The article offers a theoretical response to the current identity crisis of the International Law Commission (ILC). Examining the ILC’s working procedure, topic selection and social context, the author reveals some inherent limitations structuring its work. In his analysis, the author maintains that the success of the ILC owes much to its consensus-generating process and its focus primarily on secondary rules of international law. Consequently, the author expresses some doubt about the productivity of the ILC’s work in fields involving substantive value judgments of the international community, such as human rights. Considering the challenges of institutional fragmentation and competition, the author suggests the ILC adopt a policy of strategic diversification and serve as the guider of general international law aiming at preserving the legal unity and coherence of international law.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||