Adoption of Amendments

The legislative history of Art. 66 shows considerable debate. The Preliminary Draft provided for a final adoption of amendments by a qualified majority of the Administrative Council (History, Vol. I, p. 286). In the ensuing debate, several delegates opposed amendments by majority decision since this would create insuperable constitutional problems in their respective countries. Suggested solutions included a right of States to withdraw from the Convention if an amendment seemed unacceptable to them or the application of amendments only to States that had accepted them (History, Vol. II, pp. 282, 288, 357/8, 441/2, 534/5, 579, 652, 671).

The Subsequent First Draft required unanimous adoption by the Administrative Council of amendments involving new obligations or fundamental alterations but adoption by majority of all other amendments (History, Vol. I, pp. 286, 288;Vol. II, pp. 660, 682). A Working Group submitted a proposal that required the ratification of any amendment by all States parties to the Convention. This proposal was adopted by a large majority (at pp. 905, 909/10, 940). This point was the subject of extensive debate by the Executive Directors. Some Directors favoured a more flexible approach to amendments but in the end the proposal requiring ratification by all States parties prevailed (at pp. 994–996, 1000–1003).