Chair,

In this Cluster, Micronesia will will comment on the Commission’s Check against delivery Check against delivery work on the topic of “ work on the topic of “General principles of law.” In that connec principles of law.” In that connec Vázquez-Bermúdez tion, Micronesia welcomes the first report of Mr. Marcelo tion, Micronesia welcomes the first report of Mr. as Special Rapporteur on the topic.

General principles of law, as a source of international law, remain u principles of law, as a source of international law, remain u Commission when compared to treaties and custom inconsistencies in views when compared to treaties and customary international law. nder nder-studied by the This is reflected in the This is reflected in the of States and international judicial bodies as well a Commission of States and international judicial bodies as well a on the nature, scope, and application of general principles of law of international law. on the nature, scope, and application of general principles of law relationship to other sources of international law A key question to be addressed by the Commission is whether general principles of law are sourc Commission is whether general principles of law are sourc ed just from those principles that are common to national legal systems or also include rules to which States have given their co at the international level. common to national legal systems or also include rules to which States have given their co Clarity on this question Clarity parti cularly at the international l is essential in order to ensure the rule of law, cularly at the international level. In that connection, Micronesia of States and international judicial bodies as well as within the on the nature, scope, and application of general principles of law as well as their A key question to be addressed by the ed just from those principles that are common to national legal systems or also include rules to which States have given their consent is essential in order to ensure the rule of law, supports the final outcome conclusions, in line with the Micronesia also notes ssion’s work on general principles of law with the ernational law, including in of the Commission’s work as being in the form of draft of the Commission’s work as being in the form of draft Commission’s work on th supports the final outcome conclusions, in line e identification of customary international law. the potential overlaps between the Commi e identification of customary international law. the potential overlaps between the Commi Commission’s ongoing work on peremptory terms of general Micronesia also notes ssion’s work on general principles of law with the Commission’s ongoing work on peremptory norms of general int principles of law as possibly serving as bases for ernational law, including principles of law as possibly serving as bases for jus cogens.

Chair,

Micronesia has three main i far. First, Micronesia su nitial nitial comments to make on the Commission’s pports a draft concl pports a draft concl work on the topic so work on the topic so usion that does not limit general principles of law to usion that does not limit general principles of law to those recognized by so-call International Court ed “civilized nations.” The language used in the Statute of the of Justice in this regard is ed “civilized nations.” The language used in the Statute of the of Justice in this regard is fundamental pri nciple of sovereign equality of States, ed “civilized nations.” The language used in the Statute of the anachronistic, unnecessary, violative of the with current international practice, anachronistic, unnecessary, violative of nciple of sovereign equality of States, at odds with current international praand deeply inappropriate in its insinuation that only those principles that are common to all major Western legal systems are properly considered general principles of law. In this connection, Micronesia welcomes the language used by the Special Rapporteur in his proposed draft conclusion 2 with regard to general principles being “generally recognized by States.” Some work remains to be done on what is meant by the phrase “generally recognized,” but the omission of a reference to “civilized nations” is an important and welcome development.

Second, Micronesia notes that the first report of the Special Rapporteur as well as his proposed draft conclusion 3 favor the notion that general principles of law comprise not just those principles derived from national legal systems but also those “formed within the international legal system.” While the first category of general principles of law is well-grounded in the relevant practice and jurisprudence, the second category needs careful consideration by the Commission, especially in terms of the methodology to be used when determining what is meant by the term “formed” as well as by the term “international legal system.” Along the same lines, do general principles of law that are derived from national legal systems possess a certain normative value that is inferior or superior in some manner to customary international law? What about general principles of law that are “formed within the international legal system”? The non-hierarchical nature of the listing of sources of international law in Article 38 of the Statute of the International Court of Justice seems to argue against such weighting, but the Commission will do well to address this issue anyway.

Third, in connection with the foregoing, Micronesia generally supports the Special Rapporteur’s proposed programme of work for the Commission on this topic, particularly the suggestion that a future report might address the possibility of general principles of law with a regional or bilateral scope of application. To the extent that general principles of law are closely linked with customary international law as key sources of international law, and in recognition that it is permissible to have regional or particular customary international law, it is worth examining whether it is permissible to have regional or particular general principles of law, including on a bilateral basis. In the Pacific region, including sub-regions therein, there are a number of norms that enjoy acceptance and utilization in multiple national legal systems but that might not necessarily enjoy similar treatment beyond the Pacific, including norms regarding the natural environment and certain cultural sources of legal authority. Micronesia looks forward to contributing to the Commission’s discussion of this and other aspects of the topic, including through submission of comments to the Commission by the end of this year.

Thank you Chair.