Full text: Responsibility of states for damage caused in their territory to the person or property of foreigners

(a) After the substantive rules of State responsibility in connection 
with foreigners have been established, the codification of the international law 
should be supplemented by a set of fundamental rules of procedure for the 
enforcement of international obligations. All of these rules can be readily de- 
fined, inasmuch as they have been established as common usage by international 
practice. There is no doubt but that the States should be the ones to insti- 
tute the international action for the wrongs committed against their nationals. 
This procedure would cover amicable suggestions, requests or enjoinments, 
and formal claims handled through diplomatic channels. The foundation 
for this action on the part of the State lies upon an extant principle in the 
modern mind, that is very often resorted to. It is deemed that the dignity 
and respectability of the State would be impaired if its nationals should not 
be accorded proper juridical treatment. It is further deemed that nationals 
are units of the State, and that it is incumbent upon the State to protect them 
all over the world and demand from the other States proper justice for them. 
All of these conceptions are the remaining traces of the doctrine of the 
classical schools and, at the same time, a certain reminiscence of medieval 
tendencies. However, it is an unquestionable international fact that up to 
this day that is the theory entertained in the minds of the States. They 
claim for their nationals. They are the States’ claims and pertain to their 
sovereignty. It is not considered that these claims are instituted by the State 
under a commission from the injured person, or as his representative. The 
only requirement is that the victim of the international wrong should be a 
national of the plaintiff State. International authorities are well acquainted 
with the details of procedure, viz., nationality from the time that the damage 
was caused and until the completion of the proceedings; the effects of a 
change of nationality in the meantime, either voluntary or by operation of 
law; and the legal consequences of the death of the victim. None of these 
questions involve any difficulties. But it would be worth while to consider 
a departure from the prevailing procedure of handling claims through diplo- 
matic channels. Would it not constitute a principle of juridical evolution 

Note to user

Dear user,

In response to current developments in the web technology used by the Goobi viewer, the software no longer supports your browser.

Please use one of the following browsers to display this page correctly.

Thank you.