Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dzt6s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-24T09:34:18.016Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Domestic Jurisdiction Clause of the Charter: A Belgian View

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 May 2009

Paul Eeckman
Paul Eeckman
Affiliation:
Doctor of Jurisprudence, University of Ghent, and was a graduate student in the Faculty of Political Science, Columbia University, 1954–1955.
Get access

Extract

It has become so common to refer to the domestic jurisdiction clause as one of the most controversial provisions of the UN Charter that it may reasonably be expected that a revision conference will be confronted with proposals for its amendment.

Type
Articles
Information
International Organization , Volume 9 , Issue 4 , November 1955 , pp. 477 - 485
Copyright
Copyright © The IO Foundation 1955

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 In this section the writer draws heavily upon the extremely lucid presentation of the Belgian position by J. Nisot at the eighth session of the General Assembly. See General Assembly, Ad Hoc Political Committee, Official Records (8th Session), p. 158–160.

2 Rolin, H., “The International Court of Justice and Domestic Jurisdiction. Notes on the Anglo-Iranian Case,” International Organization, VIII, p. 42–43Google Scholar. In the same sense, the definition of the reserved sphere, proposed by M. Vallindas; “C'est l'ensemble des questions qui sont au moment de leur naissance réglées quant au fond, exclusivement ou au moins principalement par le droit national, et qui ne sont point réglementées ou qui ne sont réglemenées que d'une manière secondaire par le droit international”. Annuaire de l'Institut de Droit International, 1954, v. 45, II, p. 130Google Scholar.

3 See however the important distinction made by ProfRousseau, Ch., between “une matière simplement visée par un traité international et une matière reglée par un traité international…”. Annuaire de i'Institutde Droit International, 1954, v. 45, II, p. 131Google Scholar.

4 See Preuss, L., “Article 2, Paragraph 7 of the Charter of the United Nations and Matters of Domestic Jurisdiction,“ Académie de Droit International, Receuil des Cours, v. 74, 1949, I, p. 606Google Scholar.

5 E.g., P. Guggenheim, C. Eagleton, Ch. Rousseau, L. M. Yepes.

6 Van Langenhove, F., La question des aborigines aux Nations Unies, Institut royal colonial belge, section des sciences morales et politiques, mèmoires, Collection in 8, t. XXXVII, fasc. 4, p. 77–78Google Scholar.

7 See letter to the Committee on Information from Non-Self-Governing Territories, United Nations Document A/AC.35/L.142.

8 The domestic jurisdiction exception has been invoked in the following cases: the Spanish situation, the second Greek question, the third Greek question, the Indonesian question, the question of Kashmir, the Czechoslovakian question, people of Indian origin in South Africa, violation of human rights in Bulgaria, Rumania and Hungary, race conflict in South Africa (apartheid question), Korean war, Moroccan and Tunisian questions, the question of Cyprus and the question of West New Guinea.

9 Goodrich, L. M. and Simons, A. P., The United Nations and the Maintenance of International Peace and Security, 1955, p. 172Google Scholar.

10 See van Kleffens, E. N., “Sovereignty in International Law,” Académie de Droit International, Receuil des Cours, v. 82, p. 104Google Scholar; L. Preuss, cited above, p. 636.

11 “Le trait distinctif de l'organe collectif réside en l'existence et la production d'une volonté propre et autorisée, orientée vers la poursuite d'un but statutaire et par la même nettement distincte des volontés particulières inspirées par la poursuite des fins individuelles.”

12 Rolin, H., De la volonté générale dans les organisations internationales, in La Technique et les Principes du Droit Public, Etudes en l'honneur de G. Scelle, t. II, p. 553–564Google Scholar.

13 L. M. Goodrch and A. P. Simons, cited above, p. 612.

14 Jones, H. H., ‘Domestic Jurisdiction–From the Covenant to the Charter,” Illinois Law Review, 1951, v. 46, p. 262Google Scholar.

15 “Le domaine réservé est celui des activités étatiques où la compétence de l'Etat n'est pas liée par le droit international. L'étendue de ce domaine dépend du droit international et varie suivant son développement” Annuaire de l'Institut de Droit International (hereinafter referred to as Annuaire), 1954, v. 45, II, p. 181Google Scholar.

16 “L'étendue de ce domaine dépend du droit international et se rétrécit suivant l'accroissement de ce dernier.” Observation by Giraud, M., Annuaire, v. 45, II, p. 178Google Scholar. But Professor Guggenheim has warned against what he calls an “inflationist” state of mind towards international law. See Annuaire, v. 45, p. 179.

17 Ibid., p. 151.

18 Observation by Sir Gerald Fitzmaurice, Ibid., p. 150.

19 See Bentwich, N. and Martin, A., Charter of the United Nations, 1950, p. 15Google Scholar.

20 Observations by Wehberg, M., Annuaire, 1954, v. 45, II, p. 124–125Google Scholar.

21 Yepes, J. M., La Réforme de la Charte des Nations Unies et le Droit International américain, in Revue genérale de Droit International Public, t. XXV, No. 4, 1954, p. 637Google Scholar.

22 L. M. Goodrich and A. P. Simons, cited above, p. 116–117.

23 Thereby is meant such action which in the practice of the UN organs would have come to be considered as intervention.

24 See Annuaire, 1954, v. 45, II, p. 195Google Scholar.

25 The suggestion was made by P. C. Jessup in the seminar on UN Charter revision during the Spring Semester 1955 at Columbia University.

26 “la méfiance du juge est malheureusement devenue l'un des traits caractéristiques de la vie internationale depuis 1945.” Annuaire, 1952, v. 44, I, p. 158Google Scholar.

27 UNCIO, Documents, v. 6, p. 110Google Scholar.