Chapter 3: International Organizations and Other International Actors

The proliferation of international organizations has happened only quite recently, with the first
having been created around 1815 after the end of Napoleon’s conquests in Europe. Most of
these organizations were created to address specific problems in interstate cooperation that have
come with modern technological developments and improved transportation. For example, the
coordination of international mail is accomplished through the Universal Postal Union,
established in 1865. Commercial airplanes can pass over international borders and land at
airports in other countries by virtue of the coordinating efforts of the International Civil Aviation
Organization. Hundreds of such organizations exist, including the World Trade Organization,
the International Monetary Fund, World Bank, the World Health Organization, and the
International Telecommunication Union.
3.1 International Organizations
 Definition
The term “international organization” is meant to designate a distinct type of organization with
particular characteristics. This is important because international organizations have attained a
special status in international law that other organizations like NGOs do not have. So then, an
international organization is an organization, typically established by treaty, whose members are
States or other international organizations. The term international organization is usually used
to describe an organization set up by agreement between two or more states. It is different from
the term “non-governmental organization” (NGO), which is set up by individuals or groups of
individuals (such as Amnesty international or Greenpeace), although some non-governmental
organizations are entrusted with certain functions by states; the outstanding example is the
international committee of the Red Cross, which plays an important role in supervising the
application of the Geneva Conventions to the laws of war.
Following are the essentials of international organization, the institution:
I. Its origin is based on multilateral international agreement.
II. The institution has a personality of its own, which is distinct from that of its
individual members
III. It has permanent organs which carry out common aims.
As compared to the will of all members, its organs exhibit autonomy of will.

1
There are now some 500 international organizations of very different types. This proliferation
reflects the need for increasing cooperation between states to solve problems of a transnational
nature.
When the UN or the African Union or the World Trade Organization meets to make a decision, it
is not individuals who sit and vote their interests there but rather representatives of States who
speak in favor of State interests. The treaty that establishes an international organization usually
acts as a constitution for that organization. This is the case with the UN; its Charter sets out the
fundamental structure and rules of the organization. If someone has a question about what UN
organs can and cannot do, the Charter is the place to go for an answer.
 Characteristics
International organizations have taken on many of the characteristics of States in the
international system, as explained previously. International Organization is an international
person. Like States, international organizations can enter into treaties. The UN had to enter a
treaty with the U.S. to establish the UN headquarters in New York. Like States, international
organizations can sue and be sued in national and international tribunals. Like States,
international organizations enjoy certain privileges and immunities, as for example those enjoyed
by UN diplomats traveling abroad on UN business.
 The special nature of personality of IO-derivative, limited
This is not to say that international organizations have the same status as States in the
international system. State have general personality. but the principle of specialty govern the
personality of international organization. State have inherent personality, but the personality of
state is derivative. International organizations are the creation of States, and their powers are
limited to the powers that the constituting States have given them. States have privileges and
immunities that are general whereas international organizations have only such privileges and
immunities as are necessary to carry out the organization’s functions. An international
organization cannot invoke “sovereign immunity” – immunity from liability in foreign courts in
cases involving official acts – because an international organization is not a sovereign. Also,
only States can appear before the International Court of Justice in contentious cases.
International organizations have to resort to other international tribunals to resolve their disputes.

2
  History of personality of IO
In the early years of the United Nations, the status of international organizations in international
law still was not clear. This is the problem of “legal personality” – can international
organizations be the holders of rights and duties at the international level at all? Previously, only
States had legal personality in the international system. A significant number of international
organizations already had come into existence by the time the UN was created. In the UN’s
activities, however, it faced the question of legal personality early on. An answer was given by
the International Court of Justice in 1949.
Reparation for Injuries Suffered in the Service of the United Nations, ICJ Advisory
Opinion, 1949
[After WWII Jewish settlers in Palestine revolted from the mandate government of Britain and
began a war to displace the local Arab population. The British started a withdrawal, and the UN
dispatched a Swedish diplomat, Count Folke Bernadotte, to mediate between Jewish and Arab
groups and obtain a cease-fire. Neither Jews nor Arabs wanted a negotiated settlement. Sadly,
the UN diplomat was assassinated, most likely by Jewish extremists. The UN wanted to make a
claim for damages on behalf of its employee, but, under traditional international law principles,
such a claim could be brought only by a State with legal personality. The UN General Assembly
forwarded the question to the ICJ for an advisory opinion.]
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.
3.2: the United Nations
The prototypical international organization is the United Nations. The UN is the chief among
many international organizations that attempt to coordinate the actions of States in particular
subject areas and particular regions. The UN is the biggest global international organization in

3
terms of membership. Moreover, it is an international organization that plays a crucial role in the
maintenance of international peace and security and the realization of human rights.
We now turn to the internal workings of international organizations, with a focus on the United
Nations. As explained, the UN Charter acts as a constitution for the UN, setting out its separate
organs, defining the roles of these organs, and clarifying the relationship between the UN and its
Member States.
 Purpose of UN
The entire UN Charter must be understood “in light of its object and purpose.” In many
circumstances Member States are called on to act in a way consistent with the purposes of the
UN. Well then, what are the purposes of the UN? Not surprisingly these appear at the beginning
of the Charter in Article 1.
1. The first purpose is “to maintain international peace and security.” This is a continuation
of the mission of the League of Nations and is expressed in the first sentence of the
Charter Preamble “We the peoples of the United Nations determined to save succeeding
generations from the scourge of war…”
2. The second purpose is “to develop friendly relations among nations…” This may sound
a lot like the previous purpose, since having friendly relations would be the flip side to
having hostile relations and fighting. In fact, though, the statement is meant to reaffirm
the sovereign equality of individual States and encourage States to meet one another on
equal footing.
3. The third purpose, somewhat more rambling, is “to achieve international cooperation in
solving international problems of an economic, social, cultural, or humanitarian
character, and in promoting…human rights…” In other words, the UN will serve as a
forum for discussing and solving international problems. This has been done, in fact, and
many successful international treaties, for example the United Nations Convention on the
Law of the Sea, have been fostered under UN auspices.
4. The fourth and final purpose is “to be a center for harmonizing the actions of nations…”
This seems to repeat the third purpose, as “harmonizing” is somewhat similar to
“cooperation.” Perhaps the fourth purpose merely confirms the general commitment of
Member States to joint action in all international matters.

4
  principles of the UN
Article 2 of the UN Charter enumerates the principles upon which the UN is based and these are
as follows:

A. Sovereign equality art.2(1). The Organization is based on the principle of the sovereign
equality of all its Members.

The term ‘sovereign equality’ combines two distinct but closely related ideas, namely, ‘state
sovereignty’ and ‘equality of states’. The expression ‘state sovereignty’ has been commonly
interpreted to mean equality before the law. Therefore, it is inconsistent with substantial equality
of participation and influence in international organisations. In the UN, Permanent Members of
the Security Council enjoy special voting rights. The Charter gives to the votes of Permanent
Members of the Security Council more decisive legal effects under certain circumstances than to
the votes of non-permanent Members.

According to the report of the Technical Committee which considered the matter at San
Francisco, ‘sovereign equality’ includes the following elements:

1) That States are judicially equal;

2) That each State enjoys the rights inherent in full sovereignty;
3) That the personality of the State is respected, as well as its territorial integrity and
political independence;
4) That the State should, under international order, comply faithfully with its
international duties and obligations.

These elements of sovereign equality were later approved and reaffirmed by the Special
Committee established at the General Assembly’s eighteen session to study certain principles of
international law concerning friendly relations and cooperation among states.

B. Fulfillment of obligations 2(2) All Members, in order to ensure them the rights and benefits
resulting from membership, shall fulfil in good faith the obligations assumed by them in
accordance with the present Charter.

5
The Charter obligates the Member States to fulfil in good faith the obligations assumed by them.
The principle is fundamental to the establishment of international legal order. Its logical
inference is that members who do not fulfil their obligations are not in a position to demand the
benefits of membership.

C. Obligations to settle disputes peacefully Art.2(3).All Members shall settle their international
disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security, and justice are
not endangered.

The Member States are under obligation to settle their international disputes by peaceful means
in such a manner that international peace and security and justice, are not endangered. This
clearly indicates the primary concern of the UN with the maintenance of international peace and
security. Pacific settlement of disputes is a precondition for the maintenance of international
peace and security. It must be borne in mind that the peaceful settlement of disputes, one of the
purposes of the UN, is intrinsically linked with the maintenance of peace and security. The
obligation of pacific settlement of international disputes finds detailed expression in Chapter VI
of the Charter.

d. Prohibition of use of force:-Article 2(4) of the Charter of the United Nations provides that:

'All members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force
against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other
manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.'

In 1986 this prohibition on the use of force, regarded as the cornerstone of the United
Nations system, was found to be a rule of customary law by the International Court of
Justice in the Nicaragua Case.7

Like the prohibition on murder in domestic society, this prohibition in international

society is not always observed. However, it is recognized by states as a fundamental
principle of the contemporary international legal order, as a norm with the status of jus
cogens. States that violate this norm either do so covertly or seek to justify their action
under one of the exceptions to the use of force in the UN Charter. None deny the
existence of such a rule.

6
E. Duty to cooperate or Assistance in preventive or enforcement action:-Article 2, paragraph
5 of the Charter states:

All Members shall give the United Nations every assistance in any action it takes in accordance
with the present Charter, and shall refrain from giving assistance to any state against which the
United Nations is taking preventive or enforcement action.

This principle contains two objectives. Firstly, Members are obligated to give to the organisation
any assistance which their objectives under the Charter require of them. Secondly, members shall
not strengthen the hands of a state which has violated its obligations under the Charter to the
point where preventive or enforcement action has become necessary. Both the obligations
mentioned above relate primarily to the maintenance of international peace and security. The
United Nations practice shows that the principle contained in paragraph 5 of the Charter has
received the attention of the General Assembly and Security Council on many occasions. On the
issue of apartheid policy of South Africa Government, both the General Assembly and the
Security Council utilised the language of article 2, paragraph 5 to mobilise pressure against
South Africa.

f. Non- Interference in the internal affairs of member states. 2(7)Nothing contained in the
present Charter shall authorize the United Nations to intervene in matters which are essentially
within the domestic jurisdiction of any state or shall require the members to submit such matters
to settlement under the present Charter; but this principle shall not prejudice the application of
enforcement measures under Chapter VII.

Art.2(6. )The Organization shall ensure that states which are not members of the United Nations
act in accordance with these Principles so far as may be necessary for the maintenance of
international peace and security.

 Relations of UN with its members-can UN make and enforce law against its member
states? 3 situations where UN binds its members
Some general points about UN relations with Member States must be made here. The first and
perhaps most interesting question is, Can the UN force a Member State to do something? This

7
question is really two questions, for there is first the question of whether the UN lawfully can
bind a Member State to a course of action and then there is the question of whether the UN can
enforce its orders. As will be seen, the Security Council is really the only organ that can pass
and enforce binding resolutions. Nonetheless, the General Assembly at least may bind Member
States in regard to certain budgetary matters, and the decisions of the ICJ in contentious cases are
binding on the State parties before the Court. In practice, the UN remains a loose association of
essentially independent States rather than a world government with control over its constituent
Members.
In general, so long as the UN is acting in accordance with the Charter, the Members States are
supposed to cooperate. Member States are committed to “give the UN every assistance in any
action it takes in accordance with the present Charter…” (Article 2(5)). At the same time, the
UN has consented not to intervene “in matters which are essentially within the domestic
jurisdiction of any state…,” except for certain actions undertaken by the Security Council
(Article 2(7)). Thus Member States have committed to some international governance but with
the caveat that they continue to control their domestic affairs.
Interestingly, the UN Charter contains a “supremacy clause” (Article 103) making Charter
provisions “supreme” over any other treaty obligation that a Member State may have. This
would prevent a Member State from using its other treaty commitments as an excuse to get out
of obligations to the UN. A Member State’s UN obligations are some of the highest obligations
that it has on the international plane.
 Structure of UN
Central to the structure of the League and subsequently the UN is the ideological balance
between democratic proto-“World Parliament” representing each State equally and the
“realpolitik” of the Great Powers that concedes the greater influence of certain States. The UN
has as its proto-“World Parliament” the General Assembly where every State can participate and
every State has one vote. As for realpolitik, this is apparent in the structure of the Security
Council which gives permanent place and greater influence to the five victorious powers of
World War II – France, Britain, U.S., China, and Russia. Students are often troubled by the
organization of the Security Council that allows a single permanent member to completely block
a proposal. Certainly this is unfair, but it is the price that was paid to get the Great Powers to
submit to some form of international governance. Power matters in international politics. The

8
UN is helpful precisely in that it works to temper and mitigate the expression of raw power in
favor of greater stability. The Great Powers would not have agreed to the UN structure, nor set
up any such international body that had power over them, without having representation in the
organization somewhat commensurate with their influence in world affairs when acting alone.
The six organs of the UN are the General Assembly, the Security Council, the Secretariat, the
International Court of Justice (ICJ), the Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC), and the
Trusteeship Council (now obsolete).
a) General Assembly
 Less power
The General Assembly (GA) is the Parliament of the UN, but it is a Parliament with little or no
legislative power. GA resolutions are like recommendations to Member States – the resolutions
are not binding. (As will be seen in subsequent chapters, GA resolutions nonetheless express the
overall opinion of the international community and as such may form the basis for customary
law.) The student may very well wonder what the point is of passing non-binding resolutions,
but this would be to underestimate the power of peer pressure in a “community” of States. It is
certainly not the case that States do things only when forced to do them at gunpoint.
 General/broader/wider power
As a “legislature” the GA’s scope is general – it may discuss and make recommendations on any
matter within the scope of the Charter (Article 10). Also, the GA may be an advisor to the
Security Council (Article 10). In this role the GA sometimes brings matters to the attention of
the Security Council and makes recommendations. Notably, if the Security Council has taken up
a matter already, the GA cannot comment to the Security Council on that matter unless the
Security Council asks for advice. Actually, the GA is not supposed to comment at all on any
matter that the Security Council “remains seized of” (see Article 12).
 Inclusive body
All States are members of the GA, and each State has one vote (see Article 18).
 Decision making process
For “important questions” two-thirds of the members present must vote in favor. For “other
questions” a simple majority will prevail.
 Subsidiary bodies

9
There are also subsidiary bodies within the GA with similar procedures, for example the UN
Human Rights Council, composed of 47 member states elected by the GA. These subsidiary
bodies conduct studies and prepare resolutions for consideration by the GA.
b) Security Council
 More power and narrow power
The Security Council (SC), compared to the GA, has more power, but it is exercised within a
narrower scope. In fact, the SC passes both non-binding resolutions and binding resolutions.
The binding resolutions may be passed only when the SC is taking action “for the maintenance
of international peace and security.” (Article 24.) Seemingly the SC has wider discretion in
passing non-binding resolutions. Nonetheless, international peace and security remains the SC’s
“primary responsibility.” By “primary” is meant that other organs like the GA may have
secondary roles in maintaining international peace and security.
 Exclusive body
The SC is a far more exclusive body than the GA. The SC consists of fifteen members – five
permanent members and ten rotating members with two-year terms. (The student will be
reassured to know that the nonpermanent seats in the SC are distributed by region as follows:
three to Africa, two to Asia, two to Latin America, two to Western Europe, and one to Eastern
Europe.)
 Decision making process
A resolution requires nine votes to pass. As explained above, however, the permanent members
have a veto power over all resolutions concerning non-procedural matters. The Charter states
that a resolution must have “the concurring votes of the permanent members.” (Article 27.)
 Modification by subsequent practice
This provision has been modified by the subsequent practice of the SC. Now it is understood
that abstentions by permanent members or even failure to vote due to absence from a meeting
count as “concurring votes” and, as such, will not prevent a resolution from passing. In short,
then, it is only the casting of a vote against a resolution by a permanent member that will block
the resolution. Abstentions by permanent members will not matter. Technically, a resolution
could pass even if the five permanent members all abstain from voting.
3) Secretariat
 members

10
The Secretariat is composed of all the administrative staff of the UN and headed by the
Secretary-General.
 No power of decision making than bringing matter to the attention of SC
Although the role of the Secretary-General as a spokesman for the UN may lend to this position
an aura of power, the fact is that the Secretary-General has a limited ability to influence decision-
making. At best the Secretary-General may “bring to the attention of the Security Council any
matter which in his opinion may threaten the maintenance of international peace and security.”
(Article 99.) The Secretary-General is more the head of UN employees than the head of the UN
itself.
 Hiring process
(Of course, the position is important enough that the SC is involved in the hiring process – the
SC recommends a candidate for approval by the GA thus giving permanent members of the SC
an opportunity to veto anyone they do not like.)
4) International Court of Justice
The International Court of Justice functions under its own statute which is “an integral part” of
the Charter and is annexed to it. (Article 92.)
 Numbers of judges and selection
The Court has fifteen judges all from different States. (The judges are elected by the GA and
SC, each body voting separately.)
 Types of cases/jurisdiction and who can be parties
Two types of cases come before the Court – contentious cases between States and requests for
advisory opinions from organs of the UN or from specialized agencies. Although Member States
under the Charter have an obligation to resolve their disputes by peaceful means (article 33),
there is no specific obligation to use the ICJ. States must consent to the jurisdiction of the ICJ in
contentious cases, either at the time the dispute arises or beforehand by a separate treaty. States
also may accept the jurisdiction of the ICJ generally, or for a specified category of cases, by
communicating this in a declaration and filing it with the UN. In fact, the ICJ has been
underused by State parties. From 1946 to 1996, only one hundred cases came before the Court.
The GA has passed several resolutions calling for greater use of the Court, but Member States
remain reluctant.
5) the Economic and Social Council(ECOSOC)

11
The Economic and Social Council functions like a mini GA with a special focus on economic,
social, and humanitarian issues. Like the GA, it has subsidiary organs, for example the UN
Environment Program. Each member has one vote and a simple majority will prevail. ECOSOC
makes studies and reports and may bring matters to the attention of the GA.
6) The Trusteeship Council
The Trusteeship Council was created to monitor those colonies placed under the administrative
authority of another State following World War II. For example, Italian Somaliland was a trust
territory that was later merged with Somalia. As explained previously, the trust system was
similar to the mandate system administered by the League of Nations. (Indeed, the UN insisted
that South Africa, which had a Mandate to govern Namibia, still owed obligations under the
Mandate to the UN after World War II.) The Trusteeship Council was composed of the five
permanent members of the Security Council. Originally it monitored the eleven trust territories,
but it suspended its operations with the independence of the last trust territory in 1994
Section 3.4 Other International Actors: NGOs, Corporations, and Individuals
 Non-states actors
As we have seen, the State is the primary actor in international law. We have considered how
international organizations like the UN also participate, to a lesser extent than States, at the
international level. What about other actors? Examples of such actors include non-government
organizations (NGOs), corporations, sporting federations, organized religions, regional
governments, and international terrorists.
 Their status under international law?
In general, these non-state actors( those other than IO and individual) do not have the status of
legal persons at the international level, so they cannot have rights and duties under international
law. Rather, their activities are governed by national laws.
 Their role in international relations
This is something of an oversimplification, though, and it is important to consider how certain
non-state actors are involved in international law.
 NGO
a. Attending international conferences as observers:-NGOs, for example, play a very
prominent role in international relations. NGOs attend international law-making

12
 conferences as observers – even present their views in some cases – and lobby
governments behind the scenes.
b. NGOs also draw government attention to particular issues and sometimes push the
government to propose a treaty or enter a treaty.
c. In addition, an NGO may act like a watchdog, reporting on international events and
exposing non-compliance with international law.
d. Under Article 71 of the UN Charter, ECOSOC may arrange to consult with NGOs in
order to gain expert opinion and hear the views of certain interest groups. Many have
asked why we should not allow the same arrangement for the General Assembly.
e. Finally, although NGOs may not submit briefs directly to international dispute
settlement bodies like the ICJ or WTO dispute settlement body, NGOs nonetheless often
get member States to submit briefs for them.
 Transnational corporations
Corporations are equally involved in international relations. It is common for a corporation to
exist under the laws of one State, the “home” State, and operate in other States, the “host” States.
International corporations enter agreements with host States that give special privileges to the
corporation under national laws. In general, corporations have a strong influence over State
governments. A corporation may push its home State to make a claim against its host State
regarding the treatment of its business.
 Individuals
In the traditional State system, an individual’s rights on the international level were mere
derivatives of States’ rights. If Ethiopia unjustly harmed some foreign person in its territory, for
example, this would be a wrong to the foreigner’s home State, which could then sue Ethiopia for
redress. In fact, the foreigner’s home State could sue, recover monetary damages from Ethiopia,
and then never share this money with the injured foreigner himself!
Three new areas of international law give greater standing to individuals in the international
arena – human rights law, international humanitarian law (law of war), and international criminal
law. A person who suffers a human rights violation may have an action against the offending
State in some international court. A person who commits an atrocity such as genocide may be
brought to justice and sentenced before an international criminal court. In such cases,
international law is acting directly on individuals

13