![]() |
||||||
| ACmHPR · ACtHPR · CCJ · CACJ · COMESA CJ · CAT · CEDAW · CERD · CAEA · EACJ · ECCIS · ECOWAS CCJ · ECCC · HRahC · HRC BiH · HRC · ICI · ICC · IMT · IPC · ITLOS · PCIJ · SADC-T · STL · UNMIK HRAP · WCS BiH · | ||||||
| International Commissions of Inquiry | ||||||
| decisions · documents · jurisdiction · procedure · structure · timeline | ||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Parties to the dispute have complete
freedom in respect of the structure of the commission. Parties normally
determine the structure of the commission through the provisions of the Inquiry
Convention. Otherwise, conventions provide a recommended structure that can be
used by the parties. Article 13 of the 1907 Convention seems nevertheless to
introduce a provision that must be followed if one of the commissioners was not
able to perform his functions. In effect, this article does not allow the
parties to change the procedure for filling the vacancy for a substitute
commissioner, as it has to be the same as for the original commissioners. At the
same time, in practice, it is doubtful that this provision can create any
potential limitation to the freedom of the parties to change procedures by
mutual consent. This provision did not exist in the 1899 Convention, and was
introduced only in the 1907 Convention. In addition, Article 16 appears to
require appointment of a Secretary-General (whose office serves as a registry)
of the Commissions that are sitting outside of The Hague. It appears that since
this provision touches on the issues related to the institution as a whole, and
not simply a particular dispute (as Article 13 does), it would be more difficult
to change this provision by mutual consent of the parties, especially taking
into account the ‘public’ role of the registry. Article 16 of the 1907
Convention provides that if the Commission is sitting at The Hague the
International Bureau of the PCA acts as a registry. |
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
home | terms & conditions | about Copyright © 1999-2011 WorldCourts. All rights reserved. |
||||||