![Show Menu](styles/mobile-menu.png)
![Page Background](./../common/page-substrates/page0178.png)
162
ČESTMÍR ČEPELKA
CYIL 5 ȍ2014Ȏ
The second article is dedicated to the right to exercise diplomatic protection.
19
This stipulation is a mere logical supplement of the preceding statement. It is actually
presupposed that the present conception of State responsibility is based on an
obligation not to hinder the reparation of the wrongful act, these legal consequences
being determined by the customary general international law. This means that even
the above mentioned corresponding right is of the same provenience,
i.e.
being of
general international law (
ex lege
).
Naturally, even in this domain of international law governing the treatment
of aliens it is wholy possible that a stabilized right of a State exists to invoke the
international responsibility of another State and the obligation to implement that
responsibility. This is the situation when the breach of an international obligation by
an act of the State is composed of a series of actions in respect of separate cases and
so establishes the existence of a
composite act.
In other words, it consists of a series of
individual acts of the State succeeding each other in time; that is to say, a sequence
of separate courses of conduct, actions or omissions, adopted in separate cases, but
all contributing to the commission of the aggregate act in question (
fait global en
question
).
20
A frequently cited example is the breach of an obligation prohibiting the
State to which it applies from adopting a “discriminatory practice” in regard to the
access of aliens from a particular country to the exercise of an activity or a profession.
As opposed to the above mentioned situation, the following eventuality is quite
different. The pertinent rule refers to it by the ensuing wording. “The breach of an
international obligation by a
complex act
of the State, consisting of a succession of
actions or omissions by the same or different organs of the State in respect of the
same case, occurs at the moment when the last constituent element of that complex
act is accomplished.”
21
A complex act is not composed of a series of separate individual
acts of the State committed in separate cases. Although it, too, consists of a succession
of courses of conduct, of actions or omissions, by the State, such actions or omissions
(either by the same organ or, more frequently, by different organs) all relate to a single
specific case and, taken as a whole, represent the position taken by the State in that case.
This is just the occasion of applying diplomatic protection. In order that a State
has the right to exercise diplomatic protection (in accordance with the present draft
19
Cf.
Art. 2 – Right to exercise diplomatic protection – “A State has the right to exercise diplomatic
protection in accordance with the present draft articles.”
20
Cf.
Doc. A/51/10, Report of the International Law Commission, 1969, Art. 25 – Moment and
duration of the breach of an international obligation by an act of the State extending in time – (2)
“The breach of an international obligation by an act of the State, composed of a series of actions or
omissions in respect of separate cases, occurs at the moment when that action or omission of the series
is accomplished which establishes the existence of the composite act. (…).” See also Doc. A/56/10,
Report of the International Law Commission, 2001, Art. 15 – Breach consisting of a composite act –
(1) “The breach of an international obligation by a State through a series of actions or omissions defined
in aggregate as wrongful, occurs when the action or omission occurs which, taken with the other actions
or omissions, is sufficient to constitute the wrongful act.”
21
Cf.
Doc. A/51/10, Report of the International Law Commission, 1969, Art. 25(3). The definitive text
of 2001 does not comprise such a rule.