In the broader context of the accountability of international organisations, this book focuses on the obligation of the United Nations - like many other organisations - to âmake provisions for appropriate modes of settlement of ... disputes of a private law characterâ to which it is a party. The book advocates a systematic approach in conformity with the rule of law in discharging that obligation. That is needed to increase the legitimacy of international organisations, while bolstering their jurisdictional immunity. The work also develops the basic features of a comprehensive dispute settlement mechanism, complemented by a new United Nations convention.
Thomas S.M. Henquet, Ph.D. (Leiden University), LL.M. (Yale University), LL.M. (University of Amsterdam), specialises in international law and dispute resolution. He has acquired broad experience in these areas, working in international organisations, government and private practice. He has also lectured and published on a number of related topics.
â1.2âResearch Objective and Research Questions
â1.2.1âCase Studies: Introduction
â1.2.2âThe Rule of Law
â1.3âStructure and Outline of the Study
2âThe International Organisations Law Framework Governing Third-Party Remedies
â2.1âIntroduction
â2.2âThe Legal Status of International Organizations in Domestic Legal Orders and the International Legal Order
â2.2.1âDomestic Legal Personality, and Privileges and Immunities
â2.2.2âInternational Legal Personality
â2.2.2.1âLegal Consequences of International Legal Personality: The ario
â2.2.3âInterim Conclusions
â2.3âHow Are International Organisations, and the UN in Particular, Bound by International Law?
â2.3.1âTreaty Law, General International Law and jus cogens
â2.3.1.1âTreaty Law
â2.3.1.2âGeneral International Law
â2.3.1.3âJus cogens
â2.3.2âSources of Obligations Specific to the UN
â2.3.2.1ââConstitutionalâ Obligations
â2.3.2.2âKosovo under unmik Administration
â2.3.3âInterim Conclusions
â2.4âInternational Human Rights Law
â2.4.1âPrimary Rules
â2.4.2âSecondary Rules: the âRight to a Remedyâ
â2.4.2.1âProcedural Obligations
â2.4.2.2âSubstantive obligations
â2.4.3âInterim Conclusions
â2.5âConclusions
3âSection 29(A) of the General Convention
â3.1âIntroduction
â3.2âThe UN Is Bound by the Obligation under Section 29 of the General Convention
â3.2.1âThe General Convention Is Binding on the UN
â3.2.2âFailure to Implement Section 29 of the General Convention and Jurisdictional Immunity
â3.2.2.1âWhether the UNâs Entitlement to Immunity Is Conditional on Its Compliance with Section 29 of the General Convention
â3.2.2.2âDenying the UNâs Immunity in Response to âMaterial Breachâ or as a âCountermeasureâ
â3.3âOverview of Practice of the UN under Section 29(a) of the General Convention
â3.3.1âKey Documents Setting Out the Practice and Regulations of the UN
â3.3.2âThe UNâs Practice Per Category of Dispute
â3.3.2.1âDisputes âArising Out of Commercial Agreements (Contracts and Lease Agreements)â
â3.3.2.2âOther Disputes of a Private Law Character
â3.3.2.3ââOther Claimsâ
â3.3.3âFrom Srebrenica to Haiti: Introduction to Case Studies
â3.3.3.1âThe Srebrenica Genocide
â3.3.3.2âThe Kosovo Lead Poisoning
â3.3.3.3âThe Haiti Cholera Epidemic
â3.4âDiscussion: âA Complete Remedy System to Private Partiesâ?
â3.4.1âGeneral Observations Regarding Section 29 of the General Convention
â3.4.1.1ââDisputes ⦠to Which the UN Is a Partyâ
â3.4.1.2âLiability and Responsibility
â3.4.1.3âWho Decides?
â3.4.1.4âInterim Conclusions
â3.4.2ââPrivate Law Characterâ
â3.4.2.1ââPrivate Law Characterâ: Interpretation
â3.4.2.2âUN Practice Regarding âPrivate Law Characterâ
â3.4.2.3âInterim Conclusions
â3.4.3ââProvisions for Appropriate Modes of Settlementâ
â3.4.3.1ââAppropriate Modes of Settlementâ
â3.4.3.2âApplicable Law: The UN Liability Rules
â3.4.3.3âInterim Conclusions
â3.5âConclusions
4âThe Jurisdictional Immunity of International Organisations in the Netherlands and the View from Strasbourg
â4.1âIntroduction
â4.2âImmunity from Jurisdiction
â4.2.1âRationale
â4.2.2âSources
â4.2.3âProcedural Aspects
â4.2.4ââFunctional Immunityâ
â4.3âImmunity from Jurisdiction and âAccess to Courtâ
â4.3.1âWaite and Kennedy
â4.3.2ââReasonable Alternative Meansâ: Beyond Waite and Kennedy
â4.3.2.1âInterim Conclusions
â4.3.3âAbsence of Reasonable Alternative Means: Mothers of Srebrenica
â4.3.3.1âImmunity from Jurisdiction, Access to Court and Reasonable Alternative Means
â4.3.3.2ââCivil Rightâ under Article 6(1) of the echr in Light of Section 29 of the General Convention
â4.3.3.3âResolving the Conflict between Jurisdictional Immunity and Access to Court Absent Reasonable Alternative Means
â4.4âReducing âAccountability Gapsâ: A Role for National Courts?
â4.5âConclusions
5âTowards a âComplete Remedy Systemâ for Third-Parties under Section 29 of the General Convention
â5.1âIntroduction
â5.2âProposed Solutions
â5.2.1âThe Legal Character of Third-Party Disputes
â5.2.2.2âThe Consistent Interpretation and Application of the UN Liability Rules
â5.2.3âArbitration
â5.2.3.1âAppropriate Arbitration Rules for Third-Party Disputes
â5.2.3.2âNeutral Arbitration of Third-Party Disputes: Denationalised and Self-Contained Arbitration
â5.3âThe Mechanism for the Settlement of Disputes of a Private Law Character
â5.3.1âAmicable and Contentious Dispute Resolution under the Auspices of the pca
â5.3.1.1âAmicable Dispute Resolution
â5.3.1.2âContentious Proceedings: First Instance Tribunals and the Standing Appellate Tribunal
â5.3.1.3âThe Permanent Court of Arbitration
â5.3.2âEstablishment and Legal Framework of the Mechanism
â5.3.2.1âThe unga Resolution
â5.3.2.2âThe Convention
â5.3.2.3âFinancial Implications
â5.3.3âOther International Organisations
â5.4âConclusions
6âFindings and Conclusions
â6.1âFindings
â6.2âConcluding Observations
Bibliography
Table of Cases
Index
Lawyers in international organisations; legal advisers in foreign ministries; scholars and (post-graduate) students in public international law, international institutional law and international dispute resolution.