Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-4rdpn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-09T12:53:28.904Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Unanimous Consent in International Organization

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 May 2017

Nobman L. Hill
Nobman L. Hill*
Affiliation:
University of Nebraska
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The decisions of international bodies may be based either on the rigid principle of unanimity or on the more convenient doctrine that the majority shall govern. In a world where national sovereignty is so widely stressed, the former method has a natural appeal. The rule of unanimity has, in fact, been treated by many persons as an inevitable corollary of the theory of sovereignty, which, as it is generally understood, would subject no state to any limitation against its will. Such an idea was very probably in the mind of former Secretary of State Hughes when he stated in the opening address of the Conference on Central American Affairs in December, 1922, “ Unanimity is a part of the consequence of the status of states in international law.” Writers on internationallaw have often so defined sovereignty and independence that the requirement of unanimity for any concerted action of a group of nations would follow.

Type
Research Article
Information
American Journal of International Law , Volume 22 , Issue 2 , April 1928 , pp. 319 - 329
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 1928

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Lawrence, T. J., International Law (1911),p. 111.See also Bluntschli, J. K. (1868),p. 506; Wheaton, H. (1866), p. 32. Google Scholar

2 See “ Limitations on Sovereignty in International Relations,” by GarnerJ. W., American Science lie view, Vol.19, No. 1.

3 See La Ninfa, 75 Fed. Rep. 513 (1896), in which the Behring Sea arbitration award was held to be binding upon the United States, against whom it had been made.

4 See Satow, Diplomatic Practice, Vol.II, pp.101-106,111-112,114-116,117-118,123-124,132-134,136-138, 138-147, for use of rule of unanimity on following conferences: conference on Belgian affairs(1830-31); conference for pacification of Syria(1860-61); conference for redemption of Scheldt dues(1863); conference on affairs of Denmark(1864);conference relative to use of explosive bullets in war (1868);conference of Brussels on rules of warfare(1874); conference on navigation of Danube(1883); conference respecting affairs of Africa(1884); and other similar conferences.

5 Ibid., Vol. II, p. 118.

6 Conference on Limitation of Armament—Government Printing Office (1922), pp. 278395.The resolution relative to the Chinese Eastern Railway did not have China's consent.

7 Satow, op. dt., Vol. II, p. 157.

8 Ibid., p. 126.

9 Scott, J. B., The Hague Conventions and Declarations of 1899and1907, pp. 39-40. Published by Carnegie Endowment for International PeaceGoogle Scholar.

10 Woolf, L. S., International Government, p. 58.Google Scholar

11 Hull, W. I., The Two Hague Conferences (1908), pp. 280-285.Google Scholar

12 Temperley, H., History of the Peace Conference at Paris (1920), issued under auspices of The Institute of International Affairs. See Vol.I,p. 390, footnotes. China later arranged to sign the treaty.Google Scholar

13 SeeReinsch, P. S., Public International Unions (1911), p. 152.Google Scholar

14 Ibid., pp. 152-153.

15 See Reinsch, op. cit., p. 26.

16 Ibid., p. 50.

17 Sayre, F. B., Experiments in International Administration (1919), pp. 155-158.Google Scholar

18 Ibid.

19 Reinsch, op. cit., p. 117.

20 Sayre, F. B., op. cit., p. 127.

21 Ibid.., p. 45.

22 Provision is also made for dissenting opinions, in accordance with which the losing side is privileged to make public its findings.

23 See Statute of Court, Arts. 55 and 57.

24 Ibid.., Art. 25.

25 Rules of the Court, Arts. 7, 9, 17.

26 Statute of the Court, Art. 18.

27 Bustamante, A. S., The World Court (1925),pp. 267-272 Google Scholar.

28 Ibid.., pp. 273-275. 279-282,

29 Ibid.., pp. 295-299.

30 Statute of the Court, Art. 2.

31 The League of Nations, World Peace Foundation, Vol.VIII, Noe., 8-9, p. 596 Google Scholar

32 Rules of the Council, Art. 6.

33 See Buell, R. L., International Relations (1925), p. 668. The Assembly acts on majority principle in the following instances: (1) Election of non-permanent members of Council, (2) Election of new members of League, (3) Election of Judge of World Court, (4) Approval of additional Council members, (5) Choice of Secretary-General, (6) Report on international disputes, (7) Questions of procedure. The Council allows majority rule in following instances: (1) questions of procedure, (2) settlement of disputes, (3) questions relative to the Saar, (4) military control of defeated Powers, (5) Albania's independence, (6) the Aaland Island convention, (7) protriots regarding economic reconstruction in Austria and Hungary,(8) Memel, (9) Greek Refugee Settlement Commission, (10) the Oriental railway, (11) Germany's obligations toward allied states, (12) changes of provisions in minority treaties, (13) revision of Arms Traffic Convention.

34 Records of the Fourth Assembly, Plenary Meetings, p. 86.

35 The League of Nations News, Vol. III , No. 52, p. 3.

36 The Treaty of Peace, Art. 422. See International Conciliation, No. 142. The article reads, “ Amendments to this part of the present treaty which are adopted by a majority of two-thirds of the votes cast by the delegations present shall take effect when ratified by the states whose representatives compose the Council of the League of Nations and by threefourths of the members.”

37 Treaty of Peace, Art. 403.

38 Ibid.., Art. 405. See also Art. 407, which permits a group of less than two-thirds to cooperate among themselves for the adoption of a convention.

39 “The Attempt to Establish the Eight-Hour Day by International Legislation,” By Feis, H., Political Science Quarterly, Vol. XXXIX, Nos. 3-4, p. 376 Google Scholar.