Our future depends on international order. Our destiny is increasingly influenced by the activities – or lack thereof – of international organizations. It is obvious that global problems such as international armed conflicts, climate change and infectious diseases require global solutions. Yet, even essentially domestic problems often demand the involvement of international organizations. For instance, within the context of the UN it has not been possible during the last few years to bring the armed conflict in Syria to an end. At the same time, in the absence of peace, a number of organizations have been active to reduce human suffering (e.g. the reception of refugees), to fight the use of chemical weapons, and to investigate international crimes.
Our future depends on international order. Our destiny is increasingly influenced by the activities – or lack thereof – of international organizations. This is often recognized. International organizations have received the Nobel Peace Prize five times since 2000: the UN (2001), the International Atomic Energy Agency (2005), the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (2007),1 the European Union (2012) and the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (2013). However, international organizations are also often criticized, for ‘not delivering’, for ‘mission creep’, for mismanagement or other reasons. Part of this criticism may be explained by the current general lack of support for international cooperation as well as the renewed nationalism and populism in a number of countries. Both multilateralism and nationalism have their ups and downs.2 Additionally, criticism may also be explained in relation to specific cases where things go wrong: sexual exploitation and abuse by UN peacekeepers, cholera in Haiti brought by Nepalese UN peacekeepers, the late response of the World Health Organization to the outbreak of Ebola in West Africa in 2013–2014, etc.
No matter whether international organizations are praised or castigated, they are increasingly relevant in our globalizing but primarily state-organized world. This is not only true for well-known organizations such as those mentioned above. It is also true for those hundreds of other organizations that do not appear in the media on an almost daily basis but directly or indirectly influence our daily lives. To mention but a few: the Universal Postal Union, the World Meteorological Organization, the International Organization on Vine and Wine, the Asia-Pacific Space Cooperation Organization, the International Network on Bamboo and Rattan, the ITER Nuclear Fusion Energy Organization, the International Commission on Missing Persons, the African Tax Administration Forum, the International Potato Centre. Whether well-known or more obscure, these machineries of international governance, les rouages du monde, contribute to the organization of our international society. It is difficult to
The growing significance of international organizations makes it necessary to analyze their law and practice. Each organization has its own unique law and practice, designed for the realization of its objectives. A large number of studies have therefore already been devoted to specific organizations such as the United Nations, the World Trade Organization, the World Bank, the Organization of American States, the European Union, the African Union, the Association of South East Asian Nations, the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries and many others.
Nevertheless, international organizations also have much in common, and are confronted with a myriad of similar day-to-day questions. For example, may international organizations exercise powers that have not been given to them by the members? May members withdraw from an international organization if the constitution of the organization does not contain provisions on withdrawal? May members refuse to pay part of their contribution to an organization because they do not agree with certain activities? Should international organizations accept funds from private enterprises to finance their activities? How can non-governmental organizations be involved in the work of international organizations? Should the chairman of an international organ remain in office when a subject on the agenda directly concerns his country? Should the secretariat of the organization be composed of civil servants selected exclusively on the basis of their professional qualifications, or should it have a certain number of nationals of all member states as staff members? If a member state withdraws from an international organization, may nationals of this member state who work as international civil servants for the organization be dismissed? Should specific organs be created to deal with disputes between the organization and its personnel? How can international organizations protect whistleblowers (personnel reporting wrongdoings or misconduct by staff or by the organization). How can effect be given to the desire of the organization to invite persons to its meetings despite the fact that the host state would normally refuse these persons access to its territory? With respect to voting, should each member state have one vote (reflecting the formal rule of sovereign equality of states) or should members have different voting strength (reflecting factual inequalities between member states)?
These examples demonstrate that international organizations, despite their widely diverging objectives, powers, fields of activity and number of member states, share all kinds of similar problems. The rules for dealing with these problems are often similar. When a new organization is established, a number of its rules are copied – mutatis mutandis – from other organizations. Many writers take the view that in practice, although each organization has its own legal order, common rules and principles have developed. These shared problems, rules and principles of international organizations particularly relate to institutional legal matters. Institutional law does not differ dramatically from one organization to the next: each organization needs rules concerning, for example, its internal structure, membership, decision-making, financing, relations with the host state, and these rules often bear strong similarities.
This book offers a comparative study of the institutional law of international organizations. Although each organization has its own legal order, institutional problems
Much has changed in our field of study since 1972, when the first edition of this book was published. The international political context has changed, and this has affected the functioning of international organizations. The Cold War era passed by. The United States continues to be a superpower that plays a key role in many international organizations. Following the break-up of the Soviet Union, the Russian Federation is now more assertive than ever before. Other states (such as China, Brazil and India) have also become powerful players in international relations. Another change is the different attitude of governments towards international organizations. For a considerable number of years following the end of the Second World War, an international organization was established almost automatically as soon as an international problem arose and the need to cooperate to solve it was identified. In more recent years, however, the opposite attitude has become predominant: at present, governments almost instinctively prefer not to create a new organization when a problem presents itself and the need to cooperate arises. With regard to existing organizations, the organization’s responsibility for its own acts, as well as larger questions of accountability, are now hotly debated issues in academic writings and in practice. Other important developments covered by the current edition include Brexit, the rise of parliamentary and judicial organs (in particular at the regional level) and the evolution of external relations (increased cooperation with NGOs, the private sector, etc.; the establishment of EU delegations).
Nevertheless, while much has changed, much has also remained the same. Plus ça change, plus ça reste la même chose. In practice, new international organizations continue to be created. They are confronted with similar institutional questions, whether old or new. Often, the answers given to these questions are not given in isolation; the law and practice of other international organizations is frequently taken into account.
Henry Schermers passed away on 31 August 2006. He conceived the idea of this book and created the name of this field of law.3 From the beginning until the very end of his professional life, international institutional law was close to his heart. Working in the Dutch Foreign Ministry in the 1950s, Henry Schermers was confronted with a great number of institutional issues regarding international organizations, and the academic reflection of this practical experience was first laid down in his doctoral thesis on the specialized agencies (1957) and then subsequently in this book.
Schermers published the first edition of this book in 1972 and the second in 1980. A few weeks after I defended my dissertation (November 1989), he asked me to work with him on a third edition, which was published in 1995. Together we also prepared the fourth edition (2003), after I joined the Dutch Foreign Ministry in 2000.
Although Henry Schermers has not been involved in neither the fifth (2011) nor this sixth edition of his magnum opus, I am confident that he would have fully
This book is not only considerably practice-inspired and practice-oriented; it is also intimately connected to academic teaching. Henry Schermers taught a specialized course on international institutional law beginning in 1963, first at the Law Faculty of the University of Amsterdam and subsequently, from 1978, at the Law Faculty of the University of Leiden. From 1984, this course was given together by Henry Schermers and myself for many years.
At the end of his professional life, in his farewell lecture at Leiden University (2002), Schermers announced that he would finance a Chair in the field of international institutional law. In 2003, I was appointed on a part-time basis to this Schermers Chair at Leiden University. It became a full-time Chair in 2013, when I left the Foreign Ministry. For many years now I have been teaching two specialized annual courses in this field and have very much benefited from this in my research for this book. Vice versa, I hope that this book helps students find their way in the maze of rules and practices of international organizations.
In the previous editions of this book, published in 1972, 1980, 1995, 2003 and 2011, acknowledgements were made to many people. For the present, sixth edition I would like to repeat these acknowledgements. Although the text has been updated and revised, the previous editions have been the foundations without which no sixth edition would have been possible.
The preparations for this sixth edition started two years ago. Many people have assisted me: former colleagues and friends in the Dutch Foreign Ministry, colleagues and students at Leiden University, colleagues from other universities and many staff members of international organizations. I am particularly grateful to my research assistants Jim Ransdell and Marietta Hristovski, who made many improvements to the text, relating both to language and to substance. Finally, from the very beginning of work on this sixth edition, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, part of Brill Publishers, has supported this in numerous ways; I would like to thank Ingeborg van der Laan and Marie Sheldon. An academic work such as this is by definition largely solitary in nature. This was even more so when preparing the two most recent editions without Henry Schermers. Without the assistance of the many people mentioned here, I could not have completed this sixth edition.
Our field of study is vast, institutional rules are numerous and sometimes complex, and practical developments have also been legion. In a general comparative study, it is impossible to discuss every aspect in detail, and omissions are unavoidable. Suggestions for improvement are therefore most welcome at the Law School of Leiden University, P.O. Box 9520, 2300 RA Leiden, The Netherlands, or at n.m.blokker@law.leidenuniv.nl.
Niels BlokkerLeiden, April 2018