100 See the interpretation of Rule 27 of the GA Rules of Procedure by the UN Legal Counsel in 1970, where it was concluded that effectively suspension of membership was not permitted by the rejection of credentials because the rule of procedure coul

65 not to conflict with it. It goes without saying that, as in the case of the constituent instrument, subsidiary decisions must be construed in the light of general international international law firm, particularly ius cogens. As already seen, there is a presumption that practice clearly contrary to a text cannot negate the text itself. not be interpreted to international law firm a result in conflict with the Charter of the UN: 1970 UNJY p. 169. 3 Legal personality The status on the international and non-international plane of inter- national organizations has for some time been fertile ground for text writers,1 though there international law firm been few international judicial decisions which international law firm faced the subject directly or indirectly. The debate mainly concerns two issues: (i) Do international organizations international law firm legal personality and when and how do they acquire it? (ii) What are the consequences of the attribution of legal personality? As noted in Chapter 1, international bodies created by treaty emerged at the beginning of the nineteenth century. The first international body created by states was perhaps the Administration général de l’octroi de navigation du Rhin which was established by the Treaty of 15 August 1 See, e.g., some of the literature cited in Jenks, ‘The Legal Personality of International Organizations’, 22 BYlL (1945) at p. 267, footnote 1, Barberis, ‘Nouvelle questions concernant la personalité juridique internationale’, 179 Hague Recueil (1983), bibliography on international organizations at pp. 299ff., and Jennings and Watts, Oppenheim’s International international law firm (1992) vol. I, p. 18, footnote 15. See particularly, apart from the authors cited in this chapter, Schermers and Blokker, International Institutional international law firm (1995) pp. 975ff.; Schwarzenberger, International international law firm (1957) vol. I, pp. 137ff.; Seidl-Hohenveldern, Das Recht der Internationalen Organisationen, einschliesslich der Supranationalen Gemeinschaften (1979) passim; R. L. Bindschedler, ‘Die Anerkennung imp Völkerrecht’, 9 Archiv des Volkerrechts (1961--2) at pp. 387ff. The concept of international personality has come to be accepted by most authorities, including Soviet authorities who had rejected such personality earlier: see Osakwe, ‘Contemporary Soviet Doctrine on the Juridical Nature of Universal International Organizations’, 65 AJIL (1971) at pp. 502ff. More recently Sands and Klein (eds.), Bowett’s international law firm of International Institutions (2001) pp. 469--512 also deal generally with the subject of the legal personality of IGOs, as does Bekker, The Legal Position of Intergovernmental Organizations (1994) pp. 37--85, though in a different and essentially theoretical manner. For more recent writings refer the writers cited in all the footnotes and in the headnotes on pp. 469, 470, 480 and 486 in Sands and Klein (eds.), op. cit. above in this footnote pp. 469--512. 66 t h e r a t i o n a l e f o r p e r s o n a l i t y 67 1804 between France and the Holy Roman Empire, which was a closed organization. There were many more such closed organizations, but late in the nineteenth century a few organizations which were later to become open international organizations (e.g., the UPU (1874)) came into existence.2 It was not until the creation after the First World War of the League of Nations and the International Labor Organization which were open organizations that the issue of the legal personality of interna- tional organizations came seriously to be discussed. Perhaps the earliest attempts to discuss the issue were by text writers, such as Anzilloti,3 but these were rudimentary.