Ch.

I Purposes and Principles, Article 1

Rdiger Wolfrum
From: The Charter of the United Nations: A Commentary, Volume I
Edited By: Bruno Simma, Daniel-Erasmus Khan, Georg Nolte, Andreas Paulus,
Nikolai Wessendorf, (Assistant Editor)
Content type: Book Content
Series: Oxford Commentaries on
International Law
ISBN: 9780199639762

Product: Oxford Scholarly Authorities on

International Law [OSAIL]
Published in print: 22 November 2012

Subject(s):
United Nations (UN) International peace and security Civil and political rights UN Charter

From: Oxford Public International Law (http://opil.ouplaw.com). (c) Oxford University Press, 2013. All Rights Reserved. Subscriber: OUP - Oxford Online
% 28Sales % 26 Publicity% 29; date: 12 April 2014

Article 1
The Purposes of the United Nations are:
1. To maintain international peace and security, and to that end: to take effective
collective measures for the prevention and removal of threats to the peace, and for
the suppression of acts of aggression or other breaches of the peace, and to bring
about by peaceful means, and in conformity with the principles of justice and
international law, adjustment or settlement of international disputes or situations
which might lead to a breach of the peace;
2. To develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of
equal rights and self-determination of peoples, and to take other appropriate
measures to strengthen universal peace;
3. To achieve international co-operation in solving international problems of an
economic, social, cultural, or humanitarian character, and in promoting and
encouraging respect for human rights and for fundamental freedoms for all without
distinction as to race, sex, language, or religion; and
4. To be a centre for harmonizing the actions of nations in the attainment of these
common ends.

A. Introduction 16
B. Interpretation 727
C. Practice 2838

Select Bibliography
DArgent P and Susani N, United Nations, Purposes and Principles MPEPIL, vol X (OUP 2012)
41827.
Bailey SD, The UN Security Council and Human Rights (Martins Press and others 1994).
Bennett AL, International Organizations: Principles and Issues (7th edn, Prentice Hall 2002)
59.
Delbrck J, Collective Security EPIL I (1992) 646.
de Wet E and Wood M, Collective Security MPEPIL, vol II (OUP 2012) 31622.
Dinstein Y, War, Aggression and Self-Defence (4th edn, CUP 2005).
Doehring K, Collective Security in R Wolfrum (ed), United Nations: Law, Policies and
Practice (CH Beck 1995) 110.
Gading H, Der Schutz grundlegender Menschenrechte durch militrische Manahmen des
Sicherheitsratesdas Ende staatlicher Souvernitt? (Duncker & Humblot 1996).
Goodrich LM and Simons AP, The United Nations and the Maintenance of International
Peace and Security (Brookings Inst 1955).
Kerbrat Y, La rfrence au Chapitre VII de la Charte des Nations Unies dans les rsolutions
caractre humanitaire du Conseil de Scurit (LGDJ 1995).
Kimminich O, Was heit kollektive Sicherheit? in D Lutz (ed), Kollektive Sicherheit in und fr
EuropaEine Alternative (Nomos 1985) 47.
Randelzhofer A, Purposes and Principles of the United Nations in R Wolfrum (ed), United
Nations: Law, Policies and Practice (CH Beck 1995) 994.(p. 108)
Schrijver N, The Future of the Charter of the United Nations (2006) 10 Max Planck YB UN L 1.
Schwarzenberger G, The Purposes of the United Nations: International Judicial Practice
(1974) 4 IYBHR 11.
Styt AM, 1986: UN International Year of Peace (1986) 33 NILR 412.
UNITAR, The United Nations and the Maintenance of International Peace and Security
(Nijhoff 1987).
Verosta S, Der Begriff internationale Sicherheit in der Satzung der Vereinten Nationen in R
Marcic, H Mosler, E Suy, and K Zemanek (eds), Internationale Festschrift Verdross (Fink
From: Oxford Public International Law (http://opil.ouplaw.com). (c) Oxford University Press, 2013. All Rights Reserved. Subscriber: OUP - Oxford Online
% 28Sales % 26 Publicity% 29; date: 12 April 2014

Marcic, H Mosler, E Suy, and K Zemanek (eds), Internationale Festschrift Verdross (Fink
1971) 533.

A. Introduction*
1 The Dumbarton Oaks Proposals were based upon the premise that the effectiveness of a
system for the maintenance of international peace and security could be enhanced by defining
purposes and principles guiding the actions of the Organization and of its member States. Although
such an approach was generally accepted at the San Francisco Conference, proposals were made
to modify the Dumbarton Oaks text by introducing additional and more precise definitions. These
proposals were designed to limit the relatively far-reaching discretionary powers of the organs, as
envisaged by the Dumbarton Oaks Proposals. Accordingly, some of them met with the objections
of the United States, the United Kingdom, and the Soviet Union. The purposes as enshrined in the
Charter reflect the compromise achieved.1
2 The United Nations purposes, spelled out primarily in Art. 1 of the Charter, and the principles as
set out in Art. 2 are both supplemented by the Preamble to the Charter which expresses the ideas
which guided the States parties when establishing the United Nations.2
3 It is not easy to clearly distinguish between the purposes of Art. 1 and the principles as
enshrined in Art. 2, in particular since Art. 2 refers back to Art. 1.
4 The purposes and principles are designed to provide a guide for the conduct3 of the UN organs
in a fairly flexible manner. It is a matter of controversy whether the purposes of the United Nations
as contained in Art. 1 of the Charter are meant to be legally binding. Their place in the Charter,
taking into consideration the legislative history of Art. 1, points in the direction of qualifying the
purposes as legally binding. However, the wording of Art. 1 is more appropriate for political
objectives rather than for legally binding obligations. Account has to be taken of the fact that
certain elements of Art. 1 (1) and (2) are considered principles binding under customary
international law (such as the prohibition of aggression, the prohibition of other breaches of peace,
an obligation (p. 109) to settle disputes by peaceful means, respect for human rights, respect for
equal rights, and self-determination of peoples).
5 Article 1 of the Charter does not indicate how a possible conflict between different purposes
might be resolved. This can only be achieved by establishing a practical concordance while giving
priority to the lasting preservation of peace. The preservation of peace is often described as being
the purpose of all purposes.4 The ICJ stated in the Advisory Opinion on Certain Expenses that
[t]he primary place ascribed to international peace and security is natural, since the fulfilment of
the other purposes will be dependent upon the attainment of that basic condition.5
6 Decisions of the organs taken under other Articles may be regardedif one takes a
constitutional point of viewas bearing upon, or even implementing, such purposes and
principles. The majority of the Articles of the Charterapart from those few which further specify
Arts 1 and 2are merely of a procedural nature and serve either the purpose of attributing specific
functions to the organs or demarcating the functions of the organs. These Articles refer directly
(Arts 14, 24 (2), 52, 76, 104, and 105) or indirectly to the purposes and principles by repeating the
wording of the latter (Arts 11, 12, 13, 24 (1), 3339, 42, 43, 48, 51, 55, 73, 84, and 99). This means
that each decision taken by a UN organ is evidence of the application and interpretation in practice
of the purposes of the Charter. This relationship is often expressed in the decisions of the organs in
the form of reference made to Art. 1 as a whole or in part, together with a citation of the Articles
which allocate powers and assign functions and responsibilities to the various organs.

B. Interpretation
7 Paragraph 1 of Art. 1 is composed of two parts, the first of which describes the essential
purpose of the Organization, namely to maintain international peace and security, whereas the
following paragraphs set out means designed to achieve this purpose. However, it would be
incorrect to say that the second part of para 1 and paras 2 and 3 only describe means to maintain
international peace and security, even if this notion is understood broadly. Friendly relations among
nations and international cooperation serving the objectives as referred to in para 3 are purposes
From: Oxford Public International Law (http://opil.ouplaw.com). (c) Oxford University Press, 2013. All Rights Reserved. Subscriber: OUP - Oxford Online
% 28Sales % 26 Publicity% 29; date: 12 April 2014

in their own right, too.

8 The term international peace and security, which was previously used in the Preamble of the
Covenant of the League of Nations, is used quite frequently throughout the Charter.6 Nowhere in
the Charter is the term international security used alone, whereas the terms peace or universal
peace can be found separately. Both of these latter terms address different, although interrelated
or even overlapping, concepts. The degree of overlap, however, depends very much upon
whether the term peace is narrowly or broadly defined.7 If peace is narrowly defined as the
mere absence of a threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of
any State (Art. 2 (4))8 (p. 110) (negative peace), the term security will contain parts of what is
usually referred to as the notion of positive peace.9 This latter notion is generally understood as
encompassing the activity which is necessary for maintaining the conditions of peace.
9 The Preamble and Art. 1 (1), (2), and (3) indicate that peace is more than the absence of war.
These provisions refer to an evolutionary development in the state of international relations which
is meant to lead to the diminution of those issues likely to cause war. For example, Art. 1 (2)
speaks of the strengthening of peace through the development of friendly relations among
nations.10 In the same vein, Art. 1 (3) indicates that the United Nations function is to bring about a
stabilization of international relations in order to curtail the likelihood of war. Consequently, the GA
has frequently emphasized the close link between the strengthening of international peace and
security on the one hand, and disarmament, decolonization, and development on the other.11 This
approach was not, at least not to its fullest extent, reflected in the Declaration on the Right of
Peoples to Peace.12
10 However, it served as a basis for the Proclamation of the International Year of Peace.13 This
Proclamation stated that the promotion of international peace and security required continuing and
positive action by States and peoples with respect to a series of goals, including: the prevention of
war; the removal of various threats to peace (including the nuclear threat); respect for the principle
of the non-use of force; the resolution of conflicts and the peaceful settlement of disputes; the
development of confidence-building measures; agreement on disarmament; the maintenance of
outer space for peaceful uses; respect for the economic development of States; the promotion and
exercise of human rights and freedoms; decolonization in accordance with the principle of selfdetermination; the elimination of racial discrimination and apartheid; the enhancement of the
quality of life; the satisfaction of human needs; and the protection of the environment. The Highlevel Panel on Threats, Challenges and Change enumerated in its 2004 report A more secure
world: Our shared responsibility five clusters of threats with which the world must be concerned
now and in the decades ahead: economic and social threats, including poverty, infectious disease,
and environmental degradation; inter-State conflict; internal conflict, including civil war, genocide,
and other large-scale atrocities; nuclear, radiological, chemical, and (p. 111) biological weapons;
terrorism; and transnational organized crime.14 Similarly, the former Secretary-General Kofi Annan
stated in his report In larger freedom:
The threats to peace and security in the twenty-first century include not just international war and
conflict but civil violence, organized crime, terrorism and weapons of mass destruction. They also
include poverty, deadly infectious disease and environmental degradation since these can have
equally catastrophic consequences. All of these threats can cause death or lessen life chances on
a large scale. All of them can undermine States as the basic unit of the international system.15

11 The term international security, in turn, consists of a subjective and an objective element. The
pursuit of this principle implies a transformation of international relations so that every State is
assured that peace will not be broken, or at least that any breach of the peace will be limited in its
impact.16 International security implies the right of every State to take advantage of any relevant
security system, while also implying the legal obligations of every State to support such systems.17
The GA has stated that national and international security has become increasingly interrelated,18
which accordingly makes it necessary for States to approach international security in a
comprehensive and cooperative manner. Since the unilateral and unrestrained pursuit of national
security interests may disturb the balance of power, thus detrimentally affecting international
security, it is crucial that nations reconcile possible contradictions between national security
From: Oxford Public International Law (http://opil.ouplaw.com). (c) Oxford University Press, 2013. All Rights Reserved. Subscriber: OUP - Oxford Online
% 28Sales % 26 Publicity% 29; date: 12 April 2014

interests and the overall interest of international security. This concept has been seriously
challenged by the National Security Strategy of the United States, which was published in
September 2002.19
12 Traditionally, the concept of international security was perceived as primarily a problem of
State security. Within recent years, however, an additional concept has emergedthat of human
security, acknowledging that threats cannot only come from States and non-State actors, but can
also exist to the security of both, States and the people.20
13 The GA has emphasized the role regional arrangements play in respect of the maintenance of
international peace and security, underlining, however, the dominant role to be played by the
Security Council.21
(p. 112) 14 International security can be promoted and achieved through various policies or
measures, two of which are referred to in para 1, namely measures of collective security and
adjustment or settlement of international disputes. The former refers to measures taken under
Chapter VII, the latter to measures under Chapter VI.22
15 The defining characteristic of the concept of collective security23 is the protection of the
members of the system against a possible attack on the part of any other member of the same
system. Thus, the concept is primarily directed (unlike a system of collective self-defence) against
the illegal use of force from within the group of States forming the collective security system,
rather than against an external threat.24 The main legal prerequisite of collective security is the
general prohibition of the use of force, except when authorized by the competent central organ of
the respective organization (an idea reflected in Art. 24) or in cases of self-defence.25 The
distinction drawn between the concepts of collective security and collective self-defence has been
blurred to some extent in practice,26 and it has also lost relevance with respect to the United
Nations. This is due to the fact that membership of the United Nations has become almost
universal, rendering any distinction based upon external or internal acts of aggression rather
meaningless.
16 As collective security is a system where States collectively respond to threats to and breaches
of the peace, its scope becomes wider when the understanding of threats to the peace expands.
Thus, with the development of the concept of peace from a negative to a positive approach, the
concept of collective security has expanded.27
17 Article 1 (1) refers to the maintenance of international peace and security as the overarching
purpose of the United Nations, whereas the suppression of aggression is only referred to as one
objective to be achieved through measures of collective security. This means that international
peace and security may be endangered not only by acts of aggression, but also by any other
threat to the peace. It further means that suppression of aggression as an objective of the United
Nations is subordinate to the maintenance of international peace and security.28 In consequence
thereof the Security Council may also direct its measures against the State being a victim of
aggression if and to the extent that this measure effectively preserves international peace and
security.
(p. 113) 18 The system of collective security can be supplemented, for example, by means of
disarmament and confidence-building measures.29 With respect to disarmament, the GA30 stated
in UNGA Res 34/83 (11 December 1979), that:
genuine and lasting peace can be created only through the effective implementation of the
security system provided for in the Charter of the United Nations and through the speedy and
substantial reduction of arms and armed forces by international agreementleading ultimately to
general and complete disarmament31 under effective international control.

19 Another means through which States may protect international peace and security is to
achieve a balance of power.32 In consequence, the GA has stated that hegemonic behaviour
represents a serious threat to international peace and security.33
20 Aside from collective measures, Art. 1 (1) identifies another path to maintain international
peace and security, namely, the peaceful settlement or adjustment of international disputes or
From: Oxford Public International Law (http://opil.ouplaw.com). (c) Oxford University Press, 2013. All Rights Reserved. Subscriber: OUP - Oxford Online
% 28Sales % 26 Publicity% 29; date: 12 April 2014

situations which might lead to a breach of the peace.

21 This part of the wording of para 1 differs from the Dumbarton Oaks text in the respect that this
adjustment or settlement must be accomplished in conformity with the principles of justice and
international law. With this, the discretionary powers of the organs concerned are narrowed to a
considerable extent. This specific insertion, advocated in some form or another by several
States,34 was suggested by a four-power proposal (China, United Kingdom, United States, and the
Soviet Union), which had, however, favoured a less explicit reference to justice and international
law.35 The other participants at the San Francisco Conference then insisted upon shifting the
emphasis from a peaceful settlement of disputes on the basis of political considerations to one
based instead on considerations of international law and justice. The words justice and
international law in para 1, as in the Preamble,36 not only refer to treaties, customary (p. 114) law,
and general principles of law (Art. 38 of the ICJ Statute) but also establish a connection to natural
law.
22 During the deliberations of the San Francisco Conference, it was suggested that the
formulations of the purpose enshrined in para 1 be amended so as to read, to maintain
international peace and security in conformity with the principles of justice and international law.37
This motion, however, did not receive the required majority.38 The view was expressed that it was
important that the SC should have the power to bring about an end to hostilities without considering
whether one side could legally have recourse to armed force.39 The legislative history of Art. 1 (1)
makes it doubtful whether the SC may take permanent measures, for example, concerning the
territorial situation of a State, which are not in conformity with international law.
23 The wording of Art. 1 (1) indicates that three different functions of UN organs may be
distinguished as far as the maintenance of peace and security are concerned. These are identified
more specifically in the operative part of the Charter, to which Art. 1 (1) refers. First, the
Organization should insist upon and take measures so that States do not threaten, or cause, a
breach of the peace. This function is vested primarily in the GA, and to that extent Art. 1 (1) refers
to Arts 10, 11, and 13. If a State commits an act of aggression or another breach of the peace, or
threatens to do so, it is, secondly, up to the SC to take effective collective measures as provided
for in Chapter VII. Thirdly, the Organization can proceed to find an adjustment or settlement of the
dispute or situation, a function entrusted to the GA under Art. 14 and to the SC and the GA under
Chapter VI.
24 The Dumbarton Oaks Proposals did not refer to friendly relations among nations based on
respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples, although the Atlantic
Charter of 14 August 1941 contained some language directed toward the principle of selfdetermination. The amendment to the Dumbarton Oaks Proposals suggested by the four inviting
powers, however, included a wording nearly identical to Art. 1 (2).40 The reaction of Conference
participants was not entirely positive. The representative from Belgium, in particular, pointed out
that only the notion of equality of States and not that of equality of peoples was a part of
international law. In addition, he argued that it was dangerous to make the right to selfdetermination the basis of friendly relations among States.41 Doubts were also raised by those
States which, although in favour of introducing the right to self-determination into the Charter,
wanted to ensure that this inclusion would not embrace a right of secession. (p. 115) The
discussion at the Conference and the summary of the Rapporteur42 show the objective pursued
by the drafters of Art. 1 (2). The term equality of peoples was meant to underline that no
hierarchy existed between the various peoples. To this extent, the prohibition of racial
discrimination was transferred from the national level to the level of international relations. Apart
from that, the principle of equality of peoples and the right to self-determination are united. With
this, it is assured that no peoples can be denied the right to self-determination on the basis of any
alleged inferiority. The reference to self-determination encompasses the principle of selfgovernment, but does not justify secession.43 Finally, the principle of self-determination was
formulated as a basis for friendly relations among nations. Thus, according to the drafters of the
Charter, a hierarchy of principles existed in that the right of self-determination should be pursued
so long as it does not disturb friendly relations among nations.44
25 The principle of self-determination acquired its final shape through the practice of the UN. This
will be analysed by Oeter in a separate chapter which follows the Commentaries on Arts 1 and 2.45
From: Oxford Public International Law (http://opil.ouplaw.com). (c) Oxford University Press, 2013. All Rights Reserved. Subscriber: OUP - Oxford Online
% 28Sales % 26 Publicity% 29; date: 12 April 2014

26 Paragraph 3 differs greatly from the corresponding Dumbarton Oaks text. Whereas the latter
only provided for the achievement of international cooperation in solving international economic,
social, and other humanitarian problems, the present text is much more explicit, although not
substantially different. It was already proposed by the four inviting powers,46 and merely
underwent drafting changes during the course of the San Francisco Conference. In connection with
para 3, a suggestion was made to draft, or to include an already drafted bill of rights of nations and
individuals. It was, however, decided that such a task should be left to the Organization. The
operative parts of the Charter to which Art. 1 (3) refers are Chapters IX and X.
27 The text of Art. 1(4) is taken from the Dumbarton Oaks Proposals with only one drafting
change. Paragraph 4 emphasizes the necessity of consensus among the member States (and
especially among the permanent members of the SC) as a basis for action achieved through the
Organization.47 To that extent, para 4 has a double meaning.48 It refers, first, to the decisionmaking process in the UN organs49 and its underlying philosophy, while at the same time
envisaging the transformation of the society of States into a community of States.50 Such a
transformation is facilitated by the sharing of common goals, as well as by the means through
which these goals are to be achieved (cooperation, development of friendly relations based upon
certain principles, settlement of disputes, and adjustment of disputes and situations in conformity
with the principles of international law and justice).

(p. 116) C. Practice

28 As indicated above, references to Art. 1 in decisions by the UN organs, made in a Preamble or
in an operative paragraph, are very often combined with a reference to the Articles allocating
powers and assigning functions and responsibilities. In order to avoid duplication, the following
analysis is limited to an examination of certain general features of the practice of the UN organs in
supporting their decisions by references to Art. 1.
29 The practice of the UN organs bearing on Art. 1 falls into two categories. The first consists of
decisions of general relevance, such as those concerned with the definition of standards of
international conduct, general formulations, and their implementation. The second concerns the
decisions of the Organization with respect to disputes and situations affecting the relations of
particular States. In this respect, the organs have on some occasions issued recommendations to
particular States, namely that they should be guided by the purposes of the UN in the conduct of
their relations or in negotiations with other States. In this context, the question arose whether, for
example, Art. 1(3) contained sufficiently precise standards to be invoked as a basis for specific
recommendations.51
30 The content of the decisions referring to Art. 1 is as wide and as varied as the scope of the
Charter itself. In applying Art. 1, the organs of the United Nations have addressed each other, the
specialized agencies, member States generally, all nations, particular members, and particular
non-members.
31 The GA has occasionally referred to the purposes as a whole as forming one of the
constitutional grounds for its decisions. Reference was usually made simultaneously to Art. 2. One
of the major examples is UNGA Res 377 (V) (3 November 1950)52 (Uniting for Peace). Other such
references have been of a more general nature. In its UNGA Res 1301 (XIII) (10 December 1958),
the GA stressed that the observance of the purposes and principles created the best basis for
ensuring the conditions essential for the nations and peoples of the world to live, and to assist each
other, in mutual tolerance and understanding, for the benefit of all. In UNGA Res 1815 (XVII) (18
December 1962) (Considerations on the Principles of International Law Concerning Friendly
Relations and Co-operation Among States), in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations,
the GA noted that the great political, economic, social and scientific changes that had (p. 117)
occurred in the world since the adoption of the Charter had further emphasized the vital
importance of the Purposes and Principles of the United Nations and of their application to presentday conditions.53 In its Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations
and Co-operation among States in Accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, the GA
stated:
From: Oxford Public International Law (http://opil.ouplaw.com). (c) Oxford University Press, 2013. All Rights Reserved. Subscriber: OUP - Oxford Online
% 28Sales % 26 Publicity% 29; date: 12 April 2014

that the adoption of the Declarationwould contribute to the strengthening of world peace and
constitute a landmark in the development of international law and of relations among States, in
promoting the rule of law among nations and particularly the universal application of the Principles
embodied in the Charter.54

32 In UNGA Res 2734 (XXV) (16 December 1970) (Declaration on the Strengthening of
International Security), the GA reaffirmed the universal and unconditional validity of the Purposes
and Principles of the Charter of the United Nations as the basis of relations among States
irrespective of their size, geographical location, level of development or political, economic and
social systems.55 The commitment to the purposes and principles of the Charter was also strongly
reaffirmed in the Millennium Declaration: We reaffirm our commitment to the purposes and
principles of the Charter of the United Nations, which have proved timeless and universal. Indeed,
their relevance and capacity to inspire have increased, as nations and peoples have become
increasingly interconnected and interdependent.56 At the World Summit 2005 the Heads of State
and Government emphasized again their commitment to the purposes and principles of the
Charter.57
33 On several occasions, the GA has stated that the codification of the rules of international law
and their progressive development would assist in promoting the purposes and principles of the
Charter of the United Nations.58 Reference to the purposes was made when the GA attempted to
formulate the interests of the world community as a whole.59 Finally, the GA has frequently
requested that new efforts be made to broaden the teaching in schools of the purposes and
principles of the Charter and of the structure and activities of the United Nations and its specialized
agencies, with particular reference to human rights.60
(p. 118) 34 The principles enshrined in Art. 1 (1) have been the subject of occasional discussion
and have been specifically referred to in GA resolutions concerning the following matters: calling
upon governments to settle their disputes by peaceful means;61 appealing to the permanent
members of the SC to contribute more effectively to the promotion of international peace;62
qualifying certain situations;63 appealing for the regulation, limitation, and balanced reduction of all
armed forces and all armaments;64 condemning all forms of propaganda designed or likely to
provoke or encourage any threat to the peace, breach of the peace, or act of aggression.65
Perhaps the most comprehensive action by the GA in this respect is the Declaration of Societies
for Life in Peace.66 It lists eight principles designed to guide States.67
35 In recent years explicit references were made by the GA to Art. 1 (2), inter alia, with regard to
the Global Agenda for Dialogue among Civilizations;68 the Human Rights Council;69 the right of the
Palestinian people to self-determination;70 respect for the principles of national sovereignty and
non-interference in the internal affairs of States in electoral processes as an important element for
the promotion and protection of human rights;71 respect for the principles of national sovereignty
and diversity of democratic systems in electoral processes as an important element for the
promotion and protection of human rights.72
36 The GA, while referring to Art. 1 (3), has on several occasions stressed the need for
international cooperation in solving international problems of an economic, social, (p. 119) cultural,
or humanitarian character and of promoting and encouraging respect for human rights and
fundamental freedoms. The issues touched upon are manifold. The need for international
cooperation was particularly emphasized in the first few years, whenever the GA initiated relief
actions.73 Later on, the emphasis shifted to promoting the development of developing countries
either by creating favourable conditions for them,74 by obliging States75 or UN organs to render
help,76 by providing for direct financial or technical assistance,77 or by calling for cooperation
among States. In UNGA Res 2625 (XXV) (24 October 1970) the GA proclaimed that States have the
duty to cooperate with one another, irrespective of the differences in their political, economic and
social systems, in the various spheres of international relations.78 In connection with the creation
of new organs in the field of economic development and cooperation, Art. 1 (3), in particular, has
frequently been invoked. In Res 2152 (XXI) (17 November 1966), the GA stated that the purpose of
UNIDO should be to promote industrial development, in accordance with Article 1 para 3 and
Articles 55 and 56 of the Charter. Equally it is the task of UNIDO to encourage the mobilization of
national and international resources to assist in, promote and accelerate the industrialization of the
From: Oxford Public International Law (http://opil.ouplaw.com). (c) Oxford University Press, 2013. All Rights Reserved. Subscriber: OUP - Oxford Online
% 28Sales % 26 Publicity% 29; date: 12 April 2014

national and international resources to assist in, promote and accelerate the industrialization of the
developing countries.
37 As far as the protection of human rights is concerned, Art. 1 (3) has been invoked with respect
to the improvement generally within the UN System of the effective enjoyment of human rights and
fundamental freedoms,79 the political rights of women,80 the Draft Convention on Freedom of
Information,81 the question of racial conflict in South Africa resulting from the policies of
apartheid,82 information from non-self-governing (p. 120) territories,83 the elimination of racial
discrimination,84 the elimination of all forms of intolerance and discrimination based on religion
and beliefs,85 development of public information activities in the field of human rights,86
enhancement of international cooperation in the field of human rights,87 and the strengthening of
the rule of law.88
38 Article 1 (4) was invokedsometimes together with Art. 1 (3)when the GA established a new
organ, for example the resolution on the establishment of the United Nations Conference on Trade
and Development referred to Art. 1 (4).89 Such references, however, are not too frequent. No
explicit references to Art. 1 (4) have been made since 1965. In principle Art. 1 (4) has suffered the
same fate as Art. 56,90 to which it is related.

Footnotes:
* Mirka Mldner provided valuable information to this entry and contributed very helpful advice.
1

As to the negotiating history see A Randelzhofer, Purposes and Principles of the United Nations
in R Wolfrum (ed), United Nations: Law, Policies and Practice (CH Beck 1995) 995.
2

It has been criticized, inter alia, by Schrijver (N Schrijver, The Future of the Charter of the United
Nations (2006) 10 Max Planck YB UN L 17 and 32f) that new objectives that have emerged over
the years, such as development, combating poverty, post-war peace reconstruction, the
conservation of the environment and promoting of the rule of law, are not, or only barely
mentioned in the Charter.
3

The Rapporteur of Committee I/1 referred to the purposes as the raison dtre of the
Organization,the aggregation of the common endsthe cause and object of the Charter to which
member states collectively and severally subscribe; UNCIO VI, 447, Doc 944.
4

Compare also CPF/Bedjaoui, 314.

Certain Expenses of the United Nations (Advisory Opinion) [1962] ICJ Rep 151, 168.

eg in the Preamble; Arts 2 (3) and (6), 11 (1) and (2), 12 (2), 18 (2), 23 (1), 24 (1), 26, 33 (1), 34,
37 (2), 39, 42, 43 (1), 47, 48 (1), 51, 52 (1), 73, 76, 84, 99, 106.
7

See, especially, JA Randelzhofer, Der normative Gehalt des Friedensbegriffs im Vlkerrecht der
Gegenwart in J Delbrck (ed), Vlkerrecht und Kriegsverhtung (Duncker & Humblot 1979) 1339.
8

See Randelzhofer and Drr on Art. 2 (4) MN 14f.

Randelzhofer (n 7) 22f.

10

The UNGA has listed component elements of peace in several resolutions: UNGA Res 290 (IV)
(1 December 1949) UN Doc A/RES/290(IV); UNGA Res 380 (V) (17 November 1950) UN Doc
A/RES/380(V); UNGA Res 1236 (XII) (14 December 1957) UN Doc A/RES/1236(XII); see UNGA Res
33/73 (15 December 1978) UN Doc A/RES/33/73; in particular for the Balkan UNGA Res 50/80 B (12
December 1995) UN Doc A/RES/50/80B.
11

UNGA Res 2734 (XXV) (16 December 1970) (Declaration on the Strengthening of International
Security) UN Doc A/RES/2734(XXV); UNGA Res 34/100 (14 December 1979) UN Doc A/RES/34/100;
UNGA Res 35/158 (12 December 1980) UN Doc A/RES/35/158; UNGA Res 38/71 B (15 December
1983) UN Doc A/RES/38/71B; UNGA Res 39/160 (17 December 1984) UN Doc A/RES/39/160; UNGA
Res 40/155 (16 December 1985) UN Doc A/RES/40/155; UNGA Res 44/114 (15 December 1989) UN
Doc A/RES/44/114 concerning the reduction of military budgets; UNGA Res 50/70 (12 December
1995) UN Doc A/RES/50/70 on general and complete disarmament.
12

UNGA Res 39/11 (12 November 1984) UN Doc A/RES/39/11. Its operative para 3 reads
emphasizes that ensuring the exercise of the right of peoples to peace demands that the policies
of States be directed towards the elimination of the threat of war, particularly nuclear war, the
From: Oxford Public International Law (http://opil.ouplaw.com). (c) Oxford University Press, 2013. All Rights Reserved. Subscriber: OUP - Oxford Online
% 28Sales % 26 Publicity% 29; date: 12 April 2014