“成员责任”与国际法委员会关于国际组织责任的条款:一些意见

Sienho Yee
{"title":"“成员责任”与国际法委员会关于国际组织责任的条款:一些意见","authors":"Sienho Yee","doi":"10.1163/9789004289222_018","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper briefly explains the idea of \"member responsibility\" for acts of an international organization, moves on to lay out the International Law Commission 2011 Articles on Responsibility of International Organizations framework on this issue, and then offers some critical observations on the ILC treatment of the topic. The 2011 articles framework on this issue can be considered to have four aspects, short-handed roughly as \"independent personality\", \"additional acts approach\", \"no member responsibility\", and ‘remedy-enabling obligations pursuant to the rules of the international organization’. The consolation prizes that the ILC has given to the world are article 61 on prevention of circumvention of member States’ obligations and article 40 on ensuring the fulfillment of the obligation to make reparation. Neither represents a substantial victory for member responsibility, but each can be considered a half-step forward in that direction. As to article 61, the intention to circumvent obligations may be too high a threshold and may not cover the original establishment of an international organization and thus may not completely solve the ‘beautiful for some but ugly for others’ problem, but at least it would catch the overtly villainous States, if any. As to article 40, the ‘take all appropriate measures’ obligation to enable remedies on the part of the international organization as well as its member States may not rise to the level of ‘hard obligations’ because under article 40 these obligations are supposed to be pursuant to the rules of the organization which may reject such obligations. The saving grace is probably the suggestion made in the commentary that an implied obligation to enable remedies should be read into silent or unclear rules of the organization. This can be a powerful idea because silent or unclear rules of the organizations are the norm, other formulations the exception. This ‘rule of interpretation’ may nudge the law into the direction of providing for remedies where they are due.","PeriodicalId":375754,"journal":{"name":"Public International Law eJournal","volume":"2194 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-06-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"‘Member Responsibility’ and the ILC Articles on the Responsibility of International Organizations: Some Observations\",\"authors\":\"Sienho Yee\",\"doi\":\"10.1163/9789004289222_018\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This paper briefly explains the idea of \\\"member responsibility\\\" for acts of an international organization, moves on to lay out the International Law Commission 2011 Articles on Responsibility of International Organizations framework on this issue, and then offers some critical observations on the ILC treatment of the topic. The 2011 articles framework on this issue can be considered to have four aspects, short-handed roughly as \\\"independent personality\\\", \\\"additional acts approach\\\", \\\"no member responsibility\\\", and ‘remedy-enabling obligations pursuant to the rules of the international organization’. The consolation prizes that the ILC has given to the world are article 61 on prevention of circumvention of member States’ obligations and article 40 on ensuring the fulfillment of the obligation to make reparation. Neither represents a substantial victory for member responsibility, but each can be considered a half-step forward in that direction. As to article 61, the intention to circumvent obligations may be too high a threshold and may not cover the original establishment of an international organization and thus may not completely solve the ‘beautiful for some but ugly for others’ problem, but at least it would catch the overtly villainous States, if any. As to article 40, the ‘take all appropriate measures’ obligation to enable remedies on the part of the international organization as well as its member States may not rise to the level of ‘hard obligations’ because under article 40 these obligations are supposed to be pursuant to the rules of the organization which may reject such obligations. The saving grace is probably the suggestion made in the commentary that an implied obligation to enable remedies should be read into silent or unclear rules of the organization. This can be a powerful idea because silent or unclear rules of the organizations are the norm, other formulations the exception. This ‘rule of interpretation’ may nudge the law into the direction of providing for remedies where they are due.\",\"PeriodicalId\":375754,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Public International Law eJournal\",\"volume\":\"2194 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2013-06-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Public International Law eJournal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004289222_018\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Public International Law eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004289222_018","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

本文简要解释了国际组织行为“成员责任”的概念,接着阐述了国际法委员会2011年《国际组织责任条款》关于这一问题的框架,然后对国际法委员会对这一主题的处理提出了一些批判性的看法。2011年关于这一问题的条款框架可以认为有四个方面,简称为“独立人格”、“附加行为方式”、“无成员责任”和“根据国际组织规则的救济义务”。国际法委员会给全世界的安慰奖是关于防止规避成员国义务的第61条和关于确保履行赔偿义务的第40条。两者都不是成员责任的实质性胜利,但都可以被视为朝着这个方向前进了半步。关于第61条,规避义务的意图可能是一个过高的门槛,可能不包括最初建立一个国际组织,因此可能不能完全解决“对一些人来说是美好的,对另一些人来说是丑陋的”问题,但至少它会抓住公然作恶的国家,如果有的话。关于第40条,“采取一切适当措施”以使国际组织及其成员国能够采取补救措施的义务可能不会上升到“硬义务”的水平,因为根据第40条,这些义务应该符合可能拒绝这种义务的组织的规则。可取之处可能是评注中提出的建议,即应将使补救措施成为可能的默示义务解读为组织的沉默或不明确的规则。这可能是一个强有力的想法,因为沉默或不明确的组织规则是常态,其他公式是例外。这种“解释规则”可能会将法律推向提供应有救济的方向。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
‘Member Responsibility’ and the ILC Articles on the Responsibility of International Organizations: Some Observations
This paper briefly explains the idea of "member responsibility" for acts of an international organization, moves on to lay out the International Law Commission 2011 Articles on Responsibility of International Organizations framework on this issue, and then offers some critical observations on the ILC treatment of the topic. The 2011 articles framework on this issue can be considered to have four aspects, short-handed roughly as "independent personality", "additional acts approach", "no member responsibility", and ‘remedy-enabling obligations pursuant to the rules of the international organization’. The consolation prizes that the ILC has given to the world are article 61 on prevention of circumvention of member States’ obligations and article 40 on ensuring the fulfillment of the obligation to make reparation. Neither represents a substantial victory for member responsibility, but each can be considered a half-step forward in that direction. As to article 61, the intention to circumvent obligations may be too high a threshold and may not cover the original establishment of an international organization and thus may not completely solve the ‘beautiful for some but ugly for others’ problem, but at least it would catch the overtly villainous States, if any. As to article 40, the ‘take all appropriate measures’ obligation to enable remedies on the part of the international organization as well as its member States may not rise to the level of ‘hard obligations’ because under article 40 these obligations are supposed to be pursuant to the rules of the organization which may reject such obligations. The saving grace is probably the suggestion made in the commentary that an implied obligation to enable remedies should be read into silent or unclear rules of the organization. This can be a powerful idea because silent or unclear rules of the organizations are the norm, other formulations the exception. This ‘rule of interpretation’ may nudge the law into the direction of providing for remedies where they are due.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The Dual‐Nature Thesis: Which Dualism? Legality and the Legal Relation Soldiers as Public Officials: A Moral Justification for Combatant Immunity A Pragmatic Reconstruction of Law's Claim to Authority Ownership, Use, and Exclusivity: The Kantian Approach
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1