Abstract

The present study has found out that the international Law committee. with respect to the codification of the rules governing state responsibility, has been and still is looking upon the conditions of this responsibility in terms of the traditional legal opinions without concentrating on the international conduct trends which seem to have overlooked the legal opinions With exception to some modest attempts to establish responsibility on the objective bases , the state responsibility depends on traditional rues which precondition illegitimacy in the state act would affect any material or moral rights of another state , but at the same time necessitating to attribute that act to the state in question. It seems that the committees ambivalence on confirming the existing rules (declarative codification) and on creating new rules (constructive codification) for state responsibility is associated with: l. The development of understanding the description of (illegitimacy) of any international act based on the rules of international law . 2. The acceptability of the motion that the illegitimacy of any act necessarily means that the damage occurs by merely committing that act . 3. Specifying the basic elements involved in estimating the process of (attributing) the illegitimate act to the state . Finally , all the above (factors) depend on the circumstances which surround the international awareness of the compatibility between the general , humanitarian (interest) Of the international community and the national (needs) as perceived by each state, but even readiness to put the general interests before national needs and to sacrifice the latter if so required.