ABSTRACT
The utility to the international legal system of custom is inextricably linked to its perceived efficacy as a source of law. Increasingly States delegate and assign responsibilities to international organisations. In the past sovereignty has been invoked to justify the notion of an indivisible, absolute political authority. In the creation of rules of customary international law, the assumption obtained is that only State action counts as evidence that the formal requirements of custom have been satisfied. Two theories appear to dominate discourse on attribution of competencies to international organisations by the international legal system. The United Nations Charter lists as one of its purposes, the promotion of, and encouragement to respect human rights and fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex, language, or religion. The regional human rights regimes for Europe, Africa, and the Americas all recognise the individual's right to pursue action for alleged human rights violations in institutions beyond national frontiers.
