This article highlights the various legal obstacles faced by injured parties when litigating against States in relation to their participation in the operations of international organizations. The primary issue is finding the right forum. Rules on the invocation of responsibility hinge on whether the respondent State is sued before its own courts (domestic law being decisive), before the courts of another country (state immunity notwithstanding), or before international courts or tribunals (Monetary Gold difficulties aside). This choice will largely depend on who the applicant is: an individual, or a State. In turn, a State may act either because it was directly injured or because it is espousing a claim of one of its citizens, in which case rules on diplomatic protection may present further obstacles. Assuming that a suitable forum is available, other hindrances may be encountered, such as legal costs and restrictive substantive law. Solutions often proposed as remedies to such obstacles, such as the further reduction of State immunity before domestic courts, may be less effective than a more ambitious strategy aimed at increasing the range of situations in which domestic public law procedures and international adjudication are actually available to victims of harm.