Примеры использования Special rapporteur's decision на Английском языке и их переводы на Русский язык
{-}
-
Official
-
Colloquial
Members expressed support for the Special Rapporteur's decision to provide an entire set of draft articles.
Special Rapporteur's decision under rule 97, transmitted to the State party on 29 March 2010 not issued in document form.
In that regard, her delegation welcomed the Special Rapporteur's decision to withdraw draft guideline 2.5.X.
Special Rapporteur's decision under rules 92 and 97, transmitted to the State party on 14 June 2010 not issued in document form.
Mr. Wickremasinghe(United Kingdom) said that his delegation concurred with the Special Rapporteur's decision to base his recommendations on the judgment of the International Court of Justice in the Barcelona Traction case.
Special Rapporteur's decision under rules 92 and 97, transmitted to the State party on 18 April 2011 not issued in document form.
With regard to thetopic"Provisional application of treaties", the Nordic countries expressed support for the Special Rapporteur's decision not to embark on a comparative study of domestic provisions on the subject.
She welcomed the Special Rapporteur's decision not to consider further the socalled"triple alternative.
With regard to the report of the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, Argentina had responded to all the communications it had received(see document E/CN.4/2004/7/Add.1) and welcomed the new Special Rapporteur's decision to include replies from Governments in his reports.
It also supported the Special Rapporteur's decision not to deal with jus cogens as part of the scope of the present topic.
The Special Rapporteur's decision to travel to the Republic of Korea and Japan was in lieu of his request for access the Democratic People's Republic of Korea.
It therefore requests the Committee to clarify the criteria at the basis of the Special Rapporteur's decision to call for interim measures of protection and to consider withdrawing the request for interim protection under rule 86.
In that regard, the Special Rapporteur's decision to invoke international humanitarian law as lex specialis in article 5, paragraph 1, was worthy of support.
For those reasons, he endorsed the Special Rapporteur's decision to withdraw draft guidelines 2.5.4, 2.5.11 bis and 2.5.X at the current stage.
She welcomed the Special Rapporteur's decision to divide draft guideline 3.4 into two separate provisions, draft guidelines 3.4.1 and 3.4.2, which reflected those concerns.
On the topic of provisional application of treaties,his delegation supported the Special Rapporteur's decision not to propose draft conclusions or guidelines at the current stage, as a number of issues required additional study by Member States and by the Commission.
He agreed with the Special Rapporteur's decision not to dwell on the problem of defining primary rules and hoped that the Commission would confine itself to the codification of secondary rules.
Her delegation also endorsed the Special Rapporteur's decision to change the title of article 22 from"Exceptionally serious war crimes" to"War crimes.
It therefore welcomed the Special Rapporteur's decision to draw a clear distinction between the obligation to extradite or prosecute and the principle of universal jurisdiction, and to carry out a careful examination of their mutual relationship.
Some members expressed support for the Special Rapporteur's decision not to embark on a comparative study of domestic provisions relating to the provisional application of treaties.
At first glance, the Special Rapporteur's decision to class not just foreign citizens but also stateless persons as"aliens" and to encompass not only official or lawful acts of States in the term"expulsion" seemed to be well founded.
Similarly, her delegation fully supported the Special Rapporteur's decision not to study the conditions for acquisition of nationality or to draw up a draft article on denationalization.
Her delegation supported the Special Rapporteur's decision not to deal with the issue of rules of jus cogens for pragmatic reasons, as such rules presented their own set of unique problems that fell outside the scope of the topic.
With regard to draft article 23,his delegation supported the Special Rapporteur's decision to eliminate the crime of recruitment of mercenaries and agreed that the acts originally dealt with in that article could be prosecuted as crimes of aggression.
Accordingly, it welcomed the Special Rapporteur's decision to focus on identifying already existing legal obligations and principles, and it agreed that non-binding draft guidelines might be the preferred approach to the topic.
Her delegation welcomed the Special Rapporteur's decision to focus in his current work on the legal effects of the provisional application of treaties.
The Committee points out that the Special Rapporteur's decision not to separate the decisions on admissibility and the merits(see para. 1.2 above) does not mean that the Committee cannot consider the two matters separately.
He was pleased with the Special Rapporteur's decision to restrict the draft Code to six crimes, thus meeting the concern of those delegations including his own, which had felt it important to avoid devaluing the concept of crimes against the peace and security of mankind.
Her delegation endorsed the Special Rapporteur's decision to refrain from examining further the so-called"triple alternative", since it viewed surrender to an international criminal tribunal as substantively different from a bilateral, State-to-State act of extradition.
Canada also welcomes the Special Rapporteur's decision to refrain from further examination of the"triple alternative", as Canada considers surrender to an international criminal tribunal to differ substantively from an act of extradition, the latter involving bilateral State-to-State action.