JUS 211 Folkerett Forelesning 2 Rettskilder Malcolm Langford

JUS 211 Folkerett – Forelesning 2 Rettskilder Malcolm Langford Professor, Det juridiske fakultet, Universitet i Oslo Co-Director, Centre for Law and Social Transformation, Universitet i Bergen og CMI

Kjøreplan I. Oversikt av undervisning i folkerett II. Rettskilder - introduksjon III. Sedvanerett IV. Traktattrett V. Alminnelige rettsgrunnsetninger VI. Rettspraksis og rettsteori VII. Andre materielle kilder

I. Oversikt av undervisning i folkerett

Rocketsteg: Lesing, forelesning og kurs

Uke Lesing Forelesning 3 Ruud/Ulfstein: Kap. 1, (+3 valgfri) 1. Folkerettens karakter, kilder Crawford: 2, (1 + 3 valgfri) (Langford, uke ) 6 Ruud/Ulfstein: Kap. 4, 5 Crawford: 2, 16 2. Rettskilder (Langford) 6 Ruud/Ulfstein: Kap. 6, 7, 8, 9 Crawford: Kap. 1 -2), 6()5 , 41 -4), 7 3. Folkerettens subjekter, IOs statsbegrepet (Langford) Ruud/Ulfstein: Kap. 10, 19 Crawford: Kap. 25, 31 4. Ansvar, tvisteløsning (Langford/Kierulf) 6 Kurs Dag 1 - Folkerettslig metode, dommer, folkerettspolitikk Dag 2. Fortolkning, subjekter, rettigheter og plikter Dag 3 – Statens ansvar 12 Ruud/Ulfstein: Kap. 12, 18 Crawford: Kap. 11, 13(1 -2) , 17(1 -5), 19(4), 21, 22(1 -2) 5. Havrett, Statenes representanter (Langford) 12 Ruud/Ulfstein: Kap. 11, og 14 Crawford: Kap. , (1 -3, 5)33 , 32 6. Bruk av makt og Krigens folkerett, sikkerhetsråd (Skjold) 15/16 17 Prosedyreøvelse (obligatorisk) PBL Dag 4. Havrett, bruk av makt Dag 5 - Internasjonale domstolers/Mini prosedyreøvelse

II. Rettskilde - introduksjon

Kategorier • ‘Formelle’ kilder (eller metoder): • ‘that from which a source of law derives its force or validity’ (Salmond, 1924) • Art. 38(1)(a)-(c): sedvane, traktater, prinsipper

ICJ Statute, Art. 38 1. The Court, whose function is to decide in accordance with international law such disputes as are submitted to it, shall apply: a. international conventions, whether general or particular, establishing rules expressly recognized by the contesting states; b. international custom, as evidence of a general practice accepted as law; c. the general principles of law recognized by civilized nations; d. subject to the provisions of Article 59, judicial decisions and the teachings of the most highly qualified publicists of the various nations, as subsidiary means for the determination of rules of law.

Rettskilde i art. 38(1) ICJ Statuett • Avtaler mellom stater • Sedvanerett - demonstrert ved generell praksis og akseptert som rett • Generelle juridiske prinsipper • Juridiske avgjørelser og teori fra de mest kvalifiserte forfattere er en subsidiær kilde

Kategorier • ’Materielle’ kilder • ‘material providing the substantive content of that rule’ (Salmond, 1924) • Alt fra FN-pakten til diplomatisk protest og en ikke-ratifisert traktat – bevis av en regel • Inkluderer Art. 38(1)(d) - juridiske avgjørelser og teori • Obs! Traktater kan er derfor både en (1) formelle kilde og (2) materielle kilder (f. eks. for sedvanerett)

Interaksjon • Viktigste er interaksjon mellom kilder • Så en kilde med lav rang kan bli viktig i utformingen av regelen. – F. eks. en ILC utkast kan bli bevis av sedvanerett eller en tolkning av tidligere traktater • Sammen som i norsk rett – man må se på interaksjon mellom kildene – Se Ekhoff

Hierarki i formelle kilder? • Traktatett og sedvanerett viktigste – Hvorfor? Det handler om samtykke og gjensidighet • Generelle juridiske prinsipper er klart viktigere enn juridiske avgjørelser og teori

• Men hierarkiet er ikke alltid klar • Eksempel: • 1) Sedvanerett kan bli sett til siden mellom partene i en traktat • 2) Sedvanerett kan gå foran traktatrett hvis: – Det handler om en jus cogens norm – Det er ny sedvanerett som er anerkjent eksplisitt eller implisitt av partene til en traktat (se Art. 31(3) Wien konvensjon).

Article 31(3) Wien Konvensjon There shall be taken into account, together with the context: (a) Any subsequent agreement between the parties regarding the interpretation of the treaty or the application of its provisions; (b) Any subsequent practice in the application of the treaty which establishes the agreement of the parties regarding its interpretation; (c) Any relevant rules of international law applicable in the relations between the parties.

III. Sedvanerett

ICJ Statute, Art. 38 1. The Court, whose function is to decide in accordance with international law such disputes as are submitted to it, shall apply: a. international conventions, whether general or particular, establishing rules expressly recognized by the contesting states; b. international custom, as evidence of a general practice accepted as law; c. the general principles of law recognized by civilized nations; d. subject to the provisions of Article 59, judicial decisions and the teachings of the most highly qualified publicists of the various nations, as subsidiary means for the determination of rules of law. 2. This provision shall not prejudice the power of the Court to decide a case ex aequo et bono, if the parties agree thereto.

https: //www. youtube. com/watch? v=Iqhl. Qf. XUk 7 w

Prolog: Sedvanerett i Norske statsrett • Domstolenes rett til å prøve om en lov er i overensstemmelse med grunnloven (1822/1865 -2015)? • Parliamentarisme (1884 -2007) • Overgangen fra personlig kongemakt til en hovedsakelig seremoniell rolle for kongen (1905 -) • I alle tre saker (og mange andre) var avstand mellom Grunnlovens ord og det faktiske styringssystemet skapt. • Anerkjent av nesten alle at: • Grunnleggende prinsipp for statsmaktenes kompetanse og organisering utviklet gjennom langvarig praksis skulle regnes som konstitusjonell sedvanerett.

Folkerett • Sedvanerett var veldig viktig tidligere • Men fortsatt relevant i mange område der traktatutvikling er treg • Men staten som påberope sedvanerett må bevise at det eksisterer.

Paquette Habana-saken (1900) • Fakta: USA beslaget to cubanske fiskerbåter (eid av en spanjol) som en “prize of war” gjennom den spansk-amerikansk krigen • Spørsmål: Er fiskerbåter en unntak i gjeldende sedvanerett om krigs på den tiden? • Avgjørelse fra amerikansk høyesterett: Ja. Domstolen gikk gjennom mange kilder.

Fra dommen: By an ancient usage among civilized nations, beginning centuries ago and gradually ripening into a rule of international law, coast fishing vessels pursuing their vocation of catching and bringing in fresh fish have been recognized as exempt, with their cargoes and crews, from capture as prize of war. This doctrine, however, has been earnestly contested at the bar, and no complete collection of the instances illustrating it is to be found, so far as we are aware, in a single published work, although many are referred to and discussed by the writers on international law… It is therefore worth the while to trace the history of the rule from the earliest accessible sources through the increasing recognition of it, with occasional setbacks, to what we may now justly consider as its final establishment in our own country and generally throughout the civilized world. The earliest acts of any government on the subject mentioned in the books either emanated from, or were approved by, a King of England. In 1403 and 1406, Henry IV issued orders to his admirals and other officers, entitled "Concerning Safety for Fishermen -- De Securitate pro Piscatoribus. . … Og så videre. . .

Pulp Mills-saken • Men ICJ er ikke alltid så dyptploende… • Avsnitt 204: • « In this sense, the obligation to protect and preserve, under Article 41 (a) of the Statute, has to be interpreted in accordance with a practice, which in recent years has gained so much acceptance among States that it may now be considered a requirement under general international law to undertake an environmental impact assessment where there is a risk that the proposed industrial activity may have a significant adverse impact in a transboundary context, in particular, on a shared resource. Moreover, due diligence, and the duty of vigilance and prevention which it implies, would not be considered to have been exercised, if a party planning works liable to affect the re gime of the river or the quality of its waters did not undertake an environmental impact assessment on the potential effects of such works. » • Og det var det. .

Oversikt • Objektivt: statspraksis (”General practice”) • Subjektivt: opinio juris (”Accepted as law”) • Unntak: ”the persistent objector” • Men mange variasjoner. . .

1. Objektivt: statspraksis • Hva er praksis? • Alle uttrykk for statens rettsoppfatning er relevante • Statens lovgivning og håndhevelse • Avgjørelse av nasjonal domstoler eller forvaltningsorganer • Uttalelser fra statens representanter • Protester mot andre staters handlinger • Passivitet (Tempelsaken 1962) • Konvensjoner • Stemmegivning i IOs

Tyskland mot Italia (2012) - ICJ • 55. . In the present context, State practice of particular significance is to be found in the judgments of national courts faced with the question whether a foreign State is immune, the legislation of those States which have enacted statutes dealing with immunity, the claims to immunity advanced by States beforeign courts and the statements made by States, first in the course of the extensive study of the subject by the International Law Commission and then in the context of the adoption of the United Nations Convention.

Christina gaph

• Hva slags praksis? 1. ”Widespread acceptance” – – – Fisheries Jurisdiction Case, ICJ 1974 Trenger ikke alle stater Men representative stater eller stater med interesser 2. ”Consistent and uniform usage” – – – Aslysaken (1950) Ikke et absolutt krav – små deviasjoner er OK Men substantiv ”inconsistency” må bli vurdert av stater som et brudd, ikke en ny eller andre regel 3. ”Sufficient duration” – – Paquete Habana saken (analyserte 400år av praksis!) North Sea Continental Shelf • ”Passage of only a short period of time is not necessarily, or of itself, a bar to the formation of a new rule of customary international law if the practice is both extensive and uniform”

2. Subjektivt: opinio juris • Praksisen må ha grunnlag i en rettsoverbevisning

Tyskland mot Italia (2012) - ICJ • 55. . . Opinio juris in this context is reflected in particular in the assertion by States claiming immunity that international law accords them a right to such immunity from the jurisdiction of other States; in the acknowledgment, by States granting immunity, that international law imposes upon them an obligation to do so; and, conversely, in the assertion by States in other cases of a right to exercise jurisdiction over foreign States.

’Psykologisk’ dimensjon ”‘Not only must the acts concerned be a settled practice, but they must also be such, or be carried out in such a way, as to be evidence of a belief that this practice is rendered obligatory by the existence of a rule requiring it. . The States concerned must feel that they are conforming to what amounts to a legal obligation. ” Nordsjøsaken 1969, 44.

Rollen av resolusjoner • Atomvåpen saken (1996), s. 254 -5: – ”The Court notes that General Assembly Resolution resolutions, even if they are not binding, may sometimes have normative value. They can, in some circumstances, provide evidence important for establishing the existence of a rule or the emergence of an opinio juris. To establish whether this is true of a given General Assembly resolution, it is necessary to look at its content and the conditions of its adoption; it is also necessary to see whether an opinio juris exists as to its normative character. Or a series of resolutions may show the gradual evolution of the opinio juris required for the establishment of a new rule. ”

3. Unntak: ”the persistent objector” • Fiskerisaken (1951) ”the ten-mile rule would appear to be inapplicable as against Norway inasmuch as she has always opposed any attempt to apply it to the Norwegian coast. ” • Asylsaken (1950) • “But even if it could be supposed that such a custom existed between certain Latin-American States only, it could not be invoked against Peru which, far from having by its attitude adhered to it, has, on the contrary, repudiated it by refraining from ratifying the Montevideo Conventions of 1933 and 1939, which were the first to include a rule concerning the qualification of the offence in matters of diplomatic asylum. ”

• Men bare disse to saker fra ICJ. • Ikke klar om det er alltid relevant nå – f. eks. hvis det er nok stater. • ’Subsequent objector’? – Norge følgte ikke regelen og ingen protestert (se Fiskerisaken (1951) og diskusjon i Crawford, s. 29).

4. Variasjoner. .

a. Nivå • • Globalt (jus cogens) Globalt (vanlig) Regionalt Lokalt + Erga omnes: Plikten er til alle stater

Erga omnes: Barcelona Traction saken (1970) ” 33. . . an essential distinction should be drawn between the obligations of a State towards the international community as a whole, and those arising vis-a -vis another State in the field of diplomatic protection. By their very nature, the former are the concern of all States. In view of the importance of the rights involved, all States can be held to have a legal interest in their protection; they are obligations erga omnes. 34. Such obligations derive, for example, in contemporary international law, from the outlawing of acts of aggression, and of genocide, as also from the principles and rules concerning the basic rights of the human person, including protection from slavery and racial discrimination. Some of the corresponding rights of protection have entered into the body of general international law. . . others are conferred by international instruments of a universal or quasi- universal character. “

b. Umiddelbar sedvanerett • ”Sufficient duration” kan bli irrelevant • Av og til snakk om ”instant customary law” • Særlig etter Tunisia/Libya saken (1982) – Anerkjenelse av 200 mils økonomisk soner kom rask og før havrettskonvensjon var ratifersert – Men den var basert på kompromisset i forhandling på midten av 1970 -tallet.

c. Utkrystallisering av sedvanerett • En traktat kan: – utkrystallisere en sedvanerettsregel som er under utvikling – danne grunnlaget for en ny sedvanerettsregel • Men det ikke selvsagt (Nordsjø-saken 1969, s. 41): – Bestemmelse må være av en ”norm creating character” – Det må bli representativ og bred deltagelse av stater, spesiell de statene som er berørt av regelen.

d. Praksis nødvendig for MR? • Spm: Hvordan kan menneskerettigheter forpliktelser blir sedvanerett siden MR er ikke ofte respektert? • Men man kan spør om: – Hvor viktig er statspraksis for sedvanerett om menneskerettigheter i forhold til opinio juris? – Eller hvilke praksis er mer relevant for MR? Uttalelser kan bli viktigere enn adferd. • Hovedpoeng: – Se hvordan snakke om MR – er det snakk om fakta eller regel?

Rettskilder: Oppsummering https: //www. youtube. com/watch? v=0 Vi. SYjt-w. Gw

Kritikk • Interne/Rettsdogmatisk: – Vektlegging av praksis og opinio juris

• Eksterne kritikk

Kjøreplan IV. Traktater

ICJ Statute, Art. 38 1. The Court, whose function is to decide in accordance with international law such disputes as are submitted to it, shall apply: a. international conventions, whether general or particular, establishing rules expressly recognized by the contesting states; b. international custom, as evidence of a general practice accepted as law; c. the general principles of law recognized by civilized nations; d. subject to the provisions of Article 59, judicial decisions and the teachings of the most highly qualified publicists of the various nations, as subsidiary means for the determination of rules of law. 2. This provision shall not prejudice the power of the Court to decide a case ex aequo et bono, if the parties agree thereto.

Typer traktater • Kontraktstraktater og rettssettende traktater – • Rammetraktater og protokoller • Traktater som oppretter internasjonale institusjoner (domstoler, IGOs, traktatorganer)

Wien konvensjon • Signert i 1969, ikrafttredelse 1980 • Norge ikke tilsluttet • Generelt akseptert som et uttrykk for folkerettslig sedvanerett (Donau-saken, 1997) – – land som ikke har ratifisert avtalen (f. eks. Norge) vil også være bundet av dens bestemmelser • Regulerer inngåelse, tolkning og opphør av traktater • Gjelder (skriftlige) avtaler mellom stater • Konvensjon om traktater hvor internasjonale organisasjoner er parter, 1986, inneholder stort sett samme regler

Innga else av traktater 1. Myndighet til a innga avtaler (Art. 7 VCLT) • Fullmakt ( «full powers» ) • Statenes praksis eller andre omstendigheter, eller • «by virtue of their functions»

Innga else av traktater 2. Hvordan blir teksten vedtatt? (Art. 9 VCLT) • Vedtak etter art. 9 VCLT krever samtykke eller 2/3 flertall (internasjonale konferanser) • Vedtak av internasjonale organisasjoner • Konsensus (for a unnga «a blocking third» )

Hva er konsensus? UN Office of Legal Affairs: UNFCCC COP, Doha (2012) • “a practice under which every effort is made to achieve unanimous agreement; but if that could not be done, those dissenting from the general trend were prepared simply to make their position or reservations known and placed on record”. Statement by the Director of the General Legal Division, UN Office of Legal Affairs, Official Records of ECOSOC, 56 th session, Supp. No. 3 A, UN Doc. E. 5462 (6 March 1974), para. 64 summarised in Use of the term ‘consensus’ in UN practice, UN Juridical Yearbook 1974, Chap. VI A. 12. , pp. 163 -164.

Hvordan blir en traktat bindende? • Samtykke Arts. 9 -17 • Ikrafttredelse Arts. 24, 25

Innga else av traktater 3. Samtykke (art. 11 VCLT) • Undertegning (art. 12) – De deler av traktaten som fastsetter hvordan den blir bindende gjelder vedtak (art. 24(4) VCLT) • Hvis det trenges etterfølgende ratifikasjon (art. 14): – Staten forplikter seg til ikke a handle i strid med traktatens formål (Art. 18 VCLT) • Innebærer i praksis ofte behov for samtykke fra Stortinget (demokratisk element)

Inngåelse av traktater 4. Ikrafttredelse: • Art. 24 VCLT; ofte regulert i traktaten • Eksempler: • Art. 23 UNFCCC • Art. 308(1) UNCLOS • Art. 25 KP • Art. 21 Parisavtalen

Rettslige konsekvenser • Arts. 26, 27 VCLT

Reservasjoner • Det absolutte system • Det relative system (Art. 19 -23 VCLT) • Stemmeerklæringer (e. g. FN’s Urfolkserklæring)

Forbeholds-saken (1951) • “State which has made and maintained a reservation which has been objected to by one or more of the parties to the Convention …. can be regarded as being a party. . . if the reservation is compatible with the object and purpose of the Convention • Så var det kodifisert I art. 19 -23 Wien konvensjonen

Case Study: CEDAW Reservations and Objections • The United Arab Emirates makes reservations to articles 2 (f), 9, 15 (2), 16 and 29 (1) of the Convention, as follows: • Article 2 (f): The United Arab Emirates , being of the opinion that this paragraph violates the rules of inheritance established in accordance with the precepts of the Shariah, makes a reservation thereto and does not consider itself bound by the provisions thereof….

“With regard to reservations made by Saudi Arabia upon ratification …The Government of the French Republic believes that the reservation could make the provisions of the Convention completely ineffective and therefore objects to it. . …These objections do not preclude the Convention's entry into force between Saudi Arabia and France. ”

CEDAW Committee Statement on Reservations (1998) 7. Article 28, paragraph 2, of the Convention adopts the impermissibility principle contained in the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. It states that a reservation incompatible with the object and purpose of the present Convention shall not be permitted. 8. Although the Convention does not prohibit the entering of reservations, those which challenge the central principles of the Convention are contrary to the provisions of the Convention and to general international law. As such they may be challenged by other States parties. 16. The Committee holds the view that article 2 is central to the objects and purpose of the Convention. States parties which ratify the Convention do so because they agree that discrimination against women in all its forms should be condemned and that the strategies set out in article 2, subparagraphs (a) to (g), should be implemented by States parties to eliminate it. 17. Neither traditional, religious or cultural practice nor incompatible domestic laws and policies can justify violations of the Convention. The Committee also remains convinced that reservations to article 16, whether lodged for national, traditional, religious or cultural reasons, are incompatible with the Convention and therefore impermissible and should be reviewed and modified or withdrawn.

• "The Government of Australia advises that it is not at present in a position to take the measures required by article 11 (2) to introduce maternity leave with pay or with comparable social benefits throughout Australia.

Konsekvenser av ugyldig reservasjoner? Vanlig utgangspunkt: • Traktaten er ikke gyldig for og med den staten Men for MR-traktater: • Argumenterte at man kan bare se bort fra reservasjoner siden traktat handler om beskyttelse av individer ikke stater (MRkomiteen, – General Comment 24; Belilos-saken – EMD)

Ugyldige traktater • Inkompetanse • Tilblivelsesmangler • Innholdsmangler

Wien konvensjonen om traktatretten, 1969 Article 31, GENERAL RULE OF INTERPRETATION 1. A treaty shall be interpreted in good faith in accordance with the ordinary meaning to be given to the terms of the treaty in their context and in the light of its object and purpose. 2. The context for the purpose of the interpretation of a treaty shall comprise, in addition to the text, including its preamble and annexes: (a) Any agreement relating to the treaty which was made between all the parties in connexion with the conclusion of the treaty; (b) Any instrument which was made by one or more parties in connexion with the conclusion of the treaty and accepted by the other parties as an instrument related to the treaty. 3. There shall be taken into account, together with the context: (a) Any subsequent agreement between the parties regarding the interpretation of the treaty or the application of its provisions; (b) Any subsequent practice in the application of the treaty which establishes the agreement of the parties regarding its interpretation; (c) Any relevant rules of international law applicable in the relations between the parties. 4. A special meaning shall be given to a term if it is established that the parties so intended. Article 32. SUPPLEMENTARY MEANS OF INTERPRETATION Recourse may be had to supplementary means of interpretation, including the preparatory work of the treaty and the circumstances of its conclusion, in order to confirm the meaning resulting from the application of article 31, or to determine the meaning when the interpretation according to article 31: (a) Leaves the meaning ambiguous or obscure; or (b) Leads to a result which is manifestly absurd or unreasonable.

Fortolkningsmetoder - Objektiv - Teleologiske - Subjektiv

A. Objektiv fortolkning

Ordlyden: Art 31(1) • Begynner med «vanlige ordlyden» i «den konkrete traktaten» • Øst-Grønland-saken (1933), PCIJ: “The geographical meaning of the word ’Greenland’ i. e. The name which is habitually used in the maps to denominate the whole island, must be regarded as the ordinary of the meaning of the word”.

Et eksempel: Hva er Australia?

Men for i den 2005 Innvandringslov, er Australia mye mindre. . .

Den vanlige Kanskje i forhold til flytningskonvensjonen – men veldig kontroversielt

B. Teleologiske tolkning 1. God tro: Art 31(1) • En fornuftig tilnærming til fortolkning. • “It is a cardinal principle of interpretation that a treaty should be interpreted in good faith and not lead to a result that would be manifestly absurd or unreasonable” Mc. Taggert Sinclair, 1984, s. 120. • Formålet og partenes (objektive) intensjoner «should prevail over its literal application» : Donau-saken, 1997, avsnitt 142.

2. Formål: art. 31(1) • Dersom ordlyden ikke gir noen klar løsning, er det vanlig å legge stor vekt på formålet. • Man bruker det effektivitetsprinsippet. • Prinsippet har sin grense – kan ikke bidra til en konflikt med ordlyden og god tro (ICJ Rep. 1950. s. 220). • Men i dag er det prinsippet viktigere enn bevarelse av statenes suverenitet (et annet prinsipp som bidrar til mer restriktiv tolkning)

3. Konteksten: art 31(1) og definert i art 31(2) • Defineres som fortalen, andre bestemmelser i traktaten, og andre avtaler mellom de partene i forbindelse med traktaten. Må ta hensyn til. . . : (art. 31(3)) • Senere avtaler, praksis • Relevante regler

C. Subjektiv tolkning • Dersom fortolkningsmomentene i art. 31 fører til uklar løsninger eller absurde resultater kan man bruke supplerende tolkningsmomenter: – Traktatens forarbeider – Traktatens forhistorie

• Konflikt mellom og harmonisering av traktater – Lex specialis derogat lege generali – Lex posterior derogat lege priori (Art. 30(3) og (4)) – Lex superior derogat lege inferiori

Subjektiv mot Teleologiske Eksempel: Art. 11(1) ØSK «Konvensjonspartene anerkjenner retten for enhver til a ha en tilfredsstillende levestandard for seg selv og sin familie, herunder tilfredsstillende mat, klær og bolig, samt til fortløpende a fa sin levema te forbedret. » Spørsmål: Gir art. 11(1) også et rett til vann?

Nasjonaliteten av ofrene ]: 27

ØSK Kommittee: Generelle tolkningsuttalelser nr. 15 Avsnitt 3. “The use of the word ‘including’ indicates that this catalogue of rights was not intended to be exhaustive. ” • Hvilken metoden? Ordlyden • Men det er ikke nok. Art. 11 er åpen til forskjellige fortolkninger så man må bruker andre metoder…:

Teleogiske: Avsnitt 3: “The right to water clearly falls within the category of guarantees essential for securing an adequate standard of living, particularly since it is one of the most fundamental conditions for survival” Avsnitt. 3. Hvilken metoden? Formålet Avsnitt 3: “The right to water is also inextricably related to the right to the highest attainable standard of health (art. 12, para. 1) and the rights to adequate housing and adequate food (art. 11, para. 1). The right should also be seen in conjunction with other rights enshrined in the International Bill of Human Rights, foremost amongst them the right to life and human dignity. ” Hvilken metoden? Konteksten

Og hensyn til. . . • ” 3. . . The right to water has been recognized in a wide range of international documents, including treaties, declarations and other standards. ” • ” 5. . The right to water has been consistently addressed by the Committee during its consideration of States parties’ reports” • “ 3…Moreover, the Committee has previously recognized that water is a human right contained in article 11, paragraph 1, (see general comment No. 6 (1995)). “

Men, var det nok? • Ikke alle andre traktene og resolusjonene var klar at det var en selvstendig rett til vann. • Se Stephen Tully i Netherlands Quarterly of Human Rights (2005), ss. 35 -63: – man må også bruker art. 32 Wien – manglende subjektive intensjoner av statene. • Men se svaret fra Langford i Netherlands Quarterly of Human Rights (2006), ss. 433 -459.

På slutt. . . • På slutt bestemte FNs generalforsamling selv i 2010: – “ 1. Recognizes the right to safe and clean drinking water and sanitation as a human right that is essential for the full enjoyment of life and all human rights”. FN Res. A/RES/64/292. • FNS Menneskerettigheter råd i 2010: • “ 2. Recalls General Assembly resolution 64/292 of 28 July 2010, in which the Assembly recognized the right to safe and clean drinking water and sanitation as a human right that is essential for the full enjoyment of life and all human rights; • 3. Affirms that the human right to safe drinking water and sanitation is derived from the right to an adequate standard of living and inextricably related to the right to the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health, as well as the right to life and human dignity; ”

Opphør av traktater • Formål oppfylt eller tidsbegrensning • Ny traktat (som ikke er konsistent med den gamle): Art. 59 • Jus cogens: Arts. 54, 64 • Bristende forutsetninger: Art. 62* • Umulighet: Art. 61 • Brudd ( «material breach» ): Art. 60 • Rett til a si opp: Art. 56 • Nødvendighet? (-)

Vedtak av internasjonale av organisasjoner Traktatrett? • Indirekte har vedtakene grunnlag i en traktat (eller annen form for samtykke som gir organisasjon kompetanse) Eller separat kilde? • Enkle internasjonale organisasjoner kan treffe bindende vedtak ved flertallsavgjørelser – Art. 108 FN Pakten –endre pakten – Kapittel VII FN Pakten – pålegge stater plikter

V. Alminnelige rettsgrunnsetninger

ICJ Statute, Art. 38 1. The Court, whose function is to decide in accordance with international law such disputes as are submitted to it, shall apply: a. international conventions, whether general or particular, establishing rules expressly recognized by the contesting states; b. international custom, as evidence of a general practice accepted as law; c. the general principles of law recognized by civilized nations; d. subject to the provisions of Article 59, judicial decisions and the teachings of the most highly qualified publicists of the various nations, as subsidiary means for the determination of rules of law. 2. This provision shall not prejudice the power of the Court to decide a case ex aequo et bono, if the parties agree thereto.

• ”General principles of law recognized by civilized nations” • Prinsipper som er alminnelig utbredt i ulike nasjoners nasjonale rett • Krever anerkjennelse av statene, men hvor mange er ikke klart • Må være egnet til overføring fra internasjonal rett til nasjonal rett • Anvendes sjelden som selvstendig rettskilde, – men ser delvis Barcelona Traction og Diallo i forhold til ’limited liability’ av selskaper – Mest brukt i spm om juridiksjon, bevis og prosedyre • Brukt ofte av permanente voldgiftsdomstolen (PCA))

Corfu Channel-saken (1949) ”[T[he fact of this exclusive territorial control exercised by a State within its frontiers has a bearing upon the methods of proof available to establish the knowledge of that State as to such events. By reason of this exclusive control, the other State, the victim of a breach of international law, is often unable to furnish direct proof of facts giving rise to responsibility. Such a State should be allowed a more liberal recourse to inferences of fact and circumstantial evidence. This indirect evidence is admitted in all systems of law, and its use is recognized by international decisions. It must be regarded as of special weight when it is based on a series of facts linked together and leading logically to a single conclusion. ”

Andre prinsipper? • Equity • Humanity • Legitimate interests

VI. Rettspraksis og rettsteori

• Rettspraksis (artikkel 38(1)(d)) – Ingen formell stare decisis/bindende prejudikater men stor praktisk betydning – Internasjonale domstoler vektlegger ofte egen praksis – Internasjonale domstoler vektlegger mer og mer andre domstolers praksis • Se f. eks. Diallo-saken (2010) og Mur-saken (2004). • Rettslig teori (artikkel 38(1)(d)) – Utvidet bruk i prosesskriv, men som regel ikke sitert i majoritetsavgjørelser

VII. Andre materielle kilder

• FN resolusjoner – Rettskapende – Autoritativ fortolkning • International Law Commission – Autoritativ fortolkning – Men ILC også har rollen med ‘progressiv utvikling’ av folkerett- Må derfor se når ICJ vurdere at en regel er sedvanerett • ILC Commentaries