CYIL vol. 14 (2023)

CYIL 14 (2023) THREE QUARTERS OF A CENTURY OF THE UN INTERNATIONAL LAW COMMISSION… As a member of the Commission since 2007, I remember the times when diplomats from the permanent missions of States to the UN in Geneva were present as observers at the plenary sessions of the Commission. They are now very rarely seen if at all. The way of working in the Commission has also changed, especially in plenary sessions. Until about ten or fifteen years ago, plenary sessions were also polemical. The members of the Commission, indeed the majority of them, did not read the pre-written “statements” at plenary debates, which is now a generally introduced practice. In the last years, there were only a few members of the Commission who in the plenary sessions spoke freely and did not read their prepared statement from a computer or paper. Also, in the absence of the so-called “mini-debates” plenary sessions, once polemical especially regarding fundamental dilemmas of the topic discussed, the sessions have become readings of pre-written contributions. As a rule, there is very little confrontation of viewpoints at plenary sessions, except when the Special Rapporteur responds to the comments or critical remarks of Commissions’ members to his report while he is summarizing the discussion at the plenary session of the Commission. The confrontation of different views is mostly limited to the work in the drafting committee. However, the debate in the drafting committee is basically focused on concrete formulations of the Special Rapporteur’s proposed drafts of articles, conclusions, principles, or guidelines. The fact that there is limited time and little possibility for polemical discussions concerning the fundamental dilemmas of a topic seems also to be the consequence of too many topics dealt with by the Commission within a five-year period. It is also important to note that initiatives and proposals for new topics and projects for codification and progressive development of international law do not usually come from States (neither from international organization) but mostly from the members of the Commission, according to their views, orientations, and ambitions. The Commission’s new suggested topics are considered by the States in the 6 th Committee, but this is usually a rather formal consideration. Most importantly, the Commission lacks proposals of topics that were proposed by States and reflecting their needs for codification and progressive development of international law. According to the judgment of the writer of this article, the stated problems are mainly the consequence of the attitude of States and their diminished interest and responsiveness to the work of the Commission, rather than of the Commission itself. It would go too far to claim that the problems mentioned significantly burden the work and importance of the Commission. However, the time is coming when it will be necessary, perhaps within the framework of the UN reform efforts, to reflect on the Commission as well. A serious reflection within the Commission, especially on the way it works is also becoming urgent. Alain Pellet, a distinguished former member of the Commission, in commenting on the Commission’s work several years ago, also inter alia highlighted the choice of topics, their suitability, and the attitude of States concerning the codification proposals and other drafts of the Commission, as well as the selection of the members of the Commission and their (in)dependence as important problems to be dealt with in the consideration of the future work of the Commission. 31 Reflections on the future of the Commission and its work, its assistance to States and to the UN General Assembly in the progressive development and codification of international law inspire optimism, regardless of the problems mentioned above. The internationalization of all aspects of life and human creativity and challenges of globalization are on the rise and it is hoped that it will remain so, regardless of the contours of a new cold war which since 31 See PELLET, A., ibid, p. 301 id.

11