| A/77/10 2212452E.docx (ENGLISH) | A/77/10 2212452C.docx (CHINESE) |
| A/77/10 | A/77/10 |
| General Assembly | 大 会 |
| Official Records | 正式记录 |
| Seventy-seventh Session | 第七十七届会议 |
| Supplement No. 10 | 补编第10号 |
| Report of the International Law Commission | 国际法委员会的报告 |
| Seventy-third session | 第七十三届会议 |
| (18 April–3 June and 4 July–5 August 2022) | (2022年4月18日至6月3日和7月4日至8月5日) |
| United Nations • New York, 2022 | 联合国·纽约，2022年 |
| Note | 说明 |
| Symbols of United Nations documents are composed of capital letters combined with figures. | 联合国文件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 2022. | 委员会报告的排版本将载入《2022年国际法委员会年鉴》第二卷第二部分。 A/77/10 |
| Summary of contents | 简要目录 |
| Contents | 目录 |
| Chapter I | 第一章 |
| Introduction | 导言 |
| 1. | 1. |
| The International Law Commission held the first part of its seventy-third session from 18 April to 3 June 2022 and the second part from 4 July to 5 August 2022 at its seat at the United Nations Office at Geneva. | 国际法委员会分别于2022年4月18日至6月3日和2022年7月4日至8月5日在联合国日内瓦办事处委员会所在地举行了第七十三届会议第一期会议和第二期会议。 |
| Both parts were held in a hybrid format (in person and virtually). | 两期会议都是以混合形式(面对面和虚拟)举行的。 |
| The session was opened by Mr. Mahmoud D. Hmoud, Chair of the seventy-second session of the Commission. | 本届会议由委员会第七十二届会议主席马哈茂德·哈穆德先生主持开幕。 |
| A. | A. |
| Membership | 委员 |
| 2. | 2. |
| The Commission consists of the following members: | 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) |
| Mr. Mathias Forteau (France) | 马蒂亚斯·福尔托先生(法国) |
| 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) |
| Ms. Nilüfer Oral (Türkiye) | 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. | B. |
| Officers and the Enlarged Bureau | 主席团成员和扩大的主席团 |
| 3. | 3. |
| At its 3564th meeting, on 19 April 2022, the Commission elected the following officers: | 在2022年4月19日第3564次会议上，委员会选出以下主席团成员： |
| Chair: | 主席： |
| Mr. Dire D. Tladi (South Africa) | 迪雷·特拉迪先生(南非) |
| First Vice-Chair: | 第一副主席： |
| Sir Michael Wood (United Kingdom) | 迈克尔·伍德爵士(联合王国) |
| Second Vice-Chair: | 第二副主席： |
| Mr. Marcelo Vázquez-Bermúdez (Ecuador) | 马塞洛·巴斯克斯－贝穆德斯先生(厄瓜多尔) |
| Chair of the Drafting Committee: | 起草委员会主席： |
| Mr. Ki Gab Park (Republic of Korea) | 朴基甲先生(大韩民国) |
| Rapporteur: | 报告员： |
| Mr. Pavel Šturma (Czech Republic) | 帕维尔·斯图尔马先生(捷克共和国) |
| 4. | 4. |
| The Enlarged Bureau of the Commission was composed of the officers of the present session, the previous Chairs of the Commission, the Special Rapporteurs and the Co-Chairs of the Study Group on sea-level rise in relation to international law. | 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、 特别报告员 和与国际法有关的海平面上升专题研究组共同主席 组成。 |
| 5. | 5. |
| On 27 May 2022, the Planning Group was constituted, composed of the following members: Sir Michael Wood (Chair), Mr. Carlos J. Argüello Gómez, Mr. Yacouba Cissé, Ms. Concepción Escobar Hernández, Mr. Mathias Forteau, Ms. Patrícia Galvão Teles, Mr. Claudio Grossman Guiloff, Mr. Hussein A. Hassouna, Mr. Mahmoud D. Hmoud, Mr. Huikang Huang, Mr. Charles Chernor Jalloh, Mr. Ahmed Laraba, 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. 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, Mr. Amos S. Wako, Mr. Evgeny Zagaynov and Mr. Pavel Šturma (ex officio). | 规划组于2022年5月27日成立，由下列委员组成：迈克尔·伍德爵士(主席)、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、马蒂亚斯·福尔托先生、帕特里夏·加尔旺·特莱斯女士、克劳迪奥·格罗斯曼·吉洛夫先生、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、艾哈迈德·拉腊巴先生、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、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、阿莫斯·瓦科先生、耶夫格尼·扎加伊诺夫先生和帕维尔·斯图尔马先生(当然成员)。 |
| C. | C. |
| Drafting Committee | 起草委员会 |
| 6. | 6. |
| At its 3564th, 3569th, 3577th and 3592nd meetings, on 19 and 27 April, on 10 May and on 12 July 2022, the Commission established a Drafting Committee, composed of the following members for the topics indicated: | 在2022年4月19日和27日、5月10日和7月12日举行的第3564、3569、3577和3592次会议上，委员会为下列专题设立了由下列委员组成的起草委员会： |
| (a) | (a) |
| Immunity of State officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction: Mr. Ki Gab Park (Chair), Ms. Concepción Escobar Hernández (Special Rapporteur), Mr. Bogdan Aurescu, Mr. Mathias Forteau, Ms. Patrícia Galvão Teles, Mr. Claudio Grossman Guiloff, Mr. Mahmoud D. Hmoud, Mr. Charles Chernor Jalloh, Ms. Marja Lehto, Mr. Sean D. Murphy, Ms. Nilüfer Oral, Mr. Hassan Ouazzani Chahdi, Mr. Aniruddha Rajput, Mr. August Reinisch, Mr. Juan José Ruda Santolaria, Mr. Gilberto Vergne Saboia, Mr. Marcelo Vázquez-Bermúdez, Sir Michael Wood, Mr. Evgeny Zagaynov and Mr. Pavel Šturma (ex officio); | 国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免：朴基甲先生(主席)、康塞普西翁·埃斯科瓦尔·埃尔南德斯女士(特别报告员)、波格丹·奥雷斯库先生、马蒂亚斯·福尔托先生、帕特里夏·加尔旺·特莱斯女士、克劳迪奥·格罗斯曼·吉洛夫先生、马哈茂德·哈穆德先生、查尔斯·切尔诺·贾洛先生、玛丽亚·莱赫托女士、肖恩·墨菲先生、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、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、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维尔·斯图尔马先生(当然成员)； |
| (b) | (b) |
| Peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens): Mr. Ki Gab Park (Chair), Mr. Dire D. Tladi (Special Rapporteur), Mr. Carlos J. Argüello Gómez, Mr. Yacouba Cissé, Mr. Mathias Forteau, Ms. Patrícia Galvão Teles, Mr. Claudio Grossman Guiloff, Mr. Mahmoud D. Hmoud, Mr. Charles Chernor Jalloh, Mr. Sean D. Murphy, Mr. Hong Thao Nguyen, Ms. Nilüfer Oral, Mr. Ernest Petrič, Mr. Aniruddha Rajput, Mr. August Reinisch, Mr. Juan José Ruda Santolaria, Mr. Gilberto Vergne Saboia, Mr. Marcelo Vázquez-Bermúdez, Sir Michael Wood and Mr. Pavel Šturma (ex officio); | 一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)：朴基甲先生(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、马蒂亚斯·福尔托先生、帕特里夏·加尔旺·特莱斯女士、克劳迪奥·格罗斯曼·吉洛夫先生、马哈茂德·哈穆德先生、查尔斯·切尔诺·贾洛先生、肖恩·墨菲先生、阮洪滔先生、尼吕费尔·奥拉尔女士、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、马塞洛·巴斯克斯－贝穆德斯先生、迈克尔·伍德爵士和帕维尔·斯图尔马先生(当然成员)； |
| (c) | (c) |
| Protection of the environment in relation to armed conflicts: Mr. Ki Gab Park (Chair), Ms. Marja Lehto (Special Rapporteur), Ms. Concepción Escobar Hernández, Mr. Mathias Forteau, Ms. Patrícia Galvão Teles, Mr. Claudio Grossman Guiloff, Mr. Mahmoud D. Hmoud, Mr. Charles Chernor Jalloh, Mr. Sean D. Murphy, Mr. Hong Thao Nguyen, Ms. Nilüfer Oral, Mr. Aniruddha Rajput, Mr. Juan José Ruda Santolaria, Mr. Gilberto Vergne Saboia, Mr. Marcelo Vázquez-Bermúdez, Sir Michael Wood and Mr. Pavel Šturma (ex officio); | 与武装冲突有关的环境保护：朴基甲先生(主席)、玛丽亚·莱赫托女士(特别报告员)、康塞普西翁·埃斯科瓦尔·埃尔南德斯女士、马蒂亚斯·福尔托先生、帕特里夏·加尔旺·特莱斯女士、克劳迪奥·格罗斯曼·吉洛夫先生、马哈茂德·哈穆德先生、查尔斯·切尔诺·贾洛先生、肖恩·墨菲先生、阮洪滔先生、尼吕费尔·奥拉尔女士、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、马塞洛·巴斯克斯－贝穆德斯先生、迈克尔·伍德爵士和帕维尔·斯图尔马先生(当然成员)； |
| (d) | (d) |
| Succession of States in respect of State responsibility: Mr. Ki Gab Park (Chair), Mr. Pavel Šturma (Special Rapporteur), Mr. Carlos J. Argüello Gómez, Mr. Charles Chernor Jalloh, Mr. Sean D. Murphy, Mr. Hong Thao Nguyen, Mr. Ernest Petrič, Mr. Aniruddha Rajput, Mr. August Reinisch, Mr. Juan José Ruda Santolaria, Sir Michael Wood and Mr. Pavel Šturma (ex officio); | 国家责任方面的国家继承：朴基甲先生(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、查尔斯·切尔诺·贾洛先生、肖恩·墨菲先生、阮洪滔先生、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·伍德爵士和帕维尔·斯图尔马先生(当然成员)； |
| (e) | (e) |
| General principles of law: Mr. Ki Gab Park (Chair), Mr. Marcelo Vázquez-Bermúdez (Special Rapporteur), Mr. Carlos J. Argüello Gómez, Mr. Yacouba Cissé, Ms. Concepción Escobar Hernández, Mr. Mathias Forteau, Mr. Juan Manuel Gómez-Robledo, Mr. Claudio Grossman Guiloff, Mr. Mahmoud D. Hmoud, Mr. Huikang Huang, Mr. Charles Chernor Jalloh, Ms. Marja Lehto, Mr. Sean D. Murphy, Ms. Nilüfer Oral, Mr. Hassan Ouazzani Chahdi, Mr. August Reinisch, Mr. Juan José Ruda Santolaria, Mr. Dire D. Tladi, Sir Michael Wood, Mr. Evgeny Zagaynov and Mr. Pavel Šturma (ex officio). | 一般法律原则：朴基甲先生(主席)、马塞洛·巴斯克斯－贝穆德斯先生(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、马蒂亚斯·福尔托先生、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、查尔斯·切尔诺·贾洛先生、玛丽亚·莱赫托女士、肖恩·墨菲先生、尼吕费尔·奥拉尔女士、哈桑·瓦扎尼·恰迪先生、奥古斯特·赖尼希先生、胡安·何塞·鲁达·桑托拉里亚先生、迪雷·特拉迪先生、迈克尔·伍德爵士、耶夫格尼·扎加伊诺夫先生和帕维尔·斯图尔马先生(当然成员)。 |
| 7. | 7. |
| The Drafting Committee held a total of 56 meetings on the five topics indicated above. | 起草委员会就上述五个专题共举行了56次会议。 |
| D. | D. |
| Working Groups and Study Group | 工作组和研究组 |
| 8. | 8. |
| On 1 June 2022, the Planning Group established the following Working Groups: | 2022年6月1日，规划组设立了以下工作组： |
| (a) | (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. Mathias Forteau, Mr. Claudio Grossman Guiloff, Mr. Hussein A. Hassouna, Mr. Huikang Huang, Mr. Charles Chernor Jalloh, Mr. Ahmed Laraba, 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. Ernest Petrič, Mr. August Reinisch, Mr. Juan José Ruda Santolaria, Mr. Gilberto Vergne Saboia, Mr. Dire D. Tladi, Mr. Marcelo Vázquez-Bermúdez, Mr. Amos S. Wako, Sir Michael Wood, Mr. Evgeny Zagaynov and Mr. Pavel Šturma (ex officio); | 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、马蒂亚斯·福尔托先生、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、艾哈迈德·拉腊巴先生、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、埃内斯特·彼得里奇先生、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、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维尔·斯图尔马先生(当然成员)； |
| (b) | (b) |
| Working Group on methods of work: Mr. Hussein A. Hassouna (Chair), Mr. Bogdan Aurescu, Mr. Yacouba Cissé, Ms. Concepción Escobar Hernández, Mr. Mathias Forteau, Ms. Patrícia Galvão Teles, 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, 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 Mr. Pavel Šturma, (ex officio). | 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、马蒂亚斯·福尔托先生、帕特里夏·加尔旺·特莱斯女士、克劳迪奥·格罗斯曼·吉洛夫先生、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、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维尔·斯图尔马先生(当然成员)。 |
| 9. | 9. |
| At its 3583rd meeting, on 17 May 2022, the Commission established a Study Group on sea-level rise in relation to international law, composed of the following members: Mr. Bogdan Aurescu (Co-Chair), Mr. Yacouba Cissé (Co-Chair), Ms. Patrícia Galvão Teles (Co-Chair, and Chair at the current session), Ms. Nilüfer Oral (Co-Chair), Mr. Juan José Ruda Santolaria (Co-Chair, and Chair at the current session), Mr. Carlos J. Argüello Gómez, Ms. Concepción Escobar Hernández, Mr. Mathias Forteau, Mr. Juan Manuel Gómez-Robledo, Mr. Claudio Grossman Guiloff, Mr. Hussein A. Hassouna, Mr. Mahmoud D. Hmoud, Mr. Charles Chernor Jalloh, Mr. Ahmed Laraba, Ms. Marja Lehto, 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. Gilberto Vergne Saboia, Mr. Dire D. Tladi, Mr. Eduardo Valencia-Ospina, Mr. Marcelo Vázquez-Bermúdez, Sir Michael Wood, Mr. Evgeny Zagaynov and Mr. Pavel Šturma (ex officio). | 在2022年5月17日第3583次会议上，委员会设立了与国际法有关的海平面上升专题研究组，由下列委员组成：博格丹·奥雷斯库先生(共同主席)、雅库巴·西塞先生(共同主席)、帕特里夏·加尔旺·特莱斯女士(共同主席、本届会议主席)、尼吕费尔·奥拉尔女士(共同主席)、胡安·何塞·鲁达·桑托拉里亚先生(共同主席、本届会议主席)、卡洛斯·阿圭略·戈麦斯先生、康塞普西翁·埃斯科瓦尔·埃尔南德斯女士、马蒂亚斯·福尔托先生、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、查尔斯·切尔诺·贾洛先生、艾哈迈德·拉腊巴先生、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、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、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维尔·斯图尔马先生(当然成员)。 |
| E. | E. |
| Secretariat | 秘书处 |
| 10. | 10. |
| Mr. Miguel de Serpa Soares, Under-Secretary-General for Legal Affairs and United Nations Legal Counsel, represented the Secretary-General. | 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担任秘书长的代表。 |
| Mr. Arnold Pronto, Principal Legal Officer, served as Principal Assistant Secretary to the Commission. | 首席法律干事阿诺德·普龙托先生担任委员会首席助理秘书。 |
| Mr. Trevor Chimimba, Senior Legal Officer, served as Senior Assistant Secretary to the Commission. | 高级法律干事特雷沃尔·齐敏巴先生担任委员会高级助理秘书。 |
| Ms. Patricia Georget, Ms. Carla Hoe, Mr. Jorge Martinez Paoletti and Ms. Paola Patarroyo, Legal Officers, and Mr. Alexey Bulatov and Mr. Douglas Pivnichny, Associate Legal Officers, served as Assistant Secretaries to the Commission. | 法律干事帕特里夏·乔治女士、卡拉·霍女士、豪尔赫·马丁内斯·帕奥莱蒂先生和保拉·帕塔罗约女士以及协理法律干事阿列克谢·布拉托夫先生和道格拉斯·皮夫尼尼先生担任委员会助理秘书。 |
| F. | F. |
| Agenda | 议程 |
| 11. | 11. |
| The Commission adopted an agenda for its seventy-third session consisting of the following items: | 委员会通过了其第七十三届会议议程，项目如下： |
| 1. | 1. |
| Organization of the work of the session. | 会议工作安排。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| Immunity of State officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction. | 国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免。 |
| 3. | 3. |
| Protection of the environment in relation to armed conflicts. | 与武装冲突有关的环境保护。 |
| 4. | 4. |
| Peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)。 |
| 5. | 5. |
| Succession of States in respect of State responsibility. | 国家责任方面的国家继承。 |
| 6. | 6. |
| General principles of law. | 一般法律原则。 |
| 7. | 7. |
| Sea-level rise in relation to international law. | 与国际法有关的海平面上升。 |
| 8. | 8. |
| Programme, procedures and working methods of the Commission and its documentation. | 委员会的方案、程序和工作方法以及文件。 |
| 9. | 9. |
| Date and place of the seventy-fourth session. | 第七十四届会议的日期和地点。 |
| 10. | 10. |
| Cooperation with other bodies. | 与其他机构的合作。 |
| 11. | 11. |
| Other business. | 其他事项。 |
| Chapter II Summary of the work of the Commission at its seventy-third session | 第二章 委员会第七十三届会议工作概况 |
| 12. | 12. |
| With regard to the topic “Peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens)”, the Commission had before it the fifth report of the Special Rapporteur (A/CN.4/747), as well as comments and observations received from Governments (A/CN.4/748). | 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五次报告(A/CN.4/747)，以及各国政府的评论和意见(A/CN.4/748)。 |
| The report addressed the comments and observations received from Governments on the draft conclusions and commentaries, as adopted on first reading, and proposed modifications to the draft conclusions where necessary. | 报告述及各国政府对一读通过的结论草案和评注的评论和意见，并对结论草案提出了必要的修改意见。 |
| 13. | 13. |
| The Commission adopted, on second reading, the entire set of draft conclusions on identification and legal consequences of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens), comprising 23 draft conclusions and an annex, together with commentaries thereto. | 委员会二读通过了关于一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的识别和法律后果的整套结论草案，其中包括23项结论草案和一份附件及其评注。 |
| The Commission decided, in accordance with article 23 of its statute, to recommend the draft conclusions to the General Assembly. | 委员会决定根据其章程第23条向联大推荐这些结论草案。 |
| In particular, the Commission recommended that the Assembly take note of the draft conclusions and commend them, together with the commentaries thereto, to the attention of States and all who may be called upon to identify peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) and to apply their legal consequences (chap. IV). | 委员会尤其建议联大注意到这些结论草案，提请各国和可能被要求识别一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的所有实体注意这些结论草案及其评注，并适用其法律后果(第四章)。 |
| 14. | 14. |
| With respect to the topic “Protection of the environment in relation to armed conflicts”, the Commission had before it the third report of the Special Rapporteur (A/CN.4/750 and Corr.1 and Add.1), as well as comments and observations received from Governments, international organizations and others (A/CN.4/749). | 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三次报告(A/CN.4/750和Corr.1及Add.1)，以及各国政府、国际组织和其他方面提交的评论和意见(A/CN.4/749)。 |
| The report examined the comments and observations received from Governments, international organizations and others on the draft principles and commentaries, as adopted on first reading, and proposed modifications to the draft principles where necessary. | 报告审查了各国政府、国际组织和其他方面提交的对一读通过的原则草案及评注的评论和意见，并对结论草案提出了必要的修改意见。 |
| 15. | 15. |
| The Commission adopted, on second reading, the entire set of draft principles on protection of the environment in relation to armed conflicts, comprising a draft preamble and 27 draft principles, together with commentaries thereto. | 委员会二读通过了与武装冲突有关的环境保护的整套原则草案，其中包括一个序言草案和27项原则草案及其评注。 |
| The Commission decided, in accordance with article 23 of its statute, to recommend that the General Assembly: (a) take note of the draft principles, annex them to its resolution and encourage their widest possible dissemination; | 委员会决定根据其章程第23条，建议联大：(a) 注意到这些原则草案，将这些原则草案列为决议的附件，并鼓励尽可能广泛分发； |
| and (b) commend the draft principles, together with the commentaries thereto, to the attention of States and international organizations and all who may be called upon to deal with the subject (chap. V). | (b) 提请各国、国际组织以及可能需要处理该专题的所有实体注意这些原则草案及其评注(第五章)。 |
| 16. | 16. |
| With regard to the topic “Immunity of State officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction”, the Commission received and considered the report of the Drafting Committee (A/CN.4/L.969), following the completion by the Drafting Committee of its consideration of the remaining draft articles referred to it previously by the Commission, as contained in the second (A/CN.4/661), seventh (A/CN.4/729) and eighth (A/CN.4/739) reports of the Special Rapporteur. | 关于“国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免”专题，委员会收到并审议了起草委员会的报告(A/CN.4/L.969)。 在此之前，起草委员会完成了对委员会先前转交的特别报告员第二次报告(A/CN.4/661)、第七次报告(A/CN.4/729)和第八次报告(A/CN.4/739)所载的其余条款草案的审议。 |
| The Commission adopted, on first reading, 18 draft articles and a draft annex on immunity of State officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction, together with commentaries thereto. | 委员会一读通过了国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免的18项条款草案和一份附件草案及其评注。 |
| The Commission decided, in accordance with articles 16 to 21 of its statute, to transmit the draft articles, through the Secretary-General, to Governments for comments and observations, with the request that such comments and observations be submitted to the Secretary-General by 1 December 2023 (chap. VI). | 委员会决定根据其章程第16至21条，通过秘书长向各国政府转发这些条款草案，征求其评论和意见，并要求在2023年12月1日前向秘书长提交这些评论和意见(第六章)。 |
| 17. | 17. |
| With regard to the topic “Succession of States in respect of State responsibility”, the Commission had before it the fifth report of the Special Rapporteur (A/CN.4/751), which primarily addressed the problems relating to a plurality of injured successor States or of responsible successor States. | 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五次报告(A/CN.4/751)，其中主要论述存在数个受害继承国或数个责任继承国的有关问题。 |
| Following the debate in plenary, the Commission decided that the work of the Commission on the topic would take the form of draft guidelines, rather than draft articles. | 经全体会议辩论之后，委员会决定，委员会这一专题的工作将采取指南草案而不是条款草案的形式。 |
| The Drafting Committee proceeded to prepare draft guidelines on the basis of the texts referred to it by the Commission at previous sessions. | 起草委员会着手根据委员会前几届会议转交的案文编写指南草案。 |
| The Commission provisionally adopted draft guidelines 6, 10, 10 bis and 11, which had been provisionally adopted by the Drafting Committee in 2018 and 2021, as well as draft guidelines 7 bis, 12, 13, 13 bis, 14, 15 and 15 bis, which were provisionally adopted by the Drafting Committee at the present session, together with commentaries thereto. | 委员会暂时通过了起草委员会2018年和2021年暂时通过的指南草案6、10、10之二和11，以及起草委员会在本届会议上暂时通过的指南草案7之二、12、13、13之二、14、15和15之二及其评注。 |
| The Commission also took note of revised draft guidelines 1, 2, 5, 7, 8 and 9, as provisionally adopted by the Drafting Committee and reflected in an annex to the statement of the Chair of the Drafting Committee (chap. VII). | 委员会还注意到起草委员会暂时通过的经修订的指南草案1、2、5、7、8和9，这些修订草案载于起草委员会主席声明的附件(第七章)。 |
| 18. | 18. |
| With regard to the topic “General principles of law”, the Commission had before it the third report of the Special Rapporteur (A/CN.4/753), which discussed the issue of transposition, general principles of law formed within the international legal system, and the functions of general principles of law and their relationship with other sources of international law. | 关于“一般法律原则”专题，委员会收到了特别报告员的第三次报告(A/CN.4/753)，其中讨论了移植问题、在国际法律体系内形成的一般法律原则、一般法律原则的功能和与国际法其他渊源之间的关系。 |
| Following the debate in plenary, the Commission decided to refer draft conclusions 10, 11, 12, 13 and 14, as presented in the third report, to the Drafting Committee, taking into account the comments made in plenary. | 经全体会议辩论之后，委员会考虑到在全体会议上提出的意见，决定将第三次报告中提出的结论草案10、11、12、13和14转交起草委员会。 |
| The Commission received the report of the Drafting Committee on the consolidated text of draft conclusions 1 to 11, provisionally adopted by the Drafting Committee, and provisionally adopted draft conclusions 3, 5 and 7. | 委员会收到了起草委员会关于起草委员会暂时通过的结论草案1至11的合并案文报告，并暂时通过了结论草案3、5和7。 |
| The Commission took note of draft conclusions 6, 8, 9, 10 and 11, which were also contained in the report of the Drafting Committee (chap. VIII). | 委员会注意到结论草案6、8、9、10和11，这些结论草案也载于起草委员会的报告(第八章)。 |
| 19. | 19. |
| With respect to the topic “Sea-level rise in relation to international law”, the Commission reconstituted the Study Group on sea-level rise in relation to international law. | 关于“与国际法有关的海平面上升”专题，委员会重组了与国际法有关的海平面上升问题研究组。 |
| The Study Group had before it the second issues paper (A/CN.4/752 and Add.1) concerning issues relating to statehood and to the protection of persons affected by sea-level rise, prepared by two of the Co-Chairs of the Study Group, Ms. Patrícia Galvão Teles and Mr. Juan José Ruda Santolaria. | 研究组收到了研究组两位共同主席帕特里夏·加尔旺·特莱斯女士和胡安·何塞·鲁达·桑托拉里亚先生编写的关于国家地位和保护受海平面上升影响人员的第二份问题文件(A/CN.4/752和Add.1)。 |
| The Study Group had an exchange of views on the basis of the second issues paper and on other matters related to the subtopics under consideration. | 研究组在第二份问题文件的基础上，就审议的分专题其他有关事项交换了意见。 |
| The Study Group also addressed a series of guiding questions prepared by the Co-Chairs and held a discussion on the future programme of work on the topic (chap. IX). | 研究组还讨论了共同主席提出的一系列指导性问题，并就这一专题今后的工作方案进行了讨论(第九章)。 |
| 20. | 20. |
| Concerning “Other decisions and conclusions of the Commission”, the Commission decided to include the following topics on its programme of work: (a) “Settlement of international disputes to which international organizations are parties”, appointing Mr. August Reinisch as Special Rapporteur; | 关于“委员会的其他决定和结论”，委员会决定将下列专题列入其工作方案：(a)“国际组织作为当事方的国际争端的解决”，任命奥古斯特·赖尼施先生为特别报告员； |
| (b) “Prevention and repression of piracy and armed robbery at sea”, appointing Mr. Yacouba Cissé as Special Rapporteur; | (b)“防止和打击海盗和海上武装抢劫行为”，任命亚库巴·西塞先生为特别报告员； |
| and (c) “Subsidiary means for the determination of rules of international law”, appointing Mr. Charles Chernor Jalloh as Special Rapporteur (chap. X, sect. A). | (c)“确定国际法规则的辅助手段”，任命查尔斯·切尔诺·贾洛先生为特别报告员(第十章A节)。 |
| The Commission requested the Secretariat to prepare memorandums on those three topics and on sea-level rise in relation to international law (chap. X, sect. B). | 委员会请秘书处编写关于这三个专题和与国际法有关的海平面上升专题的备忘录(第十章B节)。 |
| 21. | 21. |
| 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. X, sect. C). | 委员会重新设立了一个规划组，以审议其方案、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)(第十章C节)。 |
| The Commission decided to include in its long-term programme of work the topic “Non-legally binding international agreements” (chap. X, sect. C, and annex I). | 委员会决定在其长期工作方案中列入“无法律约束力的国际协定”专题(第十章C节和附件一)。 |
| The Commission also provided the General Assembly with the information requested in paragraph 34 of Assembly resolution 76/111 of 9 December 2021 (chap. X, sect. E, annex II and appendix). | 委员会还向联大提供了联大2021年12月9日第76/111号决议第34段要求提供的信息(第十章E节，附件二和附录)。 |
| 22. | 22. |
| Judge Joan E. Donoghue, President of the International Court of Justice, addressed the Commission virtually on 1 June 2022. | 2022年6月1日，国际法院院长琼·多诺霍法官以在线方式在委员会发言。 |
| The Commission was once again regrettably unable to have its traditional exchanges of information with the African Union Commission on International Law; the Asian-African Legal Consultative Organization; the Committee of Legal Advisers on Public International Law of the Council of Europe; | 令人遗憾的是，委员会无法再次与非洲联盟国际法委员会、亚非法律协商组织、欧洲委员会国际公法法律顾问委员会和美洲法律委员会进行传统的信息交流。 |
| and the Inter-American Juridical Committee. However, it was able to have an informal exchange of views with the International Committee of the Red Cross on 21 July 2022 (chap. X, sect. F). | 然而，委员会在2022年7月21日与红十字国际委员会举行了非正式意见交换(第十章F节)。 |
| 23. | 23. |
| The Commission decided that its seventy-fourth session would be held in Geneva from 24 April to 2 June and from 3 July to 4 August 2023 (chap. X, sect. D). | 委员会决定其第七十四届会议将于2023年4月24日至6月2日和7月3日至8月4日在日内瓦举行(第十章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 |
| A. | A. |
| General principles of law | 一般法律原则 |
| 24. | 24. |
| The Commission considers as still relevant the request for information contained in chapter III of the report of its seventy-first session (2019) on the topic “General principles of law” and would welcome any additional information. | 委员会认为，它在第七十一届会议(2019年)报告第三章“一般法律原则”中提出的征求资料请求仍然适用， 并欢迎提供任何补充资料。 |
| B. | B. |
| Sea-level rise in relation to international law | 与国际法有关的海平面上升 |
| 25. | 25. |
| The Commission would welcome any information that States, international organizations and other relevant entities could provide on their practice, as well as other pertinent information concerning sea-level rise in relation to international law, and reiterates its requests made in chapter III of its reports on the work of its seventy-first (2019) and seventy-second (2021) sessions. | 委员会欢迎各国、国际组织和其他相关实体提供与国际法有关的海平面上升方面的实践以及其他相关资料，并重申其在第七十一届(2019年) 和第七十二届(2021年) 工作报告第三章中提出的请求。 |
| 26. | 26. |
| At the seventy-fourth session (2023), the Study Group will focus on the subject of sea-level rise in relation to the law of the sea. | 研究组将在委员会第七十四届会议(2023年)上重点讨论与海洋法有关的海平面上升专题。 |
| In this connection, the Commission reiterates that it would appreciate receiving the following information by 1 December 2022: | 在这方面，委员会重申希望在2022年12月1日前收到以下资料： |
| (a) | (a) |
| examples of practice relating to the updating, and frequency of updating, of national laws regarding baselines used for measuring the breadth of maritime zones; | 关于测量海区宽度所用基线的国家法律的更新和更新频率的实践实例； |
| and of practice relating to the frequency of updating of national maritime zone notifications deposited with the Secretary-General of the United Nations; | 与交存联合国秘书长的国家海区通告的更新频率有关的实践实例； |
| (b) | (b) |
| examples of practice relating to the updating, and frequency of updating, of charts on which baselines and outer limits of the exclusive economic zone and of the continental shelf are drawn, as well as lists of geographical coordinates prepared in accordance with the relevant provisions of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea and/or national legislation, including those which are deposited with the Secretary-General of the United Nations and given due publicity; | 与以下资料的更新和更新频率有关的实践实例：标注专属经济区和大陆架的基线和外部界限的海图，以及根据《联合国海洋法公约》和/或国家法律相关规定编制的地理坐标表，包括交存联合国秘书长并妥为公布的地理坐标表； |
| and examples of practice relating to updating, and frequency of updating, of navigational charts, including for purposes of evidencing changes of the physical contours of the coastal areas; | 与导航图(包括显示沿海地区物理轮廓变化的导航图)的更新和更新频率有关的实践实例； |
| (c) | (c) |
| any examples of the taking into account or modification of maritime boundary treaties due to sea-level rise; | 因海平面上升而考虑或修改海洋边界条约的任何例子； |
| (d) | (d) |
| information on the amount of actual and/or projected coastal regression due to sea-level rise, including possible impact on basepoints and baselines used to measure the territorial sea; | 海平面上升所致实际和/或预测海岸线倒退量的资料，包括对测量领海所用基点和基线可能产生的影响的资料； |
| (e) | (e) |
| information on existing or projected activities related to coastal adaptation measures in relation to sea-level rise, including preservation of basepoints and baselines. | 与海平面上升有关的沿海适应措施的现有或预计活动的资料，包括保护基点和基线活动的资料。 |
| 27. | 27. |
| The Commission is further requesting: | 委员会还要求： |
| (a) | (a) |
| the Office of Legal Affairs, Division of Ocean Affairs and the Law of the Sea of the United Nations to undertake a survey of charts or lists of geographical coordinates deposited with the Secretary-General of the United Nations which have been modified or updated during the period 1990 to the present, and any additional explanatory information, by 1 December 2022; | 法律事务厅联合国海洋事务和海洋法司在2022年12月1日之前，对1990年至今已修改或更新的交存联合国秘书长的海图或地理坐标表以及任何其他解释性资料进行一次全面调查； |
| (b) | (b) |
| the International Hydrographic Organization and the International Maritime Organization to provide information regarding the implementation of paragraphs 43 and 44 of General Assembly resolution 58/240 of 23 December 2003 on oceans and the law of the sea, by 1 December 2022. | 国际水道测量组织和国际海事组织在2022年12月1日之前提供资料，说明联大2003年12月23日关于海洋和海洋法的第58/240号决议第43和44段的执行情况。 |
| 28. | 28. |
| At the seventy-fifth session (2024), the Study Group will focus on the subject of sea-level rise in relation to statehood and protection of persons affected by sea-level rise. | 研究组将在委员会第七十五届会议(2024年)上重点讨论海平面上升与国家地位的关系和保护受海平面上升影响人员这一专题。 |
| In this connection, the Commission would appreciate receiving, by 30 June 2023: | 在这方面，委员会希望在2023年6月30日之前收到以下资料： |
| (a) | (a) |
| in relation to the subtopic of statehood, information on the practice of States, international organizations and other relevant entities, and other pertinent information concerning: | 关于国家地位这一分专题，提供国家、国际组织和其他相关实体以下方面实践的资料，以及其他相关资料： |
| (i) | (一) |
| appraisals and/or practice on the requirements for the configuration of a State as a subject of international law and for the continuance of its existence in the context of the phenomenon of sea-level rise; | 关于国家作为国际法主体的构成及其在海平面上升现象中继续存在的要求的评估和/或实践； |
| (ii) | (二) |
| appraisals and/or practice regarding the nature of the territory of a State, including therein the land surface and the jurisdictional maritime zones, particularly in the context of the sea-level rise; | 关于一国领土的性质，包括其中的陆地表面和管辖海区的评估和/或实践，特别是在海平面上升的情况下； |
| (iii) | (三) |
| practice related to the protection of the rights of peoples and communities, as well as to the preservation of their identity, that may contribute with elements or be considered by analogy when addressing the phenomenon of sea-level rise; | 与保护人民和社区的权利以及维护其特征有关的实践，这些实践可能有助于在解决海平面上升现象时提供一些要素或通过类比加以考虑； |
| (iv) | (四) |
| practice regarding measures of a different nature adopted by States in relation to sea-level rise in order to provide for their conservation and with respect to international cooperation on the subject; | 各国为应对海平面上升而采取不同性质措施以便进行保护和在这一问题上开展国际合作的实践； |
| (b) | (b) |
| in relation to the subtopic on protection of persons affected by sea-level rise, information on the practice of States, international organizations and other relevant entities, as well as other pertinent information concerning: | 关于保护受海平面上升影响人员的分专题，提供国家、国际组织和其他相关实体以下方面实践的资料，以及其他相关资料： |
| (i) | (一) |
| measures relating to risk reduction specific to the mitigation of the adverse impacts of sea-level rise; | 专门针对减轻海平面上升不利影响的减少风险措施； |
| (ii) | (二) |
| human rights implications of the adverse impacts of sea-level rise; | 海平面上升不利影响所涉人权问题； |
| (iii) | (三) |
| regulation of the displacement of persons affected by sea-level rise; | 管理因海平面上升而流离失所者； |
| (iv) | (四) |
| prevention of statelessness arising from the displacement of persons affected by sea-level rise; | 防止因海平面上升而流离失所者成为无国籍人口； |
| (v) | (五) |
| international cooperation regarding humanitarian assistance to persons affected by sea-level rise. | 开展国际合作向受海平面上升影响人员提供人道援助。 |
| C. | C. |
| Subsidiary means for the determination of rules of international law | 确定国际法规则的辅助手段 |
| 29. | 29. |
| The Commission would appreciate receiving information from States, international organizations and others, by 1 December 2022, on the following elements in relation to the use of subsidiary means for the determination of rules of international law, in the sense of Article 38, paragraph 1 (d), of the Statute of the International Court of Justice, including such information as can be discerned from: | 委员会希望在2022年12月1日之前收到各国、国际组织和其他方面的资料，说明在《国际法院规约》第三十八条第一款(卯)项意义内使用辅助手段确定国际法时所涉及的下列要素，包括可从这些要素中了解到的资料： |
| (a) | (a) |
| decisions of national courts, legislation and any other relevant practice at the domestic level that draw upon judicial decisions and the teachings of the most highly qualified publicists of the various nations in the process of determination of rules of international law, namely: international conventions, whether general or particular; | 各国法院的判决、法律和国内任何其他相关实践。 这些判决、法律和实践在确定国际法规则过程中借鉴了司法判决和各国权威最高之公法学家学说，所确定的国际法规则包括：普通或特别国际协约； |
| international custom, as evidence of a general practice accepted as law; | 作为通例之证明而经接受为法律的国际习惯； |
| and the general principles of law recognized by the community of nations; | 为各国所承认的一般法律原则； |
| (b) | (b) |
| statements made in international organizations, international conferences and other forums, including pleadings before international courts and tribunals, concerning subsidiary means for the determination of rules of international law. | 在国际组织、国际会议和其他论坛上就确定国际法规则的辅助手段所作的发言，包括向国际性法院和法庭提交的书状。 |
| D. | D. |
| Prevention and repression of piracy and armed robbery at sea | 防止和打击海盗和海上武装抢劫行为 |
| 30. | 30. |
| The Commission would appreciate receiving information from States and relevant international organizations, by 1 May 2023, concerning: | 委员会希望各国和相关国际组织在2023年5月1日之前提供以下资料： |
| (a) | (a) |
| the legislation, case law and practice of States relevant to the topic, including in relation to articles 100 to 107 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea; | 各国与本专题有关的法律、判例法和实践，包括与《联合国海洋法公约》第一百至一百零七条有关的法律、判例法和实践； |
| (b) | (b) |
| the agreements entered into by States under which persons accused of piracy or armed robbery at sea are transferred with a view to prosecution; and | 各国缔结的移交被控犯有海盗或海上武装抢劫行为人员以便进行起诉的协定； |
| (c) | (c) |
| the role of international, regional and subregional organizations regarding the prevention and repression of acts of piracy and armed robbery at sea. | 国际、区域和次区域组织在防止和打击海盗和海上武装抢劫行为方面的作用。 |
| E. | E. |
| Settlement of international disputes to which international organizations are parties | 国际组织作为当事方的国际争端的解决 |
| 31. | 31. |
| The Commission would appreciate receiving, by 1 May 2023, information from States and relevant international organizations which may be of relevance to its future work on the topic. | 委员会希望在2023年5月1日之前从各国和相关国际组织收到与其今后这一专题工作相关的资料。 |
| A questionnaire to this effect will be communicated to States and relevant international organizations. | 将向各国和有关国际组织发出这方面的调查问卷。 |
| Chapter IV Peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) | 第四章 一般国际法强制性规范(强行法) |
| A. | A. |
| Introduction | 导言 |
| 32. | 32. |
| At its sixty-seventh session (2015), the Commission decided to include the topic “Jus cogens” in its programme of work and appointed Mr. Dire D. Tladi as Special Rapporteur for the topic. | 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. | 联大随后在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其工作方案。 |
| 33. | 33. |
| The Commission considered the first report (A/CN.4/693) of the Special Rapporteur at its sixty-eighth session (2016). | 委员会第六十八届会议(2016年)审议了特别报告员的第一次报告(A/CN.4/693)。 |
| At its sixty-ninth session (2017), 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)”. | 委员会第六十九届会议(2017年)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)”。 |
| The Commission considered the third report (A/CN.4/714) of the Special Rapporteur at its seventieth session (2018); | 委员会第七十届会议(2018年)审议了特别报告员的第三次报告(A/CN.4/714)； |
| and his fourth report (A/CN.4/727) at its seventy-first session (2019). | 第七十一届会议(2019年)审议了其第四次报告(A/CN.4/727)。 |
| 34. | 34. |
| At its seventy-first session (2019), on the basis of the draft conclusions proposed by the Special Rapporteur in his five reports, the Commission provisionally adopted 23 draft conclusions and an annex as the draft conclusions on peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens), together with commentaries thereto, on first reading. | 委员会第七十一届会议(2019年)在特别报告员的五份报告提出的结论草案基础上，一读暂时通过了作为一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)结论草案的23项结论草案和一个附件，并通过了其评注。 |
| B. | B. |
| Consideration of the topic at the present session | 本届会议审议此专题的情况 |
| 35. | 35. |
| At the present session, the Commission had before it the fifth report of the Special Rapporteur (A/CN.4/747), as well as comments and observations received from Governments (A/CN.4/748). | 委员会本届会议收到了特别报告员的第五次报告(A/CN.4/747)，以及各国政府提交的评论和意见(A/CN.4/748)。 |
| The Special Rapporteur, in his fifth report, examined the comments and observations received from Governments on the draft conclusions, including the annex, as adopted on first reading. | 特别报告员在第五次报告中审查了各国政府关于一读通过的结论草案，包括附件的评论和意见。 |
| He made proposals for consideration on second reading, in light of the comments and observations, and proposed a recommendation to the General Assembly. | 他参考这些评论和意见提出了供二读审议的提案，并向联大提出了一项建议。 |
| 36. | 36. |
| The Commission considered the fifth report at its 3564th to 3570th meetings, from 19 to 27 April 2022. | 委员会在2022年4月19日至27日举行的第3564至第3570次会议上审议了第五次报告。 |
| 37. | 37. |
| Following its debate on the report, the Commission, at its 3570th meeting, held on 27 April 2022, decided to refer draft conclusions 1 to 23, together with the annex, as contained in the Special Rapporteur’s fifth report, to the Drafting Committee, taking into account the debate in the Commission. | 对该报告进行辩论后，委员会在2022年4月27日举行的第3570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结论草案1至23及附件转交起草委员会。 |
| 38. | 38. |
| At its 3582nd meeting, held on 17 May 2022, the Commission considered the report of the Drafting Committee (A/CN.4/L.967), and adopted the draft conclusions on identification and legal consequences of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens), including the annex containing a non-exhaustive list of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 在2022年5月17日举行的第3582次会议上，委员会审议了起草委员会的报告(A/CN.4/L.967)，并通过了关于一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的识别和法律后果的结论草案，包括载有一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)非详尽无遗清单的附件。 |
| 39. | 39. |
| At its 3595th to 3601st meetings, held from 22 to 27 July 2022, the Commission adopted the commentaries to the draft conclusions (see sect. E.2 below). | 在2022年7月22日至27日举行的第3595至第3601次会议上，委员会通过了结论草案的评注(见下文E.2节)。 |
| 40. | 40. |
| In accordance with its statute, the Commission submits the draft conclusions, including the annex, to the General Assembly, with the recommendation set out below (see sect. C below). | 委员会根据其章程向联大提交结论草案，包括附件，以及下述建议(见下文C节)。 |
| C. | C. |
| Recommendation of the Commission | 委员会的建议 |
| 41. | 41. |
| At its 3601st meeting, on 27 July 2022, the Commission decided, in accordance with article 23 of its statute, to recommend that the General Assembly: | 在2022年7月27日举行的第3601次会议上，委员会根据其章程第23条，决定建议联大： |
| (a) | (a) |
| take note of the draft conclusions of the International Law Commission on identification and legal consequences of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens), annex the draft conclusions to the resolution, and ensure their widest dissemination; | 注意到国际法委员会关于一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的识别和法律后果的结论草案，将结论草案附在决议之后，并确保对其进行尽可能广泛的传播； |
| (b) | (b) |
| commend the draft conclusions and annex, together with the commentaries thereto, to the attention of States and to all who may be called upon to identify peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) and to apply their legal consequences. | 提请各国和所有可能需要识别一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)和适用其法律后果的人注意结论草案和附件及其评注。 |
| D. | D. |
| Tribute to the Special Rapporteur | 向特别报告员表示感谢 |
| 42. | 42. |
| At its 3601st meeting, held on 27 July 2022, the Commission, after adopting the draft conclusions and annex on identification and legal consequences of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens), adopted the following resolution by acclamation: | 在2022年7月27日举行的第3601次会议上，委员会在通过了关于一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的识别和法律后果的结论草案和附件后，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 and legal consequences of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens), | 通过了关于一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的识别和法律后果的结论草案， |
| Expresses to the Special Rapporteur, Mr. Dire D. Tladi, 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 and legal consequences of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens).” | 向特别报告员迪雷·特拉迪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编写结论草案做出杰出贡献，并使一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的识别和法律后果结论草案的拟订工作取得成果。” |
| E. | E. |
| Text of the draft conclusions on identification and legal consequences of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) | 关于一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的识别和法律后果的结论草案案文 |
| 1. | 1. |
| Text of the draft conclusions and annex | 结论草案和附件案文 |
| 43. | 43. |
| The text of the draft conclusions and annex adopted by the Commission, on second reading, at its seventy-third session is reproduced below. | 委员会第七十三届会议二读通过的结论草案和附件案文载录如下。 |
| Identification and legal consequences of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) | 一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的识别和法律后果 |
| Part One Introduction | 第一部分 导言 |
| Conclusion 1 Scope | 结论1 范围 |
| The present draft conclusions concern the identification and legal consequences of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 本结论草案涉及一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的识别和法律后果。 |
| Conclusion 2 Nature of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) | 结论2 一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的性质 |
| Peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) reflect and protect fundamental values of the international community. | 一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)反映并保护国际社会的基本价值观。 |
| They are universally applicable and are hierarchically superior to other rules of international law. | 这些规范普遍适用，其位阶高于国际法其他规则。 |
| Conclusion 3 Definition of a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) | 结论3 一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的定义 |
| A peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) is a norm accepted and recognized by the international community of States as a whole as a norm from which no derogation is permitted and which can be modified only by a subsequent norm of general international law having the same character. | 一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)是指被国家组成之国际社会整体接受和承认为不容克减的规范，此类规范只能由嗣后具有相同性质的一般国际法规范加以变更。 |
| Part Two Identification of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) | 第二部分 一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的识别 |
| Conclusion 4 Criteria for the identification of a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) | 结论4 一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的识别标准 |
| To identify a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens), it is necessary to establish that the norm in question meets the following criteria: | 要识别一项规范为一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)，必须确定该规范符合以下标准： |
| (a) | (a) |
| it is a norm of general international law; | 它是一般国际法规范； |
| and | 并且 |
| (b) | (b) |
| it is accepted and recognized by the international community of States as a whole as a norm from which no derogation is permitted and which can be modified only by a subsequent norm of general international law having the same character. | 被国家组成之国际社会整体接受和承认为不容克减的规范，此类规范只能由嗣后具有相同性质的一般国际法规范加以变更。 |
| Conclusion 5 Bases for peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) | 结论5 一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的基础 |
| 1. | 1. |
| Customary international law is the most common basis for peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 习惯国际法是一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的最常见的基础。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| Treaty provisions and general principles of law may also serve as bases for peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 条约规定和一般法律原则也可作为一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的基础。 |
| Conclusion 6 Acceptance and recognition | 结论6 接受和承认 |
| 1. | 1. |
| The criterion of acceptance and recognition referred to in draft conclusion 4, subparagraph (b), is distinct from acceptance and recognition as a norm of general international law. | 结论草案4的(b)项中提到的接受和承认标准不同于接受和承认为一般国际法规范的标准。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| To identify a norm as a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens), there must be evidence that such a norm is accepted and recognized by the international community of States as a whole as a norm from which no derogation is permitted and which can only be modified by a subsequent norm of general international law having the same character. | 要识别一项规范为一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)，必须有证据表明该规范被国家组成之国际社会整体接受和承认为不容克减的规范，且只能由嗣后具有相同性质的一般国际法规范加以变更。 |
| Conclusion 7 International community of States as a whole | 结论7 国家组成之国际社会整体 |
| 1. | 1. |
| It is the acceptance and recognition by the international community of States as a whole that is relevant for the identification of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 在识别一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)时，具有相关意义的是国家组成之国际社会整体的接受和承认。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| Acceptance and recognition by a very large and representative majority of States is required for the identification of a norm as a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens); | 识别一项规范为一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)需要具有代表性的绝大多数国家接受和承认； |
| acceptance and recognition by all States is not required. | 不要求所有国家都接受和承认。 |
| 3. | 3. |
| While the positions of other actors may be relevant in providing context and for assessing acceptance and recognition by the international community of States as a whole, these positions cannot, in and of themselves, form part of such acceptance and recognition. | 其他行为体的立场虽可有助于提供背景和评估国家组成之国际社会整体的接受和承认，但这些立场本身不能构成此种接受和承认的一部分。 |
| Conclusion 8 Evidence of acceptance and recognition | 结论8 接受和承认的证据 |
| 1. | 1. |
| Evidence of acceptance and recognition that a norm of general international law is a peremptory norm (jus cogens) may take a wide range of forms. | 表明一项一般国际法规范被接受和承认为强制性规范(强行法)的证据可具有广泛多样的形式。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| Forms of evidence include, but are not limited to: public statements made on behalf of States; | 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； |
| constitutional provisions; | 宪法规定； |
| legislative and administrative acts; | 立法和行政行为； |
| decisions of national courts; | 各国法院的判决； |
| treaty provisions; | 条约规定； |
| resolutions adopted by an international organization or at an intergovernmental conference; | 国际组织通过的或在政府间会议上通过的决议； |
| and other conduct of States. | 其他国家行为。 |
| Conclusion 9 Subsidiary means for the determination of the peremptory character of norms of general international law | 结论9 确定一般国际法规范强制性的辅助手段 |
| 1. | 1. |
| Decisions of international courts and tribunals, in particular of the International Court of Justice, are a subsidiary means for determining the peremptory character of norms of general international law. | 国际性法院和法庭的判决，特别是国际法院的判决，是确定一般国际法规范强制性的辅助手段。 |
| Regard may also be had, as appropriate, to decisions of national courts. | 还可酌情考虑各国法院的判决。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| The works of expert bodies established by States or international organizations and the teachings of the most highly qualified publicists of the various nations may also serve as subsidiary means for determining the peremptory character of norms of general international law. | 各国或国际组织设立的专家机构的工作成果和各国权威最高的公法学家学说也可作为确定一般国际法规范强制性的辅助手段。 |
| Part Three Legal consequences of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) | 第三部分 一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的法律后果 |
| Conclusion 10 Treaties conflicting with a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) | 结论10 与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)抵触的条约 |
| 1. | 1. |
| A treaty is void if, at the time of its conclusion, it conflicts with a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens). | 条约在缔结时与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)相抵触者无效。 |
| The provisions of such a treaty have no legal force. | 此种条约的规定无法律效力。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| Subject to paragraph 2 of draft conclusion 11, if a new peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) emerges, any existing treaty which is in conflict with that norm becomes void and terminates. | 在不违反结论草案11第2段的前提下，如有新的一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)出现，与该项规范相抵触的任何现行条约即为无效并终止。 |
| The parties to such a treaty are released from any obligation further to perform the treaty. | 条约缔约方继续履行条约之义务解除。 |
| Conclusion 11 Separability of treaty provisions conflicting with a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) | 结论11 与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)抵触的条约规定的可分离性 |
| 1. | 1. |
| A treaty which, at the time of its conclusion, conflicts with a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) is void in whole, and no separation of the provisions of the treaty is permitted. | 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，条约任何规定均不可分离。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| A treaty which is in conflict with a new peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) becomes void and terminates in whole, unless: | 条约如与新的一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)抵触则整体无效并终止，除非： |
| (a) | (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 regard to their application; | 与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)抵触的规定就其适用而言，可与条约的其余部分分离； |
| (b) | (b) |
| it appears from the treaty or is otherwise established that acceptance of the said provisions was not an essential basis of the consent of the parties to be bound by the treaty as a whole; | 条约本身规定或通过其他方式确定，接受有关规定并非缔约方同意受整个条约约束之必要基础； |
| and | 并且 |
| (c) | (c) |
| continued performance of the remainder of the treaty would not be unjust. | 该条约其余部分继续实施不致有失公正。 |
| Conclusion 12 Consequences of the invalidity and termination of treaties conflicting with a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) | 结论12 与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)抵触的条约无效和终止的后果 |
| 1. | 1. |
| Parties to a treaty which is void 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: | 因在缔结时与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)抵触而无效的条约的缔约方有以下法律义务： |
| (a) | (a) |
| eliminate as far as possible the consequences of any act performed in reliance on any provision of the treaty which conflicts with a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens); | 尽量消除依据与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)抵触的条约之任何规定所实施的任何行为的后果； |
| and | 以及 |
| (b) | (b) |
| bring their mutual relations into conformity with the peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens). | 使彼此关系符合一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)。 |
| 2. | 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 of the parties created through the execution of the treaty prior to the termination of the treaty, provided that those rights, obligations or situations may thereafter be maintained only to the extent that their maintenance is not in itself in conflict with the new peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens). | 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，不影响缔约方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，条件是此后这些权利、义务或情势的保持仅以与新的一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)不相抵触为限。 |
| Conclusion 13 Absence of effect of reservations to treaties on peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) | 结论13 对条约的保留对一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)不具效果 |
| 1. | 1. |
| A reservation to a treaty provision that reflects a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) does not affect the binding nature of that norm, which shall continue to apply as such. | 对反映一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的条约规定的保留不影响该强制性规范的约束性，该规范应继续作为强制性规范适用。 |
| 2. | 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). | 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。 |
| Conclusion 14 Rules of customary international law conflicting with a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) | 结论14 与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)抵触的习惯国际法规则 |
| 1. | 1. |
| A rule of customary international law does not come into existence if it would conflict with an existing peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens). | 习惯国际法规则如与现有的一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)抵触，则不会形成。 |
| This is without prejudice to the possible modification of a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) by a subsequent norm of general international law having the same character. | 这不妨碍一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)由嗣后具有相同性质的一般国际法规范加以变更的可能性。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| A rule of customary international law not of a peremptory character ceases to exist if and to the extent that it conflicts with a new peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens). | 不具有强制性的习惯国际法规则如与新的一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)抵触，则在抵触范围内停止存在。 |
| 3. | 3. |
| The persistent objector rule does not apply to peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 一贯反对者规则不适用于一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)。 |
| Conclusion 15 Obligations created by unilateral acts of States conflicting with a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) | 结论15 与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)抵触的国家单方面行为所创设的义务 |
| 1. | 1. |
| A unilateral act of a State manifesting the intention to be bound by an obligation under international law that would be in conflict with a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) does not create such an obligation. | 表明有意接受与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)抵触的国际法义务约束的国家单方面行为，不创设此种义务。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| An obligation under international law created by a unilateral act of a State ceases to exist if and to the extent that it conflicts with a new peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens). | 国家单方面行为所创设的国际法义务如与新的一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)抵触，则在抵触范围内停止存在。 |
| Conclusion 16 Obligations created by resolutions, decisions or other acts of international organizations conflicting with a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) | 结论16 与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)抵触的国际组织决议、决定或其他行为所创设的义务 |
| A resolution, decision or other act of an international organization that would otherwise have binding effect does not create obligations under international law if and to the extent that they conflict with a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens). | 国际组织本应具有约束力的决议、决定或其他行为如与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)抵触，则在抵触范围内不创设国际法义务。 |
| Conclusion 17 Peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) as obligations owed to the international community as a whole (obligations erga omnes) | 结论17 一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)作为对国际社会整体承担的义务(普遍义务) |
| 1. | 1. |
| Peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) give rise to obligations owed to the international community as a whole (obligations erga omnes), in relation to which all States have a legal interest. | 一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)产生对国际社会整体承担的义务(普遍义务)，关乎所有国家的合法利益。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| Any State is entitled to invoke the responsibility of another State for a breach of a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens), in accordance with the rules on the responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts. | 根据关于国家对国际不法行为的责任的规则，任何国家均有权援引另一国对违反一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的责任。 |
| Conclusion 18 Peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) and circumstances precluding wrongfulness | 结论18 一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)和解除不法性的情况 |
| No circumstance precluding wrongfulness under the rules on the responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts may be invoked with regard to any act of a State that is not in conformity with an obligation arising under a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens). | 对于违反一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)所产生的义务的任何国家行为，不得援引关于国家对国际不法行为的责任的规则所规定的任何解除不法性的情况。 |
| Conclusion 19 Particular consequences of serious breaches of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) | 结论19 严重违反一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的特定后果 |
| 1. | 1. |
| States shall cooperate to bring to an end through lawful means any serious breach by a State of an obligation arising under a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens). | 各国应进行合作，通过合法手段制止一国严重违反一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)所产生的义务的任何行为。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| No State shall recognize as lawful a situation created by a serious breach by a State of an obligation arising under a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens), nor render aid or assistance in maintaining that situation. | 任何国家均不得承认因一国严重违反一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)所产生的义务而造成的状况为合法，也不得为维持这种状况提供援助或协助。 |
| 3. | 3. |
| A breach of an obligation arising under a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) is serious if it involves a gross or systematic failure by the responsible State to fulfil that obligation. | 违反一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)所产生的义务如涉及责任国严重或系统性地不履行该义务，则为严重违反。 |
| 4. | 4. |
| This draft conclusion is without prejudice to the other consequences that any breach by a State of an obligation arising under a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) may entail under international law. | 本条结论草案不妨碍一国违反一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)所产生的义务的任何行为可能依国际法引起的其他后果。 |
| Part Four General provisions | 第四部分 一般规定 |
| Conclusion 20 Interpretation and application consistent with peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) | 结论20 解释和适用与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)相一致 |
| Where it appears that there may be a conflict between a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) and another rule of international law, the latter is, as far as possible, to be interpreted and applied so as to be consistent with the former. | 在一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)似与另一国际法规则抵触的情况下，后者的解释和适用应尽可能与前者相一致。 |
| Conclusion 21 Recommended procedure | 结论21 建议的程序 |
| 1. | 1. |
| A State which invokes a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) as a ground for the invalidity or termination of a rule of international law should do so by notifying other States concerned of its claim. | 一国如援引一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)作为一项国际法规则无效或终止之理由，应将其主张通知其他有关国家。 |
| The notification should be in writing and should indicate the measure proposed to be taken with respect to the rule of international law in question. | 通知应以书面形式发出，并说明拟就有关国际法规则采取的措施。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| If none of the other States concerned raises an objection within a period which, except in cases of special urgency, will not be less than three months, the invoking State may carry out the measure which it has proposed. | 如其他有关国家在除特别紧急情况外不短于三个月的期间内无一表示反对，则援引国可采取其所提议的措施。 |
| 3. | 3. |
| If, however, any State concerned raises an objection, the States concerned should seek a solution through the means indicated in Article 33 of the Charter of the United Nations. | 然而，如任何有关国家表示反对，则有关国家应通过《联合国宪章》第三十三条所述方法寻求解决。 |
| If no solution is reached within a period of twelve months, and the objecting State offers to submit the matter to the International Court of Justice or to some other procedure entailing binding decisions, the invoking State should not carry out the measure which it has proposed until the dispute is resolved. | 如在十二个月内未能达成解决办法，而表示反对的国家提出将该事项提交国际法院或可作出具有约束力的裁决的某一其他程序，则在争端解决之前，援引国不得采取其所提议的措施。 |
| 4. | 4. |
| This draft conclusion is without prejudice to the procedures set forth in the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, to the relevant rules concerning the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice, or to other applicable dispute settlement provisions agreed by the States concerned. | 本条结论草案不妨碍《维也纳条约法公约》、关于国际法院管辖权的有关规则或有关国家商定的其他适用的争端解决规定所载的程序。 |
| Conclusion 22 Without prejudice to consequences that specific peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) may otherwise entail | 结论22 不妨碍特定的一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)可能引起的其他后果 |
| The present draft conclusions are without prejudice to consequences that specific peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) may otherwise entail under international law. | 本结论草案不妨碍特定的一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)可能依国际法引起的其他后果。 |
| Conclusion 23 Non-exhaustive list | 结论23 非详尽无遗的清单 |
| Without prejudice to the existence or subsequent emergence of other peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens), a non-exhaustive list of norms that the International Law Commission has previously referred to as having that status is to be found in the annex to the present draft conclusions. | 在不妨碍其他一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的存在或嗣后出现的情况下，本结论草案附件载有国际法委员会以前提到的具有这种地位的规范的非详尽无遗清单。 |
| Annex | 附件 |
| (a) | (a) |
| The prohibition of aggression; | 禁止侵略； |
| (b) | (b) |
| the prohibition of genocide; | 禁止灭绝种族； |
| (c) | (c) |
| the prohibition of crimes against humanity; | 禁止危害人类罪； |
| (d) | (d) |
| the basic rules of international humanitarian law; | 国际人道法的基本规则； |
| (e) | (e) |
| the prohibition of racial discrimination and apartheid; | 禁止种族歧视和种族隔离； |
| (f) | (f) |
| the prohibition of slavery; | 禁止奴役； |
| (g) | (g) |
| the prohibition of torture; | 禁止酷刑； |
| (h) | (h) |
| the right of self-determination. | 自决权。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| Text of the draft conclusions and commentaries thereto | 结论草案案文及其评注 |
| 44. | 44. |
| The text of the draft conclusions adopted by the Commission, on second reading, together with commentaries thereto, is reproduced below. | 委员会二读通过的结论草案案文及其评注载录如下。 |
| Identification and legal consequences of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) | 一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的识别和法律后果 |
| Part One Introduction | 第一部分 导言 |
| Conclusion 1 Scope | 结论1 范围 |
| The present draft conclusions concern the identification and legal consequences of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 本结论草案涉及一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的识别和法律后果。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) | (1) |
| As is always the case with the Commission’s outputs, the draft conclusions are to be read together with the commentaries. | 与委员会以往工作成果一样，本结论草案应结合评注来解读。 |
| (2) | (2) |
| These draft conclusions concern peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens), which have increasingly been referred to by international and regional courts, national courts, States and other actors. | 本结论草案涉及一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)，这些规范越来越多地被国际和区域性法院、国家法院、各国和其他行为体提及。 |
| These draft conclusions are aimed at providing guidance to all those who may be called upon to determine the existence of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) and their legal consequences. | 本结论草案旨在为所有可能需要确定一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的存在及其法律后果的人提供指导。 |
| Given the importance and potentially far-reaching implications of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens), it is essential that the identification of such norms and their legal consequences be done systematically and in accordance with a generally accepted methodology. | 鉴于一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的重要性和可能具有的深远影响，必须按照一个普遍接受的方法，系统地识别这些规范及其法律后果。 |
| (3) | (3) |
| Draft conclusion 1 is introductory in nature and sets out the scope of the present draft conclusions. | 结论草案1具有导言性质，说明了本结论草案的范围。 |
| It provides in simple terms that the present draft conclusions concern the identification and legal consequences of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 其中简单地规定，本结论草案涉及一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的识别和法律后果。 |
| The draft conclusions, dealing with identification and legal consequences, are primarily concerned with methodology. They do not attempt to address the content of individual peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 本结论草案处理的是识别和法律后果，主要涉及方法，而不是要讨论具体的一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的内容。 |
| It should also be noted that the commentaries will refer to different materials to illustrate methodological approaches in practice. | 还应指出的是，评注将援引不同材料来说明实践中采用的方法。 |
| The materials referred to as examples of practice, including views of States, serve to illustrate the methodology for the identification and consequences of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). They do not imply agreement with, or endorsement of, the views expressed therein by the Commission. | 作为实例提及的材料，包括各国的意见，是为了说明一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的识别方法及其后果，并不表明委员会同意或认可其中表达的看法。 |
| (4) | (4) |
| The draft conclusions are concerned primarily with the method for establishing whether a norm of general international law has the added quality of having a peremptory character (that is, being accepted and recognized by the international community of States as a whole as a norm from which no derogation is permitted and which can be modified only by a subsequent norm of general international law (jus cogens) having the same character). | 本结论草案主要涉及确定一项一般国际法规范是否具有强制性这一附加性质(即被国家组成之国际社会整体接受和承认为不容克减的规范，只能由嗣后具有相同性质的一般国际法规范(强行法)加以变更)的方法。 |
| The draft conclusions are thus not concerned with the determination of the content of the peremptory norms themselves. | 因此，本结论草案不涉及确定强制性规范本身的内容。 |
| The process of identifying whether a norm of international law is peremptory or not requires the application of the criteria developed in these draft conclusions. | 识别一项国际法规范是否是强制性规范，需要适用本结论草案中制定的标准。 |
| (5) | (5) |
| In general, the draft conclusions use the word “identify” to signify the process of establishing that a norm is a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens). | 结论草案基本上用“识别”一词来指确定一项规范为一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的过程。 |
| The word “determine”, however, is also used at places. | 不过，有些地方也用了“确定”一词。 |
| (6) | (6) |
| In addition to the identification of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens), the draft conclusions also concern the legal consequences of such norms. | 除了一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的识别外，本结论草案还涉及这些规范的法律后果。 |
| The term “legal consequences” is used because it is broad. | 使用“法律后果”一词是因为它含义广泛。 |
| While there may be non-legal consequences of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens), it is only the legal consequences that are the subject of the present draft conclusions. | 虽然一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)可能具有非法律后果，但本结论草案只讨论法律后果。 |
| Moreover, individual peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) may have specific consequences that are distinct from the general consequences flowing from all peremptory norms. | 此外，具体的一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)可能会有不同于所有强制性规范一般后果的特定后果。 |
| The present draft conclusions, however, are not concerned with such specific consequences, nor do they seek to determine whether individual peremptory norms have specific consequences. | 不过，本结论草案不涉及这种特定后果，也不试图确定具体的强制性规范是否有特定后果。 |
| The draft conclusions only address general legal consequences of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 本结论草案仅述及一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的一般法律后果。 |
| (7) | (7) |
| The terms “jus cogens”, “peremptory norms” and “peremptory norms of general international law” are sometimes used interchangeably in State practice, international jurisprudence and scholarly writings. | 在国家实践、国际判例和学术著作中，“强行法”、“强制性规范”和“一般国际法强制性规范”有时交替使用。 |
| The Commission settled on the term “peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens)” because it is clearer and also because it is the term used in the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (1969 Vienna Convention). | 委员会决定采用“一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)”这一术语，因为它更加明确，而且也是1969年《维也纳条约法公约》(1969年《维也纳公约》)中的术语。 |
| (8) | (8) |
| The term “peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens)” also serves to indicate that the topic is concerned only with norms of general international law. | “一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)”一语还有助于表明，本专题仅涉及一般国际法规范。 |
| Jus cogens norms in domestic legal systems, for example, do not form part of the topic. | 例如，国内法律体系中的强行法规范不构成本专题的一部分。 |
| Similarly, norms of a purely bilateral or regional character are also excluded from the scope of the topic. | 同样，纯双边性质和区域性质的规范也被排除在本专题范围之外。 |
| (9) | (9) |
| The word “norm” is used because it is understood to have a broader meaning than other related words such as “rules” and “principles” and to encompass both. | 之所以使用“规范”一词，是因为该词被认为具有比其他相关词语如“规则”和“原则”更广泛的含义，并包括后两者。 |
| It is, however, to be noted that, in some cases, the words “rules”, “principles” and “norms” can be used interchangeably. | 但应当指出的是，在有些情况下，“规则”、“原则”和“规范”可以交替使用。 |
| The Commission, in its 1966 draft articles on the law of treaties, used the word “norm” in draft article 50 which became article 53 of the 1969 Vienna Convention. However, in the commentaries, the Commission used the word “rules”. | 委员会在1966年条约法条款草案中，即后来成为1969年《维也纳公约》第五十三条的第50条草案中使用了“规范”一词，在评注中则用了“规则”一词。 |
| Both articles 53 and 64 of the Convention use the word “norm”. To be consistent with that Convention, the word “norm” is retained. | 该公约第五十三和第六十四条均使用了“规范”一词，为与该公约相一致，保留了“规范”一词。 |
| (10) | (10) |
| In general, the present draft conclusions apply to States, as the primary subjects of international law. | 总的来说，本结论草案适用于作为国际法主要主体的国家。 |
| For this reason, the text of the draft conclusions refers in the main to “States”. | 因此，本结论草案的案文主要提到“国家”。 |
| Nonetheless, there are instances in which the draft conclusions also apply to international organizations. | 不过，有些情况下，结论草案也适用于国际组织。 |
| Where a particular draft conclusion applies to international organizations, the commentaries will make this clear. | 如果某一条结论草案适用于国际组织，评注将会明确说明这一点。 |
| Conclusion 2 Nature of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) | 结论2 一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的一般性质 |
| Peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) reflect and protect fundamental values of the international community. | 一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)反映并保护国际社会的基本价值观。 |
| They are universally applicable and are hierarchically superior to other rules of international law. | 这些规范普遍适用，其位阶高于国际法其他规则。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) | (1) |
| Draft conclusion 2 describes the general nature of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 结论草案2描述了一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的一般性质。 |
| The general nature is described in terms of three essential characteristics associated with peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 该一般性质是通过一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的三个基本特点来描述的。 |
| The draft conclusion is placed after the provision on scope, in order to indicate that it provides a general orientation for peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 本条结论草案放在关于范围的规定之后，是为了表明，它为一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)提供了一个总的方向。 |
| (2) | (2) |
| The first characteristic referred to in draft conclusion 2 is that peremptory norms of general international law “reflect and protect fundamental values of the international community”. | 结论草案2提到的第一个特点是，一般国际法强制性规范“反映并保护国际社会的基本价值观”。 |
| The Commission chose the words “reflect and protect” to underline the dual function that fundamental values play in relation to peremptory norms of general international law. | 委员会选择使用“反映并保护”一语来强调基本价值观对一般国际法强制性规范的双重作用。 |
| The word “reflect” is meant to indicate that the fundamental value(s) in question provide, in part, a rationale for the peremptory status of the norm of general international law at issue. | “反映”一词是为了表明，这些基本价值观为相关一般国际法规范的强制性地位提供了部分依据。 |
| Further, the word “reflect” seeks to establish the idea that the norm in question gives effect to particular values. | 此外，“反映”一词旨在确立一种观念，即相关规范可以落实特定的价值观。 |
| The word “protect” is meant to convey that a specific peremptory norm of general international law serves to protect the value(s) in question. | “保护”一词意在传达的是，某一特定的一般国际法强制性规范有助于保护相关价值观。 |
| Put differently, it indicates the idea that underlying peremptory norms are particular values shared by the international community as a whole that the norms seek to protect. | 换言之，它表明，强制性规范是基于其要保护的整个国际社会共同的特定价值观。 |
| In some ways, these are mutually reinforcing concepts. | 从某种程度上说，这两个概念是相辅相成的。 |
| A value reflected by a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) will be protected by compliance with that norm. | 一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)所反映的价值观将通过对该规范的遵守而得到保护。 |
| (3) | (3) |
| The characteristic that peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) reflect and protect fundamental values of the international community relates to the content of the norm in question. | 一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)反映并保护国际社会基本价值观的特点与相关规范的内容有关。 |
| Already in 1951, before the adoption of the 1969 Vienna Convention or the 1966 draft articles on the law of treaties, the International Court of Justice had linked the prohibition of genocide, a prohibition today widely accepted and recognized as a peremptory norm, to fundamental values, noting that the prohibition was inspired by the commitment “to condemn and punish genocide as ‘a crime under international law’ involving a denial of the right of existence of entire human groups, a denial which shocks the conscience of mankind and results in great losses to humanity, and which is contrary to moral law and to the spirit and aims of the United Nations”. | 早在1951年，即通过1969年《维也纳公约》或1966年条约法条款草案之前，国际法院就已将如今被广泛接受和承认为强制性规范的禁止灭绝种族与基本价值观联系起来，指出这种禁止源于如下承诺：“谴责和惩治灭绝种族行为，视之为‘国际法上的一种罪行’，因为此等行为否认整个人类的生存权，此种否认震撼人类良知，致使人类蒙受重大损失，与道德法以及联合国的精神和宗旨大相悖谬。 ” |
| (4) | (4) |
| The references in the International Court of Justice advisory opinion on Reservations to the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide to “the conscience of mankind” and “moral law” evoke fundamental values shared by the international community. | 国际法院在关于对《防止及惩治灭绝种族罪公约》的保留的咨询意见中提到的“人类良知”和“道德法”让人想到国际社会共同的基本价值观。 |
| In subsequent decisions, the Court has reaffirmed this description of the underlying basis for the prohibition of genocide and, at the same time, affirmed the peremptory status of the prohibition of genocide. | 在后来的判决中，国际法院重申了这种关于禁止灭绝种族的依据的说法，同时申明了禁止灭绝种族的强制性地位。 |
| Moreover, in its 2007 judgment in the case concerning the Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Bosnia and Herzegovina v. Serbia and Montenegro), the Court referred to peremptory norms along with “obligations which protect essential humanitarian values”, thus indicating a relationship between them. | 此外，该法院在2007年《防止及惩治灭绝种族罪公约》的适用案(波斯尼亚和黑塞哥维那诉塞尔维亚和黑山)的判决中，同时提到强制性规范和“保护基本人道主义价值观的义务”，从而指明了二者之间的关系。 |
| Similarly, in Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (The Gambia v. Myanmar), the Court described the erga omnes character of the prohibition of genocide as based on, in part, “shared values”. | 同样，在《防止及惩治灭绝种族罪公约》的适用案(冈比亚诉缅甸)中，法院称禁止灭绝种族罪的普遍性部分上基于“共同的价值观”。 |
| The connection between values and the peremptory character of norms has also been made by other international courts and tribunals. | 其他国际性法院和法庭也提到价值观与规范的强制性之间的联系。 |
| (5) | (5) |
| Support for the link between peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) and fundamental values can be found in the practice of States. | 可在国家实践中找到对一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)与基本价值观之间联系的支持。 |
| For example, many States have, in official statements, including before the United Nations, recognized the connection between fundamental values and peremptory norms. | 例如，许多国家都在正式发言，包括在联合国的发言中，承认了基本价值观与强制性规范之间的联系。 |
| The recognition of this link has been particularly pronounced in the decisions of national courts. | 在各国法院的判决中，对这种联系的承认尤为明显。 |
| For example, in Siderman de Blake v. Argentina, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit quoted with approval the statement that peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) are “‘derived from values taken to be fundamental by the international community’”. | 例如，在Siderman de Blake诉阿根廷案中，美国第九巡回上诉法院赞同地引述了如下说法，即一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)“‘源自国际社会认同的基本价值观’”。 |
| The Constitutional Tribunal of Peru referred to the “extraordinary importance of the values that underlie” jus cogens obligations. | 秘鲁宪法法庭提到强行法义务“所体现的价值观非常重要”。 |
| Similarly, in the Arancibia Clavel case, the Supreme Court of Argentina held that the purpose of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) was “to protect States from agreements concluded against some of the general values and interests of the international community of States as a whole”. | 同样，在Arancibia Clavel案中，阿根廷最高法院认为，一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的目的是“保护各国不受违反国家组成之国际社会整体的普遍价值观和利益而缔结的协定的约束”。 |
| The Supreme Court of Canada has described peremptory norms as those norms of “fundamental importance”. | 加拿大最高法院将强制性规范描述为具有“根本重要性”的规范。 |
| In its Order of 26 October 2004, the Federal Constitutional Court of Germany described peremptory norms of general international law as those norms that were “firmly rooted in the legal conviction of the community of States [and which were] indispensable to the existence of public international law”. | 德国联邦宪法法院在其2004年10月26日的命令中，称一般国际法强制性规范“牢牢植根于国际社会的法律信念，[是]国际公法存在所不可或缺的”规范。 |
| (6) | (6) |
| The relationship between peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) and values is also accepted in scholarly writings. | 一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)与价值观之间的关系在学术著作中也得到接受。 |
| Kolb states that the idea that peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) are somehow connected with fundamental values “is the absolutely predominant theory” in international law. | Kolb指出，关于一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)与基本价值观有某种联系的观点是国际法中“绝对占主要地位的理论”。 |
| Similarly, Gagnon-Bergeron describes the characteristic of “fundamental values” as “the only determinative feature of jus cogens”. | 同样，Gagnon-Bergeron将“基本价值观”这一特点称为“强行法的唯一决定性特点”。 |
| Hannikainen, describing the role of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens), observes that “a legal community may find it necessary to establish peremptory norms for the protection of such overriding interests and values of the community itself”. | Hannikainen在描述一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的作用时指出，“法律界可能认为有必要确立强制性规范来保护其本身的这些最高利益和价值观”。 |
| Similarly, Pellet sees peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) as paving a way towards a more “moral value oriented public order”, while Tomuschat describes them as “the class of norms that protect the fundamental values of the international community”. | 同样，Pellet认为一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)为建立一个更加“以道德价值观为导向的公共秩序”铺平了道路， Tomuschat则将这些规范称为“保护国际社会基本价值观的一类规范”。 |
| (7) | (7) |
| It is unnecessary and, indeed, impractical to specify the fundamental values to which draft conclusion 2 refers. | 对结论草案2述及的基本价值观加以具体说明，是不必要的，实际上也是不可行的。 |
| These values are not static and may evolve over time. | 这些价值观不是静态的，可能会随着时间的推移而变化。 |
| While the values often associated with jus cogens are generally humanitarian in nature, other values, as long as they are shared by the international community, may also underlie peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 虽然通常与强行法有关的价值观一般具有人道主义性质，但其他价值观，只要是国际社会的共同价值观，也可能成为一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的基础。 |
| (8) | (8) |
| It will be noted from the discussion above that courts and scholarly writings have employed different terms to signify the relevance of fundamental values. | 从上面的讨论可以看出，法院和学术著作采用了不同说法来表明基本价值观的相关性。 |
| For example, the terms “fundamental values” and “interests”, or variations thereof, have been employed interchangeably. | 例如，“基本价值观” 和“利益” 或其不同表述形式被交替使用。 |
| These different choices of words, however, are not mutually exclusive and they indicate the important normative and moral background of the norm in question. | 但这些不同的措词并不相互排斥，它们表明了有关规范的重要规范背景和道德背景。 |
| (9) | (9) |
| A further terminological point is that while draft conclusion 2 refers to “the international community”, other draft conclusions, including draft conclusion 3, draft conclusion 4 and draft conclusion 7, refer to “the international community of States as a whole”. | 另一个术语问题是，结论草案2提到的是“国际社会”，其他结论草案，包括结论草案3、结论草案4和结论草案7，提到的则是“国家组成之国际社会整体”。 |
| The “international community of States as a whole” is used in respect of the criteria for peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens), because in so far as the application of the criteria is concerned, it is the views of States that matter. | 在一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的标准方面使用“国家组成之国际社会整体”，是因为就标准的适用而言，重要的是国家的意见。 |
| However, in respect of the values underlying peremptory norms, a more inclusive sense of the “international community” is relevant. | 然而，就强制性规范所体现的价值观而言，具有相关性的是更全面意义上的“国际社会”。 |
| This more inclusive international community of course includes States, but it includes other actors beyond States, which may play an important role in the emergence of fundamental values. | 这个更全面的国际社会当然包括国家，但也包括国家以外可能在基本价值观的形成中发挥重要作用的其他行为体。 |
| (10) | (10) |
| With respect to the second characteristic, draft conclusion 2 provides that peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) are universally applicable. | 关于第二个特点，结论草案2规定，一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)普遍适用。 |
| The universal applicability of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) means that they are binding on all subjects of international law that they address, including States and international organizations. | 一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的普遍适用性意味着这些规范对其述及的所有国际法主体具有约束力，包括国家和国际组织。 |
| The idea that peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) are universally applicable, like that of their hierarchical superiority, flows from non-derogability. | 一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)普遍适用的概念同其位阶优先的概念一样，源于不容克减。 |
| The fact that a norm is non-derogable, by extension, means that it is applicable to all, since States cannot derogate from it by creating their own special rules that conflict with it. | 一项规范不容克减，引申开来的话，意味着它适用于所有国家，因为各国不能通过制定与之相抵触的特殊规则来对其进行克减。 |
| The universal application of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) is both a characteristic and a consequence of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的普遍适用性既是一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的特点，也是其后果。 |
| (11) | (11) |
| In its advisory opinion on Reservations to the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, the International Court of Justice referred to “the universal character of the condemnation of genocide”, which it considered to be a consequence of the fact that genocide “shocks the conscience of mankind and results in great losses to humanity, and [which] is contrary to moral law”. | 国际法院在关于对《防止及惩治灭绝种族罪公约》的保留的咨询意见中提到“灭绝种族行为普遍受到谴责”，认为这是因为灭绝种族“震撼人类良知，致使人类蒙受重大损失，与道德法大相悖谬”。 |
| The universal character of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) was affirmed by the judgments of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia. | 前南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭的判决也确认了一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的普遍性。 |
| The Inter-American Court of Human Rights has described peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) as being “applicable to all States” and as norms that “bind all States”. | 美洲人权法院称一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)“适用于所有国家”，是“约束所有国家”的规范。 |
| Similarly, in Michael Domingues v. United States, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights determined that peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) “bind the international community as a whole, irrespective of protest, recognition or acquiescence”. | 同样，在Michael Domingues诉美国案中，美洲人权委员会认定，一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)“对整个国际社会具有约束力，无论抗议、承认或默许与否”。 |
| (12) | (12) |
| The universal character of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) is further reflected in decisions of national courts. | 一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的普遍性进一步反映在各国法院的判决中。 |
| In Tel-Oren v. Libyan Arab Republic, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit referred to peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) as “universal and obligatory norms”. | 在Tel-Oren诉阿拉伯利比亚共和国案中，美国哥伦比亚特区上诉法院将一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)称为“普遍的强制性规范”。 |
| In Youssef Nada v. State Secretariat for Economic Affairs and Federal Department of Economic Affairs, the Swiss Federal Supreme Court described peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) as those norms that were “binding on all subjects of international law”. | 在Youssef Nada诉国家经济事务秘书处和联邦经济事务部案中，瑞士联邦最高法院将一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)描述为“对国际法的所有主体都具有约束力”的规范。 |
| The Constitutional Court of Germany described peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) as “universally applicable public international law. | 德国宪法法院称一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)是“普遍适用的国际公法”。 |
| ” The view that peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) have a universal character is also reflected in the writings of scholars. | 一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)具有普遍性的观点还反映在学术著作中。 |
| (13) | (13) |
| The characteristic of universal applicability of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) itself has two implications. | 一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)普遍适用的特点本身有两个含义。 |
| First, the persistent objector rule or doctrine is not applicable to peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 第一，一贯反对者规则或理论不适用于一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)。 |
| This aspect is considered further in draft conclusion 14. | 这个方面将在结论草案14中进一步讨论。 |
| As described in paragraph (8) of the commentary to draft conclusion 1, a second implication of the universal application of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) is that such norms do not apply on a regional or bilateral basis. | 如结论草案1评注第(8)段所述，一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)普遍适用的第二个含义是这些规范不适用于区域或双边层面。 |
| (14) | (14) |
| As a third characteristic, draft conclusion 2 states that peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) are hierarchically superior to other norms of international law. | 作为第三个特点，结论草案2指出，一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的位阶高于国际法其他规范。 |
| The fact that peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) are hierarchically superior to other norms of international law is both a characteristic and a consequence of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)在位阶上高于其他国际法规范，这既是一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的特点，也是其后果。 |
| It is a consequence in that the identification of a norm as a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) has the effect that it will be superior to other norms not having the same character. | 说它是一种后果，是因为识别一项规范为一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)，即产生该规范高于其他不具有这一性质的规范的后果。 |
| Some of the implications of hierarchy are reflected in the consequences of peremptory norms described in Part Three of these draft conclusions, for example the consequence of invalidity of a conflicting treaty rule. | 位阶的一些影响反映在本结论草案第三部分所述强制性规范的后果中，例如相抵触的条约规则无效的后果。 |
| Hierarchical superiority is also characteristic since it describes the nature of the peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 位阶优先也是一个特点，因为它说明了一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的性质。 |
| (15) | (15) |
| International courts and tribunals have often referred to the hierarchical superiority of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 国际性法院和法庭经常提到一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的优先位阶。 |
| The International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, for example, held that a feature of the prohibition of torture “relates to the hierarchy of rules in the international normative order” and that the prohibition “has evolved into a peremptory norm or jus cogens, that is, a norm that enjoys a higher rank in the international hierarchy than treaty law and even ‘ordinary’ customary rules”. | 例如，前南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭认为，禁止酷刑的一个特征“涉及国际规范秩序中各规则的位阶”，这一禁令“已演变成一项强制性规范或强行法，即在国际位阶体系中享有比条约法甚至是‘普通’习惯规则更高地位的规范”。 |
| The Inter-American Court of Human Rights has similarly accepted the hierarchical superiority of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 美洲人权法院同样接受一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的优先位阶。 |
| In Kadi v. Council and Commission, the Court of First Instance of the European Communities described peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) as a “body of higher rules of public international law”. | 在Kadi诉理事会和委员会案中，欧洲共同体初审法院将一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)描述为“一套地位较高的国际公法规则”。 |
| The European Court of Human Rights, in Al-Adsani v. the United Kingdom, has similarly described a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) as “a norm that enjoys a higher rank in the international hierarchy than treaty law and even ‘ordinary’ customary rules”. | 欧洲人权法院在Al-Adsan诉联合王国案中，也同样将一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)描述为“在国际位阶体系中享有比条约法甚至是‘普通’习惯规则更高地位的规范”。 |
| (16) | (16) |
| The recognition of the hierarchical superiority of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) can also be seen in the practice of States. | 在国家实践中也可看到对一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)位阶优先的承认。 |
| For example, the High Court of Zimbabwe, in Mann v. Republic of Equatorial Guinea, described peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) as those norms “endowed with primacy in the hierarchy of rules that constitute the international normative order”. | 例如，津巴布韦高等法院在Mann诉赤道几内亚共和国案中，将一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)称为“在构成国际规范秩序的规则位阶体系中具有首要地位”的规范。 |
| Courts in the United States have similarly recognized the hierarchical superiority of norms of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 美国的法院也同样承认了一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的优先位阶。 |
| In Siderman de Blake v. Argentina, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit stated that freedom from torture, a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens), is “deserving of the highest status under international law”. | 在Siderman de Blake诉阿根廷案中，美国第九巡回上诉法院指出，免遭酷刑是一项一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)，是“应在国际法中享有最高地位”的规范。 |
| Various terms denoting hierarchical superiority have been used by different national courts to describe peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 不同国家法院使用了各种表示位阶优先的用语来描述一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)。 |
| They have been held to have “the highest hierarchical position amongst all other customary norms and principles”, to be “not only above treaty law, but over all other sources of law”, and to be norms which “prevail over both customary international law and treaties”. | 这些规范被认为是“在所有其他习惯规范和原则中位阶最高”的规范，“不仅高于条约法，还高于一切其他法律渊源”， 是“高于习惯国际法和条约”的规范。 |
| States have also, in their statements, referred to the hierarchical superiority of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 各国在其发言中也提到一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的优先位阶。 |
| (17) | (17) |
| The hierarchical superiority of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) was recognized in the conclusions of the work of the Commission’s Study Group on the fragmentation of international law. | 委员会国际法不成体系问题研究组的工作结论承认一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)在位阶上优先。 |
| This characteristic is also generally recognized in the writings of scholars. | 这一特点在学术著作中也得到普遍承认。 |
| (18) | (18) |
| The characteristics contained in draft conclusion 2 are themselves not criteria for the identification of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 结论草案2所载的特点本身并不是识别一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的标准。 |
| Thus, draft conclusion 2 is not to be read as imposing additional criteria for the identification of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 因此，结论草案2不应理解为对一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的识别规定了额外标准。 |
| The criteria for the identification of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) are contained in Part Two of the draft conclusions. | 识别一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的标准载于结论草案第二部分。 |
| To identify a norm as a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens), it is not necessary to advance evidence of the characteristics in draft conclusion 2. | 要识别一项规范为一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)，没有必要提出结论草案2中所载特点的证据。 |
| Nor can the advancement of the characteristics in draft conclusion 2 serve as substitutes for the criteria for the identification of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) found in Part Two. | 提出结论草案2中的特点也不能取代第二部分所载识别一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的标准。 |
| (19) | (19) |
| Though they themselves are not criteria, the existence of the characteristics contained in draft conclusion 2 may provide context in the assessment of evidence for the identification of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 结论草案2所载的特点本身虽然不是标准，但其存在可为评估识别一般国际法强制性规范(强制法)的证据提供背景。 |
| For example, evidence that a norm reflects and protects fundamental values of the international community, is hierarchically superior to other norms of international law and is universally applicable, may serve to support or confirm the peremptory status of a norm. | 例如，关于一项规范反映和保护国际社会的基本价值观、在位阶上高于国际法其他规范且普遍适用的证据，可能有助于支持或确认一项规范的强制性地位。 |
| This supplementary evidence cannot, however, in and of itself, constitute the basis for identifying peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 然而，这一补充证据本身并不能构成识别一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的依据。 |
| Evidence supporting the criteria, as described in Part Two of the present draft conclusions, must always be present. | 必须始终提供支持本结论草案第二部分所述标准的证据。 |
| Conclusion 3 Definition of a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) | 结论3 一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的定义 |
| A peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) is a norm accepted and recognized by the international community of States as a whole as a norm from which no derogation is permitted and which can be modified only by a subsequent norm of general international law (jus cogens) having the same character. | 一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)是指被国家组成之国际社会整体接受和承认为不容克减的规范，此类规范只能由嗣后具有相同性质的一般国际法规范加以变更。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) | (1) |
| Draft conclusion 3 provides a definition of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 结论草案3给出了一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的定义。 |
| It is based upon article 53 of the 1969 Vienna Convention with modifications to fit the context of the draft conclusions. | 它以1969年《维也纳公约》第五十三条为基础，为适合本结论草案的情况作了修改。 |
| First, only the second sentence of article 53 of the 1969 Vienna Convention is reproduced. | 首先，只照搬了1969年《维也纳公约》第五十三条第二句。 |
| The first sentence of article 53, which concerns the invalidity of treaties in conflict with peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens), does not form part of the definition. It is rather a legal consequence of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens), which is addressed in draft conclusion 10. | 第五十三条第一句涉及与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)抵触的条约的无效，并不是定义的一部分，而是一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的法律后果，法律后果问题在结论草案10中述及。 |
| Second, the phrase “[f]or the purposes of the present Convention” is omitted from the definition. | 其次，定义中省略了“就适用本公约而言”一语。 |
| As will be demonstrated below, the definition in article 53, though initially used for the purposes of the 1969 Vienna Convention, has come to be accepted as a general definition of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) that applies beyond the law of treaties. | 如下文所示，第五十三条中的定义虽然最初是为了适用1969年《维也纳公约》，但已被接受为一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的一般性定义，其适用范围超出了条约法。 |
| Finally, in keeping with the general approach in this topic, the Commission has decided to insert the phrase “jus cogens” in parentheses after “peremptory norm of general international law”. | 最后，为与本专题的一般做法保持一致，委员会决定在“一般国际法强制性规范”之后添加“强行法”一词，并放在括号内。 |
| (2) | (2) |
| This formulation was chosen because it is the most widely accepted definition in the practice of States and in the decisions of international courts and tribunals. | 之所以选择这一表述，是因为它是国家实践及国际性法院和法庭判决中最广为接受的定义。 |
| It is also commonly used in scholarly writings. | 学术著作也常用这一定义。 |
| States have generally supported the idea of proceeding on the basis of 1969 Vienna Convention. | 各国普遍支持以1969年《维也纳公约》为基础的想法。 |
| Decisions of national courts have generally also referred to article 53 when defining peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) including beyond the context of treaty law. | 各国法院的判决在界定一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)时，一般也会提到第五十三条，包括在条约法范围之外。 |
| Similarly, international courts and tribunals have used article 53 of the 1969 Vienna Convention as a basis when addressing peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) in different contexts. | 同样，国际性法院和法庭在不同情况下处理一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)时，也以1969年《维也纳公约》第五十三条作为基础。 |
| Article 53 of the 1969 Vienna Convention is also accepted as the general definition of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) in scholarly writings. | 在学术著作中，1969年《维也纳公约》第五十三条也被接受为一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的一般定义。 |
| While the formulation in article 53 of the 1969 Vienna Convention is for “the purposes of the Convention”, it also applies in other contexts including in relation to State responsibility. | 虽然1969年《维也纳公约》第五十三条的措辞是“就适用本公约而言”，但它也适用于其他情况，包括与国家责任有关的情况。 |
| The Commission has, when addressing peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) in the context of other topics, also used the definition in article 53 of the 1969 Vienna Convention. | 委员会在其他专题中述及一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)时，也使用了1969年《维也纳公约》第五十三条中的定义。 |
| It is therefore appropriate for these draft conclusions to rely on article 53 for the definition of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 因此，本结论草案依据第五十三条来定义一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)是适当的。 |
| (3) | (3) |
| The definition of peremptory norms in article 53 contains two main elements. | 第五十三条中强制性规范的定义包含两个主要要素。 |
| First, the norm in question must be a norm of general international law. | 第一，有关规范必须是一般国际法规范。 |
| Second, it must be accepted and recognized by the international community of States as a whole as one from which no derogation is permitted, and which can only be modified by a norm having the same character. | 第二，它必须被国家组成之国际社会整体接受和承认为不容克减的规范，只能由具有相同性质的规范加以变更。 |
| These elements constitute the criteria for the identification of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) and are elaborated upon further in draft conclusions 4 to 9. | 这两个要素构成了识别一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的标准，在结论草案4至9中有进一步的阐述。 |
| Part Two Identification of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) | 第二部分 一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的识别 |
| Conclusion 4 Criteria for the identification of a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) | 结论4 一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的识别标准 |
| To identify a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens), it is necessary to establish that the norm in question meets the following criteria: | 要识别一项规范为一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)，必须确定该规范符合以下标准： |
| (a) | (a) |
| it is a norm of general international law; | 它是一般国际法规范； |
| and | 并且 |
| (b) | (b) |
| it is accepted and recognized by the international community of States as a whole as a norm from which no derogation is permitted and which can be modified only by a subsequent norm of general international law having the same character. | 被国家组成之国际社会整体接受和承认为不容克减的规范，此类规范只能由嗣后具有相同性质的一般国际法规范加以变更。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) | (1) |
| Draft conclusion 4 sets out the criteria for the identification of a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens). | 结论草案4规定了识别一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的标准。 |
| The criteria are drawn from the definition of peremptory norms contained in article 53 of the 1969 Vienna Convention, which was reproduced in draft conclusion 3. | 这些标准参照了1969年《维也纳公约》第五十三条所载、结论草案3照搬的强制性规范的定义。 |
| Such criteria must be shown to be present in order to establish that a norm has a peremptory character. | 要确定一项规范具有强制性，必须证明存在这些标准。 |
| (2) | (2) |
| The chapeau of the draft conclusion states “[t]o identify a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens), it is necessary to establish that the norm in question meets the following criteria”. | 本条结论草案的起首部分指出，“要识别一项规范为一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)，必须确定该规范符合以下标准”。 |
| The phrase “it is necessary to establish” indicates that the criteria must be shown to be present and that they should not be assumed to exist. | “必须确定”一语表示，必须证明这些标准存在，而不应假定它们存在。 |
| It is thus not sufficient to point to the importance or the role of a norm in order to show the peremptory character of that norm. Rather, “it is necessary to establish” the existence of the criteria enumerated in the draft conclusion. | 因此，要证明一项规范的强制性，仅仅指出它的重要性或作用是不够的，而是“必须确定”存在本条结论草案中所列的标准。 |
| (3) | (3) |
| On the basis of the definition contained in draft conclusion 3, draft conclusion 4 sets forth two criteria. | 根据结论草案3所载的定义，结论草案4列出了两个标准。 |
| First, the norm in question must be a norm of general international law. | 第一，有关规范必须是一般国际法规范。 |
| This criterion is derived from the phrase “norm of general international law” in the definition of peremptory norms (jus cogens) and is the subject of draft conclusion 5. | 这项标准源于强制性规范(强行法)定义中的“一般国际法规范”一语，也是结论草案5的主题。 |
| Second, the norm must be accepted and recognized by the international community of States as a whole as a norm from which no derogation is permitted, and which can be modified only by a norm having the same character. | 第二，该规范必须被国家组成之国际社会整体接受和承认为不容克减的规范，并且只能由具有相同性质的规范加以变更。 |
| It bears pointing out that this second criterion, though composed of various elements, is a single composite criterion. | 值得指出的是，第二个标准虽然由各种要素组成，但它是一个单一的综合标准。 |
| This criterion is the subject of draft conclusions 6 to 9. | 这一标准是结论草案6至9的主题。 |
| The two criteria are cumulative: they are both necessary for the establishment of the peremptory character of a norm of general international law. | 上述两个标准是累加的：它们都是确定一般国际法规范的强制性所必须的。 |
| (4) | (4) |
| The language of article 53 of the 1969 Vienna Convention is complex and has given rise to different interpretations. | 1969年《维也纳公约》第五十三条的措辞很复杂，产生了不同的解释。 |
| The phrase “and which can be modified only by a subsequent norm of general international law having the same character” could, for example, be viewed as a separate criterion. | 例如，“此类规范只能由嗣后具有相同性质的一般国际法规范加以变更”可能会视为一项单独的标准。 |
| Yet, the essence of the second criterion is the acceptance and recognition by the international community of States as a whole, not just that the norm is one from which no derogation is permitted, but also that it can be modified only by a subsequent norm of general international law having the same character. | 然而，第二个标准的实质是国家组成之国际社会整体接受和承认：该规范不仅是不容克减的规范，而且只能由嗣后具有相同性质的一般国际法规范加以变更。 |
| Hence, the non-derogation and modification elements are not themselves criteria but rather, form an integral part of the “acceptance and recognition” criterion. | 因此，不容克减和变更这两个要素本身不是标准，而是“接受和承认”标准的组成部分。 |
| It is in this sense that the second criterion, though composed of several elements, constitutes a single criterion. | 从这个意义上说，第二个标准虽然由几个要素组成，却是一个单一的标准。 |
| (5) | (5) |
| Alternatively, it has been suggested that the phrase “accepted and recognized” qualifies “general international law” rather than the non-derogation and modification clauses. | 也有人认为，“被接受和承认”修饰的是“一般国际法”，而不是不容克减和变更分句。 |
| Seen from this perspective, article 53 would have three criteria for proving that a norm has peremptory character: (a) the norm must be a norm of general international law that is accepted and recognized (as a norm of general international law) by the international community of States as a whole; | 从这个角度看的话，第五十三条就有三个标准来证明一项规范具有强制性：(a) 该规范必须是被国家组成之国际社会整体接受和承认(为一般国际法规范)的一般国际法规范； |
| (b) it must be a norm from which no derogation is permitted; | (b) 它必须是不容克减的规范； |
| and (c) it must be a norm that can only be modified by a subsequent peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens). | (c) 它必须是只能由嗣后的一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)加以变更的规范。 |
| Such an interpretation, however, raises at least two problems. | 但这种解释至少有两个问题。 |
| First, it would render the first criterion tautologous, since “general international law” ought to be generally accepted and/or recognized by the international community to begin with. | 首先，它会使第一个标准显得同义反复，因为“一般国际法”理应就是国际社会普遍接受和/或承认的法律。 |
| Second, in that form the second and third criteria would not be criteria but rather a consequence of peremptoriness and a description of how peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) can be modified, respectively. | 其次，按照这种形式，第二和第三项标准都不是标准，而分别是强行法的后果和对如何变更一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的描述。 |
| (6) | (6) |
| Based on the foregoing, the two cumulative criteria in draft conclusion 4 imply a two-step approach to the identification of a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens). | 综上所述，结论草案4中的两个累加标准意味着采用两步法来识别一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)。 |
| First, evidence that the norm in question is a norm of general international law is required. | 首先，需要有证据证明有关规范是一般国际法规范。 |
| Second, the norm must be shown to be accepted and recognized by the international community of States as a whole as having a peremptory character. | 第二，必须表明该规范是国家组成之国际社会整体接受和承认为具有强制性的规范。 |
| This two-step approach was aptly described by the Commission in the commentaries to the articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts: | 委员会在国家对国际不法行为的责任条款评注中恰当地描述了这种两步法： |
| The criteria for identifying peremptory norms of general international law are stringent. | 识别一般国际法强制性规范的标准是严格的。 |
| Article 53 of the 1969 Vienna Convention requires not merely that the norm in question meet all the criteria for recognition as a norm of general international law, binding as such, but further that it should be recognized as having peremptory character by the international community of States as a whole. | 1969年《维也纳公约》第五十三条不仅要求该规范符合被承认为一般国际法规范的所有标准，具有一般国际法规范的约束力，还要求它被国家组成之国际社会整体承认具有强制性质。 |
| Conclusion 5 Bases for peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) | 结论5 一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的基础 |
| 1. | 1. |
| Customary international law is the most common basis for peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 习惯国际法是一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的最常见的基础。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| Treaty provisions and general principles of law may also serve as bases for peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 条约规定和一般法律原则也可作为一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的基础。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) | (1) |
| Draft conclusion 5 concerns the bases of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 结论草案5涉及一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的基础。 |
| It addresses the first criterion specified in draft conclusion 4 to identify peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens), namely that the norm in question must be a norm of “general international law”. | 它述及结论草案4规定的识别一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的第一个标准，即有关规范必须是“一般国际法”规范。 |
| The draft conclusion is composed of two paragraphs. | 本条结论草案由两段组成。 |
| Paragraph 1 deals with customary international law as the basis for peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens), while paragraph 2 addresses treaty provisions and general principles of law as possible bases of such norms. | 第1段述及作为一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)基础的习惯国际法，第2段则述及可能作为此类规范基础的条约规定和一般法律原则。 |
| (2) | (2) |
| The Study Group on the fragmentation of international law established by the Commission observed that “there is no accepted definition of ‘general international law’”. | 委员会设立的国际法不成体系问题研究组指出，“‘一般国际法’没有公认的定义”。 |
| The meaning of general international law will always be context-specific. | 一般国际法的含义将始终视具体情况而定。 |
| In some contexts, “general international law” could be construed in contradistinction to lex specialis. | 在某些情况下，“一般国际法”可解释为与特别法相对。 |
| In the context of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens), however, the term “general international law” is not a reference to lex generalis or law other than lex specialis. | 但在一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)范围内，“一般国际法”并不是指一般法，或特别法以外的法律。 |
| Rather, the word “general” in “norms of general international law”, in the context of peremptory norms, refers to the scope of applicability of the norm in question. | 实际上，在强制性规范范围内，“一般国际法规范”中的“一般”一词指的是有关规范的适用范围。 |
| Norms of general international law are thus those norms of international law that, in the words of the International Court of Justice, “must have equal force for all members of the international community”. | 因此，一般国际法规范是――用国际法院的话来说――“必须对国际社会所有成员具有同等效力”的国际法规范。 |
| (3) | (3) |
| The words “basis” in paragraph 1 and “bases” in paragraph 2 of draft conclusion 5 are to be understood flexibly and broadly. | 结论草案5第1和第2段中的“基础”一词应作灵活和广泛的理解。 |
| They are meant to capture the range of ways that various sources of international law may give rise to the emergence of a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens). | 该词意在反映各种国际法渊源可能导致产生一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的一系列方式。 |
| The Commission decided not to use the words “source” or “sources” as these might create confusion with the notion of sources of international law in Article 38, paragraph 1, of the Statute of the International Court of Justice. | 委员会决定不使用“来源”一词，因为该词可能会与《国际法院规约》第三十八条第一款中的国际法渊源概念相混淆。 |
| (4) | (4) |
| Paragraph 1 of draft conclusion 5 states that customary international law, which refers to a general practice accepted as law (opinio juris), is the most common basis for peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 结论草案5第1段指出，习惯国际法――指被接受为法律(法律确信)的一般惯例――是一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)最常见的基础。 |
| This is because customary international law is the most obvious manifestation of general international law. | 这是因为，习惯国际法是一般国际法最明显的表现形式。 |
| This position is borne out by State practice, which confirms that customary international law is the most common source for peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 这一立场得到国家实践的支持，国家实践证实，习惯国际法是一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)最常见的来源。 |
| The Supreme Court of Argentina, for example, recognized that peremptory norms relative to war crimes and crimes against humanity emerged from rules of customary international law already in force. | 例如，阿根廷最高法院确认，与战争罪和危害人类罪有关的强制性规范源自已经生效的习惯国际法规则。 |
| Similarly, the Constitutional Tribunal of Peru stated that peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) referred to “customary international norms under the auspices of an opinio juris seu necessitatis”. | 同样，秘鲁宪法法庭也指出，一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)是指“依据法律必要确信的习惯国际规范”。 |
| In Bayan Muna v. Alberto Romulo, the Supreme Court of the Philippines defined jus cogens as “the highest hierarchical position among all other customary norms and principles”. | 在Bayan Muna诉Alberto Romulo案中，菲律宾最高法院将强行法界定为“在所有其他习惯规范和原则中位阶最高”。 |
| Similarly, in The Kenya Section of the International Commission of Jurists v. the Attorney-General and Others, the High Court of Kenya determined the “duty to prosecute international crimes” to be both a rule of customary international law and a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens). | 同样，在国际法学家委员会肯尼亚分会诉总检察长等人案中，肯尼亚高等法院认定“起诉国际罪行的责任”既是习惯国际法规则，也是一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)。 |
| In Kazemi Estate v. Islamic Republic of Iran, the Supreme Court of Canada described peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) as a “higher form of customary international law”. | 在Kazemi财产托管方诉伊朗伊斯兰共和国案中，加拿大最高法院将一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)描述为“较高形式的习惯国际法”。 |
| In Siderman de Blake v. Argentina, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit described peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) as “an elite subset of the norms recognized as customary international law”. | 在Siderman de Blake诉阿根廷案中，美国第九巡回上诉法院将一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)描述为“被承认为习惯国际法的规范的上层子集”。 |
| That Court also noted that, in contrast to ordinary rules of customary international law, jus cogens “embraces customary laws considered binding on all nations”. | 该法院还指出，与习惯国际法的普通规则相反，强行法“包含对所有国家均有约束力的习惯法”。 |
| In Buell v. Mitchell, the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit noted that “[s]ome customary norms of international law reach a ‘higher status’”, namely that of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 在Buell诉Mitchell案中，美国第六巡回上诉法院指出，“有些国际法习惯规范”达到了“更高地位”，即一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的地位。 |
| The description of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) as a subset of customary international law is also reflected in the Nevsun Resources Ltd. v. Araya. In determining that the prohibition of the death penalty was not a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens), the Court made the following observation: “Moreover, since the abolition of the death penalty is not a customary norm of international law, it cannot have risen to the level that the international community as a whole recognizes it as jus cogens, or a norm from which no derogation is permitted.” | 将一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)描述为习惯国际法的一个子集，也反映在耐森资源有限公司诉Araya案中。 在确定禁止死刑不是一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)时，该法院提出以下意见：“此外，由于废除死刑不是国际法习惯规范，因此不可能上升到被国际社会整体承认为强行法或不容克减的规范的地位。 ” |
| (5) | (5) |
| The jurisprudence of the International Court of Justice equally provides strong evidence of the basis of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) in customary international law. | 国际法院的判例也为一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的习惯国际法基础提供了有力证据。 |
| In the case concerning Questions relating to the Obligation to Prosecute or Extradite, the Court recognized the prohibition of torture as “part of customary international law” that “has become a peremptory norm (jus cogens)”. | 在与起诉或引渡义务有关的问题案中，国际法院承认禁止酷刑是“习惯国际法的一部分”，“已成为一项强制性规范(强行法)”。 |
| Similarly, the Court’s description of “many [of the] rules of humanitarian law” as constituting “intransgressible principles of international customary law” suggests that peremptory norms – referred to here as “intransgressible principles” – have a customary basis. | 同样，该法院将“人道法[的]许多规则”描述为“不可违反的国际习惯法原则”，表明强制性规范――即这里所称“不可违反的原则”――具有习惯法的基础。 |
| (6) | (6) |
| Other international courts and tribunals have also accepted customary international law as the basis for peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 其他国际性法院和法庭也接受习惯国际法是一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的基础。 |
| The International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, for example, has noted that the prohibition of torture is a “norm of customary international law” and that it “further constitutes a norm of jus cogens”. | 例如，前南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭指出，禁止酷刑是一项“习惯国际法规范”，并“进一步构成强行法规范”。 |
| In Prosecutor v. Anto Furundžija, that Tribunal described peremptory norms as those that “enjoy a higher rank in the hierarchy of international law than treaty law or even ‘ordinary’ customary rules”. | 在检察官诉Anto Furundžija案中，该法庭将强制性规范描述为“在国际法位阶体系中享有比条约法甚至是‘普通’习惯规则更高地位”的规范。 |
| Similarly, in Prosecutor v. Jelisić, the Tribunal stated that “[t]here can be absolutely no doubt” that the prohibition of genocide in the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide falls “under customary international law” and is now “on the level of jus cogens”. | 同样，在检察官诉Jelisić案中，该法庭指出，“毫无疑问”，《防止及惩治灭绝种族罪公约》禁止灭绝种族的规定属于“习惯国际法”，现已达到“强行法级别”。 |
| (7) | (7) |
| While customary international law is the most common basis for the emergence of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens), other sources listed in Article 38, paragraph 1, of the Statute of the International Court of Justice may also form the basis of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) to the extent that they can be regarded as norms of general international law. | 虽然习惯国际法是形成一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的最常见基础，但《国际法院规约》第三十八条第一款所列的其他渊源只要可被视为一般国际法规范，也可以构成一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的基础。 |
| Paragraph 2 of draft conclusion 5 captures this idea by stating that “[t]reaty provisions and general principles of law may also serve as bases for peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens)”. | 为体现这一点，结论草案5第2段指出，“条约规定和一般法律原则也可作为一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的基础”。 |
| The words “may also” are meant to indicate that while there is little practice to support the emergence of peremptory norms from these sources, the possibility of these other sources of international law forming the basis of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) cannot be a priori excluded. | “也可”二字是为了表明，虽然在强制性规范产生于这些来源方面鲜有实践支持，但不能先验地排除这些国际法其他渊源构成一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)基础的可能性。 |
| (8) | (8) |
| Treaties are an important source of international law, as provided for in Article 38, paragraph 1 (a) of the Statute of the International Court of Justice. | 根据《国际法院规约》第三十八条第一款(子)项的规定，条约是国际法的一个重要渊源。 |
| Paragraph 2 of draft conclusion 5 identifies treaty provisions as a possible basis for peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 结论草案5第2段指出，条约规定是一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的可能基础。 |
| The phrase “treaty provisions” is used instead of “treaties” to indicate that what is at issue are the one or more norms contained in the treaty rather than the treaty itself. | 使用“条约规定”一词而不是“条约”，是为了表明，这里涉及的是条约所载的一项或多项规范，而不是条约本身。 |
| Treaties, in most cases, are not “general international law” since they do not usually have a general scope of application with “equal force for all members of the international community”. | 在大多数情况下，条约不是“一般国际法”，因为它们通常不具备“对国际社会所有成员具有同等效力”的普遍适用范围。 |
| There is, however, support in scholarly writings that provisions in treaties can form the basis of the peremptory norms of international law (jus cogens). | 然而，在学术著作中可以找到对条约规定可构成国际法强制性规范(强行法)基础的支持。 |
| While recognizing the special character of the Charter of the United Nations, it is noteworthy that in the commentary to draft article 50 of the 1966 draft articles on the law of treaties, the Commission identified “the law of the Charter [of the United Nations] concerning the prohibition of the use of force” as a “conspicuous example of a rule of international law having the character of jus cogens”. | 在承认《联合国宪章》特殊性质的同时，值得注意的是，委员会在1966年条约法条款草案第50条草案的评注中，指出“[联合国]宪章中关于禁止使用武力的法律”是一个“具有绝对法则性质的国际法规则的显著实例”。 |
| The role of treaties as a basis for peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) may be understood as a consequence of the relationship between treaty rules and customary international law as described by the International Court of Justice in North Sea Continental Shelf cases. | 条约作为一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)基础的作用，可以理解为国际法院在北海大陆架案中所描述的条约规则与习惯国际法之间关系的结果。 |
| In that case, the Court observed that a treaty rule can codify (or be declaratory of) an existing general rule of international law, or the conclusion of a treaty rule can help crystallize an emerging general rule of international law, or that a treaty rule can, after adoption, come to reflect a general rule on the basis of subsequent practice. | 在该案中，法院认为，条约规则可以编纂(或宣示)一项现有的一般国际法规则， 或者，缔结一项条约规则可有助于将新出现的一般国际法规则具体化， 或条约规则通过后，可以在嗣后实践的基础上反映一般规则。 |
| This general approach can also be seen in judgments of other international courts and tribunals. | 在其他国际性法院和法庭的判决中也可以看到这种一般做法。 |
| (9) | (9) |
| The phrase “general principles of law” in paragraph 2 of draft conclusion 5 refers to general principles of law in the sense of Article 38, paragraph 1 (c), of the Statute of the International Court of Justice. | 结论草案5第2段中的“一般法律原则”一语是指《国际法院规约》第三十八条第一款(寅)项意义上的一般法律原则。 |
| It is appropriate to refer to the possibility of general principles of law forming the basis of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 提及一般法律原则构成一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)基础的可能性是适当的。 |
| General principles of law are part of general international law since they have a general scope of application with equal force for all members of the international community. | 一般法律原则是一般国际法的一部分，因为它们有对国际社会所有成员具有同等效力的普遍适用范围。 |
| In the context of the interpretation of treaties under article 31, paragraph 3 (c), of the 1969 Vienna Convention, the conclusions of the Study Group on the fragmentation of international law distinguished between the application of treaty law on the one hand, and of general international law on the other. | 在根据1969年《维也纳公约》第三十一条第三款(c)项解释条约方面，国际法不成体系问题研究组的结论区分了条约法和一般国际法的适用。 |
| The latter, according to the Commission, consists of both “customary international law and general principles of law”. | 委员会认为后者包括“习惯国际法和一般法律原则”。 |
| There is, moreover, some support in writings for general principles of law as a basis of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 此外，在学术著作中也能找到对将一般国际法原则作为一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)基础的一些支持。 |
| (10) | (10) |
| The phrase “accepted and recognized” has a particular relevance for the sources which can serve as a basis for peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | “接受和承认”一语对可作为一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)基础的来源而言尤为重要。 |
| The text “accepted and recognized by the international community of States as a whole” was adopted at the United Nations Conference on the Law of Treaties on the basis of a joint proposal of Finland, Greece and Spain with regard to what later became article 53 (“recognized by the international community”), to which the Drafting Committee at the Conference inserted the word “accepted”. | 联合国条约法会议通过的“国家组成之国际社会整体接受和承认”的案文，是基于芬兰、希腊和西班牙就后来成为第五十三条的内容(“国际社会承认”)提出的联合提案， 会上，起草委员会在该条中添加了“接受”一词。 |
| As explained by the Chair of the Drafting Committee, this was done because Article 38 of the Statute of the International Court of Justice includes both the words “recognized” and “accepted”; | 正如起草委员会主席解释的那样，这样做是因为《国际法院规约》第三十八条既包括“承认”一词，也包括“接受”一词； |
| “recognized” was used in connection with conventions and treaties and general principles of law, while “accepted” was used in connection with customary international law. | “承认”用于公约和条约以及一般法律原则，“接受”则用于习惯国际法。 |
| This language would seem to suggest that the Commission had in mind the possibility that treaties and general principles of law could also form bases of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 这一措辞似乎表明，委员会考虑到条约和一般法律原则也可能构成一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的基础。 |
| For that reason, notwithstanding the scarcity of practice to that effect, the Commission decided to include, in draft conclusion 5, the possibility that treaty provisions and general principles of law may also serve as bases for peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 因此，虽然这方面的实践很少，委员会也决定在结论草案5中列入条约规定和一般法律原则也可作为一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的基础的可能性。 |
| Conclusion 6 Acceptance and recognition | 结论6 接受和承认 |
| 1. | 1. |
| The criterion of acceptance and recognition referred to in draft conclusion 4, subparagraph (b), is distinct from acceptance and recognition as a norm of general international law. | 结论草案4的(b)项中提到的接受和承认标准不同于接受和承认为一般国际法规范的标准。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| To identify a norm as a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens), there must be evidence that such a norm is accepted and recognized by the international community of States as a whole as one from which no derogation is permitted and which can only be modified by a subsequent norm of general international law having the same character. | 要识别一项规范为一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)，必须有证据表明该规范被国家组成之国际社会整体接受和承认为不容克减的规范，且只能由嗣后具有相同性质的一般国际法规范加以变更。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) | (1) |
| The second criterion for the identification of a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) is that the norm in question must be accepted and recognized by the international community of States as a whole as a norm from which no derogation is permitted and which can only be modified by a subsequent norm having the same character. | 识别一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的第二个标准是，有关规范必须是被国家组成之国际社会整体接受和承认为不容克减的规范，且只能由嗣后具有相同性质的规范加以变更。 |
| As stated in paragraph (4) of the commentary to draft conclusion 4, this is a single criterion composed of different elements. | 如结论草案4的评注第(4)段所指出的，这是一个由不同要素组成的单一标准。 |
| While draft conclusion 5 addresses the first element, which is referred to in paragraph (a) of draft conclusion 4, namely that the norm in question must be a norm of general international law, draft conclusion 6 concerns the second element, referred to in paragraph (b) of draft conclusion 4, namely that the norm of general international law in question must be “accepted and recognized by the international community of States as a whole as a norm from which no derogation is permitted”. | 结论草案5涉及结论草案4的(a)项中提到的第一个要素，即有关规范必须是一般国际法规范，而结论草案6涉及结论草案4的(b)项中提到的第二个要素，即有关一般国际法规范必须是“被国家组成之国际社会整体接受和承认为不容克减的规范”。 |
| The emphasis in this criterion is on “acceptance and recognition”. | 这一标准的重点在于“接受和承认”。 |
| The other elements of this second criterion indicate two aspects of that acceptance and recognition. | 第二项标准的其他要素表明了接受和承认的两个方面。 |
| First, they indicate what must be accepted and recognized, namely that the norm is one from which no derogation is permitted and that it can only be modified by a norm having the same character. | 首先，这些要素表明了必须接受和承认的内容，即该规范是不容克减的规范，且只能由具有相同性质的规范加以变更。 |
| Second, they indicate who must do the accepting and recognizing, namely the international community of States as a whole. | 其次，这些要素表明了必须得到谁的接受和承认，即国家组成之国际社会整体。 |
| Draft conclusion 7 addresses this latter aspect. | 结论草案7述及后一个方面。 |
| (2) | (2) |
| Paragraph 1 of draft conclusion 6 seeks to make clear that the acceptance and recognition referred to in the draft conclusion is distinct from the acceptance and recognition required for other rules of international law. | 结论草案6第1段旨在表明，本条结论草案中提到的接受和承认不同于其他国际法规则所要求的接受和承认。 |
| In other words, the “acceptance and recognition” addressed in draft conclusion 6 is not the same as, for example, acceptance as law (opinio juris), which is an element for the identification of customary international law, or recognition, which is an element for the identification of general principles of law. | 换言之，结论草案6中提到的“接受和承认”不同于作为识别习惯国际法之要素的接受为法律(法律确信)，或作为识别一般法律原则之要素的承认。 |
| Acceptance as law (opinio juris) addresses the question of whether States accept a practice as a rule of law and is a constitutive element of customary international law. | 接受为法律(法律确信)涉及的是国家是否接受某一实践为法律规则的问题，它是习惯国际法的一个构成要素。 |
| Recognition as a general principle of law addresses the question of whether a principle has been recognized as provided for in Article 38, paragraph 1 (c), of the Statute of the International Court of Justice. | 承认为一项一般法律原则，涉及的是一项原则是否根据《国际法院规约》第三十八条第一款(寅)项得到承认的问题。 |
| The acceptance and recognition referred to in draft conclusion 6 is qualitatively different. | 结论草案6中提到的接受和承认有本质上的不同。 |
| Acceptance and recognition, as a criterion of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens), concerns the question of whether the international community of States as a whole recognizes a rule of general international law as having peremptory character. | 作为一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的标准，接受和承认涉及国家组成之国际社会整体是否承认一项一般国际法规则具有强制性。 |
| As Gagnon-Bergeron explains, there is an additional criterion, over and above the criteria for the existence of a rule of general international law, that must be met for peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 如Gagnon-Bergeron所解释的，除了关于一般国际法规则存在的标准之外，还有一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)必须满足的另一个标准。 |
| It is this additional criterion that is referred to in draft conclusion 6. | 结论草案6提到的就是这另一个标准。 |
| (3) | (3) |
| Paragraph 2 explains what is meant by the acceptance and recognition required to elevate a norm of general international law to the status of a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens). | 第2段解释了将一项一般国际法规范提升到一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的地位所需的接受和承认的含义。 |
| It states that the norm in question must be accepted and recognized as one from which no derogation is permitted, and which can be modified only by a subsequent norm having the same character. | 它指出，有关规范必须被接受和承认为不容克减的规范，且只能由嗣后具有相同性质的规范加以变更。 |
| This implies that in order to show that a norm is a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens), it is necessary to provide evidence that the norm is accepted and recognized as having the qualities mentioned, in other words that it is a norm from which no derogation is permitted and that can only be modified by a subsequent norm having the same character. | 这意味着，要表明一项规范是一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)，必须提供证据证明该规范被接受和承认为具有上述性质，换言之，它是一项不容克减的规范，且只能由嗣后具有相同性质的规范加以变更。 |
| (4) | (4) |
| This framework of acceptance and recognition by the international community of States as a whole is based on the generally accepted interpretation of article 53 of the 1969 Vienna Convention. | 国家组成之国际社会整体接受和承认这一框架基于对1969年《维也纳公约》第五十三条作出的普遍接受的解释。 |
| In keeping with the definition of peremptory norms of general international law in draft conclusion 3, derived from article 53 of the 1969 Vienna Convention, draft conclusion 4 (b) refers to acceptance and recognition. | 根据结论草案3中源自1969年《维也纳公约》第五十三条的一般国际法强制性规范的定义，结论草案4的(b)项提到了接受和承认。 |
| Yet these are not two separate requirements that have to be shown independently. | 但它们并不是必须独立证明的两项单独要求。 |
| Acceptance and recognition as a criterion for the identification of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) is meant to denote the range of ways that States may show their view that a norm has peremptory character. | 接受和承认作为识别一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的一个标准，意在说明，各国可以通过各种方式表明其认为某项规范具有强制性。 |
| It is, therefore, sufficient to show, in general, the acceptance and recognition of the norm of general international law as being peremptory in nature. | 因此，一般来说，只要表明接受和承认一般国际法规范具有强制性就可以了。 |
| (5) | (5) |
| Draft conclusion 6 concerns the identification of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 结论草案6涉及一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的识别。 |
| Such determination involves the weighing and assessment of evidence. | 这种确定涉及对证据的权衡和评估。 |
| The word “evidence” is used to indicate that it is not sufficient merely to assert that a norm is accepted and recognized by the international community of States as a whole as one from which no derogation is permitted. | “证据”一词用于表明，仅仅声称一项规范被国家组成之国际社会整体接受和承认为不容克减的规范是不够的。 |
| It is necessary to substantiate such a claim with evidence. | 必须提供证据来证实这种说法。 |
| The evidence that may be relied upon is addressed in draft conclusions 8 and 9. | 结论草案8和9述及可以依赖的证据。 |
| Draft conclusion 6, and the requirement for evidence, is not intended to undermine the value, as evidence, of different materials identified in draft conclusion 8. | 结论草案6以及对证据的要求，无意损害结论草案8中指出的不同材料作为证据的价值。 |
| Those materials reveal the position of States in respect of particular norms and may be advanced as evidence, even if not themselves supported by evidence. | 这些材料显示了各国对特定规范的立场，即使其本身没有证据支持，也可以作为证据提出。 |
| Thus, individual assertions by States concerning the peremptory character of norms, with or without evidence, will still constitute material to be considered under draft conclusion 8, paragraph 2. | 因此，各国关于规范强制性的意见，无论有没有证据，仍将构成结论草案8第2段述及的材料。 |
| Conclusion 7 International community of States as a whole | 结论7 国家组成之国际社会整体 |
| 1. | 1. |
| It is the acceptance and recognition by the international community of States as a whole that is relevant for the identification of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 在识别一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)时，具有相关意义的是国家组成之国际社会整体的接受和承认。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| Acceptance and recognition by a very large and representative majority of States is required for the identification of a norm as a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens); | 识别一项规范为一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)需要具有代表性的绝大多数国家接受和承认； |
| acceptance and recognition by all States is not required. | 不要求所有国家都接受和承认。 |
| 3. | 3. |
| While the positions of other actors may be relevant in providing context and for assessing acceptance and recognition by the international community of States as a whole, these positions cannot, in and of themselves, form part of such acceptance and recognition. | 其他行为体的立场虽可有助于提供背景和评估国家组成之国际社会整体的接受和承认，但这些立场本身不能构成此种接受和承认的一部分。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) | (1) |
| As already indicated in draft conclusion 6, the second criterion for the peremptory character of a norm is that the norm in question must be accepted and recognized as having a peremptory character. | 如结论草案6所已经指出的，关于一项规范强制性的第二个标准是该规范必须被接受和承认为具有强制性。 |
| Draft conclusion 7 is concerned with the question of whose acceptance and recognition is relevant for the identification of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 结论草案7涉及在识别一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)方面谁的接受和承认具有相关性的问题。 |
| It provides, in general terms, that it is the “international community of States as a whole” that must accept and recognize the peremptory character of a norm. | 它笼统地规定，一项规范的强制性必须得到“国家组成之国际社会整体”的接受和承认。 |
| (2) | (2) |
| It is worth recalling that the Commission itself, when adopting article 50 of its 1966 draft articles on the law of treaties, had not included the element of acceptance and recognition by the international community of States as a whole, stating only that a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) is one “from which no derogation is permitted”. | 值得回顾的是，委员会本身在通过1966年条约法条款草案第50条时，并没有纳入国家组成之国际社会整体接受和承认这项要素，只是指出一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)是“不容克减”的规范。 |
| Rather, this element was added by States in the course of the 1968–1969 United Nations Conference on the Law of Treaties leading to the adoption of the 1969 Vienna Convention. | 实际上，这一要素是各国在使1969年《维也纳公约》得以通过的1968-1969年联合国条约法会议期间添加的。 |
| However, even during the deliberations in the Commission, the link between peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) and the acceptance and recognition of the “international community of States” had been expressed by some members of the Commission. | 然而，在委员会审议期间，就有一些委员认为一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)与“国家组成之国际社会”的接受和承认之间有联系。 |
| (3) | (3) |
| Paragraph 1 of draft conclusion 7 states that it is the acceptance and recognition by the international community of States as a whole that is relevant for the identification of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 结论草案7第1段指出，在识别一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)时，具有相关意义的是国家组成之国际社会整体的接受和承认。 |
| This paragraph seeks to make clear that it is the position of States that is relevant and not that of other actors. | 该段旨在明确说明，具有相关性的是国家的立场，而不是其他行为体的立场。 |
| While there have been calls for the inclusion of other actors whose acceptance and recognition might be pertinent for the establishment of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens), the current state of international law retains States as the entities whose acceptance and recognition is relevant. | 虽然有人呼吁列入其接受和承认可能与确立一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)相关的其他行为体， 但国际法现状是仍将国家作为其接受和承认具有相关性的实体。 |
| In the context of the draft articles on the law of treaties between States and international organizations or between international organizations, the Commission considered using the phrase “international community as a whole” and thus excluding the words “of States” from the phrase. | 在国家和国际组织间或国际组织相互间的条约法条款草案中，委员会曾考虑使用“国际社会整体”一语，不含“国家”二字。 |
| However, upon reflection, the Commission decided that “in the present state of international law, it is States that are called upon to establish or recognize peremptory norms”. | 但是，经考虑后，委员会决定，“在当前国际法情况下，被促请确立或承认强制性规范的是各个国家”。 |
| (4) | (4) |
| State practice and the decisions of international courts and tribunals have continued to link the elevation of norms of general international law to peremptory status with State acceptance and recognition. | 国家实践及国际性法院和法庭的判决继续将一般国际法规范提升到强制性地位的问题与国家的接受和承认相联系。 |
| The International Criminal Court, for example, has stated that a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) requires recognition by States. | 例如，国际刑事法院指出，一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)需要各国承认。 |
| The International Court of Justice, likewise, in the case concerning Questions Relating to the Obligation to Prosecute or Extradite, determined the peremptory character of the prohibition of torture on the basis of instruments developed by States. | 同样，国际法院在与起诉或引渡义务有关的问题案中，根据各国制定的文书确定了禁止酷刑的强制性。 |
| Domestic courts have similarly continued to link the establishment of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) with State recognition. | 国内法院也继续将一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的确立与国家的承认联系起来。 |
| For example, in determining that the prohibition of the death penalty was not a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens), the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit stated, in Buell v. Mitchell, that “only sixty-one countries, or approximately thirty-two percent of countries, had completely abolished the use of the death penalty”. | 例如，美国第六巡回上诉法院在Buell诉Mitchell案中认定禁止死刑不是一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)时，指出“只有61个国家，即大约32%的国家，完全废除了死刑”。 |
| While peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) continue to be linked to notions of the conscience of humankind in practice and scholarly writings, even then the material advanced to illustrate the peremptory character of norms remains acts and practice generated by States, including within international organizations. | 虽然在实践和学术著作中，一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)继续与人类良知概念联系在一起， 但用来表明规范强制性的材料仍然是国家的行为和实践，包括在国际组织内的行为和实践。 |
| (5) | (5) |
| Although draft conclusion 7 states that it is the acceptance and recognition of States that is relevant for determining whether a norm has a peremptory character, that does not mean that other actors do not play a role. | 虽然结论草案7指出，在识别一项规范是否有强制性时，具有相关意义的是国家的接受和承认，但这并不意味着其他行为体不起作用。 |
| Other actors may provide context and may contribute to the assessment of the acceptance and recognition by the international community of States as a whole. | 其他行为体可以提供背景，并可有助于评估国家组成之国际社会整体的接受和承认。 |
| The subsidiary role of other actors has been recognized by the Commission in other topics. | 委员会在其他专题中承认了其他行为体的这种辅助作用。 |
| In its conclusions on identification of customary international law, the Commission stated that it is “primarily … the practice of States that contributes to the formation, or expression, of rules of customary international law”, while noting that “[i]n certain cases, the practice of international organizations also contributes to the formation, or expression, of rules of customary international law”. | 在关于习惯国际法的识别的结论中，委员会指出，“主要…是有助于习惯国际法规则的形成或表述的国家实践”，并同时指出，“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。” |
| It went on to note that the conduct of non-State actors, even though not practice for such purposes, “may be relevant when assessing the practice” of States. | 委员会还指出，非国家行为体的行为即使不是此种目的方面的实践，但“在评估”国家“实践时可能相关”。 |
| Likewise, in the topic “Subsequent agreements and subsequent practice in relation to the interpretation of treaties”, the Commission concluded that the conduct of non-State actors did not constitute practice for the purposes of article 31 of the 1969 Vienna Convention but that it may “be relevant when assessing the subsequent practice of parties to a treaty”. | 同样，在与条约解释相关的嗣后协定和嗣后实践专题中，委员会得出结论认为，就1969年《维也纳公约》第三十一条的目的而言，非国家行为体的行为不构成实践，但“在评估条约缔约方的嗣后实践时可能相关”。 |
| Acts and practice of international organizations may provide evidence for the acceptance and recognition by States when determining whether a norm has a peremptory character. | 在确定一项规范是否具有强制性时，国际组织的行为和实践可以提供国家接受和承认的证据。 |
| Ultimately, however, the positions of entities other than States are not, of themselves, sufficient to establish the acceptance and recognition required for the elevation of a norm of general international law to peremptory status. | 但归根结底，国家以外实体的立场本身不足以确定将一般国际法规范提升到强制性地位所需的接受和承认。 |
| This consideration is reflected in paragraph 3 of draft conclusion 7. | 这一考虑反映在结论草案7第3段中。 |
| (6) | (6) |
| Paragraph 2 of draft conclusion 7 seeks to explain what is meant by “as a whole”. | 结论草案7第2段旨在解释“整体”的含义。 |
| It states that what is required is the acceptance and recognition by a very large and representative majority of States. | 它指出，所需要的是具有代表性的绝大多数国家的接受和承认。 |
| As explained by the Chair of the Drafting Committee during the United Nations Conference on the Law of Treaties, the words “as a whole” are meant to indicate that it was not necessary for the peremptory nature of the norm in question “to be accepted and recognized … by all States” and that it would be sufficient if “a very large majority did so”. | 如起草委员会主席在联合国条约法会议上解释的那样，“整体”二字是要表明有关规范的强制性无需“所有国家…接受和承认”，“只要绝大多数国家接受和承认”就可以了。 |
| This meaning is also captured by the phrase “community of States” as opposed to simply “States”. | 这种含义也体现在使用了“国家组成之社会”一语，而不仅仅是“国家”。 |
| The combination of the phrases “as a whole” and “community of States” serves to emphasize that it is States as a collective or community that must accept and recognize the non-derogability of a norm for it to be a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens). | 将“整体”和“国家组成之社会”这两个短语组合起来，是为了强调，一项规范要成为一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)，必须由作为一个集体或社会的各国接受和承认其不容克减性。 |
| (7) | (7) |
| The Commission considered that acceptance and recognition by a simple “majority” of States was not sufficient to establish the peremptory status of a norm. | 委员会认为，简单“多数”国家的接受和承认不足以确立规范的强制性地位。 |
| Rather, the majority had to be very large. | 这一多数必须是绝大多数。 |
| Determining whether there was a very large majority of States accepting and recognizing the peremptory status of a norm was not, however, a mechanical exercise in which the number of States is to be counted. | 但是，确定是否绝大多数国家接受和承认一项规范的强制性地位，并不是机械地计算国家的数量。 |
| Rather than a purely quantitative assessment in which a majority was determined, the assessment had to be qualitative. | 这种评估必须是定性评估，而不是确定多数的纯粹的定量评估。 |
| (8) | (8) |
| The idea that what is required is a qualitative assessment is also captured by the word “representative” to qualify “majority of States”. | 需要进行的评估是定性评估这种想法，还体现在用“具有代表性的”一词来修饰“大多数国家”的做法上。 |
| The acceptance and recognition by the international community of States as a whole requires that the acceptance and recognition be across regions, legal systems and cultures. | 国家组成之国际社会整体的接受和承认要求各种区域、法律制度和文化的接受和承认。 |
| The effect of paragraph 2 of draft conclusion 7 is that the majority of States accepting and recognizing the peremptory character of norms should be both very large and representative. | 结论草案7第2段的效果是，接受和承认规范强制性的多数国家应是绝大多数，并具有代表性。 |
| Conclusion 8 Evidence of acceptance and recognition | 结论8 接受和承认的证据 |
| 1. | 1. |
| Evidence of acceptance and recognition that a norm of general international law is a peremptory norm (jus cogens) may take a wide range of forms. | 表明一项一般国际法规范被接受和承认为强制性规范(强行法)的证据可具有广泛多样的形式。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| Forms of evidence include, but are not limited to: public statements made on behalf of States; | 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； |
| constitutional provisions; | 宪法规定； |
| legislative and administrative acts; | 立法和行政行为； |
| decisions of national courts; | 各国法院的判决； |
| treaty provisions; | 条约规定； |
| resolutions adopted by an international organization or at an intergovernmental conference; | 国际组织通过的或在政府间会议上通过的决议； |
| and other conduct of States. | 其他国家行为。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) | (1) |
| To identify a norm as a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens), it is necessary to show the acceptance and recognition by the international community of States as a whole of the non-derogability of such a norm. | 要识别一项规范为一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)，必须表明国家组成之国际社会整体接受和承认该规范的不容克减性。 |
| As implied in paragraph 2 of draft conclusion 7, this requires that evidence of acceptance and recognition must be adduced. | 如结论草案7第2段所暗示的，这要求必须举出接受和承认的证据。 |
| Draft conclusion 8 concerns the types of evidence necessary to identify that the international community of States as a whole accepts and recognizes that a norm has a peremptory character. | 结论草案8涉及确定国家组成之国际社会整体接受和承认一项规范具有强制性的必要证据类型。 |
| Subsidiary means which may be relevant for the identification of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) are addressed in draft conclusion 9. | 结论草案9讨论了可能与识别一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)相关的辅助手段。 |
| (2) | (2) |
| Paragraph 1 of draft conclusion 8 is a general statement. | 结论草案8第1段是一般性声明。 |
| It provides that evidence of acceptance and recognition may take a wide range of forms. | 其中规定，接受和承认的证据可具有广泛多样的形式。 |
| In its judgment in Questions Relating to the Obligation to Prosecute or Extradite, the International Court of Justice relied on a variety of materials when stating that, “[i]n [its] opinion, the prohibition of torture is part of customary international law and it has become a peremptory norm (jus cogens)”. | 在与起诉或引渡义务有关的问题案的判决中，国际法院依据各种材料作为禁止酷刑强制性的证据，指出“[它]认为，禁止酷刑是习惯国际法的一部分，已成为一项强制性规范(强行法)”。 |
| It should be recalled that what is at stake is the acceptance and recognition of the international community of States as a whole. | 应当指出，国家组成之国际社会整体接受和承认是关键所在。 |
| Therefore, any material capable of expressing or reflecting the views of States would be relevant as evidence of acceptance and recognition. | 因此，任何能够表达或反映各国意见的材料都可以作为接受和承认的证据。 |
| (3) | (3) |
| Paragraph 2 of draft conclusion 8 describes the forms of materials that may be used as evidence that a norm is a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens). | 结论草案8第2段描述了可作为证据证明一项规范是一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的材料的形式。 |
| In keeping with the statement above that evidence of acceptance and recognition may take various forms, paragraph 2 of draft conclusion 8 states that the forms of evidence “include, but are not limited to”. | 根据上文关于接受和承认的证据可具有广泛多样形式的说法，结论草案8第2段指出，证据的形式“包括但不限于”。 |
| The list contained in paragraph 2 of draft conclusion 8 is therefore not a closed list. | 因此，结论草案8第2段所载清单并不是一个封闭的清单。 |
| Other forms of evidence not mentioned in paragraph 2 of draft conclusion 8, if reflecting or expressing the acceptance and recognition of States, may be adduced in support of the peremptory character of a norm. | 结论草案8第2段中未提及的其他形式的证据，如果反映或表达了各国的接受和承认，即可援引这些证据来证明一项规范的强制性。 |
| The phrase “and other conduct of State” is intended to be a “catch-all” phrase that caters for the possibility of other materials that, although not reflected in the list, reveal the positions of States. | “其他国家行为”一语旨在涵盖所有情况，以考虑到清单中虽未列出但却表明了各国立场的其他材料的可能性。 |
| (4) | (4) |
| It will be noted that the forms of evidence listed in paragraph 2 of draft conclusion 8 are similar to those provided for in paragraph 2 of conclusion 10 of the conclusions on identification of customary international law, which concerns forms of evidence of acceptance as law (opinio juris). | 应当指出的是，结论草案8第2段所列的证据形式与关于习惯国际法的识别的结论之结论10第2段所规定的形式相似，该段涉及被接受为法律(法律确信)的证据形式。 |
| This similarity is because the forms of evidence identified are those from which, as a general matter, the positions, opinions and views of States can be gleaned. | 之所以存在这种相似性，是因为所列证据形式一般是体现各国立场、意见和看法的形式。 |
| The potential uses of these materials for the purposes of satisfying the acceptance and recognition criterion for peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens), on the one hand, and their uses for the purposes of the identification of customary international law, on the other hand, must be distinguished. | 必须对可能使用这些材料满足一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的接受和承认标准的情况及将其用于识别习惯国际法的情况加以区分。 |
| For the former, the materials must establish acceptance and recognition by the international community of States as a whole that the norm in question is one from which no derogation is permitted, while for the latter the materials are used to assess whether States accept the norm as a rule of customary international law. | 在前一种情况中，这些材料必须确定国家组成之国际社会整体接受和承认有关规范不容克减，在后一种情况中，这些材料被用于评估各国是否接受该规范为习惯国际法规则。 |
| (5) | (5) |
| The non-exhaustive list of forms of evidence in paragraph 2 of draft conclusion 8 have in common that they are materials expressing or reflecting the views of States. | 结论草案8第2段中的非详尽无遗清单所列的证据形式有一个共同之处，即它们是表达或反映各国意见的材料。 |
| These materials are the result of processes capable of revealing the positions and views of States. | 这些材料是能够表明各国立场和意见的各种进程的结果。 |
| States routinely express their views about the peremptory character of particular norms through public statements and statements in international forums. | 各国通常通过公开声明和在国际论坛上的发言来表达其对特定规范强制性的看法。 |
| Decisions of national courts may also be a reflection of the views of States and have been relied upon in the determination of the peremptory character of norms. | 各国法院的判决也可反映各国的意见，并被用作确定规范强制性的依据。 |
| Likewise, provisions in national constitutions, as well as legislative and administrative measures provide alternative avenues by which States express their views and may thus also provide evidence of the peremptory character of a norm of general international law. | 同样，国家宪法规定以及立法和行政措施是各国表达意见的其他渠道，因此也可以为一般国际法规范的强制性提供证据。 |
| (6) | (6) |
| Treaties and resolutions adopted by States in international organizations or at intergovernmental conferences may be an obvious example of such materials since they may also reflect the views of States. | 各国在国际组织或政府间会议上通过的条约和决议可能是这种材料的一个明显实例，因为它们也可能反映各国的观点。 |
| In assessing the weight of such treaties, various acts of States, in connection with the treaties and resolutions, must be taken into account. | 在评估这些条约的权重时，必须考虑到与条约和决议有关的各种国家行为。 |
| These include statements in explanation of vote, the extent of support expressed through positive or negative votes and abstentions, reservations, context and, in relation to treaties, the number of ratifications. | 其中包括解释投票立场的发言、通过赞成票、反对票和弃权票表示的支持程度、所作的保留、背景以及条约的批准数目等。 |
| (7) | (7) |
| In addition to the caveat that the forms of evidence in paragraph 2 of draft conclusion 8 are non-exhaustive, it should also be recalled that such materials must speak to whether the norm has a peremptory character. | 除了需要注意结论草案8第2段中的证据形式并非详尽无遗外，还应当指出的是，这些材料必须说明规范是否具有强制性。 |
| The question is not whether a particular norm has been reflected in these materials but, rather, whether the materials, when taken together, establish the acceptance and recognition of the international community of States as a whole that the norm in question is one from which no derogation is permitted. | 问题并不是某一特定规范是否在这些材料中得到反映，而是这些材料综合来看，是否能确定国家组成之国际社会整体的接受和承认。 |
| (8) | (8) |
| Finally, it should be recalled that the materials listed in draft conclusion 8 provide evidence. | 最后，应当指出，结论草案8中所列材料提供的是证据。 |
| As such they are not, individually, conclusive of the peremptory character of a norm. | 这些材料单独来看并不能确定一项规范的强制性。 |
| Thus, the fact that a resolution of the United Nations, a treaty provision, a national court decision, a public statement or any other conduct by a State indicates the belief that a norm has peremptory status, is not sufficient to establish that norm as a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens). | 因此，一项联合国决议、一条条约规定、一项国家法院判决、一份公开声明或一国的任何其他行为表明国家认为某项规范具有强制性地位，并不足以确定该规范为一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)。 |
| The materials have to be weighed and assessed together, in their context, in order to determine whether they evince acceptance and recognition of the international community of States as a whole of the peremptory character of the norm in question. | 要确定这些材料是否表明国家组成之国际社会整体对有关规范强制性的接受和承认，必须结合其背景对它们一同加以权衡和评估。 |
| Conclusion 9 Subsidiary means for the determination of the peremptory character of norms of general international law | 结论9 确定一般国际法规范强制性的辅助手段 |
| 1. | 1. |
| Decisions of international courts and tribunals, in particular of the International Court of Justice, are a subsidiary means for determining the peremptory character of norms of general international law. | 国际性法院和法庭的判决，特别是国际法院的判决，是确定一般国际法规范强制性的辅助手段。 |
| Regard may also be had, as appropriate, to decisions of national courts. | 还可酌情考虑各国法院的判决。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| The works of expert bodies established by States or international organizations and the teachings of the most highly qualified publicists of the various nations may also serve as subsidiary means for determining the peremptory character of norms of general international law. | 各国或国际组织设立的专家机构的工作成果和各国权威最高的公法学家学说也可作为确定一般国际法规范强制性的辅助手段。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) | (1) |
| To identify a norm as being a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens), it is necessary to provide evidence that the international community of States as a whole accepts and recognizes the said norm as one from which no derogation is permitted and which can only be modified by a subsequent norm of general international law having the same character. | 要识别一项规范为一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)，必须提供证据，表明该规范被国家组成之国际社会整体接受和承认为不容克减的规范，且只能由嗣后具有相同性质的一般国际法规范加以变更。 |
| As explained in draft conclusion 8, the forms of evidence relevant for this purpose are materials expressing or reflecting the views of States. | 如在结论草案8中所解释的，表达或反映各国意见的材料是与此目的相关的证据形式。 |
| Subsidiary means may also be used for the determination of the peremptory character of a norm. | 也可使用辅助手段来确定一项规范的强制性。 |
| Draft conclusion 9 concerns such subsidiary means. | 结论草案9涉及此类辅助手段。 |
| It is important to emphasize that the word “subsidiary” in this context is not meant to diminish the importance of such materials, but is rather aimed at expressing the idea that those materials facilitate the identification of “acceptance and recognition” but do not, in themselves, constitute evidence of such acceptance and recognition. | 必须强调的是，这里的“辅助”一词并不是要削弱这类材料的重要性，而是旨在表达：这些材料有助于对“接受和承认”加以识别，但其本身并不构成这种接受和承认的证据。 |
| (2) | (2) |
| Paragraph 1 of draft conclusion 9 contains two sentences. | 结论草案9第1段包含两句。 |
| The first sentence provides that decisions of international courts and tribunals are a subsidiary means for determining the peremptory character of norms of general international law. | 第一句规定，国际性法院和法庭的判决是确定一般国际法规范强制性的辅助手段。 |
| This provision mirrors Article 38, paragraph 1 (d), of the Statute of the International Court of Justice, which provides, inter alia, that judicial decisions are a “subsidiary means for the determination of rules of law”. | 这条规定仿效了《国际法院规约》第三十八条第一款(卯)项，其中除其他外规定，“司法判例”是“确定法律原则之补助资料者”。 |
| It is partly for that reason that paragraph 1 of draft conclusion 9 uses the words “means for determining” instead of “identifying” which has more often been resorted to in the present draft conclusions. | 正是部分出于这一原因，结论草案9第1段使用了“确定…的手段”，而非本结论草案中经常使用的“识别”一词。 |
| (3) | (3) |
| There is an abundance of examples of decisions of international courts relying on other decisions of international courts and tribunals when identifying a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens). | 有大量关于国际性法院的判决在识别一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)时以其他国际性法院和法庭的判决作为依据的实例。 |
| As an example, the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, in Prosecutor v. Anto Furundžija, determined that the prohibition of torture was such a norm on the basis of, inter alia, the extensiveness of the prohibition including the fact that States are prohibited “from expelling, returning or extraditing” a person to a place where they may be subject to torture. | 例如，前南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭在检察官诉Anto Furundžija案中裁定禁止酷刑是一项此类规范，其依据除其他外包括禁止国家将个人“驱逐、遣返或引渡”到他们可能遭受酷刑的地方这一禁令的广泛性。 |
| To demonstrate the extensiveness of this prohibition, the Court referred to judgments of the European Court of Human Rights, among others. | 为了证明这一禁令的广泛性，该法庭提到了欧洲人权法院等法院的判决。 |
| The judgment of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia in Prosecutor v. Anto Furundžija has itself often been referred to in order to illustrate the peremptory status of the prohibition of torture. | 前南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭对检察官诉Anto Furundžija案的判决本身也常常被提及，以说明禁止酷刑的强制性地位。 |
| The Special Tribunal for Lebanon in Prosecutor v. Ayyash, et al., concluded that “[t]he principle of legality (nullum crimen sine lege) … [is] so frequently upheld by international criminal courts with regard to international prosecution of crimes that it is warranted to hold that by now it has the status of a peremptory norm (jus cogens)”. | 黎巴嫩问题特别法庭在检察官诉Ayyash等人案的结论中指出，“国际性刑事法院在对罪行进行国际起诉方面如此频繁地坚持合法性原则(法无明文不为罪)，以致于完全有理由认为，该原则现已具有强制性规范(强行法)的地位”。 |
| The Special Tribunal for Lebanon, in El Sayed, determined that the right of access to justice has “acquired the status of a peremptory norm (jus cogens)” based on, inter alia, jurisprudence of both national and international courts. | 黎巴嫩问题特别法庭在El Sayed案中裁定，诉诸司法的权利已“获得强制性规范(强行法)的地位”，除其他外，其依据包括国家法院和国际性法院的判例。 |
| The decision in El Sayed provides a particularly apt illustration of the manner in which decisions of international courts and tribunals can be a subsidiary means for the identification of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | El Sayed案的判决特别恰当地说明，国际性法院和法庭的判决可作为识别一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的辅助手段。 |
| There, the Tribunal, in the judgment written by its then-President, Antonio Cassese, relied on various forms of evidence, including evidence listed in draft conclusion 8, to come to the conclusion that, taken as a whole, the evidence suggested that there was an acceptance and recognition of the peremptory character of the right of access to courts. | 在该案中，法庭当时的庭长安东尼奥·卡塞塞在判决书中采用了各种证据形式，包括结论草案8所列的证据，从而得出结论认为，从整体上看，证据表明，诉诸法院的权利的强制性得到了接受和承认。 |
| The decision then refers to the decision in the case of Goiburú, et al. v. Paraguay, in which the Inter-American Court of Human Rights determined that the right of access to courts is a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens), in order to give context to the primary evidence relied upon and to solidify that evidence. | 该判决随后提及Goiburú等人诉巴拉圭案的判决，在该案中，美洲人权法院裁定诉诸法院的权利是一项一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)，以便为所依赖的主要证据提供背景，并固化这一证据。 |
| (4) | (4) |
| The first sentence of paragraph 1 of draft conclusion 9 explicitly mentions the International Court of Justice as a subsidiary means for the determination of the peremptory character of norms. | 结论草案9第1段第一句明确提及国际法院是确定规范强制性的辅助手段之一。 |
| There are several reasons for this express mention. | 这种明确提及有若干原因。 |
| First, it is the principal judicial organ of the United Nations and its members are elected by the main political organs of the United Nations. | 首先，它是联合国的主要司法机关，其成员由联合国主要政治机关选出。 |
| Second, it remains the only international court with general subject-matter jurisdiction. | 其次，它仍然是唯一具有一般属事管辖权的国际法院。 |
| Moreover, while the Court has been reluctant to pronounce on peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens), its jurisprudence has left a mark on the development both of the general concept of peremptory norms and of particular peremptory norms, even in cases where such norms were not explicitly invoked. | 此外，虽然该法院不愿就一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)发表意见，但其判例在强制性规范一般概念的发展和特定强制性规范的发展中留下了印记，即使在没有明确援引这类规范的情况下也是如此。 |
| In particular, its advisory opinions on Reservations to the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Genocide, the Legal Consequences for States of the Continued Presence of South Africa in Namibia and the Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, as well as its decisions in Barcelona Traction, East Timor, and the Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua, have made major contributions to the understanding and evolution of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens), notwithstanding the fact that they do not expressly and unambiguously invoke, for their respective conclusions, such norms. | 具体而言，法院关于对《防止及惩治灭绝种族罪公约》的保留、南非继续留驻纳米比亚(西南非洲)对各国的法律后果、在被占巴勒斯坦领土修建隔离墙的法律后果等问题的咨询意见，以及在巴塞罗那电车公司案、东帝汶案和尼加拉瓜境内和针对尼加拉瓜的军事和准军事活动案中的判决，都为理解一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)及其演变作出了重大贡献，尽管这些咨询意见和判决在得出结论时都没有明确和清楚地援引这类规范。 |
| When the International Court of Justice has pronounced itself expressly on peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens), its decisions have been even more influential. | 当国际法院就一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)明确表示意见时，其判决甚至更具影响力。 |
| The judgment of the Court in Questions relating to the Obligation to Prosecute or Extradite, for example, has confirmed the peremptory status of the prohibition of torture. | 例如，法院对与起诉或引渡义务有关的问题案的判决确认了禁止酷刑的强制性地位。 |
| (5) | (5) |
| The second sentence of paragraph 1 of draft conclusion 9 provides that regard may also be had, as appropriate, to decisions of national courts. | 结论草案9第1段第二句规定，还可酌情考虑各国法院的判决。 |
| It will be recalled that Article 38, paragraph 1 (d), of the Statute of the International Court of Justice refers to “judicial decisions”, which includes both decisions of international courts and decisions of national courts. | 可以指出的是，《国际法院规约》第三十八条第一款(卯)项提到“司法判例”，包括国际性法院的判决和各国法院的判决。 |
| Consequently, the second sentence is intended to capture the idea that decisions of national courts are also relevant as subsidiary means for the determination of the peremptory character of norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 因此，第二句想要表达的是，各国法院的判决作为确定一般国际法规范(强行法)强制性的辅助手段，也具有相关性。 |
| The Commission decided to use the phrases “may also” and “as appropriate” to indicate that, although decisions of national courts may serve as subsidiary means for the determination of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens), they should be resorted to with caution. | 委员会决定使用“还可”和“酌情”这两个短语来表明，虽然各国法院的判决可以作为确定一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的辅助手段，但应谨慎使用。 |
| In particular, the weight to be accorded to such national decisions will be dependent on the reasoning applied in the particular decision. | 特别是，给予这种国家判决的权重将取决于具体判决中的推理。 |
| (6) | (6) |
| In addition to serving as subsidiary means under Article 38, paragraph 1 (d), of the Statute of the International Court of Justice, decisions of national courts may also constitute primary evidence under draft conclusion 8. | 各国法院的判决除了作为《国际法院规约》第三十八条第一款(卯)项规定的辅助手段外，还可构成结论草案8下的主要证据。 |
| When relied upon under draft conclusion 8, decisions of national courts provide evidence of the acceptance and recognition of the State in question. | 在根据结论草案8作为依据时，各国法院的判决提供有关国家接受和承认的证据。 |
| In that context, the relevance of the decision of the court concerns whether it evidences that State’s position and not its broader assessment of the recognition and acceptance of the norm in question by the international community of States as a whole as peremptory in nature. | 在这种情况下，法院判决的相关性涉及它是否证明了国家的立场，而不是其对国家组成之国际社会整体承认和接受有关规范具有强制性的广泛评估。 |
| (7) | (7) |
| Paragraph 2 of draft conclusion 9 concerns other subsidiary means for the determination of the peremptory character of norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 结论草案9第2段涉及确定一般国际法规范强制性(强行法)的其他一些辅助手段。 |
| As with decisions of international courts and tribunals, these other means are subsidiary in the sense that they facilitate the determination of whether there is acceptance and recognition by States, but they themselves are not evidence of such acceptance and recognition. | 与国际性法院和法庭的判决一样，这些其他手段也属于辅助手段，因为它们有助于确定国家是否接受和承认，但它们本身并不是这种接受和承认的证据。 |
| The paragraph lists, as examples of other subsidiary means, the works of expert bodies and teachings of the most highly qualified publicists of the various nations, also referred to as scholarly writings. | 作为其他辅助手段的实例，该段列举了专家机构的工作成果和各国权威最高的公法学家学说，也称为学术著作。 |
| The use of the phrase “may also” in paragraph 2, in contradistinction to the word “are” which is used to qualify decisions of international courts and tribunals in paragraph 1, indicates that less weight may attach to works of expert bodies and scholarly writings in comparison to judicial decisions. | 与第1段中用来限定国际性法院和法庭判决的“是”字不同的是，第2段中使用的“也可”一词表明，给予专家机构的工作成果和学术著作的权重可低于司法判决。 |
| The relevance of these other subsidiary means depends on various factors, including the reasoning of the works or writings, the extent to which the views expressed are accepted by States and the extent to which such views are corroborated either by other forms of evidence listed in draft conclusion 8 or decisions of international courts and tribunals. | 这些其他辅助手段的相关性取决于各种因素，包括工作成果或著作的推理、表达的意见在多大程度上为各国所接受，以及这些意见在多大程度上得到结论草案8所列其他形式的证据或国际性法院和法庭判决的证实等。 |
| (8) | (8) |
| The first category relates to the works of expert bodies. | 第一类涉及专家机构的工作成果。 |
| The phrase “established by States or international organizations” indicates that the paragraph refers to organs established by international organizations and subsidiary bodies of such organizations, such as the International Law Commission and expert treaty bodies. | “各国或国际组织设立的”一语指的是由国际组织设立的机关和此类组织的附属机构，如国际法委员会和专家条约机构。 |
| The qualification was necessary to emphasize that the expert body in question had to have an intergovernmental mandate and had to be created by States. | 这一限定是必要的，以强调有关专家机构必须具有政府间任务授权，而且必须由各国设立。 |
| The use of the phrase “established by States or by international organizations” means that private organizations which do not have an intergovernmental mandate are not included in the category of expert bodies. | 使用“各国或国际组织设立的”一语意味着没有政府间任务授权的私营组织不属于专家机构类别。 |
| This does not mean that the works of expert bodies without an intergovernmental mandate are irrelevant. | 这并不意味着没有政府间任务授权的专家机构的工作成果无关紧要。 |
| The works of the Institute of International Law or the International Law Association may, for example, qualify as “teachings of the most highly qualified publicists” under paragraph 2 of draft conclusion 9. | 例如，根据结论草案9第2段，国际法学会或国际法协会的工作成果可被视为“权威最高的公法学家学说”。 |
| The term “works” covers not only the final outcomes of the expert bodies but also their work leading up to the final outcome. | “工作成果”一词不仅包括专家机构的最终成果，还包括形成最终成果的工作。 |
| (9) | (9) |
| The reliance on other materials is also supported by courts. | 法院也支持使用其他材料作为依据。 |
| In RM v. Attorney-General, for example, the High Court of Kenya relied on the Human Rights Committee general comment No. 18 on non-discrimination for its determination that non-discrimination is a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens). | 例如，在RM诉总检察长一案中，肯尼亚高等法院以人权事务委员会关于不歧视的第18号一般性意见 为依据，确定不歧视是一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)。 |
| Similarly, for its conclusion that the principle of non-refoulement was a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens), the International Criminal Court relied on, inter alia, an advisory opinion of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. | 同样，为了提出不驱回原则是一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的结论，国际刑事法院除其他外，以联合国难民事务高级专员公署的一项咨询意见作为依据。 |
| Likewise, the finding by the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia in Prosecutor v. Anto Furundžija that the prohibition of torture was a norm of jus cogens was based, inter alia, on observations of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, the Human Rights Committee and a report of a Special Rapporteur, Mr. Kooijmans. | 前南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭也在检察官诉Anto Furundžija案的裁决中指出，禁止酷刑是一项强行法规范，其依据除其他外包括美洲人权委员会的意见、人权事务委员会的意见以及特别报告员科艾曼斯先生的一份报告。 |
| (10) | (10) |
| The Commission has also often been referred to in the assessment of whether a particular norm has attained peremptory status. | 在评估某项规范是否已达到强制性地位时，国际法委员会也常被提及。 |
| In assessing the status of the prohibition of the use of force, the International Court of Justice observed that the “International Law Commission … expressed the view that ‘the law of the Charter [of the United Nations] concerning the prohibition of the use of force in itself constitutes a conspicuous example of a rule in international law having the character of jus cogens’”. | 国际法院在评估禁止使用武力的地位时，注意到“国际法委员会…认为‘[联合国]宪章中关于禁止使用武力的法律本身即构成具有绝对法则性质的国际法规则的显著实例’”。 |
| Scholarly writings that provide a list of generally accepted peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) often rely on the list provided by the Commission in the commentary to article 26 of the articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts. | 提供普遍接受的一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)清单的学术著作，往往以委员会在国家对国际不法行为的责任条款第26条的评注中提供的清单为依据。 |
| The Commission’s own work may thus also contribute to the identification of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 因此，委员会本身的工作也可能有助于识别一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)。 |
| (11) | (11) |
| Paragraph 2 refers to “teachings of the most highly qualified publicists”, which may also be useful as subsidiary material for the identification of peremptory norms of international law. | 第2段提到“权威最高的公法学家学说”，这些学说也可用作识别国际法强制性规范的辅助材料。 |
| This refers to scholarly writings and other works that may be used as secondary material in assessing and providing context to the primary forms of acceptance and recognition of peremptory status. | 这指的是学术著作和其他作品也可作为次要材料，用于评估接受和承认强制性地位的主要形式并提供背景参考。 |
| It is important to emphasize that the weight to be accorded to such teachings will vary greatly depending on the quality of the reasoning and the extent to which they find support in State practice and in the decisions of international courts and tribunals. | 必须强调的是，给予这类学说的权重将因其推理的质量以及它们在国家实践中以及国际性法院和法庭的判决中得到的支持程度而大不相同。 |
| (12) | (12) |
| It is worth pointing out that the subsidiary means identified in paragraphs 1 and 2 of draft conclusion 9 are not exhaustive. | 值得指出的是，结论草案9第1和第2段中列出的辅助手段并不是详尽无遗的。 |
| The means identified in the draft conclusion are, however, the most common subsidiary means that have been relied upon in the identification of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 但是，本条结论草案中列出的手段的确是在识别一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)时所依据的最常见的辅助手段。 |
| Part Three Legal consequences of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) | 第三部分 一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的法律后果 |
| Conclusion 10 Treaties conflicting with a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) | 结论10 与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)抵触的条约 |
| 1. | 1. |
| A treaty is void if, at the time of its conclusion, it conflicts with a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens). | 条约在缔结时与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)相抵触者无效。 |
| The provisions of such a treaty have no legal force. | 此种条约的规定无法律效力。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| Subject to paragraph 2 of draft conclusion 11, if a new peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) emerges, any existing treaty which is in conflict with that norm becomes void and terminates. | 在不违反结论草案11第2段的前提下，如有新的一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)出现，与该项规范相抵触的任何现行条约即为无效并终止。 |
| The parties to such a treaty are released from any obligation further to perform the treaty. | 条约缔约方继续履行条约之义务解除。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) | (1) |
| Draft conclusion 10 concerns the invalidity and termination of treaties on account of their being in conflict with peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 结论草案10涉及条约因与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)抵触而无效和终止的问题。 |
| It is of course expected that States would not conclude treaties in conflict with peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 当然，预计各国不会缔结与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)抵触的条约。 |
| However, in the event that such treaties are concluded, such treaties will be void. | 但如果缔结了这种条约，这种条约将无效。 |
| The invalidity of treaties is the legal effect that is most closely associated with peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 条约无效是与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)最密切相关的法律效果。 |
| Article 53 of the 1969 Vienna Convention has rarely been relied upon to invalidate a treaty, so much so that it has been questioned whether that article remains relevant. | 1969年《维也纳公约》第五十三条很少用作条约无效的依据，以致该条是否仍然具有相关性受到质疑。 |
| The fact that treaties have rarely been invalidated on account of a conflict with peremptory norms is, however, not because the rule in article 53 is not accepted by States, but simply because States do not generally enter into treaties that conflict with peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 然而，条约很少因与强制性规范相抵触而无效，这一事实并不是因为第五十三条所载规则不为各国所接受，而只是因为各国一般不缔结与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)相抵触的条约。 |
| Thus, the rule that a treaty in conflict with peremptory norms is invalid continues to be applicable even though it has rarely been applied. | 因此，与强制性规范相抵触的条约无效的规则继续适用――尽管该规则很少适用。 |
| (2) | (2) |
| While instances of invalidity of treaties on account of conflict with peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) have been rare, this does not mean that there has been no practice at all that may be relevant to this question. | 虽然因与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)相抵触而使条约无效的情况很少，但这并不意味着根本没有可能与此问题相关的实践。 |
| There have been statements made by individual States assessing whether a particular treaty was consistent or not with a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) and, accordingly, whether it could be considered as valid or not. | 有些国家作出了声明，评估某一特定条约是否符合一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)，以及是否因此可能被视为无效的问题。 |
| The General Assembly has also adopted relevant resolutions which have been interpreted as recognizing that the validity of certain agreements is to be determined by reference to their consistency with certain fundamental principles. | 联大也通过了相关决议， 这些决议被解释为承认某些协定的有效性取决于它们是否符合某些基本原则。 |
| There have also been judicial decisions that have considered the invalidity of treaties on account of possible inconsistency with peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 还有一些司法判决认为某些条约因可能不符合一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)而无效。 |
| In Prosecutor v. Charles Ghankay Taylor, the Special Court for Sierra Leone had to determine whether the provision in its own statute, which did not recognize the immunities of any officials, was invalid. | 在检察官诉Charles Ghankay Taylor一案中，塞拉利昂问题特别法庭必须确定其规约中不承认任何官员豁免的规定是否无效。 |
| The Court held that since the provision was “not in conflict with any peremptory norm of general international law, [it] must be given effect” to by the Court. | 该法庭认为，因为这些规定“并未与任何一般国际法强制性规范相抵触”，所以法院“必须赋予[其]效力”。 |
| It seems to follow that had the provision been in conflict it would not have been given effect by the Court. | 由此似可推断，如果该规定存在抵触情况，法院就不会赋予其效力。 |
| Similarly, in the Aloeboetoe and Others v. Suriname case before the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, reliance had been placed on an agreement concluded between the Netherlands and the Saramaka community for the purposes of reparation. | 同样，美洲人权法院审理的Aloeboetoe等人诉苏里南案依据的是荷兰出于赔偿目的与萨拉马卡社区之间缔结的一项协定。 |
| The Court noted that, under some provisions of the treaty, the Saramaka undertook to capture any escaped slaves and return them to slavery. | 该法院指出，根据该条约的某些规定，萨拉马卡人承诺抓获逃脱的奴隶并使其重新为奴。 |
| On that account, the Court held that if the agreement in question were a treaty, it would be “null and void because it contradicts the norms of jus cogens superveniens”. | 有鉴于此，法院认为，如果所涉协定是一项条约，则该条约“无效，因为它与新的强行法规范相抵触”。 |
| (3) | (3) |
| Draft conclusion 10 follows the approach of the 1969 Vienna Convention by distinguishing between, on the one hand, treaties that, at the time of their conclusion, are in conflict with a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) (paragraph 1) and, on the other hand, treaties that conflict with a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) that emerges subsequent to the conclusion of the treaty (paragraph 2). | 结论草案10遵循1969年《维也纳公约》的做法，对以下两种情况作了区分：一种是在缔结时与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)相抵触的条约(第1段)，另一种是与缔结后出现的一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)相抵触的条约(第2段)。 |
| The first alternative is addressed in the first sentence of article 53 of the 1969 Vienna Convention while the second alternative is addressed in article 64 of that Convention. | 1969年《维也纳公约》第五十三条第一句处理了第一种情况，该公约第六十四条处理了第二种情况。 |
| Paragraphs 1 and 2 of the present draft conclusion follow closely the text of the 1969 Vienna Convention. | 本条结论草案第1和第2段非常贴近1969年《维也纳公约》的案文。 |
| (4) | (4) |
| The first sentence of paragraph 1 of draft conclusion 10 states simply that a treaty is void if, at the time of its conclusion, it conflicts with a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens). | 结论草案10第1段第一句仅声明，条约在缔结时与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)相抵触者无效。 |
| The sentence follows closely the first sentence of article 53 of the 1969 Vienna Convention. | 这一句密切仿效了1969年《维也纳公约》第五十三条第一句。 |
| The import of this sentence is that such a treaty is void ab initio. | 这句话的意思是，这样一项条约自始无效。 |
| The second sentence of paragraph 1 of draft conclusion 10 is taken from paragraph 1 of article 69 of the Convention and provides that the provisions of a treaty that is invalid on account of being in conflict with a peremptory norm at the time of its conclusion have no legal force. | 结论草案10第1段第二句摘自该公约第六十九条第一款，规定因在缔结时与强制性规范相抵触而无效的条约的规定没有法律效力。 |
| (5) | (5) |
| Paragraph 2 of draft conclusion 10 concerns the consequences of a newly emerged peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) on an existing treaty. | 结论草案10第2段涉及新出现的一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)对现有条约的后果。 |
| It states that such a treaty becomes void and terminates. | 该段规定，这样一项条约即为无效并终止。 |
| The phrase “becomes void and terminates” indicates that the treaty is not void ab initio but only becomes void at the emergence of the peremptory norm. | “即为无效并终止”的措辞说明，该条约不是自始就无效，而是在强制性规范出现之时成为无效。 |
| The treaty becomes void from the moment the norm in question is recognized and accepted as one from which no derogation is permitted. | 从有关规范被承认和接受为不容克减的规范那一刻起，条约方告无效。 |
| The consequence of the treaty becoming void is that it is only the continuing legal or subsequent legal effects of the provisions of the treaty that terminate. | 条约无效的后果是，终止的只是条约规定的持续法律效力或随后的法律效力。 |
| It is for this reason that the second sentence of paragraph 2 provides that the parties to such a treaty are released from any obligation further to perform the treaty. | 正因为如此，第2段第二句规定，这样一项条约的缔约方继续履行条约之义务解除。 |
| This formulation is drawn from article 71, paragraph 2 (a), of the 1969 Vienna Convention. | 这一措辞源自1969年《维也纳公约》第七十一条第二款(a)项。 |
| The effect of the text is to recognize that the treaty provisions were valid and could produce legal consequences prior to the emergence of the peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens). | 该案文的效果是承认条约规定在一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)出现之前是有效的，并可能产生法律后果。 |
| Subject to draft conclusion 12, it is only the obligation to “further” perform that is affected by any termination. | 依照结论草案12，受到任何条约终止影响的只有“继续”履行的义务。 |
| Prior to the acceptance and recognition, the rights and obligations under the impugned treaty are fully valid and applicable. | 在规范得到接受和承认之前，受质疑的条约规定的权利和义务是完全有效和适用的。 |
| (6) | (6) |
| The rule contained in paragraph 2 of draft conclusion 10 should be read together with draft conclusion 11 which makes provision for separability in certain cases. | 结论草案10第2段所载的规则应与结论草案11一并解读，后者对某些情况下的可分离性作了规定。 |
| For this reason, paragraph 2 begins with the words “Subject to paragraph 2 of draft conclusion 11”. | 为此，第2段以“在不违反结论草案11第2段的前提下”开头。 |
| (7) | (7) |
| Draft conclusion 10 on the invalidity of treaties on account of conflict with peremptory norms should also be read together with draft conclusion 21 on the recommended procedure for invoking invalidity. | 关于条约因与强制性规范相抵触而无效的结论草案10还应与关于建议的程序的结论草案21一并解读。 |
| In accordance with draft conclusion 21, a party to a treaty cannot unilaterally declare that a treaty is contrary to a peremptory norm and excuse itself from the duty to perform under the treaty. | 根据结论草案21，条约缔约方不能单方面宣布因为该条约违反强制性规范而解除其根据该条约履行的义务。 |
| The procedure set out in draft conclusion 21 is to be followed to confirm, objectively, the invalidity of the treaty before any consequences of invalidity can be relied upon. | 在将条约无效的任何后果作为依据之前，应遵循结论草案21规定的程序，客观地确认条约无效。 |
| (8) | (8) |
| Draft conclusion 10 should also be read together with draft conclusion 20 on interpretation and application of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 结论草案10还应与关于一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的解释和适用的结论草案20一并解读。 |
| Conclusion 11 Separability of treaty provisions conflicting with a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) | 结论11 与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)抵触的条约规定的可分离性 |
| 1. | 1. |
| A treaty which, at the time of its conclusion, conflicts with a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) is void in whole, and no separation of the provisions of the treaty is permitted. | 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，条约任何规定均不可分离。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| A treaty which is in conflict with a new peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) becomes void and terminates in whole, unless: | 条约如与新的一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)抵触则整体无效并终止，除非： |
| (a) | (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 regard to their application; | 与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)抵触的规定就其适用而言，可与条约的其余部分分离； |
| (b) | (b) |
| it appears from the treaty or is otherwise established that acceptance of the said provisions was not an essential basis of the consent of the parties to be bound by the treaty as a whole; | 条约本身规定或通过其他方式确定，接受有关规定并非缔约方同意受整个条约约束之必要基础； |
| and | 并且 |
| (c) | (c) |
| continued performance of the remainder of the treaty would not be unjust. | 该条约其余部分继续实施不致有失公正。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) | (1) |
| Draft conclusion 11 addresses circumstances where only some provisions of a treaty are in conflict with a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) while other provisions are not in conflict with such a norm. | 结论草案11涉及的是一项条约的某些规定与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)相抵触，而另一些规定与这种规范并无抵触的情况。 |
| As with draft conclusion 10 concerning invalidity of treaties, the draft conclusion follows the general approach of the 1969 Vienna Convention, namely to distinguish between, on the one hand, treaties which, at the time of their conclusion, conflict with a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) and, on the other hand, treaties which conflict with a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) that emerges subsequent to the conclusion of the treaty. | 与关于条约无效的结论草案10一样，这项结论草案遵循了1969年《维也纳公约》的一般性做法，即对以下两种情况作了区分：一种是在缔结时与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)相抵触的条约，另一种是在缔结后与新出现的一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)相抵触的条约。 |
| The draft conclusion also follows closely the text contained in the relevant provisions of the 1969 Vienna Convention. | 这项结论草案也十分贴近1969年《维也纳公约》有关规定所载案文。 |
| (2) | (2) |
| Paragraph 1 of draft conclusion 11 concerns those cases where the treaty, at the time of its conclusion, is in conflict with a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens). | 结论草案11第1段涉及条约在缔结时与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)抵触的情况。 |
| Under the 1969 Vienna Convention, in such cases, the treaty becomes void in whole. | 根据1969年《维也纳公约》，在这种情况下，条约整体无效。 |
| Article 53 of the Convention provides that the “treaty is void” and not that the relevant provision of the treaty concerned is void. | 《公约》第五十三条规定“条约无效”，而不是有关条约的相关规定无效。 |
| Moreover, article 44, paragraph 5, of the 1969 Vienna Convention makes it express that, in such cases, severance of the impugned provisions from the treaty is not permitted. | 此外，1969年《维也纳公约》第四十四条第五款明确规定，在这种情况下，受质疑的规定与条约不许分离。 |
| Draft conclusion 11 thus makes it clear that the whole treaty is void ab initio and that there is no possibility of separating those provisions that are in conflict with peremptory norms from other provisions of the treaty. | 因此，结论草案11明确指出，条约整体自始无效，不可能将那些与强制性规范相抵触的规定与条约的其他规定分离。 |
| First, the phrase “void in whole” in the draft conclusion is meant to clarify that the whole treaty and not only the offending provision is void. | 首先，结论草案中的“整体无效”一语意在澄清整个条约无效，而不仅仅是存在抵触的规定无效。 |
| Second, to emphasize this basic point, the second part of the sentence explicitly states that “no separation of the provisions of the treaty is permitted”. | 第二，为了强调这一基本点，这句话的第二部分明确声明，“条约任何规定均不可分离”。 |
| The first part of the sentence follows the text of article 53 of the 1969 Vienna Convention, while the second part of the sentence is based on paragraph 5 of article 44 of the Convention, which excludes cases of invalidity under article 53 from the rules on separability in article 44. | 该句第一部分沿用了1969年《维也纳公约》第五十三条的案文，第二部分以该公约第四十四条第五款为依据，该款将第五十三条规定的无效情况排除在第四十四条关于可否分离的规则之外。 |
| (3) | (3) |
| Paragraph 2 addresses circumstances where a treaty (or particular provisions of a treaty) conflict with a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) which emerges subsequent to the conclusion of the treaty. | 第2段涉及条约(或条约的特定规定)与在条约缔结后出现的一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)相抵触的情况。 |
| The formulation of paragraph 2 follows closely that of paragraph 3 of article 44 of the 1969 Vienna Convention. | 第2段的措辞非常贴近1969年《维也纳公约》第四十四条第三款的措辞。 |
| It recognizes the possibility of separation in cases where a treaty becomes invalid due to the emergence of a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) subsequent to the conclusion of the treaty. | 该款承认在条约缔结后因一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的出现而使条约无效的情况下分离的可能性。 |
| (4) | (4) |
| The chapeau of paragraph 2 makes plain that, as a general rule, a treaty becomes void as a whole if it conflicts with a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens), even in cases where the peremptory norm emerges subsequent to the conclusion of the treaty. | 第2段的起首语直白地表明，作为一般规则，如果一项条约与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)相抵触，即使强制性规范(强行法)是在条约缔结后出现的，条约也整体无效。 |
| For that reason, the first part of the chapeau of paragraph 2 of draft conclusion 11 provides that a treaty which becomes void because of the emergence of a new peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) terminates in whole. | 因此，结论草案11第2段起首语的第一部分规定，因出现新的一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)而无效的条约整体终止。 |
| The word “unless”, at the end of the chapeau, however, signifies that in limited instances, which are covered by subparagraphs (a) to (c), separation may take place. | 但起首语末尾处的“除非”一词表示，在(a)至(c)项所涵盖的有限情况下，可以进行分离。 |
| The elements listed in subparagraphs (a) to (c) are cumulative in nature. | (a)至(c)项所列要素为累加性质。 |
| In other words, all three elements must be present in order for provisions that conflict with a peremptory norm to be separated from the rest of the treaty. | 换言之，所有这三个要素都必须存在，才可以将与强制性规范相抵触的规定与条约的其他部分分离。 |
| (5) | (5) |
| The elements listed in paragraph 2 of draft conclusion 11 are taken from article 44, paragraph 3, of the 1969 Vienna Convention. | 结论草案11第2段列举的要素取自1969年《维也纳公约》第四十四条第三款。 |
| The first element, as stipulated in subparagraph (a), is that the provisions that are in conflict with a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) must be separable from the remainder of the treaty with regard to their application. | (a)项规定的第一项要素是，与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)抵触的规定就其适用而言，必须可与条约的其余部分分离； |
| This means that it must be possible to apply the rest of the treaty without the provisions which are in conflict with the peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens). | 这意味着，必须有可能排除与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)相抵触的规定而适用条约的其余部分。 |
| Where the other provisions serve the function of facilitating the implementation of the impugned provision, such a provision can obviously not be separated from the rest of the treaty with regard to its application. | 如果其他规定的作用是促进执行受质疑的规定，则该规定的适用显然不能与条约的其他规定分离。 |
| (6) | (6) |
| It is not enough that it is possible to apply the treaty without the impugned provision. | 有可能在排除受质疑的规定的情况下适用条约，这是不够的。 |
| Subparagraph (b) of paragraph 2 of draft conclusion 11 states that it must appear from the treaty or be otherwise established that the acceptance of the said provisions was not an essential basis of the consent of the parties to be bound by the treaty as a whole. | 结论草案11第2段(b)项声明，必须通过条约本身规定或通过其他方式确定，接受有关规定并非缔约方同意受整个条约约束之必要基础。 |
| Even if a treaty could be applied without the impugned provision, it would be contrary to the consensual nature of treaties for a treaty to be applied without a provision that was “an essential basis” for its conclusion, since without that provision there would have been no consent to the treaty. | 即使一项条约可以在排除受质疑的规定的情况下适用，将作为缔结条约之“必要基础”的规定排除在外而适用条约的情况也会违背条约的协商一致性质，因为如果没有这项规定，就不会有对条约的同意。 |
| (7) | (7) |
| Pursuant to subparagraph (c), the last condition that has to be met is that the continued performance under the treaty would not be unjust. | 根据(c)项，必须满足的最后一个条件是，条约继续实施不致有失公正。 |
| The word “unjust”, in this context, is meant to refer to the essential balance of rights and obligations created by the treaty, which could be disturbed if some provisions were separated while others were retained. | 在这里，“有失公正”一词指的是条约产生的权利和义务的基本平衡，在一些规定被分离而另一些规定被保留的情况下，会破坏这种平衡。 |
| Furthermore, to decide whether continued performance of the treaty would be “unjust”, consideration needs to be given not only to the impact on the parties to the treaty, but also impacts beyond the parties, if relevant and necessary. | 此外，确定继续实施条约是否“有失公正”，不仅需要考虑对条约缔约方的影响，如果相关且必要，还应考虑在缔约方以外产生的影响。 |
| (8) | (8) |
| Whether the three conditions set out in paragraph 2 are present is to be established by a consideration of all the relevant circumstances, including the subject of the provision, its relation to other clauses of the treaty and the travaux préparatoires, amongst other factors. | 第2段所列的三个条件是否存在，应通过考虑所有相关情况来确定，包括该规定的主题、它与条约其他条款的关系、准备工作文件以及其他因素。 |
| Conclusion 12 Consequences of the invalidity and termination of treaties conflicting with a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) | 结论12 与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)抵触的条约无效和终止的后果 |
| 1. | 1. |
| Parties to a treaty which is void 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: | 因在缔结时与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)抵触而无效的条约的缔约方有以下法律义务： |
| (a) | (a) |
| eliminate as far as possible the consequences of any act performed in reliance on any provision of the treaty which conflicts with a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens); | 尽量消除依据与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)抵触的条约之任何规定所实施的任何行为的后果； |
| and | 以及 |
| (b) | (b) |
| bring their mutual relations into conformity with the peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens). | 使彼此关系符合一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)。 |
| 2. | 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 of the parties created through the execution of the treaty prior to the termination of the treaty, provided that those rights, obligations or situations may thereafter be maintained only to the extent that their maintenance is not in itself in conflict with the new peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens). | 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，不影响缔约方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，条件是此后这些权利、义务或情势的保持仅以与新的一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)不相抵触为限。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) | (1) |
| One of the consequences of a conflict with a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) is that the treaty is void or, in the case of the emergence of the peremptory norm subsequent to the adoption of the treaty, the treaty becomes void. | 与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)相抵触的后果之一是条约无效，或在条约通过后出现强制性规范的情况下，条约成为无效。 |
| Yet a treaty, even a void one, may lead to consequences through, for example, parties acting pursuant to the treaty. | 然而，一项条约，即使是一项无效的条约，也可能产生后果，例如因为缔约方根据条约行事而产生后果。 |
| Those consequences may manifest themselves through the creation of rights and obligations or by the establishment of factual situations. | 这些后果可能通过产生权利和义务或通过确立事实情况而表现出来。 |
| Draft conclusion 12 addresses the consequences of the invalidation of treaties as a result of a conflict with a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens). | 结论草案12涉及条约因为与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)相抵触而无效的后果。 |
| There is therefore a close relationship between draft conclusion 10 and draft conclusion 12. | 因此，结论草案10和结论草案12之间存在密切关系。 |
| Draft conclusion 12 addresses the consequences of a treaty that has been rendered void. | 结论草案12涉及被宣布无效的条约的后果。 |
| (2) | (2) |
| As is the case for draft conclusions 10 and 11, draft conclusion 12 is structured on the basis of the distinction between articles 53 and 64 of the 1969 Vienna Convention: those cases of invalidity as a result of a conflict with an existing peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) and those cases of invalidity on account of conflict with a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) that emerges subsequent to the adoption of the treaty. | 与结论草案10和11一样，结论草案12的结构依据的是1969年《维也纳公约》第五十三条和第六十四条之间的区别：即因与现有的一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)相抵触而无效的情况，以及因与条约通过后出现的一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)相抵触而无效的情况。 |
| Furthermore, as with draft conclusions 10 and 11, draft conclusion 12 follows closely the text of the 1969 Vienna Convention. | 此外，与结论草案10和11一样，结论草案12也十分贴近1969年《维也纳公约》的案文。 |
| Finally, as is the case with draft conclusion 10, the consequences for the invalidity of a treaty are subject to the recommended procedure set out in draft conclusion 21. | 最后，与结论草案10一样，条约无效的后果也受结论草案21中所述建议的程序的影响。 |
| (3) | (3) |
| Paragraph 1 of draft conclusion 12 addresses cases where a treaty is void as a result of a conflict with a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) at the time of the treaty’s conclusion. | 结论草案12第1段涉及条约在缔结时与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)抵触而无效的情况。 |
| The formulation of the paragraph follows closely the formulation of article 71, paragraph 1, of the 1969 Vienna Convention concerning “a treaty which is void under article 53”. | 本段的措辞密切仿效了1969年《维也纳公约》第七十一条第一款关于“条约依第五十三条无效者”的措辞。 |
| Since in that case no treaty comes into being – which is the essence of void ab initio – no reliance can be placed on the provisions of the treaty. | 鉴于在这种情况下未缔结条约――这也是自始无效之实质――因此不得以条约规定为依据。 |
| However, acts may have been performed in good faith in reliance on the void treaty producing particular consequences. | 尽管如此，可能已秉着善意依据该无效条约采取了行动，并产生了特定后果。 |
| To address these consequences, paragraph 1 of draft conclusion 12 refers to two obligations. | 为了处理这些后果，结论草案12第1段提到两项义务。 |
| (4) | (4) |
| The first obligation of the parties to the void treaty, expressed in subparagraph (a), is to eliminate as far as possible the consequences of any act performed in reliance on any of its provisions in conflict with a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens). | (a)项述及的无效条约缔约方的第一项义务是尽量消除依据与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)抵触的条约之任何规定所实施的任何行为的后果。 |
| First, it will be noted that the obligation is to eliminate “as far as possible”. | 首先应当指出的是，这项义务是要“尽量”消除。 |
| The obligation is thus not one of result but one of conduct. | 因此，该义务不在于结果，而是在于行为。 |
| It recognizes that it may not be possible to eliminate the relevant consequences, but requires States to make best efforts to eliminate any such consequences. | 该段认识到也许不可能消除相关后果，但要求各国尽最大努力消除任何此类后果。 |
| Second, the duty is not to eliminate the consequences of any acts performed in reliance on any part of the treaty, but only the consequences of those acts performed in reliance on the impugned provisions of the treaty. | 第二，这里的义务不是消除因依据条约任何部分而实施的任何行为的后果，而只是消除依据条约受质疑的规定而实施的那些行为的后果。 |
| Thus, while the whole treaty is void, there is no obligation to eliminate consequences of acts performed in reliance on provisions of the treaty that are not in conflict with peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 因此，虽然条约整体无效，但并没有义务消除依据不与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)抵触的条约规定而实施的行为的后果。 |
| The second obligation, which flows from the first and is expressed in subparagraph (b), is that the parties are to bring their mutual relations into conformity with the peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens). | (b)项述及的第二项义务源自第一项义务，规定各方应使彼此关系符合一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)。 |
| This means that, moving forward, the parties to the treaty should ensure that their relations are consistent with the peremptory norm in question. | 这意味着，今后，条约缔约方应确保彼此关系符合所涉强制性规范。 |
| Thus, while the first obligation is concerned with past conduct, the second is concerned with future conduct. | 因此，第一项义务涉及过去的行为，而第二项义务则涉及未来的行为。 |
| (5) | (5) |
| Paragraph 2 concerns the situation addressed by article 64 of the 1969 Vienna Convention, namely those cases in which a treaty becomes void as a result of a peremptory norm that emerges subsequent to the adoption of the treaty. | 第2段涉及1969年《维也纳公约》第六十四条处理的情况，即条约因其通过后出现的强制性规范而失效的情况。 |
| The formulation in paragraph 2 of draft conclusion 12 follows closely the text of article 71, paragraph 2, of the 1969 Vienna Convention. | 结论草案12第2段的措辞非常贴近1969年《维也纳公约》第七十一条第二款的案文。 |
| It must be reiterated that, in such cases, the treaty only becomes invalid after the emergence of the peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens). | 必须重申，在这种情况下，条约只有在一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)出现之后才会无效。 |
| In other words, during the period between the adoption of the treaty and the emergence of the peremptory norm, the treaty remains valid and, consequently, acts performed and rights and obligations created pursuant to it remain valid. | 换言之，在条约通过至强制性规范出现的这段时间内，条约仍然有效，因此，根据条约实施的行为和产生的权利和义务仍然有效。 |
| There can therefore, in general, be no obligation to eliminate consequences of acts validly performed. | 故一般而言，不存在消除实施有效行为所产生的后果的义务。 |
| The draft conclusion states that the termination of a treaty due to conflict with a peremptory norm that emerges subsequent to the adoption of the treaty does not affect any right, obligation or legal situation created through the execution of the treaty prior to the termination of the treaty. | 结论草案指出，一项条约因与其通过后出现的强制性规范抵触而终止，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。 |
| Thus, while the treaty becomes void, rights, obligations or legal situations created through the lawful performance under the treaty will in principle not be affected. | 因此，虽然条约成为无效，但通过合法实施条约而产生的权利、义务或法律情势原则上不会受到影响。 |
| However, those rights, obligations or legal situations may be maintained or relied upon only to the extent that their continued existence is not itself a violation of a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens). | 然而，只有在这些权利、义务或法律情势的继续存在本身不违反一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的情况下，才可以对它们予以保持和以之作为依据。 |
| (6) | (6) |
| Paragraph 2 of draft conclusion 12 specifies, as does article 71 of the 1969 Vienna Convention, that it is the rights, obligations or legal situations “of the parties” that are unaffected. | 结论草案12第2段与1969年《维也纳公约》第七十一条一样，规定不受影响的是“缔约方”的权利、义务或法律情势。 |
| This does not mean, however, that rights, obligations or legal situations of third States created prior to the invalidation of the treaty will necessarily be affected. | 但这并不意味着在条约失效之前产生的第三国的权利、义务或法律情势必然会受到影响。 |
| The Commission decided to specify “of the parties” because draft conclusion 12 concerns treaty relations. | 委员会决定明确指出“缔约方”，是因为结论草案12涉及条约关系。 |
| Thus, any right, obligation or legal situation of a third State or person, created through the execution of the treaty prior to its invalidation, is not affected to the extent that its maintenance is not in itself in conflict with peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 因此，在条约失效之前通过实施条约而产生的第三国或第三人的任何权利、义务或法律情势，只要其保持本身不与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)相抵触，则不受影响。 |
| Conclusion 13 Absence of effect of reservations to treaties on peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) | 结论13 对条约的保留对一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)不具效果 |
| 1. | 1. |
| A reservation to a treaty provision that reflects a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) does not affect the binding nature of that norm, which shall continue to apply as such. | 对反映一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的条约规定的保留不影响该强制性规范的约束性，该规范应继续作为强制性规范适用。 |
| 2. | 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). | 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。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) | (1) |
| Draft conclusion 13 concerns the effects of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) on the rules of international law relating to reservations to treaties. | 结论草案13涉及一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)对关于条约保留的国际法规则的影响。 |
| The purpose of the draft conclusion is not to regulate reservations, which are dealt with in articles 19 to 23 of the 1969 Vienna Convention. | 其目的不是为了规范1969年《维也纳公约》第十九条至第二十三条处理的保留问题。 |
| (2) | (2) |
| Paragraph 1 addresses the case where a reservation is entered to a treaty provision that reflects a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens). | 第1段涉及对反映一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的条约规定提出保留的情况。 |
| The formulation of paragraph 1 of draft conclusion 13 is based on the Commission’s Guide to Practice on Reservations to Treaties. | 结论草案13第1段的措辞依据的是委员会《对条约的保留实践指南》。 |
| It states that a reservation to a provision in a treaty that reflects a peremptory norm does not affect the binding nature of that norm which shall continue to apply as such. | 该段指出，对反映强制性规范的条约规定的保留不影响该规范的约束性，该规范应继续作为强制性规范适用。 |
| The phrase “as such” is intended to indicate that even when reflected in a treaty provision, a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) continues to exist independently of the treaty provision. | “作为强制性规范”一语意在表明，一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)即使反映在条约规定中，仍独立于条约规定而存在。 |
| This means that, while the reservation may well affect the legal effect of the treaty provision in respect of the reserving State, the norm, as a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens), will not be affected and will continue to apply. | 这意味着，虽然保留很可能影响条约规定对保留国的法律效果，但该规范作为一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)，将不受影响，并将继续适用。 |
| The rule reflected in this paragraph of draft conclusion 13 flows from the normal operation of international law. | 结论草案13的该段所反映的规则源于国际法的正常施行。 |
| It derives, in particular, from the fact that the treaty provision reflecting a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) has, in accordance with the jurisprudence of the International Court of Justice, an existence separate from the underlying peremptory norm. | 它尤其源于一个事实，即根据国际法院的判例，反映一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的条约规定独立于该强制性规范而存在。 |
| (3) | (3) |
| The rule in paragraph 1 of draft conclusion 13 does not relate to the validity of the reservation. | 结论草案13第1段中的规则与保留的有效性无关。 |
| In many cases, it would be expected that a reservation to a treaty provision reflecting a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) would be contrary to the object and purpose of the treaty and thus invalid. | 在许多情况下，对反映一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的条约规定的保留预计会违背条约的目的和宗旨，因此无效。 |
| However, whether the reservation is valid or not, and the consequences of any invalidity, are matters that are governed by the rules contained in the 1969 Vienna Convention and not the rules on peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 但保留是否有效，以及任何无效的后果，都属于1969年《维也纳公约》所载规则而不是关于一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的规则所管辖的事项。 |
| It would, thus, be going too far to prohibit a reservation to a provision in a treaty which reflects a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) outright since such a determination should always be dependent upon ascertaining the object and purpose of the treaty in question – an exercise that can only be done through the interpretation of each particular treaty. | 因此，直接禁止对条约中反映一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的规定提出保留有些太过，因为这种决定应始终取决于对有关条约的目的和宗旨的确定――这项工作只能通过对每项具体条约的解释来进行。 |
| It is nonetheless important to emphasize that, whatever the validity of the reservation in question, a State cannot escape the binding nature of a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) by formulating a reservation to a treaty provision reflecting that norm. | 然而，必须强调的是，无论有关保留的有效性如何，一国不能通过对反映一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的条约规定提具保留的办法，逃避该规范的约束性。 |
| (4) | (4) |
| Paragraph 2 of draft conclusion 13 concerns reservations which, on their face, are neutral and do not relate to peremptory norms, but whose application would be contrary to a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens). | 结论草案13第2段涉及表面上为中性、与强制性规范无关，但其适用会违反一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的保留。 |
| Such reservations are invalid. | 这类保留无效。 |
| Drawing on paragraph 2 of guideline 4.4.3 of the Guide to Practice on Reservations to Treaties, draft conclusion 13 states that 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). | 根据《对条约的保留实践指南》所载准则4.4.3第2段，结论草案13指出，保留不能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。 |
| The typical example identified in the commentary to guideline 4.4.3 is a reservation “intended to exclude a category of persons from benefitting from certain rights granted under a treaty”. | 准则4.4.3的评注中指出的典型例子是“意图将某一类人排除在外，使其不能受益于条约所赋予的某些权利”的保留。 |
| The right to education, though very important, is not at this time a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens). | 受教育权虽然非常重要，但目前并不是一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)。 |
| Thus, the formulation of a reservation to a treaty provision proclaiming a right to education would not, as such, be contrary to a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens), nor would it constitute a reservation to a treaty provision reflecting a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens). | 因此，对宣称受教育权的条约规定提出保留本身并不违反一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)，也不构成对反映一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的条约规定的保留。 |
| However, a reservation that limits the implementation of such right to a particular racial group or excludes a particular racial group from the enjoyment of the treaty right may well be found to violate the peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) prohibiting racial discrimination. | 但是，如果一项保留限定对某一特定种族群体落实这一权利，或不让某一特定种族群体享有这一条约权利，则可认定该保留违反了禁止种族歧视的一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)。 |
| Conclusion 14 Rules of customary international law conflicting with a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) | 结论14 与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)抵触的习惯国际法规则 |
| 1. | 1. |
| A rule of customary international law does not come into existence if it would conflict with an existing peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens). | 习惯国际法规则如与现有的一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)抵触，则不会形成。 |
| This is without prejudice to the possible modification of a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) by a subsequent norm of general international law having the same character. | 这不妨碍一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)由嗣后具有相同性质的一般国际法规范加以变更的可能性。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| A rule of customary international law not of a peremptory character ceases to exist if and to the extent that it conflicts with a new peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens). | 不具有强制性的习惯国际法规则如与新的一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)抵触，则在抵触范围内停止存在。 |
| 3. | 3. |
| The persistent objector rule does not apply to peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 一贯反对者规则不适用于一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) | (1) |
| Draft conclusion 14 addresses the consequences of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) for customary international law. | 结论草案14涉及一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)对习惯国际法的影响。 |
| Draft conclusion 14 is divided into three paragraphs. | 结论草案14分为3段。 |
| Paragraph 1 concerns the consequences that an existing peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) has on the formation of a new rule of customary international law. | 第1段涉及现有一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)对形成新的习惯国际法规则的影响。 |
| Paragraph 2 concerns the consequences that a new peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) has on existing rules of customary international law. | 第2段涉及新的一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)对现有习惯国际法规则的影响。 |
| Paragraph 3 addresses the non-applicability of the persistent objector rule to peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 第3段论述一贯反对者规则不适用于一般国际法强制性规则(强行法)的问题。 |
| Paragraphs 1 and 2 mirror draft conclusion 10, which distinguishes between the situation of a treaty at the time of its conclusion conflicting with an existing peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens), on the one hand, and that of a treaty conflicting with a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) that emerges subsequent to the conclusion of a treaty. | 第1和第2段反映了结论草案10，该草案区分了与条约缔结时已存在的一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)相抵触的情况和与条约缔结后才出现的一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)相抵触的情况。 |
| (2) | (2) |
| The first sentence of paragraph 1 of draft conclusion 14 provides that a rule of customary international law does not come into existence if it would conflict with a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens). | 结论草案14第1段第一句规定，如果习惯国际法规则与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)相抵触，则该规则不会形成。 |
| The words “does not come into existence” are meant to indicate that, even if the constituent elements of customary international law were to be present (practice and opinio juris), a rule of customary international law would not come into existence if the putative rule conflicted with a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens). | “不会形成”一词意在表明，即使习惯国际法的组成要素存在(实践和法律确信)，在假定规则与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)相抵触的情况下，该习惯国际法规则也不会形成。 |
| Unlike in the case of treaties, the terms “invalid” or “void” are not appropriate since the putative rule of customary international law does not come into existence in the first place. | 与条约不同的是，“无效”或“失效”这两个术语不合适，因为习惯国际法的假定规则本来就不存在。 |
| (3) | (3) |
| Peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) are hierarchically superior to other norms of international law and therefore override such norms in the case of conflict. | 一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)在位阶上高于其他国际法规范，因此在相互抵触情况下可以否定后一类规范。 |
| Decisions of national courts have recognized that peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) prevail over conflicting rules of customary international law. | 各国法院的判决承认，一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)优先于与之相抵触的习惯国际法规则。 |
| In Siderman de Blake v. Argentina, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit considered that “[i]indeed … the supremacy of jus cogens extends over all rules of international law” and noted that “norms that have attained the status of jus cogens ‘prevail over and invalidate international agreements and other rules of international law in conflict with them’”. | 在Siderman de Blake诉阿根廷一案中，美国第九巡回上诉法院认为“[i]事实上…强行法的至高无上超越了国际法的所有规则”，并指出“已达到强行法地位的规范‘优先于与之相抵触的国际协定和其他国际法规则并使这些协定和规则无效’”。 |
| The Supreme Court of Argentina has similarly stated that crimes against humanity had the “character of jus cogens, meaning that [the prohibition is] above both treaty law, and all other sources of international law”. | 阿根廷最高法院同样指出，危害人类罪具有“强行法的性质，这意味着[该禁令]高于条约法和所有其他国际法渊源”。 |
| (4) | (4) |
| The position that peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) prevail over conflicting rules of customary international law has also been recognized in decisions of international courts and tribunals. | 国际性法院和法庭的判决也承认一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)优先于相抵触的习惯国际法规则的立场。 |
| In the Jurisdictional Immunities of the State case, the International Court of Justice noted the proposition of Italy that “jus cogens rules always prevail over any inconsistent rule of international law, whether contained in a treaty or in customary international law”. | 在国家管辖豁免一案中，国际法院注意到意大利的主张，即“强行法规则总是优先于任何不一致的国际法规则，无论是条约还是习惯国际法所载国际法规则”。 |
| The Court did not reject that proposition, but declined to find that there was a conflict between the rule on State immunities in civil proceedings and peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 法院未驳回这一立场，但拒绝认定民事诉讼中的国家豁免规则与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)之间存在冲突。 |
| The hierarchical superiority of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) over customary international law was also recognized in Al-Adsani v. the United Kingdom, in which the European Court of Human Rights determined, having considered Prosecutor v. Anto Furundžija, that peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) are those norms that enjoy “a higher rank in the international hierarchy than treaty law and even ‘ordinary’ customary rules”. | 一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)相对于习惯国际法的位阶优先也在Al-Adsani诉联合王国一案中得到承认，欧洲人权法院在该案中参照检察官诉Anto Furundžija案的结论认定，一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)是那些“在国际位阶体系中享有比条约法甚至是‘普通’习惯规则更高地位”的规范。 |
| The consequences of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) on the existence of a conflicting rule of customary international law is aptly captured in the joint dissenting opinion of Judges Rozakis and Caflisch in the Al-Adsani v. the United Kingdom case: | 一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)对与之相抵触的习惯国际法规则的存在产生的后果，在罗萨基斯(Rozakis)法官和卡弗利施(Caflisch)法官在Al-Adsani诉联合王国案中的联合反对意见中体现得恰如其分： |
| By accepting that the rule on prohibition of torture is a rule of jus cogens, the majority recognise that it is hierarchically higher than any other rule of international law … | 大多数人接受禁止酷刑规则是一项强行法规则，因此承认它在位阶上高于国际法的任何其他规则…。 |
| . For the basic characteristic of a jus cogens rule is that … it overrides any other rule which does not have the same status. | 因为强行法规则的基本特征是…它优先于不具有同样地位的任何其他规则。 |
| In the event of a conflict between a jus cogens rule and any other rule of international law, the former prevails. | 如果强行法规则与任何其他国际法规则发生冲突，前者优先。 |
| (5) | (5) |
| The rule in the first sentence of paragraph 1 of draft conclusion 14, which states that a rule of customary international law does not come into existence if it conflicts with a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens), follows from the fact that peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) prevail over conflicting rules of customary international law. | 结论草案14第1段第一句中的规则指出，如果习惯国际法规则与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)相抵触，则该规则不会形成，这源于一个事实，即一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)优先于与之相抵触的习惯国际法规则。 |
| Thus, the High Court of Kenya, in The Kenya Section of the International Commission of Jurists v. the Attorney-General and Others, stated that peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) “rendered void” any other rules of international law “which come into conflict with them”. | 因此，肯尼亚高等法院在国际法学家委员会肯尼亚分会诉总检察长等人一案中指出，一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)“使”任何其他“与之抵触”的国际法规则“无效”。 |
| (6) | (6) |
| The second sentence of paragraph 1 of draft conclusion 14 provides that the general principle captured in the first sentence is without prejudice to the possible modification of a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) by a subsequent norm of general international law having the same character. | 结论草案14第1段第二句规定，第一句中的一般原则不妨碍一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)由嗣后具有相同性质的一般国际法规范加以变更的可能性。 |
| This is based on the recognition that, as provided for in draft conclusion 5, customary international law is the most common basis for peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) and that, therefore, modification of a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) is most likely to occur through the subsequent acceptance and recognition of an existing rule of customary international law as a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) or the emergence of a new rule of customary international law so accepted and recognized. | 这是基于这样一种认识，即如结论草案5所述，习惯国际法是一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)最常见的基础。 因此，很可能发生的情况是，通过嗣后接受和承认一项现有的习惯国际法规则为一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)，或通过被接受和承认为这种规范的习惯国际法新规则的出现，对一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)加以变更。 |
| (7) | (7) |
| While the current draft conclusions do not address the modification of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens), the second sentence of paragraph 1 serves to emphasize that, in principle, modification of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) is possible. | 虽然本结论草案不涉及对一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)加以变更的问题，但第1段第二句强调，原则上，存在对一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)加以变更的可能性。 |
| The threshold for modification of a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) is, however, very high. | 但是，对一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)加以变更的门槛很高。 |
| To be able to modify a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens), the rule of customary international law in question must have the same character as the peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) being modified. | 为了能够变更一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)，有关习惯国际法规则必须与需要变更的一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)具有相同的性质。 |
| The phrase “having the same character”, which is taken from article 53 of the 1969 Vienna Convention, indicates that such a rule of customary international law must itself be recognized and accepted as one from which no derogation is permitted and which can only be modified by a subsequent peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens). | 取自1969年《维也纳公约》第五十三条的“具有相同性质”一语表明，必须承认和接受这种习惯国际法规则本身为不允许克减的规则，并且只能由嗣后的一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)加以变更。 |
| In practice, this means that there must be, at the point of the emergence of a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens), a practice accepted as law (opinio juris) and which the international community of States as a whole, at the same time, accept and recognize as having peremptory character. | 在实践中，这意味着，在一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)出现之时，必须有被接受为法律(法律确信)的一般惯例，同时，国际社会整体必须接受并承认这种惯例具有强制性。 |
| That a rule of customary international law could only derogate from, and thus modify, a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) if such a rule of customary international law also had a peremptory character is supported by a judgment of the Queen’s Bench Division of the England and Wales High Court of Justice in R (Mohamed) v. Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, which, having referred to the hierarchical superiority of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens), stated that their “derogation by States through treaties or rules of customary law not possessing the same status [was] not permitted”. | 一项习惯国际法规则只有在其本身也具有强制性的情况下，才能对一项一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)予以克减和变更。 英格兰和威尔士高等法院女王王座法庭在R (Mohamed)诉外交和联邦事务大臣一案的判决中支持这一观点。 判决提到一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的优先位阶后，指出“不允许国家通过不具有同等地位的条约或习惯法规则克减这些规范”。 |
| (8) | (8) |
| Paragraph 2 of draft conclusion 14 concerns situations where a rule of customary international law, which at the time of its formation did not conflict with an existing peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens), conflicts with such a norm that emerges subsequent to the formation of the rule of customary international law. | 结论草案14第2段涉及习惯国际法规则形成时与现有的一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)不相抵触，但在习惯国际法规则形成后与新出现的这种规范相抵触的情况。 |
| It provides that such a rule of customary international law “ceases to exist if and to the extent that it conflicts with a new peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens)”. | 该段规定，这种习惯国际法规则“如与新的一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)抵触，则在抵触范围内停止存在”。 |
| The phrase “ceases to exist” indicates that, prior to the emergence of the new peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens), the rule of customary international law was in force, but that it ceases to exist upon the emergence of the peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens). | “停止存在”一词表明，在新的一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)出现之前，习惯国际法规则已经生效，但在一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)出现时，则停止存在。 |
| The phrase “if and to the extent” is meant to indicate that only those parts of the rule of customary international law in question that conflict with the peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) will cease to exist. | “如…则在抵触范围内”一语意在表明，习惯国际法规则只有与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)相抵触的部分将停止存在。 |
| This phrase operates like a separability provision, in order to maintain those parts of the rule of customary international law that are consistent with the peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens). | 这一短语的作用就像一个分离条款，目的是保留习惯国际法规则中与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)相一致的部分。 |
| The qualifier “if and to the extent” does not apply to paragraph 1 of draft conclusion 14 since, in the case of a pre-existing peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens), the rule of customary international law in question does not come into existence at all. | 限定词“如…则在抵触范围内”不适用于结论草案14的第1段，因为就先前存在的一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)而言，所涉习惯国际法规则根本不存在。 |
| (9) | (9) |
| Paragraph 3 of draft conclusion 14 deals with the persistent objector rule. | 结论草案14第3段涉及一贯反对者规则。 |
| It provides that the persistent objector rule does not apply to peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 该段规定，一贯反对者规则不适用于一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)。 |
| Conclusion 15 of the Commission’s conclusions on identification of customary international law states that a rule of customary international law is not opposable to a State that has persistently objected to that rule of customary international law while it was in the process of formation for as long as that State maintains its objection. | 委员会关于习惯国际法的识别的结论之结论15指出，在习惯国际法规则形成过程中，只要一个国家坚持反对，该习惯国际法规则就不对一贯反对该规则的国家适用。 |
| Conclusion 15 of the conclusions on identification of customary international law also states, however, that this rule is without prejudice to any question concerning peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 然而，关于习惯国际法的识别的结论之结论15也指出，这一规则不妨碍一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)所涉任何问题。 |
| (10) | (10) |
| That the persistent objector rule does not apply to peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) flows from both the universal application and hierarchical superiority of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) as reflected in draft conclusion 2. | 一贯反对者规则不适用于一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)这一点源于结论草案2所反映的一般国际法强制性规范的普遍适用和位阶优先。 |
| This means that peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) apply to all States. | 这意味着一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)适用于所有国家。 |
| In this respect, the Federal Supreme Court of Switzerland, in Youssef Nada v. State Secretariat for Economic Affairs and Federal Department of Economic Affairs, stated that jus cogens norms “were binding on all subjects of international law”. | 在这方面，瑞士联邦最高法院在Youssef Nada诉国家经济事务秘书处和联邦经济事务部案中指出，强行法规范“对国际法的所有主体都具有约束力”。 |
| The Inter-American Court of Human Rights has concluded that peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) “bind all States”. | 美洲人权法院的结论认为，一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)“约束所有国家”。 |
| The rule that, by virtue of their universal application and hierarchical superiority, peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) cannot be subject to the persistent objector rule has been reflected in statements by States. | 由于普遍适用和位阶优先，一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)不受制于一贯反对者规则的规定也反映在各国的论述中。 |
| Specifically in response to an argument about the persistent objector rule, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, in Michael Domingues v. United States, determined that peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) “bind the international community as a whole, irrespective of protest, recognition or acquiescence”. | 具体针对一贯反对者规则的一个论点，美洲人权委员会在Michael Dominques诉美国案中裁定，一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)“对整个国际社会具有约束力，无论抗议、承认或默许与否”。 |
| (11) | (11) |
| A question that arises in scholarly writings is whether a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) can ever emerge in the face of persistent objection of one or a few States. | 学术著作中产生的一个问题是，一项一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)面对一个或几个国家的一贯反对，是否还会出现？ |
| It can because persistent objection to a rule of customary international law by a few States does not prevent the rule’s emergence; | 答案是还会出现，因为少数国家对习惯国际法规则的一贯反对并不妨碍该规则的出现； |
| rather, such objection merely renders that rule not opposable to the State or States concerned for so long as the objection is maintained. | 相反，这种反对只是使该规则不对坚持反对意见的一个或多个有关国家适用。 |
| For that reason, the persistent objector rule does not prevent the emergence of a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) based on a rule of customary international law to which one or more States have persistently objected. | 因此，一贯反对者规则不妨碍基于一个或更多国家一贯反对的习惯国际法规则的一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的出现。 |
| At the same time, if a rule of customary international law, to which a State has persistently objected, becomes accepted and recognized by the international community of States as a whole as one from which no derogation is permitted and which can only be modified by a subsequent norm of general international law having the same character, the effect of the persistent objection falls away. | 与此同时，如果一国一贯反对的习惯国际法规则被国际社会整体接受和承认为不容克减的规则，并且只能由嗣后具有同样性质的一般国际法规范加以变更，则一贯反对的效果就会消失。 |
| (12) | (12) |
| Whether there is such acceptance and recognition of a rule of general international law (jus cogens), however, may be affected by persistent objections to the establishment of the rule. | 然而，一项一般国际法规则(强行法)是否得到这种接受和承认，可能受到对确立该规则的一贯反对的影响。 |
| According to paragraph 2 of draft conclusion 7, the phrase “international community of States as a whole” does not require the acceptance and recognition of all States, but does require the acceptance and recognition of a very large and representative majority. | 根据结论草案7第2段，“国家组成之国际社会整体”一词不要求所有国家接受和承认，但要求具有代表性的绝大多数国家接受和承认。 |
| Thus, if a rule of customary international law was the object of persistent objections from several States, such objections might not be sufficient to preclude the emergence of a rule of customary international law, but might be sufficient to preclude the norm from being recognized as a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens). | 因此，如果一项习惯国际法规则遭到若干国家的一贯反对，这种反对可能不足以妨碍习惯国际法规则的出现，但可能足以妨碍该规范被承认为一项一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)。 |
| In other words, to the extent that such persistent objection implies that the norm in question is not accepted and recognized by the international community of States as a whole as one from which no derogation is permitted, then a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) might not arise. | 换句话说，如果这种一贯反对意味着有关规范不被国家组成之国际社会整体接受和承认为不容克减的规范，那么一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)可能不会出现。 |
| (13) | (13) |
| Paragraph 3 of draft conclusion 14 refers to the persistent objector “rule”. | 结论草案14第3段提及一贯反对者“规则”。 |
| The Commission settled on the “persistent objector rule” since this concept is often referred to as a “rule” and since the Commission has already referred to it as either a “rule” or a “doctrine” in its prior work. | 委员会决定使用“一贯反对者规则”一词，因为这一概念经常被称为“规则”，而且委员会在以前的工作中已经将其称为“规则”或“理论”。 |
| (14) | (14) |
| The application of draft conclusion 14 is to be read together with the interpretative rule set out in draft conclusion 20 and the recommended procedure set forth in draft conclusion 21. | 结论草案14的适用应与结论草案20中提出的解释性规则和结论草案21中提出的建议的程序一并解读。 |
| Conclusion 15 Obligations created by unilateral acts of States conflicting with a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) | 结论15 与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)抵触的国家单方面行为所创设的义务 |
| 1. | 1. |
| A unilateral act of a State manifesting the intention to be bound by an obligation under international law that would be in conflict with a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) does not create such an obligation. | 表明有意接受与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)抵触的国际法义务约束的国家单方面行为，不创设此种义务。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| An obligation under international law created by a unilateral act of a State ceases to exist if and to the extent that it conflicts with a new peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens). | 国家单方面行为所创设的国际法义务如与新的一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)抵触，则在抵触范围内停止存在。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) | (1) |
| Draft conclusion 15 addresses the legal consequences of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) for unilateral acts of States manifesting the intention to be bound by an obligation under international law. | 结论草案15涉及一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)对表明有意接受国际法义务约束的国家单方面行为的法律后果。 |
| Draft conclusion 15 is based on the understanding that unilateral acts may, under certain conditions described below, establish obligations for the State performing the unilateral act. | 结论草案15基于这样一项理解，即单方面行为在下述某些条件下，可以对实施此种单方面行为的国家产生义务。 |
| Paragraph 1 of draft conclusion 15 addresses those cases in which the unilateral act, at the time of its performance, is in conflict with a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens). | 结论草案15第1段涉及单方面行为在实施时与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)相抵触的情况。 |
| It provides that, in such cases, the unilateral act does not create any such obligation. | 该段规定，在这种情况下，单方面行为不产生任何此种义务。 |
| This consequence of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) mirrors those in the first sentence of paragraph 1 of conclusions 10 and 14 of the present draft conclusions, namely that no obligations come into existence at all. | 一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的这一后果与本结论草案结论10和14第1段第一句所述的后果是一致的，即根本不会产生任何义务。 |
| (2) | (2) |
| Paragraph 1 of draft conclusion 15 is inspired by article 53 of the 1969 Vienna Convention. | 结论草案15第1段受到1969年《维也纳公约》第五十三条的启发。 |
| The Commission, in its guiding principles applicable to unilateral declarations of States capable of creating legal obligations, formulated the rule in the following terms: “A unilateral declaration which is in conflict with a peremptory norm of general international law is void. | 委员会在其《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，对这一规则使用了以下措辞：“与一般国际法强制性规范冲突的单方面声明无效”。 |
| ” Although the guiding principles use the phrase “is void” in the context of a unilateral declaration, the present draft conclusion uses broader phrases, “does not create such an obligation” and “ceases to exist”, so as to capture more fully the broader context of the draft conclusion, which is addressing unilateral acts in a broader sense. | 虽然《指导原则》使用了单方面声明“无效”一词，但本结论草案使用了更宽泛的术语，即“不创设此种义务”和“停止存在”，以便更充分地反映结论草案的更宽泛背景，即从更广泛意义上处理单方面行为。 |
| The focus is therefore on the legal obligations intended to be created by the unilateral act in question. | 因此，重点是有关单方面行为打算产生的法律义务。 |
| As indicated in paragraph 1, such obligations are not created if they conflict with a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens). | 如第1段所述，这种义务如果与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)相抵触，则不会产生。 |
| (3) | (3) |
| Paragraph 2 concerns those cases in which a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) emerges subsequent to the creation of an obligation under international law resulting from a unilateral act. | 第2段涉及一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)在单方面行为产生国际法义务以后才出现的情况。 |
| The scope of this paragraph is different from that of paragraph 1 because paragraph 2 refers to obligations that have already been created by a unilateral act. | 该段的范围不同于第1段，第2段涉及单方面行为业已产生的义务。 |
| Paragraph 2 provides that such an obligation would cease to exist if, subsequent to its creation, it comes into conflict with a new peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens). | 第2段规定，如果这种义务在产生以后与新的一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)相抵触，则将停止存在。 |
| Paragraph 2 of draft conclusion 15 mirrors paragraph 2 of draft conclusions 10 and 14. | 结论草案15第2段反映了结论草案10和14第2段的表述。 |
| It recognizes that, in these circumstances, an obligation does come into existence and only ceases to exist at the time of the emergence of a new peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens). | 该段承认，在这些情况下，义务已经确实形成，只有在新的一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)出现后停止存在。 |
| The rule in paragraph 2 of draft conclusion 15 is inspired by article 64 of the 1969 Vienna Convention. | 结论草案15第2段的规则受到1969年《维也纳公约》第六十四条的启发。 |
| (4) | (4) |
| The obligations arising from a unilateral act that conflict with a new peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) emerging subsequent to the performance of the unilateral act cease to exist only to the extent that such obligations are inconsistent with the new peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens). | 单方面行为所产生的义务与单方面行为实施后出现的新的一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)相抵触，这种义务只在与新的一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)不一致的范围内停止存在。 |
| As in paragraph 2 of draft conclusion 14, the phrase “if and to the extent” is meant to indicate that only those aspects of the obligation in question that conflict with the peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) will cease to exist. | 同结论草案14第2段一样，“如…则在抵触范围内”一语意在表明，有关义务只与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)相抵触的那些方面将停止存在。 |
| Other aspects of the obligation would continue to exist and apply, but only if it is possible to maintain them in the absence of the aspects of the obligations that cease to exist. | 义务的其他方面将继续存在和适用，但前提是在相抵触的方面停止存在的情况下其他方面仍有可能维持。 |
| (5) | (5) |
| Draft conclusion 15 does not concern all unilateral acts, nor does it concern all acts creating obligations. | 结论草案15不涉及所有单方面行为，也不涉及创设义务的所有行为。 |
| It is concerned with unilateral acts by a State undertaken with the intention to create obligations only for the State itself. | 它关注的是一国仅打算对该国本身创设义务的单方面行为。 |
| This draft conclusion does not concern sources of obligations, such as treaties and customary international law, which are addressed in previous draft conclusions. | 本结论草案不涉及义务的来源，如条约和习惯国际法，这些在以前的结论草案中都有涉及。 |
| Similarly, it does not address reservations, which are dealt with in draft conclusion 13. | 同样，本条结论草案也不涉及结论草案13中论述的保留。 |
| Moreover, draft conclusion 15 does not cover other acts in conflict with peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens), which are addressed by other draft conclusions concerning responsibility for wrongful acts under international law. | 此外，结论草案15不涵盖与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)相抵触的其他行为，那些行为由关于国际法之下不法行为的责任的其他结论草案处理。 |
| For example, a unilateral act that is not intended to create obligations on the State but that, nonetheless, constitutes a breach of a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens), is subject to conclusions 17, 18, 19 and 22 of the present draft conclusions. | 例如，不打算对国家创设义务但却构成违反一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的单方面行为见本结论草案的结论17、18、19和22。 |
| Draft conclusion 15 concerns only those unilateral acts by which a State manifests the intention to unilaterally assume obligations, and not other acts. | 结论草案15只涉及一国表示有意单方面承担义务的单方面行为，而不涉及其他行为。 |
| (6) | (6) |
| Paragraph 1 of draft conclusion 15 describes the unilateral act under consideration as one “manifesting the intention to be bound by an obligation under international law”. | 结论草案15第1段将有关的单方面行为描述为“表明有意接受国际法义务约束的单方面行为”。 |
| The State performing the unilateral act must thus intend to establish obligations under international law. | 因此，实施单方面行为的国家必须有意确立国际法下的义务。 |
| This requires an ascertainment of the intention of the State performing a unilateral act. | 这需要确定实施单方面行为国家的意图。 |
| In Frontier Dispute (Burkina Faso/Republic of Mali), the International Court of Justice determined that whether a unilateral act could create obligations “all depends on the intention of the State in question”. | 在边界争端案(布基纳法索/马里共和国)中，国际法院裁定，单方面行为是否能够产生义务“完全取决于有关国家的意图”。 |
| The words “manifesting the intention” intend to convey that, although it is the subjective intention of the State that is sought, this intention has to be determined from the overall facts and circumstances of each particular case. | “表明有意”一词旨在表明，尽管寻求的是国家的主观意图，但这一意图必须根据每个具体案件的总体事实和情况来确定。 |
| The subjective intention is therefore to be sought by relying on objective facts. | 因此，主观意图要依靠客观事实来寻求。 |
| In the words of the International Court of Justice, whether a unilateral act was intended to create a legal obligation is to be “ascertained by interpretation of the act”. | 用国际法院的话说，单方面行为是否有意创设法律义务，将“通过对该行为的解释来确定”。 |
| Likewise, paragraph 2 of draft conclusion 15 only applies to unilateral acts as described in paragraph (5) of this commentary. | 同样，结论草案15第2段仅适用于本评注第(5)段所述的单方面行为。 |
| (7) | (7) |
| Draft conclusion 15 applies to unilateral acts of States. | 结论草案15适用于国家的单方面行为。 |
| Unilateral acts of international organizations that create or are intended to create obligations for that international organization are addressed in draft conclusion 16. | 结论草案16论述国际组织为其自身创设或打算创设义务的单方面行为。 |
| The fact that draft conclusion 15 applies to unilateral acts of States is without prejudice to the possible legal consequences of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) for unilateral acts of non-State actors. | 结论草案15涉及国家的单方面行为，这一事实不影响一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)可能对非国家行为体单方面行为产生的法律后果。 |
| (8) | (8) |
| The application of draft conclusion 15 is to be read together with the interpretative rule set out in draft conclusion 20 and the recommended procedure set forth in draft conclusion 21. | 结论草案15的适用问题应与结论草案20中提出的解释性规则和结论草案21中提出的建议的程序一并解读。 |
| Conclusion 16 Obligations created by resolutions, decisions or other acts of international organizations conflicting with a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) | 结论16 与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)抵触的国际组织决议、决定或其他行为所创设的义务 |
| A resolution, decision or other act of an international organization that would otherwise have binding effect does not create obligations under international law if and to the extent that they conflict with a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens). | 国际组织本应具有约束力的决议、决定或其他行为如与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)抵触，则在抵触范围内不创设国际法义务。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) | (1) |
| Draft conclusion 16 concerns the legal consequences of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) for resolutions, decisions and other acts of international organizations. | 结论草案16涉及一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)对国际组织的决议、决定和其他行为的法律后果。 |
| (2) | (2) |
| Draft conclusion 16 applies to resolutions, decisions or other acts of international organizations whatever their designation. | 结论草案16适用于国际组织的决议、决定或其他行为，无论其名称如何。 |
| The phrase “resolution, decision or other act” of an international organization is intended to convey the same meaning as the description of “resolution” in paragraph (2) of the commentary to conclusion 12 of the conclusions on identification of customary international law. | 国际组织的“决议、决定或其他行为”一语意在表达关于习惯国际法的识别的结论之结论12评注第(2)段中对“决议”的称谓。 |
| It also covers unilateral acts of international organizations manifesting an intention to be bound. | 它还涵盖国际组织表明有意接受约束的单方面行为。 |
| The words “that would otherwise have binding effect” serve to limit the scope of the draft conclusion to resolutions, decisions and acts of international organizations that would ordinarily have binding effect, but for the conflict with the peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens). | “本应具有约束力”一语希望将结论草案的范围限制在通常具有约束力的国际组织的决议、决定和行为，除非与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)相抵触。 |
| Examples of a resolution, decision or act of an international organization that would otherwise have binding effect include a decision in a resolution of the Security Council, taken under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations, or a decision of the General Assembly admitting a State to membership in the Organization. | 国际组织本应具有约束力的决议、决定或行为的实例包括安全理事会根据《联合国宪章》第七章 通过的一项决议中的决定，或联大准许一国为联合国会员国的决定。 |
| The question of whether such a decision has binding effect (or is one that would otherwise have binding effect) is to be determined by an interpretation of the relevant decision. | 这种决定是否具有约束力(或者本应具有约束力)的问题将通过对相关决定的解释来确定。 |
| The European Union also produces acts in the form of directives, regulations and decisions, which are binding on member States. | 欧洲联盟还以指令、条例和决定的形式产生对成员国具有约束力的法规。 |
| Other international organizations, such as the International Civil Aviation Organization, the African Union and the World Trade Organization may also produce resolutions, decisions or other acts that, but for the rule set forth in this draft conclusion, would have binding effect. | 其他国际组织，如国际民用航空组织、非洲联盟和世界贸易组织也可能产生具有约束力的决议、决定或其他行为，但本条结论草案中规定的情况除外。 |
| Draft conclusion 16 is thus meant to be broad, covering all resolutions, decisions and acts that would otherwise establish obligations under international law. | 因此，结论草案16意在宽泛，涵盖本应产生国际法义务的所有决议、决定和行为。 |
| (3) | (3) |
| Following the language of draft conclusions 14 and 15, draft conclusion 16 states that resolutions, decisions and other acts, as described in paragraph (2) of this commentary, do not create obligations under international law if and to the extent that such obligations conflict with peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 遵循结论草案14和15的措辞，结论草案16指出，本评注第(2)段所述决议、决定和其他行为如与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)抵触，则在抵触范围内不创设国际法义务。 |
| As in paragraph 2 of draft conclusion 14 and paragraph 2 of draft conclusion 15, the words “if and to the extent” are meant to indicate that only those obligations that conflict with a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) will be affected by the operation of the draft conclusion. | 与结论草案14第2段和结论草案15第2段一样，“如…则在抵触范围内”一语的意思是，只有那些与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)相抵触的义务才会受到结论草案实施的影响。 |
| Other obligations not in conflict with peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) will not be affected by the operation of draft conclusion 16. | 与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)不相抵触的其他义务不受结论草案16实施的影响。 |
| Provisions in a resolution, decision or other act of an international organization that are not in conflict with a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) will continue to apply if they are separable. | 国际组织的决议、决定或其他行为中与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)不相抵触的部分，如果可以分离，将继续适用。 |
| (4) | (4) |
| The rule in draft conclusion 16, that a resolution, decision or act does not create obligations under international law if those obligations conflict with a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens), follows from the hierarchical superiority of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 结论草案16中一项决议、决定或行为如与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)相抵触则不创设国际法义务的规则，源于一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的位阶优先。 |
| If rules of international law that are inconsistent with peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) cannot be created through treaties, customary international law and unilateral acts, it follows that such rules cannot be created through resolutions, decisions or other acts of international organizations either. | 如果不能通过条约、习惯国际法和单方面行为产生与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)不一致的国际法规则，那么也不能通过国际组织的决议、决定或其他行为产生此种规则。 |
| Obligations arising under the Charter of the United Nations, however, require additional consideration since, pursuant to Article 103, such obligations prevail in the event of conflict over other rules of international law. | 然而，《联合国宪章》规定的义务另当别论，因为根据《联合国宪章》第一百零三条，这些义务在冲突情况下优先于国际法的其他规则。 |
| If a resolution, decision or other act of the United Nations does not create obligations under international law due to a conflict with a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) then no obligations arise that implicate Article 103. | 如果联合国的决议、决定或其他行为因与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)抵触而不创设国际法义务，则不产生涉及第一百零三条的义务。 |
| For this reason, considering the hierarchical superiority of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens), the Commission considered it important to highlight that draft conclusion 16 applies equally to binding resolutions, decisions and acts of the Security Council. | 因此，委员会认为，考虑到一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的位阶优先性，必须强调，结论草案16同样适用于安全理事会具有约束力的决议、决定和行为。 |
| (5) | (5) |
| The application of the rule in draft conclusion 16 has to be read together with the interpretative rule set out in draft conclusion 20 and the procedures laid out in draft conclusion 21. | 结论草案16中规则的适用应与结论草案20中提出的解释性规则和结论草案21中所列程序一并解读。 |
| While the procedural rules laid out in draft conclusion 21 apply also to other sources of obligations, these are particularly important in relation to resolutions of the United Nations adopted under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations. | 虽然结论草案21所列的程序规则也适用于其他义务渊源，但这些规则对于根据《联合国宪章》第七章通过的联合国决议尤其重要。 |
| Draft conclusion 16 should therefore not be read as providing cover for unilateral repudiation of obligations flowing under binding resolutions of the United Nations. | 因此，结论草案16不应被解读成为单方面拒绝履行源自联合国具有约束力的决议的义务提供借口。 |
| Indeed, while the commentary states that Security Council resolutions are covered by draft conclusion 16, the Commission is conscious that it is highly unlikely that a Security Council resolution would, on its face, be in conflict with a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens). | 事实上，虽然评注指出结论草案16涵盖安全理事会决议，但委员会意识到，安全理事会决议从表面上看极不可能与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)相抵触。 |
| Thus, in the first place, before determining that there is a conflict between a Security Council decision and a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens), the rule of interpretation contained in draft conclusion 20 should be applied in order to avoid, where possible, such a conflict. | 因此，首先，在确定安全理事会决定与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)之间存在抵触之前，应适用结论草案20所载的解释规则，以便尽可能避免这种抵触。 |
| Second, prior to adopting any measure on the strength of a belief that a binding Security Council resolution is in conflict with a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens), a State should follow the procedure set forth in draft conclusion 21. | 第二，在由于认为具有约束力的安全理事会决议与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)相抵触而采取任何措施之前，一国则应遵循结论草案21中规定的程序。 |
| Conclusion 17 Peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) as obligations owed to the international community as a whole (obligations erga omnes) | 结论17 一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)作为对国际社会整体承担的义务(普遍义务) |
| 1. | 1. |
| Peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) give rise to obligations owed to the international community as a whole (obligations erga omnes), in relation to which all States have a legal interest. | 一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)产生对国际社会整体承担的义务(普遍义务)，关乎所有国家的合法利益。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| Any State is entitled to invoke the responsibility of another State for a breach of a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens), in accordance with the rules on the responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts. | 根据关于国家对国际不法行为的责任的规则，任何国家均有权援引另一国对违反一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的责任。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) | (1) |
| Draft conclusion 17 addresses obligations erga omnes. It consists of two paragraphs. | 结论草案17涉及普遍义务问题，由两段组成。 |
| Paragraph 1 states that peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) give rise to obligations owed to the international community as a whole (obligations erga omnes). | 第1段指出，一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)产生对国际社会整体承担的义务(普遍义务)。 |
| The relationship between peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) and obligations erga omnes has been recognized in the practice of States. | 一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)与普遍义务之间的关系，已在国家实践当中得到承认。 |
| The Democratic Republic of the Congo, for example, in a statement in the Sixth Committee of the General Assembly, proposed a treaty on the prohibition of the use of force and stated that the proposed treaty should have an erga omnes effect in view of the fact that the prohibition of the use of force was a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens). | 例如，刚果民主共和国在联大第六委员会的一次发言中提议缔结一项禁止使用武力条约，并指出，鉴于禁止使用武力是一项一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)，所提议的条约应具有普遍效力。 |
| Similarly, the Czech Republic stated that “jus cogens obligations were erga omnes obligations, which did not allow for any derogation, including by means of an agreement”. | 同样，捷克共和国指出，“强行法义务是普遍义务，不容有任何克减，包括协议克减。 |
| The Federal Court of Australia, in Nulyarimma and Others v. Thompson, also accepted the contention of the parties that “the prohibition of genocide is a peremptory norm of customary international law (jus cogens) giving rise to non derogable obligations erga omnes that is, enforcement obligations owed by each nation State to the international community as a whole”. | 澳大利亚联邦法院在Nulyarimma等人诉Thompson案中也接受了当事方的主张，即“禁止灭绝种族是一项习惯国际法强制性规范(强行法)，产生不可克减的普遍义务，即每个国家对国际社会整体承担的强制执行义务”。 |
| Similarly, in Kane v. Winn, the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts determined that “the prohibition against torture” is an obligation erga omnes that, “as [a] jus cogens [norm is] ‘non-derogable and peremptory’”. | 同样，美国马萨诸塞州联邦地区法院在Kane诉Winn一案中裁定“禁止酷刑”是一项普遍义务，“作为一项强行法规范…是‘不可克减且具有强制性的’”。 |
| The Federal Constitutional Court of Germany has also stated that norms that are part of jus cogens enjoy erga omnes effect. | 德国联邦宪法法院也指出，属于强行法的规范具有普遍适用的效力。 |
| (2) | (2) |
| The International Court of Justice has not explicitly pronounced that a link exists between peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) and obligations erga omnes. | 国际法院尚未明确宣布一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)与普遍义务之间存在的关联。 |
| Nevertheless, such a link could be deduced from some of its judgments and advisory opinions. | 尽管如此，可以从该法院的一些判决和咨询意见当中推断出此种关联。 |
| First, every norm described by the Court as one having an erga omnes character is also one that has been included in the non-exhaustive list of norms previously referred to by the Commission as having peremptory status. | 首先，曾被该法院描述为具有普遍性的每一项规范， 均同时出现于委员会以往提出的具有强制性地位的规范的非详尽清单。 |
| This list is reproduced in the annex to the present draft conclusions. | 该清单载于本结论草案附件。 |
| Second, the Court has applied the legal consequences under article 41 of the articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts (which concern breaches of peremptory norms) to breaches of such erga omnes obligations. | 其次，国际法院曾针对违反此类普遍义务行为适用国家对国际不法行为的责任条款第41条之下的法律后果(涉及违反强制性规范行为)。 |
| The Commission itself has been more explicit in recognizing a close relationship between obligations erga omnes and peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 在承认普遍义务与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)之间关系密切方面，委员会本身的态度更为明确。 |
| The relationship between peremptory norms and obligations erga omnes has also been recognized in scholarly writings. | 强制性规范与普遍义务之间的关系在学术著作当中也得到承认。 |
| (3) | (3) |
| Although all peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) give rise to obligations erga omnes, it is widely considered that not all obligations erga omnes arise from peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 虽然所有一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)均产生普遍义务，但普遍认为，并非所有的普遍义务均源自一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)。 |
| For example, certain rules relating to common spaces, in particular common heritage regimes, may produce erga omnes obligations independent of whether they have peremptory status. | 例如，某些与共同空间有关的规则，尤其是共同遗产制度，无论是否具有强制性地位，均可产生普遍义务。 |
| The International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea determined that the obligations of States parties relating to preservation of the environment of the high seas and the deep seabed under the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea had an erga omnes character. | 国际海洋法法庭根据1982年《联合国海洋法公约》确定了缔约国与保护公海和深海海底环境有关的义务具有普遍性。 |
| (4) | (4) |
| Paragraph 1 of draft conclusion 17 is intended to capture, in a general way, the relationship described above between peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) and obligations erga omnes. | 结论草案17第1段意在从总体上把握上文所述一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)与普遍义务之间的关系。 |
| It states that peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) “give rise to” obligations erga omnes. | 该段指出，一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)“产生”普遍义务。 |
| This wording is based on the Commission’s articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts, in which obligations erga omnes are described as including those obligations which “arise under peremptory norms of general international law”. | 这一措辞系基于委员会的国家对国际不法行为的责任条款，在上述条款当中，普遍义务被描述为包括“一般国际法强制性规范产生”的义务。 |
| The phrase “in relation to which all States have a legal interest” describes the main consequence of the erga omnes character of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | “关乎所有国家的合法利益”语句描述了一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)具有普遍性的主要后果。 |
| The words “legal interest” encompass the protection of the legal norm as such, including rights and obligations. | “合法利益”词语涵盖对法律规范本身的保护，包括权利和义务在内。 |
| (5) | (5) |
| The phrase “in relation to which” is intended to capture the variety of ways that States may have an interest in obligations erga omnes (including obligations erga omnes partes). | “关乎”一语旨在涵盖普遍义务可能涉及国家利益的各种方式。 |
| In Barcelona Traction, for example, the International Court of Justice referred to the legal interest in the “protection” of the rights covered by erga omnes obligations. | 例如，在巴塞罗那电车公司案中，国际法院提到“保护”普遍义务(包括当事方的普遍义务)所涵盖的权利所具有的合法利益。 |
| That formulation has also been used in Questions Relating to the Obligation to Prosecute or Extradite, the advisory opinion on Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, the advisory opinion on Legal Consequences of the Separation of the Chagos Archipelago from Mauritius in 1965 and the East Timor (Portugal v. Australia) judgment. | 在与起诉或引渡义务有关的问题案、关于在被占领巴勒斯坦领土修建隔离墙的法律后果的咨询意见、关于1965年查戈斯群岛从毛里求斯分裂的法律后果的咨询意见 以及东帝汶案(葡萄牙诉澳大利亚)的判决 中，也使用了这一表述。 |
| In its judgment in the Barcelona Traction case, which has been subsequently reiterated, the Court referred to the legal interest of all States in the “observance” of the obligation in question. | 在随后重申的巴塞罗那电车公司案的判决中，法院提到所有国家在“遵守”有关义务方面有合法利益。 |
| The notion that all States have an interest in the “observance” or “compliance” with the obligation has also been reflected in Questions Relating to the Obligation to Prosecute or Extradite and in Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (The Gambia v. Myanmar). | 与起诉或引渡义务有关的问题一案 和《防止及惩治灭绝种族罪公约》的适用案(冈比亚诉缅甸)中也反映了所有国家“遵守”或“遵从”义务合乎其利益的概念。 |
| The Court has also referred to the legal interest of States in the prevention of acts covered by erga omnes obligations. | 法院还提到国家防止发生普遍义务所涵盖的行为也合乎其合法利益。 |
| In its advisory opinion on Reservations to the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, the Court referred to the “common interest” in the “accomplishment of those high purposes which are the raison d’être of the convention”. | 在关于对《防止及惩治灭绝种族罪公约》提出的保留的咨询意见中，法院提到了“实现那些构成公约存在理由的崇高宗旨”中的“共同利益”。 |
| The phrase “in relation to which” is intended to capture all these different formulations. | “关乎”一语意在涵盖所有这些不同的表述。 |
| (6) | (6) |
| Paragraph 2 of draft conclusion 17 builds on paragraph 1 by describing a distinct consequence of the connection between obligations erga omnes and peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 结论草案17第2段在第1段基础上更进一步，描述了普遍义务与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)之间联系的一个确切后果。 |
| It describes, in more precise terms, the implications of the phrase “in which all States have a legal interest” in paragraph 1. | 该段以更精确的语言，描述了第1段当中“关乎所有国家的合法利益”语句的含意。 |
| This consequence is that any State is entitled to invoke the responsibility of another State for the latter’s breach of a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens). | 上述后果是，任何国家均有权就另一国违反一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)情况援引后者的责任。 |
| The words used in paragraph 2 of draft conclusion 17 follow the text of article 48 of the Commission’s articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts, which provides that “[a]ny State … is entitled to invoke the responsibility of another State … if … the obligation breached is owed to the international community as a whole”. | 结论草案17第2段所采用的措辞系遵循委员会的国家对国际不法行为的责任条款第48条案文。 该条规定，“任何国家有权…在下列情况下对另一国援引责任…被违反的义务是对整个国际社会承担的义务”。 |
| (7) | (7) |
| The rule contained in paragraph 2 of draft conclusion 17 is consistent with judicial decisions of international courts and tribunals. | 结论草案17第2段所载的规则与国际性法院和法庭的司法判决相一致。 |
| In Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (The Gambia v. Myanmar), the International Court of Justice determined that a State party to the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, even if not “a specially affected State, may invoke the responsibility of another State party” in respect of “the alleged failure to comply with its obligations erga omnes partes”. | 在《防止及惩治灭绝种族罪公约》的适用案(冈比亚诉缅甸)中，国际法院裁定，一国即使不是“特别受影响的国家”，也可以就另一缔约国“未履行其当事方普遍义务的指称”援引后者的责任。 |
| On this basis, the Court concluded that the Gambia had prima facie standing to submit a dispute concerning violations of the obligations under the Convention, alleged to have been committed in Myanmar, even though it was not specially affected by those breaches. | 在此基础上，法院得出结论认为，冈比亚有初步证据就据称在缅甸发生的违反《公约》义务的行为提交争端，即使该国没有受到这些违反行为的特别影响。 |
| The Court subsequently confirmed that the Gambia had standing to invoke the responsibility of Myanmar for alleged violations of its obligations under the Convention. | 法院随后确认，冈比亚有权援引缅甸对据称其违反公约义务的责任。 |
| While the case concerned obligations erga omnes partes, the principle applies equally to erga omnes obligations generally. | 虽然该案涉及当事方的普遍义务，但该原则同样一般性地适用于普遍义务。 |
| Similarly, in Responsibilities and Obligations of States Sponsoring Persons and Entities, the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea determined that each State party to the Convention might be entitled to submit a claim for damage, “in light of the erga omnes character of the obligations relating to preservation of the environment of the high seas and in the Area”. | 同样，在担保个人和实体的国家所负责任和义务一案中，国际海洋法法庭裁定，“考虑到与保护公海和‘区域’环境有关的义务的普遍性质”，《公约》的每个缔约国都有权提出损害索赔。 |
| (8) | (8) |
| According to paragraph 2 of draft conclusion 17, the right of a State to invoke the responsibility of another State for the latter’s breach of a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) is to be exercised in accordance with the rules on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts. | 根据结论草案17第2段，一国援引另一国对违反一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)责任的权利，须根据关于国家对国际不法行为的责任相关规则行使。 |
| This qualification is intended to emphasize the distinction between the invocation of responsibility by an injured State and the invocation of responsibility by any other State. | 这一限定旨在强调受害国援引责任与任何其他国家援引责任之间的区别。 |
| Under the articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts, the right of an injured State to invoke the responsibility of another State for the breach of a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) is to be exercised according to article 42, whereas any State other than an injured State is entitled to invoke the responsibility for such a breach under article 48. | 根据国家对国际不法行为的责任条款，受害国援引另一国对违反一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)责任的权利须根据第42条行使，而受害国以外的任何国家则有权根据第48条就此类违反情况援引责任。 |
| A State other than an injured State may claim “cessation of the internationally wrongful act, and assurances and guarantees of non-repetition”. | 受害国以外的国家可要求“停止国际不法行为，并提供不重复的承诺和保证”。 |
| When invoking the responsibility of another State in its capacity as an injured State, the injured State is entitled to claim all the forms of reparation provided for in chapter II of Part Two of the articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts. | 受害国在以受害国身份援引另一国责任时，有权要求提供国家对国际不法行为的责任条款第二部分第二章规定的所有形式赔偿。 |
| In contrast, a State other than an injured State may only claim “performance of the obligation of reparation … in the interest of the injured State or of the beneficiaries of the obligation breached” and not for its own benefit. | 相比之下，受害国以外的国家只可要求“履行向受害国或被违反之义务的受益人提供赔偿的义务”，而不是向本国提供赔偿。 |
| (9) | (9) |
| While draft conclusion 17 provides for the entitlement of States to invoke the responsibility of other States, it is without prejudice to the rules of international law concerning the invocation of the responsibility of other actors. | 虽然结论草案17规定国家有权援引其他国家的责任，但它不妨碍关于援引其他行为体责任的国际法规则。 |
| Draft conclusion 17 is also without prejudice to the entitlement of international organizations to invoke the responsibility of States or other international organizations. | 结论草案17也不妨碍国际组织援引国家或其他国际组织的责任的权利。 |
| Conclusion 18 Peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) and circumstances precluding wrongfulness | 结论18 一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)和解除不法性的情况 |
| No circumstance precluding wrongfulness under the rules on the responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts may be invoked with regard to any act of a State that is not in conformity with an obligation arising under a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens). | 对于违反一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)所产生的义务的任何国家行为，不得援引关于国家对国际不法行为的责任的规则所规定的任何解除不法性的情况。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) | (1) |
| Draft conclusion 18 addresses circumstances precluding wrongfulness in relation to a breach of a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens). | 结论草案18涉及解除违反一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)行为不法性的情况。 |
| As a general rule, the existence of certain circumstances can serve to preclude the wrongfulness of an act of a State that would otherwise be unlawful. | 一般规则是，特定情况的存在可有助于解除原本不合法之国家行为的不法性。 |
| Draft conclusion 18 sets out an exception to this general rule on responsibility under international law by providing that where the breach in question concerns a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens), the circumstances precluding wrongfulness may not be invoked. | 结论草案18规定在相关违反行为涉及一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)时不得援引解除不法性的情况，从而为上述有关国际法下责任的一般规则阐明了一种例外情况。 |
| (2) | (2) |
| Draft conclusion 18 is based on article 26 of the articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts, which excludes the invocation of grounds precluding wrongfulness, as spelled out in chapter V of Part One of the articles, for any act that is not in conformity with an obligation arising under a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens). | 结论草案18系基于国家对国际不法行为的责任条款第26条，该条不允许就违反一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)所产生义务的任何行为，援引该套条款第一部分第五章所列解除不法性的理由。 |
| The effect of this rule is that, where the responsibility of a State for a breach of a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) is invoked, the State against which the breach is invoked cannot seek to excuse itself from responsibility by raising any circumstance that might ordinarily preclude wrongfulness. | 这一规则的效力在于，在援引一国对违反一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的责任的情况下，因违反行为而被援引责任的国家不能通过提出任何通常情况下可能解除不法性的情况，寻求为本国免除责任。 |
| This applies even where the circumstance precluding wrongfulness itself involves a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens). | 即便在解除不法性情况本身涉及到一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)时，该规则也同样适用。 |
| As the Commission has previously stated, a genocide cannot be invoked as a justification for the commission of a counter-genocide. | 正如委员会此前指出的那样，不能援引灭绝种族作为以牙还牙的正当理由。 |
| (3) | (3) |
| This rule was applied in Bernhard von Pezold and others v. Republic of Zimbabwe where a Tribunal of the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) held that Zimbabwe could not raise any of the grounds precluding wrongfulness, in that case necessity, for breaches of the prohibition of discrimination, which the Tribunal described as an obligation erga omnes. | 这项规则在Bernhard von Pezold及其他人诉津巴布韦共和国案中得到适用，在此案中，国际投资争端解决中心的法庭认定，津巴布韦不能就违反禁止歧视规定的行为提出任何解除不法性的理由(在此案中即必要性)，而法庭将禁止歧视描述为一项普遍义务。 |
| While the Tribunal did not conclude that prohibition of racial discrimination is a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens), it did rely on article 26 of the articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts for its finding that necessity was not available for Zimbabwe. | 虽然该法庭没有得出禁止种族歧视是一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的结论，但它确实依据国家对国际不法行为的责任条款第26条，认定津巴布韦没有违反禁止歧视规定的必要性。 |
| In another award, in CMS Gas Transmission Company v. the Argentine Republic, the ICSID Tribunal found that it could not refuse to admit necessity because a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) was not in issue. | 在另一项裁决，即CMS天然气输送公司诉阿根廷共和国案中，国际投资争端解决中心法庭裁定，它不能因为不存在一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的问题而拒绝承认必要性。 |
| The Federal Constitutional Court of Germany also stated, on the strength of article 26, that circumstances precluding wrongfulness did not apply to obligations arising from peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 德国联邦宪法法院也根据第26条指出，解除不法性的情况不适用于一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)产生的义务。 |
| (4) | (4) |
| Article 26 of the articles on the responsibility of international organizations also provides that the wrongfulness of an act of an international organization not in conformity with a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) will not be precluded by the invocation of a circumstance precluding the wrongfulness of that act. | 国际组织的责任条款第26条 也规定，国际组织违反一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)之行为的不法性，不会因援引解除该行为不法性的情况而解除。 |
| Conclusion 19 Particular consequences of serious breaches of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) | 结论19 严重违反一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的特定后果 |
| 1. | 1. |
| States shall cooperate to bring to an end through lawful means any serious breach by a State of an obligation arising under a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens). | 各国应进行合作，通过合法手段制止一国严重违反一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)所产生的义务的任何行为。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| No State shall recognize as lawful a situation created by a serious breach by a State of an obligation arising under a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens), nor render aid or assistance in maintaining that situation. | 任何国家均不得承认因一国严重违反一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)所产生的义务而造成的状况为合法，也不得为维持这种状况提供援助或协助。 |
| 3. | 3. |
| A breach of an obligation arising under a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) is serious if it involves a gross or systematic failure by the responsible State to fulfil that obligation. | 违反一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)所产生的义务如涉及责任国严重或系统性地不履行该义务，则为严重违反。 |
| 4. | 4. |
| This draft conclusion is without prejudice to the other consequences that any breach by a State of an obligation arising under a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) may entail under international law. | 本条结论草案不妨碍一国违反一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)所产生的义务的任何行为可能依国际法引起的其他后果。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) | (1) |
| Draft conclusion 19 concerns particular consequences of serious breaches of obligations arising under peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 结论草案19涉及严重违反一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)所产生义务的特定后果。 |
| It is based on article 41 of the articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts. | 此结论草案系基于国家对国际不法行为的责任条款第41条。 |
| Draft conclusion 19 is concerned only with “additional consequences” arising from serious breaches of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 结论草案19仅涉及严重违反一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)引起的“更多的后果”。 |
| It does not address consequences arising from breaches of rules of international law that are not of a peremptory character, nor does it address the consequences of breaches of peremptory norms that are not serious in nature. | 此结论草案不涉及违反不具强制性的国际法规则所产生的后果，也不涉及性质并不严重的违反强制性规范行为所产生的后果。 |
| (2) | (2) |
| The first particular consequence of serious breaches of obligations arising under peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) is provided in paragraph 1 of draft conclusion 19. | 严重违反一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)所产生义务的第一个特定后果见结论草案19第1段。 |
| Paragraph 1 of the draft conclusion, which is based on article 41, paragraph 1, of the articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts, provides that States shall cooperate to bring to an end serious breaches of obligations arising under peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 本条结论草案第1段系基于国家对国际不法行为的责任条款第41条第1款，该款规定各国应进行合作，制止严重违反一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)所产生义务的行为。 |
| The obligation to “cooperate to bring to an end through lawful means” serious breaches of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) builds on the general obligation to cooperate under international law. | “进行合作，通过合法手段制止”严重违反一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)行为的义务，是基于在国际法下进行合作的一般义务。 |
| Although at the time of the adoption of its articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts, the Commission expressed some doubt as to whether the obligation expressed in paragraph 1 of article 41 constituted customary international law, the obligation to cooperate to bring to an end serious breaches of obligations arising under peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) is now recognized under international law. | 虽然在通过国家对国际不法行为的责任条款时，委员会对第41条第1款中表述的义务是否构成习惯国际法表达过一些疑问，但合作制止严重违反一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)所产生义务之行为的义务，如今在国际法下得到了承认。 |
| (3) | (3) |
| This obligation has been recognized in judicial decisions. | 这项义务得到司法判决的承认。 |
| The United Kingdom House of Lords in A, Amnesty International (intervening) and Commonwealth Lawyers Association (intervening) v. Secretary of State for the Home Department, for example, referred explicitly to the obligation under international law “to cooperate to bring to an end through lawful means any serious breach of an obligation under a peremptory norm of general international law”, and cited both article 41 of the articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts and the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice on Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory. | 例如，联合王国上议院在A、大赦国际(参与诉讼)和英联邦律师协会(参与诉讼)诉内政大臣案中明确提到根据国际法“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所产生义务之行为”的义务，并援引了国家对国际不法行为的责任条款第41条和国际法院关于在被占领巴勒斯坦领土修建隔离墙的法律后果的咨询意见。 |
| The Federal Constitutional Court of Germany, in a 2004 order, referred to the articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts when setting out the duty to cooperate. | 德国联邦宪法法院2004年的一项命令在陈述不合作的义务时，提到了国家对国际不法行为的责任条款。 |
| (4) | (4) |
| An example from a regional court can be found in the Case of La Cantuta v. Peru, wherein the Inter-American Court of Human Rights identified “the duty of cooperation among States for” the purpose of eradicating breaches as itself a consequence of breaches of obligations arising under peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 关于区域法院的例子，见La Cantuta诉秘鲁案，美洲人权法院在该案中，将“各国之间”以消除违反行为为目的“进行合作之责”本身确认为违反一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)所产生义务的一个后果。 |
| (5) | (5) |
| In its advisory opinion on Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, the Court determined that there is an obligation to cooperate to bring to an end breaches of “obligations to respect the right … to self-determination, and certain … obligations under international humanitarian law”. | 国际法院在关于在被占领巴勒斯坦领土修建隔离墙的法律后果的咨询意见当中确认，存在着合作以制止违反“尊重…自决权的义务以及根据国际人道主义法应遵守的某些义务”的义务。 |
| The Court determined that one of the obligations arising from the breaches of such obligations was an obligation on other States “while respecting the [Charter of the United Nations] and international law, to see to it that any impediment, resulting from” the breaches are “brought to an end”. | 国际法院确认，因违反这类义务而产生的义务之一是，其他国家“在遵守[联合国宪章]及国际法的同时，应确保终止任何”因违反“造成阻碍”的行为。 |
| Similarly, in its advisory opinion on Legal Consequences of the Separation of the Chagos Archipelago from Mauritius in 1965, the Court determined that all States “must co-operate with the United Nations” to bring to an end the breach of obligations arising from the right of self-determination. | 同样，国际法院在关于1965年查戈斯群岛从毛里求斯分裂的法律后果的咨询意见当中确认，所有国家均“必须与联合国合作”，制止违反因民族自决权所产生的义务的行为。 |
| (6) | (6) |
| While in both advisory opinions on Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory and on Legal Consequences of the Separation of the Chagos Archipelago from Mauritius in 1965 the Court does not make an explicit reference to peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens), the norms to which the Court attached the duty to cooperate to bring to an end serious breaches are peremptory in character. | 虽然在关于在被占领巴勒斯坦领土修建隔离墙的法律后果的咨询意见和关于1965年查戈斯群岛从毛里求斯分裂的法律后果的咨询意见中，国际法院都没有明确提及一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)，但法院赋予合作制止严重违反行为之义务的规范以强制性。 |
| As noted above in the commentary to draft conclusion 17, paragraphs 1 and 2, there is a significant overlap between peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) and obligations erga omnes such that the deduction that the Court in these decisions was referring to peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) is not unwarranted. | 如上文结论草案17第1和第2段的评注所述，一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)和普遍义务之间存在大量重叠，因此，推断法院在这些判决中意指一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)并非没有根据。 |
| A similar deduction, that the International Court of Justice was referring to peremptory norms, was made by the House of Lords in A, Amnesty International (intervening) and Commonwealth Lawyers Association (intervening) v. Secretary of State for the Home Department. | 联合王国上议院在A、大赦国际(参与诉讼)和英联邦律师协会(参与诉讼)诉内政大臣案中作出了类似的推论，即国际法院指的是强制性规范。 |
| At any rate, since in judicial decisions erga omnes obligations have been said to produce the duty to cooperate to bring to an end all serious breaches, given the character and importance of the rights and obligations involved, and since all peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) produce erga omnes obligations, it follows that all peremptory norms would also produce this duty. | 无论如何，由于在司法判决中，普遍义务被认为产生合作制止所有严重违反行为的义务，考虑到其中所涉权利和义务的性质和重要性， 而所有一般国际法强制性规范(强制法)产生普遍义务，可得出结论认为，所有强制性规范也将产生合作制止严重违反行为的义务。 |
| (7) | (7) |
| The obligation to cooperate to bring to an end serious breaches of obligations arising under peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) is to be carried out “through lawful means”. | 合作制止严重违反一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)所产生义务之行为的义务，须“通过合法手段”履行。 |
| This means that the breach of a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) may not serve as a justification for the breach of other rules of international law. | 这意味着违反一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的行为不得成为违反其他国际法规则的合理理由。 |
| Although international law does not prohibit unilateral measures to bring to an end a serious breach of a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) if such unilateral measures are consistent with international law, the emphasis in paragraph 1 of draft conclusion 19 is on collective measures. | 虽然国际法并不禁止采取单边措施制止严重违反一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)之行为，只要此类单边措施符合国际法，但结论草案19第1段的重点在于集体措施。 |
| This is the essence of “cooperation”. | 这是“合作”的精髓。 |
| (8) | (8) |
| Depending on the type of breach and the type of the peremptory norm in question, the collective system of the United Nations is the preferred framework for cooperative action. | 取决于违反行为的类型以及相关强制性规范的类型，联合国的集体机制是首选的合作行动框架。 |
| It is for this reason that, in light of the determination by the International Court of Justice of a breach of “self-determination” and “basic principles of humanitarian law”, the Court stated that “the United Nations, and especially the General Assembly and the Security Council, should consider what further action is required to bring to an end the illegal situation”. | 出于这一原因，鉴于国际法院已裁定违反了“自决权”和“人道法基本原则”，该法院指出，“联合国，尤其是联大和安全理事会，应该考虑须采取何种进一步行动，终止…的非法状况”。 |
| Similarly, in its advisory opinion on Legal Consequences of the Separation of the Chagos Archipelago from Mauritius in 1965, the Court referred to the obligation of “all Member States” to “co-operate with the United Nations” to end the breach in question. | 同样，国际法院在关于1965年查戈斯群岛从毛里求斯分裂的法律后果的咨询意见当中提到了“所有会员国与联合国合作”以终止相关违法行为的义务。 |
| Other international organizations may also adopt measures, consistent with international law, to bring to an end serious breaches of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) if their mandates permit them to do so. | 其他国际组织也可在其任务授权允许的情况下，根据国际法采取措施，制止严重违反一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的行为。 |
| (9) | (9) |
| There are numerous examples of resolutions of organs of international organizations, in particular the United Nations, that illustrate the duty to cooperate to bring to an end serious breaches of obligations that are widely recognized as arising from peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 国际组织机构，特别是联合国许多决议的例子表明，有义务合作制止严重违反公认的一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)所产生义务之行为。 |
| These include resolutions condemning breaches of such obligations, resolutions calling for the cessation of breaches of such obligations, and resolutions establishing accountability mechanisms to address such breaches. | 其中包括谴责违反此类义务之行为的决议， 要求停止违反此类义务之行为的决议， 以及建立处理此类违反行为的问责机制的决议。 |
| (10) | (10) |
| It is not only measures under institutionalized cooperation mechanisms that may be adopted. | 不仅是在制度化合作机制之下可采取措施。 |
| The obligation to cooperate to bring to an end serious breaches of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) may also be implemented through non-institutionalized cooperation, including through ad hoc arrangements by a group of States acting together to bring to an end a breach of a peremptory norm. | 合作制止严重违反一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)行为的义务也可通过非制度化合作来履行，包括为此对一组国家共同行动进行特定安排，以制止违反强制性规范行为。 |
| Indeed, the International Court of Justice, in its advisory opinion on Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, seems to suggest that, over and above collective action, there is an obligation on individual States to make efforts to bring situations created by the breach to an end. | 事实上，国际法院在关于在被占领巴勒斯坦领土修建隔离墙的法律后果的咨询意见当中似乎间接表示，除集体行动外，单个国家有义务作出努力，以终止违反行为所造成的局势。 |
| In that opinion, in addition to referring to the measures that may be adopted by the General Assembly and the Security Council, the Court stated that “[i]t is also for all States” to take measures to end the breach of a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens). | 在上述意见当中，国际法院除提到联大和安全理事会可以采取的措施外，还指出“所有各国…应”采取措施制止违反一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的行为。 |
| The requirement, however, is that such measures should be consistent with international law. | 但要求是，此类措施应符合国际法。 |
| (11) | (11) |
| The obligation of States to act collectively to bring to an end serious breaches of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) has particular consequences for cooperation within the organs of the United Nations and other international organizations. | 各国集体采取行动制止严重违反一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)行为的义务，对于联合国机构的内部合作和对其他国际组织有着特别的影响。 |
| It means that, in the face of serious breaches of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens), international organizations should act, within their respective mandates and when permitted to do so under international law, to bring to an end such breaches. | 该义务意味着，在面临严重违反一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的行为时，国际组织应在国际法许可的情况下，在各自的授权范围内采取行动制止此类违反行为。 |
| Thus, where an international organization has the discretion to act, the obligation to cooperate imposes a duty on the members of that international organization to act with a view to the organization exercising that discretion in a manner to bring to an end the breach of a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens). | 由此，在国际组织具备采取行动的酌处权情况下，合作之义务赋予该国际组织成员采取行动的责任，使组织能够行使上述酌处权，以制止违反一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的行为。 |
| A duty of international organizations to exercise discretion in a manner that is intended to bring to an end serious breaches of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) is a necessary corollary of the obligation to cooperate provided for in paragraph 1 of draft conclusion 19. | 国际组织以旨在制止严重违反一般国际法强制性规范(强行法) 行为的方式行使酌处权的责任，是结论草案19第1段所规定之合作义务推导出的一个必然结果。 |
| (12) | (12) |
| Paragraph 2 of draft conclusion 19 states that States shall not “recognize as lawful” a situation created by a breach of an obligation arising under a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) nor “render aid or assistance” in the maintenance of such a situation. | 结论草案19第2段指出，各国不得“承认”因违反一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)所产生的义务而造成的状况为“合法”，也不得为维持这种状况“提供援助或协助”。 |
| Paragraph 2 of draft conclusion 19, which is derived from article 41, paragraph 2, of the articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts, contains two separate obligations. | 结论草案19第2段系源自国家对国际不法行为的责任条款第41条第2款，内含两项不同的义务。 |
| The first is the obligation not to recognize as lawful situations created by a serious breach of a peremptory norm of international law (jus cogens). | 第一项是不承认严重违反一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)所造成状况为合法的义务。 |
| The second is the obligation not to render aid or assistance in maintaining the situation created by the serious breach of a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens). | 第二项是不为维持严重违反一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)所造成状况提供援助或协助的义务。 |
| While these two obligations are separate and distinct obligations, they are related in the sense that the obligation of non-assistance is a logical consequence of the obligation of non-recognition of a situation as lawful. | 上述两项义务各自独立、各有不同，但是，不协助义务是从不承认某种状况为合法的义务中推导出的必然结果，从这个意义上讲，二者之间是相互关联的。 |
| Unlike the obligation in paragraph 1 of draft conclusion 19, the duties of non-recognition and non-assistance are negative duties. | 与结论草案19第1段所载义务不同的是，不承认和不协助的义务是消极义务。 |
| In other words, while paragraph 1 of draft conclusion 19 requires States to do something – to cooperate to bring to an end serious breaches of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) – the duties of non-recognition and non-assistance in paragraph 2 require States to refrain from acting. | 换言之，结论草案19第1段要求各国采取某种行动，即进行合作以制止严重违反一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的行为，而第2段所载的不承认和不协助义务则要求各国不要采取行动。 |
| The duties in paragraph 2 of draft conclusion 19 are thus less onerous. | 可见，结论草案19第2段所载义务较易履行。 |
| (13) | (13) |
| Already in 2001, the Commission had recognized that the duties of non-recognition and non-assistance were part of customary international law. | 委员会早在2001年即已承认不承认和不协助的义务是习惯国际法的组成内容。 |
| In Kuwait Airways Corporation v. Iraqi Airways Company and Others, the United Kingdom House of Lords refused to give legal validity to acts resulting from the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait, a breach of the peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) relating to the use of force. | 联合王国上议院在科威特航空公司诉伊拉克航空公司及其他方一案中，拒绝赋予伊拉克入侵科威特所产生之行为以法律效力――伊拉克入侵科威特系违反与使用武力有关的一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)。 |
| The obligation of non-recognition had been recognized in decisions of the International Court of Justice and in the practice of States acting in international organizations. | 不承认义务已在国际法院的判决以及在国际组织内行事的各国的实践当中得到承认。 |
| In its advisory opinion on Legal Consequences for States of the Continued Presence of South Africa in Namibia, for example, the Court recalled that “qualification of a situation as illegal does not by itself put an end to” the situation. | 例如，国际法院在关于南非继续留驻纳米比亚对各国的法律后果的咨询意见当中回顾指出，“将某种状况定性为非法本身并不能终止”该状况。 |
| The Court held that there was an obligation on all States “to recognize the illegality and invalidity of South Africa’s continued presence”. | 国际法院认为，所有国家均有义务“承认南非继续留驻的非法性和无效性”。 |
| Similarly, in its advisory opinion on Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, the Court determined that “all States are under an obligation not to recognize the illegal situation resulting from” the breach of an obligation widely recognized as having peremptory character. | 此外，国际法院在关于在被占领巴勒斯坦领土修建隔离墙的法律后果的咨询意见当中确认，“所有国家都有义务不承认”违反被广泛承认为具有强制性的义务“所导致的非法状况”。 |
| In the same vein, the International Criminal Court in The Prosecutor v. Bosco Ntaganda also recalled that “as a general principle of law, there is a duty not to recognise situations created by certain serious breaches of international law”. | 同样，国际刑事法院在检察官诉Bosco Ntaganda案中也回顾说，“作为一般法律原则，存在不承认某些严重违反国际法的行为所造成状况的义务”。 |
| (14) | (14) |
| The Security Council has also recognized the obligation of States not to recognize the situation created by a breach of the prohibition of apartheid and the obligation to respect self-determination. | 安全理事会也承认各国有义务不承认违反种族隔离禁令所造成的状况，且有义务尊重自决权。 |
| Similarly, the General Assembly has made decisions calling for the non-recognition of situations created by the breach of acts widely accepted as constituting breaches of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 同样，联大也作出决定，要求不承认被广泛认为违反一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的行为所造成的状况。 |
| The obligation not to assist or render aid to the maintenance of a situation created by a serious breach of an obligation arising under a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) has also been recognized in the decisions of the International Court of Justice and resolutions of the United Nations for example, in respect of the application of apartheid by South Africa in Namibia and in respect of the situation in Ukraine. | 不为维持严重违反一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)之下义务所产生状况提供协助或援助的义务，也已在国际法院的判决以及联合国的决议当中得到承认，例如关于南非在纳米比亚实行种族隔离 和关于乌克兰局势 的决议。 |
| (15) | (15) |
| While the obligation of non-recognition is settled, this duty is not to be implemented to the detriment of the affected population and deprive it of any advantages derived from international cooperation. | 虽然不予承认的义务已经确立，但这一义务的履行不应损害受影响人口，剥夺其可从国际合作中获得的利益。 |
| In its advisory opinion on Legal Consequences for States of the Continued Presence of South Africa in Namibia, the International Court of Justice declared that the consequences of non-recognition should not negatively affect or disadvantage the affected population and, consequently, that acts related to the civilian population, such as registration of births, deaths and marriages, ought to be recognized notwithstanding the breach. | 国际法院在关于南非继续留驻纳米比亚对各国的法律后果的咨询意见当中宣布：不予承认所导致的后果不应对受影响人口造成消极影响或使其沦入不利境地； 因此，诸如出生、死亡和婚姻登记等与平民人口有关的行为，尽管存在违反行为，亦应得到承认。 |
| (16) | (16) |
| It is important to emphasize that the duty in paragraph 2 of draft conclusion 19 is concerned with a “situation created by a serious breach”, rather than the breach itself. | 必须强调的是，结论草案19第2段中的义务涉及“严重违反…而造成的状况”，而不是违反行为本身。 |
| Thus, contribution or support of the actual breach, while possibly entailing responsibility for that breach, is not covered under this draft conclusion. | 因此，促成或支持实际违反行为，虽然可能引起对违反行为的责任，但不包括在本条结论草案中。 |
| (17) | (17) |
| The obligations in draft conclusion 19 apply to serious breaches of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 结论草案19所载义务适用于严重违反一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)行为。 |
| A serious breach is defined in paragraph 3 of draft conclusion 19 as a breach that “involves a gross or systematic failure by the responsible State to fulfil [the obligation in question]”. | 结论草案19第3段将严重违反界定为“涉及责任国严重或系统性地不履行[相关义务]”。 |
| This definition is taken from article 40, paragraph 2, of the articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts. | 这一定义源自国家对国际不法行为的责任条款第40条第2款。 |
| It is important to underscore that, by referring to “serious breaches”, the Commission did not mean to indicate that there were breaches of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) that were less than serious. Rather, it is intended to convey the sense that particular consequences flowed from breaches of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) that met the threshold in paragraph 3. | 必须强调指出的是，委员会提及“严重违反”并不是意在指出存在不那么严重的违反一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)行为， 而是意在传达违反一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)会造成特定后果，达到第3段规定的门槛。 |
| (18) | (18) |
| Paragraph 4 of draft conclusion 19 provides that the obligations in draft conclusion 19 are without prejudice to other consequences that any breach by a State of an obligation arising out of a peremptory norm (jus cogens) may entail under international law. | 结论草案19第4段规定，结论草案19所载义务不妨碍一国违反强制性规范(强行法)所产生义务的任何行为可能依国际法引起的其他后果。 |
| Draft conclusion 19, for example, does not specifically address the consequences of breaches, whether meeting the threshold in paragraph 3 or not, for the responsible State. | 例如，结论草案19并未具体谈及违反行为(无论是否达到第3段规定的门槛)对于责任国有何后果。 |
| The International Court of Justice has routinely declared an obligation of cessation on the responsible State. | 国际法院的惯常做法是宣布责任国有义务停止其行为。 |
| Other examples of consequences of breaches of obligations under international law that are not addressed can be found in chapters I and II of Part Two of the articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts. | 未谈及的违反国际法义务引起的其他后果实例，可见国家对国际不法行为的责任条款第二部分第一章和第二章。 |
| Thus, the draft conclusions do not address the question of whether the peremptory character of the obligation breached will affect, for example, the issue of the amount of compensation. | 因此，本结论草案没有涉及所违反义务的强制性是否会影响赔偿数额等问题。 |
| Although not addressed in the present draft conclusions, these other consequences of responsibility continue to apply. | 相关责任的上述其他后果虽在本结论草案当中未予谈及，但依然适用。 |
| (19) | (19) |
| As with draft conclusions 17 and 18, draft conclusion 19 applies, as appropriate, to international organizations. | 和结论草案17和18一样，结论草案19在适当情况下适用于国际组织。 |
| Consequently, if States are under an obligation not to recognize as lawful situations created by a serious breach of a peremptory norm or to assist in the maintenance of such situations, it stands to reason that international organizations are under a similar obligation. | 因此，如果国家有义务不承认严重违反强制性规范而造成的状况为合法，或有义务不协助维持这种状况，那么国际组织也有同样的义务。 |
| Part Four General provisions | 第四部分 一般规定 |
| Conclusion 20 Interpretation and application consistent with peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) | 结论20 解释和适用与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)相一致 |
| Where it appears that there may be a conflict between a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) and another rule of international law, the latter is, as far as possible, to be interpreted and applied so as to be consistent with the former. | 在一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)似与另一国际法规则抵触的情况下，后者的解释和适用应尽可能与前者相一致。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) | (1) |
| Draft conclusion 20 contains an interpretative rule applicable in the case of potential conflicts between peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) and other rules of international law. | 结论草案20载有一条适用于一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)与其他国际法规则之间存在潜在抵触情况的解释性规则。 |
| Draft conclusions 10, 14, 15 and 16 provide for the invalidity or non-existence of rules of international law that conflict with peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 结论草案10、14、15和16规定，与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)相抵触的国际法规则无效或不存在。 |
| Whether or not a rule of international law conflicts with a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) is a matter to be determined through interpretation. | 一项国际法规则是否与一般国际法的强制性规范(强行法)相抵触，是一个要通过解释来确定的问题。 |
| The rule in draft conclusion 20 applies as part of the process of interpretation under applicable rules on interpretation to determine whether a conflict in fact exists. | 结论草案20中的规则作为依照适用的解释规则开展解释过程的一部分加以适用。 |
| The draft conclusions do not define conflict, but it may be understood, in this context, as the situation where two rules of international law cannot both be simultaneously applied without infringing on, or impairing, the other. | 结论草案没有对抵触下定义，但在这方面，可以将抵触理解为两项国际法规则不能同时适用，否则会彼此违反或减损的情况。 |
| (2) | (2) |
| Draft conclusion 20 is not to be applied in all cases concerning the interpretation of a rule or the determination of its content. | 结论草案20并不适用于所有关于解释一项规则或确定其内容的情况。 |
| It is to be applied only in the limited instances where “it appears that there may be a conflict” between a rule of international law not of a peremptory character and a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens). | 只有在非强制性的国际法规则“似与”一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)“抵触”的有限情况下，才能适用。 |
| In such a case, the interpreter is directed to interpret the rule of international law that is not of a peremptory character in such a way that it is consistent with the peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens). | 在这种情况下，解释者应按照与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)相一致的方式解释不具有强制性的国际法规则。 |
| The words “as far as possible” in the draft conclusion are intended to emphasize that, in the exercise of interpreting rules of international law in a manner consistent with peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens), the bounds of interpretation may not be exceeded. | 结论草案中的“尽可能”一词旨在强调，在以符合一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的方式解释国际法规则时，不得超出其解释范围。 |
| In other words, the rule in question may not be given a meaning or content that does not flow from the normal application of the rules and methodology of interpretation in order to achieve consistency with peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 换言之，为实现与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的一致性，有关规则可能不被赋予非源于正常适用解释规则和方法的含义或内容。 |
| (3) | (3) |
| Draft conclusion 20 uses the words “interpreted and applied”. | 结论草案20使用了“解释和适用”一语。 |
| The interpretation and application of a rule are interrelated but separate concepts. | 规则的解释和适用是相互关联而又相互独立的概念。 |
| The words “interpretation and application” were also used in paragraph (3) of the commentary to article 26 of the articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts, which addressed this interpretative effect of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 国家对国际不法行为的责任条款第26条评注第(3)段也使用了“解释和适用”一词，其中涉及一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的这一解释效果。 |
| It recognizes that, in some cases, what may be at issue is not the interpretation of the rule in question but its application. | 它承认，在某些情况下，可能有争议的不是对有关规则的解释，而是对规则的适用。 |
| This may be the case, for example, where a rule is, on its face, consistent with the relevant peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens), but its application in a particular way would be contrary to the relevant peremptory norm. | 例如，如果一项规则表面上符合有关的一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)，但以特定方式适用它将违反相关的强制性规范，可能就是这种情况。 |
| (4) | (4) |
| In the context of treaty rules, the rule in draft conclusion 20 may be seen as an application of article 31, paragraph 3 (c), of the 1969 Vienna Convention, which provides that in the interpretation of treaties “[a]ny relevant rules of international law applicable in the relations between the parties … shall be taken into account”. | 就条约规则而言，结论草案20中的规则可被视为对1969年《维也纳公约》第三十一条第三款(c)项的适用，该款规定，在解释条约时，“一并考虑者尚有”“适用于当事国间关系之任何有关国际法规则”。 |
| Peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) are rules of international law applicable in relations primarily between States and international organizations and must therefore, where relevant, be taken into account in the interpretation of treaties. | 一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)是主要适用于国家与国际组织之间关系的国际法规则，因此在解释条约时必须酌情加以考虑。 |
| (5) | (5) |
| Although the interpretative rule in draft conclusion 20 constitutes a concrete application of article 31, paragraph 3 (c), of the 1969 Vienna Convention, it does not apply only in relation to treaties but to the interpretation and application of all other rules of international law. | 虽然结论草案20中的解释性规则构成1969年《维也纳公约》第三十一条第三款(c)项的具体适用，但它不仅适用于条约，而且适用于所有其他国际法规则的解释和适用。 |
| In this respect, the Commission has stated that “[w]hen there is an apparent conflict between primary obligations, one of which arises for a State directly under a peremptory norm of general international law, it is evident that such an obligation must prevail … [P]eremptory norms of general international law generate strong interpretative principles which will resolve all or most apparent conflicts”. | 在这方面，委员会指出，“在一些主要义务看来互相抵触的情况下，若其中有一项义务属于一国直接根据一般国际法强制性规范而具有的义务，则显然必须优先遵守该义务…一般国际法强制性规范会产生强有力的解释原则，足以解决所有的或大部分的明显抵触情况”。 |
| (6) | (6) |
| As noted in paragraph (2) of this commentary, the words “as far as possible” are meant to indicate that the rule in this draft conclusion does not permit the limits of interpretation to be exceeded. | 如本评注第(2)段所述，“尽可能”一词意在表明，本结论草案中的规则不得超出解释的限度。 |
| Where it is not possible to arrive at an interpretation of the rule not of a peremptory character that is consistent with the peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens), the rule that is not of a peremptory character is to be invalidated in accordance with draft conclusions 10, 14, 15 and 16. | 如果不能对非强制性的规则作出与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)相一致的解释，则不具有强制性的规则将根据结论草案10、14、15和16而无效。 |
| (7) | (7) |
| The phrase “another rule of international law” in draft conclusion 20 is to be understood as referring to obligations under international law, whether arising under a treaty, customary international law, a general principle of law, a unilateral act or a resolution, decision or other act of an international organization. | 结论草案20中的“另一国际法规则”一语应理解为指国际法规定的义务，不论是条约、习惯国际法、一般法律原则、单方面行为或国际组织的决议、决定或其他行为所产生的义务。 |
| Draft conclusion 20 therefore applies in the interpretation of the rules or obligations identified in draft conclusions 10, 14, 15 and 16. | 因此，结论草案20适用于对结论草案10、14、15和16所确定的规则或义务的解释。 |
| Conclusion 21 Recommended procedure | 结论21 建议的程序 |
| 1. | 1. |
| A State which invokes a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) as a ground for the invalidity or termination of a rule of international law should do so by notifying other States concerned of its claim. | 一国如援引一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)作为一项国际法规则无效或终止之理由，应将其主张通知其他有关国家。 |
| The notification should be in writing and should indicate the measure proposed to be taken with respect to the rule of international law in question. | 通知应以书面形式发出，并说明拟就有关国际法规则采取的措施。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| If none of the other States raises an objection within a period which, except in cases of special urgency, will not be less than three months, the invoking State may carry out the measure which it has proposed. | 如其他有关国家在除特别紧急情况外不短于三个月的期间内无一表示反对，则援引国可采取其所提议的措施。 |
| 3. | 3. |
| If, however, any State concerned raises an objection, the States concerned should seek a solution through the means indicated in Article 33 of the Charter of the United Nations. | 然而，如任何有关国家表示反对，则有关国家应通过《联合国宪章》第三十三条所述方法寻求解决。 |
| If no solution is reached within a period of twelve months, and the objecting State offers to submit the matter to the International Court of Justice or to some other procedure entailing binding decisions, the invoking State should not carry out the measure which it has proposed until the dispute is resolved. | 如在十二个月内未能达成解决办法，而表示反对的国家提出将该事项提交国际法院或可作出具有约束力的裁决的某一其他程序，则在争端解决之前，援引国不得采取其所提议的措施。 |
| 4. | 4. |
| This draft conclusion is without prejudice to the procedures set forth in the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, to the relevant rules concerning the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice, or to other applicable dispute settlement provisions agreed by the States concerned. | 本条结论草案不妨碍《维也纳条约法公约》、关于国际法院管辖权的有关规则或有关国家商定的其他适用的争端解决规定所载的程序。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) | (1) |
| Draft conclusion 21 concerns the procedure that is recommended for the invocation of, and the reliance on, the invalidity of rules of international law, including treaties, by reason of being in conflict with peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 结论草案21涉及援引和依据包括条约在内的国际法规则因与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)相抵触而无效的建议程序。 |
| It is important to recall that during the United Nations Conference on the Law of Treaties, States generally supported the provisions relating to peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens), but concerns arose that the right to invoke the invalidity of treaties could be abused by States unilaterally invoking articles 53 and 64 and thus threatening the stability of treaty relations. | 必须回顾指出，在联合国条约法会议期间，各国普遍支持与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)有关的规定，但有一种关切是，国家可能通过单方面援引第五十三条和第六十四条，滥用援引条约无效的权利，从而威胁到条约关系的稳定。 |
| To address the concerns, the 1969 Vienna Convention subjects any reliance on articles 53 and 64 to a process involving judicial settlement procedures. | 为处理这一关切，1969年《维也纳公约》规定，任何依据第五十三条和第六十四条的情况都必须经过涉及司法解决程序的进程。 |
| In the context of the present draft conclusions, invocation of the rules set forth in Part Three without some type of mechanism to avoid unilateral measures raises similar concerns as those raised at the United Nations Conference on the Law of Treaties. | 就本结论草案而言，在没有某种可避免单边措施的机制的情况下援引第三部分提出的规则，会引起与联合国条约法会议提出的关切类似的关切。 |
| Draft conclusion 21 is thus aimed at avoiding, or minimizing, the potential for unilateralism and auto-interpretation in connection with peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 因此，结论草案21旨在避免或尽量减少在一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)方面出现单边主义和自行解释的可能性。 |
| (2) | (2) |
| The formulation of an appropriate provision for the purposes of the present draft conclusions is, however, not without its difficulties. | 然而，为本结论草案的目的拟订一项适当的规定并非没有困难。 |
| The principal difficulty is that detailed dispute resolution provisions are embedded in treaties and do not operate as a matter of customary international law. | 主要困难在于，详细的争端解决条款已纳入条约，而不是作为习惯国际法的问题出现。 |
| They operate in the context of treaty law, applicable only to States that have accepted the application of those rules. | 它们在条约法范围内运作，只适用于已接受适用这些规则的国家。 |
| Thus, with respect to peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens), the 1969 Vienna Convention contains an elaborate dispute settlement framework. | 因此，关于一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)，1969年《维也纳公约》载有一个详尽的争端解决框架。 |
| Under this framework, a State party that claims that a treaty is invalid on any ground, including for reason of being in conflict with a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens), must notify other States parties of its claim. | 在这一框架下，一国以任何理由宣称一项条约无效，包括以与一般国际法强制性规范相抵触为由宣称条约无效，必须将宣称的内容通知其他缔约国。 |
| If, after the expiry of a specified period, no objections to its notification are received, the consequences of invalidity may be implemented. | 如果在指定期限结束后，没有收到对其通知的反对意见，则可以实施无效的后果。 |
| If, however, there is an objection, the 1969 Vienna Convention requires that the States parties concerned seek a solution through the means provided for in the Charter of the United Nations. | 但是，如果收到反对意见，1969年《维也纳公约》要求有关国家通过《联合国宪章》规定的手段寻求解决办法。 |
| These means include negotiation, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement, resort to regional agencies or other peaceful means. | 这些手段包括谈判、调停、和解、仲裁、司法解决、诉诸区域机构或其他和平手段。 |
| If the claim of invalidity is based on a conflict with a peremptory norm under article 53 or article 64 and a solution to the conflict is not found using such means, then any party to the dispute may refer the matter to the International Court of Justice unless there is an agreement to submit it instead to arbitration. | 如果依据与第五十三条或第六十四条规定的强制性规范相抵触而提出无效主张，并且不能使用这类手段找到解决冲突的办法，则争端的任何当事方都可以将此事提交国际法院，除非各方同意对其进行仲裁。 |
| (3) | (3) |
| In the Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros Project case, the International Court of Justice stated that “both Parties agree that [a]rticles 65 to 67 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, if not codifying customary international law, at least generally reflect customary international law and contain certain procedural principles which are based on an obligation to act in good faith”. | 在加布奇科沃－大毛罗斯项目案中，国际法院声明，“双方同意，《维也纳条约法公约》第六十五至六十七条如果不是对习惯国际法的编纂，至少总体反映了习惯国际法，并载有某些基于善意行事义务的程序原则”。 |
| This observation by the Court refers primarily to the consultation process leading up to any termination of the agreement. | 法院的这一意见主要指的是导致任何协议终止的协商进程。 |
| The Court did not, by this statement, determine that there was a customary international law rule concerning the establishment of jurisdiction of the Court for the settlement of disputes relating to invalidation of treaties on the basis of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 法院作出这一声明并非认定存在一项习惯国际法规则来确定法院在处理有关基于一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的条约无效问题的争端解决方面的管辖权。 |
| The provisions of articles 65 to 67 of the 1969 Vienna Convention, in particular the provisions pertaining to the submission to the International Court of Justice of a dispute, cannot be said to reflect customary international law. | 1969年《维也纳公约》第六十五至第六十七条的规定，特别是关于向国际法院提交争端的规定，不能被视为反映了习惯国际法。 |
| As treaty provisions, they cannot be imposed on States that are not party to the 1969 Vienna Convention. | 它们是条约规定，不能被强加于非1969年《维也纳公约》缔约国的国家。 |
| Moreover, even amongst States that are party to the Convention, a number of States have formulated reservations to the application of the dispute settlement mechanism, particularly as it relates to the submission of disputes to the International Court of Justice and arbitration (art. 66 (a) of the 1969 Vienna Convention). | 此外，即使是在该公约缔约国中，也有一些国家对争端解决机制的适用提出了保留，特别是有关向国际法院提交争端和仲裁问题的保留(1969年《维也纳公约》第六十六条(a)款)。 |
| (4) | (4) |
| In formulating a provision for dispute settlement in relation to the invalidation of rules of international law on account of inconsistency with peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens), the Commission had to ensure, on the one hand, that it did not purport to impose treaty rules on States not bound by such rules while, on the other hand, that the concerns regarding the need to avoid unilateral invalidation of rules was taken account of. | 委员会在就国际法规则因为不符合一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)而无效的问题拟订解决争端的规定时，必须一方面确保该规定并非旨在将条约规则强加给不受这类规则约束的国家，而另一方面还要确保考虑到关于有必要避免单方面使规则无效的关切。 |
| Moreover, the Commission also had to ensure that the procedures established under the 1969 Vienna Convention, or any other treaty provision, were not undermined by the inclusion of the present provision. | 此外，委员会还必须确保，根据1969年《维也纳公约》或任何其他条约规定确立的程序不会因列入该规定而受到损害。 |
| Draft conclusion 21 sets forth a recommended procedure designed to achieve such a balance. | 结论草案21列出了旨在实现这种平衡的建议程序。 |
| The draft conclusion is couched in hortatory terms, to avoid any implication that its content is binding on States. | 本结论草案使用的是劝诫性措辞，以避免暗示其内容对各国具有约束力。 |
| (5) | (5) |
| Paragraphs 1 and 2 of draft conclusion 21 follow article 65 of the 1969 Vienna Convention. | 结论草案21的第1和第2段仿照了1969年《维也纳公约》第六十五条。 |
| Paragraph 1 provides that a State which seeks to impugn a rule of international law for being in conflict with a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) should notify other States of its claim. | 第1段要求因国际法规则与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)相抵触而对其加以非难的国家将其主张通知其他国家。 |
| Although this paragraph follows closely the wording of the 1969 Vienna Convention, there are two important differences. | 虽然该段紧贴1969年《维也纳公约》的措辞，但有两点重要区别。 |
| First, as is the case throughout the draft conclusion, the word “should” is used to indicate that the provision is a non-binding one. | 首先，和结论草案通篇一样，“应”字用于表示该规定不具有约束力。 |
| Second, the paragraph refers to “a rule of international law”, to signify that it applies to treaties and other international obligations deriving from other sources of international law. | 其次，该段提及“国际法规则”，以表明该段适用于条约和源自其他国际法来源的其他国际义务。 |
| Consequently, the paragraph refers to “States concerned” to indicate that the potential addressees of the notification are broader than the parties to a treaty. | 因此，该段用“有关国家”的表述，来表明通知的潜在对象比条约缔约方更广泛。 |
| The phrase “States concerned” is also used to indicate that in relation to treaties with limited membership, the requirement to notify is limited to the parties to the treaties. | “有关国家”一词还用来表明，就成员有限的条约而言，通知的要求仅限于条约缔约方。 |
| In line with paragraph (10) of the commentary to draft conclusion 1, the words “State” and “States concerned” in this draft conclusion should be understood to include mutatis mutandis international organizations that may be affected by any measures that may be adopted. | 根据结论草案1的评注第(10)段，本条结论草案中的“国家”和“有关国家”经类推应理解为也包括有可能受到可能采取的任何措施影响的国际组织。 |
| (6) | (6) |
| Paragraph 1 of draft conclusion 21 also provides that the notification is to indicate the measures proposed to remedy the conflict. | 结论草案21第1段还规定，通知的目的是为了指明拟就对冲突予以补救而采取的措施。 |
| Such measures may be those referred to in Part Three of the draft conclusions. | 这些措施可以是结论草案第三部分中提到的措施。 |
| The requirement to specify the measures proposed is in keeping with the purposes of the notification, which is to enable other States to respond appropriately, if necessary. | 具体说明拟议措施的要求符合通知的目的，即让其他国家能够在必要时作出适当回应。 |
| The notification can be distributed to other States through a variety of means, including through the Secretary-General of the United Nations. | 通知可以通过各种方式分发给其他国家，包括通过联合国秘书长分发。 |
| (7) | (7) |
| Paragraph 2 of draft conclusion 21 states that if no other State raises an objection to the notification, then the State making the claim may carry out the measure it has proposed. | 结论草案21第2段指出，如果其他国家无一对通知表示反对，则提出请求的国家可采取其所提议的措施。 |
| The right to carry out these measures, however, can only be exercised after “a period which, except in cases of special urgency, shall not be less than three months”. | 然而，采取这些措施的权利只能在“除特别紧急情况外不短于三个月的期间”之后行使。 |
| This means, in the first place, that the notification referred to in paragraph 1 should specify a period within which an objection must be made to the notification. | 这意味着，首先，第1段所指的通知应明确规定必须对通知提出反对的期限。 |
| The period should be a reasonable period and the Commission determined that, as a general rule, a minimum of three months was a reasonable period. | 这个期限应是一个合理的时间段，而委员会曾决定，作为一般性规则，至少三个月是一个合理的时间段。 |
| Second, it is only after the expiry of the said period, and if there has been no objection, that the State invoking the invalidity of a treaty can carry out the measure proposed. | 其次，只有在所述期限到期之后，且如果无人表示反对，则援引一项条约无效的国家才能采取提议的措施。 |
| There may be cases where a three-month period may be too long. | 在某些情况下，三个月的期限可能太长。 |
| For this purpose, paragraph 2 of draft conclusion 21 sets out the possibility of a shorter period “in cases of special urgency”. | 因此，结论草案21第2段规定了在“特别紧急情况”下缩短期限的可能性。 |
| The draft conclusions do not define “cases of special urgency”. | 结论草案没有界定“特别紧急情况”。 |
| This is to be determined on the basis of the facts in each particular case. | 这须依据每个具体情况的事实而定。 |
| However, it can be said that “cases of special urgency” will be those in which time is of the essence. | 然而，可以说，“特别紧急情况”将是那些时间至关重要的情况。 |
| (8) | (8) |
| Paragraph 3 of draft conclusion 21 addresses those cases in which any State concerned raises an objection against a claim that a rule of international law is void as a result of a conflict with a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens). | 结论草案21第3段涉及任何有关国家对国际法规则因与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)相抵触而无效的主张提出反对的情况。 |
| If there is such an objection, then the invoking State cannot unilaterally implement the proposed measures. | 如果出现这种反对情况，则援引国不能单方面采取提议的措施。 |
| In such a case, the invoking State and the other States concerned are then required to seek a solution of their choice amongst the means indicated in Article 33 of the Charter of the United Nations. | 在这种情况下，援引国和其他有关国家应通过自己选择的《联合国宪章》第三十三条所述手段寻求解决办法。 |
| (9) | (9) |
| Paragraph 3 of draft conclusion 21 also addresses those cases in which the States concerned are not able to find a solution through the means indicated in Article 33 of the Charter of the United Nations. | 结论草案21第3段还处理了有关国家无法通过《联合国宪章》第三十三条所述手段找到解决办法的情况。 |
| It provides that, in such cases, where the objecting State has offered to submit the matter to the International Court of Justice or some other procedure of a binding nature, the invoking State should not carry out the measure it had proposed until the dispute is resolved. | 它规定，在这种情况下，如果反对国提出将该事项提交国际法院或具有约束力的某一其他程序，则援引国在争端得到解决前，不得采取其所提议的措施。 |
| The Commission proceeded from the basis that the invocation of the invalidity of a rule of international law as a result of inconsistency with a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) did not, as such, constitute the basis for the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice. | 委员会的依据是，因一项国际法规则与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)不一致而援引其无效性，本身并不构成国际法院管辖权的基础。 |
| However, in the spirit of avoiding unilateralism, the Commission found it appropriate, without obliging submission to the International Court of Justice, to encourage submission of the dispute to the International Court of Justice. | 然而，本着避免单边主义的精神，委员会认为，鼓励而不强迫将争端提交国际法院，是适当的。 |
| The purpose of paragraph 3 of the draft conclusion is thus to encourage submission of an unresolved dispute to judicial settlement of disputes. | 因此，本结论草案第3段的目的是鼓励将未解决的争端提交司法解决。 |
| (10) | (10) |
| Draft conclusion 21 is a procedural provision, without implication for the lawfulness of any measures that may be carried out. | 结论草案21是一项程序性规定，对可能采取的任何措施的合法性没有影响。 |
| If, after the expiration of the twelve-month period, no offer to submit the matter to the International Court of Justice is made by the other States concerned, the invoking State is no longer precluded by the procedural provisions of draft conclusion 21 from taking the proposed measures. | 如果其他有关国家在十二个月期限到期后没有提出将此事提交国际法院，则援引国不再受制于阻止其采取措施的结论草案21的程序性规定。 |
| It is important to emphasize that there is, under this provision, no obligation to submit the matter to the International Court of Justice, nor does this provision establish compulsory jurisdiction. | 必须强调的是，根据这条规定，不存在将此事提交国际法院的义务，该规定也没有确定强制管辖权。 |
| Instead, the provision precludes the State invoking invalidity from carrying out the proposed measures if the other concerned States offer to submit the matter to the International Court of Justice. | 相反，如果其他有关国家提出将该事项提交国际法院，则这条规定排除了援引无效的国家采取所提议措施的可能性。 |
| In the event that such an offer to submit the matter to the International Court of Justice is made, the State invoking invalidity will then only be entitled to carry out the proposed measures after the dispute is resolved and in accordance with a determination by the Court that the measures are justified under international law. | 如果有国家提出将此事提交国际法院，那么援引无效的国家只有在争端解决后，才有权根据法院关于这些措施依照国际法属于合理措施的决定，采取提议的措施。 |
| (11) | (11) |
| Paragraph 4 is a “without prejudice” clause. | 第4段是一个不妨碍条款。 |
| As explained above, draft conclusion 21 does not establish the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice, nor does it create an obligation for any State to submit a matter to the Court or to accept the Court’s jurisdiction. | 如上文所述，结论草案21既没有确立国际法院的管辖权，也没有规定任何国家向法院提交事项或接受法院管辖权的义务。 |
| By the same token, draft conclusion 21 does not affect any basis for jurisdiction that may exist under any other rule in international law, including the dispute settlement mechanisms under the 1969 Vienna Convention or other applicable dispute settlement provisions agreed to by the States concerned (including the invoking State). | 同样，结论草案21不影响国际法任何其他规则下可能存在的管辖权依据，包括1969年《维也纳公约》下的争端解决机制或有关国家(包括援引国)商定的其他适用的争端解决规定。 |
| Conclusion 22 Without prejudice to consequences that specific peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) may otherwise entail | 结论22 不妨碍特定的一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)可能引起的其他后果 |
| The present draft conclusions are without prejudice to consequences that specific peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) may otherwise entail under international law. | 本结论草案不妨碍特定的一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)可能依国际法引起的其他后果。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) | (1) |
| Draft conclusion 22 is a “without prejudice” clause. | 结论草案22是一个不妨碍条款。 |
| It provides that the current draft conclusions are without prejudice to the consequences that specific peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) may otherwise entail under international law. | 它规定，本结论草案不妨碍特定的一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)可能依国际法引起的其他后果。 |
| (2) | (2) |
| The scope of the present draft conclusions concerns the identification and legal consequences of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 本结论草案涉及一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的识别和法律后果。 |
| As described in paragraph (3) of the commentary to draft conclusion 1, the present draft conclusions are not intended to address the content of individual peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 正如结论草案1评注第(3)段所述，本结论草案无意处理具体的一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的内容。 |
| In addition to the methodology and process for identifying peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens), the draft conclusions also address, in general, the legal consequences flowing from peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 除了识别一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的方法和程序外，结论草案还涉及一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)产生的一般法律后果。 |
| These include consequences for treaty rules, customary international law, unilateral acts and binding resolutions, decisions or other acts of international organizations. | 这包括对条约规则、习惯国际法、单方面行为和具有约束力的国际组织决议、决定或其他行为的后果。 |
| The contents of individual peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) may themselves have legal consequences that are distinct from the general legal consequences identified in the present draft conclusions. | 具体的一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的内容本身可能产生的法律后果不同于本结论草案所确定的一般法律后果。 |
| Hence, draft conclusion 22 is intended to convey that the draft conclusions are without prejudice to any such legal consequences that may otherwise arise from specific peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 因此，结论草案22意在表明，本结论草案不妨碍一般国际法特定强制性规范(强行法)可能产生的任何此类法律后果。 |
| (3) | (3) |
| One area in which the issue of legal consequences for specific peremptory norms has been raised concerns the consequences of crimes the commission of which are prohibited by peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens), such as the prohibition of genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity, and, in particular, the possible consequences for immunity and the jurisdiction of national courts. | 提出特定强制性规范的法律后果问题的一个领域是一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)所禁止的犯罪后果，例如禁止灭绝种族罪、战争罪和危害人类罪，特别是可能对豁免和国家法院管辖权产生的后果。 |
| These consequences are not general consequences of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens), but rather relate to specific peremptory norms of general international law. | 这些后果并非一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的一般后果，而是与特定的一般国际法强制性规范有关。 |
| As such, they are not addressed in the present draft conclusions. | 因此，本结论草案没有涉及这些问题。 |
| Conclusion 23 Non-exhaustive list | 结论23 非详尽无遗的清单 |
| Without prejudice to the existence or subsequent emergence of other peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens), a non-exhaustive list of norms that the International Law Commission has previously referred to as having that status is to be found in the annex to the present draft conclusions. | 在不妨碍其他一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的存在或嗣后出现的情况下，本结论草案附件载有国际法委员会以前提到的具有这种地位的规范的非详尽无遗清单。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) | (1) |
| Draft conclusion 1 sets out the scope of the present draft conclusions as concerning the identification and legal consequences of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 结论草案1阐述了本结论草案的范围，涉及一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的识别和法律后果。 |
| As indicated in paragraph (3) of the commentary to draft conclusion 1 and paragraph (2) of the commentary to draft conclusion 22, the present draft conclusions are methodological in nature and do not attempt to address the content of individual peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 正如结论草案1评注第(3)段和结论草案22评注第(2)段所述，本结论草案的本质是方法问题，无意处理具体的一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的内容。 |
| As a result, the present draft conclusions do not seek to elaborate a list of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 因此，本结论草案无意详细列出一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的清单。 |
| (2) | (2) |
| To elaborate a list of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens), even a non-exhaustive list, would require a detailed and rigorous study of many potential norms to determine which of those potential norms meet the criteria set out in Part Two of the present draft conclusions. | 拟订一份一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)清单，即使是一份非详尽无遗的清单，也需要对许多可能的规范进行详细严格的研究，以确定其中哪些可能的规范符合本结论草案第二部分所载的标准。 |
| Such an exercise falls beyond the scope of the exercise of elaborating draft conclusions on identification and legal consequences of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 这种做法超出了拟订关于一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的识别和法律后果的结论草案的范围。 |
| (3) | (3) |
| Although the identification of specific norms that have a peremptory character falls beyond the scope of the present draft conclusions, the Commission has decided to include in an annex a non-exhaustive list of norms previously referred to by the Commission as having peremptory character. | 虽然识别具有强制性的特定规范不属于本结论草案的范围，但委员会决定在附件中列入一份非详尽无遗的清单，列出委员会以前提到的具有强制性的规范。 |
| Draft conclusion 23 refers to this annex. | 结论草案23提及该附件。 |
| The Commission emphasizes that, in putting together this list, it did not apply the methodology it set forth in draft conclusions 4 to 9. | 委员会强调，在编制这份清单时，委员会没有采用结论草案4至9中提出的方法。 |
| The list is intended to illustrate, by reference to previous work of the Commission, the types of norms that have routinely been identified as having peremptory character, without itself, at this time, making an assessment of those norms. | 这份清单的目的是参照委员会以前的工作，说明通常被识别为具有强制性的规范类型，而清单本身目前没有对这些规范作出评估。 |
| (4) | (4) |
| Draft conclusion 23 provides, first, that this annex is without prejudice to the existence or subsequent emergence of other peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 结论草案23规定，首先，该附件不妨碍其他一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的存在或嗣后出现。 |
| The phrase “[w]ithout prejudice to the existence or subsequent emergence of other peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens)” is meant to indicate that the inclusion of the list in the annex in no way precludes the existence at present of other norms that may have peremptory character or the emergence of other norms in the future having that character. | “在不妨碍其他一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的存在或嗣后出现的情况下”一语意在表明，将该清单列入附件绝不排除目前可能具有强制性质的其他规范的存在，亦不排除今后出现具有此种性质的其他规范。 |
| Second, draft conclusion 23 provides, as a statement of fact, that the norms contained in the annex are those that have been previously referred to by the Commission as having peremptory status. | 其次，作为事实说明，结论草案23规定，附件所载的规范是委员会以前提到的具有强制性地位的规范。 |
| Finally, draft conclusion 23 states that the list contained in the annex is non-exhaustive, which serves to reinforce the fact that this list is without prejudice to other norms having the same character. | 最后，结论草案23指出，附件所载清单并非详尽无遗，这强化了该清单并不妨碍具有同样性质的其他规范这一事实。 |
| It is non-exhaustive in two ways. | 清单在两个方面并非详尽无遗。 |
| It is non-exhaustive, first, in the sense that beyond the norms identified in the list, there are or may be other peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 首先，它并非详尽无遗，因为在清单所确定的规范之外，还有或可能有其他一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)。 |
| Second, it is non-exhaustive in the sense that, in addition to the norms listed in the annex, the Commission has also referred previously to other norms as having peremptory character. | 第二，它并非详尽无遗，因为除了附件所列的规范外，委员会以前还提到过其他具有强制性的规范。 |
| The annex should therefore not be seen as excluding the peremptory character of these other norms. | 因此，不应视附件为排除了其他规范的强制性。 |
| (5) | (5) |
| The fact that the annex referred to in draft conclusion 23 contains norms previously referred to by the Commission has two implications for the list. | 结论草案23中提到的附件载有委员会以前提到的规范，这一事实显示出关于清单的两个含义。 |
| First, the formulation of each norm is based on a formulation previously used by the Commission. | 首先，每一项规范的表述都基于委员会以前使用的一种表述。 |
| The Commission has therefore not attempted to reformulate the norms on the list. | 因此，委员会没有试图重新拟订清单上的规范。 |
| As will be seen in the following paragraphs of the commentary to draft conclusion 23, in some cases the Commission has used different formulations in its previous works. | 从结论草案23评注的以下段落中不难看出，在某些情况下，委员会在以前的工作中采用了不同的表述。 |
| The second implication is that there has been no attempt to define the scope, content or application of the norms identified. | 第二个含义是没有对确定的规范的范围、内容或适用范围加以界定的企图。 |
| The annex merely lists norms previously identified by the Commission, relying on the same formulations and without seeking to address any aspects of the content of the rules. | 该附件仅列出了委员会以前确定的规范，依据的是同样的表述，并不涉及规则内容的任何方面。 |
| (6) | (6) |
| In its previous works, the Commission has used different phrases to qualify the norms to which it has referred. | 在以前的工作中，委员会使用了不同的措辞来限定它所提到的规范。 |
| In its commentary to draft article 50 of the draft articles on the law of treaties, it used the phrases “conspicuous example” and “example” respectively when referring to two of the norms. | 在条约法条款草案第50条的评注中，委员会在提及其中两项规范时分别使用了“显著的例子”和“例子”这两个短语。 |
| In its commentary to article 26 of the draft articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts, the Commission referred to the norms on its list as those “clearly accepted and recognized”, while in its commentary to article 40 of the same articles, it used the phrase “generally agreed” to qualify the norm of “prohibition of aggression” as peremptory, and said there “seems to be widespread agreement” with regard to other norms listed in that paragraph. | 在国家对国际不法行为的责任条款草案第26条草案的评注中，委员会提到其清单上的规范是“被明确接受和承认的”， 而在同一条款第40条的评注中，委员会使用“一般都同意”一词将“禁止侵略”的规范限定为强制性规范，并说该段所列其他规范“似乎也得到广泛认同”。 |
| (7) | (7) |
| The first norm identified in the annex is the prohibition of aggression. | 附件中确定的第一个规范是禁止侵略。 |
| The prohibition of aggression was referred to by the Commission in the commentary to the articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts. | 委员会在国家对国际不法行为的责任条款的评注中提到了禁止侵略。 |
| In 1966, the Commission stated that the “law of the Charter [of the United Nations] concerning the prohibition of the use of force in itself constitutes a conspicuous example of a rule in international law having the character of jus cogens”. | 1966年，委员会指出，“[联合国]宪章中关于禁止使用武力的法律本身即构成具有绝对法则性质的国际法规则的显著实例”。 |
| Although not strictly the output of the Commission itself, the 2006 work of its Study Group on the fragmentation of international law is also noteworthy. | 虽然严格说来并非委员会本身的产出，但委员会的国际法不成体系问题研究组2006年的工作也值得注意。 |
| Like the commentary to the articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts, the conclusions of the Study Group on the fragmentation of international law referred to the prohibition of aggression as a peremptory norm. | 如同国家对国际不法行为的责任条款的评注一样，国际法不成体系问题研究组的结论也提到禁止侵略是一项强制性规范。 |
| The report of the Study Group on the fragmentation of international law, after referring to the Commission’s identification of the prohibition of aggression, included “the prohibition of aggressive use of force” on its list of the “most frequently cited candidates for the status of jus cogens”. | 国际法不成体系问题研究组的报告在提到委员会确定的禁止侵略之后，将“禁止侵略性使用武力”列入其“最常援引的具有强行法地位的备选规范”清单。 |
| (8) | (8) |
| The second norm identified in the annex is the prohibition of genocide. | 附件中确定的第二个规范是禁止灭绝种族。 |
| The prohibition of genocide has been referred to by the Commission with a consistent formulation in all its relevant work. | 委员会在其所有相关工作中都以一致的措辞提到了禁止灭绝种族。 |
| In particular, the articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts, both in the commentary to article 26 and in the commentary to article 40, referred to the prohibition of genocide. | 具体而言，国家对国际不法行为的责任条款无论是在第26条的评注中，还是在第40条的评注中，都提到禁止灭绝种族。 |
| Similarly, both the conclusions and the report of the Study Group on the fragmentation of international law refer to the prohibition of genocide. | 同样，国际法不成体系问题研究组的结论和报告都提到禁止灭绝种族。 |
| (9) | (9) |
| The prohibition of crimes against humanity is the third norm included in the annex. | 禁止危害人类罪是附件所载的第三项规范。 |
| The fourth paragraph of the preamble to the 2019 draft articles on prevention and punishment of crimes against humanity recalled that “the prohibition of crimes against humanity is a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens)”. | 2019年防止及惩治危害人类罪条款草案序言第四段忆及“禁止危害人类罪是一项一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)”。 |
| In the commentary to article 26 of the articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts, the Commission referred not to the prohibition of crimes against humanity separately, but to the prohibition of “crimes against humanity and torture”. | 在国家对国际不法行为的责任条款第26条的评注中，委员会没有单独提到禁止危害人类罪，而是提到禁止“危害人类罪和酷刑”。 |
| The prohibition of crimes against humanity is also referred to in the report of the Study Group on the fragmentation of international law as one of the “most frequently cited candidates” for norms with jus cogens status. | 国际法不成体系问题研究组的报告还提到，禁止危害人类罪是具有强行法地位规范中“最常援引的…备选规范”之一。 |
| (10) | (10) |
| The basic rules of international humanitarian law, the fourth norm in the annex, has been referred to by the Commission in its commentary to article 40 of its articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts. | 国际人道法的基本规则是附件中的第四项规范，委员会在其国家对国际不法行为的责任条款第40条的评注中提到了这一规范。 |
| The conclusions of the Study Group on the fragmentation of international law refer to basic rules of international humanitarian law applicable in armed conflict. | 国际法不成体系问题研究组的结论提到适用于武装冲突的国际人道法的基本规则。 |
| The report of the Study Group on the fragmentation of international law, on the other hand, refers to “the prohibition of hostilities directed at civilian population (‘basic rules of international humanitarian law’)”. | 另一方面，国际法不成体系问题研究组的报告提到“禁止针对平民的敌对行为(‘国际人道法基本规则’)”。 |
| (11) | (11) |
| The fifth norm in the annex is the prohibition of racial discrimination and apartheid. | 附件中的第五项规范是禁止种族歧视和种族隔离。 |
| The prohibition of racial discrimination and apartheid is referred to in the commentary to article 40 of the articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts. | 国家对国际不法行为的责任条款第40条的评注提到禁止种族歧视和种族隔离。 |
| The commentary to article 26 of the same articles, however, only refers to the prohibition of racial discrimination, without any reference to apartheid. | 但是，该套条款第26条的评注只提到禁止种族歧视，而没有提到种族隔离。 |
| The report of the Study Group on the fragmentation of international law also refers to the prohibition of racial discrimination and apartheid. | 国际法不成体系问题研究组的报告也提到禁止种族歧视和种族隔离。 |
| The conclusions of the Study Group on the fragmentation of international law, however, refer to the prohibition of apartheid along with torture, without any reference to racial discrimination. | 然而，国际法不成体系问题研究组的结论提到禁止种族隔离和酷刑，而没有提到种族歧视。 |
| (12) | (12) |
| The annex also includes the prohibition of slavery as the sixth norm on the list of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) previously referred to by the Commission. | 附件还将禁止奴隶制列为委员会以前提到的一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)清单上的第六项规范。 |
| The prohibition of slavery was referred to by the Commission as a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) in the commentary to article 26 of the articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts. | 委员会在国家对国际不法行为的责任条款第26条的评注中提到，禁止奴隶制是一项一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)。 |
| The commentary to article 40 of the same articles refers to the prohibition of slavery and the slave trade. | 同一套条款第40条的评注中提到禁止奴隶制和奴隶贸易。 |
| The commentary to the draft articles on the law of treaties, for its part, refers to the prohibition of the trade in slaves. | 条约法条款草案的评注提到禁止奴隶贸易。 |
| (13) | (13) |
| The prohibition of torture is the seventh norm in the annex. | 禁止酷刑是附件中的第七项规范。 |
| The prohibition of torture is referred to by the Commission in its commentary to article 40 of the articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts. | 委员会在国家对国际不法行为的责任条款第40条的评注中提到禁止酷刑。 |
| In the commentary to article 26 of the same articles, the Commission refers to the prohibition of “crimes against humanity and torture”. | 在同一套条款第26条的评注中，委员会提到禁止“危害人类罪和酷刑”。 |
| The conclusions of the Study Group on the fragmentation of international law, on the other hand, refer to the prohibition of “apartheid and torture”. | 另一方面，国际法不成体系问题研究组的结论提到禁止“种族隔离和酷刑”。 |
| (14) | (14) |
| The final norm listed in the annex is the right of self-determination. | 附件所列的最后一项规范是自决权。 |
| In describing the norm as having peremptory character, the Commission has used the formulation “the right of self-determination”, although it has at times referred to the “right to self-determination”. | 在将该规范描述为具有强制性时，委员会使用了“the right of self-determination”(自决权)这一行文，尽管有时委员会使用“the right to self-determination”(自决权)。 |
| (15) | (15) |
| As explained in paragraph (2), the list is non-exhaustive not only in the sense that it does not purport to cover all peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) that may exist or that may emerge in the future, but also in the sense that it does not reflect all the norms that have been referred to in some way by the Commission as having a peremptory character. | 正如第(2)段所解释的那样，该清单并非详尽无遗，不仅因为它无意涵盖可能存在或将来可能出现的所有一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)，而且也因为它没有反映委员会以某种方式提到的所有具有强制性的规范。 |
| This includes those norms that the Commission has considered in the course of its deliberations. | 这包括委员会在审议过程中审议的规范。 |
| For example, in its commentary to article 50 of the draft articles on the law of treaties, the Commission referred, inter alia, to the prohibition of piracy and to the principle of the sovereign “equality of States” – a fundamental principle under the Charter of the United Nations. | 例如，委员会在条约法条款草案第50条的评注中，除其他外，提到禁止海盗行为和《联合国宪章》中的一项基本原则――主权“国家平等”原则。 |
| The Commission had also referred to the important role of the Charter of the United Nations, especially its provisions setting out the purposes and principles of the United Nations for the development of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 委员会还提及《联合国宪章》的重要作用，尤其是《宪章》中为联合国发展一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)规定宗旨和原则的条款。 |
| In draft article 19, adopted in 1976 during the first reading of the topic “State responsibility”, the Commission also referred to obligations “of essential importance for the safeguarding and preservation of the human environment, such as those prohibiting massive pollution of the atmosphere or of the seas” as peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 在1976年对“国家的责任”专题进行一读时通过的第19条草案中，委员会还提到“对保护和维护人类环境至关重要的”义务，“例如禁止大规模污染大气层或海洋”的义务，作为一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)。 |
| (16) | (16) |
| The norms in the annex are presented in no particular order. | 附件中的规范非按特定顺序列出。 |
| Their order does not, in any way, signify a hierarchy among them. | 排列顺序丝毫不代表它们之间的位阶排序。 |
| Annex | 附件 |
| (a) | (a) |
| The prohibition of aggression; | 禁止侵略； |
| (b) | (b) |
| the prohibition of genocide; | 禁止灭绝种族； |
| (c) | (c) |
| the prohibition of crimes against humanity; | 禁止危害人类罪； |
| (d) | (d) |
| the basic rules of international humanitarian law; | 国际人道法的基本规则； |
| (e) | (e) |
| the prohibition of racial discrimination and apartheid; | 禁止种族歧视和种族隔离； |
| (f) | (f) |
| the prohibition of slavery; | 禁止奴隶制； |
| (g) | (g) |
| the prohibition of torture; | 禁止酷刑； |
| (h) | (h) |
| the right of self-determination. | 自决权。 |
| Chapter V Protection of the environment in relation to armed conflicts | 第五章 与武装冲突有关的环境保护 |
| A. | A. |
| Introduction | 导言 |
| 45. | 45. |
| 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. | 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·雅各布松女士为特别报告员。 |
| 46. | 46. |
| The Special Rapporteur submitted three reports. | 特别报告员提交了三次报告。 |
| The Commission received and considered the preliminary report at its sixty-sixth session (2014), the second report at its sixty-seventh session (2015) and the third report at its sixty-eighth session (2016). | 委员会第六十六届会议(2014年)收到并审议了初步报告，第六十七届会议(2015年)收到并审议了第二次报告，第六十八届会议(2016年)收到并审议了第三次报告。 |
| On the basis of the draft principles proposed by the Special Rapporteur in the preliminary, second and third reports, the Commission provisionally adopted sixteen draft principles. | 委员会在特别报告员初步、第二次和第三次报告提出的原则草案基础上暂时通过了16项原则草案。 |
| 47. | 47. |
| At its sixty-ninth session (2017), the Commission established a Working Group, chaired by Mr. Marcelo Vázquez-Bermúdez, to consider the way forward in relation to the topic, as Ms. Jacobsson was no longer a member of the Commission. | 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，以考虑本专题今后的方向，马塞洛·巴斯克斯－贝穆德斯先生担任工作组主席。 |
| The Working Group recommended to the Commission the appointment of a new Special Rapporteur 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。 |
| 48. | 48. |
| At its seventieth (2018) session, the Commission received and considered the first report of the Special Rapporteur and took note of draft principles 19, 20 and 21, which had been provisionally adopted by the Drafting Committee. | 在第七十届会议(2018年)上，委员会收到并审议了特别报告员的第一次报告， 并注意到起草委员会暂时通过的原则草案19、20和21。 |
| At its seventy-first session (2019), the Commission provisionally adopted draft principles 19, 20 and 21, which had been provisionally adopted by the Drafting Committee at the seventieth session and taken note of by the Commission at the same session. | 委员会第七十一届会议(2019年)暂时通过了起草委员会在第七十届会议上暂时通过、委员会在同一届会议上注意到的原则草案19、20和21。 |
| The Commission considered the second report of the Special Rapporteur. | 委员会审议了特别报告员的第二次报告。 |
| 49. | 49. |
| Also at its seventy-first session (2019), the Commission adopted, on first reading, the entire set of draft principles on protection of the environment in relation to armed conflicts, which comprised 28 draft principles, together with commentaries thereto. | 也是在第七十一届会议(2019年)上，委员会一读通过了整套与武装冲突有关的环境保护原则草案，其中包括28项原则草案及其评注。 |
| It decided, in accordance with articles 16 to 21 of its statute, to transmit the draft principles, through the Secretary-General, to Governments, international organizations and others 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、国际组织和其他方面转发这些原则草案，以征求评论和意见。 |
| B. | B. |
| Consideration of the topic at the present session | 本届会议审议此专题的情况 |
| 50. | 50. |
| At the present session, the Commission had before it the third report of the Special Rapporteur (A/CN.4/750), as well as comments and observations received from Governments, international organizations and others (A/CN.4/749). | 委员会本届会议收到了特别报告员的第三次报告(A/CN.4/750)以及各国政府、国际组织和其他方面提交的评论和意见(A/CN.4/749)。 |
| 51. | 51. |
| At its 3571st to 3578th meetings, from 28 April to 10 May 2022, the Commission considered the third report of the Special Rapporteur and instructed the Drafting Committee to commence the second reading of the entire set of draft principles, together with a draft preamble, on the basis of the proposals by the Special Rapporteur, taking into account the comments and observations of Governments, international organizations and others, as well as the debate in plenary on the Special Rapporteur’s report. | 在2022年4月28日至5月10日举行的第3571至第3578次会议上，委员会审议了特别报告员的第三次报告，并指示起草委员会根据特别报告员的建议开始对整套原则草案及序言草案进行二读，同时考虑到各国政府、国际组织和其他方面的评论和意见，以及全体会议对特别报告员报告进行的辩论情况。 |
| 52. | 52. |
| The Commission considered the report of the Drafting Committee (A/CN.4/L.968) at its 3584th meeting, held on 27 May 2022, and adopted the entire set of draft principles, together with a preamble, on protection of the environment in relation to armed conflicts on second reading (sect. E.1 below). | 委员会在2022年5月27日举行的第3584次会议上审议了起草委员会的报告(A/CN.4/L.968)，并二读通过了整套与武装冲突有关的环境保护原则草案及序言(下文E.1节)。 |
| 53. | 53. |
| At its 3602nd to 3606th meetings, from 28 July to 2 August 2022, the Commission adopted the commentaries to the draft principles and the preamble (see sect. E.2 below). | 在2022年7月28日至8月2日举行的第3602至第3606次会议上，委员会通过了原则草案及序言的评注(见下文E.2节)。 |
| 54. | 54. |
| In accordance with its statute, the Commission submits the draft principles, together with the preamble, to the General Assembly, with the recommendation set out below. | 委员会根据其《章程》向联大提交原则草案及序言，并提出以下建议。 |
| C. | C. |
| Recommendation of the Commission | 委员会的建议 |
| 55. | 55. |
| At its 3606th meeting, on 2 August 2022, the Commission decided, in conformity with article 23 of its statute, to recommend that the General Assembly: | 在2022年8月2日举行的第3606次会议上，委员会根据其《章程》第23条决定建议联大： |
| (a) | (a) |
| take note of the draft principles on protection of the environment in relation to armed conflicts in a resolution, to annex the principles to the resolution, and to encourage their widest possible dissemination; | 在一项决议中表示注意到与武装冲突有关的环境保护原则草案，将这些原则作为该决议的附件，并鼓励尽可能广泛地予以传播； |
| (b) | (b) |
| commend the draft principles, together with the commentaries thereto, to the attention of States and international organizations and all who may be called upon to deal with the subject. | 提请各国、国际组织和所有可能需要处理该专题的人注意原则草案及其评注。 |
| D. | D. |
| Tribute to the Special Rapporteur | 向特别报告员表示感谢 |
| 56. | 56. |
| At its 3606th meeting, held on 2 August 2022, the Commission, after adopting the draft principles on protection of the environment in relation to armed conflicts, adopted the following resolution by acclamation: | 在2022年8月2日举行的第3606次会议上，委员会在通过了与武装冲突有关的环境保护原则草案后，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 principles on protection of the environment in relation to armed conflicts, | 通过了与武装冲突有关的环境保护原则草案， |
| Expresses to the Special Rapporteur, Ms. Marja Lehto, its deep appreciation and warm congratulations for the outstanding contribution she has made to the preparation of the draft principles through her tireless efforts and devoted work, and for the results achieved in the elaboration of draft principles on protection of the environment in relation to armed conflicts.” | 向特别报告员玛丽亚·莱赫托女士表示深挚感谢和热烈祝贺，感谢并祝贺她以不懈的努力和专注的工作为起草原则草案做出杰出贡献，并使与武装冲突有关的环境保护原则草案的拟订工作取得成果。 ” |
| 57. | 57. |
| The Commission also reiterated its deep appreciation for the valuable contribution of the previous Special Rapporteur, Ms. Marie G. Jacobsson, to the work on the topic. | 委员会还再次深挚感谢前任特别报告员玛丽·雅各布松女士为该专题工作做出的宝贵贡献。 |
| E. | E. |
| Text of the draft principles on protection of the environment in relation to armed conflicts | 与武装冲突有关的环境保护原则草案案文 |
| 1. | 1. |
| Text of the draft principles | 原则草案案文 |
| 58. | 58. |
| The text of the draft principles adopted by the Commission, on second reading, at its seventy-third session is reproduced below. | 委员会第七十三届会议二读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 |
| Recalling the urgent need and common objectives to reinforce and advance the conservation, restoration and sustainable use of the environment for present and future generations, | 回顾为今世后代加强和促进环境的保护、恢复和可持续利用的迫切需要和共同目标， |
| Recalling also that Principle 24 of the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development provides, inter alia, that States shall respect international law providing protection for the environment in times of armed conflict and cooperate in its further development, | 又回顾《关于环境与发展的里约宣言》原则24特别规定，各国应遵守国际法关于在武装冲突期间保护环境的规定，并合作促进其进一步发展， |
| Recognizing that environmental consequences of armed conflicts may be severe and have the potential to exacerbate global environmental challenges, such as climate change and biodiversity loss, | 承认武装冲突的环境后果可能是严重的，并可能加剧全球环境挑战，如气候变化和生物多样性丧失， |
| Aware of the importance of the environment for livelihoods, food and water security, maintenance of traditions and cultures, and the enjoyment of human rights, | 意识到环境对生计、粮食安全和水安全、维护传统和文化以及享受人权的重要性， |
| Emphasizing that environmental factors are to be taken into account in the context of the implementation of the principles and rules of the law applicable in armed conflict, | 强调在执行适用于武装冲突的法律原则和规则时应考虑到环境因素， |
| Conscious of the need to enhance the protection of the environment in relation to both international and non-international armed conflicts, including in situations of occupation, | 认识到需要加强与国际性和非国际性武装冲突有关的环境保护，包括占领局势中的环境保护， |
| Considering that effective protection of the environment in relation to armed conflicts requires that measures are taken by States, international organizations and other relevant actors to prevent, mitigate and remediate harm to the environment before, during and after an armed conflict, | 考虑到与武装冲突有关的有效的环境保护要求各国、国际组织和其他相关行为体在武装冲突之前、期间和之后，采取措施防止、减轻和补救对环境的损害， |
| Part One Introduction | 第一部分 导言 |
| 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, including in situations of occupation. | 本原则草案适用于武装冲突之前、期间或之后的环境保护，包括占领局势中的环境保护。 |
| 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 conflicts, including through measures to prevent, mitigate and remediate harm to the environment. | 本原则草案旨在加强与武装冲突有关的环境保护，包括为此采取措施，防止、减轻和补救对环境的损害。 |
| Part Two Principles of general application | 第二部分 一般适用原则 |
| Principle 3 Measures to enhance the protection of the environment | 原则3 加强环境保护的措施 |
| 1. | 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 conflicts. | 各国应依照其国际法义务，采取有效的立法、行政、司法措施和其他措施，加强与武装冲突有关的环境保护。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| In addition, States should take further measures, as appropriate, to enhance the protection of the environment in relation to armed conflicts. | 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 4 Designation of protected zones | 原则4 指定受保护区 |
| States should designate, by agreement or otherwise, areas of environmental importance as protected zones in the event of an armed conflict, including where those areas are of cultural importance. | 各国应当以协议或其他方式，指定具有重要环境意义的地区为发生武装冲突时的受保护区，其中包括具有重要文化意义的地区。 |
| Principle 5 Protection of the environment of indigenous peoples | 原则5 保护土著人民的环境 |
| 1. | 1. |
| States, international organizations and other relevant actors shall take appropriate measures, in the event of an armed conflict, to protect the environment of the lands and territories that indigenous peoples inhabit or traditionally use. | 各国、国际组织和其他相关行为体应采取适当措施，在发生武装冲突时保护土著人民居住或传统上使用的土地和领土的环境。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| When an armed conflict has adversely affected the environment of the lands and territories that indigenous peoples inhabit or traditionally use, States shall undertake appropriate and 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. | 在武装冲突对土著人民居住或传统上使用的土地和领土的环境造成不利影响时，为了采取补救措施，各国应通过适当程序，特别是通过土著人民自己的代表机构，与有关土著人民开展适当和有效的协商与合作。 |
| Principle 6 Agreements concerning the presence of military forces | 原则6 驻军协议 |
| States and international organizations should, as appropriate, include provisions on environmental protection in relation to armed conflict in agreements concerning the presence of military forces. | 各国和国际组织应当酌情将与武装冲突有关的环境保护规定纳入驻军协议。 |
| Such provisions should address measures to prevent, mitigate and remediate harm to the environment. | 此种规定应当述及防止、减轻和补救环境损害的措施。 |
| Principle 7 Peace operations | 原则7 和平行动 |
| States and international organizations involved in peace operations established in relation to armed conflicts shall consider the impact of such operations on the environment and take, as appropriate, measures to prevent, mitigate and remediate the harm to the environment resulting from those operations. | 参加与武装冲突有关而创建的和平行动的各国和国际组织应考虑此种行动对环境的影响，并采取适当措施，防止、减轻和补救这些行动对环境造成的损害。 |
| Principle 8 Human displacement | 原则8 人员流离失所 |
| States, international organizations and other relevant actors should take appropriate measures to prevent, mitigate and remediate harm to the environment in areas where persons displaced by armed conflict are located, or through which they transit, while providing relief and assistance for such persons and local communities. | 各国、国际组织和其他有关行为体应当采取适当措施，在因武装冲突而流离失所的人所在地区或他们经过的地区，防止、减轻和补救对环境的损害，同时向这些人和当地社区提供救济和援助。 |
| Principle 9 State responsibility | 原则9 国家责任 |
| 1. | 1. |
| An internationally wrongful act of a State, in relation to an armed conflict, that causes damage to the environment entails the international responsibility of that State, which is under an obligation to make full reparation for such damage, including damage to the environment in and of itself. | 一国与武装冲突有关的国际不法行为如对环境造成损害，则引起该国的国际责任，该国有义务对此种损害，包括单纯对环境本身的损害，作出充分赔偿。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| The present draft principles are without prejudice to the rules on the responsibility of States or of international organizations for internationally wrongful acts. | 本原则草案不妨碍关于国家或国际组织对国际不法行为的责任的规则。 |
| 3. | 3. |
| The present draft principles are also without prejudice to: | 本原则草案也不妨碍： |
| (a) | (a) |
| the rules on the responsibility of non-State armed groups; | 关于非国家武装团体的责任的规则； |
| (b) | (b) |
| the rules on individual criminal responsibility. | 关于个人刑事责任的规则。 |
| Principle 10 Due diligence by business enterprises | 原则10 工商企业的应尽职责 |
| States should take appropriate measures aimed at ensuring that business enterprises operating in or from their territories, or territories under their jurisdiction, exercise due diligence with respect to the protection of the environment, including in relation to human health, when acting in an area affected by an armed conflict. | 各国应当采取适当措施，以确保在其领土或其管辖的领土内运营，或从其领土或其管辖的领土上运营的工商企业，在受武装冲突影响地区开展活动时履行环境保护、包括与人类健康有关的环境保护的应尽职责。 |
| Such measures include those aimed at ensuring that natural resources are purchased or otherwise obtained in an environmentally sustainable manner. | 此种措施包括旨在确保以环境上可持续的方式购买或以其他方式获取自然资源的措施。 |
| Principle 11 Liability of business enterprises | 原则11 工商企业的赔偿责任 |
| States should take appropriate measures aimed at ensuring that business enterprises operating in or from their territories, or territories under their jurisdiction, can be held liable for harm caused by them to the environment, including in relation to human health, in an area affected by an armed conflict. | 各国应当采取适当措施，以确保在其领土或其管辖的领土内运营，或从其领土或其管辖的领土上运营的工商企业，对于它们在受武装冲突影响地区造成的环境损害、包括与人类健康有关的环境损害，可被认定负有赔偿责任。 |
| Such measures should, as appropriate, include those aimed at ensuring that a business enterprise can be held liable to the extent that such harm is caused by its subsidiary acting under its de facto control. | 此种措施应酌情包括旨在确保工商企业对事实上由其控制的子公司所造成的此种损害可被认定负有赔偿责任的措施。 |
| To this end, as appropriate, States should provide adequate and effective procedures and remedies, in particular for the victims of such harm. | 为此，各国应当酌情提供、特别是向此种损害的受害者提供充分和有效的程序和补救措施。 |
| Part Three Principles applicable during armed conflict | 第三部分 武装冲突期间适用的原则 |
| Principle 12 Martens Clause with respect to the protection of the environment in relation to armed conflicts | 原则12 与武装冲突有关的环境保护方面的马顿斯条款 |
| In cases not covered by international agreements, the environment remains under the protection and authority of the principles of international law derived from established custom, from the principles of humanity and from the dictates of public conscience. | 在国际协定所未包括的情形下，环境仍受来源于既定习惯、人道原则和公众良心要求的国际法原则的保护和支配。 |
| Principle 13 General protection of the environment during armed conflict | 原则13 武装冲突期间对环境的一般保护 |
| 1. | 1. |
| The environment shall be respected and protected in accordance with applicable international law and, in particular, the law of armed conflict. | 应按照适用的国际法，特别是武装冲突法，尊重和保护环境。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| Subject to applicable international law: | 在遵守适用的国际法的前提下： |
| (a) | (a) |
| care shall be taken to protect the environment against widespread, long-term and severe damage; | 应注意保护环境不受广泛、长期和严重的损害； |
| (b) | (b) |
| the use of methods and means of warfare that are intended, or may be expected, to cause widespread, long-term and severe damage to the environment is prohibited. | 禁止使用旨在或可能对环境引起广泛、长期和严重损害的作战方法或手段。 |
| 3. | 3. |
| No part of the environment may be attacked, unless it has become a military objective. | 除非成为军事目标，环境的任何一部分不得受到攻击。 |
| Principle 14 Application of the law of armed conflict to the environment | 原则14 对环境适用武装冲突法 |
| The law of armed conflict, including the principles and rules on distinction, proportionality and precautions shall be applied to the environment, with a view to its protection. | 武装冲突法，包括关于区分、比例和预防措施的原则和规则应适用于环境，以期保护环境。 |
| Principle 15 Prohibition of reprisals | 原则15 禁止报复 |
| Attacks against the environment by way of reprisals are prohibited. | 禁止作为报复对环境进行攻击。 |
| Principle 16 Prohibition of pillage | 原则16 禁止掠夺 |
| Pillage of natural resources is prohibited. | 禁止掠夺自然资源。 |
| Principle 17 Environmental modification techniques | 原则17 改变环境的技术 |
| In accordance with their international obligations, States shall not engage in military or any other hostile use of environmental modification techniques having widespread, long-lasting or severe effects as the means of destruction, damage or injury to any other State. | 各国按照其国际义务，不得为军事或任何其他敌对目的使用具有广泛、持久或严重影响的改变环境的技术作为摧毁、破坏或伤害任何其他国家的手段。 |
| Principle 18 Protected zones | 原则18 受保护区 |
| An area of environmental importance, including where that area is of cultural importance, designated by agreement as a protected zone shall be protected against any attack, except insofar as it contains a military objective. | 以协议方式指定为受保护区的具有重要环境意义的地区，包括具有重要文化意义的此种地区，应得到保护不受任何攻击，除非该地区包含军事目标。 |
| Such protected zone shall benefit from any additional agreed protections. | 这种受保护区应享有任何额外商定的保护。 |
| Part Four Principles applicable in situations of occupation | 第四部分 在占领局势中适用的原则 |
| Principle 19 General environmental obligations of an Occupying Power | 原则19 占领方的一般环境义务 |
| 1. | 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. | 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顾及环境考虑。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| An Occupying Power shall take appropriate measures to prevent significant harm to the environment of the occupied territory, including harm that is likely to prejudice the health and well-being of protected persons of the occupied territory or otherwise violate their rights. | 占领方应采取适当措施，防止对被占领土的环境造成重大损害，包括可能不利于被占领土被保护人的健康和福祉或以其他方式侵犯其权利的损害。 |
| 3. | 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. | 占领方应尊重被占领土关于环境保护的法律和制度，仅可在武装冲突法规定的范围内予以改动。 |
| Principle 20 Sustainable use of natural resources | 原则20 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 protected 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 harm to the environment. | 在占领方获准管理和利用被占领土自然资源的情形下，为了被占领土受保护居民的利益和出于武装冲突法规定的其他合法目的，占领方管理和利用自然资源的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。 |
| Principle 21 Prevention of transboundary harm | 原则21 预防跨界损害 |
| An Occupying Power shall take appropriate measures to ensure that activities in the occupied territory do not cause significant harm to the environment of other States or areas beyond national jurisdiction, or any area of the occupied State beyond the occupied territory. | 占领方应采取适当措施，确保被占领土内的活动不对其他国家、国家管辖范围以外地区或被占领国被占领土以外任何地区的环境造成重大损害。 |
| Part Five Principles applicable after armed conflict | 第五部分 武装冲突后适用的原则 |
| Principle 22 Peace processes | 原则22 和平进程 |
| 1. | 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 as a result of the conflict. | 武装冲突各方应当作为和平进程的一部分，处理与恢复和保护因冲突而遭受损害的环境相关的事项，包括酌情在和平协议中处理。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| Relevant international organizations should, where appropriate, play a facilitating role in this regard. | 有关国际组织应当酌情在这方面发挥调解作用。 |
| Principle 23 Sharing and granting access to information | 原则23 共享并准许获取信息 |
| 1. | 1. |
| To facilitate measures to remediate harm to the environment resulting from an armed conflict, States and relevant international organizations shall share and grant access to relevant information in accordance with their obligations under applicable international law. | 为便利对因武装冲突而产生的环境损害采取补救措施，各国和有关国际组织应按照适用的国际法规定的义务，共享并准许获取相关信息。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| Nothing in paragraph 1 affects the right to invoke the grounds for refusal to share or grant access to information provided for in applicable international law. | 第1段中的任何规定均不影响援引适用国际法规定的拒绝共享或准许获取信息的理由的权利。 |
| Nevertheless, States and international organizations shall cooperate in good faith with a view to providing as much information as possible under the circumstances. | 但各国和国际组织应进行善意合作，以期尽量提供在这种情况下可能提供的信息。 |
| Principle 24 Post-armed conflict environmental assessments and remedial measures | 原则24 武装冲突后的环境评估与补救措施 |
| Relevant actors, including States and international organizations, should cooperate with respect to post-armed conflict environmental assessments and remedial measures. | 包括国家和国际组织在内的有关行为体应当在武装冲突后的环境评估与补救措施方面开展合作。 |
| Principle 25 Relief and assistance | 原则25 救济和援助 |
| When, in relation to an armed conflict, the source of environmental damage is unidentified, or reparation is unavailable, States and relevant international organizations should take appropriate measures so that the damage does not remain unrepaired or uncompensated, and may consider establishing special compensation funds or providing other forms of relief or assistance. | 当与武装冲突有关的环境损害的来源不明或赔偿无法获得时，各国和有关国际组织应当采取适当措施，以使该损害不会持续得不到赔偿或补偿，并可考虑设立特别补偿基金或提供其他形式的救济或援助。 |
| Principle 26 Remnants of war | 原则26 战争遗留物 |
| 1. | 1. |
| Parties to an armed conflict shall seek, as soon as possible, to remove or render harmless toxic or other hazardous remnants of war under their jurisdiction or control that are causing or risk causing damage to the environment. | 武装冲突各方应设法尽快移除其管辖或控制下正在造成或可能造成环境损害的有毒的战争遗留物或其他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. | 在采取此种措施时应遵守适用的国际法规则。 |
| 2. | 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 or other hazardous remnants of war. | 各当事方应努力在相互之间以及酌情与其他国家和国际组织就技术和物资援助、包括在适当情况下开展联合行动移除此种有毒的战争遗留物或其他危险的战争遗留物或使之无害达成协议。 |
| 3. | 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. | 第1和第2段不妨碍任何关于清除、移除、销毁或维持雷场、雷区、地雷、诱杀装置、爆炸性弹药和其他装置的国际法权利或义务。 |
| Principle 27 Remnants of war at sea | 原则27 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。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| Text of the draft principles and commentaries thereto | 原则草案案文及其评注 |
| 59. | 59. |
| The text of the draft principles and commentaries thereto adopted by the Commission on second reading at its seventy-third session is reproduced below. | 委员会第七十三届会议二读通过的原则草案案文及其评注载录如下。 |
| Protection of the environment in relation to armed conflicts | 与武装冲突有关的环境保护 |
| General commentary | 总评注 |
| (1) | (1) |
| As is always the case with the Commission’s outputs, the draft principles are to be read together with the commentaries. | 与委员会以往工作成果一样，本原则草案应结合评注来解读。 |
| (2) | (2) |
| After the preamble, the draft principles are divided into five parts, including Part One entitled “Introduction” which contains draft principles on the scope and purpose of the draft principles. | 在序言之后，原则草案分为五个部分，第一部分标题为“导言”，其中载有关于原则草案范围和宗旨的几项原则草案。 |
| Part Two deals with the protection of the environment before the outbreak of an armed conflict but also contains draft principles of a more general nature that are of relevance for more than one temporal phase: before, during or after an armed conflict. | 第二部分涉及武装冲突爆发之前的环境保护，但也载有与冲突之前、期间和之后三个时间段中不止一个时间段有关的更具一般性的几项原则草案。 |
| Part Three pertains to the protection of the environment during armed conflict, and Part Four pertains to the protection of the environment in situations of occupation. | 第三部分涉及武装冲突期间的环境保护，第四部分涉及在占领局势下的环境保护。 |
| Part Five contains draft principles relative to the protection of the environment after an armed conflict. | 第五部分载有关于武装冲突之后的环境保护的几项原则草案。 |
| (3) | (3) |
| The provisions have been cast as draft “principles”. | 这些规定被定为“原则”。 |
| The Commission has previously chosen to formulate the output of its work as draft principles, both for provisions that set forth principles of international law and for non-binding declarations of principles intended to contribute to the progressive development of international law and provide appropriate guidance to States. | 委员会以前曾选择将其工作成果制定为原则草案，既包括阐述国际法原则的规定，也包括旨在促进国际法逐渐发展和向各国提供适当指导的不具约束力的原则宣言。 |
| The present set of draft principles contains provisions of different normative value, including those that reflect customary international law, and those containing recommendations for its progressive development. | 本套原则草案包含具有不同规范意义的规定，有些反映习惯国际法，有些载有关于其逐渐发展的建议。 |
| (4) | (4) |
| The draft principles were prepared bearing in mind that the law of armed conflict, where applicable, is lex specialis but that other rules of international law, to the extent that they do not enter into conflict with it, also remain applicable. | 在编写原则草案时考虑到，武装冲突法在适用的情况下是特别法，但国际法的其他规则，只要不与之冲突，也仍然适用。 |
| Such rules may generally complement and inform the application of the law of armed conflict. | 这些规则一般可补充和指导武装冲突法的适用。 |
| In addition, the fact that the law of armed conflict (jus in bello) and the law on the use of force (jus ad bellum) may apply at the same time does not affect their distinct nature. | 此外，武装冲突法(战时法)和使用武力法(诉诸战争法)可以同时适用，这一事实并不影响它们各自的独特性。 |
| (5) | (5) |
| The draft principles use the term “law of armed conflict”. | 原则草案使用了“武装冲突法”这一用语。 |
| While this term and the more commonly used term “international humanitarian law” can be seen as synonyms in international law, the term “law of armed conflict” was preferred to ensure consistency with the Commission’s articles on the effects of armed conflicts on treaties. | 虽然该用语和更常用的术语“国际人道法”在国际法中可被视为同义词， 但这里倾向使用“武装冲突法”这一用语，以确保与委员会的武装冲突对条约的影响条款保持一致。 |
| Preamble | 序言 |
| Recalling the urgent need and common objectives to reinforce and advance the conservation, restoration and sustainable use of the environment for present and future generations, | 回顾为今世后代加强和促进环境的保护、恢复和可持续利用的迫切需要和共同目标， |
| Recalling also that Principle 24 of the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development provides, inter alia, that States shall respect international law providing protection for the environment in times of armed conflict and cooperate in its further development, | 又回顾《关于环境与发展的里约宣言》原则24特别规定，各国应遵守国际法关于在武装冲突期间保护环境的规定，并合作促进其进一步发展， |
| Recognizing that environmental consequences of armed conflicts may be severe and have the potential to exacerbate global environmental challenges, such as climate change and biodiversity loss, | 承认武装冲突的环境后果可能是严重的，并可能加剧全球环境挑战，如气候变化和生物多样性丧失， |
| Aware of the importance of the environment for livelihoods, food and water security, maintenance of traditions and cultures, and the enjoyment of human rights, | 意识到环境对生计、粮食安全和水安全、维护传统和文化以及享受人权的重要性， |
| Emphasizing that environmental factors are to be taken into account in the context of the implementation of the principles and rules of the law applicable in armed conflict, | 强调在执行适用于武装冲突的法律原则和规则时应考虑到环境因素， |
| Conscious of the need to enhance the protection of the environment in relation to both international and non-international armed conflicts, including in situations of occupation, | 认识到需要加强与国际性和非国际性武装冲突有关的环境保护，包括占领局势中的环境保护， |
| Considering that effective protection of the environment in relation to armed conflicts requires that measures are taken by States, international organizations and other relevant actors to prevent, mitigate and remediate harm to the environment before, during and after an armed conflict, | 考虑到与武装冲突有关的有效的环境保护要求各国、国际组织和其他相关行为体在武装冲突之前、期间和之后，采取措施防止、减轻和补救对环境的损害， |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) | (1) |
| The preamble seeks to provide a conceptual framework for the draft principles, setting out the general context in which they were developed, as well as their main purposes. | 序言的目的是为本指南草案提供一个概念框架，阐述制定指南草案的一般背景和主要宗旨。 |
| The preamble, consisting of seven paragraphs, provides a general introduction to the draft principles without reflecting the detail of the specific issues covered by them. | 序言共分七段，对原则草案作了一般性介绍，但没有反映原则草案所涵盖具体问题的细节。 |
| (2) | (2) |
| The first paragraph contains a general statement of the urgency of the protection of the environment and of its importance for both present and future generations. | 第一段一般性地阐述保护环境的紧迫性及其对今世后代的重要性。 |
| This statement has been modelled on a preambular paragraph of the Political declaration of the special session of the United Nations Environmental Assembly to commemorate the fiftieth anniversary of the establishment of the United Nations Environment Programme. | 这一陈述以联合国环境大会纪念联合国环境规划署成立五十周年特别会议政治宣言的一个序言段为范本。 |
| Given the universal membership of the United Nations Environmental Assembly, the reference to the advancement and reinforcement of the conservation, restoration and sustainable use of the environment as “common objectives” indicates a global commitment taken by States, together with international organizations and other stakeholders. | 鉴于联合国环境大会成员的普遍性，将促进和加强环境的养护、恢复和可持续利用作为“共同目标”的提法表明了各国、国际组织和其他利益攸关方一道作出的全球承诺。 |
| (3) | (3) |
| The second paragraph contains an express reference to international law and the protection of the environment in times of armed conflict. | 第二段明确提到国际法和武装冲突时期的环境保护。 |
| It recalls principle 24 of the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, which provides, inter alia, that States shall respect international law providing protection for the environment in times of armed conflict and cooperate in its further development. | 该段回顾了《关于环境与发展的里约宣言》原则24, 该原则特别规定，各国应遵守国际法关于在武装冲突期间保护环境的规定，并于必要时合作促进其进一步发展。 |
| In addition to principle 24, other principles of the Rio Declaration are related to the present set of draft principles. | 除原则24外，《里约宣言》的其他原则也与本套原则草案有关。 |
| Principle 2 concerns the responsibility of States to ensure that activities under their jurisdiction or control do not cause damage to the environment of other States or of areas beyond national jurisdiction, principle 10 concerns access to environmental information, and principle 23 concerns the protection of the environment and natural resources of people under oppression, domination or occupation. | 原则2涉及各国确保在其管辖范围内或在其控制下的活动不致损害其他国家或在国家管辖范围以外地区的环境的责任； 原则10涉及获取环境信息； 原则23涉及保护受压迫、遭统治或被占领的人民的环境和自然资源。 |
| Principles of the Rio Declaration have also been referred to in the previous work of the Commission. | 委员会以前的工作中也曾提到《里约宣言》的原则。 |
| (4) | (4) |
| The third preambular paragraph refers to environmental consequences of armed conflicts, which may be severe and have the potential to exacerbate global environmental challenges, such as climate change and biodiversity loss. | 序言部分第三段提到武装冲突的环境后果，这些后果可能是严重的，并可能加剧全球环境挑战，如气候变化和生物多样性丧失。 |
| It was understood that the word “severe” also encompasses that the effects can be long-term or irreversible. | 可以这样理解，“严重”一词还意味着影响可能是长期的或不可逆转的。 |
| This is particularly evident in the context of the loss of biological diversity; | 在生物多样性丧失的情况下，这一点尤其明显； |
| when a species becomes extinct, it cannot be restored. | 一个物种一旦灭绝，就无法再恢复。 |
| The paragraph also refers to the fact that environmental effects of armed conflicts are not only local but may have broader ramifications. | 该段还提到这样一个事实，即武装冲突的环境影响不只是局部的，而且可能具有更广泛的影响。 |
| Research shows that armed conflicts have frequently taken place in biodiversity hotspots. | 研究表明，武装冲突经常发生在生物多样性热点地区。 |
| Deforestation as a result of armed conflict may similarly have serious local effects, but also contributes to climate change. | 武装冲突导致的毁林同样会给局部地区造成严重影响，但也会加剧气候变化。 |
| (5) | (5) |
| The fourth paragraph refers to the interrelationship between the environment on the one hand and livelihoods, food and water security, maintenance of traditions and cultures, and the enjoyment of human rights, on the other. | 第四段提到环境与生计、粮食安全和水安全、维护传统和文化以及享受人权之间的相互关系。 |
| This general statement is in line with the recognition by the International Court of Justice “that the environment is not an abstraction but represents the living space, the quality of life and the very health of human beings, including generations unborn”. | 这一一般性陈述符合国际法院的认识，即“环境不是一个抽象的概念，而是人类包括子孙后代的生存空间、生活质量和健康”。 |
| The link between human rights and the environment has also been recognized by States, most recently in the General Assembly resolution on the human right to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment. | 人权与环境之间的联系也得到各国的承认，最近在联大关于享有清洁、健康和可持续环境的人权的决议中得到承认。 |
| Reference can also be made to the two resolutions of the United Nations Environmental Assembly on the protection of the environment in areas affected by an armed conflict, which recognize “that sustainable development and the protection of the environment contribute to human well-being and the enjoyment of human rights”. | 还可参考联合国环境大会关于受武装冲突影响地区的环境保护的两项决议，其中确认“可持续发展和环境保护有助于促进人类福祉和享受人权”。 |
| (6) | (6) |
| The fifth paragraph borrows language from the Advisory Opinion of the International Court of Justice in Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons, which emphasizes that environmental factors are to be taken into account in the context of the implementation of the principles and rules of the law applicable in armed conflict, for instance with respect to the assessment of what is necessary and proportionate in the pursuit of legitimate military objectives. | 第五段借用国际法院在以核武器进行威胁或使用核武器的合法性咨询意见中的用语，该咨询意见强调，在执行适用于武装冲突的法律原则和规则时应考虑到环境因素， 例如在为追求合法的军事目标而估量什么手段是必要和成比例的手段时。 |
| The Advisory Opinion also contains further important clarifications concerning the interconnections between the law of armed conflict, on the one hand, and international environmental law and international human rights law, on the other. | 该咨询意见还载有关于武装冲突法与国际环境法和国际人权法之间的相互联系的进一步重要说明。 |
| (7) | (7) |
| The sixth and seventh paragraphs seek to direct the reader to the scope and purpose of the draft principles as contained in draft principles 1 and 2, respectively. | 第六和第七段试图引导读者注意分别载于原则草案1和2的本套原则草案的范围和宗旨。 |
| The sixth paragraph reflects the general applicability of the draft principles to different types of conflicts, as well as the enhancement of the protection of the environment in relation to armed conflicts as the purpose of the draft principles. | 第六段反映本原则草案对不同类型冲突的普遍适用性，并说明加强与武装冲突有关的环境保护是本原则草案的宗旨。 |
| The seventh paragraph focuses on the notion of measures to prevent, mitigate and remediate harm to the environment, which forms an important component of the draft principles. | 第七段侧重防止、减轻和补救环境损害的措施的概念，这一概念是本原则草案的重要组成部分。 |
| The paragraph refers to States, international organizations and other relevant actors, as different draft principles are addressed to them. | 该段提到国家、国际组织和其他相关行为体，而对于这些不同的行为体，有各项不同的原则草案予以论及。 |
| Part One Introduction | 第一部分 导言 |
| 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, including in situations of occupation. | 本原则草案适用于武装冲突之前、期间或之后的环境保护，包括占领局势中的环境保护。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) | (1) |
| This provision describes the scope of the draft principles. | 本项规定阐述了原则草案的范围。 |
| It provides that they cover three temporal phases: before, during, and after armed conflict. | 原则草案1规定，原则草案的范围涵盖三个时间段：武装冲突之前、期间和之后。 |
| Situations of occupation are covered as a special type of international armed conflicts. | 占领局势作为一种特殊类型的国际性武装冲突的加以涵盖。 |
| The disjunctive “or” seeks to underline that not all draft principles would be applicable during all phases. | 使用“或”这一选择连词的目的是着重说明并不是每项原则草案在所有阶段都适用。 |
| However, it is worth emphasizing that there is, at times, a certain degree of overlap between these three phases. | 但值得强调的是，这三个阶段有时有一定程度的重叠。 |
| (2) | (2) |
| The division of the principles into the temporal phases described above (albeit without strict dividing lines) sets out the scope ratione temporis of the draft principles. | 将原则分为上述三个时间段(尽管没有严格的分界线)确立了原则草案的属时管辖权范围。 |
| Regarding the scope ratione materiae of the draft principles, reference is made to the term “protection of the environment” as it relates to the term “armed conflict”. | 关于原则草案的属事管辖权范围，请参考与“武装冲突”有关的“环境保护”这一术语。 |
| No distinction is generally made in these draft principles between international armed conflicts and non-international armed conflicts. | 各项原则草案对于国际性武装冲突与非国际性武装冲突一般未作区分。 |
| (3) | (3) |
| In addition to States, several draft principles are addressed to international organizations, or to parties to an armed conflict, including non-State armed groups, or to other relevant actors, such as civil society organizations. | 除了国家之外，若干项原则草案还针对国际组织或武装冲突各方，包括非国家武装团体，或其他相关行为体，如民间社会组织。 |
| The scope ratione personae of the draft principles is clear from the wording of each provision, together with the commentary. | 从每条规定的措辞以及评注来看，原则草案的属人管辖范围是清楚的。 |
| 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 conflicts, including through measures to prevent, mitigate and remediate harm to the environment. | 本原则草案旨在加强与武装冲突有关的环境保护，包括为此采取措施，防止、减轻和补救对环境的损害。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) | (1) |
| This provision outlines the fundamental purpose of the draft principles. It makes it clear that the draft principles aim to enhance the protection of the environment in relation to armed conflicts and signals the general kinds of measures that would be required to offer the necessary protection. | 本项规定概述了原则草案的基本宗旨，表明原则草案的目的是加强与武装冲突有关的环境保护，并表明为提供必要的保护所需采取的措施的一般类型。 |
| Such measures include preventive measures, which aim to avoid or in any event to minimize damage to the environment during armed conflict, and measures which aim to mitigate or remediate harm that has already been caused as a result of armed conflict. | 这些措施包括旨在避免或在任何情况下将武装冲突期间对环境的损害减少至最低限度的防止措施和旨在在已因武装冲突而造成损害后减轻或补救损害的措施。 |
| (2) | (2) |
| Similar to the provision on scope, the present provision covers all three temporal phases, including situations of occupation. | 本项规定与关于范围的规定类似，涵盖所有三个时间段，包括占领局势。 |
| While the three phases are closely connected, the reference to prevention relates primarily to the situation before and during armed conflict, and the references to mitigation and remediation principally concern the post-conflict phase. | 虽然这三个时间段是密切相连的，但是，提到的防止主要涉及武装冲突之前和武装冲突期间的情况，而提到的减轻和补救则主要涉及冲突后阶段。 |
| It should be noted that a State may take remedial measures to restore the environment even before the conflict has ended. | 应当指出，一国可在冲突结束前就采取补救措施恢复环境。 |
| (3) | (3) |
| While prevention requires action to be taken at an early stage, the notion of mitigation refers to reduction of harm that has already occurred. | “防止”要求在早期阶段采取行动，而“减轻”的概念则是指减少已经发生的损害。 |
| The notion of remediation, in turn, encompasses any measure of remediation that may be taken to restore the environment. | “补救”的概念包括为恢复环境而可能采取的任何措施。 |
| This might include, inter alia, taking into account loss or damage by impairment to the environment, costs of reasonable measures of reinstatement, as well as reasonable costs of clean-up associated with the costs of reasonable response measures. | 这可能还包括考虑到损害环境所造成的损失或损害、合理的恢复措施的费用以及与合理应对措施的费用相关的合理清理费用。 |
| Part Two Principles of general application | 第二部分 一般适用原则 |
| Principle 3 Measures to enhance the protection of the environment | 原则3 加强环境保护的措施 |
| 1. | 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 conflicts. | 各国应依照其国际法义务，采取有效的立法、行政、司法措施和其他措施，加强与武装冲突有关的环境保护。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| In addition, States should take further measures, as appropriate, to enhance the protection of the environment in relation to armed conflicts. | 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) | (1) |
| Draft principle 3 recognizes that States are required to take effective measures to enhance the protection of the environment in relation to armed conflicts. | 原则草案3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 to voluntarily take further effective measures. | 第1段回顾了依国际法具有的义务，第2段鼓励各国自愿采取进一步的有效措施。 |
| The phrase “to enhance the protection of the environment”, included in both paragraphs, corresponds to the purpose of the set of draft principles. | 这两段中均包含的短语“加强环境保护”与本套原则草案的宗旨相对应。 |
| Similarly, the phrase “in relation to armed conflicts”, also inserted in both paragraphs, is intended to underline the connection of environmental protection to armed conflict. | 同样，两段中的短语“与武装冲突有关的”是为了强调环境保护与武装冲突的联系。 |
| (2) | (2) |
| Paragraph 1 reflects that States have obligations under international law to enhance the protection of the environment in relation to armed conflicts and addresses the measures that States are obliged to take to this end. | 第1段反映出各国依照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 word “shall” 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 international obligations. | “应”一词由短语“依照其国际法义务”限定，表明该规定不要求各国采取超出其国际义务范围的措施。 |
| The specific obligations of a State under this provision will differ according to the relevant obligations under international law by which it is bound and may change over time. | 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规定的哪些相关义务约束，并可能随着时间的推移而变化。 |
| (3) | (3) |
| Consequently, paragraph 1 is formulated broadly in order to cover a wide range of measures. | 因此，第1段采用了一般性措辞，以涵盖范围广泛的措施。 |
| The provision includes examples of the types of measures that can be taken by States, namely, “legislative, administrative, judicial and other measures”. | 该段列出了各国可采取的各类措施，即“立法、行政、司法措施和其他措施”。 |
| The examples are not exhaustive, as indicated by the open category “other measures”. | 正如“其他措施”这一开放性类别所表示的，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，这些例子旨在强调各国应采取的最相关的措施。 |
| (4) | (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 conflicts. | 武装冲突法为各国规定了若干义务，这些义务直接或间接地促进加强与武装冲突有关的环境保护这一目标的实现。 |
| 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“依照国际法”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。 |
| Several of the present draft principles refer to existing customary or treaty-based obligations of States relevant to the protection of the environment in relation to armed conflicts. | 本原则草案中有几项提到了相关国家在与武装冲突有关的保护环境方面的现有习惯义务或条约义务。 |
| (5) | (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. | 就武装冲突法而言，向武装部队并尽可能向平民传播武装冲突法的义务有助于保护环境。 |
| 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 integrating the relevant rules into legislation, as well as administrative and institutional measures, such as their inclusion in military manuals and codes of conduct. | 例如，可以通过将有关规则纳入立法以及行政和体制措施，如将其纳入军事手册 和行为守则， 来进行这种传播。 |
| (6) | (6) |
| The obligation to respect and ensure respect is also interpreted to require that States, to the extent possible, exert their influence to prevent and stop violations of the law of armed conflict. | 尊重和确保尊重的义务还被解释为要求各国尽可能发挥影响力，防止和制止违反武装冲突法的行为。 |
| 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 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，这些要求可能包括分享某些类型武器对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等。 |
| (7) | (7) |
| A further obligation to conduct “a weapons review” is found in article 36 of Additional Protocol I. According to this provision, a State 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 rule of international law applicable” to the State party. | 《第一附加议定书》第三十六条还规定了进行“武器审查”的义务。 根据这项规定，缔约国有义务断定，在某些或所有情况下，该新武器的使用是否为《第一附加议定书》或“适用于”该缔约国的“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 International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) commentary on the Additional Protocols, article 36 “implies the obligation to establish internal procedures for the purpose of elucidating the issue of legality”. | 根据红十字国际委员会关于各项附加议定书的评注，第三十六条“意味着有义务为解释合法性问题而建立内部程序”。 |
| 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) | (8) |
| The obligation to conduct “a weapons review” binds all States parties to Additional Protocol I. The reference to “any other rule of international law applicable” makes it clear that the obligation goes beyond merely studying whether the employment of a certain weapon would be contrary to Additional Protocol I, including articles 35 and 55, which are of direct relevance to the protection of the environment. | 进行“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。 短语“适用于…的任何其他国际法规则”表明，该义务可能不仅仅在于研究某种武器的使用是否会违反《第一附加议定书》，包括与环境保护直接相关的第三十五条和第五十五条。 |
| In other words, there is a need to 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. | 换言之，有必要分析武装冲突法(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 also includes taking into account any applicable international environmental law and human rights obligations. | 这种审查还包括考虑到任何适用的国际环境法和人权义务。 |
| (9) | (9) |
| While Additional Protocol I applies only to international armed conflicts, the weapons review provided for in article 36 also promotes respect for the law in non-international armed conflicts. | 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。 |
| For instance, 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. | 例如，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. | 这些规则的适用范围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。 |
| Furthermore, with regard to both international and non-international armed conflicts, the prohibitions of certain weapons, means and methods of warfare (such as biological and chemical weapons) under treaty or customary international law must be observed when engaging in a weapons review. | 此外，就国际性和非国际性武装冲突而言，条约或习惯国际法禁止某些武器、作战手段和方法(如生物武器和化学武器)的规定在进行武器审查时必须遵守。 |
| (10) | (10) |
| States also have the obligation to investigate war crimes that may have been committed by their nationals or armed forces, or on their territory, or over which they have jurisdiction, and, if appropriate, prosecute the suspects. | 各国还有义务调查可能由其国民或武装部队犯下的战争罪，或在其领土上或在其管辖范围内犯下的战争罪，并酌情起诉嫌疑人。 |
| This obligation extends to war crimes that concern the environment, for instance the pillaging of natural resources, and the extensive destruction and appropriation of property that is not justified by military necessity and is carried out wantonly and unlawfully. | 这一义务延伸到与环境有关的战争罪，例如掠夺自然资源 以及无军事上的必要而恣意和非法地广泛破坏和侵占财产。 |
| (11) | (11) |
| Paragraph 2 of the draft principle addresses voluntary measures that would further enhance the protection of the environment in relation to armed conflict. | 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。 |
| 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，各国采取的措施可能是立法、司法、行政措施或其他措施。 |
| To the extent that they do not reflect customary or treaty-based obligations of States, the current draft principles provide examples of effective voluntary measures to enhance the protection of the environment in relation to armed conflicts. | 目前的原则草案在不反映各国的习惯义务或条约义务的情况下，提供了加强与武装冲突有关的环境保护的有效自愿措施的例子。 |
| (12) | (12) |
| Paragraph 2 also covers situations in which a State is not bound by a certain treaty but applies its provisions as a matter of policy. | 第2段还涵盖了一国不受某一条约约束但作为政策适用条约规定的情况。 |
| It may furthermore refer to situations in which certain treaty provisions or rules of customary international law applicable to international armed conflicts are applied as a matter of policy to the protection of the environment irrespective of the type of armed conflict in question. | 该段还可指如下情况，即适用于国际性武装冲突的某些条约规定或习惯国际法规则作为政策适用于环境的保护，不论有关武装冲突的类型如何。 |
| The ICRC Guidelines on the Protection of the Natural Environment in Armed Conflict include a recommendation to this effect. | 红十字国际委员会《武装冲突中保护自然环境的准则》含有一项这样的建议。 |
| States could furthermore conclude special agreements providing additional protection to the environment in situations of armed conflict. | 各国还可以订立特别协定，在武装冲突情况下为环境提供额外保护。 |
| (13) | (13) |
| In addition to encouraging States to take voluntary measures to enhance the protection of the environment in relation to armed conflicts beyond their obligations under international law, the paragraph captures recent developments in the practice of States to this end. | 除了鼓励各国采取超出其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。 |
| 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着眼于酌情以加强与其他国家和有关国际组织的合作。 |
| Principle 4 Designation of protected zones | 原则4 指定受保护区 |
| States should designate, by agreement or otherwise, areas of environmental importance as protected zones in the event of an armed conflict, including where those areas are of cultural importance. | 各国应当以协议或其他方式，指定具有重要环境意义的地区为发生武装冲突时的受保护区，其中包括具有重要文化意义的地区。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) | (1) |
| Draft principle 4 is entitled “Designation of protected zones” and provides that States should designate, by agreement or otherwise, areas of environmental importance as protected zones, including where those areas are of cultural importance. | 原则草案4以“指定受保护区”为标题，规定各国应当以协议或其他方式，指定具有重要环境意义的地区为受保护区，其中包括具有重要文化意义的地区。 |
| Part Two (“Principles of general application”), where this provision is placed, deals with the pre-conflict stage, when peace is prevailing, but also contains principles of a more general nature that are relevant to more than one temporal phase. | 这条规定所在的第二部分(“一般适用原则”)涉及冲突前阶段，即和平处于主导地位的时期，但也载有与不止一个时间段有关的更具一般性的原则。 |
| While the designation of protected zones could take place at any time, it should preferably be done before or at least at the outset of an armed conflict. | 尽管任何时候都可以指定受保护区，但最好在武装冲突之前或至少在武装冲突一开始就指定受保护区。 |
| The phrase “in the event of an armed conflict” indicates that the designation of an area as a protected zone may be made with a possible future event of an armed conflict in mind. | 短语“发生武装冲突时”表示，在指定一个地区为受保护区时，可能会考虑到将来可能发生的武装冲突。 |
| In addition, draft principle 4 has a corresponding draft principle (draft principle 18) which is placed in Part Three “Principles applicable during armed conflict”. | 此外，原则草案4在第三部分“武装冲突期间适用的原则”中有一项对应的原则草案(原则草案18)。 |
| (2) | (2) |
| The areas referred to in draft principle 4 may be designated by agreement or otherwise. | 原则草案4所指的地区可以以协议或其他方式指定。 |
| The types of situations foreseen may include, inter alia, an agreement concluded verbally or in writing, or through reciprocal and concordant declarations, as well as those created through a unilateral declaration or designation through an international organization. | 预见到的情况可能有：口头协议或书面协议，或通过相互而一致的声明订立的协议，以及通过单方面声明或通过国际组织指定设立的受保护区。 |
| It should be noted that the word “State” does not preclude the possibility of agreements being concluded with non-State actors. | 应当指出，采用“国家”一词并不排除非国家行为体订立协议的可能性。 |
| (3) | (3) |
| It is not uncommon that geographic areas are assigned a special legal status as a means to ensure their protection and preservation. | 赋予地理区域特殊法律地位，以此确保其保护和保全，这种做法并不罕见。 |
| This can be done through international agreements or through national legislation. | 可以通过国际协议或国家立法来达到上述目的。 |
| In some instances such areas are not only protected in peacetime, but are also protected from attack during an armed conflict. | 在某些情况下，这些地区不仅在和平时期受保护，在武装冲突期间也免受攻击。 |
| As a rule, this is the case with demilitarized and neutralized zones. | 通常，非军事化地带和中立化地带便是如此。 |
| Demilitarized zones are established by the parties to a conflict and imply that the parties are prohibited from extending their military operations to that zone if such an extension is contrary to the terms of their agreement. | 非军事化地带由冲突各方建立，这意味着，如果将其军事行动扩展到该地带是违反协议的规定的，则这种扩展是禁止的。 |
| Demilitarized zones can also be established and implemented in peacetime. | 非军事化地带也可以在和平时期建立和实施。 |
| Most notably from the point of view of environmental protection, no particular criteria have been set regarding the type of area that can be designated as a demilitarized zone, which therefore can be established even outside populated areas. | 从环境保护的角度最值得注意的是，对于哪类地区可以被指定为非军事化地带，没有规定具体的标准，因此，即使在居民区以外也可建立非军事化地带。 |
| (4) | (4) |
| Granting special protection to areas of ecological importance was suggested at the time of the drafting of the Additional Protocols to the Geneva Conventions. | 在起草日内瓦四公约附加议定书时就曾建议对具有重要生态意义的地区给予特别保护。 |
| Reference can furthermore be made to the San Remo Manual on International Law Applicable to Armed Conflicts at Sea, which encouraged the parties to the conflict “to agree that no hostile actions will be conducted in marine areas containing: (a) rare or fragile ecosystems; | 还可参考《适用于海上武装冲突的国际法圣雷莫手册》，其中鼓励冲突各方“商定不在含有下列情形的海域采取敌对行动：(a) 稀有或脆弱的生态系统； |
| or (b) the habitat of depleted, threatened or endangered species or other forms of marine life. | 或(b) 衰竭、受威胁或有灭绝危险的物种和其他形式的海洋生物的生存环境”。 |
| ” The United Nations Environment Programme also recommended in 2009 that a new legal instrument be elaborated “for place-based protection of critical natural resources and areas of ecological importance during armed conflicts”. | 联合国环境规划署还在2009年建议制定一项新的法律文书，“在武装冲突期间对重要自然资源和具有生态重要性的地区进行基于地点的保护”。 |
| Most recently, the ICRC Guidelines on the Protection of the Natural Environment in Armed Conflict recommended that areas of particular environmental significance or fragility could be designated as demilitarized zones. | 最近，红十字国际委员会《武装冲突中保护自然环境的准则》建议，可将具有重大环境意义或环境尤为脆弱的地区指定为非军事化地带。 |
| (5) | (5) |
| Certain multilateral environmental conventions also establish area-based protection of the environment. | 某些多边环境公约也建立了基于地区的环境保护。 |
| For instance, the Convention on Biological Diversity requests States parties, as far as possible and appropriate, to “establish a system of protected areas or areas where special measures need to be taken to conserve biological diversity”. | 例如，《生物多样性公约》要求缔约国尽可能并酌情“建立保护区系统或需要采取特殊措施以保护生物多样性的地区”。 |
| Under the Convention on Wetlands of International Importance especially as Waterfowl Habitat (Ramsar Convention), endangered sites can be listed in the Montreux Records “where an adverse change in ecological character has occurred, is occurring, or is likely to occur, and which are therefore in need of priority conservation attention”. | 《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》) 规定，“生态特征已经、正在或可能发生不利变化，因此需要优先养护”的濒危地点可以列入《蒙特勒名录》。 |
| According to the Convention concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage, a site can be included by the World Heritage Committee on the List of World Heritage in Danger. | 根据《保护世界文化和自然遗产公约》，一处遗址可被世界遗产委员会列入《处于危险的世界遗产目录》。 |
| Sites threatened or affected by an armed conflict are included in both the World Heritage Convention and the Ramsar Convention lists. | 《世界遗产公约》和《拉姆萨尔公约》规定的目录都包括受武装冲突威胁或影响的地点。 |
| (6) | (6) |
| When designating protected zones under this draft principle, particular weight should be given to the protection of areas of environmental importance that are susceptible to the adverse consequences of hostilities. | 在指定本项原则草案所指的受保护区时，应特别着重考虑保护容易遭受敌对行动不良后果的具有重要环境意义的地区。 |
| In line with the conventions referred to above, the provision does not contain any further qualifier, such as “major”, which could be seen as unnecessarily raising the threshold beyond existing standards, and takes into account that any area can be designated as a demilitarized zone under the law of armed conflict. | 根据上述公约，这项规定不包含任何进一步的限定词，例如“重大”，因为这可能被视为不必要地将门槛提高到现有标准之上，该项规定还考虑到，任何地区都可以根据武装冲突法被指定为非军事化地带。 |
| (7) | (7) |
| Protected zones designated in accordance with the current draft principle may also be areas of cultural importance, as it is sometimes difficult to draw a clear line between areas which are of environmental importance and areas which are of cultural importance. | 根据本项原则草案指定的受保护区也可能是具有重要文化意义的地区，因为有时很难在具有重要环境意义的地区和具有重要文化意义的地区之间划出明确的界线。 |
| This is also recognized in the World Heritage Convention: the fact that the heritage sites under this Convention are selected on the basis of a set of 10 criteria, including both cultural and natural (without differentiating between them), illustrates this point. | 这一点在《世界遗产公约》中也得到了承认：该公约下的遗址按10项标准选择，其中既包括文化标准，也包括自然标准(但对二者不作区分)，这便说明了这一点。 |
| The International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources (IUCN) furthermore defines a protected area as “a clearly defined geographical space, recognised, dedicated and managed, through legal or other effective means, to achieve the long-term conservation of nature with associated ecosystem services and cultural values”. | 国际自然及自然资源保护联盟(国际自然保护联盟)进一步将受保护区定义为“一个明确界定的地理空间，通过法律或其他有效手段得到承认、指定和管理，以实现对自然及相关的生态系统服务和文化价值的长期保护”。 |
| (8) | (8) |
| It should be recalled that, prior to an armed conflict, States parties to the Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict (1954 Hague Convention) and its Protocols, are under the obligation to establish inventories of cultural property items that they wish to enjoy protection in the case of an armed conflict, in accordance with article 11, paragraph 1, of the 1999 Protocol to the Convention. | 应当回顾指出，根据《关于在武装冲突的情况下保护文化财产的公约》 (1954年《海牙公约》)1999年《议定书》 第11条第1款的规定，在武装冲突之前，《公约》及其《议定书》的缔约国有义务建立一份它们希望在武装冲突的情况下享有保护资格的文化财产目录。 |
| In peacetime, States parties are required to take other measures that they find appropriate to protect their cultural property from anticipated adverse impacts of armed conflicts, in accordance with article 3 of the Convention. | 根据《公约》第3条，在和平时期，缔约国必须采取其认为适当的其他措施，以保护其文化财产免受武装冲突可预见的不利影响。 |
| (9) | (9) |
| The purpose of the present draft principle is not to affect the regime of the 1954 Hague Convention, which is distinct in its scope and purpose. | 本项原则草案的目的不是要影响1954年《海牙公约》的制度，后者的范围和宗旨都是独特的。 |
| While draft principle 4 does not extend to cultural objects per se, the term “cultural” is used in this context to indicate the existence of a close linkage to the environment. | 虽然原则草案4的范围不延伸至文物本身，但在这里使用“文化”一词，其目的是为了表明与环境存在着密切联系。 |
| The term would include, for example, ancestral lands of indigenous peoples, who depend on the environment for their sustenance and livelihood. | 举例而言，这一用语包括土著人民的祖传土地，因为他们依赖环境维持生活和生计。 |
| (10) | (10) |
| The designation of the areas foreseen by this draft principle can be related to the rights of indigenous peoples, particularly if the protected area also serves as a sacred area which warrants special protection. | 本项原则草案所设想的地区的指定可能与土著人民的权利相关，尤其是如果受保护区也是需要特别保护的一块圣地。 |
| In some cases, the protected area may also serve to conserve the particular culture, knowledge and way of life of the indigenous populations living in the area concerned. | 在某些情况下，受保护区也可用于保护住在里面的土著居民的特定文化、知识和生活方式。 |
| The importance of preserving indigenous culture and knowledge has been formally recognised in international law under the Convention on Biological Diversity. | 根据《生物多样性公约》，保存土著文化和知识的重要性已在国际法中得到正式承认。 |
| In addition, the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples refers to the right to manage, access and protect religious and cultural sites. | 此外，《联合国土著人民权利宣言》 提到了管理、进出和保护宗教和文化场所的权利。 |
| (11) | (11) |
| The term “cultural importance”, which is also used in draft principle 18, builds on the recognition of the close connection between the environment, cultural objects and characteristics in the landscape in environmental protection instruments such as the 1993 Convention on Civil Liability for Damage Resulting from Activities Dangerous to the Environment. | “重要文化意义”这一短语依据1993年《关于危害环境的活动造成损害的民事责任公约》等环境保护文书中关于环境、文物和地貌景观之间密切联系的认识， 原则草案18也采用了这一短语。 |
| Reference can also be made to the Convention on the Protection and Use of Transboundary Watercourses and International Lakes, which stipulates that “effects on the environment include effects on human health and safety, flora, fauna, soil, air, water, climate, landscape and historical monuments or other physical structures or the interaction among these factors; | 还可以参考《跨界水道和国际湖泊保护和利用公约》，其中规定，“对环境的影响包括对人类健康和安全、植物、动物、土壤、空气、水、气候、景观和历史古迹或其他物理结构或这些因素之间相互作用的影响； |
| they also include effects on the cultural heritage or socio-economic conditions resulting from alterations to those factors”. | 还包括这些因素的改变对文化遗产或社会经济状况的影响”。 |
| Moreover, the Convention on Biological Diversity acknowledges the cultural value of biodiversity. | 此外，《生物多样性公约》承认生物多样性的文化价值。 |
| (12) | (12) |
| A few examples of domestic legislation referring to the protection of both cultural and environmental areas can also be mentioned in this context. | 在这方面，还可以提到国内立法提及保护文化和环境区的几个例子。 |
| For example, the Act on the Protection of Cultural Property of 29 August 1950 of Japan, provides for animals and plants which have a high scientific value to be listed as “protected cultural property”. | 例如，日本1950年8月29日《文化财产保护法》规定，将有高度科学价值的动植物列为“受保护的文化财产”。 |
| The National Parks and Wildlife Act of 1974 of New South Wales in Australia may apply to any area of natural, scientific or cultural significance, and the Italian Protected Areas Act of 6 December 1991 defines “nature parks” as areas of natural and environmental value constituting homogeneous systems characterised by their natural components, their landscape and aesthetic values and the cultural tradition of the local populations. | 澳大利亚新南威尔士州1974年《国家公园和野生生物法》可适用于任何具有自然、科学或文化意义的地区； 意大利1991年12月6日《保护区法》对“自然公园”的定义为：由以自然元素、地貌景观和审美价值以及当地居民的文化传统为特征的同质系统组成的具有自然和环境价值的地区。 |
| Principle 5 Protection of the environment of indigenous peoples | 原则5 保护土著人民的环境 |
| 1. | 1. |
| States, international organizations and other relevant actors shall take appropriate measures, in the event of an armed conflict, to protect the environment of the lands and territories that indigenous peoples inhabit or traditionally use. | 各国、国际组织和其他相关行为体应采取适当措施，在发生武装冲突时保护土著人民居住或传统上使用的土地和领土的环境。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| When an armed conflict has adversely affected the environment of the lands and territories that indigenous peoples inhabit or traditionally use, States shall undertake appropriate and 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. | 在武装冲突对土著人民居住或传统上使用的土地和领土的环境造成不利影响时，为了采取补救措施，各国应通过适当程序，特别是通过土著人民自己的代表机构，与有关土著人民开展适当和有效的协商与合作。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) | (1) |
| Draft principle 5 concerns the protection of the environment of indigenous peoples in relation to armed conflicts. | 原则草案5涉及与武装冲突有关的土著人民环境保护。 |
| The draft principle recognizes the crucial role that these peoples, lands and territories play in the conservation of biological diversity. | 该项原则草案承认这些人民、土地和领土在保护生物多样性方面发挥的重要作用。 |
| According to paragraph 1, States, international organizations and other relevant actors shall, due to the special relationship between indigenous peoples and their environment, take appropriate measures to protect the lands and territories of indigenous peoples in the event of an armed conflict. | 第1段指出，由于土著人民与其环境之间的特殊关系，各国、国际组织和其他相关行为体应采取适当措施，在发生武装冲突时保护土著人民的土地和领土。 |
| (2) | (2) |
| As a general reminder of the need to protect the environment of indigenous peoples, paragraph 1 addresses a broad range of actors: States, international organizations and other relevant actors. | 作为对保护土著人民环境的必要性的一般性提醒，第1段述及范围广泛的行为体：国家、国际组织和其他相关行为体。 |
| Paragraph 1 takes into account the role of international organizations when administering territory, as well as the role that certain non-State armed groups may play when exercising de facto control over a territory. | 第1段的考虑到了国际组织在管理领土时的作用，以及某些非国家武装团体在对某一领土行使事实控制时可能发挥的作用。 |
| Regarding the latter, it should be recalled that parties to an armed conflict have an obligation to protect the environment in accordance with the law of armed conflict. | 关于后者，应当回顾，武装冲突各方有义务按照武装冲突法保护环境。 |
| While the extent to which non-State armed groups have obligations under human rights law is still debated, their obligations are well established in situations in which they exercise control over a territory. | 虽然对于非国家武装团体依人权法承担义务的程度仍存在争议，但在非国家武装团体对某一领土行使控制的情况下，这些团体的义务已得到充分确立。 |
| (3) | (3) |
| Paragraph 2, however, is only addressed to States. | 但是，第2段只述及国家。 |
| It recognizes that where armed conflict has adversely affected the environment of indigenous peoples’ lands and territories, States shall undertake remedial measures. | 该段确认，如武装冲突对土著人民土地和领土的环境造成有害影响，各国应采取补救措施。 |
| In light of the special relationship between indigenous peoples and their environment, these steps shall be taken in a manner that respects this relationship and in consultation and cooperation with such peoples, in particular through their own leadership and representative institutions. | 鉴于土著人民与其环境之间的特殊关系，采取这些措施时应尊重这种关系并与土著人民进行协商与合作，特别是通过土著人民自己的领导机构和代表机构与土著人民进行协商与合作。 |
| (4) | (4) |
| 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. | 土著人民与其环境之间的特殊关系得到了国际劳工组织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》 等国际文书以及各国的实践和国际性法院和法庭的判例的承认、保护和支持。 |
| To this end, the lands of indigenous peoples have 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。 |
| (5) | (5) |
| Paragraph 1 is based 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 Convention 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”. | 第1段以《联合国土著人民权利宣言》第29条第1款和劳工组织《第169号公约》第七条第4款为依据，前者表示土著人民有权“养护和保护其土地或领土和资源的环境和生产能力”， 后者确认“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”。 |
| It furthermore builds on the jurisprudence of regional courts and tribunals. | 此外，该段还借鉴了区域法院和法庭的判例。 |
| Reference can also be made to the obligation under the Convention on Biological Diversity to respect, preserve and maintain knowledge, innovations and practices of indigenous and local communities embodying traditional lifestyles relevant for the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity. | 还可以参考《生物多样性公约》规定的义务，即尊重、保存和维持土著和地方社区体现传统生活方式而与生物多样性的保护和持久使用相关的知识、创新和做法。 |
| (6) | (6) |
| The specific rights of indigenous peoples over certain lands or territories are the subject of different legal regimes in different States. | 土著人民对某些土地或领土的具体权利在不同国家是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 and territories connected to indigenous peoples, and over which they have various rights and protected status. | 此外，在关于土著人民权利的国际文书中，采用了各种不同措辞来阐述与土著人民有关联的土地和领土，以及他们拥有各种权利和受保护地位的土地或领土。 |
| The phrase “lands and territories which indigenous peoples inhabit or traditionally use” builds on established language on the relevant international instruments. | “土著人民居住或传统上使用的土地和领土”这一短语借鉴了相关国际文书的既定用语。 |
| (7) | (7) |
| Armed conflict may have the effect of increasing existing vulnerabilities to environmental harm or creating new types of environmental harm on the lands and territories concerned and thereby affecting the survival and well-being of the peoples connected to them. | 武装冲突可能会使有关土地和领土比现在更容易受到环境危害的影响，或造成新的环境危害，从而影响到与这些土地和领土有关联的人民的生存和福祉。 |
| Under paragraph 1, in the event of an armed conflict, States, international organizations and other relevant actors shall take appropriate measures to protect the relationship that indigenous peoples have with their ancestral lands and territories. | 根据第1段，在发生武装冲突时，各国、国际组织和其他相关行为体应采取适当措施，保护土著人民与其祖传土地和领土之间关系。 |
| 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。 |
| Under this provision, States, international organizations and other relevant actors are expected to take measures only if they have a connection to the indigenous people and environment at issue. | 根据这项规定，各国、国际组织和其他相关行为体只有在与所涉的土著人民和环境有关时才应采取措施。 |
| The word “appropriate” also qualifies the obligation and allows for the measures to be adjusted according to the circumstances. | “适当”一词对义务加以限定，以便可以根据情况调整措施。 |
| (8) | (8) |
| According to the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, the concerned State shall 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. | 根据《联合国土著人民权利宣言》，有关国家应采取步骤，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 4. | 这一点可以通过不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4所规定的那样将其领土指定为受保护区来实现。 |
| In general, the concerned State shall consult effectively with the indigenous peoples concerned prior to using their lands or territories for military activities. | 一般而言，有关国家应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。 |
| (9) | (9) |
| Paragraph 2 focuses on the harm caused as a result of an armed conflict. | 第2段的重点是因武装冲突而造成的损害。 |
| 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 lands and territories that indigenous peoples inhabit or traditionally use. | 这项规定的目的是为了便利在武装冲突对土著人民居住或传统上使用的土地和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. | 该段这样规定是为了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。 |
| (10) | (10) |
| In such a case, the concerned States shall undertake appropriate and effective consultations and cooperation with the indigenous peoples concerned, through appropriate procedures and, in particular, through their own representative institutions. | 在这种情况下，有关国家应通过适当程序，特别是通过土著人民自己的代表机构，与有关土著人民进行适当和有效的协商与合作。 |
| The word “shall” reflects the established nature of the obligation of consultation. | “应”一词反映了协商义务的确定性质。 |
| (11) | (11) |
| The reference to 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. | 列入适当程序和土著人民代表机构的表述，是为了确认不同国家可用于与土著人民进行有效协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。 |
| The reference to appropriate consultations allows for the representative structures to be adjusted to the particular situation. | 适当协商的提法使代表机构能够根据具体情况进行调整。 |
| It also draws attention to the need for the consultations to be culturally appropriate. | 这一提法还提请注意，协商必须在文化上适当。 |
| The consultations must in any event be effective in practice in order not to put in jeopardy the substantive right of indigenous peoples to redress. | 无论如何，协商必须切实有效，以免损害土著人民获得补救的实质性权利。 |
| Principle 6 Agreements concerning the presence of military forces | 原则6 驻军协议 |
| States and international organizations should, as appropriate, include provisions on environmental protection in relation to armed conflict in agreements concerning the presence of military forces. | 各国和国际组织应当酌情将与武装冲突有关的环境保护规定纳入驻军协议。 |
| Such provisions should address measures to prevent, mitigate and remediate harm to the environment. | 此种规定应当述及防止、减轻和补救环境损害的措施。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) | (1) |
| Draft principle 6 addresses agreements concluded between States or between States and international organizations, concerning the presence of military forces. | 原则草案6述及国家之间以及国家与国际组织之间订立的驻军协议。 |
| The phrase “in relation to armed conflict” reflects 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”这一短语反映了本套原则草案的宗旨：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. | 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。 |
| (2) | (2) |
| The draft principle is cast in general terms to refer to “agreements concerning the presence of military forces”. | 本项原则草案采用了“驻军协议”这种一般性措辞。 |
| 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. | 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 matters relating to environmental protection have been included in agreements concerning the presence of military forces concluded with host States. | 本项原则草案的目的是反映最新动态，即与环境保护有关的事项已被列入与东道国订立的驻军协议。 |
| The word “should” indicates that the principle is not mandatory in nature, but rather aims at acknowledging and encouraging this development. | “应当”一词，表明这项原则不是强制性的，而是为了认可和鼓励这一动态。 |
| (3) | (3) |
| Examples of environmental provisions in agreements concerning the presence of military forces include the United States-Iraq agreement on the withdrawal from and temporary presence of United States forces in Iraq, which contains an explicit provision on the protection of the environment. | 在驻军协议中列入环境规定的例子包括美国和伊拉克关于美国部队撤出伊拉克及其在伊拉克暂时驻留的协议，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数次提到环境义务。 |
| Relevant treaty practice not directly related to armed conflicts includes the agreement between Germany and other NATO States, which provides that potential environmental effects shall be identified, analysed and evaluated, in order to avoid environmental burden. | 与武装冲突没有直接关系的条约实践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。 |
| Similarly, the Memorandum of Special Understanding between the United States and the Republic of Korea contains provisions on environmental protection. | 同样，《美国与大韩民国特别谅解备忘录》载有关于环境保护的规定。 |
| Furthermore, in 2015, Japan and the United States concluded a Supplementary Agreement on cooperation in the field of environmental stewardship relating to the United States Armed Forces in Japan. | 此外，2015年，日本与美国订立了《与驻日美国武装部队有关的环境管理领域合作的补充协定》。 |
| Reference can further be made to the status-of-forces agreement between the United States and Australia, which contains a relevant provision on damage claims, and the Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement between the United States and the Philippines, which contains provisions seeking to prevent environmental damage and provides for a review process. | 还可参考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《加强防务合作协定》，其中载有旨在防止损害环境的规定，并规定了审查程序。 |
| Certain arrangements applicable to short-term presence of foreign armed forces in a country for the purpose of exercises, transit by land or training, also contain environmental provisions. | 某些适用于外国军队为演习、陆上过境或训练目的在一国短期驻扎的安排也载有环境规定。 |
| (4) | (4) |
| The measures referred to in the draft principle may address a variety of relevant aspects. | 本项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 from facilities and areas granted to the deploying State; | 值得特别提及的是一些在条约实践中有所反映的确切例子：承认环境保护的重要性，包括防止来自准许部署国使用的设施和区域的污染； |
| an understanding that the agreement will be implemented in a manner consistent with protecting the environment; | 达成谅解，以与保护环境相一致的方式执行协议； |
| cooperation and sharing of information between the host State and the sending State regarding issues that could affect the health and environment of citizens; | 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； |
| measures to prevent environmental damage; | 防止环境损害的措施； |
| spill response and prevention,periodic environmental performance assessments; | 应对和防止泄漏； 定期进行环境绩效评估； |
| review processes; | 建立审查程序； |
| 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; | 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； |
| a duty to respect international norms regarding the sustainable use of natural resources; | 履行遵守关于可持续利用自然资源的国际准则的义务； |
| the taking of restorative measures where detrimental effects are unavoidable; | 在不利影响不可避免的情况下采取恢复措施； |
| and the regulation of environmental damage claims. | 就环境损害索赔作出规定。 |
| (5) | (5) |
| The phrase “as appropriate” signals two different considerations. | “酌情”一词表明两种不同的考虑。 |
| First, it takes into account that sometimes it may be especially important that the agreement contains provisions on environmental protection, for instance where a protected zone would be at risk of being adversely affected by the presence of military forces. | 首先，使用“酌情”一词是考虑到，在协议中包含环境保护规定有时可能特别重要。 例如，在受保护区有可能受到驻军的不利影响的情况下。 |
| Second, the draft principle does not apply to agreements in which it would not be appropriate to refer to armed conflicts. | 其次，本项原则草案不适用于不适合提及武装冲突的协议。 |
| The phrase “as appropriate” therefore provides nuance to this provision and allows it to capture different situations. | 因此，“酌情”一词为本项规定增加了一点灵活性，使本项规定能够适合不同情形。 |
| Principle 7 Peace operations | 原则7 和平行动 |
| States and international organizations involved in peace operations established in relation to armed conflicts shall consider the impact of such operations on the environment and take, as appropriate, measures to prevent, mitigate and remediate the harm to the environment resulting from those operations. | 参加与武装冲突有关而创建的和平行动的各国和国际组织应考虑此种行动对环境的影响，并采取适当措施，防止、减轻和补救这些行动对环境造成的损害。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) | (1) |
| Peace operations can relate to armed conflicts in multiple ways. | 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开展活动。 |
| 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，或重建国家能力。 |
| Mandates also include the protection of civilians. | 其任务还包括保护平民。 |
| Draft principle 7 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7意在涵盖可能涉及武装冲突的多个部分或方面并可能发生在不同时间段的所有此类和平行动。 |
| (2) | (2) |
| There is no clear or definitive definition for “peace operation” or “peacekeeping” in existing international law. | 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。 |
| The current draft principle is intended to cover broadly all such peace operations that are established in relation to armed conflict. | 本项原则草案意在广泛涵盖与武装冲突有关而创建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 Security Council understands “United Nations peace operations as peacekeeping operations and special political missions”. | 安全理事会将“联合国和平行动”理解为“维持和平行动和特别政治任务”。 |
| The term “peace operations” aims to cover all these types of operations, and operations broader than United Nations peacekeeping operations, including peace enforcement operations and operations by regional organizations. | “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。 |
| (3) | (3) |
| The words “established in relation to armed conflicts” delineate the scope of draft principle 7. | 短语“与武装冲突有关而创建的”确定了原则草案7的范围。 |
| They make clear the need for a 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). | 这一短语明确指出了必须与武装冲突的联系，以便确保对这些义务的解释不会过于宽泛(即可能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 peace operations have a direct link to armed conflict. | 虽然应结合本项原则草案的内容从广泛角度理解该短语，但公认的是，并非所有和平行动都与武装冲突有直接联系。 |
| Where a peace operation deployed in armed conflict becomes involved in hostilities, obligations under the law of armed conflict apply. | 如部署在武装冲突中的和平行动卷入敌对行动，则武装冲突法规定的义务适用。 |
| (4) | (4) |
| The present draft principle covers operations where States and international organizations are involved in peace operations established in relation to armed conflicts and where multiple actors may be present. | 本项原则草案涵盖国家和国际组织参加的与武装冲突有关而创建的、可能有多个行为体参与的和平行动。 |
| All these actors will have some effect on the environment. | 所有这些行为体都会对环境产生一些影响。 |
| The different departments and bodies within the United Nations recognize the potential damage by peacekeeping operations to the local environment. | 联合国内部的不同部门和机构承认维持和平行动可能对当地环境造成的损害。 |
| (5) | (5) |
| The environmental impact of a peace operation may stretch from the planning phase through its operational part, to the post-operation phase. | 和平行动对环境的影响可能从规划阶段一直延续到行动的执行阶段，再到行动后阶段。 |
| The desired goal is that peace operations undertake their activities in such a manner that the impact of their activities on the environment is minimized. | 理想目标是和平行动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 could be negatively affected by a peace operation. | 因此，本项原则草案的重点是在环境可能会受到和平行动负面影响的情况下应开展的活动。 |
| At the same time, it is understood that “appropriate” measures to be taken may differ depending on the context of the operation. | 同时，应采取的“适当”措施应当理解为可能因行动背景而有所不同。 |
| 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. | 相关考虑因素可能特别包括：这类措施是与武装冲突之前、冲突期间还是冲突之后阶段有关，以及在具体情况下哪些措施是可行的。 |
| (6) | (6) |
| The draft principle reflects the enhanced recognition by States and international organizations such as the United Nations, the European Union, and NATO, of the environmental impact of peace operations and the need to take necessary measures to prevent, mitigate and remediate negative effects. | 本项原则草案反映出，和平行动对环境的影响，以及采取必要措施防止、减轻和补救其负面影响的必要性得到了各国以及联合国、欧洲联盟 和北约 等国际组织的进一步承认。 |
| The phrase “shall consider the [environmental] impact” corresponds to the standard formulation used by the Security Council in the mandates of peace operations, which explicitly tasks the operations to consider the environmental impact of their operations. | “应考虑[环境]影响”这一短语符合安全理事会在和平行动任务中使用的标准表述，该表述明确要求各和平行动考虑其环境影响。 |
| Such operations are expected to budget for and implement multi-year plans regarding waste, energy infrastructure and water and wastewater management, and to ensure that environmental impact assessments are routinely implemented. | 这些行动应将废物、能源基础设施以及水和废水管理编入预算，实施相关多年期计划，并确保例行开展环境影响评估。 |
| Some United Nations field missions have dedicated environmental units to develop and implement mission-specific environmental policies and oversee environmental compliance. | 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。 |
| Reference can also be made to the developing practice regarding climate action, for instance recent NATO decisions concerning the reduction of military emissions. | 还可以参考气候行动方面正在形成的实践，例如北约近期关于减少军事排放的决定。 |
| The phrase “as appropriate” indicates a level of flexibility concerning the types of measures to be taken in different situations. | “适当”一词表明了在不同情况下应采取的各类措施的灵活性。 |
| (7) | (7) |
| Draft principle 7 is distinct in character from draft principle 6. | 原则草案7的性质与原则草案6明显有别。 |
| Peace operations, unlike agreements concerning the presence of military forces, do not necessarily involve armed forces or military personnel. | 和平行动不同于驻军协议，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体，如文职人员和各类专家。 |
| Draft principle 7 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7还意在使范围更广、更具一般性，并把重点放在这类和平行动的活动上。 |
| Principle 8 Human displacement | 原则8 人员流离失所 |
| States, international organizations and other relevant actors should take appropriate measures to prevent, mitigate and remediate harm to the environment in areas where persons displaced by armed conflict are located, or through which they transit, while providing relief and assistance for such persons and local communities. | 各国、国际组织和其他有关行为体应当采取适当措施，在因武装冲突而流离失所的人所在地区或他们经过的地区，防止、减轻和补救对环境的损害，同时向这些人和当地社区提供救济和援助。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) | (1) |
| Draft principle 8 addresses the inadvertent environmental effects of conflict-related human displacement. | 原则草案8涉及与冲突有关的人员流离失所无意间对环境造成的影响。 |
| The draft principle recognizes the interconnectedness of providing relief for those displaced by armed conflict and reducing the impact of displacement on the environment. | 原则草案承认向因武装冲突而流离失所的人提供救济与减少流离失所对环境的影响是相互关联的。 |
| The draft principle covers both international and internal displacement. | 本项原则草案既涵盖国际流离失所，也涵盖境内流离失所。 |
| (2) | (2) |
| Population displacement typically follows the outbreak of an armed conflict, giving rise to significant human suffering as well as environmental damage. | 人口流离失所通常发生在武装冲突爆发之后，会造成严重的人类苦难和环境损害。 |
| The United Nations Environment Programme has reported on “the massive movement of refugees and internally displaced people … across the country” as perhaps “the most immediate consequence of the conflict [in Liberia]”, as well as of “clear and significant” “links between displacement and the environment” in the Sudan. | 联合国环境规划署报告称，“难民和境内流离失所者…在全国各地的大规模流动”可能是“[利比里亚]冲突的最直接后果”， 在苏丹，“流离失所与环境之间存在明确而重要的联系”。 |
| In Rwanda, the population displacement and resettlement related to the 1990–1994 conflict and genocide “had a major impact on the environment, substantially altering land cover and land use in many parts of the country”, as well as causing extensive environmental damage in the neighbouring Democratic Republic of the Congo. | 在卢旺达，与1990至1994年的冲突和灭绝种族有关的人口流离失所和重新安置“对环境造成了重大影响，大大改变了该国许多地区的土地覆盖和土地使用情况”， 并对邻国刚果民主共和国的环境造成了广泛破坏。 |
| (3) | (3) |
| Reference can also be made to a 2014 study on the protection of the environment during armed conflict, which emphasizes the humanitarian and environmental impacts of displacement in various conflicts. | 还可参考2014年关于武装冲突期间环境保护的研究报告，该报告强调指出了各种冲突中的流离失所造成的人道主义影响和环境影响。 |
| The study notes with reference to the Democratic Republic of the Congo that “massive conflict-induced displacement of civilian populations associated with protracted conflict may have even more destructive effects [on] the environment than actual combat operations”. | 研究报告提及刚果民主共和国时指出，“大规模冲突引发的平民流离失所与旷日持久的冲突有关，可能比实际战斗行动对环境造成的破坏性影响更大”。 |
| Non-international armed conflicts, in particular, have caused important effects in terms of displacement, including the environmental strain in the affected areas. | 非国际性武装冲突在流离失所方面尤其造成了重大影响，包括给受影响地区的环境带来压力。 |
| In a similar manner, research based on the post-conflict environmental assessments conducted since the 1990s by the United Nations Environment Programme, the United Nations Development Programme and the World Bank has identified human displacement as one of the six principal pathways for direct environmental damage in conflict. | 同样，联合国环境规划署、联合国开发计划署和世界银行自1990年代以来基于冲突后环境评估开展的研究也将人员流离失所确定为冲突局势中造成直接环境损害的六个主要途径之一。 |
| (4) | (4) |
| As the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) has pointed out, considerations relating to access to water, the location of refugee camps and settlements, as well as food assistance by relief and development agencies, “all have a direct bearing on the environment”. | 正如联合国难民事务高级专员公署(难民署)指出的那样，与水的获取、难民营和定居点的位置以及救济和发展机构提供的粮食援助相关的考虑因素“都对环境有直接影响”。 |
| Uninformed decisions concerning the siting of a refugee camp in or near a fragile or internationally protected area may result in irreversible – local and distant – impacts on the environment. | 关于将难民营设在脆弱保护区或国际保护区之内或附近的不知情决定可能会对环境造成不可逆转的(局部和远距离)影响。 |
| Areas of high environmental value suffer particularly serious impacts that may be related to the area’s biological diversity, its function as a haven for endangered species or for the ecosystem services these provide. | 环境价值高的地区受到的影响尤为严重，而这些影响可能与该地区的生物多样性、作为濒危物种避难所的功能或该地区提供的生态系统服务有关。 |
| The United Nations Environment Programme and the United Nations Environmental Assembly have similarly drawn attention to the environmental impact of displacement. | 联合国环境规划署 和联合国环境大会也同样提请注意流离失所对环境的影响。 |
| The General Assembly adopted in 2016 the New York Declaration for Refugees and Migrants, which, inter alia, draws attention to the need to combat environmental degradation and contains a commitment to “support environmental, social and infrastructural rehabilitation in areas affected by large movements of refugees”, and in 2018 the global compact on refugees. | 联大于2016年通过了《关于难民和移民的纽约宣言》，其中除其他外提请注意需要防止环境退化，承诺“支持受难民大规模流动影响地区的环境、社会和基础设施的恢复”， 并于2018年通过了《难民问题全球契约》。 |
| ICRC, too, raises the issue in the updated Guidelines on the Protection of the Natural Environment in Armed Conflict. | 红十字国际委员会也在更新后的《武装冲突中保护自然环境的准则》中提出了这个问题。 |
| (5) | (5) |
| The African Union Convention for the Protection of Internally Displaced Persons in Africa, also known as the Kampala Convention, stipulates that States parties shall “[t]ake necessary measures to safeguard against environmental degradation in areas where internally displaced persons are located, either within the jurisdiction of the State Parties, or in areas under their effective control”. | 《非洲联盟保护和援助非洲境内流离失所者公约》(又称《坎帕拉公约》)规定，缔约国应“采取必要措施，防止缔约国管辖范围内或其有效控制地区内的境内流离失所者所在地的环境退化”。 |
| The Kampala Convention applies to internal displacement “in particular as a result of or in order to avoid the effects of armed conflict, situation of generalized violence, violations of human rights or natural or human-made disasters”. | 《坎帕拉公约》适用于“特别是由于武装冲突、普遍暴力、侵犯人权行为或天灾人祸等情况或为了逃避这些情况的影响而发生的境内流离失所”。 |
| (6) | (6) |
| Other recent developments related to displacement and the environment include the Task Force on Displacement, which was established by the Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, and mandated to produce recommendations on integrated approaches to avert, minimize and address displacement related to the adverse impacts of climate change. | 与流离失所和环境有关的其他最新动态包括流离失所问题工作组的设立，该工作组在《联合国气候变化框架公约》缔约方会议上设立，任务是就避免、尽量减轻和处理与气候变化不利影响相关的流离失所问题的综合办法提出建议。 |
| In 2015, States adopted the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction, which calls, inter alia, for the promotion of transboundary cooperation to build resilience and reduce the risk of disasters and the risk of displacement. | 2015年，各国通过了《仙台减少灾害风险框架》，该框架文件除其他外，呼吁促进跨界合作，以增强抗灾能力，减少灾害风险和流离失所风险。 |
| The more recent Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration likewise includes a section on the relationship between migration and environmental degradation. | 最近的《安全、有序和正常移民全球契约》也包含了关于移民与环境退化之间关系的一节文字。 |
| Although some of these developments focus on the environmental reasons for – rather than the environmental effects of – displacement, they are indicative of a recognition among States of the nexus between environment and displacement, and the need to foster cooperation and regulation in that field. | 尽管这些文书中有一些聚焦于造成流离失所问题的环境原因，而不是流离失所对环境的影响，但这些文书表明，各国承认环境与流离失所之间的联系，承认促进这一领域合作和监管的必要性。 |
| (7) | (7) |
| Draft principle 8 addresses States, international organizations and other relevant actors, including non-State armed groups, which may exercise de facto control over territories in which displaced persons are located or through which they transit. | 原则8草案涉及国家、国际组织和其他有关行为体，包括非国家武装团体，它们可能对流离失所者所在领土或他们经过的领土行使事实上的控制。 |
| International organizations involved in the protection of displaced people and the environment in conflict-affected areas include UNHCR, the United Nations Environment Programme and other United Nations agencies, as well as the European Union, the African Union, and NATO. | 在受冲突影响地区参与保护流离失所者和环境的国际组织包括难民署、联合国环境规划署和联合国其他机构以及欧洲联盟、非洲联盟和北约。 |
| “Other relevant actors” referred to in the draft principle may include, inter alia, international donors, ICRC, and international non-governmental organizations. | 本项原则草案中提到的“其他有关行为体”可能包括国际捐助方、红十字国际委员会和国际非政府组织等。 |
| All these actors are to take appropriate measures to prevent and mitigate environmental degradation in areas where persons displaced by armed conflict are located, while providing relief and assistance for such persons and local communities in accordance with their international obligations. | 这些行为体都应根据其国际义务，采取适当措施，防止和减轻因武装冲突而流离失所的人所在地区的环境退化，同时向这些人和当地社区提供救济和援助。 |
| The terms “relief and assistance” refer generally to the kind of assistance involved where human displacement occurs. | 词语“救济和援助”泛指发生人员流离失所时所需要的援助种类。 |
| These terms are not intended to convey any different meaning from how they are understood in humanitarian work. | 使用这些术语并不是要表达与人道主义工作中对这些术语的理解不同的任何含义。 |
| (8) | (8) |
| Draft principle 8 includes a reference to relief for displaced persons and local communities. | 原则草案8提及向流离失所者和当地社区提供的救济。 |
| The UNHCR Environmental Guidelines note in this regard that the “state of the environment … will have a direct bearing on the welfare and well-being of people living in that vicinity, whether refugees, returnees or local communities”. | 《难民署环境准则》在这方面指出，“环境状况将直接影响到居住在该地区附近的人们的福利和福祉，无论是难民、回返者还是当地社区”。 |
| Providing livelihoods for displaced people is intimately connected with preserving and protecting the environment in which local and host communities are located. | 为流离失所者提供生计，与维护和保护当地社区和收容社区所处的环境密切相关。 |
| Better environmental governance increases resilience for host communities, displaced persons, and the environment as such. | 改善环境治理可提高收容社区、流离失所者和环境本身的复原力。 |
| (9) | (9) |
| Similarly, the International Organization for Migration has highlighted the importance of “reducing the vulnerability of displaced persons as well as their impacts on the receiving society and ecosystem” as an emerging issue that requires addressing, and has furthermore developed an Atlas of Environmental Migration. | 同样，国际移民组织强调，“降低流离失所者的脆弱性及其对接纳地社会和生态系统的影响”是一个新出现的重要问题，需要加以处理， 该组织还编制了一份《环境移民地图集》。 |
| The World Bank has drawn attention to the issue in its 2009 report “Forced displacement – The development challenge”. | 世界银行2009年在题为“被迫流离失所――发展挑战”的报告 中曾提请注意这一问题。 |
| The report highlights the development impacts that displacement can have on environmental sustainability and development, including through environmental degradation. | 该报告强调了流离失所对环境可持续性和发展可能造成的发展影响，包括环境退化造成的影响。 |
| Reference can also be made to the Draft International Covenant on Environment and Development of IUCN, which includes a paragraph on displacement reading as follows: “Parties shall take all necessary measures to provide relief for those displaced by armed conflict, including internally displaced persons, with due regard to environmental obligations”. | 还可参考国际自然保护联盟《环境和发展国际盟约草案》，其中包含一个关于流离失所的段落，内容如下：“各方应采取一切必要措施，向包括境内流离失所者在内的因武装冲突而流离失所者提供救济，同时适当考虑到环境义务”。 |
| (10) | (10) |
| The reference to “providing relief” to persons displaced by conflict and to local communities in draft principle 8 should also be read in light of the Commission’s previous work on the topic “Protection of persons in the event of disasters”. | 原则草案8中关于向因冲突而流离失所者和当地社区“提供救济”的内容，还应当参照委员会以前关于“发生灾害时的人员保护”专题的工作 来解读。 |
| As explained in the relevant commentary, the draft articles would apply in situations of displacement that, because of their magnitude, can be viewed as “complex emergencies”, including where a disaster occurs in an area where there is an armed conflict. | 正如相关评注中所解释的那样，该条款草案将适用于其规模可被视为“复杂紧急情况”的流离失所情况，包括灾害发生于存在着武装冲突的地区的情况。 |
| (11) | (11) |
| Draft principle 8 concerns both areas where displaced persons are located and areas through which they transit. | 原则草案8既涉及流离失所者所在的地区，也涉及他们经过的地区。 |
| The notions “location” and “transit” are widely used in the context of human displacement but are rarely given a specific interpretation. | “所在”和“经过”这两个概念在人员流离失所问题上被广泛使用，但很少作出具体的解释。 |
| UNHCR recognizes in its practice both formal and institutionalized settings, such as camps, and non-camp informal and non-institutionalized settlements as areas where displaced persons are located and thus includes within the term “located” both permanent and temporary arrangements. | 难民署在其实践中承认，流离失所者营地等正式和机构化的环境，以及非营地式的非正式和非机构化定居点，都是流离失所者所在的地区，因此，“所在”一词既包括长期安排，也包括临时安排。 |
| In the application of the Kampala Convention, international organizations have similarly interpreted the phrase “where internally displaced persons are located” to include a broad spectrum of camps, as well as urban and rural settings. | 在适用《坎帕拉公约》时，国际组织同样将“境内流离失所者所在地” 这一短语解释为包括各种营地以及城市和农村场所。 |
| The International Organization for Migration defines “transit” as a stopover of passage of varying length while travelling between two or more countries. | 国际移民组织将“transit(过境)”定义为在两个或多个国家之间时间长短不一的停留。 |
| It defines a “country of transit” as a country through which migratory flows, whether regular or irregular, move. | 该组织将“country of transit(过境国)”定义为合法或非法的移民流动经过的国家。 |
| The terms of “transit camp” and “transit centre”, furthermore, refer to temporary arrangements to accommodate displaced persons securely. | 此外，“过境营地”和“过境中心”等用语是指安全地安置流离失所者的临时安排。 |
| For the present draft principle, the distinction between location and transit is not relevant as such. | 就本项原则草案而言，所在和经过之间的区别本身并不重要。 |
| The terms “located” and “transit” are not meant to be interpreted in a strict way, but rather should be taken as broadly and comprehensively as possible, encompassing the idea of movement of persons. | “所在”和“经过”这两个词并不是要以严格的方式来解释，而是应尽可能广泛和全面地加以理解，其中包括人员流动的概念。 |
| (12) | (12) |
| Draft principle 8 is located in Part Two given that conflict-related human displacement is a phenomenon that may have to be addressed both during and after an armed conflict, including in situations of occupation. | 考虑到与冲突有关的人员流离失所可能是在武装冲突期间和之后、包括在占领局势中必须处理的一个现象，原则草案8被列入第二部分。 |
| Principle 9 State responsibility | 原则9 国家责任 |
| 1. | 1. |
| An internationally wrongful act of a State, in relation to an armed conflict, that causes damage to the environment entails the international responsibility of that State, which is under an obligation to make full reparation for such damage, including damage to the environment in and of itself. | 一国与武装冲突有关的国际不法行为如对环境造成损害，则引起该国的国际责任，该国有义务对此种损害，包括单纯对环境本身的损害，作出充分赔偿。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| The present draft principles are without prejudice to the rules on the responsibility of States or of international organizations for internationally wrongful acts. | 本原则草案不妨碍关于国家或国际组织对国际不法行为的责任的规则。 |
| 3. | 3. |
| The present draft principles are also without prejudice to: | 本原则草案也不妨碍： |
| (a) | (a) |
| the rules on the responsibility of non-State armed groups; | 关于非国家武装团体的责任的规则； |
| (b) | (b) |
| the rules on individual criminal responsibility. | 关于个人刑事责任的规则。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) | (1) |
| Draft principle 9 focuses on the international responsibility of States for damage caused to the environment in relation to an armed conflict. | 原则草案9的重点是国家对与武装冲突有关的环境损害所负的国际责任。 |
| Paragraph 1 is based on the general rule that every internationally wrongful act of a State entails its international responsibility and gives rise to an obligation to make full reparation for the damage that may be caused by the act. | 第1段依据一般规则，即一国的每一国际不法行为引起该国的国际责任，并产生对该行为可能造成的损害作出充分赔偿的义务。 |
| The paragraph reaffirms the applicability of this principle to internationally wrongful acts in relation to armed conflict that cause environmental damage, including damage caused to the environment in and of itself. | 该段重申，这一原则适用于对环境造成损害、包括单纯对环境本身造成损害的与武装冲突有关的国际不法行为。 |
| (2) | (2) |
| Paragraph 1 has been modelled on articles 1 and 31, paragraph 1, of the articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts. | 第1段以国家对国际不法行为的责任条款第1条和第31条第1段为范本。 |
| Although no reference is made to other articles, the draft principle is to be applied in accordance with the rules on the responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts, including those specifying the conditions for internationally wrongful acts. | 虽然未提及其他条款，但适用本项原则草案时应遵循关于国家对国际不法行为的责任的规则，包括具体说明国际不法行为条件的规则。 |
| This means, inter alia, that conduct amounting to an internationally wrongful act may consist of action or omission. | 除其他外，这意味着构成国际不法行为的行为可能包括作为或不作为。 |
| Furthermore, for the international responsibility of a State to arise in relation to an armed conflict, the act or omission must be attributable to that State and amount to a violation of its international obligation. | 此外，要引起一国与武装冲突有关的国际责任，这种作为或不作为必须可归于该国，且必须构成对该国国际义务的违反。 |
| (3) | (3) |
| An act or omission attributable to a State that causes harm to the environment in relation to an armed conflict is wrongful if two conditions are met. | 如果满足两个条件，可归于一国的与武装冲突有关而造成环境损害的作为或不作为即为不法行为。 |
| First, the act or omission in question violates the law on the use of force or one or more of the substantive rules of the law of armed conflict providing protection to the environment, or other rules of international law applicable in the situation, including but not limited to international human rights law. | 首先，有关作为或不作为违反了使用武力法或武装冲突法中规定环境保护的一项或多项实质性规则， 或其他适用于这种情况的国际法规则，包括但不限于国际人权法。 |
| Second, such a rule, or rules, are binding on the State. | 其次，这样一项或多项规则对该国具有约束力。 |
| The scope of the responsibility of the State, as well as the threshold for compensable environmental harm, may vary depending on the applicable primary rules. | 国家责任的范围以及可补偿的环境损害的门槛可能因适用的主要规则不同而有所不同。 |
| (4) | (4) |
| The rules of the law of armed conflict concerning the responsibility of States are clear and well-established. | 武装冲突法在国家责任方面有明确和既定的规则。 |
| The law of armed conflict extends the responsibility of a State party to an armed conflict to “all acts committed by persons forming part of its armed forces”. | 武装冲突法将武装冲突当事国的责任扩大到“自己军队的组成人员做出的一切行为”。 |
| As far as the law on the use of force is concerned, a violation of Article 2, paragraph 4, of the Charter of the United Nations entails responsibility for damage caused by that violation, whether or not resulting from a violation of the law of armed conflict. | 就使用武力法而言，违反《联合国宪章》第二条第四款的情况引起对该侵犯行为所造成的损害的责任，无论损害是否因违反武装冲突法而造成。 |
| A further basis for responsibility for conflict-related environmental harm – in particular but not exclusively – in situations of occupation may be found in international human rights obligations. | 与冲突有关的环境损害责任的另一个依据体现在国际人权义务中，特别是――但不完全是――在占领局势中。 |
| Degradation of environmental conditions may violate a number of specific human rights, including the right to life, the right to health and the right to food, as has been reflected in the jurisprudence of regional human rights courts and human rights treaty bodies. | 正如区域人权法庭和人权条约机构的判例所反映的那样，环境条件恶化可能会侵犯一系列具体人权，包括生命权、健康权和食物权。 |
| In situations of occupation, furthermore, the Occupying Power is responsible for acts in violation of human rights law or the law of armed conflict even when they are committed by private actors, unless it can establish that the particular injury occurred notwithstanding its due diligence in seeking to prevent such violations. | 此外，在占领局势中，占领方对违反人权法或武装冲突法的行为承担责任，即使这些行为是私人行为体所为，除非占领方能够证明，该伤害是在它已履行设法防止这些违法行为的应尽职责的情况下发生的。 |
| (5) | (5) |
| Environmental damage caused in armed conflict was recognized as compensable under international law when the United Nations Compensation Commission (UNCC) was established by the Security Council in 1991 to deal with claims concerning the Iraqi invasion and occupation of Kuwait. | 当联合国安全理事会于1991年设立联合国赔偿委员会（赔偿委员会）来负责处理对伊拉克入侵和占领科威特索赔的问题时， 在武装冲突中造成的环境损害可依据国际法获得赔偿这一事实即已得到确立。 |
| The UNCC jurisdiction was based on Security Council resolution 687 (1991), which reaffirmed the responsibility of Iraq under international law “for any direct loss or damage – including environmental damage and the depletion of natural resources, or injury to foreign Governments, nationals and corporations as a result of its unlawful invasion and occupation of Kuwait”. | 赔偿委员会的管辖权以联合国安全理事会第687 (1991)号决议为依据，该决议重申，伊拉克按照国际法，应负责赔偿“因其非法入侵和占领科威特而对外国政府、国民和公司造成的任何直接损失、损害(包括环境的损害和自然资源的损耗)和伤害”。 |
| (6) | (6) |
| The experience of UNCC in dealing with environmental claims has been groundbreaking in the area of reparations for wartime environmental harm, and an important point of reference beyond armed conflicts. | 赔偿委员会处理环境索赔的经验在战时环境损害赔偿方面具有开创性意义，是武装冲突范围之外的一个重要参照点。 |
| One example is related to how environmental damage can be quantified. | 一个实例涉及如何对环境损害进行定量。 |
| UNCC did not attempt to define the concepts of “direct environmental damage” and “depletion of natural resources” in Security Council resolution 687 (1991) but accepted claims for a non-exhaustive list of losses or expenses resulting from: | 赔偿委员会没有试图界定安全理事会第687 (1991)号决议中的“直接环境损害”和“自然资源损耗”的概念，而是接受了就以下非详尽清单所列原因导致的损失或费用提出的索赔要求： |
| (a) | (a) |
| Abatement and prevention of environmental damage, including expenses directly relating to fighting oil fires and stemming the flow of oil in coastal and international waters; | 减轻和防止环境损害，其中包括与油田灭火和阻止沿海和国际水域石油流泄直接有关的费用； |
| (b) | (b) |
| Reasonable measures already taken to clean and restore the environment or future measures which can be documented as reasonably necessary to clean and restore the environment; | 为清洁和恢复环境已经采取的合理措施，或者有文献可以证明为清洁和恢复环境合理需要的未来措施； |
| (c) | (c) |
| Reasonable monitoring and assessment of the environmental damage for the purposes of evaluating and abating the harm and restoring the environment; | 为了评估和减轻损害以及恢复环境而对环境损害进行合理的监测和评估； |
| (d) | (d) |
| Reasonable monitoring of public health and performing medical screenings for the purposes of investigation and combating increased health risks as a result of the environmental damage; and | 为了调查和克服因环境损害引起的健康危险而合理监测公众健康状况和开展医疗普查； |
| (e) | (e) |
| Depletion of or damage to natural resources. | 对自然资源的损耗或破坏。 |
| (7) | (7) |
| Paragraph 1 of draft principle 9 reaffirms the compensability under international law of damage to the environment per se. | 原则草案9第1段重申，根据国际法，对环境本身的损害可予补偿。 |
| This statement is in line with the Commission’s previous work on State responsibility as well as on the allocation of loss in the case of transboundary harm arising out of hazardous activities. | 这一陈述与委员会以前关于国家责任的工作 和关于危险活动引起跨界损害情况下的损失分配的工作 相一致。 |
| Reference can also be made to the statement of UNCC that “there is no justification for the contention that general international law precludes compensation for pure environmental damage”. | 还可参考联合国赔偿委员会的陈述，即“没有任何理由主张一般国际法排除补偿纯环境损害”。 |
| Paragraph 1 of the draft principle is furthermore inspired by the judgment of the International Court of Justice in the Certain Activities (Costa Rica v. Nicaragua) case, in which the Court found that “it is consistent with the principles of international law governing the consequences of internationally wrongful acts, including the principle of full reparation, to hold that compensation is due for damage caused to the environment, in and of itself”. | 本项原则草案第1段还受到国际法院在某些活动(哥斯达黎加诉尼加拉瓜)案中所作判决的启发，法院在该判决中认为，“裁定单纯对环境本身造成的损害应予补偿符合关于国际不法行为后果的国际法原则，包括充分赔偿原则。 ” |
| (8) | (8) |
| The notion of “damage to the environment in and of itself” has been explained to refer to “pure environmental damage”. | “单纯对环境本身的损害”的概念被解释为指“纯环境损害”。 |
| The latter term was used by UNCC in the above citation. | 联合国赔偿委员会在上述引文中使用了后一术语。 |
| Both concepts, as well as the notion of “harm to the environment per se” that the Commission used in the principles on the allocation of loss in the case of transboundary harm arising out of hazardous activities, have the same meaning. | 这两个概念以及委员会在危险活动引起跨界损害情况下的损失分配原则中使用的“对环境本身的损害”概念具有相同的含义。 |
| They refer to harm to the environment that does not, or not only, cause material damage, but that leads to the impairment or loss of the ability of the environment to provide ecosystem services, such as sequestration of carbon from the atmosphere, air quality services and biodiversity. | 它们所指的这种对环境的损害不造成(或不止造成)物质损害，但导致环境提供生态系统服务(例如大气层碳固存、空气质量服务和生物多样性)的能力遭受损害或损失。 |
| (9) | (9) |
| The reference to “full reparation” in paragraph 1 is to be understood in accordance with the articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts as taking the form of restitution, compensation, and satisfaction, either singly or in combination, as required by the circumstances. | 第1段中提到的“充分赔偿”应根据国家对国际不法行为的责任条款理解为根据情况需要，单独或合并采取恢复原状、补偿和抵偿的方式。 |
| As pointed out above, damage to environmental values (such as biodiversity) is, as a matter of principle, no less real and compensable than damage to property. | 如上所述，从原则上说，对环境价值(如生物多样性)的损害，其真实和应该予以赔偿的程度不亚于对财产的损害。 |
| While the form of reparation for environmental damage has typically been limited to compensation, restoration measures and other distinct forms of reparation complementary to compensation are in no way excluded. | 虽然对环境损害的赔偿方式通常仅限于补偿， 但绝不排除恢复措施和作为补偿之补充的其他不同赔偿方式。 |
| (10) | (10) |
| Paragraph 2 of draft principle 9 clarifies that the draft principles are without prejudice to the rules on the responsibility of States or of international organizations for internationally wrongful acts. | 原则草案9第2段说明，本原则草案不妨碍关于国家或国际组织对国际不法行为的责任的规则。 |
| The purpose of the saving clause is to make it clear that the draft principles do not deviate from the rules of State responsibility as codified by the Commission’s articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts. | 这一保留条款的目的是要表明，本原则草案不会偏离委员会的国家对国际不法行为的责任条款所编纂的国家责任规则。 |
| A need for such clarification could arise in relation to an individual draft principle or in relation to the articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts regarding questions not dealt with in the current draft principle or commentary. | 在具体原则草案方面， 或在国家对国际不法行为的责任条款涉及本原则草案或评注中未涉及的问题时， 可能需要这种澄清。 |
| Taking into account that the responsibility for internationally wrongful acts not only of States but also of international organizations is the object of previous work by the Commission, both bodies of law are addressed in the same paragraph. | 考虑到委员会以往的工作不仅涉及国家还涉及国际组织对国际不法行为的责任， 在这一段中同时述及了这两个法律主体。 |
| (11) | (11) |
| Paragraph 3 contains another saving clause providing that the present draft principles are also without prejudice to (a) the rules on the responsibility of non-State armed groups; | 第3段载有另一个保留条款，规定本原则草案也不妨碍：(a) 关于非国家武装团体责任的规则； |
| and (b) the rules on individual criminal responsibility. | (b) 关于个人刑事责任的规则。 |
| The paragraph is closely linked to the mention of international organizations in paragraph 2. | 该段与第2段中提到的国际组织密切相关。 |
| Mentioning the three additional areas of international responsibility serves to indicate that the substantive focus of the current draft principle on the responsibility of States is not intended to downplay the role other actors may have in causing or contributing to environmental damage in the context of an armed conflict. | 提到国际责任这三个另外的领域是为了表明，本项原则草案以国家责任为实质性重点并不是要淡化其他行为体在武装冲突中造成或促成环境损害方面可能发挥的作用。 |
| Their role has also been acknowledged in several other draft principles that address not only States but “parties to an armed conflict”, international organizations, or “other relevant actors”. | 这些行为体的作用在其他几项不仅涉及国家，而且涉及“武装冲突各方”、国际组织或“其他相关行为体”的原则草案中也得到承认。 |
| (12) | (12) |
| The responsibility of non-State armed groups and individual criminal responsibility are addressed separately in order to distinguish between two different areas of international law. | 非国家武装团体的责任和个人刑事责任是分开处理的，以区分国际法的两个不同领域。 |
| Individual criminal responsibility for environmental damage during an armed conflict is recognized in the Rome Statute and was highlighted in a 2016 policy paper of the Office of the Prosecutor. | 武装冲突期间造成环境损害的个人刑事责任在《罗马规约》中得到了确认， 在检察官办公室2016年的政策文件也作了强调。 |
| The 2020 ICRC Guidelines on the Protection of the Natural Environment in Armed Conflict include a rule concerning the repression of war crimes that concern the natural environment. | 红十字国际委员会2020年《武装冲突中保护自然环境的准则》包括一项关于惩治涉及自然环境的战争罪的规则。 |
| A proposal has been made in the Assembly of States Parties of the International Criminal Court to include “ecocide” as the fifth category of crimes in the Rome Statute, and an international panel appointed by the Stop Ecocide campaign has issued a draft definition of the crime of ecocide. | 有人在国际刑事法院缔约国大会上提议将“灭绝生态”作为第五类罪行列入《罗马规约》， 制止灭绝生态运动任命的一个国际小组发布了灭绝生态罪的定义草案。 |
| The international responsibility of non-State armed groups is still a less settled area in international law. | 非国家武装团体的国际责任仍然是国际法中一个不太确定的领域。 |
| No difference has been indicated in the text of subparagraphs (a) and (b), as the applicable rules may evolve over time. | (a)项和(b)项的案文没有显示出任何区别，因为适用的规则可能会随着时间的推移而变化。 |
| (13) | (13) |
| Draft principle 9 is located in Part Two containing draft principles related to the phase before armed conflict, and draft principles that are applicable to more than one phase, including provisions of general applicability. | 原则草案9被列入第二部分，这一部分载有与武装冲突之前阶段有关的原则草案，以及适用于一个以上阶段的原则草案，包括一般适用的规定。 |
| Draft principle 9 belongs to the latter category. | 原则草案9属于后一类。 |
| Principle 10 Due diligence by business enterprises | 原则10 工商企业的应尽职责 |
| States should take appropriate measures aimed at ensuring that business enterprises operating in or from their territories, or territories under their jurisdiction, exercise due diligence with respect to the protection of the environment, including in relation to human health, when acting in an area affected by an armed conflict. | 各国应当采取适当措施，以确保在其领土或其管辖的领土内运营，或从其领土或其管辖的领土上运营的工商企业，在受武装冲突影响地区开展活动时履行环境保护、包括与人类健康有关的环境保护的应尽职责。 |
| Such measures include those aimed at ensuring that natural resources are purchased or otherwise obtained in an environmentally sustainable manner. | 此种措施包括旨在确保以环境上可持续的方式购买或以其他方式获取自然资源的措施。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) | (1) |
| Draft principle 10 recommends that States take appropriate measures to ensure that business enterprises operating in or from their territories, or territories under their jurisdiction, exercise due diligence with respect to the protection of the environment, including in relation to human health, in areas affected by an armed conflict. | 原则草案10建议各国采取适当措施，以确保在其领土或其管辖的领土内运营，或从其领土或其管辖的领土上运营的工商企业，在受武装冲突影响地区开展活动时履行环境保护、包括与人类健康有关的环境保护的应尽职责。 |
| The second sentence of draft principle 10 specifies that such measures include those aimed at ensuring that natural resources are purchased or otherwise obtained in an environmentally sustainable manner. | 原则草案10第2句具体说明，此种措施包括旨在确保以环境上可持续的方式购买或以其他方式获取自然资源的措施。 |
| The draft principle does not reflect a generally binding legal obligation and has been phrased accordingly as a recommendation. | 本项原则草案反映的不是一项具有普遍约束力的法律义务，并相应地采用了建议式的措辞。 |
| (2) | (2) |
| The concept of “due diligence by business enterprises” refers to a wide network of normative frameworks that seek to promote responsible business practices, including respect for human rights and international environmental standards. | “工商企业的应尽职责”这一概念指的是一个广泛的规范框架网络，这些规范框架旨在促进负责任的企业做法，包括尊重人权和国际环境标准。 |
| Such frameworks include non-binding guidelines as well as binding regulations at the national or regional level, and extend to codes of conduct created by the businesses themselves. | 这种框架包括不具约束力的准则以及具有约束力的国家或区域一级法规，并延伸到企业自己制定的行为守则。 |
| Draft principle 10 builds on and seeks to complement the existing regulatory frameworks which do not always display a clear environmental focus, or a focus on armed conflict and post-armed conflict situations. | 原则草案10建立在现有监管框架的基础之上，并寻求为这些框架提供补充，因为这些框架并不总是表现出明确的环境重点，也不总是侧重武装冲突和冲突后局势。 |
| (3) | (3) |
| The United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights are based on the obligations of States to respect, protect and fulfil human rights and fundamental freedoms, and their implementation largely relies on State action. | 联合国《工商企业与人权指导原则》 以各国尊重、保护及实现人权和基本自由的义务为基础，其实施工作在很大程度上取决于国家行动。 |
| The Guiding Principles propose a number of measures that States can take to ensure that business enterprises operating in conflict-affected areas are not involved with gross human rights abuses. | 《指导原则》提出，国家可采取一些措施，确保在受冲突影响地区开展业务的工商企业不会卷入严重侵犯人权的行为。 |
| This includes “[e]nsuring that their current policies, legislation, regulations and enforcement measures are effective in addressing the risk of business involvement in gross human rights abuses”. | 这包括“确保其目前的政策、立法、条例和执行措施可有效应对工商企业参与严重侵犯人权的风险”。 |
| (4) | (4) |
| The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises expressly address environmental concerns, recommending that enterprises “take due account of the need to protect the environment, public health and safety, and generally to conduct their activities in a manner contributing to the wider goal of sustainable development”. | 《经济合作与发展组织(经合组织)跨国企业准则》 明确提及环境问题，建议企业“适当考虑保护环境、公共卫生和安全的需求，在通常情况下以能够促进更广泛的可持续发展目标的方式开展活动”。 |
| The OECD Due Diligence Guidance for Responsible Supply Chains of Minerals from Conflict-Affected and High-Risk Areas of 2016, inter alia, encourages companies operating in or sourcing minerals from conflict-affected and high-risk areas to assess and avoid the risk of being involved in serious human rights violations. | 2016年《经合组织关于来自受冲突影响和高风险区域的矿石的负责任供应链尽职调查指南》 尤其鼓励在受冲突影响和高风险区域经营或采购矿物的企业评估并避免卷入严重侵犯人权行为的风险。 |
| Regulatory frameworks more specifically related to natural resources and areas of armed conflict also include the Certification Mechanism of the International Conference of the Great Lakes Region and the Chinese Due Diligence Guidelines for Responsible Mineral Supply Chains. | 与自然资源和武装冲突地区更具体相关的监管框架还包括大湖区问题国际会议认证机制 和《中国负责任矿产供应链尽责管理指南》。 |
| Due diligence frameworks have also been created for specific businesses, including extractive industries, in cooperation between States, businesses and civil society. | 在与国家、企业和民间社会的合作下，还为包括采掘业在内的具体行业建立了应尽职责框架。 |
| (5) | (5) |
| In some cases, such initiatives have provided the impetus for States to incorporate similar standards into their national legislation, making them binding on corporations subject to their jurisdiction that operate in, or deal with, conflict-affected areas. | 在一些情况下，这些举措推动各国将类似标准纳入其国家立法，使这些标准对受其管辖且在受冲突影响区内经营或有生意来往的公司产生约束力。 |
| Legally binding instruments have also been developed at the regional level. | 区域一级也制定了具有法律约束力的文书。 |
| Examples of such legally binding frameworks, either at the regional or national level, include the US Dodd-Frank Act of 2010, the Lusaka Protocol of the International Conference on the Great Lakes Region, the regulation of the European Union on conflict minerals and the European Union timber regulation. | 这种具有法律约束力的区域一级或国家一级框架的例子包括美国2010年《多德－弗兰克法》、大湖区问题国际会议《卢萨卡议定书》、欧洲联盟冲突矿产条例 以及欧洲联盟木材条例。 |
| (6) | (6) |
| The wording of draft principle 10 builds on the existing frameworks of corporate due diligence, inter alia regarding how natural resources are purchased and obtained. | 原则草案10的措辞建立在关于公司应尽职责的现有框架，特别是关于如何购买和获取自然资源的框架基础之上。 |
| At the same time, in accordance with the scope of the topic, it specifically focuses on the protection of the environment in areas affected by an armed conflict. | 同时，根据本专题的范围，原则草案10明确以受武装冲突影响地区的环境保护为重点。 |
| The phrase has been inspired by the concept of “conflict-affected and high-risk areas” used in the OECD Due Diligence Guidance for Responsible Supply Chains of Minerals, as well as in the conflict minerals regulation of the European Union. | 这一短语受经合组织《负责任矿石供应链尽职指南》 和欧洲联盟《冲突矿产条例》 中使用的“受冲突影响和高风险地区”的概念的启发。 |
| The scope of draft principle 10 does not extend to high-risk situations, as these may not always have a connection to an armed conflict. | 原则草案10的范围不包括高风险局势，因为这些局势不一定总与武装冲突有关。 |
| The phrase “area[s] affected by an armed conflict” should be understood in the sense of the concepts of “armed conflict”, including situations of occupation, and “post-armed conflict” as used in the draft principles. | “受武装冲突影响地区”这一短语应当结合原则草案中使用的“武装冲突” (包括占领局势)和“武装冲突后” 概念的含义来理解。 |
| (7) | (7) |
| According to the first sentence of draft principle 10, States should take “appropriate measures”. | 根据原则草案10第一句，各国应当采取“适当措施”。 |
| This reference should be understood to encompass a variety of measures States can take, such as legislative, administrative and judicial. | 这一提法应理解为包括国家可以采取的各种措施，如立法、行政和司法措施。 |
| Reference can be made in this regard to draft principle 3, which contains an illustrative list of the most relevant types of measures that States can take to enhance the protection of the environment in relation to armed conflicts. | 在这方面可参考原则草案3, 其中载有一份示例清单，列出了各国为加强与武装冲突有关的环境保护可采取的最相关的措施类型。 |
| The qualification “appropriate” also indicates that the measures taken at the national level may differ from one country to another. | 限定词“适当”还表明，各国在国家一级采取的措施可能有所不同。 |
| While seeking to ensure due diligence by business enterprises would usually require legislative action, this may not always be the case. | 虽然为确保工商企业应尽职责通常需要采取立法行动， 但可能并非总是如此。 |
| Such measures should in any event be aimed at ensuring that business enterprises operating in or from the country in question, or in a territory under its jurisdiction, exercise due diligence with respect to the protection of the environment when acting in an area affected by an armed conflict. | 无论如何，此类措施应当着眼于确保在有关国家领土或其管辖的领土内运营，或从其领土或其管辖的领土上运营的工商企业在受武装冲突影响地区开展活动时履行保护环境的应尽职责。 |
| (8) | (8) |
| There is no uniform practice on how to refer to business entities. | 关于如何称呼工商业实体，没有统一做法。 |
| The different regulatory frameworks use terms ranging from “transnational corporations and other business enterprises” to “multinational enterprises”, “business enterprises” or “companies”. | 不同的监管框架使用的术语包括“跨国公司和其他工商企业”、“跨国企业”、“工商企业” 或“公司”。 |
| The reference to “business enterprises” was chosen for the draft principle as a broad notion that is also used in the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights. | 本项原则草案选择的“工商企业”是一个宽泛的概念，也是《工商企业与人权指导原则》中使用的词语。 |
| How this notion is interpreted would primarily depend on the national law of each State. | 如何解释这一概念将主要取决于每个国家的国内法。 |
| There are similarly several ways to describe the connection between a corporation or other business enterprise and a State. | 同样，描述一家公司或其他工商企业与一个国家之间的联系也有几种方式。 |
| The reference to “operating in or from their territories” follows the standard phrase in the OECD Due Diligence Guidance. | “在其领土内或从其领土上运营”的提法是《经合组织尽职调查指南》 中的标准措辞。 |
| While the phrase may be interpreted to cover both territory and jurisdiction, the explicit reference to territories under the jurisdiction of the State in question takes into account that States may have obligations under international law to ensure the observance of certain rights of persons under their jurisdiction. | 虽然这句话可以解释为包括领土和管辖权， 但明确提到有关国家管辖的领土，是考虑到各国根据国际法可能有义务确保受其管辖的个人的某些权利得到遵守。 |
| The phrase is also consistent with the previous work of the Commission on other topics. | 这一短语也与委员会以往关于其他专题的工作相一致。 |
| (9) | (9) |
| Draft principle 10 also applies to private military and security companies, understood as “private business entities that provide military and/or security services, irrespective of how they may describe themselves”. | 原则草案10也适用于私营军事和安保公司，这里理解为“提供军事和/或安保服务的私营商业实体，无论它们自己如何表述”。 |
| The services that private military and security companies provide range from logistic support, intelligence services, training of troops, and protection of personnel and military assets to protection of commercial shipping from piracy. | 私营军事和安保公司提供的服务包括后勤支持、情报服务、部队训练、保护人员和军事资产，以及保护商业航运免遭海盗侵扰等。 |
| In addition to States, international organizations in the context of peace operations, private corporations in the area of extractive industries and humanitarian organizations, for instance, commonly use the services of private military and security companies. | 除国家外，和平行动中的国际组织、采掘业领域的私营公司和人道主义组织等也经常使用私营军事和安保公司的服务。 |
| In transitional phases and post-conflict situations, private contractors may furthermore be involved in different kinds of reconstruction work, including disposal of military waste and conflict debris. | 在过渡阶段和冲突后局势中，私人承包商还可能参与不同类型的重建工作，包括处理军事废弃物和冲突残留物。 |
| The special features of such services, which have traditionally been provided by the military, or other public authorities of a State, require additional comments. | 这类服务传统上由军队或国家其他公共机关提供，其特点需要进一步说明。 |
| Most notably, in a situation of an armed conflict, the personnel of a private military company may have obligations under the law of armed conflict that go beyond what is provided in the current draft principle. | 最值得注意的是，在武装冲突局势中，私营军事公司人员根据武装冲突法承担的义务可能超出本项原则草案所规定的范围。 |
| This is the case, for instance, when a private military company is empowered to exercise governmental authority and may act as a party to the conflict. | 例如，当私营军事公司被授权行使政府权力并可能作为冲突一方行事时，就属于这种情况。 |
| Furthermore, in addition to the home State of a private military and security company and the host State, the State or organization that has contracted that company has international legal obligations. | 此外，除了私营军事和安保公司的总部所在国和东道国之外，与该公司签订合同的国家或组织也负有国际法律义务。 |
| Reference can be made, for instance, to the contracting State’s obligation to ensure respect for the law of armed conflict by the private military and security companies with whom they contract. | 例如，合同签订国有义务确保与其签约的私营军事和安保公司遵守武装冲突法。 |
| When a contracting State is an Occupying Power, moreover, it has a general obligation to exercise vigilance in preventing violations of the law of armed conflict and international human rights law. | 另外，当一个合同签订国是占领方时，该国具有保持警惕，防止违反武装冲突法和国际人权法的一般义务。 |
| (10) | (10) |
| The notion of “due diligence” as used in the draft principle refers to due diligence expected of business entities when acting in areas affected by an armed conflict. | 原则草案中使用的“应尽职责”概念是指工商实体在受武装冲突影响地区采取行动时应履行的应尽职责。 |
| This notion is not used differently from the due diligence frameworks referred to in paragraphs (2) to (4) above. | 这一概念的使用与上文第(2)至第(4)段所指的应尽职责框架并无不同。 |
| As for its content, reference can be made to the parameters of “human rights due diligence” as explained in the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: | 其内容可参考《工商企业与人权指导原则》中解释的“人权尽责”的范围： |
| Human rights due diligence: | 人权尽责： |
| (a) | (a) |
| Should cover adverse human rights impacts that the business enterprise may cause or contribute to through its own activities, or which may be directly linked to its operations, products or services by its business relationships; | 应涵盖工商企业通过其自身活动可能造成或加剧或因商业关系而与其业务、产品或服务直接相关的负面人权影响； |
| (b) | (b) |
| Will vary in complexity with the size of the business enterprise, the risk of severe human rights impacts, and the nature and context of its operations; | 随工商企业的规模、产生严重人权影响的风险以及业务性质和背景的不同而在复杂性上有所不同； |
| (c) | (c) |
| Should be ongoing, recognizing that the human rights risks may change over time as the business enterprise’s operations and operating context evolve. | 应是持续的，承认人权风险可能随时会因工商企业的业务和经营背景的变化而其变化。 |
| The European Union conflict minerals regulation defines supply chain due diligence in similar terms as “an ongoing, proactive and reactive process through which economic operators monitor and administer their purchases and sales with a view to ensuring that they do not contribute to conflict or the adverse impacts thereof”. | 欧洲联盟冲突矿产条例使用类似的术语，将供应链尽责调查定义为“一个持续、主动和反应性的程序，经济从业者通过该程序监测和管理其采购和销售，以确保它们不会加剧冲突或其不利影响”。 |
| Furthermore, the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises and the related documentation include detailed guidance on international environmental standards. | 此外，经合组织《跨国企业准则》和相关文件包括关于国际环境标准的详细指导。 |
| (11) | (11) |
| The phrase “including in relation to human health” underlines the close link between environmental degradation and human health as affirmed by international environmental instruments, regional treaties and case law, the work of the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, as well as of the Special Rapporteur on human rights and the environment. | “包括与人类健康有关的环境”这一短语强调了环境退化与人类健康之间的密切联系，国际环境文书、区域条约和判例、经济、社会及文化权利委员会的工作 以及人权与环境特别报告员的工作 均确认了这种联系。 |
| Reference can also be made to the broad recognition of the right to a safe, clean, healthy and sustainable environment both at the national and international levels. | 还可参考国家 和国际 层面上对享有安全、清洁、健康和可持续环境的权利的广泛认可。 |
| The phrase thus refers to “human health” in the context of the protection of the environment. | 因此，该短语指的是环境保护背景下的“人类健康”。 |
| (12) | (12) |
| According to the second sentence of draft principle 10, the measures to be taken include those aimed at ensuring that natural resources are purchased or otherwise obtained in an environmentally sustainable manner. | 原则草案10的第二句指出，应采取的措施包括旨在确保以环境上可持续的方式购买和获取自然资源的措施。 |
| The requirement of responsible sourcing is included in a number of documents referred to above. | 上述许多文件中都包括负责任采购的要求。 |
| The OECD Guidance, for instance, recommends that States promote the observance of the Guidance by companies operating from their territories and sourcing minerals from conflict-affected and high-risk areas “with the aim of ensuring that they respect human rights, avoid contributing to conflict and successfully contribute to sustainable, equitable and effective development”. | 例如，《经合组织指南》建议各国促进从其领土上经营以及从受冲突影响和高风险地区采购矿石的企业遵守该指南，“确保这些企业尊重人权，避免助长冲突，并成功地为可持续、公平、有效的发展做出贡献”。 |
| The Chinese guidelines require that companies identify and assess the risks of contributing to conflict and serious human rights abuses associated with extracting, trading, processing, and exporting resources from conflict-affected and high-risk areas, as well as risks associated with serious misconduct in environmental, social and ethical issues. | 中国的指南要求企业识别和评估与从受冲突影响及高风险地区采掘、交易、加工及出口资源相关的助长冲突和严重侵犯人权的风险， 以及与环境、社会及道德问题上的严重过失相关的风险。 |
| The European Union conflict minerals regulation defines “supply chain due diligence” as meaning “the obligations of Union importers … in relation to their management systems, risk management, independent third-party audits and disclosure of information with a view to identifying and addressing actual and potential risks linked to conflict-affected and high-risk areas to prevent or mitigate adverse impacts associated with their sourcing activities”. | 欧洲联盟冲突矿产条例将“供应链尽责调查”定义为“欧盟进口商在其管理系统、风险管理、独立第三方审计和信息披露方面的义务，目的是识别和应对与受冲突影响和高风险地区相关的实际和潜在风险，以防止或减轻与其采购活动相关的不利影响”。 |
| (13) | (13) |
| Draft principle 10 refers to activities of business enterprises in areas affected by an armed conflict, but addresses what are essentially preventive measures. | 原则草案10适用于工商企业在受武装冲突影响地区的活动，但阐述的本质上是预防性的措施。 |
| The draft principle is therefore located in Part Two which includes principles relating to the time before conflict, and principles that are applicable in more than one phase including general principles not tied to any particular phase. | 因此，这项原则草案被列入第二部分，这部分包括与冲突前有关的原则，以及适用于不止一个阶段的原则，包括不限于任何特定阶段的一般原则。 |
| Principle 11 Liability of business enterprises | 原则11 工商企业的赔偿责任 |
| States should take appropriate measures aimed at ensuring that business enterprises operating in or from their territories, or territories under their jurisdiction, can be held liable for harm caused by them to the environment, including in relation to human health, in an area affected by an armed conflict. | 各国应当采取适当措施，以确保在其领土或其管辖的领土内运营，或从其领土或其管辖的领土上运营的工商企业，对于它们在受武装冲突影响地区造成的环境损害、包括与人类健康有关的环境损害，可被认定负有赔偿责任。 |
| Such measures should, as appropriate, include those aimed at ensuring that a business enterprise can be held liable to the extent that such harm is caused by its subsidiary acting under its de facto control. | 此种措施应酌情包括旨在确保工商企业对事实上由其控制的子公司所造成的此种损害可被认定负有赔偿责任的措施。 |
| To this end, as appropriate, States should provide adequate and effective procedures and remedies, in particular for the victims of such harm. | 为此，各国应当酌情提供、特别是向此种损害的受害者提供充分和有效的程序和补救措施。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) | (1) |
| Draft principle 11 is closely related to draft principle 10 concerning due diligence by business enterprises. | 原则草案11与关于工商企业应尽职责的原则草案10密切相关。 |
| The purpose of draft principle 11 is to address situations in which harm has been caused by business enterprises to the environment, including in relation to human health, in areas affected by an armed conflict. | 原则草案11的目的是阐述工商企业在受武装冲突影响地区造成环境损害、包括与人类健康有关的环境损害的情况。 |
| States should take appropriate measures aimed at ensuring that business enterprises operating in or from the State’s territory, or territory under its jurisdiction, can be held liable for having caused such harm. | 各国应当采取适当措施，以确保在其领土或其管辖的领土内，或从其领土或其管辖的领土上运营的工商企业，对于造成的此种损害，可被认定负有赔偿责任。 |
| The concepts of “appropriate measures”, “business enterprises”, “the environment, including in relation to human health”, “operating in or from their territories, or territories under their jurisdiction” and “in an area affected by an armed conflict” are to be interpreted in the same way as in draft principle 10. | “适当措施”、“工商企业”、“环境…、包括与人类健康有关的环境”、“在其领土或其管辖的领土内，或从其领土或其管辖的领土上运营”和“受武装冲突影响地区”等概念的解释应与原则草案10中的解释相同。 |
| (2) | (2) |
| The notions of “harm” and “caused by them” are to be interpreted in accordance with the applicable law, which may be the law of the home State of the business enterprise, or the law of the State in which the harm has been caused. | “损害”和“它们…造成的”的概念应根据适用的法律来解释，适用的法律可能是工商企业总部所在国的法律，或它们造成损害的国家的法律。 |
| In this regard, reference can be made to the legal regime applicable in the European Union, which provides that the law applicable to a claim shall in general be that of the State in which the damage occurred. | 在这方面，可以参考欧洲联盟适用的法律制度， 该制度规定，适用于索赔的法律一般应为损害发生国的法律。 |
| (3) | (3) |
| The second sentence of draft principle 11 follows the wording of draft principle 10 in that it begins with a reference to the preceding sentence and adds a further consideration that is included within its remit. | 原则草案11的第二句沿用了原则草案10的措辞，首先承接上一句，然后又增加了一个属于其范围内的考虑因素。 |
| The phrase “as appropriate”, which does not appear in draft principle 10, provides nuance as to how the elements of the provision are to be applied at the national level. | 在原则草案10中没有出现的“酌情”一词使在国家一级适用该项规定的内容时可以有一点灵活性。 |
| The second sentence of draft principle 11 recommends measures aimed at ensuring that a business enterprise can, under certain circumstances, be held liable if its subsidiary has caused harm to the environment, including in relation to human health in an area affected by an armed conflict. | 原则草案11的第二句建议采取措施，确保在某些情况下，如果一家工商企业的子公司在受武装冲突影响地区造成环境损害、包括与人类健康有关的环境损害，该企业可被认定负有赔偿责任。 |
| More specifically, this should be possible when and to the extent that the subsidiary acts under the de facto control of the parent company. | 更具体而言，当子公司在母公司事实上的控制下行事时，应当能够认定母公司负有赔偿责任。 |
| To illustrate the importance of such control, reference can be made to the statement of the United Kingdom Supreme Court in the Vedanta v. Lungowe case regarding the possible liability of the British multinational group Vedanta Resources for the release of toxic substances by its subsidiary to a watercourse in Zambia: “Everything depends on the extent to which, and the way in which, the parent availed itself of the opportunity to take over, intervene in, control, supervise or advise the management of the relevant operations (including land use) of the subsidiary.” | 为了说明这种控制的重要性，可参考联合王国最高法院在Vedanta诉Lungowe案中关于英国跨国集团Vedanta资源集团对其子公司向赞比亚水道排放有毒物质可能承担赔偿责任的声明：“一切取决于母公司在何种程度上以及以何种方式利用机会接管、干预、控制、监督或建议子公司相关业务(包括土地使用)的管理。 ” |
| (4) | (4) |
| The concept of de facto control is to be interpreted in accordance with the requirements of each national jurisdiction. | 事实上的控制的概念应根据每个国家司法管辖机构的要求来解释。 |
| The OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises point out in this regard that the companies or other entities forming a multinational enterprise may coordinate their operations in different ways. | 在这方面，经合组织《跨国企业准则》指出，组成跨国企业的公司或其他实体可能以不同方式协调其业务。 |
| “While one or more of these entities may be able to exercise a significant influence over the activities of others, their degree of autonomy within the enterprise may vary widely from one multinational enterprise to another.” | “尽管其中一个或多个实体能够对其他实体施加更明显影响，各实体的自主权在一个跨国企业和另一个跨国企业之间可能明显不同”。 |
| (5) | (5) |
| Reference can in this regard also be made to national judicial cases that have shed light on the relevant aspects of the relationship between the parent company and its subsidiary. | 在这方面，还可参考阐明母公司与其子公司之间关系相关方面的国家司法案件。 |
| For instance, U.S. courts are sometimes willing to hold a parent company accountable for the actions of a foreign subsidiary on the basis of a principal-agent relationship. | 例如，美国法院有时愿意以委托－代理关系为依据，认定母公司对外国子公司的行为承担责任。 |
| In the In re Parmalat Securities Litigation case, the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York explained that such an agency relationship exists if there is agreement between the parent and the subsidiary that the subsidiary will act for the parent, and the parent retains control over the subsidiary. | 在帕尔玛拉特债券诉讼案 中，美国纽约南区联邦地区法院解释说，如果母公司与子公司之间存在协议，规定子公司将代表母公司行事，而母公司保留对子公司的控制权，则这种代理关系存在。 |
| In a further case, the same court stated that a parent may be held legally accountable for the actions of a foreign subsidiary if the corporate relationship between the two is sufficiently close. | 在另一起案件中，同一法院指出，如果母公司与外国子公司之间的公司关系足够密切，则母公司可能被认定对外国子公司的行为承担法律责任。 |
| Relevant factors in determining whether this was the case included disregard of corporate formalities, intermingling of funds and overlap of ownership, officers, directors and personnel. | 确定是否属于这种情况的相关因素包括不遵守公司手续、资金混合以及所有权、高级管理人员、董事和工作人员重叠。 |
| In the Chandler v. Cape case, the England and Wales Court of Appeal concluded that, in appropriate circumstances, the parent company may have a duty of care in relation to the health and safety of the employees of its subsidiary. | 在Chandler诉Cape案中，英格兰和威尔士上诉法院得出结论认为，在适当情况下，母公司可能对其子公司雇员的健康和安全负有关照义务。 |
| That may be the case, for instance, when the business of the parent and the subsidiary are in a relevant aspect the same and the parent has, or ought to have, superior knowledge of the relevant aspects of health and safety in the particular industry, as well as of the shortcomings in the subsidiary’s system of work. | 例如，当母公司和子公司的业务在某一相关方面相同，且母公司对特定行业的健康和安全相关方面以及子公司工作制度的缺陷具有或应当具有更多的了解时，就可能出现这种情况。 |
| (6) | (6) |
| The third sentence of draft principle 11 concerns both the previous sentences. | 原则草案11的第三句与前两句都有关。 |
| Its purpose is to recall that States should provide adequate and effective procedures and remedies for the victims of environmental and health-related harm caused by business enterprises or their subsidiaries in areas affected by an armed conflict. | 其目的是回顾，各国应对工商企业或其子公司在受武装冲突影响地区造成的环境和健康相关损害的受害者提供充分和有效的程序和补救措施。 |
| The sentence thus refers to situations, in which the host State may not be in the position to effectively enforce its legislation. | 因此，这句提到东道国可能无法有效执行其法律的情况。 |
| Reference can in this regard also be made to the general comment of the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights which interprets the obligation to protect as extending to corporate wrongdoing abroad, “especially in cases where the remedies available to victims before the domestic courts of the State where the harm occurs are unavailable or ineffective”. | 在这方面，可参考经济、社会及文化权利委员会的一般性意见，其中将保护义务的范围解释为延伸至公司的国外不当行为，“凡遇受害人在损害发生国法院无法获得补救或所得补救无效力的情况，域外的保护尤其重要”。 |
| (7) | (7) |
| It may be recalled that the collapse of State and local institutions is a common consequence of armed conflict and one that often casts a long shadow in the aftermath of conflict, undermining law enforcement and the protection of rights as well as the integrity of justice. | 不妨回顾，国家和地方机构的崩溃是武装冲突的常见后果，这种后果在冲突结束后经常留下很长的阴影，破坏执法和权利保护以及司法公正。 |
| The important role that home States of business enterprises can play in such situations is illustrated by a reference to the Katanga Mining case, in which the dispute related to events in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. | 工商企业的总部所在国在这种情况下可以发挥的重要作用可以从加丹加采矿案 中得到说明，在该案中，争端涉及刚果民主共和国境内的事件。 |
| The company Katanga Mining Ltd. was incorporated in Bermuda and resident in Canada for tax purposes and had all its actual business operations in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. | 加丹加矿业有限公司在百慕大注册成立，为税收目的将总部设在加拿大， 而其所有实际业务活动均在刚果民主共和国进行。 |
| The parties had furthermore agreed in a previous contract that any disputes would be settled in the Tribunal de grande instance of Kolwezi (Democratic Republic of the Congo). | 各方还在之前的一份合同中商定，任何争端均由科卢韦齐(刚果民主共和国)最高法院解决。 |
| The English Court nevertheless decided, in view of the situation in which “attempted interference with the integrity of justice” was “apparently widespread and endemic”, that the Democratic Republic of the Congo would not be “a forum in which the case may be tried suitably for the interests of all the parties and for the ends of justice”. | 然而，英国法院决定，鉴于“企图干涉司法公正”的情况“显然是普遍而具有地方性的”， 刚果民主共和国不是“为所有当事方的利益和司法目的对案件进行适当审理的诉讼地”。 |
| (8) | (8) |
| The human rights treaty bodies within the United Nations have also addressed the issue in their comments on the situation in individual States. | 联合国人权条约机构在关于单个国家的状况的评论中也讨论了这个问题。 |
| The Human Rights Committee, for instance, has encouraged the relevant State party “to set out clearly the expectation that all business enterprises domiciled in its territory and/or its jurisdiction respect human rights standards in accordance with the Covenant throughout their operations” and “to take appropriate measures to strengthen the remedies provided to protect people who have been victims of activities of such business enterprises operating abroad”. | 例如，人权事务委员会鼓励相关缔约国“清晰阐明希望所有在本国境内开设和/或在本国司法管辖下的公司，在整个经营生产过程中依据《公约》，尊重各项人权标准”，并“采取适当措施，加强所提供的补救措施，保护因上述公司的海外经营运作活动蒙受伤害的人们”。 |
| Similarly, the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination has drawn attention to instances where the rights of indigenous peoples to land, health, environment and an adequate standard of living have been adversely affected by the operations of transnational corporations. | 同样，消除种族歧视委员会提请关注土著人民的土地权、健康权、环境权和适当生活水准权因跨国企业的经营活动而受到损害的情况。 |
| In that context, it has encouraged the relevant State party to “ensure that no obstacles are introduced in the law that prevent the holding of … transnational corporations accountable in the State party’s courts when [violations of the Covenant] are committed outside the State party”. | 这个问题上，委员会鼓励相关缔约国“确保不在法律上设立任何障碍，当跨国公司在缔约国境外出现[违反《公约》]行为时，不会阻碍…缔约国法院追究其责任”。 |
| (9) | (9) |
| Reference can furthermore be made to the Montreux Document which recalls the obligations that contracting States, as well as home States and host States, of private military and security companies have under the law of armed conflict and international human rights law. | 还可参考《蒙特勒文件》，其中回顾了缔约国以及私营军事和安保公司的总部所在国和东道国根据武装冲突法和国际人权法应承担的义务。 |
| In particular, States are required to take measures to prevent, investigate and provide effective penal sanctions for persons committing grave breaches of the applicable law of armed conflict and to investigate and, as appropriate, prosecute persons suspected of other crimes under international law. | 特别是，各国必须采取措施，防止、调查严重违反所适用的武装冲突法的人，并对进行有效的刑事制裁，调查并酌情起诉涉嫌犯有国际法规定的其他罪行的人。 |
| To give effect to their human rights obligations, States “have the obligation, in specific circumstances, to take appropriate measures to prevent, investigate and provide effective remedies for relevant misconduct of [private military and security companies] and their personnel”. | 为履行其人权义务，国家“有义务在特定情况下，采取适当措施，以防止、调查[私营军事和安保服务公司]及其人员的相关不检行为并提供切实有效的补救措施”。 |
| While the draft principle has been phrased as a recommendation, it is without prejudice to such obligations of States, which are not limited to private military and security companies. | 本项原则草案虽然被表述为一项建议，它不妨碍国家的此种义务，这些义务不仅仅涉及私营军事和安保公司。 |
| For instance, to the extent that a business enterprise is engaged in illegal exploitation of natural resources that amounts to pillage, the law of armed conflict provides a basis for preventing and punishing such acts. | 例如，如果一个工商企业进行的非法自然资源开采相当于掠夺，则武装冲突法可作为防止和惩罚这种行为的依据。 |
| (10) | (10) |
| The term “victims” refers to persons whose health or livelihood has been harmed by the environmental damage referred to in draft principle 11. | “受害者”一词指健康或生计受到原则草案11所述环境损害危害的人。 |
| Environmental damage may also affect other human rights such as the right to life and the right to food. | 环境损害还可能影响生命权和食物权等其他人权。 |
| The phrase “in particular for the victims” indicates, in the first place, that the adequate and effective remedies should be available for the victims of the environmental harm. | “特别是向…的受害者”短语首先表明，环境损害的受害者应当能够获得充分和有效的补救措施。 |
| In the second place, the phrase acknowledges that such remedies may also be available on a broader basis depending on the national legislation. | 第二，该短语承认这种补救措施还可根据国家立法在更广泛的基础上获得。 |
| This may be a case of public interest litigation by environmental associations or groups of persons, who cannot allege a violation of their individual rights or interests. | 一种可能的情况是环境协会或无法指称个人权利或利益受到侵犯的群体提起的公共利益诉讼。 |
| In addition, environmental damage can also give rise to civil claims in which the term “victim” would not be normally used. | 此外，环境损害也可能引起民事索赔，在这种情况下通常不使用“受害者”一词。 |
| Furthermore, in cases of pure environmental damage, compensation could be awarded to the affected communities. | 另外，在纯环境损害案件中，可判定向受影响社区提供补偿。 |
| (11) | (11) |
| The words “adequate and effective procedures and remedies” are general in nature and, together with the phrase “as appropriate”, allow States a certain flexibility when applying this provision at the national level. | “充分和有效的程序和补救措施”是一般性措辞，与“酌情”一词一起使各国在国家一级适用这一规定时有一定的灵活性。 |
| (12) | (12) |
| Draft principle 11 is located in Part Two as a provision of general application for the same reasons as draft principle 10. | 原则草案11作为一项一般适用的规定，被列入第二部分，其原因与原则草案10被列入第二部分相同。 |
| Part Three Principles applicable during armed conflict | 第三部分 武装冲突期间适用的原则 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) | (1) |
| Part Three contains draft principles applicable during armed conflict, irrespective of classification. | 第三部分载有武装冲突期间适用的原则草案，不论其分类如何。 |
| This includes international armed conflicts, understood in the traditional sense of an armed conflict fought between two or more States, including situations of occupation, armed conflicts in which peoples are fighting against colonial domination, alien occupation and racist régimes in the exercise of their right of self-determination, and non-international armed conflicts, which are fought either between a State and organized armed group(s) or between organized armed groups within the territory of a State. | 这包括国际性武装冲突，传统意义上的国际性武装冲突是指两个或两个以上国家之间的武装冲突，包括占领局势、人民行使自决权反对殖民统治和外来占领以及反对种族主义政权的武装冲突； 也包括一国领土内国家与有组织武装团体之间或有组织武装团体相互之间的非国际性武装冲突。 |
| (2) | (2) |
| While the focus of Part Three is on principles and rules of international law that are only applicable in armed conflict, there are a few exceptions. | 虽然第三部分的重点是仅在武装冲突中适用的国际法原则和规则，但也有少数例外。 |
| Paragraph 1 of draft principle 13 applies to all three phases to the extent that the law of armed conflict is applicable. | 原则草案13第1段在武装冲突法适用的所有三个阶段都适用。 |
| Draft principle 17 on environmental modification techniques is based on the Convention on the Prohibition of Military or Any Other Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques, the scope of which is not limited to armed conflicts. | 关于改变环境的技术的原则草案17以《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》 为基础，而该公约的范围并不限于武装冲突。 |
| The primary context in which States would engage in military or any other hostile use of such techniques “as a means of destruction, damage or injury to another State” is nevertheless an armed conflict. | 不过，国家为军事或任何其他敌对目的使用这类技术“作为摧毁、破坏或伤害另一国的手段” 的主要背景是武装冲突。 |
| While the Martens Clause, too, has mainly been codified in the law of armed conflict, in particular the environmental Martens Clause may be regarded as being applicable also in peacetime. | 尽管马顿斯条款也主要编入了武装冲突法， 但具体到环境方面的马顿斯条款，可能被认为也适用于和平时期。 |
| (3) | (3) |
| Part Three contains draft principles that reflect some of the most relevant rules and principles of the law of armed conflict providing protection to the environment. | 第三部分所载的原则草案反映了武装冲突法中规定保护环境的一些最相关的规则和原则。 |
| Other provisions that are relevant to the protection of the environment in relation to armed conflicts have been referred to in the commentaries to several draft principles. | 若干项原则草案的评注中提到对与武装冲突有关的环境保护具有相关意义的其他规定。 |
| They include, for instance, that “in any armed conflict, the right of the Parties to choose methods and means of warfare is not unlimited”, the prohibitions regarding objects indispensable to the survival of the civilian population, the prohibitions regarding works and installations containing dangerous forces, and the prohibition of the destruction of property not justified by military necessity. | 例如，提到的规定包括“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”， 关于对平民居民生存所不可缺少的物体的禁止规定， 关于含有危险力量的工程和装置的禁止规定， 以及关于无军事上的必要而破坏财产的禁止规定。 |
| A comprehensive compilation of the principles and rules of the law of armed conflict providing protection to the environment is contained in the 2020 ICRC Guidelines on the Protection of the Natural Environment in Armed Conflict. | 武装冲突法中规定保护环境的原则和规则的全面汇编载于红十字国际委员会2020年《武装冲突中保护自然环境的准则》。 |
| (4) | (4) |
| The focus on the law of armed conflict in Part Three does not indicate that, in the Commission’s view, other rules of international law would have no role to play. | 委员会认为，第三部分以武装冲突法为重点并不意味着其他国际法规则不能发挥作用。 |
| The general applicability of international human rights law and international environmental law in armed conflicts has provided an obvious point of departure for the Commission’s work on the topic. | 国际人权法 和国际环境法 在武装冲突中的普遍适用性，为委员会关于这一专题的工作提供了一个明显的出发点。 |
| It is furthermore recognized that the law of armed conflict, where it constitutes lex specialis, prevails when there is a conflict with another applicable rule of international law. | 此外还确认，武装冲突法在构成特别法的情况下，若与另一项适用的国际法规则发生冲突，则以武装冲突法为准。 |
| Where there is no such conflict, other relevant rules of international law, such as international environmental law and international human rights law, may apply concurrently. | 如果没有这种冲突，那么国际环境法和国际人权法等其他相关的国际法规则可同时适用。 |
| (5) | (5) |
| Unlike the treaty provisions that they reflect, draft principles 13, 14 and 15 use the term “environment” rather than the term “natural environment”. | 与它们所反映的条约规定不同，原则草案13、14和15使用了“环境”一词，而不是“自然环境”一词。 |
| The draft principles refer consistently to the “environment”, in line with the established terminology of international environmental law. | 原则草案一致采用“环境”一词，符合国际环境法的既定术语。 |
| This change should not be understood as altering the scope of the existing conventional and customary law of armed conflict, or to expand the scope of the notion of “natural environment” in that law. | 这一更改不应当被理解为改变关于武装冲突的现有协定法和习惯法的范围，或扩大该法中“自然环境”概念的范围。 |
| Principle 12 Martens Clause with respect to the protection of the environment in relation to armed conflicts | 原则12 与武装冲突有关的环境保护方面的马顿斯条款 |
| In cases not covered by international agreements, the environment remains under the protection and authority of the principles of international law derived from established custom, from the principles of humanity and from the dictates of public conscience. | 在国际协定所未包括的情形下，环境仍受来源于既定习惯、人道原则和公众良心要求的国际法原则的保护和支配。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) | (1) |
| Draft principle 12 is inspired by the Martens Clause, which originally appeared in the preamble to the 1899 Hague Convention (II) with Respect to the Laws and Customs of War on Land, and has been restated in several later treaties. | 原则草案12受到马顿斯条款的启发，该条款最初出现在《1899年关于陆战法规和习惯的海牙(第二)公约》 的序言部分，并在后来的若干条约 中得到重申。 |
| The Martens Clause provides, in essence, that even in cases not covered by specific international agreements, civilians and combatants remain under the protection and authority of the principles of international law derived from established custom, from the principles of humanity and from the dictates of public conscience. | 马顿斯条款实质上规定：即使在特定国际协定所未包括的情形下，平民和战斗员仍受来源于既定习惯、人道原则和公众良心要求的国际法原则的保护和支配。 |
| The International Court of Justice has stated that the clause forms part of customary international law. | 国际法院指出，该条款构成习惯国际法的一部分。 |
| While originally conceived in the context of belligerent occupation, the clause has today a broader application, covering all areas of the law of armed conflict. | 尽管最初是在交战占领背景下构思的，但该条款如今有更广泛的适用范围，涵盖武装冲突法的所有领域。 |
| (2) | (2) |
| The function of the Martens Clause is generally seen as providing residual protection in cases not covered by a specific rule. | 马顿斯条款的作用通常被视为是在具体规则所不包括的情况下提供剩余保护。 |
| The International Court of Justice referred to the Martens Clause in its Advisory Opinion on the Legality of Nuclear Weapons to strengthen the argument about the applicability of international humanitarian law to the threat or use of nuclear weapons. | 国际法院曾在核武器的合法性咨询意见中提到马顿斯条款，以加强其关于国际人道法是否适用于以核武器进行威胁或使用核武器问题的论点。 |
| Similarly, the ICRC commentary to the First Geneva Convention mentioned, as a dynamic aspect of the clause, that it confirms “the application of the principles and rules of humanitarian law to new situations or to developments in technology, also when those are not, or not specifically, addressed in treaty law”. | 同样，红十字国际委员会关于《日内瓦第一公约》的评注提到，该条款的一个有活力的方面是，它确认“人道法的原则和规则适用于新的形势或技术发展，同时也适用于条约法未涉及或未明确涉及的情况”。 |
| The clause thus precludes the argument that any means or methods of warfare that are not explicitly prohibited by the relevant treaties are permitted, or, in a more general manner, that acts of war not expressly addressed by treaties or general international law are ipso facto permissible. | 因此，该条款排除下列论点，即相关条约 未明确禁止的任何作战手段或方法都是允许的，或更笼统而言，条约或一般国际法未明确阐述的战争行为事实上都是许可的。 |
| (3) | (3) |
| Beyond that, however, views differ as to the legal consequences of the Martens Clause. | 然而，除此之外，对马顿斯条款的法律后果存在不同的看法。 |
| It has been seen as a reminder of the role of customary international law in the absence of applicable treaty law, and of the continued validity of customary international law alongside treaty law. | 该条款被视为提醒人们注意习惯国际法在没有适用的条约法的情况下所应发挥的作用以及习惯国际法在与条约法并行的情况下继续具有的有效性。 |
| The Martens Clause has also been seen to offer additional interpretative guidance “whenever the legal regulation provided by a treaty or customary rule is doubtful, uncertain or lacking in clarity”. | 马顿斯条款也被视为“在条约或习惯规则所提供的法律规定有疑问、不确定或缺乏明确性的任何情况下”提供额外的解释性指导。 |
| A further interpretation links the Martens Clause to a method of identifying customary international law in which particular emphasis is given to opinio juris. | 还有一种解读将马顿斯条款与一种特别强调法律确信的识别习惯国际法的方法联系起来。 |
| The inclusion of the present draft principle in the set of draft principles does not mean, or imply, that the Commission is taking a position on the various views regarding the legal consequences of the Martens Clause. | 将本项原则草案纳入这套原则草案并不意味着或暗示委员会对关于马顿斯条款法律后果的各种意见采取了某种立场。 |
| (4) | (4) |
| Draft principle 12 is entitled “Martens Clause with respect to the protection of the environment in relation to armed conflicts”. | 原则草案12的标题为“与武装冲突有关的环境保护方面的马顿斯条款”。 |
| The title draws attention to the environmental focus of the draft principle, the purpose of which is to provide subsidiary protection to the environment in relation to armed conflicts. | 该标题提请注意本项原则草案以环境为重点，其目的是提供辅助性的与武装冲突有关的环境保护。 |
| (5) | (5) |
| This is not the first time the Martens Clause has been invoked in the context of the protection of the environment in armed conflict. | 这不是第一次在武装冲突中保护环境方面援引马顿斯条款。 |
| The ICRC Guidelines for Military Manuals and Instructions on the Protection of the Environment in Armed Conflict of 1994 include a provision stating the following: “In cases not covered by international agreements, the environment remains under the protection and authority of the principles of international law derived from established custom, the principles of humanity and the dictates of public conscience. | 红十字国际委员会1994年《关于武装冲突中环境保护的军事手册和指南准则》包括一项规定，内容如下：“在国际协议所未包括的情形下，环境仍受来源于既定习惯、人道原则和公众良心要求的国际法原则的保护和支配”。 |
| ” In 1994, the General Assembly invited all States to disseminate the ICRC guidelines widely and to “give due consideration to the possibility of incorporating them into their military manuals and other instructions addressed to their military personnel”. | 1994年，联大请所有国家广为传播红十字国际委员会的准则，并“适当考虑将这些准则纳入发给其军事人员的军事手册和其他指令的可能性”。 |
| The 2020 ICRC Guidelines on the Protection of the Natural Environment in Armed Conflict retain the same formulation. | 红十字国际委员会2020年《武装冲突中保护自然环境的准则》保留了这一措辞。 |
| (6) | (6) |
| The second IUCN World Conservation Congress, furthermore, in 2000 urged Member States of the United Nations to endorse a policy reading as follows: | 此外，国际自然保护联盟2000年第二届世界自然保护大会促请联合国会员国核可一项政策，内容如下： |
| Until a more complete international code of environmental protection has been adopted, in cases not covered by international agreements and regulations, the biosphere and all its constituent elements and processes remain under the protection and authority of the principles of international law derived from established custom, from dictates of the public conscience, and from the principles and fundamental values of humanity acting as steward for present and future generations. | 在通过更为完整的国际环境保护法之前，在国际协定和条例所未包括的情形下，生物圈及其所有组成部分和进程仍受来源于既定习惯、公众良心要求以及人道原则和作为今世后代守护者的人类的基本价值观的国际法原则的保护和支配。 |
| The recommendation was adopted by consensus and was meant to apply during peacetime as well as during armed conflicts. | 这项建议获得协商一致通过， 旨在适用于和平时期以及武装冲突期间。 |
| (7) | (7) |
| The present draft principle follows the wording of the Martens Clause in Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions (art. 1, para. 2), which states: “In cases not covered by this Protocol or by other international agreements, civilians and combatants remain under the protection and authority of the principles of international law derived from established custom, from the principles of humanity and from the dictates of public conscience. | 本项原则草案采用了日内瓦四公约《第一附加议定书》(第一条第二款)中马顿斯条款的措辞，该款规定：“在本议定书或其他国际协定所未包括的情形下，平民和战斗员仍受来源于既定习惯、人道原则和公众良心要求的国际法原则的保护和支配。 |
| ” In particular, the reference to “the dictates of public conscience”, as a general notion not intrinsically limited to one specific meaning, justifies the application of the Martens Clause to the environment. | ”特别是，“公众良心要求”是一般性概念，在本质上并不限于某个具体的含义，因此马顿斯条款有理由适用于环境。 |
| In this regard, reference can be made to the importance, as generally recognized, of environmental protection, as well as to the growth and consolidation of international environmental law. | 在这方面，可以参考环境保护公认的重要性以及国际环境法的发展和加强。 |
| More specifically, the understanding of the environmental impacts of conflict has developed considerably since the adoption of the treaties codifying the law of armed conflict. | 更具体而言，自编纂武装冲突法的各项条约通过以来，对冲突的环境影响的认识已有很大发展。 |
| The term “public conscience” can furthermore be seen to encompass the notion of intergenerational equity as an important part of the ethical basis of international environmental law. | “公共良心”一词可进一步被视为包含代际公平概念，这一概念是国际环境法道德基础的重要组成部分。 |
| (8) | (8) |
| Another essential component of the Martens Clause, the reference to “the principles of humanity”, displays a more indirect relationship to the protection of the environment. | 马顿斯条款的另一个重要组成部分，即“人道原则”，显示了与环境保护更间接的关系。 |
| It may even be asked whether the environment can remain under the protection of “the principles of humanity”, given that the function of such principles is to specifically serve human beings. | 鉴于“人道原则”的作用是专门为人类服务，甚至可以质疑环境是否仍能受到这些原则的保护。 |
| It should be recalled in this regard that humanitarian and environmental concerns are not mutually exclusive, as pointed out by the International Court of Justice: “The environment is not an abstraction but represents the living space, the quality of life and the very health of human beings, including generations unborn”. | 在这方面应当回顾，人道主义关切和环境关切并不相互排斥，正如国际法院指出的：“环境不是一个抽象的概念，而是代表人类包括子孙后代的生存空间、生活质量甚至健康”。 |
| The intrinsic link between the survival of people and the environment in which they live has also been recognized in other authoritative statements. | 人的生存与其生活的环境之间的内在联系也得到了其他权威论述的确认。 |
| Similarly, modern definitions of the environment as an object of protection do not draw a strict dividing line between the environment and human activities but encourage definitions that include components of both. | 同样，作为保护对象的环境的现代定义并未在环境与人类活动之间划出严格的界线，而是鼓励将两者都纳入定义的内容。 |
| The mention of the principles of humanity is moreover an integral part of the Martens Clause. | 此外，提到人道原则也是马顿斯条款的一个组成部分。 |
| (9) | (9) |
| The term “the principles of humanity” is distinct from “the principle of humanity” as one of the two cardinal principles of the law of armed conflict, together with military necessity. | “人道原则”(the principles of humanity)一词不同于“人道原则”(the principle of humanity)，后者是武装冲突法的两项基本原则之一，另一项原则是军事必要。 |
| The reference to “the principles of humanity” in the Martens Clause is broader and can be connected to the concept of “elementary considerations of humanity”, which, according to the International Court of Justice, are “even more exacting in peace than in war”. | 马顿斯条款中提到的“人道原则”(the principles of humanity)更为广泛，可与“基本的人道考虑”这一概念联系起来，根据国际法院的说法，这一概念“在和平时期比在战争中更加严格”。 |
| In practice, the two terms are often used interchangeably. | 在实践中，两词经常互换使用。 |
| Reference can also be made to “fundamental minimum standards of humanity” recognized, inter alia, in the practice of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia and the Commission on Human Rights. | 还可以提到，在前南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭 和人权委员会 的实践中得到确认的“基本最低限度人道标准”。 |
| The term “the principles of humanity” can therefore also be taken to refer more generally to humanitarian standards that are found not only in international humanitarian law but also in international human rights law, which provides important protections to the environment. | 因此，“人道原则”(the principles of humanity)一词还可被理解为更笼统地指见于国际人道法和国际人权法的人道主义标准， 规定了对环境的重要保护。 |
| (10) | (10) |
| Draft principle 12 is located in Part Three containing draft principles applicable during an armed conflict, including in situations of occupation. | 原则草案12被列入第三部分，这部分载有武装冲突期间包括占领局势中适用的原则草案。 |
| Principle 13 General protection of the environment during armed conflict | 原则13 武装冲突期间对环境的一般保护 |
| 1. | 1. |
| The environment shall be respected and protected in accordance with applicable international law and, in particular, the law of armed conflict. | 应按照适用的国际法，特别是武装冲突法，尊重和保护环境。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| Subject to applicable international law: | 在遵守适用的国际法的前提下： |
| (a) | (a) |
| care shall be taken to protect the environment against widespread, long-term and severe damage; | 应注意保护环境不受广泛、长期和严重的损害； |
| (b) | (b) |
| the use of methods and means of warfare that are intended, or may be expected, to cause widespread, long-term and severe damage to the environment is prohibited. | 禁止使用旨在或可能对环境引起广泛、长期和严重损害的作战方法或手段。 |
| 3. | 3. |
| No part of the environment may be attacked, unless it has become a military objective. | 除非成为军事目标，环境的任何一部分不得受到攻击。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) | (1) |
| Draft principle 13 comprises three paragraphs which broadly provide for the protection of the environment during armed conflict, whether international or non-international. | 原则草案13由三段组成，对国际性和非国际性武装冲突期间的环境保护作了大体上的规定。 |
| It reflects the obligation to respect and protect the environment, the duty of care and the prohibition of the use of certain methods and means of warfare, as well as the prohibition of attacks against any part of the environment, unless it has become a military objective. | 这一原则体现的是尊重和保护环境的义务、加以注意的责任和禁止使用某些作战方法或手段的规定，以及除非环境成为军事目标，否则禁止攻击其任何一部分的规定。 |
| (2) | (2) |
| Paragraph 1 sets out the general position that in relation to armed conflict, the environment shall be respected and protected in accordance with applicable international law and, in particular, the law of armed conflict. | 第1段规定了一般立场，即在涉及武装冲突的情况下，应按照适用的国际法，特别是武装冲突法，尊重和保护环境。 |
| (3) | (3) |
| The words “respected” and “protected” were chosen for the present draft principle as they have been used in several legal instruments in the law of armed conflict, international environmental law and international human rights law. | 为本项原则草案选择了“尊重”和“保护”这两个词，因为这两个词已被若干武装冲突法、国际环境法和国际人权法的法律文书使用。 |
| The International Court of Justice in its Advisory Opinion on the Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons held that “respect for the environment is one of the elements that go to assessing whether an action is in conformity with the principle of necessity”. | 国际法院在以核武器进行威胁或使用核武器的合法性咨询意见中指出“尊重环境是评估一个行动是否符合必要性原则的因素之一”。 |
| (4) | (4) |
| As far as the term “applicable international law” is concerned, the words “in particular, the law of armed conflict” reflect the fact that it is this set of rules that has been specifically designed for armed conflicts. | 就“适用的国际法”这一表述而言，“特别是武装冲突法”这一用语反映出这套规则是专门为武装冲突设计的。 |
| At the same time, other rules of international law providing environmental protection, such as international environmental law and international human rights law, retain their relevance. | 与此同时，其他提供环境保护的国际法规则，例如国际环境法和国际人权法，仍然具有相关性。 |
| Paragraph 1 of draft principle 13 is applicable during all three phases (before, during and after an armed conflict) to the extent that the law of armed conflict applies. | 在武装冲突法适用的所有三个阶段(武装冲突之前、期间和之后)，原则草案13第1段都适用。 |
| (5) | (5) |
| Paragraph 2 is inspired by article 55, paragraph 1, and article 35, paragraph 3, of Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions. | 第2段受到日内瓦四公约《第一附加议定书》第五十五条第一款和第三十五条第三款的启发。 |
| Subparagraph (a) provides the rule that care shall be taken in warfare to protect the environment against widespread, long term and severe damage. | (a)分段规定了以下原则，即在作战中，应注意保护自然环境不受广泛、长期和严重的损害。 |
| Subparagraph (b) provides that the use of methods and means of warfare that are intended, or may be expected, to cause widespread, long-term and severe damage to the environment is prohibited. | (b)分段规定，禁止使用旨在或可能对自然环境引起广泛、长期和严重损害的作战方法或手段。 |
| The chapeau “subject to applicable international law” applies to both subparagraphs. | 前导句“在遵守适用的国际法的前提下”对这两项均适用。 |
| (6) | (6) |
| The chapeau recognizes that there are still different views regarding the customary status of both the duty of care and the prohibition as enshrined in Additional Protocol I. Paragraph 2 does not seek to extend the treaty obligations to States not parties to Additional Protocol I. It also takes into account that some States Parties to Additional Protocol I have made declarations or reservations concerning the scope of application of Additional Protocol I. | 该前导句确认，对《第一附加议定书》所载的加以注意的责任和禁止的规定的习惯地位，仍然存在不同的看法。 第2段并不寻求将条约义务扩大到非《第一附加议定书》缔约国的国家，还考虑到《第一附加议定书》的一些缔约国已就《第一附加议定书》的适用范围作出了声明或保留。 |
| (7) | (7) |
| Regarding subparagraph (a), article 55, paragraph 1, of Additional Protocol I provides that care shall be taken to protect the environment against widespread, long-term and severe damage in international armed conflicts. | 关于(a)项，《第一附加议定书》第五十五条第一款规定，武装冲突期间应注意保护环境不受广泛、长期和严重的损害。 |
| The term “care shall be taken” indicates that there is a duty on the parties to an armed conflict to be vigilant of the potential impact that military activities can have on the environment. | 短语“应注意”表示，武装冲突当事各方有责任对军事活动可能对环境造成的潜在影响保持警惕。 |
| The considerations to be taken into account for this purpose are related both to the foreseeable effect of the methods and means of warfare used, and to the characteristics of the terrain in which military activities take place, such as the importance of ecologically rich environmental areas, or vulnerable or fragile ecosystems. | 为此目的所要考虑的因素既涉及所使用的作战方法和手段的可预见影响，也涉及发生军事活动的地带的特点，例如生态丰富的环境地区或易受害或脆弱生态系统的重要性。 |
| The duty of care is also related to the obligation to take “constant care … to spare … civilians and civilian objects” and the principle of precautions. | 加以注意的责任也与“经常注意不损害…平民和民用物体”的义务 和关于预防措施的原则有关。 |
| (8) | (8) |
| Like article 55, paragraph 1, and article 35, paragraph 3, subparagraphs (a) and (b) of draft principle 13 include a triple cumulative standard: “widespread, long-term and severe”. | 与第五十五条第一款和第三十五条第三款相似，原则草案13的(a)分段和(b)分段包括一项三重累积标准：“广泛、长期和严重”。 |
| These terms are not defined in Additional Protocol I. While the same terms are used in the Convention on the Prohibition of Military or Any Other Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques, which also provides clarification on how they should be understood, the ICRC commentary to article 35, paragraph 1, indicates that the two instruments do not give the same meaning to the three terms. | 这些术语在《第一附加议定书》中没有定义。 虽然《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》也使用了同样的术语，并且也澄清了如何理解这些用语， 但红十字国际委员会对第三十五条第一款的评注表明，这两项文书对这三个术语赋予的含义并不相同。 |
| It is also obvious that, by opting for the conjunctive “and” instead of the disjunctive “or” used in the Convention on the Prohibition of Military or Any Other Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques, the States participating in the negotiations on Additional Protocol I wished to set a high threshold. | 同样明显的是，参加《第一附加议定书》谈判的国家选择采用了连接词“和”，没有选择《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》使用的区别连词“或”，就是希望设定一个高门槛。 |
| (9) | (9) |
| At the same time, the interpretation of this standard should not rely solely on how the concept of “environmental damage” was understood in the 1970s but must take into account current scientific knowledge of ecological processes. | 然而，对这一标准的解释不应当仅仅依赖于1970年代对“环境损害”这一概念的理解， 还必须考虑到当前对生态进程的科学认识。 |
| In this regard, risk of damage should not be conceptualized only in terms of harm to a specific object but should also take into account the possibility of affecting a fragile interdependent system of both living and non-living components. | 在这方面，对损害风险的概念认识不应当仅限于对具体物体造成的伤害，还应当考虑到影响由生物和非生物组成部分构成的脆弱的相互依存的系统的可能性。 |
| ICRC has similarly noted: “[w]hat is certain is that in assessing the degree to which damage meets the threshold, current knowledge, including on the connectedness and interrelationships of different parts of the natural environment as well as on the effects of the harm caused, must be considered”. | 红十字国际委员会同样指出：“可以肯定的是，在评估损害达到阈值的程度时，必须考虑到目前的知识，包括关于自然环境不同部分的联系和相互关系以及所造成损害的影响的知识”。 |
| (10) | (10) |
| Paragraph 3 of draft principle 13 is based on the fundamental rule under the law of armed conflict that a distinction must be made between military objectives and civilian objects. | 原则草案13第3段所依据的是武装冲突法的基本规则，即必须区分军事目标和民用物体。 |
| It underlines the inherently civilian nature of the environment. | 该段强调了环境固有的民用性质。 |
| Paragraph 3 of draft principle 13 is to be read with article 52, paragraph 2, of Additional Protocol I, which defines the term “military objective” as: | 原则草案13第3段应与《第一附加议定书》第五十二条第二款一并解读，其中“军事目标”一词的定义为： |
| … [T]hose objects which by their nature, location, purpose or use make an effective contribution to military action and whose total or partial destruction, capture or neutralization, in the circumstances ruling at the time, offers a definite military advantage. | …由于其性质、位置、目的或用途对军事行动有实际贡献，而且在当时情况下其全部或部分毁坏、缴获或失去效用提供明确的军事利益的物体。 |
| The term “civilian object” is defined as “all objects which are not military objectives”. | “民用物体”的定义是，“所有不是军事目标的物体”。 |
| In terms of the law of armed conflict, attacks may only be directed against military objectives, and not civilian objects. | 就武装冲突法而言，只可攻击军事目标，不得攻击民用物体。 |
| There are several binding and non-binding instruments which indicate that this rule is applicable to parts of the environment. | 有若干约束性和非约束性文书都表明，这条规则适用于环境的部分。 |
| (11) | (11) |
| Paragraph 3 is, however, temporally qualified with the words “has become”, which emphasize that this rule is not absolute: the environment may become a military objective in certain instances, and could thus be lawfully targeted. | 不过，第3段用“成为”一词作了时间上的限定，强调这一规则不是绝对性的：在某些情况下环境有可能变成军事目标，因而将其作为目标就可能是合法的。 |
| In this regard, it should be pointed out that paragraph 3 must be read together with draft principle 14, which specifically references the application of the law of armed conflict, rules and principles of distinction, proportionality and precautions. | 在这方面应当指出，第3段必须同原则草案14一并解读，原则草案14具体提到了适用武装冲突法关于区分、比例和预防措施的规则和原则的问题。 |
| Principle 14 Application of the law of armed conflict to the environment | 原则14 对环境适用武装冲突法 |
| The law of armed conflict, including the principles and rules on distinction, proportionality and precautions shall be applied to the environment, with a view to its protection. | 武装冲突法，包括关于区分、比例和预防措施的原则和规则应适用于环境，以期保护环境。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) | (1) |
| Draft principle 14 is entitled “Application of the law of armed conflict to the environment” and deals with the application of principles and rules of the law of armed conflict to the environment with a view to its protection. | 原则草案14题为“对环境适用武装冲突法”，处理的问题是，对环境适用武装冲突法的原则和规则，以期保护环境。 |
| (2) | (2) |
| Draft principle 14 mentions the principles and rules on distinction, proportionality and precautions. | 原则草案14提到了关于区分、比例和预防措施的原则和规则。 |
| The draft principle itself is of a general character and does not elaborate on how these well-established principles and rules under the law of armed conflict should be interpreted. | 本项原则草案本身属于一般性质，并没有阐述应当如何解释这些在武装冲突法之下明确订立的原则和规则。 |
| They are included in draft principle 14 because they have been identified as being the most relevant principles and rules of the law of armed conflict relating to the protection of the environment. | 将这些原则和规则列入原则草案14, 是因为它们被认为是与环境保护最为相关的武装冲突法原则和规则。 |
| However, this reference should not be interpreted as indicating a closed list, as all other rules of the law of armed conflict which relate to the protection of the environment in relation to armed conflict remain applicable and cannot be disregarded. | 但是，不应当把提及这些原则和规则解释为提出了一个封闭式的清单，因为涉及与武装冲突有关的环境保护的其他武装冲突法规则仍然适用，不得忽视。 |
| (3) | (3) |
| One of the cornerstones of the law of armed conflict is the principle of distinction which obliges parties to an armed conflict to distinguish between civilian objects and military objectives at all times, and that attacks may only be directed against military objectives. | 区分原则是武装冲突法的基石之一， 规定武装冲突当事各方有义务始终将民用物体与军事目标加以区别，只能攻击军事目标。 |
| It is considered a rule under customary international law, applicable in both international and non-international armed conflict. | 这被视为习惯国际法的一条规则，既适用于国际性武装冲突，也适用于非国际性武装冲突。 |
| As explained in the commentary to draft principle 13, the environment is inherently civilian in nature and therefore benefits from the rules governing civilian objects. | 如原则草案13的评注所解释的，环境具备固有的民用性质，因此可受益于关于民用物体的规则。 |
| However, there are certain circumstances in which parts of the environment may become a military objective, in which case such parts may be lawfully targeted. | 然而，在某些情况下，环境的某些部分可能会成为军事目标，在这种情况下将此种部分作为目标就可能是合法的。 |
| (4) | (4) |
| The principle of proportionality establishes that an attack against a legitimate military target is prohibited if it may be expected to cause incidental damage to civilians or civilian objects, which would be excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated. | 比例原则规定，如果可以预期对合法军事目标的攻击会对平民或民用物体造成附带损害而且与预期的具体和直接军事利益相比损害过分，则此种攻击是禁止的。 |
| The principle of proportionality is codified in several instruments of the law of armed conflict, and the International Court of Justice has also recognized its applicability in its Advisory Opinion on Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons. | 比例原则已编纂入若干武装冲突法文书，国际法院在以核武器进行威胁或使用核武器的合法性咨询意见中也承认了这条规则的适用性。 |
| It is considered a rule of customary international law, applicable in both international and non-international armed conflict. | 这被视为一条习惯国际法规则，既适用于国际性武装冲突，也适用于非国际性武装冲突。 |
| (5) | (5) |
| When the rules relating to proportionality are applied in relation to the protection of the environment, an attack against a legitimate military objective must not be undertaken if it would cause incidental environmental damage that would be excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated. | 当与比例有关的规则适用于环境保护时，如果对合法军事目标的攻击会造成附带的环境损害，而且与预期的具体和直接军事利益相比，这种损害是过度的，则不得对该目标进行攻击。 |
| At the same time, it has been concluded that “if the target is sufficiently important, a greater degree of risk to the environment may be justified”. | 与此同时，已得出结论，“如果目标足够重要，对环境造成更大程度的风险可能是合理的”。 |
| This standard therefore accepts that “collateral damage” to the environment may be lawful in certain instances. | 因此，这一标准承认，在某些情况下环境受到的“附带损害”可能是法律许可的。 |
| (6) | (6) |
| As the environment is often indirectly rather than directly affected by armed conflict, rules relating to proportionality are of particular importance in relation to the protection of the environment in armed conflict. | 由于环境受到的武装冲突影响往往是间接的而不是直接的，关于比例的规则在与武装冲突有关的环境保护方面尤为重要。 |
| Their importance in this regard has been emphasized by the International Court of Justice, which has held that: “States must take environmental considerations into account when assessing what is necessary and proportionate in the pursuit of legitimate military objectives. | 国际法院强调了这些规则在这方面的重要性，指出：“国家在追求合法的军事目标而估量什么手段是必要和成比例的时，必须顾及环境考虑。 |
| Respect for the environment is one of the elements that goes into assessing whether an action is in conformity with the principles of necessity and proportionality”. | 在估量一项行动是否符合必要和相称的原则时，尊重环境是考虑的因素之一”。 |
| (7) | (7) |
| Since knowledge of the environment and its ecosystems is constantly increasing, better understood and more widely accessible, environmental considerations cannot remain static over time but should develop as understanding of the environment develops. | 由于对环境及其生态系统的认知不断增加、深入和普及，随着时间的推移，环境考虑不可能一成不变，而应当随着对环境的认知的发展而发展。 |
| (8) | (8) |
| The principle of precautions lays out that constant care must be taken to spare the civilian population, civilians and civilian objects from harm during military operations. | 关于预防措施的规则规定，军事行动中必须时刻注意不损害平民居民、平民和民用物体。 |
| In addition to this general principle, which applies to all military operations, the rule concerning precautions in attack requires that all feasible precautions must be taken with a view to avoiding and in any event minimizing incidental loss of civilian life, injury to civilians, as well as damage to civilian objects, that may occur. | 除了适用于所有军事行动的这项一般原则外，关于攻击时预防措施的规则要求采取一切可行的预防措施，以期避免并无论如何尽量减少可能发生的附带造成平民死亡、受伤以及民用物体受损害的情况。 |
| The rule is codified in several instruments of the law of armed conflict and is also considered to be a rule of customary international law in both international and non-international armed conflict. | 此规则已写入若干关于武装冲突的法律文书， 而且被视为国际性和非国际性武装冲突中的习惯国际法规则。 |
| Parties to the conflict must furthermore take all feasible precautions to protect civilian objects under their control against the effects of attacks. | 此外，冲突各方必须采取一切可行的预防措施，保护在其控制下的民用物体不受攻击的影响。 |
| These so-called passive precautions may also be taken in peacetime and apply, for instance, to decisions concerning the siting of fixed military installations. | 这些所谓的被动预防措施也可在和平时期采取，举例而言，可适用于关于固定军事设施选址的决定。 |
| (9) | (9) |
| The phrase “shall be applied to the environment, with a view to its protection” is consistent with the purpose of the draft principles and introduces an objective which those involved in armed conflict or military operations should strive towards. | “应适用于环境，以期保护环境”这一短语符合原则草案的宗旨，并为参加武装冲突或军事行动的各方树立了应力争达到的目标。 |
| Principle 15 Prohibition of reprisals | 原则15 禁止报复 |
| Attacks against the environment by way of reprisals are prohibited. | 禁止作为报复对环境进行攻击。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) | (1) |
| Draft principle 15, entitled “Prohibition of reprisals”, is based on paragraph 2 of article 55 of Additional Protocol I, which states that “attacks against the natural environment by way of reprisals are prohibited”. | 原则草案15题为“禁止报复”，以《第一附加议定书》第五十五条第二款为基础，该款规定“作为报复对自然环境的攻击，是禁止的”。 |
| (2) | (2) |
| As a treaty provision, the prohibition of attacks against the natural environment by way of reprisals is a binding rule for the 174 States parties to Additional Protocol I. Certain States have included the prohibition in their military manuals. | 禁止作为报复而对自然环境进行攻击是一项条约规定，对《第一附加议定书》的174个缔约国而言是一项有约束力的规则。 某些国家将这一禁令写入了本国的军事手册。 |
| (3) | (3) |
| Even though Additional Protocol I is widely ratified, it has not yet reached universal status, and the customary nature of the prohibition of attacks against the environment by way of reprisals is not settled. | 尽管《第一附加议定书》得到了广泛批准，但该文书尚未达到普遍批准的地位，而且禁止作为报复对环境进行攻击这一规定的习惯性质并未得到确立。 |
| State practice in this area is sparse, but some States parties have made their legal positions known through reservations or declarations to Additional Protocol I. The extent to which these declarations or reservations are relevant to the application of paragraph 2 of article 55 must be evaluated on a case-by-case basis, since only a few States have made an explicit reference to this provision. | 这方面的国家实践很少，但一些缔约国已通过对《第一附加议定书》的保留或声明表明了其法律立场。 必须逐案评估这些声明或保留在多大程度上与第五十五条第二款的适用相关，因为只有少数国家明确提到了这一规定。 |
| The ICRC Guidelines on the Protection of the Natural Environment in Armed Conflict contain the following statement: “While, under treaty law, the vast majority of States have now specifically committed not to take reprisal action against such objects [including the natural environment], the ICRC Study on Customary International Humanitarian Law did not find these prohibitions to be established as rules of customary international law”. | 红十字国际委员会《武装冲突中保护自然环境的准则》包含以下表述：“虽然根据协定国际法，绝大多数国家现已明确承诺不对这些物体[包括自然环境]采取报复行动，但红十字国际委员会《习惯国际人道法研究》认为，这些禁止性规定并未确立为习惯国际法规则”。 |
| (4) | (4) |
| At the same time, it should be recalled that the environment is protected by other rules – beyond article 55, paragraph 2, of Additional Protocol I – that contain prohibitions regarding the use of reprisals. | 与此同时，应当回顾指出，除《第一附加议定书》第五十五条第二款之外，还有其他规则载有禁止使用报复手段的规定，对环境进行保护。 |
| In particular, draft principle 15 is also related to article 51, paragraph 6, of Additional Protocol I, which prohibits attacks against the civilian population or civilians by way of reprisals, and article 52, paragraph 1, which states that civilian objects shall not be the object of reprisals. | 特别是，原则草案15还与《第一附加议定书》第五十一条第六款和第五十二条第一款有关，前者禁止作为报复对平民居民或平民进行攻击，后者规定民用物体不应成为报复对象。 |
| The 1949 Geneva Conventions also prohibit the use of reprisals against, inter alia, civilians and civilian objects. | 1949年日内瓦四公约也禁止对平民和民用物体等进行报复。 |
| These customary prohibitions apply to reprisals against the environment as a civilian object, where it has not become a military objective. | 这些习惯的禁止规定适用于在环境未成为军事目标的情况下对作为民用物体的环境的报复。 |
| (5) | (5) |
| Additional Protocol I further prohibits the use of reprisals against cultural property and objects indispensable to the survival of the civilian population. | 《第一附加议定书》还禁止对文化财产 和对平民居民生存所不可缺少的物体进行报复。 |
| The 1954 Hague Convention also protects cultural property from reprisals. | 1954年《海牙公约》也保护文化财产不受报复。 |
| These prohibitions apply to reprisals against the environment when the relevant protected objects are part of the environment. | 在相关的受保护物体是环境的一部分时，这些禁止规定也适用于针对环境的报复。 |
| In addition, the rules protecting works or installations containing dangerous forces from reprisals have particular importance in protecting, for instance nuclear power plants, an attack on which would lead to severe environmental consequences. | 此外，保护含有危险力量的工程或装置不受报复的规则 在保护核电站等设施方面具有重要意义，对核电站的攻击可能导致严重的环境后果。 |
| (6) | (6) |
| As a treaty provision, article 55, paragraph 2, applies only to international armed conflicts. | 作为一项条约规定，第五十五条第二款仅适用于国际性武装冲突。 |
| There is no corresponding rule in either common article 3 to the four Geneva Conventions or Additional Protocol II, which would explicitly prohibit reprisals in non-international armed conflicts (including against civilians, the civilian population, or civilian objects). | 日内瓦四公约共同第三条和《第二附加议定书》中都没有对应的规则明确禁止在非国际性武装冲突中实施报复(包括针对平民、平民居民或民用物体的报复)。 |
| (7) | (7) |
| In light of the drafting history of Additional Protocol II, it can nevetheless be questioned, whether a right to resort to reprisals in non-international armed conflicts has ever emerged. | 考虑到《第二附加议定书》的起草历史，仍然可以质疑，是否曾出现过在非国际性武装冲突中诉诸报复的权利。 |
| Some States in the diplomatic conference were of the view that reprisals of any kind are prohibited under all circumstances in non-international armed conflicts. | 在外交会议上，有些国家认为，在非国际性武装冲突中，任何情况下任何形式的报复都是禁止的。 |
| At the same time, several States voted against the prohibition because they thought that the concept of reprisals had no place in non-international armed conflicts. | 与此同时，若干国家认为报复这一概念在非国际性武装冲突中没有一席之地，因此投票反对这项禁止规定。 |
| According to the ICRC study on customary international humanitarian law, there is “insufficient evidence that the very concept of lawful reprisal in non-internatiuonal armed conflict has ever materialized in international law”. | 红十字国际委员会关于习惯国际人道法的研究报告指出，“没有充分的证据表明，非国际性武装冲突中的合法报复这一概念本身曾在国际法中具体出现过”。 |
| It furthermore notes that the relevant practice that has formed the rules on reprisals refers exclusively to inter-State relations. | 该研究报告还指出，构成关于报复的规则的相关实践仅涉及国家间关系。 |
| Recent practice of non-international armed conflicts has not changed the situation but has rather stressed the importance of the protection of civilians, respect for human rights and diplomatic means to stop violations. | 非国际性武装冲突方面的最近实践并未改变有关情况，而是强调了保护平民、尊重人权和通过外交手段制止侵犯行为的重要性。 |
| (8) | (8) |
| The ICRC study on customary international humanitarian law found that parties to non-international armed conflicts do not have the right to resort to belligerent reprisals. | 红十字国际委员会关于习惯国际人道法的研究报告认为，非国际性武装冲突的当事方无权诉诸交战报复。 |
| The International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia has also considered that the prohibition against reprisals against civilian populations constitutes a customary international law rule “in armed conflicts of any kind”. | 前南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭也认为，“在任何类型的武装冲突中”，禁止对平民居民的报复均构成一条习惯国际法规则。 |
| The present draft principle is intended to apply in all armed conflicts irrespective of classification. | 本项原则草案旨在适用于所有武装冲突，不论其分类如何。 |
| (9) | (9) |
| The current draft principle follows the wording of Additional Protocol I without any additions as it was considered that any other formulation could be interpreted as weakening the existing rule under the law of armed conflict. | 本项原则草案采用了《第一附加议定书》的措辞，未增加任何内容，因为据认为，其他任何表述方式都可被解释为会削弱武装冲突法之下的现有规则。 |
| This would be an undesirable result, given the fundamental importance of the existing rules of the law of armed conflict concerning reprisals. | 鉴于武装冲突法关于报复的现有规则至关重要，这样的结果并不可取。 |
| (10) | (10) |
| While draft principle 15 reflects binding law in international armed conflicts for the wide majority of States, and seems to be consistent with lex lata in non-international armed conflicts, there is, at present, uncertainty concerning its customary status. | 虽然原则草案15反映了国际性武装冲突中对绝大多数国家有约束力的法律，而且似乎与非国际性武装冲突中的现行法相一致，但这一规定的习惯地位目前存在不确定性。 |
| There is thus reason to state that the principle is not intended to qualify or alter the scope and meaning of existing rules on reprisals under either conventional or customary international law. | 因此有理由指出，这一原则无意限定或改变协定国际法或习惯国际法之下关于报复的现有规则的范围和含义。 |
| Principle 16 Prohibition of pillage | 原则16 禁止掠夺 |
| Pillage of natural resources is prohibited. | 禁止掠夺自然资源。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) | (1) |
| The purpose of draft principle 16 is to restate the prohibition of pillage as well as its applicability to natural resources. | 原则草案16的目的是重申禁止掠夺以及这一规定对自然资源的适用性。 |
| Illegal exploitation of natural resources has been a driving force for many, in particular non-international, armed conflicts in recent decades, and has caused severe environmental strain in the affected areas. | 近几十年来，非法开采自然资源一直是许多武装冲突，特别是非国际性武装冲突的驱动因素， 并在受影响地区造成了严重的环境压力。 |
| In this context, the prohibition of pillage was identified as one of the rules of the law of armed conflict that provide protection to the environment. | 在这方面，禁止掠夺被确定为武装冲突法中规定保护环境的规则之一。 |
| (2) | (2) |
| Pillage is an established violation of the law of armed conflict and a war crime. | 掠夺是一种得到确认的违反武装冲突法行为，也是一项战争罪。 |
| The Fourth Geneva Convention contains an absolute prohibition of pillage, both in the territory of a party to an armed conflict, and in an occupied territory. | 《日内瓦第四公约》载有绝对禁止在武装冲突各方领土和被占领土内进行掠夺的规定。 |
| Additional Protocol II to the Geneva Conventions confirms the applicability of this general prohibition in non-international armed conflicts meeting the criteria set out in the Protocol and, in that context, “at any time and in any place whatsoever”. | 日内瓦四公约《第二附加议定书》确认，这一普遍禁令适用于符合《议定书》所列标准的非国际性武装冲突，而且，在这种情况下“在任何时候和在任何地方”都是如此。 |
| The prohibition has been widely incorporated into national legislation as well as in military manuals. | 这项禁令已被广泛纳入国家法律以及军事手册中。 |
| There is considerable case law from both post-Second World War and modern international criminal tribunals confirming the criminal nature of pillage. | 第二次世界大战后和现代国际刑事法庭也有相当多的判例证实掠夺的犯罪性质。 |
| The war crime of pillaging is also prosecutable under the Rome Statute, in both international and non-international armed conflicts. | 对于国际性和非国际性武装冲突中的掠夺战争罪，均可根据《罗马规约》提出起诉。 |
| The prohibition of pillage has been found to constitute a rule of customary international law in both types of conflicts. | 在这两类冲突中，禁止掠夺均已被认定为构成习惯国际法规则。 |
| (3) | (3) |
| According to the ICRC commentary to Additional Protocol II, the prohibition applies to all categories of property, whether public or private. | 根据红十字国际委员会关于《第二附加议定书》的评注，这一禁令适用于所有类别的财产，无论是公共财产还是私人财产。 |
| The scope of the present draft principle is limited to the pillage of natural resources, which is a common phenomenon in armed conflicts, and one that leads to severe environmental impacts. | 本项原则草案的范围仅限于掠夺自然资源的行为，这是武装冲突中的一种常见现象，会导致对环境的严重影响。 |
| While pillage only applies to natural resources that can be subject to ownership and constitute “property”, this requirement is easily met where natural resources offer the potential for significant enrichment. | 虽然掠夺只适用于涉及所有权并构成“财产”的自然资源的情况，但对于具有高收益潜力的自然资源，这一要求很容易满足。 |
| The prohibition covers pillage of natural resources, whether owned by the State, communities or private persons. | 这一禁令涵盖对国家、社区或私人拥有的自然资源的掠夺。 |
| The applicability of the prohibition of pillage to natural resources has been confirmed by the International Court of Justice, which found in the Armed Activities judgment, that Uganda was internationally responsible “for acts of looting, plundering and exploitation of the [Democratic Republic of the Congo]’s natural resources” committed by members of the Ugandan Armed Forces in the territory of the Democratic Republic of the Congo. | 对掠夺自然资源的禁令的适用已得到国际法院的确认，国际法院在武装活动案的判决中认定，乌干达对乌干达武装部队成员在刚果民主共和国境内实施的“抢掠、劫掠和盗采[刚果民主共和国的]自然资源的行为”负有国际责任。 |
| (4) | (4) |
| Pillage is a broad term that applies to any appropriation or obtention of property in armed conflict that violates the law of armed conflict. | 掠夺是一个广义术语，适用于武装冲突中违反武装冲突法的任何占用或占有财产的行为。 |
| According to the ICRC commentary to Additional Protocol II, the prohibition of pillage covers both organized pillage and individual acts, whether committed by civilians or military personnel. | 根据红十字国际委员会关于《第二附加议定书》的评注，禁止掠夺的规定既涵盖有组织的掠夺，也包括个人行为， 无论是平民还是军事人员实施的行为。 |
| Acts of pillage do not necessarily involve the use of force or violence. | 掠夺行为未必涉及使用武力或暴力。 |
| At the same time, the law of armed conflict provides a number of exceptions under which appropriation or destruction of property may be lawful. | 同时，武装冲突法规定了一些例外情况，在这些例外情况下，占用或破坏财产可能是合法的。 |
| (5) | (5) |
| The terminology used for illegal appropriation of property, including natural resources, in armed conflict has not been consistent. | 关于武装冲突中非法占用财产包括占用自然资源的术语并不一致。 |
| The International Court of Justice, in the Armed Activities judgment, referred to “looting, plundering and exploitation”, the Statute of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia referred to “plunder”, while the African Charter uses the term “spoliation”. | 国际法院在武装活动案的判决中提到“抢掠(looting)、劫掠(plundering)和盗采(exploitation)”，《前南斯拉夫问题国际法庭规约》提及“劫掠(plunder)”，而《非洲宪章》使用了“强夺(spoliation)”。 |
| Research shows, however, that the terms “pillage”, “plunder”, “spoliation” and “looting” have a common legal meaning and been used interchangeably by international courts and tribunals. | 然而，研究表明，“掠夺(pillage)”、“劫掠(plunder)”、“强夺(spoliation)”和“抢掠(looting)”等术语具有共同的法律含义，曾被国际性法院和法庭互换使用。 |
| The Nürnberg Judgment thus used “pillage” and “plunder” as synonyms. | 因此，纽伦堡法庭的判决将“掠夺(pillage)”和“劫掠(plunder)”当作同义词使用。 |
| While the post-Second World War jurisprudence preferred the term “spoliation”, it confirmed that the term was synonymous with “plunder”, which was the term used in Control Council Law No. 10. | 虽然第二次世界大战后的判例倾向于使用“强夺(spoliation)”一词，但也确认了该术语是《管制理事会第10号法》中使用的“劫掠(plunder)”一词的同义词。 |
| The jurisprudence of the modern international criminal courts and tribunals has further confirmed that “pillage”, “plunder” and “looting” all signify unlawful appropriation of public or private property in armed conflict. | 现代国际性刑事法院和法庭的判例进一步确认，“掠夺(pillage)”、“劫掠(plunder)”和“抢掠(looting)”都意味着在武装冲突中非法占用公共或私人财产。 |
| (6) | (6) |
| The term “pillage” has been used in the Hague Regulations and the Fourth Geneva Convention, Additional Protocol II and the Rome Statute. | 《海牙章程》、《日内瓦第四公约》、《第二附加议定书》 和《罗马规约》 中使用了“掠夺(pillage)”一词。 |
| The Nürnberg Charter used the term “plunder”. | 《纽伦堡宪章》 使用了“劫掠(plunder)”一词。 |
| The concept of pillage has been defined in the ICRC commentaries to the Geneva Conventions and Additional Protocol II, as well as in the jurisprudence of the international criminal tribunals. | 红十字国际委员会关于《日内瓦四公约》和《第二附加议定书》的评注以及各国际刑事法庭的判例中对掠夺的概念作了定义。 |
| It has therefore been deemed appropriate to use the term “pillage” in the present draft principle. | 因此，在本项原则草案中使用“掠夺”一词被认为是适当的。 |
| (7) | (7) |
| Pillage of natural resources is part of the broader context of illegal exploitation of natural resources that thrives in armed conflict and post-armed conflict situations. | 掠夺自然资源是在武装冲突和武装冲突后局势中猖獗发生的范围更广的非法开采自然资源行为的一部分。 |
| The Security Council and the General Assembly have drawn attention in this regard to the connections between transnational criminal networks, terrorist groups and armed conflicts, including in relation to illicit trade in natural resources. | 在这方面，安全理事会和联大提请注意跨国犯罪网络、恐怖主义团体和武装冲突之间的联系，包括与自然资源非法贸易有关的联系。 |
| Frequently characterized by poor governance, widespread corruption and weak protection of resource rights, post-armed conflict situations are vulnerable to exploitation through transnational environmental crime. | 冲突后局势的特点往往是治理不善、普遍腐败和对资源权利的保护薄弱，容易遭到通过跨国环境犯罪实施的盗采。 |
| “Illegal exploitation of natural resources”, as used in the relevant Security Council resolutions, is a general notion that may cover the activities of States, non-State armed groups, or other non-State actors, including private individuals. | 安全理事会在相关决议 中使用的“非法开采自然资源”是一个一般性概念，可涵盖国家、非国家武装团体或其他包括个人在内的非国家行为体的活动。 |
| Accordingly, the notion may refer to illegality under international or national law. | 因此，这个概念可指国际法或国内法所指的非法性。 |
| While the notion of “illegal exploitation of natural resources” is partly overlapping with the concept of pillage, it has not been defined in many instruments and may also refer to environmental crime, whether in times of armed conflict or in times of peace. | 虽然“非法开采自然资源”的概念与掠夺的概念部分重叠，但这一概念在许多文书中都未做界定， 也可能指在武装冲突时期或和平时期的环境犯罪。 |
| This broader context underscores the application of the prohibition of pillage to natural resources. | 这种更广的范围强调，禁止掠夺的规定适用于自然资源。 |
| (8) | (8) |
| Draft principle 16 is located in Part Three containing draft principles applicable during an armed conflict, including in situations of occupation. | 原则草案16被列入第三部分，这部分载有武装冲突期间包括占领局势中适用的原则草案。 |
| Principle 17 Environmental modification techniques | 原则17 改变环境的技术 |
| In accordance with their international obligations, States shall not engage in military or any other hostile use of environmental modification techniques having widespread, long-lasting or severe effects as the means of destruction, damage or injury to any other State. | 各国按照其国际义务，不得为军事或任何其他敌对目的使用具有广泛、持久或严重影响的改变环境的技术作为摧毁、破坏或伤害任何其他国家的手段。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) | (1) |
| Draft principle 17 has been modelled on article 1, paragraph 1, of the 1976 Convention on the Prohibition of Military or Any Other Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques. | 原则草案17以1976年《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》第一条第1款为范本。 |
| The Convention prohibits military or any other hostile use of environmental modification techniques having widespread, long-lasting or severe effects. | 该公约禁止为军事或任何其他敌对目的使用具有广泛、持久和严重影响的改变环境的技术。 |
| Environmental modification techniques are defined in the convention as “any technique 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”. | 《公约》将改变环境的技术的定义为“通过蓄意操纵自然过程改变地球(包括其生物群、岩石圈、水气层和大气层)或外层空间的动态、组成或结构的技术”。 |
| The present draft principle uses the concept of environmental modification technique in the same sense. | 本项原则草案使用同样意义上的改变环境的技术概念。 |
| (2) | (2) |
| The mention of international obligations in the draft principle refers to the treaty obligations of States parties to the Convention and to any related customary obligation that prohibits the use of the environment as a weapon. | 本项原则草案中提到的国际义务指该《公约》缔约国的条约义务以及任何相关的禁止将环境用作武器的习惯义务。 |
| According to the ICRC study on customary international humanitarian law, “there is sufficiently widespread, representative and uniform practice to conclude that the destruction of the natural environment may not be used as a weapon”, and this irrespective of whether the provisions of the Convention are themselves customary. | 红十字国际委员会关于习惯国际人道法的研究报告指出：“有足够广泛、有代表性和统一的做法可以得出结论认为，对自然环境的破坏不得用作武器”，这与《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》的规定本身是否是惯例无关。 |
| The ICRC Guidelines for Military Manuals and Instructions for the Protection of the Environment in Times of Armed Conflict reiterate this obligation. | 红十字国际委员会《关于武装冲突中环境保护的军事手册和指南准则》重申了这一义务。 |
| The 2020 ICRC Guidelines on the Protection of the Natural Environment in Armed Conflict also contain a rule based on articles I and II of the Convention. | 红十字国际委员会2020年《武装冲突中保护自然环境的准则》载有一项以《公约》第一和第二条为基础的规则。 |
| (3) | (3) |
| The Convention does not spell out clearly whether the prohibition of the use of environmental modification techniques could be applicable in a non-international armed conflict. | 该《公约》没有明确说明禁止使用改变环境的技术的规定是否可适用于非国际性武装冲突。 |
| The formulation of paragraph 1 of article I only prohibits environmental modification that causes damage to another State party to the Convention. | 第一条第1款的表述仅禁止对《公约》另一缔约国造成损害的环境改变。 |
| It has been argued that this condition could nevertheless also be fulfilled in a non-international armed conflict provided that a hostile use of an environmental modification technique by a State in the context of such a conflict causes environmental or other damage in the territory of another State party. | 不过，这种情况在非国际性武装冲突中也可以实现，前提是一国在这种冲突中为敌对目的使用改变环境的技术在另一缔约国境内造成环境破坏或其他破坏。 《公约》所述改变环境的技术――能够造成“地震； |
| The environmental modification techniques addressed in the Convention – capable of causing “earthquakes, tsunamis, an upset in the ecological balance of a region, changes in weather patterns (clouds, precipitation, cyclones of various types and tornadic storms); | 海啸； 一个地区的生态平衡的混乱； 气象现象(云、降水、各种类型的气旋和龙卷风暴)的改变； |
| changes in climate patterns; | 气候型态的改变； |
| changes in ocean currents; | 海洋潮流的改变； |
| changes in the state of the ozone layer, and changes in the state of the ionosphere” – could well be expected to produce transboundary effects. | 臭氧层状态的改变； 电离层状态的改变”――很可能产生跨界影响。 |
| (4) | (4) |
| The Convention only addresses the hostile or military use of environmental modification techniques by States, excluding hostile use of such techniques by non-State actors. | 《公约》只涉及国家为敌对或军事目的使用改变环境的技术，不包括非国家行为体为敌对目的使用这种技术的情况。 |
| The ICRC study on customary international humanitarian law concludes that the prohibition of the destruction of the natural environment as a weapon is a rule of customary international law “applicable in international armed conflicts and arguably also in non-international armed conflicts”. | 然而，红十字国际委员会关于习惯国际人道法的研究报告得出结论认为，禁止将破坏自然环境作为一种武器的规定是一项“适用于国际性武装冲突，也可以说适用于非国际性武装冲突”的习惯国际法规则。 |
| (5) | (5) |
| Draft principle 17 is located in Part Three, which contains draft principles applicable during armed conflict. | 原则草案17被列入第三部分，这部分载有武装冲突期间适用的原则草案。 |
| This location reflects the most likely situations in which the Convention would be applied, even though the prohibition of the Convention is broader, and also covers other hostile uses of environmental modification techniques. | 其位置反映了《公约》最有可能适用的情形，但《公约》规定的禁止范围更广，也涵盖其他为敌对目的使用改变环境的技术的情形。 |
| (6) | (6) |
| The Convention on the Prohibition of Military or Any Other Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques deserves particular attention in the context of the present draft principles as the first and, so far, the only international treaty to specifically address means and methods of environmental warfare. | 《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》在本原则草案背景下值得特别关注，因为该公约是第一项也是迄今为止唯一一项专门论述环境战手段和方法的国际条约。 |
| The inclusion of draft principle 17 in the set of draft principles is without prejudice to the existing conventional or customary rules of international law regarding specific weapons that have serious effects on the environment. | 将原则草案17列入这套原则草案不妨碍现有的关于对环境具有严重影响的特定武器的国际法协定规则或习惯规则。 |
| Principle 18 Protected zones | 原则18 受保护区 |
| An area of environmental importance, including where that area is of cultural importance, designated by agreement as a protected zone shall be protected against any attack, except insofar as it contains a military objective. | 以协议方式指定为受保护区的具有重要环境意义的地区，包括具有重要文化意义的此种地区，应得到保护不受任何攻击，除非该地区包含军事目标。 |
| Such protected zone shall benefit from any additional agreed protections. | 这种受保护区应享有任何额外商定的保护。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) | (1) |
| This draft principle corresponds to draft principle 4. | 本项原则草案对应原则草案4。 |
| It provides that an area of environmental importance designated by agreement as a protected zone shall be protected against any attack, except insofar as it contains a military objective. | 它规定，以协议方式指定为受保护区的具有重要环境意义的地区，应得到保护不受任何攻击，除非该地区包含军事目标。 |
| An area of environmental importance is also often important from a cultural point of view. | 具有重要环境意义的地区往往也在文化角度上也具有重要意义。 |
| (2) | (2) |
| Unlike draft principle 4, the current provision only covers areas that are designated by agreement because it entails undertakings by more than one party. | 与原则草案4不同的是，本项规定只涵盖以协议方式指定的地区，因为这意味着不止一方须作出承诺。 |
| There has to be an express agreement on the designation. | 必须有明确的指定协议。 |
| Such an agreement may be concluded in peacetime or during armed conflict. | 此协议可在和平时期或武装冲突期间订立。 |
| The term “agreement” should be understood in its broadest sense as including mutual as well as unilateral declarations accepted by the other party, treaties and other types of agreements, as well as agreements with non-State actors. | “协议”一词应当按最广泛的含义理解，包括共同声明和被另一方接受的单方面声明、条约和其他类型的协议，以及与非国家行为体的协议。 |
| By virtue of their civilian character, such zones are protected from attack during armed conflict. | 此类地区具有民用性质，因此得到保护，在武装冲突期间不受攻击。 |
| The phrase “except insofar as it contains a military objective” is intended to denote that it may be the entire zone, only parts thereof, or objects located within the zone that become military objectives and lose the protection from attack. | “除非该地区包含军事目标”这一短语意在表示，可以是整个地带，或仅仅是其中的部分地带，或是位于该地带内的物体成为了军事目标而失去了免受攻击的保护。 |
| (3) | (3) |
| The conditional protection is an attempt to strike a balance between military, humanitarian and environmental concerns. | 有条件的保护是为了试图平衡处理军事、人道主义和环境关切。 |
| This balance reflects the mechanism for demilitarized zones as foreseen in article 60 of Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions. | 这一平衡反映了日内瓦四公约《第一附加议定书》第六十条设想的非军事化地带机制。 |
| Article 60 prohibits parties to an armed conflict from extending their military operations to such zones. | 第六十条禁止武装冲突各方将其军事行动扩展到这种地带。 |
| If a party to an armed conflict uses a protected area for specified military purposes, the protected status is revoked. | 如果武装冲突一方将受保护地区用于具体的军事目的，则该地区被取消受保护地位。 |
| (4) | (4) |
| Under the 1954 Hague Convention, State parties are similarly under the obligation not to destroy property that has been identified as cultural property in accordance with article 4 of the Convention. | 根据1954年《海牙公约》，缔约国同样有义务不破坏已依照《公约》第四条确定为文化财产的财产。 |
| However, the protection can only be granted as long as the cultural property is not used for military purposes. | 然而，只有文化财产不被用于军事目的时，才能给予保护。 |
| (5) | (5) |
| The legal implications of designating an area as a protected area will depend on the origin and contents, as well as the form, of the protection. | 指定某地区为受保护区所产生的法律影响，取决于保护的来源和内容以及形式。 |
| By virtue of their civilian character, all such zones are protected from attack unless and to the extent that they contain a military objective. | 所有此类地带具有民用性质，因此得到保护不受攻击，除非它们包含军事目标。 |
| A special undertaking to designate an environmentally important zone as protected from attack during an armed conflict should be accompanied with measures that reduce the likelihood that the zone would be affected by military operations. | 在作出特别承诺，指定一具有重要环境意义的地带在武装冲突期间免受攻击的同时，应采取措施，降低该地带受到军事行动影响的可能性。 |
| For instance, the agreement may contain provisions prohibiting siting of military installations within the protected area, or extending any military activities therein. | 例如，协议可载有规定，禁止在受保护区内为军事设施选址，或禁止将任何军事活动扩展到这些地区。 |
| The agreement may also contain provisions on the management and operation of the zone. | 协议还可载有关于该地带的管理和运作的规定。 |
| Regarding the form of protection, it is obvious that the pacta tertiis rule will limit the application of a treaty to the parties. | 关于保护的形式，显然，“不约束第三方”规则将使一项条约仅对其缔约方适用。 |
| As a minimum, the designation of an area as a protected zone could serve to inform the planning of parties to an armed conflict such that they do not conduct military operations within the zone, and alert them to take the protected zone into account when applying the principle of proportionality or the principle of precautions in attack in the vicinity of the zone. | 将一个地区指定为受保护区至少可以对武装冲突各方的规划提供参考，使武装冲突各方不在该地带内开展军事行动，并使它们注意到，在受保护地带附近适用比例原则或攻击时预防措施原则时，将受保护地带考虑在内。 |
| In addition, preventive and remedial measures may need to be tailored so as to take the special status of the area into account. | 此外，还可能需要调整防止和补救措施，以顾及该地区的特殊地位。 |
| (6) | (6) |
| The last sentence, according to which “[s]uch protected zone shall benefit from any additional agreed protections” serves two purposes. | 最后一句规定“这种受保护区应享有任何额外商定的保护”，有两个目的。 |
| First, it aims to clarify the relationship between the current draft principle and other applicable draft principles, in particular draft principles 4 and 13, so that it could not be interpreted to lower the general level of protection. | 第一，该句旨在澄清本项原则草案与适用的其他各项原则草案特别是原则草案4和13之间的关系，使之不会被解释为降低一般保护水平。 |
| Second, it refers to other relevant international obligations, such as those contained in multilateral environmental agreements that establish protected zones. | 第二，该句提到了其他相关国际义务，例如建立受保护地带的多边环境协议所载的义务。 |
| Reference can be made in this regard, for instance, to the 1972 World Heritage Convention, the Convention on Biological Diversity, the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands of International Importance especially as Waterfowl Habitat, and the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. | 这方面可提到1972年《世界遗产公约》、《生物多样性公约》、《关于特别是作为水禽栖息地的国际重要湿地的拉姆萨尔公约》和《联合国海洋法公约》等文书。 |
| Part Four Principles applicable in situations of occupation | 第四部分 在占领局势中适用的原则 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) | (1) |
| The three draft principles applicable in situations of occupation are placed in a separate Part Four. | 适用于占领局势的三项原则草案放在了单独的第四部分。 |
| This category of draft principles is not intended as a departure from the temporal approach chosen for the topic, but as a practical solution reflecting the great variety of circumstances that may qualify as a situation of occupation. | 这一类别的几项原则草案并不是为了偏离为本专题选择的分时段方法，而是作为一个务实的解决办法，反映可构成占领局势的极为多样的情形。 |
| While military occupation under the law of armed conflict is a specific form of international armed conflict, situations of occupation differ from armed conflicts in many respects. | 虽然武装冲突法所指的军事占领是国际性武装冲突的一种具体形式， 但占领局势在许多方面不同于武装冲突。 |
| Most notably, occupations are not always characterized by active hostilities and can even take place in situations in which the invading armed forces meet no armed resistance. | 最值得注意的是，占领并不总是以积极的敌对行动为特征，甚至可能发生在入侵武装部队未遇武装抵抗的情况下。 |
| A stable occupation shares some characteristics with a post-conflict situation and may with time even come to “approximating peacetime” conditions in certain respects, in spite of the continued reality of military dominion of the Occupying Power. | 稳定的占领与冲突后局势有许多共同特征，随着时间的推移，虽然占领方的军事统治继续存在，但在某些方面甚至可能出现“近似和平时期”的状况。 |
| Occupations can nevertheless also be volatile and conflict-prone. | 不过，占领也可能不稳定，易发生冲突。 |
| The Occupying Power may confront armed resistance during the occupation and even temporarily lose control of part of the occupied territory without this affecting the overall characterization of the situation as one of occupation. | 占领期间，占领方可能面临武装抵抗，甚至暂时丧失对部分已占领土的控制，但这并不影响对这一局势构成占领局势的总体定性。 |
| Furthermore, the beginning of an occupation does not necessarily coincide with the beginning of an armed conflict, nor is there any necessary concurrence between the cessation of active hostilities and the termination of an occupation. | 此外，占领开始时，武装冲突未必也恰好同时开始，而积极的敌对行动停止时，占领也未必同时终止。 |
| (2) | (2) |
| In spite of this variety, all occupations display certain common characteristics, namely that the effective authority over a certain territory is transferred from the territorial State, without its consent, to the Occupying Power. | 尽管存在各种情形，但所有的占领都表现出某些共同特征，即事实上管控某领土的权力未经领土国同意从领土国转移给占领方。 |
| The established understanding of the concept of occupation is based on article 42 of the Hague Regulations, which stipulates that a territory is considered occupied “when it is actually placed under the authority of the hostile army. | 对占领概念的既定理解以《海牙章程》第四十二条 为基础，这条规定，“领土如实际上被置于敌军当局的权力之下，即被视为被占领的领土。 |
| The occupation extends only to the territory where such authority is established and can be exercised. | 占领只适用于该当局建立并行使其权力的地域”。 |
| ” According to the 2005 judgment in Armed Activities on the Territory of the Congo case, it was necessary “that the Ugandan armed forces in the [Democratic Republic of the Congo] were not only stationed in particular locations but also that they had substituted their own authority for that of the Congolese Government”. | 根据刚果境内的武装活动案2005年的判决，须满足的条件是，“[刚果民主共和国]境内的乌干达武装部队不仅驻扎在特定地点，还以其自身权力取代了刚果政府权力”。 |
| Authority in this context is a fact-based concept: occupation “does not transfer the sovereignty to the occupant, but simply the authority or power to exercise some of the rights of sovereignty”. | 这里提到的权力是一个基于事实的概念； 占领“并不向占领者转移主权，而仅是转移行使一些主权权利的权力”。 |
| (3) | (3) |
| Once established in the territory of an occupied State, at least when the whole territory is occupied, the temporary authority of an Occupying Power extends to the adjacent maritime areas under the territorial State’s sovereignty. | 一旦在被占领国领土确立了临时权力，至少是当整个领土被占领时，占领方的临时权力便延伸至领土国有权行使主权权利的毗邻海域。 |
| Similarly, the authority of the Occupying Power may extend to the airspace over the occupied territory and over the territorial sea. | 同样，占领方的权力可延伸至被占领土和领海的上空。 |
| Such authority underscores the obligation of the Occupying Power to take appropriate steps to prevent marine pollution and transboundary environmental harm. | 这种权力强调占领方有义务采取适当步骤，防止海洋污染和跨界环境损害。 |
| (4) | (4) |
| The status of a territory as occupied is often disputed, including when the Occupying Power relies on a local surrogate, transitional government or rebel group for the purposes of exercising control over the occupied territory. | 被占领土的地位往往有争议，包括在占领方依靠当地代理人、过渡政府或反叛团体对被占领土行使控制的情况下。 |
| It is widely acknowledged that the law of occupation applies to such cases provided that the local surrogate acting on behalf of a State exercises effective control over the occupied territory. | 普遍承认的是，只要当地代理人代表一国行事，对被占领土行使有效控制，则占领法适用于这类情况。 |
| The possibility of such an “indirect occupation” has been acknowledged by the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, the International Court of Justice, and the European Court of Human Rights. | 前南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭、 国际法院 和欧洲人权法院 都曾承认可能存在这种“间接占领”。 |
| (5) | (5) |
| The law of occupation is applicable to situations that fulfil the factual requirements of effective control of a foreign territory irrespective of whether the Occupying Power invokes the legal regime of occupation. | 无论占领方是否援用占领法制度，占领法均适用于满足有效控制外国领土的实际要求的所有局势。 |
| It also extends to territories with unclear status that are placed under foreign rule. | 其适用范围也延伸至处于外国统治下的地位不明的领土。 |
| Similarly, and in accordance with the fundamental distinction between jus ad bellum and jus in bello, the law of occupation applies equally to all occupations, whether or not they result from a use of force that is lawful in the sense of jus ad bellum. | 与此相同，并且鉴于诉诸战争权与战时法之间的根本区别，占领法平等适用于所有占领情形，无论占领是否源于诉诸战争权意义上的合法使用武力。 |
| The law of occupation may also be applicable to territorial administration by an international organization, provided that the situation meets the criteria of article 42 of the Hague Regulations. | 当情况符合《海牙章程》第四十二条的标准时，占领法也可能适用于国际组织管理某一领土的情形。 |
| The term “Occupying Power” as used in the present draft principles is sufficiently broad to cover such cases. | 本原则草案中使用的“占领方”一词足够宽泛，足以涵盖这种情况。 |
| Even where this is not the case, as in operations relying on the consent of the territorial State, the law of occupation, albeit not legally applicable, may provide guidance and inspiration for international territorial administration entailing the exercise of functions and powers over a territory that are comparable to those of an Occupying Power under the law of armed conflict. | 即使情况并非如此，如在依赖领土国的同意的行动中，占领法虽然在法律上不适用，但也可为国际领土管理提供指导和启示，国际领土管理意味着需要在某一领土上行使与武装冲突法中规定的占领方行使的职能和权力相当的职能和权力。 |
| (6) | (6) |
| While the nature and duration of occupation do not affect the applicability of the law of occupation, the obligations of the Occupying Power under the law of occupation are, to a certain extent, context specific. | 虽然占领的性质和持续时间不影响占领法的适用性，但占领法规定的占领方承担的义务在一定程度上视具体情况而定。 |
| As pointed out in the ICRC commentary to common article 2 of the Geneva Conventions, negative obligations – mostly prohibitions – under the law of occupation apply immediately, whereas the implementation of positive obligations depends on “the level of control exerted, the constraints prevailing in the initial phases of the occupation, and the resources available to the foreign forces”. | 正如红十字国际委员会关于日内瓦四公约共同第二条的评注指出的那样，占领法规定的消极义务(大多是禁止性的)直接适用，而积极义务的履行则取决于“控制的程度、占领初期存在的局限以及外国部队掌握的资源”。 |
| A certain flexibility is thus recognized in the implementation of the law of occupation until the situation has stabilized and the Occupying Power is placed in a position to fully exercise its authority. | 因此，在局势稳定和占领方能够充分行使其权力之前，承认在执行占领法时有一定的灵活性。 |
| Moreover, the exact scope of the respective obligations depends on the nature and duration of the occupation. | 此外，各项义务的确切范围取决于占领的性质和持续时间。 |
| In other words, the responsibilities falling on the Occupying Power are “commensurate with the duration of the occupation”. | 换言之，占领方承担的责任“与占领持续的时间相称”。 |
| Furthermore, while protracted occupations remain governed by the law of occupation, other bodies of law, such as human rights law and international environmental law, gain more importance as time goes by and may complement or inform the applicable rules of the law of occupation. | 此外，虽然长期占领仍受占领法管辖，但人权法和国际环境法等其他法律随着时间的推移会越来越重要，可以补充或充实占领法的适用规则。 |
| In protracted occupations, changes necessitated by economic and social development require the participation of the protected population. | 在长期占领中，经济和社会发展所需的变革需要受保护居民的参与。 |
| (7) | (7) |
| The draft principles in Parts One, Two, Three and Five apply mutatis mutandis to situations of occupation, having regard to the variety of different situations of occupation. | 考虑到存在各种不同的占领局势，第一、第二、第三和第五部分的原则草案比照适用于占领局势。 |
| For instance, the draft principles in Part Two, which cover measures to be taken with a view to enhancing the protection of the environment in the event of an armed conflict, remain relevant. | 例如，第二部分的几项原则草案涵盖发生武装冲突时为加强环境保护而采取的措施，始终具有相关性。 |
| To the extent that periods of intense hostilities during an occupation are governed by the rules concerning the conduct of hostilities, the draft principles on the conduct of hostilities in Part Three are directly relevant to the protection of the environment in occupation. | 占领期间一段时间的密集敌对行动受敌对行动的规则管辖，从这个意义上说，第三部分中关于敌对行动的原则草案与占领期间的环境保护直接相关。 |
| Additionally, the environment of an occupied territory continues to enjoy the protection afforded to the environment during an armed conflict in accordance with applicable international law and as reflected in draft principle 13, in particular. | 此外，根据适用的国际法，被占领土的环境在武装冲突期间继续享有为环境提供的保护，原则草案13特别反映了这一点。 |
| The draft principles in Part Five addressing post-armed conflict situations would primarily have relevance for situations of prolonged occupation. | 第五部分中关于武装冲突后局势的原则草案主要与长期占领的局势相关。 |
| For each part, the draft principles may require some adjustment, hence the phrase mutatis mutandis. | 每一部分的原则草案都可能需要一些调整，因此采用了比照适用这一短语。 |
| Principle 19 General environmental obligations of an Occupying Power | 原则19 占领方的一般环境义务 |
| 1. | 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. | 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顾及环境考虑。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| An Occupying Power shall take appropriate measures to prevent significant harm to the environment of the occupied territory, including harm that is likely to prejudice the health and well-being of protected persons of the occupied territory or otherwise violate their rights. | 占领方应采取适当措施，防止对被占领土的环境造成重大损害，包括可能不利于被占领土被保护人的健康和福祉或以其他方式侵犯其权利的损害。 |
| 3. | 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. | 占领方应尊重被占领土关于环境保护的法律和制度，仅可在武装冲突法规定的范围内予以改动。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) | (1) |
| Paragraph 1 of draft principle 19 sets forth the general obligation of an Occupying Power to respect and protect the environment of the occupied territory and to take environmental considerations into account in the administration of such territory. | 原则草案19第1段规定，占领方有尊重和保护被占领土的环境以及在管理此种领土时顾及环境考虑的一般义务。 |
| The provision is based on the Occupying Power’s obligation to take care of the welfare of the occupied population, derived from article 43 of the Hague Regulations, which requires the Occupying Power to re-establish and insure, as far as possible, public order and security in the occupied territory. | 这一规定的依据是源自《海牙章程》第四十三条的占领方维护被占领居民福利的义务，该条要求占领方在可能范围内恢复和确保被占领土的公共秩序与安全。 |
| The obligation to ensure that the occupied population lives as normal a life as possible in the prevailing circumstances entails environmental protection as a widely recognized public function of the modern State. | 确保被占领土居民在当前局势下尽可能正常生活的义务 要求履行环境保护这一得到广泛承认的现代国家公共职能。 |
| Moreover, environmental concerns relate to an essential interest of the territorial sovereign, which the occupying State as a temporary authority must respect. | 此外，环境方面的关切涉及领土主权的一项基本利益， 作为临时权力机构的占领方必须予以尊重。 |
| (2) | (2) |
| The law of occupation is a part of the law of armed conflict, and draft principle 19 shall be read in the context of draft principle 13, which provides that the “environment shall be respected and protected in accordance with applicable international law and, in particular, the law of armed conflict”. | 占领法是武装冲突法的一部分，应结合原则草案13来解读原则草案19, 原则草案13规定：“应按照适用的国际法，特别是武装冲突法，尊重和保护环境”。 |
| Both draft principles refer to the obligation to “respect and protect” the environment in accordance with applicable international law, although draft principle 19 does so in the more specific context of occupation. | 两项原则草案都提及按照适用的国际法“保护和尊重”环境的义务，但原则草案19更加具体地述及占领局势中的这种义务。 |
| (3) | (3) |
| The term “applicable international law” refers, in particular, to the law of armed conflict, but also to international environmental law and international human rights law. | “适用的国际法”一词特别指的是武装冲突法，但也指国际环境法和国际人权法。 |
| Concurrent application of human rights law is of particular relevance in situations of occupation. | 在占领局势中，人权法的同时适用尤其相关。 |
| The International Court of Justice has notably interpreted respect for the applicable rules of international human rights law as part of the obligations of the Occupying Power under article 43 of the Hague Regulations. | 国际法院曾引人注目地将尊重国际人权法中适用的规则解释为《海牙章程》第四十三条规定占领方承担的义务的一部分。 |
| Where both the law of occupation and international human rights law regulate the same subject matter and share the same objective, it may be possible to draw on one branch of law to enrich and deepen the rules of the other. | 如果占领法和国际人权法都规范了相同的主题事项并具有相同的目标，就有可能利用一个法律分支来丰富和深化另一个分支的规则。 |
| Sometimes human rights law may provide clearer and more detailed regulation, which can still be adapted to the realities at hand. | 人权法有时可能提供更明确和更详细的规定，但仍可根据现实情况加以调整。 |
| Human rights law may, for instance, provide specifications for the interpretation of the notion of “civil life”, or a more exact formulation of the obligations of States with regard to ensuring “public health”. | 例如，人权法可以为解释“公民生活”的概念提供依据，或更加确切地阐述国家在保障“公共卫生”方面的义务。 |
| This may also include environmental questions, which have an impact on the welfare of the population. | 这也可能包括环境问题，因为环境问题对人民的福祉有影响。 |
| (4) | (4) |
| As for the application of international environmental law, reference can be made to the 1996 Advisory Opinion of the International Court of Justice on Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons, which provides important support to the claim that customary international environmental law and treaties on the protection of the environment continue to apply in situations of armed conflict. | 关于国际环境法的适用，可以参考国际法院1996年以核武器进行威胁或使用核武器的合法性咨询意见，该咨询意见为习惯国际环境法和关于环境保护的条约继续适用于武装冲突局势的主张提供了重要的支持。 |
| Similarly, the Commission’s articles on the effects of armed conflicts on treaties indicate that treaties relating to the international protection of the environment, treaties relating to international watercourses or aquifers, and multilateral law-making treaties may continue in operation during armed conflict. | 同样，委员会的关于武装冲突对条约的影响条款表明，关于对环境进行国际保护的条约、关于国际水道或含水层的条约以及多边造法条约可在武装冲突期间继续施行。 |
| Furthermore, to the extent that multilateral environmental agreements address environmental problems that have a transboundary nature, or a global scope, and the treaties have been widely ratified, it may be difficult to conceive of suspension only between the parties to a conflict. | 此外，若多边环境协议处理的是具有跨界性质或全球范围的环境问题，并且此种条约已获得广泛批准，可能难以想象仅在冲突各方之间中止施行。 |
| Obligations established under such treaties protect a collective interest and are owed to a wider group of States than the ones involved in the conflict or occupation. | 此类条约规定的义务保护的是集体利益，是对比冲突或占领所涉国家范围更广的多个国家承担的义务。 |
| (5) | (5) |
| The reference to environmental considerations is drawn from and inspired by the Advisory Opinion of the International Court of Justice on Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons. | 对环境考虑的提及借鉴了国际法院以核武器进行威胁或使用核武器的合法性咨询意见并受到其启发。 |
| The Court held that “the existing international law relating to the protection and safeguarding of the environment … indicates important environmental factors that are properly to be taken into account in the context of the implementation of the principles and rules of the law applicable in armed conflict”. | 国际法院认为，“与保护和保障环境有关的现有国际法说明了在落实武装冲突中适用的国际法原则和规则时应适当考虑的重要的环境因素”。 |
| An Arbitral Tribunal, furthermore, has stated that “where a State exercises a right under international law within the territory of another State, considerations of environmental protection also apply”. | 此外，一个仲裁法庭指出，“若一国在另一国领土内行使国际法下的权利，则环境保护考虑也适用”。 |
| As a generic notion, the term “environmental considerations” as used in paragraph 1 is comparable to the terms “environmental factors” or “considerations of environmental protection” in that it has a general content. | 作为一个一般概念，第1段中使用的“环境考虑”一词与“环境因素”或“环境保护考虑”类似，因为该词内容笼统。 |
| Furthermore, environmental considerations are context dependent and evolving. | 此外，环境考虑与语境相关， 也是不断演变的。 |
| The notion is also understood to refer to post-occupation environmental effects of the occupation. | 这一概念也被理解为指占领产生的占领后环境影响。 |
| (6) | (6) |
| Paragraph 2 provides that an Occupying Power shall take appropriate measures to prevent significant harm to the environment of the occupied territory. This includes harm that is likely to prejudice the health and well-being of protected persons of the occupied territory or otherwise violate their rights. | 第2段规定，占领方应采取适当措施，防止对被占领土的环境造成重大损害，包括可能不利于被占领土受保护人的健康和福祉或以其他方式侵犯其权利的损害。 |
| The notion of “health and well-being” refers to the common objectives of economic, social and cultural rights, such as the right to health, on the one hand, and the law of occupation, on the other, such as the well-being of the population. | “健康和福祉”的概念指经济、社会和文化权利与占领法的共同目标，前者涉及诸如健康权等，后者涉及诸如居民的福祉等。 |
| The notion of “health and well-being” is furthermore consistently used by the World Health Organization, which recalls that health and well-being affect both the society at present and future generations and are dependent on a healthy environment. | 此外，世界卫生组织一贯使用“健康和福祉”概念，该组织指出，健康和福祉影响今世后代的社会，并有赖于健康的环境。 |
| Reference can also be made to the Stockholm Declaration, which reaffirms “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”. | 还可以参考《斯德哥尔摩宣言》，其中重申“在过着尊严和幸福生活的优良环境里享受自由、平等和适当生活条件的基本权利”。 |
| Paragraph 2 should be read in the context of the general obligation in paragraph 1. | 第2段应结合第1段中的一般义务解读。 |
| The purpose of paragraph 2 is to indicate that significant harm to the environment of an occupied territory may have adverse consequences for the population of the occupied territory, in particular with respect to the enjoyment of certain human rights, such as the right to life, the right to health, or the right to food. | 第2段的目的是表明对被占领土环境的重大损害可能对被占领土居民产生不利影响，特别是在享受某些人权方面，如生命权、 健康权 或食物权。 |
| There is in general a close link between key human rights, on the one hand, and the protection of the quality of the soil and water, as well as biodiversity to ensure viable and healthy ecosystems, on the other. | 一般而言，重要人权与为保障有生命力的健康生态系统而保护土壤质量和水质以及生物多样性这两方面之间存在着密切联系。 |
| The reference to rights also encompasses the rights of protected persons under the law of occupation. | 所提及的权利也包括占领法下受保护人的权利。 |
| (7) | (7) |
| “Significant harm” in paragraph 2 is a widely used standard in international environmental law. | 第2段中的“重大损害”是国际环境法中广泛使用的标准。 |
| The need for a certain threshold of environmental harm, such as “significant harm”, in order for the relevant rights to be violated, has also been recognized in regional human rights jurisprudence. | 区域人权判例也承认，必须达到一定的环境损害门槛， 如“重大损害”， 才能认定有关权利被侵犯。 |
| As for its content, reference can be made to the Commission’s previous work on the prevention of transboundary harm from hazardous activities and the allocation of loss in the case of such harm. | 至于其内容，可以参考委员会以前关于预防危险活动的跨界损害 和这种损害情况下的损失分配 的工作。 |
| “Significant harm” is thus “something more than ‘detectable’ but need not be at the level of ‘serious’ or ‘substantial’”. | 因此，“重大损害”的“程度超过‘可察觉’，但不必达到‘严重’或‘显著’的程度。” |
| Such harm must lead to real detrimental effects on the environment. | 这种损害必须是会对环境造成实际有害影响。 |
| At the same time, “the determination of ‘significant damage’ involves both factual considerations and objective criteria, and a value determination”, which is dependent on the circumstances of the particular case. | 同时，“确定‘重大损害’既涉及事实考虑，也涉及客观标准，还涉及价值确定”，取决于具体情况。 |
| In the context of paragraph 2, harm that is likely to prejudice the health and well-being of the population of the occupied territory would amount to “significant harm”. | 在第2段的背景下，可能不利于被占领土居民健康和福祉的损害将构成“重大损害”。 |
| (8) | (8) |
| Paragraph 2 refers to “protected persons of the occupied territory” in general terms. | 第2段采用了“被占领土受保护人”这种一般性措辞。 |
| This reference is consistent with the definition given in article 4 of the Fourth Geneva Convention and encompasses “‘the whole population’ of occupied territories (excluding nationals of the Occupying Power)”. | 这一措辞与《日内瓦第四公约》第四条的定义相一致，包括“被占领土的‘全体居民’(不包括占领国国民)”。 |
| The ICRC Commentary points out that the other distinctions and exceptions contained in article 4 may extend or restrict these limits, but they do not do so “to any appreciable extent”. | 红十字国际委员会的评注指出，“第四条所载的其他区别和例外可能会扩大或限定这些限制”，但却并非“很大程度上”的扩大或限定。 |
| (9) | (9) |
| Paragraph 3 of draft principle 19 provides that 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. | 原则草案19第3段规定，占领方应尊重被占领土关于环境保护的法律和制度，仅可在武装冲突法规定的限制内予以改动。 |
| The term “law and institutions” is intended to also cover the international obligations of the occupied State. | 短语“法律和制度”意在同时涵盖被占领方的国际义务。 |
| The paragraph is based on the last phrase of article 43 of the Hague Regulations, “while respecting, unless absolutely prevented, the laws in force in the country”, as well as on article 64 of the Fourth Geneva Convention. | 该段以《海牙章程》第四十三条最后一句“除非万不得已，应尊重当地现行的法律”以及《日内瓦第四公约》第六十四条 为基础。 |
| These provisions embody the so-called conservationist principle, which underlines the temporary nature of occupation and the need for maintaining the status quo ante. | 这些规定体现了所谓的自然保护主义原则，强调占领的临时性和维持原状的必要性。 |
| (10) | (10) |
| In spite of their strict wording, the two provisions have been interpreted to allow the Occupying Power the competence to legislate when necessary for the maintenance of public order and civil life and to change legislation that is contrary to established human rights standards. | 虽然这两项规定措辞严格，但被解释为使占领方有权在对维护公共秩序和公民生活必要之时制定法律，并且有权修改违反既定人权标准的法律。 |
| The ICRC commentary to article 47 of the Fourth Geneva Convention points out that some changes to the institutions “might conceivably be necessary and even an improvement” and explains that the object of the text in question was “to safeguard human beings and not to protect the political institutions and government machinery of the State as such”. | 红十字国际委员会关于《日内瓦第四公约》第四十七条的评注指出，对制度的某些修改“可以想象是必要的，甚至是一种改善”，并解释说，所涉案文旨在“保护人类，而不是保护国家的政治制度和政府机构本身”。 |
| It is furthermore evident that “civil life” and “orderly government” are evolving concepts, comparable to the notions of “well-being and development”, or “sacred trust” which the International Court of Justice described in the Namibia Advisory Opinion as “by definition evolutionary”. | 此外，“公民生活”和“有秩序之统治”显然是不断演变的概念，与“福祉和发展”或“神圣之信托”的概念类似，国际法院在纳米比亚咨询意见中将后两个概念称为“顾名思义是不断演变的”。 |
| The longer the occupation lasts, the more evident is the need for proactive action and to allow the Occupying Power to fulfil its duties under the law of occupation, including for the benefit of the population of the occupied territory. | 占领持续的时间越长，就越明显需要采取积极主动的行动，并使占领方能履行占领法规定的义务，包括为了被占领土居民的利益。 |
| At the same time, the Occupying Power is not supposed to take over the role of a sovereign legislator. | 与此同时，占领方不应取代主权立法机构发挥的作用。 |
| (11) | (11) |
| Paragraph 3 takes into account that armed conflict may have caused significant stress on the environment of the occupied State and resulted in institutional collapse, which is a common feature of many armed conflicts, and recognizes that an Occupying Power may have to take proactive measures to address immediate environmental problems. | 第3段考虑到，武装冲突可能对被占领国的环境造成重大压力，并可能造成体制崩溃，这是许多武装冲突的一个共同特点。 该段还承认，占领方可能必须采取积极主动的措施，处理紧迫的环境问题。 |
| The more protracted the occupation, the more diversified measures are likely to be necessary for the protection of the environment. | 占领持续时间越长，就越可能需要为保护环境采取多样化的措施。 |
| As part of the maintenance of public order and civil life of the occupied territory, which requires taking care of the welfare of the occupied population, such proactive action should entail engagement of the population of the occupied territory in decision-making. | 维持被占领土公共秩序和公民生活需要照顾被占领土居民的福利，作为维持被占领土公共秩序和公民生活一部分的这种积极主动行动应当包括让被占领土居民参与决策。 |
| (12) | (12) |
| While some active interference in the law and institutions concerning the environment of the occupied territory may thus be required, the Occupying Power may not introduce permanent changes in fundamental institutions of the country and shall be guided by a limited set of considerations: the concern for public order, civil life, and welfare in the occupied territory. | 虽然可能因此需要对被占领土关于环境的法律和制度进行某些积极主动的干预，但是占领方不得对被占领土的根本制度实施永久性改变，并应以有限的考虑因素为指导，即以对被占领土的公共秩序、公民生活和福祉的关切为指导。 |
| The phrase “within the limits provided by the law of armed conflict” in paragraph 3 also refers to article 64 of the Fourth Geneva Convention. | 第3段中的短语“在武装冲突法规定的限制内”还参考了《日内瓦第四公约》第六十四条。 |
| According to this provision, local laws may be changed when it is essential: (a) to enable the Occupying Power to fulfil its obligations under the Convention; | 该条规定，在为了下列目的而必要时，可修改当地法律：(a) 使占领国得以履行在公约下所负之义务； |
| (b) to maintain the orderly government of the territory; | (b) 维持该地有秩序之统治； |
| or (c) to ensure the security of occupying forces or administration. | 或(c) 确保占领军或行政机关的安全。 |
| Principle 20 Sustainable use of natural resources | 原则20 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 protected 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 harm to the environment. | 在占领方获准管理和利用被占领土自然资源的情形下，为了被占领土受保护居民的利益和出于武装冲突法规定的其他合法目的，占领方管理和利用自然资源的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。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) | (1) |
| The purpose of draft principle 20 is to set forth the obligations of an Occupying Power with respect to the sustainable use of natural resources. | 原则草案20旨在规定占领方在可持续利用自然资源方面的义务。 |
| As indicated in the first part of the sentence, the draft principle applies “[t]o the extent that an Occupying Power is permitted to administer and use the natural resources in an occupied territory”. | 正如该句第一部分所指出的那样，原则草案适用于“在占领方被容许管理和利用被占领土自然资源的情形下”。 |
| The phrase refers to the various rules and limitations set forth by the law of armed conflict and other international law to the exploitation of the wealth and natural resources of the occupied territory. | 该短语参考了武装冲突法和其他国际法对利用被占领土财富和自然资源规定的各种规则和限制。 |
| (2) | (2) |
| The provision is based on article 55 of the Hague Regulations, under which the Occupying Power is regarded “only as administrator and usufructuary” of immovable public property in the occupied territory. | 这项规定以《海牙章程》第五十五条为基础，根据该条，占领方对于其占领地内的公共不动产而言“只是被视为管理者和收益的享用者”。 |
| This description is interpreted to forbid “wasteful or negligent destruction of the capital value, whether by excessive cutting or mining or other abusive exploitation”. | 这种表述被解释为禁止“以浪费或疏忽方式破坏资本价值，无论是过度砍伐还是过度开采或其他滥采滥用”。 |
| A similar limitation deriving from the nature of occupation as temporary administration of the territory prevents the Occupying Power from using the resources of the occupied country or territory for its own domestic purposes. | 一个相似的限制源于占领作为对领土的临时管理的性质，不允许占领方将被占领国家或领土的资源用于其国内目的。 |
| Any exploitation of property is permitted only to the extent required to cover the expenses of the occupation, and “these should not be greater than the economy of the country can reasonably be expected to bear”. | 只有在支付占领费用所需的范围内，才容许利用财产，并且“这些费用不应当超过该国经济可以合理预期的承受能力”。 |
| (3) | (3) |
| The second sentence of the draft principle mentions explicitly that the Occupying Power’s administration and use of natural resources in the occupied territory may only be “for the benefit of the protected population of the occupied territory and for other lawful purposes under the law of armed conflict”. | 原则草案第二句明确提到，占领方对被占领土自然资源的管理和使用只能是“为了被占领土受保护居民的利益和出于武装冲突法规定的其他合法目的”。 |
| The reference to “the protected population of the occupied territory” is to be understood in this context in the sense of article 4 of the Fourth Geneva Convention, which defines protected persons. | “被占领土受保护居民”的提法在这里应理解为《日内瓦第四公约》第四条的含义，该条定义了受保护人。 |
| Unlike for draft principle 19, the word “population” was chosen as the present draft principle does not focus on individual rights but more collectively on the benefit from the use of natural resources. | 与原则草案19不同，第二句选择了“居民”一词，因为本原则草案的重点不是个人权利，而是从集体角度更多地关注从自然资源的利用中获得的利益。 |
| The terms “protected persons” and “protected population” can be used interchangeably. | “受保护人”和“受保护居民”这两个词语可以互换使用。 |
| The words “of the occupied territory” underline this meaning. | “被占领土”一词强调了这一含义。 |
| (4) | (4) |
| A further provision that provides protection to the natural resources and certain other components of the environment of the occupied territory is contained in the general prohibition of destruction or seizure of property, whether public or private, movable or immovable, in the occupied territory unless such destruction or seizure is rendered absolutely necessary by military operations. | 保护被占领土的自然资源和某些其他环境组成部分的另一项规定是，普遍禁止破坏或扣押被占领土内的公共或私人动产或不动产，除非这种破坏或扣押是军事行动所绝对必要的。 |
| The prohibition of pillage of natural resources is furthermore applicable in situations of occupation. | 禁止掠夺自然资源的规定也适用于占领局势。 |
| An “extensive destruction and appropriation of property, not justified by military necessity and carried out unlawfully and wantonly” is also defined as a grave breach in article 147 of the Fourth Geneva Convention and as the war crime of “pillaging” in the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. | 《日内瓦第四公约》第一四七条还将“无军事上之必要而以非法与暴乱之方式对财产之大规模的破坏与征收”定义为严重破坏公约行为，《国际刑事法院罗马规约》将这种行为定义为“掠夺”战争罪。 |
| (5) | (5) |
| The principle of permanent sovereignty over natural resources also has a bearing on the interpretation of article 55 of the Hague Regulations. | 对自然资源的永久主权这一原则也影响到对第《海牙章程》第五十五条的解释。 |
| According to this principle, as enshrined in both the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, all peoples may, for their own ends, freely dispose of their natural wealth and resources without prejudice to any obligations arising out of international economic cooperation, based upon the principle of mutual benefit, and international law. In no case may a people be deprived of its own means of subsistence. | 根据《公民及政治权利国际公约》和《经济社会文化权利国际公约》所载的这一原则，所有民族得为本身之目的，自由处置其天然财富及资源，但不得妨碍因基于互惠原则之国际经济合作及因国际法而生之任何义务，无论和何种情形下，民族之生计不容剥夺。 |
| The International Court of Justice has confirmed the customary nature of the principle. | 国际法院确认了该原则的习惯性质。 |
| Similarly, the principle of self-determination may be invoked in relation to the exploitation of natural resources in territories under occupation, particularly in the case of territories that are not part of any established State. | 同样，在开采被占领土内自然资源方面，特别是在领土不属于任何已经建立的国家的情况下，可援引自决原则。 |
| (6) | (6) |
| While the right of usufruct has traditionally been regarded as applicable to the exploitation of all kinds of natural resources, including non-renewable ones, the various limitations outlined above serve to curtail the Occupying Power’s rights to exploit the natural resources of the occupied territory. | 虽然用益权历来被认为适用于包括不可再生资源在内各种自然资源的开采， 但上述各种限制规定限制了占领方开采被占领土自然资源的权利。 |
| These limitations are also reflected in the use of “permitted”. | 这些限制也反映在“被容许”一词的使用上。 |
| (7) | (7) |
| The last sentence of draft principle 20 addresses situations in which an Occupying Power is permitted to administer and use the natural resources in an occupied territory. | 原则草案20最后一句述及占领方被容许管理和使用被占领土自然资源的情况。 |
| It sets forth an obligation to do so in a way that ensures the sustainable use of such resources and minimizes environmental harm. | 该句规定了一种义务，即管理和利用方式应确保这些资源的可持续利用，并将对环境的损害减少至最低限度。 |
| This requirement is based on the Occupying Power’s duty under article 55 of the Hague Regulations to safeguard the capital of public immovable property, which has for a long time been interpreted to entail certain obligations with regard to the protection of the natural resources in the occupied territory. | 这一要求以《海牙章程》第五十五条规定的占领方保护公共不动产资本的义务为依据，这一规定长期以来一直被解释为在保护被占领土的自然资源方面承担某些义务。 |
| In light of the development of the international legal framework for the exploitation and conservation of natural resources, environmental considerations and sustainability are to be seen as integral elements of the duty to safeguard the capital. | 鉴于开采和保护自然资源的国际法律框架的发展，环境考虑和环境可持续性应被视为保护资本义务的组成部分。 |
| Reference can in this respect be made to the Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros judgment, in which the International Court of Justice, in interpreting a treaty that predated certain recent norms of environmental law, accepted that “the Treaty is not static, and is open to adapt to emerging norms of international law”. | 在这方面，可以参考加布奇科沃－大毛罗斯案的判决，在该判决中，国际法院在解释一项早于某些最近的环境法规范的条约时，承认“该条约不是静态的，并可能适应新出现的国际法规范”。 |
| A court of arbitration has furthermore stated that principles of international environmental law must be taken into account even when interpreting treaties concluded before the development of that body of law. | 一个仲裁法庭进一步指出，即使在解释国际环境法制定之前缔结的条约时，也必须考虑到该法的原则。 |
| (8) | (8) |
| The notion of sustainable use of natural resources can in this regard be seen as the modern equivalent of the concept of “usufruct”, which is in essence a standard of good housekeeping, according to which the Occupying Power “must not exceed what is necessary or usual” when exploiting the relevant resource. | 在这方面，可持续利用自然资源的概念可被视为等同于现代的“用益权”概念，其本质上是“良好的内务管理”标准，根据这一标准，在开采相关资源时，占领方“不得超过必要或通常的水平”。 |
| This entails that the Occupying Power shall exercise caution in the exploitation of non-renewable resources, not exceeding pre-occupation levels of production, and exploit renewable resources in a way that ensures their long-term use and capacity for regeneration. | 这意味着，占领方在开采不可再生资源方面应谨慎行事，不应超过占领前的生产水平，开采可再生资源时应确保其长期利用和资源的再生能力。 |
| (9) | (9) |
| The notion of minimization of environmental harm follows from the purpose of the draft principles. | 对环境的损害减少至最低限度的概念源自本原则草案的宗旨。 |
| Draft principle 2 notably states that the draft principles are aimed at enhancing the protection of the environment in relation to armed conflicts, including through measures to prevent, mitigate and remediate harm to the environment. | 原则草案2特别指出，本原则草案旨在通过防止、减轻和补救对环境的损害的措施，加强与武装冲突有关的环境保护。 |
| Preventive measures are understood to aim at avoiding, or in any event minimizing, damage to the environment. | 防止措施被理解为旨在避免对环境的损害或在任何情况下将对环境的损害减少至最低限度。 |
| While the obligation to ensure the sustainable use of natural resources is most relevant in a long-term perspective, the use of natural resources, and the need to minimize environmental harm, is relevant both in short-term and more protracted occupations. | 虽然确保可持续利用自然资源的义务从长期来看最为相关，但自然资源的利用和对环境的损害减少至最低限度的必要性在短期和更长期的占领中都是相关的。 |
| Principle 21 Prevention of transboundary harm | 原则21 预防跨界损害 |
| An Occupying Power shall take appropriate measures to ensure that activities in the occupied territory do not cause significant harm to the environment of other States or areas beyond national jurisdiction, or any area of the occupied State beyond the occupied territory. | 占领方应采取适当措施，确保被占领土内的活动不对其他国家、国家管辖范围以外地区或被占领国被占领土以外任何地区的环境造成重大损害。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) | (1) |
| Draft principle 21 contains the established principle that each State has an obligation not to allow significant harm to be caused from its territory or jurisdiction to the environment of other States or to areas beyond national jurisdiction. | 原则草案21载有一项既定原则，即每个国家都有义务不允许从其领土或管辖范围内对其他国家的环境或国家管辖范围以外地区造成重大损害。 |
| The International Court of Justice referred to this principle in the Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons case and confirmed its customary nature, stating that the general obligation of States to ensure that activities within their jurisdiction and control respect the environment of other States and of areas beyond national control constitutes “part of the corpus of international law relating to the environment”. | 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提及这一原则，并确认了其习惯性质，指出，各国有一般义务确保在其管辖范围内或在其控制下的活动尊重其他国家以及国家管辖范围以外地区的环境，这种义务构成“有关环境的国际法的一部分”。 |
| (2) | (2) |
| The obligation to prevent significant harm to the environment of other States has an established status in a transboundary context and has been particularly relevant with regard to shared natural resources, such as international watercourses and transboundary aquifers. | 防止对其他国家环境的重大损害的义务已在跨界问题方面有了既定地位，并与国际水道、跨界含水层等共享自然资源特别相关。 |
| This obligation is explicitly contained in the Convention on the Law of the Non-navigational Uses of International Watercourses and in the Convention on the Protection and Use of Transboundary Watercourses and International Lakes as well as in the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. | 《国际水道非航行使用法公约》、《跨界水道和国际湖泊保护和利用公约》以及《联合国气候变化框架公约》明确载列这项义务。 |
| Numerous regional treaties establish corresponding obligations of prevention, cooperation, notification or compensation with regard to damage caused to rivers or lakes. | 许多区域条约就对河流或湖泊造成的损害规定了相应的防止、合作、通知或补偿义务。 |
| The principle has also been confirmed and clarified in international and regional jurisprudence. | 这一原则也在国际和区域判例中得到确认和澄清。 |
| (3) | (3) |
| The Commission has included this principle in its articles on prevention of transboundary harm from hazardous activities. | 委员会已将这一原则列入关于预防危险活动的跨界损害的条款。 |
| According to the commentary thereto, the obligation of due diligence can be deduced from a number of international conventions as the standard basis for the protection of the environment from harm. | 根据该条款草案的评注，适当注意的义务作为保护环境不受损害的标准基础，可以追溯到一些国际公约。 |
| (4) | (4) |
| As regards the applicability of this principle in the specific context of occupation, reference can be made to the International Court of Justice’s Namibia Advisory Opinion, in which the Court underlined the international obligations and responsibilities of South Africa towards other States while exercising its powers in relation to the occupied territory, stating that “[p]hysical control of a territory, and not sovereignty or legitimacy of title, is the basis of State liability for acts affecting other States”. | 关于这一原则在具体占领情况下的适用性，可参考国际法院纳米比亚咨询意见，在该意见中，法院强调南非在就被占领土行使权力时对其他国家承担国际义务和责任，指出，“对某一领土的实际控制，而不是主权或法定所有权，是对影响到其他国家的行动承担国家责任的基础”。 |
| Furthermore, the Court has referred to the general obligation of States to ensure that activities within their jurisdiction and control respect the environment of other States or of areas beyond national control in its judgment concerning the Pulp Mills on the River Uruguay case, as well as in the joint cases of Certain Activities and Construction of a Road. | 此外，法院在关于乌拉圭河纸浆厂案 以及在某些活动案和修建道路案合并案 的判决中，提到各国有一般义务确保在其管辖范围内或在其控制下的活动尊重其他国家或国家管辖范围以外地区的环境。 |
| (5) | (5) |
| The Commission’s articles on prevention of transboundary harm from hazardous activities state that this obligation applies to activities carried out within the territory or otherwise under the jurisdiction or control of a State. | 委员会关于预防危险活动的跨界损害的条款指出，该义务适用于在一国领土内或在其管辖或控制下进行的活动。 |
| It should be recalled that the Commission has consistently used this formulation to refer not only to the territory of a State but also to activities carried out in other territories under the State’s control. | 应当回顾，委员会一直使用这一表述，不仅指一国领土，而且指该国控制下的其他领土上进行的活动。 |
| As explained in the commentary to article 1, “it covers situations in which a State is exercising de facto jurisdiction, even though it lacks jurisdiction de jure, such as in cases of unlawful intervention, occupation and unlawful annexation”. | 正如第1条的评注所解释的，“这包括一国即使没有法律上的管辖权，却行使事实上的管辖权的各种情况，例如非法干涉、占领和非法吞并”。 |
| (6) | (6) |
| Draft principle 21 reflects the obligation of prevention in customary international environmental law, which only applies to harm above a certain threshold, most often indicated as “significant harm”. | 原则草案21反映了习惯国际环境法中的防止义务，该义务仅适用于高于某一门槛的损害，通常表示为“重大损害”。 |
| At the same time, certain treaties incorporate the prevention obligation without the threshold of significant harm. | 与此同时，某些条约纳入了防止义务，但没有规定重大损害的门槛。 |
| The obligation of prevention is an obligation of conduct that requires in situations of occupation that the Occupying Power takes all measures it can reasonably be expected to take. | 防止义务是一项行为义务，要求在占领局势中，占领方采取一切按照合理预期应采取的措施。 |
| The content of the notion of significant harm is the same as referred to above in the commentary to draft principle 19. | 重大损害概念的内容与上文原则草案19的评注中提到的概念相同。 |
| (7) | (7) |
| The wording of draft principle 21 follows the established precedents but adds a reference to “any area of the occupied State beyond the occupied territory”. | 原则草案21的措辞沿用了既定先例，但增加了“被占领国被占领土以外任何地区”的提法。 |
| The consideration behind this formulation is related to situations in which the occupied territory extends to only a part of the territory of a State and not its entirety. | 这一表述背后的考虑涉及被占领土仅占一国的部分领土而不是全部领土的情形。 |
| While the phrase “to the environment of other States or areas beyond national jurisdiction” could be interpreted as excluding the territory of other parts of the occupied State, draft principle 21 is intended to cover three situations: the territory of other States, areas beyond national jurisdiction, and any territory of the occupied State not under occupation. | 虽然“其他国家或国家管辖范围以外地区的环境”这一短语可能被解释为不包括被占领国其他地区的领土，但原则草案21意在涵盖三种情况：其他国家的领土、国家管辖范围以外地区以及被占领国未被占领的任何领土。 |
| Part Five Principles applicable after armed conflict | 第五部分 武装冲突后适用的原则 |
| Principle 22 Peace processes | 原则22 和平进程 |
| 1. | 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 as a result of the conflict. | 武装冲突各方应当作为和平进程的一部分，处理与恢复和保护因冲突而遭受损害的环境相关的事项，包括酌情在和平协议中处理。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| Relevant international organizations should, where appropriate, play a facilitating role in this regard. | 有关国际组织应当酌情在这方面发挥调解作用。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) | (1) |
| Draft principle 22 reflects the fact that environmental considerations are, to a greater extent than before, being taken into consideration in the context of peace processes, including through the regulation of environmental matters in peace agreements. | 原则草案22反映的是，在和平进程中，会比之前更加顾及环境考虑，包括为此在和平协议中就环境事项作出规定。 |
| Reference can also be made to the heavy environmental impact of non-international armed conflicts that has led a growing number of States to include measures to protect and restore the environment in transitional justice processes. | 还可以参照的是，非国际性武装冲突对环境造成严重影响，已使越来越多的国家将保护和恢复环境的措施纳入过渡期司法进程。 |
| (2) | (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. | 在本项原则草案中使用“和平进程”一词，意在扩大本项原则草案的范围，以涵盖整个和平进程以及所订立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，不一定采取订立正式协议的形式。 |
| For example, at the end of hostilities, a ceasefire agreement, an armistice or a situation of de facto peace where no agreement could be reached. | 例如，在敌对行动结束时，可能达成停火协议、停战协议，或者在没有协议的情况下形成事实上的和平局势。 |
| 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采取各种步骤和通过各种文书。 |
| 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远未实际结束之前开始。 |
| The conclusion of a peace agreement thus represents only one aspect, which, if at all, may take place several years after the end of an armed conflict. | 因此，订立和平协议只代表一个方面，即使订立和平协议，也可能是在武装冲突结束几年之后。 |
| For this purpose, and to also avoid any temporal lacuna, the words “as part of the peace process” have been employed. | 为此目的，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”这一短语。 |
| (3) | (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. | 第1段使用短语“武装冲突各方”，表明本项规定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，即本套原则草案适用于国际性和非国际性武装冲突。 |
| This phrase is understood to also refer to former parties to an armed conflict in case the conflict has ended. | 在冲突已经结束的情况下，该短语还被理解为指武装冲突的前当事方。 |
| (4) | (4) |
| The word “should” is used to reflect the normative ambition of the provision, while also recognizing that it does not correspond to any general legal obligation. | “应当”一词用于反映本项规定的规范理想，同时承认本项规定并不对应任何一般法律义务。 |
| (5) | (5) |
| The draft principle is cast in general terms to accommodate the wide variety of situations that may exist as a result of an armed conflict. | 本项原则草案采用一般性措辞，以顾及因武装冲突而可能存在的多种多样的情况。 |
| Armed conflicts often present one or more environmental issues, such as environmental degradation and scarcities as a causal factor in the conflict, exploitation of natural resources as a war-sustaining activity, or environmental damage caused during the conflict. | 武装冲突往往凸显出一个或多个环境问题，如作为冲突起因的环境退化和资源稀缺、以维持战争为目的的自然资源开采以及在冲突期间造成的环境损害。 |
| The condition of the environment can vary greatly depending on a number of factors. | 环境状况可能有很大差异，具体取决于许多因素。 |
| 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，可能需要作为紧急事项处理； |
| in others, the damage the environment has suffered may not be so significant as to warrant urgent restoration. | 在另一些情况下，环境受到的损害可能不那么重大，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数月甚至数年才会变得明显。 |
| (6) | (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). | 本项原则草案旨在涵盖所有正式的和平协议，以及在和平进程期间的任何时点订立或通过的其他文书或协议，无论是两个或两个以上国家之间订立的，国家与非国家武装团体订立的，还是两个或两个以上非国家武装团体之间订立的。 |
| 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) | (7) |
| Some modern peace agreements contain environmental provisions. | 一些现代和平协议包含环境方面的规定。 |
| 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. | 和平进程期间订立的文书或和平协议中处理的各类环境事项包括例如规定各方有义务就环境问题开展合作或鼓励这种合作； 还包括作出规定，详细载明由哪个主管机关负责环境相关事项。 |
| Such matters include preventing environmental crimes and enforcing national laws and regulations on natural resources and the sharing of communal resources. | 这类事项包括防止环境犯罪和执行关于自然资源和共享公共资源的国家法律法规。 |
| Environmental aspects in peace processes also include the need to mitigate and minimize the specific negative effects of environmental degradation on people in vulnerable situations, who historically have borne the brunt of long-term environmental damage. | 和平进程中的环境方面还包括需要减轻和最大限度减少环境退化对弱势群体的特定负面影响，这些群体历来遭受长期环境损害之苦。 |
| Mention should furthermore be made to the important role of local communities in peacebuilding and of the right of women to full and equal participation in decision-making, planning and implementation regarding the restoration and protection of natural resources and the environment. | 还应当提到地方社区在建设和平方面的重要作用， 并提到妇女有权充分和平等地参与与恢复和保护自然资源和环境有关的决策、规划和执行。 |
| The present draft principle aims to encourage parties to consider including such provisions in the agreements. | 本项原则草案旨在鼓励各方考虑在协议中纳入这些规定。 |
| (8) | (8) |
| Paragraph 2 aims to encourage relevant international organizations to take environmental considerations into account when they act as facilitators in peace processes. | 第2段旨在鼓励有关国际组织在和平进程中充当调解人时顾及环境考虑。 |
| The wording of the paragraph is intended to be broad enough to cover situations to which resolutions of the United Nations Security Council apply, as well as situations in which relevant international organizations play a facilitating role with the consent of the relevant State or parties to an armed conflict in question. | 该段的措辞旨在使范围足够广泛，以涵盖联合国安全理事会决议适用的情况，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调解作用的情况。 |
| (9) | (9) |
| Paragraph 2 refers to “relevant international organizations” to signal that not all organizations are suited to address this particular issue. | 第2段提及“有关国际组织”，以表明并非所有组织都适合处理这一特定事项。 |
| The organizations that are envisaged 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, as well as the African Union, the European Union and the Organization of American States. | 在本项原则草案中，所设想的有关组织包括被承认在过去各种武装冲突的和平进程中发挥了重要作用的组织，包括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等。 |
| 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. | 本项原则草案还用了“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各方所要求或希望的。 |
| It is furthermore recognized that international organizations, when involved in facilitation, should do so in cooperation across the humanitarian system, including local communities, national and international actors. | 此外还认识到，国际组织在参与调解时，应当与整个人道主义系统开展合作，包括与地方社区、国家行为体和国际行为体开展合作。 |
| Principle 23 Sharing and granting access to information | 原则23 共享并准许获取信息 |
| 1. | 1. |
| To facilitate measures to remediate harm to the environment resulting from an armed conflict, States and relevant international organizations shall share and grant access to relevant information in accordance with their obligations under applicable international law. | 为便利对因武装冲突而产生的环境损害采取补救措施，各国和有关国际组织应按照适用的国际法规定的义务，共享并准许获取相关信息。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| Nothing in paragraph 1 affects the right to invoke the grounds for refusal to share or grant access to information provided for in applicable international law. | 第1段中的任何规定均不影响援引适用国际法规定的拒绝共享或准许获取信息的理由的权利。 |
| Nevertheless, States and international organizations shall cooperate in good faith with a view to providing as much information as possible under the circumstances. | 但各国和国际组织应进行善意合作，以期尽量提供在这种情况下可能提供的信息。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) | (1) |
| Draft principle 23 addresses the obligation to share or grant access to relevant information to facilitate measures to remediate harm to the environment resulting from an armed conflict. | 原则草案23述及共享或准许获取相关信息以便利对因武装冲突而产生的环境损害采取补救措施的义务。 |
| It refers to “States”, as this term is broader than “parties to an armed conflict”. | 该项原则草案一般性地提及“各国”，因为这一用语比“武装冲突各方”范围更加广泛。 |
| States not parties to an armed conflict may be affected as third States, and may have information that is relevant for the taking of remedial measures and that could usefully be provided to other States or international organizations. | 非武装冲突当事方国家可能会作为第三国而受到影响，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是有益的。 |
| While States are typically the most relevant subjects, the draft principle also refers to international organizations, with the addition of the qualifier “relevant”. | 虽然国家通常是最相关的对象，但本项原则草案还提及国际组织，并添加限定词“有关”。 |
| (2) | (2) |
| While this obligation to share or grant access to information only applies to States and international organizations, it should be recalled that non-State armed groups also have obligations under the law of armed conflict, for instance regarding the clearance of landmines, that are relevant for the purpose of the draft principle. | 虽然这种共享或准许获取信息的义务仅适用于国家和国际组织，但应当回顾，非国家武装团体也须承担武装冲突法规定的义务，例如与清除地雷有关的义务，而这些义务与本原则草案的目的有关。 |
| Non-State armed groups may also possess other environmental information in relation to armed conflict and should be encouraged to share that information. | 非国家武装团体可能还掌握与武装冲突有关的其他环境信息，应当鼓励这些团体共享这些信息。 |
| (3) | (3) |
| Draft principle 23 consists of two paragraphs. | 原则草案23由两段组成。 |
| 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 measures to remediate harm to the environment resulting from an armed conflict. | 第1段提及各国和国际组织可能需要承担国际法规定的义务，共享并准许获取信息，以期便利对因武装冲突而产生的环境损害采取补救措施。 |
| Such measures may also be taken during an armed conflict. | 在武装冲突期间也可采取此类措施。 |
| Paragraph 2 refers to grounds for refusal to which such sharing or access may be subject. | 第2段提及可据以拒绝准许获取信息的理由。 |
| (4) | (4) |
| The expression “in accordance with their obligations under applicable international law” reflects that several 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. | “按照适用的国际法规定的义务”这一表述反映出，若干项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。 |
| It refers to obligations contained in treaties, rather than any corresponding rule of customary international law, and indicates that different States may have different obligations. | 这一表述是指条约所载的义务，而不是任何相应的习惯国际法规则，并表明不同国家可能有不同义务。 |
| (5) | (5) |
| 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 to such information, and thus signifies a more unilateral relationship. | “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”一词则主要指准许个人获取这些信息，因此更多地表示一种单边关系。 |
| (6) | (6) |
| The obligation to share and grant access to information pertaining to the environment can be found in numerous texts of international law, both at the global and the regional levels. | 在全球和区域层面的许多国际法文本中，都可以找到共享和准许获取环境相关信息的义务。 |
| (7) | (7) |
| 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. | 在《世界人权宣言》 第十九条和《公民及政治权利国际公约》 第十九条中可以找到现代国际人权法中获取信息的权利的来源。 |
| 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《公民及政治权利国际公约》第十九条的第34号一般性意见规定，第十九条第二款应当被解读为包括获取公共机构掌握的信息的权利。 |
| (8) | (8) |
| 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). | 在《欧洲人权公约》范围内也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，申诉人有权根据《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. | 还可以参照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). | 获取环境信息的权利除以隐私权为基础外，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)。 |
| (9) | (9) |
| 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. | 《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”界定为涉及下列方面的任何信息：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，以及可能受上述要素影响的人类健康和安全状况。 |
| 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 an obligation implies 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. | 此种义务意味着国家有责任收集此类环境信息，以便一旦收到请求，即为公众提供这种信息。 |
| In addition, the Regional Agreement on Access to Information, Public Participation and Justice in Environmental Matters in Latin America and the Caribbean (Escazú Agreement), adopted on 4 March 2018, contains similar provisions. | 此外，2018年3月4日通过的《拉丁美洲和加勒比关于在环境问题上获得信息、公众参与和诉诸法律的区域协定》(《埃斯卡苏协定》)载有类似规定。 |
| (10) | (10) |
| 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“记录和使用关于雷场、雷区、地雷、诱杀装置和其他装置的资料”的第九条第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”的第四条第2款。 |
| With regard to some remnants of war, the relevant instruments and customary rules contain requirements on providing environmental information or other information that may contribute to the taking of remedial measures. | 关于某些战争遗留物，相关文书和习惯规则载有关于提供环境信息或可能有助于采取补救措施的其他信息的要求。 |
| 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》，请求延长完成清理和销毁遗留集束弹药最后期限，必须列出这种延期在环境和人道主义方面产生的任何潜在影响。 |
| 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》载有类似义务。 |
| Reference can also be made to the International Mine Action Standards. | 还可以参照《国际地雷行动标准》。 |
| (11) | (11) |
| 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”. | 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一名环境干事，负责“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，这将假定是获取实际上可以传播、因而不属于机密的信息。 |
| (12) | (12) |
| 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.” | 红十字国际委员会《关于武装冲突中的环境保护的军事手册和指南准则》载有一项关于对组织给予保护的规定，其中可包括为“致力于防止或修复环境损害”而收集环境数据的环境组织。 |
| (13) | (13) |
| In connection with post-armed conflict environmental assessments, it is worth recalling that the United Nations Environment Programme 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. | 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临时、分散或非正式方式进行的”。 |
| (14) | (14) |
| 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. | 《国际水道非航行使用法公约》体现了在这方面共享信息和进行合作的义务。 |
| 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”. | 《生物多样性公约》第14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. | 此外，《生物多样性公约》第17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。 |
| (15) | (15) |
| Paragraph 2 contains a saving clause referring to grounds for refusal to share or grant access to information provided for in applicable international law. | 第2段包含一项保留条款，提及适用的国际法规定的拒绝共享或准许获取信息的理由。 |
| The first sentence of the paragraph reflects the fact 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. | 该段第一句反映出，相关条约所载的准许获取和/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 confidential information concerning “international relations, national defence or 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关于“国际关系、国防和公共安全”的机密信息，或者涉及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。 |
| At the same time, many multilateral environmental agreements exclude “information on health and safety of humans and the environment” from the categories of information that may be regarded as confidential. | 与此同时，许多多边环境协议将“有关人类健康与安全和环境的信息”排除在可视为机密的信息类别之外。 |
| For some international organizations confidentiality requirements may affect the extent of information that they can share or grant access to in good faith. | 对一些国际组织而言，保密要求可能影响它们能够本着善意共享或准许获取的信息的范围。 |
| In general, the applicable treaties contain very different conditions and exceptions regarding sharing and granting access to information. | 总体而言，在共享和准许获取信息方面，适用的条约所载的条件和例外差别很大。 |
| Paragraph 2 therefore refers to the existing grounds for refusal and confirms that paragraph 1 of the draft principle does not affect them. | 因此，第2段提及现有的拒绝理由，并确认本项原则草案第1段不影响这些理由。 |
| 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，各国和国际组织应通过善意合作，尽量提供在这种情况下可能提供的信息。 |
| Principle 24 Post-armed conflict environmental assessments and remedial measures | 原则24 武装冲突后的环境评估与补救措施 |
| Relevant actors, including States and international organizations, should cooperate with respect to post-armed conflict environmental assessments and remedial measures. | 包括国家和国际组织在内的有关行为体应当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) | (1) |
| The purpose of draft principle 24 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. | 原则草案24的目的是鼓励有关行为体开展合作，以确保能够在冲突后局势中进行环境评估和采取补救措施。 |
| (2) | (2) |
| The reference to “relevant actors” includes both State and non-State actors. | “有关行为体”这一提法包括国家行为体和非国家行为体。 |
| Not only States, but also a wide range of actors, including international organizations, have a role to play in relation to environmental assessments and remedial measures. | 国家和包括国际组织在内的各种广泛的行为体都可以在环境评估和补救措施方面发挥作用。 |
| The word “should” indicates the scarcity of practice regarding post-conflict environmental assessments. | “应当”一词表明，冲突后环境评估方面的实践很少。 |
| Its use in the draft principle is without prejudice to the different treaty-based obligations to remediate harm to the environment resulting from an armed conflict. | 在本项原则草案中使用“应当”一词，不妨碍对因武装冲突而产生的环境损害进行补救的各种基于条约的义务。 |
| (3) | (3) |
| The term “environmental assessment” is distinct from an “environmental impact assessment”, which is typically undertaken ex ante as a preventive measure. | “环境评估”这一用语不同于“环境影响评估”，“环境影响评估”通常是事先采取的预防措施。 |
| Such impact assessments play an important role in the preparation and adoption of plans, programmes, and policies and legislation, as appropriate. | 这种影响评估在酌情制定和通过计划、方案、政策和法律方面发挥着重要作用。 |
| This may involve the evaluation of the likely environmental effects, including health effects, in a plan or programme. | 环境影响评估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) | (4) |
| It is in this context that post-conflict environmental assessment has emerged as a tool to mainstream environmental considerations in the development plans for the post-conflict phase. | 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，并就如何应对这些风险向国家主管部门提供建议。 |
| 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. | 冲突后环境评估意在满足各种需要并服务于各项政策进程，环境评估在范围、目标和方法上各不相同，取决于具体要求。 |
| Such post-conflict environmental assessment, undertaken at the request of a State, may take the form of: (a) a needs assessment; | 应一国请求进行的这种冲突后环境评估可采取以下形式：(a) 需要评估； |
| (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，对卢旺达的综合评估便是科学专家进行的一次评价和评估，涵盖一系列活动，包括范围界定、案头研究、实地工作、环境样品采集、地理信息系统建模、分析和报告以及全国协商。 |
| 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) | (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”. | 这种评估值得鼓励，因为如果对武装冲突造成的环境影响置之不理，这些影响很可能会导致“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”并“触发恶性循环”。 |
| Such assessments may furthermore be crucial in facilitating measures to remediate harm to the environment resulting from an armed conflict. | 此外，这种评估对于便利对因武装冲突而产生的环境损害采取补救措施可能至关重要。 |
| (6) | (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. | 为使案文与其他各项原则草案，特别是原则草案2保持一致，在本项原则中使用了“补救”一词，尽管“恢复”一词在实践中用得更多。 |
| 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, rehabilitating ecosystems, mitigating risks and ensuring 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方案，以加强国家和地方环境主管机构，恢复生态系统，减轻风险并确保在所涉国家的发展计划的背景下可持续利用资源。 |
| Principle 25 Relief and assistance | 原则25 救济和援助 |
| When, in relation to an armed conflict, the source of environmental damage is unidentified, or reparation is unavailable, States and relevant international organizations should take appropriate measures so that the damage does not remain unrepaired or uncompensated, and may consider establishing special compensation funds or providing other forms of relief or assistance. | 当与武装冲突有关的环境损害的来源不明或赔偿无法获得时，各国和有关国际组织应当采取适当措施，以使该损害不会持续得不到赔偿或补偿，并可考虑设立特别补偿基金或提供其他形式的救济或援助。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) | (1) |
| The purpose of draft principle 25 is to encourage States to take appropriate measures aimed at repairing and compensating environmental damage caused during armed conflict. | 原则草案25的目的是鼓励各国采取适当措施，赔偿和补偿武装冲突期间造成的环境损害。 |
| More specifically, it addresses relief and assistance in situations where the source of environmental damage is unidentified or reparation is otherwise not available. | 更具体而言，本项原则草案涉及在环境损害的来源不明或赔偿无法获得的其他情况下的救济和援助。 |
| Such a situation may arise because of different reasons. | 这种情况可能由不同的原因引起。 |
| The particular features of environmental damage may complicate the establishment of responsibility: the damage may result from a chain of events rather than from a single act, and extend over the course of many years, which makes it difficult to establish a causal link to specific acts. | 环境损害的具体特点可能会让确立责任变得复杂：损害可能是由一连串事件而不是由单一行为造成的，并持续多年，从而难以确定损害与具体行为的因果关系。 |
| The presence of multiple State and non-State actors in contemporary conflicts may further complicate the allocation of responsibility. | 当代冲突涉及多个国家和非国家行为体，这可能会使责任分配更加复杂。 |
| While such difficulties do not exempt the responsible State from the obligation to make reparation, a situation may arise, in which the responsible actor cannot be identified, or there is no means of implementing the responsibility and obtaining reparation. | 虽然这些困难并不免除责任国进行赔偿的义务， 但可能出现责任者无法确定或无法履行责任和获得赔偿的情况。 |
| Environmental damage in armed conflict may moreover result from acts that are lawful under the law of armed conflict. | 此外，在武装冲突中造成环境损害的活动可能根据武装冲突法是合法的活动。 |
| (2) | (2) |
| It is not uncommon that States and international organizations use ex gratia payments to make amends for wartime injury and damage without acknowledging responsibility, and possibly also seeking to exclude further liability. | 并不鲜见的是，国家和国际组织使用惠给金弥补战时造成的伤害和损害，而不承认责任，并可能谋求排除进一步的赔偿责任。 |
| Such payments serve different purposes and may be available for damage and injury caused by lawful action. | 这类惠给金的用途不同，并可用于合法行为造成的损害和伤害。 |
| In most cases, amends are paid for civilian injury or death, or damage to civilian property, but they may also entail remediation of harm to the environment, including when parts of the environment constitute civilian property. | 在大多数情况下，赔偿的对象是受伤或死亡的平民，或受损害的平民财产，但也可能涉及对环境损害的补救，包括在环境的组成部分构成平民财产的情况下。 |
| Victim assistance is a broader and more recent concept used in relation to armed conflicts – but also in other contexts – to respond to harm caused to individuals or communities, inter alia by military activities. | 受害者援助是较广泛和较新的概念，不仅用于武装冲突方面，也用于其他语境； 受害者援助旨在应对武装活动等对个人或社区造成的损害。 |
| (3) | (3) |
| An example of environmental remediation in a situation envisaged in the draft principle is provided by the assistance to Lebanon following the bombing of the Jiyeh power plant in 2006. | 2006年吉耶发电厂遭轰炸后对黎巴嫩的援助是本项原则草案所设想的情况下的环境补救的一个例子。 |
| After the strike on the power plant on the Lebanese coast by Israeli Armed Forces, an estimated 15,000 tons of oil were released into the Mediterranean Sea. | 在以色列武装部队袭击黎巴嫩沿海的吉耶发电厂之后，约15,000吨石油流入地中海。 |
| Following requests for assistance from the Government of Lebanon, the Regional Marine Pollution Emergency Response Centre for the Mediterranean Sea provided remote and on-site technical assistance in the clean-up. | 应黎巴嫩政府的援助请求，地中海区域海洋污染紧急反应中心在清理方面提供了远程和现场技术援助。 |
| Assistance was provided pursuant to the 2002 Protocol concerning Cooperation in Preventing Pollution from Ships and, in Cases of Emergency, Combating Pollution of the Mediterranean Sea, one of protocols to the Barcelona Convention. | 提供援助的依据是《巴塞罗那公约》的议定书之一――2002年《地中海防止船舶污染并在紧急情况下治理污染合作议定书》。 |
| The amends related to the use of Agent Orange (an herbicide containing the toxic substance dioxin) by the United States in the Viet Nam War provide an example of ex gratia response to environmental and health effects of armed conflict. | 与美国在越南战争中使用橙剂(一种含有毒物质二恶英的除草剂)有关的补偿是就武装冲突对环境和健康的影响支付惠给金的一个实例。 |
| (4) | (4) |
| The term “reparation” is used in the draft principle as a general notion that covers different forms of reparation for an internationally wrongful act. | “赔偿”一词在本项原则草案中作为一般概念使用，涵盖对国际不法行为的不同形式的赔偿。 |
| The context, however, is one in which reparation is unavailable, including where there has been no wrongful act. | 然而，本项原则草案的背景是赔偿无法获得的情况，包括没有发生不法行为的情况。 |
| The term “unrepaired” similarly refers to the lack of any reparative measures, while “uncompensated” refers specifically to the lack of monetary compensation. | 同样，“得不到赔偿”一词指缺乏任何赔偿措施，而“得不到…补偿”则特指缺乏货币补偿。 |
| These terms define the specific circumstances in which States are encouraged to take appropriate measures of relief and assistance. | 这些用语界定了鼓励各国采取适当救济和援助措施的具体情况。 |
| Such measures may include establishment of a compensation fund. | 这些措施可能包括设立补偿基金。 |
| The terms “relief” and “assistance” should also be read as including remedial measures in the sense in which the term has been used in the present draft principles, encompassing any measure of remediation that may be taken to restore the environment. | “救济”和“援助”这两个用语也应理解为包括本原则草案中使用的和所指的“补救措施”，涵盖为恢复环境而可能采取的任何补救性质的措施。 |
| The provision is without prejudice to existing obligations States may have concerning reparations. | 这一规定不妨碍各国可能在赔偿方面承担的现有义务。 |
| (5) | (5) |
| Draft principle 25 has been located in Part Five containing draft principles applicable after an armed conflict. | 原则草案25被列入第五部分，这部分载有适用于武装冲突之后的原则草案。 |
| While it was recognized that it could be preferable to take measures to address environmental damage already during an armed conflict, given that environmental damage accumulates and restoration becomes more challenging with time, the draft principle was seen as primarily relevant in post-armed conflict situations. | 虽然认识到最好在武装冲突期间采取措施处理已经发生的环境损害，因为环境损害不断累积，随着时间的推移，恢复变得越来越难，但本项原则草案被视为主要与武装冲突后局势相关。 |
| Principle 26 Remnants of war | 原则26 战争遗留物 |
| 1. | 1. |
| Parties to an armed conflict shall seek, as soon as possible, to remove or render harmless toxic or other hazardous remnants of war under their jurisdiction or control that are causing or risk causing damage to the environment. | 武装冲突各方应设法尽快移除其管辖或控制下正在造成或可能造成环境损害的有毒的战争遗留物或其他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. | 在采取此种措施时应遵守适用的国际法规则。 |
| 2. | 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 or other hazardous remnants of war. | 各当事方应努力在相互之间以及酌情与其他国家和国际组织就技术和物资援助、包括在适当情况下开展联合行动移除此种有毒的战争遗留物或其他危险的战争遗留物或使之无害达成协议。 |
| 3. | 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. | 第1和第2段不妨碍任何关于清除、移除、销毁或维持雷场、雷区、地雷、诱杀装置、爆炸性弹药和其他装置的国际法权利或义务。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) | (1) |
| Draft principle 26 aims to strengthen the protection of the environment in a post-conflict situation. | 原则草案26旨在加强冲突后局势中的环境保护。 |
| It seeks to ensure that toxic or other hazardous remnants of war that are causing or that may cause damage to the environment are removed or rendered harmless after an armed conflict. | 原则草案26力图确保在武装冲突后移除正在造成或可能造成环境损害的有毒的战争遗留物或其他危险的战争遗留物或使之无害。 |
| This draft principle covers toxic or other hazardous remnants of war on land, as well as those which have been placed or left at sea, as long as they fall under the jurisdiction or control of a former party to the armed conflict. | 本项原则草案涵盖陆地上有毒的战争遗留物或其他危险的战争遗留物，以及在海上放置或留下的这类遗留物――只要遗留物在武装冲突前当事方的管辖或控制之下。 |
| 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) | (2) |
| Paragraph 1 is cast in general terms. | 第1段采用了一般性用语。 |
| Remnants of war take various forms. | 战争遗留物形式各异。 |
| They consist of not only explosive remnants of war but also other hazardous material and objects. | 战争遗留物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. | 有些战争遗留物在冲突结束后如果留在原地，对环境根本没有危险，或者可能危险较小。 |
| 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，在某些情况下，移除战争遗留物造成的环境风险可能比将战争遗留物留在原地造成的环境风险更大。 |
| 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，本项原则草案中包含“或使之无害”的表述，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) | (3) |
| The obligation to “seek to” is one of conduct and relates to “toxic or other hazardous remnants of war” that “are causing or risk causing damage to the environment”. | “设法”的义务是行为义务，与“正在造成或可能造成环境损害的有毒的战争遗留物或其他危险的战争遗留物”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“有毒的”和“危险的”这两个用语，在这里使用这两个用语被认为是适当的。 |
| 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”一词的含义比“有毒的”一词宽泛一些，因为对人类或环境构成威胁的所有战争遗留物都可被认为是危险的，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，但一直被用来描述“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) | (4) |
| The words “as soon as possible” indicate a time frame for the removal or rendering harmless of toxic or other hazardous remnants of war that is not related to a formal end of an armed conflict. | “尽快”一词表明移除有毒的战争遗留物或其他危险的战争遗留物或使之无害的时限，该时限与武装冲突的正式结束无关。 |
| The phrase “as soon as possible” is found in several treaties relevant to the draft principle. | “尽快”一词见于与本原则草案有关的若干条约。 |
| (5) | (5) |
| 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. | “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”一词除涵盖一国的领土外，还意在涵盖国家根据国际法，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”一词意在涵盖国家(或武装冲突当事方)行使事实上的控制权的情况，尽管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，“控制”一词“是指有效控制一国管辖范围以外活动的事实上的能力”。 |
| (6) | (6) |
| The present draft principle is intended to apply to international as well as non-international armed conflicts, including in situations of occupation. | 本项原则草案意在适用于国际性和非国际性武装冲突，包括占领局势。 |
| 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. | “冲突各方(当事方)”一词在各项武装冲突法条约涉及战争遗留物的各种规定中使用过。 |
| This term is used 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. | 本项原则草案中使用这一用语，是因为可以预见，在某些情况下，有毒的或危险的战争遗留物可能存在于国家没有完全控制权的地区。 |
| For example, a non-State actor may have control over territory where toxic and hazardous remnants of war are present. | 例如，非国家行为体可能对存在有毒的和危险的战争遗留物的领土拥有控制权。 |
| (7) | (7) |
| Paragraph 2 should be read together with paragraph 1. | 第2段应当与第1段一并解读。 |
| It aims to encourage cooperation and technical assistance amongst parties to render harmless the remnants of war referred to in paragraph 1. | 第2段旨在鼓励各当事方之间开展合作和技术援助，使第1段提及的战争遗留物无害。 |
| Paragraph 2 does not aim to place any new international law obligations on parties to cooperate. | 第2段不是要在合作方面对各当事方施加任何新的国际法义务。 |
| It is nevertheless foreseeable that there may be situations in which toxic or other hazardous remnants of war remain in a territory where a State does not have full control and is not in a position to ensure that such remnants are rendered harmless. | 然而，可以预见的是，在某些情况下，有毒的战争遗留物或其他危险的战争遗留物一直留在国家没有完全控制权，也无法确保使这种遗留物无害的领土上。 |
| It was thus considered valuable to encourage parties to cooperate in this regard. | 因此，鼓励各当事方在这方面开展合作被认为十分重要。 |
| (8) | (8) |
| 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 are unaffected. | 第3段载有一项不妨碍条款，旨在确保消除不确定性，明确说明现有条约或习惯国际法义务不受影响。 |
| There are various law of armed conflict treaties and obligations under customary international law that concern remnants of war, and different States thus have varying obligations in this regard. | 有多项武装冲突法条约和习惯国际法义务涉及战争遗留物，因此，不同国家在这方面承担的义务也不尽相同。 |
| (9) | (9) |
| 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. | “清除、移除、销毁或维持”等措辞，以及所列的特定战争遗留物，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，以确保本段以目前存在的武装冲突法为基础。 |
| Principle 27 Remnants of war at sea | 原则27 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) | (1) |
| Unlike the broader draft principle 26, which deals with remnants of war more generally, draft principle 27 deals with the specific situation of remnants of war at sea including the long-lasting effects on the marine environment. | 与范围更广、更一般性地涉及战争遗留物的原则草案26不同，原则草案27涉及海上战争遗留物这一具体情况，包括对海洋环境的持久影响。 |
| Draft principle 27 has added value as draft principle 26 only covers remnants of war under the jurisdiction or control of a former party to an armed conflict, which means that it is not broad enough to cover all remnants of war at sea. | 原则草案27具有附加价值，因为原则草案26只涵盖武装冲突的前当事方管辖或控制下的战争遗留物，这意味着范围不够广，不足以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. | 本项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) | (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. | 由于海洋法具有多面性，某一国家可以拥有主权、管辖权，同时拥有主权和管辖权，或者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并不足为奇。 |
| There may be a legal obligation on the State or States concerned to take all necessary measures to prevent, reduce and control pollution of the marine environment. | 所涉一个或多个国家可能要承担法律义务，采取一切必要措施，防止、减少和控制对海洋环境的污染。 |
| This is not always the case, however, and the coastal State, whose cooperation is needed in efforts to get rid of remnants, may not even have been a party to the conflict. | 然而，情况并非总是如此，清除遗留物需要沿海国进行合作，而沿海国可能根本不是冲突当事方。 |
| Furthermore, as with any remnants of war, the parties to the armed conflict may have ceased to exist or 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. | 此外，与任何战争遗留物的情况一样，武装冲突各方可能已不复存在，或者沿海国可能没有资源用以确保海上战争遗留物不对环境构成危险。 |
| 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. | 另一项可预见的挑战是，留下遗留物的当事方当时可能没有违反其国际法义务，但这些遗留物现在构成环境风险。 |
| (3) | (3) |
| Accordingly, draft principle 27 addresses States generally, not only those which have been involved in an armed conflict. | 因此，原则草案27一般性地提及各国，而不仅是参与武装冲突的国家。 |
| 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. | 原则草案27旨在鼓励所有国家以及有关国际组织 开展合作，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 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”的提法用“有关”一词限定。 |
| (4) | (4) |
| The words “should cooperate” rather than the more prescriptive “shall cooperate” were considered appropriate, given that this is an area where international practice is still developing. | 鉴于这一领域的国际实践仍在发展，被认为适当的表述是“应当开展合作”，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. | 合作是与海上战争遗留物有关的重要因素，因为因海上战争遗留物而受到负面影响的沿海国可能没有资源，因此没有能力确保海上战争遗留物不构成环境风险。 |
| (5) | (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. | 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，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) | (6) |
| There is increasing awareness concerning the environmental effects of remnants of war at sea. | 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 cause 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健康和安全，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 cooperation amongst States and international organizations to ensure that remnants of war at sea do not pose danger to the environment. | 对环境构成的危险与公众健康和安全之间的明确联系已在一些国际法律文书中得到承认，因此，鼓励各国和国际组织开展合作，确保海上战争遗留物不对环境构成危险被认为尤为重要。 |
| Chapter VI Immunity of State officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction | 第六章 国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免 |
| A. | A. |
| Introduction | 导言 |
| 60. | 60. |
| 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. | 委员会第五十九届会议(2007年)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·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). | 委员会同届会议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)。 |
| 61. | 61. |
| The Special Rapporteur submitted three reports. | 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)未能审议此专题。 |
| 62. | 62. |
| 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. | 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), her fifth report during the sixty-eighth (2016) and sixty-ninth sessions (2017), her sixth report during the seventieth (2018) and seventy-first (2019) sessions, her seventh report during the seventy-first session (2019), and her eighth report during the seventy-second session (2021). | 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)收到并审议了其第二次报告，第六十六届会议(2014年)收到并审议了其第三次报告，第六十七届会议(2015年)收到并审议了其第四次报告，第六十八届会议(2016年)和第六十九届会议(2017年)收到并审议了其第五次报告，第七十届会议(2018年)和第七十一届会议(2019年)收到并审议了其第六次报告，第七十一届会议(2019年)收到并审议了其第七次报告，第七十二届会议(2021年)收到并审议了其第八次报告。 |
| On the basis of the draft articles proposed by the Special Rapporteur in the second, third, fourth and fifth and seventh reports, the Commission has provisionally adopted 12 draft articles and commentaries thereto. | 委员会在特别报告员第二、第三、第四、第五和第七次报告提出的条款草案基础上，暂时通过了12条条款草案及其评注。 |
| Draft article 2 on definitions remained under development. | 关于定义的第2条草案案文仍在拟订中。 |
| B. | B. |
| Consideration of the topic at the present session | 本届会议审议此专题的情况 |
| 63. | 63. |
| The Commission had no new report of the Special Rapporteur at the present session. | 委员会本届会议没有收到特别报告员的新报告。 |
| However, the Drafting Committee continued its consideration of the remaining draft articles referred to it previously by the Commission, as contained in the second (A/CN.4/661), seventh (A/CN.4/729) and eighth (A/CN.4/739) reports of the Special Rapporteur. | 然而，委员会起草委员会继续审议委员会此前向其转交的特别报告员第二次(A/CN.4/661)、第七次(A/CN.4/729)和第八次报告(A/CN.4/739)所载的其余条款草案。 |
| 64. | 64. |
| At its 3586th meeting on 3 June 2022, the Commission received and considered the report of the Drafting Committee (A/CN.4/L.969), and adopted the draft articles on immunity of State officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction on first reading (see sect. C.1 below). | 在2022年6月3日举行的第3586次会议上，委员会收到并审议了起草委员会的报告(A/CN.4/L969)，并一读通过了国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免条款草案(见下文C.1节)。 |
| 65. | 65. |
| At its 3604th to 3609th meetings, from 29 July to 3 August 2022, the Commission adopted the commentaries to the aforementioned draft articles (see sect. C.2 below). | 在2022年7月29日至8月3日举行的第3604次至第3609次会议上，委员会通过了上述条款草案的评注(见下文C.2节)。 |
| 66. | 66. |
| At its 3609th meeting, on 3 August 2022, the Commission decided, in accordance with articles 16 to 21 of its statute, to transmit the draft articles (see section C below), through the Secretary-General, to Governments for comments and observations, with the request that such comments and observations be submitted to the Secretary-General by 1 December 2023. | 在2022年8月3日举行的第3609次会议上，委员会根据其《章程》第16至第21条，决定通过秘书长将条款草案(见下文C节)转交各国政府征求评论和意见，并请各国政府在2023年12月1日之前向秘书长提交此类评论和意见。 |
| 67. | 67. |
| At its 3609th meeting, on 3 August 2022, the Commission expressed its deep appreciation for the outstanding contribution of the Special Rapporteur, Ms. Concepción Escobar Hernández, which had enabled the Commission to bring to a successful conclusion its first reading of the draft articles on immunity of State officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction. | 在2022年8月3日举行的第3609次会议上，委员会向特别报告员康塞普西翁·埃斯科瓦尔·埃尔南德斯女士深表感谢，由于她的杰出贡献，委员会得以圆满完成对国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免条款草案的一读。 |
| The Commission also reiterated its deep appreciation for the valuable contribution of the previous Special Rapporteur, Mr. Roman A. Kolodkin, to the work on the topic. | 委员会还对前任特别报告员罗曼·科洛德金先生对此专题工作的宝贵贡献再次深表感谢。 |
| C. | C. |
| Text of the draft articles on immunity of State officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction adopted by the Commission on first reading | 委员会一读通过的国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免条款草案案文 |
| 1. | 1. |
| Text of the draft articles | 条款草案案文 |
| 68. | 68. |
| The text of the draft articles adopted by the Commission on first reading is reproduced below. | 委员会一读通过的条款草案案文载录如下。 |
| Immunity of State officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction | 国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免 |
| Part One Introduction | 第一部分 导言 |
| Article 1 Scope of the present draft articles | 第1条 本条款草案的范围 |
| 1. | 1. |
| The present draft articles apply to the immunity of State officials from the criminal jurisdiction of another State. | 本条款草案适用于国家官员对另一国刑事管辖享有的豁免。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| The present draft articles are without prejudice to the immunity from criminal jurisdiction enjoyed under special rules of international law, in particular by persons connected with diplomatic missions, consular posts, special missions, international organizations and military forces of a State. | 本条款草案不妨碍依照国际法特别规则享有的刑事管辖豁免，特别是与外交使团、领馆、特别使团、国际组织和一国军事力量相关的人员所享有的刑事管辖豁免。 |
| 3. | 3. |
| The present draft articles do not affect the rights and obligations of States Parties under international agreements establishing international criminal courts and tribunals as between the parties to those agreements. | 本条款草案不影响设立国际刑事法院和法庭的国际协定对缔约国所规定的、在这些协定缔约方之间适用的权利和义务。 |
| Article 2 Definitions | 第2条 定义 |
| For the purposes of the present draft articles: | 为本条款草案的目的： |
| (a) | (a) |
| “State official” means any individual who represents the State or who exercises State functions, and refers to both current and former State officials; | “国家官员”是指代表国家或行使国家职能的任何个人，既指现任也指前任国家官员； |
| (b) | (b) |
| an “act performed in an official capacity” means any act performed by a State official in the exercise of State authority. | “以官方身份实施的行为”是指国家官员在行使国家权力时实施的任何行为。 |
| Part Two Immunity ratione personae | 第二部分 属人豁免 |
| Article 3 Persons enjoying immunity ratione personae | 第3条 享有属人豁免的人员 |
| Heads of State, Heads of Government and Ministers for Foreign Affairs enjoy immunity ratione personae from the exercise of foreign criminal jurisdiction. | 国家元首、政府首脑和外交部长对外国行使的刑事管辖享有属人豁免。 |
| Article 4 Scope of immunity ratione personae | 第4条 属人豁免的范围 |
| 1. | 1. |
| Heads of State, Heads of Government and Ministers for Foreign Affairs enjoy immunity ratione personae only during their term of office. | 国家元首、政府首脑和外交部长仅在其任职期间享有属人豁免。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| Such immunity ratione personae covers all acts performed, whether in a private or official capacity, by Heads of State, Heads of Government and Ministers for Foreign Affairs during or prior to their term of office. | 国家元首、政府首脑和外交部长享有的此种属人豁免涵盖他们在任职期间或任职之前的所有行为，无论是私人行为还是公务行为。 |
| 3. | 3. |
| The cessation of immunity ratione personae is without prejudice to the application of the rules of international law concerning immunity ratione materiae. | 属人豁免的停止不妨碍关于属事豁免的国际法规则的适用。 |
| Part Three Immunity ratione materiae | 第三部分 属事豁免 |
| Article 5 Persons enjoying immunity ratione materiae | 第5条 享有属事豁免的人员 |
| State officials acting as such enjoy immunity ratione materiae from the exercise of foreign criminal jurisdiction. | 国家官员在以此种身份行事时，对外国行使的刑事管辖享有属事豁免。 |
| Article 6 Scope of immunity ratione materiae | 第6条 属事豁免的范围 |
| 1. | 1. |
| State officials enjoy immunity ratione materiae only with respect to acts performed in an official capacity. | 国家官员只有在以官方身份实施的行为方面享有属事豁免。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| Immunity ratione materiae with respect to acts performed in an official capacity continues to subsist after the individuals concerned have ceased to be State officials. | 对以官方身份实施的行为的属事豁免在所涉个人不再担任国家官员后继续存在。 |
| 3. | 3. |
| Individuals who enjoyed immunity ratione personae in accordance with draft article 4, whose term of office has come to an end, continue to enjoy immunity with respect to acts performed in an official capacity during such term of office. | 根据第4条草案享有属人豁免的个人在任期届满后继续就任期之内以官方身份实施的行为享有豁免。 |
| Article 7 Crimes under international law in respect of which immunity ratione materiae shall not apply | 第7条 不适用属事豁免的国际法下的罪行 |
| 1. | 1. |
| Immunity ratione materiae from the exercise of foreign criminal jurisdiction shall not apply in respect of the following crimes under international law: | 外国刑事管辖的属事豁免不适用于国际法规定的如下罪行： |
| (a) | (a) |
| crime of genocide; | 灭绝种族罪； |
| (b) | (b) |
| crimes against humanity; | 危害人类罪； |
| (c) | (c) |
| war crimes; | 战争罪； |
| (d) | (d) |
| crime of apartheid; | 种族隔离罪； |
| (e) | (e) |
| torture; | 酷刑； |
| (f) | (f) |
| enforced disappearance. | 强迫失踪。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| For the purposes of the present draft article, the crimes under international law mentioned above are to be understood according to their definition in the treaties enumerated in the annex to the present draft articles. | 为了本条草案的目的，国际法规定的上述罪行应根据本条款草案附件所列条约中这些罪行的定义来理解。 |
| Part Four Procedural provisions and safeguards | 第四部分 程序性规定和保障措施 |
| Article 8 Application of Part Four | 第8条 第四部分的适用范围 |
| The procedural provisions and safeguards in the present Part shall be applicable in relation to any exercise of criminal jurisdiction by the forum State over an official of another State, current or former, that concerns any of the draft articles contained in Part Two and Part Three of the present draft articles, including to the determination of whether immunity applies or does not apply under any of the present draft articles. | 本部分的程序性规定和保障措施适用于法院地国对另一国现任或前任官员行使的、涉及本条款草案第二部分和第三部分所载任何一条草案的刑事管辖权，包括适用于依照本条款草案任何一条确定豁免是否适用。 |
| Article 9 Examination of immunity by the forum State | 第9条 法院地国审查豁免问题 |
| 1. | 1. |
| When the competent authorities of the forum State become aware that an official of another State may be affected by the exercise of its criminal jurisdiction, they shall examine the question of immunity without delay. | 法院地国主管当局一旦意识到另一国官员可能因其行使刑事管辖权而受到影响，即应立即审查豁免问题。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| Without prejudice to paragraph 1, the competent authorities of the forum State shall always examine the question of immunity: | 在不妨碍第1款的情况下，法院地国主管当局审查豁免问题应总是： |
| (a) | (a) |
| before initiating criminal proceedings; | 在启动刑事诉讼之前进行； |
| (b) | (b) |
| before taking coercive measures that may affect an official of another State, including those that may affect any inviolability that the official may enjoy under international law. | 在采取可能影响另一国官员的强制措施、包括可能影响该官员根据国际法可能享有的任何不可侵犯性的强制措施之前进行。 |
| Article 10 Notification to the State of the official | 第10条 通知官员所属国 |
| 1. | 1. |
| Before the competent authorities of the forum State initiate criminal proceedings or take coercive measures that may affect an official of another State, the forum State shall notify the State of the official of that circumstance. | 在法院地国主管当局启动刑事诉讼或采取可能影响另一国官员的强制措施之前，法院地国应将此情况通知官员所属国。 |
| States shall consider establishing appropriate procedures to facilitate such notification. | 各国应考虑建立适当程序，以便利此种通知。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| The notification shall include, inter alia, the identity of the official, the grounds for the exercise of criminal jurisdiction and the competent authority to exercise jurisdiction. | 除其他内容外，通知应包括该官员的身份、行使刑事管辖权的理由以及拟行使管辖权的主管当局。 |
| 3. | 3. |
| The notification shall be provided through diplomatic channels or through any other means of communication accepted for that purpose by the States concerned, which may include those provided for in applicable international cooperation and mutual legal assistance treaties. | 通知应通过外交途径发出，或通过相关国家为此目的都接受的任何其他通信方式发出，其中可包括适用的国际合作和司法协助条约所规定的方式。 |
| Article 11 Invocation of immunity | 第11条 援引豁免 |
| 1. | 1. |
| A State may invoke the immunity of its official when it becomes aware that the criminal jurisdiction of another State could be or is being exercised over the official. | 一国在意识到另一国可能或正在对其官员行使刑事管辖权后，可为其官员援引豁免。 |
| Immunity should be invoked as soon as possible. | 应尽快援引豁免。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| Immunity shall be invoked in writing, indicating the identity of and the position held by the official, and the grounds on which immunity is invoked. | 援引豁免应以书面形式进行，表明该官员的身份和所任职务以及援引豁免的理由。 |
| 3. | 3. |
| Immunity may be invoked through diplomatic channels or through any other means of communication accepted for that purpose by the States concerned, which may include those provided for in applicable international cooperation and mutual legal assistance treaties. | 援引豁免可通过外交途径进行，或通过相关国家为此目的都接受的任何其他通信方式进行，其中可包括适用的国际合作和司法协助条约所规定的方式。 |
| 4. | 4. |
| The authorities before which immunity has been invoked shall immediately inform any other authorities concerned of that fact. | 收到援引豁免有关通信的当局应立即将此情况通知任何其他相关当局。 |
| Article 12 Waiver of immunity | 第12条 放弃豁免 |
| 1. | 1. |
| The immunity of a State official from foreign criminal jurisdiction may be waived by the State of the official. | 官员所属国可放弃官员的外国刑事管辖豁免。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| Waiver of immunity must always be express and in writing. | 豁免必须总是以书面形式明示放弃。 |
| 3. | 3. |
| Waiver of immunity may be communicated through diplomatic channels or through any other means of communication accepted for that purpose by the States concerned, which may include those provided for in applicable international cooperation and mutual legal assistance treaties. | 放弃豁免可通过外交途径表达，或通过相关国家为此目的都接受的任何其他通信方式表达，其中可包括适用的国际合作和司法协助条约所规定的方式。 |
| 4. | 4. |
| The authorities to which the waiver has been communicated shall immediately inform any other authorities concerned that immunity has been waived. | 收到放弃豁免有关通信的当局应立即将豁免已经放弃的情况通知任何其他相关当局。 |
| 5. | 5. |
| Waiver of immunity is irrevocable. | 豁免的放弃不可撤销。 |
| Article 13 Requests for information | 第13条 请求提供信息 |
| 1. | 1. |
| The forum State may request from the State of the official any information that it considers relevant in order to decide whether immunity applies or not. | 法院地国可请官员所属国提供其认为相关的任何信息，以便决定豁免是否适用。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| The State of the official may request from the forum State any information that it considers relevant in order to decide on the invocation or the waiver of immunity. | 官员所属国可请法院地国提供其认为相关的任何信息，以便决定援引或放弃豁免。 |
| 3. | 3. |
| Information may be requested through diplomatic channels or through any other means of communication accepted for that purpose by the States concerned, which may include those provided for in applicable international cooperation and mutual legal assistance treaties. | 可通过外交途径请求提供信息，或通过相关国家为此目的都接受的任何其他通信方式进行，其中可包括适用的国际合作和司法协助条约所规定的方式。 |
| 4. | 4. |
| The requested State shall consider any request for information in good faith. | 被请求国应善意地考虑任何关于提供信息的请求。 |
| Article 14 Determination of immunity | 第14条 豁免的确定 |
| 1. | 1. |
| A determination of the immunity of a State official from the foreign criminal jurisdiction shall be made by the competent authorities of the forum State according to its law and procedures and in conformity with the applicable rules of international law. | 国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免由法院地国主管当局根据该国法律和程序并按照适用的国际法规则确定。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| In making a determination about immunity, such competent authorities shall take into account in particular: | 在确定豁免时，此类主管当局应特别考虑： |
| (a) | (a) |
| whether the forum State has made the notification provided for in draft article 10; | 法院地国是否已发出第10条草案规定的通知； |
| (b) | (b) |
| whether the State of the official has invoked or waived immunity; | 官员所属国是否已援引或放弃豁免； |
| (c) | (c) |
| any other relevant information provided by the authorities of the State of the official; | 官员所属国当局提供的任何其他相关信息； |
| (d) | (d) |
| any other relevant information provided by other authorities of the forum State; | 法院地国其他当局提供的任何其他相关信息； |
| and | 以及 |
| (e) | (e) |
| any other relevant information from other sources. | 来自其他来源的任何其他相关信息。 |
| 3. | 3. |
| When the forum State is considering the application of draft article 7 in making the determination of immunity: | 在法院地国为确定豁免而考虑适用第7条草案时： |
| (a) | (a) |
| the authorities making the determination shall be at an appropriately high level; | 确定豁免的当局应具有适当高的级别； |
| (b) | (b) |
| in addition to what is provided in paragraph 2, the competent authorities shall: | 除第2款的规定外，主管当局应： |
| (i) | (一) |
| assure themselves that there are substantial grounds to believe that the official committed any of the crimes under international law listed in draft article 7; | 确信有充分理由认为该官员实施了第7条草案所列的任何国际法罪行； |
| (ii) | (二) |
| give consideration to any request or notification by another authority, court or tribunal regarding its exercise of or intention to exercise criminal jurisdiction over the official. | 对另一当局、法院或法庭关于对该官员行使或打算行使刑事管辖权的任何请求或通知予以考虑。 |
| 4. | 4. |
| The competent authorities of the forum State shall always determine immunity: | 法院地国主管当局确定豁免，应总是： |
| (a) | (a) |
| before initiating criminal proceedings; | 在启动刑事诉讼之前进行； |
| (b) | (b) |
| before taking coercive measures that may affect the official, including those that may affect any inviolability that the official may enjoy under international law. | 在采取可能影响该官员的强制措施、包括可能影响该官员根据国际法可能享有的任何不可侵犯性的强制措施之前进行。 |
| This sub-paragraph does not prevent the adoption or continuance of measures the absence of which would preclude subsequent criminal proceedings against the official. | 本项不妨碍采取或继续采取相关措施，以免以后无法对该官员提起刑事诉讼。 |
| 5. | 5. |
| Any determination that an official of another State does not enjoy immunity shall be open to challenge through judicial proceedings. | 任何关于另一国官员不享有豁免的决定均可通过司法程序提出质疑。 |
| This provision is without prejudice to other challenges to any determination about immunity that may be brought under the applicable law of the forum State. | 本规定不妨碍根据法院地国的适用法律对任何豁免确定提出的其他质疑。 |
| Article 15 Transfer of the criminal proceedings | 第15条 转移刑事诉讼 |
| 1. | 1. |
| The competent authorities of the forum State may, acting proprio motu or at the request of the State of the official, offer to transfer the criminal proceedings to the State of the official. | 法院地国主管当局可自行或应官员所属国请求，提出将刑事诉讼转移至官员所属国。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| The forum State shall consider in good faith a request for transfer of the criminal proceedings. | 法院地国应善意地考虑转移刑事诉讼的请求。 |
| Such transfer shall only take place if the State of the official agrees to submit the case to its competent authorities for the purpose of prosecution. | 只有在官员所属国同意将案件提交其主管当局进行起诉的情况下，才能进行这种转移。 |
| 3. | 3. |
| Once a transfer has been agreed, the forum State shall suspend its criminal proceedings, without prejudice to the adoption or continuance of measures the absence of which would preclude subsequent criminal proceedings against the official. | 一旦同意转移，法院地国应暂停其刑事诉讼，但不妨碍采取或继续采取相关措施，以免以后无法对该官员提起刑事诉讼。 |
| 4. | 4. |
| The forum State may resume its criminal proceedings if, after the transfer, the State of the official does not promptly and in good faith submit the case to its competent authorities for the purpose of prosecution. | 如果在转移后，官员所属国没有善意地迅速将案件提交其主管当局进行起诉，法院地国可恢复其刑事诉讼。 |
| 5. | 5. |
| The present draft article is without prejudice to any other obligations of the forum State or the State of the official under international law. | 本条草案不妨碍法院地国或官员所属国根据国际法承担的任何其他义务。 |
| Article 16 Fair treatment of the State official | 第16条 公平对待国家官员 |
| 1. | 1. |
| An official of another State over whom the criminal jurisdiction of the forum State is exercised or could be exercised shall be guaranteed fair treatment, including a fair trial, and full protection of his or her rights and procedural guarantees under applicable national and international law, including human rights law and international humanitarian law. | 应保障法院地国对之行使或可能行使刑事管辖权的另一国官员受到公平对待，包括公平审判、对其权利的充分保护以及适用的国内法和国际法、包括人权法和国际人道法所规定的程序保障。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| Any such official who is in prison, custody or detention in the forum State shall be entitled: | 在法院地国被监禁、羁押或拘留的任何此类官员应有权： |
| (a) | (a) |
| to communicate without delay with the nearest appropriate representative of the State of the official; | 立即联络该官员所属国最近的适当代表； |
| (b) | (b) |
| to be visited by a representative of that State; | 受到该国代表的探视； |
| and | 以及 |
| (c) | (c) |
| to be informed without delay of his or her rights under this paragraph. | 立即被告知其根据本款所享有的权利。 |
| 3. | 3. |
| The rights referred to in paragraph 2 shall be exercised in conformity with the laws and regulations of the forum State, subject to the proviso that the said laws and regulations must enable full effect to be given to the purpose for which the rights referred to in paragraph 2 are intended. | 第2款所述各项权利的行使应符合法院地国的法律和规章，但这些法律和规章必须能使第2款所述权利的预期目的得到充分实现。 |
| Article 17 Consultations | 第17条 协商 |
| The forum State and the State of the official shall consult, as appropriate, at the request of either of them, on matters relating to the immunity of an official covered by the present draft articles. | 法院地国和官员所属国应在彼此任何一方的请求下，酌情就本条款草案所涉及的官员豁免事宜进行协商。 |
| Article 18 Settlement of disputes | 第18条 争端的解决 |
| 1. | 1. |
| In the event of a dispute concerning the interpretation or application of the present draft articles, the forum State and the State of the official shall seek a solution by negotiation or other peaceful means of their own choice. | 如对本条款草案的解释或适用发生争端，法院地国和官员所属国应通过谈判或其自行选择的其他和平手段寻求解决办法。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| If a mutually acceptable solution cannot be reached within a reasonable time, the dispute shall, at the request of either the forum State or the State of the official, be submitted to the International Court of Justice, unless both States have agreed to submit the dispute to arbitration or to any other means of settlement entailing a binding decision. | 如在合理时间内无法达成双方均能接受的解决办法，则应在法院地国或官员所属国的请求下，将争端提交国际法院，除非两国同意将争端提交仲裁或可作出具有约束力的裁决的任何其他解决手段。 |
| Annex List of treaties referred to in draft article 7, paragraph 2 | 附件 第7条草案第2款所指条约的清单 |
| Crime of genocide | 灭绝种族罪 |
| Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, 17 July 1998, article 6; | 《国际刑事法院罗马规约》，1998年7月17日，第六条； |
| Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, 9 December 1948, article II. | 《防止及惩治灭绝种族罪公约》，1948年12月9日，第二条。 |
| Crimes against humanity | 危害人类罪 |
| Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, 17 July 1998, article 7. | 《国际刑事法院罗马规约》，1998年7月17日，第七条。 |
| War crimes | 战争罪 |
| Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, 17 July 1998, article 8, paragraph 2. | 《国际刑事法院罗马规约》，1998年7月17日，第八条第二款。 |
| Crime of apartheid | 种族隔离罪 |
| International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid, 30 November 1973, article II. | 《禁止并惩治种族隔离罪行国际公约》，1973年11月30日，第二条。 |
| Torture | 酷刑 |
| Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, 10 December 1984, article 1, paragraph 1. | 《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，第1条第1款。 |
| Enforced disappearance | 强迫失踪 |
| International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance, 20 December 2006, article 2. | 《保护所有人免遭强迫失踪国际公约》，2006年12月20日，第二条。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| Text of the draft articles and commentaries thereto | 条款草案案文及其评注 |
| 69. | 69. |
| The text of the draft articles and commentaries thereto adopted by the Commission on first reading at its seventy-third session is reproduced below. | 委员会第七十三届会议一读通过的条款草案案文及其评注载录如下。 |
| General commentary | 总评注 |
| (1) | (1) |
| The present draft articles address the immunity of State officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction. | 本条款草案处理国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免问题。 |
| As is always the case with the Commission’s outputs, the draft articles are to be read together with the commentaries. | 与委员会以往工作成果一样，本条款草案应结合评注来解读。 |
| (2) | (2) |
| The International Law Commission has addressed the immunity of State officials before, in the context of diplomatic and consular relations and immunities, special missions, relations between States and international organizations, and immunities of States and their property. | 国际法委员会过去曾在外交关系 和领事关系 及豁免、特别使团、国家与国际组织的关系， 以及国家及其财产的豁免 等专题下处理国家官员的豁免问题。 |
| In addition, the Commission has considered the question of immunity when examining other topics related to the criminal responsibility of individuals, including in the Nürnberg Principles and the different projects that culminated in the adoption of the draft Code of Crimes against the Peace and Security of Mankind and, more recently, the draft articles on prevention and punishment of crimes against humanity. | 除此以外，委员会在审查与个人的刑事责任有关的其他专题时，包括在通过《纽伦堡原则》、就通过《危害人类和平及安全治罪法草案》 开展不同工作时，以及最近就防止和惩治危害人类罪条款草案 开展不同工作时，也审议了豁免问题。 |
| (3) | (3) |
| The present draft articles take a different approach than the above, by specifically addressing the immunity of State officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction. | 本条款草案采取了与上述工作中的处理办法不同的办法，具体地处理了国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免问题。 |
| These draft articles define the general legal regime applicable to this type of immunity, which is distinguished by the following features: (a) it is limited to immunity from criminal jurisdiction; | 本条款草案界定适用于此类豁免的一般法律制度，特点如下：(a) 仅限于刑事管辖豁免； |
| (b) it is limited to foreign criminal jurisdiction and does not affect the legal regime applicable before international criminal courts; | (b) 仅限于外国刑事管辖权，不影响国际刑事法院适用的法律制度； |
| and (c) it covers all State officials regardless of their position or the specific functions they perform for the State, with the sole exception of those State officials covered by special regimes. | (c) 涵盖所有国家官员，无论其职位或为国家履行的具体职能是什么，唯有那些由特别制度涵盖的国家官员除外。 |
| (4) | (4) |
| In preparing the present draft articles, the Commission has taken into account the following different elements. | 在编写本条款草案时，委员会考虑了下述不同要素。 |
| (5) | (5) |
| The first of these elements is the need to guarantee respect for the principle of the sovereign equality of States, which is the very foundation of immunity of State officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction. | 第一个要素是保证尊重国家主权平等原则的必要性，这是国家官员外国刑事管辖豁免的基础。 |
| Providing immunity under international law to a State official generally seeks to ensure their ability to represent their State or to exercise State functions. | 根据国际法向国家官员提供豁免通常是为了确保他们有能力代表国家或行使国家职能。 |
| Indeed, as affirmed by the International Court of Justice, the immunities accorded to State officials are not granted for their personal benefit, but to protect the rights and interests of the State. | 的确，正如国际法院所确认的，给予国家官员豁免，不是为了让他们个人获益，而是为了保护国家的权利和利益。 |
| Moreover, in view of the different positions that different State officials may hold, the draft articles distinguish between two legal regimes, namely immunity ratione personae and immunity ratione materiae. | 此外，鉴于不同的国家官员可能担任不同的职务，条款草案区分了两种法律制度，即属人豁免制度和属事豁免制度。 |
| (6) | (6) |
| Second, under the principle of the sovereign equality of States, the forum State has the right to exercise its own criminal jurisdiction. | 其次，按照国家主权平等原则，法院地国有权行使自己的刑事管辖权。 |
| As the International Court of Justice has pointed out, there is a close relationship between jurisdiction and immunity, since immunity from foreign criminal jurisdiction can only be understood vis-à-vis the exercise of criminal jurisdiction. | 正如国际法院指出的，管辖权与豁免之间存在密切关系，因为外国刑事管辖豁免只能相对于刑事管辖权的行使来理解。 |
| (7) | (7) |
| Third, immunity of State officials applies bearing in mind that international law is a legal and congruent system. | 第三，在适用国家官员的豁免时须铭记，国际法是具有一致性的法律体系。 |
| Therefore, in the elaboration of these draft articles, consideration must be given to existing rules in different areas of contemporary international law. | 因此，在拟订这些条款草案时，必须考虑到当代国际法不同领域的现有规则。 |
| In particular, account must be taken of the strides made in international criminal law in terms of defining and punishing the most serious crimes under international law, defining the principle of accountability as one of its constituent elements, and consolidating the fight against impunity as a goal of the international community. | 具体而言，必须考虑到国际刑法取得的进步，例如根据国际法对最严重罪行加以界定和惩罚，将问责原则界定为其构成要素之一，加强对有罪不罚现象的打击，使之成为国际社会的目标。 |
| While the terms “immunity” and “impunity” are neither equivalent nor interchangeable, it is important to avoid that the immunity of State officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction results in impunity for the most serious crimes under international law. | 虽然“豁免”与“有罪不罚”这两个术语既不等值，也不可互换，但必须避免的情况是，国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免导致国际法规定的最严重罪行不受惩罚。 |
| (8) | (8) |
| Therefore, the Commission has included several provisions in the draft articles that address: exceptions to the immunity ratione materiae of State officials with respect to several crimes under international law; | 委员会因此在条款草案中纳入了几项规定，分别处理以下问题：属事豁免在国家官员可能犯下国际法规定的若干罪行时的例外情况； |
| the separation between the present draft articles and the rules applicable to international criminal tribunals; | 将适用于外国刑事管辖豁免的规则与适用于国际刑事法庭的规则分离； |
| and the existence or the establishment of mechanisms for enabling the potential prosecution of State officials, either by the courts of their own State or of a third State or, where possible, by an international tribunal. | 是否存在或建立允许官员本国法院或第三国法院或在可能的情况下允许国际法院起诉国家官员的机制。 |
| (9) | (9) |
| Finally, the Commission has also borne in mind that, under certain circumstances, the exercise of criminal jurisdiction over officials of another State may be politically motivated or abusive, which in turn will create undesirable tension in the relations between the forum State and the State of the official. | 最后，委员会同样考虑到，在某些情况下，可能发生出于政治动机对另一国官员行使刑事管辖权或滥用这一管辖权的情况，从而在法院地国和官员所属国之间造成不良的紧张关系。 |
| Consequently, the immunity of State officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction may contribute to the stability of international relations. | 因此，对国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免可能有助于国际关系的稳定。 |
| (10) | (10) |
| Thus, the present draft articles include a set of procedural provisions and safeguards aimed at promoting trust, mutual understanding and cooperation between the forum State and the State of the official and offering safeguards against possible abuses and politicization in the exercise of criminal jurisdiction over an official of another State. | 因此，本条款草案包括一套程序性规定和保障措施，旨在促进法院地国和官员所属国之间的信任、相互理解和合作，并提供保障，以防止对其他国家的官员滥用刑事管辖权，或将行使这一权利政治化。 |
| (11) | (11) |
| These elements are present in both the content and the structure of the present draft articles and contribute to the balance of the text as a whole. | 这些要素既体现在本条款草案的内容里，也体现在其结构中，有助于促进条款草案作为一个整体的平衡性。 |
| The draft articles are divided into four parts dealing, respectively, with the scope of application and definitions (Part One), immunity ratione personae (Part Two), immunity ratione materiae (Part Three) and procedural provisions and safeguards (Part Four). | 条款草案分为四部分，分别处理范围和定义(第一部分)、属人豁免(第二部分)、属事豁免(第三部分)，以及程序性规定和保障措施(第四部分)。 |
| (12) | (12) |
| As is usual in the work of the Commission, the draft articles contain proposals for both the codification and the progressive development of international law. | 按照委员会工作的惯例，条款草案含有编纂和逐渐发展国际法的提案。 |
| Reference is made to this question as appropriate in the commentaries to the draft articles, with a view to providing States with enough information in this regard and ensuring the transparency that must govern the work of the Commission. | 条款草案在评注中适当提及这一问题，旨在向各国提供这方面的充足信息，并确保委员会工作必须秉持的透明度。 |
| (13) | (13) |
| Finally, it must be borne in mind that the Commission has not yet decided on the recommendation to be addressed to the General Assembly regarding the present draft articles, be it to commend them to the attention of States in general or to use them as a basis for the negotiation of a future treaty on the topic. | 最后，必须考虑到，关于本条款草案，委员会尚未决定向大会提出何种建议：即提交各国进行一般性审议，还是建议将条款草案作为未来就这一专题进行条约谈判的基础。 |
| As is customary, the Commission will take this decision when it adopts the draft articles on second reading, which will enable it to benefit from any comments made by States on this issue. | 按照惯例，委员会将在二读通过条款草案时通过这样一项决定，届时委员会将能够参考各国就此问题作出的评论。 |
| Part One Introduction | 第一部分 导言 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| Part One, entitled “Introduction”, contains provisions defining the general framework in which the draft articles apply. | 第一部分题为“导言”，含有关于界定条款草案范围的总体框架的规定。 |
| Draft article 1 defines the scope of the draft articles, and draft article 2 sets out the definitions of “State official” and “act performed in an official capacity”, which, by their very nature, are particularly relevant for the correct understanding of the draft articles as a whole and are used throughout the text. | 第1条草案界定了条款草案的范围，第2条草案包括“国家官员”和“以官方身份实施的行为”的定义； 这些定义因其本身的性质，与正确理解整个条款草案尤为相关，其使用贯穿整个条款草案。 |
| Article 1 Scope of the present draft articles | 第1条 本条款草案的范围 |
| 1. | 1. |
| The present draft articles apply to the immunity of State officials from the criminal jurisdiction of another State. | 本条款草案适用于国家官员对另一国刑事管辖享有的豁免。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| The present draft articles are without prejudice to the immunity from criminal jurisdiction enjoyed under special rules of international law, in particular by persons connected with diplomatic missions, consular posts, special missions, international organizations and military forces of a State. | 本条款草案不妨碍依照国际法特别规则享有的刑事管辖豁免，特别是与外交使团、领馆、特别使团、国际组织和一国军事力量相关的人员所享有的刑事管辖权豁免。 |
| 3. | 3. |
| The present draft articles do not affect the rights and obligations of States parties under international agreements establishing international criminal courts and tribunals as between the parties to those agreements. | 本条款草案不影响设立国际刑事法院和法庭的国际协定对缔约国所规定的、在这些协定缔约方之间适用的权利和义务。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) | (1) |
| The purpose of draft article 1 is to define the scope of the draft articles on immunity of State officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction. | 第1条草案专门用于确定国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免条款草案的范围。 |
| It incorporates in a single draft article the dual perspective, positive and negative, that determines the scope. | 它以单独的一条草案容纳了确定范围的正面和反面两个视角。 |
| Paragraph 1 explains the cases to which the draft articles apply, while paragraph 2 contains a “without prejudice” clause listing the situations which, under international law, are governed by special regimes that are not affected by the present draft articles. | 第1款界定条款草案适用的情况，而第2款载有一项“不妨碍”条款，列出了在国际法上由特别制度管辖而不受本条款草案影响的情况。 |
| Paragraph 3 contains a clause referring to international criminal courts and tribunals, which also remain outside the scope of the draft articles. | 第3款载有一项提及国际刑事法院和法庭的规定，这些法院和法庭也不在条款草案的范围之内。 |
| In the past, the Commission has used various techniques for defining this dual perspective of the scope of a set of draft articles, but in this case it was preferable to combine both perspectives in a single draft article, since this presents the advantage of facilitating the simultaneous treatment of both perspectives of scope under a single title. | 委员会过去曾使用各种手段界定一套条款草案范围的双重视角， 但在目前情况下，委员会认为在单独一条中将这两个视角结合起来更好，因为这体现出在一个标题下便于同时处理两个视角的优势。 |
| Paragraph 1 | 第1款 |
| (2) | (2) |
| Paragraph 1 establishes the scope of the draft articles in its positive dimension. | 第1款从正面规定条款草案的适用范围。 |
| To this end, in the paragraph, the Commission has decided to use the phrase “[t]he present draft articles apply to”, which is the wording used recently in other draft articles adopted by the Commission that contain a provision referring to their scope. | 为此，在该款中，委员会决定使用“本条款草案适用于”这一短语，这是最近在委员会通过的其他载有范围规定的条款草案中使用的措辞。 |
| On the other hand, the Commission considered that the scope of the draft articles should be defined as simply as possible, so that it could frame the rest of the draft articles and not affect or prejudge the other issues to be addressed later in other provisions. | 另一方面，委员会认为，本条款草案范围的界定应尽可能简单，从而可以为条款草案其余部分打下框架，并且不会影响或预判以后在草案其他各条中须处理的其他问题。 |
| Accordingly, the Commission decided to make a descriptive reference to the scope, listing the elements comprising the title of the topic itself. | 因此，委员会决定描述性地提及范围，列出了构成这一专题本身标题的要素。 |
| For the same reason, the phrase “from the exercise of”, initially proposed, has been left out of the definition of the scope. | 出于同样原因，从定义范围中排除了最初提议的“行使”二字。 |
| This phrase was interpreted by various members of the Commission in different and even contradictory ways, in terms of the consequences for the definition of the scope of immunity from foreign criminal jurisdiction. | 就界定外国刑事管辖范围的后果来说，委员会各位委员对这二字的解释各不相同，甚至相互矛盾。 |
| Account was also taken of the fact that the phrase “exercise of” is used in other draft articles. | 还考虑到的一个事实是，其他条款草案中使用了“行使”二字。 |
| The Commission was therefore of the view that the phrase was not needed to define the general scope of the draft articles and has reserved it for use in other parts of the draft articles in which it is more suitably placed. | 因此，委员会认为，不需要用这二字来界定条款草案的一般范围，并且将它们留用于条款草案其他部分更适合的地方。 |
| (3) | (3) |
| Paragraph 1 covers the three elements defining the purpose of the draft articles, namely: (a) who are the persons enjoying immunity? | 第1款涵盖了界定条款草案宗旨的三个要素，即：(a) 谁能享受豁免？ |
| (State officials); | (国家官员)； |
| (b) what type of jurisdiction is affected by immunity? (criminal jurisdiction); | (b) 豁免影响哪些类型管辖权？ (刑事管辖权)； |
| and (c) in what domain does such criminal jurisdiction operate? (the criminal jurisdiction of another State). | 以及 (c) 这类刑事管辖权是在什么领域行使的？ (另一国的刑事管辖权)。 |
| (4) | (4) |
| As to the first element, the Commission has chosen to confine the draft articles to the immunity from foreign criminal jurisdiction that may be enjoyed by those persons who represent or act on behalf of a State. | 关于第一个要素，委员会选择将条款草案限于代表一国的或为一国利益行事的人员可享有的外国刑事管辖豁免。 |
| In the Commission’s previous work, the persons enjoying immunity have been referred to using the term “officials”. | 在委员会以往的工作中，用“官员”一词指能享受豁免的人。 |
| However, the use of this term, and its equivalents in the other language versions, has raised certain problems, and it should be noted that the terms used in the various language versions are neither interchangeable nor synonymous. | 然而，使用这一术语以及其他语言文本的对等措辞，引起了若干问题。 。应当指出，各种语言文本中使用的术语是不可互换的，也不是同义词。 |
| Nonetheless, with a view to simplifying the text, the Commission has decided to retain the term “State official” to refer in general to all persons who benefit from the immunity from foreign criminal jurisdiction contemplated in these draft articles. | 尽管如此，为了简化案文，委员会决定保留“国家官员”这一说法，泛指享有本条款草案所指外国刑事管辖豁免的所有人员。 |
| This term has been defined in draft article 2 (a), to whose text and commentary attention is drawn. | 这一概念已在第2条草案(a)项中作了界定，请注意其案文和评注。 |
| The expression “official of another State” used in some draft articles is equivalent to the expression “State official”. | 一些条款草案中使用的“另一国官员”等同于“国家官员”。 |
| (5) | (5) |
| Secondly, the Commission has decided to confine the scope of the draft articles to immunity from criminal jurisdiction. | 其次，委员会决定将条款草案的范围限于刑事管辖豁免。 |
| Following its practice in other projects in which it has dealt with immunity from criminal jurisdiction, the Commission has not considered it necessary to define what immunity and criminal jurisdiction mean. | 按照委员会处理刑事管辖豁免的其他条款的做法，委员会认为没有必要界定豁免和刑事管辖的含义。 |
| However, for merely descriptive purposes, it should be noted that the present draft articles address cases in which, by virtue of immunity, criminal jurisdiction is blocked, criminal jurisdiction being the power of States to perform acts of varying nature whose ultimate purpose is to contribute to the determination of the criminal responsibility of an individual. | 然而，仅仅出于描述目的，必须指出，本条款草案处理的是由于豁免而导致刑事管辖受阻的情况，刑事管辖是国家实施性质各异的各种行为的权力，其最终目的是帮助确定个人的刑事责任。 |
| (6) | (6) |
| Thirdly, the Commission decided to confine the scope of the draft articles to immunity from “foreign” criminal jurisdiction, i.e. that which reflects the horizontal relations between States. | 第三，委员会决定将本条款草案的范围限于国家间平行关系中称为“外国”的刑事司法管辖豁免。 |
| This means that the draft articles will be applied solely with respect to immunity from the criminal jurisdiction “of another State”. | 这意味着条款草案仅适用于“另一国”的刑事司法管辖豁免。 |
| (7) | (7) |
| It must be emphasized that paragraph 1 refers to “immunity … from the criminal jurisdiction of another State”. | 必须强调，本条草案第1款指的是“对另一国刑事管辖…的豁免”。 |
| The use of the word “from” creates a link between the concepts of “immunity” and “foreign criminal jurisdiction” (or jurisdiction “of another State”) that must be duly taken into account. | 使用“from”一词，在“豁免”和“外国刑事管辖”(或另一国“管辖”)的概念之间建立了一个必须正当考虑的联系。 |
| On this point, the Commission is of the view that the concepts of immunity and foreign criminal jurisdiction are closely interrelated: it is impossible to view immunity in abstract terms, without relating it to a foreign criminal jurisdiction which, although it exists, will not be exercised by the forum State precisely because of the existence of immunity. | 关于这一点，委员会认为，豁免与外国刑事管辖的概念密切相关：不可能抽象地看豁免问题而不涉及外国刑事管辖权：后者尽管一直存在，但恰恰由于豁免权的存在，法院地国才不行使； |
| Or, as the International Court of Justice has put it, “it is only where a State has jurisdiction under international law in relation to a particular matter that there can be any question of immunities in regard to the exercise of that jurisdiction”. | 或者，正如国际法院指出的，“只有在一国依照国际法对某具体案件有管辖权时，才会发生有关行使这一管辖的豁免问题”。 |
| (8) | (8) |
| The Commission regards immunity from foreign criminal jurisdiction as being procedural in nature. | 委员会将外国刑事管辖豁免视为程序性的。 |
| Consequently, immunity from foreign criminal jurisdiction cannot constitute a means of exempting the criminal responsibility of a person from the substantive rules of criminal law, a responsibility which accordingly is preserved, even in cases where a State cannot, through the exercise of its jurisdiction, determine that such responsibility exists at a specific moment and with regard to a given person. | 因此，外国刑事管辖豁免不能构成免除享有豁免者按刑法实质性规则所负刑事责任的手段； 这一责任相应地保留了下来，不论一国是否能通过行使管辖权在一个特定时刻对于一个特定的人员确定这一责任存在。 |
| On the contrary, immunity from foreign criminal jurisdiction is strictly a procedural obstacle or barrier to the exercise of a State’s criminal jurisdiction against the officials of another State. | 相反，严格来说，外国刑事管辖豁免是一国对另一国官员行使刑事管辖权的程序性障碍或阻隔。 |
| This position was affirmed by the International Court of Justice in the Arrest Warrant case, which is followed in the majority of State practice and in the literature. | 国际法院在逮捕证案中采取了这一立场， 大部分国家实践和文献也跟随这一立场。 |
| Paragraph 2 | 第2款 |
| (9) | (9) |
| Paragraph 2 refers to cases in which there are special rules of international law relating to immunity from foreign criminal jurisdiction. | 第2款涉及在外国刑事管辖豁免方面存在着国际法特别规则的情况。 |
| This category of special rules has its most well-known and frequently cited manifestation in the regime of privileges and immunities granted under international law to diplomatic agents and to consular officials. | 这一类特别规则中最知名并经常引用的，是根据国际法赋予外交人员和领事官员的特权和豁免制度。 |
| However, there are other examples in contemporary international law, both treaty-based and custom-based, which in the Commission’s view should likewise be taken into account for the purposes of defining the scope of the present draft articles. | 然而，当代国际法上也有以条约或惯例为基础的其他事例； 委员会认为，对于界定本条款草案范围而言，也应同样考虑到这些事例。 |
| Concerning those special regimes, the Commission considers that these are legal regimes that are well established in international law and that the present draft articles should not affect their content and application. | 关于这些特别制度，委员会认为，它们是国际法上牢固确立的法律制度，因此本条款草案不应当影响其内容和适用。 |
| It should be recalled that during the preparation of the draft articles on jurisdictional immunities of States and their property, the Commission acknowledged the existence of special immunity regimes, albeit in a different context, and specifically referred to them in article 3, entitled “Privileges and immunities not affected by the present articles”. | 应当忆及，在国家及其财产管辖豁免条款草案的编写过程中，委员会承认了特别豁免制度的存在，尽管是在不同的背景之下，并且在题为“不受本条款影响的特权和豁免” 的第3条中专门提到了它们。 |
| The relationship between the regime for immunity of State officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction set out in the draft articles and the special regimes just mentioned was established by the Commission with the inclusion of a “without prejudice” clause in paragraph 2, according to which the provisions of the present draft articles are “without prejudice” to what is set out in the special regimes; | 委员会在第2款中纳入一项“不妨碍”规定，确立了本条款草案所载的国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免制度与刚才所述的特别制度之间的关系，据此，本条款草案的规定“不妨碍”所述特别制度的规定； |
| here the Commission has followed the wording it used before, in the draft articles on jurisdictional immunities of States and their property. | 委员会在此沿用了以前在国家及其财产管辖豁免条款草案中使用的措辞。 |
| (10) | (10) |
| The Commission has used the term “special rules” as a synonym for the words “special regimes” in its earlier work. | 委员会在早先的工作中使用了“特别规则”一词，作为“特别制度”的同义词。 |
| Although the Commission has not defined the concept of “special regime”, attention should be drawn to the conclusions of the Study Group on the fragmentation of international law, particularly conclusions 2 and 3. | 虽然委员会没有界定“特别制度”的概念，但是应注意国际法不成体系专题研究组的结论，特别是结论2和3。 |
| For the purposes of the present draft articles, the Commission understands “special rules” to mean those international rules, whether treaty- or custom-based, that regulate the immunity from foreign criminal jurisdiction of persons connected with activities in specific fields of international relations. | 就本条款草案而言，委员会的理解是：“特别规则”意指那些依据条约或惯例来规范与国际关系具体领域中的活动相关的人员的外国刑事管辖豁免的国际规则。 |
| The Commission sees such “special rules” as coexisting with the regime defined in the present draft articles, the special regime being applied in the event of any conflict between the two regimes. | 委员会认为“特别规则”与本条款草案界定的制度是共存的； 在两种制度之间发生矛盾的情况下，适用特别制度。 |
| In any event, the Commission considers that the special regimes in question are only those established by “rules of international law”, this reference to international law being essential for the purpose of defining the scope of the “without prejudice” clause. | 无论如何，委员会认为，有关的特别制度只是“国际法规则”设立的制度； 援引国际法，对于界定“不妨碍”条款的范围至关重要。 |
| (11) | (11) |
| The special regimes included in paragraph 2 relate in particular to three areas of international practice in which norms regulating immunity from foreign criminal jurisdiction have been identified, namely (a) the presence of a State in a foreign country through diplomatic missions, consular posts and special missions; | 第2款涵盖的特别制度尤其涉及已经确定了外国刑事管辖豁免规范的三个国际实践领域，分别是：(a) 一国以外交使团、领事馆和特别使团的形式存在于某一外国； |
| (b) the various representational and other activities connected with international organizations; | (b) 与国际组织有关的各种派驻代表活动和其他活动； |
| and (c) the presence of a State’s military forces in a foreign country. | (c) 一国军事力量驻扎在某一外国。 |
| Although in all three areas treaty-based norms establishing a regime of immunity from foreign criminal jurisdiction may be identified, the Commission has not thought it necessary to include in paragraph 2 an explicit reference to such international conventions and instruments. | 虽然在所有这三个领域都可找到以条约为基础的建立外国刑事管辖豁免制度的规范，但委员会认为没有必要在第2款中明确提及这类性质的国际公约和文书。 |
| (12) | (12) |
| The first group includes special rules relating to the immunity from foreign criminal jurisdiction of persons connected with carrying out the functions of representation, or protection of the interests of the State in another State, whether on a permanent basis or otherwise, while connected with a diplomatic mission, consular post or special mission. | 第一组包括的特别规则涉及那些在另一国履行代表或保护国家利益的职责的有关人员的外国刑事管辖豁免，无论他们是永久还是临时的，是派驻于外交使团、领馆还是特别使团的。 |
| The Commission takes the view that the rules contained in the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations and the Convention on Special Missions, as well as the relevant rules of customary international law, fall into this category. | 委员会认为，这一类中包括了《维也纳外交关系公约》、《维也纳领事关系公约》和《特别使团公约》 所载的规则，以及习惯国际法的有关规则。 |
| (13) | (13) |
| The second group includes special rules applicable to the immunity from criminal jurisdiction enjoyed by persons connected with an activity in relation to or in the framework of an international organization. | 第二组包括的特别规则适用于与国际组织相关或在其框架内开展活动的个人所享有的刑事管辖豁免。 |
| In this category are included the special rules applicable to persons connected with missions to an international organization or delegations to organs of international organizations or to international conferences. | 这一类中包含的特别规则适用于与国际组织使命有关、或派往国际组织机关或国际会议的代表团有关人员。 |
| The Commission’s understanding is that it is unnecessary to include in this group of special rules those that apply in general to the international organizations themselves. | 委员会认为，没有必要在这组特别规则中包括一般来说适用于国际组织本身的规则。 |
| However, it considers that this category does include norms applicable to the agents of an international organization, especially in cases when the agent has been placed at the disposal of the organization by a State and continues to enjoy the status of State official during the time when he or she is acting on behalf of and for the organization. | 然而，委员会认为，这一类中的确包括那些适用于一国际组织代理人的规范，尤其是在代理人是由一国交由国际组织安置，并且在代表该组织期间内继续享受国家官员地位的情况下。 |
| Regarding this second group of special regimes, the Commission has taken into account the Vienna Convention on the Representation of States in Their Relations with International Organizations of a Universal Character, the Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations and the Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the Specialized Agencies, as well as other treaty-based and customary norms applicable in this area. | 关于第二组特别制度，委员会已经参照了《维也纳关于国家在其对普遍性国际组织关系上的代表权公约》、《联合国特权和豁免公约》、 《专门机构特权和豁免公约》， 以及在这方面适用的其他条约和习惯规范。 |
| (14) | (14) |
| The third group of special rules includes those according immunity from criminal jurisdiction to persons connected with the military forces of a State located in another State. | 第三组特别规则包括了赋予与一国驻外国军事力量有关的人员的刑事管辖豁免的规范。 |
| This category includes the whole set of rules regulating the stationing of troops in the territory of a third State, such as those included in status-of-forces agreements and those included in headquarters agreements or military cooperation accords envisaging the stationing of troops. | 这一类中包括一整套的规范在第三国境内常驻部队的规则，甚至部队地位协定、总部协定、或在设想永久驻军的军事合作协定中包括的规则。 |
| Also included in this category are agreements made in connection with the short-term activities of military forces in a foreign State. | 这一类中还包括关于军事力量在外国的短期、非永久性活动而达成的协议。 |
| (15) | (15) |
| The list of the special rules described in paragraph 2 is qualified by the words “in particular” to indicate that the clause does not exclusively apply to these three groups of special rules. | 第2款所述的特别规则前面加上了“特别是”几个字，以此表示这一款并不是排他性地适用于这三组特别规则。 |
| In this connection, various members of the Commission drew attention to the fact that special rules in other areas may be found in practice, particularly in connection with the establishment in a State’s territory of foreign institutions and centres for economic, technical, scientific and cultural cooperation, usually on the basis of specific headquarters agreements. | 在这方面，委员会多个委员提请委员会注意：在实践中可看到其他领域的特别规则，特别是在一国境内设立外国经济、技术、科学和文化合作机构和中心方面，这类机构和中心通常是以专门的总部协定为基础。 |
| Although the Commission is aware in general terms of these special regimes, it has considered that there is no need to mention them in paragraph 2. | 虽然委员会笼统地认识到这些特别制度的存在，但认为没有必要在第2款提及。 |
| (16) | (16) |
| Lastly, it should be noted that the Commission considered the possibility of including in paragraph 2 reference to the practice whereby a State unilaterally grants a foreign official immunity from foreign criminal jurisdiction. | 最后，应当指出的是，委员会考虑了能否在第2款中提及一国单方面向外国官员赋予外国刑事管辖豁免的做法。 |
| However, the Commission decided against such inclusion. | 然而，委员会决定不将这种情况写入第2款。 |
| (17) | (17) |
| On the other hand, the Commission has considered that the formulation of paragraph 2 should parallel the structure of paragraph 1. | 另一方面，委员会认为，第2款的写法应与第1款的结构保持平行。 |
| It must thus be borne in mind that the present draft articles refer to the immunity from foreign criminal jurisdiction of certain persons described as “State officials” and that, consequently, this subjective element should also be reflected in the “without prejudice” clause. | 因此，必须铭记：本条款草案说的是称为“国家官员”的特定人员的外国刑事管辖豁免，并且因此，这一主观上的因素也应当体现在“不妨碍”条款中。 |
| This is why paragraph 2 refers expressly to “persons connected with”. | 这就是为什么这一款明确提到“相关的人员”。 |
| The phrase “persons connected with” has been used in line with the terminology in the United Nations Convention on Jurisdictional Immunities of States and Their Property (art. 3). | “相关的人员”几字是《联合国国家及其财产管辖豁免公约》(第三条)使用的措辞。 |
| The scope of the term “persons connected with” will depend on the content of the rules defining the special regime that applies to them; it is therefore not possible a priori to draw up a single definition for this category. | “相关的人员”的范围将取决于界定适用于他们的特别制度的规则的内容，因此，不可能先验地为这一类别拟定一个单独定义。 |
| This is also true for civilian personnel connected with the military forces of a State, who will be included in the special regime only to the extent that the legal instrument applicable in each case so establishes. | 对于一国军队中的文职人员也是如此； 只有在每一情况下适用的法律文书所规定的范围内，特别制度才能涵盖他们。 |
| (18) | (18) |
| The combination of the terms “persons connected with” and “special rules” is essential in determining the scope and meaning of the “without prejudice” clause in paragraph 2. | 将“相关的人员”和“特别规则”结合起来，对于确定第1条第2款中的但书或“不妨碍”条款的范围和含义，必不可少。 |
| The Commission considers that the persons covered in this paragraph (diplomatic agents, consular officials, members of special missions, agents of international organizations and members of the military forces of a State) are automatically excluded from the scope of the present draft articles, not by the mere fact of belonging to that category of officials, but by the fact that one of the special regimes referred to in draft article 1, paragraph 2, applies to them under certain circumstances. | 委员会认为，本款涵盖的人员(外交代表、领事官员、特别使团成员、国际组织代理人和一国军队成员)被自动排除于本条款草案的范围之外，不是因为他们属于这一类别官员的单纯事实，而是因为第1条草案第2款所提到的特别制度之一在某些情况下适用于他们。 |
| In such circumstances, the immunity from foreign criminal jurisdiction that these persons may enjoy under the special regimes applicable to them will not be affected by the provisions of the present draft articles. | 在这种情况下，这些人员可在特别制度下享有的适用于他们的外国刑事管辖豁免不会受到本条款草案规定的影响。 |
| Paragraph 3 | 第3款 |
| (19) | (19) |
| Paragraph 3 addresses the relationship between the present draft articles and the rights and obligations of States parties under international agreements establishing international criminal courts and tribunals as between the parties to those agreements. | 第3款处理本条款草案与国际刑事法院和法庭之间的关系。 第3款处理了本条款草案与设立国际刑事法院和法庭的国际协定对缔约国所规定的、在这些协定缔约方之间适用的权利和义务的关系。 |
| (20) | (20) |
| As pointed out in paragraph (6) above, the present draft articles address the immunity of State officials from the criminal jurisdiction of another State. | 如上文第6段指出，本条款草案涉及国家官员对另一国的管辖权享有的刑事管辖豁免。 |
| As a result, issues relating to immunity before international criminal courts and tribunals remain outside the scope of the present draft articles, as such issues are governed by a legal regime of their own. | 因此，与国际刑事法院和法庭的豁免有关的问题不在本条款草案的范围内，这些问题受其本身法律制度的管辖。 |
| (21) | (21) |
| However, during the Commission’s work on the present topic, different questions have been raised that have a bearing on the activity of international criminal courts and tribunals, including the effect that existing international rules imposing an obligation on States to cooperate with such courts and tribunals may have on the present draft articles. | 然而，委员会在就本专题开展工作期间，提出了与国际刑事法院和法庭的活动有关的不同问题，包括关于要求各国与这些法院和法庭合作的现有国际规则可能对本条款草案产生的影响。 |
| Moreover, during the Commission’s debates, attention has repeatedly been drawn to the need to preserve the achievements of recent decades in the field of international criminal law, especially the establishment of international criminal courts and tribunals, in particular the International Criminal Court as a permanent international criminal jurisdiction. | 此外，在委员会进行辩论时，有人一再提请注意，需要维护过去几十年间在国际刑法领域取得的成就，特别是国际刑事法院和法庭的成立，尤其是作为常设国际刑事司法机构成立的国际刑事法院。 |
| Members of the Commission have emphasized the need for the present draft articles not to impair such achievements. | 委员会成员强调，本条款草案不应损害这些成就。 |
| For their part, some States in the Sixth Committee have also highlighted the need to preserve such achievements, so that their value and significance are not diminished as a result of the elaboration of the present draft articles. | 一些国家也在第六委员会强调，有必要维护这些成就，防止其价值和意义因本条款草案的拟订而降低。 |
| (22) | (22) |
| The Commission concluded that an express reference to the issue of international criminal tribunals was necessary in draft article 1, concerning the scope of the draft articles. | 委员会认为有必要在专门讨论适用范围的第1条草案中明确提及国际刑事法庭的问题。 |
| Paragraph 3 emphasizes the separation and independence of the draft articles and the special legal regimes applicable to international criminal courts and tribunals. | 第3款强调本条款草案和适用于国际刑事法院和法庭的特别法律制度的分离和独立性。 |
| In so doing, the Commission does not ignore the important role that international criminal courts and tribunals are playing in international law. | 委员会以此表示没有忽视国际刑事法院和法庭在国际法中所发挥的重要作用。 |
| (23) | (23) |
| Paragraph 3 is inspired by article 26 of the United Nations Convention on Jurisdictional Immunities of States and Their Property, which, under the title “Other international agreements”, reads as follows: “[n]othing in the present Convention shall affect the rights and obligations of States Parties under existing international agreements which relate to matters dealt with in the present Convention as between the parties to those agreements”. | 第3款是在《联合国国家及其财产管辖豁免公约》第26条启发下拟订的，该条的标题是“其他国际协定”，规定如下：“本公约不影响与本公约所涉事项有关的现有国际协定对缔约国所规定的，适用于这些协定缔约方之间的权利和义务”。 |
| This provision was considered an appropriate means of addressing the relationship between these draft articles and international criminal courts and tribunals. | 这一规定被认为适当地处理了这些条款草案与国际性刑事法院和法庭的关系。 |
| Its purpose is to preserve “the rights and obligations of States parties under international agreements establishing international criminal courts and tribunals as between the parties to those agreements”. | 该规定的目的是保持“设立国际法院和法庭的国际协定对缔约国规定的、在这些协定缔约方之间适用的权利和义务”。 |
| (24) | (24) |
| The expression “the rights and obligations of States parties” refers to any of the rights and obligations under a specific international agreement establishing an international criminal court or tribunal. | “缔约国的权利和义务”一语是指设立国际刑事法院或法庭的具体国际协定之下的任何权利和义务。 |
| The Commission has preferred this wording over other proposals such as “the question of immunity” regulated in such agreements or “the rules governing the functioning of international criminal tribunals”, which were considered, respectively, as being too narrow or too broad in relation to the purpose of paragraph 3 of draft article 1. | 委员会倾向于使用这一措辞，而不是提议的其他措辞，如此类协定中规定的“豁免问题”或“国际刑事法庭运作所遵循的规则”，委员会认为，相对于第1条草案第3款的目的而言，上述提议的措辞分别限制性过强或过于宽泛。 |
| (25) | (25) |
| The phrase “international agreements establishing international criminal courts and tribunals” refers to the international rules considered to be special legal regimes for the purpose of paragraph 3 of draft article 1, bearing in mind the objective pursued by that clause. | “设立国际刑事法院和法庭的国际协定”一语是指为第1条草案第3款的目的而被视为特别法律制度的国际规范，同时考虑到这一条款所追求的目标。 |
| Therefore, this phrase does not mirror the wording of article 26 of the United Nations Convention on Jurisdictional Immunities of States and Their Property, because the phrase “which relate to matters dealt with in the present Convention” was not sufficiently clear to reflect the relationship between the present draft articles and the legal regimes applicable to international criminal courts and tribunals; | 因此，《联合国国家及其财产管辖豁免公约》第26条的措辞在这一点上没有反映出来，因为“与本公约所涉事项有关的”一语不够明确，无法反映出本条款草案与适用于国际刑事法院和法庭的法律制度之间的关系。 |
| the expression “international agreements” means the constituent instrument of each international criminal tribunal, whether these agreements are concluded between States or between States and international organizations, including the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. | “国际协定”一词是指每个国际刑事法庭的组成文书，包括《国际刑事法院罗马规约》， 而不论这些协定是在国家之间订立的，还是在国家与国际组织之间订立的。 |
| Nevertheless, one member of the Commission has questioned whether the term “international agreements” is adequate to refer to this type of instrument, since some international criminal tribunals, such as the International Criminal Tribunal for the Prosecution of Persons Responsible for Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law Committed in the Territory of the Former Yugoslavia since 1991 and the International Criminal Tribunal for the Prosecution of Persons Responsible for Genocide and Other Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law Committed in the Territory of Rwanda and Rwandan Citizens Responsible for Genocide and Other Such Violations Committed in the Territory of Neighbouring States between 1 January and 31 December 1994, have been created by Security Council resolutions adopted under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations, while other tribunals, in particular hybrid or internationalized tribunals, have often been created by provisions of domestic law, including as a result of initiatives originating from universal or regional international organizations. | 然而，委员会一名委员对使用“国际协定”一词是否足以指这类文书提出质疑，因为一些国际刑事法庭――如起诉应对1991年以来前南斯拉夫境内所犯严重违反国际人道主义法行为负责者的国际刑事法庭和起诉应对1994年1月1日至12月31日期间在卢旺达境内的灭绝种族和其他严重违反国际人道主义法行为负责者和应对这一期间邻国境内灭绝种族和其他这类违法行为负责的卢旺达公民的国际刑事法庭――是由联合国安全理事会根据《联合国宪章》第七章通过的决议设立的，而另一些法庭，特别是混合法庭或国际化法庭，则往往依据国内法规定设立，包括在全球性或区域性国际组织发起的倡议下设立。 |
| (26) | (26) |
| Paragraph 3 ends with the phrase “as between the parties to those agreements”. The intention here is to highlight that conventional legal regimes applicable to international criminal tribunals, as a matter of treaty law, apply only as between the parties to the agreement establishing a particular international criminal court or tribunal. | 第3款最后一句话中含有“在这些协定缔约方之间…”一语，这里意在强调适用于国际刑事法庭的公约性法律制度作为条约法事项，仅在设立特定国际法院或法庭的协定的缔约方之间适用。 |
| This term does not, however, imply any statement whatsoever in relation to any other obligation that can be imposed upon States under international law, in particular by the Security Council or any other international organization. | 然而，这并不意味着对于依据国际法，特别是由安全理事会或任何其他国际组织可能给各国规定的任何其他义务作出了任何声明。 |
| Article 2 Definitions | 第2条 定义 |
| For the purposes of the present draft articles: | 为本条款草案的目的： |
| (a) | (a) |
| “State official” means any individual who represents the State or who exercises State functions, and refers to both current and former State officials; | “国家官员”是指代表国家或行使国家职能的任何个人，既指现任也指前任国家官员； |
| (b) | (b) |
| an “act performed in an official capacity” means any act performed by a State official in the exercise of State authority. | “以官方身份实施的行为”是指国家官员在行使国家权力时实施的任何行为。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) | (1) |
| Draft article 2 sets out the definitions of the expressions “State official” (subparagraph (a)) and “act performed in an official capacity” (subparagraph (b)), two categories that are essential for the draft articles as a whole. | 第2条草案专门讨论“国家官员”((a)项)和“以官方身份实施的行为”((b)项)这两个术语的定义，这是将条款草案作为一个整体理解的基本类别。 |
| (2) | (2) |
| Draft article 2 is entitled “Definitions”. | 第2条草案的标题是“定义”。 |
| This title is regarded as being equivalent to “Use of terms”, which has been used by the Commission in other draft articles. | 这个标题相当于委员会在其他条款草案中使用的“用语”。 |
| The use of a different title does not introduce any different meaning with regard of the nature of this provision. | 使用不同的名称并不会使这条规定的性质产生任何不同的含义。 |
| Subparagraph (a) | (a)项 |
| (3) | (3) |
| The purpose of draft article 2, subparagraph (a), is to define the persons to whom the present draft articles apply, namely “State officials”. | 第2条草案(a)项的目的是为了界定适用本条款草案的个人，即“国家官员”。 |
| Defining the concept of “State official” facilitates an understanding of one of the normative elements of immunity: the individuals who enjoy immunity. | 对国家官员作出界定有助于理解豁免的规范性要素之一：享受豁免的个人。 |
| Most members of the Commission thought it would be useful to have a definition of “State official” for the purposes of the present draft articles, given that immunity from foreign criminal jurisdiction is applicable to individuals. | 委员会多数委员认为，为了本条款草案的目的，应当有一个国家官员的定义，因为外国刑事管辖豁免适用于个人。 |
| Some members of the Commission expressed doubts about the need to include this definition. | 委员会一些委员对是否需要列入这一定义表示怀疑。 |
| (4) | (4) |
| The definition of the term “State official” contained in draft article 2, subparagraph (a), is general in nature, applicable to any person who enjoys immunity from foreign criminal jurisdiction under the present draft articles, either immunity ratione personae or immunity ratione materiae. | 第2条草案(a)项所载“国家官员”概念的定义具有一般性，适用于任何根据本条款草案享有外国刑事管辖豁免的人，无论是属人豁免还是属事豁免。 |
| Consequently, the nature and object of draft article 2, subparagraph (a), must not be confused with the nature and object of draft articles 3 and 5, which define who enjoys each category of immunity. | 因此，第2条草案(a)项的性质和目的不应与界定谁享有每一类豁免的第3条和第5条草案的性质和目的相混淆。 |
| The persons who enjoy immunity ratione personae and immunity ratione materiae both fall within the definition of “State official”, which is common to both categories. | 享有属人豁免和属事豁免的人员都在“国家官员”的定义范围之内，定义对两类人员都适用。 |
| (5) | (5) |
| There is no general definition in international law of the term “State official” or “official”, although both terms may be found in certain treaties and international instruments. | 国际法中并没有“国家官员”或“官员”概念的一般定义，尽管在某些条约和国际文书中，这两个词都可以看到。 |
| The term “State official”, or simply “official”, can mean different things in different domestic legal systems. | 另一方面，“国家官员”或简单的“官员”的概念在不同的国内法律制度中，所指可能不同。 |
| Consequently, the definition of “State official” referred to in this commentary is autonomous, and must be understood to be for the purposes of the present draft articles. | 因此，本评注中提到的“国家官员”的定义是独立的，必须理解为是为本条款草案的目的而拟订的。 |
| (6) | (6) |
| The definition of “State official” uses the term “individual” to indicate that the present draft articles cover only natural persons. | “国家官员”定义中使用“个人”一词是为了表明本条款草案仅涉及自然人。 |
| The draft articles are without prejudice to the rules applicable to legal persons. | 本条款草案不妨碍适用于法人的规则。 |
| (7) | (7) |
| As indicated above, the term “State official” must be understood as encompassing persons who enjoy immunity ratione personae and those who enjoy immunity ratione materiae. | 如前所述，“国家官员”必须理解为包括享有属人豁免的人员和享有属事豁免的人员。 |
| In this connection, it must be noted that the Commission identified the persons who enjoy immunity ratione personae by listing the individuals cited eo nomine in draft article 3, namely the Head of State, the Head of Government and the Minister for Foreign Affairs. | 在这点上，必须指出的是，委员会用来确定享有属人豁免的人员的办法是在第3条草案里明确地列出此类个人，即国家元首、政府首脑和外交部长。 |
| However, it has been decided not to mention them expressly in draft article 2, subparagraph (a), since they are deemed to be, per se, State officials in the sense of the present draft articles; | 但委员会决定不在第2条草案(a)项中明确提及这些人，因为他们本身被视为本条款草案所指的“国家官员”； |
| accordingly, they need not be differentiated from other State officials for the purposes of the definition. | 因此，从定义上讲，他们不必区别于其他国家官员。 |
| (8) | (8) |
| As regards the “State officials” to whom immunity ratione materiae is applicable, the Commission considers that it cannot use the technique of identification eo nomine. | 关于属事豁免适用的“国家官员”，委员会认为无法使用明确列举的办法来确定。 |
| In view of both the diversity of the positions of the individuals to whom immunity may apply and the variety of national legal systems that determine which persons are their officials, the Commission does not consider it possible to draw up an exhaustive list that would include all the individuals covered by immunity ratione materiae. | 鉴于豁免可以适用的个人的职务多种多样，确定哪些人是官员的国家法律制度也各不相同，委员会认为无法拟订一个详尽无疑的名单，包含属事豁免涵盖的所有个人。 |
| For the same reasons, the Commission has also considered it neither possible nor suitable to draw up an indicative list in a draft article of the positions of those individuals to whom such immunity may apply. | 出于同样的原因，委员会认为在一个条文草案里拟订这种豁免所适用个人职务的指示性名单也是不可能或不合适的。 |
| In both cases, the list would inevitably be incomplete, since all the positions of the State officials included in domestic legal systems cannot be catalogued and the list would have to be constantly updated and might be confusing for the government institutions responsible for applying immunity from foreign criminal jurisdiction. | 在这两种情况下，名单必然都是不完整的，因为无法编制国内法律制度包含的所有国家官员的职务目录，名单必须不断更新，并且可能给负责适用外国刑事管辖豁免的政府机构造成困惑。 |
| Accordingly, the individuals who may be termed “State officials” for the purposes of immunity ratione materiae must be identified on a case-by-case basis, applying the criteria included in the definition, which point to a specific link between the State and the official, namely representation of the State or the exercise of State functions. | 因此，为属事豁免目的可被称为“国家官员”的个人必须根据定义中所包含并表明国家与官员之间具体关系(即代表国家或行使国家职能)的标准逐案确定。 |
| (9) | (9) |
| Nevertheless, by way of example, the following “State officials” have been mentioned in national and international case law regarding immunity from criminal jurisdiction and, to the extent that it may be relevant, from civil jurisdiction: a former Head of State; | 不过，作为例子，下述“国家官员”出现在与刑事管辖豁免以及相关时，与民事管辖豁免有关的国内和国际案例法中：前国家元首； |
| a Minister of Defence and a former Minister of Defence; | 国防部长和前国防部长； |
| a Vice-President and Minister of Forestry; | 副总统兼林业部长； |
| a Minister of the Interior; | 内务部长； |
| an Attorney General and a General Prosecutor; | 总法务官和检察长； |
| a Head of National Security and a former intelligence service chief; | 国家安全机构首长； 前情报局局长； |
| a director of a maritime authority; | 海事局局长； |
| an Attorney General and various lower-ranking officials of a federal State (a prosecutor and his legal assistants, a detective in the Attorney General’s Office and a lawyer in a State agency); | 联邦国家的总法务官及各种低级别官员(检察官及其法律助手、总法务官办公署的侦探以及国家机构律师)； |
| military officials of various ranks, and various members of government security forces and institutions, including a police director; | 各种级别的军官、政府治安力量和机构的各种成员，包括警察局长； |
| border guards; | 边防警察； |
| the deputy director of a prison; | 监狱的副监狱长； |
| and the head of a State’s central archives. | 国家档案馆馆长。 |
| (10) | (10) |
| Attention must be drawn to the fact that the Head of State, Head of Government and Minister for Foreign Affairs may enjoy both immunity ratione personae and immunity ratione materiae in accordance with the present draft articles. | 必须注意的是，国家元首、政府首脑和外交部长可按照本条款草案享有属人和属事两种豁免。 |
| The first hypothesis is specifically envisaged in draft article 3. | 第3条草案特别对第一种假设作出了规定。 |
| The second is reflected in draft article 4, paragraph 3, according to which “[t]he cessation of immunity ratione personae is without prejudice to the application of the rules of international law concerning immunity ratione materiae”. | 第二种假设反映在第4条草案第3款中，该款规定，“属人豁免的停止不妨碍关于属事豁免的国际法规则的适用”。 |
| The conditions under which the Head of State, Head of Government and Minister for Foreign Affairs enjoy immunity ratione personae or immunity ratione materiae will depend on the rules applicable to each of these categories of immunity that are contained in the present draft articles. | 国家元首、政府首脑和外交部长享有属人豁免或属事豁免的条件将取决于本条款草案所载的适用于每一类豁免的规则。 |
| (11) | (11) |
| The definition of “State official”, it must be noted, refers solely to the person who enjoys immunity, without prejudging or implying any statement about the question of what acts may be covered by immunity from foreign criminal jurisdiction. | 必须指出的是，“国家官员”的定义仅指享有豁免的人，并不预先判断外国刑事管辖豁免涵盖哪些行为的问题或暗含对这一问题的任何表述。 |
| From this standpoint, the essential element to be taken into account in identifying an individual as a State official for the purposes of the present draft articles is the existence of a link between that person and the State. | 从这个角度来看，为本条款草案的目的，在确定个人为国家官员时应当考虑的基本要素是该人与国家之间存在某种联系。 |
| This link is reflected in draft article 2, subparagraph (a), through the reference to the fact that the individual in question “represents the State or … exercises State functions”. | 这种联系反映在第2条草案(a)项中，其中提到有关个人“代表国家或行使国家职能”。 |
| This is a clear and simple statement regarding the criteria for identifying what constitutes an official, and reiterating the proposition that the Commission accepted in relation to the scope under draft article 1, namely that the present draft articles relate to the immunity from foreign criminal jurisdiction that may be enjoyed by those persons who represent or act on behalf of a State. | 这是关于确定官员的标准的简单明了的说法，并重申了委员会就第1条草案的适用范围接受的方针，即本条款草案指代表一国或为一国利益行事的人员可享有的外国刑事管辖豁免。 |
| Lastly, attention must be drawn to the fact that a State official may fulfil both the requirements of “representing the State” and of “exercising State functions” or only one of them. | 最后，应当注意的是，国家官员可能同时满足“代表国家”和“行使国家职能”两个要求或只满足其中一个要求。 |
| (12) | (12) |
| The words “who represents the State” must be understood in a broad sense, as including any “State official” who performs representational functions. | “代表国家…的人”一语必须从广义上理解为包括任何履行代表职能的“国家官员”。 |
| The reference to representation is of special importance with regard to the Head of State, Head of Government and Minister for Foreign Affairs because, as the commentary to draft article 3 states, these three office holders represent the State in its international relations simply by virtue of their office, directly and with no need for specific powers to be granted by the State. | 提及代表性对于国家元首、政府首脑和外交部长特别重要，因为――如第3条草案的评注所述――任这些职位的人员仅凭其职务就可在国际关系中直接代表国家而无需国家专门授权其这样做。 |
| However, the reference to representation of the State may also be applicable to State officials other than the so-called “troika”, in conformity with the rules or acts of the national systems themselves. | 不过，这里提到的代表国家根据国家制度本身的规则或法律，还可适用于除所谓“三巨头”以外的国家官员。 |
| Consequently, whether an official is representing the State or not must be determined on a case-by-case basis. | 因此，官员是否代表国家须逐案确定。 |
| Lastly, it must be noted that the separate reference to representation of the State as one of the criteria for identifying a link with the State makes it possible to cover certain persons, such as those Heads of State who typically do not perform State functions in a narrow sense, but who most certainly represent the State. | 最后，必须指出的是，单独提到“代表国家”，以此作为确定与国家之间联系的一个标准，可将某些类别的个人(如一些国家元首)涵盖进来，他们通常不履行严格意义上的国家职能，但他们确实是代表国家的。 |
| (13) | (13) |
| The phrase “exercises State functions” must be understood, in a broad sense, to mean the activities carried out by the State. This designation includes the legislative, judicial, executive or other functions performed by the State. | “行使国家职能”这一短语必须从广义上理解为国家开展的活动，该词包括国家履行的立法、司法、行政或其他职能。 |
| Consequently, the “State official” is the individual who is in a position to perform these State functions. | 因此，“国家官员”是能够履行这些国家职能的个人。 |
| The reference to the exercise of State functions defines more precisely the requisite link between the official and the State, allowing for sufficient account to be taken of the fact that immunity is granted to the individual for the ultimate benefit of the State. | 提到行使国家职能，就更准确地界定了官员与国家之间的必要联系，这就可以充分地考虑到授予个人豁免是为了国家利益。 |
| Although various expressions, such as “elements of the governmental authority”, “public functions”, “sovereign authority”, “governmental authority” or “inherent functions of the State” have been suggested in order to reflect this idea, the Commission has chosen the expression “State functions” as being most suitable. | 虽然为反映这一想法提出了各种词语，如“公共权力的特权”、“公共职能”、“主权权力”、“政府权力”、“国家固有职能”等，但委员会选择了最适合的“国家职能”一词。 |
| This choice has been made for two reasons: first, it reflects sufficiently well the link between the State and the official, which is related to the latter’s duties; | 这种选择有两个原因：一是它充分反映了国家与官员之间的联系，这种联系与后者的职责有关； |
| and second, the use of the term “functions” rather than “acts performed in the name of the State” avoids potential confusion between the subjective (the official) and objective (the act) elements of immunity. | 二是使用“职能”一词，而不是“以国家名义实施的行为”，避免了豁免的主体要素(官员)与实质性要素(行为)之间可能的混淆。 |
| In any case, these terms should be understood in the broadest sense possible, keeping in mind that the exact content of what is understood by “State functions” depends to a large extent on the laws and organizational capacity of the State. | 无论如何，应在尽量广泛的意义上理解这些词语，同时铭记“国家职能”的确切内容可能在很大程度上取决于国家的法律和组织能力。 |
| Some Commission members stated, however, that the phrase chosen was infelicitous. | 但有些委员会委员认为所选择的词语不当。 |
| (14) | (14) |
| It is to be noted that the use of the verbs “represents” and “exercises” in the present tense must not be interpreted as making any statement about the temporal scope of immunity. | 须指出的是，本条草案中使用的“代表”和“行使”两词不得被解释为是对豁免的时间范围的任何表述。 |
| This verb tense is used in order to identify in general terms the link between the State and the official, and has no bearing on whether the State official must continue to be one at the time when immunity is claimed. | 使用这两个词是为了一般性地确定国家与官员之间的联系，与国家官员在请求豁免时是否必须仍为官员无关。 |
| The temporal scope of immunity ratione personae and of immunity ratione materiae is the subject of other draft articles. | 属人豁免和属事豁免的时间范围是其他条款草案讨论的问题。 |
| (15) | (15) |
| For the purposes of defining “State official”, what is important is the link between the individual and the State, whereas the form taken by that link is irrelevant. | 对界定“国家官员”的目的而言，重要的是个人与国家的联系，这种联系的形式则无关紧要。 |
| The Commission considers that the link may take many forms, depending upon national legislation and the practice of each State. | 委员会认为这种关系可有许多形式，具体取决于国家立法和每个国家的惯例。 |
| However, the majority of Commission members are of the view that the link cannot be interpreted so broadly as to cover all de facto officials. | 但大多数委员会委员认为，对这种关系的解释不能太广泛，将所有事实上的官员都包括在内。 |
| The term “de facto official” is used to refer to many possible cases, and whether or not an individual may be considered a State official for the purposes of the present draft articles will depend on each specific case. | “事实上的官员”一词用于指许多可能的情况，个人可否为本条款草案的目的被视为国家官员，取决于每个具体情况。 |
| In any event, issues relating to de facto officials may be more appropriately addressed in connection with a definition of “act performed in an official capacity”. | 无论怎样，结合“以官方身份实施的行为”处理与事实上的官员有关的问题，可能更为恰当。 |
| (16) | (16) |
| Given that the concept of “State official” rests solely on the fact that the individual in question represents the State or exercises State functions, the hierarchical position occupied by the individual within his or her State is irrelevant for the sole purposes of the definition. | 鉴于“国家官员”的概念完全基于有关个人代表国家或行使国家职能这一点，因此，该个人在国内职位高低与定义的唯一目的无关。 |
| Although, in many cases, the persons who have been recognized as State officials for the purposes of immunity hold a high or middle rank, it is also possible to find examples of such persons at a low level of the hierarchy. | 尽管在多数情况下，为豁免目的被视为国家官员的个人担任较高或相当高的职位，但也可找到这类人员职位较低的例子。 |
| Consequently, the hierarchical level is not an integral part of the definition of “State official”. | 因此，职位的高低不是国家官员定义的组成部分。 |
| (17) | (17) |
| Lastly, it must be borne in mind that the definition of “State official” has no bearing on the type of acts covered by immunity. | 最后，必须铭记的是，“国家官员”的定义与豁免涵盖的行为种类毫无关系。 |
| Consequently, the words “represent” and “exercise State functions” may not be interpreted as defining in any way the substantive scope of immunity. | 因此，“代表”和“行使国家职能”不能被解释为以任何方式界定豁免的实质范围。 |
| (18) | (18) |
| As to the question of terminology, to refer to persons who enjoy immunity, the Commission has decided to use the terms “ مسؤول الدولة” in Arabic, “国家官员” in Chinese, “State official” in English, “représentant de l’Etat” in French, “должностное лицо государства” in Russian and “funcionario del Estado” in Spanish. | 关于术语问题，在表示享有豁免的人员时，委员会决定在阿拉伯文中使用"مسؤول الدولة"、在中文中使用“国家官员”、在英文中使用“State official”、在法文中使用“représentant de l’Etat”、在俄文中使用“должностное лицо государства”，在西班牙文中使用“funcionario del Estado”。 |
| Although the Commission is aware that they do not necessarily mean the same thing and are not interchangeable, it has preferred to continue using these terms, especially since the term “State official” in English, used extensively in practice, is suitable for referring to all the categories of persons to which the present draft articles refer. | 虽然委员会认识到这些词语的所指并不一定相同，而且不能互换，但仍倾向于继续使用这些词语，尤其是因为实践中广泛使用的英文“State official”一词适于指本条款草案提到的所有类别人员。 |
| Thus, the fact that different terms are used in each of the language versions is of no semantic significance whatsoever. | 尽管如此，应当指出，各语文本中使用的不同词语并无任何语义方面的重要意义。 |
| Rather, the various terms used in each of the language versions have the same meaning for the purposes of the present draft articles, which bears no relation to the meaning that each term may have in domestic legal systems. | 相反，为了本条款草案的目的，每个语文本中使用的各词语含义相同，与其在国内法律制度中的含义无关。 |
| (19) | (19) |
| As indicated in the final sentence of this subparagraph, the term “State official” refers to both current and former State officials. | 如本款最后一句所示，“国家官员”一词既包括现任，也包括前任国家官员。 |
| This draws attention to the fact that immunity may apply to an individual who is a State official at the time when the question of immunity arises, and also to an individual who was a State official but no longer holds this position at the time when the question of immunity arises. | 因此，应注意这样一个事实，即豁免既可能适用于在出现豁免问题时身为“国家官员”的个人，也可能适用于曾经是国家官员但在出现豁免问题时已不再担任这一职务的个人。 |
| However, it should be noted that this phrase is merely intended to explicitly mention the temporal situation in which the State official (current or former) may be in relation to the State, and that this does not preclude the possibility that a person may benefit from immunity even if he or she has ceased to be a State official. | 然而，应该指出，这句话只是为了明确说明国家官员(前任或现任)与国家之间的关系可能涉及的时间情况； 同时也说明，即使该人已不再是国家官员，也不妨碍其享有豁免。 |
| On the contrary, the inclusion of the reference to “current” and “former” State officials does not alter the temporal scope of immunity from criminal jurisdiction, which must be determined in accordance with the provisions of draft article 4, paragraph 1, with regard to immunity ratione personae, and draft article 6, paragraphs 2 and 3, and draft article 4, paragraph 3, with regard to immunity ratione materiae. | 相反，提及“现任国家官员”和“前任官员”不会改变刑事管辖豁免的时间范围，这必须根据关于属人豁免的第4条草案第1款、关于属事豁免的第6条草案第2款和第3款，以及第4条第3款的规定来确定。 |
| Therefore, although the term “State official” includes “both current and former State officials” for the purpose of its definition, it should be noted that “former State officials” can only benefit from immunity from foreign criminal jurisdiction ratione materiae. | 因此，尽管“国家官员”一词就其定义而言，包括“现任国家官员和前任国家官员”，但应该强调，“前任国家官员”只能享有外国刑事管辖的属事豁免。 |
| (20) | (20) |
| In the same vein, it should be noted that the express reference to a State official, “current or former”, in draft article 8 is equivalent to the phrase “to both current and former State officials”, and must therefore be interpreted as indicated above. | 同样，必须注意这样一个事实，即第8条草案中明确提到的“现任或前任官员”相当于“既对…现任官员也对前任官员”这一短语，因此必须如上文所述进行解释。 |
| The express mention of this circumstance in draft article 8 is warranted only by the special significance that the Commission attaches to that draft article; it does not alter the scope of the immunity of State officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction, which continues to be covered by the articles cited in the preceding paragraph. | 委员会赋予该条草案的特殊意义，是第8条草案中明确提及这一点的唯一理由，但这并不改变国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免的范围，这一范围仍遵循上一段所引用条款的规定。 |
| Subparagraph (b) | (b)项 |
| (21) | (21) |
| Draft article 2, subparagraph (b), defines the concept of an “act performed in an official capacity” for the purposes of the present draft articles. | 第2条草案(b)项为本条款草案的目的界定“以官方身份实施的行为”这一概念。 |
| Despite the doubts expressed by some members as to whether this provision was necessary, the Commission thought it would be useful to include the definition in the draft articles given the centrality of the concept of an “act performed in an official capacity” in the regime of immunity ratione materiae. | 虽然一些委员对是否需要这项规定表示怀疑，但委员会认为，因为“以官方身份实施的行为”这一概念是属事豁免制度的核心，所以应当在条款草案中纳入其定义。 |
| (22) | (22) |
| The Commission has included in the definition contained in subparagraph (b) the elements that make it possible to identify a particular act as being an “act performed in an official capacity” for the purposes of immunity of State officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction. | 委员会在(b)项所载定义中包括了一些要素，以便能够出于国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免的目的，确定某项特定行为是“以官方身份实施的行为”。 |
| The Commission understands the term “acts” to refer both to actions and to omissions. | 委员会认为，“行为”一词既指作为，也指不作为。 |
| Although the terminology to be employed has been the subject of debate, the Commission has chosen to use the term “acts” in line with the English text of the articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts, article 1 of which uses the term “acts” on the understanding that an act “may consist in one or more actions or omissions or a combination of both”. | 虽然关于使用什么术语一直有争论，但是委员会按照关于国家对国际不法行为的责任的条款草案的英文案文，决定采用“act”(“行为”)一词，该草案第1条将“行为”理解为“可以包括一项或多项作为或不作为或两者兼而有之”。 |
| In addition, the term “act” is commonly used in international criminal law to define conduct (active and passive) that gives rise to criminal responsibility. | 此外，国际刑法中也通常使用“行为”一词，用于界定产生刑事责任的行为(作为和不作为)。 |
| In the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, the term “acts” is used in a general sense in articles 6, 7, 8, and 8 bis, without having elicited questions about whether both actions and omissions are included under that term, since this depends solely on each specific criminal offence. | 《国际刑事法院罗马规约》在第6、第7、第8条和第8条之二中使用一般意义上的“行为”一词，不会引起对该词是否包含作为和不作为的质疑，因为这最终取决于具体的刑事罪行的定义。 |
| The statutes of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda also use the term “act” to refer to conduct, both active and passive, constituting an offence falling within the competence of those tribunals. | 《前南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭规约》 和《卢旺达问题国际刑事法庭规约》 也使用“行为”一词，同时指属于这些法庭管辖范围内的犯罪行为，包括作为和不作为行为。 |
| The term “act” has also been used in treaties that define conduct that may give rise to criminal responsibility. | 对可能产生刑事责任的行为作出界定的条约也使用了“行为”一词。 |
| This is the case, for example, with the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (art. II) and the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (art. 1). | 例如，《防止及惩治灭绝种族罪公约》(第二条)和《禁止酷刑和其他残忍、不人道或有辱人格的待遇或处罚公约》(第1条)就是这种情况。 |
| (23) | (23) |
| The Commission has used the expression “in the exercise of State authority” to reflect the need for a link between the act and the State. | 委员会使用了“行使国家权力”的表述，以便体现出在行为和国家之间建立联系的需要。 |
| In other words, the aim is to highlight the fact that it is not sufficient for a State official to perform an act in order for it automatically to be considered an “act performed in an official capacity”. | 换句话说，该做法旨在强调，并非由国家官员实施的行为就足以被自动视为“以官方身份实施的行为”。 |
| On the contrary, there must also be a direct connection between the act and the exercise of State functions and powers, since it is this connection that justifies the recognition of immunity in order to protect the principle of the sovereign equality of States. | 反之，在该行为和行使国家职能与权力之间还必须存在直接联系，因为这种联系是承认豁免的合理基础，以便保护国家主权平等原则。 |
| (24) | (24) |
| In this regard, the Commission believes that, in order for an act to be characterized as an “act performed in an official capacity”, it must first be attributable to the State. | 在这方面，委员会认为，为了确定一项行为具备“以官方身份实施的行为”的特征，该行为首先应归于国家。 |
| However, this does not necessarily mean that only the State can be held responsible for the act. | 但是，这不一定意味着只有国家可对此行为负责。 |
| The attribution of the act to the State is a prerequisite for an act to be characterized as having been performed in an official capacity, but does not prevent the act from also being attributed to the individual, in accordance with the “single act, dual responsibility” model (double attribution) that the Commission already applied in its 1996 draft Code of Crimes against the Peace and Security of Mankind (art. 4), the articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts (art. 58) and the articles on the responsibility of international organizations (art. 66). | 根据委员会在1996年《危害人类和平及安全治罪法草案》(第4条)、 “关于国家对国际不法行为的责任条款”(第58条) 以及“关于国际组织的责任条款”(第66条) 中使用的“单一行为，双重责任”模式(双重归属)，将行为归于国家是确定一项行为具备“以官方身份实施的行为”的特征的先决条件，但这并不妨碍该行为也可归于个人。 |
| Under this model, a single act can engage both the responsibility of the State and the individual responsibility of the author, especially in criminal matters. | 根据这一模式，一项单独的行为可能同时涉及国家责任和行为人的个人责任，特别是在刑事事件中。 |
| (25) | (25) |
| For the purpose of attributing an act to a State, it is necessary to consider, as a point of departure, the rules included in the articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts adopted by the Commission at its fifty-third session. | 出于将一项行为归于国家的目的，作为出发点，有必要考虑委员会在第五十三届会议上通过的关于国家对国际不法行为的责任条款所载规则。 |
| Nonetheless, it must be borne in mind that the Commission established those rules in the context and for the purposes of State responsibility. | 然而，必须铭记，委员会是在国家责任范围内并为国家责任之目的而确立了这些规则。 |
| Consequently, their application to the process of attributing an act of an official to a State in the context of immunity of State officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction should be examined carefully. | 因此，对在国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免背景下将某行为归于国家官员的进程适用这些规则时应进行仔细审查。 |
| For the purposes of immunity, the criteria for attribution set out in articles 7–11 of the articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts do not seem generally applicable. | 在这方面，出于豁免目的，关于国家对国际不法行为的责任条款中第7至11条规定的责任标准似乎并不普遍适用。 |
| In particular, the Commission is of the view that, as a rule, acts performed by officials purely for their own benefit and in their own interest cannot be considered as acts performed in an official capacity, even though they may appear to have been performed officially. | 具体而言，委员会认为，作为一项规则，官员纯粹为了自己的好处和利益实施的行为不能被视为以官方身份实施的行为，即便这些行为也许看起来是以官方身份实施的。 |
| In such cases, it is not possible to identify any self-interest on the part of the State, and the recognition of immunity, whose ultimate objective is to protect the principle of the sovereign equality of States, is not justified. | 在这种情况下，国家不可能发现任何自身利益，承认豁免没有合理理由，因为承认豁免的最终目标是为了保护国家主权平等原则。 |
| This does not mean, however, that an unlawful act as such cannot benefit from immunity ratione materiae. | 但这并不意味着非法行为不能享有属事豁免。 |
| Several courts have concluded that unlawful acts are not exempt from immunity simply because they are unlawful, even in cases where the act is contrary to international law. | 若干法院认为，非法行为不受豁免，仅仅是因为这种行为是非法的， 甚至在所涉行为违反国际法的案件中也是如此。 |
| (26) | (26) |
| In order for an act to be characterized as having been “performed in an official capacity”, there must be a special connection between the act and the State. | 为了确定一项行为具备“以官方身份实施的行为”的特征，在行为和国家之间就必须存在特殊联系。 |
| Such a link has been defined in draft article 2 (b) using the formulation “State authority”, which the Commission considered sufficiently broad to refer generally to acts performed by State officials in the exercise of their functions and in the interests of the State, and is to be understood as covering the functions set out in draft article 2 (a), which refers to any individual who “represents the State or who exercises State functions”. | 第2条草案(b)项使用“国家权力”的措辞对这一联系作了界定，委员会认为该措辞足够宽泛，可泛指国家官员为行使其职能和从国家利益出发实施的行为，因此可将其理解为包含了第2条草案(a)项中规定的职能，其中提及“代表国家或行使国家职能”的任何个人。 |
| (27) | (27) |
| This formulation was considered preferable to the one initially proposed (“exercising elements of the governmental authority”) and to others that were successively considered by the Commission, in particular “governmental authority” and “sovereign authority”. | 与开始提出的措辞(“行使政府权力要素”)以及委员会后来讨论的另一些措辞，特别是与“政府权力”和“主权权力”相比，上述措辞被认为更加可取。 |
| Although they all equally reflect the requirement that there must be a special connection between the act and the State, there is the difficulty that they may be interpreted as referring exclusively to a type of State activity (governmental or executive), or give rise to the added problem of having to define the elements of governmental authority or sovereignty, which would be extremely difficult and is not considered part of the Commission’s mandate. | 虽然所有这些措辞都同样体现出在行为和国家之间必须存在一种特殊联系的要求，但存在一个问题，即它们可能被解释为特指某一种国家活动(政府或行政活动)，或导致必须对政府权力要素或主权进行界定的问题，该工作的难度极大，而且不被视为委员会任务的组成部分。 |
| In addition, it was considered preferable not to use the expression “State functions”, which is used in draft article 2 (a), in order to make a clear distinction between the definitions contained in subparagraphs (a) and (b) of the draft article. | 此外，为了明确区分第2条草案(a)项和(b)项提出的定义，不使用(a)项中使用的“国家职能”这一表述被认为更加适当。 |
| In this regard, it should be recalled that the expression “State functions”, together with “represents the State”, was used in draft article 2 (a) as a neutral term to define the link between the official and the State, without making any judgment as to the type of acts covered by immunity. | 在这方面，应当回顾，第2条草案(a)项将“国家职能”的表述及“代表国家”作为一个中性词，用于界定官员和国家之间的联系，但没有对豁免包括的行为种类作任何判断。 |
| The use of the term “authority” rather than “functions” also has the advantage of avoiding the debate on whether or not crimes under international law are “State functions”. | 使用“权力”而非“职能”一词，还有利于避免有关国际法规定的犯罪行为是否是“国家职能”的辩论。 |
| However, one member was of the view that it would have been more appropriate to use the expression “State functions” in draft article 2 (b). | 但是，有一名委员认为，第2条草案(b)项若使用“国家职能”的表述会更为贴切。 |
| (28) | (28) |
| The Commission did not consider it appropriate to include in the definition of an “act performed in an official capacity” a reference to the fact that the act must be criminal in nature. | 委员会认为，在“以官方身份实施的行为”的定义中纳入所涉行为必须具有刑事性质是不适当的。 |
| Its aim was to avoid a possible interpretation that any act performed in an official capacity is, by definition, of a criminal nature. | 这样做意在避免可能在定义上将以官方身份实施的任何行为视为刑事行为的解释。 |
| In any case, the concept of an “act performed in an official capacity” must be understood in the context of the present draft articles, which concern the immunity of State officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction. | 无论如何，“以官方身份实施的行为”的概念必须结合专门讨论国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免的本条款草案来理解。 |
| (29) | (29) |
| Lastly, although the definition contained in draft article 2 (b) concerns an “act performed in an official capacity”, the Commission considered it necessary to include in the definition an explicit reference to the author of the act; | 最后，虽然第2条草案(b)项所载定义指的是一项“以官方身份实施的行为”，但委员会认为，有必要在该定义中明确提及行为人，换句话说，即国家官员。 |
| in other words, the State official. It thereby draws attention to the fact that only a State official can perform an act in an official capacity, thus reflecting the need for a link between the author of the act and the State. | 这一点提请注意一个事实，即只有国家官员能够以官方身份实施一项行为，进而体现出在行为人和国家之间建立联系的需要。 |
| In addition, the reference to the State official creates a logical continuity with the definition of “State official” in draft article 2 (a). | 此外，提及国家官员是对第2条草案(a)项中“国家官员”定义的逻辑延续。 |
| (30) | (30) |
| The Commission does not believe that it is possible to draw up an exhaustive list of acts performed in an official capacity. | 委员会认为，列出一份以官方身份实施的行为的详尽无遗的清单是不可能的。 |
| Such acts must be identified on a case-by-case basis, taking into account the criteria examined previously, namely that the act in question has been performed by a State official, is generally attributable to the State and has been performed in “the exercise of State authority”. | 这类行为只能一件一件确定，考虑以往经过审查的标准，即所涉行为是由一名国家官员实施、基本上可归于国家，而且是在“行使国家权力”时实施的。 |
| However, there are examples from judicial practice of acts or categories of acts that may be considered as having been performed in an official capacity, regardless of how the courts specifically refer to them. | 但是，不论法院对行为的具体称谓如何，司法惯例中存在一些可能被视为以官方身份实施的行为或行为类别。 |
| Such examples can help judges and other national legal practitioners to identify whether a particular act falls into this category. | 这些实例可帮助法官和其他的国家法律从业者确定某项具体行为是否属于这一类别。 |
| (31) | (31) |
| In general, national courts have found that the following acts fall into the category of acts performed in an official capacity: military activities or those related to the armed forces, acts related to the exercise of police power, diplomatic activities and those relating to foreign affairs, legislative acts (including nationalization), acts related to the administration of justice, administrative acts of different kinds (such as the expulsion of aliens or the flagging of vessels), acts related to public loans and political acts of various kinds. | 总体而言，国家法院认为以下行为属于以官方身份实施的行为类别：军事活动或与武装部队相关的活动、 与行使政治权力相关的行为、 外交活动和与外交事务相关的活动、 立法行为(包括国有化)、 与司法相关的行为、 不同种类的行政行为(如驱逐外国人或舰船悬旗)、 与公债相关的行为， 以及不同种类的政治行为。 |
| (32) | (32) |
| Moreover, the immunity of State officials has been invoked before criminal courts in relation to the following acts that were claimed to be committed in an official capacity: torture, extermination, genocide, extrajudicial execution, enforced disappearance, forced pregnancy, deportation, denial of prisoner-of-war status, enslavement and forced labour, and acts of terrorism. | 此外，已要求刑事法院对据称以官方身份实施的以下行为对国家官员给予豁免：酷刑、灭绝、灭绝种族、法外处决、强迫失踪、强迫怀孕、驱逐、剥夺战俘地位、奴役和强迫劳动，以及恐怖主义行为。 |
| Such crimes are sometimes mentioned eo nomine, while in other cases the proceedings refer generically to crimes against humanity, war crimes, and serious and systematic human rights violations. | 有时提及这些罪行时采用具体罪名，而在其他案件中则笼统地提及危害人类罪、战争罪以及系统性地严重侵犯人权行为。 |
| Courts have considered other acts committed by members of the armed forces or security services that do not fall into the aforementioned categories; such acts include ill-treatment, abuse, unlawful detention, abduction, offences against the administration of justice and other acts relating to policing and law enforcement. | 其次，法院也审理由武装部队或安全机构成员实施、不属于上述类别的其他行为，包括虐待、滥用权力、非法拘留、绑架、无视司法的行为以及与警务和执法有关的其他行为。 |
| (33) | (33) |
| In a number of cases, national courts have concluded that the act in question exceeded the limits of official functions, or functions of the State. | 在一些案件中，国家法院认为，所涉行为超越了公务职能或国家职能的界限。 |
| For example, in a case related to the assassination of a political opponent, a court has indicated that “conduct designed to result in the assassination of an individual” is not an act covered by immunity. | 例如，在涉及一起谋杀政治对手案时，一家法院表示，“有意导致政治对手被谋杀的行为”不是豁免范围内的行为。 |
| Similarly, national courts have generally denied immunity in cases linked to corruption, whether in the form of diversion or misappropriation of public funds or money-laundering, or any other type of corruption, on the grounds that such acts “are distinguishable from the performance of State functions protected by international custom in accordance with the principles of sovereignty and diplomatic immunity” and “by their nature, do not relate to the exercise of sovereignty or governmental authority, nor are they in the public interest”. | 同样，在与腐败有关的案件中，无论是转用或挪用公款、洗钱还是任何其他类型的腐败行为，国家法院一般都拒绝给予豁免，理由是这类行为“有别于按照主权原则和外交豁免原则受到国际惯例保护的履行国家职能的行为”， 而且“性质上与行使主权和政府权力无关，也不符合公共利益。 |
| Following the same logic, courts have not accepted that acts performed by State officials that are closely linked to a private activity and for the official’s personal enrichment, not the benefit of the sovereign, are covered by immunity. | ” 根据同样的逻辑，法院认为，国家官员因从事与私人活动密切联系、谋求官员个人致富而非主权利益的行为而得到豁免，是不可接受的。 |
| (34) | (34) |
| With regard to the examples of possible acts performed in an official capacity, special mention should be made of the way in which national courts have dealt with crimes under international law, especially torture. | 关于可能以官方身份实施的行为的实例，应特别提及国家法院处理国际法规定的罪行，特别是处理酷刑的方式。 |
| While in some cases they have been considered acts performed in an official capacity (although illegal or aberrations), in others they have been qualified as ultra vires acts or acts that are not consistent with the nature of State functions, and should therefore be excluded from the category of acts defined in this paragraph. | 虽然在有些案件中这类行为被视为以官方身份实施的行为(但其实是非法和异常的行为)， 但在另一些案件中，它们被归类为越权行为或不符合国家职能性质的行为， 因此应排除在本款界定的行为类别以外。 |
| Moreover, attention should be drawn to the fact that such different treatment of crimes under international law has arisen both in cases in which national courts have recognized immunity and in those in which they have rejected it. | 此外，应提请注意一个事实：这种对国际法规定的罪行的不同处理方式，既出现在国家法院承认豁免、也发生在国家法院拒绝豁免的案件中。 |
| (35) | (35) |
| In any case, it should be borne in mind that the definition of an “act performed in an official capacity” set out in draft article 2 (b) refers to the distinct elements of this category of acts and is without prejudice to the question of limitations and exceptions to immunity that is addressed in draft article 7. | 无论如何，应当牢记，第2条草案(b)项中规定的“以官方身份实施的行为”的定义指的是这种行为类别的独特要素，这并不妨碍条款草案7中处理的对豁免的限制和例外问题。 |
| Part Two Immunity ratione personae | 第二部分 属人豁免 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) | (1) |
| Although immunity of State officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction is a single legal category, differences can be established in accordance with the different types of State officials, especially in light of the different positions that they hold within the State and the different roles that they play. | 虽然国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免在法律上是一个单一类别，但可以根据国家官员的不同类型，特别是根据他们每个人在国内的不同地位和发挥的不同作用，来确定差异。 |
| The Commission has taken these circumstances into account in defining two legal regimes, which are addressed in Parts Two and Three of the draft articles under the titles “Immunity ratione personae” and “Immunity ratione materiae”. | 在题为“属人豁免”和“属事豁免”的条款草案第二部分和第三部分界定两项法律制度时，委员会考虑到了这些情况。 |
| (2) | (2) |
| Part Two of the draft articles concerns the immunity ratione personae of State officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction. | 条款草案第二部分专门讨论国家官员的外国刑事管辖属人豁免。 |
| This part sets out the normative elements defining the legal regime applicable to this type of immunity, and consists of two draft articles. | 这一部分包含界定适用于这类豁免的法律制度的规范性要素，包括两条草案。 |
| Draft article 3 addresses the subjective element of immunity ratione personae (State officials enjoying immunity), and draft article 4 concerns the substantive element (the acts covered by immunity) and the temporal element (the time during which immunity is applicable). | 第3条草案涵盖属人豁免的主体要素(享有豁免的国家官员)，第4条草案包含实质性要素(豁免涵盖的行为)和时间要素(适用豁免的时间期限)。 |
| Both draft articles must be read together for a correct understanding of the legal regime applicable to immunity ratione personae. | 为了正确理解适用于属人豁免的法律制度，这两条草案必须放在一起解读。 |
| (3) | (3) |
| Additionally, paragraph 3 of draft article 4 defines the relationship between the immunity from jurisdiction ratione personae and the immunity from jurisdiction ratione materiae applicable to Heads of State, Heads of Government and Ministers for Foreign Affairs when they are no longer in office. | 此外，第4条草案第3款界定了属人管辖豁免和适用于任期届满后的国家元首、政府首脑和外交部长的属事管辖豁免之间的关系。 |
| Article 3 Persons enjoying immunity ratione personae | 第3条 享有属人豁免的人员 |
| Heads of State, Heads of Government and Ministers for Foreign Affairs enjoy immunity ratione personae from the exercise of foreign criminal jurisdiction. | 国家元首、政府首脑和外交部长对外国行使的刑事管辖享有属人豁免。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) | (1) |
| Draft article 3 lists the State officials who enjoy immunity ratione personae from foreign criminal jurisdiction, namely the Head of State, the Head of Government and the Minister for Foreign Affairs. | 第3条草案列出了享有外国刑事管辖属人豁免的国家官员，包括：国家元首、政府首脑和外交部长。 |
| The draft article confines itself to identifying the persons to whom this type of immunity applies, making no reference to its substantive scope. | 该条草案仅限于指出此类豁免适用的人员而未提及其实质性范围。 |
| (2) | (2) |
| The Commission considers that there are two reasons, one representational and one functional, for according immunity ratione personae to Heads of State, Heads of Government and Ministers for Foreign Affairs. | 委员会认为，从代表性和职能这两个方面看，有理由承认国家元首、政府首脑和外交部长的属人豁免。 |
| First, under the rules of international law, these three office holders represent the State in its international relations simply by virtue of their office, directly and with no need for specific powers to be granted by the State. | 首先，根据国际法规范，担任这些职位的人员仅凭其职务就可在国际关系中直接代表国家而无需国家专门授权其这样做。 |
| Second, they must be able to discharge their functions unhindered. | 其次，他们必须能够不受阻碍地行使职权。 |
| It is irrelevant whether those officials are nationals of the State in which they hold the office of Head of State, Head of Government or Minister for Foreign Affairs. | 这些人员是否为其任国家元首、政府首脑或外交部长的国家的公民无关紧要。 |
| (3) | (3) |
| The statement that Heads of State enjoy immunity ratione personae is not subject to dispute, given that this is established in existing rules of customary international law. | 国家元首享有属人豁免，对此没有争议，因为这一点在现行习惯国际法规则中已得到确立。 |
| In addition, various conventions contain provisions referring directly to the immunity from jurisdiction of the Head of State. | 此外，多项公约中都包括直接涉及国家元首的管辖豁免的规定。 |
| In this connection, mention should be made of article 21, paragraph 1, of the Convention on Special Missions, which expressly acknowledges that when the Head of State leads a special mission, he or she enjoys, in addition to what is granted in the Convention, the immunities accorded by international law to Heads of State on an official visit. | 在这方面，必须提及《特别使团公约》第21条第1款，其中明确表示国家元首带领特别使团时，他或她除《公约》中的规定外还享有国际法赋予进行正式访问的国家元首的豁免。 |
| Similarly, article 50, paragraph 1, of the Vienna Convention on the Representation of States in Their Relations with International Organizations of a Universal Character refers to the other “immunities accorded by international law to Heads of State”. | 与此类似，《维也纳关于国家在其对普遍性国际组织关系上的代表权公约》第五十条第1款提到了其他“国际法赋予国家元首的豁免”。 |
| Along the same lines, albeit in a different field, the United Nations Convention on Jurisdictional Immunities of States and Their Property includes, in the saving clause in article 3, paragraph 2, an express reference to the immunities accorded under international law to Heads of State. | 本着类似的原则，在另一不同领域，《联合国国家及其财产管辖豁免公约》在第三条第2款的保留条款中明确提到了根据国际法赋予国家元首的豁免。 |
| (4) | (4) |
| The immunity from foreign criminal jurisdiction of the Head of State has also been recognized in case law at both the international and national levels. | 国家元首的外国刑事管辖豁免在国际和国内的判例法中也得到了承认。 |
| Thus, the International Court of Justice has expressly mentioned the immunity of the Head of State from foreign criminal jurisdiction in the Arrest Warrant and Certain Questions of Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters cases. | 为此，国际法院在逮捕证案 和关于刑事事项互助的若干问题案 中明确提到国家元首享有外国刑事管辖豁免。 |
| It must be emphasized that examples of national judicial practice, although limited in number, are consistent in showing that Heads of State enjoy immunity ratione personae from foreign criminal jurisdiction, both in the proceedings concerning the immunity of the Head of State and in the reasoning that such courts follow in deciding whether other State officials also enjoy immunity from criminal jurisdiction. | 必须强调的是，国家司法惯例的先例虽然数量有限，但一直表明国家元首享有外国刑事管辖属人豁免，在事关国家元首豁免的程序和此类法院在决定是否其他国家官员也享有刑事管辖豁免时的论证中都是如此。 |
| (5) | (5) |
| The Commission considers that the immunity from foreign criminal jurisdiction ratione personae of the Head of State is accorded exclusively to persons who actually hold that office, and that the title given to the Head of State in each State, the conditions under which he or she acquires the status of Head of State (as a sovereign or otherwise) and the individual or collegial nature of the office are irrelevant for the purposes of the present draft articles. | 委员会认为，关于国家元首的外国刑事管辖属人豁免，该豁免仅赋予现任该职位的人员，各国给予国家元首的头衔、他或她获得国家元首身份的条件(主权或其他)以及该职位是个人还是集体性质，就本条款草案的目的而言无关紧要。 |
| (6) | (6) |
| The recognition of immunity ratione personae in favour of the Head of Government and the Minister for Foreign Affairs is a result of the fact that, under international law, their functions of representing the State have become recognized as approximate to those of the Head of State. | 政府首脑和外交部长享有属人管辖豁免之所以得到承认是因为，依照国际法，其作为国家代表的职能接近于国家元首。 |
| Examples of this may be found in the recognition of full powers for the Head of State, the Head of Government and the Minister for Foreign Affairs for the conclusion of treaties and the equality of the three categories of officials in terms of their international protection and their involvement in the representation of the State. | 国家元首、政府首脑和外交部长缔结条约的全权得到承认、 这三类官员在享受国际保护 和在国际上参与代表国家方面 享有平等地位，都是这一现象的实例。 |
| The immunity of Heads of Government and Ministers for Foreign Affairs has been referred to in the Convention on Special Missions, the Vienna Convention on the Representation of States in Their Relations with International Organizations of a Universal Character and, implicitly, the United Nations Convention on Jurisdictional Immunities of States and Their Property. | 政府首脑和外交部长享有的豁免在《特别使团公约》、《维也纳关于国家在其对普遍性国际组织关系上的代表权公约》以及隐示地在《联合国国家及其财产管辖豁免公约》中有所提及。 |
| The inclusion of the Minister for Foreign Affairs in the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Crimes against Internationally Protected Persons, including Diplomatic Agents, is particularly significant, since the Commission, in its own draft articles on the subject, decided not to include government officials in the list of internationally protected persons, but the Minister for Foreign Affairs was nevertheless included in the final Convention adopted by States. | 将外交部长纳入《关于防止和惩处侵害应受国际保护人员包括外交代表的罪行的公约》意义特别重大，因为委员会在关于该议题的条款草案中决定不将政府官员纳入受国际保护人员名单， 但外交部长还是纳入了最终由各国通过的《公约》。 |
| (7) | (7) |
| All of the above-mentioned examples have emerged from the work of the Commission, which has on several occasions dealt with the question of whether expressly to include Heads of State, Heads of Government and Ministers for Foreign Affairs in international instruments. | 上述实例全部出自委员会以往的工作，委员会在工作中曾多次处理是否明确将国家元首、政府首脑和外交部长纳入国际文书的问题。 |
| In this connection, it was noted that article 3 of the United Nations Convention on Jurisdictional Immunities of States and Their Property included a specific mention of the Head of State while excluding any express reference to the Head of Government and Minister for Foreign Affairs. | 对此，有委员提到，《联合国国家及其财产管辖豁免公约》第三条具体提及国家元首，只字未提政府首脑和外交部长。 |
| However, there is very little reason to conclude that these examples mean that in the present draft articles the Commission must treat Heads of State, Heads of Government and Ministers for Foreign Affairs differently. It is even less reasonable to conclude that the Head of Government and Minister for Foreign Affairs must be excluded from draft article 3. | 但没有多少理由可得出结论认为这些实例意味着在本条草案中委员会必须同样区别对待国家元首、政府首脑和外交部长，更没有理由得出结论认为政府首脑和外交部长必须排除在第3条草案之外。 |
| A number of factors must be taken into account here. | 为此目的必须考虑多种因素。 |
| First, the present draft articles refer solely to the immunity from foreign criminal jurisdiction of State officials, whereas the Convention on Special Missions and the Vienna Convention on the Representation of States in Their Relations with International Organizations of a Universal Character refer to all the immunities that Heads of State, Heads of Government and Ministers for Foreign Affairs may enjoy. | 首先，本套条款草案只涉及国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免，而《特别使团公约》和《维也纳关于国家在其对普遍性国际组织关系上的代表权公约》涉及国家元首、政府首脑和外交部长可能享有的所有豁免。 |
| Second, the United Nations Convention on Jurisdictional Immunities of States and Their Property refers to the immunities of States; | 其次，《联合国国家及其财产管辖豁免公约》涉及国家豁免； |
| immunity from criminal jurisdiction remains outside its scope. | 刑事管辖豁免在其范围之外。 |
| In addition, far from rejecting the immunities that may be enjoyed by the Head of Government and the Minister for Foreign Affairs, the Commission actually recognized them, but simply did not mention these categories specifically in article 3, paragraph 2, “since it would be difficult to prepare an exhaustive list, and any enumeration of such persons would moreover raise the issues of the basis and of the extent of the jurisdictional immunity exercised by such persons”. | 此外，委员会未曾声明反对政府首脑和外交部长可能享有的豁免：反之，委员会认可这些豁免，只是在第3条第2款中未专门提及这些类别，“因为难以列出穷尽清单，此外此类人员的任何列举将带来此类人员行使的管辖豁免依据和范围的问题”。 |
| And third, it must also be borne in mind that all the examples mentioned above preceded the judgment by the International Court of Justice in the Arrest Warrant case. | 第三，还应注意，上述所有实例都早于国际法院就2000年4月11日逮捕证案作出的判决。 |
| (8) | (8) |
| In its judgment in the Arrest Warrant case, the International Court of Justice expressly stated that “in international law it is firmly established that, as also diplomatic and consular agents, certain holders of high-ranking office in a State, such as the Head of State, Head of Government and Minister for Foreign Affairs, enjoy immunities from jurisdiction in other States, both civil and criminal”. | 国际法院在2000年4月11日逮捕证案的判决中明确表示，“国际法中已明确确立的一点是，国家元首、政府首脑和外交部长等一些任国家高级官员的人员同外交和领事人员一样在他国享有管辖豁免，包括民事和刑事豁免”。 |
| This statement was later reiterated by the Court in the case concerning Certain Questions of Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters. | 法院后来在关于刑事事项互助的若干问题案中重申了该声明。 |
| Both of these judgments were discussed extensively by the Commission, particularly with regard to the Minister for Foreign Affairs. | 委员会对两次声明都进行了大量讨论，特别是关于外交部长的问题。 |
| Members generally expressed the view that the Arrest Warrant case reflects the current state of international law and that it must accordingly be concluded that there is a customary rule under which the immunity from foreign criminal jurisdiction ratione personae of the Minister for Foreign Affairs is recognized. | 委员们普遍表示认为国际法院在逮捕证案中的判决反映了国际法发展至今的现状，因此应得出结论认为，认可外交部长的外国刑事管辖属人豁免是习惯规则。 |
| In the view of these members, the position of the Minister for Foreign Affairs and the special functions he or she carries out in international relations constitute the basis for the recognition of such immunity from foreign criminal jurisdiction. | 这些委员认为，外交部长的地位及其在国际关系领域的特殊职能是承认这种外国刑事管辖豁免的依据。 |
| However, some members of the Commission pointed out that the Court’s judgment did not constitute sufficient grounds for concluding that a customary rule existed, as it did not contain a thorough analysis of the practice and several judges expressed opinions that differed from the majority view. | 然而，委员会一些委员指出，法院的判决不足以作为得出结论称存在习惯规则的依据，因为判决未充分分析惯例，且好几位法官表达了不同于大多数人的意见。 |
| One of those members nevertheless said that, in view of the fact that the Court’s judgment in that case has not been opposed by States, the absence of a customary rule does not prevent the Commission from including Ministers for Foreign Affairs among the persons enjoying immunity ratione personae from foreign criminal jurisdiction, as a matter of progressive development of international law. | 尽管如此，其中的一名委员还是表示，鉴于法院对此案的判决未受到各国的反对，不存在习惯规则并不妨碍委员会在逐渐发展国际法的过程中将外交部长列入享有外国刑事管辖属人豁免的人员中。 |
| (9) | (9) |
| As to the practice of national courts, the Commission has also found that, while there are very few rulings on the immunity ratione personae from foreign criminal jurisdiction of the Head of Government and almost none in respect of the Minister for Foreign Affairs, the national courts that have had occasion to comment on this subject have nevertheless always recognized that those high-ranking officials do have immunity from foreign criminal jurisdiction during their term of office. | 关于国家法院的惯例，委员会还考虑到，判决涉及政府首脑外国刑事管辖属人豁免的情况极少，而涉及外交部长外国刑事管辖属人豁免的情况几乎不存在，尽管如此，曾对这一专题发表意见的国家法院总是承认这些高级官员在任期内确实享有外国刑事管辖豁免。 |
| (10) | (10) |
| As a result of the discussion, the Commission found that there are sufficient grounds in practice and in international law to conclude that the Head of State, Head of Government and Minister for Foreign Affairs enjoy immunity ratione personae from foreign criminal jurisdiction. | 根据讨论，委员会认为，在实践和在国际法中有充分理由断定，国家元首、政府首脑和外交部长享有外国刑事管辖属人豁免。 |
| Consequently, it has been decided to include them in draft article 3. | 因此，委员会决定将他们列入第3条草案。 |
| (11) | (11) |
| The Commission has also considered whether other State officials could be included in the list of the persons enjoying immunity ratione personae. | 委员会还审议了其他类别的国家官员能否被列入享受属人豁免的人员清单。 |
| This has been raised as a possibility by some members of the Commission in light of the evolution of international relations, particularly the fact that high-ranking officials other than the Head of State, Head of Government and Minister for Foreign Affairs are becoming increasingly involved in international forums and making frequent trips outside the national territory. | 鉴于国际关系的发展，特别是国家元首、政府首脑和外交部长之外的高级官员正在越来越多地参与国际论坛并频繁到本国领土之外访问，委员会一些委员提出了这种可能性。 |
| Some members of the Commission have supported the view that other high-ranking officials should be included in draft article 3 with a reference to the Arrest Warrant case, stating that the use of the words “such as” should be interpreted to extend the regime of immunity ratione personae to high-ranking State officials, other than the Head of State, Head of Government and Minister for Foreign Affairs, who have major responsibilities within the State and who are involved in representation of the State in the fields of their activity. | 委员会一些委员为支持他们关于高级官员应被列入第3条草案的看法援引了国际法院在逮捕证案中的判决，称使用“例如”一词应被解释为将属人豁免制度扩大至国家元首、政府首脑和外交部长之外、在国内拥有重大职权并在其活动领域中在国际上代表国家的高级官员。 |
| In this connection, some members of the Commission have suggested that immunity ratione personae is enjoyed by a minister of defence or a minister of international trade. | 在这方面，委员会一些委员提出，国防部长或国际贸易部长或许可以享有属人豁免。 |
| Other members of the Commission, however, see the use of the words “such as” as not widening the circle of the persons who enjoy this category of immunity, since the Court uses the words in the context of a specific dispute, the subject of which is the immunity from foreign criminal jurisdiction of a Minister for Foreign Affairs. | 但另一方面，委员会另一些委员认为使用“例如”一词不是为了扩大享有这类豁免者的范围，因为法院是在一项具体争端的上下文中使用该词的，而其中审议的正是一位外交部长的外国刑事管辖豁免。 |
| Lastly, several members of the Commission have drawn attention to the difficulty inherent in determining which persons should be deemed to be “other high-ranking officials”, since this will depend to a large extent on each country’s organizational structure and method of conferring powers, which differ from one State to the next. | 最后，还必须注意到，委员会的一些委员提请委员会注意，确定哪些人应被视为“其他高级官员”本身即很困难，因为这在很大程度上取决于国家的组织结构和赋予职能的方式，而国与国之间在这方面各不相同。 |
| (12) | (12) |
| In the case concerning Certain Questions of Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters, the International Court of Justice reverted to the subject of the immunity of high-ranking State officials other than the Head of State, Head of Government and Minister for Foreign Affairs. | 在关于刑事事项互助的若干问题案中，国际法院重新提到国家元首、政府首脑和外交部长之外的其他高级国家官员的豁免这一主题。 |
| The Court dealt separately with the immunity of the Head of State of Djibouti and of the two other high-ranking officials, namely the Attorney General (procureur de la République) and the Head of National Security. | 法院分开处理了吉布提国家元首的豁免和总检察长(共和国总检察长)和国家安全主管这两位其他高级官员的豁免。 |
| With regard to the Head of State, the Court made a very clear pronouncement that in general, he or she enjoys immunity from criminal jurisdiction ratione personae, although that was not applicable in the specific case, since the invitation to testify issued by the French authorities was not a measure of constraint. | 关于国家元首，法院明确宣布，一般而言，他享有外国刑事管辖属人豁免，尽管这种豁免并不具体适用于本案，因为法国当局发出的作证邀请并非一项限制性措施。 |
| With regard to the other high-ranking officials, the Court stated that the acts attributed to them were not carried out within the scope of their duties; | 关于其他高级官员，法院表示，归于他们的行为不是在他们职责范围内实施的； |
| it considered that Djibouti did not make it sufficiently clear whether it was claiming State immunity, personal immunity or some other type of immunity; | 法院认为，吉布提没有充分明确地说明该国主张的是国家豁免、属人豁免还是其他类型的豁免； |
| and it concluded that “[t]he Court notes first that there are no grounds in international law upon which it could be said that the officials concerned were entitled to personal immunities, not being diplomats within the meaning of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations of 1961, and the Convention on Special Missions of 1969 not being applicable in this case”. | 法院的结论是，“法院注意到，首先，由于有关官员不是1961年《维也纳外交关系公约》所称的外交官，1969年《特别使团公约》也不适用于本案，因而国际法中没有支持有关官员享有属人豁免的任何依据”。 |
| (13) | (13) |
| In national judicial practice, a number of decisions deal with the immunity ratione personae from foreign criminal jurisdiction of other high-ranking officials. | 在国家司法实践中，有多项判决涉及其他高级官员的外国刑事管辖属人豁免问题。 |
| However, the decisions in question are not conclusive. | 然而，所涉判决并没有得出确切的结论。 |
| While some of the decisions are in favour of the immunity ratione personae of high-ranking officials such as the minister of defence or minister of international trade, in others, the national courts found that the person on trial did not enjoy immunity, either because he or she was not a Head of State, Head of Government or Minister for Foreign Affairs or because he or she did not belong to the narrow circle of officials who deserve such treatment, which illustrates the major difficulty involved in identifying the high-ranking officials other than the Head of State, Head of Government and Minister for Foreign Affairs who can indisputably be deemed to enjoy immunity ratione personae. | 一些判决赞成国防部长或国际贸易部长等高级官员享有属人豁免， 而在另一些判决中，国家法院判定受审人不享有豁免，或因为他或她不是国家元首、政府首脑或外交部长，或因为他或她不属于有资格享受这项待遇的少数官员， 这显示了确定除国家元首、政府首脑和外交部长以外可以被视为毫无争议地享有属人豁免的高级官员的主要难点。 |
| It should also be pointed out, however, that in some of these decisions, the immunity from foreign criminal jurisdiction of a high-ranking official is analysed from various perspectives (immunity ratione personae, immunity ratione materiae, State immunity, immunity deriving from a special mission), reflecting the uncertainty in determining precisely what immunity from foreign criminal jurisdiction might be enjoyed by high-ranking officials other than the Head of State, Head of Government and Minister for Foreign Affairs. | 但还应当指出，在一些判决中，一名高级官员的外国刑事管辖豁免是从不同的角度进行分析的(属人豁免、属事豁免、国家豁免、源于特别使团的豁免)，这反映出在准确认定国家元首、政府首脑和外交部长以外的高级官员可享有的外国刑事管辖豁免是哪种豁免方面存在着不确定性。 |
| (14) | (14) |
| On another level, it must be recalled that the Commission has already referred to the immunity of other high-ranking officials in its draft articles on special missions and its draft articles on the representation of States in their relations with international organizations. | 在另一个层面上，应回顾指出，委员会在关于特别使团的条款草案和关于国家在其对国际组织关系上的代表权的条款草案中已提及其他高级官员的豁免。 |
| It must be recalled that these instruments only establish a regime under which such persons continue to enjoy the immunities accorded to them under international law beyond the framework of those instruments. | 但应回顾指出，这些文书只不过是建立了一个保障制度，使此类人员在该制度下继续享有国际法赋予他们的、超越这些文书框架的豁免。 |
| However, neither in the text of the draft articles nor in the Commission’s commentaries thereto is it clearly indicated what these immunities are and whether they do or do not include immunity from foreign criminal jurisdiction ratione personae. | 然而，无论是在条款草案案文中，还是委员会对案文的评注中，都没有明确说明这些豁免是什么，以及它们是否包括外国刑事管辖属人豁免。 |
| It must also be emphasized that although these high-ranking officials may be deemed to be included in the category of “representatives of the State” mentioned in article 2, paragraph 1 (b) (iv), of the United Nations Convention on Jurisdictional Immunities of States and Their Property, that instrument – as previously mentioned – does not apply to “criminal proceedings”. | 还必须强调的是，虽然这些高层官员可能被视为属于《联合国国家及其财产管辖豁免公约》第2条第1款(b)项(四)目中所称的“国家代表”，但如上文所述，该文书并不适用于“刑事诉讼”。 |
| Nevertheless, some members of the Commission stated that high-ranking officials do benefit from the immunity regime of special missions, including immunity from foreign criminal jurisdiction, when they are on an official visit to a third State as part of their fulfilment of the functions of representing the State in the framework of their substantive duties. | 不过，一些委员会委员表示，作为在实质性职责框架内履行国家代表职能的一部分，高级官员在第三国进行正式访问时确实会受益于特别使团的豁免制度，包括外国刑事管辖豁免。 |
| It was said that this offers a means of ensuring the proper fulfilment of the sectoral functions of this category of high-ranking officials at the international level. | 有人说，这是一种确保这类高级官员在国际一级恰当履行部门职能的办法。 |
| (15) | (15) |
| In view of the foregoing, the Commission considers that “other high-ranking officials” do not enjoy immunity ratione personae for the purposes of the present draft articles, but that this is without prejudice to the rules pertaining to immunity ratione materiae, and on the understanding that when they are on official visits, they enjoy immunity from foreign criminal jurisdiction based on the rules of international law relating to special missions. | 考虑到上文所述，委员会认为，为了本条款草案的目的，“其他高级官员”不享有属人豁免，但这并不影响关于属事豁免的规则，也不影响这样一种理解，即这些高级官员在进行正式访问时基于有关特别使团的国际法规则享有外国刑事管辖豁免。 |
| (16) | (16) |
| The phrase “from the exercise of” has been used in the draft article with reference both to immunity ratione personae and to foreign criminal jurisdiction. | 条款草案在提及属人豁免和外国刑事管辖时使用了“行使的”一词。 |
| The Commission decided not to use the same phrase in draft article 1 (Scope of the present draft articles) so as not to prejudge the substantive aspects of immunity, in particular its scope, that will be taken up in other draft articles. | 委员会决定在第1条草案(本条款草案的范围)中不使用该词，以避免预先判断将在其他条款草案中论述的豁免的实质性内容，特别是其范围。 |
| In the present draft article, the Commission has decided to retain the phrase “from the exercise of,” since it illustrates the relationship between immunity and foreign criminal jurisdiction and emphasizes the essentially procedural nature of the immunity that comes into play in relation to the exercise of criminal jurisdiction with respect to a specific act. | 在本条款草案中，委员会决定保留“行使的”一词，因为它说明了豁免和外国刑事管辖的关系，并强调了对具体行为行使刑事管辖时发挥作用的豁免本质上的程序性质。 |
| Article 4 Scope of immunity ratione personae | 第4条 属人豁免的范围 |
| 1. | 1. |
| Heads of State, Heads of Government and Ministers for Foreign Affairs enjoy immunity ratione personae only during their term of office. | 国家元首、政府首脑和外交部长仅在其任职期间享有属人豁免。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| Such immunity ratione personae covers all acts performed, whether in a private or official capacity, by Heads of State, Heads of Government and Ministers for Foreign Affairs during or prior to their term of office. | 国家元首、政府首脑和外交部长享有的此种属人豁免涵盖他们在任职之前或任职期间的所有行为，无论是私人行为还是公务行为。 |
| 3. | 3. |
| The cessation of immunity ratione personae is without prejudice to the application of the rules of international law concerning immunity ratione materiae. | 属人豁免的停止不妨碍关于属事豁免的国际法规则的适用。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) | (1) |
| Draft article 4 deals with the scope of immunity ratione personae from both the temporal and material standpoints. | 第4条草案从时间和实质两个角度阐述了属人豁免的范围。 |
| The scope of immunity ratione personae must be understood by looking at the temporal aspect (para. 1) in conjunction with the material aspect (para. 2). | 必须将时间方面(第1款)与实质方面(第2款)相结合理解属人豁免的范围。 |
| Although each of these aspects is conceptually distinct, the Commission has chosen to cover them in a single article, since this offers a more comprehensive view of the meaning and scope of the immunity enjoyed by Heads of State, Heads of Government and Ministers for Foreign Affairs. | 虽然这两个方面是不同概念，但是为了更加全面地理解国家元首、政府首脑和外交部长享有的这种豁免的含义和范围，委员会选择在同一条内涵盖这两个方面。 |
| The Commission has decided to cover the temporal aspect first, since this gives a better understanding of the scope of immunity ratione personae, which is limited to a specific period of time. | 委员会决定先阐述时间方面，这样可以更好地理解属人豁免这种仅限于特定时间段的豁免的范围。 |
| (2) | (2) |
| With regard to the temporal scope of immunity ratione personae, the Commission has thought it necessary to include the adverb “only” so as to emphasize the point that this type of immunity applies to Heads of State, Heads of Government and Ministers for Foreign Affairs exclusively during the period when they hold office. | 关于属人豁免的时间范围，委员会认为有必要加上“仅”这个副词，以强调国家元首、政府首脑和外交部长享有的这种豁免只在其任职期间适用。 |
| This is consistent with the very reason for according such immunity, which is the special position held by such officials within the State’s organizational structure and which, under international law, places them in a special situation of having a dual representational and functional link to the State in the ambit of international relations. | 这符合授予这种豁免的原因，即这些官员在国家的组织结构中担任的特殊职务，根据国际法，他们因此处于在国际关系中与国家有代表性和职务性双重联系的特殊地位。 |
| Consequently, immunity ratione personae loses its significance when the person enjoying it ceases to hold one of those posts. | 因此，当享有豁免者不再担任这些职务时，属人豁免便失去了意义。 |
| (3) | (3) |
| This position has been upheld by the International Court of Justice, which stated in the Arrest Warrant case that “after a person ceases to hold the office of Minister for Foreign Affairs, he or she will no longer enjoy all of the immunities accorded by international law in other States. | 这一立场也得到国际法院的支持，国际法院在逮捕证案中指出，“当一人不再担任外交部长后，他(她)就不再享有国际法授予的在其他国家享有的一切豁免。 |
| Provided that it has jurisdiction under international law, a court of one State may try a former Minister for Foreign Affairs of another State in respect of acts committed prior or subsequent to his or her period of office, as well as in respect of acts committed during that period of office in a private capacity”. | 只要根据国际法拥有管辖权，一国的法院可以就另一国的前任外交部长在任期之前、之后的行为及其在任期间的私人行为，对其进行审判”。 |
| Although the Court was referring to the Minister for Foreign Affairs, the same reasoning applies, a fortiori, to the Head of State and the Head of Government. | 虽然国际法院只提到了外交部长，但是这一结论肯定也适用于国家元首和政府首脑。 |
| Moreover, the limitation of immunity ratione personae to the period of time in which the persons enjoying such immunity hold office is also recognized in the conventions establishing special regimes of immunity ratione personae, particularly the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations and the Convention on Special Missions. | 此外，确立属人豁免特别制度的公约，尤其是《维也纳外交关系公约》和《特别使团公约》也承认属人豁免仅限于享有属人豁免者任职期间。 |
| The Commission itself, in its commentaries to the draft articles on jurisdictional immunities of States and their property, stated that “[t]he immunities ratione personae, unlike immunities ratione materiae which continue to survive after the termination of the official functions, will no longer be operative once the public offices are vacated or terminated”. | 委员会在国家及其财产的管辖豁免条款草案评注中也说过：“属人豁免与属事豁免不同，后者在官方职务终止后仍然继续存在，前者则于公职一旦解除或终止后即无效。 |
| The strict temporal scope of immunity ratione personae is also confirmed by various national court decisions. | ” 各种国内法院裁决也确认过属人豁免的严格时间范围。 |
| (4) | (4) |
| Consequently, the Commission considers that after the term of office of the Head of State, Head of Government or Minister for Foreign Affairs has ended, immunity ratione personae ceases. | 因此，委员会认为，国家元首、政府首脑或外交部长任期结束后，属人豁免即停止。 |
| The Commission has not thought it necessary to indicate the specific criteria to be taken into account in order to determine when the term of office of the persons enjoying such immunity begins and ends, since this depends on each State’s legal order, and practice in this area varies. | 委员会认为无需说明确定享有豁免者任期何时开始、何时结束的具体标准，因为这很大程度上取决于各国的法律，这方面的做法各不相同。 |
| (5) | (5) |
| During – and only during – the term of office, immunity ratione personae extends to all the acts carried out by the Head of State, Head of Government and Minister for Foreign Affairs, both those carried out in a private capacity and those performed in an official capacity. | 属人豁免涵盖国家元首、政府首脑和外交部长任职期间――仅限任职期间――的所有行为，不论是私人行为还是公务行为。 |
| In this way, immunity ratione personae is configured as “full immunity” with reference to any act carried out by any of the individuals just mentioned. | 因此，属人豁免被定义为对上述个人任何行为的“完全豁免”。 |
| This configuration reflects State practice. | 对属人豁免的这一描述反映了国家实践。 |
| (6) | (6) |
| As the International Court of Justice stated in the Arrest Warrant case, with particular reference to a Minister for Foreign Affairs, extension of immunity to acts performed in both a private and an official capacity is necessary to ensure that the persons enjoying immunity ratione personae are not prevented from exercising their specific official functions, since “[t]he consequences of such impediment to the exercise of those official functions are equally serious … regardless of whether the arrest relates to alleged acts performed in an ‘official’ capacity or a ‘private’ capacity”. | 正如国际法院在逮捕证案中特别提到外交部长时所述，对以私人行为和公务行为都给予豁免是必要的，以确保享有属人豁免者可以不受阻碍地行使公职，因为“(…)不论逮捕原因是公务行为还是私人行为，阻碍行使这类公职的后果同样严重。 |
| Thus, “no distinction can be drawn between acts performed by a Minister for Foreign Affairs in an ‘official’ capacity, and those claimed to have been performed in a ‘private capacity’”. | ” 因此，用国际法院的话说就是，“无法区分外交部长以‘公务’身份所作的行为与据称以‘私人’身份所作的行为”。 |
| The same reasoning must apply, a fortiori, to the Head of State and Head of Government. | 不必说，同样的推理必然适用于国家元首和政府首脑。 |
| (7) | (7) |
| The fullness of immunity ratione personae is also reflected in the present draft articles, which do not establish any limitation or exception applicable to this type of immunity, in contrast to the case of immunity ratione materiae by virtue of draft article 7. | 属人豁免的“完全性”也体现在本条款草案中，本条款草案没有规定适用于这类豁免的任何限制或例外情况，这一点与第7条草案规定的属事豁免不同。 |
| (8) | (8) |
| As regards the terminology used to refer to acts covered by immunity ratione personae, it must be borne in mind that no single, uniform wording is actually in use. | 关于指代属人豁免涵盖的行为的术语，必须注意到，实际上没有单一、统一的措词。 |
| For example, the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations makes no express distinction between acts carried out in a private or official capacity in referring to acts to which the immunity from criminal jurisdiction of diplomatic agents extends, although it is understood to apply to both categories. | 例如，《维也纳外交关系公约》在提到外交人员享有的刑事管辖豁免的行为时，没有明确区分私人行为与公务行为，不过理解为两种情况均适用。 |
| Moreover, the terminology in other instruments, documents and judicial decisions, as well as in the literature, also lacks consistency, with the use, among others, of the expressions “official acts and private acts”, “acts performed in the exercise of their functions”, “acts linked to official functions” and “acts carried out in an official or private capacity”. | 此外，其他文书、文件、司法决定以及文献在用词上也缺乏一致性，有的用“官方行为和私人行为”，有的用“行使职能时所作的行为”，有的用“与公务有关的行为”，还有的用“以公务或私人身份所作的行为”。 |
| In the present draft article, the Commission has found it preferable to use the phrase “acts performed, whether in a private or official capacity”, following the wording used by the International Court of Justice in the Arrest Warrant case. | 在本条款草案中，委员会认为最好沿用国际法院在逮捕证案中的用法，使用“无论是私人行为还是公务行为”这样的说法。 |
| (9) | (9) |
| The definition of an “act performed in an official capacity” is set out in draft article 2, subparagraph (b). | “以官方身份实施的行为”的定义载于第2条草案(b)项。 |
| The Commission has not considered it necessary to define what is meant by “act performed in a private capacity”, as this notion is residual in nature. | 委员会认为没有必要界定“以私人身份实施的行为”的含义，因为这一概念具有剩余性质。 |
| As a result, it must be understood by default that any act not performed in an official capacity has been performed in a private capacity. | 因此，必须默认理解，任何不是以官方身份实施的行为都是以私人身份实施的。 |
| (10) | (10) |
| The Commission has used the term “act” in the same sense and for the same reasons explained in the commentary to draft article 2, subparagraph (b), which contains the definition of “act performed in an official capacity”. | 委员会使用“行为”一词的意义和理由与第2条草案(b)项评注中所解释的相同，该评注载有“以官方身份实施的行为”的定义。 |
| (11) | (11) |
| The acts to which immunity ratione personae extends are those that a Head of State, Head of Government or Minister for Foreign Affairs has carried out during or prior to his or her term of office. | 属人豁免涵盖的行为是国家元首、政府首脑或外交部长在任职期间或上任之前的行为。 |
| The reason for this relates to the purpose of immunity ratione personae, which is both to protect the sovereign equality of States and to guarantees that the persons enjoying this type of immunity can perform their functions of representation of the State unimpeded throughout their term of office. | 这与属人豁免的目的有关，即保护国家的主权平等，同时保障此类享有豁免者能够在任期内不受阻碍地行使在国际上代表国家的职能。 |
| In this sense, there is no need for further clarification regarding the applicability of immunity ratione personae to the acts performed by such persons throughout their term of office. | 因此，不需要进一步说明属人豁免适用于这些人在整个任期内的行为。 |
| As regards acts performed prior to the term of office, it must be noted that immunity ratione personae applies only if the criminal jurisdiction of a foreign State is to be exercised during the term of office of the Head of State, Head of Government or Minister for Foreign Affairs. | 关于上任之前的行为，必须指出，只有当外国要在国家元首、政府首脑或外交部长在任期间对其行使刑事管辖时，才适用属人豁免。 |
| This is because, as the International Court of Justice stated in the Arrest Warrant case, “no distinction can be drawn … between acts performed before the person concerned assumed office as Minister for Foreign Affairs and acts committed during the period of office. | 正如国际法院在逮捕证案中所述，这是因为“[…]无法区分(…)该人担任外交部长之前所作的行为与在任期间所作的行为。 |
| Thus, if a Minister for Foreign Affairs is arrested in another State on a criminal charge, he or she is clearly thereby prevented from exercising the functions of his or her office. | 因此，如果一国的外交部长在另一国因刑事指控被捕，他/她显然无法行使其职能。 |
| The consequences of such impediment to the exercise of those official functions are equally serious, regardless of whether … the arrest relates to acts allegedly performed before the person became the Minister for Foreign Affairs or to acts performed while in office.” | 不论(…)逮捕原因是该人据称担任外交部长之前所作的行为还是在任期间所作的行为，阻碍行使这类公职的后果同样严重。 ” |
| (12) | (12) |
| In any event, it must be noted that, as the Court also stated in the same case, immunity ratione personae is procedural in nature and must be interpreted, not as exonerating a Head of State, Head of Government or Minister for Foreign Affairs from criminal responsibility for acts committed during or prior to his or her term of office, but solely as suspending the exercise of foreign criminal jurisdiction during the term of office of those high-ranking officials. | 无论如何，必须指出，国际法院在该案中还称，属人豁免是程序性的，不得理解为摆脱或免除国家元首、政府首脑或外交部长在任期间或上任之前所作所为的刑事责任，只能理解为在这些高官在任期间，暂停行使外国刑事管辖。 |
| Consequently, when the term of office ends, the acts carried out during or prior to the term of office cease to be covered by immunity ratione personae and may, in certain cases, be subject to the criminal jurisdiction that cannot be exercised during the term of office. | 因此，当任期结束后，在任期间或上任之前的行为不再享受属人豁免，在某些情况下，可能接受其在任期间不得对其行使的刑事管辖。 |
| (13) | (13) |
| Lastly, it should be noted also that immunity ratione personae does not in any circumstances apply to acts carried out by a Head of State, Head of Government or Minister for Foreign Affairs after his or her term of office. | 最后，还应当指出，属人豁免无论如何都不适用于国家元首、政府首脑或外交部长在任期结束后的行为。 |
| Since they are now considered a “former” Head of State, Head of Government or Minister for Foreign Affairs, such immunity would have ceased when the term of office ends. | 由于他们现在被认为是“前”国家元首、政府首脑或外交部长，这种豁免随着任期的结束而终止。 |
| (14) | (14) |
| Paragraph 3 addresses what happens with respect to acts carried out in an official capacity while in office by the Head of State, Head of Government or Minister for Foreign Affairs after his or her term of office ends. | 本条草案第3款处理的是：任期结束后，国家元首、政府首脑或外交部长在任期间以官方身份实施的行为将受到何种待遇？ |
| Paragraph 3 proceeds from the principle that immunity ratione personae ceases after the term of office ends. | 第3款遵循任期结束后便不再享有属人豁免的原则。 |
| Consequently, immunity ratione personae no longer exists after the term of office ends. | 因此，任期结束后，属人豁免即终止。 |
| Nevertheless, it must be kept in mind that a Head of State, Head of Government or Minister for Foreign Affairs may, during his or her term of office, have carried out acts in an official capacity which do not lose that quality merely because the term of office has ended and may accordingly be covered by immunity ratione materiae. | 不过，必须注意到，国家元首、政府首脑或外交部长在任期间可能以公务身份做出一些行为，这些行为不因任期结束而失去其公务性质，因此可能属于属事豁免的范围。 |
| This matter has not been disputed in substantive terms, although it has been expressed variously in State practice, treaty practice and judicial practice. | 尽管在国家实践、条约实践和司法实践中有不同的表述，但这一问题在实质上没有争议。 |
| (15) | (15) |
| In order to address these problems, paragraph 3 sets forth a “without prejudice” clause on the potential applicability of immunity ratione materiae to such acts. | 为了解决这一问题，第3款中载述了关于属事豁免有可能适用于上述行为的“不妨碍”规定。 |
| This does not mean that immunity ratione personae is prolonged past the end of the term of office of persons enjoying such immunity, since that is not in line with paragraph 1 of the draft article. | 这并不意味着属人豁免延续到享有豁免者任期结束后，因为那样不符合本条草案第1款。 |
| Nor does it mean that immunity ratione personae is transformed into a new form of immunity ratione materiae which applies automatically by virtue of paragraph 3. | 这也不意味着属人豁免变成因第3款而自动适用的新的属事豁免。 |
| The Commission considers that the “without prejudice” clause simply acknowledges the application of the rules concerning immunity ratione materiae to a former Head of State, Head of Government or Minister for Foreign Affairs. | 委员会认为该“不妨碍”条款只是承认关于属事豁免的规则对前国家元首、政府首脑或外交部长适用。 |
| Paragraph 3 does not prejudge the content of the immunity ratione materiae regime, which is developed in Part Three of the draft articles. | 第3款没有预先判断属事豁免制度的内容，这一制度的内容将在本条款草案第三部分拟定。 |
| Part Three Immunity ratione materiae | 第三部分 属事豁免 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) | (1) |
| Part Three of the present draft articles concerns immunity ratione materiae from foreign criminal jurisdiction. | 本条款草案第三部分专门讨论外国刑事管辖的属事豁免。 |
| Immunity from jurisdiction ratione materiae is applicable to all State officials, current or former, including those who previously enjoyed immunity ratione personae as a Head of State, Head of Government or Minister for Foreign Affairs but are no longer in office. | 管辖属事豁免适用于所有国家官员，无论他们是现任官员还是前任官员，包括曾经享有属人豁免、已离任国家元首、政府首脑或外交部长职位的人员。 |
| (2) | (2) |
| Part Three consists of three draft articles that define the normative elements of the legal regime applicable to immunity from jurisdiction ratione materiae. | 第三部分包含三条草案，分别规定适用于管辖属事豁免的法律制度的规范要素。 |
| Draft article 5 identifies the subjective element of immunity (State officials enjoying immunity). | 第5条确定豁免的主体要素(享有豁免的国家官员)。 |
| Draft article 6 is focused on the material element (acts covered by immunity) and the temporal element (duration of immunity). | 第6条侧重于实质要素(豁免涵盖的行为)和时间要素(豁免的期限)。 |
| Draft article 7 defines a limitation or exception to immunity linked to the alleged commission of crimes under international law. | 第7条界定与据称犯下的国际法规定的罪行有关的豁免限制或例外情况。 |
| Finally, the draft articles contain an annex that lists a number of treaties as references for identifying the crimes under international law enumerated in draft article 7. | 最后，条款草案载有一个附件，列出了一系列条约供参考，以确定第7条草案所述的国际法规定的罪行。 |
| The annex must therefore be read in conjunction with the present Part Three. | 因此，附件必须结合本第三部分一并阅读。 |
| (3) | (3) |
| Additionally, paragraph 3 of draft article 6 defines the relationship between immunity ratione personae and the immunity ratione materiae that applies to Heads of State, Heads of Government and Ministers for Foreign Affairs after their term of office has ended. | 此外，第6条草案第3款界定属人豁免与适用于任期届满后的国家元首、政府首脑和外交部长的属事豁免之间的关系。 |
| Article 5 Persons enjoying immunity ratione materiae | 第5条 享有属事豁免的人员 |
| State officials acting as such enjoy immunity ratione materiae from the exercise of foreign criminal jurisdiction. | 国家官员在以此种身份行事时，对外国行使的刑事管辖享有属事豁免。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) | (1) |
| Draft article 5 is the first of the draft articles on immunity ratione materiae and is intended to define the subjective scope of this category of immunity from foreign criminal jurisdiction. | 第5条草案是关于属事豁免的第一条草案，意在界定这类外国刑事管辖豁免的主体范围。 |
| Consequently, this draft article parallels draft article 3, on persons enjoying immunity ratione personae. | 因此，本条草案与关于享有属人豁免的人员的第3条草案平行。 |
| It has the same structure, and it uses, mutatis mutandis, the same wording and the terminology already agreed on by the Commission concerning the latter draft article. | 它具有相同的结构，比照采用了委员会已就第3条草案达成一致的同样措词和术语。 |
| There is no list of actual persons who enjoy immunity; instead, in the case of immunity ratione materiae, they have been referred to as “State officials acting as such”. | 没有列出实际享有豁免的人员，而是在属事豁免情况下，提到了“以此种身份行事”的“国家官员”。 |
| (2) | (2) |
| The expression “State officials”, as used in this draft article, is to be understood in the sense given to it in draft article 2, subparagraph (a), namely: “any individual who represents the State or who exercises State functions”. | 本条草案中使用的“国家官员”一词应从第2条草案(a)项赋予它的意义上来理解，即“代表国家或行使国家职能的任何个人”。 |
| In contrast to the situation with persons enjoying immunity ratione personae, the Commission did not consider it possible, in the present draft articles, to draw up a list of persons enjoying immunity ratione materiae. | 与享有属人豁免的人员情况相反，委员会认为不可能在本条款草案里拟订享有属事豁免的人员名单。 |
| Rather, the persons in this category must be identified on a case-by-case basis, by applying the criteria set out in draft article 2, subparagraph (a), which highlight the existence of a link between the official and the State. | 实际上，这类人员必须适用第2条草案(a)项规定的标准具体情况具体分析，这些标准强调了官员与国家之间的关系。 |
| The commentary to draft article 2, subparagraph (a), must be duly kept in mind for the purposes of the present draft article. | 为本条草案的目的，必须适当谨记第2条草案(a)项的评注。 |
| (3) | (3) |
| The phrase “acting as such” refers to the official nature of the acts of the officials, emphasizing the functional nature of immunity ratione materiae and establishing a distinction from immunity ratione personae. | “以此种身份行事”指的是官员实施的行为的公务性质，强调了属事豁免的职能性，并确立了与属人豁免的区别。 |
| In view of the functional nature of immunity ratione materiae, some members of the Commission have expressed doubts about the need to define the persons who enjoy it, since in their view the essence of immunity ratione materiae is the nature of the acts performed and not the individual who performs them. | 鉴于属事豁免的职能性，有些委员对是否需要界定享有这种豁免的人员表示怀疑，因为在他们看来，属事豁免的本质是所实施的行为的性质，而非实施这些行为的个人。 |
| Nevertheless, the majority of members of the Commission thought it would be useful to identify the persons in this category of immunity, since immunity from foreign criminal jurisdiction applies to these individuals. | 不过，委员会多数委员认为，应当确定享有这种豁免的个人，因为外国刑事管辖豁免适用于这些人。 |
| The reference to the fact that the “State officials” must have acted “as such” in order to enjoy immunity ratione materiae says nothing about the acts that might be covered by such immunity, which are addressed in draft article 6. | 提到享有属事豁免的“国家官员”必须是“以此种身份”行事的人，这丝毫没有提示这类豁免可能涵盖的行为，这些行为在第6条草案中讨论。 |
| For the same reason, the expression “acting in an official capacity” has not been used, to avoid potential confusion with the concept of an “act performed in an official capacity”. | 出于同样的原因，也没有使用“以公务身份行事”一语，以避免与“以公务身份实施的行为”的概念相混淆。 |
| (4) | (4) |
| In conformity with draft article 4, paragraph 3, immunity ratione materiae also applies to former Heads of State, Heads of Government and Ministers for Foreign Affairs “acting as [State officials]”. | 根据第4条草案第3款， 属事豁免也适用于“以国家官员身份行事”的前国家元首、政府首脑和外交部长。 |
| Nevertheless, the Commission does not consider it necessary to refer explicitly to those officials in the present draft article, since immunity ratione materiae applies to them, not because of their special status within the State, but in view of the fact that they are State officials who have acted as such during their term of office. | 不过，委员会认为没有必要在本条草案中明确提及这些官员，因为属事豁免之所以对其适用，并非是因为他们在国家中的特殊身份，而是因为他们在任期间以此种身份行事。 |
| Even though the Commission considers that the Head of State, Head of Government and Minister for Foreign Affairs enjoy immunity ratione materiae stricto sensu only after they have left office, there is no need to mention this in draft article 5. | 尽管委员会认为国家元首、政府首脑和外交部长只在离任后才享有严格意义上的属事豁免，但没有必要在第5条草案中提到这一点。 |
| The matter is covered more fully in draft article 6 on the substantive and temporal scope of immunity ratione materiae, which is modelled on draft article 4. | 关于属事豁免实质范围和时间范围的第6条草案对这一问题进行了更广泛的讨论，该条草案仿照第4条草案拟订。 |
| (5) | (5) |
| Draft article 5 is without prejudice to exceptions to immunity ratione materiae, referred to in draft article 7. | 第5条草案不妨碍属事豁免的例外情形，这些例外在第7条加以讨论。 |
| (6) | (6) |
| Lastly, attention must be drawn to the fact that draft article 5 uses the expression “from the exercise of foreign criminal jurisdiction”, as does draft article 3 to refer to persons enjoying immunity ratione personae. | 最后，必须注意的是，第5条草案使用了“外国行使的刑事管辖”一语，与第3条草案对享有属人豁免者使用的说法相同。 |
| This expression illustrates the relationship between immunity and foreign criminal jurisdiction and emphasizes the essentially procedural nature of the immunity that comes into play in relation to the exercise of criminal jurisdiction with respect to a specific act. | 这种表达说明了豁免与外国刑事管辖的关系，并强调了对具体行为行使外国刑事管辖时发挥作用的豁免本质上的程序性质。 |
| Article 6 Scope of immunity ratione materiae | 第6条 属事豁免的范围 |
| 1. | 1. |
| State officials enjoy immunity ratione materiae only with respect to acts performed in an official capacity. | 国家官员只有在以官方身份实施的行为方面享有属事豁免。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| Immunity ratione materiae with respect to acts performed in an official capacity continues to subsist after the individuals concerned have ceased to be State officials. | 对以官方身份实施的行为的属事豁免在所涉个人不再担任国家官员后继续存在。 |
| 3. | 3. |
| Individuals who enjoyed immunity ratione personae in accordance with draft article 4, whose term of office has come to an end, continue to enjoy immunity with respect to acts performed in an official capacity during such term of office. | 根据第4条草案享有属事豁免的个人任期届满后，继续就任期之内以官方身份实施的行为享有豁免。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) | (1) |
| Draft article 6 is intended to define the scope of immunity ratione materiae, which covers the material and temporal elements of this category of immunity of State officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction. | 第6条草案旨在界定属事豁免的范围，其中包括这一类国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免的实质要素和时间要素。 |
| Draft article 6 complements draft article 5, which refers to the persons enjoying immunity ratione materiae. | 第6条草案对第5条草案形成补充，后者涉及享有属事豁免的人员。 |
| Both draft articles determine the general regime applicable to this category of immunity. | 这两条草案确定了适用于这一类豁免的一般制度。 |
| (2) | (2) |
| Draft article 6 has content parallel to that used by the Commission in draft article 4 on the scope of immunity ratione personae. | 第6条草案的内容与委员会拟订的关于属人豁免的范围的第4条草案的内容类似。 |
| In draft article 6, the order of the first two paragraphs has been changed, with the reference to the material element (acts covered by immunity) appearing first and the reference to the temporal element (duration of immunity) afterwards. | 在第6条草案中，改变了前两款的顺序，首先提及实质要素(豁免所涵盖的行为)，随后才提到时间要素(豁免的时限)。 |
| The intent is to place emphasis on the material element and on the functional dimension of immunity ratione materiae, thus reflecting the fact that acts performed in an official capacity are central to this category of immunity. | 这样做是为了突出属事豁免的实质要素和职能层面，从而反映出以官方身份实施的行为对这一类豁免具有核心意义。 |
| Even so, it should be borne in mind that the scope of such immunity must be understood by looking at the material aspect (para. 1) in conjunction with the temporal aspect (para. 2). | 尽管如此，应当铭记，要理解这类豁免的范围，必须将实质要素(第1款)和时间要素(第2款)结合起来看。 |
| Furthermore, draft article 6 contains a paragraph on the relationship between immunity ratione materiae and immunity ratione personae, in similar fashion to draft article 4, paragraph 3, which it complements. | 此外，第6条草案中也有一款涉及属事豁免与属人豁免之间的关系，与第4条草案第3款类似，这两款相互补充。 |
| (3) | (3) |
| The purpose of paragraph 1 is to indicate that immunity ratione materiae applies exclusively to acts performed in an official capacity, as the concept was defined in draft article 2 (b). | 第1款的目的是指出，正如第2条草案(b)项所规定的那样， 属事豁免仅适用于以官方身份实施的行为。 |
| Consequently, acts performed in a private capacity are excluded from this category of immunity, unlike immunity ratione personae, which applies to both categories of acts. | 因此，这类豁免不包括以私人身份实施的行为，这有别于属人豁免，因为属人豁免对这两类行为均适用。 |
| (4) | (4) |
| Although the purpose of paragraph 1 is to emphasize the material element of immunity ratione materiae, the Commission decided to include a reference to State officials to highlight the fact that only such officials may perform one of the acts covered by immunity under the draft articles. | 尽管这一款的目的是突出属事豁免的实质要素，但委员会决定在其中提及国家官员，以便强调只有这些官员能够实施本条款草案下的豁免所涵盖的行为。 |
| This makes clear the need for the two elements (subjective and material) to be present in order for immunity to be applied. | 这就明确表明，必须同时满足两个要素(主体要素和实质要素)，方可适用豁免。 |
| It was not considered necessary, however, to make reference to the requirement that the officials be “acting as such”, since the status of the official does not affect the nature of the act, but rather the subjective element of immunity, and is already provided for in draft article 5. | 不过，委员会认为没有必要提及这些官员须“以此种身份行事”，因为官员的身份不影响此类行为的性质，而影响此类豁免的主体要素，并且第5条草案 已经涵括了这一点。 |
| (5) | (5) |
| The material scope of immunity ratione materiae as set out in draft article 6, paragraph 1, does not prejudge the question of limitations or exceptions to immunity, which is addressed in draft article 7. | 第6条草案第1款所规定的属事豁免的实质范围不预判适用于豁免的限制 或例外情形问题。 这一问题在第7条草案中加以处理。 |
| (6) | (6) |
| Paragraph 2 refers to the temporal element of immunity ratione materiae by placing emphasis on the permanent character of such immunity, which continues to produce effects even when the official who has performed an act in an official capacity has ceased to be an official. | 第2款涉及属事豁免的时间要素，重点强调了时间要素的永久性，并不会因为以官方身份实施某一行为的官员不再担任官员而失效。 |
| Such characterization of immunity ratione materiae as permanent derives from the fact that its recognition is based on the nature of the act performed by the official, which remains unchanged regardless of the position held by the author of the act. | 属事豁免的永久性特征源于这样一个事实，即承认属事豁免是因为官员实施的行为的性质，这种性质并不会随着实施上述行为者所担任的职务而改变。 |
| Thus, although it is necessary for the act to be performed by a State official acting as such, its official nature does not subsequently disappear. | 因此，虽然只有当国家官员以此种身份实施行为时方可称得上“官方”，但其官方性质并不会随后消失。 |
| Consequently, for the purposes of immunity ratione materiae it is irrelevant whether the official who invokes immunity holds such a position when immunity is claimed, or, conversely, has ceased to be a State official. | 因此，援引属事豁免的官员在提出豁免要求时是担任此种职务，抑或相反已经不再担任国家官员，对于属事豁免而言是不相关的。 |
| In both cases, the act performed in an official capacity will continue to be such an act and the State official who performed the act may equally enjoy immunity whether or not he or she continues to be an official. | 在这两种情况下，以官方身份实施的行为将依然是以官方身份实施的行为，无论实施这种行为的国家官员是否继续担任国家官员，均可援引属事豁免。 |
| The permanent character of immunity ratione materiae has already been recognized by the Commission in its work on diplomatic relations, has not been challenged in practice and is generally accepted in the literature. | 属事豁免的永久性此前已在关于外交关系的工作中得到委员会承认， 在实践中未遭质疑，在文献中广为接受。 |
| (7) | (7) |
| The Commission chose to define the temporal element of immunity ratione materiae by stating that such immunity “continues to subsist after the individuals concerned have ceased to be State officials”, following the model used in the 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations and the 1946 Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations. | 委员会选择界定属事豁免的时间要素，申明“属事豁免在所涉个人不再担任国家官员后继续存在”，沿袭了1961年《维也纳外交关系公约》 和1946年《联合国特权和豁免公约》 所采用的模式。 |
| The expressions “continues to subsist” and “have ceased to be State officials” are based on those treaties. | “继续存在”这个动词和“不再担任国家官员”这一说法源自这两项条约。 |
| Furthermore, the Commission used the term “individuals” to reflect the definition of “State official” in draft article 2, subparagraph (a). | 此外，委员会使用了“所涉个人”这一术语，以反映第2条草案(a)项中“国家官员”的定义。 |
| (8) | (8) |
| Lastly, it should be noted that although paragraph 2 deals with the temporal element of immunity, the Commission considered it appropriate to include an explicit reference to acts performed in an official capacity, bearing in mind that such acts are central to the issue of immunity ratione materiae and in order to avoid a broad interpretation of the permanent character of this category of immunity which could be argued to apply to other acts. | 最后，应当指出，尽管第2款涉及豁免的时间要素，但委员会认为，宜在其中明确提及以官方身份实施的行为，同时铭记这些行为对于属事豁免问题具有核心意义，也是为了避免对这类豁免的永久性做出宽泛的解释，有人可能辩称它也适用于其他行为。 |
| (9) | (9) |
| The purpose of paragraph 3 is to define the model of the relationship that exists between immunity ratione materiae and immunity ratione personae, on the basis that they are two distinct categories. | 第3款旨在界定属事豁免和属人豁免之间存在的关系的模式，其依据是它们是两类截然不同的豁免。 |
| As a result, draft article 6, paragraph 3, is closely related to draft article 4, paragraph 3, which also deals with that relationship, albeit in the form of a “without prejudice” clause. | 因此，第6条草案第3款与第4条草案第3款有着密切的联系。 后者也涉及二者之间的关系，不过仅仅以“不妨碍”条款的形式作了规定。 |
| (10) | (10) |
| Pursuant to draft article 4, paragraph 1, immunity ratione personae has a temporal aspect, since the Commission considered that after the term of office of the Head of State, Head of Government or Minister for Foreign Affairs has ended, immunity ratione personae ceases. | 根据第4条草案第1款，属人豁免具有临时性，因为委员会认为，“国家元首、政府首脑或外交部长任期结束后，属人豁免即停止。”。 |
| However, such “cessation … is without prejudice to the application of the rules of international law concerning immunity ratione materiae” (draft article 4, paragraph 3). | 不过，“[…]停止不妨碍关于属事豁免的国际法规则的适用”(第4条草案第3款)。 |
| As the Commission stated in the commentary to that draft article, “it must be kept in mind that a Head of State, Head of Government or Minister for Foreign Affairs may, during his or her term of office, have carried out acts in an official capacity which do not lose that quality merely because the term of office has ended and may accordingly be covered by immunity ratione materiae”. | 正如委员会在本条草案评注中所指出的那样，“必须注意到，国家元首、政府首脑或外交部长在任期间可能以官方身份做出一些行为，这些行为不因任期结束而失去其官方性质，因此可能属于属事豁免的范围。” |
| The Commission also stated: “This does not mean that immunity ratione personae is prolonged past the end of the term of office of persons enjoying such immunity, since that is not in line with paragraph 1 of the draft article. | 委员会还指出，“这并不意味着属人豁免延续到享有豁免者任期结束后，因为那样不符合该条草案第1款。 |
| Nor does it mean that immunity ratione personae is transformed into a new form of immunity ratione materiae which applies automatically by virtue of paragraph 3. | 这也不意味着属人豁免变成因第3款而自动适用的新的属事豁免。 |
| The Commission considers that the ‘without prejudice’ clause simply acknowledges the application of the rules concerning immunity ratione materiae to a former Head of State, Head of Government or Minister for Foreign Affairs”. | 委员会认为该‘不妨碍’条款只是承认关于属事豁免的规则对前国家元首、政府首脑或外交部长适用”。 |
| (11) | (11) |
| This is precisely the situation referred to in paragraph 3 of draft article 6. | 这正是第6条草案第3款所述的情况。 |
| The paragraph proceeds on the basis that, during their term of office, Heads of State, Heads of Government and Ministers for Foreign Affairs enjoy broad immunity known as immunity ratione personae, which, in practical terms, includes the same effects as immunity ratione materiae. | 本款的依据是，国家元首、政府首脑和外交部长在任期内享有广泛的豁免，通称“属人豁免”，实际上，这和属事豁免的效力相同。 |
| This does not prevent these State officials, after their term in office has ended, from enjoying immunity ratione materiae, stricto sensu. | 这并不妨碍国家官员在结束任期之后享有严格意义上的属事豁免。 |
| (12) | (12) |
| To this end, the requirements for immunity ratione materiae will need to be fulfilled, namely: that the act was performed by a State official acting as such (Head of State, Head of Government or Minister for Foreign Affairs in this specific case), in an official capacity and during his or her term of office. | 为此，需要满足属事豁免的标准，亦即：行为由国家官员(在这一具体情况下，包括国家元首、政府首脑或外交部长)以此种官方身份在其任期内实施。 |
| The purpose of draft article 6, paragraph 3, is precisely to state that immunity ratione materiae is applicable in such situations. | 第6条草案第3款的目标恰恰是，申明属事豁免适用于这种情况。 |
| The paragraph therefore complements draft article 4, paragraph 3, which the Commission said “does not prejudge the content of the immunity ratione materiae regime”. | 因此，本款对第4条草案第3款形成补充。 委员会曾表示，“第3款不预判属事豁免制度的内容”。 |
| (13) | (13) |
| However, regarding the situation described in draft article 6, paragraph 3, some members of the Commission considered that, during their term of office, Heads of State, Heads of Government and Ministers for Foreign Affairs enjoy both immunity ratione personae and immunity ratione materiae. | 不过，关于第6条草案第3款涉及的情况，一些委员认为，在任期间，国家元首、政府首脑和外交部长同时享有属人豁免和属事豁免。 |
| Other members of the Commission emphasized that, for the purposes of these draft articles, immunity ratione personae is general and broader in scope and encompasses immunity ratione materiae, since it applies to both private and official acts. | 相反，其他委员则认为，为本条款草案的目的，属人豁免具有普遍性、范围更广，包括属事豁免，因为属人豁免既适用于以私人身份实施的行为，也适用于以官方身份实施的行为。 |
| For these members, such officials enjoy only immunity ratione personae during their term of office, and only after their term of office has come to an end will they enjoy immunity ratione materiae, stricto sensu, as provided for in draft article 4 and reflected in the commentaries to draft articles 4 and 5. | 这些委员认为，正如第4条草案所规定以及第4条和第5条草案评注所体现的那样，这类官员在任职期间仅享有属人豁免，仅在任期结束后才享有严格意义上的属事豁免。 |
| While favouring one or the other option might have consequences before the national courts of certain States (in particular with regard to the conditions for invoking immunity), such consequences would not extend to all national legal systems. | 尽管倾向于一种或另一种选择可能对某些国家的国内法院造成后果(尤其是在援引豁免的条件方面)，但此类后果不会扩大到所有国家法律体系之中。 |
| During the debate, some members of the Commission expressed the view that it was not necessary to include paragraph 3 in draft article 6, and that it was sufficient to refer to the matter in the commentaries thereto. | 辩论期间，一些委员表示认为，无需在第6条草案中加入第3款，只需在该条草案评注中提及这一问题即可。 |
| (14) | (14) |
| The Commission ultimately decided to retain draft article 6, paragraph 3, particularly in view of the practical importance of the paragraph, whose purpose is to clarify, in operational terms, the regime applicable, after their term of office has ended, to individuals who previously enjoyed immunity ratione personae (the Head of State, Head of Government and Minister for Foreign Affairs). | 委员会最终决定保留第6条草案第3款，特别是鉴于该款的切实重要性，其目的是在操作层面说明此前曾享受属人豁免的个人(国家元首、政府首脑和外交部长)任期结束后适用何种法律制度。 |
| (15) | (15) |
| The wording of paragraph 3 is modelled on the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations (art. 39, para. 2) and the Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations (art. IV, sect. 12), which govern situations similar to those covered in the paragraph in question, namely the situation of persons who enjoyed immunity ratione personae, after the end of their term of office, with respect to acts performed in an official capacity during such term of office. | 第3款的措辞仿照了《维也纳外交关系公约》(第三十九条第二款)和《联合国特权和豁免公约》(第四条第十二节)，这两项公约所涉的情况与本款所涉的情况类似，亦即：曾享有属人豁免的人员任期结束后对于在上述任期内以官方身份实施的行为的处境。 |
| The Commission has used the expression “continue to enjoy immunity” in order to reflect the link between the moment when the act occurred and the moment when immunity is invoked. | 委员会使用了“继续享有豁免”的说法，以体现行为发生的时刻与援引豁免的时刻之间存在的联系。 |
| Like the treaties on which it is based, draft article 6, paragraph 3, does not qualify immunity, but confines itself to the use of the generic term. | 如同本款所参考的两项公约一样，第6条草案第3款没有对豁免一词定性，而仅仅使用了笼统的说法。 |
| Yet although the term “immunity” is used without any qualification whatsoever, the Commission understands that the term is used to refer to immunity ratione materiae, since it is only in this context that it is possible to take into consideration the acts of State officials performed in an official capacity after their term of office has ended. | 不过，虽然没有对“豁免”一词进行任何限定，但委员会理解，这个词是指“属事豁免”，因为只有在这种情况下，才可能在任期结束后考虑国家官员以官方身份实施的行为。 |
| Article 7 Crimes under international law in respect of which immunity ratione materiae shall not apply | 第7条 不适用属事豁免的国际法规定的罪行 |
| 1. | 1. |
| Immunity ratione materiae from the exercise of foreign criminal jurisdiction shall not apply in respect of the following crimes under international law: | 外国刑事管辖的属事豁免不适用于国际法规定的如下罪行： |
| (a) | (a) |
| crime of genocide; | 灭绝种族罪； |
| (b) | (b) |
| crimes against humanity; | 危害人类罪； |
| (c) | (c) |
| war crimes; | 战争罪； |
| (d) | (d) |
| crime of apartheid; | 种族隔离罪； |
| (e) | (e) |
| torture; | 酷刑； |
| (f) | (f) |
| enforced disappearance. | 强迫失踪。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| For the purposes of the present draft article, the crimes under international law mentioned above are to be understood according to their definition in the treaties enumerated in the annex to the present draft articles. | 为了本条款草案的目的，国际法规定的上述罪行应根据本条款草案附件所列条约中这些罪行的定义来理解。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) | (1) |
| The consideration of draft article 7 has given rise to a long debate since 2016. | 对第7条草案的审议自2016年起，在委员会中引发了长期的辩论。 |
| This debate reflected the different positions held by the members of the Commission on an issue of great relevance, namely the existence or non-existence of limitations and exceptions to immunity ratione materiae, to which reference is made in paragraphs (9)–(12) of this commentary. | 这场辩论反映了委员们在一个非常重要的问题上所持的不同立场，即是否存在属事豁免的限制或例外。 本评注第(9)至(12)段提到了这些立场。 |
| (2) | (2) |
| During the debate on draft article 7, there also arose the issue of the need to include procedural provisions and safeguards in the draft articles, including with regard to draft article 7. | 在对第7条草案进行辩论期间，另外出现了是否需要在条款草案中加上程序性规定和保障措施的问题，包括针对第7条草案。 |
| That issue was linked by some members to the issue of the adoption of draft article 7. | 一些委员将此问题与是否通过第7条草案的问题联系起来。 |
| The Commission completed its work on procedural provisions and safeguards in the seventy-third session. | 委员会第七十三届会议完成了与程序性规定和保障措施有关的工作。 |
| (3) | (3) |
| While the Commission provisionally adopted draft article 7 and the related annex by recorded vote during its sixty-ninth session (2017), in its seventy-third session (2022) draft article 7 and the related annex were adopted without a vote. | 虽然委员会在第六十九届会议上(2017年)经记录表决暂时通过了第7条草案及有关附件， 但在第七十三届会议上，第7条草案及有关附件未经表决获得通过。 |
| However, some members recalled that they had voted against draft article 7 in 2017, setting out their reasons in explanations of vote, and stated that the fact that no vote had taken place in 2022 did not mean that either the law or their legal positions had in any way changed. | 然而一些委员提到，他们在2017年曾投票反对第7条并解释了投反对票的理由，并且说，2022年未进行表决并不意味着有关法律或他们的法律立场有任何改变。 |
| (4) | (4) |
| This commentary reproduces, with minor updates, the commentary adopted in 2017. | 本评注在对2017年通过的评注略作更新之后转载了该评注。 |
| Following the well-established practice of the Commission when adopting draft articles on first reading, it seeks to capture the different positions held by the members of the Commission when draft article 7 and the related annex were provisionally adopted. | 遵循委员会在一读通过条款草案时久已确立的做法，本评注力求反映在暂时通过第7条草案及有关附件时委员们所持的不同立场。 |
| (5) | (5) |
| Draft article 7 lists crimes under international law in respect of which immunity from foreign criminal jurisdiction ratione materiae shall not apply under the present draft articles. | 第7条草案列出了根据本条款草案不适用外国刑事管辖属事豁免的国际法规定的罪行。 |
| The draft article contains two paragraphs, one that lists the crimes (para. 1) and one that identifies the definition of those crimes (para. 2). | 该条草案分为两款，一款列举有关罪行(第1款)，一款确定这些罪行的定义(第2款)。 |
| (6) | (6) |
| As draft article 7 refers solely to immunity from jurisdiction ratione materiae, it is included in Part Three of the draft articles and does not apply in respect of immunity from jurisdiction ratione personae, which is regulated in Part Two of the draft articles. | 第7条草案只提及管辖属事豁免，所以载入条款草案第三部分，对条款草案第二部分规定的管辖属人豁免不适用。 |
| (7) | (7) |
| This does not mean, however, that the State officials listed in draft article 3 (Heads of State, Heads of Government and Ministers for Foreign Affairs) will always be exempt from the application of draft article 7. | 但是，这并不意味着第7条草案永远不适用于第3条草案列举的国家官员(国家元首、政府首脑和外交部长)。 |
| On the contrary, it should be borne in mind that, as the Commission has indicated, Heads of State, Heads of Government and Ministers for Foreign Affairs “enjoy immunity ratione personae only during their term of office” and the cessation of such immunity “is without prejudice to the application of the rules of international law concerning immunity ratione materiae”. | 相反，应当牢记，正如委员会指出的那样，国家元首、政府首脑和外交部长“仅在其任职期间享有属人豁免”， 并且此类豁免的停止“不妨碍关于属事豁免的国际法规则的适用”。 |
| In addition, draft article 6, on immunity ratione materiae, provides that “[i]ndividuals who enjoyed immunity ratione personae …, whose term of office has come to an end, continue to enjoy immunity with respect to acts performed in an official capacity during such term of office”. | 此外，关于属事豁免的第6条草案规定，“…享有属人豁免的个人在任期届满后继续就任期之内以官方身份实施的行为享有豁免”。 |
| Accordingly, as this residual immunity is immunity ratione materiae, draft article 7 will be applicable to the immunity from jurisdiction enjoyed by a former Head of State, a former Head of Government or a former Minister for Foreign Affairs for acts performed in an official capacity during their term of office. | 因此，由于这种余效豁免是一种属事豁免，第7条草案将适用于前国家元首、政府首脑或外交部长对任职期间以官方身份实施的行为所享有的管辖豁免。 |
| Therefore, such immunity ratione materiae will not apply to these former officials in connection with the crimes under international law listed in paragraph 1 of draft article 7. | 因此，上述前任官员若实施第7条草案第1款所列国际法规定的罪行，则不适用此类属事豁免。 |
| (8) | (8) |
| Paragraph 1 of draft article 7 lists the crimes which, if committed, would prevent the application of such immunity from criminal jurisdiction to a foreign official, even if those crimes had been committed by the official acting in an official capacity during his or her term of office. | 外国官员如实施第7条草案第1款列举的罪行，即使是在任职期间以官方身份实施的，也不得享受刑事管辖属事豁免。 |
| Thus, draft article 7 complements the normative elements of immunity from foreign criminal jurisdiction ratione materiae as defined in draft articles 5 and 6. | 因此，第7条草案是对第5和第6条草案规定的外国刑事管辖属事豁免的规范性要素作出的补充。 |
| (9) | (9) |
| The Commission has included this draft article for the following reasons. First, it considers that there has been a discernible trend towards limiting the applicability of immunity from jurisdiction ratione materiae in respect of certain types of behaviour that constitute crimes under international law. | 委员会列入本条草案的理由如下：首先，委员们认为有一种明显的趋势倾向于对构成国际法规定的罪行的某些行为限制适用管辖属事豁免。 |
| This trend is reflected in judicial decisions taken by national courts which, even though they do not all follow the same line of reasoning, have not recognized immunity from jurisdiction ratione materiae in relation to certain international crimes. | 该趋势体现在各国法院的司法裁定中，尽管推理过程各不相同，但它们都不承认某些国际罪行的管辖属事豁免。 |
| In rare cases, this trend has also been reflected in the adoption of national legislation that provides for exceptions to immunity ratione materiae in relation to the commission of international crimes. | 在极少数情况下，通过国家立法对实施国际犯罪的行为规定管辖属事豁免例外，也体现了这种趋势。 |
| This trend has also been highlighted in the literature, and has been reflected to some extent in proceedings before international tribunals. | 该趋势还在文献中得到强调，也在某种程度上反映在国际法庭的诉讼中。 |
| (10) | (10) |
| Second, the Commission also took into account the fact that the draft articles on immunity of State officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction are intended to apply within an international legal order whose unity and systemic nature cannot be ignored. | 其次，委员会还考虑到，国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免条款草案的目的是在一个国际法律秩序内适用，而这个法律秩序的统一性和系统性是不可忽视的。 |
| Therefore, the Commission should not overlook other existing standards or clash with the legal principles enshrined in such important sectors of contemporary international law as international humanitarian law, international human rights law and international criminal law. | 因此，委员会不应当忽视其他现行标准，也不应当与国际人道法、国际人权法和国际刑法等当代国际法的重要组成部分所载的法律原则相抵触。 |
| In this context, the consideration of crimes to which immunity from foreign criminal jurisdiction does not apply must be careful and balanced, taking into account the need to preserve respect for the principle of the sovereign equality of States, to ensure the implementation of the principles of accountability and individual criminal responsibility and to end impunity for the most serious international crimes, which is one of the primary objectives of the international community. | 在此情况下，应当谨慎、平衡地审议不适用外国刑事管辖豁免的罪行，顾及尊重国家主权平等原则的必要性，以确保实施问责原则和个人刑事责任原则，终结对国际最严重罪行的有罪不罚现象――这是国际社会的一项首要目标。 |
| Striking this balance will ensure that immunity fulfils the purpose for which it was established (to protect the sovereign equality and legitimate interests of States) and that it is not turned into a procedural mechanism to block all attempts to establish the criminal responsibility of certain individuals (State officials) arising from the commission of the most serious crimes under international law. | 维持这种平衡，将确保实现规定豁免的初衷(保护主权平等和国家合法利益)，确保不把豁免变成一种程序机制，用来阻挠确定某些个人(国家官员)因犯下国际法规定的最严重罪行而应承担的刑事责任的全部努力。 |
| (11) | (11) |
| In light of the above two reasons, the Commission considers that it must pursue its mandate of promoting the progressive development and codification of international law by applying both the deductive method and the inductive method. | 考虑到上述两个原因，委员会认为它必须执行其任务，通过运用演绎法和归纳法，促进国际法的逐渐发展和编纂。 |
| It is on this premise that the Commission has included in draft article 7 a list of crimes to which immunity ratione materiae shall not apply for the following reasons: (a) they are crimes which in practice tend to be considered as crimes not covered by immunity ratione materiae from foreign criminal jurisdiction; | 正是基于这一前提，委员会在第7条草案中列出了不适用属事豁免的罪行，理由如下：(a) 它们是实践中往往认为不属于外国刑事管辖属事豁免范围的罪行； |
| and (b) they are crimes under international law that have been identified as the most serious crimes of concern to the international community, and there are international, treaty-based and customary norms relating to their prohibition, including an obligation to take steps to prevent and punish them. | (b) 它们是国际法规定的罪行，已确定为国际社会关切的最严重罪行，有国际规范、基于条约的规范和习惯规范予以禁止，还有采取措施予以防止和惩罚的义务。 |
| (12) | (12) |
| However, some members disagreed with this analysis. | 但是，有些委员不同意这一分析。 |
| First, they opposed draft article 7, which had been adopted by vote, stating that: (a) the Commission should not portray its work as possibly codifying customary international law when, for reasons indicated in the footnotes below, it is clear that national case law, national statutes, and treaty law do not support the exceptions asserted in draft article 7; | 首先，他们反对以表决方式通过的第7条草案，认为：(a) 委员会不应称其工作是视可能编纂习惯国际法，因为，如下文脚注所指出的，国家判例法、 国家成文法 和条约法 显然不支持第7条草案所述的例外； |
| (b) the relevant practice shows no “trend”, temporal or otherwise, in favour of exceptions to immunity ratione materiae from foreign criminal jurisdiction; | (b) 相关实践并未表明有支持外国刑事管辖属事豁免例外的趋势――无论是暂时趋势还是长期趋势； |
| (c) immunity is a procedural matter and, consequently, (i) it is not possible to assume that the existence of criminal responsibility for any crimes under international law committed by a State official automatically precludes immunity from foreign criminal jurisdiction; | (c) 豁免是程序性问题，因此，(一) 不能假定国家官员对其犯下的国际法规定的任何罪行所负的刑事责任自动排除外国刑事管辖豁免； |
| (ii) immunity does not depend on the gravity of the act in question or on the fact that such act is prohibited by a peremptory norm of international law; | (二) 豁免不取决于有关行为的严重程度，或此种行为受国际法强制性规范禁止的事实； |
| (iii) the issue of immunity must be considered at an early stage of the exercise of jurisdiction, before the case is considered on the merits; | (三) 必须在行使管辖权的早期阶段，在审议案情之前考虑豁免问题； |
| (d) the lack of immunity before an international criminal court is not relevant to the issue of immunity from the jurisdiction of national courts; | (d) 国际刑事法院不予豁免与国内法院管辖豁免问题无关； |
| and (e) the establishment of a new system of exceptions to immunity, if not agreed upon by treaty, will likely harm inter-State relations and risks undermining the international community’s objective of ending impunity for the most serious international crimes. | (e) 在未经条约约定的情况下确立新的豁免例外制度，可能会损害国家间的关系，并可能损害国际社会终结对最严重国际罪行的有罪不罚现象的宗旨。 |
| Furthermore, these members took the view that the Commission, by proposing draft article 7, was conducting a “normative policy” exercise that bore no relation to either the codification or the progressive development of international law. | 此外，这些委员还认为，通过提出第7条草案，委员会是在开展“规范性政策”工作，这与国际法的编纂或逐渐发展无关。 |
| For those members, draft article 7 is a proposal for “new law” that cannot be considered as either lex lata or desirable progressive development of international law. | 这些委员认为，第7条草案是在提出一种“新法律”，既不能视为现行法，也不能视为可取的国际法的逐渐发展。 |
| Second, those members of the Commission also stressed the difference between procedural immunity from foreign jurisdiction, on the one hand, and substantive criminal responsibility, on the other, and maintained that the recognition of exceptions to immunity was neither required nor necessarily appropriate for achieving the required balance. | 其次，这些委员还强调了外国刑事管辖的程序性豁免与实质性刑事责任之间的区别，并认为，承认豁免的例外既不是实现必要的平衡所必需的，也未必是适当的。 |
| Rather, in the view of those members, impunity can be avoided in situations where a State official is prosecuted in his or her own State; is prosecuted in an international court; | 相反，这些委员认为，如果国家官员在其本国、在国际性法院、或放弃豁免后在外国法院被起诉，就可避免有罪不罚现象。 |
| or is prosecuted in a foreign court after waiver of the immunity. Asserting exceptions to immunity that States have not accepted by treaty or through their widespread practice risks creating severe tensions, if not outright conflict, among States whenever one State exercises criminal jurisdiction over the officials of another based solely on an allegation that a heinous crime has been committed. | 提出各国未通过条约或本国的广泛实践所接受的豁免例外，当一国仅仅基于关于犯下令人发指的罪行的指控而对另一国官员行使刑事管辖权时，即使不会在国家间造成直接冲突，也有可能造成严重的紧张关系。 |
| Paragraph 1 | 第1款 |
| (13) | (13) |
| Paragraph 1 (a)–(f) of draft article 7 lists the crimes under international law which, if allegedly committed, would prevent the application of immunity from criminal jurisdiction to a foreign official, even if the official committed those crimes while acting in an official capacity during his or her term of office. | 第7条草案第1款(a)至(f)项列出了国际法规定的罪行，外国官员被指控实施这些罪行的，即使是任职期间以官方身份实施的，也不得享有刑事豁免。 |
| The crimes are as follows: the crime of genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, the crime of apartheid, torture and enforced disappearance. | 这些罪行如下：灭绝种族罪、危害人类罪、战争罪、种族隔离罪、酷刑和强迫失踪。 |
| (14) | (14) |
| The chapeau of the draft article uses the phrase “shall not apply” in order to reflect the fact that in both practice and doctrine two different interpretations have been followed with regard to whether or not such crimes are to be considered “acts performed in an official capacity”. | 该条草案的起首部分使用了“不适用”这一措辞，旨在反映在实践和法理中，对是否认为此类罪行是“以官方身份实施的行为”，一直有两种不同解释。 |
| One view is that the commission of such crimes can never be considered a function of the State and they therefore cannot be regarded as “acts performed in an official capacity”. | 一种观点是，绝不可认为实施这类犯罪是国家职能，因此也不能视为“以官方身份实施的行为”。 |
| The contrary view holds that crimes under international law either require the presence of a State element (torture, enforced disappearance) or else must have been committed with the backing, express or implied, of the State machinery, so that there is a connection with the State, and such crimes can therefore be considered in certain cases as “acts performed in an official capacity”. | 相反的观点却认为，国际法规定的罪行要求要么有国家要素(酷刑、强迫失踪)，要么必须是在国家机器的明示或暗示支持下实施，因此与国家有关联，所以在一些情况下可以认为此类罪行是“以官方身份实施的行为”。 |
| Although the Commission did not find it necessary to come down in favour of one or the other of these interpretations, it noted that some national courts have not applied immunity ratione materiae in the exercise of their criminal jurisdiction in respect of these crimes under international law, either because they do not regard them as an act performed in an official capacity or a characteristic function of the State, or because they take the view that, although crimes under international law may constitute such an act or function, such crimes (by virtue of their gravity or because they contravene peremptory norms) may not give rise to recognition of the perpetrator’s immunity from criminal jurisdiction. | 虽然委员会认为没有必要裁定支持其中哪一种解释，但注意到一些国内法院在对国际法规定的这些罪行行使刑事管辖权时没有适用属事豁免，原因要么是因为它们不将这些罪行视为以官方身份实施的行为或是国家特有的职能， 要么是因为它们认为，虽然国际法规定的罪行可能是国家行为或国家职能，但此类罪行(由于其严重性或因为违反强行法)不可能使实施者的刑事管辖豁免得到承认。 |
| (15) | (15) |
| Therefore, bearing in mind that, in practice, the same crime under international law has sometimes been interpreted as a limitation (absence of immunity) or as an exception (exclusion of existing immunity), the Commission considered it preferable to address the topic in terms of the effects resulting from each of these approaches, namely, the non-applicability to such crimes of immunity ratione materiae from foreign criminal jurisdiction that otherwise might be enjoyed by a State official. | 鉴于在实践中，国际法规定的同一罪行有时被解释为限制(不予豁免)，有时被解释为例外(不适用现有的豁免)，委员会认为，似宜从这两种办法产生的影响来处理这一问题，即对此类罪行不可适用国家官员否则可能享有的外国刑事管辖属事豁免。 |
| The Commission opted for this formulation for reasons of clarity and certainty, in order to provide a list of crimes which, even if committed by a State official, would preclude the possibility of immunity from foreign criminal jurisdiction. | 委员会选择这一措辞是为了明白、确定，以便提供一份清单，列明即使是国家官员实施，也不会享有外国刑事管辖豁免的罪行。 |
| (16) | (16) |
| To that end, the Commission used the phrase “immunity … shall not apply”, following, mutatis mutandis, the technique once used by the Commission in relation to jurisdictional immunity of the State, when it used the phrase “proceedings in which State immunity cannot be invoked” in a similar context. | 为此，委员会比照处理国家管辖豁免问题时一度使用的技巧，在类似背景下使用“不得援引豁免的诉讼”一语，采用了“不适用…豁免”这一措辞。 |
| However, in draft article 7, the Commission decided not to use the phrase “cannot be invoked” in order to avoid the procedural component of that phrase, preferring instead to use the neutral phrase “shall not apply”. | 然而，在第7条草案中，为了避免该措辞中的程序内容，委员会决定不采用“不得援引”的表述，而宁可使用“不适用”这一中性表述。 |
| (17) | (17) |
| The expression “from the exercise of foreign criminal jurisdiction” is included in the chapeau for consistency with the formulation used in draft articles 3 and 5. | 同时，为与第3和第5条草案中的措辞一致，起首部分加入了“外国刑事管辖的”这一措辞。 |
| (18) | (18) |
| The expression “crimes under international law” refers to conduct that is criminal under international law whether or not such conduct has been criminalized under national law. | “国际法规定的罪行”这一术语系指国际法规定的犯罪行为，无论国内法是否将其定为犯罪。 |
| The crimes listed in draft article 7 are the crimes of greatest concern to the international community as a whole; there is a broad international consensus on their definition as well as on the existence of an obligation to prevent and punish them. | 第7条草案所列罪行是整个国际社会最关切的罪行，并且国际社会对这些罪行的定义以及有义务防止和惩处这些罪行存在广泛的共识。 |
| These crimes have been addressed in treaties and are also prohibited by customary international law. | 这些罪行为条约所述及，也为习惯国际法所禁止。 |
| (19) | (19) |
| The expression “crimes under international law” was used previously by the Commission in the Nürnberg Principles and in the 1954 draft Code of Offences against the Peace and Security of Mankind. | 先前在《纽伦堡原则》 和1954年《危害人类和平及安全治罪法草案》 中，委员会就已使用了“国际法规定的罪行”这一措辞。 |
| In this context, the Commission took the view that the use of the expression “crimes under international law” means that “international law provides the basis for the criminal characterization” of such crimes and that “the prohibition of such types of behaviour and their punishability are a direct consequence of international law”. | 在此情况下，委员会认为采用“国际法规定的罪行”这一措辞意味着对于这类罪行，“国际法是刑事定性的依据”，并且，“这种行为被禁及其可惩罚性，均是国际法的直接结果”。 |
| What follows from this is “the autonomy of international law in the criminal characterization” of such crimes and the fact that “the characterization, or the absence of characterization, of a particular type of behaviour as criminal under national law has no effect on the characterization of that type of behaviour as criminal under international law”. | 由此推导出“国际法”可将此类罪行“自主定性为刑事犯罪”， 以及“是否根据国内法将某种特定行为定性为犯罪，不影响根据国际法将这种行为定性为犯罪”。 |
| Accordingly, the use of the expression “crimes under international law” directly links the list of crimes contained in paragraph 1 of draft article 7 to international law and ensures that the definition of such crimes is understood in accordance with international standards, and any definition established under domestic law to identify cases in which immunity does not apply is irrelevant. | 因此，使用“国际法规定的罪行”这一表述直接将第7条草案第1款所载罪行清单与国际法联系起来，并确保了根据国际标准理解这些罪行的定义，国内法为确认哪些案件不适用豁免而确定的任何定义均不相干。 |
| (20) | (20) |
| The category of crimes under international law includes (a) the crime of genocide, (b) crimes against humanity and (c) war crimes. | 国际法规定的罪行的范畴包括：(a) 灭绝种族罪； (b) 危害人类罪； (c) 战争罪。 |
| The Commission included these crimes among the crimes in respect of which immunity does not apply for two basic reasons. | 委员会将这些罪行列为不适用豁免的罪行有两个理由。 |
| First, these are crimes about which the international community has expressed particular concern, resulting in the adoption of treaties that are at the heart of international criminal law, international human rights law and international humanitarian law, and the international courts have emphasized not only the gravity of these crimes, but also the fact that their prohibition is customary in nature and that committing them may constitute a violation of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). | 首先，这些是国际社会表示特别关切的罪行，并因此通过了在国际刑法、国际人权法和国际人道法中占据核心地位的条约，各国际性法院不仅强调这些罪行的严重性，还强调禁止实施这类罪行是习惯性的，实施这些罪行可能违反一般国际法的强制性规范(强行法)。 |
| Second, these crimes arise, directly or indirectly, in the judicial practice of States in relation to cases in which the issue of immunity ratione materiae has been raised. | 其次，这些罪行直接或间接出现在各国涉及提出属事豁免问题的案件的司法实践中。 |
| Lastly, it should be noted that these three crimes are included in article 5 of the Rome Statute, where they are described as “the most serious crimes of concern to the international community as a whole”. | 最后，应当指出，《罗马规约》第五条载入了这三项罪行，并将其称为“整个国际社会关注的最严重犯罪”。 |
| Some members noted, however, that the inclusion of those crimes in draft article 7 found little if any support in practice, in national and international jurisprudence or in national legislation. | 但一些委员指出，在实践中，以及在国家和国际判例或国内立法中，找不到太多证据支持将这些罪行列入第7条草案。 |
| (21) | (21) |
| The Commission decided not to include the crime of aggression at this time, even though it too is included in article 5 of the Rome Statute and is characterized as a crime under the amendments adopted at the Review Conference of the Rome Statute held in Kampala in 2010. | 尽管《罗马规约》第五条同样规定了侵略罪，并且根据2010年在坎帕拉举行的《罗马规约》审查会议通过的修正案也把侵略罪称为罪行，但委员会暂时决定不列入侵略罪。 |
| The Commission took this decision in view of the nature of the crime of aggression, which would require national courts to determine the existence of a prior act of aggression by the foreign State, as well as the special political dimension of this type of crime, given that it constitutes a “crime of leaders”. | 委员会做出这一决定，是鉴于侵略罪的性质，它要求国家法院确定先前已经存在外国侵略行为，同时也是鉴于这类罪行的特殊政治层面， 因为这种罪行构成“领导人的罪行”。 |
| However, some members stated that the crime of aggression should have been included in paragraph 1 of draft article 7, as it is the most serious of the crimes under international law, it was previously included by the Commission itself in the 1996 draft Code of Crimes against the Peace and Security of Mankind and it is one of the crimes covered by the Rome Statute. | 不过，有些委员指出，本应将侵略罪载入第7条草案第1款，因为它属于国际法规定的最严重罪行，委员会本身早在1996年《危害人类和平及安全治罪法草案》 中就已载入侵略罪，它同时也是《罗马规约》列出的罪行之一。 |
| Furthermore, a substantial number of States have included the crime of aggression within their national criminal law. | 此外，许多国家也将侵略罪列入了国内刑法。 |
| Accordingly, they expressed their opposition to the majority decision of the Commission and reserved their position on the matter. | 因此，这些委员表示反对委员会的多数决定，并对这一问题保留其立场。 |
| (22) | (22) |
| On the other hand, the Commission considered it necessary to include in paragraph 1 of draft article 7 the crimes of apartheid, torture and enforced disappearance as separate categories of crimes under international law in respect of which immunity does not apply. | 另一方面，委员会认为有必要将种族隔离、酷刑和强迫失踪罪作为单独类别的不适用豁免的国际法规定的罪行列入第7条草案第1款。 |
| Although these crimes are included in article 7 of the Rome Statute under the category of crimes against humanity, the Commission took into account the following elements to consider them as separate crimes. | 虽然这些罪行已载入《罗马规约》第七条的危害人类罪项下， 但委员会考虑到以下理由，认为它们是单独罪行。 |
| First, the crimes of apartheid, torture and enforced disappearance have been the subject of treaties that establish a special legal regime for each crime for the purposes of prevention, suppression and punishment, which imposes specific obligations on States to take certain measures in their domestic legislation, including the obligation to define such crimes in their national criminal legislation and to take the necessary measures to ensure that their courts are competent to try such crimes. | 首先，种族隔离、酷刑和强迫失踪罪一直是条约的主题，这些条约为每种罪行设立了专门的法律制度，目的是预防、禁止和惩治， 规定各国有明确义务在其国内法中采取某些措施，包括在国内刑法中界定这些行为，并采取必要措施确保其国内法院有权审判这类罪行。 |
| It should be added that the treaties in question establish systems of horizontal international cooperation and judicial assistance between States. | 还应指出的是，有关条约还建立起各国之间开展国际合作和司法互助的制度。 |
| Second, the Commission also noted that the crimes of apartheid, torture and enforced disappearance are subject under the Rome Statute to a specific threshold that is defined as the commission of such crimes “as part of a widespread or systematic attack directed against any civilian population, with knowledge of the attack”, which, however, does not exist in the instruments specifically related to these crimes. | 其次，委员会也注意到，根据《罗马规约》，种族隔离、酷刑和强迫失踪罪必须满足一个具体的门槛，即“在广泛或有系统地针对任何平民人口进行的攻击中，在明知这一攻击的情况下，作为攻击的一部分” 而实施此类犯罪，但这一门槛并不存在于专门涉及这些罪行的文书中。 |
| Third, the Commission observed that the conventions against torture and enforced disappearance expressly establish that such acts can only be committed by State officials or at their instigation or with their support or acquiescence. | 再次，委员会注意到，禁止酷刑和强迫失踪的公约明确规定，这类罪行仅可由国家官员实施或在其唆使、支持或默许下实施。 |
| In addition, the Commission took into account the fact that, in many cases, when national courts have dealt with these crimes in relation to immunity, they have done so by treating them as separate crimes. | 此外，委员会还考虑到，在许多案例中，国内法院在处理这些豁免案件时，都把它们当作单独罪行对待。 |
| The treatment of torture is a good example of this. | 对酷刑案件的处理就是这方面的一个范例。 |
| Some members noted, however, that the inclusion of those crimes in draft article 7 found little if any support in practice, in national and international jurisprudence or in national legislation. | 但一些委员指出，在实践中，以及在国家和国际判例或国内立法中，找不到太多证据支持将这些罪行列入第7条草案。 |
| (23) | (23) |
| While some members of the Commission suggested that the list should include other crimes such as slavery, terrorism, human trafficking, child prostitution and child pornography, and piracy, which are also the subject of treaties that establish special legal regimes for each crime for the purposes of prevention, suppression and punishment, the Commission decided not to include them. | 尽管一些委员建议将奴役、恐怖主义、贩卖人口、儿童卖淫与儿童色情制品以及海盗等罪行纳入清单，而且为预防、禁止和惩治目的针对每种罪行建立专门法律制度的条约也述及这些罪行，但是委员会决定不予列入。 |
| In doing so, it took into account the fact that these crimes either are already covered by the category of crimes against humanity or do not fully correspond to the definition of crimes under international law stricto sensu, being more correctly described in most cases as transnational crimes. | 委员会这么做，是考虑到上述罪行或已包含在危害人类罪中，或不完全符合严格意义上的国际法规定的罪行的定义，在多数情况下将它们称为跨国犯罪更为准确。 |
| In addition, such crimes are usually committed by non-State actors and are not reflected in national judicial practice relating to immunity from jurisdiction. | 此外，这类罪行通常由非国家行为体实施，也不反映在有关管辖豁免的国内司法实践中。 |
| In any event, the non-inclusion of other international crimes in draft article 7 should not be taken to mean that the Commission underestimates the seriousness of such crimes. | 无论如何，不应当认为未把其他国际罪行载入第7条草案就意味着委员会低估其严重性。 |
| (24) | (24) |
| Lastly, it should be noted that the Commission did not include in draft article 7, paragraph 1, the crimes of corruption or crimes affected by the so-called “territorial tort exception” proposed by the Special Rapporteur. This does not mean, however, that the Commission considers that immunity from foreign criminal jurisdiction ratione materiae should apply to these two categories of crimes. | 最后，应当指出的是，委员会没有按照特别报告员的提议， 将腐败犯罪或受所谓“领土内侵权例外”影响的罪行列入第7条草案第1款，但是这并不意味着委员会认为外国刑事管辖属事豁免适用于这两类罪行。 |
| (25) | (25) |
| With regard to corruption (understood as “grand corruption”), several members of the Commission pointed out that crimes of corruption are especially serious as they directly affect the interests and stability of the State, the well-being of its population and even its international relations. | 关于腐败(应理解为“重大腐败”)，一些委员指出，腐败犯罪特别严重，因为它们直接影响到国家利益和国家稳定，国民福利，甚至国际关系。 |
| Consequently, those members were in favour of including an exception to immunity ratione materiae. | 因此，他们表示支持载入一项属事豁免例外。 |
| However, other members of the Commission argued that, while the seriousness of the crime of corruption cannot be called into question, its inclusion in draft article 7 posed a problem, related essentially to the general nature of the term “corruption” and the wide range of acts that can be included in this category, as well as the fact that, in their view, treaty practice and case law do not provide sufficient grounds for including such crimes among the limitations and exceptions to immunity. | 可另一些委员主张，尽管腐败犯罪的严重性毋庸置疑，但将其列入第7条草案却引起一个问题，本质上涉及“腐败”这一术语的一般性和可以归入此类的多种行为，而且他们认为，条约实践和判例法都没有提供将这类罪行列入豁免限制与例外范畴的充足理由。 |
| Other members questioned whether corruption met the test of gravity of the other crimes listed in draft article 7. | 还有一些委员质疑腐败是否达到第7条草案所列其他罪行的严重程度。 |
| Lastly, several members of the Commission pointed out that corruption cannot under any circumstances be regarded as an act performed in an official capacity and therefore need not be included among the crimes for which immunity does not apply. | 最后，几位委员指出，绝不可把腐败视为以官方身份实施的行为，因此也不必列入不适用豁免的罪行之中。 |
| (26) | (26) |
| Especially in view of that last argument, the Commission decided not to include crimes of corruption in draft article 7, on the grounds that they do not constitute “acts performed in an official capacity”, but are acts carried out by a State official solely for his or her own benefit. | 委员会特别考虑了最后一个论点，决定不将腐败犯罪列入第7条草案，因为它们不构成“以官方身份实施的行为”，而是国家官员纯为私利实施的行为。 |
| Although some members of the Commission pointed out that the involvement of State officials in such acts cannot be ignored, because it is precisely their official status that facilitates and makes possible the crime of corruption, some members of the Commission took the view that the fact that the crime is committed by an official does not change the nature of the act, which remains an act performed for the official’s own benefit even if the official uses State facilities that might give the act a semblance of official status. | 尽管一些委员指出，不能忽视国家官员参与这类行为的情况，因为正是其官员身份便利和促成腐败犯罪，但另一些委员认为，官员实施犯罪的事实不会改变行为的性质，即便该官员利用国家设施，可能赋予行为以官方行为表象，但仍然是该官员为私利实施的行为。 |
| Accordingly, since the normative element contained in draft article 6, paragraph 1, does not apply to the crime of corruption, several members of the Commission took the view that immunity from jurisdiction ratione materiae does not exist in relation to the crime of corruption and therefore the latter does not need to be included in the list of crimes for which immunity does not apply. | 因此，既然第6条草案第1款所载规范性要素不适用于腐败犯罪，几位委员认为，不存在对腐败犯罪的管辖属事豁免，因此没有必要将该罪列入不适用豁免的罪行清单。 |
| (27) | (27) |
| The Commission also considered the case of other crimes committed by a foreign official in the territory of the forum State without that State’s consent to both the official’s presence in its territory and the activity carried out by the official that gave rise to the commission of the crime (territorial exception). | 对于法院地国不同意外国官员在该国领土上出现并开展导致实施犯罪的活动而该外国官员在该法院地国领土上实施其他犯罪的情况(领土内侵权例外)，委员会也进行了审议。 |
| This scenario differs in many respects from the crimes under international law included in paragraph 1 of draft article 7 or the crime of corruption. | 这种情形与第7条草案第1款所载国际法规定的罪行或腐败犯罪有许多不同之处。 |
| Although the view was expressed that immunity could exist in these circumstances and the exception should not be included in draft article 7 because there was insufficient practice to justify doing so, the Commission decided not to include it in the draft article for other reasons. | 尽管有观点认为，在这类情形下可能存在豁免，不应当把例外列入第7条草案，因为没有充分的实践支持这样做，但委员会决定不将该罪行列入条款草案是出于其他原因。 |
| The Commission considers that certain crimes, such as murder, espionage, sabotage or kidnapping, committed in the territory of a State in the aforementioned circumstances are subject to the principle of territorial sovereignty and do not give rise to immunity from jurisdiction ratione materiae, and therefore there is no need to include them in the list of crimes for which this type of immunity does not apply. | 委员会认为，上述情况下在一国领土内实施的某些犯罪，例如谋杀、间谍、破坏或绑架，应当遵照领土主权原则，并不产生管辖属事豁免，因此也就没有必要把它们列入不适用豁免的罪行清单。 |
| This is without prejudice to the immunity from criminal jurisdiction enjoyed under special rules of international law, as set forth in draft article 1, paragraph 2. | 这并不妨碍根据第1条草案第2款规定的国际法特别规则享有的刑事管辖豁免。 |
| Paragraph 2 | 第2款 |
| (28) | (28) |
| Paragraph 2 of draft article 7 establishes a link between paragraph 1 of the article and the annex to the draft articles, entitled “List of treaties referred to in draft article 7, paragraph 2”. | 第7条草案第2款在本条第1款和题为“第7条草案第2款提到的条约清单”的条款草案附件之间建立起联系。 |
| While the concept of “crimes under international law” and the concepts of “crime of genocide”, “crimes against humanity”, “war crimes”, “crime of apartheid”, “torture” and “enforced disappearance” belong to well-established categories in contemporary international law, the Commission is mindful that the fact that draft article 7 refers to “crimes” means that the principle of legal certainty characteristic of criminal law must be preserved and tools must be provided to avoid subjectivity in identifying what is meant by each of the aforementioned crimes. | 虽然当代国际法明确确立了“国际法规定的罪行”这一概念以及“灭绝种族罪”、“危害人类罪”、“战争罪”、“种族隔离罪”、“酷刑”和“强迫失踪”等概念，但委员会注意到，第7条草案使用了“罪行”一词，这意味着必须保留刑法特有的法律确定性原则，并且提供工具，以免在辨别上述各项罪行的含义时主观臆断。 |
| (29) | (29) |
| However, the Commission did not consider it necessary to define the crime of genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, the crime of apartheid, torture and enforced disappearance, as this is not part of its mandate within the framework of the present draft articles. | 然而，委员会认为没有必要界定灭绝种族罪、危害人类罪、战争罪、种族隔离罪、酷刑和强迫失踪，因为这并不属于委员会在本条款草案框架内承担的任务。 |
| On the contrary, the Commission found it preferable to simply identify the treaty instruments that define the aforementioned categories, for inclusion in a list that will enable the competent authorities of the forum State to act with greater certainty in applying draft article 7. | 相反，委员会认为，最好仅列明对上述类别的罪行作出界定的条约文书，以便将这些罪行列入一份清单，使法院地国的主管部门在适用第7条草案时有更大的确定性。 |
| The outcome of this exercise is the list contained in the annex to the draft articles. | 这项工作的成果就是条款草案附件所载的清单。 |
| (30) | (30) |
| As indicated in paragraph 2 of draft article 7, the linkage of each crime with the treaties listed in the annex is only for the purposes of draft article 7 on the immunity of State officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction, in order to identify the definitions of the crimes listed in paragraph 1 of the article without assuming or requiring that States must be parties to those instruments. | 正如第7条草案第2款所述，每项罪行与附件所列条约之间的关联只是为了第7条草案(关于国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免)之目的，意在查明第7条第1款所列犯罪的定义，而不用假定或要求国家必须是这些文书的缔约国。 |
| (31) | (31) |
| On the other hand, it should be borne in mind that the listing of certain treaties has no effect on the customary nature of these crimes, as recognized under international law, or on the specific obligations that may arise from those treaties for States parties. | 另一方面，应当牢记的是，列出某些条约对这些国际法承认的罪行的习惯性质没有任何影响，对缔约国可能依据这些条约承担的具体义务也没有任何影响。 |
| Similarly, the inclusion of only some of the treaties that define the crimes in question has no effect on other treaties that define or regulate the same crimes, whose definitions and legal regimes remain intact for States parties in their application of those treaties. | 同样，仅仅载入一些对相关罪行进行界定的条约，不影响对同样的罪行作出界定或规定的其他条约，就缔约国适用这些条约而言，其定义和法律制度依然完整无损。 |
| In conclusion, the reference to a specific treaty for the definition of each of the crimes listed in paragraph 1 of draft article 7 is included for reasons of convenience and appropriateness and solely for the purposes of draft article 7, and in no way affects the other rules of customary or treaty-based international law that refer to such crimes and that contain legal regimes of general scope for each of them. | 总之，为确定第7条草案第1款所列各项罪行的定义而提及某项特定条约，是因为方便、适宜，并且只是为了第7条草案的目的，决不影响习惯国际法或基于条约的国际法提及此类罪行且载有关于各项罪行一般范围的法律制度的其他规则。 |
| (32) | (32) |
| The criteria used by the Commission to select the treaties included in the annex, as well as the explanations relating to each of them, have been included in the commentary to the annex, to which the reader is referred. | 委员会选择附件所列条约时采用的标准以及与每一项条约有关的解释载于附件评注。 |
| The commentaries to paragraph 2 of draft article 7 and to the annex should be read together. | 第7条草案第2款评注和附件评注应一并阅读。 |
| Part Four Procedural provisions and safeguards | 第四部分 程序性规定和保障措施 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) | (1) |
| Part Four of the draft articles concerns the procedural provisions and safeguards to be applied in connection with the immunity of State officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction. | 条款草案第四部分专门讨论在国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免方面必须适用的程序性规定和保障措施。 |
| (2) | (2) |
| International instruments that refer to the immunity of State officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction have generally been confined to stating that immunity exists, identifying those who enjoy immunity, defining its scope and, in certain cases, establishing rules on the waiver of immunity, without including provisions of a procedural nature. | 涉及国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免的国际文书一般仅限于宣布豁免、确定其受益人、界定其范围，在某些情况下还规定了关于放弃豁免的规则，但不包括程序性规定。 |
| (3) | (3) |
| Nevertheless, the Commission has considered that the present draft articles should include procedural provisions and safeguards supplementing the substantive provisions included in Parts One, Two and Three. | 不过，委员会认为，本条款草案应包括程序性规定和保障措施，以补充第一、第二和第三部分中的实质性规定。 |
| This is explained, first, by the need to maintain a balance between the rights and interests of the State of the official and the rights and interests of the forum State, as in both cases such rights and interests are directly linked to the principle of the sovereign equality of States. | 首先，这是因为需要在官员所属国的权利和利益与法院地国的权利和利益之间保持平衡，因为在这两种情况下，这些权利和利益都与国家主权平等原则直接相关。 |
| Second, the inclusion of procedural provisions and safeguards is conceived as a means of offering the States involved some useful instruments to facilitate reciprocal communication and cooperation regarding a particularly sensitive issue. | 第二，列入程序性规定和保障措施也是旨在为有关国家提供一些有用的工具，便利就特别敏感的问题进行相互沟通与合作。 |
| In this context, the procedural provisions and safeguards are intended to promote mutual trust and the stability of international relations. | 在这方面，程序性规定和保障措施旨在加强相互信任和国际关系的稳定性。 |
| Last but not least, the procedural provisions and safeguards are meant to ensure that the exercise of criminal jurisdiction with regard to an official of another State is not abusive or politically motivated. | 最后但并非最不重要的一点是，程序性规定和保障措施旨在确保对另一国国家官员行使管辖权不会被滥用或出于政治动机。 |
| For all these reasons, the Commission takes the view that the inclusion of procedural provisions and safeguards gives an added value to the draft articles and helps to strike a balance among the different provisions contained therein. | 出于所有这些原因，委员会认为，列入程序性规定和保障措施增加了条款草案的价值，有助于确保在其中所载的不同规定之间达成平衡。 |
| (4) | (4) |
| The procedural provisions and safeguards apply generally to all cases where the question of immunity of State officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction arises, but they are especially important in cases where immunity from foreign criminal jurisdiction may be affected by the provisions of draft article 7, which refers to limitations or exceptions to the application of immunity ratione materiae in relation to the crimes under international law listed in that draft article. | 程序性规定和保障措施普遍适用于出现国家官员外国刑事管辖豁免问题的所有情况，但在外国刑事管辖豁免可能受到第7条草案影响时，尤其重要，因第7条提及在对该条所列国际法规定的罪行适用属事豁免的限制或例外情形。 |
| The Commission has duly taken this circumstance into account, which is adequately reflected in the text of the draft articles contained in Part Four. | 委员会已适当考虑到这一情况，第四部分所载的条款草案案文充分反映了这一点。 |
| (5) | (5) |
| Part Four consists of 11 draft articles dealing, respectively, with the scope of Part Four and its relationship to the rest of the draft articles (draft article 8), the procedural provisions and safeguards that apply in the direct relations between the forum State and the State of the official (draft articles 9–15), the application of the rules pertaining to the right to a fair trial and the procedural safeguards applicable to the official of another State in respect of whom the question of immunity arises (draft article 16), and the establishment of mechanisms for facilitating consultations and the settlement of any dispute that may arise between the forum State and the State of the official with regard to the immunity from foreign criminal jurisdiction of an official of the latter State (draft articles 17 and 18). | 第四部分由11条草案组成，分别涉及第四部分的范围及其与条款草案其他规定的关系(第8条草案)、适用于法院地国和官员所属国之间直接关系的程序性规定和保障措施(第9-15条草案)，适用于豁免问题所涉另一国官员的公平审判规则和程序保障的适用(第16条草案)，以及建立机制，促进法院地国和官员所属国就后者某一官员的外国刑事管辖豁免可能出现的任何争端加以协商和解决(第17和第18条草案)。 |
| Article 8 Application of Part Four | 第8条 第四部分的适用范围 |
| The procedural provisions and safeguards in the present Part shall be applicable in relation to any exercise of criminal jurisdiction by the forum State over an official of another State, current or former, that concerns any of the draft articles contained in Part Two and Part Three of the present draft articles, including to the determination of whether immunity applies or does not apply under any of the present draft articles. | 本部分的程序性规定和保障措施适用于法院地国对另一国现任或前任官员行使的、涉及本条款草案第二部分和第三部分所载任何一条草案的刑事管辖权，包括适用于依照本条款草案任何一条确定豁免是否适用。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) | (1) |
| Draft article 8 is the first of the draft articles in Part Four. | 第8条草案是条款草案第四部分第一条。 |
| Its purpose is to define the scope of application of Part Four in connection with Part Two and Part Three, which deal respectively with immunity ratione personae and immunity ratione materiae of State officials, current or former, from foreign criminal jurisdiction. | 其目的是结合第二部分和第三部分界定第四部分的适用范围，这两部分分别涉及现任或前任国家官员的外国刑事管辖属人豁免和属事豁免。 |
| By referring to the links between Part Four, on the one hand, and Part Two and Part Three, on the other, draft article 8 takes into account the notion of balance between the substantive provisions of the present draft articles and the procedural provisions and safeguards contained therein. | 通过提及第四部分与第二部分和第三部分之间的联系，第8条草案考虑到了在本条款草案实质性规定与其中所载程序性规定和保障措施之间实现平衡的概念。 |
| (2) | (2) |
| As Part Four is an integral part of the draft articles, its provisions are intended to be generally applicable to the other provisions of the draft articles. | 鉴于第四部分是条款草案的一个有机组成部分，因此其中所载的规定意在普遍适用于条款草案的其他规定。 |
| There was nonetheless a divergence of views among the members of the Commission with regard to the scope of Part Four, in particular its relationship to draft article 7. | 然而，委员们对第四部分的范围，特别是其与第7条草案的关系，意见不一。 |
| (3) | (3) |
| In the view of some members, the procedural guarantees and safeguards contained in Part Four apply only when immunity might exist, which seemingly was not the case with respect to the crimes listed in draft article 7, as it was couched in absolute terms, stating that immunity ratione materiae “shall not apply in respect of the following crimes under international law” (referring to the crimes listed in paragraph 1 (a)–(f) of that draft article). | 一些委员认为，第四部分所载的程序性保证和保障措施只有在可能存在豁免的情况下才适用，而第7条草案所列的罪行似乎并不存在豁免，因为它的表述方式是绝对的，规定属事豁免“不适用于国际法规定的如下罪行”(指该条草案第1款(a)至(f)项所列的罪行)。 |
| On the contrary, several members supported a broader interpretation of the draft articles proposed by the Special Rapporteur and envisioned a role for procedural safeguards and guarantees even with respect to situations where draft article 7 was engaged. | 相反，一些委员支持对特别报告员提出的条款草案作更宽泛的解释，并设想即使在第7条草案所述的情况下，程序性保证和保障措施也能发挥作用。 |
| (4) | (4) |
| In light of this divergence of views, the Commission adopted draft article 8, which expressly states that all the procedural provisions and safeguards in Part Four of the draft articles “shall be applicable in relation to any exercise of criminal jurisdiction by the forum State over an official of another State, current or former, that concerns any of the draft articles contained in Part Two and Part Three of the present draft articles, including to the determination of whether immunity applies or does not apply under any of the present draft articles”. | 鉴于上述意见分歧，委员会通过了第8条，其中明确说明，决定草案第四部分中的所有程序性规定和保障措施“适用于法院地国对另一国现任或前任官员行使的、涉及本条款草案第二部分和第三部分所载任何一条草案的刑事管辖权，包括适用于依照本条款草案任何一条确定豁免是否适用。 |
| Draft article 8 does not prejudge and is without prejudice to any additional procedural guarantees and safeguards, including whether specific safeguards apply to draft article 7. | ”第8条草案不预判、也不影响任何额外的程序保证和保障措施，包括具体保障措施是否适用于第7条草案。 |
| (5) | (5) |
| With the phrase “including to the determination of whether immunity applies or does not apply under any of the present draft articles”, the Commission has confirmed that Part Four, in its entirety, also applies to draft article 7. | 通过加入“包括适用于依照本条款草案任何一条确定豁免是否适用”这一短语，委员会确认，整个第四部分也适用于第7条草案。 |
| This is made especially clear by the reference to the determination of immunity, understood as the process for deciding whether immunity applies or does not apply, which is the subject of draft article 14. | 这一点特别体现在提及“豁免的确定”，亦即决定豁免是否适用的过程，这是第14条草案的主题。 |
| In determining the applicability of immunity ratione materiae, account should be taken both of the normative elements listed in draft articles 4, 5 and 6 and of the limitations and exceptions set out in draft article 7. | 在确定是否适用属事豁免时，既应考虑到第4、第5和第6条草案中所列的规范性要素，也要考虑到第7条草案中所述的限制和例外情况。 |
| In addition, under draft article 8, all the procedural provisions and safeguards set out in Part Four must be respected in the process of determining whether exceptions are applicable. | 此外，根据第8条草案，在确定是否适用例外情况时，必须遵守第四部分所载的所有程序性规定和保障。 |
| (6) | (6) |
| Although the Commission discussed a proposal to include an express reference to draft article 7 in draft article 8, in order to ensure that the provisions and safeguards in Part Four would be understood to apply to it, the proposal was rejected in favour of a more general and neutral formulation referring to “the determination of whether immunity applies or does not apply under any of the present draft articles”. | 有人建议第8条草案应明确提及第7条草案，以确保第四部分中的规定和保障措施适用于该条。 委员会讨论了这一建议，但最终决定拒绝，而使用更笼统、更中立的表述，即“依照本条款草案任何一条确定豁免是否适用”。 |
| (7) | (7) |
| Part Four is applicable “in relation to any exercise of criminal jurisdiction by the forum State over an official of another State”. | 第四部分适用于“法院地国对另一国官员行使的刑事管辖权”。 |
| The term “exercise of criminal jurisdiction” is used in draft article 8 to refer broadly to different steps that may be taken by the forum State to determine, where appropriate, the criminal responsibility of an individual. | 第8条草案中使用的“行使刑事管辖权”一语泛指法院地国为酌情确定个人的刑事责任而可能采取的各种措施。 |
| In view of the differences in practice between States’ various legal systems and traditions, it was not considered necessary to refer specifically to the nature of these steps, which may include both acts of the executive and acts performed by judges and prosecutors. | 鉴于实践中各国法律制度和传统的差异，委员们认为没有必要明确提及这类措施的性质，这可能包括政府行政部门的行为以及法官和检察官实施的行为。 |
| (8) | (8) |
| Draft article 8 uses the phrase “over an official of another State, current or former”. | 第8条草案使用了“对另一国现任或前任官员”这一短语。 |
| This reflects the need for there to be a connection between the foreign State official and the exercise of criminal jurisdiction by the forum State in respect of which immunity might be applicable. | 这反映出需要将外国官员与可能适用豁免的法院地国行使管辖权的行为联系起来。 |
| The express mention of the temporal situation in which the official may be in his or her relationship with the foreign State (current or former) follows draft article 2 (a), which establishes that the concept of “State official” refers to “both current and former State officials”. | 明确提及官员与外国的关系中的时间状况(现任或前任)沿袭了第2条草案(a)项，该款规定“国家官员”的概念既指现任官员，也指前任官员。 |
| Nevertheless, this reference is not intended to alter the temporal scope of immunity from criminal jurisdiction, since, as the Commission points out in the commentary to draft article 2, “[t]he temporal scope of immunity ratione personae and of immunity ratione materiae is the subject of other draft articles”. | 然而，这一说法并不是要改变刑事管辖豁免的时间范围，因为正如委员会在第2条草案的评注中指出的，“属人豁免和属事豁免的时间范围是其他条款草案讨论的主题”。 |
| The words “current or former” should therefore be understood in light of the provisions of draft article 4, for immunity ratione personae, and of draft article 6, for immunity ratione materiae. | 因此，应参照关于属人豁免的第4条草案和关于属事豁免的第6条草案理解“前任或现任”一词。 |
| Article 9 Examination of immunity by the forum State | 第9条 法院地国审查豁免问题 |
| 1. | 1. |
| When the competent authorities of the forum State become aware that an official of another State may be affected by the exercise of its criminal jurisdiction, they shall examine the question of immunity without delay. | 法院地国主管当局一旦意识到另一国官员可能因其行使刑事管辖权而受到影响，即应立即审查豁免问题。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| Without prejudice to paragraph 1, the competent authorities of the forum State shall always examine the question of immunity: | 在不妨碍第1款的情况下，法院地国主管当局审查豁免问题应总是： |
| (a) | (a) |
| before initiating criminal proceedings; | 在启动刑事诉讼前进行； |
| (b) | (b) |
| before taking coercive measures that may affect an official of another State, including those that may affect any inviolability that the official may enjoy under international law. | 在采取可能影响另一国官员的强制措施，包括可能影响该官员根据国际法可能享有的任何不可侵犯性的强制措施前进行。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) | (1) |
| Draft article 9 concerns the obligation to examine the question of immunity from criminal jurisdiction when the authorities of the forum State seek to exercise or do exercise criminal jurisdiction over an official of another State. | 第9条草案涉及法院地国当局欲对另一国官员行使刑事管辖权时，或确实对其行使刑事管辖权时，须承担的审查刑事管辖豁免问题的义务。 |
| “Examination of immunity” refers to the measures necessary to assess whether or not an act of the authorities of the forum State involving the exercise of its criminal jurisdiction may affect the immunity from criminal jurisdiction of an official of another State. | “审查豁免问题”是指为评估法院地国当局涉及行使刑事管辖的行为是否会影响另一国官员的刑事管辖豁免而采取的必要措施。 |
| Thus, “examination” of immunity is a preparatory act that marks the beginning of a process that will end with a determination of whether or not immunity applies. | 因此，对豁免的“审查”是一种准备行动，标志着一个程序的开始，该程序将以确定豁免是否适用而结束。 |
| Although closely related, “examination” and “determination” of immunity are distinct categories. | 虽然豁免问题的“审查”和“确定”密切相关，但却属于不同的类别。 |
| The “determination of immunity” is addressed in draft article 14. | “豁免的确定”在第14条草案中加以处理。 |
| (2) | (2) |
| Draft article 9 contains two paragraphs that define, respectively, a general rule (para. 1) and a special rule that is applicable to specific situations (para. 2). | 第9条草案包含两款，分别用于界定一般规则(第1款)和适用于特殊情况的特定规则(第2款)。 |
| In both cases the obligation to examine the question of immunity is attributed to the “competent authorities” of the forum State. | 在这两种情况下，审查豁免问题的义务都由法院地国“主管当局”承担。 |
| The Commission decided not to specify which State organs fall into this category, since the identification of such organs will depend on the time when the question of immunity arises and on the legal system of the forum State. | 委员会决定不明确提及属于这一类别的国家机关，因为确定这些机关将取决于豁免问题出现的时间以及法院地国的法律制度。 |
| Since such organs may differ from one domestic legal system to another, it was considered preferable to use a term that encompasses organs of different types, including administrative bodies, executive organs, prosecutors and courts. | 由于这些机关在每个国家内部法律制度中可能不同，委员会认为最好还是使用能够涵盖不同性质的机关的术语，包括行政机构、政府行政部门、检察机关或法院。 |
| Determining which State organs fall within the category of “competent authorities” for the purposes of the present draft article is a matter to be considered on a case-by-case basis. | 就本条草案而言，确定哪些国家机关属于“主管当局”类别应具体情况具体分析。 |
| (3) | (3) |
| The general rule contained in paragraph 1 defines the obligation of the competent authorities of the forum State to “examine the question of immunity without delay” when they “become aware that an official of another State may be affected by the exercise of its criminal jurisdiction”. | 第1款所载的一般规则界定了法院地国主管当局“一旦意识到另一国官员可能因其行使刑事管辖权而受到影响，即应立即审查豁免问题”的义务。 |
| (4) | (4) |
| The term “official of another State” is used as an equivalent of “State official”, which is used in the title of the topic (in the plural) and whose definition is contained in draft article 2 (a). | “另一国官员”一词被用作“国家官员”的对等词，后者用于本专题的标题(复数)，其定义载于第2条草案(a)项。 |
| This term thus covers any State official, regardless of rank, whether he or she is covered by immunity ratione personae or immunity ratione materiae, and whether he or she is still an official at the time when the question of immunity is to be examined. | 因此，此术语涵盖任何国家官员，无论级别如何，无论其享有属人豁免还是属事豁免，也无论在审议豁免问题时他们是否为在职官员。 |
| The term “official of another State” therefore includes any official who could enjoy immunity from foreign criminal jurisdiction in accordance with the provisions of Part Two and Part Three of the draft articles. | “另一国官员”一语应涵盖根据本条款草案第二部分和第三部分的规定享有外国刑事管辖豁免的所有官员。 |
| (5) | (5) |
| The obligation to examine the question of immunity will arise only when an official of another State may be affected by the exercise of the criminal jurisdiction of the forum State. | 只有当另一国官员可能受到法院地国行使刑事管辖权的影响时，才会出现审查豁免问题的义务。 |
| For the general rule, the Commission has used the expression “exercise of … criminal jurisdiction”, which it considered preferable to “criminal proceeding”, an expression that was considered too narrow. | 在一般规则中，委员会使用了“行使刑事管辖权”一语，委员会认为这比“刑事诉讼”更可取，“刑事诉讼”被认为限制性过大。 |
| The term “exercise of … criminal jurisdiction” is also used in draft articles 3, 5, 7, 8, 10, 14 and 16. | 第3、第5、第7、第8、第10、第14和第16条草案中也使用了“行使刑事管辖权”一语。 |
| For the purposes of draft article 9, “exercise of … criminal jurisdiction” should be understood to mean such acts carried out by the competent authorities of the forum State as may be necessary to establish the criminal responsibility, if any, of one or several individuals. | 就第9条草案而言，“行使刑事管辖权”应被理解为法院地国主管当局为确定某一人或某几人的刑事责任(如有)而采取的必要行为。 |
| These acts may be of different types and are not limited to judicial acts, and may include governmental, police, investigative and prosecutorial acts. | 这类行为可能具有不同的性质，并不仅限于司法行为，亦可包括政府行为、警察行为、调查行为或起诉行为。 |
| (6) | (6) |
| However, not all acts that may fall within the generic category “exercise of criminal jurisdiction” will give rise to an obligation to examine the question of immunity. | 然而，并非“行使刑事管辖权”这一大类涵盖的所有行为都会产生审查豁免问题的义务。 |
| Rather, such an obligation arises only when the official of another State may be “affected” by any of the acts in this category. | 相反，只有当另一国官员可能受到这一类别涵盖的某一行为“影响”时，才会产生这种义务。 |
| As follows from the judgments of the International Court of Justice in the case concerning the Arrest Warrant of 11 April 2000 and in Certain Questions of Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters, a particular criminal procedure measure may affect the immunity of a foreign official only if it hinders or prevents the exercise of the functions of that person by imposing obligations upon him or her. | 根据国际法院在2000年4月11日逮捕证案 和《关于刑事事项互助的若干问题》案 中的判决，只有当某一项刑事诉讼措施通过对外国官员施加义务而妨碍或阻止其行使职能时，才可能影响该官员的豁免。 |
| For example, the commencement of a preliminary investigation or institution of criminal proceedings, not only in respect of the alleged fact of a crime but also actually against the person in question, cannot be seen as a violation of immunity if it does not impose any obligation upon that person under the national law being applied. | 例如，一国不仅针对被控犯罪事实，而且实际上也针对涉案人员启动了初步调查或提起了刑事诉讼，如果这种调查或诉讼行为没有根据所适用国家法律对该人施加任何义务，就不能被视为侵犯豁免权。 |
| The forum State is also able to carry out at least the initial collection of evidence for the case (to collect witness testimonies, documents, material evidence, etc.), using measures which are not binding or constraining on the foreign official. | 法院地国使用对外国官员不具约束力或限制性的措施，也至少能够为案件初步收集证据(包括证人证词、文件、物证等)。 |
| (7) | (7) |
| The general rule set out in paragraph 1 attaches particular importance to the time at which the competent authorities of the forum State should examine the question of immunity, emphasizing that it should be done at an early stage, since otherwise the effectiveness of the institution of immunity could be undermined. | 第1款规定的一般规则特别重视法院地国主管当局审查豁免问题的时间，强调豁免出现在早期阶段，否则豁免制度的效力可能会受到损害。 |
| Although treaties addressing various forms of immunity of State officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction have not included specific rules in this regard, the International Court of Justice has expressly stated that the question of immunity should be examined at an early stage and considered in limine litis. | 虽然对国家官员各种形式的外国刑事管辖豁免作出规定的条约都没有载列关于此问题的具体规则，但国际法院已明确表示，豁免问题应在早期阶段即在诉讼程序启动前加以审查。 |
| With this in mind, the Commission decided to indicate explicitly the point at which examination of the question of immunity should begin, defining it as follows: “[w]hen the competent authorities of the forum State become aware that an official of another State may be affected by the exercise of its criminal jurisdiction”. | 考虑到这一点，委员会认为有必要清楚说明开始审查豁免问题的时间，具体表述如下：“一旦意识到另一国官员可能因其行使刑事管辖权而受到影响”。 |
| The phrase “[w]hen [they] become aware” follows, to some extent, the wording used by the Institute of International Law in its 2001 resolution on immunities from jurisdiction and execution of Heads of State and of Government in international law, and is intended to emphasize that the question of immunity should be examined as soon as possible, without the need to wait until formal judicial proceedings have begun. | “一旦意识到”这一表达方式在某种程度上沿用了国际法学会在其关于国家元首和政府首脑根据国际法享有管辖和执行豁免的2001年决议 中使用的措辞，意在强调对豁免问题的审查应尽快进行，而无需等到司法程序正式确定。 |
| To reinforce this idea, the phrase “without delay” has been used, contained in articles 36 and 37 of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations. | 为强化这一概念，这里使用了《维也纳领事关系公约》第三十六条和第三十七条中的用语“立即”。 |
| (8) | (8) |
| Paragraph 2 of draft article 9 sets out a special rule covering two particular cases in which the competent authorities of the forum State should examine the question of immunity. | 第9条草案第2款载有一项特别规则，确定了法院地国主管当局应审查豁免问题的两种特殊情况。 |
| The special regime set out in this paragraph is framed as a “without prejudice” clause, in order to preserve the applicability of the general rule contained in paragraph 1. | 该款规定的特别制度作为“不妨碍”条款，维护第1款所载一般规则的适用性。 |
| In this context, the words “without prejudice” are used to emphasize that the general rule applies in all circumstances and cannot be affected or prejudiced by the special rule contained in paragraph 2. | 在这方面，使用“不妨碍”一词是为了强调一般规则适用于所有情况，不能受到第2款所载特别规则的影响或损害。 |
| The special rule in paragraph 2 is intended to draw the attention of the competent authorities of the forum State to their obligation to examine the question of immunity before taking any of the special measures set forth in this paragraph, if they have not done so earlier under the general rule. | 第2款所载的特别规则的目的是提请法院地国主管当局注意其在采取该款所述的一项特别措施之前有义务审查豁免问题，如果它们尚未根据一般规则已经这样做的话。 |
| The use of the adverb “always” is intended to reinforce this idea. | 使用副词“总是”意在强化这一点。 |
| (9) | (9) |
| Under the special rule contained in paragraph 2, the competent authorities must always examine the question of immunity “before initiating criminal proceedings” (subparagraph (a)) and “before taking coercive measures that may affect an official of another State” (subparagraph (b)). | 根据第2款所载的特别规则，豁免问题的审查应总是“在启动刑事诉讼前进行”((a)项)、“在采取可能影响另一国官员的强制措施…前进行”((b)项)。 |
| The Commission selected these two cases as examples of acts that would always affect the official of another State and that, if they were to occur, could violate any immunity from foreign criminal jurisdiction that the official might enjoy. | 委员会选择这两种情况的理由是，这两种情况都涉及总是影响另一国官员的行为，如果发生这种行为，可能会对该官员可能享有的外国刑事管辖豁免产生负面影响。 |
| The use of the adverb “before” is intended to reinforce the principle that immunity must always be examined as a preliminary issue in limine litis. | 使用“前”这个副词意在强化豁免问题的审查应总是在诉讼前预先进行这一原则。 |
| (10) | (10) |
| The term “criminal proceedings” refers to the commencement of judicial proceedings brought for the purpose of determining the possible criminal responsibility of an individual, in this case an official of another State. | “刑事诉讼”一词是指启动司法程序，其目的是确定某人(在此指另一国官员)可能承担的刑事责任。 |
| This term is to be distinguished from the term “exercise of criminal jurisdiction”, which, as noted above, has a broader meaning. | 这一术语有别于“行使刑事管辖权”一语，如上文所述，后者具有更宽泛的含义。 |
| The Commission preferred to use the expression “initiati[on] [of] criminal proceedings” rather than the terms “prosecution”, “indictment” or “accusation”, or the expressions “commencement of the trial phase” or “commencement of the oral proceedings”, as these terms may have different meanings in different domestic legal systems. | 委员会倾向于使用“启动刑事诉讼”，而不是“起诉”、“控告”或“指控”，或“启动审判阶段”或“启动口头诉讼程序”，因为这些术语在每个国家国内法律制度中的含义都可能不同。 |
| For this reason, it decided to use more general terminology encompassing any of the specific acts representing the initiation of criminal proceedings under the domestic law of the forum State. | 因此，现决定使用更一般的术语，以便将根据法院地国国内法确定启动刑事诉讼程序的任何特定行为包括在内。 |
| The identification of the time of “initiati[on] [of] criminal proceedings” as the moment at which, in any event, the question of immunity must be examined is consistent with international practice and jurisprudence. | 规定“启动刑事诉讼”的时间为在任何情况下必须审查豁免问题的时间，这一要求符合国际实践和判例。 |
| This does not mean, however, that the question of immunity cannot also be examined at a later stage if necessary, including at the appeal stage. | 不过，这并不排除在稍后阶段，包括上诉阶段，在需要时审查豁免问题。 |
| (11) | (11) |
| The phrase “coercive measures that may affect an official of another State” refers to acts of the competent authorities of the forum State that are directed at the official and that may be carried out at any time as part of the exercise of criminal jurisdiction, regardless of whether or not criminal proceedings have been initiated. | “可能影响另一国官员的强制措施”是指法院地国主管当局针对该官员的、可在行使刑事管辖权的情况下随时采取的行为，无论是否已启动刑事诉讼程序。 |
| These are essentially in personam measures that may affect, inter alia, the official’s freedom of movement, his or her appearance in court as a witness or his or her extradition to a third State. | 这些基本上是针对个人的措施，可能影响官员的行动自由、其出庭作证或被引渡到第三国等等。 |
| These measures do not necessarily imply that “criminal proceedings against the official” are taking place, but they may fall under the category “exercise of criminal jurisdiction”. | 这些措施并不一定意味正在进行“针对该官员的刑事诉讼”，但可能属于“行使刑事管辖权”的范畴。 |
| Since such measures may differ from one domestic legal system to another, it was considered preferable to use the general wording “coercive measures” to refer to “act of authority”, which was used by the International Court of Justice in the case concerning the Arrest Warrant of 11 April 2000, and is inspired by the reasoning of the Court in Certain Questions of Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters. | 由于这种措施可能因每个国家的国内法律制度而异，因此委员会认为最好使用“强制措施”这一笼统的说法来指“当局行为”。 国际法院在2000年4月11日逮捕证案中使用了“当局行为”这一措词，源自国际法院在《关于刑事事项互助的若干问题》中的论证推理。 |
| (12) | (12) |
| In practice, one of the most common coercive measures is the detention of the official. | 在实践中可以采取的最常见的强制措施之一是拘留官员。 |
| The need to examine the question of immunity before detention is ordered was asserted by the Special Court for Sierra Leone in the Charles Taylor case. | 塞拉利昂问题特别法庭在查尔斯·泰勒一案中宣布，在下令拘留之前必须审查豁免问题。 |
| In its decision of 31 May 2004, the Appeals Chamber stated: “[t]o insist that an incumbent Head of State must first submit himself to incarceration before he can raise the question of his immunity not only runs counter, in a substantial manner, to the whole purpose of the concept of sovereign immunity, but would also assume, without considering the merits, issues of exceptions to the concept that properly fall to be determined after delving into the merits of the claim to immunity”. | 上诉分庭在2004年5月31日的决定中指出：“如果坚持认为在任国家元首在提出豁免问题之前必须先接受监禁，那就不仅实质上与主权豁免概念的全部目的背道而驰，而且还在不考虑案情实质的情况下假定存在与这一概念的例外有关的问题，而这些问题应在审查豁免诉求的实质之后再予确定。 |
| The Commission therefore considered it necessary to address this issue in connection with the examination of immunity. | ” 因此，委员会认为有必要在审议豁免时处理这一问题。 |
| (13) | (13) |
| With regard to this question, it should be noted that the scope of the draft articles is limited to immunity from foreign criminal jurisdiction and thus does not include the question of inviolability. | 关于这一问题，应当指出，本条款草案的适用范围仅限于外国刑事管辖豁免，因此不涵盖不可侵犯性问题。 |
| However, while immunity from jurisdiction and inviolability are two distinct categories that are not interchangeable, it is nevertheless true that both are dealt with at the same time in various treaties, such as the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, which provides that “[t]he person of a diplomatic agent shall be inviolable [and] shall not be liable to any form of arrest or detention” (art. 29) and that “[n]o measures of execution may be taken in respect of a diplomatic agent” (art. 31, para. 3). | 然而，尽管管辖豁免和不可侵犯性是两个不同且不可互换的类别，但同样肯定的是，各项条约同时述及这两个问题，如《维也纳外交关系公约》规定，“外交代表人身不得侵犯。 外交代表不受任何方式之逮捕或拘禁”(第二十九条)， “对外交代表不得为执行之处分”(第三十一条第三款)。 |
| In a similar vein, reference may be made to the resolution of the Institute of International Law on immunities from jurisdiction and execution of Heads of State and of Government in international law (arts. 1 and 4). | 同样，还应提及国际法学会关于国家元首和政府首脑根据国际法享有的管辖和执行豁免的决议(第1和第4条)。 |
| (14) | (14) |
| The Commission also took account of the fact that the detention of an official of another State may, in certain circumstances, affect immunity from jurisdiction. | 另一方面，委员会考虑到，在某些情况下，拘留另一国官员可能会影响管辖豁免。 |
| This is the reason for the last phrase of paragraph 2 (b) of the draft article, which “includes” among coercive measures “those that may affect any inviolability that the official may enjoy under international law”. | 因此，该条草案第2款(b)项最后说明，强制措施“包括”那些“可能影响该官员根据国际法可能享有的任何不可侵犯性”的措施。 |
| The phrase “that the official may enjoy under international law” is intended to draw attention to the fact that not every official of another State, by the mere fact of being an official, enjoys inviolability. | “该官员根据国际法可能享有”一语旨在提请注意，并非每一位另一国官员仅仅因为其身为官员就享有不可侵犯性。 |
| Article 10 Notification to the State of the official | 第10条 通知官员所属国 |
| 1. | 1. |
| Before the competent authorities of the forum State initiate criminal proceedings or take coercive measures that may affect an official of another State, the forum State shall notify the State of the official of that circumstance. | 在法院地国主管当局启动刑事诉讼或采取可能影响另一国官员的强制措施之前，法院地国应将此情况通知官员所属国。 |
| States shall consider establishing appropriate procedures to facilitate such notification. | 各国应考虑建立适当程序，以便利此种通知。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| The notification shall include, inter alia, the identity of the official, the grounds for the exercise of criminal jurisdiction and the competent authority to exercise jurisdiction. | 除其他内容外，通知应包括该官员的身份、行使刑事管辖权的理由以及拟行使管辖权的主管当局。 |
| 3. | 3. |
| The notification shall be provided through diplomatic channels or through any other means of communication accepted for that purpose by the States concerned, which may include those provided for in applicable international cooperation and mutual legal assistance treaties. | 通知应通过外交途径发出，或通过相关国家为此目的都接受的任何其他通信方式发出，其中可包括适用的国际合作和司法协助条约所规定的方式。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) | (1) |
| Draft article 10 concerns the notification that the forum State must provide to another State to inform it that the forum State intends to exercise criminal jurisdiction over one of that State’s officials. | 第10条草案涉及法院地国必须向另一国发出的通知，告知其打算对另一国一名官员行使刑事管辖权。 |
| (2) | (2) |
| Since it is generally accepted that immunity from foreign criminal jurisdiction is granted to State officials for the benefit of the State, it is for the State, not the official, to decide on the invocation and waiver of immunity, and it is also for the State of the official to decide on the means by which to claim immunity for its official. | 人们普遍认为，国家官员享有外国刑事管辖豁免是为了国家的利益，因此，应由国家而不是官员来决定是否援引或放弃豁免，也应由官员所属国决定要求其官员的豁免权得到尊重的方式。 |
| However, in order for it to be able to exercise those powers, it must be aware that the authorities of another State intend to exercise their own criminal jurisdiction over one of its officials. | 然而，为了行使这些权力，官员所属国必须知道另一国当局打算对其一名官员行使刑事管辖权。 |
| (3) | (3) |
| The Commission has found that treaty instruments providing for some form of immunity of State officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction do not contain any rule imposing on the forum State an obligation to notify the State of the official of its intention to exercise criminal jurisdiction over the official, with the sole exception of article 42 of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations. | 委员会注意到，规定国家官员享有某种形式的外国刑事管辖豁免的条约文书，没有任何条款规定法院地国有义务将其打算对另一国官员行使刑事管辖权一事通知官员所属国，只有《维也纳领事关系公约》 第四十二条有此规定。 |
| The Commission also took account of the fact that the United Nations Convention on Jurisdictional Immunities of States and Their Property assumes that the forum State must give notice of its intention to exercise jurisdiction over another State. | 委员会还注意到，《联合国国家及其财产管辖豁免公约》假定，法院地国必须将其对另一国行使管辖权的意图通知另一国。 |
| To this end, article 22 of the Convention specifies the means by which “[s]ervice of process by writ or other document instituting a proceeding against a State” must be effected. | 为此目的，该公约第22条规定了“送达传票或对一国提起诉讼的其他文书”的方式。 |
| Although this provision corresponds to a model that differs from that of immunity from foreign criminal jurisdiction, service of process is undeniably indispensable for enabling the State to invoke its immunity. | 虽然这一规定所对应的模式不同于外国刑事管辖豁免的模式，但不可否认的是，送达诉讼文书对于国家援引豁免是必不可少的。 |
| The provision can thus be taken into consideration, mutatis mutandis, for the purposes of the present draft article. | 因此，为本条草案的目的，可以比照考虑该规定。 |
| With this in mind, the Commission decided to include notification among the procedural safeguards set out in Part Four of the draft articles. | 考虑到这一点，委员会决定将通知作为程序保障之一列入条款草案第四部分。 |
| (4) | (4) |
| Notification is an essential requirement for ensuring that the State of the official receives reliable information on the forum State’s intention to exercise criminal jurisdiction over one of its officials and, consequently, for enabling it to decide whether to invoke or waive immunity. | 通知是一项基本要求，可确保官员所属国收到关于法院地国打算对其一名官员行使刑事管辖权的可靠信息，从而使该国能够决定是援引还是放弃豁免。 |
| At the same time, notification facilitates the opening of a dialogue between the forum State and the State of the official and thus becomes an equally basic requirement for ensuring the proper determination and application of the immunity of State officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction. | 与此同时，通知有助于法院地国与官员所属国之间展开对话，因此成为确保适当确定和适用国家官员外国刑事管辖豁免的一项同样基本的要求。 |
| The Commission therefore regards notification as one of the procedural safeguards set out in Part Four of the draft articles. | 因此，委员会将通知视为条款草案第四部分所界定的程序保障之一。 |
| The concepts of “notification” and “consultation” should not be conflated, since consultations take place at a later stage and are dealt with in draft article 17. | “通知”和“协商”的概念不应混为一谈，因为协商是在稍后阶段进行的，在第17条草案中处理。 |
| (5) | (5) |
| Draft article 10 is divided into three paragraphs dealing, respectively, with the timing of the notification, the content of the notification and the means by which notification may be provided by the forum State. | 第10条草案分为三款，分别涉及通知的时间、通知的内容以及法院地国发出通知可用的方式。 |
| (6) | (6) |
| Paragraph 1 refers to the point in time at which notification should be provided. | 第1款提到通知的时间。 |
| In view of the purpose of notification, it must be provided at an early stage, since otherwise it will not produce its full effects. | 考虑到通知所追求的目的，通知应及早发出，只有这样，通知才能充分有效。 |
| However, the fact that notification may have unintended effects on the forum State’s exercise of criminal jurisdiction, particularly at the earliest stages, cannot be overlooked. | 然而，不能忽视的是，通知可能会对法院地国行使刑事管辖权产生不利影响，在此项行动处于非常初步的阶段时特别如此。 |
| It was therefore considered necessary to strike a balance between the duty to notify the State of the official and the right of the forum State to carry out activities in the context of criminal jurisdiction that may affect multiple subjects and facts but will not necessarily affect the official of another State. | 一方面，法院地国有义务通知官员所属国，另一方面，法院地国有权开展刑事管辖活动，这些活动可能影响多个主题和事实，而不一定影响另一国官员。 在这两者之间取得平衡，被认为是有必要的。 |
| To address this concern, the draft article identifies the following points in time as being critical for the provision of notification: (a) the initiation of criminal proceedings; | 为解决这一问题，本条草案界定了对于通知的发出至关重要以下时间点：(a) 提起刑事诉讼； |
| and (b) the taking of coercive measures that may affect an official of another State. | (b) 采取可能影响到另一国官员的强制措施。 |
| Notification must be provided prior to the occurrence of either of these two circumstances. | 通知必须在上述任何一种情况发生之前作出。 |
| Paragraph 1 of the present draft article has thus been aligned with draft article 9, paragraph 2 (a) and (b), so that the timing of the notification to the State of the official coincides with the special cases in which the competent authorities of the forum State must examine the question of immunity if they have not done so earlier. | 因此，本条草案第1款与第9条草案第2款(a)项和(b)项相对应，以便使通知官员所属国的时间与法院地国主管当局必须审查豁免问题特殊情况的时间相吻合，如果法院地国主管当局没有更早这样做的话。 |
| The expressions “criminal proceedings” and “coercive measures that may affect an official of another State” should therefore be understood in the sense already described in the commentary to draft article 9. | “刑事诉讼”和“可能影响另一国官员的强制措施”应按照第9条草案的评注中的描述予以理解。 |
| (7) | (7) |
| As used in the present draft article, the term “official of another State” is equivalent to “State official” and should therefore be understood in accordance with the definition contained in draft article 2 (a). | “另一国官员”一语在本条款草案中的使用等同于“国家官员”，因此应根据第2条草案(a)项所载定义予以理解。 |
| As noted in the commentary to that draft article, the use of the term “State official” does not affect the temporal scope of immunity, which is subject to the special rules applicable to immunity ratione personae and immunity ratione materiae. | 如该条草案的评注所指出，“国家官员”一词的使用不影响豁免的时间范围，该时间范围根据适用于属人豁免和属事豁免的特定规则而定。 |
| The commentary is equally relevant to the present draft article and, accordingly, the category “official of another State” includes any official of another State who may enjoy immunity in accordance with the provisions of Part Two and Part Three of the draft articles. | 评注与本条款草案同样相关，在“另一国官员”类别下，应列入根据条款草案第二部分和第三部分的规定可享有豁免的另一国官员。 |
| The term “official of another State” may refer both to an official in active service at the time when the forum State seeks to exercise criminal jurisdiction and to a former official, provided that both may enjoy some form of immunity. | 因此，“另一国官员”一语既可以指在法院地国试图行使刑事管辖权时在任的官员，也可以指前任官员，但两者均可享有某种形式的豁免。 |
| (8) | (8) |
| The second sentence of paragraph 1 is based on the understanding that some domestic systems may not have procedures in place to allow for communication between executive, judicial or prosecutorial authorities. | 第1款第二句的拟订，是考虑到一些国家的国内制度可能没有程序让行政当局、法官或检察官办公室之间进行沟通。 |
| In such cases, compliance with the obligation to notify the State of the official of the initiation of criminal proceedings or the taking of coercive measures against one of its officials may be significantly hampered, especially since, in practice, communications relating to the question of immunity of an official of another State from foreign criminal jurisdiction often take place through diplomatic channels. | 在这种情况下，法院地国履行就其对一名官员提起刑事诉讼或采取强制措施一事通知官员所属国的义务可能会受到很大阻碍，特别是因为在实践中，在相当多的情况下，关于另一国官员的外国刑事管辖豁免问题的沟通是通过外交渠道进行的。 |
| The Commission therefore considered it necessary to draw the attention of States to this issue by including this final sentence in paragraph 1. | 因此，委员会认为有必要在第1款中列入最后这句话，提请各国注意这一问题。 |
| However, bearing in mind as well the diversity of domestic legal systems and practices, the Commission opted for non-prescriptive wording that allows States to assess whether or not the above-mentioned procedures exist in their respective legal systems and, if not, to decide on their adoption. | 不过，还考虑到各国国内法律制度和做法的多样性，决定使用非说明性措辞，使各国能够评估其各自法律制度中是否存在上述程序，如果有，再决定是否采用这些程序。 |
| The verb “shall consider” has been used for this purpose. | 为此，使用了动词“考虑”。 |
| (9) | (9) |
| Paragraph 2 refers to the content of the notification. | 第2款阐述通知的内容。 |
| Given the purpose of the notification, while its content may vary from one case to another, it should always include sufficient information to enable the State of the official to form a judgment as to whether the immunity that might be enjoyed by one of its officials should be invoked or waived. | 考虑到通知的目的，其内容可能因具体情况而异，但必须包括足够的信息，使官员所属国能够就援引或放弃其一名官员可能享有的豁免作出判断。 |
| Although the Commission debated whether to include this paragraph, it ultimately opted to retain it as a useful means of ensuring that the forum State provides the State of the official with at least a minimum amount of relevant information. | 委员会虽然对是否列入该款举行了讨论，但最终选择保留该款，因为它有助于确保法院地国向官员所属国提供起码的相关信息。 |
| At the same time, a margin of discretion is left to the forum State, considering that different State legal systems and practices may have different rules on the permissibility of disclosing certain elements of information that may sometimes be available only to prosecutors or judges. | 然而，考虑到各国法律制度和做法不同，可能会规定以不同的方式披露有时可能只有检察官或法官才能获得的某些信息内容，该款的目的也是给法院地国留下余地。 |
| Accordingly, paragraph 2 is intended to strike a balance between giving the forum State sufficient discretion in the exercise of its criminal jurisdiction and ensuring that it provides the State of the official with sufficient information. | 因此，第2款承认法院地国一方面在行使刑事管辖权方面拥有充分的自由裁量权，另一方面需要向官员所属国提供充分的信息，该款力求在这两者之间取得平衡。 |
| This is the reason for the use of the Latin adverb “inter alia” before the list of elements that must be included, in all cases, in the notification referred to in draft article 10. | 正因为考虑到这一点，在列举第10条草案所指通知中无论如何要列入的信息内容之前使用了“除其他内容外”一语。 |
| (10) | (10) |
| The information that must be included in the notification is of three types: (a) the identity of the official, (b) the grounds for the exercise of criminal jurisdiction, and (c) the competent authority to exercise jurisdiction. | 通知中必须包含的信息有三种类型：(a) 官员的身份，(b) 行使刑事管辖权的理由，(c) 行使管辖权的主管当局。 |
| The identity of the official is a basic element for enabling the State of the official to assess whether the individual in question is indeed one of its officials and to decide on the invocation or waiver of immunity. | 官员的身份是官员所属国评估所涉人士是否实际上是其官员之一并决定援引或放弃豁免的一个基本要素。 |
| With regard to the substantive information to be included in the notification to the State of the official, the Commission took the view that limiting such information to “acts of the official that may be subject to the exercise of criminal jurisdiction” was not sufficient. | 委员会认为，应通知官员所属国的实质性信息，仅限于“可能受行使刑事管辖权影响的官员的行为”，是不够的。 |
| The phrase “grounds for the exercise of criminal jurisdiction” has therefore been used. This more general wording allows for the inclusion in the notification of not only factual elements relating to the official’s conduct, but also information on the law of the forum State on which the exercise of jurisdiction would be based. | 因此，该款中使用了“行使刑事管辖权的理由”一语，其措辞更为笼统，不仅可以在通知中列入与官员行为有关的事实要素，还可以包括关于行使管辖权所依据的法院地国法律的信息。 |
| Finally, the Commission deemed it appropriate to include, in the list of basic items of information, an indication of the authority competent to exercise jurisdiction in the specific case referred to in the notification. | 最后，委员会认为应在基本信息清单中列入有关在通知所涵盖的具体案件中行使管辖权的主管当局的信息。 |
| This reflects the fact that the State of the official may have an interest in identifying the organs responsible for deciding on the initiation of criminal proceedings or the adoption of coercive measures so that, as the case may be, it can contact them and make such arguments on immunity as it deems appropriate. | 之所以有此必要，是因为官员所属国可能有兴趣了解负责决定启动刑事诉讼或采取预防措施的机构，以便酌情与这些机构进行沟通，并在其认为适当的情况下提出豁免问题。 |
| Since the organs with competence to carry out this type of action and to examine the question of immunity may differ from one domestic legal system to another, the generic term “competent authority” has been used, which may include judges, prosecutors, police or other governmental authorities of the forum State. | 考虑到在每个国家国内法律体系中有权采取这类行动并审查豁免问题的机构可能不同，才使用了“主管当局”这一通用术语，可涵盖法院地国的法官、检察官或警官以及其他政府当局。 |
| The use of “competent authority” in the singular is explained by the fact that such an authority will already have been identified in the case to which the notification relates, but this does not mean that competence may not lie with more than one authority. | 之所以使用单数形式的“主管当局”，是因为在通知所涉案件中已经确定主管机关，但这不排除由多个机关行使管辖权的可能性。 |
| (11) | (11) |
| Paragraph 3 deals with the means of communication that the forum State may use to transmit the notification to the State of the official. | 第3款是关于法院地国通知官员所属国可用的通信方式。 |
| This issue has not been addressed in any of the treaties dealing with one form or another of immunity of State officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction. | 任何关于国家官员外国刑事管辖豁免的条约都没有涉及这一问题。 |
| However, the United Nations Convention on Jurisdictional Immunities of States and Their Property specifies the means by which service of process by writ or other document instituting a proceeding against a State must be effected. Under article 22, paragraph 1, it “shall be effected: (a) in accordance with any applicable international convention binding on the State of the forum and the State concerned; | 但是，《联合国国家及其财产管辖豁免公约》规定了送达传票或对一国提起诉讼的其他文书的方式，其中第22条第1款规定如下：“(a) 按照对法院地国和有关国家有约束力的任何可适用的国际公约； |
| or (b) in accordance with any special arrangement for service between the claimant and the State concerned, if not precluded by the law of the State of the forum; | (b) 如果法院地国法律未作禁止，则按照求偿方和有关国家关于送达诉讼文书的特殊安排； |
| or (c) in the absence of such a convention or special arrangement: (i) by transmission through diplomatic channels to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the State concerned; | 或(c) 如无此公约或特殊安排，则：(一) 通过外交渠道送交有关国家的外交部； |
| or (ii) by any other means accepted by the State concerned, if not precluded by the law of the State of the forum”. | 或(二) 采取有关国家接受的不受法院地国法律禁止的任何其他方式。 ” |
| (12) | (12) |
| The Commission considered it useful to indicate, in the present draft article, the means of communication that the forum State may use to effect service. | 委员会认为，在本条款草案中指明法院地国可用于通知目的的通信渠道是有益的。 |
| To this end, paragraph 3 sets out a model that includes “diplomatic channels” and “any other means of communication accepted for that purpose by the States concerned”. | 为此，第3款界定了一个模式，其中纳入了“外交途径”和“相关国家就此目的都接受的任何其他通信方式”。 |
| (13) | (13) |
| Communication through diplomatic channels is the means most frequently used in cases where the question of immunity of State officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction arises. This is largely because the question of whether or not immunity from foreign criminal jurisdiction applies to a particular official of another State, which is a sensitive issue, constitutes a case of “official business” and would therefore fall under article 41, paragraph 2, of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations. | 在国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免问题出现的情况下，通过外交途径沟通是最常用的，这在很大程度上是因为，对另一国某一官员适用或不适用外国刑事管辖豁免的问题是一个敏感话题，是“官方事项”，因此应适用《维也纳外交关系公约》第四十一条第二款的规定。 |
| For this reason, “diplomatic channels” have been mentioned first in order to highlight their more frequent use in practice. | 正因为如此，“外交途径”被放在首位，以突出其在实践中的更大分量。 |
| The expression “through diplomatic channels” reproduces the formulation contained in article 22, paragraph 1 (c) (i), of the United Nations Convention on Jurisdictional Immunities of States and Their Property, which was used previously by the Commission in the draft articles on prevention and punishment of crimes against humanity. | “通过外交途径”是《联合国国家及其财产管辖豁免公约》第22条第1款(c)项(1)目项的措辞，委员会曾在防止及惩治危害人类罪的条款草案 中使用过该措辞。 |
| Since that expression is not identical in all official versions of the Convention, the original terms used in the Convention have been retained in the different language versions of the present draft article. | 由于这一表述在《公约》各正式版本中并不完全相同，因此在本条草案中保留了每种语文版本中最初使用的术语。 |
| (14) | (14) |
| In addition to “diplomatic channels”, the text reflects the possibility that States may use other means of communication to provide notifications concerning immunity, some of which are mentioned in article 22 of the United Nations Convention on Jurisdictional Immunities of States and Their Property. | 除“外交途径”外，还考虑到各国可以使用其他通信方式发出与豁免有关的通知，其中一些方式在《联合国国家及其财产管辖豁免公约》第22条已提到。 |
| This is the reason for the inclusion, in paragraph 3, of the phrase “any other means of communication accepted for that purpose by the States concerned”. | 为此，在第3款中列入了“相关国家就此目的都接受的任何其他通信方式”。 |
| This wording thus provides for an alternative, the use of which will have to be decided upon by the States concerned on a case-by-case basis; such alternatives may be reflected in either treaties that are general in scope or any other agreements reached by the States concerned. | 这界定了一种替代方式，其使用应由有关国家根据具体情况决定，并可反映在一般条约和有关国家可能达成的其他协定中。 |
| Since the means of communication between States may be addressed in instruments dealing with a wide variety of issues, the phrase “for that purpose” has been included to emphasize that the agreements concerned should in any event be relevant to and applicable in cases where the question of immunity of State officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction arises. | 由于国家间通信方式可以在涉及广泛问题的文书中加以规定，因此列入了“为此目的”一词，以强调在任何情况下都可以订立相关协议，可适用于产生国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免问题的情况。 |
| This does not mean, however, that such agreements must specifically address immunity or include express rules on notification in connection with immunity. | 然而，这并不意味着这些协议应该专门针对豁免，也不应该对豁免的通知问题作出明确规定。 |
| Finally, it should be noted that the phrase “accepted … by the States concerned” refers to the requirement that such other means of communication must have been accepted by both the forum State and the State of the official. | 最后，应注意一点，“相关国家[…]接受的”这一表达方式是要求其他通信方式必须得到法院地国和官员所属国的接受。 |
| (15) | (15) |
| The last phrase of paragraph 3 provides that the other means of communication accepted “for that purpose” by the States concerned “may include those provided for in applicable international cooperation and mutual legal assistance treaties”. | 第3款最后一个短语指出，相关国家“为此目的”接受的其他通信方式“可包括适用的国际合作和司法互助条约所规定的方式”。 |
| The use of such means of communication generated an intense debate in which a number of questions were raised, such as the very concept of “international cooperation and mutual legal assistance treaties”, the fact that such treaties are not intended to address the question of immunity, and the possibility that, depending on the type of State authorities competent to issue and receive notification under such treaties, Ministries for Foreign Affairs and other organs responsible for international relations could be excluded from the notification process dealt with in draft article 10. | 这一通信方式的使用引起了激烈的辩论，有人提出了诸如“国际合作和司法互助条约”这一概念本身的问题，此类条约并不专门对豁免问题作出规定，而且考虑到根据此类条约可以发出和接收通知的国家当局的类型，这可能会将外交部和负责国际关系的其他机关排除在第10条草案所指的通知程序之外。 |
| However, the Commission decided to retain a reference to such means of communication between States on the understanding that they have, on occasion, been used by States and can be a useful tool for facilitating notification. | 尽管如此，委员会决定保留提及各国之间的这一通信方式，有一项谅解是，此通信方式有时被各国使用，可能是便利通知的有用工具。 |
| (16) | (16) |
| For the purposes of the present draft article, “international cooperation and mutual legal assistance treaties” means multilateral or bilateral instruments concluded for the purpose of facilitating cooperation and mutual legal assistance in criminal matters between States. | 就本条草案而言，“国际合作和司法协助条约”是指为便利国家间刑事事项合作和司法协助而缔结的文书，这些文书可以是多边或双边性质的。 |
| Multilateral treaties of this type include, but are not limited to, the European Convention on Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters and its two additional protocols; | 这类多边条约包括但不限于：《欧洲刑事事项互助公约》 及其两项附加议定书； |
| the European Convention on the Transfer of Proceedings in Criminal Matters; | 《欧洲刑事事项诉讼转移公约》； |
| the European Convention on Extradition and its four additional protocols; | 《欧洲引渡公约》 及其四项附加议定书； |
| the Inter-American Convention on Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters; | 《美洲刑事事项互助公约》； |
| the Inter-American Convention on Extradition; | 《美洲国家引渡公约》； |
| the Convention on Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters between the Member States of the European Union; | 《欧洲联盟成员国刑事事项互助公约》； |
| Council Framework Decision 2009/948/JHA of 30 November 2009 on prevention and settlement of conflicts of exercise of jurisdiction in criminal proceedings; | 2009年11月30日理事会关于预防和解决刑事诉讼中行使管辖权冲突的第2009/948/JHA号框架决定； |
| the Convention on Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters between the Member States of the Community of Portuguese-speaking Countries; | 《葡萄牙语国家共同体成员国刑事事项互助公约》； |
| the Convention on Extradition among the States Members of the Community of Portuguese-speaking Countries; | 《葡萄牙语国家共同体成员国间引渡公约》； |
| the Minsk Convention on Legal Assistance and Legal Relations in Civil, Family and Criminal Matters; and the Chisinau Convention on Legal Assistance and Legal Relations in Civil, Family and Criminal Matters. | 《民事、家庭、刑事案件法律援助和法律关系明斯克公约》 和《关于民事、家庭和刑事方面司法援助和法律关系的基希讷乌公约》。 |
| Bilateral treaties of this type are so numerous that it would be impossible to list them all in this commentary, but reference may be made, at least, to the model treaties that have been developed by various international organizations and that form the basis for many bilateral agreements, including the following instruments adopted within the United Nations framework: the Model Treaty on Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters, the Model Treaty on the Transfer of Proceedings in Criminal Matters and the Model Treaty on Extradition. | 关于双边条约，由于数目很多，不可能都列入本评注中，但至少可以提及在各国际组织内拟订、构成许多双边协定的基础的示范条约，包括在联合国框架内通过对下列文书：《刑事事项互助示范条约》、 《刑事事件转移诉讼示范条约》 和《引渡示范条约》。 |
| They all contain provisions relating to means of communication between States that could be used in connection with the notification dealt with in draft article 10. | 所有这些文书都载有关于国家间通信方式的规定，可用于第10条草案所述的通知。 |
| (17) | (17) |
| The means of communication provided for in international cooperation and mutual legal assistance treaties are defined in draft article 10 as a subcategory of “other means of communication” and may be used only if the treaties in question are “applicable”. This means that both the forum State and the State of the official must be parties to the treaties and that the system established therein must be capable of producing effects in cases where issues relating to the immunity of State officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction may arise. | 第10条草案将国际合作和司法协助协定中确立的通信方式称为“其他通信方式”的一个子类别，其使用条件是这些方式是“适用的”，这意味着法院地国和官员所属国都是上述协定的当事方，其中所定的制度在可能出现有关国家的外国刑事管辖豁免问题的情况下能够产生效果。 |
| (18) | (18) |
| In any event, it should be emphasized that draft article 10, paragraph 3, does not impose on States any new requirements concerning means of communication other than those already established in the applicable treaties. | 无论如何，应当指出，除适用的条约中已经确立的通信方式外，第10条草案第3款没有就通信方式问题对各国提出新要求。 |
| (19) | (19) |
| Finally, with respect to the form of the notification, the Commission members expressed different views as to whether notification should have to be in writing, as they appreciated both the need to avoid abuse in the notification process and the flexibility that the act of notification itself sometimes requires. | 最后，关于通知的形式，委员会委员们对是否应采用书面形式表达了不同的意见，他们评估了在通知过程中避免滥用的必要性，以及通知行为本身有时需要的灵活性。 |
| It was ultimately considered unnecessary to provide expressly that notification must be made in writing. | 最后，委员们认为无须明确说明通知应以书面作出。 |
| Thus, although the general view is that notification should preferably be in written form, other possibilities have not been excluded, particularly since notification – especially through diplomatic channels – is often given orally at first and later in writing, regardless of the form of such written notification (note verbale, letter or the like). | 虽然一般认为通知最好以书面形式发出，但也不排除其他可能性，特别是考虑到通知(特别是通过外交途径发出的通知)往往先是口头作出，随后再书面作出，无论其形式如何(普通照会、信函或类似形式)。 |
| Article 11 Invocation of immunity | 第11条 援引豁免 |
| 1. | 1. |
| A State may invoke the immunity of its official when it becomes aware that the criminal jurisdiction of another State could be or is being exercised over the official. | 一国在意识到另一国可能或正在对其官员行使刑事管辖权后，可为其官员援引豁免。 |
| Immunity should be invoked as soon as possible. | 应尽快援引豁免。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| Immunity shall be invoked in writing, indicating the identity of and the position held by the official, and the grounds on which immunity is invoked. | 援引豁免应以书面形式进行，表明该官员的身份和所任职务以及援引豁免的理由。 |
| 3. | 3. |
| Immunity may be invoked through diplomatic channels or through any other means of communication accepted for that purpose by the States concerned, which may include those provided for in applicable international cooperation and mutual legal assistance treaties. | 援引豁免可通过外交途径进行，或通过相关国家为此目的都接受的任何其他通信方式进行，其中可包括适用的国际合作和司法协助条约所规定的方式。 |
| 4. | 4. |
| The authorities before which immunity has been invoked shall immediately inform any other authorities concerned of that fact. | 收到援引豁免有关通信的当局应立即将此情况通知任何其他相关当局。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) | (1) |
| Draft article 11 addresses the issue of invocation of immunity from a twofold perspective: recognition of the right of the State of the official to invoke immunity, on the one hand; | 第11条草案从两个角度看待援引豁免的问题：一是承认官员所属国援引豁免的权利； |
| and the procedural aspects relating to the timing, content and means of communication of the invocation of immunity, on the other. | 二是叙述关于援引豁免的时间、内容和通信方式的程序方面。 |
| Draft article 11 also refers to the need to inform the competent authorities of the forum State that immunity has been invoked. | 第11条草案还提到有必要将援引豁免一事通知法院地国主管当局。 |
| This draft article does not deal with the effects of invocation. | 本条草案不涉及援引的效果。 |
| (2) | (2) |
| Paragraph 1 of draft article 11 is based on the recognition that the State of the official is entitled to invoke the immunity of its officials when another State seeks to exercise criminal jurisdiction over them. | 第11条草案第1款的内容基于承认官员所属国有权在另一国试图对其官员行使刑事管辖权时援引其官员的豁免权。 |
| Although treaties addressing one form or another of immunity of State officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction do not expressly refer to the invocation of immunity or the corresponding right of the State of the official, invocation of the immunity of State officials is a common practice that is understood to be covered by customary international law. | 虽然关于国家官员外国刑事管辖的某种形式豁免的条约没有明确提到援引豁免或官员所属国的相应权利，但援引国家官员的豁免是一种普遍做法，被认为是习惯国际法所涵盖的。 |
| The invocation of immunity has a dual purpose: on the one hand, it serves as an instrument with which the State of the official may claim immunity for its official; on the other, it makes the State seeking to exercise jurisdiction aware of this circumstance and enables it to take account of the information provided by the State of the official for the purpose of determining immunity. | 援引豁免有双重目的，一方面，这是官员所属国要求尊重豁免的一个手段，另一方面，这有助于寻求行使管辖权的国家了解这一情况，并为确定豁免的目的考虑到官员所属国提供的信息。 |
| (3) | (3) |
| The right to invoke immunity rests with the State of the official. | 援引豁免的权利属于官员所属国。 |
| This is easily justified by the fact that the purpose of immunity is to preserve the sovereignty of the State of the official, meaning that immunity is recognized in the interest of the State and not in the interest of the individual. | 豁免的目的是维护官员所属国的主权，这意味着承认豁免是为了国家的利益，而不是个人的利益，这一事实很容易证明上述论点是合理的。 |
| It is thus for the State itself, and not for its officials, to invoke immunity and to take all decisions relating to its possible invocation. | 因此，援引豁免的决定和与援引豁免有关的任何决定均应由国家本身作出而不是由官员作出。 |
| In any event, it is a right of a discretionary nature, which is why the phrase “[a] State may invoke the immunity of its official” has been used. | 无论如何，这是一项任选性质的权利，才使用了“一国…可为其官员援引豁免”这一措辞。 |
| (4) | (4) |
| The power to invoke immunity is attributed to the State of the official, though it has not been considered necessary to identify the authorities competent to take decisions relating to the invocation or the authorities competent to invoke immunity. | 援引豁免的权力属于官员所属国，据认为没有必要确定有权就援引豁免作出决定的当局或有权援引豁免的当局。 |
| Determination of those authorities depends on the domestic law, it being understood that this category includes those with responsibility for international relations under international law. | 如何确定这类当局取决于国内法，但应理解为包括根据国际法负责国际关系的当局。 |
| However, this does not mean that immunity cannot be invoked by a person specifically mandated to do so by the State, especially in the context of criminal proceedings. | 然而，这并不排除由国家为此目的而特别授权的人援引豁免，在刑事诉讼中尤其如此。 |
| (5) | (5) |
| The invocation of immunity must therefore be understood as an official act whereby the State of the official informs the State seeking to exercise criminal jurisdiction that the individual in question is its official and that, in its view, he or she enjoys immunity, with the consequences that follow from that circumstance. | 因此，援引豁免必须被理解为官员所属国的一种官方行为，据此告知试图行使刑事管辖权的国家，有关人士是其官员，在该国看来，此人士享有豁免，由此可能产生后果。 |
| Therefore, the earlier immunity is invoked, the more useful it will be. | 越早援引豁免，越有用。 |
| This is reflected by the indication that the State of the official may invoke immunity “when it becomes aware that the criminal jurisdiction of another State could be or is being exercised over the official”. | 这一点反映在下列表述中：官员所属国在“意识到另一国可能或正在对其官员行使刑事管辖权”后即可援引豁免。 |
| The term “another State” was considered preferable to “forum State” as being broader and more comprehensive, especially since immunity may be invoked prior to the initiation of criminal proceedings stricto sensu. | “另一国”被认为比“法院地国”更可取，其涵盖面更广泛更全面，特别是因为援引豁免可以在严格意义上的刑事诉讼程序启动之前。 |
| The phrase “when it becomes aware” reproduces the expression used in draft article 9. | “意识到”这一表述沿用了第9条草案中使用的词。 |
| With regard to the way in which the State of the official may become aware of the situation, the Commission took into account, first, the relationship between “notification” and “invocation”. | 关于官员所属国获悉情况的方式，委员会首先考虑到了“通知”与“援引”之间的关系。 |
| One of the purposes of notification is to inform the State of the official that the competent authorities of the forum State intend to exercise criminal jurisdiction. | 通知的目的是将法院地国主管当局行使刑事管辖权的意图告知官员所属国。 |
| It is therefore a primary means by which the State of the official may become aware of the situation. | 因此，这是官员所在国了解情况的主要手段。 |
| However, the Commission did not wish to exclude the possibility that the State of the official might become aware of the situation by another means, either through information received from its official or from any other source of information. | 然而，这并不是要排除官员所属国可能以另一种方式获悉这一情况的可能性，这包括从本国官员处收到的信息以及从任何其他信息来源收到的信息。 |
| Therefore, no reference is made to the notification dealt with in draft article 10 as being the relevant act for determining the point in time at which immunity may be invoked. | 因此，此处没有将提及第10条草案所述的通知作为确定可以援引豁免的时间的相关行为。 |
| (6) | (6) |
| Paragraph 1 provides for the possibility that the State of the official may invoke immunity when it becomes aware that “the criminal jurisdiction of another State could be or is being exercised over the official”. | 第1款规定，官员所属国在获悉另一国“可能或正在对其官员行使刑事管辖权”后，可援引豁免。 |
| This alternative wording is intended to reflect the fact that in some cases the State of the official may not become aware of actions taken in respect of its official until a later stage. However, this cannot deprive the State of the official of its right to invoke immunity, especially when acts of jurisdiction that may affect the official have already been carried out. | 采用这一措辞是为了表明，官员所属国有时可能在较晚时候才获悉对其官员采取的行动，但这不能剥夺官员所属国援引豁免的权利，在可能影响该官员的管辖行为已经在实施的情况下特别如此。 |
| (7) | (7) |
| The last sentence of paragraph 1 provides that “[i]mmunity should be invoked as soon as possible”. | 第1款最后一句是，“应尽快援引豁免”。 |
| The expression “as soon as possible” has been used in light of the fact that the State of the official will have to consider various relevant elements (legal and political) in order to decide whether immunity should be invoked and, if so, what the scope of such invocation should be. | 使用“尽快”一词是因为官员所属国必须分析各种相关因素(法律和政治)，以便决定是否援引豁免，并酌情确定援引的范围。 |
| Since the State of the official will need a period of time in which to do so, which may vary from one case to another, this phrase has been preferred over “as promptly as possible” or “within a reasonable time”, the interpretation of which may be ambiguous. | 考虑到官员所属国需要的时间可能因情况而异，使用该词比“尽可能从速”或“在合理时间内”更为可取，后者的解释可能有歧义。 |
| Moreover, the phrase “as soon as possible” draws attention to the importance of invoking immunity at an early stage. | 此外，“尽快”一语提请各国注意及早援引豁免的重要性。 |
| (8) | (8) |
| In any event, it should be borne in mind that, while the invocation of immunity constitutes a safeguard for the State of the official, which thus has an interest in invoking it “as soon as possible”, this does not preclude the State from invoking immunity at any other time. | 无论如何，应当牢记，援引豁免对官员所属国而言是一种保障措施，由于这个原因，官员所属国是“尽快”援引豁免的第一个利害关系方，但这并不妨碍该国在任何其他时间援引豁免。 |
| The use of the verb “may” is to be understood in this permissive sense. | “可能”一词的用法应按允许的含义理解。 |
| Such invocation of immunity will be lawful, regardless of the moment when it is made, which does not mean its effect may not vary depending on this temporal element. | 援引豁免是合法的，无论何时援引都是如此，但这并不意味着其效果不会因时间因素而有所不同。 |
| (9) | (9) |
| Paragraph 2 concerns the form in which immunity is to be invoked and the content of the invocation. | 第2款涉及援引豁免的方式和豁免的内容。 |
| The Commission took account of the fact that the invocation of immunity by the State of the official is intended to influence the process of determining immunity and the possible blocking of the forum State’s exercise of jurisdiction. | 委员会考虑到，官员所属国援引豁免会影响确定豁免的进程，可能阻止法院地国行使管辖权。 |
| For this reason, it was considered that immunity must be invoked in writing, regardless of the form that such writing may take. | 因此，据认为，援引须书面为之，而无论形式为何。 |
| The invocation should explicitly state the identity of the official and the position held by him or her, as well as the grounds on which immunity is invoked. | 援引豁免时应该明确提到官员的身份和职务，以及援引豁免的理由。 |
| (10) | (10) |
| The words “the position held” refer to the title, rank or level of the official (such as Head of State, Minister for Foreign Affairs or legal adviser). | “所任职务”指官员的头衔、职级或级别(例如，国家元首、外交部长或法律顾问)。 |
| In any event, the reference to the position held by the official should in no way be interpreted as implying that lower-level officials are not covered by immunity from foreign criminal jurisdiction, since, as the Commission itself has stated, “[g]iven that the concept of ‘State official’ rests solely on the fact that the individual in question represents the State or exercises State functions, the hierarchical position occupied by the individual is irrelevant for the sole purposes of the definition”. | 无论如何，提及官员所任职务不应解释为将较低级别的官员排除在外国刑事管辖豁免适用范围之外。 如委员会所述，“‘国家官员’的概念完全取决于代表国家或行使国家职能的有关个人，[因此]其级别与定义的目的无关”。 |
| (11) | (11) |
| The Commission took the view that the State of the official should not be required to identify the type of immunity being invoked (ratione personae or ratione materiae), since that might constitute an excessive technical requirement. | 委员会认为，规定官员所属国应说明其援引的豁免类型(属人理由或属事理由)是不合适的，这可能是过高的技术要求。 |
| The reference to the position held by the official and the grounds for invoking immunity should provide a basis on which the forum State can assess whether the rules contained in Part Two (ratione personae) or Part Three (ratione materiae) of the present draft articles apply. | 提及官员的职务和援引豁免的理由应当为法院地国评估本条款草案第二部分(属人豁免)或第三部分(属事豁免)所载规则是否适用提供依据。 |
| (12) | (12) |
| Paragraph 3 identifies the means by which immunity may be invoked. | 第3款说明援引豁免可用的方式。 |
| This paragraph is modelled on paragraph 3 of draft article 10, the commentary to which may be referred to for clarification of its general meaning. | 该款沿用了第10条草案第3款的模式，为清楚理解第3款的一般含义，可参考第10条草案第3款的评注。 |
| It should be noted, however, that the Commission made some drafting changes to paragraph 3 of the present draft article in order to adapt it to the specific features of invocation. | 然而，应当指出，委员会对本条草案第3款的措辞作了一些修改，以便使其适应援引的具体特点。 |
| In particular, the wording “[i]mmunity may be invoked” has been used instead of “shall be provided” in order not to exclude the possibility that the official’s immunity from criminal jurisdiction may be invoked by other means, especially in criminal proceedings through judicial acts permitted by the law of the forum State. | 具体而言，所用的措辞是“援引豁免可…”，而不是“应当”，借此表明不排除以其他方式援引官员的刑事管辖豁免，特别是可以在刑事诉讼中通过法院地国法律允许的司法行为援引豁免。 |
| (13) | (13) |
| Paragraph 4 is intended to ensure that the invocation of immunity by the State of the official will be made known to the authorities of the other State that are competent to deal with the question of immunity and with the examination or determination of its application. | 第4款的目的是确保官员所属国援引豁免一事为豁免问题所涉另一国主管当局所知，另一国主管当局应审查或确定豁免的适用。 |
| The purpose of this paragraph is to prevent a situation where an invocation of immunity is ineffective simply because it has not been made before the authorities responsible for examining or deciding on immunity. | 这是为了防止援引豁免仅仅因为没有告知需要审查豁免问题或对其作出判断的当局而无法产生效果。 |
| The paragraph reflects the principle that the obligation to examine and determine the question of immunity rests with the State, which must take the necessary measures to comply with this obligation. | 该款反映的原则是，审查和确定豁免问题的义务在于国家，国家必须采取必要措施履行这一义务。 |
| It is thus defined as a procedural safeguard benefiting both the State of the official and the State seeking to exercise criminal jurisdiction. | 因此这被认为是既有利于官员所属国又有利于拟行使刑事管辖权的国家的程序性保障。 |
| However, in view of the diversity of States’ legal systems and practices, as well as the need to respect the principle of self-organization, it was not considered necessary to identify which authorities are obliged to report and which authorities should receive notice of the invocation. | 然而，鉴于各国现有法律制度和做法各不相同，以及需要尊重自组织原则，据认为没有必要说明哪些当局有义务报告或哪些当局应收到援引通知。 |
| This is logically predicated on the understanding that, in both cases, the authorities referred to are those of the State that intends to exercise or has exercised its criminal jurisdiction over an official of another State, and that the words “any other authorities” refer to those authorities that are competent to participate in the processes of examining or determining immunity. | 从逻辑上来看，有一项谅解是，这两种情况下都涉及试图或正在对另一国官员行使刑事管辖权的国家当局，而“其他相关当局”是指有权参与审查或决定豁免问题的当局。 |
| In both cases, it is irrelevant whether they are administrative bodies, authorities of the executive, the judiciary or the prosecution service, or even police authorities. | 在这两种情况下，主管当局是指行政机关、执行机关、司法机关还是指检察官办公室，甚至是指警察当局，都是无关紧要的。 |
| Article 12 Waiver of immunity | 第12条 放弃豁免 |
| 1. | 1. |
| The immunity of a State official from foreign criminal jurisdiction may be waived by the State of the official. | 官员所属国可放弃官员的外国刑事管辖豁免。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| Waiver of immunity must always be express and in writing. | 豁免必须总是以书面形式明示放弃。 |
| 3. | 3. |
| Waiver of immunity may be communicated through diplomatic channels or through any other means of communication accepted for that purpose by the States concerned, which may include those provided for in applicable international cooperation and mutual legal assistance treaties. | 放弃豁免可通过外交途径表达，或通过相关国家就此目的都接受的任何其他通信方式表达，其中可包括适用的国际合作和司法互助条约所规定的方式。 |
| 4. | 4. |
| The authorities to which the waiver has been communicated shall immediately inform any other authorities concerned that immunity has been waived. | 收到放弃豁免有关通信的当局应立即将豁免已经放弃的情况通知任何其他相关当局。 |
| 5. | 5. |
| Waiver of immunity is irrevocable. | 豁免的放弃不可撤销。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) | (1) |
| Draft article 12 deals with the waiver of immunity from a twofold perspective: the recognition of the right of the State of the official to waive immunity, on the one hand, and the procedural aspects relating to the form that the waiver should take and the means by which it is communicated, on the other. | 第12条草案从两个角度处理豁免放弃问题，一是承认官员所属国放弃豁免的权利，二是阐述与放弃的形式和表达方式有关的程序方面事项。 |
| Draft article 12 also refers to the need to inform the competent authorities of the forum State that immunity has been waived. | 第12条草案还提到需要将豁免已经放弃一事通知法院地国主管当局。 |
| Although the structure of draft article 12 is modelled on that of draft article 11, the content of the two is not identical, since invocation and waiver are distinct institutions that should not be confused. | 虽然第12条草案的结构沿用了第11条草案的模式，但两者的内容并不相同，援引和弃权是不同的做法，不能混淆。 |
| (2) | (2) |
| In contrast to invocation, the waiver of immunity from jurisdiction has been discussed in detail by the Commission in several of its previous sets of draft articles and has been reflected in the treaties based on those draft articles, which cover certain forms of immunity from foreign criminal jurisdiction in the case of certain State officials. | 与援引相反，关于放弃管辖豁免的问题，委员会在以前的若干条款草案 中已详细讨论过，并反映在以这些条款草案为基础的条约中。 这些条约规定了某些国家官员的某些形式的外国刑事管辖豁免。 |
| These include, in particular, the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations (art. 32), the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations (art. 45), the Convention on Special Missions (art. 41) and the Vienna Convention on the Representation of States in Their Relations with International Organizations of a Universal Character (art. 31). | 这些条约包括《维也纳外交关系公约》(第三十二条)、《维也纳领事关系公约》(第四十五条)、《特别使团公约》(第四十一条)和《维也纳关于国家在其对普遍性国际组织关系上的代表权公约》(第三十一条)。 |
| It should be added that the question of the waiver of immunity has also been dealt with in private codification projects on this topic, in particular the 2001 and 2009 resolutions of the Institute of International Law. | 此外，放弃豁免的问题也在关于这一主题的私人编纂项目中得到处理，特别是国际法学会2001年和2009年的决议。 |
| The same is true of the waiver of State immunity, which is addressed both in the United Nations Convention on Jurisdictional Immunities of States and Their Property and in national laws on State immunity. | 放弃国家豁免也是如此，《联合国国家及其财产管辖豁免公约》 和关于国家豁免的国家法律 都对此作出了规定。 |
| (3) | (3) |
| The waiver of immunity by the State of the official is a formal act whereby that State waives its right to claim immunity, thus removing this obstacle to the exercise of jurisdiction by the courts of the forum State. | 官员所属国放弃豁免是该国放弃要求豁免的权利的官方行为，从而消除了对法院地国法院行使管辖权的这一障碍。 |
| The waiver of immunity therefore invalidates any debate on the application of immunity or on limits and exceptions to immunity. | 因此，放弃豁免将使任何关于豁免的适用及其限制和例外的讨论无效。 |
| This effect of a waiver was confirmed by the judgment of the International Court of Justice in the case of the Arrest Warrant of 11 April 2000, in which the Court stated that officials “will cease to enjoy immunity from foreign jurisdiction if the State which they represent or have represented decides to waive that immunity”. | 国际法院在2000年4月11日逮捕证案中确认了这种放弃的效果，其中指出，“如果官员所代表或曾经代表的国家决定放弃外国管辖豁免，则官员即停止享有这种豁免”。 |
| (4) | (4) |
| Paragraph 1 recognizes the right of the State of the official to waive immunity. | 第1款承认官员所属国放弃豁免的权利。 |
| This paragraph reproduces, with minor adjustments, the wording of article 32, paragraph 1, of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations. | 本款沿用了《维也纳外交关系公约》第三十二条第一款的措辞，仅略作调整。 |
| Draft article 12, paragraph 1, indicates that “[t]he immunity of a State official from foreign criminal jurisdiction may be waived by the State of the official”. | 第12条草案第1款规定，“官员所属国可放弃官员的外国刑事管辖豁免”。 |
| The emphasis is thus placed on the holder of the right to waive immunity, which is the State of the official rather than the official himself or herself. | 这里的重点是放弃权利的持有者，即官员所属国，而不是官员本人。 |
| This is a logical consequence of the fact that the immunity of State officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction is recognized for the benefit of the rights and interests of the State of the official. | 这是为了官员所属国的利益而承认国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免的合乎逻辑的结果。 |
| Therefore, only that State can waive immunity and thus consent to the exercise by another State of criminal jurisdiction over one of its officials. | 因此，只有官员所属国才能放弃豁免，从而同意另一国对其一名官员行使刑事管辖权。 |
| The verb “may” is used to indicate that the waiver of immunity is a right, not an obligation, of the State of the official. | “可”字用来表示放弃豁免是官员所属国的一项权利，而不是一项义务。 |
| This is in line with the previous practice of the Commission, which, in the various draft articles in which it has dealt with the immunity of State officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction, has reflected the view that there is no obligation to waive immunity. | 这是沿用了委员会以前的做法，在涉及国家官员外国刑事管辖豁免的各种条款草案中，委员会认为国家没有放弃豁免的义务。 |
| (5) | (5) |
| The power to waive immunity is attributed to the State of the official, though it has not been considered necessary to identify the authorities competent to take decisions relating to the waiver or the authorities competent to communicate the waiver. | 放弃豁免的权利属于官员所属国，据认为没有必要确定哪些当局有权就放弃豁免作出决定，或哪些当局有权传递放弃豁免的决定。 |
| Neither the conventions nor the national laws referred to above deal with this issue in a specific manner, instead referring to the State in abstract terms. | 公约和国家法律都没有对这一问题作出具体规定，只是抽象地提及国家。 |
| The Commission itself, in its previous work, has already considered it preferable not to refer expressly to the State organs that are competent to waive immunity. | 委员会在以前的工作中认为，最好不要明确提及有权放弃豁免的国家机关。 |
| Moreover, State practice is scant and inconclusive. | 此外，国家实践有限，也没有定论。 |
| Which authorities are competent to waive immunity depends on the domestic law, it being understood that this category includes those with responsibility for international relations under international law. | 主管当局是哪些取决于国内法，但应理解为包括根据国际法负责国际关系的当局。 |
| However, this does not mean that the waiver of immunity cannot be communicated by any other person specifically mandated to do so by the State, especially in the context of court proceedings. | 然而，这并不意味着放弃豁免的决定不能由国家为此目的而特别授权的其他人传递，在刑事诉讼中尤其如此。 |
| (6) | (6) |
| In contrast to draft article 11 on the invocation of immunity, this draft article does not include any temporal element, as the Commission found it unnecessary, given that immunity may be waived at any time. | 与第11条草案关于援引豁免的情况相反，委员会认为没有必要在本条草案中列入任何时间要素，因为放弃豁免可在任何时候。 |
| (7) | (7) |
| Paragraph 2 refers to the form of the waiver, stating that it “must always be express and in writing”. | 第2款提到放弃的形式，规定“必须总是以书面形式明示”。 |
| This wording is modelled on article 32, paragraph 2, of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, according to which “[w]aiver must always be express”, and article 45, paragraph 2, of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations, which provides that “[t]he waiver shall in all cases be express, except as provided in paragraph 3 of this Article [counterclaim], and shall be communicated to the receiving State in writing”. | 这一措辞沿用了《维也纳外交关系公约》第三十二条第二款和《维也纳领事关系公约》第四十五条第二款的模式。 《维也纳外交关系公约》第三十二条第二款规定，“豁免之抛弃，概须明示”。 《维也纳领事关系公约》第四十五条第二款规定，“除本条第三项所规定之情形外，特仅及豁免之抛弃概须明示，并应以书面通知接受国”。 |
| The statement that the waiver must be “express and in writing” reinforces the principle of legal certainty. | 放弃豁免必须“以书面形式明示”一语加强了法律确定性的原则。 |
| (8) | (8) |
| The requirement that the waiver be express has been consistently reaffirmed by the Commission in its previous work, and is reflected in both relevant treaties and national laws. | 放弃豁免必须明示，这是委员会在以往工作中一直坚持的看法， 并反映在相关条约 和国内法 中。 |
| For this reason, the Commission did not retain paragraph 4 of the draft article originally proposed by the Special Rapporteur in her seventh report, which was worded as follows: “A waiver that can be deduced clearly and unequivocally from an international treaty to which the forum State and the State of the official are parties shall be deemed an express waiver”. | 考虑到这一点，特别报告员没有保留在其第七次报告中提议的原条款草案第4款，该款内容如下：“从法院地国和官员所属国均为缔约国的国际条约中可以明确无疑推断出的放弃， 应被视为明示放弃。 |
| While members of the Commission generally considered that the waiver of immunity may be expressly provided for in a treaty, there was some criticism of the use of the phrase “can be deduced”, which was understood by some members as recognizing a form of implicit waiver. | ” 委员会委员虽然普遍认为可以在条约中对放弃豁免作出明确规定，但对“可以…推断”一词的使用提出了批评意见，一些委员认为这是承认一种默示的放弃。 |
| (9) | (9) |
| The possibility that a waiver of immunity may be based on obligations imposed on States by treaty provisions arose, in particular, in the Pinochet (No. 3) case, although this was not the basis of the decision taken by the House of Lords. | 放弃豁免的可能性可产生于条约条款规定的各国应承担的义务，在皮诺切特案(第3号) 中就是如此，虽然这并没有构成上议院作出决定的基础。 |
| It has also arisen, albeit from a different perspective, in relation to the interpretation of articles 27 and 98 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court and the duty of States parties to cooperate with the Court. | 尽管角度不同，放弃豁免的可能性也产生于对《国际刑事法院罗马规约》第二十七条和第九十八条的解释以及缔约国与国际刑事法院合作的义务。 |
| However, the Commission’s view was that there are insufficient grounds for concluding that the existence of such treaty obligations can automatically and generally be understood to waive the immunity of State officials, especially since the International Court of Justice concluded as follows in its judgment in Arrest Warrant of 11 April 2000: “Thus, although various international conventions on the prevention and punishment of certain serious crimes impose on States obligations of prosecution or extradition, thereby requiring them to extend their criminal jurisdiction, such extension of jurisdiction in no way affects immunities under customary international law, including those of Ministers for Foreign Affairs. | 然而，在委员会看来，没有充分的理由认为这种条约义务的存在可以在一般情况下自动被理解为放弃国家官员的豁免，特别是考虑到国际法院在2000年4月11日逮捕证案的判决中的如下意见：“尽管一些关于预防和惩治某些严重罪行的国际公约规定各国有起诉或引渡义务，从而迫使它们扩大其刑事管辖权，这种管辖权的扩大不会以任何方式影响习惯国际法规定的现有豁免，包括外交部长的豁免。 |
| These remain opposable before the courts of a foreign State, even where those courts exercise such a jurisdiction under these conventions.” | 这种豁免在外国法院继续有效，即使这些法院根据上述公约行使这种管辖权。 ” |
| (10) | (10) |
| In addition to being express, the waiver of immunity must be formulated in writing. | 放弃豁免，除明示外，还必须以书面形式表述。 |
| This does not, however, affect the precise form that such writing should take, which will depend not only on the will of the State of the official, but also on the means used to communicate the waiver and even on the framework in which it is formulated. | 然而，这并不影响放弃豁免的通知的具体形式，这不仅取决于官员所属国的意愿，而且还取决于用于传递放弃豁免的决定的手段，甚至取决于提出放弃的框架。 |
| Thus, nothing prevents the waiver from being formulated by means of a note verbale, letter or other non-diplomatic written communication addressed to the authorities of the forum State, by means of a procedural act or document, or even by means of any other document that expressly, clearly and reliably affirms the State’s willingness to waive the immunity of its official from foreign criminal jurisdiction. | 因此，没有什么能阻止通过向法院地国当局发出普通照会、信函或其他非外交信件、通过程序性行为或文件，或任何其他文件，明确、清楚、可靠地表明相关国家愿意放弃其官员的外国刑事管辖豁免。 |
| (11) | (11) |
| Finally, attention is drawn to the fact that, in contrast to draft article 11, paragraph 2, this draft article contains no express reference to the content of the waiver, as the Commission did not find it necessary. | 最后，应予以注意的是，与第11条草案第2款相反，委员会认为没有必要在条款草案中明确提及放弃的内容。 |
| Although the members’ views were divided as to whether a reference to content should be included, in the end it was considered preferable to leave a margin of discretion to the State of the official. | 各位委员虽然对是否提及内容有分歧，但最终认为最可取的做法是把自由裁量的空间留给官员所属国。 |
| Accordingly, the words “and shall mention the official whose immunity is being waived and, where applicable, the acts to which the waiver pertains”, which had appeared in the Special Rapporteur’s original proposal, were deleted. | 因此，删除了特别报告员最初提案中所载的“必须明示、明确和毫不含糊，提及有关官员，并在适用的情况下提及放弃所指的行为”的措辞。 |
| In any event, the Commission wishes to note that the content of the waiver should be clear enough to enable the State before whose authorities it is submitted to identify the scope of the waiver without ambiguity. | 无论如何，委员会希望指出，放弃的内容必须足够清楚，使接收放弃豁免的通知的国家当局能够清楚地了解放弃的范围。 |
| For this purpose, it is understood that the State of the official should expressly mention the name of the official whose immunity is waived, as well as, where appropriate, the substantive scope it intends to give to the waiver, especially when the State does not wish to waive immunity absolutely, but to limit it to certain acts or to exclude certain acts alleged to have been performed by the official. | 为此目的，一项理解是，官员所属国应明确提及被放弃豁免的官员的姓名，并酌情提及放弃豁免的实质范围，当该国不希望完全放弃豁免而是将其限制于某些行为或排除某些据称由该官员实施的行为时，特别应如此。 |
| If the waiver of immunity is limited in scope, the State of the official may invoke immunity in respect of acts not covered by the waiver, that is, when the authorities of the other State seek to exercise or do exercise their criminal jurisdiction over the same official for acts other than those which gave rise to the waiver or which became known after the waiver was issued. | 如果放弃豁免的范围有限，则官员所属国可对未涵盖的行为援引豁免，即另一国当局打算或正在对同一官员行使刑事管辖权所针对的行为是放弃的范围之外的行为或在表示放弃豁免之后了解到的行为。 |
| (12) | (12) |
| Paragraph 3 concerns the means by which the State of the official may communicate the waiver of immunity of its official. | 第3款提到官员所属国可用来传递放弃其官员豁免的方式。 |
| As this paragraph is thus the counterpart to draft article 11, paragraph 3, it substantially reproduces the wording of that paragraph, with the sole exception of the use of the verb “communicated” in order to align draft article 12, paragraph 3, with article 45 of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations. | 本款与第11条草案第3款相似，基本沿用了第11条草案的措辞，唯一的例外是使用了动词“表达”，以便使第12条草案第3款与《维也纳领事关系公约》第四十五条案文保持一致。 |
| In view of the parallels between this paragraph 3 and paragraph 3 of draft article 11, reference is made to the commentary to draft article 11 with regard to the question of which authorities of the State of the official are competent to decide on and to communicate the waiver of immunity. | 鉴于此处第3款与第11条草案第3款之间的相似之处，这里提及第11条草案第3款关于官员所属国有权就放弃豁免作出决定并予以传递的当局的评注。 |
| In particular, it should be noted that the use of the verb “may”, referring to means of communication, is intended to leave open the possibility that the waiver of immunity may be communicated directly to the courts of the forum State. | 尤其应予以注意的是，谈到通信方式时使用了“可”字，意在保留将放弃豁免的决定直接通知法院地国法院的可能性。 |
| (13) | (13) |
| Paragraph 4 provides that “[t]he authorities to which the waiver has been communicated shall immediately inform any other authorities concerned that immunity has been waived”. | 第4款规定，“收到放弃豁免有关通信的当局应立即将豁免已经放弃的情况通知任何其他相关当局”。 |
| This paragraph is the equivalent of draft article 11, paragraph 4, with some drafting changes only. | 本款对应于第11条草案第4款，其中只对某些用词作了调整。 |
| Since both paragraphs follow the same logic and serve the same purpose, the commentary to draft article 11 in this regard also applies to paragraph 4 of the present draft article. | 由于这两款遵循相同的逻辑，为同样的目的服务，第11条草案关于这一点的评注也适用于本条草案第4款。 |
| (14) | (14) |
| Paragraph 5 provides that “[w]aiver of immunity is irrevocable”. | 第5款规定，“豁免的放弃不可撤销”。 |
| This provision is based on the premise that once immunity has been waived, its effect is projected into the future and the question of immunity ceases to act as a barrier to the exercise of criminal jurisdiction by the authorities of the forum State. | 这一规定的依据是，一旦放弃豁免，其效果将投射到未来，豁免问题将不再成为法院地国当局行使刑事管辖权的障碍。 |
| Therefore, in light of the effects and the very nature of the waiver of immunity, the conclusion that it cannot be revoked seems obvious, since otherwise the institution would lose all meaning. | 因此，考虑到放弃豁免的效果及其性质，似乎显然可以认为放弃是不可撤销的，否则这一做法将失去其全部意义。 |
| Paragraph 5 of the present draft article nonetheless gave rise to some debate among the members of the Commission. | 尽管如此，本条款草案第5款在委员会委员中引起了辩论。 |
| (15) | (15) |
| This debate relates not to the basis for concluding that the waiver of immunity is irrevocable, but to possible exceptions to irrevocability. | 这场辩论并不影响豁免的放弃不可撤销性质的理由，但影响到不可撤销的可能的例外情况。 |
| First, it should be noted that the members of the Commission generally agree that paragraph 5, as currently drafted, reflects a general rule that manifests the principle of good faith and addresses the need to respect legal certainty. | 首先应该指出，委员会委员总体上同意，现有第5款反映了体现善意原则的一般规则，并能满足尊重法律确定性的必要性。 |
| However, some members also expressed the view that exceptions to this general rule might be warranted in some situations, such as when new facts not previously known to the State of the official come to light after immunity has been waived; | 然而，一些委员也认为，这条一般规则可能允许某些例外，特别提及以下情况：放弃豁免之后出现了官员所属国原来不知道的新事实； |
| when it is found in a particular case that the basic rules of due process have not been observed during the exercise of jurisdiction by the forum State; | 发现在法院地国对特定案件行使管辖权时，公正审判权的基本规则未得到尊重； |
| or when exceptional circumstances of a general nature arise, such as either a change of government or a change in the legal system, that could result in a situation where the right to a fair trial is no longer guaranteed in the State seeking to exercise its criminal jurisdiction. | 或者发生了一般性的例外情况，包括政府更迭或法律制度改变，可能导致在寻求行使刑事管辖权的国家不再能保障获得公正审判的权利。 |
| (16) | (16) |
| These considerations gave rise to a debate on the usefulness and desirability of including this paragraph in draft article 12. | 这引起了关于将本款列入第12条草案是否有用、是否可取的辩论。 |
| Some members expressed support for its deletion, particularly since neither the relevant treaties nor the domestic laws of States have expressly referred to the irrevocability of waivers of immunity, and the practice on this issue is limited. | 一些委员表示支持删除本款，特别是考虑到相关条约和各国国内法都没有明确提到豁免的放弃不可撤销，而且与此相关的实践很少。 |
| Conversely, other members considered it useful to retain paragraph 5 for reasons of legal certainty and because the Commission itself, referring to the waiver of immunity contemplated in its draft articles on diplomatic intercourse and immunities, stated that “[i]t goes without saying that proceedings, in whatever court or courts, are regarded as an indivisible whole, and that immunity cannot be invoked on appeal if an express or implied waiver was given in the court of first instance”. | 其他委员则认为，出于法律确定性的原因，保留第5款是有益的，并考虑到委员会本身在提及其关于外交关系和豁免的条款草案中所述的放弃豁免时表示，“诉讼程序，无论在哪一个或几个法院中进行，应视为不可分割之整体，如在第一审法院中已对豁免作明示或默示之抛弃，便不得在上诉时援引豁免，固不待言”。 |
| However, other members pointed out that the irrevocable nature of waivers of immunity cannot be inferred from that statement. | 然而，其他委员指出，豁免的放弃的不可撤销性质不能从这一断言中推断出来。 |
| (17) | (17) |
| To address the issue of possible exceptions to the irrevocability of waivers of immunity, some members of the Commission suggested that the wording of paragraph 5 should be modified to introduce attenuating language such as “save in exceptional circumstances” or “in principle”. | 为了解决放弃不可逆转性可能有例外情况的问题，委员会一些委员建议修改第5款的措辞，列入诸如“除非在特殊情况下”或“原则上”等作为保障。 |
| In their view, this would acknowledge that a waiver may be revoked in special circumstances such as those referred to above. | 他们认为，这将使人们有可能认识到，在上述情况等特殊情况下可以撤销放弃。 |
| Other members, on the contrary, took the view that the introduction of such language would further complicate the interpretation of paragraph 5 and that the wording should therefore remain unchanged if the paragraph was ultimately retained in draft article 12. | 其他委员认为，采用这些表述会使第5款的解释进一步复杂化，如果最终决定在第12条草案中保留本款的话，最好不要改变措辞。 |
| In this connection, a view was expressed that, in the final analysis, a waiver of immunity is a unilateral act of the State, the scope of which should be defined in light of the Commission’s 2006 Guiding Principles applicable to unilateral declarations of States capable of creating legal obligations, in particular principle 10. | 关于这一点，一位委员表示，放弃豁免归根结底是一国的单方面行为，其范围应根据委员会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(特别是原则10)来界定。 |
| Finally, the difficulty of identifying exceptional circumstances that could justify the revocation of a waiver of immunity was highlighted, although it was reiterated that a change of government or a change of legal system that could be prejudicial to the respect for the official’s human rights and right to a fair trial could fall into this category. | 最后，有人强调，很难确定哪些特殊情况可以证明撤销放弃是合理的，尽管有人重申，这一类特殊情况可包括政府更迭或法律制度改变，因为这种变化可能会有损于对人权的尊重和官员接受公正审判的权利。 |
| On the other hand, doubts were expressed as to whether the emergence of new facts that were not known at the time of the waiver, or the exercise of jurisdiction by the forum State in respect of facts not covered by the waiver, could be categorized as exceptional circumstances, since they were not exceptions, but matters in respect of which the State of the official had not waived immunity, with the result that immunity could be applied under the general rules contained in the draft articles. | 另一方面，关于是否有可能将在放弃豁免时或在法院地国行使管辖权时不为人所知的、放弃豁免的决定不涵盖的新事实的出现列为例外情况，有人对此表示怀疑，因为这些事实并不构成例外情况，而是官员所属国所表示的放弃没有涉及的情况，因此在这些情况下可以根据本条款草案所载的一般规则适用豁免。 |
| (18) | (18) |
| In view of the discussion summarized in the preceding paragraphs and the practice generally followed in similar cases where there is a divergence of views among the members during the first reading of a draft text, the Commission decided to retain paragraph 5 in draft article 12, thus enabling States to become duly aware of the debate and to provide comments. | 根据前述各款总结的讨论情况以及在条款草案一读期间委员意见分歧的类似情况下普遍遵循的做法，委员会决定在第12条草案中保留第5款，便于各国能够充分了解讨论情况，并发表评论。 |
| Article 13 Requests for information | 第13条 请求提供信息 |
| 1. | 1. |
| The forum State may request from the State of the official any information that it considers relevant in order to decide whether immunity applies or not. | 法院地国可请官员所属国提供其认为相关的任何信息，以便决定豁免是否适用。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| The State of the official may request from the forum State any information that it considers relevant in order to decide on the invocation or the waiver of immunity. | 官员所属国可请法院地国提供其认为相关的任何信息，以便决定援引或放弃豁免。 |
| 3. | 3. |
| Information may be requested through diplomatic channels or through any other means of communication accepted for that purpose by the States concerned, which may include those provided for in applicable international cooperation and mutual legal assistance treaties. | 可通过外交途径请求提供信息，或通过相关国家为此目的都接受的任何其他通信方式进行，其中可包括适用的国际合作和司法协助条约所规定的方式。 |
| 4. | 4. |
| The requested State shall consider any request for information in good faith. | 被请求国应善意地考虑任何关于提供信息的请求。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) | (1) |
| Draft article 13 provides that both the forum State and the State of the official may request information from each other. | 第13条草案指出，法院地国和官员所属国均可请对方提供信息。 |
| It is the last of the procedural provisions under Part Four of the draft articles before reference is made to the determination of whether immunity applies or not. | 这是列入条款草案第四部分的最后一项程序性规定，之后才谈确定豁免是否适用的问题。 |
| This is the subject of draft article 14. | 豁免的确定是第14条草案的主题。 |
| Draft article 13 consists of four paragraphs referring to the right of the States concerned to request information (paras. 1 and 2), the procedure for requesting information (para. 3) and the manner in which the requested State is to consider the request (para. 4). | 第13条草案分为四款，承认有关国家请求提供信息的权利(第1和2款)，说明请求提供信息的程序(第3款)，解释被请求国考虑这种请求的方式(第4款)。 |
| (2) | (2) |
| Paragraphs 1 and 2 indicate that both the forum State and the State of the official may request information. | 第1款和第2款指出，法院地国和官员所属国均可请求提供信息。 |
| Although the Commission takes the view that requests for information follow the same logic regardless of whether they come from one State or the other, for the sake of clarity it preferred to address the two situations in separate paragraphs. | 虽然委员会认为法院地国和官员所属国请求提供信息时遵循相同的逻辑，但为清楚起见，最好分两款列出每种情况。 |
| The two paragraphs use similar wording, the only difference being the ultimate objective pursued by the requesting State, which is, for the forum State, “to decide whether immunity applies or not” and, for the State of the official, “to decide on the invocation or the waiver of immunity”. | 这两款措辞类似，唯一的不同是请求国追求的最终目标不同，法院地国“决定豁免是否适用”，而官员所属国则“决定援引或放弃豁免”。 |
| (3) | (3) |
| The request for information referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2 is made with such an ultimate purpose in mind and should be understood as part of the process that a State must follow in order to decide on immunity in a specific case, from the perspective of either the forum State (examination and determination of immunity) or the State of the official (invocation or waiver of immunity). | 第1款和第2款提到关于提供信息的请求具有最终性质，应在国家为对某一特定案件的豁免作出决定而应遵循的程序范围内予以理解，无论是从法院地国的角度(考虑和确定豁免)还是从官员所属国的角度(援引或放弃豁免)来看均如此。 |
| This is why the expression “in order to decide” is used in both paragraphs, to show that in both cases the final decision will be the outcome of a process that may involve different phases and acts. | 因此，这两款都用了“以便决定”，这表明，在这两种情形下，最后的决定是一个过程的结果，这个过程可能包括不同的阶段和行动。 |
| (4) | (4) |
| When it adopted draft article 13, the Commission took account of the fact that, in order to determine whether or not immunity applies, the forum State will need information on the official in question (name, position within the State, scope of authority, etc.) and on the connection between the State of the official and the acts of the official that may give rise to the exercise of criminal jurisdiction. | 委员会在通过第13条草案时考虑到，为了确定豁免是否适用，法院地国需要有与官员有关的信息(姓名、在所属国的职务、职权等)以及官员所属国与官员行为的关系，而这种行为可能是行使刑事管辖权的基础。 |
| This information is important for enabling the forum State to take a decision on immunity, especially in the case of immunity ratione materiae, but it may be known only to the State of the official. | 这一信息对于使法院地国能够就豁免作出决定(特别是在属事豁免的情况下)至关重要，但相关信息可能只为官员所属国所知。 |
| The same is true in cases where the State of the official must decide whether to invoke or waive immunity, since that State may need to obtain information on the law or the competent organs of the forum State or on the stage reached in the activity undertaken by the forum State. | 从官员所属国的角度来看，为了决定援引或放弃豁免，情况也是如此，因为官员所属国可能需要获得关于法院地国国家法律、主管机关的信息或关于法院地国开展工作的状况的信息。 |
| Draft article 13 is intended to facilitate access to such information. | 第13条草案的目的是为获取此类信息提供便利。 |
| (5) | (5) |
| The information referred to in the preceding paragraph may already be in the possession of the forum State or the State of the official, especially if the provisions of draft articles 10 (on notification), 11 (on invocation) or 12 (on waiver) have been applied prior to the request for information. | 没有任何理由可阻止出现法院地国或官员所属国已经掌握上一款提及的信息的情况，如果第10条草案(通知)、第11条草案(援引)和第12条草案(放弃)的规定在请求提供信息之前已经适用，情况尤其如此。 |
| In acting under those provisions, the forum State and the State of the official undoubtedly will have provided information to each other. | 毫无疑问，通过这些规定，法院地国和官员所属国将向另一国提供信息。 |
| However, it is still possible that the information received by those means may in some cases be insufficient for the purposes of the aforementioned objectives. | 然而，不能忽视的是，在一些情况下，通过这些途径收到的信息可能不足以达到上述目标。 |
| In these circumstances, in particular, requests for information become a necessary and useful tool for ensuring the proper functioning of immunity, while also strengthening cooperation between the States concerned and building trust between them. | 因此，特别是在这种情况下，请求提供信息成为确保豁免正常运作的有用且必要工具，这也有助于加强有关国家之间的合作并创造相互信任的条件。 |
| The system for requesting information provided for in draft article 13 therefore serves as a procedural safeguard for both States. | 有鉴于此，第13条草案规定的请求提供信息制度构成对两国的程序性保障。 |
| (6) | (6) |
| The request may relate to any item of information that the requesting State considers useful for the purpose of taking a decision concerning immunity. | 请求提供信息可能涉及请求国认为有助于就豁免作出决定的任何要素。 |
| Given the variety of items of information that may be taken into account by States for the purpose of deciding on the application, invocation or waiver of immunity, it is not possible to draw up an exhaustive list of such items. | 鉴于各国在决定豁免是否适用或决定援引或放弃豁免时可能考虑的要素很多，不可能拟订一份详尽的要素清单。 |
| The Commission opted to use the expression “any information that it considers relevant”, in preference to “the necessary information”, as the adjective “necessary” could be understood in a narrow, literal sense, especially in English. | 委员会选择使用“其认为相关的任何信息”一语，认为这比“必要的信息”更可取，因为形容词“必要的”可能具有限制性，过于正式，在英语里特别如此。 |
| Conversely, the use of the word “relevant” acknowledges that the requesting State (be it the forum State or the State of the official) has the right to decide on the information that it wishes to request in each case, as provided in a number of international instruments. | 相反，根据几项国际文书的规定，使用“相关”一词使请求国(无论是法院地国还是官员所属国)有权在每一种情况下决定它希望收到哪些信息。 |
| (7) | (7) |
| Paragraph 3 refers to the channels through which information may be requested. | 第3款提到可以请求提供信息的途径。 |
| This paragraph is modelled on paragraph 3 of draft articles 10, 11 and 12, the wording of which it reproduces mutatis mutandis. | 本款沿用第10、11和12条草案第3款的模式，措辞比照使用。 |
| The commentaries to those draft articles are thus applicable to this paragraph. | 因此，这些条款草案的评注适用于本款。 |
| (8) | (8) |
| The Commission nonetheless wishes to draw attention to its decision not to include in draft article 13 a paragraph on internal communication between authorities of the forum State or the State of the official, similar to paragraph 4 of draft articles 11 and 12. | 不过，委员会希望提请注意的一点是，委员会决定不在第13条草案中列入与第11条和第12条草案第4款款类似的关于法院地国或官员所属国当局之间内部沟通的一款。 |
| This is because the request for information should be understood to refer essentially to information that, in many cases, will be complementary or additional to the information already in the possession of the forum State or the State of the official, and that therefore will usually be sought at a more advanced stage of the process. | 原因是，请求提供的信息，应被理解为主要指补充信息或额外信息，在许多情况下，这些信息是对法院地国或官员所属国已经拥有的信息的补充，基本上产生于诉讼程序的较后阶段。 |
| Thus, it is likely that the competent decision-making authority in each State will already be known to the other and that it is therefore not necessary to introduce this element, which operates as a safeguard clause. | 因此，有理由认为，这两国中的任何一国有权作出决定的当局已经为对方所知，没有必要列入这一作为保障条款的要素。 |
| In any event, if the request for information is made at a time when the authorities are only beginning to deal with the question of immunity, there is no reason not to apply the principle that the competent authorities of the same State have an obligation to communicate with each other. | 无论如何，如果索取信息的请求是在处理豁免问题的早期提出的，应当认为，没有理由不适用同一国家主管当局之间沟通义务的原则。 |
| (9) | (9) |
| Paragraph 4 replaces paragraphs 4 and 5 originally proposed by the Special Rapporteur, which listed the possible grounds for refusal of the request and the conditions to which both the request for information and the information provided could be subject, including confidentiality. | 第4款取代特别报告员最初提议的第4和5款，这两款列出拒绝接受请求的可能的理由，以及索取信息和提供信息的可能的条件，特别是保密性。 |
| The Commission considered it preferable to include in draft article 13 a simpler paragraph merely setting out the principle that any request for information must be considered in good faith by the requested State, be it the forum State or the State of the official. | 委员会认为，较可取的做法是在第13条草案中列入较简单的一款，仅说明索取信息的任何请求都将由被请求国(无论是法院地国还是官员所属国)善意地考虑的原则。 |
| There are several reasons for this. | 为此，多个原因已予考虑。 |
| First, the original proposal listing the permitted grounds for refusal could be interpreted a contrario as recognizing an obligation to provide the requested information. | 第一，最初的提案列出允许拒绝的理由，但可以相反地解释为承认提供所索取的信息的义务。 |
| Such an obligation, however, does not exist in international law, except in respect of specific obligations that may be laid down in international cooperation and mutual legal assistance agreements or other treaties. | 但国际法中不存在这种义务，国际合作和司法协助协定或其他条约可能规定的具体义务除外。 |
| Second, the original proposal could conflict with any systems for requesting and exchanging information that may be established in international cooperation and mutual legal assistance treaties, which would in any case apply between the States parties. | 第二，最初的提案可能与合作和司法协助协定中确立的请求和交换信息的制度相冲突，而这些制度在任何情况下在缔约国之间都适用。 |
| Third, the establishment of a confidentiality rule could conflict with State rules governing confidentiality. | 第三，确立保密规则可能与国家保密规则相冲突。 |
| Fourth, the purpose of draft article 13 is to promote cooperation and the exchange of information between the forum State and the State of the official, but this purpose could be undermined or called into question if the draft article expressly listed grounds for refusal and rules of conditionality. | 第四，第13条草案追求的目的是促进法院地国和官员所属国的合作和信息交流，如果条款草案明确列出拒绝理由和附带条件的规则，这一目的可能会受到损害或受到质疑。 |
| (10) | (10) |
| In the Commission’s view, however, the above considerations do not give grounds for ignoring the question of the criteria that States should follow in assessing requests for information. | 然而，委员会认为，上述理由不足以成为忽视各国在评估关于提供信息的请求时应遵循的标准的充分理由。 |
| It therefore opted for wording that sets out, in a simple manner, the obligation of the requested State to consider in good faith any request that may be addressed to it. | 因此，委员会选择了简单地表明被请求国有义务善意地考虑向其提出的任何请求的措辞。 |
| The term “requested State” reflects the terminology commonly used in international cooperation and mutual legal assistance treaties, which is familiar to States. | “被请求国”一词与各国熟悉的合作和司法协助协定中常用的术语是一致的。 |
| (11) | (11) |
| The expression “shall consider … in good faith” in paragraph 4 refers to the general obligation of States to act in good faith in their relations with third parties. | 第4款中“应善意地考虑”一语是指各国在与第三方的关系中本着善意行事的一般义务。 |
| The scope of this obligation, by its very nature, cannot be analysed in the abstract and must be determined on a case-by-case basis. | 就性质而言，这项义务的范围不能加以抽象分析，而必须逐案确定。 |
| Its inclusion in draft article 13 should be understood in the context defined by the draft article itself: as a procedural tool for promoting cooperation between the forum State and the State of the official to enable each of them to form a sound judgment to serve as a basis for the decisions referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2. | 这项义务被纳入第13条草案，应在本条草案本身界定的背景下加以理解，即作为有利于法院地国和官员所属国之间合作的程序性工具，以便每个国家都能形成正确的判断，作出第1款和第2款所指的决定。 |
| Accordingly, the expression “shall consider … in good faith” should be interpreted in light of two elements operating together: first, the obligation to examine the request; | 因此，理解“应善意地考虑”一语，应考虑到同时运作的两个要素：第一，考虑请求是一项义务； |
| and second, the requirement to do so with the intention of helping the other State to take an informed and well-founded decision on whether or not immunity applies, or on the invocation or waiver of immunity. | 第二，考虑这方面的请求的目的是便利另一国在考虑豁免是否适用或考虑援引或放弃豁免时作出知情、有理有据的决定。 |
| The expression “shall consider … in good faith” thus reflects an obligation of conduct and not an obligation of result. | “应善意地考虑”一语反映的是行为义务，而不是结果义务。 |
| (12) | (12) |
| The requested State should take these elements into account as a starting point for the examination of any request for information, but nothing prevents it from also considering other elements or circumstances in reaching a decision on the request, such as, inter alia, concerns of sovereignty, public order, security and essential public interest. | 被请求国在作出答复时应考虑到这些要素，以此作为考虑关于提供信息的任何请求的起点，但没有任何理由阻止被请求国在就此事作出决定时也考虑其他要素或情况，例如主权、公共秩序、安全、基本公共利益等问题。 |
| In any event, the Commission did not consider it necessary to refer expressly to these elements in draft article 13, recognizing that it is for the requested State to identify the reasons justifying its decision. | 无论如何，委员会认识到应由被请求国确定其决定的理由，因此认为没有必要在第13条草案中明确提及这些要素。 |
| (13) | (13) |
| The Commission did not consider it necessary to refer expressly, in paragraph 4, to the possibility of attaching conditions to the provision of the requested information. | 另一方面，应该指出，委员会认为没有必要在第4款中明确提及对提供所要求的信息附加条件的可能性。 |
| However, nothing would prevent the requested State from assessing whether to formulate conditions as part of the process of “considering in good faith” a request for information, especially if this would facilitate or encourage the provision of the requested information. | 但是，任何事情都不能阻止被请求国评估如何确立条件，作为“善意地考虑”任何关于提供信息的请求的过程的一部分，在这样做便利或有利于提供所请求的信息的情况下特别如此。 |
| Article 14 Determination of immunity | 第14条 豁免的确定 |
| 1. | 1. |
| A determination of the immunity of a State official from foreign criminal jurisdiction shall be made by the competent authorities of the forum State according to its law and procedures and in conformity with the applicable rules of international law. | 国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免由法院地国主管当局根据该国法律和程序并按照适用的国际法规则确定。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| In making a determination about immunity, such competent authorities shall take into account in particular: | 在确定豁免时，此类主管当局应特别考虑： |
| (a) | (a) |
| whether the forum State has made the notification provided for in draft article 10; | 法院地国是否已发出第10条草案规定的通知； |
| (b) | (b) |
| whether the State of the official has invoked or waived immunity; | 官员所属国是否已援引或放弃豁免； |
| (c) | (c) |
| any other relevant information provided by the authorities of the State of the official; | 官员所属国当局提供的任何其他相关信息； |
| (d) | (d) |
| any other relevant information provided by other authorities of the forum State; | 法院地国其他当局提供的任何其他相关信息； |
| and | 以及 |
| (e) | (e) |
| any other relevant information from other sources. | 来自其他来源的任何其他相关信息。 |
| 3. | 3. |
| When the forum State is considering the application of draft article 7 in making the determination of immunity: | 在法院地国为确定豁免而考虑适用第7条草案时： |
| (a) | (a) |
| the authorities making the determination shall be at an appropriately high level; | 确定豁免的当局应具有适当高的级别； |
| (b) | (b) |
| in addition to what is provided in paragraph 2, the competent authorities shall: | 除第2款的规定外，主管当局应： |
| (i) | (一) |
| assure themselves that there are substantial grounds to believe that the official committed any of the crimes under international law listed in draft article 7; | 确信有充分理由认为该官员实施了第7条草案所列的任何国际法罪行； |
| (ii) | (二) |
| give consideration to any request or notification by another authority, court or tribunal regarding its exercise of or intention to exercise criminal jurisdiction over the official. | 对另一当局、法院或法庭关于对该官员行使或打算行使刑事管辖权的任何请求或通知予以考虑。 |
| 4. | 4. |
| The competent authorities of the forum State shall always determine immunity: | 法院地国主管当局确定豁免，应总是： |
| (a) | (a) |
| before initiating criminal proceedings; | 在启动刑事诉讼之前进行； |
| (b) | (b) |
| before taking coercive measures that may affect the official, including those that may affect any inviolability that the official may enjoy under international law. | 在采取可能影响该官员的强制措施、包括可能影响该官员根据国际法可能享有的任何不可侵犯性的强制措施之前进行。 |
| This subparagraph does not prevent the adoption or continuance of measures the absence of which would preclude subsequent criminal proceedings against the official. | 本项不妨碍采取或继续采取相关措施，以免以后无法对该官员提起刑事诉讼。 |
| 5. | 5. |
| Any determination that an official of another State does not enjoy immunity shall be open to challenge through judicial proceedings. | 任何关于另一国官员不享有豁免的决定均可通过司法程序提出质疑。 |
| This provision is without prejudice to other challenges to any determination about immunity that may be brought under the applicable law of the forum State. | 本规定不妨碍根据法院地国的适用法律对任何豁免确定提出的其他质疑。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) | (1) |
| Draft article 14 concerns the determination of immunity. | 第14条草案涉及豁免的确定。 |
| As “determination” means the decision on whether or not immunity applies in a particular case, this is a key provision of Part Four of the present draft articles. | “确定”是指关于豁免是否适用于特定案件的决定，因此是本条款草案第四部分中具有中心地位的一项规定。 |
| Draft article 14 is one of the most fundamental procedural safeguards contained in this part. | 第14条草案构成该部分所载的最基本程序保障之一。 |
| (2) | (2) |
| “Determination” is the final stage of a process in which the competent authorities of the forum State make an assessment of the various elements and circumstances of a particular case. It is to be distinguished from the “examination” of immunity covered in draft article 9, which refers only to the initial consideration of this question. | “确定”是一个过程的最后阶段，在这个过程中，法院地国主管当局对特定案件中涉及的不同要素和情况进行评估，“确定”也不同于第9条草案所述的对豁免问题的“审查”，后者只涉及开始审查此问题的开始阶段。 |
| In any case, as determination is the final stage of the process, draft article 14 should be read in conjunction with other provisions of Part Four of the draft articles, in particular draft articles 8 to 13, which deal with institutions that are relevant to the determination of immunity. | 无论如何，由于确定是这一进程的最后阶段，第14条草案应与条款草案第四部分其他规定一并阅读，特别是第8至13条草案，这些条款草案提及与豁免的确定有关的做法。 |
| In this connection, attention is drawn to the special relevance of draft article 8, which defines the scope of application of Part Four and its relationship to the other parts of the draft articles. | 在这方面，应注意第8条草案的特殊相关性，该条草案界定了第四部分的适用范围及其与条款草案其他部分的关系。 |
| Under that draft article, a determination about immunity must be made whenever the question of immunity from the forum State’s exercise of criminal jurisdiction arises, including in cases where draft article 7 may be applicable. | 根据该条草案，如果法院地国行使刑事管辖权，包括在可能适用第7条草案的案件中这样做，就必然需要确定豁免问题。 |
| (3) | (3) |
| Draft article 14 consists of five paragraphs concerning, respectively, the identification of who is to make the determination of immunity and what legal rules must be followed in that process (para. 1); | 第14条草案分为五款，分别说明由谁根据哪些法律标准确定豁免问题(第1款)； |
| what general criteria must be taken into account by the forum State in determining immunity (para. 2); | 在确定豁免时，法院地国应考虑哪些一般标准(第2款)； |
| what special criteria must be taken into account by the forum State in determining immunity in connection with draft article 7 (para. 3); | 在与第7条草案有关的情况下，法院地国在确定豁免时应考虑哪些特殊标准(第3款)； |
| when immunity must be determined (para. 4); | 何时必须确定豁免(第4款)； |
| and judicial challenges to the determination of immunity (para. 5). | 通过司法程序对豁免的确定提出质疑(第5款)。 |
| Paragraph 1 | 第1款 |
| (4) | (4) |
| Paragraph 1 begins with the words “A determination”. | 第1款末尾使用了“确定”一词。 |
| The use of the article “a” is intended to show that the determination is always made with respect to a specific case, the elements and circumstances of which may differ from those of any other case. | 西班牙语定冠词“la”的使用意在表明确定总是在特定案件中进行的，其要素和情况可能不同于任何其他案件。 |
| In each language version of the draft article, the most appropriate word for achieving this purpose has been used. | 每个语言版本为了表达这一点都使用了各自最合适的词语。 |
| (5) | (5) |
| The determination of immunity is to be made by “the competent authorities of the forum State”. | 豁免的确定应由“法院地国主管当局”作出。 |
| The reference to “the competent authorities of the forum State” introduces an element of flexibility that allows two factors to be taken into account: first, that the determination of immunity may be made at different times and is not limited to a judicial procedure stricto sensu, and second, that the authorities competent to determine immunity may vary from one State to another, depending on the applicable national rules. | 提及“法院地国主管当局”就引入了一种灵活性，得以将两项因素考虑在内：首先，豁免的确定可以在不同的时间进行，而不局限于严格意义上的司法程序； 其次，根据适用的国家规则，可以确定豁免的当局可能因国而异。 |
| Authorities with competence to determine immunity may include administrative and executive bodies, prosecutors, judges or other organs to which the national law of the forum State grants such competence. | 有权确定豁免的当局可包括行政和执行机构、检察机关、司法机构或法院地国法律赋予这种权限的其他机构。 |
| Moreover, it should be borne in mind that several organs of the forum State may be considered successively as competent authorities in cases where the determination of immunity can or must be made at different stages, in particular when the exercise of the criminal jurisdiction of the forum State requires the intervention of judicial authorities. | 此外，还必须考虑到，如果豁免可以或必须在不同阶段予以确定，法院地国有若干机关可能依次被视为主管当局，在法院地国行使刑事管辖权需要司法机构参与的情况下特别如此。 |
| In such cases, the criteria set forth in paragraphs 2, 3 and 4 of draft article 14 must be applied by each of the competent authorities in making a determination of immunity. | 在这种情况下，确定豁免的每个主管当局应适用第14条草案第2、3和4款规定的标准。 |
| (6) | (6) |
| The determination of immunity is to be made in accordance with the national law of the forum State. | 豁免的确定应根据法院地国的国家法律进行。 |
| Paragraph 1 uses the phrase “according to its law and procedures” to indicate that the competent authorities must take into account both the substantive rules and the procedural rules applicable to the case. | 在第1款中，“根据该国法律和程序”一语用于表明主管当局应考虑到适用于案件的实质性规则和程序性规则。 |
| However, while the domestic law of the forum State will be the primary basis for determining immunity, an express reference to the determination to be made “in conformity with the applicable rules of international law” has also been included, given that immunity is part of international law and that States are also bound by both customary and treaty rules that may have a bearing on immunity and its determination. | 但是，虽然法院地国的国家法律将成为确定豁免的主要依据，还明确提到按照“适用的国际法规则”确定，这是考虑到豁免是国际法的一部分，国家还受到可能对豁免及其确定豁免产生影响的习惯规则和公约规则的约束。 |
| Therefore, both categories of law – national and international – must be applied in tandem. | 因此，这两类规则(国内法和国际法)应共同适用。 |
| Paragraph 2 | 第2款 |
| (7) | (7) |
| Paragraph 2 sets out the criteria to be taken into account by the competent authorities of the forum State in determining immunity in a particular case. | 第2款述及法院地国主管当局在特定案件中确定豁免时应考虑的标准。 |
| The criteria in this paragraph shall be taken into account in all cases of the determination of immunity, including those in which the application of draft article 7 may be considered. | 在确定豁免的任何案件中，包括可能考虑适用第7条草案的情况下，都应考虑本款所载标准。 |
| In any event, while these are the basic criteria that shall always be taken into account, they are not the only ones which the competent authorities of the forum State may consider in determining immunity. | 无论如何，应该强调的是，本款所载标准是法院地国主管当局在确定豁免时必须始终考虑的基本标准，但不是仅有的标准。 |
| This is reflected by the words “in particular” at the end of the introductory phrase of the paragraph. | 因此，在该款起首部分使用了“特别”一词。 |
| (8) | (8) |
| The list of criteria to be taken into account by the competent authorities of the forum State includes some essential elements forming part of the procedural path that begins with the examination of immunity and ends with the determination of immunity, in particular the notification provided for in draft article 10 (referred to in subparagraph (a)), the invocation or waiver of immunity by the State of the official (subparagraph (b)) and the information made available to the forum State (subparagraphs (c), (d) and (e)). | 在法院地国主管当局应考虑的标准清单中列入了一些基本要素，从审查豁免开始到豁免确定过程结束，这些要素构成程序性路径的一部分，具体而言，这些要素包括第10条草案规定的通知(如(a)项所述)、官员所属国援引或放弃豁免((b)项)以及法院地国可获得的信息((c)、(d)和(e)项)。 |
| (9) | (9) |
| These criteria have been included because of their direct connection to the procedural safeguards referred to in draft articles 10, 11, 12 and 13. | 这些标准与第10、11、12和13条草案中提到的程序保障直接相关。 |
| However, while all the criteria included in draft article 14, paragraph 2, are related to these other draft articles, the Commission did not consider it necessary to include cross references to them in all cases. | 然而，虽然第14条草案第2款所载的所有标准都与前面提及的其他条款草案有关，但委员会认为没有必要在所有情况下都交叉提及这些标准。 |
| Only an express reference to draft article 10 has been included, given that this is the only draft article that imposes an obligation on the forum State, while the other draft articles refer to powers of the State of the official (invocation and waiver) or to optional instruments available to the forum State and the State of the official (requests for information). | 明确提及的只有第10条草案，这是考虑到只有该条草案对法院地国规定了义务，其余条款草案提及官员所属国的权利(援引和放弃)或法院地国和官员所属国可用的手段(请求提供信息)。 |
| (10) | (10) |
| It should be borne in mind that the criteria listed in paragraph 2 are not prerequisites for the determination of immunity, but elements of guidance which are offered to the competent authorities and which they must take into consideration for the purpose of determining immunity. | 必须铭记的是，第2款所列标准不构成确定豁免的先决条件，而是供主管当局在确定豁免时应考虑的指导要素。 |
| This is particularly relevant with regard to the invocation of immunity, which has not been considered by the Commission as a prerequisite for the application of either immunity ratione personae or immunity ratione materiae. | 这与援引豁免特别相关，委员会并未将之视为适用豁免(无论是属人豁免还是属事豁免)的一个先决条件。 |
| The competent authorities of the forum State must therefore determine immunity in any case, whether or not it has been invoked, and irrespective of the different weight that the invocation or non-invocation of immunity may have in light of the circumstances of each particular case. | 因此，法院地国主管当局在任何案件中都必须确定豁免，而无论豁免是否被援引。 而且这一点与援引或不援引豁免可能因具体案件的情况而有不同的分量无关。 |
| (11) | (11) |
| With regard to the information available to the competent authorities of the forum State, the Commission considered it useful to refer separately to information from each of the sources from which it may originate. | 关于法院地国主管当局可获得的信息，委员会认为有必要分别提及信息的不同来源。 |
| Information provided by the State of the official (subparagraph (c)) is directly related to the system of requests for information provided for in draft article 13, but nothing prevents such information from being provided proprio motu outside that system. | 官员所属国提供的信息((c)项)与第13条草案所述的请求提供信息的做法直接相关，但没有什么可以阻止在此途径之外自行获取此类信息。 |
| The reference to information “provided by other authorities of the forum State” (subparagraph (d)) reflects the fact that the authorities with competence to determine immunity may receive, and often do receive, information from other authorities of the State that may be useful or necessary for the determination of immunity, including information provided by the police, the Ministry for Foreign Affairs, the Ministry of Justice or others. | 之所以提及“法院地国其他当局提供的”信息((d)项)，是考虑到有权确定豁免的当局可能会收到且在许多情况下确实收到本国其他当局提供的对确定豁免可能有用或必要的信息，其他当局包括警察部门、外交部、司法部或其他机构。 |
| Finally, the Commission has noted that the competent authorities of the forum State often receive or have access to information from other sources, including third States, international organizations (such as the International Criminal Police Organization (INTERPOL)), international investigative mechanisms, courts, the International Committee of the Red Cross and non-governmental organizations. | 最后，委员会还考虑到，法院地国主管当局会经常收到或获得其他来源的信息，包括第三国、国际组织(包括国际刑事警察组织(国际刑警组织))、国际调查机制、法院、国际红十字委员会和非政府组织。 |
| The Commission considered that this information may be useful for the determination of immunity in a particular case and has therefore referred to it in subparagraph (e). | 委员会认为这些信息可能有助于在特定案件中确定豁免问题，因此将其列入(e)项。 |
| However, it did not expressly refer to the various sources mentioned above, preferring instead to use the expression “other sources” so as to refer generally to any source of information that may be useful for the determination of immunity in a particular case. | 但是，委员会认为不宜明确列出上述各种来源，倾向于使用“其他来源”一词，从而泛指信息可能有助于在特定案件中确定豁免问题的任何来源。 |
| (12) | (12) |
| Lastly, it should be noted that the Commission decided not to establish in paragraph 2 any hierarchy among the sources from which the available information has originated. | 最后，应该指出的是，委员会决定不在第2款对现有信息来源进行排名。 |
| Therefore, subparagraphs (c), (d) and (e) begin with the words “any other relevant information”. | 因此，(c)、(d)和(e)项最后均提及“任何其他相关信息”。 |
| This phrase also means that the information to be taken into consideration in determining immunity must always be “relevant”, and it is for the competent authorities of the forum State to assess such relevance. | 无论如何，应注意的一点是，在确定豁免时应考虑的信息始终必须是“相关信息”，相关性由法院地国主管当局评估。 |
| Paragraph 3 | 第3款 |
| (13) | (13) |
| Paragraph 3 applies only in cases where the determination of immunity is related to draft article 7. In other words, it applies only in cases where the forum State considers that the official of another State may have committed one of the crimes under international law listed in that draft article, which may lead the forum State to determine that the official does not enjoy immunity ratione materiae even if the acts in question were performed in an official capacity. | 第3款仅适用于豁免的确定与第7条草案有关的情况，即法院地国认为另一国官员可能犯下该条草案所列国际法范畴内的罪行之一的情况，这可能导致法院地国确定有关官员即使以官方身份行事也不享有属事豁免。 |
| The Commission has thus taken the view that special criteria for determining immunity must be established for cases of this type to ensure a proper balance between the interests of the forum State and those of the State of the official. | 在这种情况下，委员会认为，对于此类案件，有必要制定确定豁免的特殊标准，以确保在法院地国的利益与官员所属国的利益之间取得适当平衡。 |
| These special criteria serve two complementary purposes: first, to reduce the risk of politicization and misuse of draft article 7, and second, to ensure that effect can be given to draft article 7 and that its use in good faith is not prevented. | 这些特殊标准有两个互补的目标：首先，减少政治化风险和滥用第7条草案的风险； 其次，确保第7条草案可以发挥效力，使之有可能得到善意地利用。 |
| (14) | (14) |
| The special criteria listed in paragraph 3 are complementary to those set out in paragraph 2, which also apply in cases of determination of immunity that may be affected by draft article 7. | 第3款所列的特殊标准是对第2款所列标准的补充，第2款所列标准也适用于确定可能与第7条草案有关的豁免。 |
| The special criteria set out in paragraph 3 relate to two distinct questions: which authorities should determine immunity in these circumstances (subparagraph (a)) and what additional elements should be assessed by the competent authorities for the purpose of determining immunity (subparagraph (b)). | 第3款的特殊标准涉及两个不同的问题：一是在这种情况下应由哪些当局确定豁免((a)项)，二是主管当局为确定豁免应评估哪些其他要素((b)项)。 |
| (15) | (15) |
| Subparagraph (a) requires that the authorities of the forum State that are to determine immunity “be at an appropriately high level”. | (a)项规定，法院地国确定豁免的当局“应具有适当高的级别”。 |
| The Commission included this criterion taking into account, in the first place, the seriousness of the crimes alleged to have been committed by the official in such cases, which, owing to their characteristics and specific nature, require assessment by specially qualified State authorities with a special level of competence. | 委员会提出这一标准，首先考虑到官员据称犯下的罪行的严重性，由于其特点和特殊性，需要具有特殊资格、特定级别的国家机构来评估。 |
| The Commission also considered that, in relation to this category of crimes, the exercise of criminal jurisdiction over a foreign official may have a significant impact on the relations between the forum State and the State of the official. This is another reason that the authorities making the determination of immunity should have sufficiently high-level decision-making power. | 此外，委员会还考虑到，就这类罪行而言，对外国官员行使刑事管辖权可能对法院地国与官员所属国之间的关系产生重大影响，这也证明确定豁免的当局需要具有足够高级别的决策权。 |
| (16) | (16) |
| The Commission understands “appropriately high level” to be the necessary criterion for defining the concept of a “competent authority” for the purpose of this type of determination, and has therefore, in subparagraph (a), used only the term “authorities” rather than “competent authorities”, which, however, is used in subparagraph (b). | 委员会的理解是，“适当高的级别”是为这种确定豁免的目的界定“主管当局”概念的必要标准，因此，(a)项仅使用“当局”一词，而不是(b)项里所用的“主管当局”。 |
| In any event, it should be recalled that, as noted above, the term “authorities” is used to refer to a broad range of State organs, including administrative, executive, prosecutorial and judicial authorities. | 在所有情况下，应该记得，如上所述，“当局”一词用于泛指国家机关，包括行政和执行机关、检察官办公室和司法机构。 |
| It should moreover be borne in mind that the determination of which “authorities [are] at an appropriately high level” will depend on each State’s legal system. | 另应考虑到，“具有适当高的级别”的当局的确定将依据每个国家法律的规定。 |
| Therefore, “appropriately high level” does not necessarily mean “hierarchically superior”, since the existence or not of a hierarchical relationship in each category of organs will depend on the internal system of the forum State. | 因此，不能将“适当高的级别”与“级别更高”两者等同起来，因为每一类机构是否存在等级关系或从属关系取决于法院地国内部制度。 |
| (17) | (17) |
| Paragraph 3, subparagraph (b), sets out two criteria that serve as additional elements to be assessed when determining immunity in cases that may be covered by draft article 7. | 第3款(b)项提出两项标准，作为确定可能在第7条草案范围内的豁免情形时需要评估的补充要素。 |
| Because they are different in nature, they use different wording to express the obligation imposed on the competent authorities: “assure themselves” with respect to the first criterion and “give consideration” with respect to the second. | 每项标准具有不同的性质，因此对主管当局施加的义务在每种情况下采用不同的表述：第一个标准里用“确信”，而第二个标准里用“予以考虑”。 |
| (18) | (18) |
| Under the first of these criteria, set forth in subparagraph (b) (i), “the competent authorities [must] assure themselves that there are substantial grounds to believe that the official committed any of the crimes under international law listed in draft article 7”; that is, a crime of genocide, a crime against humanity, a war crime, or a crime of apartheid, torture or enforced disappearance. | 根据(b)项(一)目所述的第一个标准，“[应]确信有充分理由认为该官员实施了第7条草案所列的任何国际法罪行”，即灭绝种族罪、危害人类罪、战争罪、种族隔离罪、酷刑罪或强迫失踪罪。 |
| The expression “[must] assure themselves” refers to the competent authorities’ obligation to form a reasoned judgment on this point. This should not, however, be confused with the standard of being convinced beyond reasonable doubt, which would be necessary for a court to conclude that the official in question is criminally responsible for the commission of any of these crimes. | “[应]确信”一语是指主管当局有义务在这方面作出有理由的判断，但不应与排除所有合理怀疑的确证相混淆，即不应将此解释为法院认定有关官员对上述类罪行之一的实施负有刑事责任。 |
| This distinction is very important, especially since, as will be noted below, the determination of immunity may be made at different times and need not necessarily take the form of a judicial determination. | 这种区别非常重要，特别是因为，如下所述，豁免的确定可在不同时间进行，不一定通过司法途径来作出。 |
| (19) | (19) |
| To prevent the politically motivated or improper use of exceptions to immunity, the criterion contained in subparagraph (b) (i) is intended to ensure that the determination of immunity is not based solely on news reports, complaints or other types of unsubstantiated information. | 为了避免政治化风险和滥用豁免的例外情况的风险，(b)项(一)目所载的标准旨在防止仅根据新闻报道、投诉或其他未经核实的信息来确定豁免。 |
| It is therefore essential to define the standard of proof applicable to the information which the competent authorities use as the basis for forming their judgment. | 因此，重要的是，应确定适用于主管当局可获得的信息的证据标准，作为其判断的基础。 |
| After weighing different possibilities, it was decided that an internationally established standard of proof should be used. | 委员会在评估了各种可能性之后， 决定采用国际上已确立的证据标准。 |
| The Commission thus decided that the standards defined in the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court would serve as a useful model, especially as these standards were considered and agreed upon by States at an international conference with broad participation. | 委员会认为《国际刑事法院罗马规约》中规定的标准是一种有用的模式，特别是考虑到这些标准是在参与国家很多的国际会议上审查商定的。 |
| (20) | (20) |
| In line with this approach, the Commission assessed the different formulations used in the Rome Statute to identify a sufficient basis for the exercise of jurisdiction, namely: (a) a “reasonable basis to believe that a crime … has been or is being committed”, as a sufficient standard of proof for the Prosecutor to decide to initiate an investigation, and, conversely, “substantial reasons to believe that an investigation would not serve the interests of justice”; | 根据这一标准，委员会评估了《罗马规约》中作为确定行使管辖权的充分依据的各种表述：(a)“是否提供了合理根据，可据以认为有人已经实施或正在实施本法院管辖权内的犯罪”，作为检察官决定启动调查的充分证据标准， 同时从消极意义上说，“有合理理由相信[…]实施了本法院管辖权内的犯罪”； |
| (b) “reasonable grounds to believe that [an individual] has committed a crime”, as the applicable standard for the Pre-Trial Chamber to issue a warrant of arrest; and (c) “whether there is sufficient evidence to establish substantial grounds to believe that the person committed each of the crimes charged”, for the Pre-Trial Chamber to confirm the charges. | (b)“有合理理由相信[某人]实施了…犯罪”； (c)作为预审分庭签发逮捕令的适用标准，同时“确定是否有充足证据，证明有实质理由相信该人实施了各项被指控的犯罪”，以便预审分庭确认指控。 |
| (21) | (21) |
| After analysing each of these ways of describing the standard of proof, the Commission decided to use the expression “substantial grounds to believe”, which in its view is precise enough to achieve the objectives pursued by this criterion. | 委员会在分析了证据标准的每一种表述之后，决定采用“确信有充分理由”一语，认为这一表述足以实现该标准所追求的目标。 |
| This expression is taken from the English version of article 61, paragraph 7, of the Rome Statute, which is the same in the Arabic, Chinese, French and Russian versions. | 该表述取自英文本《罗马规约》第六十一条第七款，该款的阿拉伯文、中文、法文和俄文文本措辞相同。 |
| Although the wording of that paragraph is different in the Spanish version (“motivos fundados para creer”), the Commission preferred not to use different wording in each of the official languages, in order to avoid possible misinterpretations on an issue of such importance as the standard of proof required for the application of the exception to immunity ratione materiae. | 虽然该表述在西班牙文本中有所不同(“motivos fundados para creer”)，但委员会选择不在每种正式语文中使用含义不同的措辞，以避免误导性解释，因为适用属事豁免例外所需的证据标准这个问题极其重要。 |
| However, the Commission decided not to retain the words immediately preceding that phrase in article 61, paragraph 7 (“whether there is sufficient evidence to establish”), to avoid creating the erroneous impression that the authorities competent to determine immunity must examine the evidence as thoroughly as the Pre-Trial Chamber of the International Criminal Court is required to do, through a judicial procedure in which the right of the accused or his or her counsel to participate is recognized. | 但是，委员会决定不保留第六十一条第七款的其余部分措辞(“是否有充足证据”)，以避免产生误解，即以为有权确定豁免的当局应以与国际刑事法院预审分庭相同的高标准，通过承认被告或其律师参与权的司法程序，审查证据。 |
| (22) | (22) |
| In connection with the above-mentioned considerations, it should be noted that the use of the phrase “substantial grounds to believe” in the present draft article should not be conflated with the use of the same phrase in the English version of article 53, paragraph 1 (c), of the Rome Statute as a basis on which the Prosecutor of the Court may decide that, despite the existence of sufficient information indicating that crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court have been committed, an investigation need not be initiated because it “would not serve the interests of justice”. | 关于上诉考量，应注意在本条草案中使用“确信有充分理由认为”一语不应与英文本《罗马规约》第五十三条第(一)款第3项中使用同一措辞 相混淆，后者是作为一种依据，供法院检察官据以作出下列决定：尽管有足够的信息表明有人已实施法院管辖范围内的罪行，但仍没有必要进行调查，因为这“无助于实现公正”。 |
| Although the Commission considered this issue, it decided not to include a reference to the interests of justice as part of this criterion because doing so could potentially politicize the determination of immunity. | 委员会虽然审议了这个问题，但决定不提及实现公正作为该标准的一部分内容，因为这可能会导致豁免的确定政治化。 |
| (23) | (23) |
| The standard of proof just discussed refers to the conduct of the official of another State, using the wording “committed any of the crimes under international law listed in draft article 7”. | 刚才讨论的证据标准涉及另一国官员的行为，使用“实施了第7条草案所列的任何国际法罪行”这一短语。 |
| The verb “committed” follows the wording of the above-mentioned provisions of the Rome Statute and should be understood in relation to the process of determining immunity, which, as noted above, cannot be confused with the determination of any criminal responsibility that the official may have incurred. | 动词“实施了”的使用仿效《罗马规约》上述条款的措辞，应在确定豁免的过程中加以理解，如上所述，这不能与确定官员可能承担的刑事责任相混淆。 |
| Therefore, the use of the verb “committed” does not prejudice the presumption of innocence of the official, respect for which is provided for in draft article 16, entitled “Fair treatment of the State official”. | 因此，“实施了”一词的使用并不影响对相关官员适用的无罪推定原则，第16条草案(其标题是“公平对待国家官员”)承认应尊重该原则。 |
| (24) | (24) |
| Under the criterion set forth in paragraph 3 (b) (ii) of this draft article, the competent authorities must “give consideration to any request or notification by another authority, court or tribunal regarding its exercise of or intention to exercise criminal jurisdiction over the official”. | 根据本条草案第3款(b)项(二)目规定的标准，“对另一当局、法院或法庭关于对该官员行使或打算行使刑事管辖权的任何请求或通知”，主管当局应“予以考虑”。 |
| The obligation imposed on the competent authorities is less stringent than that referred to in subparagraph (b) (i), since those authorities need only “give consideration to” any such request or notification. | 对主管当局施加的义务要求低于(b)项(一)目所述的义务，仅限于“考虑”此类请求或通知。 |
| (25) | (25) |
| This criterion allows for the fact that proceedings in respect of the crimes under international law listed in draft article 7 may be instituted by a plurality of jurisdictions, both national and international. | 在列入这一标准时，委员会考虑到对第7条草案所列国际法罪行的起诉可由国家和国际层面多个司法机构进行。 |
| Such crimes may be submitted to the criminal courts of the official’s own State, to the criminal courts of third States by virtue of the jurisdictional powers provided for in their legal systems or in applicable treaties, and to the competent international and hybrid courts. | 这些罪行可交由官员所属国本国刑事法院处理、由第三国刑事法院依据其法律制度或适用的条约所规定的管辖权处理或由主管国际法庭或混合法庭处理。 |
| Criminal jurisdiction may be exercised concurrently or consecutively before more than one of the courts indicated, as well as before the courts of the forum State. | 刑事管辖权可以同时或先后由上述若干司法机构行使，以及由法院地国的司法机构行使。 |
| (26) | (26) |
| The Commission therefore decided to include this special criterion for the determination of immunity in connection with draft article 7, given that it allows for the operation of the applicable systems of cooperation and mutual legal assistance and, by this means, for the establishment of objective conditions for the exercise of jurisdiction by the forum State, the State of the official, a third State or an international court. | 为此，委员会决定在第7条草案中列入确定豁免的这一特殊标准，这样做是考虑到这可使适用的合作和司法协助制度得以运作，并通过这种方式，确立法院地国、官员所属国、第三国或国际法性法院行使管辖权的条件。 |
| The Commission also noted that the official’s immunity from criminal jurisdiction will play a different role in each of the jurisdictions mentioned above, being inapplicable before the courts of the official’s State and before international criminal tribunals. | 委员会还考虑到，官员的刑事管辖豁免在上述每个司法机构面临不同的情形，在官员所属国司法机构和国际刑事法庭不起作用。 |
| Consequently, assessing whether a court other than those of the forum State is exercising or intends to exercise jurisdiction may be a useful tool for avoiding a conflict between respect for immunity and establishment of criminal responsibility for the commission of crimes under international law. | 因此，评估管辖权是否由法院地国以外的司法当局行使或打算行使，可以成为一种有用的方式，帮助避免尊重豁免权与对实施国际法范畴内的罪行追究刑事责任之间的矛盾。 |
| This amounts to an enhanced procedural safeguard for the purposes of Part Four of the present draft articles. | 这为本条款草案第四部分的目的构成强化的程序保障。 |
| (27) | (27) |
| The use, in paragraph 3 (b) (ii), of the alternative expressions “request or notification”, “another authority, court or tribunal” and “its exercise of or intention to exercise” is meant to ensure that the wording is flexible enough to cover the different situations that may arise in practice. | 在第3款(b)项(二)目中使用可替代表述“请求或通知”、“法院或法庭”和“行使或打算行使”，这是为了有足够灵活性，便于涵盖实际可能发生的各种情况。 |
| (28) | (28) |
| This criterion is clearly related to the transfer of criminal proceedings referred to in draft article 15. | 这一标准显然与第15条草案所述的转移刑事诉讼有关。 |
| However, as its scope is broader, the Commission preferred not to include an express reference to that draft article in this paragraph of draft article 14. | 但范围更广，因此委员会倾向于不在第14条草案这一款款中明确提及该条草案。 |
| Paragraph 4 | 第4款 |
| (29) | (29) |
| Paragraph 4 refers to the moment at which immunity must be determined and applies to any determination made under draft article 14. | 第4款涉及确定豁免的时间，适用于根据第14条草案进行的任何确定事宜。 |
| (30) | (30) |
| Although paragraph 4 was not initially included in draft article 14 as originally proposed, the Commission decided to include it in light of a general discussion on a proposal, made by one of its members, that the exercise of criminal jurisdiction over a foreign official should not be possible if the official is not present in the territory of the forum State. | 第4款最初未被列入第14条草案的原始提案中。 委员会一名委员提议，如果所涉官员不在法院地国境内，则不得对外国官员行使刑事管辖权。 委员会就此提案举行辩论后决定把第4款列入第14条草案。 |
| The Commission decided against that proposal on the grounds that it would excessively limit the forum State’s jurisdiction and is not in line with international practice, given that the legal systems of a number of States allow for trials in absentia. | 委员会没有在草案里保留该提案的内容，认为这是对国家管辖权的过度限制，不符合国际惯例，因为一些国家的法律制度允许缺席审判。 |
| It should be added that, in general, there is nothing to prevent certain acts characterized as an exercise of jurisdiction, in particular investigations, from being carried out even if the person concerned is not in the territory of the forum State. | 此外，一般而言，即使有关的人不在法院地国境内，也没有什么可以阻止某些被称为行使管辖权的行为的实施，特别是调查行动的实施。 |
| (31) | (31) |
| The Commission nevertheless considered that this proposal, despite its exclusion from the draft article, had raised the point that the draft article on the determination of immunity should make some provision for protecting the State official until the determination is actually made. | 该提案的内容虽然没有被保留，但委员会认为，这说明有必要在关于确定豁免的条款草案中列入一项规定，在豁免的确定工作切实进行之前，为国家官员提供保护。 |
| The result is paragraph 4 of draft article 14, which constitutes a safeguard for the State of the official and for the official himself or herself by requiring that the determination of immunity always be made before measures that will necessarily affect the official are taken. | 结果才产生了第14条草案第4款，要求确定豁免的工作必须在采取必然影响官员的措施之前进行，从而为官员所属国和官员本人提供保障。 |
| (32) | (32) |
| Like the examination of immunity, the determination of immunity should take place as early as possible, to avoid a situation where the late determination of immunity prevents it from producing its full effects. | 与审查豁免问题一样，确定的工作应尽快进行，以避免豁免确定工作的延误妨碍其充分产生效果。 |
| However, the Commission did not consider it necessary to indicate, in a general way, when the determination should take place, since this will depend on different circumstances that cannot be listed in an exhaustive manner. | 但是，委员会认为没有必要一般性地说明何时应该进行确定工作，这将取决于不同的情况，这些情况无法详尽列出。 |
| Rather, paragraph 4 of this draft article indicates when immunity must necessarily be determined if it has not been determined earlier. | 相反，本条草案第4款指出，如果以前尚未确定豁免，则必须予以确定。 |
| This is reflected in the use of the word “always” with reference to the obligation to determine immunity that is incumbent on the competent authorities of the forum State. | 这反映在“总是”一词里，以此提及对法院地国主管当局的施加的确定豁免的义务。 |
| (33) | (33) |
| In indicating when immunity must necessarily be determined, draft article 14, paragraph 4, largely follows the wording of draft article 9, paragraph 2. | 为了指出应在何时确定豁免，第14条草案第4款基本上沿用第9条草案第2款的措辞。 |
| Accordingly, the authorities must determine immunity “before initiating criminal proceedings” and “before taking coercive measures that may affect the official, including those that may affect any inviolability that the official may enjoy under international law”. | 确定豁免必须“在启动刑事诉讼之前进行”、“在采取可能影响该官员的强制措施、包括可能影响该官员根据国际法可能享有的任何不可侵犯性的强制措施之前进行”。 |
| The meaning and scope of these phrases have been previously analysed in the commentary to draft article 9, paragraph 2, to which reference is made. | 这些措辞的含义和范围先前已在第9条第2款草案的评注中讨论过，在此提及这一点。 |
| (34) | (34) |
| However, paragraph 4 (b) of draft article 14 adds a new sentence stating that the fact that immunity must always be determined before coercive measures can be taken against a foreign official “does not prevent the adoption or continuance of measures the absence of which would preclude subsequent criminal proceedings against the official”. | 但是，第14条草案第4款(b)项新增了一句话，指出虽然在对外国官员采取强制措施之前必须总是先确定豁免，但这一点“不妨碍采取或继续采取相关措施，以免以后无法对该官员提起刑事诉讼”。 |
| This clause strikes a balance between the interests of the State of the official, represented by the determination of immunity at a procedurally appropriate time, and the interests of the forum State, represented by the retention of the power to take such coercive measures as are necessary to ensure that, should the forum State subsequently be able to exercise criminal jurisdiction over the foreign official, this will not be impossible in practice. | 这一规定力求平衡官员所属国的利益与法院地国的利益。 对官员所属国有利的是，要求在程序上适当的时候确定豁免。 对法院地国有利的是，保留采取强制措施的权力，这些措施是必要的，以确保法院地国随后能够对外国官员行使刑事管辖权，而且在实践中也不是不可能的。 |
| The coercive measures that could be adopted or continued will therefore be measures of a precautionary nature, including, for example, any administrative measures aimed at preventing the official’s departure from the territory of the forum State, such as a requirement to surrender his or her passport or an order prohibiting the official from leaving the territory and requiring him or her to report periodically to the national authorities. | 因此，可以采取或继续采取的强制措施具有预防性质，例如旨在防止官员离开法院地国的各种行政措施，包括扣留护照或签发禁止离境的命令，以及要求定期向法院地国当局报到。 |
| The retention of the power to adopt and continue such coercive measures even after immunity has been determined is justified, in particular, by the fact that the determination may be made at an early stage of the exercise of jurisdiction and then be reversed at a later stage, especially in the judicial phase. | 即使在确定豁免之后，也需要保留采取和继续采取这些强制措施的权力，这是合理的，尤其考虑到豁免的确定可以在行使管辖权的早期阶段进行，并且可能在以后特别是在司法阶段改变决定。 |
| Paragraph 5 | 第5款 |
| (35) | (35) |
| As noted above, the determination of immunity may be made at different times and may be decided upon by administrative, executive, prosecutorial or judicial authorities. | 如前所述，豁免的确定可以在不同时间进行，可以由行政当局、执行当局、检察官办公室或司法机构进行。 |
| This means that the determination of immunity need not necessarily be a judicial determination. | 因此，豁免的确定不一定是司法决定。 |
| (36) | (36) |
| However, because immunity is determined for the purpose of the exercise of criminal jurisdiction by the forum State, there is in practice a strong likelihood that the determination of immunity will lead to a judicial phase, especially in relation to a decision to initiate criminal proceedings against the foreign official or the adoption of certain coercive measures that must be approved by the courts or may be subject to challenge. | 尽管如此，豁免的确定是为了使法院地国得以行使刑事管辖权，实际上，豁免的确定极有可能在司法阶段才结束，这时得决定对外国官员提起刑事诉讼或采取某些强制措施，而这些措施需要得到法院同意或可能受到质疑。 |
| In addition, the decisions adopted by administrative, executive or prosecutorial authorities on the determination of immunity may be subject to judicial oversight in many cases. | 最后，必须补充一点，在许多情况下，行政当局、执行当局或检察机关为确定豁免而采取的行动可能会受到司法审查。 |
| With this in mind, the Commission has included in draft article 14 a paragraph 5 on the possibility of challenging a determination regarding immunity by means of judicial proceedings. | 考虑到这一点，委员会在第14条草案中列入了第5款，专门说明通过司法程序对豁免的确定提出质疑一事。 |
| (37) | (37) |
| Although the Special Rapporteur’s initial proposal was broader, the Commission decided to approach the issue of challenging the determination of immunity in terms of the safeguards provided to the State of the official and to the official himself or herself. | 虽然特别报告员的初步建议范围更广，但委员会决定从向官员所属国和官员本人提供的保障的角度处理对豁免确定的质疑问题。 |
| Consequently, priority has been given to challenges to a “determination that an official of another State does not enjoy immunity”, which “shall be open to challenge through judicial proceedings”. | 因此，优先考虑对“任何关于另一国官员不享有豁免的决定”提出质疑的问题，对这类决定“均可通过司法程序提出质疑”。 |
| An obligation is thus imposed on the forum State to ensure that such a challenge is possible. | 这对法院地国施加了一项义务，确保提出质疑是可能的。 |
| The Commission has used the phrase “challenge through judicial proceedings”, which, although the subject of much debate, was considered to be the most appropriate means, owing to its generality, of covering the different legal avenues and remedies established for this purpose in national judicial systems. | 委员会使用了“通过司法程序提出质疑”一语，对此曾经过广泛辩论，最后据认为这一表述是最合适的，因为这一表述具有笼统性，涵盖每个国家法律制度为此目的确立的各种措施和补救途径。 |
| Paragraph 5 likewise does not address the issue of standing to challenge the determination or other issues of a procedural nature that will depend on each country’s national law. | 第5款也不提对决定提出质疑的合法理由或其他程序性问题，这些问题将取决于每个国家的法律。 |
| (38) | (38) |
| The emphasis placed on cases where the determination concludes that immunity does not apply is also due to other considerations. For example, it has been argued that in some judicial systems a decision by the prosecutor not to exercise jurisdiction, including where the decision is based on a finding that immunity applies, is not subject to legal challenge. | 重点处理确定豁免不适用的情况，也是出于其他考虑因素，例如，有人称，在某些法律制度中，对于检察官不行使管辖权的决定，包括因认定豁免适用而作出的决定，不得提出质疑。 |
| However, the priority treatment given to challenges to determinations denying immunity in no way implies that the Commission’s intent is to exclude challenges to determinations upholding immunity. | 但是，在任何情况下，优先重视对不予豁免的决定提出质疑，不能被解释为委员会希望在确定豁免适用的情况下排除提出质疑可能性。 |
| On the contrary, paragraph 5 contains a “without prejudice” clause stating that it is “without prejudice to other challenges to any determination about immunity that may be brought under the applicable law of the forum State”. | 相反，第5款载有一项“不妨碍”条款，即“不妨碍根据法院地国的适用法律对任何豁免确定提出的其他质疑”。 |
| (39) | (39) |
| Through this “without prejudice” clause, the Commission recognizes that a determination in favour of immunity may also be challenged in court, thus reflecting the existing practice in a number of States and the need to strike a balance between the rights of the foreign official, on the one hand, and those of the victims of the crimes he or she is alleged to have committed, on the other. | 通过这一“不妨碍”条款，委员会承认，在司法程序中也可以对确定豁免适用的决定提出质疑，从而反映了许多国家的现行做法，此外，有必要在外国官员的利益与据称所犯罪行的受害者的利益之间取得平衡。 |
| In this context, the Commission has taken into account, in particular, the right of access to justice, which is a basic component of the right to effective judicial protection and, as such, is recognized in various international human rights instruments and has been systematically referred to in the case law of regional courts such as the European Court of Human Rights and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, as well as in the doctrine of the Human Rights Committee. | 在这方面，委员会特别考虑到诉诸司法的权利，这是有效司法保护权的基本内容的一部分，各国际人权文书中都承认这项权利， 在欧洲人权法院 和美洲人权法院 等区域法院的判例中以及在人权事务委员会的意见 中都系统地提及这项权利。 |
| All these elements must be duly taken into account in order to determine whether a challenge “may be brought under the applicable law of the forum State”, since the Commission understands that the expression “applicable law” refers both to State law and to the rules of international law that are enforceable against that State. | 要确定“根据法院地国的适用法律”是否可提出质疑，上述因素均应予以考虑，委员会的理解是，“适用法律”既指国家法律，也指适用于相关国家的国际法规则。 |
| Article 15 Transfer of the criminal proceedings | 第15条 转移刑事诉讼 |
| 1. | 1. |
| The competent authorities of the forum State may, acting proprio motu or at the request of the State of the official, offer to transfer the criminal proceedings to the State of the official. | 法院地国主管当局可自行或应官员所属国请求，提出将刑事诉讼转移至官员所属国。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| The forum State shall consider in good faith a request for transfer of the criminal proceedings. | 法院地国应善意地考虑转移刑事诉讼的请求。 |
| Such transfer shall only take place if the State of the official agrees to submit the case to its competent authorities for the purpose of prosecution. | 只有在官员所属国同意将案件提交其主管当局进行起诉的情况下，才能进行这种转移。 |
| 3. | 3. |
| Once a transfer has been agreed, the forum State shall suspend its criminal proceedings, without prejudice to the adoption or continuance of measures the absence of which would preclude subsequent criminal proceedings against the official. | 一旦同意转移，法院地国应暂停其刑事诉讼，但不妨碍采取或继续采取相关措施，以免以后无法对该官员提起刑事诉讼。 |
| 4. | 4. |
| The forum State may resume its criminal proceedings if, after the transfer, the State of the official does not promptly and in good faith submit the case to its competent authorities for the purpose of prosecution. | 如果在转移后，官员所属国没有善意地迅速将案件提交其主管当局进行起诉，法院地国可恢复其刑事诉讼。 |
| 5. | 5. |
| The present draft article is without prejudice to any other obligations of the forum State or the State of the official under international law. | 本条草案不妨碍法院地国或官员所属国根据国际法承担的任何其他义务。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) | (1) |
| Draft article 15 provides for the possibility of transferring criminal proceedings to the State of the official and regulates the conditions under which this may occur, as well as its effects. | 第15条草案规定了把刑事诉讼移交给官员所属国的可能性，并说明了可能出现这种情况的条件及其影响。 |
| (2) | (2) |
| The transfer of criminal proceedings is one of the mechanisms for cooperation and mutual legal assistance in criminal matters. Although not very widespread, it has been provided for in some multilateral international instruments. | 刑事诉讼程序的移交是刑事事项法律互助与合作的一种安排，虽然使用不是很普遍，但一些多边国际文书中已对此作出规定。 |
| Its importance is illustrated by the General Assembly’s adoption of the Model Treaty on the Transfer of Proceedings in Criminal Matters. | 联大通过了《刑事事项诉讼转移示范条约》，这证明了这一安排的重要性。 |
| This mechanism allows a State that is exercising jurisdiction over an individual to transfer the criminal proceedings to another State that also has jurisdiction and that, for various reasons, would be in a better position to exercise jurisdiction. | 该机制允许对某人行使管辖权的国家将刑事诉讼程序转交给同样具有管辖权、且由于各种原因将能更好行使管辖权的另一个国家。 |
| The transfer of proceedings is intended to ensure that jurisdiction is effectively exercised and that, where appropriate, the individual’s criminal responsibility can be established. | 移交诉讼程序的目的是确保有效行使管辖权，并在适当情况下确定相关个人的刑事责任。 |
| (3) | (3) |
| Although the international instruments governing the transfer of proceedings do not refer to the immunity of State officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction, there is nothing to prevent this mechanism from also being used in a context where the question of immunity arises. | 虽然关于诉讼程序移交的国际文书没有提到国家官员的外国刑事管辖问题，但在出现豁免问题的情况下，没有什么可以阻止这一安排的使用。 |
| Draft article 15 serves this purpose by permitting the transfer, to the State of the official, of proceedings instituted against him or her in the forum State. | 第15条草案就是为此目的服务的，允许把在法院地国启动的针对某官员的诉讼程序转交给官员所属国。 |
| Recourse to this instrument of cooperation ensures a balance between the rights and interests of the State of the official and those of the forum State, helping to preserve immunity while also ensuring that immunity does not prevent the effective exercise of criminal jurisdiction over the official. | 采用这种合作方式能确保官员所属国和法院地国在各自权利和利益上取得平衡，有助于维护豁免权，同时确保豁免权不会妨碍有效行使对官员的刑事管辖权。 |
| This formula is fully compatible with the position taken by the International Court of Justice in the case concerning the Arrest Warrant of 11 April 2000, in which it stated that immunity does not affect the international criminal responsibility of a State official, which may be established through the exercise of jurisdiction by the courts of the State of the official, by other courts or by an international criminal tribunal. | 这种方式与国际法院在2000年4月11日逮捕证案中所持的立场完全一致，即豁免不影响国家官员的国际刑事责任，管辖权可由官员所属国法院、其他法院或国际刑事法庭行使，以此确定官员的国际刑事责任。 |
| (4) | (4) |
| Draft article 15 refers only to the transfer of criminal proceedings from the forum State to the State of the official, since it is intended as a procedural safeguard operating between the States directly concerned by the present draft articles. | 第15条草案仅涉及将刑事诉讼程序由法院地国移交给官员所属国，这被视为在本条款草案直接涉及的国家之间运作的程序保障。 |
| This does not mean that the proceedings cannot be transferred to a third State under applicable rules on cooperation and mutual legal assistance in criminal matters, nor does it mean that the proceedings cannot be transferred to a competent international criminal court. | 这并不妨碍根据适用的刑事事项合作和司法互助规则将诉讼程序移交给第三国，也不妨碍将诉讼程序提交主管国际刑事法庭。 |
| However, the transfer of criminal proceedings to a third State or to an international criminal court must be carried out in accordance with the international rules applicable in each case and not in accordance with draft article 15, which establishes special rules for the transfer of criminal proceedings between the forum State and the State of the official in the context of the present draft articles. | 但是，将刑事诉讼移交给第三国或某一国际刑事法庭应按照适用于每种情况的国际标准进行，而不是按照第15条草案的规定进行，本条款草案仅为法院地国和官员所属国之间的刑事诉讼程序移交确立特别规则。 |
| (5) | (5) |
| Draft article 15 consists of five paragraphs, which set out the procedural steps to be followed in transferring criminal proceedings and the effects of such transfer (paras. 1–3) and establish two safeguards concerning the exercise of jurisdiction by the forum State (paras. 4 and 5). | 第15条草案分五款，其中说明刑事诉讼移交应遵循的程序及其效果(第1-3款)，并确立了涉及法院地国行使管辖权的两项保障措施(第4和5款)。 |
| Paragraph 1 | 第1款 |
| (6) | (6) |
| Paragraph 1 concerns the first phase of the transfer process, providing that “[t]he competent authorities of the forum State may … offer to transfer the criminal proceedings to the State of the official”. | 第1款界定了移交过程的第一阶段，指出“法院地国主管当局可…提出将刑事诉讼转移至官员所属国”。 |
| The transfer is therefore understood as a prerogative of the forum State and not as an obligation. | 因此，移交被理解为法院地国的权力，而不是义务。 |
| Moreover, this prerogative of the forum State is embodied in the offer to transfer and not in the transfer itself, which will take place only if the requirement set forth in the second sentence of paragraph 2 of the draft article is met. | 此外，赋予法院地国的权力体现在移交事宜的提出而非移交本身，只有在满足条款草案第2款第二句所述要求的情况下才能进行。 |
| Although some Commission members took the view that the use of the verb “offer” was unnecessary and that its deletion would not alter the meaning of the paragraph, the Commission decided to retain it in order to strengthen the connection between paragraph 1 and the condition established in paragraph 2 for the transfer to take place and, therefore, to make clear the consensual nature of the transfer procedure as a whole. | 虽然委员会一些委员认为使用动词“提出”是不必要的，而且删除该词不会改变该款的含义，但委员会决定保留该词，以加强第1款与第2款为确保移交有效而规定的条件之间的联系，从而明确整个移交程序的协商同意的性质。 |
| (7) | (7) |
| In accordance with paragraph 1, the offer may be made “proprio motu or at the request of the State of the official”. | 根据第1款，移交建议“可自行或应官员所属国请求”提出。 |
| Although the transfer procedure is likely to be initiated at the request of the State of the official, the Commission did not wish to rule out the possibility that it may be initiated by an authority of the forum State in exercise of its own powers. | 虽然移交程序有可能应官员所属国的请求启动，但委员会不希望排除应法院地国行使权力的当局的请求启动移交程序的可能性。 |
| In any event, the ultimate decision to “offer to transfer” is within the unilateral competence of the authorities of the forum State, subject to the clause contained in the first sentence of paragraph 2. | 无论如何，最终决定“提出[…]”是法院地国当局的单方面权限，但须遵守第2款第一句所载的规定。 |
| As in other draft articles, the term “competent authorities” includes any authority of the forum State, whether administrative, executive, prosecutorial or judicial. | 与其他条款草案一样，“主管当局”涵盖法院地国的任何当局，无论是行政当局、执行当局、检察机关还是司法机构。 |
| (8) | (8) |
| Paragraph 1 does not mention the rules that should govern the adoption of a decision to offer to transfer the proceedings, but this should not be taken to mean that such a decision is discretionary in absolute terms. | 第1款没有提及关于提出移交诉讼程序的决定的规则，这不能被解释为该决定在绝对意义上是自由裁量性质的。 |
| Rather, the competent authorities referred to in this paragraph, like all State authorities, will be bound by the law applicable in the State, which includes both the rules of national law and the rules of international law that are enforceable against the forum State. | 相反，与任何国家权力机构一样，本款所述的主管当局受国家适用法律的约束，既包括本国法律规则，也包括对法院地国适用的国际法规则。 |
| This is particularly relevant in cases where the proceedings to be transferred relate to the commission of crimes under international law in respect of which the State has an obligation to exercise jurisdiction under international law. | 如果移交的诉讼程序事关国际法范畴内的罪行，因而相关国家有义务根据国际法规则行使管辖权，在这种情况下，上述要点尤其重要。 |
| This circumstance has been particularly taken into account by the Commission, which included paragraph 5 to address this specific problem. | 委员会特别考虑到了这一情形，才列入第5款，以应对这一具体问题。 |
| (9) | (9) |
| Lastly, it should be noted that the offer to transfer the criminal proceedings is an autonomous act that does not require the authorities of the forum State to first decline to exercise their jurisdiction. | 最后，应该强调的是，提出移交刑事诉讼，是单独的一类情况，不要求法院地国当局事先不行使其管辖权。 |
| The Commission noted that, in a recent case that it examined for the purpose of preparing this draft article, the competent authorities of the forum State took the view that they were delegating, rather than relinquishing, the exercise of their own jurisdiction. | 委员会考虑到，在最近为起草本条草案审议的案件中，法院地国主管当局认为自己没有放弃管辖权，而是正在授权他人行使自己的管辖权。 |
| For this reason, the Commission decided to retain only the reference to the offer to transfer, on the understanding that this implies that the competent authorities of the forum State will not be obliged to take a prior decision on the exercise of their own jurisdiction. | 因此，委员会决定仅保留关于提出移交的表述，有一项谅解是，这意味着法院地国主管当局没有义务事先就行使其管辖权作出决定。 |
| This reflects the diversity of existing models in national legal systems and is consistent with the safeguard clause contained in paragraph 4, which provides for the resumption of criminal proceedings by the forum State. | 这是考虑到各国法律制度中现有模式的多样性，与第4款所载的关于法院地国可重新启动刑事诉讼的保障条款是一致的。 |
| Paragraph 2 | 第2款 |
| (10) | (10) |
| Although the forum State is not obliged to offer to transfer the proceedings, paragraph 2 imposes an obligation on the forum State to consider any request for transfer in good faith. | 虽然法院地国没有义务提出移交诉讼程序，但第2款规定法院地国有义务善意地考虑任何移交请求。 |
| It is understood that such a request for transfer will have to come from the State of the official, in view of the relationship between paragraph 1 and paragraph 2 referred to above. | 考虑到上文提到的第1款和第2款之间的关系，这种移交请求应被理解为须由官员所属国提出。 |
| This obligation makes good faith the essential principle that will govern the relations between the State of the official and the forum State with regard to the transfer of criminal proceedings, being equally applicable to both States. | 这项义务使善意原则成为调节官员所属国与法院地国之间在移交刑事诉讼问题上的关系的基本原则，适用于这两个国家。 |
| (11) | (11) |
| The reference to good faith in the first sentence of paragraph 2 is of special significance when read in conjunction with the second sentence of that paragraph, according to which the transfer will only take place “if the State of the official agrees to submit the case to its competent authorities for the purpose of prosecution”. | 第2款第一句中提到的善意在与第2款第二句有关时特别重要，根据第二句的规定，“只有在官员所属国同意将案件提交其主管当局进行起诉的情况下”，才能进行这种转移。 |
| This wording reproduces what is known as the “Hague formula”, which appeared for the first time in article 7 of the 1970 Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Seizure of Aircraft, and which has subsequently been reproduced in many conventions. | 该措辞沿用了1970年《关于制止非法劫持航空器的公约》 第7条首次列入的所谓“海牙模式”，随后用在许多公约中。 |
| This “formula” was examined by the Commission in its work on the obligation to extradite or prosecute (aut dedere aut judicare) and on the prevention and punishment of crimes against humanity. | 委员会在其关于引渡或起诉义务(aut dedere aut iudicare) 以及关于预防和惩治危害人类罪的工作 中审议了这一模式。 |
| The wording of this phrase in draft article 15 is identical to that of draft article 10 of the draft articles on prevention and punishment of crimes against humanity, although the latter draft article deals with the obligation to extradite or prosecute. | 现在列入第15条草案的案文与防止及惩治危害人类罪条款草案第10条案文相同，虽然该条草案是在引渡或起诉义务的框架内通过的。 |
| (12) | (12) |
| As indicated by the Commission in its work on the aforementioned two topics, the submission of the case to the competent authorities should be understood as a substantive and not merely formalistic measure. | 委员会在上述两个专题下开展工作时已表示，将案件提交主管当局应被视为实质性的，而不仅仅是形式上提交。 |
| This means that the State of the official has an obligation to transmit all available evidentiary and other information to its competent authorities, so that they may evaluate it and conduct an investigation that will enable them to form a judgment on whether to initiate proceedings against the official. | 这种提交意味着，官员所属国有义务将所有可用证据和其他信息转递给其主管当局，使其能够评估证据并进行调查，从而能够就对官员提起诉讼一事作出判断。 |
| However, the submission of the case for prosecution does not amount to an obligation to initiate such proceedings, as the decision on whether to do so will depend on the evaluation of the evidence submitted and other available information, as well as the evidence obtained in the investigation to be carried out by the competent authorities. | 但是，将案件提交起诉，并不构成启动此类程序的义务，因为这将取决于对提交的证据和其他可用信息以及主管当局必须进行的调查中获得的证据进行评估的结果。 |
| In any event, the submission of the case to the competent authorities must, at the very least, be done in good faith and not for the purpose of blocking prosecution or preventing the establishment of the official’s responsibility; | 无论如何，应该记得，将案件提交主管当局至少应本着善意进行，而不是为了阻止起诉或让官员逃避责任。 |
| as the International Court of Justice stated in the case concerning Questions relating to the Obligation to Prosecute or Extradite (Belgium v. Senegal), the exercise of jurisdiction by the State concerned (in this case the State of the official) must be carried out for the purpose of ensuring that the individual (in this case the official) will not go unpunished. | 国际法院在关于起诉或引渡义务问题的案件(比利时诉塞内加尔)中确认，有关国家(在此案中是官员所属国)行使管辖权时必须确保相关个人(在此案中是所涉官员)将受到惩罚。 |
| In this regard, it should be recalled that draft article 10 of the draft articles on prevention and punishment of crimes against humanity expressly provides that the competent authorities to whom the matter is referred “shall take their decision [whether or not to initiate criminal proceedings] in the same manner as in the case of any other offence of a grave nature under the law of that State”. | 在这方面，应该记得，防止及惩治危害人类罪条款草案第10条草案明确规定，接到案件的主管当局“应以处理该国法律定为性质严重的任何其他罪行的相同方式作出[是否启动刑事诉讼的]决定。 |
| The phrase “submit the case … for the purpose of prosecution” has similarly to be interpreted in a substantive manner and with the ultimate purpose in mind. | ” 对于“将案件提交起诉”这一短语，须同样地作出实质性解释，同时不忘最终目的。 |
| (13) | (13) |
| The interpretation of the obligation of the official’s State to act in good faith in submitting the case to its national authorities is of particular importance in relation to draft article 15, paragraph 4, to which the above comments apply. | 对官员所属国善意地将案件提交其国家主管当局的义务的解释对第15条草案第4款而言特别重要，上述评论适用于第15条草案第4款。 |
| Paragraph 3 | 第3款 |
| (14) | (14) |
| Paragraph 3 provides for the suspension of criminal proceedings in the forum State as a consequence of the transfer. | 第3款规定，一旦同意转移，法院地国应暂停其刑事诉讼。 |
| Such suspension will only occur when the transfer has been agreed and, in any case, will be limited in scope by the “without prejudice” clause included at the end of the paragraph. | 刑事诉讼只有在商定移交事宜后才暂停，并且在任何情况下，暂停的范围均受本款末尾的“不妨碍”条款的限制。 |
| The wording of the “without prejudice” clause is identical to that of paragraph 4 (b) of draft article 14 and serves the same purpose. | “不妨碍”条款的措词与第14条草案第4款(b)项中的措词相同，目的也相同。 |
| Therefore, reference is made to the commentary to that provision as to the clause’s meaning and scope. | 因此，关于该规定的含义和范围，拟参考该规定的评注。 |
| Paragraph 4 | 第4款 |
| (15) | (15) |
| Paragraph 4 is intended as a safeguard clause in favour of the forum State, which, despite having transferred the criminal proceedings to the State of the official and suspended its own criminal proceedings, may resume them if the State of the official does not adequately fulfil the obligation to submit the case to its competent authorities for the purpose of prosecution. | 第4款被理解为是顾及法院地国利益的保障条款，尽管法院地国已将刑事诉讼程序移交给官员所属国并已暂停其自己的刑事诉讼程序，但如果官员所属国没有充分履行将案件提交其主管当局起诉的义务，则法院地国可以恢复诉讼程序。 |
| (16) | (16) |
| Although the Commission considered different formulations drawn essentially from article 17, paragraphs 1 and 2, of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, it finally decided to draft the safeguard clause in a simple way that avoids subjective components and allows a direct link to be established with paragraph 2 of this draft article. | 委员会虽然审议了主要受《国际刑事法院罗马规约》第十七条第一和第二款启发的各种表述， 但最后决定以简单的方式提出保障条款，以避免主观成分，并与本条草案第2款建立直接联系。 |
| This ensures that if the State of the official fails to fulfil the obligation it has undertaken to submit the case to its competent authorities for the purpose of prosecution, the forum State will be able to reactivate its criminal proceedings. | 这确保以下一点：如果官员所属国未能履行其接受的将案件提交其主管当局起诉的义务，那么法院地国就可恢复其刑事诉讼。 |
| The expression “may resume” emphasizes the optional nature of this power of the forum State. | 使用“可恢复”一词强调承认法院地国的权力的任择性质。 |
| The aim is to reflect the different situations in which the forum State may find itself depending on the nature of the crime committed by the official and the circumstances of the crime, in particular its gravity and, especially, its possible classification as a crime under international law, a category of crimes that cannot be allowed to go unpunished. | 这是为了反映法院地国可能所处的不同状况，因为这要取决于官员所犯罪行的性质以及犯罪的情形，如罪行的严重性，特别是所涉罪行是否可能被定性为国际法范畴内的罪行，如果是，则必须确保实施者不得有罪不罚。 |
| (17) | (17) |
| Paragraph 4 expressly mentions, as a factor indicating a breach of the obligation, failure to “promptly and in good faith submit the case” to the competent authorities of the State of the official for the purpose of prosecution. | 第4款明确提到表示违反义务的一个因素是“没有善意地迅速”将案件提交官员所属国主管当局进行起诉。 |
| This wording is meant to draw attention to the requirement to avoid any delaying tactics or merely formalistic submissions that would be contrary to the purpose of the transfer of proceedings. | 这是为了提请注意避免拖延做法或仅仅流于形式，而这样做将有悖于移交程序的目的。 |
| Paragraph 5 | 第5款 |
| (18) | (18) |
| Paragraph 5 contains a “without prejudice” clause stating that draft article 15 is “without prejudice to any other obligations of the forum State or the State of the official under international law”. | 第5款载有“不妨碍”条款，其中规定，第15条草案“不妨碍法院地国或官员所属国根据国际法承担的任何其他义务”。 |
| (19) | (19) |
| This paragraph is meant to address the concern expressed, during the debate on draft article 15, that the provision on the transfer of criminal proceedings might not be fully compatible or might even be in contradiction with various rules of international law that impose a primary obligation on States to exercise jurisdiction over individuals who have committed certain crimes under international law. | 该款对关于第15条草案的讨论中表达的关切作出回应，曾表示的关切是，刑事诉讼移交机制可能与国际法各项规则不完全兼容，甚至有矛盾，这些规则规定各国负有主要义务，必须对犯有国际法范畴内的某些罪行的人行使管辖权。 |
| The discussion focused, in particular, on the obligation to extradite or prosecute established in article 7 of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment and the interpretation given to it by the International Court of Justice in the case concerning Questions relating to the Obligation to Prosecute or Extradite. | 讨论特别侧重于《禁止酷刑和其他残忍、不人道或有辱人格的待遇或处罚公约》第7条规定的引渡或起诉义务，以及国际刑事法院在与起诉或引渡义务问题有关的案件中对这一义务的解释。 |
| Since the Court has defined the obligation to prosecute as a treaty obligation, and extradition as an option, a question arose as to whether the system for the transfer of criminal proceedings established in draft article 15, which does not make the transfer contingent on an inability of the forum State to exercise its jurisdiction, is in conformity with the obligations voluntarily accepted by the States parties to the Convention against Torture. | 由于法院已将审判义务界定为条约义务，并将引渡视为一种替代办法， 由此产生的一个问题是，第15条草案规定的刑事诉讼移交机制不以法院地国无法行使管辖权为条件，这样是否符合《禁止酷刑公约》缔约国自愿接受的义务。 |
| (20) | (20) |
| In view of this special problem, the Commission has included a “without prejudice” clause to be applied in connection with the transfer of criminal proceedings. | 考虑到这一特殊问题，委员会列入了“不妨碍”条款，该条款将适用于刑事诉讼的移交。 |
| This clause applies both to obligations owed by the forum State and to those owed by the State of the official and is not subject to limitations. It therefore applies in respect of any obligation arising under international law, irrespective of its source or the subject matter to which it relates. | 该条款既适用于法院地国应承担的义务，也适用于官员所属国应承担的义务，不受任何限制，适用于根据国际法产生的任何义务，无论来源或主题为何。 |
| Article 16 Fair treatment of the State official | 第16条 公平对待国家官员 |
| 1. | 1. |
| An official of another State over whom the criminal jurisdiction of the forum State is exercised or could be exercised shall be guaranteed fair treatment, including a fair trial, and full protection of his or her rights and procedural guarantees under applicable national and international law, including human rights law and international humanitarian law. | 应保障法院地国对之行使或可能行使刑事管辖权的另一国官员受到公平对待，包括公平审判、对其权利的充分保护以及适用的国内法和国际法、包括人权法和国际人道法所规定的程序保障。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| Any such official who is in prison, custody or detention in the forum State shall be entitled: | 在法院地国被监禁、羁押或拘留的任何此类官员应有权： |
| (a) | (a) |
| to communicate without delay with the nearest appropriate representative of the State of the official; | 立即联络该官员所属国最近的适当代表； |
| (b) | (b) |
| to be visited by a representative of that State; | 受到该国代表的探视； |
| and | 以及 |
| (c) | (c) |
| to be informed without delay of his or her rights under this paragraph. | 立即被告知其根据本款所享有的权利。 |
| 3. | 3. |
| The rights referred to in paragraph 2 shall be exercised in conformity with the laws and regulations of the forum State, subject to the proviso that the said laws and regulations must enable full effect to be given to the purpose for which the rights referred to in paragraph 2 are intended. | 第2款所述各项权利的行使应符合法院地国的法律和规章，但这些法律和规章必须能使第2款所述权利的预期目的得到充分实现。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) | (1) |
| Draft article 16 recognizes the right of an official of another State to be treated fairly by the authorities of the forum State that are exercising or have exercised jurisdiction over that official. | 第16条草案承认另一国官员有权得到对其行使或可能行使管辖权的法院地国当局的公平对待。 |
| The Commission has opted for an approach centred on the official, whose rights are recognized, rather than the mere enumeration of obligations owed by the forum State. | 委员会选择从承认官员的权利着手，而不仅仅是列出要求法院地国承担的义务。 |
| This more adequately reflects the eminently personal nature of the rights and guarantees set forth in the draft article. | 通过这种方式，本条草案中所列权利和保障的显著个人性质得到了更充分的反映。 |
| This approach is reflected both in the title of the draft article (Fair treatment of the State official) and in its paragraphs 1 and 2, which begin, respectively, with the words “[a]n official … shall be guaranteed” and “[a]ny such official … shall be entitled”. | 这一点反映在条款草案的标题(公平对待国家官员)及其第1和第2款中，措辞分别为“应保障…官员”和“任何此类官员应有权”。 |
| The rights enjoyed by the State official are encompassed under the general heading of “fair treatment”, on the understanding that this expression necessarily includes the requirements of impartiality and independence. | 承认国家官员享有的所有权利都包含在“公平对待”的范畴之内，有一项谅解是，这一表述必然涵盖公正性和独立性的要求。 |
| (2) | (2) |
| The recognition of the official’s right to fair treatment is an additional safeguard supplementing those already listed in draft articles 9 to 15. | 承认官员享有公平待遇的权利，是对第9至15条草案所列保障的补充。 |
| This safeguard applies to the official, insofar as the rights listed in draft article 16 are of an individual nature. | 鉴于第16条草案所载的权利具有个人性质，这一保障是对官员而言的。 |
| It should nonetheless be recalled that these safeguards apply to the official in his or her capacity as such and are therefore also safeguards for the official’s State. | 但是，应该记得，这些保障适用于担任国家职务的官员，从而也构成为官员所属国提供的保障。 |
| This draft article thus responds to the concerns expressed by some States regarding the possibility that one of their officials might be subjected to the jurisdiction of a State whose legal system does not provide sufficient guarantees of respect for human rights, especially the rights and guarantees inherent in the notion of a fair trial. | 因此，本条草案回应了一些国家提出的关切，这些国家担心其一名官员可能受到另一国的管辖，而另一国法律制度没有充分保障尊重人权，特别是接受公平审判的权利和保障。 |
| (3) | (3) |
| Draft article 16 draws upon and echoes the wording of draft article 11 of the draft articles on prevention and punishment of crimes against humanity. | 第16条草案受防止及惩治危害人类罪条款草案 第11条草案的启发，基本上沿用其措辞。 |
| Like that draft article, draft article 16 consists of three paragraphs concerning, respectively, the recognition of the general procedural rights and guarantees that any individual may enjoy (para. 1); | 与该条草案一样，第16条草案也分三款，分别涉及承认所有人可享有的一般权利和程序保障(第1款)； |
| special recognition of a set of rights enjoyed by a State official who is in prison, custody or detention in the forum State (para. 2); | 特别承认在法院地国被监禁、羁押或拘留的官员享有的一系列权利(第2款)； |
| and the rules applicable to the exercise of the special rights set forth in paragraph 2 (para. 3). | 并确定行使第2款所述的特别权利的适用规则(第3款)。 |
| However, while draft article 16 follows the structure of the aforementioned draft article 11, there are drafting and conceptual differences corresponding to elements that are specific to the present draft articles. | 但是，第16条草案虽然沿用了上述第11条草案的结构，但在措词和概念上存在差异，这是本条草案的独特要素所决定的。 |
| (4) | (4) |
| Paragraph 1 provides that “[a]n official of another State … shall be guaranteed fair treatment, including a fair trial, and full protection of his or her rights and procedural guarantees”. | 第1款规定，“应保障…另一国官员受到公平对待，包括公平审判、对其权利的充分保护以及…程序保障”。 |
| This generic statement includes all the rights and guarantees enjoyed by any individual in relation to any measure taken against him or her by the authorities of the forum State. These include rights relating to personal liberty or deprivation thereof and the various components of the right of access to the courts and the right to a fair trial, including the right of a person accused of a crime to be informed of the charges against him or her, to be assisted by counsel of his or her own choosing and to communicate with the authorities of the forum State in a language he or she understands. | 这一笼统的表述涵盖与法院地国当局可能对官员采取的任何行动有关的任何人的所有权利和保障，其中包括与人身自由或剥夺人身自由有关的权利，以及诉诸法院的权利和获得公平审判的权利的不同组成部分，包括被控犯有刑事罪的人有权被告知对其的指控，有权获得自己选择的律师的协助，有权以自己懂的语言与法院地国当局沟通。 |
| The category of rights and procedural guarantees also includes the various components of the right to consular assistance recognized in article 36 of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations. | 权利和程序保障也包括《维也纳领事关系公约》第三十六条承认的得到领事协助的权利各项组成部分的内容。 |
| This right is enjoyed by any national of a State whether or not he or she has the status of an official within the meaning of the present draft articles. | 一国的任何国民都享有这项权利，无论是否具有本条款草案所指的官员身份。 |
| (5) | (5) |
| The rights and procedural guarantees referred to in draft article 16, paragraph 1, and the conditions in which their exercise must be ensured and protected are those set forth in the national law of the forum State and international law. | 第16条草案第1款所述的权利和程序保障，以及确保和保护其行使的条件，是法院地国国内法和国际法所规定的。 |
| In particular, human rights law and international humanitarian law define the applicable international standard, the meaning of which has already been established by the Commission in relation to draft article 11 of the draft articles on prevention and punishment of crimes against humanity. | 具体地说，人权法和国际人道法界定了适用的国际标准，委员会在论及防止及惩治危害人类罪条款草案第11条草案时已确定了国际标准的含义。 |
| Although the relevant international standards usually refer to “rights” or “rights and guarantees”, the term “rights and procedural guarantees” has been used in paragraph 1 to accommodate the variety of circumstances in which these must be ensured in respect of a foreign official, which are not limited to judicial proceedings. | 虽然有关国际标准通常提及“权利”或“权利和保障”，但第1款中使用了“权利和程序保障”，这是为了顾及外国官员需要得到保障的各种情况，不仅限于法律诉讼。 |
| (6) | (6) |
| With regard to this last issue, the Commission did not consider it necessary to include in the draft article an express reference to the different stages or points in time at which the authorities of the forum State must ensure respect for the official’s rights and procedural guarantees. | 关于后一个问题，委员会认为没有必要在条款草案中明确提及法院地国当局在何阶段或时间必须确保官员的权利和程序保障。 |
| These rights and guarantees must be safeguarded and protected whenever those authorities take any action with respect to the official of another State, both in the period prior to the determination of immunity and during and after the process of determining immunity, including the prosecution of the official and the enforcement of any sentence imposed on him or her. | 法院地国当局在确定豁免之前、之后以及在确定豁免的过程中对另一国官员采取任何行动时，包括在对官员进行起诉和对其执行判决的阶段，都应确保和保护这些权利和程序保障。 |
| (7) | (7) |
| Paragraph 2 establishes a new right that is accorded to an official of another State who is under any form of imprisonment, custody or detention in the forum State. | 第2款确立了被法院地国当局以任何方式监禁、羁押或拘留的另一国官员享有的一项新权利。 |
| Its wording is modelled on draft article 11, paragraph 2, of the draft articles on prevention and punishment of crimes against humanity, but some significant changes have been introduced, in particular the deletion of any reference to ties of nationality or residence between the official and the official’s State. | 该款的措辞沿用防止及惩治危害人类罪条款草案第11条草案第2款的模式，但有重大调整，特别是删除提及官员与官员所属国之间在国籍或居住方面可能存在的关系之处。 |
| This is because the special rights articulated in paragraph 2 of draft article 16 are distinct from the right to consular assistance, which is understood to be included among the rights and procedural guarantees referred to in paragraph 1 and will apply in all circumstances. | 这是因为第16条草案第2款规定的特殊权利与获得领事协助的权利不同，获得领事协助的权利应被理解为包含在第1款提及的权利和程序保障之中，在任何情况中均适用。 |
| (8) | (8) |
| Although the right to consular assistance applies to any State official who is a national of that State, the Commission has borne in mind that, under the definition of “State official” contained in draft article 2, subparagraph (a), the official need not necessarily be a national of the State, in which case he or she would not be covered by the right to consular assistance by the State of the official. | 尽管获得领事协助的权利适用于作为一国国民的任何官员，但委员会注意到，根据第2条草案(a)项所载的“国家官员”的定义，官员不一定具有相关国家的国籍，在这种情况下，获得官员所属国领事协助的权利不包括在内。 |
| It has also taken account of the fact that an official’s immunity from foreign criminal jurisdiction is recognized for the benefit of the State and by virtue of the special relationship between the official and the official’s State, which should have a special bearing on the rights and procedural guarantees to which the official is entitled. | 此外，委员会还考虑到官员的外国刑事管辖是为了国家的利益而给予官员的，是由于官员与其所属国之间的特殊关系，这应该对官员的权利和程序保障有特别的影响。 |
| For this reason, the Commission considered it useful to include, in the draft article on fair treatment of the State official, a special provision creating certain rights that operate solely by virtue of the relationship between the State and its official. | 因此，委员会认为，有必要在关于公平对待国家官员的条款草案中列入一项特别规定，创立仅由于国家与其官员之间的关系而存在的某些权利。 |
| These additional rights are linked to cases in which the official is in prison, custody or detention in the forum State, as this is the most extreme scenario in which the forum State’s exercise of jurisdiction over a foreign official can have an adverse impact on the performance of his or her State functions or representation of the State and, therefore, on immunity. | 这些额外权利与官员在法院地国被监禁、羁押或拘留的情况有关，这是法院地国对外国官员行使管辖权的最终情况，可能对官员为本国履行国家职能或代表国家行事产生不利影响，从而也对豁免权产生不利影响。 |
| (9) | (9) |
| Paragraph 2 of the draft article begins with the words “[a]ny such official” to reinforce the link with paragraph 1. The two paragraphs must be read together for a proper understanding of the scope of the concept of “fair treatment of the State official”. | 该条草案第2款提及“任何此类官员”，重点说明与第1款的联系，这两款构成理解“公平对待国家官员”概念范围的一个整体。 |
| In defining the content of the special rights accorded to an official of another State, draft article 11 of the draft articles on prevention and punishment of crimes against humanity was used as a model. | 在确定赋予另一国官员的特殊权利的内容时，委员会沿用了防止及惩治危害人类罪条款草案第11条草案的模式。 |
| As noted in the preceding paragraph, the Commission considered that ensuring that the foreign official can communicate with and be visited by the nearest appropriate representative of his or her State, and be informed of these rights, constitutes a safeguard both for the official and for the official’s State. | 如第2款所述，应确保外国官员能够与其所属国最近的适当代表联系，接受其探视，并获得有关这些权利的信息，在委员会看来，这些构成了为官员和其所属国提供的保障。 |
| (10) | (10) |
| Paragraph 3 reproduces almost verbatim the corresponding paragraph of the above-mentioned draft article 11, which in turn is based on article 36, paragraph 2, of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations. | 第3款几乎逐字复制了上述第11条草案相应一款的内容，而后者复制了《维也纳领事关系公约》第三十六条第二款的案文。 |
| It must be noted that, for the sake of consistency with the terminology used in the present draft articles, paragraph 3 refers to applicable law as the laws and regulations “of the forum State”. | 必须指出，为了与本条款草案中使用的术语保持一致，第3款提及“法院地国”的法律和规章为适用的法律。 |
| Pursuant to this paragraph, national law is identified as the applicable law for the exercise of the special rights set forth in paragraph 2, given that the precise manner in which individuals are arrested, detained or imprisoned is, to a large extent, governed by national rules. | 第3款指出，国内法是适用于行使第2款所述的特殊权利的法律，这是考虑到对某人进行监禁、羁押或拘留的确切方式在很大程度上依据国家规范。 |
| Therefore, the manner in which such an individual may exercise the rights to receive information and to communicate with or be visited by the appropriate representatives of another State may vary from one State to another. | 因此，相关人士接收信息、与另一国适当代表联系或接受另一国代表的探视的权利的行使方式可能因国家而异。 |
| However, the recognition of this diversity and the resulting margin of discretion of the forum State are limited by the last phrase of paragraph 3, which states that the application of national law is “subject to the proviso that the said laws and regulations must enable full effect to be given to the purpose for which the rights referred to in paragraph 2 are intended”. | 尽管如此，对情况多样的承认以及由此产生的法院地国的自由裁量范围受到第3款最后一句中规定的限制。 最后一句指出，国家法律的适用“必须能使第2款所述权利的预期目的得到充分实现”。 |
| This criterion of interpretation in accordance with the intended purpose is designed to ensure that the forum State will not apply its laws and regulations in an arbitrary manner that would, in practice, impair the rights to which the official of another State is entitled under paragraph 2 of the draft article. | 这一依据最终目的的解释标准旨在确保法院地国不任意行使本国法律和规章，从而使该条草案第2款规定的另一国官员的权利在实践中无效。 |
| Article 17 Consultations | 第17条 协商 |
| The forum State and the State of the official shall consult, as appropriate, at the request of either of them, on matters relating to the immunity of an official covered by the present draft articles. | 法院地国和官员所属国应在彼此任何一方的请求下，酌情就本条款草案所涉及的官员豁免事宜进行协商。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) | (1) |
| Draft article 17 concerns consultations between the forum State and the State of the official. | 第17条草案涉及法院地国与官员所属国之间的协商。 |
| Consultations are a mechanism that is commonly used for different purposes in inter-State relations. | 协商是国家间关系中通常用于各种不同目的的做法。 |
| Consultations are held in particular, though not exclusively, to obtain information on matters of common interest, to seek the views of another State on such matters, to identify ways of avoiding a dispute between two States or to facilitate a solution to a dispute that has already arisen. | 具体而言，通过协商就共同关心的问题获取信息，了解另一国在这些问题上的立场，以确定避免两国间发生争端或推动解决已经发生的争端的方式。 但协商的作用不限于上述例子。 |
| The obligation for the States concerned to hold consultations has been included in numerous international treaties and in treaties on international cooperation and legal assistance in criminal matters. | 有关国家之间进行协商的义务已列入许多国际条约，并已列入刑事事项国际合作和法律援助条约。 |
| (2) | (2) |
| The consultations referred to in draft article 17 are not limited to a specific area and may concern all “matters relating to the immunity of an official covered by the present draft articles”. | 第17条草案中提及的协商不仅限于某一特定主题，而可能事关“本条款草案所涉及的官员豁免事宜”。 |
| Consultations may therefore relate both to the process of determining immunity and to any other issue related to immunity, including the normative elements that define immunity ratione personae (Part Two) and immunity ratione materiae (Part Three), as well as procedural provisions and safeguards (Part Four). | 因此，协商可能涉及确定豁免的过程和与豁免有关的任何其他问题，包括界定属人豁免(第二部分)和属事豁免(第三部分)的规范性要素，以及程序规定和保障(第四部分)。 |
| Consultations should thus be distinguished from the “requests for information” provided for in draft article 13, which are limited to the information necessary for the determination of immunity by the forum State and the decision on the invocation or waiver of immunity by the State of the official. | 协商应有别于第13条草案中的“请求提供信息”，“请求提供信息”仅限于法院地国确定豁免以及官员所属国决定援引或放弃豁免所需的信息。 |
| (3) | (3) |
| Consultations are a procedural safeguard for both the State of the official and the forum State and may therefore be held at the request of either State. | 协商是一种程序性保障，适用于官员所属国和法院地国，应任何一方的请求进行。 |
| Given that consultations are considered a procedural safeguard, the Commission decided to use the word “shall” to denote the obligatory nature of the consultations. | 作为程序保障，委员会选择使用“应”字，这表明协商是强制性的。 |
| However, the phrase “as appropriate” was also included to introduce an element of flexibility that allows the forum State and the State of the official to adapt to the circumstances of each specific case, including the situation of their diplomatic relations. | 但是，该条草案中包含“酌情”一词，以引入灵活性要素，使法院地国和官员所属国能够根据每个具体案件的情况作调整，包括其外交关系状况。 |
| The use of this flexibility formula does not change the obligatory nature of the consultations, nor does it mean that recourse to such consultations is merely recommended. | 采用这种显示灵活性的表述不改变协商的强制性，也不会将协商的义务仅仅作为建议来提出。 |
| (4) | (4) |
| The Commission did not consider it necessary to establish any procedure for consultations, preferring instead to preserve the extremely flexible nature of this mechanism. | 委员会认为没有必要制定任何协商程序，以保持该机制的高度灵活性。 |
| (5) | (5) |
| Lastly, it should be emphasized that consultations do not in themselves constitute a dispute settlement system, nor is their function exclusively related to dispute settlement. | 最后，应该强调的是，协商本身并不构成解决争端的方式，其作用也并非仅仅与解决争端有关。 |
| However, there is nothing to prevent consultations from being held in the context of an ongoing or emerging dispute between the forum State and the State of the official. | 尽管如此，没有什么可以阻止在法院地国与官员所属国之间正在发生或正在出现争端的背景下进行协商。 |
| For this reason, the draft article on consultations has been placed at the end of Part Four of the draft articles, immediately before the draft article on the settlement of disputes. | 因此，委员会将关于协商的条款草案列入条款草案第四部分末尾，放在关于争端的解决的条款草案之前。 |
| Article 18 Settlement of disputes | 第18条 争端的解决 |
| 1. | 1. |
| In the event of a dispute concerning the interpretation or application of the present draft articles, the forum State and the State of the official shall seek a solution by negotiation or other peaceful means of their own choice. | 如对本条款草案的解释或适用发生争端，法院地国和官员所属国应通过谈判或其自行选择的其他和平手段寻求解决办法。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| If a mutually acceptable solution cannot be reached within a reasonable time, the dispute shall, at the request of either the forum State or the State of the official, be submitted to the International Court of Justice, unless both States have agreed to submit the dispute to arbitration or to any other means of settlement entailing a binding decision. | 如在合理时间内无法达成双方均能接受的解决办法，则应在法院地国或官员所属国的请求下，将争端提交国际法院，除非两国同意将争端提交仲裁或可作出具有约束力的裁决的任何其他解决手段。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) | (1) |
| Draft article 18 is the last of the provisions in Part Four of the draft articles and concerns the settlement of any disputes that may arise between the forum State and the State of the official. | 第18条草案是条款草案第四部分的最后一项规定，用于解决法院地国与官员所属国之间可能产生的争端。 |
| (2) | (2) |
| The practice generally followed by the Commission to date has been not to include dispute settlement provisions in its draft articles, leaving the matter to be decided by States at a later stage. | 迄今为止委员会的一般做法是不在其条款草案中列入关于争端的解决的规定，将该问题留待各国决定。 |
| However, the recent draft articles on prevention and punishment of crimes against humanity include draft article 15 on the settlement of disputes, which was justified by the fact that the draft articles were conceived by the Commission as a draft treaty. | 但是，最近防止及惩治危害人类罪条款草案含有关于争端的解决的第15条草案。 根据委员会的设想，该条款草案将作为条约草案，有鉴于此，列入关于争端的解决的规定是有道理的。 |
| (3) | (3) |
| Since the Commission has not yet decided whether to recommend to the General Assembly that the present draft articles be used as a basis for the negotiation of a treaty, different views have been expressed on the advisability of including draft article 18. | 鉴于对是否建议大会将本条款草案作为条约谈判的基础，委员会尚未作出决定，故委员们对是否应将第18条草案纳入条款草案中表达了各种不同意见。 |
| The Commission nevertheless considered it preferable to include a draft article on dispute settlement, for several reasons. | 尽管如此，委员会还是认为，出于好几项原因，最好列入关于争端的解决的条文草案。 |
| Among them is a wish to encourage States to express their views in this regard by commenting on the draft article, which would not have been possible if it had not been included until the draft articles’ adoption on second reading. | 其中一个原因是，委员会希望鼓励各国对该条文草案发表评论从而表达出它们在这方面的意见，如果在二读通过条款草案时才列入该条文草案，那样就不可能了。 |
| (4) | (4) |
| A further consideration is that draft article 18 follows the logic underpinning the content and structure of Part Four of the draft articles. | 另一因素是考虑到第18条草案采用的逻辑方法为条款草案第四部分的内容和结构提供了启示。 |
| The procedural provisions and safeguards contained in Part Four are intended, inter alia, to help create conditions of trust between the forum State and the State of the official that will eliminate or reduce the possibility that a dispute may arise in connection with the immunity of a particular official from foreign criminal jurisdiction. | 第四部分所载的规定和程序保障除为了服务其他目的外，旨在帮助法院地国与官员所属国创造信任条件，以避免或减少出现与特定官员的外国刑事管辖豁免有关的争端的可能性。 |
| If such a dispute were nonetheless to arise, it could only be resolved through the means of peaceful settlement accepted in contemporary international law. | 但是，如果发生这种争端，只能通过当代国际法接受的和平解决争端的手段来解决。 |
| The Commission has therefore considered it useful to include draft article 18 as the final step in the iter or logical sequence that serves as the common thread running through Part Four of the draft articles. | 因此，委员会认为有必要列入第18条草案，作为所述事项或逻辑序列的最后一项，也是条款草案第四部分的共同主线。 |
| (5) | (5) |
| In order to ensure consistency in its work, the Commission has taken into account the text of draft article 15 of the above-mentioned draft articles on prevention and punishment of crimes against humanity, the basic elements of which are reflected in draft article 18 of the present draft articles. | 为了确保工作一致性，委员会考虑到上文提到的防止及惩治危害人类罪条款草案第15条的案文，其基本要素已反映在本条草案中。 |
| However, the wording adopted by the Commission differs in some respects from that earlier text, in order to reflect certain features specific to the dispute settlement system applicable in relation to the immunity of State officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction. | 然而，委员会通过的案文采用了部分不同的措辞，以反映适用于国家官员外国刑事管辖豁免的争端解决制度的某些特点。 |
| (6) | (6) |
| Paragraph 1 of the draft article establishes the obligation to settle by peaceful means any dispute arising between the forum State and the State of the official. | 该条草案第1款确立了法院地国与官员所属国以和平方式解决任何争端的义务。 |
| The dispute has been defined by reference to “the interpretation or application of the present draft articles”. This terminology is generally accepted and is found in various dispute settlement clauses contained in treaties, as well as in the jurisprudence of the International Court of Justice and other international tribunals. | 为界定争端，该款案文中提及“对本条款草案的解释或适用”，使用了条约关于各种争端解决的条款以及国际法院和其他国际法庭判例中普遍接受的术语。 |
| (7) | (7) |
| Paragraph 1 broadly follows the wording of Article 33 of the Charter of the United Nations, using the expression “shall seek a solution” to refer to an obligation of conduct required of the forum State and the State of the official. | 第1款总体上沿用《联合国宪章》第三十三条的措辞，使用“寻求解决办法”一语来表示要求法院地国和官员所属国承担的行为义务。 |
| The phrase “by negotiation or other peaceful means of their own choice” is intended to emphasize the principle of free choice of means. | “通过谈判或其自行选择的其他和平手段”这一短语的使用是为了强调手段自由选择的原则。 |
| The specific mention of negotiation follows the generally accepted model in various dispute settlement clauses found in treaties, without implying that other peaceful means of dispute settlement are excluded. | 具体提及谈判，这是沿用了各种条约争端解决条款中普遍接受的模式，但这并不意味着排除任何其他和平解决争端的手段。 |
| On the contrary, the reference to “other peaceful means” is to be understood as including all the means spelled out in Article 33 of the Charter: negotiation, enquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement, resort to regional agencies or arrangements, or other peaceful means of their own choice. | 相反，提及“其他和平手段”，应被理解为包括《宪章》第三十三条具体列举的所有手段：谈判、调查、调停、和解、公断、司法解决、区域机关或区域办法之利用，或各该国自行选择之其他和平方法。 |
| In any event, it should be borne in mind that the negotiation referred to in this paragraph should not be confused with the consultations referred to in draft article 17, which are autonomous in nature and are not required to be held as a precondition for the implementation of draft article 18. | 无论如何，应该指出的是，第1款提及的谈判在任何情况下都不能与第17条草案所述的协商相混淆，第17条草案所述的协商具有自动性质，举行协商不构成适用第18条草案的先决条件。 |
| (8) | (8) |
| Paragraph 2 establishes a dispute settlement system which, following the traditional model, will be triggered only if the States have been unable to resolve their dispute by a means of their own choice, as provided in paragraph 1 of the draft article. | 第2款确立了一种争端解决制度，按照传统模式运作，只有在各国无法按照条款草案第1款的规定通过其选择的手段解决争端时，这种解决制度才启用。 |
| This system is compulsory, as shown by the expression “the dispute shall … be submitted”. It may be activated unilaterally by either the forum State or the State of the official, on the sole condition that they have been unable to reach “a mutually acceptable solution … within a reasonable time”. | 如“将争端提交”一语所反映的那样，这种解决制度具有强制性，可由法院地国或官员所属国单方面启动，唯一的条件是它们无法在合理的时间内达成“双方均能接受的解决办法”。 |
| The Commission did not consider it appropriate to set a specific time limit for this purpose, preferring instead to use the term “reasonable time”, the scope of which will need to be determined on a case-by-case basis by the International Court of Justice or other dispute settlement body. | 委员会认为为此目的设定具体时限是不合适的，认为最好使用“合理时间内”这一表述，其范围应由国际法院或其他争端解决机构逐案确定。 |
| (9) | (9) |
| Jurisdiction to settle the dispute in a binding manner is attributed to the International Court of Justice, unless the forum State and the State of the official “have agreed to submit the dispute” to another means of judicial settlement, which must, in any case, lead to “a binding decision”. | 以具有约束力的方式解决争端的权限属于国际法院，除非法院地国和官员所属国“同意将争端提交”另一法律机构，但无论如何最终必须有“具有约束力的裁决”。 |
| This recognizes the character of the International Court of Justice as a reference jurisdiction for international law, which has also played a significant role in relation to the immunity of State officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction. | 作出这一规定，是承认国际法院作为国际法方面管辖机构的基准性质，此外，国际法院在国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免方面已经发挥了重要作用。 |
| (10) | (10) |
| Among the alternative means of binding settlement of disputes relating to immunity, the Commission has included arbitration in the first place, since it is a well-established means that is frequently used by States and is included as an alternative legal means in many treaties. | 作为强制性解决与豁免有关的争端的替代办法之一，委员会首先列入仲裁，因为仲裁是各国经常使用的既定手段，在许多条约中都被列为替代法律手段。 |
| Paragraph 2 of draft article 18 also provides, as an alternative, for any “other means of settlement entailing a binding decision”. | 第18条草案第2款还提及“可作出具有约束力的裁决的任何其他解决手段”作为替代方法。 |
| This wording, taken from article 282 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, accommodates the possibility that disputes concerning immunity of State officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction may or must be submitted to other international tribunals, especially those established pursuant to treaties or within regional organizations. | 这一提法取自《联合国海洋法公约》 第二八二条，委员会列入这一点，是考虑到有关国家官员外国刑事管辖豁免的争端可能会或应该提交给其他国际法庭，特别是根据条约或在区域组织内设立的法庭。 |
| (11) | (11) |
| It should be emphasized that if the International Court of Justice is replaced with another means of settlement agreed upon by the States concerned, the alternative body chosen must in any case have jurisdiction to settle the dispute by means of a decision that is binding on the parties, be it an arbitral award or a judgment of an international or internationalized court. | 无论如何，应该强调的是，如果根据有关国家之间的协定，以另一种解决办法取代诉诸国际法院的方式，在任何情况下都要求所选的替代机构有权通过对当事方具有约束力的决定来解决争端，无论是仲裁裁决还是国际性法庭或国际化法庭判决。 |
| (12) | (12) |
| To conclude the commentary on the dispute settlement system, attention is drawn to the fact that draft article 18 does not contain an opt-out clause allowing for unilateral derogation from the system of binding settlement of disputes set out in paragraph 2, thus departing from the model of draft article 15 of the draft articles on prevention and punishment of crimes against humanity. | 在结束关于争端解决制度的评注时，应提请注意第18条草案不包含单方面克减第2款规定的具有约束力的争端解决制度的退出条款，这一点有别于防止及惩治危害人类罪条款草案第15条草案的模式。 |
| Although some members of the Commission supported the inclusion of such a clause, others preferred not to include one, given that this matter is closely related to the final form of the draft articles and the recommendation to be addressed to the General Assembly in due course. | 虽然委员会一些委员支持列入这一条款，但其他委员认为不应列入，因为这是与条款草案的最后形式密切相关的问题，相关建议需在适当时候向大会提出。 |
| Finally, other members pointed out that the debate on whether or not to include such a clause has no real effect, since unilateral derogation from the binding settlement of disputes could occur under any circumstances. | 最后，其他委员指出，关于是否列入克减条款的讨论没有实际效果，因为单方面克减具有约束力的争端解决制度的情况在任何情形中都可能发生。 |
| Given this divergence of views, the Commission considered it preferable not to include a unilateral derogation clause in the draft articles adopted on first reading, although it may return to this issue at a later stage in light of comments from States and the recommendation to be addressed to the General Assembly on the future of the draft articles. | 考虑到上述各种立场，委员会认为最好不要在条款草案的一读时列入单方面克减条款，不过，委员会可以根据各国的评论和委员会将向大会提出的关于条款草案未来工作的建议，在稍后阶段重新审议这个问题。 |
| (13) | (13) |
| Finally, it should be noted that draft article 18 as adopted by the Commission on first reading does not include the final paragraph originally proposed by the Special Rapporteur, under which, “[i]f the dispute is referred to arbitration or to the International Court of Justice, the forum State shall suspend the exercise of its jurisdiction until the competent organ issues a final ruling”. | 最后，应该指出，委员会一读通过的第18条草案不包括特别报告员最初提出的最后一款：“如已将争端交付仲裁或提交国际法院，则法院地国应暂停行使管辖权，直至主管机关作出最终裁决”。 |
| While some members of the Commission took the view that an obligation to suspend criminal proceedings after submitting the dispute to a binding means of settlement could constitute a useful procedural safeguard, reference to such an obligation was excluded because it was not possible to find precedents, either in existing treaties or in international jurisprudence, to support this provision. | 虽然委员会一些委员认为在将争端提交具有约束力的解决机制后暂停刑事诉讼的义务可能构成有用的程序性保障，但案文里没有提及这一点，这是考虑到无法在现行条约或国际判例中找到支持这一规定的先例。 |
| Moreover, the suspension of criminal proceedings in these circumstances could encounter serious difficulties in some State legal systems. | 此外，在这种情况下暂停刑事诉讼可能会在不同国家法律制度中遇到严重困难。 |
| Therefore, draft article 18 does not cover this issue, and the possible suspension of domestic proceedings will depend on any relevant agreement between the parties or, where applicable, any provisional measures ordered by the International Court of Justice or other organ having jurisdiction under paragraph 2. | 因此，第18条草案没有涉及这个问题，是否暂停国家诉讼程序要取决于当事方之间的相关协议，或在适当情况下，取决于国际法院或按照第2款具有管辖权的任何机构下令采取的预防措施。 |
| Annex List of treaties referred to in draft article 7, paragraph 2 | 附件 第7条草案第2款提及的条约的清单 |
| Crime of genocide | 灭绝种族罪 |
| Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, 17 July 1998, article 6; | 《国际刑事法院罗马规约》，1998年7月17日，第六条； |
| Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, 9 December 1948, article II. | 《防止及惩治灭绝种族罪公约》，1948年12月9日，第二条。 |
| Crimes against humanity | 危害人类罪 |
| Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, 17 July 1998, article 7. | 《国际刑事法院罗马规约》，1998年7月17日，第七条。 |
| War crimes | 战争罪 |
| Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, 17 July 1998, article 8, paragraph 2. | 《国际刑事法院罗马规约》，1998年7月17日，第八条第二款。 |
| Crime of apartheid | 种族隔离罪 |
| International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid, 30 November 1973, article II. | 《禁止并惩治种族隔离罪行国际公约》，1973年11月30日，第二条。 |
| Torture | 酷刑 |
| Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, 10 December 1984, article 1, paragraph 1. | 《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，第1条第1款。 |
| Enforced disappearance | 强迫失踪 |
| International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance, 20 December 2006, article 2. | 《保护所有人免遭强迫失踪国际公约》，2006年12月20日，第二条。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) | (1) |
| As established in paragraph 2 of draft article 7, “the crimes under international law mentioned [in paragraph 1] are to be understood according to their definition in the treaties enumerated in the annex to the present draft articles”. | 第7条草案第2款规定，“[第1款所述]国际法规定的上述罪行应根据本条款草案附件所列条约中这些罪行的定义来理解”。 |
| As indicated in the commentary to paragraph 2, the sole purpose of the list included in the annex is to identify the definitions of the crimes under international law in respect of which immunity ratione materiae does not apply. | 如第2款的评注所述，附件所列清单的唯一目的是确定不适用属事豁免的国际法范畴内的罪行。 |
| The list has no effect whatsoever on the customary nature of these crimes or on any specific obligations that the treaties included in the list may impose on the States parties thereto. | 这一清单对这些罪行在习惯法层面的性质或清单所列条约可能对缔约国规定的具体义务没有任何影响。 |
| (2) | (2) |
| The choice of treaties whose articles are included in the annex to provide a definition of the various crimes under international law was based on three fundamental criteria: (a) the desire to avoid possible confusion when several treaties use different language to define the same crime; | 选择条约条款列入附件，用以界定国际法范畴内的各种罪行，选择基于三个基本标准：(a) 希望避免几项条约使用不同的语言来界定同一罪行时可能出现的混乱； |
| (b) the selection of treaties that are universal in scope; | (b) 选择具有普遍性的条约； |
| and (c) the selection of treaties providing the most up-to-date definitions available. | (c) 选择包含最新定义的条约。 |
| (3) | (3) |
| Genocide was defined for the first time in the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide and its definition has remained constant in contemporary international criminal law, notably in the statute of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (art. 4), the statute of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (art. 2) and, in particular, the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, article 6 of which reproduces the definition contained in the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. | 灭绝种族罪的定义最早是《防止及惩治灭绝种族罪公约》 界定的，该定义在当代国际刑法中一直保持不变，被写入了《前南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭规约》 (第4条)和《卢旺达问题国际刑事法庭规约》 (第2条)，特别是还被写入了《国际刑事法院罗马规约》(第六条)。 《国际刑事法院罗马规约》第六条转载了《防止及惩治灭绝种族罪公约》中的定义。 |
| For its part, the Commission defined genocide in article 17 of the 1996 draft Code of Crimes against the Peace and Security of Mankind. | 委员会在1996年《危害人类和平及安全治罪法》 草案第17条中也给灭绝种族罪下了定义。 |
| For the purposes of the present draft articles, the Commission has included in the annex both the Rome Statute (art. 6) and the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (art. II), given that the wording used in the two instruments is practically identical and has the same meaning. | 为了本条款草案的目的，委员会在附件中同时列入了《罗马规约》(第六条)和《防止及惩治灭绝种族罪公约》(第二条)，这两项文书所用的措辞实际上是相同的，而且具有相同的含义。 |
| (4) | (4) |
| With regard to crimes against humanity, it should be recalled that some treaties have identified certain behaviours as “crimes against humanity” and that international courts have ruled on the customary nature of this category of crimes. | 关于危害人类罪，应当记得，一些条约已将某些行为定为“危害人类罪”， 国际法院已从习惯法角度就这类罪行的性质作出裁决。 |
| The statute of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (art. 5) and the statute of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (art. 3) have also defined this crime. | 《前南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭规约》(第5条)和《卢旺达问题国际刑事法庭规约》(第3条)也对这一罪行下了定义。 |
| The Commission itself defined this category of crimes in the 1996 draft Code of Crimes against the Peace and Security of Mankind (art. 18). | 委员会本身在1996年《危害人类和平及安全治罪法》草案中对这类罪行下了定义(第18条)。 |
| However, the Rome Statute was the first instrument to define this category of crimes separately and comprehensively. | 然而，《罗马规约》是对这类罪行提出单独、全面的定义的第一项文书。 |
| For this reason, the Commission considered that article 7 of the Rome Statute should be taken as the definition of crimes against humanity for the purposes of the present draft article. | 因此，委员会认为，为了本条草案的目的，应将《罗马规约》第七条作为危害人类罪的定义。 |
| This is consistent with the decision taken earlier by the Commission on the draft articles on prevention and punishment of crimes against humanity, draft article 2 of which reproduces the definition of this category of crimes contained in article 7 of the Rome Statute. | 这与委员会早些时候就防止及惩治危害人类罪条款草案作出的决定是一致的，其中第2条草案转载了《罗马规约》第七条中关于这类罪行的定义。 |
| (5) | (5) |
| The concept of war crimes has a long tradition that was originally associated with treaties on international humanitarian law. | 战争罪的概念有着悠久的传统，最初与国际人道法条约有关。 |
| The Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949 for the protection of war victims and the Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts (Protocol I), define that category of crimes as “grave breaches”. | 1949年8月12日关于保护战争受难者的日内瓦四公约和1949年8月12日日内瓦四公约关于保护国际性武装冲突受难者的附加议定书(第一议定书)将这类罪行界定为“严重破坏行为”。 |
| War crimes were defined in the statute of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (arts. 2 and 3) and the statute of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (art. 4), as well as by the Commission itself in the 1996 draft Code of Crimes against the Peace and Security of Mankind (art. 20). | 《前南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭规约》(第2和3条)和《卢旺达问题国际刑事法庭规约》(第4条)以及委员会本身也在1996年《危害人类和平及安全治罪法》草案(第20条)中都给战争罪下了定义。 |
| The latest definition of war crimes is contained in article 8, paragraph 2, of the Rome Statute, which draws on previous precedents and refers comprehensively to war crimes committed in both international and non-international armed conflicts, as well as to crimes recognized on the basis of treaties and customary international law. | 战争罪的最新定义载于《罗马规约》第八条第二款，该款借鉴了以往的先例，全面提及在国际和非国际武装冲突中犯下的战争罪，以及根据条约和习惯国际法承认的罪行。 |
| For the purposes of the present draft article, the Commission decided to use the definition contained in article 8, paragraph 2, of the Rome Statute, as being the most up-to-date version of the definition of this category of crimes. | 为了本条草案的目的，委员会决定采用《罗马规约》第八条第二款所载的定义，作为这类罪行定义的最新版本。 |
| This does not imply, however, that the importance of the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and Protocol I thereto in relation to the definition of war crimes should be overlooked. | 然而，这并不意味着应忽视1949年日内瓦四公约及其第一议定书在战争罪定义方面的重要性。 |
| (6) | (6) |
| The crime of apartheid was defined for the first time in the International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid of 30 November 1973, which, although it describes apartheid as a crime against humanity and a crime under international law (art. I), contains a detailed and separate definition of the crime of apartheid (art. II). | 种族隔离罪的定义最早载于1973年11月30日《禁止并惩治种族隔离罪行国际公约》，虽然该公约将种族隔离视为危害人类罪和国际法范畴内的罪行(第一条)，但载有种族隔离罪的详细、单独的定义(第二条)。 |
| For this reason, the Commission decided to use the definition in the 1973 Convention for the purposes of the present draft article. | 为此，委员会决定为本条草案的目的保留1973年公约中的定义。 |
| (7) | (7) |
| Torture is defined as a violation of human rights in all the relevant international instruments. | 所有相关国际文书都将酷刑界定为侵犯人权行为。 |
| Its characterization as prohibited conduct liable to criminal prosecution is found for the first time in the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment of 10 December 1984, which defines it as a separate crime in article 1, paragraph 1. | 1984年12月10日《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》首次将酷刑定性为应受刑事起诉的被禁止行为，该公约第1条第1款将其界定为一项单独的罪行。 |
| This definition includes, moreover, the significant requirement that an act cannot be characterized as torture unless it is carried out by, at the instigation of or with the consent of public officials, which places this crime squarely within the scope of the present draft articles. | 此外，这一定义还包括一项重要的要求，即除非是由公职人员实施或在其唆使或同意下实施的行为，否则不能被定性为酷刑，这就将这一罪行完全置于本条款草案的范围之内。 |
| A similar definition is contained in the Inter-American Convention to Prevent and Punish Torture (arts. 2 and 3). | 《美洲防止和惩治酷刑公约》也载有类似的定义(第2和3条)。 |
| The Commission considers that, for the purposes of the present draft article, torture is to be understood in accordance with the definition in the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. | 委员会认为，就本条草案而言，酷刑应根据《禁止酷刑和其他残忍、不人道或有辱人格的待遇或处罚公约》的定义来理解。 |
| (8) | (8) |
| The enforced disappearance of persons was defined for the first time in the Inter-American Convention on the Forced Disappearance of Persons of 9 June 1994 (art. II). | 强迫失踪的定义最早载于1994年6月9日《美洲被迫失踪人士公约》(第二条)。 |
| The International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance of 20 December 2006 also defines this crime (art. 2). | 2006年12月20日《保护所有人免遭强迫失踪国际公约》也给这一罪行下了定义(第2条)。 |
| As in the case of torture, this definition requires that the act be carried out by, at the instigation of or with the consent of public officials, which places this crime squarely within the scope of the present draft articles. | 与酷刑的情况一样，这一定义要求，只有由公职人员实施或在公职人员的唆使或同意下实施的行为，才可被定性为强迫失踪，这就将这一罪行完全置于本条款草案的范围之内。 |
| The Commission therefore considers that, for the purposes of the present draft article, the definition of enforced disappearance should be understood in accordance with article 2 of the 2006 Convention. | 因此，委员会认为，就本条草案而言，强迫失踪的定义应根据2006年《公约》第2条来理解。 |
| (9) | (9) |
| Taking into account its relationship to draft article 7, the commentary to the annex are to be read together with the commentary to that draft article. | 考虑到与第7条草案的关系，附件的评注必须与该条草案的评注一并阅读。 |
| Chapter VII Succession of States in respect of State responsibility | 第七章 国家责任方面的国家继承 |
| A. | A. |
| Introduction | 导言 |
| 70. | 70. |
| 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. | 委员会在第六十九届会议(2017年)上决定将“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, 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. | 联大在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其工作方案。 |
| 71. | 71. |
| The Special Rapporteur submitted four reports from 2017 to 2021. | 2017年至2021年，特别报告员提交了四份报告。 |
| The Commission also had before it, at the seventy-first session (2019), a memorandum prepared by the Secretariat providing information on treaties which may be of relevance to its future work on the topic. | 委员会在第七十一届会议(2019年)上还收到了秘书处编写的一份备忘录，其中提供了可能与委员会今后关于此专题的工作有关的条约的资料。 |
| Following the debate on each report, the Commission decided to refer the proposals for draft articles made by the Special Rapporteur to the Drafting Committee. | 委员会对每份报告进行辩论之后，决定将特别报告员提出的关于条款草案的建议转交起草委员会。 |
| The Commission heard interim reports from the successive Chairs of the Drafting Committee on succession of States in respect of State responsibility, containing the draft articles provisionally adopted by the Drafting Committee, at the seventieth to seventy-second sessions (2018, 2019 and 2021). | 委员会在第七十至第七十二届会议(2018年、2019年和2021年)上听取了起草委员会历任主席关于国家责任方面的国家继承的临时报告，其中载有起草委员会暂时通过的条款草案。 |
| B. | B. |
| Consideration of the topic at the present session | 本届会议审议此专题的情况 |
| 72. | 72. |
| At the present session, the Commission had before it the fifth report of the Special Rapporteur (A/CN.4/751). | 委员会本届会议收到了特别报告员的第五次报告(A/CN.4/751)。 |
| 73. | 73. |
| In his fifth report, composed of four parts, the Special Rapporteur provided an updated overview of the work on the topic undertaken thus far, which included a summary of the debate in the Sixth Committee held at the seventy-sixth session of the General Assembly, together with an explanation of the methodology of the report (Part One). | 特别报告员的第五次报告由四部分组成，他在该报告中概述了迄今为止就此专题开展的工作的最新情况，其中包括联大第七十六届会议期间第六委员会辩论的摘要，以及对报告方法的解释(第一部分)。 |
| The Special Rapporteur then examined the question of a plurality of injured successor States and a plurality of responsible successor States (Part Two) and also proposed a new scheme for the consolidation and restructuring of the draft articles referred to the Drafting Committee at previous sessions on the basis of proposals contained in his reports (Part Three). | 之后，特别报告员分析了数个受害继承国和数个责任继承国的问题(第二部分)，还针对以往届会转交起草委员会的基于特别报告员报告所载建议的条款草案，提出了进行合并和调整的新方案(第三部分)。 |
| Lastly, the Special Rapporteur addressed the future programme of work on the topic (Part Four). | 最后，特别报告员述及了此专题未来的工作方案(第四部分)。 |
| No new draft articles were proposed. | 没有提出新的条款草案。 |
| 74. | 74. |
| The Commission considered the fifth report at its 3579th to 3583rd meetings, from 11 to 17 May 2022. | 委员会在2022年5月11日至17日第3579至第3583次会议上审议了第五次报告。 |
| 75. | 75. |
| At its 3583rd meeting, on 17 May 2022, the Commission decided, on the recommendation of the Special Rapporteur, to instruct the Drafting Committee to proceed with the preparation of draft guidelines on the basis of the provisions previously referred to the Drafting Committee (including those provisions provisionally adopted by the Commission at previous sessions), taking into account the debate held in the plenary on the Special Rapporteur’s fifth report. | 在2022年5月17日第3583次会议上，委员会根据特别报告员的建议，决定指示起草委员会根据先前转交起草委员会的条款(包括委员会前几届会议暂时通过的条款)，参考全体会议关于特别报告员第五次报告的辩论情况，着手编写指南草案。 |
| 76. | 76. |
| At its 3593rd meeting, on 14 July 2022, the Commission considered the report of the Drafting Committee on the topic (A/CN.4/L.970), and provisionally adopted draft guidelines 6, 10, 10 bis and 11, which had been provisionally adopted by the Drafting Committee in 2018 and 2021, respectively, as well as draft guidelines 7 bis, 12, 13, 13 bis, 14, 15 and 15 bis, which were provisionally adopted by the Drafting Committee at the present session (see section D.1 below). | 在2022年7月14日第3593次会议上，委员会审议了起草委员会关于此专题的报告(A/CN.4/L.970)，并暂时通过了起草委员会分别于2018年和2021年暂时通过的指南草案6、10、10之二和11, 以及起草委员会在本届会议上暂时通过的指南草案7之二、12、13、13之二、14、15和15之二(见下文D.1节)。 |
| As a result of the change of form of the outcome, the Commission also took note of draft articles 1, 2, 5, 7, 8 and 9, as revised by the Drafting Committee to be draft guidelines. | 由于成果形式的变化，委员会还注意到经起草委员会修订为指南草案的第1、第2、第5、第7、第8和第9条草案。 |
| It also took note that the Special Rapporteur had provided revised commentaries on an informal basis for draft guidelines 1, 2, 5, 7, 8 and 9 to assist the Commission in its future work on this topic. | 委员会还注意到，特别报告员以非正式方式提供了关于指南草案1、2、5、7、8和9的经修订的评注，以协助委员会今后关于此专题的工作。 |
| 77. | 77. |
| At its 3605th to 3611th meetings, from 29 July to 4 August 2022, the Commission adopted the commentaries to draft guidelines 6, 7 bis, 10, 10 bis, 11, 12, 13, 13 bis, 14, 15 and 15 bis (see sect. D.2 below). | 在2022年7月29日至8月4日第3605至第3611次会议上，委员会通过了指南草案6、7之二、10、10之二、11、12、13、13之二、14、15和15之二的评注(见下文D.2节)。 |
| 78. | 78. |
| At its 3611th meeting, on 4 August 2022, the Commission expressed its deep appreciation for the outstanding contribution of the Special Rapporteur, Mr. Pavel Šturma, whose mastery of the subject, guidance, and cooperation greatly facilitated the work of the Commission. | 在2022年8月4日第3611次会议上，委员会对特别报告员帕维尔·斯图尔马先生的杰出贡献表示深切赞赏，斯图尔马先生对这一主题的掌握、指导和合作极大地促进了委员会的工作。 |
| Brief summary of the debate on selected issues raised in the fifth report of the Special Rapporteur | 关于特别报告员第五次报告所提部分问题的辩论的简要概述 |
| (a) | (a) |
| Plurality of States | 数个国家 |
| 79. | 79. |
| The Special Rapporteur explained that in his fifth report he had focused primarily on the problems associated with a plurality of injured successor States or with a plurality of responsible successor States. | 特别报告员解释称，自己在第五次报告中主要关注与数个受害继承国或与数个责任继承国有关的问题。 |
| In doing so, the Special Rapporteur had also taken into account the concept of “shared responsibility”, referred to in the Guiding Principles on Shared Responsibility in International Law, developed through a project undertaken at the University of Amsterdam. | 在此过程中，特别报告员还考虑到了《关于国际法中分担责任的指导原则》所述的“分担责任”概念，该指导原则是通过阿姆斯特丹大学的一个项目制定的。 |
| However, in his view, in light of their scope of application, the Guiding Principles were of limited use to the topic at hand. | 不过特别报告员认为，考虑到其适用范围，该指导原则对此专题的作用有限。 |
| 80. | 80. |
| As regards the plurality of injured successor States, the Special Rapporteur was of the view that not all categories of succession of States were equally relevant. | 关于数个受害继承国的问题，特别报告员认为，并非所有类别的国家继承都同样相关。 |
| Typical examples that occurred in practice were the dissolution of a State and the separation of a part or parts of a State. | 在实践中发生过的典型例子是国家解体和国家的一部分或几部分领土分离。 |
| The Special Rapporteur concluded that State practice supported the priority of specific agreements. | 特别报告员的结论是，国家实践支持优先考虑具体协定。 |
| In the absence of such an agreement and where there were no special connections between one or more successor States and the injury, the solution was to be found in application of equitable apportionment. | 在没有这种协定并且一个或多个继承国与损害之间没有特殊联系的情况下，应使用公平分摊予以解决。 |
| At the same time, he noted that the responsible State could not refuse a claim by one successor State because of a plurality of injured States, since that would contravene article 46 of the articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts. | 同时，他指出，责任国不能因为有数个受害国而拒绝一个继承国提出的要求，因为这会违反国家对国际不法行为的责任条款第46条。 |
| 81. | 81. |
| Concerning the plurality of responsible successor States, the Special Rapporteur observed that in all cases where a predecessor State continued to exist, an injured State would be entitled to invoke its responsibility. | 关于数个责任继承国的问题，特别报告员指出，在被继承国继续存在的所有情况下，受害国都有权援引其责任。 |
| In cases of uniting States (merger) and incorporation, the issue of plurality did not per se arise. | 在发生国家合并(merger)和一国并入另一国的情况下，本身并不存在数国问题。 |
| In situations of the dissolution of a State, agreement between the injured State and the relevant successor State or States was key. | 在国家解体的情况下，受害国与相关继承国之间的协定是关键所在。 |
| At the same time, as a matter of invocation, the injured State was able to rely on the rule codified in article 47 of the articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts. | 同时，在援引方面，受害国能够依靠国家对国际不法行为的责任条款第47条所编纂的规则。 |
| The Special Rapporteur noted further that, in practice, owing to the application of relevant agreements or national legislation, only one successor typically bore responsibility in cases of the plurality of responsible successor States. | 特别报告员进一步指出，在实践中，由于相关协定或国家法律的适用，在有数个责任继承国的情况下，通常仅由一个继承国承担责任。 |
| 82. | 82. |
| The Special Rapporteur further recalled that he had already addressed particular aspects of plurality of States in cases of continuing or composite acts in his earlier proposals, including those made in the Drafting Committee, for draft articles 7 and 7 bis. | 特别报告员还回顾指出，他在早前的建议中，包括在起草委员会中提出的关于第7条和第7条之二的建议中，已经述及了持续行为或复合行为中涉及数国的特定方面。 |
| Accordingly, he had not proposed a draft article on plurality of States or on shared responsibility in the context of succession, since the examples of relevant State practice involved situations of either the responsibility of a predecessor State that continued to exist or the responsibility of a successor State for its own acts or the acts of a predecessor State to which it had a special link. | 因此，他没有提出关于数个国家或关于继承方面的分担责任的条款草案，因为相关国家实践的例子要么涉及继续存在的被继承国负有责任的情况，要么涉及继承国对自己的行为或与自己有特殊联系的被继承国的行为负有责任的情况。 |
| A further option was to include a clause indicating that the text being developed by the Commission was without prejudice to the application of articles 46 and 47 of the articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts. | 另一备选办法是增添一项条款，表明委员会正在拟订的案文不妨碍国家对国际不法行为的责任条款第46和第47条的适用。 |
| 83. | 83. |
| During the ensuing debate in the plenary, several members agreed that there was no need to introduce a provision on plurality of States. | 在随后的全体会议辩论中，一些委员同意，没有必要提出关于数个国家的条款。 |
| It was emphasized that particular aspects of the existence of a plurality of States in cases of continuing or composite acts could be resolved on the basis of the general rules of State responsibility. | 有人强调，对于持续行为或复合行为中涉及数国的特定方面，可基于国家责任的一般规则予以解决。 |
| According to another view, it was advisable to include such a provision, along the lines of article 7, “Plurality of successor States”, of the 2015 resolution of the Institute of International Law on succession of States in matters of international responsibility, or to include a reference thereto. | 另一种观点认为，宜增设这一条款，仿照国际法学会2015年关于国际责任事项上的国家继承问题的决议第7条“数个继承国”，或在案文中予以提及。 |
| Some members were also of the view that it was unnecessary to include a “without prejudice” clause in relation to articles 46 and 47 of the articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts. | 一些委员还认为，没有必要就国家对国际不法行为的责任条款第46和第47条增设“不妨碍”条款。 |
| 84. | 84. |
| Several members agreed that there was no need to examine separately the concept of “shared responsibility”, since, in their view, the concept was not directly relevant to the present topic. | 一些委员同意，没有必要单独分析“分担责任”的概念，因为他们认为，这一概念不与本专题直接相关。 |
| On the other hand, it was suggested that examination of the concept could provide clarity to the Commission’s work, and that it could also be referred to in the commentary. | 另一方面，有人建议，对这一概念进行分析可使委员会的工作更加明晰，亦可在评注中予以提及。 |
| (b) | (b) |
| Final form | 最终形式 |
| 85. | 85. |
| As regards the work of the Drafting Committee on the draft provisions referred to it at previous sessions, the Special Rapporteur confirmed his intention to withdraw draft articles 3 and 4, proposed in his first report, submitted in 2017. | 关于起草委员会就以往届会转交的条款草案开展的工作，特别报告员确认打算撤回2017年提交的第一次报告中提出的第3条和第4条草案。 |
| His fifth report contained several proposals, of a technical and stylistic nature, for modification of draft provisions being considered by the Drafting Committee. | 他的第五次报告载有若干技术和文体方面的建议，以修改起草委员会正在审议的条款草案。 |
| He also expressed the hope that the topic could be completed on first reading at the current session. | 他还表示希望能在本届会议上完成此专题的一读。 |
| 86. | 86. |
| Several members questioned whether the development of draft articles was the most appropriate outcome, particularly in light of concerns expressed by some States in the Sixth Committee, throughout the course of the Commission’s work on the topic, as to the relative paucity of State practice available to justify the adoption of draft articles. | 一些委员对拟订条款草案是否是最适当的成果形式表示了疑虑，特别是考虑到在委员会关于此专题的整个工作过程中，一些国家在第六委员会关切地表示，现有国家实践相对匮乏，不足以证明通过条款草案的合理性。 |
| It was suggested that the Commission consider changing the format of its work on the topic to, inter alia, draft guidelines or draft conclusions, which would be designed to serve as general guidance for States (as opposed to developing a set of binding rules). | 有人建议委员会考虑更改此专题工作的形式，除其他外，可改为指南草案或结论草案，旨在作为面向国家的一般指导 (而不是拟订一套有约束力的规则)。 |
| Some members expressed doubts as to whether the adoption of the entire set of draft articles on first reading, at the present session, was feasible. | 一些委员对在本届会议上一读通过整套条款草案是否可行表示怀疑。 |
| While several members expressed support for continuing the work of the Drafting Committee, a proposal was made to discontinue the Committee’s work on an instrument, and, instead, to convene a Working Group, chaired by the Special Rapporteur, with the aim of producing a report on the topic that would be annexed to the Commission’s report, as had been done with previous topics, including that on the “obligation to extradite or prosecute (aut dedere aut judicare)”. | 一些委员表示支持继续开展起草委员会的工作，但同时也有人提议停止起草委员会关于文书的工作，而是建议召集一个工作组，由特别报告员任主席，目标是就此专题编写一份报告，附在委员会报告之后，先前曾对以往专题采用过这种做法，包括“引渡或起诉的义务”这一专题。 |
| C. | C. |
| Text of the draft articles on succession of States in respect of State responsibility provisionally adopted by the Commission at its seventy-first and seventy-second sessions | 委员会第七十一和第七十二届会议暂时通过的关于国家责任方面的国家继承的条款草案案文 |
| 87. | 87. |
| The text of draft articles 1, 2, 5, 7, 8 and 9 provisionally adopted by the Commission at its seventy-first and seventy-second sessions is reproduced below. | 委员会第七十一和第七十二届会议暂时通过的第1、第2、第5、第7、第8和第9条草案的案文载录如下。 |
| Article 1 Scope | 第1条 范围 |
| 1. | 1. |
| The present draft articles apply to the effects of a succession of States in respect of the responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts. | 本条款草案适用于国家对国际不法行为的责任方面国家继承的效果。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| The present draft articles apply in the absence of any different solution agreed upon by the States concerned. | 本条款草案在有关国家未商定任何不同解决办法的情况下适用。 |
| Article 2 Use of terms | 第2条 用语 |
| For the purposes of the present draft articles: | 就本条款草案而言： |
| (a) | (a) |
| “succession of States” means the replacement of one State by another in the responsibility for the international relations of territory; | “国家继承”指一国对领土的国际关系所负责任由另一国取代； |
| (b) | (b) |
| “predecessor State” means the State which has been replaced by another State on the occurrence of a succession of States; | “被继承国”指发生国家继承时被另一国取代的国家； |
| (c) | (c) |
| “successor State” means the State which has replaced another State on the occurrence of a succession of States; | “继承国”指发生国家继承时取代另一国的国家； |
| (d) | (d) |
| “date of the succession of States” means the date upon which the successor State replaced the predecessor State in the responsibility for the international relations of the territory to which the succession of States relates; | “国家继承日期”指在国家继承所涉领土的国际关系责任方面被继承国由继承国取代的日期； |
| Article 5 Cases of succession of States covered by the present draft articles | 第5条 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。 |
| Article 7 Acts having a continuing character | 第7条 具有持续性的行为 |
| When an internationally wrongful act of a successor State is of a continuing character in relation to an internationally wrongful act of a predecessor State, the international responsibility of the successor State extends only to the consequences of its own act after the date of the succession of States. | 当继承国的国际不法行为相对于被继承国的国际不法行为具有持续性时，继承国的国际责任仅延伸至国家继承日期之后其本身行为的后果。 |
| If and to the extent that the successor State acknowledges and adopts the act of the predecessor State as its own, the international responsibility of the successor State also extends to the consequences of such act. | 在并且只在继承国承认被继承国的行为并认作自己的行为的情况下，继承国的国际责任也延伸至这种行为的后果。 |
| Article 8 Attribution of conduct of an insurrectional or other movement | 第8条 叛乱运动或其他运动的行为归属 |
| 1. | 1. |
| 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. | 成功地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。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| Paragraph 1 is without prejudice to the attribution to the predecessor State of any conduct, however related to that of the movement concerned, which is to be considered an act of that State by virtue of the rules on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts. | 第1款不妨碍把按照国家对国际不法行为的责任规则应视为被继承国行为的任何行为归于被继承国，无论该行为与有关运动的行为如何相关。 |
| Article 9 Cases of succession of States when the predecessor State continues to exist | 第9条 被继承国继续存在时的国家继承情况 |
| Succession of States in respect of State responsibility | 国家责任方面的国家继承 |
| 1. | 1. |
| When an internationally wrongful act has been committed by a predecessor State before the date of succession of States, and the predecessor State continues to exist, an injured State continues to be entitled to invoke the responsibility of the predecessor State even after the date of succession: | 当被继承国在国家继承日期之前实施了一项国际不法行为，并且被继承国继续存在时，受害国在下列情况下，即使在继承日期之后仍有权援引被继承国的责任： |
| (a) | (a) |
| when part of the territory of the predecessor State, or any territory for the international relations of which the predecessor State is responsible, becomes part of the territory of another State; | 被继承国的一部分领土或由被继承国负责其国际关系的任何领土成为另一国领土的一部分； |
| (b) | (b) |
| when a part or parts of the territory of the predecessor State separate to form one or more States; | 被继承国领土的一部分或多个部分分离出来形成一个或多个国家； |
| or | 或 |
| (c) | (c) |
| when a successor State is a newly independent State the territory of which immediately before the date of the succession of States was a dependent territory for the international relations of which the predecessor State was responsible. | 继承国是新独立国家，其领土在国家继承日期之前原是由被继承国负责其国际关系的附属领土。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| In particular circumstances, the injured State and the successor State shall endeavour to reach an agreement for addressing the injury. | 在特定情况下，受害国和继承国应努力达成处理损害的协定。 |
| 3. | 3. |
| Paragraphs 1 and 2 are without prejudice to any apportionment or other agreement between the predecessor State and the successor State when implementing paragraphs 1 and 2. | 第1款和第2款不影响被继承国和继承国之间在执行第1款和第2款时的任何分摊或其他协定。 |
| D. | D. |
| Text of the draft guidelines on succession of States in respect of State responsibility provisionally adopted by the Commission at its seventy-third session | 委员会第七十三届会议暂时通过的关于国家责任方面的国家继承的指南草案案文 |
| 1. | 1. |
| Text of the draft guidelines | 指南草案案文 |
| 88. | 88. |
| The text of draft guidelines 6, 7 bis, 10, 10 bis, 11, 12, 13, 13 bis, 14, 15 and 15 bis provisionally adopted by the Commission at its seventy-third session is reproduced below. | 委员会第七十三届会议暂时通过的指南草案6、7之二、10、10之二、11、12、13、13之二、14、15和15之二的案文载录如下。 |
| Guideline 6 No effect upon attribution | 指南6 对归属没有影响 |
| A succession of States has no effect upon the attribution to a State of an internationally wrongful act committed by that State before the date of succession. | 国家继承对将一国在继承日期之前实施的国际不法行为归于该国没有影响。 |
| Guideline 7 bis Composite acts | 指南7之二 复合行为 |
| 1. | 1. |
| When a predecessor State continues to exist, the breach of an international obligation by that State through a series of actions or omissions defined in aggregate as wrongful occurs when an action or omission of the predecessor State occurs after the date of succession which, taken with its other actions or omissions, is sufficient to constitute the wrongful act. | 被继承国继续存在时，该国以被一并定义为不法行为的一系列作为或不作为违背国际义务的时刻开始于该被继承国的一作为或不作为在继承日期之后发生的时刻，而该作为或不作为连同该国的其他作为或不作为来看，足以构成不法行为。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| The breach of an international obligation by a successor State through a series of actions or omissions defined in aggregate as wrongful occurs when an action or omission of the successor State occurs after the date of succession which, taken with its other actions or omissions, is sufficient to constitute the wrongful act. | 继承国以被一并定义为不法行为的一系列作为或不作为违背国际义务的时刻开始于该继承国的一作为或不作为在继承日期之后发生的时刻，而该作为或不作为连同该国的其他作为或不作为来看，足以构成不法行为。 |
| 3. | 3. |
| The provisions of paragraphs 1 and 2 are without prejudice to whether the breach of an international obligation by a successor State may occur through a series of actions or omissions defined in aggregate as wrongful that commences with the predecessor State and continues with the successor State. | 第1和第2段的规定不妨碍是否可能发生继承国以始于被继承国而延续至继承国的被一并定义为不法行为的一系列作为或不作为违背国际义务的情形。 |
| Guideline 10 Uniting of States | 指南10 国家的合并 |
| When two or more States unite and so form one successor State, and an internationally wrongful act has been committed by any of the predecessor States, the injured State and the successor State should agree on how to address the injury. | 两个或两个以上国家合并而组成一个继承国，并且有任何被继承国实施了国际不法行为时，受害国和继承国应商定如何处理损害。 |
| Guideline 10 bis Incorporation of a State into another State | 指南10之二 一国并入另一国 |
| 1. | 1. |
| When an internationally wrongful act has been committed by a State prior to its incorporation into another State, the injured State and the incorporating State should agree on how to address the injury. | 一国在并入另一国之前实施了国际不法行为时，受害国和并入国应商定如何处理损害。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| When an internationally wrongful act has been committed by a State prior to incorporating another State, the responsibility of the State that committed the wrongful act is not affected by such incorporation. | 一国在将另一国并入之前实施了国际不法行为时，实施该不法行为的国家的责任不受这种并入的影响。 |
| Guideline 11 Dissolution of a State | 指南11 一国的解体 |
| When a State that has committed an internationally wrongful act dissolves and ceases to exist and the parts of the territory of the predecessor State form two or more successor States, the injured State and the relevant successor State or States should agree on how to address the injury arising from the internationally wrongful act. | 实施了国际不法行为的一国解体和不复存在而被继承国领土各部分组成两个或两个以上继承国时，受害国和相关继承国应商定如何处理该国际不法行为产生的损害。 |
| They should take into account any territorial link, any benefit derived, any equitable apportionment, and all other relevant circumstances. | 它们应考虑到任何领土联系、任何所得利益、任何公平分摊和所有其他相关情况。 |
| Guideline 12 Cases of succession of States when the predecessor State continues to exist | 指南12 被继承国继续存在时的国家继承情况 |
| 1. | 1. |
| When an internationally wrongful act has been committed against a predecessor State by another State before the date of succession of States, and the predecessor State continues to exist, the predecessor State continues to be entitled to invoke the responsibility of the other State even after the date of succession, if the injury to it has not been made good. | 被继承国在国家继承日期之前被另一国实施了一项国际不法行为，并且被继承国继续存在时，如果被继承国所受损害尚未得到赔偿，则该被继承国即使在继承日期之后仍有权援引该另一国的责任。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| In addition to paragraph 1, a successor State may, in particular circumstances, be entitled to invoke the responsibility of the State that committed the internationally wrongful act. | 除第1段以外，继承国可在特定情况下有权援引实施国际不法行为的国家的责任。 |
| 3. | 3. |
| Paragraphs 1 and 2 are without prejudice to any apportionment or other agreement between the predecessor State and the successor State. | 第1和第2段不妨碍被继承国和继承国之间的任何分摊或其他协定。 |
| Guideline 13 Uniting of States | 指南13 国家的合并 |
| When two or more States unite and so form one successor State, and any of the predecessor States was injured by an internationally wrongful act of another State, the successor State may invoke the responsibility of that other State. | 两个或两个以上国家合并而组成一个继承国，并且有任何被继承国受到另一国的国际不法行为的损害时，继承国可援引该另一国的责任。 |
| Guideline 13 bis Incorporation of a State into another State | 指南13之二 一国并入另一国 |
| 1. | 1. |
| When an internationally wrongful act has been committed against a State prior to its incorporation into another State, the incorporating State may invoke the responsibility of the wrongdoing State. | 一国在并入另一国之前被实施了国际不法行为时，并入国可援引不法行为国的责任。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| When an internationally wrongful act has been committed against a State prior to incorporating another State, the injured State continues to be entitled to invoke the responsibility of the wrongdoing State. | 一国在将另一国并入之前被实施了国际不法行为时，该受害国仍有权援引不法行为国的责任。 |
| Guideline 14 Dissolution of a State | 指南14 一国的解体 |
| 1. | 1. |
| When a State that has been injured by an internationally wrongful act dissolves and ceases to exist and the parts of the territory of the predecessor State form two or more successor States, one or more of the successor States may, in particular circumstances, be entitled to invoke the responsibility of the wrongdoing State. | 受国际不法行为损害的一国解体和不复存在而被继承国领土各部分组成两个或两个以上继承国时，一个或多个继承国可在特定情况下有权援引不法行为国的责任。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| The wrongdoing State and the relevant successor State or States should endeavour to reach agreement for addressing the injury. | 不法行为国和相关继承国应努力达成处理损害的协定。 |
| They should take into account any territorial link, any loss or benefit derived for nationals of the successor State, any equitable proportion and all other relevant circumstances. | 它们应考虑到任何领土联系、继承国国民的任何所受损失或任何所得利益、任何公平分摊和所有其他相关情况。 |
| Guideline 15 Diplomatic protection | 指南15 外交保护 |
| The present draft guidelines do not address the application of the rules of diplomatic protection in situations of the succession of States. | 本指南草案不述及在国家继承情况下适用外交保护规则的问题。 |
| Guideline 15 bis Cessation and non-repetition | 指南15之二 停止和不重复 |
| 1. | 1. |
| A predecessor State that is responsible for an internationally wrongful act that occurred before the date of succession of States, and that continues to exist after the date of succession, remains under an obligation: | 对国家继承日期之前发生的国际不法行为负有责任并且在继承日期之后继续存在的被继承国仍有义务： |
| (a) | (a) |
| to cease that act, if it is continuing; | 在该行为持续时，停止该行为； |
| (b) | (b) |
| to offer appropriate assurances and guarantees of non-repetition, if circumstances so require. | 在必要的情况下，提供不重复该行为的适当承诺和保证。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| A State that is responsible for an internationally wrongful act in accordance with draft guideline 7 or with draft guideline 7 bis, paragraph 1 or paragraph 2, is under an obligation: | 按照指南草案7或按照指南草案7之二第1段或第2段对国际不法行为负有责任的国家有义务： |
| (a) | (a) |
| to cease that act, if it is continuing; | 在该行为持续时，停止该行为； |
| (b) | (b) |
| to offer appropriate assurances and guarantees of non-repetition, if circumstances so require. | 在必要的情况下，提供不重复该行为的适当承诺和保证。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| Text of the draft guidelines and commentaries thereto provisionally adopted by the Commission at its seventy-third session | 委员会第七十三届会议暂时通过的指南草案案文及其评注 |
| 89. | 89. |
| The text of the draft guidelines and commentaries thereto provisionally adopted by the Commission at its seventy-third session is reproduced below. | 委员会第七十三届会议暂时通过的指南草案案文及其评注载录如下。 |
| Guideline 6 No effect upon attribution | 指南6 对归属没有影响 |
| A succession of States has no effect upon the attribution to a State of an internationally wrongful act committed by that State before the date of succession. | 国家继承对将一国在继承日期之前实施的国际不法行为归于该国没有影响。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) | (1) |
| The purpose of draft guideline 6 is to clarify that an internationally wrongful act occurring before the date of succession remains attributable to the State that committed it. | 指南草案6旨在澄清指出，在继承日期之前发生的国际不法行为仍可归于实施该行为的国家。 |
| This provision expresses the basic principle which is codified in article 1 of the articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts. | 这一规定表达了国家对国际不法行为的责任条款第1条所编纂的基本原则。 |
| (2) | (2) |
| The Commission considered whether such a draft guideline was needed in the context of this topic. | 委员会审议了在本专题背景下是否需要这样一条指南草案的问题。 |
| There was a view that the draft guideline was unrelated to the present topic and unnecessarily reiterated a rule that was obvious or self-evident. | 有一种意见认为，该指南草案与本专题无关，不必要地重申了一项显而易见或不证自明的规则。 |
| However, the Commission considered that such a provision was important, because it constituted the logical premise of a number of subsequent draft guidelines concerning aspects of State responsibility, which were relevant in the context of State succession. | 但委员会认为，这样一项规定具有重要意义，因为它是一系列后续指南草案的逻辑前提，这些指南草案涉及在国家继承情况下相关的国家责任的多个方面。 |
| Such provisions, for example, concern the responsibility for breaches of international law having a continuing character (draft guideline 7), composite acts (draft guideline 7 bis) and the question of the attribution of conduct of an insurrectional or other movement (draft guideline 8). | 例如，这些规定涉及具有持续性的违反国际法行为的责任(指南草案7)、复合行为(指南草案7之二)和叛乱运动或其他运动的行为归属问题(指南草案8)。 |
| (3) | (3) |
| While the term “attribution” in this draft guideline comes from the concept of attribution of conduct addressed in article 2, subparagraph (a), and in chapter II of the articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts, it does not refer to the term “attribution of conduct” as such. | 这条指南草案中的“归属”一语虽然源自国家对国际不法行为的责任条款 第2条(a)项所述和第二章所载的行为归属这一概念，但并不指“行为归属”一语本身。 |
| Instead, the Commission opted for the formulation “attribution … of an internationally wrongful act” to emphasize that, in the context of succession of States, an internationally wrongful act as a whole remains attributable to the State that committed that act before the date of succession. | 相反，委员会选择了“国际不法行为归于…”这一措辞，以强调，在发生国家继承的情况下，整个国际不法行为仍归于在继承日期之前实施该行为的国家。 |
| Guideline 7 bis Composite acts | 指南7之二 复合行为 |
| 1. | 1. |
| When a predecessor State continues to exist, the breach of an international obligation by that State through a series of actions or omissions defined in aggregate as wrongful occurs when an action or omission of the predecessor State occurs after the date of succession which, taken with its other actions or omissions, is sufficient to constitute the wrongful act. | 被继承国继续存在时，该国以被一并定义为不法行为的一系列作为或不作为违背国际义务的时刻开始于该被继承国的一作为或不作为在继承日期之后发生的时刻，而该作为或不作为连同该国的其他作为或不作为来看，足以构成不法行为。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| The breach of an international obligation by a successor State through a series of actions or omissions defined in aggregate as wrongful occurs when an action or omission of the successor State occurs after the date of succession which, taken with its other actions or omissions, is sufficient to constitute the wrongful act. | 继承国以被一并定义为不法行为的一系列作为或不作为违背国际义务的时刻开始于该继承国的一作为或不作为在继承日期之后发生的时刻，而该作为或不作为连同该国的其他作为或不作为来看，足以构成不法行为。 |
| 3. | 3. |
| The provisions of paragraphs 1 and 2 are without prejudice to whether the breach of an international obligation by a successor State may occur through a series of actions or omissions defined in aggregate as wrongful that commences with the predecessor State and continues with the successor State. | 第1和第2段的规定不妨碍是否可能发生继承国以始于被继承国而延续至继承国的被一并定义为不法行为的一系列作为或不作为违背国际义务的情形。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) | (1) |
| Following the structure of articles 14 and 15 of the articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts, draft guidelines 7 and 7 bis appear consecutively in the present draft guidelines. | 指南草案7和7之二仿照了国家对国际不法行为的责任条款 第14和第15条的结构，在本指南草案中紧邻出现。 |
| In light of the complexity of the subject matter and the need to maintain consistency with its previous work, the Commission emphasized the importance in the present draft guideline of tracking the text of article 15 of the articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts as closely as possible. | 鉴于这一主题事项的复杂性以及与委员会先前工作保持一致的必要性，委员会强调，在本指南草案中必须尽可能密切参照国家对国际不法行为的责任条款第15条的案文。 |
| (2) | (2) |
| The draft guideline has three paragraphs. | 本条指南草案分为三段。 |
| The wording of each paragraph follows that of article 15 of the articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts, focusing on the question of when the breach by a composite act occurs in various succession contexts. | 每一段的措辞都沿用国家对国际不法行为的责任条款第15条的措辞，重点是在各种继承情况下何时发生通过复合行为违背义务的问题。 |
| The first two paragraphs relate, respectively, to composite acts performed entirely by a predecessor State and by a successor State. | 前两段分别涉及完全由被继承国实施和完全由继承国实施的复合行为。 |
| The third relates to a composite act begun by a predecessor State and completed by its successor State after the date of succession. | 第三段涉及由被继承国开始而由其继承国在继承日期之后完成的复合行为。 |
| All three paragraphs focus on composite acts that begin before the date of succession of States and end after such date. | 所有这三段的重点都是在国家继承日期之前开始并在该日期之后结束的复合行为。 |
| (3) | (3) |
| Paragraph 1 relates to composite acts that straddle the date of succession and are performed entirely by a predecessor State that continues to exist after the date of succession. | 第1段涉及横跨继承日期并且完全由继承日期之后继续存在的被继承国实施的复合行为。 |
| The paragraph makes clear that a predecessor State is responsible for an internationally wrongful composite act comprising actions or omissions attributable to the predecessor State that were performed both before and after the date of succession. | 该段明确指出，被继承国对在继承日期之前和之后实施的并归于被继承国的由作为或不作为构成的国际不法复合行为负责。 |
| In other words, the incidence of a State succession has no impact on the responsibility of a predecessor State for a composite act whose components are entirely attributable to it. | 换言之，国家继承的发生不影响被继承国对组成部分完全归于该国的复合行为承担责任。 |
| Furthermore, the paragraph does not address a composite act of the predecessor State that occurs entirely before or entirely after the date of succession. | 此外，该段不述及完全在继承日期之前或之后发生的被继承国的复合行为。 |
| (4) | (4) |
| The Commission also considered whether a specific reference to attribution was necessary in the text, to make clear that the actions or omissions constituting the composite act must all be attributable to the predecessor State. | 委员会还审议了是否有必要在案文中具体提及归属，以明确指出构成复合行为的作为或不作为必须全部归于被继承国。 |
| To address this point, the word “its” was included before “other actions and omissions” and should be understood to refer to the element of attribution. | 为处理这一问题，在“其他作为和不作为”之前加上了“该国的”一词，该词应理解为是指归属要素。 |
| (5) | (5) |
| Paragraph 2 mirrors paragraph 1 with respect to a successor State. | 第2段的案文仿照第1段，但涉及的是继承国。 |
| The paragraph makes clear that a successor State is responsible for an internationally wrongful composite act comprising actions or omissions attributable to the successor State that were performed both before and after the date of succession. | 该段明确指出，继承国对在继承日期之前和之后实施的并归于继承国的由作为或不作为构成的国际不法复合行为负责。 |
| It is recalled that a State that incorporates all or part of the territory of another State is the successor State with respect to that territory, even though the State existed before the date of succession. | 有人回顾指出，一国如果将另一国的全部或部分领土并入，则就该领土而言是继承国，即便该国在继承日期之前就已经存在。 |
| A composite act performed by a successor State entirely after the date of succession is also within the scope of this paragraph. | 完全由继承国在继承日期之后实施的复合行为也属于该段的范围。 |
| (6) | (6) |
| Paragraph 3 concerns the scenario where the composite act is started by the predecessor State before the date of succession of States and is completed by the successor State afterwards. | 第3段涉及的情形是，复合行为由被继承国在国家继承日期之前开始并在之后由继承国完成。 |
| One potential example is that of a creeping expropriation begun by the predecessor State and completed by the successor State. | 由被继承国开始并由继承国完成的蚕食式征用就是一种可能的实例。 |
| However, the obligation of the successor State to compensate for such an expropriation could be explained on other bases. | 但是，继承国对这种征用作出补偿的义务可以用其他理由加以解释。 |
| For example, it could be considered that the continued application by the successor State of the relevant measures adopted by the predecessor State is an act attributable directly to the successor State. | 例如，可以认为，继承国继续实施被继承国采取的有关措施是可直接归于继承国的一种行为。 |
| In several cases concerning the successors to the former Yugoslavia, for example Zaklan v. Croatia, the European Court of Human Rights determined, in a context relating to succession, that the successor State was responsible based on its own actions after the date of succession. | 在若干涉及前南斯拉夫的继承国的案件中，例如在Zaklan诉克罗地亚案中，欧洲人权法院在涉及继承的情况下裁定，根据继承国在继承日期之后自身的行动，继承国负有责任。 |
| (7) | (7) |
| In the Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros case, the International Court of Justice considered that a successor State could be responsible for the conduct of the predecessor State when, by its conduct, the successor assumed the actions of the predecessor as its own. | 在加布奇科沃－大毛罗斯案中，国际法院认为，继承国将被继承国的行为认作自己的行为时，继承国可对被继承国的行为负责。 |
| Other examples concern the possibility that a predecessor State might begin a series of actions that amounts to genocide or a crime against humanity only when continued by its successor State after the date of succession. | 其他例子涉及一种可能性，即被继承国可能开始了一系列行动，仅在其继承国在继承日期之后继续采取这些行动的情况下，这一系列行动才构成灭绝种族或危害人类罪。 |
| Reference could also be made to the Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Croatia v. Serbia) case brought by Croatia against Serbia before the International Court of Justice, even though the Court ultimately did not need to resolve whether succession to responsibility had occurred because it did not find that the allegations of genocide were substantiated. | 还可以提及克罗地亚向国际法院起诉塞尔维亚的《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)，不过国际法院最终并不需要解决是否发生了责任继承问题，因为法院认定灭绝种族指控没有得到证实。 |
| (8) | (8) |
| The inconsistency of the available State practice did not allow a firm conclusion to be drawn as to the content of the law. | 由于现有的国家实践不一致，无法就法律的内容得出确凿的结论。 |
| The Commission therefore decided to draft paragraph 3 in the form of a without prejudice clause. | 因此，委员会决定以不妨碍条款的形式起草第3段草案。 |
| Paragraph 3 leaves open the question of whether the responsibility of a successor State for such a composite act exists under international law. | 关于国际法之下是否存在继承国对这种复合行为的责任的问题，第3段保持了开放。 |
| Guideline 10 Uniting of States | 指南10 国家的合并 |
| When two or more States unite and so form one successor State, and an internationally wrongful act has been committed by any of the predecessor States, the injured State and the successor State should agree on how to address the injury. | 两个或两个以上国家合并而组成一个继承国，并且有任何被继承国实施了国际不法行为时，受害国和继承国应商定如何处理损害。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) | (1) |
| Draft guideline 10 addresses the situation where two or more States merge to form one successor State. | 指南草案10述及两个或两个以上国家合并而组成一个继承国的情况。 |
| By forming a new State, the predecessor States cease to exist. | 被继承国组成了一个新的国家，因而不复存在。 |
| (2) | (2) |
| In some of its earlier work, the Commission understood the term “uniting of States” to cover both merger and incorporation. | 委员会在一些早先的工作中认为，“国家的合并”一语既包括合并，也包括并入。 |
| However, following the most recent approach in article 21 of the articles on nationality of natural persons in relation to the succession of States, of 1999, the Commission decided to draw an explicit distinction by having separate draft guidelines to cover the two situations. | 但是，委员会效仿最近1999年国家继承涉及的自然人国籍问题条款 第21条采取的方法，决定予以明确的区分，用单独的指南草案分别描述这两种情况。 |
| Draft guideline 10 addresses merger, while draft guideline 11 addresses incorporation. | 指南草案10述及合并，而指南草案10之二述及并入。 |
| (3) | (3) |
| The provision is not to be interpreted as a rule of automatic succession, as rights and obligations do not automatically transfer from a predecessor State to a successor State. | 不应将这项规定解释为自动继承的规则，因为权利和义务并不会自动从被继承国转移到继承国。 |
| At the same time, the provision should not be viewed as an expression of the “clean slate” principle either, as that would risk leaving the injured State without a remedy. | 同时，也不应将这项规定视为“白板”原则的表述，因为这样做可能使受害国得不到补救。 |
| (4) | (4) |
| The Commission sought to balance such positions by recommending that the injured State and the successor State endeavour to reach an agreement on how to address the injury, an outcome inspired by draft guideline 9, paragraph 2. | 委员会力求平衡这些立场，建议受害国和继承国努力就如何处理损害达成协定，这是受指南草案9第2段启发的结果。 |
| It is intended to encourage States to seek a solution to questions of international responsibility in situations of a merger between States. | 其意图是鼓励国家自行寻求解决办法，以解决国家合并情况下的国际责任问题。 |
| The wording is sufficiently flexible to give States the freedom to choose the modalities of the agreement. | 上述措辞有足够的灵活性，使各国能自由选择协定的模式。 |
| (5) | (5) |
| The provision should be understood as meaning that the States concerned should negotiate in good faith with a view to concluding an agreement. | 应将这项规定理解为指有关国家应真诚地进行谈判以期达成协定。 |
| As the Permanent Court of International Justice stated in 1931 in the case concerning Railway Traffic between Lithuania and Poland, the obligation to negotiate is “not only to enter into negotiations, but also to pursue them as far as possible, with a view to concluding agreements”. | 正如常设国际法院1931年在关于立陶宛和波兰之间铁路交通的案件中指出的，谈判的义务是“不仅要进行谈判，而且要尽可能地进行谈判，以期缔结协定”。 |
| The International Court of Justice summarized and confirmed the relevant case law in its 2011 judgment in Application of the Interim Accord of 13 September 1995. | 国际法院在其2011年关于1995年9月13日《临时协议》的适用案的判决中总结并确认了相关判例。 |
| In the same vein, in 1972 the Arbitral Tribunal for the Agreement on German External Debts in the case of Greece v. the Federal Republic of Germany explained very aptly the nature of the obligation to negotiate. | 同样，1972年，德国外债协定仲裁法庭在希腊诉德意志联邦共和国案中非常恰当地解释了谈判义务的性质。 |
| Guideline 10 bis Incorporation of a State into another State | 指南10之二 一国并入另一国 |
| 1. | 1. |
| When an internationally wrongful act has been committed by a State prior to its incorporation into another State, the injured State and the incorporating State should agree on how to address the injury. | 一国在并入另一国之前实施了国际不法行为时，受害国和并入国应商定如何处理损害。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| When an internationally wrongful act has been committed by a State prior to incorporating another State, the responsibility of the State that committed the wrongful act is not affected by such incorporation. | 一国在将另一国并入之前实施了国际不法行为时，实施该不法行为的国家的责任不受这种并入的影响。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) | (1) |
| A situation of incorporation involves one or more States being incorporated into another State that continues to exist. | 并入的情况涉及一个或一个以上国家被并入另一个继续存在的国家。 |
| (2) | (2) |
| Paragraph 1 reflects the scope of the provision. | 第1段反映了这项规定的范围。 |
| It deals with the situation where the internationally wrongful act was committed by a State that no longer exists, owing to its incorporation into another State. | 它处理的情况是，国际不法行为是由一个因并入另一国而不再存在的国家实施的。 |
| Therefore, the incorporating State continues to exist while the State that committed the internationally wrongful act ceases to exist. | 因此，并入国继续存在，而实施国际不法行为的国家不复存在。 |
| (3) | (3) |
| Under the formulation “should agree on how to address the injury”, it is incumbent on “the injured State and the incorporating State” to pursue an agreement. | 根据“应商定如何处理损害”这一措辞，“受害国和并入国”有责任寻求达成协定。 |
| However, the obligations arising from the internationally wrongful act do not pass automatically to the incorporating State. | 但是，国际不法行为所产生的义务并不自动转移给并入国。 |
| Additionally, the obligation to negotiate in good faith is also relevant here (see para. (5) of the commentary to draft guideline 10 above), as well as the consideration of claims made by private individuals. | 另外，真诚地进行谈判的义务(见上文指南草案10评注第(5)段)在此也具有相关意义，还应考虑个人提出的求偿。 |
| (4) | (4) |
| Paragraph 2 applies to situations where the incorporating State commits the wrongful act. | 第2段适用于并入国实施不法行为的情况。 |
| It clarifies that the incorporation does not affect the responsibility of the State that committed the wrongful act. | 该段澄清，并入并不影响实施不法行为的国家的责任。 |
| Guideline 11 Dissolution of a State | 指南11 一国的解体 |
| When a State that has committed an internationally wrongful act dissolves and ceases to exist and the parts of the territory of the predecessor State form two or more successor States, the injured State and the relevant successor State or States should agree on how to address the injury arising from the internationally wrongful act. | 实施了国际不法行为的一国解体和不复存在而被继承国领土各部分组成两个或两个以上继承国时，受害国和相关继承国应商定如何处理该国际不法行为产生的损害。 |
| They should take into account any territorial link, any benefit derived, any equitable apportionment, and all other relevant circumstances. | 它们应考虑到任何领土联系、任何所得利益、任何公平分摊和所有其他相关情况。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) | (1) |
| Draft guideline 11 addresses the situation where a predecessor State that has committed an internationally wrongful act has ceased to exist as a result of a dissolution. | 指南草案11述及实施了国际不法行为的被继承国因解体而不复存在的情况。 |
| (2) | (2) |
| The phrase “a State that has committed an internationally wrongful act dissolves and ceases to exist and the parts of the territory of the predecessor State form two or more successor States” is inspired by articles 18, 31 and 41 of the 1983 Vienna Convention on Succession of States in respect of State Property, Archives and Debts. | “实施了国际不法行为的一国解体和不复存在而被继承国领土各部分组成两个或两个以上继承国”一语是受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》第18、第31和第41条的启发。 |
| (3) | (3) |
| The Commission sought to draw a balance between the “clean slate” doctrine and the “automatic succession” position. | 委员会力求在“白板”学说和“自动继承”的立场之间取得平衡。 |
| (4) | (4) |
| The draft guideline recognizes the existence of an obligation among the concerned States to seek to agree on how to address the injury. | 这条指南草案承认，有关国家有义务设法商定如何处理损害。 |
| The draft guideline only applies to the relations between the injured State and the successor State or States. | 这条指南草案只适用于受害国与继承国之间的关系。 |
| However, the need for agreement on how to address the injury may not be relevant to all successor States to an equal extent. | 然而，商定如何处理损害的必要性可能并非对所有继承国都同等相关。 |
| Some successor States might have a closer connection with the wrongful act or the injury than others. | 一些继承国与不法行为或损害的关联可能比其他继承国更加密切。 |
| (5) | (5) |
| The use of the word “relevant” in relation to “successor State or States” reflects the possibility that there may be successor States that do not have an interest in addressing the injury and therefore should not necessarily be involved in negotiations on the question. | 使用“相关”一词搭配“继承国”反映了这一可能性：即可能有些继承国与处理损害没有利害关系，因此不一定要参与关于这个问题的谈判。 |
| (6) | (6) |
| The phrase “should agree on how to address the injury” is to be understood in the same manner as in draft guidelines 10 and 10 bis, including the obligation to negotiate in good faith. | “应商定如何处理…损害”一语应按指南草案10和10之二的同样方式理解，包括真诚谈判的义务。 |
| (7) | (7) |
| The second sentence, “[t]hey should take into account any territorial link, any benefit derived, any equitable apportionment, and all other relevant circumstances” provides factors that relevant States may take into account in determining how best to address the injury arising from the internationally wrongful act committed by the predecessor State. | 第二句，“它们应考虑到任何领土联系、任何所得利益、任何公平分摊和所有其他相关情况”，提供了相关国家在确定如何最好地处理被继承国实施的国际不法行为所产生的损害时可加以考虑的因素。 |
| In doing so, the factors listed therein also serve as a guide for the determination of which successor State or States are to be considered “relevant” for purposes of draft guideline 11. | 与此同时，其中所列的因素也可作为指南，用于确定哪个或哪些继承国应被视为指南草案11目的上的“相关”继承国。 |
| (8) | (8) |
| The express reference to “any territorial link, any benefit derived, any equitable apportionment” is not intended as providing an exhaustive list of factors. | 明确提到“任何领土联系、任何所得利益、任何公平分摊”，并不是要提供一份详尽无遗的因素清单。 |
| This is confirmed by the concluding phrase “and all other relevant circumstances” which is based on article 31, paragraph 2, of the 1983 Vienna Convention on Succession of States in respect of State Property, Archives and Debts. | 最后一语“和所有其他相关情况”确认了这一点，该短语参照了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》第31条第2款。 |
| Relevant circumstances include those that establish a link between the successor State or States and the internationally wrongful act or the injury, such as the continuity of organs (i.e., a personal link), or unjust enrichment. | 相关情况包括确立继承国与国际不法行为或损害之间有联系的情况，例如机关的延续(即人员联系)或不当得利。 |
| (9) | (9) |
| The pronoun “they” refers to “the injured State and the relevant successor State or States”. | 代词“它们”是指“受害国和相关继承国”。 |
| Guideline 12 Cases of succession of States when the predecessor State continues to exist | 指南12 被继承国继续存在时的国家继承情况 |
| 1. | 1. |
| When an internationally wrongful act has been committed against a predecessor State by another State before the date of succession of States, and the predecessor State continues to exist, the predecessor State continues to be entitled to invoke the responsibility of the other State even after the date of succession, if the injury to it has not been made good. | 被继承国在国家继承日期之前被另一国实施了一项国际不法行为，并且被继承国继续存在时，如果被继承国所受损害尚未得到赔偿，则该被继承国即使在继承日期之后仍有权援引该另一国的责任。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| In addition to paragraph 1, a successor State may, in particular circumstances, be entitled to invoke the responsibility of the State that committed the internationally wrongful act. | 除第1段以外，继承国可在特定情况下有权援引实施国际不法行为的国家的责任。 |
| 3. | 3. |
| Paragraphs 1 and 2 are without prejudice to any apportionment or other agreement between the predecessor State and the successor State. | 第1和第2段不妨碍被继承国和继承国之间的任何分摊或其他协定。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) | (1) |
| Draft guideline 12 concerns cases of succession when the predecessor State which has been injured prior to the date of succession continues to exist. | 指南草案12涉及在继承日期之前受到损害的被继承国继续存在的继承情况。 |
| These comprise cases where a part of a State secedes to form a new State, including cases of newly independent States, and cases where a part of the territory of a State is ceded to another, pre-existing State. | 这些情况包括一国的一部分脱离而组成一个新国家的情况，包括新独立国家的情况，以及一国的一部分领土被割让给另一个原已存在的国家的情况。 |
| In this respect, it is analogous to draft guideline 9, which covers the comparable scenarios of succession with respect to the responsibility for internationally wrongful acts performed by a predecessor State prior to the date of succession. | 在这方面，它与指南草案9类似，后者涵盖与被继承国在继承日期之前实施的国际不法行为的责任有关的类似继承场景。 |
| (2) | (2) |
| The provision has three paragraphs. | 这项规定分为三段。 |
| The first concerns the situation of an injured predecessor State that continues to exist after the date of the succession. | 第一段涉及受害的被继承国在继承日期之后继续存在的情况。 |
| The second concerns the situation of a successor State to such a predecessor State. | 第二段涉及上述被继承国的继承国的情况。 |
| The third is a without prejudice clause with respect to apportionments or other agreements between the predecessor and successor States. | 第三段是一项不妨碍条款，涉及被继承国和继承国之间的分摊或其他协定。 |
| (3) | (3) |
| The phrase “continues to be entitled to invoke”, in paragraph 1, mirrors draft guideline 9 and confirms that the position of the predecessor State is not affected by the succession of States. | 第1段中的“仍有权援引”一语仿照了指南草案9, 确认被继承国的地位不受国家继承的影响。 |
| The Commission considered whether to refer specifically to requesting reparation from the responsible State, but decided that a reference to the “entitle[ment] to invoke” responsibility was preferable because it is broader, encompassing not only reparation but also other obligations arising from the commission of an internationally wrongful act. | 委员会审议了是否要具体提及向责任国要求赔偿的问题，但决定“有权援引”责任这一提法更好，因为这种提法更为广泛，不仅涵盖赔偿，还涵盖实施国际不法行为所产生的其他义务。 |
| Such reference also avoids the question of apportionment between the predecessor State and any relevant successor States, which is dealt with in paragraph 3. | 这种提法也避免了第3段述及的被继承国和任何相关继承国之间的分摊问题。 |
| (4) | (4) |
| The phrase at the end of paragraph 1, “if the injury to it has not been made good” results from the Commission’s consideration of how the injury in question relates to the continued entitlement of the predecessor State to invoke responsibility. | 之所以在第1段末采用“如果被继承国所受损害尚未得到赔偿”一语，是因为委员会审议了所涉损害与被继承国继续援引责任的权利之间的关系。 |
| The Commission chose this phrase rather than a reference to either the predecessor State being an “injured State” or the continued existence of the injury after the date of succession. | 委员会选择了这一表述，而不是在案文中提到被继承国是“受害国”或提到损害在继承日期之后继续存在。 |
| Paragraph 1 relates only to the position of an injured predecessor State and is not concerned with the possibility of the invocation of responsibility by a State other than an injured State in the sense of article 48 of the articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts. | 第1段仅涉及受害的被继承国的立场，并不涉及国家对国际不法行为的责任条款第48条意义上的受害国以外的国家援引责任的可能性。 |
| The phrase “the injury to it” captures the idea of the injured predecessor State. | “被继承国所受损害”一语体现了受害的被继承国这一概念。 |
| Drawing on the articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts, the phrase “has not been made good” reflects the idea that the predecessor State is not entitled to invoke responsibility in relation to an injury for which full reparation has already been made. | “尚未得到赔偿”一语借鉴了国家对国际不法行为的责任条款，所反映的理念是，被继承国无权就已得到充分赔偿的损害援引责任。 |
| (5) | (5) |
| Paragraph 2 concerns the position of a successor State of the injured predecessor State. | 第2段涉及受害的被继承国的继承国的立场。 |
| The paragraph seeks to address the circumstances where a successor State is able to invoke the responsibility of a third State for an internationally wrongful act that it committed, against the predecessor State before the date of succession. | 该段力求处理继承国能够援引第三国在继承日期之前对被继承国实施的国际不法行为的责任的情况。 |
| The paragraph begins with the phrase “In addition to paragraph 1” in order to clarify its relationship with the previous paragraph. | 该段以“除第1段以外”开头，以澄清其与上一段的关系。 |
| The entitlement of both the predecessor State and the successor State to invoke the responsibility of the wrongdoing State does not entail an obligation of the wrongdoing State to make more than full reparation. | 被继承国和继承国都有权援引不法行为国的责任，这并不意味着不法行为国有义务作出超过充分赔偿的赔偿。 |
| (6) | (6) |
| The phrase “in particular circumstances”, which tracks the formulation of draft guideline 9, paragraph 2, refers to the connection between the injury to the predecessor State before the date of succession and either the territory or the nationals that became those of the successor State as a consequence of the succession. | “在特定情况下”一语沿用了指南草案9第2段的措辞，指的是继承日期之前对被继承国的损害与因继承而成为继承国领土或国民的领土或国民之间的联系。 |
| The paragraph is thus intended, inter alia, to satisfy the interests of newly independent States. | 因此，这一段的目的除其他外，是为了满足新独立国家的利益。 |
| It would be odd if a newly independent State would not be entitled to invoke the responsibility of a wrongdoing State for injury affecting its territory or population before it became independent. | 假如新独立国家无权就其独立之前影响其领土或民众的损害援引不法行为国的责任，则不合常理。 |
| (7) | (7) |
| The Commission decided to use the phrase “entitled to invoke” to track the formulation of paragraph 1, and the word “may” to reflect the conditionality of the entitlement on the existence of the particular circumstances. | 委员会决定仿照第1段的措辞使用“有权援引”一语，以及使用“可”一词来反映特定情况的存在是这一权利的前提条件。 |
| (8) | (8) |
| Paragraph 3 is a without prejudice clause. | 第3段是一项不妨碍条款。 |
| It seeks to accommodate the scenario implied in paragraphs 1 and 2 in which both the predecessor and successor States are entitled to invoke responsibility. | 该段力求顾及第1和第2段所暗示的被继承国和继承国都有权援引责任的场景。 |
| It is analogous to paragraph 3 of draft guideline 9 and gives priority to agreements between the States concerned. | 它与指南草案9第3段类似，并对所涉国家之间的协定予以了优先地位。 |
| Such agreements could involve, inter alia, the apportionment of compensation already paid to the predecessor State before the date of succession or a decision that the successor State should pursue the entire claim. | 这类协定除其他外，可涉及继承日期之前已经支付给被继承国的补偿的分摊，或者应由继承国提出全部求偿的决定。 |
| Guideline 13 Uniting of States | 指南13 国家的合并 |
| When two or more States unite and so form one successor State, and any of the predecessor States was injured by an internationally wrongful act of another State, the successor State may invoke the responsibility of that other State. | 两个或两个以上国家合并而组成一个继承国，并且有任何被继承国受到另一国的国际不法行为的损害时，继承国可援引该另一国的责任。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) | (1) |
| Contrary to draft guideline 10, draft guideline 13 deals with the situation where a predecessor State is an injured State by an internationally wrongful act of another State. | 指南草案13与指南草案10不同，涉及被继承国是另一国实施的国际不法行为的受害国的情况。 |
| (2) | (2) |
| As explained in the commentaries to draft guidelines 10 and 10 bis, the Commission decided to treat uniting of States separately from the incorporation of a State. | 正如指南草案10和10之二的评注所解释的，委员会决定将国家合并与国家并入分开处理。 |
| The Commission decided to take the same approach with respect to draft guideline 13, treating uniting of States separately from the incorporation of a State for issues relating to the reparation of injury for internationally wrongful acts committed against a predecessor State. | 委员会决定对指南草案13采取同样的办法，在对被继承国实施的国际不法行为的损害赔偿问题上，将国家合并与国家并入分开处理。 |
| Accordingly, draft guideline 13 covers the unification scenario, while draft guideline 13 bis covers the incorporation of a State into another State. | 因此，指南草案13涉及合并的情形，而指南草案13之二涉及一国并入另一国的情形。 |
| (3) | (3) |
| The Commission considered whether to make explicit that the provision referred to an internationally wrongful act that occurred before the date of succession of States. | 委员会审议了是否要明确说明这项规定是指在国家继承日期之前发生的国际不法行为的问题。 |
| This was found to be unnecessary because, in a situation of unification, the predecessor States cease to exist on the date of succession. | 这被认为没有必要，因为在发生合并的情况下，被继承国在继承日期即不复存在。 |
| Therefore, an injury to a predecessor State could only refer to an injury caused by an internationally wrongful act that occurred before the date of succession. | 因此，对被继承国的损害只能指在继承日期之前发生的损害。 |
| (4) | (4) |
| The Commission used the phrase “may invoke” in draft guideline 13 rather than the formulation in draft guideline 12, paragraph 2, “may, in particular circumstances, be entitled to invoke”, since, in the context of a uniting of States, where there is only one successor State, the challenge of determining which State might be entitled to invoke responsibility does not arise. | 委员会在指南草案13中使用了“可援引”一语，没有使用指南草案12第2段中“可在特定情况下有权援引”的表述，这是因为在发生国家合并的情况下，继承国只有一个，不会产生要确定哪一个国家可有权援引责任的问题。 |
| Furthermore, in draft guideline 12, the notion of “entitled to invoke” is linked to the notion of continuation in paragraph 1 and to the idea of “particular circumstances” in paragraph 2, neither of which are relevant to draft guideline 13. | 此外，在指南草案12中，“有权援引”这一概念与第1段中的继续概念和第2段中的“特定情况”概念有关，而这两个概念都与指南草案13无关。 |
| Guideline 13 bis Incorporation of a State into another State | 指南13之二 一国并入另一国 |
| 1. | 1. |
| When an internationally wrongful act has been committed against a State prior to its incorporation into another State, the incorporating State may invoke the responsibility of the wrongdoing State. | 一国在并入另一国之前被实施了国际不法行为时，并入国可援引不法行为国的责任。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| When an internationally wrongful act has been committed against a State prior to incorporating another State, the injured State continues to be entitled to invoke the responsibility of the wrongdoing State. | 一国在将另一国并入之前被实施了国际不法行为时，该受害国仍有权援引不法行为国的责任。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) | (1) |
| Draft guideline 13 bis concerns the scenario in which an injured predecessor State becomes part of another State. | 指南草案13之二涉及受害的被继承国成为另一国的一部分的情形。 |
| In line with the terminology used in the present draft guidelines, as set out in the definitions in draft guideline 2, the incorporated State is the predecessor State and the incorporating State is the successor State with respect to the territory incorporated. | 按照指南草案2所载定义规定的本指南草案使用的术语，就被并入的领土而言，被并入国是被继承国，并入国是继承国。 |
| However, it was considered clearer to use phrasing such as “injured State” and “incorporated State” in the present context. | 然而，有人认为在这一语境下使用“受害国”和“被并入国”等措辞会更加清楚。 |
| (2) | (2) |
| In paragraph 1, where the ability of the incorporating State to invoke the responsibility of the wrongdoing State only begins on the date of succession, the wording “may invoke” is used. | 第1段中，并入国援引不法行为国责任的能力只从继承之日开始，故使用了“可援引”这一表述。 |
| As in draft guideline 13, this reflects the fact that there is no confusion as to which of the States might invoke responsibility after the date of succession because the predecessor State has ceased to exist. | 同指南草案13一样，这反映了以下事实，即在继承日期之后，由于被继承国已不复存在，对于哪个国家可援引责任，不会有任何混淆。 |
| (3) | (3) |
| In paragraph 2, the word “continues” is used to indicate that the entitlement of the incorporating State to invoke responsibility begins when it is injured, prior to the date of succession. | 第2段中，使用了“仍”一词，以表示并入国援引责任的权利从它在继承日期之前受到损害时开始。 |
| This reflects the notion that the pre-existing entitlement is not affected by the occurrence of succession. | 这反映的概念是，原已存在的应享权利不因发生继承而受到影响。 |
| (4) | (4) |
| The term “wrongdoing State”, used at the end of both paragraphs, as well as in draft guideline 14, is drawn from the commentary to the articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts. | 这两段末尾以及指南草案14中使用的“不法行为国”一语取自国家对国际不法行为的责任条款的评注。 |
| The Commission considered that the phrase was a concise way of indicating the State that was responsible for the internationally wrongful act. | 委员会认为，该用语是一种简洁明了的指示对国际不法行为负责的国家的方式。 |
| Guideline 14 Dissolution of a State | 指南14 一国的解体 |
| 1. | 1. |
| When a State that has been injured by an internationally wrongful act dissolves and ceases to exist and the parts of the territory of the predecessor State form two or more successor States, one or more of the successor States may, in particular circumstances, be entitled to invoke the responsibility of the wrongdoing State. | 受国际不法行为损害的一国解体和不复存在而被继承国领土各部分组成两个或两个以上继承国时，一个或多个继承国可在特定情况下有权援引不法行为国的责任。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| The wrongdoing State and the relevant successor State or States should endeavour to reach agreement for addressing the injury. | 不法行为国和相关继承国应努力达成处理损害的协定。 |
| They should take into account any territorial link, any loss or benefit derived for nationals of the successor State, any equitable proportion and all other relevant circumstances. | 它们应考虑到任何领土联系、继承国国民的任何所受损失或任何所得利益、任何公平分摊和所有其他相关情况。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) | (1) |
| Draft guideline 14 concerns the dissolution of a State in circumstances where the predecessor State was injured prior to the date of succession, but does not continue to exist after that date. | 指南草案14涉及被继承国在继承日期之前受到损害但在该日期之后不复存在的情况下的一国的解体。 |
| Like its analogue draft guideline 11, the provision defines the dissolution of a State in the terms used in article 18, paragraph 1, of the 1983 Vienna Convention on Succession of States in respect of State Property, Archives and Debts: that is, “[w]hen a State dissolves and ceases to exist and the parts of the territory of the predecessor State form two or more successor States”. | 这项规定与指南草案11类似，以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》第18条第1款的用语对一国的解体进行了定义：即“一国解体和不复存在而被继承国领土各部分组成两个或两个以上继承国时”。 |
| The same definition was also used in the Commission’s work on nationality in relation to the succession of States and the work of the Institute of International Law. | 委员会关于国家继承涉及的国籍问题的工作 和国际法学会的工作 也使用了同一定义。 |
| The only change from the 1983 Vienna Convention formulation is the addition of the phrase “that has been injured by an internationally wrongful act”. | 与1983年《维也纳公约》的措辞相比，唯一的改动是增加了“受国际不法行为损害的”一语。 |
| This does not change the definition of a dissolution, but rather serves to indicate the scenario in which the draft guideline applies. | 这并不改变解体的定义，而是表明这条指南草案所适用的场景。 |
| (2) | (2) |
| The draft guideline comprises two paragraphs. | 这条指南草案分为两段。 |
| Paragraph 1 concerns whether one or more of the successor States is entitled to invoke the responsibility of the wrongdoing State for an act against the predecessor State, while paragraph 2 emphasizes the importance of pursuing an agreement between the wrongdoing State and the relevant successor State or States in the context of a dissolution. | 第1段涉及一个或多个继承国是否有权援引不法行为国对被继承国实施的行为的责任，第2段则强调在发生解体情况下不法行为国和相关继承国之间努力达成协定的重要性。 |
| (3) | (3) |
| In paragraph 1, the use of the phrase “may, in particular circumstances, be entitled to invoke”, is inspired by that in draft guideline 12, paragraph 2. | 第1段中，使用“可在特定情况下有权援引”一语是受指南草案12第2段的启发。 |
| The Commission chose such formulation, instead of “may invoke”, so as to reflect the idea that, while not all successor States will necessarily be entitled to invoke responsibility, one or more will. | 委员会选择这一措辞而非“可援引”，是为了反映以下理念，即虽然并不是所有继承国都一定有权援引责任，但一个或多个继承国会有权援引责任。 |
| The phrase “in particular circumstances” reflects the fact that the identification of the successor State or States that are entitled to invoke responsibility in respect of the injury to the predecessor may depend on a number of factors and that it will not necessarily be all successor States who are so entitled. | “在特定情况下”一语反映了以下事实，即有权对被继承国所受损害援引责任的继承国的识别，可能取决于若干因素，而且不一定所有继承国都有权援引责任。 |
| (4) | (4) |
| The phrase “particular circumstances” refers to a territorial or personal link between an internationally wrongful act or its consequences and one or more of the successor States. | “特定情况”一语指的是国际不法行为或其后果与一个或多个继承国在领土或人员上的联系。 |
| The most obvious link seems to be in situations where the injurious consequences of an internationally wrongful act affect only the territory of one successor State. | 联系最为明显的情况似乎是，国际不法行为的损害性后果只影响一个继承国的领土。 |
| For example, in the Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros case, the object of the bilateral treaty between Czechoslovakia and Hungary was situated on the territory of Slovakia, which was solely entitled to invoke the responsibility of Hungary for the breach of the treaty, even if the breach occurred before the date of succession. | 例如，在加布奇科沃－大毛罗斯项目案中，捷克斯洛伐克和匈牙利之间双边条约的对象位于斯洛伐克领土上，因此仅斯洛伐克有权援引匈牙利违反条约的责任，哪怕违约行为发生在继承日期之前。 |
| Another possible link is the personal one, where the injury was suffered by persons who became nationals of one successor State. | 另一个可能的联系是人员联系，即受到损害的是已成为一继承国国民的个人。 |
| This seems to be the case in some decisions of the United Nations Compensation Commission. | 联合国赔偿委员会的一些决定似乎就属于这种情况。 |
| (5) | (5) |
| Paragraph 2 is inspired by draft guideline 11. | 第2段受指南草案11的启发。 |
| The use of the word “relevant” is for the same reason as indicated in paragraph (5) of the commentary to draft guideline 11. | 使用“相关”一词的理由与指南草案11评注第(5)段所述的理由相同。 |
| As explained in paragraph (4) of the present commentary, it may be that only one or more of the successor States might be affected by the consequences of the internationally wrongful act (e.g., in Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros, it was Slovakia and not the Czech Republic that was affected). | 如本评注第(4)段所解释的，可能只有一个或有多个继承国受到国际不法行为后果的影响(例如，在加布奇科沃－大毛罗斯案中，受影响的是斯洛伐克，而不是捷克共和国)。 |
| The last sentence is virtually identical to the last sentence of draft guideline 11; | 最后一句与指南草案11最后一句几乎相同； |
| it provides criteria for the determination of which successor States are relevant and have a more justified claim in relation to the injury. | 该句提供了标准，用于确定哪些继承国是相关继承国并可就损害提出更正当的求偿。 |
| The same criteria also point to the meaning of the phrase “particular circumstances” in paragraph 1. | 同样的标准也指向第1段中“特定情况”一语的含义。 |
| The emphasis on agreement is consistent with the overall orientation of the draft guidelines, reflected in draft guideline 1, paragraph 2: that agreements between the States concerned have priority. | 对协定的强调符合指南草案1第2段所反映的本指南草案的总体方向：即所涉国家之间的协定具有优先地位。 |
| Guideline 15 Diplomatic protection | 指南15 外交保护 |
| The present draft guidelines do not address the application of the rules of diplomatic protection in situations of the succession of States. | 本指南草案不述及在国家继承情况下适用外交保护规则的问题。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) | (1) |
| The present draft guidelines, as set out in draft guideline 1, paragraph 1, concern the effects of a succession of States in respect of the responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts. | 如指南草案1第1段所述，本指南草案涉及国家对国际不法行为的责任方面国家继承的效果。 |
| Therefore, they do not address the application of the rules of diplomatic protection, as diplomatic protection is just one type of invocation of the responsibility of a State. | 因此，它们没有述及外交保护规则的适用问题，因为外交保护只是援引国家责任的一种形式。 |
| (2) | (2) |
| The relationship between the rules of responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts and rules of diplomatic protection was reflected, inter alia, in article 44, subparagraph (a), of the articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts. | 国家对国际不法行为的责任规则和外交保护规则之间的关系除其他外，反映在国家对国际不法行为的责任条款第44条(a)项中。 |
| (3) | (3) |
| However, the omission of specific rules on diplomatic protection in the present draft guidelines does not mean that the rule relating to the nationality of claims and other rules of diplomatic protection cannot apply in situations of the succession of States. | 但是，本指南草案没有提及关于外交保护的具体规则，并不意味着与求偿的国籍有关的规则 和其他外交保护规则不能适用于国家继承的情况。 |
| On the contrary, the occurrence of a succession of States usually involves a change of nationality of persons who reside in the territory or parts of the territory of a predecessor State that becomes the territory of a successor State. | 恰恰相反，国家继承的发生通常涉及居住在成为继承国领土的被继承国领土或部分领土内的人的国籍的改变。 |
| (4) | (4) |
| The previous work of the Commission addressed this issue in the articles on diplomatic protection, adopted in 2006. | 委员会先前的工作在2006年通过的外交保护条款中述及了这一问题。 |
| In particular, this issue was reflected in the text of, and the commentary to, article 5. | 特别是，这一点反映在第5条的案文和评注中。 |
| While the Commission considered that it was necessary to retain the continuous nationality rule, it agreed that there were exceptions to this rule. | 虽然委员会认为有必要保留持续国籍规则，但也议定：这一规则存在例外。 |
| Paragraph 2 of article 5 accordingly provides that a State may exercise diplomatic protection in respect of a person who is its national at the date of the official presentation of the claim but was not its national at the date of injury, provided that certain conditions are met. | 相应地，第5条第2款规定，一国对在正式提出求偿之日为其国民但在受到损害之日不是其国民的人，可行使外交保护，但须满足特定条件。 |
| Those conditions, according to paragraph 2 of article 5 and the commentary thereto are: “first, the person seeking diplomatic protection had the nationality of a predecessor State or has lost his or her previous nationality; | 根据第5条第2款及其评注，这些条件是：“第一，寻求外交保护的人曾具有被继承国的国籍，或者已丧失原国籍； |
| secondly, that person has acquired the nationality of another State for a reason unrelated to the bringing of the claim; | 第二，该人已基于与提出求偿无关的原因获得另一国的国籍； |
| and thirdly, the acquisition of the new nationality has taken place in a manner not inconsistent with international law.” | 第三，新国籍是以不违反国际法的方式取得的。 ” |
| (5) | (5) |
| Such conditions are usually met in the case of succession of States, when the change of nationality is involuntary. | 在国家继承的情况下，国籍的变更是非自愿的，通常能满足上述条件。 |
| The second condition in article 5 of the articles on diplomatic protection limits exceptions to the continuous nationality rule mainly to cases involving compulsory imposition of nationality, by which the person has acquired a new nationality as a necessary consequence of factors such as the succession of States. | 外交保护条款第5条所载的第二项条件将持续国籍规则的例外情况主要限定于涉及强制性给予国籍的情况，即该人取得新国籍是由于国家继承等因素引起的必然结果。 |
| In situations of succession of States, the acquisition of the new nationality should be considered consistent with international law even if the person had a right of option to choose between two or more nationalities granted by the predecessor and successor States. | 在国家继承的情况下，即便该人有权在被继承国和继承国给予的两个或两个以上国籍中作出选择，取得新国籍也应被视为符合国际法。 |
| Guideline 15 bis Cessation and non-repetition | 指南15之二 停止和不重复 |
| 1. | 1. |
| A predecessor State that is responsible for an internationally wrongful act that occurred before the date of succession of States, and that continues to exist after the date of succession, remains under an obligation: | 对国家继承日期之前发生的国际不法行为负有责任并且在继承日期之后继续存在的被继承国仍有义务： |
| (a) | (a) |
| to cease that act, if it is continuing; | 在该行为持续时，停止该行为； |
| (b) | (b) |
| to offer appropriate assurances and guarantees of non-repetition, if circumstances so require. | 在必要的情况下，提供不重复该行为的适当承诺和保证。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| A State that is responsible for an internationally wrongful act in accordance with draft guideline 7 or with draft guideline 7 bis, paragraph 1 or paragraph 2, is under an obligation: | 按照指南草案7或按照指南草案7之二第1段或第2段对国际不法行为负有责任的国家有义务： |
| (a) | (a) |
| to cease that act, if it is continuing; | 在该行为持续时，停止该行为； |
| (b) | (b) |
| to offer appropriate assurances and guarantees of non-repetition, if circumstances so require. | 在必要的情况下，提供不重复该行为的适当承诺和保证。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) | (1) |
| Draft guideline 15 bis mirrors the formulation of article 30 of the articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts and applies the rule embodied in that article to the context of State succession. | 指南草案15之二的措辞仿照国家对国际不法行为的责任条款第30条，并将该条所载规则适用于国家继承的情况。 |
| Accordingly, it deals with two separate issues raised by the breach of an international obligation: (a) the cessation of the wrongful act, and (b) the offer of assurances and guarantees of non-repetition by the responsible State. | 相应地，这条指南述及国际义务被违背所引起的两个单独的问题：(a) 停止不法行为，(b) 由责任国提供不重复该行为的承诺和保证。 |
| (2) | (2) |
| On the one hand, cessation is thus linked to the more general rule expressed in article 29 of the articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts. | 一方面，停止问题因此与国家对国际不法行为的责任条款第29条所述的一般规则联系了起来。 |
| Article 29 states the general principle that the legal consequences of an internationally wrongful act, in particular reparation, do not affect the continued duty of the State to perform the obligation breached. | 第29条载述了一项一般原则，即一国际不法行为的法律后果，特别是赔偿，不影响责任国继续履行所违背的义务的责任。 |
| The Commission discussed this issue but decided not to include another draft guideline that would reproduce this principle. | 委员会讨论了这一问题，但决定不再新增一条指南草案以重述这一原则。 |
| The continued duty to perform is a matter of primary rules (rather than secondary rules) and depends on whether the underlying obligation is still in force. | 继续履行义务的责任涉及初级规则(而非次级规则)问题，取决于基本义务是否仍然有效。 |
| On the other hand, assurances and guarantees of non-repetition serve a preventive function. | 另一方面，不重复的承诺和保证具有预防作用。 |
| (3) | (3) |
| The general condition that the underlying primary obligations remain in force fully applies. | 基本初级义务仍然有效这一一般条件完全适用。 |
| This is a necessary assumption of both the obligation of cessation and the obligation of assurances, in particular in situations of the succession of States. | 这是停止义务和保证义务的必要假设，特别是在国家继承的情况下。 |
| Regarding the obligation of cessation, as the tribunal in Rainbow Warrior arbitration stressed, there are “two essential conditions intimately linked” for the requirement of cessation of wrongful conduct to arise, “namely that the wrongful act has a continuing character and that the violated rule is still in force at the time in which the order is issued”. | 关于停止义务，法庭在“彩虹勇士”号案仲裁中着重指出，停止不法行为这一要求的产生，有“两个密切联系的必要条件”，“即不法行为具有持续的性质以及被违背的规则在发布命令的时候仍然有效”。 |
| (4) | (4) |
| Subparagraphs (a) and (b) of each paragraph are identical to their counterparts in article 30 of the articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts. | 每一段的(a)项和(b)项与国家对国际不法行为的责任条款第30条中的对应项相同。 |
| The subparagraphs provide, respectively, for the obligation of a State to cease an internationally wrongful act, if the act has a continuing character, and to offer appropriate assurances and guarantees of non-repetition, if circumstances so require, in the situations described in the chapeaux of paragraphs 1 and 2. | 这两项分别规定，在第1和第2段前导句所述情形下，如果国际不法行为具有持续性，一国有义务予以停止，并在必要的情况下提供不重复该行为的适当承诺和保证。 |
| The Commission also considered that the term “act” should be understood to refer to both actions and omissions. | 委员会还认为，“行为”一词应理解为既指作为也指不作为。 |
| (5) | (5) |
| Paragraph 1 concerns a predecessor State which continues to exist after the date of succession of States. | 第1段涉及在国家继承日期之后继续存在的被继承国。 |
| The word “remains” indicates that the succession of States has no impact on such a State’s responsibility to cease any wrongful act of a continuing character, and to offer appropriate assurances and guarantees of non-repetition, if circumstances so require. | “仍”一词表示，国家继承不影响这一国家的以下义务，即停止任何持续性不法行为，并在必要情况下提供不重复该行为的适当承诺和保证。 |
| (6) | (6) |
| Paragraph 2 applies to acts by successor States having a continuing character and to composite acts. | 第2段适用于继承国实施的具有持续性的行为，也适用于复合行为。 |
| Acts having a continuing character for which a predecessor State that continues to exist is responsible are covered in paragraph 1. | 第1段涵盖继续存在的被继承国负有责任的具有持续性的行为。 |
| Thus, paragraph 2 addresses acts having a continuing character to the extent that a successor State is responsible. | 因此，第2段述及继承国负有责任的具有持续性的行为。 |
| As addressed in draft guideline 7, a successor State is responsible for the consequences of its own acts after the date of the succession of States, and for the acts of its predecessor State, if and to the extent that the successor State accepts such acts as its own. | 如指南草案7所述，继承国对其自身在国家继承日期之后的行为的后果负有责任，而且在并且只在继承国将被继承国的行为接受为自已的行为的情况下，对被继承国的行为负有责任。 |
| The successor State is obligated to cease any wrongful act for which it is responsible under draft guideline 7 and offer appropriate assurances and guarantees of non-repetition, if circumstances require. | 对于根据指南草案7应由继承国负责的任何不法行为，继承国有义务予以停止，并在必要情况下提供不重复该行为的适当承诺和保证。 |
| With respect to composite acts, addressed in draft guideline 7 bis, paragraphs 1 and 2, predecessor States which continue to exist and successor States, respectively, are obligated to cease acts defined in aggregate as wrongful, provided that the acts are continuing in nature. | 关于指南草案7之二第1和第2段所述的复合行为，继续存在的被继承国和继承国分别有义务停止被一并定义为不法行为的行为，前提是这些行为具有持续性。 |
| In addition, these States have to offer appropriate assurances and guarantees of non-repetition, if circumstances so require. | 此外，这些国家必须在必要情况下提供不重复该行为的适当承诺和保证。 |
| Chapter VIII General principles of law | 第八章 一般法律原则 |
| A. | A. |
| Introduction | 导言 |
| 90. | 90. |
| The Commission, at its seventieth session (2018), decided to include the topic “General principles of law” in its programme of work and appointed Mr. Marcelo Vázquez-Bermúdez as Special Rapporteur. | 委员会在第七十届会议(2018年)上决定将“一般法律原则”专题列入工作方案，并任命马塞洛·巴斯克斯－贝穆德斯先生为特别报告员。 |
| The General Assembly, in paragraph 7 of its resolution 73/265 of 22 December 2018, subsequently took note of the decision of the Commission to include the topic in its programme of work. | 联大随后在2018年12月22日第73/265号决议第7段中注意到委员会决定将此专题列入工作方案。 |
| 91. | 91. |
| At its seventy-first session (2019), the Commission considered the Special Rapporteur’s first report (A/CN.4/732), which set out his approach to the topic’s scope and outcome, as well as the main issues to be addressed in the course of the Commission’s work. | 委员会在第七十一届会议(2019年)上审议了特别报告员的第一次报告(A/CN.4/732)，特别报告员在报告中提出了他处理本专题的范围和成果的方法，以及委员会在工作中应处理的主要问题。 |
| Following the debate in plenary, the Commission decided to refer draft conclusions 1 to 3, as contained in the Special Rapporteur’s first report, to the Drafting Committee. | 经全体会议辩论后，委员会决定将特别报告员第一次报告所载结论草案1至3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 conclusion 1, provisionally adopted by the Committee in English only, which was presented to the Commission for information. | 委员会随后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1的临时报告，该报告只有英文本，已提交委员会参考。 |
| 92. | 92. |
| Also at its seventy-first session, the Commission requested the Secretariat to prepare a memorandum surveying the case law of inter-State arbitral tribunals and international criminal courts and tribunals of a universal character, as well as treaties, which would be particularly relevant for its future work on the topic. | 也在第七十一届会议上，委员会请秘书处编写一份备忘录，评述国家间仲裁法庭、普遍性国际刑事法院和法庭的判例，以及不同条约，这对委员会今后关于这一专题的工作尤为重要。 |
| 93. | 93. |
| At its seventy-second session (2021), the Commission considered the Special Rapporteur’s second report (A/CN.4/741 and Corr.1), in which the Special Rapporteur addressed the identification of general principles of law in the sense of Article 38, paragraph 1 (c), of the Statute of the International Court of Justice. | 委员会在第七十二届会议(2021年)上审议了特别报告员的第二次报告(A/CN.4/741和Corr.1)，特别报告员在报告中论述了《国际法院规约》第三十八条第一款(寅)项意义上一般法律原则的识别问题。 |
| The Commission also had before it the memorandum it had requested from the Secretariat (A/CN.4/742) at its seventy-first session. | 委员会还收到了第七十一届会议要求秘书处提供的备忘录(A/CN.4/742)。 |
| Following the debate in plenary, the Commission decided to refer draft conclusions 4 to 9, as presented in the second report, to the Drafting Committee. | 经全体会议辩论后，委员会决定将特别报告员第二次报告所载结论草案4至9转交起草委员会。 |
| The Commission provisionally adopted draft conclusions 1, 2 and 4, together with commentaries, and took note of draft conclusion 5, as contained in the report of the Drafting Committee. | 委员会暂时通过了结论草案1、2和4及其评注，并注意到起草委员会报告所载结论草案5。 |
| B. | B. |
| Consideration of the topic at the present session | 本届会议审议此专题的情况 |
| 94. | 94. |
| At the present session, the Commission considered the Special Rapporteur’s third report (A/CN.4/753), in which the Special Rapporteur discussed the issue of transposition (Part One), general principles of law formed within the international legal system (Part Two), and the functions of general principles of law and their relationship with other sources of international law (Part Three). | 委员会在本届会议上审议了特别报告员的第三次报告(A/CN.4/753)，特别报告员在报告中讨论了移植问题(第一部分)、在国际法律体系内形成的一般法律原则(第二部分)和一般法律原则的功能及其与国际法其他渊源的关系(第三部分)。 |
| The Special Rapporteur proposed five draft conclusions. | 特别报告员提出了五条结论草案。 |
| He also made suggestions for the future programme of work on the topic (Part Four). | 他还就这一专题的未来工作方案提出了建议(第四部分)。 |
| 95. | 95. |
| At its 3585th meeting, on 1 June 2022, the Commission provisionally adopted draft conclusion 5, which had been provisionally adopted by the Drafting Committee at the seventy-second session (see sect C.1 below). | 在2022年6月1日第3585次会议上，委员会暂时通过了起草委员会第七十二届会议暂时通过的结论草案5(见下文C.1节)。 |
| 96. | 96. |
| The Commission considered the Special Rapporteur’s third report at its 3587th to 3592nd meetings, from 4 to 12 July 2022. | 委员会在2022年7月4日至12日举行的第3587至3592次会议上审议了特别报告员的第三次报告。 |
| At its 3592nd meeting, on 12 July 2022, the Commission decided to refer draft conclusions 10 to 14, as contained in the third report, to the Drafting Committee, taking into account the views expressed in the plenary debate. | 在2022年7月12日第3592次会议上，委员会决定结合全体会议辩论期间发表的意见，将第三次报告所载的结论草案10至14转交起草委员会。 |
| 97. | 97. |
| At its 3605th meeting, on 29 July 2022, the Commission considered the report of the Drafting Committee (A/CN.4/L.971) on the consolidated text of draft conclusions 1 to 11, provisionally adopted by the Committee. | 在2022年7月29日第3605次会议上，委员会审议了起草委员会关于起草委员会暂时通过的结论草案1至11的合并案文的报告(A/CN.4/L.971)。 |
| At the present session, the Committee provisionally adopted draft conclusions 3, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 and 11. | 在本届会议上，起草委员会暂时通过了结论草案3、6、7、8、9、10和11。 |
| At its 3605th meeting, on 29 July 2022, the Commission provisionally adopted draft conclusions 3 and 7 (see sect. C.1 below), and took note of draft conclusions 6, 8, 9, 10 and 11. | 在2022年7月29日第3605次会议上，委员会暂时通过了结论草案3和7 (见下文C.1节)，并注意到结论草案6、8、9、10和11。 |
| At its 3605th to 3612th meetings, from 29 July to 5 August 2022, the Commission adopted the commentaries to draft conclusions 3, 5 and 7, provisionally adopted at the present session (see sect. C.2 below). | 在2022年7月29日至8月5日第3605至第3612次会议上，委员会通过了本届会议暂时通过的关于结论草案3、5和7的评注(见下文C.2节)。 |
| 1. | 1. |
| Introduction by the Special Rapporteur of the third report | 特别报告员介绍第三次报告 |
| 98. | 98. |
| The Special Rapporteur stated that the third report addressed the functions of general principles of law in the sense of Article 38 paragraph 1 (c), of the Statute of the International Court of Justice and the relationship between general principles of law and the other sources of international law contained in Article 38, namely, treaties and customary international law. | 特别报告员说，第三次报告讨论了《国际法院规约》第三十八条第一款(寅)项意义上一般法律原则的功能，以及一般法律原则与第三十八条所载国际法其他渊源，即条约和习惯国际法之间的关系。 |
| He also explained that the third report re-examined certain aspects related to the identification of general principles in light of the debate held in the Commission at its seventy-second session and in the Sixth Committee at its seventy-sixth session (2021). | 他还解释说，第三次报告结合了国际法委员会第七十二届会议和第六委员会第七十六届会议(2021年)举行的辩论，重新审查了与一般法律原则的识别有关的某些方面。 |
| 99. | 99. |
| The Special Rapporteur explained that Part One of the third report further analysed the issue of transposition of general principles of law derived from national legal systems to the international legal system. | 特别报告员解释说，第三次报告第一部分进一步分析了将源自国家法律体系的一般原则移植到国际法律体系的问题。 |
| The purpose of Part One was to address questions that had been raised by members of the Commission and States in the Sixth Committee, in particular regarding draft conclusion 6 proposed in the Special Rapporteur’s second report. | 第一部分旨在处理委员会委员和各国在第六委员会提出的问题，特别是关于特别报告员第二次报告中提出的结论草案6的问题。 |
| The Special Rapporteur first agreed with those who had suggested that draft conclusion 6 could be simplified to avoid being overly prescriptive. | 特别报告员首先同意一些人的建议，即结论草案6可以简化，以避免规范性过强。 |
| Moreover, he emphasized that for recognition to occur, in the sense of Article 38 paragraph 1 (c), of the Statute of the International Court of Justice, it was not sufficient for a principle to be recognized in foro domestico; | 此外，他强调，一项原则在国内法院得到承认不足以发生《国际法院规约》第三十八条第一款(寅)项意义上的承认； |
| rather, recognition of its applicability in the international legal system was also necessary due to differences between national legal systems and the international legal system. | 鉴于国家法律体系与国际法律体系之间的差异，这项原则在国际法律体系中的适用性也必须得到承认。 |
| He further explained that a formal act of recognition was not required and that recognition in the context of transposition essentially occurred implicitly. | 他进一步解释说，不需要正式的承认行为，移植情况下的承认基本上是默示的。 |
| He noted that determining the compatibility of the principle with the international legal system was necessary. | 他指出，有必要确定有关原则与国际法律体系的相容性。 |
| 100. | 100. |
| Part Two summarized the differing views expressed in relation to the second category of general principles of law reflected in draft conclusion 7, namely general principles of law formed within the international legal system, and clarified certain matters regarding the methodology for their identification. | 第二部分概述了对结论草案7所反映的第二类一般法律原则，即在国际法律体系内形成的一般法律原则所表达的不同意见，并澄清了有关其识别方法的特定事项。 |
| The Special Rapporteur reiterated that there was sufficient practice and doctrine to substantiate a draft conclusion on the second category, while acknowledging that caution was required, especially in view of concerns raised that this category should not be confused with customary international law. | 特别报告员重申，有足够的实践和理论来支撑关于第二类原则的结论草案，同时承认需要谨慎行事，特别是考虑到有人提出关切，称这一类原则不应与习惯国际法混淆。 |
| He emphasized that the main challenge consisted in formulating a clear and precise methodology for the identification of general principles of law formed within the international legal system. | 他强调，主要挑战在于制定一套清晰而准确的方法来识别在国际法律体系内形成的一般法律原则。 |
| 101. | 101. |
| The Special Rapporteur stated that Part Three addressed the functions of general principles of law and their relationship with other sources of international law, in particular treaties and customary international law. | 特别报告员指出，第三部分论述了一般法律原则的功能及其与国际法其他渊源(特别是条约和习惯国际法)的关系。 |
| Following the discussion in Part Three, five draft conclusions were proposed in his third report. | 继第三部分的讨论之后，他在第三次报告中提出了五条结论草案。 |
| 102. | 102. |
| Section I of Part Three dealt with the essential function of general principles of law of filling gaps that might exist in conventional and customary international law. | 第三部分第一章述及一般法律原则的基本功能，即填补协定和习惯国际法中可能存在的空白。 |
| The Special Rapporteur explained that a general principle of law could only fill a gap to the extent that the existence of said principle could be determined following the methodology for its identification. | 特别报告员解释说，一般法律原则只有在所述原则的存在可以按照其识别方法得到确定的情况下才能填补空白。 |
| He highlighted that such function was widely recognized in practice and doctrine and that the report was careful not to suggest that there was a hierarchy between the three sources of international law (treaties, customary international law, and general principles of law), but, rather, that this relationship should be understood in light of the principle of lex specialis. | 他重点指出，这项功能在实践和理论中得到广泛承认，而且，报告措辞谨慎，没有暗示国际法的三个渊源(条约、习惯国际法和一般法律原则)之间存在位阶关系，而是表示，这一关系应结合特别法原则来理解。 |
| On the question of non liquet, the Special Rapporteur clarified that it was not necessary for the Commission to delve into the matter as (a) the analysis of the gap-filling function of general principles of law already answered the question of non liquet, and (b) the question of non liquet was applicable only in the judicial context and general principles of law, as a source of international law, were not limited to such perspective. | 关于无法可依的问题，特别报告员澄清说，委员会没有必要深入研究这个问题，因为(a) 对一般法律原则填补空白功能的分析已经解答了无法可依的问题，(b) 无法可依的问题只适用于司法情况，而作为国际法渊源的一般法律原则不应局限于这种视角。 |
| 103. | 103. |
| Section II of Part Three addressed three key issues regarding the relationship between general principles of law, treaties and customary international law: (a) the absence of hierarchy between the sources of international law; | 第三部分第二章论述了有关一般法律原则、条约和习惯国际法之间关系的三个关键问题：(a) 国际法渊源之间不存在位阶关系； |
| (b) the possibility of parallel existence of general principles of law and other norms of international law with identical or analogous content; | (b) 一般法律原则与具有相同或类似内容的其他国际法规范有并行存在的可能性； |
| and (c) the operation of the lex specialis principle within the context of general principles of law. | 以及(c) 特别法原则在一般法律原则范围内的运作。 |
| The Special Rapporteur underlined that practice showed that general principles of law could indeed exist in parallel with treaties and customary international law with an identical or analogous content, and that the applicability and specificity of such principles were not affected by such parallel existence. | 特别报告员强调，实践表明，一般法律原则确实可与具有相同或类似内容的条约和习惯国际法并行存在，这种并行存在并不影响这些原则的适用性和特殊性。 |
| Additionally, he explained that the lex specialis principle was analysed in light of the work of the Commission on fragmentation of international law, concluding that general principles of law may normally be considered as the “general law” in relation to other norms of international law owing to the way in which they emerge. | 此外，他解释说，对特别法原则的分析参照了委员会关于国际法不成体系问题的工作，并得出结论说，一般法律原则由于其产生的方式，相对于其他国际法规范而言通常可被视为“一般法”。 |
| 104. | 104. |
| Section III of Part Three of the report covered specific functions of general principles of law. | 报告第三部分第三章论述了一般法律原则的特定功能。 |
| The Special Rapporteur noted that said functions were not necessarily exclusive to general principles of law and needed to be understood in light of their essential gap-filling role. | 特别报告员指出，上述功能未必为一般法律原则所独有，并且需要结合其填补空白的基本作用来理解。 |
| The Special Rapporteur concluded by summarizing the specific functions that general principles of law could serve, as identified in the third report: (a) as an independent basis for rights and obligations; | 特别报告员最后总结了第三次报告中指出的一般法律原则可发挥的特定功能：(a) 用作权利和义务的独立依据； |
| (b) as a means to interpret and complement other rules of international law; | (b) 用以解释和补充其他国际法规则； |
| and (c) as a means to ensure the coherence and consistency of the international legal system. | (c) 用以确保国际法律体系的连贯性和一致性。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| Summary of the debate | 辩论摘要 |
| (a) | (a) |
| General comments | 一般性评论 |
| 105. | 105. |
| Members generally welcomed the third report of the Special Rapporteur. | 委员们普遍欢迎特别报告员的第三次报告。 |
| Appreciation for its rigour and legal logic was expressed. | 有人对报告的严谨性和法律逻辑表示了赞赏。 |
| Several members noted the importance of the topic. | 若干委员指出了这一专题的重要性。 |
| Some members expressed concerns regarding the scope of the topic, the terminology employed in the third report, and the examples of State practice to support certain propositions therein. | 一些委员表示了关切，涉及本专题的范围、第三次报告中使用的术语，以及支持报告中某些主张的国家实践实例。 |
| 106. | 106. |
| Several members reiterated that Article 38, paragraph 1 (c), of the Statute of the International Court of Justice was widely considered as an authoritative statement on the sources of international law, and that the point of departure of the work of the Commission was general principles of law in the sense of Article 38 as a source of international law. | 若干委员重申，《国际法院规约》第三十八条第一款(寅)项被广泛视作关于国际法渊源的权威性声明，委员会工作的出发点是第三十八条意义上作为国际法渊源的一般法律原则。 |
| In that connection, some members suggested changing the title of the topic to “General principles of law as a source of international law”. | 在这方面，一些委员建议将本专题的标题改为“作为国际法渊源的一般法律原则”。 |
| It was suggested that, even though the point of departure of the work of the Commission was Article 38, paragraph 1 (c), the Commission should not be limited to the confines of the Statute in its debate and conclusions. | 有人建议，即使委员会工作的出发点是第三十八条第一款(寅)项，委员会的辩论和结论也不应受限于《规约》。 |
| The view was expressed that Article 38, paragraph 1 (c), was a provision relating to the applicable law of the International Court of Justice, rather than a specification of the sources of international law. | 有人认为，第三十八条第一款(寅)项是一项关于国际法院适用法律的规定，而不是对国际法渊源的具体说明。 |
| In that regard, it was stated that the analysis of the jurisprudence of arbitral tribunals or international criminal tribunals, each one with its own applicable law, was irrelevant in a report addressing general principles of law within the meaning of Article 38, paragraph 1 (c). | 有人就此指出，在论述第三十八条第一款(寅)项意义上的一般法律原则的报告中，对各自有适用法律的仲裁法庭或国际性刑事法庭的判例的分析不具有相关性。 |
| 107. | 107. |
| Differing views were expressed regarding the nature of general principles of law as a primary source of international law. | 对于作为国际法主要渊源的一般法律原则的性质，委员们表达了不同的看法。 |
| Several members agreed that general principles of law were a primary and independent source, while others expressed doubts. | 一些委员同意，一般法律原则是一项主要和独立的渊源，而另一些委员则表示怀疑。 |
| The need to draw a clear distinction between general principles of law and judicial techniques or maxims, as well as between principles with normative scope and principles without normative scope, was emphasized. | 有人强调，必须将一般法律原则与司法技巧或准则明确区分开，还应将具有规范性范围的原则与不具有规范性范围的原则明确区分开。 |
| 108. | 108. |
| A concern was raised regarding a perceived overreliance in the third report on judicial decisions and individual commentators rather than on State practice. | 有人表示担心，认为第三次报告过于依赖司法裁决和个别评述者，而不是依托于国家实践。 |
| It was highlighted that the recognition of general principles of law was incumbent upon States. | 有人重点指出，承认一般法律原则是国家的责任。 |
| In respect of general principles of law formed within the international legal system, States could manifest such recognition either in the express form of treaty provisions or in the unwritten form of customary international law. | 关于在国际法律体系内形成的一般法律原则，各国可通过条约规定的明示形式或习惯国际法的不成文形式表明这种承认。 |
| A view was expressed that if gap-filling, where no treaty or customary international law rule applied, was an essential function of general principles of law, then finding evidence of State recognition of the general principle of law in question would be challenging. | 有一种意见认为，如果在没有条约或习惯国际法规则适用的情况下填补空白是一般法律原则的一项基本功能，那么将很难找到国家承认有关一般法律原则的证据。 |
| 109. | 109. |
| Some members suggested adding to the draft conclusions a non-exhaustive list of general principles of law, similar to draft conclusion 23 of the topic “Peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens)”. | 一些委员建议在结论草案中增列一份一般法律原则的非详尽清单，类似“一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)”专题的结论草案23。 |
| A view was expressed that the main objective of the work on the topic should be the identification and confirmation of the specific content of general principles of law, even if it was in the form of an indicative list. | 有一种意见认为，此专题工作的主要目标应当是识别和确认一般法律原则的具体内容，即便是以指示性清单的形式。 |
| 110. | 110. |
| Several members reiterated their concerns regarding terminology; | 若干委员重申了对术语的担心； |
| it was noted that several distinct terms, such as “general international law”, “general principles of international law” and “fundamental principles of international law” were often used interchangeably in practice and in teachings, with some members calling for a proper definition and distinction between them. | 有人指出，若干不同术语，例如“一般国际法”、“国际法的一般原则”和“国际法的基本原则”，在实践和学说中经常被互换使用，一些委员要求对它们作出适当的定义和区分。 |
| (b) | (b) |
| Draft conclusion 6 | 结论草案6 |
| 111. | 111. |
| With respect to draft conclusion 6 (ascertainment of transposition to the international legal system), as proposed in the second report of the Special Rapporteur, some members reiterated their support for the two-step approach (existence in national legal systems and transposition) proposed by the Special Rapporteur, while the notion of transposition itself was questioned by others. | 关于特别报告员第二次报告中提出的结论草案6 (确定被移植到国际法律体系内)，一些委员重申支持特别报告员提出的两步方法(存在于各国的国家法律体系内和发生移植)，而其他委员则对移植这一概念本身提出了疑问。 |
| Several members supported implicit transposition rather than an express, active or formal act of transposition. | 若干委员支持默示的移植，而不是明示、主动或正式的移植行为。 |
| It was stated that recognition was fundamentally the “existence” in national legal systems, while transposition was mainly an issue of applicability of general principles of law on a case-by-case basis. | 有人指出，承认从根本上说就是“存在”于国家法律体系中，而移植则主要是一般法律原则的逐案适用问题。 |
| Agreement was expressed with the Special Rapporteur’s position that the requirement of recognition was pertinent to both the existence of the principle across national legal systems and its transposition, while it was stated that recognition should not play a role in determining whether a principle is transposable. | 有人表示同意特别报告员的立场，即承认这一条件既要求有关原则存在于各国的国家法律体系之中，又要求有关原则被移植，但也有人指出，承认不应影响确定一项原则是否可移植。 |
| A concern was raised that the notion of transposability could override the will of States in a key aspect of the process of recognition of general principles of law and be used as an excuse to ascertain the transposition of general principles of law by special arrangements between States or by controversial judicial decisions. | 有人表示担心，移植这一概念可能在一般法律原则的承认过程的某一重要方面凌驾于国家的意志之上，并被用作借口，以通过国家间特别安排或有争议的司法裁决来实现一般法律原则的移植。 |
| 112. | 112. |
| Several members expressed their support for the notion of compatibility or suitability as a defining element of transposition to the international legal system. | 一些委员表示支持将相容性或适宜性的概念作为移植到国际法律体系的一个界定要素。 |
| Doubts were expressed on the use of the term “fundamental principles of international law” in draft conclusion 6 and, in that regard, drafting suggestions were made. | 有人对结论草案6中使用“国际法基本原则”一词提出疑问，并在这方面提出了起草建议。 |
| It was suggested that article 21 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court could constitute good guidance on the issue of transposition. | 有人建议，《国际刑事法院罗马规约》第二十一条可为移植问题提供良好指导。 |
| While several members argued that transposition implied compatibility or suitability with essential elements of the international legal system, a view was expressed that compatibility had to extend to all applicable international law. | 一些委员认为，移植意味着与国际法律体系的基本要素相容或相适宜，但也有人认为，相容性必须涵盖所有适用的国际法。 |
| A suggestion to include the notion of opinio juris in the process of recognition was also made. | 还有人建议将法律确信这一概念纳入承认的过程。 |
| 113. | 113. |
| A number of members suggested simplifying draft conclusion 6, in order to favour flexibility in the identification of general principles of law derived from national legal systems, while maintaining certain rigour in the process. | 一些委员建议简化结论草案6, 以便有利于在识别源自国家法律体系的一般法律原则时保持灵活性，同时在过程中保持一定的严谨性。 |
| Some members emphasized that the Commission should aim at ensuring a text that avoided creating the impression that transposition was either automatic or that it required a formal act. | 一些委员强调，委员会的目标应是确保案文不要给人留下移植是自动的或者需要正式行为的印象。 |
| While flexibility and a non-formalized process was supported, further guidance on the requirements of transposition was sought. | 虽然灵活性和非正式过程得到了支持，但有人要求就移植的条件提供进一步指导。 |
| In that connection, drafting suggestions were made to draft conclusion 6. | 在这方面，有人对结论草案6提出了一些起草建议。 |
| (c) | (c) |
| Draft conclusion 7 | 结论草案7 |
| 114. | 114. |
| Draft conclusion 7 (identification of general principles of law formed within the international legal system) was provisionally adopted by the Commission with commentaries at the present session. | 委员会在本届会议上暂时通过了结论草案7 (识别在国际法律体系内形成的一般法律原则)及其评注。 |
| Accordingly, following the practice of the Commission, the summary of the debate of this draft conclusion is not included in the present report. | 因此，按照委员会的惯例，关于本条结论草案的辩论摘要不载于本报告。 |
| (d) | (d) |
| Draft conclusions 10 to 12 | 结论草案10至12 |
| 115. | 115. |
| Several members expressed support for draft conclusions 10 (absence of hierarchy between the sources of international law), 11 (parallel existence), and 12 (lex specialis principle), while others expressed hesitation, questioning their usefulness or necessity. | 若干委员表示支持结论草案10 (国际法渊源之间不存在位阶关系)、结论草案11 (并行存在)和结论草案12 (特别法原则)，而另一些委员则表示犹豫，对其用处或必要性提出了疑问。 |
| Some members commended the efforts by the Special Rapporteur to define relevant dimensions of general principles of law. | 一些委员赞扬特别报告员努力界定一般法律原则的有关方面。 |
| A view was expressed that draft conclusions on the issue of relationship between sources should not be included in the work of the Commission. | 有人认为，关于渊源之间关系问题的结论草案不应列入委员会的工作。 |
| 116. | 116. |
| Regarding draft conclusion 10, while some members agreed with the third report that the absence of a hierarchy between sources of international law was well supported in the practice of States and scholarly writings, others questioned this approach. | 关于结论草案10, 一些委员同意第三次报告的看法，即国际法渊源之间不存在位阶关系已在国家实践和学术著作中得到充分支持，但其他委员对此提出质疑。 |
| According to the members who questioned the approach, even if in theory there was no hierarchy between sources, in practice there was an informal hierarchy between the sources listed in Article 38 of the Statute of the International Court of Justice, which were applied en ordre successif. | 对这种立场提出质疑的委员说，即使理论上渊源之间不存在位阶关系，但在实践中，《国际法院规约》第三十八条所列的渊源之间存在一种非正式的位阶关系，在适用时应依照先后次序。 |
| In that connection, it was stated that general principles of law did not in practice have the same status as a treaty or a rule of customary international law. | 在这方面，有人指出，一般法律原则在实践中并不具有与条约或习惯国际法规则相同的地位。 |
| Several members suggested that there was a tension between draft conclusion 10 and draft conclusion 13 (gap-filling), in the sense that a gap-filling function placed general principles of law below treaties and customary international law. | 一些委员指出，结论草案10和结论草案13 (填补空白)之间存在着矛盾，因为填补空白的功能将条约和习惯国际法置于一般法律原则之上。 |
| A view was expressed that general principles of law were a subsidiary source of international law. | 有人认为，一般法律原则是国际法的一种辅助渊源。 |
| 117. | 117. |
| Concerns were raised that draft conclusion 10 did not address the relationship of general principles of law with peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens), or the relationship between general principles of law and the law of international organizations. | 有人表示关切，认为结论草案10没有述及一般法律原则与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的关系，也没有述及一般法律原则与国际组织法之间的关系。 |
| Several drafting suggestions were made for draft conclusion 10, including, inter alia, simplifying the text, merging draft conclusion 10 with draft conclusions 11 and 12, or omitting the word “hierarchy”. | 就结论草案10提出了一些起草建议，其中包括简化案文、将结论草案10与结论草案11和12合并，或省略“位阶”一词。 |
| Some members also suggested moving draft conclusions 10 to 12 after draft conclusions 13 and 14 (specific functions of general principles of law). | 一些委员还建议将结论草案10至12移到结论草案13和14 (一般法律原则的特定功能)之后。 |
| A drafting suggestion was made to specify that draft conclusions 10, 11 and 12 only applied to existing general principles of law. | 有人提出了一项起草建议，具体说明结论草案10、11和12仅适用于现有的一般法律原则。 |
| 118. | 118. |
| Several members expressed support for draft conclusion 11 as correctly reflecting the possibility of the parallel existence of general principles of law and rules of treaty law and/or rules of customary international law. | 若干委员表示支持结论草案11, 认为它正确地反映了一般法律原则与条约法规则和(或)习惯国际法规则并行存在的可能性。 |
| In that regard, the jurisprudence outlined in the third report to support such proposition was emphasized. | 在这方面，有人强调了第三次报告中概述的支持这一主张的判例。 |
| Other members considered the provision unnecessary or of limited practical applicability. | 另一些委员认为此规定没有必要或实际适用性有限。 |
| It was suggested that the content of draft conclusion 11 could be dealt with in the commentary and that the discussion on parallel existence was not relevant to the topic since the Commission was not engaged in a general discussion on sources. | 有人建议，可在评注中述及结论草案11的内容，关于并行存在的讨论与本专题无关，因为委员会不是在就渊源问题进行一般性讨论。 |
| The view was expressed that general principles of law could not coexist with rules of customary international law of similar or identical content since the processes for the formation and identification of general principles of law and customary international law would often overlap. | 有人认为，一般法律原则不能与具有类似或相同内容的习惯国际法规则并存，因为一般法律原则和习惯国际法的形成和识别过程常常存在重叠。 |
| 119. | 119. |
| Several drafting suggestions were made for draft conclusion 11, in addition to the suggestion to merge draft conclusions 10 and 11. | 除了将结论草案10和11合并的建议外，还就结论草案11提出了若干起草建议。 |
| A suggestion to reconsider the reference to the sources of international law with which general principles of law may coexist was also made. | 还有人建议对可与一般法律原则并存的国际法渊源的提法予以重新考虑。 |
| 120. | 120. |
| Draft conclusion 12 was supported by some members, who considered that lex specialis was a principle that may be applicable to resolve conflicts between rules derived from general principles of law on the one hand, and rules of treaty law and customary international law on the other hand. | 结论草案12得到了一些委员的支持，他们认为，特别法是一项原则，可适用于解决一般法律原则所产生规则与条约法和习惯国际法规则之间的冲突。 |
| Others questioned whether the provision was needed, as it appeared that its content could be discussed in the commentary. | 另一些委员质疑是否需要这项规定，因为其内容似乎可以在评注中讨论。 |
| Several members expressed doubts regarding the sole focus on the lex specialis principle in the third report and, consequently, in the draft conclusion, when other methods for deconflicting sources could also be relevant and applicable, such as the lex posteriori principle. | 若干委员对第三次报告以及结论草案只侧重于特别法原则表示了疑虑，因为消除渊源之冲突的其他方法也可能是相关的和适用的，例如后法原则。 |
| Reconsideration of the focus on the lex specialis principle was called for. | 有人要求重新考虑对特别法原则的侧重。 |
| The view was expressed that general principles of law were lex generalis in nature. | 有人认为，一般法律原则本质上是一般法。 |
| Some members suggested that there was a tension between draft conclusions 12 and 13, from the perspective of lex specialis playing no role if the essential function of general principles was that of gap-filling. | 一些委员认为，如果一般原则的基本功能是填补空白，那么特别法便不起作用，从这个角度来看，结论草案12和13之间存在矛盾。 |
| It was noted that the analysis contained in the third report and draft conclusion 12 relied mainly on the work of the Commission on fragmentation of international law, when it should also rely on State practice and jurisprudence. | 有人指出，第三次报告和结论草案12所载的分析主要依据委员会关于国际法不成体系问题的工作，但国家实践和判例也应该成为依据。 |
| Drafting suggestions were made to explicitly mention the lex generalis nature of general principles of law in the draft conclusion, as well as to reformulate the draft conclusion so it clarified that lex specialis applied as a method of deconflicting norms or rules stemming from general principles of law and other sources of international law addressing the same subject matter. | 提出了一些起草建议，即在结论草案中明确提及一般法律原则的一般法性质，并重新拟订本条结论草案的表述，以澄清适用特别法是为了消除源自一般法律原则和国际法其他渊源的规范或规则在处理同一主题事项时的冲突。 |
| (e) | (e) |
| Draft conclusions 13 and 14 | 结论草案13和14 |
| 121. | 121. |
| Some members commended the Special Rapporteur for addressing an essential dimension of general principles of law and recalled that the importance of addressing the functions of general principles of law had been highlighted by several States in the Sixth Committee. | 一些委员赞扬特别报告员述及了一般法律原则的一个基本层面，并回顾说，一些国家在第六委员会重点指出必须述及一般法律原则的功能。 |
| Other members raised doubts concerning the relevance or usefulness of drafting conclusions on the functions performed by general principles of law, an undertaking which constituted a novelty in the Commission’s work on the sources of international law. | 另一些委员对起草关于一般法律原则所履行功能的结论的相关性或效用性表示怀疑，这项工作在委员会关于国际法渊源的工作中并无先例。 |
| It was highlighted that it was not obvious that the functions listed in draft conclusions 13 and 14 were the only functions of general principles of law, or the most important ones. | 有人重点指出，并不明确结论草案13和14所列功能是否是一般法律原则的唯一功能，或是否是最重要的功能。 |
| 122. | 122. |
| Regarding draft conclusion 13, several members agreed that the essential function of general principles of law was to fill the lacunae left in the international legal system where the other sources offered no solution. | 关于结论草案13, 若干委员一致认为，一般法律原则的基本功能是填补国际法律体系中其他渊源无法提供解决办法的空白。 |
| Some members stated that general principles of law did not have a monopoly on filling gaps, since treaties and customary international law could also play a similar role. | 一些委员指出，一般法律原则并不垄断填补空白的工作，因为条约和习惯国际法也可以发挥类似的作用。 |
| In that connection, the view was expressed that not every gap could be filled with general principles of law. | 在这方面，有人认为，并非每一处空白都可以用一般法律原则来填补。 |
| It was also stated that gap-filling did not constitute the main role of general principles of law because they performed a major function in the interpretation and application of existing rules and in providing coherence to the international legal system. | 还有人指出，填补空白并不构成一般法律原则的主要作用，因为一般法律原则在解释和适用现有规则以及使国际法律体系保持一致方面发挥着重要作用。 |
| While some members supported the use of the term “gap-filling”, others considered it ambiguous and misleading. | 虽然一些委员支持使用“填补空白”一词，但另一些委员则认为该词含义模糊，容易引起误解。 |
| 123. | 123. |
| It was emphasized that general principles of law only performed a gap-filling role to the extent that they existed and were recognized. | 有人强调，一般法律原则只有在其存在并得到承认的情况下才能发挥填补空白的作用。 |
| The need to carefully consider the gap-filling function in light of the specificities of the international legal system was mentioned. | 有人提到，需要根据国际法律体系的特殊性认真考虑填补空白的功能。 |
| Some members considered that the third report overestimated the role played by general principles of law in filling gaps. | 一些委员认为，第三次报告过高估计了一般法律原则在填补空白方面发挥的作用。 |
| Others noted that the gap-filling function was performed in the context of dispute settlement to avoid situations of non liquet. | 另一些委员指出，填补空白的功能是在解决争端的背景下履行的，目的是避免无法可依的情况。 |
| In that connection, a drafting suggestion was made to include the context (dispute settlement) and the objective (preventing a situation of non liquet) in the text of the draft conclusion. | 因此，有人建议在此条结论草案案文中列入其背景(争端解决)和目的(防止无法可依的情况)。 |
| It was suggested that the existence of a gap should not be a prerequisite to the application of general principles of law, since they performed other important functions in the international legal system. | 有人建议，存在空白不应成为适用一般法律原则的先决条件，因为这些原则在国际法律体系中还发挥着其他重要的功能。 |
| Some members expressed their opposition to the distinction between essential and specific functions developed in the third report. | 一些成员表示反对第三次报告中对基本功能和特定功能所作的区分。 |
| A concern was raised that the third report did not explain how the gap-filling role would apply if the Commission came to the conclusion that two different categories of general principles of law (i.e., those derived from national legal systems and those formed within the international legal system) existed. | 有人表示关切的是，第三次报告没有解释，如果委员会得出结论认为存在两类不同的一般法律原则(即源自国家法律体系的一般法律原则和在国际法律体系内形成的一般法律原则)，填补空白的作用将如何适用。 |
| 124. | 124. |
| A number of drafting suggestions were made. | 委员们提出了若干起草建议。 |
| Several members suggested merging draft conclusions 13 and 14, in order to avoid the distinction between essential and specific functions. | 一些委员建议将结论草案13和14合并，以避免区分基本功能和特定功能。 |
| Other suggestions consisted in replacing the term “essential function” with the term “general function”, or the term “function” with “character”. | 其他建议包括将“基本功能”一词改为“一般功能”，或将“功能”一词改为“特性”。 |
| 125. | 125. |
| With respect to draft conclusion 14, some members supported it in substantive terms, agreeing that it correctly identified a number of the functions that general principles of law may serve in the international legal system. | 关于结论草案14, 一些委员对其实质内容表示了支持，认为它正确识别了一般法律原则可在国际法律体系中发挥的一些功能。 |
| Other members, however, questioned whether the functions identified in the provision were exhaustive and raised concerns regarding the characterizations employed therein. | 然而，其他委员质疑该条款所确定的功能是否详尽无遗，并对其中所采用的描述表示担心。 |
| Some members queried the description of the functions as “specific”, since the functions listed in the draft conclusion were not specific to general principles of law, but rather functions common to all sources of international law. | 一些委员对将这些功能描述为“特定”提出疑问，因为此条结论草案所列功能并非一般法律原则所特有，而是所有国际法渊源所共有的功能。 |
| Doubts were also expressed whether draft conclusion 14 was necessary and whether the Commission needed to delve into the functions of general principles of law in the context of the topic. | 还有人对结论草案14是否有必要以及委员会是否需要在本专题中深入研究一般法律原则的功能表示怀疑。 |
| 126. | 126. |
| Differing views were expressed regarding general principles of law serving as an independent basis for rights and obligations, as provided for in subparagraph (a) of draft conclusion 14. | 对于结论草案14(a)项所规定的作为权利和义务的独立依据的一般法律原则，委员们表达了不同的意见。 |
| Several members expressed support for subparagraph (a), arguing that being an independent basis for rights and obligations was the fundamental function of any source of law, and that this function was closely related to the gap-filling function. | 一些委员表示支持(a)项，认为作为权利和义务的独立依据是所有法律渊源的基本功能，而这项功能与填补空白的功能密切相关。 |
| Other members opposed this proposition, stating, inter alia, that it lacked empirical support, it conflicted with the gap-filling function, and it could unduly encourage reliance on abstract general principles of law to claim rights that did not exist under treaties or customary international law. | 另一些委员反对这一主张，除其他外，指出这一主张缺乏经验支持，与填补空白的功能相冲突，而且可能会不当地鼓励依赖抽象的一般法律原则来主张条约或习惯国际法中不存在的权利。 |
| Further elaboration on the requirements for the existence of rights and obligations on the basis of general principles of law was requested. | 有人要求进一步阐明权利和义务依据一般法律原则而存在的条件。 |
| 127. | 127. |
| While support was expressed for subparagraph (b) of draft conclusion 14 on the interpretative and complementary function of general principles of law to other rules of international law, some members considered that the subparagraph lacked sufficient support in practice. | 虽然有人表示支持关于一般法律原则解释和补充其他国际法规则的功能的结论草案14(b)项，但一些委员认为，该项在实践中缺乏足够的支持。 |
| 128. | 128. |
| Several members supported subparagraph (c) of draft conclusion 14 on the function of general principles of law to ensure the coherence of the international legal system, while others stated that general principles of law did not fulfil such function, since the notion of international law being a systematic and coherent system was not accurate. | 若干委员支持关于一般法律原则确保国际法律体系一致性功能的结论草案14(c)项，而其他委员则指出，一般法律原则不履行这种功能，因为将国际法视为一个系统性和一致的体系是不准确的。 |
| More corroboration regarding this function was called for. | 关于这项功能，需要更多的佐证。 |
| A drafting suggestion was made to merge subparagraphs (b) and (c). | 有人提出了将(b)项和(c)项合并的起草建议。 |
| (f) | (f) |
| Future programme of work | 今后的工作方案 |
| 129. | 129. |
| Some members supported the proposal by the Special Rapporteur for the Commission to conclude first reading on the topic at its seventy-third session, while others highlighted that this might not be possible due to the lack of time during the second part of the session. | 一些委员支持特别报告员关于委员会在第七十三届会议上完成对本专题的一读的建议，而另一些委员则强调，由于第二期会议时间不够，这或许不可能实现。 |
| In that connection, the complexity of the topic and the differing views within the Commission on some key aspects of the topic were mentioned. | 在这方面，有人提到本专题的复杂性和委员会内部对本专题一些关键方面的不同意见。 |
| 3. | 3. |
| Concluding remarks of the Special Rapporteur | 特别报告员的总结 |
| 130. | 130. |
| In his summary of the debate, the Special Rapporteur expressed his gratitude to the members of the Commission and welcomed the enriching debate on his third report. | 特别报告员在辩论总结中，向委员会委员表示了感谢，并对关于第三次报告的富有成果的辩论表示欢迎。 |
| He acknowledged that the topic was a complex one. | 他承认这是一个复杂的专题。 |
| He emphasized that he had carefully analysed the arguments and concerns expressed by members during the debate. | 他强调，他已仔细分析了各委员在辩论期间提出的论点和关切。 |
| 131. | 131. |
| Regarding the scope of the topic, the Special Rapporteur reiterated that the work of the Commission referred to general principles of law in the sense of Article 38, paragraph 1 (c), of the Statute of the International Court of Justice. | 关于本专题的范围，特别报告员重申，委员会的工作涉及《国际法院规约》第三十八条第一款(寅)项意义上的一般法律原则。 |
| He clarified that both categories of general principles of law (namely, those derived from national legal systems and those formed within the international legal system) were dealt with on the understanding that they fell under Article 38, paragraph 1 (c). | 他澄清说，对两类一般法律原则(即源自国家法律体系的一般法律原则和在国际法律体系内形成的一般法律原则)的处理均基于一种理解，即它们都属于第三十八条第一款(寅)项的范畴。 |
| He further clarified that the statement that the point of departure of the topic should be Article 38, paragraph 1 (c), meant that the work of the Commission should not be limited to a literal reading of such provision; | 他进一步澄清说，关于本专题的出发点应是第三十八条第一款(寅)项的声明，意味着委员会的工作不应局限于对这项规定的字面理解； |
| rather, it should take into account the existing State practice and jurisprudence, as well as writings. | 相反，委员会的工作应考虑到现有的国家实践和判例以及各种文献。 |
| 132. | 132. |
| On the question of general principles of law as a source of international law, the Special Rapporteur stated that general principles of law were considered, by the wide majority of the existing practice and doctrine, as a formal source of international law, along with treaties and customary international law. | 关于一般法律原则作为国际法渊源的问题，特别报告员指出，绝大多数现行实践和理论认为，一般法律原则与条约和习惯国际法一样，是国际法的正式渊源。 |
| He noted that a number of members of the Commission and States in the Sixth Committee explicitly stated that Article 38, paragraph 1 (c), established general principles of law as a source of international law capable of generating norms to regulate conduct at the international level. | 他指出，委员会的一些委员和各国在第六委员会明确指出，第三十八条第一款(寅)项确立了一般法律原则国际法的一种渊源，能够产生各项准则，在国际层面规范有关行为。 |
| The judgment of the International Court of Justice in Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States of America) was recalled. | 他回顾了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(尼加拉瓜诉美利坚合众国)中的判决。 |
| Moreover, he explained that the position that Article 38 was limited to the applicable law of the Court implied that there were no sources of international law of a general character; | 此外，他解释说，有的立场认为，第三十八条仅限于国际法院适用的法律，这一立场暗指不存在一般性的国际法渊源； |
| this position, in his view, was unsustainable as it would result in an unacceptable fragmentation of international law, as well as in legal uncertainty, making it impossible for the international legal system to operate. | 他认为，这种立场是不可持续的，因为它将导致国际法陷入不可接受的不成体系问题，还会导致法律不确定性，使国际法律体系无法运作。 |
| 133. | 133. |
| Regarding concerns on inconsistent terminology, the Special Rapporteur recalled that this issue had already been dealt with in the first report, emphasizing that the Commission itself had confirmed on several occasions that “general international law” or “general principles of international law” could refer to general principles of law depending on the context. | 关于对术语不一致的关切，特别报告员回顾说已在第一次报告中处理了这个问题，同时强调委员会本身已在若干场合确认，“一般国际法”或“国际法一般原则”根据上下文可指代一般法律原则。 |
| The Special Rapporteur also explained that when international criminal tribunals applied general principles of law, they were essentially the general principles of law in the sense of Article 38, paragraph 1 (c). | 特别报告员还解释说，国际性刑事法庭适用的一般法律原则基本上是第三十八条第一款(寅)项意义上的一般法律原则。 |
| The Special Rapporteur concluded that the jurisprudence and practice relating to international criminal tribunals were relevant for the topic. | 特别报告员得出结论认为，与国际性刑事法庭有关的判例和实践与本专题相关。 |
| 134. | 134. |
| Concerning the suggestion by some members to add a non-exhaustive list containing examples of general principles of law, the Special Rapporteur reiterated that such list was not necessary since the primary objective of the topic was to clarify different aspects of general principles of law as a source of international law, including their scope, the methodology for their identification, their functions and relationship with other sources of international law. | 关于一些委员建议增列一份载有一般法律原则实例的非详尽清单，特别报告员重申，没有必要列出这种清单，因为本专题的主要目的是澄清作为国际法渊源的一般法律原则的不同层面，包括其范围、识别方法、功能以及与国际法其他渊源的关系。 |
| He stated that the commentaries would refer to relevant practice, which would in turn contain such examples. | 他说，评注将提及相关实践，而相关实践又将包含此类实例。 |
| 135. | 135. |
| The Special Rapporteur stated that members of the Commission generally agreed with the two-step approach to the identification of general principles law derived from national legal systems, with the suggestion to adopt a more flexible approach regarding transposition, while maintaining a rigorous methodology, with the notion of compatibility with the international legal system, and with the proposition that transposition was implicit and did not require an express or formal act. | 特别报告员说，委员会成员普遍同意采取两步方法来识别源自国家法律体系的一般原则法，同意在保持严格方法的同时对移植采取更灵活办法的建议，同意与国际法律体系相容的概念，并同意移植是默示的，不需要明示或正式行为的提议。 |
| The Special Rapporteur also noted that several members agreed that the requirement of recognition as per Article 38, paragraph 1 (c), was necessary for transposition. | 特别报告员还指出，一些委员同意，第三十八条第一款(寅)项所规定的承认要求对移植而言是必要的。 |
| In that regard, the Special Rapporteur clarified that a general principle of law in foro domestico was not automatically transposed to the international legal system. | 在这方面，特别报告员澄清说，国内法院适用的一般法律原则不会自动移植到国际法律体系中。 |
| He highlighted the need to take into account the differences between national legal systems and the international legal system in the analysis. | 他重点指出，在分析中需要考虑到国家法律体系与国际法律体系之间的差异。 |
| He also stressed that, in light of the existing practice, jurisprudence and doctrine, the issue of transposition was related to the identification of general principles of law, rather than to the application of an existing general principle of law to a specific case. | 他还强调，从现有实践、判例和学说来看，移植问题与一般法律原则的识别有关，而不是与现有一般法律原则在具体案件中的适用有关。 |
| 136. | 136. |
| According to the Special Rapporteur, the main issue before the Commission was to establish clear criteria to determine that a principle in foro domestico was transposed to the international legal system. | 特别报告员认为，委员会面临的主要问题是制定明确的标准，以确定国内法院适用的原则是否被移植到国际法律体系。 |
| In that regard, he observed that it seemed to have transpired in the plenary debate that compatibility was required for a principle to be considered as transposed. | 在这方面，他指出，全体会议辩论似乎已经表明，一项原则要被视为已经移植，必须与国际法律体系相容。 |
| In his view, the compatibility test should be in relation to norms that were universally accepted and that could be considered as a reflection of the basic structure of the international legal system. | 他认为，相容性检验应针对普遍接受并且可被视为反映了国际法律体系基本结构的规范。 |
| Taking into account the comments and observations made by members in the plenary, as well as further reflection on certain matters, the Special Rapporteur made a revised proposal for draft conclusion 6, to be considered by the Drafting Committee. | 考虑到委员们在全体会议上提出的评论和意见，以及对特定事项的进一步思考，特别报告员对结论草案6提出了一项订正提案，供起草委员会审议。 |
| 137. | 137. |
| With regard to the question of general principles of law formed within the international legal system, the Special Rapporteur recalled that, as in previous years, this question continued to generate differing views among members of the Commission: a number of members supported the existence of general principles of law formed within the international legal system; | 关于在国际法律体系内形成的一般法律原则的问题，特别报告员回顾说，与往年一样，这个问题仍在委员会委员中引发了不同的意见：若干委员支持在国际法律体系内形成的一般法律原则的存在； |
| some members were sceptical, but did not rule out the existence of these principles; | 一些委员持怀疑态度，但并不排除这类原则的存在； |
| and some other members considered that general principles of law were limited to those derived from national legal systems. | 而另一些委员认为一般法律原则仅限于源自国家法律体系的一般法律原则。 |
| He reiterated his view that there are grounds to support the existence of general principles of law formed within the international legal system based on an analysis of practice, jurisprudence and doctrine. | 他重申他的观点，即基于对实践、判例和学说的分析，有理由支持在国际法律体系内形成的一般法律原则的存在。 |
| 138. | 138. |
| The Special Rapporteur first explained that the issue before the Commission was to clarify to the extent possible the existence of general principles of law derived from the international legal system. | 特别报告员首先解释说，委员会要处理的问题是尽可能澄清源自国际法律体系的一般法律原则的存在。 |
| He also stressed that principles falling within this second category governed basic and structural issues of the international legal system, such as sovereign equality of States and consent to the jurisdiction of international courts. | 他还强调，属于这第二类的原则涉及国际法律体系的基本和结构性问题，例如国家主权平等和同意国际法院的管辖权。 |
| He reiterated that Article 38, paragraph 1 (c), did not indicate that general principles of law were those limited to general principles of law derived from national legal systems. | 他重申，第三十八条第一款(寅)项并没有表明一般法律原则仅限于源自国家法律体系的一般法律原则。 |
| While the Special Rapporteur acknowledged that practice relevant to the existence of the second category was limited, he stated that it was not insufficient for the Commission to address the question. | 特别报告员承认，与第二类的存在有关的实践有限，但他也表示，这些实践已足以让委员会处理这一问题。 |
| The Special Rapporteur also clarified that the inductive and deductive methodology in the third report was not different from the methodology proposed for the identification of general principles of law derived from national legal systems. | 特别报告员还澄清说，第三次报告中的归纳和演绎的方法与提议的识别源自国家法律体系的一般法律原则的方法并无不同。 |
| He emphasized that, for both categories of general principles of law, an inductive analysis of norms should first be conducted, followed by a deductive analysis; | 他强调，对于这两类一般法律原则，都应首先对规范进行归纳分析，然后再进行演绎分析； |
| for the first category, the deductive analysis pertained to the test of compatibility with the international legal system, whereas for the second category, the deductive analysis pertained to demonstrating that the general principle of law in question was inherent to the international legal system. | 对于第一类，演绎分析涉及检验与国际法律体系的相容性，而对于第二类，演绎分析涉及证明有关一般法律原则是国际法律制度所固有的原则。 |
| 139. | 139. |
| The Special Rapporteur referred to an alternative formulation for draft conclusion 7, to be considered by the Drafting Committee, seeking to find a common ground in light of the comments made by members in the plenary debate. | 特别报告员提及将由起草委员会审议的结论草案7的备选案文，该案文力求结合委员们在全体会议辩论中提出的意见找到共同立场。 |
| 140. | 140. |
| Regarding draft conclusion 10, the Special Rapporteur noted that several members stated that there was no hierarchy between the different sources of international law. | 关于结论草案10, 特别报告员注意到，若干委员指出，国际法的不同渊源之间不存在位阶关系。 |
| With respect to the view by some members that there was a tension between draft conclusion 10 and the gap-filling function, the Special Rapporteur stated that any tension between the two draft conclusions was solved because there seemed to be consensus in the Commission on general principles of law fulfilling the same functions of the other sources of international law, and not being necessarily limited to gap-filling. | 关于一些委员认为结论草案10与填补空白的功能之间存在矛盾的看法，特别报告员说，这两个结论草案之间的任何矛盾都已解决，因为委员会似乎已一致认为，一般法律原则履行着与国际法其他渊源相同的功能，而不一定仅局限于填补空白。 |
| 141. | 141. |
| On draft conclusion 11, regarding the possibility of parallel existence between general principles of law and rules of other sources on international law with identical or analogous content, the Special Rapporteur noted that there were not many discrepancies among the members of the Commission. | 关于结论草案11, 就一般法律原则与具有相同或类似内容的国际法其他渊源并行存在的可能性而言，特别报告员指出，委员会委员之间不存在很多分歧。 |
| As regards comments made by some members questioning the parallel existence of general principles of law and rules of customary international law, the Special Rapporteur stated that there was no reason a general principle of law could not exist in parallel with a rule of customary international law. | 至于一些委员们提出的质疑一般法律原则和习惯国际法规则并行存在的意见，特别报告员说，一般法律原则没有理由不能与习惯国际法规则并行存在。 |
| For example, there was a possibility that a rule of customary international law covered only certain aspects of a general principle of law and thus the principle remained useful in interpreting or applying such rule of customary international law. | 例如，有可能一项习惯国际法规则仅涵盖了某项一般法律原则的某些层面，因此，该原则在解释或适用这项习惯国际法规则方面仍然有用。 |
| 142. | 142. |
| The Special Rapporteur explained that draft conclusion 12 was limited to the principle of lex specialis because said principle was usually referred to in practice and in doctrine when discussing the relationship between general principles of law and other sources. | 特别报告员解释说，结论草案12仅限于特别法原则，因为在讨论一般法律原则与其他渊源之间的关系时，实践和理论通常会提到这项原则。 |
| Nevertheless, he agreed that other principles could also be pertinent in the context of normative conflict resolution. | 不过，他同意，在解决规范性冲突方面，其他原则也可能适用。 |
| 143. | 143. |
| Regarding comments made by members on the relationship between general principles of law and peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens), the Special Rapporteur noted that the draft conclusions and the commentaries could clarify that the latter could also be important when addressing a normative conflict. | 关于委员们就一般法律原则与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)之间的关系发表的意见，特别报告员指出，结论草案和评注可以澄清，在处理规范性冲突时，后者也可以发挥重要作用。 |
| 144. | 144. |
| The Special Rapporteur considered that draft conclusions 10 to 12 were necessary to provide guidance to States, international courts and tribunals, and practitioners, taking into account the divergent views existing sometimes in practice and in doctrine on the matter. | 特别报告员认为，考虑到在实践和理论中有时存在对这一问题的不同看法，结论草案10至12是必要的，可为各国、国际性法院和法庭以及从业人员提供指导。 |
| The Special Rapporteur concurred with suggestions to merge draft conclusions 10 to 12, which could be further discussed in the Drafting Committee. | 特别报告员赞同将结论草案10至12合并的建议，此事可在起草委员会进一步讨论。 |
| 145. | 145. |
| Regarding the gap-filling role of general principles of law, the Special Rapporteur noted that members generally agreed to it, while noting that it could not be considered a function as such and that it responded to practical considerations. | 关于一般法律原则填补空白的作用，特别报告员注意到，委员们普遍同意这一点，但同时指出，这种作用不能被认定为一项功能，而是对实际考虑的回应。 |
| He explained that the functions of general principles of law were, in principle, the same functions of the other sources of international law contained in Article 38, paragraph 1 (c), while acknowledging that, in practice, general principles of law were often resorted to when treaty rules or customary international law did not regulate, or did not fully or clearly regulate, a legal question. | 他解释说，一般法律原则的功能原则上与第三十八条第一款(寅)项所载国际法其他渊源的功能相同，同时承认，在实践中，在条约规则或习惯国际法没有规范或没有充分或明确规范某个法律问题之时，往往会诉诸于一般法律原则。 |
| 146. | 146. |
| In the view of the Special Rapporteur, draft conclusions on the functions of general principles of law were indeed necessary, given the confusion that sometimes existed both in practice and in doctrine. | 特别报告员认为，鉴于实践和理论中有时存在的混淆不清，关于一般法律原则功能的结论草案确实是必要的。 |
| He agreed with the suggestion by some members that draft conclusions 13 and 14 could be merged, which could be further discussed in the Drafting Committee. | 他同意一些委员的建议，即结论草案13和14可以合并，这可以在起草委员会中进一步讨论。 |
| He indicated that the Drafting Committee could clarify the functions of general principles of law, taking into account the manner in which general principles of law were usually applied in practice. | 他表示，起草委员会可以结合一般法律原则在实践中通常的适用方式来澄清一般法律原则的功能。 |
| 147. | 147. |
| Finally, the Special Rapporteur reiterated his intention to conclude first reading before the end of the current quinquennium. | 最后，特别报告员重申，打算在本五年期结束之前完成一读。 |
| C. | C. |
| Text of the draft conclusions on general principles of law provisionally adopted by the Commission at its seventy-third session | 委员会第七十三届会议暂时通过的关于一般法律原则的结论草案案文 |
| 1. | 1. |
| Text of the draft conclusions | 结论草案案文 |
| 148. | 148. |
| The text of the draft conclusions provisionally adopted by the Commission at its seventy-third session is reproduced below. | 委员会第七十三届会议暂时通过的结论草案案文载录如下。 |
| Conclusion 3 Categories of general principles of law | 结论3 一般法律原则的类别 |
| General principles of law comprise those: | 一般法律原则包括： |
| (a) | (a) |
| that are derived from national legal systems; | 源自国家法律体系的原则； |
| (b) | (b) |
| that may be formed within the international legal system. | 可在国际法律体系内形成的原则。 |
| Conclusion 5 Determination of the existence of a principle common to the various legal systems of the world | 结论5 确定一项世界各法律体系共有的原则的存在 |
| 1. | 1. |
| To determine the existence of a principle common to the various legal systems of the world, a comparative analysis of national legal systems is required. | 要确定一项世界各法律体系共有的原则的存在，需要对各国法律体系进行比较分析。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| The comparative analysis must be wide and representative, including the different regions of the world. | 比较分析必须广泛且有代表性，包括世界不同区域。 |
| 3. | 3. |
| The comparative analysis includes an assessment of national laws and decisions of national courts, and other relevant materials. | 比较分析包括对国家法律和国家法院所作判决的评估，以及其他相关材料。 |
| Conclusion 7 Identification of general principles of law formed within the international legal system | 结论7 识别在国际法律体系内形成的一般法律原则 |
| 1. | 1. |
| To determine the existence and content of a general principle of law that may be formed within the international legal system, it is necessary to ascertain that the community of nations has recognized the principle as intrinsic to the international legal system. | 要确定可能在国际法律体系内形成的一般法律原则的存在及内容，有必要查明各国已承认该原则是国际法律体系固有的原则。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| Paragraph 1 is without prejudice to the question of the possible existence of other general principles of law formed within the international legal system. | 第1段不影响可能存在着国际法律体系内形成的其他一般法律原则的问题。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| Text of the draft conclusions and commentaries thereto provisionally adopted by the Commission at its seventy-third session | 委员会第七十三届会议暂时通过的结论草案案文及其评注 |
| 149. | 149. |
| The text of the draft conclusions, together with commentaries, provisionally adopted by the Commission at its seventy-third session, is reproduced below. | 委员会第七十三届会议暂时通过的结论草案案文及其评注载录如下。 |
| Conclusion 3 Categories of general principles of law | 结论3 一般法律原则的类别 |
| General principles of law comprise those: | 一般法律原则包括： |
| (a) | (a) |
| that are derived from national legal systems; | 源自国家法律体系的原则； |
| (b) | (b) |
| that may be formed within the international legal system. | 可在国际法律体系内形成的原则。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) | (1) |
| Draft conclusion 3 addresses the two categories of general principles of law in the sense of Article 38, paragraph 1 (c), of the Statute of the International Court of Justice. | 结论草案3述及《国际法院规约》第三十八条第一款(寅)项意义上的一般法律原则的两个类别。 |
| The term “categories” is employed to indicate two groups of general principles of law in light of their origins and thus the process through which they may emerge. | 使用“类别”一词，以表示一般法律原则依其起源及进而可能产生的过程而分为两类。 |
| In contrast with subparagraph (a) of the draft conclusion, which uses the phrase “are derived from”, subparagraph (b) uses the phrase “may be formed”. | 本条结论草案的(a)项使用了“源自”一语，相比之下，(b)项则使用了“可…形成”一语。 |
| The phrase “may be formed” was considered appropriate to introduce a degree of flexibility to the provision, acknowledging that there is a debate as to whether a second category of general principles of law exists. | “可…形成”一语被认为是适当的，以便为这项规定引入一定程度的灵活性，同时承认对于是否存在第二类一般法律原则仍有争议。 |
| (2) | (2) |
| Subparagraph (a) of the draft conclusion refers to the general principles of law that are derived from national legal systems. | 本条结论草案(a)项提到源自国家法律体系的一般法律原则。 |
| That general principles of law in the sense of Article 38, paragraph 1 (c), of the Statute of the International Court of Justice include those derived from national legal systems is established in the jurisprudence of courts and tribunals and teachings, and is confirmed by the travaux préparatoires of the Statute. | 《国际法院规约》第三十八条第一款(寅)项意义上的一般法律原则包括源自国家法律体系的一般法律原则，这一点已在法院和法庭的判例 和学说 中得到确立，并在《规约》的准备工作文件 中得到确认。 |
| Draft conclusions 4 to 6 deal in greater detail with the methodology for the identification of these general principles of law. | 结论草案4至6更详细地论述了识别这些一般法律原则的方法。 |
| (3) | (3) |
| Subparagraph (b) of draft conclusion 3 refers to the general principles of law that may be formed within the international legal system. | 结论草案3的(b)项提到可在国际法律体系内形成的一般法律原则。 |
| The existence of this category of general principles of law in the sense of Article 38, paragraph 1 (c), of the Statute of the International Court of Justice, appears to find support in the jurisprudence of courts and tribunals and teachings. | 《国际法院规约》第三十八条第一款(寅)项意义上的一般法律原则的这一类别的存在，似乎在法院和法庭的判例 以及在学说 中得到了支持。 |
| Some members, however, consider that Article 38, paragraph 1 (c), does not encompass a second category of general principles of law, or at least remain sceptical of its existence as an autonomous source of international law. | 然而，一些委员认为第三十八条第一款(寅)项并不包含第二类一般法律原则，或者至少对其作为国际法的一个自主渊源的存在持怀疑态度。 |
| Further aspects about general principles of law formed within the international legal system are explained in the commentary to draft conclusion 7. | 关于在国际法律体系内形成的一般法律原则的更多方面的解释载于结论草案7评注。 |
| Conclusion 5 Determination of the existence of a principle common to the various legal systems of the world | 结论5 确定一项世界各法律体系共有的原则的存在 |
| 1. | 1. |
| To determine the existence of a principle common to the various legal systems of the world, a comparative analysis of national legal systems is required. | 要确定一项世界各法律体系共有的原则的存在，需要对各国法律体系进行比较分析。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| The comparative analysis must be wide and representative, including the different regions of the world. | 比较分析必须广泛且有代表性，包括世界不同区域。 |
| 3. | 3. |
| The comparative analysis includes an assessment of national laws and decisions of national courts, and other relevant materials. | 比较分析包括对国家法律和国家法院所作判决的评估，以及其他相关材料。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) | (1) |
| Draft conclusion 5 addresses the first step of the two-step methodology for the identification of general principles of law derived from national legal systems set out in draft conclusion 4, that is, the determination of the existence of a principle common to the various legal systems of the world. | 结论草案5涉及结论草案4所述的识别源自国家法律体系的一般法律原则的两步方法的第一步，即确定一项世界各法律体系共有的原则的存在。 |
| Paragraph 1 of the draft conclusion provides that, to determine the existence of such a principle, a comparative analysis is required. | 结论草案第1段规定，为确定这一原则的存在，需要进行比较分析。 |
| Paragraph 2 describes the comparative analysis by indicating that the latter must be wide and representative, including the different regions of the world. | 第2段对比较分析作了描述，指出比较分析必须广泛且有代表性，包括世界不同区域。 |
| Paragraph 3 explains which materials are relevant for the purposes of this methodology. | 第3段解释为了本方法的目的哪些材料是相关材料。 |
| (2) | (2) |
| Paragraph 1 of draft conclusion 5 states that a “comparative analysis of national legal systems” is required to determine the existence of a principle common to the various legal systems of the world. | 结论草案5第1段指出，需要“对各国法律体系进行比较分析”，以确定一项世界各法律体系共有的原则的存在。 |
| This formulation is based on a general approach that is found in practice and in the literature, whereby national legal systems are assessed and compared in order to establish that a legal principle is common to them. | 这一提法所依据的是实践和文献中的一般做法，即对各国法律体系进行评估和比较，以确定一项法律原则是各国共有的。 |
| The “comparative analysis” referred to in the draft conclusion does not require that particular methodologies that exist in the field of comparative law be employed. | 结论草案中提到的“比较分析”并不要求采用比较法领域现有的特定方法。 |
| While such methodologies may, when appropriate, provide some guidance, a degree of flexibility is generally maintained in practice. | 虽然这些方法可能在适当情况下提供一些指导，但在实践中通常会保持一定程度的灵活性。 |
| What is relevant for the purposes of draft conclusion 5 is that a common denominator is found across national legal systems. | 与结论草案5的目的相关的是，须在各国法律体系中发现共同点。 |
| (3) | (3) |
| What is meant by a legal principle “common” to the various legal systems of the world is not specified in draft conclusion 5. | 结论草案5没有具体说明世界各法律体系“共有”的法律原则的含义。 |
| The Commission considered that, since the content and scope of general principles of law derived from national legal systems may vary, it was appropriate not to be overly prescriptive in this regard, thus allowing for a case-by-case analysis. | 委员会认为，源自国家法律体系的一般法律原则的内容和范围可能各不相同，因此在这方面不宜作出过强的规定，从而能够进行逐案分析。 |
| In many cases, the result of the comparative analysis may be the determination of the existence of a legal principle of a general and abstract character. | 在许多情况下，比较分析的结果可能是存在一项一般性和抽象性的法律原则。 |
| In other cases, however, the comparative analysis can lead to the ascertainment of legal principles with a more concrete or specific character. | 然而，在其他情况下，比较分析可以导致查明更有具体性或特定性的法律原则。 |
| (4) | (4) |
| The second paragraph of draft conclusion 5 indicates that the comparative analysis for the determination of the existence of a principle common to the various legal systems of the world must be “wide and representative, including the different regions of the world”. | 结论草案5第二段指出，为确定是否存在一项世界各法律体系共有的原则而进行的比较分析必须“广泛且有代表性，包括世界不同区域”。 |
| This description is aimed at clarifying that, while it is not necessary to assess every single legal system of the world to identify a general principle of law, the comparative analysis must nonetheless be sufficiently comprehensive to take into account the legal systems of States in accordance with the principle of sovereign equality of States. | 这一描述旨在澄清，虽然没有必要逐一评估世界上每一个法律体系来识别一般法律原则，但比较分析必须足够全面，以按照各国主权平等原则将各国的法律体系纳入考虑。 |
| The term “different regions of the world” was included to emphasize that it does not suffice to show that a legal principle exists in legal systems representing certain legal families (such as civil law, common law and Islamic law), but that it is also necessary to show that the principle has been recognized widely in the various regions of the world or, as the International Court of Justice indicated in the Barcelona Traction case, that a principle has been “generally accepted by municipal legal systems”. | 用上“世界不同区域”这一术语是为了强调，仅仅表明某一法律原则存在于代表某些法系(如民法、普通法和伊斯兰法)的法律体系中是不够的，也必须表明该原则已在世界各区域得到广泛承认， 或正如国际法院在巴塞罗那电车公司案中所指出的，一项原则已“为各国内法律体系所普遍接受”。 |
| (5) | (5) |
| Paragraph 3 of draft conclusion 5 provides additional guidance by listing, in a non-exhaustive manner, the sources that may be relied upon to carry out the comparative analysis of national legal systems. | 结论草案5第3段提供了进一步的指导，以非详尽无遗的方式列出了对国家法律体系进行比较分析时可以依靠的渊源。 |
| The terms “national laws” and “decisions of national courts” are to be understood in a broad way, covering the whole range of materials in national legal systems that can be potentially relevant for the identification of a general principle of law, such as constitutions, legislation, decrees and regulations, as well as decisions of national courts from different levels and jurisdictions, including constitutional courts or tribunals, supreme courts, courts of cassation, courts of appeal, courts of first instance, and administrative tribunals. | 对“国家法律”和“国家法院所作判决”这两个术语应作广义的理解，涵盖国内法律体系中可能与识别一般法律原则有关的所有材料，如宪法、立法、法令和条例，以及不同级别和管辖权的国内法院、包括宪法法院或法庭、最高法院、最高上诉法院、上诉法院、初审法院和行政法庭的判决。 |
| The term “and other relevant materials” was included so as not to preclude other sources of national legal systems that may also be relevant, such as customary law or doctrine. | 列入“以及其他相关材料”一语是为了不排除可能也相关的国家法律体系的其他渊源，如习惯法或学说。 |
| (6) | (6) |
| In preparing draft conclusion 5, paragraph 3, the Commission was mindful that national legal systems are not identical and that each legal system must be analysed in its own context, taking into account its own characteristics. | 在编写结论草案5第3段时，委员会铭记各国的法律体系不尽相同，必须在考虑到其自身特点的情况下，根据其自身的背景对每一种法律体系进行分析。 |
| In certain legal systems, for example, the decisions of national courts may be more relevant to determine the existence of a legal principle, while in others written codes and doctrine may have prevalence. | 例如，在某些法律体系中，国家法院的判决可能更适合于确定一项法律原则的存在，而在另一些法律体系中，成文法典和学说可能占主导地位。 |
| The Commission was also in agreement that all branches of national law, including both private and public law, are potentially relevant for the identification of a general principle of law derived from national legal systems. | 委员会还一致认为，国内法的所有分支，既包括私法也包括公法，都可能与源自国内法律体系的一般法律原则的识别相关。 |
| (7) | (7) |
| It should be highlighted that determining the existence of a principle common to the various legal systems of the world is not sufficient to establish the existence and content of a general principle of law in the sense of Article 38, paragraph 1 (c), of the Statute of the International Court of Justice. | 应当重点指出，确定存在一项世界各法律体系共有的原则，这不足以确定《国际法院规约》第三十八条第一款(寅)项意义上的一般法律原则的存在和内容。 |
| As noted in draft conclusion 4, the ascertainment of the transposition of that principle to the international legal system is also required. | 正如结论草案4所指出的，还需要查明上述原则是否已经被移植到国际法律体系内。 |
| This second step of the methodology is addressed in draft conclusion 6. | 结论草案6述及了方法的第二步。 |
| Conclusion 7 Identification of general principles of law formed within the international legal system | 结论7 识别在国际法律体系内形成的一般法律原则 |
| 1. | 1. |
| To determine the existence and content of a general principle of law that may be formed within the international legal system, it is necessary to ascertain that the community of nations has recognized the principle as intrinsic to the international legal system. | 要确定可能在国际法律体系内形成的一般法律原则的存在及内容，有必要查明各国已承认该原则是国际法律体系固有的原则。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| Paragraph 1 is without prejudice to the question of the possible existence of other general principles of law formed within the international legal system. | 第1段不影响可能存在着国际法律体系内形成的其他一般法律原则的问题。 |
| Commentary | 评注 |
| (1) | (1) |
| Draft conclusion 7 addresses the identification of general principles of law formed within the international legal system. | 结论草案7述及在国际法律体系内形成的一般法律原则的识别。 |
| (2) | (2) |
| Paragraph 1 of draft conclusion 7 provides that, to determine the existence and content of a general principle of law that may be formed within the international legal system, it is necessary to ascertain that the community of nations has recognized the principle as intrinsic to that system. | 结论草案7第1段规定，要确定可在国际法律体系内形成的一般法律原则的存在及内容，有必要查明各国已承认该原则是国际法律体系固有的原则。 |
| The Commission considered that the existence of this type of general principle of law is justified for a number of reasons. | 委员会认为，这类一般法律原则的存在有若干理据。 |
| First, there are examples in judicial practice which appear to support the existence of these general principles of law. | 第一，司法实践中有一些例子似乎支持这些一般法律原则的存在。 |
| Second, the international legal system, like any other legal system, must be able to generate general principles of law that are intrinsic to it, which may reflect and regulate its basic features, and not have only general principles of law borrowed from other legal systems. | 第二，国际法律体系同任何其他法律体系一样，必须能够产生其固有的、可能反映和规范其基本特征的一般法律原则，而不只是从其他法律体系借用一般法律原则。 |
| Third, nothing in the text of Article 38, paragraph 1 (c), of the Statute of the International Court of Justice limits general principles of law to those derived from national legal systems. | 第三，《国际法院规约》第三十八条第一款(寅)项的案文并未将一般法律原则限制为源自国家法律体系的原则。 |
| Fourth, the travaux préparatoires of the Statute do not exclude the existence of such principles. | 第四，《规约》的准备工作文件并未排除此类原则的存在。 |
| (3) | (3) |
| As regards the methodology for the identification of general principles of law formed within the international legal system, the Commission considered that it is similar to that applicable to general principles of law derived from national legal systems. | 关于识别在国际法律体系内形成的一般法律原则的方法，委员会认为，该方法与适用于源自国家法律体系的一般法律原则的方法类似。 |
| In both cases, first, an inductive analysis of existing norms is carried out: in the case of the principles of the first category, existing rules in national legal systems are analysed; | 对这两类一般法律原则，都首先要对现有规范进行归纳分析：对于第一类原则，要分析国家法律体系中的现有规则； |
| in the case of the second category, existing rules in the international legal system are analysed. | 对于第二类原则，要分析国际法律体系中的现有规则。 |
| The methodology is also deductive for both categories: in the case of general principles of law derived from national legal systems, their compatibility with the international legal system must be determined; | 对这两类一般法律原则而言，这一方法也都具有演绎性：对于源自国家法律体系的一般法律原则，必须确定它们与国际法律体系是否相容； |
| and in the case of principles formed within the international legal system, it must be shown that such principles are intrinsic to the international legal system. | 对于在国际法律体系内形成的原则，必须证明这种原则是国际法律体系所固有的。 |
| (4) | (4) |
| The second paragraph of draft conclusion 7 indicates that the draft conclusion is without prejudice to the question of the possible existence of other general principles of law formed within the international legal system. | 结论草案7第二段指出，本条结论草案不影响可能存在着国际法律体系内形成的其他一般法律原则的问题。 |
| This paragraph was included to reflect the view of some members of the Commission who supported the existence of general principles of law formed within the international legal system, but considered that paragraph 1 of the draft conclusion would be too narrow and would not encompass other possible principles that, while not intrinsic or inherent in the international legal system, may nonetheless emerge from within the latter system and not from national legal systems. | 列入这一段，是为了反映委员会一些委员的意见，他们支持在国际法律体系内形成的一般法律原则的存在，但认为这项结论草案的第1段过于狭隘，没有包含其他可能的原则，这些原则虽然不是国际法律体系所固有或内在的原则，但仍可能在国际法律体系内形成，而不是源自国家法律体系。 |
| (5) | (5) |
| Draft conclusion 7 was adopted by the Commission despite differing views among its members, in the interest of obtaining further comments by States on the matter before the completion of the first reading. | 尽管委员会委员之间有不同意见，但委员会仍然通过了结论草案7, 以便在完成一读之前征求各国对这一事项的进一步意见。 |
| (6) | (6) |
| Several members, while not excluding that a second category of general principles of law in the sense of Article 38, paragraph 1 (c), of the Statute of the International Court of Justice might exist, raised the concern that no sufficient State practice, jurisprudence or teachings existed to support fully the existence of the second category, making it difficult to determine in a clear manner the methodology for their identification. | 有几位委员虽然不排除可能存在《国际法院规约》第三十八条第一款(寅)项意义上的一般法律原则的第二个类别，但提出了关切，即没有足够的国家实践、判例或学说充分支持第二类的存在，因此难以明确地确定这种原则的识别方法。 |
| (7) | (7) |
| Some other members were of the view that Article 38, paragraph 1 (c), of the Statute of the International Court of Justice is limited to the general principles of law derived from national legal systems. | 另一些委员认为，《国际法院规约》第三十八条第一款(寅)项仅限于源自国家法律体系的一般法律原则。 |
| The view was expressed that, at the time of the drafting of the Statute of the Permanent Court of International Justice, the Advisory Committee of Jurists did not accept general principles of law formed within the international legal system, and that, during the drafting of the Statute of the International Court of Justice, the proposal for the creation of general principles of law within the international legal system was not accepted. | 有人表示，在《常设国际法院规约》的起草期间，法学家咨询委员会没有接受在国际法律体系内形成的一般法律原则， 而在《国际法院规约》的起草期间，关于在国际法律体系内建立一般法律原则的提议也未被接受。 |
| Some members cautioned that the Commission should be careful and not engage in an exercise of progressive development in a topic concerning one of the sources of international law. | 一些委员告诫委员会应谨慎行事，不要在涉及国际法渊源之一的专题中进行逐渐发展的工作。 |
| The view was also expressed that confusion with the other sources of international law should be avoided. | 还有人表示，应避免与国际法的其他渊源混淆。 |
| In this regard, some members of the Commission considered that the distinction between customary international law and general principles of law formed within the international legal system, within the meaning given in draft conclusion 7, was not clear, and that the Commission should be cautious not to put forward a methodology for the identification of those general principles of law that could overlap with the conditions for the emergence of rules of customary international law. | 在这方面，委员会一些委员认为，习惯国际法与结论草案7意义上的在国际法律体系内形成的一般法律原则之间的区别不明确，委员会应谨慎行事，提出的这类一般法律原则的识别方法不要与习惯国际法规则的产生条件出现重叠。 |
| (8) | (8) |
| It is emphasized that the present commentary, together with the commentary to draft conclusion 3, are provisional and the Commission will revisit them at a later stage. | 有人强调，本评注与结论草案3的评注都是临时性的，委员会将在后续阶段重新审视这些评注。 |
| Chapter IX Sea-level rise in relation to international law | 第九章 与国际法有关的海平面上升 |
| A. | A. |
| Introduction | 导言 |
| 150. | 150. |
| At its seventieth session (2018), the Commission decided to include the topic “Sea-level rise in relation to international law” in its long-term programme of work. | 委员会第七十届会议(2018年)决定将“与国际法有关的海平面上升”专题列入长期工作方案。 |
| The General Assembly, in its resolution 73/265 of 22 December 2018, noted the inclusion of the topic in the long-term programme of work of the Commission. | 联大在2018年12月22日第73/265号决议中注意到委员会将这一专题列入其长期工作方案。 |
| 151. | 151. |
| At its seventy-first session (2019), the Commission decided to include the topic in its programme of work. | 委员会第七十一届会议(2019年)决定将这一专题列入其工作方案。 |
| The Commission also decided to establish an open-ended Study Group on the topic, to be co-chaired, on a rotating basis, by Mr. Bogdan Aurescu, Mr. Yacouba Cissé, Ms. Patrícia Galvão Teles, Ms. Nilüfer Oral and Mr. Juan José Ruda Santolaria. | 委员会还决定设立一个关于该专题的不限成员名额研究组，由波格丹·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·奥拉尔女士和胡安·何塞·鲁达·桑托拉里亚先生轮流担任共同主席。 |
| At its 3480th meeting, on 15 July 2019, the Commission took note of the joint oral report of the Co-Chairs of the Study Group. | 委员会在2019年7月15日第3480次会议上注意到研究组共同主席的联合口头报告。 |
| 152. | 152. |
| At its seventy-second session (2021), the Commission reconstituted the Study Group, and considered the first issues paper on the topic, which had been issued together with a preliminary bibliography. | 委员会第七十二届会议(2021年)重组了研究组，并审议了关于该专题的第一份问题文件， 该文件已与初步参考文献 一起发布。 |
| At its 3550th meeting, on 27th July 2021, the Commission took note of the joint oral report of the Co-Chairs of the Study Group. | 委员会在2021年7月27日举行的第3550次会议上注意到研究组共同主席的联合口头报告。 |
| B. | B. |
| Consideration of the topic at the present session | 本届会议审议此专题的情况 |
| 153. | 153. |
| At the present session, the Commission reconstituted the Study Group on sea-level rise in relation to international law, chaired by the two Co-Chairs on issues related to statehood and to the protection of persons affected by sea-level rise, namely Ms. Galvão Teles and Mr. Ruda Santolaria. | 委员会在本届会议上重组了与国际法有关的海平面上升专题研究组，由处理与国家地位和受海平面上升影响人员的保护有关问题的两位共同主席加尔旺·特莱斯女士和鲁达·桑托拉里亚先生担任共同主席。 |
| 154. | 154. |
| In accordance with the agreed programme of work and methods of work, the Study Group had before it the second issues paper on the topic (A/CN.4/752), prepared by Ms. Galvão Teles and Mr. Ruda Santolaria and issued in April 2022, together with a selected bibliography (A/CN.4/752/Add.1), finalized in consultation with members of the Study Group and issued only in its original language in June 2022. | 根据商定的工作方案和工作方法，研究组收到了由加尔旺·特莱斯女士和鲁达·桑托拉里亚先生编写、于2022年4月印发的关于这一专题的第二份问题文件(A/CN.4/752)，以及与研究组成员协商后定稿、于2022年6月仅以原文印发的参考文献选编(A/CN.4/752/Add.1)。 |
| 155. | 155. |
| The Study Group held nine meetings, from 20 to 31 May and on 6, 7 and 21 July 2022. | 研究组于2022年5月20日至31日和7月6日、7日和21日举行了九次会议。 |
| 156. | 156. |
| At its 3612th meeting, on 5 August 2022, the Commission considered and adopted the report of the Study Group on its work at the present session, as reproduced below. | 在2022年8月5日第3612次会议上，委员会审议并通过了研究组本届会议工作报告，报告载录如下。 |
| 157. | 157. |
| At the same meeting, the Commission decided to request the Secretariat to prepare a memorandum identifying elements in the Commission’s previous work that could be relevant for its future work on the topic, in particular in relation to statehood and the protection of persons affected by sea-level rise, for its consideration at its seventy-fifth session. | 在同次会议上，委员会决定请秘书处编写一份备忘录，查明委员会以往工作中可能与委员会今后关于这一专题的工作相关的内容，特别是与国家地位和受海平面上升影响人员的保护有关的内容，供委员会第七十五届会议审议。 |
| 1. | 1. |
| Introduction of the second issues paper by the Co-Chairs | 共同主席介绍第二份问题文件 |
| (a) | (a) |
| Procedure followed by the Study Group | 研究组遵循的程序 |
| 158. | 158. |
| At the first meeting of the Study Group, held on 20 May 2022, the Co-Chair (Ms. Galvão Teles) indicated that the purpose of the six meetings scheduled in the first part of the session was to allow for an exchange of views on the second issues paper and any relevant matters that its members might wish to address on the topic, insofar as they related to the two subtopics under consideration, namely statehood and the protection of persons affected by sea-level rise. | 共同主席(加尔旺·特莱斯女士)在2022年5月20日举行的研究组第一次会议上指出，本届会议第一期会议安排的六次会议的目的是就第二份问题文件以及委员会委员可能希望处理的、与审议中的两个分专题(即国家地位和受海平面上升影响的人员的保护)有关的任何相关事项交换意见。 |
| The Co-Chair also invited members to engage in a structured and interactive debate, drawing upon the contents of the second issues paper, and to provide input on a draft bibliography on the subtopics, to be issued as an addendum to the second issues paper. | 共同主席还请各成员参照第二份问题文件的内容，进行分阶段互动辩论，并就将作为第二份问题文件增编印发的分专题参考文献草案提出建议。 |
| The outcome of the first part of the session would be an interim report of the Study Group, to be considered and complemented during the second part of the session so as to reflect a further interactive discussion on the future programme of work. | 第一期会议的成果将是研究组的一份临时报告，在第二期会议期间审议并加以补充，以反映关于未来的工作方案的进一步互动讨论情况。 |
| It would then be agreed upon in the Study Group and subsequently presented by the Co-Chairs to the Commission, with a view to being included in the annual report of the Commission. | 该报告将在研究组中商定，随后由共同主席提交委员会，以便列入委员会的年度报告。 |
| That procedure, agreed upon by the Study Group, was based on the 2019 report of the Commission. | 研究组商定的这一程序是以委员会2019年报告为根据的。 |
| 159. | 159. |
| The Co-Chair also recalled that, as outlined in Part Four of the second issues paper, section II of which addressed the future programme of work of the Study Group, in the next quinquennium, the Study Group would revert to each of the subtopics – the law of the sea, statehood and the protection of persons affected by sea-level rise – and would then seek to prepare a substantive report on the topic as a whole by consolidating the results of the work undertaken. | 共同主席还回顾说，第二份问题文件第四部分第二节阐述了研究组未来的工作方案，如该节所述，在下一个五年期内，研究组将重新审议海洋法、国家地位和受海平面上升影响人员的保护这几个分专题，然后汇总已开展工作的成果，争取编写一份关于整个专题的实质性报告。 |
| (b) | (b) |
| Presentation of the second issues paper | 介绍第二份问题文件 |
| (i) | (一) |
| Introduction, general comments and working methods | 导言、一般性意见和工作方法 |
| 160. | 160. |
| In a general introduction, the Co-Chairs (Ms. Galvão Teles and Mr. Ruda Santolaria) emphasized the preliminary nature of the second issues paper, underlining that it was intended to serve as a basis for the Study Group’s discussion and could be complemented by contribution papers prepared by its members. | 共同主席(加尔旺·特莱斯女士和鲁达·桑托拉里亚先生)在一般性介绍中强调第二份问题文件的初步性质，指出该文件作为研究组讨论的基础，可由研究组成员编写的论文加以补充。 |
| 161. | 161. |
| In addition to containing an outline of the purpose and structure of the issues paper (chapter I), the introduction addressed the inclusion of the topic in the Commission’s programme of work and the extent to which it had been considered so far (chapter II). | 导言除了概述问题文件的目的和结构(第一章)外，还述及将该专题列入委员会工作方案的问题以及迄今为止对该专题的审议情况(第二章)。 |
| It also contained an overview of Member States’ expression of support for or interest in the topic, or otherwise, during the debates in the Sixth Committee since 2018, and a summary of the outreach initiatives undertaken by the Co-Chairs (chapter III). | 导言还概述了会员国自2018年以来在第六委员会辩论期间对该专题表示支持或感兴趣，或表示异议的情况，以及共同主席开展的外联工作摘要(第三章)。 |
| Chapter IV of the introduction comprised an update on the scientific findings and prospects of sea-level rise relevant to the subtopics, which was orally complemented to take account of the fact that two new reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change had been issued since the submission of the second issues paper, and to share the key findings set out in the report of the panel on the impacts, adaptation and vulnerability with respect to climate change. | 导言第四章载有与分专题有关的科学结论和海平面上升前景的最新情况，对此作了口头补充，以考虑到自提交第二份问题文件以来政府间气候变化专门委员会又发表了两份新的报告，并介绍了该委员会关于气候变化影响、适应气候变化的努力和脆弱性的报告中所载的主要结论。 |
| Chapter V of the introduction contained an outline of the relevant outcomes of the International Law Association’s work. | 导言第五章概述了国际法协会工作的相关成果。 |
| In that regard, the Co-Chairs noted that the Association had since decided to extend the mandate of the Committee on International Law and Sea-level rise until 2024. | 在这方面，共同主席指出，国际法协会已决定将国际法与海平面上升问题委员会的任务期限延长至2024年。 |
| 162. | 162. |
| The purpose of Part One (entitled “General”) was to recall the scope and outcome of the topic, taking into account the limits set forth in the syllabus prepared in 2018. | 第一部分(题为“综述”)的目的是回顾本专题的范围和成果，同时考虑到2018年编写的提纲中规定的限制。 |
| In doing so, Part One contained, in chapter I, an examination of the issues to be considered by the Commission to the extent that they related to statehood, the protection of persons affected by sea-level rise, and the final outcome. | 第一部分第一章中审视了委员会将审议的与国家地位、受海平面上升影响人员的保护有关的问题以及最终成果。 |
| Chapter II recalled that methodological and organizational matters had been addressed in the 2018 syllabus, in chapter X of the 2019 annual report of the Commission, and in chapter IX of its 2021 annual report. | 第二章回顾指出，2018年提纲、 委员会2019年年度报告 第十章以及委员会2021年年度报告 第九章均述及方法和组织事项。 |
| In that connection, the Co-Chairs emphasized that State practice was essential for the work of the Commission and encouraged States, international organizations and other relevant entities to continue engaging with the Study Group and the Commission in order to share their practices and experiences with regard to the topic. | 在这方面，共同主席强调国家实践对委员会的工作至关重要，并鼓励各国、国际组织和其他相关实体继续与研究组和委员会接触，分享它们在这一专题方面的做法和经验。 |
| (ii) | (二) |
| Statehood and related observations and guiding questions | 国家地位及相关意见和指导性问题 |
| 163. | 163. |
| Part Two of the second issues paper, entitled “Reflections on statehood”, was introduced by the Co-Chair of the Study Group (Mr. Ruda Santolaria) at the second meeting of the Study Group. | 研究组共同主席(鲁达·桑托拉里亚先生)在研究组第二次会议上介绍了第二份问题文件题为“关于国家地位的思考”的第二部分。 |
| 164. | 164. |
| The Co-Chair recalled that sea-level rise is a global phenomenon, which is not uniform and poses serious threats to all States. | 共同主席回顾说，海平面上升是一个全球现象，影响面并不均衡，但对所有国家都构成严重威胁。 |
| For low-lying and small island developing States, the threat is existential in nature, and in the case of small island developing States, it concerns their very survival. | 这种威胁对低地和小岛屿发展中国家是一种现实存在，而对小岛屿发展中国家而言，这更关系到它们自身的生存。 |
| He noted that, while there had been cases within the same State of evacuation of the population from one island to another, there was no record of situations where the territory of a State had been completely submerged or rendered uninhabitable. | 他指出，虽然已经有过在同一国家内将人口从一个岛屿迁到另一个岛屿的情况， 但没有记录显示一个国家的领土被完全淹没或变得无法居住。 |
| In light of the progressive character of the phenomenon, such a situation could not, however, be considered a distant theoretical concern. | 然而，鉴于这一现象的逐步渐进性质，这种情况不能被视为遥远的理论问题。 |
| The Co-Chair also recalled that the preliminary reflections on statehood did not aim to prejudge or formulate conclusions on those sensitive matters, which deserved considerable caution. | 共同主席还回顾说，关于国家地位的初步思考，目的并不在于就这些敏感事项预先作出判断或得出结论，这些事项需要谨慎对待。 |
| The paper aimed to explore certain past or present experiences or situations so as to establish a list of relevant international law issues to be analysed from the perspective of both lex lata and lex ferenda. | 该文件旨在探讨某些过去或现在的经验或情况，以便订立一个相关国际法问题清单，从现行法和拟议法的角度加以分析。 |
| 165. | 165. |
| Turning to chapter II of Part Two of the issues paper, which focused on criteria for the creation of a State, the Co-Chair recalled that there was no generally accepted notion of a “State”. | 问题文件第二部分第二章阐述了建立国家的标准。 关于该章，共同主席回顾说，关于什么是一个“国家”，没有公认的概念。 |
| He noted, however, that to be considered a “person” or subject of international law, a State had to meet four criteria in accordance with article 1 of the 1933 Convention on the Rights and Duties of States: (a) permanent population; | 但是，他指出，一国要被视为具有“人格”，即被视为国际法主体，就必须符合1933年《国家权利与义务公约》 第1条规定的四项标准：(a) 永久居民； |
| (b) defined territory; | (b) 界定的领土； |
| (c) government; and (d) capacity to enter into relations with other States. | (c) 政府：与其他国家建立关系的能力。 |
| The Co-Chair pointed out that the latter point also applied to other subjects of international law. | 共同主席指出，后一点也适用于国际法的其他主体。 |
| A general overview of the criteria was provided in chapter II. As a matter of further reference, chapter II also explored the characteristics of a State contained in provisions of other illustrative texts: the 1936 resolution of the Institut de Droit International concerning the recognition of new States and new Governments; | 第二章概述了这些标准。 作为进一步参考，第二章还探讨了其他说明性案文的规定中所载的国家特征：1936年国际法学会关于承认新国家和新政府的决议； |
| the 1949 draft Declaration on Rights and Duties of States; | 1949年《国家权利与义务宣言》草案； |
| the 1956 draft articles on the law of treaties proposed by the Special Rapporteur; | 1956年由特别报告员提出的条约法条款草案； |
| and the opinions of the Arbitration Commission of the 1991 International Conference on the Former Yugoslavia, in which the definition of the characteristics of a State was consistent with the requirements of the Convention on the Rights and Duties of States. | 1991年前南斯拉夫问题国际会议仲裁委员会的意见， 其中关于国家特性的定义与《国家权利与义务公约》的要求是一致的。 |
| 166. | 166. |
| Chapter III contained some representative examples of actions taken by States and other subjects of international law, starting with the Holy See and the Sovereign Order of Malta. | 第三章载有国家和其他国际法主体所采取行动的一些代表性例子，首先是罗马教廷和马耳他主权骑士团。 |
| In that regard, it was noted that those entities, despite having been deprived of their territories at a certain point in history, maintained their legal personality and continued to exercise some of their rights under international law, in particular the right of legation and the treaty-making power (sections A and B). | 在这方面，该章指出，这些实体尽管在历史上的某个时刻被剥夺了领土，但仍保持其法律人格，并继续行使国际法规定的一些权利，特别是使节权和缔约能力(A节和B节)。 |
| Chapter III (section C) also considered the example of Governments being forced into exile by foreign military occupation or other circumstances. | 第三章(C节)还审议了政府因外国军事占领或其他情况而被迫流亡的例子。 |
| In that connection, it was noted that, despite losing control over all or a large part of their territory, the affected States retained their status as such and their representative organs moved to territories under the jurisdiction of third States that hosted them, which was regarded as constituting evidence of a presumption of continuity of statehood. | 在这方面，该章指出，受影响国家尽管失去了对其全部或很大一部分领土的控制，但仍保留其地位，其代表机构迁往接收它们的第三国管辖的领土，这被视为构成推定国家地位连续性的证据。 |
| In a similar vein, the Co-Chair, drawing upon certain international instruments referred to in section D of chapter III, including the Convention on the Rights and Duties of States, noted that once a State was created as such under international law, it had an unalienable right to take measures to remain a State. | 同样，共同主席援引第三章D节提及的某些国际文书，包括《国家权利与义务公约》，指出，一个国家一旦根据国际法建立，就拥有采取措施保持其国家地位的不可剥夺的权利。 |
| 167. | 167. |
| With respect to chapter IV, on concerns relating to the phenomenon of sea-level rise and measures taken in that regard, the following aspects were listed for consideration relevant to the issue of statehood: | 第四章述及对海平面上升现象的关切和在这方面采取的一些措施，列出了与国家地位问题有关的下列方面供审议： |
| (a) | (a) |
| the possibility that the land area of the State could be completely covered by the sea or rendered uninhabitable, and that there would not be sufficient supply of drinking water for the population; | 一国的陆地可能完全被海洋覆盖或变得不适合居住，居民将得不到足够的饮用水供应； |
| (b) | (b) |
| the progressive displacement of persons to the territories of other States, which in turn raised questions related to nationality, diplomatic protection and refugee status; | 人们逐渐迁移到他国领土，这又引起了与国籍、外交保护和难民地位有关的问题； |
| (c) | (c) |
| the legal status of the Government of a State affected by sea-level rise that had taken residence in the territory of another State; | 受海平面上升影响的国家政府迁到另一国领土内时的法律地位问题； |
| (d) | (d) |
| the preservation of the rights of States affected by the phenomenon of sea-level rise in respect of the maritime areas; | 受海平面上升现象影响的国家维护海洋区域权利的问题； |
| (e) | (e) |
| the right to self-determination of the populations of affected States. | 受影响国家人民的自决权问题。 |
| 168. | 168. |
| The Co-Chair further stressed the need to examine measures aimed, on the one hand, at mitigating the effects of sea-rise level – such as coastal reinforcement measures and the construction of artificial islands – and, on the other hand, possible alternatives for the future concerning statehood in the event of complete inundation of a State’s territory. | 共同主席进一步强调，一方面，需要审查减轻海平面上升影响的措施，如海岸加固措施和人工岛的建造，另一方面，需要审查在一国领土完全被淹没的情况下，未来关于国家地位的可能替代选择。 |
| With respect to the former, the high cost of preservation measures and the need to assess their environmental impact were underlined, including through cooperation in favour of the most affected States. | 关于前者，共同主席强调存续措施费用高昂，并需要评估其环境影响，包括通过有利于受影响最严重的国家的合作做到这一点。 |
| In connection with the latter, the urgent necessity to take into account the perspective of small island developing States was also emphasized. | 关于后者，共同主席还强调迫切需要考虑小岛屿发展中国家的观点。 |
| 169. | 169. |
| Against the above background, chapter V presented several preliminary alternatives that were neither conclusive nor limitative. | 在上述背景下，第五章提出了几种初步的备选办法，既不是结论性的也不是限制性的。 |
| The first of the proposed alternatives was to assume a presumption of continuity of statehood. | 第一个拟议的备选办法是对国家地位连续性的推定。 |
| That proposal was in line with the preliminary approach taken by the International Law Association and with the views expressed by some States that the Convention on the Rights and Duties of States applied only to the determination of the birth of a State rather than to its continued existence. | 该提案与国际法协会采取的初步办法和一些国家表示的意见是一致的，即《国家权利与义务公约》只适用于确定一个国家的诞生，而不适用于国家的继续存在。 |
| At the same time, it was noted that continuity of statehood in the absence of a territory could entail certain practical problems, such as statelessness of its population or difficulties in exercising rights over maritime zones. | 与此同时，报告指出，在没有领土的情况下继续保持国家地位可能会带来某些实际问题，例如其人口无国籍或难以行使对海洋区域的权利。 |
| Another possible alternative that could be explored consisted in maintaining some form of international legal personality without a territory, similar to the examples of the Holy See and the Sovereign Order of Malta, in relation to which the Co-Chair outlined various modalities: (a) ceding or assignment of segments or portions of territory in other States, with or without transfer of sovereignty; | 可以探讨的另一个可能的备选办法是，在没有领土的情况下保持某种形式的国际法人资格，类似于罗马教廷和马耳他主权骑士团的例子，共同主席概述了这方面的各种模式：(a) 在转让或不转让主权的情况下，向其他国家让出或交付部分领土； |
| (b) association with other State(s); | (b) 与其他国家联合； |
| (c) establishment of confederations or federations; | (c) 建立邦联或联邦； |
| (d) unification with another State, including the possibility of a merger; | (d) 与另一国统一，包括进行合并的可能性； |
| and (e) possible hybrid schemes combining elements of more than one modality, specific experiences of which may be illustrative or provide ideas for the formulation of alternatives or the design of such schemes. | (e) 结合不止一种模式要素的可能的混合方案，这方面的具体经验可能具有示例作用，或为可选办法的制定或这种方案的设计提供想法。 |
| 170. | 170. |
| At the third meeting of the Study Group, the Co-Chair introduced the guiding questions related to statehood, contained in paragraph 423 of the paper. | 共同主席在研究组第三次会议上，介绍了该文件第423段所载与国家地位有关的指导性问题。 |
| He emphasized that these questions were meant to serve as a basis for future discussions within the Study Group. | 他强调，提出这些问题是为了将其作为研究组今后讨论的基础。 |
| (iii) | (三) |
| Protection of persons affected by sea-level rise and related observations and guiding questions | 受海平面上升影响人员的保护及有关意见和指导性问题 |
| 171. | 171. |
| At the fourth meeting of the Study Group, the Co-Chair (Ms. Galvão Teles) recalled some of the preliminary observations based on Parts Three and Four of the second issues paper, concerning the subtopic “Protection of persons affected by sea-level rise”. | 共同主席(加尔旺·特莱斯女士)在研究组第四次会议上，回顾了在第二份问题文件第三和第四部分的基础上提出的关于“受海平面上升影响人员的保护”这一分专题的一些初步意见。 |
| 172. | 172. |
| The Co-Chair noted that the existing international legal frameworks potentially applicable to the protection of persons affected by sea-level rise were fragmented and general in nature, suggesting that they could be further developed to address specific needs of affected persons. | 共同主席指出，可能适用于受海平面上升影响人员的保护的现有国际法律框架是零散的、笼统的，建议予以进一步发展，以顾及受影响者的具体需要。 |
| In particular, the existing framework could be further complemented to reflect the specificities of the long-term or permanent consequences of sea-level rise and to take account of the fact that the affected persons could remain in situ, be displaced within their own territory or migrate to another State in order to cope with or avoid the effects of sea-level rise. | 具体而言，可对现有的框架加以进一步补充，以反映海平面上升的长期或永久性后果的具体特点，并考虑到受影响的人为应对或避免海平面上升的影响而可能留在原地、迁移到本国境内他处或移徙到另一个国家的情况。 |
| In that connection, the Commission’s prior work, namely the 2016 draft articles on the protection of persons in the event of disasters, was regarded as a basis for that exercise. | 在这方面，委员会先前的工作，即2016年关于发生灾害时的人员保护的条款草案， 被认为是这项工作的基础。 |
| 173. | 173. |
| The Co-Chair also noted that, while relevant State practice at the global level remained sparse, it was more developed among States already affected by sea-level rise. | 共同主席还指出，虽然全球层面的相关国家实践仍然很少，但在已受海平面上升影响的国家中，这方面的实践较为丰富。 |
| The Co-Chair observed that some of the practice identified was not specific to sea-level rise, but generally concerned the phenomena of disasters and climate change. | 共同主席指出，所了解到的一些做法并不是专门针对海平面上升的，而是普遍涉及灾害和气候变化现象。 |
| Nonetheless, the practice revealed several principles that might prove useful for the Study Group’s examination of the topic. | 尽管如此，这些做法揭示了可能证明对研究组审查这一专题有用的若干原则。 |
| It was also observed that international organizations and other entities with relevant mandates were taking a more proactive approach in order to promote practical tools to enable States to be better prepared to address issues related to human rights and human mobility in the face of climate displacement. | 共同主席还指出，国际组织和其他负有相关任务的实体正在采取更加积极主动的做法，以推广实用工具，使各国能够更好地做好准备，在气候导致人员迁移的情况下处理与人权和人员流动有关的问题。 |
| The Co-Chairs’ efforts to facilitate the exchange of information with States, international organizations and other stakeholders, including through expert meetings, were also underlined. | 共同主席还重点提及为促进与各国、国际组织和其他利益攸关方交流信息所作的努力，包括通过专家会议交流信息。 |
| 174. | 174. |
| The Co-Chair recalled several relevant international instruments examined in Part Three of the second issues paper, including the Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement, the African Union Convention for the Protection and Assistance of Internally Displaced Persons in Africa (Kampala Convention), the New York Declaration for Refugees and Migrants, the Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration, the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030, the Nansen Initiative’s Agenda for the Protection of Cross-Border Displaced Persons in the Context of Disasters and Climate Change, and the International Law Association’s Sydney Declaration of Principles on the Protection of Persons Displaced in the Context of Sea-level Rise. | 共同主席回顾了第二份问题文件第三部分审视的若干相关国际文书，包括《关于境内流离失所问题的指导原则》、 《非洲联盟保护和援助非洲境内流离失所者公约》(《坎帕拉公约》)、 《关于难民和移民的纽约宣言》、 《安全、有序和正常移民全球契约》、 《2015-2030年仙台减少灾害风险框架》、 《南森倡议在灾害和气候变化情况下保护跨境流离失所者议程》 和国际法协会的《关于保护在海平面上升背景下流离失所者原则的悉尼宣言》。 |
| The importance of the recent Views adopted by the Human Rights Committee in Teitiota v. New Zealand, which concerned the applicability of the non-refoulement principle in the context of both climate change and sea-level rise, was noted. | 共同主席指出，人权事务委员会最近就Teitiota诉新西兰案通过的《意见》 十分重要，其中涉及不推回原则在气候变化和海平面上升情况下的适用性。 |
| The Co-Chair further noted that, according to the Human Rights Committee in that case, the effects of climate change, namely sea-level rise, in receiving States could expose individuals to a violation of their rights under articles 6 (right to life) or 7 (prohibition of torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, thereby triggering the non-refoulement obligations of sending States. | 共同主席还指出，人权事务委员会在该案中认为，气候变化的影响，即海平面上升的影响，在接收国可能导致人们根据《公民及政治权利国际公约》 第六条(生命权)或第七条(禁止酷刑和残忍、不人道或有辱人格的待遇或处罚)享有的权利受到侵犯，从而触发送出国的不推回义务。 |
| 175. | 175. |
| Turning to Part Four of the second issues paper, the Co-Chair then referred to paragraph 435, which contained a list of guiding questions related to the protection of persons affected by sea-level rise. | 共同主席接着在说明第二份问题文件第四部分时提到第435段，其中载有一份与受海平面上升影响人员的保护有关的指导性问题清单。 |
| The questions were divided into three subsets, relating to: (a) the principles applicable to the protection of the human rights of the persons affected by sea-level rise; | 这些问题分为三组，涉及：(a) 适用于受海平面上升影响的人员人权保护的原则； |
| (b) the principles applicable to situations involving evacuation, relocation, displacement, or migration of persons, including vulnerable persons and groups, owing to the consequences of sea-level rise or as a measure of adaptation to sea-level rise; | (b) 适用于由于海平面上升的后果或作为适应海平面上升的措施而涉及包括易受伤害的个人和群体在内的人员撤离、迁移、流离或移徙的情况的原则； |
| and (c) the applicability and scope of the principle of international cooperation to help States with regard to the protection of persons affected by sea-level rise. | (c) 国际合作协助各国保护受海平面上升影响的人员的原则的适用性和范围。 |
| The Co-Chair emphasized that the guiding questions had been proposed in order to structure the future work of the Study Group on the topic, and that proposals or contributions from its members on any of the issues raised therein, and on aspects of State practice and the practice of relevant international organizations and other relevant entities with regard to the issues raised therein, would be welcomed. | 共同主席强调，提出这些指导性问题是为了安排研究组今后关于这一专题的工作，欢迎研究组成员就其中的任何问题、国家实践的各个方面以及相关国际组织和有关实体在所涉问题上的实践提出建议或意见。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| Summary of the debate | 辩论摘要 |
| (a) | (a) |
| General comments | 一般性评论 |
| (i) | (一) |
| Topic in general | 关于专题的一般性评论 |
| 176. | 176. |
| Commenting on the topic in general terms, members of the Study Group reiterated the topic’s relevance and the crucial importance of the Commission’s discussion for States that are directly affected by sea-level rise, including for those whose survival might be threatened. | 在对专题进行一般性评论时，研究组成员重申了本专题的相关性，以及委员会的讨论对直接受到海平面上升影响的国家，包括生存可能受到威胁的国家，具有的重要意义。 |
| Some members also expressed a sense of urgency given the issues at stake and the gravity of the situation, noting that sea-level rise had consequences that affected many branches of international law. | 一些成员还表示，所涉问题和局势的严重性使他们有一种紧迫感，同时指出，海平面上升的后果影响到国际法的许多分支。 |
| It was also noted that the States that could be at risk of losing their statehood were small island developing States, which contributed the least to pollution emissions in the atmosphere yet were the most affected by climate change through sea-level rise. | 还有人指出，可能失去国家地位的国家是小岛屿发展中国家，它们向大气中排放的污染物最少，但因海平面上升而受到气候变化的影响却最为严重。 |
| 177. | 177. |
| It was also noted, however, that while the needs of small island developing States as specially affected States should be carefully taken into account, consistent with the position of the Commission in its conclusions on identification of customary international law, the Commission ought not to overlook the comments and needs of other States, given that the legal consequences of sea-level rise would affect not only small island developing States and coastal States, but all States. | 然而，也有人指出，虽然应根据委员会在关于习惯国际法的识别的结论中秉持的立场， 认真考虑小岛屿发展中国家作为特别受影响国家的需要，但委员会也不应忽视其他国家的意见和需要，因为海平面上升的法律后果不仅会影响小岛屿发展中国家和沿海国家，而是会影响所有国家。 |
| It was also noted that a middle path had to be found between the human and legal dimensions of the topic to make sure that the former was wedded with the latter. | 还有人指出，必须在该专题所涉人的层面和法律层面之间找到一条中间道路，以确保前者与后者相结合。 |
| It was furthermore underlined that some aspects of the topic addressed difficult and sensitive matters in the nature of policy questions, in relation to which the Commission ought to be cautious, and that the Commission should focus on the legal aspects of the topic, in accordance with its mandate to progressively develop and codify international law. | 有人进一步强调，此专题的某些方面涉及具有政策问题性质的困难和敏感事项，委员会应在这些方面保持谨慎态度，委员会应当按照逐步发展和编纂国际法的任务授权侧重于处理这个专题的法律方面。 |
| (ii) | (二) |
| Second issues paper | 第二份问题文件 |
| 178. | 178. |
| Members of the Study Group largely expressed gratitude to the Co-Chairs (Ms. Galvão Teles and Mr. Ruda Santolaria) for a very well-documented and structured second issues paper, noting that it presented extensive relevant information in a systematized way, that it was of high quality and that it provided an excellent basis for the Study Group to deliberate on the two subtopics under consideration. | 研究组成员大体上都对共同主席(加尔旺·特莱斯女士和鲁达·桑托拉里亚先生)提交的第二份问题文件表示感谢，认为该文件资料翔实，结构严谨，系统地介绍了大量相关信息，质量很高，为研究组审议两个分专题提供了良好的基础。 |
| It was also noted, however, that the relevance of some developments in the paper – such as comments on the issues of nationality and diplomatic protection with regard to statehood – was not obvious. | 然而，也有人指出，文件中一些内容的相关性不明显，例如关于国家地位方面的国籍和外交保护问题的评论。 |
| It was also recalled that the content of the issues paper pertained to the Co-Chairs, not to the Commission as a whole. | 还有人回顾说，问题文件的内容反映了共同主席的关切，而非整个委员会的关切。 |
| 179. | 179. |
| Members further welcomed the Co-Chairs’ outreach efforts on the topic, in terms of both gathering evidence of the practice of States, international organizations and other relevant entities and generating greater interest in and contributions on the topic in intergovernmental and academic fields. | 成员们还欢迎共同主席就这一专题开展外联工作，收集各国、国际组织和其他相关实体的实践证据，并在政府间和学术领域激发对这一专题的更大兴趣和贡献。 |
| (iii) | (三) |
| Scope of the work of the Study Group and working methods | 研究组的工作范围和工作方法 |
| 180. | 180. |
| Regarding the scope of the work of the Study Group, differing views were expressed in relation to both the material scope and the temporal scope of the topic: while some members of the Study Group considered that they were too ambitious and ought to be narrowed, limitations placed upon the topic were viewed by others as preventing the Study Group from reaching conclusions on whether existing international law would be sufficient to address the challenges faced or whether new rules or principles were required to fill potential gaps. | 关于研究组的工作范围，研究组成员对专题的实质范围和时间范围表达了不同的意见：一些成员认为这些专题过于雄心勃勃，应该缩小范围，但另一些成员却认为，对专题施加限制会妨碍研究组就现有国际法是否足以应对所面临的挑战或是否需要新的规则或原则以填补潜在空白等问题达成结论。 |
| 181. | 181. |
| The need to focus on the legal dimension of the topic and avoid speculative scenarios, while ascertaining the operational role of the Commission and distinguishing matters of policy from matters of international law, was also emphasized. | 还有人强调，在确定委员会的业务作用，以及区分政策事项和国际法事项的同时，有必要侧重于本专题的法律层面，避免臆测情景。 |
| In the latter regard, it was suggested that the role of the Commission on the topic should be limited to reviewing or outlining the relevant legal problems arising from situations of sea-level rise. | 就区分政策事项和国际法事项而言，有人建议，委员会在这一专题方面的作用应仅限于评述或列出海平面上升的不同情况引起的相关法律问题。 |
| It was also suggested, in contrast, that the Commission could examine policy-related issues and allow for the possibility of developing existing law or, at least, of making non-binding policy suggestions. | 与此相反，也有人建议，委员会可以审查与政策有关的问题，考虑发展现有法律的可能性，或至少提出不具约束力的政策建议。 |
| 182. | 182. |
| The need to identify the nexus between the subtopic on issues related to the law of the sea – which the Commission had considered during its seventy-second session – and the subtopics being examined at the current session was also underlined. | 还有人强调，需要确定委员会第七十二届会议审议的海洋法相关问题分专题与本届会议审查的分专题之间的联系。 |
| In that regard, the interrelation between the impact of sea-level rise and the law of the sea was underlined, in particular the principle that “the land dominates the sea” and the principle of freedom of the seas. | 在这方面，有人强调海平面上升的影响与海洋法之间的相互关系，特别是“陆地支配海洋”原则和海洋自由原则。 |
| 183. | 183. |
| With regard to working methods, it was noted that it would be useful to clarify how the product of the Study Group would reflect its members’ contribution papers. | 关于工作方法，有人指出，不妨澄清研究组的成果如何体现研究组成员编写的论文内容。 |
| It was further suggested that the Commission, in the next quinquennium, could consider turning the topic into a traditional topic, with a designated special rapporteur or rapporteurs and with public debates in a plenary format. | 还有人建议，委员会下个五年期可以考虑将这一专题改成传统专题，指定一名或多名特别报告员，采用全体会议公开辩论的形式。 |
| (iv) | (四) |
| Scientific findings | 科学发现 |
| 184. | 184. |
| With regard to scientific findings, while it was suggested that the Commission might need to appraise the scientific findings upon which it relied so as to be in a position to provide a uniform assessment of the risks, members largely recalled that the work of the Study Group was based on the common ground that sea-level rise was a fact, already proved by science, which was significantly affecting a number of States and was a global phenomenon. | 关于科学发现，有人认为委员会可能需要评估其依赖的科学发现，以便对风险进行统一评估，但成员们大多回顾说，研究组的工作是基于一项共识，即海平面上升是一个已经得到科学证明的事实，它对一些国家产生严重影响，是一种全球现象。 |
| It was also noted that an excellent outline of the available scientific data was given in paragraphs 45 to 51 of the second issues paper, and that it was wise to lean – as did the first and second issues papers – on the work of highly regarded expert groups such as the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. | 还有人指出，第二份问题文件第45至51段对现有的科学数据进行了出色的概括，正如第一份和第二份问题文件一样，借鉴政府间气候变化专门委员会等备受推崇的专家组的工作是明智的。 |
| 185. | 185. |
| On whether future meetings with scientists were needed, differing views were expressed. | 关于今后是否需要与科学家举行会议，研究组成员表达了不同观点。 |
| Members of the Study Group nonetheless welcomed the Co-Chairs’ proposal to organize focused meetings to inform and educate them about the aspects most relevant to their study of the legal questions. | 尽管如此，他们欢迎共同主席的建议，即应举办有重点的会议，就与他们研究的法律问题最相关的方面，为他们提供信息和知识。 |
| (v) | (五) |
| State practice | 国家实践 |
| 186. | 186. |
| Members of the Study Group reiterated that State practice was essential to the work of the Study Group on the topic and that the limited State practice available restricted the mapping exercise with which it had been entrusted. | 研究组成员重申，国家实践对于研究组关于这一专题的工作至关重要，现有的有限国家实践限制了研究组受托开展的探讨工作。 |
| It was also emphasized that, so far, no States were in the process of becoming completely submerged or otherwise uninhabitable. | 还有人强调，迄今为止，没有一个国家处于被完全淹没或无法居住的状态。 |
| 187. | 187. |
| In terms of scale and representativity, while it was noted that regional practice from small island States – specifically in the Pacific – was steadily emerging, a paucity of comments from Latin America and the Caribbean, Asia and Africa was observed, in conjunction with the need for the Commission to pursue governmental outreach initiatives and for members of the Study Group to prepare contribution papers on regional practice. | 在规模和代表性方面，有人注意到，在小岛屿国家，特别是太平洋地区的小岛屿国家，正在稳步形成区域实践，但来自拉丁美洲和加勒比、亚洲和非洲的评论却很少，同时，委员会需要采取与政府外联的举措，研究组成员需要编写关于区域实践的论文。 |
| 188. | 188. |
| It was suggested that, in the particular circumstances of an extremely complex, existential and unavoidable phenomenon such as sea-level rise, where there was limited State practice since no State had yet been fully submerged, the Commission might instead have recourse to reasoning by analogy and interpretative norms, consistent with its mandate to progressively develop international law. | 有人指出，海平面上升是一个极其复杂、存在且不可避免的现象，就这一具体情况而言，因为还没有一个国家被完全淹没，所以国家实践有限，委员会可以根据逐步发展国际法这一任务，采用类比推理和解释性规范的做法。 |
| In that sense, it was recalled that international legal practice included use of international law principles and constant interpretation of legal norms in light of events, in order to be able to address new challenges when appropriate. | 在这方面，有人回顾说，国际法律实践包括采用国际法原则和根据事件不断解释法律规范，以便适时应对新的挑战。 |
| The need for the Commission to reflect on the basis of international law and to generate a dialogue on the possible options and alternatives, as the Co-Chairs had done to identify the most suitable of them, was also underlined. | 还有人强调，委员会需要思考国际法的基础，并就可能的备选方案和替代办法开展对话，正如共同主席为确定最合适的备选方案和替代办法所做的那样。 |
| (vi) | (六) |
| Sources of law | 法律渊源 |
| 189. | 189. |
| With regard to sources of law, it was reiterated that the Commission should take account of treaties, custom and general principles of law that could be applicable – including, for example, the principle of equity, the principle of good faith and the principle of international cooperation – as relevant to the topic. | 关于法律渊源，有人重申，委员会应考虑可能适用的与本专题相关的条约、习惯和一般法律原则，例如，公平原则、诚信原则和国际合作原则。 |
| The central role of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea and the need to preserve its integrity was also emphasized. | 还有人强调了《联合国海洋法公约》的核心作用和维护其完整性的必要性。 |
| 190. | 190. |
| It was suggested by some members of the Study Group that the principle of international cooperation seemed equally relevant to both subtopics under consideration. | 研究组的一些成员指出，国际合作原则似乎与审议的两个分专题同等相关。 |
| It was also observed that the principle could play an important role for States to provide for their own preservation, as suggested by the Co-Chairs in the second issues paper. | 还有人指出，正如共同主席在第二份问题文件中所建议的那样，这一原则可以为各国维护自身存续发挥重要作用。 |
| Given the particularly high cost of preservation measures such as the installation or reinforcement of coastal barriers or defences and dykes, the importance of international cooperation through technology transfer and the exchange of best practices was thus underlined. | 因为安装或加固海岸屏障或防御工事和堤坝等保护措施的成本特别高，所以有人强调通过技术转让和交流最佳做法开展国际合作的重要性。 |
| International cooperation was deemed equally important in relation to the construction of artificial islands to house persons affected by the phenomenon of sea-level rise, given the cost of these initiatives and their potential environmental impact, so that other such durable and environmentally sustainable formulas could be found. | 考虑到这些举措的成本及其潜在的环境影响，有人认为，国际合作在建造人工岛以安置受海平面上升现象影响的人口方面同样重要，可藉此找到其他类似的持久和环境可持续方案。 |
| The need to identify practical ways and means to achieve such international cooperation was underlined. | 有人强调，需要确定实现这种国际合作的切实可行的方式方法。 |
| 191. | 191. |
| It was also observed that any reflection on statehood and sea-level rise should include the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities, insofar as the cost of addressing such a severe global environmental problem should be distributed among different States according to their historical responsibility and to their capabilities. | 还有人指出，关于国家地位和海平面上升问题的任何思考都应包括共同但有区别的责任原则，这是因为，要解决如此严重的全球环境问题，应根据不同国家的历史责任和能力，在它们之间分摊费用。 |
| To that end, the Study Group could build upon the already existing legal frameworks designed to address climate-related global challenges, including, inter alia, article 2 of the Vienna Convention for the Protection of the Ozone Layer, principle 7 of the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, article 3 of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and the Kyoto Protocol thereto, article 20 of the Convention on Biological Diversity, and the Paris Agreement. | 为此，研究小组可以利用旨在应对与气候相关的全球挑战的现有法律框架，包括《保护臭氧层维也纳公约》 第2条、《关于环境与发展的里约宣言》 原则7、《联合国气候变化框架公约》 第三条及其《京都议定书》、 《生物多样性公约》 第20条，以及《巴黎协定》。 |
| 192. | 192. |
| Differing views, encompassing support and scepticism, were also expressed in relation to the relevance to statehood of the principle that the land dominated the sea. | 对于陆地支配海洋原则与国家地位的相关性，也有人表达不同的观点，包括支持和怀疑的观点。 |
| (b) | (b) |
| Comments on statehood and related observations and guiding questions | 关于国家地位及相关意见和指导性问题的评论 |
| (i) | (一) |
| Criteria of the Convention on the Rights and Duties of States | 《国家权利与义务公约》的标准 |
| 193. | 193. |
| During the exchanges on statehood, it was noted that statehood was a complex issue deserving of caution, and emphasized, as outlined in the second issues paper, that there was neither a generally accepted definition of a State, nor clearly defined criteria for the extinction of a State. | 在就国家地位问题交换意见时，有人指出，这是一个值得谨慎对待的复杂问题，并强调，如第二份问题文件所述，既没有关于什么是一个“国家”的公认的定义，也没有明确界定的关于国家消亡的标准。 |
| It was noted that the Commission itself had faced difficulties in defining statehood in the context of its work on the 1949 draft Declaration on Rights and Duties of States. | 有人指出，委员会本身在1949年开展《国家权利义务宣言草案》的工作时，就在界定国家地位方面遇到了困难。 |
| In that regard, it was observed that the term “State” had many meanings, that it had to be interpreted in the context of a particular treaty, and that there was controversial international case law on the matter. | 在这方面，有人指出，“国家”一词有许多含义，必须在特定条约的背景下加以解释，在这个问题上存在有争议的国际判例。 |
| It was also noted that the issue of statehood was relevant only to those States whose territory could totally disappear or become unsuitable for sustaining human habitation or economic life, suggesting that the effect of sea-level rise could be limited to a very small number of States. | 还有人指出，国家地位问题仅与领土可能完全消失或变得不能维持人类居住或经济生活的国家有关，这表明海平面上升的影响可能仅限于极少数国家。 |
| 194. | 194. |
| Diverse views were expressed regarding the relevance of the four criteria for the establishment of a State as set out in article 1 of the Convention on the Rights and Duties of States, namely that a State have a permanent population, a defined territory, a sovereign Government, and the capacity to enter into relations with other States and other subjects of international law. | 对于《国家权利与义务公约》第1条规定的建国的四项标准――国家有永久居民、界定的领土、主权政府和与其他国家和其他国际法主体建立关系的能力――的相关性，成员们表达了不同的意见。 |
| 195. | 195. |
| In that connection, it was noted that each of the criteria was multifaceted, with many exceptions, possibilities and changing definitions. | 在这方面，有人指出，每项标准都包含多个方面，有许多例外、可能性和不断变化的定义。 |
| While these criteria were deemed to be a useful anchoring or starting point for the discussion on statehood and sea-level rise, it was noted that they were the product of a different historical context, at a time when the disappearance of a territory due to environmental changes was conceivable as a matter of fiction only. | 虽然这些标准被看作关于国家地位和海平面上升的讨论的有用基础或出发点，但有人指出，它们是不同历史背景下的产物，由于环境变化而导致领土消失的情况那时只被视为一种虚构的情况。 |
| As such, they might unnecessarily limit the statehood options remaining for affected States. | 因此，这些标准可能会不必要地限制受影响国家在国家地位方面的选择。 |
| It was also observed that the criteria were not indefinite requirements, and that a State could not automatically disappear because it no longer met one of them, especially through the loss of a territory or a population due to inhabitability. | 还有人指出，这些标准不是无限期的要求，一个国家不会因为不再符合其中任何一项标准而自动消失，特别是由于丧失领土或失去可居住性而丧失人口等原因。 |
| 196. | 196. |
| Regarding the criterion of territory, it was affirmed that a territory was a prerequisite for the establishment of a State, and that the existence of land territory had been a deeply rooted aspect of statehood. | 关于领土标准，有人明确指出，领土是建立国家的先决条件，存在陆地领土是表明国家地位的一个根深蒂固的方面。 |
| In contrast, it was noted that sovereignty referred to the whole territory under the State’s control and not solely to the land territory. | 相反，有人指出，主权指的是国家控制下的全部领土，而不仅仅指陆地领土。 |
| Thus, a territory that became fully submerged because of sea-level rise should not be considered a non-existent territory. | 因此，一个因海平面上升而被完全淹没的领土不应被视为不存在的领土。 |
| 197. | 197. |
| It was also underlined that the capacity to enter into relations with other States, the fourth criterion, was viewed in some legal traditions as a consequence stemming from statehood, meaning that there were in fact three real constituent elements of a State: a territory, a population and an effective Government. | 还有人强调，与其他国家建立关系的能力，即第四项标准，被一些法律传统视为国家地位的结果，这意味着一个国家实际上有三个真正的组成要素：一块领土、一群居民和一个有效的政府。 |
| 198. | 198. |
| It was further noted that, in their practice, States had developed modern criteria that supplemented those of the Convention on the Rights and Duties of States, hence the need for the Commission to be careful with its conclusions in that regard. | 还有人指出，各国在实践中制定了现代标准，对《国家权利与义务公约》进行补充，所以委员会有必要谨慎对待这方面的结论。 |
| A study on the practice of States regarding the interpretation of the criteria of the Convention on the Rights and Duties of States might therefore be helpful, including to take account of the decisions of the Security Council of the United Nations given their importance in certain cases of statehood. | 因此，研究各国在解释《国家权利与义务公约》标准方面的实践，可能会有所帮助，包括可考虑联合国安全理事会的决定，因为这些决定对某些国家地位的情况有重要意义。 |
| The point was also made that, according to State practice, failure to meet any of the criteria of the Convention on the Rights and Duties of States did not necessarily result in the termination of statehood. | 还有人指出，根据国家实践，不符合《国家权利与义务公约》的任何标准并不一定导致国家地位的终止。 |
| (ii) | (二) |
| Statehood and self-determination | 国家地位和自决 |
| 199. | 199. |
| In the course of the discussion, it was observed that, with a view to understanding which statehood options could be made available to States affected by sea-level rise, the interests and needs of the affected population should be an essential consideration. | 在讨论过程中，有人指出，为了了解受海平面上升影响的国家可以有哪些国家地位的选择，受影响人口的利益和需要应当作为一个基本考虑因素。 |
| In that regard, the preservation of an affected population as a people for the purposes of exercising the right of self-determination should be one of the main pillars of the work of the Commission on the issue. | 在这方面，出于行使自决权的目的保护作为一个民族的受影响人口，应该是委员会关于这一问题的工作的主要支柱之一。 |
| At the same time, it was noted that the Commission should keep in mind the special historical and legal contexts of the right of self-determination and exercise caution in applying that principle in relation to sea-level rise. | 与此同时，有人指出，委员会应铭记自决权的特殊历史和法律背景，在对海平面上升适用这一原则时保持谨慎。 |
| (iii) | (三) |
| Statehood and presumption of continuity | 国家地位和连续性推定 |
| 200. | 200. |
| Turning to comments on the presumption of continuity of submerged or uninhabitable States and the maintenance of their international legal personality, as outlined in the second issues paper, various views were expressed by members of the Study Group. | 关于第二份问题文件中概述的被淹没或不适宜居住的国家的连续性推定及维持其国际法律人格的问题，研究组成员表达了多种观点。 |
| 201. | 201. |
| It was indicated that the presumption of continuity of statehood was a relevant solution to address the consequences of sea-level rise, expressing support for the customary presumption to be considered by the Study Group as a starting point, given that, in particular, there was no clear criterion in customary international law for the cessation of a State. | 有意见认为，国家地位连续性的推定是处理海平面上升后果的一个相关解决办法，他们表示支持研究组将习惯推定作为出发点，特别是由于习惯国际法中没有关于一国终止的明确标准。 |
| In that regard, it was noted that such an approach would also be in line with the preliminary conclusions reached by the International Law Association during its 2018 Sydney Conference. | 在这方面，有人指出，这种做法也符合国际法协会在2018年悉尼会议期间达成的初步结论。 |
| It was further asserted that the right to preservation was a right inherent in statehood. | 还有人认为，存续权是国家地位包含的一项固有权利。 |
| 202. | 202. |
| According to another view that was presented, preliminary presumption of continuity of statehood was subject to further consideration by States, some of which had previously supported that option, disfavouring the extinction of States affected by sea-level rise. | 提出的另一种意见认为，国家地位连续性的初步推定须经各国进一步审议，一些国家以前曾支持这一选项，不赞成受海平面上升影响的国家消亡。 |
| It was also suggested that it was not an issue on which the Commission could draw a specific conclusion, given that its role should be limited to outlining the relevant legal problems arising from the situation of sea-level rise, rather than taking further steps to provide specific solutions. | 还有成员认为，委员会无法就这个问题得出具体结论，因为委员会的作用应限于评述海平面上升情况引起的相关法律问题，而不是采取进一步步骤，提供具体的解决办法。 |
| 203. | 203. |
| In that regard, it was recalled that, consistent with the 2018 syllabus, as referred to in paragraph 64 of the second issues paper, the Commission was, inter alia, to undertake an “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”. | 在这方面，有人回顾，根据第二份问题文件第64段所述2018年的提纲，委员会除其他外，应“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”。 |
| It was accordingly proposed that the Commission might consider: (a) legal issues arising from the continuity of statehood in the absence of territory, such as diplomatic protection for de facto stateless persons, which were partly discussed in the issues paper; | 因此，有人建议委员会不妨考虑：(a) 在没有领土的情况下国家地位存续产生的法律问题，例如对事实上无国籍人的外交保护，问题文件部分讨论了这些问题； |
| and (b) legal issues arising from the discontinuity of statehood, namely extinction of statehood, which had not been considered so far. | (b) 国家地位终止，即国家地位的消亡产生的法律问题，这些问题迄今尚未进行审议。 |
| 204. | 204. |
| It was also noted that the principle of continuity of statehood was temporary, aimed at allowing a State to be protected in the absence of a normal situation, as, for example, in the event of military occupation of a territory or internal violence, referred to in paragraphs 192 and 193 of the second issues paper. | 还有人指出，国家地位的连续性原则具有暂时性，目的是使一国在非正常情况下得到保护，例如，在第二份问题文件第192和193段提到的领土被军事占领或发生内部暴力的情况下。 |
| Further, it was observed that the inundation of a territory or complete absence thereof could not be compared to a change in a territory, and that the presumption of continuity could be envisaged only where a territory and population existed. | 此外，有人指出，一国领土被淹没或完全没有领土不能与领土变化相比较，只有在领土和居民存在的情况下才能设想进行连续性推定。 |
| In that regard, while it was recalled that a territory was an indispensable element of a State, it was also stressed that, rather than depending upon its territory and population, the presumption of continuity of a State was attached to its legal personality. | 在这方面，有人回顾，领土是一个国家不可或缺的要素，但也有人强调，国家连续性的推定并非取决于该国的领土和居民，而是与该国的法律人格相关。 |
| 205. | 205. |
| The risks associated with the continuation of statehood in the absence of a territory, or where a disembodied State, without a territory, was subject to the sovereignty of another State, were also underlined. | 还有人强调，在没有领土的情况下，或在一个没有领土的无实体国家受制于另一国主权的情况下，国家地位的连续性面临风险。 |
| The capacity of such a State to uphold its international and domestic obligations, whether, for example, in relation to its maritime zones or in the field of human rights, migration and refugee law, was also questioned. | 也有人质疑这样一个国家是否有能力履行其国际和国内义务，例如与该国的海洋区相关或人权、移民及难民法等方面的义务。 |
| The need for the Study Group to identify means and methods for preserving peoples’ cultural and traditional identities, whether by statehood or otherwise, in low-lying coastal land as well as in fully submerged territories, was also stressed. | 有人还强调，研究组有必要查明有哪些手段和方法(无论是通过国家地位还是其他方式)，可用于保存低洼沿海地区及被完全淹没的领土的人民的文化和传统特征。 |
| (iv) | (四) |
| Other possible alternatives for the future concerning statehood | 未来关于国家地位的其他可能选择 |
| 206. | 206. |
| Against the background of the above exchange, the Study Group also examined the other possible alternatives for the future concerning statehood, as set out in chapter V of Part Two of the issues paper, such as the maintenance of international legal personality without a territory, and the use of various modalities, as listed in paragraph 169 above, to maintain statehood. | 在上述意见交换期间，研究组还审查了问题文件第二部分第五章所述未来关于国家地位的其他可能选择，例如在没有领土的情况下维持国际法律人格，以及使用上文第169段所列的各种模式，以维持国家地位。 |
| 207. | 207. |
| In doing so, the Study Group generally welcomed the in-depth analysis and the many illustrative examples explored by the Co-Chair, including those of the Holy See between 1870 and 1929, the Sovereign Order of Malta, and Governments in exile. | 讨论期间，研究组总体上欢迎共同主席所作的深入分析和探讨的许多说明性实例，包括1870至1929年期间的罗马教廷、马耳他主权骑士团和流亡政府等实例。 |
| While it was suggested that they might be helpful to the Study Group in further assessing the loss of statehood for submerged or uninhabitable States, they were deemed of historical interest rather than useful analogies in examining options aimed at maintaining the existence of States affected by sea-level rise. | 有人认为，虽然这些实例可能有助于研究组进一步评估被淹没或不适宜居住国家丧失国家地位的情况，但它们仅具有历史意义； 在审查旨在使受海平面上升影响的国家维持生存的备选办法时，这些实例无法提供有用的类比。 |
| In that regard, it was notably emphasized that the context surrounding the examples provided by the Co-Chair, in which the entities in question appeared not to be truly regarded as a State, was fundamentally different to the context of a territory becoming unavailable, as in the case of sea-level rise. | 在这方面，有人特别强调，共同主席提供的实例中所涉实体似乎并不真正被视为国家，这与丧失领土，如因海平面上升导致丧失领土的情况，有着根本的不同。 |
| 208. | 208. |
| Taking into account the various options examined in the second issues paper, it was suggested that a careful and prudent analysis of the possible alternatives be carried out, and that the creation of sui generis legal regimes, on the basis of either agreements between States or decisions by the international community, not be ruled out. | 考虑到第二份问题文件中审查的各种备选办法，有人建议对可能的选择进行仔细和审慎的分析，不排除根据国家间协定或国际社会的决定建立自成一类的法律制度的情况。 |
| In that regard, reference was made to certain cases in which various association agreements allowed the free movement of persons from small island States to a larger State, whereas in other cases no such agreement existed, with the example provided of a procedure in place for other small island States whereby only 75 persons selected by ballot were allowed to move to the larger State each year. | 在这方面，有人提到，在某些情况下，一些联合协议允许居民从小岛屿国家自由迁移到较大的国家，而在另一些情况下则不存在这种协议，例如，另一些小岛屿国家采用的程序是每年只允许通过投票选出的75人迁移到较大的国家。 |
| 209. | 209. |
| In contrast, the view was expressed that it was not the role of the Commission to recommend certain arrangements over others, a task that should be left to the political realm. | 与此相反，有人认为，委员会的作用不是提出某些安排优于其他安排的建议，这项任务应留给政治领域。 |
| Also noted was the potential imbalance in power between a disappearing State and the other (potentially receiving) State with which it would be negotiating a solution: in such a context, the maritime entitlements of the disappearing State could largely or entirely be transferred to the other (receiving) State as part of the arrangement. | 还有人指出，一个消失的国家和与之谈判解决办法的另一个(可能的接收)国家之间可能存在权力不平衡：在这种情况下，作为安排的一部分，消失国海洋权益的大部或全部可能会被转让给另一个(接收)国家。 |
| (v) | (五) |
| Statehood and reclamation efforts | 国家地位和填海造陆工作 |
| 210. | 210. |
| Given the importance attached to the possession of a territory in practice, even in small amount, it was suggested that a potential solution could lie in preserving some part of a disappearing State, such as through reclamation efforts. | 鉴于现实中对拥有领土的重视，即使是少量领土，有人认为，保留正在消失的国家的一部分，例如通过填海造陆保留一部分领土，可能是一个解决办法。 |
| Those efforts would take an already existing feature, in its natural condition – such as an island – and expand the size of that feature so as to increase the land mass. | 这类努力可以自然条件下已存在的地形――如一个岛屿――为基础，扩大该地形的面积，从而增加陆地总量。 |
| (vi) | (六) |
| Statehood and compensation | 国家地位和补偿 |
| 211. | 211. |
| It was suggested that, rather than analysing various concepts of statehood and trying to find precedents where there were none, it would be useful to give consideration to the classic issue of compensation for the damage caused, keeping in mind that considerations of continuity of sovereignty would not resolve the challenges faced by the most affected States, which had contributed the least to a phenomenon largely caused by uncontrolled human industry. | 有人建议，与其分析国家地位的各种概念，试图在没有先例的情况下寻找先例，不如考虑对造成的损害进行补偿这一传统问题，同时应铭记，讨论主权的连续性问题并不能解决受影响最严重的国家面临的挑战，在主要由不受控制的人类工业导致的这一现象的形成过程中，这些国家的作用最小。 |
| It was alternatively suggested that addressing compensation as part of the topic could be counterproductive and that it was not expressly mentioned in the 2018 syllabus. | 另有人认为，在这个专题中处理补偿问题可能适得其反，2018年提纲并没有明确提及这个问题。 |
| 212. | 212. |
| It was also noted that some States had expressed concerns about the subtopic of statehood and that it might be necessary to ascertain the extent to which global sea-level rise was attributable to changes in coastlines, given that other such human activity could explain the phenomenon. | 还有人指出，一些国家对国家地位这一分专题表示关切，可能有必要查明全球海平面上升在多大程度上可归因于海岸线的变化，因为其他类似的人类活动可能是这一现象的原因。 |
| (vii) | (七) |
| Comments on guiding questions | 对指导性问题的评论 |
| 213. | 213. |
| Members of the Study Group made the following observations with respect to the guiding questions listed in paragraph 423 of the second issues paper: | 研究组成员就第二份问题文件第423段所列的指导性问题提出了以下意见： |
| (a) | (a) |
| It was suggested that it should be possible for a State, in exceptional circumstances, to continue its existence despite no longer meeting some or all of the criteria set out in the Convention on the Rights and Duties of States. | 有意见认为，一个国家在特殊情况下，尽管不再符合《国家权利与义务公约》规定的部分或全部标准，但仍然应当有可能继续存在。 |
| Yet, caution was called for, as practical situations would always be open to interpretation. | 但是，需要谨慎行事，因为对实际情况总是会有不同的解释。 |
| At the same time, it was noted that the criteria of population and territory remained crucial, and that the prolonged or permanent loss of territory would inadvertently have an effect on statehood; | 与此同时，有人指出，人口和领土标准仍然至关重要，长期或永久丧失领土会对国家地位产生意料之外的影响； |
| (b) | (b) |
| It was noted that the cases of the Holy See and the Sovereign Order of Malta were not helpful to the examination of the subtopic, although it was also observed that while not directly related, they could be considered by analogy. | 有人指出，罗马教廷和马耳他主权骑士团的案例无助于审查这一分专题，尽管也有人认为，虽然这些案例没有直接联系，但可以用来进行类比。 |
| Relatedly, cases of Governments in exile, which were by definition temporary and did not involve the disappearance of a territory, were not considered directly relevant. | 与此相关的是流亡政府的案例，这类政府从定义来看具有临时性，但并不涉及领土消失的问题，因此被认为不具有直接相关性。 |
| According to another view, some valuable conclusions could be drawn from cases of Governments being forced in exile for, at least, the immediate aftermath of the disappearance of a State’s land territory due to sea-level rise or for when the land territory of a State became uninhabitable despite not being totally covered by the sea; | 另一观点认为，可以从政府被迫流亡的案例中得出一些有价值的结论，至少可以得出关于海平面上升导致国家陆地领土消失的直接后果，或国家陆地领土虽然没有完全被海洋覆盖但却变得不适合居住的情况下的结论； |
| (c) | (c) |
| Hesitation was expressed as to the existence and content of the right of a State to provide for its preservation, and it was proposed that the Study Group avoid addressing preservation measures from the rights and obligations perspective; | 关于一国的自我存续权是否存在以及该权利的内容，有人表示犹豫，并建议研究组避免从权利和义务的角度讨论存续措施； |
| (d) and (e) | (d)和(e) |
| It was observed that maintaining a presumption of continuity of statehood could result in complex practical difficulties. | 有意见指出，保持国家地位连续性的推定可能会造成复杂的实际困难。 |
| It was deemed uncertain whether the questions in subparagraphs (d) and (e) of paragraph 423 of the second issues paper were practical or necessary for the Study Group to explore. | 有人认为，尚不确定第二份问题文件第423段(d)和(e)分段中的问题对于研究组的讨论是否实际或必要。 |
| At the same time, it was proposed that the Study Group develop a set of preventive tools for States to use; | 与此同时，有人提议研究组制定一套预防工具，供各国使用； |
| (f) | (f) |
| It was noted that any practical modalities would depend on agreements between the States concerned. | 有人指出，任何实际的模式都取决于有关国家之间的协议。 |
| Some members expressed doubt as to the possibility of expanding the right of self-determination in that context; | 一些成员对在此背景下扩大自决权的可能性表示怀疑； |
| (g) | (g) |
| A view was expressed that there was no presumption of continuity of statehood. | 一种观点认为，不存在国家地位连续性的推定。 |
| It was also noted that the Study Group should not determine the existence of such a presumption, but instead explore whether it was appropriate; | 也有人指出，研究组不应确定存在这种推定，而应探讨该推定是否恰当； |
| (h) | (h) |
| It was noted that, assuming that a State could still maintain its jurisdiction over maritime zones despite losing its land territory, practical difficulties would arise, including in terms of the State fulfilling its obligations within those zones. | 有人指出，假设一国在失去陆地领土后仍能维持对海洋区域的管辖权，会产生实际的困难，包括国家在这些区域内履行义务方面的困难。 |
| Nonetheless, that situation was considered as a potential recourse for affected States. | 但是，这种情况被看作受影响国家的一种可能的补救。 |
| The need to differentiate between cases of complete and partial inundation, and situations where the land territory of a State became uninhabitable despite not being totally covered by the sea, was emphasized; | 有人强调，有必要区分完全淹没和部分淹没的情况，以及一国的陆地领土虽然没有完全被海洋覆盖但已不适宜居住的情况； |
| (i) | (i) |
| According to one view, the question in subparagraph (i) of paragraph 423 of the second issues paper was not useful or relevant to the topic. | 有一种意见认为，第二份问题文件第423段(i)分段中的问题对本专题既无用处也不相关。 |
| It was also noted that suggesting specific modalities, such as the establishment of a self-governing area within the territory of a third State, was beyond the scope of the topic; | 还有人指出，关于具体模式的建议，如在第三国领土内建立自治区，超出了本专题的范围； |
| (j) | (j) |
| It was observed that the choice of statehood options was a policy issue and would depend on agreements between the States concerned in each particular case. | 有人指出，国家地位备选方案的选择是一个政策问题，取决于有关国家在每一种具体情况下达成的协议。 |
| (c) | (c) |
| Comments on the protection of persons affected by sea-level rise and related guiding questions | 关于受海平面上升影响人员的保护和相关指导性问题的评论 |
| (i) | (一) |
| Existing legal frameworks | 现有法律框架 |
| 214. | 214. |
| During discussions on the subtopic at the fourth and fifth meetings of the Study Group, it was noted that there was no legal framework that provided for a distinct legal status of persons affected by sea-level rise and that existing applicable frameworks were highly fragmented. | 在研究组第四次和第五次会议上讨论该分专题时，有意见指出，没有具体的法律框架为受海平面上升影响的人员规定独特的法律地位，现有的适用框架非常零散。 |
| Support was voiced for the proposal to identify and assess the effectiveness of the existing principles applicable to the protection of persons affected by sea-level rise. The need to consider different features of sea-level rise in the course of that exercise was emphasized. | 有人表示支持关于确定和评估适用于受海平面上升影响人员的保护的现有原则有效性的提议，并强调这项工作需要考虑海平面上升的不同特点。 |
| According to another view, it was questionable as to whether the fragmented nature of applicable rules caused any practical problems. It was therefore considered unnecessary to develop a highly specific legal framework for the protection of the narrow group of persons affected by sea-level rise. | 另一种观点认为，适用规则的零散性是否会造成任何实际问题，这值得商榷，因此没有必要为保护受海平面上升影响的少数人制定一个非常具体的法律框架。 |
| 215. | 215. |
| While commenting on the question of the applicability of existing legal frameworks, some members noted that international refugee law, climate change law and international humanitarian law were not equipped to deal with the protection of persons affected by sea-level rise. | 一些成员在评论现有法律框架的适用性问题时指出，国际难民法、气候变化法和国际人道法无法处理受海平面上升影响人员的保护问题。 |
| In contrast, several relevant international legal instruments, such as the Kampala Convention, the New York Declaration for Refugees and Migrants and the Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration, were noted as examples of successful State cooperation. | 相反，《坎帕拉公约》、《关于难民和移民的纽约宣言》和《安全、有序和正常移民全球契约》等相关国际法律文书被认为是国家合作的成功范例。 |
| Members also recalled recent relevant case law of the United Nations human rights treaty bodies. | 成员们还回顾了联合国人权条约机构最近的相关判例。 |
| 216. | 216. |
| With respect to the question of available State practice, regret was expressed that only a few States had provided the Commission with relevant information on the topic. | 关于现有国家实践的问题，有人对只有少数国家向委员会提供了这一专题的相关资料表示遗憾。 |
| It was proposed that the request to States, international organizations and other relevant entities for information and practice be reiterated. | 有人提议再次要求各国、国际组织和其他相关实体提供信息和关于实践的资料。 |
| Examples were provided of administrative policies adopted by States in response to cross-border displacement induced by sea-level rise. | 有人举例说明了各国为应对海平面上升引起的跨境流离失所问题而采取的行政政策。 |
| The practices of issuing humanitarian visas and of granting subsidiary protection to persons not qualifying as refugees were regarded as requiring further examination. | 有人认为，对于发放人道主义签证和向不符合难民资格的人提供辅助性保护的做法需要进一步研究。 |
| (ii) | (二) |
| Applicability of human rights law | 人权法的适用性 |
| 217. | 217. |
| It was recognized that climate change and sea-level rise could adversely affect the enjoyment of human rights, and that there was a need to view all human rights – civil, political, economic, social and cultural – as interrelated, interdependent and indivisible. | 有意见认为，气候变化和海平面上升可能对享受人权产生不利影响，需要以相互关联、相互依存和不可分割的方式看待所有人权，包括公民权利和政治权利、经济、社会和文化权利。 |
| It was also noted that, while not directly addressing the issue of sea-level rise, certain regional instruments, such as the Cartagena Declaration on Refugees and the Brazil Declaration in Latin America or the Kampala Convention in Africa, did take into account climate change and disasters as cause for movement of persons who needed protection. | 还有人指出，某些区域文书，如《关于难民问题的卡塔赫纳宣言》 和《拉丁美洲巴西宣言》 或《非洲坎帕拉公约》，虽然没有直接处理海平面上升问题，但确实将气候变化和灾害视为造成人员流动的原因，这些人员需要受到保护。 |
| It was further stressed that States must respect their human rights obligations while addressing the phenomenon of sea-level rise. | 有人进一步强调，各国在处理海平面上升现象时，必须尊重其人权义务。 |
| Relatedly, it was recalled that the Human Rights Council had recently recognized the right to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment. | 有人就此回顾说，人权理事会最近承认了享有清洁、健康和可持续环境的权利。 |
| 218. | 218. |
| Some members of the Study Group questioned whether the international human rights law framework could be fully relevant to the protection of persons affected by sea-level rise. | 研究组的有些成员质疑国际人权法框架是否能完全适用于受海平面上升影响人员的保护。 |
| It was observed that while States had human rights obligations towards individuals, the sea-level rise phenomenon was not directly attributable to any particular State. | 有人指出，虽然国家对个人负有人权义务，但海平面上升现象并不直接归咎于任何特定国家。 |
| Accordingly, it was unclear how human rights rules would operate within that context and, specifically, how and against whom claims related to sea-level rise could be brought. | 因此，不清楚在此背景下如何适用人权规则，具体而言，不清楚如何以及向谁提出与海平面上升有关的权利主张。 |
| Those questions were considered even more pertinent in the case of a State whose territory was completely submerged or rendered uninhabitable. | 有人指出，在一个国家的领土完全被淹没或变得无法居住的情况下这些问题就更为相关。 |
| In response, it was also argued that human rights law was an important lens through which to view the sea-level rise phenomenon, and maintained that the human rights of individuals remained inalienable even if their State had ceased to exist owing to sea-level rise. | 对此，还有意见认为，人权法是看待海平面上升现象的一个重要视角，并认为即使一国因海平面上升不复存在，该国个人的人权也仍然不可剥夺。 |
| It was considered, however, necessary to examine the extent to which human rights rules were applicable in that context. | 然而，有人认为有必要审查人权规则在多大程度上适用于这种情况。 |
| A proposal was made to assess how better to integrate human rights obligations into the climate change legal framework. | 有人提议，应评估如何更好地将人权义务纳入气候变化的法律框架。 |
| An additional examination of the non-refoulement principle in the context of sea-level rise was suggested. | 有人建议在海平面上升的背景下进一步审查不推回原则。 |
| 219. | 219. |
| An argument was raised that it was difficult to examine the applicability of human rights law in the context of sea-level rise without addressing the issue of causation, because in order to determine how human rights law applied, it was necessary to identify which specific State or States were responsible in any given case for the protection of applicable human rights. | 有人提出，如果不解决因果关系问题，就很难在海平面上升的背景下审查人权法的适用性，因为为了确定人权法如何适用，就有必要确定在任何特定情况下哪个(或哪些)具体国家有责任保护适用的人权。 |
| It was noted in response that the Study Group had intentionally excluded causation from the scope of the topic, and that addressing it would not be helpful for the Study Group’s work. | 对此，有人指出，研究组已有意地将因果关系排除在本专题范围之外， 处理这个问题对研究组的工作没有帮助。 |
| (iii) | (三) |
| Comments on guiding questions | 对指导性问题的评论 |
| 220. | 220. |
| Members of the Study Group made the following observations with respect to the guiding questions listed in paragraph 435 of the second issues paper: | 研究组成员就第二份问题文件第435段所列的指导性问题提出了以下意见： |
| (a) | (a) |
| It was suggested that the human rights mentioned therein be addressed by category, namely civil and political rights on the one hand, and economic, social and cultural rights on the other. | 有人建议按类别讨论该段中提及的人权，一是公民及政治权利，二是经济、社会和文化权利。 |
| Furthermore, it was noted that the principles of non-discrimination, equality and equal protection of the law should be included among those applicable to the protection of the human rights of persons affected by sea-level rise; | 此外，有人指出，适用于保护受海平面上升影响人员的人权的原则中应包括不歧视、平等和平等享有法律保护； |
| (b) | (b) |
| A concern was raised that the measures referred to therein with regard to displacement and human mobility were too specific to be recommended as a general rule, since the choice in every particular case would depend to a great extent on domestic legal and administrative frameworks. | 有人关切地指出，该段中提及的关于迁徙和人员流动的措施过于具体，不能作为一般规则建议，因为在每个特定情况下如何选择，在很大程度上取决于国家法律和行政框架。 |
| It was also observed that a preferential regime for individuals displaced owing to sea-level rise could be seen as discriminatory towards people escaping other consequences of climate change. | 还有人指出，对因海平面上升而迁徙的人实行优待制度，可能会被视为对逃离气候变化其他影响人员的歧视。 |
| The importance of prevention and prohibition of arbitrary displacement in situations involving the evacuation, relocation, displacement or migration of persons owing to the consequences of sea-level rise was emphasized; | 有人强调，在受海平面上升影响而出现人员撤离、迁移、流离或移徙的情况下，必须防止和禁止任意迁徙的做法； |
| (c) | (c) |
| The importance of the principle of international cooperation was stressed. | 有人强调了国际合作原则的重要性。 |
| According to another view, the principle was a political concept, and it was questionable as to whether any legal consequences could be derived from it. | 另一种观点认为，该原则是一个政治概念，是否能从中衍生出任何法律后果值得商榷。 |
| For guidance on the applicability and scope of the principle of international cooperation, it was therefore suggested that the Study Group refer to the Commission’s draft articles on the protection of persons in the event of disasters and to principle 4 of the International Law Association’s Sydney Declaration of Principles on the Protection of Persons Displaced in the Context of Sea-level Rise. | 因此，关于国际合作原则的适用性及范围的指导，有人建议研究组参考委员会关于发生灾害时的人员保护的条款草案和国际法协会《关于保护在海平面上升背景下流离失所者原则的悉尼宣言》的原则4。 |
| (d) | (d) |
| Future work of the Study Group | 研究组今后的工作 |
| 221. | 221. |
| In connection with the comments made with respect to the Study Group’s scope of the work and working methods (paras. 31–34 above), concern was expressed that the scope of the subtopics was too broad, and it was suggested that the number of questions under examination be reduced. | 关于对研究组工作范围和工作方法提出的意见(上文第31至34段)，有人表示关切，认为分专题的范围过于宽泛，并建议减少所审查问题的数目。 |
| A proposal was also made to focus predominantly on areas with sufficiently developed practice. | 还有人提议应主要关注那些已经有丰富实践的领域。 |
| Relatedly, it was suggested that the Study Group should leave issues related to statehood aside and focus its future work on issues related to the law of the sea and to the protection of persons affected by sea-level rise. | 有人就此建议研究组搁置与国家地位有关的问题，将今后的工作重点放在与海洋法和受海平面上升影响人员的保护有关的问题。 |
| 222. | 222. |
| Regarding the subtopic of statehood, it was noted that further study was required of the question of extinction of statehood, as it had not been sufficiently explored in the second issues paper. | 关于国家地位这一分专题，有人指出，第二份问题文件没有充分探讨国家地位消亡的问题，需要进一步研究。 |
| Likewise, it was noted that the Study Group should further examine cases of partial land inundation, cases in which the land territory became uninhabitable despite not being totally covered by the sea, and coastal defence measures and the construction of artificial islands. | 同样，有人指出，研究组应进一步审查部分陆地被淹没的情况、陆地领土虽然没有被海洋完全覆盖但已变得不适合居住的情况、以及海岸防护措施和人工岛的建造。 |
| With respect to the subtopic of the protection of persons affected by sea-level rise, it was proposed that matters of protection of persons in situ and in displacement be considered separately. | 关于受海平面上升影响人员的保护这一分专题，有人提议将保护留在原地的人员和迁徙人员的问题分开审议。 |
| Moreover, three broad subjects for further study were put forward: (a) human rights obligations; | 此外，还提出了需要进一步研究的三大主题：(a) 人权义务； |
| (b) issues specific to the movement of persons, including displacement; | (b) 人员流动的具体问题，包括迁徙； |
| and (c) the obligation to cooperate. | (c) 合作义务。 |
| 223. | 223. |
| It was noted that the Study Group’s work needed to be based on the previous work of the Commission, in particular on the draft articles on the protection of persons in the event of disasters. | 有意见指出，研究组的工作应基于委员会先前的工作，特别是关于发生灾害时的人员保护的条款草案。 |
| At the same time, the need to examine specific aspects of sea-level rise, namely its irreversibility and long-term nature, was emphasized. | 同时，有人强调需要审查海平面上升的具体方面，即不可逆转性和长期性。 |
| It was also proposed that the Study Group consider establishing a dialogue with human rights expert bodies within the United Nations system on the subtopic of the protection of persons affected by sea-level rise. | 还有人提议研究组考虑就受海平面上升影响人员的保护这一分专题与联合国系统内的人权专家机构进行对话。 |
| On that subtopic, it was further suggested to operate on the basis of a combined rights-based and needs-based approach. | 还有人建议对该分专题采取基于权利和需求的综合办法。 |
| 224. | 224. |
| With regard to the outcome of the Study Group’s work, various proposals were made, including that a framework convention be drafted on issues related to sea-level rise, which could be used as a basis for further negotiations within the United Nations system, following the example of the Convention to Combat Desertification in Those Countries Experiencing Serious Drought and/or Desertification, Particularly in Africa. | 关于研究组的工作成果提出了多项建议，包括仿照《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》 的例子起草一项关于海平面上升问题的框架公约，作为联合国系统内进一步谈判的基础。 |
| Another proposal was to focus the work of the Study Group on more concrete, limited outcomes, such as a draft treaty on a new form of subsidiary protection for persons affected by sea-level rise, or a detailed analysis, for illustrative proposes, of certain specific human rights to determine how exactly they were affected and should be protected when affected by sea-level rise. | 另一项建议是将研究小组的工作重点放在更具体、更有限的成果上，如关于受海平面上升影响的人的新形式辅助保护的一项条约草案，或为说明起见而对某些具体人权进行详细分析，以准确判断这些人权如何受到影响，以及在受到海平面上升影响时如何加以保护。 |
| Support was voiced for the development of guidelines for bilateral agreements between States and for the preparation of a list of legal questions to be addressed at the political level within the United Nations. | 有人表示支持制定国家间双边协定的准则，并支持编写一份将在联合国内政治层面处理的法律问题清单。 |
| It was also noted that the short-term outcome of the Study Group’s work would be its final report, on all subtopics, yet the Commission’s work could be continued beyond that outcome in a different format. | 还有人指出，研究组关于所有分专题的最后报告将是研究组的短期工作成果，但在该成果之后委员会可以不同形式继续进行工作。 |
| In that regard, a proposal was made to include, in the final report of the Study Group, a draft resolution addressing all outstanding political issues, for the consideration of the General Assembly. | 在这方面，有人提议在研究组的最后报告中列入一项涉及所有未决政治问题的决议草案，供联大审议。 |
| 3. | 3. |
| Concluding remarks by the Co-Chairs | 共同主席的总结 |
| (a) | (a) |
| General concluding remarks | 一般性总结发言 |
| 225. | 225. |
| At the sixth meeting of the Study Group, the Co-Chairs (Ms. Galvão Teles and Mr. Ruda Santolaria) delivered concluding remarks in light of the comments that had been expressed by its members during the previous meetings. | 共同主席(加尔旺·特莱斯女士和鲁达·桑托拉里亚先生)在研究组第六次会议上参照研究组成员在前几次会议上发表的一些评论作了总结发言。 |
| 226. | 226. |
| The Co-Chairs expressed their gratitude to the members of the Study Group for their contributions and comments on the second issues paper. | 共同主席感谢研究组成员对第二份问题文件的贡献和评论。 |
| While the paper was considered a good basis for future discussions, some additional information was required on the practice of States and international organizations, especially in Africa, Asia and Latin America and the Caribbean. | 虽然该文件被视作今后讨论的良好基础，但还需要提供一些关于各国和国际组织实践的补充资料，特别是在非洲、亚洲、拉丁美洲及加勒比地区的实践。 |
| The Co-Chairs indicated that, while scientific findings related to sea-level rise and climate change were not within the Study Group’s scope of work, they would endeavour to organize informal meetings with scientists from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change on specific issues of interest. | 共同主席表示，虽然与海平面上升和气候变化有关的科学发现不属于研究组的工作范围，但他们将努力就关心的具体问题与政府间气候变化专门委员会的科学家举行非正式会议。 |
| 227. | 227. |
| The Co-Chairs further observed that the Study Group’s work would continue without prejudice to the outcome of its work, which, according to the syllabus, was a consolidated final report. | 共同主席还指出，根据提纲，研究组的工作成果是一份最后综合报告，研究组将在不影响其工作成果的情况下继续工作。 |
| Any proposals made by members of the Study Group with regard to the future format of its work and outcome would be examined in more detail at a later stage. | 将在稍后阶段更详细地审查研究组成员就今后工作的形式和成果提出的任何建议。 |
| (b) | (b) |
| Statehood | 国家地位 |
| 228. | 228. |
| The Co-Chair (Mr. Ruda Santolaria) recalled that sea-level rise was a gradual phenomenon that could result in the partial or total loss of a State’s territory. | 共同主席(鲁达·桑托拉里亚先生)回顾，海平面上升这一渐进的现象可能导致一国部分或全部丧失其领土。 |
| Although there had been no cases of complete inundation of a State’s land, the small island developing States were likely to become uninhabitable in the future. | 虽然尚未发生过一国土地被完全淹没的情况，但小岛屿发展中国家将来很可能变得不适合居住。 |
| 229. | 229. |
| The Co-Chair noted that the lack of State practice had rendered it necessary to explore historical examples and relevant general principles of law. | 共同主席指出，由于缺乏国家实践，因此有必要探讨历史上的实例和相关的一般法律原则。 |
| With regard to the latter, he recalled the principle of the sovereign equality of States, the principle of self-determination of peoples, the principle of international cooperation, and the principle of good faith. | 关于后者，他回顾了国家主权平等原则、人民自决原则、国际合作原则和诚信原则。 |
| While it was acknowledged that the historical analogies of the Holy See and the Order of Malta were not directly related to sea-level rise, they could nonetheless be useful for further work on the topic with respect to the possibility of maintaining international legal personality despite the loss of territory. | 虽然对罗马教廷和马耳他骑士团的历史类比被认为与海平面上升不直接相关，但通过探讨在丧失领土的情况下保留国际法律人格的可能性，这些类比可能有助于进一步开展该专题的工作。 |
| Likewise, some valuable conclusions could be drawn from cases of Governments being forced into exile for, at least, the immediate aftermath of the disappearance of a State’s land territory due to sea-level rise or for when the land territory of a State became uninhabitable despite not being totally covered by the sea. | 同样，可以从政府被迫流亡的案例中得出一些有价值的结论，至少可以得出关于海平面上升导致国家陆地领土消失的直接后果的结论，或国家陆地领土虽然没有完全被海洋覆盖但却变得不适合居住的情况下的结论。 |
| 230. | 230. |
| Turning to the criteria of statehood, the Co-Chair reiterated that, although there was no generally accepted notion of a “State”, the criteria of the Convention on the Rights and Duties of States could constitute a starting point for the Study Group’s work. | 关于国家地位的标准，共同主席重申，虽然没有关于什么是一个“国家”的公认的概念，但《国家权利与义务公约》的标准可作为研究组工作的起点。 |
| He noted the position expressed by members of the Study Group that there was a difference between criteria for the creation of a State and those for its continued existence. | 他注意到研究组成员表示的立场是，建立国家的标准与国家继续存在的标准是不同的。 |
| Some reflections on the criteria of territory and permanent population were provided. | 有人对领土和常住人口的标准提出了一些看法。 |
| 231. | 231. |
| The Co-Chair noted that the presumption of continuity of a State was also a starting point for further work. | 共同主席指出，国家连续性的推定也是下一步工作的起点。 |
| At the same time, he emphasized the need to consider the practical implications of maintaining that presumption despite serious changes to a State’s territory and its population. | 他同时强调，有必要考虑在一国领土和人口发生重大变化的情况下维持这一推定的实际影响。 |
| Relatedly, the right of a State to ensure its preservation required further reflection. | 与此相关的是，需要进一步考虑一国确保自身存续的权利。 |
| The importance of preserving the right of self-determination of the affected populations was also highlighted. | 他还强调必须维护受影响人民的自决权。 |
| (c) | (c) |
| Protection of persons affected by sea-level rise | 受海平面上升影响人员的保护 |
| 232. | 232. |
| The Co-Chair (Ms. Galvão Teles) recalled that there was no specific legal framework that provided for a distinct legal status of persons affected by sea-level rise. | 共同主席(加尔旺·特莱斯女士)回顾说，没有具体的法律框架为受海平面上升影响的人员规定独特的法律地位。 |
| Existing universal and regional legal frameworks, including human rights law, refugee and migration law, and disaster and climate change law, required additional study with a view to evaluating their applicability in the sea-level rise context. | 需要进一步研究现有的全球和区域法律框架，包括人权法、难民和移民法以及灾害和气候变化法，以评估其在海平面上升背景下的适用性。 |
| The Co-Chair noted the relevant emerging practice of States, international organizations and other relevant entities, both direct and indirect, and of the need to continue examining its development for the purpose of identifying principles applicable to the protection of persons affected by sea-level rise. | 共同主席注意到各国、国际组织和其他相关实体直接和间接的相关新做法，并注意到需要继续审查其发展情况，以确定适用于受海平面上升影响人员的保护的原则。 |
| 233. | 233. |
| The Co-Chair observed that, in line with the proposals made by some members, the Study Group should refer in its work to previous outcomes of the Commission’s work, in particular, but not limited to, the draft articles on the protection of persons in the event of disasters. | 共同主席指出，根据一些成员的提议，研究组应在其工作中参考委员会先前的工作成果，尤其是但不限于关于发生灾害时的人员保护的条款草案。 |
| The Co-Chair also recalled that members of the Study Group were welcome to provide individual written contributions on any of the guiding questions. | 共同主席还表示，欢迎研究组成员就任何指导性问题提供个人书面意见。 |
| 4. | 4. |
| Issues for further work on the subtopics of statehood and the protection of persons affected by sea-level rise | 关于就国家地位和受海平面上升影响人员的保护分专题进一步开展工作的问题 |
| 234. | 234. |
| Based on the discussions in the Study Group during the first part of the session, the Co-Chairs made the following proposals regarding the continuation of its work on the subtopics, without prejudice to the possibility of further examining other issues as appropriate. | 根据研究组在本届会议第一期会议期间的讨论情况，共同主席就研究组继续开展分专题的工作提出了以下建议，但不妨碍可能对其他问题酌情开展的进一步审查。 |
| (a) | (a) |
| Statehood | 国家地位 |
| 235. | 235. |
| The Co-Chair (Mr. Ruda Santolaria) proposed that the Study Group request the Secretariat to undertake a study of the relevant previous work of the Commission, with a view to assessing its relevance to the subtopic. | 共同主席(鲁达·桑托拉里亚先生)提议研究组请秘书处研究委员会先前的相关工作，以评估与该分专题的相关性。 |
| He emphasized the need for collaboration with entities and institutions from different regions of the world in order to ensure diversity and representativeness, especially regarding the practice in regions for which less information was available, such as Latin America and the Caribbean, Asia and the Pacific and Africa. | 他强调，需要与世界不同区域的专家法律团体和机构合作，以确保多样性和代表性，特别是要考虑拉丁美洲和加勒比、亚洲和太平洋以及非洲等信息较少的区域的做法。 |
| He proposed the following tasks to complement the second issues paper with respect to the subtopic of statehood, taking into account the exchange of opinions among members of the Study Group, in the context of the analysis of the sea-level rise in relation to statehood: | 在分析海平面上升与国家地位的关系方面，他建议开展下列工作补充第二份问题文件在国家地位分专题上的论述，同时考虑到研究组成员之间交流的意见： |
| (a) | (a) |
| an evaluation of the way in which the requirements for the configuration of a State as a person or subject of international law had been interpreted, taking the Convention on Rights and Duties of States as a starting point, and including references to the practice of the General Assembly and the Security Council of the United Nations; | 以《国家权利与义务公约》为起点，评价关于国家作为人格或国际法主体的构成条件的解释方式，包括参考联合国大会和安全理事会的惯例； |
| and an analysis of any differences between the criteria for the creation of a State and those for the continuity of its existence; | 并分析建立国家的标准和国家继续存在的标准之间是否存在差异； |
| (b) | (b) |
| an analysis of the territory, including the different spaces under the sovereignty of the State and the maritime zones under its jurisdiction, and the nature of the land surface that could become submerged as a consequence of sea-level rise; | 对领土加以分析，包括国家主权下的不同空间及其管辖下的海洋区域，以及因海平面上升而可能被淹没的陆地表面性质； |
| (c) | (c) |
| a presentation of the possible legal effects of the maintenance or the eventual loss of statehood, and of the eventual maintenance of some form of international legal personality, in the context of the different scenarios resulting from sea-level rise; | 根据海平面上升造成的不同情况，介绍维持或最终丧失国家地位以及最终维持某种形式的国际法律人格可能产生的法律影响； |
| and an analysis of the pertinence of the presumption of statehood in the case of States affected by sea-level rise, and of the ways in which self-determination could be exercised by the affected populations and whether certain principles of general international law could be applied in such cases. | 分析受海平面上升影响的国家的国家地位推定的相关性，分析受影响人口行使自决权的方式，以及在这种情况下是否可以适用一般国际法的某些原则。 |
| Given the progressive nature of sea-level rise, it would be important to distinguish between two situations and the potential effects thereof: one, closer in time, in which the land surface of a State was not completely covered by the sea, but could become uninhabitable; | 鉴于海平面上升的渐进性质，必须区分两种情况及其潜在影响：一种是时间上较为接近的情况，即一个国家的陆地表面没有完全被海洋覆盖，但可能变得不适于居住； |
| and the other, in which the land surface of a State could become completely covered by the sea. | 另一种情况是，一个国家的陆地表面可能完全被海洋覆盖。 |
| Without prejudice to the specificities of each subtopic in the analysis, the interplay between the different assumptions or scenarios in relation to statehood and their eventual implications for the protection of persons and their rights should be reinforced; | 在不影响分析中每个分专题的特殊性的情况下，应加强与国家地位及国家地位对保护个人及其权利的最终影响有关的不同假设或情景之间的相互作用； |
| (d) | (d) |
| a reflection on the right of a State affected by sea-level rise to seek its conservation, the modalities to be used for that purpose and the significance of international cooperation to that effect; | 思考受海平面上升影响的国家寻求保护的权利、为此目的采用的模式以及为此开展国际合作的意义； |
| (e) | (e) |
| a careful and prudent analysis of the various options set out in the second issues paper, taking into account the possibility of creating sui generis legal regimes or proposing practical alternatives based on agreements between States or instruments in relation to the phenomenon of sea-level rise that could be adopted within the framework of international organizations, especially in the context of the United Nations system. | 慎重细致地分析第二份问题文件中提出的各种备选方案，同时考虑到建立“自成一类”的法律制度的可能性，或根据各国之间就海平面上升现象达成的协议或文书提出可行的备选方案，这些方案可在国际组织框架内，特别是在联合国系统内通过。 |
| (b) | (b) |
| Protection of persons affected by sea-level rise | 受海平面上升影响人员的保护 |
| 236. | 236. |
| The Co-Chair (Ms. Galvão Teles) proposed that the Study Group request the Secretariat to undertake a study of the relevant previous work of the Commission, with a view to assessing its relevance to the subtopic. | 共同主席(加尔旺·特莱斯女士)提议研究组请秘书处研究委员会先前的相关工作，以评估与该分专题的相关性。 |
| She encouraged members of the Study Group to prepare papers on relevant international and regional practice, and on the guiding questions contained in paragraph 435 of the second issues paper. | 她鼓励研究组成员编写关于相关国际和区域实践以及关于第二份问题文件第435段所述指导性问题的论文。 |
| She emphasized the need to establish and maintain contacts with relevant expert bodies and international organizations. | 她强调需要与有关专家机构和国际组织建立并保持联系。 |
| Lastly, the Co-Chair listed the following points that she intended to further examine to complement the second issues paper with respect to the subtopic of protection of persons affected by sea-level rise taking into account the exchange of views among the members of the Study Group: | 最后，共同主席考虑到研究组成员之间交换意见的情况列出了下列要点，用意是推动进一步的研究，补充关于受海平面上升影响人员的保护这一分专题的第二份问题文件： |
| (a) | (a) |
| the protection of human dignity as an overarching principle in the protection of persons affected by sea-level rise; | 将保护人的尊严作为受海平面上升影响人员的保护的首要原则； |
| (b) | (b) |
| the combination of the needs-based and rights-based approaches as the basis for the legal analysis of the protection of persons affected by sea-level rise; | 将基于需求的方法和基于权利的方法结合起来，作为与受海平面上升影响人员的保护相关的法律分析基础； |
| (c) | (c) |
| implications on human rights – including with regard to civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights – in the context of the protection of persons affected by sea-level rise; | 受海平面上升影响人员的保护方面的人权影响，包括对公民权利和政治权利以及经济、社会和文化权利的影响； |
| (d) | (d) |
| identification of the scope of the obligations of human rights duty bearers in the context of sea-level rise; | 确定海平面上升背景下人权义务承担者的义务范围； |
| (e) | (e) |
| the protection of persons in vulnerable situations in the context of sea-level rise; | 在海平面上升背景下对弱势人员的保护； |
| (f) | (f) |
| the relevance of the principle of non-refoulement in the context of the protection of persons affected by sea-level rise; | 不推回原则在受海平面上升影响人员的保护方面的相关性； |
| (g) | (g) |
| the implications of the Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration and other soft-law instruments in terms of the protection of persons affected by sea-level rise; | 《安全、有序和正常移民全球契约》和其他软性法律文书在受海平面上升影响人员的保护方面的影响； |
| (h) | (h) |
| the application of subsidiary and temporary protection to persons affected by sea-level rise; | 对受海平面上升影响人员实行辅助和临时保护； |
| (i) | (i) |
| the relevance of humanitarian visas and similar administrative policies for the protection of persons affected by sea-level rise; | 人道主义签证和类似的行政政策对保护受海平面上升影响人员的意义； |
| (j) | (j) |
| tools for the avoidance of statelessness in the context of sea-level rise; | 在海平面上升背景下避免无国籍状态的工具； |
| (k) | (k) |
| the content of the principle of international cooperation, including institutional paths for inter-State, regional and international cooperation regarding the protection of persons affected by sea-level rise. | 国际合作原则的内容，包括在受海平面上升影响人员的保护方面开展国家间、区域和国际合作的体制途径。 |
| C. | C. |
| Future work of the Study Group | 研究组今后的工作 |
| 237. | 237. |
| In the next quinquennium, the Study Group will revert to the subtopic of the law of the sea in 2023 and to the subtopics of statehood and the protection of persons affected by sea-level rise in 2024. | 在下一个五年期，研究组将在2023年重新审议海洋法分专题，在2024年重新审议国家地位和受海平面上升影响人员的保护分专题。 |
| In 2025, the Study Group will then seek to finalize a substantive report on the topic as a whole by consolidating the results of the work undertaken. | 2025年，研究组将汇总已开展工作的成果，力求最终完成关于整个专题的实质性报告。 |
| Chapter X Other decisions and conclusions of the Commission | 第十章 委员会的其他决定和结论 |
| A. | A. |
| Inclusion of new topics in the programme of work | 将新专题列入工作方案 |
| 238. | 238. |
| At its 3582nd meeting, on 17 May 2022, the Commission decided to include the topic “Settlement of international disputes to which international organizations are parties” in its programme of work and to appoint Mr. August Reinisch as Special Rapporteur. | 在2022年5月17日第3582次会议上，委员会决定将“国际组织作为当事方的国际争端的解决”专题列入工作方案，并任命奥古斯特·赖尼希先生为特别报告员。 |
| At the same meeting, the Chair of the Commission recalled paragraph 3 of the 2016 syllabus on the topic, which stated that “[i]t would be for future decision whether certain disputes of a private law character, such as those arising under a contract or out of a tortious act by or against an international organization, might also be covered”. | 在同次会议上，委员会主席回顾2016年本专题提纲第3段，其中指出，“某些私法性争端，例如契约性争端，或国际组织的侵权行为或针对国际组织的侵权行为引起的争端，是否也可包括在内，将留待今后决定”。 |
| Considering the importance of such disputes for the functioning of international organizations in practice, it was presumed that the Special Rapporteur and the Commission would take such disputes into account. | 考虑到这类争端实际上对国际组织运作的重要性，可以假定特别报告员和委员会将考虑到这类争端。 |
| 239. | 239. |
| The Commission, at the same meeting, decided to include the topic “Prevention and repression of piracy and armed robbery at sea” in its programme of work and to appoint Mr. Yacouba Cissé as Special Rapporteur. | 委员会在同次会议上决定将“防止和打击海盗和海上武装抢劫行为”专题列入工作方案，并任命雅库巴·西塞先生为特别报告员。 |
| 240. | 240. |
| The Commission, also at the same meeting, decided to include the topic “Subsidiary means for the determination of rules of international law” in its programme of work and to appoint Mr. Charles Chernor Jalloh as Special Rapporteur. | 委员会还在同次会议上决定将“确定国际法规则的辅助手段”专题列入工作方案，并任命查尔斯·切尔诺·贾洛先生为特别报告员。 |
| B. | B. |
| Requests by the Commission for the Secretariat to prepare studies on topics in the Commission’s programme of work | 委员会请秘书处就委员会工作方案中的专题编写研究报告 |
| 241. | 241. |
| At its 3612th meeting, on 5 August 2022, the Commission decided to request the Secretariat to prepare a memorandum providing information on the practice of States and international organizations which may be of relevance to its future work on the topic “Settlement of international disputes to which international organizations are parties”, including both international disputes and disputes of a private law character. | 在2022年8月5日第3612次会议上，委员会决定请秘书处编写一份备忘录，提供与委员会今后就“国际组织作为当事方的国际争端的解决”专题开展工作可能有关的国家和国际组织实践的信息，其中既包括国际争端，也包括具有私法性质的争端。 |
| 242. | 242. |
| The Commission also approved the Special Rapporteur’s recommendation that the Secretariat contact States and relevant international organizations in order to obtain information and their views for the purposes of the memorandum. | 委员会还批准了特别报告员的建议，即秘书处与各国和有关国际组织联系，以便为编写备忘录征求资料及其意见。 |
| 243. | 243. |
| At the same meeting, the Commission decided to request the Secretariat to prepare a memorandum concerning the topic “Prevention and repression of piracy and armed robbery at sea”, addressing in particular: | 在同一次会议上，委员会决定请秘书处编写一份关于“防止和打击海盗和海上武装抢劫行为”专题的备忘录，特别述及： |
| (a) | (a) |
| elements in the previous work of the Commission that could be particularly relevant for its future work on the topic and the views expressed by States; | 委员会以往工作中可能与今后关于这一专题的工作特别相关的内容，以及各国发表的意见； |
| (b) | (b) |
| writings relevant to the definitions of piracy and of armed robbery at sea; and | 与海盗和海上武装抢劫行为的定义有关的著述； |
| (c) | (c) |
| resolutions adopted by the Security Council and by the General Assembly relevant to the topic. | 安全理事会和联大就此问题通过的有关决议。 |
| 244. | 244. |
| The Commission also approved the Special Rapporteur’s recommendation that the Secretariat contact States and relevant international organizations in order to obtain information and views concerning: | 委员会还批准了特别报告员的建议，即秘书处与各国和有关国际组织联系，以便征求有关以下方面的资料和意见： |
| (a) | (a) |
| the legislation, case law and practice of States relevant to the topic, including in relation to articles 100 to 107 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea; | 各国与本专题有关，包括与《联合国海洋法公约》第一〇〇至一〇七条有关的立法、判例和实践； |
| (b) | (b) |
| the agreements entered into by States under which persons accused of piracy or armed robbery at sea are transferred with a view to prosecution; and | 各国缔结的关于移交被控犯有海盗或海上武装抢劫行为的人员以便提起公诉的协定； |
| (c) | (c) |
| the role of international, regional and subregional organizations regarding the prevention and repression of acts of piracy and armed robbery at sea. | 国际、区域和次区域组织在防止和打击海盗和海上武装抢劫行为方面的作用。 |
| 245. | 245. |
| The Commission, also at the same meeting, decided to request the Secretariat to prepare a memorandum on the topic “Subsidiary means for the determination of rules of international law”: | 还是在同次会议上，委员会决定请秘书处编写一份关于“确定国际法规则的辅助手段”专题的备忘录： |
| (a) | (a) |
| identifying elements in the previous work of the Commission that could be particularly relevant to the topic; | 确定委员会以往工作中可能与该专题特别相关的内容； |
| (b) | (b) |
| surveying the case law of international courts and tribunals, and other bodies, which would be particularly relevant for its future work on the topic for submission at the seventy-fifth session. | 调查国际法院和法庭以及其他机构与今后就这一专题开展工作特别相关的判例，提交第七十五届会议。 |
| 246. | 246. |
| The Commission, at the same meeting, decided to request the Secretariat to prepare a memorandum identifying elements in the previous work of the Commission that could be relevant for its future work on the topic “Sea-level rise in relation to international law”, in particular in relation to statehood and the protection of persons, also for submission at the seventy-fifth session. | 在同一次会议上，委员会决定请秘书处编写一份备忘录，列出委员会以往工作中可能与今后关于“与国际法有关的海平面上升”专题的工作相关的内容，特别是与国家地位和人员保护有关的内容，也提交第七十五届会议。 |
| C. | C. |
| Programme, procedures and working methods of the Commission and its documentation | 委员会方案、程序和工作方法以及文件 |
| 247. | 247. |
| On 1 June 2022, the Planning Group was constituted for the present session. | 2022年6月1日，本届会议成立了规划组。 |
| 248. | 248. |
| The Planning Group held three meetings on 1 June and on 21 and 22 July 2022. It had before it the topical summary of the discussion held in the Sixth Committee of the General Assembly during its seventy-sixth session, prepared by the Secretariat (A/CN.4/746); | 规划组于2022年6月1日、7月21日和22日举行了三次会议。 |
| General Assembly resolution 76/111 of 9 December 2021 on the report of the International Law Commission on the work of its seventy-second session; General Assembly resolution 76/117 of 9 December 2021 on the rule of law at the national and international levels; and the proposed programme budget for 2023, Programme 6, Legal affairs, subprogramme 3, concerning the Progressive development and codification of international law. | 规划组收到了秘书处编写的关于联大第七十六届会议期间第六委员会进行讨论的专题摘要(A/CN.4/746)、联大2021年12月9日关于国际法委员会第七十二届会议工作报告的第76/111号决议、联大2021年12月9日关于国内和国际的法治的第76/117号决议以及2023年拟议方案预算“方案6――法律事务，次级方案3――国际法的逐渐发展和编纂”。 |
| 1. | 1. |
| Working Group on the long-term programme of work | 长期工作方案工作组 |
| 249. | 249. |
| At its 1st meeting, on 1 June 2022, the Planning Group decided to reconvene the Working Group on the long-term programme of work, with Mr. Mahmoud D. Hmoud as Chair. | 规划组在2022年6月1日第1次会议上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 21 July 2022. | 工作组主席在2022年7月21日第2次会议上向规划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. | 规划组注意到该口头报告。 |
| 250. | 250. |
| The Commission noted that it had already recommended during the present term the inclusion of the following topics in its long-term programme of work: (a) General principles of law (2017), which is in the current programme of work; | 委员会指出，在本任期内，委员会已建议将下列专题列入长期工作方案：(a) 一般法律原则(2017年)， 已列入当前工作方案； |
| (b) Evidence before international courts and tribunals (2017); | (b) 向国际性法院和法庭提交的证据(2017年)； |
| (c) Universal criminal jurisdiction (2018); | (c) 普遍刑事管辖权(2018年)； |
| (d) Sea-level rise in relation to international law (2018), which is also in the current programme of work; | (d) 与国际法有关的海平面上升(2018年)， 该专题也是当前工作方案的一部分； |
| (e) Reparation to individuals for gross violations of international human rights law and serious violations of international humanitarian law (2019); | (e) 就严重违反国际人权法和严重违反国际人道法行为对个人的赔偿(2019年)； |
| (f) Prevention and repression of piracy and armed robbery at sea (2019), included in the current programme of work at the present session; | (f) 防止和打击海盗和海上武装抢劫行为(2019年)， 在本届会议上被列入当前工作方案； |
| and (g) Subsidiary means for the determination of rules of international law (2021), also included in the current programme of work at the present session. | (g) 确定国际法规则的辅助手段(2021年)， 也在本届会议上被列入当前工作方案。 |
| 251. | 251. |
| At the present session, the Commission, on the recommendation of the Working Group, decided to recommend the inclusion of the topic “Non-legally binding international agreements” in the long-term programme of work of the Commission. | 委员会本届会议根据工作组的建议，决定建议将“不具法律约束力的国际协定”专题列入委员会的长期工作方案。 |
| 252. | 252. |
| In the selection of the topic, 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; | 在选择这一专题时，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 sufficiently advanced in 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，委员会不应局限于传统专题，也可以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 the present topic constituted a useful contribution to the progressive development of international law and its codification. | 委员会认为，这一专题的工作构成对国际法的逐渐发展和编纂的有益贡献。 |
| The syllabus of the topic selected appears as annex I to the present report. | 所选专题的提纲载于本报告附件一。 |
| 253. | 253. |
| The Commission recalls that five other topics remain inscribed in the long-term programme of work from previous quinquenniums, namely: (a) Ownership and protection of wrecks beyond the limits of national maritime jurisdiction; | 委员会回顾，前几个五年期的长期工作方案中仍有五个其他专题，即：(a) 国家海事管辖范围以外的沉船的所有权及保护； |
| (b) Jurisdictional immunity of international organizations; | (b) 国际组织的管辖豁免； |
| (c) Protection of personal data in transborder flow of information; | (c) 信息跨界流动中的个人数据保护； |
| (d) Extraterritorial jurisdiction; | (d) 域外管辖权； |
| and (e) The fair and equitable treatment standard in international investment law. | (e) 国际投资法律中的公正和公平待遇标准。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| Working Group on methods of work of the Commission | 委员会工作方法工作组 |
| 254. | 254. |
| At its 1st meeting, on 1 June 2022, the Planning Group decided to re-establish the Working Group on methods of work of the Commission, with Mr. Hussein A. Hassouna as Chair. | 规划组在2022年6月1日第1次会议上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 21 July 2022. | 工作组主席在2022年7月21日第2次会议上，向规划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. | 规划组注意到该口头报告。 |
| 255. | 255. |
| The Commission notes that in the course of the present term, the Working Group considered a series of working papers prepared by members on such issues as the work regarding the Plenary, the Drafting Committee and Special Rapporteurs; | 委员会注意到，在本届任期内，工作组审议了成员们就以下问题编写的一系列工作文件：全体会议、起草委员会和特别报告员的工作； |
| reports of Special Rapporteurs and how such reports could be addressed in Plenary; | 特别报告员的报告以及如何在全体会议上讨论这些报告； |
| the work of Study Groups and Working Groups; | 研究组和工作组的工作； |
| how texts at various stages of development in the Commission’s work should be reflected, particularly in the Commission’s report; | 如何反映处于委员会工作不同发展阶段的案文，特别是在委员会的报告中； |
| rules of procedure and selection of new topics; | 议事规则和新议题的选择； |
| the relationship with other bodies, including the Sixth Committee, international and regional organizations and other actors; | 与包括第六委员会、国际和区域组织以及其他行为体在内的其他机构的关系； |
| and the nomenclature relating to the outcomes of the Commission’s work. | 与委员会工作成果有关的术语。 |
| The substance of the working papers and the comments by members on them complemented in particular the work done by the Commission in 1996 and 2011. | 这些工作文件的实质内容和成员对文件的评论尤其补充了委员会在1996年和2011年所做的工作。 |
| 256. | 256. |
| The Commission further notes that given the constraints of time during the current session and the need not to be underinclusive of the issues addressed, the Working Group needed more time beyond the present Commission’s term. | 委员会还注意到，鉴于本届会议的时间有限，而且需要处理的问题不能缺乏包容性，工作组在本届委员会任期结束后需要更多的时间。 |
| To this end, it notes the wish of the Working Group to continue its work into the next quinquennium, building upon the work already accomplished, as well as the previous work on methods of work undertaken in particular in 1996 and 2011. | 为此，委员会注意到工作组希望在已经完成的工作以及特别是1996年和2011年开展的关于工作方法的工作的基础上，在下一个五年期继续开展工作。 |
| The Commission further notes that the Working Group recalled General Assembly resolution 76/111, as well as comments made by delegations on the report of the International Law Commission on the work of its seventy-second session, as reflected in the topical summary prepared by the Secretariat (A/CN.4/746), and stresses that the Working Group will continue its work so as to improve and develop further the methods of work of the Commission. | 委员会还注意到，工作组回顾了联大第76/111号决议，以及秘书处编写的专题摘要(A/CN.4/746)中反映的各代表团对国际法委员会第七十二届会议工作报告的评论，并强调工作组将继续开展工作，以进一步改进和发展委员会的工作方法。 |
| 257. | 257. |
| The Commission expresses its appreciation for the efforts of the Secretariat in meeting the challenges of organizing hybrid sessions for the Commission in 2021 and 2022. | 委员会对秘书处努力应对在2021年和2022年以混合形式组织委员会届会的挑战表示赞赏。 |
| In particular, it welcomes, subject to resource availability, the webcasting of the plenary meetings, as this assured visibility and transparency. | 委员会尤其欢迎在资源允许的情况下对全体会议进行网播，这保证了能见度和透明度。 |
| It also supports the continued use of the “Google drive” to assure easy accessibility of documents for members. | 委员会还支持继续使用“google drive”，以确保委员们能够方便地获取文件。 |
| Bearing in mind that greater reliance will continue to be placed on technology, the Commission encourages its members and the Secretariat to continue efforts aimed at using the available tools. | 考虑到将继续更加依赖技术，委员会鼓励委员们和秘书处继续努力利用现有工具。 |
| 3. | 3. |
| Consideration of General Assembly resolution 76/117 of 9 December 2021 on the rule of law at the national and international levels | 审议联大关于国内和国际的法治的2021年12月9日第76/117号决议 |
| 258. | 258. |
| The General Assembly, in its resolution 76/117 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. | 联大在关于国内和国际的法治的第76/117号决议中特别重申，请委员会在提交联大的报告中，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 at each of its sessions on its role in promoting the rule of law. | 委员会自第六十届会议(2008年)以来，在每届会议上都就其在促进法治方面的作用发表了评论。 |
| 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 中第341至第346段所载评论依然适用，并重申了在历届会议所作的评论。 |
| 259. | 259. |
| The Commission recalls that the rule of law is of the essence of its work. | 委员会回顾，法治是其工作的核心。 |
| 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. | 委员会章程第1条规定，委员会的宗旨是促进国际法的逐渐发展和编纂。 |
| 260. | 260. |
| 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 to promote respect for the rule of law at the international level. | 委员会在其所有工作中铭记法治原则，充分意识到在国家一级实施国际法的重要性，并致力于在国际一级促进对法治的尊重。 |
| 261. | 261. |
| 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. | 委员会在履行逐渐发展和编纂国际法的任务时，将继续酌情考虑到作为治理原则的法治和对法治至关重要的人权，这反映在《联合国宪章》序言和第十三条以及《国内和国际的法治问题大会高级别会议宣言》中。 |
| 262. | 262. |
| 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. | 在目前的工作中，委员会意识到“法治与联合国三个支柱(和平与安全、发展和人权)之间的相互关系”， 不强调一个而牺牲另一个。 |
| In this spirit, the Commission particularly welcomes the decision of the General Assembly inviting Member States to focus their comments during the upcoming Sixth Committee debate at the seventy-seventh session of the General Assembly regarding the rule of law on the subtopic “The impacts of the global coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic on the rule of law at the national and international levels”. | 本着这一精神，委员会特别欢迎联大决定邀请会员国在联大第七十七届会议期间第六委员会即将举行的关于法治的辩论中，重点就“全球冠状病毒疾病(COVID-19)疫情对国内和国际法治的影响”这一分专题发表意见。 |
| 263. | 263. |
| In this regard, since its seventy-second session in 2021, the Commission and its members have been following developments closely. | 在这方面，自2021年第七十二届会议以来，委员会及其成员一直密切关注事态发展。 |
| The Commission recalls, in this connection, its role of strengthening the current international legal framework. | 委员会就此回顾其在加强现有国际法律框架方面的作用。 |
| This is consistent with its mandate to assist the General Assembly with the promotion of the progressive development of international law and its codification. | 这符合委员会协助联大促进国际法的逐渐发展和编纂的任务。 |
| The Commission recalls, in particular, the terms of article 17 of its statute, which enables the Commission also to consider proposals and draft multilateral conventions submitted by States Members of the United Nations, the principal organs of the United Nations other than the General Assembly, specialized agencies or official bodies established by intergovernmental agreement. | 委员会特别回顾其《章程》第17条的规定，该条使委员会也能够审议联合国会员国、联大以外的联合国主要机关、专门机构或政府间协定设立的官方机构提交的提案和多边公约草案。 |
| Any such textual or other proposal on the international legal challenges related to pandemics referred to the Commission would be given all due consideration, and if taken forward, would likely be beneficial to States and the rule of law at both the national and international levels. | 提交给委员会的关于与疫情有关的国际法律挑战的任何此类案文或其他提案都将得到适当考虑，如果得到采纳，将有可能有利于各国以及国内与国际法治。 |
| 264. | 264. |
| As with other institutions, within and outside the United Nations, the COVID-19 pandemic impacted the Commission’s own work in different ways. | 如同联合国内外的其他机构一样，COVID-19疫情以不同方式影响了委员会本身的工作。 |
| In 2020, the Commission faced an unprecedented circumstance as it was unable to convene in Geneva because of the pandemic, and in 2021 it held its session in a hybrid format. | 2020年，委员会面临前所未有的情况，因为疫情的原因无法在日内瓦召开会议，2021年，委员会以混合形式举行了届会。 |
| The Commission reiterates in this regard its gratitude to both the General Assembly and the Government of Switzerland for the decisions taken that enabled it to continue the performance of its mandate during the pandemic. | 在这方面，委员会再次感谢联大和瑞士政府作出决定，使委员会能够在疫情期间继续履行任务。 |
| It should also be mentioned that while the normal methods of the Commission was disrupted significantly, the extraordinary efforts were made to ensure the smooth conduct of the Commission’s deliberations during the hybrid session. | 还应提及的是，虽然委员会的正常工作方法受到严重干扰，但还是做出了特别努力，以确保委员会在混合会议期间顺利开展审议工作。 |
| 265. | 265. |
| 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. | 在履行逐渐发展和编纂国际法的任务时，委员会意识到法治当前面临的挑战。 |
| 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. | 委员会忆及联大强调促进分享各国法治最佳做法的重要性， 愿再次说明，其大部分工作是收集和分析与法治有关的国家实践，以评估这些实践对国际法的逐渐发展和编纂的可能贡献。 |
| 266. | 266. |
| 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. | 委员会铭记多边条约进程在推进法治方面的作用， 回顾说，委员会关于不同专题的工作促成了若干多边条约进程和若干多边条约的通过。 |
| The Commission welcomes General Assembly resolution 76/119 which decided to establish an ad hoc working group of the Sixth Committee to examine the draft articles on the protection of persons in the event of disasters and to consider further the recommendation of the Commission for the elaboration of a convention by the General Assembly or by an international conference of plenipotentiaries on the basis of the draft articles. | 委员会欢迎联大第76/119号决议，该决议决定设立一个第六委员会特设工作组，审查关于发生灾害时的人员保护的条款草案，并进一步审议委员会关于由联大或国际全权代表会议在条款草案基础上拟订一项公约的建议。 |
| 267. | 267. |
| In the course of the present session, under the ongoing constraints of the COVID-19 pandemic, the Commission continues to make its contribution to the promotion of the rule of law, including by working on the topics in its current programme of work: “Peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens)” (adopted on second reading at the current session); “Protection of the environment in relation to armed conflicts” (adopted on second reading at the current session); “Immunity of State officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction” (adopted on first reading at the current session); | 在本届会议期间，在COVID-19疫情的持续限制下，委员会继续为促进法治作出贡献，包括就当前工作方案中的专题开展工作：“一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)”(本届会议二读通过)、“与武装冲突有关的环境保护”(本届会议二读通过)、“国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免”(本届会议一读通过)、“国家责任方面的国家继承”、“一般法律原则”和“与国际法有关的海平面上升”。 |
| “Succession of States in respect of State responsibility”; “General principles of law”; | 268. |
| and “Sea-level rise in relation to international law”. 268. The Commission, in light of the conclusion of its work on five topics in its programme of work between the sixty-ninth session (2017) and the present session, as well as the pending conclusion of additional topics in its current programme of work, decided to add three new topics to the programme of work, namely, “Settlement of international disputes to which international organizations are parties”, “Prevention and repression of piracy and armed robbery at sea” and “Subsidiary means for the determination of rules of international law”. | 鉴于第六十九届会议(2017年)至本届会议期间工作方案中五个专题的工作已经完成，以及当前工作方案中其他专题即将完成，委员会决定在工作方案中增加三个新专题，即“国际组织作为当事方的国际争端的解决”、“防止和打击海盗和海上武装抢劫行为”和“确定国际法规则的辅助手段”。 |
| 269. | 269. |
| The Commission reiterates its commitment to the promotion of the rule of law in all of its activities. | 委员会重申致力于在其所有活动中促进法治。 |
| 4. | 4. |
| Honoraria | 酬金 |
| 270. | 270. |
| 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. | 委员会重申对联大通过2002年3月27日第56/272号决议所引起的酬金问题的意见，委员会以前的报告已表明了这些意见。 |
| The Commission emphasizes that resolution 56/272 especially affects Special Rapporteurs, as it compromises support for their research. | 委员会强调，第56/272号决议尤其影响到特别报告员，削弱了对他们研究工作的支持。 |
| This is without prejudice to the proposed establishment of a trust fund (see, below, section E, and annex II and appendix). | 这并不影响设立一个信托基金的提议(见下文E节及附件二和附录)。 |
| 5. | 5. |
| Documentation and publications | 文件和出版物 |
| 271. | 271. |
| 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. | 委员会再次强调，委员会在国际法的逐渐发展和编纂方面的工作具有独特性，因为委员会在处理国际法问题时，尤为重视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，必须提供并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介绍先例和其他有关资料，包括条约、司法裁决和理论学说，并对审议的问题展开深入分析。 |
| The Commission stressed 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，委员会及其特别报告员都充分意识到，有必要尽可能缩减文件总量，并将继续铭记这类考虑因素。 |
| 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，不应预先限定与委员会工作有关的文件和研究项目的篇幅。 |
| It follows that Special Rapporteurs cannot be asked to reduce the length of their reports following submission to the Secretariat, irrespective of any estimates of their length made in advance of submission to the Secretariat. | 委员会还指出，无论在报告提交秘书处之前所作的篇幅预估如何，都不能要求特别报告员在报告提交秘书处后缩短篇幅。 |
| Word limits are not applicable to Commission documentation, as has been consistently reiterated by the General Assembly. | 联大已一再重申，字数限制的规定不适用于国际法委员会的文件。 |
| 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，并充分提前提交秘书处，供其处理并提交委员会，以便最好在委员会届会有关部分开始之前四周以所有正式语文印发报告。 |
| In this respect, the Commission reiterates the importance of Special Rapporteurs submitting their reports within the time limits specified by the Secretariat. | 在这方面，委员会重申，特别报告员务必在秘书处规定的时限内提交报告。 |
| Only on this basis can the Secretariat ensure that official documents of the Commission are published in due time in the six official languages of the United Nations. | 只有在此基础之上，秘书处才能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。 |
| 272. | 272. |
| 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. | 委员会重申，委员会坚定地认为其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 version for timely correction and prompt release. | 委员会再次满意地指出，第六十五届会议(2013年)实行的简化简要记录处理程序的措施，加快了向委员会委员传送英文本的速度，方便及时改错和迅速印发。 |
| The Commission once more called on the Secretariat to resume the practice of preparing provisional summary records in both 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. | 委员会再次吁请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 further noted that the more recent practice of submitting the provisional records electronically for corrections to be made in track changes was working smoothly. | 委员会还指出，最近提交电子版临时记录、以显示修改的方式进行更正的做法进展顺利。 |
| The Commission also welcomed the fact that those 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. | 委员会还欢迎这些工作方法使资源得到了更合理的利用，并吁请秘书处继续努力，便利以所有正式语文编写简要记录定本，同时不影响其完整性。 |
| 273. | 273. |
| The Commission expressed its gratitude to all Services involved in the processing of documentation, 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. | 委员会感谢日内瓦和纽约参与文件处理的所有部门努力确保及时、高效地处理委员会文件，而且经常在时间紧迫的情况下完成工作。 |
| It emphasized that timely and efficient processing of documentation was essential for the smooth conduct of the Commission’s work. | 委员会强调，及时、高效地处理文件对委员会顺利开展工作至为重要。 |
| The work done by all Services was all the more appreciated under the current conditions. | 在目前情况下，所有部门所做的工作都更加值得赞赏。 |
| 274. | 274. |
| The Commission reaffirmed its commitment to multilingualism and recalled 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 resolutions 69/324 of 11 September 2015; 71/328 of 17 September 2017; and 73/346 of 16 September 2019. | 委员会重申对使用多种语文的承诺，并回顾应在工作中高度重视联大2015年9月11日第69/324号决议、2017年9月17日第71/328号决议和2019年9月16日第73/346号决议所强调的联合国六种正式语文的平等地位。 |
| 275. | 275. |
| The Commission once more expressed its warm appreciation to the United Nations Library at Geneva, which continues to assist members of the Commission with efficiency, competence and dedication. | 委员会再次感谢联合国日内瓦办事处图书馆继续高效、称职和专注地向委员会委员提供协助。 |
| It welcomed the bibliographic package that the Library prepares for the Commission, and expressed its gratitude for the briefing it received on 5 May 2022 on the online bibliography database and other library services. | 委员会欢迎图书馆为委员会准备的书目资料包，并对2022年5月5日收到关于在线书目数据库和其他图书馆服务的简报表示感谢。 |
| The Commission wished to note that the Library continued to provide valuable services even under the limitations imposed by the COVID-19 pandemic. | 委员会愿指出，即使受COVID-19疫情的限制，图书馆仍继续提供有价值的服务。 |
| The Commission further noted that library services are essential to the functioning of the Commission in the progressive development and codification of international law, and it has long valued the assistance it has received from the Library at Geneva over the years. | 委员会还指出，图书馆服务对委员会在国际法的逐渐发展和编纂方面的运作至关重要，委员会长期以来一直重视多年来从日内瓦图书馆获得的协助。 |
| To this end, the Commission emphasized the need to limit the impact of budget restrictions on the mandate of the United Nations Library and Archives at Geneva and to provide adequate funding for the continuation of the Library’s ability to function as a research library to assist the Commission in the performance of its mandate in the codification and progressive development of international law. | 为此，委员会强调，需要减轻预算限制对日内瓦图书馆和档案馆任务的影响，并提供足够的资金，使图书馆能够继续发挥作为研究书库的功能，协助委员会履行其编纂和逐渐发展国际法的任务。 |
| The Commission also expresses the hope that every effort will be made to minimize the effect of the planned refurbishment on the services of the Library. | 委员会还表示，希望尽一切努力尽量减少计划中的翻修对图书馆服务的影响。 |
| 6. | 6. |
| Yearbook of the International Law Commission | 《国际法委员会年鉴》 |
| 276. | 276. |
| 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. | 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 76/111, expressed its appreciation to Governments that had made voluntary contributions to the Trust Fund on the backlog relating to the Yearbook of the International Law Commission, and encouraged further contributions to the Trust Fund. | 委员会注意到，联大在第76/111号决议中表示赞赏有关国家政府为帮助解决《国际法委员会年鉴》工作积压问题的信托基金提供自愿捐款，并鼓励各方进一步为该信托基金捐款。 |
| 277. | 277. |
| The Commission recommends that the General Assembly, as in its resolution 76/111, express its satisfaction with the remarkable progress achieved in the past few years in catching up with the backlog of the Yearbook of the International Law Commission in all six languages, and welcome the efforts made by the Division of Conference Management of the United Nations Office at Geneva, especially its Editing Section, in effectively implementing relevant resolutions of the General Assembly calling for the reduction of the backlog; | 委员会建议联大如在第76/111号决议中那样，对过去几年在减少所有六种语文版《国际法委员会年鉴》进度落后方面取得的显著进展表示满意，并欢迎联合国日内瓦办事处会议管理司，特别是其编辑科作出努力，切实执行联大要求减少文件积压的有关决议； |
| 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。 |
| 7. | 7. |
| Assistance of the Codification Division | 编纂司的协助 |
| 278. | 278. |
| 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. | 委员会感谢秘书处编纂司在向委员会提供实质性服务方面提供宝贵协助，以及一直向特别报告员提供协助，并应委员会的要求就目前审议的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 continued efforts, which have enabled the Commission to meet even against the backdrop of the COVID-19 pandemic. | 委员会特别感谢秘书处所作的持续努力，使委员会即使在COVID-19疫情背景下仍能够举行会议。 |
| The Commission also recognized the work of the Codification Division in providing texts in different languages to ensure the quality and representativeness of the work of the Drafting Committee. | 委员会还感谢编纂司为确保起草委员会工作的质量和代表性而提供不同语文文本的努力。 |
| 8. | 8. |
| Websites | 网站 |
| 279. | 279. |
| The Commission expressed its appreciation to the Secretariat for the website on the work of the Commission, and welcomed its continuous updating and improvement. | 委员会对秘书处维护关于委员会工作的网站表示感谢，并欢迎不断更新和完善该网站。 |
| The Commission reiterated that the website and other websites maintained by the Codification Division constitute an invaluable resource for the Commission and for researchers of the work of the Commission in the wider community, thereby contributing to the rule of law and 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 是委员会和广大社会中研究委员会工作的学者的宝贵资源，有助于法治和全面加强国际法的教学、研究、传播以及对国际法的更广泛理解。 |
| 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 and video recordings of the plenary meetings of the Commission. | 委员会欣见关于委员会工作的网站还介绍了委员会议程上各个专题的现状，并收录了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。 |
| 9. | 9. |
| United Nations Audiovisual Library of International Law | 联合国国际法视听图书馆 |
| 280. | 280. |
| 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. | 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(包括委员会的工作)的了解，意义非凡。 |
| 10. | 10. |
| Consideration of the possible convening in the next quinquennium of the first part of a session of the Commission in New York | 审议下一个五年期内在纽约召开委员会某届会议第一期会议的可能性 |
| 281. | 281. |
| The Commission recommends that it hold the first part of a session in New York during the next quinquennium and requests the Secretariat to proceed with the necessary administrative and organizational arrangements to facilitate the holding of such a session in New York. | 委员会建议，下一个五年期内在纽约举行某届会议的第一期会议，并请秘书处着手进行必要的行政和组织安排，以便利在纽约举行这样一届会议。 |
| Particular attention was drawn to the need to ensure access to library facilities at Headquarters and electronic access to the resources and research assistance of the Library of the United Nations Office at Geneva. | 特别提请注意需要确保能使用总部的图书馆设施，并以电子方式获取联合国日内瓦办事处图书馆的资源和研究援助。 |
| The need to ensure access and sufficient space for assistants to members of the Commission to attend meetings of the Commission was also emphasized. | 还强调需要确保委员会委员的助理能够参加委员会会议并有足够的空间。 |
| 11. | 11. |
| Visas | 签证 |
| 282. | 282. |
| The Commission reiterates its gratitude to the Government of Switzerland, the host State of the Commission, for its support over many years that has enabled the Commission’s smooth and effective functioning at the Palais des Nations, Geneva. | 委员会再次感谢委员会东道国瑞士政府多年来的支持，使委员会能够在日内瓦万国宫顺利有效地运作。 |
| The Commission is particularly grateful for the exceptional steps taken by the Swiss authorities to enable it to hold its seventy-second session in hybrid format in 2021, and for the continuing assistance of those authorities for the current session as the meetings of the Commission begin to return to a pre-pandemic normal. | 委员会特别感谢瑞士有关部门采取特殊步骤，使其能够在2021年以混合形式举行第七十二届会议，并感谢这些主管部门在委员会会议开始向疫情之前的正常状态恢复之际，继续为本届会议提供协助。 |
| 283. | 283. |
| The Commission draws attention to the importance that its members receive visas in a timely manner for travel to its seat at the United Nations Office at Geneva or to New York, in accordance with the relevant agreements, and requests the Secretariat to liaise, as appropriate, with the relevant authorities in that regard. | 委员会提请注意委员们根据相关协定及时获得签证，以便前往联合国日内瓦办事处委员会所在地或前往纽约的重要性，并请秘书处酌情就此与相关部门联络。 |
| D. | D. |
| Date and place of the seventy-fourth session of the Commission | 委员会第七十四届会议的日期和地点 |
| 284. | 284. |
| The Commission decided that its seventy-fourth session would be held in Geneva from 24 April to 2 June and from 3 July to 4 August 2023. | 委员会决定，第七十四届会议将于2023年4月24日至6月2日和7月3日至8月4日在日内瓦举行。 |
| E. | E. |
| Consideration of operative paragraph 34 of resolution 76/111 of 9 December 2021 on the report of the International Law Commission on the work of its seventy-second session | 审议关于国际法委员会第七十二届会议工作报告的2021年12月9日第76/111号决议执行部分第34段 |
| 285. | 285. |
| The Commission took note of operative paragraph 34 of resolution 76/111 and provided additional comments and observations on the matter, which, together with the terms of reference for the proposed Trust Fund, appear in annex II and an appendix to the present report. | 委员会注意到第76/111号决议执行部分第34段，并就这一事项提出了补充评论和意见，这些评论和意见连同拟议信托基金的职权范围载于本报告的附件二和一份附录。 |
| F. | F. |
| Cooperation with other bodies | 与其他机构的合作 |
| 286. | 286. |
| At the 3585th meeting, on 1 June 2022, Judge Joan E. Donoghue, President of the International Court of Justice, addressed the Commission and briefed it on the recent judicial activities of the Court. | 国际法院院长琼·多诺霍法官在委员会2022年6月1日第3585次会议上发言，通报了国际法院最近的司法活动。 |
| An exchange of views followed. | 随后交换了意见。 |
| At that meeting, the Commission also observed a moment of silence in memory of Judge Antônio Augusto Cançado Trindade who passed away in Brazil on 29 May 2022. | 在该次会议上，委员会还为2022年5月29日在巴西逝世的安东尼奥·奥古斯托·坎萨多·特林达德法官默哀。 |
| 287. | 287. |
| The Commission was again unable to have an exchange of views with the African Union Commission on International Law, the Asian-African Legal Consultative Organization, the Committee of Legal Advisers on Public International Law of the Council of Europe or the Inter-American Juridical Committee. | 委员会再次未能与非洲联盟国际法委员会、亚非法律协商组织、欧洲委员会国际公法法律顾问委员会和美洲法律委员会交换意见。 |
| The Commission continues to value its cooperation with such bodies and expresses the hope that the exchanges of views can be organized at future sessions. | 委员会继续重视与这些机构的合作，并表示希望能够在今后的届会上组织意见交流。 |
| 288. | 288. |
| On 21 July 2022, an informal exchange of views was held between members of the Commission and the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) on matters of mutual interest. | 2022年7月21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。 |
| Welcoming remarks were made by Mr. Nils Melzer, Director, International Law, Policy and Humanitarian Diplomacy, ICRC. Mr. Dire D. Tladi, the Chair of the Commission, gave a brief overview of the Commission’s work and spoke of different approaches to the development of international law. | 红十字会国际法、政策和人道主义外交司司长尼尔斯·梅尔策先生致欢迎辞，委员会主席迪雷·特拉迪先生简要概述了委员会的工作，并谈到了发展国际法采用的不同方法。 |
| Ms. Cordula Droege, Chief Legal Officer, Head of the Legal Division, ICRC gave a brief overview of the work of the ICRC and made remarks on assessing the value of different instruments in the clarification and development of international humanitarian law. | 红十字会法律司司长兼首席法律干事科尔杜拉·德洛格女士简要介绍了红十字会的工作，并就评估不同文书在澄清和发展国际人道法方面的价值发表了意见。 |
| A discussion on the development of international law moderated by Mr. Nils Melzer followed. | 随后，尼尔斯·梅尔策先生主持了关于国际法发展的讨论。 |
| G. | G. |
| Representation at the seventy-seventh session of the General Assembly | 出席联大第七十七届会议的代表 |
| 289. | 289. |
| The Commission decided that it should be represented at the seventy-seventh session of the General Assembly by its Chair, Mr. Dire D. Tladi. | 委员会决定由主席迪雷·特拉迪先生代表委员会出席联大第七十七届会议。 |
| H. | H. |
| International Law Seminar | 国际法讲习班 |
| 290. | 290. |
| Pursuant to General Assembly resolution 76/111, the fifty-sixth session of the International Law Seminar was held at the Palais des Nations from 4 to 22 July 2022, during the present session of the Commission. | 依照联大第76/111号决议，第五十六届国际法讲习班于2022年7月4日至22日委员会本届会议期间在万国宫举行。 |
| 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. | 讲习班的对象是专门研究国际法的年轻法学家，以及在本国公务员系统中从事学术或外交工作的年轻教授或政府官员。 |
| 291. | 291. |
| Twenty-eight participants of different nationalities, from all regional groups, took part in the session. | 来自所有区域集团、分属不同国籍的28名学员参加了讲习班。 |
| The participants attended plenary meetings of the Commission and specially arranged lectures, and participated in working groups on specific topics. | 学员们出席了委员会的全体会议和特别安排的讲座，并参加了关于具体专题的工作组。 |
| 292. | 292. |
| Mr. Dire D. Tladi, Chair of the Commission, opened the Seminar. | 委员会主席迪雷·特拉迪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、组织工作和会议的进行，并担任主任。 |
| Mr. Vittorio Mainetti, international law expert and consultant, acted as Coordinator, assisted by Mr. Georg Hopfner and Mr. Hongda Sun, legal assistants. | 国际法专家和顾问维托里奥·马内蒂先生担任协调员，法律助理乔治·霍普夫纳先生和孙宏达先生提供协助。 |
| 293. | 293. |
| The following lectures were given by members of the Commission: “The work of the International Law Commission” by Mr. Ernest Petrič; “Reparations to individuals for gross violations of international human rights law, and serious violations of international humanitarian law” by Mr. Claudio Grossman Guiloff; “Subsidiary means for the determination of rules of international law” by Mr. Charles Chernor Jalloh; | 委员会委员作了下列演讲：埃内斯特·彼得里奇先生的“国际法委员会的工作”、克劳迪奥·格罗斯曼·吉洛夫先生的“就严重违反国际人权法和严重违反国际人道法行为对个人的赔偿”、查尔斯·贾洛先生的“确定国际法规则的辅助手段”、村濑信也先生的“国际法委员会工作方法的变化：最近的趋势及其影响(或缺乏影响)”、迪雷·特拉迪先生的“一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)”、马塞洛·巴斯克斯－贝穆德斯先生的“一般法律原则”、玛丽亚·莱赫托女士的“与武装冲突有关的环境保护”、康塞普西翁·埃斯科瓦尔·埃尔南德斯女士的“国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免”、帕维尔·斯图尔马先生的“国家责任方面的国家继承”、胡安·曼努埃尔·戈麦斯·罗夫莱多先生的“条约的暂时适用”。 |
| “Changes in the methods of work of the International Law Commission: recent trends and its impact (or lack of impact)” by Mr. Shinya Murase; “Peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens)” by Mr. Dire D. Tladi; “General principles of law” by Mr. Marcelo Vázquez-Bermúdez; | 此外，还与“与国际法有关的海平面上升”专题研究组的五位共同主席(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·奥拉尔女士和胡安·何塞·鲁达·桑托拉里亚先生)组织了一次圆桌会议。 |
| “Protection of the environment in relation to armed conflicts” by Ms. Marja Lehto; “Immunity of State officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction” by Ms. Concepción Escobar Hernández; “Succession of States in respect of State responsibility” by Mr. Pavel Šturma; | 294. 国际和发展研究研究生院教授马塞洛·G·科恩先生作了题为“向国际性法院提交的证据”的演讲。 |
| and “Provisional application of treaties” by Mr. Juan Manuel Gómez Robledo. In addition, a round table was organized with the five co-Chairs of the Study Group on the topic “Sea-level rise in relation to international law”, Mr. Bodgan Aurescu, Mr. Yacouba Cissé, Ms. Patrícia Galvão Teles, Ms. Nilüfer Oral and Mr. Juan José Ruda Santolaria. | 295. 学员们参观了在日内瓦联合国博物馆举行的“日内瓦多边合作100年”展览，展览由日内瓦联合国图书馆和档案馆历史学家和顾问皮埃尔·艾蒂安·伯恩夫先生主持。 |
| 294. A lecture was given by Mr. Marcelo G. Kohen, Professor at the Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies, on “Evidence before the International Court of Justice”. 295. Participants visited the exhibition “100 years of Multilateral Cooperation in Geneva” at the United Nations Museum Geneva, led by Mr. Pierre-Etienne Bourneuf, historian and advisor to the United Nations Library and Archives at Geneva. | 学员们还访问了国际劳工组织(劳工组织)，并听取了劳工组织行政法庭书记官长德拉岑·彼得罗维奇先生关于“国际行政法庭”的两次演讲，以及劳工组织法律顾问乔治·波利塔基斯先生关于“劳工组织制定标准”的两次演讲。 |
| Participants visited also the International Labour Organization (ILO), and attended two presentations given by Mr. Dražen Petrović, Registrar of the ILO Administrative Tribunal, on “International administrative tribunals”, and Mr. Georges Politakis, ILO Legal Adviser, on “ILO standard-setting”. | 296. 组织了两个工作组，即“就严重违反国际人权法和严重违反国际人道法行为对个人的赔偿”工作组和“确定国际法规则的辅助手段”工作组，学员们被分配到其中一个工作组。 |
| 296. Two working groups, on “Reparations to individuals for gross violations of international human rights law, and serious violations of international humanitarian law” and “Subsidiary means for the determination of rules of international law”, were organized and participants were assigned to one of them. | 委员会的两名成员克劳迪奥·格罗斯曼·吉洛夫先生和查尔斯·贾洛先生分别负责监督和指导工作组的工作。 |
| Two members of the Commission, Mr. Claudio Grossman Guiloff and Mr. Charles C. Jalloh, respectively, supervised and provided guidance to the working groups. | 每个工作组都编写了一份报告，并在讲习班的最后一次工作会议上介绍了报告结论。 |
| Each group prepared a report and presented its findings during the last working session of the Seminar. | 这些报告已经汇编并分发给了所有学员以及委员会成员。 |
| The reports were compiled and distributed to all participants, as well as to the members of the Commission. | 297. 学员们还参加了国际法讲习班学员网络的一次会议。 |
| 297. Participants also attended a session with the International Law Seminar Alumni Network. Ms. Verity Robson (alumna 2017), President of the Network, Mr. Moritz Rudolf (alumnus 2017), Vice-President of the Network, Ms. Valeria Reyes Menéndez (alumna 2017), Vice-President of the Network, Ms. Ozge Bilge (alumna 2019), Mr. René Figueredo Corrales (alumnus 2019) and Mr. Vittorio Mainetti, Secretary-General of the Network and Coordinator of the International Law Seminar, addressed the participants and presented the work of the Network. | 网络主席韦里蒂·罗布森女士(2017年学员)、网络副主席莫里茨·鲁道夫先生(2017年学员)、网络副主席瓦莱丽娅·雷耶斯·梅内德斯女士(2017年学员)、奥兹格·比格女士(2019年学员)、勒内·菲格雷多·科雷莱斯先生(2019年学员)和网络秘书长兼国际法讲习班协调员维托里奥·梅内蒂先生向学员致辞并介绍了学员网络的工作情况。 |
| 298. | 298. |
| The Republic and Canton of Geneva offered its traditional hospitality at the Geneva Hôtel de Ville, where Seminar participants visited the premises of the cantonal authorities, guided by Ms. Irene Renfer, Deputy Secretary-General of the Geneva Parliament, and Mr. Giovanni Magnin, project manager, Service of Protocol of the Republic and Canton of Geneva. | “日内瓦共和国与州”在日内瓦市政厅对讲习班学员给予了传统的热情接待，学员们在日内瓦议会副秘书长艾琳·伦弗女士和“日内瓦共和国与州”礼宾处项目经理乔瓦尼·马格宁先生的带领下参观了州政府所在地。 |
| 299. | 299. |
| The Chair of the Commission, the Director of the International Law Seminar and Mr. Jamaldeen Seidu (Ghana), on behalf of the participants in the Seminar, addressed the Commission during the closing ceremony of the Seminar. | 委员会主席、国际法讲习班主任和讲习班学员代表贾马尔丁·塞杜先生(加纳)在讲习班闭幕式上向委员会发表了讲话。 |
| Each participant was presented with a diploma. | 每位学员都获得了一份证书。 |
| 300. | 300. |
| The Commission notes with concern that in recent years, the finances of the International Law Seminar have been adversely affected by the economic and financial crisis which in turn has reduced the number and amounts of voluntary contributions from Member States to the United Nations Trust Fund for the Seminar. | 委员会关切地注意到，近年来，国际法讲习班的经费受到经济和金融危机的不利影响，会员国向联合国讲习班信托基金提供的自愿捐款的次数和金额有所减少。 |
| The situation this year was much better than it was in 2019, due to two large voluntary contributions in 2021. | 由于2021年有两笔大额自愿捐款，今年的情况比2019年好得多。 |
| In 2022, 21 fellowships were granted (17 for travel and subsistence, 3 for travel only and 1 for subsistence only). | 2022年颁发了21笔研究金(17笔用于旅行和生活津贴，3笔仅用于旅行，1笔仅用于生活津贴)。 |
| 301. | 301. |
| Since its inception in 1965, 1,284 participants, representing 178 nationalities, have taken part in the Seminar. | 自1965年开始举办以来，代表178个国家的1,284名学员参加了讲习班。 |
| Some 781 participants have received a fellowship. | 大约781名参加者获得了研究金。 |
| 302. | 302. |
| 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. | 委员会强调十分重视这一讲习班，讲习班使年轻的法律专家，特别是来自发展中国家的年轻法律专家，能够熟悉委员会的工作和设在日内瓦的许多国际组织的活动。 |
| The Commission recommends that the General Assembly again appeal to States to make voluntary contributions in order to secure the organization of the Seminar in 2023 with as broad participation as possible, and an adequate geographical distribution. | 委员会建议联大再次呼吁各国提供自愿捐款，以确保在2023年举办讲习班，并确保尽可能广泛的参与和适当的地域分配。 |
| Annex I | 附件一 |
| Non-Legally Binding International Agreements/ (Les Accords Internationaux Juridiquement Non-Contraignants) | 不具法律约束力的国际协定 |
| by Mathias Forteau | 马蒂亚斯·福尔托先生 |
| 1. | 1. |
| Introduction | 导言 |
| 1. | 1. |
| The practice of non-legally binding international agreements (also called in the literature “Gentlemen’s agreements”, “political agreements”, “informal agreements” or in French “instruments (ou actes) concertés non conventionnels”) is an old practice, which has been the subject of multiple doctrinal studies since 1945. | 缔结不具法律约束力的国际协定(在研究文献中亦称“君子协定”、“政治协定”、“非正式协定”或是法文中的“非常规协定”)是一种古老的实践，自1945年以来一直是多种理论研究的主题。 |
| These studies, in particular the one conducted by the Institute of International Law in the early 1980s, provide relevant insights on this practice. | 上述研究，尤其是国际法学会在1980年代初进行的研究， 就这一实践提供了具有现实意义的见解。 |
| They have not however clarified all contentious aspects relating to the nature and regime of such agreements. | 但是，上述研究并未澄清此类协定的性质和制度所涉及的所有争议内容。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| Moreover, the practice of non-legally binding international agreements has considerably grown and has become more complex and diversified in the last decades; it is therefore the subject of increased attention and of significant concern, in the literature and in State practice. | 此外，过去数十年间，缔结不具法律约束力的国际协定的情况大幅增多，且变得更加复杂也更加多样化，因而在研究文献当中和国家实践领域受到了更多关注，也引起了严重关切。 |
| Notably, it was the subject of a study and of guidelines from the Inter-American Juridical Committee in 2020, which sought in particular to shed light on the definitions for binding and non-binding agreements and the methods for identifying them, the capacity to conclude them, and their legal effects, while at the same time indicating that “in several places [the Guidelines] note areas where existing international law is unclear or disputed” and that “The Guidelines leave such issues unresolved”. | 值得注意的是，该问题是美洲法律委员会一项研究的主题，并成为该委员会2020年一套指南的主题。 上述指南特别寻求阐明约束性协定和非约束性协定的定义以及识别两类协定的方法、缔结两类协定的资格和两类协定的法律效果，同时指出“[《指南》]在若干地方指出了现行国际法不明确或有争议之处”和“《指南》未解决这些问题”。 |
| This topic is also since 2021 on the agenda of the Committee of Legal Advisers on Public International Law of the Council of Europe (CAHDI), where the “rising importance of non-legally binding agreements in international law” has been stressed. | 此外，自2021年以来，该专题被列入欧洲委员会国际公法法律顾问委员会的议程。 该委员会强调了“国际法中不具法律约束力的协定日益提升的重要性”。 |
| Recent developments in some national legal systems also demonstrate the relevance of this topic today. | 近期一些国家法律制度内的发展动态也表明，该专题在今天具有现实意义。 |
| These different elements show that there is a need for more clarity and increased legal certainty at the universal level on the topic of non-legally binding agreements, particularly given the “legal risks still associated with the use of non-legally binding instruments”. | 上述不同因素表明，有必要在全球层面进一步理清不具法律约束力的协定这一专题，并增强其在法律上的确定性， 尤其是在考虑到“采用不具法律约束力的文书依然存在法律风险” 的情况下。 |
| 3. | 3. |
| Considering that one of the key points is to determine how these instruments can be distinguished from legally binding agreements, terminology and form play an important role because they may provide significant indications on the intent of those who adopt the act. | 鉴于关键问题之一是确定如何区分此类文书和具有法律约束力的协定，术语和形式发挥着重要作用，因为术语和形式可能会就缔结此类文书者的意图透露重要信息。 |
| The term non-legally binding “agreement” (“accord” in French) is used in the title of this proposal without prejudice to the meaning that could eventually be appropriate to give it (and bearing in mind that in the practice of some States, the term “agreement” could refer to binding agreements only). | 本提案标题当中采用不具法律约束力的“协定”(法文为“accord”)一词，不影响最终可能赋予此类文书的适当含义(不要忘了，在一些国家的实践当中，“协定”一词可能仅指具有约束力的协定)。 |
| Other terms, in case of need, could be preferred (for example, “arrangement” or “understanding” (“entente”), or “instrument”, providing that the term eventually adopted corresponds to the scope of the topic – on which see infra, para. 27). | 在必要情况下，可能更愿意使用其他术语(例如“安排”或“谅解”(法文为“entente”)，或是“文书”，只要最终采用的术语与该专题的范围相符――关于这一点，见下文第27段)。 |
| Since the term “non-binding agreement” was used in previous work of the Commission (see infra, para. 8) and in the recent work of the Inter-American Juridical Committee and the CAHDI (see supra, para. 2), it has been adopted in the present proposal. | 鉴于委员会此前的工作(见下文第8段)以及美洲法律委员会和欧洲委员会国际公法法律顾问委员会近期的工作(见上文第2段)当中采用了“不具约束力的协定”短语，本提案当中亦采用该短语。 |
| 4. | 4. |
| Consistent with the above, and as explained below at paragraph 27, this topic does not address the law and consequences arising with respect to treaties, with respect to agreements between States (or international organizations) that are governed by national law, or with respect to agreements between private actors. | 与上文内容相一致的是，如下文第27段所述，该专题不涉及条约所产生的法律和后果，不涉及受国内法管辖的国家(或国际组织)间协定所产生的法律和后果，也不涉及私人行为体之间的协定所产生的法律和后果。 |
| Further, it does not address legally binding international agreements that contain within them provisions that have combination of legally binding and non-legally binding effects. | 此外，该专题也不涉及这样的国际协定：协定本身具有法律约束力，但其中既含有具有法律约束力的规定又含有不具法律约束力的规定。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| The proposed topic and the criteria for selecting new topics | 所提议的专题和选定新专题的标准 |
| 5. | 5. |
| The practice related to non-legally binding international agreements raises an important number of legal issues which are of great and concrete importance in international relations. | 不具法律约束力的国际协定方面的实践引发了诸多法律问题。 上述法律问题在国际关系中具有重大且具体的意义。 |
| As such, these issues fulfill the criteria fixed by the International Law Commission for the selection of new topics. | 正因如此，上述问题符合国际法委员会就选定新专题确立的标准。 |
| (i) | (一) |
| The topic is one that can respond to “the needs of States” by providing them with useful clarifications and, if deemed appropriate, guidelines with regard to the nature and potential legal effects of these agreements. | 该专题能响应“各国的需求”，就此类协定的性质和潜在法律效果向各国作出有益的澄清。 若被认为适于出台指南，还可为各国提供指南。 |
| (ii) | (二) |
| The topic is “sufficiently advanced in stage in terms of State practice”, given the density of recent practice and the fact that it has been explored in detail in the literature for several decades. | 鉴于近期有着密集的相关实践，且几十年来研究文献中已进行了详细的探讨，该专题“在国家实践方面已达到足够成熟的阶段”。 |
| (iii) | (三) |
| The topic is also undoubtedly “concrete and feasible”, on the one hand because it fully corresponds to the field of expertise of the International Law Commission, which has undisputed experience and authority on the sources of international law, and on the other hand because it is a topic of reasonable scope and is sufficiently focused. | 此外，该专题无疑是“具体且可行的”，一方面是因为它完全符合国际法委员会的专长领域――国际法委员会在国际法渊源方面有着无可争议的经验和权威，另一方面是因为它是一个范围合理且重点足够明确的专题。 |
| (iv) | (四) |
| Finally, while some might consider that the topic does not correspond to “new developments in international law and pressing concerns of the international community as a whole”, it remains important for the Commission to continue to deal with classical topics which are of critical importance in the daily practice of States. | 最后，有些人可能认为该专题不符合“国际法的新动态和整个国际社会的紧迫关切”标准，但继续处理对于国家的日常实践至关重要的传统专题对于委员会而言依然具有重要意义。 |
| During the debates of the Sixth Committee in 2021 on the programme of work of the International Law Commission, the Netherlands accordingly stressed its wish that the Commission focus on topics that are “more pertinent for international practice, such as the use of non-binding instruments in the identification and application of international law”. | 因此，在第六委员会2021年就国际法委员会的工作方案进行辩论过程中，荷兰强调希望委员会重点关注“与国际实践更具相关性的专题，例如在确定和适用国际法时使用不具约束力的文书”。 |
| 3. | 3. |
| Non-legally binding international agreements in the past work of the Commission | 不具法律约束力的国际协定问题在委员会过去工作中的处理情况 |
| 6. | 6. |
| The Commission has had the occasion in the past to discuss the question of non-legally binding international agreements, but has never conducted a complete study on the topic. | 委员会过去曾有机会讨论不具法律约束力的国际协定问题，但却从未就该专题进行过全面研究。 |
| 7. | 7. |
| In the context of its work on the Law of Treaties, the Commission had to determine which agreements correspond to the notion of treaty, and by contrast, which ones do not come under the law of treaties because of their non-legally binding character. | 委员会在其关于条约法的工作当中，必须确定哪些协定符合条约概念，反之哪些协定因不具法律约束力而不属于条约法的范围。 |
| One has to admit that the 1966 draft of the Commission on the law of treaties was not perfectly clear in that regard. | 不得不承认，委员会1966年的条约法草案在这个问题上并不十分明确。 |
| It adopted a definition – which was taken up in the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties between States and the 1986 Vienna Convention on treaties concluded by international organizations – of the term “treaty” that was of a very broad nature, “covering all forms of international agreement in writing concluded between States”, provided that the agreement must be “governed by international law”. | 该草案就“条约”一词采用了一个定义。 该定义后被关于国家间条约法的1969年《维也纳公约》和关于国际组织所缔结条约的1986年《维也纳公约》采用。 该定义非常宽泛，“涵盖国家间缔结的一切形式书面国际协定”，只要相关协定系“受国际法拘束之”。 |
| But the definition given by the Commission of this latter expression is equivocal: | 但是，委员会对后者的界定是模棱两可的： |
| “The phrase ‘governed by international law’ serves to distinguish between international agreements regulated by public international law and those which, although concluded between States, are regulated by the national law of one of the parties (or by some other national law system chosen by the parties). | “‘受国际法拘束之’一语旨在分辨两类国际协定，一类是以国际公法为准则，另一类则为两国间所缔结而以当事国之一的国内法(或当事国选定的其他国内法制度)为准则。 |
| The Commission examined the question whether the element of ‘intention to create obligations under international law’ should be added to the definition. | 委员会考虑过应否在定义内增添‘有意产生国际法之义务’一项要素。 |
| Some members considered this to be actually undesirable since it might imply that States always had the option to choose between international and municipal law as the law to govern the treaty, whereas this was often not open to them. | 有些委员认为此项要素实不宜有，因为这会暗示国家可随时任意选定条约究应适用国际法或是国内法，但事实上往往不是如此。 |
| Others considered that the very nature of the contracting parties necessarily made an inter-State agreement subject to international law, at any rate in the first instance. | 其他委员认为缔结各造之本身性质就必然使国与国间的协定受国际法之拘束，无论如何，以此种拘束为先。 |
| The Commission concluded that, in so far as it may be relevant, the element of intention is embraced in the phrase ‘governed by international law’, and it decided not to make any mention of the element of intention in the definition.” | 委员会决定，此种意思要素就其有关范围来说，包括在‘受国际法拘束之’一语内，因此在定义内不提任何意思要素。 ” |
| 8. | 8. |
| In the conclusions on the Subsequent agreements and subsequent practice in relation to the interpretation of treaties adopted in 2018, the Commission considered that non-legally binding agreements are “agreements” that shall be taken into account to interpret treaties for the purpose of Article 31, paragraph 3, of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. | 委员会在2018年通过的关于与条约解释相关的嗣后协定和嗣后惯例的结论当中认为，就《维也纳条约法公约》第三十一条第三款而言，不具法律约束力的协定是在解释条约时应予考虑的“协定”。 |
| According to conclusion 10, paragraph 1, | 根据结论10第1段， |
| “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. | “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。 |
| the commentary on this draft conclusion specifies, in particular, that “[t]he 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.” | ” 上述结论草案的评注特别指出，“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’一词是指具有法律约束力的文书。 ” |
| 9. | 9. |
| Along the same lines, guideline 4 of the Guide to Provisional Application of Treaties of 2021 provides that the provisional application of a treaty “may be agreed […] through […] (b) any other means or arrangements”. | 同样，2021年《条约的暂时适用指南》准则4规定，条约的暂时适用“可[…]以[…]协议：(b) 任何其他办法或安排”。 |
| The commentary on this provision indicates that this formula “broadens the range of possibilities for reaching agreement on provisional application” and “is in accordance with the inherently flexible nature of provisional application”. | 该条款的评注指出，这一模式“扩大了就暂时适用达成协议的可能性的范围”，且“符合暂时适用的内在灵活性”。 |
| 10. | 10. |
| It should also be noted that in the draft adopted at first reading in 2019 on the Protection of the environment in relation to armed conflicts, it is indicated in the commentary of draft Principle 17 on the designation by agreement of protected zones that the notion of agreement “should be understood in its broadest sense as including mutual as well as unilateral declarations accepted by the other party, treaties and other types of agreements”. | 还应指出，在委员会2019年一读通过的《与武装冲突有关的环境保护原则草案》当中，关于以协议方式指定受保护区的原则草案17的评注指出，协议的概念“应按最广泛的含义理解，包括共同声明和被另一方接受的单方面声明、条约和其他类型的协议”。 |
| Similarly, the commentary of draft Principle 23 on peace processes indicates that it “aims to cover all formal peace agreements, as well as other instruments or agreements concluded or adopted at any point during the peace process […]”, which “agreements and instruments may take different forms”. | 同样，关于和平进程的原则23草案的评注指出，该项原则草案“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[…]”。 这些“协议和文书可以采取不同的形式”。 |
| 11. | 11. |
| The preceding elements demonstrate the potential value of a comprehensive study by the International Law Commission of existing international law on non-legally binding international agreements. | 上述内容表明了国际法委员会对有关不具法律约束力的国际协定的现有国际法进行全面研究所具有的潜在价值。 |
| Two series of questions would in particular deserve to be studied in the context of this topic: the criteria for identifying non-legally binding international agreements (infra, 4) and the potential legal effects of such agreements (infra, 5). | 在该专题范围内，有两个系列的问题特别值得研究：确定不具法律约束力的国际协定的标准(下文第4部分)，以及此类协定的潜在法律效果(下文第5部分)。 |
| 4. | 4. |
| The criteria for identifying non-legally binding international agreements | 确定不具法律约束力的国际协定的标准 |
| 12. | 12. |
| The first series of questions concerns the identification of criteria to distinguish, in international law, non-legally binding agreements from those that are legally binding. | 第一系列问题涉及到确定在国际法中区分不具法律约束力的协定和具有法律约束力的协定的标准。 |
| This distinction is crucial, as it determines the effect to be attributed to an agreement – in particular the question of whether it is subject to the law of treaties starting with the principle Pacta sunt servanda, and whether it has to be registered by the United Nations under Article 102 of the Charter (bearing in mind that it is not because an agreement is not registered that it is not necessarily a treaty), or if it is a simple declaration of intent, or an agreement of an exclusively political nature. | 上述区分至关重要，因为它决定着将要赋予某项协定的效力――尤其是决定着该协定是否受以“条约必须遵守原则”为出发点的条约法管辖的问题，还决定着是否须根据《宪章》第一百零二条由联合国予以登记(切记：协定不一定成其为条约的原因并不是未予登记)，抑或它只是一项单纯的意向声明，或是一项完全政治性的协定。 |
| In this spirit, Poland declared, during the debate of the Sixth Committee in 2021, that “the Commission had conducted useful work to clarify various provisions of the Vienna Convention and suggested that it consider carrying out similar work on other provisions of the Convention, such as those concerning the definition of the term “treaty” (…)”. | 本着上述精神，波兰在2021年第六委员会辩论过程中宣布“委员会为澄清《维也纳公约》的多项规定开展了有益的工作”，并建议委员会“考虑就《公约》的其他规定开展类似工作，例如有关“条约”(…)一词定义的规定”。 |
| 13. | 13. |
| In the case concerning Maritime Delimitation and Territorial Questions between Qatar and Bahrain, the International Court of Justice decided that the 1990 Minutes “are not a simple record of a meeting, similar to those drawn up within the framework of the Tripartite Committee; | 国际法院在卡塔尔和巴林间海洋划界和领土问题一案中裁定：1990年会议记录“不单单是与三方委员会框架内所起草的会议记录相似的会议记录； |
| they do not merely give an account of discussions and summarize points of agreement and disagreement. | 这些记录不仅仅是描述讨论情况并归纳总结达成一致意见和未达成一致意见的问题。 |
| They enumerate the commitments to which the Parties have consented. They thus create rights and obligations in international law for the Parties. | 它们列出了各方同意作出的承诺，从而在国际法中为当事各方确立了权利和义务。 |
| They constitute an international agreement.” | 它们构成国际协定。 ” |
| 14. | 14. |
| The question of the distinction between treaties and non-legally binding international agreements has arisen more recently in the case law, notably in the case concerning Maritime Delimitation in the Indian Ocean (Somalia v. Kenya) and in the case concerning the Obligation to Negotiate Access to the Pacific Ocean (Bolivia v. Chile). | 条约与不具法律约束力的国际协定之间的区别问题最近出现在判例当中，尤其是在印度洋海洋划界案(索马里诉肯尼亚)和出入太平洋的协谈义务案(玻利维亚诉智利)当中。 |
| 15. | 15. |
| In the first case, the Court had to determine whether what was formally presented as a “Memorandum of Understanding” (MOU) constituted a treaty or not. | 在第一个案例中，国际法院必须确定一份正式的“谅解备忘录”是否构成条约。 |
| The Court concluded that it was indeed a treaty, on the basis of a certain number of elements, in particular some elements of form, namely “[t]he inclusion of a provision addressing the entry into force of the MOU [which] is indicative of the instrument’s binding character” and that “Kenya considered the MOU to be a treaty, having requested its registration in accordance with Article 102 of the Charter of the United Nations, and Somalia did not protest that registration until almost five years thereafter”. | 法院得出结论认为它确实是一项条约，依据是若干要件，尤其是一些形式要件，即“纳入了一项关于该谅解备忘录生效问题的规定，表明该文书具有约束力”，以及“肯尼亚认为该谅解备忘录是一项条约，已根据《联合国宪章》第一百零二条请求予以登记，而索马里直到近五年后才针对登记提出抗议”。 |
| 16. | 16. |
| In the second case, the Court held that the agreements or declarations invoked by the Applicant did not carry legal obligations, even though the declarations in question were “politically significant”, based primarily on the search for the “intention” of the Parties to these instruments to be bound by legal obligations. | 在第二个案例中，国际法院主要在寻找相关文书缔约方受法律义务约束的“意图”基础上，认定原告所援引的协定或声明不含有法律义务，尽管相关声明具有“政治意义”。 |
| According to the Court, this intention must appear “[i]rrespective of the form that agreements may take”, and “in the absence of express terms indicating the existence of a legal commitment, [it] may be established on the basis of an objective examination of all the evidence”. | 。国际法院认为，上述意图“无论协定可能采取何种形式”均必须呈现， 且“在无明确条款表明存在法律承诺的情况下，可在对所有证据进行客观审查的基础上予以确定”。 |
| 17. | 17. |
| For its part, and without being exhaustive, the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea has held that the term “agreement”, within the meaning of Article 15 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea on the delimitation of the territorial sea between States with opposite or adjacent coasts, means “in light of the object and purpose of article 15 of the Convention, […] a legally binding agreement. | 国际海洋法法庭在未作详尽论述的情况下，认为《联合国海洋法公约》关于海岸相向或相邻国家间领海界限的划定问题的第十五条所述“协议”一词，“考虑到《公约》第十五条的目的和宗旨，系指[…]具有法律约束力的协定。 |
| In the view of the Tribunal, what is important is not the form or designation of an instrument but its legal nature and content. | 本法庭认为，重要的不是文书的形式或名称，而是其法律性质和内容。 |
| ” The question was equally raised whether the reference to agreements in Article 281 of the UNCLOS covers binding agreements only or also non-binding ones. | ” 同样提出的另一个问题是：《联合国海洋法公约》第二八一条所述协议仅包括具有约束力的协定，还是也包括不具约束力的协定。 |
| 18. | 18. |
| In many situations nowadays, doubts can arise with regard to the nature of an agreement, which lead to very concrete consequences. | 在当今的很多情况中，可能会对协定的性质产生疑问，从而导致非常具体的后果。 |
| The works of the Institute of International Law, in addition to the academic writings, have identified a large number of such agreements, including for example, the agreement of the Yalta Conference and the Helsinki Final Act of 1975. | 除学术论著外，国际法学会的著述也罗列了大量此类协定，其中包括例如雅尔塔会议的协定和1975年《赫尔辛基最后文件》。 |
| The 1997 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Non-Navigational Uses of International Watercourses provides for instance, in its Article 3, for the conclusion of “agreements” of watercourses without specifying whether these agreements must be legally binding. | 举例来说，联合国1997年《国际水道非航行使用法公约》第3条规定可缔结水道“协定”，但未具体说明此类协定是否必须具有法律约束力。 |
| Guidelines on the conclusion of agreements concerning water may have maintained a certain ambiguity in this respect, either because they use equivocal terms such as “arrangement”, or because they define these terms in a way that seems to be inclusive of both binding and non-binding agreements. | 关于缔结水道协定的指南在这方面可能保持了一定的模糊性，或是因为其中使用了诸如“安排”这种模棱两可的术语， 或是因为其中对这些术语的界定似乎既包括具有约束力的协定，又包括不具约束力的协定。 |
| Similarly, the United Nations Convention against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances of 1988 provides, among other examples in other provisions, in its Article 7, paragraph 20, that “The Parties shall consider, as may be necessary, the possibility of concluding bilateral or multilateral agreements or arrangements that would serve the purposes of, give practical effect to, or enhance the provisions of this article.” | 同样，1988年《联合国禁止非法贩运麻醉药品和精神药物公约》除其他条款中另有的其他例子外，在其第7条第20款中规定，“缔约国应视需要考虑缔结旨在实现本条目的、具体实施或加强本条规定的双边或多边协定或安排的可能性。 ” |
| 19. | 19. |
| Of course, the inquiry into the nature of the agreement is in principle facilitated when it contains a clear and unambiguous provision on the question. | 当然，从原则上讲，若协定内已就协定的性质作出了清楚明确、毫不含糊的规定，将有利于探讨协定的性质。 |
| This is the case, among numerous examples, of Article 16 of the Financial Stability Board Charter. | 《金融稳定委员会章程》第16条即是诸多例子之一。 |
| One can also cite the “Non-legally binding authoritative statement of principles” on forests adopted at the 1992 Rio Conference. | 我们也可以援引1992年里约会议就森林问题通过的“无法律约束力的权威性原则声明”。 |
| Conversely, parties to a negotiation may set themselves the explicit objective of concluding a “legally binding” instrument. | 反之，谈判各方可为自己设定缔结一项“具有法律约束力”的文书的明确目标。 |
| 20. | 20. |
| In the absence of such a clause, or when its meaning or scope is uncertain, it is necessary to be able to rely on general criteria. | 在没有此类条款或是此类条款的含义或范围不确定的情况下，须能依赖一般的标准。 |
| Available studies tend to show that there is a diversity of possible criteria. | 现有研究往往表明，存在着多种多样的可用标准。 |
| Some emphasize the intention of the parties to the agreement, which can also be revealed by the content of the instrument or the practice surrounding it; | 一些标准强调协定各方的意图，而意图可从文书的内容或围绕文书的实践中看出端倪； |
| more objective elements may also be highlighted, such as the form of the instrument, the type of language used, or the modalities related to its registration or publication. | 也可能强调更客观的要件，例如文书的形式、所使用的语言类型或是文书的登记或发布方式。 |
| The criteria that are currently considered to be favoured in practice, the case-law and academic works, and how those criteria should be applied, must be identified in order to define more clearly what separates treaties from non-legally binding agreements. | 为了更清楚地界定条约与不具法律约束力的协定之间的区别，必须确定目前在实践、判例和学术论著中倾向于采用的标准，以及上述标准应如何适用。 |
| 5. | 5. |
| The potential legal effects of non-legally binding international agreements | 不具法律约束力的国际协定可能产生的法律效果 |
| 21. | 21. |
| A second series of questions relates to the potential legal effects of non-legally binding agreements – in comparison with those, better identified, of legally binding agreements. | 第二系列问题涉及的是不具法律约束力的协定可能产生的法律效果――与具有法律约束力的协定所能产生的更易于确定的法律效果相比较而言。 |
| International law cannot be reduced today to binding obligations alone. | 今天，不能将国际法简单地归结为仅指具有约束力的义务。 |
| As it has been rightly said, even if it is not for international courts and tribunals “to pronounce on the political or moral duties”, “[t]hat an instrument does not constitute a treaty does not mean that it does not have legal effect” and “[t]he conclusion that nonbinding agreements are not governed by international law does not however remove them entirely from having legal implications” Other “legal effects” may also exist and will need to be identified. | 正如有人正确指出的那样，即便不应由国际性法院和法庭来“就政治或道德义务作出评判”，但“一项文书不构成条约，并不意味着该文书不具法律效力”，且“不具约束力的协定不受国际法管辖这一结论，并不意味着上述协定完全不产生法律影响”。 还可能存在其他“法律效果”，有待予以确定。 |
| Nothing indicates that the study will ultimately lead to the conclusion that such effects exist, or if they exist, that there are many of them. | 没有任何迹象表明该研究最终会得出此类效果确实存在的结论，或是得出此类效果如若存在会有很多的结论。 |
| But if they do exist, it is important that the Commission identify and define them, on the basis of existing practice, case-law and literature. | 但是，如果此类效果确实存在，则委员会在现有的实践、判例和研究文献基础上确定和界定上述效果具有重要意义。 |
| 22. | 22. |
| Some of these legal effects may be of a direct nature. | 其中一些法律效果可能是直接性的。 |
| Such is in particular the case of the interpretative role of non-legally binding agreements as identified by the Commission in 2018 in its conclusions on subsequent agreements and practice (see supra, para. 8). | 委员会2018年在其关于嗣后协定和嗣后实践的结论当中确定的不具法律约束力协定所具有的解释作用，尤其属于此种情况(见上文第8段)。 |
| Some also consider that such agreements would be subject to the legal principle of good faith in their application. | 有些人还认为，此类协定在适用时将须遵守善意的法律原则。 |
| Mention may also be made here of the monitoring or control of compliance with non-legally binding agreements that can be instituted by an international organization, and which implies that a certain legal effect is granted to these agreements. | 此处或许还可以提及的是可由国际组织着手对不具法律约束力协定的遵守情况进行的监督或控制――进行监督或控制，即意味着上述协定被赋予了某种法律效力。 |
| At the very least, one can safely assume that the fields covered by these agreements can no longer be considered as falling exclusively within the exclusive domestic jurisdiction of each party concerned. | 至少，我们可以有把握地认为，不能继续将上述协定所涵盖的领域视为完全属于各相关方的专属国内管辖范围。 |
| 23. | 23. |
| Other effects could be of an indirect nature. | 其他效果可能是间接性的。 |
| Non-legally binding agreements could in particular play a role in the formation of other sources of international law, starting with customary international law, or be invoked within the framework of the theory of estoppel, or even as a form of waiver, as a presumption, or as evidence in favour or against a given claim. | 具体而言，不具法律约束力的协定可在国际法其他渊源――首先是习惯国际法――的形成方面发挥作用，或是在“不容反悔理论”框架内被援引为依据，甚至被当作一种弃权形式，被用作推论理由，或是被用作支持或反对某项主张的证据。 |
| There is also the question of the relationship between agreements that are not legally binding and those that are. | 还存在着不具法律约束力的协定和具有法律约束力的协定之间的关系问题。 |
| In particular, it is necessary to determine whether or to what extent such agreements could modify or amend a legally binding agreement, considering that the criterion laid down by the ILC and the Vienna Convention with regard to treaty modification is that of the “consent” of the parties to the treaty. | 尤其值得一提的是，有必要在虑及国际法委员会和《维也纳公约》就条约修改问题所规定的标准(即须经条约缔约方“同意”)情况下，确定此类协定是否或在多大程度上可以调整或修改具有法律约束力的协定。 |
| The question of the regime applicable to termination of treaties or to withdrawal by “consent of the parties” was the subject of important debates at the time of the codification of the law of treaties. | 终止条约或“经缔约方同意”退出条约所适用的制度问题，是编纂条约法时的重要辩论主题。 |
| One can also wonder whether an initially non-binding agreement may not subsequently become binding, either by virtue of an acceptance – possibly unilateral – of one or more parties to the agreement, or by virtue of the practice related to it after its conclusion or of an act of an international organization or conference. | 有人可能还想知道：一项最初不具约束力的协定，是否可能后来因一个或多个缔约方接受――可能是单方面接受――或是因该协定缔结后的相关实践或某个国际组织或国际会议的某项举动，而具有了约束力？ |
| 24. | 24. |
| Likewise, it has to be ascertained whether, or to what extent, a non-legally binding agreement could be given legal effect as a result of a direct or indirect reference thereto in a treaty or another legally binding act. | 同样，必须确定一项不具法律约束力的协定是否可能或在多大程度上可能因某项条约或另一项具有法律约束力的行为直接或间接援引了该协定而被赋予法律效力。 |
| For example, under Article 207 of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, “States shall adopt laws and regulations to prevent, reduce and control pollution of the marine environment from land-based sources, including rivers, estuaries, pipelines and outfall structures, taking into account internationally agreed rules, standards and recommended practices and procedures”. | 举例来说，根据《联合国海洋法公约》第二〇七条，“各国应制定法律和规章，以防止、减少和控制陆地来源，包括河流、河口湾、管道和排水口结构对海洋环境的污染，同时考虑到国际上议定的规则、标准和建议的办法及程序。 |
| Similarly, it is to be noted that the United Nations have considered the Conference on Security and Co-operation in Europe (CSCE) to be a “regional agreement” within the meaning of Chapter VIII of the Charter. | ”。 同样，应当指出，联合国将欧洲安全和合作会议(欧安会)视为《宪章》第八章意义上的“区域协定”。 |
| 25. | 25. |
| In order to better identify the legal effect of non-legally binding international agreements, it will also be necessary to determine the rules, if any, regulating such agreements and ask, in particular, whether – or to what extent – rules pertaining to the law of treaties governing the capacity to conclude treaties, the process of conclusion, the application, suspension, amendment and modification, termination or invalidity of treaties apply to these agreements. For example, it has been argued that States “ne peuvent conclure un accord qui soit contraire au jus cogens sous prétexte qu’il s’agit d’un accord non obligatoire” [“cannot enter into an agreement which would be contrary to jus cogens under the pretext that the agreement is a non-binding one”]. | 为了更准确地确定不具法律约束力的国际协定的法律效力，还有必要确定对此类协定予以规范的规则(如果存在此类规则的话)。 尤其要提出的问题是：有关缔结条约之能力、缔结条约之过程以及条约的适用、停止实施、修正和修改、终止或失效等问题的条约法相关规则是否或在何种程度上适用于此类协定。 举例来说，曾有人主张，国家“不能以协定不具约束力为借口，缔结违反强行法的协定”。 |
| It can also be said that a non-legally binding agreement may not defeat provisions of a treaty in force. | 也可以这么说：一项不具法律约束力的协定，不能推翻一项已生效条约中的规定。 |
| Also, if there is no doubt that the breach of a non-legally binding agreement may not, as such, engage international responsibility, one may wonder whether in some cases, such an agreement could lead to a certain form of liability if it constitutes aiding or assisting the commission of a wrongful act. | 此外，若违反不具法律约束力的协定本身毋庸置疑不涉及国际责任， 那么人们可能会问，若此类协定在某些情况中构成帮助或协助实施不法行为，是否会产生某种形式的责任？ |
| 26. | 26. |
| The issue relating to the transparency and publication of non-legally binding agreements could also be addressed, possibly in the form of recommendations or best practices. | 还可以处理不具法律约束力的协定的透明度和公布问题――或许可采用建议或最佳做法的形式来处理。 |
| Great care must be taken, however, not to give non-legally binding agreements – which are precisely concluded with the intention of not binding legally their parties – a scope or legal effects that the said parties did not intend or which they did not consent to. | 不过，必须非常小心的是：不要赋予不具法律约束力的协定(此类协定在缔结之时，恰恰是不打算对其缔约方产生法律约束力)以上述缔约方无意赋予或不同意赋予该协定的范围或法律效果。 |
| On a more general level, it must clear that the purpose of the present topic would not be to impose limitations on the freedom of States to conclude, in a flexible manner, non-binding agreements, which are essential to international cooperation and dialogue between States. | 更广泛而言，必须明确的一点是：该专题的目的不是对各国以灵活方式缔结不具约束力协定的自由施加限制――不具约束力的协定对于国家间开展国际合作和对话必不可少。 |
| Its aim is rather to provide clarification on the nature and possible effects of such agreements under international law. | 相反，其目的是澄清国际法下此类协定的性质和可能产生的效果。 |
| 6. | 6. |
| The scope of the topic | 该专题的范围 |
| 27. | 27. |
| The scope of the topic would be as follows (see also supra, paras. 3 and 4): | 该专题范围如下(另见上文第3和第4段)： |
| (i) | (一) |
| The topic should focus only on non-legally binding international instruments and leave out the separate question of the effect of non-binding provisions that may be found in certain treaties. | 该专题应仅关注不具法律约束力的国际文书，而不考虑另一个问题，即某些条约中可能存在的不具约束力的规定的效力问题。 |
| (ii) | (二) |
| It will be necessary to delimit the types of instruments to be considered by limiting the study to “agreements”, which by definition excludes non-consensual acts, such as a unilateral act of a State or of an international organization as such. | 有必要将研究限于“协定”，从而为将予考虑的文书类型划定范围。 顾名思义，“协定”不包括诸如某国或某国际组织的单边行为等非经双方同意的行为。 |
| (iii) | (三) |
| It would be appropriate to limit the study to written agreements (excluding tacit or oral agreements, or bilateral customs). | 将研究限于书面协定(不包括默认协定或口头协定，也不包括双边习惯)，将是妥当之举。 |
| (iv) | (四) |
| It would also be appropriate to limit the study to agreements which take the form of a single instrument or a single set of instruments (an exchange of notes that would be non-binding, for example) and to exclude from the scope of the study “agreements” resulting from the combination of two or more unilateral acts, such as optional declarations recognizing the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice as compulsory under Article 36 of the Statute of the Court, or that manifest “consent” as a circumstance precluding wrongfulness as contemplated in Article 20 of the ILC Articles of 2001. | 此外，将研究限于以单一文书或单一系列文书(例如互致不具约束力的照会)形式存在的协定，而将由结合两项或两项以上单边行为而产生的“协定”(例如根据《国际法院规约》第三十六条承认国际法院的管辖具有强制性的任择性声明)以及作为国际法委员会2001年条款第20条所设想的一种解除不法性情况而表示“同意”的“协定”排除在研究范围之外，将是妥当之举。 |
| (v) | (五) |
| The question will inevitably arise as to whether the topic should include legal acts of an uncertain or debated nature such as acts adopted by conferences of States parties that are not attributable to an autonomous subject of international law and could be considered to possess a conventional nature, or concluding reports of conferences incorporating “agreed conclusions” or even certain “codes of conduct”. | 不可避免地会出现以下问题：该专题是否应涵盖性质不确定或有争议的法律行为，例如缔约国大会所通过的不能归于某个国际法独立主体、可被视为具有公约性质的行为，或是内含“商定结论”的会议结论性报告， 甚或是某些“行为守则”？ |
| Norms or standards elaborated in informal frameworks such as those existing in the field of control of imports and exports of dual-use materials (for example, the Wassenaar Arrangement) or in the field relating to the fight against money laundering or the financing of terrorism, should be included in the study. | 在非正式框架内精心制定的规范或标准，例如军民两用材料进出口管制领域存在的规范或标准(如《瓦森纳安排》)，或是打击洗钱或资助恐怖主义行为相关领域的规范或标准，应包含在研究范围内。 |
| (vi) | (六) |
| It will also be necessary to specify whether the topic concerns only agreements concluded by States or also those concluded by international organizations. | 还有必要明确该专题是仅涉及由国家缔结的协定，还是也涉及由国际组织缔结的协定。 |
| At first glance, there seems to be no particular reason to exclude the latter from the scope of the topic. | 乍看之下，似乎没有任何特别理由将后者排除在该专题范围之外。 |
| On the other hand, it is recommended not to include agreements concluded with or by non-State entities, which fall into a genre that would be too different. | 但反过来讲，建议不要将与非国家实体缔结或由非国家实体缔结的协定包含在内，因为上述协定属于一个非常不同的类别。 |
| (vii) | (七) |
| Similarly, inter-State agreements or arrangements which are not covered by international law should be excluded from the topic. | 同样，不在国际法覆盖范围内的国家间协定或安排，也应排除在该专题范围之外。 |
| (viii) | (八) |
| On the other hand, agreements between sub-States actors – or State authorities not vested with the power to engage the State internationally – of different countries would presumably fall under the scope of the topic to the extent that they are not covered by domestic law only. | 另一方面，不同国家的次国家行为体――或无权在国际上代表国家作出承诺的国家主管部门――之间的协定，就其不仅仅在国内法覆盖之下这一点而言，可能也在该专题范围之内。 |
| (ix) | (九) |
| Finally, it will be certainly advisable to limit the study to aspects of public international law and not to address – in any case, not as such – aspects of the topic which come under domestic law, including under “foreign relations law”. | 最后，将研究限于国际公法范畴，而不触及――无论如何，就该专题而言，不触及――该专题属于国内法范围的内容，包括不触及该专题属于“外交关系法”范围的内容，肯定是明智之举。 |
| 7. | 7. |
| The possible form of the work of the Commission | 委员会工作可能采取的形式 |
| 28. | 28. |
| The work of the Commission should probably take the form of conclusions, or guidelines (or model provisions) if need be. | 委员会的工作可能应采取结论的形式，或者，如若必要，采取指南(或示范条款)形式。 |
| A preliminary examination of the topic could also lead, if necessary, to the use of a study group, provided that its work is fully transparent. | 对该专题进行初步审查后，如若必要，还可能设立一个研究小组，前提是其工作完全透明。 |
| It will also be up to the Commission to decide in due time on the final outcome of the project, in accordance with the direction it will decide to give to it and its content. | 此外，将由委员会在适当时候根据委员会决定赋予该项目的方向以及该项目的内容，就其最终结果作出决定。 |
| Select bibliography | SELECT Bibliography |
| Aust A., “The Theory and Practice of Informal International Instruments”, International and Comparative Law Quarterly vol. 35 (1986), pp. 787–811 | Aust A., “The Theory and Practice of Informal International Instruments”, International and Comparative Law Quarterly vol. 35 (1986), pp. 787-811 |
| Aust A., “Alternatives to Treaty-Making: MOUs as Political Commitments”, in D. Hollis (ed.), The Oxford Guide to Treaties ( Oxford University Press, 2012) pp. 46–72 | Aust A., “Alternatives to Treaty-Making: MOUs as Political Commitments”, in D. Hollis (ed.), The Oxford Guide to Treaties ( Oxford University Press, 2012) pp. 46-72 |
| Aust A., Modern Treaty Law and Practice, 3rd ed., 2013, Chapter 3 | Aust A., Modern Treaty Law and Practice, 3rd ed., 2013, Chapter 3 |
| Barberis J., “Le concept de ‘traité international’ et ses limites”, Annuaire français de droit international, 1984, pp. 239–270 | Barberis J., “Le concept de ‘traité international’ et ses limites”, Annuaire français de droit international, 1984, pp. 239-270 |
| Bastid S., “The Special Significance of the Helsinki Act”, in Th. Buergenthal (dir.), Human Rights, International Law and the Helsinki Accord, Montclair, 1977, pp. 11–19 | Bastid S., “The Special Significance of the Helsinki Act”, in Th. Buergenthal (dir.), Human Rights, International Law and the Helsinki Accord, Montclair, 1977, pp. 11-19 |
| Baxter R., “International Law In ‘Her Infinite Variety’”, International and Comparative Law Quarterly, vol. 29 (1980), pp. 549–566 | Baxter R., “International Law In ‘Her Infinite Variety’”, International and Comparative Law Quarterly, vol.29 (1980), pp. 549-566 |
| Bothe M., “Legal and Non-Legal Norms – A Meaningful Distinction in International Relations ? ”, Netherlands Yearbook of International Law (1980), pp. 65–95 | Bothe M., “Legal and Non-Legal Norms – A Meaningful Distinction in International Relations ?”, Netherlands Yearbook of International Law (1980), pp. 65-95 |
| Boyle A., “Some Reflections on the Relationship of Treaties and Soft Law”, International and Comparative Law Quarterly, vol.48 (1999), pp. 901–913 | Boyle A., “Some Reflections on the Relationship of Treaties and Soft Law”, International and Comparative Law Quarterly, vol.48 (1999), pp. 901-913 |
| Boyle A., “The Choice of a Treaty: Hard Law versus Soft Law”, in S. Chesterman et al. (eds), The Oxford Handbook of United Nations Treaties, OUP, 2019, pp. 101–118 | Boyle A., “The Choice of a Treaty: Hard Law versus Soft Law”, in S. Chesterman et al. (eds), The Oxford Handbook of United Nations Treaties, OUP, 2019, pp. 101-118 |
| Bradley C., Goldsmith J., Hathaway O., “The Rise of Nonbinding International Agreements: An Empirical, Comparative, and Normative Analysis”, 2022, accessible online on SSRN | Bradley C., Goldsmith J., Hathaway O., “The Rise of Nonbinding International Agreements: An Empirical, Comparative, and Normative Analysis”, 2022, accessible online on SSRN |
| Busuttil J., “The Bonn Declaration on International Terrorism: A Non-Binding International Agreement on Aircraft Hijacking”, International and Comparative Law Quarterly (1982), pp. 474–487 | Busuttil J., “The Bonn Declaration on International Terrorism: A Non-Binding International Agreement on Aircraft Hijacking”, International and Comparative Law Quarterly (1982), pp. 474-487 |
| Cohen-Jonathan G., Jacqué J.-P., “Obligations Assumed by the Helsinki Signatories”, in Th. Buergenthal (dir.), Human Rights, International Law and the Helsinki Accord, Montclair, 1979, pp. 43–70 | Cohen-Jonathan G., Jacqué J.-P., “Obligations Assumed by the Helsinki Signatories”, in Th. Buergenthal (dir.), Human Rights, International Law and the Helsinki Accord, Montclair, 1979, pp. 43-70 |
| Committee of Legal Advisers on Public International Law (CAHDI), Expert Workshop on “Non-Legally Binding Agreements in International Law”, 26 March 2021, Chair’s Summary (accessible online) | Committee of Legal Advisers on Public International Law (CAHDI), Expert Workshop on “Non-Legally Binding Agreements in International Law”, 26 March 2021, Chair’s Summary (accessible online) |
| Courteix S., “Les accords de Londres entre pays exportateurs d’équipements et de matériel nucléaires”, Annuaire français de droit international, 1976, pp. 27–50 | Courteix S., “Les accords de Londres entre pays exportateurs d’équipements et de matériel nucléaires”, Annuaire français de droit international, 1976, pp. 27-50 |
| Daillier P., “L’’acte international’ selon le droit communautaire”, Mélanges Thierry, Pedone, Paris, 1998, pp. 147–158 | Daillier P., “L’‘acte international’ selon le droit communautaire”, Mélanges Thierry, Pedone, Paris, 1998, pp. 147-158 |
| Decaux E., “La forme et la force obligatoire des codes de bonne conduite”, Annuaire français de droit international, 1983, pp. 81–97 | Decaux E., “La forme et la force obligatoire des codes de bonne conduite”, Annuaire français de droit international, 1983, pp. 81-97 |
| Delabie L., “Gouvernance mondiale : G8 et G20 comme modes de coopération interétatiques informels”, Annuaire français de droit international, 2009, pp. 629–663 | Delabie L., “Gouvernance mondiale : G8 et G20 comme modes de coopération interétatiques informels”, Annuaire français de droit international, 2009, pp. 629-663 |
| Escobar Hernández C., « Los memorandos de entendimiento : consideraciones prácticas a la luz del Derecho de los tratados », in Informes del Ministerio de Asuntos Exteriores y de Cooperación a los memorandos de entendimiento de las Comunidades Autónomas con instituciones extranjeras. Años 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005 y 2006, Ministerio de Asuntos Exteriores y de Cooperación, Madrid, 2006, pp. 607–611 | Escobar Hernández C., « Los memorandos de entendimiento : consideraciones prácticas a la luz del Derecho de los tratados », in Informes del Ministerio de Asuntos Exteriores y de Cooperación a los memorandos de entendimiento de las Comunidades Autónomas con instituciones extranjeras. Años 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005 y 2006, Ministerio de Asuntos Exteriores y de Cooperación, Madrid, 2006, pp. 607-611 |
| Eisemann P.M., “Le Gentlemen’s agreement comme source du droit international”, Journal du droit international (1979), pp. 326–348 | Eisemann P.M., “Le Gentlemen’s agreement comme source du droit international”, Journal du droit international (1979), pp. 326-348 |
| Esposito C., “Spanish Foreign Relations Law and the Process for Making Treaties and other International Agreements”, in C. Bradley (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Comparative Foreign Relations Law, OUP, 2019, pp. 205–220 | Esposito C., “Spanish Foreign Relations Law and the Process for Making Treaties and other International Agreements”, in C. Bradley (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Comparative Foreign Relations Law, OUP, 2019, pp. 205-220 |
| Fawcett J., “The Legal Character of International Agreements”, British Yearbook of International Law (1953), pp. 381–400 | Fawcett J., “The Legal Character of International Agreements”, British Yearbook of International Law (1953), pp. 381-400 |
| Fawcett J., “The Helsinki Act and International Law”, Revue belge de droit international (1977), pp. 5–9 | Fawcett J., “The Helsinki Act and International Law”, Revue belge de droit international (1977), pp. 5-9 |
| Fitzmaurice M., “The Identification and Character of Treaties and Treaty Obligations between States in International Law”, British Yearbook of International Law, 2002, pp. 141–185 | Fitzmaurice M., “The Identification and Character of Treaties and Treaty Obligations between States in International Law”, British Yearbook of International Law, 2002, pp. 141-185 |
| Forteau M., Miron A., Pellet A., Droit international public (Nguyen Quoc Dinh), LGDJ-lextenso, 9th ed., 2022, pp. 480–490, No. 304–310 | Forteau M., Miron A., Pellet A., Droit international public (Nguyen Quoc Dinh), LGDJ-lextenso, 9th ed., 2022, pp. 480-490, n° 304-310 |
| Gautier Ph., Essai sur la définition des traités entre Etats. La pratique de la Belgique aux confins du droit des traités, Bruylant, Brussels, 1993, XIII-619 p., pp. 310–375 | Gautier Ph., Essai sur la définition des traités entre Etats. La pratique de la Belgique aux confins du droit des traités, Bruylant, Brussels, 1993, XIII-619 p., pp. 310-375 |
| Gautier Ph., “Accord et engagement politique en droit des gens : à propos de l’Acte fondateur sur les relations, la coopération et la sécurité mutuelles entre l’OTAN et la Fédération de Russie signé à Paris le 27 mai 1997”, Annuaire français de droit international (1997), pp. 82–92 | Gautier Ph., “Accord et engagement politique en droit des gens : à propos de l’Acte fondateur sur les relations, la coopération et la sécurité mutuelles entre l’OTAN et la Fédération de Russie signé à Paris le 27 mai 1997”, Annuaire français de droit international (1997), pp. 82-92 |
| Gautier Ph., “Les accords informels et la Convention de Vienne sur le droit des traités entre Etats”, Mélanges Salmon, Bruylant, Bruxelles, 2007, pp. 425–454 | Gautier Ph., “Les accords informels et la Convention de Vienne sur le droit des traités entre Etats”, Mélanges Salmon, Bruylant, Bruxelles, 2007, pp. 425-454 |
| Gautier Ph., “Non-Binding Agreements”, Max Planck Encyclopedia of International Law (2012) | Gautier Ph., “Non-Binding Agreements”, Max Planck Encyclopedia of International Law (2012) |
| Ghébali V.-Y., “L’Acte final de la Conférence sur la sécurité et la coopération en Europe et les Nations Unies”, Annuaire français de droit international (1975), pp. 73–127 | Ghébali V.-Y., “L’Acte final de la Conférence sur la sécurité et la coopération en Europe et les Nations Unies”, Annuaire français de droit international (1975), pp. 73-127 |
| Gomaa Mohammed M., “Non-Binding Agreements in International Law”, in L. Boisson de Chazournes and V. Gowlland-Debbas (eds.), The International Legal System in Quest of Equity and Universality: Liber amicorum Georges Abi-Saab, Brill, 2001, pp. 229–250 | Gomaa Mohammed M., “Non-Binding Agreements in International Law”, in L. Boisson de Chazournes and V. Gowlland-Debbas (eds.), The International Legal System in Quest of Equity and Universality: Liber amicorum Georges Abi-Saab, Brill, 2001, pp. 229-250 |
| Guzman A., “The Design of International Agreements”, European Journal of International Law vo.16 ( 2005), pp. 579–612 | Guzman A., “The Design of International Agreements”, European Journal of International Law vo.16 ( 2005), pp. 579-612 |
| Hathaway O., “Non-Binding Agreements and International Law”, ASIL, International Law Behind the Headlines, Episode 33, 2022, [https://soundcloud.com/americansocietyof internationallaw/international-law-behind-the-headlines-episode-33] | Hathaway O., “Non-Binding Agreements and International Law”, ASIL, International Law Behind the Headlines, Episode 33, 2022, [https://soundcloud.com/americansocietyofinternationallaw/international-law-behind-the-headlines-episode-33] |
| Institute of International Law, International Texts of Legal Import in the Mutual Relations of their Authors and Texts Devoid of Such Import, | Institute of International Law, International Texts of Legal Import in the Mutual Relations of their Authors and Texts Devoid of Such Import, |
| Provisional report of Michel Virally of July 1981, Yearbook of the IIL, 1983, vol. 60-I, Session of Cambridge, Preparatory Work, pp. 166–257 | - Provisional report of Michel Virally of July 1981, Yearbook of the IIL, 1983, vol. 60-I, Session of Cambridge, Preparatory Work, pp. 166-257 |
| Annex I: Observations by members of the Seventh Commission, ibid., pp. 258–282 | - Annex I: Observations by members of the Seventh Commission, ibid., pp. 258-282 |
| Annex II: Preliminary Statement by Michel Virally, ibid., pp. 283–306 | - Annex II: Preliminary Statement by Michel Virally, ibid., pp. 283-306 |
| Annex III: Exploratory Study by Fritz Münch of 15 September 1976, ibid., pp. 307–327 | - Annex III: Exploratory Study by Fritz Münch of 15 September 1976, ibid., pp. 307-327 |
| Definitive Report by Michel Virally of September 1982, ibid., pp. 328–357 | - Definitive Report by Michel Virally of September 1982, ibid., pp. 328-357 |
| Annex: Observations by members of the Seventh Commission, ibid., pp. 358–374 | - Annex: Observations by members of the Seventh Commission, ibid., pp. 358-374 |
| Deliberations of the Institute during Plenary Meetings, Yearbook of the IIL, 1984, vol. 60-II, Session of Cambridge, Deliberations, pp. 117–154 | - Deliberations of the Institute during Plenary Meetings, Yearbook of the IIL, 1984, vol. 60-II, Session of Cambridge, Deliberations, pp. 117-154 |
| Inter-American Juridical Committee, Guidelines on Binding and Non-Binding Agreement (resolution and final report (77 p.) by D. Hollis, August 2020, accessible online (original version of the resolution in Spanish and of the report in English) | Inter-American Juridical Committee, Guidelines on Binding and Non-Binding Agreement (resolution and final report (77 p.) by D. Hollis, August 2020, accessible online (original version of the resolution in Spanish and of the report in English) |
| Kanetake M., Nollkaemper A., “The Application of Informal International Instruments before Domestic Courts”, George Washington International Law Review (2014), pp. 765–808 | Kanetake M., Nollkaemper A., “The Application of Informal International Instruments before Domestic Courts”, George Washington International Law Review (2014), pp. 765-808 |
| Klabbers J., The Concept of Treaty in International Law, Kluwer, 1996, XV-307 p. | Klabbers J., The Concept of Treaty in International Law, Kluwer, 1996, XV-307 p. |
| Klein N. (ed.), Unconventional Lawmaking in the Law of the Sea, OUP, 2022, 464 p. | Klein N. (ed.), Unconventional Lawmaking in the Law of the Sea, OUP, 2022, 464 p. |
| Lachs M., “Some Reflections on the Substance and Form of International Law”, Mélanges Jessup, 1972, pp. 99–112 | Lachs M., “Some Reflections on the Substance and Form of International Law”, Mélanges Jessup, 1972, pp. 99-112 |
| Lauterpacht E., “Gentlemen’s Agreements”, Mélanges Mann, 1977, pp. 381–398 | Lauterpacht E., “Gentlemen’s Agreements”, Mélanges Mann, 1977, pp. 381-398 |
| Le Floch G., “Instruments concertés non conventionnels et OMC”, in SFDI, Les sources et les normes dans le droit de l’Organisation mondiale du commerce, Pedone, Paris, 2012, pp. 123–137 | Le Floch G., “Instruments concertés non conventionnels et OMC”, in SFDI, Les sources et les normes dans le droit de l’Organisation mondiale du commerce, Pedone, Paris, 2012, pp. 123-137 |
| Lipson C., “Why are Some International Agreements Informal? ”, International Organization, 1991, pp. 495–538 | Lipson C., “Why are Some International Agreements Informal?”, International Organization, 1991, pp. 495-538 |
| Mahaseth H., Subramaniam K., “Binding or Non-Binding: Analysing the Nature of the ASEAN Agreements”, International and Comparative Law Review (2021), pp. 100–123 | Mahaseth H., Subramaniam K., “Binding or Non-Binding: Analysing the Nature of the ASEAN Agreements”, International and Comparative Law Review (2021), pp. 100-123 |
| Meyer T., “Alternatives to Treaty-Making – Informal Agreements”, in D. Hollis (ed.), The Oxford Guide to Treaties, 2d ed., OUP, 2020, pp. 59–81 | Meyer T., “Alternatives to Treaty-Making – Informal Agreements”, in D. Hollis (ed.), The Oxford Guide to Treaties, 2d ed., OUP, 2020, pp. 59-81 |
| Münch F., “Non-Binding Agreements”, ZaöRV, 1969, pp. 1–11 | Münch F., “Non-Binding Agreements”, ZaöRV, 1969, pp. 1-11 |
| Nincic D., “Les implications générales juridiques et historiques de la Déclaration d’Helsinki”, Recueil des cours de l’Académie de droit international, 1977-I, t. 154, pp. 43–102 | Nincic D., “Les implications générales juridiques et historiques de la Déclaration d’Helsinki”, Recueil des cours de l’Académie de droit international, 1977-I, t. 154, pp. 43-102 |
| Pastor Palomar A., « Tipos de acuerdos internacionales celebrados por España : al hilo del Proyecto de la Ley de tratados y otros acuerdos internacionales de noviembre de 2013 », in Revista Española de Derecho Internacional, vol. 66 ( 2014), pp. 331–337 | Pastor Palomar A., « Tipos de acuerdos internacionales celebrados por España : al hilo del Proyecto de la Ley de tratados y otros acuerdos internacionales de noviembre de 2013 », in Revista Española de Derecho Internacional, vol. 66 ( 2014), pp. 331-337 |
| Pauwelyn J., Wessel R., Wouters J. (eds), Informal International Lawmaking, OUP, 2012 | Pauwelyn J., Wessel R., Wouters J. (eds), Informal International Lawmaking, OUP, 2012 |
| Prévost J.-F., “Observations sur la nature juridique de l’Acte final de la Conférence sur la sécurité et la coopération en Europe”, Annuaire français de droit international, 1975, pp. 129–153 | Prévost J.-F., “Observations sur la nature juridique de l’Acte final de la Conférence sur la sécurité et la coopération en Europe”, Annuaire français de droit international, 1975, pp. 129-153 |
| Raustiala K., “Form and Substance in International Agreements”, American Journal of International Law, 2005, pp. 581–614 | Raustiala K., “Form and Substance in International Agreements”, American Journal of International Law, 2005, pp. 581-614 |
| Recueil de pratiques des organisations internationales. Œuvrer à l’élaboration d’instruments internationaux plus efficaces / Compendium of International Organisations’ Practices. Working Towards More Effective International Instruments, 25 February 2022, accessible online on the website of the OECD | Recueil de pratiques des organisations internationales. Œuvrer à l’élaboration d’instruments internationaux plus efficaces / Compendium of International Organisations’ Practices. Working Towards More Effective International Instruments, 25 February 2022, accessible online on the website of the OECD |
| Reichard M., “Some Legal Issues Concerning the EU-NATO Berlin Plus Agreement”, Nordic Journal of International Law, 2004, pp. 37–67 | Reichard M., “Some Legal Issues Concerning the EU-NATO Berlin Plus Agreement”, Nordic Journal of International Law, 2004, pp. 37-67 |
| Reinicke H., Witte J., “Challenges to the International Legal System. Interdependence, Globalization, and Sovereignty: The Role of Non-Binding International Legal Accords”, in D. Shelton (ed.), Commitment and Compliance: The Role of Non-Binding Norms in the International Legal System, 2003, pp. 75–114 | Reinicke H., Witte J., “Challenges to the International Legal System. Interdependence, Globalization, and Sovereignty: The Role of Non-Binding International Legal Accords”, in D. Shelton (ed.), Commitment and Compliance: The Role of Non-Binding Norms in the International Legal System, 2003, pp. 75-114 |
| Reuter P., “Traités et transactions – Réflexions sur l’identification de certains engagements conventionnels”, Mélanges Ago, 1987, t. I, pp. 399–415 | Reuter P., “Traités et transactions – Réflexions sur l’identification de certains engagements conventionnels”, Mélanges Ago, 1987, t. I, pp. 399-415 |
| Rodiles A., Coalitions of the Willing and International Law. The Interplay between Formality and Informality, CUP, 2018 | Rodiles A., Coalitions of the Willing and International Law. The Interplay between Formality and Informality, CUP, 2018 |
| Roessler F., “Law, De Facto Agreements and Declarations of Principle in International Economic Relations”, German Yearbook of International Law (1978), pp. 27–59 | Roessler F., “Law, De Facto Agreements and Declarations of Principle in International Economic Relations”, German Yearbook of International Law (1978), pp. 27-59 |
| Salmon J., “Les accords non formalisés ou solo consensu”, Annuaire français de droit international, 1999, pp. 1–28 | Salmon J., “Les accords non formalisés ou solo consensu”, Annuaire français de droit international, 1999, pp. 1-28 |
| Schachter O., “The Twilight Existence of Nonbinding International Agreements”, American Journal of International Law vol. 71 (1977), pp. 296–304 | Schachter O., “The Twilight Existence of Nonbinding International Agreements”, American Journal of International Law vol.71 (1977), pp. 296-304 |
| Tardieu A., “Les conférences des Etats parties”, Annuaire français de droit international, 2011, pp. 111–143 | Tardieu A., “Les conférences des Etats parties”, Annuaire français de droit international, 2011, pp. 111-143 |
| Tomuschat Ch., “The Concluding Documents of World Order Conferences”, Mélanges Skubiszewski, 1996, pp. 563–585 | Tomuschat Ch., “The Concluding Documents of World Order Conferences”, Mélanges Skubiszewski, 1996, pp. 563-585 |
| United Nations, Treaty Handbook, section 5 | United Nations, Treaty Handbook, section 5 |
| Van Dijk P., “The Final Act of Helsinki – Basis for a Pan-European System? ”, Netherlands Yearbook of International Law, 1980, pp. 97–124 | Van Dijk P., “The Final Act of Helsinki – Basis for a Pan-European System?”, Netherlands Yearbook of International Law, 1980, pp. 97-124 |
| Virally M., “Sur la notion d’accord”, Mélanges Bindschedler, 1980, pp. 159–172 | Virally M., “Sur la notion d’accord”, Mélanges Bindschedler, 1980, pp. 159-172 |
| Weil, P., “Vers une normativité relative en droit international ? ”, Revue générale de droit international public, 1982, pp. 5–47 | Weil, P., “Vers une normativité relative en droit international ?”, Revue générale de droit international public, 1982, pp. 5-47 |
| Weil P., “Towards Relative Normativity in International Law? ”, American Journal of International Law, vol.77 (1983), pp. 413–442 | Weil P., “Towards Relative Normativity in International Law?”, American Journal of International Law, vol.77 (1983), pp. 413-442 |
| Wengler W., “Les conventions ‘non juridiques’ comme nouvelle voie à côté des conventions en droit”, Revue générale de droit international public, 1992, pp. 637–656 | Wengler W., “Les conventions ‘non juridiques’ comme nouvelle voie à côté des conventions en droit”, Revue générale de droit international public, 1992, pp. 637-656 |
| Wessel R., “Normative Transformations in EU External Relations: The Phenomenon of ‘Soft’ International Agreements”, West European Politics, 2021, pp. 72–92 | Wessel R., “Normative Transformations in EU External Relations: The Phenomenon of ‘Soft’ International Agreements”, West European Politics, 2021, pp. 72-92 |
| Widdows K., “On the Form and Distinctive Nature of International Agreements”, Australian Year Book of International Law (1977), pp. 114–128 | Widdows K., “On the Form and Distinctive Nature of International Agreements”, Australian Year Book of International Law (1977), pp. 114-128 |
| Widdows K., “What is an Agreement in International Law? ”, British Yearbook of International Law (1979), pp. 117–149 | Widdows K., “What is an Agreement in International Law?”, British Yearbook of International Law (1979), pp. 117-149 |
| Zimmermann A., Jauer N., “Legal Shades of Grey? Indirect Legal Effects of ‘Memoranda of Understanding’”, Archiv. des V., 2021, pp. 278–299 | Zimmermann A., Jauer N., “Legal Shades of Grey? Indirect Legal Effects of ‘Memoranda of Understanding’”, Archiv. des V., 2021, pp. 278-299 |
| Annex II | 附件二 |
| Request of the General Assembly under operative paragraph 34 of its resolution 76/111 of 9 December 2021 | 联大2021年12月9日第76/111号决议执行部分第34段提出的要求 |
| 1. | 1. |
| In paragraph 34 of its resolution 76/111, the General Assembly took note of paragraph 329 of the 2021 report of the Commission (A/76/10) and, inter alia, requested that more information about the constraints and shortfalls referred to in paragraph 329 be provided, as well as available options to address them, including information regarding the terms of reference of the proposed trust fund, for consideration by the General Assembly at its seventy-seventh session. | 联大第76/111号决议第34段注意到委员会2021年报告(A/76/10)第329段，除其他外，要求提供更多信息，说明第329段所述制约和短缺问题，同时提供解决这些问题的可用备选办法，包括说明建议设立的信托基金的职权范围，供联大第七十七届会议审议。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| The present information is provided in response to the above-mentioned paragraph 34. | 本资料是根据上述第34段提供的。 |
| The first part addresses matters concerning Special Rapporteurs and Chairs of Study Groups, whose work is unremunerated, and the role of the Secretariat in supporting them, while the second part considers related budgetary aspects. | 第一部分阐述的问题涉及研究组的特别报告员和研究组主席，他们的工作没有报酬，另外还谈到了秘书处向他们提供支持的作用，第二部分审议相关的预算问题。 |
| It should be noted that the information in the present annex and the terms of reference of the proposed Trust Fund set out in the appendix focus on assistance to Special Rapporteurs and Chairs of Study Groups, and support of their work by the Secretariat. | 应当指出，本附件中的资料和附录所载拟议信托基金职权范围着重论述的是向特别报告员和研究组主席提供的协助以及秘书处对他们工作的支持。 |
| 3. | 3. |
| The Commission recalls that it has on numerous occasions reiterated its views concerning the question of honoraria, as well as the extent to which the research of Special Rapporteurs is affected by lack of resources. | 委员会回顾，它曾多次重申对酬金问题的看法，以及特别报告员的研究受到缺乏资源的影响的程度。 |
| It stresses the importance of the need for Special Rapporteurs (particularly those from developing regions) to obtain the necessary assistance to undertake the research required for the preparation of their reports. | 委员会强调，特别报告员(特别是来自发展中区域的特别报告员)需要获得必要的协助，以开展编写报告所需的研究。 |
| The role of Special Rapporteurs, Chairs of Study Groups and the Secretariat | 特别报告员、研究组主席和秘书处的作用 |
| 4. | 4. |
| The proposed consideration of a Trust Fund to support the work of Special Rapporteurs and Chairs of Study Groups and Secretariat assistance to their work should not be understood as detracting from the fact that these matters should be addressed in the relevant programme budget pertaining to the work of the Commission. | 为特别报告员和研究组主席的工作以及秘书处协助他们开展工作提供支持，是应当在与委员会工作相关的方案预算中处理的事项，关于考虑设立一个信托基金的提议，不应被理解为有损这一实情。 |
| The proposed Trust Fund is suggested as a “stop-gap” measure. | 拟议的信托基金是作为一项“补缺”措施提出的。 |
| 5. | 5. |
| The Commission wishes to underline that its Special Rapporteurs play a central role in its functioning. | 委员会希望强调，特别报告员在委员会的运作中发挥着核心作用。 |
| The practice of the Commission has been to appoint one of its members to serve as Special Rapporteur at an early stage of the consideration of a topic irrespective of whether it is a matter of progressive development of international law or its codification. | 委员会的做法是，在审议一个专题的早期阶段任命一名委员担任特别报告员，不论该专题是国际法的逐渐发展问题还是编纂问题。 |
| Special Rapporteurs have different professional backgrounds and responsibilities and are appointed taking into account the different regional groups that are reflected in the composition of the Commission as a whole. | 特别报告员有不同的专业背景和责任，他们的任命考虑到了在整个委员会的组成中得到了体现的不同区域集团。 |
| 6. | 6. |
| The additional functions of a member serving as Special Rapporteur continue until the Commission has completed its work on a topic. | 担任特别报告员的委员的额外职能将持续到委员会完成关于某一专题的工作。 |
| It is the responsibility of the Special Rapporteur to offer the intellectual vision for the topic; | 特别报告员有责任为这一专题提供理论观点； |
| to mark out its contours; | 划定范围； |
| to explain existing practice and the state of the law; | 解释现行做法和法律状况； |
| to make proposals in reports on the topic to the Commission; | 在向委员会提交的关于该专题的报告中提出建议； |
| to take into account the views expressed by members, Member States and, in some instances, international organizations and other actors; | 考虑到委员、会员国以及在某些情况下国际组织和其他行为体表达的意见； |
| and to manage the overall development of the Commission’s work on the topic, from its conception in terms of content and structure to the adoption of a final output with commentaries. | 管理委员会关于这一专题工作的总体发展，从内容和结构的构想到通过附有评注的最后产出。 |
| 7. | 7. |
| The Special Rapporteur performs a variety of tasks ranging from the preparation of reports on the topic, participation in the consideration of the topic in the plenary, elucidation of various aspects of the topic in plenary and in the work of the Drafting Committee, and the preparation of revised texts, to the elaboration of commentaries, once such texts are adopted by the Commission. | 特别报告员执行各种任务，包括编写专题报告，参加全体会议关于专题的审议，在全体会议和起草委员会的工作中阐明专题的各个方面，编写经修订的案文，在委员会通过这类案文后拟订评注。 |
| The reports of Special Rapporteurs form the very basis of work for the Commission and constitute a critical component of the methods and techniques of work of the Commission established under its statute. | 特别报告员的报告是委员会工作的基础，也是根据委员会章程建立的委员会工作方法和工作技巧的重要组成部分。 |
| 8. | 8. |
| The tasks of Special Rapporteurs require extensive independent research and analysis, as well as a serious commitment to stewardship at all stages of the Commission’s work on a topic. | 特别报告员的任务需要开展广泛的独立研究和分析，并认真致力于在委员会某一专题工作的所有阶段提供指导。 |
| While the Commission is in session for a determined period of time, the functions of the Special Rapporteurs continue throughout the year. | 委员会是在确定的时段内举行届会，而特别报告员的职能贯穿全年。 |
| 9. | 9. |
| The requirement of independence in the performance of their functions has the consequence for the Special Rapporteurs that they carry out their tasks separately from their other professional responsibilities – in parallel with, but often at the expense of, their professional activities. | 履行职责的独立性要求给特别报告员带来的影响是，他们在履行任务的同时不能履行自己的其他专业职责，虽然两者并行，但往往以牺牲其专业活动为代价。 |
| As the Commission assumes increasing responsibility for topics that are multidisciplinary, coupled in certain instances with the paucity of readily available practice, research work on particular topics has involved travel and contacts with individuals and institutions with particular expertise on the specific topics in question or with access to particular information. | 随着委员会对多学科专题承担越来越多的责任，加上在某些情况下缺乏现成的实践，关于特定专题的研究工作需要旅行，并与在所涉特定专题方面具有特殊专长或能获得特定信息的个人和机构接触。 |
| The use of research assistance under the direct supervision of a Special Rapporteur has always been an essential component of the work of Special Rapporteurs in preparing reports intersessionally. | 在特别报告员的直接监督下使用研究协助一直是特别报告员在闭会期间编写报告工作的一个重要组成部分。 |
| 10. | 10. |
| In some instances, Special Rapporteurs are located in places where accessibility to primary research material and resources is difficult and expensive. | 某些情况下，在特别报告员身处的地方很难获得原始研究材料和资源，而且费用昂贵。 |
| Indeed, there have been situations in which individual Special Rapporteurs have used their personal resources for research activities or have foregone travel entitlements to make detours to conduct research elsewhere on their way to or from the Commission’s sessions in Geneva. | 事实上，曾有个别特别报告员利用个人资金从事研究活动，或放弃旅行应享待遇，在往返日内瓦委员会届会的途中绕道到其他地方进行研究。 |
| In some regions, access to the Internet may be intermittent and expensive. | 在某些地区，互联网接入可能时断时续，而且价格昂贵。 |
| All these impediments place an additional burden on Special Rapporteurs, particularly when the Commission is out of session, as they are required to prepare reports analysing complex questions of international law in readiness for the following session of the Commission. | 所有这些障碍给特别报告员带来了额外的负担，特别是在委员会闭会期间，因为他们需要编写报告，分析复杂的国际法问题，为委员会下届会议做准备。 |
| 11. | 11. |
| In short, the scheme under the statute of the Commission relies heavily on the work done by Special Rapporteurs, whose reports, prepared intersessionally, form the basis for the consideration of the various topics by the Commission. | 简而言之，委员会章程规定的计划在很大程度上依赖特别报告员的工作，他们在闭会期间编写的报告构成委员会审议各专题的基础。 |
| 12. | 12. |
| Where the Commission has in recent years established a Study Group, the Chairs and members assigned to particular issues work in a similar manner to that of Special Rapporteurs outlined above. | 对于委员会近年来设立了研究组的专题，负责具体问题的主席和委员的工作方式与上文概述的特别报告员工作方式相类似。 |
| 13. | 13. |
| As regards the Secretariat, pursuant to article 14 of the statute of the Commission, the Secretary-General of the United Nations provides substantive and technical servicing to the Commission, including providing various forms of assistance to Special Rapporteurs. | 关于秘书处，根据委员会章程第14条，联合国秘书长向委员会提供实质性和技术性服务，包括向特别报告员提供各种形式的协助。 |
| From the establishment of the Commission, the Codification Division of the Office of Legal Affairs of the United Nations has served as the Secretariat of the Commission. | 自委员会成立以来，联合国法律事务厅编纂司一直担任委员会的秘书处。 |
| 14. | 14. |
| The type of assistance offered by the Secretariat to Special Rapporteurs has two interconnected aspects: assistance provided to the Commission as a whole, from which Special Rapporteurs benefit, and assistance provided to individual Special Rapporteurs in the discharge of their responsibilities. | 秘书处向特别报告员提供的协助有两个相互关联的方面：向整个委员会提供的协助，特别报告员可能以特定方式从中受益； 以及专门为特别报告员个人履行具体职责提供的协助。 |
| 15. | 15. |
| In the context of the former, the Codification Division undertakes considerable independent research, analytical studies and surveys to facilitate the work of the Commission. | 就前者而言，编纂司开展大量独立研究、分析研究和调查，为委员会的工作提供便利。 |
| At its thirty-second session (1980), the Commission noted that the studies and research projects prepared by the Codification Division were part and parcel of the consolidated methods and techniques of work of the Commission and, as such, constituted an indispensable contribution to its work. | 委员会第三十二届会议(1980年)指出，编纂司的研究报告和研究项目是委员会综合工作方法和技巧的重要组成部分，因此是对委员会工作不可或缺的贡献。 |
| This remains the case. | 目前也还是这样。 |
| 16. | 16. |
| As to the latter, this includes the Codification Division assigning a staff member or members to: work closely with the Special Rapporteur at the various stages of development of the topic; follow and monitor developments on the topic in question; and provide research assistance upon request, such as collecting evidence of State practice, doctrinal material and jurisprudence, or conducting research on a particular issue. | 关于后者，这包括编纂司指派一名或多名工作人员与特别报告员一道工作，跟踪和监测所涉专题的发展情况，在专题发展的不同阶段与特别报告员个人密切合作，应要求提供任何研究协助，如收集国家实践、理论材料和判例的证据，或就某一问题进行研究。 |
| These functions are subsumed in the overall activities of the Division. | 这些职能纳入该司的总体活动。 |
| The staff members concerned also perform editorial, research and referencing tasks with respect to the reports prepared by Special Rapporteurs. | 有关工作人员还对特别报告员编写的报告执行编辑、研究和列出参考资料的任务。 |
| They may sometimes also assist with the preparation of the commentary to draft outcomes at the request of the Special Rapporteurs, who remain primarily responsible for the commentaries. | 他们还可应特别报告员的要求协助编写成果草案的评注，但特别报告员仍对评注负有主要责任。 |
| The presence of such staff members is often crucial during the consideration of a particular topic when the Commission is in session. | 在委员会届会期间审议某一专题时，这些工作人员在场往往至关重要。 |
| Based on recent practice, their participation in any related outside activities undertaken by the Special Rapporteur in the development of the topic can also be highly valuable. | 根据最近的实践，他们参加特别报告员就某一专题开展的任何相关外部活动也可能是极其重要的。 |
| Honoraria for Special Rapporteurs | 特别报告员的酬金 |
| 17. | 17. |
| The Commission recalls that the unique role of Special Rapporteurs in its work has been recognized by the General Assembly from the outset when, in 1949, it initially authorized on an exceptional basis the payment of research grants to Special Rapporteurs and subsequently decided that special allowances be granted on an exceptional basis to all members of the Commission. | 委员会回顾，联大从一开始就承认特别报告员在委员会工作中的独特作用，1949年，联大首次作为例外情况批准向特别报告员支付研究补助金，随后决定作为例外情况向委员会所有委员发放特别津贴。 |
| 18. | 18. |
| It was the specific provision in the statute of the Commission concerning the appointment of members of the Commission as Special Rapporteurs on selected topics that led the Fifth Committee that year to recommend to the General Assembly, as an exception, the payment of research project grants, in the form of honoraria. | 委员会章程中关于任命委员会委员担任选定专题特别报告员的具体规定促使第五委员会当年向联大提出建议，作为例外情况以酬金形式支付研究项目补助金。 |
| Payment of such honoraria was conditional upon the submission of a report. | 支付酬金的条件是提交报告。 |
| In the debates in the Fifth Committee, the Chair of the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions noted that Special Rapporteurs prepared drafts and working papers to assist the Commission, which not only saved the Commission time during sessions, but also demanded extra work and time on the part of seasoned legal authorities. | 在第五委员会的辩论中，行政和预算问题咨询委员会主席指出，特别报告员编写草稿和工作文件以协助委员会，这节省了委员会在届会期间的时间，但也需要经验丰富的法律专家付出额外的工作和时间。 |
| 19. | 19. |
| The payments were designed not so much to compensate adequately the individuals concerned for their services as to acknowledge in a token manner the substantial sacrifice of time or of financial interest on the part of the individuals concerned. | 支付这些酬金的目的与其说是为有关个人的服务提供充分报酬，不如说是象征性地承认有关个人在时间或经济利益方面作出的重大牺牲。 |
| 20. | 20. |
| After several reviews, the General Assembly, in paragraph 1 of its resolution 35/218, decided, with effect from 1 January 1981, on certain rates of honoraria payable in those cases it had already authorized on an exceptional basis, including the International Law Commission, and its Special Rapporteurs. | 经过几次审查，联大第35/218号决议第1段决定了原经联大核准作为例外情况办理的个案，包括国际法委员会及其特别报告员，从1981年1月1日起支领酬金的数额。 |
| It was determined that the rates payable would be: Five thousand (5000) United States dollars for the Chairs, 3000 dollars for other members. An additional amount of 2500 dollars was payable to members of International Law Commission when acting as Special Rapporteurs, conditional upon the preparation of specific reports or studies between sessions of the Commission. | 经确定，应付数额为：主席五千(5,000)美元，其他委员3,000美元，担任特别报告员的国际法委员会委员另加付2,500美元，但以在委员会闭会期间编写具体报告或研究报告为条件。 |
| 21. | 21. |
| At its fifty-sixth session (2002), having considered the note by the Secretariat on the comprehensive study of the question of honoraria payable to members of organs and subsidiary organs of the United Nations (A/56/311), the General Assembly, in accordance with its resolution 56/272, decided, with effect from 6 April 2002, to set at a level of one United States dollar per year all honoraria then payable on an exceptional basis, including to the members of the International Law Commission. | 联大第五十六届会议(2002年)审议了秘书处关于支付给联合国机构和附属机构成员酬金问题的综合研究的说明(A/56/311)，根据其56/272号决议，决定自2002年4月6日起，将当时作为例外情况支付给包括国际法委员会成员在内的所有酬金定为每年一美元。 |
| Consequently, when the honorarium was pegged at $1 per year for all members of the Commission, Special Rapporteurs no longer receive the additional amount that was payable conditional upon the preparation of specific reports or studies between sessions of the Commission. | 因此，当委员会所有委员的酬金定为每年1美元时，特别报告员不再获得以在委员会闭会期间编写具体报告或研究报告为条件的额外款项。 |
| 22. | 22. |
| Since its fifty-fourth session (2002), the Commission has repeatedly drawn the attention of the General Assembly to the impact of resolution 56/272, emphasizing in particular that the resolution affected Special Rapporteurs, especially those from developing countries, as it compromises support for their research work. | 委员会自第五十四届会议(2002年)以来，一再提请联大注意第56/272号决议的影响， 特别强调该决议影响到特别报告员，特别是来自发展中国家的特别报告员，因为该决议缩减了对他们研究工作的支持。 |
| It has urged the General Assembly to reconsider this matter, with a view to restoring the honoraria for Special Rapporteurs. | 委员会促请联大重新审议这一事项，以期恢复特别报告员的酬金。 |
| Other related budgetary aspects | 其他有关预算问题 |
| 23. | 23. |
| The Commission’s budget is covered under subprogramme 3 of the programme “Legal affairs” of the regular budget. | 委员会的预算列在经常预算方案“法律事务”次级方案3下。 |
| It covers the requirements of travel and subsistence allowance of the 34 members of the Commission, attendance by the Chair at the regular session of the General Assembly during consideration of the Commission’s report, honoraria for the 34 members of the Commission (payable at the $1 per year rate set by the General Assembly in its resolution 56/272, which the Commission opted not to receive), and travel and subsistence allowance for a limited number of members of the Codification Division to substantively service the sessions of the Commission. | 其中包括委员会34名委员的差旅费和生活津贴、主席在联大审议委员会报告期间出席联大常会、委员会34名委员的酬金(按联大第56/272号决议规定的每年1美元支付，但委员会决定不予接受)以及人数有限的为委员会届会提供实质性服务的编纂司成员的差旅费和生活津贴。 |
| 24. | 24. |
| The Commission notes that there have been budgetary pressures affecting the United Nations over the years, resulting in budgetary cuts (for example, 2010–2011, 2012–2013 and 2014–2015) or no growth (for example, 2006–2007), from which the Commission has not been immune. | 委员会注意到，多年来预算压力一直影响着联合国，导致预算削减(例如2010-2011年、2012-2013年和2014-2015年)或无增长(例如2006-2007年)，委员会也未能幸免。 |
| In some instances, with a budgetary overrun contemplated in the budget estimates, a programme budget implication (PBI) has been raised to meet the needs of the Commission (2016–2017). | 在某些情况下，由于概算中考虑到预算超支，提出了所涉方案预算问题，以满足委员会(2016-2017年)的需要。 |
| 25. | 25. |
| The Commission is aware that administrative and budgetary questions are matters considered by the Fifth Committee. | 委员会意识到，行政和预算问题是由第五委员会审议的事项。 |
| It is not its intention to interfere in the processes concerning the negotiation of the regular budget, and any options that may be available in that regard. | 它无意干涉有关经常预算的谈判过程，以及这方面可能有的任何选择。 |
| As will be clear from the above, however, attendance by Special Rapporteurs or by Chairs of Study Groups at workshops or seminars to further their work, and attendance at such workshops or seminars by members of the Secretariat in support of Special Rapporteurs and Chairs of Study Groups, although a valuable and often essential part of the work of the Commission, in the absence of honoraria, fall outside United Nations budgetary provision. | 然而，从上文可以清楚地看出，特别报告员或研究组主席出席讲习班或讨论会以推进他们的工作，以及秘书处成员参加这种讲习班或讨论会以支持特别报告员和研究组主席，虽然这是委员会工作的一个宝贵而且往往必不可少的部分，但在没有酬金的情况下，被排除在了联合国预算拨款的范围之外。 |
| 26. | 26. |
| In paragraph 34 of its resolution 76/111, the General Assembly also requested information regarding the terms of reference of the proposed trust fund. | 联大第76/111号决议第34段还要求提供关于拟议信托基金职权范围的信息。 |
| Should the proposal for the establishment of a trust fund be accorded favourable consideration by the General Assembly, there will be a need for terms of reference. | 如果设立信托基金的提议想要得到联大的积极考虑，就需要拟出职权范围。 |
| Such terms of reference to be promulgated by the Secretary-General could take the form contained in the appendix to the present annex. | 将由秘书长颁布的这种职权范围可采取本附件附录中所载的形式。 |
| The text draws upon other previous terms of reference, including those contained in General Assembly 75/129 on the Trust Fund for the Judicial Fellowship Programme of the International Court of Justice. | 案文借鉴了以前的其他职权范围，包括联大关于国际法院司法研究金方案信托基金的第75/129号决议所载的职权范围。 |
| The Commission is grateful to its Secretariat for the preparation of the terms of reference. | 委员会感谢秘书处编写了这一职权范围。 |
| A/77/10 | A/77/10 |
| A/77/10 | A/77/10 |
| GE.22-12452 | GE.22-12452 |
| Appendix | GE.22-12452 |
| Proposed Terms of Reference | 附录 拟议职权范围 |
| Trust Fund for Assistance to Special Rapporteurs of the International Law Commission and matters ancillary thereto (ILC Special Rapporteurs Trust Fund) | 协助国际法委员会特别报告员及其附属事项信托基金 (国际法委员会特别报告员信托基金) |
| Terms of Reference | 职权范围 |
| I. | 一. |
| Establishment | 设立 |
| 1. | 1. |
| The Trust Fund for Assistance to Special Rapporteurs of the International Law Commission and matters ancillary thereto is hereby established pursuant to resolution 77/…. | 兹根据第77/…号决议设立协助国际法委员会特别报告员及其附属事项信托基金。 |
| II. | 二. |
| Background | 背景 |
| 2. | 2. |
| At its seventy-second (2021) and seventy-third (2022) sessions, the International Law Commission proposed that consideration be given to the establishment of a Trust Fund to support Special Rapporteurs of the International Law Commission and related matters. | 国际法委员会第七十二届(2021年)和第七十三届(2022年)会议建议考虑设立一个信托基金，以支持国际法委员会特别报告员的工作及相关事项。 |
| 3. | 3. |
| Special Rapporteurs of the International Law Commission play a central role in the functioning of the Commission. | 特别报告员在委员会的运作中发挥着核心作用。 |
| The practice of the Commission has been to appoint one of its members to serve as a Special Rapporteur at the early stage of the consideration of a topic irrespective of whether it is a matter of progressive development or codification. | 委员会的做法是，在审议一个专题的早期阶段任命一名委员担任特别报告员，不论该专题是国际法的逐渐发展问题还是编纂问题。 |
| The Special Rapporteur of the Commission performs a variety of tasks ranging from the preparation of reports on the topic, participation in the consideration of the topic in the plenary, elucidation of various aspects of the topic in plenary and in the work of the Drafting Committee, and the preparation of revised texts, to the elaboration of commentaries once such texts are adopted by the Commission. | 特别报告员执行各种任务，包括编写专题报告，参加全体会议关于专题的审议，在全体会议和起草委员会的工作中阐明专题的各个方面，编写经修订的案文，在委员会通过这类案文后拟订评注。 |
| The reports of Special Rapporteurs form the very basis of work for the Commission and constitute a critical component of the methods and techniques of work of the Commission established under its statute. | 特别报告员的报告是委员会工作的基础，也是根据委员会章程建立的委员会工作方法和工作技巧的重要组成部分。 |
| 4. | 4. |
| The tasks of Special Rapporteurs require extensive independent research and analysis, as well as a serious commitment to provide stewardship at all stages of the Commission’s work on a topic. | 特别报告员的任务需要广泛的独立研究和分析，并认真致力于在委员会关于某一专题的所有工作阶段提供指导。 |
| The functions of Special Rapporteurs continue throughout the year. | 特别报告员的职能贯穿全年。 |
| The scheme under the statute of the Commission relies heavily on the work done by Special Rapporteurs, whose reports, prepared intersessionally, form the basis for the consideration of the various topics by the Commission. | 委员会章程规定的计划在很大程度上依赖特别报告员的工作，特别报告员在闭会期间编写的报告构成委员会审议各专题的基础。 |
| Special Rapporteurs bear responsibility for the authorship of their reports. | 特别报告员对他们编写的报告负有责任。 |
| 5. | 5. |
| The practical needs of the Special Rapporteurs are necessarily determined by the requirements of the statute of the Commission. | 特别报告员的实际需要必然取决于委员会章程的要求。 |
| The statutory responsibilities of the Commission and its character as an expert body of persons of recognized competence in international law with the object of promoting the progressive development of international law and its codification make it imperative to retain the distinct role of the Commission, as an expert deliberative body of the General Assembly. | 委员会的法定职责及其作为由公认胜任的国际法届人士组成的以促进国际法的逐渐发展和编纂为目标的专家机构的特性，使得委员会作为联大的专家审议机构的独特作用必须得到保留。 |
| 6. | 6. |
| The work of Special Rapporteurs is resource intensive. | 特别报告员的工作需要大量资源。 |
| Special Rapporteurs, particularly those from developing countries, face many impediments in the discharge of their activities, while it is recognized that they are required to prepare reports analysing complex questions of international law in advance for the sessions of the Commission. | 特别报告员，尤其是来自发展中国家的特别报告员，在开展活动时面临许多障碍，但众所周知，他们需要为委员会届会提前编写报告，分析复杂的国际法问题。 |
| Some Special Rapporteurs are located in places where accessibility to primary research materials and resources is difficult and expensive. | 一些特别报告员处在很难获得主要的研究材料和资源的地方，而且费用很高。 |
| As the Commission assumes increasingly responsibility for topics that are multidisciplinary, coupled, in some instances, with the paucity of readily available practice. The research work on particular topics has involved travel and contacts with individuals and institutions with particular expertise on the specific topics in question or with access to particular information. | 由于委员会对多学科专题承担越来越多的责任，加上有时缺乏现成的实践，关于某一专题的研究工作需要出差旅行，并联系在所涉特定专题方面具有特殊专长或能获得特定信息的个人和机构。 |
| Support for Special Rapporteurs is needed in particular to ensure that they are in a position to collect materials from a wide range of legal systems and in different languages. | 特别需要向特别报告员提供支持，以确保他们能够从各种法律体系和不同语言中收集材料。 |
| There have been situations in which individual Special Rapporteurs have used their personal resources for research activities or have foregone travel entitlements to make detours to conduct research elsewhere. | 曾有个别特别报告员利用个人资源从事研究活动，或放弃差旅应享待遇，绕道到其他地方进行研究。 |
| In some cases, access to the Internet is difficult and expensive. | 在一些情况下，互联网接入很困难并且价格高昂。 |
| Where the Commission has in recent years established a Study Group, the Chair(s) and members assigned to particular issues work in a similar manner. | 在委员会近年来设立研究组中，负责特定问题的主席和委员就是以与此类似的方式开展工作的。 |
| In accordance with General Assembly resolution 56/272 of 27 March 2002, Special Rapporteurs no longer receive, exceptionally, 2500 dollars that previously was specially dedicated to assisting them in the preparation of their reports, payable upon submission. | 根据联大2002年3月27日第56/272号决议，特别报告员不再作为例外情况在提交报告时获得以前专门用于协助他们编写报告的2,500美元。 |
| Since its fifty-fourth session in 2002, the International Law Commission has repeatedly drawn the attention of the General Assembly to the impact of its resolution 56/272, by the terms of which it decided, with effect from 6 April 2002, to set at a level of one United States dollar per year all honoraria payable on an exceptional basis, inter alia to the members of the International Law Commission, including for assistance to Special Rapporteurs, emphasizing in particular that the resolution affects the Special Rapporteurs, especially those from developing countries, as it compromises support for their research work. | 自2002年第五十四届会议以来，国际法委员会一再提请联大注意其第56/272号决议的影响， 联大该决议决定，自2002年4月6日起，将作为例外情况支付给国际法委员会委员等人的所有酬金，包括协助特别报告员的酬金，定为每年1美元，并特别强调该决议影响到特别报告员，特别是来自发展中国家的特别报告员，因为决议缩减了对他们研究工作的支持。 |
| It has urged the General Assembly to reconsider this matter, with a view to restoring the honoraria for Special Rapporteurs. | 委员会促请联大重新审议这一事项，以期恢复特别报告员的酬金。 |
| 7. | 7. |
| In some circumstances, the Commission has established Study Groups whose Chairs or co-Chairs work in a similar manner as outlined above in relation to Special Rapporteurs. | 在某些情况下，委员会设立了研究小组，其主席或共同主席的工作方式与上文概述的特别报告员的工作方式相似。 |
| Accordingly, references to Special Rapporteurs also refer to Chairs of Study Groups carrying out similar activities. | 因此，提到特别报告员时，也指开展类似活动的研究小组主席。 |
| 8. | 8. |
| In paragraph … of resolution … of … December 2022, the General Assembly took note of paragraphs …to … of the Commission’s report and, “without prejudice to the importance of ensuring the necessary allocations in the regular budget, request[ed] the Secretary-General to establish a trust to accept voluntary contributions so as to provide assistance to Special Rapporteurs and to provide any support to the Secretariat as may exceptionally be required”. | 在2022年12月…日第…号决议第…段中，联大注意到委员会报告第…至…段，并“在不影响确保经常预算中必要拨款的重要性的情况下，请秘书长设立一个信托基金，接受自愿捐款，以便向特别报告员提供协助，并向秘书处提供例外情况下可能需要的任何支持”。 |
| 9. | 9. |
| Additionally, in recent years the work of the Commission has proceeded under conditions of financial and budgetary stress affecting the United Nations with impact on its Secretariat. | 此外，委员会近年来的工作是在影响到联合国及其秘书处的经费和预算紧张的情况下进行的。 |
| The regular budget will continue to be used for travel and subsistence of Commission members and members of the substantive Secretariat at the annual sessions of the Commission. | 经常预算将继续用于委员会委员和实务秘书处成员在委员会年度届会期间的旅费和生活津贴。 |
| Resources from the Trust Fund may also be used to ensure attendance of a member of its Secretariat at activities other than the annual session of the Commission, undertaken by a Special Rapporteur to accomplish her or his tasks. | 信托基金的资源也可用于确保其秘书处的一名成员参加除委员会年度会议之外特别报告员为完成任务而开展的活动。 |
| III. | 三. |
| Purpose | 宗旨 |
| 10. | 10. |
| The purpose of the Trust Fund is to provide a mechanism for donors to contribute resources for the research activities of the Special Rapporteurs of the International Law Commission, and Chairs of its Study Groups, and where circumstances so require, expenses for members of the Secretariat in relation to activities undertaken by the Special Rapporteur and Chairs of Study Groups to accomplish their tasks, under subprogramme 3 for which the Codification Division, Office of Legal Affairs, is responsible. | 信托基金的宗旨是提供一个机制，便于捐助者为国际法委员会特别报告员及其研究小组主席的研究活动捐助资金，并在情况需要时，为秘书处成员协助特别报告员和研究小组主席为完成次级方案3下由法律事务厅编纂司负责的任务而开展的活动支付费用。 |
| IV. | 四. |
| Contributions | 捐款 |
| 11. | 11. |
| Contributions to the Trust Fund may be made by States, intergovernmental and non-governmental organizations, national institutions, bar associations, private institutions and individuals, and other appropriate entities. | 各国、政府间和非政府组织、国家机构、律师协会、私营机构和个人以及其他适当实体均可向信托基金捐款。 |
| Contributions may only be accepted by the Assistant Secretary-General, Controller. | 只有助理秘书长兼主计长可接受捐款。 |
| 12. | 12. |
| Contributions in cash to the Fund may be accepted in United States dollars or other fully convertible currencies. | 可接受以美元或其他完全可兑换货币向信托基金提供的现金捐款。 |
| 13. | 13. |
| Financial contributions shall not be earmarked for any specific activity of the International Law Commission, its Special Rapporteurs or Chairs of its Study Groups. | 捐款不得指定用于国际法委员会、其特别报告员或研究组主席的任何具体活动。 |
| 14. | 14. |
| Any interest income derived from contributions to the Fund shall be credited to the Fund in accordance with the applicable United Nations Regulations and Rules, and policies and procedures. | 根据适用的《联合国财务条例和细则》、政策和程序，对基金的捐款产生的任何利息收入将记入信托基金。 |
| 15. | 15. |
| The Controller has designated the following bank account in which the resources of the Fund shall be kept: | 主计长指定以下银行账户，用于存放基金的资源： |
| [Account details] | [账户详情] |
| Earmarked for the Trust Fund for Assistance to Special Rapporteurs of the International Law Commission | 指定用于协助国际法委员会特别报告员信托基金 |
| V. | 五. |
| Authority | 授权 |
| 16. | 16. |
| The Trust Fund shall be administered in conformity with the United Nations Financial Regulations and Rules and with the relevant policies and procedures. | 信托基金将按照《联合国财务条例和细则》以及相关的政策和程序进行管理。 |
| Exceptions to such rules, policies and procedures are not permissible, unless specifically authorized by the Secretary-General or on his behalf by the Assistant Secretary-General, Controller or by the Assistant Secretary-General, Office of Human Resources, as appropriate. | 这些规则、政策和程序不允许有例外情况，除非经秘书长本人或助理秘书长兼主计长或主管人力资源厅助理秘书长代表秘书长酌情特别授权。 |
| VI. | 六. |
| Administration and implementation arrangements | 管理和执行安排 |
| 17. | 17. |
| The Trust Fund will be administered by the Secretary-General. | 信托基金将由秘书长负责管理。 |
| The Codification Division, Office of Legal Affairs, shall be the implementing office of the Fund. | 法律事务厅编纂司应为基金的执行办公室。 |
| It shall coordinate its efforts with the Executive Office of the Office of Legal Affairs. | 它应当与法律事务厅执行办公室协调工作。 |
| 18. | 18. |
| For the purpose of ensuring proper financial controls, the Under-Secretary-General, The Legal Counsel shall be the Programme Manager of the Trust Fund and the Executive Officer of the Office of Legal Affairs shall be its Certifying Officer. | 为确保适当的财务管控，副秘书长兼法律顾问应当担任信托基金的方案管理人，法律事务厅执行干事应担任其核证人。 |
| 19. | 19. |
| The Legal Counsel shall be responsible for ensuring that the Trust Fund is utilized for the purpose described in Part III, as read with objectives set out in Parts I and II. | 法律顾问应当负责确保信托基金用于与第一部分和第二部分所列目标一并解读的第三部分所述目的。 |
| 20. | 20. |
| In particular, up to [X] dollars shall be payable to a member when acting as Special Rapporteur, however designated, conditional upon the preparation of specific reports or studies between sessions of the Commission. | 具体而言，担任特别报告员的委员，不论以何种方式指定，最多可领取[X]美元，条件是在委员会闭会期间编写具体的研究报告。 |
| 21. | 21. |
| Where it is determined that there is a shortfall in meeting the expenses in relation to activities that might be undertaken by the Special Rapporteur to accomplish their tasks, an attestation to that effect and its impact on the servicing of the Commission will be made by the Legal Counsel. | 如果确定特别报告员为完成其任务可能开展的活动的出现费用短缺，这一情况及其对委员会服务的影响的证明将由法律顾问出具。 |
| 22. | 22. |
| The Certifying Officer shall ensure that expenditures are incurred in accordance with the applicable United Nations Financial Regulations and Rules, and policies and procedures, for the purpose intended, and shall draw to the attention of the Controller any proposed commitment or expenditure which, in his or her view, is inconsistent therewith. | 核证人应当确保支出符合适用的《联合国财务条例和细则》、政策和程序，用于预定目的，还应当提请主计长注意其认为与此不符的任何拟议承付款项或支出。 |
| VII. | 七. |
| Reporting | 报告 |
| 23. | 23. |
| The Controller will provide an annual financial statement showing income and expenditures as at 31 December of each year with respect to the total funds pledged and received for the Trust Fund for Assistance to Special Rapporteurs of the International Law Commission. | 主计长将提供年度财务报表，列示截至每年12月31日协助国际法委员会特别报告员信托基金认捐和收到的资金总额的收支情况。 |
| 24. | 24. |
| All accounts and financial statements shall be expressed in United States dollars. | 所有账目和财务报表均以美元为单位。 |
| VIII. | 八. |
| Programme support costs | 项目支助费用 |
| 25. | 25. |
| In accordance with United Nations Financial Regulations and Rules, programme support costs will be charged to the Trust Fund at the rate of thirteen (13) per cent of the total annual expenditures, unless otherwise agreed with the Controller. | 根据《联合国财务条例和细则》，项目支助费用将由信托基金按年度支出总额的13%支付，除非与主计长另有协议。 |
| In addition, the Trust Fund operating reserve will be applied within the cash resources to meet final expenditures of the activities covered from the Fund. | 此外，信托基金业务准备金将在现金资源范围内适用，以支付基金所涵盖活动的最终支出。 |
| IX. | 九. |
| Audit | 审计 |
| 26. | 26. |
| The Trust Fund will be subject solely to the external and internal audit procedures of the United Nations. | 信托基金将只接受联合国的外部和内部审计程序。 |
| X. | 十. |
| Revision | 修订 |
| 27. | 27. |
| The Secretary-General may revise the above provisions, should circumstances so require. | 如情况需要，秘书长可修订上述规定。 |
| XI. | 十一. |
| Termination | 终止 |
| 28. | 28. |
| The Secretary-General shall decide the termination of the Trust Fund and the disposal of its assets. | 信托基金的终止及其资产的处置由秘书长决定。 |
| Mr. Mahmoud D. Hmoud, Mr. Ernest Petrič, Mr. Pavel Šturma and Mr. Eduardo Valencia-Ospina. | 马哈茂德·哈穆德先生、埃内斯特·彼得里奇先生、帕维尔·斯图尔马先生和爱德华多·巴伦西亚－奥斯皮纳先生。 |
| Ms. Concepción Escobar Hernández, Ms. Marja Lehto, Mr. Pavel Šturma, Mr. Dire D. Tladi and Mr. Marcelo Vázquez-Bermúdez. | 康塞普西翁·埃斯科瓦尔·埃尔南德斯女士、玛丽亚·莱赫托女士、帕维尔·斯图尔马先生、迪雷·特拉迪先生和马塞洛·巴斯克斯－贝穆德斯先生。 |
| Mr. Bogdan Aurescu, Mr. Yacouba Cissé, Ms. Patrícia Galvão Teles, Ms. Nilüfer Oral and 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·奥拉尔女士和胡安·何塞·鲁达·桑托拉里亚先生。 |
| Official Records of the General Assembly, Seventy-fourth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/74/10), para. 30. | 《大会正式记录，第七十四届会议，补编第10号》(A/74/10)，第30段。 |
| Ibid., paras. 31–33. | 同上，第31-33段。 |
| Ibid., Seventy-sixth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/76/10), para. 26. | 同上，《第七十六届会议，补编第10号》(A/76/10)，第26段。 |
| At its 3257th meeting, on 27 May 2015 (Yearbook … 2015, vol. II (Part Two), p. 85, para. 286). | 在2015年5月27日第3257次会议上(《2015年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第85页，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 (Yearbook … 2014, vol. II (Part Two) and corrigendum, p. 18, para. 23, and annex). | 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(《2014年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)和更正，第18页第23段及附件)将此专题列入长期工作方案。 |
| 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)。 |
| Ibid., Seventy-fourth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/74/10), paras. 52–53. | 同上，《第七十四届会议，补编第10号》(A/74/10)，第52-53段。 |
| For a discussion on nomenclature, see D. Costelloe, Legal Consequences of Peremptory Norms in International Law, Cambridge University Press, 2017, pp. 11 et seq. | 关于术语的讨论，见D. Costelloe, Legal Consequences of Peremptory Norms in International Law, Cambridge University Press, 2017, pp. 11 et seq。 |
| 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, for example, article 53 of the 1969 Vienna Convention. | 例如，见1969年《维也纳公约》第五十三条。 |
| See draft article 50 of the draft articles on the law of treaties, Yearbook … 1966, vol. II, document A/6309/Rev.1, Part II, p. 183, where the word “norm” is used. | 见条约法条款草案第50条草案，《1966年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/6309/Rev.1号文件，第二部分，第183页，其中使用了“规范”一词。 |
| The commentaries, however, refer to “general rule[s] of international law … having the character of jus cogens” and “rules of jus cogens” (ibid., p. 248, paras. (2)–(3) of the commentary to draft article 50). | 但是，评注中则提到“国际法上具有强行法性质的一般规则”和“强行法规则”(同上，第248页，第50条草案的评注第(2)-(3)段)。 |
| Reservations to the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 1951, p. 15, at p. 23. | 对《防止及惩治灭绝种族罪公约》的保留，咨询意见，《1951年国际法院案例汇编》，第15页起，见第23页。 |
| See also P. Bisazza, “Les crimes à la frontière du jus cogens”, in L. Moreillon, et al. (eds.), Droit pénal humanitaire, Series II, vol. 4, Brussels, Bruylant, 2009, at p. 164, where she evokes, quoting Bassiouni, la conscience de l’humanité; | 另见P. Bisazza, “Les crimes à la frontière du jus cogens”, in L. Moreillon, et al., (eds.), Droit pénal humanitaire, Series II, vol. 4, Brussels, Bruylant, 2009, 第164页，她引用Bassiouni的论述，提到“人类的良知”； |
| and L. Boisson de Chazournes, “Commentaire”, in R. Huesa Vinaixa and K. Wellens (eds.), L’influence des sources sur l’unité et la fragmentation du droit international : travaux du séminaire tenu à Palma, les 20–21 Mai 2005, Brussels, Bruylant, 2006, at p. 76, referring to a conscience universelle. | 以及L. Boisson de Chazournes, “Commentaire”, in R. Huesa Vinaixa and K. Wellens (eds.), L’influence des sources sur l’unité et la fragmentation du droit international : travaux du séminaire tenu à Palma, les 20-21 Mai 2005, Brussels, Bruylant, 2006, 第76页，其中提到“普遍良知”。 |
| See, for example, 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. 110–111, para. 161; | 例如，见《防止及惩治灭绝种族罪公约》的适用案(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110-111页，第161段； |
| and 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 p. 46, para. 87. | 以及《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46页，第87段。 |
| Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Bosnia and Herzegovina v. Serbia and Montenegro) (see footnote 15 above), p. 104, para. 147. | 《防止及惩治灭绝种族罪公约》的适用案(波斯尼亚和黑塞哥维那诉塞尔维亚和黑山)(见上文脚注15)，第104页，第147段。 |
| Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (The Gambia v. Myanmar), Provisional Measures, Order of 23 January 2020, I.C.J. Reports 2020, p. 3, p. 17, at para. 41 (“In view of their shared values, all the States parties to the Genocide Convention have a common interest to ensure that acts of genocide are prevented”). | 《防止及惩治灭绝种族罪公约》的适用案(冈比亚诉缅甸)，临时措施，2020年1月23日的命令，《2020年国际法院案例汇编》，第3页起，见第17页，第41段(“鉴于《灭绝种族罪公约》缔约国共同的价值观，确保防止灭绝种族行为符合该公约所有缔约国的共同利益”)。 |
| On the relationship between peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) and erga omnes obligations, see draft conclusion 17 below. | 关于一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)和普遍义务之间的关系，见下文结论草案17。 |
| See Prosecutor v. Anto Furundžija (Case No. IT-95-17/1-T, Judgment of 10 December 1998, Trial Chamber, International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, Judicial Reports 1998, vol. 1, p. 466, at p. 569, paras. 153–154), where the Tribunal expressly linked the status of the prohibition of torture as a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) to the “importance of the values it protects”, noting that “[c]learly, the jus cogens nature of the prohibition against torture articulates the notion that the prohibition has now become one of the most fundamental standards of the international community”. | 见检察官诉Anto Furundžija案(案件编号IT-95-17/1-T, 前南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭审判分庭1998年12月10日的判决，《1998年司法案例汇编》，第一卷，第466页起，见第569页，第153-154段)，其中法庭明确将禁止酷刑作为一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的地位与“它所保护的价值观的重要性”联系起来，指出“显然，禁止酷刑的强行法性质表明了如下观念，即禁止酷刑现已成为国际社会最基本的标准之一”。 |
| This holding was quoted with approval by the European Court of Human Rights in Al-Adsani v. the United Kingdom, Application No. 35763/97, Judgment of 21 November 2001, Grand Chamber, European Court of Human Rights, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 2001-XI, para. 30. | 欧洲人权法院在Al-Aldsani诉联合王国案中赞同地引用了这一裁决，申诉号35763/97，欧洲人权法院大审判庭2001年11月21日的判决，《判决和决定汇编》，2001年第十一辑，第30段。 |
| In the case of Goiburú, et al. v. Paraguay (Judgment of 22 September 2006 on Merits, Reparations and Costs, Inter-American Court of Human Rights, Series C, No. 153, para. 128), that Court described offences prohibited by jus cogens as those that “harm essential values and rights of the international community”. | 在Goiburú等人诉巴拉圭案(美洲人权法院2006年9月22日关于实质问题、赔偿和费用的判决，C辑，第153号，第128段)中，法院将强行法禁止的罪行描述为“损害国际社会基本价值观和权利”的罪行。 |
| See also Michael Domingues v. United States (Case 12.285, Merits, Judgment of 22 October 2002, Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, Report No. 62/02, para. 49), where that Commission linked peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) to “public morality” and, more importantly, stated that they “derive their status from fundamental values held by the international community”, noting that violations of jus cogens “shock the conscience of humankind”. | 另见Michael Domingues诉美国案(案件号12.285，实质问题，美洲人权委员会2002年10月22日的判决，第62/02号报告，第49段)，在该案中，美洲人权委员会将一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)与“公共道德”联系起来，更重要的是，该委员会指出，“其地位源于国际社会持有的基本价值观”，并指出违反强制法的行为“使人类的良知受到震撼”。 |
| See, for example, the statements by Germany (A/C.6/55/SR.14, para. 56): “[the Government of Germany] reiterated its conviction regarding the need to define more clearly peremptory norms of international law that protected fundamental humanitarian values”; | 例如，见以下国家的发言：德国(A/C.6/55/SR.14, 第56段)：“[德国政府]重申需要对保护基本人道主义价值观的国际法强制性规范作出更明确的界定”； |
| Italy (A/C.6/56/SR.13, para. 15): “The Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties contained a tautological definition of peremptory law, which doctrine and jurisprudence had endeavoured to interpret as being a framework of rules prohibiting conduct judged intolerable because of the threat it posed to the survival of States and peoples and to basic human values”; | 意大利(A/C.6/56/SR.13, 第15段：“《维也纳条约法公约》中载有一项强制性法律的重复定义，法律原则和判例力求把这项定义解释为一个守则框架，用于禁止某些行为，这些行为由于威胁到国家和人民的生存以及最基本的人类价值观，而被视为不可容忍”； |
| Mexico (A/C.6/56/SR.14, para. 13): “the very concept of peremptory norms had been developed to safeguard the most precious legal values of the community of States”; | 墨西哥(A/C.6/56/SR.14，第13段：“强制性规范的概念的制订正是为了保障国际社会最宝贵的法律价值观”； |
| and Portugal, ibid., para. 66: “the concepts of jus cogens, obligations erga omnes and international crimes of State or serious breaches of obligations under peremptory norms of general international law were based on a common belief in certain fundamental values of international law”. | 葡萄牙，同上，第66段：“强行法、普遍义务和国家的国际罪行或严重违背一般国际法强制性规范规定的义务等概念均基于对国际法某些基本价值观的共同认识”。 |
| See also the Federal Council of Switzerland, “La relation entre droit international et droit interne. Rapport du Conseil fédéral en réponse au postulat 07.3764 de la Commission des affaires juridiques du Conseil des Etats … ”, 5 March 2010, FF 2010 2067, at 2086: “Il s’agit donc d’une disposition si fondamentale pour la communauté internationale qu’aucune violation ne saurait être admise” [“It is therefore such a fundamental provision for the international community that no violation can be accepted”]; | 另见Federal Council of Switzerland, “La relation entre droit international et droit interne. Rapport du Conseil fédéral en réponse au postulat 07.3764 de la Commission des affaires juridiques du Conseil des Etats …”, 5 March 2010, FF 2010 2067, at 2086: “Il s’agit donc d’une disposition si fondamentale pour la communauté internationale qu’aucune violation ne saurait être admise” [“因此这是一项对国际社会的基本规定，不得违反”]; |
| and Federal Council of Switzerland, “Clarifier la relation entre le droit international et le droit interne. Rapport du Conseil fédéral en exécution du postulat 13.3805”, 12 June 2015, at p. 13: “Ces normes ont pour la communauté internationale un caractère fondamental tel qu’elles s’imposent à tous les Etats. Aucun d’eux ne peut les violer, sous aucun prétexte” [“These norms are of such fundamental importance to the international community that they are binding on all States. | and Federal Council of Switzerland, “Clarifier la relation entre le droit international et le droit interne. Rapport du Conseil fédéral en exécution du postulat 13.3805”, 12 June 2015, 第13页：“Ces normes ont pour la communauté internationale un caractère fondamental tel qu’elles s’imposent à tous les Etats. Aucun d’eux ne peut les violer, sous aucun prétexte” [“这些规范对国际社会至关重要，因此对所有国家都具有约束力。 |
| None of them may violate them under any pretext”]. | 不得以任何借口违反”]。 |
| See, for example, Bayan Muna as represented by Representative Satur Ocampo et al. v. Alberto Romulo, in his capacity as Executive Secretary et al., where the Supreme Court of the Republic of the Philippines noted that jus cogens norms are “deemed … fundamental to the existence of a just international order” (Case G.R. No. 159618, Judgment of 1 February 2011), Supreme Court of the Republic of the Philippines, ILDC [International Law in Domestic Courts] 2059 (PH2011), p. 56). | 例如，见由Satur Ocampo代表所代表的Bayan Muna等人诉作为执行秘书的Alberto Romulo等人案，菲律宾共和国最高法院在该案中指出，强行法规范“被视为…一个公正的国际秩序存在的基础”(G.R案件编号159618，菲律宾共和国最高法院2011年2月1日的判决，ILDC [International Law in Domestic Courts] 2059 (PH2011)，第56页)。 |
| See also Kaunda and Others v. President of the Republic of South Africa and Others (Society for the Abolition of the Death Penalty in South Africa intervening as Amicus Curiae) 2005 (4) SA 235 (CC); | 另见Kaunda等人诉南非共和国总统等人(南非废除死刑协会作为法庭之友介入)案，2005 (4) SA235 (CC)； |
| Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development and Others v. Southern African Litigation Centre and Others (Case No. 867/15, Judgment of 15 March 2016), South Africa Supreme Court of Appeal, [2016] ZASCA 17, where the Court states that it agrees with the following sentiment: “As State sovereignty is increasingly viewed to be contingent upon respect for certain values common to the international community, it is perhaps unsurprising that bare sovereignty is no longer sufficient to absolutely shield High officials from prosecution for jus cogens violations”; | 司法和宪法发展部长等人诉南非诉讼中心等被告案(案件编号867/15，南非最高上诉法院2016年3月15日的判决，[2016] ZASCA 17, 法院在该案中表示同意以下观点：“由于国家主权越来越被视为取决于对国际社会某些共同价值观的尊重，所以光有主权已不足以对高级官员提供绝对保护，使之免受对违反强行法行为的起诉，这或许不足为奇”； |
| and Alessi and Others v. Germany and Presidency of the Council of Ministers of the Italian Republic (intervening) (Referral to the Constitutional Court of Italy, Order No. 85/2014 of 21 January 2014), Tuscany, Florence Court of First Instance, ILDC 2725 (IT 2014): “Not in dispute are the fact that the subject of this case is an international crime by nature and its potential detrimental effect on fundamental human rights as enshrined in the Italian Constitution and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (2000/C 364/01). | 以及Alessi等人诉德国和意大利共和国部长理事会主席(参与诉讼)案(转交意大利宪法法院，2014年1月21日第85/2014号命令)，托斯卡纳，佛罗伦萨一审法院，ILDC 2725(IT 2014)：“无可争议的事实是，本案的主题本质上是一项国际罪行，对《意大利宪法》和《欧洲联盟基本权利宪章》(2000/C 364/01)所载的基本人权具有潜在的有害影响。 |
| Also considering that in the Italian legal system, the fundamental human rights recognized by the Constitution are necessarily fused to the jus cogens norms that protect fundamental human rights in international law, highlighting the same basic universal values of protection of human dignity.” | 另外还考虑到，在意大利法律制度中，《宪法》承认的基本人权必然与国际法中保护基本人权的强行法规范融合在一起，突出保护人类尊严的同样基本的普遍价值观。 ” |
| Siderman de Blake v. Republic of Argentina, United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, 965 F.2d 699 (9th Cir. 1992), at p. 715 (citing D. F. Klein, “A theory for the application of the customary international law of human rights by domestic courts”, Yale Journal of International Law, vol. 13 (1998), pp. 332–365, at p. 351). | Siderman de Blake诉阿根廷共和国案，美国第九巡回上诉法院，965 F.2d 699 (9th Cir. 1992)，见第715页(引述D. F. Klein, “A theory for the application of the customary international law of human rights by domestic courts”, Yale Journal of International Law, vol. 13 (1998)，pp. 332-365, at p. 351)。 |
| This decision was cited with approval by lower courts in the Ninth Circuit including in: Estate of Hernandez-Rojas v. United States, District Court for the Southern District of California, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS136922 (S.D.Cal. 2013), at p. 13; | 该判决得到第九巡回法院下级法院的赞同和引用，包括在以下案件中：Hernandez-Rojas财产托管方诉美国案，加利福尼亚南区联邦地区法院，2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS136922 (S.D. Cal. 2013)，第13页； |
| Estate of Hernandez-Rojas v. United States, District Court for the Southern District of California, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS101385 (S.D. Cal. 2014), at p. 9; | Hernandez-Rojas财产托管方诉美国案，加利福尼亚南区联邦地区法院，2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS101385 (SD Cal. 2014)，第9页； |
| and Doe I v. Reddy, District Court for the Northern District of California, 2003 U.S. Dist. LEXIS26120 (N.D. Cal 2003), at pp. 32 and 34. | 以及Doe I诉Reddy案，加利福尼北区联邦地区法院，2003 U.S. Dist. LEXIS26120 (N.D. Cal 2003)，第32和34页。 |
| See also the Ninth Circuit’s opinion in Alvarez-Machain v. United States (331 F.3d 604 (9th Cir. 2003)), at p. 613. | 另见第九巡回法院在Alvarez-Machain诉美国案(331 F.3d 604 (9th Cir. 2003))中发表的意见，第613页。 |
| Although that decision was eventually overturned by the Supreme Court in Sosa v. Alvarez-Machain (542 U.S. 692 (2004)), the idea of peremptory norms reflecting values of the international community was itself not addressed by the Supreme Court of the United States. | 尽管该判决最终被最高法院在Sosa诉Alvarez-Machain案(542 U.S. 692 (2004))中推翻，但美国最高法院没有讨论强制性规范反映国际社会价值观这一观点本身。 |
| 25% del número legal de Congresistas contra el Decreto Legislativo N° 1097, EXP. No. 0024-2010-PI/TC, Judgment of the Jurisdictional Plenary of 21 March 2011, Constitutional Tribunal of Peru, para. 53 (de la extraordinaria importancia de los valores que subyacen a tal [jus cogens] obligación (“of the extraordinary importance of the values that underlie [the jus cogens] obligation”)). | 25% del número legal de Congresistas contra el Decreto Legislativo 第1097号案，备审案件编号0024-2010-PI/TC，秘鲁宪法法庭，司法全体会议2011年3月21日的判决，第53段(de la extraordinaria importancia de los valores que subyacen a tal [jus cogens] obligación (“[强行法]义务所体现的价值观非常重要”)。 |
| Arancibia Clavel, Enrique Lautaro s/ homicidio calificado y asociación ilícita y otros, Case No. 259, Judgment of 24 August 2004, Supreme Court of Argentina, para. 29 (es proteger a los Estados de acuerdos concluidos en contra de algunos valores e intereses generales de la comunidad internacional de Estados en su conjunto). | Arancibia Clavel, Enrique Lautaro s/ homicidio calificado y asociación ilícita y otros案，案件编号259，阿根廷最高法院2004年8月24日的判决，第29段(es proteger a los Estados de acuerdos concluidos en contra de algunos valores e intereses generales de la comunidad internacional de Estados en su conjunto)。 |
| Nevsun Resources Ltd. v. Araya, Judgment of 28 February 2020, Supreme Court of Canada, 2020 SCC 5, para. 99. Order of 26 October 2004, 2 BvR 1038/01, Federal Constitutional Court of Germany, para. 97. | 耐森资源有限公司诉Araya案，加拿大最高法院2020年2月28日的判决，2020 SCC 5，第99段。 |
| R. Kolb, Peremptory International Law–Jus Cogens: a General Inventory, Oxford, Hart Publishing, 2015, at p. 32. | 德国联邦宪法法院2004年10月26日的命令，2 BvR 1038/01，第97段。 |
| See also P. Galvão Teles, “Peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) and the fundamental values of the international community”, in D. Tladi (ed.), Peremptory Norms of General International Law (Jus Cogens): Disquisitions and Disputations, Leiden, Brill Nijhoff, 2021. See also M. M. Mbengue and A. Koagne Zouapet, “Ending the splendid isolation: jus cogens and international economic law”, in Tladi (ed.), Peremptory Norms of General International Law (Jus Cogens)… (ibid.), pp. 509–574, at p. 513; | R. Kolb, Peremptory International Law—Jus Cogens: a General Inventory, Oxford, Hart Publishing, 2015, at p. 32. 另见P. Galvão Teles, “Peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) and the fundamental values of the international community”, in D. Tladi (ed.), Peremptory Norms of General International Law (Jus Cogens): Disquisitions and Disputations, Leiden, Brill Nijhoff, 2021. 另见M. M. Mbengue and A. Koagne Zouapet, “Ending the splendid isolation: jus cogens and international economic law”, in Tladi (ed.), Peremptory Norms of General International Law (Jus Cogens)… (同上), pp. 509-574, at p. 513; |
| S. Karvatska, “Jus cogens: problem of the role in treaty interpretation”, Indonesian Law Journal, vol. 9, No. 2 (2021), pp. 305–318, at p. 307 (“The jus cogens concept is an unchanging foundation of the international legal order designed to protect the fundamental interests”); | S. Karvatska, “Jus cogens: problem of the role in treaty interpretation”, Indonesian Law Journal, vol. 9, No. 2 (2021), pp. 305-318, at p. 307 (“强行法概念是国际法律秩序的一个恒久不变的基础，旨在保护根本利益”); |
| H. Olasolo Alonso, A. Mateus Rugeles and A. Contreras Fonseca, “La naturaleza imperativa del principio ‘no hay paz sin justicia’ respecto a los máximos responsables del fenómeno de la lesa humanidad y sus consecuencias para el ámbito de actuación de la llamada ‘justicia de transición’”, Boletín mexicano de derecho comparado, vol. 49 (2016), pp. 135–171; | H. Olasolo Alonso, A. Mateus Rugeles and A. Contreras Fonseca, “La naturaleza imperativa del principio ‘no hay paz sin justicia’ respecto a los máximos responsables del fenómeno de la lesa humanidad y sus consecuencias para el ámbito de actuación de la llamada ‘justicia de transición’”, Boletín mexicano de derecho comparado, vol. 49 (2016), pp. 135-171; |
| C. Zelada, “Ius cogens y derechos humanos: luces y sombras para una adecuada delimitación de conceptos”, Agenda Internacional, vol. 8, No. 17 (2002), pp. 129–156, at p. 139; | C. Zelada, “Ius cogens y derechos humanos: luces y sombras para una adecuada delimitación de conceptos”, Agenda Internacional, vol. 8, No. 17 (2002), pp. 129-156, at p. 139; |
| A. A. Cançado Trindade, “Jus cogens: the determination and the gradual expansion of its material content in contemporary international case-law”, XXXV Course of International Law organized by the OAS [Organization of American States] Inter-American Juridical Committee in Rio de Janeiro from 4 to 29 August 2008, Washington, D.C., OAS (2009), pp. 3–29, at pp. 6 and 12; | A. A. Cançado Trindade, “Jus cogens: the determination and the gradual expansion of its material content in contemporary international case-law”, XXXV Course of International Law organized by the OAS [Organization of American States] Inter-American Juridical Committee in Rio de Janeiro from 4 to 29 August 2008, Washington D.C., OAS (2009), pp. 3-29, at pp. 6 and 12; |
| F. J. Lara Castro, “El ius cogens: criterio de justicia universal”, Revista Perspectiva Jurídica, UP 15 (2020, Semester II), pp. 127–159, at p. 130; | F. J. Lara Castro, “El ius cogens: criterio de justicia universal”, Revista Perspectiva Jurídica, UP 15 (2020, Semester II), pp. 127-159, at p. 130; |
| K. Hossain, “The concept of jus cogens and the obligation under the U.N. Charter”, Santa Clara Journal of International Law, vol. 3, No. 1 (2005), pp. 72–98, at p. 73; | K. Hossain, “The concept of jus cogens and the obligation under the U.N. Charter”, Santa Clara Journal of International Law, vol. 3, No. 1 (2005), pp. 72-98, at p. 73; |
| L. Henkin, “International law and the inter-State system”, Collected Courses of the Hague Academy of International Law, vol. 216 (1989), pp. 21 et seq., at p. 60; | L. Henkin, “International law and the inter-State system”, Collected Courses of the Hague Academy of International Law, vol. 216 (1989), pp. 21 et seq., at p. 60; |
| J. R. Argés, “Ius cogens: descripción, valoración y propuestas de aplicación actual de un tópico jurídico clásico”, doctoral dissertation, Universidade de Santiago de Compostela, 2017, at p. 273; | J. R. Argés, “Ius cogens: descripción, valoración y propuestas de aplicación actual de un tópico jurídico clásico”, doctoral dissertation, Universidade de Santiago de Compostela, 2017, at p. 273; |
| A. C. de Beer, Peremptory Norms of General International Law (Jus Cogens) and the Prohibition of Terrorism, Leiden, Brill, 2019, pp. 79–83; | A. C. de Beer, Peremptory Norms of General International Law (Jus Cogens) and the Prohibition of Terrorism, Leiden, Brill, 2019, pp. 79-83; |
| E. Petrič, “Principles of the Charter of the United Nations: jus cogens? ”, Czech Yearbook of Public and Private International Law, vol. 7 (2016), pp. 3–17; | E. Petrič, “Principles of the Charter of the United Nations: jus cogens?”, Czech Yearbook of Public and Private International Law, vol. 7 (2016), pp. 3-17; |
| W. A. Schabas, “Le droit coutumier, les normes impératives (jus cogens), et la Cour européenne des droits de l’homme”, Revue québécoise de droit international, vol. 33 (2020), pp. 681–704, at p. 698; | W. A. Schabas, “Le droit coutumier, les normes impératives (jus cogens), et la Cour européenne des droits de l’homme”, Revue québécoise de droit international, vol. 33 (2020), pp. 681-704, at p. 698; |
| K. Crow and L. Lorenzoni-Escobar, “From traction to treaty-bound: jus cogens, erga omnes and corporate subjectivity in international investment arbitration”, Journal of International Dispute Settlement, vol. 13, No. 1 (March 2022), pp. 121–152; | K. Crow and L. Lorenzoni-Escobar, “From traction to treaty-bound: jus cogens, erga omnes and corporate subjectivity in international investment arbitration”, Journal of International Dispute Settlement, vol. 13, No. 1 (March 2022), pp. 121-152; |
| and M. A. Rodríguez Bolañoz and S. Portilla Parra, “Aplicación y límites de la inmunidad diplomática, a la luz de las normas del ‘ius cogens’”, Opinión Jurídica , vol. 19, No. 38 (January–June 2020), pp. 259–281, at p. 267. For a critique, see, generally, R. Kolb, “Peremptory norms as a legal technique rather than super norms”, in Tladi (ed.), Peremptory Norms of General International Law (Jus Cogens)… (see above). | and M. A. Rodríguez Bolañoz and S. Portilla Parra, “Aplicación y límites de la inmunidad diplomática, a la luz de las normas del ‘ius cogens’”, Opinión Jurídica , vol. 19, No. 38 (January-June 2020), pp. 259-281, at p. 267. 关于批评意见，一般见R. Kolb, “Peremptory norms as a legal technique rather than super norms”, in Tladi (ed.), Peremptory Norms of General International Law (Jus Cogens)… (见上文)。 |
| N. Gagnon-Bergeron, “Breaking the cycle of deferment: jus cogens in the practice of international law”, Utrecht Law Review, vol. 15, No. 1 (2019), pp. 50–64, at p. 64. | N. Gagnon-Bergeron, “Breaking the cycle of deferment: jus cogens in the practice of international law”, Utrecht Law Review, vol. 15, No. 1 (2019), pp. 50-64, at p. 64. |
| L. Hannikainen, Peremptory Norms (Jus Cogens) in International Law: Historical Development, Criteria, Present Status, Helsinki, Finnish Lawyers’ Publishing Company, 1988, at p. 2. | L. Hannikainen, Peremptory Norms (Jus Cogens) in International Law: Historical Development, Criteria, Present Status, Helsinki, Finnish Lawyers’ Publishing Company, 1988, at p. 2. |
| A. Pellet, “Comments in response to Christine Chinkin and in defense of jus cogens as the best bastion against the excesses of fragmentation”, Finnish Yearbook of International Law, vol. 17 (2006), pp. 83–90, at p. 87. | A. Pellet, “Comments in response to Christine Chinkin and in defense of jus cogens as the best bastion against the excesses of fragmentation”, Finnish Yearbook of International Law, vol. 17 (2006), pp. 83-90, at p. 87. |
| C. Tomuschat, “The Security Council and jus cogens”, in E. Cannizzaro (ed.), The Present and Future of Jus Cogens, Rome, Sapienza Università Editrice, 2015, at p. 8, who describes jus cogens as “the class of norms that protect the fundamental values of the international community”. | C. Tomuschat, “The Security Council and jus cogens”, in E. Cannizzaro (ed.), The Present and Future of Jus Cogens, Rome, Sapienza Università Editrice, 2015, at p. 8, 其中将强行法描述为“保护国际社会基本价值观的一类规范”。 |
| See also H. Ruiz Fabri, “Enhancing the rhetoric of jus cogens”, European Journal of International Law, vol. 23, No. 4 (2012), pp. 1049–1058, at p. 1050; | 另见H. Ruiz Fabri, “Enhancing the rhetoric of jus cogens”, European Journal of International Law, vol. 23, No. 4 (2012), p. 1049, at p. 1050; |
| M. den Heijer and H. van der Wilt, “Jus cogens and the humanization and fragmentation of international law”, Netherlands Yearbook of International Law, vol. 46 (2015), pp. 3–21, at p. 15; | M. den Heijer and H. van der Wilt “Jus cogens and the humanization and fragmentation of international law”, Netherlands Yearbook of International Law, vol. 46 (2015), pp. 3-21, at p. 15; |
| and D. Shelton, “Sherlock Holmes and the mystery of jus cogens”, ibid., pp. 23–50, especially from p. 42. | and D. Shelton, “Sherlock Holmes and the mystery of jus cogens”, 同上，第23-50页, 特别是自第42页起。 |
| See, however, Galvão Teles (footnote 26 above), at p. 47, who identifies the inherent dignity of the human person as being amongst the fundamental values of the international community. | 不过，见Galvão Teles (上文脚注26)，第47页，他认为人的固有尊严是国际社会的基本价值观之一。 |
| J. E. Viñuales, “The Friendly Relations Declaration and peremptory norms”, in Tladi (ed.), Peremptory Norms of General International Law (Jus Cogens)… (footnote 26 above), pp. 668–688, at p. 668, stating that peremptory norms “rest primarily (although not exclusively) on humanitarian considerations”. | J. E. Viñuales, “The Friendly Relations Declaration and peremptory norms”, in Tladi (ed.), Peremptory Norms of General International Law (Jus Cogens)… (上文脚注26)，第668-688页，见第668页，其中指出强制性规范“主要(但不完全)基于人道主义考虑”。 |
| See also N. Oral, “Environmental protection as a peremptory norm of general international law: is it time?”, ibid., pp. 575–599, at p. 577, referring to the values as “fundamental values of humanity”. | 另见N. Oral, “Environmental protection as a peremptory norm of general international law: is it time?”, 同上，第575-599页，见第577页，其中称这些价值观为“人类的基本价值观”。 |
| Tomuschat, “The Security Council and jus cogens” (see footnote 30 above), at p. 8. | Tomuschat, “The Security Council and jus cogens” (见上文脚注30)，第8页。 |
| See also Siderman de Blake v. Argentina (footnote 21 above), at p. 715, where the United States Court of Appeals referred to “values taken to be fundamental by the international community”, and the Constitutional Tribunal of Peru in 25% del número legal de Congresistas, referring to “extraordinary importance of the values” (footnote 22 above). | 另见Siderman de Blake诉阿根廷案(上文脚注21)，第715页，其中美国上诉法院提到“国际社会认同的基本价值观”，秘鲁宪法法庭在25% del número legal de Congresistas案中提到“价值观非常重要”(上文脚注22)。 |
| See, for example, O. Quirico, “Towards a peremptory duty to curb greenhouse gas emissions? ”, Fordham International Law Journal, vol. 44, No. 4 (April 2021), pp. 923–965, at p. 947 (“protects a fundamental interest”). | 例如，见O. Quirico, “Towards a peremptory duty to curb greenhouse gas emissions?”, Fordham International Law Journal, vol. 44, No. 4 (April 2021), pp. 923-965, at p. 947 (“保护根本利益”)。 |
| See also Hannikainen (footnote 28 above), at p. 2, referring to “overriding interests”; | 另见Hannikainen (上文脚注28)，第2页，其中提到“最高利益”； |
| and Arancibia Clavel (footnote 23 above), where the Supreme Court of Argentina referred to “general interests of the international community” as the underlying source of peremptory norms. | 以及Arancibia Clavel案(上文脚注23)，其中阿根廷最高法院提到“国际社会的普遍利益”是强制性规范的基本来源。 |
| Reservations to the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (see footnote 14 above), at p. 23. | 对《防止及惩治灭绝种族罪公约》的保留(见上文脚注14)，第23页。 |
| This language has been reaffirmed by the International Court of Justice in recent judgments. | 国际法院在最近的判决中重申了这一说法。 |
| See, for example, the judgments referred to in footnote 58 below. | 例如，见下文脚注58中提到的判决。 |
| See, for example, Prosecutor v. Anto Furundžija (footnote 18 above), at p. 571, para. 156. | 例如，见检察官诉Anto Furundžija案(上文脚注18)，第571页，第156段。 |
| See also Prosecutor v. Jelisić, Case No. IT-95-10-T, Judgment of 14 December 1999, Trial Chamber, International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, Judicial Reports 1999, p. 399, at pp. 431–433, para. 60. | 另见检察官诉Jelisić案，案件编号IT-95-10-T, 前南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭审判分庭1999年12月14日的判决，《1999年司法案例汇编》，第399页起，见第431-433页，第60段。 |
| Juridical Condition and Rights of Undocumented Migrants, Advisory Opinion OC-18/03 of 17 September 2003, requested by the United Mexican States, Inter-American Court of Human Rights, Series A, No. 18, p. 113, paras. 4–5. | 无证移民的法律地位和权利，美洲人权法院应墨西哥合众国请求，于2003年9月17日提出的OC-18/03号咨询意见，A辑，第18号，第113页，第4-5段。 |
| Michael Domingues v. United States (see footnote 18 above), at para. 49. | Michael Domingues诉美国案(见上文脚注18)，第49段。 |
| Tel-Oren v. Libyan Arab Republic, United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, 726 F.2d 774 (D.C. Cir. 1984). | Tel-Oren诉阿拉伯利比亚民众国，美国哥伦比亚特区巡回上诉法院，726 F.2d 774 (D.C. Cir. 1984)。 |
| See also Smith v. Socialist People’s Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, 101 F.3d 239 (2nd. Cir. 1996), at p. 242, in which the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit noted that peremptory norms “do not depend on the consent of individual states, but are universally binding by their very nature” (citing A. C. Belsky, M. Merva and N. Roht-Arriaza, “Implied waiver under the FSIA: a proposed exception to immunity for violations of peremptory norms of international law”, California Law Review, vol. 77, No. 2 (March 1989), pp. 365–415, at p. 399). | 另见Smith诉阿拉伯利比亚人民社会主义民众国案，101 F.3d 239 (2nd. Cir. 1996)，第242页，美国第二巡回上诉法院在该案中指出，强制性规范“不依赖具体国家的同意，因其性质而具有普遍约束力”(引自A. C. Belsky, M. Merva and N. Roht-Arriaza, “Implied waiver under the FSIA: a proposed exception to immunity for violations of peremptory norms of international law”, California Law Review, vol. 77, No. 2 (March 1989), pp. 365-415, at p. 399)。 |
| Youssef Nada v. State Secretariat for Economic Affairs and Federal Department of Economic Affairs, Case No. 1A 45/2007, Administrative Appeal Judgment of 14 November 2007, Federal Supreme Court of Switzerland, BGE 133 II 450, para. 7. | Youssef Nada诉国家经济事务秘书处和联邦经济事务部案，案件编号1A 45/2007，瑞士联邦最高法院2007年11月14日的行政上诉判决，BGE 133 II 450，第7段。 |
| Order of 26 October 2004, Federal Constitutional Court of Germany (see footnote 25 above), para. 117. | 德国联邦宪法法院2004年10月26日的命令(见上文脚注25)，第117段。 |
| See, for example, W. Conklin, “The peremptory norms of the international community”, European Journal of International Law, vol. 23, No. 3; | 例如见W. Conklin , “The peremptory norms of the international community”, European Journal of International Law, vol. 23, No. 3; |
| C. Rozakis, The Concept of Jus Cogens in the Law of Treaties, Amsterdam, North-Holland, 1976, at p. 78; | C. Rozakis, The Concept of Jus Cogens in the Law of Treaties, Amsterdam, North-Holland, 1976, at p. 78; |
| G. Gaja, “Jus cogens beyond the Vienna Convention”, in Collected Courses of the Hague Academy of International Law, vol. 172 (1981), pp. 271–289, at p. 283; | G. Gaja, “Jus cogens beyond the Vienna Convention”, in Collected Courses of the Hague Academy of International Law, vol. 172 (1981), pp. 271-289, at p. 283; |
| G. M. Danilenko, Law-Making in the International Community, Dordrecht, Martinus Nijhoff, 1993, at p. 211; | G. M. Danilenko, Law-Making in the International Community, Dordrecht, Martinus Nijhoff, 1993, at p. 211; |
| L. A. Alexidze, “Legal nature of jus cogens in contemporary international law”, Collected Courses of the Hague Academy of International Law, vol. 172 (1981), pp. 219–263; | L. A. Alexidze , “Legal nature of jus cogens in contemporary international law”, Collected Courses of the Hague Academy of International Law, vol. 172 (1981), pp. 219-263; |
| P-M. Dupuy and Y. Kerbrat, Droit international public, 11th ed., Paris, Précis Dalloz, 2012, at p. 322 (la cohésion de cet ensemble normatif exige la reconnaissance par tous ses sujets d’un minimum de règles imperatives (“the cohesion of this set of standards requires recognition by all its subjects of a minimum of mandatory rules”)); A. Rohr, La responsabilidad internacional del Estado por violación al jus cogens, Buenos Aires, SGN Editora, 2015, at p. 6; | P-M. Dupuy and Y. Kerbrat, Droit international public, 11th ed., Paris, Précis Dalloz, 2012, at p. 322 (la cohésion de cet ensemble normatif exige la reconnaissance par tous ses sujets d’un minimum de règles imperatives (“这套标准的一致性要求所有主体都公认有最低限度的强制性规则”));A. Rohr, La responsabilidad internacional del Estado por violación al jus cogens, Buenos Aires, SGN Editora, 2015, at p. 6; |
| D. Dubois, “The authority of peremptory norms in international law: State consent or natural law? ”, Nordic Journal of International Law, vol. 78 (2009), pp. 133–175, at p. 135 (“A jus cogens or peremptory norm … is applicable to all States regardless of their consenting to it”); and M. Saul, “Identifying jus cogens norms: the interaction of scholars and international judges”, Asian Journal of International Law, vol. 5 (2014), pp. 26–54, at p. 31 (“Jus cogens norms are supposed to be binding on all states”). | D. Dubois, “The authority of peremptory norms in international law: State consent or natural law?”, Nordic Journal of International Law, vol. 78 (2009), pp. 133-175, at p. 135 (“无论各国同意与否，强行法或强制性规范…对所有国家均适用”);and M. Saul, “Identifying jus cogens norms: the interaction of scholars and international judges”, Asian Journal of International Law, vol. 5 (2014), pp. 26-54, at p. 31 (“强行法规范应该对所有国家具有约束力”)。 |
| States were virtually unanimous on this point: see, for example, Finland (on behalf of the Nordic countries) (A/C.6/73/SR.24, para. 126); Greece (A/C.6/73/SR.27, para. 9); Malaysia (ibid., para. 104); | 各国在这点上的意见几乎是一致的：例如，见芬兰(代表北欧国家)(A/C.6/73/SR.24，第126段)、希腊(A/C.6/73/SR.27，第9段)、马来西亚(同上，第104段)、葡萄牙(A/C.6/73/SR.26，第119段)、南非(A/C.6/73/SR.27，第46段)、泰国(A/C.6/73/SR.26，第96段)、大不列颠及北爱尔兰联合王国(A/C.6/73/SR.22，第84段)和美利坚合众国(A/C.6/73/SR.29，第34段)。 |
| Portugal (A/C.6/73/SR.26, para. 119); South Africa (A/C.6/73/SR.27, para. 46); Thailand (A/C.6/73/SR.26, para. 96); | 检察官诉Anto Furundžija案(见上文脚注18)，第569页，第153段。 |
| the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (A/C.6/73/SR.22, para. 84); and the United States of America (A/C.6/73/SR.29, para. 34). Prosecutor v. Anto Furundžija (see footnote 18 above), at p. 569, para. 153. | García Lucero等人诉智利案，美洲人权法院2013年8月28日的判决，C辑，第267号，第123段，注139，其中赞同地引述了检查官诉Anto Furundžija案(见上文脚注18)。 |
| García Lucero, et al. v. Chile, Judgment 28 August 2013, Inter-American Court of Human Rights, Series C, No. 267, para. 123, note 139, quoting with approval Prosecutor v. Anto Furundžija (see footnote 18 above). | 另见Michael Domingues诉美国案(上文脚注18)，第49段，其中将强行法规范描述为源于“位阶更高的法律规范”。 |
| See also Michael Domingues v. United States (footnote 18 above), at para. 49, describing jus cogens norms as being derived from a “superior order of legal norms”. Yassin Abdullah Kadi v. Council of the European Union and Commission of the European Communities, Case No. T-315-01, Judgment of 21 September 2005, Second Chamber, Court of First Instance of the European Communities, [2005] ECR II-3649, para. 226. | Yassin Abdullah Kadi诉欧洲联盟理事会和欧洲共同体委员会案，案件编号T-315-01，欧洲共同体初审法院第二分庭2005年9月21日的判决，[2005] ECR II-3649，第226段。 |
| See also Hassan v. Council of the European Union and Commission of the European Communities, Case No. T-49/04, Judgment of 12 July 2006, Second Chamber, Court of First Instance of the European Communities, para. 92. | 另见Hassan诉欧洲联盟理事会和欧洲共同体委员会案，案件编号T-49/04，欧洲共同体初审法院第二分庭2006年7月12日的判决，第92段。 |
| Al-Adsani v. the United Kingdom (see footnote 18 above), para. 60. | Al-Adsani诉联合王国案(见上文脚注18)，第60段。 |
| Mann v. Republic of Equatorial Guinea, Case No. 507/07, Judgment of 23 January 2008, High Court of Zimbabwe, [2008] ZWHHC 1. | Mann诉赤道几内亚共和国案，案件编号507/07，津巴布韦高等法院2008年1月23日的判决，[2008] ZWHHC 1。 |
| Siderman de Blake v. Argentina (see footnote 21 above), at p. 717. | Siderman de Blake诉阿根廷案(见上文脚注21)，第717页。 |
| Bayan Muna v. Alberto Romulo (see footnote 20 above), at para. 92. | Bayan Muna等人诉Alberto Romulo案(见上文脚注20)，第92段。 |
| See also Certain Employees of Sidhu and Sons Nursery Ltd., et al., Case Nos. 61942, 61973, 61966, 61995, Decision of 1 February 2012, BCLRB No. B28/2012, para. 44, where the British Columbia Labour Relations Board (Canada), identified peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) as enjoying a “higher rank in the international hierarchy than treaty law and even ‘ordinary’ customary rules”. | 另见Sidhu和Sons Nursery有限公司的某些员工等人案，案件编号61942、61973、61966、61995，2012年2月1日的判决，BCLRB No. B28/2012，第44段，其中不列颠哥伦比亚省劳工关系理事会(加拿大)指出一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)“在国际位阶体系中享有比条约法甚至是‘普通’习惯规则更高的地位”。 |
| See also Regina (Al Rawi and Others) v. Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs and Another, Case No. C1/2006/1064, Judgment of 12 October 2006, England, Court of Appeal (Civil Division), [2006] EWCA Civ 1279, ILR [International Law Reports], vol. 136, p. 624; | 另见女王(Al Rawi等人)诉外交和联邦事务大臣及另一人案，案件编号C1/2006/1064，英格兰上诉法院(民事分庭)2006年10月12日的判决，[2006] EWCA Civ 1279 ILR [《国际法案例汇编》]，第136卷，第624页； |
| and Regina v. Bow Street Metropolitan Stipendiary Magistrate, ex parte Pinochet Ugarte (No. 3), Decision of 24 March 1999, England, House of Lords, [2000] 1 A.C. 147, ILR, vol. 119 (2002), p. 198. | 以及女王诉Bow Street都市领薪专职治安官：皮诺切特·乌加特缺席案(第3号)，英国上议院1999年3月24日的判决，[2000] 1 A.C. 147,《国际法案例汇编》，第119卷(2002年)，第198页。 |
| Simón, Julio Héctor y otros s/ privación ilegítima de la libertad, Case No. 17.768, Judgment of 14 June 2005, Supreme Court of Argentina, S. 1767. XXXVIII, para. 48 (que se encuentra no sólo por encima de los tratados sino incluso por sobre todas las fuentes del derecho (“which is not only above treaties but even above all sources of law”)). | Simón, Julio Héctor y otros s/ privación ilegítima de la libertad案，案件编号17.768，阿根廷最高法院2005年6月14日的判决，S. 1767. XXXVIII，第48段(que se encuentra no sólo por encima de los tratados sino incluso por sobre todas las fuentes del derecho (“不仅高于条约，甚至高于一切法律渊源”))。 |
| See also Julio Lilo Mazzeo y otros s/rec. de casación e inconstitucionalidad, Judgment of 13 July 2007, Supreme Court of Argentina, para. 15 (se trata de la más alta fuente del derecho internacional (jus cogens “is the highest source of international law”)). | 另见Julio Lilo Mazzeo y otros s/rec. de casacíon e inconstitucionalidad案，阿根廷最高法院2007年7月13日的判决，第15段 (se trata de la más alta fuente del derecho internacional (强行法是“国际法的最高渊源”))。 |
| Sabbithi v. Al Saleh, United States District Court for the District of Columbia, 605 F. Supp. 2d 122, (D.D.C. 2009), at p. 129. | Sabbithi诉Al Saleh案(美国哥伦比亚特区联邦地区法院，605 F. Supp. 2d 122, (D.D.C. 2009)，第129页。 |
| See also Mario Luiz Lozano v. the General Prosecutor for the Italian Republic, Case No. 31171/2008, Appeal Judgment of 24 July 2008, First Criminal Division, Supreme Court of Cassation, Italy, p. 6 (“priority should be given to the principle of higher rank and of jus cogens”). | 另见Mario Luiz Lozano 诉意大利共和国总检察长案，案件编号31171/2008，意大利最高上诉法院第一刑事分庭2008年7月24日的上诉判决，第6页(“应优先考虑强行法位阶较高原则”)。 |
| See, for example, the statements by the Netherlands (A/C.6/68/SR.25, para. 101) (“Jus cogens was hierarchically superior within the international law system, irrespective of whether it took the form of written law or customary law”); | 例如，见荷兰的发言(A/C.6/68/SR.25，第101段)(“在国际法体系内，无论采取成文法或习惯法的形式，强行法的位阶都较高”)； |
| and the United Kingdom (Official Records of the United Nations Conference on the Law Treaties, First Session, Vienna, 26 March–24 May 1968, Summary records of the plenary meetings and of the meetings of the Committee of the Whole (A/CONF.39/11), 53rd meeting, para. 53) (“in a properly organized international society there was a need for rules of international law that were of a higher order than the rules of a merely dispositive nature from which States could contract out”). | 以及联合王国的发言(《联合国条约法会议正式记录，第一届会议，1968年3月26日至5月24日，全体会议和全体委员会会议简要记录》(A/CONF.39/11)，第53次会议，第53段)(“在一个组织有序的国际社会，需要有位阶更高的国际法规则，这些规则高于性质仅为酌处性、各国可以通过协约方式保证不受之约束的规则”)。 |
| Conclusion (32) of the conclusions of the work of the Study Group on the fragmentation of international law: difficulties arising from the diversification and expansion of international law (A/CN.4/L.702), at p. 20 (“[a] rule of international law may be superior to other rules on account of the importance of its content as well as the universal acceptance of its superiority. | 见国际法不成体系问题：国际法多样化和扩展引起的困难研究组的工作结论，结论(32) (A/CN.4/L.702)，第20页(“可依据其内容及其被普遍接受的优先位阶来决定[一个]国际法规则优于其他规则。 |
| This is the case of peremptory norms of international law (jus cogens)”). | 这是国际法强制性规范(强行法)的情况”)。 |
| See, further, the report of the Study Group on the fragmentation of international law: difficulties arising from the diversification and expansion of international law (finalized by Martti Koskenniemi) (Yearbook … 2006, vol. II (Part One) (Addendum 2), document A/CN.4/L.682 and Add.1). | 又见国际法不成体系问题：国际法多样化和扩展引起的困难研究组的报告(马尔蒂·科斯肯涅米定稿)(《2006年…年鉴》，第二卷(第一部分)(更正2)，A/CN.4/L.682和Add.1号文件)。 |
| See, for support in the literature for the hierarchical superiority of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens), C. Ene, “Jus cogens (peremptory norms): a key concept of the international law”, Perspectives of Law and Public Administration, vol. 8, No. 2 (December 2019), pp. 302–304, at p. 303; | 关于文献中对一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)位阶优先的支持，见C. Ene, “Jus cogens (peremptory norms): a key concept of the international law”, Perspectives of Law and Public Administration, vol. 8, No. 2 (December 2019), pp. 302-304, at p. 303; |
| I. Handayani, “Concept and position of peremptory norms (jus cogens) in international law: a preliminary study”, Hasanuddin Law Review, vol. 5, No. 2 (August 2019), pp. 235–252, at p. 241; | I. Handayani, “Concept and position of peremptory norms (jus cogens) in international law: a preliminary study”, Hasanuddin Law Review, vol. 5, No. 2 (August 2019), pp. 235-252, at p. 241; |
| T. Fleury Graff, “L’interdiction de l’esclavage, norme de jus cogens en droit international et droit inconditionnel en droit européen”, Les cahiers de la Justice, vol. 2 (2020), pp. 197–206, at p. 205 (Une règle de jus cogens est une règle hiérarchiquement supérieure à toute autre règle du droit international, si bien qu’une règle qui ne s’y conformerait pas encourrait la nullité (“A rule of jus cogens is a rule hierarchically superior to any other rule of international law, so that a rule which does not comply with it would incur nullity”)); | T. Fleury Graff, “L’interdiction de l’esclavage, norme de jus cogens en droit international et droit inconditionnel en droit européen”, Les cahiers de la Justice, vol. 2 (2020), pp. 197-206, at p. 205 (Une règle de jus cogens est une règle hiérarchiquement supérieure à toute autre règle du droit international, si bien qu’une règle qui ne s’y conformerait pas encourrait la nullité (“强行法规则在位阶上高于任何其他国际法规则，因此不符合强行法规则将导致无效”))； |
| A Orakhelashvili, Peremptory Norms in International Law, Oxford, 2006, at p. 8; | A.Orakhelashvili, Peremptory Norms in International Law, Oxford, 2006, at p. 8; |
| G. M. Danilenko, “International jus cogens: issues of law-making”, European Journal of International Law, vol. 2, No. 1 (1991), pp. 42–65, at p. 42; | G. M. Danilenko, “International jus cogens: issues of law-making”, European Journal of International Law, vol. 2, No. 1 (1991), pp. 42-65, at p. 42; |
| and Conklin (footnote 42 above), at p. 838 (“[T]he very possibility of a peremptory norm once again suggests a hierarchy of international law norms with peremptory norms being the ‘fundamental standards of the international community’ at the pinnacle”). | and Conklin, (上文脚注42)，at p. 838 (“强制性规范的可能性本身再次显示，存在国际法规范的位阶体系，其中强制性规范是位阶最高的‘国际社会基本标准’”)。 |
| See also M. M. Whiteman, “Jus cogens in international law, with a projected list”, Georgia Journal of International and Comparative Law, vol. 7, No. 2 (1977), pp. 609–626, at p. 609; | 另见M. M. Whiteman, “Jus cogens in international law, with a projected list”, Georgia Journal of International and Comparative Law, vol. 7, No. 2 (1977), pp. 609-626, at p. 609; |
| and M. W. Janis, “The nature of jus cogens”, Connecticut Journal of International Law, vol. 3, No. 2 (Spring 1988), pp. 359–363, at p. 359. | and M. W. Janis, “The nature of jus cogens”, Connecticut Journal of International Law, vol. 3, No. 2 (Spring 1988), pp. 359-363, at p. 359。 |
| Tomuschat, for example, describes as a certainty that peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) are superior to other norms. | 例如，Tomuschat称一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)高于其他规范这一点是肯定的。 |
| See C. Tomuschat, “Reconceptualizing the debate on jus cogens and obligations erga omnes: concluding observations”, in C. Tomuschat and J.-M. Thouvenin (eds.), The Fundamental Rules of the International Legal Order: Jus Cogens and Obligations Erga Omnes, Leiden, Martinus Nijhoff, 2006, at p. 425 (“One thing is certain, however: the international community accepts today that there exists a class of legal precepts which is hierarchically superior to ‘ordinary’ rules of international law”). | 见C. Tomuschat, “Reconceptualizing the debate on jus cogens and obligations erga omnes: concluding observations”, in C. Tomuschat and J.-M. Thouvenin (eds.), The Fundamental Rules of the International Legal Order: Jus Cogens and Obligations Erga Omnes, Leiden, Martinus Nijhoff, 2006, at p. 425 (“但有一点是肯定的：国际社会如今接受存在位阶高于‘普通’国际法规则的一类法律规范”)。 |
| See also A. Cassese, “For an enhanced role of jus cogens”, in A. Cassese (ed.), Realizing Utopia: the Future of International Law, Oxford University Press, 2012, pp. 158–171, at p. 159. | 另见A. Cassese, “For an enhanced role of jus cogens”, in A. Cassese (ed.), Realizing Utopia: the Future of International Law, Oxford University Press, 2012, pp. 158-171, 第159页。 |
| For a contrary view, see Kolb, “Peremptory norms as a legal technique …” (footnote 26 above), at p. 37, suggesting that the language of hierarchy should be avoided and that the focus should be on voidness since the former concept – of hierarchy – leads to confusion and misunderstanding. | 相反的观点见Kolb, “Peremptory norms as a legal technique …”(上文脚注26)，第37页，其中建议避免使用位阶这种措辞，重点应放在无效性上，因为前一个概念――位阶概念――导致混淆和误解。 |
| See, for example, the statement by the Czech Republic (A/C.6/71/SR.24, para. 72). | 例如，见捷克共和国的发言(A/C.6/71/SR.24，第72段)。 |
| See also the statements by Canada (A/C.6/71/SR.27, para. 9), Chile (A/C.6/71/SR.25, para. 101), China (A/C.6/71/SR.24, para. 89), the Islamic Republic of Iran (A/C.6/71/SR.26, para. 118) (“The aim of the Commission’s work on the topic was not to contest the two criteria established under article 53 … . On the contrary, the goal was to elucidate the meaning and scope of the two criteria”), and Poland (ibid., para. 56). | 另见加拿大(A/C.6/71/SR.27，第9段)､智利(A/C.6/71/SR.25，第101段)､中国(A/C.6/71/SR.24，第89段)、伊朗伊斯兰共和国(A/C.6/71/SR.26，第118段)(“委员会关于这个专题的工作的目的并不是要质疑…第五十三条确立的两个标准…相反，其目的是要清楚说明这两个标准的含义与范围”)和波兰(同上，第56段)的发言。 |
| See, further, the statement by Ireland (A/C.6/71/SR.27, para. 19) (the delegation of Ireland “agreed with the view that articles 53 and 64 of the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties should be central to work on the topic”). | 又见爱尔兰的发言(A/C.6/71/SR.27，第19段)(“爱尔兰代表团同意这样的观点，即1969年《维也纳条约法公约》第五十三条和第六十四条应为就该专题开展工作的核心”)。 |
| See, for example, Al Shimari, et al. v. CACI Premier Technology, Inc., Opinion of 22 March 2019, United District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, 368 F. Supp. 3d 935 No. 1:08-cv-827 (LMB/JFA), 2019 WL 1320052 (E.D. Va. 2019), at p. 26; | 例如，见Al Shimari等人诉CACI Premier Technology公司案，美国弗吉尼亚东区联邦地区法院2019年3月22日的意见，368 F. Supp. 3d 935 No. 1:08-cv-827 (LMB/JFA)，2019 WL 1320052 (E.D. Va. 2019)，第26页； |
| Committee of United States Citizens Living in Nicaragua v. Reagan, United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, 859 F.2d 929 (D.C. Cir. 1988), at p. 940; | 在尼加拉瓜居住的美国公民委员会诉里根案，美国哥伦比亚特区巡回上诉法院，859 F.2d 929(D.C. Cir.1988)，第940页； |
| Youssef Nada v. State Secretariat for Economic Affairs and Federal Department of Economic Affairs (footnote 40 above), para. 7.1; | Youssef Nada诉国家经济事务秘书处和联邦经济事务部案(上文脚注40)，第7.1段； |
| National Commissioner of The South African Police Service v. Southern African Human Rights Litigation Centre and Another, Case No. CC 02/14, Judgment of 30 October 2014, Constitutional Court of South Africa, [2014] ZACC 30, para. 35; | 南非警察总署国家专员诉南部非洲人权诉讼中心和另一被告案，案件编号CC 02/14，南非宪法法院2014年10月30日的判决，[2014] ZACC 30, 第35段； |
| Priebke, Erich s/ solicitud de extradición, Case No. 16.063/94, Judgment of 2 November 1995, Supreme Court of Argentina, para. 70; | Priebke, Erich s/ solicitud de extradición案，案件编号16.063/94，阿根廷最高法院1995年11月2日的判决，第70段； |
| Bouzari v. Islamic Republic of Iran, Docket C38295, Decision of 30 June 2004, Court of Appeal for Ontario, 71 OR (3d) 675 (Ont CA), ILDC 175 (CA 2004), para. 86; | Bouzari诉伊朗伊斯兰共和国案，备审案件编号C38295, 安大略省上诉法院2004年6月30日的判决，71 OR (3d) 675 (Ont CA), ILDC 175 (CA 2004)，第86段； |
| and Gabriel Orlando Vera Navarrete, EXP. No. 2798-04-HC/TC, Decision of 9 December 2004, Constitutional Tribunal of Peru, para. 8. | 以及Gabriel Orlando Vera Navarrete案，备审案件编号2798-04-H/TC, 秘鲁宪法法庭2004年12月9日的判决，第8段。 |
| See also Jorgić Case, Order of 12 December 2000, 2BvR 1290/99, Federal Constitutional Court of Germany, at para. 17. | 另见Jorgić案，德国联邦宪法法院2000年12月12日的命令，2BvR 1290/99，第17段。 |
| See, for example, Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons, Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 1996, p. 226, at p. 258, para. 83; | 例如，见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258页，第83段； |
| Prosecutor v. Anto Furundžija (footnote 18 above), at p. 571, para. 155; | 检察官诉Anto Furundžija案(上文脚注18)，第571页，第155段； |
| and Prosecutor v. Jelisić (footnote 36 above), at pp. 431–433, para. 60. | 以及检察官诉Jelisić案(上文脚注36)，第431-433页，第60段。 |
| See also Jaime Córdoba Triviño, Case No. C-578/95, Sentence of 4 December 1995, Constitutional Tribunal of Colombia. | 另见Jaime Córdoba Triviño案，案件编号C-578/95，哥伦比亚宪法法庭1995年12月4日的判决。 |
| See, especially, the separate opinion of Judge ad hoc Dugard in Armed Activities on the Territory of the Congo (New Application: 2002) (Democratic Republic of the Congo v. Rwanda), Jurisdiction and Admissibility, Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2006, p. 6, at p. 88, para. 8. | 特别见杜加尔德专案法官在刚果境内武装活动案(新申诉：2002年)(刚果民主共和国诉卢旺达)中的个别意见，管辖权和可否受理，判决，《2006年国际法院案例汇编》，第6页起，见第88页，第8段。 |
| See, for example, Mbengue and Koagne Zouapet (footnote 26 above), at p. 510; | 例如，见Mbengue and Koagne Zouapet (上文脚注26)，at p. 510； |
| S. Knuchel, Jus Cogens: Identification and Enforcement of Peremptory Norms, Zurich, Schulthess, 2015, at p. 19 (“Given that Article 53 provides the only written legal definition of the effects of jus cogens … as well as of the process by which such norms come into being … it is the necessary starting point for analyzing this concept”); | S. Knuchel, Jus Cogens: Identification and Enforcement of Peremptory Norms, Zurich, Schulthess, 2015, at p. 19 (“鉴于第五十三条提供了关于强行法效力的唯一书面法律定义…以及这些规范形成的过程…第五十三条是分析这个概念的必要出发点”)； |
| S. Kadelbach, “Genesis, function and identification of jus cogens norms”, Netherlands Yearbook of International Law 2015, vol. 46 (2016), pp. 147–172, at p. 166, noting that “treatises on jus cogens usually start” with article 53 of the 1969 Vienna Convention and, at p. 162, assessing enhanced responsibility and the erga omnes effects of jus cogens on the basis of article 53 of the 1969 Vienna Convention; | S. Kadelbach, “Genesis, function and identification of jus cogens norms”, Netherlands Yearbook of International Law 2015, vol. 46 (2016) , pp. 147–172, at p. 166, 其中指出，“关于强行法的论文通常以”《维也纳公约》第五十三条为起点，和p. 162，依据1969年《维也纳公约》第五十三条评估强化的责任和强行法的普遍效力； |
| and U. Linderfalk, “Understanding the jus cogens debate: the pervasive influence of legal positivism and legal idealism”, ibid., pp. 51–84, at p. 52. | 以及U. Linderfalk, “Understanding the jus cogens debate: the pervasive influence of legal positivism and legal idealism”, 同上，pp. 51–84, at p. 52。 |
| See also, generally, Costelloe (footnote 11 above), who, though never stating that article 53 of the 1969 Vienna Convention is the definition, certainly proceeds on that basis. | 一般而言，另见Costelloe (上文脚注11)，他虽然从未指出1969年《维也纳公约》第五十三条是定义，但无疑是以此为基础的。 |
| Similarly, see Hannikainen (footnote 28 above), especially at pp. 5–12; | 同样，见Hannikainen (上文脚注28)，特别是pp. 5–12； |
| and Alexidze (footnote 42 above), at p. 246. | 以及Alexidze (上文脚注42)，at p. 246。 |
| See T. Weatherall, Jus Cogens: International Law and Social Contract, Cambridge University Press, 2015, at pp. 6–7 (“Although the Vienna Convention concerns the law of treaties and binds only signatories … Article 53 reflected a concept with legal effect beyond the treaty context. … | 见T. Weatherall, Jus Cogens: International Law and Social Contract, Cambridge University Press, 2015, at pp. 6–7 (“虽然《维也纳公约》涉及条约法，并且仅对签署国有约束力…但第五十三条反映的概念具有超越条约范围的法律效力。 |
| The contemporary practice of international and domestic judicial organs, to refer to Article 53 for any consideration of jus cogens, is consistent with this view of a concept existing outside the treaty context”); | …国际和国内司法机关在审议强行法时参照第五十三条的当代实践，与这种认为存在超越条约范围的概念的观点相一致”)； |
| E. Santalla Vargas, “In quest of the practical value of jus cogens norms”, Netherlands Yearbook of International Law 2015, vol. 46 (2016), pp. 211–240, at pp. 223–224 (“However, the potential effects of jus cogens not only expand beyond treaty law but they even appear more significant in situations that are not concerned with treaty law”); | E. Santalla Vargas, “In quest of the practical value of jus cogens norms”, Netherlands Yearbook of International Law 2015, vol. 46 (2016), pp. 211–240, at pp. 223–224 (“不过，强行法的潜在效力不仅超出了条约法，而且在与条约法无关的情况下甚至更为显著”)； |
| and Cassese (footnote 55 above), at p. 160 (“Fortunately states, national courts, and international judicial bodies have invoked peremptory norms with regard to areas other than treaty-making. | 以及Cassese(上文脚注55)，p. 160 (“幸运的是，国家、各国法院和国际司法机构在缔约以外的领域援引了强制性规范。 |
| By so doing, these entities have expanded the scope and normative impacts of peremptory norms” (emphasis in original)). | 通过这种做法，这些实体扩大了强制性规范的范围和规范性影响”(强调是原有的))。 |
| See also H. Charlesworth and C. Chinkin, “The gender of jus cogens”, Human Rights Quarterly, vol. 15 (1993), pp. 63–76, at p. 63 (“A formal, procedural definition of the international law concept of jus cogens is found in the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties”). | 另见H. Charlesworth and C. Chinkin, “The gender of jus cogens”, Human Rights Quarterly, vol. 15 (1993), pp. 63–76, at p. 63 (“关于国际法强行法概念的正式程序性定义见《维也纳条约法公约》”)。 |
| See paragraph (5) of the commentary to article 26 of the articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts, Yearbook … 2001, vol. II (Part Two) and corrigendum, p. 85 (“The criteria for identifying peremptory norms of general international law are stringent. | 见国家对国际不法行为的责任条款第26条的评注第(5)段，《2001年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)和更正，第85页(“识别一般国际法强制性规范的标准是严格的。 |
| Article 53 of the 1969 Vienna Convention requires not merely that the norm in question should meet all the criteria for recognition as a norm of general international law … but further that it should be recognized as having peremptory character by the international community of States as whole”). | 1969年《维也纳公约》第五十三条不仅要求该规范符合被承认为一般国际法规范的所有标准…还要求它被国家组成之国际社会整体承认具有强制性质”)。 |
| See also the conclusions of the Study Group on the fragmentation of international law (footnote 54 above), conclusion (32) (“A rule of international law may be superior to other rules on account of the importance of its content as well as the universal acceptance of its superiority. | 另见国际法不成体系问题研究组的结论(上文脚注54)，结论(32)(“可依据其内容及其被普遍接受的优先位阶来决定一个国际法规则优于其他规则。 |
| This is the case of peremptory norms of international law (jus cogens, [article 53 of the 1969 Vienna Convention]), that is, norms ‘accepted and recognized by the international community of States as a whole from which no derogation is permitted’”). | 这是国际法强制性规范(强行法，[1969年《维也纳公约》第五十三条])的情况。 也就是说，‘国际社会整体接受并公认为不许损抑’的规范”)。 |
| See, further, the report of the Study Group on the fragmentation of international law (finalized by Martti Koskenniemi) (ibid.), para. 375 (“The starting-point [for establishing the criteria] must be the formulation of article 53 itself, identifying jus cogens by reference to what is ‘accepted and recognized by the international community of States as a whole’”). | 又见国际法不成体系问题研究组的报告(马尔蒂·科斯肯涅米定稿)(同上)，第375段(“[制定标准的]起点必须是第五十三条本身的措辞，参照‘国家之国际社会整体接受并公认’的规范来识别强行法”)。 |
| But see Knuchel (footnote 59 above), at pp. 49–136. | 但参见Knuchel (上文脚注59)，at pp. 49–136。 |
| See also the statement by the Islamic Republic of Iran (A/C.6/71/SR.26, para. 118), where the two criteria identified are said to be, first, a norm recognized by the international community of States as a whole as a norm from which no derogation was permitted and, second, a norm that could be modified only by a subsequent jus cogens norm. | 另见伊朗伊斯兰共和国的发言(A/C.6/71/SR.26，第118段)，其中表示，所确立的两个标准是：首先，是由国家组成的国际社会整体承认为不容克减的规范，其次，是只能由嗣后的强行法规范加以变更的规范。 |
| Paragraph (5) of the commentary to article 26 of the articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts, Yearbook … 2001, vol. II (Part Two) and corrigendum, p. 85 (emphasis added). | 国家对国际不法行为的责任条款第26条的评注第(5)段，《2001年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)和更正，第85页(强调是后加的)。 |
| See also R. Rivier, Droit international public, 2nd ed., Paris, Presses universitaires de France, 2013, at p. 566 (Ne peut accéder au rang de règle impérative qu’une provision déjà formalisée en droit positif et universellement acceptée comme règle de droit (“Only a provision already formalized in positive law and universally accepted as law can achieve the rank of peremptory norm”)). | 另见R. Rivier, Droit international public, 2nd ed., Paris, Presses universitaires de France, 2013, 第566页(Ne peut accéder au rang de règle impérative qu’une provision déjà formalisée en droit positif et universellement acceptée comme règle de droit (“只有已在实在法中正式确立并被普遍接受为法律的规定才能达到强制性规范的位阶”))。 |
| See also U. Linderfalk, “The creation of jus cogens–making sense of article 53 of the Vienna Convention”, Heidelberg Journal of International Law, vol. 71 (2011), pp. 359–378, at p. 371 (“by ‘the creation of a rule of jus cogens’ I mean, not the creation of a rule of law, but rather the elevation of a rule of law to a jus cogens status”). | 另见U. Linderfalk, “The creation of jus cogens - making sense of article 53 of the Vienna Convention”, Heidelberg Journal of International Law, vol. 71 (2011), 第359-378页，见第371页(“我说的‘创立强行法规则’，并不是指创立法律规则，而是将法律规则提升到强行法地位”)。 |
| Report of the Study Group on the fragmentation of international law: difficulties arising from the diversification and expansion of international law (A/CN.4/L.702), para. 14 (10), note 11. | 国际法不成体系问题：国际法多样化和扩展引起的困难研究组的报告(A/CN.4/L.702)，第14(10)段，注11。 |
| See also A. Zdravkovič, “Finding the core of international law: jus cogens in the work of the International Law Commission”, South Eastern and European Union Legal Issues, vol. 5 (December 2019), pp. 141–158, at p. 144. | 另见A. Zdravkovič, “Finding the core of international law: jus cogens in the work of the International Law Commission”, South Eastern and European Union Legal Issues, vol. 5 (December 2019), pp. 141-158, at p. 144。 |
| Ibid. See also footnote 667 to paragraph (2) of the commentary to conclusion 1 of the conclusions on identification of customary international law, Official Records of the General Assembly, Seventy-third Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/73/10), p. 123 (“‘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”). | 同上。 另见关于习惯国际法的识别的结论之结论1的评注第(2)段脚注 667，《大会正式记录，补编第10号》(A/73/10)，第123页，(“‘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”)。 |
| See, for example, 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. 137–138, para. 274. | 例如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137-138页，第274段。 |
| See also Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros Project (Hungary/Slovakia), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1997, p. 7, at p. 76, para. 132. | 另见加布奇科沃－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76页，第132段。 |
| North Sea Continental Shelf, Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1969, p. 3, at pp. 38–39, para. 63. | 北海大陆架案，判决，《1969年国际法院案例汇编》，第3页起，见第38-39页，第63段。 |
| See Cassese (footnote 55 above), at p. 164 (“The second question amounts to asking by which means an international tribunal should ascertain whether a general rule or principle of international law has acquired the status of a peremptory norm. | 见Cassese (上文脚注55)，at p. 164 (“第二个问题等于是问一个国际性法庭如何确定一项国际法一般规则或原则是否已获得强制性规范的地位。 |
| Logically, this presupposes the existence of such a customary rule or principle”); | 从逻辑上说，须先存在这样一种习惯规则或原则”)； |
| G. Cahin, La coutume internationale et les organisations internationales : l’incidence de la dimension institutionnelle sur le processus coutumier, Paris, Pédone, 2001, at p. 615, who states that customary international law is the “normal, if not exclusive, means” of formation of jus cogens norms (voie normale et fréquente sinon exclusive). | G. Cahin, La coutume internationale et les organisations internationales : l’incidence de la dimension institutionnelle sur le processus coutumier, Paris, Pédone, 2001, at p. 615, 其中指出，习惯国际法即使不是形成强行法规范的“唯一方式，也是通常的方式”(voie normale et fréquente sinon exclusive)。 |
| See also Rivier (footnote 63 above), at p. 566 (Le mode coutumier est donc au premier rang pour donner naissance aux règles destinées à alimenter le droit impératif (“Customary international law is thus a primary source of rules that will form the basis of peremptory law”)). | 另见Rivier (上文脚注63), at p. 566 (Le mode coutumier est donc au premier rang pour donner naissance aux règles destinées à alimenter le droit impératif (“因此习惯国际法是构成强行法基础的各项规则的主要渊源”))。 |
| See, further, J. E. Christófolo, Solving Antinomies between Peremptory Norms in Public International Law, Zurich, Schulthess, 2016, p. 115 (“As the most likely source of general international law, customary norms would constitute ipso facto and ipso iure a privileged source of ius cogens norms”); | 又见J. E. Christófolo, Solving Antinomies between Peremptory Norms in Public International Law, Zurich, Schulthess, 2016, p. 115 (“作为一般国际法的最有可能的来源，习惯规范将构成强行法规范的事实上和法律上的优先来源”)； |
| Gagnon-Bergeron (footnote 27 above), at p. 53; | Gagnon-Bergeron (上文脚注27)，at p. 53； |
| and A. Bianchi, “Human rights and the magic of jus cogens”, European Journal of International Law, vol. 19 (2008), p. 491, at p. 493 (“the possibility that jus cogens could be created by treaty stands in sharp contrast to the view that peremptory norms can emerge only from customary law”). | 以及A. Bianchi, “Human rights and the magic of jus cogens”, European Journal of International Law, vol. 19 (2008), p. 491, at p. 493 (“可以通过条约创立强行法的观念与强制性规范只能源自习惯法的看法形成了鲜明的对比”)。 |
| See, for a contrary view, Janis (footnote 55 above), at p. 361. | 相反的观点见Janis (上文脚注55)，at p. 361。 |
| For statements by States, see the statement by Pakistan at the thirty-fourth session of the General Assembly (A/C.6/34/SR.22, para. 8) (“The principle of the non-use of force, and its corollary, were jus cogens not only by virtue of Article 103 of the Charter [of the United Nations], but also because they had become norms of customary international law recognized by the international community”). | 关于各国的发言，见巴基斯坦在联大第三十四届会议上的发言(A/C.6/34/SR.22，第8段)(“不使用武力原则及其必然结果都是强行法，其依据不仅是《[联合国]宪章》第一百零三条，而且也是因为它们已成为国际社会公认的习惯国际法规范”)。 |
| See also the statements by the United Kingdom (A/C.6/34/SR.61, para. 46) and Jamaica (A/C.6/42/SR.29, para. 3) (“The right of peoples to self-determination and independence was a right under customary international law, and perhaps even a peremptory norm of general international law”). | 另见联合王国(A/C.6/34/SR.61，第46段)和牙买加的发言(A/C.6/42/SR.29，第3段)(“人民自决和独立的权利是习惯国际法规定的权利，或许甚至是一般国际法强制性规范”)。 |
| Arancibia Clavel (see footnote 23 above), para. 28. | Arancibia Clavel案(见上文脚注23)，第28段。 |
| 25% del número legal de Congresistas (see footnote 22 above), para. 53 (Las normas de ius cogens parecen pues encontrarse referidas a normas internacionales consuetudinarias que bajo el auspicio de una opinio iuris seu necessitatis (“jus cogens norms seem like they refer more to international customary norms than to opinio juris seu necessitatis”)). | 25% del número legal de Congresistas案(见上文脚注22)，第53段(Las normas de ius cogens parecen pues encontrarse referidas a normas internacionales consuetudinarias que bajo el auspicio de una opinio iuris seu necessitatis (“强行法规范似乎更多地指的是国际习惯规范，而不是法律必要确信”))。 |
| Bayan Muna v. Alberto Romulo (see footnote 20 above), para. 92. | Bayan Muna诉Alberto Romulo案(见上文脚注20)，第92段。 |
| The Kenya Section of the International Commission of Jurists v. the Attorney-General and Others, Miscellaneous Criminal Application 685 of 2010, Judgment of 28 November 2011, High Court of Kenya, [2011] eKLR, p. 14. | 国际法学家委员会肯尼亚分会诉总检察长等人案，2010年杂项刑事申诉第685号，肯尼亚高等法院2011年11月28日的判决，[2011] eKLR, 第14页。 |
| Kazemi Estate v. Islamic Republic of Iran, File No. 35034, Appeal Decision of 10 October 2014, Supreme Court of Canada, 2014 SCC 62, [2014] 3 S.C.R. 176, at p. 249, para. 151. | Kazemi财产托管方诉伊朗伊斯兰共和国案，案卷号35034，加拿大最高法院2014年10月10日的上诉判决，2014 SCC 62, [2014] 3 S.C.R. 176, 第249页，第151段。 |
| See also Germany v. Milde (Max Josef), Case No. 1072/2009, Appeal Judgment of 13 January 2009, First Criminal Section, Supreme Court of Cassation, Italy, ILDC 1224 (IT 2009), para. 6 (“customary rules aiming to protect inviolable human rights did not permit derogation because they belonged to peremptory international law or jus cogens”). | 另见德国诉Milde (Max Josef)案，案件编号1072/2009，意大利最高上诉法院第一刑事分庭2009年1月13日的上诉判决，ILDC 1224 (IT 2009)，第6段(“旨在保护不可侵犯的人权的习惯规则不容克减，因为它们属于强制性国际法或强行法”)。 |
| Siderman de Blake v. Argentina (see footnote 21 above), at p. 715, citing Committee of United States Citizens Living in Nicaragua v. Reagan (see footnote 57 above), at p. 940. | Siderman de Blake诉阿根廷案(见上文脚注21)，第715页，其中援引了在尼加拉瓜居住的美国公民委员会诉里根案(见上文脚注57)，第940页。 |
| Ibid. This contrast between “ordinary” rules of customary international law and jus cogens – suggesting the latter constitutes extraordinary rules of customary international law – is often based on the decision of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia in Prosecutor v. Anto Furundžija (see footnote 18 above), at p. 569, para. 153, where a similar distinction is drawn. | 同上。 习惯国际法“普通”规则和强行法之间的这种对比――表明后者构成习惯国际法特殊规则――往往是以前南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭在检察官诉Anto Furundžija案(见上文脚注18)中的判决为依据的，见第569页，第153段，该案作了类似的区分。 |
| It has been mentioned, with approval, in several decisions, including decisions of the courts of the United Kingdom. | 一些判决，包括联合王国法院的判决，赞同地提到这种区分。 |
| See, for example, Regina v. Bow Street Metropolitan Stipendiary Magistrate, ex parte Pinochet Ugarte (No. 3) (footnote 50 above), at p. 198. | 例如见女王诉Bow Street都市领薪专职治安官：皮诺切特·乌加特缺席案(第3号)(上文脚注50)，第198页。 |
| See also Regina (Al Rawi and Others) v. Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (ibid.). | 另见女王(Al Rawi等人诉外交和联邦事务大臣案(同上)。 |
| Buell v. Mitchell, United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, 274 F.3d 337 (6th Cir. 2001), at pp. 372–373. | Buell诉Mitchell案，美国第六巡回上诉法院，274 F.3d 337 (6th Cir. 2001)，第372-373页。 |
| See Nevsun Resources Ltd. v. Araya (footnote 24 above), at para. 83. | 见耐森资源有限公司诉Araya案(上文脚注24)，第83段。 |
| Buell v. Mitchell (see footnote 77 above), at p. 373. | Buell诉Mitchell案(见上文脚注77)，第373页。 |
| Questions relating to the Obligation to Prosecute or Extradite (Belgium v. Senegal), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2012, p. 422, at p. 457, para. 99. | 与起诉或引渡义务有关的问题案(比利时诉塞内加尔)，判决，《2012年国际法院案例汇编》，第422页起，见第457页，第99段。 |
| Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons (see footnote 58 above), at p. 257, para. 79. | 以核武器相威胁或使用核武器的合法性(见上文脚注58)，第257页，第79段。 |
| See, for example, “Las Dos Erres” Massacre v. Guatemala, Judgment of 24 November 2009, Inter-American Court of Human Rights, Series C, No. 211, at p. 41, para. 140. | 例如见“Las Dos Erres”大屠杀诉危地马拉案，美洲人权法院2009年11月24日的判决，C辑，第211号，第41页，第140段。 |
| Prosecutor v. Delalić, et al., Case No. IT-96-21-T, Judgment of 16 November 1998, Trial Chamber, International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, at para. 454. | 检察官诉Delalić等人案，案件编号IT-96-21-T，前南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭审判分庭1998年11月16日的判决，第454段。 |
| Prosecutor v. Anto Furundžija (see footnote 18 above), at p. 569, para. 153. | 检察官诉Anto Furundžija案(见上文脚注18)，第569页，第153段。 |
| Prosecutor v. Jelisić (see footnote 36 above), at pp. 431–433, para. 60. | 检察官诉Jelisić案(见上文脚注36)，第431-433页，第60段。 |
| North Sea Continental Shelf (see footnote 67 above), at pp. 38–39, para. 63 (“for, speaking generally, it is a characteristic of purely conventional rules and obligations that, in regard to them, some faculty of making unilateral reservations may, within certain limits, be admitted; | 北海大陆架案(见上文脚注67)，第38-39页，第63段(“因为，一般而言，纯公约性规则和义务的一个特点是，允许对它们有限度地作出单方面保留的某些能力； |
| – whereas this cannot be so in the case of general or customary international law rules and obligations which, by their very nature, must have equal force for all members of the international community”). | ――而对于一般或习惯法规则和义务则不允许，习惯法规则和义务根据其性质，必须对国际社会所有成员具有同等效力”)。 |
| See also Bianchi (footnote 68 above), at p. 493 (“The possibility that jus cogens could be created by treaty stands in sharp contrast to the view that peremptory norms can emerge only from customary law”). | 另见Bianchi (上文脚注68)，at p. 493 (“可以通过条约创立强行法的观念与强制性规范只能源自习惯法的看法形成了鲜明的对比”)。 |
| G. I. Tunkin, “Is general international law customary law only? ”, European Journal of International Law, vol. 4 (1993), at p. 534, especially p. 541 (“I believe that international lawyers should accept that general international law now comprises both customary and conventional rules of international law”). | G. I. Tunkin, “Is general international law customary law only?”, European Journal of International Law, vol. 4 (1993), at p. 534,，特别是541页(“我认为国际律师应当接受，一般国际法现在包括国际法的习惯规则和公约性规则两者”)。 |
| See, specifically in the context of jus cogens, G. I. Tunkin, “Jus cogens in contemporary international law”, The University of Toledo Law Review, vol. 1971, Nos. 1–2 (Fall–Winter 1971), p. 107, at p. 116 (“principles of jus cogens consist of ‘rules which have been accepted either expressly by treaty or tacitly by custom … | 尤其是在强行法方面，见G. I. Tunkin, “Jus cogens in contemporary international law”, The University of Toledo Law Review, vol. 1971, Nos. 1-2 (Fall-Winter 1971), p. 107, at p. 116 (“强行法原则包括‘通过条约明示接受或通过习惯默示接受的规则…’。 |
| ’. Many norms of general international law are created jointly by treaty and custom”). | 一般国际法的许多规范都是通过条约和习惯共同创立的”)。 |
| See also Knuchel (footnote 59 above), at p. 50 (“Contemporary international law comprises, in the words of the [International Court of Justice], ‘instruments of a universal or quasi-universal character,’ and nothing precludes future conventions from creating universally binding norms which could be elevated to jus cogens”). | 另见Knuchel(上文脚注59)，at p. 50 (“用[国际法院]的话来说，当代国际法包括‘普遍或准普遍性质的文书’，没有任何规定不容日后的公约创立具有普遍约束力且可以提升为强行法的规范”)。 |
| See also R. Nieto-Navia, “International peremptory norms (jus cogens) and international humanitarian law”, in L. Chand Vorah, et al. (eds.), Man’s Inhumanity to Man: Essays on International Law in Honour of Antonio Cassese, The Hague, 2003, p. 595, at p. 613 (“One can state generally that norms of jus cogens can be drawn generally from the following identified sources of international law: (i) General treaties … and (ii) General principles of law recognized by civilized nations”). | 另见R. Nieto-Navia, “International peremptory norms (jus cogens) and international humanitarian law”, in L. Chand Vorah, et al. (eds.), Man’s Inhumanity to Man: Essays on International Law in Honour of Antonio Cassese, The Hague, 2003, p. 595, at p. 613 (“可以笼统地说，强行法规范一般源于下列已确定的国际法渊源：(一) 一般条约…及(二) 文明国家公认的一般法律原则”)。 |
| See, however, Weatherall (footnote 60 above), at pp. 125–126; | 不过，见Weatherall (上文脚注60)，第125-126页； |
| Hannikainen (footnote 28 above), at p. 92; | Hannikainen (上文脚注28)，第92页； |
| and E. J. Criddle and E. Fox-Decent, “A fiduciary theory of jus cogens”, Yale Journal of International Law, vol. 34 (2009), p. 331. | 以及E. J. Criddle and E. Fox-Decent, “A fiduciary theory of jus cogens”, Yale Journal of International Law, vol. 34 (2009), p. 331。 |
| See, further, Orakhelashvili (footnote 55 above), at p. 113 (“The propensity for academics to place emphasis on custom seems to follow from the general acknowledgment of the unsuitability of treaties to create peremptory norms”); | 又见Orakhelashvili (上文脚注55)，at p. 113 (“学术界倾向于把重点放在习惯上，似是由于普遍认为不宜通过条约创立强制性规范”)； |
| and U. Linderfalk, “The effect of jus cogens norms: whoever opened Pandora’s box, did you ever think about the consequences? ”, European Journal of International Law, vol. 18 (2007), p. 853, at p. 860. | 以及U. Linderfalk, “The effect of jus cogens norms: whoever opened Pandora’s box, did you ever think about the consequences?”, European Journal of International Law, vol. 18 (2007), p. 853, at p. 860。 |
| Paragraph (1) of the commentary to article 50 of the draft articles on the law of treaties, Yearbook … 1966, vol. II, document A/6309/Rev.1, Part II, p. 247. | 条约法条款草案第50条评注第(1)段，《1996年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/6309/Rev.1号文件，第二部分，第247页。 |
| North Sea Continental Shelf (see footnote 67 above). | 北海大陆架案(见上文脚注67)。 |
| See also conclusion 11 of the conclusions on identification of customary international law, Official Records of the General Assembly, Seventy-third Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/73/10), pp. 143–146. | 另见关于习惯国际法的识别的结论之结论11,《大会正式记录，第七十三届会议，补编第10号》(A/73/10)，第143-146页。 |
| North Sea Continental Shelf (see footnote 67 above), at p. 38, para. 61. | 北海大陆架案(见上文脚注67)，第38页，第61段。 |
| Ibid., at pp. 38–41, paras. 61–69. | 同上，第38-41页，第61-69段。 |
| Ibid., at pp. 41–43, paras. 70–74. | 同上，第41-43页，第70-74段。 |
| See also Margellos and Others v. Federal Republic of Germany, Case No. 6/2002, Petition for Cassation, Judgment of 17 September 2002, Special Supreme Court of Greece, para. 14 (“the provisions contained in the … Hague Regulations attached to the Hague Convention IV of 1907 have become customary rules of international law (jus cogens)”). | 另见Margellos等人诉德意志联邦共和国案，案件编号6/2002号，上诉申请，希腊特别最高法院2002年9月17日的判决，第14段(“载于1907年《海牙第四公约》所附《海牙章程》的规定已成为国际法习惯规则(强行法)”。 ) |
| See, for example, Prosecutor v. Tolimir, Case No. IT-05-88/2-T, Judgment of 12 December 2012, Trial Chamber II, International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, at para. 733 (“These provisions of the [Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide] are widely accepted as customary international law rising to the level of jus cogens”); | 例如，见检察官诉Tolimir案，案件编号IT-05-88/2-T，前南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭第二审判分庭2012年12月12日的判决，第733段(“[《防止及惩治灭绝种族罪公约》]的这些条款被广泛接受为已达到强行法级别的习惯国际法”)； |
| and Questions Relating to the Obligation to Prosecute or Extradite (footnote 80 above). | 以及与起诉或引渡义务有关的问题案(上文脚注80)。 |
| See also the statement by Mr. Ago at the 828th meeting of the Commission in 1966, Yearbook … 1966, vol. I (Part One), p. 37, para. 15 (“Even if a rule of jus cogens originated in a treaty, it was not from the treaty as such that it derived its character but from the fact that, even though derived from the treaty … , it was already a rule of general international law”). | 另见Ago先生在1966年委员会第828次会议上的发言，《1966年…年鉴》，第一卷(第一部分)，第37页，第15段(“即使一项强行法规则来源于条约，它也不是从条约本身取得这种性质，之所以有这种性质，是因为尽管它衍生自条约…，却本已是一般国际法规则”)。 |
| While there is little practice in support of general principles of law as a basis for peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens), the following cases, among others, may be considered in this connection: Prosecutor v. Jelisić (see footnote 36 above), at pp. 431–433, para. 60, where the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, having accepted that the prohibition of genocide was a norm of jus cogens, stated that the principles underlying the prohibition were “principles … recognized by civilised nations”. | 虽然支持以一般法律原则作为一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)基础的实践极少，但除其他外，以下案件可视为与此问题相关：检察官诉Jelisić案(见上文脚注36)，第431-433页，第60段，在该案中，前南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭接受禁止灭绝种族是强行法规范，指出禁止灭绝种族的基本原则是“为文明国家所承认的原则”。 |
| The Inter-American Court of Human Rights determined the right to equality to be a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) flowing from its status as a general principle of law in its advisory opinion on the Juridical Condition and Rights of Undocumented Migrants (see footnote 37 above), at p. 99, para. 101: “Accordingly, this Court considers that the principle of equality before the law, equal protection before the law and non-discrimination belongs to jus cogens, because the whole legal structure of national and international public order rests on it and it is a fundamental principle that permeates all laws.” | 美洲人权法院在其关于无证移民的法律地位和权利的咨询意见(见上文脚注37)第99页第101段中，根据平等权具有的一般法律原则地位而认定其为一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)，“因此，本法院认为，法律面前平等、受到法律平等保护和不歧视的原则属于强行法，因为国家和国际公共秩序的整个法律结构都以此为基础，这是贯穿所有法律的一项基本原则”。 |
| See North Sea Continental Shelf (footnote 67 above), at pp. 38–39, para. 63, where the Court described general international law as rules that, “by their very nature, must have equal force for all members of the international community”. | 见北海大陆架案(上文脚注67)，第38-39页，第63段，法院在该案中将一般国际法描述为“就其本质而言，必须对国际社会的全体成员具有平等效力”的规则。 |
| Conclusions of the Study Group on the fragmentation of international law (see footnote 54 above), at paras. 20–21. | 国际法不成体系问题研究组的结论(见上文脚注54)，第20-21段。 |
| Ibid. | 同上。 |
| See, for example, Knuchel (footnote 59 above), at p. 52 (“general principles [of law] may be elevated to jus cogens if the international community of States as a whole accepts and recognizes them as such”); | 例如见Knuchel (上文脚注59)，at p. 52 (“一般[法律]原则可以提升为强行法，如果国家组成之国际社会整体承认和接受它们是强行法的话”)； |
| Shelton, “Sherlock Holmes and the mystery of jus cogens” (footnote 30 above), at pp. 30–34; | Shelton, “Sherlock Holmes and the mystery of jus cogens” (上文脚注30)，at pp. 30–34； |
| and A. A. Cançado Trindade, “Jus cogens …” (footnote 26 above), at p. 27. | 以及A. A. Cançado Trindade, “Jus cogens …” (上文脚注26)，at p. 27。 |
| See also Weatherall (footnote 60 above), at p. 133; | 另见Weatherall (上文脚注60)，at p. 133； |
| and T. Kleinlein, “Jus cogens as the ‘highest law’? Peremptory norms and legal hierarchies”, Netherlands Yearbook of International Law, vol. 46 (2016), p. 173, at p. 195 (“a peremptory norm must first become general international law i.e. customary international law or general principles of law pursuant to Article 38(1) of the [Statute of the International Court of Justice]”). | 以及T. Kleinlein, “Jus cogens as the ‘highest law’? Peremptory norms and legal hierarchies”, Netherlands Yearbook of International Law, vol. 46 (2016), p. 173, at p. 195 (“强制性规范必须首先成为一般国际法，即[《国际法院规约》]第三十八条第一款规定的习惯国际法或一般法律原则”)。 |
| See also Conklin (footnote 42 above), at p. 840; | 另见Conklin (上文脚注42), at p. 840； |
| O. M. Dajani, “Contractualism in the law of treaties”, Michigan Journal of International Law, vol. 34 (2012), p. 1, at p. 60; | O. M. Dajani, “Contractualism in the law of treaties”, Michigan Journal of International Law, vol. 34 (2012), p. 1, at p. 60； |
| Nieto-Navia, “International peremptory norms (jus cogens) and international humanitarian law” (footnote 87 above), at pp. 613 et seq. (“One can state generally that norms of jus cogens can be drawn generally from the following identified sources of international law: (i) General treaties … and (ii) General principles of law recognized by civilized nations”); | Nieto-Navia, “International peremptory norms (jus cogens) and international humanitarian law” (上文脚注87)，见第613页及以下各页(“可以笼统地说，强行法规范一般源于下列已确定的国际法渊源：(一) 一般条约…及(二) 文明国家承认的一般法律原则”)； |
| Orakhelashvili (footnote 55 above), at p. 126; | Orakhelashvili(上文脚注55)，at p. 216； |
| and Santalla Vargas (footnote 60 above), at p. 214 (“jus cogens derives from customary law and general principles of international law”). | 以及Santalla Vargas (上文脚注60)，at p. 214 (“强行法源于习惯法和国际法一般原则”)。 |
| Official Records of the United Nations Conference on the Law Treaties, First and Second Sessions, Vienna, 26 March–24 May 1968 and 9 April–22 May, Documents of the Conference (A/CONF.39/11/Add.2), document A/CONF.39/C.1/L.306 and Add.1–2, p. 174. | 《联合国条约法会议正式记录，第一届和第二届会议，1968年3月26日至5月24日和1969年4月9日至5月22日，维也纳，第三卷，会议文件》(A/CONF.39/11/Add.2)，A/CONF.39/C.1/L.306及Add.1和2号文件，第174页。 |
| Official Records of the United Nations Conference on the Law Treaties, First Session … (see footnote 53 above), Summary record of the eightieth meeting of the Committee of the Whole, p. 471 at para. 4. | 《联合国条约法会议正式记录，第一届会议…》(见上文脚注53)，全体委员会第八十次会议简要纪录，第471页，第4段。 |
| Gagnon-Bergeron (see footnote 27 above), at p. 52. | Gagnon-Bergeron (见上文脚注27)，at p. 52。 |
| See Committee of United States Citizens Living in Nicaragua (footnote 57 above), at p. 940 (“Finally, in order for such a customary norm of international law to become a peremptory norm, there must be a further recognition by ‘the international community … as a whole [that this is] a norm from which no derogation is permitted’”); | 见在尼加拉瓜居住的美国公民委员会案(上文脚注57)，第940页，(“最后，为了使这种国际法习惯规范成为强制性规范，必须得到‘…国际社会整体’进一步承认，[该规范]是不许克减的规范’”)； |
| and Michael Domingues v. United States (footnote 18 above), at para. 85 (“Moreover, the Commission is satisfied, based upon the information before it, that this rule has been recognized as being of a sufficiently indelible nature to now constitute a norm of jus cogens, a development anticipated by the Commission in its Roach and Pinkerton decision”). | 以及Michael Domingues诉美国案(上文脚注18)，第85段(“此外，委员会根据所收到的资料，确信本规则已被承认具有不可磨灭的性质，时至今日，足能构成强行法规范，这是委员会早在Roach和Pinkerton案的裁决中就已预料到的事态发展”)。 |
| See also Prosecutor v. Simić, Case No. IT-95-9/2-S, Sentencing Judgment of 17 October 2002, Trial Chamber, International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, at para. 34. | 另见检察官诉Simić案，案件编号IT-95-9/2-S, 前南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭审判分庭2002年10月17日的判决，第34段。 |
| See, for discussion, J. Vidmar, “Norm conflicts and hierarchy in international law: towards a vertical international legal system?”, in E. de Wet and J. Vidmar (eds.), Hierarchy in International Law: the Place of Human Rights, Oxford, 2011, p. 26. See also C. Costello and M. Foster, “Non-refoulement as custom and jus cogens? Putting the prohibition to the test”, Netherlands Yearbook of International Law, vol. 46 (2016), p. 273, at p. 281 (“to be jus cogens, a norm must meet the normal requirements for customary international law … and furthermore have that additional widespread endorsement as to its non-derogability”); | 讨论情况见J. Vidmar, “Norm conflicts and hierarchy in international law: towards a vertical international legal system?”, in E. de Wet and J. Vidmar (eds.), Hierarchy in International Law: the Place of Human Rights, Oxford, 2011, p. 26｡另见C. Costello and M. Foster, “Non-refoulement as custom and jus cogens? Putting the prohibition to the test”, Netherlands Yearbook of International Law, vol. 46 (2016), p. 273, at p. 281 (“要成为强行法，一项规范必须符合习惯国际法的正常要求…此外，其不可克减性还要得到更广泛的认可”)； |
| and A. Hameed, “Unravelling the mystery of jus cogens in international law”, British Yearbook of International Law, vol. 84 (2014), p. 52, at p. 62. | 以及A. Hameed, “Unravelling the mystery of jus cogens in international law”, British Yearbook of International Law, vol. 84 (2014), p. 52, at p. 62。 |
| See, further, G. A. Christenson, “Jus cogens: guarding interests fundamental to international society”, Virginia Journal of International Law, vol. 28 (1987–1988), p. 585, at p. 593 (“The evidence would also need to demonstrate requisite opinio juris that the obligation is peremptory, by showing acceptance of the norm’s overriding quality”). | 又见G. A. Christenson, “Jus cogens: guarding interests fundamental to international society”, Virginia Journal of International Law, vol. 28 (1987-1988)，p. 585, at p. 593 (“证据还要通过表明规范的头等重要性质已获接受，来证明义务是强制性的这一点已存在必要的法律确信”)。 |
| See article 50 of the draft articles on the law of treaties, Yearbook … 1966, vol. II, document A/6309/Rev.1, Part II, p. 247. | 见条约法条款草案第50条，《1966年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/6309/Rev.1号文件，第二部分，第247页。 |
| See the statement by Mr. de Luna at the 828th meeting of the Commission, Yearbook … 1966, vol. I (Part One), p. 39, para. 34 (“[jus cogens] was positive law created by States, not as individuals but as organs of the international community”). | 见de Luna先生在委员会第828次会议上的发言，《1966年…年鉴》，第一卷(第一部分)，第39页，第34段(“[强行法]是国家非作为个体而是作为国际社会机关所创立的实在法”)。 |
| See, for example, Canada (A/C.6/71/SR.27, para. 9), indicating that “it would be beneficial for the Commission … to enlarge the idea of the acceptance and recognition of peremptory norms to include other entities, such as international and non-governmental organizations”. | 例如，见加拿大(A/C.6/71/SR.27，第9段)，其中指出，“委员会…若将接受和承认强制性规范的观念扩大到国际组织和非政府组织等其他实体，将会很有用。 |
| See paragraph (3) of the commentary to article 53 of the draft articles on the law of treaties between States and international organizations or between international organizations, Yearbook … | ” 见国家和国际组织间或国际组织相互间的条约法条款草案第53条评注第(3)段。 |
| 1982, vol. II (Part Two), p. 56. | 《1982年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第56页。 |
| See also, in the context of the current topic, the statement by Canada (footnote 105 above). | 就本专题而言，另见加拿大的发言(上文脚注105)。 |
| Paragraph (3) of the commentary to article 53 of the draft articles on the law of treaties between States and international organizations or between international organizations. | 国家和国际组织间或国际组织相互间的条约法条款草案第53条评注第(3)段。 |
| See Prosecutor v. Katanga, Case No. ICC-01/04-01/07-34-05-tENg, Decision on the Application for the Interim Release of Detained Witnesses of 1 October 2013, Trial Chamber II, International Criminal Court, at para. 30 (“peremptoriness [of the principle of non-refoulement] finds increasing recognition among States”). | 见检察官诉Katanga案，案件编号ICC-01/04-01/07-34-05-tENg, 国际刑事法院第二审判分庭2013年10月1日就暂时释放在押证人的申请作出的决定，第30段(“[不推回原则的]强制性日益获得各国承认”)。 |
| Questions Relating to the Obligation to Prosecute or Extradite (see footnote 80 above), at p. 457, para. 99. | 与起诉或引渡义务有关的问题案(见上文脚注80)，第457页，第99段。 |
| The Court cites, amongst others, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the Geneva Conventions for the protection of war victims, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, General Assembly resolution 3452 (XXX) of 9 December 1975 and domestic legislation. | 除其他外，法院援引了《世界人权宣言》、关于保护战争受难者的日内瓦四公约、《公民及政治权利国际公约》、联大1975年12月9日第3452 (XXX)号决议和国内立法。 |
| See, for example, Buell v. Mitchell (footnote 77 above), at p. 373. | 例如见Buell诉Mitchell案(上文脚注77)，第373页。 |
| See also On Application of Universally Recognized Principles and Norms of International Law and of International Treaties of the Russian Federation by Courts of General Jurisdiction, Ruling No. 5 of 10 October 2003 as amended on 5 March 2013, Decision of the Plenary Session, Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, at para. 1 (“The universally recognized principles of international law should be understood as the basic imperative norms of international law, accepted and recognized by the international community of states as a whole, deviation from which is inadmissible”). | 另见“关于一般管辖权法院对普遍公认的国际法原则和规范及俄罗斯联邦国际条约的适用”，2003年10月10日第5号裁决(2013年3月5日修正)，俄罗斯联邦最高法院全体会议的决定，第1段(“普遍公认的国际法原则应理解为国家组成之国际社会整体接受和承认的国际法基本强制性准则，偏离这些准则是不允许的”)。 |
| Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Croatia v. Serbia) (see footnote 15 above), at p. 46, para. 87; | 《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)(见上文脚注15)，第46页，第87段； |
| and A. A. Cançado Trindade, “International law for humankind: towards a new jus gentium (I)”, Collected Courses of the Hague Academy of International Law, vol. 316 (2005), pp. 9–312, at p. 183 (“It is my view that there is, in the multicultural world of our times, an irreducible minimum, which, in so far as international law-making is concerned, rests on its ultimate material source: human conscience”). | 以及A. A. Cançado Trindade, “International law for humankind: towards a new jus gentium (I)”, Collected Courses of the Hague Academy of International Law, vol. 316 (2005), pp. 9–312, at p. 183 (“我认为，在我们这个时代的多元文化世界中，有一个不能再低的起码标准，就制订国际法而言，其所依据的最最重要的来源是：人类的良知”)。 |
| Conclusion 4 of the conclusions on identification of customary international law, Official Records of the General Assembly, Seventy-third Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/73/10), pp. 130–132. | 关于习惯国际法的识别的结论之结论4，《大会正式记录，第七十三届会议，补编第10号》(A/73/10)，第130-132页。 |
| Conclusion 5 of the conclusions on subsequent agreements and subsequent practice in relation to the interpretation of treaties, ibid., pp. 132–133. | 关于与条约解释相关的嗣后协定和嗣后实践的结论之结论5，同上，第132-133页。 |
| See Reservations to the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (footnote 14 above), p. 23: “The origins of the Convention show that it was the intention of the United Nations to condemn and punish genocide … . The Genocide Convention was therefore intended by the General Assembly and by the contracting parties to be definitely universal in scope”. | 见对《防止及惩治灭绝种族罪公约》的保留(上文脚注14)，第23页：“《公约》的起源表明，联合国欲谴责和惩治灭绝种族行为，…因此，大会和缔约国欲使《灭绝种族罪公约》在适用范围上具有绝对普遍性”。 |
| See also conclusion 12 of the conclusions on identification of customary international law, Official Records of the General Assembly, Seventy-third Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/73/10), pp. 147–149. | 另见关于习惯国际法的识别的结论之结论12, 《大会正式记录，第七十三届会议，补编第10号》(A/73/10)，第147-149页。 |
| Mr. Yasseen, Chair of the Drafting Committee, Official Records of the United Nations Conference on the Law Treaties, First Session … (see footnote 53 above), 80th meeting, at para. 12. | 起草委员会主席Yasseen先生，《联合国条约法会议正式记录，第一届会议…》(见上文脚注53)，第80次会议，第12段。 |
| This position has been affirmed by the Federal Tribunal of Switzerland. | 这一立场得到瑞士联邦法庭的确认。 |
| See A v. Federal Department of the Economy, Case No. 2A.783/2006 /svc, Judgment of 23 January 2008, Federal Tribunal of Switzerland, para. 8.2 (“Les mots « par la communauté internationale des Etats dans son ensemble » ne permettent pas d’exiger qu’une règle soit acceptée et reconnue comme impérative par l’unanimité des Etats. Il suffit d’une très large majorité” [“The words ‘by the international community of States as a whole’ do not mean that a norm must be accepted and recognized as peremptory by States unanimously. | 见A诉联邦经济部案，案件编号2A.783/2006 /svc，瑞士联邦法庭2008年1月23日的判决，第8.2段 (Les mots « par la communauté internationale des Etats dans son ensemble » ne permettent pas d’exiger qu’une règle soit acceptée et reconnue comme impérative par l’unanimité des Etats. Il suffit d’une très large majorité [“‘由国家组成之国际社会整体’并不意味着一项规范必须被各国一致接受和承认为具有强制性。 |
| A very large majority is sufficient”]). | 只要绝大多数国家接受和承认即可”])。 |
| See also E. de Wet, “Jus cogens and obligations erga omnes”, in D. Shelton (ed.) The Oxford Handbook of International Human Rights Law, Oxford, 2013, p. 541, at p. 543 (“This threshold for gaining peremptory status is high, for although it does not require consensus among all states … it does require the acceptance of a large majority of states”). | 另见E. de Wet, “Jus cogens and obligations erga omnes”, in D. Shelton (ed.) The Oxford Handbook of International Human Rights Law, Oxford, 2013, p. 541, at p. 543要大多数国家接受”)。 |
| See, further, Christófolo (footnote 68 above), at p. 125 (The formation of peremptory norms reflects “a common will represent[ing] the consent of an overwhelming majority of States. | 又见Christófolo (上文脚注68)，at p. 125 (强制性规范的形成反映“代表绝大多数国家表示同意的共同意愿。 |
| Neither one State nor a very small number of States can obstruct the formative process of peremptory norms”). | 任何一个国家和少数国家都不能阻挠强制性规范的形成过程”)。 |
| See Michael Domingues v. United States (footnote 18 above), at para. 85 (“The acceptance of this norm crosses political and ideological boundaries and efforts to detract from this standard have been vigorously condemned by members of the international community as impermissible under contemporary human rights standards”). | 见Michael Domingues诉美国案(上文脚注18)，第85段(“接受这一规范超越了政治和意识形态界限，国际社会成员强烈谴责偏离这一标准的做法，这是当代人权标准所不允许的”)。 |
| See Questions Relating to the Obligation to Prosecute or Extradite (footnote 80 above), at p. 457, para. 99. | 见与起诉或引渡义务有关的问题案(上文脚注80)，第457页，第99段。 |
| Paragraph 99 continued: “[t]hat prohibition is grounded in a widespread international practice and on the opinio juris of States. | 第99段接着指出：“禁止酷刑是以广泛的国际惯例和各国的法律确信为基础的。 |
| It appears in numerous international instruments of universal application (in particular the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948, the 1949 Geneva Conventions for the protection of war victims; the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights of 1966; General Assembly resolution 3452/30 of 9 December 1975 on the Protection of All Persons from Being Subjected to Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment), and it has been introduced into the domestic law of almost all States; | 它出现在许多普遍适用的国际文书中(特别是1948年《世界人权宣言》、1949年关于保护战争受难者的日内瓦四公约、1966年《公民及政治权利国际公约》、联大1975年12月9日关于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的第3452/30号决议)，并已被纳入几乎所有国家的国内法； |
| finally, acts of torture are regularly denounced within national and international fora.” | 最后，酷刑行为经常在国内和国际论坛受到谴责。 ” |
| Conclusion 10 of the conclusions on identification of customary international law, Official Records of the General Assembly, Seventy-third Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/73/10), pp. 140–142. | 关于习惯国际法的识别的结论之结论10，《大会正式记录，第七十三届会议，补编第10号》(A/73/10)，第140-142页。 |
| See, for example, on aggression: Ghana (Official Records of the United Nations Conference on the Law Treaties, First Session … (footnote 53 above), 53rd meeting, para. 15); | 例如见：关于侵略：加纳(《联合国条约法会议正式记录，第一届会议…》(上文脚注53)，第53次会议，第15段)； |
| the Netherlands (A/C.6/SR.781, para. 2); | 荷兰(A/C.6/SR.781，第2段)； |
| Uruguay (Official Records of the United Nations Conference on the Law Treaties, First Session … (footnote 53 above), 53rd meeting, para. 48); | 乌拉圭(《联合国条约法会议正式记录，第一届会议…》(上文脚注53)，第53次会议，第48段)； |
| Japan (S/PV.2350); | 日本(S/PV.2350)； |
| Belarus (A/C.6/73/SR.26, para. 90); | 白俄罗斯(A/C.6/73/SR.26，第90段)； |
| and Mozambique (A/C.6/73/SR.28, para. 3). | 及莫桑比克(A/C.6/73/SR.28，第3段)。 |
| In this respect, in the case concerning Questions Relating to the Obligation to Prosecute or Extradite (see footnote 80 above), the International Court of Justice referred to the fact that “acts of torture are regularly denounced within national and international fora” in asserting the peremptory character of the prohibition of torture (p. 457, para. 99). | 在这方面，在与起诉或引渡义务有关的问题案(见上文脚注80)中，国际法院在断言禁止酷刑具有强制性时，提到“国家和国际论坛经常谴责酷刑行为”的事实(第457页，第99段)。 |
| See, for example, Prosecutor v. Anto Furundžija (footnote 18 above), at p. 569, note 170. | 例如，见检察官诉Anto Furundžija案(上文脚注18)，第569页，注170。 |
| See also Al-Adsani v. the United Kingdom (footnote 18 above), at paras. 60–61, where the Court relied, inter alia, on Regina v. Bow Street Metropolitan Stipendiary Magistrate, ex parte Pinochet Ugarte (No. 3) (footnote 50 above) and “other cases before … national courts” in its assessment of the peremptory character of the prohibition of torture. | 另见Al-Adsani诉联合王国案(上文脚注18)，第60-61段，法院在评价禁止酷刑的强制性时，除其他外依据的是女王诉Bow Street都市领薪专职治安官：皮诺切特·乌加特缺席案(第3号)(上文脚注50)及“各国法院…审理的其他案件”。 |
| In coming to the conclusion that the prohibition of torture was of a peremptory character, the International Court of Justice in the case concerning Questions Relating to the Obligation to Prosecute or Extradite (see footnote 80 above), referred to the fact that the prohibition had “been introduced into the domestic law of almost all States” (p. 457, para. 99). | 在得出禁止酷刑具有强制性的结论时，国际法院在与起诉或引渡义务有关的问题案(见上文脚注80)中提到，这一禁令“已被纳入几乎所有国家的国内法”(第457页，第99段)。 |
| Similarly, in its decision on the prohibition of the execution of individuals below the age of 18, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights in Michael Domingues v. United States (see footnote 18 above), at para. 85, took account of the fact that States had introduced relevant amendments to their national legislation. | 同样，美洲人权委员会在Michael Domingues诉美国案(见上文脚注18)关于禁止处决未满18岁的人的裁决第85段中，考虑到各国已对国家立法提出了相关修正。 |
| See Dispute Concerning Coastal States Rights in the Black Sea, Sea of Azov, and Kerch Strait (Ukraine v. the Russian Federation), PCA Case No. 2017-06, Award of 21 February 2020 concerning the Preliminary Objections of the Russian Federation, Permanent Court of Arbitration, at paras. 173 et seq., speaking of the value of General Assembly resolutions. | 见关于黑海、亚速海和刻赤海峡沿海国权利的争端案(乌克兰诉俄罗斯联邦)，常设仲裁法院第2017-06号案件，2020年2月21日关于俄罗斯联邦初步反对意见的裁决，常设仲裁法院，第173段及以下各段，其中谈到联大决议的价值。 |
| In the case concerning Questions Relating to the Obligation to Prosecute or Extradite (see footnote 80 above), at p. 457, para. 99, the International Court of Justice referred to both treaties (“the 1949 Geneva Conventions for the protection of war victims; | 在与起诉或引渡义务有关的问题案(见上文脚注80)第457页第99段中，国际法院提到两项条约(“1949年《关于保护战争受害者的日内瓦公约》； |
| the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights of 1966”) and resolutions (“the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948; | 1966年《公民及政治权利国际公约》”)及不同决议(“1948年《世界人权宣言》； |
| … General Assembly resolution 3452/30 of 9 December 1975 on the Protection of All Persons from Being Subjected to Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman and Degrading Treatment or Punishment”), in expressing its recognition of the prohibition of torture as a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens). | …联大1975年12年月9日关于保护所有人不受酷刑和其他残忍、不人道或有辱人格的待遇或处罚的第3452/30号决议”)，表示它承认禁止酷刑是一项一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)。 |
| See also Prosecutor v. Mucić, Case No. IT-96-21-T, Judgment of 16 November 1998, International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, and Prosecutor v. Delalić, et al. (see footnote 83 above), at para. 454, relying on the 1950 Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (European Convention on Human Rights), the 1966 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the 1984 Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Punishment or Treatment, and the 1969 American Convention on Human Rights (“Pact of San José, Costa Rica”). | 另见检察官诉Mucić案，案件编号IT-96-21-T，前南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭1998年11月16日的判决，以及检察官诉Delalić等人案(见上文脚注83)，第454段，该案的依据包括1950年《欧洲保护人权与基本自由公约》(《欧洲人权公约》)、1966年《公民及政治权利国际公约》、1984年《禁止酷刑和其他残忍、不人道或有辱人格的待遇或处罚公约》，及1969年《美洲人权公约》(“哥斯达黎加圣何塞公约”)。 |
| See also Prosecutor v. Anto Furundžija (footnote 18 above), at p. 563, para. 144. | 另见检察官诉Anto FurundžIja案(上文脚注18)，第563页，第144段。 |
| In reaching its decision on the peremptory character of the prohibition of the execution of individuals under the age of 18, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights in Michael Domingues v. United States (see footnote 18 above), at para. 85, relied on the ratification by States of treaties such as the 1966 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the 1989 Convention on the Rights of the Child and the Pact of San José, Costa Rica, which it said were “treaties in which this proscription is recognized as non-derogable”. | 美洲人权委员会在Michael Domingues诉美国案(见上文脚注18)第85段中就禁止处决未满18岁的人的强制性作出裁决时，依据的是各国批准的条约，如1966年《公民及政治权利国际公约》、1989年《儿童权利公约》和《哥斯达黎加圣何塞公约》，该委员会指出，“这些条约承认这一禁止是不容克减的”。 |
| See also the separate opinion of Vice-President Ammoun in 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. 79, relying on General Assembly and Security Council resolutions for the conclusion that the right of self-determination is a peremptory norm. | 另见副院长安蒙关于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)对各国的法律后果的个别意见，咨询意见，《1971年国际法院案例汇编》，第16页起，见第79页，其中依据联大和安全理事会决议得出结论，认为自决权是一项强制性规范。 |
| See also the Written Observations Submitted by the Government of the Solomon Islands to the International Court of Justice on the request by the World Health Organization for an Advisory Opinion on the Legality of the Use of Nuclear Weapons in View of their Effects on Human Health and the Environment, at pp. 39–40, para. 3.28 (“It is quite normal in international law for the most common and the most fundamental rules to be reaffirmed and repeatedly incorporated into treaties”). | 另见所罗门群岛政府应世界卫生组织从使用核武器对人的健康和环境产生的影响出发，就其合法性问题征求咨询意见的请求向国际法院提交的书面意见，第39-40页，第3.28段(“国际法中最常见和最根本的规则被重申并一再纳入各项条约是相当正常的”)。 |
| See also paragraph (2) of the commentary to conclusion 13 of the conclusions on identification of customary international law, Official Records of the General Assembly, Seventy-third Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/73/10), p. 149 (“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). | 另见关于习惯国际法的识别的结论之结论13的评注第(2)段，《大会正式记录，第七十三届会议，补编第10号》(A/73/10)，第149页(“‘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”)。 |
| To this end, Cançado Trindade makes the point that the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights have made considerable contributions to the advancement of the law on peremptory norms (see Cançado Trindade, “International law for humankind …” (footnote 111 above), at p. 296. | 为此，Cançado Trindade指出，前南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭和美洲人权法院为推动强制性规范法作出了重大贡献(见Cançado Trindade, “International law for humankind …” (上文脚注111)，at p. 296。 |
| Prosecutor v. Anto Furundžija (see footnote 18 above), para. 144. | 检察官诉Anto FurundžIja案(见上文脚注18)，第144段。 |
| Soering v. the United Kingdom, Application No. 14038/88, Judgment of 7 July 1989, European Court of Human Rights; | Soering诉联合王国案，第14038/88号申诉，欧洲人权法院1989年7月7日的判决； |
| Cruz Varas and Others v. Sweden, Application No. 15576/89, Judgment of 20 March 1991, European Court of Human Rights, Series A: Judgments and Decisions, vol. 201; | Cruz Varas等人诉瑞典案，第15576/89号申诉，欧洲人权法院1991年3月20日的判决，《A辑：判决和决定》，第201卷； |
| and Chahal v. the United Kingdom, Application No. 22414/93, Judgment of 15 November 1996, Grand Chamber, European Court of Human Rights. | 及Chahal诉联合王国案，第22414/93号申诉，欧洲人权法院大审判庭1996年11月15日的判决。 |
| See, for example, Al-Adsani v. the United Kingdom (footnote 18 above), at para. 30; and García Lucero, et al. v. Chile (footnote 45 above), at paras. 123–124, especially note 139. | 例如，见Al-Adsani诉联合王国案(上文脚注18)，第30段，及García Lucero等人诉智利案(上文脚注45)，第123-124段，尤其见注139。 |
| See also, generally, Regina v. Bow Street Metropolitan Stipendiary Magistrate, ex parte Pinochet Ugarte (No. 3) (footnote 50 above), where several of the Lords referred to Prosecutor v. Anto Furundžija (footnote 18 above). | 另外，一般见女王诉Bow Street都市领薪专职治安官：皮诺切特·乌加特缺席案(第3号)(上文脚注50)，其中几位上院议员提到检察官诉FurundžIja案(上文脚注18)。 |
| Prosecutor v. Ayyash, et al., Case No. STL-11-01/I, Interlocutory Decision of 16 February 2011 on the Applicable Law: Terrorism, Conspiracy, Homicide, Perpetration, Cumulative Charging, Appeals Chamber, Special Tribunal for Lebanon, at para. 76. | 检察官诉Ayyash等人案，案件编号STL-11-01/I，黎巴嫩问题特别法庭上诉分庭2011年2月16日关于适用法律的中间裁决：恐怖主义、共谋、杀人、犯罪、加重指控，第76段。 |
| For this decision the Court relied on, inter alia, the judgment of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia in Prosecutor v. Duško Tadić (Case No. IT-94-1-AR-72), Decision of 2 October 1995 on the Defence Motion for Interlocutory Appeal on Jurisdiction, International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia); | 在作出这项裁决时，法院除其他外依据了前南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭对检察官诉Duško Tadić案的判决(案件编号IT-94-1-AR-72，前南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭1995年10月2日对辩方就管辖权问题提出的中间上诉动议作出的决定； |
| Prosecutor v. Delalić, et al. (see footnote 83 above); | 检察官诉Delalić等人案(见上文脚注83)； |
| and Prosecutor v. Akayesu, Case No. ICTR-96-4-T, Judgment of 2 September 1998, Trial Chamber I, International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda. | 及检察官诉Akayesu案，案件编号ICTR-96-4-T，卢旺达问题国际刑事法庭第一审判分庭1998年9月2日的判决。 |
| El Sayed, Case No. CH/PRES/2010/01, Order of 15 April 2010 assigning Matter to Pre-Trial Judge, President of the Special Tribunal of Lebanon, para. 29, referring in particular to the case of Goiburú, et al. v. Paraguay (see footnote 18 above). | El Sayed案，案件编号CH/PRES/2010/01, 2010年4月15日关于将事项分配给预审法官的命令，黎巴嫩问题特别法庭庭长，第29段，其中特别提到Goiburú等人诉巴拉圭案(见上文脚注18)。 |
| See El Sayed (footnote 129 above), paras. 21–28. | 见El Sayed案(上文脚注129)，第21至28段。 |
| Ibid., para. 29. | 同上，第29段。 |
| See Reservations to the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Genocide (footnote 14 above); | 见对《防止及惩治灭绝种族罪公约》的保留(上文脚注14)； |
| Legal Consequences for States of the Continued Presence of South Africa in Namibia (footnote 122 above), p. 16; | 南非继续留驻纳米比亚对各国的法律后果(上文脚注122)，第16页； |
| Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 2004, p. 136; | 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； |
| Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons (footnote 58 above); | 以核武器相威胁或使用核武器的合法性(上文脚注58)； |
| Barcelona Traction, Light and Power Company, Limited, Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1970, p. 3; | 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； |
| East Timor (Portugal v. Australia), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1995, p. 90; | 东帝汶案(葡萄牙诉澳大利亚)，判决，《1995年国际法院判例汇编》，第90页； |
| and Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua, Merits, Judgment (footnote 66 above), at para. 190. | 及尼加拉瓜境内和针对尼加拉瓜的军事和准军事活动案，实质问题，判决(上文脚注66)，第190段。 |
| See Questions relating to the Obligation to Prosecute or Extradite (footnote 80 above), at p. 457, para. 99. | 见与起诉或引渡义务有关的问题案(上文脚注80)，第457页，第99段。 |
| See paragraph (5) of the commentary to conclusion 14 of the conclusions on identification of customary international law, Official Records of the General Assembly, Seventy-third Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/73/10), p. 151. | 见关于习惯国际法的识别的结论之结论14的评注第(5)段，《大会正式记录，第七十三届会议，补编第10号》(A/73/10)，第151页。 |
| Human Rights Committee, general comment No. 18 (1989) on non-discrimination, Official Records of the General Assembly, Forty-fifth Session, Supplement No. 40, vol. I (A/45/40 (Vol. I)), annex VI, sect. A, para. 1. | 人权事务委员会，关于不歧视的第18号一般性意见(1989年)，(《大会正式记录，第四十五届会议，补编第40号》，第一卷(A/45/40 (Vol. I))，附件六，A节，第1段。 |
| RM v. Attorney-General, Civil Case No. 1351 2002 (O.S.), Judgment of 1 December 2006, High Court of Kenya at Nairobi, [2006] eKLR, at p. 18. | RM诉总检察长案，民事案件编号1351 2002(O.S.)，内罗毕肯尼亚高等法院2006年12月1日的判决，[2006] eKLR, 第18页。 |
| See Application of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (Qatar v. United Arab Emirates) (Preliminary Objections, Decision of 4 February 2021, International Court of Justice, General List No. 172), where the Court, while recognizing that the determinations of expert bodies such as the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination should be accorded great weight, noted that it was “‘in no way obliged, in the exercise of its judicial functions, to model its own interpretation of’” human rights treaties on the views of those expert bodies (para. 101). | 见《消除一切形式种族歧视国际公约》的适用案(卡塔尔诉阿拉伯联合酋长国)(初步反对意见，2021年2月4日的裁决，国际法院，总目录第172号)，其中法院虽然承认消除种族歧视委员会等专家机构的决定应受到高度重视，但指出，法院“在行使司法职能时绝无义务参照这些专家机构的观点来解释”人权条约(第101段)。 |
| See Prosecutor v. Katanga (footnote 108 above), at para. 30, referring to the 2007 Advisory Opinion of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) on the Extraterritorial Application of Non-Refoulement Obligations under the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees and its 1967 Protocol (available from the UNHCR website: www.unhcr.org/4d9486929.pdf). | 见检察官诉Katanga案(上文脚注108)，第30段，其中提及联合国难民事务高级专员公署(难民署)2007年关于1951年《关于难民地位的公约》及其1967年《议定书》规定的不驱回义务域外适用问题的咨询意见(可查阅难民署网站：www.unhcr.org/4d9486929.pdf)。 |
| The International Criminal Court also referred to several UNHCR Executive Committee Conclusions. | 国际刑事法院还提及难民署执行委员会的若干结论。 |
| See Prosecutor v. Anto Furundžija (footnote 18 above), at paras. 144 and 153. | 见检察官诉Anto Furundžija案(上文脚注18)，第144和153段。 |
| The Tribunal referred to the Inter-American Convention on Human Rights, General Comment on Article 7 and general comment No. 24 of the Human Rights Committee and a report by Special Rapporteur Kooijmans. | 法庭提到了《美洲人权公约》、人权事务委员会关于第7条的一般性意见和第24号一般性意见，以及特别报告员科艾曼斯的一份报告。 |
| Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua, Merits, Judgment (see footnote 66 above), at pp. 100–101, para. 190. | 尼加拉瓜境内和针对尼加拉瓜的军事和准军事活动案，实质问题，判决(见上文脚注66)，第100-101页，第190段。 |
| See also Re Víctor Raúl Pinto, Re, Pinto (Víctor Raúl) v. Relatives of Tomás Rojas, Case No. 3125-94, Decision on Annulment of 13 March 2007, Supreme Court of Chile, ILDC 1093 (CL 2007), at paras. 29 and 31. | 另见Re Víctor Raúl Pinto、Re、Pinto(Víctor Raúl)诉Tomás Rojas的亲属案，案件编号3125-94，智利最高法院2007年3月13日关于宣告判决无效的裁决，ILDC 1093 (CL 2007)，第29和31段。 |
| Paragraph (5) of the commentary to article 26 of the articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts (Yearbook … 2001, vol. II (Part Two) and corrigendum, p. 85). | 国家对国际不法行为的责任条款第26条评注第(5)段(《2001年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)和更正，第85页)。 |
| See den Heijer and van der Wilt (footnote 30 above), at p. 9, referring to the norms in the list as those “beyond contestation”. | 见den Heijer and van der Wilt (上文脚注30)，第9页，其中提到清单上的规范是“无可争议”的。 |
| See also Christófolo (footnote 68 above), at p. 151; | 另见Christófolo(上文脚注68)，第151页； |
| and Weatherall (footnote 60 above), at p. 202. | 及Weatherall(上文脚注60)，第202页。 |
| See also de Wet (footnote 115 above), at p. 543. | 另见de Wet (上文脚注115)，第543页。 |
| She relies, however, not on a Commission list, but rather on the list from paragraph 374 of the report of the Study Group of the Commission (finalized by Martti Koskenniemi) (see footnote 54 above, p. 77), with a list that is slightly modified from that of the Study Group. | 但她所依据的不是委员会的清单，而是委员会研究组的报告(马尔蒂·科斯肯涅米定稿)第374段提供的清单(见上文脚注54，第77页)，并对研究组报告中的清单略作改动。 |
| For example, in the list de Wet provides, “the right of self-defence” is included as a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens) in its own right, while the list of the Study Group contains the “prohibition of aggression” but not “self-defence” as an independent peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens). | 例如，在de Wet提供的清单中，“自卫权”本身被列为一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)，而研究组的清单所载的独立强行法规范是“禁止侵略”，而不是“自卫”。 |
| See, for example, Nguyen Thang Loi v. Dow Chemical Company, United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York, 373 F. Supp. 2d 7 (E.D.N.Y. 2005), at p. 135, relying on M. C. Bassiouni, “Crimes against humanity”, in R. Gutman and D. Rieff (eds.), Crimes of War: What the Public Should Know, Norton, 1999; | 例如，见Nguyen Thang Loi诉陶氏化学公司案，美国纽约东区联邦地区法院，373 F.Supp.2d 7 (E.D.N.Y. 2005), 第135页，依据的是M. C. Bassiouni, “Crimes against humanity”, in R. Gutman and D. Rieff (eds.), Crimes of War: What the Public Should Know, Norton, 1999； |
| Prosecutor v. Kallon and Kamara, Case Nos. SCSL-2004-15-AR72(E) and SCSL-2004-16-AR72(E), Decision of 13 March 2004 on Challenge to Jurisdiction: Lomé Accord Amnesty, Appeals Chamber, Special Court for Sierra Leone, at para. 71, relying on L. Moir, The Law of Internal Armed Conflict, Cambridge, 2002; | 检察官诉Kallon和Kamara案，案件编号SCSL-2004-15-AR72(E)和SCSL-2004-16-AR72(E)，2004年3月13日关于对管辖权提出异议的裁定：洛美协议大赦，塞拉利昂问题特别法庭，上诉分庭，第71段，依据的是L.Moir, The Law of Internal Armed Conflict, Cambridge, 2002； |
| and Bayan Muna v. Alberto Romulo (see footnote 20 above), at p. 55, citing M. C. Bassiouni, “International crimes: jus cogens and obligatio erga omnes”, Law and Contemporary Problems, vol. 59 (1996), p. 63. | 及Bayan Muna诉Alberto Romulo案(见上文脚注20)，第55页，其中引述了M.C.Bassiouni, “International crimes: jus cogens and obligatio erga omnes”, Law and Contemporary Problems, vol. 59 (1996), p. 63。 |
| See also Siderman de Blake v. Argentina (footnote 21 above), at p. 717, citing several authors, including K. Parker and L. B. Neylon, “Jus cogens: compelling the law of human rights”, Hastings International and Comparative Law Review, vol. 12, No. 2 (Winter 1989), pp. 411–463; | 另见Siderman de Blake诉阿根廷案(上文脚注21)，第717页，其中引述了几位作者的著述，包括K.Parker和L.B. Neylon, “Jus cogens: compelling the law of human rights”, Hastings International and Comparative Law Review, vol. 12, No. 2 (Winter 1989), pp. 411-463; |
| and K. C. Randall, “Universal jurisdiction under international law”, Texas Law Review, vol. 66 (1987–1988), pp. 785–841, in support of the proposition that the prohibition of torture is a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens). | 及K.C.Randall, “Universal jurisdiction under international law”, Texas Law Review, vol. 66 (1987-1988), pp. 785-841, 来支持禁止酷刑是一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的主张。 |
| See also paragraph (3) of the commentary to conclusion 14 of the conclusions on identification of customary international law, Official Records of the General Assembly, Seventy-third Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/73/10), p. 151 (“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’. | 另见关于习惯国际法的识别的结论之结论14的评注第(3)段，《大会正式记录，第七十三届会议，补编第10号》(A/73/10)，第151页(“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，论著可反映著述者本国的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”)。 |
| Danilenko, Law-Making in the International Community (see footnote 42 above), at p. 212 (“As originally conceived, within the codification process relating to the law of treaties, the concept of jus cogens applies only to treaty relationships … to invalidate bilateral and multilateral agreements contrary to fundamental community rules recognized as ‘higher law’”). | Danilenko, Law-Making in the International Community(见上文脚注42)，at p. 212 (“正如最初在条约法编纂进程中设想的那样，强行法的概念只适用于条约关系…使违反被公认为‘更高一级法律’的基本共同体规则的双边和多边协定失效”)。 |
| See also Kleinlein (footnote 98 above), at p. 181; | 另见Kleinlein (上文脚注98)，at p. 181； |
| K. Kawasaki, “A brief note on the legal effects of jus cogens in international law”, Hitotsubashi Journal of Law and Politics, vol. 34 (2006), p. 27; | K.Kawasaki, “A brief note on the legal effects of jus cogens in international law”, Hitotsubashi Journal of Law and Politics, vol. 34 (2006), p. 27; |
| and den Heijer and van der Wilt (footnote 30 above), at p. 7. | 及den Heijer and van der Wilt(上文脚注30)，at p. 7。 |
| See Costelloe (see footnote 11 above), at p. 55 (“the relevant [provisions of the 1969 Vienna Convention] are very narrow, and the question whether they still have much relevance … and are now virtually a dead letter, is justified”). | 见Costelloe(见上文脚注11)，at p. 55 (“[1969年《维也纳公约》的相关规定]范围很窄，它们是否还有太大的意义…目前基本上是一纸空文这个问题是有道理的”)。 |
| See Charlesworth and Chinkin (footnote 60 above), pp. 65–66 (“Despite fears that the inclusion of [article 53 of the Vienna Convention] would subvert the principle of pacta sunt servanda and act to destabilize the certainty provided by treaty commitments, jus cogens doctrine has been only rarely invoked in this context. | 见Charlesworth and Chinkin(上文脚注60)，pp. 65–66 (“尽管担心纳入[《维也纳公约》第五十三条]将破坏条约必须遵守的原则，并可能打破条约承诺提供的确定性，但在这方面极少援引强行法理论。 |
| It thus has had little practical impact upon the operation of treaties”); | 因此，它对条约的实施几乎没有实际影响”)； |
| and Kadelbach (footnote 59 above), p. 161 (“direct conflict in the sense that a treaty has an illicit subject-matter is a theoretical case”). | 及Kadebach(上文脚注59)，p. 161 (“从条约有非法主题事项的意义上说，直接抵触是一种理论上的情况”)。 |
| See also Cassese (footnote 55 above), pp. 159–160 (“Should we conclude that consequently what is normally asserted to be a major advance accomplished by the 1969 Vienna Convention … has in fact proved over the years to be an outright flop? | 另见Cassese(上文脚注55)，pp. 159–160 (“我们是否应得出结论认为，通常所称的1969年《维也纳公约》所取得的重大进展…经过这些年后实际上证明是彻底的失败？ |
| ”). | ”)。 |
| See, for examples, Shelton, “Sherlock Holmes and the mystery of jus cogens” (footnote 30 above), at p. 36; | 例如，见Shelton, “Sherlock Holmes and the mystery of jus cogens” (上文脚注30)，p. 36； |
| and Kadelbach (footnote 59 above), p. 152. | 及Kadelbach(上文脚注59)，p. 152。 |
| See, for discussion, Knuchel (footnote 59 above), at p. 141. | 讨论情况见Knuchel(上文脚注59)，at p. 141。 |
| See C. Maia, “Jus cogens and (in)application of the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties in the jurisprudence of the International Court of Justice”, in Tladi (ed.), Peremptory Norms of General International Law (Jus Cogens)… (footnote 26 above), pp. 342–365, at p. 355. | 见C. Maia, “Jus cogens and (in)application of the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties in the jurisprudence of the International Court of Justice”, in Tladi (ed.), Peremptory Norms of General International Law (Jus Cogens)… (上文脚注26)，pp. 342–365, at p. 355。 |
| For general statements to this effect, see the statement by the Netherlands during the eighteenth session of the Sixth Committee (A/C.6/SR.781, para. 2) (on the question of jus cogens, the “Agreement concerning the Sudeten German Territory, signed at Munich on 29 September 1938, was one of the few examples of treaties which had come to be regarded as contrary to international public order”). | 关于这方面的一般性声明，见荷兰在第六委员会第十八届会议期间的发言(A/C.6/SR.781，第2段) (关于强行法问题，“1938年9月29日在慕尼黑签署的《关于苏台德德国领土的协定》是少数被认为违反国际公共秩序的条约之一”)。 |
| Cyprus, at the same session and in order to show the practice in support of nullity as a consequence of conflict with peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens), listed a number of treaties as providing for nullity on account of conflict with a peremptory norm, namely the prohibition on the use of force (A/C.6/SR.783, para. 18) (“The Covenant of the League of Nations, the General Treaty for the Renunciation of War as an Instrument of National Policy (known as the Briand Kellogg Pact); the Charter of the Nürnberg Tribunal; the Charter of the International Military Tribunal for the trial of the major war criminals in the Far East and, most recently, Article 2, paragraph 4, of the Charter of the United Nations made it lex lata in modern international law that a treaty procured by the illegal threat or use of force was void ab initio”). | 在同届会议上，为了表明支持因与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)相抵触而导致无效的做法，塞浦路斯列出了一些条约，这些条约对因与一项强制性规范即禁止使用武力相抵触而无效的问题作了规定(A/C.6/SR.783，第18段)(“《国际联盟盟约》、《关于废弃战争作为国家政策工具的一般条约》(称为《白里安－凯洛格公约》)、《纽伦堡法庭宪章》、《审判远东重要战犯的国际军事法庭宪章》以及最近的《联合国宪章》第二条第四项使通过非法使用武力达成的条约自始无效成为现代国际法中的现行法”)。 |
| See also the statement by the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic during the eighteenth session of the Sixth Committee (A/C.6/SR.784, para. 8). | 另见乌克兰苏维埃社会主义共和国在第六委员会第十八届会议期间的发言(A/C.6/SR.784，第8段)。 |
| For more specific statements, see East Timor (Portugal v. Australia), Counter-Memorial of the Government of Australia of 1 June 1992, para. 223 (available from: www.icj-cij.org), declaring that the “Timor Gap Treaty” (the Treaty on the zone of cooperation in an area between the Indonesian province of East Timor and Northern Australia, signed over the zone of cooperation, above the Timor Sea, on 11 December 1989, United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1654, No. 28462, p. 105), if in conflict with the right of self-determination, would be invalid on account of being in breach of a norm of jus cogens; | 更具体的陈述，见东帝汶案(葡萄牙诉澳大利亚)，澳大利亚政府1992年6月1日的辩诉状，第223段(可查阅：www.icj-cij.org)，其中宣布《帝汶沟条约》(1989年12月11日就帝汶海上合作区签署的关于在印度尼西亚东帝汶省与澳大利亚北部之间地区建立合作区的条约，联合国《条约汇编》，第1654卷，第28462号，第105页)如果与自决权相抵触，则因违反强行法规范而无效； |
| and the Memorandum from Roberts B. Owen, Legal Adviser of the State Department to Warren Christopher, Acting Secretary of State 29 December 1979, in U.S. Digest, chapter 2, section 1, para. 4, reproduced in M. L. Nash, “Contemporary practice of the United States relating to international law”, American Journal of International Law, vol. 74, No. 2 (April 1980), p. 418, at p. 419 (“Nor is it clear that the treaty between the USSR and Afghanistan … is valid. | 以及国务院法律顾问Roberts B. Owen 1979年12月29日致代理国务卿Warren Christopher的备忘录，载于U.S. Digest, 第2章第1节，第4段，转载于M.L.Nash, “Contemporary practice of the United States relating to international law”, 《美国国际法学报》，第74卷，第2号(1980年4月)，第418页，第419页(“也不清楚苏联和阿富汗之间的条约…是否有效。 |
| If it actually does lend itself to support of Soviet intervention of the type in question in Afghanistan, it would be void under contemporary principles of international law, since it would conflict with what the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties describes as a ‘peremptory norm of general international law’ … , namely that contained in Article 2, paragraph 4 of the Charter” of the United Nations). | 如果该条约真的支持苏联对阿富汗的这类干预，根据当代国际法原则，条约无效，因为它与《维也纳条约法公约》所称的‘一般国际法强制性规范’…，即《联合国宪章》第二条第四项所载规范相抵触”)。 |
| General Assembly resolutions 33/28A of 7 December 1978, 34/65 B of 29 November 1979, 36/51 of 24 November 1981 and 39/42 of 5 December 1984. | 联大1978年12月7日第33/28A号决议、1979年11月29日第34/65 B号决议、1981年11月24日第36/51号决议及1984年12月5日第39/42号决议。 |
| Prosecutor v. Taylor, Case No. SCSL-2003-01-I, Decision of 31 May 2004 on Immunity from Jurisdiction, Appeals Chamber, Special Court for Sierra Leone, para. 53. | 检察官诉Taylor案，案件编号SCSL-2003-01-I，塞拉利昂问题特别法庭上诉分庭2004年5月31日关于管辖豁免问题的裁决，第53段。 |
| See also Prosecutor v. Kallon, Case No. SCSL-2004-15-AR72(E), Decision of 13 March 2004 on Constitutionality and Lack of Jurisdiction, Appeals Chamber, Special Court for Sierra Leone. | 另见检察官诉Kallon案，案件编号SCSL-2004-15-AR72(E)，塞拉利昂问题特别法庭上诉分庭2004年3月13日关于合宪性和缺乏管辖权的裁决。 |
| Prosecutor v. Taylor (see footnote 148 above), para. 53. | 检察官诉Taylor案(见上文脚注148)，第53段。 |
| Aloeboetoe and Others v. Suriname, Judgment of 10 September 1993 on Reparation and Costs, Inter-American Court of Human Rights, Series C, No. 15. | Aloeboetoe等人诉苏里南案，美洲人权法院1993年9月10日关于赔偿和费用的判决，C辑，第15号。 |
| Ibid., at para. 57. | 同上，第57段。 |
| Ibid. | 同上。 |
| See paragraph (6) of the commentary to article 50 of the draft articles on the law of treaties, Yearbook … 1966, vol. II, document A/6309/Rev.1, Part II, p. 248 (draft article 50 “has to be read in conjunction with article 61 (Emergence of a new rule of jus cogens), and in the view of the Commission, there is no question of the present article having retroactive effects. | 见条约法条款草案第50条的评注第(6)段，《1966年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/6309/Rev.1号文件，第二部分，第248页(第50条草案“应与第六十一条(新创之一般国际法强制规律)合并阅读，照委员会看来，绝不发生追溯力问题。 |
| It concerns cases where a treaty is void at the time of its conclusion by reason of the fact that its provisions are in conflict with an already existing rule of jus cogens. | 本条所论的情形是条约在缔结时即因其规定与已有的属于基本法则的规则相抵触而归于无效。 |
| The treaty is wholly void because its actual conclusion conflicts with a peremptory norm of general international law … . Article 61, on the other hand, concerns cases where a treaty, valid when concluded, becomes void and terminates by reason of the subsequent development establishment of a new rule of jus cogens with which its provisions are in conflict. | 此种条约全然无效因其实际缔结与一般国际法的强制规律相抵触…在另一方面，第六十一条所论情形是条约在缔结时有效，后因创立新的绝对法则的规则，条约规定与此项规则想抵触即归无效而终止。 |
| The words ‘becomes void and terminates’ make it quite clear, the Commission considered that the emergence of a new rule of jus cogens is not to have retroactive effects on the validity of a treaty. | 委员会认为‘即归无效而终止’一语意义非常明显，新的基本法则对于条约效力并无追溯效果。 |
| The invalidity is to attach only from the time of the establishment of the new rule of jus cogens”). | 条约仅于新的绝对法则创立时方始无效”)。 |
| See paragraph (5) of the commentary to article 41 of the draft articles on the law of treaties, ibid., p. 238. | 见条约法条款草案第41条草案评注第(5)段，同上，第238页。 |
| Guideline 4.4.3. | 准则4.4.3。 |
| The guidelines constituting the Guide to Practice on Reservations to Treaties adopted by the Commission and the commentaries thereto are reproduced in Yearbook … 2011, vol. II (Part Three) and Corr.1–2, pp. 23 et seq. | 委员会通过的构成《对条约的保留实践指南》的准则案文及其评注转载于《2011年…年鉴》，第二卷(第三部分)和Corr.1-2, 第23页及以下各页。 |
| See also General Assembly resolution 68/111 of 16 December 2013, annex. | 另见联大2013年12月16日第68/111号决议，附件。 |
| Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua, Merits, Judgment (see footnote 66 above), at pp. 93–94, para. 175 (addressing this issue in the context of a reservation to a declaration recognizing as compulsory the jurisdiction of the Court under Article 36, paragraph 2, of the Statute of the International Court of Justice). | 尼加拉瓜境内和针对尼加拉瓜的军事和准军事活动案，实质问题，判决(见上文脚注66)，第93-94页，第175段(在对一项根据《国际法院规约》第三十六条第二款承认法院管辖权强制性的声明提出保留的背景下处理此问题)。 |
| See 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. 424, para. 73 (“The fact that the above-mentioned principles, recognized as such, have been codified or embodied in multilateral conventions does not mean that they cease to exist and to apply as principles of customary law”). | 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)，管辖权和可受理性，判决，《1984年国际法院案例汇编》，第392页起，见第424页，第73段(“得到公认的上述原则已编纂或体现在多边公约之中，这一事实并不意味着这些原则已不再作为习惯法原则存在或适用”)。 |
| See also Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua, Merits, Judgment (see footnote 66 above), at pp. 93–94, para. 174. | 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，实质问题，判决(见上文脚注66)，第93-94页，第174段。 |
| This view is also implicit in North Sea Continental Shelf (footnote 67 above), at pp. 41 et seq., paras. 71 et seq. | 北海大陆架案也隐含了这一观点(上文脚注67)，第41页及以下各页，第71段及以下各段。 |
| Guide to Practice on Reservations to Treaties (see footnote 155 above), para. (5) of the commentary to guideline 4.4.3. | 《对条约的保留实践指南》(见上文脚注155)，准则4.4.3评注第(5)段。 |
| See, for example, paragraph (5) of the commentary to article 26 of the articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts, Yearbook … 2001, vol. II (Part Two) and corrigendum, p. 85. | 例如，见国家对国际不法行为的责任条款第26条的评注第(5)段，《2001年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)和更正，第85页。 |
| Siderman de Blake v. Argentina (see footnote 21 above), p. 716 (citing the Restatement (Third) of the Foreign Relations Law of the United States (1987), § 102, comment k). | Siderman de Blake诉阿根廷案(见上文脚注21)，第716页(引述《美国外交关系法注释汇编》(第三版) (1987年)，§102评论k)。 |
| Simón, Julio Héctor y otros s/ privación ilegítima de la libertad (see footnote 51 above), para. 48 (el carácter de ius cogens de modo que se encuentra no sólo por encima de los tratados sino incluso por sobre todas las fuentes del derecho). | Simón, Julio Héctor y otros s/ privación ilegítima de la libertad案(见上文脚注51)，第48段(el carácter de ius cogens de modo que se encuentra no sólo por encima de los tratados sino incluso por sobre todas las fuentes del derecho(“强行法的性质使得它不仅高于条约，甚至高于所有法律渊源”))。 |
| Jurisdictional Immunities of the State (Germany v. Italy: Greece intervening), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2012, p. 99, at p. 140, para. 92. | 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140页，第92段。 |
| Ibid., paras. 92–93. | 同上，第92-93段。 |
| See, in this regard, U. Linderfalk, Understanding Jus Cogens in International Law and International Legal Discourse, Edward Elgar, 2020, at section 1.3.1 (examples include the priority-rule implicitly confirmed by the International Court of Justice in the case of Jurisdictional Immunities of the State (see footnote 162 above): in the event of a conflict between a jus cogens norm and a rule of customary international law, States must act upon the former). | 就此问题，见U. Linderfalk, Understanding Jus Cogens in International Law and International Legal Discourse, Edward Elgar, 2020, 第1.3.1节(实例包括国际法院在国家的管辖豁免案中(见上文脚注162)间接确认的优先规则：当一项强行法规范与一项习惯国际法规则相抵触时，国家必须依照前者行事)。 |
| Al-Adsani v. the United Kingdom (see footnote 18 above), para. 60. | Al-Adsani诉联合王国案(见上文脚注18)，第60段。 |
| See also Prosecutor v. Anto Furundžija (footnote 18 above), para. 153. | 另见检察官诉Anto Furundžija案(上文脚注18)，第153段。 |
| Joint dissenting opinion of Judges Rozakis and Caflisch (joined by Judges Wildhaber, Costa, Cabral Barreto and Vajić) in Al-Adsani v. the United Kingdom (see footnote 18 above), para. 1. | 罗萨基斯法官和卡弗利施法官(后维尔德哈伯法官、科斯塔法官、卡布拉尔·巴雷托法官和瓦吉奇法官加入)在Al-Adsani诉联合王国案中的联合反对意见(见上文脚注18)，第1段。 |
| See also Kleinlein (footnote 98 above), p. 187 (“it is a relatively straightforward case to perceive a structural hierarchy between jus cogens and regional or local customary rules”). | 另见Kleinlein(上文脚注98)，p. 187 (“认为强行法与区域或地方习惯规则之间存在结构等级是一个相对简单明了的论述”)。 |
| The Kenya Section of the International Commission of Jurists v. the Attorney-General and Others (see footnote 73 above). | 国际法学家委员会肯尼亚分会诉总检察长等人案(见上文脚注73)。 |
| See also C v. Director of Immigration, HCAL 132/2006, [2008] 2 HKC 165, [2008] HKCFI 109, ILDC 1119 (HK 2008), 18 February 2008, para. 75. | 另见C诉入境事务处处长案，HCAL 132/2006、[2008] 2 HKC 165、[2008] HKCFI 109、ILDC 1119 (HK 2008)，2008年2月18日，第75段。 |
| The modification of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) is considered in M. Payandeh, “Modification of peremptory norms of general international law”, in Tladi (ed.), Peremptory Norms of General International Law (Jus Cogens)… (footnote 26 above), pp. 92–131. | 关于对一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)加以变更的问题的讨论见M. Payandeh, “Modification of peremptory norms of general international law”, in Tladi (ed.), Peremptory Norms of General International Law (Jus Cogens)…(上文脚注26), pp. 92-131。 |
| See ibid., at p. 122. | 见同上，at p. 122。 |
| See also D. Tladi, “Grotian moments and peremptory norms of general international law: friendly facilitators or fatal foes? ”, Grotiana, vol. 42 (2021), pp. 335–353, at p. 346 (“an exceedingly onerous threshold”). | 另见D. Tladi, “Grotian moments and peremptory norms of general international law: friendly facilitators or fatal foes?”, Grotiana, vol. 42 (2021), pp. 335-353, at p. 346 (“极其繁重的门槛”)。 |
| R (Mohamed) v. Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, [2008] EWHC 2048 (Admin), [2009] 1 WLR 2579, para. 142 (ii). | R (Mohamed)诉外交和联邦事务大臣案，[2008] EWHC 2048(Admin)，[2009] 1 WLR 2579, 第142(ii)段。 |
| See also A. C. de Beer and D. Tladi, “The use of force against Syria in response to alleged use of chemical weapons by Syria: a return to humanitarian intervention? ”, Heidelberg Journal of International Law, vol. 79, No. 2 (2019), p. 217, in which the authors noted that if the prohibition on the use of force were regarded as a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens), a subsequent rule of customary international law could only emerge if it were “‘accepted and recognized’ as having a peremptory character, in a way that would modify the” pre-existing peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens). | 另见A. C. de Beer and D. Tladi, “The use of force against Syria in response to alleged use of chemical weapons by Syria: a return to humanitarian intervention?”, Heidelberg Journal of International Law, vol. 79, No. 2 (2019)，p. 217，作者在其中指出，如果禁止使用武力被视为一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)，只有当习惯国际法的嗣后规则被“接受和承认”为具有强制性，从而能够修改以前存在的一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)时，才能产生。 |
| Conclusion 15 of the conclusions on identification of customary international law, Official Records of the General Assembly, Seventy-third Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/73/10), pp. 152–154. | 关于习惯国际法的识别的结论之结论15，《大会正式记录，第七十三届会议，补编第10号》(A/73/10)，第152-154页。 |
| On the universal application of these norms, see, for example, the written statement of 19 June 1995 by the Government of Mexico on the request for an advisory opinion submitted to the International Court of Justice by the General Assembly at its forty-ninth session (resolution 49/75K), para. 7 (“The norms … are of a legally binding nature for all the States (jus cogens)”). | 关于这些规范的普遍适用，例如见1995年6月19日墨西哥政府关于联大第四十九届会议请求国际法院提出咨询意见的书面声明(第49/75K号决议)，第7段(“规范…对所有国家都具有法律约束力(强行法)”)。 |
| Youssef Nada v. State Secretariat for Economic Affairs and Federal Department of Economic Affairs (see footnote 40 above), para. 7 (emphasis added). | Youssef Nada诉国家经济事务秘书处和联邦经济事务部案(见上文脚注40)，第7段(强调是后加的)。 |
| Juridical Condition and Rights of Undocumented Migrants (see footnote 37 above), p. 113, paras. 4–5. | 无证移民的法律地位和权利(见上文脚注37)，第113页，第4-5段。 |
| See also the Islamic Republic of Iran, “the ‘persistent objector’ … had no place in the formation of jus cogens” (A/C.6/68/SR.26, para. 4). | 另见伊朗伊斯兰共和国，“‘一贯反对者’…在强行法形成过程中没有地位”(A/C.6/68/SR.26，第4段)。 |
| See also statements by States in the 2016 and 2018 meetings of the Sixth Committee (agenda item 78: report of the International Law Commission), particularly the following: Brazil “welcomed the clarification in draft conclusion 15 [of the conclusions on identification of customary international law] that the inclusion of the persistent objector rule was without prejudice to any issues of jus cogens” (A/C.6/71/SR.22, para. 18); | 另见各国2016年和2018年在第六委员会会议上的发言(议程项目78：国际法委员会的报告)，特别是以下发言：巴西“欢迎[关于习惯国际法的识别的结论]之结论草案15的澄清，即纳入一贯反对者规则不影响任何强行法问题”(A/C.6/71/SR.22，第18段)； |
| Chile stated that “[w]]here the rules of jus cogens were concerned, the persistent objector institution did not apply” (A/C.6/71/SR.21, para. 102); | 智利指出，“就强行法规则而言，一贯反对者制度不适用”(A/C.6/71/SR.21，第102段)； |
| Cyprus “welcomed paragraph 3 [of conclusion 15 of the conclusions on identification of customary international law] … [as] without prejudice to any question concerning peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens)” (A/C.6/73/SR.23, para. 43); | 塞浦路斯“欢迎关于习惯国际法识别的结论之结论15第3段…不妨碍关于一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的任何问题”(A/C.6/73/SR.23，第43段)； |
| El Salvador “agreed with the Special Rapporteur that the doctrine of the persistent objector was not applicable to jus cogens norms” (A/C.6/71/SR.25, para. 63); | 萨尔瓦多“同意特别报告员的意见，即一贯反对者的理论不适用于强行法规范”(A/C.6/71/SR.25，第63段)； |
| Finland, on behalf of the Nordic countries (Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden), “welcomed the inclusion in the draft conclusions [on identification of customary international law] of the persistent objector rule … . | 芬兰代表北欧国家(丹麦、芬兰、冰岛、挪威和瑞典)发言，“欢迎在结论草案中纳入[关于习惯国际法识别的]一贯反对者规则。 |
| Nonetheless, the category of rule to which the State objected should be taken into account and particular consideration must be given to universal respect for fundamental rules, especially those relating to the protection of individuals” (A/C.6/71/SR.20, para. 52); | 然而，应顾及国家反对的规则类别，必须特别考虑普遍尊重各个基本规则，特别是与保护个人有关的规则”(A/C.6/71/SR.20，第52段)； |
| Greece “reiterated [the] delegation’s doubts about the applicability of the persistent objector rule in relation not only to the rules of jus cogens but also to the broader category of the general principles of international law” (A/C.6/71/SR.22, para. 10); | 希腊“重申[该国代表团对一贯反对者规则既适用于强行法规则，也适用于更广泛的国际法一般原则表示怀疑”(A/C.6/71/SR.22, 第10段)； |
| Iceland, speaking on behalf of the Nordic countries (Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden), stated that “the notion of persistent objector was not compatible with the concept of jus cogens” (A/C.6/71/SR.24, para. 63); | 冰岛代表北欧国家(丹麦、芬兰、冰岛、挪威和瑞典)发言说，“一贯反对者的概念与强行法的概念不相符合”(A/C.6/71/SR.24，第63段)； |
| Mexico stated that “there could be no persistent objection to jus cogens rules” (A/C.6/71/SR.22, para. 25); | 墨西哥指出，“可能一贯反对强制法规则的情况并不存在”(A/C.6/71/SR.22, 第25段)； |
| Slovenia “agreed with the enunciation of jus cogens norms as being of a special and exceptional nature, reflecting the common and overarching values adhered to by the international community. | 斯洛文尼亚“同意宣布强行法规范具有特殊和例外的性质，这反映了国际社会所坚持的共同和最重要的价值。 |
| For that reason, [the] delegation reaffirmed its view that the persistent objector was incompatible with the nature of jus cogens” (A/C.6/71/SR.26, para. 114); | 为此原因，斯洛文尼亚代表团重申其意见，认为一贯反对者是与强行法的性质不符的”(A/C.6/71/SR.26，第114段)； |
| South Africa “agreed with [the Special Rapporteur’s] preliminary observation that there could be no objection to jus cogens norms” (ibid., para. 86); | 南非“同意[特别报告员的]初步意见，即不能对强行法规范提出异议”(同上，第86段)； |
| and Spain stated that “it was regrettable that it had not been specifically stated in draft conclusion 15 [of the conclusions on identification of customary international law] that there could be no persistent objection to peremptory norms of general international law” (A/C.6/73/SR.21, para. 91). | 西班牙指出，“令人遗憾的是，[关于习惯国际法的识别的结论]之结论草案15中没有具体说明不能一贯反对一般国际法的强制性规范”(A/C.6/73/SR.21，第91段)。 |
| Michael Domingues v. United States (see footnote 18 above), para. 49. | Michael Domingues诉美国案(见上文脚注18)，第49段。 |
| C. Mik, “Jus cogens in contemporary international law”, Polish Yearbook of International Law, vol. 33, No. 27 (2013), p. 50. | C. Mik, “Jus cogens in contemporary international law”,《波兰国际法年鉴》，第33卷，第27号(2013年)，第50页。 |
| See also Costelloe (footnote 11 above), pp. 21–23. | 另见Costelloe (上文脚注11)，第21-23页。 |
| For example, see the commentary to Part Four, as well as paragraph (4) of the commentary to conclusion 15, of the conclusions on identification of customary international law, Official Records of the General Assembly, Seventy-third Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/73/10), p. 153. | 例如，见关于习惯国际法的识别的结论第四部分的评注，以及结论15的评注第(4)段，《大会正式记录，第七十三届会议，补编第10号》(A/73/10)，第153页。 |
| The scope of this draft conclusion is thus broader than the scope of the 2006 guiding principles applicable to unilateral declarations of States capable of creating legal obligations, which “relate only to unilateral acts stricto sensu, i.e. those taking the form of formal declarations formulated by a State with the intent to produce obligations under international laws” (fifth preambular paragraph, Yearbook … 2006, vol. II (Part Two), pp. 161 et seq., paras. 176–177). | 因此本结论草案的范围比2006年《适用于能够产生法律义务的国家单方面声明的指导原则》的范围更为宽泛，那些原则“仅涉及严格意义上的单方面行为，即那些以国家出于创立国际法义务之意图而所作的正式声明为形式的单方面行为”(序言部分第5段，《2006年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第161页及以下各段，见第176-177页)。 |
| See the Guide to Practice on Reservations to Treaties (footnote 155 above), p. 224, paragraph (18) of the commentary to guideline 3.1.5.3, stating that it was true that “the rule prohibiting derogation from a rule of jus cogens applies not only to treaty relations, but also to all legal acts, including unilateral acts”. | 见《对条约的保留实践指南》(上文脚注155)，第224页，准则3.1.5.3评注第(18)段，其中指出，“禁止克减强行法规则的规则不仅适用于条约关系，而且适用于所有法律行为，包括单方面行为”。 |
| Guiding principle 8 of the guiding principles applicable to unilateral declarations of States capable of creating legal obligations (see footnote 178 above), p. 165. | 《适用于能够产生法律义务的国家单方面声明的指导原则》的指导原则8(见上文脚注178)，第165页。 |
| See the commentary to guiding principle 2 of the 2006 guiding principles applicable to unilateral declarations of States capable of creating legal obligations (ibid., p. 162). | 见2006年《适用于能够产生法律义务的国家单方面声明的指导原则》指导原则2的评注(同上，第162页)。 |
| Frontier Dispute (Burkina Faso/Republic of Mali), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1986, p. 554, at p. 573, para. 39. | 边界争端案(布基纳法索/马里)，判决，《1986年国际法院案例汇编》，第554页起，见第573页，第39段。 |
| See also Nuclear Tests (Australia v. France), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1974, p. 253, at p. 267, para. 43 (“When it is the intention of the State making the declaration that it should become bound according to its terms, that intention confers on the declaration the character of a legal undertaking, the State being thenceforth legally required to follow a course of conduct consistent with the declaration”). | 另见核试验案(澳大利亚诉法国)，判决，《1974年国际法院案例汇编》，第253页起，见第267页，第43段(“当发表声明的国家打算根据其条款接受约束时，这一意图赋予声明以法律承诺的性质，从那时起，法律要求该国遵循与声明相一致的行为方针”)。 |
| Frontier Dispute (see footnote 182 above), p. 574, para. 40. | 边界争端案(见上文脚注182)，第574页，第40段。 |
| Nuclear Tests (Australia v. France) (see footnote 182 above), p. 267, para. 44. | 核试验案(澳大利亚诉法国)(见上文脚注182)，第267页，第44段。 |
| See paragraph (2) of the commentary to conclusion 12 of the conclusions on identification of customary international law, Official Records of the General Assembly, Seventy-third Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/73/10), p. 147. | 见关于习惯国际法的识别的结论之结论12的评注第2段，《大会正式记录，第七十三届会议，补编第10号》(A/73/10)，第147页。 |
| By virtue of Article 25 of the Charter of the United Nations, which provides that the “Members of the United Nations agree to accept and carry out the decisions of the Security Council”, the decisions of the Security Council under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations are binding. | 《联合国宪章》第二十五条规定，“联合国会员国同意接受并履行安全理事会之决议”，根据该条，安全理事会根据《联合国宪章》第七章作出的决定具有约束力。 |
| For the statements by States, see for example, Switzerland, on behalf of Germany, Sweden and Switzerland: “some courts have also expressed their willingness to ensure that Security Council decisions comply with” peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens), “from which neither the Member States nor the United Nations may derogate” (S/PV.5446, p. 28); | 各国的发言，例如，见瑞士代表德国、瑞典和瑞士：“一些法院也表示愿意确保安全理事会的决定符合”一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)，“会员国和联合国均不得加以克减”(S/PV.5446，第28页)； |
| and Qatar: while, by virtue of Article 103 of the Charter of the United Nations, obligations flowing from Security Council resolutions supersede other obligations, this did not apply to peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) (S/PV.5779, p. 23). | 以及卡塔尔：虽然根据《联合国宪章》第一百零三条，安全理事会决议产生的义务优先于其他义务，但这不适用于一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)(S/PV.5779, 第23页)。 |
| See also Argentina and Nigeria (S/PV.5474, p. 20; | 另见阿根廷和尼日利亚(分别见S/PV.5474，第20页； |
| and S/PV.5474 (Resumption 1), p. 19, respectively); | 和S/PV.5474(续会1)，第19页)； |
| Finland, speaking on behalf of the Nordic countries (Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden), observing that there was a “widely held view that the powers of the Security Council, albeit exceptionally wide, were limited by the peremptory norms of international law” (A/C.6/60/SR.18, para. 18); | 芬兰代表北欧国家(丹麦、芬兰、冰岛、挪威和瑞典)发言说，“人们普遍认为，安全理事会的权力虽然非常广泛，但受到国际法强制性规范的限制”(A/C.6/60/SR.18，第18段)； |
| and the Islamic Republic of Iran (A/C.6/66/SR.7, para. 84). | 伊朗伊斯兰共和国(A/C.6/66/SR.7，第84段)。 |
| For other views by States, see the United States (A/C.6/60/SR.20, para. 36), which cautioned that “general pronouncements about the relationship” between peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) and obligations flowing from Article 103 of the Charter of the United Nations (of which the Security Council resolutions were a prominent example) “should be avoided”; | 其他国家的意见，见美国(A/C.6/60/SR.20, 第36段)，其中提醒说，“应当避免”对一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)和源自《联合国宪章》第一百零三条的义务(一个突出实例是安全理事会决议)之间的“关系做出笼统声明”； |
| the United Kingdom (A/C.6/73/SR.27, para. 73, citing paragraph 5 of the annex to the written statement), stating that there is no “State practice to support the contention that a State can refuse to comply with a binding [Security Council] resolution based on an assertion of a breach of a jus cogens norm”; | 大不列颠及北爱尔兰联合王国(A/C.6/73/SR.27，第73段，引述书面陈述附件第5段)，声明没有任何“国家实践支持一国可以违反强行法规范为由拒绝遵守一项有约束力的[安全理事会]决议的论点”； |
| and the Russian Federation (A/C.6/73/SR.26, para. 131), which emphasized that discussions on the issue of Security Council resolutions in connection with jus cogens norms “were not based on any practice”, and that the draft conclusion could be misinterpreted in a way “which would undermine the activities of the Security Council”. | 俄罗斯联邦 (A/C.6/73/SR.26，第131段)，其中强调，就安全理事会决议问题与强行法规范有关的讨论“不是以任何实践为基础的”，结论草案可能会被误解，“从而破坏安全理事会的活动”。 |
| For the views of Courts see, for example, R (On the Application of Al-Jedda) v. Secretary of State for Defence, Appeal Judgment of 12 December 2007, House of Lords [2008] 3 All ER 28 (Lord Bingham), para. 35; | 不同法院的意见，例如，见R (Al-Jedda的申诉)诉国防部长案，2007年12月12日上诉判决，上议院，[2008] 3 All ER 28 (宾汉勋爵)，第35段； |
| Youssef Nada v. State Secretariat for Economic Affairs and Federal Department of Economic Affairs (see footnote 40 above), para. 7 (“Yet jus cogens, the peremptory law binding on all subjects of international law, marks the limit of the obligation to apply resolutions of the Security Council. | Youssef Nada诉国家经济事务秘书处和联邦经济事务部案(见上文脚注40)，第7段。 (“然而，强行法，即对国际法所有主体具有约束力的强制性法律，限定了适用安全理事会决议的义务。 |
| For this reason, it must be determined whether, as the petitioner asserts, the resolutions of the Security Council containing the sanctions violate jus cogens”); | 为此，正如请愿人所声称的，必须确定安全理事会通过的制裁决议是否违反强行法”)； |
| Prosecutor v. Duško Tadić, Case No. IT-94-1, Decision of 15 July 1999, Appeals Chamber, International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, para. 296; | 检察官诉Duško Tadić案，案件编号IT-94-1, 1999年7月15日的判决，前南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭上诉分庭，第296段； |
| and Yassin Abdullah Kadi v. Council of the European Union and Commission of the European Communities (see footnote 46 above), para. 226 (on appeal, the European Court did not address the matter). | Yassin Abdullah Kadi诉欧洲联盟理事会和欧洲共同体委员会案(见上文脚注46)，第226段(上诉案，欧洲法院未处理此事)。 |
| Legal Consequences for States of the Continued Presence of South Africa in Namibia (see footnote 122 above), p. 53, para. 114 (“The language of a resolution of the Security Council should be carefully analysed before a conclusion can be made as to its binding effect. | 南非继续留驻纳米比亚对各国的法律后果(上文脚注122)，第53页，第114段。 (“在得到结论认为一项安全理事会决议具有约束力之前，应仔细分析该决议的措辞。 |
| In view of the nature of the powers under Article 25, the question whether they have been in fact exercised is to be determined in each case, having regard to the terms of the resolution to be interpreted, the discussions leading to it, the Charter provisions invoked and, in general, all circumstances that might assist in determining the legal consequences of the resolution of the Security Council”). | 鉴于第二十五条规定的权力的性质，实际上是否行使了这些权力的问题应根据每一种情况来加以确定，同时考虑到需要解释的决议的条款、通过该决议前的讨论、援引的《宪章》条款以及总的来说可能有助于确定安全理事会决议的法律后果的所有情况”)。 |
| Article 103 of the Charter of the United Nations provides that “[i]n the event of a conflict between the obligations of the Members of the United Nations under the present Charter and their obligations under any other international agreement, their obligations under the present Charter shall prevail”. | 《联合国宪章》第一百零三条规定，“联合国会员国在本宪章下之义务与其依任何其他国际协定所负之义务有冲突时，其在本宪章下之义务应居优先”。 |
| While this provision speaks only of international agreements, it has been interpreted as applying to customary international law and certainly to resolutions, decisions and acts of other international organizations. | 虽然这一条款只提到国际协定，但它被解释为适用于习惯国际法，当然也适用于其他国际组织的决议、决定和行为。 |
| See, for discussion, the report of the Study Group on the fragmentation of international law (finalized by Martti Koskenniemi) (footnote 54 above), paras. 344–345, especially at para. 345 (“Therefore it seems sound to join the prevailing opinion that Article 103 should be read extensively – so as to affirm that [C]harter obligations prevail also over United Nations Member States’ customary law obligations”). | 关于讨论，见国际法不成体系问题研究组的报告(马尔蒂·科斯肯涅米定稿)，(上文脚注54)，第344-345段，特别是第345段。 (“因此，似乎不妨赞同普遍的看法，即第一百零三条应当加以广泛解释，以便肯定宪章义务也优先于联合国会员国的习惯法义务”)。 |
| See, on the importance of the procedural rules for the application of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens), M. Wood, “The unilateral invocation of jus cogens norms”, in Tladi (ed.), Peremptory Norms of General International Law (Jus Cogens)… (footnote 26 above), pp. 366–385. | 关于程序规则对适用一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的重要性，见M. Wood, “The unilateral invocation of jus cogens norms”, in Tladi (ed.), Peremptory Norms of General International Law (Jus Cogens)…(上文脚注26)，pp. 366-385。 |
| See D. Costelloe, “Peremptory norms and resolutions of the United Nations Security Council”, ibid., at pp. 441–467. | 见D. Costelloe, “Peremptory norms and resolutions of the United Nations Security Council”，同上，pp. 441–467。 |
| Ibid., at p. 444 (“Interpretation of the Security Council resolution in its context and in light of other applicable rules of international law may already provide an answer”). | 同上，第444页(“根据上下文并参照其他适用的国际法规则来解释安全理事会决议或许已经提供了答案”)。 |
| The Democratic Republic of the Congo (formerly known as Zaire) (A/C.6/35/SR.32, para. 38). | 刚果民主共和国(旧称扎伊尔)(A/C.6/35/SR.32，第38段)。 |
| See also the statement of the Netherlands at the 25th meeting of the Sixth Committee during the forty-ninth session of the General Assembly, in which it stated that “an international crime would always involve a breach of a jus cogens or erga omnes obligation” (A/C.6/49/SR.25, para. 38). | 另参见荷兰在联大第四十九届会议期间在第六委员会第25次会议上的发言。 荷兰在发言中指出，“国际罪行总会涉及到违反强行法或普遍义务”(A/C.6/49/SR.25，第38段)。 |
| Czech Republic (A/C.6/49/SR.26, para. 19). | 捷克共和国(A/C.6/49/SR.26，第19段)。 |
| See also Burkina Faso (A/C.6/54/SR.26). | 另见布基纳法索(A/C.6/54/SR.26)。 |
| Nulyarimma and Others v. Thompson, Appeal Decision of 1 September 1999, [1999] FCA 1192, 165 ALR 621, 96 FCR 153, ILDC 2773 (AU 1999), para. 81. | Nulyarimma等人诉Thompson案，1999年9月1日的上诉裁定，[1999] FCA 1192, 165 ALR 621, 96 FCR 153, ILDC 2773 (AU 1999)，第81段。 |
| Kane v. Winn, United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts, 319 F. Supp. 2d 162, 199 (D. Mass. 2004). | Kane诉Winn案，美国马萨诸塞联邦地区法院，319 F. Supp.2d 162, 199 (D. Mass. 2004)。 |
| See also R and Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees v. Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs and Secretary of State for Home Affairs, Appeal Judgment of 12 October 2006 of the High Court, [2006] ALL ER (D) 138, para. 102, referring to “ius cogens erga omnes”. | 另见R和联合国难民事务高级专员公署诉外交和联邦事务大臣和内政大臣案，高等法院2006年10月12日的上诉判决，[2006] ALL ER (D) 138, 第102段，提及“普遍强行法”。 |
| Jorgić Case (see footnote 57 above), at para. 17. | Jorgić案(见上文脚注57)，第17段。 |
| See, for example, Legal Consequences of the Separation of the Chagos Archipelago from Mauritius in 1965, Advisory Opinion of 25 February 2019, I.C.J. Reports 2019, p. 95, at p. 139, para. 180 (viewing the right of self-determination as having an erga omnes character). | 例如，见1965年查戈斯群岛从毛里求斯分裂的法律后果，2019年2月25日的咨询意见，《2019年国际法院案例汇编》，第95页起，见第139页，第180段(将自决权视为具有普遍性)。 |
| See also East Timor (Portugal v. Australia) (footnote 132 above), p. 102, para. 29, in which the Court described the statement that self-determination had an erga omnes character as being “irreproachable”. | 另见东帝汶案(葡萄牙诉澳大利亚)(上文脚注132)，第102页，第29段，法院将自决具有普遍性一说描述为“无懈可击”。 |
| In Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Croatia v. Serbia) (see footnote 15 above), the Court affirmed “that the Genocide Convention contains obligations erga omnes” and “that the prohibition of Genocide has the character of a peremptory norm (jus cogens)” (ibid., p. 47, para. 87). | 在《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)(见上文脚注15)中，法院申明，“《灭绝种族罪公约》内含普遍义务”，且“灭绝种族禁令具有强制性规范(强行法)性质”(同上，第47页，第87段)。 |
| See also Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (The Gambia v. Myanmar) (footnote 17 above); | 另见《防止及惩治灭绝种族罪公约》的适用案(冈比亚诉缅甸)(上文脚注17)； |
| Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory (footnote 132 above), paras. 88, 149 and 155; | 见在被占领巴勒斯坦领土修建隔离墙的法律后果(上文脚注132)，第88、第149和第155段； |
| and Barcelona Traction (ibid.), p. 32, paras. 33–34, in which the Court determined “obligations [that] derive … from the outlawing of acts of aggression, and of genocide … [and] including protection from slavery and racial discrimination”. | 以及巴塞罗那电车公司案(同上)，第32页，第33-34段，法院在其中裁定，“义务源自…法律上对侵略行为和灭绝种族行为的禁止…包括对免遭奴役和种族歧视的保护”。 |
| See also conclusion (33) of the conclusions of the Study Group on the fragmentation of international law (footnote 54 above). | 另见国际法不成体系问题研究组的结论，结论(33)(上文脚注54)。 |
| The conclusions also appear in Yearbook … 2006, vol. II (Part Two), para. 251. | 上述结论另见《2006年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第251段。 |
| Although in the context of erga omnes inter partes, see also Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. Provisional Measures (The Gambia v. Myanmar) (footnote 17 above). | 但就“当事方之间的普遍义务”而言，另见《防止及惩治灭绝种族罪公约》的适用――临时措施(冈比亚诉缅甸)(上文脚注17)。 |
| See the articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts (Yearbook … 2001, vol. II (Part Two) and corrigendum, para. 76, and the commentaries thereto, para. 77). | 见国家对国际不法行为的责任条款(《2001年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)和更正，第76段，以及条款草案评注，第77段)。 |
| The articles also appear in General Assembly resolution 56/83 of 12 December 2001, annex, as modified by A/56/49(Vol. I)/Corr.4. | 上述条款另见经A/56/49(Vol. I)/Corr.4修改的联大2001年12月12日第56/83号决议附件。 |
| See, in particular, Legal Consequences of the Separation of the Chagos Archipelago from Mauritius in 1965 (footnote 198 above), at p. 139, para. 180; | 特别参见，1965年查戈斯群岛从毛里求斯分裂的法律后果(上文脚注198)，第139页，第180段； |
| and Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory (footnote 132 above), para. 159. | 和在被占领巴勒斯坦领土修建隔离墙的法律后果(见上文脚注132)，第159段。 |
| See Part Two, chapter III, of the articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts, especially paragraph (4) of the general commentary to that chapter, in which “the recognition of the concept of peremptory norms of international law” is said to be a development “closely related” to obligations erga omnes, and paragraph (7) of the general commentary, in which the Commission states that “there is at the very least substantial overlap between” obligations erga omnes and peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) (Yearbook … 2001, vol. II (Part Two) and corrigendum, pp. 111–112). | 见国家对国际不法行为的责任条款第二部分第三章，尤其是：该章总评注第(4)段，其中将“承认国际法强制性规范概念”称为一个与普遍义务“有密切联系”的情况； 总评注第(7)段，其中委员会指出普遍义务与一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)之间“至少存在着相当大的重叠”(《2001年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)和更正，第111-112段)。 |
| See, for example, R. J. Barber, “Cooperating through the General Assembly to end serious breaches of peremptory norms”, International and Comparative Law Quarterly, vol. 71 (2022), pp. 1–35, at p. 4; | 例如，见R. J. Barber, “Cooperating through the General Assembly to end serious breaches of peremptory norms”, International and Comparative Law Quarterly, vol. 71 (2022), pp. 1-35, at p. 4; |
| A. Pigrau, “Peremptory norms in the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice on the decolonisation of Mauritius and the Chagos Archipelago”, in T. Burri and J. Trinidad (eds.), The International Court of Justice and Decolonisation: New Directions from the Chagos Advisory Opinion, Cambridge University Press, 2021, at p. 119; | A. Pigrau, “Peremptory norms in the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice on the decolonisation of Mauritius and the Chagos Archipelago”, in T. Burri and J. Trinidad (eds.), The International Court of Justice and Decolonisation: New Directions from the Chagos Advisory Opinion, Cambridge University Press, 2021, at p. 119; |
| Ene (footnote 55 above), at p. 302; | Ene (上文脚注55), at p. 302; |
| M. Cherif Bassiouni, “International crimes: jus cogens and obligatio erga omnes” (footnote 141 above); | M. Cherif Bassiouni, “International crimes: jus cogens and obligatio erga omnes” (上文脚注141); |
| I. Scobbie, “The invocation of responsibility for the breach of ‘obligations under peremptory norms of general international law’”, European Journal of International Law, vol. 13, No. 5 (2002), p. 1210 (“Following Barcelona Traction, the Commission has taken the view that peremptory norms and obligations ‘owed to the international community as a whole’ are essentially two sides of the one coin”); | I. Scobbie, “The invocation of responsibility for the breach of ‘obligations under peremptory norms of general international law’”, European Journal of International Law, vol. 13, No. 5 (2002), p. 1210 (“在巴塞罗那电车公司案之后，委员会认为,‘对国际社会整体承担的’强制性规范和义务基本上是一枚硬币的两面”); |
| F. Forrest Martin, “Delineating a hierarchical outline of international law sources and norms”, Saskatchewan Law Review, vol. 65 (2002), p. 353; | F. Forrest Martin, “Delineating a hierarchical outline of international law sources and norms”, Saskatchewan Law Review, vol. 65 (2002), p. 353; |
| S. Villalpando, L’émergence de la communauté internationale dans la responsabilité des États, Paris, Presses Universitaires de France, 2005, p. 106; | S. Villalpando, L’émergence de la communauté internationale dans la responsabilité des États, Paris, Presses Universitaires de France, 2005, p. 106; |
| Tomuschat, “Reconceptualizing the debate …” (footnote 55 above), p. 430; | Tomuschat, “Reconceptualizing the debate …” (上文脚注55), p. 430; |
| A. Pellet, “Conclusions”, in Tomuschat and Thouvenin (ibid.); | A. Pellet, “Conclusions”, in Tomuschat and Thouvenin (同上); |
| and M. M. Bradley, “Jus cogens’ preferred sister: obligations erga omnes and the International Court of Justice–fifty years after Barcelona Traction case”, in Tladi (ed.), Peremptory Norms of General International Law (Jus Cogens)… (footnote 26 above), pp. 193–226. | and M. M. Bradley, “Jus cogens’ preferred sister: obligations erga omnes and the International Court of Justice—fifty years after Barcelona Traction case”, in Tladi (ed.), Peremptory Norms of General International Law (Jus Cogens)… (上文脚注26), pp. 193-226. |
| See, for example, Villalpando (footnote 201 above); | 例如，见Villalpando(上文脚注201); |
| Forrest Martin (footnote 201 above); | Forrest Martin(上文脚注201)； |
| and P. Lorenzo, “The protection of the environment as an imperative norm of international law (ius cogens)”, Revista de derecho de la Universidad de Montevideo, vol. 37 (2020), pp. 41–69, at p. 48. | and P. Lorenzo, “The protection of the environment as an imperative norm of international law (ius cogens)”, Revista de derecho de la Universidad de Montevideo, vol. 37 (2020), pp. 41-69, at p. 48. |
| Responsibilities and Obligations of States sponsoring persons and entities with respect to activities in the area, Advisory Opinion, ITLOS [International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea] Reports 2011, at p. 59, para. 180. | 担保个人和实体从事“区域”内活动的国家所负责任和义务，咨询意见，《2011年国际海洋法法庭报告》，第59页，第180段。 |
| Paragraph (7) of the general commentary to Part Two, chapter III, Yearbook … 2001, vol. II (Part Two) and corrigendum, pp. 111–112. | 第二部分第三章总评注第(7)段，《2001年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)和更正，第111-112页。 |
| Legal Consequences of the Separation of the Chagos Archipelago from Mauritius in 1965 (see footnote 198 above), at p. 139, para. 180 (“all States have a legal interest in protecting that right”); | 1965年查戈斯群岛从毛里求斯分裂的法律后果(见上文脚注198)，第139页，第180段(“所有国家都有保护该权利的合法利益”)； |
| and Barcelona Traction (see footnote 132 above), p. 32, para. 33 (“all States can be held to have a legal interest in their protection)”. | 巴塞罗那电车公司案(上文脚注132)，第32页，第33段(“可认为所有国家都有对其进行保护的合法利益”)。 |
| See also Prosecutor v. Blaškić, Case No. IT-95-14-AR108 bis, Judgment on the request of the Republic of Croatia for review of the Decision of Trial Chamber II of 18 July 1997, Judgment of 29 October 1997, Appeals Chamber, International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, ILR, vol. 110 (1998), p. 688, at para. 26 (“Article 29 [of the Statute of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia] imposes an ‘obligation erga omnes partes’ … . By the same token, Article 29 posits a community interest in its observance. | 另见检察官诉布拉斯基奇案，案件编号IT-95-14-AR108 bis，根据克罗地亚共和国的请求而复查第二审判分庭1997年7月18日裁决的判决，1997年10月29日的裁决，上诉分庭，前南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭，ILR, 第110卷(1998年)，第688页，第26段(“[前南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭规约]第29条规定了‘当事方的普遍义务’…同样，第29条假定遵守该条符合群体利益。 |
| In other words, every Member State of the United Nations has a legal interest in the fulfilment of the obligation laid down in Article 29”). | 换言之，联合国所有会员国对履行第29条规定的义务均具有合法利益”)。 |
| See Barcelona Traction (footnote 132 above), p. 32, para. 33. | 见巴塞罗那电车公司案(上文脚注132)，第32页，第33段。 |
| Questions Relating to the Obligation to Prosecute or Extradite (see footnote 80 above), at p. 449, para. 68 (“These obligations may be defined as ‘obligations erga omnes partes’ in the sense that each State party has an interest in compliance with them in any given case”). | 与起诉或引渡义务有关的问题案(见上文脚注80)，第449页，第68段(“这些义务可被界定为‘当事方的普遍义务’，因为每一缔约国在任何特定情况下都有遵守这些义务的利益”)。 |
| See Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory (footnote 132 above), at para. 155. | 见在被占领巴勒斯坦领土修建隔离墙的法律后果(见上文脚注132)，第155段。 |
| See Legal Consequences of the Separation of the Chagos Archipelago from Mauritius in 1965 (footnote 198 above), at p. 139, para. 180. | 见1965年查戈斯群岛从毛里求斯分裂的法律后果(上文脚注198)，第139页，第180段。 |
| See East Timor (Portugal v. Australia) (footnote 132 above), p. 102, para. 29. | 见东帝汶案(葡萄牙诉澳大利亚)(上文脚注132)，第102页，第29段。 |
| See Barcelona Traction (footnote 132 above), at p. 32, para. 35 (“It cannot be held, when one such obligation in particular is in question [diplomatic protection], in a specific case, that all States have a legal interest in its observance. ”). | 见巴塞罗那电车公司案(上文脚注132)，第32页，第35段(“在一个具体案件中，当一项具体义务[外交保护]受到质疑时，不能认为所有国家都对遵守这项义务有合法利益”。 |
| See also Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (The Gambia v. Myanmar), Preliminary Objections, International Court of Justice, Judgment of 22 July 2022, para. 107. | 另见《防止及惩治灭绝种族罪公约》的适用案(冈比亚诉缅甸)，初步反对意见，国际法院，2022年7月22日的判决，第107段。 |
| Questions Relating to the Obligation to Prosecute or Extradite (see footnote 80 above), at p. 449, para. 68 (“These obligations may be defined as ‘obligations erga omnes partes’ in the sense that each State party has an interest in compliance with them in any given case”). | 与起诉或引渡义务有关的问题案(见上文脚注80)，第449页，第68段(“这些义务可被界定为‘当事方的普遍义务’，因为每一缔约国在任何特定情况下都有遵守这些义务的利益”)。 |
| Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (The Gambia v. Myanmar) (see footnote 17 above), p. 17, para. 41 (“these provisions generated ‘obligations [which] may be defined as “obligations erga omnes partes” in the sense that each State party has an interest in compliance with them in any given case’”). | 《防止及惩治灭绝种族罪公约》的适用案(冈比亚诉缅甸)(见上文脚注17)，第17页，第41段(“这些规定产生了‘可界定为“当事方普遍义务”的义务，因为每一缔约国在任何特定情况下都有遵守这些义务的利益’”)。 |
| Ibid. (“In view of their shared values, all the States parties to the Genocide Convention have a common interest to ensure that acts of genocide are prevented and that, if they occur, their authors do not enjoy impunity”). | 同上。 (“鉴于《灭绝种族罪公约》所有缔约国的共同价值观，确保防止灭绝种族行为，并确保在发生灭绝种族行为时，犯罪人不会逍遥法外，符合它们的共同利益”)。 |
| Reservations to the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (footnote 14 above), at p. 23. | 对《防止及惩治灭绝种族罪公约》的保留(见上文脚注14)，第23页。 |
| Article 48, paragraph 1 (b), Yearbook … 2001, vol. II (Part Two) and corrigendum, p. 126. | 第48条第1款(b)项，《2001年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)和更正，第126页。 |
| Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (The Gambia v. Myanmar) (see footnote 17 above), p. 17, para. 41. | 《防止及惩治灭绝种族罪公约》的适用案(冈比亚诉缅甸)(上文脚注17)，第17页，第41段。 |
| In the Preliminary Objections phase, the Court used the term “special interest”: Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (The Gambia v. Myanmar), Preliminary Objections (see footnote 211 above), para. 108. | 在初步反对意见阶段，法院使用了“特殊利益”一词：《防止及惩治灭绝种族罪公约》的适用案(冈比亚诉缅甸)，初步反对意见(见上文脚注211)，第108段。 |
| See Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (The Gambia v. Myanmar) (see footnote 17 above), p. 17, para. 42; | 见《防止及惩治灭绝种族罪公约》的适用案(冈比亚诉缅甸)(见上文脚注17)，第17页，第42段； |
| Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (The Gambia v. Myanmar), Preliminary Objections (see footnote 211 above), para. 108. | 《防止及惩治灭绝种族罪公约》的适用案(冈比亚诉缅甸)，初步反对意见(见上文脚注211)，第108段。 |
| Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (The Gambia v. Myanmar), Preliminary Objections (see footnote 211 above), para. 114. | 《防止及惩治灭绝种族罪公约》的适用案(冈比亚诉缅甸)，初步反对意见 (见上文脚注211)，第114段。 |
| Responsibilities and Obligations of States Sponsoring Persons and Entities (see footnote 203 above), at p. 59, para. 180. | 担保个人和实体的国家所负责任和义务(见上文脚注203)，见第59页，第180段。 |
| See Yearbook … 2001, vol. II (Part Two) and corrigendum, p. 126, paragraph (1) of the commentary to article 48. | 见《2001年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)和更正，第126页，第48条评注第(1)段。 |
| Ibid., art. 48, para. 2 (a). | 同上，第48条，第2款(a)项。 |
| Ibid., art. 48, para. 2 (b). | 同上，第48条，第2款(b)项。 |
| Yearbook … 2011, vol. II (Part Two), pp. 89–91. | 《2011年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第89-91页。 |
| See, generally, Part One, chapter V, of the articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts, Yearbook … 2001, vol. II (Part Two) and corrigendum, pp. 71 et seq. | 一般见国家对国际不法行为的责任条款第一部分第五章，《2001年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)和更正，第71页及以下各页。 |
| Paragraph (1) of the general commentary to Part One, chapter V, states that the existence of these grounds “provides a shield against an otherwise well-founded claim for the breach of an international obligation” (ibid., p. 71). | 第一部分第五章总评注第(1)段指出，上述理由的存在“可提供一面盾牌，用以对抗否则将是理由充分的对违背某项国际义务的索偿要求”(同上，第71页)。 |
| Ibid., pp. 84–85. | 同上，第84-85页。 |
| See ibid., p. 85, paragraph (4) of the commentary to article 26. | 见同上，第85页，第26条评注第(4)段。 |
| See Bernhard von Pezold and others v. Republic of Zimbabwe, Case No. ARB/10/15, Award of 28 July 2015, ICSID, at para. 657. | 见Bernhard von Pezold及其他人诉津巴布韦共和国案，案件编号ARB/10/15，2015年7月28日的裁决，国际投资争端解决中心，第657段。 |
| Ibid. | 同上。 |
| CMS Gas Transmission Company v. the Argentine Republic, Case No. ARB/01/08, Award of 12 May 2005, ICSID, at para. 325. | CMS天然气输送公司诉阿根廷共和国案，案件编号ARB/01/08，2005年5月12日的裁决，国际投资争端解决中心，第325段。 |
| See Order of 26 October 2004, Federal Constitutional Court of Germany (footnote 25 above), para. 121. | 见德国联邦宪法法院2004年10月26日的命令(上文脚注25)，第121段。 |
| Yearbook … 2011, vol. II (Part Two), p. 75. See Yearbook … | 《2011年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第75页。 |
| 2001, vol. II (Part Two) and corrigendum, paragraph (7) of the general commentary to Part Two, chapter III, of the articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts, pp. 111–112. | 见《2001年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)和更正，国家对国际不法行为的责任条款第二部分第三章一般性评注第(7)段，第111-112页。 |
| See also C. Gutiérrez Espada, De la alargada sombra del ‘ius cogens’, Granada, Comares, 2021, p. 3. | 另见C. Gutiérrez Espada, De la alargada sombra del ‘ius cogens’, Granada, Comares, 2021, p. 3。 |
| See, for example, the Declaration on Principles of International Law Concerning Friendly Relations and Cooperation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, General Assembly resolution 2625 (XXV) of 24 October 1970, annex, para. 1 (“States have the duty to cooperate with one another, irrespective of the differences in their political, economic and social systems, in the various spheres of international relations, in order to maintain international peace and security and to promote international economic stability and progress, the general welfare of nations and international cooperation free from discrimination based on such differences”). | 例如，见《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》，联大1970年10月24日第2625 (XXV)号决议，附件，第1段(各国不问在政治、经济及社会制度上有何差异均有义务在国际关系之各方面彼此合作，以期维持国际和平与安全，并增进国际经济安定与进步、各国之一般福利、及不受此种差异所生歧视之国际合作)。 |
| See also the draft articles on the protection of persons in the event of disasters, Yearbook … 2016, vol. II (Part Two), paragraph (1) of the commentary to draft article 7, p. 37 (“The duty to cooperate is well established as a principle of international law and can be found in numerous international instruments”). | 另见发生灾害时的人员保护条款草案，《2016年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第7条草案评注第(1)段，第37页(“合作的义务是一项公认的国际法原则，在众多国际文书中均有表述”)。 |
| See paragraph (3) of the commentary to article 41 of the articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts, Yearbook … 2001, vol. II (Part Two) and corrigendum, p. 114. | 见国家对国际不法行为的责任条款第41条评注第(3)段，《2001年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)和更正，第114页。 |
| A, Amnesty International (intervening) and Commonwealth Lawyers Association (intervening) v. Secretary of State for the Home Department, Judgment of the House of Lords of 8 December 2005, [2006] 1 All ER 575, para. 34. | A、大赦国际(参与诉讼)和英联邦律师协会(参与诉讼)诉内政大臣，上议院2005年12月8日的判决，[2006] 1 All ER 575，第34段。 |
| See Order of 26 October 2004, Federal Constitutional Court of Germany (footnote 25 above), para. 98. | 见德国联邦宪法法院2004年10月26日的命令(上文脚注25)，第98段。 |
| Case of La Cantuta v. Peru, Merits, Reparations and Costs, Judgment of 29 November 2006, Inter-American Court of Human Rights, para. 160 (“As pointed out repeatedly, the acts involved in the instant case have violated peremptory norms of international law (jus cogens). | La Cantuta诉秘鲁案，实质问题、赔偿和费用，2006年11月29日的判决，美洲人权法院，第160段(“正如已反复指出的那样，本案所涉行为违反了国际法强制性规范(强行法)。 |
| … 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”). | …鉴于事件的性质和严重程度…消除有罪不罚现象的必要性已向国际社会表明，各国之间有责任进行合作。 ”) |
| Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory (see footnote 132 above), para. 155. | 在被占领巴勒斯坦领土修建隔离墙的法律后果(见上文脚注132)，第155段。 |
| Ibid., para. 159. | 同上，第159段。 |
| Legal Consequences of the Separation of the Chagos Archipelago from Mauritius in 1965 (see footnote 198 above), at pp. 139–140, para. 182. | 1965年查戈斯群岛从毛里求斯分裂的法律后果(见上文脚注198)，第139-140页，第182段。 |
| See Pigrau (see footnote 201 above), at p. 129. | 见Pigrau (上文脚注201)，at p. 129。 |
| A, Amnesty International (intervening) and Commonwealth Lawyers Association (intervening) v. Secretary of State for the Home Department (see footnote 236 above). | A、大赦国际(参与诉讼)和英联邦律师协会(参与诉讼)诉内政大臣(上文脚注236)。 |
| See, for example, Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory (footnote 132 above), para. 159. | 例如，见在被占领巴勒斯坦领土修建隔离墙的法律后果(上文脚注132)，第159段。 |
| See, for example, paragraph (3) of the commentary to article 41 of the articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts, Yearbook … 2001, vol. II (Part Two) and corrigendum, p. 114 (“What is called for in the face of serious breaches is a joint and coordinated effort by all States to counteract the effects of these breaches”). | 例如，见国家对国际不法行为的责任条款，第41条评注第(3)段，《2001年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)和更正，第114页(“在严重违反行为面前所需要的，是所有国家共同、协调地作出努力，抵消违反行为的影响”)。 |
| See, for example, article VIII of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Paris, 9 December 1948, ibid., vol. 78, No. 1021, p. 277) (“Any Contracting Party may call upon the competent organs of the United Nations to take such action under the Charter of the United Nations as they consider appropriate for the prevention and suppression of acts of genocide or any of the other acts enumerated in article III”), and article VIII of the International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid (New York, 30 November 1973, United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1015, No. 14861, p. 243) (“Any State Party to the present Convention may call upon any competent organ of the United Nations to take such action under the Charter of the United Nations as it considers appropriate for the prevention and suppression of the crime of apartheid”). | 例如，见《防止及惩治灭绝种族罪公约》第八条(1948年12月9日，巴黎，同上，第78卷，第1021号，第277页)(“任何缔约国得提请联合国的主管机关遵照联合国宪章，采取其认为适当的行动，以防止及惩治灭绝种族的行为或第三条所列任何其他行为”)和《禁止并惩治种族隔离罪行国际公约》第八条(1973年11月30日，纽约，联合国，《条约汇编》，第1015卷，第14861号，第243页)(“本公约任何缔约国得请联合国任何主管机关依照联合国宪章，采取其认为适当的行动，以预防并禁止种族隔离罪行”)。 |
| Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory (see footnote 132 above), para. 160. | 在被占领巴勒斯坦领土修建隔离墙的法律后果(见上文脚注132)，第160段。 |
| Legal Consequences of the Separation of the Chagos Archipelago from Mauritius in 1965 (see footnote 198 above), pp. 139–140, para. 182. | 1965年查戈斯群岛从毛里求斯分裂的法律后果(见上文脚注198)，第139-140页，第182段。 |
| See, for example, art. 4, subpara. (h), of the Constitutive Act of the African Union (Lomé, 11 July 2000, United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 2158, No. 37733, p. 3) (“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”). | 例如，见《非洲联盟组织法》第4条(h)项(2000年7月11日，洛美，联合国，《条约汇编》，第2158卷，第37733号，第3页) (“对于严重情况，即战争罪、灭绝种族和危害人类罪，联盟有权按照大会的决定在成员国境内实施干预”)。 |
| See also Treaty on the European Union (consolidated version), Official Journal, C 326, p. 13, 26 October 2012, arts. 21, para. 2, and 29. | 另见《欧洲联盟条约》(合订本)，《公报》，C 326，第13页，2012年10月26日，第21条第2款和第29条。 |
| See further Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (consolidated version), Official Journal, C 326, p. 47, 26 October 2012, art. 215. | 又见《欧洲联盟运作条约》(合订本)，《公报》，C 326，第47页，2012年10月26日，第215条。 |
| See further Regulation (EU) 2018/1727 of the European Parliament and the Council of 14 November 2018, replacing and repealing Council Decision 2002/187/JHA, Official Journal, L 295, p. 138, 21 November 2018, and Regulation (EU) 2022/838 of the European Parliament and the Council of 30 May 2022 amending Regulation (EU) 2018/1727, Official Journal, L 148, p. 1, 31 May 2022. | 还见欧洲议会和欧盟理事会2018年11月14日取代并废除理事会第2002/187/JHA号决定的(EU) 2018/1727号条例，《公报》，L 295，第138页，2018年11月21日，以及欧洲议会和欧盟理事会2022年5月30日修正(EU) 2018/1727号条例的(EU) 2022/838号条例，《公报》，L 148，第1页，2022年5月31日。 |
| See General Assembly resolution 2022 (XX) of 5 November 1965, para. 4 (“Condemns the policies of racial discrimination and segregation practised in Southern Rhodesia, which constitute a crime against humanity”); | 见联大1965年11月5日第2022(XX)号决议，第4段(“谴责南罗得西亚境内所施行之种族歧视与种族隔离政策此皆为危害人类之罪行”)； |
| General Assembly resolution 2184 (XXI) of 12 December 1966, para. 3 (“Condemns, as a crime against humanity, the policy of the Government of Portugal, which violates the economic and political rights of the indigenous population by the settlement of foreign immigrants in the Territories and by the exporting of African workers to South Africa”); | 大会1966年12月12日第2184(XXI)号决议，第3段(“谴责葡萄牙政府将外来移民安置各领土并将非洲工人输往南非因而侵害土著居民经济及政治权利之为危害人类之罪行”)； |
| General Assembly resolution ES-8/2 of 14 September 1981, para. 4 (“Strongly condemns South Africa for its continued illegal occupation of Namibia”); | 联大1981年9月14日第ES-8/2号决议，第4段(“强烈谴责南非继续非法占领纳米比亚”)； |
| General Assembly resolution 36/27 of 13 November 1981, concerning Israeli aggression against Iraqi nuclear installations, para. 1 (“Strongly condemns Israel for its premeditated and unprecedented act of aggression in violation of the Charter of the United Nations and the norms of international conduct”); | 联大1981年11月13日关于以色列侵略伊拉克核设施的第36/27号决议，第1段(“强烈谴责以色列此次蓄谋已久和史无前例的侵略行动违反了《联合国宪章》和国际行为准则”)； |
| General Assembly resolution 38/7 of 2 November 1983, para. 1 (“Deeply deplores the armed intervention in Grenada which constitutes a flagrant violation of international law and of the independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity of that State”); | 联大1983年11月2日第38/7号决议，第1段(“深为痛惜对格林纳达的武装干涉，构成对国际法和该国的独立、主权和领土完整的公然破坏”)； |
| General Assembly resolution 41/35 A of 10 November 1986, para. 1 (“Strongly condemns once again the policies and practices of apartheid of the racist régime of South Africa, in particular its brutal oppression, repression and genocidal violence against the people of South Africa”), para. 10 (“Vehemently condemns the racist régime of South Africa for its continued illegal occupation of Namibia”); | 联大1986年11月10日第41/35 A号决议，第1段(“再次强烈谴责南非种族主义政权的种族隔离政策和做法，特别是它对南非人民的残酷压迫、镇压和种族灭绝暴行”)，第10段(“强烈谴责南非种族主义政权继续非法占领纳米比亚”)； |
| General Assembly resolution 43/50 A of 5 December 1988, para. 3 (“Condemns the racist régime and its policies and practices of apartheid”); | 联大1988年12月5日第43/50 A号决议，第3段(“谴责种族隔离政权、其种族隔离政策和做法”)； |
| General Assembly resolution 44/240 of 29 December 1989, para. 1 (“Strongly deplores the intervention in Panama by the armed forces of the United States of America, which constitutes a flagrant violation of international law and of the independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity of States”); | 联大1989年12月29日第44/240号决议，第1段(“对美利坚合众国武装部队公然违反国际法和尊重他国独立、主权和领土完整的原则，干预巴拿马，深感痛惜”)； |
| General Assembly resolution 46/47 of 9 December 1991, para. 5 (“Condemns the continued and persistent violation by Israel of the Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War … and condemns in particular those violations which the Convention designates as ‘grave breaches’ thereof”); | 联大1991年12月9日第46/47号决议，第5段(“谴责以色列持续不断地违反…《关于战时保护平民的日内瓦公约》，并特别谴责该公约列为‘严重违犯’的那些违约行为”)； |
| General Assembly resolution ES-11/1 of 2 March 2022, para. 2 (“Deplores in the strongest terms the aggression by the Russian Federation against Ukraine in violation of Article 2 (4) of the Charter” of the United Nations), para. 5 (“Deplores the 21 February 2022 decision by the Russian Federation related to the status of certain areas of the Donetsk and Luhansk regions of Ukraine as a violation of the territorial integrity and sovereignty of Ukraine and inconsistent with the principles of the Charter” of the United Nations), and para. 11 (“Condemns all violations of international humanitarian law and violations and abuses of human rights”); | 联大2022年3月2日ES-11/1号决议，第2段(“最强烈地斥责俄罗斯联邦违反《宪章》第二条第四项，对乌克兰进行侵略”)，第5段(“斥责俄罗斯联邦2022年2月21日关于乌克兰顿涅茨克州和卢汉斯克州某些地区的地位的决定，认为此决定侵犯了乌克兰的领土完整和主权，不符合《宪章》的原则”，和第11段(“谴责一切违反国际人道法以及侵犯和践踏人权的行为”)； |
| Human Rights Council resolution 49/1 of 4 March 2022, para. 1 (“Condemns in the strongest possible terms the human rights violations and abuses and violations of international humanitarian law resulting from the aggression against Ukraine by the Russian Federation”). | 人权理事会2022年3月4日第49/1号决议，第1段(“最强烈地谴责俄罗斯联邦对乌克兰的侵略造成的侵犯和践踏人权及违反国际人道法的行为”)。 |
| See General Assembly resolution 2184 (XXI) of 12 December 1966, para. 5 (“Calls upon Portugal to apply immediately the principle of self-determination to the peoples of the Territories under its administration”), para. 6 (“Appeals to all States to give the peoples of the Territories under Portuguese domination the moral and material support necessary for the restoration of their inalienable rights and to prevent their nationals from cooperating with the Portuguese authorities, especially in regard to investment in the Territories”); | 见联大1966年12月12日第2184(XXI)号决议，第5段(“促请葡萄牙立即准许在其管理下各领土人民实施自决之原则”)，第6段(“吁请所有国家对在葡萄牙统治下各领土人民给予为恢复其不可割让权利所需之道义与物质支援并防止其国民与葡萄牙当局合作，特别是在各领土之投资”)； |
| General Assembly resolution 36/27 of 13 November 1981, para. 3 (“Reiterates its call to all States to cease forthwith any provision to Israel of arms and related material of all types which enable it to commit acts of aggression against other States”); | 联大1981年11月13日第36/27号决议，第3段(“再度呼吁所有国家立即停止向以色列提供使其有能力侵略其他国家的一切类型的武器和有关物资”)； |
| General Assembly resolution 38/7 of 2 November 1983, para. 4 (“Calls for an immediate cessation of the armed intervention and the immediate withdrawal of the foreign troops from Grenada”); | 联大1983年11月2日第38/7号决议，第4段(“要求立即停止武装干涉并立即从格林纳达撤出外国军队”)； |
| General Assembly resolution 44/240 of 29 December 1989, para. 2 (“Demands the immediate cessation of the intervention and the withdrawal from Panama of the armed invasion forces of the United States”), para. 4 (“Calls upon all States to uphold and respect the sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity of Panama”); | 联大1989年12月29日第44/240号决议，第2段(“要求美国入侵的武装部队立即停止干预和撤出巴拿马”)，第4段(“敦促所有国家维护和尊重巴拿马的主权、独立和领土完整”)； |
| Security Council resolution 2334 (2016) of 23 December 2016, para. 2 (“Reiterates its demand that Israel immediately and completely cease all settlement activities in the occupied Palestinian territory, including East Jerusalem, and that it fully respect all of its legal obligations in this regard”); | 安全理事会2016年12月23日第2334(2016)号决议，第2段(“再次要求以色列在被占领的巴勒斯坦领土包括东耶路撒冷立即完全停止一切定居点活动，并充分尊重其在这方面的全部法律义务”)； |
| General Assembly resolution ES-11/2 of 24 March 2022, paras. 1–2 (“Demands an immediate cessation of the hostilities by the Russian Federation against Ukraine, in particular of any attacks against civilians and civilian objects”); | 联大2022年3月24日第ES-11/2号决议，第1-2段(“要求俄罗斯联邦立即停止对乌克兰的敌对行动，特别是停止对平民和民用物体的任何袭击”)； |
| General Assembly resolution ES-11/3 of 7 April 2022, para. 1 (“Decides to suspend the rights of membership in the Human Rights Council of the Russian Federation”); | 联大2022年4月7日ES-11/3号决议，第1段(“决定暂时取消俄罗斯联邦在人权理事会的成员”)； |
| Human Rights Council resolution 49/28 of 11 April 2022, seventh preambular para. (“Reaffirming the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination in accordance with the provisions of the Charter, relevant United Nations resolutions and declarations, and the provisions of international covenants and instruments relating to the right to self-determination as an international principle and as a right of all peoples in the world, and emphasizing that this jus cogens norm of international law is a basic prerequisite for achieving a just, lasting and comprehensive peace in the Middle East”), para. 7 (“Calls upon all States to ensure their obligations of non-recognition, non-aid or assistance with regard to the serious breaches of peremptory norms of international law by Israel, in particular of the prohibition of the acquisition of territory by force, in order to ensure the exercise of the right to self-determination, and also calls upon them to cooperate further to bring, through lawful means, an end to these serious breaches and a reversal of Israel’s illegal policies and practices”). | 人权理事会2022年4月11日第49/28号决议，序言部分第七段(“重申根据《宪章》、联合国有关决议和宣言以及各项国际公约和国际文书关于自决权属于一项国际原则和世界所有民族的一项权利的规定，巴勒斯坦人民享有自决权； 强调国际法的这一强行法规范是在中东实现公正、持久和全面和平的一项基本前提”)，第7段(“吁请各国确保履行不承认、不协助或援助以色列严重违反国际法强制规范行为的义务，尤其是禁止以武力获取领土，以确保自决权的行使； 又吁请各国进一步合作，通过合法手段结束这些严重违法行为，并推翻以色列的非法政策和做法”)。 |
| See Human Rights Council resolution S-17/1 of 22 August 2011, para. 13 (“Decides to dispatch urgently an independent international commission of inquiry, to be appointed by the President of the Human Rights Council, to investigate all alleged violations of international human rights law since March 2011 in the Syrian Arab Republic, to establish the facts and circumstances that may amount to such violations and of the crimes perpetrated and, where possible, to identify those responsible with a view to ensuring that perpetrators of violations, including those that may constitute crimes against humanity, are held accountable”); | 见人权理事会2011年8月22日S-17/1号决议，第13段(“决定紧急派遣由人权事务理事会主席任命的独立的国际调查团，调查2011年3月以来在阿拉伯叙利亚共和国内所有侵犯国际人权法行为的指控，确认形同此类侵犯的事实和情况，并在可能时，查明负有责任者，与确保追究违反者的责任”)； |
| Human Rights Council resolution 39/2 of 27 September 2018, para. 22 (“Decides to establish an ongoing independent mechanism to collect, consolidate, preserve and analyse evidence of the most serious international crimes and violations of international law committed in Myanmar since 2011”); | 人权理事会2018年9月27日第39/2号决议，第22段(“决定设立一个持续独立机制，以收集、整理、保存和分析2011年以来在缅甸发生的最严重的国际罪行和违反国际法行为的证据”)； |
| Human Rights Council resolution S-33/1 of 17 December 2021, para. 9 (“Decides to establish, for a period of one year, renewable as necessary, an international commission of human rights experts on Ethiopia, comprising three human rights experts, to be appointed by the President of the Human Rights Council, to complement the work undertaken by the joint investigative team”); | 人权理事会2021年12月17日第S-33/1号决议，第9段(“决定设立一个关于埃塞俄比亚问题的国际人权专家委员会，由人权理事会主席任命的三名人权专家组成，任期一年，必要时可再延长，以对联合调查组开展的工作形成补充”)； |
| Human Rights Council resolution 49/1 of 4 March 2022, para. 11 (“Decides to urgently establish an independent international commission of inquiry, comprising three human rights experts … to investigate all alleged violations and abuses of human rights and violations of international humanitarian law, and related crimes in the context of the aggression against Ukraine by the Russian Federation, and to establish the facts, circumstances and root causes of any such violations and abuses”). | 人权理事会2022年3月4日第49/1号决议，第11段(“决定紧急设立一个独立国际调查委员会，由…三名人权专家组成…调查在俄罗斯联邦侵略乌克兰的背景下所有指控的侵犯和践踏人权及违反国际人道法的行为及相关罪行，确定任何此类违反和践踏行为的事实、情形和根源”)。 |
| See paragraph (2) of the commentary to article 41 of the articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts, Yearbook … 2001, vol. II (Part Two) and corrigendum, p. 114. | 见国家对国际不法行为的责任条款第41条评注第(2)段，《2001年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)和更正，第114页。 |
| Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory (see footnote 132 above), at p. 200, para. 159. | 在被占领巴勒斯坦领土修建隔离墙的法律后果(见上文脚注132)，第200页，第159段。 |
| Ibid. See also Barber (footnote 201 above), at p. 23 (“The unique powers and responsibility of the Security Council do not obviate the obligations of other States to cooperate to end serious breaches of peremptory norms, using all means available to them, including their membership of other international organisations”). | 同上，另见Barber(上文脚注201)，at p. 23 (“安全理事会的独特权力和责任并不免除其他国家利用其所能利用的一切手段，包括其作为其他国际组织成员的权利，合作制止严重违反强制性规范行为的义务”)。 |
| Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory (see footnote 132 above), at p. 200, para. 159 (“It is also for all States, while respecting the [Charter of the United Nations] and international law, to see to it that any impediment, resulting from the construction of the wall, to the exercise by the Palestinian people of its right to self-determination is brought to an end”) (emphasis added). | 在被占领巴勒斯坦领土修建隔离墙的法律后果(见上文脚注132)，第200页，第159段(“所有国家在遵守《联合国宪章》及国际法的同时，应确保终止任何通过修建隔离墙而对巴勒斯坦人民行使自决权造成阻碍的行为”)(强调是后加的)。 |
| See Barber (footnote 201 above), at p. 23 (“And as for members of the Security Council, duly diligent members of the General Assembly should normally be expected to support resolutions aimed at ending serious breaches of peremptory norms, unless they can provide good reason for not doing so”). | 见Barber(上文脚注201)，第23页(“至于安全理事会成员，通常应期望大会尽责的成员国支持旨在制止严重违反强制性规范行为的决议，除非它们有充分理由不这样做”)。 |
| See also R.M. Essawy, “The responsibility not to veto revisited under the theory of ‘consequential jus cogens’”, Global Responsibility to Protect, vol. 12 (2020), pp. 299–335, at p. 303. | 另见R. M. Essawy, “The responsibility not to veto revisited under the theory of ‘consequential jus cogens’”, Global Responsibility to Protect, vol. 12 (2020), pp. 299–335, at p. 303。 |
| See paragraphs (6), (11) and (12) of the commentary to article 41 of the articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts, Yearbook … 2001, vol. II (Part Two) and corrigendum, pp. 114–115. | 见国家对国际不法行为的责任条款第41条评注第(6)、第(11)和第(12)段，《2001年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)和更正，第114-115页。 |
| See O. Corten and V. Koutroulis, “The jus cogens status of the prohibition on the use of force: what is its scope and why does it matter?”, in Tladi (ed.), Peremptory Norms of General International Law (Jus Cogens)… (footnote 26 above), pp. 629–667, at p. 664, suggesting that it is beyond doubt that the duty of non-recognition for serious breaches of international law is accepted as part of international law. | 见O. Corten and V. Koutroulis, “The jus cogens status of the prohibition on the use of force: what is its scope and why does it matter?”, in Tladi (ed.), Peremptory Norms of General International Law (Jus Cogens)… (上文脚注26), pp. 629-667, at p. 664, 其中表明不承认严重违反国际法行为的义务毫无疑问已被接受为国际法的一部分。 |
| See, further, A. Lagerwall, “The non-recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital: a condition for international law to remain relevant? ”, Questions of International Law, vol. 50 (2018), pp. 33–46, arguing that the duty of non-recognition applies, beyond serious breaches of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens), to breaches of international law. | 另见 A. Lagerwall, “The non-recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital: a condition for international law to remain relevant?”, Questions of International Law, vol. 50 (2018), pp. 33-46, 其中认为不承认的义务除了适用于严重违反一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)行为外，还适用于违反国际法行为。 |
| See also Barber (footnote 201 above), at p. 16. | 另见Barber(上文脚注201)，第16页。 |
| See, however, H.P. Aust, “Legal consequences of serious breaches of peremptory norms in the law of State responsibility: observations in the light of the recent work of the International Law Commission”, in Tladi (ed.), Peremptory Norms of General International Law (Jus Cogens)… (footnote 26 above), pp. 227–255, at p. 254, suggesting that “not everything [in relation to the duty] is well and support[ed]”. | 但另见H. P. Aust, “Legal consequences of serious breaches of peremptory norms in the law of State responsibility: observations in the light of the recent work of the International Law Commission”, in Tladi (ed.), Peremptory Norms of General International Law (Jus Cogens)… (上文脚注26)，pp. 227-255, at p. 254, 其中认为“并非所有与义务相关的问题都是良好和得到支持的”。 |
| Kuwait Airways Corporation v. Iraqi Airways Company and Others, (Nos. 4 and 5) [2002] UKHL 19, [2002] 2 AC 883, para. 29. | 科威特航空公司诉伊拉克航空公司及其他方(第4和第5号) [2002] UKHL 19, [2002] 2 AC 883, 第29段。 |
| See also A, Amnesty International (intervening) and Commonwealth Lawyers Association (intervening) v. Secretary of State for the Home Department (footnote 236 above), para. 34. | 另见A、大赦国际(参与诉讼)和英联邦律师协会(参与诉讼)诉内政大臣案(上文脚注236)，第34段。 |
| Legal Consequences for States of the Continued Presence of South Africa in Namibia (see footnote 122 above), para. 111. | 南非继续留驻纳米比亚对各国的法律后果(见上文脚注122)，第111段。 |
| Ibid., para. 119. | 同上，第119段。 |
| Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory (see footnote 132 above), para. 159. | 在被占领巴勒斯坦领土修建隔离墙的法律后果(见上文脚注132)，第159段。 |
| The Prosecutor v. Bosco Ntaganda, Case No. ICC-01/04-02/06-1707, Second decision on the Defence’s challenge to the jurisdiction of the Court in respect of Counts 6 and 9, of January 2017, Trial Chamber VI, International Criminal Court, para. 53. | 检察官诉Bosco Ntaganda案，案件编号ICC-01/04-02/06-1707, 就2017年1月辩方对法院在第6和第9条罪名上的管辖权提出的质疑作出的第二次裁决，国际刑事法院第六审判分庭，第53段。 |
| See Security Council resolution 276 (1970) of 30 January 1970. | 见安全理事会1970年1月30日第276 (1970)号决议。 |
| On the duty not to recognize the “Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus”, see Security Council resolution 541 (1983) of 18 November 1983, para. 7 (“Calls upon all States not to recognize any Cypriot State other than the Republic of Cyprus”). | 关于不承认“北塞浦路斯土耳其共和国”的义务，见安全理事会1983年11月18日第541 (1983)号决议，第7段(“呼吁所有国家除塞浦路斯共和国外不要承认任何塞浦路斯国家”)。 |
| In relation to the occupation of Kuwait, see Security Council resolution 662 (1990) of 9 August 1990, para. 2 (“Calls upon all States, international organizations and specialized agencies not to recognize that annexation [of Kuwait by Iraq], and to refrain from any action or dealing that might be interpreted as an indirect recognition of the annexation”). | 关于对科威特的占领，见安全理事会1990年8月9日第662 (1990)号决议，第2段(“要求所有国家、国际组织和专门机构不承认[伊拉克对科威特的]这一兼并，也不进行任何可能被视为间接承认这一兼并的任何行动或来往”)。 |
| Likewise, see General Assembly resolution 73/295, paras. 6–7 (“Calls upon the United Nations and all its specialized agencies … to refrain from impeding that process [of decolonization] by recognizing, or giving effect to any measure taken by or on behalf of, the ‘British Indian Ocean Territory’”, and “Calls upon all other international, regional and intergovernmental organizations … to refrain from impeding that process by recognizing, or giving effect to any measure taken by or on behalf of, the ‘British Indian Ocean Territory’”). | 同样，见联大第73/295号决议，第6-7段(“促请联合国及其所有专门机构…不要因承认或实施‘英属印度洋领土’采取的或以其名义采取的任何措施而妨碍这一[非殖民化]进程”，并“促请所有其他国际、区域和政府间组织…不要因承认或实施‘英属印度洋领土’采取的或以其名义采取的任何措施而妨碍这一进程”)。 |
| General Assembly resolution 3411 (XXX) D of 28 November 1975, para. 3. | 联大1975年11月28日第3411 (XXX) D号决议，第3段。 |
| See, especially, General Assembly resolution ES-10/19 of 21 December 2017, para. 1 (“Affirms that any decisions and actions which purport to have altered the character, status or demographic composition of the Holy City of Jerusalem have no legal effect, are null and void and must be rescinded in compliance with relevant resolutions of the Security Council, and in this regard calls upon all States to refrain from the establishment of diplomatic missions in the Holy City of Jerusalem”); | 特别见联大2017年12月21日ES-10/19号决议，第1段(“申明任何宣称已改变圣城耶路撒冷性质、地位或人口组成的决定和行动都不具法律效力，是无效的，且必须遵照安全理事会相关决议予以撤销，并在这方面促请所有国家不在圣城耶路撒冷设立外交使团”)； |
| General Assembly resolution 46/47 of 9 December 1991, para. 19 (“Reiterates its call upon all States … not to recognize any changes carried out by Israel, the occupying Power, in the occupied territories and to avoid actions … that might be used by Israel in its pursuit of the policies of annexation and colonization”). | 联大1991年12月9日第46/47号决议，第19段(“再度要求所有国家…对占领国以色列在被占领领土内造成的任何改变不予承认，并避免采取可被以色列用以推行其吞并和殖民政策的行动”)。 |
| See, in relation to the duty not to recognize unlawfully established settlements in Jerusalem, Security Council resolution 2334 (2016), para. 3 (“Underlines that it will not recognize any changes to the 4 June 1967 lines, including with regard to Jerusalem, other than those agreed by the parties through negotiations”). | 关于不承认在耶路撒冷非法建立的定居点的义务，见安全理事会第2334 (2016)号决议，第3段(“强调安理会将不承认对1967年6月4日界线包括涉及耶路撒冷的界线的任何改变，但不包括各方通过谈判商定的改变”)。 |
| See, for the duty not to recognize situations created by the unlawful use of force and threats to territorial integrity in relation to the situation in Crimea, General Assembly resolution 68/262 of 27 March 2014, para. 6 (“Calls upon all States, international organizations and specialized agencies not to recognize any alteration of the status of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol on the basis of the above-mentioned referendum and to refrain from any action or dealing that might be interpreted as recognizing any such altered status”). | 关于不承认克里米亚局势中非法使用武力和威胁领土完整所造成的状况的义务，见联大2014年3月27日第68/262号决议，第6段(“促请所有国家、国际组织和专门机构不承认在上述全民投票基础上对克里米亚自治共和国和塞瓦斯托波尔市地位的任何变更，也不实施任何可能被解释为承认此种变更地位的行动或交往”)。 |
| See, for example, Legal Consequences for States of the Continued Presence of South Africa in Namibia (footnote 122 above), para. 119, stating that States are under an obligation “to refrain from lending any support or any form of assistance to South Africa with reference to its occupation of Namibia”. | 例如，见南非继续留驻纳米比亚对各国的法律后果(上文脚注122)，第119段，其中指出各国有义务“不就南非占领纳米比亚向其提供任何支持或任何形式的协助”。 |
| See also Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory (footnote 132 above), para. 159; | 另见在被占领巴勒斯坦领土修建隔离墙的法律后果(上文脚注132)，第159段； |
| and General Assembly resolution 3411 D (XXX), para. 3. | 联大第3411 D (XXX)号决议，第3段。 |
| See General Assembly resolution ES-11/1, para. 10 (“Deplores the involvement of Belarus in this unlawful use of force against Ukraine, and calls upon it to abide by its international obligations”). | 见联大ES-11/1号决议，第10段(“斥责白俄罗斯参与这一对乌克兰非法使用武力的行为，并促请白俄罗斯遵守其国际义务”)。 |
| See also General Assembly resolution 2022 (XX) para. 5 (“Condemns any support or assistance rendered by any State to the minority régime in Southern Rhodesia”) and para. 6 (“Calls upon all States to refrain from rendering any assistance whatsoever to the minority régime in Southern Rhodesia”); | 另见联大第2022 (XX)号决议，第5段(“谴责任何国家所予南罗得西亚少数政权之任何支持或协助”)和第6段(“吁请所有国家勿予南罗得西亚少数政权以任何协助”)； |
| General Assembly resolution 36/27 para. 3 (“Reiterates its call to all States to cease forthwith any provision to Israel of arms and related material of all types which enable it to commit acts of aggression against other States”). | 联大第36/27号决议第3段(“再度呼吁所有国家立即停止向以色列提供使其有能力侵略其他国家的一切类型的武器和有关物为”)。 |
| Legal Consequences for States of the Continued Presence of South Africa in Namibia (see footnote 122 above), para. 125. | 南非继续留驻纳米比亚对各国的法律后果(见上文脚注122)，第125段。 |
| Ibid. | 同上。 |
| See Humanitarian Intervention and Political Support for Interstate Use of Force: Report of the Expert Group established by the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Netherlands, December 2019, at para. 43. | 见对国家间使用武力的人道主义干预和政治支持：荷兰外交部长设立的专家组的报告，2019年12月，第43段。 |
| This position has been supported by the Government of the Netherlands in a letter of 17 April 2020 to the Chairperson of the House of Representatives of the Netherlands, although noting that an international tribunal might come to a different conclusion (“Although the Cabinet shares this interpretation, it cannot be ruled out in advance that an international tribunal might come to a different conclusion”). | 荷兰政府在2020年4月17日致荷兰众议院主席的信中支持了这一立场，尽管指出国际性法庭可能会得出不同的结论(“虽然内阁同意这一解释，但不能事先排除国际性法庭可能会得出不同的结论”)。 |
| A detailed elaboration of the elements of seriousness – gross or systematic violations – can be found in paragraphs (7) and (8) of the commentary to article 40 of the articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts, Yearbook … 2001, vol. II (Part Two) and corrigendum, p. 113. | 关于严重违反行为(即严重或系统性的违反行为)要素的详细阐述，见国家对国际不法行为的责任条款第40条评注第(7)和第(8)段，《2001年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)和更正，第113页。 |
| See paragraph (7) of the commentary to article 40 of the articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts, ibid. (“The word ‘serious’ … is not intended to suggest that any violation of these obligations is not serious or is somehow excusable”). | 见国家对国际不法行为的责任条款第40条评注第(7)段，同上(“‘严重’一词…无意表明，违反这类义务的有些情形不算严重，或在某些方面可以原谅”)。 |
| See, generally, paragraph (13) of the commentary to article 41 of the articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts, ibid., p. 115. | 一般见国家对国际不法行为的责任条款第41条评注第(13)段，同上，第115页。 |
| See, for example, Legal Consequences of the Separation of the Chagos Archipelago from Mauritius in 1965 (footnote 198 above), at p. 139, para. 178; | 例如，见：1965年查戈斯群岛从毛里求斯分裂的法律后果(上文脚注198)，第139页，第178段； |
| Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory (footnote 132 above), paras. 149 et seq.; | 在被占领巴勒斯坦领土修建隔离墙的法律后果(上文脚注132)，第149段及以下各段； |
| and Legal Consequences for States of the Continued Presence of South Africa in Namibia (footnote 122 above), para. 118. | 南非继续留驻纳米比亚对各国的法律后果(上文脚注122)，第118段。 |
| See, generally, Part Two of the articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts, Yearbook … 2001, vol. II (Part Two) and corrigendum, pp. 86 et seq. | 一般见国家对国际不法行为的责任条款第二部分，《2001年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)和更正，第86页及以下各页。 |
| The consequences include cessation and non-repetition (art. 30) and reparation (art. 31). | 后果包括停止和不重复(第30条)以及赔偿(第31条)。 |
| Reparation itself may take different forms, including restitution (art. 35), compensation (art. 36), satisfaction (art. 37) and interest (art. 38). | 赔偿本身可以不同形式进行，包括恢复原状(第35条)、补偿(第36条)、抵偿(第37条)和利息(第38条)。 |
| See, for discussion, R. Elphick (with J. Dugard), “Jus cogens and compensation”, in Tladi (ed.), Peremptory Norms of General International Law (Jus Cogens)… (footnote 26 above), pp. 413–440. | 讨论见R. Elphick (with J. Dugard), “Jus cogens and compensation”, in Tladi (ed.), Peremptory Norms of General International Law (Jus Cogens)… (上文脚注26), pp. 413-440。 |
| See, in respect of international organizations, articles 41 and 42 of the articles on the responsibility of international organizations. | 关于国际组织，见国际组织的责任条款第41和第42条。 |
| The articles on the responsibility of international organizations adopted by the Commission and the commentaries thereto are reproduced in Yearbook … 2011, vol. II (Part Two), pp. 40 et seq., paras. 87–88. | 委员会通过的国际组织的责任条款及其评注载于《2011年…年鉴》第二卷(第二部分)，第40页及以下各页，第87-88段。 |
| See also General Assembly resolution 66/100 of 9 December 2011, annex. | 另见联大2011年12月9日第66/100号决议附件。 |
| See D. Costelloe, “Peremptory norms and resolutions of the United Nations Security Council”, in Tladi (ed.), Peremptory Norms of General International Law (Jus Cogens)… (footnote 26 above), pp. 441–467, at pp. 443 et seq. | 见D. Costelloe, “Peremptory norms and resolutions of the United Nations Security Council”, in Tladi (ed.), Peremptory Norms of General International Law (Jus Cogens)… (上文脚注26), pp. 441-467, at pp. 443 et seq。 |
| See, for discussion, E. Vranes, “The definition of ‘norm conflict’ in international law and legal theory”, The European Journal of International Law, vol. 17, No. 2 (2006), pp. 395–418. See also V. Jeutner, “Rebutting four arguments in favour of resolving ius cogens conflicts by means of proportionality tests”, Nordic Journal of International Law, vol. 89, No. 3 (2020), pp. 453–470, at p. 455. | 讨论见E. Vranes, “The definition of ‘norm conflict’ in international law and legal theory”, The European Journal of International Law, vol. 17, No. 2 (2006), pp. 395-418. 另见V. Jeutner, “Rebutting four arguments in favour of resolving ius cogens conflicts by means of proportionality tests”, Nordic Journal of International Law, vol. 89, No. 3 (2020), pp. 453-470, at p. 455。 |
| S.B. Traoré, “Peremptory norms and interpretation in international law”, in Tladi (ed.), Peremptory Norms of General International Law (Jus Cogens)… (footnote 26 above), pp. 132–176. | S. B. Traoré, “Peremptory norms and interpretation in international law”, in Tladi (ed.), Peremptory Norms of General International Law (Jus Cogens)… (上文脚注26), pp. 132-176. |
| See, for example, the report of the Study Group on the fragmentation of international law (finalized by Martti Koskenniemi) (footnote 54 above), p. 85, para. 414. | 例如，见国际法不成体系问题研究组的报告(马尔蒂·科斯肯涅米定稿)(上文脚注54)，第85页，第414段。 |
| This was done for example in Council of the European Union v. Front populaire pour la libération de la saguia-el-hamra et du rio de oro (Front Polisario), Case C-104/16 P, Judgment of 21 December 2016, Grand Chamber, Court of Justice of the European Union, Official Journal of the European Union, C 53/19 (20 February 2017), at paras. 88 et seq., especially para. 114, in which the Court, having determined that the principle of self-determination was “one of the essential principles of international law” and one establishing erga omnes obligations (para. 88), proceeded to interpret a treaty between the European Commission and Morocco in such a way as to respect this rule: “It follows that the Liberalisation Agreement could not be understood at the time of its conclusion as meaning that its territorial scope included the territory of Western Sahara” (para. 114). | 例如，欧洲联盟理事会诉萨基亚阿姆拉和里奥德奥罗人民解放阵线(波利萨里奥阵线)C-104/16 P号案，2016年12月21日的判决书，欧洲联盟法院大审判庭，《欧洲联盟公报》，C 53/19(2017年2月20日，第88段及以下各段，特别是第114段，其中，法院确定自决原则是“国际法的一项基本原则”，也是确立普遍义务的原则之一(第88段)，随后以尊重这一规则的方式解释了欧洲联盟委员会与摩洛哥之间的一项条约：“因此，在缔结《自由化协定》时，不能将之理解为其领土范围包括西撒哈拉领土”(第114段)。 |
| Paragraph (3) of the commentary to article 26 of the articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts, Yearbook … 2001, vol. II (Part Two) and corrigendum, p. 85. | 国家对国际不法行为的责任条款第26条评注第(3)段，《2001年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)和更正，第85页。 |
| See also conclusion (42) of the conclusions of the Study Group on the fragmentation of international law (footnote 54 above); | 另见国际法不成体系问题研究组的结论，结论(42)(上文脚注54)； |
| and Mik (footnote 176 above), pp. 73 et seq. | 以及Mik(上文脚注176)，第73页及以下各页。 |
| See Official Records of the United Nations Conference on the Law Treaties, First Session … (see footnote 53 above), 4 May 1968, statements by: France, 54th meeting, para. 29 (“[t]he article as it stood gave no indication how a rule of law could be recognized as having the character of jus cogens, on the content of which divergent, even conflicting interpretations had been advanced during the discussion. | 见《联合国条约法会议正式记录，第一届会议…》(见上文脚注53)，1968年5月4日，以下国家的发言：法国，第54次会议，第29段(“现有的条款没有说明法治如何被承认具有强行法的性质，在讨论期间对条款内容提出了不同、甚至是相互矛盾的解释。 |
| … Also, no provision had been made for any jurisdictional control over the application of such a new and imprecise notion”); | …此外，也没有关于对这一不精确的新概念的适用实行任何管辖权控制的规定”)； |
| and Norway, 56th meeting, para. 37 (“[t]he article gave no guidance on some important questions, namely, what were the existing rules of jus cogens and how did such rules come into being? | 及挪威，第56次会议，第37段(“该条款没有就一些重要问题提供指导，即有哪些现有的强行法规则，这些规则是如何形成的？ |
| The Commission’s text stated the effects of those rules but did not define them, so that serious disputes might arise between States; | 委员会的案文指出了这些规则的影响，但没有定义这些规则，因此国家之间可能出现严重的争端； |
| and it provided no effective means of settling such disputes”). | 而且案文没有提供解决这种争端的有效手段”)。 |
| See, generally, Wood (footnote 190 above). | 一般见Wood (上文脚注190)。 |
| See articles 65 and 66 of the 1969 Vienna Convention. | 见1969年《维也纳条约法公约》第六十五和第六十六条。 |
| See Article 33, paragraph 1, of the Charter of the United Nations. | 见《联合国宪章》第三十三条第一款。 |
| Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros Project (see footnote 66 above), at p. 66, para. 109. | 加布奇科沃－大毛罗斯项目案(见上文脚注66)，第66页，第109段。 |
| For a full list of the reservations to the 1969 Vienna Convention, see United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1155, p. 131. | 对1969年《维也纳公约》保留的完整清单，见联合国，《条约汇编》，第1155卷，第131页。 |
| Armed Activities on the Territory of the Congo (see footnote 58 above), at p. 32, para. 64 (“The same applies to the relationship between peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) and the establishment of the Court’s jurisdiction: the fact that a dispute relates to compliance with a norm having such a character, which is assuredly the case with regard to the prohibition of genocide, cannot of itself provide a basis for the jurisdiction of the Court”). | 刚果境内武装活动案(见上文脚注58)，第32页，第64段(“这同样适用于一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)与确立法院管辖权之间的关系：一项争端涉及是否遵守具有这种性质的规范(禁止灭绝种族罪无疑属于这种情况)这一事实本身不能为法院的管辖权提供依据”)。 |
| See also paragraph (6) of the commentary to article 40 of the articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts addressing the non-exhaustive nature of the norms referred to in those articles, Yearbook … 2001, vol. II (Part Two) and corrigendum, p. 113 (“It should be stressed that the examples given above may not be exhaustive. | 另见国家对国际不法行为的责任条款第40条评注第(6)段，其中述及这些条款中提到的规范并非详尽无遗，《2001年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)和更正，第113段(“应强调指出，上面所举的例子可能不是完全的。 |
| In addition, article 64 of the 1969 Vienna Convention contemplates that new peremptory norms of general international law may come into existence through the processes of acceptance and recognition by the international community of States as a whole, as referred to in article 53. | 而且，1969年《维也纳公约》第六十四条考虑到，如第五十三条所言，随着国家组成之国际社会整体的接受和承认，会有新的强制性规范出现。 |
| The examples given here are thus without prejudice to existing or developing rules of international law which fulfil the criteria for peremptory norms under article 53”). | 因此，此处所举的例子并不损害能够满足第五十三条下强制性规范标准的现有和正在制订中的国际法规则”)。 |
| Paragraphs (1) and (3) of the commentary to draft article 50 of the draft articles on the law of treaties, Yearbook … 1966, vol. II, document A/6309/Rev.1, Part II, pp. 247–248. | 条约法条款草案第50条草案评注第(1)和(3)段，《1966年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/6309/Rev.1号文件，第二部分，第247-248页。 |
| Paragraph (5) of the commentary to article 26 of the articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts, Yearbook … 2001, vol. II (Part Two) and corrigendum, p. 85. | 国家对国际不法行为的责任条款第26条评注第(5)段，《2001年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)和更正，第85页。 |
| Ibid., paragraph (4) of the commentary to article 40, pp. 112–113. | 同上，第40条评注第(4)段，第112-113页。 |
| See ibid. (“Among these prohibitions, it is generally agreed that the prohibition of aggression is to be regarded as peremptory”). | 见同上(“在这些禁令中，一般都同意，禁止侵略应视为强制性的”)。 |
| See also paragraph (5) of the commentary to article 26, ibid., p. 85 (“Those peremptory norms that are clearly accepted and recognized include the [prohibition] of aggression”). | 另见第26条评注第(5)段，同上，第85页(“已经被明确接受和承认的强制性规范包括禁止实行侵略”)。 |
| See paragraph (1) of the commentary to draft article 50 of the draft articles on the law of treaties, Yearbook … 1966, vol. II, document A/6309/Rev.1, Part II, p. 247. | 见条约法条款草案第50条草案评注第(1)段，《1966年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/6309/Rev.1号文件，第二部分，第247页。 |
| In paragraph (3) of the same commentary, the Commission referred to the “unlawful use of force contrary to the principles of the Charter” of the United Nations. | 在同一评注第(3)段中，委员会提到“违反宪章原则非法使用武力”。 |
| See conclusion (33) of the conclusions of the Study Group on the fragmentation of international law (footnote 54 above). | 见国际法不成体系问题研究组的结论，结论(33)(上文脚注54)。 |
| Report of the Study Group on the fragmentation of international law (finalized by Martti Koskenniemi) (footnote 54 above), p. 77, para. 374. | 国际法不成体系问题研究组的报告(马尔蒂·科斯肯涅米定稿)(上文脚注54)，第77页，第374段。 |
| It should be noted that the report of the Study Group also refers, as a separate norm, to the right to self-defence. | 应当指出，研究组的报告还作为一项单独的规范提到自卫权。 |
| See paragraph (5) of the commentary to article 26 and paragraph (4) of the commentary to article 40 of the articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts, Yearbook … 2001, vol. II (Part Two) and corrigendum, pp. 85 and 112–113. | 见国家对国际不法行为的责任条款第26条评注第(5)段和第40条草案评注第(4)段，《2001年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)和更正，第85页和第112-113页。 |
| Conclusion (33) of the conclusions of the Study Group on the fragmentation of international law (see footnote 54 above) and the report of the Study Group on the fragmentation of international law (finalized by Martti Koskenniemi) (footnote 54 above), p. 77, para. 374. | 国际法不成体系问题研究组的结论，结论(33)(见上文脚注54)和研究组的报告(马尔蒂·科斯肯涅米定稿)(上文脚注54)，第77页，第374段。 |
| See the preamble to the draft articles on prevention and punishment of crimes against humanity, Official Records of the General Assembly, Seventy-fourth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/74/10), chap. IV, sect. E.1, para. 44. | 见防止及惩治危害人类罪条款草案序言，《大会正式记录，第七十四届会议，补编第10号》(A/74/10)，第四章，E.1节，第44段。 |
| Paragraph (5) of the commentary to article 26 of the articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts, Yearbook … 2001, vol. II (Part Two) and corrigendum, p. 85. | 国家对国际不法行为的责任条款第26条评注第(5)段，《2001年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)和更正，第85页。 |
| Report of the Study Group on the fragmentation of international law (finalized by Martti Koskenniemi) (see footnote 54 above), p. 77, para. 374. | 国际法不成体系问题研究组的报告(马尔蒂·科斯肯涅米定稿)(见上文脚注54)，第77页，第374段。 |
| Paragraph (5) of the commentary to article 40 of the articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts, Yearbook … 2001, vol. II (Part Two) and corrigendum, p. 113. | 国家对国际不法行为的责任条款第40条评注第(5)段，《2001年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)和更正，第113页。 |
| See conclusion (33) of the conclusions of the Study Group on the fragmentation of international law (footnote 54 above). | 见国际法不成体系问题研究组的结论，结论(33)(上文脚注54)。 |
| Report of the Study Group on the fragmentation of international law (finalized by Martti Koskenniemi) (see footnote 54 above), p. 77, para. 374. | 国际法不成体系问题研究组的报告(马尔蒂·科斯肯涅米定稿)(见上文脚注54)，第77页，第374段。 |
| Paragraph (4) of the commentary to article 40 of the articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts Yearbook … 2001, vol. II (Part Two) and corrigendum, pp. 112–113. | 国家对国际不法行为的责任条款第40条评注第(4)段，《2001年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)和更正，第112-113页。 |
| Ibid., p. 85, paragraph (5) of the commentary to article 26. | 同上，第85页，第26条评注第(5)段。 |
| See the report of the Study Group on the fragmentation of international law (finalized by Martti Koskenniemi) (footnote 54 above), p. 77, para. 374. | 见国际法不成体系问题研究组的报告(马尔蒂·科斯肯涅米定稿)(见上文脚注54)，第77页，第374段。 |
| See conclusion (33) of the conclusions of the Study Group on the fragmentation of international law (footnote 54 above). | 见国际法不成体系问题研究组的结论，结论(33)(上文脚注54)。 |
| Paragraph (5) of the commentary to article 26 of the articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts, Yearbook … 2001, vol. II (Part Two) and corrigendum, p. 85. | 国家对国际不法行为的责任条款第26条评注第(5)段，《2001年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)和更正，第85页。 |
| Ibid., pp. 112–113, paragraph (4) of the commentary to article 40. | 同上，第112-113页，第40条评注第(4)段。 |
| This is the formulation used in the report of the Study Group on the fragmentation of international law (finalized by Martti Koskenniemi) (see footnote 54 above), p. 77, para. 374. | 这是国际法不成体系问题研究组的报告中使用的表述(马尔蒂·科斯肯涅米定稿)(见上文脚注54)，第77页，第374段。 |
| Paragraph (3) of the commentary to article 50 of the draft articles on the law of treaties, Yearbook … 1966, vol. II, document A/6309/Rev.1, Part II, p. 248. | 条约法条款草案第50条草案评注第(3)段，《1966年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/6309/Rev.1号文件，第二部分，第248页。 |
| Paragraph (5) of the commentary to article 40 of the articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts, Yearbook … 2001, vol. II (Part Two) and corrigendum, p. 113. | 国家对国际不法行为的责任条款第40条评注第(5)段，《2001年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)和更正，第113页。 |
| The report of the Study Group on the fragmentation of international law (finalized by Martti Koskenniemi) (see footnote 54 above), p. 77, para. 374, also referred to the prohibition of torture as an example of a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens). | 国际法不成体系问题研究组的报告(马尔蒂·科斯肯涅米定稿)(见上文脚注54)，第77页，第374段，也提到禁止酷刑是一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)的一个例子。 |
| Paragraph (5) of the commentary to article 26 of the articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts, Yearbook … 2001, vol. II (Part Two) and corrigendum, p. 85. | 国家对国际不法行为的责任条款第26条评注第(5)段，《2001年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)和更正，第85页。 |
| See conclusion (33) of the conclusions of the Study Group on the fragmentation of international law (footnote 54 above). | 见国际法不成体系问题研究组结论(33)(上文脚注54)。 |
| See paragraph (5) of the commentary to article 40 of the articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts, in which the Commission referred to the “the obligation to respect the right of self-determination”, Yearbook … 2001, vol. II (Part Two) and corrigendum, p. 113. | 见国家对国际不法行为的责任条款第40条评注第(5)段，委员会在其中提到“尊重自决权的义务”，《2001年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)和更正，第113页。 |
| See also conclusion (33) of the conclusions of the Study Group on the fragmentation of international law (footnote 54 above) and the report of the Study Group on the fragmentation of international law (finalized by Martti Koskenniemi) (ibid.), p. 77, para. 374. | 另见国际法不成体系问题研究组的结论，结论(33)(上文脚注54)和研究组的报告(马尔蒂·科斯肯涅米定稿)(同上)，第77页，第374段。 |
| In paragraph (3) of the commentary to article 50 of the draft articles on the law of treaties, the Commission referred to the “principle of self-determination”, Yearbook … 1966, vol. II, document A/6309/Rev.1, Part II, p. 248. | 在条约法条款草案第50条草案的评注第(3)段中，委员会提到“自决原则”，《1966年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/6309/Rev.1号文件，第二部分，第248页。 |
| In paragraph (5) of the commentary to article 26 of the articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts, the Commission referred to the right to self-determination, Yearbook … 2001, vol. II (Part Two) and corrigendum, p. 85. | 在国家对国际不法行为的责任条款第26条的评注第(5)段中，委员会提到自决权，《2001年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)和更正，第85页。 |
| Paragraph (3) of the commentary to article 50 of the draft articles on the law of treaties, Yearbook … 1966, vol. II, document A/6309/Rev.1, Part II, p. 248. | 条约法条款草案第50条草案评注第(3)段，《1966年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/6309/Rev.1号文件，第二部分，第248页。 |
| See article 19, paragraph 3 (d), of the draft articles on State responsibility, Yearbook … 1976, vol. II (Part Two), pp. 95–96, read in conjunction with paragraphs (17) and (18) of the commentary to that article (ibid., p. 102). | 见国家的责任条款草案，第19条第3款(d)项，《1976年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第95-96页，结合第19条草案评注第(17)和(18)段阅读(同上，第102页)。 |
| 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次会议作出这一决定(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。 |
| See Official Records of the General Assembly, Seventy-fourth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/74/10), paras. 59–61. | 见《大会正式记录，第七十四届会议，补编第10号》(A/74/10)，第59-61段。 |
| 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。 |
| The Working Group had before it the draft commentaries prepared by the Special Rapporteur, even though she was no longer a member of 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. | 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在第六十八届会议上暂时通过、委员会在同一届会议上注意到的原则草案4、6至8和14至18的评注草案。 |
| Official Records of the General Assembly, Seventy-second Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/72/10), para. 260. | 《大会正式记录，第七十二届会议，补编第10号》(A/72/10)，第260段。 |
| Ibid., para. 262. | 同上，第262段。 |
| Document A/CN.4/720. | A/CN.4/720号文件。 |
| At its seventieth session (2018), the Commission established 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, provisionally adopted by the Drafting Committee at the sixty-eighth session, and taken note of by the Commission at the same session. | 在第七十届会议(2018年)上，委员会设立了一个工作组，由巴斯克斯－贝穆德斯先生担任主席，协助特别报告员编写起草委员会在第六十八届会议上暂时通过、委员会在同一届会议上注意到的原则草案4、6至8和14至18的评注草案。 |
| See Official Records of the General Assembly, Seventy-third Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/73/10), para. 167. | 见《大会正式记录，第七十三届会议，补编第10号》(A/73/10)，第167段。 |
| Ibid., para. 172. | 同上，第172段。 |
| Official Records of the General Assembly, Seventh-fourth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/74/10), para. 62. | 《大会正式记录，第七十四届会议，补编第10号》(A/74/10)，第62段。 |
| Document A/CN.4/728. | A/CN.4/728号文件。 |
| Official Records of the General Assembly, Seventy-fourth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/74/10), paras. 62–67. | 《大会正式记录，第七十四届会议，补编第10号》(A/74/10)，第62-67段。 |
| Ibid., para. 68. | 同上，第68段。 |
| Principles of International Law recognized in the Charter of the Nürnberg Tribunal and in the Judgment of the Tribunal, Yearbook … 1950, vol. II, document A/1316, Part III, p. 374. | 纽伦堡法庭宪章和判决书所确认的国际法原则，《1950年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/1316号文件，第三部分，第374页。 |
| See also principles on the allocation of loss in the case of transboundary harm arising out of hazardous activities, Yearbook … 2006, vol. II (Part Two), paras. 66–67, pp. 58–90; | 另见危险活动引起跨界损害情况下的损失分配原则，《2006年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第66-67段，第58-90页； |
| and the guiding principles applicable to unilateral declarations of States capable of creating legal obligations, Yearbook … 2006, vol. II (Part Two), para. 176, p. 161. | 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…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第176段，第161页。 |
| For a description of the semantics, see Y. Dinstein (ed.), The Conduct of Hostilities under the Law of International Armed Conflict, 3rd ed. (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2016), at paras. 56–57 and 60–67. | 语义学说明见Y. Dinstein (ed.), The Conduct of Hostilities under the Law of International Armed Conflict, 3rd ed. (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2016), at paras. 56–57 and 60–67。 |
| Yearbook … 2011, vol. II (Part Two), paras. 89–101. | 《2011年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第89-101段。 |
| United Nations Environmental Assembly, Special Session resolution 1/4 of 3 March 2022, “Political declaration of the special session of the United Nations Environmental Assembly to commemorate the fiftieth anniversary of the United Nations Environment Programme” (UNEP/EA.SS:1/4), fifth preambular paragraph. | 联合国环境大会，特别会议2022年3月3日第1/4号决议，“联合国环境大会纪念联合国环境规划署成立五十周年特别会议政治宣言”(UNEP/EA.SS:1/4)，序言部分第五段。 |
| See the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, (Rio Declaration), Report of the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development, Rio de Janeiro, 3–14 June 1992, vol. I, Resolutions adopted by the Conference (United Nations publication, Sales No. E.93.I.8 and corrigendum; | 见《关于环境与发展的里约宣言》(《里约宣言》)，《联合国环境与发展会议的报告，1992年6月3日至14日，里约热内卢》，第一卷，《环发会议通过的决议》(联合国出版物，出售品编号：E.93.I.8和更正； |
| A/CONF/151/26/Rev.1 (vol. I) and Corr.1), resolution 1, annex I, p. 5, principle 24: “Warfare is inherently destructive of sustainable development. | A/CONF/151/26/Rev.1(第一卷)和Corr.1)，决议1，附件一，第5页，原则24：“战争本来就会破坏可持续发展。 |
| States shall therefore respect international law providing protection for the environment in times of armed conflict and cooperate in its further development, as necessary”. | 因此各国应遵守国际法关于在武装冲突期间保护环境的规定，并于必要时合作促进其进一步发展”。 |
| Articles on the prevention of transboundary harm from hazardous activities, Yearbook … 2001, vol. II (Part Two) and corrigendum, para. 97, fourth preambular paragraph; | 关于预防危险活动的跨界损害的条款，《2001年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)和更正，第97段，序言部分第四段； |
| principles on the allocation of loss in the case of transboundary harm arising out of hazardous activities, Yearbook … 2006, vol. II (Part Two), para. 66, first preambular paragraph; | 危险活动引起跨界损害情况下的损失分配原则，《2006年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第66段，序言部分第一段； |
| draft articles on the law of transboundary aquifers, Yearbook … 2008, vol. II (Part Two), para. 53, fourth preambular paragraph. | 跨界含水层法条款草案，《2008年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第53段，序言部分第四段。 |
| See Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros Project (Hungary/Slovakia), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1997, p. 7, at p. 78, para. 140, in which the International Court of Justice refers to “the often irreversible character of damage to the environment”. | 见加布奇科沃－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，国际法院在其中提到“对环境造成的损害往往具有不可逆转的性质”。 |
| T. Hansson et al., “Warfare in biodiversity hotspots”, Conservation Biology, vol. 23 (2009), pp. 578–587 (between 1950 and 2000, more than 80 per cent of armed conflicts took place in biodiversity hotspots: ibid., p. 578). | T. Hansson et al., “Warfare in biodiversity hotspots”, Conservation Biology, vol. 23 (2009), 第578-587页 (1950年至2000年期间，80%以上的武装冲突发生在生物多样性热点地区：同上，第578页)。 |
| See also ICRC, When Rain Turns into Dust. Understanding and Responding to the Combined Impact of Armed Conflict and the Climate and Environment Crisis in People’s Lives (2020). | 另见红十字国际委员会，《当雨水变为沙尘――理解并应对武装冲突和气候及环境危机对民众生活所造成的多重影响》(2020年)。 |
| See IPCC, Climate Change and Land: an IPCC Special Report on Climate Change, Desertification, Land Degradation, Sustainable Land Management, Food Security and Greenhouse Gas Fluxes in Terrestrial Ecosystems (2019). | 见气专委，《气候变化与土地：气专委关于气候变化、荒漠化、土地退化、可持续土地管理、粮食安全及陆地生态系统温室气体通量的特别报告》(2019年)。 |
| See also S. Maljean-Dubois, “Le droit international de biodiversité” , Collected Courses of the Hague Academy of International Law, vol. 407 (2020), pp. 123–542. | 另见S. Maljean-Dubois, “Le droit international de biodiversité” , Collected Courses of the Hague Academy of International Law, vol. 407 (2020), pp. 123–542。 |
| Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons, Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 1996, p. 226, at p. 241, para. 29. | 以核武器进行威胁或使用核武器的合法性，咨询意见，《1996年国际法院案例汇编》，第226页起，见第241页，第29段。 |
| See General Assembly resolution 76/300 of 28 July 2022. | 见联大2022年7月28日第76/300号决议。 |
| See also Human Rights Council resolution 48/13 of 8 October 2021. | 另见人权理事会2021年10月8日第48/13号决议。 |
| United Nations Environmental Assembly resolutions 2/15 of 27 May 2016 on “Protection of the environment in areas affected by armed conflict” (UNEP/EA.2/Res.15), thirteenth preambular paragraph, and 3/1 of 6 December 2017 on “Pollution mitigation and control in areas affected by armed conflict or terrorism” (UNEP/EA.3/Res.1), eighth preambular paragraph. | 联合国环境大会2016年5月27日关于“受武装冲突影响地区的环境保护”的第2/15号决议(UNEP/EA.2/Res.15)，序言部分第十三段，以及2017年12月6日关于“减轻和控制受武装冲突或恐怖主义影响地区污染”的第3/1号决议(UNEP/EA.3/Res.1)，序言部分第八段。 |
| Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons (see footnote 340 above), p. 243, para. 33. | 以核武器进行威胁或使用核武器的合法性(见上文脚注340)，第243页，第33段。 |
| Ibid., paras. 30 and 33. | 同上，第30和第33段。 |
| See ICRC, Guidelines on the Protection of the Natural Environment in Armed Conflict: Rules and Recommendations relating to the Protection of the Natural Environment under International Humanitarian Law, with Commentary (Geneva, 2020), available from https://shop.icrc.org/guidelines-on-the-protection-of-the-natural-environment-in-armed-conflict-rules-and-recommendations-relating-to-the-protection-of-the-natural-environment-under-international-humanitarian-law-with-commentary.html (accessed on 2 August 2022). | 见红十字国际委员会，《武装冲突中保护自然环境准则：国际人道法与保护自然环境相关的规则和建议，附评注》(《红十字国际委员会准则》)(2020年，日内瓦)，可查阅https://shop.icrc.org/guidelines-on-the-protection-of-the-natural-environment-in-armed-conflict-rules-and-recommendations-relating-to-the-protection-of-the-natural-environment-under-international-humanitarian-law-with-commentary.html(2022年8月2日访问)。 |
| For the effective implementation of environmental and human rights obligations, also in relation to armed conflicts, see UNEP, Environmental Rule of Law: First Global Report (2019), available at www.unep.org/resources/assessment/environmental-rule-law-first-global-report (last accessed on 2 August 2022). | 关于有效履行环境和人权义务(也与武装冲突有关)，见环境署，《环境法治：第一份全球报告》(2019年)，可查阅www.unep.org/resources/assessment/environmental-rule-law-first-global-report(2022年8月2日最后一次访问)。 |
| Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the protection of victims of international armed conflicts (Protocol I) (Geneva, 8 June 1977), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1125, No. 17512, p. 3 (hereinafter, Additional Protocol I), 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)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第1125卷，第17512号，第3页(下称“《第一附加议定书》”)，第八十三条。 |
| See also 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 (hereinafter, First Geneva Convention), art. 47; | 另见《改善战地武装部队伤者病者境遇之日内瓦公约》(《日内瓦第一公约》) (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(下称“《日内瓦第一公约》”)，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 (hereinafter, Second Geneva Convention), art. 48; | 《改善海上武装部队伤者病者及遇船难者境遇之日内瓦公约》(《日内瓦第二公约》) (1949年8月12日，日内瓦)，同上，第971号，第85页(下称“《日内瓦第二公约》”)，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 (hereinafter, Third Geneva Convention), art. 127; | 《关于战俘待遇之日内瓦公约》(《日内瓦第三公约》) (1949年8月12日，日内瓦)，同上，第972号，第135页(下称“《日内瓦第三公约》”)，第一二七条； |
| Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War (Convention IV) (Geneva, 12 August 1949), ibid., No. 973, p. 287 (hereinafter, Fourth Geneva Convention), art. 144; | 《关于战时保护平民之日内瓦公约》(第四公约)(1949年8月12日，日内瓦)，同上，第973号，第287页(下称“《日内瓦第四公约》”)，第一四四条； |
| 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 (Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons) (Geneva, 10 October 1980), ibid., vol. 1342, No. 22495, p. 137, art. 6. | 《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》(《特定常规武器公约》)(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 (eds.), Customary International Humanitarian Law, vol. I, Rules (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2005), rule 143, pp. 505–508. | 另见J.-M. Henckaerts and L. Doswald-Beck (eds.), Customary International Humanitarian Law, vol. I, Rules (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2005), rule 143, pp. 505–508。 |
| First Geneva Convention, art. 1; | 《日内瓦第一公约》第一条； |
| Second Geneva Convention, art. 1; | 《日内瓦第二公约》第一条； |
| Third Geneva Convention, art. 1; | 《日内瓦第三公约》第一条； |
| Fourth Geneva Convention, 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, the 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包括阿根廷、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等。 |
| Information available at https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/customary-ihl/eng/docs/v2_rul_rule45 (accessed on 31 May 2022). | 相关信息见https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/customary-ihl/eng/docs/v2_rul_rule45 (2022年5月31日访问)。 |
| See ICRC, Guidelines on the Protection of the Natural Environment in Armed Conflict (footnote 345 above), paras. 303–304. | 见红十字国际委员会，《武装冲突中保护自然环境的准则》(上文脚注345)，第303-304段。 |
| See also more generally Rules 26 and 27. | 更一般的情况，另见规则26和27。 |
| 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. 114–115, para. 220; | 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114-115页，第220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. 199–200, paras. 158–159; | 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199-200页，第158-159段； |
| Henckaerts and Doswald-Beck, Customary International Humanitarian Law … (footnote 347 above), rule 144, p. 509. | Henckaerts and Doswald-Beck, Customary International Humanitarian Law … (上文脚注347), rule 144, p. 509。 |
| See also ICRC, Guidelines on the Protection of the Natural Environment in Armed Conflict (footnote 345 above), paras. 303–304. | 另见红十字国际委员会，《武装冲突中保护自然环境的准则》(上文脚注345)，第303-304段。 |
| For a more comprehensive overview, including on different positions regarding the existence and extent of positive obligations in this regard, see ICRC commentary (2020) to the Third Geneva Convention, art. 1, para. 202 (the commentaries on the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and the Protocols thereto are available from www.icrc.org/en/war-and-law/treaties-customary-law/geneva-conventions (accessed on 2 August 2022). | 关于更全面的概述，包括关于这方面积极义务的存在和程度的不同立场，见红十字国际委员会关于《日内瓦第三公约》的评注(2020年)，第一条，第202段(关于1949年日内瓦四公约及其议定书的评注可查阅www.icrc.org/en/war-and-law/treaties-customary-law/geneva-conventions (2022年8月2日访问)。 |
| 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”, in Y. Sandoz, C. Swinarski and B. Zimmerman (eds.), ICRC Commentary on the Additional Protocols of 8 June 1977 to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949 (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. | C. Pilloud and J. Pictet, “Article 35: Basic rules”, in Y. Sandoz, C. Swinarski and B. Zimmerman (eds.), ICRC Commentary on the Additional Protocols of 8 June 1977 to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949 (Geneva, Martinus Nijhoff, 1987), p. 398, para. 1402. 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这一部分。 |
| Based on information received from ICRC in June 2022, 13 States are known to have in place national mechanisms to review the legality of weapons and have made public their review mechanisms through domestic legislation, military manuals, public statements or other sources: Australia, Belgium, Denmark, Germany, Israel, Italy, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland, the United Kingdom and the United States. | 根据红十字国际委员会2022年6月提供的信息，已知有13个国家建立了审查武器合法性的国家机制，并通过国内立法、军事手册、公开声明或其他渠道公布了其审查机制：澳大利亚、比利时、丹麦、德国、以色列、意大利、荷兰、新西兰、挪威、瑞典、瑞士、联合王国和美国。 |
| Another six States have indicated publicly that they conduct legal reviews without making public national review procedures or the instruments setting up such procedures: Argentina, China, Canada, Finland, France and the Russian Federation. | 另有6个国家公开表示它们进行法律审查，但没有公布国家审查程序或建立这类程序的文书：阿根廷、中国、加拿大、芬兰、法国和俄罗斯联邦。 |
| Five other States have indicated to ICRC that they carry out reviews pursuant to Ministry of Defence’s mandate and instructions. | 还有5个国家向红十字国际委员会表示它们根据国防部的授权和指令进行审查。 |
| Additionally, Spain is in the process of revising an instruction in order to implement weapons review. | 此外，西班牙正在修订一项指令，以执行武器审查。 |
| 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”, in Casey-Maslen (ed.), Weapons under International Human Rights Law (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 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”, in Casey-Maslen (ed.), Weapons under International Human Rights Law (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2014)。 |
| Henckaerts and Doswald-Beck, Customary International Humanitarian Law … (see footnote 347 above), rules 70 and 71, pp. 237–250. | Henckaerts and Doswald-Beck, Customary International Humanitarian Law … (见上文脚注347), rules 70 and 71, pp. 237–250。 |
| By virtue of the rule of customary international law that civilians must not be made the object of attack, weapons that are by nature indiscriminate are also prohibited in non-international armed conflicts. | 由于习惯国际法规则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. | 若干适用于非国际性武装冲突的军事手册，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 2 August 2022). | 可查阅https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/customary-ihl/eng/docs/v1_rul_rule71#Fn_1_19 (2022年8月2日访问)。 |
| See also ICRC, Guidelines on the Protection of the Natural Environment in Armed Conflict (footnote 345 above), Rule 32 and commentary thereto. | 另见红十字国际委员会，《武装冲突中保护自然环境的准则》(见上文脚注345)，规则32及其评注。 |
| First Geneva Convention, art. 50; | 《日内瓦第一公约》，第五十条； |
| Second Geneva Convention, art. 51; | 《日内瓦第二公约》，第五十一条； |
| Third Geneva Convention, art. 130; | 《日内瓦第三公约》，第一三〇条； |
| Fourth Geneva Convention, art. 147; | 《日内瓦第四公约》第一四七条； |
| Additional Protocol I, arts. 11 and 85; | 《第一附加议定书》，第十一条和第八十五条； |
| Henckaerts and Doswald-Beck, Customary International Humanitarian Law … (footnote 347 above), rules 157 and 158, pp. 604–610. | Henckaerts and Doswald-Beck, Customary International Humanitarian Law…(上文脚注347), rules 157 and 158, pp. 604–610。 |
| According to these two rules, States must exercise the criminal jurisdiction which their national legislation confers upon their courts, be it limited to territorial and personal jurisdiction, or including also universal jurisdiction, which is obligatory for grave breaches. | 根据这两项规则，各国必须行使其国家立法赋予其法院的刑事管辖权，无论是仅限于属地管辖权和属人管辖权，还是也包括对严重破坏行为必须行使的普遍管辖权。 |
| 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 (a) (iv), and (b) (ii), (v), (xiii), (xvi), (xvii) and (xviii), as well as art. 8, para. 2 (e) (v), (xii), (xiii), and (xiv). | 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1项(4)目、2项(2)目、(5)目、(13)目、(16)目、(17)目和(18)目以及第八条第(二)款5项(5)目、(12)目、(13)目和(14)目。 |
| See also ICRC, Guidelines on the Protection of the Natural Environment in Armed Conflict (footnote 345 above), Rule 28 and commentary thereto. | 另见红十字国际委员会，《武装冲突中保护自然环境的准则》(上文脚注345)，规则28及其评注。 |
| Convention (IV) Respecting the Laws and Customs of War on Land (The Hague, 18 October 1907), Annex to the Convention: Regulations Respecting the Laws and Customs of War on Land, Consolidated Treaty Series, vol. 207, p. 277 (the Hague Regulations), arts. 28 and 47; | 《陆战法规和习惯(第四)公约》(1907年10月18日，海牙)，《公约》附件：《关于陆战法规和习惯的章程》，《条约汇编丛书》，第207卷，第277页(《海牙章程》)，第二十八和第四十七条； |
| Fourth Geneva Convention, art. 33, para. 2; | 《日内瓦第四公约》第三十三条第二款； |
| Additional Protocol I, art. 4, para. 2 (g); | 《第一附加议定书》第四条第二款(七)项； |
| ICRC, Guidelines on the Protection of the Natural Environment in Armed Conflict (footnote 345 above), Rule 14. | 红十字国际委员会，《武装冲突中保护自然环境的准则》(上文脚注345)，规则14。 |
| Hague Regulations, art. 23 (g); | 《海牙章程》第二十三条第七款； |
| Fourth Geneva Convention, art. 53; | 《日内瓦第四公约》第五十三条； |
| ICRC, Guidelines on the Protection of the Natural Environment (footnote 345 above), Rule 13. | 红十字国际委员会，《武装冲突中保护自然环境的准则》(见上文脚注345)，规则13。 |
| ICRC, Guidelines on the Protection of the Natural Environment in Armed Conflict (footnote 345 above), Recommendation 18: “If not already under the obligation to do so under existing rules of international humanitarian law, each party to a non-international armed conflict is encouraged to apply to that conflict all or part of the international humanitarian law rules protecting the natural environment in international armed conflicts”. | 红十字国际委员会，《武装冲突中保护自然环境的准则》(上文脚注345)，建议18：“鼓励非国际性武装冲突各方在相关冲突中部分或完全适用在国际性武装冲突中保护自然环境的国际人道法规则，前提是各方根据国际人道法现有规则尚无此项义务”。 |
| See also ICRC, resolution 1 adopted by the 33rd International Conference of the Red Cross and Red Crescent, 9–12 December 2019 (33IC/19/R1), “Bringing IHL home: A road map for better national implementation of international humanitarian law”: para. 13 of the resolution “invites States to share examples of and exchange good practices of national implementation measures taken in accordance with IHL obligations as well as other measures that may go beyond States’ IHL obligations”. | 另见红十字国际委员会，2019年12月9日至12日举行的第三十三届红十字与红新月国际大会通过的决议1 (33IC/19/R1)，“将国际人道法带回家：国家更好地执行国际人道法路线图”：该决议第13段“请各国就根据国际人道法义务采取的国家执行措施以及可能超出各国国际人道法义务范围的其他措施分享实例并交流良好做法”。 |
| For special agreements, see First Geneva Convention, art. 6; Second Geneva Convention, art. 6; Third Geneva Convention, 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。 |
| Fourth Geneva Convention, art. 7. See also common art. 3 of the Geneva Conventions. | 另见日内瓦四公约共同第三条。 |
| See further ICRC, Guidelines on the Protection of the Natural Environment in Armed Conflict (footnote 345 above), Recommendation 17, “Conclusion of agreements to provide additional protection to the natural environment”. | 另见红十字国际委员会，《武装冲突中保护自然环境的准则》(上文脚注345)，建议17：“订立协定，为自然环境提供额外保护”。 |
| See, e.g., Slovenia, Rules of Service in the Slovenian Armed Forces, item 210, available at https://www.uradni-list.si/glasilo-uradni-list-rs/vsebina/2009-01-3757?sop=2009-01-3757 (accessed on 2 August 2022); | 例如见斯洛文尼亚，《斯洛文尼亚武装部队服役规则》，第210项，可查阅https://www.uradni-list.si/glasilo-uradni-list-rs/vsebina/2009-01-3757?sop=2009-01-3757 (2022年8月2日访问); |
| 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), available at https://www.mdn.gov.py/application/files/1114/4242/5025/Politica_de_Defensa.pdf (accessed on 2 August 2022). | 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，可查阅 https://www.mdn.gov.py/application/files/1114/4242/5025/Politica_de_Defensa.pdf (2022年8月2日访问)。 |
| See also contributions in the Sixth Committee from Croatia (A/C.6/70/SR.24), para. 89, Cuba (ibid.), para. 10, Czech Republic (ibid.), para. 45, New Zealand, (A/C.6/74/SR.26), para. 92, Palau (A/C.6/70/SR.25), paras. 27–28. | 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； |
| A/CN.4/685, para. 210. | 新西兰(A/C.6/74/SR.26)，第92段； |
| See Additional Protocol I, art. 60. | 帕劳(A/C.6/70/SR.25), 第27-28段。 |
| See also Henckaerts and Doswald-Beck, Customary International Humanitarian Law … (footnote 347 above), rule 36, p. 120. | A/CN.4/685, 第210段。 见《第一附加议定书》，第六十条。 另见Henckaerts and Doswald-Beck, Customary International Humanitarian Law … (上文脚注347), rule 36, p. 120。 |
| The ICRC study on customary law considers that this constitutes a rule under customary international law and is applicable in both international and non-international armed conflicts. | 红十字国际委员会关于习惯国际法的研究报告认为，这构成习惯国际法下的一条规则，对国际性和非国际性武装冲突均适用。 |
| See e.g. Antarctic Treaty (Washington, 1 December 1959), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 402, No. 5778, p. 71, art. I. See, e.g., the definition found in M. Björklund and A. Rosas, Ålandsöarnas Demilitarisering och Neutralisering (Åbo, Åbo Academy Press, 1990). | 例如见《南极条约》(1959年12月1日，华盛顿)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第402卷，第5778号，第71页，第一条。 例如见M. Björklund和A. Rosas所著Ålandsöarnas Demilitarisering och Neutralisering (Åbo, Åbo Academy Press, 1990)中的定义。 |
| The Åland Islands are both demilitarized and neutralized. | 奥兰群岛既是非军事化地带，又是中立化地带。 |
| Björklund and Rosas list as further examples of demilitarized and neutralized areas Spitzbergen, Antarctica and the Strait of Magellan (ibid., p. 17). | Björklund和Rosas和还列举了斯匹次卑尔根、南极洲和麦哲伦海峡等中立化地带(同上，第17页)。 |
| See also L. Hannikainen, “The continued validity of the demilitarized and neutralized status of the Åland Islands”, Zeitschrift fűr ausländisches öffentliches Recht und Völkerrecht, vol. 54 (1994), p. 614, at p. 616. | 另见L. Hannikainen, “The continued validity of the demilitarized and neutralized status of the Åland Islands”, Zeitschrift fűr ausländisches öffentliches Recht und Völkerrecht, vol. 54 (1994), p. 614, at p. 616。 |
| The working group of Committee III of the Conference submitted a proposal for a draft article 48 ter providing that “publicly recognized nature reserves with adequate markings and boundaries declared as such to the adversary shall be protected and respected except when such reserves are used specifically for military purposes”. | 会议第三委员会工作组提出了一项提案，即条款草案48之三，其中规定“向对方宣布了的具有适当标记和界线的公认自然保护区应受保护和尊重，除非这种保护区被专用于军事目的”。 |
| See C. Pilloud and J. Pictet, “Article 55: Protection of the natural environment” in Sandoz et al., ICRC Commentary on the Additional Protocols … (footnote 353 above), p. 664, paras. 2138–2139. | 见C. Pilloud and J. Pictet, “Article 55: Protection of the natural environment” in Sandoz et al., ICRC Commentary on the Additional Protocols … (上文脚注353), p. 664, paras. 2138–2139。 |
| L. Doswald-Beck (ed.), San Remo Manual on International Law Applicable to Armed Conflicts at Sea (International Institute of Humanitarian Law, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1995), para. 11. The paragraph reflects art. 194, para. 5, of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (Montego Bay, 10 December 1982), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1833, p. 397. | L. Doswald-Beck (ed.), San Remo Manual on International Law Applicable to Armed Conflicts at Sea (International Institute of Humanitarian Law, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1995), para. 11. 该段反映了《联合国海洋法公约》第一九四条第5款(1982年12月10日，蒙特哥湾)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第1833卷，第397页。 |
| United Nations Environment Programme, Protecting the Environment During Armed Conflict: An Inventory and Analysis of International Law (Nairobi, United Nations Environment Programme, 2009), Recommendation 9, available at https://wedocs.unep.org/bitstream/handle/20.500.11822/7813/-Protecting%20the%20Environment%20During%20Armed%20Conflict_An%20Inventory%20and%20Analysis%20of%20International%20Law-2009891.pdf?sequence=3&%3BisAllowed= (accessed on 2 August 2022). | 联合国环境规划署，《武装冲突中对于环境的保护：国际法详索及分析》(内罗毕，联合国环境规划署，2009年)，建议9，可查阅 https://wedocs.unep.org/bitstream/handle/20.500.11822/7813/-Protecting%20the%20Environment%20During%20Armed%20Conflict_An%20Inventory%20and%20Analysis%20of%20International%20Law-2009891.pdf?sequence=3&%3BisAllowed= (2022年8月2日访问)。 |
| ICRC, Guidelines on the Protection of the Natural Environment in Armed Conflict (footnote 345 above), Recommendation 17 and commentary thereto. | 红十字国际委员会，《武装冲突中保护自然环境的准则》(上文脚注345)，建议17及其评注。 |
| Convention on Biological Diversity (Rio de Janeiro, 5 June 1992), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1760, No. 30619, p. 79, art. 8 (“In-situ conservation”). | 《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，第8条(“就地保护”)。 |
| See also S.L. Maxwell et al., “Area-based conservation in the twenty-first century”, Nature, No. 586 (2020), pp. 217–227. | 另见S.L. Maxwell et al., “Area-based conservation in the twenty-first century”, Nature, No. 586 (2020), pp. 217–227。 |
| Convention on Wetlands of International Importance especially as Waterfowl Habitat (Ramsar, 2 February 1971), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 996, No. 14583, p. 245. | 《关于特别是作为水禽栖息地的国际重要湿地公约》(1971年2月2日，拉姆萨尔)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第996卷，第14583号，第245页。 |
| Ramsar Convention, resolution VI.1 (1996) adopted by the 6th Meeting of the Conference of the Contracting Parties (Brisbane, Australia, 19–27 March 1996), annex 3, Guidelines for operation of the Montreux Record, art. 3.1. | 《拉姆萨尔公约》，缔约方会议第六次会议(1996年3月19日至27日，澳大利亚布里斯班)通过的第VI.1(1996)号决议，附件3，《蒙特勒名录操作指南》，第3.1条。 |
| Convention for the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage (World Heritage Convention) (Paris, 16 November 1972), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1037, No. 15511, p. 151, art. 11, para. 4. | 《保护世界文化和自然遗产公约》(《世界遗产公约》)(1972年11月16日，巴黎)，联合国《条约汇编》，第1037卷，第15511号，第151页，第11条，第4款。 |
| See also the UNESCO, Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention (8 July 2015) WHC.15/01. | 另见教科文组织，《实施〈世界遗产公约〉操作指南》(2015年7月8日) WHC.15/01。 |
| Out of the 52 properties listed in accordance with article 11, paragraph 4, of the World Heritage Convention, 33 are endangered because of an armed conflict. | 在根据《世界遗产公约》第11条第4款列入目录的52处财产中，有33处因武装冲突而成为濒危财产。 |
| The list is available at https://whc.unesco.org/en/danger/ (last accessed on 14 June 2022). | 该目录可查阅https://whc.unesco.org/en/danger/ (2022年6月14日最后一次访问)。 |
| The Montreux Records are available at www.ramsar.org/search?search_api_views_fulltext=montreux+records (last accessed on 2 August 2022). | 蒙特勒名录可查阅www.ramsar.org/search?search_api_views_fulltext=montreux+records (2022年8月2日最后一次访问)。 |
| See A/CN.4/685, para. 225. | 见A/CN.4/685, 第225段。 |
| See also C. Droege and M.-L. Tougas, “The protection of the natural environment in armed conflict – existing rules and need for further legal protection”, Nordic Journal of International Law, vol. 82 (2013), pp. 21–52, at p. 43. | 另见C. Droege and M.-L. Tougas, “The protection of the natural environment in armed conflict – existing rules and need for further legal protection”, Nordic Journal of International Law, vol. 82 (2013), pp. 21–52, at p. 43。 |
| UNESCO, Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention (see footnote 374 above), para. 77.1. | 教科文组织，《实施〈世界遗产公约〉操作指南》(见上文脚注374)，第77.1段。 |
| At present, 197 sites representing natural heritage across the world are listed on the World Heritage List. | 目前，全世界共有197处自然遗产列入了《世界遗产名录》。 |
| A number of these also feature on the List of World Heritage in Danger in accordance with article 11, paragraph 4, of the World Heritage Convention. | 根据《世界遗产公约》第11条第4款，其中一些遗产也列入了《处于危险的世界遗产目录》。 |
| Available at https://portals.iucn.org/library/sites/library/files/documents/PAG-019.pdf (last accessed 2 August 2022). | 可查阅https://portals.iucn.org/library/sites/library/files/documents/PAG-019.pdf (2022年8月2日最后一次访问)。 |
| Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict (The Hague, 14 May 1954), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 249, No. 3511, p. 240. | 《关于在武装冲突的情况下保护文化财产的公约》(1954年5月14日，海牙)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第249卷，第3511号，第240页。 |
| Second Protocol to The Hague Convention of 1954 for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict (1999 Second Protocol) (The Hague, 26 March 1999), ibid., vol. 2253, No. 3511, p. 172. | 《1954年关于发生武装冲突时保护文化财产的海牙公约第二议定书》(1999年第二议定书)(1999年3月26日，海牙)，同上，第2253卷，第3511号，第172页。 |
| Convention on Biological Diversity, art. 8 (j). | 《生物多样性公约》，第8条(j)项。 |
| See also Intergovernmental Science-Policy Panel on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services, Summary for policymakers of the methodological assessment of the diverse values and valuation of nature, IPBES/9/L.13, 9 July 2022. | 另见生物多样性和生态系统服务政府间科学与政策平台，《自然多样化价值和估值方法评估决策者摘要》，IPBES/9/L.13，2022年7月9日。 |
| General Assembly resolution 61/295, annex, art. 12. | 联大第61/295号决议，附件，第12条。 |
| Convention on Civil Liability for Damage Resulting from Activities Dangerous to the Environment (Lugano, 21 June 1993), Council of Europe, European Treaty Series, No. 150, art. 2, para. 10 (defining the term “environment” for the purpose of the Convention to include: “natural resources both abiotic and biotic, such as air, water, soil, fauna and flora and the interaction between the same factors; | 《关于危害环境的活动造成损害的民事责任公约》(1993年6月21日，卢加诺)，欧洲委员会，《欧洲条约汇编》，第150号，第2条第10款(为《公约》之目的规定，“环境”一词的定义包括“生物自然资源和非生物自然资源，例如空气、水、土壤、动物和植物等以及这些因素之间的相互作用； |
| property which forms part of the cultural heritage; | 作为文化遗产的财产； |
| and the characteristic aspects of the landscape”). | 以及地貌的特征部分”)。 |
| 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, art. 1, para. 2. | 《跨界水道和国际湖泊保护和利用公约》(1992年3月17日，赫尔辛基)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第1936卷，第33207号，第269页，第1条第2款。 |
| Convention on Biological Diversity, preamble and annex I, para. 1. | 《生物多样性公约》，序言和附件一第1段。 |
| Japan, Law for the Protection of Cultural Property, Law No. 214, 30 May 1950. | 日本，《文化财产保护法》，第214号法，1950年5月30日。 |
| Available from www.unesco.org/culture/natlaws/media/pdf/japan/japan_lawprotectionculturalproperty_engtof.pdf (accessed on 2 August 2022). | 可查阅 www.unesco.org/culture/natlaws/media/pdf/japan/japan_lawprotectionculturalproperty_engtof.pdf (2022年8月2日访问)。 |
| Australia, New South Wales Consolidated Acts, National Parks and Wildlife Act, Act 80 of 1974. | 澳大利亚，新南威尔士州综合法，《国家公园和野生生物法》，1974年第80号法。 |
| Available from www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/npawa1974247/ (accessed on 2 August 2022). | 可查阅 www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/npawa1974247/(2022年8月2日访问)。 |
| Italy, Act No. 394 laying down the legal framework for protected areas, 6 December 1991. | 意大利，颁布关于保护区的法律框架的《第394号法》，1991年12月6日，可查阅 |
| Available from http://faolex.fao.org (accessed on 2 August 2022). | http://faolex.fao.org (2022年8月2日访问)。 |
| While indigenous peoples account for just 6 per cent of the total human population, they hold tenure over 25 per cent of the world’s land surface and safeguard 80 per cent of the global land biodiversity. | 虽然土著人民仅占世界总人口的6%，但他们拥有保有权的土地超过地表面积的25%，保护着80%的全球陆地生物多样性。 |
| See The World Bank, “Indigenous peoples”, 14 April 2022, available at www.worldbank.org/en/topic/indigenouspeoples (accessed on 16 June 2022). | 见世界银行，“土著人民”，2022年4月14日，可查阅www.worldbank.org/en/topic/indigenouspeoples (2022年6月16日访问)。 |
| See also Department of Economic and Social Affairs, “Challenges and opportunities for indigenous peoples’ sustainability”, 23 April 2021, available at www.un.org/development/desa/dspd/2021/04/indigenous-peoples-sustainability/ (accessed on 16 June 2022). | 另见经济和社会事务部，“土著人民可持续性的挑战和机遇”，2021年4月23日，可查阅 www.un.org/development/desa/dspd/2021/04/indigenous-peoples-sustainability/ (2022年6月16日访问)。 |
| See International Labour Organization (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, art. 26. | 《联合国土著人民权利宣言》，第26条。 |
| 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). | 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, 会议记录，第一卷，AG/RES. 2888 (XLVI-O/16)号决议。 |
| 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”, see Río Negro Massacres v. Guatemala, Judgment (Preliminary Objection, Merits, Reparations and Costs), Series C, Case No. 250, 4 September 2012, para. 177, footnote 266. | 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”。 |
| See also 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. | 见Río Negro Massacres v. Guatemala, Judgment (Preliminary Objection, Merits, Reparations and Costs), Series C, Case No. 250, 4 September 2012, para. 177, footnote 266. See also 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。 |
| See also American Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, art. XIX, para. 4. | 另见《美洲土著人民权利宣言》，第十九条第4款。 |
| Inter-American Court of Human Rights: Sawhoyamaxa Indigenous Community v. Paraguay (Merits, Reparations and Costs), Series C, No. 146, 29 March 2006; | Inter-American Court of Human Rights: Sawhoyamaxa Indigenous Community v. Paraguay (Merits, Reparations and Costs), Series C, No. 146, 29 March 2006; |
| Saramaka People v. Suriname, Judgment (Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations, and Costs), Series C, No. 172, 28 November 2007, para. 134; | Saramaka People v. Suriname, Judgment (Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations, and Costs), Series C, No. 172, 28 November 2007, para. 134; |
| Río Negro Massacres v. Guatemala (see footnote 391 above); | Río Negro Massacres v. Guatemala (see footnote 391 above); |
| and Kaliña y Lokono Peoples v. Suriname (Merits, Reparations and Costs), Series C, No. 309, 25 November 2015. See further African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights v. Republic of Kenya, African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights, Case No. 006/2012, Judgment, 25 May 2017, paras. 122–131, and Centre for Minority Rights in Development (Kenya) and Minority Rights Group International on behalf of Endorois Welfare Council v. Kenya, Communication No. 276/2003, African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights, Decision, 4 February 2010. | and Kaliña y Lokono Peoples v. Suriname (Merits, Reparations and Costs), Series C, No. 309, 25 November 2015. See further African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights v. Republic of Kenya, African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights, Case No. 006/2012, Judgment, 25 May 2017, paras. 122–131, and Centre for Minority Rights in Development (Kenya) and Minority Rights Group International on behalf of Endorois Welfare Council v. Kenya, Communication No. 276/2003, African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights, Decision, 4 February 2010. |
| Convention on Biological Diversity, art. 8 (j). | 《生物多样性公约》第8条(j)项。 |
| See also para. (10) of the commentary to draft principle 4 above. | 另见上文原则草案4评注第(10)段。 |
| See, for example, “lands or territories, or both as applicable, which they occupy or otherwise use” used in art. 13, para. 1, of ILO Indigenous and Tribal Peoples Convention, 1989 (No. 169), or “lands, territories and resources” used in the preamble of the 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. | “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. | 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. | 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.” | 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款，内容如下： |
| “3. | “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. | 根据国际人道法，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. | 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 … | 各国根据所加入的国际协定，特别是国际人道法和国际人权法，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, article 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”。 |
| 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 Saramaka People v. Suriname (footnote 393 above), para. 134. | 见Saramaka People v. Suriname (上文脚注393), para. 134。 |
| See also the Indigenous and Tribal Peoples Convention, 1989 (No. 169), art. 6, para. 1. | 另见1989年《土著和部落人民公约》(第169号)，第6条第1款。 |
| See further ILO, “Understanding the Indigenous and Tribal Peoples Convention, 1989 (No. 169): Handbook for ILO Tripartite constituents” (Geneva, International Labour Office, 2013), which refers to the consultations using such words as “good faith”, “genuine dialogue” and “meaningful”. | 另见劳工组织，“了解1989年《土著和部落人民公约》(第169号)：劳工组织三方代表手册”(日内瓦，国际劳工局，2013年)，其中提到协商时使用了“善意”、“真正的对话”和“有意义的”等词语。 |
| In Canada, the duty to consult with indigenous peoples has been interpreted to mean good faith consultation with requirements depending on the potential adverse effect. | 在加拿大，与土著人民协商的义务被解释为善意协商，其要求取决于潜在的不利影响。 |
| See, e.g. Canada, Supreme Court of Canada, Haida Nation v. British Columbia (Minister of Forests), Judgment, 18 November 2004. | 例如，见Canada, Supreme Court of Canada, Haida Nation v. British Columbia (Minister of Forests), Judgment, 18 November 2004. |
| 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 Saramaka People v. Suriname (footnote 393 above), para. 134. | 见Saramaka People v. Suriname (上文脚注393), para. 134。 |
| Report of the Special Rapporteur on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (A/HRC/45/34), para. 55. | 土著人民权利特别报告员的报告(A/HRC/45/34)，第55段。 |
| For the right of redress of indigenous peoples, see United Nations Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, art. 28, and the American Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, art. XXXIII. | 关于土著人民获得补偿的权利，见《联合国土著人民权利宣言》第28条和《美洲土著人民权利宣言》第三十三条。 |
| 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定》(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 2 August 2022). | 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定》，可查阅 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:22003A0329(01) (2022年8月2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定》，(2008年11月17日，巴格达)，第8条(下称《美国－伊拉克协定》)。 |
| Available at https://www.dcaf.ch/sites/default/files/publications/documents/US-Iraqi_SOFA-en.pdf (accessed on 2 August 2022). | 可查阅https://www.dcaf.ch/sites/default/files/publications/documents/US-Iraqi_SOFA-en.pdf (2022年8月2日访问)。 |
| 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 (2015), 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定》(2014年9月30日，喀布尔)，《国际法律资料》，第54卷(2015)，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, paragraph 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定》(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 2 August 2022). | 可查阅 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A42003A1231%2801%29 (2022年8月2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定》(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－德国协定》)，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定》，第十五条。 |
| Memorandum of Special Understanding on Environmental Protection, concluded between the United States and the Republic of Korea (Seoul, 18 January 2001) (hereinafter, “United States-Republic of Korea Memorandum”). | 美国与大韩民国订立的《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》)。 可查阅 |
| Available at www.usfk.mil/Portals/105/Documents/SOFA/A12_MOSU.Environmental.Protection.pdf (accessed on 2 August 2022). | www.usfk.mil/Portals/105/Documents/SOFA/A12_MOSU.Environmental.Protection.pdf (2022年8月2日访问)。 |
| Agreement between Japan and the United States of America on cooperation in the field of environmental stewardship relating to the United States Armed Forces in Japan, Supplementary to the Agreement under Article VI of the Treaty of Mutual Cooperation and Security between Japan and the United States of America, regarding Facilities and Areas and the Status of United States Armed Forces in Japan (Washington, D.C., 28 September 2015), Treaties and Other International Acts Series 15-928, available at https://purl.fdlp.gov/GPO/gpo66458 (accessed on 2 August 2022). | 《日本与美利坚合众国与驻日美国武装部队有关的环境管理领域合作的协定》，补充日本与美利坚合众国《互相合作和安全保障条约》第六条规定的关于设施和区域及驻日美军地位的协定(2015年9月28日，华盛顿特区)，《条约及其他国际文件汇编》，15-928，可查阅https://purl.fdlp.gov/GPO/gpo66458(2022年8月2日访问)。 |
| Agreement concerning the Status of United States Forces in Australia (Canberra, 9 May 1963), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 469, No. 6784, p. 55 (United States-Australia Agreement), art. 12, para. 7. | 《美国驻澳大利亚部队地位协定》(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(《美国－澳大利亚协定》)，第12条第7款。 |
| Agreement between the Philippines and the United States on enhanced defense cooperation (United States-Philippines Agreement) (Quezon City, 28 April 2014), art. IX. | 《菲律宾与美国加强防务合作的协定》(2014年4月28日，奎松市)(《美国－菲律宾协议》)。 |
| Available at www.officialgazette.gov.ph/2014/04/29/document-enhanced-defense-cooperation-agreement/ (accessed on 2 August 2022). | 可查阅www.officialgazette.gov.ph/2014/04/29/document-enhanced-defense-cooperation-agreement/ (2022年8月2日访问)。 |
| 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 (accessed on 9 June 2022) 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 (2022年6月9日访问)，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。 |
| 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－伊拉克协定》，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－菲律宾协定》第九条第3款和《北约－德国协定》第54A条。 |
| Supplementary Agreement between Japan and the United States, art. 3, para. 1. | 《日本－美国补充协定》，第3条第1款。 |
| 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－菲律宾协定》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－德国协定》第54A条和《美国－澳大利亚协定》第12条第7款(e)项(i)目。 |
| See United States-Iraq agreement, art. 8. | 见《美国－伊拉克协定》，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定》第9条那样。 |
| See NATO-Germany Agreement, art. 54A. | 见《北约－德国协定》，第54A条。 |
| NATO-Germany Agreement, art. 41, and United States-Australia Agreement, art. 12, para. 7 (e) (i). | 《北约－德国协定》第41条和《美国－澳大利亚协定》第12条第7款(e)项(i)目。 |
| 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和G. Taylor著，《在联合国维持和平行动中保护平民：成功、挫折和仍存在的挑战》，维持和平行动部与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 also A. Geslin, “Les organisations internationales et régionales de sécurité et de défense face à la problématique environnementale” in S. J. Kirschbaum, Les défis du système de sécurité (Brussels, Bruylant, 2014), pp. 77–94. | 另见A. Geslin, “Les organisations internationales et régionales de sécurité et de défense face à la problématique environnementale” in S. J. Kirschbaum, Les défis du système de sécurité (Brussels, Bruylant, 2014), pp. 77–94。 |
| See for example the following mandates of United Nations-led missions found in Security Council resolutions: United Nations Mission in Sierra Leone (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 (1289 (2000))； |
| United Nations Observer Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (1291 (2000)); | 联合国刚果民主共和国观察团(1291 (2000))； |
| United Nations Mission in Liberia (1509 (2003) and 2215 (2015)); | 联合国利比里亚特派团(1509 (2003)和2215 (2015))； |
| United Nations Operation in Burundi (1545 (2004)); | 联合国布隆迪行动(1545 (2004))； |
| United Nations Stabilization Mission in Haiti (1542 (2004)); | 联合国海地稳定特派团(1542 (2004))； |
| United Nations Operation in Côte d’Ivoire (1528 (2004) and 2226 (2015)); | 联合国科特迪瓦行动(1528 (2004)和2226 (2015))； |
| United Nations Mission in the Sudan (1590 (2005)); | 联合国苏丹特派团(1590 (2005)； |
| African Union-United Nations Hybrid Operation in Darfur (1769 (2007)); | 非洲联盟－联合国达尔富尔混合行动(1769 (2007))； |
| and United Nations Mission in the Central African Republic and Chad (1861 (2009)). | 以及联合国中非共和国和乍得特派团(1861 (2009))。 |
| “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。 |
| Security Council resolution 2594 (2021), fourth preambular paragraph. | 安全理事会第2594 (2021)号决议，序言部分第四段。 |
| United Nations, Department of Operational Support, “DOS environment strategy for peace operations (2017–2023)”. | 联合国业务支助部，“业务支助部环境战略(2017-2023年)”。 可查阅 |
| Available at https://operationalsupport.un.org/sites/default/files/dos_environment_strategy_execsum_phase_two.pdf (accessed on 9 June 2022). | https://operationalsupport.un.org/sites/default/files/dos_environment_strategy_execsum_phase_two.pdf (2022年6月9日访问)。 |
| See also United Nations, Chief Executives Board for Coordination, “Strategy for sustainability management in the UN system 2020–2030” (CEB/2019/3/Add.2). | 另见联合国行政首长协调会，“2020-2030年联合国系统可持续性管理战略”(CEB/2019/3/Add.2)。 可查阅 |
| Available at https://unemg.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/INF_3_Strategy-for-Sustainability-Management-in-the-UN-System.pdf (accessed on 2 August 2022). | https://unemg.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/INF_3_Strategy-for-Sustainability-Management-in-the-UN-System.pdf (2022年8月2日访问)。 |
| 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。 |
| NATO has also developed a number of standardization agreements concerning, for instance, environmental protection during NATO-led military activities (NATO STANAG 7141), available at https://standards.globalspec.com/std/10301156/STANAG%207141 (accessed on 2 August 2022) and environmental protection best practices and standards for military camps in NATO operations (NATO STANAG 2582), available at https://standards.globalspec.com/std/9994281/STANAG%202582 (accessed on 2 August 2022). | 北约还制定了一些标准化协议，例如，北约领导的军事活动期间的环境保护(NATO STANAG 7141)，可查阅 https://standards.globalspec.com/std/10301156/STANAG%207141(2022年8月2日访问)，以及北约行动中军事营地的环境保护最佳做法和标准(NATO STANAG 2582)，可查阅 https://standards.globalspec.com/std/9994281/STANAG%202582 (2022年8月2日访问)。 |
| See, for instance, Security Council 2612 (2021), para. 45 (“Requests MONUSCO to consider the environmental impacts of its operations when fulfilling its mandated tasks”). | 例如见安全理事会第2612 (2021)号决议，第45段 (“请联刚稳定团在执行规定任务时考虑其行动对环境的影响”)。 |
| Similar phraseology can be found, for instance, in Security Council resolutions 2531 (2020), para. 59; 2502 (2019), para. 44; 2448 (2018), para. 54; | 类似措辞可见安全理事会第2531 (2020)号决议第59段、第2502 (2019)号决议第44段、第2448 (2018)号决议第54段、第2423 (2018)号决议第67段、第2348 (2017)号决议第48段、第2364 (2017)号决议第41段和第2295 (2016)号决议第39段等。 |
| 2423 (2018), para. 67; 2348 (2017), para. 48; 2364 (2017), para. 41; | 业务支助部，“外勤业务部环境战略…”(见上文脚注435)。 |
| 2295 (2016), para. 39. Department for Operational Support, “DOS environment strategy for peace operations …” (see footnote 435 above). “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。 |
| See Brussels Summit Communiqué issued by the Heads of State and Government participating in the meeting of the North Atlantic Council in Brussels 14 June 2021, para. 6 (“To that end we agree: … g) … to significantly reduce greenhouse gas emissions from military activities and installations”). | 见参加北大西洋理事会2021年6月14日在布鲁塞尔举行的会议的国家元首和政府首脑发表的《布鲁塞尔峰会公报》，第6段(“为此，我们商定…：g. …大幅减少军事活动和设施的温室气体排放”)。 |
| See also NATO Climate Change and Security Action Plan, 14 June 2021, para. 6, which refers to the obligations of the member States under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (New York, 9 May 1992, United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1771, No. 30882, p. 107), and the Paris Agreement of 2015 (Paris, 4 November 2016, United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 3156, No. 54113). | 另见北约《气候变化和安保行动计划》，2021年6月14日，第6段，其中提到成员国根据《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)和2015年《巴黎协定》(2016年11月4日，巴黎，联合国，《条约汇编》，第3156卷，第54113号)承担的义务。 |
| Both NATO documents are available at www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/news_185000.htm?selectedLocale=en (accessed on 2 August 2022). | 这两份北约文件均可查阅www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/news_185000.htm?selectedLocale=en (2022年8月2日访问)。 |
| See further United Nations, United Nations Secretariat Climate Action Plan 2020–2030, September 2019. | 另见联合国，《联合国秘书处2020-2030年气候行动计划》，2019年9月。 |
| Available at www.un.org/management/sites/www.un.org.management/files/united-nations-secretariat-climate-action-plan.pdf (accessed on 2 August 2022). | 可查阅 www.un.org/management/sites/www.un.org.management/files/united-nations-secretariat-climate-action-plan.pdf (2022年8月2日访问)。 |
| See UNHCR, UNHCR Environmental Guidelines (Geneva, 2005). | 见难民署，《难民署环境准则》(2005年，日内瓦)。 |
| Available at www.refworld.org/docid/4a54bbd10.html (accessed on 2 August 2022). | 可查阅 www.refworld.org/docid/4a54bbd10.html (2022年8月2日访问)。 |
| See also UNHCR, CARE International and IUCN, “Environmental perspectives of camp phase-out and closure: a compendium of lessons learned from Africa”, 1 August 2009. | 另见难民署、援外社国际协会和国际自然保护联盟，“逐步取消和关闭难民营的环境观点：非洲经验教训简编”，2009年8月1日。 |
| Available at www.unhcr.org/en-us/protection/environment/4a967ce69/environmental-perspectives-camp-phase-out-closure-compendium-lessons-learned.html?query=environmental (accessed on 2 August 2022). | 可查阅www.unhcr.org/en-us/protection/environment/4a967ce69/environmental-perspectives-camp-phase-out-closure-compendium-lessons-learned.html?query=environmental (2022年8月2日访问)。 |
| United Nations Environment Programme, Desk Study on the Environment in Liberia (United Nations Environment Programme, 2004), p. 23. | 联合国环境规划署，《利比里亚环境案头研究》(联合国环境规划署，2004年)，第23页。 |
| Available at http://wedocs.unep.org/handle/20.500.11822/8396 (accessed on 2 August 2022). | 可查阅http://wedocs.unep.org/handle/20.500.11822/8396 (2022年8月2日访问)。 |
| United Nations Environment Programme, Sudan Post-Conflict Environmental Assessment (Nairobi, 2007), p. 115. | 联合国环境规划署，《苏丹冲突后环境评估》(2007年，内罗毕)，第115页。 |
| Available at https://wedocs.unep.org/handle/20.500.11822/22234 (accessed on 2 August 2022). | 可查阅 https://wedocs.unep.org/handle/20.500.11822/22234 (2022年8月2日访问)。 |
| United Nations Environment Programme, Rwanda: From Post-Conflict to Environmentally Sustainable Development (Nairobi, 2011), p. 74. | 联合国环境规划署，《卢旺达：从冲突后到环境可持续发展》(2011年，内罗毕)，第74页。 |
| Available at https://postconflict.unep.ch/publications/UNEP_Rwanda.pdf (accessed on 2 August 2022). | 可查阅https://postconflict.unep.ch/publications/UNEP_Rwanda.pdf (2022年8月2日访问)。 |
| As more than 2 million people moved in and out of the country, up to 800,000 people in camps along the border to the Democratic Republic of the Congo had to rely on firewood from the nearby Virunga national park. | 由于有200多万人出入该国，在刚果民主共和国边境的难民营中有多达80万人口不得不从附近的维龙加国家公园获取木柴。 |
| Ibid., pp. 65–66. | 同上，第65-66页。 |
| International Law and Policy Institute, Protection of the Natural Environment in Armed Conflict: An Empirical Study, Report 12/2014 (Oslo, 2014). | 国际法律与政策研究所，《武装冲突中的自然环境保护：实证研究》，2014年12月报告 (2014年，奥斯陆)。 |
| Ibid., p. 5. | 同上，第5页。 |
| Ibid., p. 6. | 同上，第6页。 |
| D. Jensen and S. Lonergan, “Natural resources and post-conflict assessment, remediation, restoration and reconstruction: lessons and emerging issues”, in Jensen and Lonergan (eds.), Assessing and Restoring Natural Resources in Post-Conflict Peacebuilding (Abingdon, Earthscan from Routledge, 2012), pp. 411–450, p. 414. | D. Jensen and S. Lonergan, “Natural resources and post-conflict assessment, remediation, restoration and reconstruction: lessons and emerging issues”, in Jensen and Lonergan (eds.), Assessing and Restoring Natural Resources in Post-Conflict Peacebuilding (Abingdon, Earthscan from Routledge, 2012), pp. 411–450, p. 414. |
| UNHCR Environmental Guidelines (footnote 442 above), p. 5. | 《难民署环境准则》(上文脚注442)，第5页。 |
| See also G. Lahn and O. Grafham, “Heat, light and power for refugees: saving lives, reducing costs” (Chatham House, 2015). | 另见G. Lahn and O. Grafham, “Heat, light and power for refugees: saving lives, reducing costs” (Chatham House, 2015)。 |
| Ibid., p. 7. | 同上，第7页。 |
| See United Nations Environment Programme, Rwanda: From Post-Conflict to Environmentally Sustainable Development (footnote 445 above). | 见联合国环境规划署，《卢旺达：从冲突后到环境可持续发展》(上文脚注445)。 |
| See also United Nations Environment Programme, Sudan Post-Conflict Environmental Assessment (footnote 444 above). | 另见联合国环境规划署，《苏丹冲突后环境评估》(上文脚注444)。 |
| See United Nations Environmental Assembly resolution 2/15 (see footnote 342 above), para. 1. | 见联合国环境大会第2/15号决议(见上文脚注342)，第1段。 |
| New York Declaration for Refugees and Migrants, General Assembly resolution 71/1 of 19 September 2016, paras. 43 and 85. | 《关于难民和移民的纽约宣言》，联大2016年9月19日第71/1号决议，第43和85段。 |
| Global compact on refugees, General Assembly resolution 73/151 of 17 December 2018: see Report of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees: Part II: Global compact on refugees, Official Records of the General Assembly, Seventy-third Session, Supplement No. 12 (A/73/12 (Part II)), paras. 78–79. | 《难民问题全球契约》，联大2018年12月17日第73/151号决议：见联合国难民事务高级专员的报告：第二部分：难民问题全球契约，《大会正式记录，第七十三届会议，补编第12号》(A/73/12 (Part II))，第78-79段。 |
| ICRC, Guidelines on the Protection of the Natural Environment in Armed Conflict (footnote 345 above), paras. 3, 151 and 152. | 红十字国际委员会，《武装冲突中保护自然环境的准则》(上文脚注345)，第3、151和152段。 |
| African Union Convention for the Protection and Assistance of Internally Displaced Persons in Africa (Kampala, 23 October 2009), art. 9, para. 2 (j). | 《非洲联盟保护和援助非洲境内流离失所者公约》(2009年10月23日，坎帕拉)，第9条第2款(j)项。 |
| Available at https://au.int/en/treaties/african-union-convention-protection-and-assistance-internally-displaced-persons-africa (accessed on 2 August 2022). | 可查阅https://au.int/en/treaties/african-union-convention-protection-and-assistance-internally-displaced-persons-africa (2022年8月2日访问)。 |
| The Convention entered into force on 6 December 2012. | 《公约》于2012年12月6日生效。 |
| Ibid., art. 1 (k). | 同上，第1条(k)项。 |
| Conference of the Parties of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, Decision 1/CP.21 “Adoption of the Paris Agreement”, para. 49, in Report of the Conference of the Parties on its twenty-first session, held in Paris from 30 November to 13 December 2015, Addendum (FCCC/CP/2015/10/Add.1). | 《联合国气候变化框架公约》缔约方会议，第1/CP.21号决定“通过《巴黎协定》”，第49段，2015年11月30日至12月13日在巴黎举行的缔约方会议第二十一届会议报告，增编(FCCC/CP/2015/10/Add.1)。 |
| See also the Nansen Initiative, Agenda for the Protection of Cross-Border Displaced Persons in the Context of Disasters and Climate Change, vol. 1 (2015). | 另见南森倡议，《在灾害和气候变化情况下保护跨境流离失所者议程》，第1卷(2015年)。 可查阅 |
| Available at https://nanseninitiative.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/PROTECTION-AGENDA-VOLUME-1.pdf (accessed on 8 July 2019). | https://nanseninitiative.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/PROTECTION-AGENDA-VOLUME-1.pdf (2019年7月8日访问)。 |
| Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030, para. 28 (adopted at the Third United Nations World Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction and endorsed by the General Assembly in resolution 69/283 of 3 June 2015). | 《2015-2030年仙台减少灾害风险框架》，第28段(第三次联合国世界减少灾害风险大会通过，并由联大在2015年6月3日第69/283号决议中予以认可)。 |
| Available at https://disasterdisplacement.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/PROTECTION-AGENDA-VOLUME-1.pdf (accessed on 2 August 2022). | 可查阅 https://disasterdisplacement.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/PROTECTION-AGENDA-VOLUME-1.pdf (2022年8月2日访问)。 |
| General Assembly resolution 73/195 of 19 December 2018, annex. | 联大2018年12月19日第73/195号决议，附件。 |
| See also General Assembly resolution 73/326 of 19 July 2019 and Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration: Report of the Secretary-General (A/76/642). | 另见联大2019年7月19日第73/326号决议和《安全、有序和正常移民全球契约，秘书长的报告》(A/76/642)。 |
| UNHCR Environmental Guidelines (footnote 442 above), p. 5. | 《难民署环境准则》(上文脚注442)，第5页。 |
| International Organization for Migration, Compendium of Activities in Disaster Risk Reduction and Resilience (Geneva, 2013), as referenced in IOM Outlook on Migration, Environment and Climate Change (Geneva, 2014), p. 82. | 国际移民组织，《减少灾害风险和建设抗灾能力活动简编》(2013年，日内瓦)，《移民组织移民、环境和气候变化展望》(2014年，日内瓦)中曾引用，第82页。 |
| D. Ionesco, D. Mokhnacheva, F. Gemenne, The Atlas of Environmental Migration (Abingdon, Routledge 2019). | D. Ionesco, D. Mokhnacheva, F. Gemenne, The Atlas of Environmental Migration (Abingdon, Routledge 2019). |
| A. Christensen and N. Harild, “Forced displacement – The development challenge” (Social Development Department, The World Bank Group, Washington, D.C., 2009). | A. Christensen and N. Harild, “Forced displacement – The development challenge” (Social Development Department, The World Bank Group, Washington, D.C., 2009). |
| Ibid., pp. 4 and 11. | 同上，第4和11页。 |
| IUCN, Draft International Covenant on Environment and Development (2015), art. 40, on military and hostile activities (formerly art. 38). | 国际自然保护联盟，《国际环境和发展盟约草案》(2015年)，关于军事和敌对活动的第40条(上一版本第38条)。 |
| Available from www.iucn.org. | 可查阅www.iucn.org. |
| Draft articles on the protection of persons in the event of disasters, Yearbook … 2016, vol. II (Part Two), paras. 48–49. | 发生灾害时的人员保护条款草案，《2016年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第48-49段。 |
| See also General Assembly resolution 73/209 of 20 December 2018. | 另见联大2018年12月20日第73/209号决议。 |
| Para. (9) of the commentary to art. 18, para. 2, ibid., at p. 58. See also draft art. 3 (a): “disaster” was defined, for the purposes of the draft articles, 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18条评注关于第2款的第(9)段，同上，第58页，另见第3条草案(a)项：为本条款草案的目的，“灾害”是指“造成广泛的生命损失、巨大的人类痛苦和危难、大规模流离失所、或大规模的物质或环境损害，从而严重扰乱社会运转的一个灾难性事件或一系列事件”。 |
| Ibid., at p. 25. | 同上，第25页。 |
| See, for instance, UNHCR, “Global trends: forced displacement in 2018” (2019), available at www.unhcr.org/5d08d7ee7.pdf (accessed on 15 June 2022); | 例如见难民署，“全球趋势：2018年的被迫流离失所情况”(2019年)，可查阅 www.unhcr.org/5d08d7ee7.pdf (2022年6月15日访问)； |
| UNHCR, Global Protection Cluster Working Group, Handbook for the Protection of Internally Displaced Persons (2007); | 难民署，全球保护专题工作组，《保护境内流离失所者手册》(2007年)； |
| OHCHR, “Situation of migrants in transit” (2016), available at www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/2021-12/INT_CMW_INF_7940_E.pdf (accessed on 2 August 2022); | 难民署，“过境移民的状况”(2016年)，可查阅www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/2021-12/INT_CMW_INF_7940_E.pdf (2022年8月2日访问)； |
| International Organization for Migration, “Glossary on migration” (2019); | 国际移民组织，“移民术语表”(2019年)； |
| UNHCR, “Site planning for transit centres” in Emergency Handbook, 4th ed. (2015), available from https://emergency.unhcr.org/entry/31295/site-planning-for-transit-centres; | 难民署，“过境中心场地规划”，载于《应急手册》，第4版(2015年)，可查阅https://emergency.unhcr.org/entry/31295/site-planning-for-transit-centres; |
| UNHCR, “Master glossary of terms” (2006), available at www.unhcr.org/glossary/#t (accessed on 2 August 2022). | 难民署，“术语总表”(2006年)，可查阅www.unhcr.org/glossary/#t (2022年8月2日访问)。 |
| UNHCR, “Global trends: forced displacement …” (see previous footnote), pp. 59 and 62; | 难民署，“全球趋势：…被迫流离失所情况”(见上一脚注)，第59和62页； |
| UNHCR, Handbook for the Protection of Internally Displaced Persons (see previous footnote), p. 333. | 难民署，《保护境内流离失所者手册》(见上一脚注)，第333页。 |
| Kampala Convention, art. 9, para. 2 (j). | 《坎帕拉公约》，第9条第2款(j)项。 |
| African Union et al., “Making the Kampala Convention work for IDPs” (2010), p. 27. Available at www.internal-displacement.org/sites/default/files/publications/documents/2010-making-the-kampala-convention-work-thematic-en.pdf (accessed on 2 August 2022). | African Union et al., “Making the Kampala Convention work for IDPs” (2010), p. 27. 可查阅www.internal-displacement.org/sites/default/files/publications/documents/2010-making-the-kampala-convention-work-thematic-en.pdf (2022年8月2日访问)。 |
| International Organization for Migration, “Glossary on migration” (see footnote 471 above), p. 217. | 国际移民组织，“移民术语表”(见上文脚注471)，第217页。 |
| Ibid. pp. 39–40. | 同上，第39-40页。 |
| United Nations Environment Programme, Environmental Considerations of Human Displacement in Liberia: A Guide for Decision-Makers and Practitioners (Geneva, 2006) p. ix. | 联合国环境规划署，“利比里亚人口迁移的环境考虑：政策制定者和从业人员指南”(2006年，日内瓦)，第ix页。 |
| Available at https://postconflict.unep.ch/publications/liberia_idp.pdf (accessed on 2 August 2022). | 可查阅https://postconflict.unep.ch/publications/liberia_idp.pdf (2022年8月2日访问)。 |
| Art. 1 of the articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts: “Every internationally wrongful act of a State entails the international responsibility of that State”, Yearbook … 2001, vol. II (Part Two) and corrigendum, paras. 76–77, pp. 32–34. | 国家对国际不法行为的责任条款第1条：“一国的每一国际不法行为引起该国的国际责任”，《2001年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)和更正，第76至77段，第32至34页。 |
| This includes articles 35, paragraph 3, and 55 of Additional Protocol I and their customary counterparts, the principles of distinction, proportionality, military necessity and precautions in attack, as well as other rules concerning the conduct of hostilities, and the law of occupation, also reflected in the present draft principles. | 这些规则包括《第一附加议定书》第三十五条第三款和第五十五条及其对应的习惯规则、区分原则、相称原则、军事必要原则和攻击时采取预防措施原则，以及关于敌对行为的其他规则和占领法，这些规则也都体现在本原则草案中。 |
| Furthermore, to the extent that international criminal law provides protection to the environment in armed conflict, the relevant international crimes may trigger State responsibility. | 此外，在国际刑法为武装冲突中的环境提供保护情况下，相关国际罪行可能触发国家责任。 |
| See art. 1 of the articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts, Yearbook … 2001, vol. II (Part Two) and corrigendum, paras. 76–77, and para. (3) of the commentary to art. 58, ibid., at p. 142. | 见国家对国际不法行为的责任条款第1条，《2001年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)和更正，第76-77段，第58条评注第(3)段，同上，第142页。 |
| See also 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. 116, para. 173. | 另见《防止及惩治灭绝种族罪公约》的适用(波斯尼亚和黑塞哥维那诉塞尔维亚和黑山)案，判决，《2007年国际法院案例汇编》，第43页起，见第116页，第173段。 |
| Convention (IV) Respecting the Laws and Customs of War on Land (Hague Convention IV) (The Hague, 18 October 1907), J.B. Scott (ed.), The Hague Conventions and Declarations of 1899 and 1907, 3rd ed. (New York, Oxford University Press, 1915), p. 100, art. 3: “[a] belligerent party which violates the provisions of the said Regulations shall, if the case demands, be liable to pay compensation. | 《陆战法规和习惯(第四)公约》(海牙第四公约)(1907年10月18日，海牙)，J.B. Scott编，The Hague Conventions and Declarations of 1899 and 1907, 3rd ed. (New York, Oxford University Press, 1915)，第100页，第三条：“违反该章程规定的交战一方在需要时应负责赔偿。 |
| It shall be responsible for all acts committed by persons forming part of its armed forces. | 该方应对自己军队的组成人员做出的一切行为负责”。 |
| ” See also Additional Protocol I, art. 91; | 另见《第一附加议定书》，第九十一条。 |
| See ICRC, Guidelines on the Protection of the Natural Environment in Armed Conflict (footnote 345 above), Rule 26, para. 303. | 见红十字国际委员会，《武装冲突中保护自然环境的准则》(上文脚注345)，规则26，第303段。 |
| See also Henckaerts and Doswald-Beck, Customary International Humanitarian Law … (footnote 347 above), rule 149, at p. 550. | 另见Henckaerts and Doswald-Beck, Customary International Humanitarian Law … (上文脚注347) , rule 149, at p. 550。 |
| This rule also extends to private acts of armed forces, see M. Sassòli, “State responsibility for violations of international humanitarian law”, International Review of the Red Cross, vol. 84 (2002), pp. 401–434; | 这一规则也延伸适用于武装部队的私人行为，见M. Sassòli, “State responsibility for violations of international humanitarian law”, International Review of the Red Cross, vol. 84 (2002), pp. 401–434; |
| C. Greenwood, “State responsibility and civil liability for environmental damage caused by military operations”, in R.J. Grunawalt, J.E. King and R.S. McClain (eds.), “Protection of the environment during armed conflict”, International Law Studies, vol. 69 (1996), pp. 397–415, at pp. 405–406. | C. Greenwood, “State responsibility and civil liability for environmental damage caused by military operations”, in R.J. Grunawalt, J.E. King and R.S. McClain (eds.), “Protection of the environment during armed conflict”, International Law Studies, vol. 69 (1996), pp. 397–415, at pp. 405–406。 |
| See Eritrea-Ethiopia Claims Commission, Decision No. 7, Guidance Regarding Jus ad Bellum Liability, 26 UNRIAA (2009), p. 631, para. 13. | 见厄立特里亚－埃塞俄比亚索偿委员会，第7号决定，关于诉诸战争权赔偿责任的指导原则，《国际仲裁裁决汇编》第二十六卷(2009年)，第631页，第13段。 |
| See also ICRC commentary (1987) to Additional Protocol I, art. 91, para. 3650. | 另见红十字国际委员会关于《第一附加议定书》的评注(1987年)，第九十一条，第3650段。 |
| See also Allegations of Genocide under the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Ukraine v. Russian Federation), Order, 16 March 2022, General List No. 182, paras. 60 and 74. | 另见根据《防止及惩治灭绝种族罪公约》提出的灭绝种族指控(乌克兰诉俄罗斯联邦)，2022年3月16日的命令，案件总表编号182，第60和74段。 |
| See Yanomami v. Brazil, Case No. 12/85, Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, resolution No. 12/85, Case No. 7615, 5 March 1985; | 见Yanomami v. Brazil, Case No. 12/85, Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, resolution No. 12/85, Case No. 7615, 5 March 1985; |
| Öneryildiz v. Turkey, Application No. 48939/99, Judgment, European Court of Human Rights, 30 November 2004, ECHR 2004-XII; | Öneryildiz v. Turkey, Application No. 48939/99, Judgment, European Court of Human Rights, 30 November 2004, ECHR 2004-XII; |
| Powell and Rayner v. the United Kingdom, Application No. 9310/81, Judgment, European Court of Human Rights, 21 February 1990; | Powell and Rayner v. the United Kingdom, Application No. 9310/81, Judgment, European Court of Human Rights, 21 February 1990; |
| López Ostra v. Spain, Application No. 16798/90, Judgment, European Court of Human Rights, 9 December 1994; | López Ostra v. Spain, Application No. 16798/90, Judgment, European Court of Human Rights, 9 December 1994; |
| Guerra and Others v. Italy, Application No. 116/1996/735/532, Judgment, European Court of Human Rights, 19 February 1998; | Guerra and Others v. Italy, Application No. 116/1996/735/532, Judgment, European Court of Human Rights, 19 February 1998; |
| Fadeyeva v. Russia, Application No. 55723/00, Judgment, European Court of Human Rights, 9 June 2005; | Fadeyeva v. Russia, Application No. 55723/00, Judgment, European Court of Human Rights, 9 June 2005; |
| Social and Economic Rights Action Center (SERAC) and the Center for Economic and Social Rights (CESR) v. Federal Republic of Nigeria, African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights, Communication No. 155/96 (2002), paras. 64–66, available at https://www.escr-net.org/sites/default/files/serac.pdf (accessed on 22 July 2022). | Social and Economic Rights Action Center (SERAC) and the Center for Economic and Social Rights (CESR) v. Federal Republic of Nigeria, African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights, Communication No. 155/96 (2002), paras. 64-66, 可查阅 https://www.escr-net.org/sites/default/files/serac.pdf (2022年7月22日访问)。 |
| See also footnotes 769–771 below. | 另见下文脚注769-771。 |
| See further R. Pavoni, “Environmental jurisprudence of the European and Inter-American Courts of Human Rights: comparative insights”, in B. Boer, Environmental Law Dimensions of Human Rights (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2015), pp. 69–106. | 又见R. Pavoni, “Environmental jurisprudence of the European and Inter-American Courts of Human Rights: comparative insights”, in B. Boer, Environmental Law Dimensions of Human Rights (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2015), pp. 69–106。 |
| See Armed Activities on the Territory of the Congo (Democratic Republic of the Congo v. Uganda), Judgment, Reparations, 9 February 2022, General List No. 116, paras. 95 and 364, in which the Court distinguishes the responsibility of Uganda as an Occupying Power for all acts of looting, plundering and exploitation of natural resources in Ituri, which resulted from its failure to exercise its duty of vigilance, from its responsibility outside Ituri, which was limited to acts attributable to it. | 见刚果境内的武装活动案(刚果民主共和国诉乌干达)，判决，赔偿，2022年2月9日，案件总表编号116，第95和364段。 在该案中，法院将乌干达作为占领国对在伊图里发生的所有抢掠、抢占和盗采自然资源行为(由于乌干达未能履行警惕责任)的责任与其在伊图里以外的责任区分开来，后者仅限于可归于乌干达的行为。 |
| See also para. 78 (“As an Occupying Power, Uganda had a duty of vigilance in preventing violations of human rights and international humanitarian law by other actors present in the occupied territory, including rebel groups acting on their own account”). | 另见第78段 (“作为占领国，乌干达有责任保持警惕，防止被占领土上的其他行为体，包括反叛团体自行实施的侵犯人权和违反国际人道法的行为”)。 |
| See further Armed Activities on the Territory of the Congo (Democratic Republic of the Congo v. Uganda, Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2005, p. 168, at pp. 253 and 280–281, paras. 250 and 345 (4), and Eritrea-Ethiopia Claims Commission, Partial Award: Central Front – Eritrea’s Claims 2,4,6,7,8, and 22, 28 April 2004, Reports of International Arbitral Awards, vol. XXVI, pp. 115–153, at para. 67. | 又见刚果境内的武装活动案(刚果民主共和国诉乌干达)，判决，《2005年国际法院案例汇编》，第168页起，见第253页和第280-281页，第250和345 (4)段，以及厄立特里亚－埃塞俄比亚索偿委员会，部分裁决：中部前线－厄立特里亚第2、4、6、7、8和22号索偿，2004年4月28日，《国际仲裁裁决汇编》，第二十六卷，第115-153页，第67段。 |
| Security Council resolution 692 (1991) of 20 May 1991. | 安全理事会1991年5月20日第692 (1991)号决议。 |
| Security Council resolution 687 (1991) of 3 April 1991, para. 16. | 安全理事会1991年4月3日第687 (1991)号决议，第16段。 |
| D.D. Caron, “The profound significance of the UNCC for the environment”, in C.R. Payne and P.H. Sand (eds.), Gulf War Reparations and the UN Compensation Commission Environmental Liability (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2011), pp. 265–275; | D.D. Caron, “The profound significance of the UNCC for the environment”, in C.R. Payne and P.H. Sand (eds.), Gulf War Reparations and the UN Compensation Commission Environmental Liability (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2011), pp. 265–275; |
| P. Gautier, “Environmental damage and the United Nations Claims Commission: new directions for future international environmental cases?”, in T.M. Ndiaye and R. Wolfrum (eds.), Law of the Sea, Environmental Law, and Settlement of Disputes. Liber Amicorum Judge Thomas A. Mensah (Leiden, Martinus Nijhoff, 2007), pp. 177–214; | P. Gautier, “Environmental damage and the United Nations Claims Commission: new directions for future international environmental cases?”, in T.M. Ndiaye and R. Wolfrum (eds.), Law of the Sea, Environmental Law, and Settlement of Disputes. Liber Amicorum Judge Thomas A. Mensah (Leiden, Martinus Nijhoff, 2007), pp. 177–214; |
| P.H. Sand, “Compensation for environmental damage from the 1991 Gulf War”, Environmental Policy and Law, vol. 35 (2005), pp. 244–249. J.-C. Martin, “La pratique de la Commission d’indemnisation des Nations Unies pour l’Irak en matière de réclamations environnementales”, Le droit international face aux enjeux environnementaux, Colloque d’Aix-en-Provence, Société Française pour le Droit International (Paris, Pedone, 2010). | P.H. Sand, “Compensation for environmental damage from the 1991 Gulf War”, Environmental Policy and Law, vol. 35 (2005), pp. 244–249. J.-C. Martin, “La pratique de la Commission d’indemnisation des Nations Unies pour l’Irak en matière de réclamations environnementales”, Le droit international face aux enjeux environnementaux, Colloque d’Aix-en-Provence, Société Française pour le Droit International (Paris, Pedone, 2010). |
| Decision taken by the Governing Council of the United Nations Compensation Commission during its third session, at the 18th meeting, held on 28 November 1991, as revised at the 24th meeting held on 16 March 1992 (S/AC.26/1991/7/Rev.1), para. 35. | 联合国赔偿委员会理事会在1991年11月28日第三届会议第18次会议上作出的决定，经1992年3月16日第24次会议修订(S/AC.26/1991/7/Rev.1)，第35段。 |
| Para. (15) of the commentary to art. 36 of the articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts, Yearbook … 2001, vol. II (Part Two) and corrigendum, paras. 76–77, at p. 101: “environmental damage will often extend beyond that which can be readily quantified in terms of clean-up costs or property devaluation. | 国家对国际不法行为的责任条款第36条评注第(15)段，《2001年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)和更正，第76-77段，见第101页：“环境损害往往大大超过可以容易地从清洗费用或财产贬值的角度予以定量的程度。 |
| Damage to such environmental values (biodiversity, amenity, etc. – sometimes referred to as ‘non-use values’) is, as a matter of principle, no less real and compensable than damage to property, though it may be difficult to quantify”. | 从原则上说，对于这类环境价值的损害(生物多样性、环境的舒适性等――有时称为‘非使用价值’)，其真实和应该予以赔偿的程度不亚于对财产的损害，不过可能很难定量”。 |
| Para. (6) of the commentary to principle 3 of the principles on the allocation of loss in the case of transboundary harm arising out of hazardous activities, Yearbook … 2006, vol. II (Part Two), paras. 66–67, at p. 73: “it is important to emphasize that damage to environment per se could constitute damage subject to prompt and adequate compensation”. | 危险活动引起跨界损害情况下的损失分配原则的原则3评注第(6)段，《2006年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第66-67段，第73页：“重要的是强调：对环境本身的损害就可能构成需要及时和充分赔偿的损害”。 |
| United Nations Compensation Commission, Governing Council, Report and recommendations made by the Panel of Commissioners concerning the fifth instalment of “F4” claims (S/AC.26/2005/10), para. 58. | 联合国赔偿委员会理事会，专员小组就第五批“F4”类索赔提出的报告和建议(S/AC.26/2005/10)，第58段。 |
| Certain Activities Carried Out by Nicaragua in the Border Area (Costa Rica v. Nicaragua), Compensation, Judgment, International Court of Justice, I.C.J. Reports 2018, p. 15, at p. 28, para. 41. | 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)，补偿，判决，国际法院，《2018年国际法院案例汇编》，第15页起，见第28页，第41段。 |
| See also Armed Activities, Reparations (footnote 484 above), para. 348. | 另见武装活动案，赔偿(上文脚注484)，第348段。 |
| Certain Activities, Compensation, Judgment (see previous footnote), Separate Opinion of Judge Donoghue, para. 3: “Damage to the environment can include not only damage to physical goods, such as plants and minerals, but also to the ‘services’ that they provide to other natural resources (for example, habitat) and to society. | 某些活动案，补偿，判决(见上一脚注)，多诺霍法官的个别意见，第3段：“对环境的损害不仅可包括对实物(如植物和矿物)的损害，还可包括对这些实物为其他自然资源(例如生境)和社会提供的‘服务’的损害”。 |
| Reparation is due for such damage, if established, even though the damaged goods and services were not being traded in a market or otherwise placed in economic use. | 即使受损的货物和服务没有在市场上进行交易或以其他方式用于经济用途，如果确定存在这种损害，也应予以赔偿。 |
| Costa Rica is therefore entitled to seek compensation for ‘pure’ environmental damage, which the Court calls ‘damage caused to the environment, in and of itself’.” | 因此，哥斯达黎加有权就‘纯’环境损害寻求补偿，法院将这种损害称之为‘单纯对环境本身造成的损害’”。 |
| See J.B. Ruhl and J. Salzman, “The law and policy beginnings of ecosystem services”, Journal of Land Use and Environmental Law, vol. 22 (2007), pp. 157–172. | 见J.B. Ruhl and J. Salzman, “The law and policy beginnings of ecosystem services”, Journal of Land Use and Environmental Law, vol. 22 (2007), pp. 157–172。 |
| See also Certain Activities, Compensation Judgment (footnote 492 above), para. 75. | 另见某些活动案，补偿判决(上文脚注492)，第75段。 |
| Art. 34 of the articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts, Yearbook … 2001, vol. II (Part Two) and corrigendum, para. 76. | 国家对国际不法行为的责任条款第34条，《2001年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)和更正，第76段。 |
| Para. (15) of the commentary to art. 36, ibid., at p. 101. | 第36条评注第(15)段，同上，第101页。 |
| See reparations awarded by the United Nations Compensation Commission, Governing Council, Report and recommendations made by the Panel of Commissioners concerning the fifth instalment of “F4” claims (see footnote 491 above); | 见联合国赔偿委员会裁定的赔偿，理事会，专员小组就第五批“F4”类索赔提出的报告和建议(见上文脚注491)； |
| compensation sought by Ethiopia before the Claims Commission in the Eritrea-Ethiopia dispute, see Eritrea-Ethiopia Claims Commission, Damages Claim, Final Award – Ethiopia’s Claims, 17 August 2009, UNRIAA, vol. XXVI, pp. 631–770, at p. 754, para. 421. | 埃塞俄比亚在厄立特里亚－埃塞俄比亚争端中向索偿委员会提出的索赔，见厄立特里亚－埃塞俄比亚索偿委员会，损害索赔，最终裁决――埃塞俄比亚的索赔，2009年8月17日,《国际仲裁裁决汇编》，第二十六卷，第631-770页，见第754页，第421段。 |
| See also Certain Activities, Compensation, Judgment (footnote 492 above), p. 37, para 80. | 另见某些活动，补偿，判决(上文脚注492)，第37页，第80段。 |
| Certain Activities, Compensation, Judgment (footnote 492 above), Separate opinion of Judge Cançado Trindade, para. 2. | 某些活动案，补偿，判决(上文脚注492)，坎卡多·特林达德法官的个别意见，第2段。 |
| See also Committee against Torture, general comment No. 3 (2012) on the implementation of article 14 for a detailed discussion of the forms of reparation, i.e. restitution, compensation, rehabilitation, satisfaction and guarantees of non-repetition (Report of the Committee against Torture, Official Records of the General Assembly, Sixty-eighth Session, Supplement No. 44 (A/68/44), annex X). | 对赔偿形式，即恢复原状、补偿、康复、抵偿和保证不再发生的详细讨论，另见禁止酷刑委员会，关于对第14条的执行的第3号一般性意见(2012年) (禁止酷刑委员会的报告，《大会正式记录，第六十八届会议，补编第44号》(A/68/44)，附件十)。 |
| See para. (1) of the commentary to draft principle 25, below. | 见下文原则草案25评注第(1)段。 |
| See, for instance, art. 39 of the articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts on contribution to injury, Yearbook … 2001, vol. II (Part Two) and corrigendum, para. 76. | 例如见国家对国际不法行为的责任条款第39条――促成损害，《2001年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)和更正，第76段。 |
| Articles on the responsibility of international organizations, Yearbook … 2011, vol. II (Part Two), pp. 39–105, paras. 87–88 and General Assembly resolution 66/100 of 9 December 2011, annex. | 国际组织的责任条款，《2011年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第39-105页，第87-88段，以及联大2011年12月9日第66/100号决议，附件。 |
| Rome Statute, art. 8, para. 2 (b) (iv). | 《罗马规约》第八条第(二)款2项(4)目。 |
| International Criminal Court, Office of the Prosecutor, “Policy paper on case selection and prioritization”, 15 September 2016, para. 41. | 国际刑事法院，检察官办公室，“关于案件选择和优先次序的政策文件”，2016年9月15日，第41段。 |
| ICRC, Guidelines on the Protection of the Natural Environment in Armed Conflict (footnote 345 above), Rule 28. | 红十字国际委员会，《武装冲突中保护自然环境的准则》(上文脚注345)，规则28。 |
| At the eighteenth session of the International Criminal Court Assembly of States Parties, on 2–7 December 2019, Maldives and Vanuatu proposed that a new crime of ecocide be added to the Rome Statute: documents of the general debate available at https://asp.icc-pi.int/en_menus/asp/sessions/general%20debate/Pages/GeneralDebate_18th_session.aspx. For the statement of Vanuatu, see https://asp.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/asp_docs/ASP18/GD.VAN.2.12.pdf. For the statement of the Maldives, see https://asp.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/asp_docs/ASP18/GD.MDV.3.12.pdf (last accessed on 16 January 2022). | 在2019年12月2日至7日举行的国际刑事法院缔约国大会第十八届会议上，马尔代夫和瓦努阿图建议在《罗马规约》中增列灭绝生态罪这一新罪行：一般性辩论文件可查阅 https://asp.icc-pi.int/en_menus/asp/sessions/general%20debate/Pages/GeneralDebate_18th_session.aspx. 瓦努阿图的发言见https://asp.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/asp_docs/ASP18/GD.VAN.2.12.pdf. 马尔代夫的发言见https://asp.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/asp_docs/ASP18/GD.MDV.3.12.pdf (2022年1月16日最后一次访问)。 |
| An independent expert panel convened by Stop Ecocide International issued a possible legal definition of the crime of ecocide in June 2021, see www.stopecocide.earth/legal-definition (last accessed on 16 January 2022). | 2021年6月，停止灭绝生态国际运动召集的独立专家小组发布了灭绝生态罪的备选法律定义，见www.stopecocide.earth/legal-definition(2022年1月16日最后一次访问)。 |
| See the second report of the Special Rapporteur, A/CN.4/728, paras. 51–56. | 见特别报告员第二次报告，A/CN.4/728，第51-56段。 |
| Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: Implementing the United Nations “Protect, Respect and Remedy” Framework (A/HRC/17/31, annex). | 《工商企业与人权指导原则：实施联合国“保护、尊重和补救”框架》(A/HRC/17/31，附件)。 |
| The Human Rights Council endorsed the Guiding Principles in its resolution 17/4 of 16 June 2011. | 人权理事会在2011年6月16日第17/4号决议中支持这项指导原则。 |
| So far, 21 States have published national action plans on the implementation of the Guiding Principles, 23 are in the process of preparing such a plan or have committed to preparing one. | 迄今为止已有21个国家公布了实施《指导原则》的国家行动计划，23个国家正在制定或已承诺制定此类计划。 |
| In nine other States, either the national human rights institute or civil society has taken steps towards preparing a national action plan. | 另有9个国家的国家人权机构或民间社会采取了推动制定国家行动计划的措施。 |
| Information available at www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Business/Pages/NationalActionPlans.aspx (accessed on 2 August 2022). | 相关信息可查阅www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Business/Pages/NationalActionPlans.aspx (2022年8月2日访问)。 |
| Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (footnote 508 above), principle 7. | 《工商企业与人权指导原则》(上文脚注)508，原则7。 |
| Ibid., principle 7, para. (d). | 同上，原则7, (d)段。 |
| OECD, OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises. The updated guidelines and the related decision were adopted by the 42 Governments adhering thereto on 25 May 2011. | 经合组织，《经合组织跨国企业准则》，遵守该准则的42国政府于2011年5月25日通过了最新版准则和相关决定。 |
| Available at www.oecd.org/corporate/mne (accessed on 2 August 2022). | 可查阅www.oecd.org/corporate/mne (2022年8月2日访问)。 |
| Ibid., chap. VI “Environment”, p. 42. | 同上，第六章“环境”，第42页。 |
| OECD, OECD Due Diligence Guidance for Responsible Supply Chains of Minerals from Conflict-Affected and High-Risk Areas, 3rd ed. (Paris, 2016). | 经合组织，《经合组织关于来自受冲突影响和高风险区域的矿石的负责任供应链尽职调查指南》，第三版(2016年，巴黎)。 |
| Available at www.oecd.org/daf/inv/mne/mining.htm (accessed on 2 August 2022). | 可查阅www.oecd.org/daf/inv/mne/mining.htm (2022年8月2日访问)。 |
| Ibid., p. 16. | 同上，第16页。 |
| See Manual of the Regional Certification Mechanism (RCM) of the International Conference on the Great Lakes Region (ICGLR), 2nd ed. | 见《大湖区问题国际会议区域认证机制手册》，第2版(2019年)。 |
| (2019). | 可查阅 |
| Available at https://alphaminresources.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/ICGLR-Regional-Certification-Mechanism-Manual-2nd-edittion.pdf (accessed on 2 August 2022). | https://alphaminresources.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/ICGLR-Regional-Certification-Mechanism-Manual-2nd-edittion.pdf (2022年8月2日访问)。 |
| China, Chamber of Commerce of Metals, Minerals and Chemicals Importers and Exporters, Chinese Due Diligence Guidelines for Responsible Mineral Supply Chains. | 中国五矿化工进出口商会，《中国负责任矿产供应链尽责管理指南》。 |
| The guidelines apply to all Chinese companies extracting and/or using mineral resources and their related products and come into play at any point in the supply chain of minerals. | 该指南适用于所有正在开采和/或使用矿产资源及其相关产品的中国企业，并适用于矿产供应链任何环节。 |
| Available at http://mneguidelines.oecd.org/chinese-due-diligence-guidelines-for-responsible-mineral-supply-chains.htm (accessed on 2 August 2022). | 可查阅http://mneguidelines.oecd.org/chinese-due-diligence-guidelines-for-responsible-mineral-supply-chains.htm (2022年8月2日访问)。 |
| For Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative, which aims at increasing transparency in the management of oil, gas, and mining revenues, see http://eiti.org; | 旨在提高石油、天然气和采矿收入管理透明度的《采掘业透明度倡议》，见http://eiti.org; |
| for Voluntary Principles on Security and Human Rights for extractive industry companies, see at www.voluntaryprinciples.org; | 采掘业公司《安全与人权自愿原则》，见www.voluntaryprinciples.org; |
| for the Equator Principles of the financial industry for determining, assessing and managing social and environmental risk in project financing, see www.equator-principles.com. | 金融行业确定、评估和管理项目融资中的社会和环境风险的《赤道原则》，见www.equator-principles.com. |
| An Act to promote the financial stability of the United States by improving accountability and transparency in the financial system, to end “too big to fail”, to protect the American taxpayer by ending bailouts, to protect consumers from abusive financial services practices, and for other purposes (Dodd-Frank Act), 11 July 2010, Pub.L.111–203, 124 Stat. 1376–2223. | 该法旨在通过改善金融系统问责制和透明度促进美国金融稳定，结束“大到不能倒”现象，通过终止紧急财政援助保护美国纳税人，保护消费者免遭滥用金融服务做法的侵害以及其他目的(《多德－弗兰克法》)，2010年7月11日，Pub.L.111-203, 124 Stat.1376-2223。 |
| Section 1502 of the Dodd-Frank Act on conflict minerals originating from the Democratic Republic of the Congo requires that companies registered in the United States exercise due diligence on certain minerals originating from the Democratic Republic of the Congo. | 《多德－弗兰克法》中关于原产自刚果民主共和国的冲突矿物的第1502条要求在美国注册的公司对原产自刚果民主共和国的某些矿物开展尽职调查。 |
| Protocol against the Illegal Exploitation of Natural Resources of the International Conference on the Great Lakes Region (Nairobi, 30 November 2006), available at https://ungreatlakes.unmissions.org/sites/default/files/icglr_protocol_against_the_illegal_exploitation_of_natural_resourcess.pdf (accessed on 10 June 2022). | 大湖区问题国际会议《禁止非法开采自然资源议定书》(2006年11月30日，内罗毕)，可查阅https://ungreatlakes.unmissions.org/sites/default/files/icglr_protocol_against_the_illegal_exploitation_of_natural_resourcess.pdf (2022年6月10日访问)。 |
| Art. 17, para. 1, requires States parties to establish the liability of legal entities for participating in the illegal exploitation of natural resources. | 第17条第1款要求缔约国确定法律实体对参与非法开采自然资源的责任。 |
| Regulation (EU) 2017/821 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 May 2017 laying down supply chain due diligence obligations for Union importers of tin, tantalum and tungsten, their ores, and gold originating from conflict-affected and high-risk areas, Official Journal of the European Union, L130, vol. 60, p. 1 (European Union conflict minerals regulation). | 欧洲议会和欧洲理事会2017年5月17日第2017/821号(欧盟)条例规定从受冲突影响和高风险地区进口锡、钽、钨及其矿石和黄金的欧盟进口商有供应链尽职调查义务，《欧洲联盟公报》，L130号，第60卷，第1页(欧洲联盟冲突矿产条例)。 |
| The regulation entered into force on 1 January 2021. | 该条例将于2021年1月1日生效。 |
| The regulation lays down supply chain due diligence obligations for European Union importers of certain minerals originating from conflict-affected and high-risk areas. | 该条例规定从受冲突影响和高风险地区进口某些矿产的欧洲联盟进口商有供应链尽职调查义务。 |
| See also the European Commission’s proposal for a Directive on Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence, 23 February 2022, available at https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_22_1145 (accessed on 2 August 2022). | 另见欧盟委员会关于企业可持续性尽职调查指令的提案，2022年2月23日，可查阅https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_22_1145 (2022年8月2日访问)。 |
| Regulation (EU) No. 995/2010 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 October 2010 laying down obligations of operators who place timber and timber products on the market (12 November 2010), Official Journal of the European Union, L 295, p. 23. | 欧洲议会和欧洲理事会2010年10月20日第995/2010号(欧盟)条例规定了将木材和木材产品投放市场的经营者的义务(2010年11月12日)，《欧洲联盟公报》，L 295号，第23页。 |
| The timber regulation requires that operators exercise due diligence so as to minimize the risk of placing illegally harvested timber, or timber products containing illegally harvested timber, on the European Union market. | 木材条例要求经营者开展尽职调查，以最大限度地减少将非法采伐的木材或含有非法采伐木材的木材产品投放欧洲联盟市场的风险。 |
| OECD Due Diligence Guidance … (footnote 514 above), p. 13. | 《经合组织…尽责调查指南》(上文脚注514)，第13页。 |
| The Guidance explains that “Armed conflict may take a variety of forms such as a conflict of international or non-international character, which may involve two or more States, or may consist of wars of liberation, or insurgencies, civil wars, etc. | 该指南解释称，“武装冲突的形式多种多样，如国际性冲突或非国际性冲突，可能涉及两个或两个以上国家，也可能包括解放战争、叛乱或内战等。 |
| High-risk areas may include areas of political instability or repression, institutional weakness, insecurity, collapse of civil infrastructure and widespread violence. | 高风险地区是指可能存在政局不稳或政治压迫、制度缺陷、不安全因素、民用基础设施崩溃以及广泛暴力活动的地区。 |
| Such areas are often characterised by widespread human rights abuses and violations of national or international law.” | 通常这类地区的特点是存在广泛侵犯人权和违反国际国内法律的现象”。 |
| European Union conflict minerals regulation (footnote 521 above), art. 2, para. (f), gives the following definition: “areas in a state of armed conflict or fragile post-conflict as well as areas witnessing weak or non-existent governance and security, such as failed states, and widespread and systematic violations of international law, including human rights abuses”. | 欧洲联盟冲突矿产条例(上文脚注521)第2条(f)款给出了如下定义：“处于武装冲突或脆弱的冲突后状态的地区，以及治理和安保薄弱或不存在的地区，如陷于崩溃的国家，以及存在广泛和有系统的违反国际法的情况，包括侵犯人权情况的地区”。 |
| See para. (7) of the commentary to draft principle 13 below. | 见下文原则草案13评注第(7)段。 |
| See paras. (1)–(5) of the Introduction to Part Four. | 见第四部分导言第(1)-(5)段。 |
| More frequently referred to as “after an armed conflict”. | 更常被称为“武装冲突之后”。 |
| This phrase has not been defined. | 此短语尚未定义。 |
| It is nevertheless clear that it cannot, for the purpose of the protection of the environment, be limited to the immediate aftermath of an armed conflict. | 但显然，为了保护环境的目的，它不能仅限于武装冲突刚结束后这一时段。 |
| See, for instance, the French law on corporate duty of vigilance, Act No. 2017-399 of 27 March 2017 on the on the duty of care of parent and contracting companies [loi No. 2017-399 relative au devoir de vigilance des sociétés mères et des entreprises donneuses d’ordre], available at www.legifrance.gouv.fr/eli/loi/2017/3/27/2017-399/jo/texte (accessed on 2 August 2022). | 例如见法国关于公司警惕义务的法律，2017年3月27日关于母公司和承包公司警惕义务的第2017-399号法 [loi n° 2017-399 relative au devoir de vigilance des sociétés mères et des entreprises donneuses d’ordre]，可查阅www.legifrance.gouv.fr/eli/loi/2017/3/27/2017-399/jo/texte (2022年8月2日访问)。 |
| For instance, the measures taken may differ depending on whether a business enterprise is operating in or from the territory of a State. | 例如，所采取的措施可能因工商企业是在一国领土内还是从该国领土上经营而有所不同。 |
| Where an armed conflict has occurred in a host State that lacks legislative and regulatory frameworks for the protection of the environment from hazardous materials, including radioactive material, adoption of relevant international safety standards, such as the International Atomic Energy Agency Safety Standards, may assist it in introducing appropriate regulation. | 如果发生武装冲突的东道国缺乏关于保护环境不受包括放射性物质在内的危险材料影响的立法和监管框架，则采用相关的国际安全标准，如《国际原子能机构安全标准》，可能有助于实行适当的监管。 |
| Human Rights Council resolution 26/9 of 26 June 2014 setting up a Working Group to elaborate a legally binding instrument on transnational corporations and other business entities. | 人权理事会2014年6月26日第26/9号决议设立了一个工作组，以拟订一项关于跨国公司和其他工商实体的具有法律约束力的文书。 |
| OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises (footnote 512 above). | 《经合组织跨国企业准则》(上文脚注512)。 |
| Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (footnote 508 above). | 《工商企业与人权指导原则》(上文脚注508)。 |
| Chinese Due Diligence Guidelines for Responsible Mineral Supply Chains (footnote 517 above). | 《中国负责任矿产供应链尽责管理指南》(上文脚注517)。 |
| For instance, the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (footnote 508 above) use the notion “business enterprises domiciled in their territory and/or jurisdiction”, see e.g. principle 2. | 例如，《工商企业与人权指导原则》(上文脚注508)使用了“在其领土和/或管辖范围内的工商企业”这一概念，例如见原则2。 |
| OECD Due Diligence Guidance (footnote 514 above), p. 9; | 《经合组织尽职调查指南》(上文脚注514)，第9页； |
| and Recommendation of the Council on the OECD Due Diligence Guidance for Responsible Business Conduct (2018), pp. 92–94, available at https://legalinstruments.oecd.org/en/instruments/OECD-LEGAL-0443 (accessed on 8 July 2019). | 理事会关于经合组织负责任商业行为尽职调查指南的建议(2018年)，第92-94页，可查阅 https://legalinstruments.oecd.org/en/instruments/OECD-LEGAL-0443 (2019年7月8日访问)。 |
| See also OECD, Implementing the OECD Due Diligence Guidance, Executive Summary (Paris, 28 May 2018), p. 6, para. 16. | 另见经合组织，《执行〈经合组织尽职调查指南〉，内容提要》(2018年5月28日，巴黎)，第6页，第16段。 |
| Available at https://tuac.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/140PS_E_10_duediligence.pdf (accessed on 31 May 2022); | 可查阅https://tuac.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/140PS_E_10_duediligence.pdf (2022年5月31日访问)； |
| OECD Due Diligence Guidance (footnote 514 above), p. 8. | 《经合组织尽职调查指南》(上文脚注514)，第8页。 |
| OECD, The FATF Recommendations 2012 (2012, updated 2020), pp. 47, 54 and 119. | 经合组织，《金融行动特别工作组2012年建议》(2012年，2020年更新)，第47、54和119页。 |
| Available at www.fatf-gafi.org/publications/fatfrecommendations/documents/fatf-recommendations.html (accessed on 2 August 2022). | 可查阅www.fatf-gafi.org/publications/fatfrecommendations/documents/fatf-recommendations.html (2022年8月2日访问)。 |
| See also OECD, OECD Due Diligence Guidance for Responsible Supply Chains in the Garment and Footwear Sector (Paris, 2018), pp. 8 and 94, available at www.oecd-ilibrary.org/governance/oecd-due-diligence-guidance-for-responsible-supply-chains-in-the-garment-and-footwear-sector_9789264290587-en (accessed on 31 May 2022). | 另见经合组织，《经合组织鞋服行业负责任供应链尽责管理指南》(2018年，巴黎)，第8和94页，可查阅www.oecd-ilibrary.org/governance/oecd-due-diligence-guidance-for-responsible-supply-chains-in-the-garment-and-footwear-sector_9789264290587-en (2022年5月31日访问)。 |
| See, for instance, art. 2, subpara. (d), of the articles on the prevention of transboundary harm from hazardous activities, Yearbook … 2001, vol. II (Part Two) and corrigendum, para. 97; | 例如见关于预防危险活动的跨界损害的条款第2条(d)项，《2001年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)和更正，第97段； |
| art. 3, subpara. (b) of the articles on the protection of persons in the event of disasters, Yearbook … 2016, vol. II (Part Two), para. 48. | 发生灾害时的人员保护条款第3条(b)项，《2016年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第48段。 |
| Montreux Document on pertinent international legal obligations and good practices for States related to operations of private military and security companies during armed conflict (Montreux, ICRC, 2008) (Montreux Document), p. 9. | 《蒙特勒文件――武装冲突期间各国关于私营军事和安保服务公司营业的相关国际法律义务和良好惯例》(红十字国际委员会，2008年，蒙特勒)(《蒙特勒文件》)，第9页。 |
| C. Lehnhardt, “Private military contractors”, in. A. Nollkaemper and I. Plakokefalos (ed.), The Practice of Shared Responsibility in International Law (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2017), pp. 761–780. | C. Lehnhardt, “Private military contractors”, in. A. Nollkaemper and I. Plakokefalos (ed.), The Practice of Shared Responsibility in International Law (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2017), pp. 761–780. |
| See L. Cameron, “Private military companies: their status under international humanitarian law and its impact on their regulation”, International Review of the Red Cross, vol. 88 (2006), pp. 573–598, pp. 575–577. | 见L. Cameron, “Private military companies: their status under international humanitarian law and its impact on their regulation”, International Review of the Red Cross, vol. 88 (2006), pp. 573–598, pp. 575–577。 |
| O. Das and A. Kellay, “Private security companies and other private security providers (PSCs) and environmental protection in jus post bellum: policy and regulatory challenges”, in C. Stahn, J. Iverson, and J.S. Easterday (eds.), Environmental Protection and Transitions from Conflict to Peace: Clarifying Norms, Principles, and Practices (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2017), pp. 299–325. | O. Das and A. Kellay, “Private security companies and other private security providers (PSCs) and environmental protection in jus post bellum: policy and regulatory challenges”, in C. Stahn, J. Iverson, and J.S. Easterday (eds.), Environmental Protection and Transitions from Conflict to Peace: Clarifying Norms, Principles, and Practices (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2017), pp. 299–325. |
| Montreux Document, Part One, p. 12, para. 7. | 《蒙特勒文件》，第一部分，第12页，第7段。 |
| As for the responsibility of the contracting State, see art. 5 of the articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts, Yearbook … 2001, vol. II (Part Two) and corrigendum, paras. 76. | 关于缔约国的责任，见国家对国际不法行为的责任条款第5条，《2001年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)和更正，第76段。 |
| Montreux Document, Part One, pp. 11–13, paras. 1–17. | 《蒙特勒文件》，第一部分，第11-13页，第1-17段。 |
| Montreux Document, p. 11, para. 3. | 《蒙特勒文件》第11页，第3段。 |
| See footnote 486 above. | 见上文脚注486。 |
| Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (footnote 508 above), principle 17. | 《工商企业与人权指导原则》(上文脚注508)，原则17。 |
| See European Union conflict minerals regulation (footnote 521 above), eleventh preambular para. See also OECD Due Diligence Guidance … (footnote 514 above), p. 13: “Due diligence is an on-going, proactive and reactive process through which companies can ensure that they respect human rights and do not contribute to conflict”. | 见欧洲联盟冲突矿产条例(上文脚注521)，序言部分第十一段。 另见《经合组织…尽职调查指南》(上文脚注514)，第13页：“尽责调查是一个持续的主动预见，及时反应的程序，通过这一程序，能够确保企业尊重人权，不助长冲突”。 |
| OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises (footnote 512 above), part I, chap. VI “Environment”, pp. 42–46. | 《经合组织跨国企业准则》(上文脚注512)，第一部分，第六章“环境”，第42-46页。 |
| See also OECD, “Environment and the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises. | 另见经合组织，“环境与《经合组织跨国企业准则》。 |
| Corporate tools and approaches”. | 公司工具和方法”。 |
| Available at https://oecd.org/env/34992954.pdf (accessed on 2 August10 June 2022). | 可查阅 https://oecd.org/env/34992954.pdf (2022年8月2日访问)。 |
| For instance, the following instruments refer to “human health and the environment”: Convention on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution (Geneva, 13 November 1979), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1302, No. 21623, p. 217, art. 7 (d); | 例如，以下文书提及“人类健康和环境”：《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，第7条(d)项； |
| Vienna Convention for the Protection of the Ozone Layer (Vienna, 22 March 1985), ibid., vol. 1513, No. 26164, p. 293, preamble and art. 2, para. 2 (a); | 《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，序言和第2条第2款(a)项； |
| Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal (Basel, 22 March 1989), ibid., vol. 1673, No. 28911, p. 57, preamble, art. 2, paras. 8 and 9, art. 4, paras. 2 (c), (d) and (f) and para. 11, art. 10, para. 2 (b), art. 13, paras. 1 and 3 (d), art. 15, para. 5 (a); | 《控制危险废物越境转移及其处置巴塞尔公约》(1989年3月22日，巴塞尔)，同上，第1673卷，第28911号，第57页，序言、第2条第8和第9款、第4条第2款(c)、(d)和(f)项及第11款、第10条第2款(b)项、第13条第1和第3款(d)项、第15条第5款(a)项； |
| Protocol on the Prevention of Pollution of the Mediterranean Sea by Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal (Izmir, 1 October 1996), ibid., vol. 2942, No. 16908, p. 155, art. 1 (j) and (k); | 《防止危险废物的越境转移及其处置造成地中海污染议定书》(1996年10月1日，伊兹密尔)，同上，第2942卷，第16908号，第155页，第1条(j)和(k)项； |
| Rotterdam Convention on the Prior Informed Consent Procedure for Certain Hazardous Chemicals and Pesticides in International Trade (Rotterdam, 10 September 1998), ibid., vol. 2244, No. 39973, p. 337, preamble, art. 1 and art. 15, para. 4; | 《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)，同上，第2244卷，第39973号，第337页，序言、第1条和第15条第4款； |
| Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants (Stockholm, 22 May 2001), ibid., vol. 2256, No. 40214, p. 119, preamble, art. 1, art. 3, para. 2 (b) (iii) a, art. 6, para. 1, art. 11, para. 1 (d), art. 13, para. 4; | 《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，序言、第1条、第3条第2款(b)项(iii)目a分目、第6条第1款、第11条第1款(d)项、第13条第4款； |
| Minamata Convention on Mercury (Kumamoto, 10 October 2013), ibid., No. 54669 (volume number has yet to be determined), available from https://treaties.un.org (accessed on 2 August 2022), preamble, art. 1, art. 3, para. 6 (b) (i), art. 12, paras. 2 and 3 (c), art. 18, para. 1 (b), art. 19, para. 1 (c); | 《关于汞的水俣公约》(2013年10月10日，熊本)，同上，第54669号(卷号待定)，可查阅https://treaties.un.org(2022年8月2日访问), 序言、第一条、第三条第六款(二)项(1)目、第十二条第二款和第三款(三)项、第十八条第一款(二)款、第十九条第一款(三)项； |
| Regional Agreement on Access to Information, Public Participation and Justice in Environmental Matters in Latin America and the Caribbean (Escazú, 4 March 2018) (Escazú Agreement), ibid., No. 56654 (volume number has yet to be determined), available from https://treaties.un.org (accessed on 2 August 2022), art. 6, para. 12. | 《拉丁美洲和加勒比关于在环境问题上获得信息、公众参与和诉诸法律的区域协定》(2018年3月4日，埃斯卡苏)(《埃斯卡苏协定》)，同上，第56654号(卷号待定)，可查阅https://treaties.un.org(2022年8月2日访问), 第6条第12款。 |
| For instance, the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights incorporates both the right to health and the explicit right to a healthy environment. | 例如，《非洲人权和民族权宪章》纳入了健康权，还明文纳入了健康环境权。 |
| See African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (Nairobi, 27 June 1981), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1520, No. 26363, p. 217, art. 16, para. 1 (the right to health), and art. 24 (“the right to a general satisfactory environment favourable to [each person’s] development”). | 见《非洲人权和民族权宪章》(1981年6月27日，内罗毕)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第1520卷，第26363号，第217页，第16条第1款(“健康权”)和第24条(“享有有利于[每个人]发展的总体令人满意的环境的权利”)。 |
| These rights were resorted to in Social and Economic Rights Action Center (SERAC) and Center for Economic and Social Rights (CESR) v. Federal Republic of Nigeria (see footnote 483 above) and Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) v. Nigeria, Judgment No. ECW/CCJ/JUD/18/12, Community Court of Justice, Economic Community of West African States, 14 December 2012. | Social and Economic Rights Action Center (SERAC) and Center for Economic and Social Rights (CESR) v. Federal Republic of Nigeria (见上文脚注483)和Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) v. Nigeria, (Judgment No. ECW/CCJ/JUD/18/12, Community Court of Justice, Economic Community of West African States, 14 December 2012)等案件中援引了这些权利。 |
| Similarly, the Additional Protocol to the American Convention on Human Rights in the area of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (San Salvador, 17 November 1988), Organization of American States, Treaty Series, No. 69, includes the right to health. | 《美洲人权公约关于经济、社会和文化权利领域的附加议定书》(1988年11月17日，圣萨尔瓦多，美洲国家组织，《条约汇编》，第69号)同样列入了包括健康权。 |
| The regional jurisprudence acknowledges that the right to health includes an element of environmental protection, such as a pollution-free environment. | 区域判例承认健康权包括环境保护这一内容，如无污染的环境。 |
| See Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, Annual Report 1984–1985, chap. V “Areas in which further steps are needed to give effect to the human rights set forth in the American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man and the American Convention on Human Rights”, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.66; | 见美洲人权委员会，“1984-1985年度报告”，第五章“需要采取进一步步骤以落实《美洲关于人的权利和义务宣言》和《美洲人权公约》规定的人权的领域”，OEA/Ser.L/V/II.66； |
| see also Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, Report on the situation of human rights in Cuba, 4 October 1983, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.61, Doc. 29 rev. 1, chap. XIII “The right to health”, para. 41; | 另见美洲人权委员会，《关于古巴人权状况的报告》，1983年10月4日，OEA/Ser.L/V/II.61, Doc. 29 rev. 1, 第十三章“健康权”，第41段； |
| Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, resolution No. 12/85 in Case No. 7615, 5 March 1985; | 美洲人权委员会，第7615号案件第12/85号决议，1985年3月5日； |
| Inter-American Court of Human Rights, Indigenous Community Yakye Axa v. Paraguay, para. 167. | Inter-American Court of Human Rights, Indigenous Community Yakye Axa v. Paraguay, para. 167。 |
| Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, general comment No. 14 (2000) on the right to the highest attainable standard of health (art. 12), Official Records of the Economic and Social Council, 2001, Supplement No. 2 (E/2001/22-E/C.12/2000/21), annex IV, para. 30. | 经济、社会及文化权利委员会，关于享有能达到的最高标准健康的权利(第十二条)的第14号一般性意见(2000年)，《经济及社会理事会正式记录，2001年，补编第2号》(E/2001/22-E/C.12/2000/21)，附件四，第30段。 |
| See the Report of the Special Rapporteur on the issue of human rights obligations relating to the enjoyment of a safe, clean, healthy and sustainable environment (A/HRC/37/59). | 见与享有安全、清洁、健康卫生和可持续环境有关的人权义务问题特别报告员的报告 (A/HRC/37/59)。 |
| UNEP, Environmental Rule of Law (see footnote 346 above), p. 10 (“150 countries have enshrined environmental protection or the right to a healthy environment in their constitutions”), p. viii. | 环境署，《环境法治》(见上文脚注346)，第10页(“已150个国家将环境保护或享有健康环境的权利列入宪法”)，第viii页。 |
| See General Assembly resolution 76/300 of 28 July 2022 on the human right to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment. | 见联大2022年7月28日关于享有清洁、健康和可持续环境的人权的第76/300号决议。 |
| See also Human Rights Council resolution 48/13 of 8 October 2021. | 另见人权理事会2021年10月8日第48/13号决议。 |
| OECD Due Diligence Guidance (footnote 514 above), recommendation, pp. 7–9. | 《经合组织尽职调查指南》(上文脚注514)，第7-9页。 |
| Chinese Due Diligence Guidelines for Responsible Mineral Supply Chains (see footnote 517 above), sect. 5.1. | 《中国负责任矿产供应链尽责管理指南》(见上文脚注517)，第5.1节。 |
| Ibid., sect. 5.2. | 同上，第5.2节。 |
| European Union conflict minerals regulation (footnote 521 above), art. 2 (d). | 欧洲联盟冲突矿产条例(上文脚注521)，第2(d)条。 |
| As well as in Iceland, Norway and Switzerland. | 在冰岛、挪威和瑞士也适用。 |
| Regulation (EC) No. 864/2007 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 July on the law applicable to non-contractual obligations (Rome II Regulation), Official Journal of the European Union, L 199, p. 40, art. 4, para. 1. | 欧洲议会和欧洲理事会7月11日关于适用于非合同义务的法律的第864/2007号条例(《罗马条例二》)，《欧洲联盟公报》，L 199号，第40页，第4条第1款。 |
| See also Convention on Jurisdiction and the Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters (Lugano, 30 October 2007), Official Journal of the European Union, L 339, p. 3. | 另见《关于民商事司法管辖和判决执行公约》(2007年10月30日，卢加诺)，《欧洲联盟公报》，第L 339号，第3页。 |
| Vedanta Resources PLC and another v. Lungowe and others, Judgment, 10 April 2019, [2019] UKSC 20, On appeal from [2017] EWCA Civ 1528. | Vedanta Resources PLC and another v. Lungowe and others, Judgment, 10 April 2019, [2019] UKSC 20, On appeal from [2017] EWCA Civ 1528. |
| OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises (footnote 512 above), chap. I, para. 4, p. 17. | 《经合组织跨国企业准则》(上文脚注512)，第一章，第4段，第17页。 |
| United States, District Court, Southern District New York, In re Parmalat Securities Litigation, 594 F. Supp. 2d 444 (S.D.N.Y. 2009). | 美国纽约南区联邦地区法院，关于帕尔玛拉特债券诉讼，594 F. Supp. 2d 444 (S.D.N.Y. 2009)。 |
| Ibid., pp. 451–453. | 同上，第451-453页。 |
| United States, District Court, Southern District New York, In re South African Apartheid Litigation, 617 F. Supp. 2d 228 (S.D.N.Y. 2009). In this case, South African plaintiffs sued Daimler AG and Barclays National Bank Ltd. for aiding and abetting through their subsidiaries the Government of South Africa in its apartheid policy. | United States, District Court, Southern District New York, In re South African Apartheid Litigation, 617 F. Supp. 2d 228 (S.D.N.Y. 2009). 在该案中，来自南非的原告起诉戴姆勒公司和巴克莱国家银行通过其子公司协助和教唆南非政府推行种族隔离政策。 |
| Ibid., p. 271. | 同上，p. 271。 |
| Ibid., pp. 271–272. | 同上，pp. 271-272。 |
| Chandler v. Cape PLC, [2012] EWCA (Civ) 525 (Eng.), para. 80. It was furthermore required that the parent company knew or ought to have known that the subsidiary or its employees relied on it for protection. | Chandler v. Cape PLC, [2012] EWCA (Civ) 525 (Eng.), para. 80. 还要求母公司知道或应当知道子公司及其雇员依靠母公司提供保护。 |
| See also R. McCorquodale, “Waving not drowning: Kiobel outside the United States”, American Journal of International Law, vol. 107 (2013), pp. 846–51. | 另见R. McCorquodale, “Waving not drowning: Kiobel outside the United States”, American Journal of International Law, vol. 107 (2013), pp. 846–51。 |
| See also Lubbe and others v. Cape PLC Afrika and others v. Same, 20 July 2000, 1 Lloyd’s Rep. 139, as well as P. Muchlinski, “Corporations in international litigation: problems of jurisdiction and United Kingdom Asbestos cases”, International and Comparative Law Quarterly, vol. 50 (2001), pp. 1–25. | 另见Lubbe and others v. Cape PLC Afrika and others v. Same, 20 July 2000, 1 Lloyd’s Rep. 139以及P. Muchlinski, “Corporations in international litigation: problems of jurisdiction and United Kingdom Asbestos cases”, International and Comparative Law Quarterly, vol. 50 (2001), pp. 1–25。 |
| See also Akpan v. Royal Dutch Shell PLC, The Hague District Court, case No. C/09/337050/HA ZA 09-1580 (ECLI:NL:RBDHA:2013:BY9854), 30 January 2013. | 另见Akpan v. Royal Dutch Shell PLC, The Hague District Court, case No. C/09/337050/HA ZA 09-1580 (ECLI:NL:RBDHA:2013:BY9854), 30 January 2013。 |
| See further Canada, Supreme Court of Canada, Nevsun Resources Ltd. v. Araya et al., Judgment, 28 February 2020, SCC 5, para. 17. | 又见Canada, Supreme Court of Canada, Nevsun Resources Ltd. v. Araya et al., Judgment, 28 February 2020, SCC 5, para. 17。 |
| See further C. Bright, “Quelques réflexions à propos de l’affaire Shell aux Pays-Bas”, in Société Française pour le Droit International, L’entreprise multinationale et le droit international (Paris, Pedone, 2016), pp. 127–142. | 又见C. Bright, “Quelques réflexions à propos de l’affaire Shell aux Pays-Bas”, in Société Française pour le Droit International, L’entreprise multinationale et le droit international (Paris, Pedone, 2016), pp. 127-142。 |
| Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, general comment No. 24 (2017) on State obligations under the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights in the context of business activities (E/C.12/GC/24), para. 30. | 经济、社会及文化权利委员会，关于国家在工商活动中履行《经济社会文化权利国际公约》规定的义务的第24号一般性意见(2017年) (E/C.12/GC/24)，第30段。 |
| The general comment links such measures to the obligation to protect Covenant rights. | 该一般性意见将这些措施与保护《公约》权利的义务联系起来。 |
| Alberta Inc. v. Katanga Mining Ltd. [2008] EWHC 2679 (Comm), 5 November 2008 (Tomlinson J.). | Alberta Inc. v. Katanga Mining Ltd. [2008] EWHC 2679 (Comm), 5 November 2008 (Tomlinson J.). |
| Ibid., para. 19. | 同上，para. 19。 |
| Ibid., para. 20. | 同上，para. 20。 |
| Ibid., para. 34. | 同上，para. 34。 |
| Ibid., para. 33. | 同上，para. 33。 |
| Similarly, in the United States case of In re Xe Services, the District Court dismissed the private military company’s claim that Iraq would be an appropriate forum and held that it was not shown that an alternative forum existed. | 同样，在美国黑水公司案中，地区法院驳回了该私营军事公司关于伊拉克将是适当的诉讼地的主张，并认为没有证据表明存在其他诉讼地。 |
| See In re Xe Services Alien Tort Litigation, 665 F. Supp. 2d 569, 602 (E.D. Va. 2009). | 见In re Xe Services Alien Tort Litigation, 665 F. Supp. 2d 569, 602 (E.D. Va. 2009)。 |
| See also Canada, Nevsun Resources Ltd. (footnote 568 above), para. 18, referring to “a real risk of an unfair trial occurring in Eritrea”. | 另见Canada, Nevsun Resources Ltd. (上文脚注568)，第18段，其中提到“厄立特里亚发生不公正审判的真实风险”。 |
| Human Rights Committee, concluding observations on the report of Germany (CCPR/C/DEU/CO/6), para. 16. | 人权事务委员会，关于德国报告的结论性意见(CCPR/C/DEU/CO/6)，第16段。 |
| Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, concluding observations on the report of the United Kingdom (CERD/C/GBR/CO/18-20), para. 29. | 消除种族歧视委员会，关于联合王国报告的结论性意见(CERD/C/GBR/CO/18-20)，第29段。 |
| Montreux Document. Part One, paras. 5, 6, 10–12, 16, 17. | 《蒙特勒文件》，第一部分，第5、6、10-12、16和17段。 |
| Ibid., para. 15. | 同上，第15段。 |
| See also Federal Department of Foreign Affairs of Switzerland and Geneva Centre for the Democratic Control of Armed Forces (DCAF), “Legislative guidance tool for States to regulate private military and security companies” (Geneva, 2016), which contains also examples of best practices, available at www.dcaf.ch/sites/default/files/publications/documents/Legislative-Guidance-Tool-EN_1.pdf (accessed on 8 July 2019). | 另见瑞士联邦外交部和日内瓦民主管制武装力量中心，“国家立法监管私营军事和安保公司指导工具”(2016年，日内瓦)，其中还载有最佳做法实例，可查阅www.dcaf.ch/sites/default/files/publications/documents/Legislative-Guidance-Tool-EN_1.pdf(2019年7月8日访问)。 |
| For national legislation, see also the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) study, https://documents-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/G17/218/09/PDF/G1721809.pdf?OpenElement. The following link can be referred to for the various parts of the study and other related documents – https://www.ohchr.org/en/special-procedures/wg-mercenaries/annual-thematic-reports (accessed on 2 August 2022). | 关于国家立法，另见联合国人权事务高级专员办事处(人权高专办)的研究报告，https://documents-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/G17/218/09/PDF/G1721809.pdf?OpenElement. 该研究报告的各个部分和其他相关文件，可参考以下链接https://www.ohchr.org/en/special-procedures/wg-mercenaries/annual-thematic-reports (2022年8月2日访问)。 |
| See also Al-Quraishi et.al. v. Nahkla and L-3 Services, 728 F Supp 2d 702 (D Md 2010) at 35–37, 29 July 2010. | 另见Al-Quraishi et al. v. Nahkla and L-3 Services, 728 F Supp 2d 702 (D Md 2010) at 35–37, 29 July 2010。 |
| A settlement was reached in this case, after years of litigation, in 2012. | 该案经过多年诉讼，于2012年达成和解。 |
| See draft principle 16 below. | 见下文原则草案16。 |
| See footnotes 756 and 758 below. | 见下文脚注756和758。 |
| See L. Rajamani, “Public interest environmental litigation in India: exploring issues of access, participation, equity, effectiveness and sustainability”, Journal of Environmental Law, vol. 19 (2007), pp. 293–321. | 见L. Rajamani, “Public interest environmental litigation in India: exploring issues of access, participation, equity, effectiveness and sustainability”, Journal of Environmental Law, vol. 19 (2007), pp. 293–321。 |
| Available at www.researchgate.net/publication/316876795_Public_Interest_ Environmental_Litigation_in_India_Exploring_Issues_of_Access_Participation_Equity_Effectiveness_and_Sustainability (accessed on 8 July 2019). | 可查阅 www.researchgate.net/publication/316876795_Public_Interest_Environmental_Litigation_in_India_Exploring_Issues_of_Access_Participation_Equity_Effectiveness_and_Sustainability (2019年7月8日访问)。 |
| See also India Environmental Portal, Public Interest Litigation, at www.indiaenvironmentportal.org.in/category/1255/thesaurus/public-interest-litigation-pil (accessed on 8 July 2019). | 另见印度环境门户网站，公益诉讼，可查阅 www.indiaenvironmentportal.org.in/category/1255/thesaurus/public-interest-litigation-pil (2019年7月8日访问)。 |
| See also the 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. 6, as well as Directive 2003/35/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 May 2003 providing for public participation in respect of the drawing up of certain plans and programmes relating to the environment and amending with regard to public participation and access to justice Council Directives 85/337/EEC and 96/61/EC. | 另见《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，第六条； 欧洲议会和欧洲理事会2003年5月26日第2003/35/EC号指令，该指令就公众参与起草某些与环境有关的计划和方案作出了规定，并修订了关于公众参与和诉诸司法的欧洲理事会第85/337/EEC号指令和第96/61/EC号指令。 |
| First Geneva Convention; Second Geneva Convention, Third Geneva Convention; Fourth Geneva Convention, common articles 2 and 3; | 《日内瓦第一公约》、《日内瓦第二公约》、《日内瓦第三公约》、《日内瓦第四公约》，共同第二和第三条。 |
| Additional Protocol I, art. 1; | 《第一附加议定书》第一条； |
| and Additional Protocol II, art. 1. | 《第二附加议定书》第一条。 |
| Convention on the Prohibition of Military or Any Other 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。 |
| Report of the Conference of the Committee on Disarmament, vol. I, Official records of the General Assembly, Thirty-first session, Supplement No. 27 (A/31/27), annex, Understanding relating to article II, p. 92. | 《裁军委员会会议的报告》，第一卷，《大会正式记录，第三十一届会议，补编第27号》(A/31/27)，附件，对第二条的了解，第92页。 |
| See footnotes 642 and 643 below. | 见下文脚注640和643。 |
| The Martens Clause has nevertheless also been included in the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons, fifth preambular paragraph, as well as in the Convention on Cluster Munitions (Dublin, 30 May 2008), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 2688, p. 39, eleventh preambular paragraph. | 然而，马顿斯条款也被列入了《特定常规武器公约》序言部分第五段，以及《集束弹药公约》(2008年5月30日，都柏林)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第2688卷，第39页，序言部分第十一段。 |
| See para. (6) of the commentary to draft principle 12 below. | 见下文原则草案12评注第(6)段。 |
| See also D. Shelton and A. Kiss, “Martens Clause for environmental protection”, Environmental Policy and Law, vol. 30 (2000), pp. 285–286, at p. 286. | 另见D. Shelton and A. Kiss, “Martens Clause for environmental protection”, Environmental Policy and Law, vol. 30 (2000), pp. 285–286, at p. 286。 |
| Additional Protocol I, art. 35, para. 1. | 《第一附加议定书》第三十五条第一款。 |
| Additional Protocol I, art. 54, and Additional Protocol II, art. 14. | 《第一附加议定书》第五十四条，以及《第二附加议定书》第十四条。 |
| Additional Protocol I, art. 56, and Additional Protocol II, art. 15. | 《第一附加议定书》第五十六条，以及《第二附加议定书》第十五条。 |
| Hague Regulations, art. 23 (g); | 《海牙章程》第二十三条第七款； |
| Fourth Geneva Convention. art. 147. | 《日内瓦第四公约》第一四七条。 |
| ICRC, Guidelines on the Protection of the Environment in Armed Conflict (footnote 345 above). | 红十字国际委员会，《武装冲突中保护环境的准则》(上文脚注345)。 |
| Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall (see footnote 351 above), p. 178, para. 106; | 修建隔离墙的法律后果(见上文脚注351)，第178页，第106段； |
| Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons (see footnote 340 above), p. 240, para. 25. | 以核武器进行威胁或使用核武器的合法性(见上文脚注340)，第240页，第25段。 |
| Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons (see footnote 340 above), p. 243, para. 33; | 以核武器进行威胁或使用核武器的合法性(见上文脚注340)，第243页，第33段。 |
| draft articles on the effects of armed conflicts on treaties, Yearbook … 2011, vol. II (Part Two), pp. 106–130, paras. 100–101, commentary to the annex, para. (55), at p. 127. | 武装冲突对条约影响条款草案，《2011年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第106-130页，第100-101段，附件评注，第(55)段，见第127页。 |
| Convention (II) with Respect to the Laws and Customs of War on Land (The Hague, 29 July 1899), J.B. Scott (ed.), The Hague Conventions and Declarations of 1899 and 1907. | 《关于陆战法规和习惯的(第二)公约》(1899年7月29日，海牙)，J.B. Scott编，《1899年和1907年海牙公约和宣言》)。 |
| The 1899 Martens Clause reads: “Until a more complete code of the laws of war is issued, the high contracting Parties think it right to declare that in cases not included in the Regulations adopted by them, populations and belligerents remain under the protection and empire of the principles of international law, as they result from the usages established between civilized nations, from the laws of humanity, and the requirements of the public conscience. | 1899年的马顿斯条款如下：“在颁布更完整的战争法规之前，缔约各国认为有必要声明，凡属它们通过的规章中没有包括的的情况，居民和交战者仍应受国际法原则的保护和管辖，因为这些原则是来源于文明国家间制定的惯例、人道法规和公众良知的要求”。 |
| ” For a general overview, see memorandum by the Secretariat on the effect of armed conflicts on treaties: an examination of practice and doctrine (A/CN.4/550), paras. 140–142. | 一般性概述见《武装冲突对条约的影响：对实践和理论的审查》，秘书处的备忘录(A/CN.4/550)，第140-142段。 |
| See First Geneva Convention, art. 63; | 见《日内瓦第一公约》第六十三条； |
| Second Geneva Convention, art. 62; | 《日内瓦第二公约》第六十二条； |
| Third Geneva Convention, art. 142; | 《日内瓦第三公约》第一四二条； |
| Fourth Geneva Convention, art. 158. | 《日内瓦第四公约》第一五八条。 |
| Additional Protocol I, art. 1, para. 2, and Additional Protocol II, preamble, para. 4. | 《第一附加议定书》第一条第二款，以及《第二附加议定书》序言部分第四段。 |
| Additional Protocol I, art. 1, para. 2. | 《第一附加议定书》第一条第二款。 |
| Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons (see footnote 340 above), p. 259, para. 84. | 以核武器进行威胁或使用核武器的合法性(见上文脚注340)，第259页，第84段。 |
| T. Meron, “The Martens Clause, principles of humanity, and dictates of public conscience”, American Journal of International Law, vol. 94 (2000), pp. 78–89, at p. 87. | T. Meron, “The Martens Clause, principles of humanity, and dictates of public conscience”, American Journal of International Law, vol. 94 (2000), pp. 78–89, at p. 87. |
| Para. (3) of the commentary to art. 29 of the articles on the law of the non-navigational uses of international watercourses with commentaries and resolution on transboundary confined groundwater, Yearbook … 1994, vol. II (Part Two), at p. 131; | 对国际水道非航行使用法条款及其评注第29条的评注第(3)段和关于跨界封闭地下水的决议，《1994年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，见第131页； |
| para. (3) of the commentary to draft art. 18 of the draft articles on the law of transboundary aquifers, Yearbook… 2008, vol. II (Part Two), para. 54, at p. 43: “In cases not covered by a specific rule, certain fundamental protections are afforded by the ‘Martens clause’”. | 跨界含水层法条款草案第18条草案评注第(3)段，《2008年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第54段，见第43页：“在没有具体规定的情况下，可按照‘马顿斯条款’给予某些基本的保护”。 |
| “Finally, the Court points to the Martens Clause, whose continuing existence and applicability is not to be doubted, as an affirmation that the principles and rules of humanitarian law apply to nuclear weapons”, Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons (see footnote 340 above), p. 260, para. 87. | “最后，法院指出，马顿斯条款的继续存在和适用性是不容怀疑的，这也确认人道法的原则和规则适用于核武器”，以核武器进行威胁或使用核武器的合法性(见上文脚注340)，第260页，第87段。 |
| ICRC commentary (2016) to the First Geneva Convention, art. 63, para. 3298. | 红十字国际委员会关于《日内瓦第一公约》的评注(2016年)，第六十三条，第3298段。 |
| See also C. Greenwood, “Historical developments and legal basis”, in D. Fleck (ed.), The Handbook of International Humanitarian Law (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2008), pp. 33–34, at p. 34: “as new weapons and launch systems continue to be developed, incorporating ever more sophisticated robotic and computer technology, the venerable Martens Clause will ensure that the technology will not outpace the law.” | 另见 C. Greenwood, “Historical developments and legal basis”, in D. Fleck (ed.), The Handbook of International Humanitarian Law (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2008), pp. 33–34, at p. 34: “随着包含越来越复杂的机器人和计算机技术新武器和新的发射系统的不断开发，庄严的‘马顿斯条款’将确保技术的发展速度不会超过法律的发展速度”。 |
| ICRC commentary (1987) to Additional Protocol I, art. 1, para. 2, para. 55; | 红十字国际委员会关于《第一附加议定书》的评注(1987年)，第一条第二款，第55段； |
| ICRC commentary to the First Geneva Convention (2016), para. 3297. | 红十字国际委员会关于《日内瓦第一公约》的评注 (2016年)，第3297段。 |
| According to the German Military Manual, “[i]f an act of war is not expressly prohibited by international agreements or customary law, this does not necessarily mean that it is actually permissible”. | 根据德国军事手册，“国际协议或习惯法没有明确禁止某种战争行为并不一定意味着这种行为实际上获得允许”。 |
| See Federal Ministry of Defence, Humanitarian Law in Armed Conflicts – Manual, para. 129 (ZDv 15/2, 1992). | 见Federal Ministry of Defence, Humanitarian Law in Armed Conflicts – Manual, para. 129 (ZDv 15/2, 1992)。 |
| Greenwood, “Historical developments and legal basis” (footnote 601 above), p. 34. | Greenwood, “Historical developments and legal basis” (上文脚注601), p. 34。 |
| See also the ICRC commentary (2016) to the First Geneva Convention, art. 63, para. 3296, which characterizes this as the minimum content of the clause. | 另见红十字国际委员会关于《日内瓦第一公约》的评注(2016年)，第六十三条，第3296段，其中将这一点称为该条款的最低限度内容。 |
| A. Cassese, “The Martens Clause: half a loaf or simply pie in the sky? ”, European Journal of International Law, vol. 11 (2000), pp. 187–216, at pp. 212–213; | A. Cassese, “The Martens Clause: half a loaf or simply pie in the sky?”, European Journal of International Law, vol. 11 (2000), pp. 187–216, at pp. 212–213; |
| G. Distefano and E. Henry, “Final provisions, including the Martens Clause”, in A. Clapham, P. Gaeta and M. Sassòli (eds.), The 1949 Geneva Conventions: A Commentary (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015), pp. 155–188, at pp. 185–186. See also Prosecutor v. Kupreškić et al., Case No. IT-95-16-T, Judgment, 14 January 2000, paras. 525 and 527. | G. Distefano and E. Henry, “Final provisions, including the Martens Clause”, in A. Clapham, P. Gaeta and M. Sassòli (eds.), The 1949 Geneva Conventions: A Commentary (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015), pp. 155–188, at pp. 185–186. 另见 Prosecutor v. Kupreškić et al., Case No. IT-95-16-T, Judgment, 14 January 2000, paras. 525 and 527。 |
| Cassese, “The Martens Clause: half a loaf or simply pie in the sky?” (see previous footnote), p. 214; | Cassese, “The Martens Clause: half a loaf or simply pie in the sky?” (见上一脚注), p. 214; |
| Meron, “The Martens Clause, principles of humanity, and dictates of public conscience” (see footnote 598 above), p. 88. | Meron, “The Martens Clause, principles of humanity, and dictates of public conscience” (见上文脚注598), p. 88。 |
| See P. Sands et al., Principles of International Environmental Law, 4th ed. (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2018), p. 832: “In modern international law, there is no reason why [the dictates of public conscience] should not encompass environmental protection”. | 见P. Sands et al., Principles of International Environmental Law, 4th ed. (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2018), p. 832:“在现代国际法中，[公众良心要求]没有理由不包括环境保护”。 |
| Similarly M. Bothe et al., “International law protecting the environment during armed conflict: gaps and opportunities”, International Review of the Red Cross, vol. 92 (2010), pp. 569–592, at pp. 588–589; | 类似内容见 M. Bothe et al., “International law protecting the environment during armed conflict: gaps and opportunities”, International Review of the Red Cross, vol. 92 (2010), pp. 569–592, at pp. 588–589; |
| Droege and Tougas, “The protection of the natural environment in armed conflict …” (footnote 376 above), pp. 39–40; | Droege and Tougas, “The protection of the natural environment in armed conflict …” (上文脚注376), pp. 39–40; |
| M. Tignino, “Water during and after armed conflicts: what protection in international law? ”, Brill Research Perspectives in International Water Law, vol. 1.4 (2016), pp. 1–111, at pp. 26, 28 and 41. | M. Tignino, “Water during and after armed conflicts: what protection in international law?”, Brill Research Perspectives in International Water Law, vol. 1.4 (2016), pp. 1–111, at pp. 26, 28 and 41。 |
| ICRC, Guidelines for Military Manuals and Instructions on the Protection of the Environment in Times of Armed Conflict (A/49/323, annex), guideline 7. | 红十字国际委员会《关于武装冲突中环境保护的军事手册和指南准则》(A/49/323, 附件)，准则7。 |
| General Assembly resolution 49/50 of 9 December 1994, para. 11. | 联大1994年12月9日第49/50号决议，第11段。 |
| ICRC, Guidelines on the Protection of the Natural Environment in Armed Conflict (footnote 345 above), Rule 16. | 红十字国际委员会，《武装冲突中保护自然环境的准则》(上文脚注345)，规则16。 |
| World Conservation Congress, resolution 2.97, entitled “A Martens Clause for environmental protection” (Amman, 4–11 October 2000). | 世界自然保护大会题为“环境保护的马顿斯条款”的第2.97号决议(2000年10月4日至11日，安曼)。 |
| The United States and United States agency members did not join the consensus. | 美国和美国的机构会员没有加入协商一致。 |
| Shelton and Kiss, “Martens Clause for environmental protection” (footnote 586 above) p. 286. | Shelton and Kiss, “Martens Clause for environmental protection” (上文脚注586) p. 286。 |
| Similarly, ICRC, Guidelines on the Protection of the Natural Environment in Armed Conflict (footnote 345 above), para. 201, and footnotes 455 and 456. | 同样，见红十字国际委员会，《武装冲突中保护自然环境的准则》(上文脚注345)，第201段，以及脚注455和456。 |
| See Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons (see footnote 340 above), p. 241, para. 29. | 见以核武器进行威胁或使用核武器的合法性(见上文脚注340)，第241页，第29段。 |
| The World Charter for Nature stated that “[m]ankind is a part of nature and life depends on the uninterrupted functioning of natural systems”. | 《世界自然宪章》指出，“人类是自然的一部分，生命有赖于自然系统的功能维持不坠”。 |
| General Assembly resolution 37/7 of 28 October 1982, annex, preamble. | 联大1982年10月28日第37/7号决议，附件，序言部分。 |
| The Special Rapporteur on human rights and the environment has furthermore linked human dignity with the environment as a “minimum standard of human dignity”: “Without a healthy environment, we are unable to fulfil our aspirations or even live at a level commensurate with minimum standards of human dignity. | 人权与环境特别报告员还将人的尊严与环境联系起来，将环境视为“人的尊严的最低标准”：“没有健康的环境，我们就无法实现我们的愿望，甚至无法使生活水平与人的尊严的最低标准相称”。 |
| ” See, OHCHR, “Introduction”, available at www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Environment/SREnvironment/Pages/SRenvironmentIndex.aspx (accessed on 2 August 2022). | 见人权高专办，“导言”，可查阅 www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Environment/SREnvironment/Pages/SRenvironmentIndex.aspx (2022年8月2日访问)。 |
| ICRC has also recognized this intrinsic link, see ICRC, Guidelines on the Protection of the Natural Environment in Armed Conflict (footnote 345 above), para. 201. | 红十字国际委员会也确认这一内在联系，见红十字国际委员会，《武装冲突中保护自然环境的准则》(上文脚注345)，第201段。 |
| See Sands, Principles of International Environmental Law (footnote 607 above), p. 14: The concept of the environment, however, encompasses “both the features and the products of the natural world and those of human civilisation. | 见Sands, Principles of International Environmental Law (上文脚注607), p. 14: 但环境的概念包括“自然界和人类文明的特征和产物”。 |
| ” See also C.R. Payne, “Defining the environment: environmental integrity”, in Stahn, Iverson and Easterday (eds.), Environmental Protection and Transitions from Conflict to Peace … (footnote 541 above), pp. 40–70, at p. 69, calling for a consideration of “how human activities and environment function as an interactive system”, not focusing exclusively on one element. | 另见C.R. Payne, “Defining the environment: environmental integrity”, in Stahn, Iverson and Easterday (eds.), Environmental Protection and Transitions from Conflict to Peace … (上文脚注541), pp. 40–70, at p. 69, 呼吁考虑“人类活动和环境如何作为一个相互作用的系统发挥作用”，而不是仅关注某一个要素。 |
| Corfu Channel case, Judgment of April 9th, 1949, I.C.J. Reports 1949, p. 4, at p. 22. | 科孚海峡案，1949年4月9日的判决，《1949年国际法院案例汇编》，第4页起，见第22页。 |
| See also ICRC commentary (2016) to the First Geneva Convention, art. 63, para. 3291. | 另见红十字国际委员会关于《日内瓦第一公约》的评注(2016年)，第六十三条，第3291段。 |
| See also La Nostra Segnora de la Piedad (1801), 25 Merlin, Jurisprudence, Prise Maritime, sect. 3, art. 1.3, which established that the capture of such vessels was contrary to “the principles of humanity, and the maxims of international law”. | 另见La Nostra Segnora de la Piedad (1801), 25 Merlin, Jurisprudence, Prise Maritime, sect. 3, art. 1.3，其中规定捕获这种船只违反“人道原则和国际法准则”。 |
| See further The Paquete Habana v. United States, 175 U.S. 677 (1900), pp. 695 and 708, in which the United States Supreme Court recognized that customary international law prohibited the capture of coastal fishing vessels engaged in sustaining the civilian population, and cited with approval the La Nostra Segnora de la Piedad case. | 又见The Paquete Habana v. United States, 175 U.S. 677 (1900), pp. 695 and 708，其中美国最高法院承认习惯国际法禁止捕获从事维持平民居民生活的沿海渔船，并赞同地援引了La Nostra Segnora de la Piedad案。 |
| Together with such other concepts as “laws of humanity”, “humaneness” and “spirit of humanity”; | 以及“人道法则”、“人道”和“人道精神”等其他此类概念； |
| see K.M. Larsen et al. (eds.), Searching for a ‘Principle of Humanity’ in International Humanitarian Law (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press 2012), pp. 4 and p. 6. | 见K.M. Larsen et al. (eds.), Searching for a ‘Principle of Humanity’ in International Humanitarian Law (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press 2012), pp. 4 and p. 6。 |
| The link of these concepts with human rights has been recognized both in practice and in doctrine. | 这些概念与人权的联系在实践和理论中都已得到了确认。 |
| See, for instance, International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, Prosecutor v. Zejnil Delalic, Zdravko Mucic (aka “Pavo”), Hazim Delic and Esad Landžo (aka “Zenga”) (“Celebici case”) Case No. IT-96-3-A, Judgment, 20 February 2001, para. 149; | 例如，见International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, Prosecutor v. Zejnil Delalic, Zdravko Mucic (aka “Pavo”), Hazim Delic and Esad Landžo (aka “Zenga”) (“Celebici case”) Case No. IT-96-3-A, Judgment, 20 February 2001, para. 149; |
| International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, M/V Saiga (No. 2), St Vincent and the Grenadines v. Guinea, Judgment, ITLOS Reports 1999, p. 10, at para. 155; | International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, M/V Saiga (No. 2), St Vincent and the Grenadines v. Guinea, Judgment, ITLOS Reports 1999, p. 10, at para. 155; |
| I. Brownlie, Principles of Public International Law (Oxford, Clarendon Press), 1998, p. 575. | I. Brownlie, Principles of Public International Law (Oxford, Clarendon Press), 1998, p. 575。 |
| Celebici case (see previous footnote), para. 149. | Celebici案(见上一脚注)，第149段。 |
| Commission on Human Rights, Promotion and Protection of Human Rights: fundamental standards of humanity, Report of the Secretary-General (E/CN.4/2006/87). | 人权委员会，促进和保护人权：基本人道标准，秘书长的报告(E/CN.4/2006/87)。 |
| Cassese, “The Martens Clause: half a loaf or simply pie in the sky?” (footnote 605 above), p. 212, refers to “general standards of humanity” as deduced from international human rights standards. | Cassese, “The Martens Clause: half a loaf or simply pie in the sky?” (上文脚注605), p. 212, 提到从国际人权标准中推导出的“一般人道标准”。 |
| See also P.-M. Dupuy, “‘Les considérations élémentaires d’humanité’ dans la jurisprudence de la Cour internationale de Justice”, in L.-A. Sicilianos and R.-J. Dupuy (eds.), Mélanges en l’honneur de Nicolas Valticos: Droit et justice (Paris, Pedone, 1998), pp. 117–130. | 另见 P.-M. Dupuy, “‘Les considérations élémentaires d’humanité’ dans la jurisprudence de la Cour internationale de Justice”, in L.-A. Sicilianos and R.-J. Dupuy (eds.), Mélanges en l’honneur de Nicolas Valticos: Droit et justice (Paris, Pedone, 1998), pp. 117–130。 |
| Several courts and tribunals have explicitly recognized the interdependence between human beings and the environment by affirming that environmental harm affects the right to life. | 若干法院和法庭已申明环境损害影响生命权，从而明确承认了人类与环境之间的相互依存关系。 |
| Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) v. Nigeria, Judgment No. ECW/CCJ/JUD/18/12, Community Court of Justice, Economic Community of West African States, 14 December 2012; | Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) v. Nigeria, Judgment No. ECW/CCJ/JUD/18/12, Community Court of Justice, Economic Community of West African States, 14 December 2012; |
| Öneryildiz v. Turkey, Application No. 48939/99, Judgment, European Court of Human Rights, 30 November 2004, ECHR 2004-XII, para. 71. As the most recent such ruling, the advisory opinion of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights Medio Ambiente y Derechos Humanos established that there is an inalienable relationship between human rights and environmental protection. | Öneryildiz v. Turkey, Application No. 48939/99, Judgment, European Court of Human Rights, 30 November 2004, ECHR 2004-XII, para. 71. 美洲人权法院的环境与人权咨询意见是这方面最近的裁决，其中确认了人权与环境保护之间存在着不可分割的关系。 |
| Inter-American Court of Human Rights, Advisory Opinion No. OC 23-17, Medio Ambiente y Derechos Humanos [The environment and human rights], 15 November 2017, Series A, No. 23. | Inter-American Court of Human Rights, Advisory Opinion No. OC 23-17, Medio Ambiente y Derechos Humanos [环境与人权], 15 November 2017, Series A, No. 23。 |
| See also the resolution of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights in Yanomami v. Brazil, resolution No. 12/85, Case No. 7615, 5 March 1985. | 另见美洲人权委员会在Yanomami v. Brazil案中的决议，resolution No. 12/85, Case No. 7615, 5 March 1985。 |
| A considerable number of instruments on the law of armed conflict, environmental law and human rights law contain the terms “respect” and “protect”. | 相当多的关于武装冲突法、环境法和人权法的文书载有“尊重”和“保护”这两个术语。 |
| Of most relevance is the World Charter of Nature, General Assembly resolution 37/7 of 28 October 1982, in particular the preamble and principle 1, and Additional Protocol I, art. 48, para. 1, which provides that civilian objects shall be respected and protected. | 最为相关的是《世界自然宪章》、联大1982年10月28日第37/7号决议尤其是其中的序言和原则1以及《第一附加议定书》第四十八条第一款，其中规定应当尊重和保护民用物体。 |
| See also, for example, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (New York, 16 December 1964), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 999, p. 171, art. 2; | 例如，又见《公民及政治权利国际公约》(1964年12月16日，纽约)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第999卷，第171页，第二条； |
| Additional Protocol I, art. 55, and the Rio Declaration (footnote 335 above), principle 10. | 《第一附加议定书》第五十五条和《里约宣言》(上文脚注335)原则10。 |
| Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons (see footnote 340 above), para. 30. | 以核武器进行威胁或使用核武器的合法性(见上文脚注340)，第30段。 |
| Ibid., pp. 240–242, paras. 25 and 27–30. | 同上，第240-242页，第25和第27-30段。 |
| See Protection of the environment in relation to armed conflicts: comments and observations received from governments, international organizations and others (A/CN.4/749): comments on draft principle 13 of Canada, France, Israel, Switzerland, the United Kingdom, the United States and ICRC. | 见与武装冲突有关的环境保护：各国政府、国际组织和其他方面的评论和意见(A/CN.4/749)：加拿大、法国、以色列、瑞士、联合王国、美国和红十字国际委员会关于原则草案13的评论。 |
| The declarations regarding articles 35, paragraph 3, and 55 are available at https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/applic/ihl/ihl.nsf/States.xsp?xp_viewStates=XPages_NORMStatesParties&xp_treatySelected=470 (accessed on 2 August 2022). | 关于第三十五条第三款和第五十五条的声明，可查阅 https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/applic/ihl/ihl.nsf/States.xsp?xp_viewStates=XPages_NORMStatesParties&xp_treatySelected=470 (2022年8月2日访问)。 |
| Article 55 – Protection of the natural environment reads: | 第五十五条――对自然环境的保护的内容如下： |
| “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。 ” |
| Pilloud and Pictet, “Article 55: Protection of the natural environment” (see footnote 353 above), p. 663, para. 2133. | Pilloud and Pictet, “Article 55: Protection of the natural environment” (见上文脚注353), p. 663, para. 2133。 |
| See also K. Hulme, “Taking care to protect the environment against damage: a meaningless obligation?” in International Review of the Red Cross, vol. 92 (2010), pp. 675–691. | 另见K. Hulme, “Taking care to protect the environment against damage: a meaningless obligation?” in International Review of the Red Cross, vol. 92 (2010), pp. 675–691。 |
| Additional Protocol I, art. 57, para. 1. | 《第一附加议定书》第五十七条第一款。 |
| See para. (8) of the commentary to draft principle 14 below. | 见下文原则草案14评注第(8)段。 |
| Convention on the Prohibition of Military or Any Other Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques, art. 2. | 《禁止为军事或任何其他敌对目的使用改变环境的技术的公约》第二条。 |
| In the understanding relating to article I thereof, the terms “widespread”, “long-term” and “severe” are understood as follows: “‘widespread’: encompassing an area on the scale of several hundred square kilometers”; | 按照对第一条的理解，“广泛”、“长期”和“严重”这三个词的理解如下：“‘广泛’：指包括几百平方公里大小的地区”； |
| “‘long-lasting’: lasting for a period of months, or approximately a season”; | “‘长期’：指持续几个月或大约一个季节的时间”； |
| “‘severe’: involving serious or significant disruption or harm to human life, natural and economic resources or other assets” (Report of the Conference of the Committee on Disarmament, Official Records of the General Assembly, Thirty-first Session, Supplement No. 27 (A/31/27), vol. I, pp. 91–92). | “‘严重’：指人命、自然和经济资源或其他财产受到严重或重大破坏或伤害”(裁军委员会会议的报告，《大会正式记录，第三十一届会议，补编第27号》(A/31/27)，第一卷，第91-92页。 |
| ICRC Commentary (1987) to Additional Protocol I, art. 35, para. 1452. | 红十字国际委员会关于《第一附加议定书》的评注(1987年)，第三十五条，第1452段。 |
| It should also be taken into account, as Bothe notes, that at the time of the negotiations of Additional Protocol I (1974–1977), the participants had limited experience and expertise in relation to environmental damage in general and wartime environmental damage in particular. | 正如Bothe指出的，还应考虑到，在谈判《第一附加议定书》(1974-1977年)时，与会者在一般环境损害方面以及具体到战时环境损害方面的经验和专门知识有限。 |
| See M. Bothe, “The protection of the environment in times of armed conflict: legal rules, uncertainty, deficiencies and possible developments”, German Yearbook on International Law, vol. 34 (1991), pp. 54–62, at p. 56. | 见M. Bothe, “The protection of the environment in times of armed conflict: legal rules, uncertainty, deficiencies and possible developments”, German Yearbook on International Law, vol. 34 (1991), pp. 54–62, at p. 56。 |
| “Ecosystem” is defined in the Convention on Biological Diversity, art. 2, as a dynamic complex of plant, animal and micro-organism communities and their non-living environment interacting as a functional unit. | 《生物多样性公约》第2条将“生态系统”定义为植物、动物和微生物群落和它们的无生命环境作为一个生态单位交互作用形成的一个动态复合体。 |
| See also ICRC commentary (1987) to Additional Protocol I, art. 35, para. 1462, according to which the standard was meant to be applicable to “ecological warfare”. | 另见红十字国际委员会关于《第一附加议定书》的评注(1987年)，第三十五条，第1462段，根据该评注，有关标准旨在适用于“生态战”。 |
| See further L.-A. Duvic-Paoli, The Prevention Principle in International Environmental Law (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2018), p. 75, and B. Sjöstedt, The Role of Multilateral Environmental Agreements: A Reconciliatory Approach to Environmental Protection in Armed Conflict (Oxford, Hart Publishing, 2020), pp. 43–47. | 又见L.-A. Duvic-Paoli, The Prevention Principle in International Environmental Law (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2018), p. 75, and B. Sjöstedt, The Role of Multilateral Environmental Agreements: A Reconciliatory Approach to Environmental Protection in Armed Conflict (Oxford, Hart Publishing, 2020), pp. 43–47。 |
| A/CN.4/749, comments of ICRC on draft principle 13, summarizing ICRC, Guidelines on the Protection of the Natural Environment in Armed Conflict (footnote 345 above), para. 54. | A/CN.4/749，红十字国际委员会关于原则草案13的评论，其中概述了红十字国际委员会《武装冲突中保护自然环境的准则》(上文脚注345)，第54段。 |
| As for the meaning of the three terms, see ibid., paras. 56–72. | 关于这三个术语的含义，见同上，paras. 56–72。 |
| See, in general, Henckaerts and Doswald-Beck, Customary International Humanitarian Law … (footnote 347 above), rule 7 and rule 43, pp. 25–29 and 143, respectively. | 一般性阐述分别见Henckaerts and Doswald-Beck, Customary International Humanitarian Law … (上文脚注347), rule 7 and rule 43, pp. 25–29 and 143。 |
| Additional Protocol I, art. 52, para. 2. | 《第一附加议定书》第五十二条第二款。 |
| A similar definition is provided in Protocol II on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Mines, Booby-Traps and Other Devices annexed to the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons (Geneva, 10 October 1980) hereinafter (Protocol II to the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1342, No. 22495, p. 137, at p. 168; | 类似的定义载于《特定常规武器公约》所附《禁止或限制使用地雷(水雷)、诱杀装置和其他装置的第二号议定书》(1980年10月10日，日内瓦)下称(《特定常规武器公约第二号议定书》)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第1342卷，第22495号，第137页起，见第168页； |
| amended Protocol II to the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons and Protocol III on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Incendiary Weapons, annexed to the Convention on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons Which May Be Deemed to Be Excessively Injurious or to Have Indiscriminate Effects (Protocol III to the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons), ibid., vol. 1342, No. 22495, p. 171 as well as the 1999 Second Protocol. | 《特定常规武器公约经修正后的第二号议定书》和《禁止或限制使用某些可被认为具有过分伤害力或滥杀滥伤作用的常规武器公约》所附的《禁止或限制使用燃烧武器的第三号议定书》(《特定常规武器公约第三号议定书》)，同上，第1342卷，第22495号，第171页，以及1999年《第二议定书》。 |
| See art. 52, para. 1, of Additional Protocol I, as well as art. 2, para. 5 of the Protocol II to the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons; | 见《第一附加议定书》第五十二条第一款以及《特定常规武器公约第二号议定书》第二条第5款； |
| art. 2, para. 7, of the amended Protocol II to the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons; | 《特定常规武器公约经修正后的第二号议定书》第二条第7款； |
| and art. 1, para. 4, of the Protocol III to the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons. | 以及《特定常规武器公约第三号议定书》第一条第4款。 |
| See, in general, Henckaerts and Doswald-Beck, Customary International Humanitarian Law … (footnote 347 above), rule 7, pp. 25–29. | 一般性阐述见Henckaerts and Doswald-Beck, Customary International Humanitarian Law … (上文脚注347), rule 7, pp. 25–29。 |
| The principle of distinction is codified, inter alia, in article 48 and 52, paragraph 2, of Additional Protocol I, as well as the amended Protocol II and Protocol III to the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons. | 除其他外，区分原则的编纂见《第一附加议定书》第四十八条和第五十二条第二款，以及《特定常规武器公约经修正后的第二号议定书》和《第三号议定书》。 |
| It is recognized as a rule of customary international humanitarian law in both international and non-international armed conflict. | 这项原则被承认为国际性和非国际性武装冲突下习惯国际人道法的一条规则。 |
| The following instruments have been cited, inter alia: art. 2, para. 4, of Protocol III to the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons, ICRC Guidelines for Military Manuals and Instructions on the Protection of the Environment in Times of Armed Conflict (footnote 608 above), the ICRC Guidelines on the Protection of the Natural Environment in Armed Conflict (footnote 345 above), the Final Declaration adopted by the International Conference for the Protection of War Victims, General Assembly resolutions 49/50 and 51/157, annex, the military manuals of Australia and the United States, as well as national laws of Nicaragua and Spain. | 除其他外，引述了下列文书：《特定常规武器公约第三号议定书》第二条第4款、红十字国际委员会《关于武装冲突中环境保护的军事手册和指南准则》(上文脚注608)、红十字国际委员会《武装冲突中保护自然环境准则》(上文脚注345)、保护战争受难者国际会议通过的《最后宣言》、联大第49/50号和第51/157号决议附件、澳大利亚和美国的军事手册以及尼加拉瓜和西班牙的国家立法。 |
| See Henckaerts and Doswald-Beck, Customary International Humanitarian Law … (footnote 347 above), rule 43, pp. 143–144. | 见Henckaerts and Doswald-Beck, Customary International Humanitarian Law …(上文脚注347), rule 43, pp. 143–144。 |
| See e.g. Bothe et al., “International law protecting the environment during armed conflict: gaps and opportunities” (footnote 607 above); | 例如，见Bothe et al., “International law protecting the environment during armed conflict: gaps and opportunities” (上文脚注607); |
| R. Rayfuse, “Rethinking international law and the protection of the environment in relation to armed conflict” in War and the Environment: New Approaches to Protecting the Environment in Relation to Armed Conflict, R. Rayfuse (ed.) (Leiden, Brill Nijhoff, 2015), p. 6; | R. Rayfuse, “Rethinking international law and the protection of the environment in relation to armed conflict” in War and the Environment: New Approaches to Protecting the Environment in Relation to Armed Conflict, R. Rayfuse (ed.) (Leiden, Brill Nijhoff, 2015), p. 6; |
| see also C. Droege and M.-L. Tougas, “The protection of the natural environment in armed conflict …” (footnote 376 above), pp. 17–19; | 另见C. Droege and M.-L. Tougas, “The protection of the natural environment in armed conflict …” (上文脚注376), pp. 17–19; |
| D. Fleck, “The protection of the environment in armed conflict: legal obligations in the absence of specific rules”, ibid., pp. 47–52; | D. Fleck, “The protection of the environment in armed conflict: legal obligations in the absence of specific rules”, 同上, pp. 47–52; |
| E. Koppe, “The principle of ambiguity and the prohibition against excessive collateral damage to the environment during armed conflict”, ibid., pp. 76–82; | E. Koppe, “The principle of ambiguity and the prohibition against excessive collateral damage to the environment during armed conflict”,同上, pp. 76–82; |
| and M. Bothe, “The ethics, principles and objectives of protection of the environment in times of armed conflict”, ibid., p. 99. | and M. Bothe, “The ethics, principles and objectives of protection of the environment in times of armed conflict”, 同上, p. 99。 |
| See R. Rayfuse, “Rethinking international law and the protection of the environment in relation to armed conflict” (footnote 643 above), p. 6; | 见R. Rayfuse, “Rethinking international law and the protection of the environment in relation to armed conflict” (上文脚注643), p. 6； |
| United Nations Environment Programme, Protecting the Environment During Armed Conflict … (footnote 369 above), pp. 12–13. | 联合国环境规划署，《武装冲突中对于环境的保护…》(上文脚注369)，第12-13页。 |
| See ICRC, Guidelines on the Protection of the Natural Environment in Armed Conflict (footnote 345 above) as a comprehensive collection of the existing rules of the law of armed conflict protecting the environment. | 见红十字国际委员会，《武装冲突中保护自然环境的准则》(上文脚注345)，其中全面收集了武装冲突法中保护环境的现有规则。 |
| See also Henckaerts and Doswald-Beck, Customary International Humanitarian Law… (footnote 347 above), rules 43 and 44. | 另见Henckaerts and Doswald-Beck, Customary International Humanitarian Law… (上文脚注347), rules 43 and 44。 |
| Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons (see footnote 340 above), p. 257, para. 78; | 以核武器进行威胁或使用核武器的合法性(见上文脚注340)，第257页，第78段； |
| M.N. Schmitt, “Military necessity and humanity in international humanitarian law: preserving the delicate balance”, Virginia Journal of International Law, vol. 50 (2010), pp. 795–839, at p. 803. | M.N. Schmitt, “Military necessity and humanity in international humanitarian law: preserving the delicate balance”, Virginia Journal of International Law, vol. 50 (2010), pp. 795–839, at p. 803。 |
| The principle of distinction is now codified in arts. 48, 51, para. 2, and 52, para. 2, of Additional Protocol I; | 区分原则目前已编纂入《第一附加议定书》第四十八条、第五十一条第二款和第五十二条第二款； |
| art. 13, para. 2, of Additional Protocol II; | 《第二附加议定书》第十三条第二款； |
| amended Protocol II to the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons; | 《特定常规武器公约经修正后的第二号议定书》； |
| Protocol III to the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons; | 《特定常规武器公约第三号议定书》； |
| and the Convention on the Prohibition of the Use, Stockpiling, Production and Transfer of Anti-Personnel Mines and on their Destruction (Oslo, 18 September 1997), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 2056, No. 35597, p. 211. | 以及《关于禁止使用、储存、生产和转让杀伤人员地雷及销毁此种地雷的公约》(1997年9月18日，奥斯陆)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第2056卷，第35597号，第211页。 |
| See Henckaerts and Doswald-Beck, Customary International Humanitarian Law … (footnote 347 above), rule 7, p. 25. | 见Henckaerts and Doswald-Beck, Customary International Humanitarian Law … (上文脚注347), rule 7, p. 25。 |
| Art. 51, para. 5 (b), of Additional Protocol I. See also Y. Dinstein, “Protection of the environment in international armed conflict” Max Planck Yearbook of United Nations Law, vol. 5 (2001), pp. 523–549, at pp. 524–525. | 《第一附加议定书》第五十一条第五款(二)项。 另见Y. Dinstein, “Protection of the environment in international armed conflict” Max Planck Yearbook of United Nations Law, vol. 5 (2001), pp. 523–549, at pp. 524–525。 |
| See also L. Doswald-Beck, “International humanitarian law and the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice on the Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons”, International Review of the Red Cross, vol. 37 (1997), pp. 35–55, at p. 52. | 另见L. Doswald-Beck, “International humanitarian law and the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice on the Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons”, International Review of the Red Cross, vol. 37 (1997), pp. 35–55, at p. 52。 |
| Additional Protocol I, arts. 51 and 57, Additional Protocol II, and amended Protocol II to the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons as well as the Statute of the International Criminal Court, art. 8, para. 2 (b) (iv). | 《第一附加议定书》第五十一和第五十七条、《第二附加议定书》、《特定常规武器公约经修正后的第二号议定书》以及《国际刑事法院规约》第八条第二款2项4目。 |
| See also Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons (footnote 340 above), p. 242, para. 30. | 另见以核武器进行威胁或使用核武器的合法性(上文脚注340)，第242页，第30段。 |
| Henckaerts and Doswald-Beck, Customary International Humanitarian Law … (footnote 347 above), rule 14, p. 46. | Henckaerts and Doswald-Beck, Customary International Humanitarian Law … (上文脚注347), rule 14, p. 46。 |
| See also Dinstein, “Protection of the environment …” (footnote 649 above), pp. 524–525; | 另见Dinstein, “Protection of the environment …” (上文脚注649), pp. 524–525; |
| Doswald-Beck, “International humanitarian law and the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice …” (footnote 649 above); | Doswald-Beck, “International humanitarian law and the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice …” (上文脚注649); |
| United Nations Environment Programme, Protecting the Environment During Armed Conflict … (footnote 369 above), p. 13; | 联合国环境规划署，《武装冲突中对于环境的保护…》(上文脚注369)，第13页； |
| Rayfuse, “Rethinking international law and the protection of the environment in relation to armed conflict” (footnote 643 above), p. 6; | Rayfuse, “Rethinking international law and the protection of the environment in relation to armed conflict” (上文脚注643), p. 6; |
| Droege and Tougas, “The protection of the natural environment in armed conflict …” (footnote 376 above), pp. 19–23. | Droege and Tougas, “The protection of the natural environment in armed conflict …” (上文脚注376), pp. 19–23。 |
| International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, Final Report to the Prosecutor by the Committee Established to Review the NATO Bombing Campaign against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, para. 19. | 前那斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭：检察官向为审查北约对南斯拉夫联盟共和国的轰炸而设立的委员会提交的最后报告，第19段。 |
| Available from www.icty.org/x/file/Press/nato061300.pdf (accessed on 8 July 2019). | 可查阅 www.icty.org/x/file/Press/nato061300.pdf (2019年7月8日访问)。 |
| See also Dinstein, “Protection of the environment …” (footnote 649 above), pp. 524–525. | 另见Dinstein, “Protection of the environment …” (上文脚注649), pp. 524–525。 |
| Ibid., rule 44, p. 150; | 同上，rule 44, p. 150； |
| Droege and Tougas, “The protection of the natural environment in armed conflict …” (footnote 376 above), p. 19; | Droege and Tougas, “The protection of the natural environment in armed conflict …” (上文脚注376), p. 19； |
| see also United Nations Environment Programme, Desk Study on the Environment in Liberia (footnote 443 above) and United Nations Environment Programme, Environmental Considerations of Human Displacement in Liberia … (footnote 475 above). | 另见联合国环境规划署，“关于利比里亚环境的案头研究”(上文脚注443)及联合国环境规划署，“利比里亚人口迁移的环境考虑…”(上文脚注475)。 |
| Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons (see footnote 340 above), p. 242, para. 30. | 以核武器进行威胁或使用核武器的合法性(上文脚注340)，第242页，第30段。 |
| For the obligation of constant care, see Additional Protocol I, art. 57, para. 1. | 关于经常注意的义务，见《第一附加议定书》第五十七条第一款。 |
| See also Henckaerts and Doswald-Beck, Customary International Humanitarian Law … (footnote 347 above), rule 15, first sentence, p. 51. | 另见Henckaerts and Doswald-Beck, Customary International Humanitarian Law … (上文脚注347), rule 15, first sentence, p. 51。 |
| Additional Protocol I, art. 57. | 《第一附加议定书》第五十七条。 |
| See also ICRC, Guidelines on the Protection of the Natural Environment in Armed Conflict (footnote 345 above), rule 8. | 另见红十字国际委员会，《武装冲突中保护自然环境的准则》(上文脚注345)，规则8。 |
| The principle of precautions is codified in art. 2, para. 3, of the Convention (IX) of 1907 concerning Bombardment by Naval Forces in Time of War (The Hague, 18 October 1907), J. B. Scott (ed.), The Hague Conventions and Declarations of 1899 and 1907 (see footnote 481 above); | 采取预防措施的原则已写入1907年《关于战时海军轰击的第九公约》第二条第三款(海牙，1907年10月18日)，J. B. Scott(编)，《1899年和1907年海牙公约和宣言》(见上文脚注481)； |
| art. 57, para. 1, of Additional Protocol I, as well as art. 3, para. 10 of amended Protocol II to the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons. | 《第一附加议定书》第五十七条第一款，以及《特定常规武器公约经修正后的第二号议定书》第三条第十款。 |
| Henckaerts and Doswald-Beck, Customary International Humanitarian Law … (footnote 347 above), rule 15, p. 51. | Henckaerts and Doswald-Beck, Customary International Humanitarian Law … (上文脚注347), rule 15, p. 51。 |
| Additional Protocol I, art. 58 (c). | 《第一附加议定书》第五十八条第三项。 |
| See ICRC, Guidelines on the Protection of the Natural Environment in Armed Conflict (footnote 345 above), rule 9 and commentary. | 见红十字国际委员会，《武装冲突中保护自然环境的准则》(上文脚注345)，规则9和评注。 |
| See the ICRC website (www.icrc.org/ihl/INTRO/470 (accessed on 12 June 2022)). | 见红十字国际委员会网站(www.icrc.org/ihl/INTRO/470 (2022年6月12日访问))。 |
| See S.-E. Pantazopoulos, “Reflections on the legality of attacks against the natural environment by way of reprisals”, Goettingen Journal of International Law, vol. 10 (2020), pp. 47–66, at p. 59, footnote 49: Australia, The Manual of the Law of Armed Conflict (2006), ADDP 06.4, para. 5.50 (“[a]ttacks against the environment by way of reprisal are prohibited”); | 见S.-E. Pantazopoulos, “Reflections on the legality of attacks against the natural environment by way of reprisals”, Goettingen Journal of International Law, vol. 10 (2020), pp. 47-66, at p. 59, footnote 49: 澳大利亚，《武装冲突法手册》(2006年)，ADDP 06.4，第5.50段 (“禁止作为报复对环境进行攻击”)； |
| Canada, National Defence, Law of Armed Conflict at the Operational and Tactical Levels (2001), B-GJ-005-104/FP-021, sect. 1507, para. 4 (i); | 加拿大国防部，《作战和战术层面的武装冲突法》(2001年) B-GJ-005-104/FP-021, 第1507节, 第4(i)段; |
| Denmark, Ministry of Defence and Defence Command Denmark, Military Manual on International Law Relevant to Danish Armed Forces in International Operations (2016), p. 425, sect. 2.16; | 丹麦国防部和丹麦国防司令部，《与国际行动中丹麦武装部队相关的国际法军事手册》(2016年)，第425页，第2.16节； |
| Germany, Federal Ministry of Defence, Joint Service Regulation (ZDv) 15/2: Law of Armed Conflict: Manual (2013), para. 434; | 德国，联邦国防部，《联合军种条例》(ZDv)15/2：《武装冲突法：手册》(2013年)，第434段； |
| New Zealand, Defence Force, Manual of Armed Forces Law, vol. 4, Law of Armed Conflict (2008), para. 17.10.4 (e); | 新西兰，国防军，《武装部队法手册》，第4卷，《武装冲突法》(2008年)，第17.10.4(e)段； |
| Spain, Ministry of Defence, Orientaciones: El Derecho de los Conflictos Armados, vol. I (2007) [Guidance: The Law of Armed Conflict], para. 3.3.c. (5); | 西班牙，国防部，Orientaciones: El Derecho de los Conflictos Armados, 第一卷(2007年)[指导意见：《武装冲突法》]，第3.3.c.(5)段； |
| United Kingdom, Ministry of Defence, The Joint Service Manual of the Law of Armed Conflict, Joint Service Publication 383 (2004), paras. 16.19.1 and 16.19.2. | 联合王国，国防部，《武装冲突法联合军种手册》，联合军种出版物383(2004年)，第16.19.1和16.19.2段。 |
| The ICRC study on customary international humanitarian law further references the following: Croatia, Ministry of Defence, Law of Armed Conflicts Compendium (1991), p. 19; | 红十字国际委员会关于习惯国际人道法的研究还提到以下内容：克罗地亚国防部，《武装冲突法简编》(1991年)，第19页； |
| Hungary, Military Manual (1992), p. 35; | 匈牙利，《军事手册》(1992年)，第35页； |
| Italy, Military Appeals Court, Hass and Priebke case, Judgment, 7 March 1998; | 意大利, 军事上诉法院，Hass and Priebke案，1998年3月7日判决； |
| Kenya, Law of Armed Conflict Manual, 1997, Précis No. 4, p. 4; | 肯尼亚，《武装冲突法手册》，1997年，简编第4号，第4页； |
| Netherlands, Military Manual (1993), p. IV-6. | 荷兰，《军事手册》(1993年)，第IV-6页。 |
| See J.M. Henckaerts and L. Doswald-Beck, Customary International Humanitarian Law, vol. II, Practice (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2005), pp. 3473–3474, paras. 1090, 1095–1097 and 1099. | 见J.M. Henckaerts and L. Doswald-Beck, Customary International Humanitarian Law, vol. II, Practice (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2005), pp. 3473–3474, paras. 1090, 1095–1097 and 1099。 |
| See, however, United States of America, Department of Defense, Law of War Manual (Office of General Counsel, Washington D.C., 2015, updated 2016), pp. 1115–1117, paras. 18.18.3.4 and 18.18.4. | 然而，见美利坚合众国国防部，《战争法手册》(总法律顾问办公室，华盛顿特区，2015年，更新于2016年)，第1115-1117页，第18.18.3.4和18.18.4段。 |
| For declarations and reservations made by States in connection with art. 55, para. 2, of Additional Protocol I, see Henckaerts and Doswald-Beck (eds.), Customary International Humanitarian Law (see previous footnote), practice related to Rule 147, sect. D (Reprisals against protected objects), Natural environment, p. 3471. | 关于各国就《第一附加议定书》第五十五条第二款所作的声明和保留，见Henckaerts and Doswald-Beck (eds.), Customary International Humanitarian Law (见上一脚注), practice related to Rule 147, sect. D (Reprisals against protected objects), Natural environment, p. 3471。 |
| All declarations and reservations concerning Additional Protocol I are available at the ICRC database https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/applic/ihl/ihl.nsf/Notification.xsp?action=openDocument&documentId=0A9E03F0F2EE757CC1256402003FB6D2 (accessed on 2 August 2022). | 关于《第一附加议定书》的所有声明和保留可查阅红十字国际委员会数据库： https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/applic/ihl/ihl.nsf/Notification.xsp?action=openDocument&documentId=0A9E03F0F2EE757CC1256402003FB6D2 (2022年8月2日访问)。 |
| Most clearly related to art. 55 para. 2, is the reservation of the United Kingdom: “The obligations of Articles 51 and 55 are accepted on the basis that any adverse party against which the United Kingdom might be engaged will itself scrupulously observe those obligations. | 与第五十五条第二款最明显相关的是联合王国的保留：“接受第五十一条和第五十五条的义务的基础是，可能与联合王国交战的任何敌对方本身严格遵守这些义务。 |
| If an adverse party makes serious and deliberate attacks, in violation of Article 51 or Article 52 against the civilian population or civilians or against civilian objects, or, in violation of Articles 53, 54 and 55, on objects or items protected by those Articles, the United Kingdom will regard itself as entitled to take measures otherwise prohibited by the Articles in question to the extent that it considers such measures necessary for the sole purpose of compelling the adverse party to cease committing violations under those Articles, but only after formal warning to the adverse party requiring cessation of the violations has been disregarded and then only after a decision taken at the highest level of government. | 如果一敌对方违反第五十一条或第五十二条，对平民居民、平民或民用目标发动严重和蓄意的攻击，或违反第五十三、五十四和五十五条，对受这些条款保护的目标和物品发动严重和蓄意的攻击，联合王国将认为自己有权采取有关条款禁止的措施，但条件是，联合王国认为出于迫使敌对方依照这些条款停止违约行动的唯一目的，采取这种措施是必要的，而且只是在要求敌对方停止违约行动的正式警告遭到无视、并由政府最高领导层做出决定之后才可采取。 |
| Any measures thus taken by the United Kingdom will not be disproportionate to the violations giving rise there to and will not involve any action prohibited by the Geneva Conventions of 1949 nor will such measures be continued after the violations have ceased. | 联合王国据此采取的措施将不会与所涉违约行动不成比例，而且不会涉及1949年日内瓦四公约所禁止的任何行动，在违约行动停止后，这些措施也将停止。 |
| The United Kingdom will notify the Protecting Powers of any such formal warning given to an adverse party, and if that warning has been disregarded, of any measures taken as a result. | 联合王国将向保护国通报发给敌对方的这种正式警告，如果警告遭到无视，将通报因此而采取的任何措施。 |
| ” The conditions under which belligerent reprisals against the environment may be taken are partly described in United Kingdom, Ministry of Defence, The Manual of the Law of Armed Conflict (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2004), paras. 16.18–16.19.1. | ”可对环境实施交战报复的条件部分载于联合王国国防部《武装冲突法手册》(Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2004)，第16.18-16.19.1段。 |
| ICRC, Guidelines on the Protection of the Natural Environment in Armed Conflict (footnote 345 above), para. 93. | 红十字国际委员会，《武装冲突中保护自然环境的准则》(上文脚注345)，第93段。 |
| First Geneva Convention, art. 46; | 《日内瓦第一公约》第四十六条； |
| Second Geneva Convention, art. 47; | 《日内瓦第二公约》第四十七条； |
| Third Geneva Convention, art. 13; | 《日内瓦第三公约》第十三条； |
| Fourth Geneva Convention, art. 33. | 《日内瓦第四公约》第三十三条。 |
| Additional Protocol I, art. 53 (c). | 《第一附加议定书》第五十三条第三项。 |
| Ibid., art. 54, para. 4. | 同上，第五十四条第四款。 |
| 1954 Hague Convention, art. 4. | 1954年《海牙公约》第4条。 |
| Additional Protocol I, art. 56, para. 4. | 《第一附加议定书》第五十六条第四款。 |
| See Official Records of the Diplomatic Conference on the Reaffirmation and Development of International Humanitarian Law Applicable in Armed Conflicts (Geneva, 1974–1977) vol. IX, available from www.loc.gov/rr/frd/Military_Law/RC-dipl-conference-records.html (accessed on 2 August 2022). | 见Official Records of the Diplomatic Conference on the Reaffirmation and Development of International Humanitarian Law Applicable in Armed Conflicts (Geneva, 1974–1977) vol. IX, 可查阅www.loc.gov/rr/frd/Military_Law/RC-dipl-conference-records.html (2022年8月2日访问)。 |
| See also Henckaerts and Doswald-Beck, Customary International Humanitarian Law … (footnote 347 above), rule 148, p. 526, and related practice, available at https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/customary-ihl/eng/docs/v2_rul_rule148 (accessed on 2 August 2022). | 另见Henckaerts and Doswald-Beck, Customary International Humanitarian Law … (上文脚注347), rule 148, p. 526, and related practice, 可查阅 https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/customary-ihl/eng/docs/v2_rul_rule148 (2022年8月2日访问)。 |
| Henckaerts and Doswald-Beck, Customary International Humanitarian Law … (footnote 347 above), rule 148, pp. 527–528. | Henckaerts and Doswald-Beck, Customary International Humanitarian Law … (上文脚注347), rule 148, pp. 527–528。 |
| Ibid. Reference is furthermore made to the military manuals of several States, which define reprisals as an enforcement measure against another State. | 同上。 还提到了若干国家的军事手册，这些手册将报复界定为针对另一国的一种强制措施。 |
| Henckaerts and Doswald-Beck, Customary International Humanitarian Law (footnote 347 above), Rule 148, p. 526, and related practice. | Henckaerts and Doswald-Beck, Customary International Humanitarian Law (上文脚注347), Rule 148, p. 526, and related practice。 |
| See also ICRC, Guidelines on the Protection of the Natural Environment in Armed Conflict (footnote 345 above), para. 94. | 另见红十字国际委员会，《武装冲突中保护自然环境的准则》(上文脚注345)，第94段。 |
| Prosecutor v. Duško Tadić, case No. IT-94-1-A72, Decision on the Defence Motion for Interlocutory Appeal on Jurisdiction, of 2 October 1995, International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, Judicial Reports 1994–1995, vol. I, p. 353, at pp. 475–478, paras. 111–112. See also in general Henckaerts and Doswald-Beck, Customary International Humanitarian Law … (footnote 347 above), pp. 526–529. | Prosecutor v. Duško Tadić, case No. IT-94-1-A72, Decision on the Defence Motion for Interlocutory Appeal on Jurisdiction, of 2 October 1995, International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, Judicial Reports 1994–1995, vol. I, p. 353, at pp. 475–478, paras. 111–112.一般性阐述另见Henckaerts and Doswald-Beck, Customary International Humanitarian Law … (上文脚注347), pp. 526–529。 |
| According to the United Nations Environment Programme, 40 per cent of internal armed conflicts over the past 60 years were related to natural resources, and since 1990, at least 18 armed conflicts have been fuelled directly by natural resources. | 据联合国环境规划署称，过去60年来，40%的内部武装冲突与自然资源有关，自1990年以来，至少有18起武装冲突直接因自然资源而加剧。 |
| See Renewable Resources and Conflict: Toolkit and Guidance for Preventing and Managing Land and Natural Resources Conflicts (New York, United Nations Interagency Framework Team for Preventive Action, 2012), p. 14. | 见《可再生资源与冲突：预防和管理土地和自然资源冲突工具包和指导意见》(联合国机构间预防行动框架小组，纽约，2012年)，第14页。 |
| Available at www.un.org/en/land-natural-resources-conflict/renewable-resources.shtml (accessed on 2 August 2022). | 可查阅www.un.org/en/land-natural-resources-conflict/renewable-resources.shtml (2022年8月2日访问)。 |
| Interim report of the Panel of Experts on the Illegal Exploitation of Natural Resources and Other Forms of Wealth of the Democratic Republic of the Congo (S/2002/565), para. 52. | 《非法开采刚果民主共和国自然资源和其他形式财富问题专家小组的临时报告》(S/2002/565)，第52段。 |
| See also United Nations Environment Programme, The Democratic Republic of the Congo: Post-Conflict Environmental Assessment. | 另见联合国环境规划署，《刚果民主共和国：冲突后环境评估。 |
| Synthesis Report for Policy Makers (Nairobi, United Nations Environment Programme, 2011), pp. 26–28, available at http://wedocs.unep.org/handle/20.500.11822 /22069 (accessed on 2 August 2022); Report of the Panel of Experts pursuant to paragraph 25 of Security Council resolution 1478 (2003) concerning Liberia (S/2003/779), para. 14; | 决策者综合报告》(内罗毕，联合国环境规划署，2011年)，第26至28页，可查阅 http://wedocs.unep.org/handle/20.500.11822 /22069 (2022年8月2日访问);《专家小组根据安全理事会关于利比里亚问题的第1478 (2003)号决议第25段的规定提交的报告》(S/2003/779)，第14段； |
| United Nations Environment Programme, Desk Study on the Environment in Liberia (footnote 443 above), pp. 16–18 and 42–51; | 联合国环境规划署，《利比里亚环境案头研究》(上文脚注443)，第16-18和42-51页； |
| C. Nellemann et al. (eds.), The Rise of Environmental Crime – A Growing Threat to Natural Resources Peace, Development and Security (United Nations Environment Programme-INTERPOL, 2016), p. 69. | C.Nellemann等人(编)，《环境犯罪抬头――对自然资源和平、发展和安全的与日俱增的威胁》(联合国环境署－国际刑警组织，2016年)，第69页。 |
| The Hague Regulations, art. 28 and art. 47; | 《海牙章程》，第二十八和第四十七条； |
| Fourth Geneva Convention, art. 33, para. 2. | 《日内瓦第四公约》第三十三条第二款。 |
| See also the First Geneva Convention, art. 15, first para., according to which “At all times, and particularly after an engagement, Parties to the conflict shall, without delay, take all possible measures to search for and collect the wounded and sick, to protect them against pillage”. | 另见《日内瓦第一公约》第十五条第一款，该款规定：“无论何时，特别在每次战斗之后，冲突各方应立即采取一切可能的措施以搜寻并收集伤者、病者，加以保护借免抢劫”。 |
| See also African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, art. 21, para. 2: “In case of spoliation, the dispossessed people shall have the right to the lawful recovery of its property as well as to an adequate compensation”. | 另见《非洲人权和民族权宪章》，第21条第2款：“一旦遇到掠夺，被剥夺之民族不但有权要求得到足够的补偿，而且有权合法地收回其财产”。 |
| Furthermore, the Lusaka Protocol of the International Conference on the Great Lakes Region reproduces the same provision. | 此外，《大湖区问题国际会议卢萨卡议定书》转载了同一条款。 |
| See Protocol Against the Illegal Exploitation of Natural Resources of the International Conference on the Great Lakes Region art. 3, para. 2. | 见《大湖区问题国际会议禁止非法开采自然资源议定书》，第3条第2款。 |
| Additional Protocol II, art. 4, para. 2 (g). | 《第二附加议定书》第四条第二款(七)项。 |
| Henckaerts and Doswald-Beck, Customary International Humanitarian Law … (footnote 347 above), rule 52, “Pillage is prohibited”, pp. 182–185. | Henckaerts and Doswald-Beck, Customary International Humanitarian Law … (上文脚注347), rule 52, “Pillage is prohibited”, pp. 182–185。 |
| See, e.g., In re Krupp and Others, Judgment of 30 June 1948, Trials of War Criminals before the Nürnberg Military Tribunals, Vol. IX, p. 1337–1372; | 例如，见In re Krupp and Others, Judgment of 30 June 1948, Trials of War Criminals before the Nürnberg Military Tribunals, Vol. IX, p. 1337–1372; |
| U.S.A. v. von Weizsäcker et.al. (Ministries case), Trials of War Criminals before the Nürnberg Military Tribunals, vol. XIV, p. 741; | U.S.A. v. von Weizsäcker et al. (Ministries case), Trials of War Criminals before the Nürnberg Military Tribunals, vol. XIV, p. 741; |
| Prosecutor v. Goran Jelisić, Case No. IT-95-10-T, Judgment, Trial Chamber, International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, 14 December 1999; | Prosecutor v. Goran Jelisić, Case No. IT-95-10-T, Judgment, Trial Chamber, International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, 14 December 1999; |
| The Prosecutor v. Zejnil Delalić, Zdravko Mucić a/k/a “Pavo”, Hazim Delić and Esad Landžo a/k/a “Zenga”, Case No. IT-96-21-T, Judgment, International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, 16 November 1998, and Sentencing Judgement, International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, 9 October 2001; | The Prosecutor v. Zejnil Delalić, Zdravko Mucić a/k/a “Pavo”, Hazim Delić and Esad Landžo a/k/a “Zenga”, Case No. IT-96-21-T, Judgement, International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, 16 November 1998, and Sentencing Judgement, International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, 9 October 2001; |
| Prosecutor v. Tihomir Blaškić, Case No. IT-95-14-T, Judgement (with Declaration of Judge Shahabuddeen), Trial Chamber, International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, 3 March 2000, Judicial Reports 2000; | Prosecutor v. Tihomir Blaškić, Case No. IT-95-14-T, Judgement (with Declaration of Judge Shahabuddeen), Trial Chamber, International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, 3 March 2000, Judicial Reports 2000; |
| Prosecutor v. Dario Kordić and Mario Čerkez, Case No. IT-95-14/2-T, Judgement, Trial Chamber, International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, 26 February 2001; | Prosecutor v. Dario Kordić and Mario Čerkez, Case No. IT-95-14/2-T, Judgement, Trial Chamber, International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, 26 February 2001; |
| Prosecutor v. Issa Hassan Sesay, Morris Kallon and Augustine Gbao, Case No. SCSL-04-15-T-1234, Judgment, Trial Chamber, Special Court for Sierra Leone, 2 March 2009; | Prosecutor v. Issa Hassan Sesay, Morris Kallon and Augustine Gbao, Case No. SCSL-04-15-T-1234, Judgment, Trial Chamber, Special Court for Sierra Leone, 2 March 2009; |
| Prosecutor v. Charles Ghankay Taylor, Case No. SCSL-03-1-T, Judgment, 18 May 2012 (Taylor Trial Judgment); | Prosecutor v. Charles Ghankay Taylor, Case No. SCSL-03-1-T, Judgment, 18 May 2012 (Taylor Trial Judgment); |
| Prosecutor against Charles Ghankay Taylor, Case No. SCSL-03-01-A, Judgment, Appeals Chamber, Special Court for Sierra Leone, 26 September 2013. | Prosecutor against Charles Ghankay Taylor, Case No. SCSL-03-01-A, Judgment, Appeals Chamber, Special Court for Sierra Leone, 26 September 2013。 |
| Rome Statute, art. 8, para. 2 (b) (xvi) and (e) (v). | 《罗马规约》，第八条第二款2项16目和5项5目。 |
| Henckaerts and Doswald-Beck, Customary International Humanitarian Law … (footnote 347 above) rule 52, pp. 182–185. | Henckaerts and Doswald-Beck, Customary International Humanitarian Law …(上文脚注347), rule 52, pp. 182–185。 |
| ICRC commentary (1987) on Additional Protocol II, art. 4, para. 2 (g), para. 4542 of the commentary. | 红十字国际委员会关于《第二附加议定书》的评注(1987年)，第四条第二款(七)项，评注第4542页。 |
| See also ICRC commentary (1958) to the Fourth Geneva Convention, art. 33, para. 2. | 另见红十字国际委员会关于《日内瓦第四公约》的评注(1958年)，第三十三条，第2段。 |
| See also ICRC, Guidelines on the Protection of the Natural Environment (footnote 345 above), para. 182, which recognize that the prohibition of pillage also applies to “components of the natural environment [which] can be subject to ownership such that they are ‘property’”. | 另见红十字国际委员会，《保护自然环境的准则》(上文脚注345)，第182段，其中确认，“自然环境的组成部分有可能涉及所有权，从而属于‘财产’”，禁止掠夺的规定也对之适用。 |
| Property rules have also been widely used at the national level “for settling disputes concerning access, use and control of resources” and constitute therefore “a critical mechanism for environmental protection”. | 在国家一级，财产规则也被广泛用于“解决有关资源获取、使用和控制的争端”，因此构成了“环境保护的关键机制”。 |
| T. Hardman Reis, Compensation for Environmental Damage under International Law. The Role of the International Judge (Alphen aan den Rijn, Wolters Kluwer, 2011), p. 13. | T. Hardman Reis, Compensation for Environmental Damage under International Law. The Role of the International Judge (Alphen aan den Rijn, Wolters Kluwer, 2011), p. 13. |
| Armed Activities on the Territory of the Congo (Democratic Republic of the Congo v. Uganda), Judgment … 2005 (see footnote 484 above), p. 253, para. 250. | 刚果境内的武装活动案(刚果民主共和国诉乌干达)，判决，《2005年…汇编》(见上文脚注484)，第253页，第250段。 |
| ICRC commentary (1987) on Additional Protocol II, art. 4, para. 2 (g), para. 4542 of the commentary. | 红十字国际委员会关于《第二附加议定书》的评注(1987年)，第四条第二款(七)项，评注第4542页。 |
| See also ICRC commentary (1958) to the Fourth Geneva Convention, art. 33, para. 2. | 另见红十字国际委员会关于《日内瓦第四公约》的评注(1958年)，第三十三条，第2段。 |
| ICRC commentary (2016) to the First Geneva Convention, art. 15, para. 1495. | 红十字国际委员会关于《日内瓦第一公约》的评注(2016年)，第十五条，第1495段。 |
| See also International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, Prosecutor v. Zejnil Delalić et al., Case No. IT-96-21-T,Trial Chamber, Judgment, 16 November 1998, para. 590, pointing out that the prohibition of pillage “extends both to acts of looting committed by individual soldiers for their private gain, and to organized seizure of property undertaken within the framework of a systemic economic exploitation of occupied territory”. | 另见International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, Prosecutor v. Zejnil Delalić et al., Case No. IT-96-21-T,Trial Chamber, Judgment, 16 November 1998, 第590段指出，禁止掠夺“既适用于个别士兵为谋取私利而实施的抢掠行为，也适用于在对被占领土进行有系统的经济剥削的框架内有组织的没收财产行为”。 |
| Ibid., para. 1494. | 同上，第1494段。 |
| For capture of an adversary’s movable public property that can be used for military purposes, see First Geneva Convention, art. 50. | 关于缴获敌方可用于军事目的可移动公共财产，见《日内瓦第一公约》第五十条。 |
| Adversary’s property can also be lawfully destroyed or appropriated if required by imperative military necessity; | 如在迫切的军事必要所要求的情况下，敌方财产也可被合法毁坏或占用； |
| see the Hague Regulations (1907), art. 23 (g). | 见《海牙章程》(1907年)，第二十三条第七款。 |
| See also Henckaerts and Doswald-Beck, Customary International Humanitarian Law … (footnote 347 above), rule 50, pp. 175–177. | 另见Henckaerts and Doswald-Beck, Customary International Humanitarian Law … (上文脚注347), rule 50, pp. 175–177。 |
| For the lawful use under the law of armed conflict by an Occupying Power of the resources of the occupied territory for the maintenance and needs of the army of occupation, see commentary to draft principle 21 below. | 关于占领方根据武装冲突法合法使用被占领土的资源以维持和满足占领军的需要，见下文原则草案21的评注。 |
| Armed Activities on the Territory of the Congo, Judgment … 2005 (see footnote 484 above), para. 248. | 刚果境内的武装活动案，判决，《2005年…汇编》(见上文脚注484)，第248段。 |
| Art. 3 (e). | 第3(e)条。 |
| Originally adopted by Security Council resolution 827 (1993) on 25 May 1993. | 最初由1993年5月25日安全理事会第827(1993)号决议通过。 |
| The updated Statute is available at www.icty.org/x/file/Legal%20Library/Statute/statute_sept09_en.pdf (accessed on 8 July 2019). | 更新后的《规约》可查阅www.icty.org/x/file/Legal%20Library/Statute/statute_sept09_en.pdf (2019年7月8日访问)。 |
| African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, art. 21, para. 2. | 《非洲人权和民族权宪章》，第21条第2款。 |
| J.G. Stewart, Corporate War Crimes. Prosecuting the Pillage of Natural Resources (Open Society Foundations, 2011), pp. 15–17. | J.G. Stewart, Corporate War Crimes. Prosecuting the Pillage of Natural Resources (Open Society Foundations, 2011), pp. 15–17. |
| Trial of the Major War Criminals before the International Military Tribunal, vol. I (Washington D.C., Nürnberg Military Tribunals, 1945), p. 228. | 《国际军事法庭对主要战争罪犯的审判》，第一卷(华盛顿特区，纽伦堡军事法庭，1945年)，第228页。 |
| See United States v. Krauch et al. in Trials of War Criminals before the Nuernberg Military Tribunals (The I.G. Farben Case), vols. VII–VIII (Washington D.C., Nürnberg Military Tribunals, 1952), p. 1081, at p. 1133. | 见United States v. Krauch et al. in Trials of War Criminals before the Nuernberg Military Tribunals (The I.G. Farben Case), vols. VII-VIII (Washington D.C., Nürnberg Military Tribunals, 1952), p. 1081, at p. 1133。 |
| Prosecutor v. Delalić et.al., Case No. IT-96-21-T, Judgment, 16 November 1998 (see footnote 681 above), para. 591: “the offence of the unlawful appropriation of public and private property in armed conflict has varyingly been termed ‘pillage’, ‘plunder’ and ‘spoliation’. … | Prosecutor v. Delalić et al., Case No. IT-96-21-T, Judgment, 16 November 1998 (见上文脚注681)，第591段：“在武装冲突中非法侵占公共和私人财产的罪行被不同地称为‘掠夺’、‘劫掠’和‘强夺’。 |
| The Trial Chamber reaches this conclusion on the basis of its view that [plunder], as incorporated in the Statute of the International Criminal Tribunal, should be understood to embrace all forms of unlawful appropriation of property in armed conflict for which individual criminal responsibility attaches under international law, including those acts traditionally described as ‘pillage’”. | …审判分庭得出这一结论所依据的观点是，《国际刑事法庭规约》”所载的[劫掠]应被理解为包括与国际法个人刑事责任挂钩的武装冲突中所有形式的非法侵占财产行为，包括传统上被称为‘掠夺’的行为”。 |
| See also Prosecutor v. Alex Tamba Brima et al., Case No. SCSL-04-16-T, Judgment, Special Court for Sierra Leone, 20 June 2007, para. 751; | 另见Prosecutor v. Alex Tamba Brima et al., Case No. SCSL-04-16-T, Judgment, Special Court for Sierra Leone, 20 June 2007, para. 751; |
| and Prosecutor v. Blagoje Simić, Case No. IT-95-9-T, Judgment, Trial Chamber, International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, 17 October 2003, para. 98. | and Prosecutor v. Blagoje Simić, Case No. IT-95-9-T, Judgment, Trial Chamber, International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, 17 October 2003, para. 98。 |
| Arts. 28 and 47 of the 1907 Hague Regulations. | 1907年《海牙章程》第二十八和第四十七条。 |
| Art. 33, para. 2, of the Fourth Geneva Convention. | 《日内瓦第四公约》第三十三条第二款。 |
| Art. 4, para. 2 (g), of Additional Protocol II. | 《第二附加议定书》第四条第二款(七)项。 |
| Rome Statute, art. 8, para. 2 (b) (xvi), and art. 8, para. 2 (e) (v), referring to “pillaging”. | 《罗马规约》第八条第(二)款2项(16)目和第八条第(二)款5项(5)目，提及“掠夺(pillaging)”。 |
| Nürnberg Charter, art. 6 (b). | 《纽伦堡宪章》，第6(b)条。 |
| Security Council resolution 2195 (2014) of 19 December 2014, para. 3; | 安全理事会2014年12月19日第2195(2014)号决议，第3段； |
| General Assembly resolution 69/314 of 30 July 2015, paras. 2–5. | 联大2015年7月30日第69/314号决议，第2-5段。 |
| See also Security Council resolutions 2134 (2014) of 28 January 2014 and 2136 (2014) of 30 January 2014 on the Security Council’s sanctions against persons and entities involved in wildlife poaching and trade. | 另见关于安全理事会对参与野生动植物偷猎和贸易的个人和实体实施制裁安全理事会2014年1月28日第2134 (2014)号和2014年1月30日第2136 (2014)号决议。 |
| See also United Nations Environmental Assembly resolution 2/15 (see footnote 342 above), para. 4, and resolution 3/1 of 6 December 2017 on “Pollution mitigation and control in areas affected by armed conflict or terrorism” (UNEP/EA.3/Res.1), paras. 2–3. | 另见联合国环境大会第2/15号决议(见上文脚注342)，第4段，以及2017年12月6日关于“减轻和控制受武装冲突或恐怖主义影响地区污染”的第3/1号决议(UNEP/EA.3/Res.1)，第2-3段。 |
| Corruption has been identified as the most important enabling factor behind illegal trade in wildlife and timber. | 腐败被认定为野生生物和木材非法贸易背后最重要的促成因素。 |
| See Nellemann et al., The Rise of Environmental Crime … (footnote 677 above), p. 25: transnational environmental crime thrives in permissive environments. | 见Nellemann et al., The Rise of Environmental Crime … (上文脚注677), p. 25: 跨国环境犯罪在宽松的环境中猖獗发生。 |
| See also C. Cheng and D. Zaum, “Corruption and the role of natural resources in post-conflict transitions”, in C. Bruch, C. Muffett, and S.S. Nichols (eds.), Governance, Natural Resources, and Post-Conflict Peacebuilding (Abingdon, Earthscan from Routledge, 2016), pp. 461–480. | 另见C. Cheng and D. Zaum, “Corruption and the role of natural resources in post-conflict transitions”, in C. Bruch, C. Muffett, and S.S. Nichols (eds.), Governance, Natural Resources, and Post-Conflict Peacebuilding (Abingdon, Earthscan from Routledge, 2016), pp. 461–480。 |
| See, e.g., Security Council resolution 1457 (2003) of 24 January 2003, para. 2, in which the Council “[s]trongly condemns the illegal exploitation of the natural resources of the Democratic Republic of the Congo”. | 例如，见安全理事会2003年1月24日第1457(2003)号决议第2段，其中安理会“强烈谴责非法开采刚果民主共和国自然资源的行动”。 |
| The term “illegal exploitation of natural resources” appears in the Lusaka Protocol of the International Conference on the Great Lakes Region, art. 17, para. 1, but has not been defined. | “非法开采自然资源”一词出现于《大湖区问题国际会议的卢萨卡议定书》第17条第1款，但没有下定义。 |
| See, however, the Protocol on Amendments to the Protocol on the Statute of the African Court of Justice and Human Rights (Malabo, 27 June 2014), art. 28L Bis, which defines the term “illicit exploitation of natural resources” as meaning “any of the following acts if they are of a serious nature affecting the stability of a state, region or the Union: a) Concluding an agreement to exploit resources, in violation of the principle of peoples’ sovereignty over their natural resources; | 然而，见《非洲司法和人权法院规约议定书修正议定书》(2014年6月27日，马拉博)，第28L条之二，其中将“非法开采自然资源”定义为“任何下列行为，条件是其性质严重，影响到一国、区域或非洲联盟的稳定：(a) 违反人民对其自然资源拥有主权的原则，订立开采资源的协议； |
| b) Concluding with state authorities an agreement to exploit natural resources, in violation of the legal and regulatory procedures of the State concerned; | (b) 违反有关国家的法律和监管程序，与国家当局订立开采自然资源的协议； |
| c) Concluding an agreement to exploit natural resources through corrupt practices; | (c) 通过腐败手段订立开采自然资源的协议； |
| d) Concluding an agreement to exploit natural resources that is clearly one-sided; | (d) 订立一项显然偏袒一方的开采自然资源的协议； |
| e) Exploiting natural resources without any agreement with the State concerned; | (e) 在未与有关国家达成任何协议的情况下开采自然资源； |
| f) Exploiting natural resources without complying with norms relating to the protection of the environment and the security of the people and the staff; | (f) 开采自然资源时不遵守有关保护环境及人员和工作人员安全的规范； |
| and g) Violating the norms and standards established by the relevant natural resource certification mechanism”. | (g) 违反相关自然资源认证机制确立的规范和标准”。 |
| For a discussion of the crime, see D. Dam de Jong and J.G. Stewart, “Illicit Exploitation of Natural Resources”, in C.C. Jalloh, K.M. Clarke, and V.O. Nmehielle (eds.), The African Court of Justice and Human and Peoples’ Rights in Context: Development and Challenges (New York, Cambridge, 2019), pp. 519–618. | 关于这一罪行的讨论，见D. Dam de Jong and J.G. Stewart, “Illicit Exploitation of Natural Resources”, in C.C. Jalloh, K.M. Clarke, and V.O. Nmehielle (eds.), The African Court of Justice and Human and Peoples’ Rights in Context: Development and Challenges (New York, Cambridge, 2019), pp. 519–618。 |
| Art. I, para. 1. | 第一条第1款。 |
| Art. II. | 第二条。 |
| Henckaerts and Doswald-Beck, Customary International Humanitarian Law … (see footnote 347 above), p. 156. | Henckaerts and Doswald-Beck, Customary International Humanitarian Law … (见上文脚注347), p. 156。 |
| ICRC, Guidelines for Military Manuals and Instructions on the Protection of the Environment in Times of Armed Conflict (see footnote 608 above), guideline 12. | 红十字国际委员会，《关于武装冲突中的环境保护的军事手册和指南准则》(见上文脚注608)，准则12。 |
| ICRC, Guidelines on the Protection of the Natural Environment in Armed Conflict (see footnote 345 above), rule 3.B. | 红十字国际委员会，《武装冲突中保护自然环境的准则》(见上文脚注345)，规则3.B。 |
| Henckaerts and Doswald-Beck, Customary International Humanitarian Law … (see footnote 347 above) rule 44, commentary, p. 148: “it can be argued that the obligation to pay due regard to the environment also applies in non-international armed conflicts if there are effects in another State. | Henckaerts and Doswald-Beck, Customary International Humanitarian Law … (见上文脚注347) rule 44, commentary, p. 148: “可以认为，如果给另一国造成影响，适当注意环境的义务也适用于非国际性武装冲突”。 |
| ” See also Y. Dinstein, The Conduct of Hostilities under the Law of International Armed Conflict (see footnote 332 above), p. 243, referring to cross-border damage caused by environmental modification techniques. | 另见Y. Dinstein, The Conduct of Hostilities under the Law of International Armed Conflict (见上文脚注332), 第243页，提及改变环境的技术造成的跨界损害。 |
| See also T. Meron, “Comment: protection of the environment during non-international armed conflicts”, in J.R. Grunawalt, J.E. King and R.S. McClain (eds.), International Law Studies, vol. 69, Protection of the Environment during Armed Conflicts (Newport, Rhode Island, Naval War College, 1996), pp. 353–358, stating, at p. 354, that the Convention on the Prohibition of Military or Any Other Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques “is applicable in all circumstances”. | 另见T. Meron, “Comment: protection of the environment during non-international armed conflicts”, in J.R. Grunawalt, J.E. King and R.S. McClain (eds.), International Law Studies, vol. 69, Protection of the Environment during Armed Conflicts (Newport, Rhode Island, Naval War College, 1996), pp. 353–358, 第354页指出“《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》适用于所有情形”。 |
| Understanding relating to article II, Official Records of the General Assembly, Thirty-first Session, Supplement No. 27 (A/31/27), p. 92. | 对第二条的了解，《大会正式记录，第三十一届会议，补编第27号》(A/31/27)，第92页。 |
| Henckaerts and Doswald-Beck, Customary International Humanitarian Law … (footnote 347 above), explanation of rule 45, p. 151. | Henckaerts and Doswald-Beck, Customary International Humanitarian Law … (上文脚注347), explanation of rule 45, p. 151。 |
| See also Part 2 of the ICRC Customary International Humanitarian Law Study (available at https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/customary-ihl/eng/docs/v2_rul_rule45) and related practice (accessed on 2 August 2022). | 另见红十字国际委员会关于习惯国际人道法的研究报告第2部分(可查阅https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/customary-ihl/eng/docs/v2_rul_rule45)和相关实践(2022年8月2日访问)。 |
| Art. 6, para. 3, obligates States to refrain from “any deliberate measures which might damage directly or indirectly the cultural and natural heritage … situated on the territory of other States Parties” to the Convention. | 第6条第3款规定各国不得“故意采取任何可能直接或间接损害本公约其他缔约国领土的…文化和自然遗产的措施”。 |
| Convention on Biological Diversity, art. 22 para. 1 (“The provisions of this Convention shall not affect the rights and obligations of any Contracting Party deriving from any existing international agreement, except where the exercise of those rights and obligations would cause a serious damage or threat to biological diversity”). | 《生物多样性公约》第22条第1款(“本公约的规定不得影响任何缔约国在任何现有国际协定下的权利和义务，除非行使这些权利和义务将严重破坏或威胁生物多样性”)。 |
| It is worth recalling in this context that the end of an international armed conflict is determined by the general close of military operations or, in the case of occupation, the termination of the occupation. | 在这方面值得回顾的是，国际性武装冲突结束的标志是军事行动全面结束，在占领情况下，则是占领终止。 |
| See Fourth Geneva Convention, art. 6, and Additional Protocol I, art. 3 (b). | 见《日内瓦第四公约》第六条，《第一附加议定书》第三条第二款。 |
| See also United Kingdom, Ministry of Defence, The Manual of the Law of Armed Conflict … (footnote 664 above), p. 277, para. 11.8, and R. Kolb and S. Vité, Le droit de l’occupation militaire. Perspectives historiques et enjeux juridiques actuels (Brussels, Bruylant, 2009), p. 166. | 另见联合王国国防部，《武装冲突法手册》(上文脚注664), 第277页, 第11.8段； R. Kolb and S. Vité, Le droit de l’occupation militaire. Perspectives historiques et enjeux juridiques actuels (Brussels, Bruylant, 2009), p. 166。 |
| Fourth Geneva Convention, art. 2. | 《日内瓦第四公约》第二条。 |
| A. Roberts, “Prolonged military occupation: the Israeli-occupied territories since 1967”, American Journal of International Law, vol. 84 (1990), pp. 44–103, p. 47. | A. Roberts, “Prolonged military occupation: the Israeli-occupied territories since 1967”, American Journal of International Law, vol. 84 (1990), pp. 44–103, p. 47. |
| ICRC commentary (2016) to the First Geneva Convention, art. 2, para. 302. | 红十字国际委员会关于《日内瓦第一公约》的评注(2016年)，第二条，第302段。 |
| See, similarly, United Kingdom, Ministry of Defence, The Manual of the Law of Armed Conflict … (footnote 664 above), p. 277, para. 11.7.1. | 同样，见联合王国国防部，《武装冲突法手册》(上文脚注664), 第277页, 第11.7.1段。 |
| Hague Regulations, art. 42. | 《海牙章程》第四十二条。 |
| The definition contained in art. 42 has been confirmed by the International Court of Justice and the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, which have referred to it as the exclusive standard for determining the existence of a situation of occupation under the law of armed conflict. | 国际法院和前南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭确认了第四十二条所载定义，称之为确定是否存在武装冲突法规定的占领局势的唯一标准。 |
| See, respectively, Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall (see footnote 351 above), p. 167, para. 78, and Prosecutor v. Mladen Naletilić, aka “TUTA” and Vinko Martinović, aka “ŠTELA”, Case No. IT-98-34-T, Judgment of 31 March 2003, Trial Chamber, para. 215. | 分别见修建隔离墙的法律后果(见上文脚注351)，第167页，第78段，以及Prosecutor v. Mladen Naletilić, aka “TUTA” and Vinko Martinović, aka “ŠTELA”, Case No. IT-98-34-T, Judgment of 31 March 2003, Trial Chamber, para. 215。 |
| See also ICRC commentary (2016) to the First Geneva Convention, art. 2, para. 298. | 另见红十字国际委员会关于《日内瓦第一公约》第二条的评注(2016年)，第298段。 |
| Armed Activities on the Territory of the Congo, Judgment … 2005 (see footnote 484 above), para. 173; | 刚果境内的武装活动案，判决，《2005年…汇编》(见上文脚注484)，第173段; |
| see also United Kingdom, Ministry of Defence, The Manual of the Law of Armed Conflict … (footnote 664 above), p. 275, para. 11.3. | 另见联合王国国防部，《武装冲突法手册》(上文脚注664)，第275页，第11.3段。 |
| United States, Department of Defense, Law of War Manual (see footnote 663 above), sect. 11.4, pp. 772–774. | 美国国防部，《战争法手册》(见上文脚注662), 第11.4节, 第772至774页。 |
| See also H.-P. Gasser and K. Dörmann, “Protection of the civilian population”, in D. Fleck (ed.), The Handbook of International Humanitarian Law (footnote 600 above), pp. 231–320, at p. 274, para. 529. | 另见 H.-P. Gasser and K. Dörmann, “Protection of the civilian population”, in D. Fleck (ed.), The Handbook of International Humanitarian Law (上文脚注600), pp. 231–320, at p. 274, para. 529。 |
| Manual of the Laws of Naval War (Oxford, 9 August 1913), sect. VI, art. 88. Available from https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/ihl/INTRO/265?OpenDocument (accessed on 8 July 2019). | Manual of the Laws of Naval War (Oxford, 9 August 1913), sect. VI, art. 88. 可查阅https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/ihl/INTRO/265?OpenDocument (2019年7月8日访问)。 |
| See also Y. Dinstein, The International Law of Belligerent Occupation (Cambridge University Press, 2009), p. 47; | 另见Y. Dinstein, The International Law of Belligerent Occupation (Cambridge University Press, 2009), p. 47; |
| E. Benvenisti, The International Law of Occupation, 2nd ed. (Oxford University Press, 2012), p. 55, referring to the practice of several occupants, and M. Sassòli, “The concept and the beginning of occupation”, in A. Clapham, P. Gaeta and M. Sassòli (eds.), The 1949 Geneva Conventions: A Commentary (Oxford University Press, 2015), pp. 1389–1419, at p. 1396. | E. Benvenisti, The International Law of Occupation, 2nd ed. (Oxford University Press, 2012), 第55页提到一些占领者的做法； M. Sassòli, “The concept and the beginning of occupation”, in A. Clapham, P. Gaeta and M. Sassòli (eds.), The 1949 Geneva Conventions: A Commentary (Oxford University Press, 2015), pp. 1389–1419, at p. 1396。 |
| Roberts, “Prolonged military occupation …” (see footnote 719 above), p. 95; | Roberts, “Prolonged military occupation …” (见上文脚注719), p. 95; |
| Gasser and Dörmann, “Protection of the civilian population” (see footnote 723 above), p. 272. | Gasser and Dörmann, “Protection of the civilian population” (见上文脚注723), p. 272。 |
| Benvenisti, The International Law of Occupation (see footnote 724 above), pp. 61–62. | Benvenisti, The International Law of Occupation (见上文脚注724), pp. 61–62。 |
| Similarly, ICRC, “Occupation and other forms of administration of foreign territory”, Report of an expert meeting (2012), pp. 10 and 23 (the theory of “indirect effective control” was met with approval). | 同样见红十字国际委员会，“占领和以其他形式管理外国领土”，专家会议报告(2012年)，第10和第23页(同意了“间接有效控制”理论)。 |
| See also United Kingdom, Ministry of Defence, The Manual of the Law of Armed Conflict … (footnote 664 above), p. 276, para. 11.3.1 (“likely to be applicable”). | 另见联合王国国防部，《武装冲突法手册》(上文脚注664)，第276页，第11.3.1段 (“很可能适用”)。 |
| See also Kolb and Vité, Le droit de l’occupation militaire … (footnote 717 above), p. 181, as well as ICRC commentary (2016) to the First Geneva Convention, art. 2, paras. 328–332. | 另见Kolb and Vité, Le droit de l’occupation militaire … (上文脚注717), p. 181； 红十字国际委员会关于《日内瓦第一公约》的评注(2016年)，第二条，第328至332段。 |
| See Prosecutor v. Duško Tadić, Case No. IT-94-1-T, Trial Judgment, 7 May 1997, Judicial Reports 1997, para. 584, which refers to circumstances, in which “the foreign Power ‘occupies’ or operates in certain territory solely through the acts of local de facto organs or agents”. | 见Prosecutor v. Duško Tadić, Case No. IT-94-1-T, Trial Judgment, 7 May 1997, Judicial Reports 1997，第584段提及“外国仅通过当地事实上的机关或代理人的行为‘占领’某领土或在该领土内活动”的一些情形。 |
| See also Prosecutor v. Tihomir Blaskić, Case No. IT-95-14-T, Judgment, 3 March 2000, Judicial Reports 2000, paras. 149–150. | 另见Prosecutor v. Tihomir Blaskić, Case No. IT-95-14-T, Judgment, 3 March 2000, Judicial Reports 2000, paras. 149–150。 |
| The Court seems to have accepted in the Armed Activities case that Uganda would have been an occupying power in the areas controlled and administered by Congolese rebel movements, had these non-State armed groups been “under the control” of Uganda. | 国际法院在武装活动案中似乎也已认为，若刚果反叛运动处于乌干达“控制之下”，则乌干达便是这些非国家武装团体控制和管理的地区的占领国。 |
| See Armed Activities on the Territory of the Congo, Judgment … 2005 (see footnote 484 above), p. 231, para. 177. | 见刚果境内的武装活动案，判决， 《2005年…汇编》(见上文脚注484)，第231页，第177段。 |
| See also the separate opinion of Judge Kooijmans, ibid., p. 317, para. 41. | 另见科艾曼斯法官的个别意见，同上，第317页，第41段。 |
| The European Court of Human Rights has confirmed that the obligation of a State party to the European Convention on Human Rights to secure the rights and freedoms set out in the Convention in an area outside its national territory, over which it exercises effective control, “derives from the fact of such control whether it be exercised directly, through its armed forces, or through a subordinate local administration”, see Loizidou v. Turkey, Judgment (Merits), 18 December 1996, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1996-VI, para. 52. See also Ilaşcu v. Moldova and Russia [GC], application No. 48787/99, Judgment, 8 July 2004, para. 314, and Chiragov and others v. Armenia [GC], application No. 13216/05, Judgment (Merits), ECHR 2015, para. 152. | 欧洲人权法院确认，《欧洲人权公约》缔约国在其国家领土以外有效控制的地区维护《公约》规定的权利与自由这项义务“源于控制这一事实，无论这种控制是直接进行，通过其武装部队进行，还是通过一个附属的地方行政当局进行”。 见Loizidou v. Turkey, Judgment (Merits), 18 December 1996, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1996-VI, para. 52. See also Ilaşcu v. Moldova and Russia [GC], application No. 48787/99, Judgment, 8 July 2004, para. 314, and Chiragov and others v. Armenia [GC], application No. 13216/05, Judgment (Merits), ECHR 2015, para. 152。 |
| The Hostages Trial: Trial of Wilhelm List and Others, Case No. 47, United States Military Tribunal at Nuremberg, Law Reports of Trial of War Criminals, vol. VIII (London, United Nations War Crimes Commission, 1949, London), p. 55: “[w]hether an invasion has developed into an occupation is a question of fact”. | The Hostages Trial: Trial of Wilhelm List and Others, Case No. 47, United States Military Tribunal at Nuremberg, Law Reports of Trial of War Criminals, vol. VIII (London, United Nations War Crimes Commission, 1949, London), 第55页：“入侵是否发展成占领是一个事实问题”。 |
| See also Armed Activities on the Territory of the Congo, Judgment … 2005 (see footnote 484 above), p. 230, para. 173; | 另见刚果境内的武装活动案，判决，《2005年…汇编》(见上文脚注484)，第230页，第173段； |
| Naletilić and Martinović (footnote 721 above), para. 211; | Naletilić and Martinović (上文脚注721), para. 211; |
| and ICRC commentary (2016) to the First Geneva Convention, art. 2, para. 300. | 红十字国际委员会关于《日内瓦第一公约》第二条的评注(2016年)，第300段。 |
| Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall (see footnote 351 above), pp. 174–175, para. 95. | 修建隔离墙的法律后果(见上文脚注351)，第174和175页，第95段。 |
| See ICRC, “Occupation and other forms of administration of foreign territory” (footnote 726 above), Foreword by K. Dörmann, p. 4. | 见红十字国际委员会，“占领和以其他形式管理外国领土”(上文脚注726)，K. Dörmann所作的序，第4页。 |
| Similarly, the war crime trials after the Second World War relied on and interpreted the Hague Regulations and customary law. | 同样，第二次世界大战后的战争罪审判依靠并解释了《海牙章程》和习惯法。 |
| M. Sassòli, “Legislation and maintenance of public order and civil life by Occupying Powers”, European Journal of International Law, vol. 16 (2005), pp. 661–694, at p. 688; | M. Sassòli, “Legislation and maintenance of public order and civil life by Occupying Powers”, European Journal of International Law, vol. 16 (2005), pp. 661–694, at p. 688; |
| T. Ferraro, “The applicability of the law of occupation to peace forces”, ICRC and International Institute of Humanitarian Law, International Humanitarian Law, Human Rights and Peace Operations, G.L. Beruto (ed.), 31st Round Table on Current Problems of International Humanitarian Law, San Remo, 4–6 September 2008, Proceedings, pp. 133–156; | T. Ferraro, “The applicability of the law of occupation to peace forces”, ICRC and International Institute of Humanitarian Law, International Humanitarian Law, Human Rights and Peace Operations, G.L. Beruto (ed.), 31st Round Table on Current Problems of International Humanitarian Law, San Remo, 4–6 September 2008, Proceedings, pp. 133–156; |
| D. Shraga, “The applicability of international humanitarian law to peace operations, from rejection to acceptance”, ibid. pp. 90–99; | D. Shraga, “The applicability of international humanitarian law to peace operations, from rejection to acceptance”, ibid. pp. 90–99; |
| S. Wills, “Occupation law and multi-national operations: problems and perspectives”, British Yearbook of International Law, vol. 77 (2006), pp. 256–332, Benvenisti, The International Law of Occupation (see footnote 724 above), p. 66; | S. Wills, “Occupation law and multi-national operations: problems and perspectives”, British Yearbook of International Law, vol. 77 (2006), pp. 256–332, Benvenisti, The International Law of Occupation (见上文脚注724), p. 66; |
| See also ICRC, “Occupation and other forms of administration of foreign territory” (footnote 726 above), pp. 33–34. | 另见红十字国际委员会，“占领和以其他形式管理外国领土”(上文脚注726)，第33和34页。 |
| See, however, also Dinstein, The International Law of Belligerent Occupation (footnote 724 above), p. 37 for a more reserved view. | 更具保留的意见，见Dinstein, The International Law of Belligerent Occupation (上文脚注724), p. 37。 |
| Gasser and Dörmann, “Protection of the civilian population” (see footnote 723 above), p. 267; | Gasser and Dörmann, “Protection of the civilian population” (见上文脚注722), p. 267; |
| Y. Arai-Takahashi, The Law of Occupation: Continuity and Change of International Humanitarian Law and its Interaction with International Human Rights Law (Leiden, Martinus Nijhoff, 2009), p. 605; | Y. Arai-Takahashi, The Law of Occupation: Continuity and Change of International Humanitarian Law and its Interaction with International Human Rights Law (Leiden, Martinus Nijhoff, 2009), p. 605; |
| M. Zwanenburg, “Substantial relevance of the law of occupation for peace operations”, ICRC and International Institute of Humanitarian Law, International Humanitarian Law, Human Rights and Peace Operations (see previous footnote), pp. 157–167. | M. Zwanenburg, “Substantial relevance of the law of occupation for peace operations”, ICRC and International Institute of Humanitarian Law, International Humanitarian Law, Human Rights and Peace Operations (见上一脚注), pp. 157–167。 |
| ICRC commentary (2016) to the First Geneva Convention, art. 2, para. 322. | 红十字国际委员会关于《日内瓦第一公约》第二条的评注(2016年)，第322段。 |
| Ibid.: “If the occupation lasts, more and more responsibilities fall on the Occupying Power.” | 同上：“如果占领持续下去，占领方将承担越来越多的责任。 |
| Hague Regulations, art. 43: “The authority of the legitimate power having actually passed into the hands of the occupant, the latter shall take all steps in his power to re-establish and insure, as far as possible, public order and safety, while respecting, unless absolutely prevented, the laws in force in the country. | ” 《海牙章程》第四十三条规定，“合法政权的权力实际上既已落入占领者之手，占领者应尽力采取一切措施，在可能范围内恢复和确保公共秩序与安全并且除非万不得已，应尊重当地现行的法律”。 |
| ” The authentic French text of article 43 uses the expression “l’ordre et la vie publics”, and the provision has been accordingly interpreted to refer not only to physical safety but also to the “‘social functions and ordinary transactions which constitute daily life’, in other words, to the entire social and economic life of the occupied region”, see M. S. McDougal and F.P. Feliciano, Law and Minimum World Public Order: the Legal Regulation of International Coercion (New Haven, Yale University, 1961), p. 746. | 第四十三条的法文作准文本所用表述是“公共秩序和公共生活”，因此，该条被解释为不仅指人身安全，而且还指“构成日常生活内容的社会功能和一般事务，换言之，是指被占领地区的整个社会和经济生活”，见M. S. McDougal and F.P. Feliciano, Law and Minimum World Public Order: the Legal Regulation of International Coercion (New Haven, Yale University, 1961), p. 746。 |
| See also Dinstein, The International Law of Belligerent Occupation (footnote 724 above), p. 89, and Sassòli, “Legislation and maintenance of public order …” (footnote 733 above). | 另见Dinstein, The International Law of Belligerent Occupation (上文脚注724), p. 89, and Sassòli, “Legislation and maintenance of public order…” (上文脚注733)。 |
| This interpretation is also supported by the travaux préparatoires: in the Brussels Conference of 1874, the term “vie publique” was interpreted as referring to “des fonctions sociales, des transactions ordinaires, qui constituent la vie de tous les jours”. | 这一解释得到准备工作材料的进一步支持。 在1874年布鲁塞尔会议期间，“公共生活”一词被解释为“构成日常生活内容的社会功能和一般事务”。 |
| See Belgium, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Actes de la Conférence de Bruxelles de 1874 sur le projet d’une convention internationale concernant la guerre, p. 23. | 见比利时外交部，《1874年布鲁塞尔会议关于拟订一项关于战争的国际公约的文件》, 第23页。 |
| Available from https://babel.hathitrust.org/ (accessed on 2 August 2022). | 可查阅https://babel.hathitrust.org/ (2022年8月2日访问)。 |
| T. Ferraro, “The law of occupation and human rights law: some selected issues”, in R. Kolb and G. Gaggioli (eds.), Research Handbook on Human Rights and Humanitarian Law (Cheltenham, Edward Elgar, 2013), pp. 273–293, p. 279. | T. Ferraro, “The law of occupation and human rights law: some selected issues”, in R. Kolb and G. Gaggioli (eds.), Research Handbook on Human Rights and Humanitarian Law (Cheltenham, Edward Elgar, 2013), pp. 273–293, p. 279. |
| Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros Project (Hungary/Slovakia) (see footnote 337 above), p. 7, p. 41, para. 53. | 加布奇科沃－大毛罗斯项目案(匈牙利诉斯洛伐克) (见上文脚注337)，第7页起，第41页第53段。 |
| Reference can furthermore be made to the Rio Declaration, which states that “[t]he environment and natural resources of people under oppression, domination and occupation shall be protected”. | 还可参考《里约宣言》，其中指出：“受压迫、遭统治和被占领的人民，其环境和自然资源应予保护”。 |
| See the Rio Declaration, principle 23. | 见《里约宣言》，原则23。 |
| Armed Activities on the Territory of the Congo, Judgment … 2005 (see footnote 484 above), p. 231, para. 178. | 刚果境内的武装活动案，判决，《2005年…汇编》(见上文脚注484)，第231页，第178段。 |
| See also p. 243, para. 216, in which the Court confirms that international human rights agreements are applicable in respect of acts done by a State in the exercise of its jurisdiction outside its own territory, “particularly in occupied territories”. | 另见，第243页，第216段，其中国际法院确认，国际人权协议适用于一国对其领土以外地区、“特别是被占领土”进行管辖时作出的行为。 |
| See also Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall (footnote 351 above), pp. 177–181, paras. 102–113. | 另见修建隔离墙的法律后果(上文脚注351)，第177至181页，第102至113段。 |
| The International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, likewise, has stated that the distinction between a phase of hostilities and a situation of occupation “imposes more onerous duties on an occupying power than on a party to an international armed conflict”, see Naletilić and Martinović, para. 214. | 前南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭同样表示，把敌对阶段和占领局势区别对待，“加诸于占领方的义务比加诸于国际性武装冲突当事方的义务更为繁苛”。 见Naletilić and Martinović, para. 214。 |
| See also the European Court of Human Rights: Loizidou v. Turkey (Preliminary Objections), Judgment, 23 March 1995, Series A, No. 310, para. 62, and Judgment (Merits), 18 December 1996 (footnote 729 above), para. 52; | 另见the European Court of Human Rights: Loizidou v. Turkey (Preliminary Objections), Judgment, 23 March 1995, Series A, No. 310, para. 62, and Judgment (Merits), 18 December 1996 (上文脚注729)，para. 52; |
| and Al-Skeini and others v. United Kingdom [Grand Chamber], Application No. 55721/07, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 2011, para. 94, in which reference was made to the Inter-American Court of Human Rights case Mapiripán Massacre v. Colombia, Judgment, 15 September 2005, Series C, No. 134, in support of the duty to investigate alleged violations of the right to life in situations of armed conflict and occupation. | and Al-Skeini and others v. United Kingdom [Grand Chamber], Application No. 55721/07, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 2011，第94段提到美洲人权法院的案件，即Mapiripán Massacre v. Colombia, Judgment, 15 September 2005, Series C, No. 134，以支持调查关于在武装冲突和占领局势中侵犯生命权的指控之义务。 |
| The applicability of human rights during occupation has been further recognized by the Human Rights Committee, see, general comment No. 26 (1997) on continuity of obligations, Official Records of the General Assembly, Fifty-third Session, Supplement No. 40, vol. I (A/53/40 (Vol. I)), annex VII, para. 4; | 人权在占领期间适用，这已进一步得到人权事务委员会的承认，见关于义务的延续性的第26号一般性意见(1997年)，《大会正式记录，第五十三届会议，补编第40号》，第一卷(A/53/40 (Vol. I))，附件七，第4段； |
| general comment No. 29 (2001) on derogation during a state of emergency, Official Records of the General Assembly, Fifty-sixth Session, Supplement No. 40, vol. I (A/56/40 (Vol. I)), annex VI, para. 3; | 关于紧急状态期间的《公约》条款克减问题的第29号一般性意见(2001年)，《大会正式记录，第五十六届会议，补编第40号》，第一卷(A/56/40 (Vol. I))，附件六，第3段； |
| general comment No. 31 (2004) on the nature of the general legal obligation imposed on States parties to the Covenant, Official Records of the General Assembly, Fifty-ninth Session, Supplement No. 40, vol. I (A/59/40 (Vol. I)), annex III, para. 10. | 关于《公约》缔约国的一般法律义务的性质的第31号一般性意见(2004年)，《大会正式记录，第五十九届会议，补编第40号》，第一卷(A/59/40 (Vol. I))，附件三，第10段。 |
| See also Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, concluding observations: Israel, E/C.12/1/Add.69, 31 August 2001; | 另见经济、社会及文化权利委员会，结论性意见：以色列，E/C.12/1/Add.69, 2001年8月31日； |
| and concluding observation: Israel, E/C.12/ISR/CO/3, 16 December 2011, as well as the report on the situation of human rights in Kuwait under Iraqi occupation, prepared by Mr. Walter Kälin, Special Rapporteur of the Commission on Human Rights, in accordance with Commission resolution 1991/67, E/CN.4/1992/26, 16 June 1992. Such applicability has also been widely endorsed in scholarly writings: see, for example, Dinstein, The International Law of Belligerent Occupation (footnote 724 above), pp. 69–71; | 结论性意见：以色列，E/C.12/ISR/CO/3, 2011年12月16日； 人权委员会特别报告员瓦尔特·凯林先生根据委员会第1991/67号决议编写的关于伊拉克占领下的科威特的人权状况的报告，E/CN.4/1992/26, 1992年6月16日。 |
| Kolb and Vité, Le droit de l’occupation militaire … (footnote 717 above), pp. 299–332; | 这种适用在很大程度上受到学术著作的支持。 |
| A. Roberts, “Transformative military occupation: applying the laws of war and human rights”, American Journal of International Law, vol. 100 (2006), pp. 580–622; J. Cerone, “Human dignity in the line of fire: the application of international human rights law during armed conflict, occupation, and peace operations”, Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law, vol. 39 (2006), pp. 1447–1510; Benvenisti, The International Law of Occupation (see footnote 724 above), pp. 12–16; | 例如，见Dinstein, The International Law of Belligerent Occupation (上文脚注724), pp. 69–71;Kolb and Vité, Le droit de l'occupation militaire … (上文脚注717), pp. 299-332;A. Roberts, “Transformative military occupation: applying the laws of war and human rights”, American Journal of International Law, vol. 100 (2006), pp. 580–622;J. Cerone, “Human dignity in the line of fire: the application of international human rights law during armed conflict, occupation, and peace operations”, Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law, vol. 39 (2006), pp. 1447–1510;Benvenisti, The International Law of Occupation (见上文脚注724), pp. 12–16;Arai-Takahashi, The Law of Occupation … (上文脚注734); |
| Arai-Takahashi, The Law of Occupation … (footnote 734 above); N. Lubell, “Human rights obligations in military occupation”, International Review of the Red Cross, vol. 94 (2012), pp. 317–337; | N. Lubell, “Human rights obligations in military occupation”, International Review of the Red Cross, vol. 94 (2012), pp. 317–337; |
| Ferraro, “The law of occupation and human rights law …” (footnote 738 above), pp. 273–293; | Ferraro, “The law of occupation and human rights law …” (上文脚注738), pp. 273–293; |
| and M. Bothe, “The administration of occupied territory”, in Clapham, Gaeta and Sassòli (eds.), The 1949 Geneva Conventions: A Commentary (see footnote 724 above), pp. 1455–1484. | M. Bothe, “The administration of occupied territory”, in Clapham, Gaeta and Sassòli (eds.), The 1949 Geneva Conventions: A Commentary (见上文脚注724), pp. 1455–1484。 |
| For a different view, see M.J. Dennis, “Application of human rights treaties extraterritorially in times of armed conflict and military occupation”, American Journal of International Law, vol. 99 (2005), pp. 119–141. | 不同观点见M.J. Dennis, “Application of human rights treaties extraterritorially in times of armed conflict and military occupation”, American Journal of International Law, vol. 99 (2005), pp. 119–141。 |
| ICRC, “Occupation and other forms of administration of foreign territory” (footnote 726 above), p. 8, suggesting that international human rights law can be used to complement the law of occupation in matters in which the latter is silent, vague or unclear. | 红十字国际委员会，“占领和以其他形式管理外国领土”(上文脚注726)，第8页，其中建议，在占领法未作规定、模糊或不明确的情况下，可利用国际人权法补充占领法。 |
| See also ICRC, Guidelines on the Protection of the Natural Environment in Armed Conflict (footnote 345 above), para. 40. | 另见红十字国际委员会，《武装冲突中保护自然环境的准则》(上文脚注345)，第40段。 |
| Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons (see footnote 340 above), pp. 241–243, paras. 27–33. | 以核武器进行威胁或使用核武器的合法性(见上文脚注340)，第241至243页，第27至33段。 |
| Articles on the effects of armed conflicts on treaties, Yearbook … 2011, vol. II (Part Two), pp. 106–130, paras. 100–101. | 武装冲突对条约的影响条款，《2011年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第106至130页，第100和101段。 |
| See also ICRC, Guidelines on the Protection of the Natural Environment in Armed Conflict (footnote 345 above), paras. 33–36. | 另见红十字国际委员会，《武装冲突中保护自然环境的准则》(上文脚注345)，第33至36段。 |
| K. Bannelier-Christakis, “International Law Commission and protection of the environment in times of armed conflict: a possibility for adjudication? ”, Journal of International Cooperation Studies, vol. 20 (2013), pp. 129–145, at pp. 140–141; | K. Bannelier-Christakis, “International Law Commission and protection of the environment in times of armed conflict: a possibility for adjudication?”, Journal of International Cooperation Studies, vol. 20 (2013), pp. 129 –145, at pp. 140–141; |
| D. Dam-de Jong, International Law and Governance of Natural Resources in Conflict and Post-Conflict Situations (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2015), pp. 110–111. | D. Dam-de Jong, International Law and Governance of Natural Resources in Conflict and Post-Conflict Situations (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2015), pp. 110–111. |
| In the sense of art. 48, para. 1 (a), of the articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts, the relevant commentary, para. (7), mentions environmental treaties in this context. | 从国家对国际不法行为的责任条款第48条第1款(a)项的意义上讲，相关评注第(7)段提到这方面的环境条约。 |
| See Yearbook … 2001, vol. II (Part Two) and corrigendum, paras. 76–77, pp. 26–143, at p. 126. | 见《2001年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)和更正，第76和77段，第26至143页，见第126页。 |
| Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons (see footnote 340 above) p. 243, para. 33. | 以核武器进行威胁或使用核武器的合法性(见上文脚注340)，第243页，第33段。 |
| Award in the Arbitration regarding the Iron Rhine (“Ijzeren Rijn”) Railway between the Kingdom of Belgium and the Kingdom of the Netherlands, 24 May 2005, Reports of International Arbitral Awards (UNRIAA), vol. XXVII, pp. 35–131 (Iron Rhine), at paras. 222–223. | 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，《国际仲裁裁决汇编》，第二十七卷，第35至131页(莱茵铁路案)，第222-223段。 |
| See also Final Award regarding the Indus Waters Kishenganga Arbitration between Pakistan and India, 20 December 2013, UNRIAA, vol. XXXI, pp. 1–358, e.g. at paras. 101, 104 and 105. | 另见巴基斯坦与印度之间印度河基申甘加工程仲裁案的最终裁决，2013年12月20日，《国际仲裁裁决汇编》，第三十一卷，第1-358页，例如见第101、104和105段。 |
| Available at https://pca-cpa.org/en/cases/20/ (accessed on 2 August 2022). | 可查阅https://pca-cpa.org/en/cases/20/ (2022年8月2日访问)。 |
| See, however, United States, Department of Defense, Dictionary of Military and Associated Terms (2021), p. 75: “Environmental considerations: The spectrum of environmental media, resources, or programs that may affect the planning and execution of military operations. | 然而，见美国国防部，《军事及相关术语词典》(2021年)，第75页：“环境考虑：可能影响军事行动计划和执行的各种环境媒体、资源或方案”。 |
| ” Available from https://irp.fas.org/doddir/dod/dictionary.pdf (accessed on 2 August 2022). | 可查阅 https://irp.fas.org/doddir/dod/dictionary.pdf (2022年8月2日访问)。 |
| For practical examples of environmental considerations in the context of an armed conflict, see D.E. Mosher et al., Green Warriors: Army Environmental Considerations for Contingency Operations from Planning Through Post-Conflict (RAND Corporation, 2008), pp. 71–72: “given the importance placed on military expedience during combat, a unit’s environmental responsibilities are fairly limited. | 武装冲突背景下环境考虑的实际例子，见D.E. Mosher et al., Green Warriors: Army Environmental Considerations for Contingency Operations from Planning Through Post-Conflict (RAND Corporation, 2008), 第71-72页：“鉴于战斗期间军事便利的重要性，部队的环境责任相当有限。 |
| Experience in recent contingency operations has shown that environmental considerations are significantly more important in other areas, including base camps, stability and reconstruction, and the movement of forces and materiel”; | 最近应急行动的经验表明，环境考虑在其他领域更为重要，包括营地、稳定和重建以及部队和物资的流动”； |
| p. 75: “The movement of forces and materiel … can involve significant environmental considerations”; | 第75页：“部队和物资的流动…可能涉及重大的环境考虑”； |
| p. 121: “Balancing environmental considerations with other factors that contribute to mission success is a constant undertaking and requires better awareness, training, information, doctrine, and guidelines”; | 第121页：“使环境考虑与有助于任务成功的其他因素保持平衡是一项持续的任务，需要更好的认识、培训、信息、理论和准则”； |
| p. 126: “For example, experience in Iraq … points to the need for high-quality information about environmental conditions and infrastructure before an operation is initiated”. | 第126页：“例如，伊拉克的经验…表明在行动开始前需要关于环境条件和基础设施的高质量信息”。 |
| See also UNHCR Environmental Guidelines (footnote 442 above), p. 5: “Environmental considerations need to be taken into account in almost all aspects of UNHCR’s work with refugees and returnees. | 另见《难民署环境准则》(上文脚注442)，第5页：“在难民署难民和回返者方面的工作的几乎所有方面都需要顾及环境考虑”。 |
| ” See furthermore European Commission, “Integrating environmental considerations into other policy areas – a stocktaking of the Cardiff process”, document COM(2004) 394 final. | 另见European Commission, “Integrating environmental considerations into other policy areas – a stocktaking of the Cardiff process”, document COM(2004) 394 final。 |
| See para. (7) of the commentary to draft principle 14 above. | 见上文原则草案14评注第(7)段。 |
| See Benvenisti, The International Law of Occupation (see footnote 724 above), p. 87: “These considerations imply that already during occupation the occupant must take into account the post-occupation period and make the necessary provisions in anticipation of the termination of its control”. | 见Benvenisti，The International Law of Occupation (见上文脚注724)，第87页：“这些因素意味着，在占领期间，占领者就必须考虑到占领后的时期，并为预期其控制权终止的情况作出必要的准备”。 |
| See also Y. Ronen, “Post-occupation law” in C. Stahn, J.S. Easterday and J. Iverson, Jus Post Bellum: Mapping the Normative Foundations (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2014), pp. 428–446. | 另见Y. Ronen, “Post-occupation law” in C. Stahn, J.S. Easterday and J. Iverson, Jus Post Bellum: Mapping the Normative Foundations (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2014), pp. 428–446。 |
| According to the Constitution of the World Health Organization, “[h]ealth is a state of complete physical, mental and social well-being and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity”. | 《世界卫生组织组织法》指出，“健康不仅为疾病或羸弱之消除，而系体格，精神与社会之完全健康状态”。 |
| The Constitution was adopted by the International Health Conference held in New York from 19 June to 22 July 1946, and has been amended in 1977, 1984, 1994 and 2005, the consolidated text is available at www.who.int/governance/eb/who_constitution_en.pdf (accessed on 2 August 2022). | 《组织法》于1946年6月19日至7月22日在纽约举行的国际卫生会议上获得通过，并于1977年、1984年、1994年和2005年进行了修订，综合案文见 www.who.int/governance/eb/who_constitution_en.pdf (2022年8月2日访问)。 |
| Stockholm Declaration, principle 1. | 《斯德哥尔摩宣言》，原则一。 |
| See also UNHCR Environmental Guidelines (footnote 442 above), p. 5: “The state of the environment … will have a direct bearing on the welfare and well-being of people living in that vicinity”. | 另见《难民署环境准则》(上文脚注442)，第5页：“环境状况…将对生活在附近的人们的福利和福祉产生直接影响”。 |
| See International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, art. 6, para. 1. | 见《公民及政治权利国际公约》第六条第一款。 |
| See also Human Rights Committee, general comment No. 36 (2018), para. 26 (CCPR/C/GC/36), in which the Committee lists “degradation of the environment” among general conditions in society that may give rise to direct threats to life or prevent individuals from enjoying their right to life with dignity. | 另见人权事务委员会第36号一般性意见(2018年)(CCPR/C/GC/36)，第26段，其中委员会将“环境退化”列为可能对生命造成直接威胁或妨碍个人有尊严地享有生命权的社会一般条件之一。 |
| See also Human Rights Committee, concluding observations: Israel (CCPR/C/ISR/CO/3), para. 18. | 另见人权事务委员会，结论性意见：以色列(CCPR/C/ISR/CO/3), 第18段。 |
| See also Convention on the Rights of the Child (New York, 20 November 1989), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1577, No. 27531, p. 3, art. 6, para. 1, which provides that “States Parties recognize that every child has the inherent right to life”. | 另见《儿童权利公约》(1989年11月20日，纽约)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第1577卷，第27531号，第3页，第6条第1款，其中规定“缔约国确认每个儿童均有固有的生命权”。 |
| In general comment No. 16, the Committee on the Rights of the Child has related the child’s right to life with environmental degradation and contamination resulting from business activities, see general comment No. 16 (2013) on State obligations regarding the impact of the business sector on children’s rights (CRC/C/GC/16), para. 19. | 儿童权利委员会在其第16号一般性意见中将儿童的生命权与商业活动造成的环境恶化和污染联系起来，见关于商业部门对儿童权利的影响方面国家义务的第16号一般性意见(2013年) (CRC/C/GC/16), 第19段。 |
| See further African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (Nairobi, 27 June 1981), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1520, No. 26363, p. 217, art. 4 which stipulates i.e. that human beings are entitled to respect for their life. | 进一步见《非洲人权和民族权宪章》(1981年6月27日，内罗毕)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第1520卷，第26363号，第217页，第4条，其中规定人有权要求其生活受到尊重。 |
| In SERAP v. Nigeria case, the Community Court of Justice of the Economic Community of West African States affirmed that that “[t]he quality of human life depends on the quality of the environment”. | 在SERAP v. Nigeria案中，西非国家经济共同体法院申明“人类生活的质量取决于环境的质量”。 |
| See Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) v. Nigeria, Judgment No. ECW/CCJ/JUD/18/12, 14 December 2012, para. 100. | 见Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) v. Nigeria, Judgment No. ECW/CCJ/JUD/18/12, 14 December 2012, para. 100。 |
| See also American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man, O.A.S. Res. XXX, 2 May 1948, reprinted in Basic Documents Pertaining to Human Rights in the Inter-American System, OAS/Ser.L/V/I.4 Rev. 9 (2003), art. 1; | 另见《美洲关于人的权利和义务宣言》，美洲国家组织第三十号决议，1948年5月2日，转载于《美洲体系中与人权有关的基本文件》，OAS/Ser.L/V/I.4 Rev. 9 (2003), 第1条； |
| American Convention on Human Rights (San José, 22 November 1969), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1144, No. 17955, art. 4, para. 1, as well as Yanomami v. Brazil, Case No. 7615, Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, resolution No. 12/85, 5 March 1985, which acknowledged that a healthy environment and the right to life are interlinked. | 《美洲人权公约》(1969年11月22日，圣何塞)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第1144卷，第17955号，第4条第1款以及Yanomami v. Brazil案(Case No. 7615), 美洲人权法院1985年3月5日第12/85号决议确认，健康的环境与生命权相互关联。 |
| See also Inter-American Court of Human Rights, Medio Ambiente y Derechos Humanos (footnote 623 above), paras. 55 and 59. | 另见美洲人权法院，环境与人权(上文脚注623), 第55和第59段。 |
| See Universal Declaration of Human Rights, art. 25, para. 1; | 见《世界人权宣言》第二十五条第一款； |
| International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, art. 12. | 《经济社会文化权利国际公约》第十二条。 |
| See also Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, general comment No. 14 (2000) on the right to the highest attainable standard of health (art. 12), Official Records of the Economic and Social Council, 2001, Supplement No. 2 (E/2001/22-E/C.12/2000/21), annex IV, para. 4. | 另见经济、社会及文化权利委员会关于享有能达到的最高标准健康的权利(第十二条)的第14号一般性意见(2000年)，《经济及社会理事会正式记录，2001年，补编第2号》(E/2001/22-E/C.12/2000/21)，附件四，第4段。 |
| See also Committee on the Rights of the Child, general comment No. 15 (2013) on the right of the child to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of health (CRC/C/GC/15), paras. 49–50. | 另见儿童权利委员会关于儿童享有可达到的最高标准健康的权利问题的第15号一般性意见(2013年) (CRC/C/GC/15)，第49和50段。 |
| Similarly, the Additional Protocol to the American Convention on Human Rights in the area of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (Protocol of San Salvador) includes the right to health, and the regional jurisprudence acknowledges the connection between the right to health and environmental protection in the context of the universal periodic reviews. | 《美洲人权公约关于经济、社会和文化权利领域的附加议定书》(《圣萨尔瓦多议定书》)同样纳入了健康权，区域判例在普遍定期审议中承认健康权与环境保护之间的联系。 |
| See Additional Protocol to the American Convention on Human Rights in the area of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, “Mapping human rights obligations relating to the enjoyment of a safe, clean, healthy and sustainable environment: individual report on the General Assembly and the Human Rights Council, including the universal periodic review process”, Report No. 6, December 2013, part III C. See also the Report of the Special Rapporteur on the issue of human rights obligations relating to the enjoyment of a safe, clean, healthy and sustainable environment (A/HRC/37/59). | 见《美洲人权公约关于经济、社会和文化权利领域的附加议定书》，以及联合国人权事务高级专员办事处，《与享有安全、清洁、健康和可持续环境有关的人权义务摸底调查，关于联合国大会和人权理事会(包括普遍定期审议进程)的个别报告》，第6号报告，2013年12月，第三部分C。 另见与享有安全、清洁、健康和可持续环境有关的人权义务问题特别报告员的报告(A/HRC/37/59)。 |
| See Social and Economic Rights Action Center (SERAC) and the Center for Economic and Social Rights (CESR) v. Federal Republic of Nigeria (see footnote 483 above), paras. 64–66. | 见Social and Economic Rights Action Center (SERAC) and the Center for Economic and Social Rights (CESR) v. Federal Republic of Nigeria(见上文脚注483), paras. 64-66。 |
| International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, art. 11. | 《经济社会文化权利国际公约》第十一条。 |
| See also Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, general comment No. 12 (1999) on the right to adequate food (art. 11), Official Records of the Economic and Social Council, 2001, Supplement No. 2 (E/C.12/2000/22-E/C.12/1999/11), annex V, para. 7, which determines that the concept of adequacy is interlinked with the notion of sustainability, meaning that food must also be available for the future generations. | 另见经济、社会及文化权利委员会关于取得足够食物的权利(第十一条)的第12号一般性意见(1999年)，《经济及社会理事会正式记录，2001年》，补编第2号(E/C.12/2000/22-E/C.12/1999/11)，附件五，第7段，其中确定了适当性概念与可持续性概念是相互关联的，这意味着子孙后代也必须能够获得食物。 |
| See also paras. 8 and 10, which require that available food must be free from adverse substances. | 另见第8和第10段，其中要求可用食物必须不含有害物质。 |
| Moreover, the right to food has been related to the depletion of natural resources traditionally possessed by indigenous communities. | 此外，食物权还涉及土著社区传统拥有的自然资源枯竭问题。 |
| Official Records of the Economic and Social Council, 2001, Supplement No. 2 (E/2000/22-E/C.12/1999/11), para. 337; | 《经济及社会理事会正式记录，2001年，补编第2号》(E/2000/22-E/C.12/1999/11)，第337段； |
| ibid., 2010, Supplement No. 2 (E/2010/22-E/C.12/2009/3), para. 372; | 同上，《2010年，补编第2号》(E/2010/22-E/C.12/2009/3)，第372段； |
| ibid., 2012, Supplement No. 2 (E/2012/22-E/C.12/2011/3), para. 268; | 同上，《2012年，补编第2号》(E/2012/22-E/C.12/2011/3)，第268段； |
| ibid., 2008, Supplement No. 2 (E/2008/22-E/C.12/2007/3), para. 436. | 同上，《2008年，补编第2号》(E/2008/22-E/C.12/2007/3)，第436段。 |
| See further Human Rights Council resolution 7/14 on the right to food, 27 March 2008, and Report of the Special Rapporteur on the issues of human rights obligations relating to the enjoyment of a safe, clean, healthy and sustainable environment (A/76/179). | 又见人权理事会2008年3月27日关于食物权的第7/14号决议，以及与享有安全、清洁、健康和可持续环境有关的人权义务问题特别报告员的报告(A/76/179)。 |
| See, for example, World Health Organization, “Our planet, our health, our future: human health and the Rio Conventions: Biological Diversity, Climate Change and Desertification”, discussion paper, 2012, p. 2, acknowledging the role of biodiversity as the “foundation for human health”. | 例如见，世界卫生组织，“我们的地球、我们的健康、我们的未来：人类健康与里约各公约：生物多样性、气候变化和荒漠化”，讨论文件，2012年，第2页，其中确认生物多样性所发挥的“人类健康的基础”的作用。 |
| Available at www.who.int/globalchange/publications/reports/health_rioconventions.pdf (accessed on 2 August 2022). | 可查阅 www.who.int/globalchange/publications/reports/health_rioconventions.pdf (2022年8月2日访问)。 |
| See paras. (2) and (6) of the commentary to draft principle 21, below, and footnotes 797 and 807. | 见下文原则草案21评注第(2)和(6)段以及脚注797和807。 |
| The European Court of Human Rights, see e.g. Fadeyeva (footnote 483 above), paras. 68 and 70; | The European Court of Human Rights, see e.g. Fadeyeva (上文脚注483)，paras. 68 and 70; |
| Kyrtatos v. Greece, No. 41666/98, 22 May 2003, ECHR 2003-VI (extracts), para. 52. | Kyrtatos v. Greece, No. 41666/98, 22 May 2003, ECHR 2003-VI (extracts), para. 52。 |
| Inter-American Court of Human Rights, The Environment and Human Rights (State obligations in relation to the environment in the context of the protection and guarantee of the rights to life and to personal integrity: interpretation and scope of articles 4 (1) and 5 (1) in relation to articles 1 (1) and 2 of the American Convention on Human Rights), Advisory Opinion OC-23/17, 15 November 2017, pp. 55–57. | 美洲人权法院，环境与人权(在保护和保障生命权和人身完整权方面与环境有关的国家义务：与《美洲人权公约》第1条第1款和第2条相关的第4条第1款和第5条第1款的解释和范围)，2017年11月15日的OC-23/17号咨询意见，第55至57页。 |
| Paras. (1)–(7) of the commentary to art. 2 of articles on prevention of transboundary harm from hazardous activities, Yearbook … 2001, vol. II (Part Two) and corrigendum, para. 98, at pp. 152–153. | 关于预防危险活动的跨界损害的条款第2条评注第(1)至(7)段，《2001年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)和更正，第98段，见第152和153页。 |
| Paras. (1)–(3) of the commentary to principle 2 of the principles on the allocation of loss in the case of transboundary harm arising out of hazardous activities Yearbook … 2006, vol. II (Part Two), para. 67, at pp. 64–65. | 危险活动引起跨界损害情况下的损失分配原则，原则2评注第(1)至(3)段，《2006年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第67段，见第64至65页。 |
| Para. (4) of the commentary to art. 2 of the articles on prevention of transboundary harm from hazardous activities, Yearbook … 2001, vol. II (Part Two) and corrigendum, para. 98, at p. 152 (emphasis removed). | 关于预防危险活动的跨界损害的条款第2条评注第(4)段，《2001年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)和更正，第98段，见第152页(取消强调)。 |
| Para. (3) of the commentary to principle 2 of the principles on the allocation of loss in the case of transboundary harm arising out of hazardous activities, Yearbook … 2006, vol. II (Part Two), para. 67, at p. 65. | 危险活动引起跨界损害情况下的损失分配原则,原则2评注第(3)段，《2006年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第67段，见第65页。 |
| In the context of the 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), “significant harm” has been similarly defined as “the real impairment of a use, established by objective evidence. | 与此相似，在《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)中，“重大损害”也被定义为“根据客观证据确定的对使用的实际损害。 |
| For harm to be qualified as significant it must not be trivial in nature but it need not rise to the level of being substantial; | 要将损害定性为重大损害，这种损害必须不具琐细性质，但也不必达到显著的水平； |
| this is to be determined on a case by case basis”. | 这将视具体情况而定”。 |
| See “No significant harm rule”, User’s Guide Fact Sheet, No. 5. | 见“无重大损害规则”，用户指南概况介绍，第5号。 |
| Available at www.unwatercoursesconvention.org/documents/UNWC-Fact-Sheet-5-No-Significant-Harm-Rule.pdf (accessed on 2 August 2022). | 可查阅www.unwatercoursesconvention.org/documents/UNWC-Fact-Sheet-5-No-Significant-Harm-Rule.pdf (2022年8月2日访问)。 |
| ICRC commentary (1958) to the Fourth Geneva Convention, art. 4, p. 46. | 红十字国际委员会关于《日内瓦第四公约》的评注(1958年)，第四条，第46页。 |
| Ibid. | 同上。 |
| Environmental rights have been recognized at the national level in the constitutions of more than a hundred States. | 在国家层面，一百多个国家的宪法承认环境权利。 |
| There are nevertheless considerable variations in how the respective rights and duties are conceived. | 但是，在如何看待各自的权利和义务方面仍有极大差异。 |
| See P. Sands, Principles of International Environmental Law (footnote 607 above), p. 816. | 见P. Sands, Principles of International Environmental Law(上文脚注607), p. 816。 |
| A list of relevant constitutions is available in Earthjustice, Environmental Rights Report 2008, at http://earthjustice.org/sites/default/files/library/reports/2008-environmental-rights-report.pdf, Appendix (accessed on 2 August 2022). | 相关宪法清单可查阅：地球正义，《2008年环境权利报告》， http://earthjustice.org/sites/default/files/library/reports/2008-environmental-rights-report.pdf, 附录 (2022年8月2日访问)。 |
| Major multilateral environmental agreements have attracted a high number of ratifications. | 大量国家批准了主要的多边环境协议。 |
| See https://research.un.org/en/docs/environment/treaties (accessed on 2 August 2022). | 见https://research.un.org/en/docs/environment/treaties (2022年8月2日访问)。 |
| Art. 64 of the Fourth Geneva Convention reads as follows: | 《日内瓦第四公约》第六十四条内容如下： |
| “The penal laws of the occupied territory shall remain in force, with the exception that they may be repealed or suspended by the Occupying Power in cases where they constitute a threat to its security or an obstacle to the application of the present Convention. | “占领地之刑事法规应继续有效，但遇该项法规构成对占领国安全之威胁或对本公约实行之障碍时，占领国得予以废除或停止。 |
| Subject to the latter consideration and to the necessity for ensuring the effective administration of justice, the tribunals of the occupied territory shall continue to function in respect of all offences covered by the said laws. | 在后者之考虑及保证有效的司法之需要之限制下，占领地之法庭对于上述法规涉及之一切罪行，应继续执行职务。 |
| “The Occupying Power may, however, subject the population of the occupied territory to provisions which are essential to enable the Occupying Power to fulfil its obligations under the present Convention, to maintain the orderly government of the territory, and to ensure the security of the Occupying Power, of the members and property of the occupying forces or administration, and likewise of the establishments and lines of communication used by them. | 但占领国得使占领地居民服从该国为执行其在本公约下所负之义务，维持该地有秩序之统治，与保证占领国、占领军、与行政机关之人员及财产，以及其所使用之设置与交通线之安全所必要之规定。 |
| ” The ICRC commentary points out that, in spite of the reference to penal law, occupation authorities are bound to respect the whole of the law in the occupied territory, see ICRC commentary (1958) to the Fourth Geneva Convention, art. 64, p. 335; | ”红十字国际委员会的评注指出，虽然提到了刑法，但占领当局有义务尊重被占领土的全部法律，见红十字国际委员会关于《日内瓦第四公约》的评注(1958年)，第六十四条，第335页； |
| see also Sassòli, Legislation and maintenance of public order …” (footnote 733 above), p. 669; | 另见Sassòli, “Legislation and maintenance of public order …” (上文脚注733)，p. 669; |
| similarly, Dinstein, The International Law of Belligerent Occupation (footnote 724 above), p. 111; | 同样，见Dinstein, The International Law of Belligerent Occupation (上文脚注724)，p. 111； |
| Benvenisti, The International Law of Occupation (footnote 724 above), p. 101; | Benvenisti, The International Law of Occupation (上文脚注724), p. 101； |
| Kolb and Vité, Le droit de l’occupation militaire … (footnote 717 above), pp. 192–194. | Kolb and Vité, Le droit de l'occupation militaire … (上文脚注717)，pp. 192–194。 |
| See also P. Fauchille, Traité de droit international public, vol. II, 8th ed. (Rousseau, Paris, 1921), p. 228 (“Comme la situation de l’occupant est éminemment provisoire, il ne doit pas bouleverser les institutions du pays. ” [“As the situation of the occupier is eminently temporary, he should not disrupt the country’s institutions”]). | 另见P. Fauchille, Traité de droit international public, vol. II, 8th ed. (Rousseau, Paris, 1921), 第228页 (“Comme la situation de l’occupant est éminemment provisoire, il ne doit pas bouleverser les institutions du pays.”[“由于占领局势显然是暂时的，因此占领者不应扰乱国家制度”])。 |
| Sassòli, “Legislation and maintenance of public order …” (see footnote 733 above), p. 663. | Sassòli, “Legislation and maintenance of public order…” (见上文脚注733)，p. 663; |
| See also United Kingdom, Ministry of Defence, The Manual of the Law of Armed Conflict … (footnote 664 above), p. 284, para. 11.25, acknowledging that new legislation may be necessitated by the exigencies of armed conflict, the maintenance of order, or the welfare of the population. | 另见联合王国国防部，《武装冲突法手册》(上文脚注664)，第284页，第11.25段，承认由于武装冲突的紧急情况、维持秩序或人民的福利，可能需要新的立法。 |
| Similarly, McDougal and Feliciano, Law and Minimum World Public Order … (footnote 737 above), p. 757. | 同样，见McDougal and Feliciano, Law and Minimum World Public Order … (上文脚注737), p. 757。 |
| ICRC commentary (1958) to the Fourth Geneva Convention, art. 47, p. 274. | 红十字国际委员会关于《日内瓦第四公约》第四十七条的评注(1958年)，第274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. 31, 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16页起，见第31页，第53段。 |
| Similarly Aegean Sea Continental Shelf, Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1978, p. 3, at p. 32, para. 77, in which the Court stated that the meaning of certain generic terms was “intended to follow the evolution of the law and to correspond with the meaning attached to the expression by the law in force at any given time”. | 同样见爱琴海大陆架案，判决，《1978年国际法院案例汇编》，第3页起，见第32页，第77段，其中法院指出，某些通用术语的含义“旨在遵循法律的演变，与特定时期所施行法律赋予该表述的含义相符”。 |
| See also World Trade Organization, United States-Import Prohibition of Certain Shrimp and Shrimp Products, WT/DS58/AB/R (Appellate Body Report), 6 November 1998, Dispute Settlement Reports, vol. VII (1998), p. 2755, at para. 129, according to which the expression “exhaustible natural resources” had to be interpreted in light of contemporary concerns about the protection and conservation of the environment. | 另见世贸组织，美国－禁止进口某些虾类和虾制品，WT/DS58/AB/R(上诉机构报告)，1998年11月6日通过，《争端解决报告》，第七卷(1998年)，第2755页，第129段，其中认为，必须根据有关环境保护和养护的当代关切来对“可耗尽自然资源”进行解释。 |
| Available at https://docs.wto.org (accessed on 2 August 2022); | 可查阅https://docs.wto.org(2022年8月2日访问); |
| Permanent Court of Arbitration, Award in the Arbitration regarding the Iron Rhine (footnote 749 above), at paras. 79–81. | 常设仲裁法院，莱茵铁路案仲裁裁决(上文脚注749)，第79至81段。 |
| See also the Commission’s work on subsequent agreements and subsequent practice, commentary to conclusion 3 (Interpretation of treaty terms as capable of evolving over time), Official Records of the General Assembly, Sixty-eighth session, Supplement No. 10 (A/68/10), para. 39, at pp. 24–30. | 另见委员会关于“嗣后协定和嗣后实践”的工作，结论3(“能够随时间演变的条约用语的解释”)评注，《大会正式记录，第六十八届会议，补编第10号》(A/68/10), 第39段，第24至30页。 |
| E.H. Feilchenfeld, The International Economic Law of Belligerent Occupation (Washington, D.C., Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 1942), p. 49, who pointed to the need to modify tax legislation in an occupation that lasts through several years, noting that “[a] complete disregard of these realities may well interfere with the welfare of the country and ultimately with ‘public order and safety’ as understood in Article 43”. | E.H. Feilchenfeld, The International Economic Law of Belligerent Occupation (Washington, D.C., Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 1942), 第49页，作者指出，在占领持续数年的情况下，有必要修改税法，并指出“完全无视这些现实很可能对国家福祉造成影响，并最终影响第四十三条含义所指的‘公共秩序与安全’”。 |
| Similarly, McDougal and Feliciano, Law and Minimum World Public Order … (footnote 737 above), p. 746. | 同样，见McDougal and Feliciano, Law and Minimum World Public Order … (上文脚注737), p. 746。 |
| See also ICRC, “Occupation and other forms of administration of foreign territory” (footnote 726 above), p. 58, stressing the ability of the occupant to legislate to fulfil its obligations under the Fourth Geneva Convention or to enhance civil life in the occupied territory. | 另见红十字国际委员会，“占领和以其他形式管理外国领土”(上文脚注726)，第58页，其中强调了占领者为履行其根据《日内瓦第四公约》所承担的义务或改善被占领土境内公民生活而制定法律的能力。 |
| Sassòli, “Legislation and maintenance of public order…” (see footnote 733 above), p. 676, nevertheless holds that the occupant should “introduce only as many changes as is absolutely necessary under its human rights obligations”. | 但是，Sassòli, “Legislation and maintenance of public order…”(见上文脚注733)，第676页，认为占领者应“仅实行根据其人权义务规定绝对必要的那些改变”。 |
| See Jensen and Lonergan, “Natural resources and post-conflict assessment, remediation, restoration and reconstruction: lessons and emerging issues” (footnote 450 above), p. 415. | 见Jensen and Lonergan, “Natural resources and post-conflict assessment, remediation, restoration and reconstruction: lessons and emerging issues” (上文脚注450), p. 415。 |
| See also K. Conca and J. Wallace, “Environment and peacebuilding in war-torn societies: lessons from the UN Environment Programme’s experience with post-conflict assessment” in Assessing and Restoring Natural Resources in Post-Conflict Peacebuilding (footnote 450 above), pp. 63–84. | 另见K. Conca and J. Wallace, “Environment and peacebuilding in war-torn societies: lessons from the UN Environment Programme’s experience with post-conflict assessment” in Assessing and Restoring Natural Resources in Post-Conflict Peacebuilding (上文脚注450), pp. 63–84。 |
| See ICRC, “Occupation and other forms of administration of foreign territory” (footnote 726 above), pp. 75–76. | 见红十字国际委员会，“占领和以其他形式管理外国领土”(上文脚注726)，第75和76页。 |
| Ensuring public participation may also be required as part of the respect for the law of the occupied territory given that participatory rights are widely granted at the national level by domestic legal systems in most regions of the world. | 作为尊重被占领土法律的一部分，确保公众参与也可能是必须的，因为世界上大多数地区的国内法律制度普遍在国家一级赋予参与权。 |
| See J. Razzaque, “Information, public participation and access to justice in environmental matters” in S. Alam and others (eds.), Routledge Handbook on International Environmental Law (Abingdon, Routledge, 2014), pp. 137 –153, at p. 139. | 见J. Razzaque, “Information, public participation and access to justice in environmental matters” in S. Alam and others (eds.), Routledge Handbook on International Environmental Law (Abingdon, Routledge, 2014), pp. 137 –153, at p. 139。 |
| See also the Rio Declaration, principle 10: “Environmental issues are best handled with the participation of all concerned citizens, at the relevant level. | 另见《里约宣言》，原则10：“环境问题最好是在所有关心环境的市民的参与下，在恰当的级别上加以处理。 |
| At the national level, each individual shall have appropriate access to information concerning the environment that is held by public authorities, including information on hazardous materials and activities in their communities, and the opportunity to participate in decision-making processes. | 在国家一级，每一个人都应能适当取用公共当局所持有的关于环境的资料，包括关于在其社区内的危险物质和活动的资料，并应有机会参与各项决策进程。 |
| States shall facilitate and encourage public awareness and participation by making information widely available. | 各国应通过广泛提供资料来便利及鼓励公众的认识和参与。 |
| Effective access to judicial and administrative proceedings, including redress and remedy, shall be provided. | 应规定人人都能有效地使用司法和行政程序，包括补偿和补救程序”。 |
| ” See further Framework principles on human rights and the environment (A/HRC/37/59, annex), principle 9: “States should provide for and facilitate public participation in decision-making related to the environment and take the views of the public into account in the decision-making process.” | 另见人权与环境框架原则(A/HRC/37/59, 附件)，原则9：“各国应允许和便利公众参与环境相关决策，并在决策进程中考虑公众的意见”。 |
| Feilchenfeld, The International Economic Law of Belligerent Occupation (footnote 775 above), p. 89. | Feilchenfeld, The International Economic Law of Belligerent Occupation (上文脚注775), p. 89。 |
| See also Ferraro, “The law of occupation and human rights law …” (footnote 738 above), pp. 273–293; | 另见Ferraro, “The law of occupation and human rights law …” (上文脚注738), pp. 273–293; |
| see similarly the Supreme Court of Israel: H.C. 351/80, The Jerusalem District Electricity Company Ltd. v. (a) Minister of Energy and Infrastructure, (b) Commander of the Judea and Samaria Region 35(23), Piskei Din 673, partly reprinted in Israel Yearbook on Human Rights (1981), pp. 354–358. | 同样，见the Supreme Court of Israel: H.C. 351/80, The Jerusalem District Electricity Company Ltd. v. (a) Minister of Energy and Infrastructure, (b) Commander of the Judea and Samaria Region 35(23), Piskei Din 673, partly reprinted in Israel Yearbook on Human Rights (1981), pp. 354–358。 |
| Fourth Geneva Convention, art. 64. | 《日内瓦第四公约》第六十四条。 |
| See Hague Regulations, art. 55: “The occupying State shall be regarded only as administrator and usufructuary of public buildings, real estate, forests, and agricultural estates belonging to the hostile State, and situated in the occupied country. | 见《海牙章程》第五十五条：“占领国对其占领地内属于敌国的公共建筑物、不动产、森林和农庄，只是被视为管理者和收益的享用者。 |
| It must safeguard the capital of these properties, and administer them in accordance with the rules of usufruct. | 占领国必须维护这些产业并按照享用收益的规章加以管理”。 |
| ” Natural resources typically constitute immovable property. | 自然资源通常构成不动产，特别是未被(就地)开采的自然资源。 |
| In particular, natural resources that are not extracted (in situ) constitute immovable property. J. Stone, Legal Controls of International Conflict: A Treatise on the Dynamics of Disputes- and War-Law (London, Stevens and Sons Limited, 1954), p. 714. See also G. von Glahn, The Occupation of Enemy Territory: A Commentary on the Law and Practice of Belligerent Occupation (Minneapolis, University of Minnesota Press, 1957), p. 177, who emphasizes that the Occupying Power “is not permitted to exploit immovable property beyond normal use, and may not cut more timber than was done in pre-occupation days” and L. Oppenheim, International Law: A Treatise, vol. II, War and Neutrality, 2nd ed. (London, Longmans, Green and Co., 1912), p. 175, pointing out that the Occupying Power “is … prohibited from exercising his right in a wasteful or negligent way that would decrease the value of the stock and plant” and “must not cut down a whole forest unless the necessities of war compel him”. | J. Stone, Legal Controls of International Conflict: A Treatise on the Dynamics of Disputes- and War-Law (London, Stevens and Sons Limited, 1954), p. 714. 另见G. von Glahn, The Occupation of Enemy Territory: A Commentary on the Law and Practice of Belligerent Occupation (Minneapolis, University of Minnesota Press, 1957) , 第177页，作者强调，占领方“不得在超过正常使用范围的情况下利用不动产，而且木材不能比占领前砍伐得更多”； L. Oppenheim, International Law: A Treatise, vol. II, War and Neutrality, 2nd ed. (London, Longmans, Green and Co., 1912), 第175页指出，占领方“不得以浪费或疏忽方式行使其权利，这会降低存量和植物的价值”，并且“除非战争需要所迫，不得砍伐整个森林”。 |
| See also ICRC, Guidelines on the Protection of the Natural Environment in Armed Conflict (footnote 345 above), para. 194: “Jurisprudence has recognized that exploitation of natural resources in occupied territories that goes beyond the rules of usufruct, i.e. by way of excessive consumption of resources including when the local economy is not considered, is prohibited”. | 另见红十字国际委员会，《武装冲突中保护自然环境的准则》(上文脚注345)，第194段：“大量判例已经认识到，超越享有收益的规则而开采被占领土上的自然资源，即过度消耗资源的做法(包括不考虑当地经济状况的情形)，是禁止的”。 |
| Singapore, Court of Appeal, N.V. de Bataafsche Petroleum Maatschappij and Others v. The War Damage Commission, 13 April 1956, Reports: 1956 Singapore Law Reports, p. 65; | Singapore, Court of Appeal, N.V. de Bataafsche Petroleum Maatschappij and Others v. The War Damage Commission, 13 April 1956, Reports: 1956 Singapore Law Reports, p. 65; |
| reprint in International Law Reports, vol. 23 (1960), pp. 810–849, p. 822 (Singapore Oil Stocks case); | reprint in International Law Reports, vol. 23 (1960), pp. 810–849, p. 822 (Singapore Oil Stocks case); |
| In re Krupp and Others, Judgment of 30 June 1948, Trials of War Criminals before the Nürnberg Military Tribunals, vol. IX, p. 1340. | In re Krupp and Others, Judgment of 30 June 1948, Trials of War Criminals before the Nürnberg Military Tribunals, vol. IX, p. 1340. |
| The United States of America and Others v. Goering and Others, Judgment of 1 October 1946, in Trial of the Major War Criminals before the International Military Tribunal, vol. I (Nuremberg, 1947), p. 239. | The United States of America and Others v. Goering and Others, Judgment of 1 October 1946, in Trial of the Major War Criminals before the International Military Tribunal, vol. I (Nuremberg, 1947), p. 239. |
| As summarized by the Institute of International Law, “the occupying power can only dispose of the resources of the occupied territory to the extent necessary for the current administration of the territory and to meet the essential needs of the population”. | 正如国际法学会总结的那样，“占领方只能在当前领土管理和满足人们基本需要所需的范围内处置被占领土的资源”。 |
| See 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, at p. 288. | 可查阅www.idi-iil.org, Declarations, 第288页。 |
| Fourth Geneva Convention, art. 4. | 《日内瓦第四公约》第四条。 |
| See also ICRC commentary (1958) to the Fourth Geneva Convention, art. 4, p. 45, according to which there are two main classes of civilians whose “protection against arbitrary action on the part of the enemy was essential in time of war – on the one hand, persons of enemy nationality living in the territory of a belligerent State, and on the other, the inhabitants of occupied territories.” | 另见红十字国际委员会关于《日内瓦第四公约》的评注(1958年)，第四条，第45页，其中指出，有两大类平民，“在战争时期，保护他们免受敌人任意行动的伤害至关重要――一类是居住在交战国领土上的敌国国民，另一类是被占领土上的居民”。 |
| Art. 23 (g) and art. 53 of the Hague Regulations. | 《海牙章程》第二十三条第七款和第五十三条。 |
| See draft principle 18 and the commentary thereto above. | 见上文原则草案18及其评注。 |
| Rome Statute, art. 8, para. 2 (a) (iv) and (b) (xiii). | 《罗马规约》第八条第(二)款1项(4)目和2项(13)目。 |
| International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, art. 1, para. 2; | 《公民及政治权利国际公约》第一条第二款； |
| International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, art. 1, para. 2. | 《经济社会文化权利国际公约》第一条第二款； |
| See also General Assembly resolutions 1803 (XVII) of 14 December 1962; 3201 (S-VI) of 1 May 1974 (Declaration on the Establishment of a New International Economic Order); 3281 (XXIX) of 12 December 1974 (Charter of Economic Rights and Duties of States). | 另见联大1962年12月14日第1803(XVII)号、1974年5月1日第3201(S-VI)号(建立新的国际经济秩序宣言)和1974年12月12日第3281(XXIX)号决议(各国经济权利和义务宪章)。 |
| Armed Activities on the Territory of the Congo, Judgment … 2005 (see footnote 484 above), at p. 251, para. 244. | 刚果境内的武装活动案，判决，《2005年…汇编》(见上文脚注484)，第251页，第244段。 |
| In the Wall Advisory Opinion, the International Court of Justice stated that the construction of the wall, as well as other measures by the occupying State, “severely impedes the exercise by the Palestinian people of its right to self-determination”: Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall (see footnote 351 above), at p. 184, para. 122. | 国际法院在隔离墙咨询意见中指出，修建隔离墙以及占领方采取的其他措施“严重妨碍巴勒斯坦人民行使自决权”。 修建隔离墙的法律后果(见上文脚注351)，第184页，第122段。 |
| The right to self-determination was also referred to in the Namibia, Advisory Opinion (see footnote 774 above), p. 31, paras. 52–53, in Western Sahara, Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 1975, p. 12, at pp. 32–33, paras. 56–59, as well as in the East Timor case, in which the Court affirmed the erga omnes nature of the principle, see East Timor (Portugal v. Australia), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1995, p. 90, at p. 102, para. 29. | 国际法院在纳米比亚咨询意见(见上文脚注774，第31页第52-53段)、西撒哈拉咨询意见(《1975年国际法院案例汇编》，第12页起，见第32和33页，第56-59段)和东帝汶案中也提及自决权，法院在东帝汶案中确认了这项原则的普遍适用性，见东帝汶案(葡萄牙诉澳大利亚)，判决，《1995年国际法院案例汇编》，第90页起，见第102页，第29段。 |
| Feilchenfeld, The International Economic Law of Belligerent Occupation (see footnote 775 above), p. 55. See also Oppenheim, International Law … (footnote 781 above), p. 175, and Von Glahn, The Occupation of Enemy Territory … (footnote 781 above), p. 177. | Feilchenfeld, The International Economic Law of Belligerent Occupation (见上文脚注775), p. 55. See also Oppenheim, International Law … (上文脚注781), p. 175, and Von Glahn, The Occupation of Enemy Territory … (上文脚注781), p. 177。 |
| Similarly, United Kingdom, Ministry of Defence, The Manual of the Law of Armed Conflict … (footnote 664 above), p. 303, para. 11.86. | 同样，见联合王国国防部，《武装冲突法手册》 (上文脚注664), 第303页，第11.86段。 |
| See, however, N. Schrijver, Sovereignty Over Natural Resources: Balancing Rights and Duties (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press 1997), p. 268. | 然而，见N. Schrijver, Sovereignty Over Natural Resources: Balancing Rights and Duties (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press 1997), p. 268。 |
| Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros (see footnote 337 above), pp. 67–68, para. 112. | 加布奇科沃－大毛罗斯案(见上文脚注337)，第67和68页，第112段。 |
| See also p. 78, para. 140, in which the Court rules that, whenever necessary for the application of a treaty, “new norms have to be taken into consideration, and … new standards given proper weight. | 另见第78页第140段，在该案中，法院判决，在适用条约时，只要有必要，“必须考虑到这些新规范，并给予新标准适当的重视”。 |
| ” Further, see Permanent Court of Arbitration, Award in the Arbitration regarding the Iron Rhine (footnote 749 above), in which the Court applied concepts of customary international environmental law to treaties dating back to the mid-nineteenth century. | 此外，见常设仲裁法院，莱茵铁路案仲裁裁决(上文脚注749)，其中法院将习惯国际环境法概念适用于十九世纪中叶的条约。 |
| Indus Waters Kishenganga (see footnote 749 above), para. 452, in which the Court held that: “It is established that principles of international environmental law must be taken into account even when … interpreting treaties concluded before the development of that body of law … It is therefore incumbent upon this Court to interpret and apply this 1960 Treaty in light of the customary international principles for the protection of the environment in force today”. | 印度河基申甘加工程案(见上文脚注749)，第452段，其中法院指出，“已经确定，即使在…解释国际环境法制定之前缔结的条约时…也必须考虑到该法的原则…因此，本法院有责任结合现在生效的保护环境的习惯国际原则解释和适用这项1960年的条约”。 |
| Furthermore, the International Law Association has suggested that treaties and rules of customary international law should be interpreted in light of the principles of sustainable development unless doing so would conflict with a clear treaty provision or be otherwise inappropriate: “[I]nterpretations which might seem to undermine the goal of sustainable development should only take precedence where to do otherwise would be to undermine … fundamental aspects of the global legal order, would otherwise infringe the express wording of a treaty or would breach a rule of jus cogens. | 此外，国际法协会建议，应根据可持续发展原则解释条约和习惯国际法规则，除非这样做会与条约的某项明确规定冲突，或者在其他方面不适当：“可能看起来破坏可持续发展目标的解释应仅在作出其他解释会损害…全球法律秩序的基本方面、违背某项公约的确切措词或违反强行法规则的情况下才会优先”。 |
| ” See International Law Association, Committee on International Law on Sustainable Development, Resolution No. 7 (2012), annex (Sofia Guiding Statement), para. 2. | 见国际法协会，可持续发展问题国际法委员会，第7 (2012)号决议，附件(《索非亚指导声明》)，第2段。 |
| The Law of War on Land Being Part III of the Manual of Military Law (Great Britain, War Office, 1958), sect. 610. Similarly, United Kingdom, Ministry of Defence, The Manual of the Law of Armed Conflict … (footnote 664 above), p. 303, para. 11.86. | The Law of War on Land Being Part III of the Manual of Military Law (Great Britain, War Office, 1958), sect. 610. 同样，见联合王国国防部，《武装冲突法手册》(上文脚注664), 第303页，第11.86段。 |
| Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons (see footnote 340 above), pp. 241–242, para. 29. | 以核武器进行威胁或使用核武器的合法性(见上文脚注340)，第241-242页，第29段。 |
| See also Pulp Mills on the River Uruguay (Argentina v. Uruguay), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2010, p. 14), para. 101; | 另见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，第101段； |
| the Construction of a Road (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, paras. 153 and 156. | 修建道路(尼加拉瓜在边界地区开展的某些活动)(哥斯达黎加诉尼加拉瓜)和哥斯达黎加沿圣胡安河修建道路(尼加拉瓜诉哥斯达黎加)案，判决，《2015年国际法院案例汇编》，第665页，第153和156段。 |
| See furthermore Sands, Principles of International Environmental Law (footnote 607 above), p. 206, as well as U. Beyerlin, “Different types of norms in international environmental law: policies, principles and rules”, in D. Bodansky, J. Brunnée and E. Hey (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of International Environmental Law (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2008), pp. 425–448, p. 439. | 又见Sands, Principles of International Environmental Law (上文脚注607), p. 206, 以及U. Beyerlin, “Different types of norms in international environmental law: policies, principles and rules”, in D. Bodansky, J. Brunnée and E. Hey (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of International Environmental Law (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2008), pp. 425–448, p. 439。 |
| See also A. Boyle and C. Redgwell, Birnie, Boyle, and Redgwell's International Law and the Environment, 4th ed. (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2021), p. 211. | 另见A. Boyle and C. Redgwell, Birnie, Boyle, and Redgwell's International Law and the Environment, 4th ed. (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2021), p. 211。 |
| Convention on the Law of the Non-navigational Uses of International Watercourses (New York, 21 May 1997), text available from https://treaties.un.org (Status of Multilateral Treaties Deposited with the Secretary-General, chap. XXVII), art.7; | 《国际水道非航行使用法公约》(1997年5月21日，纽约)，案文可查阅https://treaties.un.org(交存秘书长的多边条约状况，第二十七章)，第7条； |
| 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, art. 2; | 《跨界水道和国际湖泊保护和利用公约》(1992年3月17日，赫尔辛基)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第1936卷，第33207号，第269页，第2条； |
| United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, art. 1, para. 1. | 《联合国气候变化框架公约》，第一条第1款。 |
| See also Convention for the Protection of the Ozone Layer, art. 1, para. 2; | 另见《保护臭氧层公约》第1条第2款； |
| Convention on the Regulation of Antarctic Mineral Resource Activities (Wellington, 2 June 1988), International Legal Materials, vol. 27 (1988), p. 868, art. 4, para. 2; | 《南极矿物资源活动管理公约》(1988年6月2日，惠灵顿)，《国际法律资料》，第27卷(1988年)，第868页，第4条第2款； |
| Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary Context (Espoo, 25 February 1991), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1989, No. 34028, p. 309, art. 1, para. 2. | 《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，第1条第2款。 |
| See, e.g., Convention on the Protection of the Rhine (1999), Agreement on the Action Plan for the Environmentally Sound Management of the Common Zambezi River System (1987); Agreement on Co-operation for the Sustainable Development of the Mekong River Basin (1995), all available at www.ecolex.org (accessed on 2 August 2022). | 例如，见《保护莱茵河公约》(1999年)、《关于共有赞比西河系无害环境管理行动计划的协定》(1987年)以及《湄公河流域可持续发展合作协定》(1995年)，均可查阅www.ecolex.org (2022年8月2日访问)。 |
| Revised Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement (United States, Canada, 2012), available at https://ijc.org (accessed on 2 August 2022). | 经修订的《大湖水质协定》(2012年，美国、加拿大)，可查阅https://ijc.org (2022年8月2日访问)。 |
| Several of the cases in which the International Court of Justice has clarified environmental obligations have been related to the use and protection of water resources such as wetlands or river; | 国际法院澄清环境义务的数个案件与利用和保护湿地、河流等水资源有关； |
| e.g., the joint cases Construction of a Road/Certain Activities Carried Out by Nicaragua in the Border Area (see footnote 796 above) and the Pulp Mills case (see footnote 796 above) as well as the case of Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros (see footnote 337 above). | 如修建道路/尼加拉瓜在边界地区开展的某些活动合并案件(见上文脚注796)； 纸浆厂案(见上文脚注796)以及加布奇科沃－大毛罗斯案(见上文脚注337)。 |
| See also Indus Waters Kishenganga (see footnote 749 above), paras. 449–450. | 另见印度河基申甘加工程仲裁案(见上文脚注749)，第449-450段。 |
| Regional jurisprudence is widely available at www.ecolex.org (accessed on 2 August 2022). | 各种区域判例可查阅www.ecolex.org (2022年8月2日访问)。 |
| Art. 3 of the articles on prevention of transboundary harm from hazardous activities, Yearbook … 2001, vol. II (Part Two) and corrigendum, paras. 97–98, at p. 146: “The State of origin shall take all appropriate measures to prevent significant transboundary harm or at any event to minimize the risk thereof”. | 关于预防危险活动的跨界损害的条款，第3条，《2001年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)和更正，第97和98段，见第146页：“起源国应采取一切适当措施，以预防重大的跨界损害或随时尽量减少这种危险”。 |
| Para. (8) of the commentary to art. 3, ibid., at p. 154. | 第3条评注第(8)段，同上，第154页。 |
| Namibia, Advisory Opinion (see footnote 774 above), p. 54, para. 118. | 纳米比亚，咨询意见(见上文脚注774)，第54页，第118段。 |
| Pulp Mills (see footnote 796 above), pp. 55–56, para. 101. | 纸浆厂案(见上文脚注796)，第55-56页，第101段。 |
| See footnote 799 above. | 见上文脚注799。 |
| Para. (10) of the commentary to art. 2 (use of terms) of the articles on prevention of transboundary harm from hazardous activities, Yearbook … 2001, vol. II (Part Two) and corrigendum, paras. 97–98, at p. 153. | 关于预防危险活动的跨界损害的条款，第2条(用语)评注第(10)段，《2001年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)和更正，第97-98段，见第153页。 |
| Para. (12) of the commentary to art. 1, ibid., at p. 151. | 第1条评注第(12)段，同上，第151页。 |
| See, for instance, Pulp Mills (see footnote 796 above), pp. 55–56 and 58, para. 101; | 例如，见纸浆厂案(见上文脚注796)，第55-56和58页，第101段； |
| Certain Activities and Construction of a Road (footnote 796 above), pp. 720–721, paras. 153 and 156; | 某些活动和修建道路案(上文脚注796)，第720-721页，第153和156段； |
| South China Sea Arbitration (the Republic of the Philippines v. the People’s Republic of China), Case No. 2013-19, Permanent Court of Arbitration, Award, 12 July 2016, para. 941. | 南海仲裁案(菲律宾共和国诉中华人民共和国)，案件编号2013-19，常设仲裁法院，2016年7月12日裁决，第941段。 |
| See also United Nations Compensation Commission, Governing Council, Report and recommendations made by the Panel of Commissioners concerning the third instalment of “F4”Claims (S/AC.26/2003/31), para. 33: while the Panel ruled on the basis that Iraq was liable for “any … damage” (Security Council resolution 687 (1991)), it did not deny that the commonly accepted threshold for compensable damage was “significant”. | 另见联合国赔偿委员会理事会专员小组就第三批“F4”类索赔提出的报告和建议(S/AC.26/2003/31)，第33段：专员小组裁定的依据是伊拉克对“任何…损害”负有赔偿责任(安全理事会第687(1991)号决议)，但并不否认公认的可予赔偿的门槛是“重大”损害。 |
| See further Duvic-Paoli, The Prevention Principle in International Environmental Law (footnote 636 above), p. 164; | 又见Duvic-Paoli, The Prevention Principle in International Environmental Law(上文脚注636), p. 164； |
| K. Hulme, War Torn Environment: Interpreting the Legal Threshold (Leiden, Martinus Nijhoff, 2004), p. 68, pointing out that in case of environmental harm, it is common to use the standard of “significant” damage. | K. Hulme, War Torn Environment: Interpreting the Legal Threshold (Leiden, Martinus Nijhoff, 2004), 第68页，其中指出，在环境损害的情况下，通常使用“重大”损害标准。 |
| Similarly T. Koivurova, “Due diligence”, Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law, p. 241, para. 23, available from www.mpepil.com. See also J.M. Arbour, S. Lavallée, and H. Trudeau, Droit International de l’Environnement, 2nd ed. (Cowansville, Editions Yvon Blais, 20122012), p. 1058; | 同样，见T. Koivurova, “Due diligence”, Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law, p. 241, para. 23,可查阅www.mpepil.com. 另见J.M. Arbour, S. Lavallée, and H. Trudeau, Droit International de l’Environnement, 2nd ed. (Cowansville, Editions Yvon Blais, 20122012), p. 1058; |
| U. Beyerlin and T. Marauhn, International Environmental Law (Hart-C.H. Beck-Nomos 2011), p. 41; | U. Beyerlin and T. Marauhn, International Environmental Law (Hart-C.H. Beck-Nomos 2011), p. 41; |
| P.M. Dupuy and J.E. Viñuales, International Environmental Law, 2nd ed. (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2018), pp. 64–65 (“Damage that does not reach the threshold of significance will not breach the no-harm principle but States will remain bound by the due diligence duty to prevent it (see prevention principle) as well as by a norm such as the polluter-pays principle, which allocates the burden of tolerable (below threshold) damage to the polluter”); | P.M. Dupuy and J.E. Viñuales, International Environmental Law, 2nd ed. (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2018), 第64-65页 (“未达到重大损害门槛的损害不会违反不损害原则，但各国仍将受到防止损害的应尽职责义务(见防止原则)以及诸如污染者付费原则等规范的约束，该原则将可容忍的(低于门槛)损害的责任分配给污染者”); |
| J. Brunnée, “Harm prevention” in L. Rajamani and J. Peel (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of International Environmental Law, 2nd ed. (Oxford, Oxford University Press 2021), pp. 271–272 (“although Principle 21 [of the Rio Declaration] did not stipulate a particular threshold of harm, it is accepted today that the rule focuses on ‘significant’ harm – harm that is more than ‘detectable’, but not necessarily ‘serious’ or ‘substantial’”). | J. Brunnée, “Harm prevention” in L. Rajamani and J. Peel (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of International Environmental Law, 2nd ed. (Oxford, Oxford University Press 2021), 第271-272页 (“虽然[《里约宣言》]原则21没有规定损害的具体门槛，但现在公认的是，该规则聚焦于“重大”损害――程度超过‘可察觉’但不必达到‘严重’或‘显著’的损害”)。 |
| See, for instance Convention on Biological Diversity, art. 3; | 例如，见《生物多样性公约》第3条； |
| United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, art. 194, para. 2. | 《联合国海洋法公约》，第一九四条第2款。 |
| See, however, South China Sea Arbitration (see previous footnote), para. 941: (“Thus States have a positive ‘duty to prevent, or at least mitigate, significant harm to the environment when pursuing large-scale construction activities’. | 然而，见南海仲裁案(见前一脚注)，第941段: (“因此，国家有积极的‘义务防止或至少减轻大规模建筑活动对环境造成的重大损害’。 |
| The Tribunal considers [that] this duty informs the scope of the general obligation in Article 192.”). | 法庭认为，这项义务贯穿于第一九二条中一般义务的范围。 |
| Second report of the International Law Association, Study Group on Due Diligence in International Law, July 2016, p. 8. | ”) 国际法协会国际法应尽义务研究组第二次报告，2016年7月，第8页。 |
| See para. (7) of the commentary to para. 2 of draft principle 19 above. | 见上文原则草案19评注关于原则草案19第2段的第(7)段。 |
| “[T]ransitional justice … comprises the full range of processes and mechanisms associated with a society’s attempts to come to terms with a legacy of large-scale past abuses, in order to ensure accountability, serve justice and achieve reconciliation. | “过渡司法…包含与一个社会为抚平过去的大规模虐害行为所遗留的伤痛，确保究问责任、声张正义、实现和解而进行的努力的所有相关进程和机制。 |
| These may include both judicial and non-judicial mechanisms, with differing levels of international involvement (or none at all) and individual prosecutions, reparations, truth-seeking, institutional reform, vetting and dismissals, or a combination thereof”, Report of the Secretary-General on “The rule of law and transitional justice in conflict and post-conflict societies” (S/2004/616), para. 8; | 这些进程和机制可以包括国际社会参与程度各有不同(或根本不参与)的司法和非司法机制、起诉个人、补偿、真相调查、制度改革、审查和革职办法，或其中任何一些的组合”。 秘书长关于“冲突中和冲突后社会的法治和过渡司法”的报告(S/2004/616)，第8段； |
| numerous countries affected by post-conflict crises have adopted transitional justice mechanisms to enhance their environmental protection and restoration, some under assistance of the United Nations Environment Programme: see, for instance, United Nations Environment Programme, “Reporting on the state of the environment in Afghanistan: workshop report” (2019); | 许多受冲突后危机影响的国家采用了过渡期司法机制，以加强环境保护和恢复，有些国家得到了联合国环境规划署的援助：例如见联合国环境规划署，“阿富汗环境状况报告：研讨会报告”(2019年)； |
| United Nations Environment Programme, South Sudan: First State of the Environment and Outlook Report 2018 (Nairobi, 2018); | 联合国环境规划署，《南苏丹：2018年第一份环境状况和展望报告》(2018年，内罗毕)； |
| A. Salazar et al., “The ecology of peace: preparing Colombia for new political and planetary climates”, Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment (September 2018), available at http://www.researchgate.net/publication/327605932_ The_ecology_of_peace_preparing_Colombia_for_new_political_and_planetary_climates/download (accessed on 8 July 2019); | A. Salazar et al., “The ecology of peace: preparing Colombia for new political and planetary climates”, Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment (September 2018), 可查阅 http://www.researchgate.net/publication/327605932_The_ecology_of_peace_preparing_Colombia_for_new_political_and_planetary_climates/download (2019年7月8日访问); |
| United Nations Environment Programme, “Addressing the role of natural resources in conflict and peacebuilding” (Nairobi, 2015); | 联合国环境规划署，“处理自然资源在冲突和建设和平中的作用”(2015年，内罗毕)； |
| United Nations Environment Programme, Rwanda: From Post-Conflict to Environmentally Sustainable Development (footnote 445 above); | 联合国环境规划署，《卢旺达：从冲突后到环境可持续发展》(上文脚注445)； |
| United Nations Environment Programme, “Sierra Leone: environment, conflict and peacebuilding assessment” (Geneva, 2010); | 联合国环境规划署，“塞拉利昂：环境、冲突与建设和平评估”(2010年，日内瓦)； |
| Cambodia, Ministry of Environment, “Cambodia environment outlook” (2009); | 柬埔寨环境部，“柬埔寨环境展望”(2009年)； |
| Sierra Leone, An Agenda for Change (2008); | 塞拉利昂，《改革议程》(2008年)； |
| United Nations Environment Programme, Environmental assessment of the Gaza Strip following the escalation of hostilities in December 2008–January 2009 (Nairobi, 2009). | 联合国环境规划署，《2008年12月至2009年1月敌对行动升级后加沙地带的环境评估》(2009年，内罗毕)。 |
| 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项“参考工具，为建立和平专业人员提供近800份可广义理解为和平协议的文件和相关材料”，其中包含多种多样的文件，如“正式和平协议和子协议，以及较为非正式的协议和文件，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. | 安全理事会的部分决议也收入了数据库。 |
| The database is available at http://peacemaker.un.org/document-search (accessed on 2 August 2022). | 该数据库可查阅http://peacemaker.un.org/document-search (2022年8月2日访问)。 |
| See also Language of Peace database which complements and builds on the United Nations peace agreements database, available at www.languageofpeace.org/#/search (accessed on 2 August 2022). | 另见和平语言数据库，该数据库是对联合国和平协议数据库的补充，并建立在联合国和平协议数据库的基础上，可查阅www.languageofpeace.org/#/search (2022年8月2日访问)。 |
| 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在特定武装冲突中造成的环境损害的程度。 |
| 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. | 关于在武装冲突中造成的环境损害，广为人知的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部队在海湾战争中烧毁科威特油井，这些都有详细记录。 |
| Instances of environmental damage, which range in severity, have also been documented in other armed conflicts, such as the conflicts in Colombia, as well as in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Iraq and Syria. | 还有记录显示，其他武装冲突，如哥伦比亚以及刚果民主共和国、伊拉克和叙利亚的冲突也对环境造成不同程度的损害。 |
| See United Nations Environment Programme Colombia, “UN Environment will support environmental recovery and peacebuilding for post-conflict development in Colombia”, available at www.unenvironment.org/news-and-stories/story/un-environment-will-support-environmental-recovery-and-peacebuilding-post (accessed on 2 August 2022); | 见联合国环境规划署驻哥伦比亚办事处，“环境署将为环境恢复和建设和平提供支持，促进哥伦比亚的冲突后发展”，可查阅www.unenvironment.org/news-and-stories/story/un-environment-will-support-environmental-recovery-and-peacebuilding-post (2022年8月2日访问)； |
| United Nations Environment Programme, “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 2 August 2022); | 联合国环境规划署，“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 (2022年8月2日访问); |
| United Nations Environment Programme, “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 2 August 2022); | 联合国环境规划署，“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 (2022年8月2日访问)； |
| “Lebanon Environmental Assessment of the Syrian Conflict” (supported by UNDP and EU), available at https://www.undp.org/sites/g/files/zskgke326/files/migration/lb/EASC-WEB.pdf (accessed on 2 August 2022). | “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https://www.undp.org/sites/g/files/zskgke326/files/migration/lb/EASC-WEB.pdf (2022年8月2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International Law and Policy Institute, “Protection of the natural environment in armed conflict: an empirical study” (Oslo, 2014), pp. 34–40。 |
| 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 (accessed on 2 August 2022). | 见C. Bell, “Women and peace processes, negotiations, and agreements: operational opportunities and challenges”, Norwegian Peacebuilding Resource Centre, Policy Brief, March 2013, 可查阅http://noref.no under “Publications”, p. 1 (2022年8月2日访问)。 |
| Such instruments are predominantly concluded in non-international armed conflicts, between a State and a non-State actor and include the following: Final Agreement to End the Armed Conflict and Build a Stable and Lasting Peace between the National Government of Colombia and the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia – People’s Army (FARC-EP), (Bogotá, 24 November 2016), available at https://www.jep.gov.co/Marco%20Normativo/Normativa_v2/01%20ACUERDOS/N01.pdf (in Spanish); | 这些文书主要是国家与非国家行为体在非国际性武装冲突中订立的，其中包括：《哥伦比亚国家政府和哥伦比亚革命武装力量－人民军关于结束武装冲突和建立稳定持久和平的最后协定》(2016年11月24日，波哥大)，可查阅 https://www.jep.gov.co/Marco%20Normativo/Normativa_v2/01%20ACUERDOS/N01.pdf (西班牙文本); |
| https://www.peaceagreements.org/viewmasterdocument/1845 (in English) (accessed on 2 August 2022). | https://www.peaceagreements.org/viewmasterdocument/1845 (英文本) (2022年8月2日访问)。 |
| Agreement on Comprehensive Solutions between the Government of the Republic of Uganda and Lord’s Resistance Army/Movement (Juba, 2 May 2007), available at https://peacemaker.un.org/sites/peacemaker.un.org/files/UG_070502_AgreementComprehensiveSolutions.pdf (accessed on 2 August 2022, para. 14.6; | 《乌干达共和国政府和上帝抵抗军/运动全面解决办法协定》(2007年5月2日，朱巴)，可查阅 https://peacemaker.un.org/sites/peacemaker.un.org/files/UG_070502_AgreementComprehensiveSolutions.pdf (2022年8月2日访问，第14.6段； |
| Darfur Peace Agreement (Abuja, 5 May 2006), available from http://peacemaker.un.org/node/535 (accessed on 2 August 2022), chap. 2, at p. 21, art. 17, para. 107 (g) and (h), and at p. 30, art. 20; | 《达尔富尔和平协议》(2006年5月5日，阿布贾)，可查阅http://peacemaker.un.org/node/535 (2022年8月2日访问)，第2章，第21页，第17条，第107(g)和(h)款以及第30页，第20条； |
| Final Act of the Inter-Congolese Political Negotiations (Sun City, 2 April 2003), available from http://peacemaker.un.org/drc-suncity-agreement2003 (accessed on 2 August 2022), 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 (2022年8月2日访问) DIC/CEF/03号决议第40-41页和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 (Machakos, 20 July 2002), available from http://peacemaker.un.org/node/1369 (accessed on 15 June 2022), 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 further regulations on oil resources are found in paras. 3.1.1 and 4; | 《苏丹共和国政府和苏丹人民解放运动/苏丹人民解放军全面和平协定》(2002年7月20日，马查科斯)，可查阅 http://peacemaker.un.org/node/1369 (2022年6月15日访问)，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最为人知的做法”(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； |
| Arusha Peace and Reconciliation Agreement for Burundi (Arusha, 28 August 2000), available from http://peacemaker.un.org/node/1207 (accessed on 2 August 2022), Additional Protocol III, at p. 62, art. 12, para. 3 (e), and Additional 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 (2022年8月2日访问)，《第三附加议定书》，第62页，第12条，第3(e)款和《第四附加议定书》，第81页，第8(h)条； |
| Peace Agreement between the Government of Sierra Leone and the Revolutionary United Front of Sierra Leone (Lomé, 7 July 1999), available from https://peacemaker.un.org/sierraleone-lome-agreement99 (accessed on 2 August 2022), S/1999/777, annex, art. VII; | 《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)，可查阅https://peacemaker.un.org/sierraleone-lome-agreement99 (2022年8月2日访问)，S/1999/777, 附件，第七条； |
| Interim Agreement for Peace and Self-Government in Kosovo (Rambouillet Accords) (Paris, 18 March 1999), S/1999/648, annex; | 《科索沃和平与自治临时协定》(《朗布依埃协定》)，(1999年3月18日，巴黎)，S/1999/648, 附件； |
| 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. | 《萨尔瓦多政府和法拉本多·马蒂民族解放阵线和平协定》(《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。 |
| Chapultepec Agreement (see previous footnote), chap. II. | 《查普尔特佩克协定》(见上一脚注)，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，国家民警局下设环境司“负责防止和打击破坏环境的罪行和不法行为”。 |
| 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页，第8(h)条，有几处提及保护环境，其中一处规定，情报部门的任务之一是“尽早发现国家生态环境面临的任何威胁”。 |
| 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”。 |
| Whereas between 1989 and 2004, natural resources were mentioned in approximately half of all peace agreements, from 2005 to 2018, natural resource provisions were included in all major peace agreements. | 在1989年至2004年期间，约半数的和平协议提到了自然资源； 而在2005年至2018年期间，所有主要和平协议都列入了与自然资源有关的条款。 |
| See S.J.A. Mason, D.A. Sguaitamatti and M. del Pilar Ramirez Gröbli, “Stepping stones to peace? Natural resource provisions in peace agreements”, in Bruch, Muffett and Nichols (eds.), Governance, Natural Resources, and Post-conflict Peacebuilding (see footnote 704 above), pp. 71–119. | 见S.J.A. Mason, D.A. Sguaitamatti and M. del Pilar Ramirez Gröbli, “Stepping stones to peace? Natural resource provisions in peace agreements”, in Bruch, Muffett and Nichols (eds.), Governance, Natural Resources, and Post-conflict Peacebuilding (见上文脚注704), pp. 71–119。 |
| Including children, youth, persons with disabilities, older persons, indigenous peoples, ethnic minorities, refugees and internally displaced persons, and migrants: see United Nations Environmental Assembly resolution 2/15 (see footnote 342 above), fourteenth preambular paragraph. | 包括儿童、青年、残疾人、老年人、土著人民、少数民族、难民和境内流离失所者及移民：见联合国环境大会第2/15号决议(见上文脚注342)，序言部分第十四段。 |
| Security Council resolution 2282 (2016) and General Assembly resolution 70/262 of 12 May 2016. | 安全理事会第2282(2016)号决议和联大2016年5月12日第70/262号决议。 |
| See also T. Ide et al., “The past and future(s) of environmental peacebuilding”, International Affairs, vol. 97 (2021), pp. 1–16, at p. 8 (“Local communities are frequently successful in managing natural resources and mitigating or managing environmental conflict”). | 另见T. Ide et al., “The past and future(s) of environmental peacebuilding”, International Affairs, vol. 97 (2021), pp. 1–16, 第8页(“地方社区往往能够成功管理自然资源，缓解或管理环境冲突”)。 |
| See Security Council resolution 1325 (2000). | 见安全理事会第1325 (2000)号决议。 |
| See also the general recommendations of the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women: No. 30 (2013) on women in conflict prevention, conflict and post-conflict situations; | 另见消除对妇女歧视委员会一般性建议：关于妇女在预防冲突、冲突中及冲突后局势中的作用的第30号一般性建议(2013年)； |
| No. 34 (2016) on the rights of rural women; | 关于农村妇女权利的第34号一般性建议(2016)； |
| No. 35 (2017) on gender-based violence against women, updating general recommendation No. 19; | 关于对妇女的性别暴力并更新第19号一般性建议的第35号一般性建议(2017年)； |
| No. 37 (2018) on the gender-related dimensions of disaster risk reduction in the context of climate change. | 关于气候变化背景下减少灾害风险所涉性别层面的第37号一般性建议(2018年)。 |
| See further United Nations Environmental Assembly resolution 4/17 of 15 March 2019 on “Promoting gender equality and the human rights and empowerment of women and girls in environmental governance” (UNEP/EA.4/Res.17) as well as UNEP/EA.3/Res.1 of 5 December 2017 on “Pollution mitigation and control in areas affected by armed conflict and terrorism”, preamble, para. 10. | 另见联合国环境大会2019年3月15日关于“在环境治理中促进性别平等以及增进妇女和女童的人权和权能”的第4/17号决议(UNEP/EA.4/Res.17)以及2017年12月5日关于“减轻和控制受武装冲突或恐怖主义影响地区污染”的UNEP/EA.3/Res.1号决议，序言部分第十段。 |
| 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充当调解人。 |
| Regional organizations have also played a facilitating role in the peace processes across the world. | 区域组织也在世界各地的和平进程中发挥了调解作用。 |
| 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, p. 3, available from www.chathamhouse.org (accessed on 2 August 2022). | 见 Chatham House, Africa Programme, “The African Union’s role in promoting peace, security and stability: from reaction to prevention?”, meeting summary, p. 3, 可查阅www.chathamhouse.org (2022年8月2日访问)。 |
| The Organization of American States was involved in the peace process in, inter alia, the Plurinational State of Bolivia and Colombia. | 美洲国家组织除其他外参与了多民族玻利维亚国和哥伦比亚的和平进程。 |
| See P.J. Meyer, “Organization of American States: background and issues for Congress” (Congressional Research Service, 2014), p. 8, available at www.fas.org (accessed on 2 August 2022). | 见P.J. Meyer, “Organization of American States: background and issues for Congress” (Congressional Research Service, 2014), p. 8, 可查阅 www.fas.org (2022年8月2日访问)。 |
| See also African Union and Centre for Humanitarian Dialogue, Managing Peace Processes: Towards more inclusive processes, vol. 3 (2013), p. 106. | 另见African Union and Centre for Humanitarian Dialogue, 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” (accessed on 2 August 2022). | 另见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, 可查阅 www.swisspeace.ch, under “Publications” (2022年8月2日访问)。 |
| General Assembly resolution 217 (III) A of 10 December 1948. | 联大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(意见和表达自由)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 and Others v. Italy, 19 February 1998, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1998-I. |
| 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. | Office of Communications v. Information Commissioner, case C-71/10, judgment of 28 July 2011。 |
| 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). | 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). |
| Aarhus Convention, art. 2. | 《奥胡斯公约》，第二条。 |
| See also United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, art. 6; | 另见《联合国气候变化框架公约》，第六条； |
| Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety to the Biodiversity Convention (Montreal, 29 June 2000), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 2226, p. 208, art. 23; | 《生物多样性公约卡塔赫纳生物安全议定书》(2000年6月29日，蒙特利尔)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第2226卷，第208页，第23条； |
| Rotterdam Convention on the Prior Informed Consent Procedure for Certain Hazardous Chemicals and Pesticides in International Trade, 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》，第15条； |
| Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants, art. 10; | 《关于持久性有机污染物的斯德哥尔摩公约》，第10条； |
| Minamata Convention on Mercury, art. 18; | 《关于汞的水俣公约》，第十八条； |
| Paris Agreement, art. 4, para. 8, and art. 12; | 《巴黎协定》，第四条第八款和第十二条； |
| United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification in Those Countries Experiencing Serious Drought and/or Desertification, particularly in Africa (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。 |
| Art. 4, para. 6 (h). | 第四条第六款(八)项。 |
| Art. 5. | 第5条。 |
| International Mine Action Standards, available from www.mineactionstandards.org (accessed on 2 August 2022). | 《国际地雷行动标准》，可查阅www.mineactionstandards.org (2022年8月2日访问)。 |
| 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 (see footnote 608 above), guideline 19, referring to the Fourth Geneva Convention, art. 63, para. 2, and Additional Protocol I, arts. 61–67. | 见红十字国际委员会《关于武装冲突中环境保护的军事手册和指南准则》(见上文脚注608)，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。 |
| See also ICRC, Guidelines on the Protection of the Natural Environment in Armed Conflict (footnote 345 above), para. 13, which states that “[t]he content of the 1994 Guidelines remains valid today”. | 另见红十字国际委员会，《武装冲突中保护自然环境的准则》(上文脚注345)，第13段，其中指出，“1994年准则的内容今天仍然有效”。 |
| United Nations Environment Programme, Guidance Note, Integrating Environment in Post-Conflict Needs Assessments (Geneva, 2009): see United Nations Environment Programme, “Disasters and conflicts programme”, p. 3. | 联合国环境规划署，指导说明，《将环境纳入冲突后需要评估》(2009年，日内瓦)：见联合国环境规划署，“灾害和冲突方案”，第3页。 |
| Convention on the Law of the Non-navigational Uses of International Watercourses, 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》，第9条、第11条、第12条、第14-16条、第19条、第30条、第31条和第33条第7款。 |
| Art. 14, para. 1 (c). | 第14条第1款(c)项。 |
| See Aarhus Convention, art. 4. | 见《奥胡斯公约》，第四条。 |
| Other grounds include the confidentiality of commercial and industrial information and the confidentiality of personal data. | 其他理由包括商业信息和工业信息的保密以及个人数据的保密。 |
| The grounds for refusal shall furthermore be interpreted in a restrictive way, taking into account the public interest served by disclosure and taking into account whether the requested information relates to emissions into the environment. | 此外，对拒绝理由的解释应有限定，要顾及能够因请求所指信息的公开而获益的公共利益并考虑到请求所指信息是否涉及向环境的排放。 |
| See also 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). | 另见《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 (Escazú Agreement), art. 5, para. 6 (b). | 另见《拉丁美洲和加勒比关于在环境问题上获得信息、公众参与和诉诸法律的区域协定》(《埃斯卡苏协定》)，第5条第6款(b)项。 |
| See, for instance, Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants, art. 9, para. 5; | 例如见《关于持久性有机污染物的斯德哥尔摩公约》，第9条第5款； |
| Cartagena Protocol, art. 21 para. 6 (c); | 《卡塔赫纳议定书》，第21条第6款(c)项； |
| Minamata Convention on Mercury, art. 17, para. 5. | 《关于汞的水俣公约》，第十七条第五款。 |
| See, for instance, UNHCR, Policy on the Protection of Personal Data of Persons of Concern to UNHCR (2015). | 例如，见难民署，《保护难民署关注人员个人资料的政策》(2015年)。 |
| Such obligations may derive from disarmament treaties, such as amended Protocol II to the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons and 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) (Geneva, 3 May 1996), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 2399, No. 22495, p. 100, the Convention on Cluster Munitions or the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (New York, 7 July 2017), United Nations, Treaty Series, No. 56478 (volume number has yet to be determined), available from https://treaties.un.org. Reference can also be made to environmental law conventions, such as the Convention on Biological Diversity, or the World Heritage Convention, which require environmental assessments after a major event such as an armed conflict. | 这些义务可能来自裁军条约，例如《特定常规武器公约》经修正后的第二号议定书和《禁止或限制使用某些可被认为具有过分伤害力或滥杀滥伤作用的常规武器公约》所附《战争遗留爆炸物议定书》(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，《集束弹药公约》或《禁止核武器条约》(2017年7月7日，纽约)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第56478号(卷号待定)，可查阅https://treaties.un.org. 还可以参照环境法公约，如《生物多样性公约》或《保护世界文化和自然遗产公约》，这些公约要求在发生武装冲突等重大事件后进行环境评估。 |
| Obligation to cooperate may also be based on the law of armed conflict or international human rights law. | 合作的义务也可能以武装冲突法或国际人权法为基础。 |
| 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 (2 August 2022). | 《〈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/eia/documents/legaltexts/protocolenglish.pdf (2022年8月2日访问)。 |
| Post-crisis environmental assessment, available at www.unenvironment.org/explore-topics/disasters-conflicts/what-we-do/preparedness-and-response/post-crisis-environmental (accessed on 2 August 2022). | 危机后环境评估，可查阅 www.unenvironment.org/explore-topics/disasters-conflicts/what-we-do/preparedness-and-response/post-crisis-environmental (2022年8月2日访问)。 |
| D. Jensen, “Evaluating the impact of UNEP’s post conflict environmental assessments”, Assessing and Restoring Natural Resources in Post-Conflict Peacebuilding (see footnote 450 above), pp. 17–62, at p. 18. | D. Jensen, “Evaluating the impact of UNEP’s post conflict environmental assessments”, Assessing and Restoring Natural Resources in Post-Conflict Peacebuilding (见上文脚注450), pp. 17–62, at p. 18。 |
| A needs assessment and desk study can be done during or after a conflict, based on a collection of pre-existing secondary information on environmental trends and natural resource management, challenges from international and national sources. | 需要评估和案头研究可在冲突期间或冲突之后进行，以从国际和国家来源收集的关于环境趋势和自然资源管理以及挑战的已有二手资料为基础。 |
| Such information, with limited verification field visits, is then compiled into a desk study report that attempts to identify and prioritize environmental needs. | 在进行有限的实地访问以核实信息之后,将这些资料汇编为案头研究报告，尝试查明环境需要并确定优先次序。 |
| Ibid., pp. 18–19. | 同上，pp. 18–19。 |
| 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. | 定量风险评估包括实地访问、实验室分析和卫星图像，侧重于由轰炸以及摧毁建筑物、工业用地和公共基础设施造成的冲突的直接环境影响。 |
| Ibid., pp. 19–20. | 同上，pp. 19–20。 |
| 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. | 战略评估评价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。 |
| These tend to be longer in duration. | 这些评估往往需要较长时间。 |
| Ibid., p. 20. | 同上，p. 20。 |
| 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、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. | 综合评估基于与利益攸关方进行的国家磋商，试图确定优先事项以及所需短期、中期和长期干预措施的费用。 |
| Ibid., p. 20. | 同上，p. 20。 |
| 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%20 Assessment%20and%20Post%20Conflict%20Development%20full%20version.pdf (accessed on 2 August 2022). | DAC Network on Environment and Development Cooperation (ENVIRONET), “Strategic environment assessment and post-conflict development SEA toolkit” (2010), p. 4, 可查阅http://content-ext.undp.org/aplaws_publications/2078176/Strategic%20Environment%20Assessment%20and%20Post%20Conflict%20Development%20full%20version.pdf (2022年8月2日访问)。 |
| Ibid. | 同上。 |
| United Nations Environment Programme, “Disasters and conflicts programme”, p. 3. | 联合国环境规划署，“灾害和冲突方案”，第3页。 |
| “First, the distance separating the source from the place of damage may be dozens or even hundreds of miles, creating doubts about the causal link even where polluting activities can be identified.”; “Second, the noxious effects of a pollutant may not be felt until years or decades after the act.”; “Third, some types of damage occur only if the pollution continues over time”; | “首先，污染源与损害地点可能相距数十甚至数百英里，即使在能够确认污染活动的情况下，因果关系也存在疑问”;“第二，污染物的有害影响可能要到行为发生数年或数十年后才会显现”;“第三，某些类型的损害在污染持续一段时间后才会发生”； |
| and “Fourth, the same pollutant does not always produce the same detrimental effects due to important variations in physical circumstances.”. | “第四，由于物理环境的重大差异，相同的污染物并不总产生相同的有害影响”。 |
| A.C. Kiss and D. Shelton, Guide to International Environmental Law (Leiden, Martinus Nijhoff, 2007), pp. 20–21. See also P.-M. Dupuy, “L’État et la réparation des dommages catastrophiques”, in F. Francioni and T. Scovazzi (eds.), International Responsibility for Environmental Harm (Boston, Graham and Trotman, 1991), pp. 125–147, p. 141, who describes the inherent characteristics of ecological damage as follows: “au-delà de ses incidences immédiates et souvent spectaculaires, il pourra aussi être diffus, parfois différé, cumulatif, indirect” [“beyond its immediate and often spectacular consequences, it could also be pervasive, sometimes deferred, cumulative, indirect”]. | A.C. Kiss and D. Shelton, Guide to International Environmental Law (Leiden, Martinus Nijhoff, 2007), pp. 20–21. 另见P.-M. Dupuy, “L’État et la réparation des dommages catastrophiques”, in F. Francioni and T. Scovazzi (eds.), International Responsibility for Environmental Harm (Boston, Graham and Trotman, 1991), pp. 125–147, p. 141, 作者对生态破坏的内在特征描述如下：“au-delà de ses incidences immédiates et souvent spectaculaires, il pourra aussi être diffus, parfois différé, cumulatif, indirect” [“除产生直接、往往引人注目的后果之外，还可能具有扩散性，有时是延迟发生、累积的和间接的”]。 |
| See also C.R. Payne, “Developments in the law of environmental reparations. A case study of the UN Compensation Commission”, in Stahn, Iverson, and Easterday (eds.), Environmental Protection and Transitions from Conflict to Peace … (footnote 541 above), pp. 329–366, p. 353. | 另见C.R. Payne, “Developments in the law of environmental reparations. A case study of the UN Compensation Commission”, in Stahn, Iverson, and Easterday (eds.), Environmental Protection and Transitions from Conflict to Peace … (上文脚注541), pp. 329–366, p. 353。 |
| For the definition of environmental harm, see Sands, Principles of International Environmental Law (footnote 607 above), pp. 741–748. | 关于环境损害的定义，见Sands, Principles of International Environmental Law (上文脚注607), pp. 741–748。 |
| See Armed Activities, Reparations (footnote 484 above), para. 94. | 见武装活动案, 赔偿 (上文脚注484)，第94段。 |
| See also ICRC, “International humanitarian law and the challenges of contemporary armed conflicts”, document prepared for the 32nd International Conference of the Red Cross and Red Crescent (2015), International Review of the Red Cross, vol. 97 (2015), pp. 1427–1502, at pp. 1431–1432. | 另见红十字国际委员会，为第三十二届红十字会与红新月会国际大会(2015年)编写的“国际人道法与当代武装冲突的挑战”，《红十字国际评论》，第97 (2015)卷，第1427-1502页，见第1431-1432页。 |
| Armed Activities, Reparation (footnote 484 above), para. 97 (“However, the fact that the damage was the result of concurrent causes is not sufficient to exempt the Respondent from any obligation to make reparation”). | 武装活动案, 赔偿(上文脚注484)，第97段(“然而，损害是共同原因造成的这一事实不足以免除被告的任何赔偿义务”)。 |
| For the history of war reparations, see P. d’Argent, Les réparations de guerre en droit international public. La responsabilité internationale des États à l’épreuve de la guerre (Brussels, Bruylant, 2002). | 关于战争赔偿的历史，见 P. d’Argent, Les réparations de guerre en droit international public. La responsabilité internationale des États à l’épreuve de la guerre (Brussels, Bruylant, 2002) 。 |
| See also ICRC commentary (1987) to Additional Protocol I, art. 91, para. 3651: “On the conclusion of a peace treaty, the Parties can in principle deal with the problems relating to war damage in general and those relating to the responsibility for starting the war, as they see fit. ” | 另见红十字国际委员会关于《第一附加议定书》的评注 (1987年)， 第九十一条，第3651段：“在缔结一项和平条约时，缔约方原则上可以在其认为适当的情况下，处理与一般战争损害有关的问题，以及与发动战争的责任有关的问题。” |
| The United Nations Compensation Commission’s experience was groundbreaking in the area of reparations for wartime environmental harm (see footnote 487 above). | 联合国赔偿委员会的经验在战时环境损害赔偿方面具有开创性意义 (见上文脚注487)。 |
| The other relevant international instances of either addressing wartime environmental damage or having the potential to do so include: the Eritrea-Ethiopia Claims Commission that was established in 2000 (see Agreement on Cessation of Hostilities between the Government of the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia and the Government of the State of Eritrea (Algiers, 18 June 2000), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 2138, No. 37273, p. 85, and Agreement between the Government of the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia and the Government of the State of Eritrea for the resettlement of displaced persons, as well as rehabilitation and peacebuilding in both countries (Algiers, 12 December 2000), ibid., No. 37274, p. 93); | 处理或有可能处理战时环境损害的其他相关国际实例包括：2000年设立厄立特里亚－埃塞俄比亚索偿委员会(见《埃塞俄比亚联邦民主共和国政府与厄立特里亚国的停止敌对行动协定》(2000年6月18日，阿尔及尔)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第2138卷，第37273号，第85页，以及《埃塞俄比亚联邦民主共和国政府与厄立特里亚国政府关于重新安置流离失所者以及在两国重建和建设和平的协定》(2000年12月12日，阿尔及尔)，同上，第37274号，第93页； |
| and the 2004 Advisory Opinion of the International Court of Justice concerning the construction of a wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territories, see Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall (footnote 351 above), p. 189, para. 131, and p. 192, para. 136. | 2004年国际法院关于在巴勒斯坦被占领土修建隔离墙的咨询意见，见修建隔离墙的法律后果 (上文脚注351)，第189页第131段和第192页第136段。 |
| See also Armed Activities on the Territory of the Congo, Judgment … 2005 (see footnote 484 above), p. 257, para. 259. | 另见刚果境内的武装活动案，判决，《2005年…汇编》(见上文脚注484)，第257页，第259段。 |
| This would arguably be the case with most environmental harm in conflict, given that the specific prohibitions in the law of armed conflict “do not address normal operational damage to the environment that is left after hostilities cease, from sources such as the use of tracked vehicles on fragile desert surfaces; disposal of solid, toxic, and medical waste; depletion of scarce water resources; and incomplete recovery of ordnance”, as pointed out by C.R. Payne, “The norm of environmental integrity in post-conflict legal regimes”, in Stahn, Easterday and Iverson (eds.), Jus Post Bellum: Mapping the Normative Foundation (footnote 753 above), pp. 502–518, at p. 511. | 可以说，冲突中的大多数环境损害都属于这种情况，因为武装冲突法中的具体禁令“不处理敌对行动停止后正常行动对环境造成的损害，包括由在脆弱的沙漠表面使用履带车辆，处置固体废物、有毒废物和医疗废物，大量消耗稀缺水资源，以及未完全回收弹药造成的损害”，C.R. Payne, “The norm of environmental integrity in post-conflict legal regimes”, in Stahn, Easterday and Iverson (eds.), Jus Post Bellum: Mapping the Normative Foundation (上文脚注753), pp. 502–518, at p. 511。 |
| See draft principle 14 and para. (8) of the commentary thereto above. | 见上文原则草案14及其评注第(8)段。 |
| University of Amsterdam and Center for Civilians in Conflict, “Monetary payments for civilian harm in international and national practice” (2015). See also United States, Government Accountability Office, “Military operations. The Department of Defense’s use of solatia and condolence payments in Iraq and Afghanistan”, Report, May 2007; | University of Amsterdam and Center for Civilians in Conflict, “Monetary payments for civilian harm in international and national practice” (2015). 另见United States, Government Accountability Office, “Military operations. The Department of Defense’s use of solatia and condolence payments in Iraq and Afghanistan”, Report, May 2007; |
| and W.M. Reisman, “Compensating collateral damage in elective international conflict”, Intercultural Human Rights Law Review, vol. 8 (2013), pp. 1–18. | and W.M. Reisman, “Compensating collateral damage in elective international conflict”, Intercultural Human Rights Law Review, vol. 8 (2013), pp. 1–18。 |
| See, e.g., Handicap International, “Victim Assistance in the context of mines and explosive remnants of war”, Handicap International (July 2014). | 例如见Handicap International, “Victim Assistance in the context of mines and explosive remnants of war”, Handicap International (July 2014)。 |
| Available at https://handicap-international.ch/sites/ch/files/documents/files/assistance-victimes-mines-reg_anglais.pdf (accessed on 2 August 2022). | 可查阅 https://handicap-international.ch/sites/ch/files/documents/files/assistance-victimes-mines-reg_anglais.pdf (2022年8月2日访问)。 |
| See also International Human Rights Clinic, Harvard Law School, “Environmental remediation under the treaty on the prohibition of nuclear weapons” (April 2018). | 另见International Human Rights Clinic, Harvard Law School, “Environmental remediation under the treaty on the prohibition of nuclear weapons” (April 2018)。 |
| Available at http://hrp.law.harvard.edu/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/Environmental-Remediation-short-5-17-18-final.pdf (accessed on 2 August 2022). | 可查阅http://hrp.law.harvard.edu/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/Environmental-Remediation-short-5-17-18-final.pdf (2022年8月2日访问)。 |
| See also 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, General Assembly resolution 60/147 of 16 December 2005, annex. | 另见《严重违反国际人权法和严重违反国际人道法行为受害人获得补救和赔偿的权利基本原则和导则》，联大2005年12月16日第60/147号决议，附件。 |
| Principle 9 states that “[a] person shall be considered a victim regardless of whether the perpetrator of the violation is identified, apprehended, prosecuted, or convicted”. | 原则9指出，“受害人的身份不取决于实施违法行为的人是否已被确认、逮捕、起诉或定罪”。 |
| United Nations Environment Programme, Lebanon Post-Conflict Environmental Assessment (2007), pp. 42–45. | 联合国环境规划署，《黎巴嫩冲突后环境评估》(2007年)，第42-45页。 |
| Available at https://postconflict.unep.ch/publications/UNEP_Lebanon.pdf (accessed on 2 August 2022). | 可查阅 https://postconflict.unep.ch/publications/UNEP_Lebanon.pdf (2022年8月2日访问)。 |
| See also Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, “Environmental emergency response to the Lebanon crisis”. | 另见人道主义事务协调厅，“对黎巴嫩危机的环境应急措施”。 可查阅 |
| Available at https://www.unocha.org/sites/dms/Documents/Report_on_response_to_the_Lebanon_Crisis.pdf (accessed on 2 August 2022). | https://www.unocha.org/sites/dms/Documents/Report_on_response_to_the_Lebanon_Crisis.pdf (2022年8月2日访问)。 |
| Protocol concerning Cooperation in Preventing Pollution from ships and, in cases of emergency, combating pollution of the Mediterranean Sea (Valletta, 25 January 2002), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 2942, annex A, No. 16908, p. 87. | 《地中海防止船舶污染并在紧急情况下治理污染合作议定书》(2002年1月25日，瓦莱塔)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第2942卷，附件A，第16908号，第87页。 |
| See United States, Congressional Research Service, “U.S. Agent Orange/Dioxin Assistance to Vietnam” (updated on 21 February 2019). | 见United States, Congressional Research Service, “U.S. Agent Orange/Dioxin Assistance to Vietnam” (2019年2月21日更新)。 |
| Available at https://fas.org/sgp/crs/row/R44268.pdf (accessed on 2 August 2022). | 可查阅https://fas.org/sgp/crs/row/R44268.pdf (2022年8月2日访问)。 |
| Art. 34 and commentary thereto of the articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts, Yearbook … 2001, vol. II (Part Two) and corrigendum, paras. 76–77, at pp. 95–96. | 国家对国际不法行为的责任条款第34条及其评注，《2001年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)和更正，第76-77段，第95-96页。 |
| Draft principle 25 has been modelled after article 12 on “Collective reparation” of the Institute of International Law resolution on responsibility and liability under international law for environmental damage from 1997 reading as follows: “Should the source of environmental damage be unidentified or compensation be unavailable from the entity liable or other back-up sources, environmental regimes should ensure that the damage does not remain uncompensated and may consider the intervention of special compensation funds or other mechanisms of collective reparation, or the establishment of such mechanisms where necessary”. | 原则草案25以国际法学会1997年关于国际法下环境损害的责任和赔偿责任的决议中有关“集体赔偿”的第12条为范本，该条内容如下：“如果环境损害的来源不明或责任实体或其他后备来源无法提供补偿，环境制度应确保损害不会持续得不到补偿，并可考虑特别补偿基金或其他集体赔偿机制的干预，或在必要时设立这种机制”。 |
| International Law Institute, resolution on “Responsibility and liability under international law for environmental damage”, Yearbook, vol. 67, Part II, Session of Strasbourg (1997), p. 486, at p. 499. | International Law Institute, resolution on “Responsibility and liability under international law for environmental damage”, Yearbook, vol. 67, Part II, Session of Strasbourg (1997), p. 486, at p. 499. |
| See para. (3) of the commentary to draft principle 2 above. | 见上文原则草案2评注第(3)段。 |
| See also para. (6) of the commentary to draft principle 24 above. | 另见上文原则草案24评注第(6)段。 |
| See further S. Hanamoto, “Mitigation and remediation of environmental damage”, in Y. Aguila and J. Vinuales (eds.), A Global Pact for the Environment – Legal Foundations (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2019), p. 79: “Mitigation and remediation of environmental damage aim at ‘avoid[ing], reduc[ing] and, if possible, remedy[ing] significant adverse effects’ (Article 5(3)(b), Directive 2011/92/EU on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment to the environment). | 又见S. Hanamoto, “Mitigation and remediation of environmental damage”, in Y. Aguila and J. Vinuales (eds.), A Global Pact for the Environment – Legal Foundations (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2019), 第79页：“减缓和补救环境损害旨在‘避免、减少，并在可能的情况下补救重大不利影响’(第5(3)(b)条，关于评估某些公共和私人环境项目对环境影响的2011/92/EU号指令)。 |
| More precisely, ‘[m]itigation is the use of practice, procedure or technology to minimise or to prevent impacts associated with proposed activities’ and ‘[r]emediation consists of the steps taken after impacts have occurred to promote, as much as possible, the return of the environment to its original condition’ (Antarctic Treaty Consultative Meeting, Revised Guidelines for Environmental Impact Assessment in Antarctica, 3.5, 2016).” | 更确切地说，‘减缓是使用做法、程序或技术，最大限度减少或预防与拟议活动相关的影响’，而‘补救包括在影响发生后采取的举措，以尽可能地促使环境恢复原状’(南极条约协商会议，《南极环境影响评估修正准则》，3.5，2016年)”。 |
| For example, this is often the case with chemical weapons that have been dumped at sea. | 例如，在海上倾弃的化学武器通常属于这种情况。 |
| 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项目(CHEMSEA)是合作项目的实例，该项目由波罗的海国家合作开展，由欧洲联盟提供部分资助。 |
| Information on the CHEMSEA project can be found at http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/en/projects/finland/chemsea-tackles-problem-of-chemical-munitions-in-the-baltic-sea (accessed on 2 August 2022). | 关于CHEMSEA项目的信息，见http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/en/projects/finland/chemsea-tackles-problem-of-chemical-munitions-in-the-baltic-sea (2022年8月2日访问)。 |
| See also the Baltic Marine Environment Protection Commission (Helsinki Commission) website at https://helcom.fi/baltic-sea-trends/hazardous-subtances/sea-dumped-chemical-munitions/ (accessed at 2 August 2022). | 另见波罗的海海洋环境保护委员会(赫尔辛基委员会)网站https://helcom.fi/baltic-sea-trends/hazardous-subtances/sea-dumped-chemical-munitions/ (2022年8月2日访问)。 |
| 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 https://paxforpeace.nl/media/download/987_icbuw-toxicharmtrwproject.pdf (accessed on 2 August 2022). | 另见https://paxforpeace.nl/media/download/987_icbuw-toxicharmtrwproject.pdf (2022年8月2日访问)。 |
| For more information on toxic remnants of war, see also the Geneva Academy, Weapons Law Encyclopedia, available at www.weaponslaw.org (accessed on 2 August 2022) 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 Geneva Academy, Weapons Law Encyclopedia ，可查阅www.weaponslaw.org (2022年8月2日访问)“词汇表”部分，其中援引了红十字国际委员会“加强对武装冲突受害者的法律保护”，第18页。 |
| See the statements delivered by Austria, Costa Rica, Ireland and South Africa to the First Committee of the General Assembly at its sixty-eighth session. | 见奥地利、哥斯达黎加、爱尔兰和南非在大会第六十八届会议第一委员会上的发言。 |
| Such as the Convention on the Prohibition, Use, Stockpiling, Production or Transfer of Anti-Personnel Mines and on Their Destruction and the Convention on Cluster Munitions. | 例如《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》。 |
| See para. (9) of the commentary to art. 1 of the articles on prevention of transboundary harm from hazardous activities, Yearbook … 2001, vol. II (Part Two) and corrigendum, paras. 97–98, at p. 151. | 见关于预防危险活动的跨界损害的条款，第1条评注第(9)段，《2001年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)和更正，第97-98段，见第151页。 |
| See also General Assembly resolution 62/68 of 6 December 2007, annex. | 另见联大2007年12月6日第62/68号决议，附件。 |
| Para. (12) of the commentary to art. 1, ibid. | 第1条的评注第(12)段，同上。 |
| A/CN.4/692, para. 33. | A/CN.4/692, 第33段。 |
| Concerning the concept of “control”, see Namibia, Advisory Opinion (footnote 774 above), at p. 54, para. 118, where the Court 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，见纳米比亚，咨询意见(上文脚注774)，第54页，第118段，法院指出：“南非不再有权管理该领土，这一事实并不免除南非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，而不是主权或法定所有权，是对影响到其他国家的行动承担国家责任的基础”。 |
| See, for example, Protocol II to the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons, as well as the Protocol V to the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons. | 例如见《特定常规武器公约第二号议定书》以及《特定常规武器公约第五号议定书》。 |
| 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; Convention on Cluster Munitions; 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》;《集束弹药公约》;《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》、《集束弹药公约》的措辞。 |
| 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. | 联大自2010年以来，包括在联大第71/220号决议中，明确认识到需要采取合作措施，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. | 该决议还注意到必须提高对海上倾弃化学弹药所生废物相关环境影响的认识，并邀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. | 见《联合国海洋法公约》。 |
| The remnants of war could be located in the internal waters, the territorial sea, archipelagic 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内水、领海、岛群水域、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”, Nordic Environmental Law Journal, vol. 1 (2015), pp. 57–69, 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). | 见A. Lott, “Pollution of the marine environment by dumping: legal framework applicable to dumped chemical weapons and nuclear waste in the Arctic Ocean”, Nordic Environmental Law Journal, vol. 1 (2015), pp. 57–69, 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)。 |
| United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, art. 194, para. 1 (“States shall take, individually or jointly as appropriate, all measures consistent with this Convention that are necessary to prevent, reduce and control pollution of the marine environment from any source, using for this purpose the best practicable means at their disposal and in accordance with their capabilities, and they shall endeavour to harmonize their policies in this connection.”). | 《联合国海洋法公约》，第一九四条第1款(“各国应适当情形下个别或联合地采取一切符合本公约的必要措施，防止、减少和控制任何来源的海洋环境污染，为此目的，按照其能力使用其所掌握的最切实可行方法，并应在这方面尽力协调它们的政策。”)。 |
| See also art. 192 and art. 194, para. 2. | 另见第一九二条和第一九四条第2款。 |
| 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 866 above). | 例如，2011年启动的CHEMSEA项目是波罗的海国家之间的合作项目，由欧洲联盟提供部分资助(见上文脚注866)。 |
| See General Assembly resolutions 65/149 of 20 December 2010 and 68/208 of 20 December 2013 and A/68/258. | 见联大2010年12月20日第65/149号决议、2013年12月20日第68/208号决议和第A/68/258号决议。 |
| See also Mensah, “Environmental damages under the Law of the Sea Convention”, | 另见Mensah, “Environmental damages under the Law of the Sea Convention”, p. 233。 |
| 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. | 《保护波罗的海地区海洋环境公约》的理事机构――波罗的海海洋环境保护委员会(赫尔辛基委员会)发布了早期阶段准则，为遇到海上倾弃化学弹药的渔民提供指导。 |
| 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/ (accessed on 2 August 2022). | 便于查阅的概览见詹姆斯·马丁不扩散研究中心开展的工作，网址www.nonproliferation.org/chemical-weapon-munitions-dumped-at-sea/ (2022年8月2日访问)。 |
| There is a clear link between danger to the environment and public health and safety. | 对环境构成的危险与公众健康和安全之间有明确联系。 |
| 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造成环境损害从而妨害居民健康的作战方法或手段； |
| article 1, paragraph 2, of the Convention on the Protection and Use of Transboundary Watercourses and International Lakes 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款规定，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、景观和历史古迹或其他物理结构或这些因素之间相互作用的影响； |
| they also include effects on the cultural heritage or socio-economic conditions resulting from alterations to those factors”. | 还包括这些因素的改变对文化遗产或社会经济状况的影响”。 |
| 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). | 在2007年7月20日第2940次会议上(《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. | 大会在2007年12月6日第62/66号决议第7段中注意到委员会决定将此专题列入其工作方案。 |
| 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). | 委员会第五十八届会议(2006年)按照委员会报告附件A所载的建议，将此专题列入了长期工作方案(《大会正式记录，第六十一届会议，补编第10号》(A/61/10)，第257段)。 |
| 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. |
| 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. | 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, A/CN.4/701, A/CN.4/722, A/CN.4/729, and A/CN.4/739, respectively. | 分别为A/CN.4/654、A/CN.4/661、A/CN.4/673、A/CN.4/686、A/CN.4/701、A/CN.4/722、A/CN.4/729和A/CN.4/739. |
| 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48-49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-eighth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/68/10), paras. 48–49). | 委员会在2013年6月7日第3174次会议上收到了起草委员会的报告并暂时通过了第1、第3和第4条草案，在2013年8月6日和7日第3193至第3196次会议上通过了其评注(同上，《第六十八届会议，补编第10号》(A/68/10)，第48-49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 (ibid., Sixty-ninth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/69/10), paras. 130–132). | 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，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(同上，《第六十九届会议，补编第10号》(A/69/10)，第130-132段)。 |
| 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). | 委员会在2016年7月27日第3329次会议上暂时通过了经起草委员会暂时通过和委员会第六十七届会议注意到的第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194-195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-second Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/72/10), paras. 74, 76 and 140–141). | 委员会在2017年7月20日第3378次会议上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至第3389次会议上通过了其评注(同上，《第七十二届会议，补编第10号》(A/72/10)，第74、第76和第140-141段)。 |
| At its 3501st meeting, on 6 August 2019, the Chair of the Drafting Committee presented the interim report of the Drafting Committee on “Immunity of State officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction”, containing draft article 8 ante provisionally adopted by the Drafting Committee at the seventy-first session (A/CN.4/L.940). | 在2019年8月6日第3501次会议上，起草委员会主席介绍了起草委员会关于“国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免”的临时报告，其中载有起草委员会在第七十一届会议上暂时通过的第8(前)条草案(A/CN.4/L.940)。 |
| The Commission took note of the interim report of the Drafting Committee on draft article 8 ante, which was presented to the Commission for information only (ibid., Seventy-fourth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/74/10), para. 125 and footnote 1469). | 委员会注意到起草委员会关于第8(前)条草案的临时报告，该报告提交委员会仅供参考(同上，《第七十四届会议，补编第10号》(A/74/10)，第125段和脚注 1469)。 |
| At its 3530th and 3549th meetings, on 3 June and 26 July 2021, respectively, the Commission received and considered the reports of the Drafting Committee (A/CN.4/L.940, A/CN.4/L.953 and Add.1), and provisionally adopted draft articles 8 ante, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12 (ibid., Seventy-sixth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/76/10), para. 114). | 在分别于2021年6月3日和7月26日举行的第3530次和第3549次会议上，委员会收到并审议了起草委员会的报告(A/CN.4/L.940、A/CN.4/L.953和Add.1)，并暂时通过了第8(前)、第8、第9、第10、第11和第12条草案(同上，《第七十六届会议，补编第10号》(A/76/10)，第114段)。 |
| See the draft articles on diplomatic intercourse and immunities adopted by the Commission at its tenth session, Yearbook of the International Law Commission (Yearbook … ), 1958, vol. II, document A/3859, p. 89, para. 53. | 见委员会第十届会议通过的关于外交关系和豁免的条款草案，《1958年国际法委员会年鉴》(《1958年…年鉴》)，第二卷，A/3859号文件，第89页，第53段。 |
| See, in particular, draft articles 29, 30 and 36–38 and the commentaries thereto, ibid., pp. 98–99 and 101–103. | 特别见第29、30和36至38条草案及相关评注，同上，第98-99和101-103页。 |
| See the draft articles on consular relations adopted by the Commission at its thirteenth session, Yearbook … 1961, vol. II, document A/4843, p. 92, para. 37. | 见委员会第十三届会议通过的关于领事关系的条款草案，《1961年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/4843号文件，第92页，第37段。 |
| See, in particular, draft articles 41–45, 53, 57 and 61 and the commentaries thereto, ibid., pp. 115–119, 122–123, 125 and 126. | 特别见第41至45、53、57和61条草案及相关评注，同上，第115-119、122-123、125和126页。 |
| See the draft articles on special missions adopted by the Commission at its nineteenth session, Yearbook … 1967, vol. II, document A/6709/Rev.1 and Rev.1/Corr.1, p. 347, para. 35. | 见委员会第十九届会议通过的关于特别使团的条款草案，《1967年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/6709/Rev.1和Rev.1/Corr.2号文件，第347页，第35段。 |
| See, in particular, draft articles 9, 29, 31, 36–41 and 44 and the commentaries thereto, ibid., pp. 351–352, 361, 362, 363–365 and 366. | 特别见第9、29、31、36至41和44条草案及相关评注，同上，第351-352、361、362、363-365和366页。 |
| See the draft articles on the representation of States in their relations with international organizations adopted by the Commission at its twenty-third session, Yearbook … 1971, vol. II (Part One), document A/8410/Rev.1, p. 284, para. 60. | 见委员会第二十三届会议通过的关于国家在其对国际组织关系上的代表权的条款草案，《1971年…年鉴》，第二卷(第一部分)，A/8410/Rev.1号文件，第284页，第60段。 |
| See, in particular, draft articles 22, 28, 30, 31, 36–38, 50, 53, 59, 61, 62, 67–69 and 74 and the commentaries thereto, ibid., pp. 299–300, 302–305, 308–310, 315–316, 317, 319–321, 322–323 and 326. | 特别见第22、28、30、31、36至38、50、53、59、61、62、67至69和74条草案及相关评注，同上，第299-300、302-305、308-310、315-316、317、319-321、322-323和326页。 |
| See the draft articles on jurisdictional immunities of States and their property adopted by the Commission at its forty-third session, Yearbook … 1991, vol. II, (Part Two), p. 13, para. 28. | 见委员会第四十三届会议通过的国家及其财产的管辖豁免条款草案，《1991年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第13页，第28段。 |
| See, in particular, draft articles 2 and 3 and the commentaries thereto, ibid., pp. 14–22. | 特别见第2和第3条草案及相关评注，同上，第14-22页。 |
| Principles of International Law recognized in the Charter of the Nürnberg Tribunal and in the Judgment of the Tribunal (Nürnberg Principles), Yearbook … 1950, vol. II, document A/1316, part three, pp. 374–378, paras. 97–127. | 见《纽伦堡法庭宪章和判决书所确认的国际法原则》(《纽伦堡原则》)，《1950年国际法委员会年鉴》，第二卷，A/1316号文件，第三部分，第374-378页，第97至127段。 |
| See, in particular, principle III and the commentary thereto, ibid., p. 375. | 特别见原则三及其评注，同上，第375页。 |
| Yearbook … 1996, vol. II (Part Two), para. 50. | 《1996年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第50段。 |
| See, in particular, draft article 7 and the commentary thereto, ibid., pp. 26–27. | 特别见第7条草案及其评注，同上，第26-27页。 |
| The text of the draft articles adopted by the Commission at its seventy-first session and the commentaries thereto are reproduced in Official Records of the General Assembly, Seventy-fourth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/74/10), paras. 44–45. | 委员会第七十一届会议通过的条款草案案文及相关评注载录于《大会正式纪录，第七十四届会议，补编第10号》(A/74/10)，第44和45段。 |
| See, in particular, draft article 6, paragraph 5, and the commentary thereto. | 特别见第6条草案第5款及其评注。 |
| Arrest Warrant of 11 April 2000 (Democratic Republic of the Congo v. Belgium), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2002, p. 3, at p. 14, para. 31. | 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14页，第31段。 |
| Ibid., p. 19, para. 46. | 同上，第19页，第46段。 |
| See conclusion (1) of Study Group on the fragmentation of international law: difficulties arising from the diversification and expansion of international law, adopted by the Commission in 2006: “(1) International law as a legal system. | 见委员会2006年通过的“国际法不成体系问题：国际法多样化和扩展引起的困难”研究组的结论(1)：“(1) 作为法律体系的国际法 国际法是一个法律体系。 |
| International law is a legal system. Its rules and principles (i.e. its norms) act in relation to and should be interpreted against the background of other rules and principles. | 它的规则和原则(也即它的规范)的运作同其他规则和原则有关，并且应该在其他规则和原则的背景之下予以解释。 |
| As a legal system, international law is not a random collection of such norms. | 作为一种法律体系，国际法并非任意收集这些规范。 |
| There are meaningful relationships between them. | 这些规范之间存在有意义的关系。 |
| Norms may thus exist at higher and lower hierarchical levels, their formulation may involve greater or lesser generality and specificity and their validity may date back to earlier or later moments in time”. | 因此，规范可能存在于较高和较低的等级，它们的表述可能涉及较大或较小的一般性和特殊性，它们的效力可能追溯到较早的或较晚的时刻。” |
| Yearbook … 2006, vol. II (Part Two), chap. XII, para. 251, pp. 177–178. | 《2006年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第十二章，第251段，第177-178页。 |
| The important role of accountability and fight against impunity have been emphasized by the General Assembly. | 大会强调了问责制和打击有罪不罚现象的重要作用。 |
| In the Declaration of the high-level meeting of the General Assembly on the rule of law at the national and international levels, States “commit to ensuring that impunity is not tolerated for genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity or for violations of international humanitarian law and gross violations of human rights law, and that such violations are properly investigated and appropriately sanctioned, including by bringing the perpetrators of any crimes to justice, through national mechanisms or, where appropriate, regional or international mechanisms, in accordance with international law”. | 在《国内和国际的法治问题大会高级别会议宣言》中，各国“承诺，对于灭绝种族罪和危害人类罪，对于违反国际人道主义法行为和严重违反人权法行为，确保绝不容忍有罪不罚，并确保对于此类违法行为要进行适当调查，给予适当制裁，包括通过国家机制，或根据国际法酌情通过区域或国际机制，将任何罪行的实施者绳之以法。” |
| See General Assembly resolution 67/1 of 24 September 2012, para. 22. | 见大会2012年9月24日第67/1号决议，第22段。 |
| For its part, the Human Rights Council has affirmed the need to “ensure accountability, serve justice [and] provide remedies to victims”, in the preamble of its resolution 27/3 of 25 September 2014. | 人权理事会在2014年9月25日第27/3号决议的序言中申明，需要“确保问责、伸张正义和向受害者提供补救”。 |
| The principle of accountability has been also highlighted by the International Court of Justice noting that the oversight system established by the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment is intended “to prevent alleged perpetrators of acts of torture from going unpunished, by ensuring that they cannot find refuge in any State party” (Questions Relating to the Obligation to Prosecute or Extradite (Belgium v. Senegal), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2012, p. 422, at p. 461, para. 120). | 国际法院也强调了问责原则，指出《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》建立的监督制度旨在“确保被指控实施酷刑行为的人无法在任何缔约国找到避难所，从而防止他们逍遥法外”(与起诉或引渡义务有关的问题案(比利时诉塞内加尔)，判决，《2012年国际法院案例汇编》，第422页起，见第461页，第120段)。 |
| The relation between immunity, on one hand, and accountability and fight against impunity, on the other hand, was pointed out by Judges Higgins, Kooijmans and Buergenthal in their separate opinion in the Arrest Warrant case, noting that the increasing recognition that “perpetrators of serious international crimes do not go unpunished has had its impact on the immunities which high State dignitaries enjoyed under traditional customary law” (Arrest Warrant of 11 April 2000 (see footnote 899 above), p. 85, para. 74). | 希金斯法官、科艾曼斯法官和比尔根塔尔法官在逮捕证案的个别意见中指出了豁免与问责制和打击有罪不罚之间的关系，指出越来越多的人认识到“犯下严重国际罪行的人不得逍遥法外，这对高级国家官员根据传统习惯法所享有的豁免产生了影响”(2000年4月11日逮捕证案(见上文脚注899)，第85页，第74段)。 |
| In its judgment on the Arrest Warrant case, the International Court of Justice stated that “the immunity from jurisdiction enjoyed by incumbent Ministers for Foreign Affairs does not mean that they enjoy impunity in respect of any crimes they might have committed, irrespective of their gravity. | 国际法院在对逮捕证案的判决中指出，“在任外交部长享有的管辖豁免并不意味着他们可能犯下的任何罪行不受惩罚，无论其严重程度如何。 |
| Immunity from criminal jurisdiction and individual criminal responsibility are quite separate concepts. | 刑事管辖豁免和个人刑事责任是完全不同的概念。 |
| While jurisdictional immunity is procedural in nature, criminal responsibility is a question of substantive law. | 虽然管辖豁免是程序性的，但刑事责任是实体法问题。 |
| Jurisdictional immunity may well bar prosecution for a certain period or for certain offences; it cannot exonerate the person to whom it applies from all criminal responsibility”. | 管辖豁免很可能在一定时期内或对某些罪行禁止起诉，但它不能免除对之适用管辖豁免的人的所有刑事责任”。 |
| The Court adds that “[a]ccordingly, the immunities enjoyed under international law by an incumbent or former Minister for Foreign Affairs do not represent a bar to criminal prosecution in certain circumstances”. | 法院补充说，“因此，在任或前任外交部长根据国际法享有的豁免在某些情况下并不妨碍刑事起诉”。 |
| See Arrest Warrant of 11 April 2000 (footnote 899 above), p. 25, paras. 60 and 61. | 见2000年4月11日逮捕证案(上文脚注899)，第25页，第60和61段。 |
| In the draft articles on jurisdictional immunities of States and their property (Yearbook … 1991, vol. II (Part Two), para. 28), the Commission chose to deal with the dual dimension of the scope in two separate draft articles, and this was ultimately reflected in the Convention adopted in 2004 (United Nations Convention on Jurisdictional Immunities of States and Their Property (New York, 2 December 2004), General Assembly resolution 59/38, annex, arts. 1 and 3). | 在国家及其财产的管辖豁免条款草案(《1991年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第28段)中，委员会选择了在两条不同草案中处理范围的双重内容，而且这最终反映在2004年通过的《公约》中(《联合国国家及其财产管辖豁免公约》(2004年12月2日，纽约)，大会第59/38号决议，附件，第一和第三条)。 |
| On the other hand, in the 1975 Vienna Convention on the Representation of States in Their Relations with International Organizations of a Universal Character (Vienna, 14 March 1975), United Nations, Juridical Yearbook 1975 (Sales No. E.77.V.3), p. 87, or Official Records of the United Nations Conference on the Representation of States in Their Relations with International Organizations, Vienna, 4 February–14 March 1975, vol. II, Documents of the Conference (United Nations publication, Sales No. E.75.V.12), p. 207, document A/CONF.67/16, and in the Convention on the Law of the Non-navigational Uses of International Watercourses (New York, 21 May 1997, United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 2999, No. 52106, p. 77), the various aspects of the scope are defined in a single article, which also refers to special regimes. | 另一方面，在1975年《维也纳关于国家在其对普遍性国际组织关系上的代表权公约》(1975年3月14日，维也纳)，联合国，《1975年法律年鉴》(出售品编号：E.77.V.3)，第87页，或联合国关于国家在其对国际组织关系上的代表权问题会议正式记录，1975年2月4日至3月14日，第二卷，会议文件(联合国出版物，出售品编号：E.75.V.12)，第207页，A/CONF.67/16号文件，及《联合国国际水道非航行使用法公约》(1997年5月21日，纽约，联合国，《条约汇编》，第2999卷，第52106号，第77页)中，以单独一条界定了范围的各个层面，并且也提到了特别制度。 |
| Although the draft articles on the expulsion of aliens, adopted by the Commission on first reading in 2014 (Official Records of the General Assembly, Sixty-ninth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/69/10), paras. 44–45), also dealt with the scope in a single article consisting of two paragraphs, the same draft articles include other separate provisions whose purpose is to keep certain special regimes within a specific scope. | 尽管委员会在2014年通过的驱逐外国人条款草案(《大会正式记录，第六十九届会议，补编第10号》(A/69/10)，第44-45段)中也以两款构成的单独一条处理范围问题，但同一套条款草案中包括其他的单独规定，以将若干特别制度保持在特定范围之内。 |
| This wording has been used, for example, in draft article 1 of the draft articles on the expulsion of aliens. | 比如说，这一措辞已经在驱逐外国人条款草案第1条草案中使用过。 |
| See draft articles 3, 5, 7, 8, 10, 14 and 16. | 见第3、5、7、8、10、14和16条草案。 |
| The words used in the various language versions are as follows: المسؤولون (Arabic), 官员 (Chinese), “officials” (English), “représentants” (French), должностные лица (Russian) and “funcionarios” (Spanish). | 在不同语言文本中使用的措辞如下：المسؤولون(阿拉伯文)； 官员(中文)； “officials”(英文)；“représentants”(法文)；“должностные лица”(俄文)和“funcionarios”(西班牙文)。 |
| Preliminary report, Yearbook …2012, vol. II (Part One), document A/CN.4/654, para. 66; | 初步报告，《2012年…年鉴》，第二卷(第一部分)，A/CN.4/654号文件，第66段； |
| and second report, Yearbook … 2013, vol. II (Part One), document A/CN.4/661, para. 32. | 以及第二次报告，《2013年…年鉴》，第二卷(第一部分)，A/CN.4/661号文件，第32段。 |
| Arrest Warrant of 11 April 2000 (see footnote 899 above), p. 19, para. 46. | 2000年4月11日逮捕证案(见上文脚注899)，第19页，第46段。 |
| See also the Commission’s commentary to article 6 of the draft articles on jurisdictional immunities of States and their property, particularly paragraphs (1)–(3) (Yearbook … 1991, vol. II (Part Two), pp. 23–24). | 另见委员会关于国家及其财产的管辖豁免条款草案第6条的评注，特别是第(1)-(3)段(《1991年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第23-24页)。 |
| Arrest Warrant of 11 April 2000 (see footnote 899 above), p. 25, para. 60. | 2000年4月11日逮捕证案(见上文脚注899)，第25页，第60段。 |
| The Court has taken the same position regarding State immunity: see Jurisdictional Immunities of the State (Germany v. Italy: Greece intervening), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2012, p. 99, at p. 124, para. 58, and p. 143, para. 100. | 法院就国家豁免问题采取了同样的立场：见国家管辖豁免案(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，特别是第124页第58段和第143页第100段。 |
| See the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations (Vienna, 18 April 1961), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 500, No. 7310, p. 95, art. 31; and the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations (Vienna, 24 April 1963), ibid., vol. 596, No. 8638, p. 261, art. 43. | 见《维也纳外交关系公约》(1961年4月18日，维也纳)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第500卷，第7310号，第95页，第三十一条，以及《维也纳领事关系公约》(1963年4月24日，维也纳)，同上，第596卷，第8638号，第261页，第四十三条。 |
| Yearbook … 1991, vol. II (Part Two), pp. 21–22, draft article 3 and commentary thereto. | 《1991年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第21-22页，第3条草案及其评注。 |
| Yearbook … 2006, vol. II (Part Two), para. 251. | 《2006年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第251段。 |
| In its commentary to article 3 of the draft articles on jurisdictional immunities of States and their property, the Commission referred to this aspect in the following terms: “[t]he article is intended to leave existing special regimes unaffected, especially with regard to persons connected with the missions listed” (Yearbook … 1991, vol. II (Part Two), p. 22, para. (5) of the commentary). | 在关于国家及其财产的管辖豁免条款草案第3条草案的评注中，委员会用以下的话提到这一现象：“本条旨在使现行特别制度不受影响，特别是涉及到所列使团有关的人员时”(《1991年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第22页，评注第(5)段)。 |
| See also paragraph (1) of the commentary. | 另见同一评注的第(1)段。 |
| The Commission also included a reference to international law in the above-mentioned article 3 of the draft articles on jurisdictional immunities of States and their property. | 委员会在上述关于国家及其财产的管辖豁免条款草案第3条中也提及国际法。 |
| It should be noted that the Commission drew special attention to this point in its commentary to the draft article, particularly paragraphs (1) and (3) thereof. | 应当指出，委员会在这一条的评注，特别是在第(1)和(3)段中，特别提醒人们注意这一说法。 |
| It must be kept in mind that the Commission also did not list such conventions in the draft articles on jurisdictional immunities of States and their property. | 必须注意，委员会也没有在国家及其财产的管辖豁免条款草案中列出这些公约。 |
| However, the commentary to draft article 3 (paragraph (2) thereof) referred to the areas in which there are such special regimes and expressly mentioned some of the conventions establishing those regimes. | 然而，第3条的评注(第(2)段)提到了存在这类特殊制度的领域，并明确提到一些建立这些制度的公约。 |
| Convention on Special Missions (New York, 8 December 1969), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1400, No. 23431, p. 231. | 《特别使团公约》(1969年12月8日，纽约)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第1400卷，第23431号，第231页。 |
| This list corresponds to the one already formulated by the Commission in draft article 3, paragraph 1 (a), of the draft articles on jurisdictional immunities of States and their property. | 这一列表相当于委员会在国家及其财产的管辖豁免条款草案中编写的第3条草案第1款(a)项。 |
| Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations (New York, 13 February 1946), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1, No. 4, p. 15, and vol. 90, p. 327. | 《联合国特权和豁免公约》(1946年2月13日，纽约)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第1卷，第4号，第15页，以及第90卷，第327页。 |
| Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the Specialized Agencies (New York, 21 November 1947), ibid., vol. 33, No. 521, p. 261. | 《专门机构特权和豁免公约》(1947年11月21日，纽约)，同上，第33卷，第521号，第261页。 |
| Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (Rome, 17 July 1998), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 2187, No. 38544, p. 3. | 《国际刑事法院罗马规约》(1998年7月17日，罗马)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第2187卷，第38544号，第3页。 |
| The Commission also considered the definitions of “immunity”, “criminal jurisdiction”, “exercise of criminal jurisdiction” and “inviolability”, which were presented by the Special Rapporteur in her second report (Yearbook … 2013, vol. II (Part One), document A/CN.4/661) and in the framework of the Drafting Committee. | 委员会还审议了特别报告员在第二次报告(《2013年…年鉴》第二卷(第一部分)，A/CN.4/661号文件)中和起草委员会框架内提出的“豁免”、“刑事管辖”、“行使刑事管辖”和“不可侵犯”的定义。 |
| However, following the practice in its previous work and in the universal conventions regarding immunity, the Commission has not considered it necessary to include these definitions in draft article 2. | 然而，委员会根据以往工作和关于豁免的普遍性公约中的做法，认为没有必要将这些定义纳入第2条草案。 |
| Draft article 3 states that “Heads of State, Heads of Government and Ministers for Foreign Affairs enjoy immunity ratione personae from the exercise of foreign criminal jurisdiction”. | 第3条草案指出，“国家元首、政府首脑和外交部长对外国行使的刑事管辖享有属人豁免”。 |
| Draft article 5 states that “State officials acting as such enjoy immunity ratione materiae from the exercise of foreign criminal jurisdiction”. | 第5条草案指出，“国家官员在以此种身份行事时，对外国行使的刑事管辖享有属事豁免”。 |
| These terms are used in the following multilateral treaties: the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations; | 下列多边条约使用了这两个词语：《维也纳外交关系公约》； |
| the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations; | 《维也纳领事关系公约》； |
| the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Crimes against Internationally Protected Persons, including Diplomatic Agents (New York, 14 December 1973), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1035, No. 15410, p. 167; | 《关于防止和惩处侵害应受国际保护人员包括外交代表的罪行的公约》(1973年12月14日，纽约)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第1035卷，第15410号，第167页； |
| the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Paris, 9 December 1948), ibid., vol. 78, No. 1021, p. 277; | 《防止及惩治灭绝种族罪公约》(1948年12月9日，巴黎)，同上，第78卷，第1021号，第277页； |
| 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》(1984年12月10日，纽约)，同上，第1465卷，第24841号，第85页； |
| the United Nations Convention against Corruption (New York, 31 October 2003), ibid., vol. 2349, No. 42146, p. 41; | 《联合国反腐败公约》(2003年10月31日，纽约)，同上，第2349卷，第42146号，第41页； |
| the Criminal Law Convention on Corruption (Council of Europe) (Strasbourg, 27 January 1999), ibid., vol. 2216, No. 39391, p. 225; | 《反腐败刑法公约》(欧洲委员会)(1999年1月27日，斯特拉斯堡)，同上，第2216卷，第39391号，第225页； |
| the Inter-American Convention against Corruption (Caracas, 29 March 1996), E/1996/99; | 《美洲反腐败公约》(1996年3月29日，加拉加斯)，E/1996/99； |
| and the African Union Convention on Preventing and Combating Corruption (Maputo, 11 July 2003), International Legal Materials, vol. 43 (2004), p. 5. | 及《非洲联盟预防和打击腐败公约》(2003年7月11日，马普托)，《国际法律资料》，第43卷(2004年)，第5页。 |
| For an analysis of these instruments for the purposes of defining “State official”, see the third report of the Special Rapporteur (A/CN.4/673), paras. 51–93. | 为界定“国家官员”的目的而对这些文书所作的分析，见特别报告员的第三次报告(A/CN.4/673)，第51-93段。 |
| See Association Fédération nationale des victimes d’accidents collectifs «FENVAC SOS Catastrophe»; | 见：全国集体事故受害人联合会“Fenvac SOS catastrophe”； |
| Association des familles des victimes du Joola et al., Court of Cassation, Criminal Chamber (France), judgment of 19 January 2010 (09-84.818) (Bulletin des Arrêts, Chambre criminelle, No. 1 (January 2010), p. 41); | 若拉(Joola)号班轮受害者家庭协会，最高上诉法院刑事庭(法国)，2010年1月19日的判决(0984.818) (Bulletin des Arrêts, Chambre criminelle, No. 1(2010年1月，第41页)； |
| Jones v. Saudi Arabia, House of Lords (United Kingdom), 14 June 2006, [2006] UKHL 26 (International Law Reports, vol. 129, p. 744); | 琼斯诉沙特阿拉伯王国内政部，上议院(联合王国)，2006年6月14日，[2006] UKHL 26 (《国际法案例汇编》，第129卷，第744页)； |
| Agent judiciaire du Trésor v. Malta Maritime Authority et Carmel X, Court of Cassation, Criminal Chamber (France), judgment of 23 November 2004 (Bulletin criminel 2004, No. 292, p. 1096); | 国库司法代表诉马耳他海事当局和Carmel X, 最高上诉法院刑事庭(法国)，2004年11月23日的判决(Bulletin criminel 2004, No. 292, p. 1096)； |
| Norbert Schmidt v. The Home Secretary of the Government of the United Kingdom, The Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police and David Jones, Supreme Court (Ireland), judgment of 24 April 1997, [1997] 2IR 121; | Norbert Schmidt诉联合王国政府内政大臣、都会警察专员和David Jones，最高法院(爱尔兰)，1997年4月24日的判决，[1997] 2IR 121； |
| Church of Scientology, Federal Supreme Court of Germany, judgment of 26 September 1978 (International Law Reports, vol. 65, p. 193); | 山达基教会案，联邦最高法院(德国)，1978年9月26日的判决(《国际法案例汇编》，第65卷，第193页)； |
| Teodoro Nguema Obiang Mangue et autres, Court of Appeal of Paris, Section Seven, Second Investigating Chamber (France), judgment of 13 June 2013; | Teodoro Nguema Obiang Mangue等人案，巴黎上诉法院，第七分部第二预审厅，2013年6月13日的判决； |
| A. c. Ministère public de la Confédération, Federal Criminal Court (Switzerland) (BB.2011.140), judgment of 25 July 2012; | A.诉总检察长办公室，联邦刑事法院(瑞士)(BB.2011.140)，2012年7月25日的判决； |
| Regina v. Bartle and the Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis and Others – Ex Parte Pinochet, House of Lords (United Kingdom), judgment of 24 March 1999 (International Legal Materials, vol. 38 (1999), p. 581); | Regina诉Bartle和市警察局长等人，皮诺切特缺席一案，上议院(联合王国)，1999年3月24日的判决(《国际法律资料》，第38卷 (1999年)，第581页)； |
| Khurts Bat v. Investigating Judge of the German Federal Court, Administrative Court, High Court of Justice (United Kingdom), judgment of 29 July 2011 ([2011] EWHC 2029 (Admin), International Law Reports, vol. 147, p. 633); | Khurts Bat诉德国联邦法院调查法官，高等法院行政法庭(联合王国)，2011年7月29日的判决([2011] EWHC 2029 (Admin)，《国际法案例汇编》，第147卷，第633页)； |
| Public Prosecutor v. Adler et.al., Tribunal of Milan, Fourth Criminal Division (Italy), judgment of 1 February 2010 (available at http://opil.ouplaw.com, International Law in Domestic Courts [ILDC 1492 (IT 2010)]); | 检察官诉Adler等人，米兰法院，第四刑事法庭(意大利)，2010年2月1日的判决(可查阅http://opil.ouplaw.com, International Law in Domestic Courts [ILDC 1492 (IT 2010)])； |
| United States of America v. Noriega, Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit (United States of America), judgment of 7 July 1997, 117 F.3d 1206 (International Law Reports, vol. 121, p. 591); | 美利坚合众国诉诺列加，第十一巡回区上诉法院(美利坚合众国)，1997年7月7日的判决，117 F.3d 1206 (《国际法案例汇编》，第121卷，第591页)； |
| Border Guards Prosecution, Federal Supreme Court (Germany), judgment of 3 November 1992 (case No. 5 StR 370/92, ibid., vol. 100, p. 364); | 起诉边界卫兵案，联邦最高法院(德国)，1992年11月3的判决(案件编号5 StR 370/92，同上，第100卷，第364页)； |
| In re Mr. and Mrs. Doe, Court of Appeals, Second Circuit (United States of America), judgment of 19 October 1988 (860 F. 2d 40 (1988), ibid., vol. 121, p. 567); | Doe先生和夫人案，第二巡回区上诉法院(美利坚合众国)，1988年10月19日的判决(860 F. 2d 40 (1988)，同上，第121卷，第567页)； |
| R. v. Lambeth Justices ex parte Yusufu, Divisional Court (United Kingdom), judgment of 8 February 1985 (ibid., vol. 88, p. 323); | R.诉兰贝斯法官，Yusufu缺席案，高等法院分庭(联合王国)，1985年2月8的判决(同上，第88卷，第323页)； |
| Estate of the late Zahra (Ziba) Kazemi and Stephan (Salman) Hashemi v. the Islamic Republic of Iran, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Saeed Mortazavi and Mohammad Bakhshi, Superior Court, Commercial Division (Canada), judgment of 25 January 2011; | 已故Zahra (Ziba) Kazemi的遗产和Stephan (Salman) Hashemi诉伊朗伊斯兰共和国、Ayatollah Ali Khamenei、Saeed Mortazavi和Mohammad Bakhshi, 高等法院商事分庭(加拿大)，2011年1月25日的判决； |
| Ali Saadallah Belhas et.al. v. Moshe Ya’alon, Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (United States of America), judgment of 15 February 2008, 515 F.3d 1279 (International Legal Materials, vol. 47 (2008), p. 144); | Ali Saadallah Belhas等人诉Moshe Ya’alon, 哥伦比亚巡回区上诉法院(美利坚合众国)，2008年2月15日的判决, 515 F.3d 1279 (《国际法律资料》，第47卷(2008年)，第144页)； |
| Ra’Ed Mohamad Ibrahim Matar, et.al. v. Avraham Dichter, District Court, Southern District of New York (United States of America), judgment of 2 May 2007, 500 F. Supp.2d 284; | Ra’Ed Mohamad Ibrahim Matar等人诉Avraham Dichter, 纽约南区地方法院(美利坚合众国)，2007年5月2日的判决, 500 F. Supp. 2d 284； |
| Jaffe v. Miller and Others, Ontario Court of Appeal (Canada), judgment of 17 June 1993 (International Law Reports, vol. 95, p. 446); | Jaffe诉Miller和其他人，安大略省上诉法院(加拿大)，1993年6月17日的判决(《国际法案例汇编》，第95卷，第446页)； |
| and case No. 3 StR 564/19, Federal Court of Justice of Germany (Bundesgerichtshof), Judgment of 28 January 2021. | 及第3 StR 564/19号案件，德国联邦法院，2021年1月28日的判决。 |
| With respect to international courts, see Certain Questions of Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters (Djibouti v. France), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2008, p. 177; | 涉及国际法庭的案件，见刑事事项互助的若干问题案(吉布提诉法国)，判决，《2008年国际法院判例汇编》，第177页； |
| Jones and Others v. the United Kingdom, Nos. 34356/06 and 40528/06, European Court of Human Rights, Reports of Judgments and Decisions (ECHR) 2014; | 琼斯等人诉联合王国，第34356/06和第40528/06号申诉，欧洲人权法院，《判决和决定汇编》(ECHR)2014； |
| Prosecutor v. Tihomir Blaškić, case No. IT-95-14-AR 108 bis, Judgment of 29 October 1997, Appeals Chamber, International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, Judicial Reports 1997, vol. 1, p. 1099; | 检察官诉Tihomir Blaškić，第IT-95-14-AR 108 bis号案件，1997年10月29日的判决，前南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭上诉庭，《1997年司法案例汇编》，第1卷，第1099页； |
| and In the matter of an arbitration before an Arbitral Tribunal constituted under annex VII to the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (the Italian Republic v. the Republic of India) concerning the “Enrica Lexie” incident, Permanent Court of Arbitration, case No. 2015-28, award of 21 May 2020, paras. 839 and 841 (available at https://pca-cpa.org/, under “Cases”). | 及根据1982年《联合国海洋法公约》附件七组成的仲裁法庭就“Enrica Lexie”事件进行的仲裁(意大利共和国诉印度共和国)，常设仲裁法院，第2015-28号案件，2020年5月21日的裁决，第839和841段(可查阅https://pca-cpa.org/, 在“Cases”下查阅)。 |
| See also the declaration of Judge Kittichaisaree in relation to case No. 26 of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, Detention of three Ukrainian naval vessels (Ukraine v. Russian Federation), provisional measures, order of 25 May 2019, Reports of Judgments, Advisory Opinions and Orders, vol. 18 (2018–2019), p. 283. | 另见Kittichaisaree法官关于国际海洋法法庭第26号案件的陈述，三艘乌克兰海军船只被扣案(乌克兰诉俄罗斯联邦)，临时措施，2019年5月25日的命令，《判决、咨询意见和命令汇编》，第18卷(2018-2019年)，第283页。 |
| The Tribunal’s case law is available from its website (www.itlos.org). | 法庭的判例可在法庭网站(www.itlos.org)上查阅。 |
| In this connection, it must be recalled that paragraph (15) of the commentary to draft article 4 below says: “The Commission considers that the ‘without prejudice’ clause simply acknowledges the application of the rules concerning immunity ratione materiae to a former Head of State, Head of Government or Minister for Foreign Affairs. | 在这方面，应当忆及，第4条草案的评注第(15)段指出：“委员会认为该‘不妨碍’条款只是承认关于属事豁免的规则对前国家元首、政府首脑或外交部长适用。 |
| Paragraph 3 does not prejudge the content of the immunity ratione materiae regime, which is developed in Part Three of the draft articles”. | 第3款没有预先判断属事豁免制度的内容，这一制度的内容将在本条款草案第三部分拟定。” |
| See paragraph (4) of the commentary to draft article 1 above. | 见上文第1条草案评注第(4)段。 |
| See paragraph (2) of the commentary to draft article 3 below. | 见下文第3条草案评注第(2)段。 |
| Yearbook … 2001, vol. II (Part Two) and corrigendum, p. 32, para. (1) of the commentary to article 1. | 《2001年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)及更正，第32页，对第1条的评注第(1)段。 |
| It should be pointed out that although the Spanish and French versions use different terms to refer to the same concept (hecho and fait, respectively), in the part of the Commission’s commentary cited above, the three language versions coincide. | 应当指出，虽然西班牙文和法文本提到同样类型的行为时使用了不同的词(分别为“hecho”和“fait”)，但是在上述委员会评注中，三种语言版本的用词一致。 |
| Statute of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, adopted by the Security Council in its resolution 827 (1993) of 25 May 1993 and contained in the report of the Secretary-General pursuant to paragraph 2 of Security Council resolution 808 (1993) (S/25704 and Corr.1 [and Add.1]), annex. | 《前南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭规约》，经安全理事会1993年5月25日第827(1993)号决议通过，载于秘书长按照安全理事会第808 (1993)号决议提交的报告第2段(S/25704和Corr.1 [及Add.1])，附件。 |
| Statute of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, Security Council resolution 955 (1994) of 8 November 1994, annex. | 《卢旺达问题国际刑事法庭规约》，安全理事会1994年11月8日第955(1994)号决议，附件。 |
| Yearbook … 1996, vol. II (Part Two), p. 23. | 《1996年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第23页。 |
| Yearbook … 2001, vol. II (Part Two) and corrigendum, p. 142. | 《2001年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)和更正，第142页。 |
| The articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts adopted by the Commission at its fifty-third session are annexed to General Assembly resolution 56/83 of 12 December 2001. | 委员会在第五十三届会议上通过的关于国家对国际不法行为的责任条款载于大会2001年12月12日第56/83号决议附件。 |
| Yearbook … 2011, vol. II (Part Two), p. 104. | 《2011年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第104页。 |
| The articles on the responsibility of international organizations adopted by the Commission at its sixty-third session are annexed to General Assembly resolution 66/100 of 9 December 2011. | 委员会在第六十三届会议上通过的关于国际组织的责任条款载于大会2011年12月9日第66/100号决议附件。 |
| The following arguments by a court in the United States, in particular, clarify the reasons for the exclusion of ultra vires acts: “Where the officer’s powers are limited by statute, his actions beyond those limitations are considered individual and not sovereign actions. | 具体而言，美国一家法院作出了以下解释，澄清排除越权行为的理由：“如果官员的权力受规章的限制，超越此限制的行动即被视为个人行动，而非主权行动。 |
| The officer is not doing the business which the sovereign has empowered him to do. | 官员所作所为不是主权国家授予的”。 |
| ” According to that court, “[the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act] does not immunize the illegal conduct of government officials” and thus, “[a]n official acting under color of authority, but not within an official mandate, can violate international law and not be entitled to immunity under [the Act]” (In re Estate of Ferdinand Marcos Human Rights Litigation; | 该法院指出，“外国主权豁免法并不豁免政府官员的非法行为”，因此，“官员虽具有权力身份，但没有在官方授权范围内行事，这就违反了国际法，无权享有外国主权豁免法规定的豁免”。 (费迪南·马科斯的遗产人权诉讼案； |
| Hilao and Others v. Estate of Marcos, United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit, Judgment of 16 June 1994, 25 F.3d 1467 (9th Cir.1994), International Law Reports (ILR), vol. 104, p. 119, at pp. 123 and 125). | Hilao等人诉马科斯遗产，美国上诉法院，第九巡回法庭，1994年6月16日的判决，25 F.3d 1467 (9th Cir.1994)，《国际法案例汇编》，第104卷，第119页起，特别是第123和125页)。 |
| Similarly, another court concluded that ultra vires acts are not subject to sovereign immunity, as the perpetrators acted beyond their authority by violating the human rights of the plaintiffs: if officials commit acts that are not officially sanctioned by the State, that is, if they are not “officials acting in an official capacity for acts within the scope of their authority”, they cannot benefit from immunity (In re Jane Doe I, et.al. v. Liu Qi, et.al.; Plaintiff A, et.al., v. Xia Deren, et.al., United States District Court for the Northern District of California, (2004) 349 F. Supp.2d 1258 C 02-0672 CW (EMC), C 02-0695 CW (EMC)). | 同样，另一法院也认为越权行为不享受主权豁免，因为行为人侵犯原告人权的行为是在权力之外实施的：“如果官员实施未经国家官方授权的行为，即如果他们不是‘在其权力范围内以官方身份行事’，那么他们就不能享受豁免。” (Jane Doe I等诉刘淇等、原告A等诉夏德仁等，美国加利福尼亚北部地区地方法院，(2004) 349 F. Supp.2d 1258 C 02-0672 CW (EMC), C 02-0695 CW (EMC))。 |
| It is noted that prior to Samantar v. Yousuf, 560 U.S. 305 (2010), many United States courts analysed immunity of foreign officials in civil cases by reference to the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act. | 值得注意的是，在Samantar诉Yousuf案(560 U.S. 305 (2010))之前，许多美国法院参照《外国主权豁免法》分析了民事案件中外国官员的豁免问题。 |
| In Samantar the United States Supreme court held that immunity of foreign State officials was not governed by the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act but, rather, by common law. | 在Samantar案中，美国最高法院认为，外国国家官员的豁免不受《外国主权豁免法》管辖，而是受普通法管辖。 |
| However, previous decisions in which United States courts analysed immunity by reference to the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act continue to offer valuable insight on the scope of such immunity, as the reasoning on which they are based remains cogent. | 然而，美国法院以前参照《外国主权豁免法》对豁免作出分析的裁决继续就这种豁免的范围提供了有价值的见解，因为这些裁决所依据的推理仍然令人信服。 |
| Jaffe v. Miller and Others, Ontario Court of Appeal, 17 June 1993 (see footnote 925 above); | Jaffe诉Miller和其他人，安大略省上诉法院，1993年6月17日(见上文脚注925)； |
| Argentine Republic v. Amerada Hess Shipping Corporation and Others, United States Supreme Court, 23 January 1989, 488 U.S. 428, International Law Reports, vol. 81, p. 658; | 阿根廷共和国诉Amerada Hess船运公司等，美国最高法院，1989年1月23日，488 U.S. 428,《国际法案例汇编》，第81卷，第658页； |
| McElhinney v. Williams, Supreme Court of Ireland, 15 December 1995, ibid., vol. 104, p. 691. | McElhinney诉Williams, 爱尔兰最高法院，1995年12月15日，同上，第104卷，第691页。 |
| I Congreso del Partido, House of Lords of the United Kingdom, 16 July 1981, [1983] A.C. 244, International Law Reports, vol. 64, p. 307. | I Congreso del Partido, 联合王国上议院，1981年7月16日，[1983] A.C. 244,《国际法案例汇编》，第64卷，第307页。 |
| In Jones v. Saudi Arabia, House of Lords of the United Kingdom, 14 June 2006 (see footnote 925 above), Lord Hoffmann rejected the argument that an act contrary to jus cogens cannot be an official act. | 在琼斯诉沙特阿拉伯案(2006年6月14日，联合王国上议院)(见上文脚注925)中，Hoffmann勋爵不接受关于违反强行法的行为不可能为官方行为的论点。 |
| See paragraph (13) of the present commentary, above. | 见上文本评注第(13)段。 |
| In this context, the Commission has taken the view that State functions include “the legislative, judicial, executive or other functions performed by the State”. | 在此背景下，委员会认为，国家职能包括“由国家履行的立法、司法、执法或其他职能”。 |
| Empire of Iran, Constitutional Court of the Federal Republic of Germany, 30 April 1963, International Law Reports, vol. 45, p. 57; | 伊朗帝国案，德意志联邦共和国宪法法院，1963年4月30日，《国际法案例汇编》，第45卷，第57页； |
| Victory Transport Inc. v. Comisaría General de Abastecimientos y Transportes, US 336 F 2d 354 (Second Circuit, 1964), ibid., vol. 35, p. 110, Saltany and Others v. Reagan and Others, United States District Court for the District of Columbia, Judgment of 23 December 1988, 702 F. Supp 319, ibid., vol. 80, p. 19; | Victory Transport Inc.诉Comisaría General de Abastecimientos y Transportes, US 336 F. 2d 354(第二巡回法庭，1964年)，同上，第35卷，第110页； Saltany等诉Reagan等，美国哥伦比亚特区地方法院，1988年12月23日的判决，702 F. Supp 319，同上，第80卷，第19页； |
| Holland v. Lampen-Wolfe (United Kingdom), [2000] 1 WLR 1573; | 荷兰诉Lampen-Wolfe (联合王国)，[2000] 1 WLR 1573； |
| Lozano v. Italy, case No. 31171/2008, Italy, Court of Cassation, Judgment of 24 July 2008 (available at http://opil.ouplaw.com, International Law in Domestic Courts [ILDC 1085 (IT 2008)]). | Lozano诉意大利，第31171/2008号案件，意大利，上诉法院，2008年7月24日的判决(可查阅http://opil.ouplaw.com，International Law in Domestic Courts [ILDC 1085 (IT 2008)])。 |
| The Arbitral Tribunal constituted within the Permanent Court of Arbitration to consider the “Enrica Lexie” case held that acts performed by Italian naval officers to protect a commercial vessel constituted an act performed in an official capacity. | 常设仲裁法院就“Enrica Lexie”事件组成的仲裁法庭认为，意大利海军军官为保护一艘商用船只实施的行为构成以官方身份实施的行为。 |
| See In the matter of an arbitration before an Arbitral Tribunal constituted under annex VII to the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (footnote 925 above), paras. 839 and 841. | 见根据1982年《联合国海洋法公约》附件七组成的仲裁法庭就“Enrica Lexie”事件进行的仲裁(上文脚注926)，第839和841段。 |
| Empire of Iran (see footnote 939 above); | 伊朗帝国案(见上文脚注939)； |
| Church of Scientology, Federal Supreme Court of Germany, 26 September 1978 (see footnote 925 above); | 科学派教会案，德国联邦最高法院，1978年9月26日的判决(见上文脚注925)； |
| Saudi Arabia and Others v. Nelson, United States Supreme Court (1993): 507 U.S. 349, International Law Reports, vol. 100, p. 544; | 沙特阿拉伯等诉Nelson, 美国最高法院，(1993): 507 U.S. 349，《国际法案例汇编》，第100卷，第544页； |
| Propend Finance Pty Ltd. v. Sing, United Kingdom, Court of Appeal, ibid., vol. 111, p. 611; | Propend Finance Pty Ltd.诉Sing，联合王国上诉法院，同上，第111卷，第611页； |
| Norbert Schmidt v. The Home Secretary of the Government of the United Kingdom, The Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police and David Jones, Supreme Court of Ireland, 24 April 1997 (see footnote 925 above); | Norbert Schmidt诉联合王国政府内政大臣，都会警察专员和David Jones，爱尔兰最高法院，1997年4月24日(见上文脚注925)； |
| First Merchants Collection v. Republic of Argentina, United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida, 31 January 2002, 190 F. Supp. 2d 1336 (S.D. Fla. 2002). | First Merchants Collection诉阿根廷共和国，美国佛罗里达南部地区地方法院，2002年1月31日，190 F. Supp. 2d 1336 (S.D. Fla. 2002)。 |
| Empire of Iran (see footnote 939 above); | 伊朗帝国案(见上文脚注939)； |
| Victory Transport Inc. v. Comisaría General de Abastecimientos y Transportes (see footnote 939 above). | Victory Transport Inc.诉Comisaría General de Abastecimientos y Transportes (见上文脚注939)。 |
| Empire of Iran (see footnote 939 above); | 伊朗帝国案(见上文脚注939)； |
| Victory Transport Inc. v. Comisaría General de Abastecimientos y Transportes (see footnote 939 above). | Victory Transport Inc.诉Comisaría General de Abastecimientos y Transportes (见上文脚注939)。 |
| Empire of Iran (see footnote 939 above); | 伊朗帝国案(见上文脚注939)； |
| case No. 12-81.676, Court of Cassation, Criminal Chamber (France), Judgment of 19 March 2013, and case No. 13-80.158, Court of Cassation, Criminal Chamber (France), Judgment of 17 June 2014 (see www.legifrance.gouv.fr). | 第12-81.676号案件，最高上诉法院刑事庭(法国)，2013年3月19日的判决，以及第13-80.158号案件，最高上诉法院刑事庭(法国)，2014年6月17日的判决(见www.legifrance.gouv.fr)。 |
| The Swiss courts made a similar ruling in case ATF 130 III 136, which concerns an international detention order issued by a Spanish judge. | 瑞士法院在涉及西班牙一名法官发出的国际拘留令的ATF 130 III 136案中作了类似的裁决。 |
| Victory Transport Inc. v. Comisaría General de Abastecimientos y Transportes (see footnote 939 above); | Victory Transport Inc.诉Comisaría General de Abastecimientos y Transportes (见上文脚注939)； |
| Kline and Others v. Kaneko and Others, District Court for the Southern District of New York (United States of America), 3 May 1988, US, 685 F Supp. 386 (1988), International Law Reports, vol. 101, p. 497; | Kline等诉Kaneko等，纽约南区法院(美利坚合众国)，1988年5月3日，US, 685 F Supp 386 (1988)，《国际法案例汇编》，第101卷，第497页； |
| Agent judiciaire du Trésor v. Malta Maritime Authority et Carmel X, Court of Cassation, Criminal Chamber (France), 23 November 2004 (see footnote 925 above). | 国库司法代表诉马耳他海事当局和Carmel X, 最高上诉法院刑事庭(法国)，2004年11月23日(见上文脚注925)。 |
| Victory Transport Inc. v. Comisaría General de Abastecimientos y Transportes (see footnote 939 above). | Victory Transport Inc.诉Comisaría General de Abastecimientos y Transportes (见上文脚注939)。 |
| Doe I v. Israel, US, 400 F. Supp. 2d 86, 106 (DCC 2005) (establishment of Israeli settlements in the occupied territories); | Doe I诉以色列案，US, 400 F.Supp. 2d 86, 106 (DCC 2005)(以色列在被占领土建立定居点)； |
| Youming Jin et.al. v. Ministry of State Security et.al., US, 557 F. Supp. 2d 131 (DDC 2008) (contracting of “thugs” to threaten members of a religious group, resulting in murders and excessive violence). | Youming Jin等诉国家安全部等，US, 557 F. Supp. 2d 131 (DDC 2008)(雇用“暴徒”威胁宗教团体成员，造成谋杀案和极度暴力案)。 |
| In re Rauter, Special Court of Cassation of the Netherlands, Judgment of 12 January 1949, International Law Reports, vol. 16, p. 526 (crimes committed by German occupation forces in Denmark); | Rauter案，荷兰最高上诉法院特别法庭，1949年1月12日的判决，《国际法案例汇编》，第16卷，第526页(德国占领军在丹麦所犯罪行)； |
| Attorney General of the Government of Israel v. Adolf Eichmann, District Court of Jerusalem (case No. 40/61), Judgment of 12 December 1961, and Supreme Court (sitting as a Court of Criminal Appeal), Judgment of 29 May 1962, ibid., vol. 36, pp. 18 and 277 (crimes committed during the Second World War, including war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide); | 以色列总检察长诉Adolf Eichmann案，耶路撒冷地区法院(第40/61号案件)，1961年12月12日的判决； 以及最高法院(上诉法院)，1962年5月29日的判决，同上，第36卷，第18和277页(二战期间所犯罪行，包括战争罪、危害人类罪和灭绝种族)； |
| Yaser Arafat (Carnevale re. Valente – Imp. Arafat e Salah), Italy, Court of Cassation, Judgment of 28 June 1985, Rivista di diritto internazionale, vol. 69, No. 4 (1986), p. 884 (sale of weapons and collaboration with the Red Brigades on acts of terrorism); | 亚西尔·阿拉法特(Carnevale re. Valente – Imp. Arafat e Salah)案，意大利，上诉法院，1985年6月28日的判决，Rivista di diritto internazionale 69，No.4, (1986)，第 884页 (销售武器及与赤军勾结从事恐怖主义行为)； |
| R. v. Mafart and Prieur/Rainbow Warrior, New Zealand, High Court, Auckland Registry, 22 November 1985, International Law Reports, vol. 74, p. 241 (acts carried out by members of the French armed forces and security forces to mine the ship Rainbow Warrior, which led to the sinking of the ship and the death of several people; | R.诉Mafart and Prieur/“彩虹勇士”案，新西兰高等法院，奥克兰登记处，1985年11月22日，《国际法案例汇编》，第74卷，第241页(法国武装部队和安全部队成员用水雷炸“彩虹勇士”号船的行为，结果导致船只沉没，数人死亡； |
| these were described as terrorist acts); | 这些行为被称为恐怖主义行为)。 |
| Former Syrian Ambassador to the German Democratic Republic, Federal Supreme Court of Germany, Federal Constitutional Court of Germany, Judgment of 10 June 1997, ibid., vol. 115, p. 595 (the case examined legal action against a former ambassador who allegedly stored, on diplomatic premises, weapons that were later used to commit terrorist acts); | 叙利亚驻德意志民主共和国前大使案，德国联邦最高法院，德国联邦宪法法院，1997年6月10日的判决，同上，第115卷，第595页(案件审查了针对一名前大使的法律行动，据称该大使曾在外交房舍内藏有武器，这些武器后来被用于恐怖主义行为)； |
| Bouterse, R 97/163/12 Sv and R 97/176/12 Sv, Netherlands, Court of Appeal of Amsterdam, Judgment of 20 November 2000, Netherlands Yearbook of International Law, vol. 32 (2001), pp. 266–282 (torture, crimes against humanity); | Bouterse案，R 97/163/12 Sv和R 97/176/12 Sv，荷兰阿姆斯特丹上诉法院，2000年11月20日的判决，《荷兰国际法年鉴》第32卷(2001)，第266至282页(酷刑、危害人类罪)； |
| Gaddafi, Court of Appeal of Paris, Judgment of 20 October 2000, and Court of Cassation, Judgment No. 1414 of 13 March 2001, Revue générale de droit international public, vol. 105 (2001) (English version reproduced in International Law Reports, vol. 125, pp. 490 and 508) (ordering a plane to be brought down using explosives, which caused the death of 170 people, considered as terrorism); | 卡扎菲案，巴黎上诉法院，2000年10月20日的判决，以及最高上诉法院，2001年3月13日第1414号判决，Revue générale de droit international public, vol. 105 (2001)(英文版载录于《国际法案例汇编》，第125卷，第490和508页)(下令用炸药使一架飞机坠毁，造成170人死亡，被认为是恐怖主义行为)； |
| Hissène Habré, Court of Appeal of Dakar (Senegal), Judgment of 4 July 2000, and Court of Cassation, Judgment of 20 March 2001, International Law Reports, vol. 125, pp. 571 and 577 (acts of torture and crimes against humanity); | Hissène Habré案，达喀尔上诉法院(塞内加尔)，2000年7月4日的判决，以及最高上诉法院2001年3月20日的判决； 《国际法案例汇编》，第125卷，第571和577页(酷刑行为和危害人类罪)； |
| Sharon and Yaron, Court of Appeal of Brussels, Judgment of 26 June 2002, ibid., vol. 127, p. 110 (war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide); | 沙龙和亚龙案，布鲁塞尔上诉法院，2002年6月26日的判决，同上，第127卷，第110页(战争罪、危害人类罪和灭绝种族)； |
| A. c. Ministère public de la Confédération, Federal Criminal Court (Switzerland), 25 July 2012 (see footnote 925 above) (torture and other crimes against humanity); | A.诉联邦检察官办公室，联邦刑事法院(瑞士)，2012年7月25日(见上文脚注925)(酷刑和其他危害人类罪)； |
| case No. 3 StR 564/19, Federal Court of Justice of Germany, 28 January 2021 (see footnote 925 above) (torture as a war crime). | 第3 StR 564/19号案，德国联邦法院，2021年1月28日(见上文脚注925)(作为战争罪的酷刑)。 |
| In re Wei Ye, Hao Wang, Does, A, B, C, D, E, F and others similarly situated v. Jiang Zemin and Falun Gong Control Office (A.K.A. Office 6/10), Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit (United States of America), judgment of 8 September 2004 (383 F.3d 620) (unlike the cases cited in footnotes 947 above and 949 below, this was a case before a civil court). | Wei Ye、Hao Wang、Does、A、B、C、D、E、F和处境类似的其他人诉江泽民和处理法轮功问题办公室(6/10办公室)，第七巡回上诉法院(美利坚合众国)，2004年9月8日的判决(383F.3d 620) (与上文脚注947和下文脚注949所述案件不同，这是一个向民事法院提起的案件)。 |
| Border Guards Prosecution, Federal Supreme Court of Germany, 3 November 1992 (see footnote 925 above) (death of a young German as a result of shots fired by border guards of the German Democratic Republic when he attempted to cross the Berlin Wall); | 起诉边界卫兵案，德国联邦最高法院，1992年11月3日(见上文脚注925)，(一名年轻德国人试图越过柏林墙时被德意志民主共和国边界卫兵开枪打死)； |
| Norbert Schmidt v. The Home Secretary of the Government of the United Kingdom, The Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police and David Jones, Supreme Court (Ireland), 24 April 1997 (see footnote 925 above) (irregular circumstances during the detention of the plaintiff by State officials); | Norbert Schmidt诉联合王国政府内政大臣、都会警察专员和David Jones，最高法院(爱尔兰)，1997年4月24日(见上文脚注925)(原告被国家官员拘留的非正常情形)； |
| Khurts Bat v. Investigating Judge of the German Federal Court, Administrative Court, High Court of Justice (United Kingdom), 29 July 2011 (see footnote 925 above) (kidnapping and unlawful detention). | Khurts Bat诉德国联邦法院调查法官案，高等法院行政庭(联合王国)，2011年7月29日(见上文脚注925)(绑架和非法拘留)。 |
| United States, District Court, District of Colombia, Letelier v. Republic of Chile, 488 F. Supp. 665 (D.D.C. 1980), p. 673. | 美国哥伦比亚特区地区法院，Letelier诉智利共和国，488 F. Supp. 665 (D.D.C. 1980), p. 673。 |
| Teodoro Nguema Obiang Mangue et autres, Court of Appeal of Paris, 13 June 2013 (see footnote 925 above). | Teodoro Nguema Obiang Mangue等案，巴黎上诉法院，2013年6月13日(见上文脚注925)。 |
| Teodoro Nguema Obiang Mangue et autres, Court of Appeal of Paris, Section Seven, Second Investigating Chamber, application for annulment, Judgment of 16 April 2015. | Teodoro Nguema Obiang Mangue等案，巴黎上诉法院，第七分部，第二预审厅，撤销申请，2015年4月16日的判决。 |
| United States of America v. Noriega, United States Court of Appeals, 7 July 1997 (see footnote 925 above); | 美利坚合众国诉诺列加(美国)，1997年7月7日(见上文脚注925)； |
| Jungquist v. Sheikh Sultan Bin Khalifa al Nahyan, United States District Court for the District of Columbia, Judgment of 20 September 1996, 94 F. Supp. 312, International Law Reports, vol. 113, p. 522; | Jungquist诉Sheikh Sultan Bin Khalifa al Nahyan, 美国哥伦比亚特区地方法院，1996年9月20日的判决，94 F. Supp. 312,《国际法案例汇编》，第113卷，第522页； |
| Mellerio c. Isabel de Bourbon, Court of Appeal of Paris, 3 June 1872, Recueil général des lois et des arrêts 1872, p. 293; | Mellerio诉西班牙前女王Isabelle de Bourbon，巴黎上诉法院，1872年6月3日，《国际公法案件年度摘要和报告》，第1872号案件，第293页； |
| Seyyid Ali Ben Hamond, prince Raschid, c. Wiercinski, Seine Civil Court, Judgment of 25 July 1916, Revue de droit international privé et de droit pénal international, vol. 15 (1919), p. 505; | Seyyid Ali Ben Hammoud、Prince Rashid诉Wiercinski, Seine民事法庭，1916年7月25日的判决，Revue de droit international privé et de droit pénal international, vol.15 (1919)，p. 505； |
| Ex-roi d’Egypte Farouk c. S.A.R.L. Christian Dior, Court of Appeal of Paris, Judgment of 11 April 1957, Journal du droit international, vol. 84, No. 1 (1957), pp. 716–718; | 埃及前国王Farouk诉克里斯汀·迪奥案，巴黎上诉法院，1957年4月11日的判决，Journal du droit international, vol. 84, No. 1 (1957)，pp. 716-718; |
| Ali Ali Reza v. Grimpel, Court of Appeal of Paris, Judgment of 28 April 1961, Revue générale de droit international public, vol. 66, No. 2 (1962), p. 418 (reproduced also in International Law Reports, vol. 47, p. 275; | Ali Ali Reza诉Grimpel, 巴黎上诉法院，1961年4月28日的判决，Revue générale de droit international public, vol. 66, No. 2 (1962)，p. 418(也载录于《国际法案例汇编》，第47卷，第275页)； |
| In re Estate of Ferdinand E. Marcos Human Rights Litigation; | 费迪南·马科斯的遗产人权诉讼案； |
| Trajano v. Marcos and Another, United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit, 21 October 1992, 978 F 2d 493 (1992), International Law Reports, vol. 103, p. 521; | Trajano诉马科斯等，美国上诉法院，第九巡回法庭，1992年10月21日，978 F 2d 493 (1992)，《国际法案例汇编》，第103卷，第521页； |
| Jimenez v. Aristeguieta et.al., United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit, 311 F 2d 547 (1962), ibid., vol. 33, p. 353; | Jimenez诉Aristeguieta等，美国上诉法院，第五巡回法庭，311 F 2d 547 (1962), 同上，第33卷，第353页； |
| Evgeny Adamov v. Office fédéral de la justice, Federal Tribunal of Switzerland, Judgment of 22 December 2005 (1A 288/2005) (available at http://opil.ouplaw.com, International Law in Domestic Courts [ILDC 339 (CH 2005)]); | Evgeny Adamov诉联邦司法办公室，瑞士联邦法庭，2005年12月22日的判决(1A 288/2005)(可查阅http://opil.ouplaw.com, International Law in Domestic Courts [ILDC 339 (CH 2005)]； |
| Republic of the Philippines v. Marcos and Others, United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit, 26 November 1986, 806 F.2d 344, International Law Reports, vol. 81, p. 581; | 菲律宾共和国诉马科斯等，美国上诉法院，第九巡回法庭，1986年11月26日，806 F.2d 344,《国际法案例汇编》，第81卷，第581页； |
| Republic of the Philippines v. Marcos and Others (No. 2), United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit, 4 June 1987 and 1 December 1988, 862 F.2d 1355, ibid., vol. 81, p. 608; | 菲律宾共和国诉马科斯等(第2号)，美国上诉法院，第九巡回法庭，1987年6月4日和1988年12月1日，862 F.2d 1355, 同上，第81卷，第608页； |
| Republic of Haiti and Others v. Duvalier and Others, [1990] 1 QB 2002 (United Kingdom), ibid., vol. 107, p. 491. | 海地共和国等诉杜瓦利埃等，[1990] 1 QB 2002(联合王国)，同上，第107卷，第491页。 |
| Regina v. Bow Street Metropolitan Stipendiary Magistrate, ex parte Pinochet Ugarte (No. 3), House of Lords, United Kingdom, 24 March 1999, [1999] UKHL 17, [2000] 1 AC 147. | Regina诉Bow Street都市领薪专职治安官，皮诺切特·乌加特缺席(第3号)，联合王国上议院，1999年3月24日，[1999] UKHL 17, [2000] 1 AC 147。 |
| Only Lord Goff believed that they were official acts that benefited from immunity. | 只有Goff勋爵认为这种行为是豁免范围内的官方行为。 |
| Lord Browne-Wilkinson and Lord Hutton stated that torture cannot be “a public function” or a “governmental function”. | Browne-Wilkinson勋爵和Hutton勋爵认为，酷刑不是“公共职能”或“政府职能”。 |
| Lord Goff, dissenting, concluded that it was a “governmental function”, while similar statements were made by Lord Hope (criminal yet governmental), Lord Saville (who referred to “official torture”), Lord Millett (“public and official acts”) and Lord Phillips (criminal and official). | Goff勋爵在反对意见中指出，这是“政府职能”； 其他人也提出类似的看法：Hope勋爵(“这是犯罪行为，但也是政府行为”)、Saville勋爵(提及“官方酷刑”)、Millett勋爵(“公共官方行为”)、Philips勋爵(“这是犯罪行为，也是官方行为”)。 |
| See also Jones v. Saudi Arabia, House of Lords (United Kingdom), 14 June 2006 (footnote 925 above) and FF v. Director of Public Prosecutions (Prince Nasser case), High Court of Justice, Queen’s Bench Division, Divisional Court, Judgment of 7 October 2014, [2014] EWHC 3419 (Admin.). | 另见：琼斯诉沙特阿拉伯王国内政部，上议院(联合王国)，2006年6月14(上文脚注925)和FF诉公诉机构首领(Nasser王子案)，高等法院王座法庭分庭，2014年10月7日的判决，[2014] EWHC 3419 (Admin.)。 |
| See also case No. 3 StR 564/19, Federal Court of Justice of Germany, 28 January 2021 (footnote 925 above). | 另见第3 StR 564/19号案，德国联邦法院，2021年1月28日(上文脚注925)。 |
| Pinochet, Belgium, Court of First Instance of Brussels, Judgment of 6 November 1998, International Law Reports, vol. 119, p. 345; | 皮诺切特案，比利时，布鲁塞尔一审法院，1998年11月6日的判决，《国际法案例汇编》，第119卷，第345页； |
| Bouterse, Netherlands, Court of Appeal of Amsterdam, 20 November 2000 (see footnote 947 above); | Bouterse案，荷兰，阿姆斯特丹上诉法院，2000年11月20日(见上文脚注947)； |
| Prefecture of Voiotia v. Federal Republic of Germany, Court of First Instance of Livadeia (Greece), Judgment of 30 October 1997 (American Journal of International Law, vol. 92, No. 4 (1998), p. 765). | Voiotia区诉德意志联邦共和国，Livadia一审法院(希腊)，1997年10月30日的判决(《美国国际法杂志》，第92卷，第4号(1998)，第765页)。 |
| The International Court of Justice has stated that “it is a well-established rule of international law that the Head of State, the Head of Government and the Minister for Foreign Affairs are deemed to represent the State merely by virtue of exercising their functions” (Armed Activities on the Territory of the Congo (New Application: 2002) (Democratic Republic of the Congo v. Rwanda), Jurisdiction and Admissibility, Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2006, p. 6, at p. 27, para. 46). | 国际法院称“国家元首、政府首脑和外交部长只因其行使的职能而被视为国家代表是国际法中已有的规则”(刚果境内武装活动案(新申诉：2002年)(民主刚果共和国诉卢旺达)，管辖权和可否受理，判决，《2006年国际法院案例汇编》，第6页起，特别是第27页，第46段)。 |
| See Arrest Warrant of 11 April 2000 (footnote 899 above), pp. 21–22, paras. 53–54, in which the International Court of Justice particularly emphasized the second element with respect to the Minister for Foreign Affairs. | 见2000年4月11日逮捕证案(上文脚注899)，第21-22页，第53-54段，其中国际法院就外交部长的问题特别强调了第二个要素。 |
| Arrest Warrant of 11 April 2000 (see footnote 899 above), pp. 20–21, para. 51. | 2000年4月11日逮捕证案(见上文脚注899)，第20和21页，第51段。 |
| Certain Questions of Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters (see footnote 925 above), pp. 236–237, para. 170. | 关于刑事事项互助的若干问题案(见上文脚注925)，第236和237页，第170段。 |
| National courts have on many occasions cited the immunity ratione personae from foreign criminal jurisdiction of the Head of State as grounds for their decisions on substance and their findings that criminal proceedings cannot be brought against an incumbent Head of State. | 国家法院曾多次引用国家元首的外国刑事管辖属人豁免，以此作为关于实质问题的决定和不能对现任国家元首启动刑事程序的结论的依据。 |
| In this regard, see Re Honecker, Federal Supreme Court, Second Criminal Chamber (Federal Republic of Germany), Judgment of 14 December 1984 (Case No. 2 ARs 252/84), reproduced in International Law Reports, vol. 80, pp. 365–366; | 这方面，见Honecker案, 联邦最高法院第二刑事法庭(德意志联邦共和国)，1984年12月14日的判决，(案件编号2 ARs 252/84)，载录于《国际法案例汇编》，第80卷，第365和366页； |
| Rey de Marruecos, National High Court (Spain), Criminal Chamber decision of 23 December 1998; | Rey de Marruecos案, 国家高等法院(西班牙)，刑事法庭1998年12月23日的判决； |
| Gaddafi, Court of Cassation, Criminal Chamber (France), 13 March 2001 (footnote 947 above); | 卡扎菲案，最高上诉法院刑事庭(法国)，2001年3月13日(上文脚注947)； |
| Fidel Castro, National High Court (Spain), plenary decision of the Criminal Chamber, 13 December 2007 (the Court had already made a similar ruling in two other cases against Fidel Castro, in 1998 and 2005); | 菲德尔·卡斯特罗案，国家高等法院(西班牙)，刑事法庭2007年12月13日全体会议的裁决(法庭在1998年和2005年的另两项起诉菲德尔·卡斯特罗的案件中曾作出类似裁决)； |
| and Case against Paul Kagame, National High Court, Central Investigation Court No. 4 (Spain), indictment of 6 February 2008. | 以及起诉保罗·卡加梅案，国家高等法院第4号调查法庭(西班牙)，2008年2月6日的判决。 |
| Also in the context of criminal proceedings, but as obiter dicta, various courts have on numerous occasions recognized immunity ratione personae from foreign criminal jurisdiction in general. | 关于刑事程序，各法院曾多次在普遍意义上承认外国刑事管辖属人豁免，但仅作为附带意见。 |
| In those cases, the national courts have not referred to the immunity of a specific Head of State, either because the person had completed his or her term of office and was no longer an incumbent Head of State or because the person was not and had never been a Head of State. | 这些案件中，国家法院没有专门提及国家元首的豁免，因为程序中受指控的人员要么已经卸任，不再是国家元首，要么从未担任国家元首。 |
| See Pinochet (solicitud de extradición), National High Court, Central Investigation Court No. 5 (Spain), request for extradition of 3 November 1998; | 这方面见以下案件：皮诺切特案(要求引渡)，国家高等法院第5号调查法庭(西班牙)，1998年11月3日的引渡请求； |
| Regina v. Bartle and the Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis and Others – Ex Parte Pinochet, House of Lords (United Kingdom), 24 March 1999 (footnote 925 above); | Regina诉Bartle和市警察局长等人，皮诺切特缺席案，上议院(联合王国)，1999年3月24日(上文脚注925)； |
| H.S.A., et.al. v. S.A., et.al. (indictment of Ariel Sharon, Amos Yaron and others), Court of Cassation (Belgium), Judgment of 12 February 2003 (P-02-1139.F), reproduced in International Legal Materials, vol. 42, No. 3 (2003), pp. 596–605; | H.S.A.等人诉S.A.等人，(对阿里埃勒·沙龙和阿莫斯·亚龙等人的起诉)，最高上诉法院(比利时)，2003年2月12日的判决(P-02-1139.F)，载录于《国际法律资料》，第42卷，第3号(2003年)，第596-605页； |
| Scilingo, National High Court, Criminal Chamber, Third Section (Spain), decision of 27 June 2003; | Scilingo, 国家高等法院刑事法庭第三庭(西班牙)，2003年6月27日的判决； |
| Association Fédération nationale des victimes d’accidents collectifs; | 全国集体事故受害人联合会； |
| Association des familles des victimes du Joola, Court of Cassation, Criminal Chamber (France), 19 January 2010 (footnote 925 above); | 若拉(Joola)号班轮受害者家庭协会，最高上诉法院刑事庭(法国)，2010年1月19日(上文脚注925)； |
| Khurts Bat v. Investigating Judge of the German Federal Court, Administrative Court, High Court of Justice (United Kingdom), 29 July 2011 (footnote 925 above); | Khurst Bat诉德国联邦法院调查法官案，高等法院行政法庭 (联合王国)，2011年7月29日(上文脚注925)； |
| and A. c. Ministère public de la Confédération, Federal Criminal Court (Switzerland), 25 July 2012 (footnote 925 above). | 及A.c.诉总检察长办公室，联邦刑事法院(瑞士)，2012年7月25日(上文脚注925)。 |
| It should be emphasized that national courts have never stated that a Head of State does not have immunity from criminal jurisdiction, and that this immunity is ratione personae. | 应强调的是，国家法院从未表示国家元首不享有刑事管辖豁免，而且这种豁免为属人豁免。 |
| It must also be kept in mind that civil jurisdiction, under which there is a greater number of judicial decisions, consistently recognizes the immunity ratione personae from jurisdiction of Heads of State. | 还应谨记的是，民事管辖范围内司法决定的数量更多，而该范围内一贯承认国家元首的管辖属人豁免。 |
| For example, see Rukmini S. Kline et.al. v. Yasuyuki Kaneko et.al., Supreme Court of the State of New York (United States of America), judgment of 31 October 1988 (535 N.Y.S.2d 1258) (141 Misc.2d 787); | 例如，见下列案件：Rukmini S. Kline等人诉Yasuyuki Kaneko等人，纽约州最高法院(美利坚合众国)，1988年10月31日的判决(535 N.Y.S.2d 1258) (141 Misc.2d 787)； |
| Mobutu v. SA Cotoni, Civil Court of Brussels, Judgment of 29 December 1988; | 蒙博托诉SA Cotoni, 布鲁塞尔民事法院，1988年12月29日的判决； |
| Ferdinand et Imelda Marcos c. Office fédéral de la police, Federal Tribunal (Switzerland), Judgment of 2 November 1989 (ATF 115 Ib 496), partially reproduced in Revue suisse de droit international et de droit européen (1991), pp. 534–537 (English version in International Law Reports, vol. 102, p. 198); | 费迪南和伊梅尔达·马科斯诉联邦警察局，联邦法庭(瑞士)，1989年11月2日的判决(ATF 115 Ib 496)，部分载录于Revue suisse de droit international et de droit européen (1991), pp. 534-537(英文版载于《国际法案例汇编》，第102卷，第198页)； |
| Lafontant v. Aristide, District Court for the Eastern District of New York (United States), Judgment of 27 January 1994, 844 F. Supp. 128; | Lafontant诉阿里斯蒂德斯，纽约东区地方法院(美国)，1994年1月27日的判决，844 F. Supp. 128； |
| W. v. Prince of Liechtenstein, Supreme Court (Austria), Judgment of 14 February 2001 (7 Ob 316/00x); | W.诉列支敦士登王子，最高法院(奥地利)，2001年2月14日的判决 (7 Ob 316/00x)； |
| Tachiona v. Mugabe (“Tachiona I”), District Court for the Southern District of New York (United States), Judgment of 30 October 2001 (169 F.Supp.2d 259); | Tachiona诉穆加贝(“Tachiona I”)，纽约南区地方法院(美国)，2001年10月30日的判决(169 F.Supp.2d 259)； |
| Fotso v. Republic of Cameroon, District Court of Oregon (United States), order of 22 February 2013 (6:12CV 1415-TC). | Fotso诉喀麦隆共和国，俄勒冈地方法院(美国)，2013年2月22日的命令(6:12CV 1415-TC)。 |
| In this connection, the provisions of the Vienna Convention on the Representation of States in Their Relations with International Organizations of a Universal Character (art. 50, para. 1) and the Convention on Special Missions (art. 21, para. 1), which refer to the case of collegial bodies acting as Head of State, are of interest. | 这方面，《维也纳关于国家在其对普遍性国际组织关系上的代表权公约》(第五十条第1款)和《特别使团公约》(第21条第1款)的规定，提到了作为国家元首的合议机构的情况，值得注意。 |
| On the other hand, the Commission did not see any need to include a reference to this category in the draft articles on the prevention and punishment of crimes against diplomatic agents and other internationally protected persons (Yearbook … 1972, vol. II, document A/8710/Rev.1, pp. 312–313, para. (2) of the commentary to draft article 1), and no reference was accordingly made in the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Crimes against Internationally Protected Persons, including Diplomatic Agents. | 另一方面，委员会认为无需在关于防止和惩处侵害外交代表和其他应受国际保护人员的罪行的条款草案中提及此类别(见《1972年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/8710/Rev.1号文件，第312-313页，对第1条的评注第(2)段)，因此，《关于防止和惩处侵害应受国际保护人员包括外交代表的罪行的公约》对此未作提及。 |
| Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (Vienna, 23 May 1969), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1155, No. 18232, p. 331, art. 7, para. 2 (a). | 《维也纳条约法公约》(1969年5月23日)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第1155卷，第18232号，第331页，第7条第2款(a)项。 |
| The International Court of Justice has made a similar statement on the capacity of the Head of State, Head of Government and Minister for Foreign Affairs to make a commitment on behalf of the State through unilateral acts (Armed Activities on the Territory of the Congo (New Application: 2002) (see footnote 956 above), p. 27, para. 46). | 国际法院曾就国家元首、政府首脑和外交部长代表国家通过单边行动做出声明的能力作类似声明(刚果境内武装活动案(新申诉：2002年)(见上文脚注956)，第27页，第46段)。 |
| Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Crimes against Internationally Protected Persons, including Diplomatic Agents, art. 1, para. 1 (a). | 《关于防止和惩处侵害应受国际保护人员包括外交代表的罪行的公约》，第1条第1款(a)项。 |
| In this connection, see the Convention on Special Missions, art. 21, and the Vienna Convention on the Representation of States in Their Relations with International Organizations of a Universal Character, art. 50. | 在这方面，见《特别使团公约》第21条和《维也纳关于国家在其对普遍性国际组织关系上的代表权公约》第五十条。 |
| Article 21 of the Convention on Special Missions, in addition to the Head of State, refers to the Head of Government and Minister for Foreign Affairs, although it does so in separate paragraphs (paragraph 1 refers to the Head of State and paragraph 2 refers to the Head of Government, Minister for Foreign Affairs and other persons of high rank). | 《特别使团公约》第21条除了提及国家元首以外，还提及政府首脑和外交部长，虽然是在不同的段落里提及的(第1款提及国家元首，第2款提及政府首脑、外交部长及其他高级官员)。 |
| The same model is followed in the Vienna Convention on the Representation of States in Their Relations with International Organizations of a Universal Character, which also refers to the officials mentioned in separate paragraphs. | 《维也纳关于国家在其对普遍性国际组织关系上的代表权公约》沿用了相同的模式，也是在不同的段落里提及这些官员。 |
| By contrast, the United Nations Convention on Jurisdictional Immunities of States and Their Property includes only a mention eo nomine of the Head of State (art. 3, para. 2), and the other two categories of officials must be considered as included in the concept of “representatives of the State” found in article 2, paragraph 1 (b) (iv). | 与此不同的是，《联合国国家及其财产管辖豁免公约》仅提及国家元首这一名称(第3条第2款)，另外两类官员必须视为包括在第2条第1款(b)项(四)目中所述的“国家代表”的概念中。 |
| See paragraphs (6) and (7) of the commentary to article 3 of the articles on jurisdictional immunities of States and their property, Yearbook … 1991, vol. II (Part Two), p. 22. | 见国家及其财产管辖豁免公约条款草案第3条的评注第(6)和第(7)段，《1991年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第22页。 |
| Yearbook … 1972, vol. II, document A/8710/Rev.1, p. 313, para. (3) of the commentary to article 1. | 《1972年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/8710/Rev.1号文件，第313页，对第1条的评注第(3)段。 |
| It must be kept in mind that the Commission decided not to make this reference because it could not be based upon any “broadly accepted rule of international law”, but it did acknowledge that “[a] cabinet officer would, of course, be entitled to special protection whenever he was in a foreign State in connexion with some official function”. (This sentence is included in both the English and French versions of the commentary, but not in the Spanish version.) | 应注意，委员会因无法以任何“广为接受的国际法原则”为依据而决定不提及这一点，但确实承认了“内阁官员因与官方职务相关的事务身在外国时当然有权得到特殊保护”(英文和法文版评注中都有这句话，但西班牙文版中没有)。 |
| The statement that the Convention “does not cover criminal proceedings” was proposed by the Ad Hoc Committee set up on the subject by the General Assembly and was ultimately included in paragraph 2 of General Assembly resolution 59/38 of 2 December 2004, by which the Convention was adopted. | 《公约》“未涵盖刑事诉讼”的声明由大会为该事项设立的特设委员会提出，最终写入了通过《公约》的2004年12月2日第59/38号决议第2段。 |
| Para. (7) of the commentary to article 3 (Yearbook … 1991, vol. II (Part Two), p. 22). | 见对第3条草案的评注第(7)段，《1991年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第22页)。 |
| Arrest Warrant of 11 April 2000 (see footnote 899 above), pp. 20–21, para. 51. | 2000年4月11日逮捕证案(见上文脚注899)，第20和21页，第51段。 |
| Certain Questions of Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters (see footnote 925 above), pp. 236–237, para. 170. | 关于刑事事项互助的若干问题案(见上文脚注925)，第236和237页，第170段。 |
| See in particular, in the Arrest Warrant of 11 April 2000 case (footnote 899 above), the joint separate opinion of Judges Higgins, Kooijmans and Buergenthal; | 具体见2000年4月11日逮捕证案(见上文脚注899)中，希金斯法官、科艾曼斯法官和比尔根塔尔法官的联合个别意见； |
| the dissenting opinion of Judge Al-Khasawneh; | 哈索内法官的不同意见； |
| and the dissenting opinion of Judge ad hoc Van den Wyngaert. | 范登·韦恩加尔特专案法官的不同意见。 |
| With regard to recognition of the immunity from foreign criminal jurisdiction of the Head of Government and the Minister for Foreign Affairs, see the following cases, both criminal and civil, in which national courts have made statements on this subject, either as the grounds for decisions on substance or as obiter dicta: Ali Ali Reza v. Grimpel, Court of Appeal of Paris, 28 April 1961 (footnote 953 above) (implicitly recognizes, a contrario, the immunity of a Minister for Foreign Affairs); | 关于承认政府首脑和外交部长的外国刑事管辖豁免的问题，见以下刑事和民事案件，国家法院在这些案件中就这一专题发表了声明，或作为就实质问题做出判决的理由，或作为附带意见：Ali Ali Reza诉Grimpel, 巴黎上诉法院，1961年4月28日(上文脚注953)(相反地，它以隐含的方式承认外交部长的豁免)； |
| Chong Boon Kim v. Kim Yong Shik and David Kim, Circuit Court of the First Circuit, State of Hawaii (United States), Judgment of 9 September 1963, reproduced in American Journal of International Law, vol. 58 (1964), pp. 186–187; | Chong Boon Kim诉Kim Yong Shik和David Kim, 夏威夷州第一巡回区巡回法院(美国)，1963年9月9日的判决，载录于《美国国际法杂志》，第58卷(1964年)，第186-187页； |
| Saltany and Others v. Reagan and Others, United States District Court for the District of Columbia, 23 December 1988 (footnote 939 above); | Saltany等诉Reagan等，美国哥伦比亚特区地方法院，1988年12月23日(上文脚注939)； |
| Tachiona v. Mugabe (“Tachiona I”), District Court for the Southern District of New York (United States), 30 October 2001 (footnote 960 above); | Tachiona诉穆加贝(“Tachiona I”)，纽约南区地方法院(美国)，2001年10月30日(上文脚注960)； |
| H.S.A., et.al. v. S.A., et.al. (indictment of Ariel Sharon, Amos Yaron and others), Court of Cassation (Belgium), 12 February 2003 (footnote 960 above). | H.S.A.等人诉S.A.等人，(对阿里埃勒·沙龙和阿莫斯·亚龙等人的起诉)，最高上诉法院(比利时)，2003年2月12日(上文脚注960)。 |
| This problem has already been raised by the Commission itself, in paragraph (7) of its commentary to article 3 of the draft articles on jurisdictional immunities of States and their property, Yearbook … 1991, vol. II (Part Two), p. 22. | 委员会本身也在关于国家及其财产管辖豁免的条款草案第3条的评注第(7)段中提出过这一问题，《1991年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第22页。 |
| The Commission drew attention to the same problems in paragraph (3) of the commentary to article 1 of the draft articles on the prevention and punishment of crimes against diplomatic agents and other internationally protected persons (Yearbook … 1972, vol. II, document A/8710/Rev.1, p. 313) and in paragraph (3) of the commentary to article 21 of the draft articles on special missions (Yearbook … 1967, vol. II, document A/6709/Rev.1 and Rev.1/Corr.1, p. 359). | 委员会提请注意关于防止和惩处侵害外交代表和其他应受国际保护人员的罪行的条款草案第1条的评注的第(3)段(《1972年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/8710/Rev.1号文件，第313页)和关于特别使团的条款草案第21条的评注第(3)段(《1967年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/6709/Rev.1及Rev.1/Corr.1号文件，第359页)中的相同问题。 |
| See Certain Questions of Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters (footnote 925 above), pp. 236–240, paras. 170–180. | 见关于刑事事项互助的若干问题案(上文脚注925)，第236至240页，第170至180段。 |
| Ibid., p. 243, para. 191. | 同上，第243页，第191段。 |
| Ibid., pp. 243–244, para. 194. | 同上，第243和244页，第194段。 |
| See, in general, paragraphs 181–197, ibid., pp. 240–244. | 一般见第181至197页，同上，第240至244段。 |
| In this connection, see the case Re General Shaul Mofaz (Minister of Defence of Israel), Bow Street Magistrates’ Court (United Kingdom), Judgment of 12 February 2004, reproduced in International and Comparative Law Quarterly, vol. 53, Issue 3 (2004), p. 771; | 在这方面，见沙乌勒·莫法兹将军(以色列国防部长)案、博街法院案(联合王国)，2004年2月12日的判决，载录于International and Comparative Law Quarterly, vol. 53, Issue 3 (2004), p. 771； |
| and the case Re Bo Xilai (Minister for Commerce and International Trade of China), Bow Street Magistrates’ Court, Judgment of 8 November 2005 (reproduced in International Law Reports, vol. 128, p. 713), in which the immunity of Mr. Bo Xilai is acknowledged, not just because he was considered to be a high-ranking official, but particularly because he was on special mission in the United Kingdom. | 薄熙来(中国商务部长)案，博街法院案，2005年11月8日的判决(载录于《国际法案例汇编》，第128卷，第713页)，该案承认对薄熙来先生的豁免，不是因为他被视为一名高级官员，而是因为他是访问英国的特别使团成员。 |
| A year later, in a civil case, the United States executive branch recognized Mr. Bo Xilai’s immunity because he was on special mission in the United States: Suggestion of Immunity and Statement of Interest of the United States, District Court for the District of Columbia, 24 July 2006 (Civ. No. 04-0649): see United States, District Court for the District of Columbia, Weixum et al. v. Xilai, 568 F. Supp. 2d 35 (D.D.C. 2008) (deferring to the executive branch’s position). | 一年后，在一宗民事案件中，美国行政部门承认对薄熙来先生的豁免，因为他是访问美国的特别使团成员：《豁免建议和美国的利益声明》，美国哥伦比亚特区地方法院，2006年7月24日(Civ. No. 04-0649): 见美国哥伦比亚特区地方法院, Weixum et al. v. Xilai, 568 F. Supp. 2d 35 (D.D.C. 2008) (遵从行政部门的立场)。 |
| In the Association Fédération nationale des victimes d’accidents collectifs; | 在全国集体事故受害人联合会； |
| Association des familles des victimes du Joola case, Court of Cassation, Criminal Chamber (France), 19 January 2010 (see footnote 925 above), the Court acknowledged in general terms that an incumbent minister of defence enjoys immunity ratione personae from foreign criminal jurisdiction, but in the specific case recognized only immunity ratione materiae, since the person on trial no longer held that office. | 若拉(Joola)号班轮受害者家庭协会案(最高上诉法院刑事庭(法国)，2010年1月19日(见上文脚注925))中，法院笼统地承认一名国防部长享有外国刑事管辖属人豁免，但在具体案件中仅承认属事豁免，因为受审者已经不再担任该职位。 |
| In the A. c. Ministère public de la Conféderation case, Federal Criminal Court, Switzerland, 25 July 2012 (see footnote 925 above), the Tribunal stated in general that an incumbent minister of defence enjoyed immunity ratione personae from foreign criminal jurisdiction, but in the case in question, it did not recognize immunity because Mr. Nezzar had completed his term of office, and the acts carried out constitute international crimes, depriving him also of immunity ratione materiae. | 在A.诉瑞士总检察长办公室案(联邦刑事法院(瑞士)，2012年7月25日(见上文脚注925))中，法庭笼统地指出，一位现任国防部长享有外国刑事管辖属人豁免，但在该案中，法庭不承认豁免，因为Nezzar先生已结束任期，其实施的行为构成了国际罪行，他因此也不能享有属事豁免。 |
| An example of this is the case of Khurts Bat v. Investigating Judge of the German Federal Court, Administrative Court, High Court of Justice (United Kingdom), Judgment of 29 July 2011 (see footnote 925 above), in which the Court admitted, based on the International Court of Justice judgment in the Arrest Warrant case (see footnote 909 above), that “in customary international law certain holders of high-ranking office are entitled to immunity ratione personae during their term of office” (para. 55) as long as they belong to a narrow circle of specific individuals because “it must be possible to attach to the individual in question a similar status” (para. 59) to that of the Head of State, Head of Government and Minister for Foreign Affairs referred to in the above-mentioned judgment. | 这方面的实例是Khurst Bat诉德国联邦法院调查法官案，高等法院行政法庭(联合王国)，2011年7月29日(见上文脚注925)，法庭在该案中承认，基于国际法院关于逮捕证案的判决(见上文脚注909)，“在习惯国际法中，只要某些高级官员属于少数的具体个人，他们在其任期内即享有属人豁免”(第55段)，因为“必须有可能将有关个人与一个身份联系起来”(第59段)，这种身份应与以上判决述及的国家元首、政府首脑和外交部长相似。 |
| After analysing the functions carried out by Mr. Khurts Bat, the Court concluded that he “falls outwith that narrow circle” (para. 61). | 在分析了Khurst Bat先生行使的职权后，法院断定他“超出了少数范围”(第61段)。 |
| Earlier, the Paris Court of Appeal also failed to recognize the immunity of Mr. Ali Ali Reza because, although he was Minister of State of Saudi Arabia, he was not the Minister for Foreign Affairs (see Ali Ali Reza v. Grimpel, Court of Appeal of Paris, 28 April 1961 (footnote 953 above)). | 之前，巴黎上诉法院也没有承认Ali Ali Reza先生的豁免，因为他虽然是沙特阿拉伯的国务大臣，但不是外交大臣(见Ali Reza诉Grimpel, 巴黎上诉法院，1961年4月28日)(上文脚注953)。 |
| In the United States of America v. Noriega case (see footnote 925 above), the Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, in its judgment of 7 July 1997 (appeals Nos. 92-4687 and 96-4471), stated that Mr. Noriega, former Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces of Panama, could not be included in the category of persons who enjoy immunity ratione personae, dismissing Mr. Noriega’s allegation that at the time of the events, he had been Head of State, or de facto leader, of Panama. | 在美利坚合众国诉诺列加案(见上文脚注925)中，第十一巡回区上诉法院1997年7月7日的判决(第92-4687号和第96-4471号上诉)认为，巴拿马武装部队前总司令诺列加先生不能被列入享有属人豁免的这类人员，驳回了诺列加先生关于事件发生时他是巴拿马国家元首或事实上的领导人的说法。 |
| Another court, in the Republic of the Philippines v. Marcos case, District Court for the Northern District of California, Judgment of 11 February 1987 (665 F. Supp. 793), indicated that the Attorney General of the Philippines did not enjoy immunity ratione personae. | 在菲律宾共和国诉马科斯案(加利福尼亚北区地方法院，1987年2月11日的判决(665 F.Supp. 793))中，法院指出，菲律宾总检察长不享有属人豁免。 |
| In the Fotso v. Republic of Cameroon case (see footnote 960 above), the executive branch informed the Court that the President of Cameroon enjoyed immunity as a sitting Head of State, and the case was dismissed. | 在Fotso诉喀麦隆共和国案(见上文脚注960)中，行政部门告知法院，喀麦隆总统作为在任国家元首享有豁免权，该案遂被驳回。 |
| United States, District Court, District of Oregon, Fotso v. Republic of Cameroon, 25 January 2013, No. 6:12-cv-1415-TC, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 25424, at *2–6 (D. Ore. Jan. 25, 2013). | 美国俄勒冈州地区法院，Fotso诉喀麦隆共和国，2013年1月25日，No. 6:12-cv-1415-TC, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 25424, at *2-6 (D. Ore. Jan. 25, 2013)。 |
| The executive branch did not address the immunity of the Minister of Defence and the Secretary of State for Defence, but the court later found that those officials enjoyed immunity, given that they “acted in their official capacities.” | 行政部门没有处理国防部长和国防国务秘书的豁免权问题，但法院后来认定，这些官员享有豁免权，因为他们“以官方身份行事”。 |
| United States, District Court, District of Oregon, Fotso v. Republic of Cameroon, 16 May 2013, No. 6:12-cv-1415-TC, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 83948, at*3, *16–21 (D. Ore. May 16, 2013). | 美国俄勒冈州地区法院，Fotso诉喀麦隆共和国，2013年5月16日，No. 6:12-cv-1415-TC, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 83948, at*3, *16-21 (D. Ore. May 16, 2013)。 |
| It should be kept in mind that the two cases previously cited involved the exercise of civil jurisdiction. | 应意识到此前引用的两宗案件涉及民事管辖的行使。 |
| It must also be noted that on some occasions, national courts have not recognized the immunity from jurisdiction of persons holding high-ranking posts in constituent units within a federal State. | 还必须注意到，在一些情况下，国家法院不承认联邦国家中联邦机构高级官员的管辖豁免。 |
| In this connection, see the following cases: R. (on the application of Diepreye Solomon Peter Alamieyeseigha) v. The Crown Prosecution Service, Queen’s Bench Division (Divisional Court) (United Kingdom), Judgment of 25 November 2005 ([2005] EWHC 2704 (Admin)), in which the Court did not recognize the immunity of the Governor and Chief Executive of Bayelsa State in the Federal Republic of Nigeria; | 在这方面，见以下案件：R (关于Diepreye Solomon Peter Alamieyeseigha的上诉)诉皇家检察署，王座分庭(分庭法院)(联合王国)，2005年11月25日的判决([2005] EWHC 2704 (Admin))，在该案中，法院不承认尼日利亚联邦共和国巴耶尔萨州州长和行政长官的豁免； |
| and Public Prosecutor (Tribunal of Naples) v. Milo Djukanovic, Court of Cassation, Third Criminal Section (Italy), Judgment of 28 December 2004 (Rivista di diritto internazionale, vol. 89 (2006), p. 568), in which the Court denied immunity to the President of Montenegro before it became an independent State. | “检察官(那不勒斯法庭)诉Milo Djukanovic”案，上诉法院(第三刑事部)(意大利)，2004年12月28日的判决(Rivista di diritto internazionale, vol. 89 (2006), p. 568)，在该案中，法院拒绝在黑山成为一个独立国家前给予其总统豁免。 |
| Finally, in Evgeny Adamov v. Office fédéral de la justice, Federal Tribunal of Switzerland, 22 December 2005 (see footnote 953 above), the Tribunal denied immunity to a former Minister of Atomic Energy of the Russian Federation in an extradition case; | 最后，在Evgeny Adamov诉联邦司法部案(瑞士联邦法院，2005年12月22日(见上文脚注953))中，法院在一宗引渡案件中拒绝给予俄罗斯联邦一位前原子能部长豁免； |
| however, it acknowledged in an obiter dictum that it was possible that unspecified high-ranking officials could enjoy immunity. | 但在附带意见中，法院承认存在高级官员享有豁免的可能性，但没有具体说明高级官员的情况。 |
| The decision in the Khurts Bat v. Investigating Judge of the German Federal Court case (see footnote 925 above) is a good example of this. | 以上引用的Khurst Bat诉德国联邦法院调查法官案(见上文脚注925)的裁定是这方面一个很好的实例。 |
| In the Association Fédération nationale des victimes d’accidents collectifs; | 在全国集体事故受害人联合会； |
| Association des familles des victimes du Joola case, Court of Cassation, Criminal Chamber (France), 19 January 2010 (see footnote 925 above), the Court ruled simultaneously, and without sufficiently differentiating its ruling, on immunity ratione personae and immunity ratione materiae. | 若拉(Joola)号班轮受害者家庭协会案(最高上诉法院刑事庭(法国)，2010年1月19日(见上文脚注925))中，法院在没有充分区分其裁决的情况下同时做出了关于属人豁免和属事豁免的判决。 |
| In the A. c. Ministère public de la Confédération case, Federal Criminal Court (Switzerland), 25 July 2012 (see footnote 925 above), after making a general statement about immunity ratione personae, the Court also considered whether immunity ratione materiae or the diplomatic immunity claimed by the person concerned could be applied. | 在A.诉瑞士总检察长办公室案(联邦刑事法院(瑞士)，2012年7月25日(见上文脚注925))中，在做出了关于属人豁免的一般性声明后，法院还审议了有关人员要求的属事豁免或外交豁免是否适用。 |
| The arguments used by national courts in other cases are even more imprecise, as in the case of Kilroy v. Windsor, District Court for the Northern District of Ohio, Eastern Division, which, in its judgment of 7 December 1978 in a civil case (Civ. No. C-78-291), recognized the immunity ratione personae of the Prince of Wales because he was a member of the British royal family and was heir apparent to the throne, but also because he was on official mission to the United States. | 国家法院在其他案件中使用的论据甚至更不明确，如Kilroy诉Windsor案，俄亥俄州北区地方法院东部分区，法院在1978年12月7日的一宗民事案件(Civ. No. C-78-291)的判决中确认威尔士亲王的属人豁免，因为他是英国王室成员及王位法定继承人，还因为他当时正在对美国进行正式访问。 |
| Noteworthy in the Bo Xilai cases was the fact that, while both the British and United States courts recognized the immunity from jurisdiction of the Chinese Minister for Commerce, they did so because he was on an official visit and enjoyed the immunity derived from special missions. | 在薄熙来一案中，值得注意的是，英国和美国的法院虽都承认中国商务部长的管辖豁免，但它们之所以这么做是因为他当时正在进行正式访问，享有源于特别使团的豁免。 |
| Draft articles on the representation of States in their relations with international organizations, adopted by the Commission at its twenty-third session, Yearbook … 1971, vol. II (Part One), document A/8410/Rev.1, p. 284. | 委员会第二十三届会议通过的关于国家在其对国际组织关系上的代表权条款草案，《1971年…年鉴》，第二卷(第一部分)，A/8410/Rev.1号文件，第284页起。 |
| On other occasions the Commission has used the expressions “personnalité officielle” (“official”) (draft articles on the prevention and punishment of crimes against diplomatic agents and other internationally protected persons, art. 1, Yearbook … 1972, vol. II, document A/8710/Rev.1) and “other persons of high rank” (draft articles on special missions, art. 21, Yearbook … 1967, vol. II, document A/6709/Rev.1 and Rev.1/Corr.1, p. 359). | 在其他情况下，委员会使用过“personnalité officielle”(“官员”)(关于防止和惩处侵害外交代表和其他应受国际保护人员的罪行的条款草案，第1条，《1972年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/8710/Rev.1号文件)及“other persons of high rank”(“其他高级人员”)(关于特别使团的条款草案，第21条，《1967年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/6709/Rev.1和Rev.1/Corr.1号文件，第359页)等表述。 |
| See above, paragraph (2) of the commentary to draft article 1. | 见上文关于第1条草案的评注第(2)段。 |
| See Arrest Warrant of 11 April 2000 (footnote 899 above), p. 25, para. 60; | 见2000年4月11日逮捕证案(上文脚注899)，第25页，第60段； |
| and Jurisdictional Immunities of the State (Germany v. Italy: Greece intervening) (footnote 910 above), p. 124, para. 58. | 及国家管辖豁免案(德国诉意大利：希腊参加诉讼)(上文脚注910)，第124页，第58段。 |
| Arrest Warrant of 11 April 2000 (see footnote 899 above), p. 25, para. 61. | 2000年4月11日逮捕证案(见上文脚注899)，第25页，第61段。 |
| Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, art. 39, para. 2; and Convention on Special Missions, art. 43, para. 2. | 《维也纳外交关系公约》第三十九条第二款和《特别使团公约》第四十三条第二款。 |
| It added: “All activities of the sovereigns and ambassadors which do not relate to their official functions are subject to review by the local jurisdiction, once the sovereigns or ambassadors have relinquished their posts” | 委员会补充道：“首脑和大使的任期结束后，所有与公务无关的活动均需接受当地司法部门的审查。” |
| (Yearbook … 1991, vol. II (Part Two), p. 18, paragraph (19) of the commentary to draft article 2, para. 1 (b) (v). | 《1991年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第18页，第2条草案第1(b)(五)款评注第(19)段。 |
| Such decisions have often arisen in the context of civil cases, where the same principle of a temporal limitation for the immunity applies. | 这种决定往往是在民事案件中作出的，豁免的时限原则也适用于这些案件。 |
| See, for example, Mellerio c. Isabel de Bourbon, Court of Appeal of Paris, 3 June 1872 (footnote 953 above); | 例如，见Mellerio诉Isabel de Bourbon，巴黎上诉法院，1872年6月3日(上文脚注953)； |
| Seyyid Ali Ben Hamond, prince Raschid, c. Wiercinski, Seine Civil Court, 25 July 1916 (footnote 953 above); | Raschid王子Seyyid Ali Ben Hamond诉Wiercinski，塞纳民事法院，1916年7月25日(上文脚注953)； |
| Ex-roi d’Egypte Farouk c. S.A.R.L. Christian Dior, Court of Appeal of Paris, 11 April 1957 (footnote 953 above); | 埃及前国王法鲁克诉克里斯汀·迪奥案有限公司，巴黎上诉法院，1957年4月11日(上文脚注953)； |
| Société Jean Dessès c. prince Farouk et dame Sadek, Tribunal de Grande Instance de la Seine, 12 June 1963, reproduced in Revue critique de droit international privé (1964), p. 689 (English version reproduced in International Law Reports, vol. 65, pp. 37–38); | Jean Dessès公司诉法鲁克王子和萨德克女士，塞纳大审法庭，1963年6月12日，转载于《国际私法评论杂志》(1964年)，第689页(英文版转载于《国际法案例汇编》，第65卷，第37-38页)； |
| In re Estate of Ferdinand Marcos Human Rights Litigation; | 费迪南·马科斯的遗产人权诉讼案； |
| Hilao and Others v. Estate of Marcos, United States Court of Appeals, 16 June 1994 (footnote 935 above). | Hilao等人诉马科斯的遗产，美国上诉法院，1994年6月16日(上文脚注935)。 |
| A British court recently found that the former King of Spain, Juan Carlos de Borbón y Borbón, has no longer enjoyed immunity ratione personae since his abdication. | 在民事管辖权方面，一家英国法院最近认为，西班牙名誉国王胡安·卡洛斯·德博尔冯·博尔冯退位后不享有属人豁免。 |
| See Corinna Zu Sayn-Wittgenstein-Sayn v. HM Juan Carlos Alfonso Víctor María de Borbón y Borbón, High Court of Justice, Queen’s Bench Division (United Kingdom), Judgment of 24 March 2022, [2022] EWHC 668 (QB), para. 58. | 见Corinna Zu Sayn-Wittgenstein-Sayn诉胡安·卡洛斯·阿方索·维克托·德博尔冯·博尔冯陛下，最高法院王座分庭(联合王国)，2022年3月24日的判决，[2022] EWHC 668 (QB)，第58段。 |
| In the context of criminal cases, see Pinochet, National High Court, Central Investigation Court No. 5 (Spain), request for extradition of 3 November 1998 (footnote 960 above). | 在刑事案件方面，见皮诺切特案，国家高等法院，第五中央调查法院(西班牙)，1998年11月3日引渡请求(上文脚注960)。 |
| The International Court of Justice refers to the material scope of immunity ratione personae as “full immunity” (Arrest Warrant of 11 April 2000 (see footnote 899 above), p. 22, para. 54). | 国际法院称属人豁免的实质范围为“完全豁免”(2000年4月11日逮捕证案(见上文脚注899)，第22页，第54段)。 |
| The Commission itself, for its part, has stated with reference to the immunity ratione personae of diplomatic agents that “[t]he immunity from criminal jurisdiction is complete” (Yearbook … 1958, vol. II, document A/3859, p. 98, paragraph (4) of the commentary to article 29 of the draft articles on diplomatic intercourse and immunities). | 国际法委员会在提到外交人员的属人豁免时称“刑事管辖豁免是完全豁免”(《1958年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/3859号文件，第98页，关于外交往来和豁免的第29条草案评注第(4)段)。 |
| See, for example, Arafat e Salah, Court of Cassation (Italy), 28 June 1985 (footnote 947 above); | 例如，见Arafat e Salah，最高法院(意大利)，1985年6月28日(上文脚注947)； |
| Ferdinand et Imelda Marcos c. Office fédéral de la police, Federal Tribunal (Switzerland), 2 November 1989 (footnote 960 above); | Ferdinand和Imelda Marcos诉联邦警察署，联邦法院(瑞士)，1989年11月2日(上文脚注960)； |
| Regina v. Bartle and the Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis and Others – Ex Parte Pinochet, House of Lords (United Kingdom), 24 March 1999 (footnote 925 above), at p. 592; | 女王诉Bartle和市警察局长等人－皮诺切特·乌加特缺席案，上议院(联合王国)，1999年3月24日(上文脚注925)，特别是第592页； |
| Gaddafi, Court of Appeal of Paris, 20 October 2000 (footnote 947 above) (English version in International Law Reports, vol. 125, p. 490, at p. 509); | 卡扎菲案，巴黎上诉法院，2000年10月20日(上文脚注947)(英文版载于《国际法案例汇编》，第125卷，第490页及其后各页，特别是第509页)； |
| H.S.A., et al. v. S.A., et al. (indictment of Ariel Sharon, Amos Yaron and others), Court of Cassation (Belgium), Judgment of 12 February 2003 (footnote 960 above), at p. 599; | H.S.A.等人诉S.A等人(关于阿里埃勒·沙龙和阿莫斯·亚龙等人的诉讼)，最高法院(比利时)，2003年2月12日的判决(上文脚注960)，第599页； |
| Issa Hassan Sesay a.k.a. Issa Sesay, Allieu Kondewa, Moinina Fofana v. President of the Special Court, Registrar of the Special Court, Prosecutor of the Special Court, Attorney-General and Minister of Justice, Supreme Court of Sierra Leone, Judgment of 14 October 2005 (S.C. No. 1/2003); | Issa Hassan Sesay(亦即Issa Sesay)、Allieu Kondewa、Moinina Fofana诉特别法院院长、特别法院书记官、特别法院检察官、总检察长和司法部长，塞拉利昂最高法院，2005年10月14日的判决(S.C No.1/2003)； |
| and Case against Paul Kagame, National High Court, Central Investigation Court No. 4 (Spain), indictment of 6 February 2008 (footnote 960 above), pp. 156–157. | 以及起诉保罗－卡加梅案，国家高等法院中央调查庭第4分庭(西班牙)，2008年2月6日的起诉书(上文脚注960)，第156-157页。 |
| Among more recent cases, see Association Fédération nationale des victimes d’accidents collectifs; | 最近的案件见全国集体事故受害者联合会； |
| Association des familles des victimes du Joola, Court of Appeal of Paris, Investigating Chamber, Judgment of 16 June 2009, confirmed by the Court of Cassation, Judgment of 19 January 2010 (footnote 925 above); | Joola受害者家属协会，巴黎上诉法院调查庭，2009年6月16日的判决，最高法院2010年1月19日的判决(上文脚注925)维持原判； |
| Khurts Bat v. Investigating Judge of the German Federal Court, Administrative Court, High Court of Justice (United Kingdom), 29 July 2011 (footnote 925 above), para. 55; | Khurts Bat诉德国联邦法院调查法官，行政法庭，最高法院(联合王国)，2011年7月29日(上文脚注925)，第55段； |
| and A. c. Ministère public de la Conféderation, Federal Criminal Court (Switzerland), 25 July 2012 (footnote 925 above), legal ground No. 5.3.1. | 以及A.诉联邦检察官办公室，联邦刑事法院(瑞士)，2012年7月25日(上文脚注925)，法律理由5.3.1。 |
| See also Teodoro Nguema Obiang Mangue et autres, Court of Appeal of Paris, 13 June 2013 (footnote 925 above). | 另见Teodoro Nguema Obiang Mangue等人，巴黎上诉法院，2013年6月13日(上文脚注925)。 |
| Arrest Warrant of 11 April 2000 (see footnote 899 above), p. 22, para. 55. | 2000年4月11日逮捕证案(见上文脚注899)，第22页，第55段。 |
| Ibid. | 同上。 |
| This is the conclusion to be drawn from reading article 31, paragraph 1, in conjunction with article 39, paragraph 2, of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations. | 这是将《维也纳外交关系公约》第三十一条第一款和第三十九条第二款一并解读得出的结论。 |
| Articles 31, paragraph 1, and 43, paragraph 2, of the Convention on Special Missions must be construed in the same way. | 《特别使团公约》第三十一条第一款和第四十三条第二款必须以同样的方式解读。 |
| Arrest Warrant of 11 April 2000 (see footnote 899 above), p. 22, para. 55. | 2000年4月11日逮捕证案(见上文脚注899)，第22页，第55段。 |
| “Jurisdictional immunity may well bar prosecution for a certain period or for certain offences; | “管辖豁免可能阻止在某一时期或对某些罪行提出起诉； |
| it cannot exonerate the person to whom it applies from all criminal responsibility” (ibid., p. 25, para. 60). | 但不能免除享有豁免者的所有刑事责任”(同上，第25页，第60段)。 |
| Thus, for example, with reference to the immunity of members of diplomatic missions, the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations expressly states that “with respect to acts performed by such a person in the exercise of his functions as a member of the mission, immunity shall continue to subsist” (art. 39, para. 2); | 例如，《维也纳外交关系公约》提到外交使团成员享有的豁免时称，“关于其以使馆人员资格执行职务之行为，豁免应始终有效”(第三十九条第二款)； |
| the formulation is repeated in the Convention on Special Missions (art. 43, para. 1). | 《外交使团公约》中重复了这一说法(第四十三条第一款)。 |
| In the judicial practice of States, this has been expressed in a wide variety of ways: reference is sometimes made to “residual immunity”, the “continuation of immunity in respect of official acts” or similar wording. | 各国的司法实践以不同方式表达了这一立场：有时提到“余效赦免”，有时提到“公务行为赦免的延续”或类似措辞。 |
| On this aspect, see the analysis by the Secretariat in its 2008 memorandum (A/CN.4/596 and Corr.1, available from the Commission’s website, documents of the sixtieth session, paras. 137 et seq.). | 关于这一点，见秘书处2008年备忘录中的分析(A/CN.4/596和Corr.1，可查阅委员会网站，第六十届会议文件，第137段及其后段落)。 |
| See, above, paragraphs (3)–(20) of the commentary to draft article 2. | 见上文第2条草案评注第(3)-(20)段。 |
| This provision reads: “The cessation of immunity ratione personae is without prejudice to the application of the rules of international law concerning immunity ratione materiae.” | 这项规定为：“属人豁免的停止不妨碍关于属事豁免的国际法规则的适用”。 |
| Concerning the scope of this “without prejudice” clause, see above, paragraph (15) of the commentary to draft article 4. | 关于这一“不妨碍”条款的范围，见上文第4条草案评注第(15)段。 |
| See, above, paragraph (16) of the commentary to draft article 3. | 见上文第3条草案评注第(16)段。 |
| See, above, draft article 2 (b) and paragraphs (21)–(35) of the commentary thereto. | 见上文第2条草案(b)项及其评注第(21)-(35)段。 |
| See, above, paragraph (3) of the commentary to draft article 5. | 见上文第5条草案评注第(3)段。 |
| See, a contrario sensu, paragraph (19) of the commentary to draft article 2, paragraph 1 (b) (v), of the draft articles on jurisdictional immunities of States and their property, adopted by the Commission at its forty-third session: “The immunities ratione personae, unlike immunities ratione materiae which continue to survive after the termination of the official functions, will no longer be operative once the public offices are vacated or terminated” (Yearbook … | 见，从另方面来说，委员会第四十三届会议通过的国家及其财产的管辖豁免条款草案第2条草案第1款(b)(五)项评注第19段：“属人豁免与属事豁免不同，后者在官方职务终止后仍然继续存在，前者则于公职一旦解除或终止后即无效。 |
| 1991, vol. II (Part Two), p. 18). | ”(《1991年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第18页)。 |
| See Institute of International Law, resolution on “Immunities from jurisdiction and execution of Heads of State and of Government in international law”, which sets out – a contrario sensu – the same position in its article 13, paragraphs 1 and 2 (Yearbook of the Institute of International Law, vol. 69 (Session of Vancouver, 2001), p. 743, at p. 753); | 见国际法学会，“关于国际法中国家元首和政府首脑的管辖和执行豁免的决议”，该决议――从另方面来说――在第13条第1款和第2款中采取了同样的立场(《国际法学会年鉴》，第69卷(温哥华会议，2001年)，第743页及其后各页，特别是第753页)； |
| and “Resolution on the immunity from jurisdiction of the State and of persons who act on behalf of the State in case of international crimes”, art. III, paras. 1–2 (ibid., vol. 73 (Session of Naples, 2009), p. 226, at p. 227). | 以及“关于国家及其官员在国际犯罪中的管辖豁免的决议”，第三条，第1款和第2款(同上，第73卷(那不勒斯会议，2009年)，第226页及其后各页，特别是第227页)。 |
| The resolutions are available from the website of the Institute: www.idi-iil.org, under “Resolutions”. | 以上决议可查阅国际法学会网站：www.idi-iil.org, 见“Resolutions”栏目。 |
| Article 39, paragraph 2, of the Convention provides: “When the functions of a person enjoying privileges and immunities have come to an end, such privileges and immunities shall normally cease at the moment when he leaves the country, or on expiry of a reasonable period in which to do so, but shall subsist until that time, even in case of armed conflict. | 该公约第三十九条第二款规定：“享有特权与豁免人员之职务如已终止，此项特权与豁免通常于该员离境之时或听任其离境之合理期间终了之时停止，纵有武装冲突情事，亦应继续有效至该时为止。 |
| However, with respect to acts performed by such a person in the exercise of his functions as a member of the mission, immunity shall continue to subsist.” | 但关于其以使馆人员资格执行职务之行为，豁免应始终有效。 ” |
| Article IV, section 12, of the Convention provides: “In order to secure, for the representatives of Members to the principal and subsidiary organs of the United Nations and to conferences convened by the United Nations, complete freedom of speech and independence in the discharge of their duties, the immunity from legal process in respect of words spoken or written and all acts done by them in discharging their duties shall continue to be accorded, notwithstanding that the persons concerned are no longer the representatives of Members.” | 该公约第四条第十二节规定：“为确保出席联合国各主要和辅助机关及联合国所召开会议的各会员国代表于履行其职责时言论完全自由和态度完全独立起见，他们为履行职责而发表的口头或书面的言论和他们所实施的一切行为对法律程序的豁免虽在关系人不再担任会员国代表时仍应继续享有。” |
| The 1947 Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the Specialized Agencies follows the same model; in article V, section 14, it provides: “In order to secure for the representatives of members of the specialized agencies at meetings convened by them complete freedom of speech and complete independence in the discharge of their duties, the immunity from legal process in respect of words spoken or written and all acts done by them in discharging their duties shall continue to be accorded, notwithstanding that the persons concerned are no longer engaged in the discharge of such duties.” | 1947年《专门机构特权和豁免公约》沿袭了同样的模式，在第五条第十四节中规定：“为确保出席专门机构所召开会议的各会员国代表于履行其职责时言论完全自由和态度完全独立起见，其为履行职责而发表的口头或书面的言论和所实施的一切行为，虽关系人已不再从事履行这种职责，仍应继续豁免法律程序。 ” |
| For the meaning of the term “individual”, see, above, paragraph (6) of the commentary to draft article 2. | 关于“个人”一词的定义，见上文第2条草案评注第(6)段。 |
| Paragraphs (14) and (15) of the commentary to draft article 4 above. | 见上文第4条草案评注第(14)和第(15)段。 |
| Paragraph (15) of the commentary to draft article 4 above. | 见上文第4条草案评注第(15)段。 |
| In order to reflect the great importance attached by the Commission to procedural provisions and safeguards in the context of the present topic, in 2017 it was agreed to include a footnote, which was later deleted when the text of the draft articles was adopted on first reading. | 为了反映委员会在本专题内对程序性规定和保障措施的高度重视，2017年委员会商定列入一个脚注，但后来在一读通过条款草案案文时删除了该脚注。 |
| The footnote reads as follows: “The Commission will consider the procedural provisions and safeguards applicable to the present draft articles at its seventieth session. | 该脚注读作：“委员会将在第七十届会议上审议适用于本条款草案的程序性规定和保障措施”。 |
| ” The footnote marker was inserted after the headings of Part Two and Part Three of the draft articles, since procedural provisions and safeguards may refer to both categories of immunity, and should also be considered in relation to the draft articles as a whole. | 该脚注标号已插在条款草案第二部分和第三部分标题的后面，因为程序性规定和保障措施可能提到两类豁免，而且也应联系整个条款草案加以审议。 |
| See Official Records of the General Assembly, Seventy-second Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/72/10), para. 140. | 见《大会正式记录，第七十二届会议，补编第10号》(A/72/10)，第140段。 |
| See Official Records of the General Assembly, Seventy-second Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/72/10), paras. 74–75. | 见《大会正式记录，第七十二届会议，补编第10号》(A/72/10)，第74-75段。 |
| Draft article 4, para. 1. | 第4条草案第1款。 |
| See, above, paragraphs (2) and (3) of the commentary to draft article 4. | 见上文第4条草案评注第(2)和第(3)段。 |
| Draft article 4, para. 3. | 第4条草案第3款。 |
| See, above, paragraphs (14) and (15) of the commentary to draft article 4. | 见上文第4条草案评注第(14)和第(15)段。 |
| Draft article 6, para. 3. | 第6条草案第3款。 |
| See, above, paragraphs (9) to (15) of the commentary to draft article 6. | 见上文第6条草案评注第(9)至第(15)段。 |
| See the following cases, which are presented in support of such a trend: Regina v. Bow Street Metropolitan Stipendiary Magistrate, ex parte Pinochet Ugarte (No. 3), House of Lords, United Kingdom, 24 March 1999 (footnote 954 above); | 见为支持这种趋势而列举的下列案件：女王诉Bow Street都市领薪专职治安官案，皮诺切特·乌加特缺席(第3号)案，联合王国上议院，1999年3月24日(上文脚注954)； |
| Pinochet, Belgium, Court of First Instance of Brussels, 6 November 1998 (footnote 955 above), p. 349; | 皮诺切特案，比利时布鲁塞尔初审法院，1998年11月6日(上文脚注955)，第349页； |
| Hussein, Germany, Higher Regional Court of Cologne, Judgment of 16 May 2000, 2 Zs 1330/99, para. 11 (makes this assertion in relation to the hypothesis that the then President Hussein had ceased to hold office); | 侯赛因案，德国科隆高等地区法院，2000年5月16日的判决，2 Zs 1330/99，第11段(作出本论断的假设是时任侯赛因总统已不再任职)； |
| Bouterse, Netherlands, Amsterdam Court of Appeal, 20 November 2000 (footnote 947 above) (although the Supreme Court subsequently quashed the verdict, it did not do so in relation to immunity but because of the violation of the principle of non-retroactivity and the limited scope of universal jurisdiction; | 鲍特瑟案，荷兰，阿姆斯特丹上诉法院，2000年11月20日(上文脚注947)(虽然最高法院随后撤销判决，但此举与豁免无关，而是因为违反了不溯既往原则及普遍管辖权范围有限； |
| see judgment of 18 September 2001, International Law in Domestic Courts [ILDC 80 (NL 2001)]); | 见2001年9月18日的判决，《国际法在国内法院的适用》[ILDC 80 (NL 2001)])； |
| Sharon and Yaron, Belgium, Court of Appeal of Brussels, 26 June 2002 (footnote 947 above), p. 123 (although the Court granted immunity ratione personae to Ariel Sharon, it tried Amos Yaron, who, at the time the acts were committed, was head of the Israeli armed forces that took part in the Sabra and Shatila massacres) (see also H.S.A., et al. v. S.A., et al. (footnote 960 above)); | 沙龙和亚龙案，比利时，布鲁塞尔上诉法院，2002年6月26日(上文脚注947)，第123页(尽管法院给予阿里埃勒·沙龙属人豁免，但审判了阿莫斯·亚龙，因为在实施所涉罪行时，他是参与萨布拉和夏蒂拉大屠杀的以色列武装部队统帅)(另见H.S.A.等人诉S.A等人案(上文脚注960))； |
| H. v. Public Prosecutor, Netherlands, Supreme Court, Judgment of 8 July 2008, ILDC 1071 (NL 2008), para. 7.2; | H.诉检察官案，荷兰，最高法院，2008年7月8日的判决，ILDC 1071(NL 2008)，第7.2段； |
| Lozano v. Italy, Italy, Court of Cassation, 24 July 2008 (footnote 939 above), para. 6; | 洛扎诺诉意大利案，意大利，最高法院，2008年7月24日(上文脚注939)，第6段； |
| A. c. Ministère public de la Confédération, Federal Criminal Court (Switzerland), 25 July 2012 (footnote 925 above); | A.诉联邦检察署案，联邦刑事法院(瑞士)，2012年7月25日(上文脚注925)； |
| FF v. Director of Public Prosecutions, High Court of Justice, Queen’s Bench Division, Divisional Court, 7 October 2014 (footnote 954 above) (the significance of this ruling lies in the fact that it was issued as a “consent order”, that is to say, based on an agreement reached between the plaintiffs and the Director of Public Prosecutions, in which the latter agrees that the charges of torture against Prince Nasser are not covered by immunity ratione materiae). | FF诉检察长案，最高法院王座分庭，2014年10月7日(上文脚注954)(该判决的重要意义在于，它是作为一项“同意令”发布的，换言之，其依据的是原告与检察长之间达成的协议，在协议中，检察长承认对纳赛尔王子的酷刑指控不属于属事豁免的范围)。 |
| In a civil proceeding, the Italian Supreme Court has also asserted that State officials who have committed international crimes do not enjoy immunity ratione materiae from criminal jurisdiction (Ferrini v. Federal Republic of Germany, Italy, Court of Cassation, Judgment of 11 March 2004, International Law Reports, vol. 128, p. 658, at p. 674). | 在一项民事诉讼中，意大利最高法院也指出，犯有国际罪行的国家官员不享有刑事管辖属事豁免(费里尼诉德意志联邦共和国案，最高法院，2004年3月11日的判决，《国际法案例汇编》，第128卷，第658页及其后各页，特别是第674页)。 |
| In Jones, although the House of Lords recognized immunity from civil jurisdiction, it reiterated that immunity from criminal jurisdiction is not applicable in the case of torture (Jones v. Saudi Arabia, 14 June 2006 (see footnote 925 above). | 在琼斯案中，虽然上议院承认民事管辖豁免，但重申刑事管辖豁免不适用于酷刑案件(琼斯诉沙特阿拉伯案，2006年6月14日(见上文脚注925))。 |
| Lastly, it should be noted that the Federal High Court of Ethiopia, albeit in the context of a case pursued against an Ethiopian national, affirmed the existence of a rule of international law preventing the application of immunity to a former Head of State accused of international crimes (Special Prosecutor v. Hailemariam, Federal High Court, Judgment of 9 October 1995, ILDC 555 (ET 1995)). | 最后，应当指出的是，在一起针对埃塞俄比亚国民的案件中，埃塞俄比亚联邦高等法院确认，存在防止对被控犯下国际罪行的前任国家元首适用豁免的国际法规则(特别检察官诉海尔马里亚姆案，联邦高等法院，1995年10月9日的判决，ILDC 555(ET 1995))。 |
| National courts have in some cases tried officials of another State for international crimes without expressly ruling on immunity. This occurred, for example, in the Barbie case before the French courts: Fédération Nationale des Déportés et Internés Résistants et Patriotes and Others v. Barbie, France, Court of Cassation, Judgments of 6 October 1983, 26 January 1984 and 20 December 1985, International Law Reports, vol. 78, p. 125; | 在一些案件中，各国法院在未就豁免作出明确裁定的情况下，对他国官员进行过审判，例如法国法院审理的芭比案：全国被驱逐和被监禁抵抗运动战士和爱国者联合会等诉芭比案，法国最高法院，1983年10月6日、1984年1月26日和1985年12月20日的判决，《国际法案例汇编》，第78卷，第125页； |
| Fédération Nationale des Déportés et Internés Résistants et Patriotes and Others v. Barbie, Rhone Court of Assizes, Judgment of 4 July 1987, ibid., p. 148; | 全国被驱逐和被监禁抵抗运动战士和爱国者联合会等诉芭比案，罗纳巡回法院，1987年7月4日的判决，同上，第148页； |
| and Court of Cassation, Judgment of 3 June 1988, ibid., vol. 100, p. 330. | 最高法院，1988年6月3日的判决，同上，第100卷，第330页。 |
| Meanwhile, the National High Court of Spain has addressed the situations of various foreign officials for alleged international crimes without deeming it necessary to rule on immunity, in the Pinochet, Scilingo, Cavallo, Guatemala, Rwanda and Tibet cases. | 在这方面，西班牙国家高等法院在皮诺切特案、希林格案、卡瓦略案、危地马拉案、卢旺达案和西藏案中处理了数名外国官员据称犯下国际罪行的情况，但并不认为有必要就豁免作出裁定。 |
| In the Rwanda case, however, the National High Court ruled against the prosecution of President Kagame on the grounds that he enjoyed immunity. | 然而，在卢旺达案中，国家高等法院却裁定不起诉卡加梅总统，理由是其享有豁免。 |
| Similarly, in the Tibet case, the National High Court ruled against the prosecution of the then President of China; | 同样，在西藏案中，国家高等法院裁定不起诉当时的中国国家主席； |
| however, following the end of the latter’s term as President of China, the Central Court of Investigation No. 2 of the National High Court allowed his prosecution by order of 9 October 2013, claiming that he no longer enjoyed “diplomatic immunity”. | 然而，在后者不再担任中国国家主席之后，国家高等法院中央调查庭第2分庭于2013年10月9日发布命令，允许起诉，声称他不再享有“外交豁免”。 |
| Nevertheless, after the modification of the Ley Orgánica del Poder Judicial (Act for the Judiciary), the case was ultimately set aside. | 然而在 Ley Orgánica del Poder Judicial (司法机构法)修订之后，该案件被搁置一边。 |
| A last relevant example is the judgment of the German Federal Court of Justice on 28 January 2021 (case No. 3 StR 564/19) (see footnote 925 above) condemning a former lieutenant of the Afghan Army for torture as a war crime committed in that country against Taliban members in 2013 and 2014. | 最后一个重要的例子是德国联邦法院2021年1月28日的判决(案件编号3 StR 564/19)(见上文脚注925)，该法院判定一名阿富汗军队前中尉因酷刑而犯下战争罪，据称他于2013年和2014年在该国对一个塔利班团体的成员实施酷刑。 |
| This judgment expressly ruled that immunity ratione materiae from foreign criminal jurisdiction does not apply with regard to war crimes under customary international law, when committed by subordinate State officials (para. 18); | 判决明确指出，外国刑事管辖的属事豁免不适用于习惯国际法确立的由处于从属地位的国家官员犯下的战争罪(第18段)； |
| see also paragraphs 11, 13, 23 and 35. | 另见第11、13、23和35段。 |
| The Court held that there is international custom supporting this finding, and analysed the relevant practice in paragraphs 19 to 43. | 该法院认为，有国际实践支持这一决定，并在第19-43段中讨论了相关实践。 |
| This judgment largely follows the legal opinion issued by the German Federal Public Prosecutor General about the applicability of immunity to crimes under international law, in which the Federal Public Prosecutor General, after analysing both national and international case law, concluded that immunity ratione materiae does not apply to an official of another State accused of crimes under international law. | 联邦法院的这一判决基本遵循了德国总检察长就豁免对于国际法规定的罪行的适用问题发表的法律意见中的论点。 该法律意见分析了国内和国际司法实践，认定对另一国官员指控的罪行是国际法规定的罪行时，不适用属事豁免。 |
| Like the judgment of the Federal Court of Justice, the legal opinion of the Federal Public Prosecutor General also examines the work of the Commission on the present topic. It has an added value, given that, under German law, the Federal Public Prosecutor General has exclusive competence to introduce criminal proceedings under the German Code of Crimes against International Law. | 与联邦法院的判决一样，德国总检察长的法律意见也分析了委员会在这一问题上的工作，并具有附加价值，即根据德国法律，总检察长拥有根据德国《违反国际法罪行法》提起刑事诉讼的专属权限。 |
| The legal opinion is available in English in C. Kreß, P. Frank and C. Barthe, “Functional immunity of foreign State officials before national courts: a legal opinion by Germany’s Federal Public Prosecutor General”, Journal of International Criminal Justice, vol. 19, No. 3 (July 2021), pp. 697–716. | 这一法律意见的英文本可以在下文中找到：C. Kreß, P. Frank and C. Barthe, "Functional immunity of foreign State officials before national courts: a legal opinion by Germany's Federal Public Prosecutor General", Journal of International Criminal Justice, vol. 19, no. 3 (July 2021), pp. 697-716. |
| In support of this position, attention has been drawn to Organic Act No. 16/2015 of 27 October, on privileges and immunities of foreign States, international organizations with headquarters or offices in Spain and international conferences and meetings held in Spain, which establishes a separate regime of immunity for Heads of State, Heads of Government and Ministers for Foreign Affairs, according to which, in respect of “acts performed in the exercise of official functions [by the officials in question] during a term in office, genocide, forced disappearance, war crimes and crimes against humanity shall be excluded from immunity” (art. 23, para. 1, in fine). | 为支持这一立场，委员们提请注意关于外国、总部或办事处位于西班牙的国际组织以及在西班牙举行的国际会议的特权和豁免的10月27日第16/2015号《组织法》，该法确立了对国家元首、政府首脑和外交部长实行豁免的独立制度，根据该制度，“[有关官员]在任期内履行公务，实施种族灭绝罪、强迫失踪罪、战争罪和危害人类罪的，不得享受豁免”(第23条第1款，最后一句)。 |
| Also of interest is Act No. 24488 of Argentina, on foreign State immunity, article 3 of which was excluded by Decree No. 849/95 promulgating the Act, with the result that the Argentine courts may not decline to hear a claim against a State for violation of international human rights law. | 另一部相关法令是阿根廷关于外国豁免的第24488号法，其中第3条由颁布该法的第849/95号法令删除，使阿根廷法院可以不再拒绝受理针对外国违反国际人权法的行为提出的控诉。 |
| Meanwhile, from a far more limited perspective, the United States Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, as amended by the Torture Victim Protection Act, establishes a “[t]errorism exception to the jurisdictional immunity of a foreign state” (sect. 1605A), which makes it possible to exclude the application of immunity for certain types of acts such as torture or extrajudicial executions, provided that they were carried out by officials of a State previously designated by the competent authorities of the United States as a “state sponsor of terrorism”. | 同时，从更加严格的意义来看，美国的《外国主权豁免法》在经《酷刑受害者保护法》修订之后，确立了“外国司法管辖豁免的恐怖主义例外”(第1605A条)，其中规定，对于美国主管当局先前指定的“支持恐怖主义国家”，如其国家官员实施了酷刑或法外处决等行为，将不能享受豁免。 |
| A similar exception is contained in the State Immunity Act of Canada. | 加拿大的《国家豁免法》也有类似的豁免例外规定。 |
| Lastly, it should be borne in mind that some limitations or exceptions to immunity in relation to international crimes are contained in national legislation concerning such crimes, either in separate laws (see the Repression of Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law Act of Belgium, as amended in 2003; | 最后，应当注意的是，某些关于国际罪行的国内立法载列了一些有关此类罪行的豁免限制或例外，有些是专门的法律(见比利时的《打击严重违反国际人道法的行为法》，2003年修正； |
| the 2003 International Crimes Act of the Netherlands; | 荷兰2003年的《国际罪行法》； |
| and the Criminal Code of the Republic of the Niger, as amended in 2003) or in legislation implementing the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. | 尼日尔共和国《刑法典》，2003年修正)，有些则旨在执行《国际刑事法院罗马规约》。 |
| For implementing legislation that establishes a general exception to immunity, see Burkina Faso, Act No. 50 of 2009 on the determination of competence and procedures for application of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court by the courts of Burkina Faso, arts. 7 and 15.1 (according to which the Burkina Faso courts may exercise jurisdiction with respect to persons who have committed a crime that falls within the competence of the Court, even in cases where it was committed abroad, provided that the suspect is in their territory. | 有些执行立法规定了豁免的一般例外情况，见：关于如何确定布基纳法索法院适用《国际刑事法院罗马规约》的职权和程序的2009年第50号法，第7和第15.1条(依据该法，实施布基纳法索法院管辖范围内的罪行的，即使是在国外实施该罪行，只要实施人在布基纳法索的领土上，布基纳法索法院就可以对犯罪实施人行使管辖权。 |
| Moreover, official status shall not be grounds for exception or reduction of responsibility); | 此外，是否担任公职并不构成豁免或减少责任的依据)； |
| Comoros, Act No. 11-022 of 13 December 2011 concerning the application of the Rome Statute, art. 7.2 (“the immunities or special rules of procedure accompanying the official status of a person by virtue of the law or of international law shall not prevent national courts from exercising their competence with regard to that person in relation to the offences specified in this Act”); | 科摩罗2011年12月13日关于适用《罗马规约》的第11-022号法，第7.2条(“因担任公职而根据法律或国际法享有的豁免或特别程序不妨碍国家法院对本法规定的违法行为的实施者行使管辖权”)； |
| Ireland, International Criminal Court Act 2006, art. 61.1 (“In accordance with Article 27, any diplomatic immunity or state immunity attaching to a person by reason of a connection with a state party to the Statute is not a bar to proceedings under this Act in relation to the person”); | 爱尔兰2006年《国际刑事法院法》，第61.1条(“依据第27条，因与规约缔约国有联系而享有的任何外交豁免或国家豁免，均不能阻止依据本法对实施人提起相关诉讼”)； |
| Mauritius, International Criminal Court Act 2001, art. 4; | 毛里求斯2001年《国际刑事法院法》，第4条； |
| South Africa, Implementation of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court Act (No. 27 of 18 July 2002), arts. 4 (2) (a) (i) and 4 (3) (c) (stating that South African courts are competent to prosecute crimes of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes when the alleged perpetrator is in South Africa and that any official status claimed by the accused is irrelevant). | 南非2002年7月18日执行《国际刑事法院罗马规约》的第27号法，第4 (2) (a) (i)和第4 (3) (c)条(规定当犯罪嫌疑人身处南非时，南非法院对种族灭绝罪、危害人类罪和战争罪拥有管辖权，不受犯罪嫌疑人是否担任公职的影响)。 |
| For implementing legislation that establishes procedures for consultation or limitations only in relation to the duty to cooperate with the International Criminal Court, see: Argentina, Act No. 26200 implementing the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, adopted by Act No. 25390 and ratified on 16 January 2001, arts. 40 and 41; | 有些执行立法仅确立了涉及与国际刑事法院的合作义务的协商程序或限制，见：阿根廷执行《国际刑事法院罗马规约法》的第26200号法，经第25390号法通过，于2001年1月16日获得批准，第40和第41条； |
| Australia, International Criminal Court Act 2002 (No. 41 of 2002), art. 12.4; | 澳大利亚2002年《国际刑事法院法》(第41号法)，第12.4条； |
| Austria, Federal Act No. 135 of 13 August 2002 on cooperation with the International Criminal Court, arts. 9.1 and 9.3; | 奥地利2002年8月13日《关于与国际刑事法院合作的第135号联邦法》，第9.1和9.3条； |
| Canada, 1999 Extradition Act, art. 18; | 加拿大1999年《引渡法》，第18条； |
| France, Code of Criminal Procedure (under Act No. 2002-268 of 26 February 2002), art. 627.8; | 法国《刑事诉讼程序法典》(根据2002年2月26日第2002-268号法)，第627.8条； |
| Germany, Courts Constitution Act, arts. 20.1 and 21; | 德国的《法院组织法》，第20.1和第21条； |
| Iceland, 2003 International Criminal Court Act, art. 20.1; | 冰岛2003年《国际刑事法院法》，第20.1条； |
| Ireland, International Criminal Court Act 2006 (No. 30), art. 6.1; | 爱尔兰2006年《国际刑事法院法》(第30号法)，第6.1条； |
| Kenya, International Crimes Act, 2008 (No. 16 of 2008), art. 27; | 肯尼亚2008年《国际罪行法》(2008年第16号法)，第27条； |
| Liechtenstein, Act of 20 October 2004 on cooperation with the International Criminal Court and other international tribunals, art. 10.1 (b) and (c); | 列支敦士登2004年10月20日《与国际刑事法院和其他国际法庭合作法》，第10.1条(b)和(c)项； |
| Malta, Extradition Act, art. 26S.1; | 马耳他《引渡法》，第26S.1条； |
| Norway, Act No. 65 of 15 June 2001 concerning implementation of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court of 17 July 1998 in Norwegian law, art. 2; | 挪威2001年6月15日执行1998年7月17日《国际刑事法院罗马规约》的第65号法，第2条； |
| New Zealand, International Crimes and International Criminal Court Act 2000, art. 31.1; | 新西兰2000年《国际罪行和国际刑事法院法》，第31.1条； |
| Samoa, International Criminal Court Act 2007 (No. 26 of 2007), arts. 32.1 and 41; | 萨摩亚2007年《国际刑事法院法》(第26号法)，第32.1和第41条； |
| Switzerland, Act on Cooperation with the International Criminal Court, art. 6; | 瑞士《与国际刑事法院合作法》，第6条； |
| Uganda, International Criminal Court Act 2006 (No. 18 of 2006), art. 25.1 (a) and (b); | 乌干达2006年《国际刑事法院法》(第18号法)，第25.1(a)和(b)条； |
| and United Kingdom, International Criminal Court Act 2001, art. 23.1. | 联合王国2001年《国际刑事法院法》，第23.1条。 |
| Denmark is a special case: its International Criminal Court Act of 16 May 2001, art. 2, attributes the settlement of questions on immunity to the executive branch without defining a specific system for consultations. | 丹麦属于特殊情况，其2001年5月16日的《国际刑事法院法》(第2条)规定了将豁免问题交由行政部门解决，但没有规定具体磋商制度。 |
| The existence of a trend towards limiting immunity for international crimes was noted by Judges Higgins, Kooijmans and Buergenthal in their joint separate opinion in Arrest Warrant of 11 April 2000 (see footnote 899 above), p. 88, para. 85. | 在2000年4月11日逮捕证案的联合独立意见中，希金斯法官、科艾曼斯法官和比尔根塔尔法官指出存在对国际罪行实行豁免限制的趋势(见上文脚注899)，第88页，第85段。 |
| For its part, the European Court of Human Rights, in Jones and Others, expressly recognized that there appeared to be “some emerging support in favour of a special rule or exception in public international law in cases concerning civil claims for torture”, and that, “in light of the developments currently underway in this area of public international law, this is a matter which needs to be kept under review by Contracting States” (Jones and Others v. the United Kingdom (see footnote 925 above), paras. 213 and 215). | 在这方面，欧洲人权法院在琼斯等人案中明确承认，似乎“在国际公法中，对于针对外国官员实施酷刑的民事索赔案件，正在出现支持适用特别规则或作例外处理的情况”，因此，“鉴于国际公法目前在这一领域的发展，缔约国需要持续审议这一问题”(琼斯等人诉联合王国(见上文脚注925)，第213和第215段)。 |
| Those members noted that only ten cases are cited (see footnote 1012 above) that purportedly expressly address the issue of immunity ratione materiae of a State official from foreign criminal jurisdiction under customary international law, and that most of those cases actually provide no support for the proposition that such immunity is to be denied. | 这些委员指出，只举出了10个据称明确涉及根据习惯国际法给予国际官员外国刑事管辖属事豁免问题的案件(见上文脚注1012)，而且其中多数案件实际上并不支持不给予这种豁免的提议。 |
| For example, in the United Kingdom case of Regina v. Bow Street Metropolitan Stipendiary Magistrate, ex parte Pinochet Ugarte (No. 3) (see footnote 954 above), immunity was denied only with respect to acts falling within the scope of a treaty in force that was interpreted as waiving immunity (the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment). | 例如，在联合王国的女王诉Bow Street都市领薪专职治安官、皮诺切特·乌加特缺席案(第3号)(见上文脚注954)案中，只对被解读为放弃豁免的现行条约范围内的行为不予豁免(《禁止酷刑和其他残忍、不人道或有辱人格的待遇或处罚公约》)。 |
| The German case of Hussein (see footnote 1012 above) did not concern any of the crimes listed in draft article 7, and the judgment did not assert, in relation to the hypothesis that the then President Hussein had ceased to hold office, that immunity ratione materiae from jurisdiction was not or should not be recognized in that instance. | 德国的侯赛因案(见上文脚注1012)不涉及第7条草案所列的任何罪行，而且就时任侯赛因总统已不在任的假设而言，判决并没有指出在这种情况下不承认或不应承认属事管辖豁免。 |
| The Bouterse case (see footnote 947 above) was not upheld by the Netherlands Supreme Court and the reasoning of the lower court on immunity remained an untested obiter dictum. | 荷兰最高法院没有维持鲍特瑟案(见上文脚注947)的判决，原审法院关于豁免的理由仍属未经检验的附带意见。 |
| The Belgian decision in Sharon and Yaron (see footnote 947 above) was controversial and led the Parliament thereafter to alter Belgian law, resulting in a ruling by the Court of Cassation (H.S.A., et al. v. S.A., et al., 12 February 2003 (see footnote 960 above)) affirming a lack of jurisdiction over the case. | 比利时在沙龙和亚龙案(见上文脚注947)中的决定是有争议的，并导致议会在此之后修改了比利时的法律，致使最高法院(H.S.A.等人诉S.A.等人，2003年2月12日(见上文脚注960)称对这一案件没有管辖权。 |
| The same law was at issue in Pinochet before the Court of First Instance of Brussels (see footnote 955 above). | 布鲁塞尔初审法院(见上文脚注955)审理的皮诺切特案也涉及该法。 |
| In the case of Lozano v. Italy (see footnote 939 above), the foreign State official was accorded, not denied, immunity ratione materiae. | 在洛扎诺诉意大利案(见上文脚注939)中，外国国家官员被给予、而非拒绝属事豁免。 |
| The case Special Prosecutor v. Hailemariam (see footnote 1012 above) concerned prosecution by Ethiopia of one of its own nationals, not of a foreign State official. | 特别检察官诉海尔马里亚姆案(见上文脚注1012)涉及埃塞俄比亚对其本国国民而不是外国官员的起诉。 |
| Other cases cited concern situations where immunity has not been invoked, or has been waived; they provide no support for the proposition that a State official does not enjoy immunity ratione materiae from foreign criminal jurisdiction under customary international law if such immunity is invoked. | 所举其他案件则涉及未援引豁免或放弃豁免的情况，它们并没有为如下主张提供支持：即援引习惯国际法规定的外国刑事管辖属事豁免时，国家官员不享有这种豁免。 |
| For example, with respect to the judgment of the German Federal Court of Justice on 28 January 2021, neither Afghanistan nor the individuals concerned invoked immunity in that case, war crimes were the sole crime at issue, and the court only went so far as to identify a rule of customary international law that applied to prosecution of “foreign low-ranking officials,” such as a soldier. | 例如，关于德国联邦法院2021年1月28日的判决，阿富汗和有关个人都没有在该案中援引豁免，战争罪是受到争论的唯一罪行，法院只是确定了适用于起诉诸如士兵这样的“外国低级官员”的习惯国际法规则。 |
| Further, those members noted that the relevance for the topic of civil cases in national courts must be carefully considered; | 此外，这些委员指出，必须认真考虑国内法院审理的民事案件与这一专题的相关性； |
| to the extent they are relevant, they tend not to support the exceptions asserted in draft article 7. | 即使相关的话，它们往往也不支持第7条草案所规定的例外。 |
| For example, the case Ferrini v. Federal Republic of Germany (see footnote 1012 above) was found by the International Court of Justice to be inconsistent with the obligations of Italy under international law. | 例如，国际法院认为费里尼诉德意志联邦共和国案(见上文脚注1012)不符合意大利根据国际法承担的义务。 |
| See Jurisdictional Immunities of the State (Germany v. Italy: Greece intervening) (footnote 910 above). | 见国家的管辖豁免(德国诉意大利：希腊参加诉讼)案(见上文脚注910)。 |
| In the case of Jones v. Saudi Arabia (see footnote 925 above), the House of Lords recognized the immunity of the State official. | 在琼斯诉沙特阿拉伯案(见上文脚注925)中，上议院承认了国家官员的豁免。 |
| By contrast, in addition to those cases indicated above, those members pointed to several cases where immunity ratione materiae has been invoked and accepted by national courts in criminal proceedings. | 相比之下，除上述案件外，这些委员指出了国内法院在刑事诉讼中援引并接受属事豁免的几起案件。 |
| See, for example, Hissène Habré, Senegal, Court of Appeal of Dakar, 4 July 2000, and Court of Cassation, 20 March 2001 (footnote 947 above) (immunity accorded to former Head of State); | 例如候赛因·哈布雷案，塞内加尔，达喀尔上诉法院，2000年7月4日，及最高法院，2001年3月20日(见上文脚注947)(给予前任国家元首豁免)； |
| and Jiang Zemin, decision of the Federal Prosecutor General of Germany, 24 June 2005, 3 ARP 654/03-2. | 以及江泽民案，德国联邦总检察长2005年6月24日的决定，3 ARP 654 / 03-2。 |
| These members noted that very few national laws address the issue of immunity ratione materiae of a State official from foreign criminal jurisdiction under customary international law. | 这些委员指出，很少有国内法处理习惯国际法之下国家官员的外国刑事管辖属事豁免问题。 |
| As acknowledged in the Special Rapporteur’s fifth report on immunity of State officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction (A/CN.4/701), para. 42: “Immunity of the State or of its officials from jurisdiction is not explicitly regulated in most States. | 正如特别报告员关于国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免的第五次报告(A/CN.4/701)第42段所确认的那样，“大多数国家并没有关于国家或其官员管辖豁免的明确规定。 |
| On the contrary, the response to immunity has been left to the courts”. | 相反，对豁免的回复由法院负责”。 |
| Of the few national laws that purportedly address such immunity (Burkina Faso, Comoros, Ireland, Mauritius, Niger, South Africa, Spain), none support draft article 7 as it is written. | 在据称述及这种豁免的少数几部国内法律(布基纳法索、科摩罗、爱尔兰、毛里求斯、尼日尔、南非、西班牙)中，无一支持第7条草案的当前措辞。 |
| For example, the Spanish Organic Act No. 16/2015 of 27 October on privileges and immunities of foreign States, international organizations with headquarters or offices in Spain and international conferences and meetings held in Spain, art. 23, para. 1, only addresses the immunity ratione materiae of former Heads of State, Heads of Government and Ministers for Foreign Affairs. | 例如，关于外国、总部或办事处位于西班牙的国际组织以及在西班牙举行的国际会议的特权和豁免的10月27日第16/2015号《组织法》第23条第1款只述及前任国家元首、政府首脑和外交部长的属事豁免。 |
| Statutes such as the Repression of Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law Act, as amended in 2003, of Belgium or the 2003 International Crimes Act of the Netherlands only provide that immunity shall be denied as recognized under international law, without any further specification. | 比利时2003年修订的《打击严重违反国际人道法的行为法》和荷兰2003年《国际罪行法》等成文法只规定应如国际法承认的那样不予赦免，而未作进一步的详述。 |
| Further, those members observed that national laws implementing an obligation to surrender a State official to the International Criminal Court, arising under the Rome Statute or a decision by the Security Council, are not relevant to the issue of immunity of a State official under customary international law from foreign criminal jurisdiction. | 此外，这些成员还指出，履行《罗马规约》或安全理事会决定所产生的向国际刑事法院移交国家官员的义务的国内法，与习惯国际法下国家官员的外国刑事管辖法豁免问题并不相关。 |
| Also irrelevant are national laws focused on the immunity of States, such as Act No. 24488 of Argentina, the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act of the United States, and the State Immunity Act of Canada (further, it was noted that the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act was not amended by the Torture Victim Protection Act, which has nothing to do with terrorism). | 侧重于国家豁免的国内法律也不相关，例如阿根廷第24488号法、美国《外国主权豁免法》和加拿大《国家豁免法》(有委员指出，《外国主权豁免法》并未经与恐怖主义无关的《酷刑受害者保护法》修订)。 |
| These members noted that none of the global treaties addressing specific types of crimes (e.g., genocide, war crimes, apartheid, torture, enforced disappearance) contain any provision precluding immunity ratione materiae of State officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction, nor do any of the global treaties addressing specific types of State officials (e.g., diplomats, consular officials, officials on special mission). | 这些委员指出，处理特定类型犯罪(例如灭绝种族罪、战争罪、种族隔离、酷刑、强迫失踪)的全球性条约并不包含任何排除国家官员的外国刑事管辖属事豁免的规定，处理特定类型国家官员(例如外交官、领事人员、特别使团人员)的全球性条约也是如此。 |
| See, for example, Jurisdictional Immunities of the State (Germany v. Italy: Greece intervening) (footnote 910 above), p. 137, para. 84 (“customary international law does not treat a State’s entitlement to immunity as dependent upon the gravity of the act of which it is accused or the peremptory nature of the rule which it is alleged to have violated”); | 例如见国家的管辖豁免(德国诉意大利：希腊参加诉讼)案(上文脚注910)，第137页，第84段(“习惯国际法并不认为国家享有的豁免取决于该国被控实施行为的严重性或据称已违反的规则的强行性质”)； |
| and Arrest Warrant of 11 April 2000 (footnote 899 above), p. 25, para. 60 (“Immunity from criminal jurisdiction and individual criminal responsibility are quite separate concepts. | 以及2000年4月11日逮捕证案(见上文脚注899)，第25页，第60段(“刑事管辖豁免和个人刑事责任是两个非常不同的概念。 |
| While jurisdictional immunity is procedural in nature, criminal responsibility is a question of substantive law”). | 管辖豁免是程序性的，而刑事责任则是实体法问题”)。 |
| See, for example, Jurisdictional Immunities of the State (Germany v. Italy: Greece intervening) (footnote 910 above), p. 125, para. 60 (discussing acta jure imperii in the context of State immunity). | 例如见国家的管辖豁免(德国诉意大利：希腊参加诉讼)案(上文脚注910)，第125页，第60段(结合国家豁免讨论了“统治权行为”)。 |
| See, for example, the following cases: Pinochet, Court of First Instance of Brussels, 6 November 1998 (footnote 955 above), p. 349; | 例如见下列案件：皮诺切特案，布鲁塞尔初审法院，1998年11月6日(上文脚注955)，第349页； |
| and Hussein, Germany, Higher Regional Court of Cologne, 16 May 2000 (footnote 1012 above), para. 11 (makes this assertion in relation to the hypothesis that the then President Hussein had ceased to hold office). | 以及侯赛因案，德国，科隆高等地区法院，2000年5月16日(上文脚注1012)，第11段(作出本论断的假设前提是侯赛因总统当时已不再担任公职)。 |
| A similar argument has also been used in some cases when the question of immunity has been raised before the civil courts. | 一些民事法院审理的豁免案件中也提出了类似的主张。 |
| See, for example, Prefecture of Voiotia v. Federal Republic of Germany, Court of First Instance of Livadeia, 30 October 1997 (footnote 955 above). | 例如见维奥蒂亚州诉德意志联邦共和国案，莱瓦贾初审法院，1997年10月30日(上文脚注955)。 |
| As happened, for example, in the case of Attorney General of the Government of Israel v. Adolf Eichmann, Israel, Supreme Court, 29 May 1962 (see footnote 947 above), pp. 309–310. | 例如以色列检察长诉阿道夫 •艾希曼案，以色列，最高法院，1962年5月29日(见上文脚注947)，第309-310页。 |
| In the Ferrini case, the Italian courts based their ruling on both the gravity of the crimes committed and the fact that the conduct in question was contrary to jus cogens norms (Ferrini v. Federal Republic of Germany, Court of Cassation, 11 March 2004 (see footnote 1012 above), p. 674). | 在费里尼案中，意大利法院既考虑了罪行的严重性，也考虑了所涉犯罪行为违反了强行法规范(费里尼诉德意志联邦共和国案，最高法院，2004年3月11日(见上文脚注1012)，第674页)。 |
| In the Lozano case, the Italian Court of Cassation based its denial of immunity on the violation of fundamental rights, which have the status of jus cogens norms and must therefore take precedence over the rules governing immunity (Lozano v. Italy, 24 July 2008 (see footnote 939 above), para. 6). | 在洛扎诺案中，意大利上诉法院以侵犯基本权利为由拒绝给予豁免，认为基本权利具有强行法规范的效力，因此相对于豁免的有关规定，应当优先适用基本权利(洛扎诺诉意大利案，2008年7月24日(见上文脚注939)，第6段)。 |
| In A. c. Ministère public de la Confédération, the Federal Criminal Court of Switzerland based its decision on the existence of a customary prohibition of international crimes that the Swiss legislature considers to be jus cogens; | 在A.诉联邦检察署案中，瑞士联邦刑事法院的裁决理由是，瑞士立法认为习惯国际法为强行法，习惯国际法禁止的行为不得实施。 |
| it also pointed out the contradiction between prohibiting such conduct and continuing to recognize immunity ratione materiae that would prevent the launch of an investigation (A. c. Ministère public de la Confédération, 25 July 2012 (see footnote 925 above)). | 该法院还进一步强调，在禁止实施此类行为方面意见并不一致，但仍然承认属事豁免会阻碍启动调查(A.诉联邦检察署案，2012年7月25日(见上文脚注925))。 |
| Draft articles on jurisdictional immunities of States and their property, adopted by the Commission at its forty-third session, Yearbook … 1991, vol. II (Part Two), p. 33. | 国家及其财产的管辖豁免条款草案，国际法委员会第四十三届会议通过，《1991年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第33页。 |
| The Commission used the phrase cited above as the title of part III of those draft articles and reiterated a variant in articles 10 to 17 in the same part. | 委员会将上述措辞作为条款草案第三部分的标题，并在该部分的第10-17条反复使用这一措辞(“国家不得援引”)。 |
| For an explanation of the reasons that led the Commission to use this phrase, see, in particular, paragraph (1) of the commentary to part III (p. 33) and paragraphs (1) to (5) of the commentary to article 10 (pp. 33–34). | 为解释委员会采用该措辞的原因，请特别参见第三部分评注第(1)段(第33页)，以及第10条评注第(1)至(5)段(第33-34页)。 |
| The United Nations Convention on Jurisdictional Immunities of States and Their Property likewise uses the phrase “[p]roceedings in which State immunity cannot be invoked” in the title of part III and similar wording in articles 10 to 17. | 在这方面，《联合国国家及其财产管辖豁免公约》第三部分的标题和第10至第17条都采用了“不得援引国家豁免的诉讼”这一措辞。 |
| See principle I of the Principles of International Law recognized in the Charter of the Nürnberg Tribunal and in the Judgment of the Tribunal: “Any person who commits an act which constitutes a crime under international law is responsible therefor and liable to punishment” (Yearbook … 1950, vol. II, document A/1316, p. 374). | 见《纽伦堡法庭宪章和判决书所确认的国际法原则》之原则一：“凡实施在国际法上构成犯罪之行为者均应负其责任并受处罚”(《1950年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/1316号文件，第374页)。 |
| See article 1 of the draft Code of Offences against the Peace and Security of Mankind adopted in 1954: “Offences against the peace and security of mankind, as defined in this Code, are crimes under international law, for which the responsible individuals shall be punished” (Yearbook … 1954, vol. II, document A/2693, p. 150). | 见1954年通过的《危害人类和平及安全治罪法草案》第1条：“本治罪法所定义危害人类和平及安全之罪，是国际法规定罪行，犯此类罪行之个人应予处罚”(《1954年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/2693号文件，第150页)。 |
| For its part, article 1, paragraph 2, of the draft Code of Crimes against the Peace and Security of Mankind adopted by the Commission in 1996 states that “[c]rimes against the peace and security of mankind are crimes under international law and punishable as such, whether or not they are punishable under national law” (Yearbook … | 同时，1996年委员会通过的《危害人类和平及安全治罪法草案》第1条第2款规定：“危害人类和平及安全罪是国际法规定罪行，因此本身可予处罚，不论依国内法是否可予以处罚。 |
| 1996, vol. II (Part Two), p. 17). | ”(《1996年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第17页)。 |
| See paragraph (6) of the commentary to article 1 of the 1996 draft Code of Crimes against the Peace and Security of Mankind, Yearbook… 1996, vol. II (Part Two), p. 17. | 见1996年《危害人类和平及安全治罪法草案》第1条评注第(6)段，《1996年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第17页。 |
| Ibid., para. (9), p. 18. | 同上，第9段，第18页。 |
| Ibid., para. (10). | 同上，第(10)段。 |
| It should be borne in mind that the Commission, in commenting on principle I of the Nürnberg Principles, had stated that “[t]he general rule underlying Principle I is that international law may impose duties on individuals directly without any interposition of internal law” (Yearbook … 1950, vol. II, document A/1316, p. 374). | 应当铭记，委员会在评论《纽伦堡原则》之原则一时，已经申明“原则一所依据之普遍规则为国际法得直接规定个人之责任，而不受国内法之干涉”(《1950年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/1316号文件，第374页)。 |
| The Commission itself has declared that the prohibition of genocide, the prohibition of crimes against humanity, the basic rules of international humanitarian law, the prohibition of apartheid and the prohibition of torture are jus cogens norms. | 委员会自己曾宣布，禁止灭绝种族罪、禁止危害人类罪、国际人道法基本规则、禁止种族隔离以及禁止酷刑，均为强行法规范。 |
| See the annex to the draft conclusions on identification and legal consequences of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens), in chapter IV of the present report. | 见本报告第四章所载的一般国际法强制性规范(强行法)结论草案的附件。 |
| Rome Statute, art. 5, para. 1, and preamble, fourth paragraph. | 《罗马规约》第五条第(一)款和序言第四段。 |
| See the definition of aggression in article 8 bis, Official Records of the Review Conference of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, Kampala, 31 May–11 June 2010, publication of the International Criminal Court, RC/9/11, resolution 6, “The crime of aggression” (RC/Res.6). | 见《国际刑事法院罗马规约审查会议正式记录》第8条之二所载关于侵略的定义，坎帕拉，2010年5月31日至6月11日，国际刑事法院出版物，RC/9/11，第6号决议“侵略罪”(RC/Res.6)。 |
| In this regard, it should be borne in mind that in the commentaries to the 1996 draft Code of Crimes against the Peace and Security of Mankind, the Commission stated the following: “The aggression attributed to a State is a sine qua non for the responsibility of an individual for his participation in the crime of aggression. | 在这方面，应当铭记，在1996年《危害人类和平及安全治罪法草案》评注中，委员会指出：“由国家进行的侵略是个人参与侵略罪责任的必要条件。 |
| An individual cannot incur responsibility for this crime in the absence of aggression committed by a State. | 如果没有国家进行侵略，个人就不可能引起这种罪行的责任。 |
| Thus, a court cannot determine the question of individual criminal responsibility for this crime without considering as a preliminary matter the question of aggression by a State. | 因此，如果不把国家侵略问题作为一个首要问题加以考虑，法院就无法确定这种罪行的个人刑事责任问题。 |
| The determination by a national court of one State of the question of whether another State had committed aggression would be contrary to the fundamental principle of international law par in parem imperium non habet. | 由一国的国家法院确定另一国是否进行了侵略将有悖于国际法中之地位平等，互不支配的根本原则。 |
| Moreover, the exercise of jurisdiction by the national court of a State which entails consideration of the commission of aggression by another State would have serious implications for international relations and international peace and security” (Yearbook … | 另外，由一个国家的国家法院行使管辖权，审议另一个国家是否进行了侵略，将会对国际关系和国际和平与安全产生严重影响。 |
| 1996, vol. II (Part Two), p. 30, paragraph (14) of the commentary to article 8). | ”(《1996年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第30页，第8条评注第(14)段)。 |
| Ibid., pp. 42–43 (art. 16). | 同上，第42-43页(第16条)。 |
| The following are examples of national legislation that includes the crime of aggression: Austria, Criminal Code No. 60/1974 of 23 January 1974, as amended by BGBl. I No. 112/2015 of 13 August 2015, sect. 321k; | 以下是列入侵略罪的国内立法的例子：奥地利，1974年1月23日第60/1974号《刑法典》第321k条，经2015年8月13日《联邦法律公报一》第112/2015号修正； |
| Azerbaijan, Criminal Code of 2000, arts. 100–101; | 阿塞拜疆，2000年《刑法典》第100-101条； |
| Bangladesh, International Crimes (Tribunals) Act, art. 3, International Crimes (Tribunals) Act No. XIX of 1973, as amended by the International Crimes (Tribunals) (Amendment) Act No. LV of 2009 and Act No. XXI of 2012; | 孟加拉国，《国际犯罪(法庭)法》第3条，1973年第十九号国际犯罪(法庭)法，经第2009年第五十五号国际犯罪(法庭)法(修正案)和2012年第二十一号法修正； |
| Belarus, Criminal Code, arts. 122–123, Law No. 275-Z of 9 July 1999 (as amended on 28 April 2015); | 白俄罗斯，《刑法典》第122-123条，1999年7月9日第275-Z号法(2015年4月28日修正)； |
| Bulgaria, Criminal Code, arts. 408–409, State Gazette, No. 26 of 2 April 1968, as amended by State Gazette, No. 32 of 27 April 2010; | 保加利亚，《刑法典》第408-409条，1968年4月2日第26号《国家公报》，经2010年4月27日第32号《国家公报》修正； |
| Croatia, Criminal Code, arts. 89 and 157, Official Gazette of the Republic of Croatia “Narodne novine”, No. 125/11; | 克罗地亚，《刑法典》第89和第157条，《克罗地亚共和国政府公报》(“Narodne novine”)，第125/11号； |
| Cuba, Criminal Code, arts. 114–115, Act No. 62 of 29 December 1987, as amended by Act No. 87 of 16 February 1999; | 古巴，《刑法典》第114-115条，1987年12月19日第62号法，经1999年2月16日第87号法修订； |
| Ecuador, Criminal Code, art. 88; | 厄瓜多尔，《刑法典》第88条； |
| Estonia, Criminal Code, sects. 91–92; | 爱沙尼亚《刑法典》第91-92条； |
| Finland, Criminal Code, Act No. 39/1889, as amended by Act No. 1718/2015, sects. 4 (a), 4 (b) and 14 (a); | 芬兰，《刑法典》，第39/1889号法，经第1718/2015号法修正，第4 (a)、4 (b)、14 (a)条； |
| Germany, Criminal Code of 13 November 1998 (BGBl); | 德国，《刑法典》，1998年11月13日(BGBl)； |
| Luxembourg, Criminal Code, art. 136; | 卢森堡，《刑法典》第136条； |
| Macedonia, Criminal Code, art. 415; | 马其顿，《刑法典》第415条； |
| Malta, Criminal Code, sect. 82(C), Criminal Code of the Republic of Malta (1854, as amended in 2004); | 马耳他，《刑法典》第82(C)条，《马耳他共和国刑法典》(1854年，2004年修正)； |
| Mongolia, Criminal Code (2002), art. 297; | 蒙古，《蒙古刑法典》(2002年)第297条； |
| Montenegro, Criminal Code, art. 442, Official Gazette of the Republic of Montenegro, No. 70/2003, Correction, No. 13/2004; | 黑山，《刑法典》第442条，《黑山共和国政府公报》，第70/2003号，更正，第13/2004号； |
| Paraguay, Criminal Code of the Republic of Paraguay, art. 271, Act No. 1160/97; | 巴拉圭，《巴拉圭共和国刑法典》第271条，第1160/97号法； |
| Poland, Criminal Code, art. 17, Law of 6 June 1997; | 波兰，《刑法典》第17条，1997年6月6日的法律； |
| Republic of Moldova, Criminal Code of the Republic of Moldova, arts. 139–140, adopted by Law No. 985-XV on 18 April 2002 (as amended in 2009); | 摩尔多瓦共和国，《摩尔多瓦共和国刑法典》第139和第140条，2002年4月18日第985-XV号法通过(2009年修正)； |
| Russia, Criminal Code, Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, arts. 353–354, Federal Law No. 64-FZ of 13 June 1996 (as amended); | 俄罗斯，《刑法典》，《俄罗斯联邦刑法典》第353-354条，1996年6月13日第64-FZ号联邦法(经修正)； |
| Samoa, International Criminal Court Act 2007, as amended by the International Criminal Court Amendment Act 2014, No. 23, sect. 7A; | 萨摩亚，2007年《国际刑事法院法》，经2014年《国际刑事法院修正法》修正，第23号，见第7A条； |
| Slovenia, Criminal Code of 2005, arts. 103 and 105; | 斯洛文尼亚，2005年《刑法典》第103和105条； |
| Tajikistan, Criminal Code of the Republic of Tajikistan, arts. 395–396; | 塔吉克斯坦，《塔吉克斯坦共和国刑法典》第395-396条； |
| Timor-Leste, Criminal Code of the Democratic Republic of Timor-Leste, Decree Law No. 19/2009, art. 134. | 东帝汶，《东帝汶民主共和国刑法典》，第19/2009号法令，第134条。 |
| See, for discussion, A. Reisinger Coracini, “National legislation on individual responsibility for conduct amounting to aggression”, in R. Bellelli (ed.), International Criminal Justice: Law and Practice from the Rome Statute to Its Review, London and New York, Routledge, 2016. | 有关讨论见A. Reisinger Coracini, “National legislation on individual responsibility for conduct amounting to aggression”, in R. Bellelli (ed.), International Criminal Justice: Law and Practice from the Rome Statute to Its Review, London and New York, Routledge, 2016。 |
| Rome Statute, art. 7, para. 1, subparas. (j), (f) and (i), respectively. | 《罗马规约》，分别见第七条第(一)款第十、第六和第九项。 |
| See International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid (New York, 30 November 1973), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1015, No. 14861, p. 243; | 见《禁止并惩治种族隔离罪行国际公约》(纽约，1973年11月30日)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第1015卷，第14861号，第243页； |
| Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment; | 《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》； |
| and International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance (New York, 20 December 2006), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 2716, No. 48088, p. 3. | 《保护所有人免遭强迫失踪国际公约》(纽约，2006年12月20日)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第2716卷，第48088号，第3页。 |
| International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid, art. IV; | 《禁止并惩治种族隔离罪行国际公约》，第四条； |
| Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, arts. 4–6; | 《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4-6条； |
| and International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance, arts. 4, 6 and 9. | 《保护所有人免遭强迫失踪国际公约》，第四、第六和第九条。 |
| International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid, art. XI; | 《禁止并惩治种族隔离罪行国际公约》，第十一条； |
| Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, arts. 6–9; | 《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6-9条； |
| and International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance, arts. 10–11 and 13–14. | 《保护所有人免遭强迫失踪国际公约》第十至十一、第十三至十四条。 |
| Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, art. 7, para. 1. | 《国际刑事法院罗马规约》，第七条第(一)款。 |
| The definition of the threshold is contained in article 7, paragraph 2 (a). | 该门槛的定义载于第七条第(二)款(a)项。 |
| Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, art. 1, para. 1; | 《禁止酷刑和其他残忍、不人道或有辱人格的待遇或处罚公约》，第1条第1款； |
| and International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance, art. 2. | 《保护所有人免遭强迫失踪国际公约》，第二条。 |
| As, for example, in the United Kingdom, where cases relating to immunity from jurisdiction ratione materiae which raised the question of the non-applicability of such immunity to acts of torture have been based on the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. | 例如联合王国就发生了这种情况，所有提出了属事豁免不适用于酷刑行为问题的管辖属事豁免案件均以《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》为判案依据。 |
| See Regina v. Bow Street Metropolitan Stipendiary Magistrate, ex parte Pinochet Ugarte (No. 3), House of Lords, United Kingdom, 24 March 1999 (footnote 954 above); | 见Regina诉Bow Street都市领薪专职治安官，皮诺切特·乌加特缺席案(第3号)，联合王国上议院，1999年3月24日(上文脚注954)； |
| and FF v. Director of Public Prosecutions, High Court of Justice, Queen’s Bench Division, Divisional Court, 7 October 2014 (footnote 954 above). | FF诉检察长案，最高法院王座分庭，2014年10月7日(上文脚注954)。 |
| The Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment also served as the basis of a matter related to immunity from civil jurisdiction: Jones v. Saudi Arabia, House of Lords, 14 June 2006 (see footnote 925 above). | 《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》也是一起涉及民事管辖豁免问题的案件的判案依据：琼斯诉沙特阿拉伯案，上议院，2006年6月14日(见上文脚注925)。 |
| See the fifth report of the Special Rapporteur on immunity of State officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction (A/CN.4/701), paras. 225–234. | 见特别报告员关于国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免的第五次报告(A/CN.4/701)，第225-234段。 |
| In the same vein, see, above, paragraphs (23), (25) and (33) of the commentary to draft article 2, dealing with the definition of an “act performed in an official capacity”. | 同样，见上文第2条草案评注第(23)、第(25)和第(33)段，其中涉及“以官方身份实施的行为”的定义。 |
| See, above, paragraphs (19)–(20) of the commentary to draft article 2. | 见上文第2条草案评注第(19)-(20)段。 |
| Paragraph (14) of the commentary to draft article 2, above. | 见上文第2条草案评注第(14)段。 |
| Arrest Warrant of 11 April 2000 (see footnote 899 above), p. 22, paras. 54–55. | 2000年4月11日逮捕证案(见上文脚注899)，第22页，第54-55段。 |
| Certain Questions of Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters (see footnote 925 above), pp. 236–237, paras. 170–171. | 见《关于刑事事项互助的若干问题》(见上文脚注925)，第236-237页，第170-171段。 |
| This question was addressed by the International Court of Justice in the proceedings concerning the Difference Relating to Immunity from Legal Process of a Special Rapporteur of the Commission on Human Rights, in which the Court elucidated the applicability of the privileges and immunities set out in the Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations in connection with the prosecution in Malaysia of the Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers, who had been prosecuted for statements made in an interview. | 国际法院在关于人权委员会特别报告员享有法律程序豁免的争议案中处理了这一问题，澄清了《联合国特权和豁免公约》所载特权和豁免对法官和律师独立性特别报告员在马来西亚被起诉的案件的适用性(该特别报告员因在一次访谈中的言论而被起诉)。 |
| In this context, the Court – at the request of the United Nations Economic and Social Council – issued an advisory opinion in which it stated that “questions of immunity are … preliminary issues which must be expeditiously decided in limine litis”, and that this affirmation “is a generally recognized principle of procedural law”, the purpose of which is to avoid “nullifying the essence of the immunity rule”. | 在这方面，国际法院应联合国经济及社会理事会的要求发表了一项咨询意见，其中指出，“豁免问题是初步问题，必须在诉讼开始前尽快决定”，这“是公认的程序法原则”，其目的并不是“剥夺豁免规则本身存在的理由”。 |
| Accordingly, the Court concluded by 14 votes to 1 “[t]hat the Malaysian courts had the obligation to deal with the question of immunity from legal process as a preliminary issue to be expeditiously decided in limine litis” (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, and p. 90, para. 67 (2) (b)). | 法院以14票赞成、1票反对的表决结果认定，“马来西亚法院有义务将管辖豁免问题作为诉讼开始前的初步问题尽快解决”(关于人权委员会特别报告员享有法律程序豁免的争议案，咨询意见，《1999年国际法院案例汇编》，第62页及其后各页，特别是第88页，第63段，以及第90页，第67(2)(b)段)。 |
| Article 6 of the resolution of the Institute of International Law states that “[t]he authorities of the State shall afford to a foreign Head of State the inviolability, immunity from jurisdiction and immunity from measures of execution to which he or she is entitled, as soon as that status is known to them” (Yearbook of the Institute of International Law, vol. 69 (see footnote 1001 above), p. 747. | 国际法学会的决议第6条指出，“国家当局一旦意识到这种地位，应立即给予外国国家元首理应有权享有的不可侵犯性、管辖豁免和执行豁免”(《国际法学会年鉴》，第69卷(见上文脚注1001)，第747页)。 |
| Arrest Warrant of 11 April 2000 (see footnote 899 above), p. 22, para. 54; | 2000年4月11日逮捕证案(见上文脚注899)，第22页，第54段； |
| Certain Questions of Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters (see footnote 925 above), pp. 236–237, para. 170. | 《关于刑事事项互助的若干问题》(见上文脚注925)，第236-237页，第170段。 |
| Prosecutor v. Charles Ghankay Taylor, Special Court for Sierra Leone, Appeals Chamber, Case No. SCSL-2003-01-I, decision on immunity from jurisdiction, 31 May 2004, para. 30. | 检察官诉查尔斯·甘凯·泰勒，塞拉利昂问题特别法庭，上诉分庭，SCSL-2003-01-I号案，关于管辖豁免的决定，2004年5月31日，第30段。 |
| For the text of the decision, see the website of the Special Court: www.scsldocs.org, under “Documents”, “Charles Taylor”. | 判决案文可查阅特别法庭网站(www.scsldocs.org)，“Documents”，“Charles Taylor”。 |
| Similar provisions can be found in the Convention on Special Missions, art. 29, and the Vienna Convention on the Representation of States in Their Relations with International Organizations of a Universal Character, arts. 28 and 58. | 类似规定见《特别使团公约》第29条； 《维也纳关于国家在其对普遍性国际组织关系上的代表权公约》第28和第58条。 |
| A more nuanced reference to this idea can be found in the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations, art. 41, paras. 1–2. | 更细致地提及这一理念的文书见《维也纳领事关系公约》，第四十一条第一和第二款。 |
| Similar provisions can also be found in the Convention on Special Missions, art. 31, and the Vienna Convention on the Representation of States in Their Relations with International Organizations of a Universal Character, art. 30 and art. 60, para. 2. | 同样，《特别使团公约》，第三十一条； 以及《维也纳关于国家在其对普遍性国际组织关系上的代表权公约》，第三十条和第六十条第二款。 |
| Yearbook of the Institute of International Law, vol. 69 (see footnote 1001 above), pp. 745 and 747. | 《国际法学会年鉴》，第69卷(见上文脚注1001)，第745和747页。 |
| Article 42 of the Convention reads as follows: “In the event of the arrest or detention, pending trial, of a member of the consular staff, or of criminal proceedings being instituted against him, the receiving State shall promptly notify the head of the consular post. | 《公约》第四十二条的措辞如下：“遇领馆馆员受逮捕候审或羁押候审，或对其提起刑事诉讼时，接受国应迅即通知领馆馆长。 |
| Should the latter be himself the object of any such measure, the receiving State shall notify the sending State through the diplomatic channel.” | 倘领馆馆长本人为该项措施之对象时，接受国应经由外交途径通知派遣国。” |
| The Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, the Vienna Convention on the Representation of States in Their Relations with International Organizations of a Universal Character and the Convention on Special Missions do not contain any similar provisions. | 《维也纳外交关系公约》、《维也纳关于国家在其对普遍性国际组织关系上的代表权公约》和《特别使团公约》没有类似的规定。 |
| See the analysis of this issue in the seventh report of the Special Rapporteur on immunity of State officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction (A/CN.4/729), paras. 121–126. | 见国家官员外国刑事管辖豁免问题特别报告员第七次报告(A/CN.4/729)所载对这一问题的分析，第121-126段。 |
| Under that article, “[a]ll official business with the receiving State entrusted to the mission by the sending State shall be conducted with or through the Ministry for Foreign Affairs of the receiving State or such other ministry as may be agreed”. | 根据该条，“使馆承派遣国之命与接受国洽商公务，概应径与或经由接受国外交部或另经商定之其他部办理”。 |
| For the text of the draft articles adopted by the Commission and commentaries thereto, see Official Records of the General Assembly, Seventy-fourth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/74/10), paras. 44–45. | 委员会通过的条款草案案文及其评注见《大会正式记录，第七十四届会议，补编第10号》(A/74/10)，第44和45段。 |
| European Convention on Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters (Strasbourg, 20 April 1959), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 472, No. 6841, p. 185. | 《欧洲刑事事项互助公约》(1959年4月20日，斯特拉斯堡)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第472卷，第6841号，第185页。 |
| Additional Protocol to the European Convention on Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters (Strasbourg, 17 March 1978), ibid., vol. 1496, No. 6841, p. 350; | 《欧洲刑事事项互助公约附加议定书》(1978年3月17日，斯特拉斯堡)，同上，第1496卷，第6841号，第350页； |
| and Second Additional Protocol to the European Convention on Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters (Strasbourg, 8 November 2001), ibid., vol. 2297, No. 6841, p. 22. | 《欧洲刑事事项互助公约第二附加议定书》(2001年11月8日，斯特拉斯堡)，同上，第2297卷，第6841号，第22页。 |
| European Convention on the Transfer of Proceedings in Criminal Matters (Strasbourg, 15 May 1972), ibid., vol. 1137, No. 17825, p. 29. | 《刑事事项诉讼转移欧洲公约》(1972年5月15日，斯特拉斯堡)，同上，第1137卷，第17825号，第29页。 |
| European Convention on Extradition (Paris, 13 December 1957), ibid., vol. 359, No. 5146, p. 273. | 《欧洲引渡公约》(1957年12月13日，巴黎)，同上，第359卷，第5146号，第273页。 |
| Additional Protocol to the European Convention on Extradition (Strasbourg, 15 October 1975), ibid., vol. 1161, No. 5146, p. 450; | 《欧洲引渡公约附加议定书》(1975年10月15日，斯特拉斯堡)，同上，第1161卷，第5146号，第450页； |
| Second Additional Protocol to the European Convention on Extradition (Strasbourg, 17 March 1978), ibid., vol. 1496, No. 5146, p. 328; | 《欧洲引渡公约第二附加议定书》(1978年3月17日，斯特拉斯堡)，同上，第1496卷，第5146号，第328页； |
| Third Additional Protocol to the European Convention on Extradition (Strasbourg, 10 November 2010), ibid., vol. 2838, No. 5146, p. 181; | 《欧洲引渡公约第三附加议定书》(2010年11月10日，斯特拉斯堡)，同上，第2838卷，第5146号，第181页； |
| and Fourth Additional Protocol to the European Convention on Extradition (Vienna, 20 September 2012), Council of Europe, Council of Europe Treaty Series, No. 212. | 《欧洲引渡公约第四附加议定书》(2012年9月20日，维也纳)，欧洲委员会，《欧洲委员会条约汇编》，第212号。 |
| Inter-American Convention on Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters (Nassau, 23 May 1992), Organization of American States, Treaty Series, No. 75. | 《美洲刑事事项互助公约》(1992年5月23日，拿骚)，美洲国家组织，《条约汇编》，第75号。 |
| Inter-American Convention on Extradition (Caracas, 25 February 1981), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1752, No. 30597, p. 177. | 《美洲引渡公约》(1981年2月25日，加拉加斯)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第1752卷，第30597号，第177页。 |
| Convention on Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters between the Member States of the European Union (Brussels, 29 May 2000), Official Journal of the European Communities, C 197, 12 July 2000, p. 3. | 《欧洲联盟成员国间刑事事项互助公约》(2000年5月29日，布鲁塞尔)，《欧洲共同体公报》，C197, 2000年7月12日，第3页。 |
| Official Journal of the European Union, L 328, 15 December 2009, p. 42. | 《欧洲联盟公报》，L328, 2009年12月15日，第42页。 |
| Convention on Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters between the Member States of the Community of Portuguese-speaking Countries (Praia, 23 November 2005), Diário da República I, No. 177, 12 September 2008, p. 6635. | 《葡萄牙语国家共同体成员国间刑事事项法律援助公约》(2005年11月23日，普拉亚)，《共和国公报》，第一卷，第177号，2008年9月12日，第6635页。 |
| Convention on Extradition among the States Members of the Community of Portuguese-speaking Countries (Praia, 23 November 2005), ibid., No. 178, 15 September 2008, p. 6664. | 《葡萄牙语国家共同体成员国间引渡公约》(2005年11月23日，普拉亚)，同上，第178号，2008年9月15日，第6664页。 |
| Convention on Legal Assistance and Legal Relations in Civil, Family and Criminal Matters (Minsk, 22 January 1993), The Informational Reporter of the CIS Council of Heads of State and Council of Heads of Government “Sodruzhestvo”, No. 1 (1993). | 《民事、家庭、刑事案件法律援助和法律关系公约》(1993年1月22日，明斯克)，独联体国家元首理事会和政府首脑理事会“Sodruzhestvo”新闻报道，第1号(1993年)。 |
| Convention on Legal Assistance and Legal Relations in Civil, Family and Criminal Matters (Chisinau, 7 October 2002), ibid., No. 2 (41) (2002). | 《关于民事、家庭和刑事方面司法援助和法律关系的公约》(2002年10月7日，基希讷乌)，同上，第2(41)号(2002年)。 |
| Model Treaty on Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters, General Assembly resolution 45/117 of 14 December 1990, annex (subsequently amended by General Assembly resolution 53/112 of 9 December 1998, annex I). | 《刑事事项互助示范条约》，大会1990年12月14日第45/117号决议，附件(后来经大会1998年12月9日第53/112号决议修订，附件一)。 |
| Model Treaty on the Transfer of Proceedings in Criminal Matters, General Assembly resolution 45/118 of 14 December 1990, annex. | 《刑事事项诉讼转移示范条约》，大会1990年12月14日第45/118号决议，附件。 |
| Model Treaty on Extradition, General Assembly resolution 45/116 of 14 December 1990, annex (subsequently amended by General Assembly resolution 52/88 of 12 December 1997, annex). | 《引渡示范条约》，大会1990年12月14日第45/116号决议，附件(后来经大会1997年12月12日第52/88号决议修订，附件)。 |
| This is an uncontroversial matter that has even been reflected in various treaties, including, by way of example, the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, the preamble of which states that “the purpose of such privileges and immunities is not to benefit individuals but to ensure the efficient performance of the functions of diplomatic missions as representing States” (fourth paragraph). | 这是一个无可争辩的问题，也反映在一些条约中，例如《维也纳外交关系公约》在序言中指出，“此等特权与豁免之目的不在于给与个人以利益而在于确保代表国家之使馆能有效执行职务”(第四段)。 |
| Virtually identical wording can be found in the preambles of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations (fifth paragraph), the Convention on Special Missions (seventh paragraph) and the Vienna Convention on the Representation of States in Their Relations with International Organizations of a Universal Character (sixth paragraph). | 下列文书的序言里也有几乎相同的措辞：《维也纳领事关系公约》(第五段)、《特别使团公约》(第七段)和《维也纳关于国家在其对普遍性国际组织关系上的代表权公约》(第六段)。 |
| The Institute of International Law expressed the same view in the preamble of its resolution on immunities from jurisdiction and execution of Heads of State and of Government in international law, in which it states that special treatment is to be given to a Head of State or a Head of Government as a representative of that State, “not in his or her personal interest, because this is necessary for the exercise of his or her functions and the fulfilment of his or her responsibilities in an independent and effective manner, in the well-conceived interest of both the State or the Government of which he or she is the Head and the international community as a whole” (Yearbook of the Institute of International Law, vol. 69 (see footnote 1001 above), p. 743, third paragraph). | 同样，国际法学会在其关于国家元首和政府首脑根据国际法享有管辖豁免和执行豁免的决议序言中指出，国家元首和政府首脑作为国家的代表，应得到特殊待遇，“不是为了他们的个人利益，而是因为有必要让他们为了有关国家和整个国际社会的利益，独立、有效地履行职责”(《国际法学会年鉴》，第69卷(见上文脚注1001)，第743页，第三段)。 |
| The two Special Rapporteurs who have dealt with this topic in the Commission have also expressed this view (see Yearbook … 2010, vol. II (Part One), document A/CN.4/631, p. 395, at p. 402, para. 19; | 委员会处理这一专题的两位特别报告员也表示了相同的看法(见《2010年…年鉴》，第二卷(第一部分)，A/CN.4/631号文件，第395页及其后各页，特别是第402页，第19段； |
| Yearbook … 2011, vol. II (Part One), document A/CN.4/646, p. 223, at p. 228, para. 15; | 《2011年…年鉴》，第二卷(第一部分)，A/CN.4/646号文件，第223页及其后各页，特别是第228页，第15段； |
| and Yearbook … 2013, vol. II (Part One), document A/CN.4/661, p. 35, at p. 44, para. 49). | 《2013年…年鉴》，第二卷(第一部分)，A/CN.4/661号文件，第35页及其后各页，特别是第44页，第49段)。 |
| Paragraph (16) of the commentary to draft article 2, above. | 上文第2条草案评注第(16)段。 |
| The Commission addressed the waiver of immunity of certain State officials in the course of its work on diplomatic relations, consular relations, special missions and the representation of States in their relations with international organizations. | 委员会在其关于外交关系、领事关系、特别使团和国家在与国际组织关系中的代表权的工作过程中讨论了放弃某些国家官员的豁免的问题。 |
| Article 30 of the draft articles on diplomatic intercourse and immunities is worded as follows: “Waiver of immunity. 1. | 关于外交关系和豁免的条款草案第30条措辞如下：“豁免之抛弃。 |
| The immunity of its diplomatic agents from jurisdiction may be waived by the sending State. 2. | 一. 外交代表对管辖之豁免得由派遣国抛弃之。 |
| In criminal proceedings, waiver must always be express” (Yearbook … | 二. 刑事诉讼中，豁免之抛弃概须明示为之。 |
| 1958, vol. II, document A/3859, p. 99). | (《1958年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/3859号文件，第99页)。 |
| Article 45 of the draft articles on consular relations provides as follows: “Waiver of immunities. | 关于领事关系的条款草案第45条规定：“豁免之抛弃。 |
| 1. The sending State may waive, with regard to a member of the consulate, the immunities provided for in articles 41, 43 and 44. 2. | 一. 派遣国得就个别领馆人员，抛弃第四十一条、第四十三条及第四十四条所规定之豁免。 |
| The waiver shall in all cases be express” (Yearbook … | 二. 豁免之抛弃概须明示。 |
| 1961, vol. II, document A/4843, p. 118). | (《1961年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/4843号文件，第118页)。 |
| Article 41 of the draft articles on special missions is worded as follows: “Waiver of immunity. | 关于特别任务的条款草案第41条措辞如下：“豁免之抛弃。 |
| 1. The sending State may waive the immunity from jurisdiction of its representatives in the special mission, of the members of its diplomatic staff, and of other persons enjoying immunity under articles 36 to 40. 2. | 一. 派遣国得抛弃其特种使节团内之代表、外交职员及依第三十六条至第四十条享有豁免之其他人员所享管辖之豁免。 |
| Waiver must always be express” (Yearbook … | 二. 豁免之抛弃概须明示。 |
| 1967, vol. II, document A/6709/Rev.1 and Rev.1/Corr.1, p. 365). | (《1967年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/6709/Rev.1和Rev.1/Corr.1号文件，第365页)。 |
| Lastly, article 31 of the draft articles on the representation of States in their relations with international organizations reads as follows: “Waiver of immunity. | 最后，关于国家代表与国际组织的关系的条款草案第31条指出：“豁免的放弃。 |
| 1. The immunity from jurisdiction of the head of mission and members of the diplomatic staff of the mission and of persons enjoying immunity under article 36 may be waived by the sending State. 2. | 1. 派遣国得放弃代表团团长、代表团外交职员和依第三十六条享有豁免的人员所享管辖的豁免。 |
| Waiver must always be express” (Yearbook … | 2. 豁免的放弃概须明示。 |
| 1971, vol. II (Part One), document A/8410/Rev.1, p. 304). | (《1971年…年鉴》，第二卷(第一部分)，A/8410/Rev.1号文件，第304页)。 |
| Article 7 of the Institute of International Law resolution on immunities from jurisdiction and execution of Heads of State and of Government in international law is worded as follows: “1. The Head of State may no longer benefit from the inviolability, immunity from jurisdiction or immunity from measures of execution conferred by international law, where the benefit thereof is waived by his or her State. | 国际法学会关于国家元首和政府首脑根据国际法享有管辖豁免和执行豁免的决议第7条措辞如下：“1. 如果国家放弃国际法赋予的不可侵犯性、管辖豁免或执行豁免，国家元首将不享有此类豁免。 |
| Such waiver may be explicit or implied, provided it is certain. | 放弃豁免可明示，也可默示，前提是放弃是肯定的。 |
| The domestic law of the State concerned determines which organ is competent to effect such a waiver. | 有权决定放弃豁免的机构是有关国家的国内法确定的。 |
| 2. Such a waiver should be made when the Head of State is suspected of having committed crimes of a particularly serious nature, or when the exercise of his or her functions is not likely to be impeded by the measures that the authorities of the forum may be called upon to take” (Yearbook of the Institute of International Law, vol. 69 (see footnote 1001 above), p. 749). Article 8 of the resolution states: “1. | 2. 当国家元首被怀疑犯有特别严重的罪行时，或者其职能的行使似乎没有受到法院地国当局应该作出的决定的影响时，才应决定是否放弃豁免”(《国际法学会年鉴》，第69卷(见上文脚注1001)，第749页)。 |
| States may, by agreement, derogate to the extent they see fit, from the inviolability, immunity from jurisdiction and immunity from measures of execution accorded to their own Heads of State. 2. | 决议第8条内容如下：“1. 各国可通过协议，就其国家元首的管辖豁免和执行豁免商定它们认为适当的克减。 |
| In the absence of an express derogation, there is a presumption that no derogation has been made to the inviolability and immunities referred to in the preceding paragraph; | 2. 未明示克减的，前款提及的不可侵犯性和豁免即推定为未被撤销； |
| the existence and extent of such a derogation shall be unambiguously established by any legal means” (ibid.). | 这种克减的存在和范围必须通过法律手段明确确定”(同上)。 |
| This approach remained the same in the Institute’s 2009 resolution on the immunity from jurisdiction of the State and of persons who act on behalf of the State in case of international crimes, although the resolution incorporates a new element by stipulating, in article II, paragraph 3, that “States should consider waiving immunity where international crimes are allegedly committed by their agents”. | 在国际法学会2009年关于国家和代表国家行事的人在国际犯罪案件中的管辖豁免的决议中，这一做法保持不变，尽管该决议纳入了新内容，在第二条第3款中规定，“如果代理人被指控犯下国际罪行，各国应考虑放弃其豁免”。 |
| This recommendation mirrors the provisions of paragraph 2 of the same article II, according to which, “[p]ursuant to treaties and customary international law, States have an obligation to prevent and suppress international crimes. | 这项建议与第二条第2款的规定对应，其中指出，“各国有义务根据条约和习惯国际法预防和制止国际犯罪。 |
| Immunities should not constitute an obstacle to the appropriate reparation to which victims of crimes addressed by this Resolution are entitled” (Yearbook of the Institute of International Law, vol. 73-I-II (see footnote 1001 above), p. 227. | 豁免不应成为本决议所涵盖罪行受害者有权获得适当赔偿的障碍”(《国际法学会年鉴》，第73-I-II卷(见上文脚注1001)，第227页。 |
| Nonetheless, it should be borne in mind that the 2004 Convention addresses the waiver of immunity only indirectly, through the enumeration of a number of cases in which the foreign State is automatically deemed to have consented to the exercise of jurisdiction by the courts of the forum State. | 但是，应当记住，就2004年《公约》而言，放弃豁免只是通过列举一些案件间接提及，在这些案件中，可以自动理解为外国已同意法院地国法院行使管辖权。 |
| See, for example, articles 7 and 8 of the Convention. | 关于这一点，见《公约》第七条和第八条。 |
| See United States, Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act 1976, sects. 1605 (a) (1), 1610 (a) (1), (b) (1) and (d) (1), and 1611 (b) (1); | 见美国，1976年《外国主权豁免法》，第1605(a)(1)节、第1610(a)(1)、(b)(1)和(d)(1)节以及第1611(b)(1)节； |
| United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, State Immunity Act 1978, sect. 2; | 大不列颠及北爱尔兰联合王国，1978年《国家豁免法》，第2节； |
| Singapore, State Immunity Act 1979, sect. 4; | 新加坡，1979年《国家豁免法》，第4节； |
| Pakistan, State Immunity Ordinance 1981, sect. 4; | 巴基斯坦，1981年《国家豁免令》，第4节； |
| South Africa, Foreign States Immunities Act 1981, sect. 3; | 南非，1981年《外国豁免法》，第3节； |
| Australia, Foreign States Immunities Act 1985, sects. | 澳大利亚，1985年《外国豁免法》，第10、3和6节； |
| 10, 3 and 6; Canada, State Immunity Act 1985, sect. 4.2; | 加拿大，1985年《国家豁免法》，第4.2节； |
| Israel, Foreign States Immunity Law 2008, sects. 9 and 10; | 以色列，2008年《外国豁免法》，第9和10节； |
| Japan, Act on the Civil Jurisdiction of Japan with respect to a Foreign State 2009, art. 6; | 日本，2009年《日本对外国民事管辖权法》，第6条； |
| and Spain, Organic Act No. 16/2015 of 27 October on privileges and immunities of foreign States, international organizations with headquarters or offices in Spain and international conferences and meetings held in Spain, arts. 5, 6 and 8. | 西班牙，10月27日第16/2015号关于外国、总部或办事处设在西班牙的国际组织以及在西班牙举行的各种国际会议的特权和豁免的组织法，第5、6和8条。 |
| Arrest Warrant of 11 April 2000 (see footnote 899 above), p. 25, para. 61. | 2000年4月11日逮捕证(见上文脚注899)，第25页，第61段。 |
| Exceptionally, some national laws refer to waivers communicated by a head of mission. | 一些国家法律例外地提及由使团团长传递放弃的决定。 |
| See United Kingdom, State Immunity Act 1978, sect. 2.7; | 见联合王国，1978年《国家豁免法》，第2.7节； |
| Singapore, State Immunity Act 1979, sect. 4.7; | 新加坡，1979年《国家豁免法》，第4.7节； |
| Pakistan, State Immunity Ordinance 1981, sect. 4.6; | 巴基斯坦，1981年《国家豁免令》，第4.6节； |
| South Africa, Foreign States Immunities Act 1981, sect. 3.6; | 南非，1981年《外国豁免法》，第3.6节； |
| and Israel, Foreign States Immunity Law 2008, sect. 9 (c). | 以色列，2008年《外国豁免法》，第9(c)节。 |
| In the draft articles on diplomatic intercourse and immunities, the Commission already considered it preferable to leave open the question of the organs competent to waive the immunity of diplomatic agents. | 在关于外交关系和豁免的条款草案中，委员会认为最好不说明哪个主管机构有权放弃外交代表的豁免。 |
| Thus, in the text of draft article 30 adopted on second reading, it decided to amend the wording of paragraph 2 by deleting the last phrase of the paragraph adopted on first reading, which read “by the Government of the sending State”. | 因此，在二读通过的第30条草案案文中，委员会决定修改第2款的措辞，删除一读通过的该款中“概需”后面的几个字：“由派遣国政府”。 |
| The Commission explains this decision as follows: “The Commission decided to delete the phrase ‘by the Government of the sending State’, because it was open to the misinterpretation that the communication of the waiver should actually emanate from the Government of the sending State. | 委员会对这一决定的解释如下：“委员会决定删去“由派遣国政府”一语，因该语可能误解为抛弃豁免之通知非确实由派遣国政府发出不可。 |
| As was pointed out, however, the head of the mission is the representative of his Government, and when he communicates a waiver of immunity the courts of the receiving State must accept it as a declaration of the Government of the sending State. | 其实，使馆馆长既如上文所述为本国政府之代表，则遇馆长通知抛弃豁免时，接受国之法院即应承认其为派遣国政府之声明。 |
| In the new text, the question of the authority of the head of the mission to make the declaration is not dealt with, for this is an internal question of concern only to the sending State and to the head of the mission” (Yearbook … 1958, vol. II, document A/3859, p. 99, paragraph (2) of the commentary to article 30). | 至于使馆馆长作此声明之权力问题，新条文未予论及，盖此乃一国内部问题，仅与派遣国及使馆馆长有关”(《1958年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/3859号文件，第99页，第30条评注第(2)段)。 |
| In a similar vein, the Commission stated the following in relation to draft article 45 of the draft articles on consular relations: “The text of the article does not state through what channel the waiver of immunity should be communicated. | 同样，委员会在谈到领事关系条款草案第45条时指出：“本条条文并未叙明抛弃豁免应经由何种途径通知。 |
| If the head of the consular post is the object of the measure in question, the waiver should presumably be made in a statement communicated through the diplomatic channel. | 如领馆馆长为受有关处分者，豁免之抛弃谅系经由外交途径以声明通知。 |
| If the waiver relates to another member of the consulate, the statement may be made by the head of the consular post concerned” (Yearbook … 1961, vol. II, document A/4843, p. 118, paragraph (2) of the commentary to article 45). | 如果豁免涉及领事馆的另一名成员，则有关领馆负责人可作出声明(《1961年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/4843号文件，第118页，第45条评注第(2)段)。 |
| For example, in the United States, the waiver was formulated by the Minister of Justice of Haiti in Paul v. Avril (United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida, Judgment of 14 January 1993, 812 F. Supp. 207), and, in Belgium, by the Minister of Justice of Chad in the Hissène Habré case (see footnote 947 above). | 例如，在美国，海地司法部长在Paul诉Avril(佛罗里达州南区地区法院，1993年1月14日的判决，812 F. Supp. 207)一案中表示海地放弃此官员的豁免； 在比利时，乍得司法部在侯赛因·哈布雷案中表示放弃豁免(见上文脚注947)。 |
| In Switzerland, in the case of Ferdinand et Imelda Marcos c. Office fédéral de la police (Federal Court, 2 November 1989 (see footnote 960 above)), the courts did not analyse which ministries were competent, but merely noted that it was sufficient that they were government bodies and therefore accepted a communication sent by the diplomatic mission of the Philippines. | 在瑞士，在费迪南德和伊梅尔达·马科斯诉联邦警察局(联邦法院，1989年11月2日的判决(见上文脚注960))一案中，法院没有分析哪些政府机构有此权限，而只认为只要是政府机构即可，并接受了菲律宾外交使团发出的来函。 |
| See footnote 1076 above. | 见上文脚注1076。 |
| See Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, art. 32, para. 2; | 见《维也纳外交关系公约》第三十二条第二款； |
| Vienna Convention on Consular Relations, art. 45, para. 2; | 《维也纳领事关系公约》第四十五条第二款； |
| Convention on Special Missions, art. 41, para. 2; | 《特别使团公约》第四十一条第二款； |
| and Vienna Convention on the Representation of States in Their Relations with International Organizations of a Universal Character, art. 31, para. 2. | 《维也纳关于国家在其对普遍性国际组织关系上的代表权公约》第三十一条第二款。 |
| For example, Organic Act No. 16/2015 of 27 October on privileges and immunities of foreign States, international organizations with headquarters or offices in Spain and international conferences and meetings held in Spain provides for such express waiver of immunity in article 27 in relation to the immunity of Heads of State, Heads of Government and Ministers for Foreign Affairs. | 例如，10月27日关于外国、在西班牙设有总部或办事处的国际组织以及在西班牙举行的国际会议的特权和豁免的第16/2015号组织法在关于国家元首、政府首脑和外交部长的豁免的第27条中规定放弃豁免必须明示。 |
| A/CN.4/729, para. 103. | A/CN.4/729, 第103段。 |
| The Institute of International Law expressed a similar view in its 2001 resolution on immunities from jurisdiction and execution of Heads of State and of Government in international law, stating, in article 8, paragraph 1, that “States may, by agreement, derogate to the extent they see fit, from the inviolability, immunity from jurisdiction and immunity from measures of execution accorded to their own Heads of State” (Yearbook of the Institute of International Law, vol. 69 (see footnote 1001 above), p. 749). | 国际法学会在其2001年关于国家元首和政府首脑的管辖豁免和执行豁免的决议第8条第1款中指出，“各国可以通过协议，就其国家元首的管辖豁免和执行豁免商定它们认为适当的克减”(《国际法学会年鉴》，第69卷(见上文脚注1001)，第749页)。 |
| Regina v. Bow Street Metropolitan Stipendiary Magistrate, ex parte Pinochet Ugarte (No. 3), United Kingdom, House of Lords, 24 March 1999 (see footnote 954 above). | 女王诉Bow街大都会法院法官，皮诺切特－乌加特缺席案(第3号)，联合王国，上议院，1999年3月24日(见上文脚注954)。 |
| Arrest Warrant of 11 April 2000 (see footnote 899 above), pp. 24–25, para. 59. | 2000年4月11日逮捕证(见上文脚注899)，第24和25页，第59段。 |
| Three examples of clear statements of waiver, which appear in the memorandum by the Secretariat on immunity of State officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction (A/CN.4/596 and Corr.1, available from the Commission’s website, documents of the sixtieth session, paras. 252 and 253), are reproduced below. | 关于放弃的明确声明的三个例子载于秘书处关于国家官员外国刑事管辖豁免的备忘录(A/CN.4/596和Corr.1(见委员会网站，第六十届会议文件)，第252和253段)。 |
| In Paul v. Avril, the Minister of Justice of Haiti stated that “Prosper Avril, ex-Lieutenant-General of the Armed Forces of Haiti and former President of the Military Government of the Republic of Haiti, enjoys absolutely no form of immunity, whether it be of a sovereign, a chief of state, a former chief of state; whether it be diplomatic, consular, or testimonial immunity, or all other immunity, including immunity against judgment, or process, immunity against enforcement of judgments and immunity against appearing before court before and after judgment” (Paul v. Avril (see footnote 1083 above), p. 211). | 在Paul诉Avril案中，海地司法部长指出，“前海地武装部队中将、海地共和国军政府前总统Prosper Avril绝对不享有任何形式的豁免权，无论是君主、国家元首还是前国家元首的豁免权，无论是外交、领事还是作证豁免权，或任何其他类型的豁免权，包括判决或起诉豁免权、判决执行豁免权和判决前后出庭豁免权”(Paul诉Avril案(见上文脚注1083)，第211页)。 |
| In the Ferdinand et Imelda Marcos case, the waiver submitted by the Philippines was worded as follows: “The Government of the Philippines hereby waives all (1) State, (2) head of State or (3) diplomatic immunity that the former President of the Philippines, Ferdinand Marcos, and his wife, Imelda Marcos, might enjoy or might have enjoyed on the basis of American law or international law. … | 在费迪南德和伊梅尔达·马科斯案中，菲律宾提交的放弃书措辞如下：“菲律宾政府特此放弃菲律宾前总统费迪南德·马科斯和他的妻子伊梅尔达·马科斯根据美国法律或国际法可以享有或本可以享有的任何豁免，包括(1) 国家豁免权、(2) 国家元首豁免权或(3) 外交豁免权。 |
| This waiver extends to the prosecution of Ferdinand and Imelda Marcos in the above-mentioned case (the investigation conducted in the southern district of New York) and to any criminal acts or any other related matters in connection with which these persons might attempt to refer to their immunity” (Ferdinand et Imelda Marcos c. Office fédéral de la police (see footnote 960 above), pp. 501–502). | […]豁免的放弃适用于在上述案件(在纽约州南区进行的调查)中对费迪南德和伊梅尔达·马科斯的起诉，以及他们试图援引其豁免权所涉的任何犯罪行为或其他相关事项”(费迪南德和伊梅尔达·马科斯诉联邦警察局案(见上文脚注960)，第501和502页)。 |
| In the proceedings conducted in Brussels against Hissène Habré, the Ministry of Justice of Chad expressly waived immunity in the following terms: “The National Sovereign Conference, held in N’djaména from 15 January to 7 April 1993, officially waived any immunity from jurisdiction with respect to Mr. Hissène Habré. | 在布鲁塞尔针对侯赛因·哈布雷的案件中，乍得司法部明确放弃豁免：“1993年1月15日至4月7日在恩贾梅纳举行的主权全国会议正式取消了侯赛因·哈布雷先生的所有管辖豁免权。 |
| This position was confirmed by Act No. 010/PR/95 of 9 June 1995, which granted amnesty to political prisoners and exiles and to persons in armed opposition, with the exception of ‘the former President of the Republic, Hissène Habré, his accomplices and/or accessories’. | 这一立场得到了1995年6月9日第010/PR/95号法的认可，该法赦免了政治犯和流亡者以及武装反对派人士，但不包括“共和国前总统侯赛因·哈布雷、他的同伙和(或)他的同谋”。 |
| It is therefore clear that Mr. Hissène Habré cannot claim any immunity whatsoever from the Chadian authorities since the end of the National Sovereign Conference” (letter from the Minister of Justice of Chad to the examining magistrate of the Brussels district, 7 October 2002). | 因此，很明显，侯赛因·哈布雷先生无法要求乍得当局赋予他任何豁免权，自从主权全国会议结束以来就是如此”(2002年10月7日乍得司法部长给布鲁塞尔地区预审法官的信)。 |
| On waiver of immunity and submission of the foreign State to the jurisdiction of the forum State, see: United States, Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act 1976, sect. 1605 (a); | 关于放弃豁免和外国接受法院地国管辖的问题，见：美国，1976年《外国主权豁免法》，第1605(a)节； |
| United Kingdom, State Immunity Act 1978, sect. 2; | 联合王国，1978年《国家豁免法》，第2节； |
| Singapore, State Immunity Act 1979, sect. 4; | 新加坡，1979年《国家豁免法》，第4节； |
| Pakistan, State Immunity Ordinance 1981, sect. 4; | 巴基斯坦，1981年《国家豁免令》，第4节； |
| South Africa, Foreign States Immunities Act 1981, sect. 3; | 南非，1981年《外国豁免法》，第3节； |
| Australia, Foreign States Immunities Act 1985, sect. 10; | 澳大利亚，1985年《外国豁免法》，第10节； |
| Canada, State Immunity Act 1985, sect. 4; | 加拿大，1985年《国家豁免法》，第4节； |
| Israel, Foreign States Immunity Law 2008, sects. 9 and 10; | 以色列，2008年《外国豁免法》，第9和10节； |
| Japan, Act on the Civil Jurisdiction of Japan with respect to a Foreign State 2009, arts. 5 and 6; | 日本，2009年《日本对外国民事管辖权法》，第5和6条； |
| and Spain, Organic Act No. 16/2015 of 27 October on privileges and immunities of foreign States, international organizations with headquarters or offices in Spain and international conferences and meetings held in Spain, arts. 5–8. | 西班牙，10月27日第16/2015号关于外国、总部或办事处设在西班牙的国际组织以及在西班牙举行的各种国际会议的特权和豁免的组织法，第5和8条。 |
| Only the laws of Australia and Spain provide for the irrevocability of the waiver of immunity. | 只有澳大利亚和西班牙的法律规定豁免的放弃不可撤销。 |
| Under the Foreign States Immunities Act 1985 of Australia, “[a]n agreement by a foreign State to waive its immunity under this Part has effect to waive that immunity and the waiver may not be withdrawn except in accordance with the terms of the agreement” (sect. 10.5). | 根据1985年澳大利亚《外国豁免法》，“外国根据本编规定放弃其豁免的协议具有放弃该豁免的效果，除非根据协议的条款，否则不得撤回放弃”(第10节第5款)。 |
| For its part, Organic Act No. 16/2015 of Spain establishes that “[t]he consent of the foreign State referred to in articles 5 and 6 may not be revoked once the proceedings have been initiated before a Spanish court” (art. 8 (Revocation of consent)). | 西班牙第16/2015号组织法规定，“在西班牙法院提起诉讼后，第5条和第6条所述外国的同意不得撤销”(第8条(同意的撤销))。 |
| Yearbook … 1958, vol. II, document A/3859, p. 99, paragraph (5) of the commentary to article 30. | 《1958年…年鉴》，第二卷，A/3859号文件，第99页，第30条评注第(5)段。 |
| Principle 10 reads as follows: “A unilateral declaration that has created legal obligations for the State making the declaration cannot be revoked arbitrarily. | 原则10如下：“不能任意撤销一项已经对声明国创立了法律义务的单方面声明。 |
| In assessing whether a revocation would be arbitrary, consideration should be given to: (a) any specific terms of the declaration relating to revocation; | 在考虑一项撤销是否属于任意时，应考虑下述因素：(a) 声明中与撤销有关的具体条件； |
| (b) the extent to which those to whom the obligations are owed have relied on such obligations; | (b) 义务的对象对这类义务的信赖程度； |
| (c) the extent to which there has been a fundamental change in the circumstances” | (c) 情况发生根本变化的程度。” |
| (Yearbook … 2006, vol. II (Part Two), p. 161, para. 176). | (《2006年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第161页，第176段)。 |
| See, for example, European Convention on Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters, art. 3; | 例如，见《欧洲刑事事项互助公约》，第3条； |
| Inter-American Convention on Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters, art. 7; | 《美洲刑事事项互助公约》，第7条； |
| Convention on Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters between the Member States of the Community of Portuguese-speaking Countries, art. 1, paras. 1 and 2; | 《葡萄牙语国家共同体成员国间刑事事项法律援助公约》，第1条第1和2款； |
| and Model Treaty on Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters, art. 1, para. 2. | 《刑事事项互助示范条约》，第1条第2款。 |
| See the seventh report of the Special Rapporteur on immunity of State officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction (A/CN.4/729), annex II. | 见特别报告员关于国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免的第七次报告(A/CN.4/729)，附件二。 |
| The Commission considered, among others, the following formulations: “prima facie evidence”, “clear and convincing evidence” and “the highest standard of proof for the prosecution of crimes in the domestic legal system” of the forum State. | 委员会审议了以下表述：“初步证据”、“明确令人信服的证据”、“法院地国国内法律制度中起诉犯罪所需的最高证据标准”等等。 |
| Rome Statute, art. 53, para. 1 (a). | 《罗马规约》，第五十三条第(一)款第1项。 |
| Ibid., art. 53, para. 1 (c). | 同上，第五十三条第(一)款第3项。 |
| Ibid., art. 58, para. 1 (a). | 同上，第五十八条第(一)款第1项。 |
| Ibid., art. 61, para. 7. | 同上，第六十一条第(七)款。 |
| The same wording is used in the Chinese and Spanish versions of this article. | 中文和西班牙文文本采用了相同的措辞。 |
| The wording of Arabic, French and Russian versions is different. | 阿拉伯文、法文和俄文版本的措辞不同。 |
| See, in particular, paragraph (7) of the commentary to draft article 9 above. | 尤其见上文第9条草案评注第(7)段。 |
| See, in particular, paragraphs (8)–(14) of the commentary to draft article 9 above. | 尤其见上文第9条草案评注第(8)-(14)段。 |
| See, in this connection, the following instruments: International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (New York, 16 December 1966), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 999, No. 14668, p. 171, and vol. 1057, p. 407, art. 14; | 在这方面，见以下文书：《公民及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，以及第1057卷，第407页，第十四条； |
| Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (European Convention on Human Rights) (Rome, 4 November 1950), ibid., vol. 213, No. 2889, p. 221, arts. 6 and 13; | 《保护人权与基本自由公约》(《欧洲人权公约》)(1950年11月4日，罗马)，同上，第213卷，第2889号，第221页，第6和13条； |
| Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (Nice, 7 December 2000), Official Journal of the European Communities, C 364, 18 December 2000, p. 1, art. 47; | 《欧洲联盟基本权利宪章》(2000年12月7日，尼斯)，《欧洲共同体官方公报》，C364, 2000年12月18日，第1页，第47条； |
| American Convention on Human Rights: “Pact of San José, Costa Rica” (San Jose, 22 November 1969), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1144, No. 17955, p. 123, art. 8; | 《美洲人权公约》(《哥斯达黎加圣何塞公约》)(1969年11月22日，圣约塞)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第1144卷，第17955号，第123页，第8条； |
| African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (Nairobi, 27 June 1981), ibid., vol. 1520, No. 26363, p. 217, art. 7; | 《非洲人权和民族权宪章》(1981年6月27日，内罗毕)，同上，第1520卷，第26363号，第217页，第7条； |
| and Arab Charter on Human Rights (adopted at the Summit of the League of Arab States at its sixteenth ordinary session, held in Tunis in May 2004, CHR/NONE/2004/40/Rev.1, or Boston University International Law Journal, vol. 24, No. 2 (2006), p. 147), art. 12. | 《阿拉伯人权宪章》(2004年5月在突尼斯举行的阿拉伯国家联盟首脑会议第十六届常会通过，CHR/NONE/2004/40/Rev.1, 或波士顿大学国际法杂志，第24卷，第2号(2006年)，第147页，第12条。 |
| See, e.g., Airey v. Ireland, 9 October 1979, European Court of Human Rights, Series A, No. 32; | 例如，见Airey诉爱尔兰，1979年10月9日，欧洲人权法院，A系列，第32号； |
| and Stanev v. Bulgaria [GC], No. 36760/06, European Court of Human Rights, ECHR 2012. | Stanev诉保加利亚[GC]，第36760/06号，欧洲人权法院，ECHR 2012。 |
| See, in particular, Judicial Guarantees in States of Emergency (arts. 27(2), 25 and 8 American Convention on Human Rights), Advisory Opinion OC-9/87, 6 October 1987, Inter-American Court of Human Rights, Series A, No. 9. | 尤其见紧急状态下的司法保障(《美洲人权公约》第27.2、25和8条)，1987年10月6日OC-9/87号咨询意见，美洲人权法院，A系列，第9号。 |
| See, in particular, Human Rights Committee, general comment No. 32 (2007) on the right to equality before courts and tribunals and to a fair trial. | 尤其见人权事务委员会关于在法庭和裁判所前一律平等和获得公正审判的权利的第32号一般性意见(2007年)。 |
| The Council of Europe adopted the 1972 European Convention on the Transfer of Proceedings in Criminal Matters. | 1972年《刑事事项诉讼转移欧洲公约》已在欧洲委员会内通过。 |
| The European Convention on Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters refers to the transfer of proceedings in article 21. | 《欧洲刑事事项互助公约》第21条提到诉讼程序的移交。 |
| Of particular importance is the treatment given to the transfer of criminal proceedings in article 21 of the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime ((New York, 15 November 2000), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 2225, No. 39574, p. 209), which, moreover, has been the subject of continued discussion within the Conference of the Parties to the Convention. | 特别重要的是《联合国打击跨国有组织犯罪公约》(2000年11月15日，纽约)第21条中处理移交刑事诉讼的问题的方式，联合国，《条约汇编》，第2225卷，第39574号，第209页)，此事也得到公约缔约方大会的不断审查。 |
| In this regard, see Working Group on International Cooperation of the Conference of the Parties to the Convention, Practical considerations, good practices and challenges encountered in the area of transfer of criminal proceedings as a separate form of international cooperation in criminal matters (CTOC/COP/WG.3/2017/2). | 在这方面，见公约缔约方大会国际合作工作组，作为刑事事项国际合作的一种独特形式，刑事诉讼移交方面的实际考虑因素、良好做法及遇到的困难(CTOC/COP/WG.3/2017/2)。 |
| See Council of Europe, Explanatory Report to the European Convention on the Transfer of Proceedings in Criminal Matters, European Treaty Series, No. 73. | 见欧洲委员会，向《刑事事项诉讼转移欧洲公约》机构提交的解释性报告，《欧洲条约汇编》，第73号。 |
| Arrest Warrant of 11 April 2000 (see footnote 899 above), pp. 25–26, para. 61. | 2000年4月11日逮捕证(见上文脚注899)，第25和26页，第61段。 |
| The decision in question is the judgment of 10 May 2018 of the Lisbon Court of Appeal, handed down in criminal proceedings for corruption involving a former Vice-President of Angola. | 这是里斯本上诉法院在安哥拉前副总统腐败案的刑事诉讼中于2018年5月10日作出的判决。 |
| See Case No. 333/14.9TELSB-U.L1-9, available at http://www.dgsi.pt/jtrl.nsf/33182fc732316039802565fa00497eec/88e2a666e33779ce802582b8003567f3?OpenDocument. The Court’s interpretation was probably based on the fact that the transfer of the criminal proceedings to the Angolan courts was based exclusively on Portuguese law (the Code of Criminal Procedure). | 见第333/14.9TELSB-U.L1-9号案件，可查阅 http://www.dgsi.pt/jtrl.nsf/33182fc732316039802565fa00497eec/88e2a666e33779ce802582b8003567f3?OpenDocument. 法院的解释可能是基于这样一个事实：把刑事诉讼移交给安哥拉法院完全是根据葡萄牙法律(刑事诉讼法)进行的。 |
| Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Seizure of Aircraft (The Hague, 16 December 1970), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 860, No. 12325, p. 105. | 《关于制止非法劫持航空器的公约》(1970年12月16日，海牙)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第860卷，第12325号，第105页。 |
| See Official Records of the General Assembly, Sixty-ninth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/69/10), chap. VI, in particular paras. (10)–(21) of the final report on the topic, which is reproduced in paragraph 65 of the Commission’s report. | 见《大会正式记录，第六十九届会议，补编第10号》(A/69/10)，第四章，特别是关于该专题的最后报告第(10)至(21)段，转载于委员会报告第65段。 |
| Ibid., Seventy-fourth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/74/10), paras. 44–45, draft articles on prevention and punishment of crimes against humanity, draft article 10 (Aut dedere aut judicare) and commentary thereto. | 同上，《第七十四届会议，补编第10号》(A/74/10)，第44-45段，防止及惩治危害人类罪条款草案，第10条(aut dedere aut iudicare)及其评注。 |
| Questions relating to the Obligation to Prosecute or Extradite (see footnote 902 above), at pp. 460 and 461, paras. 115 and 120. | 关于起诉或引渡义务的问题(比利时诉塞内加尔)(见上文脚注902)，见第460-461页，第115和120段。 |
| This expression is also found in the judgment of the International Court of Justice in Questions relating to the Obligation to Prosecute or Extradite (see footnote 902 above), pp. 454–455, para. 90. | 这一表述也出现在国际法院在关于起诉或引渡义务的问题一案的判决中(见上文脚注902)，第454和455页，第90段。 |
| See, in particular, paragraphs (32)–(34) of the commentary to draft article 14 above. | 尤其见上文第14条草案评注第(32)-(34)段。 |
| Article 17, paragraph 1 (a), of the Rome Statute provides that the Court must find a case inadmissible unless the “State which has jurisdiction over it … is unwilling or unable genuinely to carry out the investigation or prosecution”. | 根据《罗马规约》第十七条第(一)款第1项，除非法院认定“对案件具有管辖权的国家[…]不愿意或不能够切实进行调查或起诉”，否则法院不受理案件。 |
| Paragraph 2 identifies the circumstances to be taken into account in determining “unwillingness in a particular case”, namely: “(a) The proceedings were or are being undertaken or the national decision was made for the purpose of shielding the person concerned from criminal responsibility for crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court referred to in article 5; | 第(二)款述及在确定“是否有不愿意”时应考虑的情况，即：“1. 已经或正在进行的诉讼程序，或一国所作出的决定，是为了包庇有关的人，使其免负第五条所述的本法院管辖权内的犯罪的刑事责任； |
| (b) There has been an unjustified delay in the proceedings which in the circumstances is inconsistent with an intent to bring the person concerned to justice; | 2. 诉讼程序发生不当延误，而根据实际情况，这种延误不符合将有关的人绳之以法的目的； |
| (c) The proceedings were not or are not being conducted independently or impartially, and they were or are being conducted in a manner which, in the circumstances, is inconsistent with an intent to bring the person concerned to justice.” | 3. 已经或正在进行的诉讼程序，没有以独立或公正的方式进行，而根据实际情况，采用的方式不符合将有关的人绳之以法的目的。” |
| The final proposal considered by the Commission was worded as follows: “4. The competent authorities of the forum State can resume the exercise of their criminal jurisdiction when the competent authorities of the official’s State, after having accepted the transfer, conduct themselves in a manner indicating that: (a) they have no intention to bring the official concerned to justice; | 委员会审议的最终提案内容如下：“4. 法院地国主管当局在下列情况下可恢复行使管辖权：官员所属国主管当局在接受移交的诉讼程序后，其行为表明：(a) 无意将所涉官员绳之以法； |
| (b) they aim at shielding the official concerned from criminal responsibility”. | (b) 旨在免除该官员的刑事责任。” |
| In its judgment of 20 July 2012, the Court stated as follows: “94. The Court considers that Article 7, paragraph 1, requires the State concerned to submit the case to its competent authorities for the purpose of prosecution, irrespective of the existence of a prior request for the extradition of the suspect. | 法院在其2012年7月20日的判决中指出：“94. 法院认为，第7条第1款要求有关国家为起诉目的将案件提交其主管当局，无论是否存在引渡嫌疑人的事先请求。 |
| That is why Article 6, paragraph 2, obliges the State to make a preliminary inquiry immediately from the time that the suspect is present in its territory. | 这就是为什么第6条第2款要求国家在嫌疑人在其领土上时立即进行初步调查。 |
| The obligation to submit the case to the competent authorities, under Article 7, paragraph 1, may or may not result in the institution of proceedings, in the light of the evidence before them, relating to the charges against the suspect. | 第7条第1款规定的将案件提交主管当局的义务，可能会也可能不会导致提起诉讼，这要视提交给主管当局的与对嫌疑人的指控有关的证据。 |
| 95. However, if the State in whose territory the suspect is present has received a request for extradition in any of the cases envisaged in the provisions of the Convention, it can relieve itself of its obligation to prosecute by acceding to that request. | 95. 然而，如果嫌疑人所在的国家在《公约》条款设想的任何情况下收到引渡请求，它可以通过同意这一请求来免除其起诉义务。 |
| It follows that the choice between extradition or submission for prosecution, pursuant to the Convention, does not mean that the two alternatives are to be given the same weight. | 因此，根据《公约》,在引渡或提交起诉之间做出选择，并不意味着对这两种选择给予同等重视。 |
| Extradition is an option offered to the State by the Convention, whereas prosecution is an international obligation under the Convention, the violation of which is a wrongful act engaging the responsibility of the State”. | 引渡是《公约》提供给国家的一种选择，而起诉是《公约》规定的一项国际义务，违反这一义务是一种涉及国家责任的不法行为“。 |
| See Questions relating to the Obligation to Prosecute or Extradite (see footnote 902 above), p. 456, paras. 94–95. | 见与起诉或引渡义务有关的问题案(见上文脚注902)，第456页，第94-95段。 |
| Official Records of the General Assembly, Seventy-fourth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/74/10), paras. 44 and 45, draft articles on prevention and punishment of crimes against humanity, draft article 11 (Fair treatment of the alleged offender) and commentary thereto. | 《大会正式记录，第七十四届会议，补编第10号》(A/74/10)，第44-45段，防止及惩治危害人类罪条款草案，第11条草案(公平对待被指控罪犯)及其评注。 |
| For a list of the rights included in this category, see the seventh report of the Special Rapporteur on immunity of State officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction (A/CN.4/729), paras. 159–168. | 关于属于这一类别的权利清单，见国家官员外国刑事管辖豁免问题特别报告员的第七次报告(A/CN.4/729)，第159-168页。 |
| See A/74/10, pp. 98–101, commentary to draft article 11, in particular para. (7). | 见A/74/10，第98-101页，对第11条草案的评注，特别是第(7)段。 |
| See also seventh report of the Special Rapporteur on immunity of State officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction, A/CN.4/729, chap. IV, sect. A, paras. 159–168. | 另见特别报告员关于国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免的第七次报告，A/CN.4/729，第四章，A节，第159-168段。 |
| Consular assistance has been considered as one of the components of the “fair treatment”. | 领事协助被认为是“公平待遇”的组成部分之一。 |
| See draft articles on prevention and punishment of crimes against humanity, A/74/10, pp. 98–101, commentary to draft article 11, in particular paras. (8) and (9). | 见防止及惩治危害人类罪条款草案，A//74/10，第98-101页，对第11条草案的评注，特别是第(8)和(9)段。 |
| These terms are, consequently, different to the terms used in the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations (“the laws and regulations of the receiving State”) and in draft article 11, paragraph 3, of the draft articles on prevention and punishment of crimes against humanity (“State in the territory under whose jurisdiction the person is present”). | 这些术语因而不同于《维也纳领事关系公约》中所用术语(“接受国法律规章”)和防止及惩治危害人类罪条款草案第11条草案第3款(“该人所在领土管辖国”)所用术语。 |
| See A/74/10, chap. IV, para. 44. | 见A/74/10，第四章，第44段。 |
| See Convention on Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters between the Member States of the Community of Portuguese-speaking Countries, art. 18; | 见《葡萄牙语国家共同体成员国间刑事事项法律援助公约》，第18条； |
| and Model Treaty on Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters, art. 21. | 《刑事事项互助示范条约》，第21条。 |
| United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (Montego Bay, 10 December 1982), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1834, 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1834卷，第31363号，第3页。 |
| Eighth report of the Special Rapporteur on immunity of State officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction (A/CN.4/739), para. 54, draft article 17, para. 3. | 特别报告员关于国家官员的外国刑事管辖豁免的第八次报告(A/CN.4/739)，第54段，第17条草案第3款。 |
| Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, art. II. | 《防止及惩治灭绝种族罪公约》，第二条。 |
| See footnote 930 above. | 见上文脚注930。 |
| See footnote 931 above. | 见上文脚注931。 |
| Yearbook … 1996, vol. II (Part Two), p. 44. | 《1996年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第44页。 |
| International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid, art. I; | 《禁止并惩治种族隔离罪行国际公约》，第一条； |
| and International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance, preamble, fifth paragraph. | 《保护所有人免遭强迫失踪国际公约》，序言第五段。 |
| Yearbook… 1996, vol. II (Part Two), p. 47. | 《1996年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第47页。 |
| See Official Records of the General Assembly, Seventy-fourth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/74/10), pp. 27–47. | 见《大会正式记录，第七十四届会议，补编第10号》(A/74/10)，第27-47页。 |
| Geneva Convention for the Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded and Sick in Armed Forces in the Field of 12 August 1949 (First Geneva Convention), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 75, No. 970, p. 31, art. 50; | 1949年8月12日《改善战地武装部队伤者病者境遇之日内瓦公约》(日内瓦第一公约)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第75卷，第970号，第31页，第五十条； |
| Geneva Convention for the Amelioration of the Condition of Wounded, Sick and Shipwrecked Members of Armed Forces at Sea of 12 August 1949 (Second Geneva Convention), ibid., No. 971, p. 85, art. 51; | 1949年8月12日《改善海上武装部队伤者病者及遇船难者境遇之日内瓦公约》(日内瓦第二公约)，同上，第971号，第85页，第五十一条； |
| Geneva Convention relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War of 12 August 1949 (Third Geneva Convention), ibid., No. 972, p. 135, art. 130; | 1949年8月12日《关于战俘待遇之日内瓦公约》(日内瓦第三公约)，同上，第972号，第135页，第一三〇条； |
| Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War of 12 August 1949 (Fourth Geneva Convention), ibid., No. 973, p. 287, art. 147; | 1949年8月12日《关于战时保护平民之日内瓦公约》(日内瓦第四公约)，同上，第973号，第287页，第一四七条； |
| Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts (Protocol I) (Geneva, 8 June 1977), ibid., vol. 1125, No. 17512, p. 3, art. 85. | 1949年8月12日《日内瓦四公约关于保护国际性武装冲突受难者的附加议定书》(第一议定书)(1977年6月8日，日内瓦)，同上，第1125卷，第17512号，第3页，第八十五条。 |
| Yearbook … 1996, vol. II (Part Two), pp. 53–54. | 《1996年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第53-54页。 |
| Inter-American Convention to Prevent and Punish Torture (Cartagena, Colombia, 9 December 1985), Organization of American States, Treaty Series, No. 67. | 《美洲防止和惩治酷刑公约》(1985年12月9日，哥伦比亚卡塔赫纳)，美洲国家组织，《条约汇编》，第67号。 |
| Inter-American Convention on the Forced Disappearance of Persons (Belem do Pará, Brazil, 9 June 1994), Organization of American States, Official Records, OEA/Ser.A/55. | 《美洲被迫失踪人士公约》(1994年6月9日，巴西贝伦)，美洲国家组织，正式记录，OEA/Ser. A/55。 |
| At its 3354th meeting, on 9 May 2017. | 在2017年5月9日第3354次会议上。 |
| 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)). | 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，委员会第六十八届会议(2016年)已将此专题列入长期工作方案。 |
| A/CN.4/708, A/CN.4/719, A/CN.4/731 and A/CN.4/743 and Corr.1, respectively. | 分别为A/CN.4/708、A/CN.4/719、A/CN.4/731和A/CN.4/743及Corr.1。 |
| A/CN.4/730. | A/CN.4/730. |
| The report and the corresponding statement of the Chair of the Drafting Committee, containing an annex reflecting a consolidated text of all the titles and texts of the draft guidelines on succession of States in respect of State responsibility worked out by the Drafting Committee thus far, are available in the online analytical guide to the work of the International Law Commission. | 该报告和起草委员会主席的相应声明载有一个附件，反映了起草委员会迄今为止拟订的关于国家责任方面的国家继承的指南草案的所有标题和案文，这些可查阅在线的国际法委员会工作分析指南。 |
| For the ease of reference, the previously adopted draft articles revised to the form of draft guidelines are reproduced below. | 为便于参考，先前通过的、形式已修改为指南草案的条款草案案文载录如下。 |
| The numbering reflects the omission of draft articles 3 and 4, proposed by the Special Rapporteur in his first report (2017) and pending in the Drafting Committee until 2022: | 特别报告员在第一次报告(2017年)中提出的、至2022年仍待起草委员会处理的第3和第4条草案在编号中留空： |
| Guideline 1 | 指南1 |
| Scope | 范围 |
| 1. | 1. |
| The present draft guidelines concern the effects of a succession of States in respect of the responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts. | 本指南草案涉及国家对国际不法行为的责任方面国家继承的效果。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| The present draft guidelines apply in the absence of any different solution agreed upon by the States concerned. | 本指南草案在有关国家未商定任何不同解决办法的情况下适用。 |
| Guideline 2 | 指南2 |
| Use of terms | 用语 |
| For the purposes of the present draft guidelines: | 为本指南草案的目的： |
| (a) | (a) |
| “succession of States” means the replacement of one State by another in the responsibility for the international relations of territory; | “国家继承”指一国对领土的国际关系所负责任由另一国取代； |
| (b) | (b) |
| “predecessor State” means the State which has been replaced by another State on the occurrence of a succession of States; | “被继承国”指发生国家继承时被另一国取代的国家； |
| (c) | (c) |
| “successor State” means the State which has replaced another State on the occurrence of a succession of States; | “继承国”指发生国家继承时取代另一国的国家； |
| (d) | (d) |
| “date of the succession of States” means the date upon which the successor State replaced the predecessor State in the responsibility for the international relations of the territory to which the succession of States relates; | “国家继承日期”指在国家继承所涉领土的国际关系责任方面被继承国由继承国取代的日期； |
| Guideline 5 | 指南5 |
| Cases of succession of States covered by the present draft guidelines | 本指南草案所涵盖的国家继承情况 |
| The present draft guidelines concern only 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. | 本指南草案只涉及依照国际法尤其是《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。 |
| Guideline 7 | 指南7 |
| Acts having a continuing character | 具有持续性的行为 |
| When an internationally wrongful act of a successor State is of a continuing character in relation to an internationally wrongful act of a predecessor State, the international responsibility of the successor State extends only to the consequences of its own act after the date of the succession of States. | 继承国的国际不法行为相对于被继承国的国际不法行为具有持续性时，继承国的国际责任仅延伸至国家继承日期之后其本身行为的后果。 |
| If and to the extent that the successor State acknowledges and adopts the act of the predecessor State as its own, the international responsibility of the successor State also extends to the consequences of such act. | 在并且只在继承国承认被继承国的行为并认作自己的行为的情况下，继承国的国际责任也延伸至这种行为的后果。 |
| Guideline 8 | 指南8 |
| Attribution of conduct of an insurrectional or other movement | 叛乱运动或其他运动的行为归属 |
| 1. | 1. |
| 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 is considered an act of the new State under international law. | 成功地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，依国际法视为该新国家的行为。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| Paragraph 1 is without prejudice to the attribution to the predecessor State of any conduct, however related to that of the movement concerned, which is to be considered an act of that State by virtue of the rules on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts. | 第1段不妨碍把按照国家对国际不法行为的责任规则应视为被继承国行为的任何行为归于被继承国，无论该行为与有关运动的行为如何相关。 |
| Guideline 9 | 指南9 |
| Cases of succession of States when the predecessor State continues to exist | 被继承国继续存在时的国家继承情况 |
| 1. | 1. |
| When an internationally wrongful act has been committed by a predecessor State before the date of succession of States, and the predecessor State continues to exist, an injured State continues to be entitled to invoke the responsibility of the predecessor State even after the date of succession: | 被继承国在国家继承日期之前实施了一项国际不法行为，并且被继承国继续存在时，受害国在下列情况下，即使在继承日期之后仍有权援引被继承国的责任： |
| (a) | (a) |
| when part of the territory of the predecessor State, or any territory for the international relations of which the predecessor State is responsible, becomes part of the territory of another State; | 被继承国的一部分领土或由被继承国负责其国际关系的任何领土成为另一国领土的一部分； |
| (b) | (b) |
| when a part or parts of the territory of the predecessor State separate to form one or more States; | 被继承国领土的一部分或多个部分分离出来形成一个或多个国家； |
| or | 或 |
| (c) | (c) |
| when a successor State is a newly independent State the territory of which immediately before the date of the succession of States was a dependent territory for the international relations of which the predecessor State was responsible. | 继承国是新独立国家，其领土在国家继承日期之前原是由被继承国负责其国际关系的附属领土。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| In particular circumstances, the injured State and the successor State should endeavour to reach an agreement for addressing the injury. | 在特定情况下，受害国和继承国应努力达成处理损害的协定。 |
| 3. | 3. |
| Paragraphs 1 and 2 are without prejudice to any apportionment or other agreement between the predecessor State and the successor State when implementing paragraphs 1 and 2. | 第1和第2段不妨碍被继承国和继承国之间在执行第1和第2段时的任何分摊或其他协定。 |
| A. Nollkaemper et al., “Guiding Principles on Shared Responsibility in International Law”, European Journal of International Law, vol. 31 (2020), pp. 15–72. | A. Nollkaemper et al., “Guiding Principles on Shared Responsibility in International Law”, European Journal of International Law, vol. 31 (2020), pp. 15-72. |
| See Yearbook … 2001, vol. II (Part Two) and corrigendum, paras. 76–77. | 见《2001年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)及更正，第76-77页。 |
| See also General Assembly resolution 56/83 of 12 December 2001, annex. | 另见联大2001年12月12日第56/83号决议，附件。 |
| Yearbook of Institute of International Law, Tallinn Session, vol. 76 (2015), p. 711, at p. 715. | Yearbook of Institute of International Law, Tallinn Session, vol. 76 (2015), p. 711, at p. 715. |
| Yearbook of the International Law Commission, 2014, vol. II (Part Two), para. 65. | 《2014年国际法委员会年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第65段。 |
| Informal consultations on the final form of the work on the present topic were held on 19 May 2022. | 2022年5月19日，就本专题工作的最终形式进行了非正式磋商。 |
| For the commentary to this draft article, see A/74/10, para. 118. | 本条草案的评注见A/74/10，第118段。 |
| The commentary should be read in light of the changes of draft articles to draft guidelines, where appropriate. | 条款草案已改为指南草案，阅读评注时应酌情考虑到这些改动。 |
| For the commentary to this draft article, see ibid. | 本条草案的评注，见同上。 |
| The commentary should be read in light of the changes of draft articles to draft guidelines, where appropriate. | 条款草案已改为指南草案，阅读评注时应酌情考虑到这些改动。 |
| For the commentary to this draft article, see ibid. | 本条草案的评注，见同上。 |
| The commentary should be read in light of the change of draft articles to draft guidelines, where appropriate. | 条款草案已改为指南草案，阅读评注时应酌情考虑到这些改动。 |
| For the commentary to this draft article, see A/76/10, para. 165. | 本条草案的评注见A/76/10，第165段。 |
| The commentary should be read in light of the changes of draft articles to draft guidelines, where appropriate. | 条款草案已改为指南草案，阅读评注时应酌情考虑到这些改动。 |
| For the commentary to this draft article, see ibid. | 本条草案的评注，见同上。 |
| The commentary should be read in light of the changes of draft articles to draft guidelines, where appropriate. | 条款草案已改为指南草案，阅读评注时应酌情考虑到这些改动。 |
| For the commentary to this draft article, see ibid. | 本条草案的评注，见同上。 |
| The commentary should be read in light of the change of draft articles to draft guidelines, where appropriate. | 条款草案已改为指南草案，阅读评注时应酌情考虑到这些改动。 |
| Yearbook … 2001, vol. II (Part Two) and corrigendum, para. 76, p. 26 (“Every internationally wrongful act of a State entails the international responsibility of that State.”). | 《2001年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)和更正，第76段，第26页(“一国的每一国际不法行为引起该国的国际责任。”)。 |
| See also General Assembly resolution 56/83 of 12 December 2001, annex. | 另见联大2001年12月12日第56/83号决议，附件。 |
| Ibid. | 同上。 |
| See Yearbook … 2001, vol. II (Part Two) and corrigendum, paras. 76–77. | 见《2001年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)和更正，第76-77段。 |
| See also General Assembly resolution 56/83 of 12 December 2001, annex. | 另见联大2001年12月12日第56/83号决议，附件。 |
| See article 15 of the articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts, Yearbook … 2001, vol. II (Part Two) and corrigendum, para. 76, p. 27. | 见国家对国际不法行为的责任条款第15条，《2001年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)和更正，第76段，第27页。 |
| Zaklan v. Croatia, No. 57239/13, European Court of Human Rights, 16 December 2021, paras. 85–86. | Zaklan v. Croatia, No. 57239/13, European Court of Human Rights, 16 December 2021, paras. 85-86. |
| Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros Project (Hungary/Slovakia), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1997, p. 7, at p. 81, paras. 151–152. | 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81页，第151-152段。 |
| See paras. (3) and (5) of commentary to article 15, Yearbook … 2001, vol. II (Part Two) and corrigendum, para. 77, at pp. 62–63. | 第15条评注第(3)和(5)段，《2001年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)和更正，第77段，见第62-63页。 |
| 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. 58 and 129, paras. 117 and 442. | 《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，见第58和129页，第117和442段。 |
| See art. 31 of the Vienna Convention on Succession of States in respect of Treaties (Vienna, 23 August 1978), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1946, No. 33356, p. 3. | 见《关于国家在条约方面的继承的维也纳公约》第三十一条 (1978年8月23日，维也纳)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第1946卷，第33356号，第3页。 |
| Yearbook … 1999, vol. II (Part Two), para. 48, at pp. 41–42. | 《1999年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第48段，见第41-42页。 |
| Railway Traffic between Lithuania and Poland, Advisory Opinion, 1931, P.C.I.J., Series A/B, No. 42, p. 116. | 立陶宛和波兰之间铁路交通，咨询意见，《1931年常设国际法院案例汇编》，A/B辑，第42号，第116页。 |
| 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 p. 685, para. 132. | 1995年9月13日《临时协议》的适用案(前南斯拉夫的马其顿共和国诉希腊)，2011年12月5日判决，《2011年国际法院案例汇编》，第644页起，见第685页，第132段。 |
| Greece v. the Federal Republic of Germany, Arbitral Award of 26 January 1972, paras. 62–65: “However, a pactum de negotiando is also not without legal consequences. | Greece v. the Federal Republic of Germany, Arbitral Award of 26 January 1972, paras. 62-65: “然而，谈判契约也并非没有法律后果。 |
| It means that both sides would make an effort, in good faith, to bring about a mutually satisfactory solution by way of a compromise, even if that meant the relinquishment of strongly held positions earlier taken.” | 这意味着双方将真诚地作出努力，以妥协的方式达成双方满意的解决办法，即使这意味着放弃先前采取的坚定立场。 ” |
| Vienna Convention on Succession of States in respect of State Property, Archives and Debts (Vienna, 8 April 1983, not yet in force), United Nations, Juridical Yearbook 1983 (United Nations publication, Sales No. E.90.V.1), p. 139. | 《关于国家对国家财产、档案和债务的继承的维也纳公约》(1983年4月8日，维也纳，尚未生效)，联合国，《1983年法律年鉴》(联合国出版物，出售品编号E.90.V.1)，第139页。 |
| Yearbook … 2001, vol. II (Part Two) and corrigendum, para. 76, pp. 29–30. | 《2001年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)和更正，第76段，第29-30页。 |
| This was, for example, the case with the secession of Pakistan from India in 1947. | 例如，1947年巴基斯坦脱离印度的情况就是如此。 |
| The British Dominion of India had been party to the 1946 Agreement on Reparation from Germany, on the Establishment of an Inter-Allied Reparation Agency and on the Restitution of Monetary Gold, the purpose of which was the equitable distribution of the total assets available as reparation from Germany among several injured States. | 英属印度是1946年《关于德国赔款、设立联盟内部赔款机构和归还货币黄金的协定》的缔约方，该协定的目的是在几个受害国之间公平分配以德国赔款为形式的可用总资产。 |
| See Agreement on Reparation from Germany, on the Establishment of an Inter-Allied Reparation Agency and on the Restitution of Monetary Gold, done at Paris on 14 January 1946 (United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 555, No. 8105, p. 69). | 《关于德国赔款、设立联盟内部赔款机构和归还货币黄金的协定》，1946年1月14日订于巴黎 (联合国，《条约汇编》，第555卷，第8105号，第69页)。 |
| The Governments of India and Pakistan agreed in January 1948 on how to divide the share of reparations allocated to India under the 1946 Agreement. | 印度和巴基斯坦两国政府于1948年1月商定了如何划分根据1946年《协定》分配给印度的赔款。 |
| This bilateral agreement led to the conclusion of an additional Protocol to the 1946 Agreement. | 经双方同意，缔结了1946年《协定》的一项《补充议定书》。 |
| See Protocol attached to the Paris Agreement of 14 January 1946 on Reparation from Germany, on the Establishment of an Inter-Allied Reparation Agency and on the Restitution of Monetary Gold, signed at Brussels on 15 March 1948 (ibid., p. 104). | 见《关于德国赔款、设立联盟内部赔款机构和归还货币黄金的1946年1月14日巴黎协定的所附议定书》，1948年3月15日在布鲁塞尔签署 (同上，第104页)。 |
| See, for example, para. (5) of the commentary to article 1, Yearbook … 2001, vol. II (Part Two) and corrigendum, p. 33. | 例如见第1条评注第(5)段，《2001年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)和更正，第33页。 |
| Art. 22: General Assembly resolution 55/153 of 12 December 2000, annex. | 第22条：联大2000年12月12日第55/153号决议，附件。 |
| The articles and the commentaries thereto are reproduced in Yearbook … 1999, vol. II (Part Two), paras. 47–48. | 条款草案及其评注载于《1999年…年鉴》第二卷(第二部分)，第47-48段。 |
| See art. 15, para. 1, of the Institute of International Law resolution on State succession in matters of international responsibility: Institute of International Law, Yearbook, vol. 76, Session of Tallinn (2015), “State succession in matters of international responsibility”, Fourteenth Commission, Rapporteur: Marcelo Kohen, p. 509, resolution, p. 711. | 见国际法学会关于国际责任事项上的国家继承的决议第15条第1款：Institute of International Law, Yearbook, vol. 76, Session of Tallinn (2015), “State succession in matters of international responsibility”, Fourteenth Commission, Rapporteur: Marcelo Kohen, p. 509, resolution, p. 711。 |
| Available from https://idi-iil.org/app/uploads/2017/06/05-Kohen-succession.pdf. | 可查阅https://idi-iil.org/app/uploads/2017/06/05-Kohen-succession.pdf. |
| Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros Project (Hungary/Slovakia), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1997, p. 7, at pp. 71–72 and 81, paras. 123 and 151. | 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71-72和81页，第123和151段。 |
| United Nations Compensation Commission, Decision concerning the first instalment of claims for serious personal injury or death (category “B” claims) taken by the Governing Council of the United Nations Compensation Commission at its 43rd meeting, held on 26 May 1994 in Geneva (Decision 20) and Decision concerning the first instalment of claims for departure from Iraq or Kuwait (category “A” claims) taken by the Governing Council of the United Nations Compensation Commission at its 46th meeting, held on 20 October 1994 in Geneva (Decision 22): see documents S/AC.26/Dec.20 (1994), para. 3, footnote 2 (“The claims were initially submitted by the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic. | 联合国赔偿委员会，联合国赔偿委员会理事会在1994年5月26日在日内瓦举行的第43次会议上针对关于严重人身伤害或死亡(“B”类索赔要求)的第一批索赔要求采取的决定(第20号决定)和联合国赔偿委员会理事会1994年10月20日在日内瓦举行的第46次会议上所作关于离开伊拉克或科威特的第一批索赔要求(“A”类索赔要求)的决定(第22号决定)：见S/AC.26/Dec.20 (1994)号文件，第3段，脚注 2(“索赔要求最初由捷克和斯洛伐克联邦共和国提交。 |
| The award of compensation is to be paid to the Government of the Slovak Republic.”) and S/AC.26/Dec.22 (1994), para. 2, footnote 2 (“These claims were submitted before the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic ceased to exist. | 赔偿金将付给斯洛伐克共和国政府。 ”)和S/AC.26/Dec.22 (1994)号文件，第2段，脚注 2(“这些索赔要求在捷克和斯洛伐克联邦共和国停止存在之前提交。 |
| Awards of compensation are to be paid to the Governments of the Czech Republic and the Slovak Republic, respectively. | 赔偿金须分别付给捷克共和国和斯洛伐克共和国政府。 |
| ”). | ”)。 |
| Decisions of the Governing Council are available at https://uncc.ch/decisions-governing-council. | 理事会的决定可查阅https://uncc.ch/decisions-governing-council. |
| Article 44: “The responsibility of a State may not be invoked if: (a) the claim is not brought in accordance with any applicable rule relating to the nationality of claims”. | 第44条：“在下列情况下不得援引另一国的责任：(a) 不是按照涉及国籍的任何可适用的规则提出要求”。 |
| As expressed in the Permanent Court of International Justice, Mavrommatis Palestine Concessions, Judgment No. 2, 1924, P.C.I.J., Series A, No. 2, p. 12. | 见常设国际法院，马夫罗马蒂斯在巴勒斯坦特许权案，1924年第2号判决，《常设国际法院案例汇编》，A辑，第2号，第12页。 |
| See General Assembly resolution 62/67, annex, of 6 December 2007. | 见联大2007年12月6日第62/67号决议，附件。 |
| The articles adopted by the Commission and the commentaries thereto are reproduced in Yearbook … 2006, vol. II (Part Two), paras. 49–50. | 委员会通过的条款草案及其评注载于《2006年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第49-50段。 |
| Yearbook … 2006, vol. II (Part Two), para. 50, at pp. 31–33. | 《2006年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第50段，见第31-33页。 |
| Para. (7) of the commentary to article 5, ibid., p. 32. | 第5条评注第(7)段，同上，第32页。 |
| Para. (10) of the commentary to article 5, ibid. | 第5条评注第(10)段，同上。 |
| Seed also articles 23 and 26 of the articles on nationality of natural persons in relation to the succession of States, Yearbook … 1999, vol. II (Part Two), pp. 43–47. | 另见国家继承涉及的自然人国籍问题条款第23和第26条，《1999年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第43-47页。 |
| Yearbook … 2001, vol. II (Part Two) and corrigendum, p. 88. | 《2001年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)和更正，第88页。 |
| Ibid. | 同上。 |
| Case concerning the difference between New Zealand and France concerning the interpretation or application of two agreements, concluded on 9 July 1986 between the two States and which related to the problems arising from the Rainbow Warrior Affair, Decision, 30 April 1990, Reports of International Arbitral Awards (UNRIAA), vol. XX (1990), pp. 215–264, at p. 270, para. 114. | 关于新西兰和法国在1986年7月9日两国缔结的涉及“彩虹勇士”号事件产生的问题的两项协议的解释或适用上的分歧的案件，决定，1990年4月30日，《国际仲裁裁决汇编》，第二十卷(1990年)，第215-264页，见第270页，第114段。 |
| The interim report of the Chair of the Drafting Committee is available under the analytical guide to the work of the International Law Commission: http://legal.un.org/ilc/guide/1_15.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/1_15.shtml. |
| Official Records of the General Assembly, Seventy-sixth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/76/10), paras. 169–172 and 238–239. | 《大会正式记录，第七十六届会议，补编第10号》(A/76/10)，第169-172段和第238-239段。 |
| See also A/CN.4/L.955 and Add.1. | 另见A/CN.4/L.955和Add.1。 |
| The draft conclusions proposed by the Special Rapporteur in his third report read as follows: | 报告员在第三次报告中提出的结论草案如下： |
| Draft conclusion 10 | 结论草案10 |
| Absence of hierarchy between the sources of international law | 国际法渊源之间不存在位阶关系 |
| General principles of law are not in a hierarchical relationship with treaties and customary international law. | 一般法律原则与条约和习惯国际法不存在位阶关系。 |
| Draft conclusion 11 | 结论草案11 |
| Parallel existence | 并行存在 |
| General principles of law may exist in parallel with treaty and customary rules with identical or analogous content. | 一般法律原则可与具有相同或类似内容的条约和习惯规则并行存在。 |
| Draft conclusion 12 | 结论草案12 |
| Lex specialis principle | 特别法原则 |
| The relationship of general principles of law with rules of the other sources of international law addressing the same subject matter is governed by the lex specialis principle. | 一般法律原则与处理同一事项的其他国际法渊源的规则之间的关系受特别法原则的制约。 |
| Draft conclusion 13 | 结论草案13 |
| Gap-filling | 填补空白 |
| The essential function of general principles of law is to fill gaps that may exist in treaties and customary international law. | 一般法律原则的基本功能是填补条约和习惯国际法中可能存在的空白。 |
| Draft conclusion 14 | 结论草案14 |
| Specific functions of general principles of law | 一般法律原则的特定功能 |
| General principles of law may serve, inter alia: | 除其他外，一般法律原则可发挥以下功能： |
| (a) | (a) |
| as an independent basis for rights and obligations; | 作为权利和义务的独立依据； |
| (b) | (b) |
| to interpret and complement other rules of international law; | 解释和补充其他国际法规则； |
| (c) | (c) |
| to ensure the coherence of the international legal system. | 确保国际法体系的一致性。 |
| Draft conclusion 1 | 结论草案1 |
| Scope | 范围 |
| The present draft conclusions concern general principles of law as a source of international law. | 本结论草案涉及作为国际法渊源的一般法律原则。 |
| Draft conclusion 2 | 结论草案2 |
| Recognition | 承认 |
| For a general principle of law to exist, it must be recognized by the community of nations. | 一般法律原则须为各国承认才会存在。 |
| Draft conclusion 3 | 结论草案3 |
| Categories of general principles of law | 一般法律原则的类别 |
| General principles of law comprise those: | 一般法律原则包括： |
| (a) | (a) |
| that are derived from national legal systems; | 源自国家法律体系的原则； |
| (b) | (b) |
| that may be formed within the international legal system. | 可在国际法律体系内形成的原则。 |
| Draft conclusion 4 | 结论草案4 |
| Identification of general principles of law derived from national legal systems | 识别源自国家法律体系的一般法律原则 |
| To determine the existence and content of a general principle of law derived from national legal systems, it is necessary to ascertain: | 要确定源自国家法律体系的一般法律原则的存在及内容，有必要查明： |
| (a) | (a) |
| the existence of a principle common to the various legal systems of the world; and | 存在一项世界各法律体系共有的原则； |
| (b) | (b) |
| its transposition to the international legal system. | 其被移植到国际法律体系内。 |
| Draft conclusion 5 | 结论草案5 |
| Determination of the existence of a principle common to the various legal systems of the world | 确定一项世界各法律体系共有的原则的存在 |
| 1. | 1. |
| To determine the existence of a principle common to the various legal systems of the world, a comparative analysis of national legal systems is required. | 要确定一项世界各法律体系共有的原则的存在，需要对各国法律体系进行比较分析。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| The comparative analysis must be wide and representative, including the different regions of the world. | 比较分析必须广泛且有代表性，包括世界不同区域。 |
| 3. | 3. |
| The comparative analysis includes an assessment of national laws and decisions of national courts, and other relevant materials. | 比较分析包括对国家法律和国家法院所作判决的评估，以及其他相关材料。 |
| Draft conclusion 6 | 结论草案6 |
| Determination of transposition to the international legal system | 确定被移植到国际法律体系内 |
| A principle common to the various legal systems of the world may be transposed to the international legal system in so far as it is compatible with that system. | 一项世界各法律体系共有的原则在与国际法律体系相容的限度内，可移植到该体系内。 |
| Draft conclusion 7 | 结论草案7 |
| Identification of general principles of law formed within the international legal system | 识别在国际法律体系内形成的一般法律原则 |
| 1. | 1. |
| To determine the existence and content of a general principle of law that may be formed within the international legal system, it is necessary to ascertain that the community of nations has recognised the principle as intrinsic to the international legal system. | 要确定可能在国际法律体系内形成的一般法律原则的存在及内容，有必要查明各国已承认该原则是国际法律体系固有的原则。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| Paragraph 1 is without prejudice to the question of the possible existence of other general principles of law formed within the international legal system. | 第1段不影响可能存在着国际法律体系内形成的其他一般法律原则的问题。 |
| Draft conclusion 8 | 结论草案8 |
| Decisions of courts and tribunals | 法院和法庭的判决 |
| 1. | 1. |
| Decisions of international courts and tribunals, in particular of the International Court of Justice, concerning the existence and content of general principles of law are a subsidiary means for the determination of such principles. | 国际性法院和法庭特别是国际法院涉及一般法律原则的存在及内容的判决是确定此类原则的辅助手段。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| Regard may be had, as appropriate, to decisions of national courts concerning the existence and content of general principles of law, as a subsidiary means for the determination of such principles. | 可酌情考虑将各国法院涉及一般法律原则的存在及内容的判决用作确定此类原则的辅助手段。 |
| Draft conclusion 9 | 结论草案9 |
| Teachings | 学说 |
| Teachings of the most highly qualified publicists of the various nations may serve as a subsidiary means for the determination of general principles of law. | 各国最权威的国际法专家的学说可用作确定一般法律原则的辅助手段。 |
| Draft conclusion 10 | 结论草案10 |
| Functions of general principles of law | 一般法律原则的功能 |
| 1. | 1. |
| General principles of law are mainly resorted to when other rules of international law do not resolve a particular issue in whole or in part. | 当其他国际法规则不能全部或部分解决某一特定问题时，主要求助于一般法律原则。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| General principles of law contribute to the coherence of the international legal system. | 一般法律原则有利于国际法律体系的一致性。 |
| They may serve, inter alia: | 一般法律原则尤其具有以下功能： |
| (a) | (a) |
| to interpret and complement other rules of international law; | 用以解释和补充其他国际法规则； |
| (b) | (b) |
| as a basis for primary rights and obligations, as well as a basis for secondary and procedural rules. | 用作主要权利和义务的依据，以及用作次要和程序性规则的依据。 |
| Draft conclusion 11 | 结论草案11 |
| Relationship between general principles of law and treaties and customary international law | 一般法律原则与条约和习惯国际法的关系 |
| 1. | 1. |
| General principles of law, as a source of international law, are not in a hierarchical relationship with treaties and customary international law. | 作为国际法渊源的一般法律原则与条约和习惯国际法不存在位阶关系。 |
| 2. | 2. |
| A general principle of law may exist in parallel with a rule of the same or similar content in a treaty or customary international law. | 一般法律原则可与条约或习惯国际法中具有相同或类似内容的规则并行存在。 |
| 3. | 3. |
| Any conflict between a general principle of law and a rule in a treaty or customary international law is to be resolved by applying the generally accepted techniques of interpretation and conflict resolution in international law. | 对于一般法律原则与条约或习惯国际法中的规则之间的任何冲突，应适用国际法中公认的解释和冲突解决方法予以解决。 |
| 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. 38, para. 56. | 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38页，第56段。 |
| See, for example, the Fabiani case (1896) (in H. La Fontaine, Pasicrisie internationale 1794–1900: Histoire documentaire des arbitrages internationaux (Berlin, Stämpfli, 1902), p. 356); | 例如见the Fabiani case (1896) (in H. La Fontaine, Pasicrisie internationale 1794-1900: Histoire documentaire des arbitrages internationaux (Berlin, Stämpfli, 1902), p. 356)； |
| Affaire de l’indemnité russe (Russie, Turquie), Award of 11 November 1912, Reports of International Arbitral Awards (UNRIAA), vol. XI, pp. 421–447, at p. 445; | 俄罗斯赔偿案(俄罗斯、土耳其)，1912年11月11日裁决，《国际仲裁裁决汇编》，第十一卷，第421-447页，见第445页； |
| Corfu Channel case, Judgment of 9 April 1949: I.C.J. Reports 1949, p. 4, at p. 18; | 科孚海峡案，1949年4月9日的判决：《1949年国际法院案例汇编》，第4页起，见第18页； |
| International Court of Justice, South West Africa, Second Phase, Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1966, p. 6, para. 88; | 国际法院，西南非洲案(第二阶段)，判决，《1966年国际法院案例汇编》，第6页，第88段； |
| Argentine-Chile Frontier Case, Award of 9 December 1966, UNRIAA, vol. XVI, pp. 109–182, at p. 164; | 阿根廷－智利边境案，1966年12月9日裁决，《国际仲裁裁决汇编》，第十六卷，第109-182页，见第164页； |
| International Court of Justice, Barcelona Traction, Light and Power Company, Limited, Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1970, p. 3, at p. 38, para. 50; | 国际法院，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38页，第50段； |
| Iran-United States Claims Tribunal, Sea-Land Service, Inc. v. Iran, Award No. 135-33-1, 20 June 1984, Iran-United States Claims Tribunal Reports (IUSCTR), vol. 6, pp. 149 et seq., at p. 168; | Iran–United States Claims Tribunal, Sea-Land Service, Inc. v. Iran, Award No. 135-33-1, 20 June 1984, Iran–United States Claims Tribunal Reports (IUSCTR), vol. 6, pp. 149 et seq., at p. 168; |
| Iran-United States Claims Tribunal, Questech, Inc. v. Iran, Award No. 191-59-1, 25 September 1985, IUSCTR, vol. 9, pp. 107 et seq., at p. 122; | Iran–United States Claims Tribunal, Questech, Inc. v. Iran, Award No. 191-59-1, 25 September 1985, IUSCTR, vol. 9, pp. 107 et seq., at p. 122; |
| Inter-American Court of Human Rights, Aloeboetoe et al. v. Suriname, Judgment (Reparations and Costs), 10 September 1993, Series C, No. 15, para. 50; | Inter-American Court of Human Rights, Aloeboetoe et al. v. Suriname, Judgment (Reparations and Costs), 10 September 1993, Series C, No. 15, para. 50; |
| International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, Prosecutor v. Duško Tadić, No. IT-94-1-A, Judgment, 15 July 1999, Appeals Chamber, para. 225; | International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, Prosecutor v. Duško Tadić, No. IT-94-1-A, Judgment, 15 July 1999, Appeals Chamber, para. 225; |
| Prosecutor v. Zejnil Delalić et al., No. IT-96-21-A, Judgment, 20 February 2001, Appeals Chamber, para. 179; | Prosecutor v. Zejnil Delalić et al., No. IT-96-21-A, Judgment, 20 February 2001, Appeals Chamber, para. 179; |
| World Trade Organization, Appellate Body, United States – Tax Treatment for “Foreign Sales Corporations”, Appellate Body Report, 14 January 2002 (WT/DS108/AB/RW), paras. 142–143; | World Trade Organization, Appellate Body, United States – Tax Treatment for “Foreign Sales Corporations”, Appellate Body Report, 14 January 2002 (WT/DS108/AB/RW), paras. 142-143; |
| Germany, Constitutional Court, Judgment, 4 September 2004 (2 BvR 1475/07), para. 20; | Germany, Constitutional Court, Judgment, 4 September 2004 (2 BvR 1475/07), para. 20; |
| Permanent Court of Arbitration, Award in the Arbitration regarding the delimitation of the Abyei Area between the Government of Sudan and the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement/Army, Case No. 2008-7, Award, 22 July 2009, UNRIAA, vol. XXX, pp. 145–416, at p. 299, para. 401; | 常设仲裁法院，关于苏丹政府与苏丹人民解放运动/解放军之间阿卜耶伊地区划界的仲裁裁决，案件编号2008-7，裁决，2009年7月22日，《国际仲裁裁决汇编》，第三十卷，第145-416页，见第299页，第401段； |
| International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes, El Paso Energy International Company v. The Argentine Republic, Case No. ARB/03/15, Award, 31 October 2011, para. 622; | International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes, El Paso Energy International Company v. The Argentine Republic, Case No. ARB/03/15, Award, 31 October 2011, para. 622; |
| Philippines, Supreme Court, Mary Grace Natividad S. Poe-Llamanzares v. COMELEC, Decision of 8 March 2016 (G.R. No. 221697; | Philippines, Supreme Court, Mary Grace Natividad S. Poe-Llamanzares v. COMELEC, Decision of 8 March 2016 (G.R. No. 221697; |
| G.R. Nos. 221698-700), pp. 19, 21. | G.R. Nos. 221698-700), pp. 19, 21。 |
| See, for example, B. Cheng, General Principles of Law as Applied by International Courts and Tribunals (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1953/2006), p. 25; | 例如见B. Cheng, General Principles of Law as Applied by International Courts and Tribunals (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1953/2006), p. 25; |
| G. Abi-Saab, “Cours général de droit international public”, in Collected Courses of the Hague Academy of International Law, vol. 207 (1987), pp. 188–189; | G. Abi-Saab, “Cours général de droit international public”, in Collected Courses of the Hague Academy of International Law, vol. 207 (1987), pp. 188-189; |
| J. A. Barberis, “Los Principios Generales de Derecho como Fuente del Derecho Internacional”, Revista IIDH, vol. 14 (1991), pp. 11–41, at pp. 30–31; | J. A. Barberis, “Los Principios Generales de Derecho como Fuente del Derecho Internacional”, Revista IIDH, vol. 14 (1991), pp. 11-41, at pp. 30-31; |
| R. Jennings and A. Watts, Oppenheim’s International Law, vol. I, 9th ed. (Longman, 1996), pp. 36–37; | R. Jennings and A. Watts, Oppenheim’s International Law, vol. I, 9th ed. (Longman, 1996), pp. 36-37; |
| S. Yee, “Article 38 of the ICJ Statute and applicable law: selected issues in recent cases”, Journal of International Dispute Settlement, vol. 7 (2016), pp. 472–498, at p. 487; | S. Yee, “Article 38 of the ICJ Statute and applicable law: selected issues in recent cases”, Journal of International Dispute Settlement, vol. 7 (2016), pp. 472-498, at p. 487; |
| P. Palchetti, “The role of general principles in promoting the development of customary international rules”, in M. Andenas et al. (eds.), General Principles and the Coherence of International Law (Leiden, Brill, 2019), pp. 47–59, at p. 48; | P. Palchetti, “The role of general principles in promoting the development of customary international rules”, in M. Andenas et al. (eds.), General Principles and the Coherence of International Law (Leiden, Brill, 2019), pp. 47-59, at p. 48; |
| Pellet and D. Müller, “Article 38”, in A. Zimmermann et al. (eds.), The Statute of the International Court of Justice: A Commentary, 3rd ed. (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2019), p. 925. | Pellet and D. Müller, “Article 38”, in A. Zimmermann et al. (eds.), The Statute of the International Court of Justice: A Commentary, 3rd ed. (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2019), p. 925。 |
| Permanent Court of International Justice, Advisory Committee of Jurists, Procès-verbaux of the Proceedings of the Committee, June 16th – July 24th 1920 (The Hague, Van Langenhuysen Bros., 1920), pp. 331–336. | 常设国际法院，法学家咨询委员会，《委员会议事录，1920年6月16日至7月24日》(1920年，海牙，Van Langenhuysen Bros.)，第331-336页。 |
| See, for example, International Court of Justice, Corfu Channel case (see previous footnote), p. 22; | 例如见国际法院，科孚海峡案 (见前注)，第22页； |
| International Court of Justice, Reservations to the Convention on Genocide, Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 1951, p. 15, at p. 23; | 国际法院，对《防止及惩治灭绝种族罪公约》提出的保留，咨询意见，《1951年国际法院案例汇编》，第15页起，见第23页； |
| International Court of Justice, Case of the Monetary Gold Removed from Rome in 1943 (Preliminary Question), Judgment of June 15th, 1954, I.C.J. Reports 1954, p. 19, at p. 32; | 国际法院，1943年从罗马运走的货币黄金案(初步问题)，1954年6月15日的判决，《1954年国际法院案例汇编》，第19页起，见第32页； |
| International Court of Justice, Frontier Dispute, Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1986, p. 554, at p. 565, paras. 20–21; | 国际法院，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20-21段； |
| International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, Prosecutor v. Anto Furundžija, No. IT-95-17/1-T, Judgment, Trial Chamber, 10 December 1998 (IT-95-17/1-T), para. 183; | International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, Prosecutor v. Anto Furundžija, No. IT-95-17/1-T, Judgment, Trial Chamber, 10 December 1998 (IT-95-17/1-T), para. 183; |
| International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, Prosecutor v. Zoran Kupreškić et al., No. IT-95-16-T, Judgment, Trial Chamber, 14 January 2000, para. 738. | International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, Prosecutor v. Zoran Kupreškić et al., No. IT-95-16-T, Judgment, Trial Chamber, 14 January 2000, para. 738。 |
| See, for example, L. Siorat, Le problème des lacunes en droit International : Contribution à l’étude des sources du droit et de la fonction judiciaire (Paris, Librairie générale de droit et de jurisprudence, 1958), p. 286 ; | 例如见L. Siorat, Le problème des lacunes en droit International : Contribution à l’étude des sources du droit et de la fonction judiciaire (Paris, Librairie générale de droit et de jurisprudence, 1958), p. 286 ; |
| J.G. Lammers, “General principles of law recognized by civilized nations”, in F. Kalshoven, P.J. Kuyper and J.G. Lammers (eds.), Essays on the Development of the International Legal Order in Memory of Haro F. van Panhuys (Alphen aa den Rijn, Sijthoff & Noordhoff, 1980), pp. 53–75, at p. 67; | J. G. Lammers, “General principles of law recognized by civilized nations”, in F. Kalshoven, P.J. Kuyper and J.G. Lammers (eds.), Essays on the Development of the International Legal Order in Memory of Haro F. van Panhuys (Alphen aa den Rijn, Sijthoff & Noordhoff, 1980), pp. 53-75, at p. 67; |
| O. Schachter, “International law in theory and practice: general course in public international law”, in Collected Courses of the Hague Academy of International Law, vol. 178 (1982), pp. 9–396, at pp. 75, 79–80; | O. Schachter, “International law in theory and practice: general course in public international law”, in Collected Courses of the Hague Academy of International Law, vol. 178 (1982), pp. 9-396, at pp. 75, 79-80; |
| R. Wolfrum, “General international law (principles, rules, and standards)”, in R. Wolfrum (ed.), Max Planck Encyclopedia of International Law, vol. IV (entry updated in 2010; | R. Wolfrum, “General international law (principles, rules, and standards)”, in R. Wolfrum (ed.), Max Planck Encyclopedia of International Law, vol. IV (entry updated in 2010; |
| Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2012), para. 28; | Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2012), para. 28; |
| A. A. Cançado Trindade, “General principles of law as a source of international law”, in United Nations Audiovisual Library of International Law (2010), at 22:00; | A. A. Cançado Trindade, “General principles of law as a source of international law”, in United Nations Audiovisual Library of International Law (2010), at 22:00; |
| B. I. Bonafé and P. Palchetti, “Relying on general principles of law”, in C. Brölmann and Y. Radi (eds.), Research Handbook on the Theory and Practice of International Lawmaking (Cheltenham, Edward Edgar Publishing, 2016), p. 162; | B. I. Bonafé and P. Palchetti, “Relying on general principles of law”, in C. Brölmann and Y. Radi (eds.), Research Handbook on the Theory and Practice of International Lawmaking (Cheltenham, Edward Edgar Publishing, 2016), p. 162; |
| A. Yusuf, “Concluding remarks”, in M. Andenas et al. (eds.), General Principles and the Coherence of International Law (footnote 1192 above), p. 450; | A. Yusuf, “Concluding remarks”, in M. Andenas et al. (eds.), General Principles and the Coherence of International Law (footnote 1192 above), p. 450; |
| G. Gaja, “General principles of law”, in Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law (2020), paras. 17–20. | G. Gaja, “General principles of law”, in Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law (2020), paras. 17-20. |
| See, for example, International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, Furundžija (footnote 1194 above), para. 178; | 例如见International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, Furundžija (上文脚注1194), para. 178; |
| and Prosecutor v. Dragoljub Kunarac, Radomir Kunac and Zoran Vuković, Nos. IT-96-23-T & IT-96-23/1-T, Judgment, Trial Chamber, 22 February 2001, para. 439. | and Prosecutor v. Dragoljub Kunarac, Radomir Kunac and Zoran Vuković, Nos. IT-96-23-T & IT-96-23/1-T, Judgment, Trial Chamber, 22 February 2001, para. 439。 |
| A general principle of law that is often referred to in practice and in the literature, and which may be considered to be of a general and abstract character, is the principle of good faith. | 在实践和文献中经常提到的一项可被认为具有一般性和抽象性的一般法律原则是善意原则。 |
| Examples of general principles of law that have been invoked or applied in practice, and which may be considered to be of a more specific character (because they present, for instance, precise conditions for their application), include the principles of res judicata and lis pendens, and the right to lawyer-client confidentiality. | 在实践中得到过援引或适用并可(譬如因为提出了确切的适用条件而)被视为更有特定性的一般法律原则的例子，包括既判力原则和未决诉讼原则，以及律师与委托人保密权。 |
| See, respectively, International Court of Justice, Question of the Delimitation of the Continental Shelf between Nicaragua and Colombia beyond 200 Nautical Miles from the Nicaraguan Coast (Nicaraguas v. Colombia), Preliminary Objections, Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2016, p. 100, at pp. 125–126, paras. 58–61; | 分别见国际法院，尼加拉瓜和哥伦比亚距尼加拉瓜海岸200海里以外大陆架划界问题案 (尼加拉瓜诉哥伦比亚)，初步反对意见，判决，《2016年国际法院案例汇编》，第100页起，见第125-126页，第58-61段； |
| Permanent Court of International Justice, Certain German Interests in Polish Upper Silesia, Judgment, 15 August 1925, P.C.I.J. Series A, No. 6, pp. 5 et seq., at p. 20; | 国际常设法院，德国在波兰上西里西亚的某些权益案，判决，1925年8月15日，《常设国际法院案例汇编》，A辑，第6号，第5页及以下各页，见第20页； |
| International Court of Justice, Questions relating to the Seizure and Detention of Certain Documents and Data (Timor‐Leste v. Australia), Provisional Measures, Order of 3 March 2014, I.C.J. Reports 2014, p. 147, at pp. 152–153, paras. 24–28. | 国际法院，收缴和扣押某些文件和数据的问题案 (东帝汶诉澳大利亚)，临时措施，2014年3月3日的命令，《2014年国际法院案例汇编》，第147页起，见第152-153页，第24-28段。 |
| Examples of State practice where a wide and representative comparative analysis may be considered to have been conducted include International Court of Justice, Case concerning Right of Passage over Indian Territory (Merits), Judgment of 12 April 1960: I.C.J. Reports 1960, p. 6, Observations and Submissions of Portugal on the Preliminary Objections of India, annex 20, pp. 714–752, and Reply of Portugal, annexes 192, pp. 858–861 (including the legal systems of Argentina, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Bolivia (Plurinational State of), Brazil, Bulgaria, Canada, Chile, China, Colombia, Costa Rica, Cuba, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, France, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, India, Indonesia, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Mexico, Myanmar, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Norway, Pakistan, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Korea, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, United States of America, Uruguay, Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of), Yemen and Zambia, and Czechoslovakia and the Soviet Union); | 可以认为进行了广泛和有代表性的比较分析的国家实践的例子包括：国际法院，穿越印度领土的通行权案(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，葡萄牙就印度的初步反对意见提出的意见和陈述，附件20, 第714-752页，以及葡萄牙的答复，附件192, 第858-861页 (包括了下列国家的法律体系：阿根廷、澳大利亚、奥地利、比利时、多民族玻利维亚国、巴西、保加利亚、加拿大、智利、中国、哥伦比亚、哥斯达黎加、古巴、丹麦、多米尼加共和国、厄瓜多尔、埃及、萨尔瓦多、法国、德国、加纳、希腊、危地马拉、海地、洪都拉斯、印度、印度尼西亚、爱尔兰、意大利、日本、墨西哥、缅甸、荷兰、新西兰、尼加拉瓜、挪威、巴基斯坦、巴拿马、巴拉圭、秘鲁、菲律宾、波兰、葡萄牙、大韩民国、沙特阿拉伯、南非、西班牙、斯里兰卡、瑞典、瑞士、土耳其、美利坚合众国、乌拉圭、委内瑞拉玻利瓦尔共和国、也门和赞比亚、捷克斯洛伐克和苏联)； |
| International Court of Justice, Certain Phosphate Lands in Nauru (Nauru v. Australia), Preliminary Objections, Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1992, p. 240, Memorial of Nauru, appendix 3 (including the legal systems of Argentina, Australia, Bangladesh, Belgium, Canada, Chile, China, Colombia, Cyprus, Denmark, Ethiopia, Finland, France, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Hungary, India, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Liechtenstein, Mexico, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nigeria, Pakistan, Romania, Senegal, South Africa, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sweden, Switzerland, the United Kingdom and the United States); | 国际法院，瑙鲁境内某些磷酸盐地案(瑙鲁诉澳大利亚)，初步反对意见，判决，《1992年国际法院案例汇编》，第240页，瑙鲁诉状，附录3 (包括了下列国家的法律体系：阿根廷、澳大利亚、孟加拉国、比利时、加拿大、智利、中国、哥伦比亚、塞浦路斯、丹麦、埃塞俄比亚、芬兰、法国、德国、加纳、希腊、匈牙利、印度、爱尔兰、意大利、日本、列支敦士登、墨西哥、荷兰、新西兰、尼日利亚、巴基斯坦、罗马尼亚、塞内加尔、南非、西班牙、斯里兰卡、瑞典、瑞士、联合王国和美国)； |
| International Court of Justice, Questions relating to the Seizure and Detention of Certain Documents and Data (Timor-Leste v. Australia) (footnote 1198 above), Memorial of Timor-Leste, annexes 22 to 24 (including the legal systems of Australia, Austria, Belgium, Brazil, Bulgaria, China, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Indonesia, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Mexico, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Korea, Romania, Russian Federation, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, South Africa, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Thailand, Turkey, United Kingdom and the United States, and the European Union, and Hong Kong, China) and Counter-Memorial of Australia, annex 51 (covering the legal systems of Australia, Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany, India, Indonesia, Mexico, Morocco, New Zealand, Russian Federation, Slovakia, Switzerland, Timor-Leste, Uganda, United Kingdom and United States of America). | 国际法院，收缴和扣押某些文件和数据的问题案 (东帝汶诉澳大利亚) (上文脚注1198)，东帝汶诉状，附件22至24 (包括了下列国家的法律体系：澳大利亚、奥地利、比利时、巴西、保加利亚、中国、塞浦路斯、捷克共和国、丹麦、爱沙尼亚、芬兰、法国、德国、希腊、匈牙利、印度尼西亚、爱尔兰、意大利、日本、拉脱维亚、立陶宛、卢森堡、马耳他、墨西哥、荷兰、新西兰、挪威、波兰、葡萄牙、大韩民国、罗马尼亚、俄罗斯联邦、沙特阿拉伯、新加坡、南非、斯洛伐克、斯洛文尼亚、西班牙、瑞典、瑞士、泰国、土耳其、联合王国和美国以及欧洲联盟和中国香港)和澳大利亚的辩诉状，附件51(涵盖下列国家的法律体系：澳大利亚、比利时、丹麦、法国、德国、印度、印度尼西亚、墨西哥、摩洛哥、新西兰、俄罗斯联邦、斯洛伐克、瑞士、东帝汶、乌干达、联合王国和美利坚合众国)。 |
| Similar examples are found in the case law. | 类似的例子见于判例。 |
| See, for example, International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, Delalić (footnote 1191 above), paras. 584–589 (Australia, Bahamas, Barbados, Croatia, Germany, Italy, Japan, Russian Federation, Singapore, South Africa, Turkey, United States, England, Scotland, and former Yugoslavia, and Hong Kong, China); | 例如见International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, Delalić (上文脚注1191), paras. 584-589 (澳大利亚、巴哈马、巴巴多斯、克罗地亚、德国、意大利、日本、俄罗斯联邦、新加坡、南非、土耳其、美国、英格兰、苏格兰和前南斯拉夫，以及中国香港)； |
| International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, Prosecutor v. Pavle Strugar, No. IT-01-42-A, Judgment, Appeals Chamber, 17 July 2008, paras. 52–54 (Australia, Austria, Belgium, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Canada, Chile, Croatia, Germany, India, Japan, Malaysia, Montenegro, Netherlands, Republic of Korea, Russian Federation, Serbia, United Kingdom and United States); | International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, Prosecutor v. Pavle Strugar, No. IT-01-42-A, Judgment, Appeals Chamber, 17 July 2008, paras. 52-54 (澳大利亚、奥地利、比利时、波斯尼亚和黑塞哥维那、加拿大、智利、克罗地亚、德国、印度、日本、马来西亚、黑山、荷兰、大韩民国、俄罗斯联邦、塞尔维亚、联合王国和美国)； |
| International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, Prosecutor v. Dražen Erdemović, Judgment, Appeals Chamber, Case No. IT-96-22-A, Judgment, 7 October 1997, para. 19, referring to the Joint Separate Opinion of Judge McDonald and Judge Vohrah, paras. 59–65 (Australia, Belgium, Canada, Chile, China, Ethiopia, Finland, France, Germany, India, Italy, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, Morocco, Netherlands, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Norway, Panama, Poland, Somalia, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of), and England, and former Yugoslavia); | International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, Prosecutor v. Dražen Erdemović, Judgment, Appeals Chamber, Case No. IT-96-22-A, Judgment, 7 October 1997, para. 19, referring to the Joint Separate Opinion of Judge McDonald and Judge Vohrah, paras. 59-65 (澳大利亚、比利时、加拿大、智利、中国、埃塞俄比亚、芬兰、法国、德国、印度、意大利、日本、马来西亚、墨西哥、摩洛哥、荷兰、尼加拉瓜、尼日利亚、挪威、巴拿马、波兰、索马里、南非、西班牙、瑞典、委内瑞拉玻利瓦尔共和国和英格兰，以及前南斯拉夫)； |
| Furundžija (see footnote 1194 above), para. 180 (Argentina, Austria, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Chile, China, France, Germany, India, Italy, Japan, Netherlands, Pakistan, Uganda, Zambia, and England and Wales, former Yugoslavia, and New South Wales (Australia)); | Furundžija (见上文脚注1194), para. 180 (阿根廷、奥地利、波斯尼亚和黑塞哥维那、智利、中国、法国、德国、印度、意大利、日本、荷兰、巴基斯坦、乌干达、赞比亚，以及英格兰和威尔士、前南斯拉夫和新南威尔士州(澳大利亚))； |
| Kunarac (see footnote 1196 above), paras. 437–460 (Argentina, Australia, Austria, Bangladesh, Belgium, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brazil, Canada, China, Costa Rica, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, India, Italy, Japan, New Zealand, Norway, Philippines, Portugal, Republic of Korea, Sierra Leone, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Uruguay, United Kingdom, United States and Zambia). | Kunarac (见上文脚注1196), paras. 437-460 (阿根廷、澳大利亚、奥地利、孟加拉国、比利时、波斯尼亚和黑塞哥维那、巴西、加拿大、中国、哥斯达黎加、丹麦、爱沙尼亚、芬兰、法国、德国、印度、意大利、日本、新西兰、挪威、菲律宾、葡萄牙、大韩民国、塞拉利昂、南非、西班牙、瑞典、瑞士、乌拉圭、联合王国、美国和赞比亚)。 |
| Barcelona Traction (footnote 1191 above), p. 38, para. 50. | 巴塞罗那电车公司案 (上文脚注1191)，第38页，第50段。 |
| See also Mary Grace Natividad S. Poe-Llamanzares v. COMELEC (footnote 1191 above), pp. 19, 21; | 另见Mary Grace Natividad S. Poe-Llamanzares v. COMELEC (上文脚注1191), pp. 19, 21; |
| El Paso Energy International Company v. The Argentine Republic (footnote 1191 above), para. 622; | El Paso Energy International Company v. The Argentine Republic (上文脚注1191), para. 622; |
| International Court of Justice, Ahmadou Sadio Diallo (Republic of Guinea v. Democratic Republic of the Congo), Merits, Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2010, p. 639, at p. 675, para. 104; | 国际法院，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675页，第104段； |
| Abyei Area (footnote 1191 above), p. 299, para. 401; | 阿卜耶伊地区仲裁裁决 (上文脚注1191)，第299页，第401段； |
| Germany, Constitutional Court, Judgment, 4 September 2004 (footnote 1191 above), para. 20; | Germany, Constitutional Court, Judgment, 4 September 2004 (上文脚注1191), para. 20; |
| Kunarac (see footnote 1196 above), para. 439; | Kunarac (见上文脚注1196), para. 439; |
| Delalić (footnote 1191 above), para. 179; | Delalić (上文脚注1191), para. 179; |
| Tadić (footnote 1191 above), para. 225; | Tadić (上文脚注1191), para. 225; |
| International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, Prosecutor v. Jean-Paul Akayesu, No. ICTR-96-4-T, Judgment, 2 September 1998, para. 46; | International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, Prosecutor v. Jean-Paul Akayesu, No. ICTR-96-4-T, Judgment, 2 September 1998, para. 46; |
| International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, Prosecutor v. Zejnil Delalić et al., No. IT-96-21-T, Decision on the motion to allow witnesses K, L and M to give their testimony by means of video-link conference, Trial Chamber, 28 May 1997, paras. 7–8; | International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, Prosecutor v. Zejnil Delalić et al., No. IT-96-21-T, Decision on the motion to allow witnesses K, L and M to give their testimony by means of video-link conference, Trial Chamber, 28 May 1997, paras. 7-8; |
| Aloeboetoe et al. v. Suriname (footnote 1191 above), para. 62; | Aloeboetoe et al. v. Suriname (上文脚注1191), para. 62; |
| Questech (footnote 1191 above), p. 122; | Questech (上文脚注1191), p. 122; |
| Sea-Land Service, Inc. v. Iran (footnote 1191 above), p. 168; | Sea-Land Service, Inc. v. Iran (上文脚注1191), p. 168; |
| Corfu Channel case (footnote 1191 above), p. 18; | 科孚海峡案 (上文脚注1191)，第18页； |
| Fabiani case (footnote 1191 above), p. 356; | Fabiani case (上文脚注1191), p. 356; |
| and the Queen case between Brazil, Norway and Sweden (1871) (reproduced in La Fontaine, Pasicrisie internationale 1794–1900: Histoire documentaire des arbitrages internationaux (footnote 1191 above)), p. 155. | and the Queen case between Brazil, Norway and Sweden (1871) ((reproduced in La Fontaine, Pasicrisie internationale 1794-1900: Histoire documentaire des arbitrages internationaux (上文脚注1191)), p. 155. |
| See, for example, Question of the Delimitation of the Continental Shelf between Nicaragua and Colombia … (footnote 1198 above) p. 125, para. 58 (applying the principle of res judicata, derived from civil procedure); | 例如，见尼加拉瓜和哥伦比亚大陆架划界问题案 (上文脚注1198)，第125页，第58段 (适用源自民事诉讼程序的既判力原则)； |
| Barcelona Traction (footnote 1191 above), p. 38, para. 50 (applying the principle of separation between companies and shareholders, derived from corporate law); | 巴塞罗那电车公司案 (上文脚注1191)，第38页，第50段 (适用源自公司法的公司与股东分离原则)； |
| United States–Tax Treatment for “Foreign Sales Corporations” (footnote 1191 above), para. 143 (applying a principle relating to taxation of non-residents, derived from tax law); | United States – Tax Treatment for “Foreign Sales Corporations” (上文脚注1191), para. 143 (适用源自税法的非居民征税原则)； |
| Questech, Inc. v. Iran (see previous footnote), p. 122 (applying the principle rebuc sic stantibus, derived from contract law); | Questech, Inc. v. Iran (见前注), p. 122 (适用源自合同法的情势不变原则)； |
| Sea-Land Service, Inc. v. Iran (footnote 1191 above), p. 168 (applying the principle of unjust enrichment, derived from civil law or the law of obligations); | Sea-Land Service, Inc. v. Iran (上文脚注1191), p. 168 (适用源自民法或债务法的不当得利原则)； |
| Furundžija (see footnote 1194 above), paras. 178–182, and Kunarac (see footnote 1196 above), paras. 439–460 (applying a definition of “rape” derived from criminal law); | Furundžija (见上文脚注1194), paras. 178-182，以及Kunarac (见上文脚注1196), paras. 439-460 (适用源自刑法的“强奸”定义)； |
| Aloeboetoe v. Suriname (footnote 1191 above), para. 62 (applying a principle relating to succession for purposes of compensation, derived from laws on inheritance or succession); | Aloeboetoe v. Suriname (上文脚注1191), para. 62 (适用源自遗产或继承法的为赔偿目的继承的原则)； |
| Mary Grace Natividad S. Poe-Llamanzares v. COMELEC (footnote 1191 above), p. 21 (applying a principle of nationality of foundlings, derived from laws on nationality). | Mary Grace Natividad S. Poe-Llamanzares v. COMELEC (上文脚注1191), p. 21 (适用源自国籍法的弃儿国籍原则)。 |
| See also El Paso Energy International Company v. The Argentine Republic (footnote 1191 above), para. 622 (“‘general principles’ are rules largely applied in foro domestico, in private or public, substantive or procedural matters”); | 另见El Paso Energy International Company v. The Argentine Republic (上文脚注1191), para. 622 (“‘一般原则’是主要适用于国内法院的、私人或公共的实质性或程序性事项的规则”)； |
| South West Africa, Second Phase (footnote 1191 above), Dissenting Opinion of Judge Tanaka, p. 250, at p. 294 (“So far as the ‘general principles of law’ are not qualified, the ‘law’ must be understood to embrace all branches of law, including municipal law, public law, constitutional and administrative law, private law, commercial law, substantive and procedural law, etc.”). | 西南非洲案(第二阶段) (上文脚注1191)，田中法官的反对意见，第250起，见第294页 (“只要‘一般法律原则’没有限定，‘法律’就必须理解为包括所有法律分支，包括国内法、公法、宪法和行政法、私法、商法、实体法和程序法等”)。 |
| Examples that were referred to by members of the Commission during the debates of the Commission include the principle of sovereign equality of States, the principle of territorial integrity, the principle of uti possidetis juris, the principle of non-intervention in the internal affairs of another State, the principle of consent to the jurisdiction to international courts and tribunals, elementary considerations of humanity, respect for human dignity, the Nürnberg Principles and principles of international environmental law. | 委员会委员在委员会辩论期间提到的例子包括各国主权平等原则、领土完整原则、依法保有原则、不干涉他国内政原则、同意国际性法院和法庭管辖权的原则、基本的人道考虑、尊重人的尊严、纽伦堡原则和国际环境法的各项原则。 |
| Procès-verbaux of the Proceedings of the Committee, June 16th – July 24th 1920 (footnote 1193 above), 15th meeting, p. 335. | 《委员会议事录，1920年6月16日至7月24日》(上文脚注1193)，第15次会议，第335页。 |
| Documents of the United Nations Conference on International Organization, San Francisco, 1945, vol. XIII, 5th meeting of Committee IV/1, 10 May 1945, p. 162 (1945), at p. 164. | 联合国国际组织会议文件，旧金山，1945年，第十三卷，第四/1委员会第5次会议，1945年5月10日，第162页起 (1945年)，见第164页。 |
| Official Records of the General Assembly, Seventy-third Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/73/10), para. 369. | 《大会正式记录，第七十三届会议，补编第10号》(A/73/10)，第369段。 |
| Official Records of the General Assembly, Seventy-fourth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/74/10), paras. 265–273. | 《大会正式记录，第七十四届会议，补编第10号》(A/74/10)，第265-273段。 |
| A/CN.4/740 and Corr.1. | A/CN.4/740和Corr.1. |
| A/CN.4/740/Add.1. | A/CN.4/740/Add.1. |
| Official Records of the General Assembly, Seventy-sixth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/76/10), paras. 247–296. | 《大会正式记录，第七十六届会议，补编第10号》(A/76/10)，第247至296段。 |
| For the membership of the Study Group, see chap. I. | 研究组的成员情况，见第一章。 |
| Official Records of the General Assembly, Seventy-fourth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/74/10), paras. 270–271. | 《大会正式记录，第七十四届会议，补编第10号》(A/74/10)，第270-271段。 |
| Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability – Contribution of Working Group II to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [H.-O. Pörtner et al. (eds.)] (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press); | 政府间气候变化专门委员会，《气候变化2022：影响、适应和脆弱性――第二工作组对政府间气候变化专门委员会第六次评估报告的贡献》[H.-O. Pörtner 等人编] (剑桥，剑桥大学出版社)； |
| and Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Climate Change 2022: Mitigation of Climate Change – Contribution of Working Group III to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [P.R. Shukla et al. (eds.)] (Cambridge and New York, Cambridge University Press). | 政府间气候变化专门委员会，《气候变化2022：减缓气候变化――第三工作组对政府间气候变化专门委员会第六次评估报告的贡献》[P.R. Shukla等人编] (剑桥和纽约，剑桥大学出版社)。 |
| Official Records of the General Assembly, Seventy-third Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/73/10), annex B, paras. 12–14. | 《大会正式记录，第七十三届会议，补编第10号》(A/73/10)，附件B, 第12-14段。 |
| Ibid., para. 18. | 同上，第18段。 |
| A/74/10, para. 263–273. | A/74/10, 第263-273段。 |
| A/76/10, para. 245–246. | A/76/10, 第245-246段。 |
| For example, the people of the Carteret Islands, in Papua New Guinea, have been relocated owing to sea-level rise. | 例如，巴布亚新几内亚卡特雷特群岛居民由于海平面上升而迁移。 |
| Convention on the Rights and Duties of States (Montevideo, 26 December 1933), League of Nations, Treaty Series, vol. CLXV, No. 3802, p. 19. | 《各国权利与义务公约》(1933年12月26日，蒙得维的亚)，国际联盟，《条约汇编》，CLXV卷，第3802号，第19页。 |
| Institut de Droit International, “Resolutions concerning the recognition of new States and new Governments” (Brussels, April 1936), The American Journal of International Law, vol. 30, No. 4, Supplement: Official Documents (October 1936), pp. 185–187. | 国际法学会，“关于承认新国家和新政府的决议”(1936年4月，布鲁塞尔)，《美国国际法学报》，第30卷，第4号，补编：正式文件(1936年10月)，第185-187页。 |
| Yearbook of the International Law Commission 1949, p. 287. | 《1949年国际法委员会年鉴》，第287页。 |
| Yearbook of the International Law Commission, 1956, vol. II, document A/CN.4/101, para. 10, at pp. 107–108. | 《1956年国际法委员会年鉴》，第二卷，A/CN.4/101号文件，第10段，见第107-108页。 |
| Maurizio Ragazzi, “Conference on Yugoslavia Arbitration Commission: opinions on questions arising from the dissolution of Yugoslavia”, International Legal Materials, vol. 31, No. 6 (November 1992), pp. 1488–1526, at p. 1495. | Maurizio Ragazzi,“Conference on Yugoslavia Arbitration Commission: opinions on questions arising from the dissolution of Yugoslavia”，International Legal Materials, vol. 31, No. 6 (November 1992)，pp. 1488-1526, at p. 1495. |
| Yearbook of the International Law Commission, 2016, vol. II (Part Two), para. 48. | 《2016年国际法委员会年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第48段。 |
| E/CN.4/1998/53/Add.2, annex. | E/CN.4/1998/53/Add.2, 附件。 |
| African Union Convention for the Protection and Assistance of Internally Displaced Persons in Africa (Kampala, 23 October 2009), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 3014, No. 52375, p. 3. | 《非洲联盟保护和援助非洲境内流离失所者公约》(2009年10月23日，坎帕拉)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第3014卷，第52375号，第3页。 |
| General Assembly resolution 71/1 of 19 September 2016. | 联大2016年9月19日第71/1号决议。 |
| General Assembly resolution 73/195 of 19 December 2018, annex. | 联大2018年12月19日第73/195号决议，附件。 |
| See also A/CONF.231/7. | 另见A/CONF.231/7。 |
| General Assembly resolution 69/283 of 3 June 2015, annex II. | 联大2015年6月3日第69/283号决议，附件二。 |
| Nansen Initiative, Agenda for the Protection of Cross-Border Displaced Persons in the Context of Disasters and Climate Change, vol. 1 (December 2015). | 南森倡议，《在灾害和气候变化情况下保护跨境流离失所者议程》，第1卷(2015年12月)。 |
| Final report of the Committee on International Law and Sea-Level Rise, in International Law Association, Report of the Seventy-eighth Conference, Held in Sydney, 19–24 August 2018, vol. 78 (2019), pp. 897 ff., and resolution 6/2018, annex, ibid., p. 33. | 国际法与海平面上升问题委员会的最后报告，载于国际法协会，第七十八届会议报告，2018年8月19日至24日，悉尼，第78卷(2019年)，第897页及其后，以及第6/2018号决议，附件，同上，第33页。 |
| CCPR/C/127/D/2728/2016. | CCPR/C/127/D/2728/2016. |
| International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (New York, 16 December 1966), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 999, No. 14668, p. 171. | 《公民及政治权利国际公约》(1966年12月16日，纽约)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第999卷，第14668号，第171页。 |
| A/73/10, chap. V (paras. 53–66). | A/73/10, 第五章(第53-66段)。 |
| 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》(蒙特哥湾，1982年12月10日)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第1833卷，第31363号，第3页。 |
| Vienna Convention for the Protection of the Ozone Layer (Vienna, 22 March 1985), 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。 |
| A/CONF.151/26/Rev.l (Vol. l). | A/CONF.151/26/Rev.l (Vol. l). |
| United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (New York, 9 May 1992), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1771, No. 30822, p. 107. | 《联合国气候变化框架公约》(1992年5月9日，纽约)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第1771卷，第30822号，第107页。 |
| 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。 |
| 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。 |
| Paris Agreement (Paris, 12 December 2015), United Nations, Treaty Series, No. 54113 (volume number has yet to be determined), available from https://treaties.un.org. | 《巴黎协定》(2015年12月12日，巴黎)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第54113号(卷号待定)，可查阅https://treaties.un.org. |
| A/73/10, annex B, para. 16. | A/73/10, 附件B, 第16段。 |
| See, for example, the Statement of Partnership between New Zealand and Tuvalu (2019–2023), available at https://www.mfat.govt.nz/assets/Countries-and-Regions/Pacific/Tuvalu/Statement-of-Partnership-NZ-Tuvalu-_2019-2023.pdf. | 例如，见新西兰和图瓦卢的伙伴关系声明(2019-2023年)可查阅 https://www.mfat.govt.nz/assets/Countries-and-Regions/Pacific/Tuvalu/Statement-of-Partnership-NZ-Tuvalu-_2019-2023.pdf. 另见新西兰，《执行手册》，可查阅 |
| See also New Zealand, Operational Manual, available at https://www.immigration.govt.nz/opsmanual/#46618.htm; | https://www.immigration.govt.nz/opsmanual/#46618.htm; 及新西兰政府移民局网站 |
| and the New Zealand Government Immigration website at https://www.immigration.govt.nz/new-zealand-visas/apply-for-a-visa/about-visa/pacific-access-category-resident-visa; | https://www.immigration.govt.nz/new-zealand-visas/apply-for-a-visa/about-visa/pacific-access-category-resident-visa; |
| as well as R. Curtain and M. Dornan, “Climate change and migration in Kiribati, Tuvalu and Nauru”, DevPolicyBlog, 15 February 2019, available at https://devpolicy.org/climate-change-migration-kiribati-tuvalu-nauru-20190215/. | 以及R. Curtain and M. Dornan, “Climate change and migration in Kiribati, Tuvalu and Nauru”, DevPolicyBlog, 15 February 2019, available at https://devpolicy.org/climate-change-migration-kiribati-tuvalu-nauru-20190215/. |
| For example, Teitiota v. New Zealand (CCPR/C/127/D/2728/2016) and Bakatu-Bia v. Sweden (CAT/C/46/D/379/2009). | 例如，Teitiota诉新西兰案(CCPR/C/127/D/2728/2016)和Bakatu-Bia诉瑞典案(CAT/C/46/D/379/2009)。 |
| Cartagena Declaration on Refugees, adopted at the Colloquium on the International Protection of Refugees in Central America, Mexico and Panama: Legal and Humanitarian Problems, held in Cartagena, Colombia, on 19–22 November 1984. | 1984年11月19日至22日在哥伦比亚卡塔赫纳举行的“中美洲、墨西哥和巴拿马关于国际保护难民问题座谈会：法律和人道主义问题”通过的《关于难民的卡塔赫纳宣言》。 |
| Available at www.oas.org/dil/1984_Cartagena_Declaration_on_Refugees.pdf. | 可查阅www.oas.org/dil/1984_Cartagena_Declaration_on_Refugees.pdf. |
| Brazil Declaration: “A Framework for Cooperation and Regional Solidarity to Strengthen the International Protection of Refugees, Displaced and Stateless Persons in Latin America and the Caribbean”, 3 December 2014. | 《巴西宣言》――《加强拉丁美洲和加勒比地区难民、流离失所者和无国籍者国际保护的合作和区域团结框架》，2014年12月3日。 |
| Available at: https://www.unhcr.org/brazil-declaration.html. | 可查阅https://www.unhcr.org/brazil-declaration.html. |
| See footnote 1225 above. | 见上文脚注1225。 |
| See Human Rights Council resolution 48/13 of 8 October 2021. | 见人权理事会2021年10月8日第48/13号决议。 |
| A/73/10, annex B, para. 14. | A/73/10, 附件B, 第14段。 |
| Final report of the Committee on International Law and Sea-Level Rise, in International Law Association, Report of the Seventy-eighth Conference (see footnote 1230 above), p. 904, and resolution 6/2018, annex, ibid., p. 33. | 国际法和海平面上升问题委员会的最后报告，载于国际法协会第七十八届会议报告(见上文脚注1230)，第904页，以及第6/2018号决议，附件，同上，第33页。 |
| Convention to Combat Desertification in Those Countries Experiencing Serious Drought and/or Desertification, Particularly in Africa (Paris, 14 October 1994), United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1954, No. 33480, p. 3. | 《在发生严重干旱和/或荒漠化的国家特别是在非洲防治荒漠化的公约》(1994年10月14日，巴黎)，联合国，《条约汇编》，第1954卷，第33480号，第3页。 |
| Yearbook of the International Law Commission, 2016, vol. II (Part Two), annex I, p. 233. | 《2016年国际法委员会年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，附件一，第233页。 |
| Yearbook … 2017, vol II (Part Two), p. 147, para. 267 and pp. 155 et seq., annex I. | 《2017年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第147页，第267段和第155页及以下各页，附件一。 |
| Ibid., p. 147, para. 267 and pp. 168 et seq., annex II. | 同上，第147页，第267段和第168页及以下各页，附件二。 |
| Official Records of the General Assembly, Seventy-third Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/73/10), para. 369 and annex A. | 《大会正式记录，第七十三届会议，补编第10号》(A/73/10)，第369段和附件A。 |
| Ibid., para. 369 and annex B. | 同上，第369段和附件B。 |
| Ibid., Seventy-fourth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/74/10), para. 290 and annex B. | 同上，《第七十四届会议，补编第10号》(A/74/10)，第290段和附件B。 |
| Ibid., para. 290 and annex C. | 同上，第290段和附件C。 |
| Ibid., Seventy-sixth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/76/10), para. 302 and annex. | 同上，《第七十六届会议，补编第10号》(A/76/10)，第302段和附件。 |
| Yearbook … 1998, vol. II (Part Two), p. 110, para. 553. | 《1998年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第110页，第553段。 |
| See also Yearbook … 1997, vol. II (Part Two), pp. 71–72, para. 238. | 另见《1997年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第71-72页，第238段。 |
| Yearbook … 1996, vol. II (Part Two), pp. 97–98, para. 248 and pp. 139 et seq., annex II, Addendum 2. | 《1996年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第97-98页，第248段和第139页及以下各页，附件二，增编2。 |
| Yearbook … 2006, vol. II (Part Two), p. 185, para. 257 and pp. 201 et seq., annex II. | 《2006年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第185页，第257段和第201页及以下各页，附件二。 |
| Ibid., pp. 217 et seq., annex IV. | 同上，第217页及以下各页，附件四。 |
| Ibid., pp. 229 et seq., annex V. Yearbook … | 同上，第229页及以下各页，附件五。 |
| 2011, vol. II (Part Two), p. 175, para. 365, and pp. 202 et seq., annex IV. | 《2011年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第175页，第365段和第202页及以下各页，附件四。 |
| Yearbook … 2008, vol. II (Part Two), pp. 146–147. | 《2008年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第146-147页。 |
| Yearbook … 2009, vol. II (Part Two), p. 150, para. 231; Yearbook … | 《2009年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第150页，第231段； |
| 2010, vol. II (Part Two), pp. 202–204, paras. 390–393; | 《2010年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第202-204页，第390-393段； |
| Yearbook … 2011, vol. II (Part Two), p. 178, paras. 392–398; Yearbook … | 《2011年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第178页，第392-398段； |
| 2012, vol. II (Part Two), p. 87, paras. 274–279; | 《2012年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第87页，第274-279段； |
| Yearbook … 2013, vol. II (Part Two), p. 79, paras. 171–179; Yearbook … | 《2013年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第79页，第171-179段； |
| 2014, vol. II (Part Two) and Corr.1, p. 165, paras. 273–280; | 《2014年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)和Corr.1, 第165页，第273-280段； |
| Yearbook … 2015, vol. II (Part Two), p. 85, paras. 288–295; Yearbook … | 《2015年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第85页，第288-295段； |
| 2016, vol. II (Part Two), pp. 227–228, paras. 314–322; | 《2016年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第227-228页，第314-322段； |
| Yearbook … 2017, vol. II (Part Two), pp. 149–150, paras. 269–278; | 《2017年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第149-150页，第269-278段； |
| Official Records of the General Assembly, Seventy-third Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/73/10), paras. 372–380; | 《大会正式记录，第七十三届会议，补编第10号》(A/73/10)，第372-380段； |
| ibid., Seventy-fourth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/74/10), paras. 293–301; | 同上，《第七十四届会议，补编第10号》(A/74/10)，第293-301段； |
| and ibid., Seventy-sixth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/76/10), paras. 304–312. | 同上，《第七十六届会议，补编第10号》(A/76/10)，第304-312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. | 联大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), 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)，第70段。 |
| General Assembly resolution 76/117, para. 23. | 联大第76/117号决议，第23段。 |
| See, in this regard, Official Records of the General Assembly, Seventy-sixth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/76/10), para. 315. | 关于这一点，见《大会正式记录，第七十六届会议，补编第10号》(A/76/10)，第315段。 |
| General Assembly resolution 75/141 of 15 December 2020 on the rule of law at the national and international levels, paras. 2 and 19. | 联大2020年12月15日关于国内和国际的法治的第75/141号决议，第2和第19段。 |
| Ibid., para. 8. | 同上，第8段。 |
| See, more specifically, Yearbook … 2015, vol. II (Part Two), p. 86, para. 294. | 详见《2015年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第86页，第294段。 |
| See Yearbook … 2002, vol. II (Part Two), pp. 102–103, paras. 525–531; | 见《2002年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第102-103页，第525-531段； |
| Yearbook … 2003, vol. II (Part Two), p. 101, para. 447; | 《2003年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第101页，第447段； |
| Yearbook … 2004, vol. II (Part Two), pp. 120–121, para. 369; | 《2004年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第120-121页，第369段； |
| Yearbook … 2005, vol. II (Part Two), p. 92, para. 501; | 《2005年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第92页，第501段； |
| Yearbook … 2006, vol. II (Part Two), p. 187, para. 269; | 《2006年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第187页，第269段； |
| Yearbook … 2007, vol. II (Part Two), p. 100, para. 379; | 《2007年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第100页，第379段； |
| Yearbook … 2008, vol. II (Part Two), p. 148, para. 358; | 《2008年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第148页，第358段； |
| Yearbook … 2009, vol. II (Part Two), p. 151, para. 240; | 《2009年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第151页，第240段； |
| Yearbook … 2010, vol. II (Part Two), p. 203, para. 396; | 《2010年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第203页，第396段； |
| Yearbook … 2011, vol. II (Part Two), p. 178, para. 399; | 《2011年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第178页，第399段； |
| Yearbook … 2012, vol. II (Part Two), p. 87, para. 280; | 《2012年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第87页，第280段； |
| Yearbook … 2013, vol. II (Part Two), p. 79, para. 181; | 《2013年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第79页，第181段； |
| Yearbook … 2014, vol. II (Part Two) and Corr.1, p. 165, para. 281; | 《2014年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)和Corr.1, 第165页，第281段； |
| Yearbook … 2015, vol. II (Part Two), p. 87, para. 299; | 《2015年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第87页，第299段； |
| Yearbook … 2016, vol. II (Part Two), p. 229, para. 333; | 《2016年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第229页，第333段； |
| Yearbook … 2017, vol. II (Part Two), p. 150, para. 282; | 《2017年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第150页，第282段； |
| Official Records of the General Assembly, Seventy-third Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/73/10), para. 382; | 《大会正式记录，第七十三届会议，补编第10号》(A/73/10)，第382段； |
| ibid., Seventy-fourth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/74/10), para. 302; | 同上，《第七十四届会议，补编第10号》(A/74/10)，第302段； |
| and ibid., Seventy-sixth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/76/10), para. 317. | 和同上，《第七十六届会议，补编第10号》(A/76/10)，第317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. | 关于对特别报告员报告页数限制的考虑因素，例如，见《1977年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第132页，和《1982年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第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. | 另见联大1977年12月9日第32/151号决议第10段和联大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联大提交年度报告的决议。 |
| See also General Assembly resolution 76/111. | 另见联大第76/111号决议。 |
| http://legal.un.org/ilc. | http://legal.un.org//ilc. |
| In general, available from: http://legal.un.org/cod/. | 概况可查阅：http://legal.un.org/cod/. |
| http://legal.un.org/avl/intro/welcome_avl.html. | http://legal.un.org/avl/intro/welcome_avl.html. |
| The statement is 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: Mr. Adam Abdou Hassan (Niger); | 下列人士参加了讲习班：亚当·阿卜杜·哈桑先生(尼日尔)； |
| Ms. Rawa Almakky (Saudi Arabia); | 拉瓦·阿尔马基女士(沙特阿拉伯)、 |
| Mr. Christian Bukor (Slovenia); | 克里斯蒂安·布科尔先生(斯洛文尼亚)、 |
| Mr. Víctor P. Calderón Merino (Ecuador); | 维克托·卡尔德龙·梅里诺先生(厄瓜多尔)、 |
| Mr. Pierrot Chambu Ntizimire (Democratic Republic of the Congo); | 皮埃罗·尚布·恩蒂齐米尔先生(刚果民主共和国)、 |
| Ms. Ludovica Di Lullo (Italy); | 卢多维卡·迪卢洛女士(意大利)、 |
| Mr. Fabian Simon Eichberger (Germany); | 费边·西蒙·艾希伯格先生(德国)、 |
| Ms. Malak Elkasrawy (Egypt); | 马拉克·埃尔卡斯拉维女士(埃及)、 |
| Ms. Kaniz Fatima (Pakistan); | 卡尼兹·法蒂玛女士(巴基斯坦)、 |
| Ms. María Consuelo Gálvez Reyes (Chile); | 玛丽·阿·孔苏埃洛·加尔维斯·雷耶斯女士(智利)、 |
| Ms. Estelle Carine Gassi Matago (Cameroon); | 埃斯特尔·卡林·加西·马塔戈女士(喀麦隆)、 |
| Ms. Kristi How (Singapore); | 克里斯蒂·豪女士(新加坡)、 |
| Mr. Manzi Karbou (Togo); | 曼齐·卡尔布先生(多哥)、 |
| Ms. Irene Meta (United Republic of Tanzania); | 艾琳·梅塔女士(坦桑尼亚联合共和国)、 |
| Ms. Kefilwe Moshokwa-Seberane (Botswana); | 凯菲勒韦·莫肖克瓦－塞贝拉内女士(博茨瓦纳)、 |
| Mr. Garo Moughalian (Lebanon); | 加罗·穆加里安先生(黎巴嫩)、 |
| Ms. Shaiesta Nabibaks (Suriname); | 沙耶斯塔·纳比巴克斯女士(苏里南)、 |
| Mr. Alfredo Uriel Pérez Manriquez (Mexico); | 阿尔弗雷多·乌列尔·佩雷斯·曼里克先生(墨西哥)、 |
| Ms. Sasha Raycheva (Bulgaria); | 萨沙·莱切娃女士(保加利亚)、 |
| Mr. Juan David Saenz Henao (Colombia); | 胡安·戴维·萨恩斯·埃纳奥先生(哥伦比亚)、 |
| Mr. Jamaldeen Seidu (Ghana); | 贾马尔代恩·塞杜先生(加纳)、 |
| Ms. Augustina Siman (Moldova); | 奥古斯蒂娜·西曼女士(摩尔多瓦)、 |
| Ms. Beril Sogut (Türkiye); | 贝里·索古特女士(土耳其)、 |
| Mr. Viet Tong Trinh (Viet Nam); | 越宋成先生(越南)、 |
| Mr. Leandro Daniel Verteramo (Argentina); | 莱安德罗·丹尼尔·韦尔特拉莫先生(阿根廷)、 |
| Ms. Andrea Maria Villavicencio Morales (Peru); | 安德烈娅·玛丽亚·维拉维森西奥·莫拉莱斯女士(秘鲁)、 |
| Mr. Louino Volcy (Haiti); | 卢伊诺·沃尔西先生(海地)、 |
| and Ms. Florentina Xavier (Timor-Leste). | 弗洛伦蒂娜·哈维尔女士(东帝汶)。 |
| The Selection Committee, chaired by Mr. Makane Moïse Mbengue, Professor of International Law at the University of Geneva, met on 28 April 2022 and selected 29 candidates from 202 applications. | 由日内瓦大学国际法教授马凯恩·莫阿斯·姆本格先生担任主席的甄选委员会于2022年4月28日开会，从202名申请人中选出了29名候选人。 |
| At the last minute, one selected candidate could not attend the Seminar. | 在最后一刻，一名被选中的候选人未能出席讲习班。 |
| The author wishes to thank Ms. Jessica Joly Hébert, doctoral candidate at the Université Paris Nanterre and member of the CEDIN, for her help in preparing the present proposal. | 作者谨感谢巴黎楠泰尔大学博士候选人、楠泰尔国际法中心成员Jessica Joly Hébert女士在编写本提案过程中提供的帮助。 |
| On terminology, see infra, para. 3. | 关于术语，见下文第3段。 |
| See, in the selective bibliography attached, references to the work of the Institute of International Law on International Texts of Legal Import in the Mutual Relations of their Authors and Texts Devoid of Such Import. | 见后附参考文献选编中提及的国际法学会的作品《在缔约双方的关系中具有法律意义的国际文本与不具此种意义的文本》。 |
| Inter-American Juridical Committee, Guidelines on Binding and Non-Binding Agreement (resolution and final report (77 p.) by D. Hollis), August 2020, accessible online (original version of the resolution in Spanish and of the report in English). | 美洲法律委员会，《关于约束性协定和非约束性协定的指南》(决议和D. Hollis撰写的最后报告第77页)，2020年8月，可在网上查阅(决议原文为西班牙文，报告原文为英文)。 |
| Committee of Legal Advisers on Public International Law (CAHDI), Expert Workshop on “Non-Legally Binding Agreements in International Law”, 26 March 2021, Chair’s Summary, p. 1. | 国际公法法律顾问委员会，“国际法中不具法律约束力的协定”专家研讨会，2021年3月26日，“主席的总结”，第1页。 |
| See also p. 4: “a significant number of CoE Member States had expressed their support to assemble a more detailed account of their practice on non-legally binding agreements”. | 另见第4页：“大量欧洲委员会成员国已表示支持就其在不具法律约束力的协定方面的实践汇编一份更详细的材料。” |
| In France, for example, it was suggested by the Conseil d’Etat that a circular expressly provides that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs ensures a certain control over non-legally binding agreements before their conclusion, to make sure that “la rédaction ne laisse pas d’ambiguïté sur le caractère juridiquement non contraignant” [“the drafting does not leave any ambiguity on the non-legally binding nature”] and that these agreements be in principle published (see Conseil d’Etat, Le droit souple, Etudes et documents, 2013, pp. 168–170). | 举例来说，在法国，最高行政法院建议发布一项通知，其中明确规定由外交部确保在缔结不具法律约束力的协定之前进行一定的控制，以确保 “la rédaction ne laisse pas d’ambiguïté sur le caractère juridiquement non contraignant” [“协定的起草不会在不具法律约束力的性质问题上留下任何模糊之处”]，并确保此类协定原则上应予以公布(见最高行政法院《软法》，研究与文件，2013年，第168至第170页)。 |
| See also in Spain, Law 25/2014 of 27 November 2014 on treaties and other international agreements, which contains provisions on “non-normative” (“no normativos”) international agreements ([https://www.boe.es/buscar/act.php?id=BOE-A-2014-12326]). | 另见西班牙2014年11月27日关于条约和其他国际协定的第25/2014号法律，其中含有关于“非规范性”国际协定的条款 ([ https://www.boe.es/buscar/act.php?id=BOE-A-2014-12326 ]。 |
| On the Canadian practice, see for example [https://treaty-accord.gc.ca/procedures.aspx?lang=fra], point 8 and Annex C. | 关于加拿大的实践，例如见[ https://treaty-accord.gc.ca/procedures.aspx?lang=fra ]，第8点和附件C。 |
| On the United Kingdom’s practice, see for example “The Scrutiny of International Treaties and other international agreements in the 21st century inquiry”, Written evidence from Sir Michael Wood (SIT 03) to the Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee of the House of Commons, accessible online [https://committees.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/36775/pdf/]. | 关于联合王国的实践，例如见迈克尔·伍德爵士向下议院公共行政和宪法事务委员会提交的书面证据“在21世纪的探讨中仔细审视国际条约和其他国际协定”，可在网上查阅 [ https://committees.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/36775/pdf/ ]。 |
| See more broadly, on current developments in national practices, C. Bradley, J. Goldsmith, O. Hathaway, “The Rise of Nonbinding International Agreements: An Empirical, Comparative, and Normative Analysis”, 2022, accessible online; | 更广泛而言，关于国家实践中的当前发展动态，参见C. Bradley、J. Goldsmith、O. Hathaway，“The Rise of Nonbinding International Agreements: An Empirical, Comparative, and Normative Analysis”，2022年，可在网上查阅； |
| O. Hathaway, “Non-Binding Agreements and International Law”, ASIL, International Law Behind the Headlines, Episode 33, 2022, [https://soundcloud.com/americansocietyofinternationallaw/international-law-behind-the-headlines-episode-33]. | O. Hathaway，“Non-Binding Agreements and International Law”，美国国际法学会，“头条背后的国际法”节目，第33期，2022年， [https://soundcloud.com/americansocietyofinternationallaw/international-law-behind-the-headlines-episode-33 ]。 |
| The concern was recently expressed by the OECD in the Recueil de pratiques d’organisations internationales. Œuvrer à l’élaboration d’instruments internationaux plus efficaces/Compendium of International Organisations’ Practices. Working Towards More Effective International Instruments, 25 February 2022, accessible online. | 经合组织最近在“国际组织实践概略：努力提高国际文书的有效性”(2022年2月25日)中表达了关切。 可在网上查阅。 |
| Statement of the Legal Adviser of the United Nations, as cited by CAHDI Chair’s Summary, cited above, p. 1. | 上文援引的国际公法法律顾问委员会“主席的总结”第1页中引述的联合国法律顾问的声明。 |
| See infra, paras. 12–20. | 见下文第12至第20段。 |
| See also A. Aust, Modern Treaty Law and Practice, 3rd ed. (CUP:2013), Chapter 3. | 另见：A. Aust，Modern Treaty Law and Practice，第3版(剑桥大学出版社，2013年)，第3章。 |
| Yearbook … 2011, vol. II (2), p. 175, para. 366. | 《2011年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第175页，第366段。 |
| A/C.6/76/SR.18, para. 50. | A/C.6/76/SR.18，第50段。 |
| Para. 6 of the commentary on draft Article 2, Yearbook… 1966, vol. II, p. 189. | 第2条草案评注第6段，《1966年…年鉴》，第二卷，第189页。 |
| Official Records of the General Assembly, Seventy-third session Supplement 10 (A/73/10), para. 9 of the commentary on conclusion 10. | 《大会正式记录，第七十三届会议，补编第10号》(A/73/10)，结论10评注第9段。 |
| Ibid., seventy-sixth session (A/76/10), para. 5 of the commentary on Guideline 4. | 同上，第七十六届会议(A/76/10)，准则4评注第5段。 |
| Ibid., seventy-fourth session (A/74/10), para. 1 of the commentary on draft Principle 17. | 同上，第七十四届会议(A/74/10)，原则17草案评注第1段。 |
| Ibid., para. 6 of the commentary on draft Principle 23; | 同上，原则23草案评注第6段； |
| see also about the “documents” considered as “peace agreements” in the United Nations peace agreements database, ibid., footnote 1359. | 另见联合国和平协议数据库中被视为“和平协议”的“文件”，同上，脚注 1359。 |
| On the related practice of the Treaty Section of the United Nations, see particularly Treaty Handbook, United Nations, section 5.3. | 关于联合国条约科的相关实践，尤请参阅联合国《条约手册》第5.3节。 |
| A/C.6/76/SR.19, para. 19. | A/C.6/76/SR.19，第19段。 |
| Judgment of 1 July 1994, I.C.J. Reports 1994, p. 121, para. 25. | 1994年7月1日的判决，《1994年国际法院案例汇编》，第121页，第25段。 |
| Judgment of 2 February 2017, preliminary objection, I.C.J. Reports 2017, pp. 22–25, paras. 41–50 (para. 42 for the quote). | 2017年2月2日的判决，初步反对意见，《2017年国际法院案例汇编》，第22至第25页，第41至第50段(所援引内容见第42段)。 |
| Judgment of 1 October 2018, I.C.J. Reports 2018, p. 543, para. 105. | 2018年10月1日的判决，《2018年国际法院案例汇编》，第543页，第105段。 |
| Judgment of 1 October 2018, I.C.J. Reports 2018, p. 540, para. 97. | 2018年10月1日的判决，《2018年国际法院案例汇编》，第540页，第97段。 |
| Judgment of 1 October 2018, I.C.J. Reports 2018, p. 539, para. 91. | 2018年10月1日的判决，《2018年国际法院案例汇编》，第539页，第91段。 |
| See pp. 543 and ff., paras. 105 and ff., for the examination, one by one, of the agreements invoked by the Applicant in this case. | 对此案中原告所援引的协定进行的逐一审查，见第543页及以后各页，第105段及以后各段。 |
| Judgment of 14 March 2012, in the case concerning the Delimitation of the maritime boundary in the Bay of Bengal (Bangladesh/Myanmar), Rep. 2012, p. 35, para. 89. | 孟加拉湾海洋划界案(孟加拉国/缅甸)2012年3月14日的判决，《2012年案例汇编》，第35页，第89段。 |
| See in particular on this point the decision of the Conciliation Commission between Timor-leste and Australia dated 19 September 2016, paras. 55 ff. [https://pcacases.com/web/sendAttach/10052]. | 关于这一点，尤请参阅东帝汶和澳大利亚调解委员会2016年9月19日的决定，第55段及以后各段[https://pcacases.com/web/sendAttach/10052 ]。 |
| See for example the agreements identified by O. Schachter, “The Twilight Existence of Nonbinding International Agreements”, American Journal of International Law, 1977, pp. 296–304; | 例如见O. Schachter所确定的协定，“The Twilight Existence of Nonbinding International Agreements”，《美国国际法杂志》，1977年，第296至第304页； |
| Ph. Gautier, Essai sur la définition des traités entre Etats. La pratique de la Belgique aux confins du droit des traités, Bruylant, Bruxelles, 1993, pp. 312–375 and particularly pp. 323 and ff. for the practice; | Ph. Gautier，Essai sur la définition des traités entre Etats. La pratique de la Belgique aux confins du droit des traités，布鲁塞尔布吕朗出版社，1993年，第312至第375页，关于实践问题，尤请参见第323页及以后各页； |
| M. Forteau, A. Miron, A. Pellet, Droit international public (Nguyen Quoc Dinh), LGDJ-lextenso, Paris, 2022, No. 304 and ff. | M. Forteau、A. Miron、A. Pellet，《国际公法(阮国定)》，LGDJ-lextenso出版社，巴黎，2022年，第304页及以后各页。 |
| See also the analysis of the Founding Act on NATO/Russia Relations of 1997 by Ph. Gautier in Annuaire français de droit international, 1997, pp. 82–92. | 另见Ph. Gautier对《北约/俄罗斯关系基本文件》的分析，《法国国际法年刊》，1997年，第82至第92页。 |
| The commentary on Article 3 of the corresponding 1994 ILC draft does not contain further details on this point. | 国际法委员会1994年相应草案的第3条相关评注内未包含有关这一点的进一步详细信息。 |
| See Yearbook…, 1994, vol. II (2), pp. 92–95. | 见《1994年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第92至第95页。 |
| See the Guide to reporting under the Water Convention and as contribution to SDG indicator 6.5.2 of the UNECE, United Nations, Geneva, 2020, Section 2, pp. 13–15. | 见联合国欧洲经济委员会《根据〈水道公约〉并作为对可持续发展目标指标6.5.2的贡献进行报告的指南》，日内瓦，2020年，第2节，第13至第15页。 |
| See for example the Step-by-step monitoring methodology for SDG indicator 6.5.2 version “2020”, p. 3 ([https://www.unwater.org/app/uploads/2020/02/SDG_652_Step-by-step_methodology_2020_ENG.pdf]): “Arrangement for water cooperation refers to: a bilateral or multilateral treaty, convention, agreement or other arrangement, such as memorandum of understanding, between riparian States that provides a framework for cooperation on transboundary water management”. | 例如见《可持续发展目标指标6.5.2分步监测方法(2020版)》第3页 ([https://www.unwater.org/app/uploads/2020/02/SDG_652_Step-by-step_methodology_2020_ENG.pdf ])：“水合作安排系指：沿岸国家间的双边或多边条约、公约、协定或诸如谅解备忘录等其他安排，其中提供了跨界水管理合作框架。” |
| Article 16: “This Charter is not intended to create any legal rights or obligations” ([https://www.fsb.org/wp-content/uploads/r_090925d.pdf?page_moved=1]). | 第16条：“本章程无意确立任何法律权利或义务” ([https://www.fsb.org/wp-content/uploads/r_090925d.pdf?page_moved=1 ])。 |
| Non-legally binding authoritative statement of principles for a global consensus on the management, conservation and sustainable development of all types of forests, 21 April 1992, A/CONF.151/6 ([https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/144461?ln=en]). | 1992年4月21日《关于所有类型森林的经营、保护和可持续发展的全球协商一致的无法律约束力的权威性原则声明》，A/CONF.151/6 ([https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/144461?ln=en ])。 |
| See for example United Nations General Assembly Resolution 69/292 of 19 June 2015 which plans for the development of such an instrument on marine biological diversity of areas beyond national jurisdiction. | 例如见联合国大会2015年6月19日第69/292号决议，其中计划就国家管辖范围以外区域的海洋生物多样性问题拟订这样一项文书。 |
| See in particular A. Aust, “The Theory and Practice of Informal International Instruments”, International and Comparative Law Quarterly, 1986, pp. 796 and ff.; | 尤请参阅：A. Aust，“The Theory and Practice of Informal International Instruments”，《国际法和比较法季刊》，1986年，第796页及以后各页； |
| Ph. Gautier, Essai sur la définition des traités entre Etats. La pratique de la Belgique aux confins du droit des traités, Bruylant, Bruxelles, 1993, pp. 353 and ff., especially pp. 352–352 on the doctrinal debates on the relevant criteria. | Ph. Gautier，Essai sur la définition des traités entre Etats. La pratique de la Belgique aux confins du droit des traités，布鲁塞尔布吕朗出版社，1993年，第353页及以后各页，尤其是关于相关标准的理论辩论的第352至第352页。 |
| ICJ, International Status of South-West Africa, Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 1950, p. 140. | 国际法院咨询意见，西南非洲的国际地位，《1950年国际法院案例汇编》，第140页。 |
| Oppenheim’s International Law, Vol. 1, Parts 2 to 4, Longman, 1992, pp. 1209–1210, note 8. | 《奥本海国际法》，第1卷，第2至第4部分，朗曼出版社，1992年，第1209至第1210页，注释8。 |
| See O. Schachter, “The Twilight Existence of Nonbinding International Agreements”, American Journal of International Law, 1977, p. 301. | 见：O. Schachter，“The Twilight Existence of Nonbinding International Agreements”，《美国国际法杂志》，1977年，第301页。 |
| See also M. Forteau, A. Miron, A. Pellet, Droit international public, cited above, No. 304: non-legally binding agreements “sont aux traités ce que les recommandations sont aux décisions des organisations internationales” [“are to treaties what recommendations are to decisions of international organizations”]. | 另见：上文援引的M. Forteau、A. Miron、A. Pellet，《国际公法》，第304页：不具法律约束力的协定“sont aux traités ce que les recommandations sont aux décisions des organisations internationales” [“之于条约，相当于建议之于国际组织的决定”]。 |
| See for example United Nations General Assembly Resolution 47/191 of 22 December 1992 putting in place “institutional arrangements to follow up the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development”. | 例如见联合国大会1992年12月22日关于建立起“联合国环境与发展会议体制方面的后续安排”的第47/191号决议。 |
| See recently on the topic, A. Zimmerman, N. Jauer, “Legal Shades of Grey? Indirect Legal Effects of ‘Memoranda of Understanding’”, Archiv. des V., 2021, pp. 278–299. | 见A. Zimmerman、N. Jauer最近关于该专题的著述，“Legal Shades of Grey? Indirect Legal Effects of ‘Memoranda of Understanding’”，国际法档案库，2021年，第278至第299页。 |
| See para. 3 of the commentary on Article 51 of the ILC draft on the law of treaties: Yearbook …, 1966, vol. II, p. 249: “The theory has sometimes been advanced that an agreement terminating a treaty must be cast in the same form as the treaty which is to be terminated or at least constitute a treaty form of equal weight. | 见国际法委员会条约法草案第51条评注第3段，《1966年…年鉴》，第二卷，第249页：“有一派理论鼓吹终止条约的协议必须与所拟终止的条约出于同样形式，或至少以比重相等的条约形式作成。 |
| The Commission, however, concluded that this theory reflects the constitutional practice of particular States and not a rule of international law. | 但委员会的结论是此种理论仅反映某些国家的宪政惯例，并非国际法规则。 |
| In its opinion, international law does not accept the theory of the ‘acte contraire’. | 据委员会的看法，国际法不接受“相反行为”的理论。 |
| The States concerned are always free to choose the form in which they arrive at their agreement to terminate the treaty. | 关系国家总可自由选择达成终止条约的协议的方式。 |
| In doing so, they will doubtless take into account their own constitutional requirements, but international law requires no more than that they should consent to the treaty’s termination.” | 它们作此种协议，无疑会顾到本身的宪法要件，国际法所要求的只是它们必须同意终止条约。” |
| See in particular Yearbook … 1963, vol. II, pp. 202–203, and 1966, vol. II, pp. 28–31. | 尤请参阅：《1963年…年鉴》，第二卷，第202至第203页； 1966年，第二卷，第28至第31页。 |
| See J. Barberis, “Le concept de ‘traité international’ et ses limites”, Annuaire français de droit international, 1984, p. 259. | 见J. Barberis，“Le concept de ‘traité international’ et ses limites”，《法国国际法年刊》，1984年，第259页。 |
| See also, e.g, UNCLOS Art. 60, para. 5. | 例如，另见《联合国海洋法公约》第六十条，第5款。 |
| See the United Nations General Assembly Resolution 47/10 of 28 October 1992. | 见联合国大会1992年10月28日第47/10号决议。 |
| The Court of Justice of the European Union, for example, ruled that the European Commission had not been given the power under the European Union treaties to sign non-legally binding agreements with a third State without the prior authorization of the Council: see CJUE, Council v. Commission, 28 July 2016, C-660/13, para. 38. | 举例来说，欧洲联盟法院裁定：欧洲联盟诸条约未赋予欧盟委员会在未经理事会事先授权情况下与第三国签订不具法律约束力的协定之权限。 见欧洲联盟法院，理事会诉委员会，2016年7月28日，C-660/13，第38段。 |
| J. Barberis, “Le concept de ‘traité international’ et ses limites”, Annuaire français de droit international, 1984, p. 258. | J. Barberis，“Le concept de ‘traité international’ et ses limites”，《法国国际法年刊》，1984年，第258页。 |
| See for example, Court of Justice of the European Union, Commission v. Greece, 12 February 2009, C-45/07, para. 29. | 例如见欧洲联盟法院，欧盟委员会诉希腊，2009年2月12日，C-45/07，第29段。 |
| See O. Schachter, “The Twilight Existence of Nonbinding International Agreements”, American Journal of International Law, 1977, p. 300: “[…] a nonbinding agreement, however seriously taken by the parties, does not engage their legal responsibility”. | 见O. Schachter，“The Twilight Existence of Nonbinding International Agreements”，《美国国际法杂志》，1977年，第300页：“[…]一项不具约束力的协定，无论缔约方对其何其重视，均不赋予缔约方以法律上的责任”。 |
| See Articles on State Responsibility, Art. 16. | 见关于国家责任的条款，第16条。 |
| See for example ICJ, Oil Platforms, Judgment, 12 December 1996, I.C.J. Reports 1996, p. 815, para. 31: “In the light of the foregoing, the Court considers that the objective of peace and friendship proclaimed in Article I of the Treaty of 1955 is such as to throw light on the interpretation of the other Treaty provisions, and in particular of Articles IV and X. | 例如见：国际法院，石油平台案，1996年12月12日的判决，《1996年国际法院案例汇编》，第815页，第31段――“有鉴于上述情况，本法院认为，1955年条约第一条所昭告之和平与友好目标有助于解释该条约其他规定，尤其是第四条和第十条。 |
| Article I is thus not without legal significance for such an interpretation, but cannot, taken in isolation, be a basis for the jurisdiction of the Court”; | 因此，就上述解释而言，第一条在法律上并非无意义，但是不能孤立地作为本法院裁判的依据”； |
| compare with Certain Questions of Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters (Djibouti v. France), Judgment, 4 June 2008, I.C.J. Reports 2008, pp. 215–216, para. 101, and p. 216, para. 104. | 可与刑事事宜互助的若干问题案(吉布提诉法国)相比较，2008年6月4日的判决，《2008年国际法院案例汇编》，第215至第216页，第101段，以及第216页，第104段。 |
| See also J. d’Aspremont, “Les dispositions non normatives des actes juridiques conventionnels à la lumière de la jurisprudence de la Cour internationale de Justice”, RBDI 2003, pp. 496–520. | 另见：J. d’Aspremont，“Les dispositions non normatives des actes juridiques conventionnels à la lumière de la jurisprudence de la Cour internationale de Justice”，《比利时国际法评论》，2003年，第496至第520页。 |
| In the articles adopted on State responsibility at first reading in 1996, the Commission considered that “[t]he case covered by the article therefore comprises, first, the request of a State to be permitted to act in a specific case in a manner not in conformity with the obligation and, secondly, the expression of consent, by the State benefiting from the obligation, to such conduct by the first State. | 委员会在1996年一读通过的关于国家责任的条款当中认为，“因此，该条所涵盖的情况由以下内容组成：首先，一国请求允许在某种特定情况中以不符合义务的方式行事； 其次，义务受益国表示同意该国如此行事。 |
| It is the combined effect of these two elements which results in an agreement that, in the case in point, precludes the wrongfulness of the act. | 正是上述两项要件相结合，导致达成了此种情况下解除该行为不法性的协议。 |
| ” (Yearbook of the ILC, 1979, vol. II, pp. 109–110, Article 29 on consent, commentary, para. 3). | ”(《1979年国际法委员会年鉴》，第二卷，第109至第110页，关于同意问题的第29条评注，第3段)。 |
| See more broadly on the question J. Salmon, “Les accords non formalisés ou solo consensu”, Annuaire français de droit international, 1999, pp. 1–28. | 要更广泛地了解该问题，见：J. Salmon, “Les accords non formalisés ou solo consensu”, 《法国国际法年刊》，1999年，第1至第28页。 |
| Oppenheim’s International Law, vol. 1, Parts 2 to 4, Longman, 1992, p. 1189. | 《奥本海国际法》，第1卷，第2至第4部分，朗曼出版社，1992年，第1189页。 |
| Ibid., p. 1202, note 18. | 同上，第1202页，注释18。 |
| See especially A. Rodiles, Coalitions of the Willing and International Law. The Interplay between Formality and Informality, CUP, 2018. | 尤请参阅：A. Rodiles，Coalitions of the Willing and International Law. The Interplay between Formality and Informality，剑桥大学出版社，2018年。 |
| For example, on the practice of the European Union, see R. Wessel, “Normative Transformations in EU External Relations: The Phenomenon of ‘Soft’ International Agreements”, West European Politics, 2021, pp. 72–92. | 例如，关于欧洲联盟的实践，见：R. Wessel, “Normative Transformations in EU External Relations: The Phenomenon of ‘Soft’ International Agreements”，《西欧政治》，2021年，第72至第92页。 |
| The Secretariat of the ILC recommended making it a separate topic (see Long-term programme of work, International Law Commission, A/CN.4/679/Add.1 to 3, 31 March 2016, paras. 13 and ff.). | 国际法委员会秘书处建议将之另设一个专题(见国际法委员会“长期工作方案”，A/CN.4/679/Add.1至3，2016年3月31日，第13段及以后各段)。 |
| The Inter-American Juridical Committee chose to include them in its study. | 美洲法律委员会选择将上述内容纳入其研究。 |
| The question of the international or domestic nature of an inter-State agreement referring to domestic law as the applicable law has been discussed for example in the case Loan Agreement between Italy and Costa Rica, RIAA, vol. XXV, p. 61, para. 37 (the Tribunal concluded that it was an international agreement). | 举例来说，援引国内法作为适用法的国家间协定具有国际性质还是国内性质的问题，在意大利与哥斯达黎加之间的贷款协议案中进行过讨论，《国际仲裁裁决汇编》，第二十五卷，第61页，第37段(仲裁法院得出结论认定，该协议属国际协议)。 |
| On this point, see supra, para. 2. | 关于这一点，见上文第2段。 |
| The statute of the Commission only envisages the appointment of a Special Rapporteur in the case of progressive development of international law. | 委员会章程只设想在国际法的逐渐发展的工作中任命一特别报告员。 |
| See generally, United Nations, The Work of the International Law Commission, vol. I (2017) (9th ed.), (United Nations publication, Sales. No. E.17.V.2). | 一般见联合国，《国际法委员会的工作》，第一卷(2017年)(第9版)，(联合国出版物，出售品编号：E.17.V.2)。 |
| See Yearbook … 1980, vol. II (Part Two), pp. 169–170, para. 192. | 见《1980年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第169至170页，第192段。 |
| While there is a synergy for the overall work of the Commission, the studies and surveys by the Secretariat are independent of reports of the Special Rapporteurs and, in the nature of the work of the Commission, are not intended to be a replacement thereof. | 虽然委员会的总体工作具有协同作用，但秘书处的研究和调查独立于特别报告员的报告，而且就委员会工作的性质而言，并不打算取代特别报告员的报告。 |
| See Yearbook … 1996, vol. II (Part Two), p. 96, para. 234; | 见《1996年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第96页，第234段； |
| see also article 20 of the statute of the International Law Commission. | 另见《国际法委员会章程》第20条。 |
| At its fourth session (1949), the General Assembly authorized the annual payment of honoraria to the Chair and the Special Rapporteurs of the Commission in respect of work performed by them between sessions. | 联大第四届会议(1949年)批准每年向委员会主席和特别报告员支付酬金，作为他们在闭会期间所做工作的报酬。 |
| See Official Records of the General Assembly, Fourth Session, Fifth Committee, Summary Records of Meetings, 20 September–8 December 1949, 208th Meeting, 26 October 1949. | 见《大会正式记录，第四届会议，第五委员会，会议简要记录》，1949年9月20日至12月8日，第208次会议，1949年10月26日。 |
| A/53/643. | A/53/643. |
| See Yearbook … 2002, vol. II (Part Two), pp. 102–103, paras. 525–531; | 见《2002年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第102-103页，第525-531段； |
| Yearbook … 2003, vol. II (Part Two), p. 101, para. 447; Yearbook … | 《2003年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第101页，第447段； |
| 2004, vol. II (Part Two), pp. 120–121, para. 369; | 《2004年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第120-121页，第369段； |
| Yearbook … 2005, vol. II (Part Two), p. 92, para. 501; Yearbook … | 《2005年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第92页，第501段； |
| 2006, vol. II (Part Two), p. 187, para. 269; | 《2006年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第187页，第269段； |
| Yearbook … 2007, vol. II (Part Two), p. 100, para. 379; Yearbook … | 《2007年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第100页，第379段； |
| 2008, vol. II (Part Two), p. 148, para. 358; | 《2008年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第148页，第358段； |
| Yearbook … 2009, vol. II (Part Two), p. 151, para. 240; Yearbook … | 《2009年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第151页，第240段； |
| 2010, vol. II (Part Two), p. 203, para. 396; | 《2010年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第203页，第396段； |
| Yearbook … 2011, vol. II (Part Two), p. 178, para. 399; Yearbook … | 《2011年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第178页，第399段； |
| 2012, vol. II (Part Two), p. 87, para. 280; | 《2012年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第87页，第280段； |
| Yearbook … 2013, vol. II (Part Two), p. 79, para. 181; Yearbook … | 《2013年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第79页，第181段； |
| 2014, vol. II (Part Two) and Corr.1, p. 165, para. 281; | 《2014年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)和Corr.1, 第165页，第281段； |
| Yearbook … 2015, vol. II (Part Two), p. 87, para. 299; Yearbook … | 《2015年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第87页，第299段； |
| 2016, vol. II (Part Two), p. 229, para. 333; | 《2016年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第229页，第333段； |
| Yearbook … 2017, vol. II (Part Two), p. 150, para. 282; | 《2017年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第150页，第282段； |
| Official Records of the General Assembly, Seventy-third Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/73/10), para. 382; | 《大会正式记录，第七十三届会议，补编第10号》(A/73/10)，第382段； |
| ibid., Seventy-fourth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/74/10), para. 302; | 同上，《第七十四届会议，补编第10号》(A/74/10)，第302段； |
| and ibid., Seventy-sixth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/76/10), para. 317. | 同上，《第七十六届会议，补编第10号》(A/76/10)，第317段。 |
| The statute of the Commission only envisages the appointment of a special rapporteur in the case of progressive development of international law. | 委员会章程只设想在国际法的逐渐发展的工作中任命一特别报告员。 |
| See generally, United Nations, The Work of the International Law Commission, vol. I (2017) (ninth edition), (United Nations publication, Sales. No. E.17.V.2). | 一般见联合国，《国际法委员会的工作》，第一卷(2017年)(第9版)，(联合国出版物，出售品编号：E.17.V.2)。 |
| See Yearbook … 2002, vol. II (Part Two), pp. 102–103, paras. 525–531; | 见《2002年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第102-103页，第525-531段； |
| Yearbook … 2003, vol. II (Part Two), p. 101, para. 447; Yearbook … | 《2003年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第101页，第447段； |
| 2004, vol. II (Part Two), pp. 120–121, para. 369; | 《2004年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第120-121页，第369段； |
| Yearbook … 2005, vol. II (Part Two), p. 92, para. 501; Yearbook … | 《2005年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第92页，第501段； |
| 2006, vol. II (Part Two), p. 187, para. 269; | 《2006年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第187页，第269段； |
| Yearbook … 2007, vol. II (Part Two), p. 100, para. 379; Yearbook … | 《2007年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第100页，第379段； |
| 2008, vol. II (Part Two), p. 148, para. 358; | 《2008年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第148页，第358段； |
| Yearbook … 2009, vol. II (Part Two), p. 151, para. 240; Yearbook … | 《2009年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第151页，第240段； |
| 2010, vol. II (Part Two), p. 203, para. 396; | 《2010年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第203页，第396段； |
| Yearbook … 2011, vol. II (Part Two), p. 178, para. 399; Yearbook … | 《2011年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第178页，第399段； |
| 2012, vol. II (Part Two), p. 87, para. 280; | 《2012年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第87页，第280段； |
| Yearbook … 2013, vol. II (Part Two), p. 79, para. 181; Yearbook … | 《2013年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第79页，第181段； |
| 2014, vol. II (Part Two) and Corr.1, p. 165, para. 281; | 《2014年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)和Corr.1, 第165页，第281段； |
| Yearbook … 2015, vol. II (Part Two), p. 87, para. 299; Yearbook … | 《2015年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第87页，第299段； |
| 2016, vol. II (Part Two), p. 229, para. 333; | 《2016年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第229页，第333段； |
| Yearbook … 2017, vol. II (Part Two), p. 150, para. 282; | 《2017年…年鉴》，第二卷(第二部分)，第150页，第282段； |
| Official Records of the General Assembly, Seventy-third Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/73/10), para. 382; | 《大会正式记录，第七十三届会议，补编第10号》(A/73/10)，第382段； |
| ibid., Seventy-fourth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/74/10), para. 302; | 同上，《第七十四届会议，补编第10号》(A/74/10)，第302段； |
| and ibid., Seventy-sixth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/76/10), para. 317. | 同上，《第七十六届会议，补编第10号》(A/76/10)，第317段。 |
| |
