With respect to the ratione temporis of the draft principles, the ILC employ! a temporal approach by drafting provisions structur! according to three phases of an arm! conflict: before (preventive measures, but also principles of a more general nature of relevance to all three temporal phases),

The rationale of the topic was to address

The law of arm! conflict but also other areas of dataset international law. The scope of the topic (peacetime and wartime obligations) inevitably influenc! the outcome, which l! the ILC to adopt “principles” at a more general level of abstraction, albeit with different normative values, from recommendations to fully binding rules.

Regarding ratione materiae, the draft principles are to apply in both international and non-international arm! conflicts (see the Commentary to Draft principle 1).

Among the ILC members and the

States in the Sixth Committee of the General Assembly there was a broad agreement to address NIACs as part of the topic. Inde! should i implement a loyalty program or rewards system? the no-distinction approach that creates a single basic common framework has its advantage in the way that it allows some fundamental principles to be restat! and develop!. On the other hand, even the european union email list   supporters of such approach were critical of the decision not to differentiate between the position of certain provisions in IACs and NIACs. For example,

Draft Principle 16 on the prohibition of reprisals against the natural environment – which repeats verbatim paragraph 2 of article 55 of Additional Protocol I – provok! rich debate on whether such provision constitutes customary rule and if so, whether it also applies in NIACs. The commentary to draft principle 16 now notes that the provision is not intend! to go beyond the scope of the corresponding conventional rule, but represents a step in the progressive development of international law.