draft principle 18 consists of two
paragraphs. | (3) 原则草案18包括两段。 |
| Paragraph 1 refers to the obligations
States and international organizations may have under international law to
share and grant access to information with a view to facilitating remedial
measures after an armed conflict. | 第1段提及各国和国际组织依照国际法可能有义务共享并准许获取信息，以期便利武装冲突后采取补救措施。 |
| Paragraph 2 refers to security
considerations to which such access may be subject. | 第2段提及这种获取可能须考虑到的安全因素。 |
| (4) The expression “in accordance with
their obligations under international law” reflects that treaties contain obligations
relevant in the context of the protection of the environment in relation to
armed conflicts, which may be instrumental for the purpose of the taking of
remedial measures after an armed conflict, such as, for instance, keeping a
record of the placement of landmines. | (4) “按国际法规定的义务”这一表述反映出各条约载有与武装冲突有关的环境保护方面的义务，这些义务可有助于在武装冲突后采取补救措施，
如记录地雷的位置。 |
| Obligations to grant access to and/or
share information which provide protection for the environment in relation to
armed conflicts have been listed above. | 上文列出了为在武装冲突中保护环境而准许获取和/或共享信息的义务。 |
| Also relevant is paragraph 2 of article 9
on “Recording and use of information on minefields, mined areas, mines,
booby-traps and other devices” of Protocol II to the Convention on Certain
Conventional Weapons, as well as article 4, paragraph 2, on “Recording,
retaining and transmission of information” of Protocol V to the Convention on
Certain Conventional Weapons. | 与此有关的还有《特定常规武器公约第二号议定书》中涉及“记录和利用关于雷场、雷区、地雷、诱杀装置和其他装置的资料”的第9条第2款和《特定常规武器公约第五号议定书》中涉及“资料的记录、保存和提供”的第4条第2款。 |
| (5) Furthermore, this expression reflects
that the obligations to grant access to and/or share information as contained
in the relevant treaties are commonly accompanied by exceptions or
limitations regarding grounds for which the disclosure of information may be
refused. | (5) 此外，这一表述还反映出，相关条约中包含的准许获取和/或共享信息的义务通常伴有与可拒绝披露信息的理由有关的例外或限制。 |
| Such grounds relate, inter alia, to
“national defence and public security” or situations in which the disclosure
would make it more likely that the environment to which such information
related would be damaged. | 这些理由除其他外涉及“国防和公共安全”，或者披露会使与此类信息有关的环境受损害的风险增加的情况。 |
| (6) While the term “share” refers to
information provided by States and international organizations in their
mutual relations and as a means of cooperation, the term “granting access”
refers primarily to allowing access to individuals for example to such
information, and thus signifies a more unilateral relationship. | (6) “共享”一词是指各国和国际组织在相互关系中和作为合作手段提供的信息，“准许获取”则主要是指准许个人获取这些信息，因此更多地是一种单边关系。 |
| (7) The obligation to share and grant
access to information pertaining to the environment can be found in numerous
sources of international law, both at global and regional level. | (7) 在全球和区域层面的许多国际法渊源中，都可找到关于共享和准许获取环境相关信息的义务。 |
| (8) The origins of the right to access to
information in modern international human rights law can be found in article
19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, as well as in article 19 of
the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. | (8) 在《世界人权宣言》 第十九条和《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》
第十九条中可以找到现代国际人权法中获取信息权利的来源。 |
| General comment No. 34 on article 19 of
the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights provides that
article 19, paragraph 2, should be read as including a right to access to
information held by public bodies. | 关于《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》第十九条的第34号一般性意见规定，第十九条第2 款应当被解读为包括获取公共机构掌握的信息的权利。 |
| (9) A right to environmental information
has also developed within the context of the European Convention on Human
Rights as exemplified in the case of Guerra and Others v. Italy, in which the
European Court of Human Rights decided that the applicants had a right to
environmental information on the basis of article 8 of the Convention (the
right to family life and privacy). | (9) 还在《欧洲人权公约》范围内形成了获取环境信息的权利，Guerra等人诉意大利案 就是例证：欧洲人权法院在该案中裁定，申请人有权根据《公约》第8条(家庭生活权和隐私权)获取环境信息。 |
| Reference can also be made to the
European Union directive on public access to environmental information and to
a related judgment of the European Court of Justice of 2011. | 也可以参考欧洲联盟关于公众获取环境信息的指令以及欧洲法院2011年的相关判决。 |
| In addition to the right to privacy, a
right to environmental information has also been based on the right to
freedom of expression (as in e.g. Claude-Reyes et al. v. Chile before the
Inter-American Court of Human Rights). | 除隐私权外，获取环境信息的权利还以表达自由权为基础(例如美洲人权法院审理的Claude-Reyes等人诉智利案)。 |
| (10) Principle 10 of the 1992 Rio
Declaration also provides that individuals shall have appropriate access to
information, including on hazardous materials. | (10) 1992年《里约宣言》的原则10也规定，个人应能适当获取信息，包括关于危险材料的信息。 |
| The recently adopted Sustainable
Development Goal 16 on peaceful and inclusive societies calls upon States to
ensure public access to information and protect fundamental freedoms, in
accordance with national legislation and international agreements. | 最近通过的关于和平和包容性社会的可持续发展目标16要求各国根据国家立法和国际协定，确保公众获得各种信息，保障基本自由。 |
| (11) Article 2 of the Convention on
Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-making and Access to
Justice in Environmental Matters (Aarhus Convention) defines “environmental
information” as any information pertaining to the state of elements of the
environment, factors affecting or likely to affect elements of the
environment, as well as the state of human health and safety insofar as it
may be affected by these elements. | (11) 《在环境问题上获得信息、公众参与决策和诉诸法律的公约》(《奥胡斯公约》)第二条将“环境信息”界定为与各种环境要素的状况、正在影响或可能影响环境要素的各种因素和可能受以上要素影响的人类健康和安全状况有关的任何信息。 |
| Article 4 of the Aarhus Convention
stipulates that State parties must “make such [environmental] information
available to the public, within the framework of national legislation”. | 《奥胡斯公约》第四条规定，缔约国必须“在国家立法范围内为公众提供这种[环境]信息”。 |
| Such a right necessarily entails a duty
for States to collect such environmental information for the purposes of
making it available to the public if and when requested to do so. | 此种权利必然要求国家担负收集此类环境信息的义务，以便一旦收到请求，即为公众提供这种信息。 |
| (12) The United Nations Framework
Convention on Climate Change addresses access to information in its article
6, noting that the Parties shall “[p]romote and facilitate at the national
and, as appropriate, subregional and regional levels, and in accordance with
national laws and regulations, and within their respective capacities: …
public access to information on climate change and its effects”. | (12) 《联合国气候变化框架公约》第六条提及信息的获取，指出各缔约方应：“在国家一级并酌情在次区域和区域一级，根据国家法律和规定，并在各自的能力范围内，促进和便利：…公众获取有关气候变化及其影响的信息”。 |
| In addition, the Cartagena Protocol on
Biosafety to the Convention stipulates that Parties shall promote and
facilitate access to information on living modified organisms. | 此外，《生物安全公约卡塔赫纳议定书》规定，缔约方应促进和便利获取有关改性活生物体的信息。 |
| Both the Rotterdam Convention on the
Prior Informed Consent Procedure for Certain Hazardous Chemicals and
Pesticides in International Trade, and the Stockholm Convention on Persistent
Organic Pollutants contain provisions on access to information. | 《关于在国际贸易中对某些危险化学品和农药采用事先知情同意程序的鹿特丹公约》 和《关于持久性有机污染物的斯德哥尔摩公约》
均载有关于获取信息的条款。 |
| Similarly, article 18 of the 2013
Minamata Convention on Mercury stipulates that Parties shall “promote and
facilitate” access to such information. | 同样，2013年《关于汞的水俣公约》第十八条 规定，各缔约方应“推动和促进”获取这类信息。 |
| The recently concluded Paris Agreement
similarly addresses access to information in numerous paragraphs and
articles, e.g. as part of the responsibility for States to provide intended
nationally determined contributions in article 4, paragraph 8, of the Agreement,
and more generally regarding climate change education and public access to
information in article 12. | 最近缔结的《巴黎协定》也在许多条款中述及获取信息，例如该协定第四条第八款作为通报国家自主贡献的国家责任的一部分而提及，第十二条中则有关于气候变化教育和公众获取信息的更宽泛的规定。 |
| (13) In accordance with the United
Nations Convention to Combat Desertification in Those Countries Experiencing
Serious Drought and/or Desertification, particularly in Africa, Parties
thereto shall make information on desertification “fully, openly and promptly
available”. | (13) 根据《联合国关于在发生严重干旱和/或荒漠化的国家特别是在非洲防治荒漠化的公约》，各缔约方应“充分、公开和及时提供”荒漠化信息。 |
| Similarly, the 2010 Bali Guidelines
provide that “affordable, effective and timely access to environmental
information held by public authorities upon request” should be ensured. | 同样，2010年《巴厘准则》规定，应当确保“提出请求后应可廉价、有效、及时地获得由公共主管部门掌握的环境信息”。 |
| (14) Within the particular regime of
humanitarian demining and remnants of war, a number of instruments contain
requirements on providing environmental information. | (14) 在人道主义排雷和战争遗留物的特定制度内，一些文书载有关于提供环境信息的要求。 |
| For instance, a request to extend the
deadline for completing the clearance and destruction of cluster munition
remnants under the Convention on Cluster Munitions must outline any potential
environmental and humanitarian impacts of such an extension. | 例如，根据《集束弹药公约》，关于延长完成清理和销毁遗留集束弹药最后期限的请求必须列出这种延期在环境和人道主义方面的任何可能影响。 |
| Similarly, in connection to the
destruction of cluster munitions, the “location of all destruction sites and
the applicable safety and environmental standards” must be outlined. | 同样，在销毁集束弹药方面，还必须说明“所有销毁场址的位置以及应遵守的适用安全标准和环境标准”。 |
| Similar obligations are contained in the
Convention on the Prohibition of the Use, Stockpiling, Production and
Transfer of Anti-Personnel Mines and on their Destruction. | 《关于禁止使用、储存、生产和转让杀伤人员地雷及销毁此种地雷的公约》载有类似的义务。 |
| Reference can also be made to the
International Mine Action Standard 10.70, which states, inter alia, that
national mine action authorities should “promulgate information about
significant environmental incidents to other demining organizations within
the programme”. | 还可以参考《国际地雷行动标准》第10.70条，除其他外，该条规定，国家排雷行动当局应当“向方案内的其他排雷组织发布有关重大环境事件的信息”。 |
| (15) Regarding the practice of
international organizations, the Environmental Policy for United Nations
Field Missions of 2009 stipulates that peacekeeping missions shall assign an
Environmental Officer with the duty to “[p]rovide environmental information
relevant to the operations of the mission and take actions to promote
awareness on environmental issues”. | (15) 关于国际组织的做法，2009年《联合国外地特派团环境政策》规定，维持和平特派团应指派1名环境干事，“提供与特派团行动有关的环境信息，并采取行动，促进对环境问题的认识。 |
| The policy also contains a requirement to
disseminate and study information on the environment, which would presuppose
access to information that can in fact be disseminated and that thus is not
classified. | ” 该政策还包括一项关于传播和研究环境信息的要求，其前提是获取实际上可以传播、因而不是保密资料的信息。 |
| (16) Moreover, the ICRC Guidelines for
Military Manuals and Instructions on the Protection of the Environment in
Times of Armed Conflict contain a provision on protection of organizations,
which could include environmental organizations gathering environmental data
as a means of “contributing to prevent or repair damage to the environment”. | (16) 此外，红十字委员会《关于武装冲突中的环境保护的军事手册和指南准则》载有关于保护组织的一项规定，
其中可包括“为防止或修复环境损害”而收集环境数据的环境组织。 |
| (17) In connection with post-armed
conflict environmental assessments, it is worth recalling that the UNEP
guidelines on integrating environment in post-conflict assessments include a
reference to the importance of public participation and access to
information, as “natural resource allocation and management is done in an
ad-hoc, decentralized, or informal manner” in post-conflict contexts. | (17) 关于武装冲突后环境评估，值得回顾的是，环境署关于将环境纳入冲突后评估的准则提到了公众参与和获取信息的重要性，因为在冲突后环境中，“自然资源的配置和管理是以特定、分散或非正规方式进行的”。 |
| (18) The obligation to share information
and to cooperate in this context is reflected in the Convention on the Law of
the Non-navigational Uses of International Watercourses. | (18) 在这方面共享信息和进行合作的义务反映在《国际水道非航行使用法公约》中。 |
| Moreover, the Convention on Biological
Diversity contains a provision on exchange of information in its article 14,
requiring that each Contracting Party shall, as far as possible and as
appropriate, promote “notification, exchange of information and consultation
on activities under their jurisdiction or control which are likely to
significantly affect adversely the biological diversity of other States or
areas beyond the limits of national jurisdiction, by encouraging the
conclusion of bilateral, regional or multilateral arrangements, as
appropriate”. | 此外，《生物多样性公约》第十四条包含一项关于交流信息的规定，要求每一缔约国应尽可能并酌情“就其管辖或控制范围内对其他国家或国家管辖范围以外地区生物多样性可能产生严重不利影响的活动促进通报、信息交流和磋商，其办法是为此鼓励酌情订立双边、区域或多边安排”。 |
| In addition, article 17 of the Convention
calls upon the Parties to facilitate the exchange of information relevant to
the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity. | 另外，该《公约》第十七条呼吁缔约方便利有关生物多样性保护和持久使用的信息的交流。 |
| (19) Previous work of the Commission of
relevance to this aspect of the draft principle includes the articles on nationality
of natural persons in relation to the succession of States (1999), articles
on prevention of transboundary harm from hazardous activities (2001),
principles on the allocation of loss in the case of transboundary harm
arising out of hazardous activities (2006) and the articles on the law of
transboundary aquifers (2008). | (19) 委员会以前与原则草案这一方面有关的工作包括国家继承涉及的自然人国籍问题条款(1999年)、预防危险活动的跨界损害条款(2001年) 、危险活动所致跨界损害的损失分配原则(2006年) 和跨界含水层法条款(2008年)。 |
| (20) Paragraph 2 serves a similar purpose
in the context of draft principle 18. | (20) 第2段在原则草案18中具有类似的目的。 |
| The exception to the obligation set out
under paragraph 1 concerns information vital to the national defence of a
State or the security of a State or an international organization. | 第1段规定的义务的例外涉及对一国的国防或一国或国际组织的安全至关重要的信息。 |
| This exception is not absolute. | 这种例外并不是绝对的。 |
| The second sentence of the paragraph
provides that States and international organizations shall provide as much
information as possible under the circumstances, through cooperation in good
faith. | 第2段第二句规定，国家和国际组织应诚意合作，根据具体情况提供尽可能多的信息。 |
| Paragraph 2 is based on provisions
contained in the Convention on the Law of the Non-navigational Uses of
International Watercourses. | 第2段基于《国际水道非航行使用法公约》中的规定。 |
| Article 31 of the Convention provides
that a watercourse State is not obliged to provide data and information vital
to its national defence or security, while noting that obligation to
cooperate in good faith is still applicable. | 该公约第31条规定，水道国没有义务提供对其国防或国家安全至关重要的数据或资料，同时注意到善意合作的义务仍然适用。 |
| The articles on prevention of
transboundary harm from hazardous activities and the articles on the law of
transboundary aquifers contain a similar exception. | 预防危险活动的跨界损害条款 和跨界含水层法条款 也有类似的例外。 |
| (21) Draft principle 18 is closely linked
to the duty to cooperate, as well as draft principle 15 on post-armed
conflict environmental assessments and remedial measures. | (21) 原则草案18与合作义务以及关于武装冲突后环境评估和补救措施的原则草案15密切相关。 |
| Chapter X Succession of States in respect
of State responsibility | 第十章 国家责任方面的国家继承 |
| A. Introduction | A. 导言 |
| 219. At its sixty-ninth session (2017),
the Commission decided to include the topic “Succession of States in respect
of State responsibility” in its programme of work and appointed Mr. Pavel
Šturma as Special Rapporteur. | 219. 委员会第六十九届会议(2017年)决定将“国家责任方面的国家继承”专题列入工作方案，并任命帕维尔·斯图尔马先生为特别报告员。 |
| The General Assembly subsequently, in its
resolution 72/116 of 7 December 2017, took note of the decision of the
Commission to include the topic in its programme of work. | 大会随后在2017年12月7日第72/116号决议中注意到委员会决定将此专题列入工作方案。 |
| 220. At the same session, the Commission
considered 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, as well as to provide an overview of general provisions
relating to the topic. | 220. 在同一届会议上，委员会审议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研究此专题的范围和结果的方法，并概述了与此专题相关的一般规定。 |
| Following the debate in plenary, the
Commission decided to refer draft articles 1 to 4, as contained in the first
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第一次报告所载的第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 Chair of the Drafting Committee regarding draft
articles 1 and 2, provisionally adopted by the Committee, which was presented
to the Commission for information only. | 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。 提交该报告仅供委员会参考。 |
| B. Consideration of the topic at the
present session | B. 本届会议审议此专题的情况 |
| 221. At the present session, the
Commission had before it the second report of the Special Rapporteur
(A/CN.4/719), which was considered at its 3431st to 3435th meetings, from 17
to 24 July 2018. | 221. 在本届会议上，委员会收到了特别报告员的第二次报告(A/CN.4/719)，并在2018年7月17日至24日举行的第3431至第3435次会议上审议了该报告。 |
| 222. In his second report, which was composed
of four parts, the Special Rapporteur at first addressed certain introductory
issues, including the legality of succession (Part One). | 222. 特别报告员的第二次报告分为四个部分。 特别报告员在报告中首先述及了某些先导问题，包括继承的合法性(第一部分)。 |
| He then discussed the general rules on
succession of States in respect of State responsibility, particularly in
relation to attribution and in relation to the difference between continuing
and completed breaches (Part Two). | 随后，他讨论了国家责任方面的国家继承的一般规则，特别述及了行为的归属，以及持续的违背义务行为与已完成的违背义务行为之间的区别(第二部分)。 |
| Thereafter, the Special Rapporteur
considered certain special categories of State succession to the obligations
arising from responsibility (Part Three). | 之后，特别报告员审议了责任所致义务方面的国家继承的某些特殊类别(第三部分)。 |
| The future programme of work on the topic
was then addressed (Part Four). | 随后，特别报告员讨论了关于本专题的今后工作方案(第四部分)。 |
| The Special Rapporteur proposed seven
draft articles corresponding to the issues considered in Part One (draft
article 5), Part Two (draft article 6), and Part Three (draft articles 7 to
11) of his second report. | 特别报告员针对其第二次报告第一部分(第5条草案)、第二部分(第6条草案)和第三部分(第7至第11条草案)审议的问题，相应地提出了七项条款草案。 |
| 223. At its 3435th meeting, on 24 July
2018, the Commission decided to refer draft articles 5 to 11, as contained in
the Special Rapporteur’s second report, to the Drafting Committee, taking
into account the views expressed in the plenary debate. | 223. 在2018年7月24日举行的第3435次会议上，委员会决定将特别报告员第二次报告所载的第5至第11条草案转交起草委员会。 |
| 224. At its 3443rd meeting, on 3 August
2018, the Chair of the Drafting Committee presented an interim oral report on
draft article 1, paragraph 2, and draft articles 5 and 6, provisionally
adopted by the Drafting Committee. | 224. 在2018年8月3日举行的第3443次会议上，起草委员会主席提出了一份关于起草委员会暂时通过的第1条草案第2款以及第5和第6条草案的临时口头报告。 |
| The report was presented for information
only and is available on the website of the Commission. | 这份报告仅供参考，可在委员会网站查阅。 |
| 225. At its 3451st meeting, on 9 August
2018, the Commission decided to request from the Secretariat a memorandum
providing information on treaties which may be of relevance to its future
work on the topic. | 225. 在2018年8月9日举行的第3451次会议上，委员会决定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的条约的资料。 |
| 1. Introduction by the Special Rapporteur
of the second report | 1. 特别报告员介绍第二次报告 |
| 226. The Special Rapporteur indicated
that his second report took into account the comments from members of the
Commission and from delegates in the Sixth Committee. | 226. 特别报告员指出，他的第二次报告考虑到了委员会委员和第六委员会代表的评论。 |
| In relation to the general rule
underlying the topic of succession to responsibility, the Special Rapporteur
considered that a general theory of non-succession should not be replaced by
another similar theory in favour of succession: a more flexible and realistic
approach was needed. | 关于继承责任专题的一般规则，特别报告员认为不应以一种支持继承的一般理论取代不继承的一般理论：需要采取更为灵活务实的办法。 |
| While consistency with the previous work
of the Commission was important, especially in relation to terminology, it
was unnecessary to adopt the same structure as the Vienna Convention on
Succession of States in Respect of Treaties of 1978 and the Vienna Convention
on Succession of States in Respect of State Property, Archives and Debts of
1983. | 虽然与委员会以前的工作保持一致很重要，特别是在术语方面保持一致很重要，但没有必要采用与1978年《关于国家在条约方面的继承的维也纳公约》和1983年《关于国家对国家财产、档案和债务的继承的维也纳公约》相同的结构。 |
| The previous work of the Commission on
State responsibility for internationally wrongful acts was equally essential. | 委员会以前就国家对国际不法行为的责任开展的工作同样重要。 |
| 227. In that regard, the Special
Rapporteur remarked that the complex legal regime of State responsibility had
already been codified by the Commission in its articles on responsibility of
States for internationally wrongful acts, which largely reflected customary
international law. | 227. 在这方面，特别报告员指出，国家责任这一复杂的法律制度已由国际法委员会通过其国家对国际不法行为的责任条款
编纂成法，该条款在很大程度上体现了习惯国际法。 |
| The general principles and rules arising
therefrom should thus be applied or developed, if necessary, to serve as
guidance for States facing problems of responsibility in cases of succession. | 如有必要，应适用或发展源自该条款的一般原则和规则，用于为在继承情况下面临责任问题的国家提供指导。 |
| The question of succession had to be
considered not with respect to “responsibility” in abstracto but rather with
respect to the principles and rules of a secondary character governing, in
particular: the establishment of an internationally wrongful act and its
attribution to a given State; | 对于继承问题，不应抽象地从“责任”的角度来考虑，而是应当结合次级层面的原则和规则来考虑，特别是规范以下方面的原则和规则：确立国际不法行为并将之归于某一国； |
| the content and forms of responsibility; | 责任的内容和形式； |
| and the invocation of such
responsibility. | 这种责任的援引。 |
| Any general rules identified would then
be subject to exceptions and modifications, taking into account various
factors, such as whether the breach was completed or continuing, whether
damage was localized, and whether the predecessor State continued to exist or
not. | 凡是识别出的一般规则，之后都可能出现例外或受到修改，例外和修改会考虑多种因素，包括违约行为是已经完成还是仍在持续、损害是否是局部性的、被继承国是否继续存在等。 |
| The latter issue was especially
significant, in the view of the Special Rapporteur. | 特别报告员认为，被继承国是否继续存在是一个特别重要的问题。 |
| 228. Seven new draft articles had been
proposed by the Special Rapporteur in his second report. | 228. 特别报告员在其第二次报告中提出了七项新的条款草案。 |
| In addition to addressing certain general
rules (draft articles 5 and 6), the draft articles focused on the transfer of
obligations arising from the internationally wrongful act of the predecessor
State (draft articles 7 to 11). | 除了阐述某些一般规则(第5和第6条草案)外，这些条款草案的重点是被继承国的国际不法行为产生的义务的转移(第7至第11条草案)。 |
| Draft article 5 dealt with the issue of
legality of succession, providing that the draft articles applied only to the
effects of a succession of States occurring in conformity with international
law and, in particular, the principles of international law embodied in the
Charter of the United Nations. | 第5条草案论及继承的合法性问题，规定本条款草案只适用于依照国际法尤其是《联合国宪章》所体现的国际法原则而发生的国家继承的效果。 |
| The Special Rapporteur had initially been
hesitant to address such a potentially controversial issue, given that, in
addition to clear cases of illegal succession, there were also cases which
belonged to a “grey” or “neutral” zone which was possibly not governed by
international law. | 特别报告员最初对述及这个具有潜在争议性问题犹豫不决，因为除了明显的非法继承情况外，还有属于“灰色”或“中性”地带的情况，这些情况可能不受国际法管辖。 |
| Draft article 5 was therefore a modest
provision modelled on article 6 of the Vienna Convention on Succession of
States in Respect of Treaties of 1978, and consistent with other provisions
previously adopted by the Commission, as well as with the work undertaken by
the Institute of International Law. | 因此，第5条草案是仿照1978年《关于国家在条约方面的继承的维也纳公约》第6条制定的一项适度的规定，与委员会先前通过的其他规定以及国际法学会开展的工作相一致。 |
| 229. The second general provision was
draft article 6, which set out the general rule applicable to the succession
of States in respect of State responsibility, namely the principle of
non-succession when it comes to the establishment of an internationally
wrongful act. | 229. 第二项一般规定是第6条草案，其中规定了适用于国家责任方面的国家继承的一般规则，即在确立国际不法行为时的不继承原则。 |
| The draft article provided that
succession of States had no impact on the attribution of an internationally
wrongful act committed before the date of succession of States. | 该项条款草案规定，国家继承不影响在国家继承日之前犯下的国际不法行为的归属。 |
| It then addressed the possible impact on
succession to responsibility of the distinction between instantaneous and
continuing breaches, as well the issue of composite acts. | 随后，该项条款草案讨论了区分瞬时违背行为和持续违背行为对责任继承的可能影响，以及复合行为问题。 |
| 230. The five draft articles that followed
draft article 6 developed and modified the general rule expressed therein. | 230. 第6条草案之后的五项条款草案发展并修改了第6条草案中表达的一般规则。 |
| They considered individual categories of
succession and specified the circumstances where the obligations arising from
an internationally wrongful act rested with the predecessor State and those
where they passed to the successor State. | 他们审议了个别类别的继承，并具体说明了被继承国国际不法行为产生的义务属于被继承国的情况以及这些义务转属给继承国的情况。 |
| The five draft articles were divided in
two groups. | 这五项条款草案分为两组。 |
| Draft articles 7, 8 and 9 dealt with
cases of succession where the predecessor State continued to exist, while
draft articles 10 and 11 dealt with situations where the predecessor State
had ceased to exist. | 第7、第8和9条草案述及被继承国继续存在时的继承情况，而第10和第11条草案述及被继承国不复存在时的情况。 |
| 231. Draft articles 7, 8 and 9 addressed
respectively the separation of parts of a State, the establishment of a newly
independent State, and the transfer of part of the territory of a State. | 231. 第7、第8和第9条草案分别述及一国若干部分分离、新独立国家的建立和一国部分领土的移交。 |
| They were similarly structured. | 这几条具有相似的结构。 |
| First, they expressed the general rule
that obligations arising from an internationally wrongful act of the
predecessor State did not pass to the successor State; | 首先，它们表述了一般规则，即被继承国的国际不法行为产生的义务不转属继承国； |
| then, they identified exceptions that
applied in particular circumstances, such as a direct link between the act or
its consequences and the territory of the successor State or States. | 然后，它们指出了适用于具体情形的例外情况，例如行为或其后果与一个或多个继承国的领土有直接联系。 |
| Draft articles 7 and 9 also addressed the
possibility of an act carried out by an organ of a territorial unit of the
predecessor State that had later become an organ of the successor State. | 第7和第9条草案还阐述了一种可能性，即行为由被继承国某一领土单位的机关实施，而该机关后来已成为继承国机关。 |
| 232. Draft article 10 dealt with the two
situations of merger of States and incorporation of a State into another
existing State, while draft article 11 addressed the dissolution of State. | 232. 第10条草案述及国家合并和一国并入另一现存国家这两种情况，第11条草案则述及国家解体。 |
| The latter draft article underlined the
role of agreements that should be negotiated in good faith by successor
States. | 第11条草案强调了协定的作用，继承国应秉持诚意进行协定谈判。 |
| 233. The Special Rapporteur indicated
that the final wording and placement of draft articles 3 and 4, as proposed
on the first report and referred to the Drafting Committee, may be left for
discussion at a later stage. | 233. 特别报告员指出，第一次报告提出并转交起草委员会的第3和第4条草案的最终措辞和位置安排可留待稍后阶段讨论。 |
| In relation to the future programme of
work, the Special Rapporteur reiterated his intention of following the
programme outlined in his first report (A/CN.4/708, para. 133) with the
necessary flexibility. | 关于今后的工作方案，特别报告员重申，他打算遵循其第一次报告中概述的工作方案(A/CN.4/708,
第133段)，同时保持必要的灵活性。 |
| The issue of forms and invocation of
reparation might require further analysis in the future, and some additional
definitions might be included in draft article 2 on the use of terms. | 今后可能需要对赔偿的形式和援引问题作进一步分析，并且可能在关于用语的第2条草案中加入一些其他定义。 |
| In principle, the third report (2019)
would focus on the transfer of the rights or claims of an injured predecessor
State to the successor State. | 原则上，第三次报告(2019年)将重点讨论受损害的被继承国向继承国转移权利或索偿的问题。 |
| The fourth report (2020) would then
address procedural and miscellaneous issues, including the plurality of
successor States and the issue of shared responsibility, as well as issues
concerning injured international organizations and injured individuals. | 之后，第四次报告(2020年)将述及程序性问题和其他问题，包括多个继承国问题和共同责任问题，以及与受害国际组织或受害个人有关的问题。 |
| The Special Rapporteur envisaged that the
entire set of draft articles might be adopted on first reading in 2020 or
2021, depending on the progress of the debate. | 特别报告员设想，整套条款草案可能在2020年或2021年一读通过，具体取决于辩论的进展情况。 |
| 2. Summary of the debate | 2. 辩论摘要 |
| (a) General comments | (a) 一般性评论 |
| 234. Members generally welcomed the
second report of the Special Rapporteur and commended its structure. | 234. 委员们普遍欢迎特别报告员的第二次报告，并赞扬报告的结构。 |
| Several members remarked that the
scarcity of State practice on succession of States in respect of State
responsibility presented significant challenges to the work of the Commission
on the topic. | 几位委员指出，关于国家责任方面的国家继承的国家实践很少，这给委员会关于这一专题的工作带来了重大挑战。 |
| Some members agreed with the Special
Rapporteur that the available State practice was diverse, context-specific
and often politically sensitive, and observed that not many relevant
decisions by domestic and international courts and tribunals were available. | 一些委员同意特别报告员的意见，认为现有的国家实践多种多样，各有背景特殊性，还往往具有政治敏感性，他们还指出，国内和国际性法院和法庭的相关判决也不多。 |
| According to a number of members, such
difficulties confirmed the initial misgivings expressed by some members as to
the suitability of the topic for codification or progressive development. | 若干委员认为，这些困难证实了一些委员最初对该专题是否适合编纂或逐渐发展表示的疑虑。 |
| Several members expressed caution at the
heavy reliance of the report of the Special Rapporteur on academic writings
and on the work of the Institute of International Law. | 特别报告员的报告高度依赖学术著作和国际法学会的工作，几位委员就此提出了告诫。 |
| In addition, it was noted that the
practice considered in the report, although generally more diverse than in
his first report, had still predominantly focused on European sources and
examples. | 此外还有人指出，报告中审议的实践虽然普遍比特别报告员第一次报告审议的实践更加多样化，但仍主要侧重欧洲的来源和实例。 |
| 235. Several members agreed with the
Special Rapporteur that it was possible to identify an underlying general
rule applicable to the succession of States in respect of State
responsibility, according to which State responsibility did not automatically
transfer to the successor State, except in certain circumstances. | 235. 几位委员同意特别报告员的意见，即有可能确定适用于国家责任方面的国家继承的基本一般规则，根据该规则，除非在某些情况下，国家责任不会自动转移给继承国。 |
| It was underlined that a realistic and
flexible approach was needed in that regard, as the Special Rapporteur had remarked. | 有人强调，正如特别报告员所说，在这方面需要采取务实灵活的办法。 |
| Other members of the Commission expressed
the view that identifying several rules would be more practical than
attempting to confirm the existence of a single underlying general rule,
which could be impossible to determine. | 委员会其他委员认为，确定几条规则比试图确认存在一项单一的基本一般规则更实际，因为可能无法确定这样一项规则。 |
| 236. The scope of possible exceptions to
the underlying general rule of non-succession was the object of considerable
debate. | 236. 不继承这一基本一般规则的可能例外的范围引发了大量辩论。 |
| Several members cautioned against
replacing a general theory of non-succession to State responsibility with a
similarly general presumption of succession. | 几位委员告诫不要以同样笼统的继承推定取代笼统的国家责任不继承理论。 |
| It was noted that some of the draft
articles proposed by the Special Rapporteur in fact espoused such a
presumption of succession, especially in relation to cases where the
predecessor State no longer existed. | 有人指出，特别报告员提出的一些条款草案事实上支持这种继承推定，特别是在被继承国不复存在的情况下。 |
| In the view of several members, such
proposals were based on policy grounds rather than State practice, and were
more in the nature of progressive development, or de lege ferenda, rather
than codification of existing international law. | 几位委员认为，这种建议的依据是政策理由而不是国家实践，本质上更像是逐渐发展或拟议法，而不是编纂现有国际法。 |
| In that respect, it was highlighted that
it was important to clarify the extent to which each of the draft articles
would constitute progressive development or codification of international
law. | 在这方面，有人强调，必须澄清每项条款草案在多大程度上构成国际法的逐渐发展或编纂。 |
| 237. In relation to the methodology
adopted by the Special Rapporteur, some members expressed doubts as to the
separation of the issues of succession to obligations arising from an
internationally wrongful act of a predecessor State (considered in the second
report) from the issues concerning the rights and claims arising from an
internationally wrongful act injuring a predecessor State (to be considered
in the third report). | 237. 关于特别报告员采用的方法，一些委员对将被继承国实施的国际不法行为所产生义务之继承问题(第二次报告进行了审议)与关于损害被继承国的国际不法行为引起的权利和索赔问题(将在第三次报告中进行审议)分开审议表示怀疑。 |
| In their view, that might lead to
unnecessary duplication of work. | 他们认为，这可能会导致不必要的重复工作。 |
| In relation to the categories of
succession to be analysed, a number of members agreed with the basic
distinction proposed by the Special Rapporteur between cases where the
predecessor State continued to exist and cases where it did not. | 关于要分析的继承类别，若干委员同意特别报告员提议的对被继承国继续存在的情况和不复存在的情况作出基本区分。 |
| Other members, however, suggested that
such a distinction was not necessarily borne out by State practice, but was
rather the result of policy considerations. | 然而，其他委员认为，这种区分不一定得到国家实践的支持，而是政策考虑的结果。 |
| Members also generally agreed that it was
important to maintain consistency with the previous work of the Commission,
both in matters of terminology and substance, especially in relation to the
articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts. | 委员们还普遍同意，在术语和实质问题方面，必须与委员会以前的工作保持一致，特别是与国家对国际不法行为的责任条款保持一致。 |
| 238. In relation to the subsidiary nature
of the proposed rules, a number of members proposed that a draft article be
added stating that the draft articles would only apply in the absence of any
agreement between the parties, including the injured State of an
internationally wrongful act. | 238. 关于拟议规则的从属性质，若干委员建议增加一项条款草案，指出条款草案仅在包括国际不法行为受害国在内的当事方之间没有任何协定的情况下适用。 |
| In that regard, the fundamental role of
treaties, other agreements, and unilateral undertakings by successor States
was underlined by some members. | 在这方面，一些委员强调了条约、其他协定和继承国单方面承诺的基本作用。 |
| The view was also expressed that caution
was required in inferring general rules from existing agreements, which were
often narrow in scope and only bound the parties thereto. | 还有一种意见认为，在从现有协定推导一般规则时需要谨慎，因为这些协议的范围往往很窄，只对协议各方有约束力。 |
| According to a view, the Commission
should focus its work solely on responsibility of States for internationally
wrongful acts whose injured parties were also States. | 一种意见认为，委员会的工作应完全专注于国家对受害方也是国家的国际不法行为的责任。 |
| 239. Some members proposed changing the
title of the topic to “State responsibility problems in cases of succession
of States”. | 239. 一些委员建议将该专题的标题改为“国家继承情况下的国家责任问题”。 |
| Suggestions were also made as to the
possible structuring of the draft articles in several parts. | 还有人建议是否能将条款草案在结构上分为几个部分。 |
| (b) Specific comments | (b) 具体评论 |
| (i) Draft article 5 — Cases of succession
of States covered by the present draft articles | (一) 第5条草案――本条款草案所涵盖的国家继承情况 |
| 240. Members generally expressed their
support for draft article 5, the wording of which was consistent with the
previous work of the Commission. | 240. 委员们普遍表示支持第5条草案，该条的措辞与委员会以前的工作一致。 |
| It was noted that the draft article was
also consistent with the fundamental principle ex injuria jus non oritur and
with General Assembly resolution 2625 (XXV) of 1970 (Declaration on
Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Cooperation
among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations). | 有人指出，该条草案也符合不法行为不产生权利这一基本原则和大会1970年第2625(XXV)号决议(《关于各国依联合国宪章建立友好关系及合作之国际法原则之宣言》)。 |
| In relation to the legality of
succession, some members remarked that no third category existed beyond
lawful and unlawful cases of succession. | 关于继承的合法性，一些委员指出，除了合法继承和非法继承之外，不存在第三类。 |
| Other members considered that the
question of legality of succession should be considered separately from the
possible consequences, in terms of responsibility, of unlawful succession,
including in relation to any unlawful territorial changes occurring before
it. | 其他委员认为，继承的合法性问题应与非法继承在责任方面的可能后果，包括与继承前发生的任何非法领土变更有关的后果分开审议。 |
| The view was also expressed that draft
article 5 might not accomplish its intended purpose, because the exclusion of
unlawful succession from the scope of application of the draft articles might
lead to a paradoxical advantage for unlawful successor States, insofar as any
identified exceptions to the general rule of non-succession to State
responsibility may not be understood as applying to them. | 还有意见认为，第5条草案可能无法实现其预期目的，因为将非法继承排除在条款草案的适用范围之外可能反而会有利于非法继承国，因为国家责任不继承这项一般规则的任何已确定的例外可能都不会被理解为适用于这些国家。 |
| (ii) Draft article 6 — General rule | (二) 第6条草案――一般规则 |
| 241. While members generally expressed
agreement with the rule of non-succession to State responsibility enshrined
in draft article 6, several members remarked that the formulation of that
draft article was unclear. | 241. 虽然委员们普遍表示同意第6条草案所载的国家责任不继承规则，但几位委员指出，该条草案的行文并不明确。 |
| A number of drafting suggestions were
made in that regard, which inter alia aimed at clarifying that the
responsibility for wrongful acts in cases of succession of States only arose
for the State that had committed the wrongful act, except when the draft
articles otherwise provided. | 在这方面，委员们提出了一些起草建议，主要目的在于澄清国家继承情况下的不法行为责任仅由实施不法行为的国家承担，除非条款草案另有规定。 |
| 242. In relation to the legal basis of
the general rule of non-succession, some members expressed support for the
view of the Special Rapporteur that such a rule derived from the rules on
attribution of conduct enshrined in the articles on responsibility of States
for internationally wrongful acts, and in particular that the non-succession
rule was a corollary to the definition of State responsibility contained in
article 1 thereof. | 242. 关于不继承这项一般规则的法律依据，一些委员表示支持特别报告员的观点，即这一规则源自国家对国际不法行为的责任条款所载的行为归属规则，具体而言，不继承规则是该条款第1条所载国家责任定义的必然结果。 |
| Other members, however, considered that
the question of attribution of conduct was distinct from the question of
succession to responsibility, and that employing the language of attribution
of conduct might generate confusion, because issues of succession in respect
to State responsibility only arose in relation to internationally wrongful
acts that had already been attributed to the predecessor State under article
2 of the articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful
acts; | 然而，另一些委员认为，行为归属问题不同于责任继承问题，使用行为归属的用语可能会造成混淆，因为只有在涉及根据国家对国际不法行为的责任条款第2条已经归于被继承国的国际不法行为时，才会产生国家责任方面的继承问题； |
| in the absence of such attribution, there
would be no responsibility to transfer. | 如果没有这种归属，就不会有责任的转移。 |
| The view was also expressed that the
general rules on attribution of conduct and other rules on State
responsibility may in fact be affected by rules on State succession. | 还有意见认为，关于行为归属的一般规则和关于国家责任的其他规则实际上可能会受到关于国家继承的规则的影响。 |
| 243. In relation to paragraph 4 of draft
article 6, some members considered that its reference to “reparation” would
limit the scope of the draft articles only to certain aspects of State
responsibility; | 243. 关于第6条草案第4款，一些委员认为，该款提及“赔偿”，这将使条款草案的范围仅限于国家责任的某些方面； |
| it was therefore necessary to clarify the
extent of the obligations arising from an internationally wrongful act that
would be transferred in cases of succession in respect to responsibility. | 因此，有必要澄清在责任继承情况下转移的国际不法行为所产生的义务的范围。 |
| Other members considered that paragraph 4
undermined the general rule of non-succession enshrined in the first part of
draft article 6, and that it conflicted with the general principle of law
that only the wrongdoer should be held responsible for a wrongful act. | 另一些委员认为，第4款破坏了第6条草案第一部分所载的不继承的一般规则，并与只有不法行为者应对不法行为负责这项一般法律原则相冲突。 |
| (iii) Draft article 7 — Separation of
parts of a State | (三) 第7条草案――国家若干部分的分离 |
| 244. The suggestion was made by several
members of the Commission to omit from draft article 7 and its title any
reference to “secession”, because the term might be interpreted as including
unlawful succession. | 244. 委员会几位委员建议从第7条草案及其标题中删去任何提及“脱离”的词语，因为这一用语可能被解释为包括非法继承。 |
| Some members considered that the limited
State practice did not support the exceptions to the non-succession rule included
in draft article 7. | 一些委员认为，有限的国家实践不支持第7条草案所列的不继承规则的例外情况。 |
| In addition, the expressions “if
particular circumstances so require” (in paragraphs 2 and 3), “an organ of a
territorial unit” (in paragraph 2), “direct link”, and “are assumed” (in
paragraph 3) were deemed unclear by a number of members. | 此外，若干委员认为，“若具体情况要求如此”(第2款和第3款)、“某一领土单位的机关”(第2款)、“直接联系”和“承担”(第3款)等表述不明确。 |
| In relation to paragraph 2, the view was
expressed that when an act of a continuing character was carried out by an
organ of the predecessor State that became the organ of the successor State,
no transfer of responsibility would occur, but two separate internationally
wrongful acts could be established, each attributable to either the
predecessor or the successor State. | 关于第2款，一种意见认为，如果某个原属于被继承国、后来成为继承国机构的机关实施了某项持续性行为，则不会发生责任转移，而是可以认定两种单独的国际不法行为，一种归于被继承国，一种归于继承国。 |
| The view was also expressed that some
criteria for the apportionment of rights and obligations after succession
should be added to this and other draft articles, and that the concept of
unjust enrichment might provide additional clarity in that regard. | 还有意见认为，应在本条草案和其他条草案中增加一些继承后的权利和义务分配标准，不当得利概念可能在这方面提供更多的明确性。 |
| Other members considered that the rules
applicable to unjust enrichment might not be pertinent in this context. | 另一些委员认为，适用于不当得利的规则在这方面可能不相关。 |
| 245. Several members expressed their
support in relation to paragraph 4 of draft article 7, and a number of
drafting proposals were made to clarify further the link between the
attribution of conduct of an insurrectional or other movement and the
consequent transfer of responsibility at the date of succession. | 245. 几位委员对第7条草案第4款表示支持，并提出了一些起草建议，以进一步澄清叛乱运动或其他运动的行为归属与由此在继承日发生的责任转移之间的联系。 |
| Drafting suggestions were also made with
a view to combining this draft article with draft articles 8 and/or draft
article 9. | 还有人提出了一些起草建议，以期将本条草案与第8条草案和/或第9条草案合并。 |
| (iv) Draft article 8 — Newly independent
States | (四) 第8条草案――新独立国家 |
| 246. A number of drafting suggestions
were made in relation to draft article 8. | 246. 委员们就第8条草案提出了一些起草建议。 |
| The article received the support of
several members of the Commission. | 该条得到了委员会几名委员的支持。 |
| Other members questioned whether it would
still be necessary for the Commission to adopt a draft article devoted to
“newly independent States”, as the concept now seemed anachronistic. | 另一些委员质疑委员会是否仍有必要通过一项专门针对“新独立国家”的条款草案，因为这一概念现在似乎已不合时宜。 |
| Other members, however, remarked that the
General Assembly maintained a list of non-self-governing territories, and
that cases of succession based on the principle of self-determination raised
certain legal specificities that should not be overlooked. | 但另一些委员指出，大会存有一份非自治领土清单，而基于自决原则的继承案例提出了某些具体的法律问题，不容忽视。 |
| Several members proposed that the
definition of “newly independent States” be included among those in draft
article 2. | 几位委员建议将“新独立国家”的定义列入第2条草案所列的定义。 |
| 247. The view was expressed that, among
the criteria to be considered under paragraph 2 of draft article 8, reference
should be made to the possible direct link between an internationally
wrongful act and the population, rather than just the territory, of the
successor State. | 247. 一种意见认为，在第8条草案第2款所述的应予考虑的标准中，应当提及国际不法行为与继承国人口之间可能存在的直接联系，而不仅仅是国际不法行为与继承国领土之间可能存在的直接联系。 |
| In relation to paragraph 3, some members
considered that the concept of “insurrectional or other movement” would
comprise “national liberation” movements, and it was thus possible to adopt
the same language employed in paragraph 4 of draft article 7. | 关于第3款，一些委员认为，“叛乱运动或其他运动”的概念将包括“民族解放”运动，因此有可能采用与第7条草案第4款同样的措辞。 |
| (v) Draft article 9 — Transfer of part of
the territory of a State | (五) 第9条草案――一国部分领土的移交 |
| 248. In relation to draft article 9,
several members remarked that their views concerning draft article 7 applied
mutatis mutandis, including those concerning the limited State practice in
support of the exceptions to the general rule of non-succession and the need
to clarify the meaning of some of the terms employed. | 248. 关于第9条草案，几位委员指出，他们对第7条草案的意见比照适用于此，包括支持不继承一般规则的例外情况的国家实践有限，以及需要澄清所使用的一些术语的含义。 |
| A number of drafting suggestions were
made. | 有人提出了若干起草建议。 |
| (vi) Draft article 10 — Uniting of States | (六) 第10条草案――国家的合并 |
| 249. Several members of the Commission
remarked that draft articles 10 and 11, which concerned the situation where
the predecessor State no longer existed, espoused a general presumption of
succession to responsibility that was inconsistent with the general rule of
non-succession in respect to State responsibility identified in draft article
6. | 249. 委员会几位委员指出，第10条和第11条草案涉及被继承国不复存在的情况，这两条草案支持责任继承的一般推定，这不符合第6条草案确定的关于国家责任不继承的一般规则。 |
| In their view, there was not sufficient
State practice in support of such a presumption of succession, which found
support only in some academic writings and in the work of the Institute of
International Law. | 他们认为，没有足够的国家实践支持这种继承推定，这种推定仅得到了一些学术著作和国际法研究所的工作的支持。 |
| The examples provided by the Special
Rapporteur often concerned expropriation, which was not an internationally
wrongful act per se. | 特别报告员提供的实例往往涉及征用，而征用本身并不是国际不法行为。 |
| Some members underlined that, in the
absence of consent, it was simply not possible to deduce any assumption of
obligations by the successor State. | 一些委员强调，在没有同意的情况下，根本不可能推断继承国承担任何义务。 |
| Some members considered that the policy
rationale underlying such a reversal of the general rule of non-succession
may in fact lead to inequitable or unjust results. | 一些委员认为，这种逆转不继承的一般规则所依据的政策理由实际上可能导致不公平或不公正的结果。 |
| In addition, it was remarked that
attaching legal consequences to the predecessor State remaining in existence,
or otherwise, may lead to discriminatory results. | 此外，有人指出，将法律后果归于仍然存在的被继承国，或不归于仍然存在的被继承国，可能会导致歧视性结果。 |
| Other members expressed support for draft
articles 10 and 11, as they established the certainty of legal consequences
for all internationally wrongful acts, and thus preserved the rights of
injured parties. | 另一些委员表示支持第10和第11条草案，因为它们确定了所有国际不法行为的法律后果的确定性，从而维护了受害方的权利。 |
| 250. A number of drafting suggestions were
made in relation to draft article 10, some of which aimed at removing any
reference to the distinction between types of unification of States, given
that the legal consequences in terms of succession to responsibility were
deemed to be identical. | 250. 有人就第10条草案提出了一些起草建议，其中一些建议旨在删除任何提及不同种类的国家合并之间的差异的内容，因为它们在责任继承方面的法律后果被认为是相同的。 |
| (vii) Draft article 11 — Dissolution of
State | (七) 第11条草案――国家解体 |
| 251. In addition to the observations that
applied to both draft article 10 and draft article 11 mentioned above, a number
of members of the Commission remarked that draft article 11 posed specific
challenges and would require careful consideration in the light of the highly
context-specific nature of dissolution of States. | 251. 除了同时适用于第10条草案和第11条草案的上述意见之外，委员会一些委员指出，第11条草案提出了具体挑战，需要结合国家解体的高度背景特殊性谨慎审议。 |
| 252. Several members of the Commission
considered that paragraph 1 of draft article 11 was unclear, especially in
relation to the expression “subject to an agreement”; | 252. 委员会几位委员认为，第11条草案第1款不明确，特别是“但须遵照有关协定”一语； |
| it was important to specify which parties
would be involved in such an agreement, and whether the scope of the
agreement would be the apportionment of responsibility among successors or
the transfer of responsibility itself. | 必须具体说明这样的协定涉及哪些当事方以及协定的范围是在继承国之间分配责任还是转移责任本身。 |
| In relation to paragraph 2, a number of
members considered that the introduction of a duty to negotiate would not be
appropriate, and that it was therefore important that the wording remained
hortatory in nature. | 关于第2款，若干委员认为不宜设立谈判的义务，而是保留劝告性的用语。 |
| A number of drafting suggestions were
made. | 委员们提出了一些起草建议。 |
| (c) Final form | (c) 最终形式 |
| 253. In terms of the final form that the
project should take, a number of members noted that some States had expressed
their preference for a form other than draft articles, such as draft
guidelines or conclusions, although other States had supported the form of
draft articles. | 253. 关于这一项目应采取的最终形式，若干委员指出，一些国家已表示倾向于条款草案以外的形式，如准则草案或结论草案，但另一些国家支持条款草案的形式。 |
| The view was expressed that the final
form could be decided upon at a later stage. | 有意见认为，最终形式可以在较晚的阶段决定。 |
| Some members remarked that it could be
useful to consider the possibility of drafting model clauses to be used as a
basis for negotiation of agreements on succession. | 一些委员指出，不妨考虑是否可以起草示范条款，作为谈判继承协定的基础。 |
| (d) Future programme of work | (d) 今后的工作方案 |
| 254. Members of the Commission generally
agreed with the proposals by the Special Rapporteur concerning the future
programme of work. | 254. 委员会委员普遍同意特别报告员关于今后工作方案的建议。 |
| The view was also expressed that the
Special Rapporteur should consider further topics, such as the role of
international organizations and the effect of non-recognition policies on
issues of succession to responsibility. | 还有意见认为，特别报告员应审议其他专题，如国际组织的作用和不承认政策对责任继承问题的影响。 |
| 3. Concluding remarks of the Special
Rapporteur | 3. 特别报告员的总结 |
| 255. In response to the debate, the
Special Rapporteur expressed his gratitude for the many comments received and
welcomed the prevailing sense of the debate, which had focused on how to best
approach the topic in a balanced manner. | 255. 针对讨论情况，特别报告员对收到的许多评论表示感谢，并对辩论的主流意见表示欢迎，辩论的重点是如何最好地以平衡的方式处理这一专题。 |
| In relation to the doubts that had been
expressed as to the feasibility and suitability of the topic for
codification, the Special Rapporteur reiterated his view that the topic was
suitable for codification and progressive development, as it aimed to shed
more light on the gaps left by the previous codification work of the
Commission in the two fields of State responsibility and succession of
States. | 关于对编纂该专题的可行性和适当性表示的怀疑，特别报告员重申了他的观点，认为该专题适合编纂和逐渐发展，因为该专题旨在进一步阐明委员会以前的编纂工作在国家责任和国家继承这两个领域留下的空白。 |
| The topic intended to explain the
possible impact of succession of States on general rules of State
responsibility, not at creating new rules on the succession of States. | 该专题意在解释国家继承对国家责任一般规则的可能影响，而不是制定关于国家继承的新规则。 |
| In his view, the fact that such issues
had been deliberately left unaddressed during the Commission’s work on State
responsibility was an invitation rather than a hindrance to further consideration
by the Commission. | 他认为，在委员会以前关于国家责任的工作中，这些问题被故意搁置，这种情况应促使委员会进行进一步审议，而不是阻碍审议。 |
| In the Special Rapporteur’s view, nothing
in the articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts
suggested that the legal consequences of an internationally wrongful act
simply disappeared because of State succession. | 特别报告员认为，国家对国际不法行为的责任条款中没有任何内容表明，国际不法行为的法律后果因国家继承而消失。 |
| The Special Rapporteur also indicated
that he agreed that the Commission should consider changing the title of the
topic to “State responsibility problems in cases of succession of States”. | 特别报告员还表示，他同意委员会应考虑将该专题的标题改为“国家继承情况下的国家责任问题”。 |
| 256. Concerning issues of methodology,
and in particular comments made by members as to available practice, the
Special Rapporteur underlined his intention to combine the progressive
development of international law and its codification, an approach consistent
with the mandate of the Commission. | 256. 关于方法问题，特别是委员们关于现有实践的评论，特别报告员强调，他打算将国际法的逐渐发展与编纂结合起来，这种方法符合委员会的任务。 |
| He indicated that there was little
distinction between lex ferenda and policy considerations, and that State
practice, including bilateral and multilateral treaties, was also influenced
by policy considerations. | 他指出，拟议法和政策考虑之间几乎没有区别，他还指出，包括双边和多边条约在内的国家实践也受政策考虑的影响。 |
| 257. The Special Rapporteur also noted
that a slow but growing trend of case law was emerging concerning succession
to State responsibility, especially among regional human rights courts. | 257. 特别报告员还指出，在国家责任的继承方面正在出现缓慢但不断增长的判例趋势，虽然缓慢但日益显著，特别是在区域人权法院中。 |
| He agreed that, in his report, he had
greatly relied on academic writings, but considered that this was consistent
with the role of writings as subsidiary means for the identification of rules
of law. | 他承认自己在报告中非常依赖学术著作，但认为这符合著作作为识别法律规则的辅助手段的作用。 |
| In addition, the Special Rapporteur
stressed that the existence of early drafts on the topic by private
codification bodies, and in particular the Institute of International Law,
confirmed the relevance of the topic. | 此外，特别报告员强调，私人编纂机构，特别是国际法学会，已经就该专题提出了早期草案，这证实了该专题的相关性。 |
| He added that the Commission was,
however, not bound by previous work undertaken by such bodies. | 但他补充说，委员会不受这些机构以往工作的约束。 |
| 258. In relation the question of the
identification of a general rule underlying the topic of State succession in
relation to State responsibility, the Special Rapporteur agreed that such a
general rule, or rules, was needed, together with exceptions applicable to
individual categories of succession. | 258. 关于国家责任方面的国家继承专题的一般规则的识别问题，特别报告员同意，需要具备这样的一项或多项一般规则，同时还需要有适用于个别继承类别的例外情况。 |
| For the purpose of creation of
responsibility of a State (based on its own internationally wrongful act),
non-succession was an absolute rule: both the act and the international
obligation breached must refer only to the predecessor State. | 为了确立一国的责任(基于其自身的国际不法行为)，不继承是一项绝对规则：行为和被违背的国际义务都必须仅仅指向被继承国。 |
| The legal consequences of a wrongful act,
including circumstances precluding wrongfulness, the obligation of cessation,
and possible countermeasures, would all in principle remain applicable to the
predecessor State. | 不法行为的法律后果，包括解除不法性的情况、停止义务和可能的反措施，原则上只适用于被继承国。 |
| The successor State would not become
responsible on the basis of a wrongful act that it did not commit. Rather, it
may be responsible for its own wrongful acts, in cases such as continuing
breaches or attribution of conduct of insurrectional or other movements. | 继承国不会因其没有实施的不法行为而承担责任，而是可能要对自己的不法行为承担责任，例如为持续的违背行为负责，或者因叛乱运动或其他运动的行为归属该国而承担责任。 |
| In addition, some exceptions to the rule
of non-succession existed in relation to certain consequences of an
internationally wrongful act that did not disappear if the predecessor State
no longer existed. | 此外，不继承规则也存在一些例外，即国际不法行为的某些后果在被继承国不复存在的情况下也仍不消失。 |
| These consequences continued to exist in
a similar manner as territory, population, property or debts continued to
exist in cases of succession. | 这些后果继续存在的方式与领土、人口、财产或债务在继承情况下继续存在的方式类似。 |
| The exceptional grounds on which this was
the case were certainly open to debate. | 当然，对于在哪些特殊条件下才会触发这一状况，仍然存在争议。 |
| Nonetheless, such circumstances did not
determine a situation in which the successor State would become responsible,
or be blamed, for acts that it did not commit; | 无论如何，并不会因为这种状况就认定继承国要对其没有实施的行为负责或受到指责； |
| it would rather have to be commended for
not leaving the injured States or injured persons without any reparation. | 恰恰相反，应称赞继承国没有坐视受害国或受害人得不到任何赔偿。 |
| 259. The Special Rapporteur pointed out
that the basic distinction between cases where the predecessor State
continued to exist and cases where it no longer existed was based on the
description of real differences and was consistent with the recognized
categories of succession, regardless of possible policy considerations. | 259. 特别报告员指出，被继承国继续存在的情况与被继承国不复存在的情况二者之间基本区分的依据在于对实际差异的描述，与公认的继承类别一致，不受可能的政策考虑的影响。 |
| The specific rules and exceptions to be
drafted in that regard had to be worded in such a way as to prevent unjust
and inequitable results. | 起草这方面的具体规则和例外情况，措辞必须防止不公正和不公平的结果。 |
| With reference to the separation of the
issues of succession to obligations arising from an internationally wrongful
act of a predecessor State (considered in the second report) from the issues
concerning the rights and claims arising from an internationally wrongful act
injuring a predecessor State (to be considered in the third report), the
Special Rapporteur noted that duplication could be avoided by eventually
merging draft articles, as needed. | 关于被继承国实施的国际不法行为所产生义务之继承问题(第二次报告进行了审议)与关于损害被继承国的国际不法行为引起的权利和索赔问题(将在第三次报告中进行审议)分开，特别报告员指出，可根据需要，通过最终合并条款草案来避免重复。 |
| 260. The Special Rapporteur also
expressed his agreement with several other comments and proposals, including:
the need to consider the link between an internationally wrongful act and the
population of a successor State; | 260. 特别报告员还表示同意其他几项评论和建议，包括：需要考虑国际不法行为与继承国人口之间的联系； |
| the relevance of the consent of the
injured State or person to any undertaking of responsibility by the successor
State; | 受害国或受害人的同意与继承国承担责任的相关性； |
| the importance of agreements and
unilateral declarations in matters of succession; | 协定和单方面声明在继承事项中的重要性； |
| and the need to include a provision
expressly indicating the subsidiary character of the draft articles. | 以及需要列入一项规定，明确表明条款草案的从属性质。 |
| He also agreed that a number of
definitions would need to be added to draft article 2, and considered that a
number of the drafting proposals concerning the structure and content of the
draft articles should be upheld. | 他还同意，需要在第2条草案中增加一些定义，并认为应该支持关于条款草案结构和内容的一些起草建议。 |
| 261. In the Special Rapporteur’s view,
the draft articles should also address subjects other than States as possible
injured subjects. | 261. 特别报告员认为，条款草案还应将国家以外的主体作为可能的受害主体。 |
| Such an approach was consistent with the
first part of the articles on responsibility of States for internationally
wrongful acts, which also applied to breaches of international obligations of
States owed to other actors. | 这种方法符合国家对国际不法行为的责任条款的第一部分，该部分也适用于违反国家对其他行为方的国际义务的情况。 |
| 262. In relation to draft article 5, the
Special Rapporteur reiterated that this proposal was consistent with the
Vienna Convention on Succession of States in Respect of Treaties of 1978 and
the Vienna Convention on Succession of States in Respect of State Property,
Archives and Debts of 1983. | 262. 关于第5条草案，特别报告员重申，这一提议符合1978年《关于国家在条约方面的继承的维也纳公约》和1983年《关于国家对国家财产、档案和债务的继承的维也纳公约》。 |
| He noted that it remained unclear whether
modern international law fully regulated certain facts in relation to the
creation of States. | 他指出，尚不清楚现代国际法是否完全规范了与国家成立有关的某些事实。 |
| Draft article 5 aimed at positively
delineating the material scope of the draft articles in a manner consistent
with the previous work of the Commission on succession. | 第5条草案旨在以与委员会以往关于继承的工作相一致的方式积极界定条款草案的实质范围。 |
| The draft article in no way sought to
grant any privileges to unlawful successor States by exempting them from
responsibility; | 该条草案绝不试图通过免除非法继承国的责任来给予它们任何特权； |
| rather, it concerned both the possible
transfer of obligations and the transfer of rights arising from
responsibility. | 相反，该条既涉及义务的可能转移，也涉及责任产生的权利的转移。 |
| 263. As to draft article 6, the Special
Rapporteur was open to several of the suggestions received to improve its
clarity. | 263. 关于第6条草案，特别报告员对收到的一些关于提高该条草案的明确性的建议持开放态度。 |
| Concerning paragraph 4, the Special
Rapporteur indicated that the reference to reparation did not exclude the
relevance of other rules of State responsibility, which remained applicable
to the predecessor State. | 关于第4款，特别报告员指出，提及赔偿并不排除其他国家责任规则的相关性，这些规则仍然适用于被继承国。 |
| 264. In relation to draft article 7, the
Special Rapporteur agreed with a number of drafting suggestions, including
omitting any reference to “secession” therefrom; | 264. 关于第7条草案，特别报告员赞同一些起草建议，包括从其中删去任何提及“脱离”的词语； |
| in addition, the expression “if
particular circumstances so require” needed further clarification or removal. | 此外，需要进一步澄清或删除“若具体情况要求如此”一语。 |
| As to draft article 8, the Special
Rapporteur indicated that, in his view, all categories of succession
previously considered by the Commission should be maintained, including the
category of newly independent States. | 关于第8条草案，特别报告员表示，他认为，应当保留委员会以前审议过的所有类别的继承，包括新独立国家这一类别。 |
| Regarding both draft article 7 and draft
article 9, the Special Rapporteur indicated that the term “an organ of a
territorial unit” referred to situations where such organs had a substantive
degree of autonomy, such as in the case of federal States. | 关于第7条草案和第9条草案，特别报告员指出，“某一领土单位的机关”一词指的是这种机关具有实质自治权的情况，例如联邦国家内的情况。 |
| Furthermore, he agreed with a number of
drafting proposals, including those aimed at combining draft articles 7, 8
and 9 in a single provision. | 此外，他赞同一些起草建议，包括旨在将第7、第8和第9条草案合并为单一一条的建议。 |
| The Special Rapporteur also clarified
that it was not the purpose of draft articles 7, 8 and 9 to create
obligations entailing the automatic transfer of obligations to the successor
State. | 特别报告员还澄清说，第7、第8和第9条草案的目的并不是要产生将义务自动转移给继承国的义务。 。 |
| 265. Regarding draft articles 10 and 11,
the Special Rapporteur agreed with many of the comments made during the
plenary debate. | 265. 关于第10和第11条草案，特别报告员同意全体辩论期间提出的许多评论。 |
| He underlined, however, that draft
article 10 created a rebuttable presumption rather than a rule of automatic
succession replacing that of non-succession in all circumstances. | 然而，他强调，第10条草案提出了一种可反驳的推定，而不是在所有情况下以自动继承规则替代不继承规则。 |
| Furthermore, in his view, cases
concerning unlawful expropriation could not be discounted as irrelevant. | 此外，他认为，有关非法征用的案例不能被视为不相关。 |
| As to draft article 11, the Special
Rapporteur underlined that it was as a general, introductory provision that
would later be complemented by another draft article on the criteria and
rules for the apportionment of obligations arising from the internationally
wrongful act of a predecessor State that had ceased to exist. | 关于第11条草案，特别报告员强调，这是一项一般性的引言条款，以后将由另一项关于已不复存在的被继承国的国际不法行为所产生义务的分配标准和规则的条款草案予以补充。 |
| 266. In relation to the future programme
of work, the Special Rapporteur took note of the agreement of some members
with his proposed programme of work and agreed that the focus of the third
report on transfer of rights or claims of an injured predecessor might need
careful consideration to avoid duplication of work and that the role of
international organizations could also be considered at a later stage
together with other issues. | 266. 关于今后的工作方案，特别报告员注意到一些委员同意他的拟议工作方案，并同意可能需要谨慎考虑关于受损害的被继承国的权利或索赔主张的转移的第三次报告的重点，以避免工作重复，并且国际组织的作用也可以在较晚的阶段与其他问题一起审议。 |
| Chapter XI Immunity of State officials
from foreign criminal jurisdiction | 第十一章 国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免 |
| A. Introduction | A. 导言 |
| 267. The Commission, at its fifty-ninth
session (2007), decided to include the topic “Immunity of State officials
from foreign criminal jurisdiction” in its programme of work and appointed
Mr. Roman A. Kolodkin as Special Rapporteur. | 267. 委员会在第五十九届会议(2007年)上决定将“国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免”专题列入工作方案，并任命罗曼·阿·科洛德金先生为特别报告员。 |
| At the same session, the Commission
requested the Secretariat to prepare a background study on the topic, which
was made available to the Commission at its sixtieth session (2008). | 同届会议上，委员会请秘书处编写一份关于此专题的背景研究报告，该研究报告提交给了委员会第六十届会议(2008年)。 |
| 268. The Special Rapporteur submitted
three reports. | 268. 该特别报告员提交了三次报告。 |
| The Commission received and considered
the preliminary report at its sixtieth session (2008) and the second and
third reports at its sixty-third session (2011). | 委员会第六十届会议(2008年)收到并审议了初步报告，第六十三届会议(2011年)收到并审议了第二次和第三次报告。 |
| The Commission was unable to consider the
topic at its sixty-first (2009) and sixty-second (2010) sessions. | 委员会第六十一届会议(2009年)和第六十二届会议(2010年)未能审议本专题。 |
| 269. The Commission, at its sixty-fourth
session (2012), appointed Ms. Concepción Escobar Hernández as Special
Rapporteur to replace Mr. Kolodkin, who was no longer a member of the
Commission. | 269. 委员会第六十四届会议(2012年)任命康塞普西翁·埃斯科瓦尔·埃尔南德斯女士代替不再是委员会委员的科洛德金先生担任特别报告员。 |
| The Commission received and considered
the preliminary report of the Special Rapporteur at the same session (2012),
her second report during the sixty-fifth session (2013), her third report
during the sixty-sixth session (2014), her fourth report during the
sixty-seventh session (2015) and her fifth report, during the sixty-eighth
(2016) and sixty-ninth sessions (2017). | 委员会同届会议(2012年)收到并审议了该特别报告员提交的初步报告，第六十五届会议(2013年)收到并审议了她的第二次报告，第六十六届会议(2014年)收到并审议了她的第三次报告，第六十七届会议(2015年)收到并审议了她的第四次报告，第六十八届会议(2016年)和第六十九届会议(2017年)收到并审议了她的第五次报告。 |
| On the basis of the draft articles
proposed by the Special Rapporteur in the second, third, fourth and fifth
reports, the Commission has thus far provisionally adopted seven draft
articles and commentaries thereto. | 委员会在特别报告员第二、第三、第四和第五次报告提出的条款草案基础上，迄今为止暂时通过了七条条文草案及其评注。 |
| Draft article 2 on the use of terms is
still being developed. | 关于术语的使用的第2条草案案文仍在拟订中。 |
| B. Consideration of the topic at the
present session | B. 本届会议审议这个专题的情况 |
| 270. The Commission had before it the
sixth report of the Special Rapporteur (A/CN.4/722), in which she summarized
the debates in the Commission and the Sixth Committee on draft article 7,
dealing with crimes under international law in respect of which immunity
ratione materiae should not apply, and which was provisionally adopted by the
Commission at its sixty-ninth session. | 270. 委员会收到特别报告员第六次报告(A/CN.4/722)。 她在报告中概述了国际法委员会和第六委员会就第7条草案进行的辩论。
本条草案涉及根据国际法不应适用属事豁免的各种罪行，经委员会第六十九届会议暂时通过。 |
| She then started to address the
procedural aspects of immunity from foreign criminal jurisdiction in chapters
II and III. In particular, she initiated the consideration, expected to be
completed next year, of the procedural aspects of immunity, by first
analysing the way in which procedural aspects had been dealt with previously
in the work of the Commission, how such procedural aspects comported with the
overall boundaries of the present topic and the approach that the Special
Rapporteur intended to follow when analysing procedural aspects; | 她随后在第二和第三章中开始讨论国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免的程序方面。 具体而言，她开始审议豁免的程序方面，预计将于明年完成审议工作。
她首先分析了委员会以往工作中如何处理程序方面、此类程序方面如何符合本专题的总体界限，以及特别报告员在分析程序方面时希望使用的方法； |
| and, second, providing an analysis of
three components of procedural aspects related to the concept of jurisdiction,
namely: (a) timing; | 其次，她分析了与管辖权概念有关的程序方面的三个组成部分，即：(a) 时间点； |
| (b) the kinds of acts affected; | (b) 受到影响的行为种类； |
| and (c) the determination of immunity. | (c) 豁免的确定。 |
| The report did not include new draft
articles. | 报告未列入新的条款草案。 |
| 271. It was anticipated that the seventh
report, to be submitted in 2019, would constitute the final component of the
procedural aspects. | 271. 预计拟于2019年提交的第七次报告将是程序方面的最后一部分。 |
| The seventh report would consider such
issues as: the invocation of immunity and the waiver of immunity, as well as
addressing aspects concerning procedural safeguards related to both the State
of the official and the foreign official concerned, including safeguards and
rights that must be recognized in relation to such an official; | 第七次报告将审议以下问题：援引豁免和放弃豁免，并讨论与官员所属国和当事外国官员二者有关的程序性保障的问题，包括对此类官员必须予以承认的保障和权利； |
| communication between the forum State and
the State of the official; | 法院地国和官员所属国之间的沟通； |
| transmission of information by the State
of the official; | 官员所属国所提供资料的转递； |
| and cooperation and international legal
assistance between the State of the official and the forum State. | 官员所属国与法院地国之间的合作和国际法律援助。 |
| In addition, the report would analyse
matters related to cooperation between States and international criminal
courts and the possible impact of such cooperation on immunity from foreign
criminal jurisdiction. | 另外，报告还将分析各国与国际性刑事法院之间的合作以及此类合作可能对外国刑事管辖豁免带来的长期影响相关事项。 |
| Furthermore, it would contain proposals
for draft articles on the issues addressed in the sixth report and the
analysis contained in the seventh report. | 此外，报告还将载有就第六次报告涉及的各个议题提出的条款草案以及第七次报告中所载的分析。 |
| It was hoped that the Commission would
complete the first reading of the draft articles of the topic next year. | 希望委员会明年将完成条款草案的一读。 |
| 272. The Commission considered the sixth
report at its 3438th to 3440th meetings, on 30 and 31 July 2018. | 272. 委员会在2018年7月30日和31日举行的第3438至第3440次会议上审议了第六次报告。 |
| The debate on the report would be
continued and completed at the seventy-first session in 2019. | 将在2019年第七十一届会议上继续就本报告展开并完成辩论。 |
| 1. Introduction by the Special Rapporteur
of the sixth report | 1. 特别报告员介绍第六次报告 |
| 273. The Special Rapporteur prefaced her
introduction by stating that the sixth report, unlike previous reports,
contained in the introduction a detailed summary, for information purposes,
of the debate in the Commission and the Sixth Committee on draft article 7,
which had been provisionally adopted by the Commission at its sixty-ninth
session. | 273. 特别报告员在介绍第六次报告之初指出，与前几次报告不同，本次报告导言部分概述了国际法委员会和第六委员会就此前在委员会第六十九届会议上暂时通过的第7条草案进行的辩论的详情。 |
| Such an approach was justified given the
intensity of the debate on limitations and exceptions to immunity and the
related draft article 7, also bearing in mind the sensitivity of the subject
and the divergence of the views expressed. | 这种办法是有道理的，因为就豁免的限制和例外以及相关的第7条草案展开的辩论十分激烈，同时铭记这一主题很敏感，意见存在分歧。 |
| Moreover, in the debate on draft article
7, attention had been drawn to the importance of considering procedural
aspects that would also focus on procedural safeguards, the consideration of
which for some was a condition for the adoption of draft article 7. | 此外，在就第7条草案进行辩论时，有人提请注意必须审议程序方面，重点关注程序性保障，而对于一些人而言，讨论程序方面是通过第7条草案的前提。 |
| 274. Highlighting the importance of
addressing the procedural aspects in the present topic, it was recalled that
aspects thereof were addressed in the memorandum by the Secretariat, the
third report of the former Special Rapporteur, as well as by the Special
Rapporteur herself in previous reports, including in the informal concept
paper on procedural provisions and safeguards discussed in informal
consultations at the Commission’s session in 2017, as well as during the
interactive dialogue of the Sixth Committee in 2017. | 274. 特别报告员强调，在本专题中讨论程序方面很重要，回顾称秘书处的备忘录、前任特别报告员的第三次报告
以及本特别报告员以往的报告，包括在2017年委员会届会期间举行的非正式磋商和2017年第六委员会互动对话期间讨论的关于程序性规定和保障的非正式概念文件，均讨论过程序方面。 |
| The Special Rapporteur observed that, in
its prior work, the Commission had focused on the timing of any consideration
of immunity, the invocation and the waiver of immunity, acts affected by
immunity, as well as the determination of immunity. | 特别报告员注意到，委员会在此前的工作中主要侧重于审议豁免、援引和放弃豁免、受豁免影响的行为以及确定豁免的时间点问题。 |
| Moreover, it had considered the related
analysis of the concept of jurisdiction, as well as the relationship between
limitations and exceptions to immunity and procedural safeguards. | 此外，委员会还审议了关于管辖权概念的有关分析，以及豁免的限制和例外与程序性保障之间的关系。 |
| Indeed, the Commission had proceeded on
the assumption that it would at some stage address the procedural provisions
and safeguards applicable to the present draft articles. | 事实上，委员会已然假定，它会在某个阶段讨论适用于本条款草案的程序性规定和保障。 |
| She also recalled that the Sixth
Committee had considered the procedural aspects, particularly at the
sixty-sixth session of the General Assembly. | 她还回顾说，第六委员会已审议了程序方面，特别是在第六十六届大会上。 |
| 275. The Special Rapporteur, however,
noted that in subsequent years, the focus with regard to the procedural
aspects of immunity in the Commission had shifted somewhat from the classical
aspects related to procedure, such as timing, invocation and waiver towards
the need to establish procedural safeguards to avoid the politicization and
abuse of the exercise of criminal jurisdiction in respect of foreign
officials. | 275. 不过，特别报告员指出，在随后的几年中，委员会在豁免的程序方面的侧重点有所转变，从时间点、援引和放弃等传统上与程序有关的方面，转变至是否需要设置程序性保障，以防对外国官员的刑事管辖被政治化并遭到滥用。 |
| Such a shift had been replicated in
discussions in the Sixth Committee, where the interest in the procedural
aspects was closely linked to the safeguarding and strengthening of the
immunity regime and the principle of the sovereign equality of States, as well
as assuring guarantees of due process. | 第六委员会的讨论也出现了同样的转变，对于外国刑事管辖豁免的程序方面产生的兴趣，与保障并加强豁免和国家主权平等原则密切相关。 |
| While the Special Rapporteur stressed
that the need to analyse and establish procedural safeguards to prevent
politically motivated proceedings and the abuse of jurisdiction was not a new
subject, as the concern had been raised in earlier discussions, the debate on
the issue was more pronounced in 2016 and 2017 in the context of the debate
on draft article 7. | 特别报告员强调，为防止出于政治动机的诉讼和滥用管辖权行为而分析并制定程序性保障并不是一个新主题，因为在早些时候的讨论中已经提出过这一关切，在2016年和2017年就第7条草案进行辩论时，关于这一问题的讨论更加明显。 |
| 276. The Special Rapporteur stressed the
significance of the consideration of the procedural aspects of immunity,
bearing in mind that immunity was claimed in a foreign criminal jurisdiction. | 276. 特别报告员强调，鉴于豁免诉求是在外国刑事管辖区内提出，审议豁免的程序方面十分重要。 |
| She stated that, considering procedural
aspects, the Commission could offer proposals for respecting the sovereign
equality of States, as well as the other legal principles and values of the
international community as a whole (including the fight against impunity). | 她表示，关于程序方面，委员会可以提出尊重各国主权平等以及国际社会作为一个整体所坚持的其他法律原则和价值(包括打击有罪不罚)的建议。 |
| She also noted that, by considering the
procedural aspects, it was possible to ensure that a State official who might
be affected by the exercise of foreign criminal jurisdiction enjoyed all of
the procedural safeguards recognized under international law, in particular
international human rights law. | 她还指出，审议程序方面可确保有可能受到行使外国刑事管辖权影响的国家官员能够享受国际法、特别是国际人权法所承认的一切程序性保障。 |
| In the view of the Special Rapporteur, a
proper consideration of the procedural aspects, by introducing a neutral
element into the treatment of immunity, would provide certainty to both the
forum State and the State of the official. | 在特别报告员看来，通过在豁免的处理方法中加入一个中立的要素，适当审议程序方面，将给法院地国和官员所属国双方均提供确定性。 |
| Furthermore, it would reduce the impact
of political factors and avoid unnecessary claims of abusive prosecution of
an official of a foreign State for political reasons or other ends, and would
also help build trust between the States concerned. | 此外，这还将减轻政治因素的影响，并避免不必要的关于出于政治原因或其他目的对外国官员进行恶意起诉的指称。 |
| 277. As regards the scope of the
potential issues to be discussed, the Special Rapporteur stressed that an
appreciation of the procedural aspects required a consideration of a range of
granular issues, including: (a) what was meant by criminal “jurisdiction”; | 277. 关于可能要讨论的问题的范围，特别报告员强调，要评估程序方面，就要审议一系列详细的问题，包括：(a) 刑事“管辖权”是指什么； |
| (b) what kinds of acts of the forum State
were affected by immunity from foreign criminal jurisdiction; | (b) 外国刑事管辖豁免对法院地国的哪些行动造成影响； |
| (c) who determined the applicability of
immunity, and what effect did such a determination have on immunity; | (c) 是否适用豁免的问题由谁裁定，这一裁定有何影响； |
| (d) when did immunity from foreign
criminal jurisdiction begin to apply; | (d) 外国刑事管辖豁免何时开始适用； |
| (e) was invocation of immunity necessary,
and who could invoke such immunity; | (e) 是否需要援引豁免，谁可援引豁免； |
| (f) how was the waiver of immunity
effected, and by whom; | (f) 怎样以及由谁放弃或取消豁免； |
| (g) what was the effect of the waiver of
immunity on the exercise of jurisdiction; | (g) 放弃或取消豁免对行使管辖权有何影响； |
| (h) how would the communication between
the forum State and the State of the official be ensured, and what mechanisms
could be used for such communication; | (h) 怎样确保法院地国与官员所属国之间的沟通，可用哪些机制进行沟通； |
| (i) what mechanisms, if any, enabled the
State of the official to have its legal positions made known and taken into
consideration by the courts of the forum State when determining whether
immunity applied in a specific case; | (i) 有无机制可供官员所属国表明法律立场，并让法院地国的法院在裁定豁免是否适用于某一具体案件时予以考虑； |
| (j) how would international judicial
cooperation and assistance between the forum State and the State of the
official be facilitated; | (j) 怎样促进法院地国与官员所属国之间的国际司法合作与协助； |
| (k) to what extent, and through which
procedures, would the obligation to cooperate with an international criminal
court be taken into consideration; | (k) 应在何种程度上、通过何种程序考虑与国际性刑事法院合作的义务； |
| and (l) how would proceedings began in
the forum State be transferred to the State of the official or an
international criminal court, as necessary. | (l) 在必要时，怎样向官员所属国或国际性刑事法院移交法院地国业已启动的程序。 |
| 278. To address such a variety of issues,
the Special Rapporteur suggested that it was necessary to take into account a
set of criteria consisting of the following: (a) the presence in the
jurisdiction of the forum State of a foreign element identified as the “State
official”, and whose acts, at least with respect to immunity ratione
materiae, were performed in an official capacity; | 278. 为了解决此类问题，特别报告员表示，有必要考虑如下的一套标准，包括：(a) 被认定为“国家官员”、以官方身份行事(至少就属事豁免而言)的外国人出现在法院地国的管辖范围内； |
| (b) the need to establish a balance
between the right of the forum State to exercise jurisdiction and the right
of the State of the official to ensure that the immunity of its officials was
respected; | (b) 需要在法院地国行使管辖权的权利与官员所属国确保其官员的豁免权受到尊重的权利之间达成平衡； |
| (c) the need to establish a balance
between respecting the functional and representative character of State
officials and safeguarding the fight against impunity for the commission of
serious crimes under international law; | (c) 需要在尊重国家官员的职能性和代表性与保障对犯下国际法规定的严重罪行打击有罪不罚之间达成平衡； |
| and (d) ensuring that State officials
would benefit from the procedural rights and guarantees recognized by
international human rights law. | (d) 确保国家官员享有国际人权法所承认的程序性权利和保证。 |
| 279. In that connection, the Special
Rapporteur thought it important to pursue a broad and comprehensive approach,
which would take into account four distinct but complementary dimensions: | 279. 在这方面，特别报告员认为，有必要采用一种广泛、全面的方针，考虑到四个不同但又互补的方面： |
| (a) The procedural implications for
immunity arising from the concept of jurisdiction, in particular with respect
to timing, the identification of the acts of the forum State that may be
affected by immunity and issues related to the determination of immunity; | (a) 管辖权概念对豁免造成的程序性影响，特别是时间点、确定可能受到豁免影响的法院地国行为，以及与确定豁免有关的问题； |
| (b) The procedural elements of autonomous
procedural significance with links to the application or non-application of
immunity in a given case, which served as a first-level safeguard for the
State of the official, in particular questions concerning the invocation and
waiver of immunity; | (b) 具有自主程序意义、与在特定案件中适用或不适用豁免有直接联系并且作为对官员所属国的第一级保障的程序性要素，特别是与援引和放弃豁免有关的问题； |
| (c) The procedural safeguards for the
State of the official, in particular mechanisms to facilitate communication
and consultation between it and the forum State and to transmit information
between the judicial authorities concerned, as well as instruments of
international legal cooperation and mutual assistance between the States concerned; | (c) 对官员所属国的程序性保障，特别是协助法院地国与官员所属国之间沟通和协商的机制、有关司法当局之间传递信息的机制，以及当事国之间的国际法律合作和互助文书； |
| (d) The procedural safeguards inherent in
the concept of a fair trial, including respect for international human rights
law. | (d) 公正审判概念中固有的程序性保障，包括尊重国际人权法。 |
| 280. The Special Rapporteur also thought
it necessary that the Commission consider the effect that the obligation to
cooperate with an international criminal court could have on the immunity of
foreign State officials. | 280. 特别报告员还认为，委员会有必要审议与国际性刑事法院合作的义务可能对外国国家官员的豁免产生的影响。 |
| 281. The Special Rapporteur highlighted
that the consideration of the various procedural issues required information
from States on their practices. | 281. 特别报告员强调，审议各种程序性问题要求各国就其做法提供资料。 |
| She expressed her appreciation for the
comments that had been received from States and renewed her request for new
contributions. | 她对已经从各国收到的评论意见表示感谢，并再次请各国提交文稿。 |
| 282. Turning to the content of the sixth
report, the Special Rapporteur noted that, even though the various procedural
aspects of immunity were interrelated and required holistic treatment, the
report focused on the implications of the concept of jurisdiction for the
procedural aspects of immunity. | 282. 在介绍第六次报告的内容时，特别报告员指出，尽管豁免的各种程序方面问题相互关联，须全面处理，但本报告重点讨论管辖权概念对豁免的程序方面的影响。 |
| She recalled the proposal for a definition
of “jurisdiction” included in her second report, which was still pending in
the Drafting Committee. | 她回顾称，曾建议在其第二次报告中纳入“管辖权”的定义，而目前起草委员会仍在对这一概念进行定义。 |
| Although the sixth report did not intend
to reopen a general discussion on the concept of jurisdiction, the Special
Rapporteur stressed the significance that jurisdiction had on some procedural
aspects, Accordingly, the sixth report focused on the “when”, the “what” and
the “who”, by examining: (a) the timing of the consideration of immunity; | 虽然第六次报告无意就管辖权概念再次展开一般性讨论，但特别报告员强调，管辖权对于一些程序方面问题有重要意义。 因此，第六次报告主要讨论“何时”、“什么”和“谁”，审查了：(a) 考虑豁免的时间点； |
| (b) the acts of the authorities of the
forum State that may be affected by immunity; | (b) 可能受到豁免影响的法院地国当局的行为； |
| and (c) the identification of the organ
competent to decide whether immunity applies. | (c) 确定决定是否适用豁免的主管机关。 |
| 283. As regards, the timing of the
consideration of immunity, the Special Rapporteur highlighted that the competent
organs of the State should consider whether immunity existed at an early
stage in the process, since otherwise immunity would lose its usefulness and
raison d’être. | 283. 关于考虑豁免权的时间点问题，特别报告员强调指出，国家主管机关应在这一过程的早期阶段考虑是否存在豁免权，否则豁免权就会失去其效用和存在的理由。 |
| However, she stressed that it was not
easy to define what was meant by “an early stage”, in particular because of
the great variety of practices and procedures related to the criminal process
in the various national legal systems. | 然而，她强调说，要界定“早期阶段”的含义并不容易，特别是因为各国法律制度中与刑事程序有关的做法和程序多种多样。 |
| Thus, in the view of the Special
Rapporteur, the timing of the consideration of immunity must be identified by
combining two elements: (a) the stage of criminal procedures (investigation,
prosecution and trial); | 因此，特别报告员认为，必须将如下两个因素结合起来确定考虑豁免的时间点：(a) 刑事诉讼程序所处的阶段(调查、起诉和审判)； |
| and (b) the binding and coercive nature
of any measure to be adopted and its effect on the foreign State official. | (b) 有待采取的任何措施的约束力和强制性及其对外国国家官员的影响。 |
| 284. By applying such criteria, the
Special Rapporteur concluded as follows: | 284. 通过运用这些标准，特别报告员得出如下结论： |
| (a) Immunity must be considered by the
courts of the forum State, at the earliest possible opportunity, when they
began to exercise their jurisdiction and before adopting any decision on the
merits; | (a) 法院地国的法院必须在开始行使管辖权时，且在就案件实质通过任何决定之前，尽早考虑豁免问题； |
| and, in any event, when they had to take
any measures expressly directed at that official imposing obligations on him
or her that, in the event of non-compliance, could lead to coercive measures
and that could possibly impede the proper performance of his or her State
functions. | 在任何情况下，当法院必须采取专门针对这名官员的措施对其施加义务，如不遵守有可能导致采取强制性措施并可能妨碍其妥善履行国家职能时，必须考虑豁免问题。 |
| Accordingly, the immunity of a State
official had to be considered by the courts: (i) before commencing the
prosecution of a foreign official; | 因此，法院必须在下列时点考虑豁免问题：(一) 在开始起诉外国官员之前； |
| (ii) before bringing charges against the
official or committing him or her for trial; | (二) 在对该官员提出指控或将其移送审判之前； |
| or (iii) before commencing the hearing. | 或(三) 在开始听讯之前。 |
| (b) Whether immunity applied at the
inquiry or investigation stage was more doubtful, but it must be considered
at the stage before taking any measures expressly directed at that official
imposing obligations on him or her that, in the event of non-compliance,
could lead to coercive measures and that could possibly impede the proper
performance of his or her State functions, in particular an arrest warrant,
an indictment or certain provisional measures. | (b) 豁免是否适用于查证或调查阶段则更加没有定论，但在采取专门针对这名官员的措施对其施加义务，如不遵守有可能导致采取强制性措施并可能妨碍其妥善履行国家职能之前，特别是对其发出逮捕令、正式提出指控或采取某些临时措施之前，必须考虑豁免问题。 |
| (c) It appeared impossible to conclude
that immunity from jurisdiction must be considered automatically from the
start of an investigation, in particular because the acts of a mere
investigative nature, as a rule, did not have either binding force or
directly affect a State official or the performance of his or her functions. | (c) 似乎无法得出结论认为，必须在调查伊始即考虑管辖权的豁免问题，特别是因为单纯调查性的行为一般来说既没有约束力，也不会直接影响国家官员或直接影响其履行职责。 |
| 285. As a final remark, she stressed the
importance of maintaining the distinction between immunity ratione personae
and immunity ratione materiae regarding the timing of the consideration of
immunity, in particular taking into account the different requirements for
identifying a Head of State, a Head of Government or a Minister for Foreign
Affairs, on the one hand, and any other State official, on the other. | 285. 最后，她强调，在考虑豁免的时间点方面，必须保持属人豁免和属事豁免的区分，特别是考虑到认定国家元首、政府首脑或外交部长与认定任何其他国家官员的要求不同。 |
| 286. Regarding the kinds of acts affected
by immunity, the Special Rapporteur noted that measures that were directly
affected by immunity included the bringing of a criminal charge, a summons to
appear before a court as a person under investigation or to attend a confirmation
of charges hearing, a decision on the confirmation of charges, committal for
trial, a summons to appear as the accused in a criminal trial, a court
detention order or an application to extradite or surrender a foreign
official. | 286. 关于哪些行为受到豁免影响，特别报告员指出，直接受到豁免影响的措施包括提出刑事指控、传唤作为被调查者出庭或出席确认指控听讯、作出确认指控的决定、移送审判、传唤作为刑事审判被告人出庭、发布法院拘留令，或申请引渡或移交一名外国官员。 |
| All those acts were jurisdictional in
nature, directly affected a State official and could have an influence or
would interfere with the performance of his or her State functions. | 所有上述行为都具有司法性质，直接影响国家官员，并可能影响或干扰其履行国家职能。 |
| 287. The Special Rapporteur also identified
other kinds of acts of an authority of the forum State that could have an
impact on the foreign official and his or her immunity from foreign criminal
jurisdiction. | 287. 特别报告员还指出了法院地国当局的哪些其他行为可能对外国官员及其拥有的外国刑事管辖豁免产生影响。 |
| Those included: (a) acts that were
essentially executive in nature, including, for example, the detention of a
foreign official as part of a police operation in the territory of the forum
State or in accordance with an international arrest warrant, or of the
registration of a search or arrest warrant in international police
cooperation systems; | 这些行为包括：(a) 本质上属于行政性质的行为，例如，包括作为法院地国领土内警方行动的一部分或根据国际逮捕令拘留一名外国官员，或在国际警务合作系统中登记搜查证或逮捕令； |
| (b) acts that, despite being qualified as
judicial in nature, ordinarily had the purpose of exercising criminal
jurisdiction over a third person rather than over a foreign official,
including, for example, a summons to appear as a witness, or an order to
provide a court of the forum State with information in the possession of the
official; | (b) 虽然被描述为具有司法性质，但通常的目的是对第三人而不是对一名外国官员行使刑事管辖权的行为，例如包括传唤出庭作证，或下令向法院地国法院提供该官员所掌握的信息； |
| (c) precautionary measures that could be
ordered by a court in the forum State in the exercise of its jurisdiction
over a foreign official, but which did not in themselves have the purpose of
determining his or her criminal responsibility, including, for example,
interim measures aimed at attaching assets of that foreign official. | (c) 法院地国法院在对外国官员行使管辖权时可能下令采取、但本身并不是为了确定其刑事责任的预防性措施，例如，包括旨在扣押外国官员资产的临时措施。 |
| 288. In the view of the Special
Rapporteur, whether such acts were affected by immunity from foreign criminal
jurisdiction depended on various factors, including, while bearing in mind
the distinction between immunity ratione personae and immunity ratione
materiae: (a) the distinction between immunity from jurisdiction and
inviolability; | 288. 在特别报告员看来，此类行为是否受外国刑事管辖豁免影响取决于多个因素，在铭记属人豁免和属事豁免的区别的情况下，包括：(a) 区分管辖豁免和不可侵犯性； |
| (b) the separation between the person of
the official and the assets the seizure of which was sought; | (b) 该官员的人身与被寻求扣押的资产分离； |
| and (c) the binding and coercive nature
of the measure and its impact on the exercise by the foreign official of his
or her functions. | (c) 措施的约束力和强制性及其对该外国官员履行职责的影响。 |
| Thus, whether such acts were affected by
immunity must be considered case by case. | 因此，必须具体情况具体分析，审议此类行为是否受到豁免的影响。 |
| 289. Concerning the determination of
immunity, in particular the identification of the organ in the forum State
that was competent to consider and decide on the applicability of immunity,
the Special Rapporteur observed that the courts of the forum State would be
competent to give a definitive view on the matter, although it would also be
possible for organs other than the judicial bodies (such as public
prosecutors) to decide, when tasked with the investigation or preliminary
proceedings, and a question arose as to immunity in relation to any of the
acts affected by immunity. | 289. 关于豁免的确定，特别是确定法院地国有权审议并决定豁免是否适用的主管机关，特别报告员指出，法院地国法院有权就此事项给予明确意见，不过司法机构以外的机关(如检察官)若负责调查或初步程序，在出现受豁免影响的任何行为时，这些机关也可能就此作出决定。 |
| 290. The Special Rapporteur stressed that
asserting that a foreign court was competent to give a definitive view on
determining immunity did not necessarily imply that other State organs or
authorities could not express their views on the matter, acting together with
the courts to settle the question of immunity. | 290. 特别报告员强调，申明一家外国法院有权就确定豁免给予明确意见并不必然暗示其他国家机关或当局不能对此发表意见，并和法院一道采取行动解决豁免问题。 |
| In any case, the possibility for other
organs or State authorities to express their views depended on national law. | 无论如何，其他机关或国家当局能否表达意见取决于国内法。 |
| She expressed a similar view regarding
the information provided by the State of the official, which could have
considerable importance for the court’s determination of immunity. | 她对官员所属国提供的信息表达了类似的意见，这些信息对于法院确定豁免可能相当重要。 |
| The Special Rapporteur stated that that
matter would be the subject of analysis in the seventh report as a
cooperation issue. | 特别报告员指出，将在第七次报告中将此事作为一个合作问题加以分析。 |
| 291. In the view of the Special
Rapporteur, the determination of immunity by the courts of the forum State
must take into account various elements, depending on whether it was a matter
of determining immunity ratione personae or immunity ratione materiae. | 291. 法院地国法院对豁免的确定必须考虑到各种因素，具体取决于是确定属人豁免还是确定属事豁免。 |
| Regarding the former, it was enough for
the court to consider whether the State official possessed the status of Head
of State, Head of Government or Minister for Foreign Affairs, and whether
they were serving in that capacity at the time when the immunity had to be
considered. | 对于前者，法院考虑这名国家官员是否具有国家元首、政府首脑或外交部长地位，以及在法院审理豁免时是否在任便足够了。 |
| Regarding immunity ratione materiae, the
court had to assess: (a) whether the individual was a State official; | 对于属事豁免，法院必须评估：(a) 所涉个人是否是国家官员； |
| (b) whether the acts in question were
performed in an official capacity; | (b) 所涉行为是否是以官方身份实施； |
| (c) whether the acts were performed by
the official during his or her term of office; | (c) 上述行为是否是该官员在其任期内实施； |
| and (d) whether the acts in question fell
within any of the categories of crimes under international law to which
immunity ratione materiae did not apply. | (d) 所涉行为是否属于国际法规定的不适用属事豁免的任何类别罪行。 |
| 292. The Special Rapporteur also
addressed the future programme of work as outlined in paragraph 271 above. | 292. 特别报告员还介绍了今后的工作方案，如上文第271段所述。 |
| 2. Summary of the debate | 2. 辩论摘要 |
| 293. Given the limited time available for
the consideration of this report at the present session, the debate on the
sixth report would be continued at its seventy-first session. | 293. 鉴于本届会议审议本报告的时间有限，第七十一届会议将继续就第六次报告进行辩论。 |
| Thus, the members who spoke stressed the
preliminary character of their interventions while reserving the right to
comment further on the report next year. | 因此，发言的委员们强调，他们的发言属于初步性质，保留明年进一步评论该报告的权利。 |
| (a) General comments | (a) 一般评论 |
| 294. Members commended the Special
Rapporteur for her excellent and solid report, even though some members
regretted its late issuance, as well as the fact that the relevant draft
articles on the issues analysed in the report would only be submitted next
year. | 294. 委员们赞扬特别报告员的报告出色且扎实，也有一些委员遗憾地表示，报告分发过迟，与其中分析的问题相关的条文草案要等到明年才会提交。 |
| It was noted that the report did not
address all the procedural aspects nor deal with the relationship between the
procedural and substantive aspects of the topic. | 有人指出，报告未涵盖所有程序方面，也未论述本专题的程序方面与实质方面之间的关系。 |
| Some other members observed that, even
though draft articles were not proposed in the sixth report, the analysis
therein provided a crucial advance in the understanding of procedural issues. | 另一些委员则认为，第六次报告虽然没有提出条文草案，但所作的分析极大地增进了对程序问题的了解。 |
| Several members expressed the hope that
the seventh report would be submitted for consideration in a timely manner
next year. | 若干成员希望明年能够及时提交第七次报告以供审议。 |
| 295. Members stressed the continuing
importance of the topic for States. | 295. 委员们强调，本专题对国家依然很重要。 |
| In that connection, some members
mentioned the interest of the African Union in having a request included in
the agenda of the General Assembly for an advisory opinion of the
International Court of Justice on the question of immunities and the
relationship between articles 27 and 98 of the Rome Statute of the
International Criminal Court for States parties under international law. | 在这方面，一些委员提到，非洲联盟有意在大会议程中列入一个项目，请国际法院就国际法中的管辖问题及《国际刑事法院罗马规约》第二十七条与第九十八条之间在涉及缔约国时的关系提供咨询意见。 |
| It was reiterated that the topic was
politically sensitive and legally complex, with a potential impact not only
on international relations, but also on the practice of courts at the
national level, thereby affording an opportunity to assist States to
harmonize their procedures regarding immunity of State officials. | 有人重申，本专题具有政治敏感性和法律复杂性，不但可能影响国际关系，而且在国家一级可能影响法院实践，因而可借此机会协助各国协调它们关于国家官员豁免的程序。 |
| It was also underlined that the
consideration of the topic required deliberation and careful treatment of and
attention to State practice. | 还有人强调，在审议本专题时，需要审慎细致地对待和关注国家实践。 |
| In that connection, some members
regretted the absence of practice from certain regions or practice with
respect to particular aspects of immunity ratione materiae. | 为此，一些委员遗憾地指出，缺乏某些地区或属事豁免特定方面的实践。 |
| The paucity of practice and doctrine in
matters concerning procedural aspects and safeguards was acknowledged by
other members. | 其他委员则承认，在关于程序方面和保障的问题上，实践和理论乏善可陈。 |
| 296. Attention was also drawn by some
members to the relationship between the topic and other topics on the current
programme of work of the Commission, including crimes against humanity and
peremptory norms of international law (jus cogens), as well as universal
criminal jurisdiction, included in the long-term programme of the Commission
at the current session. | 296. 一些委员还提请注意本专题与委员会现行工作方案中其他专题之间的关系，这些专题包括危害人类罪和国际法强制性规范(强行法)以及在本届会议上纳入委员会长期方案的普遍刑事管辖。 |
| That had implications for the Commission
as it required the pursuit of a common approach to ensure consistency and
guard against fragmentation of international law. | 这关系到委员会的工作，因为委员会的工作需前后连贯，以保证一致性并防止国际法不成体系。 |
| Some members recalled the need to treat
the elaboration of the present topic consistently with other relevant
regimes, in particular article 27, paragraph 1, of the Rome Statute of the
International Criminal Court. | 一些委员重申，本专题的拟订工作需注意与其他相关制度保持一致，特别是《国际刑事法院罗马规约》第二十七条第(一)款。 |
| 297. It was considered that the
discussion on procedural issues was important to ensure that immunities,
where applicable, were respected in order to safeguard the stability of
international relations and ensure respect for the sovereign equality of
States. | 297. 有人认为，程序问题的讨论很重要，有助于确保在可适用豁免的情况下豁免得到尊重，以维护国际关系的稳定，并保证国家主权平等的原则得到遵守。 |
| It was equally vital to take into account
the jurisdiction of the forum State, the importance of the fight against
impunity and the rights of the State official concerned. | 同样重要的是，要考虑到法院地国的管辖权、打击有罪不罚的重要性和有关国家官员的权利。 |
| For some members, it was therefore
necessary to ponder carefully on the types of procedures that were to be
elaborated. | 因此，一些委员认为，有必要仔细考虑要拟订何种程序。 |
| Such procedures it was suggested should
aim to achieve a delicate balance between all the various interests,
including respect for immunity and ensuring the stability of international
relations, and consideration of the limitations to immunity in the fight
against impunity. | 有人表示，这种程序应在各个不同的利益之间谋求微妙的平衡，其中包括豁免得到尊重、确保国际关系稳定和考虑到为打击有罪不罚而对豁免有所限制。 |
| 298. Several members expressed their
support for the suggested approach of the Special Rapporteur to deal with
procedural aspects broadly and comprehensively. | 298. 若干委员表示支持特别报告员广泛和全面处理程序方面的建议。 |
| Moreover, members alluded to the
importance of addressing the dual components of procedural aspects: the
traditional considerations concerning such issues as timing, invocation and
waiver, as well as, more importantly, a full range of considerations concerning
safeguards in the light particularly, though not exclusively, of the adoption
of draft article 7. | 此外，委员们提到，有必要处理程序方面的两个组成部分：关于时间、援引和放弃等问题的传统考虑； 以及更重要的是，关于保障的一系列考虑，特别但不仅仅是因为第7条草案已获得通过。 |
| (b) Comments on the summary of the debate
on draft article 7 | (b) 对第7条草案辩论摘要的评论 |
| 299. Members who spoke expressed their
appreciation for the summary of the debate in the sixth report on draft
article 7, the circumstances surrounding the adoption of which were recalled,
with members drawing attention to various components of the debate that they
considered essential. | 299. 一些委员赞赏第六次报告中关于第7条草案的辩论摘要，回顾了第7条草案通过的情况，还有委员们提请注意他们认为不容忽视的各种论点。 |
| Some members reiterated their
dissatisfaction with the manner in which draft article 7 had been adopted and
the impact that would have on the working methods of the Commission. | 一些委员重申对第7条草案通过的方式感到不满，认为这会影响委员会的工作方法。 |
| Some other members recalled the importance
for member States to have a clear indication by the Commission of whether
draft article 7 reflected existing customary international law or progressive
development. | 另一些委员回顾指出，会员国需要委员会明确说明第7条草案究竟是反映现有的习惯国际法还是反映逐渐发展。 |
| In view of the anticipated completion of
the topic on first reading next year, it was envisaged by some members that
the Commission could afford itself a further opportunity to address the
content of draft article 7, not only in order to address the question of
whether it reflected customary international law or was an exercise in
progressive development, but also to ameliorate the manner in which the draft
article was adopted. | 鉴于本专题的一读预期将于明年完成，一些委员表示，委员会不妨借此机会再次审视第7条草案的内容，不但可探讨它反映的是习惯国际法还是反映逐渐发展这个问题，而且可对该条草案通过的方式作些补救。 |
| Nevertheless, some other members recalled
that the consideration of limitations and exceptions constituted the essence
of the topic. | 另一些委员则回顾，本专题的实质工作是审议限制和例外。 |
| In that connection, it was considered
that the discussion on procedural aspects would ensure a fair and effective
operation of draft article 7. | 在这方面，程序方面的讨论被认为有助于确保第7条草案的公平和有效实施。 |
| It was at the same time highlighted that
procedural provisions and safeguards were relevant to the whole set of draft
articles, not only with respect to draft article 7. | 有人同时着重指出，程序性规定和保障与整个条款草案相关，而不仅仅关系到第7条草案。 |
| Several members looked forward to
consideration of those aspects in the seventh report next year. | 若干委员期待明年对第七次报告中的这些方面进行审议。 |
| According to another view, the
feasibility of curing through procedural safeguards what were considered to
be substantive fundamental flaws in draft article 7 was doubtful. | 另一种观点认为，通过程序性保障来补救第7条草案的实质性基本缺陷，能否行得通是成疑问的。 |
| (c) Comments on the procedural aspects
dealt with in the sixth report | (c) 对第六次报告所述程序方面的评论 |
| 300. Regarding the concept of
jurisdiction, some members, while acknowledging the proposals of the Special
Rapporteur on draft article 2 that were before the Drafting Committee, noted
that it was not entirely necessary to define criminal “jurisdiction” for the
purposes of the draft articles on the topic. | 300. 关于管辖概念，一些委员注意到特别报告员就第2条草案提出了供起草委员会审议的建议，但认为完全没有必要为关于本专题的条款草案的目的界定刑事“管辖”。 |
| A functional approach would be sufficient
to sketch out the parameters of jurisdiction in respect of the procedural
aspects. | 就程序方面而言，着眼于功能即足以勾画出管辖的范围。 |
| It was suggested, as a general matter of
methodology, to distinguish between the general concept of jurisdiction,
including the general bases of jurisdiction of the State, and the question of
the bodies that were competent to exercise the criminal jurisdiction of a
particular State. | 有人建议，作为一般方法，对于管辖的一般概念，包括国家管辖的一般基本要素，要与特定国家行使刑事管辖权的主管机构问题加以区分。 |
| For some other members, such a definition
was necessary as it would bring certainty to the scope of criminal
jurisdiction affected by the rules on immunity. | 另一些委员则认为，这一定义有其必要，因为它能够明确受豁免规则影响的刑事管辖范围。 |
| 301. Methodologically, it was considered
useful to maintain the distinction between immunity ratione personae and
immunity ratione materiae in addressing the procedural provisions, as well as
subsequently the safeguards, even though some members noted that the
distinction should not be exaggerated. | 301. 有人认为，就方法而言，继续区分属人豁免与属事豁免有助于处理程序规定及日后处理保障问题，但一些委员指出，不应过度区分。 |
| 302. Members in general looked forward to
the draft articles that would be presented by the Special Rapporteur in the
seventh report on the procedural aspects considered in the sixth report. | 302. 委员们都期待看到特别报告员在第七次报告中就第六次报告所论述的程序方面提出条文草案。 |
| (i) Timing | (一) 时间 |
| 303. Regarding the question of timing, it
was generally considered that that was an area that could be considered by
the Commission and on which it could offer valuable guidance on the basis of
existing case law and practice. | 303. 关于时间问题，普遍认为委员会可以审议这一领域，在现有案例法和实践的基础上提供有用的指导。 |
| 304. In any event, members stressed the
importance of addressing immunity issues at an early stage of the proceedings
so as to avoid confusion at a later stage. | 304. 总之，委员们强调在诉讼的早期阶段处理豁免问题以免后来出现混淆的重要性。 |
| Based on case law, it was confirmed that
questions of immunity were preliminary in nature, which had to be resolved
expeditiously and decided in limine litis. | 从案例法看，豁免问题确实具有不确定性质，必须在争端开始时迅速解决和作出裁决。 |
| It was recalled that in the Advisory
Opinion on the Difference Relating to Immunity from Legal Process of a
Special Rapporteur of the Commission on Human Rights, the International Court
of Justice had stated that that principle was “a generally recognized
principle of procedural law” intended to prevent “nullifying the essence of
the immunity rule”. | 有人回顾，国际法院已在关于人权委员会特别报告员享有法律程序豁免的争议咨询意见中表明，这个原则是“被普遍承认的程序法原则”，旨在防止“使豁免规则的实质内容失效”。 |
| 305. It was nevertheless considered by
some members important to address, as suggested by the Special Rapporteur,
some practical aspects, such as what was meant by “an early stage” or “at the
earliest opportunity”, as the terms were imprecise and fraught with
ambiguity. | 305. 然而，一些委员认为有必要依照特别报告员的建议，处理某些实际方面，诸如“在早期阶段”或“尽早”的含义，因为这些词语模糊不清。 |
| It was confirmed that, at least with
respect to immunity ratione personae, the 2001 Vancouver resolution on
immunities from jurisdiction and execution of Heads of State and of
Government in international law of the Institute of International Law
indicated that immunity and inviolability to which a foreign Head of State
was entitled should be afforded to him or her as soon as that status was
known to them. | 已经确知，至少在属人豁免方面，2001年国际法学会关于国际法中国家元首和政府首脑的管辖豁免和执行豁免的温哥华决议中表明，一旦知悉外国国家元首的地位，即应向其提供其有权享有的豁免和不受侵犯权。 |
| Accordingly, it was observed that
immunity must be considered without delay and in any event at the initiation
of the procedure and before binding measures were taken against the State
official that constituted an obstacle to the exercise of his or her
functions. | 因此，有人指出，必须不加拖延地而且无论如何要在对国家官员启动程序之时和采取有碍于其履行职责的约束性措施之前考虑豁免问题。 |
| Moreover, it was suggested that the Avena
case could provide some guidance on addressing aspects of a practical nature
concerning the immediacy of acting “without delay”; | 此外，有人认为，Avena案 可为处理关于“不加拖延地”立即行动的实际方面提供借鉴； |
| in that particular case, the Court interpreted
the expression as not necessarily meaning “immediately after arrest and
before interrogation”. | 在该案中，法院将该词语解释为不一定意味着“要在逮捕后和审问前立即如此做”。 |
| 306. Some members who spoke recognized
the difficulty of determining the application of immunity rules during the investigative
stages given the diversity of national law and practice in investigation and
prosecution. | 306. 一些委员承认，鉴于各国在调查和起诉方面的法律和实践不尽相同，很难确定在调查阶段何时适用豁免规则。 |
| It was still necessary for the Commission
to study the matter and provide practical guidance for States. | 委员会仍有必要研究这个问题，为国家提供实际指导。 |
| 307. It was suggested that immunity
considerations should cover, in principle, the whole criminal procedure,
starting from investigation, arrest, detention, extradition, transfer,
prosecution, prosecutorial review, pretrial stage and provisional measures of
protection, as well as formal court proceedings and judgments and their
execution. | 307. 有人建议，豁免考虑时间原则上应涵盖整个刑事诉讼程序，从调查、逮捕、拘留、引渡、移送、起诉、检察官审查、审前阶段和临时保护措施一直到正式的法院诉讼和判决及执行判决。 |
| 308. Some members doubted that it was
necessarily conclusive that immunity had no immediate application during the
investigative stages, as much depended on the circumstances of each case and
the law and practice of the particular States concerned. | 308. 一些委员怀疑是否可以断定调查阶段不能立即适用豁免，因为这在很大程度上取决于每个案件的具体情况及有关具体国家的法律和实践。 |
| Such a matter required further study. | 这个问题需进一步探讨。 |
| (ii) Acts affected | (二) 受影响的行为 |
| 309. Concerning the acts of the forum
States to which immunity applied, members generally agreed with the three
categories canvassed by the Special Rapporteur in her sixth report — namely,
detention, appearance as a witness and precautionary measures — as requiring
examination. | 309. 关于适用豁免的法院地国行为，委员们普遍同意需要审查特别报告员在第六次报告中提出的三大类行为，即拘留、作为证人出庭和预防性措施。 |
| Some members noted that it was necessary
to clarify what was meant by “acts affected by immunity”. | 一些委员指出，有必要澄清“受到豁免影响的行为”的含义。 |
| According to some, it was useful to
distinguish between the criminal investigation of a situation and the
criminal investigation of a particular case for purposes of immunity. | 一些委员认为，为豁免的目的，不妨区别针对特定情况的刑事调查和针对具体案件的刑事调查。 |
| It would be in the latter context that
particular attention should be focused. | 应特别关注的是后者。 |
| In that connection, there was stress
placed on the binding acts that imposed coercive measures on the State
official. | 在这方面，有人着重提到对国家官员采取强制性措施的约束行为。 |
| Accordingly, it was observed that
immunity must be considered before binding measures were taken against the
State official that constituted an obstacle to the exercise of his or her
functions. | 因此，一种意见是，在对国家官员采取有碍于其履行职责的约束性措施之前，必须先考虑豁免问题。 |
| 310. In the estimation of some members,
measures would include the arrest warrant, the criminal indictment, a summons
to appear before a court as an investigated person or to attend confirmation
of charges hearings, and a request for extradition or surrender. | 310. 一些委员估计，这些措施包括签发逮捕令、刑事起诉、传唤其作为被调查人出庭或参加确认罪名的庭讯以及要求引渡或自首。 |
| It was also noted that not all acts
performed during criminal proceedings implied subjecting an official to
constraining coercive measures. | 还有人指出，刑事诉讼期间的行为并非都意味着对官员采取强制性的约束措施。 |
| It was noted, for instance, that a
criminal complaint per se did not have a direct influence on the exercise of
functions by an official. | 例如，刑事指控本身被指出并未对官员履行职责产生直接影响。 |
| 311. Members stressed the importance of the
coercive nature of the constraint measures and the consequent impediment on
the exercise of functions by an official. | 311. 委员们强调，重要的是，约束措施具有强制性，因而妨碍官员履行职责。 |
| It was recalled that in the Arrest
Warrant of 11 April 2000 case, the Court referred to protecting the
individual concerned against any act of authority of another State that would
hinder him or her in the performance of his or her duties, while in the case
concerning Certain Questions of Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters, it
stressed that “the determining factor in assessing whether or not there has
been an attack on the immunity of the Head of State lies in the subjection …
to a constraining act of authority”. | 有人回顾，国际法院在2000年4月11日逮捕证案中提及要保护有关个人在履行职责时不受另一国任何权力行为的妨碍，而在关于刑事事项互助的若干问题一案中，国际法院强调，“评估国家元首的豁免权是否受到攻击的决定因素是有无受到权力行为的约束”。 |
| 312. Suggestions were made by some
members to address further the impact of inviolability on immunity,
particularly on immunity ratione materiae, instead of overly relying on a
deductive methodology or drawing certain inferences from the practice
relevant to immunity ratione personae. | 312. 一些委员建议进一步处理豁免特别是属事豁免不容侵犯所涉及的问题，而非过度依赖从属人豁免的相关实践中加以引申或作某些推论。 |
| It was also suggested that the role of
the International Criminal Police Organization and its practice with respect,
in particular, to its system of “red notices” required further in-depth
analysis. | 还有人建议，需进一步深入分析国际刑事警察组织的作用，特别是其在“红色通缉令”制度方面的实践。 |
| 313. It was viewed necessary by some members
to study further questions related to appearing as a witness, particularly
with respect to immunity ratione materiae, including in the production of
evidentiary material and documents. | 313. 一些委员认为，有必要进一步研究作为证人出庭的有关问题，特别是与属事豁免相关的问题，包括在出具证据材料和文件方面。 |
| 314. Some members also considered that
the question of precautionary measures required further consideration. | 314. 一些委员还认为，需进一步审议预防性措施问题。 |
| (iii) Determination of immunity | (三) 豁免的确定 |
| 315. Some members agreed with the Special
Rapporteur that it was for the courts of the forum State to determine whether
immunity existed and, if so, whether there were exceptions to such immunity. | 315. 一些委员同意特别报告员的观点，认为应由法院地国的法院确定是否存在豁免，而如果存在，豁免是否有例外。 |
| Nevertheless, it was suggested that the
Commission consider the procedural requirement that any exercise of
jurisdiction over an official should be subject to a decision of a higher
court and not the lowest magistrate court. | 但有人建议委员会考虑在程序上规定任何对官员行使管辖的行为均须由高等法院作裁决，而非由最低级的地方法院作裁决。 |
| 316. Some members echoed the importance
of not discounting the role to be played by the executive. | 316. 一些委员赞同不得忽视行政机关发挥的作用。 |
| In that regard, attention was drawn to
the role played nationally by the ministries responsible for foreign affairs. | 在这方面，有人提请注意负责外交事务的部委在全国发挥的作用。 |
| 317. Some other members stressed the
importance of addressing, within the scope of the present topic and with a
view to elaborating possible limitations, questions concerning prosecutorial
discretion. | 317. 另一些委员强调，需要在本专题的范围内处理有关检察机关酌处权的问题，以拟订可能的限制。 |
| That was necessary in order to avoid
abusive or politically motivated prosecutions. | 为求防止出现滥权或出于政治动机的起诉，有必要作这样的限制。 |
| It was noted that the establishment of
guidelines for prosecutors would have the advantage of ameliorating the
arbitrary or aggressive exercise of prosecutorial discretion against the
troika and other State officials. | 有人指出，为检察官制定准则的好处是可以改善对“三巨头”和其他国家官员任意或狂妄行使检察机关酌处权的情况。 |
| Conversely, such guidelines would provide
a mechanism to safeguard against the negative exercise of prosecutorial
discretion in cases in which a State official who had committed a serious
crime under international law was not prosecuted. | 反过来看，这样的准则可提供一种保障机制，在国家官员犯下经国际法定为严重罪行的情况下，防止检察机关酌处权的负向行使。 |
| 318. Some members stressed the importance
of ensuring certainty in the rules concerning the applicable procedure for
law enforcement. | 318. 一些委员强调，有必要确保有关适用执法程序的规则的确定性。 |
| In case of doubt or ambiguity, it was
suggested that there should be a State organ designated to provide
appropriate instructions to the law enforcement agencies, recognizing in that
regard the role played by the ministries responsible for foreign affairs. | 有人建议，如有疑问或含糊不清，应指定一个国家机关向执法机构提供适当的指示，而在这方面应承认负责外交事务的部委所发挥的作用。 |
| 319. It was also suggested that the
question of the settlement of disputes related to questions of immunity by
international courts and tribunals could be examined. | 319. 还有人建议，可审查由国际法院和法庭解决与豁免问题相关争端的问题。 |
| It would also be necessary to examine the
possible role of the Security Council in matters concerning compliance with
arrest warrants or compliance with orders for the delivery of documentation. | 也有必要审查安全理事会在关于遵守逮捕令或遵守出具文件的命令的事项上可能发挥的作用。 |
| 320. Some members advocated exploring
further the possible use of the waiver of immunity as an option for the State
of the official. | 320. 一些委员主张进一步探讨可能将放弃豁免作为国家官员的一个选择的问题。 |
| (d) Comments on procedural safeguards and
guarantees | (d) 对程序性保障和保证的评论 |
| 321. The consideration of procedural
safeguards and guarantees was viewed by members to be crucial to the
successful completion of work on the topic. | 321. 委员们认为，审议程序性保障和保证对顺利完成本专题的工作至关重要。 |
| It was noted that a distinction had to be
drawn between safeguards ensuring individual due process and other guarantees
under international human rights law, and safeguards that aimed at protecting
the stability of international relations and avoiding political and abusive
prosecutions. | 有人指出，在确保个别正当程序的保障和国际人权法规定的其他保证与旨在保护国际关系稳定和防止出于政治动机起诉和滥权起诉的保障之间，有必要加以区分。 |
| Both aspects required treatment and it
was suggested that, for safeguards to be meaningful, they should not only
address the consequences of the denial of immunity of the State official in
the forum State generally, but also in the specific context of draft article
7. | 这两方面都需要处理，而且有人表示，有意义的保障不但应针对法院地国一般剥夺国家官员豁免的后果，而且应针对第7条草案的特定情况。 |
| 322. For procedural safeguards affecting
the foreign official concerned, attention was drawn, for instance, to the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, especially its
provisions safeguarding minimum international standards in criminal
proceedings, such as arrest and detention (article 9), fair treatment of
suspects and the accused (article 10) and the right to a fair trial (article
14). | 322. 例如，关于影响有关外国官员的程序性保障，有人提请注意《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》，特别是其保障刑事诉讼中最低国际标准的规定，诸如逮捕或拘禁(第九条)、嫌疑人和被告受到公平对待(第十条)和受到公平审判的权利(第十四条)。 |
| 323. Concerning safeguards with a
potential impact on the stability of international relations, and the related
draft article 7, the point was made that it was crucial for the Commission to
make an effort to reach some common ground. | 323. 关于可能影响国际关系稳定的保障及有关的第7条草案，有一种观点是，委员会有必要致力于达成某种共识。 |
| In that connection, the suggestion was
made that specific safeguards be developed to address questions arising from
draft article 7. | 为此，有人建议针对第7条草案产生的问题拟订具体的保障。 |
| Such safeguards would entail that an
exercise of criminal jurisdiction based upon draft article 7 was only
permissible if: (a) the foreign official was present in the forum State; | 这些保障意味着只有在下列情况下才允许依照第7条草案行使刑事管辖：(a) 外国官员身在法院地国； |
| (b) the evidence that the official
committed the alleged offence, given its exceptional gravity, was “fully
conclusive”; | (b) 由于其特殊的严重性，该官员犯下所称罪行的证据是“确凿无疑的”； |
| (c) the decision by the forum State to
pursue criminal proceedings against the foreign official was taken at the
highest level of Government or prosecutorial authority; | (c) 法院地国对外国官员提起刑事诉讼的决定是政府最高层或检察机关作出的； |
| and (d) the forum State must cooperate
with the State of the official. | 而且(d) 法院地国必须与官员所属国合作。 |
| 324. It was further elaborated that the
duty to cooperate in that regard meant that the forum State must notify the
State of the official if it intended to pursue criminal proceedings and
inquire whether the State of the official wished to waive the immunity of its
official; | 324. 还进一步说明，这方面进行合作的义务意味着：法院地国若打算提起刑事诉讼，必须通知官员所属国并询问官员所属国是否愿意放弃官员的豁免权； |
| and if the State of the official was able
and willing to submit the matter to prosecution before its own courts, the
forum State must transfer the proceedings and extradite the alleged offender
to the State of the official or, if agreed between the States concerned,
transfer him or her to a competent international court or tribunal. | 而若官员所属国能够且愿意就此事向其本国法院提起诉讼，则法院地国必须将诉讼移送官员所属国并将被指控罪犯引渡回该国，或经有关国家商定，将其移送主管国际法院或法庭。 |
| Alternatively, if the State of the
official was not able or willing to submit the matter to prosecution before
its own courts or before an international court or tribunal, the forum State
must, before permitting the continuation of the prosecution by its national
instances, offer to be ready to transfer the alleged offender to a competent
international court or tribunal, if such a court or tribunal had
jurisdiction. | 不然的话，如果官员所属国不能或不愿就此事向其本国法院提起诉讼或送交国际法院或法庭，则法院地国在准许本国机关继续进行起诉之前，必须先表示愿意将被指控罪犯移送主管国际法院或法庭，如果该法院或法庭有管辖权的话。 |
| 325. Some members stressed the importance
that might be played by the State of the official in exercising jurisdiction
over its own officials. | 325. 一些委员强调，官员所属国可在对本国官员行使管辖方面发挥重要作用。 |
| The view was also expressed that it would
be hardly possible to solve the questions arising from draft article 7
through procedural safeguards and guarantees. | 还有人认为，几乎不可能通过程序性保障和保证来解决第7条草案产生的问题。 |
| (e) Future work | (e) 今后的工作 |
| 326. Members who spoke generally expressed
support for the plan of future work suggested by the Special Rapporteur,
emphasizing the need to have a complete set of draft articles on procedural
aspects in the seventh report. | 326. 委员们在发言中普遍支持特别报告员提议的今后工作计划，强调第七次报告中需要就程序方面提出完整的一套条款草案。 |
| The wish was expressed to complete the
first reading of the draft articles during the next session. | 有人表示，希望在下届会议期间完成条款草案的一读。 |
| 327. However, while some members
supported studying what effect an obligation to cooperate with the
International Criminal Court might have on the immunity of State officials,
others opposed such a consideration, viewing it as incompatible with the
agreed scope and draft article 1, according to which the draft articles were
without prejudice to the immunity from criminal jurisdiction enjoyed under
special rules of international law. | 327. 虽然有些委员赞成探讨与国际刑事法院合作的义务可能对国家官员的豁免产生何种影响，但另一些委员反对审议这个问题，认为这不符合商定的范围和第1条草案，因为其中规定本条款草案不妨碍依照国际法特别规则享有的刑事管辖豁免。 |
| It was also suggested that it might be
useful to consider the procedural implications for immunity created by
conventional obligations, according to which crimes as defined could be
committed by public officials. | 还有人建议，不妨考虑公约义务对豁免产生的程序方面影响，按公职人员可能犯下所界定的哪些罪行分析这样的影响。 |
| 328. Some members stressed the importance
of devising a possible communication mechanism between the forum State and
the State of the official based on a system of subsidiarity or
complementarity. | 328. 一些委员强调，需要设计法院地国与官员所属国之间可能建立的立足于一个辅助性或互补性系统的沟通机制。 |
| Such a system would foster investigation
and prosecution by the State of the official. | 这一系统应可促进国家对官员进行调查和起诉。 |
| 329. It was considered useful for some
members to clarify the relationship between procedural invocation,
particularly of immunity ratione materiae, and the consequences thereof,
including for the international responsibility of the State concerned. | 329. 一些委员认为，宜澄清程序援引(尤其是属事豁免的程序援引)与其后果(包括对有关国家的国际责任产生的后果)之间的关系。 |
| 330. The debate on the sixth report would
be continued and completed at the seventy-first session of the Commission. | 330. 委员会第七十一届会议将继续并完成对第六次报告的辩论。 |
| Chapter XII Commemoration of the
seventieth anniversary of the Commission | 第十二章 纪念委员会成立七十周年 |
| A. Introduction | A. 导言 |
| 331. The Commission, at its sixty-eighth
session (2016), recommended that anniversary events be held during its
seventieth session, in 2018, at meetings in New York and in Geneva. | 331. 委员会第六十八届会议(2016年)建议在2018年第七十届会议期间，在纽约和日内瓦的会议上举行周年纪念活动。 |
| In that connection, the Commission
recommended that a solemn half-day meeting of the Commission, to which
high-level dignitaries would be invited, and an informal half-day meeting
with delegates to the Sixth Committee of the General Assembly to exchange
views on the work of the Commission, the relationship between the Commission
and the Sixth Committee, and the role of both bodies in the promotion of the
progressive development and codification of international law should be held
in New York. | 在这方面，委员会建议在纽约举行一次隆重的半天会议，邀请高级贵宾出席，并与出席大会第六委员会的代表举行为期半天的非正式会议，就委员会的工作、委员会与第六委员会之间的关系以及这两个机构在促进国际法的逐渐发展和编纂方面的作用交换意见。 |
| The Commission furthermore recommended
that a one-and-a-half-day conference with legal advisers of States and
international organizations, academics and other distinguished international
lawyers dedicated to the work of the Commission should be held in Geneva. | 委员会还建议在日内瓦与各国和国际组织的法律顾问、学术界人士和其他杰出的国际法学家举行一次为期一天半的会议，专门讨论委员会的工作。 |
| The Commission also recommended that a
report on the meetings should be discussed at the annual meeting of the Legal
Advisers in New York, and that the outcome of the anniversary events be
published. | 委员会还建议，在纽约举行的法律顾问年度会议上讨论会议的报告，并发布周年纪念活动的结果。 |
| The Commission requested the Secretariat,
in consultation with the Chair of the Commission and the Chair of the
Planning Group, to commence arrangements for the holding of the commemorative
events. | 委员会请秘书处与委员会主席和规划小组主席协商，着手安排举行纪念活动。 |
| The General Assembly took note with
appreciation of these recommendations. | 大会赞赏地注意到这些建议。 |
| 332. The Commission, at its sixty-ninth
session (2017), confirmed the plans for the anniversary, noting that the
conference in Geneva would be preceded by a high-level opening session, to
which high-level dignitaries would be invited. | 332. 委员会第六十九届会议(2017年)确认了周年纪念计划，并指出，在日内瓦会议之前将举行一次高级别开幕会议，邀请高级贵宾出席。 |
| An advisory committee was established to
continue to work intersessionally, together with the Secretariat, towards the
convening of the commemorative events. | 成立了一个咨询委员会， 在闭会期间继续与秘书处一道开展工作，筹备举办纪念活动。 |
| 333. Moreover, the Commission recommended
that the events in New York should be held on 21 May 2018, while the events
in Geneva should be held on 5 and 6 July, under the overarching theme of “70
years of the International Law Commission — Drawing a balance for the future”. | 333. 此外，委员会建议2018年5月21日在纽约举行活动，7月5日和6日在日内瓦举行活动，主题为“国际法委员会70年――总结过去，展望未来”。 |
| The General Assembly took note with
appreciation of the recommendation of the Commission on the arrangements
regarding the commemoration of its seventieth anniversary and encouraged
States to make voluntary contributions in order to facilitate the commemoration. | 大会赞赏地注意到委员会关于纪念其七十周年活动安排的建议，并鼓励各国自愿捐款，以利举行纪念活动。 |
| B. Seventieth anniversary session of the
International Law Commission | B. 国际法委员会七十周年届会 |
| 334. At its 3392nd meeting, on 1 May
2018, the Commission received a briefing on the arrangements for the commemoration
of the seventieth session of the Commission. | 334. 在2018年5月1日第3392次会议上，委员会听取了关于委员会第七十届会议纪念活动安排的简要介绍。 |
| 335. Under the overarching theme “70
years of the International Law Commission — Drawing a balance for the
future”, the Commission celebrated its seventieth anniversary, with events
organized in New York on 21 May 2018 and Geneva on 5 and 6 July 2018. | 335. 在“国际法委员会70年――总结过去，展望未来”的主题下，委员会于2018年5月21日在纽约、2018年7月5日和6日在日内瓦举行了其成立70周年纪念活动。 |
| In New York, at its 3407th meeting on 21
May 2018, the Commission convened a solemn half-day meeting, which was
followed, at its 3408th meeting, by a half-day conversation with
representatives of the Sixth Committee of the General Assembly. | 在纽约，委员会2018年5月21日在第3407次会议上举行了一次隆重的半天会议，随后在第3408次会议上与大会第六委员会的代表进行了半天对话。 |
| At the 3407th meeting, commemorative
speeches were delivered by: Mr. Eduardo Valencia-Ospina, Chair of the
Commission, Mr. Miroslav Lajčák, President of the General Assembly, Mr. Miguel de Serpa Soares,
Under-Secretary-General for Legal Affairs and United Nations Legal Counsel,
on behalf of the Secretary-General, Mr. Burhan Gafoor, Chair of the Sixth
Committee of the General Assembly, Mr. Jürg Lauber, Permanent Representative
of Switzerland to the United Nations, and Ms. Jennifer Newstead, Legal
Adviser of the Department of State of the United States of America. | 在第3407次会议上，委员会主席爱德华多·巴伦西亚－奥斯皮纳先生、大会主席米罗斯拉夫·莱恰克先生、主管法律事务副秘书长兼联合国法律顾问米格尔·德塞尔帕·苏亚雷斯先生(代表秘书长)、大会第六委员会主席布尔汉·加福尔先生、瑞士常驻联合国代表于尔格·劳贝尔先生和美利坚合众国国务院法律顾问珍妮弗·纽斯特德女士阁下作了纪念发言。 |
| 336. The keynote address was delivered by
Mr. Nico Schrijver, Professor of Public International Law, Grotius Centre for
International Legal Studies, Leiden University, and President of the
Institute of International Law. | 336. 莱顿大学格劳秀斯国际法研究中心国际公法教授、国际法学会主席尼科·斯赫雷弗先生作了主旨发言。 |
| 337. During the conversation with the
Sixth Committee, at the 3408th meeting, Mr. Gafoor and Mr. Valencia-Ospina
offered introductory remarks, which were followed by two panel discussions. | 337. 在委员会第3408次会议与第六委员会对话期间，加福尔先生和巴伦西亚－奥斯皮纳先生作了介绍发言，随后进行了两次小组讨论。 |
| 338. The first panel — on “The Commission
and the Sixth Committee: structural challenges” — addressed the following
questions: what were the future challenges to the progressive development of
international law and its codification; | 338. 关于“委员会与第六委员会：结构性挑战”的第一小组讨论了以下问题：国际法的逐渐发展和编纂今后面临哪些挑战； |
| whether the Commission should concentrate
more on general international law or on particular areas of international
law; | 委员会应更加侧重于一般国际法还是国际法的特定领域； |
| whether the distinction between
progressive development and codification needed to be revisited; | 是否需要重新审视逐渐发展和编纂之间的区分； |
| and to whom did the Commission speak —
whether it was only to States, or also to courts and other actors. | 委员会与谁对话：只对国家，还是对法院和其他行为体。 |
| 339. The panel was chaired by Mr.
Valencia-Ospina, while Mr. François Alabrune, Ministry of Foreign Affairs,
France, Mr. Mahmoud Hmoud, Ms. Janine Coye Felson, Permanent Mission of
Belize, and Mr. Ernest Petrič served as panellists. | 339. 该小组由巴伦西亚－奥斯皮纳先生担任主席，法国外交部弗朗索瓦·阿拉布吕纳先生、马哈穆德·哈穆德先生、伯利兹常驻代表团雅尼娜·库瓦·费尔逊女士和埃内斯特·彼得里奇先生担任小组成员。 |
| 340. The second panel — on “The
Commission and the Sixth Committee: reflections on the interaction in the
past and the future” — considered the questions: the ways in which the Sixth
Committee and the Commission had interacted, formally and informally, to
advance the progressive development of international law and its
codification; | 340. 关于“委员会与第六委员会：关于过去和未来互动的思考”的第二小组审议了以下问题：第六委员会和委员会以何种方式正式和非正式互动，以推动国际法的逐步发展和编纂？ |
| how the bodies had influenced each other,
and what had been the joint achievements and the difficulties; | 这两个机构如何相互影响，共同的成就和困难是什么； |
| which practical measures could be taken
to enhance the relationship between the Sixth Committee and the Commission; | 可以采取哪些实际措施来加强第六委员会与委员会之间的关系； |
| how the Commission should design its
outcomes, and how the Sixth Committee should deal with them; | 委员会应如何设计其成果，第六委员会应如何处理这些成果； |
| and what the Commission should look like
in 10 years. | 委员会十年后会是如何。 |
| 341. The panel was chaired by Mr. Gafoor,
while Mr. Evgeny Zagaynov, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Russian Federation,
Ms. Concepción Escobar Hernández, Mr. Angel Horna, Permanent Mission of Peru,
and Mr. Hussein A. Hassouna served as panellists. | 341. 该小组由加福尔先生担任主席，俄罗斯联邦外交部Evgeny Zagaynov先生、康塞普西翁·埃斯科瓦尔·埃尔南德斯女士、秘鲁常驻代表团安赫尔·奥尔纳先生和侯赛因·哈苏纳先生担任小组成员。 |
| 342. The event in Geneva consisted of a
solemn meeting and a meeting with legal advisers from States and other
international law experts, focusing on various aspects of the work of the
Commission in the progressive development of international law and its
codification. | 342. 日内瓦的活动包括一次隆重的会议，和一次与来自各国的法律顾问和其他国际法专家的会议，重点是委员会有关国际法的逐渐发展和编纂工作的各个方面。 |
| At the 3422nd meeting on 5 July 2018,
commemorative speeches were delivered by: Mr. Valencia-Ospina; Mr. Miguel de
Serpa Soares; Ms. Corinne Cicéron Bühler, Director, Directorate of
International Law and Legal Advisor of the Federal Department of Foreign
Affairs, Switzerland; | 在2018年7月5日委员会第3422次会议上，巴伦西亚－奥斯皮纳先生、米格尔·德塞尔帕·苏亚雷斯先生、瑞士联邦外交部国际法司司长兼法律顾问科琳娜·西龙·比勒女士，和联合国人权事务副高级专员凯特·吉尔摩女士作了纪念发言； |
| and Ms. Kate Gilmore, United Nations
Deputy High Commissioner for Human Rights. 343. The keynote address was
delivered by Mr. Abdulqawi Ahmed Yusuf, President of the International Court
of Justice. | 343. 国际法院院长阿卜杜勒卡维·艾哈迈德·优素福先生阁下作了主旨发言。 |
| 344. In the meetings with legal advisers
and international law experts, at the 3423rd and 3424th meetings on 5 and 6
July 2018, introductory remarks were made by Mr. Georg Nolte, Chair of the
Commission at its sixty-ninth session, and five panel discussions took place. | 344. 在2018年7月5日和6日委员会第3423次至3424次会议与法律顾问和国际法专家的会议上，委员会第六十九届会议主席格奥尔格·诺尔特先生作了介绍发言，并进行了五次小组讨论。 |
| 345. The first panel — on “The Commission
and its impact” — discussed the following questions: what happened to the
final outcomes of the Commission; | 345. 关于“委员会及其影响”的第一小组讨论了以下问题：国际法委员会的最终成果如何了； |
| what had been the impact of the
Commission’s work on State practice, including court decisions and legal
scholarship; | 委员会的工作对国家实践、包括法院判决和法学界产生了什么影响； |
| and to what extent the form of the work
of the Commission affected its impact. | 委员会工作的形式在多大程度上影响到其效果。 |
| 346. The panel was chaired by Mr. Pedro
Comissário Afonso, Permanent Representative of Mozambique in Geneva, while
Mr. Alejandro Rodiles, Autonomous Technological Institute of Mexico, Ms.
Laurence Boisson de Chazournes, University of Geneva, and Mr. Pavel Šturma
served as panellists. | 346. 该小组由莫桑比克常驻日内瓦代表佩德罗·科米萨里奥·阿丰索先生担任主席，墨西哥科技自治学院亚历杭德罗·罗迪莱斯先生和日内瓦大学劳伦斯·布瓦松·德沙祖尔内女士以及帕维尔·斯图尔马先生担任小组成员。 |
| 347. The second panel — on “The working
methods of the Commission” — addressed the topics: whether the Commission
needed to further adapt its working methods to the outcomes of its work; | 347. 关于“委员会的工作方法”的第二小组讨论了以下专题：委员会是否需要根据工作结果进一步调整其工作方法； |
| how communication with other bodies and
persons had changed and how it could be improved; | 与其他机构和个人的交流如何发生了变化，可如何改进； |
| the role of Special Rapporteurs; | 特别报告员的作用； |
| the role of the Drafting Committee; | 起草委员会的作用； |
| the role of commentaries; | 评注的作用； |
| the role of the Codification Division; | 编纂司的作用； |
| and other support. | 和其他支持。 |
| 348. The panel was chaired by Mr.
Aleksandar Gajić, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Serbia, while Ms. Danae Azaria,
University College London, Mr. Maurice Kamto, University of Yaoundé II, and Mr. Shinya Murase served as panellists. | 348. 该小组由塞尔维亚外交部亚历山大·加伊奇先生担任主席，伦敦大学学院Danae Azaria女士、雅温得第二大学莫里斯·卡姆托先生和村濑信也先生担任小组成员。 |
| 349. The third panel — on “The function
of the Commission: how much identifying existing law, how much proposing new
law?” — discussed the following questions: the need for an “International Law
Commission” — then (and now?); | 349. 关于“委员会的职能：有多少是确定现行法律，有多少是提议新法律？ ”的第三小组讨论了以下问题：对“国际法委员会”的需要――当时(现在？ )； |
| whether it was true that the distinction
between progressive development and codification was usually difficult to
maintain, or whether there were topics where that distinction should be
emphasized in the work of the Commission; | 是否常常难以保持区分逐渐发展和编纂，或是否存在委员会工作中应该强调这种区分的专题； |
| and whether the Commission should
emphasize the consolidation of existing law or the development of new law. | 委员会应强调巩固现行法律，还是应强调发展新的法律。 |
| 350. The panel was chaired by Ms. Davinia
Aziz, Attorney-General’s Chambers, Singapore, while Mr. Yifeng Chen, Peking
University, Ms. Ineta Ziemele, Riga Graduate School of Law, and Mr. Sean
Murphy served as panellists. | 350. 该小组由新加坡总检察长办公室的Davinia Aziz女士担任主席，北京大学陈一峰先生、里加法学研究生院Ineta
Ziemele女士和肖恩·墨菲先生担任小组成员。 |
| 351. The fourth panel — on “The changing
landscape of international law” — addressed the following topics: the
Commission and the development of international law — an assessment after 70
years; | 351. 关于“不断变化的国际法的格局”的第四小组讨论了以下专题：委员会与国际法的发展――70年后的评估； |
| which topics the Commission should take
up next; | 委员会下一步应处理哪些专题； |
| whether the methods used by the
Commission to select its topics should be reconsidered; | 是否应重新考虑委员会的选题方法； |
| and what role States could play in the
identification of topics. | 各国在确定专题方面可以发挥什么作用。 |
| 352. The panel was chaired by Ms. Elinor
Hammarskjöld, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Sweden, while Ms. Hajer Gueldich,
University of Carthage, Mr. Keun-Gwan Lee, Seoul National University, and Mr.
Claudio Grossman Guiloff served as panellists. | 352. 该小组由瑞典外交部埃莉诺·哈马舍尔德女士担任主席；
迦太基大学Hajer Gueldich女士、首尔国立大学Keun -
Gwan Lee先生和克劳迪奥·格罗斯曼·吉洛夫先生担任小组成员。 |
| 353. The fifth panel — on “The authority
and the membership of the Commission in the future” — discussed the questions
of: how the Commission and the outcome of its work was perceived by
Governments, courts and other international law-making bodies and processes; | 353. 关于“委员会未来的职权和成员”的第五小组讨论了以下问题：各国政府、法院和其他国际立法机构和进程如何看待委员会及其工作成果； |
| whether the relationship with the Sixth
Committee needed to be improved; | 与第六委员会的关系是否需要改善； |
| whether the different legal traditions,
regional origins and professions of the members of the Commission were
influencing its work; | 委员会成员不同的法律传统、籍贯和职业是否影响到委员会的工作； |
| how to attain gender parity, and perhaps
other forms of diversity, such as generational diversity; | 如何实现性别均等，或许还有其他形式的多样性，如代际多样性； |
| and what were the possibilities and the
pitfalls for the Commission in the decade to come. | 委员会未来十年有哪些可能性和陷阱。 |
| 354. The panel was chaired by Mr.
Djamchid Momtaz, University of Tehran, former member of the Commission, while
Ms. Zuzana Trávníčková, University of Economics, Prague, Ms.
Mónica Pinto, University of Buenos Aires, and Mr.
Dire Tladi served as panellists. | 354. 该小组由国际法委员会前委员德黑兰大学的贾姆契德·蒙塔兹先生担任主席，布拉格经济大学苏珊娜·特拉夫尼奇科娃女士、布宜诺斯艾利斯大学莫尼卡·平托女士和迪雷·特拉迪先生担任小组成员。 |
| 355. The Chair of the Commission made
concluding remarks. | 355. 委员会主席作了总结发言。 |
| 356. The commemorative events in New York
and Geneva were enriched by a large number of side events, in which the
members of the Commission and representatives of States, international
organizations and academic institutions participated. | 356. 委员会委员、各国和国际组织及学术机构的代表参加了大量会外活动，使纽约和日内瓦的纪念活动更加丰富。 |
| The side events included the following:
an informal exchange of views on immunity of State officials, crimes against
humanity and identification of customary international law, sponsored by the
Asian-African Legal Consultative Organization; | 这些会外活动包括：亚非法律协商组织主办的国家官员豁免、危害人类罪和习惯国际法识别问题非正式意见交流会； |
| a lecture by Mr. Shinya Murase on the
work in progress of the Commission on the protection of the atmosphere, given
as part of the Dag Hammarskjöld Library speaker series; | 达格·哈马舍尔德图书馆演讲人系列之村濑信也先生关于委员会保护大气层工作进展情况的讲座； |
| a panel discussion on the role of the
Commission in the fight against impunity, organized by Brazil, the Republic
of Korea, Slovakia and Switzerland; | 巴西、大韩民国、斯洛伐克和瑞士举办的关于委员会在打击有罪不罚现象中作用的小组讨论会； |
| an event entitled, “The promise (and
pitfalls) of universal jurisdiction”, organized by Costa Rica; | 哥斯达黎加举办的题为“普遍管辖权的期许(和陷阱)”的活动； |
| a lecture by Ms. Nilüfer Oral on “Climate
change and protecting the oceans — a tale of two regimes”, given as part of
the Dag Hammarskjöld Library speaker series; | 达格·哈马舍尔德图书馆演讲人系列之尼吕费尔·奥拉尔女士关于“气候变化与保护海洋：两种制度的故事”的讲座； |
| a panel discussion on “The codification
of international law: back to the future?”, organized by the United Nations
Law Committee of the American Branch of the International Law Association; | 国际法协会美国分会联合国法律委员会举办的关于“国际法的编纂：回到未来？ ”的小组讨论会； |
| an informal discussion on the interplay
between immunity and impunity at the international level, and on the
practical implications of the result of identification of customary
international law, organized by the Asian-African Legal Consultative
Organization; | 亚非法律协商组织举办的关于国际豁免与有罪不罚之间的相互作用以及习惯国际法识别结果的实际影响的非正式讨论； |
| a dialogue entitled, “A way forward on
universal jurisdiction: a dialogue with Commission members”, organized by
Costa Rica; | 哥斯达黎加举办的题为“关于普遍管辖权的前进道路：与委员会委员对话”的对话； |
| a panel discussion on “Enhancing the
contribution of small and developing States to the work of the Commission”,
organized by Fiji, Ghana, Honduras and Saint Lucia; | 斐济、加纳、洪都拉斯和圣卢西亚举办的关于“加强发展中小国对国际法委员会工作的贡献”的小组讨论会； |
| a lecture by Mr. Ki Gab Park on lex lata
and lex ferenda in the recent works of the Commission, given as part of the
Dag Hammarskjöld Library speaker series; | 达格·哈马舍尔德图书馆演讲人系列之朴基甲先生关于委员会最近工作中现行法和拟议法的讲座； |
| a panel discussion on the draft articles
on the protection of persons in the event of disasters, on the occasion of
its seventieth session, organized by Colombia; | 哥伦比亚在委员会第七十届会议之际举办的有关发生灾害时的人员保护条款草案的小组讨论会； |
| a panel entitled, “Articles on
responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts: quo vadis?”,
organized by Brazil; | 巴西举办的题为“关于国家对国际不法行为的责任条款：往何处去？ ”的小组讨论会； |
| a discussion of current issues in the
field of succession of States, organized by the Czech Republic and Slovenia; | 捷克共和国和斯洛文尼亚举办的关于国家继承领域现有问题的讨论会； |
| a round-table discussion on achieving
gender parity at the Commission, entitled “Seven women in seventy years”,
organized by China, Finland, Portugal, Spain, Sweden and Turkey; | 中国、芬兰、葡萄牙、西班牙、瑞典和土耳其举办的题为“70年七名女性”的实现国际法委员会两性均等问题圆桌讨论会； |
| a lecture by Ms. Patrícia Galvão Teles on
“The Commission viewed from the outside: Member States, academia and the
International Court of Justice”, given as part of the Dag Hammarskjöld
Library speaker series; | 达格·哈马舍尔德图书馆演讲人系列之帕特里夏·加尔旺·特莱斯女士关于“从外部看委员会：会员国、学术界和国际法院”的讲座； |
| and a panel discussion on the Global Pact
for the Environment, sponsored by the Environment Commission of the Club des
Juristes. | 和法学家俱乐部环境委员会主办的关于《全球环境契约》的小组讨论会。 |
| 357. As part of the events, a photo
exhibition was organized by the Secretariat in New York, Geneva and The Hague
on the history of codification of international law and the accomplishments
of the Commission. | 357. 作为活动的一部分，秘书处在纽约、日内瓦和海牙举办了关于国际法编纂史和委员会成就的摄影展。 |
| 358. Pursuant to General Assembly
resolution 72/116 of 7 December 2017, States were encouraged to make
voluntary contributions to the trust fund for the Office of Legal Affairs to
support the promotion of international law in order to facilitate the
commemoration of the seventieth anniversary of the Commission. | 358. 根据大会2017年12月7日第72/116号决议，鼓励各国向法律事务厅支助宣传国际法信托基金自愿捐款，以促进国际法委员会七十周年庆祝。 |
| The following generous financial
contributions have been received from Governments: Chile (50,000 United
States dollars); | 从各国政府收到了下列慷慨捐款：智利(50,000美元)； |
| China (10,000 United States dollars); | 中国(10,000美元)； |
| Finland (10,000 euros); | 芬兰(10,000欧元)； |
| Ireland (10,000 United States dollars); | 爱尔兰(10,000美元)； |
| Portugal (5,043 United States dollars,
earmarked for a reception on the occasion of an exhibition; see paragraph
below); | 葡萄牙(5,043美元，指定用于展览招待会，见下文)； |
| Qatar (10,000 United States dollars); | 卡塔尔(10,000美元)； |
| Singapore (5,000 United States dollars); | 新加坡(5,000美元)； |
| Sri Lanka (5,000 United States dollars);
and United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (2,000 pounds
sterling). | 斯里兰卡(5,000美元)和大不列颠及北爱尔兰联合王国(2,000英镑)。 |
| Contributions were also received from
Istanbul Bilgi University (5,000 United States dollars) and others (4,000
United States dollars). | 还收到了伊斯坦布尔比尔基大学(5,000美元)和其他(4,000美元)的捐款。 |
| 359. The following Governments offered
contributions in kind: India, Japan and Viet Nam — a lunch reception in New
York on 21 May 2018; | 359. 下列国家政府提供了实物捐助：印度、日本和越南：2018年5月21日在纽约举行午餐招待会； |
| the Republic of Korea — a reception on
the occasion of an exhibition in New York on 21 May 2018, together with
Portugal (see previous paragraph); | 大韩民国――2018年5月21日在纽约与葡萄牙一起举办展览招待会(见上段)； |
| Romania — an evening reception in New
York on 21 May 2018; | 罗马尼亚――2018年5月21日在纽约的晚餐招待会； |
| Germany — a lunch reception in Geneva on
5 July 2018; | 德国――2018年7月5日在日内瓦举行午餐招待会； |
| Switzerland — music during the solemn
meeting and an evening reception on 5 July 2018; | 瑞士――2018年7月5日为隆重会议提供音乐和晚餐招待会； |
| and Austria and Czech Republic — a lunch
reception on 6 July 2018. | 以及奥地利和捷克共和国――2018年7月6日午餐招待会。 |
| 360. The Commission is most grateful for the
generous contributions, which were used to cover expenses and incidental
costs related to the organization of events in New York and Geneva. | 360. 委员会十分感谢这些慷慨捐款，这些捐款用于支付与在纽约和日内瓦组织活动有关的费用和杂费。 |
| These included: travel expenses (ticket
and per diem) of the keynote speaker in New York and panellists invited to
the commemoration in Geneva; | 其中包括：纽约主旨发言人和应邀参加日内瓦纪念活动的嘉宾的差旅费(机票和每日津贴)； |
| the preparation of promotional material; | 准备宣传材料； |
| the organizing of the photo exhibition,
including a reception to launch the exhibition in New York; | 举办摄影展，包括在纽约举办展览开幕招待会； |
| decorations, music and refreshments in
the conference hall in Geneva; | 日内瓦会议厅的装饰品、音乐和点心； |
| and various receptions. | 以及各种招待会。 |
| 361. The details of proceedings of the
seventieth anniversary commemorative events will be made available in a
publication, to be prepared and issued as soon as possible, and to be given
the widest possible circulation. | 361. 70周年纪念活动详细情况将在一份出版物中提供，出版物将尽快编写和发布，并尽可能广泛分发。 |
| Some of the resources of the trust fund
have been set aside to ensure that the publication is readily available to
potential users, including from developing countries. | 为了确保立即向包括来自发展中国家的潜在用户提供上述出版物，信托基金的部分资源留用于该出版物。 |
| 362. The Commission notes that a symposium
on the theme “The contributions of the International Law Commission to the
development of international law in the past/next 70 years: codification,
progressive development, or both?” will be organized by the Law Review of the
Florida International University on 26 and 27 October 2018. | 362. 委员会注意到，关于“国际法委员会过去/今后70年对国际法的发展的贡献：编纂、逐步发展还是兼而有之”的专题讨论会，将于2018年10月26日至27日由佛罗里达国际大学法律评论组主办。 |
| Chapter XIII Other decisions and
conclusions of the Commission | 第十三章 委员会的其他决定和结论 |
| A. General principles of law | A. 一般法律原则 |
| 363. At its 3433rd meeting, on 19 July
2018, the Commission decided to include the topic “General principles of law”
in its programme of work and to appoint Mr. Marcelo Vázquez-Bermúdez as
Special Rapporteur. | 363. 在2018年7月19日第3433次会议上，委员会决定将“一般法律原则”专题列入工作方案并任命马塞洛·巴斯克斯－贝穆德斯先生为该专题特别报告员。 |
| B. Requests by the Commission for the
Secretariat to prepare and update studies on topics in the Commission’s
agenda | B. 委员会请秘书处就委员会议程上的专题编写并更新研究报告 |
| 364. At its 3441st meeting, on 2 August
2018, the Commission requested that the memorandum by the Secretariat on ways
and means for making the evidence of customary international law more readily
available (A/CN.4/710) be reissued to reflect the text of the draft
conclusions and commentaries on identification of customary international law
adopted on second reading. | 364. 在2018年8月2日举行的第3441次会议上，委员会请求再次印发秘书处关于使习惯国际法的证据更易考察的方法和手段的备忘录(A/CN.4/710)，以反映二读通过的关于习惯国际法的识别的结论草案和评注案文。 |
| 365. At its 3451st meeting, on 9 August
2018, the Commission decided to request from the Secretariat a memorandum
providing information on treaties which may be of relevance to its future
work on the topic “Succession of States in respect of State responsibility”. | 365. 在2018年8月9日举行的第3451次会议上，委员会决定请秘书处编写一份备忘录，提供可能与“国家责任方面的国家继承”专题今后工作有关的的条约的资料。 |
| C. Programme, procedures and working
methods of the Commission and its documentation | C. 委员会的方案、程序和工作方法以及文件 |
| 366. At its 3390th meeting, on 30 April
2018, the Commission established a Planning Group for the present session. | 366. 委员会2018年4月30日第3390次会议设立了本届会议的规划小组。 |
| 367. The Planning Group held three
meetings on 1 May and 30 and 31 July 2018. | 367. 规划小组于2018年5月1日及7月30日和31日举行了3次会议。 |
| It had before it section G, entitled
“Other decisions and conclusions of the Commission”, of the topical summary
of the discussion held in the Sixth Committee of the General Assembly during
its seventy-second session (A/CN.4/713); | 规划小组收到的文件有：大会第七十二届会议第六委员会讨论情况专题摘要(A/CN.4/713)G节，题为“委员会的其他决定和结论”； |
| General Assembly resolution 72/116 of 7
December 2017 on the report of the International Law Commission on the work
of its sixty-ninth session; | 大会2017年12月7日关于国际法委员会第六十九届会议工作报告的第72/116号决议； |
| and General Assembly resolution 72/119 of
7 December 2017 on the rule of law at the national and international levels. | 大会2017年12月7日关于国内和国际法治问题的第72/119号决议。 |
| 1. Working Group on the long-term
programme of work | 1. 长期工作方案工作组 |
| 368. At its 1st meeting, on 1 May 2018,
the Planning Group decided to reconvene the Working Group on the long-term
programme of work, with Mr. Mahmoud D. Hmoud as Chair. | 368. 规划小组2018年5月1日第1次会议决定再次召集长期工作方案工作组，由马哈茂德·哈穆德先生担任主席。 |
| The Chair of the Working Group presented
an oral report on the work of the Working Group at the current session to the
Planning Group, at its 2nd meeting, on 30 July 2018. | 工作组主席在2018年7月30日第2次会议上向规划小组口头汇报了工作组本届会议的工作。 |
| The Planning Group took note of the oral
report. | 规划小组注意到口头报告。 |
| 369. At the present session, the
Commission, on the recommendation of the Working Group, decided to recommend
the inclusion of the following topics in the long-term programme of work of
the Commission: | 369. 委员会本届会议根据工作组的建议，决定将下列专题纳入委员会的长期工作方案： |
| (a) Universal criminal jurisdiction; | (a) 普遍刑事管辖权； |
| and (b) Sea-level rise in relation to
international law. | (b) 与国际法有关的海平面上升问题。 |
| 370. In the selection of the topics, the
Commission was guided by its recommendation at its fiftieth session (1998)
regarding the criteria for the selection of the topics, namely: (a) the topic
should reflect the needs of States in respect of the progressive development
and codification of international law; | 370. 在选择专题时，委员会遵循了第五十届会议(1998年)关于专题选择标准的建议：(a) 专题应反映各国在逐渐发展和编纂国际法方面的需要； |
| (b) the topic should be 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； |
| and (c) the topic 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。 |
| The Commission further agreed that it
should not restrict itself to traditional topics, but could also consider
those that reflect new developments in international law and pressing
concerns of the international community as a whole. | 委员会还议定，它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 considered that work on
the two topics would constitute useful contributions to the progressive
development of international law and its codification. | 委员会认为，上述两个专题的工作可对国际法的逐渐发展和编纂作出有益贡献。 |
| The syllabuses of the two topics selected
appear as annexes A and B to the present report. | 所选择的这两个专题，大纲载于本报告的附件A和B。 |
| 2. Working Group on methods of work of
the Commission | 2. 委员会工作方法工作组 |
| 371. At its 1st meeting, on 1 May 2018,
the Planning Group decided to re-establish the Working Group on methods of
work of the Commission, with Mr. Hussein A. Hassouna as Chair. | 371. 规划小组2018年5月1日第1次会议决定重新设立委员会工作方法工作组，由侯赛因·哈苏纳先生担任主席。 |
| The Chair of the Working Group presented
an oral report on the work of the Working Group at the current session to the
Planning Group, at its 2nd meeting, on 30 July 2018. | 工作组主席在2018年7月30日第2次会议上向规划小组口头汇报了工作组本届会议的工作。 |
| The Planning Group took note of the oral
report. | 规划小组注意到口头报告。 |
| 3. Consideration of General Assembly
resolution 72/119 of 7 December 2017 on the rule of law at the national and
international levels | 3. 审议大会2017年12月7日关于国内和国际法治问题的第72/119号决议 |
| 372. The General Assembly, in resolution
72/119 of 7 December 2017 on the rule of law at the national and
international levels, inter alia, reiterated its invitation to the Commission
to comment, in its report to the General Assembly, on its current role in
promoting the rule of law. | 372. 大会在2017年12月7日关于国内和国际法治问题的第72/119号决议中特别重申，请委员会在提交大会的报告中，就委员会目前在促进法治方面的作用作出评论。 |
| Since its sixtieth session (2008), the
Commission has commented annually on its role in promoting the rule of law. | 自第六十届会议(2008年)以来，委员会每年均对其在促进法治方面的作用作出评论。 |
| The Commission notes that the comments
contained in paragraphs 341 to 346 of its 2008 report remain relevant and
reiterates the comments made at its previous sessions. | 委员会指出2008年报告 第341至第346段所载评论依然适用，并重申了其后各届会议所作的评论。 |
| 373. The Commission recalls that the rule
of law is of the essence of its work. | 373. 委员会回顾，法治是其工作的精髓。 |
| The Commission’s purpose, as set out in
article 1 of its statute, is to promote the progressive development of
international law and its codification. | 委员会的宗旨一如其《章程》第1条所申明的，是促进国际法的逐渐发展及编纂。 |
| 374. Having in mind the principle of the
rule of law in all its work, the Commission is fully conscious of the
importance of the implementation of international law at the national level,
and aims at promoting respect for the rule of law at the international level. | 374. 委员会在所有工作中都铭记法治原则，充分意识到在国家层面实施国际法的重要性，并以在国际上促进尊重法治为追求的目标。 |
| 375. In fulfilling its mandate concerning
the progressive development of international law and its codification, the
Commission will continue to take into account, where appropriate, the rule of
law as a principle of governance and the human rights that are fundamental to
the rule of law, as reflected in the preamble and in Article 13 of the
Charter of the United Nations and in the Declaration of the high-level
meeting of the General Assembly on the rule of law at the national and
international levels. | 375. 委员会在履行逐渐发展和编纂国际法的任务过程中，将继续视情况将法治作为一项治理原则加以考虑，而人权又是法治的基石，《联合国宪章》的序言和第十三条及《国内和国际的法治问题大会高级别会议宣言》都揭示了这一点。 |
| 376. In its current work, the Commission
is aware of “the interrelationship between the rule of law and the three
pillars of the United Nations (peace and security, development, and human
rights)”, without emphasizing one at the expense of the other. | 376. 委员会在目前开展的工作中，充分注意到“法治与联合国三大支柱(和平与安全、发展、人权)之间的相互关系”，不会顾此失彼。 |
| In this context, the Commission is
cognizant that the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development recognizes the
need for an effective rule of law and good governance at all levels. | 为此，委员会深知，《2030年可持续发展议程》中确认有必要在各级实行有效的法治和良政。 |
| In fulfilling its mandate concerning the
progressive development and codification of international law, the Commission
is conscious of current challenges for the rule of law. | 委员会在履行关于国际法的逐渐发展和编纂的任务时，认识到法治当前面临的挑战。 |
| 377. Recalling that the General Assembly
has stressed the importance of promoting the sharing of national best
practices on the rule of law, the Commission wishes to recall that much of
its work consists of collecting and analysing national practices related to
the rule of law with a view to assessing their possible contribution to the
progressive development and codification of international law. | 377. 鉴于大会强调必须促进分享各国在法治方面的最佳做法， 委员会谨回顾指出，其大部分工作就是收集和分析各国与法治有关的实践，以评估这些实践对国际法的逐渐发展和编纂可能作出的贡献。 |
| The Commission underlines the value of
State responses to its requests in this regard. | 委员会强调，各国对委员会在这方面的要求做出反应具有重要意义。 |
| 378. Bearing in mind the role of
multilateral treaty processes in advancing the rule of law, the Commission
recalls that the work of the Commission on different topics has led to
several multilateral treaty processes and to the adoption of a number of multilateral
treaties. | 378. 委员会铭记多边条约进程对推进法治的作用， 回顾委员会围绕不同专题开展的工作已经促成了若干多边条约进程，使一些多边条约得以通过。 |
| 379. In the course of the present
session, the Commission has continued to make its contribution to the rule of
law, including by working on the topics, “Subsequent agreements and
subsequent practice in relation to the interpretation of treaties” (adopted
on second reading at the current session), “Identification of customary
international law” (adopted on second reading at the current session),
“Provisional application of treaties” (adopted on first reading at the
current session), “Protection of the atmosphere” (adopted on first reading at
the current session), “Immunity of State officials from foreign criminal
jurisdiction”, “Peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens)”,
“Protection of the environment in relation to armed conflicts” and
“Succession of States in respect of State responsibility”. | 379. 本届会议期间，委员会继续为法治做出贡献，包括就下列专题开展工作：“与条约解释相关的嗣后协定和嗣后实践”(本届会议二读通过)、“习惯国际法的识别”(本届会议二读通过)、“条约的暂时适用”(本届会议一读通过)、“保护大气层”(本届会议一读通过)、“国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免”、“一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)”、“与武装冲突有关的环境保护”和“国家责任方面的国家继承”。 |
| A further topic on the current work
programme of the Commission is “Crimes against humanity” (adopted on first
reading at the previous session). | 委员会目前工作方案上的另一专题是“危害人类罪”(上届会议一读通过)。 |
| The Commission also decided to include a
new topic, “General principles of law” in its programme of work. | 委员会还决定将新专题“一般法律原则”列入其工作方案。 |
| 380. The Commission reiterates its
commitment to the rule of law in all of its activities. | 380. 委员会重申在其全部活动中致力于促进法治。 |
| 4. Consideration of paragraphs 13 and 14
of resolution 72/116 of 7 December 2017 on the report of the International
Law Commission on the work of the sixty-ninth session | 4. 审议大会2017年12月7日关于国际法委员会第六十九届会议工作报告的第72/116号决议第13和第14段 |
| 381. The Commission, recalling its
decision to convene part of its session, coinciding with the commemoration of
the seventieth anniversary of the Commission, at United Nations Headquarters
in New York from 30 April to 1 June 2018, takes note with appreciation of the
necessary administrative and organizational arrangements provided by the
Secretariat. | 381. 委员会回顾其决定，本届会议适逢委员会成立七十周年，部分会议将于2018年4月30日至6月1日在纽约联合国总部举行，并赞赏地注意到秘书处在行政和组织方面做出的必要安排。 |
| The arrangements, among other things,
facilitated interaction between members of the Commission and representatives
of Governments, especially in the Sixth Committee, and others. | 这些安排尤其促进了委员会委员与各国政府的代表，特别是在第六委员会和其他机构中的代表的互动。 |
| 5. Honoraria | 5. 酬金 |
| 382. The Commission reiterates its views
concerning the question of honoraria, resulting from the adoption by the
General Assembly of its resolution 56/272 of 27 March 2002, which have been
expressed in the previous reports of the Commission. | 382. 委员会重申了对大会通过2002年3月27日第56/272号决议所引起的酬金问题的意见，委员会以前的报告表明了这些意见。 |
| The Commission emphasizes that resolution
56/272 especially affects Special Rapporteurs, as it compromises support for
their research work. | 委员会强调，第56/272号决议尤其影响到特别报告员，因为决议缩减了对他们研究工作的支持。 |
| 6. Documentation and publications | 6. 文件和出版物 |
| 383. The Commission underscored once more
the unique nature of its functioning in the progressive development of
international law and its codification, in that it attaches particular
relevance to State practice and the decisions of national and international
courts in its treatment of questions of international law. | 383. 委员会再次强调，委员会的工作在国际法的逐渐发展和编纂方面具有独特的性质，委员会在对待国际法的问题上十分重视特别相关的国家实践及国家法院和国际性法院的裁决。 |
| The Commission reiterated the importance
of providing and making available all evidence of State practice and other
sources of international law relevant to the performance of the function of
the Commission. | 委员会重申，必须提供和开放一切与委员会履行职能有关的国家实践和其他国际法渊源的证据。 |
| The reports of its Special Rapporteurs
require an adequate presentation of precedents and other relevant data,
including treaties, judicial decisions and doctrine, and a thorough analysis
of the questions under consideration. | 特别报告员的报告需要充分说明判例和其他有关资料，包括条约、司法裁决和理论学说，并对审议的问题展开透彻的分析。 |
| The Commission stresses that it and its
Special Rapporteurs are fully conscious of the need to achieve economies
whenever possible in the overall volume of documentation and will continue to
bear such considerations in mind. | 委员会强调，委员会和委员会的特别报告员都充分意识到，有必要尽可能节省文件总量，并将始终牢记这个考虑因素。 |
| While the Commission is aware of the
advantages of being as concise as possible, it reiterates its strong belief
that an a priori limitation cannot be placed on the length of the
documentation and research projects relating to the work of the Commission. | 尽管委员会意识到尽可能简洁的好处，但仍重申，委员会坚信，对与委员会工作有关的文件和研究项目长度不能预先规定限额。 |
| It follows that Special Rapporteurs
cannot be asked to reduce the length of their report following submission to
the Secretariat, irrespective of any estimates of their length made in
advance of submission by the Secretariat. | 因此，不能要求特别报告员在报告提交秘书处后缩短篇幅，无论秘书处在报告提交之前所作的任何篇幅预估如何。 |
| Word limits are not applicable to
Commission documentation, as has been consistently reiterated by the General
Assembly. | 大会已一再重申，字数限制的规定不适用于委员会的文件。 |
| The Commission stresses also the
importance of the timely preparation of reports by Special Rapporteurs and
their submission to the Secretariat for processing and submission to the
Commission sufficiently in advance so that the reports are issued in all
official languages ideally four weeks before the start of the relevant part
of the session of the Commission. | 委员会还强调，特别报告员必须及时编写报告，按时提交秘书处，以便有充分的时间处理并提交委员会，最好是在委员会届会有关部分的开始日期之前四个星期以所有正式语文印发。 |
| In this respect, the Commission
reiterated its request that: (a) Special Rapporteurs submit their reports
within the time limits specified by the Secretariat; | 在这方面，委员会重申其要求：(a) 特别报告员应在秘书处规定的时限内提交报告； |
| and (b) the Secretariat continue to
ensure that official documents of the Commission are published in due time in
the six official languages of the United Nations. | (b) 秘书处继续确保按时以联合国的六种正式语文印发委员会的正式文件。 |
| 384. The Commission reiterated its firm
view that the summary records of the Commission, constituting crucial travaux
préparatoires in the progressive development and codification of
international law, cannot be subject to arbitrary length restrictions. | 384. 委员会重申，委员会坚持认为，委员会的简要记录是国际法逐渐发展和编纂过程中的重要准备工作，不能受到任意的篇幅限制。 |
| The Commission once more noted with
satisfaction that the measures introduced at its sixty-fifth session (2013)
to streamline the processing of its summary records had resulted in the more
expeditious transmission to members of the Commission of the English and
French versions for timely correction and prompt release. | 委员会再次满意地注意到，第六十五届会议(2013年)实行的精简处理简要记录的措施加快了向委员会委员传送英文本和法文本以便及时纠正和迅速印发的速度。 |
| The Commission called on the Secretariat
to resume the practice of preparing summary records in English and French,
and to continue its efforts to sustain the measures in question, in order to
ensure the expeditious transmission of the provisional records to members of
the Commission. | 委员会要求秘书处恢复以英文和法文编写简要记录的做法，并继续努力保持有关措施，以确保向委员会委员迅速传送临时记录。 |
| The Commission also welcomed the fact
that these working methods had led to the more rational use of resources and
called on the Secretariat to continue its efforts to facilitate the
preparation of the definitive records in all official languages, without compromising
their integrity. | 委员会还对这些工作方法更合理地利用了资源表示欢迎，要求秘书处继续努力，便利以所有正式语文编写简要记录定本，而又不致影响其完整性。 |
| 385. The Commission expressed its
gratitude to all Services involved in the processing of documents, both in
Geneva and in New York, for their efforts in seeking to ensure timely and
efficient processing of the Commission’s documents, often under narrow time
constraints. | 385. 委员会感谢日内瓦和纽约参与文件处理的各个部门经常在时间紧迫的情况下及时、高效地处理委员会的文件。 |
| It emphasized that timely and efficient
processing of documentation was essential for the smooth conduct of the
Commission’s work. | 委员会指出，及时、高效地处理文件对委员会顺利开展工作至为重要。 |
| 386. The Commission reaffirmed its
commitment to multilingualism and recalls the paramount importance to be
given in its work to the equality of the six official languages of the United
Nations, which had been emphasized in General Assembly resolution 69/324 of
11 September 2015. | 386. 委员会重申对使用多种语文的承诺，忆及大会2015年9月11日第69/324号决议强调联合国六种正式语文地位平等至关重要，因此委员会在其工作中极其重视六种正式语文的地位平等。 |
| 387. The Commission expressed its warm
appreciation to the United Nations Headquarters Library for the facilities
and assistance provided during the Commission’s segment in New York, in
particular for organizing a lecture series involving members of the
Commission. | 387. 委员会表示热烈赞赏联合国总部图书馆在委员会纽约会议期间提供的设施和协助，特别是组织了委员会成员参与的一系列讲座。 |
| 388. The Commission once again expressed
its warm appreciation to the United Nations Office at Geneva Library, which
continues to assist members of the Commission very efficiently and
competently. | 388. 委员会再次表示热烈赞赏联合国日内瓦办事处图书馆继续十分高效和称职地向委员们提供协助。 |
| 389. The Commission expressed its deep
condolences on the passing of Ms. Irina Gerassimova, whose assistance,
dedication and professionalism, as a legal librarian at the United Nations
Office at Geneva Library for many years, was greatly appreciated. | 389. 委员会对伊琳娜·格拉西莫娃女士的逝世表示深切哀悼，对于她多年来作为联合国日内瓦办事处图书馆法律图书管理员所提供的协助、奉献和专业精神表示赞赏。 |
| 7. Yearbook of the International Law
Commission | 7. 《国际法委员会年鉴》 |
| 390. The Commission reiterated that the
Yearbook of the International Law Commission was critical to the
understanding of the Commission’s work in the progressive development of
international law and its codification, as well as in the strengthening of
the rule of law in international relations. | 390. 委员会重申，《国际法委员会年鉴》对于了解委员会在国际法的逐渐发展和编纂，以及在国际关系中加强法治方面的工作具有关键意义。 |
| The Commission took note that the General
Assembly, in its resolution 72/116, expressed its appreciation to Governments
that had made voluntary contributions to the trust fund on the backlog
relating to the Yearbook, and encouraged further contributions to the trust
fund. | 委员会注意到，大会第72/116号决议赞赏有关国家政府为帮助解决《年鉴》工作积压问题的信托基金自愿捐款，并鼓励各方进一步为该信托基金捐款。 |
| 391. The Commission recommends that the
General Assembly, as in its resolution 72/116, express its satisfaction with
the remarkable progress achieved in the past few years in catching up with
the backlog of the Yearbook in all six languages, and welcome the efforts
made by the Division of Conference Management, especially the Editing Section
of the United Nations Office at Geneva, in effectively implementing relevant
resolutions of the General Assembly calling for the reduction of the backlog; | 391. 委员会建议大会如在第72/116号决议中那样，对过去几年里在减少所有六种语文版《年鉴》积压工作方面取得显著进展表示满意，欢迎联合国日内瓦办事处会议管理司，特别是其编辑科为切实执行大会要求减少积压工作的有关决议所作的努力； |
| and encourage the Division of Conference
Management to continue providing all necessary support to the Editing Section
in advancing work on the Yearbook. | 鼓励会议管理司继续向编辑科提供一切必要支持，推动《年鉴》的相关工作。 |
| 8. Assistance of the Codification
Division | 8. 编纂司的协助 |
| 392. The Commission expressed its
appreciation for the invaluable assistance of the Codification Division of
the Secretariat in its substantive servicing of the Commission and the
ongoing assistance provided to Special Rapporteurs and the preparation of
in-depth research studies pertaining to aspects of topics presently under consideration,
as requested by the Commission. | 392. 委员会表示赞赏秘书处编纂司在向委员会提供实质性服务方面给予的宝贵协助，以及一直向特别报告员提供的协助，并应委员会的要求就目前审议的专题的各方面编写深入的研究报告。 |
| In particular, the Commission expressed
its appreciation to the Secretariat for its preparation of a memorandum on
ways and means for making the evidence of customary international law more
readily available (A/CN.4/710). | 委员会特别对秘书处编写了关于使习惯国际法的证据更易考察的方法和手段的备忘录(A/CN.4/710)表示感谢。 |
| 9. Websites | 9. 网站 |
| 393. The Commission expressed its deep
appreciation to the Secretariat for the website on the work of the
Commission, and welcomed its continuous updating and improvement. | 393. 委员会对于秘书处在网站上公布委员会的工作深表赞赏，并欢迎网站的不断更新和完善。 |
| The Commission reiterated that the
website and other websites maintained by the Codification Division constitute
an invaluable resource for the Commission and for researchers of the work of
the Commission in the wider community, thereby contributing to the overall
strengthening of the teaching, study, dissemination and wider appreciation of
international law. | 委员会重申，这个网站以及由编纂司维护的其他网站 是委员会和研究委员会工作的更多学者的宝贵资源，有助于全面加强国际法的教学、研究、传播以及对国际法的广泛理解。 |
| The Commission welcomed the fact that the
website on the work of the Commission included information on the current
status of the topics on the agenda of the Commission, as well as links to the
advance edited versions of the summary records of the Commission and the
audio recording of the plenary meetings of the Commission. | 委员会欢迎关于委员会工作的网站还介绍了委员会议程上各个专题的现状，并收录了委员会简要记录的预先编辑版和委员会全体会议录音的链接。 |
| 10. United Nations Audiovisual Library of
International Law | 10. 联合国国际法视听图书馆 |
| 394. The Commission once more noted with
appreciation the extraordinary value of the United Nations Audiovisual
Library of International Law in promoting a better knowledge of international
law and the work of the United Nations in the field, including the work of
the Commission. | 394. 委员会再次赞赏地指出，联合国国际法视听图书馆 对于增进对国际法和联合国在该领域的工作包括委员会工作的了解，意义非凡。 |
| D. Date and place of the seventy-first
session of the Commission | D. 委员会第七十一届会议的日期和地点 |
| 395. The Commission decided that its
seventy-first session would be held in Geneva from 29 April to 7 June and
from 8 July to 9 August 2019. | 395. 委员会决定，委员会第七十一届会议将于2019年4月29日至6月7日和7月8日至8月9日在日内瓦举行。 |
| E. Cooperation with other bodies | E. 与其他机构的合作 |
| 396. The Inter-American Juridical
Committee was represented at the present session of the Commission by its
President, Mr. Hernán Salinas Burgos, who addressed the Commission at the
3420th meeting, on 4 July 2018. | 396. 美洲司法委员会主席埃尔南·萨利纳斯·布尔戈斯先生代表该组织出席委员会本届会议，并在2018年7月4日第3420次会议上发了言。 |
| He gave an overview of the activities of
the Committee on various legal issues, focusing in particular on activities
in 2017. | 他概述了该委员会就种种法律问题所开展的活动，特别是2017年所开展的活动。 |
| An exchange of views followed. | 随后交换了意见。 |
| 397. The Committee of Legal Advisers on
Public International Law of the Council of Europe was represented at the
present session of the Commission by the Chair of the Committee, Ms. Päivi
Kaukoranta, and the Head of the Public International Law Division and Treaty
Office of the Directorate of Legal Advice and Public International Law and
Secretary of the Committee, Ms. Marta Requena, both of whom addressed the
Commission at its 3433rd meeting, on 19 July 2018. | 397. 欧洲委员会国际公法法律顾问委员会主席佩伊维·考科兰塔女士和国际公法司司长兼法律咨询和国际公法局条约处处长、委员会秘书玛尔塔·雷克纳女士代表国际公法法律顾问委员会出席了委员会本届会议，并都在2018年7月19日第3433次会议上发言。 |
| They focused on the current activities of
the Committee in the field of public international law, as well of the
Council of Europe. | 她们着重介绍了国际公法法律顾问委员会目前在国际公法领域开展的工作，以及欧洲委员会目前的活动。 |
| An exchange of views followed. | 随后交换了意见。 |
| 398. In response to an initiative by the
African Union Commission on International Law (AUCIL), and in accordance with
article 26, paragraph 1, of its statute, the Commission recommended that a
meeting be held during the second part of its seventy-first session with
AUCIL in the context of activities to commemorate the tenth anniversary of
AUCIL. | 398. 委员会响应非洲联盟国际法委员会(非盟国际法委)的倡议，根据委员会章程第26条第1款，建议在第七十一届会议第二期会议期间结合非盟国际法委成立十周年纪念活动，与非盟国际法委举行一次会议。 |
| The Commission requests the Secretariat,
in consultation with the Chair of the Commission and members of the Enlarged
Bureau, to explore possibilities for the holding of such a meeting. | 委员会请秘书处与委员会主席和扩大主席团的成员协商，探讨举行这一会议的可能性。 |
| 399. On 18 July 2018, an informal
exchange of views was held between members of the Commission and the
International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) on topics of mutual interest. | 399. 2018年7月18日，委员会委员与红十字国际委员会(红十字会)就共同关心的问题非正式地交换了意见。 |
| Following statements made by Mr. Gilles
Carbonnier, Vice-President, ICRC, Mr. Knut Dörmann, Chief Legal Officer and
Head of the Legal Division, ICRC, and Mr. Eduardo Valencia-Ospina, Chair of
the Commission, presentations were made on the topics “Subsequent agreements
and subsequent practice in relation to the interpretation of treaties” by Mr.
Georg Nolte, Special Rapporteur on the topic, and “Subsequent agreements and
subsequent practice and the project to update the Commentaries on the Geneva
Conventions” by Mr. Jean-Marie Henckaerts, Head of Commentaries Update Unit,
Legal Division, ICRC. | 在红十字会副主席Gilles Carbonnier先生、红十字会首席法务官兼法律司司长Knut Dörmann先生和委员会主席爱德华多·巴伦西亚－奥斯皮纳先生讲话之后，专题特别报告员格奥尔格·诺尔特先生介绍了“与条约解释相关的嗣后协定和嗣后实践”专题，红十字会法律司评注更新股负责人Jean-Marie Henckaerts先生介绍了“嗣后协定和嗣后实践与日内瓦四公约评注的更新项目”。 |
| Further presentations were made on
“Crimes against humanity” by Mr. Sean D. Murphy, Special Rapporteur on the
topic, and “International humanitarian law and cyber warfare: ICRC work on
the application and clarification of existing law, a prerequisite to
assessing possible need for development”. | 专题特别报告员肖恩·墨菲先生还介绍了“危害人类罪”专题，其他发言还包括“国际人道主义法和网络战争：红十字会在适用和澄清现行法律方面的工作，这是评估发展需要的前提条件”。 |
| Each set of presentations was followed by
discussion moderated by Ms. Helen Durham, Director, International Law and
Policy, ICRC. | 每组介绍之后由红十字会国际法和政策主任Helen Durham女士主持讨论。 |
| Concluding remarks were made by Ms.
Durham. | Helen Durham女士作了总结发言。 |
| F. Representation at the seventy-third
session of the General Assembly | F. 出席大会第七十三届会议的代表 |
| 400. The Commission decided that it
should be represented at the seventy-third session of the General Assembly by
its Chair, Mr. Eduardo Valencia-Ospina. | 400. 委员会决定由主席爱德华德·巴伦西亚－奥斯皮纳代表委员会出席大会第七十三届会议。 |
| G. International Law Seminar | G. 国际法讲习班 |
| 401. Pursuant to General Assembly
resolution 72/116 of 7 December 2017, the fifty-fourth session of the
International Law Seminar was held at the Palais des Nations from 2 to 20
July 2018, during the present session of the Commission. | 401. 依照大会2017年12月7日第72/116号决议，在国际法委员会本届会议期间，第五十四届国际法讲习班于2018年7月2日至20日在万国宫举行。 |
| The Seminar is intended for young jurists
specializing in international law, and young professors or government
officials pursuing an academic or diplomatic career in posts in the civil
service of their countries. | 讲习班的对象是专长于国际法的年轻法学家、年轻教师以及在其本国公务员系统任职的从事学术或外交工作的政府官员。 |
| 402. Twenty-five participants of
different nationalities, from all regional groups, took part in the session. | 402. 来自世界各个地区分属不同国籍的25名学员参加了这届讲习班。 |
| The participants attended plenary
meetings of the Commission and specially arranged lectures, and participated
in working groups on specific topics. | 学员们列席了委员会的全体会议，参加了特别安排的专题演讲和关于特定专题的工作组。 |
| 403. Mr. Eduardo Valencia-Ospina, Chair
of the Commission, opened the Seminar. | 403. 委员会主席爱德华德·巴伦西亚－奥斯皮纳先生宣布讲习班开幕。 |
| Mr. Markus Schmidt, Senior Legal Adviser
to the United Nations Office at Geneva, was responsible for the
administration, organization and conduct of the Seminar and served as its
Director. | 联合国日内瓦办事处高级法律顾问马库斯·施密特先生负责讲习班的行政管理、组织事宜和活动的进行，同时担任讲习班主任。 |
| The University of Geneva ensured the
scientific coordination of the Seminar. | 日内瓦大学负责讲习班的专业协调。 |
| Mr. Vittorio Mainetti, international law
expert from the University of Geneva, acted as Coordinator, assisted by Mr.
Federico Daniele, legal assistant. | 日内瓦大学国际法专家Vittorio Mainetti先生担任协调员，法律助理Federico Daniele先生从旁协助。 |
| 404. The following lectures were given by
members of the Commission: “The work of the International Law Commission” by
Mr. Ernest Petrič; | 404. 委员会委员作了以下演讲：埃内斯特·彼得里奇先生：“国际法委员会的工作”； |
| “The principle of universal jurisdiction”
by Mr. Charles Chernor Jalloh; | 查尔斯·切尔诺·贾洛先生：“普遍管辖原则”； |
| “The International Law Commission viewed
from outside” by Ms. Patrícia Galvão Teles; | 帕特里夏·加尔旺·特莱斯女士：“从外部看国际法委员会”； |
| “Protection of the atmosphere” by Mr.
Shinya Murase; | 村濑信也先生：“保护大气层”； |
| “Protection of the environment in
relation to armed conflict” by Ms. Marja Lehto; | 玛丽亚·莱赫托女士：“与武装冲突有关的环境保护”； |
| “Immunity of State officials from foreign
criminal jurisdiction” by Ms. Concepción Escobar Hernández; | 康塞普西翁·埃斯科瓦尔·埃尔南德斯女士：“国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免”； |
| “Jus cogens” by Mr. Dire D. Tladi; | 迪雷·特拉迪先生：“强行法”； |
| “Subsequent agreements and subsequent
practice in relation to interpretation of treaties” by Mr. Georg Nolte; | 格奥尔格·诺尔特先生：“与条约解释相关的嗣后协定和嗣后实践”； |
| “Crimes against humanity” by Mr. Sean D.
Murphy; | 肖恩·墨菲先生：“危害人类罪”； |
| and “Provisional application of treaties”
by Mr. Juan Manuel Gómez Robledo. | 胡安·曼努埃尔·戈麦斯－罗夫莱多先生：“条约的暂时适用”。 |
| 405. Participants attended the
commemoration of the seventieth anniversary of the Commission — “70 years of
the International Law Commission — Drawing a balance for the future”, held in
Geneva on 5 and 6 July 2018. | 405. 学员们参加了2018年7月5日和6日在日内瓦举行的国际法委员会七十周年纪念活动：“国际法委员会70年――总结过去，展望未来”。 |
| 406. Participants also attended a
conference organized by the University of Geneva on the work of the
Commission, focusing on the topics “Identification of customary international
law” and “State succession in relation to State responsibility”, with the
participation of Sir. | 406. 学员们还参加了日内瓦大学举办的关于国际法委员会工作的会议，专门讨论“习惯国际法的识别”和“与国家责任有关的国家继承”。 |
| Michael Wood and Mr. Pavel Šturma, Special
Rapporteurs of the Commission on the respective topics. | 委员会相关专题特别报告员迈克尔·伍德先生和帕维尔·斯图尔马先生参加了会议。 |
| The following speakers spoke at the
conference: Ms. Danae Azaria, Lecturer at University College London; | 下列人员在会上发言：伦敦大学学院讲师Danae Azaria女士； |
| Mr. Peter Haggenmacher, Honorary
Professor at the Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies,
Geneva; | 日内瓦国际关系与发展研究院名誉教授Peter Haggenmacher先生； |
| Mr. Marcelo Kohen, Professor of
International Law at the Graduate Institute of International and Development
Studies, Geneva; | 日内瓦国际关系与发展研究院教授Marcelo Kohen先生； |
| Mr. Robert Kolb, Professor of
International Law at the University of Geneva; | 日内瓦大学国际法教授Robert Kolb先生； |
| Mr. Nicolas Levrat, Professor at the
University of Geneva; | 日内瓦大学教授Nicolas Levrat先生； |
| Mr. Marco Sassòli, Professor of
International Law and Director of the Department of Public International Law
and International Organizations at the University of Geneva; | 日内瓦大学国际法教授兼国际公法和国际组织系主任Marco Sassòli先生； |
| Ms. Mara Tignino, Senior Lecturer at the
University of Geneva; | 日内瓦大学高级讲师Mara Tignino女士； |
| and Ms. Alla Tymofeyeva, Senior Lecturer,
Faculty of Law, Charles University, Prague. | 布拉格查理大学法学院资深讲师Alla Tymofeyeva女士。 |
| 407. Participants visited the
International Labour Organization (ILO), guided by Mr. Remo Becci, Director
of the ILO Archives, and attended two presentations given by Mr. Dražen
Petrović, Registrar of the ILO Administrative Tribunal, on “International administrative justice”, and
Mr. Georges Politakis, ILO Legal Adviser, on ILO standard-setting. | 407. 国际劳工组织(劳工组织)档案处处长Remo Becci先生带领讲习班学员参观了劳工组织，学员们听取了劳工组织行政法庭书记官长Dražen Petrović先生关于“国际行政司法”和劳工组织法律顾问Georges
Politakis先生关于劳工组织标准制订的两场介绍。 |
| They also visited the World Trade
Organization (WTO), and attended a presentation on “The WTO dispute
settlement system” by Mr. Juan Pablo Moya Hoyos, from the WTO Legal Affairs
Division, and by Mr. Shashank Kumar, from the WTO Appellate Body Secretariat. | 他们还参观了世界贸易组织(世贸组织)，听取了世贸组织法律事务司Juan Pablo Moya Hoyos先生和世贸组织上诉机构秘书处Shashank
Kumar先生关于“世贸组织争端解决制度”的介绍。 |
| 408. Two working groups, on identifying
new topics for the Commission and clarification of the scope and application
of the principle of universal jurisdiction, were organized and participants
were assigned to one of them. | 408. 围绕“为委员会确定新专题”和“澄清普遍管辖原则的范围和适用问题”组织了两个工作组，学员们被分配到其中一个工作组。 |
| Two members of the Commission, Ms.
Patrícia Galvão Teles and Mr. Charles Chernor Jalloh, supervised and provided
guidance to the working groups. | 委员会的两位委员帕特里夏·加尔旺·特莱斯女士和查尔斯·切尔诺·贾洛先生为两个工作组提供了督导和指导。 |
| Each group prepared a report and
presented its findings during the last working session of the Seminar. | 每个工作组都编写了一份报告，并在讲习班最后一次工作会议上介绍了心得。 |
| The reports were compiled and distributed
to all participants, as well as to the members of the Commission. | 报告编辑成册，发给了所有学员和委员会委员。 |
| 409. The Chair of the Commission, the
Director of the International Law Seminar and Mr. Michael Moffatt, on behalf
of participants attending the Seminar, addressed the Commission during the
closing ceremony of the Seminar. | 409. 讲习班闭幕式上，国际法委员会主席、国际法讲习班主任和讲习班学员代表Michael Moffatt先生向委员会致辞。 |
| Each participant was presented with a
diploma. | 每名学员都获颁一份参加讲习班的证书。 |
| 410. The Commission noted with particular
appreciation that since 2016 the Governments of Argentina, Austria, China,
Finland, India, Ireland, Mexico, Switzerland and the United Kingdom had made
voluntary contributions to the United Nations Trust Fund for the
International Law Seminar. | 410. 委员会特别感谢地指出，自2016年以来，阿根廷、奥地利、中国、芬兰、印度、爱尔兰、墨西哥、瑞士和联合王国等国政府向联合国国际法讲习班信托基金提供了自愿捐款。 |
| Though the financial crisis of recent
years had seriously affected the finances of the Seminar, the Fund was still
able to grant a sufficient number of fellowships to deserving candidates,
especially those from developing countries, in order to achieve an adequate
geographical distribution among participants. | 尽管近年的金融危机严重影响了讲习班的财务状况，但信托基金还是可以提供足够份数的研究金，使优秀学员特别是来自发展中国家的优秀学员得以参加，从而实现了学员的适当地域分布。 |
| In 2018, 12 fellowships were granted. | 2018年共向12名学员颁发了研究金。 |
| 411. Since its inception in 1965, 1,233
participants, representing 175 nationalities, have taken part in the Seminar. | 411. 自1965年创设讲习班以来，分属175个不同国籍的1,233名学员参加了讲习班，其中748人获得了研究金。 |
| Some 748 participants have received a
fellowship. | 412. 委员会强调了对讲习班的重视。 |
| 412. The Commission stresses the
importance it attaches to the Seminar, which enables young lawyers,
especially those from developing countries, to familiarize themselves with
the work of the Commission and the activities of the many international
organizations based in Geneva. | 讲习班使年轻法律工作者，特别是发展中国家的年轻法律工作者，能够熟悉委员会的工作和总部设在日内瓦的众多国际组织的活动。 |
| The Commission recommends that the
General Assembly should again appeal to States to make voluntary
contributions in order to secure the organization of the Seminar in 2019 with
as broad participation as possible. | 委员会建议大会再度向各国发出呼吁，请它们提供自愿捐款，以保证在2019年能够继续举办讲习班，并让尽可能多的学员参加。 |
| 413. The Commission notes that the
International Law Seminar Alumni Network was formally launched, at the
initiative of former participants, and held its first general assembly at the
United Nations Office at Geneva, on 17 July 2018. | 413. 委员会注意到，在往届学员的倡议下，国际法讲习班校友网络已经正式启动，2018年7月17日在联合国日内瓦办事处举行了首届大会。 |
| The Honorary Board of Directors of the
Network comprises five members of the Commission, Ms. Patrícia Galvão Teles,
Mr. Claudio Grossman Guiloff, Mr. Mahmoud D. Hmoud, Mr. Shinya Murase and Mr.
Pavel Šturma, as well as Mr. Marcelo Kohen, Professor of International Law at
the Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies in Geneva. | 校友网络名誉理事会成员包括国际法委员会5名委员：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、村濑信也先生和帕维尔·斯图尔马先生，以及日内瓦国际关系与发展研究院国际法教授Marcelo Kohen先生。 |
| The Executive Committee has five members
consisting of Ms. Verity Robson, President; | 执行委员会由五名成员组成：主席Verity Robson女士； |
| Ms. Mary-Elisabeth Chong, Vice-President
for Seminars and Conferences; | 负责讲习班和会议事务的副主席Mary-Elisabeth Chong女士； |
| Ms. Valeria Reyes Menéndez,
Vice-President for Internal Relations; | 负责内部关系事务的副主席Valeria Reyes Menéndez女士； |
| Mr. Moritz Rudolf, Vice-President for Outreach
and Publicity; | 负责外联和宣传事务的副主席Moritz Rudolf先生； |
| and Mr. Vittorio Mainetti,
Secretary-General. | 秘书长Vittorio Mainetti先生。 |
| The signing of the statute by members of
the Honorary Board of Directors and the Executive Committee took place at the
end of the assembly. | 名誉理事会和执行委员会成员在大会结束时签署了章程。 |
| A/73/10 | 附件 |
| A/73/10 GE.18-13644 GE.18-13644 | A. 普遍刑事管辖权 |
| Annexes A. Universal criminal
jurisdiction Mr. Charles Chernor Jalloh | 查尔斯·切尔诺·贾洛先生 |
| I. Introduction | 一. 导言 |
| 1. The principle of “universal
jurisdiction” or the “universality principle” is a unique ground of
jurisdiction in international law that may permit a State to exercise
national jurisdiction over certain crimes in the interest of the
international community. | 1. “普遍管辖原则”或“普遍性原则”是国际法中一项独特的管辖权依据，可允许一国为国际社会的利益对某些罪行行使国家管辖权。 |
| There is no single globally-accepted
definition of the concept but, for working purposes, it can be described as
criminal jurisdiction based solely on the nature of the crime, without regard
to the territory where the crime was committed, the nationality of the
alleged or convicted perpetrator, the nationality of the victim, or any other
connection to the State exercising such jurisdiction. | 这一概念没有一个单一的全球公认定义，但出于实用目的，可以不考虑犯罪发生的所在属地、被指控或被定罪肇事者的国籍、受害人的国籍，或与行使这种管辖权的国家的任何其他联系，单纯依据罪行的性质将其称为刑事管辖权。 |
| This means that a State may exercise
universal jurisdiction regarding a crime committed by a foreign national
against another foreign national outside its territory. | 这就意味着，一国可以对其领土之外一名外籍人士对另一名外籍人士实施的罪行行使普遍管辖权。 |
| Such jurisdiction differs markedly from
the traditional bases of jurisdiction under international law, which
typically require some type of territorial, nationality or other connection
between the State exercising the jurisdiction and the conduct at issue. | 这种管辖权与国际法下的传统管辖权依据有显著的差别，传统的管辖权依据通常要求在行使管辖的国家与所涉行为之间存在某种类型的属地、国籍或其他联系。 |
| 2. Due to the definitional and other
ambiguities surrounding the universality principle, which has in its past
application strained and today continues to strain relations among States, it
is submitted that the International Law Commission (“ILC”/”the Commission”)
should include this topic in its programme of work, as this could enhance
clarity for States and thereby contribute to the rule of law in international
affairs. | 2. 由于普遍性原则存在定义和其他方面的模糊，它的适用曾经造成国家间关系的紧张，今天也依然如此，所以有人提出，国际法委员会(“本委员会”)应将这一专题列入工作方案，这可以为各国厘清条理，从而促进国际事务的法治。 |
| 3. In the modern context, especially
since the Nuremberg Trials after World War II, the principle of universal
jurisdiction increasingly has been invoked by States in the fight against
impunity for heinous international crimes. | 3. 在现代背景下，尤其是第二次世界大战之后的纽伦堡审判以来，普遍管辖原则越来越多地被各国援引，用于打击滔天国际罪行有罪不罚的现象。 |
| These include war crimes, crimes against
humanity, and genocide, which are among the most serious crimes of concern to
the international community as a whole. | 其中包括战争罪、危害人类罪和灭绝种族罪，这些罪行属于整个国际社会关切的严重罪行之列。 |
| In fact, in addition to establishing
various ad hoc international or hybrid criminal tribunals, as well as the
International Criminal Court (“ICC”), to pursue those most responsible for
such crimes in various conflicts around the world, States in the past have
relied on the principle of universal jurisdiction to justify the exercise of
national criminal jurisdiction — as Israel did in respect of Adolf Eichmann
in 1961. | 事实上，除了设立各种特设国际 或“混合” 刑事法庭以及国际刑事法院，追究对全世界各种冲突中此类罪行负有最大责任的人，各国在过去已经依赖普遍管辖原则作为在这方面行使国家刑事管辖的合法依据――例如以色列1961年对阿道夫·艾希曼行使的刑事管辖。 |
| However, without defining the permissible
scope under international law of a State’s national criminal jurisdiction in
such circumstances, there is a risk that a State will either infringe the
sovereignty of another State in violation of international law or decline to
exercise its criminal jurisdiction even where universal jurisdiction might
allow it to do so. | 然而，如果不界定国际法之下允许一国就这种情况行使国家刑事管辖权的范围，就存在这样一种风险：一国要么违反国际法去侵犯另一国的主权，要么拒绝行使刑事管辖权，即便普遍管辖权可能允许这样做。 |
| 4. Several rationales are offered by
proponents of universal jurisdiction. | 4. 普遍管辖权的支持者提出了若干理由。 |
| First, the existence of universal
jurisdiction is said to reflect the desire of the international community to
promote the punishment by States of criminals acting outside the jurisdiction
of any State — such as the classic example of piracy jus gentium, which as a
crime affecting the communis juris, is delicta juris gentium (a “crime
against the law of nations”). | 首先，认为普遍管辖权的存在反映了国际社会促进国家惩罚在任何国家管辖范围以外实施行为的罪犯的愿望――例如万民法下海盗罪的古典例子，这是一种影响共同管辖权的罪行，因此也就是一种国际法上的犯罪(一种“违反万国法的罪行”)。 |
| 5. Second, the exercise of universal
jurisdiction for certain crimes is said to be justified because these crimes
violate universal values and humanitarian principles. | 5. 其次，认为对某些罪行行使普遍管辖权是合理的，因为这些罪行违反了普遍价值观和人道主义原则。 |
| These fundamental values are at the root
of the systems of criminal law of all States. | 这些基本价值观是所有国家刑法体系的根本。 |
| Thus, according to the Commission in its
past work, the interest in imposing punishment for acts comprising
international crimes that are condemned by all States — especially when they
are perpetrated on a very large scale — must necessarily extend beyond the
borders of the single State which has jurisdiction based on the location of
the crime or the nationality of the perpetrators or victims, and which may
have even passively tolerated or encouraged the outrages; for such acts can
undermine the foundations of the international community as a whole. | 因此，根据本委员会以往开展的工作，对于遭到所有国家谴责的国际罪行构成的行为――特别是以巨大规模实施的此种行为――施加惩罚的意向，必然会超越基于犯罪地点或犯罪者或受害者国籍而具有管辖权的、甚至可能被动地容忍或鼓励此种暴行的单一国家的疆界，因为这类行为会破坏国际社会作为一个整体的根基。 |
| 6. Lastly, it has long been felt, and
certainly since the Nuremberg Trials and Judgment in 1946, that some crimes
are so serious and the magnitude of their impact so great that their
commission shocks the conscience of all humanity. | 6. 最后，长期以来，而且肯定是自1946年纽伦堡审判和判决以来，人们感到有些罪行是如此之严重，其影响的规模是如此之巨大，乃至于这些罪行的实施震撼了全人类的良知。 |
| That is why States carved out certain
conduct as gross violations which would entail the individual criminal
responsibility of the perpetrator. | 正是由于这个原因，各国将某些行为划为必须追究犯罪者个人刑事责任的严重犯罪行为。 |
| Their heinous nature, coupled with the
potential to undermine the peace and security of all States, in turn entitles
every State to investigate and prosecute those who carry them out. | 这些罪行令人发指的性质，加上其破坏所有国家和平与安全的可能，反过来使每个国家有权调查和起诉犯下这些罪行的人。 |
| Much like the pirates of earlier eras,
the perpetrators of such crimes are deemed to be hostes humani generis —
enemies of all humankind — who do not deserve safe haven anywhere in the
world. | 同早些年代的海盗很相似，此类罪行的犯罪者被认为是“人类公敌”――全人类的敌人――不配在世界上任何地方有藏身之地。 |
| In sum, when taken together, the logic
underpinning the exercise of universal criminal jurisdiction is that States
can and should act against individuals who may not otherwise be held
accountable by anyone. | 总之，行使普遍管辖权的逻辑整体看来就是，各国可以也应当针对不然就可能不会被任何人追究责任的个人采取行动。 |
| That is one of the only ways to dispense
justice and to help achieve some deterrence for certain crimes condemned
under international law. | 这是伸张正义以及在一定程度上制止国际法谴责的某些罪行的仅有办法之一。 |
| 7. Nevertheless, despite the above and
other related justifications, State practice regarding the exercise of
universal jurisdiction reveals that aspects of the nature and substantive
content of the principle are mired in legal controversy. | 7. 然而，尽管有上述及其他相关理由，关于行使普遍管辖权的国家实践表明，这一原则的性质和实质内容的各个方面都深陷于法律争议之中。 |
| States appear generally to agree on its
legality, at least in certain circumstances, and on the fact that it is, in
principle, a useful and important tool in combating impunity. | 各国似乎一般都同意普遍管辖权的合法性，至少在某些情况下是这样，也认可这在原则上是打击有罪不罚的一个有用和重要的工具。 |
| Numerous treaties require States to
establish and exercise national jurisdiction in respect of particular
offences with which the State may have no connection, such as genocide under
the 1948 Genocide Convention, the “grave breaches” (war crimes) of the 1949
Geneva Conventions and of 1977 Additional Protocol I, and torture under the
1984 Convention against Torture. | 很多条约 要求各国对与本国可能没有关联的某些特定罪行确立并行使国家管辖权，例如1948年《灭绝种族罪公约》下的灭绝种族罪、1949年日内瓦四公约及1977年《第一附加议定书》 下的“严重破坏行为”(战争罪)以及1984年《禁止酷刑公约》 下的酷刑。 |
| The universality principle also appears
to be the basis for regional treaties and for the domestic legislation of
many States as well. | 普遍性原则似乎也是一些区域条约以及很多国家国内立法的基础。 |
| But this is where general agreement on
universal jurisdiction appears to end. | 但是，关于普遍管辖权的总体共识似乎就到此为止了。 |
| 8. Disagreements among States on the
universality principle, as may be seen in an informal paper developed within
the framework of a working group of the Sixth Committee of the U.N. General
Assembly, include three aspects namely: 1) the definition of the concept of
universal jurisdiction, including its distinction from other related
concepts; | 8. 从在联合国大会第六委员会一个工作组的框架内编写的一份非正式文件中可以看出，各国之间关于普遍性原则的分歧包括三个方面，即：1) 普遍管辖权的定义，包括与其他相关概念的区别； |
| 2) the scope of universal jurisdiction,
including the list of crimes under international law subject to such
jurisdiction, and how long or how short that list is; | 2) 普遍管辖权的范围，包括国际法下受此种管辖的罪行清单，以及该清单的长短； |
| and 3) the parameters for the application
of universal jurisdiction, including the conditions for its application; | 3) 普遍管辖权的适用参数，包括适用条件； |
| criteria for the exercise of such
jurisdiction; | 行使此种管辖权的标准； |
| procedural and practical aspects,
including whether the presence of a suspect in the territory is required before
investigations or other measures may be taken against him; | 程序和实践方面，包括是否要求只有当嫌疑人处于属地之内时方能对其进行调查或采取其他措施； |
| role of national judicial systems; | 国家司法系统的作用； |
| interaction with other concepts of
international law; | 与其他国际法概念的互动关系； |
| international assistance and cooperation,
including the question of mutual legal assistance and technical and other
cooperation in respect of criminal matters at the horizontal level; | 国际援助与合作，包括司法协助问题和就刑事事项开展横向技术及其他合作的问题； |
| whether the territorial State should have
priority to act as against other States with different connections to the
alleged prohibited conduct; | 同与据称受禁止行为有不同关联的其他国家相比，属地国是否应有优先行动权； |
| the possible applicability of statute of
limitations and international due process standards, including the right to a
fair trial and the rule against double jeopardy (ne bis in idem); | 法定时效和国际正当程序标准的可能适用性，包括受公平审判权和一罪不再审规则(一事不再理)； |
| its interaction with the usually
treaty-based duty to extradite or prosecute (aut dedere aut judicare) in
relation to certain crimes and the relationship of universality with the
principle of complementarity, which for States Parties to the Rome Statute,
gives primacy to national prosecutions of core crimes in relation to the
jurisdiction of the permanent ICC. | 此种管辖在涉及某些罪行时与通常基于条约的引渡或起诉义务(不引渡即起诉)之间的互动关系以及普遍性与互补性原则的关系，按照互补性原则，《罗马规约》缔约国对核心罪行的国家起诉具有优先于常设国际刑事法院(国际刑院)管辖权的地位。 |
| 9. That said, the political discretion
available to States in their decision whether to invoke universal
jurisdiction to initiate criminal proceedings is probably the biggest
controversy surrounding the universality principle. | 9. 尽管如此，各国在决定是否援引普遍管辖权提起刑事诉讼时可加利用的政治裁量余地，很可能是围绕着普遍性原则的最大争议。 |
| The African Group, the Latin American and
Caribbean Group and the Non-Aligned Movement particularly voice this
criticism; they claim that nationals of less powerful States have been the
only real targets of universal jurisdiction while nationals of more powerful
States have largely been exempt. | 非洲集团、拉丁美洲和加勒比集团及不结盟运动对此的批判尤其强烈，它们说，实力较弱国家的国民一向是普遍管辖权的唯一真正目标，而实力较强国家的国民基本上都得到了豁免。 |
| Conversely, other States, especially some
in the Western European and Others Group whose domestic courts seem to more
frequently invoke universality, such as Belgium, France and Spain, counter
that the exercise of universal jurisdiction is consistent with international
law and must be understood as part of the vital bulwark in the fight against
impunity for certain serious crimes condemned by the international community
as a whole. | 相反，其他一些国家，特别是一些国内法院似乎更经常援引普遍性的西欧及其他国家集团的国家，如比利时、法国和西班牙反驳说，行使普遍性管辖权符合国际法，必须将此理解为与国际社会作为一个整体所谴责的某些严重罪行不受惩罚现象展开斗争的重要壁垒的组成部分。 |
| All the more so in circumstances where
the territorial or the State of nationality of the suspect or the State where
the suspect may be found proves to be unwilling and or unable to submit the
matter to prosecution. | 在嫌疑人的属地或国籍国或者嫌疑人可能藏身的国家证明不愿意和(或)无能力起诉的情况下，就更是如此。 |
| 10. Perhaps unsurprisingly, attempts to
use universal jurisdiction often give rise to legal, political and diplomatic
friction among the concerned States at the bilateral, regional and
international levels. | 10. 适用普遍管辖权的尝试往往引起所涉国家在双边、区域和国际层面的法律、政治和外交摩擦，或许这并不令人感到意外。 |
| This occurred, for instance, in the
Arrest Warrant of 11 April 2000 case before the International Court of
Justice concerning the validity of a Belgian arrest warrant for Congolese
foreign minister Abdoulaye Yerodia for alleged war crimes and crimes against
humanity. | 例如，提交国际法院的2000年4月11日逮捕令案 就出现了这种情况。 该案涉及比利时以战争罪和危害人类罪的指控对刚果外交部长阿卜杜拉耶·耶罗迪亚下达逮捕令的有效性。 |
| In a subsequent development, following
the indictments of certain high level Rwandese officials in various European
States, the Assembly of Heads of State and Government of the 54-member
African Union (“AU”) adopted several resolutions in which it affirmed “that
universal jurisdiction is a principle of international law whose purpose is
to ensure that individuals who commit grave offences such as war crimes and
crimes against humanity do not do so with impunity and are brought to
justice”, consistent with Article 4(h) of the Constitutive Act. | 在随后的事态发展中，继多个欧洲国家起诉了某些卢旺达高官之后，有54个成员国的非洲联盟(非盟)的国家元首和政府首脑大会通过了若干决议， 其中申明，“普遍管辖权是一项国际法原则，其宗旨是确保对犯下战争罪和危害人类罪等严重罪行的个人不会有罪不罚，并确保将其绳之以法”，这符合《非洲联盟宪章》第4条(h)项。 |
| However, in the same and several
subsequent decisions, the AU also expressed serious concern about the
potential for political “misuse” and “abuse” of universal jurisdiction. | 但是，同样在这些决定及若干此后的决定中，非盟也对普遍管辖权有可能受到政治上的“错用”和“滥用”表示了严重的关切。 |
| It therefore, inter alia, called for a
moratorium on the issuance or execution of arrest warrants based on the
principle, the establishment of an international regulatory body with
competence to review and/or handle complaints stemming from the use of
universal jurisdiction by individual States, and a dialogue on the matter at
the regional (AU-EU) level as well as at the global (United Nations) level. | 因此，非盟除其他外，呼吁暂停基于该原则签发或执行逮捕令，设立一个国际监管机构负责审查和(或)处理由于个别国家适用普遍管辖权引起的申诉，以及在全球一级(联合国)和区域一级(非盟－欧盟)就此事开展对话。 |
| 11. Considering, on the one hand, the
views of those States that perceive universal jurisdiction as a valuable
legal tool for the international community’s ongoing efforts to curb serious
violations under international law, and on the other hand, the views of those
States that worry about its potential for selective, arbitrary and political
abuse and application, as well as its interaction and relationship with other
rules of international law, the question arises whether the ILC as a
subsidiary body of the General Assembly charged with the progressive
development and codification of international law should take up a legal
study of this important topic. | 11. 考虑到一方面有些国家认为，普遍管辖权是国际社会当前努力遏制国际法下严重犯罪行为的一种宝贵工具，而另一方面，有些国家对于普遍管辖权与国际法的其他规则的互动和关系以及可能会受到选择性、任意性和政治性的滥用和适用表示担忧，随之而来的问题就是，国际法委员会作为大会下负责逐渐发展和编纂国际法的附属机构，是否应当就这项重要议题开展一项法律研究。 |
| If it decides to do so to potentially
assist with guidelines or conclusions derived from the practice of States,
this could prove to be of practical utility to States. | 如果委员会决定从事这一研究以便有可能协助基于各国的实践拟订准则或结论，可能会对各国具有实用价值。 |
| Indeed, the General Assembly explicitly
recognized the need to clarify this legal principle as far back as 2009 when
it, by consensus, added the item to the agenda of the Sixth Committee based
on a proposal of the African Group during the sixty-fourth session in 2009. | 实际上，大会早在2009年就明确承认有必要澄清这一法律原则，当时以非洲集团在2009年第六十四届会议期间提出的一项提案为基础，经协商一致同意在第六委员会的议程上增加了这个项目。 |
| 12. The Sixth Committee has been debating
the topic annually since 2009. | 12. 自2009年以来，第六委员会每年都就这项专题展开辩论。 |
| While important progress has been made in
clarifying areas of difference of view concerning universal jurisdiction
during the last nine years, in other respects, progress has not been as
substantial as was initially envisaged. | 过去的九年当中，在澄清关于普遍管辖权的分歧领域方面取得了进展，可在其他方面，没有取得预计的重大进展。 |
| The AU, as recently as January 2018,
adopted a decision in which it expressed regret at the “apparent impasse” in
the debate of the universality topic in the General Assembly and consequently
called on the African Group in New York to “make recommendations to the
Summit on how to move this discussion forward. | 就在前不久的2018年1月，非洲联盟通过了一项决定，对大会关于普遍性专题的辩论“显然陷入僵局”表示遗憾，因此呼吁在纽约的非洲集团“就如何推进这一讨论向峰会提出建议”。 |
| ” The lack of meaningful progress seems
due, at least partially, to the political disagreements concerning the
potential for selective and arbitrary application of this jurisdictional
principle. | 缺乏有意义进展的原因似乎至少一部分在于，对这一管辖权原则被有选择性和任意性地适用的可能存在政治分歧。 |
| Indeed, during the 2017 General Assembly
debate on the issue, the overwhelming majority of delegations could agree on
the need to advance the discussion on universal jurisdiction, while differing
over its definition, nature, scope and limits. | 在2017年大会就这个问题进行辩论的过程中，确实有压倒多数的代表团可以就推进普遍性管辖权相关讨论的必要性达成一致，但在其定义、性质、范围和限制上各持己见。 |
| The same pattern can be discerned from
earlier debates of the Sixth Committee dating back to October 2010. | 从第六委员会2010年10月以来的辩论中可以看出同样的格局。 |
| 13. In these circumstances, if focused on
a limited set of core legal issues rather than the entire panoply of issues
identified by States as areas reflecting their differing views (as noted at
paragraph 8 above), the Commission would appear to be particularly well
placed to assist States by formulating guidelines or drawing conclusions
clarifying the nature, scope, limits and procedural safeguards that guide the
proper application of universal jurisdiction. | 13. 在这种情况下，如果委员会侧重为数有限的一组核心法律问题，而不是各国作为反映它们分歧意见的不同领域提出的全套问题(如上文第8段所述)，看上去就能特别稳妥地协助各国，就性质、范围、限制和程序保障的澄清拟订准则或得出结论，指导各国正确适用普遍管辖权。 |
| 14. Firstly, a legal study of universal
jurisdiction leading to draft guidelines or draft conclusions could assist
the Sixth Committee’s deliberations over the issue. | 14. 首先，以准则草案或结论草案为目标的普遍管辖权法律研究可以协助第六委员会有关这个问题的议事工作。 |
| The topic seems ripe for progressive
development and codification, given the availability of extensive State
practice, precedent and doctrine. | 从已有的广泛国家实践、先例和理论来看，逐渐发展和编纂这个专题的时机已经成熟。 |
| Here, we might note that the Commission
has worked extensively in the field of international criminal law and, in
close partnership with the Sixth Committee, has in fact made significant
contributions to the development of the field. | 就此我们可以指出，本委员会已经在国际法领域开展了广泛的工作，在与第六委员会的密切合作下，事实上为这个领域的发展做出了重大贡献。 |
| Taking up this topic now would continue
that tradition, which included but is not limited to the formulation of the
principles of international law recognized in the charter of the Nuremberg
Tribunal and in the judgment of the tribunal in 1950 and the preparation of a
draft statute for a permanent international criminal court in 1994. | 现在着手处理这一专题将是该传统的延续，这个传统包括但不限于在1950年拟订了纽伦堡法庭宪章及该法庭判决书确认的各项国际法原则，以及在1994年编写了常设国际刑事法院规约草案。 |
| 15. Secondly, the proposed topic
continues to be a source of bilateral, regional and international engagement
for all States, especially where the universality principle is alleged to
have been selectively and arbitrarily applied. | 15. 其次，拟议的这项专题继续是所有国家双边、区域和国际参与的一个来源，尤其是在普遍性原则据称被有选择和任意适用的背景下。 |
| The example of the AU and the EU creating
an ad hoc expert group, in January 2009, to inform their discussions of the
issue suggests that a technical approach has been found helpful and relevant
for States. | 非盟和欧盟2009年1月成立了一个特设专家组，为其讨论这个问题提供信息，这表明技术方法被认为对各国有帮助和有意义。 |
| 16. Thirdly, as discussed below, the
topic satisfies the Commission’s criteria for placement in its long-term
programme of work. | 16. 第三，如下文的讨论，这个专题达到了委员会关于将专题列入长期工作方案的标准。 |
| 17. The ILC’s long-term programme of work
already includes a related topic entitled “Extraterritorial jurisdiction,”
which has not yet been placed on the Commission’s active agenda. | 17. 委员会的长期工作方案已经包含一个题为“域外管辖权” 的相关专题，但尚未列入委员会的当前议程。 |
| Nonetheless, there is no overlap or
duplication between the two topics. | 无论如何，这两个专题没有任何重叠或重复。 |
| The syllabus for the “extraterritorial
jurisdiction,” which is in respect of both criminal and commercial matters,
explicitly considered and excluded the universality principle from within its
scope due to that principle’s unique nature. | 有关“域外管辖权”(涉及刑事和商务事项)的提纲出于普遍性原则的特质而明确认为普遍性原则不在其范围之内，并将其排除在外。 |
| If anything, the addition of universal
jurisdiction on the long-term work programme would complement that topic. | 将普遍管辖权列入长期工作方案，只会充实该项专题。 |
| II. The topic satisfies the criteria for
addition to the Long-Term Programme of Work | 二． 这一专题达到了列入长期工作方案的标准 |
| 18. For a topic to be placed on the ILC’s
long-term programme of work, it must be shown that it satisfies the following
criteria set in 1996: | 18. 一项专题要列入国际法委员会的长期工作方案，就必须表明达到了1996年规定的下列标准： |
| (1) the topic must reflect the needs of
States in respect of the progressive development and codification of
international law; | (1) 专题应反映出各国在逐渐发展和编纂国际法方面的需要； |
| (2) the topic should be at a sufficiently
advanced stage in terms of State practice to permit progressive development
and codification; | (2) 专题在国家实践方面应处于足够成熟阶段，从而允许逐渐发展和编纂； |
| (3) the topic should be concrete and
feasible; | (3) 专题应具体可行； |
| and (4) the Commission should not
restrict itself to traditional topics, but should also consider those that
reflect new developments in international law and pressing concerns of the
international community as a whole. | (4) 委员会不应局限于传统专题，还应考虑那些反映国际法中新动态和整个国际社会的紧迫关切事项的专题。 |
| As the subsequent discussion will
demonstrate, all these criteria are fulfilled in the present case. | 以下的讨论将表明，本专题满足所有这些标准。 |
| 1. A study of universal criminal
jurisdiction reflects the needs of states | 1. 对普遍刑事管辖权开展研究反映了各国的需要 |
| 19. As already noted, the Sixth Committee
has been debating the topic of universal jurisdiction since 2009, with only
limited progress. | 19. 如前所述，第六委员会自2009年以来一直在辩论普遍管辖权专题，但进展甚微。 |
| The Sixth Committee has concluded that
“the legitimacy and credibility of the use of universal jurisdiction are best
ensured by its responsible and judicious application consistent with
international law. | 第六委员会最近的说法是，“最好依照国际法负责任地、慎重地适用普遍管辖权，以此确保使用这种管辖权的合法性和公信力”。 |
| ” This begs the question regarding what
judicious application entails and what consistency with international law
requires. | 由此而来的问题是，什么是慎重的适用，需要在何种程度上按照国际法适用。 |
| Recognizing the lack of substantial
progress after years of debate, the pattern of a working group, open to all
Member States, was identified to facilitate more informal discussions of the
topic. The hope was that this might help minimize differences of view between
delegations. | 认识到在经过多年辩论之后仍然缺乏长足进展，找到了一种对所有会员国开放的工作组模式以促进专题的更多非正式讨论，希望这种方式能有助于尽量缩小各代表团之间的意见分歧。 |
| In addition to the working group, which
has generated some progress on the issue but appears to still reflect some of
the same divisions in the wider Sixth Committee and General Assembly, it was
decided that any consideration should be “without prejudice to the
consideration of this topic and related issues in other forums of the United
Nations. | 工作组的确就该专题取得了某些进展，但反映出的某些分歧似乎与较大范围的第六委员会和大会内的分歧并无二致。 除了成立工作组之外，还决定，任何审议都应“无碍于联合国其他论坛对这项专题及相关问题的审议”。 |
| ” The explicit purpose of this language
was to leave room for other relevant UN bodies, such as the Commission, to
engage with the issue from the perspective of their respective mandates. | 这一措词的明示意图就是为联合国的其他有关机构――例如国际法委员会――留有余地，以便从其各自的任务授权角度处理这个专题。 |
| 20. From a Sixth Committee perspective,
an ILC study of this topic would likely enable the General Assembly to
achieve more progress in clarifying the status or at least certain legal
aspects of the universality principle under international law. | 20. 从第六委员会的角度看，国际法委员会就这项专题开展研究有可能帮助大会进一步澄清普遍性原则在国际法下的地位，或至少是某些法律方面。 |
| A contribution by the Commission at this
stage through a focused legal analysis could assist the present New York
debate, as far as possible, and address State concerns on potential abuse or
misuse of the principle. | 国际法委员会通过集中的法律分析在目前阶段做出贡献，可以为在纽约举行的辩论尽可能提供协助，并解决各国对于普遍性原则可能受到滥用或错用的关切。 |
| It should also help to elaborate concrete
proposals rooted in State practice that may better allow States, to have a
clearer legal basis from which to negotiate a compromise outcome if not reach
consensus on the topic within the General Assembly. | 国际法委员会还应协助拟订以国家实践为根基的具体提案，以便更好地帮助各国立足于更为清晰的法律基础，即使不能就这一专题在大会内形成协商一致意见，至少也可以谈判达成一种妥协结果。 |
| The Commission, as a technical subsidiary
body, is well poised to undertake such legal analysis of this important
principle of international law. | 国际法委员会作为一个技术性附属机构，非常适合就这一重要的国际法原则开展此种法律分析。 |
| The legal study would help to unlock the
potential of the principle to fill the current impunity gap in relation to
the international community’s efforts against serious crimes under
international law, while providing much needed legal certainty for States and
national authorities including courts. | 这一法律研究将有助于发挥普遍性原则的潜力，结合国际社会打击国际法下严重罪行的努力，填补当前存在的有罪不罚空白，同时为各国和包括法院在内的国家主管部门提供迫切需要的法律确定性。 |
| 2. The topic is sufficiently advanced in
State practice to enable progressive development and codification | 2. 这一专题在国家实践方面进入了足以付诸逐渐发展和编纂的成熟阶段 |
| 21. Regardless of the current doubts
between States regarding its scope of application, many States already have
legislation providing for a form of universal jurisdiction or quasi-universal
jurisdiction based on certain treaty obligations. | 21. 无论各国之间目前对于普遍管辖权的适用范围存在何种疑问，很多国家已经基于条约义务在立法中规定了某种形式的普遍管辖权或准普遍管辖权。 |
| This is evidenced by the wealth of
materials that have been provided by States to the Secretary-General and
numerous reports prepared for the General Assembly by the Secretariat of the
Sixth Committee to facilitate its debate on universal jurisdiction. | 这方面的证据见诸于各国向秘书长提供的丰富资料以及第六委员会秘书处为了便利大会有关普遍管辖权的辩论而为大会编写的多份报告。 |
| In addition to municipal legislation and
numerous international conventions providing for the aut dedere aut judicare
obligation, which may be related but not necessarily co-extensive with
universal jurisdiction, some States anticipate a form of universal
jurisdiction within their internal laws when it comes to certain serious
crimes under international law, even where the impugned conduct occurs
outside their territory and does not involve its nationals. | 不引渡即起诉的义务 可能与普遍管辖权相关，但不一定同延，除规定了这一义务的国内法和多项国际公约之外，一些国家还希望国内法当中规定某种形式的普遍管辖权，以便应对国际法下的某些严重罪行，即使被控行为发生在本国境外且不涉及本国国民。 |
| There is sufficient State practice, given
the steady increase in such investigations and prosecutions, all of which are
sufficiently widespread and sufficiently advanced to enable progressive
development and codification of the law in this area. | 鉴于这类调查和起诉不断增多，因此也就存在着充分的国家实践，所有这些调查和起诉的广泛性和深入性都达到了足以着手逐渐发展和编纂这个领域内的法律的程度。 |
| 22. The added value of such a Commission
study is apparent from an examination of: (1) the Sixth Committee’s extensive
debates on universal jurisdiction between 2009 and 2017; | 22. 审视以下各项就可以看出本委员会从事这样一项研究的附加值：(1) 第六委员会2009年至2017年就普遍管辖权开展的广泛辩论； |
| (2) the wealth of legislative, judicial
and executive branch information submitted by individual and groups of States
cataloguing their practices on universal jurisdiction; | (2) 各个国家或国家集团提交的、列举其普遍管辖权实践的大量立法、司法和行政分支的资料； |
| (3) the detailed reports of the
Secretary-General prepared to assist States in structuring their Sixth
Committee debates on the topic; | (3) 秘书长为了帮助各国构建在第六委员会内就该专题进行的辩论所编写的多份详细报告； |
| and (4) the annual General Assembly
resolutions on the matter. | 以及(4) 大会每年就此事通过的决议。 |
| To the extent that there might be concern
about taking up a topic that the Sixth Committee is presently considering, it
should be emphasized that the annual General Assembly resolutions on the
scope and application of universal jurisdiction for the past several years
have repeatedly underscored that their debate of the issue was always
intended to be “without prejudice” to its examination in other fora of the
United Nations. | 如果说着手处理一个第六委员会目前正在审议的专题可能会引起关切，那么就应当强调，大会在过去数年里每年通过的关于普遍管辖权的范围和适用的决议都一再指出，大会关于这个问题的辩论一向希望“不妨碍” 联合国其他论坛审议这个问题。 |
| Plainly, as a subsidiary body of the
General Assembly, this includes the Commission. | 显然，既然国际法委员会是大会的一个附属机构，当然也就包括在内。 |
| To the contrary, on repeated occasions
over the past few years, States from all geographic regions have in fact
suggested at different stages of the debate in the Sixth Committee that the
“technical nature” of universal jurisdiction makes the ILC a more suitable
forum for its legal clarification. | 不仅如此，过去数年当中，来自所有地理区域 的国家事实上都在第六委员会的不同辩论阶段多次提出，国际法委员会是从法律上澄清普遍管辖权的较为合适的论坛，这是由这一问题的“技术性质”所决定的。 |
| 3. The topic is concrete and feasible and
a wealth of State practice on universal criminal jurisdiction has already
been collected by the Secretariat | 3. 这一专题具体、可行，秘书处已经收集了关于普遍刑事管辖权的大量国家实践 |
| 23. Universal jurisdiction is both
concrete and feasible as an object of study. | 23. 普遍刑事管辖权作为一项研究课题，既是具体的，也是可行的。 |
| Sufficient State practice exists to
codify current practice and sufficient controversy exists to necessitate
codification and progressive development of the scope of universal
jurisdiction. | 已有的国家实践足以编纂现行的惯例，存在的争议足以使编纂和逐渐发展普遍管辖权的范围成为必要。 |
| It has already been noted that the State
practice, precedent and doctrine, available to assist with codification, has
already been gathered in the nearly ten years during which the scope and
application of the principle has been under discussion in the Sixth
Committee. | 已经有人指出，在第六委员会讨论该原则的范围和适用的近十年里，已经收集了国家实践、先例和理论，可用以帮助开展编纂工作。 |
| This may be a unique situation. | 这可能是一个独特的局面。 |
| Considering the seeming paucity of State
response to ILC questionnaires on its topics, the information currently
available provides ready raw material which the Commission could take to
advance its work. | 考虑到委员会就其专题提出的问卷调查似乎鲜有国家回复，目前掌握的信息提供了现成的原始材料，委员会可借以推进自己的工作。 |
| 24. A study of the issue of universal
jurisdiction is feasible, additionally, because many conventions widely
ratified by States already require States to prohibit certain types of
conduct and to extend jurisdiction over such crimes through domestic
legislation. | 24. 研究普遍管辖权问题之所以可行，还因为各国广为批准的很多公约已经要求各国通过国内立法禁止某些类型的行为，并将管辖权扩大到涵盖此类罪行。 |
| There is relevant case law on universal
jurisdiction in varied jurisdictions, as well as regional instruments and
academic works addressing the topic. | 除了关于这一专题的区域文书和学术著述，一些不同的辖域还有关于普遍管辖权的判例法。 |
| These include, for instance, the African
Union Model Law on Universal Jurisdiction, the Cairo-Arusha Principles on
Universal Jurisdiction and the Princeton Principles on Universal
Jurisdiction. | 例如，其中包括《非洲联盟普遍管辖权示范法》、《开罗－阿鲁沙普遍管辖原则》 及《普林斯顿普遍管辖权原则》。 |
| Moreover, without suggesting that there
is overlap that would widen the scope of this topic, several other topics
currently or recently under consideration by the Commission may enable it to
more easily clarify the principle of universal jurisdiction. | 另外，委员会目前或近期审议的其他一些专题可帮助委员会较容易地澄清普遍管辖原则，当然这并不是说存在着重叠之处，会扩大这一专题的范围。 |
| 4. A study of universal criminal
jurisdiction allows the Commission to address a topic that is both
traditional and contemporary | 4. 普遍刑事管辖权研究使委员会得以处理一个既传统又现代的专题 |
| 25. An examination of universal
jurisdiction at this stage, when the question of individual criminal responsibility
for international crimes seems to be increasingly important since at least
the 1990s, gives the Commission the further opportunity to address not just
issues of traditional concern to States and the international community as a
whole, but also those of considerable contemporary interest as well as
practical utility to States. | 25. 至少从1990年代以来，国际罪行的个人刑事责任问题看似日趋重要，在当前这个阶段研究普遍管辖权，将使本委员会得到进一步的机会，不仅处理各国和整个国际社会在传统上所关切的问题，而且也处理各国在当代特别关心且对其具有实用性的问题。 |
| It also allows the ILC to develop aspects
of a traditional topic such as jurisdiction. | 开展这项研究还使本委员会能够发展像管辖权这样一个传统专题的不同侧面。 |
| There is a convenient mix of the classic
with the modern preoccupations of international law. | 这方便地结合了国际法的古典问题和现代考虑。 |
| Indeed, such a study could serve to
bolster the Commission’s engagement in fields that evidence international
law’s on-going concern with the advancement of human rights. | 这样一项研究的确可有助于支持本委员会在体现国际法对增进人权的持续关切的各个领域内开展工作。 |
| The rights of victims of atrocity crimes
to some form of justice is further recognized by the previous work on the
draft code of crimes as well as more recent work on the draft statute for a
permanent international court and topics such as Crimes against Humanity. | 以前就治罪法草案开展的工作以及较近期关于常设国际法院规约草案和危害人类罪等专题的工作，进一步确认了暴行罪受害人获得某种形式正义的权利。 |
| III. Potential scope of the study and
guidelines or conclusion as possible outcomes | 三． 研究的可能范围以及作为可能结果的准则或结论 |
| 26. Regarding possible scope of the
study, and consistent with deliberations of States in the Sixth Committee
which already identified many key gaps in the informal paper mentioned at
paragraph 8 above, it is suggested that the Commission should not try to be
comprehensive in addressing all the issues where there is a lack of clarity
among States. | 26. 关于研究的可能范围，按照各国在第六委员会的审议结果(已在上文第8段提到的非正式文件中确认了许多关键差距)，建议委员会不要试着全面处理各国间有欠明朗的所有问题。 |
| It could rather concentrate on a more
limited set of legal concerns on which it can, through its work and
engagement with the Sixth Committee, provide further guidance. | 相反，可侧重于为数相对有限、可以通过其工作以及与第六委员会的合作提供进一步相关指导的一组法律关切。 |
| 27. First, it would seem important to
consider identifying a basic definition of the concept of universal
jurisdiction, its role and purpose, classification of the “types” of universal
jurisdiction as well as the conditions or the criteria reflected in the
practice of States for its application. | 27. 首先，似乎必须考虑确定普遍管辖权概念的基本定义、作用和宗旨、普遍管辖权“类型”的划分以及国家实践反映的适用条件或标准。 |
| This could include whether the forum
State can or tends to only act if the subject of the investigation is present
on its territory, and distinguishing the legal basis for such assertions of
jurisdiction under international law in terms of sources (i.e., treaties and
custom) and whether or not the decision to prosecute is discretionary/permissive
as opposed to obligatory/mandatory in nature. | 这可包括法院所在国是否可以或倾向于仅在调查对象处于境内时才采取行动，根据不同的国际法渊源(即条约和习惯)区分此种管辖权主张的法律依据，以及起诉的决定是否属于裁量/酌定性质，而不是义务/强制性质。 |
| 28. A second aspect of the study, which
could be pursued in a second or later report, would identify the scope and
limits of universal jurisdiction, including potentially drawing up a
non-exhaustive list of crimes subject to such jurisdiction. | 28. 研究的第二个方面可在第二次或之后的报告中处理，将确定普遍管辖权的范围和限制，包括可能拟订一份管辖权范围内罪行的非详尽清单。 |
| It would, for instance, be useful to consider
whether there is in the practice of States universal jurisdiction for war
crimes, genocide and crimes against humanity. | 例如，有必要考虑国家实践中是否存在对战争罪、种族灭绝罪和危害人类罪的普遍管辖权。 |
| Additional issues that may arise between
States, and might therefore be worth addressing, include the possible
resolution of disputes over competing claims of jurisdiction which is
possible in situations of concurrent jurisdiction. | 各国之间可能出现的、因此可能值得处理的其他问题，包括可能需要解决在并行管辖权的情况下争夺管辖权的争议。 |
| 29. Finally, regarding the universality
principle’s relationship with and possible intersection with the work of
international courts and tribunals, the scope of the project could also
include identification of a set of guidelines or conclusions to prevent
conflict between the exercise of universal jurisdiction by States Parties to
the Rome Statute and the ICC’s jurisdiction, as well as the exercise of
universal jurisdiction by all States in situations of Security Council
referrals to the ICC of situations involving non-party States or in
situations of the creation of other international criminal tribunals. | 29. 最后，鉴于普遍性原则与国际法院和法庭工作的关系和可能的交叉，这个项目的范围还可包括确定一套准则或结论，以防止《罗马规约》缔约国行使普遍管辖权与国际刑事法院管辖权的冲突，以及在安全理事会将涉及非缔约国的案件提交国际刑事法院或设立其他国际刑事法庭的情况下，所有国家行使普遍管辖权的冲突。 |
| A detailed study should help to bring
greater certainty to this relational aspect of the universal jurisdiction
matter at the national level with the work of the international criminal
tribunals that might have overlapping jurisdiction in respect of a limited set
of core international crimes. This includes the complementarity principle and
the duty to prosecute or extradite. | 有些国际刑事法庭可能对有限的一些核心国际罪行具有重叠的管辖权，对于国家一级的普遍管辖权问题与这类法庭的工作之间的这种关系，开展周密的研究应有助于提供更大的确定性。 |
| IV. Conclusion | 四. 结论 |
| 30. The Commission’s past work has spoken
highly of the important place of universal jurisdiction in a two-level system
of prosecutions at the national and international levels in relation to the
1994 Statute for an International Criminal Court and the 1996 Draft Code of
Crimes. | 30. 委员会过去在1994年《国际刑事法院规约》和1996年《治罪法草案》方面开展的工作高度评价了普遍管辖权在国家和国际两级起诉制度中的重要地位。 |
| In this regard, both the ILC and, more
recently, States in the Sixth Committee as well as other institutes and
writers of international law as well as publicists, all agree on the
potentially useful role universal jurisdiction can play in the prosecution of
serious crimes condemned by international law. | 在这方面，国际法委员会、各国较为近期在第六委员会、其他国际法研究机构和编纂者及出版机构都一致认为，普遍管辖权在起诉国际法谴责的严重国际罪行方面可发挥潜在的有益作用。 |
| This enhances the prospects for more
justice within the international community and will likely help States to
better balance the imperatives of sovereignty and the fight against impunity. | 这能增加国际社会内强化正义的前景，将有可能帮助各国在主权必要性和打击有罪不罚之间实现更好的平衡。 |
| If many States can rely on such a
principle, and do so based on clearer rules of the road, such crimes can be
better punished, and perhaps, even deterred. | 如果很多国家都能依靠这样的一条原则，并且基于较为明确的“交通规则”这样做，就能更有力地惩治此类罪行，或许甚至能阻慑此类罪行。 |
| 31. Regarding the final outcomes of the
project, the output could take the form of draft guidelines or draft
conclusions on the scope and application of the principle of universal
criminal jurisdiction. | 31. 关于这个项目的最终成果，可以是关于普遍刑事管辖权的范围和适用的准则草案或结论草案。 |
| Other forms of outputs could also be
considered, depending on the suggestions of States in the Sixth Committee of
the General Assembly. | 取决于各国在大会第六委员会提出的建议，还可以采取其他形式。 |
| 32. In sum, it is suggested that part of
the answer to the universal jurisdiction conundrum rests in helping States
locate the principles that can assist them to better balance the imperatives
of sovereignty, on the one hand, and the fight against impunity, on the
other. | 32. 总之，解决普遍管辖权难题，一部分在于帮助各国找到能够帮助它们在主权必要性和打击有罪不罚之间实现更好的平衡的各项原则。 |
| This necessarily requires illuminating
the proper contours of the principle from the perspective of codification of
existing international law as well as its progressive development. | 这必然要求从逐渐发展以及编纂现有国际法的角度阐明普遍管辖原则的恰当轮廓。 |
| The conclusions and commentaries
envisaged as a result of the consideration of this topic will also be useful
for international organizations, courts and tribunals, as well as scholars
and practitioners of international law. | 审议这一专题将得出的结论和评注也将对国际组织、法院和法庭以及国际法学者和从业者有用。 |
| The Commission, considering its unique
statutory mandate in that regard and drawing on its prior and on-going work
on related topics of international criminal law, would make a useful
contribution. | 考虑到国际法委员会在这方面独特的法定任务授权，以过去和当前就国际刑法相关专题开展的工作为借鉴，委员会将会做出有益的贡献。 |
| Selected Bibliography | 参考文献选编 |
| A. Declarations, draft articles,
resolutions, conclusions and recommendations | A. Declarations, draft articles,
resolutions, conclusions and recommendations |
| 1943 Joint Four Nation-Declaration,
Moscow Conference | 1943 Joint Four Nation-Declaration,
Moscow Conference |
| 1950 Principles of International Law
Recognized in the Charter of the Nürnberg Tribunal and in the Judgment of the
Tribunal | 1950 Principles of International Law
Recognized in the Charter of the Nürnberg Tribunal and in the Judgment of the
Tribunal |
| 1954 International Law Commission Draft
Code of Offences against the Peace and Security of Mankind | 1954 International Law Commission Draft
Code of Offences against the Peace and Security of Mankind |
| 1967 Declaration on Territorial Asylum | 1967 Declaration on Territorial Asylum |
| 1970 Basic Principles for the Protection
of Civilian Populations in Armed Conflicts | 1970 Basic Principles for the Protection
of Civilian Populations in Armed Conflicts |
| 1973 Principles of International
Cooperation in the Detection, Arrest, Extradition and Punishment of Persons
Guilty of War Crimes and Crimes Against Humanity | 1973 Principles of International
Cooperation in the Detection, Arrest, Extradition and Punishment of Persons
Guilty of War Crimes and Crimes Against Humanity |
| 1974 Declaration on the Protection of
Women and Children in Emergency and Armed Conflict | 1974 Declaration on the Protection of
Women and Children in Emergency and Armed Conflict |
| 1990 Declaration of Minimum Humanitarian
Standards (Turku Declaration) | 1990 Declaration of Minimum Humanitarian
Standards (Turku Declaration) |
| 1996 International Law Commission Draft
Code of Crimes against the Peace and Security of Mankind | 1996 International Law Commission Draft
Code of Crimes against the Peace and Security of Mankind |
| 2000 ILA London Conference, Committee on
International Human Rights Law and Practice, Final Report on the Exercise of
Universal Jurisdiction in Respect of Gross Human Rights offences: Conclusions
and recommendations | 2000 ILA London Conference, Committee on
International Human Rights Law and Practice, Final Report on the Exercise of
Universal Jurisdiction in Respect of Gross Human Rights offences: Conclusions
and recommendations |
| 2001 Institute of International Law
Resolution on Immunities from Jurisdiction and Execution of Heads of State
and of Government in International Law | 2001 Institute of International Law
Resolution on Immunities from Jurisdiction and Execution of Heads of State
and of Government in International Law |
| 2001 Princeton Principles on Universal
Jurisdiction | 2001 Princeton Principles on Universal
Jurisdiction |
| 2002 Cairo-Arusha Principles on Universal
Jurisdiction in respect of Gross Human Rights Offences: An African
Perspective | 2002 Cairo-Arusha Principles on Universal
Jurisdiction in respect of Gross Human Rights Offences: An African
Perspective |
| 2002 London Scheme for Extradition within
the Commonwealth, Incorporating the Amendments Agreed at Kingstown in
November | 2002 London Scheme for Extradition within
the Commonwealth, Incorporating the Amendments Agreed at Kingstown in
November |
| 2004 International Association of Penal
Law resolution on Concurrent National and International Criminal Jurisdiction
and the Principle ‘Ne bis in idem’ | 2004 International Association of Penal
Law resolution on Concurrent National and International Criminal Jurisdiction
and the Principle ‘Ne bis in idem’ |
| 2005 Basic Principles and Guidelines on
the Right to a Remedy and Reparation for Victims of Gross Violations of
International Human Rights Law and Serious Violations of International
Humanitarian Law | 2005 Basic Principles and Guidelines on
the Right to a Remedy and Reparation for Victims of Gross Violations of
International Human Rights Law and Serious Violations of International
Humanitarian Law |
| 2005 Institute of International Law
Resolution on Universal Criminal Jurisdiction with Regard to the Crime of
Genocide, Crimes Against Humanity and War Crimes | 2005 Institute of International Law
Resolution on Universal Criminal Jurisdiction with Regard to the Crime of
Genocide, Crimes Against Humanity and War Crimes |
| 2009 Code of Conduct Concerning the
Repression of Piracy and Armed Robbery Against Ships in the Western Indian
Ocean and the Gulf of Aden (Djibouti Code of conduct) | 2009 Code of Conduct Concerning the
Repression of Piracy and Armed Robbery Against Ships in the Western Indian
Ocean and the Gulf of Aden (Djibouti Code of conduct) |
| 2009 Institute of International Law
Resolution on the Immunity from Jurisdiction of the State and of Persons Who
Act on Behalf of the State in case of International Crimes | 2009 Institute of International Law
Resolution on the Immunity from Jurisdiction of the State and of Persons Who
Act on Behalf of the State in case of International Crimes |
| 2009 International Association of Penal
Law Resolution on Universal Jurisdiction | 2009 International Association of Penal
Law Resolution on Universal Jurisdiction |
| 2009 Recommendations of the Report of the
AU-EU Technical Ad hoc Expert Group on the Principle of Universal
Jurisdiction | 2009 Recommendations of the Report of the
AU-EU Technical Ad hoc Expert Group on the Principle of Universal
Jurisdiction |
| 2009–2017, United Nations General
Assembly, Resolutions [64/117; | 2009–2017, United Nations General
Assembly, Resolutions [64/117; |
| 65/33; | 65/33; |
| 67/98; | 67/98; |
| 68/117; | 68/117; |
| 69/124; | 69/124; |
| 70/119; | 70/119; |
| 71/149; | 71/149; |
| 72/120], The Scope and Application of the
Principle of Universal Jurisdiction | 72/120], The Scope and Application of the
Principle of Universal Jurisdiction |
| B. International Jurisprudence | B. International Jurisprudence |
| (1) International Court of Justice | (1) International Court of Justice |
| Fisheries (U.K. v. Nor.), Judgment, 1951
I.C.J. Rep. 116. | Fisheries (U.K. v. Nor.), Judgment, 1951
I.C.J. Rep. 116. |
| Application of the Convention on the
Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Bosn. & Herz. v.
Serb. & Montenegro), Order, 1993 I.C.J. Rep. 3. | Application of the Convention on the
Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Bosn. & Herz. v.
Serb. & Montenegro), Order, 1993 I.C.J. Rep. 3. |
| Application of the Convention on the
Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Bosn. & Herz. v.
Yugoslavia), Judgment, Preliminary Objections, 2006 I.C.J. Rep. 595. | Application of the Convention on the
Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Bosn. & Herz. v.
Yugoslavia), Judgment, Preliminary Objections, 2006 I.C.J. Rep. 595. |
| Arrest Warrant (Dem. Rep. Congo v. Belg.
), Judgment, 2002 I.C.J. Rep. 3. | Arrest Warrant (Dem. Rep. Congo v.
Belg.), Judgment, 2002 I.C.J. Rep. 3. |
| Barcelona Traction, Light and Power
Company, Limited (Belg. v. Spain), Order, 1962 I.C.J. Rep. 310. | Barcelona Traction, Light and Power
Company, Limited (Belg. v. Spain), Order, 1962 I.C.J. Rep. 310. |
| Questions Relating to the Obligation to
Prosecute or Extradite (Belg. v Sen.), Order, 2009 I.C.J. Rep. 139. | Questions Relating to the Obligation to
Prosecute or Extradite (Belg. v Sen.), Order, 2009 I.C.J. Rep. 139. |
| Barcelona Traction, Light and Power
Company, Limited (Belg. v. Spain), Judgment, 1970 I.C.J. Rep. 3. | Barcelona Traction, Light and Power
Company, Limited (Belg. v. Spain), Judgment, 1970 I.C.J. Rep. 3. |
| Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear
Weapons, Advisory Opinion, 1996 I.C.J. Rep. 226. | Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear
Weapons, Advisory Opinion, 1996 I.C.J. Rep. 226. |
| Military and Paramilitary Activities in
and against Nicaragua (Nicar. v. U.S. ), Merits, Judgment, 1986 I.C.J. Rep.
14. | Military and Paramilitary Activities in
and against Nicaragua (Nicar. v. U.S.), Merits, Judgment, 1986 I.C.J. Rep.
14. |
| Questions of Interpretation and
Application of the 1971 Montreal Convention arising from the Aerial Incident
at Lockerbie (Libya v. U.K. ), Judgment, 1998 I.C.J. Rep. 9. | Questions of Interpretation and
Application of the 1971 Montreal Convention arising from the Aerial Incident
at Lockerbie (Libya v. U.K.), Judgment, 1998 I.C.J. Rep. 9. |
| Reservations to the Convention on the
Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, Advisory Opinion, 1951
I.C.J. Rep. 15. | Reservations to the Convention on the
Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, Advisory Opinion, 1951
I.C.J. Rep. 15. |
| (2) European Court of Human Rights | (2) European Court of Human Rights |
| Al-Adsani v. United Kingdom, App. no.
35763/97, Eur. Ct. H.R. (2001). | Al-Adsani v. United Kingdom, App. no.
35763/97, Eur. Ct. H.R. (2001). |
| Siliadin v. France, App. no. 73316/01, 43
Eur. Ct. H.R. 16 (2005). | Siliadin v. France, App. no. 73316/01, 43
Eur. Ct. H.R. 16 (2005). |
| Berger v. Germany, App. No. 10731/05,
Eur. Ct. H.R. (2009). | Berger v. Germany, App. No. 10731/05,
Eur. Ct. H.R. (2009). |
| Case of Al-Adsani v. The United Kingdom,
34 Eur. Ct. H.R. 273 (2002). | Case of Al-Adsani v. The United Kingdom,
34 Eur. Ct. H.R. 273 (2002). |
| Soering v. United Kingdom, App. No.
14038/88, Eur. Ct. H.R. (1989). | Soering v. United Kingdom, App. No.
14038/88, Eur. Ct. H.R. (1989). |
| The Decision on the admissibility by Ely
Ould Dah v. France, App. No. 13113/03, Eur. Ct. H.R. (2009). | The Decision on the admissibility by Ely
Ould Dah v. France, App. No. 13113/03, Eur. Ct. H.R. (2009). |
| (3) Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts
of Cambodia | (3) Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts
of Cambodia |
| Appeals by Nuon Chea and Ieng Thirith
Against the Closing Order, Doc. No. D427/2/12, Extraordinary Chambers in the
Courts of Cambodia, (Feb. 15, 2011). | Appeals by Nuon Chea and Ieng Thirith
Against the Closing Order, Doc. No. D427/2/12, Extraordinary Chambers in the
Courts of Cambodia, (Feb. 15, 2011). |
| Chea v. Kaing, Case File No.
001/18-07-2007/ECCC/TC, E188 E.C.C.C. 1 (2010). | Chea v. Kaing, Case File No.
001/18-07-2007/ECCC/TC, E188 E.C.C.C. 1 (2010). |
| (4) Inter-American Court of Human Rights | (4) Inter-American Court of Human Rights |
| Cantoral-Benavides v. Peru, Merits,
Judgment, Inter-Am. Ct. H.R. (ser. C) No. 69, ¶ 1 (Aug. 18, 2000). | Cantoral-Benavides v. Peru, Merits,
Judgment, Inter-Am. Ct. H.R. (ser. C) No. 69, ¶ 1 (Aug. 18, 2000). |
| Maritza Urrutia v. Guatemala, Merits,
Reparation, Costs, Judgment, Inter-Am. Ct. H.R. (Nov. 27, 2003). | Maritza Urrutia v. Guatemala, Merits,
Reparation, Costs, Judgment, Inter-Am. Ct. H.R. (Nov. 27, 2003). |
| (5) International Criminal Tribunal for
the Former Yugoslavia | (5) International Criminal Tribunal for
the Former Yugoslavia |
| Prosecutor v Delalić,
Case No. IT-96-21-A (Int’l Crim. Trib. for the Former
Yugoslavia Feb. 20, 2001). | Prosecutor v Delalić,
Case No. IT-96-21-A (Int’l Crim. Trib. for the Former
Yugoslavia Feb. 20, 2001). |
| Prosecutor v. Krstić,
Case No. IT-98-33-T (Int’l Crim. Trib. for the Former
Yugoslavia Aug. 2, 2001). | Prosecutor v. Krstić,
Case No. IT-98-33-T (Int’l Crim. Trib. for the Former
Yugoslavia Aug. 2, 2001). |
| Prosecutor v. Anto Furundzija, Case No.
IT-95-17/1-T (Int’l Crim. Trib. for the Former Yugoslavia Dec. 10, 1998). | Prosecutor v. Anto Furundzija, Case No.
IT-95-17/1-T (Int’l Crim. Trib. for the Former Yugoslavia Dec. 10, 1998). |
| Prosecutor v. Dusko Tadic A/K/A “Dule”,
Case No. IT-94-1 (Int’l Crim. Trib. for the Former Yugoslavia Aug. 10, 1995). | Prosecutor v. Dusko Tadic A/K/A “Dule”,
Case No. IT-94-1 (Int’l Crim. Trib. for the Former Yugoslavia Aug. 10, 1995). |
| Prosecutor v. Kunarac, Kovac and Vukovic,
Case No. IT-96-23-T & IT-96-23/1-T (Int’l Crim. Trib. for the Former
Yugoslavia Feb. 22, 2001). | Prosecutor v. Kunarac, Kovac and Vukovic,
Case No. IT-96-23-T & IT-96-23/1-T (Int’l Crim. Trib. for the Former
Yugoslavia Feb. 22, 2001). |
| (6) International Criminal Tribunal for
Rwanda | (6) International Criminal Tribunal for
Rwanda |
| Prosecutor v. Jean-Paul Akayesu, Case No.
ICTR-96-4-T (Int’l Crim. Trib. for Rwanda Sept. 02, 1998). | Prosecutor v. Jean-Paul Akayesu, Case No.
ICTR-96-4-T (Int’l Crim. Trib. for Rwanda Sept. 02, 1998). |
| (7) Special Court for Sierra Leone | (7) Special Court for Sierra Leone |
| Prosecutor v. Taylor, Case SCSL-2003-01-I
(Special Ct. for Sierra Leone May 31, 2004). | Prosecutor v. Taylor, Case SCSL-2003-01-I
(Special Ct. for Sierra Leone May 31, 2004). |
| Prosecutor v. Fofana & Kondewa, Case
SCSL-04-14-ES-836 (Special Ct. for Sierra Leone Aug. 11, 2014). | Prosecutor v. Fofana & Kondewa, Case
SCSL-04-14-ES-836 (Special Ct. for Sierra Leone Aug. 11, 2014). |
| (8) Permanent Court of International
Justice | (8) Permanent Court of International
Justice |
| The S.S. Lotus (Fr. v. Turk.), Judgment,
1927 P.C.I.J. (ser. A) No. 10. | The S.S. Lotus (Fr. v. Turk.), Judgment,
1927 P.C.I.J. (ser. A) No. 10. |
| C. International Organizations | C. International Organizations |
| African Union, Decision on the Abuse of
the Principle of Universal Jurisdiction, Doc. Assembly/AU/11(XIII). | African Union, Decision on the Abuse of
the Principle of Universal Jurisdiction, Doc. Assembly/AU/11(XIII). |
| African Union Model National Law on
Universal Jurisdiction over International Crimes, Doc. EX.CL/73l(XXI)c, art.
8. | African Union Model National Law on
Universal Jurisdiction over International Crimes, Doc. EX.CL/73l(XXI)c, art.
8. |
| Commission of Inquiry on Darfur, Report
of the International Commission of Inquiry on Darfur to the United Nations
Secretary-General, UN SCOR, UN Doc. S/2005/60, § 614 (Jan. 25, 2005). | Commission of Inquiry on Darfur, Report
of the International Commission of Inquiry on Darfur to the United Nations
Secretary-General, UN SCOR, UN Doc. S/2005/60, § 614 (Jan. 25, 2005). |
| Human Rights Committee, “General Comment
no. 20 (Article 7),” UN Doc A/47/40, 193 (Mar. 10, 1992). | Human Rights Committee, “General Comment
no. 20 (Article 7),” UN Doc A/47/40, 193 (Mar. 10, 1992). |
| Int’l Law Comm’n, Draft Code of Crimes
against the Peace and Security of Mankind with commentaries, Rep. of the
Comm’n to the General Assembly on the work of its forty-eighth session, U.N.
Doc A/CN.4/SER.A/1996/Add.l (Part 2) at 17–56 (1996). | Int’l Law Comm’n, Draft Code of Crimes
against the Peace and Security of Mankind with commentaries, Rep. of the
Comm’n to the General Assembly on the work of its forty-eighth session, U.N.
Doc A/CN.4/SER.A/1996/Add.l (Part 2) at 17–56 (1996). |
| Int’l Law Comm’n, The obligation to
extradite or prosecute (aut dedere aut judicare), adopted U.N. Doc. A/69/10,
¶ 65 (2014). | Int’l Law Comm’n, The obligation to
extradite or prosecute (aut dedere aut judicare), adopted U.N. Doc. A/69/10,
¶ 65 (2014). |
| International Law Association, Final
Report on the Exercise of Universal Jurisdiction in Respect of Gross Human
Rights Offenses, prepared by the Committee on International Human Rights Law
and Practice, submitted to London Conference (2000). | International Law Association, Final
Report on the Exercise of Universal Jurisdiction in Respect of Gross Human
Rights Offenses, prepared by the Committee on International Human Rights Law
and Practice, submitted to London Conference (2000). |
| Justitia Et Pace Institut De Droit
International, Resolution on Universal Civil Jurisdiction with regard to
Reparation for International Crimes http://www.andreasbucherlaw.ch/images/stories/res_iil_en_universal_civil_jurisdiction.pdf. | Justitia Et Pace Institut De Droit
International, Resolution on Universal Civil Jurisdiction with regard to
Reparation for International Crimes http://www.andreasbucherlaw.ch/
images/stories/res_iil_en_universal_civil_jurisdiction.pdf. |
| Rep. of the Secretary-General prepared on
the basis of comments and observations of Governments, The scope and
application of the principle of universal jurisdiction, U.N. Doc. A/65/181
(2010). | Rep. of the Secretary-General prepared on
the basis of comments and observations of Governments, The scope and
application of the principle of universal jurisdiction, U.N. Doc. A/65/181
(2010). |
| Rep. of the Secretary-General, The scope
and application of the principle of universal jurisdiction, U.N. Doc.
A/66/93/Add.1 (2011). | Rep. of the Secretary-General, The scope
and application of the principle of universal jurisdiction, U.N. Doc.
A/66/93/Add.1 (2011). |
| Rep. of the Secretary-General, The scope
and application of the principle of universal jurisdiction, U.N. Doc.
A/67/116 (2012). | Rep. of the Secretary-General, The scope
and application of the principle of universal jurisdiction, U.N. Doc.
A/67/116 (2012). |
| Rep. of the Secretary-General, The scope
and application of the principle of universal jurisdiction, U.N. Doc.
A/68/113 (2013). | Rep. of the Secretary-General, The scope
and application of the principle of universal jurisdiction, U.N. Doc.
A/68/113 (2013). |
| Rep. of the Secretary-General, The scope
and application of the principle of universal jurisdiction, U.N. Doc.
A/69/174 (2014). | Rep. of the Secretary-General, The scope
and application of the principle of universal jurisdiction, U.N. Doc.
A/69/174 (2014). |
| Rep. of the Secretary-General, The scope
and application of the principle of universal jurisdiction, U.N. Doc.
A/70/125 (2015). | Rep. of the Secretary-General, The scope
and application of the principle of universal jurisdiction, U.N. Doc.
A/70/125 (2015). |
| Rep. of the Secretary-General, The scope
and application of the principle of universal jurisdiction, U.N. Doc.
A/71/111 (2016). | Rep. of the Secretary-General, The scope
and application of the principle of universal jurisdiction, U.N. Doc.
A/71/111 (2016). |
| Resolutions of The Congresses Of The
International Association Of Penal Law, Eighteenth International Congress of
Penal Law (Istanbul, 20–27 September 2009),
http://www.penal.org/sites/default/files/RIDP86%201-2%202015%20EN.pdf (last
visited July 16, 2017). | Resolutions of The Congresses Of The
International Association Of Penal Law, Eighteenth International Congress of
Penal Law (Istanbul, 20–27 September 2009), http://www.penal.
org/sites/default/files/RIDP86%201-2%202015%20EN.pdf (last visited July 16,
2017). |
| The AU-EU Expert Report on the Principle
of Universal Jurisdiction, EU Doc. 8672/1/09 Rev. 1 (Apr. 16, 2009). | The AU-EU Expert Report on the Principle
of Universal Jurisdiction, EU Doc. 8672/1/09 Rev. 1 (Apr. 16, 2009). |
| D. Academic Literature | D. Academic Literature |
| Abad Castelo, A., “The End of Universal
Jurisdiction in Spain? ”, 18 SYbIL 223–230 (2013–2014). | Abad Castelo, A., “The End of Universal
Jurisdiction in Spain?”, 18 SYbIL 223–230 (2013–2014). |
| Abass A., “The International Criminal
Court and Universal Jurisdiction,” 6 International Criminal Law Review
(2006). | Abass A., “The International Criminal
Court and Universal Jurisdiction,” 6 International Criminal Law Review
(2006). |
| Addis A., “Imagining the International
Community: The Constitutive Dimension of Universal Jurisdiction,” 31 Human
Rights Quarterly 129, (2009). | Addis A., “Imagining the International
Community: The Constitutive Dimension of Universal Jurisdiction,” 31 Human
Rights Quarterly 129, (2009). |
| Aghenitei M. and Boboc L., “Universal
Jurisdiction and Concurrent Criminal Jurisdiction,” Vol. I (1) Union of
Jurists of Romania Law Review, (Jan./Mar. 2011). | Aghenitei M. and Boboc L., “Universal
Jurisdiction and Concurrent Criminal Jurisdiction,” Vol. I (1) Union of
Jurists of Romania Law Review, (Jan./Mar. 2011). |
| Ambos K., Treatise on International
Criminal Law, Volume I: Foundations and General Part (Oxford University
Press, 2013). | Ambos K., Treatise on International Criminal
Law, Volume I: Foundations and General Part (Oxford University Press, 2013). |
| Ambos K., Treatise on International
Criminal Law, Volume II: The Crimes and Sentencing (Oxford University Press,
2014). | Ambos K., Treatise on International
Criminal Law, Volume II: The Crimes and Sentencing (Oxford University Press,
2014). |
| Ankumah E. A., The Cairo-Arusha
Principles on Universal Jurisdiction in Respect of Gross Human Rights
Offenses: An African Perspective, 98 Proceedings of the Annual Meeting
(American Society of International Law) 238 (Mar. 31–Apr. 3, 2004). | Ankumah E. A., The Cairo-Arusha
Principles on Universal Jurisdiction in Respect of Gross Human Rights
Offenses: An African Perspective, 98 Proceedings of the Annual Meeting
(American Society of International Law) 238 (Mar. 31–Apr. 3, 2004). |
| Armand L. C. De Mestral, Extraterritorial
Application of Export Control Legislation: Canada and the U. S. A. (Canadian
Council on International Law Research Study), 19 (1st Ed. 1990). | Armand L. C. De Mestral, Extraterritorial
Application of Export Control Legislation: Canada and the U. S. A. (Canadian
Council on International Law Research Study), 19 (1st Ed. 1990). |
| Arp B., “Universal Jurisdiction to
Enforce,” The American Journal of International Law, Vol 110 (2016). | Arp B., “Universal Jurisdiction to
Enforce,” The American Journal of International Law, Vol 110 (2016). |
| Ascensio H., “Are Spanish Courts Backing
Down on Universality? The Supreme Tribunal’s Decision in Guatemalan
Generals,” 1 Journal of International Criminal Justice (2003). | Ascensio H., “Are Spanish Courts Backing
Down on Universality? The Supreme Tribunal’s Decision in Guatemalan
Generals,” 1 Journal of International Criminal Justice (2003). |
| Bailleux, A., “L’histoire De La Loi Belge
De Compétence Universelle. Une Valse à Trois Temps: Ouverture, Étroitesse,
Modestie,” 59(1) Droit Et Société 107, (2005). | Bailleux, A., “L’histoire De La Loi Belge
De Compétence Universelle. Une Valse à Trois Temps: Ouverture, Étroitesse,
Modestie,” 59(1) Droit Et Société 107, (2005). |
| Bassiouni M. C., “Universal Jurisdiction
for International Crimes: Historical Perspectives and Contemporary Practice”,
42 Va. J. Int’l L. 81 (2011). | Bassiouni M. C., “Universal Jurisdiction
for International Crimes: Historical Perspectives and Contemporary Practice”,
42 Va. J. Int’l L. 81 (2011). |
| Bassiouni M.C. and Wise E, Aut Dedere Aut
Judicare: The Duty to Extradite or Prosecute in International Law, (M
Nijhoff, 1995). | Bassiouni M.C. and Wise E, Aut Dedere Aut
Judicare: The Duty to Extradite or Prosecute in International Law, (M
Nijhoff, 1995). |
| Bassiouni M.C., “Post-Conflict Justice”
(Transnational Publishers, New York, 2002) | Bassiouni M.C., “Post-Conflict Justice”
(Transnational Publishers, New York, 2002) |
| Bekou O. and Cryer R. “The International
Criminal Court and Universal Jurisdiction: A Close Encounter? ”, ICLQ Vol 56,
49- 68, (Jan. 2007). | Bekou O. and Cryer R. “The International
Criminal Court and Universal Jurisdiction: A Close Encounter?”, ICLQ Vol 56,
49- 68, (Jan. 2007). |
| Ben-Ari R., “Universal Jurisdiction:
Chronicle of a Death Foretold? ”, Denver Journal of International Law and Policy,
Vol 43:2, (2014–2015). | Ben-Ari R., “Universal Jurisdiction:
Chronicle of a Death Foretold?”, Denver Journal of International Law and
Policy, Vol 43:2, (2014–2015). |
| Benavides L., “The Universal Jurisdiction
Principle: Nature and Scope,” 1 Anuario Mexicano de Derecho Internacional, L.
Rev. 22 (2001). | Benavides L., “The Universal Jurisdiction
Principle: Nature and Scope,” 1 Anuario Mexicano de Derecho Internacional, L.
Rev. 22 (2001). |
| Blakesley C.L., ‘Extraterritorial
Jurisdiction,’ in M. Cherif Bassiouni (ed.), International Criminal Law, vol.
2, Transnational Publishers Inc., 36, (1999). | Blakesley C.L., ‘Extraterritorial
Jurisdiction,’ in M. Cherif Bassiouni (ed.), International Criminal Law, vol.
2, Transnational Publishers Inc., 36, (1999). |
| Bollo Arocena, M.D., “The Reform of the
Universal Jurisdiction in Spain,” 18 SYbIL 239–247 (2013–2014). | Bollo Arocena, M.D., “The Reform of the
Universal Jurisdiction in Spain,” 18 SYbIL 239–247 (2013–2014). |
| Bottini G, “Universal Jurisdiction after
the Creation of the International Criminal Court,” 36 International Law and
Politics, (2004). | Bottini G, “Universal Jurisdiction after
the Creation of the International Criminal Court,” 36 International Law and
Politics, (2004). |
| Brandes R., “Who’s Afraid of Universal
Jurisdiction? The Fujimori Case,” SW Journal of International Law, Vol 123,
(2008–2009). | Brandes R., “Who’s Afraid of Universal
Jurisdiction? The Fujimori Case,” SW Journal of International Law, Vol 123,
(2008–2009). |
| Broomhall B., “Towards the Development of
an Effective System of Universal Jurisdiction for Crimes under International
Law,” 35 New England Law Review, 399, (2001). | Broomhall B., “Towards the Development of
an Effective System of Universal Jurisdiction for Crimes under International
Law,” 35 New England Law Review, 399, (2001). |
| Caflisch, L., “Immunité De Juridiction Et
Respect Des Droits De L’homme,” in International Legal System in Quest of
Equity and Universality: Liber Amicorum Georges Abi Saab, (2001). | Caflisch, L., “Immunité De Juridiction Et
Respect Des Droits De L’homme,” in International Legal System in Quest of
Equity and Universality: Liber Amicorum Georges Abi Saab, (2001). |
| Cassese A., “Is the Bell Tolling for
Universality? A Plea for a Sensible Notion of Universal Jurisdiction,” 1 J.
Int’l Crim. Just. 589 (2003). | Cassese A., “Is the Bell Tolling for
Universality? A Plea for a Sensible Notion of Universal Jurisdiction,” 1 J.
Int’l Crim. Just. 589 (2003). |
| Cassesse A., Cassese’s International
Criminal Law, (A. Cassese et al. eds., OUP Oxford, 3d ed. 2008). | Cassesse A., Cassese’s International
Criminal Law, (A. Cassese et al. eds., OUP Oxford, 3d ed. 2008). |
| Chinchón Alvarez, J., “The Reform(s) of
Universal Jurisdiction in Spain: For Whom the Bells Tolls? ”, 18 SYbIL
231–237 (2013–2014). | Chinchón Alvarez, J., “The Reform(s) of
Universal Jurisdiction in Spain: For Whom the Bells Tolls?”, 18 SYbIL 231–237
(2013–2014). |
| Coppens, P., “Du Droit De Punir:
Humanite? A Propos De La Competence Universelle,” 35(3) Revue Generale De
Droit 403, (2005). | Coppens, P., “Du Droit De Punir:
Humanite? A Propos De La Competence Universelle,” 35(3) Revue Generale De
Droit 403, (2005). |
| Corredor Carvajal, I., “Analyse De La
Compétence Juridictionnelle à Partir De La Première Décision De La Cour
Africaine Des Droits De l’Homme Et Des Peuples: l’Affaire Hissène Habré,” 5
ACDI: Anuario Colombiano De Derecho Internacional 59, (2012). | Corredor Carvajal, I., “Analyse De La
Compétence Juridictionnelle à Partir De La Première Décision De La Cour
Africaine Des Droits De l’Homme Et Des Peuples: l’Affaire Hissène Habré,” 5
ACDI: Anuario Colombiano De Derecho Internacional 59, (2012). |
| Cosnard, M., “Chapitre XVI. La Compétence
Universelle En Matière Pénale,” in The Fundamental Rules of the International
Legal Order: Jus Cogens and Obligations Erga Omnes, (2006). | Cosnard, M., “Chapitre XVI. La Compétence
Universelle En Matière Pénale,” in The Fundamental Rules of the International
Legal Order: Jus Cogens and Obligations Erga Omnes, (2006). |
| Cot, J., “Eloge De L’indécision : La Cour
Et La compétence Universelle,” 35(1/2) Revue Belge De Droit International
546, (2002). | Cot, J., “Eloge De L’indécision : La Cour
Et La compétence Universelle,” 35(1/2) Revue Belge De Droit International
546, (2002). |
| Cottim, A., Terrorismo No Mar De Um Mundo
Globalizado, (2008). | Cottim, A., Terrorismo No Mar De Um Mundo
Globalizado, (2008). |
| Cryer R, An Introduction To International
Criminal Law And Procedure (Cambridge University Press 2014). | Cryer R, An Introduction To International
Criminal Law And Procedure (Cambridge University Press 2014). |
| Dube A., “The AU Model Law on Universal
Jurisdiction: An African Response to Western Prosecutions Based on the
Universality Principle,” Potchefstroom Electronic Law Journal (18)3, 457,
(2015). | Dube A., “The AU Model Law on Universal
Jurisdiction: An African Response to Western Prosecutions Based on the
Universality Principle,” Potchefstroom Electronic Law Journal (18)3, 457,
(2015). |
| Dumas, H., “Rwanda: Comment Juger Un
Génocide? ”, 4 Politique Étrangère 39, (2015). | Dumas, H., “Rwanda: Comment Juger Un
Génocide?”, 4 Politique Étrangère 39, (2015). |
| Duţu, M., “Vespasian V. Pella - Românul Științei
Juridice Universale,” 5 Pandectele Romane 231,
(2017). | Duţu, M., “Vespasian V. Pella - Românul Științei
Juridice Universale,” 5 Pandectele Romane 231,
(2017). |
| Elst R.V, “Implementing Universal
Jurisdiction over Grave Breaches of the Geneva Convention,” 13 Leiden Journal
of International Law 815, (2000). | Elst R.V, “Implementing Universal
Jurisdiction over Grave Breaches of the Geneva Convention,” 13 Leiden Journal
of International Law 815, (2000). |
| Escobar Hernández, C., “Universal Jurisdiction
in Spain: Substantial Change of Model or Implied Repeal? ”, 18 SYbIL 255–265
(2013–2014). | Escobar Hernández, C., “Universal
Jurisdiction in Spain: Substantial Change of Model or Implied Repeal?”, 18
SYbIL 255–265 (2013–2014). |
| Garcia Arán, M., López Garrido, D.,
Crimen Internacional y Jurisdicción Universal. El caso Pinochet, (Tirant lo
Blanch, Valencia, 2000). | Garcia Arán, M., López Garrido, D.,
Crimen Internacional y Jurisdicción Universal. El caso Pinochet, (Tirant lo
Blanch, Valencia, 2000). |
| Hall C, “Universal Jurisdiction:
Developing and Implementing an Effective Global Strategy,” in Kaleck W. et
al. (eds.), International Prosecution of Human Rights Crimes (2007). | Hall C, “Universal Jurisdiction:
Developing and Implementing an Effective Global Strategy,” in Kaleck W. et
al. (eds.), International Prosecution of Human Rights Crimes (2007). |
| Hans M., “Providing for Uniformity in the
Exercise of Universal Jurisdiction: Can Either the Princeton Principles on
Universal Jurisdiction or an International Criminal Court Accomplish This
Goal? ”, 15 Transnat’l Law (2002), 357. | Hans M., “Providing for Uniformity in the
Exercise of Universal Jurisdiction: Can Either the Princeton Principles on
Universal Jurisdiction or an International Criminal Court Accomplish This
Goal?”, 15 Transnat’l Law (2002), 357. |
| Hesenov R., “Universal Jurisdiction for
International Crimes- A Case Study,” European Journal of Criminal Policy, Vol
19 (2013). | Hesenov R., “Universal Jurisdiction for
International Crimes- A Case Study,” European Journal of Criminal Policy, Vol
19 (2013). |
| Hitimana, C., “Les Rapports Entre Le
Droit Pénal National Et Le Droit Pénal International Dans La Prévention Et La
Répression Des Infractions Internationales,” (Université D’Ottawa /University
of Ottawa, 2004). | Hitimana, C., “Les Rapports Entre Le
Droit Pénal National Et Le Droit Pénal International Dans La Prévention Et La
Répression Des Infractions Internationales,” (Université D’Ottawa /University
of Ottawa, 2004). |
| Hoover D.V., “Universal Jurisdiction not
so Universal: Time to Delegate to the International Criminal Court,” (2011)
Cornell Law School Inter-University Graduate Student Conference Papers. Paper
52, http://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/lps_clacp/52. | Hoover D.V., “Universal Jurisdiction not
so Universal: Time to Delegate to the International Criminal Court,” (2011)
Cornell Law School Inter-University Graduate Student Conference Papers. Paper
52, http://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/lps_clacp/52. |
| Implementing the principle of universal
jurisdiction in France, https://www.fidh.org/IMG/pdf/universal_juris.pdf
(last visited Jul. 16, 2017). | Implementing the principle of universal
jurisdiction in France, https://www.fidh.org/IMG/ pdf/universal_juris.pdf
(last visited Jul. 16, 2017). |
| Inazumi M., Universal Jurisdiction in
Modern International Law: Expansion of National Jurisdiction for Prosecuting
Serious Crimes under International Law, School of Human Rights Research. | Inazumi M., Universal Jurisdiction in
Modern International Law: Expansion of National Jurisdiction for Prosecuting
Serious Crimes under International Law, School of Human Rights Research. |
| Jalloh C.C., “Universal Jurisdiction,
Universal Prescription? A Preliminary Assessment of the African Union
Perspective on Universal Jurisdiction,” University of Pittsburgh, Legal
Studies Research Paper Series, Working Paper No. 2009-38, (Mar. 2010). | Jalloh C.C., “Universal Jurisdiction,
Universal Prescription? A Preliminary Assessment of the African Union
Perspective on Universal Jurisdiction,” University of Pittsburgh, Legal
Studies Research Paper Series, Working Paper No. 2009-38, (Mar. 2010). |
| Kaleck W., “From Pinochet to Rumsfeld:
Universal Jurisdiction in Europe 1998–2008,” 30 Michigan Journal of
International Law 927, (2009). | Kaleck W., “From Pinochet to Rumsfeld:
Universal Jurisdiction in Europe 1998–2008,” 30 Michigan Journal of
International Law 927, (2009). |
| Kamminga M.T., “Lessons Learned from the
Exercise of Universal Jurisdiction in Respect of Gross Human Rights
Offences,” 23 Human Rights Quarterly 940, (2001). | Kamminga M.T., “Lessons Learned from the
Exercise of Universal Jurisdiction in Respect of Gross Human Rights
Offences,” 23 Human Rights Quarterly 940, (2001). |
| Kissinger H., “The Pitfalls of Universal
Jurisdiction: Risking Judicial Tyranny,” 80 Foreign Affairs 86, (July–Aug.
2001). | Kissinger H., “The Pitfalls of Universal
Jurisdiction: Risking Judicial Tyranny,” 80 Foreign Affairs 86, (July–Aug.
2001). |
| Konstantopoulou, Z., “Universal
Jurisdiction,” 3 Revue Internationale De Droit Pénal 487, (2010). | Konstantopoulou, Z., “Universal Jurisdiction,”
3 Revue Internationale De Droit Pénal 487, (2010). |
| Kontorovich E., “The Inefficiency of
Universal Jurisdiction,” University of St. Gallen Law School, Law and
Economics Research Paper Series, Working Paper No. 2007-13, (July 2007). | Kontorovich E., “The Inefficiency of
Universal Jurisdiction,” University of St. Gallen Law School, Law and
Economics Research Paper Series, Working Paper No. 2007-13, (July 2007). |
| Lafontaine, F., and Bousquet, F.,
“Défendre Un Accusé Pendant Un Procès Pour Génocide, Crimes Contre L’humanité
Et Crimes De Guerre Au Canada: Mission Impossible? ”, 22(2) Canadian Criminal
Law Review 159, (2017). | Lafontaine, F., and Bousquet, F.,
“Défendre Un Accusé Pendant Un Procès Pour Génocide, Crimes Contre L’humanité
Et Crimes De Guerre Au Canada: Mission Impossible?”, 22(2) Canadian Criminal
Law Review 159, (2017). |
| Lagerwall, A., “Que Reste-t-Il De La
Compétence Universelle Au Regard De Certaines Évolutions Législatives
Récentes? ”, 55(1) Annuaire Français De Droit International 743, (2009). | Lagerwall, A., “Que Reste-t-Il De La
Compétence Universelle Au Regard De Certaines Évolutions Législatives
Récentes?”, 55(1) Annuaire Français De Droit International 743, (2009). |
| Langer M., “The Diplomacy of Universal
Jurisdiction: The Political Branches and the Transnational Prosecution of
International Crimes,” 4–6.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228162248. | Langer M., “The Diplomacy of Universal
Jurisdiction: The Political Branches and the Transnational Prosecution of
International Crimes,” 4–6. https://www.researchgate.net/
publication/228162248. |
| Liu, J., “Issues of Universal
Jurisdiction in Comtemporary International Relations. ” 6(286) Shèhui Kexué
Journal of Social Sciences 34, (2004). | Liu, J., “Issues of Universal
Jurisdiction in Comtemporary International Relations.” 6(286) Shèhui Kexué
Journal of Social Sciences 34, (2004). |
| Lundborg, I., “Att Ställa Den
Skyddsbehövande Inför Rätta: Om De Rättsliga Förutsättningarna För Att
Förhindra Skyddslöshet Vid Tillämpningen Av Flyktingkonventionens
Uteslutandeklausuler Och Samtidigt Motverka Straffrihet För De Grova
Folkrättsbrott Som Faller under Klausulernas Artikel 1F(a),” (2010). | Lundborg, I., “Att Ställa Den
Skyddsbehövande Inför Rätta: Om De Rättsliga Förutsättningarna För Att
Förhindra Skyddslöshet Vid Tillämpningen Av Flyktingkonventionens
Uteslutandeklausuler Och Samtidigt Motverka Straffrihet För De Grova
Folkrättsbrott Som Faller under Klausulernas Artikel 1F(a),” (2010). |
| Macedo S., The Princeton Principles on
Universal Jurisdiction, https://lapa.princeton.edu/hosteddocs/unive_jur.pdf
(last visited July 16, 2017). | Macedo S., The Princeton Principles on
Universal Jurisdiction, https://lapa.princeton.edu/ hosteddocs/unive_jur.pdf
(last visited July 16, 2017). |
| Márquez Carrasco, C. y Martín Martínez,
M. “El Principio de Jurisdicción Universal en el Ordenamiento Jurídico
Español: Pasado, Presente y Futuro,” XI Anuario Mexicano de Derecho
Internacional, 251–303, 2011 . | Márquez Carrasco, C. y Martín Martínez,
M. “El Principio de Jurisdicción Universal en el Ordenamiento Jurídico
Español: Pasado, Presente y Futuro,” XI Anuario Mexicano de Derecho
Internacional, 251–303, 2011 . |
| May L., “Crimes against Humanity: A
Normative Account” (Cambridge University Press, 2000). | May L., “Crimes against Humanity: A
Normative Account” (Cambridge University Press, 2000). |
| Morgan A. L., “U.S. Officials’
Vulnerability to “Global Justice”: Will Universal Jurisdiction over War
Crimes Make Traveling for Pleasure Less Pleasurable? ”, 57 Hastings L.J. 423,
425 (2005). | Morgan A. L., “U.S. Officials’
Vulnerability to “Global Justice”: Will Universal Jurisdiction over War
Crimes Make Traveling for Pleasure Less Pleasurable?”, 57 Hastings L.J. 423,
425 (2005). |
| Morris M.H., “Universal Jurisdiction in a
Divided World: Conference Remarks,” 35 New Eng. Rev. 337, (2001). | Morris M.H., “Universal Jurisdiction in a
Divided World: Conference Remarks,” 35 New Eng. Rev. 337, (2001). |
| Morris-Sharma N.Y., “The ILC’s Draft
Articles before the 69th Session of the UNGA: A Reawakening? ”, Asian Journal
of International Law, 2, (2015). | Morris-Sharma N.Y., “The ILC’s Draft
Articles before the 69th Session of the UNGA: A Reawakening?”, Asian Journal
of International Law, 2, (2015). |
| Odila Conceição Silva Donda, E., “O
Princípio Da Jursidição Universal Dos Direitos Humanos e o Alcance Da Paz e
Segurança Internacional,” 29 Derecho y Cambio Social, (2012). | Odila Conceição Silva Donda, E., “O
Princípio Da Jursidição Universal Dos Direitos Humanos e o Alcance Da Paz e
Segurança Internacional,” 29 Derecho y Cambio Social, (2012). |
| O’Keefe R., “Universal Jurisdiction:
Clarifying the Basic Concept,” Journal of International Criminal Justice,
2(3) 735, (2004). | O’Keefe R., “Universal Jurisdiction:
Clarifying the Basic Concept,” Journal of International Criminal Justice,
2(3) 735, (2004). |
| O’Keefe R., “The Grave Breaches Regime
and Universal Jurisdiction,” Journal of International Criminal Justice 7 811,
(2009). | O’Keefe R., “The Grave Breaches Regime
and Universal Jurisdiction,” Journal of International Criminal Justice 7 811,
(2009). |
| Ondo, T., “La compétence Universelle En
Afrique: Essai D’analyse,” 88(1) Revue De Droit International Et De Droit
comparé 53, (2011). | Ondo, T., “La compétence Universelle En
Afrique: Essai D’analyse,” 88(1) Revue De Droit International Et De Droit
comparé 53, (2011). |
| O’Sullivan A. Universal Jurisdiction in
International Criminal Law: The Debate and the Battle for Hegemony (Routledge
2017). | O’Sullivan A. Universal Jurisdiction in
International Criminal Law: The Debate and the Battle for Hegemony (Routledge
2017). |
| Orentlicher, D. F., “Whose Justice?
Reconciling Universal Jurisdiction with Democratic Principles,” 92 Georgetown
Law Journal 1057, (2004). | Orentlicher, D. F., “Whose Justice?
Reconciling Universal Jurisdiction with Democratic Principles,” 92 Georgetown
Law Journal 1057, (2004). |
| Orihuela Calatayud, E., “La Jurisdicción
Universal en España,” Real Academia de Legislación y Jurisprudencia de Murcia
(2016). | Orihuela Calatayud, E., “La Jurisdicción
Universal en España,” Real Academia de Legislación y Jurisprudencia de Murcia
(2016). |
| Pasculli M., “Universal Jurisdiction
between Unity and Fragmentation of International Criminal Law,” Issue 1
Rivista di Criminologia, (Apr. 2011). | Pasculli M., “Universal Jurisdiction
between Unity and Fragmentation of International Criminal Law,” Issue 1
Rivista di Criminologia, (Apr. 2011). |
| Perez Cepeda, A.I., El Principio de
Jurisdicción Universal: Fundamentos y Limites (Tirant lo Blanch, Valencia,
2012). | Perez Cepeda, A.I., El Principio de
Jurisdicción Universal: Fundamentos y Limites (Tirant lo Blanch, Valencia,
2012). |
| Pérez González, C., “Some Comments on
Article 24 (4) (M) of Spain’s Organic Law of the Judiciary: Universal
Jurisdiction Over Trafficking in Human Beings Offences? ”, 18 SYbIL 249–254
(2013–2014). | Pérez González, C., “Some Comments on
Article 24 (4) (M) of Spain’s Organic Law of the Judiciary: Universal
Jurisdiction Over Trafficking in Human Beings Offences?”, 18 SYbIL 249–254
(2013–2014). |
| Peyró Llopis, A., “Le Sahara Occidental
Face à La compétence Universelle En Espagne,” 43 (1) Revue Belge De Droit International
61, (2010). | Peyró Llopis, A., “Le Sahara Occidental
Face à La compétence Universelle En Espagne,” 43 (1) Revue Belge De Droit
International 61, (2010). |
| Pigrau Solé, A., La Jurisdicción
Universal y su Aplicación en España. La Persecución del Genocidio, los
Crímenes de Guerra y los Crímenes Contra La Humanidad por los Tribunales
Nacionales (Barcelona, 2009). | Pigrau Solé, A., La Jurisdicción
Universal y su Aplicación en España. La Persecución del Genocidio, los
Crímenes de Guerra y los Crímenes Contra La Humanidad por los Tribunales
Nacionales (Barcelona, 2009). |
| Princeton University Program in Law and
Public Affairs, The Princeton Principles on Universal Jurisdiction (2001),
available at http://www.princeton.edu/~lapa/unive_jur.pdf. | Princeton University Program in Law and
Public Affairs, The Princeton Principles on Universal Jurisdiction (2001),
available at http://www.princeton.edu/~lapa/unive_jur.pdf. |
| Randall K. C., Universal Jurisdiction
Under International Law, 66 Tex. L. Rev. 785, 794–95 (1988). | Randall K. C., Universal Jurisdiction
Under International Law, 66 Tex. L. Rev. 785, 794–95 (1988). |
| Reydams L., Universal Jurisdiction:
International and Municipal Legal Perspectives, (Oxford University Press,
2003). | Reydams L., Universal Jurisdiction:
International and Municipal Legal Perspectives, (Oxford University Press,
2003). |
| Rezai Shaghaji, D., “L’exercice De La
Compétence Universelle Absolue à L’encontre Des Crimes Graves De Droit
International, Afin De Protéger Les Intérêts Généraux De La Communauté
Internationale Dans Son Ensemble,” 93(1) Revue De Droit International Et De
Droit comparé 30, (2016). | Rezai Shaghaji, D., “L’exercice De La
Compétence Universelle Absolue à L’encontre Des Crimes Graves De Droit
International, Afin De Protéger Les Intérêts Généraux De La Communauté
Internationale Dans Son Ensemble,” 93(1) Revue De Droit International Et De
Droit comparé 30, (2016). |
| Ríos Rodríguez, J., “La Restriction De
La compétence Universelle Des Juridictions Nationales: Les Exemples Belge Et
Espagnol,” 114(3) Revue générale De Droit International Public 563, (2010). | Ríos Rodríguez, J., “La Restriction De
La compétence Universelle Des Juridictions Nationales: Les Exemples Belge Et
Espagnol,” 114(3) Revue générale De Droit International Public 563, (2010). |
| Roht-Arriaza N., Guatemala Genocide Case,
100 Am. J. Int’l L. 207 (2006). | Roht-Arriaza N., Guatemala Genocide Case,
100 Am. J. Int’l L. 207 (2006). |
| Ryngaert C, “The International Criminal
Court and Universal Jurisdiction: A Fraught Relationship? ”, New Criminal Law
Review, Vol. 12, Number 4. | Ryngaert C, “The International Criminal
Court and Universal Jurisdiction: A Fraught Relationship?”, New Criminal Law
Review, Vol. 12, Number 4. |
| Ryngaert C., “Applying the Rome Statute’s
Complementarity Principle: Drawing Lessons from the Prosecution of Core
Crimes by States Acting Under the Universality Principle,” Criminal Law Forum
19 153, (2008). | Ryngaert C., “Applying the Rome Statute’s
Complementarity Principle: Drawing Lessons from the Prosecution of Core
Crimes by States Acting Under the Universality Principle,” Criminal Law Forum
19 153, (2008). |
| Ryngaert C., Jurisdiction in
International Law (Oxford University Press 2015). | Ryngaert C., Jurisdiction in
International Law (Oxford University Press 2015). |
| Ryngaert C., Universal Jurisdiction over
Violations of International Humanitarian Law in Germany (2008). | Ryngaert C., Universal Jurisdiction over
Violations of International Humanitarian Law in Germany (2008). |
| Safarov, N. A., “Presledovanie
Mezhdunarodnykh Prestuplenii: Universal’naia Iurisdiktsiia Protiv
Diplomaticheskogo Immuniteta,” 9 Gosudarstvo i Pravo 81, (2011). | Safarov, N. A., “Presledovanie Mezhdunarodnykh
Prestuplenii: Universal’naia Iurisdiktsiia Protiv Diplomaticheskogo
Immuniteta,” 9 Gosudarstvo i Pravo 81, (2011). |
| Safarov, N. A., “Universal’naia
Iurisdiktsiia v Mekhanizme Presledovaniia Mezhdunarodnykh Prestuplenii,”
4(60) Moskovskii Zhurnal Mezhdunarodnogo Prava 190, (2005). | Safarov, N. A., “Universal’naia
Iurisdiktsiia v Mekhanizme Presledovaniia Mezhdunarodnykh Prestuplenii,”
4(60) Moskovskii Zhurnal Mezhdunarodnogo Prava 190, (2005). |
| Sánchez Legido, A., Jurisdicción
Universal Penal y Derecho Internacional (Tirant lo Blanch, Valencia, 2003). | Sánchez Legido, A., Jurisdicción
Universal Penal y Derecho Internacional (Tirant lo Blanch, Valencia, 2003). |
| Sánchez Legido, A.: “El Fin del Modelo
Español de Jurisdicción Universal,” 27 Revista Electrónica de Estudios
Internacionales (2014). | Sánchez Legido, A.: “El Fin del Modelo
Español de Jurisdicción Universal,” 27 Revista Electrónica de Estudios
Internacionales (2014). |
| Savadogo, R.O., et al., “Les Chambres
Africaines Extraordinaires Au Sein Des Tribunaux Sénégalais,” 45(1) Études
Internationales, 105, (2014). | Savadogo, R.O., et al., “Les Chambres
Africaines Extraordinaires Au Sein Des Tribunaux Sénégalais,” 45(1) Études
Internationales, 105, (2014). |
| Schabas W. A., “The International
Criminal Court” (Oxford University Press, 2010). | Schabas W. A., “The International
Criminal Court” (Oxford University Press, 2010). |
| Schabas W. A., “The UN International
Criminal Tribunals: The Former Yugoslavia, Rwanda and Sierra Leone”
(Cambridge University Press, 2006). | Schabas W. A., “The UN International
Criminal Tribunals: The Former Yugoslavia, Rwanda and Sierra Leone”
(Cambridge University Press, 2006). |
| Scharf M.P., “Application of Treaty-Based
Universal Jurisdiction to Nationals of Non-Party States,” 35 New Eng. L. Rev.
363, (2001). | Scharf M.P., “Application of Treaty-Based
Universal Jurisdiction to Nationals of Non-Party States,” 35 New Eng. L. Rev.
363, (2001). |
| Schiff B., Building the International
Criminal Court (Cambridge University Press 2008). | Schiff B., Building the International
Criminal Court (Cambridge University Press 2008). |
| Sharpe D. N., Prosecutions, Development,
and Justice: The Trial of Hissein Habre, 16 Harv. Hum. Rts. J. 147 (2003). | Sharpe D. N., Prosecutions, Development,
and Justice: The Trial of Hissein Habre, 16 Harv. Hum. Rts. J. 147 (2003). |
| Simbeye Y., Immunity and International
Criminal Law (Ashgate 2004). | Simbeye Y., Immunity and International
Criminal Law (Ashgate 2004). |
| Stahn C. (ed.), The Law and Practice of
the International Criminal Court (Oxford University Press, 2015). | Stahn C. (ed.), The Law and Practice of
the International Criminal Court (Oxford University Press, 2015). |
| Vallejo Peña, C., El Estado de la
Jurisdicción Internacional en el Derecho Internacional y en el Derecho
Interno Español (Tirant lo Blanch, Valencia, 2016). | Vallejo Peña, C., El Estado de la
Jurisdicción Internacional en el Derecho Internacional y en el Derecho
Interno Español (Tirant lo Blanch, Valencia, 2016). |
| Van der Wilt H., “Universal Jurisdiction
under Attack: An Assessment of African Misgivings towards International
Criminal Justice as Administered by Western States,” Journal of International
Criminal Justice 9(5) 1043, (2011). | Van der Wilt H., “Universal Jurisdiction
under Attack: An Assessment of African Misgivings towards International
Criminal Justice as Administered by Western States,” Journal of International
Criminal Justice 9(5) 1043, (2011). |
| Vincent, P., “L’Arret Yerodia de la Cour
Internationale de Justice Et Les Avatars De La Loi Belge De Compétence
Universelle,” 3 Revue de la Faculté de Droit de l’Université de Liège 379,
(2004). | Vincent, P., “L’Arret Yerodia de la Cour
Internationale de Justice Et Les Avatars De La Loi Belge De Compétence Universelle,”
3 Revue de la Faculté de Droit de l’Université de Liège 379, (2004). |
| Watio, R.T., “Quelques Réflexions sur les
Lois du 12 Février 2007 Portant Modification du Code Pénal Sénégalais et Mise
en Oeuvre du Statut de la Cour Pénale Internationale,” 15(1) African Yearbook
of International Law Online / Annuaire Africain De Droit International Online
285, (2007). | Watio, R.T., “Quelques Réflexions sur les
Lois du 12 Février 2007 Portant Modification du Code Pénal Sénégalais et Mise
en Oeuvre du Statut de la Cour Pénale Internationale,” 15(1) African Yearbook
of International Law Online / Annuaire Africain De Droit International Online
285, (2007). |
| Weiss P, “The Future of Universal
Jurisdiction,” in Wolfgang Kaleck et al. (eds.), International Prosecution of
Human Rights Crimes (2007). | Weiss P, “The Future of Universal
Jurisdiction,” in Wolfgang Kaleck et al. (eds.), International Prosecution of
Human Rights Crimes (2007). |
| Werle G, Principles of International
Criminal Law (3rd edn, 2014). | Werle G, Principles of International
Criminal Law (3rd edn, 2014). |
| Xavier P., “The Principles of Universal
Jurisdiction and Complementarity: How do the two Principles Intermesh? ”, 88
International Review of the Red Cross 375, 378 (2006). | Xavier P., “The Principles of Universal
Jurisdiction and Complementarity: How do the two Principles Intermesh?”, 88
International Review of the Red Cross 375, 378 (2006). |
| B. Sea-level rise in relation to
international law | B. 海平面上升与国际法有关的问题 |
| Mr. Bogdan Aurescu, Mr. Yacouba Cissé,
Ms. Patrícia Galvão Teles, Ms. Nilüfer Oral, Mr. Juan José Ruda Santolaria | 波格丹·奥雷斯库先生、雅库巴·西塞先生、帕特里夏·加尔旺·特莱斯女士、尼吕费尔·奥拉尔女士、胡安·何塞·鲁达·桑托拉里亚先生 |
| I. Introduction | 一. 导言 |
| 1. Sea-level rise has become in recent
years a subject of increasing importance for a significant part of the
international community — more than 70 States are or are likely to be
directly affected by sea-level rise, a group which represents more than one third
of the States of the international community. | 1. 近年来，对于国际社会相当一部分成员而言，海平面上升已成为一个越来越重要的问题――超过70个国家正在或可能受到海平面上升的直接影响，此类国家的数量已逾全球国家总数的三分之一。 |
| Indeed, as is well known, this phenomenon
is already having an increasing impact upon many essential aspects of life
for coastal areas, for low-lying coastal States and small island States, and
especially for their populations. | 事实上，众所周知，这一现象已日益影响到沿海地区、低洼沿海国家和小岛屿国家，特别是当地人民生活的诸多重要方面。 |
| Another quite large number of States is
likely to be indirectly affected (for instance, by the displacement of people
or the lack of access to resources). | 另有众多国家可能会受到间接影响(例如人口流离失所或无法获得资源)。 |
| Sea-level rise has become a global
phenomenon and thus creates global problems, impacting on the international
community as a whole. | 海平面上升已成为一种全球现象，从而导致影响整个国际社会的全球性问题。 |
| 2. In 2015, in paragraph 14 of the 2030
Agenda for Sustainable Development, the U.N. General Assembly recognised
that: “Climate change is one of the greatest challenges of our time and its
adverse impacts undermine the ability of all countries to achieve sustainable
development. | 2. 2015年，联合国大会在《2030年可持续发展议程》第14段中承认：“气候变化是当今时代的最大挑战之一，它产生的不利影响削弱了各国实现可持续发展的能力。 |
| Increases in global temperature,
sea-level rise, ocean acidification and other climate change impacts are
seriously affecting coastal areas and low-lying coastal countries, including
many least developed countries and small island developing States. | 全球升温、海平面上升、海洋酸化和气候变化产生的其他影响，严重影响到沿岸地区和低洼沿岸国家，包括许多最不发达国家和小岛屿发展中国家。 |
| The survival of many societies, and of
the biological support systems of the planet, is at risk.” | 许多社会和各种维系地球的生物系统的生存受到威胁。 ” |
| 3. Thus, among the several impacts of
climate change is sea-level rise. | 3. 由此可见，气候变化造成的几类影响包括海平面上升。 |
| According to scientific studies and
reports, such as the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel
on Climate Change, this phenomenon is likely to accelerate in the future. | 据科学研究和报告(如政府间气候变化专门委员会第五次评估报告)表明，未来这一现象有可能加速。 |
| As a result, the inundation of low-lying
coastal areas and of islands will make these zones less and less habitable or
uninhabitable, resulting in their partial or full depopulation. | 因此，低洼沿海地区和岛屿被淹没将使这些地区变得越来越不适合居住或根本无法居住，这些地方将丧失部分或全部人口。 |
| 4. These factual consequences of
sea-level rise prompt a number of important questions relevant to
international law. | 4. 海平面上升的这些实际后果引发了与国际法有关的若干重要问题。 |
| For instance, what are the legal
implications of the inundation of low-lying coastal areas and of islands upon
their baselines, upon maritime zones extending from those baselines and upon
delimitation of maritime zones, whether by agreement or adjudication? | 例如，低洼沿海地区和岛屿被淹没对于其基线、自基线延伸的海洋区以及海洋区划界(无论是通过协议还是裁定划界)有何法律影响？ |
| What are the effects upon the rights of
States in relation to those maritime zones? | 对与这些海洋区相关的国家权利有何影响？ |
| What are the consequences for statehood
under international law should the territory and population of a State
disappear? | 如果一国的领土和人口消失，对国际法之下的国家地位产生何种后果？ |
| What protection do persons directly
affected by sea-level rise enjoy under international law? | 直接受海平面上升影响的人员在国际法之下受到何种保护？ |
| 5. These questions should be examined
through an in-depth analysis of existing international law, including treaty
and customary international law, in accordance with the mandate of the International
Law Commission, which is the progressive development of international law and
its codification. | 5. 探讨这些问题，应依照国际法委员会逐步发展和编纂国际法这项任务，深入分析包括条约和习惯国际法在内的现行国际法。 |
| This effort could contribute to the
endeavours of the international community to ascertain the degree to which
current international law is able to respond to these issues and where there
is a need for States to develop practicable solutions in order to respond
effectively to the issues prompted by sea-level rise. | 这将有助于国际社会努力确定现行国际法能够在多大程度上应对这些问题，以及各国在哪些方面需要制定切实可行的解决办法，以便有效应对海平面上升引发的问题。 |
| 6. There has been a high level of
interest and support for the topic by States. | 6. 各国一直高度关注和支持这个专题。 |
| Fifteen delegations in the Sixth
Committee during the 72nd session of the U.N. General Assembly requested its
inclusion in the work programme of the Commission, while other nine
delegations mentioned, in their national statements, the importance of the problem. | 联合国大会第七十二届会议期间，第六委员会的15个代表团要求将其列入国际法委员会的工作方案，
还有9个代表团在发言中提到了这个问题的重要性。 |
| Furthermore, during an informal meeting
held on 26 October 2017, in New York, at the Permanent Mission of Romania, 35
States which attended showed a positive interest for the Commission to
undertake this topic. | 此外，2017年10月26日在罗马尼亚常驻纽约代表团举行的非正式会议期间，35个出席会议的国家对国际法委员会探讨这一专题表示了积极的兴趣。 |
| 7. Furthermore, the Government of the
Federated States of Micronesia has put forward a proposal dated 31 January
2018 for inclusion of a topic on the Long-Term Programme of Work of the
International Law Commission entitled “Legal Implications of Sea-level Rise”,
which was taken into account in the preparation of the present syllabus. | 7. 此外，密克罗尼西亚联邦政府提出了日期为2018年1月31日的提案，建议将“海平面上升的法律影响”这一专题列入国际法委员会的长期工作方案， 本提纲的编写考虑到了这项提案。 |
| II. Previous references to this topic in
the works of the International Law Commission | 二. 国际法委员会工作中曾提及本专题之处 |
| 8. The topic was referred to in the
Fourth Report on the Protection of the atmosphere (in paragraphs 66–67),
examined during the 69th session of the Commission in 2017. | 8. 关于“保护大气层”的第四次报告曾提及本专题(第66至第67段)，2017年委员会第六十九届会议审查了该报告。 |
| As a result of the debates during the
session, the Commission decided in that topic to provisionally adopt, inter
alia, a paragraph in the preamble and another paragraph where sea-level rise
is mentioned. | 会上经过辩论后，委员会决定在该专题中暂时通过，除其他外，提及海平面上升的一个序言段落 和另一段落。 |
| On that occasion, several members of the
Commission suggested that the issue of the sea-level rise be treated in a
more comprehensive manner, as a matter of priority, as a separate topic of
the Commission. | 当时，几位委员会委员建议以更加全面的方式处理海平面上升问题，将其作为优先事项，列为委员会的一项单独专题。 |
| 9. With regard to the topic Protection of
persons in the event of disasters, completed by the Commission in 2016, the
draft articles were considered in the commentary to be applicable to
different types of “disasters”, including with regard to “sudden-onset events
(such as an earthquake or tsunami) and to slow-onset events (such as drought
or “sea-level rise”), as well as frequent small-scale events (floods or
landslides)”. | 9. 关于委员会2016年完成的“发生灾害时的人员保护”专题， 其条款草案在评注中被认为适用于不同类型的“灾害”， 包括“突发事件(如地震或海啸)和缓慢发生的事件(如干旱或“海平面上升”)以及频繁的小规模事件(洪水或山体滑坡)。 ” |
| III. Consideration of the topic by other
bodies | 三. 其他机构对本专题的审议 |
| 10. The topic of sea-level rise was
initially examined by the International Law Association (ILA) Committee on
Baselines under the International Law of the Sea, whose final report was
considered at the Sofia Conference (2012). | 10. 最初讨论海平面上升专题的是国际法协会国际海洋法下的基线问题委员会，索菲亚会议审议了该委员会的最后报告(2012年)。 |
| The 2012 report recognized “that
substantial territorial loss resulting from sea-level rise is an issue that
extends beyond baselines and the law of the sea and encompasses consideration
at a junction of several parts of international law.” | 2012年报告确认，“海平面上升导致的大量领土丧失是一个超出基线和海洋法范围的问题，需要结合国际法的多个部分一同审议。 ” |
| 11. As a consequence, the ILA in 2012
established a new Committee on International Law and Sea Level Rise. | 11. 因此，国际法协会于2012年设立了新的国际法与海平面上升问题委员会。 |
| That Committee decided to focus its work
on three main issue areas: the law of the sea; forced migration and human
rights; and issues of statehood and international security. | 委员会决定将工作重点放在三个主要问题领域：海洋法、被迫移民与人权、国家地位问题与国际安全。 |
| An interim report of that Committee,
which was presented at the Johannesburg Conference in 2016, focused on issues
regarding the law of the sea and migration/human rights. | 委员会在2016年约翰内斯堡会议上介绍的中期报告 重点讨论了有关海洋法和移民/人权的问题。 |
| Another report was considered at the
Sydney Conference, which completed the Committee’s work on law of the sea
issues. | 悉尼会议上审议了另一份报告，完成了该委员会有关海洋法问题的工作。 |
| Further, the 2018 report proposed 12
principles with commentary comprising a “Declaration of Principles on the
Protection of Persons Displaced in the Context of Sea Level Rise. | 此外，2018年报告还提出了12项附带评注的原则，其中包含《关于保护在海平面上升背景下流离失所者的原则宣言》。 |
| ” The mandate of the Committee is
expected to be extended to continue the study of the statehood question and
other relevant issues of international law. | 委员会的任务预计将延长，以继续研究国家地位问题及其他有关的国际法问题。 |
| IV. Consequences of sea-level rise | 四. 海平面上升的后果 |
| 12. As already mentioned, sea-level rise
produces the inundation of low-lying coastal areas and of islands, which has
consequences in three main areas: A) law of the sea; | 12. 如前所述，海平面上升致使低洼沿海地区和岛屿被淹没，主要造成三个方面的后果：A) 海洋法； |
| B) statehood; | B) 国家地位； |
| and C) protection of persons affected by
sea-level rise. | C) 受海平面上升影响的人员的保护。 |
| 13. These three issues reflect the legal
implications of sea-level rise for the constituent elements of the State
(territory, population and government/Statehood) and are thus interconnected
and should be examined together. | 13. 这三个问题反映了海平面上升对国家构成要素(领土、人口和政府/国家地位)的法律影响，因此相互关联，应该一起讨论。 |
| V. Scope of the topic and questions to be
addressed | 五. 专题的范畴和需要处理的问题 |
| 14. This topic deals only with the legal
implications of sea-level rise. It does not deal with protection of
environment, climate change per se, causation, responsibility and liability. | 14. 本专题仅涉及海平面上升的法律影响，不涉及环境保护、气候变化本身、因果关系、责任和义务。 |
| It does not intend to provide a
comprehensive and exhaustive scoping of the application of international law
to the questions raised by sea-level rise, but to outline some key issues. | 本专题无意就海平面上升引起的问题全面而详尽地划定国际法的适用范围，只想概述一些关键的问题。 |
| The three areas to be examined should be
analysed only within the context of sea-level rise notwithstanding other
causal factors that may lead to similar consequences. | 虽然还有其他诱因可能造成类似后果，但是对于要探讨的三个方面，应该仅在海平面上升的背景下加以分析。 |
| Due attention should be paid, where
possible, to distinguish between consequences related to sea-level rise and
those from other factors. | 如有可能，应注意区分与海平面上升有关的后果和其他因素造成的后果。 |
| This topic will not propose modifications
to existing international law, such as the 1982 U.N. Convention on the Law of
the Sea (UNCLOS). | 本专题不会对1982年《联合国海洋法公约》等现行国际法提出修正建议。 |
| Other questions may arise in the future
requiring analysis. | 今后可能会出现其他需要分析的问题。 |
| Having in mind the above considerations,
the Commission could analyse the following questions related to the legal
implications sea-level rise. | 考虑到上述考虑因素，委员会可以分析与海平面上升的法律影响有关的下列问题。 |
| 15. Law of the Sea issues | 15. 海洋法的问题： |
| (i) Possible legal effects of sea-level
rise on the baselines and outer limits of the maritime spaces which are
measured from the baselines; | (一) 海平面上升对基线和从基线开始测量的海域外部界限可能产生的法律影响； |
| (ii) Possible legal effects of sea-level
rise on maritime delimitations; | (二) 海平面上升对海洋划界可能产生的法律影响； |
| (iii) Possible legal effects of sea-level
rise on islands as far as their role in the construction of baselines and in
maritime delimitations; | (三) 海平面上升对岛屿在构成基线和海洋划界方面的作用可能产生的法律影响； |
| (iv) Possible legal effects of sea-level
rise on the exercise of sovereign rights and jurisdiction of the coastal
State and its nationals in maritime spaces in which boundaries or baselines
have been established, especially regarding the exploration, exploitation and
conservation of their resources, as well as the rights of third States and
their nationals (e.g., innocent passage, freedom of navigation, fishing
rights); | (四) 海平面上升对沿海国及其国民在已确立边界或基线的海域行使主权和管辖权可能产生的法律影响，特别是在资源的勘探、开采和保护方面，以及对第三国及其国民的权利(例如无害通过、航行自由、捕鱼权)方面的影响； |
| (v) Possible legal effects of sea-level
rise on the status of islands, including rocks and on the maritime
entitlements of a coastal State with fringing islands; | (五) 海平面上升对岛屿(包括岩礁)的地位以及具有岸岛的沿海国的海洋权利可能产生的法律影响； |
| (vi) Legal status of artificial islands,
reclamation or island fortification activities under international law as a
response/adaptive measures to sea-level rise. | (六) 人工岛屿、填海或岛屿防御活动作为对海平面上升的应对/适应措施，在国际法之下的法律地位。 |
| 16. Statehood issues | 16. 国家地位的问题： |
| (i) Analysis of the possible legal effects
on the continuity or loss of statehood in cases where the territory of island
States is completely covered by the sea or becomes uninhabitable; | (一) 分析岛屿国家领土完全被海洋覆盖或变得无法居住的情况对国家地位的存续或丧失可能产生的法律影响； |
| (ii) Legal assessment regarding the
reinforcement of islands with barriers or the erection of artificial islands
as a means to preserve the statehood of island States against the risk that
their land territory might be completely covered by the sea or become
uninhabitable; | (二) 对以下做法进行法律评估：岛屿国家用屏障巩固岛屿或建造人工岛屿，以保护其国家地位不因陆地领土可能完全被海洋覆盖或变得无法居住而受到威胁； |
| (iii) Analysis of the legal fiction
according to which, considering the freezing of baselines and the respect of
the boundaries established by treaties, judicial judgments or arbitral
awards, it could be admitted the continuity of statehood of the island States
due to the maritime territory established as a result of territories under
their sovereignty before the latter become completely covered by the sea or
uninhabitable; | (三) 分析以下法律拟制：考虑到基线冻结和对条约、司法判决或仲裁裁决所定边界的尊重，可以因为岛屿国家的主权领土在完全被海洋覆盖或变得不适合居住之前，存在依其主权领土而确定的领海，承认该岛屿国家的国家地位继续存续； |
| (iv) Assessment of the possible legal
effects regarding the transfer — either with or without transfer of
sovereignty — of a strip or portion of territory of a third State in favour
of an island State whose terrestrial territory is at risk of becoming
completely covered by the sea or uninhabitable, in order to maintain its
statehood or any form of international legal personality; | (四) 评估以下做法可能产生的法律影响：将第三国的一片或部分领土转让给陆地领土有可能完全被海水覆盖或变得不适合居住的岛屿国家(无论是否移交主权)，以维持其国家地位或任何形式的国际法律人格； |
| (v) Analysis of the possible legal
effects of a merger between the island developing State whose land territory
is at risk of becoming completely covered by the sea or uninhabitable and
another State, or of the creation of a federation or association between them
regarding the maintenance of statehood or of any form of international legal
personality of the island State. | (五) 分析以下做法可能产生的法律影响：陆地领土有可能完全被海水覆盖或变得不适合居住的岛屿发展中国家与另一国合并，或双方为维持岛屿国家的国家地位或任何形式的国际法律人格而建立联邦或联盟。 |
| 17. Issues related to the protection of
persons affected by sea-level rise | 17. 与保护受海平面上升影响的人员有关的问题 |
| (i) The extent to which the duty of
States to protect the human rights of individuals under their jurisdiction
apply to consequences related to sea-level rise; | (一) 国家保护其所管辖个人的人权的责任在多大程度上适用于与海平面上升有关的后果； |
| (ii) Whether the principle of
international cooperation be applied to help States cope with the adverse
effects of sea-level rise on their population; | (二) 是否可以运用国际合作原则帮助国家应对海平面上升对其人口造成的不利影响； |
| (iii) Whether there are any international
legal principles applicable to measures to be taken by States to help their
population to remain in situ, despite rising sea levels; | (三) 是否已存在国际法律原则，适用于国家为帮助人民克服海平面上升而留在原地而采取的措施； |
| (iv) Whether there are any international
legal principles applicable to the evacuation, relocation and migration
abroad of persons caused by the adverse effects of sea-level rise; | (四) 是否已存在国际法律原则，适用于海平面上升的不利影响所致人员撤离、迁移和移民海外； |
| (vi) Possible principles applicable to
the protection of the human rights of persons displaced internally or that
migrate due to the adverse effects of sea-level rise. | (五) 可能有哪些原则适用于保护海平面上升的不利影响所致境内流离失所者或移民的人权。 |
| VI. Method of work of the Commission on
this topic | 六. 委员会关于本专题的工作方法 |
| 18. The format of a Study Group would
allow for a mapping exercise of the legal questions raised by sea-level rise
and its interrelated issues. | 18. 采用研究组的形式，可以摸清对海平面上升及相关问题所引起的法律问题。 |
| The Study Group would analyse the
existing international law, including treaty and customary international law,
in accordance with the mandate of the International Law Commission, which is
to perform codification of customary international law and its progressive
development. | 研究组将依照国际法委员会编纂和逐步发展习惯国际法这项任务，分析包括条约和习惯国际法在内的现行国际法。 |
| This effort could contribute to the
endeavours of the international community to respond to these issues and to
assist States in developing practicable solutions in order to respond effectively
to the issues prompted by sea-level rise. | 这将有助于国际社会努力应对这些问题，以及帮助国家制定切实可行的解决办法，以便有效应对海平面上升引发的问题。 |
| 19. The work of the Study Group would be
based on papers that would address the different issues raised by the topic,
namely with regard to A) law of the sea, B) statehood and C) protection of
persons affected by sea-level rise. | 19. 研究组的工作将基于为解决本专题提出的各方面问题而撰写的文章，这些问题涉及：A) 海洋法、B) 国家地位、C) 受海平面上升影响的人员的保护。 |
| This approach would allow for sufficient
flexibility of approach and would be able to actively involve members of the
Commission in the work on this topic. | 这种方法将具有足够的灵活性，能够让委员会委员积极参与本专题的工作。 |
| It is to be recalled that the Commission
has used this method successfully in the past, a relevant example being the
Study Group on the Fragmentation of International Law (2002–2006). | 应该指出，国际法委员会以往曾成功运用过这种方法，国际法不成体系问题研究组(2002至2006年)便是一例。 |
| 20. The work of the Study Group would be
based on the practice of States, international treaties, other international
instruments, judicial decisions of international and national courts and
tribunals, and the analyses of scholars — all these in a systemic and
integrative approach. | 20. 研究组的工作将立足于各国实践、国际条约、其他国际文书、国际法院和各国法院及法庭的司法判决以及学者的分析，以系统和综合的方法分析以上所有信息。 |
| VII. The topic satisfies the requirements
for selection of a new topic | 七. 本专题符合选择新专题的标准 |
| 21. In order to select new topics for
inclusion in its programme of work, the Commission is guided by the 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; | 21. 在选择列入工作方案的新专题时，委员会遵循第五十届会议(1998年)商定的标准， 即专题(a)
应反映各国在逐渐发展和编纂国际法方面的需要； |
| (b) should be at a sufficiently advanced
stage in terms of State practice to permit progressive development and codification; | (b) 专题在国家实践方面应处于足够成熟阶段，从而允许逐渐发展和编纂； |
| (c) should be concrete and feasible for
progressive development and codification; | (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，还应考虑那些反映国际法中新动态和整个国际社会的紧迫关切事项的专题。 |
| 22. First, the topic “Sea-Level Rise in
relation to International Law” reflects the needs of States: more than a
third of the existing States of the international community are likely to be
directly affected by the sea-level rise and are keenly interested in this
topic. | 22. 首先，“海平面上升与国际法有关的问题”专题反映了各国的需要：国际社会现有的国家中，超过三分之一可能直接受到海平面上升的影响，并对这一专题十分关注。 |
| Moreover, there may be broader impacts to
the international community at large, since another large number of States
are likely to be indirectly affected by sea-level rise (for instance, by the
displacement of people, the lack of access to resources). | 此外，这一问题可能会对整个国际社会产生更广泛的影响，因为另有众多国家可能会受到海平面上升的间接影响(例如人口流离失所、无法获得资源)。 |
| Sea-level rise has become a global
phenomenon, and thus creates global problems, impacting in general on the
international community of States as a whole. | 海平面上升已成为一种全球现象，从而导致影响整个国际社会的全球性问题。 |
| This interest is shared by a variety of
States, from very different geographic locations, including landlocked
countries, which shows the amplitude of the States’ interest. | 地理位置截然不同的国家，包括内陆国家，都对这一问题保持关注，可见其受关注范围之广。 |
| 23. Second, there is an emerging State
practice — namely with regard to issues related to the law of the sea (such
as maintaining baselines, construction of artificial islands, and coastal
fortifications) and the protection of persons affected by sea-level rise
(such as the relocation of local communities within the country or to other
countries, and the creation of humanitarian visa categories). | 23. 其次，在涉及海洋法的问题(如维持基线、建造人工岛屿、沿海防御)和与保护受海平面上升影响的人员有关的问题(如在国内或其他国家重新安置当地社区、创建人道主义签证类别)上，出现了新的国家实践。 |
| In addition, relevant practice exists,
inter alia, in relation to governments in exile as examples of maintaining
statehood in absence of control over territory. | 此外，还存在流亡政府等做法，在丧失领土控制权的情况下维持国家地位。 |
| The consequences of sea-level rise, which
may be defined as affecting the very existence of a number of the States
concerned, and, in any case, essential parameters of statehood like
territory, population and governance as well as the enjoyment of the essential
resources for the prosperity of these nations, call for an early analysis of
its legal implications. | 海平面上升的后果，可界定为影响若干有关国家的存续，而且无论如何会影响到领土、人口和治理等国家地位基本参数以及为促进国家繁荣对基本资源的享有，因此需要尽早分析其法律影响。 |
| 24. That is why, third, the topic is
feasible because the work of the Study Group will be able to identify areas
ripe for possible codification and progressive development of international
law and where there are gaps. | 24. 第三，正因如此，此专题具有可行性，因为通过研究组的工作，将确定条件成熟、可能进行编纂和逐渐发展的领域，以及需要填补空白的领域。 |
| At the same time, the aspects to be
examined have a high degree of concreteness, as shown above in sections IV
and V. | 与此同时，如上文第四和第五节所述，将要探讨的内容十分具体。 |
| 25. Fourth, it is beyond any doubt that
this topic, in the light of the arguments presented, reflects new
developments in international law and pressing concerns of the international
community as a whole. | 25. 第四，鉴于上述论点，毋庸置疑的是，本专题反映了国际法中新动态和整个国际社会的紧迫关切事项。 |
| VIII. Conclusion | 八. 结论 |
| 26. The final outcome would be a Final
Report of the Study Group on “Sea-Level Rise in relation to International
Law”, accompanied by a set of Conclusions of the work of the Study Group. | 26. 最终成果将是“海平面上升与国际法有关的问题”研究组的最后报告，并附有研究组工作的一套结论。 |
| After the presentation of the Final
Report of the Study Group, it could be considered whether and how to pursue
further the development of the topic or parts of it within the Commission or
other fora. | 研究组提出最后报告后，将考虑是否及如何在国际法委员会或其他论坛继续进一步发展这一专题或其中部分内容。 |
| Bibliography | 参考文献 |
| Books and articles | Books and articles |
| Gómez, Mariano J. Aznar. “El Estado sin
territorio: La desaparición del territorio debido al cambio climático. “
Revista electrónica de estudios internacionales (REEI) 26 (2013): 2–23 / “The
State Without Territory: The Disappearance of the Territory due to Climate
Change, in Revista Electrónica de Estudios Internacionales N° 6 (2013). | Gómez, Mariano J. Aznar. “El Estado sin
territorio: La desaparición del territorio debido al cambio climático. “
Revista electrónica de estudios internacionales (REEI) 26 (2013): 2–23 / “The
State Without Territory: The Disappearance of the Territory due to Climate
Change, in Revista Electrónica de Estudios Internacionales N° 6 (2013). |
| Baldacchino, Godfrey, and David Milne.
The case for non-sovereignty. Routledge, 2009. | Baldacchino, Godfrey, and David Milne.
The case for non-sovereignty. Routledge, 2009. |
| Bergmann, Nina. Versinkende Inselstaaten:
Auswirkungen des Klimawandels auf die Staatlichkeit kleiner Inselstaaten.
Duncker & Humblot, 2016. | Bergmann, Nina. Versinkende Inselstaaten:
Auswirkungen des Klimawandels auf die Staatlichkeit kleiner Inselstaaten.
Duncker & Humblot, 2016. |
| Bird, E., and V. Prescott. “Rising global
sea levels and national maritime claims. ” Marine Policy Reports 1, no. 3
(1989). | Bird, E., and V. Prescott. “Rising global
sea levels and national maritime claims.” Marine Policy Reports 1, no. 3
(1989). |
| Blake, Gerald H., ed. Maritime
Boundaries: World Boundaries. | Blake, Gerald H., ed. Maritime
Boundaries: World Boundaries. Vol. 5. Routledge, 2002. |
| Vol. 5. Routledge, 2002. | |
| Bowett, Derek William. “The legal regime
of islands in international law. ” Oceana Publications, (1979). | Bowett, Derek William. “The legal regime
of islands in international law.” Oceana Publications, (1979). |
| Boyle, Alan, “Climate Change, Ocean
Governance and UNCLOS”, In Law of the Sea: UNCLOS as a Living Treaty. By Jill
Barrett and Richard Barnes (eds). British Institute of International and
Comparative Law, 2016 (2016): 225–231. | Boyle, Alan, “Climate Change, Ocean
Governance and UNCLOS”, In Law of the Sea: UNCLOS as a Living Treaty. By Jill
Barrett and Richard Barnes (eds). British Institute of International and
Comparative Law, 2016 (2016): 225–231. |
| Caron, David D. “When law makes climate
change worse: rethinking the law of baselines in light of a rising sea level.
” Ecology LQ 17 (1990): 621. | Caron, David D. “When law makes climate
change worse: rethinking the law of baselines in light of a rising sea
level.” Ecology LQ 17 (1990): 621. |
| Caron, David D. “Climate change, sea
level rise and the coming uncertainty in oceanic boundaries: a proposal to
avoid conflict. ” In Maritime Boundary Disputes, Settlement Processes, and
the Law of the Sea, pp. 1–18. Brill, 2009. | Caron, David D. “Climate change, sea
level rise and the coming uncertainty in oceanic boundaries: a proposal to
avoid conflict.” In Maritime Boundary Disputes, Settlement Processes, and the
Law of the Sea, pp. 1–18. Brill, 2009. |
| Castangia, Isabella. Sovranità,
contiguità territoriale e isole in una controversia internazionale del XVIII
secolo. | Castangia, Isabella. Sovranità,
contiguità territoriale e isole in una controversia internazionale del XVIII
secolo. Vol. 39. Jovene, 1988. |
| Vol. 39. Jovene, 1988. | |
| Dipla, Haritini. Le régime juridique des
îles dans le droit international de la mer. Graduate Institute Publications,
2015. | Dipla, Haritini. Le régime juridique des
îles dans le droit international de la mer. Graduate Institute Publications,
2015. |
| Duong, Tiffany TV. “When islands drown:
The plight of climate change refugees and recourse to international human
rights law. ” U. Pa. J. Int’l L. 31 (2009): 1239. | Duong, Tiffany TV. “When islands drown:
The plight of climate change refugees and recourse to international human
rights law.” U. Pa. J. Int’l L. 31 (2009): 1239. |
| Freestone, David. “Can the UN Climate
Regime Respond to the Challenges of Sea Level Rise. ” U. Haw. L. Rev. 35
(2013): 671. | Freestone, David. “Can the UN Climate
Regime Respond to the Challenges of Sea Level Rise.” U. Haw. L. Rev. 35
(2013): 671. |
| Freestone, David, and John Pethick. “Sea
Level Rise and Maritime Boundaries: The Effect of Rising Sea Level on
International Boundaries. ” In Coastal Zone’91, pp. 3162–3162. | Freestone, David, and John Pethick. “Sea
Level Rise and Maritime Boundaries: The Effect of Rising Sea Level on
International Boundaries.” In Coastal Zone’91, pp. 3162–3162. ASCE, 1991. |
| ASCE, 1991. | |
| Freestone, David. “International law and
sea level rise. ” International Law and Global Climate Change, Kluwer Law
International, London (1991): 109. | Freestone, David. “International law and
sea level rise.” International Law and Global Climate Change, Kluwer Law
International, London (1991): 109. |
| Gagain, Michael. “Climate change, sea
level rise, and artificial islands: Saving the Maldives’ statehood and
maritime claims through the constitution of the oceans. | Gagain, Michael. “Climate change, sea
level rise, and artificial islands: Saving the Maldives’ statehood and
maritime claims through the constitution of the oceans.” Colo. J. Int’l
Envtl. L. & Pol’y 23 (2012): 77. |
| ” Colo. J. Int’l Envtl. L. & Pol’y 23
(2012): 77. | |
| Gerrard, Michael B., and Gregory E.
Wannier, eds. Threatened island nations: legal implications of rising seas
and a changing climate. Cambridge University Press, 2013. | Gerrard, Michael B., and Gregory E.
Wannier, eds. Threatened island nations: legal implications of rising seas
and a changing climate. Cambridge University Press, 2013. |
| Hayashi, Moritaka, “Sea level rise and
the law of the sea: future options. ” The World Ocean in Globalisation.
Brill/Martinus Nijhoff, Boston/Leiden (2011): 187–206. | Hayashi, Moritaka, “Sea level rise and
the law of the sea: future options.” The World Ocean in Globalisation.
Brill/Martinus Nijhoff, Boston/Leiden (2011): 187–206. |
| Hayashi, Moritaka. “Islands’ Sea Areas:
Effects of a Rising Sea Level. ” Review of Island Studies, 10 June 2013,
https://www.spf.org/islandstudies/research/a00003/. | Hayashi, Moritaka. “Islands’ Sea Areas:
Effects of a Rising Sea Level.” Review of Island Studies, 10 June 2013,
https://www.spf.org/islandstudies/research/a00003/. |
| Hayashi, Moritaka “Sea Level Rise and the
Law of the Sea: How Can the Affected States Be Better Protected?. ” In The
Limits of Maritime Jurisdiction Clive Schofield, Seokwoo Lee and Moon-Sang
Kwon. eds., Brill, 2013. | Hayashi, Moritaka “Sea Level Rise and the
Law of the Sea: How Can the Affected States Be Better Protected?.” In The
Limits of Maritime Jurisdiction Clive Schofield, Seokwoo Lee and Moon-Sang
Kwon. eds., Brill, 2013. |
| Hestetune, Jared. “The invading waters:
climate change dispossession, state extinction, and international law. ”
California Western School of Law (2010). | Hestetune, Jared. “The invading waters:
climate change dispossession, state extinction, and international law.”
California Western School of Law (2010). |
| Huang, Lei. “International law relating
to the outer limits of maritime zones in the context of sea level rise. ”
Master’s thesis, Universitetet i Tromsø, 2011. | Huang, Lei. “International law relating
to the outer limits of maritime zones in the context of sea level rise.”
Master’s thesis, Universitetet i Tromsø, 2011. |
| Jaen, Monica. “Protecting the Oceans from
Climate Change: An Analysis of the Role of Selected International Instruments
on Resources and Environmental Protection in the Context of UNCLOS. ” Ocean
YB 21 (2007): 91. | Jaen, Monica. “Protecting the Oceans from
Climate Change: An Analysis of the Role of Selected International Instruments
on Resources and Environmental Protection in the Context of UNCLOS.” Ocean YB
21 (2007): 91. |
| Jayaraman, K. Legal Regime of Islands.
Marwah Publications, 1982. Jayewardene, Hiran Wasantha. | Jayaraman, K. Legal Regime of Islands.
Marwah Publications, 1982. |
| The regime of islands in international
law. Vol. 15. Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 1990. | Jayewardene, Hiran Wasantha. The regime
of islands in international law. Vol. 15. Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 1990. |
| Kälin, Walter. “The Human Rights
Dimension of Natural or Human Made Disasters. ” German Yearbook of
International Law 55 (2013): 119–147. | Kälin, Walter. “The Human Rights
Dimension of Natural or Human Made Disasters.” German Yearbook of
International Law 55 (2013): 119–147. |
| Kaye, Stuart. “The Law of the Sea
Convention and Sea Level Rise after the South China Sea Arbitration. ” Int’l
L. Stud. Ser. US Naval War Col. 93 (2017): i. | Kaye, Stuart. “The Law of the Sea
Convention and Sea Level Rise after the South China Sea Arbitration.” Int’l
L. Stud. Ser. US Naval War Col. 93 (2017): i. |
| Kausher, Armand, R. C. Kay, M.
Asaduzzaman, and S. Paul. “Climate change and sea-level rise: the case of the
coast. ” In The Implications of Climate and Sea–Level Change for Bangladesh,
pp. 335–405. | Kausher, Armand, R. C. Kay, M.
Asaduzzaman, and S. Paul. “Climate change and sea-level rise: the case of the
coast.” In The Implications of Climate and Sea–Level Change for Bangladesh,
pp. 335–405. Springer, Dordrecht, 1996. |
| Springer, Dordrecht, 1996. Kendall,
Rachel. “Climate change as a security threat to the Pacific Islands. | Kendall, Rachel. “Climate change as a
security threat to the Pacific Islands.” NZJ Envtl. L. 16 (2012): 83. |
| ” NZJ Envtl. L. 16 (2012): 83. | |
| Rigaud, Kanta Kumari, Alex de Sherbinin,
Bryan Jones, Jonas Bergmann, Viviane Clement, Kayly Ober, Jacob Schewe et al.
Groundswell: preparing for internal climate migration. World Bank, 2018. | Rigaud, Kanta Kumari, Alex de Sherbinin,
Bryan Jones, Jonas Bergmann, Viviane Clement, Kayly Ober, Jacob Schewe et al.
Groundswell: preparing for internal climate migration. World Bank, 2018. |
| Lusthaus, Jonathan. “Shifting sands: sea
level rise, maritime boundaries and inter-state conflict. ” Politics 30, no.
2 (2010): 113–118. | Lusthaus, Jonathan. “Shifting sands: sea
level rise, maritime boundaries and inter-state conflict.” Politics 30, no. 2
(2010): 113–118. |
| McAnaney, Sheila C. “Sinking
islands-formulating a realistic solution to climate change displacement. ”
NYUL Rev. 87 (2012): 1172. | McAnaney, Sheila C. “Sinking
islands-formulating a realistic solution to climate change displacement.”
NYUL Rev. 87 (2012): 1172. |
| McAdam, Jane. Climate change, forced
migration, and international law. Oxford University Press, 2012. | McAdam, Jane. Climate change, forced
migration, and international law. Oxford University Press, 2012. |
| McAdam, Jane, Bruce Burson, Walter Kälin,
and Sanjula Weerasinghe. “International law and sea-level rise: forced
migration and human rights. ” (2016). | McAdam, Jane, Bruce Burson, Walter Kälin,
and Sanjula Weerasinghe. “International law and sea-level rise: forced
migration and human rights.” (2016). |
| McAdam, Jane. “‘Disappearing states’,
statelessness and the boundaries of international law. ” (2010). | McAdam, Jane. “‘Disappearing states’,
statelessness and the boundaries of international law.” (2010). |
| Menefee, Samuel Pyeatt. “Half seas over:
The impact of sea level rise on international law and policy. ” UCLA J.
Envtl. L. & Pol’y 9 (1990): 175. | Menefee, Samuel Pyeatt. “Half seas over:
The impact of sea level rise on international law and policy.” UCLA J. Envtl.
L. & Pol’y 9 (1990): 175. |
| Murphy, Sean D. “International Law
Relating to Islands. ” (2017). | Murphy, Sean D. “International Law
Relating to Islands.” (2017). |
| Nandan, Satya N. “The exclusive economic
zone: A historical perspective. ” (1987). | Nandan, Satya N. “The exclusive economic
zone: A historical perspective.” (1987). |
| Nansen Initiative, Agenda for the
Protection of Cross-Border Displaced Persons in the Context of Disasters and
Climate Change (December 2015) | Nansen Initiative, Agenda for the
Protection of Cross-Border Displaced Persons in the Context of Disasters and
Climate Change (December 2015) |
| Orellana, Marcos A., “Climate Change and
the International Law of the Sea. Mapping the Legal Issues”, in Randall S.
Abate, Climate Change Impacts on Ocean and Coastal Law. U.S. and
International Perspectives, (Oxford Scholarship Online: January 2015) | Orellana, Marcos A., “Climate Change and
the International Law of the Sea. Mapping the Legal Issues”, in Randall S. Abate,
Climate Change Impacts on Ocean and Coastal Law. U.S. and International
Perspectives, (Oxford Scholarship Online: January 2015) |
| Pardo, Miguel Lamas. “Micronaciones en
islas artificiales según el Derecho Marítimo e Internacional. ” Anuario de
derecho marítimo 29 (2012): 197–227. | Pardo, Miguel Lamas. “Micronaciones en
islas artificiales según el Derecho Marítimo e Internacional.” Anuario de
derecho marítimo 29 (2012): 197–227. |
| Park, Susin: El Cambio Climático y el
Riesgo de Apatridia: La Situación de los Estados Insulares Bajos, Geneva,
(ACNUR / UNHCR, May 2011). | Park, Susin: El Cambio Climático y el
Riesgo de Apatridia: La Situación de los Estados Insulares Bajos, Geneva,
(ACNUR / UNHCR, May 2011). |
| Puthucherril, Tony George. “Rising Seas,
Receding Coastlines, and Vanishing Maritime Estates and Territories: Possible
Solutions and Reassessing the Role of International Law. ” International
Community Law Review 16, no. 1 (2014): 38–74. | Puthucherril, Tony George. “Rising Seas,
Receding Coastlines, and Vanishing Maritime Estates and Territories: Possible
Solutions and Reassessing the Role of International Law.” International
Community Law Review 16, no. 1 (2014): 38–74. |
| Rayfuse, Rosemary. “International Law and
Disappearing States. ” Envtl. Pol’y & L. 41 (2011): 281. | Rayfuse, Rosemary. “International Law and
Disappearing States.” Envtl. Pol’y & L. 41 (2011): 281. |
| Rayfuse, Rosemary. “International law and
disappearing states: utilising maritime entitlements to overcome the
statehood dilemma. ” (2010). | Rayfuse, Rosemary. “International law and
disappearing states: utilising maritime entitlements to overcome the
statehood dilemma.” (2010). |
| Rayfuse, Rosemary Gail, and Shirley V.
Scott, eds. International Law in the Era of Climate Change. Edward Elgar
Publishing, 2012. | Rayfuse, Rosemary Gail, and Shirley V.
Scott, eds. International Law in the Era of Climate Change. Edward Elgar
Publishing, 2012. |
| Ruppel, Oliver C, Roschmann, Christian,
Ruppel-Schlichting, Katharina. eds, Climate Change: International Law and
Global Governance. Volume I: Legal Responses and Global Responsibility,
Nomos, 2013 | Ruppel, Oliver C, Roschmann, Christian,
Ruppel-Schlichting, Katharina. eds, Climate Change: International Law and
Global Governance. Volume I: Legal Responses and Global Responsibility,
Nomos, 2013 |
| Schofield, Clive. “Shifting Limits: Sea
Level Rise and Options to Secure Maritime Jurisdictional Claims. ” Carbon
& Climate L. Rev. (2009): 405. | Schofield, Clive. “Shifting Limits: Sea
Level Rise and Options to Secure Maritime Jurisdictional Claims.” Carbon
& Climate L. Rev. (2009): 405. |
| Schofield, Clive, and David Freestone.
“Options to protect coastlines and secure maritime jurisdictional claims in
the face of global sea level rise. ” (2013): 141. | Schofield, Clive, and David Freestone.
“Options to protect coastlines and secure maritime jurisdictional claims in
the face of global sea level rise.” (2013): 141. |
| Schofield, Clive. “The trouble with Islands:
the definition and role of Islands and rocks in maritime boundary
delimitation. ” In Maritime boundary disputes, settlement processes, and the
Law of the Sea, pp. 19–38. | Schofield, Clive. “The trouble with
Islands: the definition and role of Islands and rocks in maritime boundary
delimitation.” In Maritime boundary disputes, settlement processes, and the
Law of the Sea, pp. 19–38. Brill, 2009. |
| Brill, 2009. Scholten, Henk Jan. | |
| Statehood and State Extinction: Sea Level
Rise and the Legal Challenges Faced by Low-lying Island-states.
Rijksuniversiteit Groningen, 2011. | Scholten, Henk Jan. Statehood and State
Extinction: Sea Level Rise and the Legal Challenges Faced by Low-lying
Island-states. Rijksuniversiteit Groningen, 2011. |
| Sefrioui, Sarra. “Adapting to Sea Level
Rise: A Law of the Sea Perspective. ” In The Future of the Law of the Sea,
pp. 3–22. Springer, Cham, 2017. | Sefrioui, Sarra. “Adapting to Sea Level
Rise: A Law of the Sea Perspective.” In The Future of the Law of the Sea, pp.
3–22. Springer, Cham, 2017. |
| McInerney-Lankford, Siobhán, Mac Darrow,
and Lavanya Rajamani. Human rights and climate change: a review of the
international legal dimensions. The World Bank, 2011. | McInerney-Lankford, Siobhán, Mac Darrow,
and Lavanya Rajamani. Human rights and climate change: a review of the
international legal dimensions. The World Bank, 2011. |
| Soons, Alfred HA. “The effects of a
rising sea level on maritime limits and boundaries. ” Netherlands
International Law Review 37, no. 2 (1990): 207–232. | Soons, Alfred HA. “The effects of a
rising sea level on maritime limits and boundaries.” Netherlands
International Law Review 37, no. 2 (1990): 207–232. |
| Storr, Cait. “Islands and the South:
Framing the Relationship between International Law and Environmental Crisis.
” (2016): 519–540. | Storr, Cait. “Islands and the South:
Framing the Relationship between International Law and Environmental Crisis.”
(2016): 519–540. |
| Stoutenburg, Jenny Grote. “Implementing a
new regime of stable maritime zones to ensure the (economic) survival of
small island states threatened by sea-level rise. ” The International Journal
of Marine and Coastal Law 26, no. 2 (2011): 263–311. | Stoutenburg, Jenny Grote. “Implementing a
new regime of stable maritime zones to ensure the (economic) survival of
small island states threatened by sea-level rise.” The International Journal
of Marine and Coastal Law 26, no. 2 (2011): 263–311. |
| Stoutenburg, Jenny Grote. | |
| “When Do States Disappear? Thresholds of
Effective Statehood and the Continued Recognition of “Deterritorialized”
Island States. ” Threatened Island Nations: Legal Implications of Rising Seas
and a Changing Climate 57 (2013). | Stoutenburg, Jenny Grote. “When Do States
Disappear? Thresholds of Effective Statehood and the Continued Recognition of
“Deterritorialized” Island States.” Threatened Island Nations: Legal
Implications of Rising Seas and a Changing Climate 57 (2013). |
| Stoutenburg, Jenny Grote. Disappearing
island states in international law. Brill, 2015. | Stoutenburg, Jenny Grote. Disappearing
island states in international law. Brill, 2015. |
| Takamura, Yukari. “Climate Change and
Small Island Claims in the Pacific. ” In Climate Change: International Law
and Global Governance, pp. 657–684. | Takamura, Yukari. “Climate Change and
Small Island Claims in the Pacific.” In Climate Change: International Law and
Global Governance, pp. 657–684. Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG,
2013. |
| Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co.
KG, 2013. | |
| Camprubí, Alejandra Torres. Statehood
under water: Challenges of sea-level rise to the continuity of Pacific Island
States. Brill, 2016. | Camprubí, Alejandra Torres. Statehood
under water: Challenges of sea-level rise to the continuity of Pacific Island
States. Brill, 2016. |
| Vidas, Davor. “Sea-Level Rise and
International Law. ” Climate law 4, no. 1-2 (2014): 70–84. | Vidas, Davor. “Sea-Level Rise and
International Law.” Climate law 4, no. 1-2 (2014): 70–84. |
| Vidas, Davor, David Freestone, and Jane
McAdam. “International Law And Sea Level Rise: The New ILA Committee. ” ILSA
Journal of International & Comparative Law21, no. 2 (2015): 157–167. | Vidas, Davor, David Freestone, and Jane
McAdam. “International Law And Sea Level Rise: The New ILA Committee.” ILSA
Journal of International & Comparative Law21, no. 2 (2015): 157–167. |
| Wannier, Gregory E., and Michael B.
Gerrard. “Disappearing States: Harnessing International Law to Preserve
Cultures and Society. ” In Climate Change: International Law and Global
Governance, pp. 615–656. | Wannier, Gregory E., and Michael B.
Gerrard. “Disappearing States: Harnessing International Law to Preserve
Cultures and Society.” In Climate Change: International Law and Global
Governance, pp. 615–656. Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG, 2013. |
| Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co.
KG, 2013. | |
| Warrick, Richard A., and Qazi
Kholiquzzaman Ahmad, eds. The implications of climate and sea-level change
for Bangladesh. Springer Science & Business Media, 2012. | Warrick, Richard A., and Qazi
Kholiquzzaman Ahmad, eds. The implications of climate and sea-level change
for Bangladesh. Springer Science & Business Media, 2012. |
| Wentz, Jessica. “Assessing the Impacts of
Climate Change on the Built Environment Under NEPA and State EIA Laws: A
Survey of Current Practices and Recommendations for Model Protocols. ”
(2015). | Wentz, Jessica. “Assessing the Impacts of
Climate Change on the Built Environment Under NEPA and State EIA Laws: A
Survey of Current Practices and Recommendations for Model Protocols.” (2015). |
| Williams, Angela. “Turning the tide:
recognizing climate change refugees in international law. ” Law & Policy
30, no. 4 (2008): 502–529. | Williams, Angela. “Turning the tide:
recognizing climate change refugees in international law.” Law & Policy
30, no. 4 (2008): 502–529. |
| Wong, Derek. | |
| “Sovereignty Sunk-The Position of Sinking
States at International Law. ” Melb. J. Int’l L. 14 (2013): 346. | Wong, Derek. “Sovereignty Sunk-The
Position of Sinking States at International Law.” Melb. J. Int’l L. 14
(2013): 346. |
| Yamamoto, Lilian, and Miguel Esteban.
Atoll Island States and international law. Springer-Verlag Berlin An, 2016. | Yamamoto, Lilian, and Miguel Esteban.
Atoll Island States and international law. Springer-Verlag Berlin An, 2016. |
| Ni, Xing-Yin. “A Nation Going under:
Legal Protection for Climate Change Refugees. ” BC Int’l & Comp. L. Rev.
38 (2015): 329. | Ni, Xing-Yin. “A Nation Going under:
Legal Protection for Climate Change Refugees.” BC Int’l & Comp. L. Rev.
38 (2015): 329. |
| Xue, Guifang Julia. “Climate Change
Challenges and the Law of the Sea Responses. ” In Climate Change:
International Law and Global Governance, pp. 547–592. | Xue, Guifang Julia. “Climate Change
Challenges and the Law of the Sea Responses.” In Climate Change:
International Law and Global Governance, pp. 547–592. Nomos
Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG, 2013. |
| Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co.
KG, 2013. Other Documents | Other Documents |
| Stocker, Thomas, ed. Climate change 2013:
the physical science basis: Working Group I contribution to the Fifth
assessment report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge
University Press, 2013. | Stocker, Thomas, ed. Climate change 2013:
the physical science basis: Working Group I contribution to the Fifth
assessment report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge
University Press, 2013. |
| International Law Association Sofia
Conference. “Report of the Committee on Baselines under the International Law
of the Sea. ” (2012). | International Law Association Sofia
Conference. “Report of the Committee on Baselines under the International Law
of the Sea.” (2012). |
| International Law Association Washington
Conference. “Report of the Committee on Baselines under the International Law
of the Sea. ” (2014). | International Law Association Washington
Conference. “Report of the Committee on Baselines under the International Law
of the Sea.” (2014). |
| International Law Association
Johannesburg Conference. “Report of the Committee on Baselines under the
International Law of the Sea. ” (2016). | International Law Association
Johannesburg Conference. “Report of the Committee on Baselines under the International
Law of the Sea.” (2016). |
| International Law Association Sidney
Conference. “Report of the Committee on Baselines under the International Law
of the Sea. ” (2018). | International Law Association Sidney
Conference. “Report of the Committee on Baselines under the International Law
of the Sea.” (2018). |
| International Law Association
Johannesburg Conference. “Interim Report of the Committee on ‘International
Law and Sea Level Rise’. ” (2016). | International Law Association
Johannesburg Conference. “Interim Report of the Committee on ‘International
Law and Sea Level Rise’.” (2016). |
| International Law Association Sidney
Conference. “Report of the Committee on ‘International Law and Sea Level
Rise’. ” (2018). | International Law Association Sidney
Conference. “Report of the Committee on ‘International Law and Sea Level
Rise’.” (2018). |
| GE.18-13644 (E) GE.18-13644 (E) Mr. Georg
Nolte, Mr. Ernest Petrič. | 格奥尔格·诺尔特先生，埃内斯特·彼得里奇先生。 |
| Ms. Concepción Escobar Hernández, Mr.
Juan Manuel Gómez Robledo, Ms. Marja Lehto, Mr. Shinya Murase, Mr. Sean D.
Murphy, Mr. Georg Nolte, Mr. Pavel Šturma, Mr. Dire D. Tladi and Sir Michael
Wood. | 康塞普西翁·埃斯科瓦尔·埃尔南德斯女士、胡安·曼努埃尔·戈麦斯－罗夫莱多先生、玛丽亚·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、帕维尔·斯图尔马先生、迪雷·特拉迪先生和迈克尔·伍德爵士。 |
| Official Records of the General Assembly,
Seventieth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/70/10), para. 31. | 《大会正式记录，第七十届会议，补编第10号》(A/70/10)，第31段。 |
| Ibid., Seventieth Session, Supplement No.
10 (A/70/10), para. 27. | 同上，《第七十届会议，补编第10号》(A/70/10)，第35段。 |
| At its 2997th meeting, on 8 August 2008. | 2008年8月8日第2997次会议。 |
| See Yearbook … 2008, vol. II (Part Two),
para. 353; | 见《2008年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第353段； |
| and for the syllabus of the topic, ibid.,
annex I. The General Assembly, in paragraph 6 of its resolution 63/123 of 11
December 2008, took note of the decision. | 专题提纲见同上，附件一。 大会2008年12月11日第63/123号决议第6段注意到该决定。 |
| Yearbook … 2009, vol. II (Part Two),
paras. 220–226. | 《2009年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第220-226段。 |
| Official Records of the General Assembly,
Sixty-fifth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/65/10), paras. 344–354; | 《大会正式记录，第六十五届会议，补编第10号》(A/65/10)，第344-354段； |
| and ibid., Sixty-sixth Session,
Supplement No. 10 (A/66/10), para. 337. | 同上，《第六十六届会议，补编第10号》(A/66/10)，第337段。 |
| Ibid., Sixty-sixth Session, Supplement
No. 10 (A/66/10), paras. 338–341; | 同上，《第六十六届会议，补编第10号》(A/66/10)，第338-341段； |
| and ibid., Sixty-seventh Session,
Supplement No. 10 (A/67/10), paras. 230–231. | 同上，《第六十七届会议，补编第10号》(A/67/10)，第230-231段。 |
| Ibid., Sixty-seventh Session, Supplement
No. 10 (A/67/10), paras. 232–234. | 同上，《第六十七届会议，补编第10号》(A/67/10)，第232-234段。 |
| At the sixty-third session (2011), the
Chair of the Study Group presented nine preliminary conclusions, reformulated
in the light of the discussions in the Study Group (ibid., Sixty-sixth
Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/66/10), para. 344). | 在第六十三届会议上(2011年)，研究组主席提交了参照研究组讨论情况重新拟订的九项初步结论(同上，《第六十六届会议，补编第10号》(A/66/10)，第344段)。 |
| At the sixty-fourth session (2012), the
Chair presented the text of six additional preliminary conclusions, also
reformulated in the light of the discussions in the Study Group (ibid.,
Sixty-seventh Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/67/10), para. 240). | 在第六十四届会议上(2012年)，研究组主席提交了也是参照研究组讨论情况重新拟订的另外六项初步结论(同上，《第六十七届会议，补编第10号》(A/67/10)，第240段)。 |
| The Study Group also discussed the format
in which the further work on the topic should proceed and the possible
outcome of the work. | 研究组还讨论了此专题进一步工作应采取的形式以及工作的可能成果。 |
| A number of suggestions were formulated
by the Chair and agreed upon by the Study Group (ibid., paras. 235–239). | 研究组主席提出了若干建议并得到研究组的赞同(同上，第235-239段)。 |
| Ibid., Sixty-seventh Session, Supplement
No. 10 (A/67/10), paras. 226 and 239. | 同上，《第六十七届会议，补编第10号》(A/67/10)，第226和第239段。 |
| Ibid., para. 227. | 同上，第227段。 |
| A/CN.4/660 (first report), A/CN.4/671
(second report), A/CN.4/683 (third report) and A/CN.4/694 (fourth report). | A/CN.4/660 (第一次报告)、A/CN.4/671 (第二次报告)、A/CN.4/683 (第三次报告)和A/CN.4/694 (第四次报告)。 |
| Official Records of the General Assembly,
Seventy-first Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/71/10), paras. 75–76. | 《大会正式记录，第七十一届会议，补编第10号》(A/71/10)，第75-76段。 |
| Ibid., para. 73. | 同上，第73段。 |
| Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties
(Vienna, 23 May 1969), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1155, No. 18232,
p. 331. | 《维也纳条约法公约》(1969年5月23日，维也纳)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第1155卷，第18232号，第331页。 |
| See Vienna Convention on the Law of
Treaties between States and International Organizations or between
International Organizations (hereinafter, “1986 Vienna Convention”) (Vienna,
21 March 1986, not yet in force) (A/CONF.129/15). | 见《关于国家和国际组织间或国际组织相互间条约的维也纳公约》(下称“1986年《维也纳公约》”)(1986年3月21日，维也纳，尚未生效)(A/CONF.129/15)。 |
| Some materials relating to such treaties,
but which are also of general relevance, are used in these commentaries. | 在这些评注中使用了一些涉及这种条约但也具有一般相关性的材料。 |
| Title of article 31 of the 1969 Vienna
Convention. | 1969年《维也纳公约》第三十一条标题。 |
| See the first report on subsequent
agreements and subsequent practice in relation to treaty interpretation
(A/CN.4/660), para. 8; | 见与条约解释相关的嗣后协定和嗣后实践第一次报告(A/CN.4/660)，第8段； |
| M.E. Villiger, “The 1969 Vienna
Convention on the law of treaties: 40 years after”, Recueil des cours de
l’Académie de droit international de La Haye 2009 (hereinafter “Recueil des
cours …”), vol. 344, pp. 9–133, at pp. 118–119 and 126–128. | M.E. Villiger, “1969年《维也纳条约法公约》：40年之后”，《2009年海牙国际法学院教程汇编》(下称“《…教程汇编》”)，第344卷，第9-133页，见第118-119页和第126-128页。 |
| On the meaning of the term “rules” in
this context: see Yearbook … 1966, vol. II, document A/6309/Rev.1, pp.
217–220 (Commentary, introduction); | 关于这一上下文中“规则”一词的含义：见《1966年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/6309/Rev.1号文件，第217-220页(评注，导言)； |
| R.K. Gardiner, Treaty Interpretation, 2nd
ed. (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2015), pp. 36–38. | R.K. Gardiner, 《条约解释》，第2版(牛津，牛津大学出版社，2015年)，第36-38页。 |
| Yearbook … 1966, vol. II, document
A/6309/Rev.1, p. 223, commentary to draft article 28, para. (19); | 《1966年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/6309/Rev.1号文件，第223页，第28条草案的评注第(19)段； |
| H. Waldock, Third report on the law of
treaties, Yearbook … 1964, vol. II, document A/CN.4/167 and Add.1-3, pp.
58–59, para. 21; | 汉·沃尔多克，关于条约法的第三次报告，《1964年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/CN.4/167和Add.1-3号文件，第58-59页，第21段； |
| M.K. Yasseen, “L’interprétation des
traités d’après la Convention de Vienne sur le droit des traités”, Recueil
des cours … 1976-III, vol. 151, pp. 1–114, at p. 78; | M.K. Yasseen,“根据《维也纳条约法公约》对条约进行解释”，《1976年…教程汇编》第三卷，第151卷，第1-114页，见第78页； |
| I. Sinclair, The Vienna Convention on the
Law of Treaties (Manchester, Manchester University Press, 1984), pp. 141–142; | I. Sinclair, 《维也纳条约法公约》(曼切斯特，曼彻斯特大学出版社，1984年)，第141-142页； |
| Villiger, “The 1969 Vienna Convention …”
(see footnote 8 above), pp. 127–128. | Villiger,“1969年《维也纳…公约》”(见上文脚注8)，第127-128页。 |
| Y. le Bouthillier, “Commentary on article
32 of the Vienna Convention”, in The Vienna Conventions on the Law of
Treaties: A Commentary, O. Corten and P. Klein, eds. (Oxford, Oxford
University Press, 2011), pp. 841–865, at pp. 843–846, paras. 4–8; | Y. le Bouthillier,“对《维也纳公约》第三十二条的评注”，O. Corten和P.
Klein所编《〈维也纳条约法公约〉评注》(牛津，牛津大学出版社，2011年)，第841-865页，见843-846页，第4-8段； |
| P. Daillier, M. Forteau and A. Pellet,
Droit international public, 8th ed. (Paris, L.G.D.J., 2009), pp. 285–286; | P. Daillier、M.
Forteau和A. Pellet, 《国际公法》，第8版(巴黎，L.G.D.J.，2009年)， 285-286页； |
| Gardiner, Treaty Interpretation (see
footnote 19 above), pp. 13–20; | Gardiner, 《条约解释》(见上文脚注19)，第13-20页； |
| Villiger, “The 1969 Vienna Convention”
(see footnote 18 above), pp. 132–133. | Villiger, 1969年《维也纳公约》”(见上文脚注18)，第132-133页。 |
| Pulp Mills on the River Uruguay
(Argentina v. Uruguay), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2010, p. 14, at p. 46, para.
65 (1969 Vienna Convention, art. 31); | 乌拉圭河纸浆厂案(阿根廷诉乌拉圭)，判决，《2010年国际法院案例汇编》，第14页起，见第46页，第65段(1969年《维也纳公约》第三十一条)； |
| Dispute regarding Navigational and
Related Rights (Costa Rica v. Nicaragua), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2009, p.
213, at p. 237, para. 47; | 关于航行权和相关权利的争端案(哥斯达黎加诉尼加拉瓜)，判决，《2009年国际法院案例汇编》，第213页起，见第237页，第47段； |
| Application of the Convention on the
Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Bosnia and Herzegovina v.
Serbia and Montenegro), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2007, p. 43, at pp. 109–110,
para. 160; | 《防止及惩治灭绝种族罪公约》的适用(波斯尼亚和黑塞哥维那诉塞尔维亚和黑山)，判决，《2007年国际法院案例汇编》，第43页起，见第109-110页，第160段； |
| Legal Consequences of the Construction of
a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, Advisory Opinion, I.C.J.
Reports 2004, p. 136, at p. 174, para. 94; | 在巴勒斯坦被占领土修建隔离墙的法律后果，咨询意见，《2004年国际法院案例汇编》，第136页起，见第174页，第94段； |
| Avena and Other Mexican Nationals (Mexico
v. United States of America), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2004, p. 12, at p. 48,
para. 83; | 阿韦纳和其他墨西哥国民案(墨西哥诉美利坚合众国)，判决，《2004年国际法院案例汇编》，第12页起，见第48页，第83段； |
| Sovereignty over Pulau Ligitan and Pulau
Sipadan (Indonesia v. Malaysia), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2002, p. 625, at p.
645, para. 37; | 利吉丹岛和西巴丹岛的主权归属案(印度尼西亚诉马来西亚)，判决，《2002年国际法院案例汇编》，第652页起，见第645页，第37段； |
| LaGrand (Germany v. United States of
America), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2001, p. 466, at p. 501, para. 99 (1969
Vienna Convention, art. 31); | 拉格朗案(德国诉美利坚合众国)，判决，《2001年国际法院案例汇编》，第466页起，见第501页，第99段(1969年《维也纳公约》第三十一条)； |
| Kasikili/Sedudu Island
(Botswana/Namibia), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1999, p. 1045, at p. 1059, para.
18 (1969 Vienna Convention, art. 31); | 卡西基里/塞杜杜岛案(博茨瓦纳/纳米比亚)，判决，《1999年国际法院案例汇编》，第1045页起，见第1059页，第18段(1969年《维也纳公约》第三十一条)； |
| Territorial Dispute (Libyan Arab
Jamahiriya/Chad), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1994, p. 6, at pp. 21–22, para. 41
(1969 Vienna Convention, art. 31, without expressly mentioning art. 32 of the
1969 Vienna Convention, but referring to supplementary means of interpretation). | 领土争端案(阿拉伯利比亚民众国诉乍得)，判决，《1994年国际法院案例汇编》，第6页起，见第21-22页，第41段(1969年《维也纳公约》第三十一条，未明确提到1969年《维也纳公约》第三十二条，但提到补充解释资料)。 |
| Responsibilities and obligations of
States sponsoring persons and entities with respect to activities in the
area, case No. 17, Advisory Opinion, 1 February 2011, ITLOS Reports 2011, p.
10, at para. 57. | 担保个人和实体从事区域内活动的国家所负责任和义务，第17号案件，咨询意见，2011年2月1日，《2011年海洋法法庭案例汇编》，第10页，见第57段。 |
| Award in Arbitration regarding the Iron
Rhine (“Ijzeren Rijn”) Railway between the Kingdom of Belgium and the Kingdom
of the Netherlands, decision of 24 May 2005, United Nations, Reports of
International Arbitral Awards (UNRIAA), vol. XXVII (sales No. E/F.06.V.8),
pp. 35–125, at para. 45 (1969 Vienna Convention, arts. 31–32). | 比利时王国与荷兰王国莱茵铁路案仲裁裁决，2005年5月24日的决定，联合国，《联合国国际仲裁裁决汇编》(《国际仲裁裁决汇编》)，第二十七卷(出售品编号：E/F.06.V.8)，第35-125页，见第45段(1969年《维也纳公约》第三十一至第三十二条)。 |
| Art. 3, para. 2, of the WTO understanding
on rules and procedures governing the settlement of disputes provides that
“it serves to … to clarify the existing provisions of [the WTO-covered]
agreements in accordance with customary rules of interpretation of public
international law” (United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1869, No. 31874, p.
402), but does not specifically refer to arts. 31 and 32 of the 1969 Vienna Convention. | 世贸组织《关于争端解决规则与程序的谅解》第3条第2款规定，“该体制适于…依照解释国际公法的习惯规则澄清[世贸组织所涵盖的]协定的现有规定”(联合国，《条约汇编》，第1869卷，第31874号，第402页)，但并未具体提到1969年《维也纳公约》第三十一条和第三十二条。 |
| However, the Appellate Body has
consistently recognized that arts. 31 and 32 reflect rules of customary
international law and has resorted to them by reference to art. 3.2 of the
understanding on rules and procedures governing the settlement of disputes. | 然而，上述机构历来承认第三十一条和第三十二条反映了习惯国际法的规则，并通过《关于争端解决规则与程序的谅解》第3条第2款诉诸这些规则。 |
| See, for example, WTO Appellate Body
Report, United States — Standards for Reformulated and Conventional Gasoline
(US-Gasoline), WT/DS2/AB/R, adopted 20 May 1996, Section III, B (1969 Vienna
Convention, art. 31, para 1); | 例如，见世贸组织上诉机构报告，美国－新配方汽油和常规汽油标准案(美国－汽油案)，WT/DS2/AB/R, 1996年5月20日通过，第三节B(1969年《维也纳公约》第三十一条第一款)； |
| WTO Appellate Body Report, Japan — Taxes
on Alcoholic Beverages (Japan-Alcoholic Beverages II), WT/DS8/AB/R,
WT/DS10/AB/R, WT/DS11/AB/R, adopted 1 November 1996, Section D (1969 Vienna
Convention, arts. 31–32). | 世贸组织上诉机构报告，日本－酒精饮料税案(日本－酒精饮料案(二))，WT/DS8/AB/R,
WT/DS10/AB/R, WT/DS11/AB/R, 1996年11月1日通过，D节(1969年《维也纳公约》第三十一条至第三十二条)。 |
| See also G. Nolte, “Jurisprudence under
special regimes relating to subsequent agreements and subsequent practice:
second report for the ILC Study Group on treaties over time”, in Treaties and
Subsequent Practice, G. Nolte, ed. (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2013),
pp. 210–240, at p. 215. | 另见格·诺尔特，“特殊制度下与嗣后协定和嗣后实践有关的判例：国际法委员会条约随时间演变问题研究组第二次报告”，载于格·诺尔特所编《条约和嗣后实践》 (牛津，牛津大学出版社，2013年)，第210-240页，见第215页。 |
| Golder v. the United Kingdom, No.
4451/70, 21 February 1975, Series A No. 18, para. 29; | Golder诉联合王国，第4451/70号，1975年2月21日，A辑第18号，第29段； |
| Witold Litwa v. Poland, No. 26629/95, 4
April 2000, ECHR 2000-III, para. 58 (1969 Vienna Convention, art. 31); | Witold Litwa诉波兰，第26629/95号，2000年4月4日，《2000年欧洲人权法院案例汇编》第三卷，第58段(1969年《维也纳公约》第三十一条)； |
| Demir and Baykara v. Turkey [GC], No.
34503/97, 12 November 2008, ECHR-2008, para. 65 (by implication, 1969 Vienna
Convention, arts. 31–33); | Demir和Baykara诉土耳其[大审判庭]，第34503/97号，2008年11月12日，《2008年欧洲人权法院案例汇编》，第65段(暗指1969年《维也纳公约》第三十一条至第三十三条)； |
| Hassan v. United Kingdom [GC], No.
29750/09, 16 September 2014, ECHR 2014, para. 100. | Hassan诉联合王国[大审判庭]，第29750/09号，2014年9月16日，《2014年欧洲人权法院案例汇编》，第100段。 |
| The effect of reservations on the entry
into force of the American Convention on Human Rights (Arts. 74 and 75),
Advisory Opinion OC-2/82, 24 September 1982, Inter-Am. Ct. H.R. Series A No.
2, para. 19 (by implication, 1969 Vienna Convention, arts. 31–32); | 保留对《美洲人权公约》生效的影响(第74和75条)，咨询意见OC-2/82, 1982年9月24日，美洲人权法院，A辑第2号，第19段(暗指1969年《维也纳公约》第三十一条至第三十二条)； |
| Hilaire, Constantine and Benjamin et al.
v. Trinidad and Tobago, Judgment (Merits, Reparations and Costs,), 21 June
2002, Inter-Am. Ct. H.R. Series C No. 94, para. 19 (1969 Vienna Convention,
art. 31, para. 1); | Hilaire、Constantine和Benjamin等诉特立尼达和多巴哥，判决(实质问题、赔偿和费用)，2002年6月21日，美洲人权法院，C辑第94号，第19段(1969年《维也纳公约》第三十一条第一款)； |
| more decisions are referred to by C.E.
Arévalo Narváez and P.A. Patarroyo Ramírez, “Treaties over time and human
rights: a case law analysis of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights”,
Anuario Colombiano de Derecho Internacional (2017), pp. 295–331, at p. 315,
footnote 88. | 更多裁决见C.E. Arévalo Narváez和P.A. Patarroyo Ramírez, “条约随时间的演变以及人权：美洲人权法院判例分析”，《哥伦比亚国际法年鉴(2017)》，第295-331页，见第315页，脚注88。 |
| Judgment of 25 February 2010, Case
C-386/08, Brita GmbH v. Hauptzollamt Hamburg-Hafen, European Court Reports
2010 I-01289, paras. 41–43 (1969 Vienna Convention, art. 31). | 2010年2月25日的判决，C-386/08号案，Brita有限责任公司诉汉堡港海关总局，《2010年欧洲法院案例汇编》I-01289, 第41-43段(1969年《维也纳公约》第三十一条)。 联合国，《条约汇编》，第575卷，第8359号，第159页。 |
| National Grid plc v. Argentine Republic,
decision on jurisdiction (UNCITRAL), 20 June 2006, para. 51 (1969 Vienna
Convention, arts. 31–32); | 英国国家电网公司诉阿根廷共和国，关于管辖权的裁决(国际贸易法委员会)，2006年6月20日，第51段(1969年《维也纳公约》第三十一条至第三十二条)； |
| Canfor Corporation v. United States of
America, and Tembec et al. v. United States of America, and Terminal Forest
Products Ltd. v. United States of America, Order of the Consolidation
Tribunal, 7 September 2005, para. 59 (1969 Vienna Convention, arts. 31–32); | Canfor公司诉美利坚合众国，Tembec公司等诉美利坚合众国，以及Terminal林产品公司诉美利坚合众国，合并法庭命令，2005年9月7日，第59段(1969年《维也纳公约》第三十一条至第三十二条)； |
| see The Renco Group Inc. v. Republic of
Peru, partial award on jurisdiction, 15 July 2016, ICSID Case No. UNCT/13/1,
para. 69; | 见Renco集团有限公司诉秘鲁共和国，关于管辖权问题的临时裁决，2016年7月15日，解决投资争端国际中心UNCT/13/1号案件，第69段； |
| Venezuela US, S.R.L. v. Bolivarian
Republic of Venezuela, interim award on jurisdiction, 26 July 2016, PCA Case
No. 2013-34, para. 49. United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 575, No. 8359, p.
159. | 委内瑞拉美国有限责任公司诉委内瑞拉玻里瓦尔共和国，关于管辖权问题的临时裁决，2016年7月26日，常设仲裁法院第2013-34号案件，第49段。 |
| The International Court of Justice has
recognized that paragraph 4 of article 33 reflects customary international
law, LaGrand (see footnote 22 above), p. 502, para. 101; | 国际法院承认第三十三条第四款反映了习惯国际法，拉格朗案(见上文脚注22)，第502页，第101段； |
| the WTO Appellate Body has held that the
rules in paragraphs 3 and 4 reflect customary law, WTO Appellate Body Report,
United States — Final Countervailing Duty Determination with Respect to
Certain Softwood Lumber from Canada (US — Softwood Lumber IV), WT/DS257/AB/R,
adopted 17 February 2004, para. 59 (1969 Vienna Convention, art. 33, para.
3); | 世贸组织上诉机构认为第三和第四款的规则反映了习惯法，世贸组织上诉机构报告，美国－对加拿大的某些软木木材反倾销关税最终裁断案(美国－软木木材案(四))，WT/DS257/AB/R, 2004年2月17日通过，第59段(1969年《维也纳公约》第三十三条第三款)； |
| WTO Appellate Body Report, Chile — Price
Band System and Safeguard Measures Relating to Certain Agricultural Products,
WT/DS207/AB/R and Corr.1, adopted 23 October 2002, para. 271 (1969 Vienna
Convention, art. 33 (4)); | 世贸组织上诉机构报告，智利－某些农产品的价格幅度制度和保障措施案，WT/DS207/AB/R和Corr.1, 2002年10月23日通过，第271段(1969年《维也纳公约》第三十三条第四款)； |
| ITLOS and the European Court of Human
Rights have gone one step further and stated that article 33 as a whole
reflects customary law, see Responsibilities and obligations of States
sponsoring persons and entities with respect to activities in the Area (see
footnote 23 above); | 海洋法法庭和欧洲人权法院更进一步，主张第三十三条整条反映了习惯法，见担保个人和实体从事区域内活动的国家所负责任和义务(见上文脚注23)； |
| Golder v. the United Kingdom (see
footnote 26 above), para. 29; | Golder诉联合王国(见上文脚注26)，第29段； |
| Witold Litwa v. Poland (see footnote 26
above), para. 59; | Witold Litwa诉波兰(见上文脚注26)，第59段； |
| Demir and Baykara v. Turkey [GC] (see
footnote 26 above), para. 65 (1969 Vienna Convention, arts. 31–33). | Demir和Baykara诉土耳其[大审判庭](见上文脚注26)，第65段(1969年《维也纳公约》第三十一条至第三十三条)。 |
| Yearbook … 1966, vol. II, document A/6309/Rev.1,
pp. 219–220, para. (8). | 《1966年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/6309/Rev.1号文件，第219-220页，第(8)段。 |
| See, in detail, below para. (12) of the
commentary to draft conclusion 2, para. 5. | 详见下文结论草案2第5段的评注第(12)段。 |
| Yearbook … 1966, vol. II, document
A/6309/Rev.1, p. 220, para. (8); | 《1966年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/6309/Rev.1号文件，第220页，第(8)段； |
| and G. Nolte, “Jurisprudence of the
International Court of Justice and arbitral tribunals of ad hoc jurisdiction
relating to subsequent agreements and subsequent practice: introductory
report for the ILC Study Group on treaties over time”, in Nolte, Treaties and
Subsequent Practice (see footnote 25 above), p. 169, at p. 177. | 格·诺尔特，“与嗣后协定和嗣后实践有关的国际法院和特别管辖权仲裁法庭判例：国际法委员会条约随时间演变问题研究组的介绍性报告”，载于诺尔特，《条约和嗣后实践》(见上文脚注25)，第169页起，见第177页。 |
| Yasseen, “L’interprétation des traités …”
(see footnote 20 above), p. 79. | Yasseen,“…条约进行解释”，(见上文脚注20)，第79页。 |
| Yearbook … 1964, vol. II, document
A/5809, pp. 203–204, commentary to draft article 69, para. (13). | 《1964年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/5809号文件，第203-204页，第69条草案的评注，第(13)段。 |
| Kasikili/Sedudu Island (see footnote 22
above), p. 1096, paras. 79–80; | 卡西基里/塞杜杜岛案(见上文脚注22)，第1096页，第79-80段； |
| Loizidou v. Turkey (preliminary
objections), No. 15318/89, 23 March 1995, ECHR Series A No. 310, paras.
79–81; | Loizidou诉土耳其(初步反对意见)，第15318/89号，1995年3月23日，《欧洲人权法院案例汇编》A辑，第310号，第79-81段； |
| Hilaire, Constantine and Benjamin et al.
(see footnote 27 above), para. 92; | Hilaire、Constantine和Benjamin等(见上文脚注27)，第92段； |
| Southern Bluefin Tuna (New Zealand v.
Japan; | 南方金枪鱼案(新西兰诉日本； |
| Australia v. Japan), provisional
measures, order of 27 August 1999, ITLOS Reports 1999, p. 280, at para. 50; | 澳大利亚诉日本)，临时措施，1999年8月27日的命令，《1999年海洋法法庭案例汇编》，第280页，见第50段； |
| WTO Appellate Body Report, European
Communities — Customs Classification of Certain Computer Equipment (EC —
Computer Equipment), WT/DS62/AB/R, WT/DS67/AB/R and WT/DS68/AB/R, adopted 22
June 1998, para. 90; | 世贸组织上诉机构报告，欧洲共同体－某些计算机设备的关税分类案(欧共体－计算机设备案)，WT/DS62/AB/R、WT/DS67/AB/R和WT/DS68/AB/R, 1998年6月22日通过，第90段； |
| see also WTO Appellate Body Report,
United States — Certain Country of Origin Labelling (COOL) Requirements (US —
COOL), WT/DS384/AB/R and WT/DS386/AB/R, adopted 23 July 2012, para. 452. | 另见世贸组织上诉机构报告，美国－某些原产国标签要求案(美国－原产国标签案)，WT/DS384/AB/R和WT/DS386/AB/R,
2012年7月23日通过，第452段。 |
| Yasseen, “L’interprétation des traités …”
(see footnote 20 above), p. 52 (“la Convention de Vienne ne retient pas comme
élément de la règle générale d’interprétation la pratique ultérieure en
général, mais une pratique ultérieure spécifique, à savoir une pratique
ultérieure non seulement concordante, mais également commune à toutes les
parties. … Ce qui reste de la pratique ultérieure peut être un moyen
complémentaire d’interprétation, selon l’article 32 de la Convention de
Vienne” (emphasis added)); | Yasseen, “…对条约进行解释”，(见上文脚注20)，第52页(“la Convention de Vienne ne retient
pas comme élément de la règle générale d’interprétation la pratique
ultérieure en général, mais une pratique ultérieure spécifique, à savoir une
pratique ultérieure non seulement concordante, mais également commune à
toutes les parties.”Ce qui reste de la pratique ultérieure peut être un moyen
complémentaire d’interprétation, selon l’article 32 de la Convention de
Vienne” (强调是后加的)）； |
| Sinclair, The Vienna Convention … (see footnote
20 above), p. 138: “paragraph 3 (b) of [a]rticle 31 of the Convention
[covers] … only a specific form of subsequent practice — that is to say,
concordant subsequent practice common to all the parties. | Sinclair, 《维也纳…公约》(见上文脚注20)，第138页：“《公约》第三十一条第三款(b)项仅[涉及]一种具体形式的司法实践――即所有当事方共有的一致性嗣后实践。 |
| Subsequent practice which does not fall
within this narrow definition may nonetheless constitute a supplementary
means of interpretation within the meaning of [a]rticle 32 of the Convention”
(emphasis added); | 然而不在这一狭窄定义范围内的嗣后实践可构成《公约》第三十二条意义上的补充的解释资料”(强调是后加的)； |
| S. Torres Bernárdez, “Interpretation of
treaties by the International Court of Justice following the adoption of the
1969 Vienna Convention on the law of treaties” in Liber Amicorum: Professor
Ignaz Seidl-Hohenveldern, in honour of his 80th birthday, G. Hafner et al.,
eds. (The Hague, Kluwer Law International, 1998), p. 721, at p. 726; | S. Torres Bernárdez, “自1969年《维也纳条约法公约》通过以来国际法院对条约的解释”，载于G. Hafner等人所编《Ignaz Seidl-Hohenveldern教授诞辰八十周年纪念文集》 (海牙，Kluwer Law International, 1998年)，第721页起，见第726页； |
| M.E. Villiger, Commentary on the 1969
Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (Leiden, Martinus Nijhoff, 2009),
pp. 431–432. | M.E. Villiger, 《对1969年〈维也纳条约法公约〉的评注》(莱顿，Martinus Nijhoff, 2009年)，第431-432页。 |
| L. Boisson de Chazournes, “Subsequent
practice, practices, and ‘family resemblance’: towards embedding subsequent
practice in its operative milieu”, in Nolte, Treaties and Subsequent Practice
(see footnote 25 above), pp. 53–63, at pp. 59–62. | 见L. Boisson de Chazournes, “嗣后实践、实践及‘家族相似性’：力求将嗣后实践植入到实施场地中”，载于诺尔特，《条约和嗣后实践》(见上文脚注25)，第53-63页，见第59-62页。 |
| A/CN.4/660, para. 64; | A/CN.4/660, 第64段； |
| and Nolte, “Jurisprudence of the
International Court of Justice …” (see footnote 33 above), pp. 171 and 177. | 诺尔特,“…国际法院…判例…”，(见上文脚注33)，第171和第177页。 |
| On the different function of subsequent
agreements and subsequent practice in relation to other means of
interpretation, see A/CN.4/660, paras. 42–57; | 关于嗣后协定和嗣后实践相对于其他解释资料的不同作用，见A/CN.4/660, 第42-57段； |
| and Nolte, “Jurisprudence of the
International Court of Justice …” (see footnote 33 above), p. 183. | 诺尔特,“…国际法院…判例…”，(见上文脚注33)，第183页。 |
| Yearbook … 1966, vol. II, document
A/6309/Rev.1, pp. 219–220, para. (8). | 《1966年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/6309/Rev.1号文件，第219-220页，第(8)段。 |
| Ibid. | 同上。 |
| See the first report of the Special
Rapporteur (A/CN.4/660), paras. 8–28. | 见特别报告员的第一次报告 (A/CN.4/660)，第8-28段。 |
| See also above the commentary to draft
conclusion 2, para. (1); | 另见上文结论草案2评注，第(1)段； |
| and Villiger, “The 1969 Vienna Convention
… “(see footnote 18 above), p. 129; | Villiger,“1969年《维也纳…公约》”(见上文脚注18)，第129页； |
| Daillier, Forteau and Pellet, Droit
international public (see footnote 21 above), pp. 284–289. | Daillier、Forteau和Pellet,《国际公法》(见上文脚注21)，第284-289页。 |
| Provisional summary record of the 3172nd
meeting, 31 May 2013 (A/CN.4/SR.3172), p. 4. | 第3172次会议临时简要记录，2013年5月31日(A/CN.4/SR.3172)，第4页。 |
| Yearbook … 1966, vol. II, document
A/6309/Rev.1, pp. 219–220, para. (8). | 《1966年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/6309/Rev.1号文件，第219-220页，第(8)段。 |
| Ibid. | 同上。 |
| Ibid., p. 219, para. (6). | 同上，第219页，第(6)段。 |
| See also Yasseen, “L’interprétation des
traités …” (footnote 20 above), p. 58; | 另见Yasseen,“…对条约进行解释”，(上文脚注20)，第58页； |
| Sinclair, The Vienna Convention …
(footnote 20 above), p. 130; | Sinclair,《维也纳…公约》(上文脚注20)，第130页； |
| J. Klabbers, “Treaties, object and
purpose”, Max Planck Encyclopedia on Public International Law
(www.mpepil.com), para. 7; | J. Klabbers,“条约、目标和宗旨”，《马克斯·普朗克国际公法百科全书》(www.mpepil.com)，第7段； |
| Villiger, Commentary … (see footnote 37
above), p. 427, para. 11; | Villiger,《…评注》(见上文脚注37)，第427页，第11段； |
| Border and Transborder Armed Actions
(Nicaragua v. Honduras), Jurisdiction and Admissibility, Judgment, I.C.J.
Reports 1988, p. 69, at p. 89, paras. 45–46; | 边界和跨界武装行动案(尼加拉瓜诉洪都拉斯)，管辖权和可否受理，判决，《1988年国际法院案例汇编》，第69页起，见第89页，第45-46段； |
| Delimitation of the continental shelf
between the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the
French Republic, decision of 30 June 1977, UNRIAA, vol. XVIII (sales No. E/F.80.V.7),
pp. 3–413, at pp. 32–35, para. 39. | 大不列颠及北爱尔兰联合王国与法兰西共和国大陆架划界案，1977年6月30日的裁决，《国际仲裁裁决汇编》，第十八卷(出售品编号：E/F.80.V.7)，第3-413页，见第32-35页，第39段。 |
| Yearbook … 1966, vol. II, document
A/6309/Rev.1, p. 220. | 《1966年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/6309/Rev.1号文件，第220页。 |
| Draft conclusion 1, para. 2, as proposed
in document A/CN.4/660, para. 28, and, generally, paras. 10–27. | A/CN.4/660中提出的结论草案1第2段，第28段，并主要见第10-27段。 |
| Decisions of domestic courts have not
been uniform as regards the relative weight that subsequent agreements and
subsequent practice possess in the process of treaty interpretation, see
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, House of Lords: R
(Mullen) v. Secretary of State for the Home Department [2004] UKHL 18, paras.
47–48 (Lord Steyn); | 关于嗣后协定和嗣后实践在条约解释过程中所占权重，国内法院的决定并不一致，见大不列颠及北爱尔兰联合王国，上议院：R (Mullen)诉内政大臣[2004] UKHL 18, 第47-48段(Steyn勋爵)； |
| Deep Vein Thrombosis and Air Travel Group
Litigation [2005] UKHL 72, para. 31 (Lord Steyn). | 深静脉血栓与航空旅行集团诉讼[2005] UKHL 72, 第31段(Steyn勋爵)。 |
| United States of America, Supreme Court:
Sumitomo Shoji America, Inc. v. Avagliano, 457 U.S. 176 (1982), pp. 183–185; | 美利坚合众国，最高法院：住友商事(美国)公司诉Avagliano, 457 U.S. 176 (1982年), 第183-185页； |
| O’Connor v. United States, 479 U.S. 27
(1986), pp. 31–32; | O’Connor 诉美国，479
U.S. 27 (1986年)，第31-32页； |
| United States v. Stuart, 489 U.S. 353
(1989), where a dissenting judge (Justice Scalia) criticized the majority of
the Court for relying on “[t]he practice of the treaty signatories”, which,
according to him, need not be consulted, since when the “Treaty’s language
resolves the issue presented, there is no necessity of looking further”, at
p. 371. | 美国诉Stuart, 489 U.S. 353 (1989年)，持不同意见的法官(Scalia勋爵)对占多数意见的法官将“条约签署国的实践”作为审判依据提出了批评，他认为，不需要考虑这些实践，因为“《条约》的用语已能解决当前问题，没有必要寻找更多依据”，见第371页。 |
| Switzerland: Federal Administrative
Court, judgment of 21 January 2010, BVGE 2010/7, para 3.7.11; | 瑞士：联邦行政法院，2010年1月21日的判决，BVGE 2010/7, 第3.7.11段； |
| Federal Supreme Court, A v. B, appeal
judgment of 8 April 2004, No. 4C.140/2003, BGE, vol. 130 III, p. 430, at p.
439. | 联邦最高法院，A诉B, 2004年4月8日的上诉判决，第4C.140/2003号，BGE, 第130卷(三)，第430页起，见第439页。 |
| Draft conclusion 1, para. 2, as proposed
in the first report (A/CN.4/660), para. 28, and analysis at paras. 8–28. | 第一次报告(A/CN.4/660)中提出的结论草案1, 第2段起，见第28段，以及第8-28段中的分析。 |
| WTO Panels and the Appellate Body, for
example, seem to emphasize more the terms of the respective WTO-covered
agreement (for example, WTO Appellate Body, Brazil — Export Financing
Programme for Aircraft, Recourse by Canada to Article 21.5 of the DSU,
WT/DS46/AB/RW, adopted 4 August 2000, para. 45), whereas the European Court
of Human Rights and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights highlight the
character of the Convention as a human rights treaty (for example, Mamatkulov
and Askarov v. Turkey [GC], nos. 46827/99 and 46951/99, ECHR 2005-I, para.
111; | 例如，世贸组织各专家组和上诉机构看来更加强调世贸组织所涉各协定的用语(例如世贸组织上诉机构，巴西－航空器出口融资方案，加拿大诉诸《争端解决谅解》第21.5条，WT/DS46/AB/RW, 2000年8月4日，第45段)，而欧洲人权法院和美洲人权法院则强调有关公约作为人权条约的性质(例如，Mamatkulov和Askarov诉土耳其[大审判庭]，第46827/99和46951/99号，《2005年欧洲人权法院案例汇编》第一卷，第111段； |
| The Right to Information on Consular
Assistance in the Framework of the Guarantees of the Due Process of Law,
Advisory Opinion OC-16/99, 1 October 1999, Inter-Am. Ct. H.R. Series A No.
16, para. 58); | 在正当法律程序保障框架内获得领事协助信息的权利，咨询意见OC-16/99,
1999年10月1日，美洲人权法院，A辑，第16号，第58段)； |
| see also Official Records of the General
Assembly, Sixty-sixth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/66/10 and Add.1), pp.
281–282, and Nolte, “Jurisprudence under special regimes …” (see footnote 25
above), p. 210, at pp. 216, 244–246, 249–262 and 270–275. | 另见《大会正式记录，第六十六届会议，补编第10号》(A/66/10和Add.1)，第281-282页，和诺尔特,“特殊制度下…的判例”(见上文脚注25)，第210页起，见第216、244-246、249-262、270-275页。 |
| M. Forteau, “Les techniques
interprétatives de la Cour internationale de Justice”, Revue générale de
droit international public, vol. 115 (2011), p. 399, at pp. 406–407 and 416; | M. Forteau, ‘Les Techniques
Interpretatives de la Cour Internationale de Justice’，Revue générale de droit international public, 第115卷(2011年)，第399页起，见第406-407页、第416页； |
| Legal Consequences for States of the
Continued Presence of South Africa in Namibia (South West Africa)
notwithstanding Security Council Resolution 276 (1970), Advisory Opinion,
I.C.J. Reports 1971, p. 16, Separate Opinion of Judge Dillard, p. 150, at p.
154, footnote 1. | 南非不遵守安全理事会第276(1970)号决议继续留驻纳米比亚(西南非洲)对各国的法律后果，咨询意见，《1971年国际法院案例汇编》，第16页起，Dillard法官的个别意见，第150页起，见第154页，脚注1。 |
| Articles on the effects of armed
conflicts on treaties (art. 6 (a)), General Assembly resolution 66/99 of 9
December 2011, annex; | 关于武装冲突对条约的影响的条款草案(第6条(a)款)，大会2011年12月9日第66/99号决议，附件； |
| see also the Guide to Practice on
Reservations to Treaties, Official Records of the General Assembly,
Sixty-sixth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/66/10 and Add.1); | 另见《对条约的保留实践指南》，《大会正式记录，第六十六届会议，补编第10号》(A/66/10和A/66/10/Add.1)； |
| guideline 4.2.5 refers to the nature of
obligations of the treaty, rather than the nature of the treaty as such. | 准则4.2.5提到条约义务的性质，而不是条约本身的性质。 |
| See e.g. the commentary to guideline
4.2.5 (para. (3) of the Guide to Practice on Reservations to Treaties, in Official
Records of the General Assembly, Sixty-sixth Session, Supplement No. 10
(A/66/10 and Add.1)). | 例如见《对条约的保留实践》指南准则4.2.5的评注 (第(3)段，见《大会正式记录，第六十六届会议，补编第10号》(A/66/10和A/66/10/Add.1))。 |
| On the other hand, article 6 of the
articles on the effects of armed conflicts on treaties suggests “a series of
factors pertaining to the nature of the treaty, particularly its subject
matter, its object and purpose, its content and the number of the parties to
the treaty”, ibid., commentary to draft article 6, para. (3). | 另一方面，关于武装冲突对条约的影响的条款草案第6条提出了“与条约性质有关的一系列因素，特别是条约的主题事项、它的宗旨和目的、它的内容以及缔约方的数量”，同上，第6条草案评注，第(3)段。 |
| See R. Jennings and A. Watts, eds.,
Oppenheim’s International Law, 9th ed., vol. 1 (Harlow, Longman, 1992), p.
1268, para. 630; | 见R. Jennings和A.
Watts所编《奥本海国际法》第9版，第1卷(哈洛，朗文，1992年)，第1268页，第630段； |
| G. Fitzmaurice, “The law and procedure of
the International Court of Justice 1951-4: treaty interpretation and certain
other treaty points”, British Yearbook of International Law 1957, vol. 33,
pp. 203–293, at pp. 223–225; | G. Fitzmaurice,“国际法院的法律和程序(1951-4)：条约的解释与其他某些条约问题”《1957年英国国际法年鉴》，第33卷，第203-293页，见第223-225页； |
| WTO Panel Report, United States —
Measures Affecting Trade in Large Civil Aircraft (second complaint) (US —
Large Civil Aircraft (2nd Complaint)), WT/DS353/R, adopted 23 March 2012,
para. 7.953. | 世贸组织专家组报告，美国－影响大型民用飞机贸易的措施(第2次申诉)(美国－大型民用飞机案(第2次申诉))，WT/DS353/R,
2012年3月23日通过，第7.953段。 |
| See Yearbook … 1966, vol. II, document
A/6309/Rev.1, p. 221, para. (15). | 见《1966年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/6309/Rev.1号文件，第221页，第(15)段。 |
| Yearbook … 1964, vol. II, document
A/5809, pp. 204–205, para. (15); | 《1964年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/5809号文件，第204-205页，第(15)段； |
| see also ibid., pp. 203–204, para. 13:
“Paragraph 3 specifies as further authentic elements of interpretation: (a)
agreements between the parties regarding the interpretation of the treaty,
and (b) any subsequent practice in the application of the treaty which
clearly established the understanding of all the parties regarding its
interpretation” (emphasis added); | 另见同上，第203-204页，第13段：“第三项说明其他作准的解释要素：(甲)
缔约国关于解释条约的协定，及(乙) 后来在适用条约时明白确定全体缔约国对解释条约的了解的实践”[强调是后加的]； |
| on the other hand, Waldock explained in
his third report that “travaux préparatoires are not, as such, an authentic
means of interpretation”. | 另一方面，沃尔多克在其第三次报告中解释了“准备工作本身并非作准解释资料”。 |
| See ibid., document A/CN.4/167 and
Add.1-3, pp. 58–59, para. (21). | 见同上，A/CN.4/167和Add.1-3号文件，第58-59页，第(21)段。 |
| Yearbook … 1966, vol. II, document
A/6309/Rev.1, pp. 219–220, paras. (8) and (9). | 《1966年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/6309/Rev.1号文件，第219-220页，第(8)和第(9)段。 |
| M.E. Villiger, “The rules on
interpretation: misgivings, misunderstandings, miscarriage? | M.E. Villiger,“解释规则：担心、误解、误用？ |
| The ‘crucible’ intended by the
International Law Commission”, in The Law of Treaties beyond the Vienna
Convention, E. Cannizzaro, ed. (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2011), pp.
105–122, at p. 111; | 国际法委员会所设想的‘熔炉’”，载于E. Cannizaro 所编《〈维也纳公约〉之后的条约法》(牛津，牛津大学出版社，2011年)，第105-122页，见第111页； |
| Gardiner, Treaty Interpretation (see
footnote 19 above), p. 34; | Gardiner,《条约解释》(见上文脚注19)，第34页； |
| O. Dörr, “Article 31, general rule of
interpretation”, in Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. A Commentary,
2nd ed., O. Dörr and K. Schmalenbach, eds. (Berlin, Springer, 2018), pp.
559–616, at pp. 593–595, paras. 72–76; | O. Dörr,“第三十一条，解释之通则”，载于O. Dörr和K.
Schmalenbach所编《〈维也纳条约法公约〉评注》，第2版(柏林，Springer, 2018年)，第559-616页，见第593-595页，第72-76段； |
| K. Skubiszewski, “Remarks on the
interpretation of the United Nations Charter”, in Völkerrecht als
Rechtsordnung, Internationale Gerichtsbarkeit, Menschenrechte — Festschrift
für Hermann Mosler, R. Bernhardt et al., eds. (Berlin, Springer, 1983), pp.
891–902, at p. 898. | K. Skubiszewski,“漫谈《联合国宪章》的解释问题”，载于R. Bernhardt等人所编Völkerrecht als Rechtsordnung, Internationale Gerichtsbarkeit,
Menschenrechte – Festschrift für Hermann Mosler (柏林，Springer,
1983年)，第891-902页，见第898页。 |
| H. Fox, “Article 31 (3) (a) and (b) of the
Vienna Convention and the Kasikili Sedudu Island Case”, in Treaty
Interpretation and the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties: 30 Years on,
M. Fitzmaurice, O. Elias and P. Merkouris, eds. (Leiden, Martinus Nijhoff,
2010), pp. 59–74, at pp. 61–62; | H. Fox,“《维也纳公约》第三十一条第3款(a)项和(b)项与卡西基里/塞塞杜岛案”，载于M.
Fitzmaurice、O. Elias和P.
Merkouris所编《条约解释与〈维也纳条约法公约〉：30年之后》 (莱顿，Martinus Nijhoff, 2010年)，第59-74页，见第61-62页； |
| A. Chanaki, L’adaptation des traités dans
le temps (Brussels, Bruylant, 2013), pp. 313–315; | A. Chanaki, L’adaptation des traités dans
le temps (布鲁塞尔，Bruylant, 2013年)，第313-315页； |
| M. Benatar, “From probative value to
authentic interpretation: the legal effects of interpretative declarations”,
Revue belge de droit international, vol. 44 (2011), pp. 170–195, at pp.
194–195; | M. Benatar,“从证明价值到作准的解释：解释性声明的法律效果”，《比利时国际法评论》，第44卷(2011年)，第170-195页，见第194-195页； |
| cautious: J.M. Sorel and B. Eveno, “1969
Vienna Convention, Article 31: General rule of interpretation”, in Corten and
Klein, The Vienna Conventions … (see footnote 21 above), pp. 804–837, at p.
825, paras. 42–43; | 提醒：J.M. Sorel和B.
Eveno,“1969年《维也纳公约》第三十一条：解释之通则”载于Corten和Klein,《〈维也纳…公约〉…》(见上文脚注21)，第804-837页，见第825页，第42-43段； |
| see also G. Nolte, “Subsequent agreements
and subsequent practice of States outside of judicial or quasi-judicial
proceedings”, in Nolte, Treaties and Subsequent Practice (see footnote 25
above), pp. 307–385, at p. 375, para. 16.4.3. | 另见格·诺尔特,“司法或准司法程序外的国家嗣后协定与嗣后实践”，载于诺尔特，《条约和嗣后实践》(见上文脚注25)，第307-385页，见第375页，第16.4.3段。 |
| Yearbook … 1966, vol. II, document
A/6309/Rev.1, p. 221, para. (14). | 《1966年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/6309/Rev.1号文件，第221页，第(14)段。 |
| Yearbook … 1964, vol. II, document
A/CN.4/167 and Add.1-3, p. 60, para. (25). | 《1964年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/CN.4/167和Add.1-3号文件，第60页，第(25)段。 |
| North American Free Trade Agreement between
the Government of the United States of America, the Government of Canada and
the Government of the United Mexican States (1992) (Washington, D.C., United
States Government Printing Office, 1993); | 《美利坚合众国政府、加拿大政府和墨西哥合众国北美自由贸易协定》(1992年)(华盛顿特区，美国政府印刷局，1993年)； |
| Mesa Power Group, LLC v. Government of
Canada, UNCITRAL Arbitration under NAFTA Chapter Eleven, award, 24 March
2016, PCA Case No. 2012-17, paras. 478–480. | 梅萨电力集团责任有限公司诉加拿大政府，贸易法委员会按照《北美自由贸易协定》第十一章作出的仲裁，2016年3月24日的裁决，常设仲裁法院第2012-17号案件，第478-480段。 |
| See also: the Marrakesh Agreement
establishing the World Trade Organization (1994), United Nations, Treaty
Series, vol. 1867, No. 31874, p. 3, art. IX, para. 2; | 另见《马拉喀什建立世界贸易组织协定》(1994年)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第1867卷，第31874号，第3页，第九条第2款； |
| WTO Appellate Body Report, European
Communities — Custom Classification of Frozen Boneless Chicken Cuts (EC —
Chicken Cuts), WT/DS269/AB/R and Corr.1, WT/DS286/AB/R and Corr.1, adopted 27
September 2005, para. 273; | 世贸组织上诉机构报告，欧洲共同体－冷冻无骨切片鸡肉关税分类案(欧共体－切片鸡肉案)，WT/DS269/AB/R和Corr.1,
WT/DS286/AB/R和Corr.1, 2005年9月27日通过，第273段； |
| WTO Appellate Body Report, European
Communities — Regime for the Importation, Sale and Distribution of Bananas,
Second Recourse to Article 21.5 of the DSU by Ecuador (EC — Bananas III),
Second Recourse to Article 21.5, WT/DS27/AB/RW2/ECU and Corr.1, adopted 11
December 2008, WT/DS27/AB/RW/USA and Corr.1, adopted 22 December 2008, paras.
383 and 390. | 世贸组织上诉机构报告，欧洲共同体－香蕉的进口、销售和分销制度案，厄瓜多尔第二次诉诸《争端解决谅解》第21.5条(欧共体－香蕉案(三))，第二次诉诸第21.5条，WT/DS27/AB/RW2/ECU和Corr.1, 2008年12月11日通过，WT/DS27/AB/RW/ USA和Corr.1, 2008年12月22日通过，第383和390段。 |
| See, for example, Methanex Corporation v.
United States of America, UNCITRAL Arbitration under NAFTA Chapter Eleven,
Final Award on Jurisdiction and Merits, 3 August 2005, Part II, chap. H,
para. 23 (with reference to Jennings and Watts (see footnote 57 above), p.
1268, para. 630); | 例如，见Methanex公司诉美利坚合众国案，国际贸易法委员会依据《北美自由贸易协定》第十一章进行的仲裁，对管辖权和案情实质的最后裁决，2005年8月3日，第二部分，H章，第23段(提及Jennings和Watts(见上文脚注57), 第1268页，第630段)； |
| Gardiner, Treaty Interpretation (see
footnote 19 above), p. 34; | Gardiner,《条约解释》(见上文脚注19)，第34页； |
| U. Linderfalk, On the Interpretation of
Treaties (Dordrecht, Springer, 2007), p. 153; | U. Linderfalk,《论条约的解释》(多德雷赫特，Springer, 2007年)，第153页； |
| Skubiszewski, “Remarks on the
interpretation of the United Nations Charter” (see footnote 61 above), p.
898; | Skubiszewski,“漫谈《联合国宪章》的解释问题”(见上文脚注61)，第898页； |
| G. Haraszti, Some Fundamental Problems of
the Law of Treaties (Budapest, Akadémiai Kiadó, 1973), p. 43; | G. Haraszti,《条约法的一些基本问题》(布达佩斯，Akadémiai Kiadó，1973年)，第43页； |
| see also Nolte, “Jurisprudence under
special regimes … (see footnote 25 above), p. 210, at p. 240, para. 4.5. | 另见诺尔特,“特殊制度下…的判例”(见上文脚注25)，第210页起，见第240页，第4.5段。 |
| Switzerland Federal Supreme Court: A v.
B, appeal judgment of 8 April 2004, No. 4C.140/2003, BGE, vol. 130 III, p.
430, at p. 439 (where the Court speaks of the parties as being “masters of
the treaty” (“Herren der Verträge”); | 瑞士联邦最高法院：A诉B,
2004年4月8日的上诉判决，第4C.140/2003号，BGE, 第130卷(三)，第430页起，见第439页(法院提到缔约国是“条约的主人”(“Herren der Verträge”)； |
| judgment of 12 September 2012, No.
2C_743/2011, BGE, vol. 138 II, p. 524, at pp. 527–528. | 2012年9月12日的判决，第2C_743/2011号，BGE, 第138卷(二)，第524页起，见第527-528页。 |
| Germany, Federal Constitutional Court,
BVerfGE, vol. 90, p. 286, at p. 362. | 德国，联邦宪法法院，BVerfGE, 第90卷，第286页起，见第362页。 |
| See also India, Supreme Court, Godhra
Electricity Co. Ltd. and Another v. The State of Gujarat and Another [1975]
AIR 32. | 另见印度，最高法院，Godhra电力有限公司等诉古吉拉特邦等[1975] AIR 32。 |
| Available from
http://indiankanoon.org/doc/737188 (accessed 8 June 2016). | 可查阅http://indiankanoon.org/ doc/737188(访问日期：2016年6月8日)。 |
| Germany, Federal Fiscal Court, BFHE, vol.
215, p. 237, at p. 241; | 德国，联邦财政法院，BFHE, 第215卷，第237页起，见第241页； |
| ibid., vol. 181, p. 158, at p. 161. | 同上，第181卷，第158页起，见第161页。 |
| New Zealand, Court of Appeal, Zaoui v.
Attorney-General (No. 2) [2005] 1 NZLR 690, para. 130; | 新西兰，上诉法院，Zaoui诉总检察长(第2号)[2005] 1 NZLR
690, 第130段； |
| Hong Kong, China, Court of Final Appeal,
Ng Ka Ling and Others v. Director of Immigration [1999] 1 HKLRD 315, 354; | 中国香港，终审法院，吴嘉玲等人诉入境事务处处长[1999] 1 HKLRD
315, 354； |
| Austria, Supreme Administrative Court,
VwGH, judgment of 30 March 2006, 2002/15/0098, 2, 5. | 奥地利，最高行政法院，VwGH, 2006年3月30日的判决，2002/15/0098,
2, 5。 |
| Yearbook … 1966, vol. II, document
A/6309/Rev.1, p. 221, para. (14). | 《1966年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/6309/Rev.1号文件，第221页，第(14)段。 |
| Ibid., para. (15). | 同上，第(15)段。 |
| Gardiner, Treaty Interpretation (see
footnote 19 above), pp. 34 and 414–415; | Gardiner,《条约解释》(见上文脚注19)，第34和414-415页； |
| Linderfalk, On the Interpretation of
Treaties (see footnote 67 above), pp. 152–153. | Linderfalk,《论条约的解释》(见上文脚注67)，第152-153页。 |
| A/CN.4/660, para. 69. | A/CN.4/660, 第69段。 |
| Yearbook … 1966, vol. II, document
A/6309/Rev.1, pp. 221–222, para. (15); | 《1966年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/6309/Rev.1号文件，第221-222页，第(15)段； |
| see also W. Karl, Vertrag und spätere
Praxis im Völkerrecht (Berlin, Springer, 1983), p. 294. | 另见W. Karl, Vertrag und spätere Praxis im
Völkerrecht (柏林，Springer, 1983年)，第294页。 |
| Kasikili/Sedudu Island (see footnote 22
above), at p. 1087, para. 63, see also below draft conclusion 4 and the
commentary thereto. | 卡西基里/塞杜杜岛案(见上文脚注22)，见第1087页，第63段，另见下文结论草案4及其评注。 |
| See below draft conclusion 13 and Nolte,
“Subsequent agreements and subsequent practice of States …” (footnote 62
above), p. 307, at pp. 381 et seq., para. 17.3.1. | 见下文结论草案13和诺尔特,“…国家嗣后协定与嗣后实践”(上文脚注62)，第307页起，见第381页及以下各页，第17.3.1段。 |
| See below, in particular paras. (23) to
(35) of the commentary to draft conclusion 4, para. 3. | 尤见下文结论草案4第3段的评注第(23)至(35)段。 |
| See below also para. (33) of the
commentary to draft conclusion 4, para. 3. | 另见下文结论草案4第3段的评注第(33)段。 |
| Yearbook … 1966, vol. II, document
A/6309/Rev.1, p. 221, para. (14). | 《1966年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/6309/Rev.1号文件，第221页，第(14)段。 |
| See J.L. Brierly, second report on the
law of treaties, Yearbook … 1951, vol. II, document A/CN.4/43, pp. 70 et
seq.; | 见J. L.布赖尔利，关于条约法的第二次报告，《1951年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/CN.4/43号文件，第70页及以下各页； |
| and G.G. Fitzmaurice, first report on the
law of treaties, Yearbook … 1956, vol. II, document A/CN.4/101, p. 112; | G. G.菲茨莫里斯，关于条约法的第一次报告，《1956年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/CN.4/101号文件，第112页； |
| see also S. Rosenne, “Treaties,
conclusion and entry into force”, in Encyclopedia of Public International
Law, vol. IV, R. Bernhardt, ed. (Amsterdam, North Holland, 2000), p. 933
(“Strictly speaking it is the negotiation that is concluded through a treaty”); | 另见S. Rosenne,“条约、缔结与生效”，载于R. Bernhardt 所编《国际公法百科全书》，第四卷 (阿姆斯特丹，North Holland, 2000年)，第933页(“严格地说，正是通过缔结条约而完成了谈判”)； |
| Villiger, Commentary … (see footnote 37
above), pp. 78–80, paras. 9–14. | Villiger,《…评注》(见上文脚注37)，第78-80页，第9-14段。 |
| See, for example, Declaration on the
European Stability Mechanism, agreed on by the Contracting Parties to the
Treaty Establishing the Stability Mechanism, 27 September 2012. | 例如，见《欧洲稳定机制宣言》，《欧洲稳定机制条约》缔约国于2012年9月27日商定了此宣言。 |
| See Yearbook … 1966, vol. II, document
A/6309/Rev.1, p. 221, para. (13); | 见《1966年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/6309/Rev.1号文件，第221页，第(13)段； |
| the German Federal Constitutional Court
has held that this term may include unilateral declarations if the other
party did not object to them, see German Federal Constitutional Court,
BVerfGE, vol. 40, p. 141, at p. 176; | 《德意志联邦宪法》认为，这个用语可包括单方面宣布，如果另一方不提出反对的话。 见《德意志联邦宪法》，BVerfGE, 第40卷，第141页起，见第176页； |
| see, generally, Gardiner, Treaty
Interpretation (footnote 19 above), pp. 240–242. | 一般见Gardiner,《条约解释》(上文脚注19)，第240-242页。 |
| Yasseen, “L’interprétation des traités …”
(see footnote 20 above), p. 38; | Yasseen,“…对条约进行解释”(见上文脚注20)，第38页； |
| Jennings and Watts, Oppenheim’s
International Law (see footnote 57 above), p. 1274, para. 632 (“but, on the
other hand, too long a lapse of time between the treaty and the additional
agreement might prevent it being regarded as made in connection with ‘the
conclusion of’ the treaty”). | Jennings和Watts,《奥本海国际法》(见上文脚注57)，第1274页，第632段(“…但另一方面，如果条约和补充协定之间间隔的时间太长，可能会妨碍把它与“条约的缔结”联系起来”)。 |
| See Yearbook … 1966, vol. II, document
A/6309/Rev.1, p. 221, para. (14); | 见《1966年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/6309/Rev.1号文件，第221页，第(14)段； |
| see also Villiger, Commentary … (footnote
37 above), p. 431, paras. 20–21; | 另见Villiger,《…评注》(上文脚注37)，第431页，第20-21段； |
| see also K.J. Heller, “The uncertain
legal status of the aggression understandings”, Journal of International
Criminal Justice, vol. 10 (2012), pp. 229–248, at p. 237. | 另见K.J. Heller,“The Uncertain Legal Status
of the Aggression Understandings”，《国际刑事司法杂志》，第10卷(2012年)，第229-248页，见第237页。 |
| Villiger, Commentary … (see footnote 37
above), p. 80, para. 15; | Villiger,《…评注》(见上文脚注37)，第80页，第15段； |
| P. Gautier, “Commentary on article 2 of
the Vienna Convention”, in Corten and Klein, The Vienna Conventions … (see
footnote 21 above), vol. II, pp. 38–40, paras. 14–18; | P. Gautier,“对《维也纳公约》第二条的评注”，载于Corten和P.
Klein,《〈维也纳…公约〉…》(见上文脚注21)，第二卷，第38-40页，第14-18段； |
| J. Klabbers, The Concept of Treaty in
International Law (The Hague, Kluwer Law International, 1996), pp. 49–50; | J. Klabbers,《国际法中的条约概念》(Kluwer Law International, 1996年)，第49-50页； |
| see also A. Aust, “The theory and
practice of informal international instruments”, International and
Comparative Law Quarterly, vol. 35, No. 4 (1986), pp. 787–812, at pp. 794 et
seq. | 另见A. Aust,“非正式国际文书的理论和实践”，《国际法和比较法季刊》，第35卷，第4号(1986年)，第787-812页，见第794页及以下各页。 |
| See arts. 2, para. 1 (a), 3, 24, para. 2,
39–41, 58 and 60. | 见第二条第一款(a)项、第三条、第二十四条第二款、第三十九至四十一条、第五十八条、第六十条。 |
| Yearbook … 1966, vol. II, document
A/6309/Rev.1, pp. 232 and 233; | 《1966年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/6309/Rev.1号文件，第232和233页； |
| see also Villiger, Commentary … (footnote
37 above), p. 513, para. 7; | 另见Villiger,《…评注》(上文脚注37)，第513页，第7段； |
| P. Sands, “Commentary on article 39 of
the Vienna Convention”, in Corten and Klein, The Vienna Conventions … (see
footnote 21 above), pp. 971–972, paras. 31–34. | P. Sands,“对《维也纳公约》第三十九条的评注”，载于Corten和Klein,《〈维也纳…公约〉…》(见上文脚注21)，第971-972页，第31-34段。 |
| Draft article 27, paragraph 3 (b), which
later became article 31, paragraph 3 (b), of the Vienna Convention, contained
the word “understanding”, which was changed to “agreement” at the United
Nations Conference on the Law of Treaties. | 国际法委员会条款草案第二十七条第三款(b)项，这一款后来成为《维也纳公约》的第三十一条第三款(b)项，其中的“谅解”一词，在《维也纳公约》中改为“协定”。 |
| This change was “related to drafting
only”, see Official Records of the United Nations Conference on the Law of
Treaties, First session, Vienna 26 March-24 May 1968 (A/CONF.39/11, sales No.
E.68.V.7), p. 169; | 这个修改“只是一个起草问题”，见《联合国条约法会议正式记录，第一届会议，维也纳，1968年3月26日至5月24日》(A/CONF.39/11,
出售品编号：E.68.V.7)，第169页； |
| Fox, “Article 31 (3) (a) and (b) …” (see
footnote 62 above), p. 63. | Fox,“…第三十一条第三款(a)项和(b)项…”(见上文脚注62)，第63页。 |
| See Territorial Dispute (see footnote 22
above), p. 6, at pp. 34 et seq., paras. 66 et seq. | 见领土争端案(见上文脚注22)，第6页起，见第34页及以下各页，第66段及以下各段。 |
| Sovereignty over Pulau Ligitan and Pulau
Sipadan (see footnote 22 above), p. 656, para. 61; | 利吉丹岛和西巴丹岛的主权归属案(见上文脚注22)，第656页起，第61段； |
| in the Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros
case, the Court spoke of “subsequent positions” in order to establish that
“the explicit terms of the treaty itself were, therefore, in practice
acknowledged by the parties to be negotiable”, Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros
Project (Hungary/Slovakia), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1997, p. 7, at p. 77,
para. 138, see also Maritime Delimitation and Territorial Questions between
Qatar and Bahrain, Judgment (Jurisdiction and Admissibility), I.C.J. Reports
1995, p. 6, at p. 16, para. 28 (“subsequent conduct”). | 在加布奇科沃－大毛罗斯案中，法院讲到“嗣后立场”，以便确定“因此，条约本身的明确措辞表明，缔约方实际上承认是可以谈判的”，加布奇科沃－大毛罗斯项目案(匈牙利诉斯洛伐克)，判决，《1997年国际法院案例汇编》，第7页起，见第77页，第138段，另见卡塔尔和巴林海洋划界和领土问题案，判决(管辖权和可否受理)，《1995年国际法院案例汇编》，第6页起，见第16页，第28段(‘嗣后行为’)。 |
| See “Scheduling guidelines” in WTO Panel
Report, Mexico — Measures Affecting Telecommunications Services, WT/DS204/R,
adopted 1 June 2004, and in WTO Appellate Body Report, United States —
Measures Affecting the Cross-Border Supply of Gambling and Betting Services,
WT/DS285/AB/R and Corr.1, adopted 20 April 2005; | 见世贸组织专家组报告中的“具体承诺表指南”，墨西哥－影响电信服务的措施案，WT/DS204/R, 2004年6月1日通过，以及世贸组织上诉机构报告中的“具体承诺表指南”，美国－影响跨界提供赌博服务的措施案，WT/DS285/AB/R和Corr.1, 2005年4月20日通过； |
| to qualify a “1981 Understanding” in WTO
Panel Report, United States — Tax Treatment for “Foreign Sales Corporations”,
WT/DS108/R, adopted 20 March 2000; | 对世贸组织专家组报告中“1981年谅解”的定性，美国－“外国销售公司”的税务待遇案，WT/DS108/R, 2000年3月20日通过； |
| “Tokyo Round SCM Code” in WTO Panel
Report, Brazil — Measures Affecting Desiccated Coconut, WT/DS22/R, adopted 20
March 1997, and a “waiver” in WTO Appellate Body Report, EC — Bananas III
(see footnote 66 above). | 世贸组织专家组报告中的“东京回合补贴和反补贴协定”，巴西－影响椰子粉的措施案，WT/DS22/R, 1997年3月20日通过，以及世贸组织上诉机构报告中的“放弃”，欧共体－香蕉案(三)(见上文脚注66)。 |
| C.C.F.T. v. United States, UNCITRAL
Arbitration under NAFTA Chapter Eleven, Award on Jurisdiction, 28 January
2008; | C.C.F.T诉美国案，国际贸易法委员会依照《北美自贸协定》第十一章进行的仲裁，关于管辖权的裁决，2008年1月28日； |
| see also Compañía de Aguas del Aconquija
S.A. and Vivendi Universal S.A. v. Argentine Republic, Decision on the
Challenge to the President of the Committee, 3 October 2001, ICSID Case No.
ARB/97/3, ICSID Reports 2004, vol. 6 (2004), p. 168, at p. 174, para. 12; | 另见Compañía de Aguas del Aconquija S.A.和Vivendi Universal S.A.诉阿根廷共和国，关于质疑委员会主席的裁决，2001年10月3日，解决投资争端国际中心ARB/97/3号案件, 《2004年解决投资争端国际中心案例汇编》，第六卷(2004年)，第168页起，见第174页，第12段； |
| P. Merkouris and M. Fitzmaurice, “Canons
of treaty interpretation: selected case studies from the World Trade
Organization and the North American Free Trade Agreement”, in Fitzmaurice,
Elias and Merkouris, Treaty Interpretation … (see footnote 62 above), pp.
153–238, at pp. 217–233. | P. Merkouris和M.
Fitzmaurice,“条约解释准则：世界贸易组织和《北美自由贸易协定》的某些案例研究”，载于Fitzmaurice、Elias 和Merkouris所编《条约解释…》
(见上文脚注62)，第153-238页，见第217-233页。 |
| C.C.F.T. v. United States (see footnote
93 above), paras. 174–177. | C.C.F.T诉美国案(见上文脚注93)，第174-177段。 |
| Ibid., paras. 184–187. | 同上，第184-187段。 |
| Ibid., paras. 188, see also para. 189; | 同上，第188段，另见第189段； |
| and in a similar sense: Aguas del Tunari
SA v. Republic of Bolivia (Netherlands/Bolivia Bilateral Investment Treaty
(BIT)), Decision on Respondent’s Objections to Jurisdiction, ICSID Case No.
ARB/02/3, 21 October 2005, ICSID Review — Foreign Investment Law Journal,
vol. 20, No. 2 (2005), p. 450, at pp. 528 et seq., paras. 251 et seq. | 相似的还有Aguas del Tunari SA诉玻利维亚共和国(荷兰/玻利维亚双边投资条约)，就应诉方反对管辖权作出的裁决，解决投资争端国际中心ARB/02/3号案件, 2005年10月21日，《解决投资争端国际中心评论――外国投资法律杂志》，第20卷，No.2 (2005年)，第450页，见528页及以下各页，第251段及以下各段。 |
| Yearbook … 1966, vol. II, document
A/6309/Rev.1, pp. 221–222, para. (15). | 《1966年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/6309/Rev.1号文件，第221-222页，第(15)段。 |
| Ibid.; | 同上； |
| see also Karl, Vertrag und spätere Praxis
… (footnote 75 above), p. 294. | 另见Karl, Vertrag und spätere Praxis …(上文脚注75)，第294页。 |
| A common act or undertaking may consist
of an exchange of letters or some other form of agreement. | 共同的行动或承诺可能构成换文或其他形式的协定。 |
| The word “understanding” had been used by
the Commission in the corresponding draft article 27, para. 3 (b), on the law
of treaties (see footnote 89 above). | 委员会在关于条约法的相应条款草案第二十七条第三款(b)项中使用了“谅解”一词(见上文脚注89)。 |
| Pulp Mills on the River Uruguay
(Argentina v. Uruguay), Provisional Measures, Order of 13 July 2006, I.C.J.
Reports 2006, p. 113, at pp. 127–128, para. 53: in this case, even an
explicit subsequent verbal agreement was characterized by one of the parties
as “subsequent practice”. | 乌拉圭河纸浆厂案(阿根廷诉乌拉圭)，临时措施，2006年7月13日的命令，《2006年国际法院案例汇编》，第113页起，见第127-128页，第53段：在该案中，即使一个明确的嗣后口头协定，也被一个缔约方定性为“嗣后实践”。 |
| See WTO Appellate Body Report, United
States — Measures Concerning the Importation, Marketing and Sale of Tuna and
Tuna Products, WT/DS381/AB/R, adopted 13 June, para. 371. | 见世贸组织上诉机构报告，美国－关于进口、营销和销售金枪鱼和金枪鱼产品的措施案，WT/DS381/AB/R,
6月13日通过，第371段。 |
| Ibid., paras. 366–378, in particular
para. 372; | 同上，第366-378段，特别是372段； |
| e.g. agreements which are arrived at
under a clause in a bilateral tax treaty mirroring article 25, paragraph 3,
of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development Model Tax Convention; | 例如按照双边税收条约中仿效经济合作与发展组织《税收示范公约》第25条第3款的一项条款达成的协定； |
| Linderfalk, On the Interpretation of
Treaties (see footnote 67 above), pp. 164 et seq. | Linderfalk,《关于条约的解释》(见上文脚注67)，第164页及以下各页。 |
| Orascom TMT Investments S.à r.l. v.
People’s Democratic Republic of Algeria, award, 25 May 2017, ICSID Case No.
ARB/12/35, paras. 302–303. | Orascom TMT Investments S.à r.l.诉阿尔及利亚民主人民共和国，2017年5月25日的裁决, 解决投资争端国际中心ARB/12/35号案件，第302-303段。 |
| Maritime Delimitation in the Area between
Greenland and Jan Mayen, Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1993, p. 38, at p. 51,
para. 28. | 格陵兰和扬马延之间区域的海洋划界案，《1993年国际法院案例汇编》，第38页起，见第51页，第28段。 |
| In the Dispute Regarding Navigational and
Related Rights case between Costa Rica and Nicaragua, Judge ad hoc Guillaume
referred to a memorandum of understanding between the two States (Dispute
regarding Navigational and Related Rights (see footnote 22 above),
Declaration of Judge ad hoc Guillaume, p. 290, at pp. 298–299, para. 16). | 在哥斯达黎加与尼加拉瓜关于航行权和相关权利的争端案中，专案法官纪尧姆提到了两国的一项谅解备忘录(关于航行权和相关权利的争端案(见上文脚注22)，专案法官纪尧姆的声明，第290页起，见第298-299页，第16段)。 |
| It was not clear, however, whether this
particular memorandum was meant by the parties to serve as an interpretation
of the boundary treaty under examination. | 然而并不清楚两国是否准备将这份备忘录用于解释所审议的边界条约。 |
| See Ng Ka Ling and Others v. Director of
Immigration (footnote 70 above). | 见吴嘉玲等人诉入境事务处处长案(上文脚注70)。 |
| Ibid., paras. 152–153. | 同上，第152-153段。 |
| On the distinction between the two forms
of subsequent practice see below, paras. (23) and (24) of the present
commentary. | 关于这两种嗣后实践形式的区分，见本评注下文第(23)和第(24)段。 |
| Yearbook … 2001, vol. II (Part Two) and
Corrigendum, pp. 34–35, paras. (2)–(4) of the commentary. | 《2001年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)及更正，第34-35页，评注第(2)-(4)段。 |
| Waldock, third report on the law of
treaties, Yearbook … 1964, vol. II, document A/CN.4/167 and Add.1-3, pp.
61–62, paras. (32)–(33); | 沃尔多克，《关于条约法的第三次报告》，《1964年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/CN.4/167和Add.1-3号文件，第61-62页，第(32)-(33)段； |
| Case concerning the Temple of Preah
Vihear (Cambodia v. Thailand), Merits, Judgment of 15 June 1962, I.C.J.
Reports 1962, p. 6, at p. 23; | 隆瑞古寺案(柬埔寨诉泰国)，实质问题，1962年6月15日的判决，《1962年国际法院案例汇编》，第6页起，见第23页； |
| Case concerning Military and Paramilitary
Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States of America),
Jurisdiction and Admissibility, Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1984, p. 392, at p.
410, para. 39; | 在尼加拉瓜境内和针对尼加拉瓜的军事和准军事活动案(尼加拉瓜诉美利坚合众国)，管辖权和可否受理，判决，《1984年国际法院案例汇编》，第392页起，见第410页，第39段； |
| Dispute between Argentina and Chile
concerning the Beagle Channel, UNRIAA, vol. XXI (Sales No. E/F.95.V2), pp.
53–264, at pp. 185–187, paras. 168–169. | 阿根廷和智利比格尔海峡争端案，《国际仲裁裁决汇编》，第21卷(出售品编号：E/F.95.V2)，第53-264页，见第185-187页，第168-169段。 |
| NAFTA Arbitral Panel Final Report,
Cross-Border Trucking Services (Mexico v. United States of America), No.
USA-MEX-98-2008-01, adopted 6 February 2001, para. 224 (footnotes omitted). | 《北美自贸协定》仲裁专家组最后报告，跨界卡车运输服务(墨西哥诉美利坚合众国)，编号USA-MEX-98-2008-01, 2001年2月6日通过，第224段(脚注略)。 |
| For example, WTO Panel Report, United
States — Section 110(5) Copyright Act, WT/DS160/R, adopted 27 July 2000,
para. 6.55; | 例如，世贸组织专家组报告，美国－版权法第110(5)节条款案，WT/DS160/R, 2000年7月27日通过，第6.55段； |
| WTO Panel Report, United States —
Continued Existence and Application of Zeroing Methodology, WT/DS350/R,
adopted 19 February 2009, para. 7.173; | 世贸组织专家组报告，美国－“归零”法的继续存在和适用案，WT/DS350/R, 2009年2月19日通过，第7.173段； |
| WTO Appellate Body Report, United States
— Definitive Anti-Dumping and Countervailing Duties on Certain Products from
China, WT/DS379/AB/R, adopted 25 March 2011, paras. 335–336; | 世贸组织上诉机构报告，美国－对中国某些产品确定征收的反倾销税和反补贴税案，WT/DS379/AB/R,
2011年3月25日通过，第335-336段； |
| CMS Gas Transmission Company v. Argentine
Republic (United States/Argentina BIT), Decision on Objections to
Jurisdiction, 17 July 2003, ICSID Case No. ARB/01/8, ICSID Reports 2003, vol.
7, p. 492, para. 47; | CMS燃气输送公司诉阿根廷共和国(美国/阿根廷双边投资条约)，就反对管辖权作出的裁决，2003年7月17日，解决投资争端国际中心ARB/01/8号案件, 《2003年解决投资争端国际中心案例汇编》，第7卷，第492页，第47段； |
| V. v. the United Kingdom [GC], No.
24888/94, 16 December 1999, ECHR 1999-IX, para. 73; | V.诉英国[大审判庭]，第24888/94号申诉，1999年12月16日，《1999年欧洲人权法院案例汇编》第九卷，第73段； |
| Kart v. Turkey [GC], No. 8917/05, 3 December
2009, ECHR 2009-VI, para. 54; | Kart诉土耳其[大审判庭]，第8917/05号申诉，2009年12月3日，《2009年欧洲人权法院案例汇编》第六卷，第54段； |
| Sigurður A. Sigurjónsson v. Iceland, No.
16130/90, 30 June 1993, ECHR Series A No. 264, para. 35. | Sigurður A. Sigurjónsson诉冰岛，第16130/90号申诉，1993年6月30日，《欧洲人权法院案例汇编》A辑，第264号，第35段。 |
| Karl, Vertrag und spätere Praxis … (see
footnote 75 above), pp. 115 et seq. | Karl, Vertrag und spätere Praxis …(见上文脚注75)，第115页及以下各页。 |
| See draft conclusion 5, para. 2. | 见结论草案5第2段。 |
| Yearbook … 1964, vol. II, document
A/5809, p. 204, para. (13); | 《1964年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/5809号文件，第204页，第(13)段； |
| see also Yearbook … 1966, vol. II,
document A/6309/Rev.1, pp. 221–222, para. (15). | 另见《1966年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/6309/Rev.1号文件，第221-222页，第(15)段。 |
| WTO Appellate Body Report, Japan —
Alcoholic Beverages II, WT/DS8/AB/R, WT/DS10/AB/R and WT/DS11/AB/R, adopted
on 1 November 1996, and WTO Report of the Panel, WT/DS8/R, WT/DS10/R and
WT/DS11/R, adopted on 1 November 1996. | 世贸组织上诉机构报告，日本－酒精饮料案(二)，WT/DS8/AB/R、WT/DS10/AB/R和WT/DS11/AB/R, 1996年11月1日通过，以及世贸组织专家组报告，WT/DS8/R、WT/DS10/R和WT/DS11/R, 1996年11月1日通过。 |
| Ibid. (WTO Appellate Body Report),
section E, p. 16. | 同上(世贸组织上诉机构报告)，E节，第16页。 |
| Kasikili/Sedudu Island (see footnote 22
above), at p. 1078, para. 55. | 卡西基里/塞杜杜岛案(见上文脚注22)，第1078页，第55段。 |
| Ibid., p. 1096, para. 80. | 同上，第1096页，第80段。 |
| Loizidou v. Turkey (preliminary
objections), No. 15318/89, 23 March 1995, ECHR Series A No. 310, para. 79. | Loizidou诉土耳其(初步反对意见)，第15318/89号申诉，1995年3月23日，《欧洲人权法院案例汇编》A辑，第310号，第79段。 |
| Ibid., para. 80; | 同上，第80段； |
| it is noteworthy that the Court described
“such a State practice” as being “uniform and consistent” despite the fact
that it had recognised that two States possibly constituted exceptions
(Cyprus and the United Kingdom; | 值得一提的是，法院形容“这种国家实践”是“统一和一贯的”，尽管法院承认，可能有两个国家例外(塞浦路斯和联合王国； |
| “whatever their meaning”), paras. 80 and
82. | “不管其意义如何”)，第80和82段。 |
| Demir and Baykara v. Turkey [GC], No.
34503/97, 12 November 2008, ECHR-2008, para. 52. | Demir和Baykara诉土耳其[大审判庭]，第34503/97号申诉，2008年11月12日，《2008年欧洲人权法院案例汇编》，第52段。 |
| Ibid., para. 151; | 同上，第151段； |
| similarly Jorgic v. Germany, No.
74613/01, 12 July 2007, ECHR 2007III, para. 69. | 相似的还有Jorgic诉德国，第74613/01号申诉，2007年7月12日，《2007年欧洲人权法院案例汇编》第三卷，第69段。 |
| Hilaire, Constantine and Benjamin et al.
(see footnote 27 above), Concurring Separate Opinion of Judge Sergio García
Ramírez, para. 12; | Hilaire、Constantine和Benjamin等人诉特立尼达和多巴哥(见上文脚注27)，Sergio García Ramírez法官单独的赞同意见，第12段； |
| Case of Artavia Murillo et al. (“In vitro
fertilization”) v. Costa Rica, Judgment (Preliminary Objections, Merits,
Reparations and Costs), 28 November 2012, Inter-Am. Ct. H.R. Series C No.
257, paras. 245–256. | Artavia Murillo等人(“体外受精”)诉哥斯达黎加，判决(初步反对意见，实质问题、赔偿和费用）)，2012年11月28日，美洲人权法院，C辑第257号，第245-256段。 |
| Jong-Cheol v. The Republic of Korea,
Views, 27 July 2005, Communication No. 968/2001, Report of the Human Rights
Committee, Official Records of the General Assembly, Sixtieth Session,
Supplement No. 40 (A/60/40), vol. II, annex V, G. | Jong-Cheol诉大韩民国，意见，2005年7月27日，第968/2001号来文，人权事务委员会的报告，《大会正式记录，第六十届会议，补编第40号》(A/60/40)，第二卷，附件五，G节。 |
| Ibid., para. 8.3. | 同上，第8.3段。 |
| Ibid.; | 同上； |
| see also Yoon and Choi v. The Republic of
Korea, Views, 3 November 2006, Communication Nos. 1321/2004 and 1322/2004,
ibid., Sixty-second Session, Supplement No. 40 (A/62/40), vol. II, annex VII,
V, para. 8.4. | 另见Yoon和Choi诉大韩民国，意见，2006年11月3日，第1321/2004和第1322/2004号来文，同上，《第六十二届会议，补编第40号》(A/62/40)，第二卷，附件七，V节，第8.4段。 |
| United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 78,
No. 1021, p. 277. | 联合国，《条约汇编》，第78卷，第1021号，第277页。 |
| Prosecutor v. Goran Jelisić,
Trial Chamber, Judgment, 14 December 1999, IT-95-10-T, para. 61 (footnotes
omitted); | 检察官诉Goran Jelisić案，审判庭，判决，1999年12月14日，IT-95-10-T,
第61段(脚注略)； |
| similarly Prosecutor v. Radislav Krstić,
Trial Chamber, Judgment, 2 August 2001, IT-98-33-T, para. 541. | 相似的还有检察官诉Radislav Krstić，审判庭，判决，2001年8月2日，IT-98-33-T, 第541段。 |
| WTO Panel Report, United States — Section
110(5) of the US Copyright Act, WT/DS160/R, adopted 27 July 2000. | 世贸组织专家组报告，美国－版权法第110(5)节条款案，WT/DS160/R, 2000年7月27日通过。 |
| See Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of
Intellectual Property Rights, art. 9, para. 1. | 见《与贸易有关的知识产权协议》，第9条第1款。 |
| WTO Panel Report, United States — Section
110(5) of the US Copyright Act, WT/DS160/R, adopted 27 July 2000, para. 6.55
(footnotes omitted). | 世贸组织专家组报告，美国－版权法第110(5)节条款案，WT/DS160/R, 2000年7月27日通过，第6.55段(脚注略)。 |
| Ibid., footnote 69. | 同上，脚注69。 |
| See WTO Appellate Body Report, EC —
Computer Equipment, WT/DS62/AB/R, WT/DS67/AB/R and WT/DS68/AB/R, adopted 22
June 1998, at para. 90. | 见世贸组织上诉机构报告，欧共体－计算机设备案，WT/DS62/AB/R、WT/DS67/AB/R和WT/DS68/AB/R, 1998年6月22日通过，第90段。 |
| See also I. van Damme, Treaty
Interpretation by the WTO Appellate Body (Oxford, Oxford University Press,
2009), p. 342. | 另见 I. van Damme,《世贸组织上诉机构对条约的解释》(牛津，牛津大学出版社，2009年)，第342页。 |
| See also WTO Appellate Body Report, US —
COOL, WT/DS384/AB/R and WT/DS386/AB/R, adopted 23 July 2012, para. 452. | 另见世贸组织上诉机构报告，美国－COOL案，WT/DS384/AB/R和WT/DS386/AB/R, 2012年7月23日通过，第452段。 |
| Sempra Energy International v. Argentine
Republic, Award, 28 September 2007, ICSID Case No. ARB/02/16, para. 385; | Sempra Energy International诉阿根廷共和国，裁决，2007年9月28日，解决投资争端国际中心ARB/02/16号案件, 第385段； |
| see also Enron Corporation and Ponderosa
Assets, L.P. v. Argentine Republic, Award, 22 May 2007, ICSID Case No.
ARB/01/3, para. 337; | 另见Enron Corporation 和Ponderosa Assets, L.P.诉阿根廷共和国，裁决，2007年5月22日，解决投资争端国际中心ARB/01/3号案件, 第337段； |
| WTO Panel Report, US — Large Civil
Aircraft (2nd Complaint), WT/DS353/R, adopted 23 March 2012, fn. 2420 in
para. 7.953; | 世贸组织专家组报告，美国－大型民用飞机案(第二次申诉)，WT/DS353/R, 2012年3月23日通过，第7.953段中脚注2420； |
| Philip Morris Brands Sàrl, Philip Morris
Products S.A. and Abal Hermanos S.A. v. Oriental Republic of Uruguay, ICSID
Case No. ARB/10/7, Award, 28 June 2016, para. 476. | Philip Morris Brands Sàrl、Philip Morris Products S.A.和Abal Hermanos
S.A诉乌拉圭东岸共和国，解决投资争端国际中心ARB/10/7号案件，2016年6月28日的裁决，第476段。 |
| See, for example: United Kingdom, House
of Lords, Deep Vein Thrombosis and Air Travel Group Litigation [2005] UKHL
72, paras. 54–55 and 66–85 (Lord Mance); | 例如，见：联合王国，上议院，深静脉血栓与航空旅行集团诉讼[2005] UKHL
72, 第54-55段和第66-85段(Mance勋爵)； |
| United Kingdom, House of Lords, R
(Al-Jedda) v. Secretary of State for Defence [2007] UKHL 58, para. 38; | 联合王国，上议院，R (Al-Jedda)诉国防大臣[2007] UKHL 58, 第38段； |
| United Kingdom, House of Lords, R
(Mullen) v. Secretary of State for the Home Department [2004] UKHL 18, para.
47 (Lord Steyn); | 联合王国，上议院，R (Mullen)诉内政大臣[2004] UKHL 18, 第47段(Steyn勋爵)； |
| United Kingdom, House of Lords, King v.
Bristow Helicopters Ltd. (Scotland) [2002] UKHL 7, para. 80 (Lord Hope); | 联合王国，上议院，King诉Bristow直升机公司(苏格兰) [2002] UKHL 7, 第80段(Hope勋爵)； |
| New Zealand, Court of Appeal, Zaoui v.
Attorney-General (No. 2) [2005] 1 NZLR 690, para. 130 (Glazebrook J.); | 新西兰，上诉法院，Zaoui诉总检察长(第2号)[2005] 1 NZLR
690, 第130段(Glazebrook J.)； |
| New Zealand, Court of Appeal, P. v.
Secretary for Justice, ex parte A.P. [2004] 2 NZLR 28, para. 61 (Glazebrook
J.); | 新西兰，上诉法院，P.诉司法部长，ex
parte A.P. [2004] 2 NZLR 28, 第61段(Glazebrook J.)； |
| Germany, Federal Administrative Court,
BVerwGE, vol. 104, p. 254, at pp. 256–257; | 德国，联邦行政法院，BVerwGE, 第104卷，第254页起，见第256-257页； |
| judgment of 29 November 1988, 1 C 75/86
[1988], Neue Zeitschrift für Verwaltungsrecht, 1989, p. 765, at p. 766. | 1988年11月29日的判决，1 C 75/86 [1988]，Neue Zeitschrift für Verwaltungsrecht, 1989年, 第765页起，见第766页。 |
| Villiger, Commentary … (see footnote 37
above), p. 431, para. 22. | Villiger,《…评注》(见上文脚注37)，第431页，第22段。 |
| Linderfalk, On the Interpretation of
Treaties (see footnote 67 above), p. 166. | Linderfalk,《关于条约的解释》(见上文脚注67)，第166页。 |
| WTO Appellate Body Report, Japan —
Alcoholic Beverages II, WT/DS8/AB/R, WT/DS10/AB/R and WT/DS11/AB/R, adopted 1
November 1996, section E, p. 13. | 世贸组织上诉机构报告，日本－酒精饮料案(二)，WT/DS8/AB/R、WT/DS10/AB/R和WT/DS11/AB/R, 1996年11月1日通过，E节，第13页。 |
| See para. (11) of the commentary to draft
conclusion 9, paragraph 2, above; | 见上文结论草案9第2段的评注第(11)段； |
| Kolb, Interprétation et création du droit
international (Brussels, Bruylant, 2006), pp. 506–507. | Kolb, Interprétation et création du droit
international(布鲁塞尔，Bruylant, 2006)，pp. 506-507。 |
| Aust, Modern Treaty Law and Practice, 3rd
ed. (Cambridge, United Kingdom, Cambridge University Press, 2013), p. 239. | Aust,《现代条约法和实践》，第3版 (剑桥，联合王国，剑桥大学出版社，2013年)，第239页。 |
| Karl, Vertrag und spätere Praxis … (see
footnote 75 above), pp. 114 et seq. | Karl, Vertrag und spätere Praxis …(见上文脚注75)，第114页及以下各页。 |
| See para. (3) of the commentary to draft
conclusion 1 above. | 见上文结论草案1的评注第(3)段。 |
| Draft articles on responsibility of
States for internationally wrongful acts, with commentaries, Yearbook … 2001,
vol. II (Part Two) and corrigendum, p. 35, para. (4) of the commentary; | 国家对国际不法行为的责任条款及评注，《2001年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)和更正，第35页，评注第(4)段； |
| the question of the attribution of
relevant subsequent conduct to international organizations for the purpose of
treaty interpretation is addressed in draft conclusion 12 below. | 为了条约解释的目的，国际组织的相关嗣后行为的归属问题在下文结论草案12[11]中作了说明。 |
| Cf. arts. 4 and 5 of the articles on
responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts, General Assembly
resolution 56/83 of 12 December 2001, annex. | 参见国家对国际不法行为的责任条款第4和第5条，大会2001年12月12日第56/83号决议，附件。 |
| For the draft articles adopted by the
Commission and the commentaries thereto, see Yearbook … 2001, vol. II (Part
Two) and Corrigendum, paras. 76–77. | 关于委员会通过的条款草案及其评注，见《2001年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)和更正，第76-77段。 |
| See para. (18) of the commentary to draft
conclusion 4 above. | 见上文结论草案4的评注第(18)段。 |
| See para. (19) of the commentary to draft
conclusion 4 above. | 见上文结论草案4的评注第(19)段。 |
| Kasikili/Sedudu Island (see footnote 22
above), p. 1094, para. 74. | 卡西基里/塞杜杜岛案(见上文脚注22)，第1094页，第74段。 |
| 34 Stat. 2905 (1902–1907). | 34 Stat. 2905 (1902-1907)。 |
| Case concerning rights of nationals of
the United States of America in Morocco, Judgment of August 27th, 1952,
I.C.J. Reports 1952, p. 176, at p. 211. | 摩洛哥境内美利坚合众国国民权利案，1952年8月27日的判决，《1952年国际法院案例汇编》，第176页起，见第211页。 |
| Case concerning the question whether the
re-evaluation of the German Mark in 1961 and 1969 constitutes a case for
application of the clause in article 2 (e) of Annex I A of the 1953 Agreement
on German External Debts between Belgium, France, Switzerland, the United
Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of
America on the one hand and the Federal Republic of Germany on the other,
Decision, 16 May 1980, UNRIAA, vol. XIX (Sales No. E/F.90.V.7), pp. 67–145,
at pp. 103–104, para. 31. | 关于1961年和1969年德国马克升值是否构成适用1953年比利时、法国、瑞士、大不列颠和北爱尔兰联合王国和美利坚合众国与德意志联邦共和国关于德国外债的协定附件一A第2条(e)项条款的情况问题，1980年5月16日的决定，《国际仲裁裁决汇编》，第十九卷(出售品编号：E/F.90.V.7)，第67-145页，见第103-104页，第31段。 |
| Question of the tax regime governing
pensions paid to retired UNESCO officials residing in France, Decision, 14
January 2003, UNRIAA, vol. XXV (Sales No. E/F.05.V.5), pp. 231–266, at p.
257, para. 66 and p. 259, para. 74. | “关于居住在法国的教科文组织退休官员所领退休金的征税制度问题”，2003年1月14日的决定，《国际仲裁裁决汇编》，第二十五卷(出售品编号：E/F.05.V.5)，第231-266页，见第257页第66段和第259页第74段。 |
| See Chanaki, L’adaptation des traités …
(see footnote 62 above), pp. 323–328; | 见Chanaki, L’adaptation des traités …(见上文脚注62)，第323-328页； |
| Gardiner, Treaty Interpretation (footnote
19 above), p. 269–270; | Gardiner,《条约解释》(见上文脚注19)，第269-270页； |
| M. Kamto, “La volonté de l’État en droit
international”, Recueil des cours … 2004, vol. 310, pp. 9–428, at pp.
142–144; | M. Kamto, 《国际法中的国家意志》，《2004年海牙国际法学院讲义》，第310卷，第9-428页，见第142-144页； |
| Dörr, “Article 31 …” (see footnote 61
above), p. 597, para. 79. | Dörr,“第三十一条…”(见上文脚注61)，第597页，第79段。 |
| The Commission has adopted the same
approach in draft conclusion 4, paragraph 3, on identification of customary
international law. According to this draft conclusion: “[c]onduct of other
actors is not practice that contributes to the formation, or expression, of
rules of customary international law, but may be relevant when assessing the
practice referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2.” | 委员会在关于习惯国际法的识别的结论草案4第3段采用了同样的办法，根据该结论草案，“其他行为体的行为不是有助于习惯国际法规则形成或表述的实践，但在评估第1和第2段所指的实践时可能相关。 ” |
| See Iran-United States Claims Tribunal,
United States of America et al. v. Islamic Republic of Iran et al., Award No.
108-A-16/582/591-FT, Iran-United States Claims Tribunal Reports, vol. 5
(1984), p. 57, at p. 71; | 见伊朗－美利坚合众国索赔法庭，美利坚合众国等诉伊朗伊斯兰共和国，第108-A-16/582/591
FT号裁决，《伊朗－美利坚合众国索赔法庭裁决汇编》，第5卷(1984年)，第57页起，见第71页； |
| similarly Iran-United States Claims
Tribunal, Interlocutory Award No. ITL 83-B1-FT (Counterclaim), The Islamic
Republic of Iran v. United States of America, ibid., vol. 38 (2004–2009), p.
77, at pp. 124–125, paras. 127–128; | 相似的还有伊朗－美利坚合众国索赔法庭，第ITL 83-B1-FT号中间裁决(反诉)，伊朗伊斯兰共和国诉美利坚合众国，同上，第38卷(2004-2009年)，第77页起，见第124-125页，第127-128段； |
| see also Iran-United States Claims
Tribunal, Interlocutory Award No. ITL 37-111-FT, International Schools
Services, Inc. (ISS) v. National Iranian Copper Industries Company (NICICO),
ibid., vol. 5 (1984), p. 338, Dissenting Opinion of President Lagergren, p.
348, at p. 353: “the provision in the Vienna Convention on subsequent
agreements refers to agreements between States parties to a treaty, and a
settlement agreement between two arbitrating parties can hardly be regarded
as equal to an agreement between the two States that are parties to the
treaty, even though the Islamic Republic of Iran was one of the arbitrating
parties in the case”. | 另见伊朗－美利坚合众国索赔法庭，第ITL 37-111-FT号中间裁决，“国际学校服务公司诉伊朗国家铜业公司”，同上，第5卷(1984年)，第338页起，Lagergren庭长的不同意见，第348页起，见第353页：“《维也纳公约》关于嗣后协定的规定系指条约当事国之间的协定，尽管伊朗伊斯兰共和国是该案仲裁当事方之一，但仲裁当事双方之间的和解协定很难被视为等同于均为条约缔约方的两国间的协定”。 |
| For the Algiers Declarations (Declaration
of the Government of the Democratic and Popular Republic of Algeria and
Declaration of the Government of the Democratic and Popular Republic of
Algeria concerning the Settlement of Claims by the Government of the United
States of America and the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran, see
International Legal Materials, vol. 20 (1981), pp. 224 and 230
(respectively), at pp. 232–233). | 各项阿尔及尔声明(阿尔及利亚人民民主共和国政府的声明以及阿尔及利亚人民民主共和国政府就美利坚合众国政府和伊朗伊斯兰共和国政府处理索赔问题发表的声明)见《国际法律资料》，第20卷
(1981年)，(分别为)第224和第230页，见第232-233页。 |
| See, for example, Observations of the
United States of America on the Human Rights Committee’s General Comment 33:
The Obligations of States Parties under the Optional Protocol to the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 22 December 2008, p. 1,
para. 3 (available at www.state.gov/documents/organization/138852.pdf). | 例如，见美利坚合众国关于人权事务委员会第33号一般性意见：缔约国在《公民权利和政治权利国际公约任择议定书》下的义务的意见，2008年12月22日，第1页，第3段(可查阅www.state.gov/documents/organization/138852.pdf)。 |
| To the extent that the statement by the
United States relates to the interpretation of the Optional Protocol to the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (United Nations, Treaty
Series, vol. 999, No. 14668, p. 171), to which the United States is not party
nor a contracting State, its statement constitutes “other conduct” under
draft conclusion 5, para. 2. | 美国与解释《公民权利和政治权利国际公约任择议定书》(联合国，《条约汇编》，第999卷，第14668号，第171页)有关的声明――虽然美国既不是该公约的当事国也不是缔约国――构成结论草案5第2段所称的“其他行为”。 |
| See, for example, International Law
Association, Committee on International Human Rights Law and Practice, “Final
report on the impact of findings of United Nations Human Rights treaty
bodies”, Report of the Seventy-first Conference, Berlin, 16–21 August 2004
(London, 2004), p. 621, paras. 21 et seq. | 例如，见国际法协会人权法和实践委员会，“关于联合国人权条约机构调查结果影响的最后报告”，第七十一届会议报告，柏林，2004年8月16日至21日(伦敦，2004年)第621页，第21段及以下各段。 |
| See Gardiner, Treaty Interpretation (see
footnote 19 above), p. 270. | 见Gardiner,《条约解释》(见上文脚注19)，第270页。 |
| See paras. (40)–(42) of the commentary to
draft conclusion 12 below. | 见下文结论草案12的评注第(40)-(42)段。 |
| See UNHCR, Handbook and Guidelines on
Procedures and Criteria for Determining Refugee Status under the 1951
Convention and the 1967 Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees (December
2011), HCR/1P/4/ENG/REV. 3 (www.refworld.org/docid/4f33c8d92.html), Foreword; | 见难民署，《根据关于难民地位的1951年公约和1967年议定书确定难民身份的程序和标准手册》(2011年12月)，HCR/IP/4/Eng/REV.3(www.refworld.org/docid/4f33c8d92.htm)，前言； |
| the view that the UNHCR Handbook itself
expresses State practice has correctly been rejected by the Federal Court of
Australia in Semunigus v. Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs
[1999] FCA 422 (1999), Judgment, 14 April 1999, paras. 5–13; | “Semunigus诉澳大利亚移民和多元文化事务部长案”正确地否决了难民署手册本身体现国家实践的意见，[1999] FCA
422(1999)，1999年4月14日判决，第5-13段； |
| the UNHCR Handbook nevertheless possesses
considerable evidentiary weight as a correct statement of subsequent State
practice. | 但手册作为一项关于嗣后国家实践的正确声明具有重要的证据份量。 |
| Its authority is based on article 35,
paragraph 1, of the Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, 1951
(United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 189, No. 2545, p. 137), according to
which “[t]he Contracting States undertake to co-operate with the Office of
the United Nations High Commissioner for refugees … in the exercise of its
functions, and shall in particular facilitate its duty of supervising the
application of the provisions of this Convention”. | 该手册的权威性基于1951年《关于难民地位的公约》(联合国，《条约汇编》，第189卷，第2545号，第137页)第35条第1款，根据该款，“缔约各国保证同联合国难民事务高级专员办事处…在其执行职务时进行合作，并应特别使其在监督适用本公约规定而行使职务时获得便利”。 |
| Security Council resolution 1540 (2004)
of 24 April 2004, operative para. 8 (c); | 安全理事会2004年4月24日第1540(2004)号决议，执行部分第8(c)段； |
| according to the 1540 Committee’s
website, “the 1540 Matrix has functioned as the primary method used by the
1540 Committee to organize information about implementation of UN Security
Council resolution 1540 by Member States” (www.un.org/en/sc/1540/national-implementation/matrices.shtml
(accessed 11 May 2016)). | 根据1540委员会的网页，“1540汇总表是1540委员会使用的一个主要方法，用于汇总会员国执行联合国安全理事会第1540号决议工作的有关信息”(www.un.org/en/sc/1540/nationalimplementation/ matrix.shtml (2016年5月11日查阅))。 |
| United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1015,
No. 14860, p. 163. | 联合国，《条约汇编》，第1015卷，第14860号，第163页。 |
| United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1974,
No. 33757, p. 45. | 联合国，《条约汇编》，第1974卷，第33757号，第45页。 |
| See, generally, Gardiner, Treaty
Interpretation (footnote 19 above), p. 270. | 一般见Gardiner,《条约解释》(上文脚注19)，第270页。 |
| H.-P. Gasser, “International Committee of
the Red Cross (ICRC)”, Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law
(www.mpepil.com), para. 20. | H.-P. Gasser,“红十字国际委员会(红十字委员会)”，《马克思普朗克国际公法百科全书》(www.mpepil.com)，第20段。 |
| Geneva Convention for the Amelioration of
the Condition of the Wounded and Sick in Armed Forces in the Field (Geneva,
12 August 1949), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 75, No. 970, p. 31
(“Geneva Convention I”), art. 3 and art. 9; | 《改善战地武装部队伤者病者境遇的日内瓦公约》(1949年8月12日，日内瓦)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第75卷，第970号，第31页(“《日内瓦第一公约》”)，第3和第9条； |
| Geneva Convention for the Amelioration of
the Condition of Wounded, Sick and Shipwrecked Members of Armed Forces at Sea
(Geneva, 12 August 1949), ibid., No. 971, p. 85 (“Geneva Convention II”),
art. 3 and art. 9; | 《改善海上武装部队伤者病者及遇船难者境遇的日内瓦公约》(1949年8月12日，日内瓦)，同上，第971号，第85页(“《日内瓦第二公约》”)，第3和第9条； |
| Geneva Convention relative to the
Treatment of Prisoners of War (Geneva, 12 August 1949), ibid., No. 972, p.
135 (“Geneva Convention III”), art. 3 and art. 9; | 《关于战俘待遇的日内瓦公约》(1949年8月12日，日内瓦)，同上，第972号，第135页(“《日内瓦第三公约》”)，第3和第9条； |
| and Geneva Convention relative to the
Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War (Geneva, 12 August 1949),
ibid., No. 973, p. 287 (“Geneva Convention IV”), art. 3 and art. 10; | 及《关于战时保护平民的日内瓦公约》(1949年8月12日，日内瓦)，同上，第973号，第287页(“《日内瓦第四公约》”)，第3和第9条； |
| Protocol Additional to the Geneva
Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of
International Armed Conflicts (Protocol I), 1977, ibid., vol. 1125, No.
17512, p. 3, art. 81; | 《1949年8月12日日内瓦四公约关于保护国际性武装冲突受害者的附加议定书》(《第一议定书》)，1977年，同上，第1125卷，第17512号，第3页，第81条； |
| Statutes of the International Red Cross
and Red Crescent Movement, Adopted by the 25th International Conference of
the Red Cross at Geneva in 1986 and amended in 1995 and 2006, art. 5. | 1986年在日内瓦举行的第25届国际红十字大会通过，并于1995年和2006年修正的《国际红十字和红新月运动章程》，第5条。 |
| Available at
www.icrc.org/eng/assets/files/other/statutes-en-a5.pdf (accessed on 9 August
2018). | 可查阅：www.icrc.org/eng/assets/files/other/statutes-en-a5.pdf(2018年8月9日查询)。 |
| Geneva Conventions I, II, III and IV,
ibid. | 日内瓦第一、第二、第三和第四公约，同上。 |
| Protocol Additional to the Geneva
Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of
International Armed Conflicts (Protocol I), 1977, United Nations, Treaty
Series, vol. 1125, No. 17512, p. 3; | 《1949年8月12日日内瓦四公约关于保护国际性武装冲突受害者的附加议定书》(第一议定书)，1977年，联合国，《条约汇编》，第1125卷，第17512号，第3页； |
| and Protocol Additional to the Geneva
Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of
Non-International Armed Conflicts (Protocol II), 1977, ibid., No. 17513, p.
609. | 《1949年8月12日日内瓦四公约关于保护非国际性武装冲突受害者的附加议定书》(第二议定书)，1977年，同上，第17513号，第609页。 |
| Adopted by the 25th International
Conference of the Red Cross at Geneva in 1986 and amended in 1995 and 2006. | 1986年在日内瓦举行的第25届国际红十字大会通过，并于1995年和2006年进行了修正。 |
| Available from
www.icrc.org/eng/assets/files/other/statutes-en-a5.pdf (accessed on 17 May
2016). | 可查阅：www.icrc.org/eng/assets/files/other/statutes-en-a5.pdf(2016年5月17日查询)。 |
| Geneva, 2009, p. 10. Available from
www.icrc.org. | 日内瓦，2009年，第10页，可查阅www.icrc.org。 |
| Ibid., p. 9. | 同上，第9页。 |
| Resolution 1 on strengthening legal
protection for victims of armed conflicts, 1 December 2011. | 第1号决议――加强对武装冲突受害者的法律保护，2011年12月1日。 |
| See www.the-monitor.org. | 见www.the-monitor.org。 |
| United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 2056,
No. 35597, p. 211. | 联合国，《条约汇编》，第2056卷，第35597号，第211页。 |
| Ibid., vol. 2688, No. 47713, p. 39. | 同上，《条约汇编》，第2688卷，第47713号，第39页。 |
| See, for example, Cluster Munitions
Monitor 2011, pp. 24–31. | 例如，见《2011年集束弹药监测报告》，第24-31页。 |
| See A/CN.4/660, paras. 129 et seq. | 见A/CN.4/660, 第129段及以下各段。 |
| Christine Goodwin v. the United Kingdom
[GC], No. 28957/95, 11 July 2002, ECHR 2002-VI, para. 85. | Christine Goodwin诉联合王国[大审判庭]，第28957/95号申诉，2002年7月11日，《2002年欧洲人权法院案例汇编》第六卷，第85段。 |
| Ibid., para. 100. | 同上，第100段。 |
| See also I. v. the United Kingdom [GC],
No. 25680/94, 11 July 2002, para. 65; | 另见I.诉联合王国[大审判庭]，第25680/94号申诉，2002年7月11日，第65段； |
| Burden and Burden v. the United Kingdom,
No. 13378/05, 12 December 2006, para. 57; | Burden和Burden诉联合王国[大审判庭]，第13378/05号申诉，2006年12月12日，第57段； |
| Shackell v. the United Kingdom (dec.),
No. 45851/99, 27 April 2000, para. 1; | Shackell诉联合王国(裁定)，第45851/99号申诉，2000年4月27日，第1段； |
| Schalk and Kopf v. Austria, No. 30141/04,
24 June 2010, para. 58. | Schalk和Kopf诉奥地利，第30141/04号申诉，2010年6月24日，第58段。 |
| Dudgeon v. the United Kingdom, No.
7525/76, 22 October 1981, ECHR Series A No. 45, in particular para. 60. | Dudgeon诉联合王国，第7525/76号申诉，1981年10月22日，《欧洲人权法院案例汇编》A辑，第45号，特别是第60段。 |
| Christine Goodwin v. the United Kingdom
[GC] (see footnote 179 above), in particular para. 85. | Christine Goodwin诉联合王国[大审判庭](见上文脚注179)，特别是第85段。 |
| See Dudgeon v. the United Kingdom, No.
7525/76, 22 October 1981, ECHR Series A No. 45, para. 60. | Dudgeon诉联合王国，第7525/76号申诉，1981年10月22日，《欧洲人权法院案例汇编》A辑，第45号，第60段。 |
| Ibid. | 同上。 |
| Christine Goodwin v. the United Kingdom
[GC] (see footnote 179 above), para. 85; | Christine Goodwin诉联合王国[大审判庭](见上文脚注179)，第85段； |
| see also, ibid., para. 90. | 另见同上，第90段。 |
| Mazurek v. France, No. 34406/97, 1
February 2000, ECHR 2000-II, para. 52; | Mazurek诉法国，第34406/97号申诉，2000年2月1日，《2000年欧洲人权法院案例汇编》第二卷，第52段； |
| see also Marckx v. Belgium, No. 6833/74,
13 June 1979, ECHR Series A No. 31, para. 41; | 另见Marckx诉比利时，第6833/74号申诉，1979年6月13日，《欧洲人权法院案例汇编》A辑，第31号，第41段； |
| Inze v. Austria, No. 8695/79, 28 October
1987, ECHR Series A No. 126, para. 44; | Inze诉奥地利，第8695/79号申诉，1987年10月28日，《欧洲人权法院案例汇编》A辑，第126号，第44段； |
| Brauer v. Germany, No. 3545/04, 28 May
2009, para. 40. | Brauer诉德国，第3545/04号申诉，2009年5月28日，第40段。 |
| Chapman v. the United Kingdom [GC], No.
27238/95, 18 January 2001, ECHR 2001-I, paras. 70 and 93; | Chapman诉联合王国[大审判庭]，第27238/95号申诉，2001年1月18日，《2001年欧洲人权法院案例汇编》第一卷，第70和93段； |
| see also Lee v. the United Kingdom [GC],
No. 25289/94, 18 January 2001, paras. 95–96; | 另见Lee诉联合王国[大审判庭]，第25289/94号申诉，2001年1月18日，第95-96段； |
| Beard v. the United Kingdom [GC], No.
24882/94, 18 January 2001, paras. 104–105; | Beard诉联合王国[大审判庭]，第24882/94号申诉，2001年1月18日，第104-105页； |
| Coster v. the United Kingdom [GC], No.
24876/94, 18 January 2001, paras. 107–108; | Coster诉联合王国[大审判庭]，第24876/94号申诉，2001年1月18日，第107-108段； |
| Jane Smith v. the United Kingdom [GC],
No. 25154/94, 18 January 2001, paras. 100–101. | Jane Smith诉联合王国[大审判庭]，第25154/94号申诉，2001年1月18日，第100-101段。 |
| See draft conclusion 4, paras. 1–3, and
commentary thereto, paras. (17)–(20), above. | 见上文结论草案4, 第1-3段，及评注的第(17)-(20)段。 |
| According to G. Haraszti, “interpretation
has the elucidation of the meaning of the text as its objective while
application implies the specifying of the consequences devolving on the
contracting parties” (see Haraszti, Some Fundamental Problems … (footnote 67
above), p. 18); | 根据G. Haraszti的看法，“解释将阐明案文的意思视为其目标，而适用意味着说明给缔约各方带来的后果”(见Haraszti,《…一些基本问题》(上文脚注67)，第18页)； |
| he recognizes, however, that “[a] legal
rule manifesting itself in whatever form cannot be applied unless its content
has been elucidated” (ibid., p. 15). | 不过他承认，“不论以何形式呈现的法律规则，除非其内容得到阐明，否则不可能适用”(同上，第15页)。 |
| Harvard Draft Convention on the Law of
Treaties, American Journal of International Law Supp., vol. 29 (1935), p.
653, at pp. 938–939; | 哈佛条约法草案，《美国国际法期刊(增刊)》，第29卷(1935年)，第653页起，见第938-939页； |
| A. McNair, The Law of Treaties (Oxford,
Clarendon Press, 1961), p. 372; | A. McNair,《条约法》(1961年，克拉伦登出版社，牛津)，第372页； |
| Sinclair, The Vienna Convention … (see
footnote 20 above), p. 116; | Sinclair,《维也纳…公约》(见上文脚注20)，第116页； |
| Report of the Study Group on
fragmentation of international law, 2006 (A/CN.4/L.682 and Corr.1), para.
423; | 国际法不成体系问题研究组2006年报告(A/CN.4/L.682和A/CN.4/L.682/Corr.1)，第423段； |
| Gardiner, Treaty Interpretation (see
footnote 19 above), pp. 28–30 and 238; | Gardiner,《条约解释》(见上文脚注19)，第28-30页和第238页； |
| Yasseen, “L’interprétation des traités…”
(see footnote 20 above) p. 47; | Yasseen,“…对条约进行解释”(见上文脚注20)，第47页； |
| U. Linderfalk, “Is the hierarchical
structure of articles 31 and 32 of the Vienna Convention real or not? | U. Linderfalk,“《维也纳公约》第三十一和第三十二条的等级结构是否真实？ |
| Interpreting the rules of
interpretation”, Netherlands International Law Review, vol. 54 (2007), pp.
133–154, at pp. 141–144 and p. 147; | 对解释规则进行解释”，《荷兰国际法评论》，第54卷 (2007年)，第133-154页，见第141-144页和第147页； |
| G. Distefano, “La pratique subséquente
des États parties à un traité”, Annuaire français de droit international,
vol. 40 (1994), p. 44; | G. Distefano,“条约缔约国的嗣后实践”，《法国国际法年鉴》，第40卷(1994年)，第44页； |
| Villiger, “The rules on interpretation …”
(see footnote 61 above), p. 111. | Villiger,“解释的规则…”(见上文脚注61)，第111页。 |
| Gardiner, Treaty Interpretation (see
footnote 19 above), p. 266; | Gardiner,《条约解释》(见上文脚注19)，第266页； |
| Linderfalk, On the Interpretation of
Treaties (see footnote 67 above), p. 162; | Linderfalk,《论条约的解释》(见上文脚注67)，第162页； |
| Karl, Vertrag und spätere Praxis … (see
footnote 75 above), pp. 114 and 118; | Karl, Vertrag und spätere Praxis…(见上文脚注75)，第114和第118页； |
| Dörr, “Article 31 …” (see footnote 61
above), pp. 598–599, paras. 81 and 83. | Dörr,“第三十一条…”(见上文脚注61)，第598-599页，第81和第83段。 |
| This second alternative was introduced at
the proposal of Pakistan, but its scope and purpose was never addressed or
clarified, see Official Records of the United Nations Conference on the Law
of Treaties, First and Second Sessions, Vienna 26 March-24 May 1968 and 9
April-22 May, Summary records of the plenary meetings and of the meetings of
the Committee of the Whole (A/CONF.39/11, United Nations publications, Sales
No. E.68.V.7), 31st meeting, 19 April 1968, p. 168, para. 53. | 这个第二项备选案文应巴基斯坦提议而提出，但其范围和目的从未得到讨论或澄清，见《联合国条约法会议，第一和第二届会议，1968年3月26日至5月24日和4月9日至5月22日，维也纳，全体会议和全体委员会会议简要记录》(A/CONF.39/11, 联合国出版物，出售品编号：E.68.V.7)，第31次会议，1968年4月19日，第168页，第53段。 |
| See Linderfalk, On the Interpretation of
Treaties (footnote 67 above), pp. 164–165 and 167; | 见Linderfalk,《论条约的解释》(上文脚注67)，第164-165页和第167页； |
| see also draft conclusions 2, para. 4,
and 4, para. 3. | 另见结论草案2第4段和结论草案4第3段。 |
| See draft conclusion 7, para. 1, below. | 见下文结论草案7, 第1段。 |
| See Boisson de Chazournes, “Subsequent
practice, practices, …” (footnote 38 above), p. 53, at pp. 54, 56 and 59–60. | 见Boisson de Chazournes,“嗣后实践、实践…”(上文脚注38)，第53页起，见第54、56及59-60页。 |
| In the case concerning Application of the
International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial
Discrimination (Georgia v. Russian Federation), Preliminary Objections,
Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2011, p. 70, at p. 117, para. 105, the International
Court of Justice denied that certain conduct (statements) satisfied the
burden of proof with respect to the compliance of the Russian Federation with
its obligations under the International Convention on the Elimination of All
Forms of Racial Discrimination between 1999 and July 2008, in particular
because the conduct was not found to specifically relate to the Convention. | 见《消除一切形式种族歧视国际公约》的适用案(格鲁吉亚诉俄罗斯联邦)，初步反对意见，判决，《2011年国际法院案例汇编》，第70页，见第117页，第105段，国际法院在这里否认某些行为(声明)已经满足了举证责任，能证明俄罗斯联邦在1999年至2008年7月期间履行了其按照《消除一切形式种族歧视国际公约》所承担的义务，这特别是因为有关行为不是专门为了公约而实施的。 |
| According to Judge Simma, the burden of
proof had been met to some degree, see Separate Opinion of Judge Simma,
ibid., pp. 199–223, paras. 23–57. | 根据辛马法官的意见，举证责任已经在一定程度上得到履行，见辛马法官的个别意见，同上，第199-223页，第23-57段。 |
| In the case concerning the
Kasikili/Sedudu Island (see footnote 22 above), the International Court of
Justice analysed subsequent practice not only in the context of treaty
interpretation but also in the context of acquisitive prescription (see p.
1092, para. 71, p. 1096, para. 79, and p. 1105, para. 97). | 卡西基里/塞杜杜岛案(见上文脚注22)，国际法院不仅从条约的解释角度而且从取得时效的角度分析了嗣后实践(见第1092页，第71段，第1096页，第79段，及第1105页，第97段)。 |
| Certain Expenses of the United Nations
(Article 17, paragraph 2, of the Charter), Advisory Opinion of 20 July 1962,
I.C.J. Reports 1962, p. 151, at pp. 201–202 (Separate Opinion of Judge
Fitzmaurice) and pp. 189–195 (Separate Opinion of Judge Spender). | 联合国的某些开支案(《宪章》第十七条第二项)，1962年7月20日咨询意见，《1962年国际法院案例汇编》，第151页起，见第201-202页(菲茨莫里斯法官的个别意见)及第189-195页(斯彭德法官的个别意见)。 |
| Ibid., p. 201. | 同上，第201页。 |
| Ibid. | 同上。 |
| Maritime Delimitation and Territorial
Questions between Qatar and Bahrain (Qatar v. Bahrain), Jurisdiction and Admissibility,
Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1995, p. 6, at p. 16, para. 28. | 卡塔尔和巴林之间的海洋划界和领土问题案(卡塔尔诉巴林)，管辖权和可否受理，判决，《1995年国际法院案例汇编》，第6页起，见第16页，第28段。 |
| See A. Skordas, “General provisions:
article 5”, in The 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees and its
1967 Protocol: A Commentary, A. Zimmermann, ed. (Oxford, Oxford University
Press, 2011), p. 682, para. 30; | 见A. Skordas,“一般规定：第五条”，载于A. Zimmermann所编《1951年〈关于难民地位的公约〉及其1967年议定书：评注》牛津，牛津大学出版社，2011年)，第682页，第30段； |
| J. McAdam, Complementary Protection in
International Refugee Law (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2007), p. 21. | J. McAdam,《国际难民法律中的补充保护》(牛津，牛津大学出版社，2007年)，第21页。 |
| On the “weight” of an agreement or
practice as a means of interpretation, see draft conclusion 9, paras. 1–3,
below; | 关于协定或实践作为解释资料的“权重”，见下文结论草案9，第1-3段； |
| for an example of the need, and also the
occasional difficulty, to distinguish between specific conduct by the parties
regarding the interpretation of a treaty and more general development, see
Maritime Dispute (Peru v. Chile), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2014, p. 3, at pp.
41–58, paras. 103–151. | 区别当事方在解释条约方面的具体行为与一般性发展的必要性和困难性的实例见海洋争端案(秘鲁诉智利)，判决，《2014年国际法院案例汇编》，第3页，见第41-58页，第103-151段。 |
| Dispute regarding Navigational and
Related Rights (see footnote 22above), p. 234, para. 40; | 关于航行权和相关权利的争端案(见上文脚注22)，第234页，第40段； |
| see also Kasikili/Sedudu Island (footnote
22 above), p. 1091, para. 68, where the Court implied that one of the parties
did not consider that certain forms of practical cooperation were legally
relevant for the purpose of the question of boundary at issue and thus did
not agree with a contrary position of the other party. | 另参阅卡西基里/塞杜杜岛案(上文脚注22)，第1091页，第68段，法院在这里暗示，当事方之一某些实际合作的形式对于解决目前的边界问题有法律意义，因而不同意另一当事方的相反立场。 |
| Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear
Weapons, Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 1996, p. 226, at p. 248, paras.
55–56; | 以核武器相威胁或使用核武器的合法性，咨询意见，《1996年国际法院案例汇编》，第226页起，见第248页，第55-56段； |
| see also Oil Platforms (Islamic Republic
of Iran v. United States of America), Preliminary Objection, Judgment, I.C.J.
Reports 1996, p. 803, at p. 815, para. 30; | 另参阅石油平台案(伊朗伊斯兰共和国诉美利坚合众国)，初步反对意见，判决，《1996年国际法院案例汇编》，第803页起，见第815页，第30段； |
| Gardiner, Treaty Interpretation (see
footnote 19 above), pp. 262–264. | Gardiner,《条约解释》(见上文脚注19)，第262-264页。 |
| Whaling in the Antarctic (Australia v.
Japan: New Zealand intervening), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2014, p. 226, at p.
257, para. 83. | 南极捕鲸案(澳大利亚诉日本：新西兰参加诉讼)，判决，《2014年国际法院案例汇编》，第226页起，见第257页，第83段。 |
| See Iran-United States Claims Tribunal,
Islamic Republic of Iran and United States of America, Iran-United States
Claims Tribunal Reports, Partial Award No. 382-B1-FT vol. 19 (1989), pp.
294–295. | 见伊朗－美国索赔法庭，伊朗伊斯兰共和国和美利坚合众国，《伊朗-美国索赔法庭裁决汇编》，第382-B1-FT号部分裁决，第19卷(1989年)，第294-295页。 |
| Separate Opinion of Judge Holtzmann,
Concurring in Part, Dissenting in Part, ibid., at p. 304. | 霍尔茨曼法官的个别意见，部分赞同、部分反对，同上，第304页。 |
| See second report on subsequent
agreements and subsequent practice in relation to the interpretation of
treaties (A/CN.4/671), para. 15. | 见与条约解释相关的嗣后协定和嗣后实践第二次报告(A/CN.4/671)，第15段。 |
| See, for example, Soering v. the United
Kingdom, No. 14038/88, 7 July 1989, ECHR Series A No. 161, para. 103; | 例如见Soering诉联合王国，第14038/88号，1989年7月7日，《欧洲人权法院案例汇编》A辑，第161号，第103段； |
| Dudgeon v. the United Kingdom, No.
7525/76, 22 October 1981, ECHR Series A No. 45, para. 60; | Dudgeon诉联合王国，第7525/76号，1981年10月22日，《欧洲人权法院案例汇编》A辑，第45号，第60段； |
| Demir and Baykara v. Turkey [GC], No.
34503/97, 12 November 2008, ECHR-2008, para. 48; | Demir和Baykara诉土耳其[大审判庭]，第34503/97号，2008年11月12日，欧洲人权法院2008, 第48段； |
| however, by way of contrast, compare with
Mamatkulov and Askarov v. Turkey [GC], nos. 46827/99 and 46951/99, ECHR
2005-I, para. 146; | 然而作为对照，请比较Mamatkulov和Askarov诉土耳其案[大审判庭]，第46827/99号和第46951/99号，《2005年欧洲人权法院案例汇编》，第一卷，第146段； |
| Cruz Varas and others v. Sweden, No.
15576/89, 20 March 1991, ECHR Series A No. 201, para. 100. | Cruz Varas等人诉瑞典，第15576/89号，1991年3月20日，《欧洲人权法院案例汇编》A辑，第201号，第100段。 |
| See footnote 211 above; | 见上文脚注211； |
| see further Marckx v. Belgium, No.
6833/74, 13 June 1979, ECHR Series A No. 31, para. 41; | 另见Marckx诉比利时，第6833/74号，1979年6月13日，《欧洲人权法院案例汇编》A辑，第31号，第41段； |
| Jorgic v. Germany, No. 74613/01, 12 July
2007, ECHR 2007III, para. 69; | Jorgic诉德国，第74613/01号，2007年7月12日，《2007年欧洲人权法院案例汇编》，第三卷，第69段； |
| Mazurek v. France, No. 34406/97, 1
February 2000, ECHR 2000-II, para. 52. | Mazurek诉法国，第34406/97号，2000年2月1日《2000年欧洲人权法院案例汇编》，第二卷，第52段。 |
| See, for example, Hilaire, Constantine
and Benjamin et al. v. Trinidad and Tobago (see footnote 27 above), para. 12. | 例如见Hilaire、Constantine和Benjamin等人诉特里尼达和多巴哥案(见上文脚注27)，第12段。 |
| Banković et al. v.
Belgium and 16 other contracting States (dec.) [GC], No. 52207/99, ECHR
2001-XII, para. 62. | Bankovic等人诉比利时及16个其他缔约国(裁决)[大审判庭]，第52207/99号，《2001年欧洲人权法院案例汇编》第十二卷，第62段。 |
| See footnote 168 above. | 见上文脚注168。 |
| C. Shields Delessert, Release and Repatriation
of Prisoners of War at the End of Active Hostilities (Zurich, Schulthess,
1977), pp. 145–156 and pp. 171–175; | C. Shields Delessert,《敌对活动结束后释放与遣返战俘》(苏黎世，Schulthess, 1977年)，第145-156页和第171-175页； |
| see in general on the duty to repatriate,
S. Krähenmann, “Protection of prisoners in armed conflict”, in The Handbook
of International Humanitarian Law, 3rd ed., D. Fleck, ed. (Oxford, Oxford
University Press, 2013), pp. 359–412, at pp. 409–410. | 关于一般遣返义务，见S. Krähenmann,“武装冲突中保护战俘”，载于《国际人道主义法手册》，第3版，D. Fleck编(牛津，牛津大学出版社，2013年)，第359-412页，见第409-410页。 |
| Thus, by its involvement, ICRC tries to
reconcile the interests in speedy repatriation and the respect of the will of
prisoners of war (see Krähenmann, “Protection of prisoners in armed conflict”
(footnote 216 above), pp. 409–410). | 因此，红十字委员会通过自己的介入，力求调和快速遣返与尊重战俘意愿这两种利益(见Krähenmann,“武装冲突中保护战俘”(上文脚注216)，第409-410页)。 |
| J.-M. Henckaerts and L. Doswald-Beck,
eds., Customary International Humanitarian Law, Volume 1: Rules (Cambridge,
International Committee of the Red Cross and Cambridge University Press,
2005), p. 455 (footnotes omitted). | J.-M. Henckaerts和L.
Doswald-Beck编，《国际人道主义习惯法》，第1卷：《规则》(剑桥，红十字国际委员会和剑桥大学出版社，2005年)，第455页(脚注略)。 |
| J.-M. Henckaerts and L. Doswald-Beck,
eds., Customary International Humanitarian Law, Volume 2: Practice
(Cambridge, International Committee of the Red Cross and Cambridge University
Press, 2005), pp. 2893–2894, paras. 844–855, and online update for Australia,
Israel, the Netherlands and Spain, available from
http://ihl-databases.icrc.org/customary-ihl/eng/docs/v2_rul_rule128_sectiond. | J.-M. Henckaerts和L.
Doswald-Beck编，《国际人道主义习惯法》，第2卷：《实践》(剑桥，红十字国际委员会和剑桥大学出版社，2005年)，第2893-2894页，第844-855段，以及对澳大利亚、以色列、荷兰和西班牙的在线更新，可查阅http://ihl-databases.icrc.org/
customary-ihl/eng/docs/v2_rul_rule128_sectiond。 |
| United Kingdom, Ministry of Defence, The
Manual of the Law of Armed Conflict (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2004),
pp. 205–206, para. 8.170 (footnote omitted). | 联合王国国防部，《武装冲突法手册》(牛津，牛津大学出版社，2004年)，第205-206页，第8.170段(脚注略)。 |
| See also United States, Department of
Defense, Law of War Manual (2015, updated 2016), sect. 9.37.4.2.: “[T]he
[Geneva Convention relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War] does not
itself change accepted principles of international law under which asylum is
applicable to [prisoners of war], and the Detaining Power may, but is not
required to, grant asylum. ”. | 另见美国国防部，《战争法手册》(2015年，2016年修订)，第9.37.4.2.条：“[《关于战俘待遇之日内瓦公约》]本身并没有改变公认的国际法原则，根据这些规则，庇护适用于[战俘]，拘留国可以但不是必须授予庇护。 |
| Available from www.defense.gov. | ”可查阅www.defense.gov。 |
| A/CN.4/671, paras. 11–18. | A/CN.4/671, 第11-18段。 |
| See also L. Crema, “Subsequent agreements
and subsequent practice within and outside the Vienna Convention”, in Nolte,
Treaties and Subsequent Practice (see footnote 25above), pp. 25–26. | 另见L. Crema,“《维也纳公约》之内和之外的嗣后协定与嗣后实践”，载于诺尔特，《条约和嗣后实践》(见上文脚注25)，第25-26页。 |
| See A/CN.4/671, p. 33, para. 71. | 见A/CN.4/671, 第33页，第71段。 |
| Dispute regarding Navigational and
Related Rights (see footnote 22 above), pp. 234–235, para. 40; | 关于航行权和相关权利的争端案(见上文脚注22)，第234-235页，第40段； |
| Pulp Mills on the River Uruguay (see
footnote 22 above), p. 14, at pp. 65–66, paras. 138–140; | 乌拉圭河纸浆厂案(见上文脚注22)，第14页起，见第65-66页，第138-140段； |
| J. Crawford, “A consensualist
interpretation of article 31 (3) of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties”,
in Nolte, Treaties and Subsequent Practice (see footnote 25 above), p. 32; | J. Crawford,“对《维也纳条约法公约》第三十一条第三款的合意主义解释”，载于诺尔特,《条约和嗣后实践》(见上文脚注25)，第32页； |
| for another example, see A/CN.4/671,
para. 72; | 另一案例见A/CN.4/671, 第72段； |
| and J.R. Crook, “Contemporary practice of
the United States”, American Journal of International Law, vol. 105 (2011),
pp. 775 et seq., at pp. 809–812. | 及J. R. Crook,“美国当代实践”，《美国国际法期刊》，第105卷(2011年)，第775页及以后各页，见第809-812页。 |
| See ICRC, International Red Cross Handbook,
12th ed. (Geneva, 1983), p. 20. | 见红十字委员会，《国际红十字手册》，第12版(日内瓦，1983年)，第20页。 |
| “Bulletin international des Sociétés de
Secours aux Militaires blessés”, No. 29 (January 1877), pp. 35–37, quoted in
F. Bugnion, The Emblem of the Red Cross. A Brief History (Geneva, ICRC,
1977), p. 15. | “Bulletin international des Sociétés de
Secoursaux Militaires blesses”，第29号(1877年1月)，第35-37页，引用于F. Bugnion,《红十字标志简史》(日内瓦，红十字委员会，1977年)，第15页。 |
| Ibid., No. 31 (July 1877), p. 89, quoted
in Bugnion, The Emblem of the Red Cross … (see footnote 226 above), p. 18. | 同上，第31号(1877年7月)，第89页，引用于Bugnion,《红十字标志…》(见上文脚注226)，第18页。 |
| Bugnion, The Emblem of the Red Cross …
(see footnote 226 above), pp. 19–31. | Bugnion,《红十字标志…》(见上文脚注226)，第19-31页。 |
| Joined by Egypt upon accession in 1923,
see Bugnion, The Emblem of the Red Cross … (footnote 226 above), pp. 23–26; | 1923年埃及通过继承而加入，见Bugnion,《红十字标志…》(见上文脚注226)，第23-26页； |
| it was only on the occasion of the
revision of the Geneva Conventions in 1929, when Turkey, Persia and Egypt
claimed that the use of other emblems had become a fait accompli and that
those emblems had been used in practice without giving rise to any
objections, that the Red Crescent and the Red Lion and Sun were finally
recognized as a distinctive sign by article 19, paragraph 2, of the 1929 Geneva
Convention for the Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded and Sick in
Armies in the Field (League of Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 118, No. 2733, p.
303). | 1929年修订各项日内瓦公约时，土耳其、波斯和埃及声称，使用其他标志已成为既成事实，且这些标志已在实践中使用而未致任何异议，红新月和红狮与日这才最终被1929年《改善战地武装部队伤者病者境遇日内瓦公约》第十九条第二款承认为特殊标志(国际联盟，《条约汇编》，第118卷，第2733号，第303页)。 |
| See commentary to draft conclusion 4,
paras. (17)–(20), above. | 见上文结论草案4的评注，第(17)-(20)段。 |
| See, for example, commentary to draft
conclusion 5 above; | 例如见上文结论草案5的评注； |
| Boisson de Chazournes, “Subsequent
practice …” (footnote 38 above), pp. 54, 56 and 59–60; | Boisson de Chazournes,《嗣后实践…》(上文脚注38)，第54、56和59-60页； |
| Gardiner, Treaty Interpretation (footnote
19 above), pp. 257–259; | Gardiner,《条约解释》(见上文脚注19)，第257-259页； |
| see also Maritime Dispute (Peru v.
Chile), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2014, p. 3, at pp. 42–45, paras. 103–111 and
pp. 48–49, paras. 119–122, and p. 50, para. 126; | 另见海洋争端案(秘鲁诉智利)，判决，《2014年国际法院案例汇编》，第3页起，见第42-45页，第103-111段和第48-49页，第119-122段，以及第50页，第126段； |
| Dörr, “Article 31 …” (see footnote 61
above), pp. 597–598, para. 79. | Dörr,“第三十一条…”(见上文脚注61)，第597-598页，第79段。 |
| Gardiner, Treaty Interpretation (see
footnote 19 above), pp. 254–255. | Gardiner,《条约解释》(见上文脚注19)，第254-255页。 |
| Case concerning the Temple of Preah
Vihear (see footnote 110 above), p. 33; | 柏威夏寺案(见上文脚注110)，第33页； |
| Kasikili/Sedudu Island (see footnote 22
above), p. 1213, para. 17, Dissenting Opinion of Judge Parra-Aranguren. | 卡西基里/塞杜杜岛案(见上文脚注22)，第1213页，第17段，帕拉－阿朗古伦法官的不同意见。 |
| Territorial and Maritime Dispute between
Nicaragua and Honduras in the Caribbean Sea (Nicaragua v. Honduras),
Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2007, p. 659, at p. 737, para. 258; | 尼加拉瓜和洪都拉斯之间在加勒比海的领土和海洋争端案(尼加拉瓜诉洪都拉斯)，判决，《2007年国际法院案例汇编》，第659页起，见第737页，第258段； |
| but see Continental Shelf (Tunisia/Libyan
Arab Jamahiriya), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1982, p. 18, at pp. 83–84, para.
117, where the Court recognized concessions granted by the parties to the
dispute as evidence of their tacit agreement; | 但是，见大陆架案(突尼斯/阿拉伯利比亚民众国)，判决，《1982年国际法院案例汇编》，第18页起，见第83-84页，第117段，在此段中，法院将争议双方授予的特许权视为双方默示协定的证据； |
| see also Maritime Dispute (Peru v. Chile)
(footnote 231 above). | 另见海洋争端案(秘鲁诉智利)(见上文脚注231)。 |
| Gardiner, Treaty Interpretation (see
footnote 19 above), pp. 244 and 250. | Gardiner,《条约解释》(见上文脚注19)，第244和250页。 |
| See paras. (1)–(4) of the present
commentary, above; | 见上文，本评注第(1)-(4)段； |
| and A/CN.4/671, paras. 3–5. | 以及A/CN.4/671, 第3-5段。 |
| See commentary to draft conclusion 2,
para. (10), above. | 见上文结论草案2的评注，第(10)段。 |
| Crook, “Contemporary practice of the
United States” (see footnote 224 above), pp. 809–812; | Crook,“美国当代实践”(见上文脚注224)，第809-812页； |
| see also: Mexico, Diario Oficial de la
Federación (7 July 2011), “Decreto por el que se modifica el artículo 1 del
diverso por el que se establece la Tasa Aplicable durante 2003, del Impuesto
General de Importación, para las mercancías originarias de América del
Norte”, publicado el 31 de diciembre de 2002, por lo que respecta a las
mercancías originarias de los Estados Unidos de América (www.dof.gob.mx). | 另见墨西哥，Diario Oficial de la Federación
(2011年7月7日)，Decreto por el que se modifica el
artículo 1 del diverso por el que se establece la Tasa Aplicable durante
2003, del Impuesto General de Importación, para las mercancías originarias de
América del Norte, publicado el 31 de diciembre de 2002, por lo que respecta
a las mercancías originarias de los Estados Unidos de América(www.dof.gob.mx)。 |
| See commentary to draft conclusion 2,
para. 5, paras. (12)–(15), above. | 见上文结论草案2第5段的评注，第(12)-(15)段。 |
| Ibid. | 同上。 |
| The terminology follows guideline 1.2
(Definition of interpretative declarations) of the Commission’s Guide to
Practice on Reservations to Treaties: “‘Interpretative declaration’ means a
unilateral statement … whereby [a] State or [an] international organization
purports to specify or clarify the meaning or scope of a treaty or of certain
of its provisions. | 术语遵循委员会《对条约的保留实践指南》指南1.2(解释性声明的定义)：“‘解释性声明’是指[一]国或[一]国际组织为了阐明或澄清条约或其中某些规定的含义或范围而作出的单方面声明。 |
| ” (Official records of the General
Assembly, Sixty-sixth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/66/10), chap. IV,
guideline 1.2); | ”(《大会正式记录，第六十六届会议，补编第10号》(A/66/10)，第四章，指南1.2)； |
| see also commentary to guideline 1.2,
para. (18) (A/66/10/Add.1). | 另见对指南1.2的评注，第(18)段(A/66/10/Add.1)。 |
| See commentary to draft conclusion 2,
para. 5, para. (14), above; | 见上文对结论草案2第5段的评注，第(14)段； |
| Competence of Assembly regarding
admission to the United Nations, Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 1950, p. 4,
at p. 8. | 大会接纳国家加入联合国的权限，咨询意见，《1950年国院法院案例汇编》，第4页起，见第8页。 |
| See, for example, Sovereignty over Pulau
Ligitan and Pulau Sipadan (footnote 22 above), p. 656, paras. 59–61 and p.
665, para. 80; | 例如见吉利丹岛和西巴丹岛的主权归属案(上文脚注22)，第656页，第59-61段和第665页，第80段； |
| Territorial Dispute (footnote 22 above),
p. 34, paras. 66–71; | 领土争端案(上文脚注22)，第34页，第66-71段； |
| Dispute regarding Navigational and
Related Rights (footnote 22 above), p. 290, Declaration of Judge ad hoc
Guillaume. | 关于航行权和相关权利的争端案(上文脚注22)，第290页(专案法官纪尧姆的声明)。 |
| For more examples see Nolte,
“Jurisprudence under special regimes” (footnote 25 above), pp. 210–306. | 例如见诺尔特，“特殊制度下的判例”(上文脚注25)，第210-306页。 |
| See also Oil Platforms (Islamic Republic
of Iran v. United States of America), Preliminary Objection, Judgment, I.C.J.
Reports 1996, p. 803, at p. 815, para. 30; | 另见石油平台案(伊朗伊斯兰共和国诉美利坚合众国)，初步反对意见，判决，《1996年国际法院案例汇编》，第803页起，见第815页，第30段； |
| Land and Maritime Boundary between
Cameroon and Nigeria, Preliminary Objections, Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1998,
p. 275, at p. 306, para. 67; | 喀麦隆和尼日利亚间陆地和海洋疆界案(喀麦隆诉尼日利亚)，初步反对意见，判决，《1998年国际法院案例汇编》，第275页起，见第306页，第67段； |
| Competence of Assembly regarding
admission to the United Nations, Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 1950, p. 4,
at p. 9. | 大会接纳国家加入联合国的权限，咨询意见，《1950年国际法院案例汇编》，第4页起，见第9页。 |
| Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear
Weapons, Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 1996, p. 226, at p. 248, para. 55. | 使用或威胁使用核武器的合法性，咨询意见，《1996年国际法院案例汇编》，第226页起，见第248页，第55段。 |
| Reservations to the Convention on
Genocide, Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 1951, p. 15, at p. 25. | 对《灭绝种族罪公约》的保留，咨询意见，《1951年国际法院案例汇编》，第15页起，见第25页。 |
| Case concerning Rights of Nationals of
the United States of America in Morocco, Judgment of August 27th, 1952,
I.C.J. Reports 1952, p. 176, at p. 211. | 摩洛哥境内的美利坚合众国公民权利案，1952年8月27日的判决，《1952年国际法院案例汇编》，第176页起，见第211页。 |
| See, mutatis mutandis, Certain Expenses
of the United Nations (Article 17, paragraph 2, of the Charter), Advisory
Opinion of 20 July 1962, I.C.J. Reports 1962, p. 151, where the International
Court of Justice interpreted the term “expenses” broadly and “action”
narrowly in the light of the respective subsequent practice of the United
Nations, at pp. 158–161 (“expenses”) and pp. 164–165 (“action”). | 比照参见联合国的某些开支案(《宪章》第十七条第二项)，1962年7月20日的咨询意见，《1962年国际法院案例汇编》，第151条，国际法院参照联合国相关的嗣后实践，对“费用”一词作出了宽泛的解释，而对“行动”一词作出了狭义的解释，见第158-161页(“费用”)和第164-165页(“行动”)。 |
| See, for example, Border and Transborder
Armed Actions (Nicaragua v. Honduras), Jurisdiction and Admissibility,
Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1988, p. 69, at p. 87, para. 40. | 例如见边界和跨界武装行动案(尼加拉瓜诉洪都拉斯)，管辖权和可否受理，判决，《1988年国际法院案例汇编》，第69页起，见第87页，第40段。 |
| United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 289,
No. 4214, p. 3. | 联合国，《条约汇编》，第289卷，第4214号，第3页。 |
| Constitution of the Maritime Safety
Committee of the Inter-Governmental Maritime Consultative Organization,
Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 1960, p. 150, at p. 169; | 政府间海事协商组织海事安全委员会章程，咨询意见，《1960年国际法院案例汇编》，第150页起，见第169页； |
| see also pp. 167–169; | 另见第167-169页； |
| obiter dicta: Proceedings pursuant to the
OSPAR Convention (Ireland-United Kingdom), 2 July 2003, UNRIAA, vol. XXIII
(Sales No. E/F.04.V.15), pp. 59–151, at p. 99, para. 141. | 另见根据《保护东北大西洋海洋环境公约》提出的诉讼(爱尔兰诉联合王国)，2003年7月2日，《国际仲裁裁决汇编》，第二十三卷(出售品编号：E/F.04.V.15)，第59-151页，见第99页，第141段。 |
| Gardiner, Treaty Interpretation (see
footnote 19 above), pp. 211 and 219. | Gardiner,《条约解释》(见上文脚注19)，第211和219页。 |
| Ibid., pp. 212–215; | 同上，第212-215页； |
| see also Legal Consequences for States of
the Continued Presence of South Africa in Namibia (South West Africa)
notwithstanding Security Council Resolution 276 (1970), Advisory Opinion,
I.C.J. Reports 1971, p. 16, at p. 31, para. 53; | 另见南非不遵守安全理事会第276(1970)号决议继续留驻纳米比亚(西南非洲)对各国的法律后果，咨询意见，《1971年国际法院案例汇编》，第16页起，见第31页，第53段； |
| Legal Consequences of the Construction of
a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports
2004, p. 136, at p. 179, para. 109; | 在被占巴勒斯坦领土修建隔离墙的法律后果，咨询意见，《2004年国际法院案例汇编》，第136页起，见第179页，第109段； |
| R. Higgins, “Some observations on the
inter-temporal rule in international law”, in Theory of International Law at
the Threshold of the 21st Century, J. Makarczyk, ed. (The Hague, Kluwer Law
International, 1996), pp. 173–181, at p. 180; | R. Higgins,“关于国际法中的时效规则的若干意见”，载于J. Makarczyk所编《二十一世纪初的国际法理论》(海牙，Kluwer Law International, 1996年)，第173-181页，见第180页； |
| Distefano, “La pratique subséquente …”
(see footnote 191 above), pp. 52–54; | Distefano,“…嗣后实践”(见上文脚注191)，第52-54页； |
| Crema, “Subsequent agreements and
subsequent practice …” (footnote 222 above), p. 21. | Crema,“…嗣后协定与嗣后实践”(上文脚注222)，第21页。 |
| Maritime Delimitation in the Area between
Greenland and Jan Mayen, Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1993, p. 38, at p. 50,
para. 27. | 格陵兰和扬马延间区域海洋划界案，判决，《1993年国际法院案例汇编》，第38页起，见第50页，第27段。 |
| Oil Platforms (Islamic Republic of Iran
v. United States of America), Preliminary Objection, Judgment, I.C.J. Reports
1996, p. 803, at pp. 813 and 815, paras. 27 and 30. | 石油平台案(伊朗伊斯兰共和国诉美利坚合众国)，初步反对意见，判决，《1996年国际法院案例汇编》，第803页起，见第813和815页，第27和30段。 |
| See also Land and Maritime Boundary
between Cameroon and Nigeria, Preliminary Objections, Judgment, I.C.J.
Reports 1998, p. 275, at p. 306, para. 67. | 另见喀麦隆和尼日利亚间陆地和海洋疆界案(喀麦隆诉尼日利亚)，初步反对意见，判决，《1998年国际法院案例汇编》，第275页起，见第306页，第67段。 |
| This is not to suggest that there may ultimately
be different interpretations of a treaty, but rather that the treaty may
accord the parties the possibility to choose from a spectrum of different
permitted acts, see Gardiner, Treaty Interpretation (footnote 19 above), pp.
32–33 and p. 268, quoting the House of Lords in R v. Secretary of State for
the Home Department, ex parte Adan [2001] AC 477: “It is necessary to
determine the autonomous meaning of the relevant treaty provision. … It
follows that, as in the case of other multilateral treaties, the Refugee
Convention must be given an independent meaning derivable from the sources
mentioned in articles 31 and 32 [of the 1969 Vienna Convention] and without
taking colour from distinctive features of the legal system of any individual
contracting [S]tate. | 这并不是说可能存在对条约的不同解释，而是说条约必须让缔约方有可能在一系列允许的行为中作出选择，见Gardiner,《条约解释》(见上文脚注19)，第32-33页和第268页，引用上议院在R诉内政部大臣案，Adan缺席[2001]AC
477中发表的意见：“…需要确定有关条约规定的自主含义…由此可见，与其他多边条约一样，必须赋予《难民公约》可从[1969年《维也纳公约》]第三十一条和第三十二条所指来源中得出的独立含义，而不是随便借鉴某个缔约国法律体系的特点得出含义。 |
| In principle, therefore, there can only
be one true interpretation of a treaty. … In practice it is left to national
courts, faced with a material disagreement on an issue of interpretation, to
resolve it. | 因此，原则上，条约只能有一个真正的解释…在实践中，面对解释问题上的重大分歧，由各国法院做出决定。 |
| But in doing so it must search,
untrammelled by notions of its national legal culture, for the true
autonomous international meaning of the treaty. | 不过，做决定时，法院必须摆脱本国法律文化理念的束缚，探索条约真正的自主含义。 |
| And there can only be one true meaning”
(The Law Reports, Appeal Cases 2001, vol. 2, at pp. 515–517 (Lord Steyn)). | 而真正的含义只有一个”(《判例汇编》，2001年上诉案例，第2卷，见第515-517页(斯泰恩勋爵)。 |
| United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 15,
No. 102, p. 2. | 联合国，《条约汇编》，第15卷，第102号，第2页。 |
| S.D. Murphy, “The relevance of subsequent
agreement and subsequent practice for the interpretation of treaties”, in
Nolte, Treaties and Subsequent Practice (see footnote 25 above), p. 85; | S. D. Murphy,“嗣后协定和嗣后管理对条约解释的作用”，载于诺尔特，《条约和嗣后实践》(见上文脚注25)，第85页； |
| A. Aust, Modern Treaty Law and Practice
(see footnote 142 above), p. 215. | A. Aust,《现代条约法和实践》(见上文脚注142)，第215页。 |
| United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 500,
No. 7310, p. 95. | 联合国，《条约汇编》，第500卷，第7310号，第95页。 |
| E. Denza, Diplomatic Law: Commentary on
the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, Oxford Commentaries on
International Law, 4th ed. (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2016), pp.
131–133; | E. Denza,《外交法：〈维也纳外交关系法〉评注》，牛津大学国际法评论，第4版(牛津，牛津大学出版社，2016年)，第131-133页； |
| J. Salmon, Manuel de droit diplomatique
(Brussels, Bruylant, 1994), p. 208, para. 315. | J. Salmon,《外交法手册》(布鲁塞尔，Bruylant, 1994年)，第208页，第315段。 |
| See, for example, Australia, Department
of Foreign Affairs and Trade, Privileges and Immunities of Foreign
Representatives
(http://dfat.gov.au/about-us/publications/corporate/protocol-guidelines/Documents/A21.pdf); | 例如见澳大利亚外交贸易部，《驻外代表的特权和豁免》(http://dfat.gov.au/about-us/publications/
corporate/protocol-guidelines/Documents/A21.pdf)； |
| Iceland, Protocol Department, Ministry of
Foreign Affairs, Diplomatic Handbook (Reykjavik, 2009), p. 14
(www.mfa.is/media/PDF/ | 冰岛外交部礼宾司，《外交手册》(Reykjavik, 2009年)，第14页(www.mfa.is/media/PDF/Diplomatic_Handbook.PDF)； |
| Diplomatic_Handbook.PDF); United Kingdom,
see the statement of the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Home Office
(Lord Elton) in the House of Lords, HL Deb, 12 December 1983, vol. 446 cc3-4; | 联合王国，见内政部政务次官(埃尔顿议员在上议院的发言，1983年12月12日的上议院辩论，第446卷，cc3-4； |
| United States, see M. Nash (Leich),
“Contemporary practice of the United States relating to international law”,
American Journal of International Law, vol. 88 (April 1994), p. 312, at pp.
312–313. | 美国，见M. Nash (Leich)，“美国在国际法方面的当代实践”，《美国国际法期刊》，第88卷(1994年4月)，第312页起，见第312-313页。 |
| Denza, Diplomatic Law … (see footnote 262
above), pp. 132–133; | Denza,《外交法…》(见上文脚注262)，第132-133页； |
| M. Richtsteig, Wiener Übereinkommen über
diplomatische und konsularische Beziehungen: Entstehungsgeschichte,
Kommentierung, Praxis, 2nd ed. (Baden-Baden, Germany, Nomos, 2010), p. 70. | M. Richtsteig, Wiener Übereinkommen über
diplomatische und konsularische Beziehungen:Entstehungsgeschichte,
Kommentierung, Praxis, 第2版(Baden-Baden,
Nomos, 2010年)，第70页。 |
| See footnote 169 above. | 见上文脚注169。 |
| Y. Sandoz, C. Swinarski and B.
Zimmermann, eds., Commentary on the Additional Protocols of 8 June 1977 to
the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949 (Dordrecht, ICRC and Martinus
Nijhoff, 1987), p. 1440, paras. 4742–4744; | Y. Sandoz、C.
Swinarski和B. Zimmermann 编，《对一九四九年八月十二日日内瓦四公约一九七七年六月八日附加议定书的评注》(多德雷赫特，红十字委员会和马蒂努斯·奈霍夫出版社，1987年)，第1440页，第4742-4744段； |
| H. Spieker, “Medical transportation”, in
Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law (www.mpepil.com), paras.
7–12; | H. Spieker,“医务运输工具”，载于《马克斯·普朗克国际公法百科全书》(www.mpepil.com)，第7-12段； |
| see also the less stringent future tense
in the French version “sera arboré”. | 另见法文版使用的不太死板的将来时“sera arboré”。 |
| Deutscher Bundestag, “Antwort der
Bundesregierung: Rechtlicher Status des Sanitätspersonals der Bundeswehr in
Afghanistan”, 9 April 2010, Bundestagsdrucksache 17/1338, p. 2 (translation
by the Special Rapporteur). | Deutscher Bundestag,“Antwort der
Bundesregierung: Rechtlicher Status des Sanitätspersonals der Bundeswehr in
Afghanistan”，2010年4月9日，Bundestagsdrucksache 17/1338, 第2页(特别报告员翻译)。 |
| Spieker, “Medical transportation” (see
footnote 266 above), para. 12. | Spieker,“医务运输工具”(见上文脚注266)，第12段。 |
| See Denza, Diplomatic Law … (footnote 262
above), pp. 64–73, with further references to declarations in relation to
espionage; | 见Denza,《外交法…》(上文脚注262)，第64-73页，其中进一步提到了与间谍活动有关的声明。 |
| see also Salmon, Manuel de droit
diplomatique (footnote 262 above), p. 484, para. 630; | 另见Salmon,《外交法手册》(上文脚注262)，第484页，第630段； |
| and Richtsteig, Wiener Übereinkommen über
diplomatische … (footnote 264 above), p. 30. | 以及Richtsteig, Wiener Übereinkommen über
diplomatische …(上文脚注264)，第30页。 |
| The Netherlands, Protocol Department,
Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Protocol Guide for Diplomatic Missions and
Consular Posts. | 荷兰外交部礼宾司，《使领馆礼仪指南》。 |
| Available from
www.government.nl/government/
documents/leaflets/2015/04/15/protocol-guide-for-diplomatic-missions-en-consular-posts. | 可查阅www.government.nl/government/documents/
leaflets/2015/04/15/protocol-guide-for-diplomatic-missions-en-consular-posts。 |
| France, Ministère des affaires étrangères
et du développement, Guide for Foreign Diplomats Serving in France:
Immunities — Respect for Local Laws and Regulations (www.diplomatie.gouv.fr/en/ministry/guide-for-foreign-diplomats/immunities/article/respect-for-local-laws-and); | 法国外交与国际发展部，《外国驻法外交官指南：豁免――遵守当地法律和法规》(www.diplomatie.gouv.fr/en/ministry/guide-for-foreign-diplomats/immunities/article/respect-for-local-laws-and)； |
| Turkey, Ministry of Foreign Affairs,
traffic regulations to be followed by foreign missions in Turkey, Principal
Circular Note 63552, Traffic Regulations 2005/PDGY/63552 (6 April 2005)
(www.mfa.gov.tr/06_04_2005--63552-traffic-regulations.en.mfa); | 土耳其外交部，《外国驻土耳其使团应遵守的交通规则》，第63552号重要通知，交规2005/PDGY/63552(2005年4月6日)(www.mfa.gov.tr/06_04_2005--63552-traffic-regulations.en.mfa)； |
| United Kingdom, Foreign and Commonwealth
Office, Circular dated 19 April 1985 to the Heads of Diplomatic Missions in
London, reprinted in G. Marston, “United Kingdom materials on international
law 1985”, British Yearbook of International Law 1985, vol. 56, p. 437. | 联合王国外交及联邦事务部，1985年4月19日致驻伦敦使馆馆长的通知，又刊印于G. Marston的“1985年联合国王国关于国际法的材料”，《1985年英国国际法年鉴》，第56卷，第437页。 |
| See Canada, Foreign Affairs, Trade and
Development, Revised Impaired Driving Policy
(www.international.gc.ca/protocol-protocole/vienna_convention_idp-convention_vienne_vfa.aspx?lang=eng); | 见加拿大外交、贸易与发展部，经修订的酒后驾车政策(www.international.gc.ca/protocol-protocole/
vienna_convention_idp-convention_vienne_vfa.aspx?lang=eng)； |
| United States, Department of State,
Diplomatic Note 10-181 of the Department of State (24 September 2010)
(www.state.gov/documents/ organization/149985.pdf), pp. 8–9. | 美国国务院，国务院第10-181号外交照会(2010年9月24日)(www.state.gov/documents/organization/149985.pdf)，第8-9页。 |
| See G. Hafner, “Subsequent agreements and
practice: between interpretation, informal modification, and formal
amendment”, in Nolte, Treaties and Subsequent Practice (see footnote 25
above), p. 105, at p. 112, for an even more far-reaching case under article 9
of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations. | 见G. Hafner,《嗣后协定和实践：解释、非正式修改与正式修正》，载于诺尔特,《条约和嗣后实践》(见上文脚注25)，第105页起，见第112页，其中载有《维也纳外交关系公约》第九条下一个影响更加深远的案例。 |
| WTO Appellate Body Report, China —
Measures Affecting Trading Rights and Distribution Services for Certain
Publications and Audiovisual Entertainment Products (China — Publications and
Audiovisual Products), WT/DS363/AB/R, adopted 19 January 2010, para. 403; | 世贸组织上诉机构报告，中国－影响某些出版物和娱乐视听产品贸易权和分销服务的措施案(中国－出版物和视听产品案)，WT/DS363/AB/R, 2010年1月19日通过，第403段； |
| “Although the Panel’s application of
[a]rticle 31 of the Vienna Convention to ‘Sound recording distribution
services’ led it to a ‘preliminary conclusion’ as to the meaning of that
entry, the Panel nonetheless decided to have recourse to supplementary means
of interpretation to confirm that meaning. | “虽然专家组适用《维也纳公约》第三十一条解释‘录音制品分销服务’就该词的含义得出了‘初步结论’，专家组还是决定使用解释的补充资料证实该含义。 |
| We note, in this regard, that China’s
argument on appeal appears to assume that the Panel’s analysis under
[a]rticle 32 of the Vienna Convention would necessarily have been different
if the Panel had found that the application of [a]rticle 31 left the meaning
of ‘Sound recording distribution services’ ambiguous or obscure, and if the
Panel had, therefore, resorted to [a]rticle 32 to determine, rather than to
confirm, the meaning of that term. | 关于这一点，我们注意到，中国的上诉论点似乎假定如果委员会发现适用第三十一条导致‘录音制品分销服务’一词的含义不明或难解，故而适用第三十二条来确定，而不是证实该词的含义，那么专家组根据《维也纳公约》第三十二条所作的分析必然将得出不同的结果。 |
| We do not share this view. | 我们不同意这种论点。 |
| The elements to be examined under
[a]rticle 32 are distinct from those to be analysed under [a]rticle 31, but
it is the same elements that are examined under [a]rticle 32 irrespective of
the outcome of the [a]rticle 31 analysis. | 第三十二条下考察的要素与第三十一条下分析的要素不同，但是无论根据第三十一条分析的结果如何，第三十二条下需要考察的都是同样的要素。 |
| Instead, what may differ, depending on
the results of the application of [a]rticle 31, is the weight that will be
attributed to the elements analysed under [a]rticle 32. | 根据第三十一条分析的结果可能影响的，是第三十二条下需考察的各要素的权重。 |
| ” See also Villiger, Commentary …
(footnote 37 above), p. 447, para. 11. | ”另见Villiger,《…评注》(上文脚注37)，第447页，第11段。 |
| See WTO Appellate Body Report, United
States — Import Prohibition of Certain Shrimp and Shrimp Products —
AB-1998-4, WT/DS58/AB/R, adopted 6 November 1998, para. 17 (“most treaties
have no single, undiluted object and purpose but rather a variety of
different, and possibly conflicting, objects and purposes”); | 见世贸组织上诉机构报告，美国－禁止进口某些虾类和虾制品案－AB-1998-4,
WT/DS58/ AB/R, 1998年11月6日通过，第17段(“大多数条约的目的和宗旨不是单一、纯粹的，而是具有各种不同，可能是冲突的目的和宗旨”； |
| Gardiner, Treaty Interpretation (see
footnote 19 above), p. 216. | Gardiner,《条约解释》(见上文脚注19)，第216页。 |
| Kasikili/Sedudu Island (see footnote 22
above), p. 1074, para. 45. | 卡西基里/塞杜杜岛案(见上文脚注22)，第1074页，第45段。 |
| Ibid., p. 1096, para. 80. | 同上，第1096页，第80段。 |
| Ibid. | 同上。 |
| United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1342,
No. 22495, p. 137. | 联合国，《条约汇编》，第1342卷，第22495号，第137页。 |
| For the military manuals of Argentina
(1989), Canada (2001) and the United Kingdom (2004), see Henckaerts and
Doswald-Beck, Customary International Humanitarian Law, volume 2 … (footnote
219 above), pp. 359–360, paras. 160–164 and the online update for the
military manual of Australia (2006)
(www.icrc.org/customary-ihl/eng/docs/v2_rul_rule15_sectionc); | 阿根廷(1989年)、加拿大(2001年)和联合王国(2004年)的军事指南，见Henckaerts和Doswald-Beck,《国际人道主义习惯法》，第2卷…(上文脚注219)，第359-360页，第160-164段，以及澳大利亚军事指南网上最新版(2006年)(www.icrc.org/customary-ihl/eng/docs/v2_rul_rule15_ sectionc)； |
| see also Sandoz, Swinarski and
Zimmermann, Commentary on the Additional Protocols … (footnote 266 above), p.
683, para. 2202. | 另见Sandoz、Swinarski和Zimmermann,《对…附加议定书的评注》(上文脚注266)，第683页，第2202段。 |
| United Kingdom, House of Lords,
Fothergill v. Monarch Airlines Ltd. [1981] AC 251, at p. 278 (Lord
Wilberforce) and p. 279 (Lord Diplock); | 联合王国，上议院，Fothergill诉君主航空有限公司案[1981] AC 251, 第278页(Wilberforce勋爵)和第279页(Diplock勋爵)； |
| similarly, Germany, Federal Court (Civil
Matters), BGHZ, vol. 84, p. 339, at pp. 343–344. | 类似的案件见德国，联邦法院(民事事项)，BGHZ, 第84卷，第339页起，见第343-344页。 |
| United States, Supreme Court, Air France
v. Saks, 470 U.S. 392, pp. 403–404. | 美国，最高法院，法国航空公司诉Saks案，470 U.S. 392, 第403-404页。 |
| Australia, Federal Court of Australia,
Commissioner of the Australian Federal Police and the Commonwealth of
Australia v. Geraldo Magno and Ines Almeida [1992] FCA 566, paras. 30–35
(Einfeld J.); | 澳大利亚，澳大利亚联邦法院，澳大利亚联邦警察专员和澳大利亚联邦诉Geraldo
Magno和Ines Almeida案[1992] FCA
566, 第30-35段(Einfeld J.)； |
| see also United Kingdom, House of Lords,
R (Mullen) v. Secretary of State for the Home Department [2004] UKHL 18,
paras. 47–48 (Lord Steyn). | 另见联合王国，上议院，R(Mullen)诉内政大臣案[2004] UKHL18, 第47-48段(Steyn勋爵)。 |
| See, for example, United States, Supreme
Court, Air France v. Saks, 470 U.S. 392, pp. 397–407; | 例如，见美国，最高法院，法国航空公司诉Saks案，470 U.S. 392, 第397-407页； |
| United States, Supreme Court, Abbott v.
Abbott 560 U.S. (2010), Opinion of the Court (delivered by Justice Kennedy),
Slip Opinion (www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/09pdf/08-645.pdf) (accessed 9
June 2016), at pp. 12–16; | 美国，最高法院，Abbott诉Abbott案，560 U.S.(2010)，法院意见书(肯尼迪法官撰写)，意见原文单(www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/09pdf/08-645.pdf)(2016年6月9日查阅)，见第12-16页； |
| Germany, Federal Administrative Court,
BVerwGE, vol. 139, p. 272, at pp. 288–289; | 德国，联邦行政法院，BVerwGE, 第139卷，第272页，见第288-289页； |
| High Court of Australia, Andrew John Macoun
v. Commissioner of Taxation [2015] HCA 44, at pp. 75–82; | 澳大利亚高等法院，Andrew John Macoun诉税务专员案[2015] HCA 44, 见第75-82页； |
| P. Wall, “A marked improvement: The High
Court of Australia’s approach to treaty interpretation in Macoun v.
Commissioner of Taxation [2015] HCA 44” (case note), Melbourne Journal of
International Law, vol. 17 (2016), pp. 170–188. | P. Wall，“显著进展：澳大利亚高等法院在Macoun诉税务专员案[2015] HCA 44中采取的条约解释办法”(案情说明)，《墨尔本国际法杂志》，第17卷(2016年)，第170-188页。 |
| A. Tzanakopoulos, “Judicial dialogue as a
means of interpretation”, in The Interpretation of International Law by
Domestic Courts: Uniformity, Diversity, Convergence, H.P. Aust and G. Nolte,
eds. (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2016), p. 72, at p. 94; | A. Tzanakopulos，“作为解释手段的司法对话”，载于H.P. Aust 和G.
Nolte所编《国内法院对国际法的解释：一致、多样、趋同》(牛津，牛津大学出版社，2016年)，第72页起，见第94页； |
| E. Benvenisti, “Reclaiming democracy: the
strategic uses of foreign and international law by national courts”, American
Journal of International Law, vol. 102 (2008), pp. 241–274. | E. Benvenisti, Benvenisti，“回收民主：国内法院对外国法律和国际法的战略使用”，《美国国际法期刊》，第102卷(2008年)，第241-274页。 |
| United Kingdom, House of Lords, King v.
Bristow Helicopters Ltd (Scotland) [2002] UKHL 7, at para. 81. | 联合王国，上议院，King诉Bristow直升机有限公司(苏格兰)案[2002] UKHL
7, 第81段。 |
| See also United Kingdom, Supreme Court, R
(Adams) v. Secretary of State for Justice [2011] UKSC 18, para. 17 (Lord
Philips) (“[t]his practice on the part of only one of the many signatories to
the ICCPR does not provide a guide to the meaning of article 14 (6) …. It has
not been suggested that there is any consistency of practice on the part of
the signatories that assists in determining the meaning of article 14 (6)”). | 另见联合王国，最高法院，R (Adams)诉司法大臣案[2011] UKSC 18, 第17段(Philips勋爵)(“《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》的许多签署国中唯一一个国家的这种实践没有为第十四条第6款的含义提供指导…不能认为存在签署国有助于确定第十四条第6款含义的任何一致实践”)。 |
| United Kingdom, House of Lords: Sidhu v.
British Airways [1997] AC 430, at p. 453 (Lord Hope); | 联合王国，上议院，Sidhu诉英国航空公司案[1997] AC 430，见第453页(Hope勋爵)； |
| Fothergill v. Monarch Airlines Ltd.
[1981] AC 251, pp. 275–276 (Lord Wilberforce). | Fothergill诉君主航空有限公司案[1981] AC 251, 第275-276页(Wilberforce勋爵)。 |
| See also Canada, Supreme Court, Yugraneft
Corp. v. Rexx Management Corp. [2010] 1 SCR 649, para. 21 (Rothstein J.). | 另见加拿大，最高法院，Yugraneft公司诉Rexx管理公司案[2010] 1 SCR 649, 第21段(Rothstein, J.)。 |
| WTO, Appellate Body Report, EC — Bananas
III (see footnote 66 above), paras. 391–393. | 世贸组织上诉机构报告，欧共体－香蕉案(三)(见上文脚注66)，第391-393段。 |
| Murphy, “The relevance of subsequent
agreement …” (see footnote 260 above), p. 88. | Murphy,“嗣后协定…的作用”(见上文脚注260)，第88页。 |
| Sinclair, The Vienna Convention … (see
footnote 20 above), p. 107 with reference to Waldock, Official Records of the
United Nations Conference on the Law of Treaties … (A/CONF.39/11) (see
footnote 193 above), 37th meeting, 24 April 1968, p. 207, paras. 49–52; | Sinclair,《维也纳…公约》(见上文脚注20)，第107页，其中提到沃尔多克,《联合国条约法会议正式记录…》(A/CONF.39/11)(见上文脚注193)，第37次会议，1968年4月24日，第207页，第49-52段； |
| Villiger, Commentary … (see footnote 37
above), p. 513, paras. 7, 9 and 11; | Villiger,《…评注》(见上文脚注37)，第513页，第7、9和11段； |
| K. Odendahl, “Article 39. General rule
regarding the amendment of treaties”, in Dörr and Schmalenbach, Vienna
Convention on the Law of Treaties … (see footnote 61 above), p. 706, para.
16. | K. Odendahl,“第三十九条. 修正条约的一般规则”，载于Dörr
和Schmalenbach,《维也纳条约法公约…》(见上文脚注61)，第706页，第16段。 |
| Pulp Mills on the River Uruguay (see
footnote 22 above), pp. 62–63, paras. 128 and 131; | 乌拉圭河沿岸纸浆厂案(见上文脚注22)，第62-63页，第128和131段； |
| the Court then concluded, in the case
under review, that these conditions had not been fulfilled, pp. 62–66, paras.
128–142. | 法院继而得出结论称，本案不满足这些条件，见第62-66页，第128-142段。 |
| In judicial practice, it is sometimes not
necessary to determine whether an agreement has the effect of interpreting or
modifying a treaty, see Territorial Dispute (footnote 22 above), p. 29, para.
60 (“in the view of the Court, for the purposes of the present Judgment,
there is no reason to categorize it either as confirmation or as a
modification of the Declaration”); | 在司法实践中，有时不需要确定一项协定是具有解释还是修改条约的效果，见领土争端案(上文脚注22)，第29页，第60段(“…法院认为，为本判决之目的，没有必要划分其属于对声明的证实还是修改”)； |
| it is sometimes considered that an
agreement under art. 31, para. 3 (a), can also have the effect of modifying a
treaty (see Aust, Modern Treaty Law and Practice (see footnote 142 above),
pp. 212–214 with examples. | 有时认为，第三十一条第三款(a)项所指协定也可以具有修改条约的效果，(见Aust,《现代条约法和实践》(上文脚注142)，第212-214页，其中举了例子)。 |
| Pulp Mills on the River Uruguay (see
footnote 22 above), p. 63, para. 131 and p. 66, para. 140; | 乌拉圭河沿岸纸浆厂案(见上文脚注22)，第63页，第131段和第66页，第140段； |
| Crawford, “A consensualist interpretation
of article 31 (3) …” (see footnote 224 above), p. 32; | Crawford,“对…第三十一条第三款的合意主义解释”(见上文脚注224)，第32页； |
| Iran-United States Claims Tribunal,
Interlocutory Award No. ITL 83-B1-FT (Counterclaim) (see footnote 156 above),
p. 77, at pp. 125–126, para. 132; | 伊朗－美国索赔法庭，第ITL 83-B1-FT号中间裁决(反诉)(见上文脚注156)，第77页起，见第125-126页，第132段； |
| in diplomatic contexts outside court
proceedings, States tend to acknowledge more openly that a certain agreement
or common practice amounts to a modification of a treaty, see Murphy, “The
relevance of subsequent agreement …” (footnote 260 above), p. 83. | 在法庭诉讼外的外交环境下，国家可能比较愿意公开承认某项协定或共同的实践构成对条约的修改，见Murphy,“嗣后协定…的作用”(上文脚注260)，第83页。 |
| Pulp Mills on the River Uruguay (see
footnote 22 above), p. 66, para. 140; | 乌拉圭河沿岸纸浆厂案(见上文脚注22)，第66页，第140段； |
| Crawford, “A consensualist interpretation
of article 31 (3) …” (see footnote 224 above), p. 32. | Crawford,“对…第三十一条第三款的合意主义解释”(见上文脚注224)，第32页。 |
| Yearbook … 1966, vol. II, document
A/6309/Rev.1, p. 236 (footnote omitted). | 《1966年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/6309/Rev.1号文件，第236页(脚注略)。 |
| See Official Records of the United
Nations Conference on the Law of Treaties … (A/CONF.39/11) (footnote 193
above), 37th meeting, 24 April 1968, pp. 207–215; | 见《联合国条约法会议正式记录…》(A/CONF.39/11)(上文脚注193)，第37次会议，1968年4月24日，第207-215页； |
| A/CN.4/671, paras. 119–121; | A/CN.4/671, 第119-121段； |
| Distefano, “La pratique subséquente …”
(footnote 191 above), pp. 56–61. | Distefano,“…嗣后实践”(上文脚注191)，第56-61页。 |
| Sinclair, The Vienna Convention … (see
footnote 20 above), p. 138; | Sinclair,《维也纳…公约》(见上文脚注20)，第138页； |
| Gardiner, Treaty Interpretation (see
footnote 19 above), pp. 275–280; | Gardiner,《条约解释》(见上文脚注19)，第275-280页； |
| Yasseen, “L’interprétation des traités…”
(see footnote 20 above), pp. 51–52; | Yasseen,“…对条约进行解释”(见上文脚注20)，第51-52页； |
| Kamto, “La volonté de l’État …” (see
footnote 154 above), pp. 134–141, at p. 134; | Kamto,“…国家意志”(见上文脚注154)，第134-141页，见第134页； |
| Aust, Modern Treaty Law and Practice (see
footnote 142 above), p. 213; | Aust,《现代条约法和实践》(见上文脚注142)，第213页； |
| Villiger, Commentary … (see footnote 37
above), p. 432, para. 23; | Villiger,《…评注》(上文脚注37)，第432页，第23段； |
| Dörr, “Article 31 …” (see footnote 61
above), pp. 595–596, para. 77 (in accord, Odendahl, “Article 39 …” (see
footnote 290 above), p. 702, paras. 10–11); | Dörr,“第三十一条…”(见上文脚注61)，第595-596页，第77段(又见Odendahl,“第三十九条…”(见上文脚注290)，第702页，第10-11段)； |
| Distefano, “La pratique subséquente …”
(see footnote 191 above), pp. 62–67; | Distefano,“…嗣后实践”(见上文脚注191)，第62-67页； |
| H. Thirlway, “The law and procedure of
the International Court of Justice 1960–1989: supplement, 2006 — part three”,
British Yearbook of International Law 2006, vol. 77, pp. 1–82, p. 65; | H. Thirlway,“1960-1989年国际法院的法律和诉讼：2006年补编－第三部分”，《2006年英国国际法年鉴》，第77卷，第1-82页，见第65页； |
| M.N. Shaw, International Law, 7th ed.
(Cambridge, United Kingdom, Cambridge University Press, 2014), p. 677; | M. N. Shaw,《国际法》，第7版(剑桥，剑桥大学出版社，2014年)，第677页； |
| I. Buga, “Subsequent practice and treaty
modification”, in Conceptual and Contextual Perspectives on the Modern Law of
Treaties, M.J. Bowman and D. Kritsiotis, eds. (forthcoming), footnote 73 with
further references; | I. Buga,“嗣后实践与条约修改”，载于M. J. Bowman和D.
Kritsiotis所编《现代条约法的概念和语境视角》(即将出版)，脚注73, 其中提到了更多的参考资料； |
| disagreeing with this view, in
particular, and stressing the solemnity of the conclusion of a treaty in
contrast to the informality of practice Murphy, “The relevance of subsequent
agreement …” (see footnote 260 above), pp. 89–90; | 反对这种观点，强调相对于实践的非正式性，缔结条约具有庄重性，见Murphy,“嗣后协定…的作用”(见上文脚注260)，第89-90页； |
| see also Hafner, “Subsequent agreements
and practice …” (see footnote 273 above), pp. 115–117 (differentiating between
the perspectives of courts and States, as well as emphasizing the importance
of amendment provisions in this context). | 另见Hafner,《嗣后协定和实践…》(见上文脚注273)，第115-117页(区分法院和国家的角度，在这种背景下强调修正案的重要性)。 |
| Dispute regarding Navigational and
Related Rights (see footnote 22 above), p. 242, para. 64; | 关于航行权和相关权利的争端案(见上文脚注22)，第242页，第64段； |
| see also Question of the tax regime
governing pensions paid to retired UNESCO officials residing in France
(footnote 153 above); | 另见向居住在法国的教科文组织退休职员支付退休金的税收制度问题案(见上文脚注153)； |
| Yasseen, “L’interprétation des traités …”
(see footnote 20 above), p. 51; | Yasseen,“…对条约进行解释”(见上文脚注20)，第51页； |
| Kamto, “La volonté de l’État …” (see
footnote 154 above), pp. 134–141; | Kamto,“…国家意志”(见上文脚注154)，第134-141页； |
| R. Bernhardt, Die Auslegung völkerrechtlicher
Verträge (Cologne, Berlin, Heymanns, 1963), p. 132. | R. Bernhardt, Die Auslegung
völkerrechtlicher Verträge (Cologne, 柏林，Heymann, 1963年)，第132页。 |
| See draft conclusion 8 and commentary
thereto, paras. (1)–(18). | 见结论草案8及其评注，第(1)-(18)段。 |
| Sinclair, The Vienna Convention … (see
footnote 20 above), p. 138; | Sinclair,《维也纳…公约》(见上文脚注20)，第138页； |
| Gardiner, Treaty Interpretation (see
footnote 19 above), p. 275; | Gardiner,《条约解释》(见上文脚注19)，第275页； |
| Murphy, “The relevance of subsequent
agreement …” (see footnote 260 above), p. 90; | Murphy,“嗣后协定…的作用”(见上文脚注260)，第90页； |
| B. Simma, “Miscellaneous thoughts on
subsequent agreements and practice”, in Nolte, Treaties and Subsequent
Practice (see footnote 25 above), p. 46; | B. Simma,“关于嗣后协定和实践的思考”，载于诺尔特,《条约和嗣后实践》(见上文脚注25)，第46页； |
| Karl, Vertrag und spätere Praxis … (see
footnote 75 above), pp. 42–43; | Karl, Vertrag und spätere Praxis…(见上文脚注75)，第42-43页； |
| Sorel and Boré Eveno, “1969 Vienna
Convention, Article 31 …” (see footnote 62 above), p. 825, para. 42; | Sorel和Boré
Eveno,“1969年《维也纳公约》，第三十一条…”(见上文脚注62), 第825页，第42段； |
| Dörr, “Article 31 …” (see footnote 61
above), pp. 595–596, para. 77; | Dörr,“第三十一条…”(见上文脚注61)，第595-596页，第77段； |
| this is true even if the two processes
can theoretically be seen as being “legally quite distinct”, see the Dissenting
Opinion of Judge Parra-Aranguren in Kasikili/Sedudu Island (footnote 22
above), pp. 1212–1213, para. 16; | 的确难以划分界限，即使理论上二者被视为“在法律上有明显区别”，见Parra-Aranguren法官在卡西基里/塞杜杜岛案(上文脚注22)中的反对意见，见1212-1213页，第16段； |
| similarly, Hafner, “Subsequent agreements
and practice …” (see footnote 273 above), p. 114; | 同样见Hafner,《嗣后协定和实践…》(见上文脚注273)，第114页； |
| Linderfalk, On the Interpretation of
Treaties (see footnote 67 above), p. 168. | Linderfalk,《论条约的解释》(见上文脚注67)，第168页。 |
| Dispute regarding Navigational and
Related Rights (see footnote 22 above), p. 242, para. 64. | 关于航行权和相关权利的争端案(见上文脚注22)，第242页，第64段。 |
| Thirlway, “The law and procedure of the
International Court of Justice 1960–1989 …” (see footnote 297 above), p. 64. | Thirlway,“1960-1989年国际法院的法律和诉讼…”(见上文脚注297)，第64页。 |
| See already Official Records of the
General Assembly, Sixty-seventh Session, Supplement No. 10, A/67/10, p. 124,
para. 238, and, ibid., Sixty-third Session, Supplement No. 10, A/63/10, annex
A, para. 42. | 见《大会正式记录，第六十七届会议，补编第10号》，A/67/10, 第124页，第238段，以及同上，《第六十三届会议，补编第10号》，A/63/10, 附件A,
第42段。 |
| Land and Maritime Boundary between
Cameroon and Nigeria (Cameroon v. Nigeria: Equatorial Guinea intervening),
Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2002, p. 303, at p. 353, para. 68. | 喀麦隆和尼日利亚间陆地和海洋疆界案(喀麦隆诉尼日利亚：赤道几内亚参与诉讼)，判决，《2002年国际法院案例汇编》，第303页起，见第353页，第68段。 |
| Case concerning the Temple of Preah
Vihear (see footnote 110 above): “an acknowledgement by conduct was
undoubtedly made in a very definite way … it is clear that the circumstances
were such as called for some reaction” (p. 23); | 柏威夏寺案(见上文脚注110)：“毫无疑问，以非常确定的方式通过行为承认…这种情况下显然需要作出反应”(第23页)； |
| “[a] clearer affirmation of title on the
French Indo-Chinese side can scarcely be imagined” and therefore “demanded a
reaction” (p. 30). | “法属印度支那对所有权的主张再明确不过了”，因此“需要作出反应”(第30页)。 |
| M. Kohen, “Uti possidetis, prescription
et pratique subséquente à un traité dans l’affaire de l’île de
Kasikili/Sedudu devant la Cour internationale de Justice”, German Yearbook of
International Law, vol. 43 (2000), p. 253, at p. 272. | M. Kohen,“Uti possidetis, prescription et
pratique subséquente à un traité dans l’affaire de l’île de Kasikili/Sedudu
devant la Cour internationale de Justice”，《德国国际法年鉴》，第43(2000)卷，第253页起，见第272页。 |
| Case concerning the Temple of Preah
Vihear (see footnote 110 above), p. 26: “a fact, which if true, must have
been no less evident in 1908”. | 柏威夏寺案(见上文脚注110)，第26页：“这一事实，如果千真万确，在1908年一定更加明显”。 |
| Judge Parra-Aranguren has opined that the
Temple of Preah Vihear case demonstrated “that the effect of subsequent
practice on that occasion was to amend the treaty” (see Kasikili/Sedudu
Island (footnote 22 above), Dissenting Opinion of Judge Parra-Aranguren, pp.
1212–1213, para. 16); | Parra-Aranguren法官认为柏威夏寺案表明，“那种情况下的嗣后实践起到了修改条约的作用”(见卡西基里/塞杜杜岛案(上文脚注22)，Parra-Aranguren法官的反对意见，第1212-1213页，第16段)； |
| Buga, “Subsequent practice and treaty
modification” (see footnote 297 above), footnote 120. | Buga,“嗣后实践与条约修改”(见上文脚注297)，脚注120。 |
| In particular the Namibia Advisory
Opinion (see footnote 254 above) has been read as implying that subsequent
practice has modified Article 27, paragraph 3, of the Charter of the United
Nations, see A. Pellet, “Article 38”, in The Statute of the International
Court of Justice A Commentary, 2nd ed., A. Zimmermann et al., eds. (Oxford,
Oxford University Press, 2012), p. 844, para. 279, note 809; | 特别是，纳米比亚案的咨询意见(见上文脚注254)被解读为暗示嗣后实践修改了《联合国宪章》第二十七条第三项，见A.
Pellet,“第三十八条”，载于A.
Zimmermann等人所编《〈国际法院规约〉评注》，第2版(牛津，牛津大学出版社，2012年)，第844页，第279段； |
| cf. A/CN.4/671, paras. 124–126. | 注809, 参见A/CN.4/671,
第124-126段。 |
| M. Kohen, “Keeping subsequent agreements
and practice in their right limits”, in Nolte, Treaties and Subsequent
Practice (see footnote 25 above), pp. 34 et seq., at p. 43 regarding Decision
regarding delimitation of the border between Eritrea and Ethiopia, 13 April
2002, UNRIAA, vol. XXV (Sales No. E/F.05.V.5), pp. 83–195, at pp. 110–111,
paras. 3.6–3.10; | M. Kohen,“适当限制嗣后协定和实践的作用”，载于诺尔特，《条约和嗣后实践》(见上文脚注25)，第34页及以后各页，见第43页，其中提到埃塞俄比亚和厄立特里亚划界案的裁决，2002年4月13日，《国际仲裁裁决汇编》，第二十五卷(出售品编号：E/F.05.V.5)，第83-195页，见第110-111页，第3.6.-3.10段； |
| see also Case concerning the location of
boundary markers in Taba between Egypt and Israel, 29 September 1988, UNRIAA,
vol. XX (Sales No. E/F.93.V.3), pp. 1–118, see pp. 56–57, paras. 209–210, in
which the Arbitral Tribunal held, in an obiter dictum, “that the demarcated
boundary line would prevail over the Agreement if a contradiction could be
detected” (ibid., p. 57); | 另见埃及和以色列之间塔巴界桩位置案，1988年9月29日，《国际仲裁裁决汇编》，第二十卷(出售品编号：E/F.93.V.3)，第1-118页，见第56-57页，第209和210段，仲裁法庭在附带意见中称：“划定的界线与《协定》不符时，以划定的界线为准”(同上，第57页)； |
| but see R. Kolb, “La modification d’un
traité par la pratique subséquente des parties”, Revue suisse de droit
international et de droit européen, vol. 14 (2004), pp. 9–32, at p. 20. | 另见R. Kolb,“La modification d’un traité
par la pratique subséquente des parties”，《瑞士国际法和欧洲法评论》，第14卷(2004年)，第9-32页，见第20页。 |
| Interpretation of the Air Transport
Services Agreement between the United States of America and France, 22
December 1963, UNRIAA, vol. XVI (Sales No. E/F.69.V.1), pp. 5–74, at pp.
62–63; | 对美利坚合众国与法国航空运输协定的解释，1963年12月22日，《国际仲裁裁决汇编》，第十六卷(出售品编号：E/F.69.V.1)，第5-74页，见第62-63页； |
| Official Records of the United Nations
Conference on the Law of Treaties … (A/CONF.39/11) (see footnote 193 above),
37th meeting, 24 April 1968, p. 208, para. 58 (Japan); | 《联合国条约法会议正式记录…》(A/CONF.39/11)(见上文脚注193)，第37次会议，1968年4月24日，第208页，第58段(日本)； |
| Murphy, “The relevance of subsequent
agreement …” (footnote 260 above), p. 89. | Murphy,“嗣后协定…的作用”(见上文脚注260)，第89页。 |
| WTO, Appellate Body Report, EC — Bananas
III (see footnote 66 above), Second Recourse to Article 21.5,
WT/DS27/AB/RW2/ECU and Corr.1 adopted 11 December 2008, WT/DS27/AB/RW/USA and
Corr.1, adopted 22 December 2008, paras. 391–393. | 世贸组织上诉机构报告，欧共体―香蕉案(三)(见上文脚注66)，第二次诉诸第21.5条，WT/DS27/AB/ RW2/ECU和Corr.1, 2008年12月11日通过，WT/DS27/AB/RW/USA和Corr.1, 2008年12月22日通过，第391-393段。 |
| Marrakesh Agreement establishing the
World Trade Organization (see footnote 66 above), Understanding on Rules and
Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes, Annex 2, at p. 401. | 《马拉喀什建立世界贸易组织协定》(见上文脚注66)，《关于争端解决规则与程序的谅解》，附件2, 第401页。 |
| Öcalan v. Turkey [GC], No. 46221/99, 12
May 2005, ECHR 2005-IV, para. 163, referring to Soering v. the United
Kingdom, No. 14038/88, 7 July 1989, ECHR Series A No. 161, para. 103. | Öcalan诉土耳其[大审判庭]，第46221/99号，2005年5月12日，《2005年欧洲人权法院案例汇编》第四卷，第163段，其中提到了Soering诉联合王国案，第14038/88号，1989年7月7日，《欧洲人权法院案例汇编》A辑，第161号，第103段。 |
| See also Al-Saadoon and Mufdhi v. the
United Kingdom, No. 61498/08, 4 October 2010, paras. 119–120. | 另见Al-Saadoon和Mufdhi诉联合王国，第61498/08号，2010年10月4日，第119-120段。 |
| Al-Saadoon and Mufdhi v. the United
Kingdom, No. 61498/08, 4 October 2010, para. 120; | Al-Saadoon和Mufdhi
诉联合王国，第61498/08号，2010年10月4日，第120段； |
| B. Malkani, “The obligation to refrain
from assisting the use of the death penalty”, International and Comparative
Law Quarterly, vol. 62 (2013), pp. 523–556; | B. Malkani,“避免协助使用死刑的义务”，《国际法和比较法季刊》，第62卷
(2013年)，第523-556页； |
| confirmed in Hassan v. United Kingdom
[GC] (see footnote 26 above), para. 101. | 并在Hassan诉联合王国案[大审判庭]中得到确认(见上文脚注26)，第101段。 |
| See Buga, “Subsequent practice and treaty
modification” (footnote 297 above), footnotes 126–132. | 见Buga,“嗣后实践与条约修改”(上文脚注297)，脚注126-132。 |
| See Land and Maritime Boundary between
Cameroon and Nigeria (Cameroon v. Nigeria: Equatorial Guinea intervening),
Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2002, p. 303, at p. 353, para. 68. | 见喀麦隆和尼日利亚间陆地和海洋疆界案(喀麦隆诉尼日利亚：赤道几内亚参与诉讼)，判决，《2002年国际法院案例汇编》，第303页起，见第353页，第68段。 |
| A/CN.4/671, paras. 119–121. | A/CN.4/671, 第119-121段。 |
| Murphy, “The relevance of subsequent
agreement and subsequent practice …” (footnote 260 above), p. 89; | Murphy,“嗣后协定和嗣后实践…的作用”(上文脚注260)，第89页； |
| Simma, “Miscellaneous thoughts on
subsequent agreements …” (footnote 300 above), p. 47; | Simma,“关于嗣后协定…的思考”(上文脚注300)，第47页； |
| Hafner, “Subsequent agreements and
practice …” (see footnote 273 above), pp. 115–117; | Hafner,《嗣后协定和实践…》(见上文脚注273)，第115-117页； |
| J.E. Alvarez, “Limits of change by way of
subsequent agreements and practice”, in Nolte, Treaties and Subsequent
Practice (see footnote 25 above), p. 130. | J.E. Alvarez,“通过嗣后协定和实践修改条约的限制”，载于诺尔特，《条约和嗣后实践》(见上文脚注25)，第130页。 |
| See NATO Strategic Concept Case, German
Federal Constitutional Court, Judgment of 19 June 2001, Application 2 BvE
6/99 (English translation available from
www.bundesverfassungsgericht.de/entscheidungen/es20011122_2bve000699en.html),
paras. 19–21; | 见北约战略概念案，德国联邦宪法法院，2001年6月19日的判决，申诉号2 BvE
6/99(英文译文见：www.bundesverfassungsgericht.de/entscheidungen/es20011122_2bve000699en.html)，第19-21段； |
| German Federal Fiscal Court, BFHE, vol.
157, p. 39, at pp. 43–44; | 德国联邦财政法院，BFHE, 第157卷，第39页起，见第43-44页； |
| ibid., vol. 227, p. 419, at p. 426; | 同上，第227卷，第419起，见第426页； |
| ibid., vol. 181, p. 158, at p. 161; | 同上，第181卷，第158页起，见第161页； |
| S. Kadelbach, “Domestic constitutional
concerns with respect to the use of subsequent agreements and practice at the
international level”, in Nolte, Treaties and Subsequent Practice (see
footnote 25 above), pp. 145–148; | S. Kadelbach,“与国际上使用嗣后协定和实践有关的国内宪法问题”，载于诺尔特，《条约和嗣后实践》(见上文脚注25)，第145-148页； |
| Alvarez, “Limits of change …” (see
footnote 318 above), p. 130; | Alvarez,“…修改条约的限制”(见上文脚注318)，第130页； |
| I. Wuerth, “Treaty interpretation,
subsequent agreements and practice, and domestic constitutions”, in Nolte,
Treaties and Subsequent Practice (see footnote 25 above), pp. 154–159; | I. Wuerth,“条约解释、嗣后协定和实践与国内宪法”，载于诺尔特，《条约和嗣后实践》(见上文脚注25)，第154-159页； |
| and H. Ruiz Fabri, “Subsequent practice,
domestic separation of powers, and concerns of legitimacy”, in Nolte,
Treaties and Subsequent Practice (see footnote 25 above), pp. 165–166. | H. Ruiz Fabri,“嗣后实践、国内权力分立与合法性问题”载于诺尔特，《条约和嗣后实践》(见上文脚注25)，第165-166页。 |
| See, for example, Kohen, “Uti possidetis,
prescription et pratique subséquente …” (footnote 306 above), p. 274 (in
particular with respect to boundary treaties). | 例如见Kohen,“Uti possidetis, prescription et
pratique subséquente …”(上文脚注306)，第274页(特别是在边界条约方面)。 |
| Instead, States and courts prefer to make
every effort to conceive of an agreed subsequent practice of the parties as
an effort to interpret the treaty in a particular way. | 相反，国家和法院倾向于尽量将缔约方达成一致的嗣后实践视为以特定方式解释条约的努力。 |
| Such efforts to interpret a treaty
broadly are possible since article 31 of the 1969 Vienna Convention does not
accord primacy to one particular means of interpretation contained therein,
but rather requires the interpreter to take into account all means of
interpretation as appropriate. | 对条约作出宽泛的解释是有可能的，因为1969年《维也纳公约》第三十一条并没有赋予特定的解释资料优先地位，而是要求解释方酌情考虑所有解释资料。 |
| (See draft conclusion 2, para. 5, and the
commentary thereto, above; | (见上文结论草案2第5段及其评注； |
| Hafner, “Subsequent agreements and
practice …” (see footnote 273 above), p. 117; | Hafner,《嗣后协定和实践…》(见上文脚注273)，第117页； |
| some authors support the view that the
range of what is conceivable as an “interpretation” is wider in case of a
subsequent agreement or subsequent practice under article 31, paragraph 3,
than in the case of interpretations by other means of interpretation,
including the range for evolutive interpretations by courts or tribunals, for
example, Gardiner, Treaty Interpretation (see footnote 19 above), p. 275; | 一些著述者认为，第三十一条第三款所指的嗣后协定或嗣后实践作为解释资料的“解释”范围超出了通过其他解释资料进行的解释，包括法院或仲裁法庭的各种演进性解释，例如见Gardiner,《条约解释》(见上文脚注19)，第275页； |
| Dörr, “Article 31 …” (see footnote 61
above), pp. 595–596, para. 77. | Dörr,“第三十一条…”(见上文脚注61)，第595-596页，第77段。 |
| ) In this context an important
consideration is how far a evolutive interpretation of the treaty provision
concerned is possible. | 有鉴于此，一个重要问题就是可以在多大程度上对所涉条约规定作出演进性解释。 |
| (See draft conclusion 8; | (见结论草案8； |
| in the case concerning the Dispute
regarding Navigational and Related Rights, for example, the International
Court of Justice could leave the question open as to whether the term
“comercio” had been modified by the subsequent practice of the parties since
it decided that it was possible to give this term an evolutive
interpretation. | 在关于航行权和相关权利的争端案中，国际法院可以不回答缔约方的嗣后实践是否修改了“comercio”一词的含义，因为法院已判定可以对其作出演进性解释。 |
| Dispute regarding Navigational and
Related Rights (see footnote 22 above), pp. 242–243, paras. 64–66.) | 关于航行权和相关权利的争端案(见上文脚注22)，第242-243页，第64-66段。 |
| T.O. Elias, “The doctrine of
intertemporal law”, American Journal of International Law, vol. 74 (1980),
pp. 285 et seq.; | ) T.O. Elias,“国际法理论”，《美国国际法期刊》，第74卷(1980年)，第285页及以下各页； |
| D.W. Greig, Intertemporality and the Law
of Treaties (London, British Institute of International and Comparative Law,
2001); | D.W. Greig,《时际性与条约法》(伦敦，英国国际法和比较法学会，2001年)； |
| M. Fitzmaurice, “Dynamic (evolutive)
interpretation of treaties, Part I”, The Hague Yearbook of International Law,
vol. 21 (2008), pp. 101–153; | M. Fitzmaurice,“动态性(演进性)条约解释，第一部分”，《海牙国际法年鉴》，第21卷(2008年)，第101-153页； |
| M. Kotzur, “Intertemporal law”, in Max
Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law (www.mpepil.com); | M. Kotzur,“时际法”，载于《马克斯·普朗克国际公法百科全书》(www.mpepil. com)； |
| U. Linderfalk, “Doing the right thing for
the right reason: why dynamic or static approaches should be taken in the
interpretation of treaties”, International Community Law Review, vol. 10
(2008), pp. 109 et seq.; | U. Linderfalk,“出于正确的理由做正确的事情：对于条约解释为何应当采取动态或静态的办法”，《国际社会法律评论》，第10卷
(2008年)，第109页及以下各页； |
| A. Verdross and B. Simma, Universelles
Völkerrecht, 3rd ed. (Berlin, Duncker & Humblot, 1984), pp. 496 et seq.,
paras. 782 et seq. | A. Verdross和B.
Simma, Universelles Völkerrecht, 第3版(柏林，Duncker & Humblot, 1984年)，第496页及以下各页，第782段及以下各段。 |
| M. Fitzmaurice, “Dynamic (evolutive)
interpretation …” (see footnote 322 above). | M. Fitzmaurice,“动态性(演进性)…解释”(见上文脚注322)。 |
| Island of Palmas case (the
Netherlands/United States of America), award of 4 April 1928, UNRIAA, vol. II
(Sales No. 1949.V.1), pp. 829–871, at p. 845. | 帕尔马斯岛案(荷兰诉美利坚合众国)，1928年4月4日的裁决，《国际仲裁裁决汇编》，第二卷(出售品编号1949.V.1)，第829-871页，见第845页。 |
| Yearbook … 1966, vol. II, document
A/6309/Rev.1, pp. 220–221, para. (11). | 《1966年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/6309/Rev.1号文件，第220-221页，第(11)段。 |
| Award in Arbitration regarding the Iron
Rhine (“Ijzeren Rijn”) Railway (see footnote 24 above), p. 35, at para. 81; | 莱茵铁路案仲裁裁决(见上文脚注24)，第35页，见第81段； |
| see, for example, A. Aust, Modern Treaty
Law and Practice (see footnote 142 above), pp. 215–216; | 例如，见A. Aust,《现代条约法和实践》(见上文脚注142)，第215-216页； |
| M. Fitzmaurice, “Dynamic (evolutive)
interpretation …” (see footnote 322 above), pp. 29–31; | M. Fitzmaurice,“动态性(演进性)…解释”(见上文脚注322)，第29-31页； |
| G. Distefano, “L’interprétation évolutive
de la norme internationale”, Revue générale de droit international public,
vol. 115 (2011), pp. 373–396, at pp. 384 and 389 et seq.; | G. Distefano,“L’interprétation évolutive
de la norme internationale”，Revue générale de droit
international public, 第115卷
(2011年)，第373-396页，见第384页和第389页及以下各页； |
| Higgins, “Some observations on the
inter-temporal rule …” (see footnote 254 above), pp. 174 et seq.; | Higgins,“关于…时效规则的若干意见(见上文脚注254)，第174页及以下各页； |
| Sorel and Boré Eveno, “1969 Vienna
Convention, Article 31 …” (see footnote 62 above), p. 807, para. 8; | Sorel和Boré
Eveno,“1969年《维也纳公约》第三十一条…”(见上文脚注62)，第807页，第8段； |
| P.-M. Dupuy, “Evolutionary interpretation
of treaties”, in Cannizzaro, The Law of Treaties … (see footnote 61 above),
pp. 125 et seq.; | P.-M. Dupuy,“条约的演变性解释”，载于Cannizzaro,《…条约法》(见上文脚注61)，第125页及以下各页； |
| M. Kotzur, “Intertemporal Law” (see
footnote 322 above), para. 14. | M. Kotzur,“国际法”(见上文脚注322)，第14段。 |
| Yearbook … 1966, vol. II, document
A/6309/Rev.1, p. 222, para. (16); | 《1966年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/6309/Rev.1号文件，第222页，第(16)段； |
| Higgins, “Some observations on the
inter-temporal rule …” (see footnote 254 above), p. 178. | Higgins,“关于…时效规则的若干意见”(见上文脚注254)，第178页。 |
| Report of the Study Group on
fragmentation of international law, 2006 (A/CN.4/L.682 and Corr.1), para.
478. | 国际法不成体系问题研究组的报告，2006年，(A/CN.4/L.682和Corr.1)，第478段。 |
| Dispute regarding Navigational and
Related Rights (see footnote 22 above), Declaration of Judge ad hoc
Guillaume, p. 290, at pp. 294 et seq., paras. 9 et seq.; | 关于航行权和相关权利的争端案(见上文脚注22)，专案法官纪尧姆的声明，第290页起，见第294页及以下各页，第9段及以下各段； |
| see also Yearbook … 2005, vol. II (Part
Two), p. 89, para. 479; | 另见《2005年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第89页，479段； |
| Report of the Study Group on
fragmentation of international law (A/CN.4/L.682 and Corr.1), para. 478; | 国际法不成体系问题研究组的报告(A/CN.4/L.682和Corr.1)，第478段； |
| Institut de droit international, resolution
on “Le problème intertemporel en droit international public”, Annuaire de
l’Institut de droit international, vol. 56 (Wiesbaden session, 1975), pp. 536
et seq. (www.idi-iil.org). | 国际法学会，关于“公共国际法中的时际问题”的决议，《国际法学会年刊》，第56卷(威斯巴登届会，1975年)，第536页及以下各页(www.idi-iil.org)。 |
| Case concerning a boundary dispute
between Argentina and Chile concerning the delimitation of the frontier line
between boundary post 62 and Mount Fitzroy, decision of 21 October 1994,
UNRIAA, vol. XXII (Sales No. E/F.00.V.7), pp. 3–149, at p. 43, para. 130; | 阿根廷和智利在第62号界桩与菲茨罗伊峰之间划界争端案，1994年10月21日的裁决，《国际仲裁裁决汇编》，第二十二卷(出售品编号E/F.00.V.7)，第3-149页，见第43页，第130段； |
| see also, with respect to the term
“watershed”, Case concerning the Temple of Preah Vihear (see footnote 110
above), pp. 16–22. | 另外关于“分水岭”一词，参见隆瑞古寺案(见上文脚注110)，第16-22页。 |
| Kasikili/Sedudu Island (see footnote 22
above), pp. 1060–1062, paras. 21 and 25. | 卡西基里/塞杜杜岛案(见上文脚注22)，第1060-1062页，第21和第25段。 |
| Decision regarding delimitation of the
border between Eritrea and Ethiopia (Eritrea v. Ethiopia), UNRIAA, vol. XXV
(Sales No. E/F.05.V.5), pp. 83–195, p. 110, para. 3.5. | 关于厄立特里亚与埃塞俄比亚划界问题的裁决(厄立特里亚诉埃塞俄比亚)，《国际仲裁裁决汇编》，第二十五卷(出售品编号E/F.05.V.5)，第83-195页，见第110页，第3.5段。 |
| Land and Maritime Boundary between
Cameroon and Nigeria (Cameroon v. Nigeria: Equatorial Guinea intervening),
Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2002, p. 303, at p. 338 and 339, para. 48, and p.
346, para. 59. | 喀麦隆和尼日利亚间陆地和海洋疆界案(喀麦隆诉尼日利亚：赤道几内亚参与诉讼)，判决，《2002年国际法院案例汇编》，第303页起，见第338和339页，第48段，以及第346页，第59段。 |
| Legal Consequences for States of the
Continued Presence of South Africa in Namibia (see footnote 54 above), p. 31,
para. 53. | 南非继续留驻纳米比亚对各国的法律后果(见上文脚注54)，第31页，第53段。 |
| Aegean Sea Continental Shelf, Judgment,
I.C.J. Reports 1978, p. 3, at p. 32, para. 77; | 爱琴海大陆架案，判决，《1978年国际法院案例汇编》，第3页起，见第32页，第77段； |
| Report of the Study Group on
fragmentation of international law, 2006 (A/CN.4/L.682 and Corr.1), para.
478. | 国际法委员会国际法不成体系问题研究组的报告，2006年(A/CN.4/L.682和Corr.1)，第478段。 |
| Dispute regarding Navigational and
Related Rights (see footnote 22 above), p. 243, para. 66. | 关于航行权和相关权利的争端案(见上文脚注22)，第243页，第66段。 |
| WTO Appellate Body Report, United States
— Import Prohibition of Certain Shrimp and Shrimp Products (US — Shrimp),
WT/DS58/AB/R, adopted 6 November 1998, para. 130. | 世贸组织上诉机构的报告，美国－禁止进口特定虾类和虾类制品案(美国－虾案)，WT/DS58/AB/R, 1998年11月6日通过，第130段。 |
| See United Nations Convention on the Law
of the Sea, 1982, United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1833, No. 31363, p. 3,
art. 153, para. 4, and art. 4, para. 4 in annex III. | 见《联合国海洋法公约》，1982年，联合国，《条约汇编》，第1833卷，第31363号，第3页，第一五三条第4款和附件三第四条第4款。 |
| Responsibilities and obligations of
States sponsoring persons and entities with respect to activities in the area
(see footnote 23 above), para. 117. | 担保个人和实体从事“区域”内活动的国家所负责任和义务(见上文脚注23)，见第117段。 |
| Ibid., para. 211. | 同上，第211段。 |
| Tyrer v. the United Kingdom, No. 5856/72,
ECHR Series A, No. 26, para. 31; | Tyrer诉联合王国，第5856/72号，《欧洲人权法院案例汇编》A辑，第26号，第31段； |
| Güzelyurtlu and Others v. Cyprus and
Turkey, No. 36925/07, 4 April 2017, para. 286; | Güzelyurtlu等人诉塞浦路斯和土耳其，第36925/07号，2017年4月4日，第286段； |
| Magyar Helsinki Bizottság v. Hungary
[GC], No. 18030/11, ECHR 2016 (extracts), paras. 138 and 150; | Magyar Helsinki Bizottság诉匈牙利[大审判庭]，第18030/11号，《2016年欧洲人权法院案例汇编》(摘要)，第138和第150段； |
| Biao v. Denmark [GC], No. 38590/10, 24
May 2016, para. 131. | Biao诉丹麦[大审判庭]，第38590/10号，2016年5月24日，第131段。 |
| The Right to Information on Consular
Assistance in the Framework of the Guarantees of the Due Process of Law (see
footnote 53 above), para. 114 (“This guidance is particularly relevant in the
case of international human rights law, which has made great headway thanks
to an evolutive interpretation of international instruments of protection. | 在正当法律程序保障框架内获得领事协助信息的权利(见上文脚注53)，第114段(“这一指导意见与国际人权法问题特别相关，由于对有关保护的国际文书的演进性解释，国际人权法取得了很大进展。 |
| That evolutive interpretation is
consistent with the general rules of treaty interpretation established in the
1969 Vienna Convention. | 演进性解释符合1969年《维也纳公约》确立的条约解释的通则。 |
| Both this Court, in the Advisory Opinion
on the Interpretation of the American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of
Man (1989) and the European Court of Human Rights, in Tyrer v. United Kingdom
(1978), Marckx v. Belgium (1979), Loizidou v. Turkey (1995), among others,
have held that human rights treaties are living instruments whose interpretation
must consider the changes over time and present-day conditions”) (footnotes
omitted); | 本院在关于《美洲关于人的权利和义务宣言》的解释的咨询意见(1989年)中以及欧洲人权法院在Tyrer诉联合王国(1978年)、Marckx诉比利时(1979年)、Loizidou诉土耳其(1995年)等案件中均认定，人权条约是活的文书，其解释必须考虑到随时间流逝而来的变化和今天的条件)”(脚注略)； |
| Arévalo Narváez and Patarroyo Ramirez,
“Treaties over Time and Human Rights …” (see footnote 27 above), pp. 295–331. | Arévalo Narváez和Patarroyo
Ramirez，“条约随时间的演变以及人权…” (见上文脚注27)，第295-331页。 |
| See Arbitration regarding the Iron Rhine
(see footnote 24 above), para. 80: “In the present case it is not a
conceptual or generic term that is in issue, but rather new technical
developments relating to the operation and capacity of the railway”; | 见莱茵铁路仲裁案(见上文脚注24)，见第80段：“在本案中，问题并非是概念还是普通用语问题，而是一个涉及铁路运营和能力的新的技术发展问题”； |
| and also Aegean Sea Continental Shelf
case (see footnote 335 above), p. 32, para. 77; | 另见爱琴海大陆架案(见上文脚注335)，第32页，第77段； |
| Case concerning the delimitation of the
maritime boundary between Guinea-Bissau and Senegal (Guinea-Bissau v.
Senegal), Award, 31 July 1989, UNRIAA, vol. XX (Sales No. E/F.93.V.3), pp.
119–213, at pp. 151–152, para. 85. | 几内亚比绍和塞内加尔海洋疆界划界案(几内亚比绍诉塞内加尔)，裁决，1989年7月31日，《国际仲裁裁决汇编》，第二十卷(出售品编号E/F.93.V.3)，第119-213页，见第151-152页，第85段。 |
| As the Study Group on fragmentation of
international law has phrased it in its 2006 report, “[t]he starting-point
must be … the fact that deciding [the] issue [of evolutive interpretation] is
a matter of interpreting the treaty itself” (see A/CN.4/L.682 and Corr.1,
para. 478). | 正如国际法不成体系问题研究组在2006年的报告中所述，“起点必须是…就此(演进性解释)问题做出决定就是一件解释条约本身的事情”(见A/CN.4/L.682和Corr.1, 第478段)。 |
| Yearbook … 1964, vol. II, document
A/5809, pp. 204–205, para. (15); | 《1964年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/5809号文件，第204-205页，第(15)段； |
| see also para. (13), “[p]aragraph 3
specifies as further authentic elements of interpretation: (a) agreements
between the parties regarding the interpretation of the treaty, and (b) any
subsequent practice in the application of the treaty which clearly
established the understanding of all the parties regarding its
interpretation” (ibid., pp. 203–204); | 另见第(13)段，“第三款具体规定，进一步的权威解释要素有：(a) 关于条约之解释之任何协定，和(b) 嗣后在条约适用方面确定各当事方对条约解释之协定之任何实践”(同上，第203-204页)； |
| on the other hand, Waldock in his third
report on the law of treaties explained that travaux préparatoires are not,
as such, an authentic means of interpretation (ibid., document A/CN.4/167 and
Add.1-3, pp. 58–59, para. (21)). | 另一方面，沃尔多克在关于条约法的第三次报告中解释称，准备工作本身并非作准的解释资料(同上，A/CN.4/167和Add.1-3号文件，第58-59页，第(21)段)。 |
| See also Gardiner, Treaty Interpretation
(above footnote 19), pp. 292–294; | 另见Gardiner,《条约解释》(上文脚注19)，第292-294页； |
| R. Kolb, Interprétation et création du
droit international (see footnote 141 above), pp. 488–501; | R. Kolb, Interprétation et création du
droit international (见上文脚注141)，第488-501页； |
| J. Arato, “Subsequent practice and
evolutive interpretation”, The Law & Practice of International Courts and
Tribunals, vol. 9–3 (2010), pp. 443–494, at pp. 444–445, 465 et seq. | J. Arato,“嗣后实践与演进性解释”，《国际性法院和法庭的法律和实践》，第9-3卷(2010年)，第443-494页，见第444-445页、第465页及以下各页。 |
| Legal Consequences for States of the
Continued Presence of South Africa in Namibia (see footnote 54 above), pp.
30–31, paras. 49–51. | 南非继续留驻纳米比亚对各国的法律后果(见上文脚注54)，第30-31页，第49-51段。 |
| Aegean Sea Continental Shelf case (see
footnote 335 above), p. 31, para. 74. | 爱琴海大陆架案(见上文脚注335)，第31页，第74段。 |
| See also Case concerning the delimitation
of the maritime boundary between Guinea-Bissau and Senegal (see footnote 343
above), pp. 151–152, para. 85. | 另见几内亚比绍与塞内加尔海洋疆界划界案(见上文脚注343)，第151-152页，第85段。 |
| Dispute regarding Navigational and
Related Rights (see footnote 22 above), p. 242, para. 64. | 关于航行权和相关权利的争端案(见上文脚注22)，第242页，第64段。 |
| Ibid., p. 243, paras. 66–68. | 同上，第243页，第66-68段。 |
| Ibid., Separate Opinion of Judge
Skotnikov, p. 283, at p. 285, paras. 9–10. | 同上，斯科特尼科夫法官的个别意见，第283页起，见第285页，第9-10段。 |
| Prosecutor v. Anto Furundžija,
Trial Chamber, Judgment, 10 December 1998, case No. IT-95-17/1-T, ICTY
Judicial Reports 1998, vol. I, paras. 165 et seq. | 检察官诉Anto Furundžija，审判分庭，判决，1998年12月10日，IT-95-17/1-T号案件，前南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭《1998年司法案例汇编》，第1卷，第165段及以下各段。 |
| United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 75,
No. 973, p. 287. | 联合国，《条约汇编》，第75卷，第973号，第287页。 |
| Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions
of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of International
Armed Conflicts (Protocol I), 1977, United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1125,
No. 17512, p. 3. | 《一九四九年八月十二日日内瓦四公约关于保护国际性武装冲突受难者的附加议定书》(《第一议定书》)，1977年，联合国，《条约汇编》，第1125卷，第17512号，第3页。 |
| Protocol Additional to the Geneva
Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of
Non-international Armed Conflicts (Protocol II), 1977, United Nations, Treaty
Series, vol. 1125, No. 17513, p. 609. | 《一九四九年八月十二日日内瓦四公约关于保护非国际性武装冲突受难者的附加议定书》(《第二议定书》)，1977年，联合国，《条约汇编》，第1125卷，第17513号，第609页。 |
| See Prosecutor v. Anto Furundžija
(footnote 353 above), para. 179; | 见检察官诉Anto Furundžija (上文脚注353)，第179段； |
| similarly The Prosecutor v. Alfred
Musema, International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, Trial Chamber I,
Judgment, 27 January 2000, case No. ICTR-96-13-A, paras. 220 et seq., in
particular para. 228. | 相似的还有，检察官诉Alfred Musema, 卢旺达问题国际刑事法庭，第一审判分庭，判决，2000年1月27日，ICTR-96-13-A号案件，第220段及以下各段，尤其是第228段。 |
| See Nolte, “Jurisprudence under special
regimes …” (footnote 25 above), pp. 246 et seq. | 见诺尔特,“特殊制度下…的判例”(上文脚注25)，第246页及以下各页。 |
| Öcalan v. Turkey [GC], No. 46221/99, 12
May 2005, ECHR 2005-IV, para. 163; | Öcalan诉土耳其[大审判庭]，第46221/99号，2005年5月12日，《2005年欧洲人权法院案例汇编》第四卷，第163段； |
| VO v. France [GC], No. 53924/00, 8 July
2004, ECHR 2004-VIII, paras. 4 and 70; | VO诉法国[大审判庭]，第53924/00号，2004年7月8日，《2004年欧洲人权法院案例汇编》第八卷，第4和第70段； |
| Johnston and Others. v. Ireland, No.
9697/82, 18 December 1986, ECHR Series A No. 112, para. 53; | Johnston等人诉爱尔兰，第9697/82号，1986年12月18日，《欧洲人权法院案例汇编》A辑，第112号，第53段； |
| Bayatyan v. Armenia [GC], No. 23459/03, 7
July 2011, para. 63; | Bayatyan诉美国[大审判庭]，第23459/03号，2011年7月7日，第63段； |
| Soering v. the United Kingdom, No.
14038/88, 7 July 1989, ECHR Series A No. 161, para. 103; | Soering诉联合王国，第14038/88号，1989年7月7日，《欧洲人权法院案例汇编》A辑，第161号，第103段； |
| Al-Saadoon and Mufdhi v. the United
Kingdom, No. 61498/08, 4 October 2010, paras. 119–120, ECHR 2010 (extracts); | Al-Saadoon和Mufdhi诉联合王国，第61498/08号，2010年10月4日，第119-120段，《2010年欧洲人权法院案例汇编》(摘要)； |
| Demir and Baykara v. Turkey [GC], No.
34503/97, 12 November 2008, ECHR-2008, para. 76; | Demir和Baykara诉土耳其[大审判庭]，第34503/97号，2008年11月12日，《2008年欧洲人权法院案例汇编》，第76段； |
| Christine Goodwin v. the United Kingdom
[GC] (see footnote 179 above). | Christine Goodwin诉联合王国[大审判庭] (见上文脚注179)。 |
| See, for example, Velásquez-Rodríguez v.
Honduras, Judgment (Merits), 29 July 1988, Inter-Am. Ct. H.R. Series C No. 4,
para. 151; | 例如，见Velásquez-Rodríguez诉洪都拉斯，判决(实质问题)，1988年7月29日，美洲人权法院，C辑，第4号，第151段； |
| The Right to Information on Consular
Assistance In the Framework of the Guarantees of the Due Process of Law (see
footnote 53 above), paras. 130–133 and 137. | 在正当法律程序保障框架内获得领事协助信息的权利(见上文脚注53)，第130-133段和第137段。 |
| Mayagna (Sumo) Awas Tingni Community v.
Nicaragua, Judgment (Merits, Reparations and Costs), 31 August 2001, Series C
No. 79, para. 146; | Mayagna (Sumo) Awas Tingni社区诉尼加拉瓜，判决(实质问题、赔偿和费用)，2001年8月31日，C辑第79号，第146段； |
| also see Interpretation of the American
Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man within the Framework of Article
64 of the American Convention on Human Rights, Advisory Opinion, 14 July
1989, OC10/89, Series A No. 10, para. 38. | 另见关于在《美洲人权公约》第64条框架内对《美洲关于人的权利和义务宣言》的解释，咨询意见，1989年7月14日，OC10/89, A辑第10号，第38段。 |
| Kindler v. Canada, Views, 30 July 1993,
Communication No. 470/1991, Report of the Human Rights Committee, Official
Records of the General Assembly, Forty-eighth Session, Supplement No. 40
(A/48/40), vol. II, annex XII, U. | Kindler诉加拿大，意见，1993年7月30日，第470/1991号来文，人权事务委员会的报告，《大会正式记录，第四十八届会议，补编第40号》(A/48/40)，第二卷，附件十二，U。 |
| Judge v. Canada, Views, 5 August 2002,
Communication No. 829/1998, Official Records of the General Assembly,
Fifty-eighth Session, Supplement No. 40 (A/58/40), vol. II, annex V, G, para.
10.3. | 法官诉加拿大，意见，2002年8月5日，第829/1998号来文，《大会正式记录，第五十八届会议，补编第40号》(A/58/40)，第二卷，附件五，G, 第10.3段。 |
| United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 999,
No. 14668, p. 171. | 联合国，《条约汇编》，第999卷，第14668号，第171页。 |
| Yoon and Choi v. the Republic of Korea,
Views, 3 November 2006, Communication Nos. 1321/2004 and 1322/2004, Official
Records of the General Assembly, Sixty-second Session, Supplement No. 40
(A/62/40), vol. II, annex VII, V, para. 8.4. | Yoon和Choi诉大韩民国，意见，2006年11月3日，第1321/2004和第1322/2004号来文，《大会正式记录，第六十二届会议，补编第40号》(A/62/40)，第二卷，附件七，V, 第8.4段。 |
| See Mihaly International Corporation v.
Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka (United States/Sri Lanka BIT),
Award and Concurring Opinion, 15 March 2002, ICSID Case No. ARB/00/2, ICSID
Reports, vol. 6 (2004), pp. 308 et seq., at p. 317, para. 33; | 见米海利国际公司诉斯里兰卡民主社会主义共和国(美国/斯里兰卡双边投资条约)，裁定和同意意见，2002年3月15日，解决投资争端国际中心案件编号ARB/00/2,《解决投资争端国际中心案例汇编》，第6卷(2004年)，第308页及以下各页，见第317页，第33段； |
| similarly, Autopista Concesionada de
Venezuela, CA v. Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, Decision on Jurisdiction,
27 September 2001, ICSID Case No. ARB/00/5, ibid., p. 419, para. 97. | 相似的还有，Autopista Concesionada de
Venezuela, CA诉委内瑞拉玻利瓦尔共和国，关于管辖权的决定，2001年9月27日，解决投资争端国际中心案件编号ARB/00/5, 同上，第419页，第97段。 |
| United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1343,
No. 22514, p. 89. | 联合国，《条约汇编》，第1343卷，第22514号，第89页。 |
| New Zealand, Court of Appeal, C v. H
[2009] NZCA 100, paras. 175–177 and 195–196 (Baragwanath J.); | 新西兰，上诉法院，C诉H
[2009] NZCA 100, 第175-177段和第195-196段(Baragwanath J.)； |
| see also para. 31 (Chambers J.):
“Revision of the text as drafted and agreed in 1980 is simply impracticable,
given that any revisions would have to be agreed among such a large body of
Contracting States. | 另见第31段(Chambers
J.)：“修改1980年起草和商定的案文肯定不可行，因为任何修改必须经诸多缔约国商定。 |
| Therefore evolutions necessary to keep
pace with social and other trends must be achieved by evolutions in
interpretation and construction. | 因此，必须通过解释和说明的演变，来实现使案文与社会趋势和其他趋势保持一致所必需的演变。 |
| This is a permissible exercise given the
terms of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, which also came in
force in 1980. | 考虑到同样于1980年生效的《维也纳条约法公约》的条款，这是可允许的做法。 |
| Article 31 (3) (b) permits a construction
that reflects ‘any subsequent practice in the application of the treaty which
establishes the agreement of the parties regarding its interpretation’. | 第三十一条第三款(b)项允许反映‘嗣后在条约适用方面确定各当事国对条约解释之协定之任何实践’的说明。 |
| ” Similarly, Canada, Supreme Court,
Pushpanathan v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) [1998] 1 SCR
982, para. 129 (Cory J.). | ”相似的还有加拿大，最高法院，Pushpanathan诉加拿大(公民和移民部部长) [1998] 1 SCR 982, 第129段(Cory J.)。 |
| United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 34,
No. 541, p. 243. | 联合国，《条约汇编》，第34卷，第541号，第243页。 |
| Germany, Federal Constitutional Court,
BVerfGE, vol. 90, p. 286, at pp. 363–364, para. 276; | 德国，联邦宪法法院，BVerfGE, 第90卷，第286页起，见第363-364页，第276段； |
| ibid., vol. 104, p. 151, at pp. 206–207. | 同上，第104卷，第151页起，见第206-207页。 |
| Convention for the Unification of Certain
Rules regarding International Transport, League of Nations, Treaty Series,
vol. CXXXVII, p. 11. | 《统一国际运输某些规则的公约》，国际联盟，《条约汇编》，第一百三十七卷，第11页。 |
| United States of America, Supreme Court,
Eastern Airlines, Inc. v. Floyd et al., 499 U.S. 530, pp. 546–549; | 美利坚合众国，最高法院，美国东方航空公司诉Floyd等人，499 U.S. 530, 第546-549页； |
| see also United Kingdom, House of Lords,
King v. Bristow Helicopters Ltd. (Scotland) [2002] UKHL 7, paras. 98 and 125
(Lord Hope). | 另见联合王国，上议院，国王诉Bristow直升飞机公司(苏格兰) [2002] UKHL 7, 第98和第125段(Hope勋爵)。 |
| In the case concerning the Maritime
Dispute (Peru v. Chile), the Court privileged the practice that was closer to
the date of entry into force, Maritime Dispute (Peru v. Chile), Judgment, I.C.J.
Reports 2014, p. 3, at p. 50, para. 126. | 在海洋争端案(秘鲁诉智利)中，法院优先采纳更接近生效日期的实践，海洋争端案(秘鲁诉智利)，判决，《2014年国际法院案例汇编》，第3页起，见第50页，第126段。 |
| Murphy, “The relevance of subsequent
agreement and subsequent practice …” (footnote 260 above), p. 91. | Murphy,“嗣后协定和嗣后实践…的作用”(见上文脚注260)，第91页。 |
| See, for example, Maritime Delimitation
in the Area between Greenland and Jan Mayen, Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1993,
p. 38, at p. 55, para. 38; | 例如，见格陵兰和扬马延间区域海洋划界案，判决，《1993年国际法院案例汇编》，第38页起，见第55页，第38段； |
| Question of the tax regime governing pensions
paid to retired UNESCO officials residing in France (see footnote 153 above),
p. 231, at p. 259, para. 74; | “关于居住在法国的教科文组织退休官员所领退休金的征税制度问题”(见上文脚注153)，第231页起，见第259页，第74段； |
| WTO Panel Report, United States —
Continued Existence and Application of Zeroing Methodology, WT/DS350/R,
adopted 19 February 2009, WTO Appellate Body Report, United States —
Subsidies on Upland Cotton (US — Upland Cotton), WT/DS267/AB/R, adopted 21
March 2005, para. 625. | 世贸组织专家组报告，美国“归零”法的继续存在和适用，WT/DS350/R, 2009年2月19日通过，世贸组织上诉机构报告，美国－高地棉花补贴案(美国－高地棉花案)，WT/DS267/AB/R, 2005年3月21日通过，第625段。 |
| Plama Consortium Limited v. Republic of
Bulgaria, ICSID Case No. ARB/03/24, Decision on Jurisdiction, 8 February
2005, ICSID Review — Foreign Investment Law Journal, vol. 20, No. 1 (Spring
2005), p. 262, at pp. 323–324, para. 195. | Plama联合有限公司诉保加利亚共和国，解决投资争端国际中心案件编号ARB/03/24，关于管辖权的裁决，2005年2月8日，《解决投资争端国际中心综述－外国投资法期刊》，第20卷，第1号(2005年春)，第262页起，见第323-324页，第195段。 |
| See, for example, Cossey v. the United
Kingdom, No. 10843/84, 27 September 1990, ECHR Series A No. 184, para. 40; | 例如，见Cossey诉联合王国，第10843/84号，1990年9月27日，《欧洲人权法院案例汇编》A辑，第184号，第40段； |
| Tyrer v. the United Kingdom, No. 5856/72,
ECHR Series A, No. 26, para. 31; | Tyrer诉联合王国，第5856/72号，《欧洲人权法院案例汇编》A辑，第26号，第31段； |
| Norris v. Ireland, No. 10581/83, 26
October 1988, ECHR Series A No. 142, para. 46. | Norris诉爱尔兰，第10581/83号，1988年10月26日，《欧洲人权法院案例汇编》A辑，第142号，第46段。 |
| Convention for the Protection of Human
Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (Rome, 4 November 1950), United Nations,
Treaty Series, vol. 213, No. 2889, p. 221. | 《欧洲保护人权与基本自由公约》(1950年11月4日，罗马)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第213卷，第2889号，第221页。 |
| Rantsev v. Cyprus and Russia, No.
25965/04, 7 January 2010, ECHR 2010 (extracts), para. 285; | Rantsev诉塞浦路斯和俄罗斯，第25965/04号，2010年1月7日，《2010年欧洲人权法院案例汇编》(摘要)，第285段； |
| see also paras. 273–274. | 另见第273-274段。 |
| Chapman v. the United Kingdom [GC], No.
27238/95, 18 January 2001, ECHR 2001-I, para. 93. | Chapman诉联合王国[大审判庭]，第27238/95号，2001年1月18日，《2001年欧洲人权法院案例汇编》第一卷，第93段。 |
| Ibid., para. 94. | 同上，第94段。 |
| Pulp Mills on the River Uruguay (see
footnote 22 above), p. 63, para. 131. | 乌拉圭河沿岸纸浆厂案(见上文脚注22)，第63页，第131段。 |
| See draft conclusion 4, para. 2, above. | 见上文结论草案4, 第2段。 |
| WTO Appellate Body Report, Japan —
Alcoholic Beverages II, WT/DS8/AB/R, WT/DS10/AB/R and WT/DS11/AB/R, adopted on
1 November 1996, sect. E, pp. 12–13 (footnotes omitted). | 世贸组织上诉机构报告，日本－酒精饮料案(二)，WT/DS8/AB/R、WT/DS10/AB/R和WT/DS11/AB/R, 1996年11月1日通过，E部分，第12-13页(脚注略)。 |
| Kasikili/Sedudu Island (see footnote 22
above), pp. 1075–1076, paras. 47–50 and p. 1087, para. 63; | 卡西基里/塞杜杜岛案(见上文脚注22)，第1075-1076页，第47-50段和第1087页，第63段； |
| Territorial Dispute (see footnote 22
above), pp. 34–37, paras. 66–71. | 领土争端案(见上文脚注22)，第34-37页，第66-71段。 |
| Iran-United States Claims Tribunal,
Interlocutory Award No. ITL 83-B1-FT (Counterclaim) (see footnote 156 above),
p. 77, at pp. 116–126, paras. 109–133. | 伊朗－美国索赔法庭，第ITL 83-B1-FT号中间裁决(反诉)(见上文脚注156)，第77页起，见第116-126页，第109-133段。 |
| Soering v. the United Kingdom, No.
14038/88, 7 July 1989, ECHR Series A No. 161, para. 103; | Soering诉联合王国，第14038/88号，1989年7月7日，《欧洲人权法院案例汇编》A辑，第161号，第103段； |
| Loizidou v. Turkey (preliminary
objections), No. 15318/89, 23 March 1995, ECHR Series A No. 310, paras. 73
and 79–82; | Loizidou诉土耳其(初步反对意见)，第15318/89号，1995年3月23日，《欧洲人权法院案例汇编》A辑，第310号，第73段和第79-82段； |
| Banković et al. v.
Belgium and 16 other contracting States (dec.) [GC], No. 52207/99, ECHR
2001-XII, paras. 56 and 62; | Bankovic等人诉比利时及16个其他缔约国(裁决)[大审判庭]，第52207/99号，《2001年欧洲人权法院案例汇编》第十二卷，第56和第62段； |
| concerning the jurisprudence of ICSID
tribunals, see O.K. Fauchald, “The Legal Reasoning of ICSID Tribunals — An
Empirical Analysis”, European Journal of International Law, vol. 19, No. 2
(2008), p. 301, at, p. 345; | 关于解决投资争端国际中心的法庭的判例，见O.K. Fauchald，“解决投资争端国际中心法庭的法律推理－实证分析”，《欧洲国际法杂志》，第19卷，第2期(2008年)，第301页起，见第345页； |
| see also A. Roberts, “Power and persuasion
in investment treaty interpretation: the dual role of States”, American
Journal of International Law, vol. 104 (2010), pp. 207–215. | 另见A. Roberts,“投资条约解释中的实力和说服：国家的双重角色”，《美国国际法期刊》，第104卷(2010年)，第207-215页。 |
| Sinclair, The Vienna Convention … (see
footnote 20 above), p. 137; | Sinclair,《维也纳…公约》(见上文脚注20)，第137页； |
| see also Yasseen, “L’interprétation des
traités…” (see footnote 20 above), pp. 48–49; | 另见Yasseen,“…对条约进行解释”(见上文脚注20)，第48-49页； |
| whilst “commune” is taken from the work
of the International Law Commission, “d’une certaine constance” and
“concordante” are conditions that Yasseen derives through further reasoning; | “共同的”一词来自国际法委员会的工作，而“一致的”和“协调的”则是Yasseen进一步论述得出的条件； |
| see Yearbook … 1966, vol. II, document
A/6309/Rev.1, pp. 98–99, paras. 17–18 and p. 221–222, para. 15. | 见《1966年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/6309/Rev.1号文件，第98-99页，第17-18段，以及第221-222页，第15段。 |
| Sinclair, The Vienna Convention … (see
footnote 20 above); | Sinclair,《维也纳…公约》(见上文脚注20)； |
| Iran-United States Claims Tribunal,
Interlocutory Award No. ITL 83-B1-FT (Counterclaim) (see footnote 156 above),
p. 77, at p. 118, para. 114. | 伊朗－美国索赔法庭，第ITL 83-B1-FT号中间裁决(反诉)(见上文脚注156)，第77页起，见第118页，第114段。 |
| Case concerning a dispute between
Argentina and Chile concerning the Beagle Channel, 18 February 1977, UNRIAA,
vol. XXI, part II, pp. 53–264, at p. 187, para. 169; | 阿根廷和智利比格尔海峡划界争端案，1977年2月18日，《国际仲裁裁决汇编》，第二十一卷，第二部分，第53-264页，见第187页，第169段； |
| J.-P. Cot, “La conduite subséquente des
parties a un traité”, Revue générale de droit international public, vol. 70,
1966, pp. 644–647 (“valeur probatoire”); | J.-P Cot,“条约缔约方的嗣后实践”，《国际公法总期刊》，第70卷，1966年，第644-647页(“证明价值”)； |
| Distefano, “La pratique subséquente …”
(see footnote 191 above), p. 46; | Distefano,“…嗣后实践”(见上文脚注191)，第46页； |
| Dörr, “Article 31 …” (see footnote 61
above), p. 598, para. 80; | Dörr,“第三十一条…”(见上文脚注61)，第598页，第80段； |
| see also the oral argument before the
International Court of Justice in Maritime Dispute (Peru v. Chile), CR
2012/33, pp. 32–36, paras. 7–19 (Wood), available from
www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/137/17218.pdf and CR 2012/36, pp. 13–18, paras.
6–21 (Wordsworth), available from www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/137/17234.pdf. | 另见在国际法院海洋争端案(秘鲁诉智利)的口头抗辩，CR 2012/33, 第32-36页，第7-19段(Wood)，可查阅www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/137/17218.pdf，以及CR 2012/36, 第13-18页，第6-21段(Wordsworth)，可查阅www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/137/17234.pdf。 |
| WTO Appellate Body Report, EC — Computer
Equipment, WT/DS62/AB/R, WT/DS67/AB/R and WT/DS68/AB/R, 22 June 1998, para.
93. | 世贸组织上诉机构报告，欧共体－计算机设备案，WT/DS62/AB/R、WT/DS67/AB/R和WT/DS68/AB/R, 1998年6月22日，第93段。 |
| See Yearbook … 1966, vol. II, document
A/6309/Rev.1, p. 222, para. (15); | 见《1966年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/6309/Rev.1号文件，第222页，第(15)段； |
| Cot, “La conduite subséquente des parties
…” (see footnote 390 above), p. 652. | Cot,“…缔约方的嗣后实践”(见上文脚注390)，第652页。 |
| In practice, a one-off practice will
often not be sufficient to establish an agreement of the parties regarding a
treaty’s interpretation, as a general rule, however, subsequent practice
under article 31, paragraph 3 (b), does not require any repetition but only
an agreement regarding the interpretation. | 在实践中，作为一般性规则，一次性的做法常常不足以确定缔约方就条约解释达成协定，但是，第三十一条第三款(b)项所指的嗣后实践没有要求任何重复，只是要求就解释达成协定。 |
| The likelihood of an agreement
established by an one-off practice thus depends on the act and the treaty in
question, see E. Lauterpacht, “The development of the law of international
organization by the decisions of international tribunals”, Recueil des cours
… 1976, vol. 152, pp. 377–466, at p. 457; | 因此，一次性做法确立协定的可能性就取决于有关的行为及条约，见E.
Lauterpacht,“国际性法庭的裁决带来的国际组织法律的发展”，《1976年…学院讲义》，第152卷，第377-466页，见第457页； |
| Linderfalk, On the Interpretation of
Treaties (footnote 67 above), p. 166; | Linderfalk,《论条约的解释》(见上文脚注67)，第166页； |
| C.F. Amerasinghe, “Interpretation of
texts in open international organizations”, British Yearbook of International
Law 1994, vol. 65, p. 175, at p. 199; | C.F. Amerasinghe,“公开的国际组织文件的解释”，《1994年英国国际法年鉴》，第65卷，第175页起，见第199页； |
| Villiger argues in favour of a certain
frequency, but emphasizes that the important point is the establishment of an
agreement, Villiger, Commentary … (see footnote 37 above), p. 431, para. 22. | Villiger支持要有一定的次数要求，但也强调，最重要的一点是确立协定，Villiger, 《…评注》(见上文脚注37)，第431页，第22段。 |
| Yasseen and Sinclair write that practice
cannot “in general” be established by one single act, Yasseen,
“L’interprétation des traités …” (see footnote 20 above), p. 47; | Yasseen和Sinclair 写道，“通常”一次性的行为不能够构成实践，Yasseen,“…对条约进行解释”(见上文脚注20)，第47页； |
| Sinclair, The Vienna Convention … (see
footnote 20 above), p. 137; | Sinclair,《维也纳…公约》(见上文脚注20)，第137页； |
| cf. Nolte, “Subsequent agreements and
subsequent practice of States …” (see footnote 62 above), p. 310. | 参阅诺尔特,“…国家嗣后协定和嗣后实践”(见上文脚注62)，第310页。 |
| WTO Appellate Body Report, EC — Chicken
Cuts, WT/DS269/AB/R and Corr.1, and WT/DS286/AB/R and Corr.1, adopted 27
September 2005, para. 297. | 世贸组织上诉机构报告，欧共体—鸡块案，WT/DS269/AB/R和Corr.1, 以及WT/DS286/AB/R和Corr.1, 2005年9月27日通过，第297段。 |
| WTO Appellate Body Report, EC — Computer
Equipment, WT/DS62/AB/R, WT/DS67/AB/R and WT/DS68/AB/R, adopted 22 June 1998,
para. 92 (footnote omitted and original emphasis). | 世贸组织上诉机构报告，欧共体—计算机设备案，WT/DS62/AB/R、WT/DS67/AB/R和WT/DS68/AB/R, 1998年6月22日，第92段(脚注略，强调系原文所有)。 |
| EC — Chicken Cuts (see footnote 394
above), para. 290 (footnote omitted). | 欧共体—鸡块案(见上文脚注394)，第290段(脚注略)。 |
| Ibid., para. 307 (footnote omitted and
original emphasis); | 同上，第307段(脚注略，强调系原文所有)； |
| cf. also EC — Computer Equipment (see
footnote 395 above), para. 95. | 另参阅欧共体—计算机设备案(见上文脚注395)，第95段。 |
| EC — Computer Equipment (see footnote 395
above), para. 93 (original emphasis). | 欧共体—计算机设备案(见上文脚注395)，第93段(强调系原文所有)。 |
| Philip Morris Brands Sàrl, Philip Morris
Products S.A. and Abal Hermanos S.A. v. Oriental Republic of Uruguay (see
footnote 136 above), para. 476. | 菲利普莫里斯品牌公司、菲利普莫里斯产品公司和阿瓦尔埃尔马诺斯公司诉乌拉圭东岸共和国(见上文脚注136)，第476段。 |
| See commentary to draft conclusion 4,
para. (10), above. | 见上文结论草案4的评注第(10)段。 |
| See draft conclusions 3 and 4, para. 3,
above. | 见上文结论草案3和结论草案4第3段。 |
| See Crawford, “A consensualist
interpretation of article 31 (3) …” (footnote 224 above), p. 30: “There is no
reason to think that the word ‘agreement’ in para. (b) has any different
meaning as compared to the meaning it has in para. (a).” | 见Crawford,“对…第三十一条第三款的合意主义解释”(上文脚注224)，第30页：“没有理由认为(b)项中的‘协定’一词与(a)项中的协定一词的含义有任何的不同。 ” |
| See commentary to draft conclusion 2,
paras. (12)–(15), above; | 见上文结论草案2的评注，第(12)-(15)段； |
| article 31 must be “read as a whole” and
conceives of the process of interpretation as “a single combined operation”
and is “not laying down a legal hierarchy of norms for the interpretation of
treaties”, Yearbook … 1966, vol. II, document A/6309/Rev.1, p. 219, para.
(8), and p. 220, para. (9). | 对第三十一条必须作“整体理解”，该条将解释进程视为“一个综合的行动”，该条并“未确立一个解释条约的法律等级制度”，《1966年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/6309/Rev.1号文件，第219页第(8)段和第220页第(9)段。 |
| Case concerning the question whether the
re-evaluation of the German Mark in 1961 and 1969 constitutes a case for
application of the clause in article 2 (e) of Annex I A of the 1953 Agreement
on German External Debts between Belgium, France, Switzerland, the United
Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of
America on the one hand and the Federal Republic of Germany on the other,
Award of 16 May 1980, UNRIAA, vol. XIX, part III, pp. 67–145, pp. 103–104,
para. 31; | 关于1961年和1969年德国马克升值是否构成适用1953年比利时、法国、瑞士、大不列颠及北爱尔兰联合王国和美利坚合众国与德意志联邦共和国关于德国外债的协定附件一A第2条(e)项条款问题案，1980年5月16日的裁决，《国际仲裁裁决汇编》，第十九卷，第三部分，第67-145页，见第103-104页，第31段； |
| see also EC — Computer Equipment
(footnote 395 above), para. 95; | 另见欧共体－计算机设备案(上文脚注395)，第95段； |
| Case concerning the delimitation of the
maritime boundary between Guinea and Guinea-Bissau (footnote 343 above), p.
175, para. 66. | 几内亚比绍和塞内加尔海洋疆界划界案(上文脚注343)，第175页，第66段。 |
| See commentary to draft conclusion 7,
paras. (12)–(15), above. | 见上文结论草案7的评注，第(12)-(15)段。 |
| Question of the tax regime governing
pensions paid to retired UNESCO officials residing in France (see footnote
153 above), p. 258, para. 70; | 关于居住在法国的教科文组织退休官员所领退休金的征税制度问题(见上文脚注153)，第258页，第70段； |
| Kolb, “La modification d’un traité …” (see footnote 309 above), p. 16. | Kolb,“La modification d’un traité …”(见上文脚注309)，第16页。 |
| Case concerning a dispute between
Argentina and Chile concerning the Beagle Channel, 18 February 1977, UNRIAA,
vol. XXI, part II, pp. 53–264, at p. 188, para. 171. | 阿根廷和智利比格尔海峡争端案，1977年2月18日，《国际仲裁裁决汇编》，第二十一卷，第二部分，第53-264页，见第188页，第171段。 |
| Loizidou v. Turkey (preliminary
objections), No. 15318/89, 23 March 1995, ECHR Series A No. 310, paras. 79
and 81. | Loizidou诉土耳其(初步反对意见)，第15318/89号，1995年3月23日，《欧洲人权法院案例汇编》A辑，第310号，第79和第81段。 |
| Ibid., paras. 80 and 82; | 同上，第80和第82段； |
| the case did not concern the
interpretation of a particular human right, but rather the question of
whether a State was bound by the Convention at all. | 该案不涉及对具体人权的解释，而是涉及一国是否受《公约》约束的问题。 |
| The more restrictive jurisprudence of the
WTO Dispute Settlement Body suggests that different interpreters may evaluate
matters differently, see United States — Laws, Regulations and Methodology
for Calculating Dumping Margins (Zeroing), WT/DS294/R, adopted 9 May 2006,
para. 7.218: “even if it were established conclusively that all the 76
Members referred to by the European Communities have adopted a [certain]
practice … this would only mean that a considerable number of WTO Members
have adopted an approach different from that of the United States. | 世贸组织争端解决机构较严格的判例认为，不同的解释者可能对问题作出不同的评价，见美国－用于计算倾销幅度的法律、法规和方法(归零法)案，WT/DS294/R,
2006年5月9日通过，第7.218段：“即使已经确凿地确认，欧洲共同体所指全部76个成员国都采取了一种[特定的]实践…，这也只能意味着有不少世贸组织成员采取了与美国不同的办法。 |
| … We note that one third party in this
proceeding submitted arguments contesting the view of the European
Communities”. | …我们注意到，在本诉讼中，有一个第三方提交了论述，反驳欧洲共同体的观点”。 |
| See articles 2, para. 1 (a), 3, 24, para.
2, 39–41, 58 and 60. | 见第二条第一款(a)项、第三条、第二十四条第二款、第三十九至第四十一条、第五十八条和第六十条。 |
| See commentary to draft conclusion 4,
para. (5), above; | 见上文结论草案4的评注，第(5)段； |
| confirmed by the Permanent Court of
Arbitration in the Bay of Bengal Maritime Boundary Arbitration (Bangladesh v.
India), Award of 7 July 2014, available at
https://pcacases.com/web/sendAttach/383, p. 47, para. 165; | 常设仲裁法院在孟加拉湾海洋边界仲裁案(孟加拉国诉印度)中确认了这一点，2014年7月7日的裁决，可查阅www.pcacases.com/web/sendAttach/383，第47页，第165段； |
| Yasseen, “L’interprétation des traités …”
(see footnote 20 above), p. 45; | Yasseen,“…对条约进行解释”(见上文脚注20)，第45页； |
| Distefano, “La pratique subséquente …” (see
footnote 191 above), p. 47. | Distefano,“…嗣后实践”(见上文脚注191)，第47页。 |
| See commentary to draft conclusion 4,
para. (5), above; | 见上文结论草案4的评注，第(5)段； |
| Gardiner, Treaty Interpretation (see
footnote 19 above), pp. 231–232 and 243–247; | Gardiner,《条约解释》(见上文脚注19)，第231-232页和第243-247页； |
| Aust, Modern Treaty Law and Practice (see
footnote 142 above), p. 213; | Aust,《现代条约法和实践》(见上文脚注142)，第213页； |
| Dörr, “Article 31 …” (see footnote 61
above), p. 594, para. 75; | Dörr,“第三十一条…”(见上文脚注61)，第594页，第75段； |
| R. Gardiner, “The Vienna Convention rules
on treaty interpretation”, in The Oxford Guide to Treaties, D.B. Hollis, ed.
(Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2012), pp. 475 and 483. | R. Gardiner,“《维也纳公约》的条约解释规则”，载于D. B. Hollis 所编《牛津条约指南》(牛津，牛津大学出版社，2012年)，第475和第483页。 |
| See commentary to draft conclusion 4,
para. (10), above; | 见上文结论草案4的评注，第(10)段； |
| a “common act” may also consist of an
exchange of letters, see European Molecular Biology Laboratory Arbitration
(EMBL v. Germany), 29 June 1990, International Law Reports, vol. 105 (1997),
p. 1, at pp. 54–56; | 一次“共同的行动”也可包括交换信件，见欧洲分子生物实验室仲裁案(欧洲分子生物实验室诉德国)，1990年6月29日，《国际法案例汇编》，第105卷(1997年)，第1页起，见第54-56页； |
| Fox, “Article 31 (3) (a) and (b) …”
(footnote 62 above), p. 63; | Fox,“…第三十一条第三款(a)项和(b)项…”(上文脚注62)，第63页； |
| Gardiner, Treaty Interpretation (footnote
19 above), pp. 248–249. | Gardiner,《条约解释》(上文脚注19)，第248-249页。 |
| Aust, “The theory and practice of
informal international instruments” (see footnote 86 above), pp. 789–790. | Aust,“非正式国际文书的理论与实践”(见上文脚注86)，第789-790页。 |
| Kasikili/Sedudu Island (see footnote 22
above), p. 1094, para. 74 (“occupation of the island by the Masubia tribe”)
and pp. 1077, para. 55 (“Eason Report”, which “appears never to have been
made known to Germany”); | 卡西基里/塞杜杜岛案(见上文脚注22)，第1094页，第74段 (“马苏比亚部落对该岛的占领”) 和第1077页，第55段 (“伊森报告”，“德国似乎从不知晓这份报告”)； |
| Dörr, “Article 31 …” (see footnote 61
above), pp. 602–603, para. 89. | Dörr, “第三十一条…”(见上文脚注61)，第602-603页，第89段。 |
| See commentary to draft conclusion 4,
para. (6), above; | 见上文结论草案4的评注，第(6)段； |
| P. Gautier, “Non-binding agreements”, in
Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law (www.mpepil.com), para.
14; | P. Gautier,“非约束性协定”，载于《马克斯·普朗克国际公法百科全书》(www.mpepil.com)，第14段； |
| Benatar, “From probative value to
authentic interpretation …” (see footnote 62 above), pp. 194–195; | Benatar,“从实证价值到作准解释…”(见上文脚注62)，第194-195页； |
| Aust, Modern Treaty Law and Practice (see
footnote 142 above), p. 213; | Aust,《现代条约法和实践》(见上文脚注142)，第213页； |
| Gardiner, Treaty Interpretation (see
footnote 19 above), p. 244; | Gardiner,《条约解释》(见上文脚注19)，第244页； |
| see also Nolte, “Subsequent agreements
and subsequent practice of States …” (footnote 62 above), p. 307, at p. 375. | 另见诺尔特,“…国家嗣后协定和嗣后实践”(上文脚注62)，第307页起，见第375页。 |
| See articles 2, para. 1 (a), 3, 24, para.
2, 39–41, 58 and 60. | 见第二条第一款(a)项、第三条、第二十四条第二款、第三十九至第四十一条、第五十八和第六十条。 |
| See Yearbook … 1966, vol. II, document
A/6309/Rev.1, p. 222, para. (15). | 见《1966年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/6309/Rev.1号文件，第222页，第(15)段。 |
| Case concerning a dispute between
Argentina and Chile concerning the Beagle Channel, 18 February 1977, UNRIAA,
vol. XXI, part II, pp. 53–264, at p. 187, para. 169; | 阿根廷和智利比格尔海峡争端案，1977年2月18日，《国际仲裁裁决汇编》，第二十一卷，第二部分，第53-264页，见第187页，第169段； |
| The Question whether the re-evaluation of
the German Mark in 1961 and 1969 constitutes a case for application of the
clause in article 2 (e) of Annex I A of the 1953 Agreement on German External
Debts between Belgium, France, Switzerland, the United Kingdom of Great
Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America on the one hand
and the Federal Republic of Germany on the other, 16 May 1980, ibid., vol.
XIX, pp. 67–145, pp. 103–104, para. 31; | 关于1961年和1969年德国马克升值是否构成适用1953年比利时、法国、瑞士、大不列颠及北爱尔兰联合王国和美利坚合众国与德意志联邦共和国关于德国外债的协定附件一A第2条(e)项条款问题案，1980年5月16日，同上，第十九卷，第67-145页，见103-104页，第31段； |
| Karl, Vertrag und spätere Praxis … (see
footnote 75 above), pp. 190–195; | Karl, Vertrag und spätere Praxis…(见上文脚注75)，第190-195页； |
| Kolb, “La modification d’un traité …” (see footnote 309 above), pp. 25–26; | Kolb,“La modification d’un traité …”(见上文脚注309)，第25-26页； |
| Linderfalk, On the Interpretation of
Treaties (see footnote 67 above), pp. 169–171. | Linderfalk,《论条约的解释》(见上文脚注67)，第169-171页。 |
| Official Records of the United Nations
Conference on the Law of Treaties … (A/CONF.39/11) (see footnote 193 above),
thirty-first meeting, 19 April 1968, p. 169, at para. 59 (Australia); | 《联合国条约法会议正式记录…》(A/CONF.39/11)(见上文脚注193)，第31次会议，1968年4月19日，第169页，见第59段(澳大利亚)； |
| P. Gautier, “Les accords informels et la
Convention de Vienne sur le droit des traités entre États”, in Droit du
pouvoir, pouvoir du droit: mélanges offerts à Jean Salmon, N. Angelet, ed.
(Brussels, Bruylant, 2007), pp. 425–454, at pp. 430–431 (“La lettre [a] du
paragraphe 3 fait référence à̀ un accord interprétatif
et l’on peut supposer que le terme ‘accord’ est ici utilisé dans un sens générique, qui ne correspond
pas nécessairement au ‘traité’ défini à l’article 2
de la convention de Vienne. | P. Gautier,“非正式协定与《维也纳条约法公约》”，载于N. Angelet所编《权利法与法权：Jean Salmon纪念文集》(布鲁塞尔，Bruylant, 2007年)，第425-454页，见第430-431页(“第三款所述系指解释性的协定，此处使用‘协定’是取其广义的意义，不一定与《维也纳公约》第二条定义的‘条约’相符。 |
| Ainsi, l’accord interprétatif ultérieur
pourrait être un accord verbal, voire un accord politique”). | 因此，解释性协定最终有可能是一个口头协定甚至是政治协定”)。 |
| See Gautier, “Non-binding agreements”
(footnote 417 above), para. 14; | 见Gautier,“非约束性协定”(上文脚注417)，第14段； |
| Aust, Modern Treaty Law and Practice (see
footnote 142 above), pp. 211, 213. | Aust,《现代条约法和实践》(见上文脚注142)，第211、213页。 |
| This terminology follows the commentary
of guideline 1.2. (Definition of interpretative declarations) of the
Commission’s Guide to Practice on Reservations to Treaties (see Official
Records of the General Assembly, Sixty-sixth Session, Supplement No. 10,
A/66/10/Add.1, paras. (18) and (19)). | 这一词汇遵循委员会《对条约的保留实践指南》中准则1.2.(解释性声明的定义)的评注(见《大会正式记录，第六十六届会议，补编第10号》，A/66/10/Add.1, 第(18)和(19)段)。 |
| See Yearbook … 1966, vol. II, document
A/6309/Rev.1, pp. 221–222, paras. (15) and (16) (uses of the term
“understanding” both in the context of what became article 31, para. 3 (a),
as well as what became article 31, para. 3 (b)). | 见《1966年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/6309/Rev.1号文件，第221-222页，第(15)和(16)段(在日后成为第三十一条第三款(a)项和第三十一条第三款(b)项的文字中均使用了“谅解”一语)。 |
| United States-United Kingdom Arbitration
concerning Heathrow Airport User Charges, Award on the First Question, 30
November 1992, UNRIAA, vol. XXIV (Sales No. E/F.04.V.18), pp. 1–359, at p.
131, para. 6.7; | 美国－联合王国希斯罗机场用户诉讼案仲裁，关于第一个问题的裁决，1992年11月30日，《国际仲裁裁决汇编》，第二十四卷(出售品编号：E/F.04.V.18)，第1-359页，见第131页，第6.7段； |
| Aust, “The theory and practice of
informal international instruments” (see footnote 86 above), pp. 787 and 807; | Aust,“非正式国际文书的理论和实践”(见上文脚注86)，第787和第807页； |
| Linderfalk, On the Interpretation of
Treaties (see footnote 67 above), p. 173; | Linderfalk,《论条约的解释》(见上文脚注67)，第173页； |
| Hafner, “Subsequent agreements and
practice …” (see footnote 273 above), pp. 110–113; | Hafner,“嗣后协定和实践…”(见上文脚注273)，第110-113页； |
| Gautier, “Les accords informels et la
Convention de Vienne …” (see footnote 421 above), p. 434. | Gautier,“非正式协定与《维也纳条约法公约》”(见上文脚注421)，第434页。 |
| For example, “pattern implying the
agreement of the parties regarding its interpretation” (WTO Appellate Body
Report, Japan — Alcoholic Beverages II, WT/DS8/AB/R, WT/DS10/AB/R and
WT/DS11/AB/R, adopted 1 November 1996, section E, p. 13); | 例如，“说明缔约方就解释达成协定的模式”(世贸组织上诉机构报告，日本—酒精饮料案(二)，WT/DS8/AB/R、WT/DS10/AB/R和WT/DS11/AB/R, 1996年11月1日通过，E节，第13页)； |
| or “pattern … must imply agreement on the
interpretation of the relevant provision” (WTO Panel Report, European
Communities and its member States — Tariff Treatment of Certain Information
Technology Products, WT/DS375/R, WT/DS376/R and WT/DS377/R, adopted 21
September 2010, para. 7.558); | 或者“模式…必须暗示就相关条款的解释达成协定”(世贸组织专家组报告，欧洲共同体及其成员国—某些信息技术产品的关税待遇案，WT/DS375/R、WT/DS376/R和WT/DS377/R, 2010年9月21日通过，第7.558段)； |
| or “practice [that] reflects an agreement
as to the interpretation” (Iran-United States Claims Tribunal, Interlocutory
Award No. ITL 83-B1-FT (Counterclaim) (see footnote 156 above), p. 77, at p.
119, para. 116); | 或“体现就解释达成协定的实践”(伊朗－美国索赔法庭，第ITL 83-B1-FT号中间裁决(反诉)(见上文脚注156)，第77页起，见第119页，第116段)； |
| or that “State practice” was “indicative
of a lack of any apprehension on the part of the Contracting States” (Banković et
al. v. Belgium and 16 other contracting States (dec.) [GC], No. 52207/99,
ECHR 2001-XII, para. 62); | 或“国家实践”“表明缔约国没有任何谅解”(Bankovic等人诉比利时及16个其他缔约国(裁决)[大审判庭]，第52207/99号，《2001年欧洲人权法院案例汇编》第十二卷，第62段)； |
| “[T]he Tribunal is not bound by the views
of either State Party. | “本庭不受任一方缔约国意见的约束。 |
| Although the Tribunal must ‘take into
account’ any subsequent agreement between the State Parties pursuant to
Article 31(3)(a) of the [1969 Vienna Convention], the proper interpretation
of Article 10.18 and how it should be applied to the facts of this case are
tasks which reside exclusively with this Tribunal”: The Renco Group Inc. v.
Republic of Peru (see footnote 29 above), para. 156. | 虽然依照[1969年《维也纳公约》]第三十一条第三款(a)项的规定，本庭必须‘考虑’缔约国之间的任何嗣后协定，但如何妥善解释第10.18条及如何将其适用于本案事实，完全是本庭的任务”：Renco集团公司诉秘鲁共和国(见上文脚注29)，第156段。 |
| United States-United Kingdom Arbitration
concerning Heathrow Airport (see footnote 425 above), p. 131, para. 6.7; | 美国－联合王国希斯罗机场诉讼案仲裁(见上文脚注425)，第131页，第6.7段； |
| see also Arbitration regarding the Iron
Rhine (see footnote 24 above), p. 98, para. 157. | 另见莱茵铁路案仲裁(见上文脚注24)，第98页，第157段。 |
| Yearbook … 1966, vol. II, document
A/6309/Rev.1, p. 222, para. (15). | 《1966年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/6309/Rev.1号文件，第222页，第(15)段。 |
| Case concerning the Temple of Preah
Vihear (see footnote 110 above), p. 23. | 柏威夏寺案(见上文脚注110)，第23页。 |
| See also Oil Platforms (Islamic Republic
of Iran v. United States of America), Preliminary Objection, Judgment, I.C.J.
Reports 1996, p. 803, p. 815, para. 30; | 另见石油平台案(伊朗伊斯兰共和国诉美利坚合众国)，初步反对意见，判决，《1996年国际法院案例汇编》，第803页起，见第815页，第30段； |
| Military and Paramilitary Activities in
and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States of America), Jurisdiction
and Admissibility, Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1984, p. 392, at p. 410, para.
39; | 尼加拉瓜境内和针对尼加拉瓜的军事活动和准军事活动案(尼加拉瓜诉美利坚合众国)，管辖权和可否受理问题，判决，《1984年国际法院案例汇编》，第392页起，见第410页，第39段； |
| Prosecutor v. Anto Furundžija
(see footnote 353 above), paras. 165 et seq., at para. 179; | 检察官诉Anto Furundžija(见上文脚注353)，第165段及以下各段，见第179段； |
| Rantsev v. Cyprus and Russia, No.
25965/04, 7 January 2010, ECHR 2010 (extracts), para. 285; | Rantsev诉塞浦路斯和俄罗斯，第25965/04号，2010年1月7日，《2010年欧洲人权法院案例汇编》(摘录)，第285段； |
| cautiously: WTO Appellate Body Report, EC
— Chicken Cuts WT/DS269/AB/R and Corr.1, WT/DS286/AB/R and Corr.1, adopted 27
September 2005, para. 272; | 较慎重的立场，见世贸组织上诉机构报告，欧共体—鸡块案，WT/DS269/AB/R和Corr.1、WT/DS286/AB/R和Corr.1, 2005年9月27日通过，第272段； |
| see, also, for a limited holding,
Iran-United States Claims Tribunal, Award No. 30-16-3, RayGo Wagner Equipment
Company v. Iran Express Terminal Corporation, Iran-United States Claims
Tribunal Reports, vol. 2 (1983), p. 141, at p. 144; | 另见，对于控股有限公司，伊朗－美国索赔法庭，第30-16-3号裁决，RayGo Wagner设备公司诉伊朗快递公司，《伊朗－美国索赔法庭裁决汇编》，第2卷(1983年)，第141页起，见第144页； |
| The Question whether the re-evaluation of
the German Mark in 1961 and 1969 constitutes a case for application of the
clause in article 2 (e) of Annex I A of the 1953 Agreement on German External
Debts between Belgium, France, Switzerland, the United Kingdom of Great
Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America on the one hand
and the Federal Republic of Germany on the other, 16 May 1980, UNRIAA, vol.
XIX, pp. 67–145, pp. 103–104, para. 31. | 关于1961年和1969年德国马克升值是否构成适用1953年比利时、法国、瑞士、大不列颠及北爱尔兰联合王国和美利坚合众国与德意志联邦共和国关于德国外债的协定附件一A第2条(e)项条款问题案，1980年5月16日，《国际仲裁裁决汇编》，第十九卷，第67-145页，见第103-104页，第31段。 |
| Kamto, “La volonté de l’État en droit
international” (see footnote 154 above), pp. 134–141; | Kamto,“国际法中的国家意志”(见上文脚注154)，第134-141页； |
| Yasseen, “L’interprétation des traités …”
(see footnote 20 above), p. 49; | Yasseen,“…对条约进行解释”(见上文脚注20)，第49页； |
| Gardiner, Treaty Interpretation (see
footnote 19 above), p. 267; | Gardiner,《条约解释》(见上文脚注19)，第267页； |
| Villiger, Commentary … (see footnote 37
above), p. 431, para. 22; | Villiger,《…评注》(见上文脚注37)，第431页，第22段； |
| Dörr, “Article 31 …” (see footnote 61
above), pp. 599–600 and 601–602, paras. 84 and 87. | Dörr,“第三十一条…”(见上文脚注61)，第599-600页和第601-602页，第84和第87段。 |
| For example, when acting within the
framework of an international organization, see Application of the Interim
Accord of 13 September 1995 (the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia v.
Greece), Judgment of 5 December 2011, I.C.J. Reports 2011, p. 644, at pp.
675–676, paras. 99–101; | 例如，在国际组织的框架内行动时，见关于1995年9月13日《临时协定》的适用案(前南斯拉夫的马其顿共和国诉希腊)，2011年12月5日的判决，《2011年国际法院案例汇编》，第644页起，见第675-676页，第99-101段； |
| Kamto, “La volonté de l’État en droit
international” (see footnote 154 above), p. 136. | Kamto,“国际法中的国家意志”(见上文脚注154)，第136页。 |
| Case concerning a dispute between
Argentina and Chile concerning the Beagle Channel, 18 February 1977, UNRIAA,
vol. XXI, part II, pp. 53–264. | 阿根廷和智利比格尔海峡争端案，1977年2月18日，《国际仲裁裁决汇编》，第二十一卷，第二部分，第53-264页。 |
| Ibid., p. 187, para. 169 (a). | 同上，见第187页，第169(a)段。 |
| Ibid., p. 188, para. 171. | 同上，见第188页，第171段。 |
| Land and Maritime Boundary between
Cameroon and Nigeria (Cameroon v. Nigeria: Equatorial Guinea intervening),
Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2002, p. 303, at p. 352, para. 67. | 喀麦隆和尼日利亚间陆地和海洋疆界案(喀麦隆诉尼日利亚：赤道几内亚参与诉讼)，判决，《2002年国际法院案例汇编》，第303页起，见第352页，第67段。 |
| Ibid., p. 351, para. 64: “The Court
notes, however, that now that it has made its findings that the frontier in
Lake Chad was delimited …, it … follows that any Nigerian effectivités are
indeed to be evaluated for their legal consequences as acts contra legem”; | 同上，见第351页，第64段：“但是，本院指出，鉴于本院已经认定，乍得湖的边界已经划定…自然，事实上必须对尼日利亚的任何行动的效力进行评价，评价其作为违法行为的法律后果”； |
| see also Frontier Dispute, Judgment,
I.C.J. Reports 1986, p. 554, at p. 586, para. 63; | 另见边界争端案，判决，《1986年国际法院案例汇编》，第554页起，见第586页，第63段； |
| Case concerning the delimitation of
maritime boundary between Guinea-Bissau and Senegal (see footnote 343 above),
p. 181, para. 70. | 几内亚比绍和塞内加尔海洋疆界划界案(见上文脚注343)，第181页，第70段。 |
| Sovereignty over Pulau Ligitan and Pulau
Sipadan (see footnote 22 above), p. 650, para. 48; | 利吉丹岛和西巴丹岛的主权归属案(见上文脚注22)，第650页，第48段； |
| WTO Appellate Body Report, EC — Chicken
Cuts, WT/DS269/AB/R and Corr.1, WT/DS286/AB/R and Corr.1, adopted 27
September 2005, para. 334 (“mere access to a published judgment cannot be
equated with acceptance”); | 世贸组织上诉机构报告，欧共体—鸡块案，WT/DS269/AB/R和Corr.1、WT/DS286/AB/R和Corr.1, 2005年9月27日通过，第334段(“仅仅是能够查阅一个公布的判决不能等同于接受”)； |
| see also Court of Justice of the European
Union, Judgment of 21 December 2016, Case C-104/16 P, Council v. Front
Polisario [2016], European Court Reports 973, para. 118. | 另见欧洲联盟法院，2016年12月21日的判决，案件编号C-104/16 P，欧盟理事会诉波利萨里奥阵线[2016年]，欧洲法院973号案例报告，第118段。 |
| Kasikili/Sedudu Island (see footnote 22
above), pp. 1089–1091, paras. 65–68. | 卡西基里/塞杜杜岛案 (见上文脚注22)，第1089-1091页，第65-68段。 |
| WTO Appellate Body Report, EC — Chicken
Cuts (see footnote 438 above), para. 272 (footnote omitted). | 世贸组织上诉机构报告，欧共体—鸡块案(见上文脚注438)，第272段(脚注略)。 |
| The M/V “Virginia G”
(Panama/Guinea-Bissau), Judgment, ITLOS Reports 2014, para. 218. | “弗吉尼亚G号”商船案(巴拿马/几内亚比绍)，判决，《2014年国际海洋法法庭案例汇编》，第218段。 |
| Switzerland, Federal Court, judgment of
17 February 1971, BGE, vol. 97 I, p. 359, at pp. 370–371. | 瑞士，联邦法院，1971年2月17日的判决，BGE, 第97 I卷，第359页，见第370-371页。 |
| See United States, Supreme Court,
O’Connor et ux. v. United States, 479 U.S. 27, at pp. 33–35; | 见美国，最高法院，O’Connor和ux诉美国，479 U.S. 27, 见第33-35页； |
| Germany, Federal Constitutional Court,
BVerfGE, vol. 59, p. 63, at pp. 94–95. | 德国，联邦宪法法院，BVerfGE, 第59卷，第63页起，见第94-95页。 |
| See United Kingdom, Supreme Court: on the
one hand, Assange v. The Swedish Prosecution Authority [2012] UKSC 22, paras.
68–71 (Lord Phillips); | 见联合王国，最高法院：一方面是阿桑奇诉瑞典检察机关[2012年] UKSC 22, 第68-71段(Phillips勋爵)； |
| and, on the other, Bucnys v. Ministry of
Justice, Lithuania [2013] UKSC 71, paras. 39–43 (Lord Mance). | 另一方面是Bucnys诉立陶宛司法部[2013年] UKSC 71, 第39-43段(Mance勋爵)。 |
| Certain Expenses of the United Nations
(Article 17, paragraph 2, of the Charter), Advisory Opinion of 20 July 1962,
I.C.J. Reports 1962, p. 151, at p. 182 (Dissenting Opinion of Judge Spender). | 联合国的某些开支(《宪章》第十七条第二项)，1962年7月20日的咨询意见，《1962年国际法院案例汇编》，第151页起，见第182页(Spender法官的不同意见)。 |
| Hafner, “Subsequent agreements and
practice …” (see footnote 273 above), p. 118; | Hafner,“嗣后协定和实践…”(见上文脚注273)，第118页； |
| this means that the interpretative effect
of an agreement under article 31, para. 3, does not necessarily go back to
the date of the entry into force of the treaty, as Yasseen maintains,
“L’interprétation des traités…” (see footnote 20 above), p. 47. | 这意味着第三十一条第三款所述协定的解释性效力并不一定追溯到条约生效之日，与Yasseen的主张一样,“…对条约进行解释”(见上文脚注20)，第47页。 |
| Karl, Vertrag und spätere Praxis … (see
footnote 75 above), p. 151. | Karl, Vertrag und spätere Praxis…(见上文脚注75)，第151页。 |
| Maritime Dispute (Peru v. Chile),
Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2014, p. 3, at p. 52, para. 142. | 海洋争端案(秘鲁诉智利)，判决，《2014年国际法院案例汇编》，第3页起，见第52页，第142段。 |
| Other designations include: “Meetings of
the Parties” or “Assemblies of the States Parties”. | 其他说法包括：“缔约方会议”或“缔约国会议”。 |
| See V. Röben, “Conference (Meeting) of
States Parties”, in Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law
(www.mpepil.com), p. 605; | 见V. Röben,“缔约国大会(会议)”，载于《马克斯·普朗克国际公法百科全书》(www.mpepil. com)，第605页； |
| R.R. Churchill and G. Ulfstein,
“Autonomous institutional arrangements in multilateral environmental
agreements: a little-noticed phenomenon in international law”, American
Journal of International Law, vol. 94 (2000), pp. 623–659; | R. R. Churchill和G.
Ulfstein,“多边环境协定中的自治机构安排：国际法中极少受到注意的一个现象”，《美国国际法期刊》，第94卷(2000年)，第623-659页； |
| J. Brunnée, “COPing with consent:
law-making under multilateral environmental agreements”, Leiden Journal of
International Law, vol. 15 (2002), pp. 1–52; | J. Brunnée,“处理同意问题：多边环境协定下的法律制订”，《莱顿国际法期刊》，第15卷
(2002年)，第1-52页； |
| A. Wiersema, “The new international
law-makers? | A. Wiersema,“新的国际法制订者？ |
| Conference of the Parties to multilateral
environmental agreements”, Michigan Journal of International Law, vol. 31
(2009), pp. 231–287; | 多边环境协定的缔约方大会”，《密歇根国际法期刊》，第31卷 (2009年)，第231-287页； |
| L. Boisson de Chazournes, “Environmental
treaties in time”, Environmental Policy and Law, vol. 39 (2009), pp. 293–298. | L. Boisson de Chazournes,“随时间演变的环境条约”，《环境政策和法律》，第39卷
(2009年)，第293-298页。 |
| Marrakesh Agreement establishing the
World Trade Organization (1994) (see footnote 66 above); | 《马拉喀什建立世界贸易组织协定》(1994年)(见上文脚注66)； |
| Convention on the Prohibition of the
Development, Production, Stockpiling and Use of Chemical Weapons and on their
Destruction (1993) (see footnote 164 above); | 《关于禁止发展、生产、储存和使用化学武器及销毁此种武器的公约》(1993年)(见上文脚注164)； |
| Convention on International Civil
Aviation (Chicago Convention, 1944), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 15,
No. 102, p. 295. | 《国际民用航空组织公约》(《芝加哥公约》，1944年)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第15卷，第102号，第295页。 |
| See draft conclusion 12 below. | 见下文结论草案12。 |
| See Convention on the Prohibition of the
Development, Production and Stockpiling of Bacteriological (Biological) and
Toxin Weapons and on their Destruction (1972) (see footnote 163 above), art.
XI. | 见《关于禁止发展、生产和储存细菌(生物)及毒素武器和销毁此种武器的公约》(1972年)(见上文脚注163)，第十一条。 |
| According to this mechanism, States
parties meeting in a review conference shall “review the operation of the
Convention, with a view to assuring that the purposes of the preamble and the
provisions of the Convention … are being realised. | 按照这个机制，缔约国在审查会议上应“…审查本公约的实施情况，以保证本公约序言的宗旨和各项条款…正在得到实现。 |
| Such review shall take into account any
new scientific and technological developments relevant to the Convention”
(art. XII). | 此项审查应考虑到任何与本公约有关的科学和技术的新发展”(第十二条)。 |
| Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of
Nuclear Weapons (1968), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 729, No. 10485,
p. 161; | 《不扩散核武器条约》(1968年)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第729卷，第10485号，第161页； |
| art. VIII, para. 3, provides that a
review conference shall be held five years after its entry into force, and,
if so decided, at intervals of five years thereafter “in order to review the
operation of this Treaty with a view to assuring that the purposes of the
preamble and the provisions of the Treaty are being realised”. | 第八条第3款规定，在条约生效后五年，应举行审查会议，此后，如有此决定，应每隔五年另行召集这种会议，“…审查本条约的实施情况，以保证本条约序言的宗旨和本条约的各项条款正在得到实现”。 |
| By way of such decisions, States parties
review the operation of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear
Weapons, article by article, and formulate conclusions and recommendations on
follow-on actions. | 通过这种决定，缔约国逐条审查《不扩散核武器条约》的实施情况，并就后续行动拟订结论和建议。 |
| Examples include the Conference of the
Parties of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (1992)
(United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1771, No. 30822, p. 107), the Conference
of the Parties serving as the meeting of the Parties to the Kyoto Protocol to
the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (Kyoto Protocol,
1997) (United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 2303, No. 30822, p. 161) and the
Conference of the Contracting Parties of the Convention on Wetlands of
International Importance especially as Waterfowl Habitat (Ramsar Convention,
1971) (United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 996, No. 14583, p. 245). | 例证包括《联合国气候变化框架公约》(1992年)(联合国，《条约汇编》，第1771卷，第30822号，第107页)缔约方会议，作为《联合国气候变化框架公约京都议定书》(《京都议定书》，1997年)(联合国，《条约汇编》，第2303卷，第30822号，第161页)缔约方会议的《公约》缔约方会议和《关于特别是作为水禽栖息地的国际重要湿地公约》(《拉姆萨尔公约》，1971年)(联合国，《条约汇编》，第996卷，第14583号，第245页)缔约方会议。 |
| The Convention is often described as
establishing an international organization, but it does not do so clearly,
and it provides the International Whaling Commission with features that fit
the present definition of a Conference of States Parties. | 人们常称该公约设立了一个国际组织，但该公约并未非常明确地作出这样的规定，而是赋予了国际捕鲸委员会一些特点，这些特点符合本文对缔约国大会的定义。 |
| Whaling in the Antarctic (Australia v.
Japan: New Zealand intervening), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2014, p. 226, at p.
248, para. 46. | 南极捕鲸案(澳大利亚诉日本：新西兰参与诉讼)，判决，《2014年国际法院案例汇编》，第226页起，见第248页，第46段。 |
| Convention on Wetlands of International
Importance especially as Waterfowl Habitat: art. 6, para. 1, on review
functions and art. 10 bis, on amendments; | 《关于特别是作为水禽栖息地的国际重要湿地公约》：关于审查职能的第6条第1款和关于修正的第10条之二； |
| United Nations Framework Convention on
Climate Change, art. 7, para. 2, on review powers, and art. 15, on
amendments; | 《联合国气候变化框架公约》：关于审评权力的第七条第2款和关于修正的第十五条； |
| Kyoto Protocol, art. 13, para. 4, on
review powers of the Conference of the Parties serving as the meeting of the
Parties to the Kyoto Protocol, art. 20 on amendment procedures; | 《京都议定书》：关于作为《京都议定书》缔约方会议的《公约》缔约方会议审评权的第十三条第4款和关于修正程序的第二十条； |
| Convention on International Trade in
Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (United Nations, Treaty Series,
vol. 993, No. 14537, p. 243), art. XI on Conference of the Parties, and art.
XVII on amendment procedures; | 《濒危野生动植物种国际贸易公约》(联合国，《条约汇编》，第993卷，第14537号，第243页)，关于缔约国大会的第十一条和关于修正程序的第十七条； |
| Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of
Nuclear Weapons; | 《不扩散核武器条约》； |
| World Health Organization Framework
Convention on Tobacco Control (United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 2302, No.
41032, p. 166), art. 23, para. 5 (review powers), art. 28 (amendments) and
art. 33 (protocols). | 世界卫生组织《烟草控制框架公约》(联合国，《条约汇编》，第2302卷，第41032号，第166页)，第23条第5款(审评权)、第28条(修正)和第33条(议定书)。 |
| Arts. 7 and 9 of the World Health
Organization Framework Convention on Tobacco Control. | 世界卫生组织《烟草控制框架公约》第7和第9条。 |
| Art. 17 of the Kyoto Protocol provides an
example, see Churchill and Ulfstein, “Autonomous institutional arrangements
in multilateral environmental agreements …” (footnote 450 above), p. 639; | 《京都议定书》关于排放贸易的第十七条提供了一个例子，见Churchill和 Ulfstein,“多边环境协定中的自治机构安排…”(上文脚注450)，第639页； |
| J. Brunnée, “Reweaving the fabric of
international law? | J. Brunnée,“重新构建国际法架构？ |
| Patterns of consent in environmental
framework agreements”, in Developments of International Law in Treaty Making,
R. Wolfrum and V. Röben, eds. (Berlin, Springer, 2005), pp. 110–115. | 环境框架协定中的同意模式”，载于R.
Wolfrum和V. Röben所编《条约制订方面的国际法发展》(Berlin, Springer, 2005年)，第110-115页。 |
| See J. Brunnée, “Treaty amendments”, in
Hollis, The Oxford Guide to Treaties (footnote 413 above), pp. 354–360. | 见J. Brunnée,“条约的修正”，载于Hollis,《牛津条约指南》(上文脚注413)，第354-360页。 |
| Ibid. | 同上。 |
| This is the case, for example, for the
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. | 例如，《联合国气候变化框架公约》就是这样。 |
| See P. Millett, “The Biological Weapons
Convention: securing biology in the twenty-first century”, Journal of
Conflict and Security Law, vol. 15 (2010), pp. 25–43, at p. 33. | 见P. Millett,“《生物武器公约》：保障二十一世纪的生物安全”，《冲突和安全法期刊》，第15卷
(2010年)，第25-43页，见第33页。 |
| The “Implementation Support Unit” was
created by the Conference of States Parties, in order to provide
administrative support to the Conference, and to enhance confidence-building
measures among States parties (see Final Document of the Sixth Review
Conference of the States Parties to the Convention on the Prohibition of the
Development, Production and Stockpiling of Bacteriological (Biological) and
Toxin Weapons and on their Destruction (BWC/CONF.VI/6), Part. III (decisions
and recommendations), para. 5). | “执行支助股”由缔约国会议创立，以便为会议提供行政支助，并加强缔约国之间的建立信任措施(见《关于禁止发展、生产和储存细菌(生物)及毒素武器和销毁此种武器的公约》缔约国第六次审查会议最后文件(BWC/CONF.VI/6)，第三部分(决定和建议)，第5段)。 |
| See background information document
submitted by the Implementation and Support Unit, prepared for the Seventh
Review Conference of the States Parties to the Convention, entitled
“Additional understandings and agreements reached by previous Review
Conferences relating to each article of the Convention” (BWC/CONF.VII/INF.5)
(updated later to include the understandings and agreements reached by that
Conference, Geneva, 2012). | 见执行支助股提交的背景资料文件，该文件为《公约》缔约国第七次审查会议编写，题为“以往各次审查会议就《公约》每一条款达成的进一步谅解和协议”(BWC/CONF.VII/INF.5) (后来经过更新，增添了2012年日内瓦此次会议达成的谅解和协议)。 |
| United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1046,
No. 15749, p. 120. | 联合国，《条约汇编》，第1046卷，第15749号，第120页。 |
| Agenda item 4 (Ocean fertilization),
submitted by the Secretariat on procedural requirements in relation to a
decision on an interpretive resolution: views of the IMO Sub-Division of
Legal Affairs, document LC 33/J/6, para. 3. | 议程项目4(海洋富氧化)，秘书处提交的关于解释性决议决定的程序性规定的材料：海事组织法律事务处的意见，LC 33/J/6号文件，第3段。 |
| See Conference of the Parties to the
World Health Organization Framework Convention on Tobacco Control,
Intergovernmental Negotiating Body on a Protocol on Illicit Trade in Tobacco
Products, “Revised Chairperson’s text on a protocol on illicit trade in
tobacco products, and general debate: legal advice on the scope of the
protocol”, note by the WHO Legal Counsel on scope of the protocol on illicit
trade in tobacco products (FCTC/COP/INB-IT/3/INF.DOC./6) annex, para. 8; | 见世界卫生组织《烟草控制框架公约》缔约方会议，烟草制品非法贸易议定书政府间谈判机构，“烟草制品非法贸易议定书主席修订文本和一般性辩论：关于议定书范围的法律意见”，世卫组织法律顾问关于烟草制品非法贸易议定书范围的说明 (FCTC/COP/INB-IT/3/INF.DOC./6)，附件，第8段； |
| S.F. Halabi, “The World Health
Organization’s Framework Convention on Tobacco Control: an analysis of guidelines
adopted by the Conference of the Parties”, Georgia Journal of International
and Comparative Law, vol. 39 (2010), pp. 121–183. | S. F. Halabi,“世界卫生组织的《烟草控制框架公约》：对缔约方会议所通过的指南的分析”，《格鲁吉亚国际和比较法期刊》，第39卷(2010年)，第121-183页。 |
| D.H. Joyner, Interpreting the Nuclear
Non-Proliferation Treaty (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2011), p. 83 (with
respect to the Non-Proliferation Treaty); | D. H. Joyner,《解释核不扩散条约》(牛津，牛津大学出版社，2011年)，第83页(关于不扩散条约)； |
| Aust, Modern Treaty Law and Practice (see
footnote 142 above), pp. 213–214. | Aust,《现代条约法和实践》(见上文脚注142)，第213-214页。 |
| B.M. Carnahan, “Treaty review
conferences”, American Journal of International Law, vol. 81 (1987), pp.
226–230, at p. 229. | B. M. Carnahan,“条约审查会议”，《美国国际法期刊》，第81卷
(1987年)，第226-230页，见第229页。 |
| Whaling in the Antarctic (Australia v.
Japan: New Zealand intervening), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2014, p. 226, at p.
248, para. 46. | 南极捕鲸案(澳大利亚诉日本：新西兰参与诉讼)，判决，《2014年国际法院案例汇编》，第226页起，见第248页，第46段。 |
| Final Declaration of the Third Review
Conference of the Parties to the Convention on the Prohibition of the
Development, Production and Stockpiling of Bacteriological (Biological) and
Toxin Weapons and on their Destruction, Geneva, 9–27 September 1991
(BWC/CONF.III/23, part II). | 《关于禁止发展、生产和储存细菌(生物)及毒素武器和销毁此种武器的公约》缔约国第三次审查会议最后宣言，1991年9月9日至27日，日内瓦(BWC/CONF.III/23, 第二部分)。 |
| United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1522,
No. 26369, p. 3. | 联合国，《条约汇编》，第1522卷，第26369号，第3页。 |
| Copenhagen Amendment to the Montreal
Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer (1992), United Nations,
Treaty Series, vol. 1785, No. 26369, p. 517; | 《关于消耗臭氧层物质的蒙特利尔议定书哥本哈根修正案》(1992年)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第1785卷，第26369号，第517页； |
| and Beijing Amendment to the Montreal
Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer (1999), ibid., vol. 2173,
No. 26369, p. 183. | 以及《关于消耗臭氧层物质的蒙特利尔议定书北京修正案》(1999年)，同上，第2173卷，第26369号，第183页。 |
| For details, see decision XV/3 on
obligations of parties to the 1999 Beijing Amendment under art. 4 of the
Montreal Protocol with respect to hydrochlorofluorocarbons; | 详见第XV/3号决定：1999年《北京修正》缔约方依照《蒙特利尔议定书》第4条针对氢氟氯化碳承担的义务； |
| the definition itself is formulated as
follows: “(a) The term ‘State not party to this Protocol’ in article 4,
paragraph 9, does not apply to those States operating under article 5,
paragraph 1, of the Protocol until January 1, 2016 when, in accordance with
the Copenhagen and Beijing Amendments, hydrochlorofluorocarbon production and
consumption control measures will be in effect for States that operate under
article 5, paragraph 1, of the Protocol; | 定义本身如下：“… (a) 第4条第9款中的“非本议定书缔约方的国家”一语于2016年1月1日之前不适用于那些按《议定书》第5条第1款行事的缔约方，届时依照《哥本哈根修正》和《北京修正》的相关规定，氢氟氯化碳的生产和消费控制措施将开始对这些按《议定书》第5条第1款行事的国家生效； |
| (b) The term ‘State not party to this
Protocol’ includes all other States and regional economic integration
organizations that have not agreed to be bound by the Copenhagen and Beijing
Amendments; | (b)“非本议定书缔约方的国家”一语包括所有尚未同意受《哥本哈根修正》和《北京修正》约束的其他国家和区域经济一体化组织； |
| (c) Recognizing, however, the practical
difficulties imposed by the timing associated with the adoption of the
foregoing interpretation of the term ‘State not party to this Protocol,’
paragraph 1 (b) shall apply unless such a State has by 31 March 2004: (i)
Notified the Secretariat that it intends to ratify, accede or accept the
Beijing Amendment as soon as possible; | (c) 但同时还认识到，鉴于在采用对“非本议定书缔约方的国家”一语的上述解释时在时间上涉及的实际困难，决定只要所涉国家已于2004年3月31日之前采取了下列各项措施，则以上第1(b)段便将不对之适用：(i) 通知秘书处它打算尽快批准、加入或接受《北京修正》； |
| (ii) Certified that it is in full
compliance with articles 2, 2A to 2G and article 4 of the Protocol, as
amended by the Copenhagen Amendment; | (ii) 提供证明，确认它已完全遵守经《哥本哈根修正》修正的《议定书》第2条、第2A-2G条和第4条的相关规定； |
| (iii) Submitted data on (i) and (ii)
above to the Secretariat, to be updated on 31 March 2005, in which case that
State shall fall outside the definition of ‘State not party to this Protocol’
until the conclusion of the Seventeenth Meeting of the Parties” (Report of
the 15th meeting of the State Parties to the Montreal Protocol on Substances
that deplete the Ozone Layer (UNEP/OzL.Pro.15/9), chap. XVIII. sect. A,
decision XV/3, para. 1). | (iii) 向秘书处提交了第(i)和(ii)项中所述数据，并计划于2005年3月31日予以增订； 如系此种情形，则在缔约方第十七次会议结束之前便可暂不把此种国家归入“非本议定书缔约方的国家”的定义范围； (《关于消耗臭氧层物质的蒙特利尔议定书》缔约方第十五次会议报告
(UNEP/OzL.Pro.15/9)，第十八章，A节，第XV/3号决定，第1段)。 |
| See para. (8) of the present commentary,
above. | 见上文本评注第(8)段。 |
| See London Sixteenth Consultative Meeting
of the Contracting Parties, and resolutions LC.49 (16), LC.50 (16) and LC.51
(16) (United Nations, Treaties Series, vol. 1775, No. 15749, p. 395). | 见缔约方伦敦第十六次磋商会议，LC.49(16)号、LC.50(16)号和LC.51(16)号决议(联合国，《条约汇编》，第1775卷，第15749号，第395页)。 |
| First, the meeting decided to amend the
phasing-out of the dumping of industrial waste by 31 December 1995. | 首先，会议决定在1995年12月31日以前修正逐步停止倾倒工业废物的规定； |
| Second, it banned the incineration at sea
of industrial waste and sewage sludge. | 其次，禁止向海洋倾倒工业废物和下水管道废弃物的焚化物。 |
| And, finally, it decided to replace
paragraph 6 of annex I, banning the dumping of radioactive waste or other
radioactive matter (see also “Dumping at sea: the evolution of the Convention
on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and Other Matter
(LC), 1972”, Focus on IMO (July 1997), p. 11). | 最后，决定取代附件一第6段，禁止倾倒放射性垃圾或其他放射性物质(见“向海洋倾倒：1972年《防止倾倒废物及其他物质污染海洋的公约》(《伦敦公约》)的发展”，《聚焦海事组织》(1997年7月)，第11页)。 |
| It has even been asserted that these
amendments to annex I of the London Dumping Convention “constitute major
changes in the Convention” (see Churchill and Ulfstein, “Autonomous
institutional arrangements in multilateral environmental agreements …”
(footnote 450 above), p. 638). | 有人主张，对《伦敦倾倒公约》附件一的这些修正“是公约的重大变化”(见Churchill和Ulfstein,“多边环境协定中的自治机构安排…”(上文脚注450)，第638页)。 |
| IMO, Report of the Thirteenth
Consultative Meeting of Contracting Parties to the Convention on the
Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and Other Matter, LDC
13/15, annex 7, resolution LDC.41 (13), para. 1. | 海事组织，《防止倾倒废物及其他物质污染海洋的公约》第十三次缔约方磋商会议报告，LDC
13/15, 附件7, LDC.41 (13)号决议，第1段。 |
| Churchill and Ulfstein, “Autonomous
institutional arrangements in multilateral environmental agreements …” (see
footnote 450 above), p. 641. | Churchill和Ulfstein,“多边环境协定中的自治机构安排…”(见上文脚注450)，第641页。 |
| United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1673,
No. 28911, p. 57. | 联合国，《条约汇编》，第1673卷，第28911号，第57页。 |
| See Report of the Conference of the
Parties to the Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of
Hazardous Wastes and Their Disposal on its tenth meeting (Cartagena,
Colombia, 17–21 October 2011), UNEP/CHW.10/28, annex 1, Decision BC-10/3
(Indonesian-Swiss country-led initiative to improve the effectiveness of the
Basel Convention), para. 2. | 见《控制危险废物越境转移及其处置的巴塞尔公约》缔约方会议第十次会议报告(2011年10月17日至21日，哥伦比亚卡塔赫纳)，UNEP/CHW.10/28, 附件一，BC-10/3号决定(印度尼西亚— 瑞士国家牵头提高《巴塞尔公约》效力的倡议)，第2段。 |
| Ibid., chap. III. A, para. 65. | 同上，第三章A节，第65段。 |
| See G. Handl, “International ‘lawmaking’
by conferences of the parties and other politically mandated bodies”, in
Wolfrum and Röben, Developments of International Law in Treaty Making
(footnote 460 above), pp. 127–143, at p. 132. | 见G. Handl,“缔约方会议和其他有政治授权的机构的‘国际法律制订’”，载于Wolfrum和Röben,《国际法在条约形成方面的进展》(上文脚注460)，第127-143页，见第132页。 |
| The “current-time approach” favoured by
the Legal Counsel of the United Nations stipulates that: “Where the treaty is
silent or ambiguous on the matter, the practice of the Secretary-General is
to calculate the number of acceptances on the basis of the number of parties
to the treaty at the time of deposit of each instrument of acceptance of an
amendment. | 联合国法律顾问所赞成的“现时办法”规定，“当条约对此事项未作规定或比较模糊时，秘书长的实践是以交存每份修正接受文书时条约缔约方的数目来计算接受国的数目。 |
| ” See extracts from the memorandum of 8
March 2004 received from the Office of Legal Affairs of the United Nations,
available at
www.basel.int/TheConvention/Overview/Amendments/Background/tabid/2760/Default.aspx. | ”见联合国法律事务厅2004年3月8日备忘录摘要，可查阅www.basel.int/TheConvention/Overview/
Amendments/Background/tabid/2760/Default.aspx。 |
| Report of the Conference of the Parties
to the Basel Convention … (see footnote 483 above), para. 68 (emphasis
added). | 《巴塞尔公约》缔约方会议报告…(见上文脚注483)，第68段(强调是后加的)。 |
| Partial guidelines for implementation of
articles 9 and 10 of the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control
(Regulation of the contents of tobacco products and Regulation of tobacco
product disclosures), FCTC/COP4(10), Annex, adopted at the fourth session of
the Conference of the Parties to the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco
Control (Punta del Este, Uruguay, 15–20 November 2010), in FCTC/COP/4/DIV/6,
p. 39. | 执行世卫组织《烟草控制框架公约》第9条和第10条的部分指南(《管制烟草制品成分和管制烟草制品披露)，FCTC/COP4(10)，附件，世卫组织《烟草控制框架公约》第四届缔约方会议通过(2010年11月15日至20日，乌拉圭埃斯特角)，载于FCTC/COP/4/DIV/6,
第39页。 |
| Whaling in the Antarctic (Australia v.
Japan: New Zealand intervening), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2014, p. 226, at p.
257, para. 83. | 南极捕鲸案(澳大利亚诉日本：新西兰参与诉讼)，判决，《2014年国际法院案例汇编》，第226页起，见第257页，第83段。 |
| Ibid., p. 248, para. 46. | 同上，第248页，第46段。 |
| See commentary to draft conclusion 10,
paras. (23)–(24), above. | 见上文结论草案10评注，第(23)-(24)段。 |
| Whaling in the Antarctic (Australia v.
Japan: New Zealand intervening), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2014, p. 226
(Separate Opinion of Judge ad hoc Charlesworth, at p. 454, para. 4: “I note
that resolutions adopted by a vote of the [International Whaling Commission]
have some consequence although they do not come within the terms of [a]rticle
31.3 of the Vienna Convention”). | 南极捕鲸案(澳大利亚诉日本：新西兰参与诉讼)，判决，《2014年国际法院案例汇编》，第226页起(专案法官Charlesworth的个别意见，见第454页，第4段：“我注意到，[国际捕鲸委员会]投票通过的决议具有一定的后果，但不属于《维也纳公约》第三十一条第三款的规定范围”)。 |
| The Conference of States Parties to the
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change provisionally applies
the draft rules of procedure of the Conference of the Parties and its
subsidiaries bodies (FCCC/CP/1996/2), with the exception of draft rule 42 in
the chapter on “Voting”, since no agreement has been reached so far on one of
the two voting alternatives contained therein, see Report of the Conference
of the Parties on its first session (28 March to 7 April 1995)
(FCCC/CP/1995/7), p. 8, para. 10; | 《联合国气候变化框架公约》缔约方会议暂时适用缔约方会议及其附属机构议事规则草案(FCCC/CP/1996/2)，但不包括“投票”章节中的规则草案42，因为缔约方迄今为止尚未就其中列出的两种投票替代办法之一达成协定，见缔约方会议第一届会议报告(1995年3月28日至4月7日)
(FCCC/CP/1995/7)，第8页，第10段； |
| Report of the Conference of the Parties
on its nineteenth session (11 to 23 November 2013) (FCCC/CP/2013/10), p. 6,
para. 4; | 缔约方会议第十九届会议报告(2013年11月11日至23日) (FCCC/CP/2013/10)，第6页，第4段； |
| similarly, the Conference of States
Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity (1992, United Nations,
Treaties Series, vol. 1760, No. 30619, p. 79) did not adopt Rule 40,
paragraph 1 (Voting), of the rules of procedure “because of the lack of consensus
among the Parties concerning the majority required for decision-making on
matters of substance”, see Report of the Eleventh Meeting of the Conference
of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity (8–19 October 2012)
(UNEP/CBD/COP/11/35), para. 65. | 同样，《生物多样性公约》(1992年，联合国，《条约汇编》，第1760卷，第30619号，第79页)缔约方会议没有通过议事规则中的规则40的第1段(投票)，“原因是各缔约方对就实质性问题作出决定所需的多数尚未达成协商一致意见”，见《生物多样性公约》缔约方会议第十一次会议报告(2012年10月8日至19日) (UNEP/CBD/COP/11/35)，第65段。 |
| See rule 28, paragraph 2, of the
provisional rules of procedure for the Review Conference of the Parties to
the Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production and
Stockpiling of Bacteriological (Biological) and Toxin Weapons and on their
Destruction, held in Geneva, from 3 to 21 March 1980 (BWC/CONF.I/2). | 见1980年3月3日至21日在日内瓦举行的《关于禁止发展、生产和储存细菌(生物)及毒素武器和销毁此种武器的公约》缔约国审查会议临时议事规则中规则28第2段(BWC/CONF.I/2)。 |
| See General Assembly resolution 60/286 of
8 September 2006 on revitalization of the General Assembly, requesting the
Office of Legal Affairs of the Secretariat “to make precedents and past
practice available in the public domain with respect to rules and practices
of the intergovernmental bodies of the Organization” (annex, para. 24). | 见大会2006年9月8日关于振兴大会的第60/286号决议，该决议请秘书处法律事务厅“提供有关本组织政府间机构规则和做法的先例和实践，供公众查询”(附件，第24段)。 |
| See “Consensus in UN practice: General”,
paper prepared by the Secretariat, available from
http://legal.un.org/ola/media/GA_RoP/GA_RoP_EN.pdf; | 见“联合国实践中的协商一致：概论”，秘书处编写的文件，可查阅http://legal.un.org/ola/ media/GA_RoP/GA_RoP_EN.pdf； |
| see also R. Wolfrum and J. Pichon,
“Consensus”, in Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law
(www.mpepil.com), paras. 3–4 and 24. | 另见R. Wolfrum和J.
Pichon,“协商一致”，载于《马克斯·普朗克国际公法百科全书》(www.mpepil.com)，第3-4段和第24段。 |
| Whaling in the Antarctic (Australia v.
Japan: New Zealand intervening), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2014, p. 226, at p.
257, para. 83. | 南极捕鲸案(澳大利亚诉日本：新西兰参与诉讼)，判决，《2014年国际法院案例汇编》，第226页起，见第257页，第83段。 |
| See report of the sixth meeting of the
Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity
(UNEP/CBD/COP/6/20), annex I, decision VI/23. | 见《生物多样性公约》缔约方大会第六次会议报告(UNEP/CBD/COP/6/20)，附件一，第VI/23号决定。 |
| Ibid., para. 313. | 同上，第313段。 |
| Ibid., para. 318; | 同上，第318段； |
| for the discussion see paras. 294–324. | 讨论情况见第294-324段。 |
| Available from the secretariat of the
Convention on Biological Diversity, document SCBD/SEL/DBO/30219 (6 June
2002). | 存于《生物多样性公约》秘书处，SCBD/SEL/DBO/30219号文件(2002年6月6日)。 |
| Letter dated 17 June 2002, transmitted by
facsimile. | 2002年6月17日的信函，通过传真发送。 |
| Ibid. | 同上。 |
| See report of the Conference of the
Parties serving as the meeting of the Parties to the Kyoto Protocol on its
sixth session, held in Cancún from 29 November to 10 December 2010
(FCCC/KP/CMP/2010/12 and Add.1), decision 1/CMP.6 (The Cancún Agreements:
outcome of the work of the Ad hoc Working Group on Further Commitments for
Annex I Parties under the Kyoto Protocol at its fifteenth session) and
decision 2/CMP.6 (The Cancún Agreements: land use, land-use change and
forestry); | 见2010年11月29日至12月10日在坎昆举行的作为《京都议定书》缔约方会议的《公约》缔约方会议第六届会议报告(FCCC/KP/CMP/2010/12和Add.1)，第1/CMP.6号决定(坎昆协议：附件一缔约方在《京都议定书》之下的进一步承诺问题特设工作组第十五届会议的工作结果)和第2/CMP.6号决定(坎昆协议：土地利用、土地利用的变化和林业)； |
| as well as the proceedings of the
Conference of the Parties serving as the Meeting of the Parties to the Kyoto
Protocol, para. 29. | 以及作为《京都议定书》缔约方会议的《公约》缔约方会议纪要，第29段。 |
| See Nolte, “Subsequent agreements and
subsequent practice of States …” (footnote 62 above), pp. 372–377. | 见诺尔特,“…国家嗣后协定和嗣后实践”(上文脚注62)，第372-377页。 |
| IMO, report of the 3rd meeting of the
Intersessional Working Group on Ocean Fertilization (LC 33/4), para. 4.15.2. | 海事组织，闭会期间海洋肥化问题工作组第3次会议报告(LC 33/4)，第4.15.2段。 |
| IMO, document LC 33/J/6 (see footnote 468
above), para. 3. | 海事组织，LC 33/J/6号文件
(见上文脚注468)，第3段。 |
| Ibid., para. 8. | 同上，第8段。 |
| See commentary to draft conclusion 10,
paras. (9)–(11), above. | 见上文结论草案10评注，第(9)-(11)段。 |
| Commentary to draft conclusion 3, para.
(4), above. | 上文结论草案3评注，第(4)段。 |
| Whaling in the Antarctic (Australia v.
Japan: New Zealand intervening), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2014, p. 226,
Separate Opinion of Judge Greenwood, at pp. 407–408, para. 6, and Separate
Opinion of Judge ad hoc Charlesworth, at pp. 453–454, para. 4. | 南极捕鲸案(澳大利亚诉日本：新西兰参与诉讼)，判决，《2014年国际法院案例汇编》，第226页，Greenwood法官的个别意见，见第407-408页，第6段，和专案法官Charlesworth的个别意见，见第453-454页，第4段。 |
| See commentary to draft conclusion 3,
para. 4, above. | 见上文结论草案3评注，第(4)段。 |
| See also the parallel provision of
article 5 of the 1986 Vienna Convention. | 另见1986年《维也纳公约》第5条的平行条款。 |
| Art. 20, para. 3, of the 1969 Vienna
Convention requires the acceptance, by the competent organ of the
organization, of reservations relating to its constituent instrument. | 1969年《维也纳公约》第二十条第三款规定，条约是一国际组织的组成文书时，保留须经该组织主管机关接受。 |
| Twelfth report on reservations to
treaties, Yearbook … 2007, vol. II (Part One), document A/CN.4/584, paras.
75–77; | 《关于对条约的保留的第十二次报告》，《2007年…年鉴》，第二卷(第一部分)，A/CN.4/584号文件，第75-77段； |
| S. Rosenne, Developments in the Law of
Treaties 1945-1986 (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1989), p. 204. | S. Rosenne,《1945-1986年条约法发展情况》(剑桥，剑桥大学出版社，1989年)，第204页。 |
| See Yearbook … 1966, vol. II, document
A/6309/Rev.1, p. 191 (draft article 4); | 见《1966年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/6309/Rev.1号文件，第191页(第四条草案)； |
| K. Schmalenbach, “Art. 5”, in Dörr and
Schmalenbach, Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties … (see footnote
61above), p. 89, para. 1. | K. Schmalenbach,“第五条”，载于Dörr和K.
Schmalenbach,《〈维也纳条约法公约〉…》(见上文脚注61)，第89页，第1段。 |
| See, for example, articles 16; 19 (a) and
(b); 20, paras. 1 and 3–5; 22; 24, para. 3; 25, para. 2; | |
| 44, para. 1; 55; 58, para. 2; 70, para.
1; 72, para. 1; | |
| 77, para. 1, of the 1969 Vienna
Convention. | 例如，见1969年《维也纳公约》第十六条，第十九条(a)项和(b)项，第二十条第一款、第三款至第五款，第二十二条，第二十四条第三款，第二十五条第二款，第四十四条第一款，第五十五条，第五十八条第二款，第七十条第一款，第七十二条第一款，第七十七条第一款。 |
| The latter category is addressed by the
1986 Vienna Convention (A/CONF.129/15). | 后一类由1986年《维也纳公约》规定(A/CONF.129/15)。 |
| Accordance with International Law of the
Unilateral Declaration of Independence in Respect of Kosovo, Advisory
Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 2010, p. 403, at p. 442, para. 94 (“While the rules
on treaty interpretation embodied in [a]rticles 31 and 32 of the Vienna
Convention on the Law of Treaties may provide guidance, differences between
Security Council resolutions and treaties mean that the interpretation of
Security Council resolutions also require that other factors be taken into
account”); | 科索沃单方面宣布独立是否符合国际法，咨询意见，《2010年国际法院案例汇编》，第403页起，见第442页，第94段(“…尽管《维也纳条约法公约》第三十一条和第三十二条所载关于条约解释的规则可作为指引，但安全理事会决议同条约有所区别，因此在解释安全理事会决议时还需考虑其他因素”)； |
| see also H. Thirlway, “The law and
procedure of the International Court of Justice 1960-1989, part eight”,
British Yearbook of International Law 1996, vol. 67, p. 1, at p. 29; | 另见H. Thirlway,“1960-1989年国际法院的法律和程序，第八部分”，《1996年英国国际法年鉴》，第67卷，第1页起，见第29页； |
| M.C. Wood, “The interpretation of
Security Council resolutions”, Max Planck Yearbook of United Nations Law,
vol. 2 (1998), p. 73, at p. 85; | M.C. Wood,“安全理事会决议的解释”，《马克斯·普朗克联合国法律年鉴》，第2卷(1998年)，第73页起，见第85页； |
| Gardiner, Treaty Interpretation (see
footnote 19 above), p. 128. | Gardiner,《条约解释》(见上文脚注19)，第128页。 |
| Request for Interpretation of the
Judgment of 15 June 1962 in the Case concerning the Temple of Preah Vihear
(Cambodia v. Thailand), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2013, p. 281, at p. 307,
para. 75 (“A judgment of the Court cannot be equated to a treaty, an
instrument which derives its binding force and content from the consent of
the contracting States and the interpretation of which may be affected by the
subsequent conduct of those States, as provided by the principle stated in
article 31, paragraph 3 (b), of the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of
Treaties”). | “请求解释1962年6月15日对柏威夏寺(柬埔寨诉泰国)案所作判决”，判决，《2013年国际法院案例汇编》，第281页起，见第307页，第75段(“法院的判决不能等同于一项条约。 按1969年《维也纳条约法公约》第三十一条第三款(b)项所述的原则，条约这种文书的约束力和内容源自缔约国的同意，其解释可能受到缔约国嗣后行为的影响”)。 |
| See Regina v. Secretary of State for the
Environment, Transport and the Regions ex parte Alconbury Developments
Limited and others [2001] UKHL 23; | 见女王代表Alconbury发展有限公司等诉环境、运输和地区事务大臣[2001] UKHL 23； |
| Regina v. Special Adjudicator
(respondent) ex parte Ullah (FC) (appellant) Do (FC) (appellant) v. Secretary
of State for the Home Department (Respondent) [2004] UKHL 26 [20] (Lord
Bingham of Cornhill); | 女王代表Ullah (受法律援助)
(申诉人)诉特别审裁官(应诉人)暨Do (受法律援助)) (申诉人)诉内政大臣(应诉人)[2004]
UKHL 26[20] (康希尔勋爵Bingham)； |
| Regina (On the Application of Animal
Defenders International) v. Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport
[2008] UKHL 15. | 女王(应动物保护国际的申请)诉文化、媒体和体育大臣[2008] UKHL 15。 |
| Such jurisprudence may be a means for the
determination of rules of law as indicated, in particular, by article 38,
paragraph 1 (d), of the Statute of the International Court of Justice. | 特别是如《国际法院规约》第三十八条第一款(卯)项所述，此类判例可用作确定法律原则的资料。 |
| Gardiner, Treaty Interpretation (see
footnote 19 above), pp. 281–282. | Gardiner,《条约解释》(见上文脚注19)，第281-282页。 |
| Legality of the Use by a State of Nuclear
Weapons in Armed Conflict, Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 1996, p. 66, at
p. 74, para. 19. | 国家在武装冲突中使用核武器的合法性，咨询意见，《1996年国际法院案例汇编》，第66页起，见第74页，第19段。 |
| Certain Expenses of the United Nations
(Article 17, paragraph 2, of the Charter), Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports
1962, p. 151, at p. 157. | 联合国的某些开支(《宪章》第十七条第二项)，咨询意见，《1962年国际法院案例汇编》，第151页起，见第157页。 |
| Legality of the Use by a State of Nuclear
Weapons in Armed Conflict, Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 1996, p. 66, at
p. 75, para. 19. | 国家在武装冲突中使用核武器的合法性，咨询意见，《1996年国际法院案例汇编》，第66页起，见第75页，第19段。 |
| Ibid. | 同上。 |
| Ibid. | 同上。 |
| See art. 17 of the Convention and Statute
relating to the Development of the Chad Basin (Treaty of Fort-Lamy von 1964),
Heidelberg Journal of International Law, vol. 34 (1974), p. 80; | 见《乍得湖流域开发公约和规约》(《1964年拉密堡条约》)第十七条，《海德堡国际法期刊》，第34卷 (1974年)，见第80页； |
| generally: P.H. Sand, “Development of
International Water Law in the Lake Chad Basin”, ibid., pp. 52–76. | 一般参考：P.H. Sand,“国际水法在乍得湖流域的发展”，同上，第52-76页。 |
| Land and Maritime Boundary between
Cameroon and Nigeria, Preliminary Objections, Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1998,
p. 275, at p. 305, para. 65. | 喀麦隆和尼日利亚间陆地和海洋疆界案，初步反对意见，判决，《1998年国际法院案例汇编》，第275页起，见第305页，第65段。 |
| Ibid., pp. 306–307, para. 67. | 同上，见第306-307页，第67段。 |
| Whaling in the Antarctic (Australia v.
Japan: New Zealand intervening), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2014, p. 226; | 南极捕鲸案(澳大利亚诉日本：新西兰参与诉讼)，判决，《2014年国际法院案例汇编》，第226页； |
| see also below footnote 558 and
accompanying text. | 另见下文脚注558和随附文本。 |
| See articles 39–41 of the 1969 Vienna
Convention. | 见1969年《维也纳公约》第三十九至第四十一条。 |
| See Madrid European Council, Conclusions
of the Presidency, European Union Bulletin, No. 12 (1995), p. 9, at p. 10,
sect. I.A.I. | 见欧洲理事会马德里会议，主席的结论，《欧洲联盟公报》，第12号(1995年)，第9页起，见第10页，第I.A.I节)。 |
| Ibid. | 同上。 |
| See Aust, Modern Treaty Law and Practice
(footnote 142 above), p. 215; | 见Aust,《现代条约法和实践》(上文脚注142)，第215页； |
| Hafner, “Subsequent agreements and
practice …” (see footnote 273 above), pp. 109–110. | Hafner,“嗣后协定和实践…”(见上文上文脚注273)，第109-110页。 |
| P.C.G. Kapteyn and P. VerLoren van
Themaat, Introduction to the Law of the European Communities, 3rd ed., L.W.
Gormley, ed. (London, Kluwer Law International, 1998), pp. 340–343. | P.C.G. Kapteyn和P.
VerLoren van Themaat，《欧洲共同体法律导论》，第三版，L.W. Gormley编 (伦敦，威科法律国际，1998年)，第340-343页。 |
| Case C-181/91 and C-248/91, Parliament v.
Council and Commission [1993], European Court Reports I-3713, para. 12. | C-181/91和C-248/91号案，议会诉理事会和委员会[1993年]，欧洲法院I-3713号案例报告，第12段。 |
| Ibid., para. 14. | 同上，第14段。 |
| See draft conclusions 2, para. 4, and 4,
para. 3, and commentary thereto, respectively, para. (10) and paras.
(23)–(35), above. | 见上文结论草案2第4段和结论草案4第3段，及分别见结论草案2评注第(10)段和结论草案4评注第(23)-(37)段。 |
| R. Higgins, “The development of
international law by the political organs of the United Nations”, Proceedings
of the American Society of International Law at its 59th Annual Meeting
(Washington, D.C., April 22–24, 1965), pp. 116–124, at p. 119; | R. Higgins,“联合国政治机关发展国际法的情况”，《美国国际法学会第59次年度会议纪要》(华盛顿特区，1965年4月22日至24日)，第116-124页，见第119页； |
| the practice of an international
organization itself may also be a means of interpretation in itself under
paragraph 3 (see below at paras. (25)–(35)). | 国际组织的实践还可能本身就是第3段所称的一种解释资料(见下文第(25)-(35)段)。 |
| Legality of the Use by a State of Nuclear
Weapons in Armed Conflict, Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 1996, p. 66, at
p. 81, para. 27. | 国家在武装冲突中使用核武器的合法性，咨询意见，《1996年国际法院案例汇编》，第66页起，见第81页，第27段。 |
| The Permanent Court of International
Justice had adopted this approach in its Advisory Opinion on Competence of
the International Labour Organization to regulate, incidentally, the personal
work of the employer, 23 July 1926, P.C.I.J. Series B. No. 13, at pp. 19–20; | 常设国际法院在关于国际劳工组织附带规范雇主个人工作的权限的咨询意见中便采用了这种办法，1926年7月23日，《常设国际法院案例汇编》，B辑第13号，见第19-20页； |
| see S. Engel, “‘Living’ international
constitutions and the world court (the subsequent practice of international
organs under their constituent instruments)”, International and Comparative
Law Quarterly, vol. 16 (1967), pp. 865–910, at p. 871. | 见S. Engel,“‘活的’国际章程和世界法院(国际机关在其组成文书下的嗣后实践)”，《国际和比较法季刊》，第16卷 (1967年)，第865-910页，见第871页。 |
| WTO Appellate Body Report, United States
— Measures Affecting the Production and Sale of Clove Cigarettes,
WT/DS406/AB/R, adopted 24 April 2012, para. 262 (original emphasis). | 世贸组织上诉机构报告，美国－影响丁香烟生产和销售的措施案，WT/DS406/AB/R,
2012年4月24日通过，第262段(强调系原文所有)。 |
| Ibid. (footnotes omitted); | 同上(脚注略)； |
| although the Doha Ministerial Decision
does not concern a provision of the WTO Agreement itself, it concerns an
annex to that Agreement (the “TBT Agreement”), which is an “integral part” of
the Agreement establishing the WTO (art. 2, para. 2, WTO Agreement). | 《多哈部长级会议决定》尽管不涉及《世贸组织协定》本身的条款，但涉及其中一个附件(《技术性贸易壁垒协定》)，该附件是《建立世贸组织的协定》的“完整组成部分”(《世贸组织协定》第2条第2款)。 |
| Military and Paramilitary Activities in
and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States of America), Merits,
Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1986, p. 14, at p. 100, para. 188: “The effect of
consent to the text of such resolutions cannot be understood as merely that
of a ‘reiteration or elucidation’ of the treaty commitment undertaken in the
Charter. | 尼加拉瓜境内和针对尼加拉瓜的军事和准军事活动(尼加拉瓜诉美利坚合众国)，实质问题，判决，《1986年国际法院案例汇编》，第14页起，见第100页，第188段：“对此类决议案文的同意所具效力不能被理解为仅是‘重申或阐明’《宪章》中的条约义务。 |
| On the contrary, it may be understood as
an acceptance of the validity of the rule or set of rules declared by the
resolution by themselves”. | 相反，同意的效力可被理解为自身接受决议宣示的一项规则或一套规则的有效性”。 |
| This statement, whose primary purpose is
to explain the possible role of General Assembly resolutions for the
formation of customary law, also recognizes the treaty-related point that
such resolutions may serve to express the agreement, or the positions, of the
parties regarding a certain interpretation of the Charter of the United Nations
as a treaty (“elucidation”); | 这段话的主要目的在于解释大会决议在形成习惯法方面可能起到的作用，但同时也确认了与条约有关的论点，即：此类决议可能有助于表达缔约方对于把《联合国宪章》解释为条约的协定或立场(“阐明”)； |
| similarly: Accordance with International
Law of the Unilateral Declaration of Independence in Respect of Kosovo,
Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 2010, p. 403, at p. 437, para. 80; | 相似的还有：科索沃单方面宣布独立是否符合国际法，咨询意见，《2010年国际法院案例汇编》，第403页起，见第437页，第80段； |
| in this sense, for example, L.B. Sohn,
“The UN system as authoritative interpreter of its law”, in United Nations
Legal Order, vol. 1, O. Schachter and C.C. Joyner, eds. (Cambridge, American
Society of International Law/Cambridge University Press, 1995), pp. 169–229,
at p. 177 (noting in regard to the Nicaragua case that “[t]he Court accepted
the Friendly Relations Declaration as an authentic interpretation of the
Charter”). | 在此意义上，例如L.B. Sohn,“联合国系统是联合国法律的作准解释者”，载于O. Schachter和C.C.
Joyner所编《联合国法律秩序》(剑桥，美国国际法学会/剑桥大学出版社，1995年)，第1卷，第169-229页，见第177页 (针对尼加拉瓜案指出，“本院接受《友好关系宣言》是对《宪章》的作准解释”)。 |
| H.G. Schermers and N.M. Blokker,
International Institutional Law, 5th revised ed. (Leiden/Boston, Martinus
Nijhoff, 2011), p. 854 (referring to interpretations by the Assembly of the
Oil Pollution Compensation Fund regarding the constituent instruments of the
Fund); | H. G. Schermers和N.
M. Blokker,《国际机构法》，第5修订版 (莱顿/波士顿，马丁努斯·奈霍夫出版社，2011年)，第854页 (提到油污赔偿基金大会就基金组成文书所作的解释)； |
| M. Cogen, “Membership, associate
membership and pre-accession arrangements of CERN, ESO, ESA, and EUMETSAT”,
International Organizations Law Review, vol. 9 (2012), pp. 145–179, at pp.
157–158 (referring to a unanimously adopted decision of the CERN Council of
17 June 2010 interpreting the admission criteria established in the CERN
Convention as a subsequent agreement under article 31, para. 3 (a), of the
1969 Vienna Convention). See E. Jimémez de Aréchega, “International law in
the past third of a century”, Recueil des cours … | M. Cogen,“欧洲核研究组织、欧洲南半球天文台、欧洲航天局和欧洲气象卫星利用组织的成员地位、非正式成员地位和加入前安排”，《国际组织法律述评》，第9卷
(2012年)，第145-179页，见第157-158页 (提到2010年6月17日欧洲核研究组织通过一致决定，将《欧洲核研究组织公约》的加入标准解释为1969年《维也纳公约》第三十一条第三款(a)项所称的嗣后协定)。 |
| 1978, vol. 159, pp. 1–334, at p. 32
(stating in relation to the Friendly Relations Declaration that “[t]his
Resolution … constitutes an authoritative expression of the views held by the
totality of the parties to the Charter as to these basic principles and
certain corollaries resulting from them. | 见E. Jimémez de Aréchega,“过去三十年的国际法”，《1978年…学院讲义》，第159卷，第1-334页，见第32页 (谈到《友好关系宣言》时指出，“该决议…构成了《宪章》全体缔约方对这些基本原则所持观点和由此产生的某些推论的作准表述。 |
| In the light of these circumstances, it
seems difficult to deny the legal weight and authority of the Declaration
both as a resolution recognizing what the Members themselves believe constitute
existing rules of customary law and as an interpretation of the Charter by
the subsequent agreement and the subsequent practice of all its members”); | 鉴于这种情形，《宣言》的法律份量和权威似乎难以否认：它既是确认会员国自己认为构成习惯法现行准则的决议，又是其所有成员通过嗣后协定和嗣后实践对《宪章》的解释”)； |
| O. Schachter, “General course in public
international law”, Recueil des cours … 1982, vol. 178, pp. 9–396, at p. 113
(“[t]he law-declaring resolutions that construed and ‘concretized’ the
principles of the Charter — whether as general rules or in regard to
particular cases — may be regarded as authentic interpretation by the parties
of their existing treaty obligations. | O. Schachter，“国际公法通用课程”，《1982年…学院讲义》，第178卷，第9-396页，见第113页 (“可把用于解释和‘具体化’《宪章》各项原则(不论是作为一般规则还是针对具体情形)的法律宣示性决议视为缔约方对其现有条约义务的作准解释。 |
| To that extent they were interpretation,
and agreed by all Member States, they fitted comfortably into an established
source of law.”); | 在此意义上，这些决议属于解释，且经所有会员国同意，所以完全属于确定的法律渊源。 |
| P. Kunig, “United Nations Charter,
interpretation of”, in Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law,
vol. X (www.mpepil.com), pp. 273 et seq., at p. 275 (stating that, “[i]f
passed by consensus, they [that is, General Assembly resolutions] are able to
play a major role in the … interpretation of the UN Charter”); | ”)； P. Kunig,“《联合国宪章》的解释”，载于《马克斯·普朗克国际公法百科全书》，第十卷(www.mpepil.com)，第273页及以下各页，见第275页 (指出，“它们[即大会决议]如果以协商一致的方式获得通过，就能在…解释《联合国宪章》方面发挥重大作用”)； |
| Aust, Modern Treaty Law and Practice (see
footnote 142 above), p. 213 (mentioning that General Assembly resolution
51/210 on measures to eliminate international terrorism of 17 December 1996
“can be seen as a subsequent agreement about the interpretation of the UN
Charter”). | Aust,《现代条约法和实践》(见上文脚注142)，第213页(提到联合国大会1996年12月17日关于消除国际恐怖主义的措施的第51/210号决议“可被视为关于解释《联合国宪章》的嗣后协定”)。 |
| All resolutions to which the writers are
referring have been adopted by consensus. | 著述者提到的所有决议均是以协商一致的方式获得通过的。 |
| WTO Appellate Body Report, United States
— Measures Affecting the Production and Sale of Clove Cigarettes,
WT/DS406/AB/R, adopted 24 April 2012, para. 265. | 世贸组织上诉机构报告，美国－影响丁香烟生产和销售的措施案，WT/DS406/AB/R,
2012年4月24日通过，第265段。 |
| Y. Bonzon, Public Participation and
Legitimacy in the WTO (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2014), pp.
114–115. | Y. Bonzon,《世贸组织中的公共参与和合法性》(剑桥，剑桥大学出版社，2014年)，第114-115页。 |
| Legal Consequences for States of the
Continued Presence of South Africa in Namibia (South West Africa)
Notwithstanding Security Council Resolution 276 (1970), Advisory Opinion,
I.C.J. Reports 1971, p. 16, at p. 22. | 南非不顾安全理事会第276(1970)号决议继续留驻纳米比亚(西南非洲)对各国的法律后果，咨询意见，《1971年国际法院案例汇编》，第16页起，见第22页。 |
| H. Thirlway, “The law and procedure of
the International Court of Justice 1960-1989, Part Two”, British Yearbook of
International Law 1990, vol. 61, pp. 1–133, at p. 76 (mentioning that “[t]he
Court’s reference to the practice as being ‘of’ the Organization is
presumably intended to refer, not to a practice followed by the Organization
as an entity in its relations with other subjects of international law, but
rather a practice followed, approved or respected throughout the
Organization. | H. Thirlway,“1960-1989年国际法院的法律和程序，第二部分”，《1990年英国国际法年鉴》，第61卷，第1-133页，见第76页 (提到“法院提及该组织‘的’实践，很可能是想指这不是该组织作为一个实体在其与国际法其他主体的关系中遵循的实践，而是在整个组织范围内得到遵循、批准或尊重的实践。 |
| Seen in this light, the practice is …
rather a recognition by the other members of the Security Council at the
relevant moment, and indeed by all member States by tacit acceptance, of the
validity of such resolutions”). | 从这个角度看，该实践…不如说是在相关时刻安全理事会其他成员承认此类决议的有效性，实际上是所有会员国以默许接受的方式承认此类决议的有效性”)。 |
| Legal Consequences of the Construction of
a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, Advisory Opinion, I.C.J.
Reports 2004, p. 136, at p. 150 (emphasis added). | 在巴勒斯坦被占领土修建隔离墙的法律后果，咨询意见，《2004年国际法院案例汇编》，第136页起，见第150页(强调是后加的)。 |
| Ibid. | 同上。 |
| See commentary to draft conclusion 11,
para. 2, second sentence, paras. (13)–(25), above; | 见上文结论草案11的评注，第2段，第二句，第(13)-(25)段； |
| Villiger, Commentary … (see footnote 37
above), pp. 431–432, para. 22; | Villiger, 《…评注》(见上文脚注37)，第431-432页，第22段； |
| J. Arato, “Treaty interpretation and
constitutional transformation”, Yale Journal of International Law, vol. 38
(2013), pp. 289–357, at p. 322. | J. Arato,“条约解释和组织转型”，《耶鲁国际法期刊》，第38卷
(2013年)，第289-357页，见第322页。 |
| Judgment of 11 March 2015, Joined Cases
C-464/13 and C-465/13, Europäische Schule München v. Silvana Oberto and
Barbara O’Leary [2015], paras. 65–66. | 2015年3月11日的判决，C-464/13号和C-465/13号联合案件，慕尼黑欧洲学校诉Silvana Oberto和Barbara O’Leary [2015年]，第65-66段。 |
| Gardiner, Treaty Interpretation (see
footnote 19 above), p. 281. | Gardiner,《条约解释》 (见上文脚注19)，第281页。 |
| Ibid. | 同上。 |
| S. Schiele, Evolution of International
Environmental Regimes: The Case of Climate Change (Cambridge, Cambridge
University Press, 2014), pp. 37–38; | S. Schiele,《国际环境制度的演变：着眼气候变化》(剑桥，剑桥大学出版社，2014年)，第37-38页； |
| A. Gillespie, Whaling Diplomacy: Defining
Issues in International Environmental Law (Cheltenham, Edward Elgar, 2005),
p. 411. | A. Gillespie，《捕鲸外交：确定国际环境法中的各项问题》 (切尔滕纳姆，爱德华·埃尔加出版社，2005年)，第411页。 |
| Whaling in the Antarctic (Australia v.
Japan: New Zealand intervening), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2014, p. 226. | 南极捕鲸案(澳大利亚诉日本：新西兰参与诉讼)，判决，《2014年国际法院案例汇编》，第226页。 |
| Ibid., p. 257, para. 83. | 同上，第257页，第83段。 |
| See Legal Consequences of the
Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, Advisory
Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 2004, p. 136, at p. 149 (referring to General
Assembly resolution 1600 (XV) of 15 April 1961 (adopted with 60 votes to 16,
with 23 abstentions, including the Soviet Union and other States of Eastern
Europe) and resolution 1913 (XVIII) of 13 December 1963 (adopted by 91 votes
to 2 (Spain and Portugal)). | 见在巴勒斯坦被占领土修建隔离墙的法律后果，咨询意见，《2004年国际法院案例汇编》，第136页起，见第149页(提及大会1961年4月15日第1600 (XV)号决议(以60票赞成、23票弃权和16票反对获得通过，反对国包括苏联和其他东欧国家)和大会1963年12月13日第1913 (XVIII)号决议，(以91票赞同、西班牙和葡萄牙2票反对获得通过)。 |
| Legality of the Use by a State of Nuclear
Weapons in Armed Conflict, Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 1996, p. 66, at
p. 74; | 国家在武装冲突中使用核武器的合法性，咨询意见，《1996年国际法院案例汇编》，第66页起，见第74页； |
| See also D. Simon, L’interprétation
judiciaire des traités d’organisations internationales (Paris, Pedone, 1981),
pp. 379–384. | 另见D. Simon,《国际组织条约的司法解释》 (巴黎，贝多内出版社，1981年)，第379-384页。 |
| Competence of Assembly regarding
admission to the United Nations, Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 1950, p. 4,
at p. 9. | 联合国大会接纳国家加入联合国的权限，咨询意见，《1950年国际法院案例汇编》，第4页起，见第9页。 |
| Applicability of Article VI, Section 22,
of the Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations,
Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 1989, p. 177, at p. 194, para. 48. | 《联合国特权和豁免公约》第六条第二十二节的适用，咨询意见，《1989年国际法院案例汇编》，第177页起，见第194页，第48段。 |
| Constitution of the Maritime Safety
Committee of the Inter-Governmental Maritime Consultative Organization,
Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 1960, p. 150, at p. 169. | 政府间海事协商组织海上安全委员会的组成，咨询意见，《1960年国际法院案例汇编》，第150页起，见第169页。 |
| Certain Expenses of the United Nations
(Article 17, paragraph 2, of the Charter), Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports
1962, p. 151, at p. 168. | 联合国的某些开支(《宪章》第十七条第二项)，咨询意见，《1962年国际法院案例汇编》，第151页起，见第168页。 |
| See J. Klabbers, An Introduction to
International Organizations Law, 3rd ed. (Cambridge, Cambridge University
Press, 2015), p. 86; | 见J. Klabbers,《国际组织法律导论》，第3版 (剑桥，剑桥大学出版社，2015年)，第86页； |
| C.F. Amerasinghe, Principles of the
Institutional Law of International Organizations, 2nd ed. (Cambridge,
Cambridge University Press, 2005), p. 25; | C.F. Amerasinghe,《国际组织机构法原则》，第2版(剑桥，剑桥大学出版社，2005年)，第25页； |
| J.E. Alvarez, International Organizations
as Law-Makers (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2005), p. 80; | J.E. Alvarez,《制定法律的国际组织》(牛津，牛津大学出版社，2005年)，第80页； |
| Rosenne, Developments in the Law of
Treaties … (see footnote 514 above), pp. 224–225. | Rosenne,《…条约法发展情况》(见上文脚注514)，第224-225页。 |
| See Lauterpacht, “The development of the
law of international organization …” (footnote 393 above), p. 460; | 见Lauterpacht,“…国际组织法律的发展”(上文脚注393)，第460页； |
| N.M. Blokker, “Beyond ‘Dili’: on the
powers and practice of international organizations”, in State, Sovereignty,
and International Governance, G. Kreijen, ed. (Oxford, Oxford University
Press, 2002), pp. 299–322, at pp. 312–318. | N.M. Blokker, “Beyond ‘Dili’: on the
powers and practice of international organizations”, 载于G. Kreijen 所编《国家、主权和国际治理》(牛津，牛津大学出版社，2002年)，第299-322页，见第312-318页。 |
| C. Brölmann, “Specialized rules of treaty
interpretation: international organizations”, in Hollis, The Oxford Guide to
Treaties (see footnote 413 above), pp. 507–534, at pp. 520–521; | C. Brölmann,“条约解释的专门规则：国际组织”，载于Hollis,《牛津条约指南》(见上文脚注413)，第507-534页，见第520-521页； |
| S. Kadelbach, “The interpretation of the
Charter”, in The Charter of the United Nations: A Commentary, 3rd ed., B.
Simma et al., eds. (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2012), p. 71, at p. 80; | S. Kadelbach,“《宪章》的解释”，载于B. Simma 等人所编《〈联合国宪章〉：评注》第3版(牛津，牛津大学出版社，2012年)，第71页起，见第80页； |
| Gardiner, Treaty Interpretation (see
footnote 19 above), pp. 127 and 281. | Gardiner,《条约解释》(见上文脚注19)，第127和第281页。 |
| Gardiner, Treaty Interpretation (see
footnote 19 above), p. 282; | Gardiner,《条约解释》(见上文脚注19)，第282页； |
| Schermers and Blokker, International
Institutional Law (see footnote 546 above), p. 844; | Schermers和Blokker,《国际机构法》(见上文脚注546)，第844页； |
| J. Crawford, Brownlie’s Principles of
Public International Law, 8th ed. (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2012), p.
187; | J. Crawford,《布朗利的国际公法原则》，第8版(牛津，牛津大学出版社，2012年)，第187页； |
| Klabbers, An Introduction to
International Organizations Law (see footnote 567 above), pp. 85–86; | Klabbers,《国际组织法律导论》(见上文脚注567)，第85-86页； |
| see also Partial Award on the Lawfulness
of the Recall of the Privately Held Shares on 8 January 2001 and the
Applicable Standards for Valuation of those Shares, 22 November 2002, UNRIAA,
vol. XXIII (Sales No. E/F.04.V.15), pp. 183–251, at p. 224, para. 145. | 另见关于2001年1月8日召回私人持股合法性及此类股份估值适用标准的部分裁决，2002年11月22日，《国际仲裁裁决汇编》，第二十三卷(出售品编号E/F.04.V.15)，第183-251页，见第224页，第145段。 |
| See Legal Consequences of the
Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, Advisory
Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 2004, p. 136, at p. 149 (referring to General
Assembly resolution 1600 (XV) of 15 April 1961 (adopted by 60 votes to 16,
with 23 abstentions, including the Soviet Union and other States of Eastern
Europe) and resolution 1913 (XVIII) of 13 December 1963 (adopted by 91 votes
with 2 against (Spain and Portugal)). | 见在巴勒斯坦被占领土修建隔离墙的法律后果，咨询意见，《2004年国际法院案例汇编》，第136页起，见第149页(提及大会1961年4月15日第1600(XV)号决议(以60票赞成、23票弃权和16票反对获得通过，反对国包括苏联和其他东欧国家)和大会1963年12月13日第1913(XVIII)号决议，(以91票赞同、西班牙和葡萄牙2票反对获得通过)。 |
| The International Court of Justice used
the expression “purposes and functions as specified or implied in its
constituent documents and developed in practice”, Reparations for injuries
suffered in the service of the United Nations, Advisory Opinion, I.C.J.
Reports 1949, p. 174, at p. 180. | 国际法院所用的措辞是“…其组成文件中具体规定或默示的，以及在实践中发展的宗旨和职能”，执行联合国公务时所受损害的补偿，咨询意见，《1949年国际法院案例汇编》，第174页起，见第180页。 |
| See para. (15) of the commentary to draft
conclusion 2 and footnote 58 above; | 见结论草案2评注第(15)段和上文脚注58； |
| see also, in particular, Land and
Maritime Boundary between Cameroon and Nigeria, Preliminary Objections,
Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1998, p. 275, at pp. 306–307, para. 67. | 尤其另见喀麦隆和尼日利亚间陆地和海洋疆界案，初步反对意见，判决，《1998年国际法院判例汇编》，第275页起，见第306-307页，第67段。 |
| See South-West Africa—Voting Procedure,
Advisory Opinion of June 7th, 1955, I.C.J. Reports 1955, p. 67, Separate
Opinion of Judge Lauterpacht, at p. 106 (“[a] proper interpretation of a
constitutional instrument must take into account not only the formal letter
of the original instrument, but also its operation in actual practice and in
the light of the revealed tendencies in the life of the Organization”). | 见西南非洲—表决程序案，1955年6月7日的咨询意见，《1955年国际法院案例汇编》，第67页起，劳特帕赫特法官的个别意见，见第106页。 (“要想妥善地解释组成文书，必须不仅考虑到原始文书的正式文字，而且要考虑到其实践中的运作并联系本组织存在期间所出现的各种趋势”)。 |
| Commentators are debating whether the
specific institutional character of certain international organizations, in
combination with the principles and values that are enshrined in their
constituent instruments could also yield a “constitutional” interpretation of
such instruments that receives inspiration from national constitutional law,
see, for example, J.E. Alvarez, “Constitutional interpretation in
international organizations”, in The Legitimacy of International Organizations,
J.-M. Coicaud and V. Heiskanen, eds. (Tokyo, United Nations University Press,
2001), pp. 104–154; | 评论家们正在就以下问题进行辩论，即：某些国际组织具体的机构性质，加上其组成文书中所显示的原则和价值，是否也能够导致人们借鉴国家宪法，对此类文书作出“宪法性”解释？ 例如，见J.E.
Alvarez,“国际组织中的宪法性解释”，载于J.-M.
Coicaud和V. Heiskanen 所编《国际组织的合法性》(东京，联合国大学出版社，2001年)，第104-154页； |
| A. Peters, “L’acte constitutif de
l’organisation internationale”, in Droit des organisations internationales,
E. Lagrange and J.-M. Sorel, eds. (Paris, LGDJ, 2013), pp. 216–218; | A. Peters, “L’acte constitutif de l’organisation
internationale”，载于E. Lagrange和J.-M. Sorel所编《国际组织的法律》 (巴黎，LGDJ，2013年)，第216-218页； |
| J. Klabbers, “Constitutionalism Lite”,
International Organizations Law Review, vol. 1 (2004), pp. 31–58, at pp.
50–54. | J. Klabbers, “Constitutionalism Lite”,《国际组织法律评论》, 第1卷(2004年)，第31–58页，见第50-54页。 |
| Legal consequences for States of the
continued presence of South Africa in Namibia (South West Africa)
notwithstanding Security Council resolution 276 (1970), Advisory Opinion,
I.C.J. Reports 1971, pp. 31–32, para. 53; | 南非不顾安全理事会第276(1970)号决议继续留驻纳米比亚(西南非洲)对各国的法律后果，咨询意见，《1971年国际法院案例汇编》，第31-32页，第53段； |
| see also draft conclusion 8 and
commentary thereto, paras. (24)–(30); | 另见结论草案8及评注，第(24)-(30)段； |
| Dörr, “Article 31 …” (see footnote 61
above), p. 575, para. 30; | Dörr,“第三十一条…”(见上文脚注61)，第575页，第30段； |
| Schmalenbach, “Art. 5” (footnote 515
above), p. 92, para. 7. | Schmalenbach,“第五条”(上文脚注515)，第92页，第7段。 |
| Certain Expenses of the United Nations
(Article 17, paragraph 2, of the Charter), Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports
1962, p. 151, at p. 168 (“[b]ut when the Organization takes action which
warrants the assertion that it was appropriate for the fulfilment of one of
the stated purposes of the United Nations, the presumption is that such
action is not ultra vires the Organization”). | 联合国的某些开支(《宪章》第十七条第二项)，咨询意见，《1962年国际法院案例汇编》，第151页起，见168页(“但如果该组织采取行动证明其言论，即这样做对于实现联合国明文规定的宗旨之一是适当的，就可推定这种行动没有超越该组织的权力”)。 |
| See commentary to draft conclusion 5,
para. (14), above. | 见上文结论草案5评注，第(14)段。 |
| Draft articles on the responsibility of
international organizations, general commentary, para. (7) (report of the
International Law Commission on its sixty-third session, Official Records of
the General Assembly, Sixty-sixth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/66/10), chap.
V, p. 70, para. 88). | 关于国际组织的责任的条款草案，总评注，第(7)段，(国际法委员会第六十三届会议报告，《大会正式记录，第六十六届会议，补编第10号》A/66/10)，第五章，第70页，第88段)。 |
| See, for example, Klabbers, An
Introduction to International Organizations Law (footnote 567 above), p. 84; | 例如，见Klabbers,《国际组织法律导论》 (上文脚注567)，第84页； |
| Schmalenbach, “Art. 5” (footnote 515
above), p. 89, para. 1, and p. 96, para. 15; | Schmalenbach,“第五条”(上文脚注515)，第89页第1段和第96页第15段； |
| Brölmann, “Specialized rules of treaty
interpretation …” (footnote 569 above), p. 522; | Brölmann,“条约解释的专门规则…”(上文脚注569)，第522页； |
| Dörr, “Article 31 …” (see footnote 61
above), pp. 576–577, para. 31. | Dörr,“第三十一条…”(见上文脚注61)，第576-577页，第31段。 |
| WTO Appellate Body Report, United States
— Measures Affecting the Production and Sale of Clove Cigarettes,
WT/DS406/AB/R, adopted 24 April 2012, paras. 252–257. | 世贸组织上诉机构报告，美国－影响丁香烟生产和销售的措施案，WT/DS406/AB/R,
2012年4月4日通过，第252-257段。 |
| Most so-called interpretation clauses
determine which organ is competent authoritatively to interpret the treaty,
or certain of its provisions, but do not formulate specific rules “on”
interpretation itself, see C. Fernández de Casadevante y Romani, Sovereignty
and Interpretation of International Norms (Berlin/Heidelberg, Springer,
2007), pp. 26–27; | 大多数所谓的解释条款旨在确定哪个机关有权作准地解释条约或其中某些条款，而不是制订“关于”解释本身的具体规则，见C. Fernández de Casadevante y
Romani,《主权与国际规范的解释》(柏林/海德堡，施普林格出版社，2007年)，第26-27页； |
| Dörr, “Article 31 …” (see footnote 61
above), p. 576, para. 31. | Dörr,“第三十一条…”(见上文脚注61)，第576页，第31段。 |
| See 1986 Vienna Convention, art. 2 (j); | 见1986年《维也纳公约》，第二条(j)项； |
| and the International Law Commission’s
draft articles on the responsibility of international organizations, art. 2
(b), report of the International Law Commission on its sixty-third session,
Official Records of the General Assembly, Sixty-sixth Session, Supplement No.
10 (A/66/10), chap. V, sect. E, para. 87; | 国际法委员会关于国际组织的责任的条款草案，第二条(b)项，国际法委员会第六十三届会议报告，《大会正式记录，第六十六届会议，补编第10号》(A/66/10)，第五章，E节，第87段； |
| C. Peters, “Subsequent practice and
established practice of international organizations”, Göttingen Journal of
International Law, vol. 3 (2011), pp. 617–642. | C. Peters,“国际组织的嗣后实践和已确立的实践”，《哥廷根国际法期刊》，第3卷(2011年)，第617-642页。 |
| Yearbook … 1982, vol. II (Part Two),
chap. II, p. 21, commentary to draft article 2, para. 1 (j), para. (25). | 《1982年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第二章，第21页，第二条第1款(j)项草案的评注，第(25)段。 |
| Report of the International Law
Commission on its sixty-third session, Official Records of the General
Assembly, Sixty-sixth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/66/10), chap. V, p. 52. | 国际法委员会第六十三届会议报告，《大会正式记录，第六十六届会议，补编第10号》(A/66/10)，第五章，第52页。 |
| See Higgins, “The Development of
international law …” (footnote 540 above), p. 121 (“aspects of treaty
interpretation and customary practice in this field merge very closely”); | 见Higgins,“…发展国际法的情况”(上文脚注540)，第121页(“条约解释的若干方面与这一领域的习惯实践融合得非常接近”)； |
| Peters, “Subsequent practice …” (footnote
583 above), pp. 630–631 (“should be considered a kind of customary
international law of the organization”); | Peters,“…嗣后实践…”(上文脚注583)，第630-631页(“应视为该组织的一种习惯国际法”)； |
| it is not persuasive to limit the
“established practice of the organization” to so-called internal rules since,
according to the Commission, “there would have been problems in referring to
the ‘internal’ law of an organization, for while it has an internal aspect,
this law also has in other respects an international aspect”, Yearbook …
1982, vol. II (Part Two), chap. II, p. 21, commentary to draft article 2,
para. 1 (j), para. (25); | 将“该组织已确立的实践”限定为所谓的内部规则是没有说服力的，因为委员会表示，“采用一个组织的‘内部’法这个提法会出现一些问题，因为虽然这种法律有其对内的一面，但在其他方面还有国际性质”，《1982年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第二章，第21页，第二条第1款(j)项草案的评注，第(25)段； |
| Schermers and Blokker, International
Institutional Law (see footnote 546 above), p. 766; | Schermers和Blokker,《国际机构法》(见上文脚注546)，第766页； |
| but see C. Ahlborn, “The rules of
international organizations and the law of international responsibility”,
International Organizations Law Review, vol. 8 (2011), pp. 397–482, at pp.
424–428. | 但见C. Ahlborn,“国际组织的规则和国际责任法”，《国际组织法律述评》，第8卷(2011年)，第397-482页，见第424-428页。 |
| Case C-43/75, Gabrielle Defrenne v.
Société anonyme belge de navigation aérienne Sabena [1976] European Court
Reports 455, para. 57; | C-43/75号案件，Gabrielle
Defrenne诉比利时航空[1976年]欧洲法院455号案例报告，第57段； |
| see also G. Nolte, “Jurisprudence under
special regimes relating to subsequent agreements and subsequent practice”,
in Nolte, Treaties and Subsequent Practice (see footnote 25 above), pp.
210–306, at pp. 297–300. | 另见格·诺尔特，“特殊制度下与嗣后协定和嗣后实践有关的判例”，载于诺尔特，《条约和嗣后实践》(见上文脚注25)，第210-306页，见第297-300页。 |
| Blokker, “Beyond ‘Dili’ …” (see footnote
568 above), p. 312. | Blokker, “Beyond ‘Dili’ …” (见上文脚注568)，第312页。 |
| Lauterpacht, “The development of the law
of international organization …” (footnote 393 above), p. 464 (“consent of
the general body of membership”); | Lauterpacht,“…国际组织法律的发展”(上文脚注393)，第464页(“全体成员普遍的同意”)； |
| Higgins, “The Development of
international law …” (footnote 540 above), p. 121 (“[t]he degree of length
and acquiescence need here perhaps to be less marked than elsewhere, because
the U.N. organs undoubtedly have initial authority to make such decisions
[regarding their own jurisdiction and competence]”); | Higgins,“…发展国际法的情况”(上文脚注540)，第121页(“此处所需的默认的程度和长度可能比别处弱一些，因为联合国机关无疑具有作出[关于其自身管辖权和职权的]此类决定的最初权威”)； |
| Peters, “Subsequent practice and
established practice …” (footnote 583 above), pp. 633–641. | Peters,“…嗣后实践和已确立的实践”(上文脚注583)，第633-641页。 |
| See N. Rodley, “The role and impact of
treaty bodies”, in The Oxford Handbook of International Human Rights Law, D.
Shelton, ed. (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2013), pp. 621–641, at pp.
622–623. | 见N. Rodley，“条约机构的作用和影响”，载于D. Shelton所编《牛津国际人权法手册》(牛津，牛津大学出版社，2013年)，第621-641页，见第622-623页。 |
| Arts. 8–14 of the International
Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (New
York, 7 March 1966), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 660, No. 9464, p.
195. | 《消除一切形式种族歧视国际公约》第八至第十四条(1966年3月7日，纽约)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第660卷，第9464号，第195页。 |
| Arts. 28–45 of the International Covenant
on Civil and Political Rights (New York, 19 December 1966), ibid., vol. 999,
No. 14668, p. 171. | 《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》第二十八至第四十五条(1966年12月19日，纽约)，同上，第999卷，第14668号，第171页。 |
| Arts. 17–22 of the Convention on the
Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (New York, 18
December 1979), ibid., vol. 1249, No. 20378, p. 13. | 《消除对妇女一切形式歧视公约》第十七至第二十二条(1979年12月18日，纽约)，同上，第1249卷，第20378号，第13页。 |
| Arts. 34–39 of the Convention on the
Rights of Persons with Disabilities (New York, 13 December 2006), ibid., vol.
2515, No. 44910, p. 3. | 《残疾人权利公约》第三十四至第三十九条(2006年12月13日，纽约)，同上，第2515卷，第44910号，第3页。 |
| Arts. 43–45 of the Convention on the
Rights of the Child (New York, 20 November 1989), ibid., vol. 1577, No.
27531, p. 3. | 《儿童权利公约》第43至第45条(1989年11月20日，纽约)，同上，第1577卷，第27531号，第3页。 |
| Arts. 17–24 of the Convention against
Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (New
York, 10 December 1984), ibid., vol. 1465, No. 24841, p. 85. | 《禁止酷刑和其他残忍、不人道或有辱人格的待遇或处罚公约》第17至第24条(1984年12月10日，纽约)，同上，第1465卷，第24841号，第85页。 |
| The Commission on the Limits of the
Continental Shelf was established under art. 76, para. 8, of the United
Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea and annex II to the Convention
(Montego Bay, 10 December 1982), ibid., vol. 1833, No. 31363, p. 3. | 大陆架界限委员会是根据《联合国海洋法公约》第七十六条第8款和该《公约》附件二设立的(1982年12月10日，蒙特哥湾)，同上，第1833卷，第31363号，第3页。 |
| The Compliance Committee under the Aarhus
Convention was established under art. 15 of the Convention on Access to
Information, Public Participation in Decision-Making and Access to Justice in
Environmental Matters (Aarhus, Denmark, 25 June 1998), ibid., vol. 2161, No.
37770, p. 447, and decision I/7 on review of compliance, adopted at the first
meeting of the parties in 2002 (ECE/MP.PP/2/Add.8). | 《奥胡斯公约》遵约委员会是根据《在环境问题上获得信息、公众参与决策和诉诸法律的公约》第十五条设立的 (1998年6月25日，丹麦奥胡斯)，同上，第2161卷，第37770号，第447页，以及2002年缔约方会议第一届会议通过的关于审查遵约情况的第I/7号决定(ECE/MP.PP/2/Add.8)。 |
| The International Narcotics Control Board
was established under art. 5 of the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs (New
York, 30 March 1961), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 520, No. 7515, p.
151. | 国际麻醉品管制局是根据《麻醉品单一公约》第五条设立的 (1961年3月30日，纽约)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第520卷，第7515号，第151页。 |
| See, e.g., art. 28, para. 3, of the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights; | 例如，见《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》第二十八条第3款； |
| see also Christian Tomuschat, Human
Rights: Between Idealism and Realism, 3rd ed. (Oxford, Oxford University
Press, 2014), p. 219. | 另见Christian Tomuschat,《人权：理想主义与现实主义之间》，第3版 (牛津，牛津大学出版社，2014年)，第219页。 |
| This is true, in particular, for
decisions of Conferences of States Parties, see draft conclusion 12 [11]. | 缔约国大会的决定就尤其属于这种情况，见结论草案12 [11]。 |
| The Committee of Experts on the
Application of Conventions and Recommendations of the International Labour
Organization (ILO) is an important example of an expert body that is an organ
of an international organization. | 国际劳工组织(劳工组织)实施公约与建议书专家委员会是属于国际组织机关的专家机构的重要例子。 |
| It was established in 1926 to examine government
reports on ratified conventions. It is composed of 20 eminent jurists from
different geographic regions, legal systems and cultures, who are appointed
by the governing body of ILO for three-year terms, see www.ilo.org and
information provided by ILO to the Commission, which is available on the
International Law Commission website at
http://legal.un.org/ilc/guide/1_11.shtml. | 该机构于1926年设立，负责审查关于已批准公约的政府报告，由20名来自不同地域、法律系统和文化的知名法学家组成，由劳工组织理事会任命，任期三年，见www.ilo.org和劳工组织向委员会提供的资料，可查阅国际法委员会网站：http://legal.un.org/ilc/guide/
1_11.shtml。 |
| The Working Group on Arbitrary Detention
is an example of a body of experts serving in their personal capacity that is
mandated by the Human Rights Council under its resolution 24/7 of 26
September 2013, Official Records of the General Assembly, Sixty-eighth
Session, Supplement No. 53 (A/68/53/Add.1). | 任意拘留问题工作组是一例由以个人身份任职的专家组成的机构，其任务授权来自人权理事会2013年9月26日第24/7号决议，《大会正式记录，第六十八届会议，补编第53号》(A/68/53/Add.1)。 |
| Being a subsidiary organ of the Council,
it is not an expert treaty body in the sense of draft conclusion 13, see
www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Detention/Pages/WGADIndex.aspx. | 该工作组是人权理事会的附属机构，因此不是结论草案13所指的专家条约机构，见www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Detention/Pages/WGADIndex.aspx。 |
| Economic and Social Council, resolution
1985/17 of 28 May 1985. | 经济及社会理事会，1985年5月28日第1985/17号决议。 |
| Arts. 1–15 of the Optional Protocol to
the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, annexed
to General Assembly resolution 63/117 of 10 December 2008. | 大会2008年12月10日第63/117号决议所附《经济、社会及文化权利国际公约任择议定书》第一至第十五条。 |
| The Compliance Committee under the Kyoto
Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (Kyoto,
11 December 1997) (United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 2303, No. 30822, p.
162) was established under art. 18 of the Protocol and decision 24/CP.7 on
procedures and mechanisms relating to compliance under the Kyoto Protocol,
adopted by the Conference of the Parties at its seventh session
(FCCC/CP/2001/13/Add.3). | 《联合国气候变化框架公约京都议定书》(1997年12月11日，京都) (联合国，《条约汇编》，第2303卷，第30822号，第162页)遵约委员会是根据《议定书》第十八条和缔约方会议第七届会议通过的关于与《京都议定书》规定的遵约有关的程序和机制的第24/CP.7号决定(FCCC/CP/2001/13/Add.3)设立的。 |
| See International Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights, art. 42, para. 7 (c); | 见《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》，第四十二条第7款(丙)项； |
| Optional Protocol to the International
Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, art. 5, para. 4; | 《公民权利和政治权利国际公约任择议定书》，第五条第4款； |
| and Optional Protocol to the
International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, art. 9, para.
1. | 《经济、社会及文化权利国际公约任择议定书》，第九条第一款。 |
| See International Convention on the
Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, art. 9, para. 2; | 见《消除一切形式种族歧视国际公约》，第九条第二款； |
| Convention on the Elimination of All
Forms of Discrimination against Women, art. 21, para. 1; | 《消除对妇女一切形式歧视公约》，第二十一条第1款； |
| Convention on the Rights of the Child
(New York, 29 November 1989) (United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1577, No.
27531, p. 3), art. 45 (d); | 《儿童权利公约》(1989年11月29日，纽约)(联合国，《条约汇编》，第1577卷，第27531号，第3页)，第四十五条(d)项； |
| International Convention for the
Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance (New York, 20 December
2006) (ibid., vol. 2716, No. 48088, p. 3), art. 33, para. 5; | 《保护所有人免遭强迫失踪国际公约》(2006年12月20日，纽约)(同上，第2716卷，第48088号，第3页)，第三十三条第五款； |
| United Nations Convention on the Law of
the Sea (Montego Bay, 10 December 1982) (ibid., vol. 1833, No. 31363, p. 3),
art. 76, para. 8. | 《联合国海洋法公约》(1982年12月10日，蒙特哥湾) (同上，第1833卷，第31363号，第3页)，第七十六条第8款。 |
| See Convention against Torture and Other
Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, art. 19, para. 3; | 见《禁止酷刑和其他残忍、不人道或有辱人格的待遇或处罚公约》，第19条第3款； |
| International Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights, art. 40, para. 4; | 《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》，第四十条第4款； |
| International Convention on the
Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families
(New York, 18 December 1990) (United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 2220, No.
39481, p. 3), art. 74. | 《保护所有移徙工人及其家庭成员权利国际公约》(1990年12月18日，纽约) (联合国，《条约汇编》，第2220卷，第39481号，第3页)，第74条。 |
| Decision I/7 on review of compliance (see
footnote 598 above), sect. XI, para. 36, and sect. XII, para. 37; | 关于审查遵约情况的第I/7号决定(见上文脚注598)，第十一节，第36段，和第十二节，第37段； |
| Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, art.
14. | 《麻醉品单一公约》，第十四条。 |
| Decision 24/CP.7 on procedures and mechanisms
relating to compliance under the Kyoto Protocol (see footnote 605 above),
annex, sect. XV. | 关于与《京都议定书》规定的遵约有关的程序和机制的第24/CP.7号决定(见上文脚注605)，附件，第十五节。 |
| See Official Records of the General
Assembly, Seventieth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/70/10), chap. III, para.
26 (b); | 见《大会正式记录，第七十届会议，补编第10号》(A/70/10)，第三章，第26 (b)段； |
| see also the “Final report on the impact
of findings of the United Nations human rights treaty bodies”, International
Law Association, Report of the Seventy-first Conference (see footnote 158
above) p. 5, para. 15; | 另见“关于联合国人权条约机构调查结果影响的最后报告”，国际法协会，《第七十一届会议报告》(见上文脚注158)第5页，第15段； |
| European Commission for Democracy through
Law (Venice Commission), “Report on the implementation of international human
rights treaties in domestic law and the role of courts” (CDL-AD(2014)036),
adopted by the Venice Commission at its 100th plenary session (Rome, 10–11
October 2014), p. 31, para. 78. | 通过法律实现民主欧洲委员会(威尼斯委员会)，“关于国内法中国际人权条约执行情况和法院作用的报告”(CDL-AD(2014)036)，威尼斯委员会第100届全体会议(2014年10月10日至11日，罗马)通过，第31页，第78段。 |
| See Ahmadou Sadio Diallo (Republic of
Guinea v. Democratic Republic of the Congo), Merits, Judgment, I.C.J. Reports
2010, p. 639, at pp. 663–664, para. 66; | 见艾哈迈杜·萨迪奥·迪亚洛(几内亚共和国诉刚果民主共和国)，实质问题，判决，《2010年国际法院案例汇编》，第639页起，见第663-664页，第66段； |
| Rodley, “The role and impact of treaty
bodies” (footnote 590 above), p. 640; | Rodley,“条约机构的作用和影响”(上文脚注590)，第640页； |
| A. Andrusevych and S. Kern, eds., Case
Law of the Aarhus Convention Compliance Committee (2004–2014), 3rd ed. (2016)
(Lviv, Resource and Analysis Center “Society and Environment”, 2011); | A. Andrusevych和S.
Kern编《〈奥胡斯公约〉遵约委员会判例(2004-2014年)》，第3版 (2016年) (利沃夫，资源和分析中心“社会和环境”，2011年)； |
| “Compilation of findings of the Aarhus
Convention Compliance Committee adopted 18 February 2005 to date”, available
from
www.unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/env/pp/compliance/Compilation_of_CC_findings.pdf
(accessed 8 July 2016). | “2005年2月18日至今通过的《奥胡斯公约》遵约委员会调查结果汇编”，可查www.unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/env/pp/compliance/Compilation_of_CC_
findings.pdf (访问日期：2016年7月8日)。 |
| R. Van Alebeek and A. Nollkaemper, “The
legal status of decisions by human rights treaty bodies in national law”, in
UN Human Rights Treaty Bodies: Law and Legitimacy, H. Keller and L. Grover,
eds. (Cambridge, United Kingdom, Cambridge University Press, 2012), pp.
356–413, at p. 402; | R. Van Alebeek和A.
Nollkaemper,“人权条约机构的决定在国内法中的法律地位”，载于H. Kelle和L. Grover所编《联合国人权条约机构：法律和合法性》(联合王国剑桥，剑桥大学出版社，2012年)，第356-413页，见第402页； |
| Rodley, “The role and impact of treaty
bodies” (see footnote 590 above), p. 639; | Rodley,“条约机构的作用和影响”(见上文脚注590)，第639页； |
| K. Mechlem, “Treaty bodies and the
interpretation of human rights“, Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law,
vol. 42 (2009), pp. 905–947, at p. 908. | K. Mechlem,“条约机构和人权的解释”，《范德比跨国法期刊》，第42卷(2009年)，第905-947页，见第908页。 |
| This is generally accepted in the
literature, see International Law Association, Report of the Seventy-first
Conference (see footnote 158 above), p. 5, para. 18; | 这一点在文献中得到了普遍接受，见国际法协会，《第七十一届会议报告》(上文脚注158)，第5页，第18段； |
| Rodley, “The role and impact of treaty
bodies” (see footnote 590 above), p. 639; | Rodley,“条约机构的作用和影响”(见上文脚注590)，第639页； |
| Tomuschat, Human Rights … (see footnote
600 above), pp. 233 and 267; | Tomuschat,《人权…》(见上文脚注600)，第233和第267页； |
| D. Shelton, “The legal status of
normative pronouncements of human rights treaty bodies” in Coexistence,
Cooperation and Solidarity, Liber Amicorum Rüdiger Wolfrum, vol. I, H.P.
Hestermeyer et al., eds. (Leiden/Boston, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 2012),
pp. 553–575, at p. 559; | D. Shelton,“人权条约机构规范性声明的法律地位”，载于H.P. Hestermeyer等人所编《共存、合作与团结：吕迪格·沃尔夫鲁姆友人文选》，第一卷，(莱顿/波士顿，马丁努斯·奈霍夫出版社，2012年)，第553-575页，见第559页； |
| H. Keller and L. Grover, “General
comments of the Human Rights Committee and their legitimacy”, in Keller and
Grover, UN Human Rights Treaty Bodies … (see footnote 613 above), pp.
116–198, at p. 129; | H. Keller和L.
Grover,“人权事务委员会的一般性意见及其合法性”，载于Keller和Grover,《联合国人权条约机构…》(见上文脚注613)，第116-198页，见第129页； |
| Venice Commission, “Report on the
implementation of international human rights treaties … (see footnote 611
above), p. 30, para. 76; | 威尼斯委员会，“关于…国际人权条约执行情况…的报告” (见上文脚注611)，第30页，第76段； |
| for the term “determine” in art. 18 of
the Kyoto Protocol and decision 24/CP.7, see G. Ulfstein and J. Werksmann,
“The Kyoto compliance system: towards hard enforcement”, in Implementing the
Climate Regime: International Compliance, O.S. Stokke, J. Hovi and G.
Ulfstein, eds. (London, Fridtjof Nansen Institut, 2005), pp. 39–62, at pp.
55–56. | 对于《京都议定书》第十八条和第24/CP.7号决定中的“断定”一词，见G.
Ulfstein和J. Werksmann,“京都遵约体系：走向强制执行”，载于O.S. Stokke、J.
Hovi和G. Ulfstein所编《执行气候制度：国际遵约》(伦敦，弗里乔夫·南森学会，2005年)，第39-62页，见第55-56页。 |
| See, for example, arts. 1 and 2 of the
Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social, and
Cultural Rights (New York, 10 December 2008), General Assembly resolution
63/117, annex. | 例如，见《经济、社会及文化权利国际公约任择议定书》第一和第二条(2008年12月10日，纽约)，大会第63/117号决议，附件。 |
| W. Kälin, “Examination of state reports”,
in Keller and Grover, UN Human Rights Treaty Bodies … (see footnote 613
above), pp. 16–72; | W. Kälin,“国家报告的审查”，载于Keller和Grover,《联合国人权条约机构…》(见上文脚注613)，第16-72页； |
| G. Ulfstein, “Individual complaints”,
ibid., pp. 73–115; | G. Ulfstein,“个人申诉”，同上，第73-115页； |
| Mechlem, “Treaty bodies …” (see footnote
613 above), pp. 922–930; | Mechlem,“条约机构…”(见上文脚注613)，第922-930页； |
| the legal basis for general comments
under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights is art. 40,
para. 4, but this practice has been generally accepted also with regard to
other expert bodies under human rights treaties, see Keller and Grover,
“General comments …” (see footnote 614 above), pp. 127–128. | 《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》之下一般性意见的法律依据是第四十条第4款，但对于各人权条约之下的其他专家机构，这一实践也已得到普遍接受，见Keller和Grover,“…一般性意见…”(见上文脚注614)，第127-128页。 |
| For example, Rodley, “The role and impact
of treaty bodies” (see footnote 590 above), p. 639; | 例如，Rodley,“条约机构的作用和影响”(见上文脚注590)，第639页； |
| Shelton, “The legal status of normative
pronouncements …” (see footnote 614 above), pp. 574–575; | Shelton,“…规范性声明的法律地位”(见上文脚注614)，第574-575页； |
| A. Boyle and C. Chinkin, The Making of
International Law (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2007), p. 155. | A. Boyle 和C.
Chinkin,《国际法的制定》(牛津，牛津大学出版社，2007年)，第155页。 |
| Draft general comment No. 33 (The
obligations of States parties under the Optional Protocol to the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights) (Second revised version
as of 18 August 2008) (CCPR/C/GC/33/CRP.3), 25 August 2008, at para. 17; | 第33号一般性意见草案(缔约国根据《公民权利和政治权利任择议定书》所承担的义务) (2008年8月18日第二次修订稿) (CCPR/C/GC/33/CRP.3), 2008年8月25日，见第17段； |
| this position has also been put forward
by several authors, see Keller and Grover, “General comments …” (see footnote
614 above), pp. 130–132 with further references. | 若干著述者也提出了这一立场，见Keller和Grover,“…一般性意见…” (见上文脚注614)，第130-132页，及更多参考文献。 |
| See, for example, the “Comments of the
United States of America on the Human Rights Committee’s ‘Draft general
comment 33: The Obligations of States Parties under the Optional Protocol to
the International Covenant Civil and Political Rights’”, 17 October 2008,
para. 17. | 例如，见“美利坚合众国对人权事务委员会‘第33号一般性意见草案：缔约国在《公民权利和政治权利国际公约任择议定书》下的义务’的评论”，2008年10月17日，第17段。 |
| Available from
www.state.gov/documents/organization/138851.pdf (accessed 8 July 2016). | 可查阅www.state.gov/documents/organization/138851.pdf
(访问日期：2016年7月8日)。 |
| Report of the Human Rights Committee,
Official Records of the General Assembly, Sixty-fourth Session, Supplement
No. 40 (A/64/40), vol. I, annex V. | 人权事务委员会的报告，《大会正式记录，第六十四届会议，补编第40号》(A/64/40)，第一卷，附件五。 |
| Dörr, “Article 31 …” (see footnote 61
above), p. 600, para. 85. | Dörr,“第三十一条…”(见上文脚注61)，第600页，第85段。 |
| See, for example, Official Records of the
General Assembly, Seventieth Session, Sixth Committee, Summary Record of the
22nd meeting (A/C.6/70/SR.22), 6 November 2015, para. 46 (United States:
“States Parties’ reactions to the pronouncements or activities of a treaty
body might, in some circumstances, constitute subsequent practice (of those
States) for the purposes of art. 31, paragraph 3”). | 例如见《大会正式记录，第七十届会议，第六委员会》，第22次会议简要记录(A/C.6/70/SR.22)，2015年11月6日，第46段(美国：“缔约国对条约机构的声明或活动作出的反应在某些情况下可以构成第三十一条第三款所述的(这些国家的)嗣后实践”)。 |
| See para. (11) of the commentary to draft
conclusion 3. | 见结论草案3评注第(11)段。 |
| See International Law Association, Report
of the Seventy-first Conference (see footnote 158 above), p. 6, para. 21. | 见国际法协会，《第七十一届会议报告》(见上文脚注158)，第6页，第21段。 |
| See, for example, M. Kanetake, “UN human
rights treaty monitoring bodies before domestic courts”, International and
Comparative Law Quarterly, vol. 67 (2018), pp. 201–232, at p. 218; | 例如，见M. Kanetake,“联合国人权条约监督机构在国内法院”，《国际和比较法季刊》，第67卷(2018年)，第201-232页，见第218页； |
| Mechlem, “Treaty bodies …” (see footnote
613 above), pp. 920–921; | Mechlem,“条约机构…”(见上文脚注613), 第920-921页； |
| B. Schlütter, “Aspects of human rights
interpretation by the UN treaty bodies”, in Keller and Grover, UN Human
Rights Treaty Bodies … (see footnote 613 above), pp. 289–290; | B. Schlütter,“论联合国条约机构的人权解释工作”，载于Keller和Grover,
《联合国人权条约机构…》(见上文脚注613)，第289-290页； |
| E. Klein and D. Kretzmer, “The UN Human
Rights Committee: the general comments — the evolution of an autonomous
monitoring instrument”, German Yearbook of International Law, vol. 58 (2015),
pp. 189–229, at pp. 205–206; | E. Klein和D.
Kretzmer,“联合国人权事务委员会：一般性意见――自主监测文书的演变”，《德国国际法年鉴》，第58卷
(2015年)，第189-229页，见第205-206页； |
| Ulfstein and Werksmann, “The Kyoto
compliance system …” (see footnote 614 above), p. 96. | Ulfstein和Werksmann,“京都遵约体系…”(见上文脚注614)，第96页。 |
| General Assembly resolutions 65/221 of 21
December 2010, para. 5, footnote 8, and 68/178 of 18 December 2013, para. 5,
footnote 8. | 大会2010年12月21日第65/221号决议，第5段，脚注8，和2013年12月18日第68/178号决议，第5段，脚注8。 |
| Report of the Human Rights Committee,
Official Records of the General Assembly, Fifty-sixth Session, Supplement No.
40 (A/56/40), vol. I, Annex VI. | 人权事务委员会的报告，《大会正式记录，第五十六届会议，补编第40号》(A/56/40)，第一卷，附件六。 |
| Ibid., para. 2. | 同上，第2段。 |
| See draft conclusion 11, para. 3, and the
commentary thereto. | 见结论草案11第3段及其评注。 |
| Committee on Economic, Social and
Cultural Rights, general comment No. 15 (2002), Official Records of the
Economic and Social Council 2003, Supplement No. 2
(E/2003/22-E/C.12/2002/13), annex IV, para. 2. | 经济、社会及文化权利委员会，第15号一般性意见(2002年)，《2003年经济及社会理事会正式记录，补编第2号》(E/2003/22-E/C.12/2002/13)，附件四，第2段。 |
| (“The human right to water entitles
everyone to sufficient, safe, acceptable, physically accessible and
affordable water for personal and domestic uses”). | (“水权保证人人能为个人和家庭生活得到充足、安全、可接受、便于汲取、价格合理的供水”)。 |
| General Assembly resolution 70/169 of 17
December 2015 recalls general comment No. 15 of the Committee on Economic,
Social and Cultural Rights on the right to water (see footnote 630 above) and
uses the same language: “Recognizes that the human right to safe drinking
water entitles everyone, without discrimination, to have access to
sufficient, safe, acceptable, physically accessible and affordable water for
personal and domestic use” (para. 2). | 大会2015年12月17日第70/169号决议回顾了经济、社会及文化权利委员会关于水权的第15号一般性意见(见上文脚注630)，并使用了相同的用语：“确认享受安全饮用水的人权意味着每个人都有权不受歧视地获得供个人和家庭使用的充足、安全、可接受、便于汲取和负担得起的用水”(第2段)。 |
| See draft conclusion 11, para. 3, and the
commentary thereto, paras. (31)–(38); | 见结论草案11第3段及其评注，第(31)-(38)段； |
| in the case of resolution 70/169 on the
right to water (see footnote 631 above) “the United States dissociated itself
from the consensus on paragraph 2 on the grounds that the language used to
define the right to water and sanitation was based on the views of the
Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and the Special Rapporteur
only and did not appear in any international agreement or reflect any
international consensus” (see Official Records of the General Assembly,
Seventieth Session, Third Committee, 55th meeting (A/C.3/70/SR.55), 24
November 2015, para. 144). | 就关于水权的第70/169号决议(见上文脚注631)而言，“…美国不赞同关于第2段的协商一致，理由是界定享有水和卫生设施的权利采用的措辞仅以经济、社会及文化权利委员会及特别报告员的观点为基础，而且从未在任何国际协定中出现过，也未反映出任何国际协商一致”(见《大会正式记录，第七十届会议，第三委员会，第55次会议》(A/C.3/70/SR.55)，2015年11月24日，第144段)。 |
| It is not entirely clear whether the
United States thereby wished to merely restate its position that the
resolution did not recognize a particular effect of the pronouncement of the
Committee, as such, or whether it disagreed with the definition in substance. | 并不完全清楚的是，美国此举是仅仅想重申其立场，指出该项决议并没有确认委员会声明本身的特定效力，还是想表明该国不同意定义的实质内容。 |
| See General Assembly resolution 69/166 of
18 December 2014, adopted without a vote, recalling general comment No. 16 of
the Human Rights Committee on the right to respect of privacy, family, home
and correspondence, and protection of honour and reputation (Official Records
of the General Assembly, Forty-third Session, Supplement No. 40 (A/43/40),
annex VI). | 见大会2014年12月18日第69/166号决议，未经表决获得通过，回顾人权事务委员会关于尊重隐私、家庭、住宅和通信权以及保护荣誉和声誉问题的第16号一般性意见(《大会正式记录，第四十三届会议，补编第40号》(A/43/40)，附件六)。 |
| See General Assembly resolution 69/157 of
18 December 2014, adopted without a vote; | 见大会2014年12月18日第69/157号决议，未经表决获得通过； |
| and resolution 68/147 of 18 December
2013, adopted without a vote. | 及2013年12月18日第68/147号决议，未经表决获得通过。 |
| Decision I/7 on review of compliance (see
footnote 598 above), annex, sects. III and XII, para. 37; | 关于审查遵约情况的第I/7号决定(见上文脚注598)，附件，第三和第十二节，第37段； |
| V. Koester, “The Convention on Access to
Information, Public Participation in Decision-making and Access to Justice in
Environmental Matters (Aarhus Convention)”, in Making Treaties Work, Human
Rights, Environment and Arms Control, G. Ulfstein et al., eds. (Cambridge,
United Kingdom, Cambridge University Press, 2007), pp. 179–217, at p. 203. | V. Koester,“《在环境问题上获得信息、公众参与决策和诉诸法律的公约》 (《奥胡斯公约》)”，载于G.
Ulfstein等人所编《让条约发挥作用：人权、环境和军控》(联合王国剑桥，剑桥大学出版社，2007年)，第179-217页，见第203页。 |
| See Human Rights Council resolutions
28/16 of 26 March 2015 and 28/19 of 27 March 2015, adopted without a vote
(report of the Human Rights Council, Official Records of the General
Assembly, Seventieth Session, Supplement No. 53 (A/70/53)). | 见人权理事会2015年3月26日第28/16号和2015年3月27日第28/19号决议，未经表决获得通过(人权理事会报告，《大会正式记录，第七十届会议，补编第53号》(A/70/53))。 |
| See footnote 599 above. | 见上文脚注599。 |
| See Report of the International Narcotics
Control Board for 2009 (E/INCB/2009/1, United Nations Publication, Sales No.
E.10.XI.1), para. 278; | 见《国际麻醉品管制局2009年报告》(E/INCB/2009/1，联合国出版物，出售品编号E.10.XI.1)，第278段； |
| see also P. Gallahue, “International drug
control”, in The Practice of Shared Responsibility in International Law, A.
Nollkaemper and I. Plakokefalos, eds. (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press,
2017), p. 171, footnote 55. | 另见P. Gallahue,“国际毒品管制”，载于A. Nollkaemper和I. Plakokefalos所编《国际法中的责任共担实践》(剑桥，剑桥大学出版社，2017年)，第171页，脚注55。 |
| D. Barrett, Unique in International
Relations? | D. Barrett,《在国际关系中独一无二？ |
| A Comparison of the International
Narcotics Control Board and the UN Human Rights Treaty Bodies (London,
International Harm Reduction Association, 2008), p. 8; | 比较国际麻醉品管制局与联合国人权条约机构》(伦敦，国际减低危害协会，2008年)，第8页； |
| D.R. Bewley-Taylor, International Drug
Control: Consensus Fractured (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2012),
pp. 124–126. | D.R. Bewley-Taylor,《国际毒品管制：共识的破裂》 (剑桥大学出版社，剑桥，2012年)，第124-126页。 |
| See e.g. Committee on the Elimination of
Discrimination against Women, general recommendation No. 35 (2017) on
gender-based violence against women, updating general recommendation No. 19
(CEDAW/C/GC/35): “For over 25 years, the practice of States parties has
endorsed the Committee’s interpretation. | 例如，见消除对妇女歧视委员会，关于基于性别的暴力侵害妇女行为、更新第19号一般性建议的第35号一般性建议(2017年)
(CEDAW/C/GC/35)：“25年以来，缔约国在各自的实践中认可了委员会的解释。 |
| The opinio juris and State practice
suggest that the prohibition of gender-based violence against women has
evolved into a principle of customary international law”, quoting State
practice and opinion juris as well as judicial decisions in support of the statement
“that general recommendation No. 19 has been a key catalyst for this process”
(ibid., para. 2). | 法律确信和国家实践表明，禁止基于性别的暴力侵害妇女行为已成为习惯国际法的一项准则”，援引国家实践和法律确信来佐证“第19号一般性建议是加快这一进程的关键推动力”这一陈述(同上，第2段)。 |
| Expert treaty bodies under human rights
treaties have rarely attempted to specifically identify the practice of the
parties for the purpose of interpreting a particular treaty provision, see
examples in G. Nolte, “Jurisprudence under special regimes relating to
subsequent agreements and subsequent practice: second report for the ILC
Study Group on treaties over time”, in Nolte, Treaties and Subsequent
Practice (see footnote 25 above), pp. 210–278; | 人权条约之下的专家条约机构很少为了解释条约的某一条款而试图识别缔约方的实践，例子见，格·诺尔特，“特殊制度下与嗣后协定和嗣后实践有关的判例：国际法委员会条约随时间演变问题研究组第二次报告”，载于诺尔特所编《条约和嗣后实践》(见上文脚注25)，第210-278页； |
| Schlütter, “Aspects of human rights
interpretation …” (see footnote 625 above), p. 318. | Schlütter,“…人权解释工作”(见上文脚注625)，第318页。 |
| See draft conclusion 10, para. 2. | 见结论草案10，第2段。 |
| See Ulfstein and Werksmann, “The Kyoto
compliance system …” (see footnote 614 above), p. 97; | 见Ulfstein和Werksmann,“京都遵约体系…”(见上文脚注614)，第97页； |
| Van Alebeek and Nollkaemper, “The legal
status of decisions by human rights treaty bodies …” (see footnote 613
above), p. 410. | Van Alebeek和Nollkaemper,“人权条约机构的决定…的法律地位”(见上文脚注613)，第410页。 |
| Such as a pronouncement regarding the
permissibility of a reservation that it has formulated, see guideline 3.2.3
of the Guide to Practice on Reservations to Treaties, and para. (3) of the
commentary thereto, adopted by the Commission in 2011, Official Records of
the General Assembly, Sixty-sixth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/66/10/Add.1). | 例如关于可否允许该国提出的某项保留的声明，见委员会2011年通过的《对条约的保留实践指南》，指南3.2.3及其评注第(3)段，《大会正式记录，第六十六届会议，补编第10号》(A/66/10/Add.1)。 |
| C. Tomuschat, “Human Rights Committee”,
in The Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law (www.mpepil.com),
at para. 14 (“States parties cannot simply ignore them [individual
communications] but have to consider them in good faith (bona fide) … not to
react at all … would appear to amount to a violation …”), in this sense also
European Commission for Democracy through Law (Venice Commission), Study No.
690/2012 and Report on the implementation of international human rights
treaties in domestic law and the role of courts, adopted by the Venice
Commission at its 100th plenary session (Rome, 10–11 October 2014), para.
78–79. | C. Tomuschat,“人权事务委员会”，载于《马克斯·普朗克国际公法百科全书》 (www.mpepil.com)，见第14段 (“缔约国不能简单地对它们[个人来问]不予理睬，而是必须本着诚意予以审议，…完全不予回应…将可能构成违约行为…”)，在这方面，另见通过法律实现民主欧洲委员会(威尼斯委员会)，第690/2012号研究报告和威尼斯委员会第100届全体会议(2014年10月10日至11日，罗马)通过的“关于国内法中国际人权条约执行情况和法院作用的报告”，第78-79段。 |
| Ahmadou Sadio Diallo (Republic of Guinea
v. Democratic Republic of the Congo), Merits, Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2010,
p. 639, at pp. 663–664, para. 66; | 艾哈迈杜·萨迪奥·迪亚洛案(几内亚共和国诉刚果民主共和国)，实质问题，判决，《2010年国际法院案例汇编》，第639页起，见第663-664页，第66段； |
| see also Judgment No. 2867 of the
Administrative Tribunal of the International Labour Organization upon a
Complaint Filed against the International Fund for Agricultural Development,
Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 2012, p. 10, at p. 27, para. 39; | 另见国际劳工组织行政法庭关于对国际农业发展基金提起的申诉的第2867号判决，咨询意见，《2012年国际法院案例汇编》，第10页起，见第27页，第39段； |
| Legal Consequences of the Construction of
a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, Advisory Opinion, I.C.J.
Reports 2004, p. 136, at pp. 179–181, paras. 109–110 and 112, and at pp.
192–193, para. 136, in which the Court referred to various pronouncements of
the Human Rights Committee and the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural
Rights; | 在巴勒斯坦被占领土修建隔离墙的法律后果，咨询意见，《2004年国际法院案例汇编》，第136页起，见第179-181页，第109-110和112段，以及第192-193页，第136段，其中法院提到人权事务委员会和经济、社会及文化权利委员会的多项声明； |
| see also Questions relating to the
Obligation to Prosecute or Extradite (Belgium v. Senegal), Judgment, I.C.J.
Reports 2012, p. 422, at p. 457, para. 101, referring to pronouncements of
the Committee against Torture when determining the temporal scope of the
Convention against Torture. | 另见与起诉或引渡义务有关的问题(比利时诉塞内加尔)，判决，《2012年国际法院案例汇编》，第422页起，见第457页，第101段，其中提及禁止酷刑委员会在确定《禁止酷刑公约》的时间范围时的声明。 |
| The Inter-American Court of Human Rights,
Case of the Constitutional Tribunal (Camba Campos and Others) v. Ecuador,
Judgment (Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations and Costs), 28 August
2013, Series C No. 268, paras. 189 and 191; | 美洲人权法院，宪法法庭(Camba Campos和其他人)诉厄瓜多尔案，判决(初步反对意见，实质问题，赔偿和费用)，2013年8月28日，C辑第268号，第189和第191段； |
| African Commission on Human and Peoples’
Rights, Civil Liberties Organisation and others v. Nigeria, Communication No.
218/98, Decisions on communications brought before the African Commission,
twenty-ninth ordinary session, Tripoli, May 2001 at para. 24 (“In
interpreting and applying the Charter, the Commission … is also enjoined by
the Charter and by international human rights standards, which include
decisions and general comments by UN treaty bodies”); | 非洲人权和民族权委员会，公民自由组织及其他方诉尼日利亚，第218/98号来文，关于提交给非洲委员会第二十九届常会(2001年5月，的黎波里)的来文的决定，见第24段(“在解释和适用《宪章》的过程中，委员会…还受《宪章》和包括联合国条约机构的决定和一般性意见在内的国际人权标准的指导”)； |
| African Commission on Human and Peoples’
Rights, Social and Economic Rights Action Centre and the Centre for Economic
and Social Rights v. Nigeria, Communication No. 155/96, Decisions on
communications brought before the African Commission, thirtieth ordinary
session, Banjul, October 2001 at para. 63 (“draws inspiration from the
definition of the term ‘forced evictions’ by the Committee on Economic Social
and Cultural Rights in its General Comment No. 7”); | 非洲人权和民族权委员会，社会和经济权利行动中心及经济和社会权利中心诉尼日利亚，第155/96号来文，关于提交给非洲委员会第三十届常会(2001年10月，班珠尔)的来文的决定，见第63段(“借鉴经济、社会及文化权利委员会在其第7号一般性意见中对“强迫驱逐”一词的定义”)； |
| European Court of Human Rights: Magyar
Helsinki Bizottsag v. Hungary [GC] (see footnote 341 above), para. 141; | 欧洲人权法院：Magyar Helsinki Bizottsag诉匈牙利[大审判庭] (见上文脚注341)，第141段； |
| Marguš v. Croatia [GC], No. 4455/10, ECHR
2014 (extracts), paras. 48–50; | Marguš诉克罗地亚[大审判庭]，第4455/10号，《2014年欧洲人权法院案例汇编》(摘要)，第48-50段； |
| Baka v. Hungary, No. 20261/12, 27 May
2014, para. 58; | 巴卡诉匈牙利，第20261/12号，2014年5月27日，第58段； |
| Othman (Abu Qatada) v. the United
Kingdom, No. 8139/09, ECHR 2012 (extracts), paras. 107–108, 147–151, 155 and
158; | Othman (Abu Qatada)诉联合王国，第8139/09号，《2012年欧洲人权法院案例汇编》(摘要)，第107-108、147-151、155和158段； |
| Gäfgen v. Germany [GC], No. 22978/05,
ECHR 2010, paras. 68 and 70–72; | Gäfgen诉德国[大审判庭]，第22978/05号，《2010年欧洲人权法院案例汇编》，第68段和第70-72段； |
| see also International Law Association,
Report of the Seventy-first Conference (footnote 158 above), pp. 29–38,
paras. 116–155. | 另见国际法协会，第七十一届会议报告(上文脚注158)，第29-38页，第116-155页。 |
| See the decisions quoted in Venice
Commission, “Report on the implementation of international human rights
treaties …” (footnote 611 above), at para. 76, footnotes 172 and 173
(Ireland, Supreme Court, Kavanagh (Joseph) v. the Governor of Mountjoy Prison
and the Attorney General [2002] IESC 13 (1 March 2002), para. 36; | 见威尼斯委员会引用的决定，关于…国际人权条约执行情况…的报告”(上文脚注611)，见第76段，脚注172和173(爱尔兰，最高法院，Kavanagh (Joseph)诉Mountjoy监狱长和司法部长[2002] IESC 13 (2002年3月1日)，第36段； |
| France, Council of State, Hauchemaille v.
France, case No. 238849, 11 October 2001, ILDC 767 (FR 2001), para. 22). | 法国，最高行政法院，Hauchemaille诉法国，案件编号238849, 2001年10月11日，ILDC 767(FR 2001)，第22段)。 |
| International Law Association, Report of
the Seventy-first Conference (footnote 158 above), p. 43, para. 175; | 国际法协会，第七十一届会议报告(上文脚注158)，第43页，第175段； |
| see e.g. Germany, Federal Administrative
Court, BVerwGE, vol. 134, p. 1, at p. 22, para. 48; | 例如，见德国，联邦行政法院，《联邦宪法法院裁决汇编》，第134卷，第1页起，见第22页，第48段； |
| Colombia, Constitutional Court, Sentencia
T-077/13 (2013), 14 February 2013; | 哥伦比亚，宪法法院，T-077/13 (2013)号裁决，2013年2月14日； |
| India, High Court of Delhi, Laxmi Mandal
v. Deen Dayal Harinagar Hospital & Ors, WP(C) Nos 8853 of 2008, and 10700
of 2009 (2010), Judgment of 4 June 2010, para 23; | 印度，德里高等法院，Laxmi Mandal诉Deen Dayal Harinagar医院等，WP(C) 编号8853/2008和10700/2009(2010)，2010年6月4日的判决，第23段； |
| Bangladesh, High Court Division of the
Supreme Court, Bangladesh Legal Aid and Services Trust and ors v. Government
of Bangladesh, Writ Petitions No 5863 of 2009, No 754 of 2010, No 4275 of
2010, ILDC 1916 (BD 2010), 8 July 2010, para. 45; | 孟加拉国，最高法院高等法院部，孟加拉国法律援助和服务信托基金等诉孟加拉国政府，上诉编号5863/2009、754/2010、4275/2010，ILDC 1916 (BD 2010)，2010年7月8日，第45段； |
| but see Spain, Tribunal Supremo de
Espãna, sentencia núm. 1263/2018, 17 July 2018, fundamento de derecho
séptimo, pp. 23–24. | 但是见西班牙，Tribunal Supremo de Espãna,
sentencia núm. 1263/2018, 17 July 2018, fundamento de derecho séptimo, pp.
23–24。 |
| Report of the International Law
Commission (2011), Official Records of the General Assembly, Sixty-sixth
Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/66/10/Add.1). | 国际法委员会报告(2011年)，《大会正式记录，第六十六届会议，补编第10号(A/66/10/Add.1)。 |
| “Of course, if such bodies have been
vested with decision-making power the parties must respect their decisions,
but this is currently not the case in practice except for some regional human
rights courts. | “当然，如果这些机构已被赋予决策权，则当事方必须遵守它们的决定，但是，目前在实践中，除了区域人权法院以外，还没有这么做。 |
| In contrast, the other monitoring bodies
lack any juridical decision-making power, either in the area of reservations
or in other areas in which they possess declaratory powers. Consequently,
their conclusions are not legally binding, and States parties are obliged
only to ‘take account’ of their assessments in good faith” (ibid., para. (3)
of the commentary to guideline 3.2.3). | 与此相反，其他监督机构在保留方面和它们拥有宣示权力的其他方面没有任何法律决策权，因此，它们得出的结论不具有法律约束力，缔约国只是有义务诚意地“顾及”其评估”(同上，准则3.2.3评注第(3)段)。 |
| Legal Consequences of the Construction of
a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, Advisory Opinion, I.C.J.
Reports 2004, p. 136, at p. 179, para. 109. | 在巴勒斯坦被占领土修建隔离墙的法律后果，咨询意见，《2004年国际法院案例汇编》，第136页起，见第179页，第109段。 |
| The High Court of Osaka has explicitly
stated: “One may consider that the ‘general comments’ and ‘views’… should be
relied upon as supplementary means of interpretation of the ICCPR. | 大阪高等法院明确指出：“可以认为，应该借助‘一般性意见’和‘意见’…，作为解释《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》的补充资料。 |
| ” Osaka High Court, Judgment of 28
October 1994, as quoted in the Report of the Seventy-first Conference of the
International Law Association (see footnote 158 above), at para. 85, footnote
178, also available in Japanese Annual of International Law, vol. 38 (1995),
at pp. 129–130; | ”大阪高等法院1994年10月28日判决，引自国际法协会第七十一届会议报告(见上文脚注158)，见第85段，脚注178，另外可查阅《日本国际法年鉴》，第38卷(1995年)，见第129-130页； |
| see also, for example, Netherlands,
Central Appeals Tribunal, Appellante v. de Raad van Bestuur van de Sociale
Verzekeringsbank (available from
http://deeplink.rechtspraak.nl/uitspraak?id=ECLI:NL:CRVB:2006:AY5560,
accessed 11 July 2016); | 例如也见荷兰，中央上诉法庭，申诉人诉荷兰社会保险银行董事会(可查阅http://deeplink.rechtspraak.nl/uitspraak?id=ECLI:NL:
CRVB:2006:AY5560, 访问日期：2016年7月11日)； |
| United Kingdom, on the one hand, House of
Lords, Jones v. Saudi Arabia, 14 June 2006 [2006] UKHL 26 (“no value”) and,
on the other hand, House of Lords, A. v. Secretary of State for the Home
Department [2005] UKHL 71, paras. 34–36 (relying on treaty body
pronouncements to establish an exclusionary rule of evidence that prevents
the use of information obtained by means of torture) and Court of Appeal, R. (on
the application of Al-Skeini) v. Secretary of State for Defence, application
for judicial review (2005) EWCA Civ 1609 (2006) HRLR 7, at para. 101 (citing
general comment No. 31 of the Human Rights Committee to establish the
extraterritorial application of the Human Rights Act 1998); | 联合王国，一方面，上议院，Jones诉沙特阿拉伯，2016年6月14日 [2006] UKHL 26 (“无价值”)，另一方面，上议院，A. 诉内政大臣 [2005] UKHL 71，第34-36段(依据条约机构的声明确立一项排除法证据规则，防止利用通过酷刑手段获得的信息)和上诉法院，R (斯凯尼案的应用)诉国防大臣，申请进行司法审查，(2005) EWCA Civ 1609 (2006) HRLR 7，见第101段(援引人权事务委员会第31号一般性意见，确立《1998年人权法》域外适用)； |
| South Africa, on the one hand, High Court
Witwatersrand, Residents of Bon Vista Mansions v. Southern Metropolitan Local
Council, 2002 (6) BCLR, p. 625, at p. 629 (“general comments have an
authoritative status under international law”), as quoted at para. 11 the
Report of the Seventy-first Conference of the International Law Association
(footnote 158 above) and, on the other hand, Constitutional Court, Minister
of Health and Others v. Treatment Action Campaign and Others (No 2) (CCT
8/02) [2002] ZACC 15, paras. 26 and 37 (rejecting [application of] the
“minimum-core standard” set out by the Committee on Economic, Social and
Cultural Rights in general comment No. 3 (Official Records of the Economic
and Social Council, 1991, Supplement No. 3 (E/1991/23-E/C.12/1990/8 and
Corr.1), annex III, p. 83); | 南非，一方面，威特沃特斯兰高等法院：Bon Vista Mansions 居民诉南部都市地方理事会案，2002 (6) BCLR, 第625页起，见第629页(“一般性意见具有国际法所规定的权威性地位”)，引自国际法协会第七十一届会议报告第11段(上文脚注158)，另一方面，宪法法院，卫生部长等诉治疗行动运动和其他人(第2号)(CCT
8/02)[2002] ZACC 15，第26和第37段(反对[适用]经济、社会及文化权利委员会第3号一般性意见规定的“最低核心标准”)(《1991年经济及社会理事会正式记录，补编第3号》(E/1991/23-E/C.12/1990/8和Corr.1)，附件三，第83页)； |
| Japan, Tokyo District Court, Judgment of
15 March 2001, 1784 Hanrei Jiho 67, at 74 (“the General Comment neither
represents authoritative interpretation of the ICCPR nor binds the
interpretation of the treaty in Japan”), as quoted at para. 87 of the Report
of the Seventy-first Conference of the International Law Association
(footnote 158 above). | 日本，东京区法院，2001年3月15日的判决，1784 Hanrei Jiho 67，见74 (“一般性意见既不是对《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》的作准解释，也不对条约在日本的解释具约束力”)，引自国际法协会第七十一届会议报告第87段(上文脚注158)。 |
| See para. (15) of the commentary to draft
conclusion 2; | 见结论草案2评注第(15)段； |
| see also draft conclusion 12, para. 3. | 另见结论草案12，第3段。 |
| C. Chinkin, “Sources”, in International
Human Rights Law, 3rd ed., D. Moeckli, S. Shah, S. Sivakumaran and D. J.
Harris, eds. (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2018), pp. 63–85, at pp.
78–80, as teachings and also possibly judicial decisions; | C. Chinkin,“渊源”，载于D. Moeckli、S. Shah、S. Sivakumaran和D. J. Harris所编《国际人权法》，第3版 (牛津，牛津大学出版社，2018年)，第63-85页，见第78-80页，可被视作理论，也可能被视作司法裁决； |
| in that direction also: R. Van Alebeek
and A. Nollkaemper, “The legal status of decisions by human rights treaty
bodies in national law”, in Keller and Ulfstein, UN Human Rights Treaty
Bodies … (see footnote 613 above), pp. 408 and 410 ff. | 在此方向上，另见：R. Van Alebeek和A. Nollkaemper, “人权条约机构的决定在国内法中的法律地位”，载于Keller和Ulfstein，《联合国人权条约机构…》(见上文脚注613)，第408和第410页及以下各页。 |
| 3132nd meeting, on 22 May 2012 (Official
Records of the General Assembly, Sixty-seventh Session, Supplement No. 10
(A/67/10), para. 157). | 2012年5月22日第3132次会议(《大会正式记录，第六十七届会议，补编第10号》(A/67/10)，第157段)。 |
| The topic had been included in the
long-term programme of work of the Commission during its sixty-third session
(2011), on the basis of the proposal contained in annex A to the report of
the Commission (ibid., Sixty-sixth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/66/10), pp.
305–314). | 委员会第六十三届会议(2011年)按照委员会报告附件A所载的建议(同上，《第六十六届会议，补编第10号》(A/66/10)，第305-314页)将该专题列入长期工作方案。 |
| In its resolution 66/98 of 9 December
2011, the General Assembly took note of the inclusion of the topic in the
long-term programme of work of the Commission. | 大会2011年12月9日第66/98号决议注意到该专题已列入委员会长期工作方案。 |
| Ibid., Sixty-eighth Session, Supplement
No. 10 (A/68/10), para. 65. | 同上，《第六十八届会议，补编第10号》(A/68/10)，第65段。 |
| See A/CN.4/663 (first report), A/CN.4/672
(second report), A/CN.4/682 (third report), A/CN.4/695 and Add.1 (fourth
report and addendum thereto). | 见A/CN.4/663(第一次报告)、A/CN.4/672(第二次报告)、A/CN.4/682(第三次报告)，A/CN.4/695和Add.1(第四次报告及增编)。 |
| See A/CN.4/659 (memorandum by the
Secretariat) and A/CN.4/691 (memorandum by the Secretariat). | 见A/CN.4/659(秘书处备忘录)和A/CN.4/691(秘书处备忘录)。 |
| Official Records of the General Assembly,
Seventy-first session, Supplement No. 10 (A/71/10), paras. 57 and 59. | 《大会正式记录，第七十一届会议，补编第10号》(A/71/10)，第57和59段。 |
| Ibid., para. 60. | 同上，第60段。 |
| A/CN.4/710, paras. 7–10. | A/CN.4/710, 第7至第10段。 |
| Some important fields of international
law are still governed essentially by customary international law, with few
if any applicable treaties. | 国际法的一些重要领域因几乎没有适用的条约，仍然主要由习惯国际法加以规范。 |
| Even where there is a treaty in force,
the rules of customary international law continue to govern questions not
regulated by the treaty and continue to apply in relations with and among
non-parties to the treaty. | 即便有时存在着生效的条约，但对条约没有规范到的问题仍然执行习惯国际法规则； 在涉及条约非缔约方时以及在非缔约方之间，习惯国际法规则也仍然适用。 |
| In addition, treaties may refer to rules
of customary international law; | 此外，条约可能会提到习惯国际法规则； |
| and such rules may be taken into account
in treaty interpretation in accordance with article 31, paragraph 3 (c), of
the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (United Nations, Treaty Series,
vol. 1155, No. 18232, p. 331 (“1969 Vienna Convention”)). | 在按照《维也纳条约法公约》(联合国，《条约汇编》，第1155卷，第18232号，第331页(“1969年《维也纳公约》”))第三十一条第三款(c)项解释条约时，也可将这种规则纳入考虑。 |
| Moreover, it may sometimes be necessary
to determine the law applicable at the time when certain acts occurred (“the intertemporal
law”), which may be customary international law even if a treaty is now in
force. | 另外，有时候，即便现在已经有了生效的条约，但可能有必要确定在某些行为发生时适用的法律(“时际法”)，而这种法律可能属于习惯国际法。 |
| In any event, a rule of customary
international law may continue to exist and be applicable, separately from a
treaty, even where the two have the same content and even among parties to
the treaty (see Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua
(Nicaragua v. United States of America), Merits, Judgment, I.C.J. Reports
1986, p. 14, at pp. 93–96, paras. 174–179; | 无论如何，即便习惯国际法的规则与条约具备相同的内容，这种规则也可独立于条约而继续存在和适用，甚至是在条约的缔约方之间继续存在和适用(见尼加拉瓜境内和针对尼加拉瓜的军事和准军事活动案(尼加拉瓜诉美利坚合众国)，实质问题，判决，《1986年国际法院案例汇编》，第14页起，见第93-96页，第174-179段； |
| Application of the Convention on the
Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Croatia v. Serbia),
Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2015, p. 3, at pp. 47–48, para. 88). | 《防止及惩治灭绝种族罪公约》的适用案(克罗地亚诉塞尔维亚)，判决，《2015年国际法院案例汇编》，第3页起，见第47-48页，第88段)。 |
| This wording was proposed by the Advisory
Committee of Jurists, established by the League of Nations in 1920 to prepare
a draft statute for the Permanent Court of International Justice; | 1920年，国际联盟设立了法学家咨询委员会以编写《常设国际法院规约》草案，该委员会提出了这一措辞； |
| it was retained, without change, in the
Statute of the International Court of Justice in 1945. | 1945年《国际法院规约》中原样保留了这一措辞。 |
| While the drafting has been criticized as
imprecise, the formula is nevertheless widely considered as capturing the
essence of customary international law. | 虽然这种起草方式曾被批评为不准确，但这一程式化语句仍被广泛视为体现了习惯国际法的实质所在。 |
| The Latin term opinio juris has been
retained in the draft conclusions and commentaries alongside “acceptance as
law” because of its prevalence in legal discourse (including in the case law
of the International Court of Justice), and also because it may capture
better the particular nature of the subjective element of customary
international law as referring to legal conviction and not to formal consent. | 在结论草案和评注中，拉丁文术语opinio juris(法律确信)与“被接受为法律”一同保留，因为该术语常见于法律话语(包括在国际法院的判例中)，而且该术语可更好地体现出习惯国际法主观要素的实质在于法律信念而非正式同意。 |
| The present commentary does not contain
references to scholarly writings in the field, though they may be useful (and
were referred to extensively in the Special Rapporteur’s reports). | 虽然这一领域的学术著作可能有价值，但本评注没有提及这些著作(特别报告员的报告中大量提及)。 |
| For a bibliography, including sections
that correspond to issues covered by individual draft conclusions, as well as
sections addressing customary international law in various fields, see annex
II to the fifth report (A/CN.4/717/Add.1). | 习惯国际法方面的文献目录，包括对应一些结论草案所涵盖问题的文献，以及论及习惯国际法在各领域应用情况的文献，见特别报告员的第五次报告(A/CN.4/717/Add.1)附件二。 |
| Some of these terms may be used in other
senses; | 其中一些术语可能在使用上具有其他含义； |
| in particular, “general international
law” is used in various ways (not always clearly specified) including to
refer to rules of international law of general application, whether treaty
law or customary international law or general principles of law. | 特定是，“一般国际法”有多种不同用法(含义并非始终明确)，包括用于指代通用国际法规则，不论是条约法、习惯国际法，还是一般法律原则。 |
| For a judicial discussion of the term
“general international law” see Certain Activities Carried Out by Nicaragua
in the Border Area (Costa Rica v. Nicaragua) and Construction of a Road in
Costa Rica along the San Juan River (Nicaragua v. Costa Rica), Judgment,
I.C.J. Reports 2015, p. 665, at p. 782 (separate opinion of Judge Donoghue,
para. 2) and pp. 846–849 (separate opinion of Judge ad hoc Dugard, paras.
12–17). | 有关“一般国际法”这一术语的司法讨论，见尼加拉瓜在边界地区开展的某些活动案(哥斯达黎加诉尼加拉瓜)和哥斯达黎加圣胡安河沿线修建道路案(尼加拉瓜诉哥斯达黎加)，判决，《2015年国际法院案例汇编》，第665页起，见第782页(多诺霍法官的个别意见，第2段)和第846-849页(杜加尔德专案法官的个别意见，第12-17段)。 |
| See also Delimitation of the Maritime
Boundary in the Gulf of Maine Area, Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1984, p. 246, at
pp. 288–290, para. 79 (“the association of the terms ‘rules’ and ‘principles’
is no more than the use of a dual expression to convey one and the same idea,
since in this context [of defining the applicable international law]
‘principles’ clearly means principles of law, that is, it also includes rules
of international law in whose case the use of the term ‘principles’ may be
justified because of their more general and more fundamental character”). | 另见缅因湾区域海洋边界划界案，判决，《1984年国际法院案例汇编》，第246页起，见第288-290页，第79段(“‘规则’与‘原则’之间的关系只不过是用两个用语表达同一概念，因为在[确定适用的国际法的]背景下，‘原则’显然指的是法律原则，也就是说，它也包括国际法规则，在国际法规则中，使用‘原则’一词可能是合理的，因为原则具有更加通用、更加基本的特点”)。 |
| Thus, reference in these commentaries to
particular decisions of courts and tribunals is made in order to illustrate
the methodology of the decisions, not for their substance. | 因此，在这些评注中提到各法院和法庭的具体判决是为了说明判决所用方法，而不是为了介绍判决的实质内容。 |
| The shared view of parties to a case is
not sufficient; it must be ascertained that a general practice that is
accepted as law actually exists. | 案件当事各方的一致意见不足以作为识别依据，必须确定确实存在被接受为法律的一般惯例。 |
| See also Military and Paramilitary
Activities in and against Nicaragua (see footnote 663 above), at pp. 97–98,
para. 184 (“Where two States agree to incorporate a particular rule in a
treaty, their agreement suffices to make that rule a legal one, binding upon
them; | 另见尼加拉瓜境内和针对尼加拉瓜的军事和准军事活动案(见上文脚注663)，见第97-98页，第184段(“如果两国商定将某项规则纳入条约，其商定协议足以使这一规则成为约束双方的法律规则； |
| but in the field of customary
international law, the shared view of the Parties as to the content of what
they regard as the rule is not enough. | 但在习惯国际法领域中，仅缔约方就规则内容达成共识还不够。 |
| The Court must satisfy itself that the
existence of the rule in the opinio juris of States is confirmed by
practice”). | 法院必须确定各国惯例的确证实该规则存在于国家法律确信中”)。 |
| North Sea Continental Shelf, Judgment,
I.C.J. Reports 1969, p. 3, at p. 44, para. 77. | 北海大陆架案，判决，《1969年国际法院案例汇编》，第3页起，见第44页，第77段。 |
| See, for example, Jurisdictional
Immunities of the State (Germany v. Italy: Greece intervening), Judgment,
I.C.J. Reports 2012, p. 99, at pp. 122–123, para. 55; | 例如见国家的管辖豁免案(德国诉意大利：希腊参加诉讼)，判决，《2012年国际法院案例汇编》，第99页起，见第122-123页，第55段； |
| Continental Shelf (Libyan Arab
Jamahiriya/Malta), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1985, p. 13, at pp. 29–30, para.
27; | 大陆架案(阿拉伯利比亚民众国/马耳他)，判决，《1985年国际法院案例汇编》，第13页起，见第29-30页，第27段； |
| and North Sea Continental Shelf (see
footnote above), at p. 44, para. 77. | 北海大陆架案(见上文脚注)，见第44页，第77段。 |
| For example, in the Jurisdictional
Immunities of the State case, an extensive survey of the practice of States
in the form of national legislation, judicial decisions, and claims and other
official statements, which was found to be accompanied by opinio juris,
served to identify the scope of State immunity under customary international
law (Jurisdictional Immunities of the State (see footnote 672 above), at pp.
122–139, paras. 55–91). | 例如，在国家的管辖豁免案中，对国内立法、司法判决以及主张和其他官方声明等形式的国家实践进行了广泛的调查，发现这种国家实践伴有法律确信，从而识别了习惯国际法规定的国家豁免的范围(国家的管辖豁免案(见上文脚注672)，见第122-139页，第55-91段)。 |
| Colombian-Peruvian asylum case, Judgment
of 20 November 1950, I.C.J. Reports 1950, p. 266, at p. 277. | 哥伦比亚－秘鲁庇护权案，1950年11月20日的判决：《1950年国际法院案例汇编》，第266页起，见第277页。 |
| In the Right of Passage case, for
example, the Court found that there was nothing to show that the recurring
practice of passage through Indian territory of Portuguese armed forces and
armed police between Daman and the Portuguese enclaves in India, or between
the enclaves themselves, was permitted or exercised as of right. | 例如，在通行权案中，法院认为没有证据表明，葡萄牙武装部队和武装警察经印度领土在达曼与葡属印度飞地之间以及在两个飞地本身之间反复通行的惯例是依法当然许可或依法当然行使的。 |
| The Court explained that: “Having regard
to the special circumstances of the case, this necessity for authorization
before passage could take place constitutes, in the view of the Court, a
negation of passage as of right. | 法院解释称：“考虑到本案的特殊情况，法院认为，通行前必须获得许可的这一情况依法当然构成通行权谈判。 |
| The practice predicates that the
territorial sovereign had the discretionary power to withdraw or to refuse
permission. | 该惯例意味着，领土主权享有撤回或拒绝许可的自由裁量权。 |
| It is argued that permission was always
granted, but this does not, in the opinion of the Court, affect the legal
position. | 有人辩称，通行一贯可以得到许可，但法院认为这不影响法律立场。 |
| There is nothing in the record to show
that grant of permission was incumbent on the British or on India as an
obligation” (Case concerning Right of Passage over Indian Territory (Merits),
Judgment of 12 April 1960, I.C.J. Reports 1960, p. 6, at pp. 40–43). | 没有任何记录表明，给予许可是英国或印度负有的义务”(在印度领土上的通行权案(实质问题)，1960年4月12日的判决：《1960年国际法院案例汇编》，第6页起，见第40-43页)。 |
| In Legality of the Threat or Use of
Nuclear Weapons, the Court considered that: “The emergence, as lex lata, of a
customary rule specifically prohibiting the use of nuclear weapons as such is
hampered by the continuing tensions between the nascent opinio juris on the
one hand, and the still strong adherence to the practice of deterrence on the
other” (Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons, Advisory Opinion,
I.C.J. Reports 1996, p. 226, at p. 255, para. 73). | 在以核武器相威胁或使用核武器的合法性一案中，法院认为：“一方面，有了新生的法律确信，而另一方面，仍存在对威慑做法的强烈坚持，这二者之间的关系持续紧张，使专门禁止使用核武器的习惯规则难以作为现行法出现。 ”(以核武器相威胁或使用核武器的合法性，咨询意见，《1996年国际法院案例汇编》，第226页起，见第255页，第73段)。 |
| See also Prosecutor v. Sam Hinga Norman,
Case No. SCSL-2004-14-AR72(E), decision on preliminary motion based on lack
of jurisdiction (child recruitment) of 31 May 2004, Special Court for Sierra
Leone, p. 13, para. 17. | 另见检察官诉萨姆·辛加·诺曼案，案件号SCSL-2004-14-AR72(E)，对以缺乏管辖权为由提出的初步请求所作裁定(招募儿童)，2004年5月31日，塞拉利昂特别法庭，第13页，第17段。 |
| This appears to be the approach in Pulp
Mills on the River Uruguay (Argentina v. Uruguay), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports
2010, p. 14, at pp. 55–56, para. 101. | 以下案件看上去就使用了这一方法：乌拉圭河沿岸的纸浆厂案(阿根廷诉乌拉圭)，判决，《2010年国际法院案例汇编》，第14页起，见第55-56页，第101段。 |
| Territorial and Maritime Dispute
(Nicaragua v. Colombia), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2012, p. 624, at p. 674,
para. 139. | 领土争端和海洋划界案(尼加拉瓜诉哥伦比亚)，判决，《2012年国际法院案例汇编》，第624页起，见第674页，第139段。 |
| See also conclusions of the work of the
Study Group on fragmentation of international law, Yearbook … 2006, vol. II
(Part Two), para. 251 (1). | 另见国际法不成体系问题研究组的工作结论，《2006年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第251(1)段。 |
| See draft conclusion 3 below. | 见下文结论草案3。 |
| The term “evidence” is used here as a
broad concept relating to all the materials that may be considered as a basis
for the identification of customary international law, not in any technical
sense as used by particular courts or in particular legal systems. | 此处使用的“证据”一词为广义，涉及可被视为习惯国际法识别依据的所有材料，而非具体法院或具体法律系统中使用的技术性含义。 |
| See also North Sea Continental Shelf
(footnote 671 above), dissenting opinion of Judge Tanaka, at p. 175 (“To
decide whether these two factors in the formative process of a customary law
exist or not, is a delicate and difficult matter. | 另见北海大陆架案(上文脚注671)，田中法官的反对意见，见第175页(“要决定在习惯法的形成过程中是否存在这两个因素，是一项棘手和困难的工作。 |
| The repetition, the number of examples of
State practice, the duration of time required for the generation of customary
law cannot be mathematically and uniformly decided. | 对重复的情况、国家实践例证的数量、习惯法产生所需的时间都无法以数学方法、以统一标准决定。 |
| Each fact requires to be evaluated relatively
according to the different occasions and circumstances”); | 对每项因素，都需要结合不同的场景和情况相对地进行评估”)； |
| Freedom and Justice Party v. Secretary of
State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, Court of Appeal of England and
Wales, [2018] EWCA Civ 1719 (19 July 2018), para. 19 (“the ascertainment of
customary international law involves an exhaustive and careful scrutiny of a
wide range of evidence”). | 自由与正义党诉外交和联邦事务大臣，英格兰和威尔士上诉法院，[2018] EWCA
Civ 1719号(2018年7月19日)，第19段(“习惯国际法的确认涉及对各种证据的详尽和仔细审查”)。 |
| In the Jurisdictional Immunities of the
State case, the International Court of Justice considered that the customary
rule of State immunity derived from the principle of sovereign equality of
States and, in that context, had to be viewed together with the principle
that each State possesses sovereignty over its own territory and that there
flows from that sovereignty the jurisdiction of the State over events and
persons within that territory (Jurisdictional Immunities of the State (see
footnote 672 above), at pp. 123–124, para. 57). | 在国家的管辖豁免案中，国际法院认为，国家豁免的习惯规则源于国家主权平等原则，在此背景下，审视这一规则时必须结合每个国家对其领土拥有主权的原则；
国际法院还认为，源自上述主权，国家对上述领土内的事件和人员享有管辖权(国家的管辖豁免案(见上文脚注672)，见第123-124页，第57段)。 |
| See also Certain Activities carried out
by Nicaragua in the Border Area and Construction of a Road in Costa Rica
along the San Juan River (footnote 667 above), separate opinion of Judge
Donoghue (paras. 3–10). | 另见尼加拉瓜在边界地区开展的某些活动案和哥斯达黎加圣胡安河沿线修建公路案(上文脚注667)，多诺霍法官的个别意见(第3-10段)。 |
| It has also been explained that “a rule
of international law, whether customary or conventional, does not operate in
a vacuum; it operates in relation to facts and in the context of a wider
framework of legal rules of which it forms only a part” (Interpretation of
the Agreement of 25 March 1951 between the WHO and Egypt, Advisory Opinion,
I.C.J. Reports 1980, p. 73, at p. 76, para. 10). | 国际法院还曾解释称“国际法规则，无论是习惯国际法还是传统国际法的规则，都不在真空中运作，而是基于事实并在它仅为其中一部分的更大法律规则框架内运作”(1951年3月25日世界卫生组织与埃及之间协定的解释，咨询意见，《1980年国际法院案例汇编》，第73页起，见第76页，第10段)。 |
| Jurisdictional Immunities of the State
(see footnote 672 above), at p. 123, para. 55. | 国家的管辖豁免案(见上文脚注672)，见第123页，第55段。 |
| In the Navigational and Related Rights
case, where the question arose whether long-established practice of fishing
for subsistence purposes (acknowledged by both parties to the case) has
evolved into a rule of (particular) customary international law, the
International Court of Justice observed that “the practice, by its very
nature, especially given the remoteness of the area and the small, thinly
spread population, is not likely to be documented in any formal way in any
official record. | 在航行权利和相关权利案中，一个问题是(案件当事双方均承认)由来已久的自给性捕鱼惯例是否已演变为一项(特别)习惯国际法规则，对此国际法院指出：“就该惯例的性质而言，尤其是考虑到该地区地处偏远、人口较少且分布松散，该惯例不太可能以任何正式形式载入官方记录。 |
| For the Court, the failure of Nicaragua
to deny the existence of a right arising from the practice which had
continued undisturbed and unquestioned over a very long period, is
particularly significant” (Dispute regarding Navigational and Related Rights
(Costa Rica v. Nicaragua), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2009, p. 213, at pp. 265–266,
para. 141). | 在法院看来，尼加拉瓜未能否认源自长期以来未受扰乱和质疑的惯例的权利之存在，这一点十分重要”(航行权利和相关权利争端案(哥斯达黎加诉尼加拉瓜)，判决，《2009年国际法院案例汇编》，第213页起，见第265-266页，第141段)。 |
| The Appeals Chamber of the International
Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia has noted the difficulty of observing
State practice on the battlefield: Prosecutor v. Tadić, Case
IT-94-1-AR72, Decision on the Defence Motion for Interlocutory Appeal on
Jurisdiction of 2 October 1995, para. 99. | 前南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭上诉分庭指出过观察国家战地惯例的难度：检察官诉塔迪奇案，案件号IT-94-1-AR72, 1995年10月2日对辩方就管辖权问题提出的中间上诉申请作出的裁决，第99段。 |
| On inaction as a form of practice see
draft conclusion 6, below, and paragraph (3) of the commentary thereto. | 关于不作为这种形式的惯例，见下文结论草案6及其评注第(3)段。 |
| Case concerning rights of nationals of
the United States of America in Morocco, Judgment of 27 August 1952, I.C.J.
Reports 1952, p. 176, at p. 200. | 摩洛哥境内美利坚合众国国民的权利案，1952年8月27日的判决：《1952年国际法院案例汇编》，第176页起，见第200页。 |
| See also paragraph (5) of the commentary
to draft conclusion 9, below. | 另见下文结论草案9的评注第(5)段。 |
| North Sea Continental Shelf (see footnote
671 above), at p. 44, para. 76. | 北海大陆架案(见上文脚注671)，见第44页，第76段。 |
| In the Lotus case, the Permanent Court of
International Justice likewise held that: “Even if the rarity of the judicial
decisions to be found among the reported cases were sufficient to prove in
point of fact the circumstance alleged … it would merely show that States had
often, in practice, abstained from instituting criminal proceedings, and not
that they recognized themselves as being obliged to do so; | 在“莲花号”案中，常设国际法院也认为：“在报告的案件中，判决十分少见，这一点足以从事实上证明所称的情况，尽管如此，…这只能显示各国在实践中往往不提起刑事诉讼，而非各国承认自己有义务不提起刑事诉讼； |
| for only if such abstention were based on
their being conscious of having a duty to abstain would it be possible to
speak of an international custom. | 因为，除非各国不诉讼的原因是认识到自身有不诉讼的义务，否则谈不上国际习惯。 |
| The alleged fact does not allow one to
infer that States have been conscious of having such a duty” (The Case of the
S.S. “Lotus”, P.C.I.J., Series A, No. 10 (1927), p. 28). | 所称的事实无法推断出各国已认识到存在着这种义务”(“莲花号”案，常设国际法院，A辑，第10号(1927年)，第28页)。 |
| See also draft conclusion 9, paragraph 2,
below. | 另见下文结论草案9第(2)段。 |
| Sometimes also referred to as usus
(usage), but this may lead to confusion with “mere usage or habit”, which is
to be distinguished from customary international law: see draft conclusion 9,
paragraph 2, below. | 有时也称“做法”，但这可能与“单纯的常例或习惯”相混淆，后者与习惯国际法不同：见下文结论草案9，第2段。 |
| State practice serves other important
functions in public international law, including in relation to treaty
interpretation, but these are not within the scope of the present draft
conclusions. | 国家实践在国际公法中还具有其他重要作用，包括与条约解释有关的作用，但这些不属于本结论草案的范围。 |
| Military and Paramilitary Activities in
and against Nicaragua (see footnote 663 above), at p. 97, para. 183. | 尼加拉瓜境内和针对尼加拉瓜的军事和准军事活动案(见上文脚注663)，见第97页，第183段。 |
| In the Continental Shelf (Libyan Arab
Jamahiriya/Malta) case, the Court similarly stated that “[i]t is of course
axiomatic that the material of customary international law is to be looked
for primarily in the actual practice and opinio juris of States … ”
(Continental Shelf (Libyan Arab Jamahiriya/Malta) (see footnote 672 above),
at p. 29, para. 27); | 在大陆架案(阿拉伯利比亚民众国/马耳他)中，法院同样指出，“当然，不言而喻，习惯国际法的材料应主要在各国的实际惯例和法律确信中寻找…”(大陆架案(阿拉伯利比亚民众国/马耳他)(见上文脚注672)，见第29页，第27段)； |
| and in the Jurisdictional Immunities of
the State case, the Court again confirmed that it is “State practice from
which customary international law is derived” (Jurisdictional Immunities of
the State (see footnote 672 above), at p. 143, para. 101). | 在国家的管辖豁免案中，法院证实，“习惯国际法源自国家实践”(国家的管辖豁免案(见上文脚注672)，第143页，第101段)。 |
| The term “international organizations”
refers, in these draft conclusions, to organizations that are established by
instruments governed by international law (usually treaties), and possess
their own international legal personality. | 在这些结论草案中，“国际组织”这一术语指受国际法规范的文书(通常是条约)所设立并具有自身国际法律人格的组织。 |
| The term does not include
non-governmental organizations. | 该术语不包括非政府组织。 |
| See draft conclusions 6, 10 and 12,
below, which refer, inter alia, to the practice, and acceptance as law, of
States within international organizations. | 另见下文结论草案6、10和12，这些草案除其他外，提到了国际组织内部的国家实践和被接受为法律。 |
| See also the draft articles on the
responsibility of international organizations adopted by the Commission in
2011, paragraph (7) of the general commentary: “International organizations
are quite different from States, and in addition present great diversity
among themselves. | 另见委员会于2011年通过的关于国际组织责任的条款草案，总评注，第(7)段：“国际组织与国家相当不同，此外国际组织相互之间也有很大的差别。 |
| In contrast with States, they do not
possess a general competence and have been established in order to exercise
specific functions (‘principle of speciality’). | 与国家相对的是，国际组织不具有一般性权能，其建立是为了行使专门的职能(‘特定性原则’)。 |
| There are very significant differences
among international organizations with regard to their powers and functions,
size of membership, relations between the organization and its members,
procedures for deliberation, structure and facilities, as well as the primary
rules including treaty obligations by which they are bound” (Yearbook … 2011,
vol. II (Part Two), p. 47). | 各国际组织在下列方面相互之间有很大的不同：其权力和职能、成员国数量、该组织与成员的关系、辩论程序、结构和设施以及国际组织受其约束的主要规则包括条约义务等”(《2011年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第47段)。 |
| See also Reparation for injuries suffered
in the service of the United Nations, Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 1949,
p. 174, at p. 178 (“The subjects of law in any legal system are not
necessarily identical in their nature or in the extent of their rights”). | 另见执行联合国职务时所受损害的赔偿，咨询意见：《1949年国际法院案例汇编》，第174页起，见第178页(“在任何法律体系中，各法律主体的性质或权利范围并不一定相同”)。 |
| “Established practice” of the
organization (that is, practice forming part of the rules of the organization
within the meaning of article 2, paragraph 1 (j), of the 1986 Vienna
Convention on the Law of Treaties between States and International
Organizations or between International Organizations) is not within the scope
of the present conclusions. | 组织的“确立的惯例”(即1986年《关于国家和国际组织间或国际组织相互间条约法的维也纳公约》第2条第1款(j)项意义上的形成组织规则的一部分的惯例)不属于本结论的范围。 |
| In this vein, the Standard Terms and
Conditions for loan, guarantee and other financing agreements of the European
Bank for Reconstruction and Development and the General Conditions for
Sovereign-backed Loans of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank both
recognize that the sources of public international law that may be applicable
in the event of dispute between the Bank and a party to a financing agreement
include, inter alia, “… forms of international custom, including the practice
of states and international financial institutions of such generality,
consistency and duration as to create legal obligations” (European Bank for
Reconstruction and Development, Standard Terms and Conditions (1 December
2012), Sect. 8.04(b)(vi)(C); | 在这方面，欧洲复兴开发银行《关于贷款、担保和其他融资协议的标准条款和条件》和亚洲基础设施投资银行《主权担保贷款一般条件》都确认，适用于该银行和一项融资协议当事方之间争议的国际公法的来源，除其他外，包括“…各种形式的国际习惯，包括国家和国际金融机构在普遍性、连贯性和存续时间方面足以产生法律义务的实践”(欧洲复兴开发银行，《标准条款和条件》(2012年12月1日)，第8.04(b)(六)(C)条； |
| Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank,
General Conditions for Sovereign-backed Loans (1 May 2016), Sect.
7.04(vii)(c) (emphasis added)). | 亚洲基础设施投资银行，《主权担保贷款一般条件》(2016年5月1日)，第7.04(七)(c)条。 (强调是后加的))。 |
| In the latter capacity their output may
fall within the ambit of draft conclusion 14, below. | 在发挥后面这种作用时，其成果可能属于下文结论草案14的范围。 |
| The Commission has considered a similar
point with respect to practice by “non-State actors” under its topic
“Subsequent agreements and subsequent practice in relation to interpretation
of treaties”: see draft conclusion 5, paragraph 2, adopted on second reading
under that topic (see chapter IV above). | 委员会在“与条约解释相关的嗣后协定和嗣后实践”这一专题下审议了涉及“非国家行为体”类似论点：见该专题下二读通过的结论草案5，第2段，(见上文第四章)。 |
| See, for example, Dispute regarding
Navigational and Related Rights (footnote 683 above), at pp. 265–266, para.
141. | 例如见航行权利和相关权利争端案(上文脚注683)，第265-266页，第141段。 |
| This is without prejudice to the
significance of acts of the ICRC in exercise of specific functions conferred
upon it, in particular by the Geneva Conventions for the protection of war
victims of 12 August 1949. | 这不妨碍红十字国际委员会为履行尤其由1949年8月12月关于保护战争受难者的《日内瓦四公约》赋予它的特定职责而采取的行动的意义。 |
| See articles 4 and 5 of the articles on
responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts, General Assembly
resolution 56/83 of 12 December 2001, annex. | 见国家对国际不法行为的责任条款的第4和第5条，大会2001年12月12日第56/83号决议，附件。 |
| For the draft articles adopted by the
Commission and the commentaries thereto, see Yearbook … 2001, vol. II (Part
Two) and corrigendum, paras. 76–77. | 委员会通过的条款草案及其评注，见《2001年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)和更正，第76-77段。 |
| See also draft conclusion 4, paragraph 2,
above, and the commentary thereto. | 另见上文结论草案4第2段及其评注。 |
| In the case of particular customary
international law, the practice must be known to at least one other State or
group of States concerned (see draft conclusion 16, below). | 就特别习惯国际法而言，实践应至少被另一个或另一组相关国家知晓(见下文结论草案16)。 |
| For illustrations, see The Case of the
S.S. “Lotus” (footnote 687 above), at p. 28; | 例证见“莲花号”案(上文脚注687)，见第28页； |
| Nottebohm Case (second phase), Judgment
of 6 April, 1955, I.C.J. Reports 1955, p. 4, at p. 22; | 诺特波姆案(第二阶段)，1955年4月6日的判决：《1955年国际法院案例汇编》，第4页起，见第22页； |
| and Jurisdictional Immunities of the
State (see footnote 672 above), at pp. 134–135, para. 77. | 国家的管辖豁免案(见上文脚注672)，见第134-135页，第77段。 |
| See also “Ways and means for making the
evidence of customary international law more readily available”, Yearbook …
1950, vol. II (Part Two), p. 368, para. 31; | 另见“使习惯国际法的证据更易考察的方法和手段”，《1950年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第368页，第31段； |
| and document A/CN.4/710: Ways and means
for making the evidence of customary international law more readily
available: memorandum by the Secretariat (2018). | A/CN.4/710号文件：使习惯国际法的证据更易考察的方法和手段：秘书处的备忘录”(2018年)。 |
| See paragraph (3) of the commentary to
draft conclusion 3, above. | 见上文结论草案3的评注第(3)段。 |
| See, for example, Jurisdictional
Immunities of the State (footnote 672 above), at pp. 131–135, paras. 72–77; | 例如见国家的管辖豁免案(上文脚注672)，见第131-135页，第72-77段； |
| and Arrest Warrant of 11 April 2000
(Democratic Republic of the Congo v. Belgium), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2002,
p. 3, at p. 24, para. 58. | 2000年4月11日逮捕令案(刚果民主共和国诉比利时)，判决，《2002年国际法院案例汇编》，第3页起，见第24页，第58段。 |
| The term “national courts” may also
include courts with an international element operating within one or more
domestic legal systems, such as courts or tribunals with mixed national and
international composition. | “各国法院”这一术语也可包括在一个或多个国内法律体系内运作、具备国际要素的法院，例如由本国法官和国际法官混合组成的法院或法庭。 |
| See draft conclusion 13, paragraph 2,
below. | 见下文结论草案13第2段。 |
| Decisions of national courts may also
serve as evidence of acceptance as law (opinio juris), on which see draft
conclusion 10, paragraph 2, below. | 各国法院的判决也可成为被接受为法律(法律确信)的证据，有关内容见下文结论草案10第2段。 |
| Jurisdictional Immunities of the State
(see footnote 672 above), at p. 134, para. 76, and p. 136, para. 83. | 国家的管辖豁免案(见上文脚注672)，见第134页，第76段和第136页，第83段。 |
| See also Military and Paramilitary
Activities in and against Nicaragua (footnote 663 above), at p. 98, para.
186. | 另见尼加拉瓜境内和针对尼加拉瓜的军事和准军事活动案(上文脚注663)，见第98页，第186段。 |
| Fisheries case, Judgment of 18 December
1951, I.C.J. Reports 1951, p. 116, at p. 138. | 渔业案，1951年12月18日的判决，《1951年国际法院案例汇编》，第116页起，见第138页。 |
| See, for example, Jurisdictional
Immunities of the State (footnote 672 above), at p. 136, para. 83 (where the
Court noted that “under Greek law” the view expressed by the Special Supreme
Court prevailed over that of the Hellenic Supreme Court). | 例如见国家的管辖豁免案(上文脚注672)，见第136页，第83段(国际法院指出，“根据希腊法律”，特别最高法院的意见高于希腊最高法院的意见)。 |
| North Sea Continental Shelf (see footnote
671 above), at p. 43, para. 74. | 北海大陆架案(见上文脚注671)，见第43页，第74段。 |
| A wide range of terms has been used to
describe the requirement of generality, including by the International Court
of Justice, without any real difference in meaning being implied. | 包括国际法院在内，各方使用过许多种术语来描述一般性的要求，这些术语在所指含义上不存在真正的区别。 |
| Ibid., at p. 44, para. 77. | 同上，见第44页，第77段。 |
| See also draft conclusion 3, above. | 另见上文结论草案3。 |
| Divergences from the alleged rule may
suggest that no rule exists or point, inter alia, to an admissible customary
exception that has arisen; | 除其他外，出现与所称规则不同之处可能说明规则不存在，或表明，除其他外，出现了允许的习惯例外； |
| a change in a previous rule; | 先前的规则发生了变化； |
| a rule of particular customary
international law; | 存在一项特别习惯国际法规则； |
| or the existence of one or more
persistent objectors. | 或存在一个或多个一贯反对者。 |
| It might also be relevant to consider
when the inconsistent practice occurred, in particular whether it lay in the
past, after which consistency prevailed. | 可能还需要考虑不一致惯例出现的时间，特别是需要考虑是否该不一致发生在过去而其后的惯例大体上保持一致。 |
| See also the judgment of 4 February 2016
of the Federal Court of Australia in Ure v. The Commonwealth of Australia
[2016] FCAFC 8, para. 37 (“we would hesitate to say that it is impossible to
demonstrate the existence of a rule of customary international [law] from a
small number of instances of State practice. | 另见Ure诉澳大利亚联邦案[2016]
FCAFC 8, 澳大利亚联邦法院2016年2月4日的判决，第37段(“我们不愿作出这样的表态，即国家实践实例数量较少就无法证明习惯国际[法]规则的存在。 |
| We would accept the less prescriptive
proposition that as the number of instances of State practice decreases the
task becomes more difficult”). | 我们接受规范性较弱的立场，即国家实践实例数量越少，就越难完成这一任务”)。 |
| A relatively small number of States
engaging in a certain practice might thus suffice if indeed such practice, as
well as other States’ inaction in response, is generally accepted as law
(accompanied by opinio juris). | 因此，如果某具体惯例以及其他国家在回应方面的不作为确实已被普遍接受为法律(伴有法律确信)，则有较少国家参与这种惯例就足够了。 |
| The International Court of Justice has
said that “an indispensable requirement would be that within the period in
question, short though it might be, State practice, including that of States
whose interests are specially affected, should have been both extensive and
virtually uniform”, North Sea Continental Shelf (see footnote 671 above), at
p. 43, para. 74. | 国际法院曾表示，“一项必要要求是，在所涉时期内，即便该时期较短，国家实践，包括利益特别受到影响的国家的实践，必须是既广泛又基本上统一的”，北海大陆架案(见上文脚注671)，见第43页，第74段。 |
| Fisheries case (see footnote 708 above),
at p. 131. | 渔业案(见上文脚注708)，见第131页。 |
| A chamber of the International Court of
Justice held in the Gulf of Maine case that where the practice demonstrates
“that each specific case is, in the final analysis, different from all the
others …. This precludes the possibility of those conditions arising which
are necessary for the formation of principles and rules of customary law”
(Delimitation of the Maritime Boundary in the Gulf of Maine Area (see
footnote 668 above), at p. 290, para. 81). | 国际法院分庭在缅因湾案中认定，若惯例显示“每宗具体案件在最终的分析中都与其他案件不同…就不可能具备形成习惯法原则和规则所必需的条件”(缅因湾区域海洋边界划界案(见上文脚注668)，见第290页，第81段)。 |
| See also, for example, Colombian-Peruvian
asylum case (footnote 674 above), at p. 277 (“The facts brought to the
knowledge of the Court disclose so much uncertainty and contradiction, so
much fluctuation and discrepancy in the exercise of diplomatic asylum … that
it is not possible to discern in all this any constant and uniform usage …
with regard to the alleged rule of unilateral and definitive qualification of
the offence”); | 例如，另见，哥伦比亚－秘鲁庇护权案(上文脚注674)，见第277页(“法院所掌握的事实显示，在外交庇护的使用方面，存在太多不确定与矛盾之处，也存在太多变动与差异之处…无法从中观察出任何与所称的单方面确定犯罪性质的规则有关的恒定和统一的做法…”)； |
| and Interpretation of the air transport
services agreement between the United States of America and Italy, Advisory
Opinion of 17 July 1965, United Nations, Reports of International Arbitral
Awards (UNRIAA), vol. XVI (Sales No. E/F.69.V.1), pp. 75–108, at p. 100 (“It
is correct that only a constant practice, observed in fact and without change
can constitute a rule of customary international law”). | 对美利坚合众国与意大利航空运输服务协定的解释，1965年7月17日的咨询意见，联合国，《国际仲裁裁决汇编》(UNRIAA)，第十六卷(出售品编号E/F.69.V.1)，第75-108页，见第100页(“只有在事实上观察到的没有变化的恒定惯例可以构成一项习惯国际法规则，这是正确的”)。 |
| The Case of the S.S. “Lotus” (see
footnote 687 above), at p. 21. | “莲花号”案(见上文脚注687)，见第21页。 |
| See also North Sea Continental Shelf
(footnote 671 above), at p. 45, para. 79; | 另见北海大陆架案(上文脚注671)，见第45页，第79段； |
| and Prosecutor v. Moinina Fofana and
Allieu Kondewa, Case No. SCSL-04-14-A, Judgment (Appeals Chamber) of 28 May
2008, Special Court for Sierra Leone, para. 406. | 检察官诉Moinina Fofana和Allieu Kondewa案，案件号SCSL-04-14-A, 判决(上诉分庭)，2008年5月28日，塞拉利昂特别法庭，第406段。 |
| Military and Paramilitary Activities in
and against Nicaragua (see footnote 663 above), at p. 98, para. 186. | 尼加拉瓜境内和针对尼加拉瓜的军事和准军事活动案(见上文脚注663)，见第98页，第186段。 |
| Ibid. See also, for example, Prosecutor
v. Sam Hinga Norman (footnote 675 above), para. 51. | 同上。 例如另见检察官诉萨姆·辛加·诺曼案(上文脚注675)，第51段。 |
| The same is true when assessing a
particular State’s practice: see draft conclusion 7, above. | 在评估某特定国家的实践时同理：见上文结论草案7。 |
| In fields such as international space law
or the law of the sea, for example, customary international law has sometimes
developed rapidly. | 举例而言，在国际空间法或海洋法等领域，习惯国际法有时发展迅速。 |
| North Sea Continental Shelf (see footnote
671 above), at p. 43, para. 74. | 北海大陆架案(见上文脚注671)，见第43页，第74段。 |
| While acceptance of a certain practice as
law (opinio juris) has often been described in terms of “a sense of legal
obligation”, draft conclusion 9 uses the broader language “a sense of legal
right or obligation” as States have both rights and obligations under
customary international law and they may act in the belief that they have a
right or an obligation. | 虽然将某项惯例接受为法律(法律确信)常被描述为“一种法律义务感”，但结论草案9使用了“一种法律权利或义务感”这种更为宽泛的措辞，因为国家在习惯国际法之下既有权利也有义务，而且它们可能在行事时相信它们有这样做的权利或义务。 |
| The draft conclusion does not suggest
that, where there is no prohibition, a State needs to point to a right to
justify its action. | 但结论草案9并不表明，如果没有禁止，国家需要指出一项权利来证明其行动有理。 |
| North Sea Continental Shelf (see footnote
671 above), at p. 44, para. 77; | 北海大陆架案(见上文脚注671)，见第44页，第77段； |
| see also paragraph 76 (referring to the
requirement that States “believed themselves to be applying a mandatory rule
of customary international law”). | 另见第76段(提及一项要求，即各国“相信自己是在适用习惯国际法的一项强制性规则”)。 |
| The Court has also referred, inter alia,
to “a practice illustrative of belief in a kind of general right for States”
(Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (see footnote
663 above), at p. 108, para. 206). | 法院还提及，除其他外，“显示相信国家有某种一般权利的惯例”(尼加拉瓜境内和针对尼加拉瓜的军事和准军事活动案(见上文脚注663)，见第108页，第206段)。 |
| Colombian-Peruvian asylum case (see
footnote 674 above), at pp. 277 and 286. | 哥伦比亚－秘鲁庇护权案(见上文脚注674)，见第277和第286页。 |
| See also The Case of the S.S. “Lotus”
(footnote 687 above), at p. 28 (“Even if the rarity of the judicial decisions
to be found among the reported cases were sufficient to prove in point of
fact the circumstance alleged … it would merely show that States had often,
in practice, abstained from instituting criminal proceedings, and not that
they recognized themselves as being obliged to do so; | 另见“莲花号”案(上文脚注687)，见第28页(“即使在所报告的案件中罕见的司法裁决足以证明实际情形…这也只会表明，各国常常在实践中放弃刑事诉讼，而不是它们认为自己有义务这样做； |
| for only if such abstention were based on
their being conscious of having a duty to abstain would it be possible to
speak of an international custom. | 因为只有此种放弃行为是基于它们意识到有责任放弃，才有可能称得上国际习惯。 |
| The alleged fact does not allow one to
infer that States have been conscious of having such a duty; | 声称的事实无法使人推断国家意识到有此种义务； |
| on the other hand … there are other
circumstances calculated to show that the contrary is true”); | 另一方面…有被认为能够证明情况恰恰相反的其他情形”)； |
| and Military and Paramilitary Activities
in and against Nicaragua (see footnote 663 above), at pp. 108–110, paras.
206–209. | 在尼加拉瓜境内和针对尼加拉瓜的军事和准军事活动案(见上文脚注663)； |
| See, for example, North Sea Continental
Shelf (footnote 671 above), at p. 43, para. 76. | 第108-110页，第206-209段。
例如另见北海大陆架案(上文脚注671)； |
| A particular difficulty may thus arise in
ascertaining whether a rule of customary international law has emerged where
a non-declaratory treaty has attracted virtually universal participation. | 第43页，第76段。
在一项非宣誓性条约几乎吸引到普遍参与时，这一点可对确定是否已经形成一项习惯国际法规则造成特别的困难。 |
| See Military and Paramilitary Activities
in and against Nicaragua (footnote 663 above), at p. 109, para. 207 (“Either
the States taking such action or other States in a position to react to it,
must have behaved so that their conduct is ‘evidence of a belief that this
practice is rendered obligatory by the existence of a rule of law requiring
it’” (citing the North Sea Continental Shelf judgment)). | 见在尼加拉瓜和针对尼加拉瓜的军事和准军事活动案(上文脚注663)，第109页，第207段(“无论是那些采取这种行动的国家还是那些有能力对其做出反应的国家，其行为方式都必须使它们的行为可以证明这一信念，即这种惯例是由于存在着要求将其付诸实施的法律规则而变得具有强制性”(援引北海大陆架案判决)。 |
| Thus, where “the members of the
international community are profoundly divided” on the question of whether a
certain practice is accompanied by acceptance as law (opinio juris), no such
acceptance as law could be said to exist: see Legality of the Threat or Use
of Nuclear Weapons (footnote 675 above), at p. 254, para. 67. | 因此，在有关某项惯例是否伴有被接受为法律(法律确信)问题上“国际社会的成员意见极为分歧”时，不能说存在此种被接受为法律：见以核武器进行威胁或使用核武器的合法性案(上文脚注675)，第254页，第67段。 |
| In the Right of Passage case the
International Court of Justice thus observed, with respect to the passage of
armed forces and armed police, that “[t]he practice predicates that the
territorial sovereign had the discretionary power to withdraw or to refuse
permission. | 在通行权案中，国际法院就武装部队和武装警察通过的问题指出，“该惯例意味着领土主权享有撤销或拒绝许可的自由裁量权。 |
| It is argued that permission was always
granted, but this does not, in the opinion of the Court, affect the legal
position. | 有人争辩说，这种许可总是可以得到的，但法院认为，这不影响法律立场。 |
| There is nothing in the record to show
that grant of permission was incumbent on the British or on India as an
obligation” (Case concerning Right of Passage over Indian Territory (see
footnote 675 above), at pp. 42–43). | 没有任何记录表明，给予许可是英国或印度负有的义务”(在印度领土上的通行权案(见上文脚注675)，第42-43页)。 |
| In the Jurisdictional Immunities of the
State case, the International Court of Justice similarly held, in seeking to
determine the content of a rule of customary international law, that,
“[w]hile it may be true that States sometimes decide to accord an immunity
more extensive than that required by international law, for present purposes,
the point is that the grant of immunity in such a case is not accompanied by
the requisite opinio juris and therefore sheds no light upon the issue currently
under consideration by the Court” (Jurisdictional Immunities of the State
(see footnote 672 above), at p. 123, para. 55). | 在国家的管辖豁免案中，国际法院同样认为，在试图确定一项习惯国际法规则的内容时“虽然各国有时的确可能会决定给予比国际法要求更广泛的豁免，但就当前目的而言，要点是在这一个案例中豁免的给予并不伴有必要的法律确信，因此无助于说明法院目前正在审议的问题(国家的管辖豁免案(见上文脚注672)，第123页，第55段)。 |
| The International Court of Justice
observed that indeed “[t]here are many international acts, e.g., in the field
of ceremonial and protocol, which are performed almost invariably, but which
are motivated only by considerations of courtesy, convenience or tradition,
and not by any sense of legal duty” (North Sea Continental Shelf (see
footnote 671 above), at p. 44, para. 77). | 国际法院指出，事实上：“有许多国际行为，例如在礼仪和礼宾方面，几乎总是得到实施，但其动机仅仅是出于礼貌、方便或传统的考虑，而不是出于任何法律义务感”(北海大陆架案(见上文脚注671)，第44页，第77段)。 |
| See also document A/CN.4/710: Ways and
means for making the evidence of customary international law more readily
available: memorandum by the Secretariat (2018). | 另见A/CN.4/710号文件：使习惯国际法的证据更易考察的方法和手段：秘书处的备忘录(2018年)。 |
| There are also differences between the lists,
as they are intended to refer to the principal examples connected with each
of the constituent elements. | 清单之间还有其他不同之处，因为其目的是指出与每个构成要素有关的主要实例。 |
| See draft conclusion 3, paragraph 2,
above. | 见上文结论草案3，第2段。 |
| At times the practice itself is
accompanied by an express disavowal of legal obligation, such as when States
pay compensation ex gratia for damage caused to foreign diplomatic property. | 有时，惯例本身伴有对法律义务的明确否认，例如国家向对外国外交财产造成的损害支付惠给赔偿的情况。 |
| Fisheries case (see footnote 708 above),
at p. 139. | 渔业案(见上文脚注708)，第139页。 |
| See also The Case of the S.S. “Lotus”
(footnote 687 above), at p. 29 (“the Court feels called upon to lay stress
upon the fact that it does not appear that the States concerned have objected
to criminal proceedings in respect of collision cases before the courts of a
country other than that the flag of which was flown, or that they have made
protests: their conduct does not appear to have differed appreciably from
that observed by them in all cases of concurrent jurisdiction. | 另见“莲花号”案(上文脚注687)，第29页(“法院认为有必要强调以下事实：有关国家似乎没有反对在船旗国以外国家的法庭进行有关碰撞案件的刑事诉讼程序，它们似乎也没有提出抗议：它们的行为似乎没有明显不同于它们在所有共同管辖权案件中遵守的行为。 |
| This fact is directly opposed to the
existence of a tacit consent on the part of States to the exclusive
jurisdiction of the State whose flag is flown, such as the Agent for the
French Government has thought it possible to deduce from the infrequency of
questions of jurisdiction before criminal courts. | 这一事实与存在国家对船旗国的专属管辖权的默示同意直接相反，例如法国政府人员认为，从刑事法院很少审理管辖权问题这一事实可以推断出这一点。 |
| It seems hardly probable, and it would
not be in accordance with international practice, that the French Government
in the Ortigia-Oncle-Joseph case and the German Government in the
Ekbatana-West-Hinder case would have omitted to protest against the exercise
of criminal jurisdiction by the Italian and Belgian Courts, if they had
really thought that this was a violation of international law”); | 如果它们真的认为这种情况违反了国际法，那么法国政府在Ortigia-Oncle-Joseph案及德国政府在Ekbatana-West-Hinder案中都没有抗议意大利和比利时法院行使刑事管辖权似乎是不可能的，也不符合国际惯例”)； |
| and Priebke, Erich s/ solicitud de
extradición, Case No. 16.063/94, Judgment of 2 November 1995, Supreme Court
of Justice of Argentina, Vote of Judge Gustavo A. Bossert, at p. 40, para.
90. | Priebke, Erich s/ solicitud de
extradición案，第16.063/94号案件，1995年11月2日的判决，阿根廷最高法院，Gustavo
A. Bossert法官的投票，第40页，第90段。 |
| See also, more generally, North Sea
Continental Shelf (footnote 671 above), at p. 27, para. 33. | 另见，从更一般性的意义上，北海大陆架案(上文脚注671)，第27页，第33段。 |
| The International Court of Justice has
observed, in a different context, that “[t]he absence of reaction may well
amount to acquiescence …. That is to say, silence may also speak, but only if
the conduct of the other State calls for a response” (Sovereignty over Pedra
Branca/Pulau Batu Puteh, Middle Rocks and South Ledge (Malaysia/Singapore),
Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2008, p. 12, at pp. 50–51, para. 121). | 国际法院曾在不同情况下指出：“没有做出反应很有可能构成默认…换言之，沉默也可表达意思，但只有在其他国家的行为要求做出回应的情形下才会如此”。
白礁岛、中岩礁和南礁的主权归属案(马来西亚/新加坡)，判决，《2008年国际法院案例汇编》，第12页起，见第50-51页，第121段)。 |
| See also Dispute regarding Navigational
and Related Rights (footnote 683 above), at pp. 265–266, para. 141 (“For the
Court, the failure of Nicaragua to deny the existence of a right arising from
the practice which had continued undisturbed and unquestioned over a very
long period, is particularly significant”). | 另见航行权利和相关权利争端案(见上文脚注683)，第265-266页，第141段(“在法院看来，尼加拉瓜未能否认一项权利的存在，此权利源自长期以来未受扰乱和质疑的惯例，这一点十分重要”)。 |
| It may well be that a certain practice
would be seen as affecting all or virtually all States. | 某种惯例很可能被视为影响到所有或几乎所有国家。 |
| See, for example, Gabčikovo-Nagymaros
Project (Hungary/Slovakia), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1997, p. 7, at p. 40,
para. 51; | 例如见加布奇科沃－大毛罗斯项目(匈牙利/斯洛伐克)，判决，《1997年国际法院案例汇编》，第7页起，见第40页，第51段； |
| Responsibilities and obligations of
States with respect to activities in the Area, Advisory Opinion, 1 February
2011, ITLOS Reports 2011, p. 10, at p. 56, para. 169; | 国家关于“区域”内活动的责任和义务，咨询意见，2011年2月1日，《2011年国际海洋法法庭案例汇编》，第10页起，见第56页，第169段； |
| Prosecutor v. Elizaphan Ntakirutimana and
Gérard Ntakirutimana, Cases Nos. ICTR-96-10-A and ICTR-96-17-A, Judgment
(Appeals Chamber) of 13 December 2004, International Criminal Tribunal for
Rwanda, para. 518; | 检察官诉Elizaphan Ntakirutimana和Gérard Ntakirutimana案，ICTR-96-10-A号案件和ICTR-96-17-A号案件，判决(上诉分庭)，2004年12月13日，卢旺达问题国际刑事法庭，第518段； |
| Dubai-Sharjah Border Arbitration (1981),
International Law Reports, vol. 91, pp. 543–701, at p. 575; | 迪拜－沙迦边境仲裁(1981年)，《国际法案例汇编》，第91卷，第543-701页，见第575页； |
| and 2 BvR 1506/03, German Federal
Constitutional Court, Order of the Second Senate of 5 November 2003, para.
47. | 2 BvR 1506/03, 德国联邦宪法法院，2003年11月5日第二审判庭的命令，第47段。 |
| See the statute of the International Law
Commission (1947), adopted by the General Assembly in resolution 174 (II) of
21 November 1947. | 见《国际法委员会章程》(1947年)，大会1947年11月21日第174(II)号决议通过。 |
| Once the General Assembly has taken
action in relation to a final draft of the Commission, such as by annexing it
to a resolution and commending it to States, the output of the Commission may
also fall to be considered under draft conclusion 12, below. | 一旦大会已就委员会的一项最终草案采取行动，例如将其附于决议之中或推荐给各国，委员会的工作成果也可在下文结论草案12下进行考虑。 |
| Continental Shelf (see footnote 672
above), at pp. 29–30, para. 27 (“It is of course axiomatic that the material
of customary international law is to be looked for primarily in the actual
practice and opinio juris of States, even though multilateral conventions may
have an important role to play in recording and defining rules deriving from
custom, or indeed in developing them”). | 大陆架案(见上文脚注672)，见第29-30页，第27段(“当然，不言而喻，尽管多边公约在记录和界定，甚至发展源于习惯的规则方面可发挥重要作用，但习惯国际法的材料还是应主要在各国的实际惯例和法律确信中寻找”)。 |
| Article 38 of the 1969 Vienna Convention
refers to the possibility of “a rule set forth in a treaty … becoming binding
upon a third State as a customary rule of international law, recognized as
such”. | 1969年《维也纳公约》第三十八条提到“条约所载规则成为对第三国有拘束力之公认国际法习惯规则”的可能性。 |
| See Jurisdictional Immunities of the
State (footnote 672 above), at p. 128, para. 66; | 见国家的司法管辖豁免(上文脚注672)，见第128页，第66段； |
| “Ways and means for making the evidence
of customary international law more readily available”, Yearbook … 1950, vol.
II (Part Two), p. 368, para. 29 (“not infrequently conventional formulation
by certain States of a practice also followed by other States is relied upon
in efforts to establish the existence of a rule of customary international
law. Even multipartite conventions signed but not brought into force are
frequently regarded as having value as evidence of customary international
law”). | “使习惯国际法的证据更易考察的方法和手段”，《1950年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第368页，第29段，(“若干国家为力求确定国际习惯法中某项法则之存在，辄有将为他国所遵行之惯例订为协约者，甚至有将虽经签字而尚未生效之多边协约视为具有证明国际习惯法之价值者。 ”)。 |
| See, for example, Eritrea-Ethiopia Claims
Commission, Partial Award: Prisoners of War, Ethiopia’s Claim 4, 1 July 2003,
UNRIAA, vol. XXVI (Sales No. E/F.06.V.7), pp. 73–114, at pp. 86–87, para. 31
(“Certainly, there are important, modern authorities for the proposition that
the Geneva Conventions of 1949 have largely become expressions of customary
international law, and both Parties to this case agree. | 例如见厄立特里亚－埃塞俄比亚混合索赔委员会，部分裁决：战俘，埃塞俄比亚的第4号索赔，2003年7月1日，UNRIAA, 第二十六卷(出售品编号E/F.06.V.7)，第73-114页，见第86-87页，第31段(“当然，关于1949年日内瓦四公约已大体上成为习惯国际法表述的主张具有重要的现代效力，并且本案中的双方均赞同这一点。 |
| The mere fact that they have obtained
nearly universal acceptance supports this conclusion” (footnote omitted)); | 这些公约获得了几乎普遍的接受这一事实本身也支持这项结论”(脚注省略))； |
| and Prosecutor v. Sam Hinga Norman (see
footnote 675 above) at paras. 17–20 (referring, inter alia, to the “huge
acceptance, the highest acceptance of all international conventions” as
indicating that the relevant provisions of the Convention on the Rights of
the Child had come to reflect customary international law). | 检察官诉萨姆·欣加·诺曼案(见上文脚注675)，见第17-20段(除其他外，提到“极大的认可，所有国际文书中最高的接受程度”来说明《儿童权利公约》的有关条款已反映习惯国际法)。 |
| See, for example, Continental Shelf
(footnote 672 above), at p. 30, para. 27 (“it cannot be denied that the 1982
Convention [on the Law of the Sea — which was not then in force] is of major
importance, having been adopted by an overwhelming majority of States; | 例如见大陆架案(上文脚注672)，见第30页，第27段(“不可否认，1982年的《公约》[《海洋法公约》――当时尚未生效]已被绝大多数国家通过，具有十分重要的意义； |
| hence it is clearly the duty of the
Court, even independently of the references made to the Convention by the
Parties, to consider in what degree any of its relevant provisions are binding
upon the Parties as a rule of customary international law”). | 因此，即便当事方没有提到《公约》，法院显然也有义务考虑《公约》任何相关条款作为习惯国际法规则在何种程度上对当事方具有约束力”)。 |
| It may also be the case that a single
provision only partly reflects customary international law. | 也有可能某单一条款仅部分反映了习惯国际法。 |
| In the North Sea Continental Shelf cases,
this consideration led to the disqualification of several of the invoked
instances of State practice (North Sea Continental Shelf (see footnote 671
above), at p. 43, para. 76). | 在北海大陆架案中，这种考虑致使所引述的若干国家实践被视为不充分的证据(北海大陆架(见上文脚注671)，第43页，第76段)。 |
| See, for example, Application of the
Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide
(footnote 663 above), at pp. 46–47, para. 87. | 例如见《防止及惩治灭绝种族罪公约》的适用(上文脚注663)，第46-47页，第87段。 |
| In the 1948 Convention on the Prevention
and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (United Nations, Treaties Series,
vol. 78, No. 1021, p. 277), for example, the Parties “confirm that genocide,
whether committed in time of peace or in time of war, is a crime under
international law” (art. 1) (emphasis added); | 例如，在1948年《防止及惩治灭绝种族罪公约》(联合国，《条约汇编》，第78卷，第1021号，第277页)中，各缔约国“确认灭绝种族之行为，不论出于平时或战时，均属国际法下之一种罪行”(第一条)(强调是后加的)； |
| and the 1958 Geneva Convention on the
High Seas contains the following preambular paragraph: “Desiring to codify
the rules of international law relating to the high seas” (ibid., vol. 450,
No. 6465, at p. 82). | 而1958年日内瓦《公海公约》载有如下序言段落：“深愿编纂关于公海之国际法规则”(同上，第450卷，第6465号，见第82页)。 |
| A treaty may equally indicate that it
embodies progressive development rather than codification; | 条约同样可能表明其体现了逐渐发展而不是对法律的编纂； |
| in the Colombian-Peruvian asylum case,
for example, the International Court of Justice found that the preamble to
the Montevideo Convention on Rights and duties of States of 1933 (League of
Nations, Treaty Series, vol. CLXV, No. 3802, p. 19), which states that it
modifies a previous convention (and the limited number of States that have
ratified it), runs counter to the argument that the Convention “merely
codified principles which were already recognized by … custom”
(Colombian-Peruvian asylum case (see footnote 674 above), at p. 277). | 例如，在哥伦比亚－秘鲁庇护权案中，国际法院裁定1933年《蒙得维的亚国家权利与义务公约》(国际联盟，《条约汇编》，第165卷，第3802号，第19页)的序言称该公约是对先前一份公约的更改(并且批准前一份公约的国家数量有限)，这有悖于认为该公约“仅编纂了已被认定为习惯的原则”的论点(哥伦比亚－秘鲁庇护权案(见上文脚注674)，见第277页)。 |
| See also the Commission’s Guide to
Practice on Reservations to Treaties, guidelines 3.1.5.3 (Reservations to a
provision reflecting a customary rule) and 4.4.2 (Absence of effect on rights
and obligations under customary international law), Official Records of the
General Assembly, Sixty-sixth session, Supplement No. 10 (A/66/10 and Add.1). | 另见委员会《对条约的保留实践指南》，准则3.1.5.3(对反映习惯规则的规定的保留)和4.4.2(对习惯国际法之下的权利和义务不产生效果)，《大会正式记录，第六十六届会议，补编第10号》(A/66/10和Add.1)。 |
| The 1930 Convention on Certain Questions
relating to the Conflict of Nationality Laws (League of Nations, Treaty
Series, vol. CLXXIX, No. 4137, p. 89), for example, provides that: “The
inclusion of the above-mentioned principles and rules in the Convention shall
in no way be deemed to prejudice the question whether they do or do not
already form part of international law” (art. 18). | 例如，1930年《关于国籍法冲突的若干问题的公约》(国际联盟，《条约汇编》，第179卷，第4137号，第89页)规定“将上述原则和规则纳入公约，无论如何不得视为预断这些原则和规则是否已经构成国际法一部分的问题”(第18条)。 |
| Sometimes a general reference is made to
both codification and development: in the 1969 Vienna Convention, for
example, the States parties express in the preamble their belief that
“codification and progressive development of the law of treaties [are]
achieved in the present Convention”; | 有时，会笼统地同时提及编纂和发展：例如，在1969年《维也纳公约》中，各缔约国在序言中表示它们深信“本公约[达成了]条约法之编纂及逐渐发展”； |
| in the 2004 United Nations Convention on
Jurisdictional Immunities of States and Their Property (General Assembly
resolution 59/38 of 2 December 2004), the States parties consider in the
preamble “that the jurisdictional immunities of States and their property are
generally accepted as a principle of customary international law” and express
their belief that the Convention “would contribute to the codification and
development of international law and the harmonization of practice in this
area”. | 在2004年《联合国国家及其财产管辖豁免公约》(2004年12月2日大会第59/38号决议)中，各缔约国在序言中考虑到“国家及其财产的管辖豁免为一项普遍接受的习惯国际法原则”，并表示相信《公约》“将有助于国际法的编纂与发展及此领域实践的协调”。 |
| See also Benkharbouche v. Secretary of
State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs and Secretary of State for Foreign
and Commonwealth Affairs and Libya v. Janah, United Kingdom Supreme Court,
[2017] UKSC 62 (18 October 2017), para. 32. | 另见Benkharbouche诉外交和联邦事务大臣，以及外交和联邦事务大臣及利比亚诉Janah, 联合王国最高法院，[2017] UKSC 62 (2017年10月18日)，第32段。 |
| In examining in the North Sea Continental
Shelf cases whether article 6 of the 1958 Convention on the Continental Shelf
(United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 499, No. 7302, p. 311) reflected
customary international law when the Convention was drawn up, the
International Court of Justice held that “[t]he status of the rule in the
Convention therefore depends mainly on the processes that led the
[International Law] Commission to propose it. | 在北海大陆架案中，国际法院审查了1958年《大陆架公约》(联合国，《条约汇编》，第499卷，第7302号，第311页)第6条在起草时是否反映了习惯国际法，并判定：“因此，《公约》中规则的法律地位主要取决于致使[国际法]委员会提出该规则的程序。 |
| These processes have already been
reviewed in connection with the Danish-Netherlands contention of an a priori
necessity for equidistance [in maritime delimitation], and the Court
considers this review sufficient for present purposes also, in order to show
that the principle of equidistance, as it now figures in Article 6 of the
Convention, was proposed by the Commission with considerable hesitation,
somewhat on an experimental basis, at most de lege ferenda, and not at all de
lege lata or as an emerging rule of customary international law. | 已经结合丹麦－荷兰关于[在海洋划界中]等距离测量的先验必要性的主张对这些程序进行了审查，并且法院认为这种审查在此也能满足要求，显示委员会在提出《公约》第6条中出现的等距离原则时相当犹豫，在某种程度上是一种试验，充其量是拟议法，绝不是现行法或是正在出现的新习惯国际法规则。 |
| This is clearly not the sort of
foundation on which Article 6 of the Convention could be said to have
reflected or crystallized such a rule” (North Sea Continental Shelf (see
footnote 671 above), at p. 38, para. 62). | 显然不能以此为基础来说《公约》第6条反映或具体化了这样的规则”(北海大陆架案(见上文脚注671)，见第38页，第62段)。 |
| See also Jurisdictional Immunities of the
State (footnote 672 above), at pp. 138–139, para. 89. | 另见国家的司法管辖豁免(上文脚注672)，第138-139页，第89段。 |
| Even where a treaty provision could not
eventually be agreed, it remains possible that customary international law
has later evolved “through the practice of States on the basis of the debates
and near-agreements at the Conference [where a treaty was negotiated]”:
Fisheries Jurisdiction (Federal Republic of Germany v. Iceland), Merits,
Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1974, p. 175, at pp. 191–192, para. 44. | 即便最终无法商定某一条约条款，习惯国际法仍有可能稍后“在[谈判条约的]会议的辩论和接近协定的基础上通过各国实践”而演变出来，捕鱼管辖权案(德意志联邦共和国诉冰岛)，案情实质，判决，《1974年国际法院案例汇编》，第175页起，见第191-192页，第44段。 |
| See, for example, Continental Shelf
(footnote 672 above), at p. 33, para. 34 (“It is in the Court’s view
incontestable that … the institution of the exclusive economic zone, with its
rule on entitlement by reason of distance, is shown by the practice of States
to have become a part of customary law” (emphasis added)). | 例如见大陆架案(上文脚注672)，第33页，第34段(“法院认为，毫无疑问，各国惯例显示，根据距离确定应享权利的专属经济区制度已成为习惯法的一部分”(强调是后加的))。 |
| As the International Court of Justice
confirmed, “this process is a perfectly possible one and does from time to
time occur: it constitutes indeed one of the recognized methods by which new
rules of customary international law may be formed” (North Sea Continental
Shelf (see footnote 671 above), at p. 41, para. 71). | 正如国际法院所确认的，“这个过程完全有可能发生，且实际上不时发生：这已构成公认的习惯国际法新规则形成的方法之一”(北海大陆架案(见上文脚注671)，见第41页，第71段)。 |
| One example frequently cited is the Hague
Regulations annexed to the 1907 Fourth Hague Convention respecting the Laws
and Customs of War on Land: although these were prepared, according to the
Convention, “to revise the general laws and customs of war” existing at that
time (and thus did not codify existing customary international law), they
later came to be regarded as reflecting customary international law (see
Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian
Territory, Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 2004, p. 136, at p. 172, para.
89). | 频繁援引的一个例子是1907年《关于陆战法规和惯例的海牙(第四)公约》附件《海牙章程》。 尽管根据《公约》，起草这些条款，是为“修改[当时存在的]一般战争法规和惯例”(因此不是编纂现有的习惯国际法)，但后来它们被视为反映了习惯国际法(见在被占领巴勒斯坦领土修建隔离墙的法律后果，咨询意见，《2004年国际法院案例汇编》，第136页起，见第172页，第89段)。 |
| North Sea Continental Shelf (see footnote
671 above), at pp. 41–43, paras. 72 and 74 (cautioning, at para. 71, that
“this result is not lightly to be regarded as having been attained”). | 北海大陆架案(见上文脚注671)，见第41-43页，第72和第74段(在第71段提醒“这种结果不能轻率地视为已经达成”)。 |
| See also Military and Paramilitary
Activities in and against Nicaragua (footnote 663 above), at p. 98, para. 184
(“Where two States agree to incorporate a particular rule in a treaty, their
agreement suffices to make that rule a legal one, binding upon them; | 另见尼加拉瓜境内和针对尼加拉瓜的军事和准军事活动(上文脚注663)，见第98页，第184段(“如果两国商定将某项规则纳入条约，其商定协议足以使这一规则成为约束双方的法律规则； |
| but in the field of customary
international law, the shared view of the Parties as to the content of what
they regard as the rule is not enough. | 但在习惯国际法领域中，仅缔约方就规则内容达成共识还不够。 |
| The Court must satisfy itself that the
existence of the rule in the opinio juris of States is confirmed by
practice”). | 法院必须确定各国惯例的确证实该规则存在于国家法律确信中”)。 |
| See Ahmadou Sadio Diallo (Republic of
Guinea v. Democratic Republic of the Congo), Preliminary Objections,
Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2007, p. 582, at p. 615, para. 90 (“The fact invoked
by Guinea that various international agreements, such as agreements for the
promotion and protection of foreign investments and the Washington
Convention, have established special legal regimes governing investment
protection, or that provisions in this regard are commonly included in
contracts entered into directly between States and foreign investors, is not
sufficient to show that there has been a change in the customary rules of
diplomatic protection; | 见艾哈迈杜·萨迪奥·迪亚洛案(几内亚共和国诉刚果民主共和国)，初步异议，判决，《2007年国际法院案例汇编》，第582页起，见第615页，第90段(“据几内亚援引，促进和保护外国投资协定以及《华盛顿公约》等各项国际协定制定了保护投资的特别法律制度，或这方面的规定通常被列入国家与外国投资者之间直接签订的合同，这些事实不足以证明外交保护的习惯规则发生了变化，因为这同样可以证明事实正好相反”)。 |
| it could equally show the contrary”). See
Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons (footnote 675 above), at pp.
254–255, para 70; | 见以核武器进行威胁或使用核武器的合法性案(上文脚注675)，见第254-255页，第70段； |
| SEDCO Incorporated v. National Iranian
Oil Company and Iran, second interlocutory award, Award No. ITL 59-129-3 of
27 March 1986, International Law Reports, vol. 84, pp. 483–592, at p. 526. | SEDCO公司诉伊朗国家石油公司和伊朗案，中间裁决，第ITL 59-129-3号裁决，1986年3月27日，《国际法案例汇编》，第84卷，第483-592页，见第526页。 |
| There is a wide range of designations,
such as “declaration” or “declaration of principles”. | 其名称众多，例如“宣言”或“原则宣言”。 |
| See also para. (9) of the commentary to
draft conclusion 8, above. | 另见上文结论草案8的评注第(9)段。 |
| Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear
Weapons (see footnote 675 above), at pp. 254–255, para. 70 (referring to
General Assembly resolutions). | 以核武器进行威胁或使用核武器的合法性案(上文脚注675)，见第254-255页，第70段(提及联大的决议)。 |
| Military and Paramilitary Activities in
and against Nicaragua (see footnote 663 above), at p. 100, para. 188. | 尼加拉瓜境内和针对尼加拉瓜的军事和准军事活动案(见上文脚注663)，见第100页，第188段。 |
| See also The Government of the State of
Kuwait v. The American Independent Oil Company (AMINOIL), Final Award of 24
March 1982, International Law Reports, vol. 66, pp. 518–627, at pp. 601–602,
para. 143. | 另见科威特政府诉美国独立石油公司(AMINOIL)案，1982年3月24日最终裁决，《国际法案例汇编》，第66卷，第518-627页，见第601-602页，第143段。 |
| Military and Paramilitary Activities in
and against Nicaragua (see footnote 663 above), at p. 99, para. 188. | 尼加拉瓜境内和针对尼加拉瓜的军事和准军事活动案(见上文脚注663)，见第99页，第188段。 |
| Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear
Weapons (see footnote 675 above), at p. 255, para. 70. | 以核武器进行威胁或使用核武器的合法性案(见上文脚注675)，见第255页，第70段。 |
| In resolution 96 (I) of 11 December 1946,
for example, the General Assembly “Affirm[ed] that genocide is a crime under
international law”, language that suggests that the paragraph was intended to
be declaratory of existing customary international law. | 例如，在1946年12月11日第96(I)号决议中，联大“确认灭绝种族为国际法下之一种犯罪行为”，这种措辞表明该段旨在宣示现有习惯国际法。 |
| In the General Assembly, explanations of
vote are often given upon adoption by a main committee, in which case they
are not usually repeated in plenary. | 在联大中，对投票的解释往往在某一主要委员会通过决议时作出，全体会议中通常不再重复。 |
| See, for example, Legality of the Threat
or Use of Nuclear Weapons (footnote 675 above), at p. 255, para. 71 (“several
of the resolutions under consideration in the present case have been adopted
with substantial numbers of negative votes and abstentions; | 例如见以核武器进行威胁或使用核武器的合法性案(见上文脚注675)，见第255页，第71段(“本案所审查的决议之中有几项决议在通过时，相当多的国家投反对票或弃权； |
| thus, although those resolutions are a
clear sign of deep concern regarding the problem of nuclear weapons, they
still fall short of establishing the existence of an opinio juris on the
illegality of the use of such weapons”). | 因此，这些决议虽然显示各方对核武器问题深感关切，仍然不足以确定存在一种认为使用此类武器为非法的法律意见”)。 |
| See, for example, KAING Guek Eav alias
Duch, Case No. 001/18-07-2007-ECCC/SC, Appeal Judgment, Extraordinary
Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia, Supreme Court Chamber (3 February 2012),
para. 194 (“The 1975 Declaration on Torture [resolution 3452 (XXX) of 9
December 1975, Declaration on the Protection of All Persons from Being
Subjected to Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or
Punishment] is a non-binding General Assembly resolution and thus more
evidence is required to find that the definition of torture found therein
reflected customary international law at the relevant time”). | 例如见康克由(别名“杜赫”)案，001/18-07-2007-ECCC/SC号案件，上诉判决，柬埔寨法院特别法庭最高法庭(2012年2月3日)，第194段(“1975年《酷刑宣言》[1975年12月9日第3452(XXX)号决议，《保护人人不受酷刑和其他残忍、不人道或有辱人格待遇或处罚宣言》]是一项不具约束力的大会决议，因而需要有进一步的证据，才能确定其中对酷刑的定义反映了相关时期的习惯国际法”)。 |
| Although there is no hierarchy of
international courts and tribunals, decisions of the International Court of
Justice are often regarded as authoritative by other courts and tribunals. | 尽管国际性法院和法庭不存在等级关系，其他法院和法庭往往认为国际法院的判决有权威。 |
| See, for example, Jones and Others v. the
United Kingdom, Application nos. 34356/06 and 40528/06, European Court of
Human Rights, ECHR 2014, para. 198; | 例如见，Jones等人诉联合王国案，第34356/06号和第40528/06号申诉，欧洲人权法院，《2014年欧洲人权法院案例汇编》，第198段； |
| M/V “SAIGA” (No. 2) (Saint Vincent and
the Grenadines v. Guinea), Judgment, ITLOS Reports 1999, p. 10, at paras.
133–134; | “赛加羚羊”号轮案(第2号)(圣文森特和格林那丁斯诉几内亚)，判决，《1999年海洋法法庭案例汇编》，第10页，见第133-134段； |
| and Japan — Taxes on Alcoholic Beverages,
WTO Appellate Body Report, WT/DS8/AB/R, WT/DS10/AB/R and WT/DS11/AB/R,
adopted on 1 November 1996, sect. D. | 日本－酒精饮料税案，世贸组织上诉机构报告，WT/DS8/AB/R,
WT/DS10/AB/R和WT/DS11/AB/ R, 1996年11月1日通过，D节。 |
| On decisions of national courts as a
subsidiary means for the determination of rules of customary international
law see, for example, Mohammed and others v. Ministry of Defence, United
Kingdom Supreme Court, [2017] UKSC 2 (17 January 2017), paras. 149–151 (Lord
Mance). | 关于作为确定习惯国际法规则的辅助手段的各国法院的判决，例如见Mohammed等人诉国防部案，联合王国最高法院，[2017] UKSC 2 (2017年1月17日)，第149-151段(Mance勋爵)。 |
| See also Minister of Justice and
Constitutional Development v. Southern African Litigation Centre, Supreme
Court of Appeal of South Africa (2016) 3 SA 317 (SCA) (15 March 2016), para.
74. | 另见司法和宪法发展部长诉南部非洲诉讼中心，南非最高上诉法院(2016年) 3 SA 317 (SCA) (2016年3月15日)，第74段。 |
| See also “Ways and means for making the
evidence of customary international law more readily available”, Yearbook …
1950, vol. II (Part Two), p. 370, para. 53. | 另见“使习惯国际法的证据更易考察的方法和手段”，《1950年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第370页，第53段。 |
| The Paquete Habana and The Lola, US
Supreme Court 175 US 677 (1900), at p. 700. | Paquete Habana和Lola案，美国最高法院175 US 677(1900)，见第700页。 |
| See also The Case of the S.S. “Lotus”
(footnote 687 above), at pp. 26 and 31. | 另见“莲花号”案(上文脚注687)，第26和第31页。 |
| The special consideration to be given to
the output of the International Law Commission is described in paragraph (2)
of the general commentary to the present Part (Part Five) above. | 本部分(第五部分)总评注第(2)段阐述了应给予国际法委员会的工作成果的特殊考虑。 |
| North Sea Continental Shelf (see footnote
671 above), at pp. 38–39, para. 63. | 北海大陆架案(见上文脚注671)，第38-39页，第63段。 |
| This is true of rules of “general”
customary international law, as opposed to “particular” customary
international law (on which see draft conclusion 16, below). | 这对于“一般”习惯国际法成立，与“特别”习惯国际法相对(关于特别习惯法，见下文结论草案16)。 |
| See, for example, Entscheidungen des
Bundesverfassungsgerichts (German Federal Constitutional Court), vol. 46
(1978), Judgment of 13 December 1977, 2 BvM 1/76, No. 32, pp. 34–404, at pp.
388–389, para. 6 (“This concerns not merely action that a State can
successfully uphold from the outset against application of an existing
general rule of international law by way of perseverant protestation of
rights (in the sense of the ruling of the International Court of Justice in
the Norwegian Fisheries case …); | 例如见德国联邦宪法法院的判决，第46卷(1978年)，1977年12月13日的判决，2 BvM
1/76, No. 32, 第34-404页，见第388-389页，第6段(“这不只是说一国可采取行动，从一开始就坚持主张权利，从而成功地坚持对一条国际法现有规则的适用表示反对(就国际法院在挪威渔业案…中的判决而言； |
| instead, the existence of a corresponding
general rule of international law cannot at present be assumed”). | 而是说，目前不能假定存在一条对应的国际法一般规则”)。 |
| In due course, and as part of an overall
package on the law of the sea, States did not in fact maintain their
objections. | 在这一过程中，而且作为一揽子海洋法的一部分，国家实际上没有维持其反对立场。 |
| While the ability effectively to preserve
a persistent objector status over time may sometimes prove difficult, this
does not call into question the existence of the rule reflected in draft
conclusion 15. | 虽然要长期地有效保持一贯反对者地位有时证明是很难的，但这不会对结论草案15所述规则的存在提出疑问。 |
| See, for example, the Fisheries case
(footnote 708 above), at p. 131; | 例如见渔业案(上文脚注708)，见第131页； |
| Michael Domingues v. United States, Case
No. 12.285 (2002), Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, Report No.
62/02, paras. 48 and 49; | Michael Domingues诉美国案，案件号12.285 (2002)，美洲人权委员会，第62/02号报告，第48和49段； |
| Sabeh El Leil v. France [GC], No.
34869/05, European Court of Human Rights, 29 June 2011, para. 54; | Sabeh El Leil诉法国案[GC]，第34869/05号，欧洲人权法院，2011年6月29日，第54段； |
| WTO Panel Reports, European Communities —
Measures Affecting the Approval and Marketing of Biotech Products,
WT/DS291/R, WT/DS292/R and WT/DS293/R, adopted 21 November 2006, at p. 335,
footnote 248; | 世贸组织小组报告，“欧洲共同体――影响生物技术产品批准和营销的措施”，WT/DS291/R、WT/DS292/R和WT/DS293/R, 2006年11月21日通过，见第335页，脚注248； |
| and Siderman de Blake v. Republic of
Argentina, United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, 965 F.2d
699; | 西德曼·德布莱克诉阿根廷共和国案，美国上诉法院第九巡回审判庭，965 F.2d 699; |
| 1992 U.S. App., at p. 715, para. 54. | 1992 U.S. App., 第715页，第54段。 |
| See, for example, the intervention by
Turkey in 1982 at the Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea,
document A/CONF.62/SR.189, p. 76, para. 150 (available from
http://legal.un.org/diplomaticconferences/lawofthesea-1982/Vol17.html); | 例如见土耳其于1982年在第三次联合国海洋法会议上的发言，第A/CONF.62/SR.189号文件，第76页，第150段(可访问http://legal.un.org/diplomaticconferences/lawofthesea-1982/Vol17.
html)； |
| United States Department of Defense, Law
of War Manual, Office of General Counsel, Washington D.C., December 2016, at
pp. 29–34, sect. 1.8 (Customary international law), in particular at p. 30,
para. 1.8 (“Customary international law is generally binding on all States,
but States that have been persistent objectors to a customary international
law rule during its development are not bound by that rule”) and p. 34, para.
1.8.4. | 美国国防部，“战争法手册”，总法律顾问办公室，华盛顿特区，2016年12月，第29-34页，第1.8节(习惯国际法)，尤其参见第30页，第1.8段(“习惯国际法在总体上对各国均有约束力，但在一条习惯国际法规则的发展过程中一贯对其反对的国家不受该规则约束”)以及第34页，第1.8.4段。 |
| The Commission itself recently referred
to the rule in its Guide to Practice on Reservations to Treaties, where it
stated that “a reservation may be the means by which a ‘persistent objector’
manifests the persistence of its objection; | 委员会最近在“对条约的保留实践指南”中提到了这条规则，委员会说“保留可能是‘一贯反对者’表示坚持反对的一种手段； |
| the objector may certainly reject the
application, through a treaty, of a rule which cannot be invoked against it
under general international law” (see paragraph (7) of the commentary to
guideline 3.1.5.3, Official Records of the General Assembly, Sixty-sixth
session, Supplement No. 10 (A/66/10/Add.1)). | 该反对者肯定可以拒绝通过一项条约适用某项规范，这样，其他国家便无法依一般国际法援引此项规范来指控他了”(见指南3.1.5.3的评注第(7)段，《大会正式记录，第六十六届会议，补编第10号》(A/66/10/Add.1))。 |
| See, for example, C v. Director of
Immigration and another, Hong Kong Court of Appeal, [2011] HKCA 159, CACV
132-137/2008 (2011), at para. 68 (“Evidence of objection must be clear”). | 例如见C诉入境事务处处长等人案，香港上诉法庭，[2011] HKCA 159, CACV 132-137/2008 (2011)，第68段(“反对的证据必须清楚”)。 |
| See paragraph (5) of the commentary to
draft conclusion 1, above. | 见上文结论草案1的评注第(5)段。 |
| It is not to be excluded that such rules
may evolve, over time, into rules of general customary international law. | 不能排除的是，这类规则可能随时间推移演变为一般习惯国际法规则。 |
| Military and Paramilitary Activities in
and against Nicaragua (see footnote 663 above), at p. 105, para. 199. | 尼加拉瓜境内和针对尼加拉瓜的军事和准军事活动案(见上文脚注663)，见第105页，第199段。 |
| Frontier Dispute, Judgment, I.C.J.
Reports 1986, p. 554, at p. 565, para. 21. | 边界争端案，判决，《1986年国际法院案例汇编》，第554页起，见第565页，第21段。 |
| Case concerning rights of nationals of the
United States of America in Morocco (see footnote 685 above), at p. 200; | 摩洛哥境内美利坚合众国国民的权利案(见上文脚注685)，见第200页； |
| and Case concerning Right of Passage over
Indian Territory (see footnote 675 above), at p. 39. | 在印度领土上的通行权案(见上文脚注675)，见第39页。 |
| Dispute regarding Navigational and
Related Rights (see footnote 683 above), at p. 233, para. 34. | 航行权利和相关权利争端案(见上文脚注683)，见第233页，第34段。 |
| Colombian-Peruvian asylum case (see
footnote 674 above). | 哥伦比亚－秘鲁庇护权案(见上文脚注674)。 |
| Case concerning Right of Passage over Indian
Territory (see footnote 675 above). | 在印度领土上的通行权案(见上文脚注675)。 |
| See also draft conclusion 9, paragraph 2,
above. | 另见上文结论草案9，第2段。 |
| The International Court of Justice has
treated particular customary international law as falling within Article 38,
paragraph 1 (b), of its Statute: see Colombian-Peruvian asylum case (footnote
674 above), at pp. 276–277. | 国际法院已把特别习惯国际法归入其《规约》第三十八条第1款(丑)项的范畴； 哥伦比亚－秘鲁庇护权案(见上文脚注674)，见第276-277页。 |
| The position is similar to that set out
in the provisions of the 1969 Vienna Convention concerning treaties and third
States (Part III, sect. 4). | 这一立场与1969年《维也纳公约》关于条约与第三国的规定(第三编第四节)中的立场相似。 |
| Colombian-Peruvian asylum case (see
footnote 674 above), at p. 276. | 哥伦比亚－秘鲁庇护权案(见上文脚注674)，见第276页。 |
| Case concerning Right of Passage over
Indian Territory (see footnote 675 above), at p. 39. | 在印度领土上的通行权案(见上文脚注675)，见第39页。 |
| Ibid., p. 6. | 同上，第6页。 |
| See the claim by Honduras in Land, Island
and Maritime Frontier Dispute (El Salvador/Honduras: Nicaragua intervening),
Judgment of 11 September 1992, p. 351, at p. 597, para. 399. | 见洪都拉斯在关于土地、岛屿和海洋边界争端案(萨尔瓦多/洪都拉斯：尼加拉瓜参加诉讼)中的主张，1992年9月11日的判决，第351页起，见第597页，第399段。 |
| Dispute regarding Navigational and
Related Rights (see footnote 683 above), at pp. 265–266, paras. 140–144; | 航行权利和相关权利争端案(见上文脚注683)，见第265-266页，第140-144段； |
| see also Judge Sepúlveda-Amor’s Separate
Opinion, at pp. 278–282, paras. 20–36. | 另见塞普尔伟达－阿莫尔法官的个别意见，见第278-282页，第20-36段。 |
| Nkondo v. Minister of Police and Another,
South African Supreme Court, 1980 (2) SA 894 (O), 7 March 1980, International
Law Reports, vol. 82, pp. 358–375, at pp. 368–375 (Smuts J. holding that:
“There was no evidence of long standing practice between the Republic of
South Africa and Lesotho which had crystallized into a local customary right
of transit free from immigration formalities” (at p. 359)). | Nkondo诉警察部长等人案，南非最高法院，1980(2) SA 894(O)，1980年3月7日，《国际法案例汇编》，第82卷，第358-375页，见第368-375页(Smuts法官认定：“没有证据表明，南非共和国与莱索托之间存在长期有效的惯例，已具体化为免于移民手续过境的地方习惯权利”(见第359页))。 |
| Kraftwerk Reckingen AG v. Canton of
Zurich and others, Appeal Judgment, BGE 129 II 114, ILDC 346 (CH 2002), 10
October 2002, Switzerland, Federal Supreme Court [BGer]; | Kraftwerk Reckingen AG诉苏黎世州等案，上诉判决，BGE 129 II 114, ILDC 346 (CH 2002)，2002年10月10日，瑞士，联邦最高法院[BGer]； |
| Public Law Chamber II, para. 4. | 公法二庭，第4段。 |
| Colombian-Peruvian asylum case (see
footnote 674 above), at pp. 276–277. | 哥伦比亚－秘鲁庇护权案(见上文脚注674)，见第276-277页。 |
| At its 3197th meeting, on 9 August 2013
(Official Records of the General Assembly, Sixty-eighth Session, Supplement
No. 10 (A/68/10)), para. 168. | 在2013年8月9日举行的第3197次会议上(《大会正式记录，第六十八届会议，补编第10号》(A/68/10))，第168段。 |
| The Commission included the topic in its
programme of work on the understanding that: “(a) Work on the topic will
proceed in a manner so as not to interfere with relevant political
negotiations, including on climate change, ozone depletion, and long-range transboundary
air pollution. | 委员会将此专题列入工作方案时有以下谅解：“(a) 此专题工作的进行方式不会影响有关的政治谈判，包括就气候变化、臭氧层消耗、远距离跨界空气污染进行的政治谈判。 |
| The topic will not deal with, but is also
without prejudice to, questions such as: liability of States and their
nationals, the polluter-pays principle, the precautionary principle, common
but differentiated responsibilities, and the transfer of funds and technology
to developing countries, including intellectual property rights; | 此专题不会处理，但也不妨碍诸如下述问题：国家及其国民的赔偿责任、污染者付费原则、谨慎原则、共同但有区别的责任、向发展中国家转让资金和技术，包括知识产权； |
| (b) The topic will also not deal with
specific substances, such as black carbon, tropospheric ozone, and other
dual-impact substances, which are the subject of negotiations among States. | (b) 这一专题也不会处理具体物质，例如国家之间正在谈判的黑碳、对流层臭氧以及其他双重影响物质。 |
| The project will not seek to ‘fill’ gaps
in the treaty regimes; | 这一专题不会试图“弥补”条约制度存在的缺陷； |
| (c) Questions relating to outer space,
including its delimitation, are not part of the topic; | (c) 与外层空间有关的问题，包括外层空间的划界问题，不在此专题的范围之内； |
| (d) The outcome of the work on the topic
will be draft guidelines that do not seek to impose on current treaty regimes
legal rules or legal principles not already contained therein. | (d) 此专题的工作结果将是指南草案，但这种指南草案不会试图给现行条约制度强加条约制度尚不具有的法律规则或法律原则。 |
| The Special Rapporteur’s reports would be
based on such understanding. | 特别报告员的报告将以上述谅解为基础。 |
| ” The General Assembly, in paragraph 6 of
its resolution 68/112 of 16 December 2013, took note of the decision of the
Commission to include the topic in its programme of work. | ”大会2013年12月16日第68/112号决议第6段注意到委员会决定将此专题列入工作方案。 |
| The topic had been included in the
long-term programme of work of the Commission during its sixty-third session
(2011), on the basis of the proposal contained in annex B to the report of
the Commission (Official Records of the General Assembly, Sixty-sixth
Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/66/10), para. 365). | 委员会第六十三届会议(2011年)以委员会报告附件B所载的建议为基础，将此专题列入长期工作方案(《大会正式记录，第六十六届会议，补编第10号》(A/66/10)，第365段)。 |
| A/CN.4/667, A/CN.4/681 and Corr.1
(Chinese only), A/CN.4/692, and A/CN.4/705 and Corr.1, respectively. | 分别为A/CN.4/667、A/CN.4/681和Corr.1(仅有中文)、A/CN.4/692以及A/CN.4/705和Corr.1。 |
| Official Records of the General Assembly,
Seventieth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/70/10), paras. 53–54; | 《大会正式记录，第七十届会议，补编第10号》(A/70/10)，第53-54段； |
| and ibid., Seventy-first Session, Supplement
No. 10 (A/71/10), paras. 95–96, and ibid., Seventy-second Session, Supplement
No. 10 (A/72/10), paras. 66–67. | 同上，《第七十一届会议，补编第10号》(A/71/10)，第95-96段； 同上，《第七十二届会议，补编第10号》(A/72/10)，第66-67段。 |
| In the past, the Commission has generally
presented to the General Assembly an outcome of its work without a draft
preamble, leaving its elaboration to States. | 委员会以往一般是将工作结果交给大会，不带序言草案，后者留待会员国详细拟订。 |
| However, there have also been precedents
during which the Commission has prepared such preambles. | 然而，也有过委员会拟就此种序言的先例。 |
| This was the case, for instance, with
respect to the two draft conventions on the elimination of future
statelessness (1954), Yearbook … | 例如，这样的情况有：关于消除未来无国籍状态的两项公约草案(1954年)，《1954年…年鉴》，第二卷，第25段； |
| 1954, vol. II, para. 25, and on the
reduction of the future statelessness (1954), Yearbook … 1954, vol. II, para.
25; | 关于减少未来无国籍状态的公约草案(1954年)，《1954年…年鉴》，第二卷，第25段； |
| the model rules on arbitral procedures
(1958), Yearbook … 1958, vol. II, para. 22 (the preamble reflected
fundamental rules for an undertaking to arbitrate); | 仲裁程序示范规则(1958年)，《1958年…年鉴》，第二卷，第22段(序言反映了进行仲裁的基本规则)； |
| the draft articles on the nationality of
natural persons in relation to the succession of States (1999), Yearbook …
1999, vol. II (Part Two), para. 47 (reproduced in General Assembly resolution
55/153, annex, of 12 December 2000); | 国家继承涉及的自然人国籍问题条款草案(1999年)，《1999年…年鉴》，第二卷，第二部分，第47段(案文也载于2000年12月12日大会第55/153号决议附件)； |
| the draft articles on prevention of
transboundary harm from hazardous activities (2001), Yearbook … 2001, vol. II
(Part Two) and corrigendum, para. 97 (reproduced in General Assembly
resolution 62/68, annex, of 6 December 2007); | 预防危险活动的跨界损害条款草案(2001年)，《2001年…年鉴》，第二卷，第二部分，第97段(案文也载于2007年12月6日大会第62/68号决议附件)； |
| the Guiding Principles applicable to
unilateral declarations of States capable of creating legal obligations
(2006), Yearbook … 2006, vol. II (Part Two), para. 176; | 适用于能够产生法律义务的国家单方面声明的指导原则(2006年)，《2006年…年鉴》，第二卷，第二部分，第176段； |
| the draft principles on the allocation of
loss in the case of transboundary harm arising out of hazardous activities
(2006), Yearbook … 2006, vol. II (Part Two), para. 66 (reproduced in General
Assembly resolution 61/36, annex, of 4 December 2006); | 危险活动所致跨界损害的损失分配原则草案(2006)《2006年…年鉴》，第二卷，第二部分，第66段(案文也载于2006年12月6日大会第61/36号决议附件)； |
| and the articles on the law of
transboundary aquifers (2008), Yearbook … 2008, vol. II (Part Two), paras.
53–54. | 跨界含水层法条款(2008年)，《2008年…年鉴》第二卷(第二部分)，第53和54段。 |
| A/CN.4/681 and Corr.1, para. 3. | A/CN.4/681和Corr.1,
第3段。 |
| The inclusion of “atmospheric resources”
among “other natural resources” by the former Committee on Natural Resources
was first mentioned in the Committee’s report on its first session, Official
Records of the Economic and Social Council, Fiftieth Session, Supplement No.
6 (E/4969-E/C.7/13), section 4 (“other natural resources”), para. 94 (d). | 原联合国自然资源委员会将“大气资源”列为“其他自然资源”，最初提及是该委员会第一届会议报告，《经济及社会理事会正式记录，第五十届会议，补编第6号》(E/4969-E/C.7/13)，第4节(“其他自然资源”)，第94(d)段。 |
| The work of the Committee (later the
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources for Development) was subsequently
transferred to the Commission on Sustainable Development. | 该委员会(后改名为能源和自然资源促进发展委员会)的工作以后又转给可持续发展问题委员会。 |
| “The natural resources of the earth
including the air … must be safeguarded for the benefit of present and future
generations through careful planning or management, as appropriate” (adopted
at Stockholm on 16 June 1972, see Report of the United Nations Conference on
the Human Environment, Stockholm, 5-16 June 1972 (United Nations publication,
Sales No. E.73.II.A.14 (A/CONF.48/14/Rev.1 and Corr.1), part one, chap. I,
principle 2). | “地球上的自然资源，包括空气…，必须为今世后代的利益，酌量情形，通过仔细的设计或管理，加以保护。 ”(1972年6月16日在斯德哥尔摩通过，见《联合国人类环境会议报告，1972年6月5日至16日斯德哥尔摩》(联合国出版物，出售品编号E.73.II.A.14 (A/CONF.48/14/Rev.1和Corr.1)，第一部分，第一章，原则2)。 |
| “[A]tmospheric resources that are
utilized by man, shall be managed to achieve and maintain optimum sustainable
productivity” (World Charter for Nature, General Assembly resolution 37/7 of
28 October 1982, annex, general principles, para. 4). | “对人类所利用的…大气资源，应设法使其达到并维持最适宜的持续生产率”(《世界自然宪章》，1982年10月28日大会第37/7号决议，一般原则，第4段)。 |
| The World Trade Organization (WTO) Panel
and Appellate Body recognized in the Gasoline case of 1996 that clean air was
an “exhaustible natural resource” that could be “depleted”. | 世界贸易组织(世贸组织)专题小组及上诉机构在1996年汽油案中确认，空气是“可耗尽的自然资源”。 |
| Report of the Appellate Body, United
States-Standards for Reformulated and Conventional Gasoline (1996),
WT/DS2/AB/R. | 美国－新配方汽油和常规汽油标准案(1996年)，WT/DS2/AB/R。 |
| See the 2001 Stockholm Convention on
Persistent Organic Pollutants, United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 2256, No.
40214, p. 119 (noting in the preamble that “persistent organic pollutants, …
are transported, through air … across international boundaries and deposited
far from their place of release, where they accumulate in terrestrial and
aquatic ecosystems”). | 见2001年《关于持久性有机污染物的斯德哥尔摩公约》，联合国，《条约汇编》，第2256卷，第40214号，第119页(在序言里指出：“持久性有机污染物…通过空气…作跨越国际边界的迁移并沉积在远离其排放地点的地区，随后在那里的陆地生态系统和水域生态系统中蓄积起来”)。 |
| The 2012 amendment to the Gothenburg
Protocol to the 1979 Convention on Long-range Transboundary Air Pollution to
Abate Acidification, Eutrophication and Ground-level Ozone (Gothenburg, 30
November 1999, United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 2319, p. 81) indicates in
the third preambular paragraph: “Concerned … that emitted [chemical
substances] are transported in the atmosphere over long distance and may have
adverse transboundary effects”. | 《1979年远距离越境空气污染公约减少酸化、富营养化和地面臭氧哥德堡议定书》2012年修正案(联合国，《条约汇编》，第2319卷，第81页)在序言第三段里指出：“关注…排放的[化学物质]在大气层里长距离输送，可产生不利的跨界影响。 |
| The 2013 Minamata Convention on Mercury
(Kumamoto (Japan), 10 October 2013, text available at
https://treaties.un.org/doc/Treaties/2013/10/20131010%2011-16%20AM/CTC-XXVII-17.pdf)
recognizes mercury as “a chemical of global concern owing to its long-range
atmospheric transport” (first preambular para.); | ”2013年《关于汞的水俣公约》(日本熊本县)2013年10月10日，公约案文可从下述网址查阅：https://treaties.un.org/doc/Treaties/2013/10/20131010%2011-16%20AM/CTC-XXVII-17.pdf)承认汞因其“可在大气中作远距离迁移”，因而“此种化学品已成为全球性关注问题”(第一序言段)； |
| See, J.S. Fuglesvedt et al., “Transport
impacts on atmosphere and climate: metrics”, Atmospheric Environment, vol. 44
(2010), pp. 4648–4677; | 见J.S. Fuglesvedt et al., “Transport
impacts on atmosphere and climate: metrics”, Atmospheric Environment, vol. 44
(2010), pp. 4648–4677; |
| D.J. Wuebbles, H. Lei and J.-T Lin,
“Inter-continental transport of aerosols and photochemical oxidants from Asia
and its consequences”, Environmental Pollution, vol. 150 (2007), pp. 65–84; | D.J. Wuebbles, H. Lei and J.-T Lin,
“Inter-continental transport of aerosols and photochemical oxidants from Asia
and its consequences”, Environmental Pollution, vol. 150 (2007), pp. 65–84; |
| J.-T Lin, X.-Z Liang and D.J. Wuebbles,
“Effects of inter-continental transport on surface ozone over the United
States: Present and future assessment with a global model”, Geophysical
Research Letters, vol. 35 (2008). | J.-T Lin, X.-Z Liang and D.J. Wuebbles,
“Effects of inter-continental transport on surface ozone over the United
States: Present and future assessment with a global model”, Geophysical
Research Letters, vol. 35 (2008)。 |
| Several of these pollution threats to the
Arctic environment have been identified, such as persistent organic
pollutants and mercury, which originate mainly from sources outside the
region. | 现已认定了对北极环境的多种污染威胁，诸如持久性有机污染物和汞，主要源自北极地区以外。 |
| These pollutants end up in the Arctic
from southern industrial regions of Europe and other continents via
prevailing northerly winds and ocean circulation. | 这些污染物随北向盛行风和海洋环流移动，从北极以南的欧洲和其他大陆最终沉积在北极地区。 |
| See T. Koivurova, P. Kankaanpää and A.
Stepien, “Innovative environmental protection: lessons from the Arctic,”
Journal of Environmental Law, vol. 27 (2015), pp. 285–311, at p. 297. | 见T. Koivurova, P. Kankaanpää and A.
Stepien, “Innovative environmental protection: lessons from the Arctic,”
Journal of Environmental Law, vol. 27 (2015), pp. 285-311, at p. 297。 |
| R.A. Duce et al., “The atmospheric input
of trace species to the world ocean”, Global Biogeochemical Cycles, vol. 5
(1991), pp. 193–259; | R.A. Duce et al., “The atmospheric input
of trace species to the world ocean”, Global Biogeochemical Cycles, vol. 5
(1991), pp. 193–259; |
| T. Jickells and C.M. Moore, “The
importance of atmospheric deposition for ocean productivity”, Annual Review
of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics, vol. 46 (2015), pp. 481–501. | T. Jickells and C.M. Moore, “The
importance of atmospheric deposition for ocean productivity”, Annual Review
of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics, vol. 46 (2015), pp. 481–501. |
| According to the Intergovernmental Panel
on Climate Change, “Climate change 2014 synthesis report: summary for
policymakers”, p. 4: “Ocean warming dominates the increase in energy stored
in the climate system, accounting for more than 90% of the energy accumulated
between 1971 and 2010 (high confidence), with only about 1% stored in the atmosphere. | 根据政府间气候变化专门委员会，“2014年气候变化综合报告：为决策者编写的摘要”，第4页：“气候系统中储存能量的增加主要表现为海洋水温升高，占1971年至2010年累积能量的90%以上(高度可信)，其中只有约1%存储在大气层中。 |
| On a global scale, the ocean warming is
largest near the surface, and the upper 75 m warmed by 0.11 [0.09 to 0.13] °C
per decade over the period 1971 to 2010. | 在全球范围内，海洋表层温度升幅最大。 1971年至2010年期间，在海洋上层75米以上深度的海水温度升幅为每十年0.11 [0.09至0.13]°C。 |
| It is virtually certain that the upper
ocean (0–700 m) warmed from 1971 to 2010, and it likely warmed between the
1870s and 1971”. | 几乎可以肯定，上层海洋(0-700米)从1971年至2010年出现了升温，并可能在1870年代至1971年出现了升温。 |
| Because of the rise in ocean
temperatures, many scientific analyses suggest risk of severe and widespread
drought in the twenty-first century over many land areas. | ”许多科学分析指出，由于海洋温度升高，21世纪很多陆地地区将有出现严重和广泛干旱的风险。 |
| See S.K. Min et al., “Human contribution
to more-intense precipitation extremes”, Nature, vol. 470 (2011), pp.
378–381; | 见S.K. Min et al., “Human contribution to
more-intense precipitation extremes”, Nature, vol. 470 (2011), pp. 378–381; |
| A. Dai, “Increasing drought under global
warming in observations and models”, Nature Climate Change, vol. 3 (2013),
pp. 52–58; | A. Dai, “Increasing drought under global
warming in observations and models”, Nature Climate Change, vol. 3 (2013),
pp. 52–58; |
| and J. Sheffield, E.F. Wood, and M.L.
Roderick, “Little change in global drought over the past 60 years”, Nature,
vol. 491 (2012), pp. 435–438. See also Ø. Hov, “Overview: oceans and the
atmosphere” and T. Jickells, “Linkages between the oceans and the
atmosphere”, in “Summary of the informal meeting of the International Law
Commission: dialogue with atmospheric scientists (third session), 4 May
2017”, paras. 4–12 and 21–30, respectively. | and J. Sheffield, E.F. Wood, and M.L.
Roderick, “Little change in global drought over the past 60 years”, Nature,
vol. 491 (2012), pp. 435–438. See also Ø. Hov, “Overview: oceans and the
atmosphere” and T. Jickells, “Linkages between the oceans and the
atmosphere”, in “Summary of the informal meeting of the International Law
Commission: dialogue with atmospheric scientists (third session), 4 May
2017”, paras. 4–12 and 21–30, respectively. Available from
http://legal.un.org/docs/?path=../ilc/ |
| Available from
http://legal.un.org/docs/?path=../ilc/ sessions/69/pdfs/english/informal_
dialogue_4may2017.pdf&lang=E. | sessions/69/pdfs/english/informal_
dialogue_4may2017.pdf&lang=E。 |
| General Assembly resolution 71/257 of 23
December 2016 on oceans and the law of the sea, paras. 185–196 and 279. | 大会2016年12月23日关于海洋和海洋法的第71/257号决议，第185-196段和第279段。 |
| United Nations Division for Ocean Affairs
and the Law of the Sea, “First Global Integrated Marine Assessment (first
World Ocean Assessment)”. Available from
www.un.org/depts/los/global_reporting/WOA_RegProcess.htm (accessed 7 July
2017) (see, in particular, chap. 20 on “Coastal, riverine and atmospheric
inputs from land”). | 联合国海洋事务和海洋法司，“第一次全球海洋综合评估(第一次世界海洋评估)”，可查阅：www.un.org/depts/los/global_
reporting/WOA_RegProcess.htm (2017年7月7日查询)(特别见第20章，“来自陆地的沿海、沿江和大气层输入物”)。 |
| General Assembly resolution 70/235 of 23
December 2015. | 大会2015年12月23日第70/235号决议。 |
| Ø. Buhaug et al., Second IMO GHG Study
2009 (London, IMO, 2009), p. 23. See also T.W.P. Smith et al., Third IMO GHG
Study (London, IMO, 2014), executive summary, table 1. M. Righi, J. Hendricks
and R. Sausen, “The global impact of the transport sectors on atmospheric
aerosol in 2030 — Part 1: land transport and shipping”, Atmospheric Chemistry
and Physics, vol. 15 (2015), pp. 633–651. | Ø. Buhaug et al., Second IMO GHG Study
2009 (London, IMO, 2009), p. 23. See also T.W.P. Smith et al., Third IMO GHG
Study (London, IMO, 2014), executive summary, table 1. M. Righi, J. Hendricks
and R. Sausen, “The global impact of the transport sectors on atmospheric
aerosol in 2030 — Part 1: land transport and shipping”, Atmospheric Chemistry
and Physics, vol. 15 (2015), pp. 633–651. |
| Most of the greenhouse gas emissions from
ships are emitted in or transported to the marine boundary layer where they
affect atmospheric composition. | 船舶排放的温室气体的大多数被排放在或被传送到海洋边界层，影响大气构成。 |
| See, e.g., V. Eyring et al., “Transport
impacts on atmosphere and climate: shipping”, Atmospheric Environment, vol.
44 (2010), pp. 4735, 4744–4745 and 4752–4753. | 例如见V. Eyring et al., “Transport impacts
on atmosphere and climate: shipping”, Atmospheric Environment, vol. 44
(2010), pp. 4735, 4744–4745 and 4752–4753。 |
| D.E.J. Currie and K. Wowk, “Climate
change and CO2 in the oceans and global oceans governance”, Carbon and
Climate Law Review, vol. 3 (2009), pp. 387 and 389; | D.E.J. Currie and K. Wowk, “Climate change
and CO2 in the oceans and global oceans governance”, Carbon and Climate Law
Review, vol. 3 (2009), pp. 387 and 389; |
| C. Schofield, “Shifting limits? Sea level
rise and options to secure maritime jurisdictional claims”, Carbon and
Climate Law Review, vol. 3 (2009), p. 12; | C. Schofield, “Shifting limits? Sea level
rise and options to secure maritime jurisdictional claims”, Carbon and
Climate Law Review, vol. 3 (2009), p. 12; |
| and S.R. Cooley and J.T. Mathis,
“Addressing ocean acidification as part of sustainable ocean development”,
Ocean Yearbook, vol. 27 (2013), pp. 29–47. | and S.R. Cooley and J.T. Mathis,
“Addressing ocean acidification as part of sustainable ocean development”,
Ocean Yearbook, vol. 27 (2013), pp. 29–47. |
| General Assembly resolution 70/1 of 25
September 2015, Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable
Development, para. 14 (“Climate change is one of the greatest challenges of
our time and its adverse impacts undermine the ability of all countries to
achieve sustainable development. | 大会2015年9月25日第70/1号决议，变革我们的世界：2030年可持续发展议程，第14段，(“气候变化是当今时代的最大挑战之一，它产生的不利影响削弱了各国实现可持续发展的能力。 |
| Increases in global temperature, sea
level rise, ocean acidification and other climate change impacts are
seriously affecting coastal areas and low-lying coastal countries, including
many least developed countries and small island developing States. | 全球升温、海平面上升、海洋酸化和其他气候变化产生的影响，严重影响到沿岸地区和低洼沿岸国家，包括许多最不发达国家和小岛屿发展中国家。 |
| The survival of many societies, and of
the biological support systems of the planet, is at risk. | 许多社会和各种维系地球的生物系统的生存受到威胁。 |
| ”). | ”)。 |
| See also “Oceans and the law of the sea:
report of the Secretary-General” (A/71/74/Add.1), chap. VIII (“Oceans and
climate change and ocean acidification”), paras. 115–122. | 另见《海洋和海洋法：秘书长的报告》(A/71/74/Add.1)，第八章(“海洋与气候变化和海洋酸化”)，第115-122段。 |
| See para. (6) of the commentary to draft
guideline 9 below. | 见下文指南草案9的评注第(6)段。 |
| Paragraph 1 of the preamble to the 1992
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (New York, 9 May 1992,
United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1771, No. 30822, p. 107) acknowledges
that “change in the Earth’s climate and its adverse effects are a common
concern of humankind”. | 1992年《联合国气候变化框架公约》(1992年5月9日纽约，联合国，《条约汇编》，第1771卷，第30822号，第107页)序言第1段承认“地球气候的变化及其不利影响是人类共同关心的问题”。 |
| Likewise, the preamble to the 1992
Convention on Biological Diversity (ibid., vol. 1760, No. 30619, p. 79) shows
parties to be “[c]onscious … of the importance of biological diversity for
evolution and for maintaining life sustaining systems of the biosphere,”
(para. 2) and affirms that “the conservation of biological diversity is a
common concern of humankind” (para. 3). | 同样，1992年《生物多样性公约》(同上，第1760卷，第30619号，第79页)序言部分表示缔约“意识到…生物多样性对进化和保持生物圈的生命维持系统的重要性”(第2段)，并确认“生物多样性的保护是全人类的共同关切事项”(第3段)。 |
| The 1994 Convention to Combat
Desertification in Those Countries Experiencing Drought and/or
Desertification, Particularly in Africa (opened for signature, Paris, 14
October 1994, ibid., vol. 1954, No. 33480, p. 3) adopted phrases similar to
common concern in its preamble, including “the centre of concerns”, “the
urgent concern of the international community” and “problems of global
dimension” for combatting desertification and drought. | 1994年《关于在发生严重干旱和/或荒漠化的国家特别是在非洲防治荒漠化的公约》(1994年10月14日在巴黎开放供签署，同上，第1954卷，第33480号，第3页)在序言部分采用了与类似于共同关切的词语，包括：防治荒漠化是“受关注的中心”、“国际社会迫切关注，并且“是全球范围问题”。 |
| Other instruments such as the Minamata
Convention on Mercury, the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic
Pollutants and the Gothenburg Protocol to the 1979 Convention on Long-Range
Transboundary Air Pollution employ similar concepts to the common concern. | 采用与共同关心的问题类似词语的还有另一些文书，诸如《关于汞的水俣公约》、《关于持久性有机污染物的斯德哥尔摩公约》，以及1979年《远距离越境空气污染公约》的哥德堡议定书。 |
| See, A.E. Boyle, “International law and
the protection of the global atmosphere: concepts, categories and
principles”, in International Law and Global Climate Change, R. Churchill and
D. Freestone, eds. (Leiden, Kluwer Academic, 1991), pp. 11–12; | 见A.E. Boyle, “International law and the
protection of the global atmosphere: concepts, categories and principles”, in
International Law and Global Climate Change, R. Churchill and D. Freestone,
eds. (Leiden, Kluwer Academic, 1991), pp. 11–12; |
| D. French, “Common concern, common
heritage and other global(-ising) concepts: rhetorical devices, legal
principles or a fundamental challenge?” in Research Handbook on Biodiversity
and Law, M. Bowman, P. Davies and E. Goodwin, eds. (Cheltenham/Northampton,
Edward Elgar, 2016), pp. 334–360, p. 347; | D. French, “Common concern, common
heritage and other global(-ising) concepts: rhetorical devices, legal
principles or a fundamental challenge?” in Research Handbook on Biodiversity
and Law, M. Bowman, P. Davies and E. Goodwin, eds. (Cheltenham/Northampton,
Edward Elgar, 2016), pp. 334–360, p. 347; |
| A. Kiss, “The common concern of mankind”,
Environmental Policy and Law, vol. 27 (1997), p. 246; | A. Kiss, “The common concern of mankind”,
Environmental Policy and Law, vol. 27 (1997), p. 246; |
| A.A. Cançado-Trindade and D.J. Attard,
“The implication of the “common concern of mankind” concept on global
environmental issues”, in Policies and Laws on Global Warming: International
and Comparative Analysis, T. Iwama, ed. (Tokyo, Environmental Research
Centre, 1991), pp. 7–13; | A.A. Cançado-Trindade and D.J. Attard,
“The implication of the “common concern of mankind” concept on global
environmental issues”, in Policies and Laws on Global Warming: International
and Comparative Analysis, T. Iwama, ed. (Tokyo, Environmental Research
Centre, 1991), pp. 7–13; |
| J. Brunnée, “Common areas, common
heritage, and common concern”, in The Oxford Handbook of International Environmental
Law, D. Bodansky, J. Brunnée and H. Hey, eds. (Oxford, Oxford University
Press, 2007), pp. 565–566. See also C. Kreuter-Kirchhoff, “Atmosphere,
international protection”, in Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International
Law, vol. I, R. Wolfrum, ed. (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2012), pp.
737–744 (the atmosphere as a “common concern of mankind”). | J. Brunnée, “Common areas, common
heritage, and common concern”, in The Oxford Handbook of International
Environmental Law, D. Bodansky, J. Brunnée and H. Hey, eds. (Oxford, Oxford
University Press, 2007), pp. 565–566. See also C. Kreuter-Kirchhoff,
“Atmosphere, international protection”, in Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public
International Law, vol. I, R. Wolfrum, ed. (Oxford, Oxford University Press,
2012), pp. 737-744 (the atmosphere as a “common concern of mankind”)。 |
| Yearbook … 1997, vol. II (Part Two),
para. 238; Yearbook … | 《1997年…年鉴》，第二卷，第二部分，第238段； |
| 1998, vol. II (Part Two), para. 553. | 《1998年…年鉴》，第二卷，第二部分，第553段。 |
| See also Official Records of the General
Assembly, Sixty-ninth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/69/10), para. 269. | 另见《大会正式记录，第六十九届会议，补编第10号》(A/69/10)，第269段。 |
| The Commission has agreed that it should
not restrict itself to traditional topics, but could also consider those that
reflect new developments in international law and pressing concerns of the
international community as a whole. | 委员会一致认为不应局限于传统专题，也可考虑反映国际法的最新发展以及国际社会紧迫关切的专题。 |
| On the basis of art. 405, para. 3, of the
1919 Treaty of Versailles (Treaty of Peace between the Allied and Associated
Powers and Germany, 28 June 1919), which became art. 19, para. 3, of the
International Labour Organization Constitution (9 October 1946, United
Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 15, No. 229, p. 35) (labour conventions “shall
have due regard” to the special circumstances of countries where local
industrial conditions are “substantially different”). | 依据是成为《国际劳工组织章程》第19条第3款(1946年10月9日，联合国，《条约汇编》，第15卷，第229号，第35页)的1919年《凡尔赛条约》(《协约国和参战各国对德和约》，1919年6月28日)第405条第3款(劳工公约“应适当顾及”当地产业条件“迥异”的各国特殊情况)。 |
| The same principle also appeared in some
of the conventions approved by the Organization in 1919 and in several
conventions adopted afterwards. | 同一原则还见于该组织1919年批准的一些公约以及嗣后通过的一些公约。 |
| See I.F. Ayusawa, International Labor
Legislation (New York, Columbia University, 1920), chap. VI, pp. 149 et seq. | 见I.F. Ayusawa, International Labor
Legislation (New York, Columbia University, 1920), chap. VI, pp. 149 et seq. |
| See art. 23 (The most-favoured-nation
clause in relation to treatment under a generalized system of preferences)
and art. 30 (New rules of international law in favour of developing
countries) of the draft articles on the most-favoured-nation clauses adopted
by the Commission at its thirtieth session in 1978, Yearbook … 1978, vol. II
(Part Two), paras. 74, see also paras. 47–72. | 见1978年国际法委员会第三十届会议通过的最惠国条款草案的第23条(最惠国条款与普遍优惠制待遇的关系)和第30条(有利于发展中国家的国际法新规则)，《1978年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第74段，另见第47至72段。 |
| S. Murase, Economic Basis of
International Law (Tokyo, Yuhikaku, 2001), pp. 109–179 (in Japanese). And see
the earlier exceptions for developing countries specified in art. XVIII of
the 1947 General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (Geneva, 30 October 1947),
United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 55, No. 814, p. 194. | S. Murase, Economic Basis of
International Law, (Tokyo, Yuhikaku, 2001)，pp.
109-179(in Japanese). 又见1947年《关税和贸易总协定》(1947年10月30日，日内瓦)(联合国，《条约汇编》，第55卷，第814号，第194页)第十八条所述早先给予发展中国家的例外待遇。 |
| See L.B. Sohn, “The Stockholm Declaration
on the Human Environment”, Harvard International Law Journal, vol. 14 (1973),
pp. 423–515, at pp. 485–493. | See L.B. Sohn, “The Stockholm Declaration
on the Human Environment”, Harvard International Law Journal, vol. 14 (1973),
pp. 423–515, at pp. 485–493. |
| Adopted at Rio de Janeiro on 14 June
1992, see Report of the United Nations Conference on Environment and
Development, Rio de Janeiro, 3-14 June 1992 (A/CONF.151/26/Rev.1 (vol. I) and
Corr.1), resolution I, p. 3. | 1992年6月14日在里约热内卢通过，见《联合国环境与发展会议报告，1992年6月3日至14日，里约热内卢》(A/CONF.151/26/Rev.1 (第一卷)和Corr.1)，第1号决议，第3页。 |
| Report of the World Summit on Sustainable
Development, Johannesburg, South Africa, 26 August–4 September 2002
(A/CONF.199/20; | 《可持续发展问题世界首脑会议的报告，2002年8月26日至9月4日，南非约翰内斯堡》(A/CONF.199/20； |
| United Nations publication, Sales No.
E.03.II.A.1 and corrigendum), chap. I, resolution 1, annex. | 联合国出版物, 出售品编号：E.03.II.A.1和更正)，第一章，决议1，附件。 |
| Johannesburg Declaration, para. 24. | 《约翰内斯堡宣言》，第24段。 |
| See also outcome document of the United
Nations Conference on Sustainable Development, “The future we want”,
contained in General Assembly resolution 66/288 of 27 July 2012, annex. | 另见联合国可持续发展大会成果文件，“我们希望的未来”，载于大会2012年7月27日第66/288号决议附件。 |
| United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1771,
No. 30822, p. 107. | 联合国，《条约汇编》，第1771卷，第30822号，第107页。 |
| Paris Agreement under the United Nations
Framework Convention on Climate Change (Paris, 12 December 2015)
https://treaties.un.org/doc/Treaties/2016/02/20160215%2006-03%20PM/Ch_XXVII-7-d.pdf. | 《联合国气候变化框架公约》下的《巴黎协定》(2015年12月12日，巴黎)，https://treaties.un.org/doc/Treaties/2016/02/20160215%2006-03%20PM/Ch_XXVII-7-d.pdf。 |
| Adopted by the General Assembly in
resolution 51/229 (annex) on 21 May 1997. | 大会1997年5月21日在第51/229号决议(附件)中通过。 |
| The Convention entered into force on 17
August 2014. | 《公约》于2014年8月17日生效。 |
| Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change, Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. | 政府间气候变化专门委员会，《2013年气候变化：物理科学基础。 |
| Working Group I Contribution to the Fifth
Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
(Cambridge, United Kingdom, Cambridge University Press, 2013), p. 1180. | 第一工作组给〈政府间气候变化专门委员会(气专委)第五次评估报告〉的贡献》(联合王国剑桥，剑桥大学出版社，2013年)，第1180页。 |
| Ibid., p. 1140. | 同上，第1140页。 |
| See A.H.A. Soons, “The effects of a
rising sea level on maritime limits and boundaries”, Netherlands
International Law Review, vol. 37 (1990), pp. 207–232; | 见A.H.A. Soons, “The effects of a rising
sea level on maritime limits and boundaries”, Netherlands International Law
Review, vol. 37 (1990), pp. 207–232; |
| M. Hayashi, “Sea-level rise and the law
of the sea: future options”, in The World Ocean in Globalisation: Climate
Change, Sustainable Fisheries, Biodiversity, Shipping, Regional Issues, D.
Vidas and P.J. Schei, eds. (Leiden, Brill/Martinus Nijhoff, 2011), pp. 187 et
seq. | M. Hayashi, “Sea-level rise and the law
of the sea: future options”, in The World Ocean in Globalisation: Climate
Change, Sustainable Fisheries, Biodiversity, Shipping, Regional Issues, D.
Vidas and P.J. Schei, eds. (Leiden, Brill/Martinus Nijhoff, 2011), pp. 187 et
seq。 |
| See also, International Law Association,
Report of the Seventy-fifth Conference held in Sofia, August 2012 (London,
2012), pp. 385–428, and International Law Association, Johannesburg
Conference (2016): International Law and Sea Level Rise (interim report), pp.
13–18. | 另见国际法协会，《2012年8月在索非亚举行的第七十五届会议报告》(伦敦，2012年)，第385-428页； 国际法协会，《约翰内斯堡会议报告(2016年)：国际法与海平面上升》(中期报告)，第13-18页。 |
| See para. (6) of the commentary to draft
guideline 9 below. | 见下文指南草案9的评注第(6)段。 |
| See para. (16) of the commentary to draft
guideline 9 below. | 见下文指南草案9的评注第(16)段。 |
| Principle 1 of the Declaration refers to
the “solemn responsibility to protect and improve the environment for present
and future generations”. | 《宣言》的原则1提及“保护和改善这一代和将来的世世代代的环境的庄严责任”。 |
| Report of the World Commission on
Environment and Development, Our Common Future (Oxford, Oxford University
Press, 1987). | 世界环境与发展委员会的报告，《我们共同的未来》(牛津，牛津大学出版社，1987)。 |
| It emphasized the importance of
“development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the
ability of future generations” (p. 43). | 报告强调了“满足当代需求而又不危及后代能力的发展”的重要性(第43页)。 |
| General Assembly resolution 70/1 of 25
September 2015, which emphasizes the need to protect the planet from
degradation so that it can “support the needs of present and future
generations”. | 大会2015年9月25日第70/1号决议强调必须阻止地球的退化，使地球能够“满足今世后代的需求”。 |
| The preamble of the Convention provides
for the “benefit of present and future generations” in conservation and
sustainable use of biological diversity. | 《公约》序言规定，为“今世后代的利益”，保护和持久使用生物多样性。 |
| Art. 4 (vi) of the Joint Convention on
the Safety of Spent Fuel Management and on the Safety of Radioactive Waste
Management (Vienna, 5 September 1997, United Nations, Treaty Series, vol.
2153, No. 37605, p. 303) provides that parties shall “strive to avoid actions
that impose reasonably predictable impacts on future generations greater than
those permitted for the current generation”. | 《乏燃料管理安全和放射性废物管理安全联合公约》(1997年9月5日维也纳，联合国，《条约汇编》，第2153卷，第37605号，第303页)第4条第(六)款规定，缔约方应“努力避免那些对后代产生的能合理预计到的影响大于对当代人允许的影响的行动”。 |
| Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear
Weapons, Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 1996, p. 226, at p. 244, para. 36. | 使用或威胁使用核武器的合法性，咨询意见，《1996年国际法院案例汇编》，第226页起，见第244页，第36段。 |
| Though there are as yet no decisions by
international tribunals concerning customary intergenerational rights, there
have been many national court decisions, which may constitute practice for
the purposes of customary international law, recognizing intergenerational
equity, see C. Redgwell, “Intra- and inter-generational equity”, in The
Oxford Handbook of International Climate Change Law, C.P. Carlarne, K.R. Gray
and R.G. Tarasofsky, eds. (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2016), pp.
185–201, at p. 198. | 尽管国际法庭尚未作出过关于习惯代际权利的裁决，但许多国内法院的裁决可能会构成习惯国际法的实践，这些裁决承认代际公平，见C. Redgwell, “Intra- and inter-generational equity”， in The Oxford Handbook of International Climate Change Law, C.P.
Carlarne, K.R. Gray and R.G. Tarasofsky, eds. (Oxford, Oxford University
Press, 2016)，pp. 185-201, at p. 198。 |
| See also Australia, Gray v. Minister for
Planning, [2006] NSWLEC 720; | 见澳大利亚：Gray诉规划大臣，[2006]
NSWLEC 720； |
| India, Vellore Citizens’ Welfare Forum
and State of Tamil Nadu (joining) v. Union of India and others, original
public interest writ petition, 1996 5 SCR 241, ILDC 443 (IN 1996); | 印度：韦洛尔公民福利论坛和泰米尔纳德邦(联合)诉印度联邦等，最初的公共利益上诉状，1996 5 SCR 241, ILDC
443 (IN 1996)； |
| Kenya, Waweru, Mwangi (joining) and
others (joining) v. Kenya, miscellaneous civil application, Case No. 118 of
2004, Application No. 118/04, ILDC 880 (KE 2006); | 肯尼亚：Waweru、Mwangi
(参加诉讼)及其他人(参加诉讼)诉肯尼亚，杂项民事诉讼，2004年第118号案件，申诉号：118/04, ILDC 880 (KE 2006)； |
| South Africa, Fuel Retailers Association
of South Africa v. Director-General, Environmental Management, Department of
Agriculture, Conservation and Environment, Mpumalanga Province, and others,
[2007] ZACC 13, 10 BCLR 1059; | 南非：南非燃料零售商协会诉姆普马兰加省农业、养护和环境部环境管理总干事等人，[2007]
ZACC 13, 10 BCLR 1059； |
| Pakistan, Rabab Ali v. Federation of
Pakistan, petition filed 6 April 2016 (summary available at
www.ourchildrenstrust.org/pakistan). | 巴基斯坦：Rabab Ali诉巴基斯坦联邦，2016年4月6日提出的申诉(摘要见www.ourchildrenstrust.org/pakistan)。 |
| For commentary, see E. Brown Weiss, In
Fairness to Future Generations: International Law, Common Patrimony, and
Intergenerational Equity (Tokyo, United Nations University Press, 1989), p.
96; | 有关评论，见E. Brown Weiss, In Fairness to
Future Generations: International Law, Common Patrimony, and
Intergenerational Equity (Tokyo, United Nations University Press, 1989), p.
96; |
| M. Bruce, “Institutional aspects of a
charter of the rights of future generations”, in Our Responsibilities Towards
Future Generations, S. Busuttil et al., eds. (Valetta, UNESCO and Foundation
for International Studies, University of Malta, 1990), pp. 127–131; | M. Bruce, “Institutional aspects of a
charter of the rights of future generations”, in Our Responsibilities Towards
Future Generations, S. Busuttil et al. (eds.) (Valetta, UNESCO and Foundation
for International Studies, University of Malta, 1990), pp. 127-131; |
| T. Allen, “The Philippine children’s
case: recognizing legal standing for future generations”, Georgetown
International Environmental Law Review, vol. 6 (1994), pp. 713–741 (referring
to the judgment of the Philippine Supreme Court in Minors Oposa et al. v.
Factoran (30 July 1993), International Legal Materials, vol. 33 (1994), p.
168). | T. Allen, “The Philippine children’s
case: recognizing legal standing for future generations”, Georgetown
International Environmental Law Review, vol. 6 (1994), pp. 713-741 (提到菲律宾最高法院在Minors Oposa等人诉Factoran案中作出的判决(1993年7月30日)，《国际法律资料》 第33卷
(1994年)，第168页)。 |
| Standing to sue in some proceedings was
granted on the basis of the “public trust doctrine”, which holds governments
accountable as trustees for the management of common environmental resources. | 有些诉讼根据“公共信托论”给予起诉资格，这种理论要求政府作为受托人负责管理共同的环境资源。 |
| See M.C. Wood and C.W. Woodward IV,
“Atmospheric trust litigation and the constitutional right to a healthy
climate system: judicial recognition at last”, Washington Journal of
Environmental Law and Policy, vol. 6 (2016), pp. 634–684; | 见M.C. Wood and C.W. Woodward IV,
“Atmospheric trust litigation and the constitutional right to a healthy
climate system: judicial recognition at last”, Washington Journal of
Environmental Law and Policy, vol. 6 (2016), pp. 634-684; |
| C. Redgwell, Intergenerational Trusts and
Environmental Protection (Manchester, Manchester University Press, 1999); | C. Redgwell, Intergenerational Trusts and
Environmental Protection (Manchester, Manchester University Press, 1999); |
| K. Coghill, C. Sampford and T. Smith,
eds., Fiduciary Duty and the Atmospheric Trust (London, Routledge, 2012); | K. Coghill, C. Sampford and T. Smith
(eds.), Fiduciary Duty and the Atmospheric Trust (London, Routledge, 2012); |
| M.C. Blumm and M.C. Wood, The Public
Trust Doctrine in Environmental and Natural Resources Law, 2nd ed. (Durham,
North Carolina, Carolina Academic Press, 2015); | M.C. Blumm and M.C. Wood, The Public
Trust Doctrine in Environmental and Natural Resources Law, 2nd ed. (Durham,
North Carolina, Carolina Academic Press, 2015); |
| and K. Bosselmann, Earth Governance:
Trusteeship of the Global Commons (Cheltenham, Edward Elgar Publishing,
2015). | and K. Bosselmann, Earth Governance:
Trusteeship of the Global Commons (Cheltenham, Edward Elgar Publishing, 2015)。 |
| In a judgment on 13 December 1996, the
Indian Supreme Court declared the public trust doctrine “the law of the
land”; | 印度最高法院在1996年12月13日的一项判决中，宣布公共信托论为“本国的法律”； |
| M.C. Mehta v. Kamal Nath and Others,
(1997) 1 Supreme Court Cases 388, reprinted in C.O. Okidi, ed., Compendium of
Judicial Decisions in Matters Related to the Environment: National Decisions,
vol. I (Nairobi, United Nations Environment Programme/United Nations
Development Programme, 1998), p. 259. | M.C. Mehta诉Kamal
Nath等案，(1997) 1最高法院第388号案件，重新刊登于C.O. Okidi编辑的《环境相关问题的司法判决简编：国家判决》，第一卷(内罗毕，联合国环境规划署/联合国开发计划署，1998年)，第259页。 |
| See J. Razzaque, “Application of public
trust doctrine in Indian environmental cases”, Journal of Environmental Law,
vol. 13 (2001), pp. 221–234. | 见J. Razzaque, “Application of public
trust doctrine in Indian environmental cases”, Journal of Environmental Law,
vol. 13 (2001), pp. 221-234。 |
| It was agreed that the terminology and
location of this paragraph would be revisited at a later stage in the
Commission’s work on this topic. | 委员会商定，本段的用语和位置将在委员会关于本专题的工作的以后一个阶段重新审视。 |
| See also Official Records of the General
Assembly, Sixty-eighth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/68/10), para. 168. | 另见《大会正式记录，第六十九届会议，补编第10号》(A/68/10)，第168段。 |
| Fifth Assessment Report, Working Group
III, annex I. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Climate Change 2014:
Mitigation of Climate Change, O. Edenhofer et al., eds. (Cambridge University
Press, 2014), p. 1252, available at www.ipcc.ch/report/ar5/wg3/. | 《第五次评估报告》，第三工作组，附件一。 政府间气候变化专门委员会，Climate
Change 2014: Mitigation of Climate Change, O. Edenhofer et al., eds.
(Cambridge University Press, 2014), p. 1252, available at
www.ipcc.ch/report/ar5/wg3/。 |
| The American Meteorology Society defines
the “atmospheric shell” (also called atmospheric layer or atmospheric region)
as “any one of a number of strata or ‘layers’ of the earth’s atmosphere”
(available at http://glossary.ametsoc.org/wiki/Atmospheric_shell). | 美国气象学会将“大气壳层”(也称为大气层或大气区)界定为“地球大气不同层级中的任何一层或‘若干层’”(可查阅
http://glossary.ametsoc.org/wiki/Atmospheric_shell)。 |
| Physically, water vapour, which accounts
for roughly 0.25 per cent of the mass of the atmosphere, is a highly variable
constituent. | 从物理角度而言，约占大气层质量0.25%的水蒸气是一个变化极为频繁的成分。 |
| In atmospheric science, “because of the
large variability of water vapor concentrations in air, it is customary to
list the percentages of the various constituents in relation to dry air”. | 在大气科学中，“因为空气中水蒸气浓度的大幅度变化，所以习惯做法是列出不同成分占干燥空气的比例”。 |
| Ozone concentrations are also highly
variable. Over 0.1 ppmv (parts per million by volume) of ozone concentration
in the atmosphere is considered hazardous to human beings. | 臭氧的浓度也时常变化，大气中的臭氧浓度超过0.1ppmv(体积百万分比)，被视为对人体有害。 |
| See J.M. Wallace and P.V. Hobbs, Atmospheric
Science: An Introductory Survey, 2nd ed. (Boston, Elsevier Academic Press,
2006), p. 8. | 见J.M. Wallace and P.V. Hobbs, Atmospheric
Science: An Introductory Survey, 2nd ed. (Boston, Elsevier Academic Press,
2006)，p. 8。 |
| Ibid. | 同上。 |
| The American Meteorological Society
defines the “lower atmosphere” as “generally and quite loosely, that part of
the atmosphere in which most weather phenomena occur (i.e., the troposphere
and lower stratosphere); | 美国气象学会对“低层大气层”的界定是：“一般粗略而言，指的是大气层中发生大多数天气现象的部分(即对流层和平流层下部)； |
| hence used in contrast to the common
meaning for the upper atmosphere” (available at
http://glossary.ametsoc.org/wiki/Lower_atmosphere). | 因而用于与高层大气层的一般含义形成对照”(可查阅http://glossary.ametsoc.org/wiki/Lower_atmosphere)。 |
| The “upper atmosphere” is defined as residual,
that is “the general term applied to the atmosphere above the troposphere”
(available at http://glossary.ametsoc.org/wiki/Upper_atmosphere). | 美国气象学会将“高层大气层”界定为剩余部分，即“用于指对流层以上的大气层的广义概念”(可查阅http://glossary.ametsoc.org/ wiki/Upper_atmosphere)。 |
| The thickness of the troposphere is not
the same everywhere; | 对流层的厚度并非在所有地方都相同； |
| it depends on the latitude and the
season. | 该厚度取决于海拔与季节。 |
| The top of the troposphere lies at an
altitude of about 17 km at the equator, although it is lower at the poles. | 赤道上空对流层顶的海拔约为17千米，但这一海拔在两极低得多。 |
| On average, the height of the outer
boundary of the troposphere is about 12 km. | 平均而言，对流层外边界的高度约为12千米。 |
| See E.J. Tarbuck, F.K. Lutgens and D.
Tasa, Earth Science, 13th ed. (New Jersey, Pearson, 2011), p. 466. | 见E.J. Tarbuck, F.K. Lutgens and D. Tasa,
Earth Science, 13th ed. (New Jersey, Pearson, 2011)，p.
466。 |
| Strictly, the temperature of the
stratosphere remains constant to a height of about 20–35 km and then begins a
gradual increase. | 严格说，平流层的温度到20-35千米高度时都一直保持恒定，然后开始逐渐上升。 |
| See Tarbuck, Lutgens and Tasa, Earth
Science (footnote 850 above), p. 467. | 见Tarbuck, Lutgens and Tasa, Earth Science
(上文脚注850), p. 467。 |
| See para. (3) of the commentary to the
preamble, above. | 见上文序言部分评注第(3)段。 |
| For instance, art. 1, para. 1, of the
Cairo resolution (1987) of the Institute of International Law (Institut de
droit international) on “Transboundary Air Pollution” provides that: “[f]or
the purpose of this Resolution, ‘pollution’ means any physical, chemical or
biological alteration in the composition or quality of the atmosphere which
results directly or indirectly from human action or omission and produces
injurious or deleterious effects in the environment of other States or of
areas beyond the limits of national jurisdiction.” (emphasis added). | 例如，国际法学会(Institut de droit international)关于“跨界空气污染”的开罗决议(1987年)第1条第1段规定，“为本决议的目的，‘跨界污染’指因为人类的直接或间接行为或疏忽、导致大气的组成或质量发生物理、化学或生物改变、对其他国家或对一国管辖权范围以外地带的环境产生伤害性或有害影响的现象。 ”(强调是后加的)。 |
| Available from www.idi-iil.org,
Resolutions. | 可查阅www.idi-iil.org, Resolutions。 |
| Convention on Long-Range Transboundary
Air Pollution (Geneva, 13 November 1979), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol.
1302, No. 21623, p. 217. | 《远距离越境空气污染公约》(1979年11月13日日内瓦，联合国，《条约汇编》，第1302卷，第21623号，第217页。 |
| The formulation of art. 1 (a) of the Convention
on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution goes back to the definition of
pollution by the Council of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and
Development (OECD) in its Recommendation C(74)224 on “Principles concerning
Transfrontier Pollution”, of 14 November 1974 (International Legal Materials,
vol. 14 (1975), p. 243), which reads as follows: “For the purpose of these
principles, pollution means the introduction by man, directly or indirectly,
of substances or energy into the environment resulting in deleterious effects
of such a nature as to endanger human health, harm living resources and
ecosystems, and impair or interfere with amenities and other legitimate uses
of the environment”. | 《远距离越境空气污染公约》第1条(a)项措词的渊源在经济合作与发展组织(经合组织)理事会关于污染的定义，载于1974年11月14日的建议C (74)224“有关跨界污染的原则”(《国际法律资料》，第14卷(1975年)，第243页)，行文如下“为本原则的目的，污染指由人类直接或间接将物质或能量引入环境，所致有害影响的性质包括危害人的健康、破坏生命资源和生态系统，并损害或干扰舒适度及对环境的其他合理使用”。 |
| See H. van Edig, ed., Legal Aspects of
Transfrontier Pollution (Paris, OECD, 1977), p. 13; | 见H. van Edig, ed., Legal Aspects of
Transfrontier Pollution (Paris, OECD, 1977), p. 13; |
| see also P. Birnie, A. Boyle and C.
Redgwell, International Law and the Environment, 3rd ed. (Oxford, Oxford
University Press, 2009), pp. 188–189; | see also P. Birnie, A. Boyle and C.
Redgwell, International Law and the Environment, 3rd ed. (Oxford, Oxford
University Press, 2009), pp. 188–189; |
| A. Kiss and D. Shelton, International
Environmental Law (London, Graham & Trotman, 1991), p. 117 (definition of
pollution: “also forms of energy such as noise, vibrations, heat, radiation
are included”). | A. Kiss and D. Shelton, International
Environmental Law (London, Graham & Trotman, 1991), p. 117 (污染的定义：“还包括各种能量形式，诸如噪音、振动、热、辐射”)。 |
| United Nations Convention on the Law of
the Sea (Montego Bay, 10 December 1982), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol.
1833, No. 31363, p. 3. | 《联合国海洋法公约》(1982年12月10日蒙特哥湾，联合国，《条约汇编》，第1833卷，第31363号，第3页。 |
| Art. 212 of the United Nations Convention
on the Law of the Sea provides for an obligation to prevent airborne
pollution of the sea, and to that extent, the definition of “pollution” in
this Convention is relevant to atmospheric pollution. | 《联合国海洋法公约》第二一二条规定了一项防止空气带来的海洋污染的义务，在这个意义上，该公约关于“污染”的定义对于大气污染具有相关性。 |
| With regard to heat, see World
Meteorological Organization/International Global Atmospheric Chemistry,
Project Report, “Impacts of megacities on air pollution and climate”, Global
Atmosphere Watch Report No. 205 (Geneva, World Meteorological Organization,
2012); | 关于热，见World Meteorological
Organization/International Global Atmospheric Chemistry, Project Report,
“Impacts of megacities on air pollution and climate”, Global Atmosphere Watch
Report No. 205 (Geneva, World Meteorological Organization, 2012); |
| D. Simon and H. Leck, “Urban adaptation
to climate/environmental change: governance, policy and planning”, Special
Issue, Urban Climate, vol. 7 (2014) pp. 1–134; | D. Simon and H. Leck, “Urban adaptation
to climate/environmental change: governance, policy and planning”, Special
Issue, Urban Climate, vol. 7 (2014) pp. 1–134; |
| J.A. Arnfield, “Two decades of urban
climate research: a review of turbulence, exchanges of energy and water, and
the urban heat island”, International Journal of Climatology, vol. 23 (2003),
pp. 1–26; | J.A. Arnfield, “Two decades of urban
climate research: a review of turbulence, exchanges of energy and water, and
the urban heat island”, International Journal of Climatology, vol. 23 (2003),
pp. 1–26; |
| L. Gartland, Heat Islands: Understanding
and Mitigating Heat in Urban Areas (London, Earthscan, 2008); | L. Gartland, Heat Islands: Understanding
and Mitigating Heat in Urban Areas (London, Earthscan, 2008); |
| see, in general, B. Stone Jr., The City
and the Coming Climate: Climate Change in the Places We Live (Cambridge,
Massachusetts, Cambridge University Press, 2012). | see, in general, B. Stone Jr., The City
and the Coming Climate: Climate Change in the Places We Live (Cambridge,
Massachusetts, Cambridge University Press, 2012)。 |
| Regarding light pollution, see C. Rich
and T. Longcore, eds., Ecological Consequences of Artificial Night Lighting,
(Washington, D.C., Island Press, 2006); | 关于光污染，见C. Rich and T. Longcore, eds.,
Ecological Consequences of Artificial Night Lighting, (Washington, D.C.,
Island Press, 2006); |
| P. Cinzano and F. Falchi, “The
propagation of light pollution in the atmosphere”, Monthly Notices of the
Royal Astronomic Society, vol. 427 (2012), pp. 3337–3357; | P. Cinzano and F. Falchi, “The propagation
of light pollution in the atmosphere”, Monthly Notices of the Royal
Astronomic Society, vol. 427 (2012), pp. 3337–3357; |
| F. Bashiri and C. Rosmani Che Hassan,
“Light pollution and its effects on the environment”, International Journal
of Fundamental Physical Sciences, vol. 4 (2014), pp. 8–12. | F. Bashiri and C. Rosmani Che Hassan,
“Light pollution and its effects on the environment”, International Journal
of Fundamental Physical Sciences, vol. 4 (2014), pp. 8–12。 |
| Regarding acoustic/noise pollution, see
e.g. annex 16 of the 1944 Convention on International Civil Aviation
(Chicago, 7 December 1944, United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 15, No. 295 p.
295), vol. I: Aircraft Noise, 5th ed. 2008; | 关于声/噪音污染，可参看annex
16 of the 1944 Convention on International Civil Aviation (Chicago, 7
December 1944, United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 15, No. 295 p. 295), vol.
I: Aircraft Noise, 5th ed. 2008; |
| see P. Davies and J. Goh, “Air transport
and the environment: regulating aircraft noise”, Air and Space Law, vol. 18
(1993), pp. 123–135. | see P. Davies and J. Goh, “Air transport
and the environment: regulating aircraft noise”, Air and Space Law, vol. 18
(1993), pp. 123–135。 |
| Concerning radioactive emissions, see D.
Rauschning, “Legal problems of continuous and instantaneous long-distance air
pollution: interim report”, Report of the Sixty-Second Conference of the
International Law Association (Seoul, 1986), pp. 198–223, at p. 219; | 关于放射性排放，见D. Rauschning, “Legal problems
of continuous and instantaneous long-distance air pollution: interim report”,
Report of the Sixty-Second Conference of the International Law Association
(Seoul, 1986), pp. 198–223, at p. 219; |
| and International Atomic Energy Agency,
Environmental Consequences of the Chernobyl Accident and their Remediation:
Twenty Years of Experience — Report of the Chernobyl Forum Expert Group
‘Environment’, Radiological Assessment Report Series (2006), STI/PUB/1239. | and International Atomic Energy Agency,
Environmental Consequences of the Chernobyl Accident and their Remediation:
Twenty Years of Experience – Report of the Chernobyl Forum Expert Group
‘Environment’, Radiological Assessment Report Series (2006), STI/PUB/1239。 |
| See also United Nations Scientific
Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation, 2013 Report to the General
Assembly, Scientific Annex A: Levels and effects of radiation exposure due to
the nuclear accident after the 2011 great east-Japan earthquake and tsunami
(United Nations publication, Sales No. E.14.IX.1), available at
www.unscear.org/docs/reports/2013/13-85418_Report_2013_Annex_A.pdf. | 另见联合国原子辐射影响问题科学委员会2013年提交大会的报告，《科学附件A：2011年日本东部大地震和海啸后核事故所致的辐射照射水平和影响》(联合国出版物，出售品编号E.14.IX.1)，可查阅www.unscear.org/docs/reports/2013/13-85418_Report_2013_Annex_A.pdf。 |
| This is without prejudice to the peaceful
uses of nuclear energy in relation to climate change in particular (see
International Atomic Energy Agency, Climate Change and Nuclear Power 2014
(Vienna, 2014), p. 7). | 在尤其涉及气候变化问题时，这并不妨碍核能的和平利用(见《气候变化与核能2014》, (2014年，维也纳)，第7页)。 |
| Vienna Convention for the Protection of
Ozone Layer (Vienna, 22 March 1985), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol.
1513, No. 26164, p. 293. | 《保护臭氧层维也纳公约》(1985年3月22日，维也纳，联合国，《条约汇编》，第1513卷，第26164号，第293页。 |
| See for example article 7 of the
Convention on the Law of the Non-navigational Uses of International
Watercourses (1997) (General Assembly resolution 51/229 of 21 May 1997,
annex); | 例如，见《国际水道非航行使用法公约》(1997年)第7条(大会1997年5月21日第51/229号决议，附件)； |
| art. 1 of the draft articles on
prevention of transboundary harm from hazardous activities (2001) (General
Assembly resolution 62/68, annex); | 预防危险活动的跨界损害条款草案(2001年)第1条(大会第62/68号决议，附件)； |
| principle 2 of the draft principles on
the allocation of loss in the case of transboundary harm arising out of
hazardous activities (2006) (General Assembly resolution 61/36, annex); | 危险活动所致跨界损害的损失分配原则草案(2006年)原则草案2(大会第61/36号决议，附件)； |
| art. 6 of the articles on the law of
transboundary aquifers (2008) (General Assembly resolution 63/124, annex). | 跨界含水层法条款草案(2008年)条款草案6(大会第63/124号决议，附件)。 |
| Para. (4) of the commentary to draft
article 2 of the draft articles on prevention of transboundary harm from
hazardous activities, 2001, Yearbook … 2001, Vol. II (Part Two) and
corrigendum, p. 152, at para. 98. | 2001年预防危险活动的跨界损害条款草案第2条草案评注第(4)段，《2001年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)和更正，第152页，见第98段。 |
| See, for example, the commentary to the
draft articles on prevention of transboundary harm from hazardous activities
(paras. (4) and (7) of the commentary to draft article 2), ibid. | 例如见预防危险活动的跨界损害条款草案评注(第2条评注第(4)和第(7)段)，同上。 |
| See also the commentary to the draft
principles on the allocation of loss in the case of transboundary harm
arising out of hazardous activities (paras. (1) to (3) of the commentary to
draft principle 2), Yearbook … 2006, vol. II (Part Two), para. 67. | 另见危险活动所致跨界损害的损失分配原则草案评注(原则2草案评注第(1)至(3)段)，《2006年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第67段。 |
| See generally, Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change, Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis”, Summary for
Policy makers, available at www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar5/wg1/WG1AR5_SPM_FINAL.pdf. | 一般参看：政府间气候变化专门委员会，Climate Change 2013:
The Physical Science Basis”, Summary for Policy makers，可查阅www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar5/wg1/WG1AR5_SPM_ FINAL.pdf。 |
| Ibid. | 同上。 |
| Ibid. | 同上。 |
| Birnie, Boyle, Redgwell, International
Law and the Environment (see footnote 855 above), p. 342. | Birnie, Boyle, Redgwell, International
Law and the Environment (见上文脚注855), p. 342。 |
| Ibid., p. 336. | 同上，第336页。 |
| The linkages between climate change and
ozone depletion are addressed in the preamble as well as in article 4 of the
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. | 气候变化与臭氧消耗的联系在《联合国气候变化框架公约》序言及第4条里得到过处理。 |
| The linkage between transboundary
atmospheric pollution and climate change is addressed in the preamble and
article 2, paragraph 1, of the 2012 amendment of the Gothenburg Protocol. | 跨界大气污染与气候变化的联系在2012年哥德堡议定书序言及第2条第1款里得到过处理。 |
| Ibid. | 同上。 |
| Official Records of the General Assembly,
Sixty-eighth Session, Supplement 10 (A/68/10), para. 168. | 《大会正式记录，第六十八届会议，补编第10号》(A/68/10)，第168段。 |
| Convention on International Civil
Aviation (Chicago, 7 December 1944), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 15,
No. 102, p. 295. | 《国际民用航空公约》(1944年12月7日，芝加哥)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第15卷，第102号，第295页。 |
| See also art. 2, para. 2, of the United
Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, which provides that “sovereignty
extends to the air space over the territorial sea as well as to its bed and
subsoil”. | 另见《联合国海洋法公约》第二条第2款，该款规定：“主权及于领海的上空及其海床和底土”。 |
| See generally Birnie, Boyle and Redgwell,
International Law and the Environment (footnote 855 above), chap. 6. | 一般参看Birnie, Boyle and Redgwell,
International Law and the Environment (见上文脚注 855),
chap. 6。 |
| Tarbuck, Lutgens and Tasa, Earth Science
(see footnote 850 above), pp. 465 and 466. | Tarbuck, Lutgens and Tasa, Earth Science
(见上文脚注850), pp. 465 and 466。 |
| Moscow, London and Washington, D.C., 27
January 1967, United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 610, No. 8843, p. 205. | 1967年1月27日莫斯科、伦敦、华盛顿，联合国，《条约汇编》，第610卷，第8843号，第205页。 |
| See, generally, B. Jasani, ed., Peaceful
and Non-Peaceful uses of Space: Problems of Definition for the Prevention of
an Arms Race, United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research (New York,
Taylor and Francis, 1991), especially chaps. 2–3. | 一般参看B. Jasani, ed., Peaceful and
Non-Peaceful uses of Space: Problems of Definition for the Prevention of an
Arms Race, United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research (New York,
Taylor and Francis, 1991)，特别是第2至第3章。 |
| See UNRIAA, vol. III (Sales No.
1949.V.2), pp. 1905–1982 (Award of 11 March 1941), at p. 1965 et seq.; | 见《国际仲裁裁决汇编》第三卷，(出售品编号1949.V.2)，第1905-1982页(1941年3月11日裁决)，第1965页起； |
| and the first report of the Special
Rapporteur (A/CN.4/667), para. 43. | 特别报告员的第一次报告(A/CN.4/667)，第43段。 |
| See also A.K. Kuhn, “The Trail Smelter
Arbitration, United States and Canada”, American Journal of International
Law, vol. 32 (1938), pp. 785–788, and ibid., vol. 35 (1941), pp. 665–666; | 另见A.K. Kuhn, “The Trail Smelter
Arbitration, United States and Canada”, American Journal of International
Law, vol. 32 (1938), pp. 785–788, and ibid., vol. 35 (1941), pp. 665–666; |
| and J.E. Read, “The Trail Smelter
Dispute”, Canadian Yearbook of International Law, vol. 1 (1963), pp. 213–229. | and J.E. Read, “The Trail Smelter
Dispute”, Canadian Yearbook of International Law, vol. 1 (1963), pp. 213–229。 |
| Article 48 (Invocation of responsibility
by a State other than an injured State) provides that: “1. Any State other
than an injured State is entitled to invoke the responsibility of another
State in accordance with paragraph 2 if … (b) the obligation breached is owed
to the international community as a whole” (General Assembly resolution 56/83
of 12 December 2001. | 第四十八条(受害国以外的国家援引责任)规定，“1. 受害国以外的另一国家有权按照该条第2款在下列情况下对另一国援引责任…，(b)
被违背的义务是对整个国际社会承担的义务”(大会2001年12月12日第56/83号决议。 |
| For the articles adopted by the
Commission and the commentaries thereto, see Yearbook … 2001, vol. II (Part
Two) and corrigendum, chap. IV, sect. E). | 委员会通过的条款草案及其评注，见《2001年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)和更正，第四章，E节)。 |
| Pulp Mills on the River Uruguay
(Argentina v. Uruguay), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2010, p. 14, at pp. 55 and
179, paras. 101 and 197; | 乌拉圭河沿岸纸浆厂案(阿根廷诉乌拉圭)，判决，《2010年国际法院案例汇编》，第14页起，见第55和第179页，第101和第197段； |
| Construction of a Road in Costa Rica
along the San Juan River (Nicaragua v. Costa Rica), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports
2015, p. 665, at pp. 706, 720, 724 and 740, paras. 104, 153, 168 and 228; | 哥斯达黎加圣胡安河沿线修建道路案(尼加拉瓜诉哥斯达黎加)，《2015年国际法院案例汇编》，第665页起，见第706、第720、第724和第740页，第104、第153、第168和第228段； |
| International Tribunal for the Law of the
Sea, Responsibilities and Obligations of States with Respect to Activities in
the Area (Request for Advisory Opinion submitted to the Seabed Dispute
Chamber), Advisory Opinion, 1 February 2011, ITLOS Reports 2011, p. 10, at
para. 131; | 国际海洋法法庭，“国家对区域内活动的责任和义务(请求海底争端分庭提出咨询意见)”，咨询意见，2011年2月1日，《2011年国际海洋法法庭案例汇编》，第10页，第131段； |
| draft articles on prevention of
transboundary harm from hazardous activities, Yearbook … 2001, vol. II (Part
Two) and corrigendum, para. 97 (reproduced in General Assembly resolution
62/68, annex, of 6 December 2007), paras. 7–18; | 关于预防危险活动的跨界损害条款草案，《2001年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)和更正，第97段(案文也载于2007年12月6日大会第62/68号决议附件)，第7-18段； |
| first and second reports of the
International Law Association Study Group on due diligence in international
law, 7 March 2014 and July 2016, respectively; | 国际法协会国际法应尽义务研究组的第一和第二次报告，分别于2014年3月7日和2016年7月； |
| J. Kulesza, Due Diligence in
International Law (Leiden, Brill, 2016). | J. Kulesza, Due Diligence in
International Law (Leiden, Brill, 2016)。 |
| Art. 194. | 第一百九十四条。 |
| Article 3, paragraph 3, has a similar
provision that “[t]he Parties should take precautionary measures to
anticipate, prevent or minimize the causes of climate change and mitigate its
adverse effect”. | 第三条第3款有一个相似的规定，即：“各缔约方应当采取预防措施，预测、防止或尽量减少引起气候变化的原因，并缓解其不利影响”。 |
| Yearbook … 2001, vol. II (Part Two) and
corrigendum, chap. V, sect. E, art. 3 (Prevention): “The State of origin
shall take all appropriate measures to prevent significant transboundary harm
or at any event to minimize the risk thereof”. | 《2001年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)和更正，第五章，E节，第3条(预防)：“起源国应采取一切适当措施，防止重大跨界损害或随时尽量减少这种危险”。 |
| The Commission has also dealt with the
obligation of prevention in its articles on responsibility of States for
internationally wrongful acts. | 委员会还在国家对国际不法行为责任的条款中论述了预防义务。 |
| Article 14, paragraph 3, provides that
“The breach of an international obligation requiring a State to prevent a
given event occurs when the event occurs and extends over the entire period
during which the event continues” (ibid., chap. IV, sect. E). | 第14条第3款规定，“一国违背要求它防止某一特定事件之国际义务的行为开始于该事件发生的时刻，并延续至该事件持续的整个期间”(同上，第四章，E节)。 |
| According to the commentary: “Obligations
of prevention are usually construed as best efforts obligations, requiring
States to take all reasonable or necessary measures to prevent a given event
from occurring, but without warranting that the event will not occur” (ibid.,
para. (14) of the commentary to art. 14, para. 3) The commentary illustrated
“the obligation to prevent transboundary damage by air pollution, dealt with
in the Trail Smelter arbitration” as one of the examples of the obligation of
prevention (ibid.). | 根据评注，“对预防义务的通常理解是作出最大努力的义务，要求国家采取一切合理或必要措施防止某一事件发生，但不能确保事件不致发生”(同上，第14条第3款评注第(14)段)。 评注指出，“特雷尔冶炼厂仲裁案处理的防止空气污染造成跨界损害的义务”，正是预防义务的一个例子(同上)。 |
| The International Court of Justice has
emphasized prevention as well. | 国际法院也强调了防止问题。 |
| In the Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros
Project case, the Court stated that it “is mindful
that, in the field of environmental protection, vigilance and prevention are
required on account of the often irreversible character of damage to the
environment and of the limitations inherent in the very mechanism of
reparation of this type of damage” (Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros
Project (Hungary/Slovakia), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1997, p. 7, at p. 78,
para. 140). | 在加布奇科沃－大毛罗斯项目案中，国际法院表示，“应该铭记，鉴于对环境造成的损害往往具有不可逆转的性质，而对这种损害进行赔偿的机制也具有局限性，在环境保护领域需要加以警惕和防止”(加布奇科沃－大毛罗斯项目案(匈牙利/斯洛伐克)，判决，《1997年国际法院案例汇编》，第7页起，见第78页，第140段)。 |
| In the Iron Rhine Railway case, the
Arbitral Tribunal also stated that “[t]oday, in international environmental
law, a growing emphasis is being put on the duty of prevention” (Award in the
Arbitration regarding the Iron Rhine (“Ijzeren Rijn”) Railway between the
Kingdom of Belgium and the Kingdom of the Netherlands, decision of 24 May
2005, UNRIAA, vol. XXVII, pp. 35–125, at p. 116, para. 222). | 仲裁法庭在莱茵铁路案中也指出，“今天，国际环境法越来越重视防止责任”(比利时王国与荷兰王国莱茵铁路仲裁裁决，2005年5月24日的决定，《国际仲裁裁决汇编》，第二十七卷，第35-125页起，见第116页，第222段)。 |
| Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear
Weapons, Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 1996, p. 226, at pp. 241–242, para.
29. | 威胁使用或使用核武器的合法性，咨询意见，《1996年国际法院案例汇编》，第226页起，见第241-242页，第29段。 |
| Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros
Project (see footnote 881 above), p. 41, para. 53; | 加布奇科沃－大毛罗斯项目案(见上文脚注881)，第41页，第53段； |
| the Court cited the same paragraph in
Pulp Mills on the River Uruguay (see footnote 877 above), p. 78, para. 193. | 法院在乌拉圭河沿岸纸浆厂案中援引了同一段落(见上文脚注877)，第78页，第193段。 |
| Iron Rhine Railway (see footnote 881
above), pp. 66–67, para. 59. | 莱茵铁路案(见上文脚注881)，第66-67页，第59段。 |
| See, for example, United Nations
Convention on the Law of the Sea; | 例如见《联合国海洋法公约》； |
| Vienna Convention for the Protection of
the Ozone Layer (Vienna, 22 March 1985), ibid., vol. 1513, No. 26164, p. 293; | 《保护臭氧层维也纳公约》(1985年3月22日，维也纳)，同上，第1513卷，第26164号，第293页； |
| United Nations Framework Convention on
Climate Change; | 《联合国气候变化框架公约》； |
| Convention on Biological Diversity; | 《生物多样性公约》； |
| United Nations Convention to Combat
Desertification in Those Countries Experiencing Serious Drought and/or
Desertification, Particularly in Africa (opened for signature, Paris, 14
October 1994), ibid., vol. 1954, No. 33480, p. 3; | 《联合国关于在发生严重干旱和/或荒漠化的国家特别是在非洲防治荒漠化的公约》(1994年10月14日在巴黎开放供签署)，同上，第1954卷，第33480号，第3页； |
| Stockholm Convention on Persistent
Organic Pollutants (Stockholm, 22 May 2001), ibid., vol. 2256, No. 40214, p.
119; | 《关于持久性有机污染物的斯德哥尔摩公约》(2001年5月22日，斯德哥尔摩)，同上，第2256卷，第40214号，第119页； |
| and Minamata Convention on Mercury. | 《关于汞的水俣公约》。 |
| Art. 2, para. 1. | 第二条第一款。 |
| Construction of a Road in Costa Rica
along the San Juan River (Nicaragua v. Costa Rica), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports
2015, p. 665, para. 153. | 哥斯达黎加圣胡安河沿线修建道路案(尼加拉瓜诉哥斯达黎加)，判决，《2015年国际法院案例汇编》，第665页，第153段。 |
| Ibid., para. 168. | 同上，第168段。 |
| Ibid., Separate Opinion of Judge Owada,
para. 18. | 同上，小和田恒法官的个人意见，第18段。 |
| Pulp Mills on the River Uruguay (see
footnote 877 above), para. 204. | 乌拉圭河沿岸纸浆厂案(见上文脚注877)，第204段。 |
| International Tribunal for the Law of the
Sea, Responsibilities and Obligations of States with Respect to Activities in
the Area (Request for Advisory Opinion submitted to the Seabed Dispute
Chamber), Advisory Opinion, 1 February 2011, ITLOS Reports 2011, p. 10, at
para. 145. | 国际海洋法法庭，“国家对区域内活动的责任和义务(请求海底争端分庭提出咨询意见)”，咨询意见，2011年2月1日，《2011年国际海洋法法庭案例汇编》，第10页，第145段。 |
| Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros
Project (see footnote 881 above). | 加布奇科沃－大毛罗斯项目案(见上文脚注881)。 |
| Convention on Environmental Impact
Assessment in a Transboundary Context (Espoo, 25 February 1991), United
Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1989, No. 34028, p. 309. | 《越境环境影响评估公约》，(1991年2月25日，埃斯波)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第1989卷，第34028号，第309页。 |
| Pulp Mills on the River Uruguay (see
footnote 877 above), p. 83, para. 204. | 乌拉圭河沿岸纸浆厂案(见上文脚注877)，第83页，第204段。 |
| The Commission has frequently employed
the term “significant” in its work, including in the articles on the
prevention of transboundary harm from hazardous activities (2001). | 委员会在工作中经常使用“重大”一词，包括在预防危险活动的跨界损害条款(2001年)中使用。 |
| In that case, the Commission chose not to
define the term, recognizing that the question of “significance” requires a
factual determination rather than a legal one (see the general commentary,
para. (4), Yearbook … 2001, vol. II (Part Two) and corrigendum, chap. V,
sect. E). | 当时，委员会选择不对该词进行界定，承认“重大”一词需要作事实判定，而不是法律判定(见一般性评注，第(4)段，《2001年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)和更正，第五章，E节)。 |
| See, for example, paras. (4) and (7) of
the commentary to art. 2 of the articles on the prevention of transboundary
harm from hazardous activities (ibid.). | 另见如预防危险活动的跨界损害条款第2条评注第(4)和第(7)段)(同上)。 |
| See also the commentary to the draft
principles on the allocation of loss in the case of transboundary harm
arising out of hazardous activities (commentary to draft principle 2, paras.
(1)–(3), Yearbook … 2006, vol. II (Part Two), chap. V, sect. E). | 还见危险活动所致跨界损害的损失分配原则草案评注(原则2评注，第(1)至(3)段，《2006年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第五章，E节)。 |
| See draft guideline 7. | 见指南草案7。 |
| Protocol on Strategic Environmental
Assessment to the Convention on the Environmental Impact in the Transboundary
Context (Kiev, 21 May 2003), ECE/MP.EIA/2003/2 (available from:
www.unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/env/eia/documents/legaltexts/protocolenglish),
art. 2, paras. 6–7. | 《越境环境影响评估公约关于战略环境评估的基辅议定书》(2003年5月21日，基辅)，文件ECE/MP.EIA/2003/2(可查阅：www.unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/env/eia/documents/legaltexts/
protocolenglish)，第2条第6-7款。 |
| Convention on Access to Information,
Public Participation in Decision-making and Access to Justice in
Environmental Matters (Aarhus, 28 June 1998), United Nations, Treaty Series,
vol. 2161, No. 37770, p. 447. | 《在环境问题上获得信息、公众参与决策和诉诸法律的公约》(1998年6月28日，奥胡斯)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第2161卷，第37770号，第447页。 |
| Art. 2, paras. 6–7. | 第2条第6-7款。 |
| See para. (2) of the commentary to the
preamble, above. | 见上文序言部分评注第(2)段。 |
| Arts. 5 and 6. | 第5和第6条。 |
| For the draft articles and commentaries
thereto adopted by the Commission, see Yearbook … 1994, vol. II (Part Two),
chap. III, sect. E. | 委员会通过的条款草案及其评注，见《1994年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第三章，E节。 |
| General Assembly resolution 63/124 of 11
December 2008, annex, arts. 4–5. | 大会2008年12月11日第63/124号决议，附件，第4-5条。 |
| For the draft articles and commentaries
thereto adopted by the Commission, see Yearbook … 2008, vol. II (Part Two),
chap. IV, sect. E. | 委员会通过的条款草案及其评注，见《2008年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第四章，E节。 |
| See draft guideline 7 below. | 见下文指南草案7。 |
| Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros
Project (see footnote 881 above), p. 78, para. 140. | 加布奇科沃－大毛罗斯项目案(见上文脚注881)，第78页，第140段。 |
| In the 2006 order of the Pulp Mills case,
the International Court of Justice highlighted “the importance of the need to
ensure environmental protection of shared natural resources while allowing
for sustainable economic development” (Pulp Mills on the River Uruguay
(Argentina v. Uruguay), Provisional Measures, Order of 13 July 2006, I.C.J.
Reports 2006, p. 113, at p. 133, para. 80); | 在2006年纸浆厂案的命令中，国际法院着重强调了“确保对共有自然资源予以环境保护同时允许可持续经济发展这一需要的重要性”(乌拉圭河沿岸纸浆厂案(阿根廷诉乌拉圭)，临时措施，2006年7月13日的命令，《2006年国际法院案例汇编》，第113页起，见第133页，第80段)； |
| the 1998 WTO Appellate Body decision on
United States — Import Prohibition of Certain Shrimp and Shrimp Products
stated that, “recalling the explicit recognition by WTO Members of the
objective of sustainable development in the preamble of the WTO Agreement, we
believe it is too late in the day to suppose that article XX(g) of the
[General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade] may be read as referring only to the
conservation of exhaustible mineral or other non-living resources” (Appellate
Body Report, United States — Import Prohibition of Certain Shrimp and Shrimp
Products, WT/DS58/AB/R, adopted 6 November 1998, para. 131, see also paras.
129 and 153); | 世贸组织上诉机构1998年关于美国－禁止进口特定虾类和虾类制品案的决定指出，“回顾世贸组织成员在《世贸组织协定》序言中明确确认了可持续发展的目标，我们认为，已经不能再认为[《关税及贸易总协定》]第20条(g)款可解释为只包括对可用尽的矿物或其他非生物资源的保护”(上诉机构报告，美国－禁止进口特定虾类和虾类制品案，WT/DS58/AB/R，1998年11月6日通过，第131段，另见第129和第153段)； |
| in the 2005 arbitral case of the Iron
Rhine Railway, the Tribunal held as follows: “[t]here is considerable debate
as to what, within the field of environmental law, constitutes ‘rules’ or
‘principles’: what is ‘soft’ law; | 在2005年莱茵铁路仲裁案中，仲裁庭认定如下：“在环境法领域中，对以下问题存在不少争议，什么属于‘原则’，什么属于‘规则’：什么是‘软’法； |
| and which environmental treaty law or
principles have contributed to the development of customary international
law. | 哪些环境条约法或原则对习惯国际法的发展作出了贡献。 |
| … The emerging principles, whatever their
current status, make reference to … sustainable development. … | …新出现的原则，不论其当前地位如何，均提到…可持续发展。 |
| Importantly, these emerging principles
now integrate environmental protection into the development process. | …重要的是，这些新出现的原则现在使环境保护成为了发展进程的一部分。 |
| Environmental law and the law on
development stand not as alternatives but as mutually reinforcing, integral
concepts, which require that where development may cause signify harm to the
environment there is a duty to prevent, or at least mitigate such harm. … | 环境法与发展法不是相互替代的关系，而是相互增强的一体的概念，要求是，若发展可能对环境造成显著危害，则有义务防止或至少减缓这种危害。 |
| This duty, in the opinion of the
Tribunal, has now become a principle of general international law”, Iron
Rhine Railway (see footnote 881 above), paras. 58–59; | …本庭认为，这一义务已成为了一项一般国际法原则”，莱茵铁路案(见上文脚注881)，第58-59段； |
| the 2013 Partial Award of the Indus
Waters Kishenganga Arbitration (Pakistan v. India) states: “[t]here is no
doubt that States are required under contemporary customary international law
to take environmental protection into consideration when planning and
developing projects that may cause injury to a bordering State. Since the
time of Trail Smelter, a series of international … arbitral decisions have
addressed the need to manage natural resources in a sustainable manner. | 2013年印度河水域吉申甘加河仲裁案(巴基斯坦诉印度)部分裁决中写道：“无疑，根据当代习惯国际法，各国在规划和开发可能对邻国造成损害的项目时，必须考虑到环境保护问题，自特雷尔冶炼厂案的时代以来，一系列国际…仲裁裁决均提到了以可持续方式管理自然资源的必要性。 |
| In particular, the International Court of
Justice expounded upon the principle of ‘sustainable development’ in Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros
(see footnote 881 above), referring to the ‘need to reconcile economic
development with protection of the environment” (Permanent Court of
Arbitration Award Series, Indus Waters Kishenganga Arbitration (Pakistan v.
India): Record of Proceedings 2010-2013, Partial Award of 18 February 2013,
para. 449. | 特别是，国际法院在加布奇科沃－大毛罗斯项目案(见上文脚注881)中阐释了‘可持续发展’原则，提到‘需要兼顾环境保护与经济发展’”(《常设仲裁法院裁决汇编》，印度河水域吉申甘加河仲裁案(巴基斯坦诉印度)：《2010-2013年诉讼记录》，2013年2月18日的部分裁决，第449段)。 |
| This was confirmed by the Final Award of
20 December 2013, para. 111. | 2013年12月20日最终裁决第111段证实了这一点。 |
| See, for example, J. Kokott, “Equity in
international law”, in Fair Weather? Equity Concerns in Climate Change, F.L.
Toth, ed. (Abingdon and New York, Routledge, 2014), pp. 173–192; | 例如，见J. Kokott, “Equity in international
law”, in Fair Weather? Equity Concerns in Climate Change, F.L. Toth, ed.
(Abingdon and New York, Routledge, 2014), pp. 173-192； |
| Frontier Dispute (Burkina Faso v. Mali),
Judgment, I.C.J Reports 1986, p. 554; | 边界争端案(布基纳法索诉马里)，《1986年国际法院案例汇编》，第554页； |
| See, in general, P. Weil, “L’équité dans
la jurisprudence de la Cour internationale de Justice: Un mystère en voie de
dissipation?”, in Fifty Years of the International Court of Justice: Essays
in Honour of Sir Robert Jennings, V. Lowe and M. Fitzmaurice, eds. (Cambridge,
United Kingdom, Cambridge University Press, 1996), pp. 121–144; | See, in general, P. Weil, “L’équité dans
la jurisprudence de la Cour internationale de Justice: Un mystère en voie de
dissipation?”, in Fifty Years of the International Court of Justice: Essays
in Honour of Sir Robert Jennings, V. Lowe and M. Fitzmaurice, eds.
(Cambridge, United Kingdom, Cambridge University Press, 1996), pp. 121–144; |
| F. Francioni, “Equity in international
law,” in Max Plank Encyclopedia of Public International Law, vol. III, R.
Wolfrum, ed. (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2013), pp. 632–642. | F. Francioni, “Equity in international
law,” in Max Plank Encyclopedia of Public International Law, vol. III, R.
Wolfrum, ed. (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2013), pp. 632–642。 |
| C. Redgwell, “Principles and emerging
norms in international law: intra- and inter-generational equity”, in The
Oxford Handbook on International Climate Change Law, C.P. Carlarne et al.,
eds. (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2016), pp. 185–201.; | C. Redgwell, “Principles and emerging
norms in international law: intra- and inter-generational equity”, in The
Oxford Handbook on International Climate Change Law, C.P. Carlarne et al.,
eds. (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2016), pp. 185–201.; |
| D. Shelton, “Equity” in Oxford Handbook
of International Environmental Law, Bodansky et al., eds. (footnote 821
above), pp. 639–662. | D. Shelton, “Equity” in Oxford Handbook
of International Environmental Law, Bodansky et al., eds. (上文脚注821), pp. 639–662。 |
| Convention on the Prohibition of Military
or any Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques (New York, 10
December 1976), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1108, No. 17119, p. 151. | 《禁止为军事或任何其他敌对目的使用改变环境的技术的公约》(1976年12月10日，纽约)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第1108卷，第17119号，第151页。 |
| See art. 1. | 见第一条。 |
| Protocol Additional to the Geneva
Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of
International Armed Conflicts (Protocol I), 1977, United Nations, Treaty
Series, vol. 1125, No. 17512, p. 3, arts. 35, para. 3 and 55; | 《一九四九年八月十二日日内瓦四公约关于保护国际性武装冲突受难者的附加议定书》(《第一议定书》)，1977年，联合国，《条约汇编》，第1125卷，第17512号，第3页，第三十五条第三款和第五十五条； |
| see also Rome Statute of the
International Criminal Court (Rome, 17 July 1998), United Nations, Treaty
Series, vol. 2187, No. 38544, p. 3, art. 8, para. 2 (b) (iv). | 另见《国际刑事法院罗马规约》(1998年7月17日，罗马)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第2187卷，第38544号，第3页，第八条第(二)款第2项(4)目。 |
| Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations
Framework Convention on Climate Change (Kyoto, 11 December 1997), United
Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 2303, No. 30822, p. 162. | 《〈联合国气候变化框架公约〉京都议定书》(1997年12月11日，京都)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第2303卷，第30822号，第162页。 |
| 1996 Protocol to the 1972 Convention on
the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and Other Matter
(London, 7 November 1996), International Legal Materials, vol. 36 (1997), p.
7. | 《防止倾倒废物及其他物质污染海洋的公约》(1972年12月29日，伦敦、墨西哥城、莫斯科和华盛顿特区)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第1046卷，第15749号，第138页。 |
| Convention on the Prevention of Marine
Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and Other Matter (London, Mexico City, Moscow
and Washington, D.C., 29 December 1972), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol.
1046, No. 15749, p. 138. | 《1972年〈防止倾倒废物及其他物质污染海洋的公约〉1996年议定书》(1996年11月7日，伦敦)，《国际法律资料》，第36卷(1997年)，第7页。 |
| See Second Report on the Advancement of
Atmospheric Science and Their Application in the Light of the Developments in
Outer Space (Geneva, World Meteorological Organization, 1963); | 见《关于外空间发展视角下大气科学进步及其应用的第二次报告》(日内瓦，世界气象组织，1963年)； |
| see also Decision 8/7 (Earthwatch:
assessment of outer limits) of the Governing Council of the United Nations
Environment Programme, Part A (Provisions for co-operation between States in
weather modification) of 29 April 1980. | 另见联合国环境规划署理事会1980年4月29日第8/7号决定(地球观察：评估外部界限)，A部分(关于各国在人工影响天气方面开展合作的规定)。 |
| Southern Blue Fin Tuna Cases (New Zealand
v. Japan; | 南方蓝鳍金枪鱼案(新西兰诉日本； |
| Australia v. Japan), Provisional
Measures, Order of 27 August 1999, ITLOS Reports 1999, p. 280, at para. 77. | 澳大利亚诉日本)，临时措施，1999年8月27日的命令，《1999年国际海洋法法庭案例汇编》，第280页，见第77段。 |
| The Tribunal stated that “[c]onsidering
that, in the view of the Tribunal, the parties should in the circumstances
act with prudence and caution to ensure that effective conservation measures
are taken to prevent serious harm to the stock of southern bluefin tuna”. | 该法庭指出，“有鉴于此，法庭认为，双方应当在这种情况下审慎和谨慎行事，以确保采取有效保护措施，防止对南方蓝鳍金枪鱼鱼种造成严重危害”。 |
| Mox Plant (Ireland v. United Kingdom),
Provisional Measures, Order of 3 December 2001, ITLOS Reports 2001, p. 95, at
para. 84 (“[c]onsidering that, in the view of the Tribunal, prudence and
caution require that Ireland and the United Kingdom cooperate in exchanging
information concerning risks or effects of the operation of the Mox plant and
in devising ways to deal with them, as appropriate”). | 混合氧化物核燃料厂案(爱尔兰诉联合王国)，临时措施，2001年12月3日的命令，《2001年国际海洋法法庭案例汇编》，第95页，见第84段(“有鉴于此，法庭认为，审慎和谨慎原则要求爱尔兰和联合王国开展合作，交流关于混合氧化物核燃料厂的运营所造成的风险或影响的信息，并酌情制定应对这些风险或影响的方式”)。 |
| Case concerning Land Reclamation by
Singapore in and around the Strait of Johor (Malaysia v. Singapore),
Provisional Measures, Order of 8 October 2003, ITLOS Reports 2003, p. 10, at
para. 99. | 新加坡在柔佛海峡及周边填海案(马来西亚诉新加坡)，临时措施，2003年10月8日的命令，《2003年国际海洋法法庭案例汇编》，第10页，见第99段。 |
| W. Friedmann, The Changing Structure of
International Law (London, Stevens & Sons, 1964), pp. 60–71; | W. Friedmann, The Changing Structure of
International Law (London, Stevens & Sons, 1964), pp. 60–71; |
| C. Leben, “The changing structure of
international law revisited by way of introduction”, European Journal of
International Law, vol. 3 (1997), pp. 399–408. See also, J. Delbrück, “The
international obligation to cooperate — an empty shell or a hard law principle
of international law? — a critical look at a much debated paradigm of modern
international law”, H.P. Hestermeyer et al., eds., Coexistence, Cooperation
and Solidarity (Liber Amicorum Rüdiger Wolfrum), vol. 1 (Leiden, Martinus
Njihoff, 2012), pp. 3–16. | C. Leben, “The changing structure of
international law revisited by way of introduction”, European Journal of
International Law, vol. 3 (1997), pp. 399–408. See also, J. Delbrück, “The
international obligation to cooperate — an empty shell or a hard law
principle of international law? — a critical look at a much debated paradigm
of modern international law”, H.P. Hestermeyer et al., eds., Coexistence,
Cooperation and Solidarity (Liber Amicorum Rüdiger Wolfrum), vol. 1 (Leiden,
Martinus Njihoff, 2012), pp. 3–16. |
| B. Simma, “From bilateralism to community
interests in international law”, Collected Courses of The Hague Academy of
International Law, 1994-VI, vol. 250, pp. 217–384; | B. Simma, “From bilateralism to community
interests in international law”, Collected Courses of The Hague Academy of
International Law, 1994-VI, vol. 250, pp. 217–384; |
| N. Okuwaki, “On compliance with the
obligation to cooperate: new developments of ‘international law for
cooperation’”, in Aspects of International Law Studies (Festschrift for
Shinya Murase), J. Eto, ed. (Tokyo, Shinzansha, 2015), pp. 5–46, at pp. 16–17
(in Japanese). | N. Okuwaki, “On compliance with the
obligation to cooperate: new developments of ‘international law for
cooperation’”, in Aspects of International Law Studies (Festschrift for
Shinya Murase), J. Eto, ed. (Tokyo, Shinzansha, 2015), pp. 5–46, at pp. 16–17
(in Japanese). |
| Pulp Mills on the River Uruguay (footnote
877 above), p. 49, para. 77. | 乌拉圭河纸浆厂案(上文脚注877)，第49页，第77段。 |
| Principle 24 of the Stockholm Declaration
states: | 《斯德哥尔摩宣言》原则24写明： |
| “International matters concerning the
protection and improvement of the environment should be handled in a
cooperative spirit by all countries, big or small, on an equal footing.
Cooperation through multilateral or bilateral arrangements or other
appropriate means is essential to effectively control, prevent, reduce and
eliminate adverse environmental effects resulting from activities conducted
in all spheres, in such a way that due account is taken of the sovereignty
and interests of all States.” | “有关保护和改善环境的国际问题应当由所有的国家，不论大小，在平等的基础上本着合作精神加以处理，必须通过多边或双边的安排或其它合适途径的合作，在正当地考虑所有国家的主权和利益的情况下，防止、消灭或减少和有效地控制各方面的行动所造成的对环境的有害影响。 ” |
| Report of the United Nations Conference
on the Human Environment, Stockholm, 5-16 June 1972 (see footnote 807 above). | 《联合国人类环境会议报告，1972年6月5日至16日斯德哥尔摩》(见上文脚注807)。 |
| Principle 274 of the Rio Declaration
states: | 《里约宣言》原则27写明： |
| “States and people shall cooperate in
good faith and in a spirit of partnership in the fulfilment of the principles
embodied in this Declaration and in the further development of international
law in the field of sustainable development.” | “所有国家和人民均应诚意地一本伙伴精神、合作实现本宣言所体现的各项原则，合作推动可持续发展方面的国际法的进一步发展。 ” |
| Report of the United Nations Conference
on the Human Environment, Rio de Janeiro, 3–14 June 1992, vol. I: Resolutions
adopted by the Conference (United Nations publication, Sales No. E.93.I.8 and
corrigenda), resolution 1, annex I, chap. I. | 《联合国环境与发展会议报告，1992年6月3日至14日里约热内卢》，第一卷：《环发会议通过的决议》(联合国出版物，出售品编号：C.93.I.8和更正)，决议1, 附件一，第一章。 |
| See also section 2 of Part XII of the
United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, which provides for “Global
and Regional Cooperation”, setting out “Cooperation on global or regional
basis” (art. 197), “Notification of imminent or actual damage” (art. 198),
“Contingency plans against pollution” (art. 199), “Studies, research
programmes and exchange of information and data” (art. 200) and “Scientific
criteria for regulations” (art. 201). | 另见《联合国海洋法公约》关于“全球性和区域性合作”的第十二部分第二节。 该节规定了“在全球性或区域性的基础上的合作”(第一百九十七条)、“即将发生的损害或实际损害的通知”(第一百九十八条)、“对污染的应急计划”(第一百九十九条)，“研究、研究方案及情报和资料的交换”(第二百条)以及“规章的科学标准”(第二百零一条)。 |
| Section 2 of Part XIII on Marine Scientific
Research of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea provides for
“International Cooperation”, setting out “Promotion of international
cooperation” (art. 242), “Creation of favourable conditions” (art. 243) and
“Publication and dissemination of information and knowledge” (art. 244). | 《联合国海洋法公约》关于海洋科学研究的第十三部分第二节规定了“国际合作”，写明了“国际合作的促进”(第二百四十二条)、“有利条件的创造”(第二百四十三条)和“情报和知识的公布和传播”(第二百四十四条)等内容。 |
| Draft article 7 provides that: | 第7条草案规定： |
| “In the application of the present draft
articles, States shall, as appropriate, cooperate among themselves, with the
United Nations, with the components of the Red Cross and Red Crescent
Movement, and with other assisting actors.” | “适用本条款草案时，各国应酌情相互合作，并与联合国、红十字与红新月运动各组成部分及其他援助方合作。 ” |
| The draft articles were adopted on second
reading by the Commission at its sixty-eighth session, in 2016, and submitted
to the General Assembly as a part of the Commission’s report covering the
work of that session (A/71/10), para. 48. | 2016年委员会第六十八届会议二读通过了该条款草案，并作为委员会关于该届会议工作的报告(A/71/10)的一部分(第48段)提交大会。 |
| In its resolution 71/141 of 13 December
2016, the General Assembly took note of the draft articles, and invited
Governments to submit comments concerning the recommendation by the
Commission to elaborate a convention on the basis of the articles. | 2016年12月13日大会第71/141号决议注意到条款草案，并邀请各国政府就委员会关于在这些条款基础上拟订一项公约的建议提交评论。 |
| Available at
https://web.archive.org/web/20111226174901/http:/www.unep.org/urban_environment/PDFs/EABAQ2008-AirPollutionAgreement.pdf. | 可查阅https://web.archive.org/web/20111226174901/http://www.unep.org/urban_environment/
PDFs/EABAQ2008-AirPollutionAgreement.pdf。 |
| Available at
https://web.archive.org/web/20111224143143/http://www.unep.org/urban_environment/PDFs/BAQ09_AgreementEn.Pdf. | 可查阅https://web.archive.org/web/20111224143143/http://www.unep.org/urban_environment/
PDFs/BAQ09_AgreementEn.Pdf。 |
| See draft article 10 (on
interrelationship) of resolution 2/2014 on the declaration of legal
principles relating to climate change of the International Law Association,
Report of the Seventy-sixth Conference held in Washington D.C., August 2014
(London, 2014), p. 26. | 见国际法协会关于气候变化相关法律原则声明的第2/2014号决议的第10条草案(关于相互关系)，《2014年8月在华盛顿特区举行的第七十六届会议的报告》(2014年，伦敦)，第26页。 |
| Yearbook … 2006, vol. II (Part Two), para.
251. | 《2006年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第251段。 |
| See conclusion (2) on “relationships of
interpretation” and “relationships of conflict”. | 见关于“解释的关系”和“冲突的关系”的结论(2)。 |
| See, for the analytical study,
“Fragmentation of international law: difficulties arising from the diversification
and expansion of international law”, report of the Study Group of the
International Law Commission finalized by Martti Koskenniemi (A/CN.4/L.682
and Corr.1 and Add.1). | 关于分析研究，见马尔蒂·科斯肯涅米定稿的国际法委员会研究组报告“国际法不成体系问题：国际法多样化和扩展引起的困难”(A/CN.4/L.682及Corr.1和Add.1)。 |
| United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1155,
No. 18232, p. 331. | 联合国，《条约汇编》，第1155卷，第18232号，第331页。 |
| See, e.g., WTO, Appellate Body report,
United States — Import Prohibition of Certain Shrimp and Shrimp Products,
WT/DS58/AB/R, 6 November 1998, para. 158. | 例如见世贸组织上诉机构的报告，美国－禁止进口特定虾类和虾类制品案，WT/DS58/AB/R,
1998年11月6日，第158段。 |
| See also Al-Adsani v. the United Kingdom,
Application No. 35763/97, ECHR 2001-XI, para. 55. | 另见Al-Adsani诉联合王国案，第35763/97号申诉，ECHR 2001-XI, 第55段。 |
| P. Sands, “Treaty, custom and the cross-fertilization
of international law”, Yale Human Rights and Development Law Journal, vol. 1
(1998), p. 95, para. 25; | P. Sands, “Treaty, custom and the
cross-fertilization of international law”, Yale Human Rights and Development
Law Journal, vol. 1 (1998), p. 95, para. 25; |
| C. McLachlan, “The principle of systemic
integration and article 31 (3) (c) of the Vienna Convention”, International
and Comparative Law Quarterly, vol. 54 (2005), p. 279; | C. McLachlan, “The principle of systemic
integration and article 31 (3) (c) of the Vienna Convention”, International
and Comparative Law Quarterly, vol. 54 (2005), p. 279; |
| O. Corten and P. Klein, eds., The Vienna
Conventions on the Law of Treaties: A Commentary, vol. 1 (Oxford, Oxford
University Press, 2011), pp. 828–829. | O. Corten and P. Klein, eds., The Vienna
Conventions on the Law of Treaties: A Commentary, vol. 1 (Oxford, Oxford University
Press, 2011), pp. 828–829. |
| Ibid., pp. 791–798. | Ibid., pp. 791–798. |
| It may be noted that the WTO
Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes
(Marrakesh Agreement establishing the World Trade Organization, United Nations,
Treaty Series, vol. 1869, No. 31874, p. 3, annex 2, p. 401) provides in
article 3, paragraph 2, that “[t]he dispute settlement system of the WTO …
serves … to clarify the existing provisions of those [covered] agreements in
accordance with customary rules of interpretation of public international
law” (emphasis added). | 不妨指出，《世贸组织关于争端解决规则与程序的谅解》(《马拉喀什建立世界贸易组织协定》，联合国，《条约汇编》，第1869卷，第31874号，第3页，附件2, 第401页)第3条第2款规定，“WTO争端解决体制…适于…依照解释国际公法的习惯规则澄清这些[适用]协定的现有规定”(强调是后加的)。 |
| See International Law Association, Report
of the Seventy-sixth Conference held in Washington … (footnote 926 above); | 国际法协会，《…在华盛顿特区举行的第七十六届会议的报告》(上文脚注926)； |
| and A. Boyle, “Relationship between
international environmental law and other branches of international law”, in
The Oxford Handbook of International Environmental Law, Bodansky et al.
(footnote 821 above), pp. 125–146. | and A. Boyle, “Relationship between
international environmental law and other branches of international law”, in
The Oxford Handbook of International Environmental Law, Bodansky et al. (上文脚注 821), pp. 125–146。 |
| United Nations, Treaty Series, vols.
1867–1869, No. 31874. | 联合国，《条约汇编》，第1867-1869卷，第31874号。 |
| Ibid., vol. 1867, No. 31874, p. 154. | 同上，第1867卷，第31874号，第154页。 |
| Trade Negotiations Committee, decision of
14 April 1994, MTN.TNC/45(MIN), annex II, p. 17. | 贸易谈判委员会，1994年4月14日决定，MTN.TNC/45(MIN)，附件二，第17页。 |
| WTO, Committee on Trade and Environment,
Report (1996), WT/CTE/1 (12 November 1996), para. 167. | 世贸组织贸易和环境委员会报告(1996年)，WT/CTE/1(1996年11月12日)，第167段。 |
| J. Pauwelyn, Conflict of Norms in Public
International Law: How WTO Law Relates to Other Rules of International Law
(Cambridge, United Kingdom, Cambridge University Press, 2003); | J. Pauwelyn, Conflict of Norms in Public
International Law: How WTO Law Relates to Other Rules of International Law
(Cambridge, United Kingdom, Cambridge University Press, 2003); |
| R. Pavoni, “Mutual supportiveness as a
principle of interpretation and law-making: a watershed for the
‘WTO-and-competing regimes’ debate? ”, European Journal of International Law,
vol. 21 (2010), pp. 651–652. See also S. Murase, “Perspectives from
international economic law on transnational environmental issues”, Collected
Courses of The Hague Academy of International Law, vol. 253 (Leiden, Martinus
Nijhoff, 1996), pp. 283–431, reproduced in S. Murase, International Law: An
Integrative Perspective on Transboundary Issues (Tokyo, Sophia University
Press, 2011), pp. 1–127; | R. Pavoni, “Mutual supportiveness as a
principle of interpretation and law-making: a watershed for the
‘WTO-and-competing regimes’ debate?”, European Journal of International Law,
vol. 21 (2010), pp. 651–652. See also S. Murase, “Perspectives from
international economic law on transnational environmental issues”, Collected
Courses of The Hague Academy of International Law, vol. 253 (Leiden, Martinus
Nijhoff, 1996), pp. 283–431, reproduced in S. Murase, International Law: An
Integrative Perspective on Transboundary Issues (Tokyo, Sophia University
Press, 2011), pp. 1–127; |
| and S. Murase, “Conflict of international
regimes: trade and the environment”, ibid., pp. 130–166. | and S. Murase, “Conflict of international
regimes: trade and the environment”, ibid., pp. 130–166. |
| Adopted on 14 November 2001 at the fourth
session of the WTO Ministerial Conference in Doha, WT/MIN(01)/DEC/1, para. 6. | 2001年11月14日在多哈举行的世贸组织部长级会议第四届会议上通过，WT/MIN(01)
/DEC/1, 第6段。 |
| The Hong Kong Ministerial Declaration of
2005 reaffirmed that “the mandate in paragraph 31 of the Doha Ministerial
Declaration aimed at enhancing the mutual supportiveness of trade and
environment” (adopted on 18 December 2005 at the sixth session of the
Ministerial Conference in Hong Kong, China, WT/MIN(05)/DEC, para. 31). | 2005年《香港部长级宣言》重申，“《多哈部长宣言》第31段所载指令的目的是要加强贸易与环境之间的相互支持”(2005年12月18日在中国香港举行的部长级会议第六届会议上通过，WT/MIN(05)/DEC, 第31段)。 |
| WTO, Appellate Body report, Standards for
Reformulated and Conventional Gasoline, WT/DS2/AB/R, 29 April 1996, p. 17. | 世贸组织上诉机构的报告，新配方汽油和常规汽油标准案，WT/DS2/AB/R,
1996年4月29日通过，第17页。 |
| See also S. Murase, “Unilateral measures
and the WTO dispute settlement” (discussing the Gasoline case), in Asian
Dragons and Green Trade: Environment, Economics and International Law, S.C.
Tay and D.C. Esty, eds. (Singapore, Times Academic Press, 1996), pp. 137–144. | 另见S. Murase, “Unilateral measures and the
WTO dispute settlement” (discussing the Gasoline case), in Asian Dragons and
Green Trade: Environment, Economics and International Law, S.C. Tay and D.C.
Esty, eds. (Singapore, Times Academic Press, 1996), pp. 137–144。 |
| North American Free Trade Agreement
Between the Government of Canada, the Government of the United Mexican
States, and the Government of the United States of America (Washington D.C.,
United States Government Printing Office, 1993). | 《加拿大政府、美利坚合众国政府和墨西哥合众国北美自由贸易协定》(华盛顿特区，美国政府印刷局，1993年)。 |
| Note, in particular, arts. 104, para. 1,
and 1114. | 特别注意第104条第1款和第1114条。 |
| There are various model bilateral
investment treaties (BITs), such as: Canada Model BIT of 2004, available at
www.italaw.com/documents/Canadian2004-FIPA-model-en.pdf; | 有各种双边投资示范条约，如2004年《加拿大双边投资示范条约》，可查阅www.italaw. com/documents/Canadian2004-FIPA-model-en.pdf； |
| Colombia Model BIT of 2007, available at
www.italaw.com/documents/inv_model_bit_colombia.pdf; | 2007年《哥伦比亚双边投资示范条约》，可查阅www.italaw.com/documents/inv_model_bit_colombia.pdf； |
| United States Model BIT of 2012,
available at www.italaw.com/sites/default/files/archive/ita1028.pdf; | 2012年《美国双边投资示范条约》，可查阅www.italaw.com/sites/default/files/archive/ita1028.pdf； |
| Model International Agreement on
Investment for Sustainable Development of the International Institute for
Sustainable Development (IISD) of 2005, in H. Mann et al., IISD Model
International Agreement on Investment for Sustainable Development, 2nd ed.
(Winnipeg, 2005), art. 34, available from www.iisd.org/pdf/2005/investment_model_int_agreement.pdf. | 国际可持续发展研究所2005年《可持续发展国际投资示范协定》，载于H. Mann等人著，《国际可持续发展研究所可持续发展国际投资示范协定》，第2版(温尼伯，2005年)，第34条。 可查阅www.iisd.org/pdf/2005/investment_model_int_agreement.pdf。 |
| See also United Nations Conference on
Trade and Development, Investment Policy Framework for Sustainable
Development (2015), pp. 91–121, available at
http://unctad.org/en/PublicationsLibrary/diaepcb2015d5_en.pdf; | 另见联合国贸易和发展会议，《可持续发展投资政策框架》(2015年)，第91-121页，可查阅http://unctad.org/en/Publications
Library/diaepcb2015d5_en.pdf; |
| P. Muchlinski, “Negotiating new
generation international investment agreements: new sustainable
development-oriented initiatives”, in Shifting Paradigms in International
Investment Law: More Balanced, Less Isolated, Increasingly Diversified, S. Hindelang
and M. Krajewski, eds. (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2016), pp. 41–64.
Phoenix Action Ltd. v. the Czech Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB/06/5, award, 15
April 2009, para. 78. Prior to the Convention, the only international
instrument of significance was the 1963 Treaty Banning Nuclear Weapon Tests
in the Atmosphere, in Outer Space and Under Water (Moscow, 5 August 1963,
United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 480, No. 6964, p. 43). | P. Muchlinski, “Negotiating new
generation international investment agreements: new sustainable
development-oriented initiatives”, in Shifting Paradigms in International
Investment Law: More Balanced, Less Isolated, Increasingly Diversified, S.
Hindelang and M. Krajewski, eds. (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2016), pp.
41–64。 |
| M.H. Nordquist et al., eds., United
Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea 1982: A Commentary, vol. II
(Dordrecht, Martinus Nijhoff, 1991), pp. 41–42. For example, the Convention
for the Protection of the Marine Environment of the North-East Atlantic
(United Nations, Treaty Series, No. 42279, p. 67, at p. 71, art. 1 (e)); the
Convention on the Protection of the Marine Environment of the Baltic Sea Area
(Helsinki, 9 April 1992, ibid., vol. 1507, No. 25986, p. 166, at p. 169, art.
2, para. 2); | 菲尼克斯行动有限公司诉捷克共和国案，ICSID第ARB/06/5号案，2009年4月15日的判决，第78段。 在该公约之前，具有重要意义的唯一国际文书是1963年《禁止在大气层、外层空间和水下进行核武器试验条约》(1963年8月5日，莫斯科，联合国，《条约汇编》，第480卷，第6964号，第43页)。 M.H. Nordquist et al., eds., United
Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea 1982: A Commentary, vol. II
(Dordrecht, Martinus Nijhoff, 1991), pp. 41–42. |
| the Protocol for the Protection of the
Mediterranean Sea against Pollution from Land-based Sources (ibid., vol.
1328, No. 22281, p. 105, at p. 121, art. 4, para. 1 (b)); the Protocol for
the Protection of the South-East Pacific against Pollution from Land-based
Sources (Quito, 22 July 1983, ibid., vol. 1648, No. 28327, p. 73, at p. 90,
art. II (c)); and the Protocol for the Protection of the Marine Environment
against Pollution from Land-based Sources to the Kuwait Regional Convention
for Co-operation on the Protection of the Marine Environment from Pollution
(Kuwait, 21 February 1990, ibid., vol. 2399, No. 17898, p. 3, at p. 40, art.
III). | 例如，《保护东北大西洋海洋环境公约》(联合国，《条约汇编》，第42279号，第67页起，见第71页，第1(e)条)、《保护波罗的海地区海洋环境公约》(1992年4月9日，赫尔辛基，同上，第1507卷，第25986号，第166页起，见第169页，第2条第2款)、《保护地中海免遭陆源污染议定书》(同上，第1328卷，第22281号，第105页起，见第121页，第4条第1(b)款)、《保护东南太平洋免遭陆源污染议定书》(1983年7月22日，基多，同上，第1648卷，第28327号，第73页起，见第90页，第二条第(c)款)、《〈关于合作保护海洋环境免受污染的科威特区域公约〉保护海洋环境免受陆源污染议定书》(1990年2月21日，科威特，同上，第2399卷，第17898号，第3页起，见第40页，第三条)。 |
| For example, at the fifty-eighth session
of the Marine Environment Protection Committee in 2008, IMO adopted annex VI,
as amended, to the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution
from Ships (ibid., vol. 1340, No. 22484, p. 61), which regulates, inter alia,
emissions of SOx and NOx. | 例如，2008年海洋环境保护委员会第五十八次会议上，海事组织通过了《国际防止船舶造成污染公约》经修正的附件六(同上，第1340卷，第22484号，第61页)，附件六管理除其他外，氧化硫和氧化氮的排放。 |
| The Convention now has six annexes,
namely, annex I on regulations for the prevention of pollution by oil (entry
into force on 2 October 1983); | 迄今为止，《公约》已有六项附件，即关于管理预防石油污染的附件一(1983年10月2日生效)； |
| annex II on regulations for the control
of pollution by noxious liquid substances in bulk (entry into force on 6
April 1987); | 关于管理预防控制批量运输的有害液体物质污染的附件二(1987年4月6日生效)； |
| annex III on regulations for the
prevention of pollution by harmful substances carried by sea in packaged form
(entry into force on 1 July 1992); | 关于管理预防包装形式的有害物质污染的附件三(1992年7月1日生效)； |
| annex IV on regulations for the
prevention of pollution by sewage from ships (entry into force on 27
September 2003); | 关于管理预防船只污水污染的附件四(2003年9月27日生效)； |
| annex V on regulations for the prevention
of pollution by garbage from ships (entry into force on 31 December 1988); | 关于管理预防船只垃圾污染的附件五(1988年12月31日生效)； |
| and annex VI on regulations for the
prevention of air pollution from ships (entry into force on 19 May 2005). | 关于管理预防船只造成空气污染的附件六(2005年5月19日生效)。 |
| S. Karim, Prevention of Pollution of the
Marine Environment from Vessels: The Potential and Limits of the
International Maritime Organization (Dordrecht, Springer, 2015), pp. 107–126; | S. Karim, Prevention of Pollution of the
Marine Environment from Vessels: The Potential and Limits of the
International Maritime Organization (Dordrecht, Springer, 2015), pp. 107–126; |
| S. Karim and S. Alam, “Climate change and
reduction of emissions of greenhouse gases from ships: an appraisal”, Asian
Journal of International Law, vol. 1 (2011), pp. 131–148; | S. Karim and S. Alam, “Climate change and
reduction of emissions of greenhouse gases from ships: an appraisal”, Asian
Journal of International Law, vol. 1 (2011), pp. 131–148; |
| Y. Shi, “Are greenhouse gas emissions
from international shipping a type of marine pollution? ” Marine Pollution
Bulletin, vol. 113 (2016), pp. 187–192; | Y. Shi, “Are greenhouse gas emissions
from international shipping a type of marine pollution?” Marine Pollution
Bulletin, vol. 113 (2016), pp. 187–192; |
| J. Harrison, “Recent developments and
continuing challenges in the regulation of greenhouse gas emissions from
international shipping” (2012), Edinburgh School of Law Research Paper No.
2012/12, p. 20. Available from https://ssrn.com/abstract=2037038 (accessed 7
July 2017). | J. Harrison, “Recent developments and
continuing challenges in the regulation of greenhouse gas emissions from
international shipping” (2012), Edinburgh School of Law Research Paper No.
2012/12, p. 20. Available from https://ssrn.com/abstract=2037038 (accessed 7
July 2017). |
| Analytical study on the relationship
between human rights and the environment: report of the United Nations High
Commissioner for Human Rights (A/HRC/19/34), para. 15. | 关于人权与环境之间关系的分析研究：联合国人权事务高级专员的报告(A/HRC/19/34)，第15段。 |
| See also Human Rights Council resolution
19/10 of 19 April 2012 on human rights and the environment. | 另见人权理事会2012年4月19日关于人权与环境问题的第19/10号决议。 |
| See L.B. Sohn, “The Stockholm Declaration
on the Human Environment” (footnote 825 above), at pp. 451–455. | 见L.B. Sohn, “The Stockholm Declaration on
the Human Environment” (上文脚注825), at pp. 451–455。 |
| F. Francioni, “Principle 1: human beings
and the environment”, in The Rio Declaration on Environment and Development:
A Commentary, J.E. Viñuales, ed. (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2015), pp.
93–106, at pp. 97–98. | F. Francioni, “Principle 1: human beings
and the environment”, in The Rio Declaration on Environment and Development:
A Commentary, J.E. Viñuales, ed. (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2015), pp.
93–106, at pp. 97–98. |
| United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1302,
No. 21623, p. 217, at p. 219, arts. 1 and 2. | 联合国，《条约汇编》，第1302卷，第21623号，第217页起，见第219页，第1和第2条。 |
| Ibid., vol. 1513, No. 26164, p. 293, at
p. 326, art. 2. | 同上，第1513卷，第26164号，第293页起，见第326页，第2条。 |
| Art. 1. | 第一条。 |
| Art. 6 of the International Covenant on
Civil and Political Rights of 1966 (New York, 16 December 1966, United
Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 999, No. 14668, p. 171); | 1966年《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》(1966年12月16日，纽约，联合国《条约汇编》，第999卷，第14668号，第171页)，第六条； |
| art. 6 of the Convention on the Rights of
the Child of 1989 (New York, 20 December 1989, ibid., vol. 1577, No. 27531,
p. 3); | 1989年《儿童权利公约》第6条(1998年12月20日，纽约，同上，第1577卷，第27531号，第3页)； |
| art. 10 of the Convention on the Rights
of Persons with Disabilities of 2006 (New York, 20 December 2006, ibid., vol.
2515, No. 44910, p. 3); | 2006年《残疾人权利公约》第十条(2006年12月20日，纽约，同上，第2515卷，第44910号，第3页)； |
| art. 2 of the Convention for the
Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms of 1950 (Rome, 4 November
1950, ibid., vol. 213, No. 2889, p. 221, hereinafter, “European Convention on
Human Rights”); | 1950年《保护人权与基本自由公约》第2条(1950年11月4日，罗马，同上，第213卷，第2889号，第221页，下称“《欧洲人权公约》”)； |
| art. 4 of the American Convention on
Human Rights of 1969 (San José, 22 November 1969, ibid., vol. 1144, No.
14668, p. 171); | 1969年《美洲人权公约》第4条(1969年11月22日，圣何塞，同上，第1144卷，第14668号，第171页)； |
| and art. 4 of the African Charter on
Human and Peoples’ Rights of 1981 (Nairobi, 27 June 1981, ibid., vol. 1520,
No. 26363, p. 217). | 1981年《非洲人权和民族权宪章》第4条(1981年6月27日，内罗毕，同上，第1520卷，第26363号，第217页)。 |
| Art. 17 of the International Covenant on
Civil and Political Rights; | 《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》第十七条； |
| art. 8 of the European Convention on
Human Rights; | 《欧洲人权公约》第8条； |
| and art. 11, para. 2, of the American
Convention on Human Rights. | 《美洲人权公约》第11条第2款。 |
| Art. 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the European
Convention on Human Rights (ibid., vol. 213, No. 2889, p. 221); | 《〈欧洲人权公约〉第一议定书》第1条(同上，第213卷，第2889号，第221页)； |
| art. 21 of the American Convention on
Human Rights; | 《美洲人权公约》第21条； |
| and art. 14 of the African Charter on Human
and Peoples’ Rights. | 《非洲人权和民族权宪章》第14条。 |
| See D. Shelton, “Human rights and the
environment: substantive rights” in Research Handbook on International
Environmental Law, M. Fitzmaurice, D.M. Ong and P. Merkouris, eds.
(Cheltenham, Edward Elgar, 2010), pp. 267–283, at pp. 267, 269–278. | 见D. Shelton, “Human rights and the
environment: substantive rights” in Research Handbook on International
Environmental Law, M. Fitzmaurice, D.M. Ong and P. Merkouris, eds.
(Cheltenham, Edward Elgar, 2010), pp. 267–283, at pp. 267, 269–278。 |
| P.-M. Dupuy and J.E. Viñuales,
International Environmental Law (Cambridge, United Kingdom, Cambridge
University Press, 2015), pp. 320–329. | P.-M. Dupuy and J.E. Viñuales,
International Environmental Law (Cambridge, United Kingdom, Cambridge
University Press, 2015), pp. 320–329. |
| Ibid., pp. 308–309. | Ibid., pp. 308–309. |
| Art. 2 of the International Covenant on
Civil and Political Rights; | 《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》第二条； |
| art. 1 of the European Convention on
Human Rights; | 《欧洲人权公约》第1条； |
| and art. 1 of the American Convention on
Human Rights. | 《美洲人权公约》第1条。 |
| See A. Boyle, “Human rights and the
environment: where next? ”, European Journal of International Law, vol. 23
(2012), pp. 613–642, at pp. 633–641. | 见A. Boyle, “Human rights and the environment:
where next?”, European Journal of International Law, vol. 23 (2012), pp.
613–642, at pp. 633–641。 |
| Legal Consequences of the Construction of
a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, Advisory Opinion, I.C.J.
Reports 2004, p. 136, at p. 179, para. 109. | 在巴勒斯坦被占领土修建隔离墙的法律后果，咨询意见，《2004年国际法院案例汇编》，第136页起，见第179页，第109段。 |
| Boyle, “Human rights and the environment”
(see footnote 960 above), pp. 639–640. | Boyle, “Human rights and the environment”
(见上文脚注960), pp. 639–640。 |
| B. Simma and P. Alston, “Sources of human
rights law: custom, jus cogens and general principles”, Australian Year Book
of International Law, vol. 12 (1988), pp. 82–108; | B. Simma and P. Alston, “Sources of human
rights law: custom, jus cogens and general principles”, Australian Year Book
of International Law, vol. 12 (1988), pp. 82–108; |
| V. Dimitrijevic, “Customary law as an
instrument for the protection of human rights”, Working Paper, No. 7 (Milan,
Istituto Per Gli Studi Di Politica Internazionale (ISPI), 2006), pp. 3–30; | V. Dimitrijevic, “Customary law as an
instrument for the protection of human rights”, Working Paper, No. 7 (Milan,
Istituto Per Gli Studi Di Politica Internazionale (ISPI), 2006), pp. 3–30; |
| B. Simma, “Human rights in the
International Court of Justice: are we witnessing a sea change?”, in Unity
and Diversity of International Law: Essays in Honour of Professor
Pierre-Marie Dupuy, D. Alland et al., eds. (Leiden, Martinus Nijhoff, 2014),
pp. 711–737; | B. Simma, “Human rights in the
International Court of Justice: are we witnessing a sea change?”, in Unity
and Diversity of International Law: Essays in Honour of Professor
Pierre-Marie Dupuy, D. Alland et al., eds. (Leiden, Martinus Nijhoff, 2014),
pp. 711–737; |
| and H. Thirlway, “International law and
practice: human rights in customary law: an attempt to define some of the
issues,” Leiden Journal of International Law, vol. 28 (2015), pp. 495–506. | and H. Thirlway, “International law and
practice: human rights in customary law: an attempt to define some of the
issues,” Leiden Journal of International Law, vol. 28 (2015), pp. 495–506. |
| World Health Organization, Protecting
Health from Climate Change: Connecting Science, Policy and People (Geneva,
2009), p. 2. | 世界卫生组织，《保护健康不受气候变化的影响：连接科学、政策和人民》(2009年，日内瓦)，第2页。 |
| See B. Lode, P. Schönberger and P.
Toussaint, “Clean air for all by 2030? Air quality in the 2030 Agenda and in
international law”, Review of European, Comparative and International
Environmental Law, vol. 25 (2016), pp. 27–38. | 见B. Lode, P. Schönberger and P.
Toussaint, “Clean air for all by 2030? Air quality in the 2030 Agenda and in
international law”, Review of European, Comparative and International
Environmental Law, vol. 25 (2016), pp. 27–38。 |
| See also the indicators for these targets
specified in 2016 (3.9.1: mortality rate attributed to household and ambient
air pollution; | 另见2016年规定的这些具体目标的指标(3.9.1：家庭和环境空气污染导致的死亡率； |
| and 11.6.2: annual mean levels of fine
particulate matter in cities). | 11.6.2：城市细颗粒物年度均值)。 |
| “Report of the Indigenous Peoples’ Global
Summit on Climate Change, 20–24 April 2009, Anchorage, Alaska”, p. 12,
available from www.un.org/ga/president/63/letters/
globalsummitoncc.pdf#search=%27 (accessed 7 July 2017). | “《土著人民气候变化全球峰会报告》，2009年4月20日至24日，阿拉斯加安克雷奇”，第12页，可查阅www.un.org/ga/president/63/letters/global
summitoncc.pdf#search=%27 (2017年7月7日查询)。 |
| See R.L. Barsh, “Indigenous peoples”, in
The Oxford Handbook of International Environmental Law, Bodansky et al.
(footnote 821 above), pp. 829–852; | 见R.L. Barsh, “Indigenous peoples”, in The
Oxford Handbook of International Environmental Law, Bodansky et al. (footnote
821 above), pp. 829–852; |
| B. Kingsbury, “Indigenous peoples”, in
The Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law, R. Wolfrum, ed.
(Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2012), vol. V, pp. 116–133; | B. Kingsbury, “Indigenous peoples”, in
The Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law, R. Wolfrum, ed.
(Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2012), vol. V, pp. 116–133; |
| and H.A. Strydom, “Environment and
indigenous peoples”, in The Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International
Law, R. Wolfrum, ed. (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2012), vol. III, pp.
455–461. | and H.A. Strydom, “Environment and
indigenous peoples”, in The Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International
Law, R. Wolfrum, ed. (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2012), vol. III, pp.
455–461。 |
| World Bank Group Climate Change Action
Plan, 7 April 2016, para. 104, available from
http://pubdocs.worldbank.org/en/677331460056382875/WBG-Climate-Change-Action-Plan-public-version.pdf
(accessed 7 July 2017). | 世界银行集团，《气候变化行动计划》，2016年4月7日，第104段，可查阅http://pubdocs.worldbank.org/en/677331460056382875/WBG-Climate-Change-Action-Plan-public-version.pdf
(2017年7月7日查询)。 |
| The Committee on the Elimination of
Discrimination against Women has an agenda on “gender-related dimensions of
disaster risk reduction and climate change”; | 消除对妇女歧视委员会有一项题为“减少灾害风险和气候变化与性别有关的层面”的议程； |
| see http://www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/CEDAW/Pages/ClimateChange.aspx
(accessed 7 July 2017). | 见www.ohchr.org/EN/
HRBodies/CEDAW/Pages/ClimateChange.aspx (2017年7月7日查询)； |
| Along with women and children, the
elderly and persons with disabilities are usually mentioned as vulnerable
people. | 同妇女和儿童一样，老年人和残疾人通常被称为易受影响群体。 |
| See World Health Organization, Protecting
Health from Climate Change … (footnote 964 above) and the World Bank Group
Climate Change Action Plan (footnote 967 above). | 见世界卫生组织《保护健康不受气候变化…》(上文脚注964)和世界银行集团《行动计划》(上文脚注967)。 |
| The Inter-American Convention on
Protecting the Human Rights of Older Persons of 2015 (General Assembly of the
Organization of American States, Forty-fifth Regular Session, Proceedings,
vol. I (OEA/Ser.P/XLV-O.2), pp. 11–38) provides, in article 25 (right to a
healthy environment), that: “Older persons have the right to live in a
healthy environment with access to basic public services. | 2015年《美洲保护老年人人权公约》(美洲国家组织大会，第四十五届常会，议事录，第1(OEA/Ser.P/XLV-O.2)卷，第11-38页)第25条(健康环境权)规定：“老年人有权生活在健康的环境中，享有基本公共服务。 |
| To that end, States Parties shall adopt
appropriate measures to safeguard and promote the exercise of this right,
inter alia: a. To foster the development of older persons to their full
potential in harmony with nature; | 为此，缔约国应采取适当措施，维护和促进这项权利的行使，特别是：a. 以与自然和谐的方式促进老年人充分发挥最大潜力； |
| b. To ensure access for older persons, on
an equal with others, to basic public drinking water and sanitation services,
among others.” | b. 确保老年人在与他人平等的基础上获得公共饮用水和卫生服务等”。 |
| See generally, P. Sands and J. Peel,
Principles of International Environmental Law, 3rd ed. (Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 2012), pp. 135–183; | See generally, P. Sands and J. Peel,
Principles of International Environmental Law, 3rd ed. (Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 2012), pp. 135–183; |
| E. Brown Weiss and H.K. Jacobson, eds.,
Engaging Countries: Strengthening Compliance with International Environmental
Accords, (Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press, 1998), see “A framework for
analysis”, pp. 1–18, at p. 4. | E. Brown Weiss and H.K. Jacobson, eds.,
Engaging Countries: Strengthening Compliance with International Environmental
Accords, (Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press, 1998), see “A framework for
analysis”, pp. 1–18, at p. 4. |
| Even the obligation to cooperate
sometimes requires national implementation. | 甚至合作的义务有时也需要国家执行。 |
| According to draft guideline 8, paragraph
2, “[c]ooperation could include exchange of information and joint
monitoring”, which normally require national implementing legislation. | 根据指南草案8第2段，“合作可包括信息交流和联合监测”，这通常需要国家执行法律。 |
| C. Redgwell, “National implementation”,
in The Oxford Handbook of International Environmental Law, Bodansky et al.
(footnote 821 above), p. 925. | C. Redgwell, “National implementation”,
in The Oxford Handbook of International Environmental Law, Bodansky et al. (上文脚注821), p. 925。 |
| See L. Krämer, “Regional economic
integration organizations: the European Union as an example”, in The Oxford
Handbook of International Environmental Law, Bodansky et al. (footnote 821
above), pp. 853–876 (on implementation, pp. 868–870). | See L. Krämer, “Regional economic
integration organizations: the European Union as an example”, in The Oxford
Handbook of International Environmental Law, Bodansky et al. (上文脚注821), pp. 853–876 (on implementation, pp. 868–870)。 |
| See, for example, draft guidelines 5, 6,
7, 9, and 12, para. 2. | 例如见指南草案5、6、7和9以及指南草案12第2段。 |
| See the fifth report of the Special
Rapporteur (A/CN.4/711), para. 31. | 见特别报告员的第五次报告(A/CN.4/711)，第31段。 |
| For the articles adopted by the
Commission and the commentaries thereto, see Yearbook … 2001, vol. II (Part
Two) and corrigendum, paras. 76–77. | 委员会通过的条款及其评注，见《2001年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)和更正，第76-77段。 |
| The relevant precedents of
extraterritorial application of national law include: (a) Tuna-Dolphin cases
under the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (The “extra-jurisdictional
application” of the United States Marine Mammal Protection Act not being consistent
with article XX of the General Agreement, Panel report, United States —
Restrictions on Imports of Tuna, DS21/R-39S/155, 3 September 1991
(Tuna-Dolphin-I, not adopted), paras. 5.27–5.29; | 域外适用国内法的相关先例包括：(a) 向关税及贸易总协定提出的金枪鱼－海豚案(《美国海洋哺乳动物保护法》的“域外适用”与《总协定》第二十条不符，小组报告，美国－对金枪鱼的进口限制，DS21/R-39S/155,
1991年9月3日(第一起金枪鱼－海豚案，未通过)，第5.27-5.29段； |
| General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade,
Panel report, United States — Restrictions on Imports of Tuna, DS29/R, 16
June 1994 (Tuna-Dolphin II, not adopted), para. 5.32.); | 关税及贸易总协定，小组报告，美国－对金枪鱼的进口限制，DS29/R, 1994年6月16日(第二起金枪鱼－海豚案，未通过)，第5.32段。 |
| (b) WTO Gasoline case (On the
extraterritorial application of the United States Clean Air Act, WTO,
Appellate Body report, United States — Standards of Reformulated and
Conventional Gasoline, WT/DS2/AB/R, 22 April 1996; | )； (b) 世贸组织汽油案，(关于《美国清洁空气法》的域外适用，世贸组织，上诉机构报告，美国－新配方汽油和常规汽油标准，WT/DS2/AB/R, 1996年4月22日)； |
| (c) European Court of Justice judgment,
Air Transport Association of America and Others v. Secretary of State for
Energy and Climate, 21 December 2011 (On the extraterritorial application of
the European Union Aviation Directive 2008/101/EC); | (c) 欧洲法院，美国航空运输协会等诉能源与气候大臣案，2011年12月21日(关于第 2008/101/EC号欧洲联盟航空指令的域外适用)； |
| and (d) Singapore Transboundary Haze
Pollution Act of 2014, providing for extraterritorial jurisdiction based on
the “objective territorial principle” (Parliament of Singapore, Official
Reports, No. 12, Session 2, 4 August 2014, paras. 5–6). | (d) 新加坡2014年《跨境烟霾污染法》规定了根据“客体属地原则”的域外适用(新加坡议会，《正式报告》，第12号，第2部分，2014年8月4日，第5-6段)。 |
| See Murase, “Perspectives from
international economic law on transnational environmental issues” (footnote
938 above), at pp. 349–372. | 见Murase, “Perspectives from international
economic law on transnational environmental issues” (上文脚注 938), at pp. 349–372。 |
| See the Special Rapporteur’s fifth report
(A/CN.4/711), para. 31. | 见特别报告员的第五次报告(A/CN.4/711)，第31段。 |
| This reflection of State practice would
include multilateral or regional or other trade agreements, for example, that
may also contemplate environmental protection provisions including exceptions
such as those under article XX of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade
or even so-called environmental “side agreements”, such as the North American
Agreement on Environmental Cooperation. | 例如，国家惯例的这种反映包括多边或区域协定或其他贸易协定，这些协定也可能考虑到环境保护条款，包括《关税及贸易总协定》第二十条规定的例外，甚至包括所谓的环境“附属协定”，如《北美环境合作协定》。 |
| Non-compliance procedures have been
widely adopted in multilateral environmental agreements relating to the
protection of the atmosphere, including the following: (a) Convention on Long-range
Transboundary Air Pollution and its subsequent Protocols (United Nations,
Treaty Series, vol. 1302, No. 21623, p. 217): see E. Milano, “Procedures and
mechanisms for review of compliance under the 1979 Long-Range Transboundary
Air Pollution Convention and its Protocols”, in Non-Compliance Procedures and
Mechanisms and the Effectiveness of International Environmental Agreements,
T. Treves et al., eds. (The Hague, T.M.C. Asser Press, 2009), pp. 169–180; | 有关保护大气层的多边环境协定广泛采用了不遵约情况的审查程序，包括下列协定：(a)《远距离越境空气污染公约》以及后来的《议定书》(联合国，《条约汇编》，第1302卷，第21623号，第217页)：见E. Milano, “Procedures and mechanisms for review of compliance
under the 1979 Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution Convention and its
Protocols”, in Non-Compliance Procedures and Mechanisms and the Effectiveness
of International Environmental Agreements, T. Treves et al., eds. (The Hague,
T.M.C. Asser Press, 2009), pp. 169–180; |
| (b) the Montreal Protocol on the
Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer (United Nations, Treaty Series, vol.
1522, No. 26369, p. 3, and UNEP/OzL.Pro.4/15); | (b) 《关于消耗臭氧层物质的蒙特利尔议定书》(联合国，《条约汇编》，第1522卷，第26369号，第3页，以及UNEP/OzL.Pro.4/15)； |
| F. Lesniewska, “Filling the holes: the
Montreal Protocol’s non-compliance mechanisms”, in Research Handbook on
International Environmental Law, Fitzmaurice, Ong and Merkouris, eds.
(footnote 957 above), pp. 471–489; | F. Lesniewska, “Filling the holes: the
Montreal Protocol’s non-compliance mechanisms”, in Research Handbook on
International Environmental Law, Fitzmaurice, Ong and Merkouris, eds. (上文脚注957 ), pp. 471–489; |
| (c) Convention on Environmental Impact
Assessment in a Transboundary Context; | (c) 《越境环境影响评估公约》； |
| (d) Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations
Framework Convention on Climate Change, and decision 24/CP.7
(FCCC/CP/2001/13/Add.3); | (d)《联合国气候变化框架公约京都议定书》和第24/CP.7号决定(FCCC/CP/2001/13/Add.3)； |
| J. Brunnée, “Climate change and
compliance and enforcement processes”, in R. Rayfuse and S.V. Scott, eds.,
International Law in the Era of Climate Change (Cheltenham: Edward Elgar,
2012), pp. 290–320; | J. Brunnée, “Climate change and
compliance and enforcement processes”, in R. Rayfuse and S.V. Scott, eds.,
International Law in the Era of Climate Change (Cheltenham: Edward Elgar,
2012), pp. 290–320; |
| (e) the Paris Agreement under the United
Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (FCCC/CP/2015/10/Add.1,
annex); | (e) 《联合国气候变化框架公约》下之《巴黎协定》(FCCC/CP/2015/10/Add.1, 附件); |
| D. Bodansky, “The Paris Climate Change
Agreement: a new hope? ”, American Journal of International Law, vol. 110
(2016), pp. 288–319). | D. Bodansky, “The Paris Climate Change
Agreement: a new hope?”, American Journal of International Law, vol. 110
(2016), pp. 288–319)。 |
| This is based on the Montreal Protocol on
Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer, which in art. 8 uses the phrase
“Parties found to be in non-compliance” (United Nations, Treaty Series, vol.
1522, No. 26369, p. 40). | 这一说法依据的是《关于消耗臭氧层物质的蒙特利尔议定书》，该议定书第8条使用了“被查明不遵守规定的缔约国”这一短语(联合国，《条约汇编》，第1522卷，第26369号，第40页)。 |
| M. Koskenniemi, “Breach of treaty or
non-compliance? Reflections on the enforcement of the Montreal Protocol”,
Yearbook of International Environmental Law, vol. 3 (1992), pp. 123–162; | M. Koskenniemi, “Breach of treaty or
non-compliance? Reflections on the enforcement of the Montreal Protocol”,
Yearbook of International Environmental Law, vol. 3 (1992), pp. 123–162; |
| D.G. Victor, “The operation and
effectiveness of the Montreal Protocol’s non-compliance procedure”, in
Victor, K. Raustiala and E.B. Skolnikoff, eds., The Implementation and
Effectiveness of International Environmental Commitments: Theory and Practice
(Cambridge, Massachusetts, MIT Press, 1998), pp. 137–176; | D.G. Victor, “The operation and
effectiveness of the Montreal Protocol’s non-compliance procedure”, in
Victor, K. Raustiala and E.B. Skolnikoff, eds., The Implementation and
Effectiveness of International Environmental Commitments: Theory and Practice
(Cambridge, Massachusetts, MIT Press, 1998), pp. 137–176; |
| O. Yoshida, The International Legal
Régime for the Protection of the Stratospheric Ozone Layer (The Hague, Kluwer
Law International, 2001), pp. 178–179; | O. Yoshida, The International Legal
Régime for the Protection of the Stratospheric Ozone Layer (The Hague, Kluwer
Law International, 2001), pp. 178–179; |
| Dupuy and Viñuales, International
Environmental Law (footnote 958 above), p. 285 et seq. | Dupuy and Viñuales, International
Environmental Law (上文脚注 958), p. 285 et seq。 |
| G. Ulfstein and J. Werksman, “The Kyoto
compliance system: towards hard enforcement”, in O. Schram Stokke, J. Hovi
and G. Ulfstein, eds., Implementing the Climate Change Regime: International
Compliance (London, Earthscan, 2005), pp. 39–62; | G. Ulfstein and J. Werksman, “The Kyoto
compliance system: towards hard enforcement”, in O. Schram Stokke, J. Hovi
and G. Ulfstein, eds., Implementing the Climate Change Regime: International
Compliance (London, Earthscan, 2005), pp. 39–62; |
| S. Urbinati, “Procedures and mechanisms
relating to compliance under the 1997 Kyoto Protocol to the 1992 United
Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change”, in Non-Compliance Procedures
and Mechanisms and the Effectiveness of International Environmental
Agreements, Treves et al. (footnote 979 above), pp. 63–84; | S. Urbinati, “Procedures and mechanisms
relating to compliance under the 1997 Kyoto Protocol to the 1992 United
Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change”, in Non-Compliance Procedures
and Mechanisms and the Effectiveness of International Environmental
Agreements, Treves et al. (上文脚注979), pp. 63–84; |
| S. Murase, “International lawmaking for
the future framework on climate change: a WTO/GATT Model”, in International
Law: An Integrative Perspective on Transboundary Issues, Murase (footnote 938
above), pp. 173–174. | S. Murase, “International lawmaking for
the future framework on climate change: a WTO/GATT Model”, in International
Law: An Integrative Perspective on Transboundary Issues, Murase (上文脚注938), pp. 173–174。 |
| G. Loibl, “Compliance procedures and
mechanisms”, in Research Handbook on International Environmental Law,
Fitzmaurice, Ong and Merkouris, eds. (see footnote 957 above), pp. 426–449,
at pp. 437–439. | G. Loibl, “Compliance procedures and
mechanisms”, in Research Handbook on International Environmental Law,
Fitzmaurice, Ong and Merkouris, eds. (见上文脚注957), pp.
426–449, at pp. 437–439。 |
| C. Tomuschat, “Article 33”, in The
Charter of the United Nations: A Commentary, 2nd ed., vol. 1, B. Simma, ed.
(Munich, Verlag C.H. Beck, 2002), pp. 583–594. | C. Tomuschat, “Article 33”, in The
Charter of the United Nations: A Commentary, 2nd ed., vol. 1, B. Simma, ed.
(Munich, Verlag C.H. Beck, 2002), pp. 583–594. |
| N. Klein, “Settlement of international
environmental law disputes”, in Research Handbook of International
Environmental Law, Fitzmaurice, Ong and Merkouris, eds. (footnote 957 above),
pp. 379–400; | N. Klein, “Settlement of international
environmental law disputes”, in Research Handbook of International
Environmental Law, Fitzmaurice, Ong and Merkouris, eds. (上文脚注 957), pp. 379–400; |
| C.P.R. Romano, “International dispute
settlement”, in The Oxford Handbook of International Environmental Law,
Bodansky et al. (footnote 821 above), at pp. 1039–1042. | C.P.R. Romano, “International dispute
settlement”, in The Oxford Handbook of International Environmental Law,
Bodansky et al. (上文脚注821), at pp. 1039–1042。 |
| See S. Murase, “Scientific knowledge and
the progressive development of international law: with reference to the ILC
topic on the protection of the atmosphere”, in The International Legal Order:
Current Needs and Possible Responses: Essays in Honour of Djamchid Momtaz, J.
Crawford et al., eds. (Leiden, Brill Nijhoff, 2017), pp. 41–52. | See S. Murase, “Scientific knowledge and
the progressive development of international law: with reference to the ILC
topic on the protection of the atmosphere”, in The International Legal Order:
Current Needs and Possible Responses: Essays in Honour of Djamchid Momtaz, J.
Crawford et al., eds. (Leiden, Brill Nijhoff, 2017), pp. 41–52. |
| See the speech of the President of the International
Court of Justice, Ronny Abraham, before the Sixth Committee on 28 October
2016 (on international environmental law cases before the International Court
of Justice) (available at www.icj-cij.org/files/press-releases/0/19280.pdf); | 见国际法院院长龙尼·亚伯拉罕2016年10月28日在第六委员会(就提交国际法院的国际环境法案件)发表的讲话(可查阅www.icj-cij.org/files/press-releases/0/19280.pdf)； |
| and President Peter Tomka, “The ICJ in
the service of peace and justice — words of welcome by President Tomka”, 27
September 2013 (available at www.icj-cij.org/files/press-releases/8/17538.pdf). | 彼得·通卡院长，“国际法院为和平与正义服务――通卡院长的欢迎辞”，2013年9月27日(可查阅www.icj-cij.org/files/press-releases/8/17538.pdf)。 |
| See also E. Valencia-Ospina, “Evidence
before the International Court of Justice”, International Law Forum du droit
international, vol. 1 (1999), pp. 202–207; | 另见E. Valencia-Ospina, “Evidence before
the International Court of Justice”, International Law Forum du droit
international, vol. 1 (1999), pp. 202–207; |
| A. Riddell, “Scientific evidence in the
International Court of Justice — problems and possibilities”, Finnish
Yearbook of International Law, vol. 20 (2009), pp. 229–258; | A. Riddell, “Scientific evidence in the
International Court of Justice — problems and possibilities”, Finnish
Yearbook of International Law, vol. 20 (2009), pp. 229–258; |
| B. Simma, “The International Court of
Justice and scientific expertise”, American Society of International Law
Proceedings, vol. 106 (2012), pp. 230–233; | B. Simma, “The International Court of
Justice and scientific expertise”, American Society of International Law
Proceedings, vol. 106 (2012), pp. 230–233; |
| A. Riddell and B. Plant, Evidence Before
the International Court of Justice (London, British Institute of
International and Comparative Law, 2009), chap. 9. | A. Riddell and B. Plant, Evidence Before
the International Court of Justice (London, British Institute of
International and Comparative Law, 2009), chap. 9。 |
| In the 1997 Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros
(see footnote 881 above) and the 2010 Pulp Mills (see footnote 877 above)
cases, the parties followed the traditional method of presenting the
evidence, that is, by expert-counsel, though they were scientists and not
lawyers. | 在1997年加布奇科沃－大毛罗斯案(见上文脚注881)和2010年纸浆厂案(见上文脚注877)中，当事方遵循传统的举证方法，即通过专家－律师举证，但他们是科学家而非律师。 |
| Their scientific findings were treated as
the parties’ assertions, but this met some criticisms by the Bench, as well
as by commentators. | 他们的科学结论被视为当事方的说法，但这种做法遭到了法官及评论者的强烈批评。 |
| Thus, in the Aerial Herbicide Spraying
(withdrawn in 2013) (Aerial Herbicide Spraying (Ecuador v. Colombia), Order
of 13 September 2013, I.C.J. Reports 2013, p. 278), the 2014 Whaling in the
Antarctica (Whaling in the Antarctica (Australia v. Japan: New Zealand
intervening), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2014, p. 226) and the 2015
Construction of a Road (see footnote 887 above) cases, the parties appointed
independent experts, who were, in the latter two cases, cross-examined and
were treated with more weight than the statements of expert-counsel. | 在空中喷洒除草剂案(2013年撤诉)(空中喷洒除草剂案(厄瓜多尔诉哥伦比亚)，2013年9月13日的命令，《2013年国际法院案例汇编》，第278页)、2014年南极捕鲸案(南极捕鲸案，澳大利亚诉日本：新西兰参加诉讼)，判决，《2014年国际法院案例汇编》第266页)和2015年修建道路案(见上文脚注887)中，当事方指定了独立专家，在后两起案件中，独立专家接受了对方的交叉诘问，并被视为比专家－律师的陈述更具分量。 |
| In all of these cases, the Court did not
appoint its own experts in accordance with Article 50 of its Statute, but it
did so finally in the Maritime Delimitation case, although the latter was not
per se an environmental law dispute (Maritime Delimitation in the Caribbean
Sea and the Pacific Ocean (Costa Rica v. Nicaragua), Judgment (Merits), 2
February 2018, available at
www.icj-cij.org/files/case-related/157/157-20180202-JUD-01-00-EN.pdf). | 在所有这些案件中，国际法院均未根据《规约》第五十条指定自己的专家，但国际法院最终在海洋划界案中指定了自己的专家，尽管该案本身并不是环境法争端(加勒比海与太平洋划界案(哥斯达黎加诉尼加拉瓜)，判决(案情实质)，2018年2月2日，可查阅www.icj-cij.org/files/case-related/157/157-20180202-JUD-01-00-EN.pdf)。 |
| See, D. Peat, “The use of court-appointed
experts by the International Court of Justice”, British Yearbook of
International Law, vol. 84 (2014), pp. 271–303; | See, D. Peat, “The use of court-appointed
experts by the International Court of Justice”, British Yearbook of
International Law, vol. 84 (2014), pp. 271–303; |
| J.G. Devaney, Fact-finding before the
International Court of Justice (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2016); | J.G. Devaney, Fact-finding before the
International Court of Justice (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2016); |
| C.E. Foster, Science and the
Precautionary Principle in International Courts and Tribunals: Expert
Evidence, Burden of Proof and Finality (Cambridge, Cambridge University
Press, 2011), pp. 77–135; | C.E. Foster, Science and the
Precautionary Principle in International Courts and Tribunals: Expert
Evidence, Burden of Proof and Finality (Cambridge, Cambridge University
Press, 2011), pp. 77–135; |
| Special edition on courts and tribunals
and the treatment of scientific issues, Journal of International Dispute
Settlement, vol. 3 (2012); | Special edition on courts and tribunals
and the treatment of scientific issues, Journal of International Dispute Settlement,
vol. 3 (2012); |
| C. Tams, “Article 50” and “Article 51”,
in The Statute of the International Court of Justice: A Commentary, A.
Zimmermann et al., eds. (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2012), pp.
1287–1311; | C. Tams, “Article 50” and “Article 51”,
in The Statute of the International Court of Justice: A Commentary, A.
Zimmermann et al., eds. (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2012), pp.
1287–1311; |
| C.E. Foster, “New clothes for the
emperor? Consultation of experts by the International Court of Justice”,
Journal of International Dispute Settlement, vol. 5 (2014), pp. 139–173; | C.E. Foster, “New clothes for the
emperor? Consultation of experts by the International Court of Justice”,
Journal of International Dispute Settlement, vol. 5 (2014), pp. 139–173; |
| J.E. Viñuales, “Legal techniques for
dealing with scientific uncertainty in environmental law”, Vanderbilt Journal
of Transnational Law, vol. 43 (2010), pp. 437–504, at pp. 476–480; | J.E. Viñuales, “Legal techniques for
dealing with scientific uncertainty in environmental law”, Vanderbilt Journal
of Transnational Law, vol. 43 (2010), pp. 437–504, at pp. 476–480; |
| G. Gaja, “Assessing expert evidence in
the ICJ”, The Law and Practice of International Courts and Tribunals, vol. 15
(2016), pp. 409–418. | G. Gaja, “Assessing expert evidence in
the ICJ”, The Law and Practice of International Courts and Tribunals, vol. 15
(2016), pp. 409–418. |
| It should be recalled that there are
close interactions between non-judicial and judicial means of settling
disputes. | 应当回顾指出，解决争端的非司法手段和司法手段之间存在密切的互动。 |
| In the context of disputes relating to
the environment and to the protection of the atmosphere, in particular, even
at the stage of initial negotiations, States are often required to be well
equipped with scientific evidence on which their claims are based, and
accordingly the distance between negotiation and judicial settlement may not
be very distant. | 在与环境和保护大气层有关的争端中，特别是在初步谈判阶段，各国往往需要有充分的科学证据作为其主张的依据，因此谈判与司法解决之间可能相距不远。 |
| The line between “fact” and “law” is
often obscured (M. Kazazi, Burden of Proof and Related Issues: A Study on
Evidence before International Tribunals (The Hague, Kluwer Law International,
1996), pp. 42–49). | “事实”与“法律”的边界往往模糊不清(M.
Kazazi, Burden of Proof and Related Issues: A Study on Evidence before
International Tribunals (The Hague, Kluwer Law International, 1996), pp.
42–49)。 |
| Scientific issues are described by
commentators as “mixed questions of fact and law” (e.g., C.F. Amerasinghe,
Evidence in International Litigation, (Leiden, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers,
2005), p. 58), which cannot be easily categorized into either a matter of law
or fact. | 科学问题被评论者形容为“法律与事实掺杂的问题”(e.g., C.F. Amerasinghe, Evidence in International Litigation,
(Leiden, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 2005), p. 58)，既不能轻易归为法律问题，也不能轻易归为事实问题。 |
| Judge A. Yusuf stated in his declaration
in the Pulp Mills case that the experts’ role was to elucidate facts and to
clarify the scientific validity of the methods used to establish facts or to
collect data; | 优素福法官在纸浆厂案的声明中指出，专家的作用是阐明事实、澄清用于确立事实的方法的科学有效性或收集数据； |
| whereas it is for the Court to weigh the
probative value of the facts (Pulp Mills (see footnote 877 above),
Declaration of Judge Yusuf, para. 10). | 而法院的职责是衡量事实的证明价值(纸浆厂案(见上文脚注877)，优素福法官的声明，第10段)。 |
| See also Foster, Science and the
Precautionary Principle in International Courts and Tribunals: Expert
Evidence, Burden of Proof and Finality (see footnote 989 above), pp.
145–147). Based on jura novit curia, the Court can in principle apply any law
to any fact, and in theory can evaluate evidence and draw conclusions as it
sees appropriate (as long as the Court complies with the non ultra petita
rule); | See also Foster, Science and the
Precautionary Principle in International Courts and Tribunals: Expert Evidence,
Burden of Proof and Finality (见上文脚注989), pp.
145–147). 根据法官知法原则，法院原则上可对任何事实适用任何法律，理论上可评价证据并酌情得出结论(只要法院遵守不超出诉讼请求规则)； |
| these are all legal matters. | 这些都属于法律问题。 |
| Given its judicial function and under
jura novit curia, the Court needs to sufficiently understand the meaning of
each related technical fact in the case at hand. | 鉴于法院的司法职能，并根据法官知法原则，法院需要充分理解手头案件中的每个相关技术事实的含义。 |
| See the Special Rapporteur’s fifth report
(A/CN.4/711), para. 104. | 见特别报告员的第五次报告(A/CN.4/711)，第104段。 |
| Official Records of the General Assembly,
Sixty-seventh Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/67/10), para. 267. | 《大会正式记录，第六十七届会议，补编第10号》(A/67/10)，第267段。 |
| A/CN.4/664 (first report), A/CN.4/675
(second report), A/CN.4/687 (third report), and A/CN.4/699 and Add.1 (fourth
report). | A/CN.4/664(第一次报告)、A/CN.4/675(第二次报告)、A/CN.4/687(第三次报告)以及A/CN.4/699和Add.1(第四次报告)。 |
| A/CN.4/658, A/CN.4/676 and A/CN.4/707. | A/CN.4/658、A/CN.4/676和A/CN.4/707。 |
| The consideration of document A/CN.4/707
was postponed to the present session. | A/CN.4/707号文件的审议工作推迟至本届会议。 |
| For the text of the draft model clauses
proposed by the Special Rapporteur in his fifth report (A/CN.4/718), see
footnote 996 below. | 特别报告员在其第五次报告(A/CN.4/718)中建议的示范条款草案的案文，见下文脚注996。 |
| The text of the draft model clauses
proposed by the Special Rapporteur, in his fifth report (A/CN.4/718),
excluding footnotes, reads as follows: | 特别报告员在其第五次报告(A/CN.4/718)中建议的示范条款草案(不包括脚注)内容如下： |
| A. Time frame for the provisional
application of a treaty | A. 暂时适用条约的时限 |
| 1. Commencement | 1. 开始 |
| Draft model clause 1 | 示范条款草案1 |
| The negotiating [contracting] States
[international organizations] agree to apply this Treaty provisionally from
the date of signature (or any subsequent date agreed upon). | 谈判[缔约]国[国际组织]同意自签署之日(或商定的任何随后日期)起暂时适用本条约。 |
| Draft model clause 2 | 示范条款草案2 |
| The negotiating [contracting] States
[international organizations] agree to apply this Treaty provisionally from …
[a specified date]. | 谈判[缔约]国[国际组织]同意自…[某个具体日期]起暂时适用本条约。 |
| Draft model clause 3 | 示范条款草案3 |
| The negotiating [contracting] States
[international organizations] agree that the Treaty [articles … of the
Treaty] shall be applied provisionally, except by any State [international
organization] that notifies the Depositary in writing at the time of signature
that it does not consent to such provisional application. | 谈判[缔约]国[国际组织]同意暂时适用条约[条约第…条]，但在签字时以书面形式通知保存人它不同意此类暂时适用的国家[国际组织]除外。 |
| Draft model clause 4 | 示范条款草案4 |
| This Treaty shall be applied
provisionally from the date on which a State [an international organization]
so notifies the other States [international organizations] concerned or
deposits a declaration to that effect with the Depositary. | 本条约应自一国[一国际组织]通知其他有关国家[国际组织]暂时适用本条约之日或向保存人交存这一内容的声明之日起暂时适用。 |
| 2. Termination | 2. 终止 |
| Draft model clause 5 | 示范条款草案5 |
| The provisional application of this
Treaty shall terminate upon its entry into force for a State [an
international organization] that is applying it provisionally. | 本条约的暂时适用应在它对暂时适用条约的国家[国际组织]生效时终止。 |
| Draft model clause 6 | 示范条款草案6 |
| The provisional application of this
Treaty with respect to a State [an international organization] shall be
terminated if that State [international organization] notifies the other
States [international organizations] (or the Depositary) of its intention not
to become a party to the Treaty. | 如一国[一国际组织]通知其他国家[国际组织](或保存人)它不打算成为本条约的缔约方，则应终止本条约对该国[国际组织]的暂时适用。 |
| B. Scope of provisional application | B. 暂时适用的范围 |
| 1. Treaty as a whole | 1. 整个条约 |
| Draft model clause 7 | 示范条款草案7 |
| A State [An international organization]
that has notified the other States [international organizations] (or the
Depositary) that it will provisionally apply this Treaty shall be bound to
observe all the provisions thereof as agreed with the States [international
organizations] concerned. | 一国[一国际组织]如已通知其他国家[国际组织](或保存人)它将暂时适用本条约，则必须按照与有关国家[国际组织]商定的那样遵守条约的所有规定。 |
| 2. Only a part of a treaty | 2. 仅条约的一部分 |
| Draft model clause 8 | 示范条款草案8 |
| A State [An international organization]
that has notified the other States [international organizations] (or the
Depositary) that it will provisionally apply articles […] of this Treaty
shall be bound to observe the provisions thereof as agreed with the States
[international organizations] concerned.] | 一国[一国际组织]如已通知其他国家[国际组织](或保存人)它将暂时适用本条约第[…]条，则必须按照与有关国家[国际组织]商定的那样遵守该条的规定。 |
| See D. Mathy, “Article 25”, in The Vienna
Conventions on the Law of Treaties: A Commentary, vol. 1, O. Corten and P.
Klein, eds. (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2011), p. 640; | 见D. Mathy,“第二十五条”，载于O. Corten和P. Klein所编《〈维也纳条约法公约〉评注》，第1卷 (牛津，牛津大学出版社，2011年)，第640页； |
| and A.Q. Mertsch, Provisionally Applied
Treaties: Their Binding Force and Legal Nature (Leiden, Brill, 2012). | 和A. Q. Mertsch, 《暂时适用的条约：约束力和法律性质》 (莱顿，博睿，2012年)。 |
| The concept has been defined by writers
as “the application of and binding adherence to a treaty’s terms before its
entry into force” (R. Lefeber, “Treaties, provisional application”, in The
Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law, vol. 10, R. Wolfrum, ed.
(Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2012), p. 1) or as “a simplified form of
obtaining the application of a treaty, or of certain provisions, for a
limited period of time” (M.E. Villager, Commentary on the 1969 Vienna
Convention on the Law of Treaties (Leiden and Boston, Martinus Nijhoff,
2009), p. 354). | 有著述者将这一概念定义为“在条约生效前适用其条款或以有约束力的方式遵守其条款”(R. Lefeber, “条约，暂时适用”，载于R. Wolfrum所编《马克斯·普朗克国际公法百科全书》，第10卷 (牛津，牛津大学出版社，2012年)，第1页)，或定义为“在有限期间内适用条约或条约的某些条款的一种简化形式”(M.E. Villager,
《对1969年〈维也纳条约法公约〉的评注》(莱顿和波士顿，马丁努斯·奈霍夫出版社，2009年)，第354页)。 |
| See H. Krieger, “Article 25”, in Vienna
Convention on the Law of Treaties: A Commentary, O. Dörr and K. Schmalenbach,
eds. (Heidelberg and New York, Springer, 2012), p. 408. | 见H. Krieger,“第二十五条”，载于O. Dörr和K.
Schmalenbach所编《〈维也纳条约法公约〉评注》(海德堡和纽约，施普林格出版社，2012年)，第408页。 |
| See A/CN.4/664, paras. 25–35. | 见A/CN.4/664, 第25-35段。 |
| Article 25 of the 1969 Vienna Convention
reads as follows: | 1969年《维也纳公约》第二十五条内容如下： |
| Provisional application | 暂时适用 |
| 1. A treaty or a part of a treaty is
applied provisionally pending its entry into force if: | 一、条约或条约之一部分于条约生效前在下列情形下暂时适用： |
| (a) the treaty itself so provides; | (甲) 条约本身如此规定； |
| or | 或 |
| (b) the negotiating States have in some
other manner so agreed. | (乙) 谈判国以其他方式协议如此办理。 |
| 2. Unless the treaty otherwise provides
or the negotiating States have otherwise agreed, the provisional application
of a treaty or a part of a treaty with respect to a State shall be terminated
if that State notifies the other States between which the treaty is being
applied provisionally of its intention not to become a party to the treaty. | 二、除条约另有规定或谈判国另有协议外，条约或条约一部分对一国暂时适用，于该国将其不欲成为条约当事国之意思通知已暂时适用条约之其他各国时终止。 |
| (United Nations, Treaty Series, vol.
1155, No. 18232, p. 331, at pp. 338–339.) | (联合国，《条约汇编》，第1155卷，第18232号，第331页起，见第338-339页。 ) |
| Article 25 of the 1986 Vienna Convention
reads as follows: | 1986年《维也纳公约》第二十五条内容如下： |
| Provisional application | 暂时适用 |
| 1. A treaty or a part of a treaty is
applied provisionally pending its entry into force if: | 1. 有下列情形之一时，条约或其一部分在其生效前暂时适用： |
| (a) the treaty itself so provides; or | (a) 该条约本身有此规定； |
| (b) the negotiating States and
negotiating organizations or, as the case may be, the negotiating
organizations have in some other manner so agreed. | (b) 各谈判国和谈判组织或按情况各谈判组织以其他方式有此协议。 |
| 2. Unless the treaty otherwise provides
or the negotiating States and negotiating organizations or, as the case may
be, the negotiating organizations have otherwise agreed, the provisional
application of a treaty or a part of a treaty with respect to a State or an
international organization shall be terminated if that State or that
organization notifies the States and organizations with regard to which the
treaty is being applied provisionally of its intention not to become a party
to the treaty. | 2. 除该条约另有规定或各谈判国和谈判组织或按情况各谈判组织另有协议外，该条约或其一部分对一国或一国际组织的暂时适用，于该国或该组织将其不愿成为该条约当事方的意思通知该条约正对其暂时适用的各国和国际组织时应即终止。 |
| (A/CONF.129/15 (not yet in force).) | (A/CONF.129/15 (尚未生效)。 ) |
| See A/CN.4/664, paras. 28–30. | 见A/CN.4/664, 第28-30段。 |
| In this regard, reference can be made to
the analysis contained in The Treaty, Protocols, Conventions and
Supplementary Acts of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS),
1975–2010 (Abuja, Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Nigeria, 2011), which is a
collection of a total of 59 treaties concluded under the auspices of the
Community. | 在这方面，可参考2011年出版的《西非国家经济共同体(西非经共体)1975年至2010年的条约、议定书、公约和补充法》(阿布贾，尼日利亚外交部)中的分析，其中收集了西非经共体主持下缔结的59项条约。 |
| There it can be observed that of those 59
treaties, only 11 did not provide for provisional application (see
A/CN.4/699, paras. 168–174). | 从中可以看出，在这59项条约中，只有11项没有规定暂时适用(见A/CN.4/699,
第168-174段)。 |
| See paragraph 33 of the letter from the
Federal Republic of Yugoslavia in the Exchange of Letters Constituting an
Agreement between the United Nations and the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia
on the Status of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human
Rights in the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (United Nations, Treaty Series,
vol. 2042, No. 35283, p. 23, and United Nations Juridical Yearbook 1998
(United Nations publication, Sales No. E.03.V.5), at p. 103); | 见《构成联合国与南斯拉夫联盟共和国之间关于联合国人权事务高级专员办事处在南斯拉夫联盟共和国地位问题的协定的换文》中南斯拉夫联盟共和国的来函第33段(联合国，《条约汇编》，第2042卷，第35283号，第23页和《1998年联合国法律年鉴》(联合国出版物，出售品编号：E.03.V.5)，第103页)； |
| article 15 of the Agreement between
Belarus and Ireland on the Conditions of Recuperation of Minor Citizens from
the Republic of Belarus in Ireland (United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 2679,
No. 47597, p. 65, at p. 79); | 《白俄罗斯与爱尔兰关于在爱尔兰的白俄罗斯共和国未成年公民回返条件的协定》第15条(联合国，《条约汇编》，第2679卷，第47597号，第65页起，见第79页)； |
| and article 16 of the Agreement between
the Government of Malaysia and the United Nations Development Programme
concerning the Establishment of the UNDP Global Shared Service Centre (ibid.,
vol. 2794, No. 49154, p. 67). | 以及《马来西亚政府与联合国开发计划署关于建立开发署全球共享服务中心的协定》第16条(同上，第2794卷，第49154号，第67页)。 |
| See the memorandums by the Secretariat on
the origins of article 25 of the 1969 and 1986 Vienna Conventions (A/CN.4/658
and A/CN.4/676), and the memorandum by the Secretariat on the practice of
States and international organizations in respect of treaties that provide
for provisional application (A/CN.4/707). | 见秘书处关于1969年和1986年《维也纳公约》第二十五条起源的备忘录(A/CN.4/658和A/CN.4/676)以及秘书处关于各国和国际组织在条约中规定暂时适用的做法的备忘录(A/CN.4/707)。 |
| See Mertsch, Provisionally Applied
Treaties … (see footnote 997 above), p. 22. | 见Mertsch,《暂时适用的条约…》(见上文脚注997), p. 22。 |
| See A. Geslin, La mise en application
provisoire des traités (Paris, Editions A. Pedone, 2005), p. 111. | 见A. Geslin, La mise en application
provisoire des traités (Paris, Editions A. Pedone, 2005), p. 111。 |
| See M.A. Rogoff and B.E. Gauditz, “The
provisional application of international agreements”, Maine Law Review, vol.
39 (1987), p. 41. | 见M.A. Rogoff和B.E.
Gauditz,“国际协定的暂时适用”，《缅因法律述评》，第39卷 (1987年)，第41页。 |
| For the text of the draft model clauses
as proposed by the Special Rapporteur in his fifth report, see footnote 996
above. | 特别报告员在第五次报告中建议的示范条款草案案文，见上文脚注996。 |
| The Commission was not able to conclude
its consideration of draft model clauses because of a lack of time. | 由于时间不够，委员会无法完成对示范条款草案的审议。 |
| It therefore intends to resume such
consideration at its seventy-first session, to allow States and international
organizations to assess the annex containing such draft model clauses before
the second reading of the draft guidelines takes place during its
seventy-second session. | 因此，委员会打算在第七十一届会议上继续审议，以便允许各国和国际组织在第七十二届会议上准则草案二读之前能够调阅载有示范条款草案的附件。 |
| The question of the potential role to be
played by an international organization or an international conference in an
agreement to provisionally apply a treaty or a part of a treaty is addressed
in draft guideline 4. | 准则草案4述及国际组织或国际会议在暂时适用条约或条约之一部分的协定中可能发挥的作用的问题。 |
| See A/CN.4/707, para. 37. | 见A/CN.4/707, 第37段。 |
| See, for example, the International
Tropical Timber Agreement, 1994 (United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1955,
No. 33484, p. 81), which was extended several times on the basis of article
46 of the Agreement, during which time some States (Guatemala, Mexico,
Nigeria and Poland) acceded to it. | 例如见1994年《国际热带木材协定》(联合国，《条约汇编》，第1955卷，第33484号，第81页)，该协定根据第46条几次被延长，期间有一些国家(危地马拉、墨西哥、尼日利亚和波兰)加入。 |
| See also the case of Montenegro regarding
Protocol No. 14 to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and
Fundamental Freedoms, amending the control system of the Convention (ibid.,
vol. 2677, No. 2889, p. 3, at p. 34). | 另见黑山在《保护人权与基本自由公约关于修改公约监察体系的第14号议定书》(同上，第2677卷，第2889号，第3页起，见第34页)方面的情况。 |
| Montenegro, which became independent in
2006 and was therefore not a negotiating State, succeeded to the
aforementioned treaty and had the option of provisionally applying certain
provisions in accordance with the Madrid Agreement (Agreement on the
Provisional Application of Certain Provisions of Protocol No. 14 Pending its
Entry into Force). | 黑山于2006年独立，因此不是谈判国，它继承了上述条约，可以根据《马德里协定》(《关于第14号议定书生效前暂时适用其某些规定的协定》)暂时适用某些规定。 |
| For the declarations of provisional
applications made by Albania, Belgium, Estonia, Germany, Liechtenstein,
Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Spain, Switzerland and the United Kingdom of
Great Britain and Northern Ireland, see, ibid., pp. 30–37. | 关于阿尔巴尼亚、比利时、爱沙尼亚、德国、列支敦士登、卢森堡，荷兰、西班牙、瑞士和大不列颠及北爱尔兰联合王国所作的暂时适用声明，见同上，第30-37页。 |
| Yearbook … 1966, vol. II, para. 38. | 《1966年…年鉴》，第二卷，第38段。 |
| Paragraph (3) of the commentary to draft
article 22, ibid. | 第22条草案的评注第(3)段，同上。 |
| An example of the practice regarding the
provisional application of a part of a treaty in bilateral treaties can be
found in the Agreement between the Kingdom of the Netherlands and the
Principality of Monaco on the Payment of Dutch Social Insurance Benefits in
Monaco (United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 2205, No. 39160, p. 541, at p.
550, art. 13, para. 2); | 关于在双边条约中暂时适用条约一部分的实践的例子，见《荷兰王国和摩纳哥公国关于在摩纳哥支付荷兰社会保险福利的协定》(联合国，《条约汇编》，第2205卷，第39160号，第541页起，见第550页，第13条第2款)； |
| and examples of bilateral treaties
expressly excluding a part of a treaty from provisional application can be
found in the Agreement between the Austrian Federal Government and the
Government of the Federal Republic of Germany on the Cooperation of the
Police Authorities and the Customs Administrations in the Border Areas
(ibid., vol. 2170, No. 38115, p. 573, at p. 586) and the Agreement between the
Government of the Federal Republic of Germany and the Government of the
Republic of Croatia regarding Technical Cooperation (ibid., vol. 2306, No.
41129, p. 439). | 关于明确排除暂时适用条约一部分的双边条约的例子，见《奥地利联邦政府和德意志联邦共和国政府关于警务和海关当局边境地区合作的协定》(同上，第2170卷，第38115号，第573页起，见第586页)和《德意志联邦共和国政府与克罗地亚共和国政府之间关于技术合作的协定》(同上，第2306卷，第41129号，第439页)。 |
| With respect to multilateral treaties,
practice can be found in: Convention on the Prohibition of the Use,
Stockpiling, Production and Transfer of Anti-Personnel Mines and on their
Destruction (ibid., vol. 2056, No. 35597, p. 211, at p. 252); | 关于多边条约，可在以下文书中找到相关实践：《关于禁止使用、储存、生产和转让杀伤人员地雷及销毁此种地雷的公约》(同上，第2056卷，第35597号，第211页起，见第252页)； |
| Convention on Cluster Munitions, (ibid.,
vol. 2688, No. 47713, p. 39, at p. 112); | 《集束弹药公约》(同上，第2688卷，第47713号，第39页起，见第112页)； |
| Arms Trade Treaty (A/CONF.217/2013/L.3,
art. 23); | 《武器贸易条约》(A/CONF.217/2013/L.3, 第23条)； |
| and the Document agreed among the States
Parties to the Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe (International
Legal Materials, vol. 36, p. 866, sect. VI, para. 1). | 以及《欧洲常规武装力量条约缔约国商定文件》(《国际法律资料》，第36卷，第866页，第六部分，第1段)。 |
| Similarly, the Protocol on the Provisional
Application of the Revised Treaty of Chaguaramas (ibid., vol. 2259, No.
40269, p. 440) makes explicit which provisions of the Revised Treaty are not
to be provisionally applied, while the Trans-Pacific Strategic Economic
Partnership Agreement (ibid., vol. 2592, No. 46151, p. 225) is an example of
provisional application of a part of the treaty that applies only in respect
of one party to the Agreement. | 同样，《关于暂时适用经修订的查瓜拉马斯条约的议定书》(同上，第2259卷，第40269号，第440页)明确规定了《经修订的条约》的哪些条款不得暂时适用，而《跨太平洋经济战略伙伴关系协定》(同上，第2592卷，第46151号，第225页)是条约之一部分仅暂时适用于协定一个缔约方的例子。 |
| As in the case of the Agreement relating
to the Implementation of Part XI of the United Nations Convention on the Law
of the Sea of 10 December 1982 (ibid., vol. 1836, No. 31364, p. 3) and in the
Agreement on the Provisional Application of Certain Provisions of Protocol
No. 14 Pending its Entry into Force. | 如《关于执行1982年12月10日联合国海洋法公约第十一部分的协定》(同上，第1836卷，第31364号，第3页)和《关于第14号议定书生效前暂时适用其某些规定的协定》。 |
| For example, the Arms Trade Treaty. | 如《武器贸易条约》。 |
| Examples in the bilateral sphere include:
Agreement between the European Community and the Republic of Paraguay on
Certain Aspects of Air Services (Official Journal of the European Union L
122, 11 May 2007), art. 9; | 双边领域的例子包括：《欧洲共同体和巴拉圭共和国关于航空服务某些方面的协定》(《欧洲联盟公报》L 122, 2007年5月11日)，第9条； |
| Agreement between the Argentine Republic
and the Republic of Suriname on Visa Waiver for Holders of Ordinary Passports
(United Nations, Treaty Series, [vol. not published yet], No. 51407), art. 8; | 《阿根廷共和国与苏里南共和国关于普通护照持有者豁免签证的协定》(联合国，《条约汇编》，[所在卷尚未出版]，第51407号)，第8条； |
| Treaty between the Swiss Confederation
and the Principality of Liechtenstein relating to Environmental Taxes in the
Principality of Liechtenstein (ibid., vol. 2761, No. 48680, p. 23), art. 5; | 《瑞士联邦与列支敦士登公国关于环境税问题的条约》(同上，第2761卷，第48680号，第23页)，第5条； |
| Agreement between the Kingdom of Spain
and the Principality of Andorra on the Transfer and Management of Waste
(ibid., [vol. not published yet], No. 50313), art. 13; | 《西班牙王国与安道尔公国关于废物转移和管理的协定》(同上，[所在卷尚未出版]，第50313号)，第13条； |
| Agreement between the Government of the
Kingdom of Spain and the Government of the Slovak Republic on Cooperation to
Combat Organized Crime (ibid., vol. 2098, No. 36475, p. 341), art. 14, para.
2; | 《西班牙王国政府与斯洛伐克共和国政府关于合作打击有组织犯罪的协定》(同上，第2098卷，第36475号，第341页)，第14条第2款； |
| and Treaty on the Formation of an
Association between the Russian Federation and the Republic of Belarus
(ibid., vol. 2120, No. 36926, p. 595), art. 19. | 以及《俄罗斯联邦与白俄罗斯共和国关于组建联盟的条约》(同上，第2120卷，第36926号，第595页)，第19条。 |
| Examples in the multilateral sphere
include: Agreement relating to the Implementation of Part XI of the United
Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea of 10 December 1982, art. 7; | 多边领域的例子包括：《关于执行1982年12月10日联合国海洋法公约第十一部分的协定》，第7条； |
| Agreement on the Amendments to the
Framework Agreement on the Sava River Basin and the Protocol on the
Navigation Regime to the Framework Agreement on the Sava River Basin (ibid.,
vol. 2367, No. 42662, p. 697), art. 3, para. 5; | 《关于萨瓦河盆地框架协定修正案的协定》和《关于萨瓦河盆地框架协定航行制度的议定书》(同上，第2367卷，第42662号，第697页)，第3条第5款； |
| Framework Agreement on a Multilateral
Nuclear Environmental Programme in the Russian Federation (ibid., vol. 2265,
No. 40358, p. 5, at pp. 13–14), art. 18, para. 7, and its corresponding
Protocol on Claims, Legal Proceedings and Indemnification (ibid., p. 35),
art. 4, para. 8; | 《俄罗斯联邦多边核环境方案框架协定》(同上，第2265卷，第40358号，第5页起，见第13-14页)，第18条第7款，及其《关于索赔、法律程序和赔偿的议定书》(同上，第35页)，第4条第8款； |
| Statutes of the Community of
Portuguese-Speaking Countries (ibid., vol. 2233, No. 39756, p. 207), art. 21; | 《葡萄牙语国家共同体规约》(同上，第2233卷，第39756号，第207页)，第21条； |
| and Agreement establishing the “Karanta”
Foundation for Support of Non-Formal Education Policies and Including in
Annex the Statutes of the Foundation (ibid., vol. 2341, No. 41941, p. 3),
arts. 8 and 49, respectively. | 以及《设立支持非正规教育政策的“Karanta”基金会和在附件中列入基金会章程的协定》(同上，第2341卷，第41941页，第3页)，分别为第8和第49条。 |
| Examples of bilateral treaties on
provisional application that are separate from the treaty that is
provisionally applied include: Agreement on the Taxation of Savings Income
and the Provisional Application Thereof between the Netherlands and Germany
(ibid., [vol. not yet published], No. 49430) and the Amendment to the
Agreement on Air Services between the Kingdom of the Netherlands and the
State of Qatar (ibid., vol. 2265, No. 40360, p. 507, at p. 511). | 正在暂时适用的条约之外关于暂时适用的双边条约例子包括：《德国与荷兰之间关于储蓄收入征税的协定及其暂时适用》(同上，[所在卷尚未出版])，第49430号)和《荷兰王国与卡塔尔国之间关于航空服务的协定修正案》(同上，第2265卷，第40360号，第507页起，见第511页)。 |
| The Netherlands has concluded a number of
similar treaties. | 荷兰缔结了一些类似的条约。 |
| Examples of multilateral treaties on
provisional application that are separate from the treaty that is
provisionally applied include: Protocol on the Provisional Application of the
Agreement establishing the Caribbean Community Climate Change Centre (ibid.,
[vol. not yet published], No. 51181); Protocol on the Provisional Application
of the Revised Treaty of Chaguaramas; and the Madrid Agreement (Agreement on
the Provisional Application of Certain Provisions of Protocol No. 14 Pending
its Entry into Force). | 正在暂时适用的条约之外关于暂时适用的多边条约例子包括：《关于暂时适用建立加勒比共同体气候变化中心的协定的议定书》(同上，[所在卷尚未出版]，第51181号)、《关于暂时适用经修订的查瓜拉马斯条约的议定书》和《马德里协定》(《关于第14号议定书生效前暂时适用其某些规定的协定》)。 |
| In practice, some treaties were
registered with the United Nations as having been provisionally applied, but
with no indication as to which other means or arrangements had been employed
to agree upon provisional application. | 在实践中，有些条约在联合国登记为暂时适用的条约，但并没有说明约定暂时适用所采用的其他办法或安排。 |
| The following are examples of such
treaties: Agreement between the Kingdom of the Netherlands and the United
States of America on the Status of United States Personnel in the Caribbean
Part of the Kingdom (ibid., [vol. not yet published], No. 51578); | 以下是这些条约的例子：《荷兰王国与美利坚合众国之间关于美国人员在荷属加勒比地区地位的协定》(同上，[所在卷尚未出版]，第51578号)； |
| Agreement between the Government of
Latvia and the Government of the Republic of Azerbaijan on Cooperation in
Combating Terrorism, Illicit Trafficking in Narcotic Drugs, Psychotropic
Substances and Precursors and Organized Crime (ibid., vol. 2461, No. 44230,
p. 205); | 《拉脱维亚政府和阿塞拜疆共和国政府关于合作打击恐怖主义、非法贩运麻醉药品和精神药物及其前体以及有组织犯罪的协定》(同上，第2461卷，第44230号，第205页)； |
| and Agreement between the United Nations
and the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan relating to the
Establishment of the Subregional Office for North and Central Asia of the
United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific
(ibid., vol. 2761, No. 48688, p. 339). | 以及《联合国与哈萨克斯坦共和国政府关于建立联合国亚洲及太平洋经济社会委员会北亚和中亚次区域办事处的协定》(同上，第2761号，第48688号，第339页)。 |
| See R. Lefeber, “The provisional
application of treaties”, in Essays on the Law of Treaties: A Collection of
Essays in Honour of Bert Vierdag, J. Klabbers and R. Lefeber, eds. (The
Hague, Martinus Nijhoff, 1998), p. 81. | 见R. Lefeber, “条约的暂时适用”，载于J. Klabbers和R.
Lefeber所编《条约法文集：贝尔特·维尔达格纪念文集》(海牙，马丁努斯·奈霍夫出版社，1998年)，第81页。 |
| These are not agreements in which the
international organization is a party to the treaty as such. Rather, these
are agreements between States reached in meetings or conferences under the
auspices of that international organization. | 这些协议并不是作为条约缔约方的国际组织订立的协议，而是各国之间在该国际组织主持的会议上达成的协议。 |
| Several such instances can be given. | 可以举出几个这样的例子。 |
| First, the amendments to the Convention
on the International Maritime Satellite Organization (INMARSAT) and its
Operating Agreement (United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1143, No. 17948, p.
105). | 第一，《国际海事卫星组织公约》及其《业务协定》的修正案(联合国，《条约汇编》，第1143卷，第17948号，第105页)。 |
| See D. Sagar, “Provisional application in
an international organization”, Journal of Space Law, vol. 27 (1999), pp.
99–116. | 见D. Sagar, “国际组织中的暂时适用”，《太空法期刊》，第27卷，(1999年)，第99-116页。 |
| Second, there are a number of precedents
in which the competent organs of international organizations provisionally
applied amendments, without explicit power being provided for in their
constitutions, namely the Congress of the Universal Postal Union, the
Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe, and the practice of the International
Telecommunication Union. | 第二，有一些国际组织主管机关在其章程并未明确赋予权力的情况下暂时适用修正案的先例，即万国邮政联盟大会、欧洲委员会部长委员会和国际电信联盟的做法。 |
| See Sagar, “Provisional application in an
international organization”, pp. 104–106. | 见Sagar, “国际组织中的暂时适用”，第104-106页。 |
| Third, the amendment adopted in 2012 by
the Conference of the Parties serving as the meeting of the Parties to the
Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change
(United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 2303, No. 30822, p. 162), in which the
Ad Hoc Working Group on Further Commitments for Annex I Parties under the
Kyoto Protocol, in considering the gap in the operation of the clean
development mechanism that might arise in relation to the entry into force of
amendments to the Kyoto Protocol, recommended that those amendments could be
provisionally applied. | 第三，作为《联合国气候变化框架公约京都议定书》(联合国，《条约汇编》，第2303卷，第30822号，第162页)缔约方会议的《公约》缔约方会议2012年通过的修正案，在该修正案中，附件一缔约方在《京都议定书》之下的进一步承诺问题特设工作组在审议与《京都议定书》修正案生效有关的清洁发展机制运作方面可能出现的空白时，建议可暂时适用这些修正案。 |
| See “Legal considerations relating to a
possible gap between the first and subsequent commitment periods”
(FCCC/KP/AWG/2010/10), para. 18. | 见“有关第一个承诺期与随后各承诺期之间可能出现空白的法律考虑”(FCCC/KP/AWG/2010/10)，第18段。 |
| Fourth, the Amendment to Article 14 of
the Statutes of the World Tourism Organization (United Nations, Treaty
Series, [vol. not published yet], No. 14403). | 第四，《世界旅游组织章程第14条修正案》(联合国，《条约汇编》，[所在卷尚未出版]，第14403号)。 |
| Other examples, where Governments are
given the possibility to bring the agreement provisionally into force by
virtue of a collective decision, include: (a) International Agreement on
Olive Oil and Table Olives (ibid., vol. 2684, No. 47662, p. 63); | 各国政府有机会通过集体决定使协定暂时生效的其他例子包括：(a)《国际橄榄油和食用橄榄协定》(同上，第2684卷，第47662号，第63页)； |
| (b) International Tropical Timber
Agreement; | (b)《国际热带木材协定》； |
| (c) International Cocoa Agreement, 1993
(ibid., vol. 1766, No. 30692, p. 3); | (c) 1993年《国际可可协定》(同上，第1766卷，第30692号，第3页)； |
| and (d) International Cocoa Agreement,
2010 (ibid., vol. 2871, No. 50115, p. 3). | 以及(d) 2010年《国际可可协定》(同上，第2871卷，第50115号，第3页)。 |
| Lastly, a case that two academic sources
qualify as one of provisional application refers to the establishment of the
Preparatory Commission of the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test Ban Treaty
Organization, which was done through the adoption of a resolution by the
Meeting of States Signatories (CTBT/MSS/RES/1) on 19 November 1996. | 最后，两份学术资料称作暂时适用的案例提及全面禁止核试验条约组织筹备委员会的设立，该委员会是以签署国会议1996年11月19日通过一项决议(CTBT/MSS/RES/1)的形式设立的。 |
| Although in the negotiations that led to
the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test Ban Treaty Organization a proposal for
provisional application was rejected, although the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test
Ban Treaty has no explicit provision for provisional application, and
although no separate treaty has been concluded to that effect, these scholars
argue that because the decisions of the Preparatory Commission are intended
to implement core provisions of the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test Ban Treaty
before its entry into force, the resolution of the Meeting of States
Signatories can be interpreted as evidence of an agreement “in some other
manner”, or of an “implied provisional application” on the basis of article
25, paragraph1 (b), of the 1969 Vienna Convention. | 尽管在促成《全面禁止核试验条约》的谈判中，暂时适用提议被驳回，尽管《全面禁止核试验条约》没有明确的暂时适用规定，尽管没有为此签署单独的条约，但这些学者认为，由于筹备委员会的决定意在于《全面禁止核试验条约》生效之前执行其核心条款，因此，签署国会议的决议可视为“以其他方式”约定或依据1969年《维也纳公约》第二十五条第一款(乙)项“暗示暂时适用”的证据。 |
| See A. Michie,” The provisional
application of arms control treaties”, Journal of Conflict and Security Law,
vol. 10, (2005), pp. 347–377, at pp. 369–370. | 见A. Michie, “军备控制条约的暂时适用”，《冲突和安全法期刊》，第10卷，(2005年)，第347-377页，见第369-370页。 |
| See also, Y. Fukui, “CTBT: Legal
questions arising from its non-entry into force revisited”, Journal of
Conflict and Security Law, vol. 22, pp. 183–200, at pp. 197–199. | 另见Y. Fukui, “再论因《禁核试条约》不生效而产生的法律问题”，《冲突和安全法期刊》，第22卷，第183-200页，见第197-199页。 |
| By contrast, another source, published
under the auspices of the United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research
and containing a preface by the Executive Secretary of the Preparatory
Commission, maintains that the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test Ban Treaty is not
currently being provisionally applied. | 相反，在联合国裁军研究所主持下出版并包含筹备委员会执行秘书所作前言的另一资料来源则认为，《全面禁止核试验条约》目前并未在暂时适用。 |
| See R. Johnson, Unfinished Business: The
Negotiation of the CTBT and the End of Nuclear Testing, UNIDIR/2009/2 (2009),
pp. 227–231. | 见R. Johnson, 《未竟之功：〈禁核试条约〉的谈判与核试验的停止》，UNIDIR/2009/2 (2009年)，第227-231页。 |
| There are cases in which the treaty does
not require the negotiating or signatory States to apply it provisionally,
but leaves open the possibility for each State to decide whether or not it
wishes to apply the treaty or a part of the treaty, at any point in the
process from the adoption of the text until or even after its entry into
force. | 在有些情况下，条约并未要求谈判国或签署国暂时适用条约，但留有余地，允许每个国家自行决定是否希望在从案文通过至生效乃至生效之后的整个进程中的任一时刻适用条约或条约之一部分。 |
| In these circumstances, the expression of
intention that creates the obligation arising from provisional application
may take the form of a unilateral declaration by the State. | 在这种情况下，国家发表单边声明，就可以成为一种表达意图的形式，产生源自暂时适用的义务。 |
| An example of this is the provisional
application by the Syrian Arab Republic of the Convention on the Prohibition
of the Development, Production, Stockpiling and Use of Chemical Weapons and
on their Destruction (United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1974, No. 33757). | 阿拉伯叙利亚共和国暂时适用《关于禁止发展、生产、储存和使用化学武器及销毁此种武器的公约》(联合国，《条约汇编》，第1974卷，第33757号)就是一个例子。 |
| When the Syrian Arab Republic
unilaterally declared that it would provisionally apply the Convention, the
Director-General of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons
(OPCW) replied neutrally, informing the Syrian Arab Republic that its
“request” to provisionally apply the Convention would be forwarded to the
States parties through the Depositary. | 阿拉伯叙利亚共和国单方面宣布将暂时适用《公约》时，禁止化学武器组织(禁化武组织)总干事作出了中立的答复，告知该国其暂时适用《公约》的“请求”将通过保存人转交各缔约国。 |
| Although the Convention does not provide
for provisional application of the Convention and such possibility was not
discussed during its negotiation, neither the States parties nor OPCW
objected to the provisional application by the Syrian Arab Republic of the
Convention, as expressed in its unilateral declaration (see the second report
by the Special Rapporteur (A/CN.4/675), para. 35 (c), and the third report by
the Special Rapporteur (A/CN.4/687), para. 120). | 虽然《公约》没有对暂时适用《公约》的情况作出规定，《公约》谈判期间也没有讨论这种可能性，但各缔约国和禁化武组织都没有反对阿拉伯叙利亚共和国按其单方面声明暂时适用《公约》(见特别报告员的第二次报告(A/CN.4/675)第35(c)段、特别报告员的第三次报告(A/CN.4/687)第120段)。 |
| Another example of consent to be bound by
the provisional application of a part of a treaty by means of a unilateral
declaration, but which is expressly provided for in a parallel agreement to
the treaty, is contained in the Protocol to the Agreement on a Unified Patent
Court on Provisional Application (see
www.unified-patent-court.org/sites/default/files/Protocol_to_the_Agreement_on_Unified_Patent_Court_on_provisional_application.pdf). | 还有一种情况是，条约的平行协定明文规定缔约方可通过单方面声明暂时适用条约之一部分而同意受到约束，《关于设立暂时适用方面统一专利法院的协议议定书》属于此例 (见www.unified-patent-court.org/sites/default/files/Protocol_to_the_Agreement_on_
Unified_Patent_Court_on_provisional_application.pdf)。 |
| See paragraph (5) of the commentary to
draft guideline 3 above. | 见上文准则草案3的评注第(5)段。 |
| See Mathy, “Article 25” (footnote 997
above), p. 651. | 见Mathy,“第二十五条”(上文脚注997)，第651页。 |
| The memorandum by the Secretariat
(A/CN.4/707) contains an analysis of more than 400 bilateral and 40
multilateral treaties and recognizes that in reality the number of both
bilateral and multilateral treaties provisionally applied is higher than the
number available in the United Nations Treaty Series; | 秘书处的备忘录(A/CN.4/707)分析了逾400项双边条约和40项多边条约，并确认暂时适用的双边和多边条约的实际数量均高于联合国《条约汇编》中的条约数量； |
| see also the examples contained in the
reports submitted by the Special Rapporteur: A/CN.4/664, A/CN.4/675,
A/CN.4/687 and A/CN.4/699 and Add.1. | 另见特别报告员提交的报告中的例子：A/CN.4/664、A/CN.4/675、A/CN.4/687以及A/CN.4/699和Add.1。 |
| The latter contains an annex with examples
of recent European Union practice on provisional application of agreements
with third States. | 后者有一个附件，其中载有欧洲联盟暂时适用与第三国协定的近期做法实例。 |
| See also the examples of the practice of
the European Free Trade Association (EFTA) referred to in the fifth report by
the Special Rapporteur (A/CN.4/718). | 另见特别报告员第五次报告(A/CN.4/718)中提及的欧洲自由贸易联盟实践例子。 |
| However, the subsequent practice of one
or more parties to a treaty may provide a means of interpretation of the
treaty under articles 31 or 32 of the 1969 Vienna Convention. | 但条约一个或多个缔约方的嗣后实践可为根据1969年《维也纳公约》第三十一或第三十二条解释条约提供资料。 |
| See chapter IV above on subsequent
agreements and subsequent practice in relation to the interpretation of
treaties. | 见上文第四章：与条约解释相关的嗣后协定和嗣后实践。 |
| Official Records of the General Assembly,
Sixty-sixth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/66/10 and Add.1). | 《大会正式记录，第六十六届会议，补编第10号》(A/66/10和Add.1)。 |
| See, in particular, guideline 1.3 of the
Guide to Practice on Reservations to Treaties (ibid.). | 尤其见《对条约的保留实践指南》 (同上)准则1.3。 |
| See e.g. art. 45, para. 2 (a) of the
Energy Charter Treaty (United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 2080, No. 36116,
p. 95); | 例如见《能源宪章条约》(联合国，《条约汇编》，第2080卷，第36116号，第95页)第45条第2款(a)项； |
| and art. 7, para. 1 (a), of the Agreement
relating to the implementation of Part XI of the United Nations Convention on
the Law of the Sea of 10 December 1982. | 《关于执行1982年12月10日联合国海洋法公约第十一部分的协定》第7条第1款(a)项。 |
| Yearbook … 2001, vol. II (Part Two) and
corrigendum, para. 76, subsequently annexed to General Assembly resolution
56/83 of 12 December 2001. | 《2001年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)和更正，第76段，随后被列为大会2001年12月12日第56/83号决议的附件。 |
| Yearbook … 2011, vol. II (Part Two),
para. 87. | 《2011年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第87段。 |
| See A/CN.4/707, para. 88. | 见A/CN.4/707, 第88段。 |
| Most bilateral treaties state that the
treaty shall be provisionally applied “pending its entry into force”,
“pending its ratification”, “pending the fulfilment of the formal
requirements for its entry into force”, “pending the completion of these
internal procedures and the entry into force of this Convention”, “pending
the Governments … informing each other in writing that the formalities
constitutionally required in their respective countries have been complied
with”, “until the fulfilment of all the procedures mentioned in paragraph 1
of this article” or “until its entry into force” (see A/CN.4/707, para. 90). | 大多数双边条约载明，条约在“生效前”、“批准前”、“生效所需的正式要求得到满足前”、“完成内部程序和本公约生效前”、“政府…互相书面通知对方已遵守本国宪法所要求的程序前”、“本条第一款提及的所有程序完成前”或“生效前”将暂时适用(见A/CN.4/707, 第90段)。 |
| That is also the case for multilateral
treaties, such as the Madrid Agreement (Agreement on the Provisional
Application of Certain Provisions of Protocol No. 14 Pending its Entry into
Force), which provides in paragraph (d) that: “Such a declaration [of
provisional application] will cease to be effective upon the entry into force
of Protocol No. 14 bis to the Convention in respect of the High Contracting
Party concerned.” | 多边条约也是如此，如《马德里协定》(《关于第14号议定书生效前暂时适用其某些规定的协定》)(d)款规定，“一旦《公约》第14号议定书之二对有关缔约方生效，这样的[暂时适用]声明将失效。 ” |
| See, e.g., the Agreement between the
Federal Republic of Germany and the Government of the Republic of Slovenia
concerning the Inclusion in the Reserves of the Slovenian Office for Minimum
Reserves of Petroleum and Petroleum Products of Supplies of Petroleum and
Petroleum Products Stored in Germany on its Behalf (United Nations, Treaty
Series, vol. 2169, No. 38039, p. 287, at p. 302); | 例如见《德意志联邦共和国与斯洛维尼亚共和国政府关于将斯洛文尼亚石油和石油产品最低储备厅代存在德国的石油和石油产品计入该厅储备的协定》(联合国，《条约汇编》，第2169卷，第38039号，第287页起，见第302页)； |
| and the case in the Exchange of Notes
Constituting an Agreement between the Government of Spain and the Government
of Colombia on Free Visas (ibid., vol. 2253, No. 20662, p. 328, at pp.
333–334). | 以及《构成西班牙政府和哥伦比亚政府签证免费协定的换文》(同上，第2253卷，第20662号，第328页起，见第333-334页)。 |
| Such an approach accords with that taken
with regard to the position of negotiating States in draft guideline 3. | 这种做法与准则草案3就谈判国采取的做法相一致。 |
| See paragraphs (2) and (5) of the
commentary to draft guideline 3, above. | 见上文准则草案3的评注第(2)和(5)段。 |
| A small number of bilateral treaties
contain explicit clauses on termination of provisional application and in
some cases provide also for its notification. | 少数双边条约载有终止暂时适用的明确条款，有些还规定了终止的通知问题。 |
| An example could be the Agreement between
the Government of the United States of America and the Government of the
Republic of the Marshall Islands concerning Cooperation to Suppress the
Proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction, their Delivery Systems, and
Related Materials by Sea (United Nations, Treaty Series, [vol. not yet
published], No. 51490, p. 14), art. 17. | 其中一个例子为《美利坚合众国政府和马绍尔群岛共和国政府之间关于合作制止大规模毁灭性武器、其运载系统和相关材料通过海运扩散的协定》(联合国，《条约汇编》，[所在卷尚未出版]，第51490号，第14页)，第17条。 |
| Other examples include: Treaty between
the Federal Republic of Germany and the Kingdom of the Netherlands concerning
the Implementation of Air Traffic Controls by the Federal Republic of Germany
above Dutch Territory and concerning the Impact of the Civil Operations of
Niederrhein Airport on the Territory of the Kingdom of the Netherlands
(ibid., vol. 2389, No. 43165, p. 117, at p. 173); | 其他例子包括：《德意志联邦共和国和荷兰王国之间关于德意志联邦共和国在荷兰领土上空执行空中交通管制以及关于下莱茵机场民用业务对荷兰王国领土的影响的条约》(同上，第2389卷，第43165号，第117页起，见第173页)； |
| Agreement between Spain and the
International Oil Pollution Compensation Fund (ibid., vol. 2161, No. 37756,
p. 45, at p. 50); | 《西班牙和国际油污赔偿基金之间的协定》(同上，第2161卷，第37756号，第45页起，见第50页)； |
| and Treaty between the Kingdom of Spain
and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization Represented by the Supreme
Headquarters Allied Powers Europe on the Special Conditions Applicable to the
Establishment and Operation on Spanish Territory of International Military
Headquarters (ibid., vol. 2156, No. 37662, p. 139, at p. 155). | 以及《西班牙王国与盟国欧洲最高总部所代表的北大西洋公约组织之间关于在西班牙境内设立和运作国际军事总部所适用的特别条件的协定》(同上，第2156卷，第37662号，第139页起，见第155页)。 |
| As for the termination of multilateral
treaties, the Agreement for the Implementation of the Provisions of the
United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea of 10 December 1982 relating
to the Conservation and Management of Straddling Fish Stocks and Highly
Migratory Fish Stocks (ibid., vol. 2167, No. 37924, p. 3, at p. 126),
includes a clause (art. 41) allowing for termination by notification
reflecting the wording of article 25, paragraph 2, of the 1969 Vienna
Convention. | 关于多边条约的终止，《执行1982年12月10日联合国海洋法公约有关养护和管理跨界鱼类种群和高度洄游鱼类种群的规定的协定》(同上，第2167卷，第37924号，第3页起，见第126页)包含一个允许以通知方式终止的条款(第41条)，该条体现了1969年《维也纳公约》第二十五条第二款的措辞。 |
| Furthermore, the practice with regard to
commodity agreements illustrates that provisional application may be agreed
to be terminated by withdrawal from the agreement, as is the case with the
International Agreement on Olive Oil and Table Olives. | 此外，商品协定方面的实践表明，可约定通过撤出协定的方式终止暂时适用，《国际橄榄油和食用橄榄协定》就是如此。 |
| See, for example, art. 29 of the 1978
Vienna Convention on Succession of States in Respect of Treaties (ibid., vol.
1946, No. 33356, p. 3), which envisages additional means of terminating
provisional application of multilateral treaties that are in force with
respect to the territory to which the succession of States relates. | 例如见1978年《关于国家在条约方面的继承的维也纳公约》(同上，第1946卷，第33356号，第3页)第二十九条谈及终止暂时适用对与国家继承有关的领土有效的多边条约的其他方式。 |
| Article 27 of the 1969 Vienna Convention
provides as follows: | 1969年《维也纳公约》第二十七条规定如下： |
| Internal law and observance of treaties | 国内法与条约之遵守 |
| A party may not invoke the provisions of
its internal law as justification for its failure to perform a treaty. | 一当事国不得援引其国内法规定为理由而不履行条约。 |
| This rule is without prejudice to article
46. | 此项规则不妨碍第四十六条。 |
| Article 27 of the 1986 Vienna Convention
provides as follows: | 1986年《维也纳公约》第27条规定如下： |
| Internal law of states, rules of
international organizations and observance of treaties | 国家的国内法、国际组织的规则和条约的遵守 |
| 1. A State party to a treaty may not
invoke the provisions of its internal law as justification for its failure to
perform the treaty. | 1. 为一条约当事方的国家不得援引其国内法的规定作为不履行条约的理由。 |
| 2. An international organization party to
a treaty may not invoke the rules of the organization as justification for
its failure to perform the treaty. | 2. 为一条约当事方的国际组织不得援引该组织的规则作为不履行条约的理由。 |
| 3. The rules contained in the preceding
paragraphs are without prejudice to article 46. | 3. 以上两款所载规则不妨碍第46条。 |
| See A. Schaus, “1969 Vienna Convention. | 见A. Schaus,“1969年《维也纳公约》。 |
| Article 27: internal law and observance
of treaties”, in The Vienna Conventions on the Law of Treaties. A Commentary,
vol. I, Corten and Klein (see footnote 997 above), pp. 688–701, at p. 689. | 第二十七条：国内法与条约之遵守”，载于Corten和Klein所编《〈维也纳条约法公约〉评注》，第1卷 (见上文脚注997)，第688-701页，见第689。 |
| See article 7, “Obligatory character of
treaties: the principle of the supremacy of international law over domestic
law” in the fourth report by Sir Gerald Fitzmaurice, Special Rapporteur
(Yearbook … 1959, vol. II, document A/CN.4/120, p. 43). | 见第7条，“条约的强制性：国际法高于国内法之原则”，载于特别报告员杰拉尔德·菲茨莫里斯爵士的第四次报告中(《1959年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/CN.4/120号文件，第43页)。 |
| See Mertsch, Provisionally Applied
Treaties … (see footnote 997 above), p. 64. | 见Mertsch, 《暂时适用的条约…》(见上文脚注997)，第64页。 |
| See Mathy, “Article 25”, (footnote 997
above), p. 646. | 见Mathy,“第二十五条”(上文脚注997)，第646页。 |
| See article 3 of the draft articles on
responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts of 2001 (Yearbook
… 2001, vol. II (Part Two) and corrigendum, para. 76, subsequently annexed to
General Assembly resolution 56/83 of 12 December 2001); | 见2001年关于国家对国际不法行为的责任条款草案第3条(《2001年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)和更正，第76段，随后附于2001年12月12日大会第56/83号决议)； |
| and draft article 5 of the draft articles
on responsibility of international organizations of 2011 (Yearbook … 2011,
vol. II (Part Two), para. 87, subsequently annexed to General Assembly
resolution 66/100 of 9 December 2011). | 2011年关于国际组织责任的条款草案第5条草案(《2011年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第87段，随后附于2011年12月9日大会第66/100号决议)。 |
| Article 46 of the 1969 Vienna Convention
provides as follows: | 1969年《维也纳公约》第四十六条规定如下： |
| Provisions of internal law regarding
competence to conclude treaties | 国内法关于缔约权限之规定 |
| 1. A State may not invoke the fact that
its consent to be bound by a treaty has been expressed in violation of a
provision of its internal law regarding competence to conclude treaties as
invalidating its consent unless that violation was manifest and concerned a
rule of its internal law of fundamental importance. | 一. 一国不得以其同意受条约拘束的表示违反该国国内法关于缔约权限的规定为理由而主张其同意无效，但违反情事明显且涉及其具有根本重要性的国内法规则时不在此限。 |
| 2. A violation is manifest if it would be
objectively evident to any State conducting itself in the matter in accordance
with normal practice and in good faith. | 二. 违反情事倘由对此事依通常惯例并秉善意处理之任何国家客观视之为显然可见者，即系显明违反。 |
| Article 46 of the 1986 Vienna Convention
provides as follows: | 1986年《维也纳公约》第46条规定如下： |
| Provisions of internal law of a State and
rules of an international organization regarding competence to conclude
treaties | 一国国内法关于缔约权限的规定和一国际组织关于缔约权限的规则 |
| 1. A State may not invoke the fact that
its consent to be bound by a treaty has been expressed in violation of a
provision of its internal law regarding competence to conclude treaties as
invalidating its consent unless that violation was manifest and concerned a
rule of its internal law of fundamental importance. | 1. 一国不得以其同意受条约拘束的表示违反该国国内法关于缔约权限的规定为理由而主张其同意无效，但违反情事明显且涉及其具有根本重要性的国内法规则时不在此限。 |
| 2. An international organization may not
invoke the fact that its consent to be bound by a treaty has been expressed
in violation of the rules of the organization regarding competence to
conclude treaties as invalidating its consent unless that violation was
manifest and concerned a rule of fundamental importance. | 2. 一国际组织不得以其同意受条约拘束的表示违反该组织关于缔约权限的规则为理由而主张其同意无效，但违反情事明显且涉及其具有根本重要性的规则时不在此限。 |
| 3. A violation is manifest if it would be
objectively evident to any State or any international organization conducting
itself in the matter in accordance with the normal practice of States and,
where appropriate, of international organizations and in good faith. | 3. 违反情事如对在此事情上按照各国和在适当情况下按照各国际组织的通常惯例诚意地行事的任何国家或任何国际组织客观明显时，即为明显。 |
| According to art. 46, para. 2, of the
1969 Vienna Convention and art. 46, para. 3, of the 1986 Vienna Convention. | 根据1969年《维也纳公约》第四十六条第二款和1986年《维也纳公约》第46条第3款。 |
| See, for example, article 45 of the
Energy Charter Treaty. | 例如见《能源宪章条约》第45条。 |
| See the several examples of Free Trade
Agreements between the EFTA States and other numerous States (i.e. Albania,
Bosnia and Herzegovina, Canada, Chile, Egypt, Georgia, Lebanon, Mexico,
Montenegro, Peru, Philippines, Republic of Korea, Serbia, Singapore, the
former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Tunisia and the Central American
States, the Gulf Cooperation Council Member States and the Southern African
Custom Union States), where different clauses are used in this regard, such
as: “if its constitutional requirements permit”, “if its respective legal
requirements permit” or “if their domestic requirements permit”
(www.efta.int/free-trade/free-trade-agreements). | 见欧洲自由贸易联盟(欧贸联)国家与其他许多国家(即阿尔巴尼亚、波斯尼亚和黑塞哥维那、加拿大、智利、埃及、格鲁吉亚、黎巴嫩、墨西哥、黑山、秘鲁、菲律宾、大韩民国、塞尔维亚、新加坡、前南斯拉夫的马其顿共和国、突尼斯和中美洲国家、海湾合作委员会成员国和南部非洲关税同盟国家)之间自由贸易协定的一些例子，这些协定在这方面使用了不同的用语，例如：“如果其宪法规定允许”、“如果其各自的法律要求允许”或“如果其国内要求允许”(http://www.efta.int/free-trade/free-trade-agreements)。 |
| For instance, article 43, paragraph 2, of
the Free Trade Agreement between the EFTA States and the Southern African
Custom Union States, reads as follows: | 例如，欧贸联国家与南部非洲关税同盟国家之间的自由贸易协定第43条第2款规定如下： |
| Article 43 (Entry into force) | 第43条(生效) |
| 2. If its constitutional requirements
permit, any EFTA State or SACU State may apply this Agreement provisionally. | 2. 如果其宪法规定允许，任何欧洲自由贸易联盟国家或南部非洲关税同盟国家均可暂时适用本协定。 |
| Provisional application of this Agreement
under this paragraph shall be notified to the Depository. | 应将根据本款暂时适用本协定事宜通知保存人。 |
| At its 3257th meeting, on 27 May 2015
(Official Records of the General Assembly, Seventieth Session, Supplement No.
10 (A/70/10), para. 286). | 在2015年5月27日举行的第3257次会议上(《大会正式记录，第七十届会议，补编第10号》(A/70/10)，第286段)。 |
| The topic had been included in the
long-term programme of work of the Commission during its sixty-sixth session
(2014), on the basis of the proposal contained in the annex to the report of
the Commission (ibid., Sixty-ninth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/69/10),
para. 23). | 委员会第六十六届会议(2014年)按照委员会报告附件所载的建议(同上，《第六十九届会议，补编第10号》(A/69/10)，第23段)将此专题列入长期工作方案。 |
| A/CN.4/693 and A/CN.4/706. | A/CN.4/693和A/CN.4/706。 |
| A/CN.4/706, para. 90. | A/CN.4/706，第90段。 |
| Official Records of the General Assembly,
Seventy-second Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/72/10), para. 146). | 《大会正式记录，第七十二届会议，补编第10号》(A/72/10)，第146段。 |
| The text of draft conclusions 10 to 23,
as proposed by the Special Rapporteur in his third report, reads as follows: | 特别报告员在其第三次报告中提出的结论草案10至23案文如下： |
| Draft conclusion 10 | 结论草案10 |
| Invalidity of a treaty in conflict with a
peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) | 与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)抵触的条约无效 |
| 1. A treaty is void if, at the time of
its conclusion, it conflicts with a peremptory norm of general international
law (jus cogens). | 1. 条约在缔结时与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)抵触者无效。 |
| Such a treaty does not create any rights
or obligations. | 这样一项条约不产生任何权利或义务。 |
| 2. An existing treaty becomes void and
terminates if it conflicts with a new peremptory norm of general
international law (jus cogens) that emerges subsequent to the conclusion of
the treaty. | 2. 若与条约缔结之后产生的新的一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)相抵触，现有条约即成为无效而终止。 |
| Parties to such a treaty are released
from any further obligation to perform in terms of the treaty. | 条约缔约方继续履行条约之义务解除。 |
| 3. To avoid conflict with a peremptory
norm of general international law, a provision in a treaty should, as far as
possible, be interpreted in a way that renders it consistent with a
peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens). | 3. 为避免与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)抵触，对条约条款的解释应尽可能使之符合一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)。 |
| Draft conclusion 11 | 结论草案11 |
| Severability of treaty provisions in
conflict with peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) | 与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)抵触的条约条款的可分割性 |
| 1. A treaty which, at its conclusion, is
in conflict with a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens)
is invalid in whole, and no part of the treaty may be severed or separated. | 1. 条约如在缔结时与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)抵触则整体无效，条约任何一部分均不可分割或分离。 |
| 2. A treaty which becomes invalid due to
the emergence of a new peremptory norm of general international law (jus
cogens) terminates in whole, unless: | 2. 因出现新的一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)而成为无效的条约整体终止，除非： |
| (a) the provisions that are in conflict
with a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) are separable
from the remainder of the treaty with regards to their application; | (a) 与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)抵触的条款就其适用而言，可与条约的其余部分分离； |
| (b) the provisions that are in conflict
with a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) do not
constitute an essential basis of the consent to the treaty; | (b) 与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)抵触的条款不构成同意该条约的必要基础； |
| and (c) continued performance of the
remainder of the treaty would not be unjust. | (c) 该条约其余部分继续施行不致有失公正。 |
| Draft conclusion 12 | 结论草案12 |
| Elimination of consequences of acts
performed in reliance of invalid treaty | 消除依据无效条约实施的行为的后果 |
| 1. Parties to a treaty which is invalid
as a result of being in conflict with a peremptory norm of general
international law (jus cogens) at the time of the treaty’s conclusion have a
legal obligation to eliminate the consequences of any act performed in
reliance of the provision of the treaty which is in conflict with a
peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens). | 1. 因在缔结时与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)抵触而无效的条约缔约方有消除依据与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)抵触的条约条款实施的任何行为之后果的法律义务。 |
| 2. The termination of a treaty on account
of the emergence of a new peremptory norm of general international law (jus
cogens) does not affect any right, obligation or legal situation created
through the execution of the treaty prior to the termination of the treaty
unless such a right, obligation or legal situation is itself in conflict with
a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens). | 2. 一项条约因出现新的一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)而终止，不影响在该条约终止前因实施该条约而产生的任何权利、义务或法律情势，除非此种权利、义务或法律情势本身与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)抵触。 |
| Draft conclusion 13 | 结论草案13 |
| Effects of peremptory norms of general
international law (jus cogens) on reservations to treaties | 一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)对条约保留的影响 |
| 1. A reservation to a treaty provision
which reflects a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens)
does not affect the binding nature of that norm, which shall continue to
apply. | 1. 对反映一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的条约条款的保留不影响该强制性规范的约束性，该强制性规范应继续适用。 |
| 2. A reservation cannot exclude or modify
the legal effect of a treaty in a manner contrary to a peremptory norm of
general international law (jus cogens). | 2. 保留不得以违反一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的方式排除或更改条约的法律效力。 |
| Draft conclusion 14 | 结论草案14 |
| Recommended procedure regarding
settlement of disputes involving conflict between a treaty and a peremptory
norm of general international law (jus cogens) | 关于解决条约与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)之间抵触所涉争端的建议程序 |
| 1. Subject to the jurisdictional rules of
the International Court of Justice, any dispute concerning whether a treaty
conflicts with a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens)
should be submitted to the International Court of Justice for a decision,
unless the parties to the dispute agree to submit the dispute to arbitration. | 1. 在遵守国际法院管辖权规则的前提下，关于一项条约是否与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)抵触的任何争端，均应提交国际法院裁判，除非争端各方商定将争端交付仲裁。 |
| 2. Notwithstanding paragraph 1, the fact
that a dispute involves a peremptory norm of general international law (jus
cogens) is not sufficient to establish the jurisdiction of the Court without
the necessary consent to jurisdiction in accordance with international law. | 2. 尽管有第1段的规定，但是若当事方未依照国际法作出接受国际法院管辖权的必要同意，则争端涉及一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)这一事实不足以确立国际法院的管辖权。 |
| Draft conclusion 15 | 结论草案15 |
| Consequences of peremptory norms of
general international law (jus cogens) for customary international law | 一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)对习惯国际法的影响 |
| 1. A customary international law rule
does not arise if it conflicts with a peremptory norm of general
international law (jus cogens). | 1. 习惯国际法规则如与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)抵触，则不会形成。 |
| 2. A customary international law rule not
of jus cogens character ceases to exist if a new conflicting peremptory norm
of general international law (jus cogens) arises. | 2. 不具有强行法性质的习惯国际法规则如与新产生的一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)抵触，则停止存在。 |
| 3. Since peremptory norms of general
international law (jus cogens) bind all subjects of international law, the
persistent objector rule is not applicable. | 3. 由于一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)约束所有国际法主体，一贯反对者规则不适用。 |
| Draft conclusion 16 | 结论草案16 |
| Consequences of peremptory norms of
general international law (jus cogens) on unilateral acts | 一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)对单方面行为的影响 |
| A unilateral act that is in conflict with
a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) is invalid. | 与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)抵触的单方面行为无效。 |
| Draft conclusion 17 | 结论草案17 |
| Consequences of peremptory norms of
general international law (jus cogens) for binding resolutions of
international organizations | 一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)对国际组织有约束力的决议的影响 |
| 1. Binding resolutions of international
organizations, including those of the Security Council of the United Nations,
do not establish binding obligations if they conflict with a peremptory norm
of general international law (jus cogens). | 1. 国际组织具有约束力的决议，包括联合国安全理事会的此类决议，如与一般国际法的强制性规范(强行法)抵触，则不创设有约束力的义务。 |
| 2. To the extent possible, resolutions of
international organizations, including those of the Security Council of the
United Nations, must be interpreted in a manner consistent with peremptory
norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 2. 在可能的情况下，对国际组织的决议，包括联合国安全理事会的决议，必须采取符合一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的方式加以解释。 |
| Draft conclusion 18 | 结论草案18 |
| The relationship between peremptory norms
of general international law (jus cogens) and obligations erga omnes | 一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)与普遍义务之间的关系 |
| Peremptory norms of general international
law (jus cogens) establish obligations erga omnes, the breach of which
concerns all States. | 一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)创设普遍义务，对这些义务的违反关乎所有国家。 |
| Draft conclusion 19 | 结论草案19 |
| Effects of peremptory norms of general
international law (jus cogens) on circumstances precluding wrongfulness | 一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)对解除不法性的情况产生的影响 |
| 1. No circumstance may be advanced to
preclude the wrongfulness of an act which is not in conformity with an obligation
arising under a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens). | 1. 对于违反一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)产生的义务的任何行为，不得提出任何情况以解除其不法性。 |
| 2. Paragraph 1 does not apply where a
peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) emerges subsequent
to the commission of an act. | 2. 第1段不适用于一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)在行为实施之后出现的情况。 |
| Draft conclusion 20 | 结论草案20 |
| Duty to cooperate | 合作义务 |
| 1. States shall cooperate to bring to an
end through lawful means any serious breach of a peremptory norm of general
international law (jus cogens). | 1. 各国应进行合作，通过合法手段制止任何严重违反一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的行为。 |
| 2. A serious breach of a peremptory norm
of general international law (jus cogens) refers to a breach that is either
gross or systematic. | 2. 严重违反一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)指的是重大或系统性违反。 |
| 3. The cooperation envisioned in this
draft conclusion can be carried out through institutionalized cooperation
mechanisms or through ad hoc cooperative arrangements. | 3. 本结论草案中设想的合作可通过制度化合作机制或通过特设合作安排开展。 |
| Draft conclusion 21 | 结论草案21 |
| Duty not to recognize or render
assistance | 不予承认或不提供协助的义务 |
| 1. States have a duty not to recognize as
lawful a situation created by a breach of a peremptory norm of general
international law (jus cogens). | 1. 对于违反一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)所造成的状况，各国有义务不承认其合法性。 |
| 2. States shall not render aid or
assistance in the maintenance of a situation created by a breach of a
peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens). | 2. 各国不应援助或协助以维持违反一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)行为造成的状况。 |
| Draft conclusion 22 | 结论草案22 |
| Duty to exercise domestic jurisdiction
over crimes prohibited by peremptory norms of general international law (jus
cogens) | 有义务对一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)所禁止的犯罪行使国家管辖权 |
| 1. States have a duty to exercise
jurisdiction over offences prohibited by peremptory norms of international
law (jus cogens), where the offences are committed by the nationals of that
State or on the territory under its jurisdiction. | 1. 各国有义务对该国国民实施或在受该国管辖的领土上实施的、为一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)所禁止的犯罪行使管辖权。 |
| 2. Paragraph 1 does not preclude the
establishment of jurisdiction on any other ground as permitted under its
national law. | 2. 第1段不妨碍一国根据其国内法所允许的任何其他理由确立管辖权。 |
| Draft conclusion 23 | 结论草案23 |
| Irrelevance of official position and
non-applicability of immunity ratione materiae | 公务职位无关性以及不适用属事豁免 |
| 1. The fact that an offence prohibited by
a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) was committed by
a person holding an official position shall not constitute a ground excluding
criminal responsibility. | 1. 为一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)所禁止的罪行系由担任公职的人实施这一事实不应构成排除刑事责任的理由。 |
| 2. Immunity ratione materiae shall not
apply to any offence prohibited by a peremptory norm of general international
law (jus cogens). | 2. 属事豁免不应适用于一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)所禁止的任何罪行。 |
| Idem. | 同上。 |
| The reports are available in the
Analytical Guide to the Work of the International Law Commission:
http://legal.un.org/ilc/guide/gfra/shtml. | 报告见《国际法委员会工作分析指南》：http://legal.un.org/ilc/guide/gfra/shtml。 |
| Official Records of the General Assembly,
Sixty-sixth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/66/10), para. 75. | 《大会正式记录，第六十六届会议，补编第10号》(A/66/10)，第75段。 |
| Yearbook … 2006, vol. II (Part Two),
para. 176. | 《2006年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第176段。 |
| Yearbook … 2001, vol. II (Part Two) and
corrigendum, para. 76. | 《2001年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)和更正，第76段。 |
| Official Records of the General Assembly,
Seventy-first Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/71/10), para. 48. | 《大会正式记录，第七十一届会议，补编第10号》(A/71/10)，第48段。 |
| Legal Consequences of the Construction of
a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, Advisory Opinion, I.C.J.
Reports 2004, p. 136, at p. 200, para. 159. | 在巴勒斯坦被占领土修建隔离墙的法律后果，咨询意见，《2004年国际法院案例汇编》，第136页起，见第200页，第159段。 |
| La Cantuta v. Perú (Merits, Reparations
and Costs), Series C, No. 162, Judgment, 29 November 2006, Inter-American
Court of Human Rights, para. 160 (“[a]s pointed out repeatedly, the acts
involved in the instant case have violated peremptory norms of international
law (jus cogens) … In view of the nature and seriousness of the events … the
need to eradicate impunity reveals itself to the international community as a
duty of cooperation among states”). | La Cantuta诉秘鲁(实质问题、赔偿和费用)，C辑，第162号，判决，2006年11月29日，美洲人权法院，第160段(“正如一再指出的那样，本案所涉行为违反了国际法强制性规范(强行法) …鉴于事件的性质和严重性…需要消除有罪不罚，对国际社会而言，这表现为国家间有义务进行合作”)。 |
| Legal Consequences for States of the
Continued Presence of South Africa in Namibia (South West Africa)
notwithstanding Security Council Resolution 276 (1970), Advisory Opinion,
I.C.J. Reports 1971, p. 16, at p. 54, para. 119. | 南非不顾安全理事会第276(1970)号决议继续留驻纳米比亚(西南非洲)对各国的法律后果，咨询意见，《1971年国际法院案例汇编》，第16页起，见第54页，第119段。 |
| Official Records of the General Assembly,
Seventy-second Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/72/10), para. 45. | 《大会正式记录，第七十二届会议，补编第10号》(A/72/10)，第45段。 |
| Ibid., para. 140. | 同上，第140段。 |
| Jurisdictional Immunities of the State
(Germany v. Italy: Greece intervening), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2012, p. 99,
at p. 130, para. 70 (national legislation), and p. 141, para. 96 (case law). | 国家的管辖豁免(德国诉意大利：希腊参加诉讼)，判决，《2012年国际法院案例汇编》，第99页起，见第130页第70段(国内法)，和第141页第96段(判例法)。 |
| Human Rights Committee, general comment
No. 24 (1994) on issues relating to reservations made upon ratification or
accession to the Covenant or the Optional Protocols thereto, or in relation
to declarations under article 41 of the Covenant, Official Records of the
General Assembly, Fiftieth Session, Supplement No. 40, vol. I (A/50/40 (Vol.
I)), annex V, para. 8. | 人权事务委员会，第24号一般性意见(1994年)：关于批准或加入《公约》或其《任择议定书》时提出的保留或者有关《公约》第四十一条下声明的问题，《大会正式记录，第五十届会议，补编第40号》，第一卷(A/50/40 (Vol. I))，附件五，第8段。 |
| Gabčikovo-Nagymaros
Project (Hungary/Slovakia), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1997, p. 7, at p. 66,
para. 109. | Gabčeikovo-Nagymaros项目案(匈牙利/斯洛伐克)，判决，《1997年国际法院案例汇编》，第7页起，见第66页，第109段。 |
| See chapter V above. | 见上文第五章。 |
| See Legal Consequences for States of the
Continued Presence of South Africa in Namibia (South West Africa)
notwithstanding Security Council Resolution 276 (1970), Advisory Opinion,
I.C.J. Reports 1971, p. 16, at p. 54, paras. 117–119. | 见南非不顾安全理事会第276(1970)号决议继续留驻纳米比亚(西南非洲)对各国的法律后果，咨询意见，《1971年国际法院案例汇编》，第16页起，见第54页，第117-119段。 |
| Official Records of the General Assembly,
Seventy-second Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/72/10), para. 140. | 《大会正式记录，第七十二届会议，补编第10号》(A/72/10)，第140段。 |
| Ibid., para. 45. | 同上，第45段。 |
| Barcelona Traction, Light and Power
Company, Limited, Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1970, p. 3, at p. 32, para. 33. | 巴塞罗那电车、电灯及电力有限公司案，判决，《1970年国际法院案例汇编》，第3页起，见第32页第33段。 |
| Official Records of the General Assembly,
Sixty-ninth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/69/10), annex. | 《大会正式记录，第六十九届会议，补编第10号》(A/69/10)，附件。 |
| The decision was made at the 3171st
meeting of the Commission, on 28 May 2013 (see Yearbook … 2013, vol. II (Part
Two), p. 78, para. 167). | 委员会2013年5月28日第3171次会议做出了这一决定(见《2013年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第78页，第167段)。 |
| For the syllabus of the topic, see
Yearbook … 2011, vol. II (Part Two), annex V. | 本专题的大纲见《2011年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，附件五。 |
| Documents A/CN.4/674 and Corr.1
(preliminary report), A/CN.4/685 (second report) and A/CN.4/700 (third
report). | A/CN.4/674和Corr.1(初步报告)、A/CN.4/685(第二次报告)以及A/CN.4/700(第三次报告)号文件。 |
| Official Records of the General Assembly,
Sixty-ninth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/69/10), chap. XI. | 《大会正式记录，第六十九届会议，补编第10号》(A/69/10)，第十一章。 |
| Ibid., Seventieth Session, Supplement No.
10 (A/70/10), chap. IX. | 同上，《第七十届会议，补编第10号》(A/70/10)，第九章。 |
| Documents A/CN.4/L.870 and
A/CN.4/L.870/Rev.1. | A/CN.4/L.870和A/CN.4/L.870/Rev.1号文件。 |
| Official Records of the General Assembly,
Seventy-first Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/71/10), para. 188. | 《大会正式记录，第七十一届会议，补编第10号》(A/71/10)，第188段。 |
| Ibid., chap. X. | 同上，第十章。 |
| Document A/CN.4/L.876. | A/CN.4/L.876号文件。 |
| Official Records of the General Assembly,
Seventy-second Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/72/10), para. 255. | 《大会正式记录，第七十二届会议，补编第10号》(A/72/10)，第255段。 |
| Ibid., para. 260. | 同上，第260段。 |
| Ibid., para. 262. | 同上，第262段。 |
| The draft principles proposed by the
Special Rapporteur in her first report read as follows: | 特别报告员第一次报告提出的原则草案如下： |
| “Part Four | “第四部分 |
| Draft principle 19 | 原则草案19 |
| 1. Environmental considerations shall be
taken into account by the occupying State in the administration of the
occupied territory, including in any adjacent maritime areas over which the
territorial State is entitled to exercise sovereign rights. | 1. 占领国在管理被占领土过程中，包括在管理领土国有权行使主权权利的任何毗邻海域的过程中，应考虑到环境因素。 |
| 2. An occupying State shall, unless absolutely
prevented, respect the legislation of the occupied territory pertaining to
the protection of the environment. | 2. 占领国除非万不得已，否则应尊重被占领土的环境保护立法。 |
| Draft principle 20 | 原则草案20 |
| An occupying State shall administer
natural resources in an occupied territory in a way that ensures their
sustainable use and minimizes environmental harm. | 占领国在管理被占领土的自然资源时应确保可持续利用自然资源，并将对环境的损害减少至最低限度。 |
| Draft principle 21 | 原则草案21 |
| An occupying State shall use all the
means at its disposal to ensure that activities in the occupied territory do
not cause significant damage to the environment of another State or to areas
beyond national jurisdiction.” | 占领国应利用其所拥有的一切手段，确保被占领土内的活动不对另一国的环境或国家管辖范围以外的地区造成重大损害。 |
| The text provisionally adopted by the
Drafting Committee reads as follows: | ” 起草委员会暂时通过的案文如下： |
| “Part Four | “第四部分 |
| Principles applicable in situations of
occupation | 在占领局势下适用的原则 |
| Draft principle 19 | 原则草案19 |
| General obligations of an Occupying Power | 占领方的一般义务 |
| 1. An Occupying Power shall respect and
protect the environment of the occupied territory in accordance with
applicable international law and take environmental considerations into
account in the administration of such territory. | 1. 占领方应按照适用的国际法尊重和保护被占领土的环境，并应在管理此种领土时将环境因素纳入考虑。 |
| 2. An Occupying Power shall take
appropriate measures to prevent significant harm to the environment of the
occupied territory that is likely to prejudice the health and well-being of
the population of the occupied territory. | 2. 占领方应采取适当措施，防止对被占领土的环境造成可能有损被占领土居民健康和福利的重大损害。 |
| 3. An Occupying Power shall respect the
law and institutions of the occupied territory concerning the protection of
the environment and may only introduce changes within the limits provided by
the law of armed conflict. | 3. 占领方应尊重被占领土关于环境保护的法律和制度，并仅可在武装冲突法规定的限制内予以改动。 |
| Draft principle 20 | 原则草案20 |
| Sustainable use of natural resources | 自然资源的可持续利用 |
| To the extent that an Occupying Power is
permitted to administer and use the natural resources in an occupied
territory, for the benefit of the population of the occupied territory and
for other lawful purposes under the law of armed conflict, it shall do so in
a way that ensures their sustainable use and minimizes environmental harm. | 在占领方为了被占领土居民的利益和出于武装冲突法规定的其他合法目的而获准管理和利用被占领土内自然资源的情形下，其管理和利用方式应确保这些自然资源的可持续利用，并将对环境的损害减少至最低限度。 |
| Draft principle 21 | 原则草案21 |
| Due diligence | 应尽职责 |
| An Occupying Power shall exercise due
diligence to ensure that activities in the occupied territory do not cause
significant harm to the environment of areas beyond the occupied territory.” | 占领方应履行应尽职责，确保被占领土内的活动不对被占领土以外地区的环境造成重大损害。 |
| The report and the corresponding
statement of the Chair of the Drafting Committee are available in the
Analytical Guide to the Work of the International Law Commission:
http://legal.un.org/ilc/guide/gfra/shtml. | ” 该报告和起草委员会主席的相应声明可查阅国际法委员会工作分析指南：http://legal.un.org/ilc/ guide/gfra/shtml。 |
| Berlin Rules on Equitable Use and
Sustainable Development of Waters (International Law Association, Report of
the Seventy-First Conference, Berlin, 16–21 August 2004, London, 2004, pp.
334 et seq., at p. 397). | 《水资源平等使用及可持续开发柏林规则》(国际法协会，第七十一届会议报告，柏林，2004年8月16日至21日，伦敦，2004年，第334页起，见第397页。 ) |
| Pulp Mills on the River Uruguay
(Argentina v. Uruguay), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2010, p.14. | 乌拉圭河纸浆厂(阿根廷诉乌拉圭)，判决，《2010年国际法院案例汇编》，第14页。 |
| Institute of International Law, Yearbook,
vol. 70, Part II, Session of Bruges (2003), pp. 285 et seq.; | 国际法学会，《年鉴》，第70卷，第二部分，布鲁日会议(2003年)，第285页起； |
| available from www.idi-iil.org,
Declarations. | 可查阅www.idi-iil.org, Declarations。 |
| General Assembly resolution 70/1 of 25
September 2015. | 大会2015年9月25日第70/1号决议。 |
| Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear
Weapons, Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 1996, p. 226. | 使用或威胁使用核武器的合法性，咨询意见，《1996年国际法院判例汇编》，第226页。 |
| Yearbook … 2001, vol. II (Part Two) and
corrigendum, pp. 146 et seq. | 《2001年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)和更正，第146页起。 |
| * Whether the term “environment” or
“natural environment” is preferable for all or some of these draft principles
will be revisited at a later stage. | * 以后再研究全部或部分原则草案使用“环境”还是“自然环境”更合适。 |
| Geneva Convention for the Amelioration of
the Condition of the Wounded and Sick in Armed Forces in the Field (Convention
I) (Geneva, 12 August 1949), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 75, No. 970,
p. 31, art. 47; | 《改善战地武装部队伤者病者境遇的日内瓦公约》(《第一公约》) (1949年8月12日，日内瓦)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第75卷，第970号，第31页，第四十七条； |
| Geneva Convention for the Amelioration of
the Condition of Wounded, Sick and Shipwrecked Members of Armed Forces at Sea
(Convention II) (Geneva, 12 August 1949), ibid., No. 971, p. 85, art. 48; | 《改善海上武装部队伤者病者及遇船难者境遇的日内瓦公约》(《第二公约》) (1949年8月12日，日内瓦)，同上，第971号，第85页，第四十八条； |
| Geneva Convention relative to the
Treatment of Prisoners of War (Convention III) (Geneva, 12 August 1949),
ibid., No. 972, p. 135, art. 127; | 《关于战俘待遇的日内瓦公约》(《第三公约》) (1949年8月12日，日内瓦)，同上，第972号，第135页，第一百二十七条； |
| Geneva Convention relative to the Protection
of Civilian Persons in Time of War (Convention IV) (Geneva, 12 August 1949),
ibid., No. 973, p. 287, art. 144; | 《关于战时保护平民的日内瓦公约》(《第四公约》) (1949年8月12日，日内瓦)，同上，第973号，第287页，第一百四十四条； |
| Protocol Additional to the Geneva
Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the protection of victims of
international armed conflicts (Additional Protocol I) (Geneva, 8 June 1977),
ibid., vol. 1125, No. 17512, p. 3, art. 83; | 《1949年8月12日日内瓦四公约关于保护国际性武装冲突受难者的附加议定书》(《第一附加议定书》)，(1977年6月8日，日内瓦)，同上，第1125卷，第17512号，第3页，第八十三条； |
| Protocol Additional to the Geneva
Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the protection of victims of
non-international armed conflicts (Additional Protocol II) (Geneva, 8 June 1977),
ibid., No. 17513, p. 609, art. 19; | 《1949年8月12日日内瓦四公约关于保护非国际性武装冲突受难者的附加议定书》(第二附加议定书) (1977年6月8日，日内瓦)，同上，第17513号，第609页，第十九条； |
| Protocol additional to the Geneva
Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the adoption of an additional
distinctive emblem (Additional Protocol III) (Geneva, 8 December 2005),
ibid., vol. 2404, No. 43425, p. 261, art. 7; | 《1949年8月12日日内瓦四公约关于采纳一个新增特殊标志的附加议定书》(第三附加议定书)(2005年12月8日，日内瓦)，同上，第2404卷，第43425号，第261页，第七条； |
| and the Convention on Prohibitions or
Restrictions on the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons Which May Be Deemed
to Be Excessively Injurious or to Have Indiscriminate Effects (Geneva, 10
October 1980), ibid., vol. 1342, No. 22495, p. 137, art. 6. | 以及《禁止或限制使用某些可被认为具有过分伤害力或滥杀滥伤作用的常规武器公约》(1980年10月10日，日内瓦)，同上，第1342卷，第22495号，第137页，第六条。 |
| See also J.-M. Henckaerts and L.
Doswald-Beck, Customary International Humanitarian Law: Rules, vol. I
(Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2005), rule 143, pp. 505–508. | 另见J.-M. Henckaerts and L. Doswald-Beck,
Customary International Humanitarian Law: Rules, vol. I (Cambridge, Cambridge
University Press, 2005), rule 143, pp. 505-508。 |
| Article 35 of Additional Protocol I
reads: | 《第一附加议定书》第三十五条规定： |
| “1. In any armed conflict, the right of
the Parties to the conflict to choose methods or means of warfare is not
unlimited. | “一、在任何武装冲突中，冲突各方选择作战方法和手段的权利，不是无限制的。 |
| 2. It is prohibited to employ weapons,
projectiles and material and methods of warfare of a nature to cause
superfluous injury or unnecessary suffering. | 二、禁止使用属于引起过分伤害和不必要痛苦的性质的武器、投射体和物质及作战方法。 |
| 3. It is prohibited to employ methods or
means of warfare which are intended, or may be expected, to cause widespread,
long-term and severe damage to the natural environment.” | 三、禁止使用旨在或可能对自然环境引起广泛、长期而严重损害的作战方法或手段。 ” |
| Article 55 reads: | 第五十五条规定： |
| “1. Care shall be taken in warfare to
protect the natural environment against widespread, long-term and severe
damage. | “一、在作战中，应注意保护自然环境不受广泛、长期和严重的损害。 |
| This protection includes a prohibition of
the use of methods or means of warfare which are intended or may be expected
to cause such damage to the natural environment and thereby to prejudice the
health or survival of the population. | 这种保护包括禁止使用旨在或可能对自然环境造成这种损害从而妨害居民的健康和生存的作战方法或手段。 |
| 2. Attacks against the natural
environment by way of reprisals are prohibited.” | 二、作为报复对自然环境的攻击，是禁止的。 ” |
| Geneva Convention I, art. 1; | 《日内瓦第一公约》第一条； |
| Geneva Convention II, art. 1; | 《日内瓦第二公约》第一条； |
| Geneva Convention III, art. 1; | 《日内瓦第三公约》第一条； |
| Geneva Convention IV, art. 1. | 《日内瓦第四公约》第一条。 |
| Examples of States that have introduced
such provisions in their military manuals include Argentina, Australia,
Belgium, Benin, Burundi, Canada, Central African Republic, Chad, Colombia,
Côte d’Ivoire, France, Germany, Italy, Kenya, Netherlands, New Zealand, Peru,
the Russian Federation, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Togo,
Ukraine, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the
United States of America. | 在军事手册中纳入这些规定的国家有：阿根廷、澳大利亚、比利时、贝宁、布隆迪、加拿大、中非共和国、乍得、哥伦比亚、科特迪瓦、法国、德国、意大利、肯尼亚、荷兰、新西兰、秘鲁、俄罗斯联邦、南非、西班牙、瑞典、瑞士、多哥、乌克兰、大不列颠及北爱尔兰联合王国和美利坚合众国。 |
| Information available at
https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/customary-ihl/eng/docs/v2_rul_rule45 (accessed
on 7 May 2018). | 相关信息见https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/customary-ihl/eng/docs/
v2_rul_rule45 (2018年5月7日访问)。 |
| The Guidelines for Military Manuals and
Instructions on the Protection of the Environment in Time of Armed Conflict
(A/49/323, annex) states, in guideline 17, that: “States shall disseminate
these rules and make them known as widely as possible in their respective
countries and include them in their programmes of military and civil
instruction”. | 《关于武装冲突中的环境保护的军事手册和指南准则》(A/49/323, 附件)的准则17指出：“各国应传播这些规则，各自在其国内广为宣传，并将这些规则编入其军事和民事教学方案中”。 |
| See the 2016 ICRC commentary (2016) on
article 1 of Geneva Convention I. The ICRC study on customary international
law provides a broader interpretation, according to which the obligation to
respect and ensure respect is not limited to the Geneva Conventions but
refers to the entire body of international humanitarian law binding upon a
particular State (J.-M. Henckaerts and L. Doswald-Beck, eds., Customary
International Humanitarian Law, Volume 1: Rules (Cambridge, International
Committee of the Red Cross and Cambridge University Press, 2005), p. 495,
rule 139). | 见红十字委员会2016年关于《日内瓦第一公约》第一条的评注(2016年)。 红十字委员会关于习惯国际法的研究提供了较广义的解释，根据这一解释，尊重和确保尊重的义务不限于日内瓦四公约，而是指对某一特定国家具有约束力的整个国际人道主义法(J.-M. Henckaerts and L. Doswald-Beck, eds., Customary
International Humanitarian Law, Volume 1: Rules (Cambridge, International
Committee of the Red Cross and Cambridge University Press, 2005), p. 495,
rule 139)。 |
| Additional Protocol I, art. 36. | 《第一附加议定书》，第三十六条。 |
| C. Pilloud and J. Pictet, “Article 35:
Basic rules”, ICRC Commentary on the Additional Protocols of 8 June 1977 to
the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, Y. Sandoz, C. Swinarski and B.
Zimmerman, eds. (Geneva, Martinus Nijhoff, 1987), p. 398, para. 1402. | C. Pilloud and J. Pictet, “Article 35:
Basic rules”, ICRC Commentary on the Additional Protocols of 8 June 1977 to
the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, Y. Sandoz, C. Swinarski and B.
Zimmerman, eds. (Geneva, Martinus Nijhoff, 1987), p. 398, para. 1402。 |
| The commentary on “Article 36: New
weapons” refers to this section for an explanation of means and methods on p.
425, para. 1472. | 关于“第三十六条：新武器”的评注在第425页第1472段作为对手段和方法的解释提到本节。 |
| States that are known to have in place
national mechanisms to review the legality of weapons and that have made the
instruments setting up these mechanisms available to ICRC include Australia,
Belgium, Canada, Denmark, Germany, the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, the
United Kingdom and the United States. | 已知建立审查武器合法性的国家机制并向红十字委员会提供设立这些机制的文书的国家有：澳大利亚、比利时、加拿大、丹麦、德国、荷兰、挪威、瑞典、联合王国和美国。 |
| Other States have indicated to ICRC that
they carry out reviews pursuant to Ministry of Defence instructions, but
these have not been made available. | 另一些国家向红十字委员会表示它们根据国防部的指令进行审查，但尚未提供这些指令。 |
| Information received from ICRC on 31
December 2017. | 2017年12月31日从红十字委员会收到的资料。 |
| Some States, such as Sweden, Switzerland
and the United Kingdom, see a value in considering international human rights
law in the review of military weapons because military personnel may in some
situations (e.g. peacekeeping missions) use the weapon to conduct law
enforcement missions. | 瑞典、瑞士和联合王国等一些国家认为有必要在审查军事武器时考虑到国际人权法，因为军事人员可能在某些情况下(例如维和特派团)使用武器履行执法任务。 |
| For further commentary, see S. Casey-
Maslen, N. Corney and A. Dymond-Bass, “The review of weapons under
international humanitarian law and human rights law”, Weapons under
International Human Rights Law, Casey-Maslen, ed. (Cambridge University
Press, Cambridge, 2014). | 进一步的评论，见S. Casey- Maslen, N. Corney and
A. Dymond-Bass, “The review of weapons under international humanitarian law
and human rights law”, Weapons under International Human Rights Law,
Casey-Maslen, ed. (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2014)。 |
| Henckaerts and Doswald-Beck, Customary
International Humanitarian Law, rules 70 and 71, pp. 237–250. | Henckaerts and Doswald-Beck, Customary
International Humanitarian Law, rules 70 and 71, pp. 237–250. |
| By virtue of the customary rule that
civilians must not be made the object of attack, weapons that are by nature
indiscriminate are also prohibited in non-international armed conflicts. | 由于习惯法规定不得将平民作为攻击目标，因此在非国际性武装冲突中也禁止本质上具有滥杀滥伤作用的武器。 |
| The prohibition of weapons that are by
nature indiscriminate is also set forth in several military manuals
applicable in non-international armed conflicts, for instance those of
Australia, Colombia, Ecuador, Germany, Nigeria and the Republic of Korea. | 适用于非国际性武装冲突的一些军事手册，例如澳大利亚、哥伦比亚、厄瓜多尔、德国、尼日利亚和大韩民国的军事手册也规定禁止本质上具有滥杀滥伤作用的武器。 |
| Information available at
https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/customary-ihl/eng/docs/v1_rul_rule71#Fn_1_19
(accessed on 8 May 2018). | 可查阅https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/customary-ihl/eng/docs/v1_rul_rule71#Fn_1_19
(2018年5月8日访问)。 |
| Geneva Convention I, art. 49; | 《日内瓦第一公约》第四十九条； |
| Geneva Convention II, art. 50; | 《日内瓦第二公约》第五十条； |
| Geneva Convention III, art. 129; Geneva
Convention IV, art. 146. | 《日内瓦第三公约》第一百二十九条：《日内瓦第四公约》第一百四十六条。 |
| See, for example, the amended Protocol II
on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Mines, Booby-Traps and Other
Devices as amended on 3 May 1996 (Protocol II, as amended on 3 May 1996)
annexed to the Convention on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of
Certain Conventional Weapons which may be deemed to be Excessively Injurious
or to have Indiscriminate Effects (Geneva, 3 May 1996) (hereinafter, “amended
Protocol II to the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons”), United
Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 2048, No. 22495, p. 93. | 例如见《禁止或限制使用某些可被认为具有过分伤害力或滥杀滥伤作用的常规武器公约》所附的经1996年5月3日修正后的《禁止或限制使用地雷、诱杀装置和其他装置的第二号议定书》(《经1996年5月3日修正后的第二号议定书》) (1996年5月3日，日内瓦)(下称“《特定常规武器公约经修正后的第二号议定书》”)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第2048卷，第22495号，第93页。 |
| For special agreements, see Geneva
Convention I, art. 6; Geneva Convention II, art 6; Geneva Convention III,
art. 6; | 关于特别协定，见《日内瓦第一公约》第六条、《日内瓦第二公约》第六条、《日内瓦第三公约》第六条、《日内瓦第四公约》第七条。 |
| Geneva Convention IV, art. 7. See also
common art. 3 of the Geneva Conventions. | 另见日内瓦四公约共同的第三条。 |
| See, e.g., Slovenia, Rules of Service in
the Slovenian Armed Forces, item 210; | 例如见斯洛文尼亚，《斯洛文尼亚武装部队服役规则》，第210项； |
| Paraguay, National Defence Council,
Política de Defensa Nacional de la Republica de Paraguay [National Defence
Policy of the Republic of Paraguay], 7 October 1999, para. I (A); | 巴拉圭国防委员会，Política de Defensa Nacional de
la Republica de Paraguay [巴拉圭共和国国防政策]，1999年10月7日，第I (A)段； |
| and Netherlands, note verbale dated 20
April 2016 from the Permanent Mission of the Netherlands to the United
Nations addressed to the Secretariat, para. 5. | 以及荷兰，2016年4月20日荷兰常驻联合国代表团致秘书处的普通照会，第5段。 |
| See also contributions in the Sixth
Committee from Croatia (A/C.6/70/SR.24, para. 89), Cuba (ibid., para. 10),
the Czech Republic (ibid., para. 45), New Zealand (A/C.6/70/SR.25, para. 102)
and Palau (ibid., para. 27). | 另见以下国家向第六委员会提供的资料：克罗地亚(A/C.6/70/SR.24, 第89段)，古巴(同上，第10段)，捷克共和国(同上，第45段)，新西兰(A/C.6/70/SR.25,
第102段)和帕劳(同上，第27段)。 |
| Examples of States that have done so
include Australia, Burundi, Cameroon, Côte d’Ivoire, Netherlands, Republic of
Korea, Switzerland, Ukraine, the United Kingdom and the United States. | 已经这样做的国家包括澳大利亚、布隆迪、喀麦隆、科特迪瓦、荷兰、大韩民国、瑞士、乌克兰、联合王国和美国。 |
| Information available at
https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/customary-ihl/eng/docs/v2_rul_rule44 (accessed
on 8 May 2018). | 可查阅https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/customary-ihl/eng/docs/v2_rul_
rule44 (2018年5月8日访问)。 |
| For further examples, see A/CN.4/685,
paras. 69–76 and A/CN.4/700, para. 52. | 更多的例子见A/CN.4/685, 第69-76段和A/CN.4/700, 第52段。 |
| See the information on the United Nations
Environment Programme (UNEP) website regarding post-crisis environmental
recovery, available at
www.unenvironment.org/explore-topics/disasters-conflicts/what-we-do/recovery. | 见联合国环境规划署(环境署)网站上关于危机后环境恢复的信息，可查阅www.unenvironment.org/
explore-topics/disasters-conflicts/what-we-do/recovery。 |
| UNEP, Greening the Blue Helmets
Environment, Natural Resources and UN Peacekeeping Operations (Nairobi,
2012). | 环境署，《绿动蓝盔：环境、自然资源和联合国维持和平行动》(2012年，内罗毕)。 |
| Report of the United Nations Conference
on the Human Environment (A/CONF.48/14/Rev.1; | 《联合国人类环境会议报告》(A/CONF.48/14/Rev.1； |
| United Nations publication, Sales No.
E.73.II.A.14), chap. I. | 联合国出版物，出售品编号：E.73.II.A. 14)，第一章。 |
| General Assembly resolution 37/7 of 28
October 1982, annex. | 大会1982年10月28日第37/7号决议，附件。 |
| Opened for signature, Washington, 3 March
1975, United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 993, No. 14537, p. 243. | 1975年3月3日在华盛顿开放供签署，联合国，《条约汇编》，第993卷，第14537号，第243页。 |
| Convention on Biological Diversity (Rio
de Janeiro, 5 June 1992), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1760, No.
30619, p. 79. | 《生物多样性公约》(1992年6月5日，里约热内卢)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第1760卷，第30619号，第79页。 |
| Ramsar, 2 February 1971, United Nations,
Treaty Series, vol. 994, No. 14583, p. 245. | 1971年2月2日，拉姆萨尔，联合国，《条约汇编》，第994卷，第14583号，第245页。 |
| United Nations, Department of
Peacekeeping Operations and the Department of Field Support, “Environmental
Guidelines for UN Field Missions”, 24 July 2009. | 联合国维持和平行动部和外勤支助部，“联合国外地特派团环境准则”，2009年7月24日。 |
| See also the Department of Field Support
website, available at https://fieldsupport.un.org/en/environment. | 另见外勤支助部网站，可查阅https://fieldsupport.un.org/en/environment。 |
| See International Labour (ILO),
Convention concerning Indigenous and Other Tribal Peoples in Independent
Countries (Geneva, 27 June 1989) (Indigenous and Tribal Peoples Convention,
1989 (No. 169)), which revised the Indigenous and Tribal Populations
Convention, 1957 (No. 107); | 见国际劳工组织(劳工组织)，《关于独立国家土著和其他部落人民的公约》(1989年6月27日，日内瓦)(1989年《土著和部落人民公约》(第169号))，该公约修订了1957年《土著和部落人口公约》(第107号)； |
| United Nations Declaration on the Rights
of Indigenous Peoples, General Assembly resolution 61/295 of 13 September
2007, annex, article 26. | 《联合国土著人民权利宣言》，大会2007年9月13日第61/295号决议，附件，第26条。 |
| The reports of the Special Rapporteur on
the rights of indigenous peoples, and the Special Rapporteur on human rights
and the environment (formerly the Independent Expert on human rights and the
environment) provide an overview of the application of the rights of
indigenous peoples in connection to the environment and natural resources
(see, for example, A/HRC/15/37 and A/HRC/4/32, respectively). | 土著人民权利问题特别报告员和人权与环境问题特别报告员(前人权与环境问题独立专家)的报告概述了土著人民在环境和自然资源方面的权利的落实情况(例如，分别见A/HRC/15/37和A/HRC/4/32)。 |
| See, for example, Río Negro Massacres v.
Guatemala, in which the Inter-American Court of Human Rights recognized “the
culture of the members of the indigenous communities corresponds to a
specific way of being, seeing and acting in the world, constituted on the
basis of their close relationship with their traditional lands and natural
resources, not only because these are their main means of subsistence, but
also because they constitute an integral component of their cosmovision,
religious beliefs and, consequently, their cultural identity”. | 例如见里奥内格罗屠杀诉危地马拉案，在该案中，美洲人权法院确认“土著社区成员的文化符合他们在世界中特有的存在、观察和行动方式，并系在他们同其传统土地和自然资源的密切关系基础上构成，不仅因为传统土地和自然资源是他们主要的生存手段，而且因为这些土地和自然资源是他们的世界观和宗教信仰的组成部分，因此，也是他们的文化特性的组成部分”。 |
| Río Negro Massacres v. Guatemala,
Judgment (Preliminary Objection, Merits, Reparations and Costs), Series C,
Case No. 250, 4 September 2012, para. 177, footnote 266. C.f. | 里奥内格罗屠杀诉危地马拉案，判决(初步反对意见，实质问题，赔偿和费用)，C 辑，第250号案件，2012年9月4日，第177段，脚注266。 |
| Case of the Yakye Axa Indigenous
Community v. Paraguay, Judgment (Merits, Reparations and Costs), Series C,
Case No. 125, 17 June 2005, para. 135, and Case of Chitay Nech et al. v.
Guatemala, Judgment (Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations, and Costs),
Series C, Case No. 212, 25 May 2010, para. 147, footnote 160. | 参照Yakye Axa土著社区诉巴拉圭案，判决(实质问题，赔偿和费用)，C辑，第125号案件，2005年6月17日，第135段，以及Chitay
Nech等人诉危地马拉案，判决(初步反对意见，实质问题，赔偿和费用)，C 辑，第212号案件，2010年5月25日，第147段，脚注160。 |
| See also American Declaration on the
Rights of Indigenous Peoples, adopted on 15 June 2016, Organization of
American States, General Assembly, Report of the Forty-Sixth Regular Session,
Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic, June 13-15, 2016, XLVI-O.2, Proceedings,
vol. I, resolution AG/RES. 2888 (XLVI-O/16), art. XIX, para. 4. | 另见2016年6月15日通过的《美洲土著人民权利宣言》，美洲国家组织，大会，《第四十六届常会报告，2016年6月13日至15日，多米尼加共和国圣多明各》，XLVI-O.2, 会议录，第一卷，AG/RES. 2888 (XLVI-O/16)号决议，第十九条，第4款。 |
| See, for example, “lands or territories,
or both as applicable, which they occupy or otherwise use” used in art. 13,
1, of ILO Indigenous and Tribal Peoples Convention, 1989 (No. 169), or
“lands, territories and resources” used in the preamble of United Nations
Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. | 例如见劳工组织1989年《土著和部落人民公约》(第169号)第十三条第1款中使用的“其所占有或使用的土地或领域――或两者都适用”，或《联合国土著人民权利宣言》序言中使用的“土地、领土和资源”。 |
| See United Nations Declaration on the
Rights of Indigenous Peoples, art. 30: | 见《联合国土著人民权利宣言》第30条： |
| “1. Military activities shall not take
place in the lands or territories of indigenous peoples, unless justified by
a relevant public interest or otherwise freely agreed with or requested by
the indigenous people concerned. | “1. 不得在土著人民的土地或领土上进行军事活动，除非是基于相关公共利益有理由这样做，或经有关的土著人民自由同意，或应其要求这样做。 |
| 2. States shall undertake effective
consultations with the indigenous peoples concerned, through appropriate
procedures and in particular through their representative institutions, prior
to using their lands or territories for military activities.” | 2. 各国在使用土著人民的土地或领土进行军事活动前，应通过适当程序，特别是通过其代表机构，与有关的土著人民进行有效协商。 ” |
| Ibid. | 同上。 |
| See the American Declaration on the
Rights of Indigenous Peoples, art. XXX, paras. 3 and 4, which read: | 见《美洲土著人民权利宣言》，第三十条，第3和第4段，内容如下： |
| “3. Indigenous peoples have the right to
protection and security in situations or periods of internal or international
armed conflict, in accordance with international humanitarian law. | “3. 根据国际人道主义法，土著人民有权在国内或国际性武装冲突情况下或在此期间获得保护和安全。 |
| 4. States, in compliance with
international agreements to which they are party, in particular those of
international humanitarian law and international human rights law, including
the Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time
of War, and Protocol II thereof relating to the protection of victims of
non-international armed conflicts, shall, in the event of armed conflicts,
take adequate measures to protect the human rights, institutions, lands,
territories, and resources of indigenous peoples and their communities [… | 4. 各国根据所加入的国际协定，特别是国际人道主义法和国际人权法，包括《关于战时保护平民之日内瓦公约》及其《关于保护非国际性武装冲突受难者的第二议定书》，应在在发生武装冲突时，采取适当措施保护土著人民及其社区的人权、机构、土地、领土和资源[…]。 |
| ]”. | ” |
| According to the United Nations
Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, art. 28, “[i]ndigenous
peoples have the right to redress, by means that can include restitution or,
when this is not possible, just, fair and equitable compensation, for the
lands, territories and resources which they have traditionally owned or
otherwise occupied or used, and which have been confiscated, taken, occupied,
used or damaged without their free, prior and informed consent”. | 根据《联合国土著人民权利宣言》第28条，“土著人民传统上拥有或以其他方式占有或使用的土地、领土和资源，未事先获得他们自由知情同意而被没收、拿走、占有、使用或损坏的，有权获得补偿，方式可包括归还原物，或在不可能这样做时，获得公正、公平、合理的赔偿。 |
| Similarly, the American Declaration on
the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, art. XXXIII, states: “Indigenous peoples
and individuals have the right to effective and suitable remedies, including
prompt judicial remedies, for the reparation of any violation of their
collective and individual rights. | ”同样，《美洲土著人民权利宣言》第三十三条规定：“土著人民和个人有权获得有效和适当的补救，包括迅速的司法补救办法，以赔偿其集体和个人权利受到的任何侵犯。 |
| States, with full and effective
participation of indigenous peoples, shall provide the necessary mechanisms
for the exercise of this right.” | 各国应在土著人民充分有效的参与下，为行使这项权利提供必要的机制。 ” |
| For example, see art. 13 of ILO
Indigenous and Tribal Peoples Convention, 1989 (No. 169), which states that
“In applying the provisions of this Part of the Convention governments shall
respect the special importance for the cultures and spiritual values of the
peoples concerned of their relationship with the lands or territories, or
both as applicable, which they occupy or otherwise use, and in particular the
collective aspects of this relationship”. | 例如见劳工组织1989年《土著和部落人民公约》(第169号)第十三条，其中规定：“在实施本公约这部分的条款时，各国政府应重视有关民族与其所占有或使用的土地或领域――或两者都适用――的关系对于该民族文化和精神价值的特殊重要性，特别是这种关系的集体方面”。 |
| Though specific to that Convention’s
application, it explicitly notes the collective aspects of the relationship
that indigenous peoples have with their lands or territories. | 虽然具体针对的是该公约的适用，但它明确指出了土著人民与其土地或领土间关系的集体方面。 |
| See for instance, United Nations
Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, art. 19. | 例如见《联合国土著人民权利宣言》第19条。 |
| The Inter-American Court of Human Rights
has established safeguards requiring States to obtain the “free, prior, and
informed consent [of indigenous peoples], according to their customs and
traditions”. | 美洲人权法院确立了保障措施，要求各国“根据[土著人民]的习俗和传统”获得“他们自由、事先且知情的同意”。 |
| See Case of the Saramaka People v.
Suriname, Judgment (Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations, and Costs),
Series C, No. 172, 28 November 2007, para. 134. | 见萨拉马卡人诉苏里南案，判决(初步反对意见，实质问题，赔偿和费用)，C辑，第172号案件，2007年11月28日，第134段。 |
| The Agreement between the European Union
and the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia on the status of the European
Union-led forces in the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (Official
Journal L 082, 29/03/2003 P. 0046 – 0051, annex; | 《欧洲联盟与前南斯拉夫的马其顿共和国关于欧洲联盟领导的部队在前南斯拉夫的马其顿共和国地位的协议》(官方公报L 082, 29/03/2003 P. 0046 – 0051, 附件； |
| hereinafter, “Concordia status of forces
agreement”), art. 9, provided a duty to respect international norms
regarding, inter alia, the sustainable use of natural resources. | 下称《康科迪亚部队地位协议》)第9条规定，部队有义务尊重国际规范，尤其是关于可持续利用自然资源的规范。 |
| See Agreement between the European Union
and the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia on the status of the European
Union-led forces in the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, available at
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:22003A0329(01)
(accessed on 7 May, 2018). | 见《欧洲联盟与前南斯拉夫的马其顿共和国关于欧洲联盟领导的部队在前南斯拉夫的马其顿共和国地位的协议》，可查阅https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:
22003A0329 (01) (2018年5月7日访问)。 |
| Agreement between the United States of
America and the Republic of Iraq on the Withdrawal of United States Forces
from Iraq and the Organization of Their Activities during their Temporary
Presence in Iraq (Baghdad, 17 November 2008), art. 8 (hereinafter, “United
States-Iraq Agreement”). | 《美利坚合众国和伊拉克共和国关于美国部队撤出伊拉克及其在伊拉克暂时驻留期间活动的组织的协议》，(2008年11月17日，巴格达)，第8条(下称《美国－伊拉克协议》)。 |
| Available at
www.state.gov/documents/organization/122074.pdf. | 可查阅www.state.gov/documents/organization/122074.pdf。 |
| Agreement between the North Atlantic
Treaty Organization and the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan on the Status of
NATO Forces and NATO personnel conducting mutually agreed NATO-led activities
in Afghanistan (Kabul, 30 September 2014), International Legal Materials,
vol. 54, pp. 272–305, art. 5, para. 6, art. 6, para. 1, and art. 7, para. 2. | 《北大西洋公约组织和阿富汗伊斯兰共和国关于在阿富汗执行共同商定由北约主导活动的北约部队和北约人员地位的协议》(2014年9月30日，喀布尔)，《国际法律资料》，第54卷，第272-305页，第5条第6款、第6条第1款和第7条第2款。 |
| Agreement between the Member States of
the European Union concerning the status of military and civilian staff
seconded to the institutions of the European Union, of the headquarters and
forces which may be made available to the European Union in the context of
the preparation and execution of the tasks referred to in Article 17(2) of
the Treaty on European Union, including exercises, and of the military and
civilian staff of the Member States put at the disposal of the European Union
to act in this context (EU SOFA) (Brussels, 17 November 2003). | 《欧洲联盟成员国之间关于借调给欧洲联盟和总部各机构以及部队、可在准备和执行〈欧洲联盟条约〉第17条第2款所述的任务，包括演习时供欧洲联盟使用的军事和文职人员，以及供欧洲联盟为采取这方面行动而支配的成员国军事和文职人员地位的协议》(EU SOFA)(2003年11月17日，布鲁塞尔)。 |
| Available at
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A42003A1231%2801%29
(accessed on 7 May, 2018). | 可查阅https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%
3A42003A1231%2801%29 (2018年5月7日访问)。 |
| Agreement to Supplement the Agreement
between the Parties to the North Atlantic Treaty regarding the Status of
their Forces with respect to Foreign Forces stationed in the Federal Republic
of Germany (Bonn, 3 August 1959), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 481,
No. 6986, p. 329, amended by the Agreements of 21 October 1971 and 18 March
1993 (hereinafter, “NATO-Germany Agreement”), art. 54A. | 《补充北大西洋公约缔约国部队地位协定的关于驻德意志联邦共和国的外国军队的协议》(1959年8月3日，波恩)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第481卷，第6986号，第329页，1971年10月21日和1993年3月18日修订(下称《北约－德国协议》)，第54A条。 |
| See also Agreement between the Parties to
the North Atlantic Treaty regarding the Status of their Forces of 19 June
1951, art. XV. | 另见1951年6月19日《北大西洋公约缔约国部队地位协议》，第十五条。 |
| Memorandum of Special Understandings on
Environmental Protection, concluded between the United States and the
Republic of Korea (Seoul, 18 January 2001) (hereinafter, “United
States-Republic of Korea Memorandum”). | 美国与大韩民国缔结的《环境保护特别谅解备忘录》(2001年1月18日，首尔)(下称《美国－大韩民国备忘录》)。 |
| Available at
www.usfk.mil/Portals/105/Documents/SOFA/A12_MOSU.Environmental.Protection.pdf. | 可查阅www.usfk.mil/Portals/105/Documents/SOFA/A12_MOSU.
Environmental.Protection.pdf。 |
| See, e.g., Memorandum of Understanding
between Finland and NATO regarding the provision of host nation support for
the execution of NATO operations/exercises/similar military activity (4
September 2014), available at www.defmin.fi/files/2898/HNS_MOU_FINLAND.pdf,
reference HE 82/2014. | 例如见《芬兰和北约之间关于为执行北约行动/演习/类似军事活动提供东道国支持的谅解备忘录》(2014年9月4日)，可查阅www.defmin.fi/files/2898/HNS_MOU_FINLAND.pdf，参考号HE 82/2014。 |
| According to art. 5.3 (g), sending
nations must follow host nation environmental regulations as well as any host
nation’s regulations for the storage, movement, or disposal of hazardous
materials. | 根据第5.3(g)条，派遣国必须遵守东道国环境法规以及东道国有关储存、移动或处置危险材料的规定。 |
| Agreement concerning the Status of United
States Forces in Australia (Canberra, 9 May 1963), United Nations, Treaty Series,
vol. 469, No. 6784, p. 55 (hereinafter, “United States-Australia Agreement”),
art. 12, para. 7 (e) (i). | 《美国驻澳大利亚部队地位协议》(1963年5月9日，堪培拉)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第469卷，第6784号，第55页(下称《美国－澳大利亚协议》)，第12条第7 (e) (i)款。 |
| Agreement between the Philippines and the
United States on enhanced defense cooperation (Quezon City, 28 April 2014)
(hereinafter, “United States-Philippines Agreement”). | 《菲律宾与美国之间加强防务合作的协议》(2014年4月28日，奎松市)(下称《美国－菲律宾协议》)。 |
| Available at
www.officialgazette.gov.ph/2014/04/29/document-enhanced-defense-cooperation-agreement/. | 可查阅www.officialgazette.gov.ph/2014/04/29/document-enhanced-defense-cooperation-agreement/。 |
| See e.g. D.L. Shelton and I. Cutting, “If
you break it, do you own it? ”, Journal of International Humanitarian Legal
Studies, vol. 6 (2015), pp. 201–246, at pp. 210–211, and J. Taylor,
“Environment and security conflicts: The U.S. Military in Okinawa”, The
Geographical Bulletin, vol. 48 (2007), pp. 6–7. | 例如见D.L. Shelton and I. Cutting, “If you
break it, do you own it?”, Journal of International Humanitarian Legal
Studies, vol. 6 (2015), pp. 201–246, at pp. 210–211, and J. Taylor,
“Environment and security conflicts: The U.S. Military in Okinawa”, The
Geographical Bulletin, vol. 48 (2007), pp. 6–7。 |
| See United States-Republic of Korea
Memorandum. | 见《美国－大韩民国备忘录》。 |
| See United States-Iraq Agreement, art. 8. | 见《美国－伊拉克协议》第8条。 |
| See United States-Republic of Korea
Memorandum. | 见《美国－大韩民国备忘录》。 |
| See United States-Philippines Agreement,
art. IX, para. 3, and NATO-Germany Agreement, art. 54A. | 见《美国－菲律宾协议》第九条第3款和《北约－德国协定》第54A条。 |
| These assessments could identify and
evaluate the environmental aspects of the operation and can be accompanied by
a commitment to plan, program and budget for these requirements accordingly,
as in done the United States-Republic of Korea Memorandum. | 这些评估可以确定和评估行动的环境方面，并可针对这些要求相应作出规划、计划和预算承诺，如《美国－大韩民国备忘录》所做的那样。 |
| See United States-Philippines Agreement,
art. IX, para. 2. | 见《美国－菲律宾协议》第九条第2款。 |
| See NATO-Germany Agreement, art. 54A, and
United States-Australia Agreement, art. 12, para. 7 (e) (i). | 见《北约－德国协议》第54A条和《美国－澳大利亚协议》第12条第7(e) (i)款。 |
| See United States-Iraq agreement, art. 8. | 见《美国－伊拉克协议》第8条。 |
| As is done in art. 9 of the Concordia
status of forces agreement. | 如《康科迪亚部队地位协议》第9条那样。 |
| See NATO-Germany Agreement, art. 54A. | 见《北约－德国协议》第54A条。 |
| NATO-Germany Agreement, art. 41, and
United States-Australia Agreement, art. 12, para. 7 (e) (i). | 《北约－德国协议》第41条和《美国－澳大利亚协议》第12条第7(e) (i)款。 |
| Report of the High-level Independent
Panel on Peace Operations on uniting our strengths for peace: politics,
partnership and people (contained in A/70/95-S/2015/446), para. 23. | 和平行动问题高级别独立小组关于“集中力量，促进和平：政治、伙伴关系和人民”的报告。 (载于A/70/95-S/2015/446)，第23段。 |
| Ibid. | 同上。 |
| V. Holt and G. Taylor, Protecting
Civilians in the Context of UN Peacekeeping Operations: Successes, Setbacks
and Remaining Challenges, independent study jointly commissioned by the
Department of Peacekeeping Operations and the Office for the Coordination of
Humanitarian Affairs (United Nations publication, Sales No. E.10.III.M.1),
pp. 2–3. | V. Holt and G. Taylor, Protecting
Civilians in the Context of UN Peacekeeping Operations: Successes, Setbacks
and Remaining Challenges, 维持和平行动部和人道主义事务协调厅联合委托进行的独立研究 (联合国出版物，出售品编号：E.10.III.M.1)，第2-3页。 |
| See for example the following mandates of
United Nations-led missions found in Security Council resolutions: United
Nations Mission in Sierra Leone (UNAMSIL) (1289 (2000)); | 例如见安全理事会决议中联合国主导的特派团的下列任务：联合国塞拉利昂特派团(联塞特派团)(1289(2000))； |
| United Nations Observer Mission in the
Democratic Republic of the Congo (MONUC) (1291 (2000)); | 联合国刚果民主共和国观察团(联刚观察团)(1291(2000))； |
| United Nations Mission in Liberia (UNMIL)
(1509 (2003) and 2215 (2015)); | 联合国利比里亚特派团(联利特派团)(1509(2003)和2215(2015))； |
| United Nations Operation in Burundi
(ONUB) (1545 (2004)); | 联合国布隆迪行动(联布行动)(1545(2004))； |
| United Nations Stabilization Mission in
Haiti (MINUSTAH) (1542 (2004)); | 联合国海地稳定特派团(联海稳定团)(1542(2004))； |
| United Nations Operation in Côte d’Ivoire
(UNOCI) (1528 (2004) and 2226 (2015)); | 联合国科特迪瓦行动(联科行动)(1528(2004)和2226(2015))； |
| United Nations Mission in the Sudan
(UNMIS) (1590 (2005)); | 联合国苏丹特派团(联苏特派团)(1590(2005)； |
| African Union-United Nations Hybrid
Operation in Darfur (UNAMID) (1769 (2007)); | 非洲联盟－联合国达尔富尔混合行动(达尔富尔混合行动)(1769(2007))； |
| and United Nations Mission in the Central
African Republic and Chad (MINURCAT) (1861 (2009)). | 以及联合国中非共和国和乍得特派团(中乍特派团)(1861 (2009))。 |
| See United Nations, Department of
Peacekeeping Operations and the Department of Field Support, “DFS Environment
Strategy” (2017). | 见联合国维持和平行动部和外勤支助部，“外勤部环境战略”(2017年)。 |
| Available at
https://peacekeeping.un.org/sites/default/files/171116_dfs_exec_summary_environment_0.pdf
(accessed on 8 May 2018). | 可查阅https://peace
keeping.un.org/sites/default/files/171116_dfs_exec_summary_environment_0.pdf(2018年5月8日访问)。 |
| The strategy is complemented by an
environmental policy and environmental guidelines on environment for United
Nations field missions (see footnote 1118 above). | 该战略以联合国外地特派团环境政策和环境准则作为补充(见上文脚注1118)。 |
| See, e.g., European Union, “Military
Concept on Environmental Protection and Energy Efficiency for EU-led military
operations”, 14 September 2012, document EEAS 01574/12. | 例如见欧洲联盟，“欧盟领导的军事行动的环境保护和能源效率军事概念”，2012年9月14日，EEAS 01574/12号文件。 |
| See, e.g., NATO, “Joint NATO doctrine for
environmental protection during NATO-led military activities”, 8 March 2018,
document NSO(Joint)0335(2018)EP/7141. | 例如见北约，“关于在北约领导的军事活动期间保护环境的北约联合原则”，2018年3月8日，NSO(Joint)0335(2018)EP/7141号文件。 |
| “The future of United Nations peace
operations: implementation of the recommendations of the High-level
Independent Panel on Peace Operations”, Report of the Secretary-General
(A/70/357-S/2015/682), para 129. | “联合国和平行动的未来：执行和平行动问题高级别独立小组的各项建议：秘书长的报告”，(A/70/357-S/2015/682)，第129段。 |
| “An Agenda for Peace: Preventive
Diplomacy, Peacemaking and Peace-keeping” (A/47/277-S/24111), para. 20. | “和平纲领：预防性外交、建立和平与维持和平”(A/47/277-S/24111)，第20段。 |
| See also the supplement thereto, a
position paper by the Secretary-General on the occasion of the fiftieth
anniversary of the United Nations (A/50/60-S/1995/1). | 另见其补编，即秘书长在联合国五十周年提出的立场文件(A/50/60-S/1995/1)。 |
| Ibid. | 同上。 |
| Ibid., para. 56. | 同上，第56段。 |
| A/70/95-S/2015/446, para. 18. | A/70/95-S/2015/446, 第18段。 |
| The United Nations peace agreements
database, a “reference tool providing peacemaking professionals with close to
800 documents that can be understood broadly as peace agreements and related
material”, contains a huge variety of documents, such as “formal peace
agreements and sub-agreements, as well as more informal agreements and
documents such as declarations, communiqués, joint public statements
resulting from informal talks, agreed accounts of meetings between parties,
exchanges of letters and key outcome documents of some international or
regional conferences … The database also contains selected legislation, acts
and decrees that constitute an agreement between parties and/or were the
outcome of peace negotiations”. | 联合国和平协议数据库是一个“参考工具，为建立和平专业人员提供近800份可广泛理解为和平协定和相关材料的文件”，其中包含各种文件，如“正式和平协议和子协议，以及更加非正式的协议和文件，例如声明、公报、非正式会谈产生的联合公开声明、各方会议的商定报告、换文和一些国际或区域会议的主要成果文件…该数据库还包含构成各方之间协议和/或和平谈判结果的部分立法、法律和法令”。 |
| Selected resolutions of the Security
Council are also included. | 还包括安全理事会的部分决议。 |
| The database is available at
http://peacemaker.un.org/document-search. | 该数据库的网址为：http://peacemaker.un.org/document-search。 |
| For example, the intensity and duration
of the conflict as well as the weapons used can all influence how much
environmental damage is caused in a particular armed conflict. | 例如，冲突的强度和持续时间以及使用的武器都可能影响到某一特定武装冲突会造成多大的环境损害。 |
| Well-known examples of environmental
damage caused in armed conflict is the damage caused by the United States
Armed Forces’ use of Agent Orange in the Viet Nam War and the burning of
Kuwaiti oil wells by Iraqi troops in the Gulf War, which are well documented. | 在武装冲突中造成环境损害的著名例子包括美国武装部队在越南战争中使用橙剂造成的损害以及伊拉克军队在海湾战争中烧毁科威特油井的事件，这些都有详细记录。 |
| Instances of environmental damage, which
range in severity, have also been documented other armed conflicts, such as
the conflicts in Colombia, as well as in the Democratic Republic of the
Congo, Iraq and Syria. | 其他武装冲突，如哥伦比亚、刚果民主共和国、伊拉克和叙利亚的冲突也记录了对环境造成的不同程度的损害。 |
| See UNEP Colombia, available at
www.unenvironment.org/news-and-stories/story/un-environment-will-support-environmental-recovery-and-peacebuilding-post
(accessed on 9 May 2018); | 见环境署驻哥伦比亚办事处，可查阅www.unenvironment.org/news-and-stories/story/un-environment-will-support-environmental-recovery-and-peacebuilding-post
(2018年5月9日访问)； |
| UNEP, “Post-conflict environmental
assessment of the Democratic Republic of the Congo”, available at
https://postconflict.unep.ch/publications/UNEP_DRC_PCEA_EN.pdf (accessed on 9
May 2018); | 环境署，“刚果民主共和国冲突后环境评估”，可查阅https://postconflict.unep.ch/publications/
UNEP_DRC_PCEA_EN.pdf (2018年5月9日访问)； |
| UNEP, “Post-conflict environmental
assessment, clean-up and reconstruction in Iraq”, available at
https://wedocs.unep.org/bitstream/handle/20.500.11822/17462/UNEP_Iraq.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
(accessed on 9 May 2018); | 环境署，“伊拉克冲突后环境评估、清理和重建”，可查阅https://wedocs.unep.org/bitstream/handle/20.500.11822/17462/UNEP_Iraq.pdf?
sequence=1&isAllowed=y (2018年5月9日访问)； |
| “Lebanon Environmental Assessment of the
Syrian Conflict” (supported by UNDP and EU), available at
www.undp.org/content/dam/lebanon/docs/Energy%20and%20Environment/Publications/EASC-WEB.pdf
(accessed on 9 May 2018). | “叙利亚冲突下的黎巴嫩环境评估”(由开发署和欧盟提供支持)，可查阅www.undp.org/content/dam/lebanon/docs/Energy%20and%20
Environment/Publications/EASC-WEB.pdf (2018年5月9日访问)。 |
| See also International Law and Policy
Institute, “Protection of the natural environment in armed conflict: an
empirical study” (Oslo, 2014), pp. 34–40. | 另见国际法和政策研究所，“武装冲突中的自然环境保护：一项实证研究”(奥斯陆，2014年)，第34-40页。 |
| See C. Bell, “Women and peace processes,
negotiations, and agreements: operational opportunities and challenges”,
Norwegian Peacebuilding Resource Centre, Policy Brief, March 2013, available
at http://noref.no under “Publications”, p. 1. | See C. Bell, “Women and peace processes,
negotiations, and agreements: operational opportunities and challenges”,
Norwegian Peacebuilding Resource Centre, Policy Brief, March 2013, available
at http://noref.no under “Publications”, p. 1. |
| Such instruments are predominantly
concluded in non-international armed conflicts, between a State and a
non-State actor and include the following: Peace Agreement between the
Government of El Salvador and the Frente Farabundo Martí para la Liberación
Nacional (Chapultepec Agreement) (Mexico City, 16 January 1992), A/46/864,
annex, chap. II; | 这些文书主要是在非国际性武装冲突中、在国家和非国家行为体之间订立的，其中包括：《萨尔瓦多政府和拉本多·马蒂民族解放阵线之间的和平协定》(《查普尔特佩克协定》)(1992年1月16日，墨西哥城)，A/46/864, 附件，第二章； |
| Interim Agreement for Peace and
Self-Government in Kosovo (Rambouillet Accords), S/1999/648, annex; | 《科索沃和平与自治临时协定》(《朗布依埃协定》) S/1999/648, 附件； |
| Arusha Peace and Reconciliation Agreement
for Burundi (Arusha, 28 August 2000), available from
http://peacemaker.un.org/node/1207, Protocol III, at p. 62, art. 12, para. 3
(e), and Protocol IV, at p. 81, art. 8 (h); | 《阿鲁沙布隆迪和平与和解协定》(2000年8月28日，阿鲁沙)，可查阅http://peacemaker.un.org/node/1207, 第三议定书，第62页，第12条第3(e)款和第四议定书，第81页，第8(h)条； |
| Final Act of the Inter-Congolese
Political Negotiations (Sun City, 2 April 2003), available from
http://peacemaker.un.org/drc-suncity-agreement2003, resolution No.
DIC/CEF/03, pp. 40–41, and resolution No. DIC/CHSC/03, pp. 62–65; | 《刚果人政治谈判最后文件》(2003年4月2日，太阳城)，可查阅http://peacemaker.un.org/drc-suncity-agreement2003, DIC/CEF/03号决议，第40-41页和第DIC/CHSC/03号决议，第62-65页； |
| Comprehensive Peace Agreement between the
Government of the Republic of the Sudan and the Sudan People’s Liberation
Movement/Sudan People’s Liberation Army, available from
http://peacemaker.un.org/node/1369, chap. V, p. 71 and chap. III, p. 45,
which set out as guiding principles that “the best known practices in the
sustainable utilization and control of natural resources shall be followed”
(para. 1.10) — further regulations on oil resources are found in paras. 3.1.1
and 4; | 苏丹共和国政府与苏丹人民解放运动/苏丹人民解放军签署的《全面和平协定》，可查阅http://peacemaker.un.org/node/1369, 第五章，第71页和第三章，第45页，其中规定的指导原则是：“应遵循可持续利用和管理自然资源方面的最著名做法”(第1.10段)――有关石油资源的进一步规定见第3.1.1段和第4段； |
| Darfur Peace Agreement (Abuja, 5 May
2006), available from http://peacemaker.un.org/ node/535, chap. 2, at p. 21,
art. 17, para. 107 (g) and (h), and at p. 30, art. 20; | 《达尔富尔和平协定》(2006年5月5日，阿布贾)，可查阅http://peacemaker.un.org/node/535,
第2章，第21页，第17条，第107(g)和(h)款以及第30页，第20条； |
| Agreement on comprehensive solutions
between Uganda and Lord’s Resistance Army/Movement (Juba, 2 May 2007),
available from https://peacemaker.un.org/sites/ | 乌干达共和国政府与上帝抵抗军/运动在签署的《全面解决办法协定》，(2007年5月2日，朱巴)，可查阅https://peacemaker.un.org/
sites/peacemaker.un.org/files/UG_070502_AgreementComprehensiveSolutions.pdf, 第14.6段； |
| peacemaker.un.org/files/UG_070502_AgreementComprehensiveSolutions.pdf
, para. 14.6, and the Peace Agreement between the Government of Sierra Leone
and the Revolutionary United Front of Sierra Leone (Lomé, 7 July 1999),
S/1999/777, annex, art. VII. | 以及《塞拉利昂政府和塞拉利昂革命联合阵线和平协定》(1999年7月7日，洛美)，S/1999/777, 附件，第七条。 |
| Chapultepec Agreement, chap. II. | 《查普尔特佩克协定》，第二章。 |
| Further regulations are found in art. 13
contained in annex II to the Peace Agreement; | 进一步的规定见《和平协定》附件二所载的第13条； |
| they prescribe that it is the role of the
Environment Division of the National Civil Police to “be responsible for
preventing and combating crimes and misdemeanours against the environment”. | 其中规定，国家民警局环境司应“负责防止和打击破坏环境的犯罪和过失行为”。 |
| The Arusha Peace and Reconciliation
Agreement for Burundi, Protocol III, at p. 62, art. 12, para. 3 (e), and at
p. 81, art. 8 (h), contains several references to the protection of the
environment, one of which prescribes that one of the missions of the
intelligence services is “[t]o detect as early as possible any threat to the
country’s ecological environment”. | 《阿鲁沙布隆迪和平与和解协定》，第三议定书，第62页，第12条第3(e)款和第81也，第8(h)条，有几处提到保护环境，其中一条规定情报部门的任务之一是“尽早发现任何威胁国家生态环境的因素”。 |
| Furthermore, it states that “[t]he policy
of distribution or allocation of new lands shall take account of the need for
environmental protection and management of the country’s water system through
protection of forests”. | 此外，该协定指出，“分配或划拨新土地的政策应考虑到需要通过保护森林来保护环境和管理国家水系”。 |
| The United Nations has acted as a
facilitator in numerous armed conflicts, inter alia the armed conflicts in
Angola, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Libya and Mozambique. | 联合国在许多武装冲突，特别是安哥拉、刚果民主共和国、利比亚和莫桑比克的武装冲突中担任调解人。 |
| Regional organizations have also played a
facilitating role in the peace processes across the world. | 区域组织也在全世界的和平进程中发挥了促进作用。 |
| For example, the African Union has been
involved in aspects of the peace processes in, inter alia, Comoros, Côte d’Ivoire, Guinea-Bissau, Liberia and Somalia. | 例如，非洲联盟参与了和平进程的各个方面，尤其是在科摩罗、科特迪瓦、几内亚比绍、利比里亚和索马里。 |
| See Chatham House, Africa Programme, “The
African Union’s role in promoting peace, security and stability: from
reaction to prevention?”, meeting summary, available from
www.chathamhouse.org, p. 3. | 见Chatham House, Africa Programme, “The
African Union’s role in promoting peace, security and stability: from
reaction to prevention?”, 会议纪要，可查阅www.chathamhouse.org,
p. 3。 |
| The Organization of American States was
involved in the peace process in, inter alia, the Plurinational State of
Bolivia and Colombia. | 美洲国家组织参与了多民族玻利维亚国和哥伦比亚等国的和平进程。 |
| See P.J. Meyer, “Organization of American
States: background and issues for Congress” (Congressional Research Service,
2014), available at www.fas.org, p. 8. | 见P.J. Meyer, “Organization of American
States: background and issues for Congress” (Congressional Research Service,
2014), 可查阅www.fas.org, p. 8。 |
| See also African Union and Centre for
Humanitarian Dialogue, Managing Peace Processes: Towards more inclusive
processes, vol. 3 (2013), p. 106. | 另见非洲联盟和人道主义对话中心，Managing Peace Processes:
Towards more inclusive processes, vol. 3 (2013), p. 106。 |
| The European Union has been involved in
the peace processes in armed conflicts in, inter alia, the Middle East and
Northern Ireland. | 欧洲联盟除其他外参与了中东和北爱尔兰武装冲突的和平进程。 |
| See also Switzerland, Federal Department
of International Affairs, “Mediation and facilitation in today’s peace
processes: centrality of commitment, coordination and context”, presentation
by Thomas Greminger, a retreat of the International Organization of la
Francophonie, 15–17 February 2007, available from www.swisspeace.ch, under
“Publications”. | 另见瑞士联邦外交事务部，“Mediation and facilitation
in today’s peace processes: centrality of commitment, coordination and
context”, Thomas Greminger的发言，法语国家国际组织务虚会，2007年2月15至17日, 可查阅www.swisspeace.ch的“Publications”部分。 |
| See, for instance, Convention on
Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary Context (Espoo, 25
February 1991), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1989, No. 34028, p. 309. | 例如见《越境环境影响评估公约》(1991年2月25日，埃斯波)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第1989卷，第34028号，第309页。 |
| Protocol on Strategic Environmental
Assessment to the Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment in a
Transboundary Context, available at
www.unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/env/eia/documents/legaltexts/protocolenglish.pdf. | 《越境环境影响评估公约战略环境评估议定书》，可查阅www.unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/env/
eidocuments/legaltexts/protocolenglish.pdf。 |
| Post-crisis environmental assessment,
available at
http://drustage.unep.org/disastersandconflicts/what-we-do/preparedness-response/post-crisis-environmental-assessment. | 危机后环境评估，可查阅http://drustage.unep.org/disastersandconflicts/what-we-do/preparedness-response/post-crisis-environmental-assessment。 |
| D. Jensen, “Evaluating the impact of
UNEP’s post conflict environmental assessments”, Assessing and Restoring
Natural Resources in Post-Conflict Peacebuilding, Jensen and S. Lonergan,
eds., available at https://environmentalpeacebuilding.org/assets/Documents/ | D. Jensen, “Evaluating the impact of
UNEP’s post conflict environmental assessments”, Assessing and Restoring
Natural Resources in Post-Conflict Peacebuilding, Jensen and S. Lonergan,
eds., available at
https://environmentalpeacebuilding.org/assets/Documents/LibraryItem_000_Doc_061.pdf,
p. 18. |
| LibraryItem_000_Doc_061.pdf, p. 18. A
needs assessment and desk study can be done during or after a conflict, based
on a collection pre-existing secondary information on environmental trends
and natural resource management, challenges from international and national
sources. | 需求评估和案头研究可在冲突期间或冲突后进行，并以收集已有的关于环境趋势和自然资源管理、国际和国家挑战的二手资料为基础。 |
| Such information, with limited
verification field visits, is then compiled into a desk study report that
attempts to identify and prioritize environmental needs. | 然后在进行有限的实地验证访问情况下，将这些资料汇编成案头研究报告，尝试确定环境需求并排定其优先顺序。 |
| Ibid., pp. 18–19. | 同上，第18-19页。 |
| A quantitative risk assessment, involving
field visits, laboratory analysis and satellite imagery, focuses on the
direct environmental impact of conflicts caused by bombing and destruction of
buildings, industrial sites, and public infrastructure. | 涉及实地访问、实验室分析和卫星图像的定量风险评估侧重于冲突中的轰炸以及破坏建筑物、工业用地和公共基础设施的行为对环境造成的直接影响。 |
| Ibid., pp. 19–20. | 同上，第19-20页。 |
| A strategic assessment evaluates the
indirect impact of the survival and coping strategies of local people and the
institutional problems caused by the breakdown of governance and capacity. | 战略评估对当地居民生存和应对策略的间接影响以及治理和能力崩溃造成的体制问题进行评价。 |
| These tend to be longer in duration. | 这往往需要更长时间。 |
| Ibid., p. 20. | 同上，第20页。 |
| A comprehensive assessment seeks to
provide a detailed picture of each natural resource sector and the
environmental trends, governance challenges, and capacity needs. | 综合评估力求提供关于每个自然资源部门和环境趋势、治理挑战和能力需求的详细情况。 |
| Based on national consultations with
stakeholders, comprehensive assessments attempt to identify priorities and
cost the required interventions over the short, medium, and long term. | 根据与利益攸关方进行的全国磋商，综合评估试图确定优先事项和所需短期、中期和长期干预措施的费用。 |
| Ibid., p. 20. | 同上，第20页。 |
| DAC Network on Environment and
Development Cooperation (ENVIRONET), “Strategic environment assessment and
post-conflict development SEA toolkit” (2010), p. 4, available at
http://content-ext.undp.org/aplaws_publications/2078176/Strategic%20Environment
%20Assessment%20and%20Post%20Conflict%20Development%20full%20version.pdf . | DAC Network on Environment and
Development Cooperation (ENVIRONET), “Strategic environment assessment and
post-conflict development SEA toolkit” (2010), p. 4, available at
http://content-ext.undp.org/aplaws_publications/2078176/Strategic%20Environment%20Assessment%
20and%20Post%20Conflict%20Development%20full%20version.pdf. |
| Ibid. | 同上。 |
| UNEP, “Disasters and Conflicts
Programme”, available at www.un.org/en/events/environmentconflictday/pdf/UNEP_conflict_and_disaster_brochure.pdf,
p. 3. | 环境署，“灾害和冲突方案”，可查阅www.un.org/en/events/environmentconflictday/pdf/
UNEP_conflict_and_disaster_brochure.pdf, 第3页。 |
| For example, this is often the case with
chemical weapons that have been dumped at sea. | 例如，在海上倾倒的化学武器通常就是这种情况。 |
| See T.A. Mensah, “Environmental damages
under the Law of the Sea Convention”, The Environmental Consequences of War:
Legal, Economic, and Scientific Perspectives, J.E. Austin and C.E. Bruch,
eds. (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2000), pp. 226–249. | 见T.A. Mensah, “Environmental damages
under the Law of the Sea Convention”, The Environmental Consequences of War:
Legal, Economic, and Scientific Perspectives, J.E. Austin and C.E. Bruch,
eds. (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2000), pp. 226–249。 |
| The Chemical Munitions Search and
Assessment (CHEMSEA) is an example of a project of cooperation among the
Baltic States, which is partly financed by the European Union. | “化学弹药搜索和评估”是波罗的海国家之间的一个合作项目，由欧盟提供部分资助。 |
| Information on the CHEMSEA project can be
found at
http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/en/projects/finland/chemsea-tacklesproblem-of-chemical-munitions-in-the-baltic-sea. | 关于该项目的信息，见http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/en/projects/finland/
chemsea-tacklesproblem-of-chemical-munitions-in-the-baltic-sea。 |
| See also the Baltic Marine Environment
Protection Commission (Helsinki Commission) website at
www.helcom.fi/baltic-sea-trends/hazardous-substances/sea-dumped-chemical-munitions. | 另见波罗的海海洋环境保护委员会(赫尔辛基委员会)网站：www.helcom.fi/baltic-sea-trends/hazardous-substances/sea-dumped-chemical-munitions。 |
| See, for more information, ICRC,
“Strengthening legal protection for victims of armed conflicts”, report
prepared for the Thirty-first International Conference of the Red Cross and
Red Crescent in 2011, No. 31IC/11/5.1.1 3, p. 18. | 更多信息见红十字国际委员会，“加强对武装冲突受害者的法律保护”，为2011年第三十一届红十字与红新月国际大会编写的报告，第31IC/11/5.1.13号，第18页。 |
| See M. Ghalaieny, “Toxic harm:
humanitarian and environmental concerns from military-origin contamination”,
discussion paper (Toxic Remnants of War project, 2013), p. 2. | 见M. Ghalaieny, “Toxic harm: humanitarian
and environmental concerns from military-origin contamination”, discussion
paper (Toxic Remnants of War project, 2013), p. 2。 |
| See also www.toxicremnantsofwar.info/new-trw-publication-toxic-harm-humanitarian-and-environmental-concerns-from-military-origin-contamination/. | 另见www.toxi
cremnantsofwar.info/new-trw-publication-toxic-harm-humanitarian-and-environmental-concerns-from-military-origin-contamination/。 |
| For more information on toxic remnants of
war, see also the Geneva Academy, Weapons Law Encyclopedia, available at
www.weaponslaw.org under “Glossary”, which cites ICRC, “Strengthening legal
protection for victims of armed conflicts”, p. 18. | 关于有毒的战争遗留物的更多信息，另见日内瓦学院，《武器法百科全书》，可查阅www.weaponslaw.org的“词汇表”项，其中援引了红十字委员会“加强对武装冲突受难者的法律保护”，第18页。 |
| See the statements delivered by Austria,
Costa Rica, Ireland and South Africa to the First Committee of the General
Assembly as its sixty-eighth session, which are available from the
paper-smart portal at http://papersmart.unmeetings.org. | 见奥地利、哥斯达黎加、爱尔兰和南非在大会第一委员会第六十八届会议上所作的发言，可在节纸门户网站查阅：http://papersmart. unmeetings.org。 |
| See para. (9) of the commentary to draft
article 1 of the draft articles on prevention of transboundary harm from
hazardous activities, Yearbook … | 见预防危险活动的跨界损害条款草案第1条草案评注第(9)段。 |
| 2001, vol. II (Part Two) and corrigendum,
paras. 97–98. | 《2001年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)和更正，第97-98段。 |
| See also General Assembly resolution
62/68 of 6 December 2007, annex. | 另见大会2007年12月6日第62/68号决议，附件。 |
| Para. (12) of the commentary to draft
article 1, ibid. | 第1条草案评注第(12)段，同上。 |
| A/CN.4/692, para. 33. | A/CN.4/692, 第33段。 |
| Concerning the concept of “control”, see
Legal Consequences for States of the Continued Presence of South Africa in
Namibia (South West Africa) notwithstanding Security Council Resolution 276
(1970), Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 1971, p. 16, at p. 54, para. 118,
where it states that: “The fact that South Africa no longer has any title to
administer the Territory does not release it from its obligations and
responsibilities under international law towards other States in respect of
the exercise of its powers in relation to this Territory. | 关于“控制”的概念，见南非不顾安全理事会第276(1970)号决议继续留驻纳米比亚(西南非洲)对各国的法律后果，咨询意见，《1971年国际法院案例汇编》，第16页起，见第54页，第118段，其中指出：“南非不再有权管理该领土，这一事实并不免除它根据国际法在对该领土行使其权力方面对其他国家的义务和责任。 |
| Physical control of a territory, and not
sovereignty or legitimacy of title, is the basis of State liability for acts
affecting other States.” | 对某一领土的实际控制，而不是主权或权利的合法性，正是对影响到其他国家的行为的国家责任的基础”。 |
| See, for example, Protocol II to the
Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons, as well as the Protocol on
Explosive Remnants of War, annexed to the Convention on Prohibitions or
Restrictions on the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons which may be deemed
to be Excessively Injurious or to have Indiscriminate Effects (Protocol V)
(hereinafter, “Protocol V to the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons”)
(Geneva, 3 May 1996), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 2399, No. 22495, p.
100. | 例如见《特定常规武器公约第二号议定书》，以及《禁止或限制使用某些可被认为具有过分伤害力或滥杀滥伤作用的常规武器公约》所附的《战争遗留爆炸物议定书》(第五号议定书)(下称《特定常规武器公约第五号议定书》)(1996年5月3日，日内瓦)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第2399卷，第22495号，第100页。 |
| See, for example, amended Protocol II to
the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons; | 例如见《特定常规武器公约经修正后的第二号议定书》； |
| Protocol V to the Convention on Certain
Conventional Weapons; | 《特定常规武器公约第五号议定书》； |
| Convention on the Prohibition of the Use,
Stockpiling, Production and Transfer of Anti-Personnel Mines and on their
Destruction (Oslo, 18 September 1997), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol.
2056, No. 35597, p. 211; | 《关于禁止使用、储存、生产和转让杀伤人员地雷及销毁此种地雷的公约》(1997年9月18日，奥斯陆)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第2056卷，第35597号，第211页； |
| Convention on Cluster Munitions (Dublin,
30 May 2008), ibid., vol. 2688, No. 47713, p. 39; | 《集束弹药公约》(2008年5月30日，都柏林)，同上，第2688卷，第47713号，第39页； |
| Convention on the Prohibition of the
Development, Production, Stockpiling and Use of Chemical Weapons and on Their
Destruction (Geneva, 3 September 1992), ibid., vol. 1974, No. 33757, p. 45. | 《关于禁止发展、生产、储存和使用化学武器及销毁此种武器的公约》(1992年9月3日，日内瓦)，同上，第1974卷，第33757号，第45页。 |
| See the wording of the amended Protocol
II to the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons; Convention on the
Prohibition of the Use, Stockpiling, Production and Transfer of
Anti-Personnel Mines and on their Destruction; Convention on Cluster
Munitions. | 见《特定常规武器公约经修正后的第二号议定书》、《关于禁止使用、储存、生产和转让杀伤人员地雷及销毁此种地雷的公约》和《集束弹药公约》的措词。 |
| See, e.g., art. 3, para. 2, of the
amended Protocol II Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons: “Each High
Contracting Party or party to a conflict is, in accordance with the
provisions of this Protocol, responsible for all mines, booby-traps, and
other devices employed by it and undertakes to clear, remove, destroy or
maintain them as specified in Article 10 of this Protocol. | 例如见《特定常规武器公约经修正后的第二号议定书》第3条第2款，“按照本议定书的规定，每一缔约方或冲突当事方对其布设的所有地雷、诱杀装置和其他装置负有责任，并承诺按照本议定书第10条的规定对其进行清除、排除、销毁或维持”。 |
| ” Art. 10, para. 2, in turn provides
that: “High Contracting Parties and parties to a conflict bear such
responsibility with respect to minefields, mined areas, mines, booby-traps
and other devices in areas under their control. | 第10条第2款规定又规定：“各缔约方和冲突各方对其控制区域内的雷场、雷区、地雷、诱杀装置和其他装置负有此种责任”。 |
| ” In addition, art. 3, para. 2, of
Protocol V to the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons provides that:
“After the cessation of active hostilities and as soon as feasible, each High
Contracting Party and party to an armed conflict shall mark and clear, remove
or destroy explosive remnants of war in affected territories under its
control”; | 此外，《特定常规武器公约第五号议定书》第3条第2款规定：“每一缔约方和武装冲突当事方应在现行敌对行动停止后并在可行的情况下尽快标示和清除、排除或销毁其控制之下的受影响领土内的战争遗留爆炸物”； |
| Convention on Cluster Munitions, art. 4,
para. 1: “Each State Party undertakes to clear and destroy, or ensure the
clearance and destruction of, cluster munition remnants located in cluster
munition contaminated areas under its jurisdiction or control”; | 《集束弹药公约》第四条第一款规定：“每一缔约国承诺清理并销毁或确保清除和销毁位于其管辖或控制下的集束弹药污染地区的遗留集束弹药”； |
| Convention on the Prohibition of the Use,
Stockpiling, Production and Transfer of Anti-Personnel Mines and on their
Destruction, art. 5, para. 1: “Each State Party undertakes to destroy or
ensure the destruction of all anti-personnel mines in mined areas under its
jurisdiction or control”. | 《关于禁止使用、储存、生产和转让杀伤人员地雷及销毁此种地雷的公约》第5条第1款规定：“每一缔约国承诺销毁或确保销毁在其管辖或控制下的雷区内的所有杀伤人员地雷”。 |
| The need to take cooperative measures to
assess and increase awareness of environmental effects related to waste
originating from chemical munitions dumped at sea has been explicitly
recognized by the General Assembly since 2010, including in General Assembly
resolution 71/220. | 大会自2010年以来，包括在大会第71/220号决议中，明确确认需要采取合作措施，评估海上倾弃化学弹药所生废物的环境影响和提高对此种影响的认识。 |
| The resolution reaffirms the 2030 Agenda
for Sustainable Development and recalls a number of relevant international
and regional instruments. | 该决议重申了《2030年可持续发展议程》，并回顾了一些相关的国际和区域文书。 |
| It furthermore notes the importance of
raising awareness of the environmental effects related to waste originating
from chemical weapons dumped at sea and invites the Secretary General to seek
the views of Member States and relevant regional and international
organizations on the cooperative measures envisaged in the resolution and
identifying the appropriate intergovernmental bodies within the United
Nations for further consideration and implementation, as appropriate, of
those measures. | 它还注意到应提高对海上倾弃化学弹药所生废物相关环境影响的认识，并请秘书长征求会员国和有关区域和国际组织对决议设想的合作措施的意见，并确定联合国系统内的适当政府间机构，以进一步适当审议和实施这些措施。 |
| See the United Nations Convention on the
Law of the Sea (Montego Bay, 10 December 1982), United Nations, Treaty
Series, vol. 1833, No. 31363, p. 3. | 见《联合国海洋法公约》(1982年12月10日，蒙特哥湾)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第1833卷，第31363号，第3页。 |
| The remnants of war could be located in
the territorial waters, the continental shelf, the exclusive economic zone or
on the high seas, and this will have an impact on the rights and obligations
of States. | 战争遗留物可能位于领水、大陆架、专属经济区或公海，这将对各国的权利和义务产生影响。 |
| See A. Lott, “Pollution of the Marine
Environment by Dumping: Legal Framework Applicable to Dumped Chemical Weapons
and Nuclear Waste in the Arctic Ocean” 1 Nordic Environmental Law Journal
(2015), p. 57 and W. Searle and D. Moody, “Explosive Remnants of War at Sea:
Technical Aspects of Disposal”, in Explosive Remnants of War: Mitigating the
Environmental Effects, A. Westing, ed. (Taylor & Francis 1985). | See A. Lott, “Pollution of the Marine
Environment by Dumping: Legal Framework Applicable to Dumped Chemical Weapons
and Nuclear Waste in the Arctic Ocean” 1 Nordic Environmental Law Journal
(2015), p. 57 and W. Searle and D. Moody, “Explosive Remnants of War at Sea:
Technical Aspects of Disposal”, in Explosive Remnants of War: Mitigating the
Environmental Effects, A. Westing, ed. (Taylor & Francis 1985). |
| For example, the CHEMSEA project, which
was initiated in 2011 as a project of cooperation among the Baltic States and
partly financed by the European Union (see footnote 1180 above). | 例如，“化学弹药搜索和评估”项目于2011年启动，是波罗的海国家之间的一个合作项目，由欧盟提供部分资助(见上文脚注1180)。 |
| See General Assembly resolutions 65/149
of 20 December 2010 and 68/208 of 20 December 2013 and A/68/258. | 见大会2010年12月20日第65/149号决议和2013年12月20日第68/208号决议以及A/68/258号文件。 |
| See also Mensah, “Environmental damages
under the Law of the Sea Convention”, p. 233. | 另见Mensah, “Environmental damages under
the Law of the Sea Convention”, p. 233。 |
| The Baltic Marine Environment Protection
Commission (Helsinki Commission), governing body of the Convention on the
Protection of the Marine Environment of the Baltic Sea Area, issued
guidelines for fishermen that encounter sea-dumped chemical munitions at an
early stage. | 波罗的海海洋环境保护委员会(赫尔辛基委员会)，是《保护波罗的海地区海洋环境公约》理事结构，发布了渔民遇到海上倾弃化学弹药早期阶段准则。 |
| For an easily accessible overview see the
work done by the James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies at
www.nonproliferation.org/chemical-weapon-munitions-dumped-at-sea/. | 便于查阅的概览见詹姆斯·马丁不扩散研究中心所做的工作，网址：www.nonproliferation.org/chemical-weapon-munitions-dumped -at
-sea/。 |
| There is a clear link between danger to
the environment and public health and safety. | 环境危险与公共健康和安全之间有明显的联系。 |
| See, for example, article 55, paragraph 1,
of Additional Protocol I provides for the protection of the natural
environment in international armed conflicts and prohibits the use of means
and methods of warfare which are intended or may be expected to cause
environmental damage and thereby prejudice the health of the population; | 例如见《第一附加议定书》第五十五条第一款，其中规定应在国际性武装冲突中保护自然环境，并禁止使用旨在或可能对自然环境造成损害从而妨害居民健康的作战方法或手段； |
| art. 1, para. 2, of the Convention on the
Protection and Use of Transboundary Watercourses and International Lakes
(Helsinki, 17 March 1992), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1936, No.
33207, p. 269, stipulates that adverse effects on the environment include:
“effects on human health and safety, flora, fauna, soil, air, water, climate,
landscape and historical monuments or other physical structures or the
interactions among these factors; | 《跨界水道和国际湖泊保护和利用公约》第1条第2款(1992年3月17日，赫尔辛基)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第1936卷，第33207号，第269页，其中规定对环境的不利影响包括：对环境的不利影响包括“对人类健康和安全、植物、动物、土壤、空气、水、气候、地貌和历史纪念物或其他物理结构影响或这些因素之间的互动； |
| they also include effects on the cultural
heritage or socio-economic conditions resulting from alterations to those
factors”. | 它们也包括上述因素的变化对于文化遗产或社会经济状况而产生的影响”。 |
| Cf. e.g. Office of the United Nations
High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), Policy on the Protection of Personal
Data of Persons of Concern to UNHCR (2015), available at
www.refworld.org/pdfid/55643c1d4.pdf. | 例如参见联合国难民事务高级专员公署(难民署)，《保护难民署关注对象个人资料的政策》(2015年)，可查阅www.refworld.org/pdfid/55643c1d4.pdf。 |
| Additional Protocol I, art. 33; | 《第一附加议定书》第三十三条； |
| Geneva Convention I, art. 16; | 《日内瓦第一公约》第十六条； |
| Geneva Convention II, arts. 19 and 42; | 《日内瓦第二公约》第十九和第四十二条； |
| Geneva Convention III, art. 23; | 《日内瓦第三公约》第二十三条； |
| Geneva Convention IV, art. 137. | 《日内瓦第四公约》第一百三十七条。 |
| See Aarhus Convention, art. 4, para. 3
(b); | 见《奥胡斯公约》第四条第3款(b)项； |
| Convention for the Protection of the
Marine Environment of the North-East Atlantic (Paris, 22 September 1992),
United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 2354, No. 42279, p. 67, art. 9, para. 3
(g). | 《保护东北大西洋海洋环境公约》(1992年9月22日，巴黎)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第2354卷，第42279号，第67页，第9条第3款(g)项。 |
| See also the Regional Agreement on Access
to Information, Public Participation and Justice in Environmental Matters in
Latin America and the Caribbean, article 5, paragraph 6 (b). | 另见《拉丁美洲和加勒比地区关于在环境事务方面获取信息、公众参与和诉诸司法的区域协定》，第5条第6 (b)款。 |
| General Assembly resolution 217 (III) A of
10 December 1948. | 大会1948年12月10日第217 (III) A号决议。 |
| New York, 16 December 1966, United
Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 993, No. 14531, p. 3. | 1966年12月16日，纽约，联合国，《条约汇编》，第993卷，第14531号，第3页。 |
| Human Rights Committee, general comment
No. 34 (2011) on article 19 (freedoms of opinion and expression), Official
Records of the General Assembly, Sixty-sixth Session, Supplement No. 40, vol.
I (A/66/40 (Vol. I), annex V, para. 18. | 人权事务委员会关于第十九条(见解自由和言论自由)的第34号一般性意见(2011年)，《大会正式记录，第六十六届会议，补编第40号》，第一卷(A/66/40(Vol. I)，附件五，第18段。 |
| Guerra and Others v. Italy, 19 February
1998, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1998-I. | Guerra等人诉意大利案，1998年2月19日，《判决和决定汇编》1998年第一辑。 |
| Directive 2003/4/EC of the European
Parliament and of the Council on public access to environmental information; | 欧洲议会和欧洲委员会关于公众获取环境信息的第2003/4/EC号指令； |
| Office of Communications v. Information
Commissioner, case C-71/10, judgment of 28 July 2011. | 通信办公室诉信息专员案，C-71/10号案件，2011年7月28日的判决。 |
| Case of Claude-Reyes et al. v. Chile,
Inter-American Court of Human Rights, Judgement of 19 September 2006 (merits,
reparations and costs), Series C, No. 151 (2006). | Claude-Reyes等人诉智利案，美洲人权法院，2006年9月19日的判决(实质问题、赔偿和费用)，C辑，第151 (2006)号。 |
| General Assembly resolution 70/1 of 25
September 2015. | 大会2015年9月25日第70/1号决议。 |
| Convention on Access to Information,
Public Participation in Decision-Making and Access to Justice in
Environmental Matters (Aarhus Convention) (Aarhus, Denmark, 25 June 1998),
United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 2161, No. 37770, p. 447, art. 2. | 《在环境问题上获得信息、公众参与决策和诉诸法律的公约》(《奥胡斯公约》)(1998年6月25日，丹麦奥胡斯)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第2161卷，第37770号，第447页，第二条。 |
| United Nations Framework Convention on
Climate Change (New York, 9 May 1992), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol.
1771, No. 30882, p. 107. | 《联合国气候变化框架公约》(1992年5月9日，纽约)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第1771卷，第30882号，第107页。 |
| Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety to the
Convention on Biological Diversity, art. 23. | 《生物多样性公约卡塔赫纳生物安全议定书》，第23条。 |
| Rotterdam Convention on the Prior
Informed Consent Procedure for Certain Hazardous Chemicals and Pesticides in
International Trade (Rotterdam, 10 September 1998), United Nations, Treaty
Series, vol. 2244, No. 39973, p. 337, art. 15. | 《关于在国际贸易中对某些危险化学品和农药采用事先知情同意程序的鹿特丹公约》(1998年9月10日，鹿特丹)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第2244卷，第39973号，第337页，第15条。 |
| Stockholm Convention on Persistent
Organic Pollutants (Stockholm, 22 May 2001), United Nations, Treaty Series,
vol. 2256, No. 40214, p. 119, art. 10. | 《关于持久性有机污染物的斯德哥尔摩公约》(2001年5月22日，斯德哥尔摩)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第2256卷，第40214号，第119页，第10条。 |
| Text available from
https://treaties.un.org (Status of Multilateral Treaties Deposited with the
Secretary General, chap. XXVII.17). | 案文可查阅https://treaties.un.org (交存秘书长的多边条约状况，第XXVII.17章)。 |
| Report of the Conference of the Parties
to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change on its
twenty-first session, held in Paris from 30 November to 13 December 2015,
addendum: decisions adopted by the Conference of the Parties
(FCCC/CP/2015/10/Add.1), decision 1/CP.21, annex. | 《2015年11月30日至12月13日在巴黎举行的〈联合国气候变化框架公约〉，缔约方会议第二十一届会议报告增编：缔约方会议通过的决定》(FCCC/CP/2015/10/Add.1)，第1/CP.21号决定，附件。 |
| United Nations Convention to Combat
Desertification in Those Countries Experiencing Serious Drought and/or
Desertification, particularly in Africa (opened for signature, Paris, 14
October 1994), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1954, No. 33480, p. 3,
art. 16, also art. 19. | 《联合国关于在发生严重干旱和/或荒漠化的国家特别是在非洲防治荒漠化的公约》(1994年10月14日在巴黎开放供签署)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第1954卷，第33480号，第3页，第16条，另见第19条。 |
| United Nations Environment Programme,
Guidelines for the development of national legislation on access to
information, public participation and access to justice in environmental
matters, adopted by the Governing Council of the United Nations Environment
Programme in decision SS.XI/5, part A, of 26 February 2010. | 联合国环境规划署，联合国环境规划署理事会在2010年2月26日SS.XI/5号决定A部分通过的《关于为在环境问题上获得信息、公众参与和诉诸法律而制定国家立法的准则》。 |
| Available from www.unep.org under
“Resources”. | 可查阅www.unep.org的“资源”部分。 |
| Art. 4, para. 6 (h). | 第四条第六款第(八)项。 |
| Art. 7 (transparency measures), para. 1
(e). | 第七条(透明度措施)，第一款第(五)项。 |
| Art. 5. | 第五条。 |
| IMAS 10.70, 1 October 2007, “Safety and
occupational health, protection of the environment”, para. 12.1 (a),
available from www.mineactionstandards.org. | 《国际地雷行动标准》第10.70条，2007年10月1日，《安全和职业健康：保护环境》，第12.1 (a)段。 可查阅www.mineactionstandards.org。 |
| United Nations, Department of
Peacekeeping Operations and Department of Field Support, “Environmental
Policy for UN Field Missions”, 2009, para. 23.5. | 联合国维持和平行动部和外勤支助部，《联合国外地特派团环境政策》，2009年，第23.5段。 |
| See ICRC, Guidelines for Military Manuals
and Instructions on the Protection of the Environment in Times of Armed
Conflict, A/49/323, annex, guideline 19, referring to Geneva Convention IV,
art. 63, para. 2, and Additional Protocol I, arts. 61–67. | 见红十字委员会《关于武装冲突中的环境保护的军事手册和指南准则》，A/49/323,
附件，准则19, 其中提及《日内瓦第四公约》第六十三条第二款和《第一附加议定书》第六十一至第六十七条。 |
| It should be noted that guideline 19
refers to pursuant to special agreements between the parties or permission
granted by one of them. | 应当指出的是，准则19提及根据各方之间的特别协定或其中一方的许可。 |
| UNEP, Guidance Note, Integrating
Environment in Post-Conflict Needs Assessments (Geneva, 2009), available from
http://postconflict.unep.ch/publications/environment_toolkit.pdf (as
referenced in para. 144 and footnote 238 of A/CN.4/700). | 环境署，指导说明，《将环境纳入冲突后需求评估》(2009年，日内瓦)，可查阅http://postconflict.unep.ch/publications/environment_toolkit.pdf(参见A/CN.4/700第144段和脚注238)。 |
| Convention on the Law of the
Non-navigational Uses of International Watercourses (New York, 21 May 1997),
Official Records of the General Assembly, Fifty-first Session, Supplement No.
49 (A/51/49), vol. III, resolution 51/229, annex, arts. 9, 11, 12, 14–16, 19,
30, 31 and 33, para. 7. | 《国际水道非航行使用法公约》(1997年5月21日，纽约)，《大会正式记录，第五十一届会议，补编第49号》(A/51/49)，第三卷，第51/229号决议，附件，第9、第11、第12、第14-16、第19、第30、第31条和第33条第7款。 |
| Art. 14, para. 1 (c). | 第十四条第1款(c)项。 |
| General Assembly resolution 55/153 of 12
December 2000, annex, art. 18. The draft articles and the commentaries
thereto are reproduced in Yearbook … 1999, vol. II (Part Two), paras. 47–48. | 大会2000年12月12日第55/153号决议，附件，第18条，条款草案及其评注载录于《1999年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第47-48段。 |
| Arts. 8, 12–14 and 17. | 第8、第12-14和17条。 |
| General Assembly resolution 61/36 of 4
December 2006, annex, principle 5. | 大会2006年12月4日第61/36号决议，附件，原则5。 |
| The draft principles and the commentaries
thereto are reproduced in Yearbook … 2006, vol. (Part Two), paras. 66–67. | 原则草案及其评注载录于《2006年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第66-67段。 |
| General Assembly resolution 63/124 of 11
December 2008, annex, arts. 8, 13, 15, 17 and 19. | 大会2008年12月11日第63/124号决议，附件，第8、13、15、17和19条。 |
| The draft articles adopted by the
Commission and commentaries thereto are reproduced in Yearbook … 2008, vol.
II (Part Two), paras. 53–54. | 委员会通过的条款草案及其评注载录于《2008年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第53-54段。 |
| Art. 14. | 第14条。 |
| Art. 19. | 第19条。 |
| At its 3354th meeting, on 9 May 2017. The
topic had been included in the long-term programme of work of the Commission
during its sixty-eighth session (2016), on the basis of the proposal
contained in annex B to the report of the Commission (Official Records of the
General Assembly, Seventy-first Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/71/10)). | 在2017年5月9日的第3354次会议上，根据委员会报告(《大会正式记录，第七十一届会议，补编第10号》(A/71/10))附件B所载建议，将这个专题列入了委员会第六十八届会议(2016年)长期工作方案。 |
| The interim report of the Chair of the
Drafting Committee is available in the Analytical Guide to the Work of the
International Law Commission: http://legal.un.org/ilc/guide/gfra/shtml. | 起草委员会主席的临时报告可查阅《国际法委员会工作分析指南》：http://legal.un.org/ilc/
guide/gfra/shtml。 |
| The text of draft articles 5 to 11, as
proposed by the Special Rapporteur in his second report, reads as follows: | 特别报告员在其第二次报告中提出的第5至第11条草案案文如下： |
| Draft article 5 | 第5条草案 |
| Cases of succession of States covered by
the present draft articles | 本条款草案所涵盖的国家继承情况 |
| The present draft articles apply only to
the effects of a succession of States occurring in conformity with
international law and, in particular, the principles of international law
embodied in the Charter of the United Nations. | 本条款草案只适用于依照国际法尤其是《联合国宪章》所体现的国际法原则而发生的国家继承的效果。 |
| Draft article 6 | 第6条草案 |
| General rule | 一般规则 |
| 1. Succession of States has no impact on
the attribution of the internationally wrongful act committed before the date
of succession of States. | 1. 国家继承不影响在国家继承日之前犯下的国际不法行为的归属。 |
| 2. If the predecessor State continues to
exist, the injured State or subject may, even after the date of succession,
invoke the responsibility of the predecessor State and claim from it a
reparation for the damage caused by such internationally wrongful act. | 2. 若被继承国继续存在，则受害国或受害主体，甚至在继承日期之后，亦可援引被继承国的责任，就该国际不法行为造成的损害向被继承国提出赔偿要求。 |
| 3. This rule is without prejudice to the
possible attribution of the internationally wrongful act to the successor
State on the basis of the breach of an international obligation by an act
having a continuing character if it is bound by the obligation. | 3. 本规则不妨碍可能依据一个持续性的行为违背一项国际义务，而将该国际不法行为归于继承国，条件是该项义务对继承国具有约束力。 |
| 4. Notwithstanding the provisions of
paragraphs 1 and 2, the injured State or subject may claim reparation for the
damage caused by an internationally wrongful act of the predecessor State
also or solely from the successor State or States, as provided in the
following draft articles. | 4. 尽管有第1款和第2款的规定，但受害国或受害主体可以按照下列各条款草案的规定，就被继承国的一项国际不法行为造成的损害也向或仅向一个继承国或多个继承国提出赔偿要求。 |
| Draft article 7 | 第7条草案 |
| Separation of parts of a State
(secession) | 国家若干部分的分离(脱离) |
| 1. Subject to the exceptions referred to
in paragraphs 2 and 3, the obligations arising from an internationally
wrongful act of the predecessor State do not pass to the successor State in
case of secession of a part or parts of the territory of a State to form one
or more States, if the predecessor State continues to exist. | 1. 除第2和3款提到的例外之外，在一个国家领土一个部分或若干部分脱离，组成一个或多个国家的情况下，若被继承国继续存在，则被继承国国际不法行为产生的义务不转属继承国。 |
| 2. If particular circumstances so
require, the obligations arising from an internationally wrongful act of the
predecessor State will transfer to the successor State when the act was
carried out by an organ of a territorial unit of the predecessor that has
later become an organ of the successor State. | 2. 若具体情况要求如此，则当被继承国的国际不法行为由其某一领土单位的机关实施，而该机关后来已成为继承国机关时，该行为产生的义务将转移给继承国。 |
| 3. If particular circumstances so
require, the obligations arising from an internationally wrongful act of the
predecessor State, where there is a direct link between the act or its
consequences and the territory of the successor State or States, are assumed
by the predecessor and the successor State or States. | 3. 若具体情况要求如此，则当被继承国的国际不法行为或其后果与一个或多个继承国的领土有直接联系时，该行为产生的义务由被继承国和一个或多个继承国承担。 |
| 4. The conduct of a movement,
insurrectional or other, which succeeds in establishing a new State in part
of the territory of a predecessor State or in a territory under its
administration shall be considered an act of the new State under
international law. | 4. 成功在被继承国的一部分领土或在其管理下的某一领土内建立一个新国家的叛乱运动或其他运动的行为，依国际法应视为该新国家的行为。 |
| Draft article 8 | 第8条草案 |
| Newly independent States | 新独立国家 |
| 1. Subject to the exceptions referred to
in paragraph 2, the obligations arising from an internationally wrongful act
of the predecessor State do not pass to the successor State in case of
establishment of a newly independent State. | 1. 除第2款提及的例外情况外，在建立新独立国家的情况下，被继承国国际不法行为产生的义务不转属继承国。 |
| 2. If the newly independent State agrees,
the obligations arising from an internationally wrongful act of the
predecessor State may transfer to the successor State. | 2. 若新独立国家同意，则被继承国国际不法行为产生的义务可转移给继承国。 |
| The particular circumstances may be taken
into consideration where there is a direct link between the act or its
consequences and the territory of the successor State and where the former
dependent territory had substantive autonomy. | 若该行为或其后果与继承国领土有直接联系，且该前附属领土曾拥有实质自治权，则可考虑这一具体情形。 |
| 3. The conduct of a national liberation
or other movement which succeeds in establishing a newly independent State
shall be considered an act of the new State under international law. | 3. 成功建立新独立国家的民族解放运动或其他运动的行为依国际法应视为新国家的行为。 |
| Draft article 9 | 第9条草案 |
| Transfer of part of the territory of a
State | 一国部分领土的移交 |
| 1. Subject to the exceptions referred to
in paragraphs 2 and 3, the obligations arising from an internationally
wrongful act of the predecessor State do not pass to the successor State when
part of the territory of the predecessor State becomes part of the territory
of the successor State. | 1. 除第2和3款提及的例外情况外，当被继承国部分领土成为继承国领土时，被继承国国际不法行为产生的义务不转属继承国。 |
| 2. If particular circumstances so
require, the obligations arising from an internationally wrongful act of the
predecessor State will transfer to the successor State when the act was
carried out by an organ of a territorial unit of the predecessor that has
later become an organ of the successor State. | 2. 若具体情况要求如此，则当被继承国的国际不法行为由其某一领土单位的机关实施，而该机关后来已成为继承国机关时，该行为产生的义务将转移给继承国。 |
| 3. If particular circumstances so
require, the obligations arising from an internationally wrongful act of the
predecessor State, where there is a direct link between the act or its
consequences and the territory of the successor State or States, are assumed
by the predecessor and the successor State. | 3. 若具体情况要求如此，则当被继承国的国际不法行为或其后果与一个或多个继承国的领土有直接联系时，该行为产生的义务由被继承国和继承国承担。 |
| Draft article 10 | 第10条草案 |
| Uniting of States | 国家的合并 |
| 1. When two or more States unite and form
a new successor State, the obligations arising from an internationally
wrongful act of any predecessor State pass to the successor State. | 1. 当两个或两个以上的国家合并组成一个新的继承国时，任一被继承国的国际不法行为产生的义务转属继承国。 |
| 2. When a State is incorporated into
another existing State and ceased to exist, the obligations from an
internationally wrongful act of the predecessor State pass to the successor
State. | 2. 当一国并入另一现存国家且不复存在时，被继承国的国际不法行为产生的义务转属继承国。 |
| 3. Paragraphs 1 and 2 apply unless the
States concerned, including an injured State, otherwise agree. | 3. 除非有关国家、包括受害国另有协定，否则适用第1和2款。 |
| Draft article 11 | 第11条草案 |
| Dissolution of State | 国家解体 |
| 1. When a State dissolves and ceases to
exist and the parts of its territory form two or more successor States, the
obligations arising from the commission of an internationally wrongful act of
the predecessor State pass, subject to an agreement, to one, several or all
the successor States. | 1 一国解体且不复存在而其领土各部分组成两个或两个以上继承国时，被继承国实施国际不法行为产生的义务转属一个、几个或所有继承国，但须遵照有关协定。 |
| 2. Successor States should negotiate in
good faith with the injured State and among themselves in order to settle the
consequences of the internationally wrongful act of the predecessor State. | 2. 继承国应秉持诚意与受害国进行谈判并相互谈判，以解决被继承国国际不法行为的后果。 |
| They should take into consideration a
territorial link, an equitable proportion and other relevant factors. | 应考虑到领土联系、公平比例和其他相关因素。 |
| The report is available in the Analytical
Guide to the Work of the International Law Commission:
http://legal.un.org/ilc/guide/gfra/shtml. | 报告可查阅《国际法委员会工作分析指南》：http://legal.un.org/ilc/guide/gfra/shtml。 |
| General Assembly resolution 56/83 of 12
December 2001, annex. | 大会2001年12月12日第56/83号决议，附件。 |
| The draft articles adopted by the
Commission and the commentaries thereto are reproduced in Yearbook … 2001,
vol. II (Part Two) and corrigendum, paras. 76–77. | 委员会通过的条款草案及其评注载录于《2001年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)和更正，第76-77页。 |
| At its 2940th meeting, on 20 July 2007
(Official Records of the General Assembly, Sixty-second Session, Supplement
No. 10 (A/62/10), para. 376). | 2007年7月20日第2940次会议(《大会正式记录，第六十二届会议，补编第10号》(A/62/10)，第376段)。 |
| The General Assembly, in paragraph 7 of
its resolution 62/66 of 6 December 2007, took note of the decision of the
Commission to include the topic in its programme of work. | 大会2007年12月6日第62/66号决议第7段注意到委员会将本专题列入其工作方案的决定。 |
| The topic had been included in the
long-term programme of work of the Commission during its fifty-eighth session
(2006), on the basis of the proposal contained in annex A of the report of
the Commission (Official Records of the General Assembly, Sixty-first
Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/61/10), para. 257). | 在第五十八届会议(2006年)上，委员会已根据其报告附件A中所载建议(《大会正式记录，第六十一届会议，补编第10号》(A/61/10)，第257段)将本专题列入其长期工作方案。 |
| Official Records of the General Assembly,
Sixty-second Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/62/10), para. 386. | 《大会正式记录，第六十二届会议，补编第10号》(A/62/10)，第386段。 |
| For the memorandum prepared by the
Secretariat, see A/CN.4/596 and Corr.1. | 秘书处编写的备忘录见A/CN.4/596和Corr.1号文件。 |
| A/CN.4/601, A/CN.4/631 and A/CN.4/646,
respectively. | 分别为A/CN.4/601、A/CN.4/631和A/CN.4/646。 |
| See Official Records of the General
Assembly, Sixty-fourth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/64/10), para. 207; | 见《大会正式记录，第六十四届会议，补编第10号》(A/64/10)，第207段； |
| and ibid., Sixty-fifth Session,
Supplement No. 10 (A/65/10), para. 343. | 和同上，《第六十五届会议，补编第10号》(A/65/10)，第343段。 |
| Ibid., Sixty-seventh Session, Supplement
No. 10 (A/67/10), para. 266. | 同上，《第六十七届会议，补编第10号》(A/67/10)，第266段。 |
| A/CN.4/654, A/CN.4/661, A/CN.4/673,
A/CN.4/686 and A/CN.4/701, respectively. | 分别为A/CN.4/654、A/CN.4/661、A/CN.4/673、A/CN.4/686和A/CN.4/701。 |
| See Official Records of the General
Assembly, Sixty-eighth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/68/10), paras. 48–49. | 见《大会正式记录，第六十八届会议，补编第10号》(A/68/10)，第48和第49段。 |
| At its 3174th meeting, on 7 June 2013,
the Commission received the report of the Drafting Committee and
provisionally adopted draft articles 1, 3 and 4 and, at its 3193rd to 3196th
meetings, on 6 and 7 August 2013, it adopted the commentaries thereto (ibid.,
Sixty-ninth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/69/10), paras. 48–49). | 在2013年6月7日第3174次会议上，委员会收到起草委员会的报告并暂时通过了第1、第3和第4这三条草案，在2013年8月6日和7日第3193至第3196次会议上通过了这三条的评注(同上，《第六十九届会议，补编第10号》(A/69/10)，第48和第49段)。 |
| At its 3231st meeting, on 25 July 2014,
the Commission received the report of the Drafting Committee and
provisionally adopted draft articles 2 (e) and 5 and, at its 3240th to 3242nd
meetings, on 6 and 7 August 2014, it adopted the commentaries thereto. | 委员会在2014年7月25日第3231次会议上收到了起草委员会的报告并暂时通过了第2条草案(e)项和第5条草案，又在2014年8月6日和7日的第3240至第3242次会议上通过了其评注。 |
| At its 3329th meeting, on 27 July 2016,
the Commission provisionally adopted draft articles 2, subparagraph (f), and
6, provisionally adopted by the Drafting Committee and taken note of by the
Commission at its sixty-seventh session, and at its 3345th and 3346th
meetings, on 11 August 2016, the Commission adopted the commentaries thereto
(ibid., Seventy-first Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/71/10), paras. 194–195
and 250). | 在2016年7月27日第3329次会议上，委员会暂时通过了经第六十七届会议上起草委员会暂时通过和委员会注意到的第2条草案(f)项和第6条草案。
在2016年8月11日第3345次和第3346次会议上，委员会通过了其评注(同上，《第七十一届会议，补编第10号》(A/71/10)，第194至第195段和第250段)。 |
| At its 3378th meeting, on 20 July 2017,
the Commission provisionally adopted draft article 7 by a recorded vote and
at the 3387th to 3389th meetings on 3 and 4 August 2017, the commentaries
thereto (ibid., Seventy-first Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/72/10), paras.
74, 76 and 140–141). | 在2017年7月20日第3378次会议上，委员会经记录表决暂时通过了第7条草案。 在2017年8月3日和4日第3387次至第3389次会议上，委员会通过了其评注(同上，《第七十二届会议，补编第10号》(A/72/10)，第74、第76和第140至第141段)。 |
| A/CN.4/596 and Corr.1. | A/CN.4/596和Corr.1。 |
| A/CN.4/646. | A/CN.4/646。 |
| A/CN.4/654, A/CN.4/661 and A/CN.4/701. | A/CN.4/654、A/CN.4/661和A/CN.4/701。 |
| Difference Relating to Immunity from
Legal Process of a Special Rapporteur of the Commission on Human Rights,
Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 1999, p. 62, at p. 88, para. 63. | 关于人权委员会特别报告员享有法律程序豁免的争议，咨询意见，《1999年国际法院案例汇编》，第62页起，见第88页，第63段。 |
| Avena and Other Mexican Nationals (Mexico
v. United States of America), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2004, p. 12. | Avena及其他墨西哥国民(墨西哥诉美利坚合众国)，判决，《2004年国际法院案例汇编》，第12页。 |
| Arrest Warrant of 11 April 2000
(Democratic Republic of the Congo v. Belgium), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2002,
p. 3, at p. 22, para. 54. | 2000年4月11日逮捕证案(刚果民主共和国诉比利时)，判决，《2002年国际法院案例汇编》，第3页起，见第22页，第54段。 |
| Certain Questions of Mutual Assistance in
Criminal Matters (Djibouti v. France), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2008, p. 177,
at p. 237, para. 170. | 关于刑事事项互助的若干问题(吉布提诉法国)，判决，《2008年国际法院案例汇编》，第177页起，见第237页，第170段。 |
| Application of the Convention on the
Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Bosnia and Herzegovina v.
Serbia and Montenegro), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2007, p. 43, at p. 129,
para. 209. | 适用《防止及惩治灭绝种族罪公约》(波斯尼亚和黑塞哥维那诉塞尔维亚和黑山)，判决，《2007年国际法院案例汇编》，第43页起，见第129页，第209段。 |
| Official Records of the General Assembly,
Seventy-first Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/71/10), paras. 327–332. | 《大会正式记录，第七十一届会议，补编第10号》(A/71/10)，第327-332段。 |
| General Assembly resolution 71/140 of 13
December 2016. | 大会2016年12月13日第71/140号决议。 |
| The Advisory Group was composed of: the
Chair of the Commission, Mr. Georg Nolte, the Chair of the Planning Group,
Mr. Eduardo Valencia-Ospina, Mr. Yacouba Cissé, Mr. Shinya Murase and Mr.
Pavel Šturma. | 咨询小组的成员包括：委员会该届会议主席格奥尔格·诺尔特先生、规划组主席爱德华多·巴伦西亚－奥斯皮纳先生、雅库巴·西塞先生、村濑信也先生和帕维尔·斯图尔马先生。 |
| Official Records of the General Assembly,
Seventy-second Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/72/10), paras. 279–281. | 《大会正式记录，第七十二届会议，补编第10号》(A/72/10)，第279-281段。 |
| General Assembly resolution 72/116 of 7
December 2017. | 大会2017年12月7日第72/116号决议。 |
| Official Records of the General Assembly,
Sixty-third Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/63/10). | 《大会正式记录，第六十三届会议，补编第10号》(A/63/10)。 |
| Ibid., Sixty-fourth Session, Supplement
No. 10 (A/64/10), para. 231; | 同上，《第六十四届会议，补编第10号》(A/64/10)，第231段； |
| ibid., Sixty-fifth Session, Supplement
No. 10 (A/65/10), paras. 390–393; | 同上，《第六十五届会议，补编第10号》(A/65/10)，第390-393段； |
| ibid., Sixty-sixth Session, Supplement
No. 10 (A/66/10), paras. 392–398; | 同上，《第六十六届会议，补编第10号》(A/66/10)，第392-398段； |
| ibid., Sixty-seventh Session, Supplement
No. 10 (A/67/10), paras. 274–279; | 同上，《第六十七届会议，补编第10号》(A/67/10)，第274-279段； |
| ibid., Sixty-eighth Session, Supplement
No. 10 (A/68/10), paras. 171–179; | 同上，《第六十八届会议，补编第10号》(A/68/10)，第171-179段； |
| ibid., Sixty-ninth Session, Supplement
No. 10 (A/69/10), paras. 273–280; | 同上，《第六十九届会议，补编第10号》(A/69/10)，第273-280段； |
| ibid., Seventieth Session, Supplement No.
10 (A/70/10), paras. 288–295; | 同上，《第七十届会议，补编第10号》(A/70/10)，第288-295段； |
| ibid., Seventy-first Session, Supplement
No.10 (A/71/10), paras. 314–322; | 同上，《第七十一届会议，补编第10号》(A/71/10)，第314-322段； |
| ibid., Seventy-second Session, Supplement
No. 10 (A/72/10), paras. 269–278. | 同上，《第七十二届会议，补编第10号》(A/72/10)，第269-278段。 |
| General Assembly resolution 67/1 of 30
November 2012 on the Declaration of the high-level meeting of the General
Assembly on the rule of law at the national and international levels, para.
41. | 大会2012年11月30日关于《国内和国际的法治问题大会高级别会议宣言》的第67/1号决议，第41段。 |
| Report of the Secretary-General on
measuring the effectiveness of the support provided by the United Nations
system for the promotion of the rule of law in conflict and post-conflict
situations, S/2013/341, 11 June 2013, para. 70. | 秘书长关于衡量联合国系统在冲突中和冲突后支持促进法治的效力的报告，S/2013/341,
2013年6月11日，第70段。 |
| General Assembly resolution 70/1 of 21
October 2015, para. 35. | 大会2015年10月21日第70/1号决议，第35段。 |
| General Assembly resolution 72/119 of 7
December 2017, paras. 2 and 24. | 大会2017年12月7日第72/119号决议，第2和第24段。 |
| Ibid., para. 9. | 同上，第9段。 |
| See more specifically Official Records of
the General Assembly, Seventieth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/70/10), para.
294. | 具体见《大会正式记录，第七十届会议，补编第10号》(A/70/10)，第294段。 |
| See ibid., Fifty-seventh Session,
Supplement No. 10 (A/57/10), paras. 525–531; | 同上，《第五十七届会议，补编第10号》(A/57/10)，第525-531段； |
| ibid., Fifty-eighth Session, Supplement
No. 10 (A/58/10), para. 447; | 同上，《第五十八届会议，补编第10号》(A/58/10)，第447段； |
| ibid., Fifty-ninth Session, Supplement
No. 10 (A/59/10), para. 369; | 同上，《第五十九届会议，补编第10号》(A/59/10)，第369段； |
| ibid., Sixtieth Session, Supplement No.
10 (A/60/10), para. 501; | 同上，《第六十届会议，补编第10号》(A/60/10)，第501段； |
| ibid., Sixty-first Session, Supplement
No. 10 (A/61/10), para. 269; | 同上，《第六十一届会议，补编第10号》(A/61/10)，第269段； |
| ibid., Sixty-second Session, Supplement
No. 10 (A/62/10), para. 379; | 同上，《第六十二届会议，补编第10号》(A/62/10)，第379段； |
| ibid., Sixty-third Session, Supplement
No. 10 (A/63/10), para. 358; | 同上，《第六十三届会议，补编第10号》(A/63/10)，第358段； |
| ibid., Sixty-fourth Session, Supplement
No. 10 (A/64/10), para. 240; | 同上，《第六十四届会议，补编第10号》(A/64/10)，第240段； |
| ibid., Sixty-fifth Session, Supplement
No. 10 (A/65/10), para. 396; | 同上，《第六十五届会议，补编第10号》(A/65/10)，第396段； |
| ibid., Sixty-sixth Session, Supplement
No. 10 (A/66/10), para. 399; | 同上，《第六十六届会议，补编第10号》(A/66/10)，第399段； |
| ibid., Sixty-seventh Session, Supplement
No. 10 (A/67/10), para. 280; | 同上，《第六十七届会议，补编第10号》(A/67/10)，第280段； |
| ibid., Sixty-eighth Session, Supplement
No. 10 (A/68/10), para. 181; | 同上，《第六十八届会议，补编第10号》(A/68/10)，第181段； |
| ibid., Sixty-ninth Session, Supplement
No. 10 (A/69/10), para. 281; | 同上，《第六十九届会议，补编第10号》(A/69/10)，第281段； |
| and ibid., Seventieth Session, Supplement
No. 10 (A/70/10), para. 299; | 以及同上，《第七十届会议，补编第10号》(A/70/10)，第299段； |
| ibid., Seventy-first Session, Supplement
No. 10 (A/71/10), para. 333; | 同上，《第七十一届会议，补编第10号》(A/71/10)，第333段； |
| ibid., Seventy-second Session, Supplement
No. 10 (A/72/10), para. 282. | 同上，《第七十二届会议，补编第10号》(A/72/10)，第282段。 |
| For considerations relating to page
limits on the reports of Special Rapporteurs, see, for example, Yearbook …
1977, vol. II (Part Two), p. 132, and Yearbook … 1982, vol. II (Part Two),
pp. 123–124. | 例如，关于对特别报告员报告页数限制的考虑，见《1977年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，132页，和《1982年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，123-124页。 |
| See also General Assembly resolution
32/151 of 9 December 1977, para. 10, and General Assembly resolution 37/111
of 16 December 1982, para. 5, as well as subsequent resolutions on the annual
reports of the Commission to the General Assembly. | 另见大会1977年12月9日第32/151号决议第10段和大会1982年12月16日第37/111号决议第5段，以及之后关于委员会向大会提交年度报告的决议。 |
| http://legal.un.org//ilc. | http://legal.un.org//ilc。 |
| In general, available from:
http://legal.un.org/cod/. | 一般而言，可从以下网站获取：http://legal.un.org/cod/。 |
| www.un.org/law/avl/. | www.un.org/law/avl/。 |
| The statement is recorded in the summary
record of that meeting. | 发言载于该次会议简要记录。 |
| The statements are recorded in the
summary record of that meeting. | 发言载于该次会议简要记录。 |
| The following persons participated in the
Seminar: Ms. Manjida Ahamed (Bangladesh), Ms. Noor Alsada (Qatar), Mr.
Ezéchiel Amani Cirimwami (Democratic Republic of the Congo), Ms. Meseret
Fassil Assefa (Ethiopia), Ms. Jing Geng (United States of America), Mr.
Arnaud Irakoze (Burundi), Mr. Berdak Kalmuratov (Uzbekistan), Mr. Fadi Khalil
(Egypt), Mr. Ales Klyunya (Russian Federation), Mr. Oumar Kourouma (Guinea),
Mr. Ralph Loren Eisendecher (Chile), Mr. Patrick Luna (Brazil), Mr. Michael
Moffatt (Canada), Mr. Yusuke Nakayama (Japan), Ms. Keseme Odudu (Nigeria),
Mr. Andrés Ordoñez-Buitrago (Colombia), Ms. Anastasija Popeska (the former
Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia), Ms. Harsha Rajwanshi (India), Mr. Mustafa
Can Sati (Turkey), Ms. Antara Singh (Nepal), Mr. Gianfranco Smith (Panama),
Ms. Alba Surana González (Andorra), Ms. Hilda Tizeba (United Republic of
Tanzania), Mr. Tianze Zhang (China) and Ms. Eva Zijlstra (Netherlands). | 下列人员参加了讲习班研讨会：Manjida Ahamed女士(孟加拉国)、Noor Alsada女士(卡塔尔)、Ezéchiel
Amani Cirimwami先生(刚果民主共和国)、Meseret Fassil Assefa女士(埃塞俄比亚)、Jing Geng女士(美利坚合众国)、Arnaud Irakoze先生(布隆迪)、Berdak Kalmuratov先生(乌兹别克斯坦)、Fadi
Khalil先生(埃及)、Ales Klyunya先生(俄罗斯联邦)、Oumar Kourouma先生(几内亚)、Ralph Loren-Eisendecher先生(智利)、Patrick Luna先生(巴西)、Michael
Moffatt先生(加拿大)、Yusuke Nakayama先生(日本)、Keseme Odudu女士(尼日利亚)、Andrés Ordoñez-Buitrago先生(哥伦比亚)、Anastasija
Popeska女士(前南斯拉夫的马其顿共和国)、Harsha Rajwanshi女士(印度)、Mustafa Can Sati先生(土耳其)、Antara Singh女士(尼泊尔)、Gianfranco
Smith先生(巴拿马)、Alba Surana Gonzalez女士(安道尔)、Hilda Tizeba女士(坦桑尼亚)、Tianze Zhang先生(中国)、Eva Zijlstra女士(荷兰)。 |
| The Selection Committee, chaired by Mr.
Makane Moïse Mbengue, Professor of International Law at the University of
Geneva, met on 24 April 2018 and selected 25 candidates from 302
applications. | 由日内瓦大学国际法教授Makane Moïse Mbengue先生担任主席的甄选委员会于2018年4月24日举行会议，从302名申请人中录取了25人参加本届讲习班。 |
| https://ilsalumni.org/. | https://ilsalumni.org/。 |
| See principle 1(1) of the Princeton
Principles on Universal Jurisdiction, (adopted Jan. 27, 2001), Princeton
University, Program in Law and Public Affairs and Universal Jurisdiction:
National Courts and the Prosecution of Serious Crimes Under International Law
(Stephen Macedo, ed. ), 2004. | 见《普林斯顿普遍管辖权原则》的原则1(1)，(2001年1月27日通过)，普林斯顿大学法律和公共事务方案和《普遍管辖权：国家法院与国际法下严重罪行的起诉问题》(Stephen Macedo编著)，2004年。 |
| Here, by the title of this topic, we
impliedly distinguish between universal criminal jurisdiction and universal
civil jurisdiction. | 在本专题的标题中，我们隐含地区分了普遍刑事管辖权与普遍民事管辖权。 |
| However, we note that the body of this
paper refers to the former principle using the more common phrase “universal
jurisdiction” or the “universality principle”. | 但我们注意到，正文使用更常用的短语“普遍管辖原则”或“普遍性原则”指普遍刑事管辖权原则。 |
| U.N. Secretary-General, The Scope and
Application of the Principle of Universal Jurisdiction, ¶¶ 10–11, U.N. Doc
A/65/181 (July 29, 2010). | 联合国秘书长，《普遍管辖权原则的范围和适用》，第10-11段，联合国文件A/65/181(2010年7月29日)。 |
| See the preamble to the Rome Statute for
the International Criminal Court, July 17, 1998, U.N.T.S., vol. 2187, p. 3,
which used this language. | 见《国际刑事法院罗马规约》序言，1998年7月17日，《联合国条约汇编》第2187卷第3页，其中使用了这一措辞。 |
| But this was by no means the first
expression of this same concept. | 但是，这绝非这一概念的第一次表述。 |
| In fact, that phrasing can be traced back
to the work of the ILC, which in its Draft Code of Crimes, determined that
universal jurisdiction attaches to such crimes. | 事实上，这一措辞可追溯到国际法委员会的工作，委员会在其《治罪法草案》中认定，普遍管辖权与此类犯罪相挂钩。 |
| See, e.g., the Draft Code of Crimes
against the Peace and Security of Mankind, Yearbook of the International Law
Commission, 1996, Part Two. | 例如，见《危害人类和平及安全治罪法》，《国际法委员会年鉴》，1996年，第二部分。 |
| The UN Security Council established,
acting under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations, the
International Criminal Tribunals for the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda in 1993
and 1994 respectively. | 联合国安全理事会根据《联合国宪章》第七章行事，分别于1993年和1994年设立了前南斯拉夫问题和卢旺达问题国际刑事法庭。 |
| The UN also entered into agreements with
Sierra Leone, Cambodia and Lebanon to establish special “hybrid” courts for
those countries. | 联合国还与塞拉利昂、柬埔寨和黎巴嫩签订了协议，为这些国家设立了“混合”型的特别法庭。 |
| Regional bodies have taken up the issue
with, for example, the African Union having entered into an agreement with
one of its member States to establish a hybrid court within the national
courts of Senegal to prosecute torture and crimes against humanity while the
European Union has also collaborated with one of its members to do the same. | 有的区域机构已着手处理这一问题，例如非洲联盟与其成员国之一签订了一项协议，在塞内加尔国内法院内设立一个混合法庭起诉酷刑和危害人类罪，而欧洲联盟也与成员国之一开展了同样的合作。 |
| For assessments of some of these
tribunals, see Charles Chernor Jalloh, ed., The Sierra Leone Special Court
and Its Legacy: The Impact for Africa and International Criminal Law
(Cambridge University Press, 2013); | 对其中一些法庭的评价，见Charles Chernor Jalloh编著的《塞拉利昂特别法庭及其影响：对非洲和国际刑法的影响》(剑桥大学出版社，2013年)； |
| Simon Meisenberg and Ignaz Stegmiller,
eds., The Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia (Springer, 2016); | Simon Meisenberg和Ignaz
Stegmiller编著的《柬埔寨法院特别法庭》(施普林格，2016年)。 |
| Att’y-Gen. of the Gov’t of Israel v.
Eichmann, (Isr. Sup. Ct. 1962), 36 ILR 5 (1961). | 以色列总检察长诉艾希曼案，(以色列最高法院，1962年)，36 ILR
5(1961年)。 |
| See, id., which speaks to piracy as an
example of that crime. | 见，同上，其中提到海盗行为是此种罪行的一个例子。 |
| The Adolf Eichmann case reflected this. | 阿道夫·艾希曼一案反映了这一点。 |
| Eichmann was a senior official in Nazi
Germany responsible for organizing the arrest, deportation, internment and
extermination of Jews during World War II. Israeli secret agents kidnapped
him from Argentina on 11 May 1960. | 艾希曼是纳粹德国的一名高级官员，在第二次世界大战期间负责组织逮捕、驱逐、监禁和灭绝犹太人的行动。 以色列特工人员1960年5月11日在阿根廷将他绑架。 |
| Argentina complained to the Security
Council, claiming a breach of its sovereignty and international law. | 阿根廷向安全理事会提出控告，声称这一行为侵犯其主权和国际法。 |
| The Security Council adopted resolution
138 (1960) on 24 June 1960. | 安全理事会1960年6月24日通过了第138(1960)号决议。 |
| The Security Council declared such acts
could cause international friction, and may, if repeated, endanger
international peace and security. | 安全理事会宣布，这种行为可能导致国际摩擦，如果再度发生就可能危及国际和平与安全。 |
| It asked Israel to make appropriate
reparation. | 它要求以色列作出适当赔偿。 |
| Israel expressed regrets and considered
that this constituted such reparation. | 以色列表示遗憾，并认为这一表态即构成了此种赔偿。 |
| Argentina expressed dissatisfaction with
Israel’s expression of regret. | 阿根廷对以色列表示遗憾表示了不满。 |
| It expelled the Israeli Ambassador. | 阿根廷驱逐了以色列大使。 |
| After diplomatic discussions behind the
scenes, the two States issued a joint communiqué declaring the incident
closed. | 经过幕后外交商讨，两国发表了一份联合公报，宣布这一事件结案。 |
| These sentiments are expressed in the
Draft Code of Crimes against the Peace and Security of Mankind with
commentaries 1996, text adopted by the International Law Commission at its
forty-eighth session, in 1996, and submitted to the General Assembly as a
part of the Commission’s report covering the work of that session (at para.
50). | 国际法委员会1996年第四十八届会议通过并列入向大会提交的委员会该届会议工作报告的《〈危害人类和平及安全治罪法草案〉的案文及其评注》(1996年)表达了这些情绪(第50段)。 |
| The report, which also contains
commentaries on the draft articles especially articles 8 and 9, appears in
Yearbook of the International Law Commission, 1996, vol. II, Part Two. | 该报告还含有关于条款草案尤其是第8和第9条的评注，载于1996年《国际法委员会年鉴》第二卷第二部分。 |
| The Commission provided for the broadest
form of jurisdiction for the crimes at the national level based on the
universality principle alongside the jurisdiction of an international
criminal court. | 委员会在普遍性原则与国际刑事法院的管辖权相并行的基础上，对国家层次的罪行规定了最广泛形式的管辖权。 |
| U.N. Secretary-General Assembly, The
Scope and Application of the Principle of Universal Jurisdiction Report of
the Secretary-General prepared on the basis of comments and observations of
governments, ¶¶ 10–11, U.N. Doc A/65/181 (July 29, 2010). | 联合国秘书长，《普遍管辖权原则的范围和适用》，秘书长在各国政府的评论和意见基础上编写的报告，第10-11段，联合国文件A/65/181(2010年7月29日)。 |
| The Rome Statute for the International
Criminal Court, supra note 3, at preamble, (“most serious crimes of concern
to the international community”); | 《国际刑事法院罗马规约》，前注3, 序言，(“国际社会关注的最严重犯罪”)； |
| Luis Benavides, The Universal
Jurisdiction Principle: Nature and Scope, 1 Anuario Mexicano de Derecho
Internacional, L. Rev. 22, 26–27 (2001). | Luis Benavides, 《普遍管辖原则：性质和范围》，1 Anuario Mexicano de Derecho Internacional, L. Rev. 22, 26-27
(2001)。 |
| See the 1996 Report of the International
Law Commission, supra note 8, including the text of draft article 8 and 9 of
the Draft Code of Crimes Against the Peace and Security of Mankind with
commentaries thereto. | 见1996年《国际法委员会报告》，前注8, 包括《危害人类和平及安全治罪法草案》第8和第9条的案文及评注。 |
| See, e.g., Convention Against the Taking
of Hostages, art. 5, Dec. 17, 1979, 1316 U.N.T.S. 206; | 例如，见《反对劫持人质国际公约》第5条，1979年12月17日，1316《联合国条约汇编》206； |
| Convention Against Torture and Other
Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, art 5(3), Dec. 10, 1984,
1465 U.N.T.S. 85; | 《禁止酷刑和其他残忍、不人道或有辱人格的待遇或处罚公约》第5条第3款，1984年12月10日，1465《联合国条约汇编》85； |
| Convention for the Protection of Cultural
Property in the Event of Armed Conflict with Regulations for the Execution of
the Convention, art. 28, May 14, 1954,
http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0008/000824/082464mb.pdf; | 《关于发生武装冲突时保护文化财产公约的实施条例》第28条，1954年5月14日，http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0008/000824/082464 mb.pdf； |
| Convention for the Protection of
Submarine Telegraph Cables, art. 8–9, Mar. 14, 1884,
http://www.iscpc.org/information/Convention_on_Protection_of_Cables_1884.pdf; | 《保护海底电报电缆公约》第8-9条，1884年3月14日，http://www.iscpc.org/information/ Convention on Protection of
Cables1884.pdf； |
| Convention for the Suppression of the
Circulation of and Traffic in Obscene Publications, art. 2, Sept. 12, 1923,
27 League of Nations Treaty Series 214; | 《禁止流通和贩运淫秽出版物》第2条，1923年9月12日，《国际联盟条约汇编》214； |
| Convention on Offences and Certain Other
Acts Committed on Board Aircraft, art. 3, Sept. 14, 1963, 704 U.N.T.S. 219; | 《关于在航空器内的犯罪和犯有某些其他行为的公约》第3条，1963年9月14日，704《联合国条约汇编》219； |
| Convention on the Prevention and
Punishment of Crimes Against Internationally Protected Persons, Including
Diplomatic Agents, art. 3, Dec. 14, 1973, 1035 U.N.T.S. 168; | 《关于防止和惩处侵害应受国际保护人员包括外交代表的公约》第3条，1973年12月14日，1035《联合国条约汇编》168； |
| Convention on the Prevention and
Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, art. 6, Dec. 9, 1948, 78 U.N.T.S. 277; | 《防止及惩治灭绝种族罪公约》第6条，1948年12月9日，78《联合国条约汇编》277； |
| Convention on the Safety of United
Nations and Associated Personnel, Dec. 9, 1994, 2051 U.N.T.S. 363; | 《联合国人员和有关人员的安全公约》，1994年12月9日，2051《联合国条约汇编》363； |
| Convention on the Suppression of Unlawful
Acts Against the Safety of Maritime Navigation, art. 7 (4, 5), Mar. 10, 1988,
1678 U.N.T.S. 222; | 《关于制止危害海上航行安全公约》第7条(第4、第5款)，1988年3月10日，1678《联合国条约汇编》222； |
| First Additional Protocol to the 1949
Geneva Convention, art. 85 ¶ 1, Jun. 8, 1977, 1125 U.N.T.S. 3; | 1949年《日内瓦四公约第一附加议定书》第85条第1款，1977年6月8日，1125《联合国条约汇编》3； |
| First Geneva Convention, art. 49, Aug.
12, 1949, 75 U.N.T.S. 31; | 《日内瓦第一公约》第49条，1949年8月12日，75《联合国条约汇编》31； |
| Fourth Geneva Convention, art. 146, Aug.
12, 1949, 75 U.N.T.S. 287; | 《日内瓦第四公约》第146条，1949年8月12日，75《联合国条约汇编》287； |
| Hague Convention for the Suppression of
Unlawful Seizure of Aircraft, art. 4 (3), Dec. 16, 1970, 860 U.N.T.S. 105; | 《关于制止非法劫持航空器的海牙公约》第4条第3款，1970年12月16日，860《联合国条约汇编》105； |
| International Convention against the
Recruitment, Use, Financing and Training of Mercenaries, G.A. Res. 44/34,
art. 9(2–3) (Dec. 4, 1989); | 《反对招募、使用、资助和训练雇佣军国际公约》，大会第44/34号决议，第9条(第2-3款)(1989年12月4日)； |
| Inter-American Convention on Forced
Disappearance of Persons, art. 4, 6, June 9, 1994,
http://www.oas.org/juridico/english/treaties/a-60.html; | 《美洲被迫失踪人士公约》第4、第6条，1994年6月9日，http://www.oas.org/juridico/english/treaties/a-60.html； |
| International Convention against the
Taking of Hostages, G.A. Res. 34/146, art. 5, 8 (Dec. 17, 1979); | 《反对劫持人质国际公约》，大会第34/146号决议，第5、第8条(1979年12月17日)； |
| International Convention for the
Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance, art. 6.1, Dec. 20,
2006, 2716 U.N.T.S. 3; | 《保护所有人免遭强迫失踪国际公约》，第6.1条，2006年12月20日，2716《联合国条约汇编》3； |
| International Convention for the
Suppression of Counterfeiting Currency, art. 17, Apr. 20, 1929, 112 League of
Nations Treaty Series 371; | 《国际取缔伪造货币公约》第17条，1929年4月20日，112《国际联盟条约汇编》371； |
| Protocol for the Suppression of Unlawful
Acts Against the Safety of Fixed Platforms Located on the Continental Shelf,
art. 3, Mar. 10 1988, 1678 U.N.T.S. 304; | 《关于制止危害民用航空安全的非法行为的大陆架固定平台的议定书》第3条，1988月3月10日，1678《联合国条约汇编》304； |
| Second Geneva Convention, art. 50, Aug.
12, 1949, 75 U.N.T.S. 85; | 《日内瓦第二公约》第50条，1949年8月12日，75《联合国条约汇编》85； |
| Single Convention on Narcotics and Drugs,
art. 36 ¶ 2, Mar. 30, 1961, 520 U.N.T.S. 151; | 《麻醉品单一公约》第36条第2款，1961年3月30日，520《联合国条约汇编》151； |
| Statute of the International Criminal
Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia S.C. Res. 832 (May 25, 1993); | 《前南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭规约》，安理会第832号决议，(1993年5月25日)； |
| Third Geneva Convention, art. 129, Aug.
12, 1949, 75 U.N.T.S. 135. | 《日内瓦第三公约》第129条，1949年8月12日，75《联合国条约汇编》135。 |
| Further, the complementarity principle of
the Rome Statute for the International Criminal Court, arts. 17–20, 53, July
17, 1998, U.N. Doc. A/Conf.183/9, envisages the possibility of States
exercising jurisdiction at the national level for crimes within the
jurisdiction of the Court. | 此外，《国际刑事法院罗马规约》的补充性原则，第17-20条和第53条，1998年7月17日，联合国文件A/CONF.183/9, 提出国家可以对国际刑事法院管辖范围内的罪行行使国家一级的管辖权。 |
| Geneva Convention, supra note 12. | 日内瓦公约，前注12。 |
| Convention Against Torture and Other
Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, Dec. 10, 1984, 1465
U.N.T.S. 85. | 《禁止酷刑和其他残忍、不人道或有辱人格的待遇或处罚公约》，1984年12月10日，1465《联合国条约汇编》85。 |
| See Sixth Committee of the General
Assembly, The Scope and Application of the Principle of Universal Jurisdiction,
Informal Working Paper prepared by the Chairperson for discussion in the
Working Group, pp. 1–7 (3 November 2017) (prepared as a basis for
facilitating further discussion in the light of previous exchanges of views
among state delegates to the Sixth Committee and merging various informal
papers developed between 2011 and 2014),
https://papersmart.unmeetings.org/media2/16155022/wg-universal-jurisdiction_informal-working-paper.pdf. | 见大会第六委员会，《普遍管辖权原则的范围和适用》，主席为工作组讨论所编写的非正式工作文件，第1至7页(2017年11月3日)(参照出席第六委员会的各国代表之间此前交换的意见并汇总了2011至2014年期间拟订的多份非正式文件编写，作为便利进一步讨论的基础)，https://papersmart.unmeetings.org/media2/16155022/wg-universal-jurisdiction_informal-working-paper.pdf。 |
| Case Concerning the Arrest Warrant of 11
April 2000 (Democratic Republic of the Congo v. Belgium), Judgment, I.C.J.
Reports 2002, ¶ 7. | 2000年4月11日逮捕令案(刚果民主共和国诉比利时)，判决书，《2002年国际法院案例汇编》，第7段。 |
| A more recent set of cases before the
ICJ, some of which have not yet been decided but raised similar concerns
about immunities and assertions of criminal jurisdiction, involved France on
the one hand and Congo, Djibouti and Equatorial Guinea on the other. | 国际法院较为近期处理的一些案件以法国为一方，刚果、吉布提和赤道几内亚为另一方，其中有些案件尚未判决但引起了对刑事管辖豁免和主张的类似关切。 |
| The Court has more recently been asked to
rule on other cases implicating the duty to prosecute or extradite under the
Torture Convention in a case involving Belgium and Senegal. | 国际法院在更为近期被要求裁决其他一些案件，其中涉及比利时和塞内加尔在一起案件中根据《禁止酷刑公约》负有的起诉或引渡义务。 |
| Id. In Arrest Warrant, the Court
addressed the issue of immunity, not universal jurisdiction. | 同上，在逮捕令案中，国际法院处理的是豁免问题，不是普遍管辖权问题。 |
| Assembly/AU/Dec. 420(XIX) — Decision on
the Abuse of the Principle of Universal Jurisdiction, Doc. EX.CL/731(XXI); | Assembly/AU/Dec. 420(XIX)，关于滥用普遍管辖原则问题的决定，文件EX.CL/731(XXI)； |
| Nineteenth Ordinary Session of the
Assembly in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 15–16 July 2012; | 2012年7月15日至16日在埃塞俄比亚亚的斯亚贝巴举行的大会第十九届常会； |
| Assembly/AU/Dec. 355(XVI), Decision on
the Abuse of the Principle of Universal Jurisdiction, Doc. EX.CL/640(XVIII),
Sixteenth Ordinary Session of the Assembly in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 30–31
January 2011; | Assembly/ AU/Dec.355(XVI)，关于滥用普遍管辖原则问题的决定，文件EX.CL/640(XVIII)，2011年1月30日至31日在埃塞俄比亚亚的斯亚贝巴举行的大会第十六届常会； |
| Assembly/ AU/Dec. 296 (XV), Decision on
the Abuse of the Principle of Universal Jurisdiction, Doc. EX.CL/606 (XVII); | Assembly/AU/Dec.296 (XV)，关于滥用普遍管辖原则问题的决定，文件EX.CL/606 (XVII)； |
| Fifteenth Ordinary Session of the
Assembly in in Kampala, Uganda in July 2010; | 2010年7月在乌干达坎帕拉举行的第十五届常会； |
| Assembly/AU/Dec.271(XIV), Decision on the
Abuse of the Principle of Universal Jurisdiction, Doc. EX.CL/540(XVI); | Assembly/AU/Dec.271(XIV)，关于滥用普遍管辖原则问题的决定，文件EX.CL/540(XVI)； |
| Fourteenth Ordinary Session of the
Assembly in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 31 January–2 February 2010; | 2010年1月31日至2月2日在埃塞俄比亚亚的斯亚贝巴举行的第十四届常会； |
| Assembly/AU/Dec.243(XIII) Rev.1, Decision
on the Abuse of the Principle of Universal Jurisdiction, Doc. Assembly /AU/11
(XIII); | Assembly/AU/Dec.243(XIII) Rev.1, 关于滥用普遍管辖原则问题的决定，文件Assembly/AU/11 (XIII)； |
| Thirteenth Ordinary Session of the
Assembly in Sirte, Great Socialist People’s Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, 1–3 July
2009; | 2009年7月1日至3日在大阿拉伯利比亚人民社会主义民众国锡尔特举行的大会第十三届常会； |
| Assembly/AU/Dec.213(XII), Decision on the
Implementation of the Assembly Decision on the Abuse of the Principle of
Universal Jurisdiction, Doc. | Assembly/AU/Dec.213(XII)，关于执行关于滥用普遍管辖原则问题的大会决定的决定，文件Assembly/AU/3 (XII)； |
| Assembly/AU/3 (XII); Twelfth Ordinary
Session of the Assembly in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 1–3 February 2009; | 2009年2月1日至3日在埃塞俄比亚亚的斯亚贝巴举行的第十二届常会； |
| Assembly/AU/Dec.199 (XI), Decision on the
Report of the Commission on the Abuse of the Principle of Universal
Jurisdiction, Doc. Assembly/AU/14 (XI); | Assembly/AU/Dec.199 (XI)，关于滥用普遍管辖权问题委员会报告的决定，文件Assembly/AU/14 (XI)； |
| Eleventh Ordinary Session of the Assembly
in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 30 June–1 July, 2008. | 2008年6月30日至7月1日在埃塞俄比亚亚的斯亚贝巴举行的第十一届常会。 |
| Letter dated June 29, 2009, from the
Permanent Rep. of the United Republic of Tanzania to the United Nations
addressed to the Secretary-General, U.N. Doc. A/63/237/Rev. 1 (July 23,
2009). | 坦桑尼亚联合共和国常驻联合国代表2009年6月29日致联合国秘书长的信函，联合国文件A/63/237/Rev.1 (2009年7月23日)。 |
| See also Constitutive Act of the African
Union art. 4(h) (“The Union shall function in accordance with the following
principles: … the right of the Union to intervene in a Member State pursuant
to a decision of the Assembly in respect of grave circumstances, namely: war
crimes, genocide and crimes against humanity”). | 又见《非洲联盟宪章》第4条(h)项(“联盟的运作遵循下列原则：“对于严重情况，即战争罪、种族灭绝和危害人类罪，联盟有权按照大会的决定在成员国境内实施干预”)。 |
| AU Decisions on Universal Jurisdiction,
see discussion associated with footnote 18. | 非盟关于普遍管辖权的决定，见脚注18涉及的讨论。 |
| AU Decisions on Universal Jurisdiction,
id. | 非盟关于普遍管辖权的决定，同上。 |
| Note that, in the aftermath of the AU-EU
expert group, the AU Commission concluded that it had been “difficult to find
a durable solution in further discussions on this matter with the EU side. | 请注意，继非盟－欧盟专家组会议之后，非盟委员会得出结论认为，“难以在关于此事的进一步讨论中与欧盟方面找到持久的解决办法”。 |
| ” It therefore championed the item in the
General Assembly, which added it as a topic in 2009, to make the discussion
more global. | 因此，非盟向大会提出了这个项目以求扩大讨论的范围，大会于2009年将此列为专题。 |
| Significantly, in 2012, the AU also took
a positive step and also adopted the African Union Model Law on Universal
Jurisdiction over International Crimes which it commended to its Member
States for inclusion in domestic legislation (endorsing “universal
jurisdiction” for genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, piracy,
trafficking in drugs and terrorism). Rep. of the Sixth Comm. on Its
Sixty-Fourth Session, The scope and application of the principle of universal
jurisdiction, U.N. Doc. A/64/452, at 1–2. | 重要的是在2012年，非盟又采取了一个积极步骤，并通过了《非洲联盟国际罪行普遍管辖权示范法》，其中建议成员国在国内立法中纳入相关规定(核可对种族灭绝、危害人类罪、战争罪、海盗罪、贩运毒品和恐怖主义的“普遍管辖权”)。 |
| G.A. Res. 64/117 (Jan. 15, 2010); G.A.
Res. 65/33 (Jan. 10, 2011); G.A. Res. 66/103 (Jan. 13, 2012); | 第六委员会第六十四届会议的报告，《普遍管辖权原则的范围和适用》，联合国文件A/64/452,
第1-2页。 |
| G.A. Res. 67/98 (Jan. 14, 2013); G.A.
Res. 68/117 (Dec. 18, 2013); G.A. Res. 69/124 (Dec. 18, 2014); | 大会第64/117 (2010年1月15日)、第65/33 (2011年1月10日)、第66/103 (2012年1月13日)、第67/98 (2013年1月14日)、第68/117 (2013年12月18日)、第69/124 (2014年12月18日)、第70/119 (2015年12月18日)、第71/149 (2016年12月20日)、第72/120 (2017年12月18日)号决议。 |
| G.A. Res. 70/119 (Dec. 18, 2015); G.A.
Res. 71/149 (Dec. 20, 2016); G.A. Res. 72/120 (Dec. 18, 2017). | 截至本文撰写之时，非洲集团尚未举行会议或提出这样一项建议。 |
| The African Group has not, as of this
writing, being convened or forwarded such a recommendation. See
Assembly/AU/Dec.665-689(XXX), Decision on the International Criminal Court,
Doc. EX.CL/1068(XXXII), Thirtieth Ordinary Session, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia,
28–29 January 2018, para. 5(v), p. 2. | 见Assembly/AU/Dec.665-689(XXX)，关于国际刑事法院的决定，文件EX.CL/1068(XXXII)，2018年1月28日至29日在埃塞俄比亚亚的斯亚贝巴举行的第三十届常会，第5(v)段，第2页。 |
| The Commission has worked extensively in
the field of international criminal law. | 本委员会在国际刑法领域做了大量工作。 |
| This began with its first project, that
is, the Formulation of the Principles of International Law recognized in the
Charter of the Nuremberg Tribunal and Judgment, and continued with the
Question of International Criminal Jurisdiction, the Question of Defining
Aggression, Draft Code of Crimes against the Peace and Security of Mankind
(1954, 1996), Draft Statute for an International Criminal Court, Crime of
Aggression, The Obligation to Extradite or Prosecute (aut dedere aut
judicare) through to more recent topics such as Immunity of State officials
from foreign criminal jurisdiction, and Crimes against Humanity. | 这始于委员会的第一个项目，即拟订纽伦堡法庭宪章及该法庭判决书确认的各项国际法原则，此后又处理了国际刑事管辖权问题、侵略的定义问题、《危害人类和平及人类治罪法草案》(1954年、1996年)、《国际刑事法院规约草案》、侵略罪、引渡或起诉的义务(不引渡即起诉)，以及较为近期的“国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免”和“危害人类罪”等专题。 |
| See the Secretariat Proposal on the topic
of Extraterritorial Jurisdiction (Annex V),
http://legal.un.org/docs/?path=../ilc/reports/2006/english/annexes.pdf&lang=EFSRAC
(last accessed Aug. 10, 2018). | 见秘书处关于“域外管辖权”专题的提案(附件五)，http://legal.un.org/docs/?path=../ilc/reports/
2006/english/annexes.pdf&lang=EFSRAC (最近一次访问是在2018年8月10日)。 |
| Int’l Law Comm’n, Rep. on the Work of Its
Fifty-Eighth Session, U.N. Doc. A/61/10, at Annex E (2006) (noting at
paragraph 16, that universal jurisdiction is distinctive compared to other
grounds of jurisdiction since its invocation typically is in relation to
protection of the interests of the international community rather than
exclusively the forum state’s own national interest, and thus, that the
principle “would fall outside of the scope” of that topic. | 《国际法委员会第五十八届会议工作报告》，联合国文件A/61/10, 附件E (2006年) (第16段指出，普遍管辖权的基理不同于其他管辖权，援引普遍管辖权通常是为了保护国际社会的利益而不单纯是法院所在国的本国利益，因此，这一原则“处于本专题的范围之外”。 |
| Interestingly, as an aside,
extraterritorial jurisdiction was among the first cluster of topics selected
by the Commission when it reviewed, during its first session, a survey of
international law prepared by the Secretariat. | 值得顺带一提的是，域外管辖权是本委员会在第一届会议期间审查秘书处编写的一份国际法调查报告时选定的第一批专题之一。 |
| Out of 25 topics recommended for possible
inclusion in its work programme, the Commission identified a provisional list
of 14, one of which was “Jurisdiction with regard to crimes committed outside
national territory”). | 在建议可纳入工作方案的25项专题中，委员会确定了包含14项专题的暂定清单，其中之一便是“对在国家领土以外实施的罪行的管辖权”)。 |
| Yearbook of the International Law
Commission, 1997, vol. II (Part Two), para. 238. | 《国际法委员会年鉴》，1997年，第二卷(第二部分)，第238段。 |
| Sixth Committee G.A. Draft Res., U.N.
Doc. A/C.6/66/L.19, at 1 (Nov. 1, 2001). | 大会第六委员会决议草案，联合国文件A/C.6/66/L.19, 第1页(2001年11月1日)。 |
| United Nations, Seventy-Second Session:
The scope and application of the principle of universal jurisdiction (Agenda
item 85), http://www.un.org/en/ga/sixth/72/universal_jurisdiction.shtml (last
visited August 10, 2018). | 联合国，第七十二届会议：普遍管辖权原则的范围和适用(议程项目85)，http://www.un.org/
en/ga/sixth/72/universal_jurisdiction.shtml (最近一次访问是在2018年8月10日)。 |
| G.A. Res. 65/33, ¶ 2 (Jan. 10, 2011). | 大会第65/33号决议，第2段 (2011年1月10日)。 |
| See, e.g., the treaties cited in footnote
12. | 例如，见脚注12中提到的条约。 |
| A number of states spoke to the topic in
the 2017 debate, including: Algeria, Argentina, Australia, Bangladesh,
Brazil, China, Cuba, the Czech Republic, El Salvador, Estonia, India,
Indonesia, the Islamic Republic of Iran, Israel, Kenya, Lebanon, Lesotho,
Liechtenstein, Malaysia, Mexico, Nigeria, Norway, Paraguay, Rwanda,
Singapore, Slovenia, South Africa, Sudan, Syria, Thailand, Trinidad and
Tobago, the United Kingdom, the United States, and Venezuela. U.N.
Secretary-General, The Scope and application of the principle of universal
jurisdiction, U.N. Doc. | 一些国家在2017年的辩论中谈到了这个专题，包括阿尔及利亚、阿根廷、澳大利亚、孟加拉国、巴西、中国、古巴、捷克共和国、萨尔瓦多、爱沙尼亚、印度、印度尼西亚、伊朗伊斯兰共和国、以色列、肯尼亚、黎巴嫩、莱索托、列支敦士登、马来西亚、墨西哥、尼日利亚、挪威、巴拉圭、卢旺达、新加坡、斯洛文尼亚、南非、苏丹、叙利亚、泰国、特立尼达和多巴哥、联合王国、美国和委内瑞拉玻利瓦尔共和国。 |
| A/65/181 (July 29, 2010); U.N.
Secretary-General, The Scope and application of the principle of universal
jurisdiction, U.N. Doc. | 联合国秘书长，《普遍管辖权原则的范围和适用》，联合国文件A/65/181(2010年7月29日)； |
| A/66/93 (June 20, 2011); U.N.
Secretary-General, The Scope and application of the principle of universal
jurisdiction, U.N. Doc. | 联合国秘书长，《普遍管辖权原则的范围和适用》，联合国文件A/66/93 (2011年6月20日)； |
| A/66/93/Add. 1 (June 20, 2011); The Scope
and application of the principle of universal jurisdiction, U.N. Doc. | 联合国秘书长，《普遍管辖权原则的范围和适用》，联合国文件A/66/93/Add.1
(2011年6月20日)； |
| A/67/116 (June 28, 2012); The Scope and
application of the principle of universal jurisdiction, U.N. Doc. | 《普遍管辖权原则的范围和适用》，联合国文件A/67/116 (2012年6月28日)； |
| A/68/113 (June 26, 2013); The Scope and
application of the principle of universal jurisdiction, U.N. Doc. | 《普遍管辖权原则的范围和适用》，联合国文件A/68/113 (2013年6月26日)； |
| A/69/174 (July 23, 2014); The Scope and
application of the principle of universal jurisdiction, U.N. Doc. | 《普遍管辖权原则的范围和适用》，联合国文件A/69/174 (2014年7月23日)； |
| A/70/136 (July 14, 2015); The Scope and
application of the principle of universal jurisdiction, U.N. Doc. A/71/111
(June 28, 2016); | 《普遍管辖权原则的范围和适用》，联合国文件A/70/136 (2015年7月14日)； |
| The Scope and application of the principle
of universal jurisdiction, U.N. Doc. A/72/112 (June 22, 2017). G.A. Res.
64/117 (Jan. 15, 2010); | 《普遍管辖权原则的范围和适用》，联合国文件A/71/111 (2016年6月28日)； |
| G.A. Res. 65/33 (Jan. 10, 2011); G.A.
Res. 66/103 (Jan. 13, 2012); G.A. Res. 67/98 (Jan. 14, 2013); | 《普遍管辖权原则的范围和适用》，联合国文件A/72/112 (2017年6月22日)。 |
| G.A. Res. 68/117 (Dec. 18, 2013); G.A.
Res. 69/124 (Dec. 18, 2014); G.A. Res. 70/119 (Dec. 18, 2015); | 大会第64/117 (2010年1月15日)、第65/33 (2011年1月10日)、第66/103 (2012年1月13日)、第67/98 (2013年1月14日)、第68/117 (2013年12月18日)、第69/124 (2014年12月18日)、第70/119 (2015年12月18日)、第71/149 (2016年12月20日)、第72/120 (2017年12月18日)号决议。 |
| G.A. Res. 71/149 (Dec. 20, 2016); | 同上。 |
| G.A. Res. 72/120 (Dec. 18, 2017). Id. For
example, during the 2017 General Assembly debate, the statements by CELAC
(comprised of 33 States from Latin America and the Caribbean, for example,
envisaged the Commission’s review of the topic (“if no progress is made at
the next meetings of the working group, we should consider request to the
International Law Commission to study some or all of the elements of this
topic. | 例如，在大会2017年的一般性辩论期间，拉丁美洲和加勒比共同体(由33个拉丁美洲和加勒比国家组成，设想由国际法委员会审议这个专题――“假如在工作组今后的会议上无法取得进展，我们就应考虑请国际法委员会研究这一专题的某些或全部要素。 |
| This would be particularly useful if we
take into account that the Commission is currently examining a number of
issues linked to the Universal Jurisdiction Principle”), as well as CARICOM
(comprised of 14 States — “we see merit in the possibility of referring this
topic to the International Law Commission. | 如果我们考虑到委员会目前正在研究与普遍管辖原则相联系的一些问题，这样做将特别有益”)和加勒比共同体(由14个国家组成――“我们认为将这个专题提交国际法委员会的可能性值得考虑。 |
| Given that the ILC is currently examining
topics which are related to the principle of universal jurisdiction, we
believe that a decision to refer this topic would also be timely”) as well as
statements by other countries, such as Nigeria (“We also call on the
International Law Commission to contribute to the debate, considering its
technical nature”) and Colombia, Guatemala, Lichtenstein, Vietnam, South
Africa, and Thailand. | 鉴于委员会目前正在研究的一些专题与普遍管辖原则有关，我们认为决定提交这一专题也将是恰逢其时”)的发言，以及尼日利亚(“考虑到这一辩论的技术性，我们也吁请国际法委员会为此做出贡献”)和哥伦比亚、危地马拉、列支敦士登、越南、南非、泰国等其他国家的发言。 |
| Id. | 同上。 |
| See, in this regard, the references
contained in footnote 12 (above). | 在这方面，见(上文)脚注12中的参考材料。 |
| See, Polyukhovich v. Commonwealth [1991]
HCA 32 (Austl.); | 见Polyukhovich诉英联邦案[1991年] HCA 32 (澳大利亚)； |
| Belgium’s 1993 genocide law, (revised
2003), leading to the ICJ Arrest Warrant Case 2002; | 比利时1993年《灭绝种族罪法》(2003年修订)，2002年国际法院逮捕令案即由此而来； |
| Belgium v. Chad 2005; | 2005年比利时诉乍得案； |
| Canada’s Crimes Against Humanity and War
Crimes Act 2000, leading to Canada v. Desire Munyaneza 2005; | 加拿大2000年《危害人类罪和战争罪法》，2005年加拿大诉Desire Munyaneza案即由此而来； |
| Finland v. Bazaramba 2010; | 2010年芬兰诉Bazaramba案； |
| France’s code de procedure penale article
689; | 法国《刑事诉讼法》第689条； |
| Germany’s Volkerstrafgesetzbuch (VStGB)
2002, used in the case of Ignace Murwanashyaka 2015; | 德国2002年《刑法》，2015年Ignace Murwanashyaka案援引了该法； |
| Ireland’s Offences against Person Act
1861, now the Criminal Law (Jurisdiction) Act 1976; | 爱尔兰1861年《侵害人身罪法》，现为1976年《刑事(管辖)法》； |
| Attorney General of Israel v. Eichmann,
Criminal Case 40/61 (District Court of Jerusalem 1961); | 以色列总检察长诉艾希曼案，第40/61号刑事案件(耶路撒冷区法院，1961年)； |
| Malaysia v. George W. Bush and Others
2001 (convicted in absentia); | 2001年马来西亚诉乔治·W·布什等人案(缺席判定有罪)； |
| Senegal in the Hissene Habre Case 2015; | 2015年塞内加尔的侯赛因·哈布雷案； |
| Spain’s Judicial Power Oragnization Act
1985, article 23.4; | 1985年《西班牙司法权组织法》第23.4条； |
| The Pinochet Case 1998; | 1998年皮诺切特案； |
| Jones v. Ministry of Interior For The
Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and Others 2006; | 2006年琼斯诉沙特阿拉伯王国内政部等人案； |
| and the Justice Against Sponsors of
Terrorism Act (S.2040) Against The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. | 制裁沙特阿拉伯王国的《对恐怖主义资助者实行法律制裁法》(S.2040)。 |
| African Union Model National Law on
Universal Jurisdiction over International Crimes (2012). | 《非洲联盟国际罪行普遍管辖权示范法》(2012年)。 |
| Africa Legal Aid (AFLA), the Cairo-Arusha
Principle on Universal Jurisdiction in Respect of Gross Human Rights
Offences: An African Perspectives, adopted at the Follow-up Expert Meeting
held at Arusha (2002). | 非洲法律援助组织，《开罗－阿鲁沙关于严重侵犯人权罪行的普遍管辖原则：非洲的视角》，在阿鲁沙举行的后续专家会议上通过(2002年)。 |
| The Princeton Principles on Universal
Jurisdiction, supra note 1. | 《普林斯顿普遍管辖权原则》，前注1。 |
| Informal Working Paper, supra note 15. | 非正式工作文件，前注15。 |
| U.N. SCOR, 64th Sess., 12 mtg. at para.
21, U.N. Doc. A/C.6/64/SR.12 (Nov. 29, 2009). | 联合国安理会正式记录，第六十四届会议第12次会议，第21段，联合国文件A/C.6/64/SR.12 (2009年11月29日)。 |
| Id. at para. 12. | 同上，第12段。 |
| Most cooperation takes place pursuant to
agreements concluded by States on a bilateral basis. | 大多数合作是根据各国之间缔结的双边协定实施的。 |
| See T. R. Salomon, “Mutual Legal
Assistance in Criminal Matters,” in Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public
International Law (January 2013); | 见《马克斯·普朗克国际公法百科全书》(2013年1月)中T. R. Salomon所著《刑事事项司法协助》； |
| Initiative by Belgium, Towards a
Multilateral Treaty for Mutual Legal Assistance and Extradition for Domestic
Prosecution of the Most Serious International Crimes, supported by 49 member
States of the UN General Assembly as of 03/16/2016. U.N. SCOR, 64th Sess., 12
mtg. at para. 12, U.N. Doc. A/C.6/64/SR.12 (Nov. 29, 2009). | 比利时发起的“制定一项关于为国内起诉最严重国际罪行提供司法协助和引渡的多边条约”倡议，截至2016年3月16日得到联合国大会49个会员国支持，联合国安全理事会，第六十四届会议第12次会议，第12段，联合国文件A/C.6/64/SR.12
(2009年11月29日)。 |
| Id. at 154. | 同上，第154段。 |
| A/RES/70/1. | A/RES/70/1。 |
| Emphasis added. | 着重部分系本文所加。 |
| The Fifth Assessment Report of the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change estimates that the global mean
sea-level rise is likely to be between 26 cm and 98 cm by the year 2100. | 政府间气候变化专门委员会第五次评估报告估计，到2100年，全球平均海平面上升可能达到26厘米至98厘米之间。 |
| See Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change, Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. | 见政府间气候变化专门委员会《2013年气候变化：物理科学基础。 |
| Working Group I Contribution to the Fifth
Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
(Cambridge, United Kingdom, Cambridge University Press, 2013), p. 25. | 第一工作组对〈政府间气候变化专门委员会第五次评估报告〉的贡献》(联合王国剑桥，剑桥大学出版社，2013年)，第25页。 |
| Indonesia, Micronesia, Peru, Romania,
Tonga and the Pacific Small Island Developing States (Micronesia, Fiji,
Kiribati, Nauru, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Marshall Islands, Samoa, Solomon
Islands, Tonga, Tuvalu and Vanuatu). | 印度尼西亚、密克罗尼西亚、秘鲁、罗马尼亚、汤加和太平洋小岛屿发展中国家(密克罗尼西亚、斐济、基里巴斯、瑙鲁、帕劳、巴布亚新几内亚、马绍尔群岛、萨摩亚、所罗门群岛、汤加、图瓦卢和瓦努阿图)。 |
| See
http://statements.unmeetings.org/media2/16154559/marshall-islands-on-behalf-of-pacific-small-island-developing-states-.pdf. | 见http://statements.unmeetings.org/media2/16154559/marshall-islands-on-behalf-of-pacific-small-island-developing-states-.pdf。 |
| Austria, Chile, India, Israel, Malaysia,
New Zealand, Republic of Korea, Singapore and Sri Lanka. | 奥地利、智利、印度、以色列、马来西亚、新西兰、大韩民国、新加坡和斯里兰卡。 |
| See document ILC(LXX)/LT/INFORMAL/1 of 31
January 2018. | 见2018年1月31日ILC(LXX)/LT/INFORMAL/1号文件。 |
| “Aware also, in particular, of the
special situation of low-lying coastal areas and small island developing
States due to sea level rise,”. | “又尤其意识到低地沿海地区和小岛屿发展中国家因海平面上升而面临的特别处境”。 |
| See Report of the International Law
Commission on the work of the sixty-ninth session (2017), document A/72/10,
http://legal.un.org/docs/?path=../ilc/reports/2017/english/chp6.pdf&lang=EFSRAC,
p. 152. | 见国际法委员会第六十九届会议工作报告(2017年)，A/72/10号文件，http://legal.un.org/
docs/?path=../ilc/reports/2017/english/chp6.pdf&lang=EFSRAC，第152页。 |
| 3. When applying paragraphs 1 and 2,
special consideration should be given to persons and groups particularly
vulnerable to atmospheric pollution and atmospheric degradation. | “3.在适用第1和第2款时，应当特别考虑到特别易受大气污染和大气层退化影响的个人和群体。 |
| Such groups may include, inter alia, indigenous
peoples, people of the least developed countries and people of low-lying
coastal areas and small island developing States affected by sea level rise. | 这些群体除其他人外，可能包括土著人民、最不发达国家的人民和受海平面上升影响的低地沿海地区和小岛屿发展中国家的人民。 |
| ” See Report of the International Law Commission
on the work of the sixty-ninth session (2017), document A/72/10,
http://legal.un.org/docs/?path=../ilc/reports/2017/english/chp6.pdf&lang=EFSRAC,
p. 157. | ”见国际法委员会第六十九届会议工作报告(2017年)，A/72/10号文件，http://legal.un.org/docs/?path=../ilc/reports/2017/english/chp6.pdf&lang=
EFSRAC，第157页。 |
| Adopted by the International Law
Commission at its sixty-eighth session, in 2016, and submitted to the General
Assembly as a part of the Commission’s report covering the work of that
session (A/71/10), para. 48. | 2016年国际法委员会第六十八届会议通过，作为委员会当届会议工作报告(A/71/10)的一部分提交至大会，第48段。 |
| The report will appear in Yearbook of the
International Law Commission, 2016, vol. II, Part Two. | 报告将载入《2016年国际法委员会年鉴》第二卷第二部分。 |
| Defined in Draft Article 3 (a) as “a
calamitous event or series of events resulting in widespread loss of life,
great human suffering and distress, mass displacement, or large-scale
material or environmental damage, thereby seriously disrupting the
functioning of society.” | 第三条草案(a)项将其定义为“造成广泛的生命损失、巨大的人类痛苦和危难、大规模流离失所、或大规模的物质或环境损害，从而严重扰乱社会运转的一个灾难性事件或一系列事件”。 |
| Paragraph 4 of the Commentary to Draft
Article 3. | 第三条草案评注第4段。 |
| See International Law Association
Committee on Baselines under the International Law of the Sea, Final Report
(2012), Sofia Conference, at 30, available at
http://ilareporter.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/Source-1-Baselines-Final-Report-Sofia-2012.pdf. | 见国际法协会国际海洋法下的基线问题委员会，最后报告(2012年)，索菲亚会议，第30页，可参阅http://ilareporter.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/Source-1-Baselines-Final-Report-Sofia-2012.pdf。 |
| This report stated that “the existing law
of normal baseline applies in situations of significant coastal change caused
by both territorial gain and territorial loss. | 报告指出，“关于正常基线的现行法律适用于因领土扩大和丧失引起重大海岸变化的情形。 |
| Coastal states may protect and preserve
territory through physical reinforcement, but not through the legal fiction
of a charted line that is unrepresentative of the actual low-water line.” | 沿海国家可以通过物理加固来保护和维持领土，但不能通过法律拟制的不能代表实际低水位线的图表线来保护和维持领土。 ” |
| See the Interim Report of the ILA
Committee on International Law and Sea Level Rise (2016), Johannesburg
Conference, available at http://www.ila-hq.org/index.php/committees. | 见国际法协会国际法与海平面上升问题委员会中期报告(2016年)，约翰内斯堡会议，可参阅http://www.ila-hq.org/index.php/committees。 |
| See the Draft Report of the ILA Committee
on International Law and Sea Level Rise (2018), Sydney Conference, p. 19,
available at
http://www.ila-hq.org/images/ILA/DraftReports/DraftReport_SeaLevelRise.pdf. | 见国际法协会国际法与海平面上升问题委员会报告草稿(2018年)，悉尼会议，第19页，可参阅http://www.ila-hq.org/images/ILA/DraftReports/DraftReport_SeaLevelRise.pdf。 |
| The committee recommended that the ILA
adopt a resolution containing two “de lege ferenda” proposals: (1) “proposing
that States should accept that, once the baselines and the outer limits of the
maritime zones of a coastal or an archipelagic State have been properly
determined in accordance with the detailed requirements of the 1982 Law of
the Sea Convention, these baselines and limits should not be required to be
recalculated should sea level change affect the geographical reality of the
coastline”; | 委员会建议国际法协会通过一项决议，其中载有两项“拟议法”建议：(1)“建议国家应接受这一点，即一旦根据1982年《海洋法公约》的详细要求适当确定了沿海或群岛国家海域的基线和外部界限，即使海平面变化影响海岸线的地理现实，也不应要求重新计算这些基线和界限”； |
| and (2) proposing “that, on the grounds
of legal certainty and stability, the impacts of sea level rise on maritime
boundaries, whether contemplated or not by the parties at the time of the
negotiation of the maritime boundary, should not be regarded as a fundamental
change of circumstances.” | (2) 建议“出于法律确定性和稳定性考虑，海平面上升对海洋边界的影响，无论当事方在谈判海洋边界时是否予以考虑，不应视为情况的根本变化。 ” |
| Followed by Study Groups on “Treaties
over Time” (2009–2012) and “The Most-Favoured-Nation Clause” (2009–2015). | 其后还有“条约随时间演变问题”(2009至2012年)和“最惠国条款”(2009至2015年)研究小组。 |
| Report of the fiftieth session, A/53/10
(1998), chap. X(C), para. 553. | 第五十届会议报告，A/53/10(1998年)，第十章(C节)，第553段。 |
| See also Report of the sixty-ninth
session, A/72/10 (2017), chapter III(C), para. 32. | 另见第六十九届会议报告，A/72/10 (2017年)，第三章(C节)，第32段。 |
| |
