CYIL vol. 9 (2018)

JAKUB HANDRLICA CYIL 9 ȍ2018Ȏ this remote Arctic territory between 1912 and 1920 and the International Commission of Control, created 18 to administer Albania between 1913 and 1914, did represent another examples of these special bodies. Thus, the signatories of the PeaceTreaties concluded at the Paris Peace Conference 1919–1920 (i.e. the Versailles Treaty, the St. GermainTreaty, the NeuillyTreaty and the Sèvres Treaty) were already aware of the administration of certain territories by special international commissions. In this regard, Francis B. Sayre claimed, that “it must be frankly recognized, that up to this time, very few international executive organs with power have proved successful. The true explanation lies in the fact that hitherto nations, loath to restrict the exercite of their own sovereign powers, have been unwilling to accord any real power of control to an international body. The striking fact is not that successes have been so few, but rather that in the very few cases, where international government has been sincerely and honestly tried, the results have been on the whole successful”. 19 Edward B. Krehbiel presented quite more optimistic opinion regarding international administration and suggested that other “ international administrative agents ” like the European Commission of the Danube would eventually be created to handle specific problems. “Instead of trying to lay down a co-ordinating set of principles applicable to all the world, they are pragmatic, and do what is convenient to their own case. They may even reverse themselves, a thing not possible where a universal law has been decreed. The international administrative agents enjoy all the advantages which accrue from customary law and is free from the difficulties of a codified law, which springs into being full-fledged”. 20 Further, he argued, that “if the proceeding be true of one commission, it will be true of others. Each will have its own problems, and its own solutions; each will develop a body of custom that will harden into law. And by their several activities, they will in a space of time develop a whole body of rules which will in effect be the foundation of the super-state itself ”. 21 This rather optimistic evaluation of the international commissions was shared by other authors. Glen A. Blackburn claimed, that “it is safe to predict that the need for protecting the integrity of the commission will some day lift it out of the twilight of statehood and accord it full membership in the League of Nations”. 22 At last, but not at least, Joseph P. Chamberlain observed (with respect to the international river commissions) that “this development of local control is worth studying as an institution, which has long existed in response to a need of international society, and as a likely avenue of future international progress”. 23 Consequently, the model was used by the signatories of the Paris Peace Treaties to address the need to administer certain sensitive territories.

18 Francis Sayre (n 11) 14-15. 19 Ibid, 147-148. 20 Edward Krehbiel (n 11) 55. 21 Ibid. 22 Glen Blackburn (n 13) 46. 23 Joseph Chamberlain (n 16) 6.

84