The human rights movement, which has had such a powerful impact on international law and relations in the post—World War II period, has in recent years turned its attention to extradition. Treaties, executive acts and judicial decisions on extradition have all been affected. At the same time, transnational and international crime has increased. The international community has responded by creating new institutions and expanding the network of bilateral and multilateral treaties designed to outlaw transnational crime, promote extradition, and authorize mutual assistance. Inevitably, there is a tension between the claim for the inclusion of human rights in the extradition process and the demand for more effective international cooperation in the suppression of crime, which resembles the tension in many national legal systems between the “law and order” and human rights approaches to criminal justice. As in domestic society, it is necessary to strike a balance between the two so as to establish a system in which crime is suppressed and human rights are respected. This was stressed by the European Court of Human Rights in the leading case on extradition and human rights, Soering v. United Kingdom, when it stated:

The roots of the modern law of war lie in the 1860s. Developments in this decade began in 1862 when Henry Dunant published Un Souvenir de Solferino, which inspired the conclusion two years later of the first Geneva Convention on treatment of the sick and wounded. Four years later came the first multilateral agreement to ban the use of a particular weapon in war. And in 1863, before either of these agreements had been concluded, the earliest official government codification of the laws of war was promulgated by the United States. This codification was issued as General Orders No. 100, Instructions for the Government of Armies of the United States in the Field, more commonly known as the “Lieber Code.”

In January 1998, the Department of State released its Publication 10518, Consular Notification and Access: Instructions for Federal, State, and Local Law Enforcement and Other Officials Regarding Foreign Nationals in the United States and the Rights of Consular Officials to Assist Them. Prepared in the Office of the Legal Adviser, the booklet contains “instructions and guidance relating to the arrest and detention of foreign nationals, deaths of foreign nationals, the appointment of guardians for minors or incompetent adults who are foreign nationals, and related issues pertaining to the provision of consular services to foreign nationals in the United States.” The foreword points out that cooperation of federal, state and local law enforcement agencies in ensuring treatment of foreign nationals in accordance with the instructions not only will permit the United States to comply with its consular legal obligations domestically, but also will help ensure that the United States can insist upon “rigorous compliance by foreign governments with respect to United States citizens abroad.”

In December 1997, in Kyoto, Japan, over 160 parties to the 1992 United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (FCCC or Convention) adopted the Kyoto Protocol, which, for the first time, establishes legally binding limits for industrialized countries on emissions of carbon dioxide and other “greenhouse gases.” The Kyoto Protocol (the Protocol) is quite complex, reflecting the complicated political, economic, scientific and legal issues raised by human-induced climate change. The result of more than two years of preparatory discussions and eleven days of often-intense negotiations in Kyoto, the Protocol will be opened for signature in March 1998 for one year, although countries may accede to it after that period. It will enter into force ninety days after at least fifty-five parties to the FCCC, encompassing FCCC Annex I parties that accounted in total for at least 55 percent of the total emissions for 1990 of carbon dioxide (CO2) of Annex I parties, have ratified, accepted, approved or acceded to the Protocol.

The Preparatory Committee on the Establishment of an International Criminal Court (Preparatory Committee or committee) held its fifth session from December 1 to 12, 1997. The Preparatory Committee, chaired by Adriaan Bos (the Netherlands), conducted most of its work in five open working groups to consider (1) definitions of war crimes, (2) general principles of criminal law, (3) penalties, (4) procedural matters, and (5) state cooperation. Three of the working groups were assisted by small drafting groups focusing on particular articles; in the other two working groups, the chairs undertook the task of drafting revised texts in the light of the discussion. The following short summary discusses some of the major decisions adopted by the five working groups; the positions of some of the states, including the United States, that were active on these issues; and the plans of the Preparatory Committee for its final session (March 16 to April 3, 1998) before the five-week diplomatic conference opens in Rome on June 15, 1998.

While the public’s attention has recently focused on the United Nations Special Commission on Iraq (UNSCOM) and its weapons inspection activities, the United Nations Compensation Commission (UNCC or Commission), another ad hoc UN body created pursuant to Security Council Resolution 687 in the aftermath of the Persian Gulf war, has been making steady progress in resolving the war reparation claims asserted against Iraq. Nonetheless, the UNCC is under increasing pressure to speed up the claims review process and complete its work expeditiously.

This Note summarizes the judicial work of the International Court of Justice during 1997, using the updated General List, pleadings filed, Orders and Judgments given and hearings held at the Peace Palace in The Hague to describe the Court’s current record.