We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
This Chapter focuses on the situation where acts by the rebels or the government are committed in the context of the insurgent’s struggle for the creation of a new State. When the rebels are successful, the new State is not responsible for the acts committed by the predecessor State while fighting the rebels. The rule is problematic is however when the predecessor State ceases to exist. Also, the acts committed by the rebels during the insurgency are attributable to the new State after their victory. The rule applies in situations of secession, dissolution and Newly independent States, but it is controversial regarding transfer of territories. When the rebels are not successful, the acts committed by them are not attributable to the State once the insurgency has failed. Responsibility arises as a result of a State’s failure to discharge its due diligence obligation of vigilance, prevention and punishment in relation to the conduct of rebels.
Marcelo Kohen and Patrick Dumberry explore in an article-by-article commentary the Resolution adopted in 2015 by the Institute of International Law, on state succession in matters of state responsibility. They analyse the content and scope of application of each provision based on a comprehensive survey of existing state practice and judicial decisions (both domestic and international), as well as taking into account the works of scholars and that of the ILC Special Rapporteur in his proposed Draft Articles on the same topic. This book explains the rationale and the reasons behind why the Institute adopted specific solutions to address particular problems of succession to responsibility for each provision, including the need to achieve a fair outcome given the specific circumstances and relevant factors for each case.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.