Topic: Role Of International Institutions In Protection Of Norms Of

International Law

Subject: Public International Law

Written By:Junaid Ahmad

Department Of Law
Abdul Wali Khan University Mardan
Introduction:
• Definition Of International Law:

International law is defined as:

The rules and regulations, treaties and conventions binding between states.

• Definition Of International Institutions:

International Institutions are also called international organizations.

The international institutions are organizations have a great role in the protection of norms of
international law.

Role:

International institutions play an important role in the protection of norms of international law.

Following are the International Organizations:

• International Non Governmental Institutions

• Multinational Enterprises
• World Bank
• UNICEF
• UNISCO
• WHO
• ICJ
• WTO
• WFO
• NATO

Role of International Institutions in the protection of Norms Of International Law:

Intergovernmental Organizations:
In Intergovernmental Organization is an organization composed primarily of sovereign states, or of other
intergovernmental organizations IGO's are established by treaty or other agreement that acts as a
charter creating the group.

Examples include the United Nations, the World Bank, or the European Union.

International Non Governmental Institutions NGOs:

An international non governmental organization has the same mission as the non governmental
organization NGO’s but it is international in shape and has outposts and the world to deal with specific
issues in many countries some NGO’s are operational and some are advocacy based. It’s primary
purpose is to influence the policy making of different countries uh governments regarding certain issues
are promote the awareness of certain issue.

• Multinational Enterprises:

all corporations are multinational enterprise is an organization that own or controls production of
goods or services in one or more countries other than their home countries . It can also be referred as
an international corporation a transitional corporation or a stateless corporation.

• World Bank:

World Bank, in full World Bank Group, international organization affiliated with the United Nations (UN)
and designed to finance projects that enhance the economic development of member states.
Headquartered in Washington, D.C., the bank is the largest source of financial assistance to developing
countries. It also provides technical assistance and policy advice and supervises on behalf of
international creditors, the implementation of free-market reforms. Together with the International
Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Trade Organization, it plays a central role in overseeing economic
policy and reforming public institutions in developing countries and defining the global macroeconomic
agenda.

Role of World bank in the protection of Norms of International Law:

The World Bank promotes long-term economic development and poverty reduction by providing
technical and financial support to help countries implement reforms or projects, such as building
schools, providing water and electricity, fighting disease, and protecting the environment. World Bank
assistance is generally long-term and is funded by member country contributions and by issuing bonds.
World Bank staff are often specialists on specific issues, such as climate, or sectors, such as education.

• UNICEF (United Nations International Children’s Emergency Fund)

What is UNICEF:

UNICEF is a special program of the United Nations devoted to aiding national efforts to improve the
health, nutrition, education, and general welfare of children.

UNICEF stands for:

UNICEF is an acronym of the name United Nations International Children’s Emergency Fund, which was
established in 1946. In 1953 the organization changed its name to United Nations Children’s Fund to
reflect its broader mission.

Role of UNICEF in the Protection of Norms of International Law:

UNICEF was established in 1946 to provide relief to children in countries devastated by World War II.
After 1950 the fund directed its efforts toward general programs for the improvement of children’s
welfare, particularly in less-developed countries and in various emergency situations.

Who are some of UNICEF’s Celebrity’s Goodwill Ambassadors ?

UNICEF’s celebrity Goodwill Ambassadors initiative began in 1954 with American actor Danny Kaye, and
international ambassadors since then have included Audrey Hepburn, Amitabh Bachchan, Serena
Williams, and Shakira.

What have been some criticisms of UNICEF?

One criticism of UNICEF has been that the organization emphasizes the universal rights of children at the
expense of children’s immediate needs for survival. In addition, critics have disagreed with UNICEF’s
position on inter-country adoption, arguing that the organization’s insistence on the importance of
growing up in a culturally familiar environment, as well as its opposition to what it considers exploitative
adoption practices, has been detrimental to inter-country adoptions.

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

Stand For:

It stands for United Nations Educational, Scientific & Cultural Organization (UNESCO) was founded in
November 1945. The overall objective of this specialized United Nations agency is to “build peace in the
minds of men’s” through Education, Social & Natural Science, Culture & Communication.

Role of the UNESCO in the protection of norms of international law:

UNESCO played an important role in setting up CERN. The original of the CERN Convention and the
instruments of ratification of all Member States are deposited with UNESCO. In the past years UNESCO
also facilitated the participation of some CERN Non-Member States in the CERN programs.
Complementarities between the actions of the two Organizations exist in various fields, in particular in
those fields where CERN’s scientific and technological know-how can contribute to develop education
and culture worldwide.

Some examples are the CERN contribution to the reconstruction of scientific co-operation in South-East
Europe and, more recently, the ongoing collaboration with the UNESCO International Basic Science
Programme (IBSP) in training, capacity-building and strengthening science, particularly in Africa.

Main ongoing collaborations between CERN and UNESCO:

In the last decades CERN and UNESCO jointly participated in many visible events and cooperated in joint
projects. Only the most recent ones are mentioned below.

Since 2009, CERN and UNESCO develop and implement training projects in Africa, “CERN-UNESCO
schools on digital libraries”. The purpose of the schools is to deepen the participants’ understanding of
digital libraries, expose new trends in scientific publishing and emphasize a set of principles related to
open access, both for data and publications, crucial to promoting open science.

UNESCO's International Basic Science Programme (IBSP) funded the training courses over the years
2009-2010-2011, while the CERN and Society Foundation is currently financing the program.

• ICJ (International Court Of Justice)

Stands for:

Its stand for the International Court Of Justice (hereinafter, the ICJ or the Court) is the principal judicial
organ of the United Nations. It offers an important forum for the settlement of international economic
disputes among States.

Role in the Protection of Norms of International Law:

History:

The creation of the Court represented the culmination of a long process of developing methods for the
pacific settlement of international disputes, the origins of which can be traced back to classical times.
Article 33 of the United Nations Charter lists the following methods for the pacific settlement of
disputes between States, negotiation, enquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement,
and resort to regional agencies or arrangements, to which should also be added good offices. Some of
these methods involve the services of third parties.

For example, mediation places the parties to a dispute in a position in which they can themselves
resolve their dispute thanks to the intervention of a third party. Arbitration goes further, in the sense
that the dispute is submitted to the decision or award of an impartial third party, so that a binding
settlement can be achieved. The same is true of judicial settlement (the method applied by the
International Court of Justice), except that a court is subject to stricter rules than an arbitral tribunal,
particularly in procedural matters.

Historically, mediation and arbitration preceded judicial settlement. The former was known in ancient
India and the Islamic world, whilst numerous examples of the latter can be found in ancient Greece, in
China, among the Arabian tribes, in maritime customary law in medieval Europe, and in Papal practice.

The origins of Arbitration:

The modern history of international arbitration is generally recognized as dating from the so called Jay
Treaty of 1794 between the United States of America and Great Britain. This Treaty of Amity, Commerce
and navigation provided for the creation of three mixed commissions, composed of equal numbers of
American and British nationals, whose task it would be to settle a number of outstanding questions
between the two countries which it had not been possible to resolve by negotiation. While it is true that
these mixed commissions were not strictly speaking organs of third-party adjudication, they were
intended to function to some extent as tribunals. They reawakened interest in the process of arbitration.
Throughout the nineteenth century, the United States and the United Kingdom had recourse to them, as
did other States in Europe and the Americas.

The Alabama Claims arbitration in 1872 between the United Kingdom and the United States marked the
start of a second, even more decisive, phase. Under the Treaty of Washington of 1871, the United States
and the United Kingdom agreed to submit to arbitration claims by the former for alleged breaches of
neutrality by the latter during the American Civil War. The two countries set forth certain rules
governing the duties of neutral governments that were to be applied by the tribunal, which they agreed
should consist of five members, to be appointed by the Heads of State of the United States, the United
Kingdom, Brazil, Italy and Switzerland, the last three States not being parties to the case. The arbitral
tribunal’s award ordered the United Kingdom to pay compensation, which it duly did. The proceedings
served to demonstrate the effectiveness of arbitration in settling of a major dispute, and led during the
latter years of the nineteenth century to a range of developments, namely:

1. A sharp growth in the practice of inserting in treaties clauses providing for recourse to arbitration in
the event of a dispute between the parties.
2. The conclusion of general treaties of arbitration for the settlement of specified classes of inter-State
disputes.

3. Efforts to construct a general law of arbitration, so that countries wishing to have recourse to this
means of settling disputes would not be obliged to agree each time on the procedure to be
adopted, the composition of the tribunal, the rules to be followed and the factors to be taken into
consideration in making the award.
4. Proposals for the creation of a permanent international arbitral tribunal to avoid the need to set up
a special ad hoc tribunal to decide each individual dispute.

The Hague Peace Conference & The Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA):

The Hague Peace Conference of 1899, convened on the initiative of the Russian Czar Nicholas II, marked
the beginning of a third phase in the modern history of international arbitration. The chief object of the
conference, in which a remarkable innovation for the time, the smaller States of Europe, some Asian
states and Mexico also participated, was to discuss peace and disarmament. It culminated in the
adoption of a convention on the Pacific Settlement of International Disputes, which dealt not only with
arbitration but also with other methods of pacific settlement, such as good offices and mediation. With
respect to arbitration, the 1899 Convention provided for the creation of permanent machinery which
would enable arbitral tribunals to be set up as desired and would facilitate their work. This institution,
known as the Permanent Court of Arbitration, consisted in essence of a panel of jurists designated by
each country acceding to the Convention each country being entitled to designate up to four — from
among whom the members of each arbitral tribunal might be chosen. The Convention also created a
permanent Bureau, located in The Hague, with functions corresponding to those of a court registry or
secretariat, and laid down a set of rules of procedure to govern the conduct of arbitrations. Clearly, the
name “Permanent Court of Arbitration” is not a wholly accurate description of the machinery set up by
the Convention, which consisted only of a method or device for facilitating the creation of arbitral
tribunals as and when necessary. Nevertheless, the system thus established was permanent, and the
Convention “institutionalized” the law and practice of arbitration, placing it on a more definite and more
generally accepted footing. The Permanent Court of Arbitration was established in 1900 and began
operating in 1902.

A few years later, in 1907, a second Hague Peace Conference, to which the States of Central and South
America were also invited, revised the Convention and improved the rules governing arbitral
proceedings. Some participants would have preferred the Conference not to confine itself to improving
the machinery created in 1899.

The United States Secretary of State, Elihu Root, had instructed the United States delegation to work
towards the creation of a permanent tribunal composed of judges who were full-time judicial officers,
with no other occupation, who would devote their time wholly to the trial and decision of international
cases by judicial methods. “These judges”, wrote Secretary Root, “should be so selected from the
different countries that the different systems of law and procedure and the principal languages shall be
fairly represented”. The United States, the United Kingdom and Germany submitted a joint proposal for
a permanent court, but the Conference was unable to reach agreement upon it. It became apparent in
the course of the discussions that one of the major difficulties was finding an acceptable way of
choosing the judges, since none of the proposals tabled had garnered widespread support. The
Conference confined itself to recommending that States should adopt a draft convention for the
creation of a court of arbitral justice as soon as agreement was reached “respecting the selection of the
judges and the constitution of the court”. Although this court was never in fact to see the light of day,
the draft convention that was to have given birth to it enshrined certain fundamental ideas that some
years later were to serve as a source of inspiration for the drafting of the Statute of the Permanent
Court some years later were to serve as a source of inspiration for the drafting of the Statute of the
Permanent Court of International Justice (PCIJ).

Notwithstanding the fate of these proposals, the Permanent Court of Arbitration, which in 1913 took up
residence in the Peace Palace that had been built for it thanks to a gift from Andrew Carnegie, has made
a positive contribution to the development of international law. The landmark cases that have been
decided through recourse to it include the Carthage and Manouba cases (1913) concerning the seizure
of vessels, and the Timor Frontiers (1914) and Sovereignty over the Island of Palmas (1928) cases.
Although these cases demonstrate that arbitral tribunals set up using permanent machinery could
decide disputes between States on a basis of law and justice and command respect for their impartiality,
they also threw into bold relief the shortcomings of the Permanent Court of Arbitration. Tribunals of
differing composition could hardly be expected to develop a consistent approach to international law to
the same extent as a permanently constituted tribunal. Besides, there was the entirely voluntary
character of the machinery.

The fact that States were parties to the 1899 and 1907 Conventions did not oblige them to submit their
disputes to arbitration.

What is more, even if they were minded to do so, they were not duty-bound to have recourse to the
Permanent Court of Arbitration, nor to follow the rules of procedure laid down in the Conventions. The
Permanent Court of Arbitration has recently sought to diversify the services that it can offer, alongside
those contemplated by the Conventions. For example, the International Bureau of the Permanent Court
of Arbitration serves as a registry in important international arbitrations. Moreover, in 1993, the
Permanent Court of Arbitration adopted new “Optional Rules for Arbitrating Disputes between Two
Parties of Which Only One is a State” and, in 2001, “Optional Rules for Arbitration of Disputes Relating
to Natural Resources and/or the environment of International Justice (PCIJ).

Notwithstanding the fate of these proposals, the Permanent Court of Arbitration, which in 1913 took up
residence in the Peace Palace that had been built for it thanks to a gift from Andrew Carnegie, has made
a positive contribution to the development of international law. The landmark cases that have been
decided through recourse to it include the Carthage and Manouba cases (1913) concerning the seizure
of vessels, and the Timor Frontiers (1914) and Sovereignty over the Island of Palmas (1928) cases.
Although these cases demonstrate that arbitral tribunals set up using permanent machinery could
decide disputes between States on a basis of law and justice and command respect for their impartiality,
they also threw into bold relief the shortcomings of the Permanent Court of Arbitration. Tribunals of
differing composition could hardly be expected to develop a consistent approach to international law to
the same extent as a permanently constituted tribunal. Besides, there was the entirely voluntary
character of the machinery. The fact that States were parties to the 1899 and 1907 Conventions did not
oblige them to submit their disputes to arbitration.

What is more, even if they were minded to do so, they were not duty-bound to have recourse to the
Permanent Court of Arbitration, nor to follow the rules of procedure laid down in the Conventions. The
Permanent Court of Arbitration has recently sought to diversify the services that it can offer, alongside
those contemplated by the Conventions. For example, the International Bureau of the Permanent Court
of Arbitration serves as a registry in important international arbitrations. Moreover, in 1993, the
Permanent Court of Arbitration adopted new “Optional Rules for Arbitrating Disputes between Two
Parties of Which Only One is a State” and, in 2001, “Optional Rules for Arbitration of Disputes Relating
to Natural Resources and/or the Environment”.

How the Court Works ?

The Court may entertain two types of cases: legal disputes between States submitted to it by them
(contentious cases) and requests for advisory opinions on legal questions referred to it by United
Nations organs and specialized agencies (advisory proceedings).

Contentious cases only States (States Members of the United Nations and other States which have
become parties to the statute of the Court or which have accepted its jurisdiction under certain
conditions) may be parties to contentious cases.

The Court is competent to entertain a dispute only if the States concerned have accepted its jurisdiction
in one or more of the following ways:

By entering into a special agreement to submit the dispute to the Court;

By virtue of a jurisdictional clause, i.e., typically, when they are parties to a treaty containing a provision
whereby, in the event of a dispute of a given type or disagreement over the interpretation or application
of the treaty, one of them may refer the dispute to the Court, through the reciprocal effect of
declarations made by them under the Statute, whereby each has accepted the jurisdiction of the Court
as compulsory in the event of a dispute with another State having made a similar declaration. A number
of these declarations, which must be deposited with the United Nations Secretary-General, contain
reservations excluding certain categories of dispute.

• WTO (World Trade Organization)

Stands for:

It stand for World Trade Organization.

Role of WTO in the Protection of Norrms of International Law:

Trough this institution or organization different countries trade with each other.
 • WFO (World Food Organization)

Stands for :

It stands for World Food organization.

Role of WFO in the protection of norms of international law:

It provides food to the world poor countries.

• NATO (North Atlantic Organization)

Stands for:

It stands for North Atlantic treaty organization.

Role Of NATO:

It’s role is military alliance , and collective security of it’s members.

Benefits:

International organizations or international institutions can provide smaller States and opportunity for
stronger economic power.

This can also help build relationships with larger states in which some believe can prevent war between
one another. International organizations or international institutions also give states an opportunity to
be and this is why states join them.

International organizations or international institutions provide opportunity for secured worldwide

trade.

International organizations are international institutions can benefit the larger states because it shows
other states did they are willing to not always get dear we on issues and it all allows them to work with
others.

It is very important and at the same time very difficult to closely analyze all the economic and their
dynamic situations all over the world.

Conclusion:

Thus the aforementioned institutions play important role in the protection of norms of international
law.