The no-harm principle is at the heart of the several international conventions focusing on the uses, allocation, management and protection of transboundary water resources. However, in the framework of these agreements, the meaning of “no-harm” remains rather vague. Through an analysis of six emblematic cases brought before the International Court of Justice and arbitration tribunals, we elucidate the various facets of this principle. In doing so, the paper identifies four facets. The first is characterized by concerns related to the protection of territorial integrity rather than those related to the protection of the environment. The second facet focuses on the principle of equitable and reasonable use of water, which testifies to the willingness to anticipate possible harms and to define conditions for cooperation between neighbouring countries. The third facet explores the use of three instruments and emphasizes their importance to clarify the very nature of harm: the conduct of environmental impact assessment, the consultation of local populations and the insurance of minimum environmental flows. The fourth facet develops a preventive perspective on harm by unravelling the duty to take appropriate measures to prevent and mitigate risks deriving from the obligations of notification and consultation.

中文翻译：

---

国际判例法在履行不造成重大损害的义务方面的作用

无害原则是多项国际公约的核心，这些公约侧重于跨界水资源的使用、分配、管理和保护。然而，在这些协议的框架内，“无害”的含义仍然相当模糊。通过对提交给国际法院和仲裁庭的六个标志性案件的分析，我们阐明了这一原则的各个方面。为此，本文确定了四个方面。第一个特点是关注与保护领土完整有关的问题，而不是与保护环境有关的问题。第二个方面侧重于公平合理用水的原则，这证明愿意预测可能的危害并确定邻国之间的合作条件。第三个方面探讨了三种工具的使用，并强调了它们在澄清损害本质方面的重要性：环境影响评估的进行、当地居民的咨询和最低环境流量的保险。第四个方面通过阐明采取适当措施预防和减轻因通知和协商义务而产生的风险的责任，形成了对伤害的预防性观点。