Abstract

International law’s duty of non-aggravation requires states to avoid actions that might inflame an international dispute, both to maintain international peace and to preserve the effectiveness of judicial or arbitral proceedings. Yet parties on the receiving end of calls for non-aggravation – whether from the Security Council or a tribunal – have little idea of what conduct they are expected to avoid. This state of affairs is most unfortunate in light of the centrality of this norm to the peaceful resolution of disputes and, in particular, examples of provocative and aggravating acts in recent years. This article attempts to give some meaning to this important, but frustratingly vague, norm of international law. After reviewing current understandings of the duty by political and judicial bodies, it justifies the need for a more specific understanding of non-aggravation. It then develops a set of criteria to distinguish aggravating from non-aggravating acts, a process informed by both existing expectations and the underlying purposes of the norm. Based on these criteria, the article offers a coding scheme of presumptively aggravating and non-aggravating acts. Beyond its relevance for decision-makers, the article seeks to encourage theoretical inquiry into the advantages and disadvantages of vague (or underspecified) norms in the international legal order.

中文翻译：

---

不加重的加重义务

摘要

国际法的不加重义务要求各国避免采取可能煽动国际争端的行动，既要维护国际和平，又要保持司法或仲裁程序的效力。然而，无论是安全理事会还是法庭，都在呼吁不加重制裁的当事方对他们应避免采取何种行为一无所知。鉴于该规范对和平解决争端的中心作用，尤其是近年来发生的挑衅和加重行为的例子，这种状况是最不幸的。本文试图为这一重要但令人沮丧的模糊国际法规范赋予一些含义。在回顾了政治和司法机构对义务的当前理解之后，它证明需要更具体地了解不加重现象。然后，它制定了一套区分加重行为和不加重行为的标准，这一过程既有现有的期望，也有规范的基本目的。基于这些标准，本文提供了一种推定加重和不加重行为的编码方案。除了对决策者的意义外，本文还试图鼓励对国际法律秩序中含糊不清（或未指定）的规范的优缺点进行理论探讨。本文提供了一种推定加重和不加重行为的编码方案。除了对决策者的意义外，本文还试图鼓励对国际法律秩序中含糊不清（或未指定）的规范的优缺点进行理论探讨。本文提供了一种推定加重和不加重行为的编码方案。除了对决策者的意义外，本文还试图鼓励对国际法律秩序中含糊不清（或未指定）的规范的优缺点进行理论探讨。