• |
Ministers'
Deputies Strasbourg,
12-13 September 2000 List
of items discussed and decisions taken 1.
The
Ad Hoc Committee of Legal
Advisers on Public International Law (CAHDI) held its 20th meeting in
Strasbourg, on 12 and 13 September 2000. The meeting was chaired by Ambassador Dr
Hilger (Germany),
Chairman of the CAHDI. The list of participants appears in Appendix I
and the agenda appears in Appendix II. 2.
The
CAHDI was informed by the Director General of Legal Affairs, Mr
De Vel, about recent developments concerning the Council of Europe.
Moreover, the CAHDI was informed of the decisions taken by the Committee of Ministers concerning the
Committee. 3.
The CAHDI held a fruitful exchange of views with Mr Krüger,
Deputy Secretary General of the Council of Europe, and one of the
representatives of the Organisation in the "Convention",
regarding developments on the preparation of a Charter of Fundamental
Rights in the European Union. The CAHDI agreed that there should be no
competing human rights systems between the EU and the Council of
Europe. Moreover, it decided to keep this item on its agenda and to
serve as a clearing house for the distribution of information relating
thereto. 4.
The
CAHDI examined a draft analytical report on “Expression of
consent by States to be bound by a treaty” prepared by the British
Institute of International and Comparative Law on the basis of the
replies by 37 member States and 5 observer States. Delegations and
observer States which have not yet sent their reply and those who wish
to make comments to the document are kindly invited to submit their
contributions shortly. 5.
Following the Committee of Ministers' request (cf. Decision
No. CM/751/26042000, 707th
meeting – Strasbourg, 26 April 2000), the
CAHDI considered the Parliamentary Assembly Recommendation 1458 (2000)
towards a uniform interpretation of Council of Europe conventions:
creation of a general judicial authority as well as the report of
the Parliamentary Assembly relating thereto. The CAHDI was informed by
the Czech delegation about the underlying reasons for the proposal by
the Czech Republic for the setting up of a General Judicial Authority
of the Council of Europe which was at the basis of the Parliamentary
Assembly recommendation. The CAHDI concluded that it was not possible
to deliver a single opinion representing the position of the Committee
as a whole and adopted by subsequent written procedure the opinion in
Appendix III. 6.
In the context of its activity on the law and practice relating to reservations to
international treaties carried out with the assistance of the Group of Experts on Reservations to International Treaties
(DI-E-RIT), the
Chairman of the DI-E-RIT, Ambassador Magnuson (Sweden) informed members of the CAHDI about the third meeting of the DI-E-RIT.
The CAHDI adopted the report relating thereto. Also
in the context of this activity at the DI-E-RIT's request, the CAHDI
held a fruitful exchange of views with Professor Pellet, member of the
International Law Commission (ILC) of the United Nations and Special
Rapporteur on reservations to international treaties about
developments concerning the implementation of this activity by the ILC
and in particular Professor Pellet's fifth report on reservations to
international treaties. In
the context of its operation as European Observatory of
Reservations to International Treaties, the CAHDI considered a
list of outstanding declarations and reservations to international
treaties. 7.
The CAHDI held a fruitful exchange of views with Mr Kohona,
Chief of the Treaty Section of the United Nations regarding the
practice of the United Nations Secretary General on the depositary of
multilateral treaties. 8.
The CAHDI held an exchange of views on developments concerning
the International Criminal Court and was informed about the
organisation by the Council of Europe of a consultation meeting on the
implications of the ratification of the Rome Statute of the
International Criminal Court on the internal legal order of the member
States of the Council of Europe (Strasbourg, 16-17 May 2000). 9.
The CAHDI held an exchange of views on the work of the Sixth
Commission of the General Assembly of United nations and of the ILC.
In this context, the CAHDI examined a non-edited version of the Report
of the 52nd Session of the ILC (Geneva, 1 May to 9 June and 10 July to
18 August 2000), obtained as a result of Council of Europe and United
Nations inter-secretariat contacts at the CAHDI's request, and a
report of the 52nd session of the ILC, prepared by Professor Simma,
member of the ILC, for the attention of the members of the CAHDI. 10.
The CAHDI was informed about developments concerning the
implementation of international instruments protecting the victims of
armed conflicts as well as the implementation and the functioning of
the Tribunals established by UN Security Council Resolutions 927
(1993) and 955 (1994). 11.
The CAHDI held an exchange of views on developments concerning
protection of sub aquatic cultural heritage and work under way within
the framework of UNESCO. 12.
The CAHDI examined the request by the Ligue Internationale
contre le Racisme et l'Antisémitisme (LICRA) for observer status
with the CAHDI. The CAHDI thanked LICRA for its interest in the work
of the Committee but concluded that in view of LICRA's statutory aim
and activities the CAHDI would not be the most suitable
committee for LICRA to attend as observer and suggested that other
committees for which LICRA had requested observer status would be more
fitting. 13.
The CAHDI adopted draft specific terms of reference for
2001-2002 as they appear in Appendix IV and decided to request their
approval by the Committee of Ministers. 14.
The
CAHDI elected Ambassador Tomka (Slovak Republic) and Ambassador
Michel (Suisse) respectively as Chair and Vice-Chair for one year. 15.
The
CAHDI decided to hold its next
meeting in Strasbourg, from 6 to 7 March 2001 and adopted the
preliminary draft agenda in Appendix V. APPENDIX I LIST OF PARTICIPANTS ALBANIA/ALBANIE: Mrs Ledia HYSI, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, TIRANA ANDORRA/ANDORRE: Mme Iolanda SOLA, Ministère des Relations extérieures- ANDORRE LA
VIEILLE AUSTRIA/AUTRICHE: Mr Hans WINKLER, Ministry for Foreign Affairs - WIEN BELGIUM/BELGIQUE: Mme
A.M. SNYERS, Ministère des Affaires Etrangères - BRUXELLES BULGARIA /BULGARIE: Mrs Katia TODOROVA, Ministry of Foreign Affairs - SOFIA CROATIA /CROATIE: Ms Andreja
METELKO-ZGOMBIĆ, Ministry of Foreign Affairs - ZAGREB CYPRUS /CHYPRE: Mrs Evie GEORGIOU-ANTONIOU, Counsel of the Republic - NICOSIA CZECH REPUBLIC /REPUBLIQUE TCHEQUE:
Mr Jaroslav HORAK, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, - PRAGUE Mr
Jiři MALENOVSKÝ, Constitutional Court - 660 83 BRNO Monsieur
l'Ambassadeur Jiri MUCHA, Représentation Permanente de la République
Tchèque auprès du Conseil de l'Europe DENMARK/DANEMARK: Mr Hans KLINGENBERG, Ministry of Foreign Affairs - COPENHAGEN ESTONIA/ESTONIE:
Mrs Marina KALJURAND, Ministry of Foreign Affairs -TALLINN FINLAND/FINLANDE:
Mr Esko KIURU, Ministry for Foreign Affairs - HELSINKI Mrs Marja LEHTO, Ministry for Foreign Affairs - HELSINKI FRANCE: Mme
Frédérique COULEE, Ministère des Affaires étrangères - PARIS Monsieur
Jean-Luc FLORENT, Ministère des Affaires étrangères - PARIS GEORGIE:
Mr Gela BEZHUASHVILI, Ministry of Foreign Affairs - TBILISI GERMANY/ALLEMAGNE: Dr Reinhard HILGER, Federal Foreign Office - BERLIN (Chairman/Président) Dr
Ernst MARTENS, Federal Foreign Office - BERLIN GREECE/GRECE: Ms Phani DASCALOPOULOU-LIVADA, Ministry of Foreign Affairs - ATHENS HUNGARY/HONGRIE: Mr György SZÉNÁSI, Ministry of Foreign Affairs - BUDAPEST Ms
Gabrielle HORVÁTH, Ministère des Affaires étrangères - BUDAPEST ICELAND/ISLANDE:
Mr Tomas H. HEIDAR, Ministry for Foreign Affairs -
REYKJAVIK ITALY/ITALIE: M. Umberto COLESANTI, Ministère des Affaires étrangères IRELAND/IRLANDE: Dr. Alpha CONNELLY, Department of Foreign Affairs - DUBLIN LATVIA/LETTONIE: Mrs Evija DUMPE, Ministry of Foreign Affairs - RIGA LIECHTENSTEIN: M. Daniel OSPELT, Office pour les Affaires étrangères - VADUZ LITHUANIA/LITUANIE: Mr Sigute JAKŠTONYTĖ, Ministry of Foreign Affairs - VILNIUS LUXEMBOURG:
M. Paul STEINMETZ, Ministère des Affaires étrangères - LUXEMBOURG MALTA/MALTE:
Dr Lawrence QUINTANO, Office of the Attorney General - VALLETTA MOLDOVA:
Mr Vitalie SLONOVSCHI, Ministère des
Affaires étrangères - CHISINAU NETHERLANDS/PAYS-BAS:
Dr Liesbeth LIJNZAAD, Ministry of Foreign Affairs - THE HAGUE NORWAY/NORVEGE: Mr Hans-Wilhelm LONGVA, Royal Ministry of Foreign Affairs - OSLO POLAND/POLOGNE: Prof. Anna WYROZUMSKA, Ministry of Foreign Affairs - WARSAW PORTUGAL:
Mrs Margarida REI, Ministry of Foreign Affairs - LISBOA ROMANIA/ROUMANIE: M. Anghel CONSTANTIN, Ministère des Affaires Etrangères - BUCAREST RUSSIAN FEDERATION/FEDERATION DE RUSSIE:
Mr Ilya ROGACHEV, Ministry of Foreign Affairs - MOSCOW SAN MARINO/SAINT MARIN: - SLOVAK REPUBLIC/REPUBLIQUE SLOVAQUE:
Mr Peter TOMKA, Permanent Mission of Slovakia to the United Nations,
NEW YORK (Vice-Chairman/Vice-Président) SLOVENIA/SLOVENIE: Mr Andrej
GRASSELLI, Ministry for Foreign Affairs - LJUBLJANA SPAIN/ESPAGNE: Mr Aurelio PEREZ GIRALDA, Ministerio de Asuntos Exteriores - MADRID M. Maximiliano BERNAD Y
ALVAREZ DE EULATE, Professeur de Droit international public et
d'Institutions et droit communautaire européens - ZARAGOZA SWEDEN/SUEDE: Mr Lars MAGNUSON, Ministry
for Foreign Affairs - STOCKHOLM SWITZERLAND/SUISSE: M. l'Ambassadeur Nicolas MICHEL, Département fédéral des affaires
étrangères - BERNE M.
Jürg LINDENMANN, Département fédéral des Affaires étrangères -
BERNE "THE FORMER REPUBLIC YOUGOSLAV OF MACEDONIA"/"L'EX-REPUBLIQUE
YOUGOSLAVE DE MACEDOINE":
- TURKEY/ TURQUIE: Mme Nehir ÜNEL, Ministère des Affaires étrangères - ANKARA UKRAINE:
Mr Markiyan KULYK, Ministry for Foreign Affairs - KIEV UNITED KINGDOM/ ROYAUME‑UNI: Mr Christopher
WHOMERSLEY, Foreign and Commonwealth Office – LONDON SPECIAL GUESTS/INVITES SPECIAUX
Professeur
Alain PELLET, Rapporteur spécial des Nations Unies sur les réserves
aux traités internationaux Mr
Palitha T.B. KOHANA, Treaty Section, Office of Legal Affairs, United
Nations, NEW YORK - U.S.A EUROPEAN COMMUNITY /COMMUNAUTE EUROPEENNE
EUROPEAN COMMISSION/ COMMISSION EUROPEENNE:
Mr Esa PAASIVIRTA, European
Commission OBSERVERS/ OBSERVATEURS
CANADA:
Mr Michael R. LEIR, Department of Foreign Affairs and International
Trade - OTTAWA Mr
Alain TELLIER, Mission Permanente du Canada auprès de l'Office des
Nations Unies à Genève HOLY SEE/SAINT-SIEGE: Mme Odile GANGHOFER, Mission Permanente du Saint-Siège -
STRASBOURG JAPAN/JAPON:
M. Yoshihide ASAKURA, Consulat Général du Japon - STRASBOURG M.
Pierre DREYFUS, Consulat Général du Japon
- STRASBOURG UNITED STATES OF AMERICA/ ETATS-UNIS D'AMERIQUE:
Mr Robert E. DALTON, Department of State, USA WASHINGTON DC UNITED STATES OF MEXICO/ ETATS UNIS DU MEXIQUE:
Ambassador Miguel Angel GONZÁLEZ FELIX, Ministry of Foreign Affairs (SRE),-
MEXICO AUSTRALIA/AUSTRALIE: - ISRAEL:
Mr Alan BAKER, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, JERUSALEM NEW ZELAND/NOUVELLE ZELANDE: - THE HAGUE CONFERENCE ON PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW/CONFERENCE DE LA HAYE
DE DROIT INTERNATIONAL PRIVE: Apologised/Excusé NORTH ATLANTIC TREATY ORGANISATION / ORGANISATION DU TRAITE DE L'ATLANTIQUE NORD:
M. Baldwin DE VIDTS, Service juridique de l'OTAN - BRUXELLES ORGANISATION FOR ECONOMIC CO-OPERATION AND DEVELOPMENT/ORGANISATION DE
COOPERATION ET DE DEVELOPPEMENT ECONOMIQUES: Mr David H. SMALL, OECD - PARIS ARMENIA/ARMENIE: Apologised/Excusé AZERBAIJAN/AZERBAIDJAN: Mr Rashad ASLANOV, Ministry of Foreign Affairs - BAKU BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA/BOSNIE-HERZEGOVINE:
Mrs Jasmina HANDZIĆ, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, SARAJEVO
SECRETARIAT GENERAL M.
H.C. KRUGER, Secrétaire Général adjoint du Conseil de l'Europe M.
Guy DE VEL, Director General of Legal Affairs/Directeur Général des
Affaires Juridiques M.
Alexey KOZHEMYAKOV, Head of the Department of Public Law/Chef du
Service du droit public Mr
Rafael A. BENITEZ, Secretary of the CAHDI/Secrétaire du CAHDI,
Department of Public Law/Service du Droit public M:
Jörg POLAKIEWICZ, Deputy Head of
Legal Advice Department and Treaty Office/Adjoint au Chef du Service
du Conseil Juridique et Bureau des Traités Mme Francine NAAS,
Assistant/Assistante, Department of Public Law/Service du Droit public APPENDIX
II AGENDA A.
INTRODUCTION 1.
Opening of the meeting by the Chairman, Ambassador Dr. Hilger -
Draft meeting report of the 19th meeting (Berlin, 13-14 March 2000) 2.
Adoption of the agenda 3.
Communication by the Director general of Legal Affairs, Mr. De
Vel B.
ONGOING ACTIVITES OF THE CAHDI 4.
Decisions by the Committee of Ministers concerning the CAHDI - Resolution (2000) 2 of the Committee of Ministers on "Council
of Europe's information strategy" 5.
The law and practice relating to reservations and
interpretative declarations concerning international treaties : -
Draft meeting report of the 3rd DI-E-RIT meeting (Berlin, 10
March 2000) a.
Exchange of views with Professor A. Pellet, Special Rapporteur
of the United Nations and member of the International Law Commission b.
European Observatory of Reservations to international Treaties 6.
Expression of consent by States to be bound by a treaty 7.
Proposal for the setting up of a General Judicial Authority of
the Council of Europe 8.
Discussion on possible new activities - Report of the European Commission for Democracy through law on
Federated and Regional Entities and international Treaties - Colloquy of the French Society for International Law
"International Law and the time factor" 9.
Adoption of the draft specific terms of reference of the CAHDI
for 2001-2002 and possibly of any subordinated group C.
GENERAL ISSUES ON PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW 10.
The work of the Sixth Commission of the General Assembly of
United Nations and of the International Law Commission (ILC) -
Report of the 52nd session of the International Law Commission -
The work of the International Law Commission at its 52nd Session 11.
The role of depository : Exchange of views with Mr.
Palitha Kohona, Chief of the Treaty Section of the United Nations
regarding the practice of the United Nations Secretary General on the
deposit of multilateral treaties 12.
Implementation of international instruments protecting the
victims of armed conflicts 13.
Developments concerning the International Criminal Court :
Conclusions of the consultation meeting on the implications of the
ratification of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court
on the internal legal order of the member States of the Council of
Europe 14.
Implementation and functioning of the Tribunals established by
UN Security Council Resolutions 827 (1993) and 955 (1994) 15.
Law of the Sea : Protection of Sub aquatic Cultural
Heritage 16.
Developments concerning the preparation of a Charter of
Fundamental Rights in the European Union: Exchange of views with Mr.
H.C. Krüger, Deputy Secretary General of the Council of Europe D.
OTHER 17.
Request by the Ligue Internationale contre le Racisme et
l'Antisémitisme (LICRA) for observer status with the CAHDI 18.
Election of the Chair and the Vice-Chair of the CAHDI 19.
Date, place and agenda of the 21st meeting of the CAHDI 20.
Other business 21.
Closing APPENDIX
III OPINION OF THE CAHDI ON THE PARLIAMENTARY
ASSEMBLY RECOMMENDATION 1458 (2000)
TOWARDS A UNIFORM INTERPRETATION OF COUNCIL OF EUROPE CONVENTIONS:
CREATION OF A GENERAL JUDICIAL AUTHORITY The
Ad Hoc Committee of Legal
Advisers on Public International Law (CAHDI) held its 20th meeting in Strasbourg,
12-13 September 2000. The agenda included an item entitled "Proposal for the setting up
of a General Judicial Authority of the Council of Europe”. The CAHDI
decided to consider this proposal submitted by the Czech Republic to
the Committee of Ministers at its own initiative. In
the framework of this item and pursuant to the Committee of
Ministers' decision No.
CM/751/26042000 (707th meeting – Strasbourg, 26 April 2000),
the CAHDI was also
asked to give an opinion on the Council of
Europe's Parliamentary Assembly Recommendation 1458 (2000)
Towards A Uniform Interpretation of Council of Europe Conventions:
Creation of a General Judicial Authority. In its recommendation,
the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe supports the Czech
proposal for the setting up of a “general judicial authority” of
the Council of Europe and recommends that the Committee of Ministers
set up such an authority, which would provide the mechanism for the
uniform interpretation of Council of Europe treaties starting with
those still to be concluded and with a selected number of the existing
conventions. The Parliamentary
Assembly recommends that such an authority should have the following
competencies: to give binding opinions on the interpretation and
application of Council of Europe conventions at the request of one or
several member states or at the request of the Committee of Ministers
or of the Parliamentary Assembly, to give non-binding opinions at the
request of one or several member states or of one of the two organs of
the Council of Europe, and to make preliminary rulings, at the request
of a national court, on lines similar to those of Article 177 of
the Rome Treaty of 1956 establishing the European Economic Community. The CAHDI was advised
by the Czech delegation about the underlying reasons for the proposal
which are both legal and political and try to respond to a real need,
i.e.: to ensure the uniform interpretation of Council of Europe
international instruments, in view of the fact that very few of them
provide for a control mechanism. In this perspective, the Czech
delegation understood that there were two basic options in order to
implement the recommendation: to empower a newly created authority or
to extend the competencies of an existing body such as the European
Court of Human Rights and supported the second one. The CAHDI held an
exchange of views on the Parliamentary Assembly recommendation to the
extent possible within the time available, and concentrated, in
accordance with its terms of reference and its role in the Council of
Europe intergovernmental structure, on what it understood to be the
public international law issues connected with the Parliamentary
Assembly Recommendation. From the onset, the
CAHDI considered that the implementation of the Parliamentary Assembly
Recommendation would change the very way in the which the Council of
Europe has operated until now. The CAHDI therefore
concluded that it would not be possible to deliver a single opinion on
behalf of the Committee as a whole. Instead it decided to provide a
summary of arguments for and against the implementation of the
Parliamentary Assembly Recommendation which were submitted by
delegations. Arguments
in favour Since the 1960s three recommendations of the
Parliamentary Assembly, as well as the report of the Wise Persons
Committee have supported the search for a means of ensuring the
uniform interpretation of Council of Europe international instruments,
in view of the fact that very few of them provide for a control
mechanism solution to such a situation. Parliamentary Assembly Recommendation 1458 (2000)
now provides the political support on the part of parliamentarians to
move forward in that direction. Article
3 of the Statute of the Council of Europe provides that “Every
member of the Council of Europe must accept the principles of the rule
of law”. The rule of law implies the existence of a jurisdiction to
guarantee uniform interpretation of law. In as far as
Council of Europe conventions are concerned, the
setting up of such a general judicial authority as suggested by the
Parliamentary Assembly, would guarantee a uniform interpretation. The
European Court of Human Rights could ensure these functions given its
prestige and authority and the fact that it regularly applies public
international law. Moreover, this solution would have low cost and a
limited impact on the Court's workload. Finally,
the implementation of Parliamentary Assembly Recommendation 1458
(2000) would contribute in increasing the visibility of the
Organisation as a whole. Arguments
against Council of Europe
conventions are very diverse regarding their substance and autonomous
regarding their contracting parties and supervisory mechanisms.
Therefore, they hardly represent a uniform and coherent body of
international law. Some conventions make provision for committees
which consider questions arising from the application of these texts,
including interpretation. Although they may not be judicial in nature,
they have operated well and have brought in the flexibility which is
inherent to the system of international law. Other conventions have a
relative character. They expressly do not provide for such control or
interpretation mechanism and form part of the general system of
international law. States may have become parties to these conventions
precisely because of this relative character which should be
preserved. Otherwise, protocols to these conventions would have to be
concluded. The creation of a new
general judicial authority, in addition to requiring significant
resources would contribute further to the proliferation of
international judicial authorities and to the fragmentation of
international law which would be highly undesirable. It is not
justified in as far as the Council of Europe already disposes of a
Convention for the Peaceful Settlement of Disputes to which States may
become parties. In addition, the International Court of Justice could
solve disputes arising from the application or interpretation of
Council of Europe conventions. The allocation of new
competences to an already existing body, such as the European Court of
Human Rights, would also raise legal and practical problems. The Court
forms part of a legal system which has its own justification. Pursuant
to its new role, the Court would be compelled to give opinions on a
variety of issues, some of which lying far beyond its traditional
field of expertise. As far as the workload is concerned, it is far
from certain that the allocation of new competencies to the Court
would not entail an excessive increase in the Court's workload at
the cost of efficiency in performing its primary tasks. Moreover, if
it only entailed a minor increase in work, the question would arise
about the usefulness of the new role altogether. Moreover, it should be
noted that the European Community is party to some Council of Europe
conventions. The setting up of a general judicial authority could
conflict with the competencies of the Court of Justice of the European
Communities in this respect. Finally, it should
noted that paragraph 9, i) of the Parliamentary Assembly
Recommendation provides that a general judicial authority should have
the competence to give binding opinions on the interpretation and
application of Council of Europe conventions at the request of one or
several member states. However, it is not indicated whether this or
these member States have to be party to the convention in question and
this raises a delicate question. Conclusions The CAHDI concluded
that at this time, the reluctance on the part of a significant number
of States is too high regarding the pursuance of the Parliamentary
Assembly Recommendation in whatever form. The CAHDI, therefore
suggests reverting to consideration of this issue in the future when
appropriate conditions are met. Moreover, the CAHDI,
inspired by the Czech proposal and the Parliamentary Assembly
Recommendation, suggests that the question of interpretation be
considered for future conventions to be concluded in the framework of
the Council of Europe and that, where appropriate, suitable means for
interpretation be provided for. APPENDIX IV DRAFT SPECIFIC TERMS OF REFERENCE 1. Name of committee:
COMMITTEE OF LEGAL ADVISERS ON PUBLIC
INTERNATIONAL LAW (CAHDI) 2.
Type of committee:
Ad hoc committee of experts 3.
Source of terms of reference:
Committee of Ministers 4. Terms of reference:
Under the authority of
the Committee of Ministers, the Committee is instructed to examine
questions of public international law, to exchange and, if
appropriate, to co-ordinate the views of member States at the request
of the Committee of Ministers, Steering Committees and Ad
Hoc Committees and at its
own initiative. 5.
Membership of the Committee: a.
The Committee is composed of experts by member States,
preferably chosen among the Legal Advisers to the Ministries of
Foreign Affairs. Travel and subsistence expenses of one expert per
member State (two for the State assuming the Chair of the Committee)
are borne by the Council of Europe budget. b.
The European Community may send representatives, without the
right to vote or to a refund of expenses, to meetings of the
Committee. c.
The following States having observer status with the Council of
Europe may send a representative without the right to vote or to a
refund of expenses to meetings of the Committee: Canada, Holy See,
Japan, United States of America and Mexico. d.
The following non‑member States or organisations may send
a representative, without the right to vote or to a refund of expenses
(1), to meetings of the Committee:
* Armenia (1)
* Azerbaijan (1)
Australia
* Bosnia Herzegovina (2)
New Zealand
Israel (3)
The Hague Conference on Private International Law
NATO (4)
The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development
The United Nations and its specialised agencies (5). 6.
Structures and working methods:
The CAHDI may set up working parties and have recourse
to consultant experts. 7. Duration:
The present terms of reference expire on 31 December 2002. _________________ (1)
Except in the case of special provisions application to States marked
with *. Adopted: see CM/Del/Concl(91)455/24, Appendix 5, Revised: (1)
see CM/Del/Dec(96)557, item 2.1. (2) Subject to their request. (3) Admitted as observer "for the whole duration of the
Committee" by the CAHDI, 15th meeting, Strasbourg 3-4 March 1998.
The same is valid for subordinated committees. This decision was
confirmed by the Committee of Ministers at its 670th
meeting, Strasbourg, 18 May 1999. See CM/Del/Dec(99)670,
item 10.2. (4) see CM/Del/Dec/Act(93)488/29 and CM/Del/Concl(92)480/3. (5)
For specific items, at the request of the Committee. APPENDIX V PRELIMINARY
DRAFT AGENDA FOR THE 21ST MEETING OF THE CAHDI A.
INTRODUCTION 1.
Opening of the meeting by the Chairman, Ambassador Tomka 2.
Adoption of the agenda 3.
Communication by the Director general of Legal Affairs, Mr. De
Vel B.
ONGOING ACTIVITES OF THE CAHDI 4.
Decisions by the Committee of Ministers concerning the CAHDI 5.
The law and practice relating to reservations and
interpretative declarations concerning international treaties : European
Observatory of Reservations to international Treaties 6.
Expression of consent by States to be bound by a treaty 7.
Discussion on possible new activities C.
GENERAL ISSUES ON PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW 8.
Implementation of international instruments protecting the
victims of armed conflicts 9.
Developments concerning the International Criminal Court 10.
Implementation and functioning of the Tribunals established by
UN Security Council Resolutions 827 (1993) and 955 (1994) 11.
Law of the Sea : Protection of Sub aquatic Cultural
Heritage 12.
Developments concerning the preparation of a Charter of
Fundamental Rights in the European Union D.
OTHER 13.
Date, place and agenda of the 22nd meeting 14.
Other business 15.
Closing
|