https://sites.google.

com/site/walidabdulrahim/home/my-studies-in-english/3-subjects-of-
international-law
3. Subjects of International Law
A subject of International Law is a person (entity) who possesses international legal personality, i.e.,
capable of possessing international rights and obligations and having the capacity to take certain types of
action on the international level.[! "raditionally, #tates have been the only subjects or persons of
International Law.[$! %owever, with the establish&ent of international organi'ations, it has beco&e necessary
that a sort of international legal personality be granted to these entities. "hus, international organi'ations
beco&e subjects or persons of International Law.[(! )eside #tates and international organi'ations, non*#tates
entities such as &e&bers of federal #tates, belligerents, insurgents, national liberation &ove&ents, and
international territories are granted a sort of international legal personality. #pecial international status was
granted to the %olly #ee and the +atican ,ity, and the #overeign -rder of .alta. .oreover, individuals, ethnic
&inorities, and indigenous peoples are considered, in certain circu&stances, subjects of International Law.
"hese persons and subjects of International Law are discussed in the following.a

1. States !"
#tates are the original and &ajor subjects of International Law. "heir legal personalities derive fro& the
very nature and structure of the international syste&. All #tates, by virtue of the principle of sovereign e/uality,
enjoy the sa&e degree of international legal personality.
International Law is pri&arily concerned with the rights, duties and interests of #tates. 0or&ally the rules of
conducts that International Law prescribes are rules which #tates are to observe.
#ince a #tate is the pri&ary concern of International Law, it is necessary to study it in a separate chapter.
"hus, the ne1t chapter of this book is devoted to the study of a #tate as a subject of International Law.

#. International $rgani%ations &"
An international organi'ation is an association of #tates, established by a treaty between two or &ore
#tates. Its functions transcend national boundaries. It is for certain purposes a subject of International Law.
"he appearance of international organi'ations fro& the early part of the 0ineteenth ,entury raises a
critical /uestion of their status in the International Law.[2! International organi'ations are generally
considered to be subjects of International Law, as are #tates, even though their international legal
personality is li&ited to possessing specific rights and duties. "heir status is deter&ined be conventions
a&ong #tates and, therefore, the recognition of the international personality of an international organi'ation
is li&ited to signatory #tates of the convention creating such an organi'ation.
International organi'ations include universal all purposes organi'ations, universal functional
organi'ations, and regional organi'ations. 3enerally, the treaty creating a public international organi'ation
indicates its nature, purposes and powers. "he international legal personality of an international
organi'ation is, therefore, li&ited to the rights, duties, purposes and powers laid down in the treaty creating
it. "he international legal personality of the 4nited 0ations, for e1a&ple, is derived fro& the 4nited
0ations ,harter, the %ead/uarters Agree&ent between the 4nited 0ations and the 4nited #tates of A&erica
of 567, and the 562 ,onvention on the 8rinciples and I&&unities of the 4nited 0ations.[7! "he
attribution of an international legal personality involves the capacity to perfor& legal acts, to have rights and
duties and to enter into relations on the international level. Actually, the legal capacity of the 4nited
0ations was a /uestion brought before the International ,ourt of 9ustice. In its advisory opinion in the
Reparation for Injuries Case of 565,[:! the ,ourt held that the 4nited 0ations was an international person,
although not a #tate, and therefore not having the sa&e rights and duties as a #tate. "he 4nited 0ations had
an international personality; its functions and powers were so i&portant that the -rgani'ation could not
carry the& out unless it had so&e degree of international personality. "he 4nited 0ations can perfor& legal
acts such as entering into agree&ents with &e&ber #tates and with other international organi'ations,
concluding contracts and bringing clai&s before a court. #uch capacity to perfor& legal acts is a
prere/uisite of international legal personality.
In reality, international organi'ations have e1ercised their legal capacity in a great variety of ways. "hey
have concluded treaties, created &ilitary forces, convened international conferences, and brought clai&s
against #tates.

3. 'on-State (ntities
"here are certain entities, although they are not regarded as independent #tates, they are granted a
degree of personality, a definite and li&ited special type of personality, under International Law. #uch
entities have certain rights and duties under International Law. "hey can participate in international
conferences and enter into treaty relations.
%owever, the rights and duties of these entities in International Law are not the sa&e as those of the
#tates. "hey have a sort of international personality. "he capacity of each of the& is &ore li&ited than an
independent #tate has since it is li&ited to the purpose it is e1isted for and the powers or functions it can
perfor&. "hese entities fall into the following categories<

(a) .e&bers of co&posed #tates or federal #tates< [5! "he federal #tate has itself, of course, an
international legal personality, but the controversial /uestion is whether the co&ponent units of the federation
have the personality on the international plane. Actually, the international personality of such units and its
e1tent can only be deter&ined in the light of the constitution of the #tate and #tate practice. "he constitution of
a federation &ay grant a co&ponent unit a special international personality; however such personality will not
be operative on the international plane without being recogni'ed as such by other #tates. #tate practice has
granted international personality to certain co&ponent units of the federation. =or instance, the #oviet
>epublics of )yelorussia and the 4kraine were ad&itted as &e&bers of the 4nited 0ations in 56? and to that
e1tent possessed international personality.[@! .oreover, these two >epublics were &e&bers of a nu&ber of
international organi'ations and parties to a nu&ber of treaties.

(b) Insurgents and )elligerents< Insurgents are individuals who participate in an insurrection (rebellion)
against their govern&ent.[! )elligerents are a body of insurgents who by reason of their te&porary
organi'ed govern&ent are regarded as lawful co&batants conducting lawful hostilities, provided they observe
the laws of war.[$! =or a long ti&e, International Law has recogni'ed that insurgents and belligerents &ay in
certain circu&stances, pri&arily dependent upon the de facto ad&inistration of specific territory, be
international subjects having certain rights and duties under International Law, and &ay in due course be
recogni'ed as de facto govern&ents.[(! "hey can enter into valid arrange&ents on the international plane
with #tates, international organi'ations, and other belligerents and insurgents. "hey are bound by the rules of
International Law with respect to the conduct of hostilities.

(c) 0ational liberation &ove&ents< In the course of anti*colonial actions sponsored by the 4nited
0ations and regional organi'ations, these organi'ations and the &e&ber #tates have conferred international
legal status upon certain national liberation &ove&ents.[6! In 576, the 3eneral Asse&bly recogni'ed the
international legal status to the Angolan, .o'a&bican, 8alestinian, and >hodesian &ove&ents (which had
been recogni'ed as such by the -rgani'ation of African 4nity (-A4) or the Arab League), and accorded the&
observer status in its &eetings, in &eetings of various organs of the 4nited 0ations, in &eetings of the 4nited
0ations speciali'ed agencies, and in conferences convened under the auspices of the 4nited 0ations.[?! "he
#ecurity ,ouncil of the 4nited 0ations per&itted the 8alestine Liberation -rgani'ation (8L-) to participate in
its debates with the sa&e rights of participation as conferred upon a &e&ber #tate not a &e&ber of the
#ecurity ,ouncil.[2!
International practice has accorded the political entities recogni'ed as national liberation
&ove&ents a nu&ber of legal rights and duties. "he &ost significant of these rights and duties are the
capacity to conclude binding international agree&ents with other international legal persons, the capacity to
participate in the proceedings of the 4nited 0ations, and the rights and obligations of International
%u&anitarian Law.[7!

(d) International territories<[:! "he ter& AInternational territoryB refers to territories placed
under a variety of international legal regi&es including those ad&inistered by the 4nited 0ations under the
trusteeship syste& or special arrange&ents. "he ,harter of the 4nited 0ations established the trusteeship
syste&, replacing the &andate syste& established by the League of 0ations, to enable the 4nited 0ations itself
or a #tate to ad&inister certain territories pending independence.[5! "he 4nited 0ations is also able to
ad&inister territories in specific circu&stances. In several instances, "he 4nited 0ations placed certain
territories under its transitional ad&inistration for a variety of purposes, such as the preparation for
independence, the ad&inistration of an election, the adoption of a new constitution, the i&ple&entation of a
peace settle&ent, and the perfor&ance of other civil functions. C1a&ples of such instances are ,a&bodia
(55$*55(), )osnia and %er'egovina (55?* ), and Cast "i&or (555*$@@$).[$@!
"he territories (trust territories) placed under the trusteeship syste& have been accorded special
status under International Law. "heir inhabitants have been granted the rights for advance&ent, progressive
develop&ent, and self*govern&ent or independence. Actually, all these territories have attained independence
as separate #tates, or have joined other independent #tates. "he territories placed by the 4nited 0ations under
special syste&s, e1cept ,a&bodia which has been already an independent #tate, have been also accorded
special status under International Law for the purpose of assisting the& in attaining their independence.


!. Special case entities
"here are two special case entities accorded a special uni/ue status under International Law; they are
the #overeign -rder of .alta, and the %olly #ee and the +atican ,ity.
(a) "he #overeign -rder of .alta< [$! "he #overeign -rder of .alta was established during the
,rusades as a &ilitary and &edical association. It ruled >hodes fro& (@5 to ?$$. It was entrusted to rule
.alta by the treaty with Ding ,harles + of Cngland in ?(@. It lost its rule of .alta in 75:. In :(6 the -rder
established its head/uarters in >o&e as a hu&anitarian organi'ation. "he -rder already had international
personality at the ti&e of its taking control of .alta and even when it had to leave the island it continued to
e1change diplo&atic legations with &ost Curopean #tates. "oday, the -rder &aintains diplo&atic relations with
over forty #tates.[$$!

(b) "he %oly #ee and the +atican ,ity<[$(! "he %oly #ee, which is so&eti&es used interchangeably with
the +atican ,ity, is the international legal person of the >o&an ,atholic ,hurch, with its physical location at the
+atican ,ity in >o&e and its sovereign the 8ope.[$6! It is not a #tate in the nor&al sense of the word. It is a
uni/ue person of International law because it co&bines the feature of the personality of the %oly #ee as a
religious entity with its territorial base in the +atican ,ity.[$?! Apart of so&e one thousand ,hurch
functionaries, it has no per&anent population of its own. Its sovereign territory consists of only about one
hundred acres granted it by Italy in the 5$5 Lateran "reaty. 0evertheless, the status of the %oly #ee as an
international person is accepted by a nu&ber of #tates. Its personality appro1i&ates to a #tate in functions. "he
%oly #ee e1changes diplo&atic representatives with other #tates, enters into bilateral treaties (called
concordats), and is a party to &any &ultilateral treaties.

&. Indi)iduals #*"
"he ulti&ate concern for the hu&an being has always been the essence of International Law. "his
concern was apparent in the 0atural Law origin of the classical International Law. "he growth of the positivist
theories of law, particularly in the 0ineteenth ,entury, obscured this concern for the hu&an being and
e&phasi'ed the centrality and even the e1clusivity of the #tate in International Law.[$7!
In the "wentieth ,entury, International Law beca&e again concerned with individuals. In 5@7, the %ague
,onventions initiated the concern in view of prisoners of war and the wounded.[$:! Euring the #econd Forld
Far, the trend of International Law had been towards attaching direct responsibility to individuals for cri&es
co&&itted against the peace and security.[$5! "he ,harter of London of 56( issued by the Allied 8owers
established the individual responsibility for co&&itting war cri&es, cri&es against hu&anities and cri&es
against peace. -n this basis, after the #econd Forld Far, the 3er&an leaders were brought to trial before the
0ure&berg International "ribunal (56?*562) where their guilt was established. "he ,harter of the
0ure&berg International "ribunal of 56? provided specifically for individual responsibility for cri&es against
peace, war cri&es and cri&es against hu&anity.[(@! "he 0ure&berg International "ribunal pointed out that
Ainternational law i&poses duties and liabilities upon individuals as well as upon statesB and this was because
Acri&es against international law are co&&itted by &en, not by abstract entities, and only by punishing
individuals who co&&it such cri&es can the provisions of international law be enforcedB.[(! "he principles of
the ,harter of the 0ure&berg "ribunal and the decisions of this tribunal were affir&ed by the 3eneral Asse&bly
of the 4nited 0ations in 562, thus &aking the& to be part of the International Law.[($! "he Asse&bly also, in
562, stated that genocide was a cri&e under International Law bearing individual responsibility;[((! and this
was reaffir&ed in the 3enocide ,onvention of 56:.[(6!
Individual responsibility was also confir&ed with regard to grave breaches of the =our 3eneva ,onventions
of 565 and the Additional 8rotocols I and II of 577, which deal with ar&ed conflicts (International
%u&anitarian Law). -n this basis, two specific international war cri&es tribunals were established, one for the
for&er Gugoslavia in 55( and one for >wanda in 556, to prosecute persons responsible for the serious
violations of International %u&anitarian Law co&&itted in the territory of each of these countries.
"he events in the for&er Gugoslavia and >wanda i&pelled the renewal of the international concern for the
establish&ent of a per&anent international cri&inal court, which had long been under consideration. In 55:,
the >o&e #tatute of the International ,ri&inal ,ourt was adopted at the 4nited 0ations Eiplo&atic
,onference. "he #tatute provides that the jurisdiction of the ,ourt is li&ited to Athe &ost serious cri&es of
concern of the international co&&unity as a wholeB, which are the cri&e of genocide, cri&es against hu&anity,
war cri&es and the cri&e of aggression,[(?! and that A[A! person who co&&its a cri&e within the jurisdiction
of the ,ourt shall be individually responsible and liable for punish&ent in accordance with this #tatute.B[(2!
In addition, after the #econd Forld Far, International law beca&e also concerned with individuals in the
field of hu&an rights and the funda&ental freedo&s. "he ,harter of the 4nited 0ations started this trend in
56? by calling upon &e&ber states to observe hu&an rights and funda&ental freedo&s for individuals and
peoples.[(7! #ince then, several conventions have been concluded to define hu&an rights and funda&ental
freedo&s which individuals and peoples are entitled to and to ensure their respect and protection. A&ong these
conventions are the International ,ovenant on ,ivil and 8olitical >ights of 522,[(:! and the International
,ovenant on Ccono&ic, #ocial and ,ultural >ights of 522.[(5!
Although, individuals as a general rule lack standing to assert violations of the above treaties in the absence
of the protest by the #tate of nationality, a wide range of other treaties have enabled individuals to have direct
access to international courts and tribunals. C1a&ples of such treaties are the Curopean ,onvention on %u&an
>ights of 5?@,[6@! the A&erican ,onvention on %u&an >ights of 525,[6! the International ,onvention on
the Cli&ination of All for&s of >acial Eiscri&ination of 522,[6$! and the -ptional 8rotocol to the
International ,ovenant on ,ivil and 8olitical >ights of 522.[6(!
In conclusion, we can say that ,onte&porary International Law has recaptured the concern for individuals,
and individuals have beco&e recogni'ed as participants and subjects of this law. "his has occurred pri&arily
through the evolution of %u&an >ights Law and %u&anitarian Law co&ing together with the evolution of the
"raditional International Law. Individuals have a sort of legal personality under International Law; they are
granted certain rights and subjected to certain obligations directly under International Law. International Law is
applicable to relations of #tates with individuals and to certain interrelations of individuals the&selves where
such relations involve &atters of international concern.

*. +inorities
"he concern of International Law, in the "wentieth ,entury, for individuals was acco&panied by another
concern for &inorities. "he proble& of protecting national &inorities in Curope confronted the League of
0ations after the =irst Forld Far. "he League assu&ed its responsibilities in the field of treaty*based protection
of &inorities in Curope, in social &atters, such as health and fair labor standards.[66! After the #econd Forld
Far certain rights were granted to the individual &e&bers of ethnic, linguistic and cultural &inorities; they
were granted the right to have their identity and language respected by the #tate as part of the process of the
develop&ent of hu&an rights in general. [6?!
"he rise of ethno*nationalis& after the collapse of the #oviet 4nion in 55 brought back the status of ethnic
&inorities and other groups in International Law to be an i&portant issue concerning the international
co&&unity. +arious efforts have been &ade on the global and regional level to i&prove the legal protection of
&inorities. -n the 3lobal level, there is Athe 4nited 0ations Eeclaration on the >ights of 8ersons )elonging to
0ational or Cthnic, >eligious and Linguistic .inorities of 55$B.[62! -n the regional level, there are Athe
Curopean ,harter for >egional or .inority LanguagesB adopted by Athe ,ouncil of CuropeB in 55$, Athe
=ra&ework ,onvention for the 8rotection of 0ational .inoritiesB[67! adopted by Athe ,ouncil of CuropeB in
55? and the creation of Athe %igh ,o&&ission for 0ational .inoritiesB belonging to Athe ,onference on
#ecurity and ,ooperation in CuropeB.[6:!
Eespite all these efforts that ai&ed to grant specific rights to &inorities, the /uestion re&ains, what legal
status should be accorded to &inorities in International LawH Eo &inorities have international legal
personalityH
"here is no clear answer to these /uestions. Actually, the proble& of &inorities is very co&plicated because
it involves political and legal di&ensions related to the &eaning and legal conse/uences of the principle of self*
deter&ination that &ay lead to loss of the concerned #tate part of its territory and its control over part of its
population and to the possible outside intervention in its do&estic affairs.[65! =or this reason, it is no accident
that in the develop&ent of International Law since the #econd Forld Far, the rights of &inorities have been
conceived as a category of hu&an rights which are to be e1ercised by the individual belonging to a &inority,
rather than as group rights attributed to a collective entity as such.[?@!

,. Indigenous -eoples [?!

In recent years, a special issue related to a category of the so*called Aindigenous peoplesB has been raised.
C1a&ples of indigenous peoples are the Aborigines in Australia, the A&erican Indians, the Cski&os and the
.aori in 0ew Iealand. Eespite the atte&pts by the 4nited 0ations to recogni'e group rights to indigenous
peoples, it is still regarded as a specific category of &inorities with special needs and having a particular
relationship to their traditional territory.
In conclusion, we can say that &inorities and indigenous peoples are not subjects of International Law in
any &eaningful sense of the ter& and that they have not achieved an international legal personality. "hey &ay
receive guarantees of certain levels of treat&ent under international treaties, but it does not follow that they as
such have legal personality. International Law does not attribute rights to &inorities and indigenous peoples as
an entity, but rather to individual &e&bers of the&.