Author: Alexandra Popova
Keywords: equivalent protection; formal and informal mechanisms for considering internal labor disputes; functional immunity; international employees; quasi-judicial authorities
The immunity of international intergovernmental organizations from the jurisdiction of national courts, as well as the special status of the employees of such organizations, which are both broadly accepted concepts today, have demanded the establishment of special mechanisms ensuring the protection of the rights of international servants for settling internal labor disputes that arise. Nowadays there are various formal and informal mechanisms for considering relevant internal labor disputes between international organizations and their employees. These mechanisms function within most international intergovernmental organizations. Their establishment has provided a possibility for employees of international organizations to resolve labor disputes with an international organization employer in the absence of access to national courts. Nevertheless, there is a problem of efficiency with such mechanisms, which can be especially observed now through the lens of providing the appropriate standards for protection of the rights of international employees and the availability of justice. In the present article, the author focuses on the questions of the evolution of the mechanisms for considering disputes between international organizations and their employees in the light of realizing the right of access to the court. The author also carries out an analysis of the contemporary approaches of international and national courts regarding this issue. Having analyzed various decisions of these courts, the author comes to the conclusion that the existing mechanisms for considering internal labor disputes between international intergovernmental organizations and their employees should be improved in a certain way that takes into account the context of contemporary international law realities.
About the author: Alexandra Popova – Postgraduate student, Faculty of law, Lomonosov Moscow State University, Moscow, Russia.
Citation: Popova A. (2017) Evolyutsiya mekhanizmov rassmotreniya sporov mezhdu mezhdunarodnymi mezhpravitel’stvennymi organizatsiyami i ikh sluzhashchimi [Evolution of mechanisms for considering disputes between international intergovernmental organizations and their employees]. Mezhdunarodnoe pravosudie, no.4, pp.55–66. (In Russian).
Blokker N. (2014) International Organizations: The Untouchables? International Organizations Law Review, vol.10, no.2, pp.259–275.
Grunebaum-Ballin P. (1921) De l’utilité d’une juridiction spéciale pour le règlement des litiges intéressant les services de la S.D.N. Revue de Droit International et de Législation Comparée, vol.2, pp.78–82.
Ispolinov A.S. (2017) Chto skryvaetsya za broskim terminom “integratsionnoe pravosudie”? [What lies behind the catchy term “integration justice”?]. Pravo. Zhurnal Vysshey shkoly ekonomiki, no.3, pp.105–120. (In Russian).
Reinisch A. (2014) To What Extent Can and Should National Courts “Fill the Accountability Gap”? International Organizations Law Review, vol.10, no.2, pp.572–587.
Van Alebeek R., Nollkaemper A. (2013) The Netherlands. In: Reinisch A. (ed.) The Privileges and Immunities of International Organizations in Domestic Courts, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp.179–206.