United Nations Compensation Commission Research Articles

The Planetary Crisis: Applicability of Negotiorum Gestio

Negotiorum gestio is originally a civil law concept. When an intervenor acts on behalf of, and for the benefit of, the principal without the prior consent of the principal, the intervenor is entitled to reimbursement of expenses. The concept of negotiorum gestio can provide a legal basis for it. Does the concept exist in international law? Although negotiorum gestio is rarely referred to in international law and its legal status is unclear, we can find it in some treaties like salvage conventions as well as some diplomatic practices like the reimbursement of expenses arising from the assistance to abate and prevent environmental damage to the Gulf after the Gulf War in the framework of the United Nations Compensation Commission. Moreover, the application of the concept of negotiorum gestio is indispensable for addressing planetary level crisis such as space debris and planetary defense. Even if international cooperation is difficult due to geopolitical situations, voluntary actions by a State acting in good faith to mitigate the crisis should be promoted. Negotiorum gestio can be the legal basis of such actions.

Ecocide in National and International Criminal Law: current challenges and prospects for legal regulation

The article examines the current challenges and prospects of legal regulation of ecocide in national and international criminal law. The author analyzes the problems of prosecution for ecocide in national criminal law and the prospects for such liability in international criminal law. The authors emphasize that the armed aggression of the terrorist state of the Russian Federation against Ukraine has had a devastating impact on the environment, which will take decades to restore. Russian attacks on Ukrainian oil depots, strikes on the territory of the Kharkiv Institute of Physics and Technology with its nuclear facility, the death of several million chickens at the Chornobaiv poultry farm, and the mass death of dolphins in the Black Sea are qualified as ecocide. The destruction of the Kakhovka hydroelectric power plant dam is qualified as ecocide and a violation of the laws and customs of war. The evolution, concept, and composition of ecocide are analyzed.
 Having found its legislative consolidation in the national criminal law (Article 441 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine), ecocide has not been enshrined in international criminal law. It is not recognized as a crime either in the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court or in any other international legal act. As of today, Russian crimes against the environment can be investigated by the International Criminal Court as war crimes. The authors of the article emphasize the need to include the crime of ecocide in the Rome Statute, since serious damage to the environment during armed conflicts is still to some extent covered by the provisions of the Rome Statute, but such damage caused in peacetime falls outside the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court.
 The authors of the article note that it is important not only to punish the racists for all crimes of ecocide committed in Ukraine since 2014, but also to force the aggressor state to compensate for all environmental damage caused. When creating a compensation mechanism, we must take into account the international practice of compensation for environmental damage caused by military actions, in particular the practice of the International Court of Justice and the historical experience of creating special compensation bodies (in particular, the experience of the United Nations Compensation Commission (UNCC), 1991-2022). The future compensation mechanism should be based on the «ecosystem services approach», which will significantly increase the amount of reparations to be paid by the Russian Federation to Ukraine. To ensure legal regulation of the concept of ecosystem services, it is necessary to develop and adopt the Law of Ukraine «On Ecosystem Services» and regulations aimed at its implementation (primarily, methods of inventory and assessment of ecosystem services).

Governing Council Decision 277 (U.N. Compensation Comm'n)

On January 13, 2022, the secretariat of the United Nations Compensation Commission (UNCC), an institution established by the UN Security Council in 1991 to process and pay claims resulting from Iraq's unlawful invasion and occupation of Kuwait from August 2, 1990, to March 2, 1991, issued a press release stating that, with a payment that day of over US$629 million to Kuwait, all claimants awarded compensation by the UNCC had received full payment.

Credible commitment without independent regulatory agent: Evidence from the Security Council's United Nations Compensation Commission

AbstractCredible commitment problems arise whenever decisions made according to short‐term incentives undermine long‐term policy goals. While political actors can credibly commit themselves to their long‐term policy goals by delegating decisions to independent regulatory agencies, the member states of international institutions rarely sacrifice control over regulatory decisions. Against the backdrop of the United Nations Compensation Commission established by the Security Council to settle claims on damage from the Iraqi occupation of Kuwait, we present an institutional arrangement that promises to credibly commit member states to their previously defined interests without excluding them from the decision process. It separates the stages of rulemaking and rule application, and is reinforced by conditional agenda‐setting of an advisory body. We probe the theoretical claim with evidence from a unique data set that shows that the Commission settled compensation claims in a remarkably consistent way. The arrangement provides a blueprint for comparable regulatory tasks in many areas of international, European, or domestic politics, in which independent regulation is not feasible.

The Duty to Compensate for Expenses Occurring as a Result of Mass Migration in International Law

The phenomenon of mass expulsion has nowadays become ubiquitous, when millions of people flee from their homes across entire continents to escape gross human rights violations and internal disturbances. Migration waves are now considered inevitable in order to escape inhuman consequences of current conflicts; still, thus far, only a marginal degree of discussion has been dedicated in the legal literature to the adverse effects of such events on the host State’s environment, economy and resources. Emphatically, it is important to stress that the aim of the present research is not to enrage public opinion regarding mass migration flows, but to articulate the serious violations of international law committed by States, which generate mass outflows, and consequently, to draw attention to the need for compensating non-refouling States for the expenses borne. Accordingly, this paper starts its analysis by first discussing the definition of mass migration under international law. Then it continues by addressing the question of standing of the host State to claim compensation as well as the responsibility and liability of the State of origin under international law. The paper finally elaborates on the concept of burden sharing for the costs incurred and the relevant practice of the United Nations Compensation Commission. As a conclusion, the paper will argue that in order to preserve the current normative system of the protection of refugees, international law ought to provide an effective remedy for legitimate concerns of host States.

Statelessness at the United Nations Compensation Commission

Every wrongful act results in an obligation to redress the offense. Under the ‘traditional’ claims approach for internationally wrongful acts, when a state injures another state’s national, it is the state of nationality that has the duty to request redress for the violations incurred by its nationals through diplomatic protection. However, this ‘traditional approach’ excludes stateless persons, who are not considered nationals by any state. After the Gulf War, Iraq was held liable by the UN Security Council (UNSC), which established the United Nations Compensation Commission (UNCC) to process claims for compensation of Iraq’s victims. However, initially only states could file claims on behalf of their nationals, which excluded stateless persons from accessing compensation for the violations they suffered as a result of the war. The UNCC adopted several special procedures to address this issue. This paper explores the UNCC’s approach concerning the stateless, and seeks to determine whether this approach could serve as a model for future mechanisms of a similar nature and also explores the changing nature of diplomatic protection and the role it has played and can play in the future of mechanisms of a nature similar to that of the UNCC.

Dispute System Design: The United Nations Compensation Commission

The Security Council of the United Nations established the United nations Compensation Commission (UNCC) with its Resolution 687 on April 3, 1991. It was the first compensation system established under the authority of Chapter VII of the U.N. Charter and was designed to process and pay claims arising from the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait in 1990. Resolution 687 confirmed that Iraq was liable for any direct loss, damage, including environmental damages and the depletion of natural resources, or injury to foreign Governments, nationals and corporations... Resolution 687 also created a fund to pay those claims and a commission to administer that fund. The details of the compensation fund and the commission were established by Security Council Resolution 693 on May 20, 1991.

Reintroduction of the Arabian oryxOryx leucoryxin Jordan: war and redemption

AbstractFollowing the extinction of the Arabian oryxOryx leucoryxin the wild in 1972 Jordan began a reintroduction programme in 1978 with 11 founding animals. When the herd size reached 31 in 1983 most were released from captive breeding pens into the 342 km2Shaumari Nature Reserve, part of which (22 km2) was fenced the following year to protect the oryx and exclude livestock. The herd grew initially (between 1979 and 1986) at about 23% per year. In 1990, when the herd numbered 79, its management was preparing to release it into the wild outside the fenced reserve. However, Bedouin families fleeing the Gulf War in Kuwait and Iraq brought 1.6 million sheep, goats, camels, and donkeys into Jordan. These livestock so overgrazed potential oryx habitat throughout the arid rangelands that reintroduction was impossible. Overcrowding within Shaumari became apparent by 1995, when the population numbered 186. The herd's rate of increase began to decline as productivity and recruitment decreased and mortality increased. In 1997, to reduce overcrowding, the herd's management began dispersing them to other Middle Eastern countries and to another nature reserve in Jordan. By February 2006, 43 oryx remained at Shaumari. In 2005, however, the prospects improved when the United Nations Compensation Commission awarded Jordan the cost of environmental damages resulting from the 1990–1991 Gulf War. Part of this award is designated for renewal of the captive breeding and reintroduction programme.

The Gendered Dimensions of Conflict's Aftermath: A Victim-Centered Approach to Compensation

Although international security studies tend to focus on the nature of armed conflict and how nations fare in the face of such conflicts, our attention has been drawn to the challenge of managing the peace. Specifically, given the enormity of the damage caused by state-sponsored violence, both in terms of property and in terms of human damage, how can the people of a nation that has served as a battleground be assisted in their recovery from the devastation caused by conflict? Ongoing trauma from armed conflict has peculiarly gendered dimensions and requires solutions that are attentive to those dimensions. Here, we focus on remedies that shift from perpetrator-centered tribunals to victim-centered compensation commissions. Using the United Nations Compensation Commission established to provide restitution to Kuwaiti citizens following the Iraqi invasion as an example, we argue that the restitution model is a more humane and ethical option for managing the aftermath of conflict than war crimes tribunals, which employ a retributive philosophy. Using the limited evidence available on compensation and rebuilding, we make concrete recommendations for an approach to post-conflict adjudication that makes the well-being of victims its top priority.

The United Nations Compensation Commission (UNCC): Reflections on its Judicial Character

The United Nations Compensation Commission (UNCC): Reflections on its Judicial Character

United Nations Compensation Commission (UNCC) Governing Council: Report and Recommendations Made by the Panel of the Commissioners Concerning the Third Installment of “F4” Claims

United Nations Compensation Commission (UNCC) Governing Council: Report and Recommendations Made by the Panel of the Commissioners Concerning the Third Installment of “F4” Claims

Conference Papers: 3. The Impact on the Economic and Social Fabric Assessing the Costs of Iraq's 1990 Invasion and Occupation of Kuwait - The United Nations Compensation Commission

Conference Papers: 3. The Impact on the Economic and Social Fabric Assessing the Costs of Iraq's 1990 Invasion and Occupation of Kuwait - The United Nations Compensation Commission

In the wake of the Gulf War: assessing family spending of compensation money in Sri Lanka

AbstractBetween 1997 and 2000, the United Nations Compensation Commission delivered US$4000 apiece to roughly 87,000 Sri Lankan citizens who suffered displacement and loss of employment due to Iraq's military actions in Kuwait during the Gulf War. Using qualitative ethnographic data, this essay examines 11 case studies of Kuwait returnees in the village of Naeaegama, in southern Sri Lanka. Like the majority of Sri Lankans caught in the Gulf War, these returnees are women from poor rural families who worked as domestic servants in Kuwait. The paper compares how the 11 households have spent compensation money and migrants' remittances. Spending choices reveal a clear hierarchy of priorities: buying land and building a house, providing a dowry for unmarried women, and starting a viable business. These goals reflect family‐based considerations, and use of the money illustrates the family's role as an economic as well as a social unit. The paper also explores the role of family in facilitating migration and depressing women's wages on the global market. Data reveal the local values, motives, and cultural contexts that shape individual and family decision‐making on matters of finance and migration. Family choices are products of and adaptations to globalised contexts. Copyright © 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Humanitarian considerations in the work of the United Nations Compensation Commission

RésuméLa Commission d'indemnisation des Nations Unies a été créée par le Conseil de sécurité pour examiner les demandes déindemnisation et verser des indemnités aux victimes de l'invasion et de l'occupation illicites du Koweït par l'Irak (1990-1991), Cet article examine I'importance que les considérations d'ordre humanitaire revêtent dans le cadre des travaux de la Commission, notamment dans la procédure d'examen des demandes d'indemnisation et dans les mécanismes pour la répartition des indemnités accordées aux requérants dont la réclamation a abouti. L'article examine également les sources des contributions versées au Fonds d'indemnisation des Nations Unies (à partir duquel les indemnités sont versées) dans le contexte de la situation humanitaire qui prévaut en Irak, et il établit une distinction entre le mandat de la Commission et les autres institutions et processus mis en place par le Conseil de sécurité après l'invasion du Koweït en 1990. Finalement, l'article explore brièvement comment les considérations d'ordre humanitaire peuvent jouer un rôle dans des futures procédures de réparation des dommages de guerre.

Humanitarian considerations in the work of the United Nations Compensation Commission

Humanitarian considerations in the work of the United Nations Compensation Commission

Imposing Liability for Losses from Aggressive War: An Economic Analysis of the UN Compensation Commission

Through an economic analysis of the work of the United Nations Compensation Commission (UNCC), this Comment seeks to understand better the process by which liability is imposed losses caused by aggressive war. It concludes that a loss is appropriately compensable by an aggressor state if the war is a but for cause of the loss and ex ante the war increased the likelihood that the loss would occur. The loss need not be as foreseeable as in the law of negligence. The total amount of losses appropriately compensable under this standard may, however, exceed the maximum that is desirable or even practical to collect. Iraq involves such a shortfall. Collecting more would hinder its reintegration into the world community. Moreover, any increase in the UNCC tax rate on Iraq's oil revenues is likely to reduce, not enhance, total revenues because of the added disincentives to export. Because of this shortfall, the practice of denying Iraq formal access to UNCC proceedings involves no procedural unfairness. The UNCC is effectively only deciding who, among all claimants against Iraq, should receive money from a fixed, maximally extractable sum. UNCC decisions also violate no norm of substantive fairness. The money extracted by the UNCC and the economic effect of the more formal sanctions imposed on Iraq, while both burdens on the Iraqi people, do not raise comparable fairness issues. As a general matter, imposing the losses on the people of the aggressor state, even if onerous, is not more unfair than leaving them to be borne by the victims of the aggressive war. Moreover, payments to the UNCC are in essence a tax on Iraq's oil wealth, not on the fruits of the labour, skills and non-oil resources of the Iraqi people. Unlike the more formal sanctions, the UNCC payments simply deprive the Iraqi people of a portion of the good luck they had to have oil resources in the first place.

The UN Compensation Commission: Old Rules, New Procedures on War Reparations

Since its inception, the legitimacy of the United Nations Compensation Commission (UNCC) has been controversial, particularly the Security Council's competence to establish it. In this article, the author maintains that the UNCC, although it represents an unprecedented example of institutionalized international cooperation, follows and improves on the tradition of international law rules on war reparations. Although some of its procedural and substantial aspects might be open to criticism, the work hitherto accomplished by the various UNCC panels shows a very high standard of legal skill and fairness, and has contributed significantly to the clarification and development of various international law rules on claims settlement. Nevertheless, a final political compromise with Iraq is necessary if the UNCC is to be acknowledged as the first fully successful model of a collective relief system organized by the international community in response to an aggression.

The UN Compensation Commission: Practical Justice, not Retribution

Over the decade of the United Nations Compensation Commission’s work, there has been voiced by some a vague sense that the UNCC, although created to give some justice to those directly injured by Iraq’s invasion and occupation of Kuwait, should instead be viewed as a part of the system of international economic sanctions. While it is true that any compensatory mechanism may be said to sanction the wrongful actor, the UNCC is not an economic sanction as that term is understood in international relations and law. Rather, the UNCC provides a measure of practical justice to those who suffered damage as a direct result of the crime of aggression. In this essay, the authors ask when it may be said that that which ostensibly is a compensation procedure partakes more of a scheme of retribution, and should be analysed in terms not of the adequacy of compensation to the victims, but rather of the extent of the punishment that is indirectly inflicted on the population of the wrongdoing state. Applying such an analysis, it is concluded that the UNCC should not be viewed as an economic sanction, but rather an institution that has delivered practical justice to millions of victims of Iraq’s invasion and occupation of Kuwait.

The United Nations Compensation Commission: A new contribution to the process of international claims resolution

The United Nations Compensation Commission is one of the many bodies that have over recent years contributed to the proliferation of claims resolution and dispute settlement facilities. The Commission has been set up by the UN Security Council to process claims and pay compensation for direct losses resulting from Iraq's 1990 invasion and subsequent occupation of Kuwait. While the Commission is in many respects in the tradition of international claims practice, there are other features that make it a novel and unprecedented scheme. In particular, the UNCC represents the first attempt of the international community to organize a claims resolution process through a multilateral facility within the UN system. In addition, the large number of claims, the size and variety of the losses and damages and the complexity of the process have required an organization and procedures that have developed modern international claims practice further, especially with respect to the methods and techniques used for the processing of the claims. This article focuses on these procedural aspects of the Commission's work and on the issues and challenges that are facing the Commission and that others may face in the future.

An Overview of Evidence before the United Nations Compensation Commission

An Overview of Evidence before the United Nations Compensation Commission