Statistics on exports and imports by partner country are maintained in the data base and disseminated through publications and magnetic tapes. The Guide describes the collection, compilation, and dissemination of these statistics; discusses the concepts, methodology, coverage, and reliability of data for trade by partner countries; and provides information for accessing the data base.
The Fund can decide whether or not to admit countries to membership. In considering applications, the Fund’s practice is to satisfy itself that the country is a state that conducts all of its international relations and that the obligations of the Articles will be performed. Membership in the Fund had grown to 103 states by the beginning of 1966. Among the non-members are the U.S.S.R. and countries of Eastern Europe, Switzerland, and certain small territories such as Liechtenstein, but this list is not complete. The Eastern European countries include two that are former members of the Fund: Czechoslovakia and Poland. Cuba and Indonesia are also ex-members.
This article discusses six cases, in most of which basic questions of law under the Articles of Agreement of the International Monetary Fund were raised. Two cases decided by German courts dealt with the unenforceability of certain exchange contracts; a case in New York and another in the Philippines involved exchange surrender requirements; a fifth case, decided in Brazil, considered multiple rates of exchange; and the last case, decided by the courts of the District of Columbia, dealt with the privileges and immunities of the Fund.
Article IX, Section 1, provides that to enable the Fund to fulfill its functions the status, privileges and immunities set forth in Article IX “shall be accorded to the Fund in the territories of each member.” Section 2 provides that the Fund “shall possess full juridical personality” and, in particular, the capacity to contract, acquire, and dispose of property, and institute legal proceedings. Notwithstanding the reference to the territories of members, it has never been doubted that the Fund has juridical personality and the capacity that flows from it in relations with non-members. Indeed, there is explicit evidence in the Articles that the reference to the territories of members in Article IX, Section 1, does not circumscribe the personality and capacity of the Fund. Under Article X, the Fund may make arrangements with other international organizations, and it has already been seen that under Article VII, Section 2, the Fund may borrow from sources “either within or outside the territories” of a member. Even these express provisions, however, do not exhaust the personality and capacity of the Fund. It is established in international law now that an international organization has an objective personality which goes beyond the express provisions of its charter. In its Advisory Opinion of April 11, 1949 (Reparation for Injuries Suffered in the Service of the United Nations),54 the International Court of Justice dealt, inter alia, with the question whether the United Nations had the capacity to bring international claims against a non-member state for injuries suffered by agents of the United Nations in the performance of their duties in circumstances involving the responsibility of the state for those injuries. The Charter of the United Nations is silent on this subject, and it contains language similar to Article IX, Section 1, of the Fund’s Articles.55 The Court declared that “fifty States, representing the vast majority of the members of the international community, had the power, in conformity with international law, to bring into being an entity possessing objective international personality, and not merely personality recognized by them alone, together with capacity to bring international claims.” 56 The reference to member territory in Article IX, Section 1, must be taken to deal with the status of the Fund under the municipal law of members and not with the position under international law.57
This sixteenth installment in the series dealing with the effect of the Articles of Agreement of the International Monetary Fund on litigation examines a proceeding before an arbitral tribunal established under the Agreement on German External Debts in which the main issue was the meaning of the expression “the least depreciated currency” in relation to two revaluations of the deutsche mark. An important facet of this issue was whether the expression had to be understood within the context of the international monetary order established by the Articles.
This seventeenth installment in the series dealing with the impact of the Articles of Agreement of the International Monetary Fund on litigation discusses two cases involving Article VIII, Section 2(b) of the Articles. The first case, decided by an English court, dealt with the issue whether that provision of the Articles applied to a claim against a bank under a confirmed irrevocable letter of credit. Little authority has existed hitherto on the question whether the provision qualifies the important legal principle that an irrevocable letter of credit is independent of the underlying commercial contract that gives rise to the letter of credit. The second case, decided by the Supreme Court of the Netherlands, raised the question of the application of the provision by courts in a region of the Kingdom of the Netherlands to a contract contrary to the exchange control regulations of another region of the Kingdom that had become independent after the contract was made but before the action was instituted.
This chapter discusses the views of courts, legal scholars, legal practitioners, and officials on the relationship of the Articles of Agreement to the freeze of certain assets imposed by the President of the United States in November 1979. The chapter does not deal with the numerous other legal issues that have been discussed in connection with this action, except insofar as they have a bearing on the relationship of the U.S. measures to the Articles.