Writ of summons - Van Diepen Van der Kroef
Writ of summons - Van Diepen Van der Kroef Writ of summons - Van Diepen Van der Kroef
Netherlands jointly) argue that there is here an issue of a breach of international law thatleads to responsibility.Requirements for responsibility of States343. Article 2 of the ILC Articles for States provides that a state is responsible if tworequirements are satisfied:‘There is an internationally wrongful act of a State when conduct consisting of anaction or an omission:a. Is attributable to the State under international law; andb. Constitutes a breach of an international obligation of the State.’344. The ILC Articles for States do not stipulate the obligations that a state has. Thoseobligations arise from other sources of international law, such as internationalhumanitarian law (for example: the Geneva Conventions, the Hague Conventionrespecting the Laws and Customs of War on Land of 1907, the European Convention forthe Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (EECHR), and theGenocide Convention, as well as the caselaw of the ICJ). The ILC Articles for Statesprovide, inter alia, a definition of a breach of international law, elaborate therequirements for attribution and also determine what the consequences are of anattributable breach of international law. Plaintiff will return below to those matters.Requirements for responsibility of international organisations345. The ILC Articles for International Organisations, like the UN, are grafted onto theprinciples of the ILC Articles for States. The principles that are applicable for States aremutatis mutandis applied to the international organisations (see, R.J. Dupuy et al, AHandbook on International Organizations, 1998, pages 886 and 887, and M.Zwanenburg, op. cit., pages 70 and 71).346. Article 3 of the ILC Articles for International Organisations states:© Van Diepen Van der Kroef Advocaten 2007www.vandiepen.com148
‘Article 3 – General Principles1. Every internationally wrongful act of an international organization entails theinternational responsibility of the international organization.2. There is an internationally wrongful act of an international organization whenconduct consisting of an action or omission:(a) Is attributable to the international organization under international law; and(b) Constitutes a breach of an international obligation of that internationalorganization.’II.5.b. Attribution347. In both the ILC Articles for States and in the ILC Articles for International Organisationsthe concept of ‘attribution’ is, together with a breach of international law, a requirementfor the responsibility of the state, or the international organisation, respectively. Beforeturning to the breach of international law, Plaintiff will address the question to whomcan the conduct of Dutchbat and UNPROFOR be attributed. Plaintiff will conclude thatthis conduct must be attributed both to the UN and to the State of the Netherlands.Attribution to the UN348. It is generally accepted that the UN is responsible for the actions of bodies or an agencyof the UN. This principle is confirmed in the ILC Articles for InternationalOrganisations under Article 4. That Article deals with the situation in which a body oragency of the UN itself is concerned, or in which the body or agency concerned is placedfully at the disposal of the UN.349. Article 5 ILC Articles for International Organisations envisages, on the contrary,situations where the body or the agency is not placed fully at the disposal of the UN andcertain powers remain with the State providing troops. By virtue of Article 5 ILCArticles for International Organisations, the acts of a body (of a state) that is placed atthe disposal of an international organisation are attributed to the internationalorganisation under the following circumstances (see, 2 nd ILC report over the ILCArticles for International Organisations (A/CN.4/L.654/Add.1, page 11 no. 2)):© Van Diepen Van der Kroef Advocaten 2007www.vandiepen.com149
- Page 97 and 98: 228. Only one Dutchbat officer was
- Page 99 and 100: ‘UNMO source about 1,000 men take
- Page 101 and 102: night-time. I did not dare to leave
- Page 103 and 104: 239. Plaintiff Hotič states (see E
- Page 105 and 106: People had no food or water, nor we
- Page 107 and 108: During all of this the Dutch soldie
- Page 109 and 110: group and they were raped. I was ve
- Page 111 and 112: four or five Dutchbat soldiers were
- Page 113 and 114: shocked by what he had evidently se
- Page 115 and 116: follows:‘An alternative position
- Page 117 and 118: ‘We were deported to Tuzla later
- Page 119 and 120: I arrived at the barrier shortly th
- Page 121 and 122: encountered objections from the Dut
- Page 123 and 124: 277. Plaintiff Hasanović was born
- Page 125 and 126: Subašić282. Plaintiff Subašić w
- Page 127 and 128: IILegal characterisationIntroductio
- Page 129 and 130: the United Nations, Advisory opinio
- Page 131 and 132: 302. The UN and the State of the Ne
- Page 133 and 134: acting arise, respectively). In add
- Page 135 and 136: of the Safe Area and was not immedi
- Page 137 and 138: weapons of the VRS, or at least to
- Page 139 and 140: consequence that the VRS could depl
- Page 141 and 142: 326. Instead of taking action from
- Page 143 and 144: ‘(…) I had spent days lying on
- Page 145 and 146: 23 July 1995 (see H. Praamsma, J. P
- Page 147: (a) (…) encouraging the progressi
- Page 151 and 152: control of UNPROFOR from the moment
- Page 153 and 154: ‘The presumption can be rebutted
- Page 155 and 156: ecame entwined. In his view, it was
- Page 157 and 158: Conventions obliges the Contracting
- Page 159 and 160: Article 8 of the ILC Articles for I
- Page 161 and 162: - secondly, it was evident that the
- Page 163 and 164: international customary humanitaria
- Page 165 and 166: civilians, deportation and murder.
- Page 167 and 168: ‘(…) confirm that Article I doe
- Page 169 and 170: also be assessed by legal criteria,
- Page 171 and 172: ‘(14) UNPROFOR had participated a
- Page 173 and 174: under customary law. A duty on stat
- Page 175 and 176: and the State of the Netherlands ac
- Page 177 and 178: for International Organisations com
- Page 179 and 180: ‘(c) Provide those who claim to b
- Page 181 and 182: the State of the Netherlands must p
- Page 183 and 184: of the Netherlands. The UN and the
- Page 185 and 186: ‘militairement avait mal conduit.
- Page 187 and 188: UN but also to the purposes that ar
- Page 189 and 190: possible immunity on the part of th
- Page 191 and 192: ‘The United Nations shall make pr
- Page 193 and 194: ‘In spite of this provision of th
- Page 195: THEREFORE:If it pleases the Court t
Netherlands jointly) argue that there is here an issue <strong>of</strong> a breach <strong>of</strong> international law thatleads to responsibility.Requirements for responsibility <strong>of</strong> States343. Article 2 <strong>of</strong> the ILC Articles for States provides that a state is responsible if tworequirements are satisfied:‘There is an internationally wrongful act <strong>of</strong> a State when conduct consisting <strong>of</strong> anaction or an omission:a. Is attributable to the State un<strong>der</strong> international law; andb. Constitutes a breach <strong>of</strong> an international obligation <strong>of</strong> the State.’344. The ILC Articles for States do not stipulate the obligations that a state has. Thoseobligations arise from other sources <strong>of</strong> international law, such as internationalhumanitarian law (for example: the Geneva Conventions, the Hague Conventionrespecting the Laws and Customs <strong>of</strong> War on Land <strong>of</strong> 1907, the European Convention forthe Protection <strong>of</strong> Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (EECHR), and theGenocide Convention, as well as the caselaw <strong>of</strong> the ICJ). The ILC Articles for Statesprovide, inter alia, a definition <strong>of</strong> a breach <strong>of</strong> international law, elaborate therequirements for attribution and also determine what the consequences are <strong>of</strong> anattributable breach <strong>of</strong> international law. Plaintiff will return below to those matters.Requirements for responsibility <strong>of</strong> international organisations345. The ILC Articles for International Organisations, like the UN, are grafted onto theprinciples <strong>of</strong> the ILC Articles for States. The principles that are applicable for States aremutatis mutandis applied to the international organisations (see, R.J. Dupuy et al, AHandbook on International Organizations, 1998, pages 886 and 887, and M.Zwanenburg, op. cit., pages 70 and 71).346. Article 3 <strong>of</strong> the ILC Articles for International Organisations states:© <strong>Van</strong> <strong>Diepen</strong> <strong>Van</strong> <strong>der</strong> <strong>Kroef</strong> Advocaten 2007www.vandiepen.com148