Document Type

Article

Disciplines

International Law

Abstract

The United Nations is an exceptional organization that covers nearly all states of the world. The UN has not only contributed greatly to the maintenance of international peace and security but has also contributed significantly to the development of the present international human rights regime. With the end of the Cold War and the new geopolitical order in the early nineties, the concept of peace maintenance changed more and more to active peace-enforcement. UN operations gradually turned into "peace-making" operations, like those in Yugoslavia and Rwanda in the first half of the nineties. This new type ofpeacemaking also led to new tasks for the UN, which must also conduct multidimensional policing and administrative tasks. These tasks might effectively amount to the administration of whole territories. Such state-like activities evidently cause state-like behavior, and it is for this reason that the United Nations is increasingly being criticized as a human rights violator or even, as in Bosnia or Rwanda, for not preventing genocide.

This article does not aim to find out whether the United Nations is responsible for human rights violations or genocide. Moreover, I will argue that the international system lacks an efficient framework to determine such responsibility effectively and independently, and suggest that the UN should be monitored and scrutinized by independent human rights bodies. I will analyze and illustrate the immunity enjoyed by the United Nations on the basis ofArticle 105 of the UN Charter and the dispute settlement procedures under Sections 29 and 30 of the 1946 Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations. I will point out the weaknesses ofnon-contractual claims arising in regions affected by a conflict, as the claim reviews require either the cooperation of the host state or are carried out by local UN review boards. Particular attention is given to the relationship between UN immunity and the international human rights regime, and the concept of jus cogens and the differences and similarities between UN immunity and the immunity enjoyed by national states. I will examine both national and international jurisprudence on immunity in the case ofhuman rights violations. This article will then go on to demonstrate that, while state accountability has constantly increased, UN immunity and the corresponding accountability are still based on the terms of 1945 and require reform. Finally, I will discuss the possibilities of tying the United Nations closer to the international human rights regime.

Accessibility Requirements

1

Download

Share

COinS