Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-14T23:01:24.178Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Problem of the International Personality of Individuals

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 March 2017

Marek St. Korowicz
Marek St. Korowicz*
Affiliation:
Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy; Yagellonian University in Cracow
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In this article, which presents an outline of the interesting and important problem of individuals as subjects of international law, special attention will be devoted to an original experiment in the field of public international law. This experiment was carried out on behalf of the Principal Allied Powers after the first World War in the territory of Upper Silesia, which is one of the largest coal, steel, zinc, lead and chemical-producing industrial centers in Europe.

Type
Research Article
Information
American Journal of International Law , Volume 50 , Issue 3 , July 1956 , pp. 533 - 562
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 1956

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Cf. Stone, Julius, International Guarantees of Minority Rights. A Study of Minorities Procedure in Tipper Silesia (New York, 1933)Google Scholar; Korowicz, Marek St., Görnoślaska Ochrona Mniejszości (Katowice, 1938)Google Scholar, in Polish (The Upper Silesian Protection of Minorities), Bibliography on pp. 243–251; German translation: Der Oberschlesische Minderheitenschutz (Berlin-Dahlem, 1938) in Library of Congress, bibliography on pp. 239–251; Kaeekenbeeck, Georges, The International Experiment of Tipper Silesia (Oxford-London, 1942)Google Scholar, bibliography on pp. 529–551; Korowicz, Marek St., Une Expérience de droit international (Paris, Pedone, 1946.)Google Scholar.

2 Cf. Wright, Quincy, “The End of a Period of Transition,” 31 A.J.I.L. 604–613 (1937)Google Scholar. Cf. also Hudson, Manley O., The Permanent Court of International Justice (New York, 1943)Google Scholar, footnote, p. 396; Kelsen, Hans, Principles of International Law (New York, 1952), p. 142 Google Scholar; Jessup, Philip C., A Modern Law of Nations (New York, 1952), pp. 32, 33 Google Scholar; Constantin Th. Eustathiades, “Les sujets du droit international et la responsabilité internationale,” 84 Hague Recueil 554 ff. (1953)Google Scholar; Briggs, Herbert W., The Law of Nations, Cases, Documents and Notes (New York, 1952), p. 95 Google Scholar; Oppenheim-Lauterpacht, , International Law (London, 1953)Google Scholar, Vol. I, p. 58, footnote 4; Bishop, William W., Jr., International Law Cases and Materials (New York, 1953), p. 209 Google Scholar.

3 Cf. Jules Basdevant, Les Fondateurs du Droit International (Paris), pp. 227 ff.; Reeves, Jesse S., “La Communanté Internationale,” 3 Hague Recueil 26, 27 (1924)Google Scholar; Maurice Bourquin, “Grotius et les tendances actuelles du droit international,” Revue de Droit International et de Législation Comparée, 1926, pp. 88 ff.

The human being is a center of the legal conceptions of Grotius. Cf. his definition of the state: Est autem civitas coetus perfectus liberorum hominum juris fruendi et communis utilitatis causa sociatus. De Iure Belli ac Pacis, L. I, Ch. 1 & 14.

4 De Jure Naturae et Gentium, L. II, Ch. III.

5 De Cive. Imperium, Ch. XIV, § 4.

6 droit, Le international de 1'Europe (Berlin-Paris, 1883), pp. 44 ff.Google Scholar

7 Droit, Le International codifié et sa sanction juridique (Paris, 1890), p. 90 Google Scholar.

8 Droit, Le International Public Positif (Oxford, 1920), pp. 52 and 62 Google Scholar.

9 Heilborn, Dr. Paul, Das System des Völkerrechts (Berlin, 1896), p. 84 Google Scholar.

10 de Martens, P., Traité de droit international (Paris, 1883), Vol. I, pp. 428, 442 Google Scholar.

11 Rechtskraft des, Die International Rechts und das Verhältniss der Staatsgesetz-gebungen und der Staatsorgane zu demselben (Berlin, 1889), pp. 2, 3 Google Scholar.

12 Collected Papers of John Westlake on Public International Law (ed. by L. Oppenheim, London, 1914), p. 78.

13 In Générate de, Revue Droit International Public (Paris, 1901), Vol. 8, p. 399 Google Scholar.

14 de, Annuaire l'Institut de Droit International (Paris, 1924)Google Scholar.

15 La théiorie du droit naturel depuis XVIII siècle et la doctrine moderne (Paris, 1928), pp. 92 ff. Also de Droit, Précis International Public (Paris, 1933), p. 114 Google Scholar.

16 Almost in the same sense Bonfils, Henry, Manuel de droit international public (Paris, 1905), p. 79 Google Scholar; Basdevant, Jules, in Rev. Gen. Dr. Int. Pub. (Paris, 1912), Vol. 19, p. 519 Google Scholar; Fauchille, Paul, Traité de droit international, Vol. I, Pt. I (Paris, 1922), p. 761 Google Scholar.

17 Renard, Georges, La Théorie de L'Institution (Paris, 1930), pp. 543, 544 Google Scholar.

18 Verdross, Alfred, “Règles generates du droit international de la paix,” 30 Hague Eecueil 347–349 (1929)Google Scholar.

19 “La personnalité dans l'Empire Britannique,” Rev. de Droit Int. Pub. et de Leg. Comp., Vol. 9 (3rd ser., 1928), pp. 439 ff.

20 “Règies géoérales de la paix,” 32 Hague Recueil 260 (1930)Google Scholar.

21 “L'Arbitrage international en matière privée,” 23 Hague Recueil 360, 427 (1928)Google Scholar.

22 Loc. cit. 16.

23 “Règles généales du droit de la paix,” 35 Hague Recueil 42 (1931)Google Scholar.

24 Spiropoulos, Jean, “L'Individu et le droit international,” 30 ibid. 248–258 (1929)Google Scholar.

25 Brierly, James Leslie, “Règies générates du droit de la paix,” 58 ibid. 44–47 (1936)Google Scholar.

26 “La sauvegarde internationale des droits de l'homme,” 59 ibid. 5, 6 (1937)Google Scholar.

27 Hildebrando Accioly, Traité de droit international public (Paris), Vol. I, pp. 2, 83, 84.

28 “War Crimes,” 39 A.J.I.L. 262 ff. (1945)Google ScholarPubMed, quotation from p. 265.

29 Op. cit. 95.

30 Op. cit. 207–208, and 206.

31 Loc. cit. 605, 610, 614.

32 International Law (New York, 1948), pp. 129–135, quotation from p. 134.

33 International Law, Chiefly as Interpreted and Applied by the United States (2nd ed., Boston, 1945), p. 39.

34 Guggenheim, Paul, “Les principes de droit international public,” 80 Hague Recueil 116–118 (1952)Google Scholar.

35 H. Lauterpaeht pronounces himself very much in favor of the recognition of the individual as a subject of international law. See his International Law and Human Rights (New York, 1950), pp. 4, 27–71, 145 ff. In the textbook he is, however, less enthusiastic. Op. cit. 19, quote from p. 20.

36 Diritto internazionale pubblico (Milan, 1952), pp. 173, 175. He stresses the international character of the Nuremberg and Tokyo Tribunals for trying major war criminals and refutes the objection of those who see in these tribunals only common national organs of the states which created them.

37 de Droit, Traité International Public (Paris, 1951), Vol. I, pp. 94–98, and 427–430Google Scholar.

38 Op. cit. 2, 9, 10, 17, 27.

39 Etudes de droit public, Vol. I: L'Etat, le droit objectif et la loi positive (Paris, 1901); Vol. II: L'Etat, les gouvernants et les agents (Paris, 1903).

40 Cf. L'Etat, Vol. I, pp. 243–246; also droit, Le individual et la transformation de l'Etat (Paris, 1908), pp. 5, 42, 43, 63Google Scholar; and de droit, Traité constitutionnel (Paris, 1921), Vol. I, pp. 555, 556 Google Scholar.

41 Les principes généraux du droit administratif (Paris, 1904), pp. 7–21.

42 Die Lehre von der Rechtssouveranität (1906). Cf. also his “L'idée moderne de l'Etat,” 13 Hague Recueil 513–583 (1926)Google Scholar.

43 Les nouvelles tendances du droit international (Paris, 1927).

44 Précis du Droit des Gens, Pt. I (Paris, 1932), pp. 9, 10, 12.

45 Cours de droit international public (Paris, 1948), p. 5.

46 Hauptprobleme der Staatslehre entwickelt aus der Lehre vom Rechtssatz (Vienna, 1911). The citation is from his “Les rapports de systeme entre le droit interne et le droit international public,” 14 Hague Recueil 310–312 (1926)Google Scholar.

47 Principles of International Law (New York, 1952), p. 114; also pp. 97, 116.

48 Ibia. 124.

49 “Théorie du Droit International Public,” 84 Hague Recueil 93, 117 (1953)Google Scholar; also Principles, op. cit. 261, with an identical definition.

50 Le progres du droit des gens (Paris, 1924), p. 360.

51 The lack of space does not allow discussion either of the “monistic” or “dualistic” doctrines of public law, or of the problem of the relationship of international law and municipal law, although these theories are very closely connected with the subject of the present article. Nor can analysis be made here of the problem of the sovereignty of states of which the international personality of individuals constitutes an important part. See on these problems Korowicz, M. S., La souveraineté des Etats et l'avenir du droit international (Paris, Pedone, 1945)Google Scholar, where the international personality of individuals is examined at pp. 98–176. Also idem, Individual as Subject of International Law (in Polish, Katowice, 1938).

Cf. Josef Kunz, “La primauté du droit des gens,” Revue de Droit International, 1925; and his Die Staatenverbindungen (Stuttgart, 1928); Frederic S. Dunn, “The International Rights of Individuals,” Proceedings of the A.S.I.L., 1941; Knubben, Rolf, Die Subjekte des Völkerreehts (Stuttgart, 1928)Google Scholar; Sohn, Louis B., Cases and Other Materials on World Law (Brooklyn, 1950)Google Scholar, important bibliography concerning the access of individuals to international courts, pp. 1042–1043, and the international responsibility of individuals, pp. 967 ff., particularly pp. 973–974; Pintor, Manfredi Siotto, “Les sujets du droit international autres que les Etats,” 41 Hague Eecueil 251–361 (1932)Google Scholar; Berezowski, Cezary, “Les sujets non souverains du droit international,” 65 ibid. 5–84 (1938)Google Scholar; McNair, Sir Arnold, “Aspects of State Sovereignty,” 31 British Year Book of International Law (1954)Google Scholar; Loewenstein, Karl, “Sovereignty and International Co-operation,” 48 A.J.I.L. 223 (1954)Google Scholar; Suotausta, Tauno, La Souveraineté des Etats (Helsinki, 1955)Google Scholar, bibliography, pp. 118–122; Sukiennicki, Victor, Essai sur la Souveraineté des Etats en Droit International Moderne (Paris, 1926)Google Scholar.

52 Cf. Manner, George, “The Object Theory of the Individual in International Law,” 46 A.J.I.L. 428 ff. (1952)Google Scholar, and his criticisms of the traditional doctrine.

53 A great impulse in this direction was given by the creation of the League of Nations—with its jus tractatuum, jus legationis and jus belli—and of the United Nations as well as of a number of the so-called Specialized Agencies. The international personality of the United Nations was clearly stated by the International Court of Justice in its Advisory Opinion of April 11, 1949, [1949] I.C.J. Rep. 178, 179, 185.

54 Cours de droit international (Paris), Vol. I, pp. 44–52, 123, 124.

55 Völkerrecht und Landesrecht (1899); also “Les rapports entre le droit interne et le droit international,” 1 Hague Recueil 77–121 (1923)Google Scholar.

56 “Les règies générales du droit international de la paix,” 47 Hague Eecueil 263–593 (1934)Google Scholar.

57 Kaufmann, “Règles générales du droit de la paix,” 54 ibid. 313–615 (1935)Google Scholar; cf. Julian Makowski, criticism of M. S. Korowicz’ study, Jednostka jako podmiot prawa międzynarodowego (Individual as Subject of International Law), in Buch Prawniezy i Ekonomiczny (Poznań), Vol. III, 1938; Winiarski, Bohdan, criticism of M. S. Korowicz’ study, La personnalité Internationale de l'individu (Paris, 1938)Google Scholar, in Ruch Prawniezy i Ekonomiczny (Poznań), Vol. IV, 1938.

58 Traits’ de Droit des Gens (Paris, 1950), p. 71.

59 Anzilotti's point of view was, however, softened with the years. In his textbook of 1929, he writes that the principle of the exclusive international personality of states has been affirmed with a special energy by the recent positivist doctrine, which takes it as a point of departure in the drive for elimination of a number of erroneous infiltrations originated by the doctrines of natural law. Op. cit. 44–52. But in his dissenting opinion annexed to the Advisory Opinion of the P.C.I.J. concerning the consistency of certain Danzig legislative decrees with the Constitution of the Free City, of Dec. 4, 1935 (Series A/B, No. 65, p. 65), he criticizes the fact that the three minority parties were only allowed to send explanatory notes without taking any part in the oral procedure. “Willing to admit individuals to take an active and direct part before the Court in advisory proceedings, the eminent scholar and jurist heavily contradicts his previous standpoint. If his suggestion had been accepted by the majority of the Court's judges, a new “erroneous infiltration” would have been achieved.

60 Korovin in his article in 40 A.J.I.L. 742 (1946) ; Krylov in his “Les notions princi-pales du droit des gens: La doctrine sovifitique du droit international,” 70 Hague Beeueil 446, 447 (1947)Google Scholar; also Materialy k'istorii O.O.N. (Materials for the history of the UNO) (Moscow, 1949)Google Scholar, last part.

61 Miechdunarodnoe pravo. Ucebnoe posobie (Moscow, 1947); and Prawo Między-narodowe (International Law), Polish edition under the direction of Ludwik Gelberg (Warsaw, 1950), see p. 128 and footnote.

62 U.N. General Assembly, Doc. A/CN.4/SE.9. Cf. Kelsen, Hans, The Communist Theory of Law (New York, 1955), pp. 176–179 Google Scholar; also Calvez, Jean-Yves, Droit International et Souveraineté en U.E.S.S. (Paris, 1953), pp. 198 ffGoogle Scholar.

63 “The Individual and the State in International Law,” Current Digest of Soviet Press, Vol. 4, No. 22, July 12, 1952, pp. 3, 4, 38, quoted in French by Eustathiades, op. cit. 554 et seq. Cf. Kulski, W. W., “The Soviet Interpretation of International Law,” 49 A.J.I.L. 518 ff. (1955)Google Scholar. Outstanding Soviet writers in their recent studies contest the International personality of both individuals and international organizations. See opinions of Prof. Krylov and V. V. Evgenyev, ibid. 522, 523.

64 In French original, Proces-verbaux des séances du Comité de Juristes de la S.d.N. (The Hague-Genève, 1920), p. 208. Cf. Minutes of the 1920 Committee of Jurists, pp. 205 ff. Cf. also Borchard, E. M., “Access of Individuals to International Courts,” 24 A.J.I.L. 359 ff. (1930)Google Scholar, and Séfèriadès, Stelio, “Le problème de l'accès des particuliers è des juridictions internationales,” 54 Hague Recueil 5 ff. (1935)Google Scholar.

65 Op. cit. 396.

66 Mavrommatis case. Cf. P.C.I.J., Ser. A, No. 2, p. 12.

67 Judgment No. 13, The Factory at Chorzow (claim for indemnity—merits), Ser. A, No. 17, pp. 27, 28. Cf. also Hudson, op. cit. 397–399, about “Espousal of Nationals’ Claims.”

68 P.C.I.J., March 3, 1928, Ser. B, No. 15, p. 18. Cf. also M. O. Hudson, op. cit. 640: “The officials were therefore held to have a right of action in Danzig courts against the Polish Railways Administration for the recovery of pecuniary claims based upon the Beamtenabkommen.”

69 Op. cit. 75.

70 Hudson, M. O., International Tribunals (Washington, 1944), p. 24 Google Scholar; also op. cit. 70. Cf. also de Bustamante, Antonio Sánchez y Sirvén, Droit international public (Paris, 1934), Vol. I, pp. 217, 220 Google Scholar.

71 Recueil des Décisions des Tribunaux Arbitraux Mixtes institués par les Traités de Paix (Paris, 1922–1930).

72 Anzilotti, op. and loc. cit.; Makowski, Julian, Prawo Narodów (Law of Nations) (Warsaw, 1930)Google Scholar, Vol. I, and Podręcznik prawa międzynarodowego (Textbook of International Law) (Warsaw, 1948). Let us remember here, that in case of tribunals or administrative bodies created by two or more states under a regime of condominium (co-imperium), not international law, but municipal law of the administered territory is applied by those judicial or administrative authorities of the country.

73 Op. cit. 71, 72.

74 International Law and Human Rights, op. cit. 4; see also Goodrich, Leland M. and Hambro, Edvard, Charter of the United Nations (Boston, 1949), pp. 96, 97, 322–324Google Scholar.

75 See, however, in this matter the important observations of Wright, Quincy, “The Fujii Case,” 45 A.J.I.L. 62 ff., 69 (1951)Google Scholar.

76 Cf. Nazi Conspiracy and Aggression, Opinion and Judgment (U. S. Government Printing Office, Washington, 1947)Google ScholarPubMed, Ch. IV: Violation of International Treaties. Quotations from pp. 52, 53.

77 The Soviet standpoint before and during the Nürnberg Trial was presented by A. N. Trainin in his book, Hitlerite Responsibility under Criminal Law (London, 1945). See also studies of the Soviet writers in this field (D. B. Levin, A. N. Trainin, W. N. Durdenevskii), cited in the above-mentioned Soviet textbook of international law (Polish ed.), p. 637. During the first two years after the war, these authors did not contest the responsibility of individuals under international law, as it was defined and established in Nürnberg. The authors of the textbook stress the international character of the Tribunal (p. 642).

78 Cf. also Kelsen, , The Communist Theory of Law (New York, 1945), pp. 177–179 Google Scholar. Georg Schwarzenberger, starting from a different point of view, writes: “Until the position of the individual as bearer of rights and duties under international law is very much more firmly established than it is at present, it appears less artificial to conceive jurisdiction regarding war crimes and similar cases as an exceptional extension of State jurisdiction than to elevate these rather disreputable objects of international law to the rank of international persons.” International Law (New York, 1950), p. 79.

79 Cf., e.g., Viscount Maiigham, formerly Chancellor of Great Britain, U.N.O. and War Crimes, with a postscript by Lord Hankey (London, 1951). See also Dr. Hans Ehard, Minister-President of Bavaria, “The Nürnberg Trial against the Major War Criminals and International Law,” 43 A.J.I.L. 223 ff. (1949). The author, expressing the point of view of influential German lawyers and of official circles of West Germany, states openly, on p. 241, that “… the Charter and the trial have proceeded beyond international law as in force and have applied new law retroactively.”

80 See, on this, Quincy “Wright, “The End of a Period of Transition,” loc. cit. 612.

81 The Conference of Ambassadors was then composed of Lord Harding of Penshurst (British Empire), Jules Cambon (France), Bonin (Italy) and Ishii (Japan), and presided over by Aristide Briand, the French Foreign Minister.

82 English text of the Decision in League of Nations Doc. II. A. 16923/14742; also in Kaeekenbeeck's book. It was published in the Polish Dziennik Ustaw (Journal of Laws) and in the German Reichsgesetzblatt in French original and in Polish and German translations, respectively.

83 French is the original text of the convention. English translation in League of Nations Documents and in Kaeckenbeeck's book. We quote from Professor Kaeckenbeeck's translation.

84 Kaeckenbeeck, op. cit. 52–54. Cf. Arbitral Tribunal Decisions, Vol. 1, p. 2 ff., in the Zbior Urzędowy Orzeczeń Trybunalu Rozjemczego dla Górnego Sląska, in Polish, or in the Sammlung von Entscheidungen des Schiedsgeriehtes für Oberschlesien, in German (Berlin, de Gruyter, 7 volumes, containing 127 decisions). The case of Steiner and Gross v. Poland was reprinted also in Annual Digest and Reports of Public International Law (London) 1927–1928, Case No. 188. Cf. also Kaeckenbeeck, “The Protection of Vested Rights in International Law,” 17 British Year Book of International Law 2 ff. (1936).

85 We cannot enter into the merits of these regulations, based upon numerous resolutions of the Council of the League. See Société des Nations, Protection des minorités de langue, de race ou de religion par la S.d.N. (Genève, 1931), where all texts pertaining to this matter are published. In connection with Art. 147, cf. 1 Hyde, op. cit. 39.

86 Polish Dziennjk Ustaw No. 19, pos. 128, 1923, German Reichsgesetzblatt II. 1923, 63.

87 Urzedowy Zbiór Poglądów Prezydenta Gómośląskiej Komisji Mięszanej (Cieszyn, 1937) (Official Collection of Opinions of the President of the Upper Silesian Mixed Commission), and in Amtliche Sammlung der Stellungnahmen des Prasidenten der Gemischten Kommission für Oberschlesien (Berlin, 1937, de Gruyter). The collection contains 127 Opinions of President Calonder in minority disputes.

88 League of Nations, Archives of the Mixed Commission for Upper Silesia. Cf. Reports on 2,283 petitions received by the President, according to Art. 149 of the convention, in 8 mimeographed volumes. Calonder's speech is also in Kaeckenbeeck's book at pp. 844–853.

89 Pablo de Azcarate, The League of Nations and National Minorities (Washington, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 1945), pp. 154, 155, 157.

90 The Upper Silesian Geneva Convention, when published in the official Journals of Laws of Poland and Germany, became a self-executing treaty; individuals were authorized to base their petitions or lawsuits directly on its provisions. If, however, the individual's action was brought before an administrative or judicial organ of his own country, he did not appear as an international person. He acquired this character when proceeding before the Arbitral Tribunal or before the President of the Mixed Commission. This difference makes the division between the individual's legal position under international law, according to the Upper Silesian Convention, and his position based upon the “Beamtenabkommen,” where the persons interested could proceed only before their national courts.

91 Op. cit. 430–432.

92 Cf. Korowicz, La Souveraineté, op. cit. 166–172.

93 Cf. International Tribunals, op. cit. 202.

94 Korowicz, Une Expérience, op. cit. 161–174; also “La Personnalité Internationale de l'Individu,” in Revue Internationale Française du Droit des Gens, Vols. 1–2 (Paris, 1938), and special reprint. See also the impressive book of William John Rose, The Drama of Upper Silesia (London, 1935).

95 Op. cit. 360.

96 International Tribunals, op. cit. 201.

97 Ibid. 201, 203.

98 See in this connection the speech of Edvard I. Hambro before the American Society of International Law, where he mentioned the access of individuals to international courts as a symptom of a tendency to create a real international society. Proceedings of A.S.I.L., 1941, pp. 26 ff.

99 Cf., e.g., Draft Articles for Inclusion in Covenant of International Court of Human Eights, of May 10, 1948, U.N. Doc. E/N.A./C.1./7. Also in Prof. Sohn's collection, op. cit. 568. Art. 17(1) of the draft provides:

1. The following may be parties in cases before the Court:

a) States,

b) Individuals,

c) Groups of individuals.

d) Associations, whether national or international.

See also Draft Statute for an International Criminal Court, U.N. Doc. A/AC.48/4, Sept. 5, 1951, reprinted in 46 A.J.I.L. Supp. 1 (1952). Cf. the profound analysis of this document by Wright, Quincy, “Proposal for an International Criminal Court,” 46 A. J. I. L. 60 ff. (1952)Google Scholar.