This introductory chapter presents four working hypotheses that provide the general framework for discussing legal challenges of acts of international organizations before various national courts. First, it suggests that scholarly analysis should go beyond the issue of targeted sanctions as discussed in the Kadi decision of the European Court of Justice and include various other (also indirect) forms of judicial review of acts of international organizations. Second, such review is relatively independent of the form of incorporation of international law into the domestic legal order. Third, challenges in the light of human rights are more adequate when based on internationally accepted principles than on purely national legal concepts. Lastly, it is argued that the dichotomy of securing the independent functioning of international organizations, as opposed to guaranteeing legal protection against them, should be viewed as providing related problems as requests for legal action against international organizations and their immunity from suit.
Oxford Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.
If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.