The Law of Responsability of Internacional Organizations: General Rules, Special Regimes or Alternative Mechanisms of Accountability?

Autor:Paolo Palchetti
Páginas:72-88
RESUMO

O presente artigo tem por objetivo analisar duas diferentes, ainda que relacionadas, críticas dirigidas à abordagem geral seguida pela Comissão de Direito Internacional no seu trabalho de codificação das regras relativas à responsabilidade das organizações internacionais. A primeira crítica baseia-se na consideração da grande diversidade entre as organizações internacionais e da dificuldade que... (ver resumo completo)

 
TRECHO GRÁTIS
72
X ANUÁRIO BRASILEIRO DE DIREITO INTERNACIONAL
THE LAW OF RESPONSIBILITY OF INTERNATIONAL
ORGANIZATIONS: GENERAL RULES, SPECIAL REGIMES OR
ALTERNATIVE MECHANISMS OF ACCOUNTABILITY?
Paolo Palchetti1
ABSTRACT
The present article aims to analyze two different, albeit related, criticisms
addressed to the general approach followed by the International Law Commission in
its work of codification of the rules on the responsibility of international
organizations. The first relies on the consideration of the great diversity among
international organizations and of the ensuing difficulty of identifying a set of rules
of responsibility which apply to every organization. The other criticism raises the
question of whether a set of general rules of responsibility may be regarded as an
adequate way of making international organizations more accountable. This article
will show that these criticisms appear excessive. It is submitted that, to the extent that
the Articles adopted on 2011 provide a first attempt to delineate a comprehensive
legal framework for regulating the question of the responsibility of international
organizations, they fill an important gap and may contribute to generate a greater
awareness of the limitations incumbent on international organizations and of the
consequences stemming from an overstepping of such limitations.
Keywords: International organizations. Responsibility. Accountability. International
Law Commission.
RESUMO
O presente artigo tem por objetivo analisar duas diferentes, ainda que
relacionadas, críticas dirigidas à abordagem geral seguida pela Comissão de Direito
Internacional no seu trabalho de codificação das regras relativas à responsabilidade
das organizações internacionais. A primeira crítica baseia-se na consideração da
grande diversidade entre as organizações internacionais e da dificuldade que se
seguiu de identificação de um conjunto de regras de responsabilidade que se aplicam
a todas as organizações. A outra crítica levanta a questão de saber se um conjunto de
regras gerais da responsabilidade pode ser considerado como uma forma adequada de
tornar as organizações internacionais mais responsáveis.
Este artigo irá mostrar que estas críticas parecem excessivas. Alega-se que, na
medida em que as disposições adotadas em 2011 fornecem uma primeira tentativa de
delinear um quadro jurídico abrangente para regular a questão da responsabilidade
1PhD, University of Milan. Professor of International Law, University of Macerata.
73
The Law of Responsibility of International Organizations: General Rules, Special Regimes or Alternative
Mechanisms of Accountability?
das organizações internacionais, eles preenchem uma lacuna importante e podem
contribuir para gerar uma maior consciência das limitações que incumbem às
organizações internacionais e das consequências decorrentes de uma ultrapassagem
de tais limitações.
Palavras-Chave: Organizações Internacionais. Responsabilidade. Comissão De
Direito Internacional
INTRODUCTION
On 9 December 2011 the United Nations General Assembly adopted
Resolution 66/100, by which it took note of the articles on the responsibility of
international organizations, presented by the International Law Commission, and
commended «them to the attention of Governments and international organizations
without prejudice to the question of their future adoption or other appropriate
action».2The 67 Articles on the responsibility of international organizations, to
which Resolution 66/100 refers, were adopted on second reading by the International
Law Commission at its sixty-three session in 2011.3If one considers that the first
report of the Commission’s special rapporteur, Giorgio Gaja, was submitted in 2003,4
it can be said that the period of time spent by Commission on this work was a
relatively short one. This can be also explained by the fact that, in addressing the
issue of responsibility of international organizations, the Commission benefited from
the previous codification of the rules on state responsibility. The general approach of
the 2011 Articles, including the distinction between primary and secondary rules, as
well as the content of several provisions are modeled on the Articles on state
responsibility adopted in 2001.5
Much has already been written about the 2011 Articles on the responsibility
of international organizations.6Some of the legal issues addressed in the Articles
2UN Doc. A/RES/66/100, paragraph 3.
3Report of the International Law Commiss ion on the Work of its Sixty-third Session, UN doc. A/66/10, p.
54.
4GAJA, G., First report on the responsibility of international organizations, UN doc. A/CN.4/532.
5However, the Commission took care to specify that the Articles are not based on any presumption that
the Articles on state responsibility are also applicable to international organizations: «While the present
draft articles are in many respects similar to the articles on State responsibility, they represent an
autonomous text. Each issue has been considered from the specific perspective of the responsibility of
international organizations. Some provisions address question s that are peculiar to internationa l
organizations. When in the st udy of the responsibility of in ternational organizations t he conclusion is
reached that an identi cal or similar solution to the one expressed in th e articles on State resp onsibility
should apply with respect to international organizations, this is based on appropriate reasons and not on a
general presumption that the same principles apply». Report of the International Law Commission on the
Work of its Sixty-third Session, cit., p. 69. On this issue, see AHLBORN, C., The Use of Analogies in
Drafting the Articles on the Res ponsibility of Internationa l Organizations. An Appra isal of the ‘Copy-
Paste’ Approach, International Organizations Law Review, vol. 9, 2012, p. 53 ff.
6Among the many contributions, see RAGAZZI, M. (ed.), Responsibility of international
organizations: essays in memory of Sir Ian Brownlie, Martinus Nijhoff, Leiden/ Boston, 2013; the

Para continuar a ler

PEÇA SUA AVALIAÇÃO