The Nature of International Responsibility of States in the Contemporary World Arena

  • Dawan Mohammed Jaza Abdullah Department of Law, College of Law, University of Sulaimani, Sulaimani, Kurdistan Region, Iraq


The subject of state responsibility occupies a central place in international law. Its basic principle, now well established, provides that every internationally wrongful act entails the responsibility of the state. One of the most controversial problems regarding the international responsibility of the state for wrongful acts concerns the nature of such responsibility.  The present paper examines the nature of state responsibility for international wrongful acts under existing international law. It takes the view that the International Law Commission (ILC), in its Draft Articles on State Responsibility can be applied in case of breach of any international obligations by states because there is no international convention regarding state responsibility on the international plane. Finally, the study concludes that the identification of the nature of the state responsibility seems to be much more complicated since ILC’s Articles do not explicitly address the issue of whether responsibility of state for wrongful act or omission is strict liability (objective theory) or there must be some fault (subjective theory) in the conduct of state in order to hold responsibility; customary international law to some extent does not help in filling the gap exists in ILC’s Draft Articles on state responsibility with regard to objective and subjective theories because  it supports both theories.


Andrea, B. (2004). Enforcing International Law Norms Against Terrorism. Portland Oregon: Hart Publishing.
Barding, R. (2006). ‘The Due Diligence Principle under International Law’, International Community Law Review, Vol. 8, No.1.
Brownlie, I. (2008). Principle of Public International Law. Oxford University Press.
Brownlie, I. (1983). System of the Law of Nations: State Responsibility: Part I. Oxford University Press.
Bosnia and Herzegovina v Serbia and Montenegro (2007) ICJ, Report, paras. 403-406.
Cassese, A. (2005). International Law. Oxford University Press.
Charter of United Nation 1945.
Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the crime of Genocide 1948.
Crawford, J. (2002). The International Law Commission’s Articles on State Responsibility: Introduction, Text and Commentaries. Cambridge University Press.
Crawford, J. (1999). ‘Revising the Draft Articles on State Responsibility’, European Journal of International Law, Vol.10, No.2.
Caire Claim (France v. Mexico) [1929] 5 RIAA 42.
Chrozow factory case (Portugal v. Germany) [1928] P.C.I.J., Ser A, No 17.
Corfu channel case (UK v. Albania) [1949] ICJ Rep, p.4.
Dunia, Z. (2019). International Law in Namibia. Langaa Research & Publishing CIG .
D. Evans, M. (2010). International Law. Oxford University Press.
Dixon, M. (2007). Textbook on International Law. Oxford University Press.
Dixon, M and McCorquodale, R and Williams, S. (2003). International law. Oxford University Press.
Diane A. (2012). Necessity and National Emergency Clauses : Sovereignty in Modern Treaty Interpretation. Boston: Martinus Nijhoff Publisher.
Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Project case [1997] ICJ Reports, pp.7, 38;116 ILR,P.1.
Harris, D. (2010). Cases and Materials on International Law. Sweet & Maxwell.
Hege, K. (2013). Applicable Law in Investor-State Arbitration: The Interplay Between National and International Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hillier, T. (1998). Sourcebook on Public International law. Cavendish Publishing Limited.
Crawford, J., Alain P. and Simon O. (2010). The Law of International Responsibility. Oxford University Press.
Crawford, J. (2013). State Responsibility: The General Part. Cambridge University Press.
Jan A. (2015). Responsibility and Liability in the Context of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes by Sea: Existing Rules and the 1999 Liability Protocol to the Basel Convention. Hamburg: Springer.
Janes Claim (US v. Mexico) [1926] 4 RIAA 82
Jean H. (2018). State Responsibility for Breaches of Investment Contracts. Cambridge University Press.
Jure V. (2012). “Explaining the legal effects of recognition”, International & Comparative Law Quarterly, Vol. 61, No. 2.
Kaczorowska, A. (2010). Public International Law. Routledge Oxon.
Kimberley N. (2011). State Responsibility for International Terrorism. Oxford University Press.
Lyal S. (1997). The Emerging System of International Criminal Law: Developments in Codification and Implementation. London: Springe.
Noble Ventures, Inc v Romania case, ICSID (2005), ARB/01/11, para.53.
Neer claim [1926] 4 RIAA 60.
Nicaragua v. United States [1986] I.C.J Repots, p.14; ILR, p.39.
Onita D. (2013). Environmental protection, security and armed conflict: a sustainable development perspective. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited.
Phosphates in Morocco, Preliminary Objections [1938] P.C.I.J., Ser A/B, No 74, p.10.
Riccardo P. (1992). “The Due Diligence Rule and the Nature of the International Responsibility of States”, German Yearbook of International Law, Vol.35, No.1.
Rainbow Warrior Arbitration case (New Zealand v. France) [1999]82 ILR 499.
Stephan W. (2002). “The International Law Commission's Articles on the Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts Adopted on Second Reading”, Leiden Journal of International Law, Vol.15, No.4.
Susan B. (2016). The Responsibility to Protect in International Law: An Emerging Paradigm Shift. London: Routledge.
Shaw, M. (2008). International Law. Cambridge University Press.
Shelton, D. (1990). Remedies in international human right law. Oxford University Press.
Spanish Zone of Morocco claim [1923] RIAA, p.615 ; 2AD, p.157.
Sandline International Inc. v. the independent state of Papua Guinea case (1998)117 ILR, PP. 552, 561.
Sri Lanka v. AAPL [1991] 30 ILM 577
Southern Pacific Properties (Middle East) Ltd v. Egypt case,(1993) ILM933.
Tal B. (2006). Terrorism and the State: Rethinking the Rules of State Responsibility. Oxford and Portland Oregon: Hart Publishing.
The International Law Commission’s Articles on State Responsibility 2001.
The Home Missionary Society claim (UK v. USA) [1920] 6 RIAA 42.
Tehran [1980], I.C.J. Reports, p.3.
United States Diplomatic and Consular Staff in Union Bridge Company case, (1924) 6 RIAA, p.138; 2AD, p.170.
Wallace, M and Martin-Ortega, O. (2009). International Law. Sweet & Maxwell.
Wheatley, S. (1996). International Law. Blackstone Press Limited.
Xinmin M. (2008). “Statement on Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts”, Chinese Journal of International Law, Vol. 7, No.2.
Youmans Claim (U.S v. Mexico) [1926] 4 RIAA 110.
How to Cite
ABDULLAH, Dawan Mohammed Jaza. The Nature of International Responsibility of States in the Contemporary World Arena. Journal of University of Human Development, [S.l.], v. 5, n. 4, p. 50-59, oct. 2019. ISSN 2411-7765. Available at: <>. Date accessed: 13 may 2021. doi: