PILPG Ukraine Drafting Notes: International Administration

Providing for an Interim International Administration of Temporarily Occupied Territories

When a state lacks full control over parts of its territory, establishing an interim international administration may be necessary on a temporary basis.  These administrations are designed to manage occupied or transitional regions by providing neutral oversight and fostering stability.  In the context of a peace agreement that calls for an interim international administration, several key decision points are generally considered, including:

• Legal authority for establishment:  Identifying the legal framework or body responsible for authorizing the international administration.

• Mandate:  Defining the scope of the administration’s responsibilities, including governance, security, and reconstruction.

• Duration:  Determining the length of time the international administration will operate, along with conditions for renewal or conclusion.

• Leadership:  Deciding on the structure of leadership, including how the head of the administration will be appointed and their level of authority.

There are a number of approaches and precedents that can be adopted when establishing an interim international administration.  

Identifying the Legal Framework for Authorizing the Interim International Administration

There are different pathways for authorizing an interim international administration and choosing the administrative entity.  Some of the pathways pursued by states in the past are:

• United Nations:  The United Nations Security Council can establish international administrations through resolutions under Chapter VII of the UN Charter.  While this is often the preferred pathway and enhances the entity’s legitimacy, obtaining consensus among the members of such international institutions may be exceedingly difficult.

• Regional Organizations:  Regional organizations like the European Union, African Union, or NATO may establish international administrations within their member states’ territories or in other states for peacekeeping, humanitarian, or governance purposes.

• Peace Agreement:  Some previous practices have included establishing the administrative entity and authorizing the international administration through the peace agreement itself.  

• Coalitions of States:  Groups of states, often acting together outside formal international organizations, may establish administrations to stabilize regions.  This practice has historically established joint military administrations. 

Defining the Mandate of the Interim International Administration

The mandate of the interim international administration is often one of the most difficult elements to agree upon.  It is essential to strike a discrete balance within the mandate to avoid undermining the state’s sovereignty while preventing instability.  

In complex situations, interim international administrations often adopt hybrid and multi-dimensional mandates, addressing security, governance, human rights, and economic recovery in a coordinated manner.  These comprehensive approaches are designed to foster long-term peace and stability by tackling the root causes of conflict and ensuring an integrated reconstruction process.  Such mandates may include the following elements:

• Governance and Political Transition:  Interim international administrations may be tasked with overseeing transitional governance, managing political transitions, or organizing elections.  This can include supporting constitutional reform, building local governmental institutions, or facilitating democratic processes during a period of instability.  An interim international administration can support the provision of security and planning of disarmament, demobilization, and reintegration, however, it generally has only a limited role concerning security. 

• Human Rights and Rule of Law:  Interim international administrations are often mandated to monitor human rights violations, enforce international legal standards, and help establish judicial systems in post-conflict regions.  This could involve overseeing judicial reform, rebuilding court systems, and ensuring accountability for human rights abuses.

• Humanitarian Assistance and Reconstruction:  Interim international administrations can be mandated to provide humanitarian aid and oversee reconstruction efforts.  These mandates may include organizing relief efforts, supporting displaced populations, and managing the rebuilding of critical infrastructure such as healthcare, education, and housing.

• Cultural Preservation and Social Reconciliation:  Administrations can also work towards cultural preservation, promoting social cohesion, and supporting reconciliation processes.  This might involve education initiatives, intergroup dialogues, and the protection of cultural heritage.

Determining the Duration of the Interim International Administration

The duration of the interim international administration can be determined using different measures, including:

• Fixed Time Period:  The interim international administration could be established for a predefined duration, such as five or ten years, with the option for renewal or extension if necessary.  This provides for a clear time commitment while allowing for adjustments based on progress.

• Benchmark-Based Duration:  The administration could remain in place until specific benchmarks or milestones are reached, such as the successful reintegration of displaced populations, holding elections, legal reform, withdrawal of foreign troops, or the establishment of functional local governance structures.  Here, the administration’s timeline is outcome-oriented rather than time-bound.

• Phased Withdrawal:  A phased approach could be established, where the interim international administration gradually transfers authority to local actors over a set period.  Each phase could be tied to the achievement of key goals, such as political stabilization, economic recovery, or security improvements.

• Rolling Mandate with Periodic Reviews:  The administration could operate on a rolling mandate, subject to periodic reviews (e.g., every two or three years).  Each review would assess the progress made and determine whether the administration’s mandate should be extended, modified, or concluded.  

• Hybrid Approach (Time and Benchmarks):  A combination of a fixed time period and benchmark-based progress could be employed, where the administration operates for an initial set period but may extend or shorten its mandate based on the achievement of agreed-upon goals.

Deciding on the Structure of Leadership for the Interim International Administration

Neutral and credible leadership of the interim international administration is essential to maintaining fairness and legitimacy. Options for structuring an international administration’s leadership include:

• Single International Organization Leadership:  The administration could be led by a single international organization, such as the United Nations or the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, which would appoint a special representative or head of mission to oversee operations. This centralizes authority and provides clear lines of responsibility.

• Joint Leadership by Multiple International Organizations:  Leadership could be shared between multiple international organizations, such as regional bodies, humanitarian agencies, and global institutions, each overseeing specific sectors like security, governance, or reconstruction.  This allows for a multi-faceted approach but requires strong coordination mechanisms.

• Coalition of States Leadership:  A group of states acting as a coalition could take the lead in managing the interim international administration, with each country contributing expertise, resources, and personnel.  This structure would allow states with specific interests or commitments in the region to play a more direct role in leadership.

• Hybrid Model (International and Local Co-Leadership):  Leadership could be shared between international actors and local representatives, with the goal of gradually transferring authority to local authorities as capacity builds.  This fosters local ownership while ensuring international oversight during critical stages of transition.

• High Commissioner or Special Envoy Leadership:  A single high-ranking international official, such as a High Commissioner or Special Envoy, could be appointed to lead the administration with broad authority to make decisions.  This provides strong, centralized leadership but requires the selection of an individual with significant experience and credibility.