The 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties is a fundamental treaty providing rights and obligations that states assume in the conclusion and implementation of treaties. Some of the provisions of the Convention, however, continue to divide the legal scholarship. One of them concerns the legal definition of jus cogens provided in Article 53 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. The international community, particularly the International Law Commission, has exerted strenuous efforts for a long time to reach a consensus on jus cogens. Nevertheless, the legal definition of jus cogens is still open to varying interpretation among different countries and international publicists.
In this light, the article analyses the legal definition of jus cogens in three aspects. First, the connotation of the concept ‘peremptory norms of general international law’ is assessed in terms of particular, general and universal international law. Second, it analyses some problems arising in understanding the non-derogability from and modifiability of jus cogens. Finally, the article discusses some issues regarding ‘acceptance and recognition’ of jus cogens by the ‘international community of states as a whole’.
AlexidzeL. A. (1981). Legal nature of jus cogens in contemporary international law (Vol. 172). In Collected courses of the Hague Academy of International Law. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/1875-8096_pplrdc_A9789024727780_02
2.
BaylisE. (2019). The International Law Commission’s soft law influence. FIU Law Review, 13(6), Article 6.
3.
ByersM. (1997). Conceptualising the relationship between jus cogens and erga omnes rules. Nordic Journal of International Law, 66(2–3), 211.
4.
CasseseA. (2005). International law (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press.
5.
CrawfordJ. (1979). The creation of states in international law. Oxford University Press.
6.
DanilenkoG. M. (1991). International jus cogens: Issues of law-making. European Journal of International Law, 42(2). http://www.ejil.org/article.php?article=2025&issue=101
7.
FroweinJ. A. (2012). Jus cogens. InWolfrumR.(Ed.), The MaxPlanck encyclopedia of public international law (Vol. VI, pp. 443–446). Oxford University Press.
8.
GajaG. (1981). Jus Cogens beyond the Vienna convention. RCADI, 172.
9.
GiorgioG. (1981). Jus cogens beyond the Vienna Convention (Vol. 172). In Collected courses of the Hague Academy of International Law. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/1875-8096_pplrdc_A9789024727780_03
10.
Gomez-RobledoA. (1981). Le jus cogens international: Sa genese, sa nature, ses fonctions (Vol. 172). In Collected courses of the Hague Academy of International Law. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/1875-8096_pplrdc_A9789024727780_01
11.
GülgeçY. B. (2017). The problem of jus cogens from a theoretical perspective. Ankara Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi, 1(66), 73–115.
12.
HannikainenL. (1988). Peremptory norms (jus cogens) in international law: Historical development, criteria, present status. Finnish Lawyers’ Publishing Company.
13.
HossainK. (2005). The concept of jus cogens and the obligations under the U.N. Charter. Santa Clara Journal of International Law, 3(1). https://digitalcommons.law.scu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1011&context=scujil
14.
ICJ. (1969). North Sea Continental Shelf.
15.
ICJ. (1970). Barcelona Traction, Light and Power Company, Limited.
16.
ICJ. (1985). Continental Shelf (Libyan Arab Jarmahiriya/Malta) Judgment.
17.
ICJ. (1986). Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States of America).
ILC. (1976). Summary Records of the 1374th Meeting. Yearbook of the International Law Commission, 73.
20.
International Law Commission. (1976). Summary records of the 1374th meeting. Yearbook of the International Law Commission, 73. https://legal.un.org/ilc/publications/yearbooks/english/ilc_1976_v2_p2.pdf
21.
International Law Commission. (2019). Chapter V Peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens).
22.
JasudowiczT. (1983). Normy regionalne w prawie międzynarodowym [Regional Norms in International Law]. Uniwersytet Mikołaja Kopernika.
23.
JenningsR., & WattsA. (1992). Oppenheim’s international law (Vol. 1). Longman.
24.
KadelbachS. (2006). Jus cogens, obligations erga omnes and other rules: The identification of fundamental rules. InTomuschatC. & ThouveninJ.-M.(Eds.), The fundamental rules of the international legal order: Jus cogens and obligations erga omnesl. Martinus Nijhoff.
25.
KennedyD. (1987). International Legal Structures. Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft Mbh & Co.
26.
KolbR. (2001). Theorie du jus cogens international. Graduate Institute Publications
27.
KolbR. (2005). Jus cogens, intangibilite, intransgressibilite, derogation ‘positive’ et ‘negative’. Revue Generale de Droit International Public, 109(1), 305–330.
28.
KolbR. (2007). Conflits entre normes de jus cogens. In Droit du pouvoir, pouvoir du droit. Bruylant.
29.
KolbR. (2015). Peremptory international law—jus cogens: A general inventory. Hart Publishing.
30.
KoskenniemiM. (2006). Fragmentation of international law: Difficulties arising from the diversification and expansion of international law(Report of the Study Group of the International Law Commission, A/CN.4/L.702), para 14(10). https://legal.un.org/ilc/documentation/english/a_cn4_l682.pdf
31.
LeishmanL. (2019, October). A compelling idea: Jus cogens and the power of the United Nations Security Council. Univesity of Otago.
32.
MahmoudH. (2021). Report on the 72nd session of the ILC.
33.
MikC. (2014). Jus cogens in contemporary international law. XXXIII Polish Yearbook of International Law, 27–94. https://journals.pan.pl/publication/110222/edition/95690/polish-yearbook-of-international-law-2013-no-xxxiii-jus-cogens-in-contemporary-international-law-mik-cezary?language=en
34.
OnufN., & BirneyR. K. (1974). Peremptory norms of international law: Their source, function and future. Denver Journal of International Law and Policy, 4(2). https://digitalcommons.du.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2214&context=djilp
35.
OppenheimL. F. (1905). International law: A treatise (Vol. 1). Longman.
36.
SheltonD. (2006). Normative hierarchy in international law. American Journal of International Law, 100. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0002930000016675
37.
SinclairI. M. (1984). The Vienna Convention on the Law of the Treaties (2nd ed.). Manchester University Press.
38.
SuyE. (2006). Commentary to Art. 53. InCortenO. & KleinP.(Eds.), Les Conventions de Viennesur le droit des traités. Commentaire article par article (Vol. II). https://www.worldcat.org/title/conventions-de-vienne-sur-le-droit-des-traites-commentaire-article-par-article/oclc/269324514
39.
SztuckiJ. (1974). Jus cogens and the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. https://doi.org/10.1163/ej.9789004149816.i-472.28
40.
ThirlwayH. (2010). The sources of international law. InEvansM. D.(Ed.), International law (pp. 95–121). Oxford University Press.
41.
TomuschatC. (2015). The Security Council and jus cogens. InCannizzarE.(Ed.), The present and future of jus cogens. Sapienza Universita Editrice.
42.
TuluD. A. & AlemuY. A. (2020). A critique on the concept of Jus Cogens and its substantive content in International Law: A brief overview. International Affairs and Global Strategy, 84.
43.
United Nations. (1963). Yearbook of the International Law Commission (Vol. 2, UN Doc A/CN.4/Ser.A/1963). https://legal.un.org/ilc/publications/yearbooks/english/ilc_1963_v2.pdf
44.
United Nations. (1968). UN Conference on the Law of Treaties Official Records. http://legal.un.org/diplomaticconferences/lawoftreaties-1969/2st_sess_e.html
45.
United Nations. (1969). Official records: Summary records of the plenary meetings and of the meetings of the Committee of the Whole. In United Nations Conference on the Law of Treaties, First Session, Vienna, 26 March–24 May 1968(A/CONF.39/11), 53rd meeting. https://legal.un.org/diplomaticconferences/1968_lot/docs/english/sess_1.pdf
46.
United Nations. (1971). United Nations Conference on the Law of Treaties I. https://treaties.un.org/doc/source/docs/A_CONF.39_11_Add.2-E.pdf
47.
VattelE. (2008). Law of nations. Edited byKapossyB. & WhatmoreR.Liberty Fund.
48.
VidmarJ. (2012). Norm conflicts and hierarchy in international law: Towards a vertical international system?InWetE. & VidmarJ.(Eds.), Hierarchy in international law: The place of human rights. Oxford University Press.
