2009Cambridge University Press eBooksRequires access

International organizations and the law of treaties

Jan Klabbers

Open publisher page 22 citations

Abstract

Introduction The constituent documents of international organizations are strange creatures, often said to occupy a special place in international law. On the one hand, they are treaties, concluded between duly authorized representatives of states, and as such no different from other treaties. Thus, one would expect, they are simply subject to the general law of treaties. Yet, such constituent documents are not ordinary treaties: they establish an international organization, and, for that reason, most authors appear inclined to grant those treaties a separate status, from which follows the applicability of some special rules, or, in the reverse, the argument that in some circumstances different rules apply to treaties establishing international organizations may lead to the conclusion that therefore, these instruments occupy a special place. As Zacklin once put it, constituent treaties have an ‘organic-constitutive element’ which distinguishes them from other multilateral treaties and influences their working. As a theoretical matter, the claim that constituent documents are somehow different from other treaties has yet to find serious elaboration and substantiation; authors usually limit themselves to detailing in what respects organizational charters differ in practice from other treaties. Thus, for some, an important difference is that constituent documents are often concluded for an indefinite period; may only be amended or terminated with the help of the organization's pertinent organs; and are often interpreted in light of the organization's goals.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Introduction The constituent documents of international organizations are strange creatures, often said to occupy a special place in international law. On the one hand, they are treaties, concluded between duly authorized representatives of states, and as such no different from other treaties. Thus, one would expect, they are simply subject to the general law of treaties. Yet, such constituent documents are not ordinary treaties: they establish an international organization, and, for that reason, most authors appear inclined to grant those treaties a separate status, from which follows the applicability of some special rules, or, in the reverse, the argument that in some circumstances different rules apply to treaties establishing international organizations may lead to the conclusion that therefore, these instruments occupy a special place. As Zacklin once put it, constituent treaties have an ‘organic-constitutive element’ which distinguishes them from other multilateral treaties and influences their working. As a theoretical matter, the claim that constituent documents are somehow different from other treaties has yet to find serious elaboration and substantiation; authors usually limit themselves to detailing in what respects organizational charters differ in practice from other treaties. Thus, for some, an important difference is that constituent documents are often concluded for an indefinite period; may only be amended or terminated with the help of the organization's pertinent organs; and are often interpreted in light of the organization's goals.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 22 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Introduction The constituent documents of international organizations are strange creatures, often said to occupy a special place in international law. On the one hand, they are treaties, concluded between duly authorized representatives of states, and as such no different from other treaties. Thus, one would expect, they are simply subject to the general law of treaties. Yet, such constituent documents are not ordinary treaties: they establish an international organization, and, for that reason, most authors appear inclined to grant those treaties a separate status, from which follows the applicability of some special rules, or, in the reverse, the argument that in some circumstances different rules apply to treaties establishing international organizations may lead to the conclusion that therefore, these instruments occupy a special place. As Zacklin once put it, constituent treaties have an ‘organic-constitutive element’ which distinguishes them from other multilateral treaties and influences their working. As a theoretical matter, the claim that constituent documents are somehow different from other treaties has yet to find serious elaboration and substantiation; authors usually limit themselves to detailing in what respects organizational charters differ in practice from other treaties. Thus, for some, an important difference is that constituent documents are often concluded for an indefinite period; may only be amended or terminated with the help of the organization's pertinent organs; and are often interpreted in light of the organization's goals.

Key concepts: Law, Political science, International law

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
International organizations and the law of treaties — Research Paper | ScholarLens