Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-vdxz6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T02:14:45.585Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Accountability of International Organizations: Some Salient Features

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 February 2017

Karel Wellens
Karel Wellens*
Affiliation:
Public International Law and the Law of International Organisations, Katholieke Universiteit, Nijmegen
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Can International Organizations Be Controlled? Accountability and Responsibility
Information
Proceedings of the ASIL Annual Meeting , Volume 97 , 2003 , pp. 241 - 245
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 2003

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 Geneva Conventions Relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, 1949, Art. 1.

2 Council of Europe, European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, Nov. 4, 1950, Art. 1.

3 See Matthews v. UK, 1999-1 Eur. Ct. H.R. 253 (1999).

4 Difference Relating to Immunity from Legal Process of a Special Rapporteur of the Commission on Human Rights, Advisory Opinion, 1999 ICJ Rep. 62, 88, para. 66.

5 Reparation for Injuries Suffered in the Service of the United Nations, 1949 ICJ Rep. 174, 179.

6 Application 56672/00 before the ECHR by DSR-Senator Lines GMBH of Mar. 30, 2000, pending before a Grand Chamber.

7 See 1321st meeting: Draft Articles Submitted by the Special Rapporteur—Article 9, 1975 Y.B. ILC 88, 89-90.

8 Report of the International Law Commission, UN Gaor, 55th Sess., Suppl. No. 10, para. 478, UN Doc. A/57/10 (2002), available at <http://www.un.org/law/ilc/reports/2002/english/chp8e.pdf> [hereinafter 2002 ILC Report].

9 James Crawford, the International Law Commission’s Articles on State Responsibility: Introduction, Text and Commentaries 311 (2002), at para. 4.

10 Id., para. 5.

11 2002 ILC Report, supra note 4, para. 476.

12 Crawford, supra note 9, at 310, para. 3.

13 Id. at 311, para. 3.

11 See 2002 ILC Report, supra note 4, para. 482.

15 See Bankoviċ v. Belgium, Appl. No. 52207/99 (Eur. Ct. H.R. Dec. 12, 2001) (decision on admissibility), available at <http://www.echr.coe.int>.

16 Legality of Use of Force (Serbia and Montenegro) v. Belgium, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Portugal, the United Kingdom.

17 Higgins, Rosalyn, The Responsibility of States Members for the Defaults of International Organizations: Continuing the Dialogue, in Liber Amicorum Ibrahim Shihata, 440-48, at 446 (Schlemmer-Schulte, S. & Tung, Ko-Yung eds., 2001)Google Scholar.

18 Decision and motion for judicial assistance to be provided by Sfor and others, in Prosecutor v. Simic, Trial Chamber Decision No. It-95-9-PT (Oct. 18, 2000), para. 45 (letter of the Legal Advisor of Shape dated May 9, 1996).

19 2002 ILC Report, supra note 4, para. 486.

20 Philip C Jessup, A Modern Law of Nations: An Introduction 25 (1948).

21 Sabine Schlemmer-Schulte, The World Bank Inspection Panel: A Model for other International Organizations?, in Proliferation of International Organizations. Legal Issues 483,508 (N. Blokker & H. Schermers eds., 2001).

22 Reinisch, August, Remarks. Exploring the Evolution of Purposes, Methods and Legitimacy: Accountability of Intergovernmental Organizations, 94 ASIL Proc. 204, 206 (2000)Google Scholar.

23 Carol Harlow, Accountability in the European Union, back cover (2002).