Abstract
This chapter addresses the question of how the responsibility to discharge the duty of care is allocated between an international organization, its member States and the civilian personnel deployed abroad by the international organization. First of all, it discusses the applicability of the rules on international responsibility, in particular the Draft Articles on the Responsibility of International Organizations and the Articles on the Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts. In this regard, attention will be paid to the interplay between special regimes imposed by the international organizations and general rules. Secondly, and provided that the general rules on international responsibility have a role in apportioning the responsibility between States and international organizations, the chapter analyses the rules of attribution of conduct and of responsibility in light of the most recent international practice and jurisprudence.
Annex II—the Table of Cases—can be accessed online here: http://extras.springer.com/.
Andrea Spagnolo, Research Fellow in International Law, Department of Law, University of Turin, Lungo Dora Siena 100, 10154 Turin, Italy, andrea.spagnolo@unito.it
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
See for example Convention on the Safety of United Nations and Associated Personnel, opened for signature 9 December 1994, entered into force 15 January 1999, Article 7.
- 2.
On the allocation of responsibility to the host State, see Chap. 4 by Gasbarri in this volume.
- 3.
Merkelbach 2017.
- 4.
Ibid., p. 14.
- 5.
Flores Callejas and Wesley Cazeau 2016, p. 1, para 6.
- 6.
Policy of the European Union on the security of personnel deployed outside the EU in an operational capacity under Title V of the Treaty on European Union, doc. 9490/06 of 29 May 2006, p. 12, paras 28 ff.
- 7.
See Nollkaemper and Jacobs 2013, pp. 366–368.
- 8.
On this issue see more broadly Chap. 16 by Poli.
- 9.
See accordingly Ahlborn 2013, p. 20.
- 10.
Draft Articles on the Responsibility of International Organizations (DARIO), with commentaries, in Yearbook of the International Law Commission, 2011, Vol. II, Part Two, Article 1.
- 11.
Draft Articles on the Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts (DARSIWA), with commentaries, Article 1.
- 12.
DARIO, Commentary to Article 1, para 3.
- 13.
DARSIWA, Commentary to Article 1, para 1.
- 14.
For an overview of the theories and of the relevant judicial decisions see the chapter authored by de Guttry in this volume, Chap. 2.
- 15.
ICJ, Reparation for injuries suffered in the service of the United Nations, Advisory Opinion, 11 April 1949, I.C.J. Rep. 1949, p. 174.
- 16.
Staff Regulations and Rules of the United Nations. Secretary-General’s bulletin, UN Doc ST/SGB/2017/1 of 30 December 2016.
- 17.
OSCE Staff Regulations and Staff Rules, Regulation 2.03, https://jobs.osce.org/resources/document/osce-staff-regulations-and-staff-rules. Accessed 28 February 2018.
- 18.
In Part II of this volume, the internal rules of each international organization will be analysed.
- 19.
On such debate see Gasbarri 2017, pp. 87–99.
- 20.
- 21.
DARIO, Article 10(2).
- 22.
See DARIO, Commentary to Artilce 10, para 7.
- 23.
See DARIO, Commentary to Article 10, para 8.
- 24.
Ahlborn 2011, p. 422.
- 25.
Comments and observations received from international organizations, UN Doc A/CN.4/568 and Add.1, pp. 133–135. The World Health Organization (WHO), to the contrary, showed its appreciation for the inclusion of a similar rules in the DARIO, regarding it as an ‘acceptable compromise’ (ibid., p. 135).
- 26.
DARIO, Article 64: ‘These articles do not apply where and to the extent that the conditions for the existence of an internationally wrongful act or the content or implementation of the international responsibility of an international organization, or a State in connection with the conduct of an international organization, are governed by special rules of international law. Such special rules of international law may be contained in the rules of the organization applicable to the relations between an international organization and its members.’
- 27.
D’Argent 2014, p. 230, particularly footnote 75.
- 28.
DARSIWA, General Commentary, para 1.
- 29.
Ibid., para 4.
- 30.
DARIO, General Commentary, para 3.
- 31.
David 2010, p. 31.
- 32.
See generally Nollkaemper and Jacobs 2013, pp. 408–412.
- 33.
- 34.
Latty 2010, p. 361.
- 35.
Linderfalk 2009, p. 62.
- 36.
Klein 2010, pp. 298–299.
- 37.
DARIO, Article 6(1).
- 38.
DARIO, Article 2(d).
- 39.
ICJ, Reparation for injuries, p. 177.
- 40.
ICJ, Difference Relating to Immunity from Legal Process of a Special Rapporteur of the Commission on Human Rights, Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Rep. 1999, p. 62, pp. 88–89, para 66.
- 41.
DARIO, Article 6(2). See Klein 2016, p. 1030.
- 42.
See again Klein 2010, p. 298.
- 43.
See accordingly Magi 2010, p. 760.
- 44.
DARIO, Article 8.
- 45.
Klein 2010, p. 305.
- 46.
ICJ, Certain expenses of the United Nations (Article 17, para 2 of the Charter), Advisory Opinion, 20 July 1962, ICJ Rep. 1962, p. 151, p. 168: ‘If it is agreed that the action in question is within the scope of the functions of the Organization but it is alleged that it has been initiated or carried out in a manner not in conformity with the division of functions among the several organs which the Charter prescribes, one moves to the internal plane, to the internal structure of the Organization. If the action was taken by the wrong organ, it was irregular as a matter of that internal structure, but this would not necessarily mean that the expense incurred was not an expense of the Organization. Both national or international law contemplate cases in which the body corporate or politic may be bound, as to third parties, by an ultra vires act of an agent’. See also Salerno 2013, p. 422.
- 47.
This is the case of the many agreements concluded by the EU with third Parties for the Organization of EU military and civilian operations and missions. See on this Chap. 8 by Saluzzo in this volume.
- 48.
See ex multis Bothe 2012, p. 1184.
- 49.
Ibid.
- 50.
Gill and Fleck 2015, p. 267.
- 51.
As noted by the ILC in its Commentary to Article 7 of the DARIO at para 1.
- 52.
See accordingly: Jacob 2013, p. 24.
- 53.
DARIO, Article 7: ‘The conduct of an organ of a State or an organ or agent of an international organization that is placed at the disposal of another international organization shall be considered under international law an act of the latter organization if the organization exercises effective control over that conduct.’
- 54.
For an overview of possible applications of Article 7 in other than peacekeeping scenarios see Palchetti 2016.
- 55.
ICJ, Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States of America), 27 June 1986, I.C.J. Rep. 1986, p. 14, p. 65, para 115.
- 56.
ICJ, Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Bosnia and Herzegovina v. Serbia and Montenegro), 26 February 2007, I.C.J. Rep. 2007, p. 43, p. 208, para 400.
- 57.
See accordingly Messineo 2014, p. 66.
- 58.
See accordingly Cassese 2007, pp. 649 ff.
- 59.
See accordingly Gradoni 2015, p. 298.
- 60.
Gaja 2004, p. 13, para 47.
- 61.
The Hague Court of Appeal, Hasan Nuhanovic v. Netherlands, 7 July 2011, Case No. 12/03324.
- 62.
See accordingly Nollkaemper 2011, p. 1150.
- 63.
The Hague Court of Appeal, Hasan Nuhanovic, para 5.9.
- 64.
See Dannenbaum 2010, pp. 149–151.
- 65.
Sorel 2001, p. 138.
- 66.
See Fry 2014, pp. 98 ff.
- 67.
Eighth report on State responsibility by Mr. Roberto Ago, Special Rapporteur, UN Doc A/CN.4/318 and Add. 1–4 of 24 January, 5 February and 15 June 1979, p. 4, paras 1–47.
- 68.
DARIO, Chapter IV Responsibility of an international organization in connection with the act of a State or another international organization.
- 69.
DARIO, Article 14.
- 70.
DARIO, Article 15.
- 71.
DARIO, Article 16.
- 72.
DARIO, Article 17.
- 73.
See broadly Nedeski and Nollkaemper 2012, pp. 33 ff.
- 74.
- 75.
See DARIO, Commentary to Article 14, para 5. See also DARIO, Commentary to Article 15, para 6.
- 76.
Ibid.
- 77.
DARIO, Commentary to Article 14, para 6.
- 78.
See DARIO, Commentary to Article 16, para 5.
- 79.
Merkelbach 2017, p. 14.
List of References
Ahlborn C (2011) The Rules of International Organizations and the Law of International Responsibility. International Organization Law Review 8:397–482
Amerasinghe CF (1988) The Law of the International Civil Service (as Applied by International Administrative Tribunals) Volume I and II. Clarendon Press, Oxford
Bothe M (2012) Peacekeeping. In: Simma B et al (eds) The Charter of the United Nations: A Commentary. Volume I. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 1172–1200
Cassese A (2007) The Nicaragua and Tadić Tests Revisited in Light of the ICJ Judgment on Genocide in Bosnia. European Journal of International Law 18:649–668
D’Argent P (2014) Reparation, Cessation, Assurances and Guarantees of Non-Repetition. In: Nollkaemper A, Plakokefalos I (eds) Principles of shared responsibility in international law: An appraisal. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 208–250
Dannenbaum T (2010) Translating the Standard of Effective Control into a System of Effective Accountability: How Liability Should be Apportioned for Violations of Human Rights by Member State Troop Contingents Serving as United Nations Peacekeepers. Harvard International Law Journal 51:149–151
David E (2010) Primary and Secondary Rules. In: Crawford J et al (eds) The Law of International Responsibility. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 27–33
Dominicé C (2010) Attribution of Conduct to Multiple States and the Implication of a State in the Act of Another State. In: Crawford J et al (eds) The Law of International Responsibility. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 281–289
Flores Callejas J, Wesley Cazeau J (2016) Safety and Security in the United Nations System. UN, Geneva
Fry JD (2014) Attribution of responsibility. In: Nollkaemper A, Plakokefalos I (eds) Principles of shared responsibility in international law: An appraisal. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 98–133
Gaja G (2004) Second report on responsibility of international organizations, A/CN.4/541. http://legal.un.org/ilc/documentation/english/a_cn4_541.pdf. Accessed 2 March 2018
Gaja G (2014) Primary and Secondary Rules in the International Law on State Responsibility. Rivista di diritto internazionale 97:981–991
Gasbarri L (2017) The Dual Legality of the Rules of International Organizations. International Organizations Law Review 14:87–119
Gill T, Fleck D (2015) Authority, command and control in United Nations-led peace operations. In: Gill T, Fleck D (eds) The Handbook of International Law of Military Operations. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 259–269
Gradoni L (2015) The International Court of Justice and the International Customary Law Game of Cards. In: Andenas M (ed) A Farewell to Fragmentation Reassertion and Convergence in International Law. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 371–398
Jacob P (2013) Les définitions des notions d’organe et d’agent retenues par la CDI sont-elles opérationnelles? Rev BDI 46:17–44
Klein P (2010) The Attribution of Acts to International Organizations. In: Crawford J et al (eds) The Law of International Responsibility. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 2971–315
Klein P (2016) Responsibility. In: Katz Cogan J et al (eds) The Oxford Handbook of International Organizations. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 1026–1046
Kolb R (2017) The International Law of State Responsibility: An Introduction. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham
Latty F (2010) Actions and Omissions. In: Crawford J et al (eds) The Law of International Responsibility. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 356–364
Linderfalk U (2009) State Responsibility and the Primary-Secondary Rules Terminology –The Role of Language for an Understanding of the International Legal System. Nordic Journal of International Law 38:53–72
Magi L (2010) Sull’attribuzione ad una organizzazione internazionale dell’attività di società private che operano per suo conto. Rivista di diritto internazionale 93:753–801.
Merkelbach M (2017) Voluntary Guidelines on the Duty of Care to Seconded Civilian Personnel. http://www.zif-berlin.org/fileadmin/uploads/experten-einsaetze/Voluntary_Guidelines_on_the_Duty_of_Care_to_Seconded_Civilian_Personnel_Final_170420.pdf. Accessed 2 March 2018
Messineo F (2014) Attribution of Conduct. In: Nollkaemper A, Plakokefalos I (eds) Principles of shared responsibility in international law: an appraisal. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 60–97
Nedeski N, Nollkaemper A (2012) Responsibility of international organizations ‘in connection with acts of States’. International Organizations Law Review 9:33–52
Nollkaemper A (2011) Dual Attribution: Liability of the Netherlands for Conduct of Dutchbat in Srebrenica. Journal of International Criminal Justice 9:1143–1157
Nollkaemper A, Jacobs D (2013) Shared Responsibility in International Law: A Conceptual Framework. Michigan Journal of International Law 34:359–438
Palchetti P (2016) Applying the Rules of Attribution in Complex Scenarios. The Case of Partnerships among International Organizations. International Organizations Law Review 13:37–54
Reinisch A (2010) Aid or Assistance and Direction and Control between States and International Organizations in the Commission of Internationally Wrongful Acts. International Organizations Law Review 7:63–77
Salerno F (2013) International responsibility for the conduct of ‘Blue Helmets’: Exploring the organic link. In: Ragazzi M (ed) Responsibility of international organizations. Essays in memory of Sir Ian Brownlie. Nijhoff, Leiden-Boston, pp 415–427
Sorel J M (2001) La responsabilité des Nations Unies dans les opérations de maintien de la paix. International Law Forum 3:127–138
Villalpando S (2016) The Law of International Civil Service. In: Katz Cogan J et al (eds) The Oxford Handbook of International Organizations. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 1069–1084
List of Cases
(A) International Courts
ICJ, Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Bosnia and Herzegovina v. Serbia and Montenegro), 26 February 2007, I.C.J. Rep. 2007, p 43
ICJ, Certain expenses of the United Nations (Article 17 Paragraph 2 of the Charter), Advisory Opinion, 20 July 1962, I.C.J. Rep. 1962, p 151
ICJ, Difference Relating to Immunity from Legal Process of a Special Rapporteur of the Commission on Human Rights, Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Rep. 1999, p 62
ICJ, Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States of America), 27 June 1986, I.C.J. Rep. 1986, p 14
ICJ, Reparation for injuries suffered in the service of the United Nations, Advisory Opinion, 11 April 1949, I.C.J. Rep. 1949, p 174
(B) National Courts
The Hague Court of Appeal, Hasan Nuhanovic v. Netherlands, 7 July 2011, Case No 12/03324
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 T.M.C. Asser press and the authors
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Spagnolo, A. (2018). The Duty of Care of International Organizations: Issues of Conduct and Responsibility Attribution. In: de Guttry, A., Frulli, M., Greppi, E., Macchi, C. (eds) The Duty of Care of International Organizations Towards Their Civilian Personnel. T.M.C. Asser Press, The Hague. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6265-258-3_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6265-258-3_3
Published:
Publisher Name: T.M.C. Asser Press, The Hague
Print ISBN: 978-94-6265-257-6
Online ISBN: 978-94-6265-258-3
eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)