![Show Menu](styles/mobile-menu.png)
![Page Background](./../common/page-substrates/page0500.png)
484
PAVEL ŠTURMA
CYIL 5 ȍ2014Ȏ
other kinds of agreements and arrangements between IOs. Chapter 6 then provides
an illustration and analysis of the implementation of
inter se
obligations of the IOs.
Last but not the least, Chapter 7 addresses the issues of breach of obligations
and the settlement of disputes between the IOs. Here the main problem is that most
cooperation agreements of the IOs lack provisions on dispute settlement, because the
IOs assume that their legal relations will be free of any disputes. The non-applicability
of the advisory opinion procedure between IOs makes recourse to the International
Court of Justice without practical significance. Arbitration clauses are possible but
remain exceptional in agreements between IOs. However, as the author concludes,
there is an implied obligation to consult or negotiate in order to settle any difference.
The book ends with very detailed conclusions (Chapter 8, pp. 325-354). They
include, in particular, the proposal of a code of conduct or model rules which IOs
should adhere to when they enter into relations with other IOs. As suggested by
B.N. Patel, the rules should be adopted by the UN General Assembly or highest
decision-making organs of the IOs in the form of a resolution (p. 350).
The monograph also includes standard annexes, such as a table of cases,
abbreviations, bibliography, subject index, as well as Draft Articles on the Responsibility
of International Organizations. From the formal point of view, I would point out
that the reference to articles of the Treaty on EC is outdated and should be replaced,
in the context of the Lisbon Treaty, by the respective provisions of the Treaty on
Functioning of the EU.
To evaluate the substantive aspects of the book, I would like to commend Bimal
Patel for his empirical and analytical approach to the responsibility of international
organizations. His work stems from an in-depth, inside examination into the agreements
and practice of the IOs, namely the selected four organizations.
At the same time, the book is a stimulating and, through its questions, thought
provoking piece of work. On the one hand, the conclusions stress the importance
of adoption of the coherent body of rules of the responsibility of IOs. On the other
hand, they show that the breaches of obligations between IOs do not qualify “the
need for evoking a legal framework such as one exists for the State responsibility”.
Another statement which entails questions is that “the spread of IOs and the growing
awareness of the potential risks arising from their activities will probably generate a
trend towards the codification of existing responsibility rules and the formulation of
new ones in international treaties.” The author hopes that the 1972 Liability Treaty
and 1982 Law of the Sea Convention provisions will ensue the trend. However, Article
304 of the UNCLOS is just a
pactum de contrahendo
. Article XXII of the 1972 Outer
Space Liability Treaty only transposes the principles of liability of launching States
to an international organization. This special treaty regime of international liability
differs significantly from general secondary rules on responsibility of States and that
of IOs.