Compulsory reading: Akande, Dapo.

“International Organizations” in Evans

(ed.), International Law, OUP, 3rd ed., 2014, pp. 252-283.
Aybay & Oral, pp. 301-360; 379-382.
 History
19th century è (specialization on communication, navigation, trade…)
1865
International 1883 Paris Convention for
1815 Central 1856 International 1874 the Protection of Industrial 1899
Commission for Commission for Telegraph Universal
(today Property Permanent
the Navigation the Protection of Telecommun Postal Court of
of the Rhine the Danube River Union (World Intellectual Property
ication) Arbitration*
Union Organization as of 1967)

* Permanent Court of Arbitration is an IGO created by Convention for the Pacific Settlement of International Disputes. It started
working in 1902. (revision 1907)

20th century è (the move to institutions)

‘Since the law of nations is based on the common consent of individual States, and not of
individual human beings, States solely and exclusively are subjects of international law.’
(Oppenheim, International Law: A treatise, 2nd ed., Vol. I, Peace, 1912, p. 19)

1907 Office International 1919 1922

1919 League International International 1945
d’Hygiène Publique
of Nations Labour Union of United Nations
(WHO as of 1946) Organization Railways

After WW II è Proliferation of IGOs and mushrooming of regional organizations

Collective security (UN), Council of Europe (human rights), humanitarian and development assistance (World
Bank), trade (GATT (now WTO)), civil aviation (ICAO), maritime law (IMO), health (WHO), criminal justice (ICC),
EU, Pan-American Union..
2
But no IGO for the protection of environment yet, which reflects the absence of political agreement (only UNEP,
which is a subsidiary organ of the UN)
 1st International Telegraph Conference, 1865 (Sources: ITU)

1st Convention of the International Telegraph Union, signed on 17 May 1865

3
 Types of Organizations
IGO IGO

Open Closed Universal Regional

UN Charter Art. 52
(to membership)
Examples of Regional Organizations:
OSCE, incl. US and Canada
Commonwealth of Independent States
Organization of American States (OAS)
Organization of Central American States (ODECA)
African Union
Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN)
the Arab League
Gulf Cooperation Council
NATO vs. 4Warsaw Pact …
 Types of Organizations based on their Functions (Aybay, pp. 315-323)

Cultural, Common
ethnic, Social historical/
Political Military Economic Judicial
religious cultural
relations heritage
Commonwea
UN IMF UNESCO lth of
NATO Organization Permanent Nations
of Islamic Court of Commonwealth
World Bank Conference Arbitration of Independent
African States
Union ILO
(former) African
Warsaw Pact WTO Union
CoE FAO
Community League of
OECD Arab States
SEATO of Portugese-
ICC
South-East Speaking
League of Asia Treaty Countries Communidad
Arab States NAFTA WHO
Organization Andina

“Functionalism = whereas states are organized on a territorial basis, IOs are built around functions. They are often
considered to have such rights, powers, privileges and immunities as are necessary to enable them to exercise those
functions, and nothing more.” (Klabbers, p. 85.)
Functions of IGOs:
- Providing a forum for identifying and deliberating upon matters of common interests,
- Acting as vehicle for taking action on international or transnational problems,
- Providing a forum for developing rules on matters of common interest,
- Providing mechanisms for promoting, monitoring and supervising State compliance with agreed rules and policies
as well as for gathering information regarding the conditions
5 in and practices of States,
- Providing a forum for the resolution of international disputes.
 Supranational Organizations (Aybay, p. 312)

1. Its organs are composed of persons who are not government representatives;
2. The organs can take decisions by majority vote;
3. They have the authority to adopt binding acts è supremacy of EU law
4. Some of its decisions have direct effect on individuals & companies è principle of direct effect
5. The constituent treaty of the IO and the measures adopted by its organs form a new legal order;
6. Compliance of member states with their obligations and the validity of acts adopted by the organs
of the organization are subject to judicial review by an independent court.

The only existing international organization which currently meets all of these criteria in a sufficient degree is the
European Union. … The agreements establishing the European Communities and the ‘secondary’ law created by
Community organs on the basis of these treaties form an independent legal order which can no longer be adequately
grouped with categories of general international law. European Community law claims absolute priority over any
conflicting national law of the member states. All other IOs are more or less based upon intergovernmental
cooperation where states have retained their control over the organization and have not submitted to the decisions of
independent organs. In fact the criteria for a ‘supranational organization’ have been taken from the example of the
European Community, which is often described as an entity sui generis in the contemporary pattern of the
international organization of states. (Akehurst’s, p. 96)

6
 Definition

1986 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties concluded btw States and IOs or btw
IOs, Art. 2(1)(i): “international organization” means an intergovernmental organization.

ATTENTION: IGO ≄ NGO

IO = IGO

2011 ILC Articles on the Responsibility of International Organizations Art. 2(a) (use of
terms): “International organization” means an organization established by a treaty or other
instrument governed by international law and possessing its own international legal
personality. International organizations may include as members, in addition to States, other
entities…

IOs:
1. composed predominantly of States and/or other IOs
e.g. UN World Tourism Organization has 156 member states, 2 observers (Holy See & Palestine), 6 associate members (ortak üye) (Hong
Kong, Puerto Rico…), 480 affiliate members (bağlı üye) (Bringing together over 500 companies, educational & research institutions,
destinations and NGOs, this interactive platform provides space for members to engage in dialogue, share info & take further action.)
2. established under international law.
3. usually created by treaty but they can also be created by other means, such as the
resolution of another IO or joint unilateral acts by States.
4. must possess autonomous organs having a will which is separate from that of the
members. è have a separate legal personality and be able to act on a majority basis.
7
(Akande, “International Organizations” in Evans, p. 253)
 International Legal Personality
Reminder:

- Having international rights & obligations

- Having the capacity to bring claims arising from the violation of PIL
- Having the capacity to conclude valid international agreements
- Enjoying privileges and immunities from national jurisdictions

ICJ: ‘[t]he subjects of law in any legal system are not necessarily identical in their nature
or in the extent of their rights, and their nature depends upon the needs of the
community’.

The IGOs have secondary, limited, and relative legal personality:

Limited as to substance determined by their constitutive treaty = functional legal personality
Relative in the sense that it exists only with regard to the member states of the IO and with
respect to non-member states acknowledging the organization. (Akehurst’s, p. 91-92)

“Such secondary subjects act ultra vires, meaning that their acts are legally void, if they operate
8
beyond the authority given to them by the constitutive treaty. …” (cf. “objective legal personality!!!)
 International Legal Personality of IGOs

Constitutive treaties of the IGOs may or may not involve provisions regarding the legal personality.
= express personality / implied personality
e.g. Art. 104 of the UN Charter,
= “the IO enjoys legal personality under the municipal laws of its MS; it can own property, enter into contracts etc.
There is no corresponding article in the Charter expressly giving the UN personality under international law.
Nevertheless, it is generally agreed that the UN does have at least some degree of international personality; e.g.,
Art. 43 of the Charter empowers the UN to make certain types of treaties with member states—a power which
could not exist if the UN had no international personality.” (Akehurst’s, p. 92)

1) 1986 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties between States and IOs or between IOs:
The right to enter into international agreements with non-member states on matters within the organization’s province.

2) 2011 ILC Articles on Responsibility of IOs (ARIO)

Art 3 Responsibility of an IO for its internationally wrongful acts: Every internationally wrongful act of an IO entails
the international responsibility of that organization. Responsibilities è HUK 216

3) IGOs often have standing before international tribunals, not only to raise claims for reparations, but also to protect
their interests more generally: The right to bring an international claim (with a view to obtaining reparation for any
damage caused by MS or by third states to the assets of the IO or to its officials acting on behalf of the organization.

4) IGOs also have organic jurisdiction over internal matters (such as employee discipline), free from State interference.
(Bederman & Keitner, p. 120)

5) Privileges and immunities, necessary for the efficient and independent functioning of the IO (CIL)
(see e.g. Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the UN): The right to immunity from jurisdiction of State
courts for acts and activities performed by the organization and the right to protection for all the organization’s agents
acting in the territory of a third State in their official capacity as international civil servants. ***Akande, pp. 271-276.
9
 Subjects of PIL
NSA
(limited special
type of legal
personality)

IO
(secondary/derived subjects of PIL)
è Functional legal personality STATE
è No need for recognition = objective
legal personality (primary/original
è Constituent instrument is the
primary law for the IOs. Resolutions, subjects of PIL)
decisions, directives etc. adopted by the
organs of the IO in accordance with the
constituent instrument are the
secondary law for the IOs.
è Sovereign equality
& no need for
recognition

10
Reparation for Injuries Suffered in the Service of the UN, Advisory Opinion, ICJ
Rep. 1949, p. 174:

*At the time of the

killing, the Jewish
settlers had not yet
declared the new State
of Israel, and Israel was
not yet a UN member.
(Bederman & Keitner,
pp. 117-119)

“The leading judicial authority on the personality of international organizations is the advisory opinion given by the ICJ in the Reparation for Injuries
case. The case arose out of the murder of Count Bernadotte, the UN mediator in Palestine, in 1948. The UN considered that Israel had been negligent in
failing to prevent or punish the murderers, and wished to make a claim for compensation under international law. There was uncertainty over the
preliminary problem of whether the UN had the legal capacity to make such a claim, and so the following question was put to the Court: In the event of an
agent of the United Nations in the performance of his duties suffering injury in circumstances involving the responsibility of a State, has the United
Nations, as an organization, the capacity to bring an international claim against the responsible de jure or de facto government with a view to
obtaining the reparation due in respect of the damage caused (a) to the United Nations, (b) to the victim?
The Court answered both parts of the question in the affirmative. The Court began by saying that the United Nations organization had international
personality in principle; its functions were so important that the organization could not carry them out unless it had some degree of international
personality. The Court then went on to advise that the organization’s personality included the capacity to bring the type of claim mentioned in the request to
the Court. It decided without much argument that the organization could claim for the loss suffered by the organization itself as a result of the breach of an
international obligation owed to it. The capacity to claim for the loss suffered by the organization’s agents raised a more difficult problem, but the Court
nevertheless advised that the organization had an implied power to make such a claim, because the organization could not work effectively without the help
of loyal and efficient agents, who would not serve it loyally and efficiently unless they were sure of its protection. (The Court dealt with the abstract question
of the capacity to claim, not with the facts of the Bernadotte case. Although the UN has capacity to make a claim, it cannot enforce that claim through the
ICJ, since Article 34 of the Statute of the ICJ provides that only states may 11be parties in contentious cases before the Court. In the end the Bernadotte case
was settled by negotiation; Israel agreed to pay compensation, while denying that it was under an obligation to do so.) (Akehurst’s, p. 92)
Teleological interpretation used by the Court to give the UN Charter real effectiveness.

Reparation for Injuries Suffered in the Service of the UN, Advisory Opinion, ICJ Rep. 1949, p. 174: “The
subjects of law in any legal system are not necessarily identical in their nature or in the extent of their rights, and
their nature depends upon the needs of the community. Throughout its history, the development of international
law has been influenced by the requirements of international life, and the progressive increase in the collective
activities of States has already given rise to instances of action upon the international plane by certain entities
which are not States. This development culminated in the establishment in June 1945 of an international
organization whose purposes and principles are specified in the Charter of the United Nations. But to achieve
these ends the attribution of international personality is indispensable. … (è end to the old perception of intl law
as purely a “law of nations”, in which States were the only actors and players.)
In the opinion of the Court, the Organization was intended to exercise and enjoy, and is in fact exercising and
enjoying, functions and rights which can only be explained on the basis of the possession of a large measure of
international personality and the capacity to operate upon an international plane. It is at present the supreme type
of international organization, and it could not carry out the intentions of its founders if it was devoid of international
personality. It must be acknowledged that its Members, by entrusting certain functions to it, with the attendant
duties and responsibilities, have clothed it with the competence required to enable those functions to be effectively
discharged.
Accordingly, the Court has come to the conclusion that the Organization is an international person. That is
not the same thing as saying that it is a State, which it certainly is not, or that its legal personality and rights and
duties are the same as those of a State. Still less is it the same thing as saying that it is "a super-State", whatever
that expression may mean. It does not even imply that all its rights and duties must be upon the international
plane, any more than all the rights and duties of a State must be upon that plane. What it does mean is that it is
a subject of international law and capable of possessing international rights and duties, and that it has
capacity to maintain its rights by bringing international claims. CONTINUES, NEXT SLIDE èèè

12
CONTINUING è
“The next question is whether the sum of the international rights of the Organization comprises the right to bring
the kind of international claim described in the Request for this Opinion. That is a claim against a State to obtain
reparation in respect of the damage caused by the injury of an agent of the Organization in the course of the
performance of his duties. Whereas a State possesses the totality of international rights and duties
recognized by international law, the rights and duties of an entity such as the Organization must depend
upon its purposes and functions as specified or implied in its constituent documents and developed in
practice. The functions of the Organization are of such a character that they could not be effectively discharged if
they involved the concurrent action, on the international plane, of fifty-eight or more Foreign Offices, and the Court
concludes that the Members have endowed the Organization with capacity to bring international claims when
necessitated by the discharge of its functions.
…
The question remains whether the Organization has "the capacity to bring an international claim against the
responsible de jure or de facto government with a view to obtaining the reparation due in respect of the damage
caused (a) to the United Nations, (b) to the victim or to persons entitled through him" when the defendant State is
not a member of the Organization.
In considering this aspect of Question 1 (a) and (b), it is necessary to keep in mind the reasons which have led the
Court to give an affirmative answer to it when the defendant State is a Member of the Organization. It has now
been established that the Organization has capacity to bring claims on the international [p185] plane, and that it
possesses a right of functional protection in respect of its agents. Here again the Court is authorized to assume
that the damage suffered involves the responsibility of a State, and it is not called upon to express an opinion
upon the various ways in which that responsibility might be engaged. Accordingly, the question is whether the
Organization has capacity to bring a claim against the defendant State to recover reparation in respect of that
damage or whether, on the contrary, the defendant State, not being a member, is justified in raising the objection
that the Organization lacks the capacity to bring an international claim. On this point, the Court's opinion is that
fifty States, representing the vast majority of the members of the international community, had the power,
in conformity with international law, to bring into being an entity possessing objective international
personality, and not merely personality recognized by them alone, together with capacity to bring
international claims.
Accordingly, the Court arrives at the conclusion that ail affirmative answer should be given to Question 1 (a) and
13
(b) whether or not the defendant State is a Member of the United Nations.” (Reparation for Injuries Suffered in
the Service of the UN, Advisory Opinion, ICJ Rep. 1949, p. 174)
Legality of the Use by a State of Nuclear Weapons in Armed Conflict, Advisory Opinion, ICJ rep.
1996, p. 66:
Para. 19: “In order to delineate the field of activity or the area of competence of an international organization, one must refer to
the relevant rules of the organization and, in the first place, to its constitution. From a forma1 standpoint, the constituent
instruments of international organizations are multilateral treaties, to which the well-established rules of treaty interpretation apply.
As the Court has said with respect to the Charter:

"On the previous occasions when the Court has had to interpret the Charter of the United Nations, it has followed the
principles and rules applicable in general to the interpretation of treaties, since it has recognized that the Charter is a multilateral
treaty, albeit a treaty having certain special characteristics." (Certain Expenses of the United Nations (Article 17, paragraph 2, of
the Charter), Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 1962, p. 157.)

But the constituent instruments of international organizations are also treaties of a particular type; their object is to create new
subjects of law endowed with a certain autonomy, to which the parties entrust the task of realizing common goals. Such treaties can
raise specific problems of interpretation owing, inter alia, to their character which is conventional and at the same time institutional;
the very nature of the organization created, the objectives which have been assigned to it by its founders, the imperatives associated
with the effective performance of its functions, as well as its own practice, are al1 elements which may deserve special attention when
the time comes to interpret these constituent treaties.

Para. 25: The Court need hardly point out that international organizations are subjects of international law which do not, unlike
States, possess a general competence. International organizations are governed by the "principle of speciality", that is to say, they
are invested by the States which create them with powers, the limits of which are a function of the common interests whose
promotion those States entrust to them. The Permanent Court of International Justice referred to this basic principle in the following
terms:

"As the European Commission is not a State, but an international institution with a special purpose, it only has the functions
bestowed upon it by the Definitive Statute with a view to the fulfilment of that purpose, but it has power to exercise these functions
to their full extent, in so far as the Statute does not impose restrictions upon it." (Jurisdiction of the European Commission of the
Danube, Advisory Opinion, P. C.I.J., Series B, No. 14, p. 64.)
14
CONTINUE è
CONTINUING è

The powers conferred on international organizations are normally the subject of an express statement in their constituent
instruments. Nevertheless, the necessities of international life may point to the need for organizations, in order to achieve their
objectives, to possess subsidiary powers which are not expressly provided for in the basic instruments which govern their activities.
It is generally accepted that international organizations can exercise such powers, known as "implied" powers. As far as the United
Nations is concerned, the Court has expressed itself in the following terms in this respect:

"Under international law, the Organization must be deemed to have those powers which, though not expressly
provided in the Charter, are conferred upon it by necessary implication as being essential to the performance of its duties. This
principle of law was applied by the Permanent Court of International Justice to the International Labour Organization in its
Advisory Opinion No. 13 of July 23rd, 1926 (Series B, No. 13, p. 18), and must be applied to the United Nations." (Reparation
for Injuries Suffered in the Service of the United Nations, Advisory Opinion, I. C. J. Reports 1949, pp. 182-183; cf. Effect of
Awards of Compensation Made by the United Nations Administrative Tribunal, Advisory Opinion, I. C. J. Reports 1954, p. 57.)

In the opinion of the Court, to ascribe to the WHO the competence to address the legality of the use of nuclear weapons - even in
view of their health and environmental effects - would be tantamount to disregarding the principle of speciality; for such
competence could not be deemed a necessary implication of the Constitution of the Organization in the light of the purposes
assigned to it by its member States.”

Akande, p. 278: “Despite the suggestion to the contrary in the Nuclear Weapons Advisory
Opinion (WHO Request), legitimate overlap can and does occur between the competences
of specialized agencies within the UN system. For example, both the WHO and the ILO
are competent to deal with health of workers. Likewise IMO, UNEP, and the International
Atomic Energy Agency cooperate regarding transportation of nuclear fuel by sea.”
15
Express powers Implied powers
• “Implied powers are not restricted to those
powers necessary for carrying out of express
powers or functions. On the contrary, ICJ
practice shows that powers can be implied
whenever they are 'essential' for the fulfilment of
the organization's objects and purposes.
Furthermore, 'essentiality' does not mean that
the power to be implied must be 'indispensably
required' (Lauterpacht, 1976, pp 430-432). The
Court has been rather liberal in its approach and
has been willing to imply a power where it
would 'promote the efficiency of the
Organization? The main limitation is that the
power must be directed at achieving the aims
and purposes of the Organization. As the ICJ
stated that in Certain Expenses Advisory Opinion:
• When the Organization takes action which warrants
the assertion that it was appropriate for the
fulfilment of one of the stated purposes of the UN,
the presumption is that such action is not ultra vires
the Organization.” (Akande, p. 265)
16
Ultra vires (beyond the powers)
• Certain Expenses of the United Nations, Advisory
Opinion, ICJ Rep. 1962, p. 151 at p. 222: “In the
case of acts of international organizations ...
there is nothing comparable to the remedies
existing in domestic law in connection with
administrative acts. The consequence of this is
that there is no possibility of applying the
concept of voidability to the acts of the UN. If
an act of an organ of the UN had to be
considered as an invalid act, such invalidity
could constitute only the absolute nullity of the
act. In other words, there are only two
alternatives for the acts of the Organization:
either the act is fully valid, or it is an absolute
nullity, because absolute nullity is the only form
in which invalidity of an act of the
Organization can occur.”
• “Thus, where a decision is illegal, a State is free
to depart from it. However there is always the
risk that the decision might later on be found to
be lawful and the non-compliant State in breach
of its obligations. It must be noted that given the
limited opportunities for judicial review, the
principle that ultra vires acts are void ab initio
might undermine the certainty of decisions of
international organizations and permit States to
seek to evade their treaty obligations. However,
this danger is reduced by the presumption,
already referred to, that acts of international
organizations directed at the fulfilment of the
purposes of the organization are valid, meaning
that the burden of proof is on the State arguing
otherwise. Additionally, mere procedural defects
do not render decisions invalid. The
combination of these principles is sufficient to
ensure stability.” (Akande, p. 268-269.)
 Structure

Executive Administrative
Plenary organ Judicial organ
organ organ
• Assembly • League • PCIJ • Secretariat
• UNGA Council • ICJ • Secretariat
• UNSC

17
UNITED NATIONS
 History
™ The name "United Nations", coined by USA President
Franklin D. Roosevelt was first used in the Declaration by
United Nations of 1 January 1942. Representatives of 26
countries fighting the Rome-Berlin-Tokyo Axis, decide to
affirm their support by signing the Declaration.
™ Original UN Declaration Signatories: USA, UK,
USSR, China, Australia, Belgium, Canada, Costa Rica,
Cuba, Czechoslovakia, Dominican Republic, El Salvador,
Greece, Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, India, Luxembourg,
Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Norway, Panama,
Poland, Union of South Africa, Yugoslavia
™ Subsequent Signatories (in order of signature):
Mexico, Philippines, Ethiopia, Iraq, Brazil, Bolivia, Iran,
Colombia, Liberia, France, Ecuador, Peru, Chile, Paraguay,
Venezuela, Uruguay, Turkey, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Syria,
Lebanon.

March 1945: San Francisco Conference (46 nations were

originally invited to the San Francisco Conference: nations
which had declared war on Germany & Japan and had
subscribed to the United Nations Declaration.)
19
24 October 1945: UN Charter enters into force.
 Overview
Purposes (Art. 1)
Due to the powers vested in its Charter and its unique international character, the UN can take action on the issues
confronting humanity in the 21st century, such as peace and security, climate change, sustainable development,
human rights, disarmament, terrorism, humanitarian and health emergencies, gender equality, governance, food
production, and more.

Principles (Art. 2)

Membership Art. 3-6!!!!! Today UN has 193 MS.

Principal organs (Art. 7)

20
 Principal organs (Art. 7(1))
1) The General Assembly
- The main deliberative (not legislative),
policymaking and representative organ of the UN.
- It can only make binding decisions on internal
administrative matters. (e.g. Art 17)
Art. 9: All 193 Member States of the UN are represented in
the General Assembly, making it the only UN body with
universal representation.
Unlike the UNSC, UNGA is not in permanent session but
meets annually in regular session which usually takes place
between September and December, in the the General
Assembly Hall in New York
Art. 10, 11, 13, 14: recommendations, except Art. 12+Art.2(7)
Art. 18: Decisions on important questions è 2/3 majority
Decisions on other questions are è simple majority
Art. 20 è UNGA has six main committees, where
substantive discussion and decision-taking occurs:
1st Committee: Disarmament & International Security
2nd Committee: Economic and Financial C.
3rd Committee: Social, Humanitarian and Cultural C.
4th Committee: Special Political & Decolonization C.
5th Committee: Administrative and Budgetary C.
6th Committee: Legal Committee.
21
2) Security Council (Art. 24 & 25)
Art. 23: It has 15 Members:
A) 5 permanent members:
China, France, Russian Federation, the UK, and
the USA.
B) 10 non-permanent members elected for
two-year terms by the UNGA:
Albania (2023), Brazil (2023), Ecuador (2024),
Gabon (2023), Ghana (2023), Japan (2024),
Malta (2024), Mozambique (2024), Switzerland
(2024), United Arab Emirates (2023)
Each Member has one vote (*** Arts. 31, 32, 35, 93)!!!
1) Amendments to the UN Charter: Art. 108.
2) The UNSC takes the lead in determining the existence of a
threat to the peace or act of aggression.
It calls upon the parties to a dispute to settle it by peaceful means
and recommends methods of adjustment or terms of settlement.
In some cases, the UNSC can resort to imposing sanctions or even
authorize the use of force to maintain or restore international peace
and security è Chapter VII!
3) Akande, p. 279: “Although each member has one vote,
decisions on non-procedural matters must be adopted by the
affirmative vote of nine members and include the concurring vote
of the permanent members who therefore possess a veto with
respect 22
to substantive decisions. Abstention, however, are not
deemed to be vetos.” è
23
Legal Consequences for States of the Continued Presence of South Africa in Namibia (South West
Africa) notwithstanding Security Council Resolution 276 (1970), Advisory Opinion, ICJ Rep. 1971,
p. 16, paras. 20-22:

“21. The first objection is that in the voting on the resolution two permanent members of the Security Council
abstained. It is contended that the resolution was consequently not adopted by an affirmative vote of nine members,
including the concurring votes of the permanent members, as required by Article 27(3) of the UN Charter.

22. However, the proceedings of the Security Council extending over a long period supply abundant evidence that
presidential rulings and the positions taken by members of the Council, in particular its permanent members, have
consistently and uniformly interpreted the practice of voluntary abstention by a permanent member as not
constituting a bar to the adoption of resolutions. By abstaining, a member does not signify its objection to the
approval of what is being proposed; in order to prevent the adoption of a resolution requiring unanimity of the
permanent members, a permanent member has only to cast a negative vote. This procedure followed by the
Security Council, which has continued unchanged after the amendment in 1965 of Art. 27 of the Charter, has
been generally accepted by Members of the UN and evidences a general practice of that Organization.”

è Abstentions by a permanent member of the SC is a concurring vote within the meaning of Art. 27(3)
and not a veto.

24
3) Economic and Social Council (Chapter X of the UN Charter)

The principal body to advance the three dimensions of sustainable development: economic, social and
environmental

- It serves as the central mechanism for activities of the UN system and its specialized agencies in the
economic, social and environmental fields, supervising subsidiary and expert bodies.
- It is the UN’s central platform for reflection, debate & innovative thinking on sustainable development.
- Functions & Powers: Art. 62

It has 54 Members, elected by the General Assembly for overlapping

three-year terms. (Seats on the ECOSOC are allotted based on
geographical representation with fourteen allocated to African
States, eleven to Asian States, six to Eastern European States, ten to
Latin American and Caribbean States, and thirteen to Western
European and other States.)

Some of the Subsidiary Bodies of ECOSOC:

ECOSOC Functional Committees:
Commission on Population and Development
Commission for Social Development
Commission on the Status of Women
Commission on Narcotic Drugs
Commission on Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice
Commission on Science and Technology for Development
United Nations Forum on Forests
ECOSOC Standing Committees:
Committee for Programme and Coordination
Committee on Non-Governmental Organizations
Committee on Negotiations with Intergovernmental Agencies
25
4) Trusteeship Council (Chapter XIII)

The Trusteeship Council was established to provide international supervision for eleven Trust Territories
that had been placed under the administration of seven Member States, and ensure that adequate steps
were taken to prepare the Territories for self-government and independence.

This concerned the administration of territories that had been League of Nations mandates (i.e.,
territories taken from Germany and Turkey following the First World War) and territories 'detached
from enemy States as a result of the Second World War' (Article 77) with the objective of promoting the
advancement of the inhabitants and their progressive development towards self-government and
independence.

By 1994, when Palau, the last of the Trust territories, achieved independence, the Trusteeship Council
suspended operation on 1 November 1994.

5) Secretariat (Chapter XV)

The Secretariat comprises the Secretary-General and tens of thousands of international UN staff
members who carry out the day-to-day work of the UN as mandated by the General Assembly and the
Organization's other principal organs.

The Secretary-General is chief administrative officer of the Organization, appointed by the General
Assembly on the recommendation of the Security Council for a five-year, renewable term. UN staff
members are recruited internationally and locally, and work in duty stations and on peacekeeping
missions all around the world.
26
Art. 99, 100
6) International Court of Justice (Chapter XIV (Art. 92-96) + Statue of the ICJ)

The ICJ is the principal judicial organ of the UN. (Statute Art. 1) Its seat is at the Peace Palace in the Hague (NL). It is
the only one of the six principal organs of the UN not located in New York/USA. (Statute Art. 22)

The Court is composed of 15 judges, no two of whom may be nationals of the same state, who are elected for terms of
office of nine years by the UNGA and the UNSC. (ICJ Statute Art. 1, 2, 3, 4, 9, 19!!!)

The International Court of Justice acts as a world court. The Court has a dual jurisdiction:

1) It decides, in accordance with international law, disputes of a legal nature that are submitted to it by States
(jurisdiction in contentious cases); Art. 94, ICJ Statute Arts. 59,60, 36
2) It gives advisory opinions on legal questions at the request of the organs of the United Nations or specialized
agencies authorized to make such a request (advisory jurisdiction); Art. 96, ICJ Statute Arts. 65-68
27
+ provisional measures (or interim protection measures) (Art. 41) è LaGrand case, 1999.
 BASIS of THE ICJ’s JURISDICTION

a) Matters specifically provided for in the UN Charter (Art. 36(1))

b) Transferred jurisdiction (Art. 36(5), 37) (from the PCIJ)

c) Consent ad hoc: jurisdiction by special agreement (compromis)

d) Advance consent: treaties and conventions (jurisdictional clause)

e) Advance consent: declaration under optional clause (Art. 36(2))

f) Consent post hoc (after the event): forum prorogatum: If a State has not recognized the jurisdiction of the
Court at the time when an application instituting proceedings is filed against it, that State has the possibility
of accepting such jurisdiction subsequently to enable the ICJ to entertain the case.

e) The Court itself decides any questions as to its jurisdiction (Art 36(6)): in the event of a dispute as to
whether the Court has jurisdiction, the matter shall be settled by the decision of the Court.

f) Interpretation of a judgment (Art 60): in the event of dispute as to the meaning or scope of a judgment, the
Court shall construe it upon the request of any party. The request for interpretation may be made either by
means of a special agreement between the parties or of an application by one or more of the parties.

g) Revision of a judgment (Art. 61(1)): An application for revision of a judgment may be made only when it
is based upon the discovery of some fact of such a nature as to be a decisive factor, which fact was, when the
judgment was given, unknown to the Court and also to the party claiming revision, always provided that such
party's ignorance was not due to negligence. 28
Organs and Agencies of the United Nations Authorized to Request Advisory Opinions
(Art. 96 of the UN Charter)

UN Organs
General Assembly
Security Council
Economic and Social Council
Trusteeship Council
Interim Committee of the General Assembly
Specialized Agencies
International Labour Organization (ILO)
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO)
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO)
World Health Organization (WHO)
International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD)
International Finance Corporation (IFC)
International Development Association (IDA)
International Monetary Fund (IMF)
International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO)
International Telecommunication Union (ITU)
International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD)
World Meteorological Organization (WMO)
International Maritime Organization (IMO)
World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO)
United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO)
Related Organization(s)
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) 29
C) Provisional Measures: ICJ Statute Article 41

Alleged Violations of the 1955 Treaty of Amity, Economic Relations, and Consular Rights (Islamic
Republic of Iran v. USA), Request for the Indication of Provisional Measures, Order, 3 October 2018:

“77. The Court, pursuant to Article 41 of its Statute, has the power to indicate provisional measures when there is a
risk that irreparable prejudice could be caused to rights which are the subject of judicial proceedings (see, for example,
Jadhav (Indiav. Pakistan), Provisional Measures, Order of 18 May 2017, I.C.J. Reports 2017, p. 243, para. 49), or
when the alleged disregard of such rights may entail irreparable consequences.

78. However, the power of the Court to indicate provisional measures will be exercised only if there is urgency, in the
sense that there is a real and imminent risk that irreparable prejudice will be caused before the Court gives its final
decision (ibid., para. 50). The condition of urgency is met when the acts susceptible of causing irreparable prejudice
can “occur at any moment” before the Court makes a final decision on the case (Immunities and Criminal
Proceedings (Equatorial Guinea v. France), Provisional Measures, Order of 7 December 2016, I.C.J. Reports 2016
(II), p. 1169, para. 90). The Court must therefore consider whether such a risk exists at this stage of the proceedings.

100. The Court reaffirms that its “orders on provisional measures under Article 41 [of the Statute] have binding
effect” (LaGrand (Germany v. USA), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2001, p. 506, para. 109) and thus create
international legal obligations for any party to whom the provisional measures are addressed.”

30
 Subsidiary organs (Art. 7(2))
Subsidiary organs established by the General Assembly include:
Boards, Commissions, Committees, Councils and Panels, and Working Groups and others.
the International Law Commission
the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP)
the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR)
the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL)
UNICEF (not an IGO!, has ‘partial legal personality’)
the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP)
the UN Administrative Tribunal (UNAT)
*The Peacebuilding Commission

Subsidiary organs set up by the Security Council include (Art. 29):

peacekeeping missions,
the International Criminal Tribunals for the Former Yugoslavia,
the International Criminal Tribunals for Rwanda,
the United Nations Compensation Commission (UNCC)
Counter Terrorism Committee,
Sanctions Committee
31
*The Peacebuilding Commission
 Specialized Agencies

Bederman & Keitner, p. 115: “Today the UN stands in the center of a vast network of international institutions. Known
generically as “specialized agencies,” these are continuations of the functional bureaus and commissions created in the
1800s. For virtually every realm of human interaction -economic, social, and scientific- there is a specialized agency
established to manage cooperation, prepare new treaties, and draft needed regulations. … All of these agencies represent a
veritable “alphabet soup” of international cooperation across the broadest imaginable spectrum of global problems..

Article 57 and 63 of the UN Charter

International Labour Organization (ILO)

International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO)
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO)
World Health Organization (WHO)
Universal Postal Union (UPU)
International Telecommunication Union (ITU)
International Maritime Organization (IMO)
World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO)
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
World Meteorological Organization (WMO) and others.
32