Part One of the Waft, they felt they would have to deal with sanctions which had surely a punitiv.3 nature. They, however, agreed that the matter aould be re-examined when dealing with countermeasures and the consequences of crimes uaaer article 19, 398. With regard to the queetion of the nature of satisfaction, the Special Rapportour stated that on further reflection he believed the term tVafflictive*8 to be inappropriate, Indeed, in a number of languages, it was usea with regard to forms of punishment applicable only to human beings. He confirmed his belief, however, in the retributive - and in that sense punitive -function of satisfaction. On the other hand, he did not think that the real question was whether tha adjective would be used, What mattered was the retributive fun&ion of satisfaction, This remedy placed iteelf half-way betweerr the purely compensatory forms of reparation, such as pecuniary compensation end B, on the one hand, and those predominantly retributive remedies which were represented by reprisals and sanctions in general on the other hand. After all, the Commission was required to deal with similar concepts not only in its work on the Draft Code of Crimes against the Peace and Security of Mankind - such crimes to be attributable, v, to Heads of State or Qovernment - but also in coaifying and developing the consequences of the international crimes of States as aefined in article 19 of Part One. 399, As regards the type of damsge for which satisfaction should be grantod, some members found the scope of “moral or legal injury” in paragraph 1 too broad in the light of the definition the Special Rapporteur had given. The concept of “legal injury”, aefinea by the Special Rapporteur as the infringement of the State’s rights LQ~ and independent from the infringement of the State’s dignity, honour and prestige, existed in any
**Analysis**
The text appears to be discussing international law and the concept of satisfaction as a remedy for crimes, particularly in the context of international crimes committed by States. The language and terminology used suggest a focus on legal and diplomatic matters, rather than economic, social, or scientific issues.

**Category**
International law, Humanitarian aid and relief