The Institutionalization of a Process

The Development of the Kimberley Process towards an International Organization

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

The Kimberley Process represents a new method of international cooperation between subjects of international law. It was named by its creators as a process, setting it apart from international organizations, and leading too to its consideration as informal international law-making or soft law. In this study we shall analyze the extent to which the Kimberley Process falls into these categories. Our main task, however, is to compare it to formal international organizations, with a view to establishing whether what really has been created is an institutionalization process that is like an international organization, but with a different name. To do this, we will analyze with reference to the Kimberley Process the various respective fields of international organizations, such as founding agreement, membership, structure, decision-making process and legal order.

Sections

References

5

Vidal, supra note 3, p. 507.

15

Shelton, supra note 14, p. 15.

17

Pauwelyn, supra note 14, p. 19.

25

Schermers and Blokker, supra note 21, p. 132; Eibe Riedel, ‘The Development of International Law: Alternatives to Treaty-Making? International Organizations and Non-State Actors’, in R. Wolfrum and V. Röben (eds.), Developments of International Law in Treaty Making (Springer, Berlin, 2005) pp. 301–318; Carlos Teijo García, Organisaciones Internacionales No gubernamentales y Derecho Internacional (Madrid, Dilex, 2005), pp. 155–176, Pérez-prat Durbán, supra note 18, pp. 158–172.

28

Chardon, supra note 2, p. 480.

30

Bieri, supra note 26, p. 110.

33

Schermers and Blokker, supra note 21, p. 131; Jan Klabbers, An Introduction to International Institutional Law (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2002) p. 112; Pérez Prat Durbán, supra note 18, pp. 184–194.

37

Chardon, supra note 2, p. 480. However, recently there has been criticism from ngos for “stifling swift and decisive actions by the kp against non-compliant countries”: Bieri, supra note 26, p. 112.

38

Schermers and Blokker, supra note 21, p. 141.

48

Chardon, supra note 2, p. 478.

50

Schermers and Blokker, supra note 21, p. 238.

54

Schermers and Blokker, supra note 21, pp. 290–300.

56

Schermers and Blokker, supra note 21, p. 240.

61

Chardon, supra note 2, p. 478.

63

Klabbers, supra note 33, p. 174.

64

Amerasinghe, supra note 45, p. 154.

65

Klabbers, supra note 33, p. 175.

66

Schermers and Blokker, supra note 21, p. 315.

67

Amerasinghe, supra note 45, p. 154.

69

Chardon, supra note 2, pp. 478–479.

74

Fernández Arribas, supra note 2, p. 16.

81

Berman and Wessel, supra note 51, p. 43.

86

Chardon, supra note 2, p. 478.

88

Bieri, supra note 26, p. 111.

89

Chardon, supra note 2, p. 479.

93

Smillie, supra note 2, pp. 3–4.

94

Pauwelyn, Wessel and Wouters, supra note 6, p. 738.

97

Klabbers, supra note 95, p. 157; Prosper Weil, ‘Towards relative normativity in international Law?’ (1983) 77 American Journal of International Law pp. 413–442.

99

Klabbers, supra note 95, p. 105.

103

Wright, supra note 2, p. 699.

104

Klabbers, supra note 95, p. 155.

106

Curtis, supra note 73, p. 12. Tracey Michelle Price, ‘The Kimberley Process: Conflict Diamonds, wto Obligations, and the Universality Debate’ (2003) 12 Minnesota Journal of International Law p. 66.

109

Aust, supra note 96, pp. 52–53.

110

Boyle, supra note 96, at. 124–125. Boyle also mentions non-treaty form, but soft law can also have the form of a treaty without being considered a binding instrument. See Christine M. Chinkin, ‘The Challenge of Soft Law: Development and Change in International Law’ (1989) 38 International and Comparative Law Quarterly p. 851.

111

Dinah L. Shelton, supra note 14, p. 74; Chinkin, supra note 110, p. 859.

113

Schermers and Blokker, supra note 21, p. 531.

114

Klabbers, supra note 33, p. 229.

126

Schermers and Blokker, supra note 21, p. 752–830.

130

Schermers and Blokker, supra note 21, p. 780.

135

Shelton, supra note 14, p. 70.

137

Klabbers, supra note 8, p. 410.

138

Aust, supra note 96, p. 32.

140

Aust, supra note 96, p. 45.

141

Curtis, supra note 73, p. 12; Price, supra note 106, p. 66.

143

Bieri, supra note 26, p. 103.

144

Ruiter and Wessel, supra note 6, p. 165.

146

Neuhold, supra note 96, p. 51.

150

Klabbers, supra note 8, p. 414.

Information

Content Metrics

Content Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 8 8 5
Full Text Views 7 7 7
PDF Downloads 2 2 2
EPUB Downloads 0 0 0