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 Treaty Section of the United Nations is engaged in a major effort to disseminate its vast collection of both bilateral and multilateral treaties by electronic means, including the Internet. As an essential complementary measure, the publication of the United Nations Treaty Series (UNTS) is to be brought up to date. Both these objectives have presented a range of challenges, not the least of which is securing the requisite resources in the current financial climate. In this paper these challenges (legal, technical and financial) and the approaches that have been adopted to deal with them will be discussed.

European Communities—Measures Concerning Meat and Meat Products. WTO Doc. WT/DS26/AB/R & WT/DS48/AB/R.

World Trade Organization Appellate Body, January 16, 1998.

This report of the Appellate Body of the World Trade Organization (WTO) is both the most recent development in a long-running trade battle between the United States and the European Communities and the first dispute to be addressed under a new Uruguay Round agreement concerning food safety measures.

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.

On March 7, 1995, Conoco oil company of Houston, Texas, announced that it had entered into a contract with Iran to have a Netherlands-based affiliate assist in the development of the Sirri Island oil field. In response, the Clinton administration issued Executive Order No. 12,957, prohibiting participation by U.S. entities in the development of Iranian petroleum resources. Eventually, Conoco withdrew from its contract, but in early May of 1995 the administration stepped up its pressure on Iran by issuing Executive Order No. 12,959, prohibiting U.S. entities from using foreign entities they owned or controlled to make investments in or conduct trade transactions with Iran. On July 13 of that year, the French oil company Total S.A. entered into an agreement with Iran to replace Conoco in developing the Sirri Island field, and over the next several months Iran struck nearly a dozen petroleum development agreements worth in excess of $50 million each with other foreign oil companies. Within a couple of months, both Houses of the U.S. Congress took up consideration of proposals to complicate Iran’s ability to develop its hydrocarbon resources. By the end of 1995, the proposals, which even extended to wholly foreign entities organized and operating outside the United States, had come to include Libya as well. Final passage of one of the proposals, specifically, H.R. 3107, took place in the Senate and the House in July 1996. It was signed into law as the Iran and Libya Sanctions Act (ILSA) on August 5.

United States v. Balsys. 118 S.Ct. 2218.

U.S. Supreme Court, June 25, 1998.

Resolving a long-open question, the U.S. Supreme Court held in this 7-2 decision that a witness in a domestic proceeding may not invoke the constitutional privilege against self-incrimination if the witness fears that the testimony may be used in a prosecution outside the United States. Although grounded in domestic law, the three opinions in Balsys reveal tension between the judiciary's traditional deference to the political branches in foreign relations matters and its concern over the risk that individuals subject to prosecution abroad will suffer deprivation of liberty because of that deference.

In Re Aquarone. 101 Revue Générale de Droit International Public 838 (1997).

Conseil d'Etat (Assemblée), June 6, 1997.

In this case, the French Council of State, sitting in its most authoritative formation, had to pass on a petition by Stanislav Aquarone for review of a judgment of the administrative court of appeal of Lyon, dismissing his request for annulment of die imposition by France of income taxes on his retirement pension for the years 1981-1986, paid by the United Nations. In a carefully crafted opinion, the highest administrative court of France rejected die petition and die claim of immunity from taxation of his retirement pay by Aquarone, a former Registrar of the International Court of Justice and an Australian national now living in Gordes, France.

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.

The Preparatory Committee on the Establishment of an International Criminal Court (Preparatory Committee or committee) held its sixth and final session from March 16 to April 3, 1998, at the United Nations headquarters in New York. At this session it completed its work of preparing a consolidated text of a statute for a permanent international criminal court (ICC) for adoption at a diplomatic conference in Rome held from June 15 to July 17, 1998. The consolidated text is considerably longer than the draft statute submitted by the International Law Commission to the UN General Assembly in July 1994 (ILC draft statute) and contains many different options submitted by states, but it is still largely consistent with the basic structure of the ILC draft statute.

Regular readers of this Journal will be familiar with the idea of developing a set of minimum humanitarian standards to provide greater protection of human rights in situations of internal conflict. The idea was first put forward in 1983 by Professor Theodor Meron as both a necessary and an effective means of closing the gap in legal protection that exists in internal conflicts that fall outside the scope of applicability of international humanitarian law, and where human rights norms might be insufficient. The idea became more concrete in 1990 with the adoption of the Declaration on Minimum Humanitarian Standards in Turku/Åbo, Finland, now often referred to as the “Turku Declaration,” by a group of experts convened by the Institute for Human Rights at Abo Akademi University.

Prefecture of Voiotia v. Federal Republic of Germany. Case No. 137/1997.

Court of First Instance of Leivadia, Greece, October 30, 1997.

On November 27, 1995, the Prefecture of Voiotia (soudiern Greece) and other claimants, in their individual capacity, brought a claim of indemnity before the Court of First Instance of Leivadia against the German state. The plaintiffs based their claims on atrocities (willful murder and destruction of private property) committed by German occupation forces against the persons and property of die village of Distomo in Voiotia on June 10, 1944. They sought compensation for the material and mental damage suffered as a result of those atrocities, which were specifically described in their briefs. The Greek Foreign Office forwarded the complaint to the German Foreign Office, which rejected and returned it to the Greek Embassy on the grounds that the suit impaired the sovereign rights of the German state. Germany was not represented at trial. The court awarded damages to the individual claimants of 9,448,105,000 drachmas (approximately $30 million).

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.

In October 1997, a little-noticed event took place at the United Nations that may roll back the international legal protection of human rights. Jamaica became the first country to denounce the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), and thus withdrew the right of individual petition to the UN Human Rights Committee (Committee). Although it is provided for under the Protocol’s Article 12, no state has previously made such a denunciation.

Alejandre v. Republic of Cuba. 996 F.Supp. 1239.

U.S. District Court, S.D. Fla., December 17, 1997.

On February 24, 1996, the Cuban Air Force deliberately shot down two unarmed civil aircraft piloted by members of the Miami-based organization Brothers to die Rescue. The incident resulted in the loss of four lives and evoked widespread international condemnation. It prompted Congress to enact the controversial Helms-Burton Act on March 12, 1996, tightening the U.S. embargo against Cuba in effect since 1962.