Примеры использования Committed by a state на Английском языке и их переводы на Русский язык
{-}
-
Official
-
Colloquial
The present article refers to"aggression committed by a State.
Crimes and delicts both involved wrongful acts committed by a State, but the nature and seriousness of those acts might and indeed often did vary.
But the present text provided that an individual could be guilty of the crime of aggression only if aggression had been committed by a State.
The new convention should also address acts of terror committed by a State, including by its military forces.
In that connection,the draft Code should address only crimes committed by an individual through participation in an aggression committed by a State.
Люди также переводят
Rather, it was the most serious violation of international law committed by a State and represented a danger for the entire international community.
An"act of aggression", that is to say, an act referred to in United Nations General Assembly resolution 3314(XXIX) of 14 December 1974,was committed by a State.
With regard to the legal consequences of an international crime committed by a State, the Commission had been right to maintain the distinction between delicts and crimes.
She regretted that the Commission had struck out article 19, which had been adopted on first reading,on the notion of an international crime committed by a State.
Also, the questions of the use of force in response to a"crime" committed by a State, the role of the organs of the United Nations, and other questions, were all very important to the discussion.
With regard to the draft articles on the consequences of an international crime,the notion of an international crime committed by a State continued to arouse controversy.
The words"aggression committed by a State" clearly indicate that such a violation of the law by a State is a sine qua non condition for the possible attribution to an individual of responsibility for a crime of aggression.
It was stated that an error of fact should be easier to correct than an error committed by a State in adopting the text of a treaty.
The threshold of involvement of an individual as leader or organizer was defined as actively participating in or ordering the planning, preparation, initiation orwaging of aggression committed by a State.
The proposal by some members of the Commission to replace the expression"international crimes committed by a State" with"exceptionally serious wrongful acts of a State" deserved support.
The thorny problem of defining aggression had been cleverly solved by having the Code deal with individual responsibility rather than with the definition of what constituted an unlawful act committed by a State.
The Commission has repeatedly emphasized the difference between a crime committed by a State and a crime committed by an individual, even one acting on behalf of the State. .
France proposes inserting the phrase“under conditions which are contrary to international law” after the phrase“An internationally wrongful act committed by a State as the result of coercion”.
In addition, a wrongful act committed by a State could not be taken to justify an action, whether by the injured State or any other, which, while initially legitimate, might itself have far-reaching consequences.
The crux of the controversy over the concept of an international crime committed by a State was whether a State could commit a crime and, if so, what the differences were between the legal consequences of a crime and of a delict.
The Security Council should be authorized to initiate investigations before the Court, andits prior decision that an act of aggression had been committed by a State should be a condition for initiating proceedings.
For the purposes of this Statute, an act of aggression means an act committed by a State as defined by United Nations General Assembly resolution 3314(XXIX) of 14 December 1974 and subject to a prior determination by the United Nations Security Council.
Turning to chapter IV, on international crimes, he said that article 19 had provoked heated discussion in the Commission,which had found it necessary to include a chapter on the consequences of an international crime committed by a State.
In draft article 16, paragraph 2(b), the Commission had tried to reinforce the link between an authorization orrecommendation of an international organization and an act committed by a State or international organization that gave rise to the responsibility of the organization.
That work must be coordinated with the elaboration of the draft articles on State responsibility, because very often crimes against the peace andsecurity of mankind committed by individuals were the consequence of an international crime committed by a State.
The arbitral tribunal in Joseph C. Lemire v. Ukraine cited article 31 as authority for the proposition that"a wrong committed by a State against an investor must always give rise to a right for compensation of the economic harm sustained.
The view was also expressed that, on second reading, the Commission should pay closer attention to the practicability of the concept of State crimes andthat the proposal by some members of the Commission to replace the expression"international crimes committed by a State" with"exceptionally serious wrongful acts of a State" deserved support.
The solution did not lie in adopting the definition set out in General Assembly resolution 3314(XXIX),which defined an act committed by a State and, consequently, did not include the necessary elements for prosecuting individuals who had contributed to the preparation or commission of an act of aggression.
In all other cases, by analogy with article 42 of the articles on State responsibility,an organization that was directly injured as a result of a wrongful act committed by a State should be entitled to invoke that State's responsibility.