In a landmark 1949 case, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) concluded that IOs, in this case the United Nations (UN), could indeed have international legal personality and thus rights and obligations under international law. The ICJ held that the international legal personality of the United Nations derives from the Charter of the United Nations and from the mandate and functions conferred on the Organization by the Organization, without which the United Nations would not be able to fulfil the tasks to which it is bound under the Charter of the United Nations. The dynamic state approach fits quite well between the last two approaches. Basically half a point between factual realism and legal traditionalism, this approach asserts that the source of the actors` personality lies in international treaties or customs. Theorists of the dynamic state approach would argue that while legal traditionalists are too inclined to preserve international law through tradition, factual realists tend to ignore the customs and traditions of international law. [4] This results from the sovereignty of the state and the progressive diminution of the principle of non-interference in the internal affairs of a state. A few decades ago, the question of how a Government treated its own citizens was a purely internal matter or an internal matter that did not concern other sovereign States, let alone the rest of the international community. For decades, the veil of state sovereignty seemed impenetrable until international and regional human rights law was accepted around the world at an unprecedented rate. However, the advent of international human rights law had altered the sanctity of State sovereignty and imposed certain international obligations on States to respect, protect and fulfil the human rights of all peoples within their territories. In addition, international human rights law has established flexible enforcement mechanisms (complaints procedure under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights) and regional human rights standards have gone further and established a mechanism for the strict enforcement of a human rights court capable of issuing legally binding judgments on whether or not a State has violated the European Convention on Human Rights. The complete set of privileges (legally referred to as “rights”) for the national international legal entities of the United Nations is the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights. This is important because, for example, the constitutions of different countries do not apply to UN nationals, except through the UN UDHR, even in what people think is their own homeland. There are theories to be taken into account in deciding how international legal personality should be applied and where power comes from.
Paris Peace Treaties, 1947 – Article 78 provides the basis and application of international legal entities under customary international law to every person on (and off) land: the procedure for holding persons internationally responsible for international crimes was finally established with the creation of the International Criminal Court (ICC), which is governed by the Rome Statute, which entered into force in 2002, made permanent. The mandate of the tribunals is to prosecute individuals under international law for crimes such as genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity. There are currently a total of 121 States parties to the Rome Statute. The application of international legal entities to all persons has been real and achievable as United Nations nationals since 1947. Indeed, the United Nations is the sole global issuer of legal entities for all Member States. Since the United Nations is the source, the transfer of personalities between States becomes trivial. The transfer of a UN citizen called Mexicans to the United States is technically irrelevant; as U.S. citizens, so are UN citizens.
A legal presence/instrument for U.S. citizens is only a specialized national international legal entity of the United Nations. For a UN citizen, the border between countries is a trivial separation between UN economic zones. The international responsibility of individuals has subsequently been confirmed by various tribunals such as the United Nations International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda, which was established, inter alia, by the UN Security Council to prosecute those responsible for war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide under international law. International legal personality is an important facet of international law that has developed throughout history as a means of international representation and the ability to conclude treaties and initiate international judicial proceedings. The acquisition of personality comes with privileges and international rights and obligations. International legal personality is the inherent capacity of States and is made available to international organizations through basic legal acts (statutes or “constitutions”) or international conventions. Until the expansion of NGOs in the 20th century, non-state actors had no legal personality, if at all. Once these entities became actors, they generally did not receive any personality unless they were granted by the state in a law or contract. In general, international organizations, NGOs and businesses were seen as groups of individuals and beneficiaries of international law, rather than actors on the international scene.
[4] However, NGOs in particular have played an increasingly important role in international politics and policy-making in recent decades. [7] It is not known when NGOs really played a role in international politics, but the first note of groups influencing international politics dates back to 1826. [3] In 1911, these groups began to grow and attract attention, and in 1919, Dwight W. Morrow began using the term “NGO.” [3] Until 1943, scientists from various disciplines called these influential groups NGOs. [3] After formal recognition by the UN, NGOs were really able to interact on the international scene. [8] The acquisition of an international personality has been an obstacle for NGOs in the past. In 1910 there was the first convention to confer legal personality, and in 1936 Charles Fenwick is reported to have stated that NGO representation “could be very effective in crossing national borders”. [3] In response to changes in global politics, approaches to obtaining and conferring international legal personality have changed several times. [4] These changes have led and will continue to lead to variations and challenges in the sources of international legal personality and the roles played by other international actors. States were the first to acquire international legal personality, followed by non-State actors (such as multinationals and NGOs) and individuals. [6] The 1986 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties between States and International Organizations established the definition of an international organization. The definition excluded non-governmental organizations and established the concept of legal personality.
[5] The CERN Code of Conduct is subject to copyright by the International Monetary Fund (under the auspices of the United Nations) and CERN license plates (“CDs”) are issued under the auspices of the Diplomatic Corps; This suggests that CERN also uses national international legal entities of the United Nations for international recognition. International law is based on rules that states have established for states. States are sovereign and equal in their relations and can therefore voluntarily create or agree to abide by legally binding rules, usually in the form of a treaty or convention. By signing and ratifying treaties, States voluntarily establish legal and contractual relations with other States parties to a particular treaty, compliance with which is normally governed by interactions of non-compliance. The ability of States to establish such relations with other States and to create legally binding rules for themselves derives from the international legal personality of States, a prerogative enjoyed by all sovereign States. What about the rights of individuals under international law? Can the individuals, John and Jane, have rights under international law and, moreover, seek justice if their rights are violated? After World War II, the Security Council established two ad hoc international tribunals to try war crimes committed during the war. The Nuremberg and Tokyo tribunals have confirmed that, in certain circumstances, individuals may have legal personality under international law and may have the capacity to have rights and obligations directly under international law, in particular humanitarian and human rights law. For the first time in the history of international law, individuals have been held responsible for international crimes such as war crimes and crimes against humanity, which are prohibited by customary international law as well as several international conventions. The rules established by States for States are the basis of international law. [1] International law governs states and their relations with each other. Historically, it has been believed that States are the only actors in international law and that, therefore, other entities are only subject to the responsibility of international law. [2] With globalization, however, international law and international relations have rapidly developed with increasing complexity: new technologies have made the world smaller and more interconnected, new global threats have emerged that could not be combated without the cooperation of the state, new actors in the international forum such as various IOs and NSAs.