This volume contains the report of the International Law Commission on the work of its fifty-third session (23 April - 1 June and 2 July – 10 August 2001). The issues discussed at that session included: reservations to treaties, diplomatic protection, unilateral acts of States, state responsibility, and international liability for injurious consequences arising out of acts not prohibited by international law.

This volume contains the summary records of the meetings of the fifty-third session of the Commission with the corrections requested by members of the Commission and such editorial changes as were considered necessary. The issues discussed at that session included: State responsibility; unilateral acts of States; nationality in relation to the succession of States; prevention of transboundary damage from hazardous activities; diplomatic protection; reservations to treaties and long-term programme of work of the Commission.

Customary International Humanitarian Law, Volume I: Rules is a comprehensive analysis of the customary rules of international humanitarian law applicable in international and non-international armed conflicts. In the absence of ratifications of important treaties in this area, this is clearly a publication of major importance, carried out at the express request of the international community. In so doing, this study identifies the common core of international humanitarian law binding on all parties to all armed conflicts. Comment Don:RWI.

The International Law Commission was established in 1947 with a view to carrying out the responsibility of the General Assembly, under article 13(1)(a) of the Charter of the United Nations, to "initiate studies and make recommendations for the purpose of ... encouraging the progressive development of international law and its codification." Since its first session in 1949, the Commission has considered a wide-range of topics of international law and made a number of proposals for its codification and progressive development, some of which have served as the basis for the subsequent adoption of major multilateral treaties. The Yearbook of the International Law Commission contains the official records of the Commission and is an indispensable tool for the preservation of the legislative history of the documents emanating from the Commission, as well as for the teaching, study, dissemination and wider appreciation of the efforts undertaken by the Commission in the progressive development of international law and its codification. Volume I reproduces the summary records of the Commission's annual sessions.

This is a study of the principal negotiating processes and law-making tools through which contemporary international law is made. It does not seek to give an account of the traditional - and untraditional - sources and theories of international law, but rather to identify the processes, participants and instruments employed in the making of international law. It accordingly examines some of the mechanisms and procedures whereby new rules of law are created or old rules are amended or abrogated. It concentrates on the UN, other international organisations, diplomatic conferences, codification bodies, NGOs, and courts. Every society perceives the need to differentiate between its legal norms and other norms controlling social, economic and political behaviour. But unlike domestic legal systems where this distinction is typically determined by constitutional provisions, the decentralised nature of the international legal system makes this a complex and contested issue. Moreover, contemporary international law is often the product of a subtle and evolving interplay of law-making instruments, both binding and non-binding, and of customary law and general principles. Only in this broader context can the significance of so-called 'soft law' and multilateral treaties be fully appreciated. An important question posed by any examination of international law-making structures is the extent to which we can or should make judgments about their legitimacy and coherence, and if so in what terms. Put simply, a law-making process perceived to be illegitimate or incoherent is more likely to be an ineffective process. From this perspective, the assumption of law-making power by the UN Security Council offers unique advantages of speed and universality, but it also poses a particular challenge to the development of a more open and participatory process observable in other international law-making bodies.

Note on sources and style