Hostname: page-component-5c6d5d7d68-wbk2r Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-19T22:23:11.839Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

New Dimensions to Tripartism in the International Labour Organization

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 May 2009

S.E. Werners
Get access

Extract

One of the main problems of the implementation of rules of international law, whether they are created at a multilateral or at a bilateral level, is the confluence of the decision making process at both the international and the national level. Especially within international organizations, that do not have a supranational structure, the activation of the enforcement process needs a series of decisions at the national level, which are mostly beyond the effective control of the international body concerned.

Type
Articles
Information
Netherlands International Law Review , Volume 24 , Issue 1-2 , May 1977 , pp. 323 - 334
Copyright
Copyright © T.M.C. Asser Press 1977

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. The terms employers and workers are used in accordance with the Constitution of the ILO.

2. Article 19, 5c and 6c Constitution ILO.

3. See for a closer examination Conventions No. 67 (hours of work and rest periods, road transport); 92 (accomodation of crews, revised); 109 (wages, hours of work, and manning, sea, revised); 115 (radiation protection); 119 (guarding of machinery); 120 (hygiene, commerce and offices); 124 (medical examination of young persons, underground work); 126 (accomodation of crews, fishermen); 127 (maximum weight) and 133 (accomodation of crews, supplementary provisions).

4. Article 5, 1.

5. Paragraph 6.

6. Article 7, 1 Constitution ILO.

7. Article 16, 1 Constitution ILO.

8. Article 3, 1 Constitution ILO.

9. Article 3, 9 Constitution ILO.

10. Permanent Court of International Justice, Series B, No. 1 (1922), p. 23.Google Scholar

11. See for example: ILO, Record of Proceedings, 10th session, pp. 72–93, 473–512Google Scholar, and 17th session, pp. 227–234, 485–491.

12. Osakwe, Chris, The Participation of the Soviet Union in Universal International Organizations (Leiden: A.W. Sijthoff, 1972), pp. 72–75.Google Scholar

13. ILO, Governing Body, 127th session, p. 125Google Scholar (Appendix XXI).

14. Report and minority report Mc Nair Committee, ILO, Official Bulletin, XXXLX (1956), No. 9, pp. 475–599.Google Scholar

15. Valticos, Nicolas, Droit International du Travail (Paris: Librairie Dalloz, 1970), p. 216Google Scholar; bach, Alfred Fern, Soviet Coexistence Strategy (Washington D.C.: Public Affairs Press, 1960), pp. 23–29.Google Scholar

16. Report of Ago Committee GB 141/2/9, 141st session ILO.

17. ILO, 43rd session, Report I (Part I) p. 5.Google Scholar

18. Jenks, C. Wilfred, The International Protection of Trade Union Freedom (New York: Praeger, 1957) pp. 180–187Google Scholar; Jenks, C. Wilfred, “The International Protection of Freedom of Association for Trade Union Purposes”, 87 Recueil des Cours (1955), I), pp. 7–107Google Scholar; von Potobsky, G., “Protection of Trade Union Rights; Twenty Years' Work by the Committee on Freedom of Association”, 105 International Labour Review (1972) pp. 69–83.Google Scholar

19. Articles 22 and 23 Constitution ILO.

20. Wolf, Francis, “L' Interdépendence des Conventions Internationales du Travail”, 121 Recueil des Cours (1967,11), pp. 133, 134.Google Scholar

21. Articles 26–29 Constitution ILO.

22. Article 26 of the Statute and Article 7 of the Rules of the Court.

23. Article 30, 2 of the Statute and Article 7 of the Rules of the Court.