topic 6

Competence of International Organizations

• Derived Competence:

  • IOs' powers are often derived from interpreting constituent instruments to fulfill constitutional aims.

  • Example: In 1954, the ICJ assessed if the UN GA could establish an independent international tribunal.

  • The ICJ noted the UN Charter promotes freedom and justice.

  • The UN must address this task; it can use judicial or arbitral means for staff disputes.

  • Establishing a tribunal ensures justice in disputes between the UN and its staff.

  • This also improves the UN Secretariat's efficiency and member integrity.

  • Relying on UN Charter Art. 7(2), Art. 22, and Art. 101(1), ICJ found this power implicit in the UN Charter and vestable in the UN GA.

Intrinsic Competence

• IOs may possess powers beyond those expressly fixed or implied in their constituent instruments, acquired on their own initiative.

• Related to "implied" competence.

• Scholars (G. Weisberg, M. Schneider, etc.) argue that the basis of “implied” competence is the "inherent powers" of international organizations.

• Scholars argue IOs can act to achieve goals despite constituent acts, which can be problematic.

• Reflected in ICJ Advisory Opinion (July 20, 1962) on UN expenses.

• The Court noted, "the presumption is that when the Organization takes an action which may be regarded as expedient for the accomplishment of one of the purposes of the UN, such action does not exceed the powers of the Organization”.

General vs. Special Competence

• General Competence:

  • Powers exercised to realize main statutory goals.

• Special Competence:

  • Powers exercised to implement main objectives.

  • Organs resolve technical or administrative issues not directly related to main objectives.

  • General competence allows dealing with a wide range of international relations.

  • Special competence limits this possibility.

  • Examples:

    • General competence: UN, OAS (international peace and security, economic, humanitarian issues).

    • Special competence: WHO, Council of Europe (narrowly focused activities).

External vs. Internal Competence

• External Competence:

  • Power to conduct external relations.

  • Relations with states (members and non-members), other IOs, legal and natural persons.

• Internal Competence:

  • Powers and activities to solve internal issues.

  • Examples: creating subsidiary organs, solving financial, technical, and administrative issues.

Exclusive Competence

• When an organ of an IO has powers that other organs cannot exercise.

• Example: In the UN, only the Security Council can take armed measures against acts of aggression.

• Only the SC can waive the Secretary General's immunity.

• The SC (and GA) decide which states can apply to the ICJ for advisory opinions.

• The UNGA has exclusive competence to deprive a state of voting rights for violating the UN Charter.

• The UNGA has exclusive competence to elect non-permanent members of the SC.

Competing Competence

• When two or more organs handle the same issues independently.

• Example: League of Nations, where the Council and Assembly independently dealt with international peace and security.

• This overlap complicated the League's work.

Parallel Exercise of Competence

• When two or more bodies address the same issue within their competence without competition.

• Example: UN GA and SC adopting resolutions on unarmed coercive measures.

• These bodies solve the problem within their competence via authorized methods.

Delegation of Competence

• Provided for in constituent acts.

• Occurs when establishing subsidiary organs.

• The principal organ delegates some powers to the subsidiary.

• Powers are necessary for the subsidiary body to carry out tasks.

• Subsidiary bodies' competence is narrower than the principal organ's.

• Rules:

  • Principal organs cannot delegate powers assigned to other principal organs.

  • Principal organs cannot delegate their exclusive powers.

Structure of an International Organization

• Modern IOs have complex systems of bodies/organs.

• Bodies:

  • Form and fix internal structure.

  • Exercise competencies.

  • Rationally allocate resources.

  • Interact with members and other actors.

  • Solve internal issues and regulate processes.

  • Ensure the existence and functioning of IOs.

• The organ of an IO is an instrument through which an IO exercises its rights and carries out its mandate.

• The organization exists in the form of organs, which manifest the organization's will.

• The organs express and implement the will of the international organization as a legal entity.

• Elements of an IO body:

  • Constituent act: reflects the creation of a relevant body, to endow it with certain resources, to entrust it with certain functions.

  • Constitution procedure: a way of formation of the relevant body.

  • Composition and internal structure: the order of arrangement of its elements and interrelations between them.

  • Competences, powers: rights, boundaries, limits of actions of a given body.

  • Rules of procedure: formal algorithms of the body's actions to implement its powers

  • Object of regulation

Types of Bodies

• Main (Governing) Bodies:

  • Make decisions on behalf of the organization.

  • Can establish subsidiary organs.

  • Most IOs have several governing organs.

  • Main organs act within established competence.

• Subsidiary Bodies:

  • Assist in decision-making or make decisions in a narrow area.

  • Established by decisions of governing organs.

  • Discuss issues and submit recommendations.

  • Can number dozens or hundreds.

  • Ensure the work of organization or its governing organs.

  • Submit recommendations and draft decisions to the main organs.

• IOs have at least 3 main bodies:

  • Plenary assemblies

  • Councils of permanent representatives

  • Councils of highest officials

• Subsidiary bodies: committees, commissions, working/expert groups, tribunals, etc.

Creation of Bodies

• At the Will of Members:

  • Main organs are created by the will of the members; fixed in statutes.

  • Members can change body structure.

• By Decision of the Organization:

  • Subsidiary bodies are established by the organization's decision.

  • Associated with development or new regulation.

• According to Conventions:

  • Organs formed based on multilateral treaties, giving the organization competences.

  • Example: ECtHR established by the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms of 1950.

  • The ECtHR has relationships with the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe, the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, the Secretariat, and other bodies of the Council of Europe.

Composition of Bodies

• Representatives of different status groups:

  • Diplomats

  • Heads of executive branch

  • International officials

  • Parliamentarians

  • Experts

  • Elected/appointed persons

  • Civil society representatives

• Bodies are divided into elected and non-elected.

• Example: UNHRC, a subsidiary body of the UNGA elected at its sessions.

• Criteria for membership: contribution to human rights protection, voluntary contributions, fulfillment of obligations.

• Members of the UNHRC are subject to periodic review

United Nations: History, Objectives, Principles, Bodies, Membership

• I. History of Creation

  • 1) The Moscow Conference of Foreign Ministers of the USSR, the USA and the UK (also known as the Interim Meeting of Foreign Ministers) with the participation of the Ambassador of China to the USSR, which adopted on October 30, 1943, the Declaration on Universal Security (Декларация по вопросу о всеобщей безопасности).

    • Recognized the need for a universal international organization for peace and security, based on the sovereign equality of all peace-loving states.

  • 2) The Tehran Conference of the Heads of Government of the USSR, USA, and the UK (September - December 1943), which confirmed the importance of the task of creating a new organization

  • 3) The conference in Dumbarton Oaks (near Washington) of representatives of the same powers and at the second stage - China (September 1944), which developed a draft UN Charter.

  • 4) The final text of the UN Charter was adopted at the conference in San Francisco (April-June 1945) and signed on June 26, 1945.

    • The date of its entry into force, October 24, 1945, is celebrated in all UN member states as UN Day.

    • The UN Charter was approved unanimously, but not by a vote with a show of hands or by name, but by the standing of all conference participants.

    • The Charter deviated from the universally recognized alphabetical order when it was signed.

    • It was decided to give the first 5 seats at the signing of the Charter to the major powers - the four inviting states to the San Francisco Conference in the order of the English alphabet: China, the USSR, Great Britain and the USA, then France, then all other states in alphabetical order.

    • Poland, which did not participate in the conference, was left a space for a signature.

    • It was also decided to allow all delegates who were authorized to do so to sign the Charter on behalf of their countries.

    • The Charter was signed by 153 delegates from 51 States.

    • From the USSR, 7 representatives signed the Charter.

• II. Objectives and Basic Principles

  • The UN is established, as defined in Art. 1 of its Charter, for the purpose of:

    • Maintain international peace and security

    • Develop friendly relations among nations based on equal rights and self-determination

    • Achieve international cooperation in solving international problems and encouraging human rights

    • Serve as a center for harmonizing actions of nations

  • Principles of the UN Charter (Art. 2):

    • Sovereign equality of all members

    • Good faith fulfillment of obligations

    • Peaceful settlement of disputes

    • Refrain from the threat or use of force

    • Give assistance to the UN and refrain from assisting states against which the UN is taking action

    • Ensure non-member states act according to these principles

  • Other principles:

    • Good-neighborly relations

    • Joint action for peace and security

    • Disarmament

    • Equal rights and self-determination

    • International cooperation for economic and social progress

  • Confirmed in GA resolutions, such as:

    • Resolution on General and Complete Disarmament of 1959

    • Declaration on Granting Independence to Colonial Countries of 1960

• III. Main Bodies and Competence

  • Main bodies according to the UN Charter (Art. 7):

    • GA (General Assembly)

    • SC (Security Council)

    • ECOSOC (Economic and Social Council)

    • Trusteeship Council

    • ICJ (International Court of Justice)

    • The Secretariat

  • The GA and the SC are independent bodies that are not subordinate to each other or to other bodies of the UN system.

  • ECOSOC and the Trusteeship Council exercise their functions under the direction and control of the GA and, in some cases, the SC.

  • The ICJ is the principal judicial organ of the UN, consisting of a panel of independent judges.

  • The Secretariat, as the main administrative and technical body, is designed to service the activities of all other bodies.

  • Official Languages:

    • According to the Rules of Procedure of the GA, the official and working languages of the GA, its committees and subcommittees are Arabic, Chinese, English, French, Russian and Spanish.

    • In ECOSOC, the official languages are the same six languages as in the GA, while the working languages are English, French, Spanish and Russian.

  • General Assembly

    • Composition:

      • Composed of all member states, up to 5 representatives each.

      • Each state has one vote.

    • Governed by a General Committee:

      • Chairman

      • 21 Vice-Chairmen

      • Chairs of 6 Main Committees

      • The President of the GA shall hold office from the opening of a regular session until the opening of the next regular session and the election of a new President.

  • Competence:

    • Can discuss questions within the UN Charter and make recommendations to member states and the SC (Art. 10).

    • In the field of the maintenance of international peace and security the GA:

      • considers general principles of international cooperation, including principles governing disarmament and arms regulation

      • discusses any issues related to the maintenance of peace and international security

      • makes recommendations on these principles and issues to UN member states and the SC.

    • Cannot:

      • make any recommendations concerning any dispute or situation in respect of which the SC is exercising its functions, unless the SC requests it to do so (Art. 12)

      • act on behalf of the UN: any matter on which action is required shall be referred to the SC before or after discussion (Art. 11(2)).

    • In the field of ensuring the development of friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples:

      • conduct studies and make recommendations with a view to promoting international political cooperation and encouraging the progressive development of international law and its codification

      • recommend measures for the peaceful settlement of any situation, whatever its origin, which might disturb the general welfare or other relations among nations

      • promote the development of Non-Self-Governing and Trust Territories in the political, economic, social, cultural fields.

      • The GA should approve trusteeship agreements for territories not designated as strategic and monitor their implementation through the Trusteeship Council.

• Security Council
  * Composition:
  * 15 states: 5 permanent, 10 non-permanent (elected for 2-year terms).
  * Permanent: Russia, USA, UK, France, China (veto power).
  * Resolution 1991 established quotas for non-permanent members:
  * 5 from Asian and African States
  * 1 from the States of Eastern Europe
  * 2 from Latin American States
  * 2 from Western European and other States.
  * Voting:
  * Each member has one vote.
  * 9 votes needed for procedural matters.
  * 9 votes including concurring votes of all permanent members for substantive.
  * Competence:
  * Acts on behalf of all UN members for peace and security.
  * Investigates situations that may cause friction.
  * The SC is the only body in the UN system that must act on behalf of all UN members in the maintenance of international peace and security.
  * Tasks to seek the peaceful settlement of such disputes and situations (Chapter VI of the UN Charter):
  * require the parties to a dispute to fulfil their obligation to settle disputes by peaceful means (Art. 33(2))
  * recommend to the parties an appropriate procedure or methods for the settlement of disputes and situations (Art. 36(1))
  * recommend such terms of dispute resolution as the Council may deem appropriate (Art. 37(2))
  * make recommendations to the parties to a dispute, at their request, with a view to the peaceful settlement of that dispute (Art. 38).
  * Recommendations and decisions: decisions are legally binding.
  * The SC adopts acts of two kinds: recommendations and decisions. Unlike recommendations, the Council’s decisions are legally binding on states in accordance with the UN Charter.

• ECOSOC
  * Consists of 54 states elected by the GA for 3-year terms. An outgoing (выбывающий) ECOSOC member can be re-elected immediately
  * Plays the role of a centre for international economic and social cooperation. It is called upon under Art. 55 of the UN Charter.
  * Resolution 2847 (XXVI) of December 20, 1971 established a distribution of seats in ECOSOC:
  * 14 from African States
  * 11 from African States
  * 11 from Asian States
  * 10 from Latin American States
  * 13 from Western Europe and other States
  * 6 from Eastern European States.
  * Meetings take place in organizational session at the beginning of the year in New York and a main session in the summer, alternately in Geneva and New York (until 1992 there were two main sessions)
  * Work of the regular sessions of ECOSOC is conducted in three sessional committees composed of all members of the Council:
  * First (economic)
  * Second (social)
  * Third (Program and Coordination).
  * Competence.
  * qualified discussion of international economic and social problems and development of principles of UN activities and policies in this sphere
  * coordination of all activities of the UN system on economic and social issues, including coordination of the activities of specialized agencies
  * preparing qualified studies and reports on general and special problems of international economic and social cooperation. ECOSOC can also convene international conferences on issues within its competence, draft conventions for submission to theUNGA.

• Trusteeship Council
  * The managed States (7 in total - Australia, Belgium, Great Britain, Italy, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, the United States, France) concluded agreements with the UN, which defined the terms of trusteeship for each territory.
  * Two types of trust territories were distinguished:
  * those not classified as strategic areas and
  * those classified as strategic areas (Micronesia under US trusteeship).
  * The Trusteeship Council has fulfilled its statutory mandate: all 11 Trust Territories have attained independence, the most recent being the Palau Islands in 1994.

• ICJ:
  * Consists of a panel of independent judges elected, irrespective of their nationality
  * The Composition of the judges as a whole must be representative of the principal forms of civilization and of the principal legal systems of the world.
  * The Court consists of 15 members elected for a term of 9 years

• The Secretariat
  * The UN Secretariat is the principal administrative and technical body consisting of the UN Secretary General and staff as the UN may require. The Secretary General is appointed by the GA on the recommendation of the SC, adopted on the basis of unanimity, for a term of 1 year.

UN Membership

• Original members: 51 states that participated in the San Francisco Conference.

• According to Art. 4 of the Charter, the UN membership is open to peace-loving states which accept the obligations contained in the Charter and which, in the judgment of the UN, are able and willing to fulfill these obligations.

• UN membership Admission to membership requires a recommendation of the SC of the UN adopted by at least 9 votes, including concurring votes of all 5 permanent members of the SC, and GA resolution adopted by 2/3 of the States present and voting (GA).

• Expulsion from the UN: A UN member that systematically violates the principles of the UN Charter may be expelled from the Organization by a decision of the GA upon the recommendation of the SC (Art. 6).

• Withdrawal, such a right belongs to each member of the UN as a sovereign state.

• Suspension of rights and privileges of a UN member State if preventive measures are taken against it by the UN Security Council.

Specialized Agencies of the UN

• Autonomous organizations working with the UN.

• Work in specific fields to promote global cooperation, economic development, health, education, and more.

• Operate under agreements with the UN, but maintain their own governing bodies, budgets, and membership.

List of Major UN Specialized Agencies

• Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO)

• International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO)

• International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD)

• International Labour Organization (ILO)

• International Maritime Organization (IMO)

• International Monetary Fund (IMF)

• International Telecommunication Union (ITU)

• United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO)

• United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO)

• Universal Postal Union (UPU)

• World Bank Group (IBRD, IDA, IFC, MIGA, ICSID)

• World Health Organization (WHO)

• World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO)

• World Meteorological Organization (WMO)

• World Tourism Organization (UNWTO)

Key Features of UN Specialized Agencies

• Autonomy & Relationship with the UN

  • Independent governance: Each agency has its own member states, budget, and leadership.

  • Agreement with the UN: They coordinate with the UN through ECOSOC (Economic and Social Council) but are not controlled by the UN General Assembly.

  • Voluntary funding: Most rely on member contributions, grants, and donations.

• Functions & Roles

  • Setting International Standards (e.g., ICAO for aviation, IMO for shipping).

  • Providing Technical Assistance (e.g., WHO in health crises, FAO in agriculture).

  • Financial Support (e.g., IMF & World Bank for economic stability).

  • Research & Data Collection (e.g., WMO for climate, UNESCO for education).

• Differences from UN Programs (e.g., UNDP, UNICEF, UNEP)

  • Specialized agencies are independent organizations with separate legal status.

  • UN programs/funds (like UNICEF or UNDP) are directly under the UN General Assembly.

Notable Contributions of Selected Agencies

• WHO: Eradication of smallpox, COVID-19 response, vaccination programs.

• IMF: Financial crisis management (e.g., 2008 crisis, debt relief).

• World Bank: Poverty reduction projects (e.g., infrastructure in developing nations).

• UNESCO: World Heritage Sites, literacy programs, internet freedom advocacy.

• ILO: Labor rights conventions (e.g., abolition of child labor).

• ICAO: Global aviation safety standards (e.g., preventing air disasters).

Challenges Facing Specialized Agencies

• Funding shortages (e.g., WHO relies heavily on voluntary contributions).

• Political influence (e.g., IMF/WB criticized for favoring wealthy nations).

• Coordination issues (overlap with other UN bodies).

OSCE: History, Main Bodies, Areas of Activity

History of Creation

• Originated in the détente phase of the early 1970s.

• Conference on Security and Co-operation in Europe (CSCE) was created.

• Served as a multilateral forum for dialogue between East and West.

• Helsinki Final Act signed on August 1, 1975.

• Contained commitments on political-military, economic, environmental, and human rights issues.

• Established ten fundamental principles governing state behavior.

• Until 1990, functioned as meetings and conferences.

• The Paris Summit of November 1990 set the CSCE on a new course.

• With the end of the Cold War, the Charter of Paris called upon the CSCE to play its part in managing the change. This included the need to address the changes brought about by the revolutions in Central and Eastern Europe as well as to respond to challenges such as growing nationalism and a rise in acts of terrorism.

UN Specialized Agencies

• Controlled by the UN General Assembly.

  • Coordinate with the UN through ECOSOC (Economic and Social Council).

  • Not voluntary funding.

  • Rely on member contributions, grants, and donations.

Functions & Roles

• Setting International Standards

  • Examples: ICAO for aviation, IMO for shipping.

• Providing Technical Assistance

  • Examples: WHO in health crises, FAO in agriculture.

• Financial Support

  • Examples: IMF & World Bank for economic stability.

• Research & Data Collection

  • Examples: WMO for climate, UNESCO for education.

Differences from UN Programs

• Specialized agencies are independent organizations with separate legal status.

• UN programs/funds (like UNICEF or UNDP) are directly under the UN General Assembly.

Notable Contributions of Selected Agencies

• WHO (World Health Organization)

  • Eradication of smallpox.

  • Response to COVID-19.

  • Vaccination programs.

• IMF (International Monetary Fund)

  • Financial crisis management (e.g., 2008 crisis).

  • Debt relief.

• World Bank

  • Poverty reduction projects (e.g., infrastructure in developing nations).

• UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization)

  • World Heritage Sites.

  • Literacy programs.

  • Internet freedom advocacy.

• ILO (International Labour Organization)

  • Labor rights conventions (e.g., abolition of child labor).

• ICAO (International Civil Aviation Organization)

  • Global aviation safety standards (e.g., preventing air disasters).

Challenges Facing Specialized Agencies

• Funding shortages.

  • Example: WHO relies heavily on voluntary contributions.

• Political influence.

  • Example: IMF/WB criticized for favoring wealthy nations.

• Coordination issues.

  • Overlap with other UN bodies.

OSCE (Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe)

History of Creation

• Origins trace back to the détente phase of the early 1970s.

• Conference on Security and Co-operation in Europe (CSCE) was created as a multilateral forum for dialogue and negotiation between East and West.

• Helsinki Final Act signed on August 1, 1975, contained key commitments on:

  • Polito-military issues.

  • Economic and environmental issues.

  • Human rights issues.

• Established ten fundamental principles (“Decalogue”) governing the behavior of States towards their citizens and each other.

• Until 1990, CSCE functioned as a series of meetings and conferences.

• Paris Summit of November 1990 set the CSCE on a new course, leading to permanent institutions and operational capabilities.

• Name changed from CSCE to OSCE in December 1994 at the Budapest Summit.

Main Bodies

• Summits

  • Heads of State or Government set the Organization’s priorities.

  • Provide orientation for several years.

  • No general rules determining how often Summits take place.

  • Any participating State can propose a Summit.

  • Decision to hold it must be taken by consensus.

  • Between summits, decision-making and governing powers lie with the Ministerial Council.

  • The Helsinki Final Act was adopted at the first CSCE Summit in Helsinki (July 30-August 1, 1975).

• Ministerial Council

  • Established by the Charter of Paris for a New Europe (1990).

  • Composed of the Ministers for Foreign Affairs of the OSCE participating States.

  • Central decision-making and governing body of the Organization.

  • Summit meetings are the highest decision-making body.

  • Ministerial meetings are convened once a year in the country holding the Chairmanship.

  • Additional meetings may be called at any time.

  • The OSCE Chairpersonship is held for one calendar year by the OSCE participating State.

  • The function of the Chairperson-in-Office (CiO) is exercised by the Minister of Foreign Affairs of that State.

  • 2025 OSCE Chairperson-in-Office: Minister for Foreign Affairs of Finland, Elina Valtonen.

• Permanent Council

  • Principal decision-making body for regular political consultations.

  • Governs the day-to-day operational work of the OSCE between the meetings of the Ministerial Council.

  • Implements tasks defined by OSCE Summits and the Ministerial Council.

  • Meetings take place once a week in Vienna, chaired by the Chairperson-in-Office or his/her representative.

  • Composed of delegates of the 57 participating States.

  • A delegation consists of representatives of that participating State, under the leadership of an Ambassador appointed as Permanent Representative to the OSCE.

  • Negotiating process and political dialogue occur in Plenary Meetings, where delegations may raise any issue for discussion.

  • OSCE decisions have to be taken by consensus.

  • Informal subsidiary bodies:

    • Security Committee

    • Economic and Environmental Committee

    • Human Dimension Committee

  • Preparatory Committee (PrepComm) assists in the Permanent Council’s deliberations and decision-making.

  • Advisory Committee on Management and Finance (ACMF) advises on the OSCE budget, funding, and resources management.

• Forum for Security Co-operation

  • Works to increase military security and stability in Europe.

  • Covers fundamental politico-military agreements of the OSCE participating States.

  • Implements confidence and security-building measures to regulate the exchange of military information and mutual verification between states.

  • Includes the Code of Conduct, ensuring democratic control of security forces.

  • Develops norms and provides practical assistance to address the proliferation of illicit small arms and light weapons.

  • Deals with non-proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.

  • Oversees regular contact, co-operation, and sharing of military information among the participating States.

• Parliamentary Assembly

  • Facilitates inter-parliamentary dialogue to advance the OSCE's goals of comprehensive security.

  • Established by the 1990 Paris Summit.

  • Objectives include:

    • Assessing the implementation of OSCE objectives by participating States.

    • Discussing subjects addressed during meetings of the Ministerial Council and summit meetings.

    • Developing and promoting mechanisms for the prevention and resolution of conflicts.

    • Supporting the strengthening and consolidation of democratic institutions in OSCE participating States.

    • Contributing to the development of OSCE institutional structures.

  • Employs a variety of means, including:

    • Final Declaration and resolutions adopted each year at the Annual Session.

    • Committee work to address important contemporary international issues.

    • Programmes, including an extensive election observation programme, and various seminars.

    • Special missions of PA delegations to areas of concern or crisis.

  • Organizations with observer status:

    • European Parliament

    • Inter-Parliamentary Union

    • Interparliamentary Assembly of the CIS

    • NATO Parliamentary Assembly (NATO PA)

    • Parliamentary Assembly of the Black Sea Economic Cooperation (PABSEC)

    • Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE)

  • Decision-making bodies include the Standing Committee of heads of delegations and the Bureau.

• High Commissioner on National Minorities

  • Gets involved if there are tensions involving national minorities which could develop into a conflict.

  • Identifies and addresses causes of ethnic tensions and conflicts.

  • Addresses short-term triggers of inter-ethnic tension or conflict and long-term structural concerns.

  • Assists if a participating State is not meeting its political commitments or international norms.

  • Publishes thematic Recommendations and Guidelines.

  • Provides structural support through small collaborative projects.

• Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights

  • Provides support, assistance and expertise to participating States and civil society to promote democracy, rule of law, human rights and tolerance and non-discrimination.

  • Observes elections, reviews legislation, and advises governments on how to develop and sustain democratic institutions.

  • Conducts training programmes for government and law-enforcement officials and non-governmental organizations on how to uphold, promote and monitor human rights.

• Representative on Freedom of the Media

  • Activities:

    • Observing media developments as part of an early warning function.

    • Helping participating States abide by their commitments to freedom of expression and free media.

  • Includes:

    • Efforts to ensure the safety of journalists

    • Assisting with the development of media pluralism

    • Promoting decriminalization of defamation; combating hate speech while preserving freedom of expression

    • Providing expert opinions on media regulation and legislation

    • Promoting Internet freedom; and assisting with the process of switching from analogue to digital broadcasting.

Areas of Activity

• International regional political organization with 55 participating States (as of January 2014).

  • Includes all European countries + the USA, Canada, Central Asian and Transcaucasian States.

  • Mediterranean Partners for Co-operation: Algeria, Egypt, Israel, Jordan, Morocco, Tunisia.

  • Asian Partners for Cooperation: Afghanistan, Japan, Mongolia, the Republic of Korea and Thailand.

• Recognized as a regional organization under Chapter VIII of the UN Charter.

• Key instrument for early warning, conflict prevention, crisis management and post-conflict rehabilitation.

• Operates based on the concept of common and comprehensive security, combining three dimensions within the so-called three baskets:

  • Politico-military

  • Economic (environmental)

  • Human

• Guided by the principles of equal partnership, solidarity, and transparency.

• All participating States have equal status.

Specific Areas of Activity:

1. Arms control

   • Confidence- and security-building measures (CSBMs) to reduce the risks of conflict and increase trust.

   • Key document: Vienna Document on Confidence- and Security-Building Measures.

2. Border management

   • Balance between security against cross-border threats and the freedom of movement for persons, goods, services and commerce.

   • Field operations support effective border management through:

     • Maintaining a presence in border zones

     • Supporting co-operation and rapid information sharing between border police and neighboring country counterparts

     • Training, workshops and awareness-raising for navy and border security officers, customs personnel, and aviation and airport security staff

3. Combating trafficking in human beings

   • Office of the Special Representative and Co-ordinator for Combating Trafficking in Human Beings.

   • OSCE Action Plan to Combat Trafficking in Human Beings provides the framework.

   • Focus on the “3 Ps”:

     • Prevention

     • Prosecution

     • Protection

   • Added a fourth “P” - partnerships.

4. Conflict prevention and resolution

   • Works to prevent conflicts from arising and to facilitate lasting comprehensive political settlements of existing conflicts.

   • Key instrument for early warning, conflict prevention and resolution, crisis management and post-conflict rehabilitation (the “conflict cycle”).

   • Activities include:

     • Capacity building for local actors.

     • Facilitating exchanges between political and civic actors.

     • Assisting with dialogue facilitation and mediation.

     • Monitoring the security situation.

     • Supporting national crisis response plans.

5. Democratization

   • Helps its participating States build and consolidate democratic institutions.

   • Field operations actively work in supporting democratic institutions through:

     • Running public information, awareness-raising, and outreach campaigns.

     • Working with government structures and civil society organizations on capacity building.

     • Helping further electoral and political processes.

6. Economic activities

   • Supports sustainable economic growth and fosters international economic co-operation.

   • Office of the Co-ordinator of OSCE Economic and Environmental Activities (OCEEA) works with field operations.

   • Focus on:

     • Good governance and anti-corruption

     • Anti-money laundering and countering the financing of terrorism (AML/CFT)

     • Transport, trade, and border crossing facilitation

     • Labor migration

   • Field operations conduct economic activities, including:

     • Assisting national economic reform processes

     • Improving conditions for investment and economic development

     • Sustainable development and good governance

     • Promoting economic security

7. Human rights

   • Respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms are key to the OSCE's comprehensive security concept.

   • Efforts include:

     • Supporting the implementation of legislation protecting the rights of persons belonging to minorities

     • Working to eliminate discriminatory laws, policies and practices

     • Providing technical support to human rights bodies

     • Reviewing legislation to ensure compliance with OSCE commitments and international human rights standards

UN Peacekeeping Operations

• Peacemaking: Action to bring hostile parties to an agreement, using peaceful means.

• Peacekeeping: Deployment of a UN presence in the field.

• Peacebuilding: Action to identify and support structures that will assist peace.

• Peace Enforcement: Peacekeeping not involving the consent of the parties.

• No explicit legal basis in the UN Charter.

• Broad bases lie in the general provisions governing the powers of the Security Council and General Assembly.

• Involves the deployment of armed forces under UN control to contain and resolve military conflicts.

• Originally intended for inter-state conflicts, now used in civil wars and intra-state conflicts.

• Origin may be traced to truce supervision activities (e.g., UN Special Committee on the Balkans (UNSCOB) in Greece, 1947).

• Key principles:

  • Consent of the parties

  • Impartiality

  • Non-use of force

• Chapter VII mandates allow for enforcement measures (Article 42).

• Responsibility and liability for the activities of UN peacekeeping forces:

  • The United Nations has accepted responsibility and offered compensation for wrongful acts.

  • Focus is on the nature of effective control as exercised by the United Nations.

  • Examples: Korean (1950) and Kuwait (1990) operations.

• Legal framework for the conduct of peacekeeping activities:

  • Subject to the law governing the UN organizations as a whole.

  • Model Status of Forces Agreement for Peacekeeping Operations (1990).

  • Convention on the Safety of United Nations and Associated Personnel 1994.

SCO (Shanghai Cooperation Organization)

History of Creation

• Sub-regional intergovernmental organization founded in 2001 by Russia, China, Kazakhstan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, and Uzbekistan.

• Predecessor: Shanghai Five mechanism.

• Observer states: India, Iran, Mongolia and Pakistan.

• Iran filed an official declaration of intent to become a full member in March 2008.

• Charter of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization signed in 2002, entered into force in 2003.

Main Bodies

• Council of Heads of State

  • Supreme SCO body determining priorities and defining major areas of activities.

  • Decides upon fundamental issues of internal arrangement and functioning.

  • Considers topical international issues.

  • Holds regular meetings once a year, chaired by the head of State organizing the meeting.

• Council of Heads of Government (Prime Ministers)

  • Approves the budget of the Organization.

  • Considers and decides upon major issues related to particular, especially economic, spheres of interaction within the Organization.

  • Holds regular meetings once a year, chaired by the head of State organizing the meeting.

• Council of Ministers of Foreign Affairs

  • Considers issues related to day-today activities of the Organization.

  • Prepares meetings of the Heads of State Council and holds consultations on international problems.

  • Meets one month prior to a meeting of the Heads of State Council.

  • Makes statements on behalf of SCO.

• Meetings of Heads of Ministries and/or Agencies

  • Held on a regular basis to consider particular issues of interaction in respective fields within SCO.

  • Chaired by the head of a respective ministry of the state organizing the meeting.

  • Permanent or ad hoc working groups of experts may be established.

Areas of Activity

• Initially focused on mutual intra-regional actions to suppress terrorist acts, separatism, and extremism in Central Asia.

• Agreement on the Regional Anti-Terrorist Structure signed on June 7, 2001.

• Not a military bloc, but involves armed forces due to the growing danger of “terrorism, extremism and separatism”.

• Main goals:

  • Strengthening mutual trust and good-neighborliness among the member countries

  • Promoting their effective cooperation in the political, trade, economic, scientific, technical, and cultural fields

  • Jointly ensuring and maintaining peace, security, and stability in the region

  • Advancing toward the establishment of a democratic, just and rational new international political and economic order

EAEU (Eurasian Economic Union)

History of Creation

• 1994: Nursultan Nazarbayev suggested forming a trade alliance.

• 1995: Belarus, Kazakhstan, and Russia signed the Treaty on the Customs Union.

• 1999: Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia and Tajikistan signed the Treaty on the Customs Union and the Single Economic Space.

• 2000: Establishment of the Eurasian Economic Community (EurAsEC).

• 2010: Customs Union of Belarus, Kazakhstan, and Russia entered into force.

• 2011: Decision to start negotiations on the accession of the Kyrgyz Republic.

  • Declaration on the Eurasian Economic Integration signed.

  • Treaty on the Eurasian Economic Commission signed.

• 2012: Single Economic Space entered into force.

  • Eurasian Economic Commission commenced operation.

• 2014: Treaty on the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU) signed.

  • Treaty on the Accession of the Republic of Armenia to the EAEU signed.

  • Treaty on the Accession of the Kyrgyz Republic to the EAEU signed.

Main Bodies

• Supreme Eurasian Economic Council

• Eurasian Intergovernmental Council

• Eurasian Economic Commission

• Court of the Eurasian Economic Union

• Presidency at the Supreme Council, the Intergovernmental Council, and the Council of the Commission rotates.

Details on each body:

• Supreme Council

  • Supreme body of the EAEU, consisting of the Heads of the member States.

  • Meets at least once a year.

  • Considers fundamental issues of activity of the EAEU and defines the strategy.

  • Responsibilities include:

    • Determining the strategy, direction and prospects for the formation and development of the EAEU

    • Approving the membership of the Collegium of Commission

    • Appointing the Chairman of the Collegium of Commission

    • Appointing the judges of the Court of the EAEU

    • Approving the rules on procedures of the Commission

    • Approving the budget of the EAEU

  • Takes decisions and instructions by consensus.

• Intergovernmental Council

  • Consists of the Heads of Governments of the member States.

  • Meets at least two times a year.

  • Ensures the implementation and control of the implementation of the Treaty.

  • Gives instructions to the Commission.

  • Proposes candidates to the members of the Council and Collegium of the Commission.

  • Takes decisions and orders by consensus.

• Commission

  • Institutional body of the EAEU, consisting of the Council and Collegium.

  • Takes decisions, orders, and recommendations.

  • Decisions, orders, and recommendations of the Council of the Commission are made in terms of consensus.

• Court of the EAEU

  • Institutional judicial body of the EAEU.

  • Residence: Minsk, Belarus.

Areas of Activity

• Main objectives:

  • Create conditions for stable economic development.

  • Create a common market for goods, services, capital, and labor.

  • comprehensive modernization, cooperation, and competitiveness of national economies.

• Priority is to continue the dialogue on trade and economic issues with the nearest neighbors

• Enhance interaction with key integration associations in Eurasia, Africa, and Latin America.

• Increasing the transport connectivity of the EAEU with actively developing markets.

• Creating favorable conditions for businesses.

CSTO (Collective Security Treaty Organization)

History of Creation

• Originated from the Collective Security Treaty signed in Tashkent on May 15, 1992.

• Members: Armenia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan (initially joined, but later ceased membership).

• Key Art. 4: Aggression against one member is considered aggression against all.

• Treaty concluded for 5 years with the possibility of further extension.

• In 1999, a Protocol on the extension of the Collective Security Treaty was signed.

• On May 14, 2002, granted the status of an international regional organization.

• Approved the CSTO Charter in 2002, registered with the UN Secretariat in 2003.

• Received an Observer status in the UN General Assembly in 2004.

Main Bodies

• The Collective Security Council

  • Highest body of the Organization.

  • Considers fundamental issues and ensures coordination.

  • Includes heads of the Member States.

• The Council of Ministers of Foreign Affairs

  • Consultative and executive body for coordinating foreign policy.

• The Council of Ministers of Defense

  • Consultative and executive body for coordinating military policy.

• Military Committee

  • Established in 2012 to consider the planning and use of forces.

• The Committee of Secretaries of Security Councils

  • Consultative and executive body for coordinating national security.

• The Secretary General of the Organization

  • Highest administrative official.

• The Secretariat of the Organization

  • Permanent working body.

• The CSTO United Staff

  • Permanent working body responsible for the military component.

Areas of Activity

• Objectives:

  • Strengthening peace, international and regional security and stability.

  • Protecting independence, territorial integrity, and sovereignty of the member States.

• Principles:

  • Priority of political means over the military

  • Strict respect for independence

  • Voluntary participation

  • Equality of rights and obligations of the member States

  • Non-interference in affairs falling under national jurisdiction.

• Mechanism of regular political consultations.

• Cooperation with international organizations and third countries.

• Important area of activity for the CSTO is crisis response.

• Military cooperation aims to ensure the collective and national security.

• Troops (Collective Forces):

  • Collective Operational Reaction Forces

  • Regional (combined) groups of troops (forces)

• Priority given to the fight against international terrorism and extremism, drug trafficking.

• Parliamentary Assembly

• Focuses on countering contemporary challenges and threats to the CSTO collective security.

CSTO Media Support

• Important for informing audiences about CSTO's peace and security efforts.

Council of Europe (CoE)

History of Creation

• Founded post-WWII, oldest European political organization.

• Idea originated at the Congress of Europe, The Hague, 10 May 1948.

• Promoted by pro-European movements to prevent totalitarian regimes, defend freedoms, peace, and democracy.

• Congress called for a European assembly, human rights charter, and a court of justice.

• French Government proposed a European assembly in July 1948.

• British Government sought more details on the assembly.

• International Committee of the Movements for European Unity presented proposals on 18 August 1948.

• British rejected non-government appointed members in an international institution.

• British proposed a ministerial committee with parliamentary delegations and experts.

• Consultative Council of the Brussels Treaty established a Committee for the Study of European Unity, chaired by Édouard Herriot, from November 1948 to January 1949.

• A sub-committee drafted a constituent text for a European union on 15 December 1948.

• British Government submitted a new proposal on 18 January 1949.

• Compromise reached on 27-28 January 1949 by Foreign Ministers of the Brussels Treaty countries.

  • Establishment of a ministerial committee with decision-making power.

  • Consultative assembly with members appointed by their governments.

• Ireland, Italy, Denmark, Norway, and Sweden invited to a conference on the establishment of the Council of Europe, held in London from 3-5 May 1949.

• Statute signed on 5 May and entered into force on 3 August 1949, after Luxembourg's ratification.

Main Bodies

• According to Art. 10 of the CoE Charter, the CoE bodies are the Committee of Ministers and the Parliamentary Assembly.

Committee of Ministers

• Supreme intergovernmental body (Art. 13 of the CoE Statutes).

• Composed of Foreign Affairs Ministers of member states.

• Each state has one vote.

• Meets once a year in private.

• Determines intergovernmental cooperation, makes decisions, opens treaties for signature, decides membership issues, and grants observer status.

Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE)

• Main deliberative body (Art. 25.1 of the Statutes).

• Delegates from each member (2 to 18).

• 5 political parties are active in PACE.

• Meets 4 times a year in public.

• Rights:

  • Discuss and make recommendations on any issue within the CoE's competence.

  • Adopt resolutions.

  • Elect officials and experts.

  • Grant observer status and specially invited state status.

Specialized Bodies

• Congress of Local and Regional Authorities

  • Established in 1994.

  • Consultative body ensuring local and regional authorities' participation.

  • Composed of a Chamber of Local Authorities and a Chamber of Regions.

  • Each state represented by 2-18 delegates.

  • Meets at least once a year.

  • Functions:

    • Adopts recommendations and conclusions for CoE bodies.

    • Advises the Committee of Ministers and PACE.

    • Makes proposals for developing local democracy.

    • Grants observer status and specially invited state status.

• Conference of International Non-Governmental Organizations (Conference of INGOs)

  • Evolved from CoE's engagement with civil society.

  • Partner INGOs joined the INGO Conference in 2005.

  • Contributes to strengthening civil society's role in the CoE.

• Commissioner for Human Rights

  • Established in 1999.

  • Elected by PACE for a 5-year term.

  • Promotes human rights in the Council of Europe.

  • Monitors human rights, promotes CoE standards, and assists states in promotion and protection.

• European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR)

  • Sole judicial body of the Council of Europe.

  • Monitors states' fulfillment of obligations under the 1950 Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.

• Secretary General and the Secretariat

  • Ensure the work of CoE bodies (Art. 10 of the CoE Charter).

  • Secretary General:

    • Elected by PACE for a 5-year term.

    • Manages the CoE, coordinates its bodies.

    • Performs depositary functions.

    • Forms the CoE Secretariat.

Areas of Activity

• Purpose: achieve greater unity, protect ideals and principles, and promote economic and social progress (Article 1(a) of the CoE Statutes).

• Based on: the rule of law, respect for human rights, and democracy.

• According to Article 1 (b) of the CoE Statutes, the CoE:

  • Considers matters of common interest to the Member States

  • Concludes agreements and undertakes joint actions

  • Supports the realization of human rights and fundamental freedoms

• Activities cover economic, social, cultural, scientific, legal, and administrative spheres.

• National defense matters are outside the CoE's competence.

NATO

History of Creation

• Post-WWII Western Europe:

  • Economically exhausted and militarily weak.

  • Powerful communist parties in France and Italy.

• Soviet Union:

  • Emerges with armies dominating Central and Eastern Europe.

  • Communists consolidate control by 1948.

• Iron Curtain:

  • Term popularized by Winston Churchill.

  • Divides Europe.

• Wartime cooperation breaks down.

  • Germany divided into democratic West and communist East.

• Marshall Plan (1948):

  • Economic aid to Western and Southern Europe.

  • Condition: cooperation and joint planning.

• Military recovery:

  • Brussels Treaty (1948): UK, France, and the Low Countries (Belgium, Netherlands, Luxembourg) create the Western European Union (WEU) as a collective-defense agreement.

  • Recognized: need for a more formidable alliance.

• Secret talks (Britain, Canada, USA):

  • Security arrangements as an alternative to the UN.

  • UN paralyzed by the Cold War.

• March 1948:

  • Communist coup in Czechoslovakia triggers multilateral collective-defense discussions.

  • France, Low Countries, and Norway join discussions.

• April 1949:

  • North Atlantic Treaty signed.

Main Bodies

Political Elements

• North Atlantic Council

  • Composed of ministerial representatives.

  • Meets at least twice a year.

  • Chaired by the NATO secretary-general.

  • Permanent session at the ambassadorial level.

  • Meets at least once a week at the level of permanent representatives.

  • Decisions are equally binding regardless of the level of the participating state representatives.

  • Decisions are made based on consensus, that is, every decision must be approved on the basis of unanimity and general agreement.

• Defence Policy and Planning Committee (DPPC)

  • Analyzes defense expenditures.

  • Coordinates military planning, armed forces, and armaments.

  • Meets regularly at the level of permanent representatives and twice a year at the level of ministers of defense.

  • Same powers as the North Atlantic Council within its competences.

• Nuclear Planning Committee (NPG)

  • Consults on all issues related to nuclear forces in NATO's security and defense policy.

  • Meets twice a year at the level of defense ministers, usually together with the Defense Planning Committee.

• The Secretary General

  • Highest political international representative of NATO.

  • Chairman of the North Atlantic Council, the Defense Planning Committee, and the Nuclear Planning Group.

  • Manages the international secretariat.

  • Main spokesman of the Alliance in communication with the representatives of the governments of the member countries.

  • Responsible for the consultation and decision-making process.

• The International Secretariat

  • Serves the Council and a wide range of committees and working groups dealing with policy matters, defense planning, defense assurance, infrastructure and logistics, scientific research, and the environment.

Military Elements

• The Military Committee (MC)

  • Highest military body of the Alliance under the political authority of the North Atlantic Council and the Defense Planning Committee, or Nuclear Planning Groups.

  • Consists of the chiefs of staff of all member countries, which are represented by the military mission in the Military Committee.

  • The Chiefs of Staff meet at least twice a year.

• The International Military Staff (IMS)

  • An integrated military staff that assists the NATO Military Committee in solving specific military issues.

  • Fulfills the decisions of the Military Committee, prepares studies and plans for the procedure proposed by the national authorities of member countries or NATO authorities.

• Allied Command Operations (ACO)

  • Based in Belgium near the city of Mons.

  • Responsible for the area of planning and implementation of joint operations of the allied military forces to achieve the political goals of the Alliance.

• Allied Command Transformation (ACT)

  • Is responsible for supporting and overseeing the transformation of allied forces and capabilities based in Norfolk, USA.

Areas of Activity

• Decisions and consultations

  • Every day, member countries consult and take decisions on security issues at all levels and in a variety of fields.

  • A “NATO decision” is the expression of the collective will of all 31 member countries since all decisions are taken by consensus.

• Operations and missions

  • NATO takes an active role in a broad range of crisis-management operations and missions, including civil emergency operations.

  • NATO’s crisis-management operations are carried out under Article 5 of the Washington Treaty or under a United Nations mandate.

• Partnerships

  • Around 40 non-member countries work with NATO on a wide range of political and security-related issues.

  • These countries pursue dialogue and practical cooperation with the Alliance, and many contribute to NATO-led operations and missions.

  • NATO is also cooperating with a wide network of international organizations.

  • Partner countries do not have the same decision-making authority as member countries.

• Developing the means to respond to threats

  • NATO has always innovated and adapted itself to ensure its policies, capabilities and structures meet current and future threats, including the collective defense of its members.

European Union (EU)

History of Creation

• Founded in 1951 after the Second World War by six countries (Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Luxembourg, and the Netherlands).

• Current Member States: 27 countries.

• Applicants for future membership: 9 candidate countries and 1 potential candidate.

Institutional Setup

• The EU has a unique setup of institutions, bodies and agencies who all work for the common interests of the EU and European people.

• 7 European institutions, 9 EU bodies and over 30 decentralised agencies with specific roles are spread across the EU.

Elections

• European elections are held every five years to elect new Members of the European Parliament.

Integration

• The EU is a regional organization of economic integration.

Legal Status of an International Organization and its Employees

• Legal status is governed both by international law and sometimes domestic law (in case of specific buildings, headquarters, etc.).

• The Court noted in the Reparation for Injuries case that the obligations entered into by member states to enable UN agents to perform their duties were obligations owed to the organisation.

  • Thus, the organisation has, in the case of a breach of such obligations, ‘the capacity to claim adequate reparation, and that in assessing this reparation it is authorised to include the damage suffered by the victim or by persons entitled through him’.

  • Whereas the right of a state to assert a claim on behalf of a victim is predicated upon the link of nationality, in the case of an international organisation, the necessary link relates to the requirements of the organisation and therefore the fact that the victim was acting on behalf of the organisation in exercising one of the functions of that organisation.

  • As the Court noted, ‘the organization . . . possesses a right of functional protection in respect of its agents’.

• The United Nations, for example, has produced Staff Rules and Staff Regulations, and a revised mechanism for dealing with internal disputes and disciplinary matters commencing on 1 July 2009.

• Article 105 of the UN Charter notes that:

  • (1) The Organization shall enjoy in the territory of each of its members such privileges and immunities as are necessary for the fulfilment of its purposes.

  • (2) Representatives of the members of the United Nations and officials of the Organization shall similarly enjoy such privileges and immunities as are necessary for the independent exercise of their functions in connection with the Organization.

• These general provisions have been supplemented by the General Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations 1946, and by the Convention on Privileges and Immunities of the Specialised Agencies 1947.

• These general conventions have been supplemented by bilateral agreements, particularly the growing number of headquarters and host agreements.

• The United Nations, for example, has concluded headquarters agreements with the United States for the UN Headquarters in New York and with Switzerland for the UN Office in Geneva in 1947.

• Such agreements, for example, provide for the application of local laws within the headquarters area subject to the application of relevant staff administrative regulations; the immunity of the premises and property of the organization from search, requisition and confiscation and other forms of interference by the host state; exemption from local taxes except for utility charges and freedom of communication.

Legal Status of Permanent Missions and Observer Missions

Permanent Mission of a State to an IO

• Means a mission of a permanent character sent by a State member of an IO to represent it to that organization.

• (!) A special mission is a temporary mission representing a State and sent by it to another state to address certain issues and tasks.

  • The international legal status of special missions is regulated by the provisions of the Vienna Convention on Special Missions (1969).

  • The Convention entered into force in 1985, the Russian Federation does not participate in it.

• In the history of international relations, the question of the legitimacy of a mission of a State to IOs as a result of an unconstitutional change of government has arisen many times.

  • For this and other reasons, it is the practice within the UN to examine, at each session of the GA of the UN, the credentials of all representatives of Member States attending the session.

  • The examination of credentials is first conducted in the Credentials Committee (official name - United Nations Credentials Committee), which may address the question of whether the government that has accredited its representative is in power. This is decided by a majority vote of the GA of the UN.

China Example:

• The Republic of China is an original member of the UN. However, in 1949 the Chinese Communists came to power and the former Kuomintang government retreated to Taiwan and declared it a territory of the Republic of China.

• In China itself, a new government, the People’s Republic of China (PRC), was established.

• The question then arose as to which government should represent China at the UN. For a long time, there was no consensus on this issue, and until 1971 China was represented at the UN by the Kuomintang government.

• In 1971, it was decided that China should be represented by the government of the People’s Republic of China.

• The legal status of state representations to international organizations is determined primarily in the constituent instrument of the respective organization, bilateral agreements, as well as the Vienna Convention on the Representation of States in their Relations with International Organizations of a Universal Character (1975).

Functions of Representations:

• To ensure the representation of the sending state at the organization

• Maintaining communication between the sending State and the organization

• Negotiating with and within the organization

• Ascertaining the activities of the organization and reporting them to the government of the sending State

• Ensuring the participation of the sending State in the activities of the organization

• Protecting the interests of the sending State in relation to the organization

• Promoting the aims and principles of the organization

Observer Mission Status

• May be granted to international organizations.

• (permanent) observer mission status means a mission of a permanent character sent by a State not a member of an international organization to represent it to that organization.

• According to the Vienna Convention of 1975, permanent observer missions may perform the following functions:

  • ensuring the representation of the sending State, safeguarding its interests vis-à-vis the organization, and maintaining liaison with it

  • to ascertain the activities of the organization and report them to the government of the sending State

  • promoting cooperation with the organization and negotiating with it.

• The status of the permanent mission of a State is also determined by the internal acts of the State.

• According to the Regulations on the Permanent Mission of the Russian Federation to an international organization, approved by Presidential Decree № 1316 of 29 September 1999 (as amended by Presidential Decrees № 1198 of 21 August 2012 and № 69 of 18 February 2017), the main tasks and functions of the permanent mission are:

  • representation of the Russian Federation in the relevant international organization

  • protection of national interests and realization of the foreign policy course of the Russian Federation

  • ensuring the participation of the Russian Federation in the activities of the international organization

  • participation in the preparation and implementation of visits of officials and official delegations, including delegations of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation, related to events within the framework of an international organization.

• A state may appoint the same person as head of a mission to several IOs or include the head of the mission as a member of the diplomatic staff of another mission.

• (!) Privileges and immunities of missions of states to international organizations and their personnel are practically identical to those of diplomatic missions and their personnel as defined by the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations of 1961.

• Privileges and immunities of representations to international organizations are also determined by the relevant constituent instruments or by special conventions, as is the case with the UN and the specialized agencies of the UN (Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations (1946), Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the Specialized Agencies of the United Nations (1947)).

• Representatives to international organizations are accredited to the organization itself and not to heads of state or foreign ministers, as is the case with diplomatic representatives.

• The credentials of the head of mission are addressed to the chief executive officer of the organization, usually the Secretary General.

• The sending State thus does not need to obtain an aggreeman, as is the case with the appointment of the head of a diplomatic mission of a State.

International Conferences

Definition

• Formal gatherings of representatives from states, international organizations, and sometimes non-state actors (e.g., NGOs) to discuss and negotiate matters of common interest.

• Examples:

  • Congress of Vienna (1815) – Reorganized Europe post-Napoleon.

  • Paris Peace Conference (1919) – Established the League of Nations.

  • UN Climate Change Conferences (COP) – Address global warming.

Preparation and Convocation

Initiation

• By a State or IO: A country (e.g., host nation) or an international organization (e.g., UN) proposes the conference.

• Purpose: Defined in advance (e.g., peace negotiations, environmental treaties).

Pre-Conference Steps

• Consultations: Informal discussions among key stakeholders.

• Agenda Setting: Drafting topics for discussion.

• Invitations: Sent to relevant states, IOs, and observers.

• Venue & Logistics: Selection of location, date, and procedural rules.

Rules of Procedure

• Most conferences follow formal rules (often based on the UN Model Rules).

Key Components

• Credentials Committee – Verifies participants' authority.

• Presiding Officer (Chairperson) – Ensures orderly debate.

• Voting Rules – Consensus, majority, or unanimity.

• Debate & Amendments – Time limits, speaking order.

• Adoption of Decisions – Voting or consensus-based.

Decision-Making Methods

Types of Acts & Their Legal Significance

Binding Acts

• Treaties/Conventions – Legally enforceable agreements (e.g., Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, 1961).

• Protocols – Supplementary agreements (e.g., Kyoto Protocol, 1997).

Non-Binding Acts

• Declarations – Political commitments (e.g., Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 1948).

• Resolutions – Recommendations (e.g., UNGA resolutions).

• Final Acts – Summary of conference outcomes (e.g., Helsinki Final Act, 1975).

Institutional Decisions

• Creation of new bodies (e.g., International Criminal Court via Rome Statute, 1998).

Legal Significance of Conference Outcomes

• Treaties: Become binding upon ratification.

• Soft Law (Declarations, Resolutions): Influence state practice but are not directly enforceable.

• Customary International Law: Repeated conference declarations may contribute to state practice (opinio juris).

Conclusion

• International conferences are key instruments of diplomacy, shaping global norms through treaties, declarations, and institutional frameworks.

• Their legal impact depends on the type of act produced, with treaties being the most enforceable.

International Responsibility

Definition

• State responsibility is a fundamental principle of international law, arising out of the nature of the international legal system and the doctrines of state sovereignty and equality of states.

• It provides that whenever one state commits an internationally unlawful act against another state, international responsibility is established between the two.

• A breach of an international obligation gives rise to a requirement for reparation.

• Some Russian doctrine understand international responsibility as the obligation of a subject of international law to remedy the damage caused to another subject of international law as a result of a breach of an international legal obligation.

Alternative View

• Other authors believe that international responsibility covers any legal consequences resulting from the commission of an international offence.

• These consequences consist in the emergence of special legal relations, the contents of which are the duty of the responsible State to cease the offence and to make reparation and the right of the injured State to take countermeasures. In addition, in some cases, the consequence of the offence may be a reaction by third States.

ILC Commentary

• “The term ‘international responsibility’ … encompasses relations arising under international law as a result of an internationally wrongful act of a State, whether or not such relations are limited to the offending State and a single State.”

• International responsibility is governed primarily by customary rules of international law.

• An attempt to codify these norms was made by the ILC - its result is UN General Assembly Resolution No. 56/83 of 12 December 2001 ‘Responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts’.

Definition of an Internationally Wrongful Act

• The basis of international responsibility, the legal fact giving rise to it, is an international offence (an internationally wrongful act).

• In order to establish the fact of its commission, two questions must be answered: first, whether a behaviour is attributable to a State and, second, whether it constitutes a breach of an international obligation (Art. 2 of the Resolution 2001 г.).

Attribution

• Unlawful behaviour may be imputed (attributed) to the State when it emanates from one of its organs or officials, i.e. from one of those elements through which the State manifests itself and with which it is usually identified.

• In this case, the place of the organ or official in the machinery of the State is irrelevant: according to Article 4 of the 2001 Resolution, the conduct of any organ of the State is considered an act of that State under international law, regardless of whether that organ exercises legislative, executive, judicial or any other functions, regardless of the position it occupies in the system of the State, and regardless of whether it is an organ of the central power or of an administrative-territorial unit of the State.

• In accordance with the well-established principle reflected in Article 3 of the 2001 Resolution, the characterisation of an act of a State as internationally wrongful is not affected by the characterisation of that act as lawful under internal law.

• Thus, an act of a State organ contrary to an international obligation of the State but in conformity with its internal law nevertheless entails international responsibility (although responsibility under internal law may be excluded).

• An internationally wrongful act cannot be considered an unfriendly act, i.e. an act that causes damage to a foreign State or its nationals but is not contrary to an international legal obligation (raising customs duties, restricting the entry of foreign nationals, tightening the investment regime where the relevant issues are not regulated by international law).

• An international offence may be an act or omission, it may be of a momentary or continuing nature.

• An act may be considered an international offence only if the obligation to which it is contrary was binding on the State at the time of its commission.

• As the Court noted in its Order of 3 March 1999 on provisional measures in the LAGRAND CASE, ‘the international responsibility of a State is engaged by the action of the competent organs and authorities acting in that State, whatever they may be’.

Guilt

• There is no common position on the meaning of fault in the doctrine of international law.

• The proponents of the concept of objective responsibility believe that international responsibility arises independently of guilt.

• There is also an approach according to which guilt is taken into account when committing offences in the form of inaction (omission) and is not taken into account when committing offences - actions.

• The basis for this approach was some court decisions in which the liability of a State for damage caused to aliens as a result of omission was made dependent on whether the omission was intentional.

• Failure to exercise due diligence (‘due diligence’) is considered culpable.

• Some international treaties make the incidence of international responsibility dependent on guilt, which is an exception to the concept of objective responsibility.

• Thus, according to Article II of the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, genocide is defined as acts ‘committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group as such’.

Sources and Codification of Law of International Responsibility

• That conceptual framework was not significantly changed even after the Second World War.

• To be sure, the assaults on international peace and security and the atrocities committed during the war forced legal scholars to rethink their conception of what constituted unlawful acts of states beyond their treatment of aliens.

• Attention shifted to the actions of individual officials, for which remedies were to be meted out by other states which would prosecute and punish the accused officials. But the responsibility of the state, as such, continued to be limited to its unlawful treatment of aliens.

• This venerable conception dominated the International Law Commission and the Legal Committee of the General Assembly when the Commission began codifying the law in this area in 1953.

• But during the 8 years that the Commission codified the law of state responsibility for the treatment of aliens, a number of changes occurred in the General Assembly. Between 1953 and 1961 when the Commission's draft on state responsibility was finally turned down by the Assembly, the membership of the Assembly increased.

• The developing states and the Eastern bloc considered the Commission's draft on the law about the treatment of aliens unrealistic and excessively favorable to aliens at a time when these states were struggling for political and economic independence.

• The Commission faced a choice: to begin codifying the specific and substantive obligations of states in all areas or to codify the general principles of international law of state responsibility, without identifying the specific obligations.

• The second option appeared more attractive for a number of reasons. In terms of a political strategy, the codification of substantive areas of state responsibility such as the treatment of aliens, the non-use of force, self-determination, apartheid, aggression, etc., would have been extremely difficult at the height of the Cold War and at a time of increasing developing-world membership in the United Nations, for this new group had its own conception of international law.

• The Commission's design of the draft Convention on State Responsibility envisages a single regime of responsibility for any wrongful acts of states, irrespective of the source of the obligation that has been violated.

Part One of the draft Convention

• Consists of 35 articles organized in 5 chapters:

• Chapter I on general principles is concerned with the definition of basic rules that apply to all the articles in the Convention. This chapter defines wrongful acts and identifies their constituent elements. An act of state is characterized as an internationally wrongful act in accordance with international law, regardless of whether the internal law of the state characterizes the same act as lawful.

• Chapter II on the act of the state under international law defines the rules of attribution by which a wrongful act is considered an act of a state under international law.

• Chapter III, on the breaches of an international obligation, identifies criteria by which it can be established that an international obligation has been breached and whether there are differences in degrees and types of state responsibility depending on the content of the breached obligation and the gravity of the wrongful act. In this chapter the origin of the international obligation breached by the state, whether customary, conventional, or other, does not affect international responsibility of the state. This chapter also introduces the concept of international crimes and differentiates them from ordinary wrongful acts or international delicts.

• Chapter IV on the implication of a state in the is deemed to have participated in the commission by another state of an internationally wrongful act, by assisting or exercising power and control over that state.

• Chapter V, on circumstances precluding wrongfulness, identifies six conditions under which an otherwise internationally wrongful act will not result in the responsibility of a state.

• The 35 articles of part one are followed by lengthy and scholarly commentaries.

• The articles are designed to remain faithful to the customary law of state responsibility, but they also incorporate some innovations such as the progressive development of the law in this area.

Subjects of International Responsibility

• Governments and any other state actor.

• The establishment of an international organization with international personality results in the formation of a new legal person, separate and distinct from that of the states creating it.

• This separate and distinct personality necessarily imports consequences as to international responsibility, both to and by the organization.

REPARATION FOR INJURIES CASE

• The International Court noted that ‘when an infringement occurs, the organization should be able to call upon the responsible state to remedy its default, and, in particular, to obtain from the state reparation for the damage that the default may have caused’ and emphasized that there existed an ‘undeniable right of the organization to demand that its members shall fulfil the obligations entered into by them in the interest of the good working of the organization’.
  Responsibility is a necessary consequence of international personality and the resulting possession of international rights and duties.

• Such rights and duties may flow from treaties, such as headquarters agreements, or from the principles of customary international law.

• The precise nature of responsibility will depend upon the circumstances of the case and, no doubt, analogies drawn from the law of state responsibility with regard to the conditions under which responsibility will be imposed, although some caution should be exercised here since there is a fundamental conceptual difference between states and international organizations.

• The basis of international responsibility is the breach of an international obligation and such obligations will depend upon the situation.

REPARATION FOR INJURIES CASE on member state duties to IO

• The Court noted that the obligations entered into by member states to enable UN agents to perform their duties were obligations owed to the organization.

• Thus, the organization has, in the case of a breach of such obligations, ‘the capacity to claim adequate reparation, and that in assessing this reparation it is authorized to include the damage suffered by the victim or by persons entitled through him’.

• Whereas the right of a state to assert a claim on behalf of a victim is predicated upon the link of nationality, in the case of an international organization, the necessary link relates to the requirements of the organization and therefore the fact that the victim was acting on behalf of the organization in exercising one of the functions of that organization.

• As the Court noted, ‘the organization . . . possesses a right of functional protection in respect of its agents’.
  Just as a state can be held responsible for injury to an organisation, so can the organisation be held responsible for injury to a state, where the injury arises out of a breach by the organisation of an international obligation deriving from a treaty provision or principle of customary international law.

• Analogies may be drawn from the general rules relating to state responsibility with regard to the conditions under which responsibility is imposed.

• For example, the conduct of an organ or an agent of an international organisation in the performance of the functions of that organ or agent (including officials and other persons or entities through whom the organisation acts) is considered as an act of the organisation, irrespective of the position actually held by the organ or agent and even if the conduct exceeds the authority of that organ or agent.

• An international organisation which aids or assists a state or another international organisation in the commission of an internationally wrongful act will itself bear international responsibility where the organisation knew the circumstances of the wrongful act and the act would be internationally wrongful if committed by that organisation.

• As in the case of states, international organisations may benefit from the precluding of responsibility in particular circumstances, such as consent by a state or an international organisation to the commission of the act or where the act constitutes a lawful measure of self-defence in conformity with international law.

• An international organisation responsible for the internationally wrongful act is under an obligation to cease that act and to offer appropriate assurances and guarantees of non-repetition (if circumstances so require) and to make full reparation for the injury caused.

• The issue of responsibility has particularly arisen in the context of UN peacekeeping operations and liability for the activities of the members of such forces.

• In such circumstances, the United Nations has accepted responsibility and offered compensation for wrongful acts.

• The crucial issue will be whether the wrongful acts in question are imputable to the United Nations and this has not been accepted where the offenders were under the jurisdiction of the national state, rather than under that of the United Nations.

• Much will depend upon the circumstances of the operation in question and the nature of the link between the offenders and the United Nations and between the United Nations and the national state of the offenders. It appears, for example, to have been accepted that in the KOREAN (1950) AND KUWAIT (1990) OPERATIONS, the relationship between the national forces and the United Nations was such as to preclude the latter’s responsibility. The focus would now appear to be on the nature of effective control as exercised or not by the United Nations with regard to the offender.

Types and Forms of International Responsibility

1) CESSATION AND NON-REPETITION

ARSIWA

Article 30: Cessation and Assurances of Non-Repetition

• Deals with cessation of wrongful conduct and assurances/guarantees of non-repetition.

• Cessation Obligation:

  • Two conditions for cessation:

    • Wrongful act has a continuing character.

    • The violated rule is still in force when the order is issued (as stressed in the “Rainbow Warrior” arbitration).

  • Applies to continuing wrongful acts and repeated violations, implying possible future repetitions.

  • Cessation aims to end international law violations and maintain the validity/effectiveness of the underlying rule.

  • Protects interests of injured states and the international community in preserving the rule of law.

• Assurances/Guarantees of Non-Repetition:

  • May be sought through satisfaction (e.g., repealing legislation that allowed the breach).

  • Reinforces the legal relationship affected by the breach.

  • Focuses on the future, not the past.

  • May be sought by states other than the injured state (Article 48).

  • Assurances are verbal, while guarantees involve preventive measures.

  • International practice regarding guarantees is not uniform.

  • Injured states may demand safeguards or assurances of better protection for nationals and property.

  • In LaGrand case, the ICJ specified the obligation for the United States following a future breach.

    • The Court noted that the means to carry out this obligation were at the discretion of the United States.

    • The Court mentioned a state may not always be in a position to offer a firm guarantee of non-repetition.

  • Appropriateness depends on circumstances, including the nature of the obligation and the breach.

  • Exceptional character indicated by “if circumstances so require”.

  • Formulated flexibly to prevent abusive claims.

Article 31: Reparation

• Responsible state must make full reparation for injury caused by the internationally wrongful act.

• Injury includes material and moral damage.

• Factory at Chorzów case:

  • Reparation is indispensable for failure to apply a convention.

  • Differences relating to reparations are related to the application of the convention.

• Reparation aims to wipe out consequences of the illegal act and re-establish the situation before the act.

  • Includes restitution in kind or payment of equivalent value.

  • Damages may be awarded for losses not covered by restitution/payment.

Article 34: Types of Reparation

• Restitution: Restoring the situation to its state before the wrongful act.

• Compensation: Financial compensation for damages not restored through restitution.

• Satisfaction: Acknowledgment of the wrongful act, including apologies or assurances.

• Full reparation may involve a combination of restitution, compensation, and satisfaction.

• Re-establishment of the situation before the breach may not suffice for full reparation if additional material damage occurred (e.g., loss of use of wrongfully seized property).

• Proportionality:

  • Concerns exist that full reparation may lead to disproportionate requirements for the responsible state.

  • Proportionality is addressed in the context of each form of reparation:

    • Restitution is excluded if it involves a burden disproportionate to the benefit gained.

    • Compensation is limited to damage actually suffered, excluding indirect/remote damage.

    • Satisfaction must not be out of proportion to the injury.

Coercion in International Law

• Coercion invalidates consent in treaties.

• Article 51 of the Vienna Convention: Consent obtained by coercing a state representative is without legal effect.

• Coercion against the state itself:

  • Before the League of Nations, international law did not invalidate treaties based on the use/threat of force.

  • This was due to the absence of customary law rules prohibiting recourse to war.

• ARSIWA Article 18 (Coercion of another State):

  • A state coercing another to commit an act is internationally responsible if:

    • The act would be wrongful without coercion.

    • The coercing state knows the circumstances of the act.

Attribution of Internationally Wrongful Acts to a State

• Doctrine depends on the link between the state and the person committing the unlawful act.

• The state acts through authorized officials/representatives.

• The state is not responsible for all acts performed by its nationals.

• Attribution (imputability) is the legal fiction that assimilates actions/omissions of state officials to the state.

  • Renders the state liable for damage to alien property/persons.

• Article 4 of the ILC Articles:

  • The conduct of any state organ is considered an act of the state.

  • Applies to legislative, executive, judicial, or other functions.

  • Applies regardless of position in the state organization or character as an organ.

• Article 5:

  • Addresses the proliferation of government agencies and parastatal entities.

  • Conduct of a person/entity empowered by state law to exercise governmental authority is an act of the state if acting in that capacity.

• Article 5 issues:

  • Arise when a state organ/agent is placed at the disposal of another international legal entity.

  • Occurs when both the state and the entity exercise control over the organ/agent.

• BEHRAMI V. FRANCE:

  • Addressed whether NATO troops in KFOR (Kosovo demining operations) fell under the European Court of Human Rights jurisdiction.

  • The Court held that the key question was whether the UN Security Council retained ultimate authority and control.

  • Responsibility was attributable to the United Nations, so jurisdiction did not exist for the states concerned in the European Court.

• NETHERLANDS V. NUHANOVIĆ:

  • The Supreme Court of the Netherlands held the Netherlands responsible for the conduct of the UN Dutch peace-keeping force in Srebrenica, Bosnia, in 1995.

  • The court deemed the conduct to have resulted in the massacre of thousands of Moslems.

• Article 6:

  • The conduct of an organ placed at the disposal of a state by another state is an act of the former state if the organ is acting in the exercise of governmental authority of the former state.

Ultra Vires Acts

• An unlawful act may be imputed to the state even if it was beyond the legal capacity of the official involved.

  • As noted by Verzijl in the Caire case, officials must have acted as competent officials or used powers/methods appropriate to their official capacity.

• Article 7 of the ILC Articles:

  • The conduct of a state organ/person empowered to exercise governmental authority is considered an act of the state if acting in that capacity, even if it exceeds its authority or contravenes instructions.

  • This article appears to lay down an absolute rule of liability, not limited by reference to the apparent exercise of authority.

  • In the context of the general acceptance of the objective theory of responsibility, this is likely the correct approach.

• Private individuals:

  • Not regarded as state officials, so the state is not liable for their acts.

  • However, the state may be responsible for failing to exercise the control necessary to prevent such acts.

  • Emphasized in the Zafiro case (Britain v. America, 1925).

  • The tribunal held the latter responsible for damage caused by the civilian crew of a naval ship in the Philippines, since the naval officers had not adopted effective preventative measures.

• ARSIWA Article 4 (Conduct of organs of a State):

  • The conduct of any State organ shall be considered an act of that State under international law, whether the organ exercises legislative, executive, judicial or any other functions, whatever position it holds in the organization of the State, and whatever its character as an organ of the central Government or of a territorial unit of the State.

  • An organ includes any person or entity which has that status in accordance with the internal law of the State.

• Article 5 (Conduct of persons or entities exercising elements of governmental authority):

  • The conduct of a person or entity which is not an organ of the State under article 4 but which is empowered by the law of that State to exercise elements of the governmental authority shall be considered an act of the State under international law, provided the person or entity is acting in that capacity in the particular instance.

• Article 6 (Conduct of organs placed at the disposal of a State by another State):

  • The conduct of an organ placed at the disposal of a State by another State shall be considered an act of the former State under international law if the organ is acting in the exercise of elements of the governmental authority of the State at whose disposal it is placed.

• Article 7 (Excess of authority or contravention of instructions):

  • The conduct of an organ of a State or of a person or entity empowered to exercise elements of the governmental authority shall be considered an act of the State under international law if the organ, person or entity acts in that capacity, even if it exceeds its authority or contravenes instructions.

• Article 8 (Conduct directed or controlled by a State):

  • The conduct of a person or group of persons shall be considered an act of a State under international law if the person or group of persons is in fact acting on the instructions of, or under the direction or control of, that State in carrying out the conduct.

• Article 9 (Conduct carried out in the absence or default of the official authorities):

  • The conduct of a person or group of persons shall be considered an act of a State under international law if the person or group of persons is in fact exercising elements of the governmental authority in the absence or default of the official authorities and in circumstances such as to call for the exercise of those elements of authority.

• Article 10 (Conduct of an insurrectional or other movement):

  • The conduct of an insurrectional movement which becomes the new Government of a State shall be considered an act of that State under international law.

  • The conduct of a movement, insurrectional or other, which succeeds in establishing a new State in part of the territory of a pre-existing State or in a territory under its administration shall be considered an act of the new State under international law.

  • This article is without prejudice to the attribution to a State of any conduct, however related to that of the movement concerned, which is to be considered an act of that State by virtue of articles 4 to 9.

• Article 11 (Conduct acknowledged and adopted by a State as its own):

  • Conduct which is not attributable to a State under the preceding articles shall nevertheless be considered an act of that State under international law if and to the extent that the State acknowledges and adopts the conduct in question as its own.

• Conduct attributable to the State can consist of actions or omissions:

• Cases in which the international responsibility of a State has been invoked on the basis of an omission are at least as numerous as those based on positive acts, and no difference in principle exists between the two.

• Moreover, it may be difficult to isolate an “omission” from the surrounding circumstances which are relevant to the determination of responsibility.

• For example, in the Corfu Channel case, ICJ held that it was a sufficient basis for Albanian responsibility that it knew, or must have known, of the presence of the mines in its territorial waters and did nothing to warn third States of their presence.

• In the United States Diplomatic and Consular Staff in Tehran case, the Court concluded that the responsibility of the Islamic Republic of Iran was entailed by the “inaction” of its authorities which “failed to take appropriate steps”, in circumstances where such steps were evidently called for.

• In other cases, it may be the combination of an action and an omission which is the basis for responsibility.

• In speaking of attribution to the State what is meant is the State as a subject of international law. Under many legal systems, the State organs consist of different legal persons (ministries or other legal entities), which are regarded as having distinct rights and obligations for which they alone can be sued and are responsible.

• For the purposes of the international law of State responsibility the position is different. The State is treated as a unity, consistent with its recognition as a single legal person in international law. In this as in other respects the attribution of conduct to the State is necessarily a normative operation.

• What is crucial is that a given event is sufficiently connected to conduct (whether an act or omission) which is attributable to the State under one or other of the rules set out in chapter II.

Circumstances Precluding Wrongfulness

• ARSIWA Article 20 (Consent):

  • Valid consent by a State to the commission of a given act by another State precludes the wrongfulness of that act in relation to the former State to the extent that the act remains within the limits of that consent.

• Article 21 (Self-defence):

  • The wrongfulness of an act of a State is precluded if the act constitutes a lawful measure of selfdefence taken in conformity with the Charter of the United Nations.

• Article 22 (Countermeasures in respect of an internationally wrongful act):

  • The wrongfulness of an act of a State not in conformity with an international obligation towards another State is precluded if and to the extent that the act constitutes a countermeasure taken against the latter State in accordance with chapter II of part three.

• Article 23 (Force majeure):

  • The wrongfulness of an act of a State not in conformity with an international obligation of that State is precluded if the act is due to force majeure, that is the occurrence of an irresistible force or of an unforeseen event, beyond the control of the State, making it materially impossible in the circumstances to perform the obligation.

  • Paragraph 1 does not apply if:

    • The situation of force majeure is due, either alone or in combination with other factors, to the conduct of the State invoking it; or

    • The State has assumed the risk of that situation occurring.

• Article 24 (Distress):

  • The wrongfulness of an act of a State not in conformity with an international obligation of that State is precluded if the author of the act in question has no other reasonable way, in a situation of distress, of saving the author’s life or the lives of other persons entrusted to the author’s care.

  • Paragraph 1 does not apply if:

    • The situation of distress is due, either alone or in combination with other factors, to the conduct of the State invoking it; or

    • The act in question is likely to create a comparable or greater peril.

• Article 25 (Necessity):

  • Necessity may not be invoked by a State as a ground for precluding the wrongfulness of an act not in conformity with an international obligation of that State unless the act:

    • is the only way for the State to safeguard an essential interest against a grave and imminent peril; and

    • does not seriously impair an essential interest of the State or States towards which the obligation exists, or of the international community as a whole.

  • In any case, necessity may not be invoked by a State as a ground for precluding wrongfulness if:

    • the international obligation in question excludes the possibility of invoking necessity; or

    • the State has contributed to the situation of necessity.

• Article 27 (Consequences of invoking a circumstance precluding wrongfulness):

  • The invocation of a circumstance precluding wrongfulness in accordance with this chapter is without prejudice to:

    • compliance with the obligation in question, if and to the extent that the circumstance precluding wrongfulness no longer exists;

    • the question of compensation for any material loss caused by the act in question.

Content of International Responsibility of States

• ARSIWA PART TWO CONTENT OF THE INTERNATIONAL RESPONSIBILITY OF A STATE CHAPTER I GENERAL PRINCIPLES

• Article 28 (Legal consequences of an internationally wrongful act):

  • The international responsibility of a State which is entailed by an internationally wrongful act in accordance with the provisions of part one involves legal consequences as set out in this part.

• Article 29 (Continued duty of performance):

  • The legal consequences of an internationally wrongful act under this part do not affect the continued duty of the responsible State to perform the obligation breached.

• Article 30 (Cessation and non-repetition):

  • The State responsible for the internationally wrongful act is under an obligation:

    • to cease that act, if it is continuing;

    • to offer appropriate assurances and guarantees of non-repetition, if circumstances so require.

• Article 31 (Reparation):

  • The responsible State is under an obligation to make full reparation for the injury caused by the internationally wrongful act.

  • Injury includes any damage, whether material or moral, caused by an internationally wrongful act of a State.

• Article 32 (Irrelevance of internal law):

  • The responsible State may not rely on the provisions of its internal law as justification for failure to comply with its obligations under this part.

• Article 33 (Scope of international obligations set out in this part):

  • The obligations of the responsible State set out in this part may be owed to another State, to several States, or to the international community as a whole, depending in particular on the character and content of the international obligation and on the circumstances of the breach.

  • This part is without prejudice to any right, arising from the international responsibility of a State, which may accrue directly to any person or entity other than a State.

• CHAPTER II REPARATION FOR INJURY

• Article 34 (Forms of reparation):

  • Full reparation for the injury caused by the internationally wrongful act shall take the form of restitution, compensation and satisfaction, either singly or in combination, in accordance with the provisions of this chapter.

• Article 35 (Restitution):

  • A State responsible for an internationally wrongful act is under an obligation to make restitution, that is, to re-establish the situation which existed before the wrongful act was committed, provided and to the extent that restitution:

    • is not materially impossible;

    • does not involve a burden out of all proportion to the benefit deriving from restitution instead of compensation.

• Article 36 (Compensation):

  • The State responsible for an internationally wrongful act is under an obligation to compensate for the damage caused thereby, insofar as such damage is not made good by restitution.

  • The compensation shall cover any financially assessable damage including loss of profits insofar as it is established.

• Article 37 (Satisfaction):

  • The State responsible for an internationally wrongful act is under an obligation to give satisfaction for the injury caused by that act insofar as it cannot be made good by restitution or compensation.

  • Satisfaction may consist in an acknowledgement of the breach, an expression of regret, a formal apology or another appropriate modality.

    • Satisfaction shall not be out of proportion to the injury and may not take a form humiliating to the responsible State.

• Article 38 (Interest):

  • Interest on any principal sum due under this chapter shall be payable when necessary in order to ensure full reparation. The interest rate and mode of calculation shall be set so as to achieve that result.

  • Interest runs from the date when the principal sum should have been paid until the date the obligation to pay is fulfilled.

• Article 39 (Contribution to the injury):

  • In the determination of reparation, account shall be taken of the contribution to the injury by wilful or negligent action or omission of the injured State or any person or entity in relation to whom reparation is sought.

Implementation of the International Responsibility

• ARSIWA (Part Three The Implementation Of The International Responsibility Of A State) PART THREE THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE INTERNATIONAL RESPONSIBILITY OF A STATE CHAPTER I INVOCATION OF THE RESPONSIBILITY OF A STATE

• Article 42 (Invocation of responsibility by an injured State):

  • A State is entitled as an injured State to invoke the responsibility of another State if the obligation breached is owed to:

    • that State individually; or

    • a group of States including that State, or the international community as a whole, and the breach of the obligation:

      • specially affects that State; or

      • is of such a character as radically to change the position of all the other States to which the obligation is owed with respect to the further performance of the obligation.

• Article 43 (Notice of claim by an injured State):

  • An injured State which invokes the responsibility of another State shall give notice of its claim to that State.

  • The injured State may specify in particular:

    • the conduct that the responsible State should take in order to cease the wrongful act, if it is continuing;

    • what form reparation should take in accordance with the provisions of part two.

• Article 44 (Admissibility of claims):

  • The responsibility of a State may not be invoked if:

    • the claim is not brought in accordance with any applicable rule relating to the nationality of claims;

    • the claim is one to which the rule of exhaustion of local remedies applies and any available and effective local remedy has not been exhausted.

• Article 45 (Loss of the right to invoke responsibility):

  • The responsibility of a State may not be invoked if:

    • the injured State has validly waived the claim;

    • the injured State is to be considered as having, by reason of its conduct, validly acquiesced in the lapse of the claim.

• Article 46 (Plurality of injured States):

  • Where several States are injured by the same internationally wrongful act, each injured State may separately invoke the responsibility of the State which has committed the internationally wrongful act.

• Article 47 (Plurality of responsible States):

  • Where several States are responsible for the same internationally wrongful act, the responsibility of each State may be invoked in relation to that act.

  • Paragraph 1:

    • does not permit any injured State to recover, by way of compensation, more than the damage it has suffered;

    • is without prejudice to any right of recourse against the other responsible States.

• Article 48 (Invocation of responsibility by a State other than an injured State):

  • Any State other than an injured State is entitled to invoke the responsibility of another State in accordance with paragraph 2 if:

    • the obligation breached is owed to a group of States including that State, and is established for the protection of a collective interest of the group; or

    • the obligation breached is owed to the international community as a whole.

  • Any State entitled to invoke responsibility under paragraph 1 may claim from the responsible State:

    • cessation of the internationally wrongful act, and assurances and guarantees of non-repetition in accordance with article 30; and

    • performance of the obligation of reparation in accordance with the preceding articles, in the interest of the injured State or of the beneficiaries of the obligation breached.

  • The requirements for the invocation of responsibility by an injured State under articles 43, 44 and 45 apply to an invocation of responsibility by a State entitled to do so under paragraph 1.

• CHAPTER II COUNTERMEASURES

• Article 49 (Object and limits of countermeasures):

  • An injured State may only take countermeasures against a State which is responsible for an internationally wrongful act in order to induce that State to comply with its obligations under part two.

  • Countermeasures are limited to the non-performance for the time being of international obligations of the State taking the measures towards the responsible State.

  • Countermeasures shall, as far as possible, be taken in such a way as to permit the resumption of performance of the obligations in question.

• Article 50 (Obligations not affected by countermeasures):

  • Countermeasures shall not affect:

    • the obligation to refrain from the threat or use of force as embodied in the Charter of the United Nations;

    • obligations for the protection of fundamental human rights;

    • obligations of a humanitarian character prohibiting reprisals;

    • other obligations under peremptory norms of general international law.

  • A State taking countermeasures is not relieved from fulfilling its obligations:

    • under any dispute settlement procedure applicable between it and the responsible State;

    • to respect the inviolability of diplomatic or consular agents, premises, archives and documents.

• Article 51 (Proportionality):

  • Countermeasures must be commensurate with the injury suffered, taking into account the gravity of the internationally wrongful act and the rights in question.

• Article 52 (Conditions relating to resort to countermeasures):

  • Before taking countermeasures, an injured State shall:

    • call upon the responsible State, in accordance with article 43, to fulfil its obligations under part two;

    • notify the responsible State of any decision to take countermeasures and offer to negotiate with that State.

  • Notwithstanding paragraph 1 (b), the injured State may take such urgent countermeasures as are necessary to preserve its rights.

  • Countermeasures may not be taken, and if already taken must be suspended without undue delay if:

    • the internationally wrongful act has ceased; and

    • the dispute is pending before a court or tribunal which has the authority to make decisions binding on the parties.

  • Paragraph 3 does not apply if the responsible State fails to implement the dispute settlement procedures in good faith.

• Article 53 (Termination of countermeasures):

  • Countermeasures shall be terminated as soon as the responsible State has complied with its obligations under part two in relation to the internationally wrongful act.

• Article 54 (Measures taken by States other than an injured State):

  • This chapter does not prejudice the right of any State, entitled under article 48, paragraph 1, to invoke the responsibility of another State, to take lawful measures against that State to ensure cessation of the breach and reparation in the interest of the injured State or of the beneficiaries of the obligation breached.

International Responsibility of Natural Persons

• Under international criminal responsibility, all states may arrest and punish offenders, provided they have been apprehended on the high seas or within the state's territory.

• Punishment occurs regardless of nationality or where criminal activities took place.

• The Nuremberg Tribunal (1945) established that individuals, not just states, can be held responsible.

• The International Criminal Court (ICC) prosecutes crimes under the Rome Statute.

• Other tribunals: ICTY (Yugoslavia), ICTR (Rwanda), Special Court for Sierra Leone, East Timor Special Panels for Serious Crimes, Bosnia War Crimes Chamber.

• Offences against the peace and security of mankind are crimes under international law, for which the responsible individuals shall be punishable.

• Any individual, regardless of rank or governmental status, is personally liable for war crimes or grave breaches committed.

• The principle of command (or superior) responsibility means any person in authority ordering a war crime or grave breach is as accountable as the subordinate committing it.

• The 1996 Draft Code provides for individual criminal responsibility for aggression, genocide, crimes against humanity, crimes against UN and associated personnel, and war crimes.

• Piracy is also viewed as an international crime.

• Genocide Definition:

  • Any of the following acts committed ‘with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group as such’:

    • (a) killing members of the group;

    • (b) causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;

    • (c) deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;

    • (d) imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;

    • (e) forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

• War Crimes Definition:

  • Essentially serious violations of the rules of customary and treaty law concerning international humanitarian law, including (non-exhaustively):

    • (a) wilful killing;

    • (b) torture or inhuman treatment, including biological experiments;

    • (c) wilfully causing great suffering or serious injury to body or health;

    • (d) extensive destruction and appropriation of property, not justified by military necessity and carried out unlawfully and wantonly;

    • (e) compelling a prisoner of war or a civilian to serve in the forces of a hostile power;

    • (f) wilfully depriving a prisoner of war or a civilian of the rights of fair and regular trial;

    • (g) unlawful deportation or transfer or unlawful confinement of a civilian;

    • (h) taking civilians as hostages.

• Crimes Against Humanity Definition (Nuremberg Charter):

  • ‘Murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation and other inhumane acts committed against any civilian population, before or during the war, or persecutions on political, racial or religious grounds in execution of or in connection with any crime within the jurisdiction of the Tribunal, whether or not in violation of the law of the country where perpetrated

• Crimes Against Peace:

  • Planning, preparation, initiation, or waging of a war of aggression or a war in violation of international treaties, agreements or assurances, or participation in a common plan or conspiracy for the accomplishment of any of the foregoing.

Strict Responsibility in International Law

• Objective responsibility ('risk' theory):

  • Maintains that the liability of the state is strict.

  • Once an unlawful act has taken place, which has caused injury and has been committed by an agent of the state, that state will be responsible in international law to the state suffering the damage irrespective of good or bad faith.

• Subjective responsibility ('fault' theory):

  • Emphasizes that an element of intentional (dolus) or negligent (culpa) conduct on the part of the person concerned is necessary before his state can be rendered liable for any injury caused.

• Cases and academic opinions are divided, but the majority tends towards the strict liability, objective theory of responsibility.

• NEER CLAIM (1926):

  • An American superintendent of a Mexican mine was shot.

  • The United States, on behalf of his widow and daughter, claimed damages because of the lackadaisical manner in which the Mexican authorities pursued their investigations.

  • The General Claims Commission dealing with the matter disallowed the claim, in applying the objective test.

• CAIRE CLAIM:

  • The French–Mexican Claims Commission had to consider the case of a French citizen shot by Mexican soldiers for failing to supply them with 5,000 Mexican dollars.

  • Verzijl, the presiding commissioner, held that Mexico was responsible for the injury caused.