Several important legal features of the contemporary practice of international organizations (IOs) are not easily accommodated in standard approaches to international organizations law. This article argues that Global Administrative Law (GAL) approaches may strengthen analysis of operational issues such as emergency actions by IOs and the human rights implications of IO activities, structural issues such as the involvement of IOs in field missions and in public-private partnerships, and normative issues concerning the production and effects of non-treaty regulatory instruments by IOs (guidelines, best practices, national policy assessments, and other documents rather amorphously analyzed under the 'soft law' rubric). In examining these activities as forms of administration (broadly understood), subject to precepts of good administration and legal standards concerning transparency, participation, reason-giving, review, and accountability, a GAL perspective provides a basis both for critique of problematic practices, and for increasing the effectiveness and legitimacy of some beneficial IO activities which are contentious or currently not undertaken. GAL also responds to the proliferation and differentiation of IOs and other entities in global governance through applying legal standards to their interactions, bringing a principled 'inter-public' approach to the legal relations among global public entities. GAL provides a valuable, and thus far overly neglected, addition to the field of international institutional law. © 2009 Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden.

Global administrative law dimensions of international organizations law

Lorenzo Casini
2009-01-01

Abstract

Several important legal features of the contemporary practice of international organizations (IOs) are not easily accommodated in standard approaches to international organizations law. This article argues that Global Administrative Law (GAL) approaches may strengthen analysis of operational issues such as emergency actions by IOs and the human rights implications of IO activities, structural issues such as the involvement of IOs in field missions and in public-private partnerships, and normative issues concerning the production and effects of non-treaty regulatory instruments by IOs (guidelines, best practices, national policy assessments, and other documents rather amorphously analyzed under the 'soft law' rubric). In examining these activities as forms of administration (broadly understood), subject to precepts of good administration and legal standards concerning transparency, participation, reason-giving, review, and accountability, a GAL perspective provides a basis both for critique of problematic practices, and for increasing the effectiveness and legitimacy of some beneficial IO activities which are contentious or currently not undertaken. GAL also responds to the proliferation and differentiation of IOs and other entities in global governance through applying legal standards to their interactions, bringing a principled 'inter-public' approach to the legal relations among global public entities. GAL provides a valuable, and thus far overly neglected, addition to the field of international institutional law. © 2009 Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden.
2009
accountability; emergency powers; field operations; global administrative law; human rights; international institutional law; international organizations; normative fragmentation; public and private partnerships
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
s2.pdf

non disponibili

Licenza: Non specificato
Dimensione 337.45 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
337.45 kB Adobe PDF   Visualizza/Apri   Richiedi una copia
s2.pdf

non disponibili

Licenza: Non specificato
Dimensione 337.45 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
337.45 kB Adobe PDF   Visualizza/Apri   Richiedi una copia

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11771/3856
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 76
social impact