Search results

The foundation of international organizations has created the need to employ in their offices qualified persons who, with the time passing, were called international civil servants. The legal status of international civil servants, their place in the organization and the role played towards member countries, is the subject of the present work. The origin of international civil servants goes back to the 19th c. administrative unions but it was only the League of Nations which accepted this situation. Its full development took place, however, in the latter part of the 20th c., in the period of the so-called organizational revolution. International law and sometimes also the domestic law of the states define the rules of employing civil servants in the organizations. They formulate both the conditions which the candidate for the civil servant must fulfil and the types of his connections with the organization (Chpt. II). International civil servants enjoy the rights and appropriate duties (Chpts. Ill and IV). Their content and scope is the result of, first of all, the internal regulations of the organization, sometimes enriched by the rules of the law of the host state. The rights and duties of civil servants are accompanied by the privileges and immunities — facilities necessary to perform their duties in the organization (Chpt. V). The activities of civil servants may lead to conflicts with organization authorities. To protect their interests civil servants may make use of either administrative procedure stipulated in the inner law of the organization or submit the existing controversy to the competent judicial agency, i. e. administrative tribunal (Chpt. VI). The work closes with considerations on the independence of international civil servants towards the countries they are citizens of (Chpt. VII). And although the rule of independence of civil servants is confirmed by the statutes of particular organizations, still the activities of some countries are threat for this independence.

A politological analysis is presented in this book of the more than seventy year long period of US — Panama relations. Particular interest is devoted to the diplomatic and international law aspects, since in the author's opinion they are of paramount, fundamental significance. The main stream of these considerations is preceded (section 1) by a description of the circumstances governing the founding od Panama as an independent state. The author sees this as the resultant of a number of causes, both internal and also external, and hence not merely as a product of US policies. In section 2 is presented the initial state of bilateral relations, in particular the circumstances accompanying the signing of the Hay — Bunau-Varilla agreement, analysis of its clauses and also the legal and practical consequences of this agreement as the plane of the links between' Panama and the United States. Panama — US relations in the years from 1904—1964 are shown (section 3), analysing selected problems in a dynamic conception. Dealt with here are such problems as: guaranteeing independence and the policy of intervention, titular and eminents sovereignty military and economic questions and also matters concerning the conflict of 1964. It is the author's view that the situations analysed determine the principal lines of division and differences in the interests of the two sides, and also make it possible to discern — in a negative sense — future and desired foundations of these bilateral relations. Also comprehended in the field of interest is the question of the interpretation of the 1903 convention^ the evolution of Panama's attitude towards its principal terms and also certain legal modifications. The last two sections deal with the story of the negotiations lastingover many years and also the analysis of the currently binding agreements on the Panama Canal. Attention is drawn to the internal and international determinants governing the attitudes of the two sides. The author evaluates the new foundation of US — Panama relations in finding answers to the question: to what degree have the three groups of already historical controversies between the two sides been eliminated. These involve: 1) the legal and factual position of the Canal Zone; 2) the legal situation of the canal; 3) the rights held by USA extending over the whole Panamese relations results from the overcoming of a certain barrier, impossilbe to surmount in the earlier period, which determined the limiting (referring both to intentions and also to pacts negotiated) to modification of the Hay — Bunau-Varilla agreements without making any changes in its basic terms. In this sense the actual treaties are an incomparable qualitative state (chiefly due to annulling the clause on the permanence and titular sovereignty of Panama over the Canal Zone) that is achieveable due to the determination of the Torrijos government and also of the Carter administration. The present situation is of a clearly temporary character (up to 2000 AD). Although many anachronistic regulations have been annulled and in many cases conditions for cooperation have been created, intractable problems for the future are discernible. These result from the different interpretations by the two sides of the function of the Panama Canal. Panama aims to extract maximum direct and indirect advantages from the canal. As a small country its policy is to achieve demilitarisation and neutrality understood as the elimination of foreign bases and the obtaining of international guarantees safeguarding against external intervention. For the USA the economic question, although important (the advantages are rather indirect), does not play such a dominant role. Moreover, the canal itself has a strategic significance, the more so in view Of the lack of stability in Central America. From the aspect of Panamese rights further doubts are raised by the plans for building a canal at sea level. Among the varied problems to be confronted in the coming decade, these major items are most likely to govern US — Panama relations: the economic viability, of exploiting the canal, the method of implementing its strategic function and matters relating to the plans for building a new canal.