CYIL vol. 14 (2023)

MAREK ZUKAL – ANNA MATOUŠKOVÁ CYIL 14 (2023) that these issues are outside the scope of the PTHHA. The politicization of the debate meant that the idea of ending consideration of the issue was no longer viable. Therefore, in the zero-draft resolution, the facilitator proposed to reduce the frequency of consideration of the issue from triennial to quinquennial, instead of ending consideration. During the informal consultations, most delegations either supported this approach or expressed flexibility (only El Salvador and Argentina said they would have preferred to maintain the triennial consideration). In the end, the resolution reducing the frequency of consideration to quinquennial passed silence procedure, and the Sixth Committee will not revert to the issue until 2027, during the 82 nd session of the General Assembly. Given the politicization of the debate, this outcome can be seen as a success, even though it fell short of the facilitator’s original goal. Brief overview of some other agenda items As mentioned above, the agenda of the Sixth Committee in 2022 was exceptionally full. It is therefore not possible to describe in detail the negotiation under all agenda items here. Moreover, the negotiations under some agenda items during this session were very similar to those that had taken place during the 76 th session of the General Assembly. For example, the negotiations (and their outcome) on the scope and application of the principle of universal jurisdiction were very similar 23 . Therefore, the following paragraphs provide only a brief overview of the consideration of three other agenda items, all of which relate to the work of the ILC. Peremptory rules of general international law (jus cogens) In 2022, the ILC adopted in second reading the Draft Conclusions on Identification and Legal Consequences of Peremptory Norms of General International Law ( Jus Cogens ) 24 . This ILC product was discussed during the International Law Week. During the debate, a group of States expressed reservations or even criticism about the Draft Conclusions (e.g. Ireland, Canada, Germany, Israel or the United Kingdom). The critical delegations mentioned that not all comments and concerns of States on the Draft Conclusions had been taken into account; some (including the Czech Republic) also did not like the inclusion of a non exhaustive list of peremptory norms. They criticized that the list itself was not developed on the basis of the methodology for identifying peremptory norms proposed by the ILC itself. The informal consultations were led by the Legal Adviser of the Permanent Mission of Slovakia to the UN. The negotiations were very difficult, with one part of the membership insisting on the adoption of a standard resolution welcoming the outcome of the work of the ILC, and the other part wanting a more neutral wording by which the General Assembly would merely take note of the outcome. Morocco, for example, even questioned the need to adopt a standalone resolution on the issue, suggesting that the Draft Conclusions should only be mentioned in the omnibus resolution on the ILC report.

23 See ZUKAL, Marek and Jan MAIS, op. cit. , p. 392. 24 International Law Commission. Draft conclusions on identification and legal consequences of peremptory norms of general international law ( jus cogens ), with commentaries . 2022. Available here: https://legal.un.org/ilc/texts/ instruments/english/commentaries/1_14_2022.pdf.

462