View/save PDF version of this document - La Strada International

288 Travaux préparatoires: United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized CrimeRolling text (A/AC.254/4/Rev.2)“Article 25“Settlement of disputes 2“l. Any dispute between two or more States Parties concerning the interpretationor application of this Convention [and its Protocols] that cannot be settledthrough negotiation within a reasonable time 3 shall, at the request of one of them, besubmitted to arbitration. If, six months after the date of the request for arbitration,those States Parties are unable to agree on the organization of the arbitration, anyone of those Parties may refer the dispute to the International Court of Justice byrequest in conformity with the Statute of the Court.“2. Each State Party may, at the time of [signature,] ratification [, acceptance]or [approval] of this Convention, declare that it does not consider itself bound byparagraph 1 of this article. The other States Parties shall not be bound by paragraph1 of this article with respect to any State Party that has made such a reservation. 4“3. Any State Party that has made a reservation 5 in accordance with paragraph2 of this article may at any time withdraw that reservation by notification to theSecretary-General of the United Nations.”Sixth session: 6-17 December 1999Notes by the Secretariat2. The version of article 25 contained in document A/AC.254/4/Rev.2 remained thesame in the intermediate drafts of the convention (A/AC.254/4/Revs.3-5).Rolling text (A/AC.254/4/Rev.6)“Article 25“Settlement of disputes“l. Any dispute between two or more States Parties concerning the interpretationor application of this Convention and its Protocols that cannot be settled throughnegotiation within a reasonable time [ninety days] shall, at the request of one of thoseParties, be submitted to arbitration. If, six months after the date of the request for2Some delegations proposed that article 32 of the 1988 Convention would be a more appropriate model for this article,in that it referred not simply to negotiation and arbitration, but in greater detail to “negotiation, enquiry, mediation, conciliation,arbitration, recourse to regional bodies, judicial process or other peaceful means of their [the Parties’] own choice”.Other delegations, however, essentially supported the present formulation, since it was based on the 1997 InternationalConvention for the Suppression of Terrorist Bombings (General Assembly resolution 52/164, annex), which was more recentthan the 1988 Convention.3Some delegations were of the view that the term “reasonable time” was ambiguous.4One delegation noted that the issue of a declaration would apply only to cases involving the compulsory settlementof disputes. Some delegations proposed that paragraphs 2 and 3 of article 25, together with the appropriate paragraphs fromarticle 26, should be placed in a separate article on reservations. Other delegations, however, noted that reservations inrespect of the resolution of conflicts were an issue that should be kept in article 25, separate from the issue of reservationsin general.5One delegation proposed that the word “reservation” should be replaced with the word “declaration”.