0521817749 cambridge university press an introduction to international institutional law dec 2002

This complicated relationship fre- quently leads to some uncertainty in the law relating to international organizations: the legal argument of an organization will often be counter- poin

I N S T I T U T I O N A L L A W

International organizations are unusual creations: generated by and for their member-states, at the same time they often have to compete with those very states that created them This complicated relationship fre- quently leads to some uncertainty in the law relating to international organizations: the legal argument of an organization will often be counter- pointed by an equally valid argument from a member-state Professor Jan Klabbers is mindful of this complex relationship in his comprehensive analysis of international institutional law As well as describing the law as

it applies to legal institutions in chapters that cover dispute settlement, nancing and treaty-making, Klabbers looks forward to a re-appraisal of the status of international organizations This is a key textbook for advanced- level students of law and of international relations.

fi-jan kl abb ers is Professor of International Law at the University of Helsinki and also works as a consultant for international organizations.

His publications include The Concept of Treaty in International Law (1996).

Mary Shelley

A N I N T R O D U C T I O N T O

I N T E R N A T I O N A L

I N S T I T U T I O N A L L A W

J A N K L A B B E R S

Cambridge, New York, Melbourne, Madrid, Cape Town, Singapore, São Paulo Cambridge University Press

The Edinburgh Building, Cambridge  , United Kingdom

First published in print format

Information on this title: www.cambridge.org/9780521817745

This book is in copyright Subject to statutory exception and to the provision of relevant collective licensing agreements, no reproduction of any part may take place without the written permission of Cambridge University Press.

- ---

- ---

- ---

Cambridge University Press has no responsibility for the persistence or accuracy of

s for external or third-party internet websites referred to in this book, and does not guarantee that any content on such websites is, or will remain, accurate or appropriate.

Published in the United States of America by Cambridge University Press, New York

www.cambridge.org

hardback paperback paperback

eBook (NetLibrary) eBook (NetLibrary) hardback

Preface page xiii

Trying to define international organizations 7

2 The rise of international organizations 16

Classifying international organizations 23

Legal theory and international organizations 34Discarding the functional necessity theory 36

3 The legal position of international organizations 42

Indicators of ‘subjectivity’ 43

Legal personality under domestic law 49

vii

International legal personality 52

4 The foundations of powers of organizations 60

The doctrine of attributed powers 63

Reconciling the two doctrines 73

The theoretical basis of privileges and immunities 147

Inter-relationship: hierarchy or not? 185

Hierarchy in other organizations 192

Judicial review in the EC 243

Judicial review in other organizations 245

Hierarchy between acts 247

12 Dispute settlement 253

The ICJ’s advisory jurisdiction 255

Dispute settlement in other organizations 265

Indirect and secondary responsibility 311

Limited liability and legal personality 315

Piercing the corporate veil 317

Succession: some basic issues 326

Transgovernmentalism, civil society and formalism 339

It was in the autumn of 1992, or perhaps the spring of 1993, when I received

a phonecall from a former student of mine at the University of Amsterdam,now working for a solicitor’s firm in London After the usual expressions ofsurprise and politeness, he asked me what I knew about the responsibility

of international organizations under international law

The short answer was: nothing Teaching international law in dam, one was not supposed to inquire into the law of international orga-nizations beyond the merest basics (personality, the legal status of GeneralAssembly resolutions, collective security, that sort of thing); after all, wehad a separate department (or section, rather) to cover international insti-tutional law

Amster-The one thing I did remember from my student days was that thelaw of international organizations was taught to us as a seemingly end-less enumeration of facts (‘The Council of Europe was established inwhenever’), numbers (‘The European Parliament has umpteen members’),abbreviations (‘IRO stands for whatever’) and generally incomprehensiblephrases (‘Specialized agencies?’ Specialized in what? Agencies of and forwhom?)

Indeed, leafing through the textbooks I had to read as a student, it comes clear that general legal issues relating to international organizationshad no priority One of our textbooks addressed such issues, but in thepart that was not compulsory reading for our exams.1 The other generaltextbook was more in the nature of a comparative review of internal provi-sions some organizations may have had in common, without emphasizing

be-1 This book was D W Bowett, The Law of International Institutions (4thedn, London, 1982) Recently, a new edition appeared: Philippe Sands & Pierre Klein, Bowett’s Law of International

Institutions (London, 2001) Unfortunately, I received it too late to be able to do muchwithit.

xiii

general legal issues.2In short, I had to tell my former student that on points

of detail my knowledge displayed, er, a slight deficiency, but that I was surethe professor of international law at the London School of Economics atthe time could be of more assistance to him.3

Nonetheless, the episode got me thinking that there might be more to thelaw of international organizations than I had always been accustomed to,and in particular when I started teaching EC law some years later (which in-volved, at the time, yet another department at the University of Amsterdam),

I was forced to look a bit more closely into suchnotions as implied powers,ultra vires, legal personality, treaty-making by organizations, and judicialprotection So, when in 1996 I switched to the University of Helsinki andfound out that there was no separate department for the law of internationalorganizations, I readily volunteered to set up a course

The one problem I encountered was that few of the textbooks availablewould address the issues I found to be important, with the exception ofAmerasinghe’s recent textbook.4 Amerasinghe’s excellent book, however,came withtwo drawbacks: not only was its retail price prohibitive, I alsofound myself often admiringly disagreeing, in particular when it came to thegeneral outlook on international organizations.5While I could appreciateAmerasinghe’s scholarship, I still felt that his textbook did not explain things

in the way I would And so, I figured, there was only one thing I could do,and that was to write my own textbook

The famous (if controversial) philosopher Richard Rorty once wrote thateducation ought first to socialize people into the customs and ideas thatmake up the society they are a part of, after which at colleges and universitiesthe happy few should be allowed and stimulated to question and debate allthe things they have learned in the past: socialization first, followed byindividualization.6

2 This was the synoptic Dutch version of H G Schermers’s famous International Institutional Law, condensed to some 300 pages under the title Inleiding tot het internationale institutionele recht

(2nd edn, Alphen aan den Rijn, 1980).

3 I did not know half how fortunate that suggestion was: Professor (now Judge) Rosalyn Higgins was at the time preparing a report for the Institut de Droit International on the very topic of the responsibility of international organizations and their member-states.

4 C F Amerasinghe, Principles of the Institutional Law of International Organizations (Cambridge,

1996).

5 I have set this out more broadly in a review of Amerasinghe’s book (1997) 66 Nordic JIL, 553–55.

6 Richard Rorty, ‘Education as Socialization and as Individualization’, reproduced in his Philosophy

and Social Hope (London, 1999), 114–26.

It is with both goals simultaneously in mind that the present book iswritten All too often perhaps, textbooks and courses on the law of inter-national organizations remain limited to socialization: introducing new-comers to the particular rites of international institutional lawyers Whilethat is a valuable goal in its own right (and indeed this book contains muchsocialization as well), my ultimate aims are to get people to think aboutthe law of international organizations, and help the reader understand howinteresting it can be as long as one does not insist on approaching the topic

as a mere gathering of numbers, dates, abbreviations and ble phrases As my students have convinced me, it might actually be worththe effort of treating them not as mere receptacles for bits and pieces ofinformation – useful only to impress tuition-fee-paying parents and forboosting their chances of victory at Trivial Pursuit – but as intelligent adultswithcritical faculties

incomprehensi-Admittedly, after reading this book, the reader may still not know howmany seats the European Parliament has, or whether the IAEA is properly

to be considered a Specialized agency, or in what year the Council of Europewas established, or what the name of the WTO’s plenary body is Instead,the reader will hopefully have come to an understanding of why seeminglysimple legal questions (May organization X engage in activity Y? May state Abecome a member of organization B? May state F withhold its contributionfrom organization G?) usually seem to defy easy answers and become thestuff of politics

A number of people have, directly or indirectly, contributed to this book.Much of what follows has benefited from discussions with CatherineBr¨olmann, Veijo Heiskanen, Martti Koskenniemi, Anja Lindroos, Inger

¨

Osterdahl, Jarna Petman and Richard Wouters Brief discussions withMartin Bj¨orklund, Balakrishnan Rajagopal and Chanaka Wickremasinghehelped convince me that the book might be of some interest

Anja Lindroos and Jarna Petman have read and commented upon theentire manuscript, as have the anonymous referees for Cambridge Univer-sity Press Their comments have done much to improve the quality of thetext

I have also benefited enormously from being able to participate in aninterdisciplinary researchproject undertaken by the United Nations Uni-versity, on the legitimacy of international organizations (directed by VeijoHeiskanen and Jean-Marc Coicaud: thanks, guys), in which some of thebest minds of various disciplines participated Without our free-flowingdiscussions at meetings in New York and Geneva, this book would havelooked very different indeed

My thanks go also to the organizations, both intergovernmental andnon-governmental, that have over the years asked me to advise them onthe law of international organizations As is so often the case, the mainbenefit of acting as consultant accrues to the consultant: the insights gainedfrom drafting a constituent document or an agreement on privileges andimmunities, as well as from attending international meetings and beingable to observe what goes on and how the process works, are invaluable

As usual, however, the deepest professional gratitude is owed to my dents, present and past, and bothin Helsinki and Amsterdam as well as(during a few visiting stints) in Addis Ababa They have listened with pa-tience, swallowed what they felt could be deemed plausible, and rejectedsome of the nonsense that made its way through to the classroom

stu-xvi

At home, thanks to Marja-Leena for her love, guidance, patience andsupport Our son Johan feels he has an inherent power to monopolize hisfather’s time and attention, and that any decision to the contrary is simply

a decision ultra vires He has a point, of course: it is difficult to imaginethose concepts being put to better use

Permanent Court of International Justice

Case Concerning the Factory at Chorz´ow (claim for indemnity),

Certain Questions Relating to Settlers of German Origin in the

Territory Ceded by Germany to Poland, advisory opinion, [1923]

Competence of the ILO to Examine Proposals for the Organisation

and Development of Methods of Agricultural Production, advisory

Competence of the ILO to Regulate the Conditions of Labour of

Persons Employed in Agriculture, advisory opinion, [1922]

Competence of the International Labour Organization to Regulate,

Incidentally, the Personal Work of the Employer, advisory

Interpretation of Article 3, paragraph 2, of the Treaty of Lausanne,

Interpretation of the Greco-Turkish Agreement of December 1st,

Jurisdiction of the European Commission of the Danube between

Galatz and Braila, advisory opinion, [1926] Publ PCIJ, Series B,

Nationality Decrees Issued in Tunis and Morocco (French Zone),

Nomination of the Worker’s Delegate for the Netherlands, advisory

xix

Railway Traffic between Lithuania and Poland (Railway sector

Landwar´ow–Kaisiadorys), [1931] Publ PCIJ, Series A/B,

Request for Advisory Opinion Concerning the Status of Eastern

International Court of Justice

Appeal Relating to the Jurisdiction of the ICAO Council (India v.

Applicability of Article VI, Section 22, of the Convention on the

Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations (Mazilu),

Applicability of the Obligation to Arbitrate under Section 21 of the

United Nations Headquarters Agreement of 26 June 1947,

Application for Review of Judgement No 158 of the United Nations

Administrative Tribunal (Fasla), advisory opinion, [1973] ICJ

Application for Review of Judgement No 273 of the United Nations

Administrative Tribunal, advisory opinion, [1982] ICJ Reports

Application for Review of Judgement No 333 of the United Nations

Administrative Tribunal, advisory opinion, [1987] ICJ Reports

Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of

the Crime of Genocide (Bosnia and Herzegovina v Yugoslavia),

Border and Transborder Armed Actions (Nicaragua v Honduras),

Case Concerning Application of the Convention on the Prevention

and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Bosnia and

Herzegovina v Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegno)), further

request for the indication of provisional measures, [1993] ICJ

Case Concerning Questions of Interpretation and Application of the

1971 Montreal Convention arising from the Aerial Incident at

Lockerbie (Libya v UK), preliminary objections, decision of 27

Case Concerning Questions of Interpretation and Application of the

1971 Montreal Convention arising from the Aerial Incident at

Case concerning the Barcelona Traction, Light and Power Company,

Limited (Belgium v Spain), second phase, [1970] ICJ

Case Concerning the Frontier Dispute (Burkina Faso v Mali),

Case Concerning the Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Project

Case Concerning the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations

Case of Certain Norwegian Loans (France v Norway), [1957] ICJ

Certain Expenses of the United Nations (Article 17, paragraph 2,

of the Charter), advisory opinion, [1962] ICJ Reports 151 70, 78, 91,

101, 133–5, 136, 188–90, 237, 241, 242, 308

Competence of the General Assembly for the Admission of a State to

Conditions of Admission of a State to Membership in the United

Nations (Article 4 of the Charter), advisory opinion, [1948] ICJ

Constitution of the Maritime Safety Committee of the

Inter-Governmental Maritime Consultative Organization,

Difference Relating to Immunity from Legal Process of a Special

Rapporteur of the Commission of Human Rights (Cumaraswamy),

Effect of Awards of Compensation made by the United Nations

Administrative Tribunal, advisory opinion, [1954] ICJ

Fisheries Jurisdiction Case (UK v Iceland), jurisdiction, [1973] ICJ

Interpretation of Peace Treaties with Bulgaria, Hungary and

Interpretation of the Agreement of 25 March 1951 between the WHO

Judgments of the Administrative Tribunal of the International

Labour Organization upon Complaints made against the United

Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization,

Legal Consequences for States of the Continued Presence of South

Africa in Namibia (South West Africa) notwithstanding Security

Council Resolution 276 (1970), advisory opinion, [1971] ICJ

Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons, advisory opinion,

Legality of the Use by a State of Nuclear Weapons in Armed Conflict,

Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua

(Nicaragua v USA), merits, [1986] ICJ Reports 14 206, 208, 209

North Sea Continental Shelf Cases (Federal Republic of

Germany/Denmark; Federal Republic of

Reparation for Injuries Suffered in the Service of the United Nations,

advisory opinion, [1949] ICJ Reports 174 35, 36, 43, 44, 47–8, 52–3,

56, 58, 68–9, 70, 72, 74, 167, 284, 286

Reservations to the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, advisory opinion, [1951] ICJ Reports 15 84, 107 South West Africa Cases (Ethiopia v South Africa; Liberia v South

Africa), preliminary objections, [1962] ICJ Reports 319 45, 278

South West Africa Cases (Ethiopia v South Africa; Liberia v South

United States Diplomatic and Consular Staff in Tehran, [1980] ICJ

Voting Procedure on Questions Relating to Reports and Petitions

Concerning the Territory of South-West Africa, advisory opinion,

Court of Justice of the EC

8/55, F´ed´eration Charbonni`ere de Belgique v HighAuthority

7/56 & 3–7/57, Algera and others v Common Assembly [1957–8]

26/62, Van Gend & Loos v Nederlandse Administratie der

22/70, Commission v Council (ERTA) [1971] ECR 273 71–2, 285, 286

21–24/72, International Fruit Company v Produktschap voor

50/76, Amsterdam Bulb v Produktschap voor Siergewassen [1977]

104/81, Hauptzollamt Mainz v C A Kupferberg & Cie [1982]

85/86, Commission v Board of Governors EIB [1988] ECR 1281 164

C-70/88 European Parliament v Council (Chernobyl) [1990] ECR

C-6/90 & C-9/90, Andrea Francovichand others v Italy [1991]

C-159/90, Society for the Protection of Unborn Children Ireland

C-286/90, Anklagemyndigheden v Poulsen & Diva Navigation

C-327/91, France v Commission [1994] ECR I-3641 169, 244, 288, 308

C-405/92, Mondiet SA v Armement Islais SARL [1993] ECR

C-415/93, Union Royale Belge des Soci´et´es de Football Association

ASBL and others v Jean-Marc Bosman and others [1995] ECR

Opinion 2/94 (European Convention on Human Rights) [1996] ECR

Opinion 3/94 (Framework Agreement on Bananas) [1995] ECR

C-25/94, Commission v Council (FAO) [1996] ECR I-1469 235, 297

C-70/94, Fritz Werner Industrie-Ausr¨ustungen GmbH v Germany

C-83/94, Criminal Proceedings against Peter Leifer and others

C-311/94, Ijssel-Vliet Combinatie BV v Ministry of Economic

C-321/95 P, Stichting Greenpeace Council and others v.

C-149/96, Portugal v Council, decision of 23 November 1999, nyr 244

C-17/98, Emesa Sugar v Aruba, order of 4 February 2000, nyr 164

C-376/98, Germany v European Parliament and Council (Tobacco

Court of First Instance (EC)

Arbitration

Dalmia Cement Ltd v National Bank of Pakistan, 18 December

European Molecular Biology Laboratory v Federal Republic of

Trail Smelter (US/Canada), 16 April 1938 and 11 March1941, III

UNESCO (Constitution) case, 19 September 1949 (1969) 16 AD

Westland Helicopters Ltd and Arab Organization for

Industrialization, United Arab Emirates, Kingdom of Saudi

Arabia, State of Qatar, Arab Republic of Egypt and Arab British

Other international tribunals

Benelux Court of Justice

MBAK and another v Minister for Foreign Affairs, 20 December

European Commission of Human Rights

European Court of Human Rights

Waite and Kennedy v Germany, 18 February 1999, 118 ILR 121 152

General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade

United States Tax Legislation (DISC), Panel report L/4422, 1976, 28

ICTY

ILO Administrative Tribunal

Brache v World HealthOrganization, 3 November 1969, 43 ILR

ILO inquiry

Abolition of the Forced Labour Convention (Ghana v Portugal),

Inter-American Court of Human Rights

Domestic courts

Argentina

Bergaveche v United Nations Information Centre, C´amara

Nacional de Apelaciones del Trabajo de la Capital Federal,

Dutto v UN HighCommissioner for Refugees, National Labour

Austria

Evangelical Church (Ausburg and Helvitic Confessions [sic] in

Austria v Grezda, Supreme Court, 27 February 1962, 38

Karl M v Provincial Revenue Office for Vienna, Administrative

N K v Austria, Vienna Superior Provincial Court, 26 February

Belgium

M v Organisation des Nations Unies and Etat Belge (Ministre

des Affaires Etrang`eres), Brussels Tribunal Civil, 11 May 1966,

United Nations v B, Brussels Tribunal Civil, 27 March1952,

Canada

In the Matter of Legislative Jurisdiction over Hours of Labour,

Supreme Court (early 1920s; no precise date given), (1925–6)

Elias and Abdou Noujaim v Eastern TelegraphCo., Port Said

Nader v Marconi Radio TelegraphCo of Egypt, Alexandria Civil

France

Chambre Syndicale des Transports Aeriens, Conseil d’Etat, 22 July

Chemidlin v International Bureau of Weights and Measures,

Tribunal Civil de Versailles, 27 July 1945, (1943–5) 12

In re Weiss, Conseil d’Etat, 20 February 1953, 20 ILR 531 270

Klarsfeld v Office Franco-Allemand pour la Jeunesse, Paris Court

Procureur G´en´eral v Syndicate of co-owners of the Alfred

Dehodencq Property Company, Court of Cassation, 6 July 1954,

Germany

IAEA Representative Immunity case, Bavaria Supreme Court, 30

International Military Operations (German Participation), Federal

Maida v Administration for International Assistance, Court of

Minnini v Bari Institute of the International Centre for Advanced

Mediterranean Agronomic Studies, Court of Cassation, 4 April

Porru v Food and Agriculture Organization, Tribunal of First

Re Pisani Balestra di Mottola, Court of Cassation, 10 July 1969, 71

Iran – United States Claims Tribunal v A S., Local Court, The

Hague, 8 June 1983; District Court, The Hague, 9 July 1984;

UNRRA v Daan, Utrecht District Court, 23 February 1949,

Nigeria

African Reinsurance Corporation v Abate Fantaye, Supreme

Philippines

World HealthOrganization and Verstuyft v Aquino and others,

South Africa

Binga v The Administrator-General for South West Africa and

Switzerland

Arab Organization for Industrialization and others v Westland

Helicopters Ltd, Federal Supreme Court (First Civil Court),

Arab organization for Industrialization and others v Westland

Helicopters Ltd and others, Geneva Court of Justice,

Jenni and others v Conseil d’Etat of the Canton of Geneva, Swiss

United Kingdom

Arab Banking Corporation v International Tin Council, High

Arab Monetary Fund v Hashim and others, House of Lords,

J H Rayner (Mincing Lane) Ltd v Department of Trade and

Industry and others, HighCourt, Queen’s BenchDivision,

J H Rayner (Mincing Lane) Ltd v Department of Trade and

Industry and others; MacLaine Watson & Co Ltd v Department

of Trade and Industry; MacLaine Watson & Co Ltd v.

International Tin Council, House of Lords, 26 October 1989,

MacLaine Watson & Co Ltd v Department of Trade and Industry,

HighCourt, Chancery Division, 29 July 1987, 80 ILR 39 305, 313

Maclaine Watson & Co Ltd v Department of Trade and Industry;

J H Rayner (Mincing Lane) v Department of Trade and

Industry and others, and related appeals, Court of Appeal,

MacLaine Watson & Co Ltd v International Tin Council, High

MacLaine Watson & Co Ltd v International Tin Council, Court of

MacLaine Watson & Co Ltd v International Tin Council (no 2),

MacLaine Watson & Co Ltd v International Tin Council (no 2),

United States

Balfour, Guthrie & Co., Limited et al v United States et al., District

Court, Northern District, California, 5 May 1950, 17 ILR 323 156

Boimah v United Nations General Assembly, District Court,

Broadbent v Organization of American States, District Court, DC,

Diggs v Schultz, Court of Appeals, DC Circuit, 31 October 1971,

Huynh Thi Anh and another v Levi and others, Court of Appeals,

International Refugee Organization v Republic S S Corp et al.,

Jennings v Markley, Warden, District Court, Southern District,

Kadic v Karadzic, and Doe I and Doe II v Karadzic, Court of

Karadzole et al v Artukovic, Court of Appeals, 9thCircuit, 24 June

Klinghoffer and others v SNC Achille Lauro and others, Court of

Means v Means, Family Court, New York, 6 August 1969, 53 ILR

Mendaro v World Bank, Court of Appeals, DC, 27 September

Pan-American Union v American Security and Trust Company,

People v Von Otter, City Court, La Rochelle (New York), 30 July

Re International Bank for Reconstruction and Development and

International Monetary Fund v All America Cables & Radio, Inc and other cable companies, Federal Communications

United States v Melekhet al., District Court, Southern District,

New York, 28 November 1960; District Court, Northern

Weidner v International Telecommunications Satellite

Organization, Court of Appeals, DC, 21 September 1978,

Wencak v United States, New York Supreme Court, 18 January

In writing this book, two compilations of source materials have provedimmensely helpful Many of the more current constitutional documents

are brought together in Louis B Sohn (ed.), International Organisation and

Integration: Student Edition (Dordrecht, 1986); additional documents can

be found in the tremendously useful eight-volume collection compiled by

a number of Dutch scholars: P J G Kapteyn et al (eds.), International

Organization and Integration: Annotated Basic Documents and Descriptive Directory of International Organizations and Arrangements (2nd rev edn,

at www.coe.int, and Interpol also has ‘int’ in its name: www.interpol.int.Sometimes there is a surprise, in that an abbreviation in a language otherthan English is chosen Thus, the OAS can be found www.oea.org A usefulset of links to a number of organizations is maintained by the University ofBologna in Italy, at www.spfo.unibo.it/spolfo/INTORG.htm#oio

For the text of the EC and EU treaties I have used the consolidated versionpublished in (1998) 37 ILM 56, while more recent documents (the Treaty

of Nice comes to mind) have been culled from the EU’s official website,

at europa.eu.int/eur-lex Here one can also find decisions of the EC courtswhich have not been published in the European Court Reports just yet

xxxiii

Finally, the UN maintains a number of important sites for information.One of these, very useful but, alas, accessible only at a fee, is the treatycollection, at untreaty.un.org/English/treaty.asp When looking for Secu-rity Council and General Assembly materials, probably the quickest sourcenowadays is the UN’s Documentation Service, at www.un.org/documents/index.html.

My approach has been that constituent documents have not been peatedly cited in footnotes, in light of their widespread and relatively easyavailability They can be found with the help of the few guidelines set outabove Other treaties have generally been listed with a place where they can

re-be found

AD Annual Digest of Public International Law Cases

Australian YIL Australian Yearbook of International Law

Brooklyn JIL Brooklyn Journal of International Law

Chicago JIL Chicago Journal of International Law

Cornell ILJ Cornell International Law Journal

xxxv

ELR European Law Review

GaJICL Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

Development

Yugoslavia

Organization

Michigan JIL Michigan Journal of International Law

NATO NorthAtlantic Treaty Organization

Nordisk TIR Nordisk Tidsskrift for International Ret

Development

Development

Organization

Awards

UNRRA United Nations Relief and Rehabilitation

Administration

Refugees in the Near East

Vanderbilt JTL Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law

Za¨oRV Zeitschrift f¨ur ausl¨andisches ¨offentliches Recht und

V¨olkerrecht

of activities of at least one (and quite often more than one) internationalorganization International organizations have developed into a pervasivephenomenon, and according to most calculations even outnumber states.1

Wherever human activity is organized, there will be rules of law, as

ex-pressed in the ancient adage ubi societas, ibi jus Social organization without

rules is, quite literally, unthinkable Hence, the activities of internationalorganizations are also subject to law, and give rise to law Eachand everyinternational organization has a set of rules relating to its own functioning,however rudimentary such a set of rules may be Moreover, as internationalorganizations do not exist in a vacuum, their activities are also bound

to exercise some influence on other legal systems, and absorb the ence of suchsystems While it is by no means impossible for internationalorganizations to be influenced by, and exert influence on, the law of indi-vidual nation-states (the law of the European Community is an excellent

influ-1 Brownlie’s estimate of 170 organizations appears somewhat conservative See Ian Brownlie,

Principles of Public International Law (4thedn, Oxford, 1990), p 680 Others, suchas Peter Bekker,

mention a figure of some 350 See his The Legal Position of Intergovernmental Organizations: A

Functional Necessity Analysis of their Legal Status and Immunities (Dordrecht, 1994), p 4 Possibly

speaking from the top of his head, Jeremy Carver went so far as to suggest the figure of 7,000 See his intervention at the Taipei meeting of the International Law Association’s Committee

on Accountability of International Organisations, in ILA, Report of the Sixty-eighth Conference

(London, 1998), p 614.

1