Responsibility and Immunities

Similarities and Differences between International Organizations and States

in International Organizations Law Review
Restricted Access
Get Access to Full Text
Rent on DeepDyve

Have an Access Token?



Enter your access token to activate and access content online.

Please login and go to your personal user account to enter your access token.



Help

Have Institutional Access?



Access content through your institution. Any other coaching guidance?



Connect

Over the past couple of decades, the relative growth of the human-oriented element in the international legal system has been one of the defining characteristics of the process of its evolution. Rules, instruments, practices and institutions for protecting individuals in peacetime as well as during times of war keep multiplying and becoming more imperative. How does the law respond to underlying the dilemmas this presents: through developing a system of effective remedies, or by admitting and tolerating substantial gaps in accountability? The present contribution covers the law of the responsibility of international organizations and the multiple grounds of attribution under it, mainly focusing on the International Law Commission’s Draft Articles on the Responsibility of International Organizations and their applicability in practice. It also focuses on the immunities of international organizations, their sources and scope, and on the relationship between their competing or conflicting standards. There is more inter-dependence between the standards under the law of responsibility and those under the law of immunities than often meets the eye, and such inter-dependence is dictated by the orderly operation of both these branches of international law.

Responsibility and Immunities

Similarities and Differences between International Organizations and States

in International Organizations Law Review

Sections

References

17

Second Report p. 26.

31

Opened for signature 4 November 1950ets 5 (entered into force 3 September 1953).

55

Crawfordsupra note 47 p. 432.

58

Ryngaertsupra note 48 p. 1005.

78

Gajasupra note 1 para. 7.

82

Opened for signature 13 February 19461 unts p. 15 (entered into force 17 September 1946).

84

Gajasupra note 1 para. 3.

87

Amerasinghesupra note 80 p. 322.

98

Amerasinghesupra note 80 p. 347.

100

Gaillard & Pingel-Lenuzzasupra note 79 pp. 4–5.

101

Reinischsupra note 6 p. 134.

104

Bekkersupra note 102 p. 158.

106

Reinischsupra note 6 p. 139.

110

Reinischsupra note 6 p. 139 by reference to Seidl-Hohenveldern’s unpublished report to the Interational Law Association.

Information

Content Metrics

Content Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 23 23 6
Full Text Views 94 94 79
PDF Downloads 6 6 2
EPUB Downloads 0 0 0