Codification, Progressive Development, or Scholarly Analysis? The Art of Packaging the ILC's Work Product

The Responsibility of International Organizations: Essays in Memory of Sir Ian Brownlie, Maurizio Ragazzi, ed., 2013

GWU Legal Studies Research Paper No. 2012-109

GWU Law School Public Law Research Paper No. 2012-109

12 Pages Posted: 3 Nov 2012 Last revised: 27 Nov 2012

See all articles by Sean D. Murphy

Sean D. Murphy

George Washington University - Law School

Date Written: October 27, 2012

Abstract

Over its life, the U.N. International Law Commission has developed various ways of “packaging” its work product. Multiple techniques are available for balancing the Commission’s roles in advancing the codification and progressive development of international law – choices about the format of the project, about how to characterize the project in the associated commentary, and about the recommendation to the U.N. General Assembly on what should be done with the completed project. While creative use of such techniques to suit the particular topics on the Commission’s agenda is to be welcomed, the Commission’s authority and legacy ultimately will turn on whether States and other relevant actors view the Commission as adhering to its statutory role or perceive it as aggregating to itself the role of legislator.

Keywords: International Law Commission, codification, progressive development

Suggested Citation

Murphy, Sean D., Codification, Progressive Development, or Scholarly Analysis? The Art of Packaging the ILC's Work Product (October 27, 2012). The Responsibility of International Organizations: Essays in Memory of Sir Ian Brownlie, Maurizio Ragazzi, ed., 2013, GWU Legal Studies Research Paper No. 2012-109, GWU Law School Public Law Research Paper No. 2012-109, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2169997

Sean D. Murphy (Contact Author)

George Washington University - Law School ( email )

2000 H Street, N.W.
Washington, DC 20052
United States
202-994-8763 (Phone)
202-994-5654 (Fax)

Do you have negative results from your research you’d like to share?

Paper statistics

Downloads
246
Abstract Views
1,308
Rank
227,912
PlumX Metrics