In Reservations to the Convention on Genocide (Advisory Opinion), 1951…

Question

In Reservations to the Convention on Genocide (Advisory Opinion), 1951 ICJ Rep 15, the ICJ:

Accepted Answer

C. introduced the OBJECT AND PURPOSE test for the permissibility of reservations to multilateral treaties, departing from the strict 'unanimous consent' rule

1. The ICJ Advisory Opinion (1951) addressed reservations to the Genocide Convention 1948.
2. The Court rejected the strict 'unanimous consent' (League of Nations) rule and held: a State which has made a reservation incompatible with the OBJECT AND PURPOSE of the Convention cannot be regarded as a party.
3. The test was later codified in Article 19(c) VCLT.
4. Hence option B is correct.
_Source: UN Charter 1945 / Vienna Convention on Law of Treaties 1969 / ICJ Statute / ARSIWA 2001 — Reservations to the Convention on Genocide, Advisory Opinion, 1951 ICJ Rep 15_

Answer

held that no reservations are permissible to any multilateral treaty (cf. Reservations to the Convention on Genocide, Advisory Opinion, 1951 ICJ Rep 15)

Answer

ruled that reservations must be accepted by every other party (cf. Reservations to the Convention on Genocide, Advisory Opinion, 1951 ICJ Rep 15)

Answer

held that genocide is not an international crime under any treaty (cf. Reservations to the Convention on Genocide, Advisory Opinion, 1951 ICJ Rep 15)