Good Offices

Good Offices

Good Offices in the Pacific Settlement of International Disputes

Main characteristics, legal framework and relation to other peaceful means under the Charter of the United Nations

The 1982 Manila Declaration on the Peaceful Settlement of International Disputes places good offices on an equal footing with the other peaceful methods enumerated in Article 33,
paragraph 1, of the Charter, providing the following disposition: States shall seek in good faith and in a spirit of cooperation an early and equitable settlement of their international disputes by any of the following means:

  • negotiation,
  • inquiry,
  • mediation,
  • conciliation,
  • arbitration,
  • judicial settlement,
  • resort to regional arrangements or agencies, or
  • other peaceful means of their own choice, including good offices.

The article reads: “In seeking such a settlement, the parties shall agree on such peaceful means
as may be appropriate to the circumstances and the nature of their dispute.”

Functions of the Good Offices in the Pacific Settlement of International Disputes

The Secretary-General provided (in SG/SM/3525, pp. 4 and 5) the following explanation of the functions of good offices:

“Furthermore, the Security Council and other organs of the United Nations have entrusted the Secretary-General with various tasks which broadly entail the exercise of good offices. This is a very flexible term as it may mean very little or very much. But, in an age in which negotiations
have to replace confrontation, I feel that the Secretary-General’s good offices can significantly help in encouraging Member States to bring their disputes to the negotiating table. Negotiations today have a character quite different from what they had in the past. Talleyrand
called negotiations ‘ (to the) ‘art de laisser les autres suivre votre propre voie’.

That, however, was true of a world which no longer exists. Today, negotiations need to take account of the great political and economic changes in our world. In order to succeed, and if the vital interests of all concerned are taken sufficiently into consideration, no party will consider
it a sign of weakness to listen to a cogent argument, and accept a demonstrably reasonable outcome. The parties may retain their different outlooks, but wherever they confront one another, life imposes upon them the obligation to seek all possible points of rapprochement and try to reduce the elements of contention and conflict. The task of the United Nations and the purpose of the good offices of the Secretary-General is to make the discharge of this obligation easier. In view of the complexity of the issues which arise in our dynamic world, traditional diplomacy can no longer suffice. New methods and devices have become important.

The process involved contributes to the growth of international law, for every resolution of a dispute, every new agreement, adds a new building-stone to the edifice of law. More immediately, it answers the needs of peace-making. It is a very complex task, requiring great discretion.

One of my predecessors rightly remarked that, ‘while the SecretaryGeneral is working privately with the parties in an attempt to resolve a delicate situation, he is criticized publicly for his inaction or even lack of interest’.

In situations of confrontation, the parties to a dispute are
extremely sensitive and this makes it important that they should have confidence in the impartiality or the objectivity of the United Nations and its Secretary-General. The only instrument I can use is persuasion.
When successful, it is a more powerful weapon than constraint, for it makes the persuaded party an ally of the solution. But to be able to persuade, you must prove the virtues of a solution, demonstrate the need to compromise and convince the party concerned that an agreement today is much more advantageous for it than a doubtful victory tomorrow.

It is here that inventiveness is essential. We have to stretch our imagination to discern points of potential agreement even where at first sight they look non-existent. Even more important is patience, the refusal to give up in the face of apparently hopeless odds. Patience is greatly helped by the realization that in so many areas some of the great problems of today reflect the accumulation of violations, mistakes and passivity stretching over long periods. Hence, the difficulty of reconciling different positions, and hence also, its acute urgency.
As Secretary-General of the United Nations, I am encouraged when States respond positively to the offer of my services. If two parties are unable or unwilling to sit down at the same table, action from some third quarter-such as the United Nations-is indispensable. But, in
such a situation, each party must feel that it will not incur a disadvantage by responding to my good offices. And, in making my good offices available, timing is of critical importance.

Application of the Good Offices

The Agreement on the Interrelationships for the Settlement of the Situation Relating to Afghanistan provides in its paragraph 7 as follows:

“A representative of the Secretary-General of the United Nations shall lend his good offices to the Parties and in that context he will assist in the organization of the meetings and participate in them. He may submit to the Parties for their consideration and approval suggestions
and recommendations for prompt, faithful and complete observance of the provisions of the instruments.”

Termination of the Good Offices process

For example, is the article X of the Pact of Bogota, reads as follows:

“Once the parties [to the dispute] have been brought together and have resumed direct negotiations, no further action is to be taken by the States or citizens that have offered their good offices or have accepted an invitation to offer them; they may, however, by agreement between the parties, be present at the negotiations.”

Good Offices

Embracing mainstream international law, this section on good offices explores the context, history and effect of the area of the law covered here.

Resources

Further Reading

  • The entry “good offices” in the Parry and Grant Encyclopaedic Dictionary of International Law (currently, the Encyclopaedic Dictionary of International Law, 2009), Oxford University Press

Resources

See Also

Conciliation Commissions
Institutionalization of the Peaceful Means of Settlement
Economic Community of West Africa
European Convention for the Peaceful Settlement of Disputes
Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe
African Charter on Human and PeoplesÂ’ Rights
Peaceful Settlement of International Disputes
Organization of American States
Organization of African Unity
Obligation of Peaceful Settlement Scope

Further Reading

  • FO Hampson ‘The Risks of Peace: Implications for International MediationÂ’ (2006) 22 Negotiation Journal 13-30.S Voigt,
  • A Cassese ‘The Concept of Legal Dispute in the Jurisprudence of the International CourtÂ’ (1975) XIVComunicazioni e studi 173-200.
  • F Horchani (ed) Règlement pacifique des différends internationaux (Centre de Publication Universitaire Tunis2002).
  • DD Caron and G Shinkaretskaya ‘Peaceful Settlement of Disputes through the Rule of LawÂ’ in F Damrosch

Definition of Good Offices

In accordance with the work A Dictionary of Law, this is a description of Good Offices : A technique of peaceful settlement of an international dispute, in which a third party, acting with the consent of the disputing states, serves as a friendly intermediary in an effort to persuade them to negotiate between themselves without necessarily offering the disputing states substantive suggestions towards achieving a settlement.

See also conciliation; mediation.n.


Posted

in

, ,

by

Comments

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *