Abstract
The mandate system of the League of Nations was created as a compromise between the colonial interests of the victorious powers and the new ‘internationalist’ principles in international relations. It therefore had the same “inherent flaws” as the new organization as a whole. Despite a number of undoubtedly progressive provisions enshrined in Article 22 of the League's constitution, its implementation faced problems due to a lack of clear powers and mechanisms to curb abuses. As a result, its relevant bodies had to rely primarily on the “internationalization” of controversial issues, publicity and moral pressure from the international community to curb the arbitrariness of the mandatorial powers.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
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.
