text: literature and in case law, such a6 the Lusitania 2451 and P&U&q.~sa .(=olonies 2sv C06B6. He mentioned a number of issues related to pecuniary compensation that should be examined. ?hey included1 the compensatory function of reparation by equivalent and **punitive damaqes”t whether such form ’ of reparation should also be granted for“moral” damage; indemnification of “indirect” as well as “direct” damage; the effect of multiplicity of cause6 on this form of reparation1 the effect of the injured State’s conduct on reparation; and the question of v a6 distinguished from !&nwm amem* 345. The Special Rapporteur was aware that the standarde of indemnification in interrlational law did not present the high degree of uniformity that would be desire ,le.But this drd not mean, in his view, that there were no general principles to be determined in international law OL sufficient clarity for 2481PCIJ, Ser. A, No. 17, 1926, pp47. 24.9/ Su~r_a, note 241. 2.5.Q/ UNRIAA, vol. 2, p.1032. - 190 -application or codification. He further believed, on the other hand, that considering the nature of the topic it would be impossible and indeed undesirable to identify or develop rigid and detniled rules susceptible of mechanical application to every conceivable breach. Many of tho principloe regarding pecuniary compansation, even though they were originally modelled on municipal principles, had now become rules of international law. These rules did more than provide juet general guidance, as Borne authors sUgqe6ted. They provided sufficient ground for their codification. Besides, it wa6 within the function of the Commission to fill the gaps, where more detailed rules were necessary and conceivable, by progressively developing the law. In the field of international SespUn6ibility, morrr than any other, the Commi6sion wa6 not entrusted wit,1 the task of codification alone. Whenever the study of doctrine
analysis: The text appears to be discussing international law and the concept of pecuniary compensation, specifically in the context of reparations for damages caused by a state to another state. The language used is formal and technical, suggesting a focus on legal and international relations issues. The text does not mention specific economic sectors, industries, or technologies, but rather deals with abstract concepts and principles.