International Court of Justice List
Expert opinions were often controversial because the questions asked were controversial or the case was pursued as an indirect means of bringing a truly contentious case to court. For examples of advisory opinions, see the Advisory Opinions section of the article List of cases of the International Court of Justice. One of these well-known reports is the case of nuclear weapons. After a peak of activity in 1933, the PCIJ began to restrict its activities due to the growing international tensions and isolationism that characterized the time. World War II effectively ended the court, which held its last public session in December 1939 and issued its final orders in February 1940. In 1942, the United States and the United Kingdom jointly declared their support for the creation or re-establishment of an international tribunal after the war, and in 1943 Britain chaired a group of jurists from around the world, the “Inter-Allied Committee,” to discuss the issue. Their 1944 report recommended: Cases before the ICJ will follow a standard pattern. The action is brought by the applicant, who submits a written statement setting out the jurisdiction of the court and the merits of his claim. The defendant may accept the jurisdiction of the court and file his own claim on the merits.
The ICJ is composed of 15 permanent judges elected by the United Nations General Assembly and the United Nations Security Council from a list of persons appointed by the national groups to the Permanent Court of Arbitration. The electoral procedure is defined in Articles 4 to 12 of the ICJ Statute. The term of office of judges shall be nine years and shall be eligible for re-election. Elections are held every three years, and one third of the judges retire each time to ensure continuity within the Court. The ICJ is a body of 15 judges elected by the General Assembly and the Security Council for a nine-year term. No more than one judge of a given nationality may sit on the Court at the same time, and the judges as a whole must represent the principal civilizations and legal systems of the world. The ICJ, based at the Peace Palace in The Hague, Netherlands, is the only principal organ of the United Nations that is not located in New York. [3] The official working languages are English and French. There cannot be two judges who are nationals of the same country. According to article 9, the composition of the Court must represent “the principal forms of civilization and the most important legal systems in the world”. Essentially, this meant common law, civil law, and socialist law (now post-communist law). Pending a final judgment, the tribunal has the power to order interim measures to protect the rights of a disputing party.
One or both parties to the dispute may apply to the ICJ for interim measures. In the border dispute, both parties to the dispute, Burkina Faso and Mali, submitted a request for interim measures to the Court. [32] The Court`s ancillary jurisdiction derives from Article 41 of its Statute. [33] Like the final judgment, the interim measures taken by the Tribunal are binding on the parties to the dispute. The ICJ has the power to grant interim measures only if prima facie jurisdiction is met. [ref. In deciding cases, the Court applies international law as summarized in Article 38 of the ICJ Statute, which provides that the Tribunal shall apply international conventions, international customs and “general principles of law recognized by civilized nations” in its decisions. It may also refer to academic writings (“the teachings of the most qualified publicists of various nations”) and previous judicial decisions to assist in the interpretation of the law, although the court is not formally bound by its earlier decisions under the doctrine of stare decisis. Article 59 clarifies that the common law concept of precedent or stare decisis does not apply to ICJ decisions. The court`s decision binds only the parties to this particular controversy. However, Article 38(1)(d) allows the court to take into account its own previous judgments.
Article 94 establishes the duty of all Members of the United Nations to comply with the Court`s decisions concerning them. If the parties fail to comply, the case may be referred to the Security Council for implementation. There are obvious problems with such a method of application. If the verdict is directed against one of the five permanent members of the Security Council or its allies, any implementing resolution would be vetoed. This occurred, for example, after the Nicaragua case, when Nicaragua raised the issue of United States non-compliance with the Court`s decision before the Security Council. [16] If the Security Council refuses to enforce a sentence against another state, there is no way to force the state to comply. Moreover, the most effective form of action for the Security Council, namely enforcement measures under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations, can be justified only when international peace and security are at stake. The Security Council has never done that before. [ref. needed] In principle, the Court`s opinions are only advisory in nature, but they are influential and widely respected. Some instruments or regulations may provide in advance for the advisory opinion to be expressly binding on certain bodies or States, but by their nature they are not binding under the Statute of the Court of Justice. This non-binding nature does not mean that advisory opinions are devoid of legal effect, since the legal reasoning contained therein reflects the relevant views of the Court on important questions of international law.
In its investigation, the Court follows essentially the same rules and procedures as apply to its binding judgements in contentious cases submitted to it by sovereign States. The International Court of Justice (colloquially known as the World Court or ICJ; French: Cour internationale de Justice) is the principal judicial organ of the United Nations. Its headquarters are located at the Peace Palace in The Hague. The Court was established in 1945 by the Charter of the United Nations and began its work in 1946 as the successor to the Permanent Court of International Justice. The Statute of the International Court of Justice, like its predecessor, is the main constitutional document that constitutes and regulates the Court. The ICJ should not be confused with the International Criminal Court or a competent court under Belgian war crimes law, which may also have “global” jurisdiction. English and French are the two official languages. Article 6 of the Statute provides that all judges “shall be elected, irrespective of their nationality, from among persons of high moral character” who are either qualified to hold the highest judicial office in their home State or who are known to be jurists of sufficient competence in international law. The independence of the judiciary is specifically addressed in Articles 16 to 18. ICJ judges are not in a position to hold any other office or act as defence counsel. In practice, tribunal members have their own interpretation of these rules and allow them to be involved in external arbitration proceedings and to hold professional positions as long as there is no conflict of interest. A judge may be removed only unanimously by the other members of the court.
[15] Despite these provisions, the independence of ICJ judges has been called into question. For example, in the Nicaragua case, the United States issued a communiqué emphasizing that it could not present sensitive documents to the Court because of the presence of judges from the Soviet bloc. [16] Once a case has been filed, any party (usually the applicant) may seek a court order to protect the status quo until the matter is heard. These injunctions are known as interim measures (or interim) and correspond to injunctions under U.S. law. Section 41 of the Act authorizes the court to make such orders. The court must be satisfied that it has prima facie jurisdiction to hear the merits of the case before adopting interim measures. The International Court of Justice (ICJ; French: International Court of Justice; ICJ), sometimes known as the World Court,[1] is one of the six principal organs of the United Nations (UN). [2] It decides on disputes between States in accordance with international law and advises on questions of international law. The ICJ is the only international court that adjudicates general disputes between countries, with its judgments and advisory opinions serving as primary sources of international law. Article 31 of the Statute provides for a procedure whereby judges ad hoc sit before the General Court in contentious proceedings.
The system allows each party in a contentious case (if not, one of its nationals sits on the court) to choose an additional person to sit as a judge only in that case. It is therefore possible to sit up to seventeen judges in a case. An advisory opinion is a task of the Tribunal open only to certain organs and agencies of the United Nations. The Charter of the United Nations gives the General Assembly or the Security Council the power to request an advisory opinion from the Tribunal on any question of law. United Nations organs other than the General Assembly and the Permanent Council may request an advisory opinion from the ICJ only if approved by the General Assembly.
