Home » Articles » Coercion, Causation, and the Fictional Elements of Indirect State Responsibility

Coercion, Causation, and the Fictional Elements of Indirect State Responsibility

PDF · James D. Fry · Aug-16-2012 · 40 VAND. J. TRANSNAT'L L. 611 (2007)

This Article provides an in-depth analysis of Article 18 of the 2001 ILC Draft Articles on State Responsibility, which holds a coercing state indirectly responsible for an injurious act committed by a coerced state.  Not only does this provision lack support from state practice, but the structural and logical flaws within the current formulation ensure that this provision does not significantly influence the evolution of state practice.  Indeed, it would have been better for the ILC to have left Article 18 out of the Draft Articles, given that other, less problematic provisions could have covered such situations involving coercion.  In reaching this conclusion, this Article explores the fascinating roles that coercion and causation play within the law of state responsibility.




Leave a Reply

ExpressO Top 10 Law Review

ANNOUNCEMENTS

The Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law sponsored a one-day symposium on February 13, 2015, This is Not a Drill: Confronting Legal Issues in the Wake of International Disasters.

We are pleased to announce the 2015-2016 Board of Editors.

Read the Journal’s latest issue (Vol. 47 No. 5) here.

The Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law mourns the death of its founder, Professor Harold G. Maier.

Please join us in congratulating the Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law 2013-2014 Annual Award Winners.

 

Explore Other Vanderbilt Law Resources