text: origin shall refuse authorisation for the activity unless the operatot proposes less harmful alternatives,” - 267 -obligation of prevention under article 8. There should perhaps be some more significant consequences for failure to comply with procedlxsl obligations. The Commission, according to this view, should create a rigime containing obligations that gave rise to international responsibility in the event of a breach. The obligations of coneultations, notifications, etc. must be at least as strict as those in the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. A breach of such obligations, as it had become clear in the State responeibility topic (A/CN.4/429), did not always entail pecuniary compensations perhaps nominal damages or other forms of satisfaction could apply I 504, In sununaririnq the debate, the Special Rapporteur felt that there seemed to be uncertainty in the Commission as to the role which the obligations of prevention should play in this topic. If the obligations of prevention were to be more stringent, i.e. if their breach would lead to ltate responsibility, then the topic would be dealing with wronqfral acts, not. with acts not prohibited by international law. Of course, that could be remedied if in t.ho title of the topic “activities” replaced “acts”. In that case, if States 818 not comply with the obligations incumbent on them, such BE imposing certain obligations of prevention on private parties conducting, under their jurisdiction or control, activities of article 1, they would be obligated to pay compensation for transboundary harm. 505. As for article 19, the Special Rapporteur stated that it provided a reasonable time within which the State thtlt had been notified had to reply. He had recommended a period of six months, If during that time the notifying State did not receive any reply, At would be considered that the notified
analysis: The text appears to be discussing international law and regulations related to environmental protection and prevention of harm to people and the environment. The mention of "obligations of prevention", "notifications", and "compensation for transboundary harm" suggests that the topic is concerned with the responsible management of activities that could potentially harm the environment or people.