COUNTERMEASURES IN LIGHT OF THE INTERNATIONAL LAW COMMISSION’S WORKS
COUNTERMEASURES IN LIGHT OF THE INTERNATIONAL LAW COMMISSION’S WORKS

Summary/Abstract: The term countermeasures has been subject to a sinuous development, coming in international law by means of successive borrowings. Countermeasures are considered reminiscent elements of private law, being identified as “violent procedures” of making justice for the purpose of punishing the author of a wrongful action and obligating them to make reparations of the damage caused. A specific meaning seems to be noted by the contemporary school of law, an interpretation which has found support also in the arguments of the International Law Commission (I.L.C.). The existence of a wrongful action is considered to be the precondition of exerting countermeasures, thus we have to refer to the provisions of art. 2 of the Draft Articles on State Responsibility for Internationally Wrongful Acts prepared by I.L.C. In order to have a wrongful act to justify the exertion of countermeasures, the state’s action must constitute a violation of its international obligations, attributed to the state involved in light of international law. This way, the Commission adopts a new vision running counter to the traditionalist norm setting stance, which considers that the victim state is the only one in a position to appreciate the wrongful act of another state. Such a position is not incorrect if we consider the differences determined by establishing the conditions for the states’ responsibility for wrongful acts. Countermeasures can be taken by the victim state in order to obligate the state author of the act to meet its obligations assumed at international level, to end the wrongful conduct and to provide the necessary reparations to the injured state. The fundamental condition is, as already pointed out above, the existence of the wrongful act against which the state has to resort to countermeasures.

• Details
• Contents