Abstract
Two decades post the Cold-War; the World has witnessed a systematic revival of a practice long thought to be extinct- territory administration via an international body to act as a government for running the state/territory. The most prominent examples were the United Mission in Kosovo (UNMIK) and the United Nations Transitional Administration in East Timor (UNTAET).Various criticisms were directed to the International Administrations of Territories; the most prominent was mandating this Administration Authority complete power in running the Legislative, Executive and Judiciary authorities where its decisions are not being subject to monitoring or accountability. Yet, such decisions were mostly in violation of the International law which undermined the core principles of democratic governments, the rule of law and human rights as being the corner stones of International peace and security.This study aims at analyzing the legitimacy of forming international administrations as well as scrutinizing the legal restrictions and commitments thereof. The ramifications of any violations of such restrictions and commitments (The International Human Right Law and The International Humanitarian Law) should be holding these administrations and its members accountable internationally.
Highlights
During the past two decades, an international phenomenon stated to spread called “the International Administration of Territories”
The only exception relates to the duties of the United Nations missions approved by the Security Council under Chapter VII, as the participating United Nations force personnel are considered combatants against regular armed forces and this entails applying the international law of armed conflict (Greenwood, 1998)
The International Law Association (ILA) linked international authority to accountability when the international administration conflicts with the limits of authority granted or contravenes instructions, and linked administration and accountability in terms of reviewing the way in which the administration performs its duties; or in terms of liability that involves harming others and acts or omissions that are in breach of any rule of international law (Berlin Conference, 2004)
Summary
During the past two decades, an international phenomenon stated to spread called “the International Administration of Territories”. The United Nations was the body to run these territories as a local government where Administration members control the three authorities per se: Legislative, Executive, and Judiciary. The Administration, is not subject to any clear legal accountability leading to the violation of enshrined principles in the International Law- the Rule of Law, the Right to Self-determination, Human Rights...etc. - which are considered the core factors in protecting International Peace and Security. This paper tries to highlight the deficiency in the attempt to hold the UN Administration accountable
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
