A study of the evolution of transitional administration in the twentieth and early twenty-first centuries confirms that the practice of territorial administration has developed in historical cycles. Throughout this evolution, international territorial administration has taken on different forms and functions.

Models of administration

One may distinguish between at least three different models of governance: direct and indirect models of territorial administration, exclusive and shared forms of authority and governance systems established by consent and by unilateral acts.

Direct v. indirect administration

Most engagements in international territorial administration throughout the twentieth century have been direct forms of governance and assistance, in the sense that they were carried out by organs or subsidiary organs of international organisations, or by institutions directly appointed by the latter (direct international territorial administration).

Forms of direct international territorial administration

The first high tide of the technique of direct international territorial administration was the inter-war period. The League of Nations exercised concrete governing or administering powers over territories placed under its scrutiny. The governing institutions of the three main undertakings in territorial administration at that time, the High Commissioner for Danzig, the Governing Commission for the Saar Territory and the transitional Governing Commission for Leticia, were directly appointed by the League of Nations. The Council of the League of Nations itself served as a monitoring organ for individual petitions in the Saar, and as an instance of appeal against decisions of the High Commissioner in Danzig.