Under both domestic and international law, an act violating the rights of an individual or a group renders the perpetrator responsible. The juridical acts that give rise to obligations entailing the responsibility of a subject of law (an individual or a State) are specified by law. It is true that State responsibility is indisputable in positive law. It has, in fact, gained recognition, however belatedly, in the domestic sphere, where it had long seemed virtually incompatible with the lopsided relationship between the State and its subjects. The modern State engages in activities, some of which are government acts connected directly with the exercise of sovereignty while others are management activities carried out exactly like private activities subject to the rules of private law. In all cases, the responsibility of the State can be engaged in the event of violation of the rights of an individual or a group. Economic, social and cultural rights are generally connected with an economic activity and it is in this framework that they are most often violated.
The responsibility of the state is entire when the violations result from the malfunctioning of the civil service, whatever be the cause. The State cannot invoke either its own legislation or the incompetence or disobedience of its agents to exonerate it from its responsibility, whether the actions in question are government ones or purely managerial. In connection with the behaviour of State agents, abundant case-law from the Nurnberg International Tribunal that neither disobedience to or the execution of a clearly unlawful order reduces in any way the responsibility of the State. An occupying Power is responsible, under the Geneva Conventions, for violations committed in the occupied territory. The implementation of such responsibilities requires a certain amount of cooperation between States and the international community.