An Intrastate Approach to the Withdrawal from International Organizations

2021 ◽  
Vol 27 (1) ◽  
pp. 49-70
Author(s):  
Michelle Morais de Sa e Silva
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Member State ◽  
International Organizations ◽  
International Organization ◽  
Decision Making Process ◽  
Final Decision ◽  
National Interests ◽  
Democratic Leadership ◽  
American States

Abstract When international organizations take measures that seem to go against the national interests of a Member State, is withdrawal inevitable? What do past cases reveal about how the extreme decision of withdrawal has been contained? This article examines the case of Brazil and the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, which is part of the Organization of American States (OAS). Having received a harsh decision by the Commission, Brazil first threatened to leave OAS, but later mobilized diplomatic strategies to reform its Commission. What happened between a first reaction that considered withdrawal and the final decision to work to reform the system? The article advances the argument that containing international organization withdrawal benefits from the convergence and mutual reinforcement provided by internationally engaged institutions, bureaucrats committed to multilateralism, and a democratic leadership. The case helps to recognize the relevant intrastate variables that play out in the decision-making process that may eventually lead to withdrawal.

Piercing the Corporate Veil: The Responsibility of Member states of an International Organization

2011 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 291-347 ◽  
Author(s):  
Odette Murray
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Member State ◽  
International Law ◽  
International Organizations ◽  
Good Faith ◽  
International Organization ◽  
Member States ◽  
Draft Article ◽  
Legal Limit ◽  
Primary Rule

AbstractThis paper applies two manifestations of the principle of good faith – pacta sunt servanda and the doctrine of abuse of rights – to the complex relationship between member states and international organizations. The paper argues that these existing doctrines operate as a legal limit on the conduct of states when creating, controlling and functioning within international organizations. The paper begins by exploring an innovative provision in the International Law Commission's recently finalised Draft Articles on the Responsibility of International Organisations – Draft Article 61 – according to which a member state will bear international responsibility for the act of an international organization where the member state uses the organization to circumvent its own international obligations. Examining the development of Draft Article 61 and the jurisprudence upon which it is based, this paper argues that the principle which the Commission in fact seeks to articulate in Draft Article 61 is that of good faith in the performance of treaties. As such, being based on a primary rule of international law, this paper queries whether Draft Article 61 belongs in a set of secondary rules. The paper then considers the role of states in the decision-making organs of international organizations and argues that the widely held presumption against member state responsibility for participation in decision-making organs can and should be displaced in certain cases, in recognition of the various voting mechanisms in international organizations and the varied power which certain states may wield. The paper argues that the doctrine of abuse of rights operates as a fundamental legal limit on the exercise of a member state's voting discretion, and thereby forms a complementary primary obligation placed on states in the context of their participation in international organizations.

The Institutionalization of a Process

2016 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 308-340
Author(s):  
Gloria Fernández Arribas
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
International Law ◽  
International Organizations ◽  
Legal Order ◽  
International Organization ◽  
Soft Law ◽  
Decision Making Process ◽  
Main Task ◽  
Kimberley Process ◽  
Law Making

The Kimberley Process represents a new method of international cooperation between subjects of international law. It was named by its creators as a process, setting it apart from international organizations, and leading too to its consideration as informal international law-making or soft law. In this study we shall analyze the extent to which the Kimberley Process falls into these categories. Our main task, however, is to compare it to formal international organizations, with a view to establishing whether what really has been created is an institutionalization process that is like an international organization, but with a different name. To do this, we will analyze with reference to the Kimberley Process the various respective fields of international organizations, such as founding agreement, membership, structure, decision-making process and legal order.

Abuse of the Legal Personality of International Organizations and the Responsibility of Member States

2007 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 91-119 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jean d'Aspremont
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
International Law ◽  
International Organizations ◽  
International Organization ◽  
Decision Making Process ◽  
Member States ◽  
Legal Personality ◽  
International Obligations ◽  
International Legal Personality

AbstractIt is classically contended that when an international organization endowed with international legal personality commits an international wrongful act, the organization is to be held exclusively responsible even though the act would have constituted a violation of its member states' obligations if committed by them. This Article intends to depart from such a rigid interpretation of the responsibility of international organization and makes the argument that when member states abuse the international legal personality of an international organization through the exercise of an excessive control over the decision-making process of the organization, they must be held, together with the organization, responsible for violations of international law by the organization provided that such a wrongful act would also constitute a breach of the member states' international obligations if committed by them. It is posited here that, in this situation, member states can no longer hide behind the screen of the international legal personality of the organization. Failing to take the extent of control exercised by member states over the decision-making process of an international organization into account boils down to ignoring that autonomy is one of the constitutive elements of the legal personality of an international organization, which can bolster the contemporary move away from international institutionalism.

scholarly journals A visita da Comissão Interamericana de Direitos Humanos na Argentina durante a ditadura civil-militar (1976-1983) | The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights’ on-site visit in Argentina during the civil-military dictatorship (1976-1983)

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
pp. e58852
Author(s):  
Gabriel Roberto Dauer
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
International Organizations ◽  
Site Visit ◽  
Foreign Policy Analysis ◽  
Military Dictatorship ◽  
American States ◽  
The Military ◽  
To Receive

As violações de direitos humanos na ditadura civil-militar argentina (1976-1983) foram tema de foros multilaterais, sendo um deles a Comissão Interamericana de Direitos Humanos (CIDH) da Organização dos Estados Americanos. Nesse contexto, este trabalho analisa como a ditadura respondeu às críticas aos direitos humanos, particularmente quando da visita in loco da CIDH na Argentina em 1979 até a publicação de seu informe em 1980. Utilizamos da Análise de Política Externa para compreender as tomadas de decisão da ditadura para receber a CIDH, os atores envolvidos e as consequências nacionais e internacionais desse evento. A visita transformou o campo de oportunidades de denúncia e visibilidade de opositores ao expor as atrocidades da ditadura. Contudo, as decisões do regime não foram lineares: os militares não eram os únicos interessados em defender seus interesses; grupos de direitos humanos, exilados e organizações internacionais disputaram esse campo, somadas desavenças internas na Junta Militar que dificultaram uma congruência diplomática.Palavras-chave: Argentina; Ditadura; Comissão Interamericana de Direitos Humanos.ABSTRACT:Human rights violations during the argentine civil-military dictatorship (1976-1983) were a theme on multilateral forums, such as the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) of the Organization of American States (OAS). The article analyzes how the dictatorship reacted to criticisms regarding human rights violations in Argentina, especially during the IACHR's on-site visit in Argentina in 1979 until the publication of its report in 1980. Theoretically, Foreign Policy Analysis concepts were articulated to understand the decision-making of the dictatorship to receive the IACHR, the actors involved, and the national and international consequences of the event. IACHR's visit transformed the field of human rights actors’ opportunities of complaints and the visibility of opponents by exposing the atrocities of the dictatorship, whose decisions were not linear: the military was not the only interested actor in defending its interests; human rights groups, exiles, and international organizations also disputed this narrative, while internal disputes in the Military Junta made Argentina's diplomatic congruence difficult.Keywords: Argentina; Dictatorship; Inter-American Commission on Human Rights. Recebido em: 31 mar. 2021 | Aceito em: 23 jun. 2021.

scholarly journals ‘Los Argentinos Somos Derechos Y Humanos’: A Política Externa Da Ditadura Civil-Militar Argentina (1976-1983) Diante Da Visita Da Comissão Interamericana De Direitos Humanos

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Gabriel Roberto Dauer
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
International Organizations ◽  
Site Visit ◽  
Foreign Policy Analysis ◽  
Military Dictatorship ◽  
American States ◽  
The Military ◽  
To Receive

As violações de direitos humanos na ditadura civil-militar argentina (1976-1983) foram tema de foros multilaterais, sendo um deles a Comissão Interamericana de Direitos Humanos (CIDH) da Organização dos Estados Americanos. Nesse contexto, este trabalho analisa como a ditadura respondeu às críticas aos direitos humanos, particularmente quando da visita in loco da CIDH na Argentina em 1979 até a publicação de seu informe em 1980. Utilizamos da Análise de Política Externa para compreender as tomadas de decisão da ditadura para receber a CIDH, os atores envolvidos e as consequências nacionais e internacionais desse evento. A visita transformou o campo de oportunidades de denúncia e visibilidade de opositores ao expor as atrocidades da ditadura. Contudo, as decisões do regime não foram lineares: os militares não eram os únicos interessados em defender seus interesses; grupos de direitos humanos, exilados e organizações internacionais disputaram esse campo, somadas desavenças internas na Junta Militar que dificultaram uma congruência diplomática.Palavras-chave: Argentina; Ditadura; Comissão Interamericana de Direitos Humanos.ABSTRACTHuman rights violations during the Argentine civil-military dictatorship (1976-1983) were a theme on multilateral forums, such as the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) of the Organization of American States (OAS). The article analyzes how the dictatorship reacted to criticisms regarding human rights violations in Argentina, especially during the IACHR's on-site visit in Argentina in 1979 until the publication of its report in 1980.  Theoretically, Foreign Policy Analysis concepts were articulated to understand the decision-making of the dictatorship to receive the IACHR, the actors involved, and the national and international consequences of the event. IACHR's visit transformed the field of human rights actors’ opportunities of complaints and the visibility of opponents by exposing the atrocities of the dictatorship, whose decisions were not linear: the military was not the only interested actor in defending its interests; human rights groups, exiles, and international organizations also disputed this narrative, while internal disputes in the Military Junta made Argentina's diplomatic congruence difficult.Keywords: Argentina; Dictatorship; Inter-American Commission on Human Rights. Recebido em: 19 Nov. 2020 | Aceito em: 01 Jan. 2021 

In/on applied legal research: Pragmatic limits to the impact of peripheral international legal scholarship via policy papers

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-13
Author(s):  
Arthur Roberto Capella Giannattasio ◽  
Débora Roma Drezza ◽  
Maria Beatriz Wehby
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
International Law ◽  
International Organizations ◽  
International Organization ◽  
Primary Sources ◽  
Decision Making Process ◽  
Legal Research ◽  
Legal Scholarship ◽  
Academic Communities ◽  
The Impact

Abstract This article examines the limits that academics from peripheral countries might encounter while trying to influence the decision-making process inside an international organization. Although there are different mechanisms whereby academia might influence non-academic debates, we highlight here the use of policy papers, in order to examine and discuss the non-textual barriers which might be faced by those academics. After an analysis of primary sources this article presents some pragmatic limits in the use of policy papers and discusses the consequences of this condition for the legitimation of international organizations. As such, relevant international organizations still seem to be unresponsive to some initiatives in particular: closed to the spontaneous participation of academia; and not willing to call for contributions from academic communities. This is particularly relevant for contributions from peripheral academia and other non-state actors, who lack the capability to disturb the traditional ideational power exercised by core (Western) countries and by state-centric ideology in current international law.

Method for Selecting Storage Enterprises Based on IFHA

2015 ◽  
Vol 713-715 ◽  
pp. 1769-1772
Author(s):  
Jie Wu ◽  
Lei Na Zheng ◽  
Tie Jun Pan
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Group Decision Making ◽  
Group Decision ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Decision Problems ◽  
Decision Making Process ◽  
Final Decision ◽  
Multiple Decision Makers ◽  
Intuitionistic Fuzzy ◽  
Averaging Operator

In order to reflect the decision-making more scientific and democratic, modern decision problems often require the participation of multiple decision makers. In group decision making process,require the use of intuitionistic fuzzy hybrid averaging operator (IFHA) to get the final decision result.

The implications of the decision in Helen Suzman Foundation v Judicial Service Commission 2018 (7) BCLR 763 (CC) 8 on the functioning of the South African Judicial Service Commission

2020 ◽  
Vol 24 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nomthandazo Ntlama
Keyword(s):  
South Africa ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
South African ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Decision Making Process ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Service Commission ◽  
Insight Into ◽  
Future Management

ABSTRACT The article examines the implications of the judgment of the Constitutional Court in Helen Suzman Foundation v Judicial Service Commission 2018 (7) BCLR 763 (CC) 8 on the functioning of the Judicial Service Commission (JSC). The judgment has brought to the fore a new lease of life relating to the JSC's post-interview deliberations as a disclosable record in terms of Rule 53(1)(b) of the Uniform Rules of Court. The disclosure seeks to provide an insight into the decision-making process of the JSC in the appointment of judicial officers in South Africa. It is argued that the judgment is two-pronged: first, the disclosure of the post-interview record enhances the culture of justification for decisions taken, which advances the foundational values of the new democratic dispensation; secondly, it creates uncertainty about the future management and protection of the JSC processes in the undertaking of robust debates on the post-interview deliberations. It then questions whether the JSC members will be privileged in their engagement with the suitability of the candidates to be recommended for appointment by the President. The question is raised against the uncertainty about which decision of the JSC will be challenged that will need the disclosure of the record because the judgment does not entail the national disclosure of the record in respect of each candidate but applies only when there is an application for review of the JSC decision. Key words: Judicial Service Commission, appointments, discretion, judiciary, independence, rule of law, discretion, accountability, transparency, human rights.

The German Länder: From Milieu-Shaping to Territorial Politics

2003 ◽  
Author(s):  
Charlie Jeffery
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Member State ◽  
European Integration ◽  
Decision Making Process ◽  
Post Cold War ◽  
Collective Rights ◽  
German Länder ◽  
Territorial Politics ◽  
Over Time ◽  
The Eu

This chapter looks at Europeanization through the lens of how the German Länder have responded to challenges posed by European integration since 1985. It does this by conceiving of ‘Europeanization’ as a two-way process in which the EU imposes adaptational pressures on, but is also subject to adaptational pressures from, the Länder. The chapter also uses the timescale of fifteen years to explore the dynamics of Europeanization. It finds that the Länder have persistently sought to minimize any perceived ‘misfit’ between the EU decision-making process and their domestic role as constituent units of the German federation. The nature of the misfit, and ideas on its resolution, have, however, changed over time as both the EU and Germany have adapted to the post-Cold War era. An initial concern for winning collective rights of access to a deepening EU is now being supplanted by a concern to protect individual Länder autonomy within the framework of the German member state from what is increasingly perceived as an unnecessarily interventionist EU.

7 Immunity, 7.6 Prewitt Enterprises, Inc. v Org. of Petroleum Exporting Countries , 353 F.3d 916 (11th Cir. 2003)

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Boon Kristen
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Member State ◽  
International Organizations ◽  
The United States ◽  
Civil Procedure ◽  
International Organization ◽  
Domestic Court ◽  
Court Of Appeals ◽  
Foreign Law ◽  
Effective Service

This case addresses effective service of process of an international organization by a non-member state. The United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit relied upon the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP) because the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) did not fall within the purview of the International Organizations Immunities Act (IOIA) and no other applicable treaty existed regarding the treatment of the OPEC in a United States domestic court. The decision’s reliance upon FRCP and application of foreign law resulted in the inability of the plaintiffs to bring a claim against the OPEC without its express consent.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document