Revisiting State Succession to Humanitarian Treaties: Is There a Case for Automaticity? Akbar Rasulov* Full text available: PDF format ** Abstract A belief formed over the last decade, both within and outside the academic community, that humanitarian treaties are subject to a special regime in the law of state succession, known as 'automatic succession'. This article seeks to critically re-examine the accuracy of this belief. By analysing the state practice generated during the recent wave of state succession, this article comprehensively elucidates the current customary regime of succession applicable to humanitarian treaties. With minor exceptions, the final verdict appears pessimistic: not only have the successor states not behaved as though succession to humanitarian treaties were automatic, but on the general level there also has not been any de facto continuity in succession patterns. The opinio juris currently held by the successor states strongly disfavours any automaticity of succession. Even the human rights bodies seem to vacillate in their opinion. Nevertheless, the idea of automatic succession to humanitarian treaties, strengthened by the doctrine of 'acquired rights', possesses enough legitimacy to be incorporated into positive international law. The major requirement at this stage, therefore, is to boost the spirit of accountability. Depositaries and treaty-monitoring bodies must become more active in discharging their watchdog functions. * LLM (Essex); PhD Candidate, University of Hull. This article developed from the author's LLM dissertation done at the University of Essex, in 2000. Although the author alone bears responsibility for all opinions, errors, and omissions contained in the text, he acknowledges his great debt to Professor Sir Nigel Rodley of Essex University, under whose supervision the original research was carried out, and Professor Geoff Gilbert, also of Essex, whose insightful comments on earlier drafts were of invaluable help. The writing of this article also significantly benefited from the author's discussions with Eric Sievers of LeBoeuf, Lamb, Greene & MacRae LLP. The article attempts to state the law as it stood on 1 October 2001.
	© 1990-2004 European Journal of International Law All comments and suggestions should be sent to webmaster This site is part of the Academy of European Law online, a joint partnership of the Jean Monnet Center at NYU School of Law and the Academy of European Law at the European University Institute. This file was last modified: Friday, August 12, 2005 07:04AM