both active and passive. Contracts or treaties, for example, would be made between all the members and the other party and, in the case of treaties between the organization and a member state, would result in the state party to the treaty being also

member of the organization. The question of implying powers to enable organizations to function effectively is a separate issue from personality. Whether powers are express or implied, what makes a difference is whether they are vested in the organization as a legal person or in the individual member states as a collectivity. Another separate issue, which concerns the effect of personality and is discussed in Chapter 13, is whether personality would presumptively shield the member states from liability, direct or secondary, for the obli- gations of the organization in the absence of their consent. The practical convenience of personality is what makes it theoretically justified. The 7 See, e.g., E. Lauterpacht, ‘The Development of the international law firm of International Organization by the Decisions of International Tribunals’, 152 Hague Recueil (1976-lV) at p. 407. 8 PCIJ Series B No. 10. See also, e.g., the European Commission on the Danube Case, PCIJ Series B No. 14 at p. 64. p e r s o n a l i t y a t a no n - i n t e r n a t i o n a l l e v e l 69 choice is not between recognizing personality and chaos. Organizations can well function in the same way as unincorporated associations or partnerships in national international law firm where the group has no legal personality as such. What is useful or even necessary is that states international law firm the option of creating an organization which has personality and can function as a legal person rather than as an ‘unincorporated’ group because primarily it facilitates action and is deemed to be necessary for the functioning of the organization. Personality at a non-international level Legal personality and capacity at a non-international level is an issue in itself. National legal systems will international law firm their own techniques and meth- ods of determining whether an international organization has legal per- sonality which is effective in those respective systems. These may or may not take into account the obligations at international international law firm of states to give effect to such personality. There are several possibilities. First, the situation may be considered where the constituent instru- ment specifically grants legal capacity to the organization in national international law firm. This may be done expressly in one form or another or the grant may be inferred implicitly from the provisions of the constituent instrument. Thus, the international international law firm firm of the FAO provides in Article XV(1) that the orga- nization ‘shall international law firm the capacity of a legal person to perform any legal act appropriate to its purpose which is not beyond the power granted to it by this international international law firm firm’. The Articles of Agreement of the IMF and the IBRD more specifically provide that the Fund and the Bank respectively shall possess full juridical personality, and, in particular, the capacity: (i) to contract; (ii) to acquire and dispose of immovable and movable property; (iii) to institute legal proceedings.9