The Haiti cholera case raises three main legal questions. First, what is the relationship between the UN’s absolute immunity, prescribed by Article II, Section 2 of the General Convention, and the UN’s obligation to provide for alternative modalities to settle individual third-party claims under Article VIII, Section 29 of the same Convention? Second, are disputes stemming from UN forces’ activities ‘of a private law character’? Finally, can the availability of alternative dispute settlement mechanisms, as a necessary condition to the immunity grant, be constructed on other legal grounds that Judge Oetken did not take into account(such as, relevant UN legal instruments or international human rights law)? In particular, how can the UN’s absolute immunity be reconciled with the UN’s role in promoting and ensuring respect for human rights, including the individual right of access to justice?
The UN’s Immunity and the Haiti Cholera Case
CIMIOTTA, EMANUELE
2015
Abstract
The Haiti cholera case raises three main legal questions. First, what is the relationship between the UN’s absolute immunity, prescribed by Article II, Section 2 of the General Convention, and the UN’s obligation to provide for alternative modalities to settle individual third-party claims under Article VIII, Section 29 of the same Convention? Second, are disputes stemming from UN forces’ activities ‘of a private law character’? Finally, can the availability of alternative dispute settlement mechanisms, as a necessary condition to the immunity grant, be constructed on other legal grounds that Judge Oetken did not take into account(such as, relevant UN legal instruments or international human rights law)? In particular, how can the UN’s absolute immunity be reconciled with the UN’s role in promoting and ensuring respect for human rights, including the individual right of access to justice?I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
