Hostname: page-component-6d856f89d9-mhpxw Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-16T06:30:03.299Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Principles and Practices of Recognition by International Organizations

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 April 2017

Hans Aufricht
Hans Aufricht*
Affiliation:
International Monetary Fund
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Intergovernmental organizations are frequently confronted with questions concerning the recognition of states and governments. This essay deals with the principles and practices concerning recognition by major intergovernmental organizations in the light of the related rules and practices of the League of Nations, the Inter-American System and the United Nations.

Type
Research Article
Information
American Journal of International Law , Volume 43 , Issue 4 , October 1949 , pp. 679 - 704
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 1949

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 See League of Nations, Records of the 2nd Assembly, Plenary Meetings, p. 334.

2 On this question see Lauterpacht, H., Recognition in International Law (Cambridge, 1947), p. 346 Google Scholar, footnote 1.

3 See League of Nations, Records of the 1st Assembly, Plenary Meetings, pp. 618, 623.

4 For the extensive discussion of this issue, see League of Nations Official Journal, Spec. Supp. No. 130, pp. 17-27, and ibid., Spec. Supp. No. 125, pp. 62-64.

5 For the opposite view that admission to the League is tantamount to recognition, see Schüeking-Wehberg, , Die Satzung des Völkerbundes (Berlin, 1931), pp. 267–269 Google Scholar.

6 See League of Nations Council, Procès-Verbal, 2nd Session, 4th Meeting, p. 5.

7 See the discussion of the severance of diplomatic relations between Uruguay and the U.S.S.R. League of Nations Official Journal (1936), pp. 90-98.

8 League of Nations, Records of the 1st Assembly, Plenary Meetings, pp. 568-569.

9 For the text of these Minority Declarations, see Protection of Linguistic, Baciai and Religious Minorities by the League of Nations (League of Nations Doc. C.L. 110. 1927. I. Annex) (1927 I.B.2.).

10 On “Conditional Recognition” see Lauterpacht, op. cit., pp. 357-364; see also Statement by the Latvian Delegate, Dr. Walters, in Records of the 3rd Assembly, Minutes of the 6th Committee, p. 12: “When Latvia undertook to make a statement, she complied not with a resolution of the Assembly but with a recommendation -which was not legally binding and did not constitute a condition for admission.” (Italics added.)

11 See League of Nations Official Journal, Spec. Supp. No. 19, p. 32.

12 See Hackworth, Digest of International Law, Vol. I, p. 306.

13 For full text of the report of the Committee on Credentials, see League of Nations Official Journal, Spec. Supp. No. 155, pp. 40-41.

14 See, for instance, Survey of International Affairs, 1935, Vol. II (ed. by Toynbee, A. J., London, 1936), pp. 619–526 Google Scholar.

15 Balosaim, C. E., La perte de la qualité de membre de la S.d.N.. (Les cas de l’U.R.S.S. et de la France) (Geneva, 1945), pp. 32–36 Google Scholar.

16 For the text of the report, see League of Nations Officiai Journal, Spec. Supp. No. 113, pp. 10-13 (Session of the Advisory Committee, June 7, 1933).

17 Ibid., pp. 12-13.

18 See League of Nations Official Journal (1934), pp. 430-431.

19 Ibid.

20 (1938), 304 U. S. 126, 137. For municipal and international courts as agencies of recognition, see Lauterpacht, op. cit., pp. 69-73.

21 League of Nations, Records of the 1st Assembly, Plenary Meetings, p. 667.

22 For League practice see Burton, Margaret E., The Assembly of the League of Nations (Chicago, 1941), pp. 107–109 Google Scholar; for United Nations practice, see Doc. A/P.V./81, Nov. 20, 1947.

23 On the Inter-American system see, for instance, Resolution IX of the Inter-American Conference on Problems of War and Peace, Mexico City, Feb. 21-March 8, 1945, in Pan American Union, Congress and Conference Series, No. 47, pp. 33-38.

24 On these conferences, see ibid., p. 34.

25 Ibid., p. 1.

26 See notes 35 and 39 below.

27 See Minutes of the Special Meeting of the Governing Board of the Pan American Union, held July 28, 1947 (Approved at the meeting held Oct. 20, 1947), p. 13.

28 Ibid., p. 17.

29 Ibid., p. 18. It should be noted that on p. 18 Nicaragua is listed among those in favor of the invitation, but that on p. 24 the Ambassador of Nicaragua is recorded as abstaining from voting.

30 Ibid., p. 18.

31 Ibid., 24.

32 Ibid., 28.

33 Ibid., p. 26.

34 See Statute and Regulations of the Pan Americas Union, Law and Treaty Series No. 9, p. 5.

35 See Minutes of the Special Meeting of the Governing Board, op. cit., p. 14. On March 8, 1948, the Governing Board of the Pan American Union approved the report of a Special Committee recommending the participation of Nicaragua in the Bogota Conference.

36 See, for instance, the statement by Venezuela, ibid., p. 15: “the Venezuelan Foreign Ministry maintains the criterion that an invitation to the mentioned de facto government would imply its recognition....”

37 See, for instance, the statement by Argentina “that this invitation in no wise implies recognition.” Ibid., p. 17.

38 See, for instance, Kunz, Josef L., “The Bogota Charter of the Organization of American States,” this Journal, Vol. 42 (July, 1948), p. 575 Google Scholar: “This seems to reestablish the legal rule that the right to be represented does not depend on whether the de facto government of a Member State is or is not recognized at the time in question. “See also Fenwick, C. G., “The Recognition of De Facto Governments,” this Journal, Vol. 42 (October, 1948), p. 863 Google Scholar.

39 See Hackworth, op. cit., Vol. I, p. 347.

40 See Statute and Regulations of the Pan American Union, Law and Treaty Series No. 9.

41 Resolution IX (3). For the corresponding Art. 48 of the Charter of the Organization of American States, see below.

42 Pan American Union, Congress and Conference Series, No. 47, loc. cit., p. 13.

43 On this recommendation see Fenwick, Charles G., “Third Meeting of Ministers of Foreign Affairs at Rio de Janeiro,” in this Journal, Vol. 36 (1942), p. 178 Google Scholar; on Resolution V concerning severance of commercial and financial relations, see ibid.

44 For final list and chart on these measures, see Bulletin of the Pan American Union, February, 1946, p. 94.

45 See United Nations Conference on International Organization, Amendments and Observations on the Dumbarton Oaks Proposals, submitted by the Norwegian Delegation, May 3, 1945. Doc. 2, G/7, n. (1), p. 2.

46 On recognition by the League of Nations, see Jessup, Philip C., A Modern Law of Nations (New York, 1948), p. 45 Google Scholar; see also Graham, Malbone W., The League of Nations and the Recognition of States (Berkeley, 1933)Google Scholar, passim.

With reference to the United Nations, Jessup (op. cit., p. 47) suggests that “it would be within the competence of the General Assembly to adopt by the two-thirds vote required under Article 18 for important questions a declaration relative to the essential characteristics of a state and to assert that there must be a finding of the possession of such characteristics before any political entity is recognized as a state . . . the criteria for membership would not be identical with the criteria for statehood, but the latter would not be included within the former, since one requirement for membership is that the applicant shall be a state.”

47 See “Rules covering the Admission of New Members to the United Nations” in General Assembly, First Session, Journal No. 75, Supp. A-64, Add. 1, p. 824, and U. N. Doc. A/502, Nov. 20, 1947, incorporating new Rules of Procedure for the General Assembly Nos. 113, 114, 116, 117, adopted on Nov. 19, 1947; see especially the new Rule 116. In addition, the Assembly, at its 122nd plenary meeting, held on Nov. 21, 1947, and on the recommendation of the First Committee, adopted certain rules governing the admission of new Members, for insertion in the Rules of Procedure of the General Assembly as adopted on Nov. 17, 1947. For text of these rules (Rules 123 to 127) see U. N. Doc. A/520, Dec. 12, 1947, p. 23. On the .use of the “veto” in the Security Council in connection with applications for membership, see Bechhoefer, Bernhard G., “Voting in the Security Council,” Department of State Bulletin, Vol. XIX, No. 470 (July 4, 1948), p. 3 Google Scholar, especially pp. 5-7. On membership in general, see also Kelsen, Hans, “Membership in the United Nations,” Columbia Law Review, Vol. 46 (May, 1946), p. 391 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

48 For the voting on these resolutions in the General Assembly, see United Nations Weekly Bulletin, Nov. 25, 1947, p. 685.

49 See U. N. Doc. A/471 adopted by the General Assembly on Nov. 17, 1947.

50 International Court of Justice, Conditions of Admission of a State to Membership in the United Nations (Article 4 of the Charter). Advisory Opinion of May 28th, 1948; this Journal, Vol. 42 (1948), p. 927.

51 I. C. J., op. cit., p. 71.

52 Ibid., p. 77.

53 See ibid., pp. 82-93.

54 Ibid., p. 97.

55 Ibid., p. 110.

56 Ibid., p. 114.

57 For text of the decrees, see International Conciliation, No. 398 (March, 1944), p. 246.

58 Ibid., p. 247.

59 See “Report of Vyacheslaw M. Molotov to the Supreme Soviet of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (February 1, 1944) in International Conciliation, No. 398 (March, 1944), p. 241.

60 Quotation from Byrnes, James F., Speaking Frankly (New York, 1947), p. 40 Google Scholar.

61 On this point see also Byrnes, op. cit, pp. 41-42.

62 See Documents of the United Nations Conference on International Organization, San Francisco, 1945, Vol. I, p. 168.

63 For text of the “Declaration” see Information Bulletin (Spec. Supp., May, 1945) issued by the Embassy of the U.S.S.B. in Washington, p. 1.

64 Ibid, p. 7.

65 On the domestic and international effects of these decrees, see Shotwell, James T., The Great Decision (New York, 1944), pp. 67–82 Google Scholar; Laserson, Max M., Russia and the Western World (New York, 1945), pp. 100–114 Google Scholar; Verdross, Alfred, “Die Völkerrechts-Subjektivität der Gliedstaaten der Sovietunion,” österreichische Zeitschrift für öffentliches Recht (1946), Vol. 1, pp. 212–218 Google Scholar; Schuman, Frederick L., Soviet Politics at at home and Abroad (New York, 1946), pp. 475–478 Google Scholar.

66 For text of legal opinion of the Secretariat, see U. N. Doc. PM/473, Aug. 12, 1947. See also Liang, Yuen-li, “Notes on Legal Questions concerning the United Nations,” this Journal, Vol. 43 (January, 1949), p. 134 Google Scholar, especially pp. 144-149.

67 For complete listing of the members of the UPU in 1939, see International Agencies in “Which the United States Participates (Department of State Publication No. 2699, Washington, 1946), pp. 299-300; for 1948 membership, see United Nations Weekly Bulletin, Jan. 15, 1948, pp. 62-64.

68 For amendments to Art. 68, proposed at the Havana ITO Conference, designed to strengthen the legal position of “separate customs territories,” see U. N. Doc. E/Conf. 2/C.6/1.

69 See on this point U. N. Doc. E/Conf.2/C.6/51.

70 See U. N. Doc. S/96, Rev. 3, Jan. 27, 1948.

71 See General Assembly, First Session, Journal No. 75, Supp. A-64, Add. 1, pp. 825-826; also U. N. Doc. A/479, Nov. 14, 1947.

72 See, however, Art. IV (2) of the Agreement between the United Nations and the International Monetary Fund: “Neither organization, nor any of their subsidiary bodies, will present any formal recommendations to the other without reasonable prior consultation with regard thereto. Any formal recommendations made by either organization after Ruch consultation will be considered as soon as possible by the appropriate organ of the other.”

73 See U. N. Docs. A/788, Dec. 9, 1948, and A/806, Dec. 12, 1948.