International Organisations (“IOs”) enjoy jurisdictional immunities before domestic courts. The effect of such immunities is that, generally speaking, national courts refuse to adjudicate disputes where an IO is sued, and where that IO refuses to waive its immunity from suit. Traditionally, IO immunities have been absolute, and generally speaking domestic courts refuse to pierce it. This means that often, individuals and private parties who may have a grievance against an IO, in seeking a remedy, are left to the mercy of the IO’s internal justice system, or to alternative forms of dispute resolution such as arbitration, which can be expensive and opaque. In this presentation, I will first, highlight the kinds of disputes that may arise between IOs and private parties. Second, I focus on disputes between IOs and its staff, a common occurrence, showing that such employees may
often be left without a remedy. Given that such cases arise frequently, this is a fertile ground to analyse how the principles on IO immunities are developing and work in practice.
Finally, I discuss the case law from the European Court of Human Right regarding the right to access to courts and its bearing on IO immunity. I will conclude by making observations whether or not these decisions have succeeded in enhancing access to justice.