Responsibility of International Organizations

Topic: 2025 – Responsibility of International Organizations
Country: Colombia
Delegate Name: McKenzie Montgomery

The Republic of Colombia believes that the topic of the Responsibility of International Organizations is very important, and they become increasingly important as the years pass. For Colombia, there is a wide range of organizations such as the International Humanitarian Law (IHL), UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), the World Food Programme (WFP), the Peacebuilding Fund (PBF), and many other organizations that help Colombia be a sustainable member of the United Nations. As well as having overall major responsibility for peacekeeping/making, aid in humanitarian, security, advances in development, and protection of rights. But the organizations may sometimes cause issues, and it’s up to the UN to decide how to disperse accountability for these organizations’ mistakes.
The Republic of Colombia believes in a way of holding international organizations responsible with transparency. If an organization makes a mistake or commits an act of misconduct, it is important for that organization to be honest about it. The Republic of Colombia hopes that this will build trust with organizations as well as encourage honesty and decrease the number of mistakes made.
Another solution to this problem that the Republic of Colombia believes could work would be a mechanism for accountability, as well as that states should be held accountable for issues caused by the organization because of the state’s responsibility and position in decision-making. In 2023, Colombia reported on human rights practices, where they talked about punishment for those who were causing issues, and Colombia put restrictions on them. Holding states accountable also helps with figuring out how to deal with issues when it’s only the state making the decision.
In conclusion, the Colombian delegation believes the best way to figure out the ongoing issue of the responsibility of international organizations would be to hold states accountable and ask for transparency. Colombia understands that this will be hard to do, especially because of the privacy aspect. But Colombia hopes to change people’s views because of the overall benefits of these solutions. The Republic of Colombia is excited to work with other delegations and come up with a solution.

https://www.state.gov/reports/2023-country-reports-on-human-rights-practices/colombia/#:~:text=The%20government%20took%20credible%20steps,prosecuted%20such%20actions%20when%20reported.
https://www.un.org/peacebuilding/content/Colombia-
https://www.britannica.com/place/Colombia

Topic: 2025 – Responsibility of International Organizations
Country: Democratic Republic of the Congo
Delegate Name: Harini Manikandan

International organizations are a fundamental part of the world, and the Democratic Republic of Congo firmly believes in the importance of these organizations. However, as a nation that has been wrecked by colonialism and bigger powers, it is important to ensure that these organizations remain transparent and have a limit to its powers. These organizations complete important tasks whether it is helping refugees, peacekeeping missions, or providing sustenance, and it is vital that measures of oversight do not deter these actions. The DRC believes in finding a solution where the utilities of these programs are not impacted, but the responsibility of their actions are heightened to ensure the least amount of harm to nations in need.

As a nation that receives both benefits and harms from these international organizations, it is of utmost importance to the Democratic Republic of Congo that the balance of the powers of these groups is controlled. Peacekeeping efforts like the MONUSCO have provided substantial aid to our nation; however, there have been flaws within the programs as well. Many individual peacekeepers have partook in crimes like assault, sexual abuse, and fraud which our nation believes must be addressed in a fast manner. However, for actions that cause harm or destruction committed by the organization as a whole, the Democratic Republic of Congo believes that solutions must be at a more widespread level that take into consideration the impact of the programs as well.

In conclusion, the Democratic Republic of Congo looks forward to finding a solution that will maintain the benefits of the programs and will provide guidelines to them, as well. The DRC first proposes better, more advanced jurisdictions for the legal aspects of prosecuting international organizations. While individuals may be tried in home country legal systems, there must be more guidelines when the problems arise from the organization as a whole. Finally, as a nation affected at a close level, DRC urges more action in the aid of victims and to work on fixing the damage that has already occurred.

Topic: 2025 – Responsibility of International Organizations
Country: Portugal
Delegate Name: Ishitha Turlapati

Portugal recognizes that international organizations (IOs) play a growing and indispensable role in global governance, peacekeeping, humanitarian assistance, economic development, and multilateral cooperation. IOs, such as the United Nations, European Union, NATO, and the World Bank, don’t just set the agenda anymore; they’re on the ground, making decisions that have impact. With this expanded influence, legal accountability cannot be an afterthought. Portugal supports a framework for responsibility that follows international law, protects those who suffer harm, and keeps global institutions.
The International Law Commission’s Draft Articles on the Responsibility of International Organizations (2011) provide the most comprehensive legal guidance on this topic, affirming that organizations bear international responsibility when their conduct causes injury, whether through wrongful acts, omissions, or ultra vires actions.
Still, the question of who should answer for what isn’t always simple. Sometimes it’s unclear whether the organization itself is at fault, or if responsibility lies with the member states calling the shots, or even with individuals acting under the organization’s authority. Real-world cases, like the UN’s involvement in the Haiti cholera outbreak or civilian casualties during NATO missions, show just how easy it is for accountability to slip through the cracks. The Draft Articles try to close these gaps: if an organization causes harm, and that harm breaches its international obligations, it’s responsible. But if a member state is giving strict orders or has clear control over what happens, then the state shares the blame. Portugal supports this approach.
Portugal acknowledges that challenges arise when determining whether responsibility should lie with the IO itself, the member states directing its actions, or individuals acting under its authority. Past controversies, including the UN’s role in the Haiti cholera outbreak and civilian harm resulting from NATO operations, demonstrate gaps in accountability mechanisms. The Draft Articles clarify that an organization bears responsibility when the wrongful act is attributable to it and constitutes a breach of an international obligation, while member states may bear responsibility if they give binding instructions or exercise effective control over the conduct in question. Portugal agrees with this dual-responsibility framework, as it balances fairness with the reality of how IOs operate. The UN Sixth Committee, as the primary platform for legal debate in the General Assembly, plays a critical role in shaping how these principles evolve into future conventions or norms.
Portugal strongly supports strengthening accountability while preserving the independence and operational capacity of IOs. Excessive legal burdens could discourage organizations from engaging in peacekeeping and aid missions, especially in high-risk environments, yet complete immunity undermines both justice and trust. Portugal, therefore, favors mechanisms that provide victims with accessible pathways for redress without undermining organizational effectiveness. This includes establishing or enhancing claims commissions, ombudsman systems, internal review boards, transparent reporting, and cooperation with judicial bodies. Portugal also underscores the importance of guidance from the International Court of Justice (ICJ); its advisory opinions offer essential clarification on attribution, immunity, and the scope of obligations binding IOs under international law. Such judicial insights help refine the balance between legal responsibility and institutional autonomy.
Ultimately, Portugal believes that IOs should be held accountable for internationally wrongful acts to the extent that their conduct directly causes harm, in accordance with the Draft Articles. However, this accountability must reflect the unique nature of IOs, whose mandates depend on multilateral cooperation and delegated authority. Portugal supports a system where responsibility is shared appropriately: IOs bear responsibility for their own actions, member states bear responsibility when exercising effective control, and individuals may be held personally liable when acting in bad faith or committing violations of international criminal law. Portugal remains committed to constructive dialogue within the Sixth Committee to strengthen international legal frameworks that ensure responsibility, protect victims, and preserve the capacity of international organizations to fulfil their essential global functions.

Sources
https://legal.un.org/ilc/texts/instruments/english/draft_articles/9_11_2011.pdf
https://legal.un.org/ilc/texts/9_11.shtml
https://legal.un.org/ilc/texts/instruments/english/commentaries/9_11_2011.pdf

Topic: 2025 – Responsibility of International Organizations
Country: Saudi Arabia
Delegate Name: Sophia Caron

International organizations play a bigger role than ever in peacekeeping, humanitarian work, and global governance. As their influence grows, questions about responsibility also increase, especially when wrongful acts happen, like human rights violations, financial misconduct, environmental damage, or failures in UN missions. While the International Law Commission created the Articles on the Responsibility of International Organizations (ARIO), there is no binding treaty, which leaves gaps in accountability—particularly when immunity prevents domestic prosecution or when host states don’t have the capacity to investigate. Saudi Arabia believes that accountability must be clear and fair. Immunity should protect the independence of international organizations, but it should never be a shield for wrongdoing. International organizations must be responsible for acts that violate international law, while accountability systems should remain compatible with organizational neutrality and effectiveness. Member States need to cooperate to close legal gaps that allow harm to go unaddressed. Saudi Arabia has actively participated in Sixth Committee debates on the ARIO, supported UN reforms to strengthen ethics offices and misconduct reporting, advocated for transparency in peacekeeping, and promoted stronger legal frameworks to prevent abuse and ensure justice for affected communities. To improve accountability, Saudi Arabia recommends using the ARIO as a foundation for clearer guidelines or a future treaty defining responsibility, compensation, and cooperation among states; strengthening oversight through audits, ethics offices, whistleblower protections, and independent investigations; clarifying immunity so that official acts are protected but serious misconduct can be prosecuted; enhancing cooperation with standardized evidence-sharing and communication between host states, member states, and organizations; and ensuring victims have access to justice through complaint procedures, reporting hotlines, and fair remedies. Saudi Arabia believes that by strengthening oversight, clarifying legal responsibilities, and ensuring justice for affected populations, the international community can maintain trust in international organizations and reinforce the legitimacy and integrity of global institutions.

Topic: 2025 – Responsibility of International Organizations
Country: Switzerland
Delegate Name: Christian Boyce

Committee: Legal
Topic: Responsibility of International Organizations
Country: Swiss Confederation
Delegate: Christian Boyce
School: Forest Hills Northern High School

Joining the ranks of nations’ diplomats and United Nations (UN) officials, international
organizations (IOs) are generally granted comparable immunity to the two aforementioned
groups to ensure their effectiveness. With the growing prevalence of IOs in international affairs,
the question of accountability naturally arises. The UN’s various organizations, among others,
have fallen under scrutiny for the effects their work may have. Ultimately, the matter of whether
and how to attribute responsibility to IOs is becoming increasingly pressing.
The Swiss Confederation has played a large role in international organizations in recent
decades, with Geneva hosting the most IOs of any city in the world. Switzerland’s Host State Act
(HSA) creates privileges and immunities for the many IOs it hosts. While there are no explicit
provisions made for holding IOs accountable for harmful acts, there are agreements regarding
private-law disputes. The headquarters agreements made under the HSA require that IOs create
their own internal mechanisms for settling private-law disputes. Swiss law essentially maintains
a similar approach for international organizations just as it would diplomats, granting immunity,
though having some provisions for holding accountability.
Being an international organization itself, the United Nations has proposed a framework
for attributing responsibility to international organizations for their actions. As a part of General
Assembly Session A/66/10, the International Law Commission has detailed varieties of actions
for which international organizations would be held responsible. While the Draft Articles have
not been made into any form of binding law, they still cement themselves as a reference for
further discussion on the matter. Furthermore, with the countermeasures for responsibility
detailed in the articles from the session, there may still be debate over what may constitute
“self-defence” or similar matters.
In general, the accountability of international organizations is a topic with which the
Legal Committee must deal delicately. Seeing as the United Nations is itself an international
organization, any precedents set may affect the UN’s own efficacy in future endeavours. The
Swiss Confederation looks favorably upon creating a more comprehensive and binding
responsibility model for all intergovernmental organizations.

Topic: 2025 – Responsibility of International Organizations
Country: Ecuador
Delegate Name: Rafay Dar

Topic: Responsibility of International Organizations
Country: Ecuador
Delegate: Rafay Dar
School: Forest Hills central high school

International organizations (IOs) are created with the sole purpose of making things better than they were before. However, despite the best intentions of any group of people, things do not always happen the way we want them to. When international organizations overstep their bounds and cause catastrophes, one important question arises: who is responsible for these actions? Often, victims of these catastrophes are silenced by the immunity and independence that these international organizations possess. The issue at hand is becoming more and more apparent, especially in a world with increasing tensions and international turmoil. These international organizations will be forced to expand their scope in order to further their goals in assisting those in need, but if something went awry, there would be no liability in the current system we possess. This is not just the reality that Ecuador faces, but every nation on this planet.

The delegation of Ecuador, acknowledging that there are many significant IOs at work within our nation’s borders, believes that these organizations contribute significantly to help alleviate many of our nation’s problems. However, these organizations have also been shown to sometimes cause harm. The international monetary fund, a United Nations organization, has promoted many extractionist policies within our nation, leading to many environmental and social consequences. These problems are prevalent throughout the globe, and with little liability, there is nothing we can do about international organizations assuming too much responsibility. This is why the delegation of Ecuador believes that the liability of a problematic action from an international organization falls on whoever or whatever exercised “effective control” over the topic at hand, being the body or individual who ordered about the act that caused the incident. This means that the perpetrator of this action would be held responsible for it, being that if something was ordered or supervised by a part of an organization, the liability would fall upon that part of the organization should something happen. However, if it were a United Nations directive, then the liability would fall upon the United Nations.

It is imperative that this framework or something similar should be passed in order to create a way for international organizations to be held accountable for their actions without impeding their intended goals and purposes. With effective control liability, there is a smaller burden on the United Nations itself to try and regulate these international organizations at the cost of their independence. Additionally, this would also allow for more accountability and justice for the victims of these events that could be caused by international organizations. The delegation of Ecuador urges the United Nations to reverse a historic negative trend that has been perpetuated for too long. This plan calls for the establishment of more guidelines for the regulation of international organization liability, as well as a framework for the transparency for victims to seek compensation as a result of the unpunished atrocities that these IOs have committed, intentionally or not.

Works Cited:
https://www.un.org/ola/
https://www.cesr.org/sites/default/files/Rights_Violation_in_the_Ecuadorian_Amazon_The_Human_Consequences_of_Oil_Development_1_1.pdf
https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2025/country-chapters/ecuador

Topic: 2025 – Responsibility of International Organizations
Country: Peru
Delegate Name: Luis Avila

Legal Committee
Responsibility of International Organizations
The Republic of Peru
Luis Avila, Forest Hills Northern High School
Over the past decade, United Nations peacekeeping operations have been involved in controversies affecting thousands of civilians, highlighting the urgent need to clarify the responsibility of international organizations. In 2010, cholera was introduced to Haiti by United Nations (UN) peacekeeping forces from Nepal, where the disease was prevalent. The outbreak occurred in 2010 due to inadequate sanitation in a UN camp. Untreated waste from the camp was dumped into an open septic pit that overflowed into a nearby stream, causing over 8,000 deaths. Addressing this concern, the International Law Commission (ILC) drafted articles on the responsibilities of international organizations, 2011.
Peru believes that international organizations should be held accountable for their actions when the results cause harm, while still ensuring that their operations are effective and not compromised. Peru agrees with the terms and conclusion of the ILC articles, as they outlined the legal obligations international organizations have. The cholera outbreak is a prime example of the consequences of little accountability and the limitations of current immunity protections. At the national level, Peru informs its positions on human rights and international cooperation. Peru’s normative commitment to the passing of: ICCPR, ICESCR, CAT, CEDAW, CRC, CERD, and TPNW (2021). Through Peru’s historical support of these human rights treaties, it has been shown that Peru respects international law obligations and supports accountability. Peru’s track record of treaty ratification gives weight to its position; it’s not just ideological. Peru has already legally committed to upholding human rights and accountability at the international level. If individual states are bound by these treaties, then IOs should also be subject to clear legal responsibilities for harm.
Peru believes that international organizations should be held fully accountable for actions that cause harm. That being said, this accountability should be balanced with operational effectiveness and independence. Peru supports creating accountability systems that fit each international organization, like NATO, the World Bank, the WHO, and regional unions, because each organization works differently and has different missions. These systems could include regular internal checks, clear rules for reporting and handling harm caused by the organization, and independent review boards to make sure decisions are fair and responsible. This accountability should be upheld at three different levels. First, through the organization itself, the organization must enforce rules and set ethical boundaries to prevent harm from happening. Second, Member states, countries that participate in IOs, must cooperate when or if harm occurs. Lastly, individuals, people working in IOs must face personal responsibility if they have broken an international law. Peru also supports creating special funds to help people who are harmed by the actions of international organizations. These funds would give victims real compensation, not just promises of accountability. .By promoting accountability, transparency, and shared responsibility, Peru aims to help build international organizations that are effective and fair.

Topic: 2025 – Responsibility of International Organizations
Country: Slovenia
Delegate Name: Giada Orsini

Committee: LEGAL
School: East Grand Rapids

Slovenia strongly supports international cooperation and the rule of law. As international organizations such as the UN, NATO, and the European Union take on larger roles in peacekeeping, development, and humanitarian work, questions about their legal responsibility have become more important. When the actions of the international organizations lead to harm, such as disease outbreaks, civilian deaths, or economic damage, victims often struggle to get answers. Slovenia believes that accountability is essential for fairness and for maintaining trust in the international system.
Slovenia believes that international organizations should act responsibly, but recognizes that they are not the same as member states. Their decisions often depend on complicated structures and cooperation between many countries. Because of this, responsibility should depend on the situation.
Slovenia thinks that the international organization is responsible when harm comes from its own policies or failures. Slovenia also thinks that member states are responsible when they directly control or lead the organization’s actions. Slovenia also believes that individuals should be responsible when they misuse their authority or act outside their duties. Slovenia wants accountability, but also wants international organizations to continue their important work without being limited by fear of lawsuits or political pressure.
To improve responsibility while keeping international organizations effective, Slovenia suggests that there should be clear rules that explain when an international organization, a state, or an individual is responsible. Slovenia also thinks that there needs to be stronger oversight and review systems inside international organizations to prevent mistakes and misconduct. Slovenia also wants to encourage international organizations to follow the International Law Commission’s draft articles on the responsibility of international organizations. Regarding victims, Slovenia believes that there should be fair and accessible ways for victims to receive compensation or have their complaints reviewed, and that there should be more transparency so that victims understand how decisions are made and where the harm came from.
Slovenia believes that responsibility and accountability make international organizations stronger, not weaker. International organizations must be able to protect communities and support global peace, but they must also take responsibility when their actions cause harm. Slovenia looks forward to working with other countries to create fair and realistic guidelines that protect victims while allowing international organizations to fulfill their essential missions.

Topic: 2025 – Responsibility of International Organizations
Country: Greece
Delegate Name: Claire Yang

Country: Hellenic Republic of Greece
Committee: Legal
Topics: Criminal Accountability of UN Officials and Responsibility of International Organizations
School: Mattawan High School

The delegation of the Hellenic Republic of Greece emphasizes the importance of a strong commitment to criminal accountability and to the responsibility of international organizations to maintain global peace, security, and justice. As an active participant in UN peacekeeping missions and humanitarian initiatives, the Hellenic Republic of Greece believes that international organizations play a central role in promoting stability and upholding international law. In line with the principles of international criminal law and the rule of law, any criminal activities involving UN officials within international organizations must be reviewed impartially and addressed justly.

The Hellenic Republic of Greece recognizes the necessity of balancing the empowerment of international organizations with the imperative of accountability. While international organizations must have authority to fulfill their essential mandates, they must operate under transparent and legally binding frameworks. The Hellenic Republic of Greece asserts that: any individual, regardless of rank or position within an international organization, must be held responsible for violations of international law, international organizations themselves must be answerable for misconduct and actions that would breach established legal norms, and investigations and prosecutions must be conducted fairly proportionately and consistently with international legal standards.

The delegation has consistently supported initiatives strengthening accountability mechanisms within the UN and other international bodies that including: endorsing UN internal oversight reforms to ensure transparency and justice, ratifying international treaties such as the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court that highlights individual criminal responsibility for violations of international law, and actively participating in multilateral forums in addressing humanitarian and legal responsibility of international organizations.

The Hellenic Republic of Greece proposes the following measures to maintain criminal accountability and organizational responsibility:
Strengthening International Oversight Mechanisms: Establish or reinforce independent investigative bodies within international organizations to monitor compliance and report violations.
Legal Clarity and Consistency: Ensuring that all personnel and organizations operate under clear international legal frameworks and face consistent enforcement measures.
International Cooperation: Encourages cooperation among sovereigns and international courts to ensure accountability without undermining their authorities.
Education: Promoting programs on ethics within international law and human rights for UN officials and staff of international organizations to prevent misconduct proactively.

The Hellenic Republic of Greece reaffirms its dedication to justice, accountability, and multilateral cooperation. The delegation remains committed to working alongside the international community to ensure that UN officials and international organizations act responsibly and transparently while preserving the integrity of their goals. Upholding the rule of law and international standards is essential for the continued trust and effectiveness of global governance.

Topic: 2025 – Responsibility of International Organizations
Country: Israel
Delegate Name: Josephine Moe-Abla

2025-Responsibility of international organizations
Israel
Josephine Moe-Abla

A nation is hard to govern; nonetheless, several go through the UN. Take a moment of grace when Israel states its opinion. All nations are doing their utmost to provide sovereignty, while still maintaining international peace with other countries; Israel is no less. Indulge this debate, and think, each nation has a rivalry with another. Think how easily this dispute could be handled if each nation took responsibility for its aggressive behavior.
To elaborate, several countries (to go unnamed) have either threatened or carried out military violence against innocent Israeli citizens. This unlawful behavior has struck fear into Israel’s civilians and officials. Israel asks that delegates side with the innocent and protect those blameless bystanders. The State of Israel will only use violence if deemed necessary to protect itself and its civilians. Other nations often overstep the national borders to harm Israel’s people. And while the State of Israel wishes for them to be condemned, this delegate still feels the resolution must focus on national sovereignty, in opposition to crossing borders. Untrue accusations are absurd and unnecessary; all allegations against the state of Israel are
harming the mental well-being of our civilians.
In addition, one of Israel’s core values is international peace. This topic of debate hits heavy within the soul of this delegate. Other nations purposefully choosing to harm Israeli land may face any consequence. In previous UN meetings, delegates have failed to condemn Hamas. This makes the State of Israel feel unrepresented and misinformed; the UN is a place of options and resolutions. To so easily find Hamas non-guilty while simultaneously blaming Israel for corruption is unlawful and unjustified. The state of Israel only operates for self-defence. Hamas targets Israel and harms innocent people. To add, Palestine needs to enforce better control over its citizens. Delegates, we must agree that when a nation oversteps, the country fights back. It is only natural human behavior.
To resolve, the resolution must ensure national sovereignty while simultaneously enforcing international peace between nations. As Israel must stay true to its values of the aforesaid. If a resolution fails to meet these requirements, Israel will oppose. Attacks ranging across borders are harmful and must be dealt with utmost haste. Political attacks are violating what the UN has ruled unlawful. In fact, all nations of the UN must take action against these international organizations and side with the State of Israel, so these torments come to an end.

Topic: 2025 – Responsibility of International Organizations
Country: Bangladesh
Delegate Name: DeeDee Cairns

Legal
Responsibility of International Organizations
Bangladesh
DeeDee Cairns
Forest Hills Northern

International organizations now play an increasingly influential role in global governance, from peacekeeping to economic development. As their responsibilities expand, so does the need for a clear and fair methods on governing their legal accountability. The International Law Commission’s 2011 Draft Articles on the Responsibility of International Organizations state that international organizations, like states, can be held responsible when their actions amount to an internationally wrongful act and can be legally attributed to the organization as an independent entity. This idea now plays a large role in discussions within the UN Sixth Committee, where Member States review and debate the developing legal duties of both states and international organizations.
For Bangladesh, the growing complexity of international operations- whether in peacekeeping mandates, humanitarian missions, or financial and development programs- shows the necessity of strengthening accountability without compromising the independence and operational capacity of these organizations. The Draft Articles make clear that responsibility may arise not only from the organization’s own actions but also in situations where a member state directs or coerces the organization. These provisions show the shared and sometimes overlapping responsibilities that must be addressed through careful legal interpretation.
Bangladesh recognizes the value of established judicial mechanisms, particularly the International Court of Justice, whose advisory opinions have guided the development of legal norms towards international organizations. However, judicial opinions alone cannot resolve the challenges faced by victims seeking reforms. Bangladesh therefore supports discussion within on strengthening internal review processes and encouraging organizations to use transparent standards consistent with the Draft Articles.
At the same time, Bangladesh emphasizes that any system of responsibility must allow international organizations- especially the United Nations- to continue carrying out their work in peace and security. A balanced approach is necessary, one that supports accountability while ensuring organizations can operate effectively and without unnecessary political influence. Bangladesh remains committed to working with other Member States to strengthen these principles promote fair and practical mechanisms that uphold justice and the integrity of the UN.

Topic: 2025 – Responsibility of International Organizations
Country: Central African Republic
Delegate Name: Haley Hansen

International organizations such as the EU, NATO, UN, and HRD are cornerstones of furthering
the possibility of peace and order within struggling countries. I believe my fellow delegates can agree
with me that these organizations are crucial to every country. But these organizations can make mistakes
that worsen the disorder in the countries they wish to help. These mistakes can be of individual fault or of
the organizations themselves. The Central African Republic believes that holding these parties responsible
for their actions is important, but maintaining fair judgment and acknowledging their intentions is
necessary as well.

The Central African Republic has been a struggling country for a long time, due to many factors.
But recent steady improvements can be greatly attributed to the international aid that it has received. The
United Nations Multidimensional Integrated Stabilization Mission in the Central African Republic (or
MINUSCA) has been widely praised for its work in the country. It has disbanded numerous armed
groups, with eleven of fourteen having joined the peace agreement, with the two most recent groups to
join being the Central African Republic’s most active armed groups. The work of MINUSCA has allowed
the Central African Republic’s government to have time to reform and establish reliable security
measures.

However, this does not mean that international organizations have not worsened the situation in
the Central African Republic. The Central African Republic has suffered many abuses from international
aid groups. For example, on the seventeenth of January two thousand and twenty three, a group of russian
aid workers drove up to Privat Damabakizi’s house demanding to see him. Privat had recently bought a
radio that he didn’t know was stolen by the seller. But because of which the russian workers beat him,
then threw him into the back of their truck and proceeded to torture him by beating and stabbing him
while his wife screamed for him as they drove away. He was never seen again, presumed to have been
tortured to death (Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty). The Central African Republic has long suffered
sexual violence, killings, torture, and attacks from International groups meant to aid it.

Given the immense improvements achieved by international organizations, the Central African
Republic believes that a flexible form of punishment for organizations is important to maintain
effectiveness. We strongly believe in the ability of these organizations to improve. But for countries that
have suffered due to these organizations, transparency is a necessity for trust to be regained. These
organizations need to be completely transparent about their actions and plans for the countries they are
helping. Responsibility for these mistakes should be on the individual perpetrators, so as not to be
counterproductive to the progress that could be made. But it must be acknowledged that much trust must
be regained for countries that have been negatively affected to allow progress to be made

Topic: 2025 – Responsibility of International Organizations
Country: Thailand
Delegate Name: Jennavieve Conant

With the uprising in the need for the UN’s because responsibility of the UN is a major importance because it holds everyone accountable and makes sure that there are no problems that could come up in the future. Holding people legally responsible has many ways to go about it. It all depends on the crimes committed, how bad the crime is, and how it affects the other countries in the UN. Also, something that determines how the country is going to be held responsible for actions is the decision made by the UN to prosecute them. Thailand wants to follow the rules and doesn’t want a crime to go unpunished. They would most likely agree with the statement “eye for an eye,” meaning they would want the punishment to be as bad as the crime. Thailand would want the UN to decide what the punishment should be. Thailand would have a fair trial for the country that committed the crime. When it comes to deciding how to have order without imposing on international organizations, we need to limit the “immunity” that the UN officials have, depending on the crime. Crimes like fraud, sexual assault, and rape are examples of crimes that should not be included in the “immunity” that keeps UN officials out of jail. Thailand would prosecute any crimes that don’t have anything to do with the UN, like they are a normal individual/citizens. So, ways to hold countries and officials accountable are to look at the crime committed and decide if it has anything to do with the UN, and if it doesn’t, then they should be charged like a normal citizen without immunity.

Topic: 2025 – Responsibility of International Organizations
Country: Bahrain
Delegate Name: Kaitlyn Gruber

Ensuring both that international organizations are held responsible for their actions and that there are defined responsibilities for international organizations is necessary for a smoothly functioning society. Without the influence of international organizations (IO’s), we wouldn’t have the WHO, NATO, or even the UN; all important in protecting, establishing, and upholding international law. These vital organizations encourage cooperation and communication between nations, handling large scale issues, providing necessary resources, and establishing peaceful relations. However, like all things, they can fail and actions taken by IO’s can result in disaster. In 1995 the UN neglected to prevent the Srebrenica massacre, a glaring example of a time where an IO lacked the urgency and didn’t provide the resources needed to quash the conflict before it became a genocide. Despite the UN declaring Srebrenica a supposed “safe area,” a place under the protection of UN peacekeeping forces and to be protected with “all necessary means, including the use of force,” it still suffered mass civilian casualties amounting to over 8,000 and large-scale destruction. The reason for preventable genocides such as this occurring are a combination of weak command structures, unclear mandates, and poorly implemented support, demonstrating how institutional flaws and lack of responsibility can lead to the most catastrophic consequences. Recognizing these pressing challenges, global action has been taken to reinforce accountability within these institutions. The UN specifically has strengthened oversight internally through the Office of Internal Oversight Services (OIOS), established to audit operations, investigate misconduct, and promote transparency. Other reforms such as the “Human Rights Up Front” initiative are intended to ensure that threats to civilian populations are handled quickly and efficiently rather than being ignored until it’s too late. Meanwhile, the World Bank and the International Criminal Court have further expanded and enforced their integrity frameworks and due-diligence requirements to reduce abuse, corruption, and operational oversights. While such actions are important step forward, they are only the beginning. A universally recognized system of responsibility is essential to ensure that international organizations uphold their mandates and be held accountable for their actions to prevent repeated and catastrophic failures. Strengthening oversight, clarifying mandates, and ensuring greater transparency will not only enhance the legitimacy of IO’s but also reinforce their capacity to foster international cooperation, protect human rights, and maintain global stability.

The nation of Bahrain is committed to addressing the vitally important topic of Responsibility of International Organization. While Bahrain hasn’t struggled directly with a need for UN intervention of any kind, it does recognize that this need is prevalent in other nations and stands to support the United Nations and other such organization’s efforts. The kingdom of Bahrain holds a strong commitment to international cooperation and participates in organizations like the United Nations, World Bank, and Gulf Cooperation Council with the shared intent to both bolster lasting international relations and to contribute to global cooperation efforts, achieving shared prosperity and security. We have been vocal in our support of international law and the rights of peoples to self-determination and the legal opinions of international bodies such as the International Court of Justice. Every nation should posses the same commitment to establishing solutions to global issues through support of international organizations, if we are able to increase support of and for individual nations then the issues of security, humanitarian aid, and other such things would be lesser, crating a better world. However, non-interference in the internal affairs of other countries, national sovereignty, must be upheld and maintained. The specific responsibilities of international organizations is something that must be properly defined and implemented to ensure improvement in the state of society on a global scale.

Going into this committee session, the kingdom of Bahrain hopes to see proposals reinforcing international cooperation by clarifying the roles, duties, and oversight of international organizations, to ensure that these international organizations act responsibly and consistently across all regions. Many international organizations have faced challenges due to limited enforcement capabilities, inconsistent member-state compliance, or gaps in internal monitoring systems. Bahrain looks forward to working with fellow member states to design innovative approaches and global frameworks that ensure international organizations fulfill their responsibilities with integrity. Together, we can reinforce global trust and build international institutions that serve the interests of all nations.

Topic: 2025 – Responsibility of International Organizations
Country: Chile
Delegate Name: Bryce Broughton

In this tumultuous time period, international organizations are nothing short of critical for maintaining global stability. Trade blocs, alliances, global humanitarian consortiums, et cetera, all generally tend to be created of altruistic intentions – yet, there are concerns afoot. Within recent years, as the importance and publicity of many of these organizations has been steadily increasing, so too has the possibility for misconduct. These organizations, often acting as “surrogate governments” and “de facto local public authorities” (per the Council of Europe), have been put in a position in which wrongdoing could run rampant at any given moment if a precedent is not set ahead of time.

It is the belief of the delegation from Chile that a strong need is present for institutions and regulations in order to prevent misdeeds regarding international organizations, and we strongly urge law to be created and doled out accordingly for such possibilities. As a member of various international organizations, including the United Nations and associated organs (evidently), the OECD, and APEC – as well as an associate state of Mercosur – the delegation from Chile recognizes that alongside the security blanket these organizations provide, there comes an inherent responsibility to use that ability for the good of humanity, and we call upon local governments to work parallel to independent justice systems in order to strike the proverbial hammer upon individuals associated with organizations – or, in extreme cases, perhaps the organizations themselves – that have been involved in nefarious actions and otherwise lack the means to be prosecuted and receive due punishment. Additionally, we call upon the organizations themselves to consider cutting ties with unethical figures and states, if applicable.

Works Cited
Review of Draft Articles on the Responsibility of International Organizations. 2011. United Nations. 2011. https://legal.un.org/ilc/texts/instruments/english/draft_articles/9_11_2011.pdf.
Council of Europe. 2009. “International Organisations Acting as Quasi-Governments Should Be Held Accountable.” Commissioner for Human Rights. Council of Europe. June 8, 2009. https://www.coe.int/en/web/commissioner/-/international-organisations-acting-as-quasi-governm ents-should-be-held-accountable.

Topic: 2025 – Responsibility of International Organizations
Country: Ireland
Delegate Name: Josh Machnacki

The Republic of Ireland views the responsibility of International Organizations (IOs) as a central component of international law. IOs shape global policy in varying areas, from peacekeeping to economic development. The major role of such organizations means that the task of clarifying the legal questions of who is responsible when IOs cause harm, and to what extent they should be liable, is all the more urgent. The Legal Committee must ensure IOs are held responsible for harm consistent with international law without paralyzing organizations ability to function.

Ireland has long supported the International Law Commission’s (ILC) Draft Articles on the Responsibility of International Organizations. These articles affirm that IOs bear international responsibility for internationally wrongful acts, and are obligated to make full reparations. Simultaneously, Ireland stands against states using IOs to hide behind liability and skirt treaty obligations. Both IOs and member states bear responsibility in some circumstances. Rules in this area should keep in mind that states should not lightly escape liability behind the shield of an organization, but neither should they be excessively punished for the independent actions of the IO. If Irish soldiers under UN command commit misconduct, Ireland accepts the duty of individual responsibility to discipline/prosecute, and also expects the UN to answer for institutional failures. A balance must be struck between UN and state responsibility so neither have impunity and both can be respectively held accountable. Ireland strongly supports holding individuals accountable for harmful acts carried out under the banner of an IO. The Legal Committee separately deals with this vein in criminal accountability of UN officials. Troop Contributing Countries (TCCs)/home states must have legal frameworks in place to prosecute foreign nationals for crimes.

An effective accountability system has multiple layers. IOs must provide remedies and political accountability. Member states must exercise oversight and be prevented from skirting responsibility. Individuals must be held criminally responsible. All three layers together collectively ensure IOs are responsible for harmful acts. To achieve such ends, Ireland supports the development and expansion of claims commissions by IOs to review allegations of harm and recommend appropriate compensation, the publishing by IOs of investigative findings and measures taken to address harm caused, and the collection of funds by members of organizations to ensure reparations can be given. Organizations cannot be allowed to run rampant throughout the globe and hide from responsibility if they cause harm.

Sources:
Statement by Ireland on the Responsibility of International Organizations (Sixth Committee, 62nd Session). United Nations General Assembly, 2007.

International Law Commission. Draft Articles on the Responsibility of International Organizations, with Commentaries. United Nations, 2011.

“Secretary-General Apologizes for UN Role in Haiti Cholera Outbreak.” United Nations Press Release, 1 Dec. 2016.

United Nations General Assembly. Resolution 66/100: Responsibility of International Organizations. 9 Dec. 2011.

Topic: 2025 – Responsibility of International Organizations
Country: Philippines
Delegate Name: Kennedy Anderson

Since becoming one of the founding states of the United Nations in 1945, the Philippines has taken an active role throughout its history, with a focus on peace. This year when asking for a non-permanent seat in the security council for the 2027-2028 term, our goal while having on the seat we would consider the views and concerns of all Member States and other UN organs. Along with that we want to advance the cause of global peace, “with the depth of experience earned from our struggles for peace.”. The Philippines values our role in the United Nations and values the work that is done and believe that the United Nations is a vital part of country relations. In a 2015 Security Council open debate on Maintaining International Peace and Security as a representative of the Philippines Irene Susan B. Natividad stated that “the international community can count on the Philippines to uphold the Purposes and Principles of the UN Charter. The UN and its Charter have been, and will remain to be, crucial bastions for the voices of all countries to be heard on the global stage.”

The United Nations defines an IO as an “international governmental organizations or organizations with a universal membership of sovereign states” The Republic of Philippines has long been involved with International Organizations with being in the UN, Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC), the International Monetary Fund (IMF), World Bank, and the World Trade Organization (WTO). Although the Republic of Philippines has had a difficult relationship with IO intervention in our country but has also aided the betterment of our country. There must be an equal distribution of a country’s sovereignty, international law and immunity of a country or an IO.

The Philippines believes that “disputes between international organizations and private parties should be settled in good faith and in a spirit of cooperation by the means of dispute settlement.” There first needs to be made a distinction between the organizational immunity enjoyed by international organizations and the functional immunity of its personnel. While international organizations have immunity to ensure their independent functioning, such immunity must not deprive individuals of access to justice. Countries should also not be acquitted of their obligations under international law because legal authority has been transferred to an international organization. We are of the view that further deliberation may also be undertaken in order to ensure that international organizations are not allowed to hide behind a blanket of immunity by letting countries grant privileges and immunities to an international organization existing within its territory.

Topic: 2025 – Responsibility of International Organizations
Country: Sierra Leone
Delegate Name: Julian Andare

The role of international organizations is one of multilateralism. These organizations are critical to properly resolving international issues and are necessary. The responsibility of international organizations encompasses the legal, ethical, and operational frameworks that govern how international organizations operate and interact. The legal committee must properly interpret said frameworks. Further, the committee must adopt a resolution that allows such organizations to continue their vital work while forcing them to be accountable for their actions.

International organizations are extremely variable in size, purpose, membership, and functions. This variability causes inherent problems in accountability, as different organizations require different regulation. This need for regulation is underscored by the continued human rights violations being committed by such organizations. Allegations include claims of sexual exploitation and abuse by U.N. personnel and U.N. complicity in human rights abuses in Haiti, as stated by the Harvard Human Rights Journal. Furthermore, the International Finance Corporation’s investments and complicity in the ongoing persecution of Uyghur communities in China. Many of these organizations operate in a legal grey area, creating a difficulty for the international community to hold them accountable.

The delegation of Sierra Leone maintains that international communities play an extremely vital role in resolving issues. Sierra Leone upholds this belief as a contributing nation to the African Union, ECOWAS, the United Nations, and other U.N. organizations. This is even further underscored by the delegation of Sierra Leone serving as the president of the United Nations Security Council during the month of November of 2025. Sierra Leone strongly supports international organizations and believes they play a critical role in resolving global problems. Sierra Leone maintains that many international organizations are not representative of many African nations. Forming the UNSC to be a more representative group has been a primary goal of this delegation during its time as president of the council. The delegation of Sierra Leone believes that international organizations must be reformed, not limited.

As such, the Legal Committee must adopt a resolution that allows international organizations to continue their critical work while increasing transparency and legitimacy. Sierra Leone believes that international organizations should not be limited but should be reformed. This allows them to continue their work and grow their efforts. Sierra Leone maintains that IOs are capable of doing wrong and have. However, we cannot permit a few incidents to harm the reputation of many.

Topic: 2025 – Responsibility of International Organizations
Country: India
Delegate Name: Ezra Navin

The Responsibility of International Organisations has become increasingly more important in recent years, as IOs such as the United Nations, NATO, the World Bank, and the European Union take a larger role in peacekeeping, humanitarian aid, and development. While these organisations are created to help developing nations, certain oversights can cause more problems in these developing countries than there were before. India believes that these IOs must be held accountable for their misconduct. Although there have been developments on the issue, India believes that this problem, if not dealt with, could damage the reputations and efficacies of IOs across the world.
The Indian delegation believes that when holding an International Organisation responsible for an issue, you are also holding the member states responsible. Member states should take responsibility for the actions of the IOs they belong to, because states are responsible for the decision-making. An example of this situation is during the Kosovo War, member States of NATO chose to carry out air strikes against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, causing civilian deaths. The states that decided to carry out the air strikes should hold responsibility for their actions.
The Indian delegation additionally believes that jurisdiction over an International Organisation’s misconduct should fall under international and state law where the misconduct occurred. If the IO violates any international law that applies, regardless of where the rule originated or its nature, it has breached international law. IOs should be included in international laws, just as states are, to ensure they are held accountable for their actions.
Furthermore, the Indian delegation believes that rules set by an International Organisation must be regarded as obligations under international law. These rules create responsibility for the Organisations not just as internal guidelines, but as real laws they must follow. These rules also create accountability for IOs without imposing on the effectiveness or independence of International Organisations.
The Republic of India believes that if an International Organisation is held responsible for an issue, the member states included are also responsible. Furthermore, the delegation also believes that organisations should be held legally accountable just as much as states when misconduct occurs. India hopes that this committee can reach an agreement on the Responsibility of International Organisations to prevent misconduct committed by organisations in the future.

Bibliography:
United Nations. “Final Report to the Prosecutor by the Committee Established to Review the NATO Bombing Campaign Against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia.” International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, https://www.icty.org/en/press/final-report-prosecutor-committee-established-review-nato-bombing-campaign-against-federal.

Permanent Mission of India to the UN, New York. www.pminewyork.gov.in/IndiaatUNGA?id=MjA5Nw.
Permanent Mission of India to the UN. “Report of the International Law Commission on the Work of Its Seventy-fifth Session (Cluster 1): India Statement.” 6th Committee of the 79th Session of the UNGA (Agenda Item 79), 2021, www.un.org/en/ga/sixth/79/pdfs/statements/ilc/24mtg_india_1.pdf.

Topic: 2025 – Responsibility of International Organizations
Country: Egypt
Delegate Name: Vivienne Ilg

International Organizations have increased their involvement in all aspects around the globe. Throughout this period, questions of legal responsibility have become more aggressive. The Arab Republic of Egypt believes that these organizations, like the UN, WTO, WHO, and MF must be held accountable if their policies or operations, by any means, cause damage to states or populations, especially in developing countries. Egypt would like to support clear liability frameworks, compensation mechanisms, and transparent reporting
We would also like to showcase that the importance of international organizations should not infringe on the sovereignty or cultural policies of member states. New reforms should balance organizational authority with national decision-making power, especially for developing nations.
Another very important issue for Egypt is fairness in decision-making. Many international organizations still give more influence and power to wealthier States, leaving us, developing nations, with less power and influence. Egypt supports increasing transparency, improving representation, and making sure all nations are equally seen and heard.
Overall, Egypt believes that strengthening responsibility makes international organizations more trustworthy and effective. By respecting sovereignty, improving fairness, and being transparent, these organizations can better support missions for overall peace, development, and cooperation.

Works Cited:
Draft Articles on the Responsibility of International Organizations 2011. ‌
“Towards More Effective, Fit for Future UN Peacekeeping Operations.” Egypt, 2024, egypt.un.org/en/270055-towards-more-effective-fit-future-un-peacekeeping-operations. ‌
“Document Viewer.” Un.org, 2025, docs.un.org/en/a/res/77/280. Accessed 26 Nov. 2025. ‌

Topic: 2025 – Responsibility of International Organizations
Country: Iran
Delegate Name: Connor Robertson

The Islamic Republic of Iran believes that international organizations have come to play a leading role in international governance, which ranges from simple peacekeeping to humanitarian aid and financial assistance. In this way, organizations exercise an increasingly wide-reaching authority, where issues of responsibility and accountability assume particular importance. Iran views that while international organizations do have to remain effective and independent in their role, they cannot remain immune from responsibility in cases where their actions cause damage or violate the principles of international law. Fairness, justice, and respect for state sovereignty remain central in Iran’s approach with regard to this subject.
Iran urges the committee to move beyond the broad question of accountability and examine how the attribution of responsibility could be precisely identified when a multitude of actors are involved, including drawing a line between acts conducted by the organization itself and by member states through directing or supporting its operations. The committee also has to consider how victims may be compensated or remedied without unnecessarily burdening states or organizations with protracted judicial procedures. Iran strongly feels that another important concern is the increasing perception that some international organizations act in a non-accountable way, and that decision-making is unbalanced and non-transparent.
Iran also supports the elaboration of clearer legal guidelines on when international organizations are responsible for harmful actions. Without supporting any measure that would weaken state sovereignty, Iran is open to frameworks that increase the transparency, reporting, and internal review systems of organizations. The strengthening of dispute-resolution mechanisms (including, inter alia, independent review boards or advisory processes), which allow victims access to redress without politicising the issue and burdening the states with full liability, is also welcomed by Iran. Iran is also ready to engage with other member states in finding practical ways to enhance peacekeeping standards, improve training, and prevent harm at the outset. These steps can be taken as a way to provide for more balance and reliability in this system of accountability.
Iran values the International Law Commission’s Draft Articles on the Responsibility of International Organizations, which provide a useful starting point, but need further clarification before wide application. Iran looks to advisory opinions emanating from the International Court of Justice, which has discussed in previous cases both questions of liability and institutional authority. In its own policy, Iran has always put an emphasis on adherence to international law, ensuring justice in global governance, and preventing the abuse of powers by international institutions. This approach guides Iran’s position as the committee develops an improved legal foundation for accountability.
The Islamic Republic of Iran is hopeful that the Committee will be able to contribute to the establishment of principles which will enhance responsibility and confidence in international organizations. It is in this way that the international community can prevent future harm without restricting these organizations from carrying out their fundamental missions. Iran looks forward to cooperating with all delegates towards building a more just and balanced international system.
Samara, Chrysanthi. “International Responsibility Of International Organizations (The Draft Articles of the International Law Commission).” SSRN, 2019, https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3480061. Accessed 24 11 2025.
United Nations. “Draft articles on the responsibility of international organizations.” Legal United Nations, 2011, https://legal.un.org/ilc/texts/instruments/english/draft_articles/9_11_2011.pdf. Accessed 24 11 2025.
MousaviNejad, Elahe “Responsibility of International Organizations” https://www.un.org/en/ga/sixth/72/pdfs/statements/int_organizations/iran.pdf Accessed 24 11 2025.

Topic: 2025 – Responsibility of International Organizations
Country: Pakistan
Delegate Name: Julia Serraiocco

International organizations shape political stability, developing procedures, protection of people, and the economic future of our world. For countries such as Pakistan, these organizations include the World Bank, the International Labor Organization, the Food and Agriculture Organization, various United Nations agencies, and NATO. International Organizational presence in Pakistan has brought support, useful programs, structural transformation, labor reforms, and cooperation through security. Their influence reaches deeply into planning and affects millions of people. Pakistan believes that international organizations must accept clear, legal, and ethical responsibility for a wide range of global issues and any measures they take to combat them. Responsibility is essential for fairness and the proper function of our international system.
Pakistan recognizes the value of these partnerships but also recognizes that authority must come with accountability. The World Bank’s role in economic reforms and stability, the ILO’s work on labor standards, and the FAO runs programs on food security demonstrate the significant impact international organizations have within Pakistan. Pakistan supports cooperation with these organizations, yet believes their decisions should be transparent, evidence-based, and aligned with national priorities.
Pakistan believes that international organizations should be legally responsible for actions that consequently result in harm or violations of international law. Pakistan has long advocated for the International Law Commission article and the responsibility of international organizations as a framework for ensuring accountability. Without the establishment of clear authority, developing countries are left vulnerable when expectations are not met, harmful conditions are the result of false promises. In the past decade, Pakistan has taken measures which demonstrate and resemble those of international organizations and their responsibilities. This has been done by implementing a new national firewall to regulate online trafficking, or even the country’s dedication to our missile program. Over the years, Pakistan has strengthened oversight and created clear ways for people to report harm experienced within peacekeeping programs. Pakistan has been an impactful voice, pushing for developing countries to be included in a fair manner, especially when it comes to global decision-making. Pakistan works closely with organizations and invests in long-term capacity, which offers a practical approach that other officials can reference when discussing global solutions and engaging with international communities.
Pakistan remains committed to engaging with international organizations. The delegation of Pakistan looks forward to working alongside countries of similar values, ensuring international organizations fulfill their duties will strengthen development and promote the well-being of all people.

Work Cited:
Tariq, Azeem. International Organizations in Pakistan-A Brief Overview of World Bank, ILO and FAO. 15 June 2020, www.researchgate.net/publication/342171771_International_Organizations_in_Pakistan-A_brief_overview_of_World_Bank_ILO_and_FAO. ‌
Nasir, Memoona. “The International Responsibility of International Organisations.” Paradigm Shift, 13 June 2023, www.paradigmshift.com.pk/international-responsibility-of-international-organisations/. Accessed 26 Nov. 2025. ‌
“Global Pakistan – Pakistanʿs Role in the International System.” Pakistan.fes.de, pakistan.fes.de/e/global-pakistan-pakistan%CA%BFs-role-in-the-international-system.html. ‌
“Relations with Pakistan.” Site Name Seo, 2025, www.nato.int/en/what-we-do/partnerships-and-cooperation/relations-with-pakistan. Accessed 26 Nov. 2025.
Klabbers, Jan. “Reflections on Role Responsibility: The Responsibility of International Organizations for Failing to Act.” European Journal of International Law, vol. 28, no. 4, Nov. 2017, pp. 1133–1161, academic.oup.com/ejil/article/28/4/1133/4866310, https://doi.org/10.1093/ejil/chx068.

Topic: 2025 – Responsibility of International Organizations
Country: Republic of Korea
Delegate Name: Esther Kim

As international organizations (IOs) continue to grow and play crucial roles in fostering global cooperation, the question of international accountability has become increasingly prominent. This has long been a subject of discussion in the UN, and bore some fruit, most recognizably the Draft Articles on the Responsibilities of International Organizations (DARIO) in 2011. However, while the General Assembly took note of this document, it was not passed as a legally binding convention. Thus, there are still debates over who incurs responsibility and how punishments or reparations will be enforced. South Korea believes that nations must cooperate to create multifaceted solutions that will hold IOs accountable for international wrongdoing without hindering their functionality.

As a firm supporter of multilateral cooperation, South Korea is deeply involved in countless IOs, participating in the treaty-making process of many. Throughout its diplomatic efforts, South Korea reaffirms its commitment to the rule of law, which lays the foundation for equitable relations among states and international organizations.
Even as South Korea affirms the need to rely on IOs in emergency situations (as detailed through the Responsibility to Protect), it emphasizes that IOs have a derivative nature and thus should not be placed above international law. IOs should be held legally accountable for internationally wrongful acts, particularly those that breach human rights regulations. South Korea believes that this will not deviate from international law as it is, as there has been a discernible trend in the integration of human rights considerations into IO mandates, as seen in the World Trade Organization’s decision to protect public health in the Doha Declaration.

Nonetheless, IOs are independent, separate legal entities, and should be treated accordingly. In general, South Korea agrees with the DARIO that IOs’ responsibilities should parallel those of a state’s. However, as IOs have different functional/operational necessities, regulations should also be tailored to each IO’s specialized function. South Korea concurs with the concept of responsibility in the DARIO, where the entity with primary responsibility, determined by an agent’s knowledge of the circumstances and level of contribution, should bear the legal consequences. Yet, South Korea diverges from the DARIO in believing that states should not be required to provide for and lead IOs in fulfilling their obligations. Instead, when found responsible for internationally wrongful acts that fall beyond the scope of their immunity, IOs should independently incur responsibility and work to fulfill their obligations.

Further, South Korea finds that there is a need to strengthen the process of prosecution and reparation. South Korea recommends the use of regional courts to settle disputes that occur in local areas, whereas for larger-scale disputes, an international claims commission should be established. To ensure the fairness and transparency of the prosecution process, the responsibilities of IOs should be further codified. South Korea urges the implementation of the DARIO as the legal guideline for IOs, albeit with amendments to refine the focus on IOs’ independence and specific functions.

Ultimately, South Korea believes that through more effective prosecution and clearer legal standards that strengthen norms of accountability, the international community can benefit from a system where IOs remain responsible actors in global cooperation.

Topic: 2025 – Responsibility of International Organizations
Country: Canada
Delegate Name: Gavin O’Meara

Gavin O’Meara
Canada
Responsibility of International Organizations
Legal Committee
Forest Hills Central High School
In recent years, questions have arisen regarding how to hold international organizations accountable for causing unintended consequences. These consequences include the spread of disease, the death of civilians, and the disruption of economies. International organizations in the past, such as military and humanitarian operations, have saved many lives and contributed positively to the global ecosystem, so holding these organizations accountable for what they have done wrong requires overlooking all the good these organizations have caused. Therefore, many countries in the UN have disputed the role of these organizations and how to keep them accountable for their actions.
Recently, Canada has passed the Foreign Influence Transparency and Accountability Act, which deals with this issue. This act was passed with the hopes of countering harmful foreign interference by ensuring transparency in activities conducted on behalf of foreign governments, entities, or principals. This act also includes a public database that international organizations must register for, therefore improving clarity of who is doing what in other nations.
In adherence with this act, Canada would urge the UN to also create a publicly available database of international organizations wishing to impact foreign nations. The delegation of Canada believes that this will help improve the effectiveness of these organizations while also allowing the UN to closely monitor their actions. Another solution that the delegation of Canada would propose is that more preventative measures need to be taken to prevent issues arising in the future, while also helping these international organizations achieve their goals. Placing restrictions on and aiding these organizations would be more effective than attempting to punish them, as issues begin to arise regarding national sovereignty when trying to punish organizations working in other countries.

Topic: 2025 – Responsibility of International Organizations
Country: Russian Federation
Delegate Name: Pradham Nalam

Pradham Nalam
The Russian Federation
Responsibility of International Organizations
Legal Committee
Forest Hills Central High School

The world has never been more connected. Through technology, trade, and foreign policy, we have faced tremendous cultural exposure. However, to manage these changes peacefully without conflict, international organizations rose to the occasion. These organizations, such as the World Bank, the European Union, and NATO, were created to make the world a safer and more convenient place to live in. Yet, these organizations have a record of committing mistakes that harm or affect others in a negative way. NATO activities in military missions have caused plenty of harm to innocent civilians. For example, NATO’s bombing campaign in the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia was intended to avoid harming civilians, yet an investigation by the Human Rights Watch revealed that there were ninety separate incidents involving civilian deaths during the seventy-eight-day bombing campaign. Some 500 Yugoslav civilians are known to have died in these incidents. The World Bank is an entity that is designed to help countries and states with economic development. For example, the Construction of the Sardar Sarovar Dam began in the 1960s, but it was a $450 million loan from the World Bank in 1985 that sped up the project. The bank approved funding for the dam, even though it failed to meet India’s environmental regulations. It eventually flooded 245 villages and displaced 250,000 people. The dam’s project began operation in 2017, but its history of construction is a trauma for many people who were hurt and affected by it.
These problems exist everywhere where these organizations exist. The problem occurs when civilians don’t know who to blame for the damage caused. In many scenarios, the organization that helped solve problems claims that they only intended to help, and that the main benefactor who started solving the problem should be the one held accountable, as they were the reason the harm was induced. The Russian Federation recommends that the UN’s Legal Committee resolve this problem by advising these world organizations to refer themselves to personal committees that research problems before lending a hand to solve them. If harm is committed, the Legal Committee should hold a proper trial that dictates only the parties involved and not any 3rd parties.
The Russian Federation hopes to reach a fair resolution not only for nations but also for the civilian population affected by these problems. We should keep in mind all the people who are involved and affected by issues that relate to everyone. There should be a priority system on who to help first, and who to punish based on a fair and equal trial.

SOURCES

Accountability mechanisms gave people and communities the right to contest harmful development projects, but challenges remain

https://www.heritage.org/trade/report/the-world-bank-and-economic-growth-50-years-failure

https://www.hrw.org/reports/natbm002.pdf

Responsibility of International Organizations

Topic: 2025 – Responsibility of International Organizations
Country: Iraq
Delegate Name: Noah Nelson

Legal Committee
Responsibility of International Organizations
Republic of Iraq
Noah Nelson
Forest Hills Eastern

The issue of accountability in international bodies is important in the formation and sustenance of governance in the world. The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development – Development Assistance Committee or OECD-DA for short requests that pledged nations devote 0.7% of their income to global humanitarian aid. This mark however is not reached, as only 6 out of the 28 pledged nations assisted their required amount. The Iraqi government recognizes the significance of the issue since the functioning and performance of multinational institutions have a direct impact on the development and security of each nation. The mismanagement, politicization, and lack of oversight in these institutions could indirectly create an environment in the nation that encourages corruption in the local governance systems. The United Nations has addressed the issue by developing frameworks and initiatives that encourage compliance with the set regulations and standards among the multinational institutions. The UNDP projects in the Republic of Iraq have supported the monitoring and development of capacities in ensuring accountability among the national and multinational bodies present in the region (United Nations Development Programme, 2023; United Nations Assistance Mission for Iraq, 2023).

The role of international organizations becomes particularly pertinent in the Iraqi context because these bodies work extensively in the country, contributing to its rebuild, humanitarian services, and governance. The government in Iraq emphasizes that international organizations need to work in a clear and ethical manner, aligning with their government structures in a manner that avoids consequences like the development of corruption. In terms of government measures, the government in Iraq has increased the effectiveness and performance of bodies like the Federal Commission of Integrity, known as Nazaha, and anticorruption courts. The government has also adopted legal frameworks consistent with the UNCAC and the Adoption and Implementation in the Republic of Iraq – UN Convention Against Corruption – ICCD/CPA.8. These measures help create accountable safeguard whistleblowers. In the broader international framework, the government in Iraq works through the monitoring and reform bodies related to UN bodies, ensuring that various international bodies meet their obligations. The government in this regard works through other bodies like the UN Convention Against Corruption, the League of Arab States, and regional frameworks related to economic cooperation, under which there are frameworks and structures in monitoring, best practices, and the accountability of the settings and actions by different bodies. Iraq has in mind solutions that rely on reforms within the country together with the monitoring role of the UN in making sure that multinational institutions act in a responsible and transparent manner. Some important components include improving the legal framework, the capacity of institutions, and coordination between national and international institutions.

The role of the UN, according to Iraq, would entail the continued provision of technical assistance, monitoring and enforcement of compliance, and encouragement and facilitation of cooperation among nations and internationally among institutions like the UN. The role of Iraq would include the enforcement of national law, transparency, and collaboration with the UN in ensuring that the other institutions are responsible. The collaborative effort between Iraq and the UN would enable the two work together in ensuring the integrity and effectiveness of institutions internationally.

Topic: 2025 – Responsibility of International Organizations
Country: Brazil
Delegate Name: Keegan Miller

Committee: Legal
Topic: Responsibility of International Organizations
Country: Brazil
Delegate: Keegan Miller

When an International Organization (IO) is deployed into an area of need for any reason, they must be able to provide the support by limiting the harm done to the inhabitants of the region. In the past, when IOs had been deployed into a region they have acted with some disregard to the inhabitants of said region. This has led to many unnecessary civilian casualties that wouldn’t have happened if an IO had stepped in. While IOs may be important to help and support a region during its time of need, the actions and crimes that they commit have sometimes gone unpunished, or barely punished at all.
Brazil has historically believed that IOs must be held accountable for their actions and no organization deployed to an area can do more damage then what it was sent out to prevent (Avezov). With this Brazil in the past has created articles like the RWP which stands to help prevent an organization from rushing into a situation and ending up causing more harm to said situation than they were sent out to prevent with strict barriers to be set in place to slow down the response of these organizations. These barriers would allow IOs to accurately assess the damage and harm of an Area.
With this UN position on the topic has been contrarily different with them having a more head on approach to IOs being involved. The more popular position in the UN is one of immediate aid to the region that is being harmed through IOs and little punishment to an IO if they do end up causing harm. Relevant to this issue is the R2P docterine which aims to support regions undergoing hardships like genocide, war crimes against the people, and crimes against humanity (What is R2P?), through rapid and immediate response to the region. This would mean that IOs would be deployed rapidly to an area regardless of whether or not the full situation is known. In short, if a situation is deemed to be an atrocity then immediate action must be had.
It is because of this that Brazil believes that more time is required to deliberate and debate on a potential humanitarian crisis at hand. As well, when an IO is deployed, they must face consequences for their actions and cannot be allowed to harm civilians in an already bad situation. This is why Brazil proposes the “Responsability of International Organizations” which aims to hold every IO accountable for their actions.

Work cited
“What Is R2P?” Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect, 17 Sept. 2025, www.globalr2p.org/what-is-r2p/.
Avezov, Xenia. “‘Responsibility While Protecting’: Are We Asking the Wrong Questions?” SIPRI, www.sipri.org/node/409.

Topic: 2025 – Responsibility of International Organizations
Country: Ethiopia
Delegate Name: Xavier Sapotichne

Country: Ethiopia
Committee: Legal Committee
Topic: Responsibility of International Organizations
Delegate: Xavier Sapotichne
School: Okemos High School
Ethiopia believes that a legal framework is required for all levels of government, including national, regional, and international, to prevent impunity of international officials (IOs). We have come to the viewpoint that the organization is critically involved in the accountability of its IOs. We also believe that a framework should be developed to address abuse of immunity and misconduct that fall outside international organization and functional immunity. It is essential to establish this framework to hold IOs accountable for their actions to prevent more impunity and abuse of immunity in the future. We also believe that state governments should more clearly outline and define misconduct among IOs to prevent impunity.
We believe that international cooperation should be a guarantee and that the shortcomings of international organizations can undermine the cooperation that we need to advance and solve problems that fall under the UN’s umbrella. We believe that a framework should be created that separates the state from international organizations. While judicial power resides with the national governments, we believe that it is very important for the government to stay impartial while investigating international organizations and to properly reprimand IOs that are detrimental to the UN’s goal of government cooperation. We believe that impartiality can be specified by providing a framework to help international organizations take accountability for their actions in a way that shows the UN is holding itself and its organizations accountable for misconduct.

Topic: 2025 – Responsibility of International Organizations
Country: Malaysia
Delegate Name: Sage England

United Nations General Assembly Legal Committee
Responsibility of International Organizations
Malaysia
Sage England
Forest Hills Eastern High School
The United Nations Legal Committee’s primary purpose is to offer a platform for states to address and debate issues regarding international law. The growing involvement of international organizations, such as the United Nations, NATO, the European Union, and the World Bank, in global governance functions has led, in recent times, to thoughts on issues of accountability. International law has historically dealt with states’ responsibility; however, recent events emphasize that international organizations should also be called upon to account for their actions when they have caused harm. The UN’s role in the Haiti cholera outbreak, NATO actions in operations causing civilian casualties, and the economic crises caused by international financial institutions all brought international inquiry.
Malaysia stands firm in the position that international organizations should function within a legal framework that is clear and enforceable, where accountability is ensured while still allowing their effective and independent operations to function efficiently. We view principles enunciated in the International Law Commission’s Draft Articles on Responsibility of International Organizations (2011) as important, making clear that organizations should take sole responsibility for internationally harmful acts committed as part of their activities. For Malaysia, immunity is essential to ensure that organizations will be safe from being subjected to external political pressure; but immunity should not negate legal accountability. An accountability structure must be clearly defined, equally applicable to all organizations, and set in conformity with international standards.
In these reported cases of alleged harm, victims’ attempts to seek legal action, as well as compensation, are often overlooked. International organizations usually look to internal claims procedures that all, from one institution to another, vary, as well as lack any substantive enforcement. Malaysia maintains that organizations need to clearly outline reporting and follow-up mechanisms to ensure accountability.
Malaysia has often affirmed its respect for international legal structures. On the domestic front, Malaysia puts international responsibilities into national law, and on the global platform, it supports international judicial mechanisms such as the ICJ. Malaysia stands upon the principle of equal responsibility, where international organizations shall be accountable when organizational policies or acts can directly attribute to harm, while member states that direct or authorize such acts shall be equally responsible, where appropriate. This will sustain operational independence while ensuring accountability is administered equally.
Malaysia’s position remains that clear standards, organizational policy, and consistent claims structures must be developed for international organizations to be held accountable. The protection of civilians, confidence in international law, and the credibility of the organizations entrusted with the maintenance of peace, development, and humanitarian assistance worldwide will all remain upheld with these policies put into place.

Works Cited
International Court of Justice. Advisory Proceedings. ICJ,
https://www.icj-cij.org/en/advisory-proceedings.
International Law Commission. Draft Articles on the Responsibility of International Organizations. United Nations, 2011,
https://legal.un.org/ilc/texts/instruments/english/draft_articles/9_11_2011.pdf.
United Nations General Assembly. Responsibility of International Organizations: Report of the Secretary-General.United Nations,
https://documents.un.org/.
United Nations General Assembly Sixth Committee. Sixth Committee (Legal). United Nations,
https://www.un.org/en/ga/sixth/.

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.

Topic: 2025 – Responsibility of International Organizations
Country: Sweden
Delegate Name: Amelia Wigant

International organizations, such as the United Nations (UN), the European Union (EU), and the World Trade Organization (WTO), play a vital role in the global order, addressing challenges that transcend national borders, including climate change, peace and security, human rights, and economic cooperation. These organizations have considerable authority and influence over the policies and actions of their member states and non-member states. With this power, however, comes the responsibility to uphold human rights, the rule of law, and ethical standards in all their operations.

This position paper explores the responsibility of international organizations, with a particular focus on Sweden’s role as both a member of various international organizations and a champion of ethical conduct in global governance. Sweden has long been an advocate for human rights, democracy, and international cooperation. As a member of several key international organizations, Sweden has a vested interest in ensuring that these bodies operate in a manner that is transparent, accountable, and responsive to the needs of the global population. This paper addresses Sweden’s position on the responsibility of international organizations in promoting human rights, ensuring accountability, and fostering sustainable development.

The Ethical Responsibility of International Organizations

International organizations have a responsibility to operate in accordance with the principles of justice, democracy, and human rights. These organizations are tasked with addressing global issues, from maintaining peace and security to promoting sustainable development and ensuring respect for human rights. The fundamental ethical responsibility of international organizations includes:
Promoting and Protecting Human Rights: One of the core objectives of many international organizations, including the UN, is to promote and protect human rights. These organizations must uphold international human rights standards and take decisive action when member states violate these rights. International organizations should create frameworks for monitoring human rights abuses, reporting violations, and holding perpetrators accountable.
Accountability and Transparency: As entities that wield significant influence, international organizations must operate transparently and be held accountable for their actions. This includes ensuring that decision-making processes are open to scrutiny, that resources are used efficiently, and that misconduct within the organization is addressed swiftly and fairly. The failure to maintain high standards of accountability not only undermines the credibility of the organization but can also contribute to wider global instability.
Ensuring Sustainable Development: International organizations play a crucial role in shaping global economic policies and in fostering development. In this capacity, they bear a responsibility to ensure that their actions contribute to the long-term welfare of all nations, particularly those in the Global South. This includes addressing global inequalities, promoting environmentally sustainable policies, and ensuring that economic growth does not come at the expense of the planet’s natural resources.
Conflict Prevention and Peacebuilding: International organizations, particularly the UN, play a key role in preventing conflicts and promoting peace. This responsibility includes not only diplomatic intervention but also addressing the underlying causes of conflict, such as poverty, inequality, and human rights violations. Additionally, peacekeeping operations must be conducted in a manner that respects the sovereignty and dignity of all parties involved.

Sweden’s Role and Advocacy for Ethical Responsibility

Sweden has been a strong advocate for the ethical and accountable conduct of international organizations, grounded in the principles of human rights, the rule of law, and sustainable development. Sweden’s approach to international relations is shaped by a commitment to multilateralism and cooperative global governance. Some of the key ways Sweden upholds and promotes the responsibility of international organizations include:
Human Rights and the Rule of Law: Sweden consistently advocates for the integration of human rights considerations into the activities of international organizations. As a member of the UN and the EU, Sweden works to ensure that these organizations uphold and promote human rights in their policies, frameworks, and operations. For instance, Sweden has been a strong supporter of the UN Human Rights Council and actively participates in efforts to hold states accountable for human rights violations.
Accountability and Transparency: Sweden places a high premium on transparency and accountability within international organizations. This is evident in Sweden’s support for reforms aimed at improving the internal functioning of the UN and other multilateral bodies. Sweden has called for greater oversight of the UN’s peacekeeping missions to address issues such as sexual exploitation and abuse by peacekeepers. Additionally, Sweden supports initiatives to increase the transparency of international financial institutions like the IMF and World Bank, advocating for measures to prevent corruption and ensure that funds are used for their intended purposes.
Sustainable Development and Climate Action: Sweden has been a vocal proponent of sustainable development both domestically and internationally. Sweden’s leadership in advocating for the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, which includes the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), reflects its commitment to ensuring that international organizations play a leading role in fostering a sustainable, just, and inclusive global economy. Sweden has also supported global efforts to combat climate change, including international climate agreements such as the Paris Agreement, and works to ensure that these global frameworks are effective in addressing the environmental challenges of the 21st century.
Promoting Peace and Security: Sweden is a strong advocate for the UN’s role in peacebuilding and conflict resolution. Sweden has contributed both military and humanitarian resources to peacekeeping operations and has supported peacebuilding initiatives in conflict-affected countries. Sweden has been particularly vocal in calling for the UN to focus on conflict prevention, as well as addressing the root causes of conflict such as poverty, inequality, and human rights abuses.
Challenges to the Responsibility of International Organizations
While Sweden has consistently pushed for a more responsible and accountable international order, there are significant challenges to ensuring that international organizations fulfill their ethical duties. Some of the key obstacles include:
Political and Geopolitical Interests: International organizations, particularly those like the UN and the EU, are composed of diverse member states with often conflicting political and strategic interests. These competing interests can undermine the ability of these organizations to take decisive action on critical issues, such as human rights violations or environmental degradation. Sweden’s efforts to promote responsibility within these organizations are often hampered by resistance from states with vested interests in maintaining the status quo.
Lack of Enforcement Mechanisms: Many international organizations lack strong enforcement mechanisms to ensure compliance with their policies. For example, while the UN has established numerous human rights frameworks, there is often little ability to compel member states to comply with international law or UN resolutions. Similarly, international economic organizations like the WTO have limited tools for holding member states accountable for failing to adhere to trade agreements or environmental regulations.
Internal Failures and Scandals: International organizations are not immune to corruption, inefficiency, or misconduct. There have been numerous instances where organizations such as the UN have been criticized for failing to address scandals involving sexual abuse by peacekeepers, corruption within their own ranks, or wasteful spending of resources. These failures often undermine the credibility of international organizations and hinder their ability to fulfill their ethical responsibilities.
Global Inequality and Unequal Influence: The structures of many international organizations are often skewed to favor the interests of powerful, wealthy nations. This can undermine the legitimacy and fairness of decisions made by these organizations, particularly when it comes to issues such as global trade, development, and climate action. Sweden advocates for greater equality in decision-making processes but faces significant challenges in reforming the power structures within these organizations.

Recommendations and Sweden’s Vision for Reform

Sweden is committed to working with other member states to address the challenges facing international organizations and to ensure that these bodies remain accountable to the global community. Sweden’s recommendations for strengthening the responsibility of international organizations include:
Reforming Decision-Making Processes: Sweden supports reforms aimed at making international organizations, particularly the UN and the EU, more transparent and accountable in their decision-making processes. This includes enhancing the role of civil society organizations and other non-governmental actors in global governance and ensuring that the voices of smaller and less powerful states are heard.
Strengthening Human Rights Mechanisms: Sweden advocates for stronger international mechanisms to monitor human rights abuses and hold states accountable for violations. This includes enhancing the capacity of the UN Human Rights Council and supporting the work of the International Criminal Court (ICC) to ensure accountability for grave international crimes.
Ensuring Effective Climate Action: Sweden continues to push for more ambitious global action on climate change, including stronger commitments within the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the Paris Agreement. Sweden is also advocating for the inclusion of environmental sustainability as a central tenet in the policies and operations of all international organizations.
Building Capacity for Peacebuilding and Conflict Prevention: Sweden calls for increased investments in preventive diplomacy, peacebuilding, and conflict resolution, particularly in the UN’s peacekeeping and mediation efforts. This includes a focus on addressing the root causes of conflict, such as poverty, inequality, and human rights abuses.

Sweden firmly believes that international organizations have a critical role to play in addressing the global challenges of the 21st century, but they must be held accountable for their actions and decisions. As a leading advocate for human rights, democracy, and sustainable development, Sweden continues to work within these organizations to ensure that they live up to their ethical responsibilities. By advocating for reform, transparency, and accountability, Sweden aims to strengthen the effectiveness and credibility of international organizations in their pursuit of a just, peaceful, and sustainable world.

Topic: 2025 – Responsibility of International Organizations
Country: Bolivia
Delegate Name: Mithil Joshi

The Responsibility of International Organizations through the Lens of Bolivia

International Organizations such as the UN, NATO, the World Bank, and the European Union increasingly have influence over peacekeeping operations, humanitarian aid, and development. When these very IOs cause harm, a question of liability arises, as seen in the cholera outbreak in Haiti connected to UN peacekeepers, NATO military operations causing the deaths of civilians, and controversial IFIs’ lending practices. Bolivia holds that international organizations must be held accountable for their actions while simultaneously not undermining their independence. Clear, predictable frameworks are essential to corroborate justice for affected populations while allowing IOs to continue their essential operations.

Bolivia participates in multiple IOs, including the UN, CELAC, and BRICS, and relies on those organizations for development support, technical assistance, and response to disasters. Bolivia has advocated in the UN Sixth Committee for accountability procedures that protect smaller states from disproportionate responsibility. Bolivia aligns with internal oversight offices like the UN’s Office of Internal Oversight Services and aligns with regional partners like Peru and Ecuador in promoting transparent reporting. Bolivia’s experiences show that it is imperative for accountability structures to balance justice for victims while supporting the operational needs of international organizations.

Bolivia proposes a standardized definition of “effective control” which would entail the authority to direct or intervene in actions of an IO or a member state, to prevent or remedy harm, ensuring that integrity is balanced with operational independence. Based on this definition, Bolivia proposes a transparent institutional liability framework that standardizes responsibility definitions to figure out when IOs or member states can be held accountable. Second, the creation of a joint responsibility mechanism that divides accountability between IOs and member states for missions they jointly authorize. Third, the expansion of transparency obligations means an annual public reporting of harm, investigations, and compensation requests. Finally, strengthening victim-access channels, which would ensure affected individuals can seek justice while preserving the autonomy of the IO. These mechanisms allow IOs to remain effective partners while consequently taking responsibility for harm caused during their operations or deciding how the responsibility is shared between the state and the IO.

Topic: 2025 – Responsibility of International Organizations
Country: Finland
Delegate Name: Alayna Wigant

Position Paper: The Responsibility of International Organizations in the Context of Finland
I. Introduction
As a committed proponent of multilateralism, the rule of law, and effective international cooperation, Finland places strong emphasis on the accountability and responsibility of international organizations (IOs). While IOs play a vital role in addressing global challenges—ranging from security to environmental protection—their legal personality and functional immunities can create accountability gaps that affect both member states and individuals.
Finland’s position is that international organizations must uphold high standards of transparency, legality, and accountability in their operations, and that mechanisms must exist to ensure responsibility when harm is caused. This paper outlines Finland’s principles, expectations, and policy priorities related to the responsibility of IOs.
II. Legal and Normative Foundations for IO Responsibility
1. International Legal Personality and Obligations
Finland recognizes that IOs possess independent legal personality under international law and therefore:
Have rights and duties separate from those of their member states.

Can incur international responsibility for wrongful acts.

Must respect general principles of international law, including human rights obligations.

Finland supports the work of the International Law Commission (ILC) on the Articles on the Responsibility of International Organizations (ARIO) as an important normative guide.
2. Functional Immunities and Accountability
Finland acknowledges the need for IO immunities to allow independent functioning. However:
Immunity must be functional, not absolute.

Immunities should not prevent victims from accessing remedies.

The balance between operational effectiveness and accountability must be recalibrated when immunities impede justice.

Finland promotes innovative mechanisms—such as internal review boards, arbitration panels, and claims commissions—to ensure accountability even when immunity is preserved.
III. Finland’s Policy Priorities on IO Responsibility
1. Rule of Law and Good Governance
Finland emphasizes that IOs must operate according to:
Transparency

Due process

Good governance standards comparable to democratic member states

Finland encourages IOs to adopt:
Clear procurement rules

Anti-corruption safeguards

Internal audit and oversight structures

Accessible complaint mechanisms for stakeholders

2. Human Rights Obligations
Finland holds that all IOs should comply with fundamental human rights norms. This includes:
Protecting individuals affected by peacekeeping missions

Safeguarding labor rights of staff

Ensuring non-discrimination and gender equality

As a strong advocate of human rights, Finland expects IOs—especially those operating in crisis settings—to integrate human rights due diligence into their activities.
3. Responsibility in Peacekeeping and Crisis Response
Finland participates in peacekeeping and humanitarian operations, making accountability in these contexts especially relevant. Finland supports:
Clear command structures and mandate boundaries

Civilian protection standards

Mechanisms to investigate and respond to harm caused by IO missions

Finland also calls for improved accountability for:
Environmental damage

Misconduct by personnel

Failures in mandate implementation

IV. The Role of Member States, Including Finland
Finland recognizes that IO responsibility is interconnected with member state responsibility.
1. Duty to Ensure Organizations Act Lawfully
Member states must:
Provide adequate oversight

Ensure mandates reflect legal standards

Design governance structures that promote accountability

Finland actively supports reforms in IO governing bodies to enhance transparency and ethical behavior.
2. Shared and Derivative Responsibility
Finland acknowledges situations where both an IO and member states may bear responsibility, such as:
Joint missions

Delegated powers

Mixed financing structures

Finland supports clearer apportionment of responsibility to prevent “accountability gaps” in complex operations.
3. Domestic Implementation
Finland ensures that:
Domestic laws enabling cooperation with IOs incorporate accountability safeguards

National authorities can engage with IO oversight bodies

Finnish personnel serving under IO mandates uphold strict standards of conduct

V. Strengthening Accountability Mechanisms
Finland advocates for reforms that make the responsibility of IOs more effective and transparent.
1. Claims and Remedies for Individuals
Finland supports:
Establishing independent claims commissions for victims

Strengthening grievance mechanisms for staff and affected civilians

Ensuring remedies are timely, fair, and transparent

2. Waiver of Immunity When Necessary
Finland holds that immunities should be waived:
When misconduct falls outside official functions

When justice cannot be served without access to legal processes

Finland encourages IOs to adopt standardized criteria for waiving immunity.
3. Oversight and Auditing Reform
Finland supports:
Empowering independent oversight bodies

Improving whistleblower protections within IOs

Establishing consistent reporting guidelines across organizations

VI. Conclusion
Finland maintains that strong and accountable international organizations are essential to a functioning rules-based international order. To that end, Finland’s position is that:
IOs must uphold international law, including human rights norms.

Immunity should never amount to impunity.

Effective mechanisms must exist to ensure responsibility and provide remedies to those harmed by IO actions.

Member states, including Finland, share a duty to ensure responsible behavior through governance, oversight, and reform.

By championing these principles, Finland seeks to strengthen the legitimacy, effectiveness, and trustworthiness of international organizations and to reinforce global cooperation grounded in justice and accountability.

Topic: 2025 – Responsibility of International Organizations
Country: Algeria
Delegate Name: Riley Dugan

Legal
Responsibility for International organizations
Algeria
Riley Dugan
Forest Hills Northern

The concept of international organizations began to emerge in the nineteenth century, but became significantly more important after the Second World War, when global actors assumed greater roles in international law. The United Nations was created to maintain peace, security, and cooperation among nations, succeeding the League of Nations and establishing the foundation for cooperation. Today, international organizations profoundly influence states: responsible, transparent, and effective institutions contribute to global stability, economic development, human rights, and international cooperation, while weak, unaccountable, or biased organizations can contribute to conflict, instability, and broken international agreements. The People’s Democratic Republic of Algeria recognizes the importance of strong and responsible international organizations to limit international tensions and promote global governance. The Legal Committee must address this issue, as ineffective or unaccountable international institutions can cause regional conflicts and weaken global trust. As Kofi Annan, former Secretary-General of the United Nations, stated, “There is no peace without development; there is no development without peace; and there is no lasting peace or sustainable development without respect for human rights.”
Algeria views the responsibilities of international organizations through the lens of state sovereignty. Nations must have the authority to manage their own internal institution, including ministries, courts, and security forces, without excessive interference by external bodies. At the same time, Algeria recognizes that international organizations must operate with fairness, neutrality, and accountability to support global peace and cooperation. This position reflects Algeria’s long-standing commitment to self-determination. While Algeria has at times expressed concern regarding overreach by certain international bodies, it maintains that reforms should strengthen organizational responsibility rather than undermine state sovereignty.
Nationally, Algeria has pursued reforms that help the work of international organizations, such as strengthening anti-corruption institutions, improving public oversight, enhancing local governance, and advancing asset-recovery efforts. Internationally, Algeria has cooperated with the UNDP, OECD, African Union, and other institutions to promote transparency, development, and institutional capacity-building. Although these partnerships have slowed progress, Algeria acknowledges that challenges persist within the global system, including uneven representation, political bias, and limited enforcement capabilities, which require continued oversight and reform. Therefore, Algeria believes the Legal Committee must support strengthening the responsibility, transparency, and effectiveness of international organizations while respecting the sovereignty of member states. On December 9, 2003, Algeria signed the UN Convention against Corruption (UNCAC). This treaty was designed to strengthen both national institutions and international cooperation by setting global standards for transparency, prevention mechanisms, and accountability. Algeria also signed the African Union Convention on Preventing and Combating Corruption (AUCPCC). Together, these agreements strengthened Algeria’s commitment to regional and international norms of good governance and responsible organizational conduct. By actively participating in these frameworks, Algeria demonstrates its support for stronger and more accountable international institutions.
The People’s Democratic Republic of Algeria urges the Legal Committee to address the responsibility of international organizations by developing clearer legal frameworks, improving organizational governance, and enhancing transparency across all levels of cooperation. These goals reflect Algeria’s commitment to reinforcing international institutions, promoting fairness in global governance, and ensuring that international organizations effectively contribute to peace, stability, and development worldwide.

Topic: 2025 – Responsibility of International Organizations
Country: Turkey
Delegate Name: Dimitri Hong

Committee: GA 6 Legal 

Delegation: Türkiye 

International organizations/IOs are the cornerstone of aid for many conflict areas, but when they fail to act in some cases, it is unclear if IOs are liable and responsible for that failure (Klabbers). Enforcement is the hardest part of the responsibility of these IOs because it’s unclear if IOs are obligated to follow international law (Klabbers). It also makes it harder with these IOs having immunity from national courts however there is no international court with a jurisdiction over these IOs (Hartwig). The most exemplar case of omission of an international organization was the UN failure to stop the Rwandan genocide (Klabbers). Instead of protecting the citizens they withdrew troops even when the UN had received reports about bad events in the future for Rwanda (Klabbers). Then when the genocide happened, they did not try to stop or intervene and after the fact they established a criminal tribunal to prosecute war criminals (Klabbers). The UN’s approach to this genocide was frowned upon by the public, but there was no legal obligation for the UN to interfere in matters like this (Klabbers). This situation was made worse because it was hard to find peacekeepers, then some of those that were sent had orders to not take risks (Klabbers). Also, with this the civilian police arrived late and did not truly have passion to fix the situation (Klabbers). Then finally this mission did not get any advisors to help the situation on the ground which was needed for a ethically motivated genocide (Klabbers).The mandate rule then applies to every organization, meaning if a responsibility is not written in their mandate, they then do not have to act in certain matters (Klabbers, Hartwig). The logistics part of when a UN assistance mission was sent was terrible with some peacekeepers going for the weapons and training or just simply being unqualified for peacekeeping (Klabbers). When the UN assistance mission arrived, they did not get much UN backing with civilian police arriving late, no legal advisor, human rights officer or a humanitarian coordinator (Klabbers). If these officials had been sent, they could have helped a lot with this mission and made it much more successful (Klabbers). The problem with many international legal documents and Articles on the Responsibility of International Organizations (ARIO) is that it is very unclear (Klabbers, Hartwig). In ARIO article 4 it says that responsibility can cover actions but also omissions, but it does not explain what an omission and action would be by an organization (Hartwig). Organizations are also only recognized as international organizations when they are recognized by member states (Hartwig). So, if not recognized, they technically are not under international law (Hartwig). States could also use IOs to throw responsibility of a breach on these IOs instead of themselves which has not yet happened. However, in the ARIO it does state if a member state helps an IO commit a breach of international law, they are liable for that breach (Hartwig). For normal breaches if IOs fail to pay for their breach of international law, the member state of the IO is required to pay for it but does not assume responsibility for such breach (Hartwig).

Since the creation of the nation of Türkiye and during Ottoman rule, we have always committed to international organizations, which is a major part of our foreign policy (Küçük). Through these organizations we wish to show our solidarity with the west and to maintain the status quo in the world (Küçük). We followed this principle due to our focus of preserving our national independence during an era of tension (Küçük). During the Cold War due to Soviet claims on our land we chose the side of the west and joined many international organizations such as NATO, European Economic Community, and many more (Küçük). Then with the slow end of the Cold War we involved ourselves in many other organizations like the Black Sea Economic Cooperation and the D-8 which we proposed (Küçük). Most recently we have been joining and involving ourselves in more regional organizations such as the African Union and Shanghai Cooperation Organization (Küçük).

The Delegation of Türkiye believes that an IO should be held legally responsible for an action that causes harm or destruction when it is a responsibility under their mandate or treaties. This would also require a case-by-case basis, for example the WHO should not be held legally responsible if an employee spreads misinformation. However, if it is a senior staff member or multiple staff, the IO should be legally responsible, especially if lives are lost or have been hurt. For accountability IOs cannot be legally prosecuted in national courts, and there is no system for an international court on IO failure to act. In the rare case of a state using an IO to take responsibility of their misconduct, legal responsibility should be applied to the state, not the IO. So, the Delegation of Türkiye proposes a new legal branch which would create and expand law on the responsibility of IOs by taking cases of these cases of omission. The Delegation of Türkiye believes that getting judges from all over the world, including one from every country, will hopefully make this branch fair and just. GA 6 would interview these judges to make sure they are credible. Due to limited funds that IOs possess sometimes they will not be able to pay for repatriation of their omissions. So, the Delegation of Türkiye believes that the solution to this is to make the member country of this IO pay for repatriation. This principle has already been established in international law.

Work Cited:

Responsibility of International Organizations

Klabbers, Jan. “Reflections on Role Responsibility: The Responsibility of International Organizations for Failing to Act | European Journal of International Law | Oxford Academic.” European Journal of International Law, 16 Feb. 2018, academic.oup.com/ejil/article/28/4/1133/4866310.

Hartwig, Matthias. “Oxford Public International Law: International Organizations or Institutions, Responsibility and Liability.” Oxford Public International Law, May 2011,

Küçük, Ömer, et al. “Türkiye’s Increased Activism in International Organizations as an Initiator State, Articles Muhittin Ataman, Metin Yücekaya, Ömer Naim Küçük | Insight Turkey.” Insight Turkey, 11 Apr. 2025, www.insightturkey.com/articles/turkiyes-increased-activism-in-international-organizations-as-an-initiator-state.

Topic: 2025 – Responsibility of International Organizations
Country: China
Delegate Name: Owen Hufnagel

Legal Committee
Responsibility of International Organizations
People’s Republic of China
Owen Hufnagel
Forest Hills Eastern
The People’s Republic of China increasingly recognizes the need to establish international organizational (IO) responsibility, given the growing IO activity in peacekeeping, humanitarian assistance, development, and economic governance. Thus, where bacteria and disease spread from peacekeeping missions, where global poverty arises through international lending agencies, and where civilian casualties are unfortunately part of a globalized military enterprise, there is a legitimate purpose for responsibility given international concern. Yet at the same time, China believes that IOs that necessarily operate within the parameters set by the United Nations and similar programs have power and capability through state action, and that IOs exist to foster stability and cohesion. Therefore, the international level of responsibility should be established through practical application that clarifies what responsibility looks like, while ultimately maintaining the IOs’ ability to operate successfully and effectively help people. Thus, China recognizes the International Law Commission’s 2011 Draft Articles on the Responsibility of International Organizations (the ILC) as appropriate for this level of consideration, but acknowledges that the articles are non-binding recommendations that should be approached with caution and consideration of differences between Organizations and state sovereignty.
China believes that responsibility must respect the IO structure, with restricted personnel and specific mandates, rather than mirroring state responsibility. For example, IOs, their mandates, and their member state composition mean that IOs are not one-size-fits-all. While certain members are part of the IO and call upon IO action (as States would to a State entity), sometimes the member states assign responsibility. Thus, when wrongdoing occurs, responsibility must be assessed in light of the intention behind the action. Was it part of a mandate that went wrong? An assembly decision? An intentional choice made by someone doing something in their capacity? China does not want the blame to fall on the IO as an entity first, as it might in some contexts. Instead, states might have given permission (for peacekeeping efforts) or control (for coalition warfare efforts), and thus, IO responsibilities are subordinate to state citizens and should remain above the IO. In addition, China believes that responsibility should not infringe on the IO’s operational independence established by international law. For example, peacekeeping and humanitarian efforts have extensive operational rights and specific immunities that are sometimes rigid enough to provide safe passage. Suppose responsibility is too vast and covers IOs indiscriminately. In that case, states might flinch from delivering troops, time, and expertise in times of great need, as was the case in many humanitarian missions following certain natural disasters.
Going forward, China welcomes reforms that promote transparency, oversight, and recourse without diminishing operational efficiency. For example, improvements should be made through recommendations for better cooperation between the United Nations and regional agencies, improved reporting, joint investigations, and for those acting under authority, meaning IO authority should be returned to national jurisdiction. China promotes non-judicial means: independent review boards, claims boards, and internal investigations as means to endorse justice for those who were victims of wrongdoing, but not view IOs as adversaries. Finally, China believes that any recourse assessed should be established over time through a deliberative process with the UN Legal Committee, which supports state consent and avoids politicization. The more oversight there is, with appropriate levels of responsibility and accountability, the more responsibility can be avoided without sacrificing IOs’ ability to foster peace, stability, and development internationally.

Topic: 2025 – Responsibility of International Organizations
Country: Germany
Delegate Name: Harnoor Bath

Legal
Responsibility of International Organizations
Federal Republic of Germany
Harnoor Bath
Forest Hills Eastern High School

The responsibility of International Organizations (IOs) is a pressing issue currently because actions by IOs can lead to harm, and victims struggle to find meetings to seek justice or reparations. IOs such as the United Nations have immunity, which often benefits them, but leaves victims of misconduct with no legal venue to sue for damages. The United Nations’ primary contribution to this topic is establishing The Draft Articles on the Responsibility of International Organizations (DARIO), established by the International Law Commission (ILC), which lay out the legal framework for when an International Organization can be held accountable for its actions. Additionally, the International Criminal Court (ICC) prosecutes those who have committed misconduct, and it works with the UN to ensure responsibility and accountability. When International Organizations fail to take responsibility, many victims are affected, and they are unable to get the help they need financially and morally.

Germany is concerned with the responsibility of International Organizations as a widespread issue today. We are concerned with pushing for legal clarity, accountability for crimes, and financial support for victims of misconduct. Germany has specifically participated in discussions surrounding The Draft Articles on the Responsibility of International Organizations (DARIO) to ensure it serves as a framework for international law. This is relevant to Germany because it determines whether the conduct of an agent is legally the act of an IO or the contributing Member State. Furthermore, they urge Troop-and Police-Contributing Countries (T/PCCs) to establish jurisdiction in their domestic laws. This makes certain that organizations are held accountable for misconduct, even when committed abroad, and ensures the victims are provided with aid. To address its own domestic legal system, Germany has a Code of Crimes against International Law to model a high-standard system of prosecution and investigation.
Germany is also a major contributor to victim trust funds, providing support to victims and children, including medical care, psychological support, and legal services.

The Federal Republic of Germany encourages the United Nations to address the responsibility of International Organizations with urgency by establishing jurisdiction, Codes of Crimes, and trust funds for victims. By implementing these necessary measures to hold International Organizations accountable for misconduct, we believe that victims can be provided the care they need and organizations can be viewed with integrity. Countries should contribute to the Trust Fund in Support of Victims of Sexual Exploitation and Abuse and the Trust Fund for Victims (TFV) to provide aid to victims who are suffering, and join Germany, which is a prominent donor contributing to the victims.

Topic: 2025 – Responsibility of International Organizations
Country: Kazakhstan
Delegate Name: Rowan Babbage

Country: Kazakhstan
Committee: LEGAL
Topic: Responsibility of International Organizations
Delegate: Rowan Babbage
School: Williamston High School

International Organizations (IOs) have a responsibility to prevent as much unnecessary harm and destruction as they can while administering their duties. Naturally, IOs make mistakes and cause damage from time to time, leaving countries with the question of where responsibility will fall in regards to the damage. There are several questions that need to be answered with finality, but before that, some principles need to be established to address said questions. The extent to which IOs are responsible for damage resulting from their actions has not been determined. The parts of the IOs that responsibility will fall on have not been determined. Lastly, how responsibility will be addressed without impeding the ability of IOs to function is not determined.
Kazakhstan supports that IOs should have some responsibility in relation to the negative effects of their actions. In the past, the UN General Assembly has drafted several articles that aimed to discuss this issue. In 2011, the UN General Assembly formed a list of articles that relate to this issue. In general, there is a law of international responsibility, but it still needs refinement. Due to this issue’s lack of resolution, there is a need for an assembly to determine some base principles on which to base future resolutions. Kazakhstan recognizes this need and is determined to participate in the formation of these principles.
Kazakhstan would like to address the formation of principles regarding this topic by supporting that IOs are at least partially responsible for the damage caused by their actions. Kazakhstan acknowledges that being held responsible for their actions could cause IOs to be hesitant about administering aid to underdeveloped countries, and consequently supports that some of the responsibility for the damage be held by those who performed the actions(both the countries within the IO that affirmed that the action took place, and those who acted). A country would determine responsibility with a trial and carry out said determination on a case-by-case basis in cooperation with the UN. Kazakhstan expects to find allies in this resolution with South Africa.

Works Cited
Samara, Chrysanthi. “International Responsibility Of International Organizations (The Draft Articles of the International Law Commission).” SSRN, 2019, https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3480061. Accessed 24 11 2025.
United Nations. “Draft articles on the responsibility of international organizations.” Legal United Nations, 2011, https://legal.un.org/ilc/texts/instruments/english/draft_articles/9_11_2011.pdf. Accessed 24 11 2025.

Topic: 2025 – Responsibility of International Organizations
Country: Italy
Delegate Name: Alexander McBride

Name: Alexander McBride
Country: Italy
Committee: LEGAL
Topic: Responsibility of International Organizations
School: Williamston High School

The responsibility of international organizations has become more of a talking point in recent decades, as organizations like the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, the European Union, and many UN Organizations have gotten more involved in international affairs. The major concern is how to punish these organizations for their harmful actions, and how to divide up the responsibilities of these international organizations, whether it be to the people running the international organizations, the member states of the international organizations, or the international organizations as a whole.
There is a draft article from 2011 regarding the responsibility of international organizations, which was adopted by the International Law Commission to be considered by the United Nations General Assembly. The document details what an international organization is, under what circumstances the international organization is to be held accountable, if member states are to also be held accountable, and how to hold the international organization’s, and possibly the member states, accountable. The United Nations General Assembly took note of the draft, and put a pin in it to circle back to later, so this draft is open for changes and ratification into international law. Italy hasn’t made significant statements or policies on the responsibility of international organizations, but has affirmed its commitment to multilateralism and peace between nations, and feels that IO’s, like the United Nations and European Union, are important to multilateralism and peace around the globe.
All official statements from the Italian Republic regarding this topic are about promoting multilateralism and peace. Italy would like to revisit the main idea of the draft; punishing the IO’s themselves, and any member states that are directly involved with harmful actions. Italy hopes that this approach will continue to promote multilateralism between nations, and help with peace efforts around the world. The Italian Republic also hopes that this approach will deter any malpractice and misconduct of international organizations and member states. The Italian Republic welcomes all nations willing and able to cooperate to find the most effective and just resolution to the issue of international organizations.

Topic: 2025 – Responsibility of International Organizations
Country: South Africa
Delegate Name: Caitlyn Leahy

Country: South Africa
Delegate: Caitlyn Leahy
School: Williamston High School
Committee: Legal
Topic: Responsibility of International Organizations

United Nations organizations are very important for maintaining peace and security around the world, but it’s not immune from mistakes and consequences of those mistakes. Specifically, sometimes UN organizations escalate the situations in which they are in and do not contribute to the solutions to international issues. For example, in Sudan’s civil war the UN gave weapons to a rebel militia in order to overthrow the authoritarian government, but in turn the militia committed genocide of hundreds of innocent civilians. In 2010 UN peacekeepers in Haiti contributed to a cholera outbreak and spread diseases due to poor sanitation in its base and infected one of Haiti’s major rivers with disease. In 2011 the UN authorized NATO’s Operation Unified Protector which issued airstrikes that killed an estimated seventy civilians. The question arises; who should be held responsible for this – the UN, member states, or the individuals who are in control of these situations?
South Africa is committed to the UN’s charter and goals of peace and believes that the UN has real responsibilities like upholding human rights and supporting development. In 2025, South Africa has publicly called out other African states on their failure to properly adhere to international humanitarian law. South Africa helped launch a campaign to defend the ruling of the international court of justice, pressing for enforcement of international law.Through the Hague group, it expects states to be held accountable and push for collective action to enforce international law when states violate it.
South Africa believes that individuals who are affiliated with the UN and go against its goals toward peace and stabilization of governments should be held accountable for their actions and be fired or tried in a court of law. South Africa believes that some of these problems are a multilateral issue with accountability also given to the member states as well as the entirety of the UN. South Africa firmly believes that international organizations are not just advisory and used for justice and enforcement; They feel any instances where the fundamental values are being compromised, the UN should use full force to punish individuals and fix any internal issues with the organization.

Topic: 2025 – Responsibility of International Organizations
Country: Indonesia
Delegate Name: Colton Kolka

Country: Indonesia
Delagate: Colton Kolka
School: Williamston High School
Committee: Legal
Topic: Responsibility of International Orginizations

International Organizations (IOs) are absolutely vital to maintain diplomacy throughout the globe. The United Nations (UN) is the most crucial by far, working to uphold peace between member states. The UN has a strict responsibility to preserve peace and human rights all while protecting national soverignty. This begets a delicate balance of where and when to step into crisis or other situations and not step on other nations’ responsibilities and jurisdiction. Other IOs follow in similar footsteps helping keep the peace but not overreach its power. Orginizations like ASEAN (Assosiation of Southeast Asian Countries) or MERCOSAUR in South America deal with regional interests which helps ensure misconduct happens less as regional interests are mainly shared. When an IO does overstep however, there must be reprucusions that fit the specific overreach.

Indonesia is a founding and active member of ASEAN and as Indonesia represents 41% of ASEAN’s population, it takes a leadership role. Indonesia has helped by acting as a bridge for diplomacy within ASEAN and other partners. Indonesia’s activeness in IOs stresses the importance of having them as the conflict that arises can be dealt with as an orginization and thus resolved through the IO. Indonesia is also an important member of the non-aligned movement (NAM) which has allowed for relations between global powers and other countries to happen, but still has the opportunity to act in favor of national interests. Indonesia has taken this in practice and currently has working relationships with the United States and China but aligned with neither, giving Indonesia freedom to protect national interest.

Indonesia believes that the rule of law is essential and it is up to the organization to uphold it and the member states’ responsibility to strengthen it. Indonesia also believes that education of citizens is crucial when it comes to legal responsibilities and laws. If international law is understood by the global public, it can be effective. Indonesia affirms that nobody is above the law and if a line is crossed, the perpetrator(s) must be held accountable according to the rule of law upheld. International organizations have a clear responsibility to promote peace and diplomacy and their members have the responsibily to particpate in upholding and regulating the IO’s action they are a part of. Indonesia looks to work with its allies in ASEAN as well as other willing countries who hold the same values.

Works Cited
Heinrich, Klaus. “Indonesia must reclaim its ASEAN leadership.” Lowy Institute, 31 January 2025, https://www.lowyinstitute.org/the-interpreter/indonesia-must-reclaim-its-asean-leadership. Accessed 18 November 2025.

“Indonesia statement — Rule of Law — Sixth Committee (Legal) — 72nd session.” the United Nations, https://www.un.org/en/ga/sixth/72/pdfs/statements/rule_of_law/indonesia.pdf. Accessed 18 November 2025.
“Indonesia – The World Factbook.” CIA, 29 September 2025, https://www.cia.gov/the-world-factbook/countries/indonesia/. Accessed 18 November 2025.

Ramillon, Alix. “Indonesia and The World: The Impact of Non-Aligned Foreign Policy – The St Andrews Economist.” The St Andrews Economist -, 5 April 2025, https://standrewseconomist.com/2025/04/05/indonesia-and-the-world-the-impact-of-non-aligned-foreign-policy/. Accessed 18 November 2025.

Umar, Ahmad, and Rheea Saggar. “What is Indonesia’s vision for the international order?” Chatham House, 2023, https://www.chathamhouse.org/2023/07/what-indonesias-vision-international-order. Accessed 18 November 2025.

Topic: 2025 – Responsibility of International Organizations
Country: France
Delegate Name: Lee Gerring

In recent years, the question of outlining the responsibilities of International Organizations (IOs) has been continuously brought into question. As UN bodies and other international groups continue to take on more responsibilities and roles within humanitarian work and development, the official jurisdiction in which these organizations are held accountable once harm is caused becomes difficult to fully lay out. Over time, it becomes muddy whether the responsibility lies with the organization itself, the member states that conduct the organization’s actions, or the individual carrying out the organization’s actions.

France, in particular, is in a special place when it comes to outlining the responsibilities of International Organizations. France holds a very special level of power as a top leading nation and holds itself to a belief of reformation rather than radicalization. As a member of multiple organizations, such as the European Union (EU), and a top contributor to the Official Development Assistance (ODA), France finds itself particularly implicated in what it could mean to make sure IOs understand their proper responsibilities.

France continuously does not believe that radical changes are needed to help the systems of accountability. Rather, France sees an emphasis on a realistic approach of smaller reforms to consolidate the already established systems and further strengthen them. France is under the common belief of the Rule of Law, making it certain that it believes no one or group is above the law. With this, France believes that IOs opening themselves up to more transparency of their operations will further their credibility and overall effectiveness. France has demonstrated this itself with its push for reform within the ODA to broaden its development landscape and further benefit those under the ODA’s help. France has done this by publishing detailed information on the projects being carried out by the ODA through a government portal in line with what is described as “open line” standards, including those of the International Aid Transparency Initiative. Furthermore, France vehemently supports international judicial bodies as to uphold the standards by which the world should conduct itself, such as the International Criminal Court. Similarly, France holds the EU to the same standard as they do the ODA. For example, France greatly supports the EU Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD), which further promotes the idea of transparency and accountability within a multinational organization. France also greatly understands the importance of sovereignty within an IO, and is taking into account the implications it may have on an IO if too much infringement is put on them in regulation, ultimately leading to a decline in influence and impact. France hopes to further outline the guidelines of which International Organizations must conduct themselves and the levels at which they must be held accountable, while also keeping the same influence that they continue to have now. France hopes to work with those with whom it conducts IOs with such as member states of the EU.

Topic: 2025 – Responsibility of International Organizations
Country: Argentina
Delegate Name: Izzy Sheppard

Delegate: Izzy Sheppard
School: Williamston High School
Committee: Legal Committee
Topic: Responsibility of International Organizations
Country: Argentine Republic

In recent decades the world has experienced unprecedented globalization and development of global organizations and immense global organizations. Organizations from the World Health Organization(WHO), the United Nations(UN), the International Monetary Fund(IMF), and the World Trade Organization(WTO), have grown to have immense power and influence on the world stage, and we are now beginning to see some of their effects, positive and negative. While these organizations are made to encourage growth and benefit those in need, they are not always so successful. Many across the globe blame separate organizations for a menagerie of issues, from UN peacekeepers spreading disease in Haiti, to the IMF damaging economies more than truly aiding them, and the North Atlantic Trade Organization becoming a majority militaristic organization.
The Argentine Republic has felt the impact of these larger international organizations, most significantly, the IMF. While on paper it can be said that the IMF loaned money that helped keep Argentina somewhat afloat, it is the belief of many in the government that the interaction of the IMF only served to subdue Argentina, and never really hoped to benefit Argentina. While the economy of Argentina is finally beginning to see some hope, there is still a strong sentiment that the country may have been better off trying to use other resources, albeit there are few. In other organizations, the Argentine Republic has seen positive involvement, such as the UN, and regional organizations such as the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States which helps promote common policy, and align member nations to common goals.
Over the next coming years, the Argentine Republic would like to see reforms to international organizations and their approach to honesty, transparency, and responsibility. These now large influential organizations should be held accountable, and should behave responsibly without bias, or favoritism. To this end, the UN should look to establish policy that encourages both itself, and other international organizations to be more transparent, so that member countries can hold the organizations accountable, and ensure that the groups are functioning as they should be. Argentina would be interested in establishing, or developing groups to monitor organizations, and check them. Additionally, many of these organizations that cause damage, often take no motion to address the damage, and Argentia believes this must be changed. If, and when, organizations cause damage, there must be action taken to amend the situation to the best of that organization’s ability. To achieve this goal, Argentina looks to establish a system by which nations looking for support can on paper legally hold organizations accountable. Whether this be pen and paper, or a sub-group that estimates risk factors and focuses on amending issues with the organization, some sort of action must be taken, and systems to protect vulnerable nations must be developed. Argentina believes that change must come, and it must come in the form of action to ensure that member nations are reimbursed for their damages, and can seek some sense of justice from these international organizations.

Works Cited:

Great Lakes Invitational Conference Organization. “Responsibility of International Organizations.” GLIMUN – 2025, https://glica.org/glimun/committees/responsibility-of-international-organizations/. Accessed 16 Nov. 2025.

United Nations. “Office of Legal Affairs.” UN.Org, United Nations, https://www.un.org/ola/. Accessed 16 Nov. 2025.

Topic: 2025 – Responsibility of International Organizations
Country: Ukraine
Delegate Name: Jaclyn Charbauski

Committee: LEGAL
Topic: Responsibility of International Organizations
Country: Ukraine
Delegate Name: Jaclyn Charbauski
School: Forest Hills Northern

International Organizations (IOs) such as the United Nations, NATO, the World Bank, and the European Union have provided invaluable services to nations for decades. The United Nations helps to maintain international peace and security, serving nations by tackling problems like climate change, pandemics, and poverty. NATO uses political and military means to ensure the freedom and security of its member countries. The World Bank works to eradicate global poverty and provides financial support to countries in pursuit of this goal. The European Union promotes peace and prosperity through a unified voice that participates in UN affairs. All in all, each one of these IOs has vital roles in global affairs that keep the world afloat and that work to continue creating prosperous environments for each country. Yet, in recent decades, these IOs have gained so much power that when they slip up and their attempts at help fail, it can cause disastrous consequences for nations. For example, Haiti’s 2010 cholera epidemic was rightfully blamed on UN peacekeepers who had recently arrived from a cholera-endemic region. This resulted in thousands of deaths and hundreds of thousands of infections. When things go south for a country due to failed attempts by these IOs, the question is raised of who to place the blame on and how to administer the consequences best.
The responsibility of IOs is a significant issue in Ukraine because of its ongoing conflict with Russia. Its main problem is that although the UN and other IOs are involved in attempts to provide aid and diplomatic solutions, their effectiveness seems to be little in preventing aggression, holding perpetrators accountable, and supporting Ukraine’s needs. Ukraine urges the UN to recognize its responsibility toward helping Ukraine in this war. Despite claims of support made in May, when the UN said, “It is time to put an end to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine,” and agreed to assist Ukraine, the UN has yet to do much more than pass resolutions to address the conflict and provide some aid to displaced persons. Ukraine believes that there is more to be done, for there are still roughly 3.7 to 3.8 million people displaced within the country and 6.8 to 6.9 million people who have fled. Additionally, the UN’s past attempts to coerce Russia into an agreement have failed miserably due to Russia’s Security Council veto. Russia vetoed resolutions that demanded an immediate withdrawal of troops from Ukraine and that condemned the attempted annexation of Ukrainian regions. These two resolutions, which were intended to end, or otherwise subside the conflict, only worsened it. Thus, Ukraine believes that the UN needs to take more responsibility as its measures are currently fruitless and ineffective.
Ukraine maintains the belief that IOs should bear the full legal responsibility of any harmful or destructive actions. IOs should uphold full transparency and accountability of their actions so that they can be watched for any dangerous activity. Yet accountability does not need to jeopardize the effectiveness or the independence of IOs. Ukraine argues that responsibility should primarily fall on IOs, but emphasizes that member states should be held accountable for any actions that would influence these IOs toward harmful behaviors. Ukraine also supports individual accountability for any war crimes, human rights abuses, and misconduct by peacekeeping officials. Ukraine proposes an international monitoring system of IOs, along with security guarantees from international partners that would prevent future aggression.

Position papers for GLIMUN 2025 will appear above this line, with the newest being at the top.