Hostname: page-component-6bf8c574d5-2jptb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-03-01T12:59:34.124Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Remarks by Sharon A. Williams

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 February 2017

Sharon A. Williams
Sharon A. Williams*
Affiliation:
Osgoode Hall Law School, York University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Panel Sessions
Information
Proceedings of the ASIL Annual Meeting , Volume 80 , 1986 , pp. 124 - 127
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 1986

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 G.A. Res. 177, U.N. Doc. A/519, at 112 (1947).

* Ed. Note: A fourth was submitted in November 1986.

* Ed. Note:In November 1986 the Commission presented the fourth report of the Special Rapporteur to the General Assembly at its 41st session. Mr. Thiam had prepared a number of new draft articles, but the Commission decided to postpone consideration of them until its next session. The fourth report was divided into five parts: crimes against humanity, war crimes, other related offenses, general principles and draft articles. The Commission had concluded prior to the presentation of the report that the Special Rapporteur should recast the draft articles in the light of opinions of members of the Commission itself and the views expressed by states in the consideration of the report by the Sixth Committee of the General Assembly at its 41st session. As to implementation the Commission stated that it would accept guidance on the options of jurisdiction over the offense proposed in the report and reminded the General Assembly of a question posed to it by the ILC in 1983 as to whether the Commission's mandate extends to the preparation of the statute of an international criminal court for individuals.