Contemporary Lawmaking Processes and Progressive Lawmaking Processes That Bind the States Without Unanimous Vote
Over the past half century, a new sub-field of Public International Law, named “International Institutional Law,” emerged regarding the functions of inter-governmental organizations and other international arrangements—comprehensively speaking “international institutions.” By “international institutions” I comprehensively refer to both the inter-governmental organizations (“IOs”) and the treaty-based international institutions. “Treaty-based international institutions” or “treaty-based (international) bodies” are institutions in the framework of a treaty, i.e. in this case, a MEA In other places, I refer to all of these bodies, bodies, and institutionalized elements of the architecture of an MEA collectively, as “international arrangements,” which is another commonly cited and comprehensive term., International Institutional Law is the legal aspect of the political phenomenon of the so-called “autonomy” of the inter-governmental organizations (“IOs”). IOs are no longer merely “new settings for old techniques of diplomacy.” They have moved away from the state-centric model and are now fora for policies that tend to evolve to a certain extent independently from the separate interests of each of their Member States. The autonomy of an IO is a necessary prerequisite for the recognition of the existence of lawmaking powers held by the IOs, and lawmaking itself is a feature of the autonomy of an IO. The IOs’ autonomy has already been ascertained in theory and in practice by, among others, the fact that IOs enjoy a legal personality that is separate from the legal personality of their Member States. The IOs’ legal personality is either outlined in the founding instruments of the IO or inferable from the competences that the founding instrument or other pertinent legal instruments attribute to the IO. The question that still remains open is not whether an IO is an “autonomous arrangement” in International Law, but what is the degree of autonomy enjoyed by an IO. The present Book researches the degree of autonomy to the extent that this is related to the lawmaking functions of the IOs. Under the lawmaking perspective, the answer to this question has two tiers: the first tier provides a general answer that applies to the majority of IOs and relates to the definition of an IO itself; the second tier depends on an analysis of each IO separately.