OCR Text |
Show -112- The important substantive provisions of the Convention are as follows:1 Article 1. The present Convention in no way affects the right belonging to each State, within the limits of international law, to carry out on its own territory any operations for the development of hydraulic power which it may consider desirable. Article 2. Should reasonable development of hydraulic power involve international investigation, the Contracting States concerned shall agree to such investigation, which shall be carried out conjointly at the request of any one of them with a view to arriving at the solution most favourable to their interests as a whole, and to drawing up, if possible, a scheme of development, with due regard for any works already existing, under construction, or projected. Any Contracting State desirous of modifying a programme of development so drawn up shall, if necessary, apply for a fresh investigation, under the conditions laid down in the preceding paragraph. No State shall be obliged to carry out a programme of development unless it has formally accepted the obligation to do so. Article 3. If a Contracting State desires to carry out operations for the development of hydraulic power, partly on its own territory and partly on the territory of another Contracting State or involving alterations on the territory of another Contracting State, the States concerned shall enter into negotiations with a view to the conclusion of agreements which will allow such operations to be executed. Article 4. If a Contracting State desires to carry out operations for the development of hydraulic power which might cause serious prejudice to any other Contracting State, the States concerned shall enter into negotiations with a view to the conclusion of agreements which will allow such operations to be executed. Article 5. The technical methods adopted in the agreements referred to in the foregoing articles shall, within the limits of the national legislation of ;.L 36 L.N.T.S. 77. |
Source |
Original book: [State of Arizona, complainant v. State of California, Palo Verde Irrigation District, Coachella Valley County Water District, Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, City of Los Angeles, California, City of San Diego, California, and County of San Diego, California, defendants, United States of America, State of Nevada, State of New Mexico, State of Utah, interveners] : |