Topic: 2025 – Responsibility of International Organizations
Country: Japan
Delegate Name: Liem Krueger
Legal
Responsibility of International Organizations
Japan
Liem Krueger
Forest Hills Eastern
International Organizations have an extended history dating back to the 19th century. However, in the second half of the 20th century, the number and scope of IO activities significantly increased to cover various areas, such as human rights, trade, environmental protection, and military action. As a result, numerous questions arose around how IOs should be held accountable for actions that affect nations, other organizations, and individuals. A notable example is when UN peacekeepers from Nepal were deployed to Haiti after an earthquake and caused a cholera outbreak. The resulting epidemic resulted in 10,000 deaths and infected over 800,000 people in the country. For many years after the incident, the UN invoked absolute immunity and dodged legal ramifications. However, after immense political and public pressure, they did issue an apology and set up a fund for victims. Still, the UN did not accept legal liability for their wrongful act. The UN’s primary legal contribution to holding IOs accountable is the 2011 Draft Articles on the Responsibility of International Organizations, which is a non-binding treaty stipulating that IOs are responsible for their internationally wrongful acts. Currently, IOs have functional immunity that helps them operate in countries without interference of domestic legal systems. There is much left to consider regarding the responsibilities of IOs for their actions, which the UN will continue to discuss in future sessions.
Japan advocates for full compliance with international law and has generally supported the Draft Articles on the International Responsibility of International Organizations. Furthermore, Japan believes that responsibility should rest on IOs themselves for actions. The member states, however, are responsible for their own contributions to the incidents. In terms of IO immunity, Japan does not support a complete overhaul, but rather it stresses transparency, due diligence, and improved internal governance of IOs. In many cases, there are IOs that Japan strongly supports, such as the ICJ and ICC. After the 2010s Cholera outbreak in Haiti, Japan donated over $1 million to support health and sanitation improvements, demonstrating a preference for providing material assistance to victims. Japan’s robust system for compensating victims of large-scale disasters, such as the Fukushima nuclear incident, displays their support for clear, pre-defined compensation when there is inherent risk associated with IO activity. Finally, when a wrongful act is managed, Japan believes that the financial burden should be collectively managed by member states to demonstrate their shared responsibility.
Japan recommends that the internal internal review and accountability mechanisms within IOs be improved to prevent future incidents. Specifically, Japan supports mechanisms, such as review panels, that require International organizations to submit detailed information on their actions. In the event of future incidents, Japan supports using voluntary trust funds to help support victims.
