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

Part Four. Article 1 599Rolling text (A/AC.254/4/Add.2/Rev.5)Eighth session: 21 February-3 March 2000“Article 1“Relationship with the United Nations Convention againstTransnational Organized Crime 4“This Protocol supplements the United Nations Convention against TransnationalOrganized Crime, done at [...] (hereinafter referred to as “the Convention”), and, asregards the States Parties to the Convention and to the Protocol, those two instrumentsshall be read and interpreted together as one single instrument.“[Paragraph 2 has been deleted]” 5Rolling text (A/AC.254/4/Add.2/Rev.6)Eleventh session: 2-28 October 2000“Article 1“Relation with the United Nations Convention againstTransnational Organized Crime 6“1. This Protocol supplements the United Nations Convention againstTransnational Organized Crime. It shall be interpreted together with the Convention.“2. The provisions of the Convention shall apply, mutatis mutandis, to thisProtocol, unless otherwise provided herein.“3. The offences established in accordance with article 5 of this Protocol shallbe regarded as offences established in accordance with the Convention.”Notes by the Secretariat3. Article 1 was approved at the twelfth session of the Ad Hoc Committee (see thefinal text of the protocol, as included in the report of the Ad Hoc Committee(A/55/383/Add.2, sect. III, draft resolution, annex), that was submitted to the GeneralAssembly for adoption pursuant to resolutions 54/126 of 17 December 1999 and 55/25 of15 November 2000).4As indicated above, the question of the relationship between the convention and the protocols was discussed extensivelyby the Ad Hoc Committee in the negotiations on the convention itself. Already at its sixth session, the Ad HocCommittee had agreed that common subject matter should be dealt with in one of three ways: by incorporating appropriatearticles of the convention into each protocol mutatis mutandis; by providing supplementary or more specific terms in theprotocols modifying the applicable provisions of the convention; or by incorporating parallel provisions into both instrumentsin their entirety. The details of specific provisions and the question of whether the relationship should be set out inthe text of the convention or in each protocol were left open to further discussion (see article 37 of the convention in partone; the note by the Secretariat on the common provisions (A/AC.254/21); the report of the Chairman on the informal consultationsheld during the sixth session concerning the common provisions (A/AC.254/L.109); and the report of the Ad HocCommittee on its sixth session (see A/AC.254/23 and Corr.1, paras. 17 and 18)).5The informal consultations held during the eighth session of the Ad Hoc Committee recommended the deletion ofarticle 1, paragraph 2, after adopting similar text in article 3 proposed by France and Italy (see A/AC.254/L.172).6At the eleventh session of the Ad Hoc Committee, article 1 of the draft protocol was finalized with the followingnote to be inserted in the travaux préparatoires: “This paragraph was adopted on the understanding that the words ‘mutatismutandis’ meant ‘with such modifications as circumstances require’ or ‘with the necessary modifications’. Provisions of theconvention that are applied to the protocol under this article would consequently be modified or interpreted so as to havethe same essential meaning or effect in the protocol as in the convention.” (See below under section C.)