Chapter 2: The customary status of the articles on the responsibility of international organizations: a critical assessment of its scholarly treatment
The Articles on Responsibility of International Organizations (ARIO) have given rise to various controversies, notably concerning: the customary status of the rules set out in the ARIO; the participation of international organisations in the formation of general custom, if any, underpinning those ru...
Salvato in:
| Autore principale: | |
|---|---|
| Natura: | Online |
| Lingua: | inglese |
| Pubblicazione: |
Edward Elgar Publishing
2024
|
| Soggetti: | |
| Accesso online: | https://directory.doabooks.org/handle/20.500.12854/146253 |
| Tags: |
Nessun Tag, puoi essere il primo ad aggiungerne!!
|
| Riassunto: | The Articles on Responsibility of International Organizations (ARIO) have given rise to various controversies, notably concerning: the customary status of the rules set out in the ARIO; the participation of international organisations in the formation of general custom, if any, underpinning those rules; and the nature of those rules as secondary rules of ‘systemic’ significance. This chapter critically examines scholarly approaches to those controversies and advances three major claims. First, the customary status of the ARIO is often assumed or asserted, in contrast to the views of states and international organisations. Secondly, the nature of international organisations as derived subjects of law is insufficiently considered in analyses of international organisations’ custom-making power. Thirdly, the character of the ARIO as an instrument aiming to codify secondary rules performing ‘systemic’ functions requires a more rigorous approach, notably if compliance with the two-element approach to customary international law identification is to be ensured. |
|---|