CYIL vol. 8 (2017)

ZUZANA TRÁVNÍČKOVÁ CYIL 8 ȍ2017Ȏ measures that states that “ unilateral coercive measures and legislation are contrary to international law, international humanitarian law, the Charter of the United Nations and the norms and principles governing peaceful relations among States ”. This particular provision seems to bear a clear message about the illegality of UCM. However, there are other statements included in the same resolution 16 whose language interpretation indicates that there is a group of UCM that are in conformity with international law. The second aspect examined in ICJ decision making (and the third question defined above) focuses on the support of a particular resolution. Table 1 illustrates the voting on selected resolutions. Table 1. Voting on selected GA resolutions relating to UCM 17181920

Date of adoption

Votes against

GA Official Report A/38/PV.104 A/51/PV.67 A/51/PV.82 A/53/PV.43 A/54/PV.87 A/55/PV.41 A/55/PV.81 A/57/PV.31 A/61/PV.81 A/62/PV.76 A/68/PV.71 A/68/PV.70 A/69/PV.73 A/70/PV.80 A/70/PV.81 A/71/PV.65

Resolution Topic

Votes for

Abstentions

A/RES/38/197 DC 20. 12. 1983 119

19

5

A/RES/51/22 EL 27. 11. 1996 A/RES/51/103 HR 12. 12. 1996 A/RES/53/10 EL 26. 10. 1998

56 57 80

4

76 59 67 46 10 46

45

2 3 2 9 2

A/RES/54/200 DC 22. 12. 1999 107

A/RES/55/6

EL 26.10.2006 136 + 2 17

A/RES/55/110 HR 4. 12. 2000 117 + 2 18

2

A/RES/57/5

EL 16. 9. 2002 133 + 7 19

A/RES/61/170 HR 19. 12. 2006 131 A/RES/62/162 HR 18. 12. 2007 132 A/RES/68/200 EL 20.12.2013 127 + 2 A/RES/68/162 HR 18. 12. 2013 135 A/RES/69/180 HR 18. 12. 2014 134 A/RES/70/151 HR 17. 12. 2015 135 A/RES/70/185 DC 22. 12. 2015 131 A/RES/71/193 HR 19. 12. 2016 133

54 54

- -

2

50 + 1 20

55 53 54

0 1 0

2

49

54

0

Source: Author. Based on resolutions and Official records as listed in the table.

16 “Urges all States to stop adopting or implementing any unilateral measures not in accordance with international law”…, “urges all States not to adopt any unilateral measures not in accordance with international law” . UN GA Res 62/162 Human rights and unilateral coercive measures (18 December 2007) UN Doc A/RES/62/162. 17 Subsequently, the delegations of Lithuania and Suriname informed the Secretariat that they had intended to vote in favour. 18 Subsequently, the delegations of Kuwait and Tajikistan informed the Secretariat that they had intended to vote in favour. 19 Subsequently, the delegations of Bhutan, Côte d’Ivoire, Ethiopia, Gabon, Mongolia, Sao Tome and Principe and Togo informed the Secretariat that they had intended to vote in favour. 20 Subsequently, the delegations of the Bahamas and Saint Kitts and Nevis informed the Secretariat that they had intended to vote in favour; the delegation of Switzerland informed the Secretariat that it had intended to abstain.

122