Politics & International Relations
International Court of Justice
The International Court of Justice (ICJ) is the principal judicial organ of the United Nations, established to settle legal disputes between states and give advisory opinions on legal questions referred by authorized UN organs and specialized agencies. It is located in The Hague, Netherlands, and plays a crucial role in promoting peaceful resolution of international conflicts through legal means.
Written by Perlego with AI-assistance
Related key terms
1 of 5
12 Key excerpts on "International Court of Justice"
eBook - PDFInternational Organizations
Politics, Law, Practice
- Ian Hurd(Author)
- 2020(Publication Date)
- Cambridge University Press(Publisher)
9 The International Court of Justice Headquarters: The Hague Members: 193 states parties Mandate: to settle inter-state legal disputes with the consent of both parties. Key structure: fifteen international judges provide definitive legal judgments when requested by states. Key obligations: states agree to follow the decisions of the Court in cases to which they are a party, and to carry out provisional measures as requested by the Court. Enforcement: a party that is unsatisfied with the performance of the losing party in a case may refer the matter to the UN Security Council. Key clauses in the ICJ Statute: Articles 2, 3, and 4 on the composition of the Court. Article 34 on states as parties. Article 36 on jurisdiction. Article 38 on the sources of law. Article 41 on provisional measures. Article 59 on the absence of precedent. UN Charter Article 94 on the obligation to comply with the ICJ. UN Charter Article 96 on advisory opinions. Key Facts When countries find themselves with disagreements over their legal obligations to other states, the International Court of Justice can provide a decisive and binding judgment. The Court is an international juridical body that hears cases involving legal complaints between governments. Its jurisdiction is carefully defined to preserve the sovereignty of the states involved, and much controversy comes out of the complicated relation-ship between state sovereignty and the binding nature of international law. 220 The International Court of Justice State sovereignty and the international rule of law make an odd pairing, and the design of the ICJ straddles the two. For instance, the ICJ is forbid-den from using past decisions as precedents in future cases, and it can only hear a case if both parties agree to it.
eBook - PDFInternational Organizations
Politics, Law, Practice
- Ian Hurd(Author)
- 2017(Publication Date)
- Cambridge University Press(Publisher)
Conclusion The International Court of Justice is an important element in the legal architec- ture of international relations. It fulfills the role of an institution that gives definitive judgments in legal disputes among countries. It has considerable 216 The International Court of Justice authority in that its decisions are final and binding on states: there are no means for appeal, and states commit in advance to accepting whatever result the Court produces. These give the decisions of the Court a status in international law that supersedes the choices of governments. But its authority is sharply limited by the fact that it only has jurisdiction over disputes in which all parties consent to its involvement. It is worth debating whether these two facts together make the Court very powerful or very weak as compared to states. The decisions and advisory opinions of the Court are influential in world politics for both legal and political reasons. The legal reasons are evident in the formal powers discussed above. Its political influence is subtle but at least as important as its formal legal powers. States treat the ICJ as a powerful actor in world politics, and in so doing they help to give it that power. The Court’s judgments are important sources of political legitimation and delegitimation, and states use them to reinforce their own positions and undermine those of their opponents. This capacity to legitimize state behavior means that the Court’s influence cannot be entirely captured with a description of its formal, legal authority. The Court’s position in world politics is broader than its position in international law. A full accounting of the influence of the Court must recognize both its considerable, though circumscribed, legal authority as defined in the Statute and also the subtle influence that comes from its political utility in the practice of foreign policy. Further Reading An excellent introduction to the ICJ is Terry D.
eBook - PDF- Robert Kolb(Author)
- 2013(Publication Date)
- Hart Publishing(Publisher)
To sum up, then, the ICJ is the principal legal organ of the UN, and that does (albeit rather vaguely) imply a hierarchy of jurisdictions, not a monopoly jurisdiction. What, then, are the legal and practical consequences of the ICJ’s being the ‘principal legal organ of the United Nations?’ 51 Resolution 351(IV) of 24 November 1949. The ICJ has itself given effect to this creation: case of the Effect of awards made by the United Nations Administrative Tribunal , ICJ, Reports 1954, 56 et seq . 52 Resolution 827 (1993). 53 Resolution 955 (1994). 54 Resolution 1757 (2007). 55 See, eg the case of the Applicability of the agreement to artibrate under Section 21 of the United Nations Headquarters Agreement of 26 June 1947 , ICJ, Reports 1988, 12 et seq . THE ICJ AS THE PRINCIPAL JUDICIAL ORGAN 61 − First , in exercising its judicial functions, the Court, as an organ of the United Nations, is obliged, whether dealing with contentious or consultative matters, to be guided by, and indeed to apply, the principles and objectives of the Charter as set out in Articles 1 and 2. This means that the Court must play its part in realising the UN’s general objectives, namely the preservation of peace, the peaceful resolution of disputes, the facilitation of international cooperation and friendly relations between States, the self-determination of peoples, and respect for fundamental human rights. For two reasons, these general objectives, which are part of modern international law, can (indeed must) inform the Court’s activities. One reason is that they are norms under the Charter, to which the Court is firmly tied as the UN’s principal judicial organ; the other is that they are norms of international customary law, which the Court is bound to apply in its capacity as an international law jurisdiction. 56 That is not to say, however, that in every case before it, the Court is in a position to apply these principles and objectives in a more or less direct way.
eBook - PDFThe Settlement of International Disputes
Basic Documents
- Christian J Tams, Antonios Tzanakopoulos, Christian J Tams, Antonios Tzanakopoulos(Authors)
- 2012(Publication Date)
- Hart Publishing(Publisher)
Statute of the International Court of Justice 137 17.a 3 The International Court of Justice The Framework * 17.a Statute of the International Court of Justice Date: 26 June 1945 Source: 33 UNTS 993 http://www.icj-cij.org/documents/index.php?p1=4&p2=2&p3=0 Article 1 The International Court of Justice established by the Charter of the United Nations as the principal judicial organ of the United Nations shall be constituted and shall function in accordance with the provisions of the present Statute. CHAPTER I - ORGANIZATION OF THE COURT Article 2 The Court shall be composed of a body of independent judges, elected regardless of their nationality from among persons of high moral character, who possess the qualifications required in their respective countries for appointment to the highest judicial offices, or are jurisconsults of recognized competence in international law. Article 3 1. The Court shall consist of fifteen members, no two of whom may be nationals of the same state. 2. A person who for the purposes of membership in the Court could be regarded as a national of more than one state shall be deemed to be a national of the one in which he ordinarily exercises civil and political rights. Article 4 1. The members of the Court shall be elected by the General Assembly and by the Security Council from a list of persons nominated by the national groups in the Permanent Court of Arbitration, in accordance with the following provisions. 2. In the case of Members of the United Nations not represented in the Permanent Court of Arbitration, candidates shall be nominated by national groups appointed for this purpose by their governments under the same conditions as those prescribed for members of the Permanent Court of Arbitration by Article 44 of the Convention of The Hague of 1907 for the pacific settlement of international disputes.
eBook - PDFInternational Law
Cases and Materials with Australian Perspectives
- Donald Rothwell, Stuart Kaye, Afshin Akhtarkhavari, Ruth Davis(Authors)
- 2014(Publication Date)
- Cambridge University Press(Publisher)
The creation in 1919 of the League of Nations as a forum for international discussion and cooperation, and the Permanent Court of International Justice (PCIJ) as the first permanent judicial body to hear disputes between States, laid the foundation for a system of measures designed to ensure peaceful settlement of international disputes. However, the League of Nations was unable to prevent World War II, and following the war, the victorious States set about redesigning the system to overcome its major weaknesses. With the preservation of world peace as its founda- tion, the United Nations (UN) was formed. Although UN member States are obliged to settle their disputes peacefully (UN Charter, art 2(3)), there is no specific requirement as to how a particular dispute must be settled. The UN Charter refers to a variety of mechanisms (art 33, below) and establishes the International Court of Justice (ICJ) as a forum for judicial settlement of international disputes. However, no particular method is mandated, and all depend ........................................................................... 1 [1945] ATS 1, arts 2(3) and 2(4), extracted below. 2 UN General Assembly Resolution 2625 (XXV) (1970). 3 UN General Assembly Resolution A/Res/37/10 (1982). 4 Discussed below at 14.2.4. 806 INTERNATIONAL LAW upon the consent of the parties. In practice, a range of dispute resolution mechanisms are employed, from informal negotiations or diplomacy through to formal judicial proceedings. 1945 Charter of the United Nations [1945] ATS 1 Article 2 The Organization and its Members, in pursuit of the Purposes stated in Article 1, shall act in accordance with the following Principles . . . 3. All Members shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security, and justice, are not endangered.
eBook - PDFInternational Law
Cases and Materials with Australian Perspectives
- Donald R Rothwell, Stuart Kaye, Afshin Akhtar-Khavari, Ruth Davis, Imogen Saunders(Authors)
- 2018(Publication Date)
- Cambridge University Press(Publisher)
Even after the PCIJ was established, a variety of international tribunals continued to provide forums for third-party settlement of international disputes. After the International Court of Justice (ICJ) was estab- lished at the conclusion of World War II, ad hoc tribunals also continued to be used, albeit with less frequency. Consequently, the International Court never has stood alone as the sole tribunal to settle disputes in accordance with international law. It always has coexisted with other third-party dispute settlement forums. Recent developments are changing the inter- national environment as a result of the establishment of more permanent tribunals and, perhaps, the use of fewer ad hoc tribunals. In very recent years, the rate of change from ad hoc to permanent tribunals appears to be increasing dramatically. [703] . . . Despite limitations and setbacks . . . we have witnessed an overall expansion of third-party settlement of international disputes through law-based forums. This seems to reflect an increase in the role of international law in the settlement of international disputes and a healthy environment for this to take place. If it were otherwise, fewer [704] states and other entities would submit their disputes to international law forums. This may reflect the fact that other international forums are necessary complements to the ICJ, especially in matters that involve issues less central to core state concerns or involve parties that are incapable of being litigants before the ICJ. The fact that only states may be parties before the ICJ may explain the creation of other tribunals and the fact that they attract so many cases. The establishment and use of various third-party forums to decide questions of inter- national law means that more international issues are being resolved pursuant to inter- national law. This will add to the body of decisions based on international law that are authoritative and can be relied upon by the international community.
- Erika de Wet(Author)
- 2004(Publication Date)
- Hart Publishing(Publisher)
It occurs where the ICJ is asked to decide upon the legal obligations arising from, or the legal consequences that flow from a particular resolution or decision. 90 Where this is the case the ICJ has an obligation to take into account all legal aspects relevant to the situation. It cannot pronounce upon such obligations or consequences without determining the legal basis of the origins of such obligations or consequences. 91 In reviewing the resolutions of political organs of the United Nations the ICJ does so with care and with the respect due to other principal organs of the organisation, reflecting a spirit of cooperation. 92 This is due to the fact that the ICJ was established as the principal judicial organ within the United Nations. This provided the basis for the judicial duty to cooperate, which entails the overcoming of difficulties in order to extend maximal assistance to fellow organs of the United Nations. 93 The duty to cooperate also gains support from the inherent right of each organ of the United Nations to interpret the Charter in relation to its authority. 94 In the following paragraphs some of the central questions intrinsically linked to the doctrine of cooperation will be addressed. The first question is whether the ICJ should actually be engaging in judicial review at all, or whether the doctrine of cooperation would necessitate the development of a political question doctrine. For example, should the ICJ refrain from engaging in a review of the legality of binding resolutions of the Security Council under Chapter VII of the Charter? Questions also arise with respect to the consequences of an invalid Security Council resolution, and whether this would result in the nullity of the resolution. One can also ask why the advisory opinion procedure is not used more often, and whether this under-utilisation of the ICJ can be overcome by extending the authority to request advisory opinions to the Secretary-General.
- James A. Green(Author)
- 2009(Publication Date)
- Hart Publishing(Publisher)
See S Rosenne, The Law and Practice of the International Court of Justice, 1920–2005, Vol I: The Court and the United Nations , 4th edn (Leiden, Martinus Nijhoff, 2006) 364–78). Moreover, an increasing number of the appointees to the ICJ come from a ‘governmental’ rather than a purely ‘legal’ background—a fact that could arguably influence the ‘political’ nature of the Court. Schachter, International Law in Theory and Practice (n 42) 44. 82 Chayes (n 72) 1447–48; and Brown Weiss (n 63) 128–33. 83 R Higgins, ‘Alternative Perspectives on the Independence of International Courts: Remarks’ (2005) 99 American Society of International Law Proceedings 135. 84 Ibid , esp 137. 85 Posner himself notes this (n 72) 131. The disparate cultural and political background of ICJ judges in some respects may inhibit the work of the Court. However, as Jennings points out, the Court’s composition is certainly appropriate for a ‘world’ court. It gives the body a level of political credibility and a useful diversity of opinion. Jennings, ‘The Internal Judicial Practice of the International Court of Justice’ (n 59) 33 and 35–36. Obviously, such diversity is specifically required by Art 9 of the ICJ’s Statute. 86 Eg, as made by BVA Röling, International Law in an Expanded World (Amsterdam, Djambatan, 1960) 76. 87 Noted by C Gray, ‘The Use and Abuse of the International Court of Justice: Cases Concerning the Use of Force Since Nicaragua ’ (2003) 14 European Journal of International Law 867, 885. detected in the work of the Court. 88 In general, the judges must be seen as fulfilling their duty by acting in high moral character and, so far as pos-sible, independently of the views or wishes of their states of origin. 89 International judges and international courts (including the ICJ) should not be viewed as ‘agents’.
- Freya Baetens(Author)
- 2019(Publication Date)
- Cambridge University Press(Publisher)
While it is true that the purpose of our work as Registry officials is indeed to ensure that the elected Members of the Court can work in the best 1 The views expressed in this chapter are personal to the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the United Nations, the International Court of Justice, or of any other particular organization. Nathalie Wiles 32 32 conditions, I am happy to report that there are no Sir Humphreyesque ulterior motives! The work of the Judges and Judges ad hoc is at the heart of the Court’s unique mandate under the United Nations Charter to bring about the peaceful settlement of disputes between States, in accordance with international law, and to give advisory opinions on legal questions referred to it by authorized United Nations organs and specialized agencies. Since the Court’s inception in 1946, its Registry has provided dedicated assistance to the Judges, with a particular focus on judicial, diplomatic, administrative, financial and linguistic tasks. The Statute of the ICJ is based upon that of its predecessor, the Permanent Court of International Justice (PCIJ). The PCIJ Statute was widely considered to work well and it therefore made sense to follow it. In addition, it was deemed important to retain a sense of continuity between the PCIJ and the ICJ. The role of the Registry is defined by reference to the functions of the Registrar. Indeed, the Statute of the Court only makes specific mention of the Registrar. This factor is key in addressing the question of the controls in place within the Court’s Registry to ensure the legitimacy of the process of international dispute settlement at the Court.
eBook - PDF- Malcolm N. Shaw(Author)
- 2021(Publication Date)
- Cambridge University Press(Publisher)
477. 373 Ibid., pp. 303–4. Judge Weeramantry noted that the request for an examination of the situation was ‘probably without precedent in the annals of the Court’ and one that did not fit in with any of the standard applications recognised by the Rules of the Court for revision or interpretation of a judgment: ibid., p. 320. 374 Ibid., p. 320. 972 The International Court of Justice the atmosphere that would affect the basis of that judgment and that had not occurred. 375 Accordingly, New Zealand’s request for an examination of the situation was rejected. The Advisory Jurisdiction of the Court 376 In addition to having the capacity to decide disputes between states, the ICJ may give advisory opinions. Article 65 of the Statute declares that ‘the Court may give an advisory opinion on any legal question at the request of whatever body may be authorised by or in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations to make such a request’, while article 96 of the Charter notes that as well as the General Assembly and Security Council, other organs of the United Nations and specialised agencies where so authorised by the Assembly may request such opinions on legal questions arising within the scope of their activities. 377 Unlike contentious cases, the purpose of the Court’s advisory jurisdiction is not to settle, at least directly or as such, inter-state disputes, but rather to ‘offer legal advice to the organs and institutions requesting the opinion’. 378 Accordingly, the fact that the question put to the Court does not relate to a specific dispute does not affect the competence of the Court, nor does it matter that the question posed is abstract in nature. 379 Similarly, the fact that a legal question also has political aspects will not deprive the Court of its jurisdiction, nor of its function, which is to assess the legality of the possible conduct of states with regard to obligations imposed upon them by international law.
eBook - ePubResolving Claims to Self-Determination
Is There a Role for the International Court of Justice?
- Andrew Coleman(Author)
- 2014(Publication Date)
- Taylor & Francis(Publisher)
Northern Cameroons (Cameroon v United Kingdom) (Judgment) [1963] ICJ Rep 15, 34 where the Court said ‘The Court’s judgment must have some practical consequence in the sense that it can affect existing legal rights or obligations of the parties, thus removing uncertainty from their legal relations.’227. For example, Judge Mohamed Shahabuddeen stated that: [t]o be useful, the Court does not have to deal with the entirety of a dispute; it could make a substantial contribution by sorting out any particular legal aspects with a view to promoting or facilitating the final settlement of the remainder of the dispute by other methods Shahabuddeen, The World Court, p. 23. See also Gross, Enhancing its Role , pp. 258–59.228. Nicaragua Case [1986] ICJ Rep 14, 172–3 (Separate Opinion of Judge Lachs).229. 229.United States Diplomatic and Consular Staff in Tehran (United States of America v Iran) (Judgment) [1980] ICJ Rep 3, 49 (Separate Opinion of Judge Lachs).230. Nuclear Weapons Opinion , [1996] 1 ICJ Rep 226, 328 (Dissenting Opinion of Judge Weeramantry). Others too believed that the ICJ had a role to play. Judge Koroma stated that the ICJ’s ‘decision can contribute to the prevention of war by ensuring respect for the law’: at 557 (Dissenting Opinion of Judge Koroma). At [13] the Court noted that: Furthermore, as the Court said in the Opinion it gave in 1980 concerning the Interpretation of the Agreement of 25 March 1951 between the WHO and Egypt: ‘Indeed, in situations in which political considerations are prominent it may be particularly necessary for an international organization to obtain an advisory opinion from the Court as to the legal principles applicable with respect to the matter under debate.’231. ‘In addition, the clarification of a legal issue relevant to a dispute can favourably influence the subsequent political settlement’, Steinberger The International Court of Justice , p. 210.232. Introduction to the Annual Report of the Secretary-General on the Work of the Organization: June 1956 - 15June 1957
- Gbenga Oduntan(Author)
- 2015(Publication Date)
- Routledge(Publisher)
For instance, the provision on competence of the Court and sources of law are drafted largely along the lines of Articles 36 and 38 of the Statute of the ICJ. Apart from the controversial compulsory jurisdiction mechanism in Article 36 (2 a–d of the Statute), the jurisdiction of both courts includes: (a) the interpretation of treaties; (b) any question of international law; (c) the existence of any fact which, if established, would constitute a breach of an international obligation; and (d) the nature or extent of the reparation to be made for the breach of an international obligation. Both courts have as their function the making of decisions in accordance with international law through the application of: (a) international conventions, whether general or particular, establishing rules expressly recognised by the contesting states; (b) international custom, as evidence of a general practice accepted as law; (c) the general principles of law recognised by civilised nations; and (d) the teachings of the most highly qualified publicists of the various nations, as subsidiary means for the determination of rules of law and the ability to decide a case ex aequo et bono, if the parties agree thereto. African scholars and critics of the perceived ‘eurocentricity’ of public international law would follow the jurisprudence of the ACJ very closely to see what principles it would recognise as ‘general principles of law recognised by African states’ and indeed how much diffidence it would pay to this invitation to enrich international judicial practice. The fusing of the human rights and general legal jurisdictions ought to have a beneficial effect on the ability of the Court to handle complex boundary cases, especially those that concern the rights and interests of indigenous peoples affected by colonial and/or post-colonial delimitation and demarcation of boundaries
Index pages curate the most relevant extracts from our library of academic textbooks. They’ve been created using an in-house natural language model (NLM), each adding context and meaning to key research topics.
