Relationship problems inherent in the decentralized United Nations System

Abstract

The organizational structure of the League of Nations' non-political work–on economic and financial matters, on communications and transit, on health, on narcotic drug control and certain other social problems–was essentially a centralized one, although each technical ‘organization’ enjoyed a considerable degree of independence. The Expert Committees in each organization reported to the League of Nations Council and were served by members of the League secretariat; and the work was financed from the budget of the League. That budget also financed the work of the International Labour Organization (ILO), which had been established, in accordance with Chapter 13 of the Treaty of Versailles, ‘at the seat of the League of Nations as part of the organisation of the League’. The proposals made in August 1939 by the Special Committee of the League of Nations on the Development of International Co-operation in Economic and Social Affairs (the Bruce Committee) would have replaced in this field the League Council–a body consisting largely of Ministers for Foreign Affairs and concerned primarily with political issues–by a Central Committee for Economic and Social Questions, composed in large part of ministers and high officials directly involved in such questions and in which non-Members of the League could participate on a basis of equality with Members. The Central Committee was to exercise, as the League Council had done, ‘direction and control’ over all the League's economic and social activities.