International Court of Justice Flashcards
International Court of Justice origins
Year: 1945
Members: 193 members
Headquarters: Den Haag, Netherlands
ICJ mission
Provide a decisive and binding judgements on disagreements over states legal obligations to each other while preserving state’s sovereignty.
ICJ - topics ICJ looks at
States disagree about where their border is
- When states contest islands or maritime zone
- When 1 states consider another state has violated a treaty/other rules of international law.
- When the UN or any Un agencies need an opinion on any legal issue
ICJ Role
To decide disputes between states: contenus cases
Respond to legal questions instituted by the GA, SC, and other UN organs & Agencies: advisory proceedings
(does not treat individual cases, only states)
ICJ Structure
15 judges: 5 Western Europe, 3 African Judges, 3 Asian Judges, 2 Latin American/Caribbean, 2 Eastern Europe
+ 2 ‘ad hoc’ judges: each party from a case may appoint 1 additional judge from their country.
President & Vice President are elected every 3 years, the president directs its work and supervises its administration.
ICJ is the only UN organ administratively independent from the UN secretariat. Judges are assisted by the registry - the secretariat, ICJ spokesperson, and manager.)
ICJ Jurisdiction
- legal disputes between states that have recognized the ICJ
- Based on formal acceptance, treaty clause or general acceptance by being member eu
- legally binding
- Request for advisory opinions on legal questions referred to the court by UN organs:
-
ICJ Regarding decisions
Legal disputes, decision are public
No opportunity for appeal - states comply through UN Charter
Enforcement: If losing Party fails to comply, winning party can ask for enforcements (complies most of the time - reputation)
ICJ CASE STUDY 1
ICJ: Yerodia or Belgium v. Congo - 2000
a. Belgium created a domestic law that has universal applicability (according to Belgium). 1993 that allowed to prosecute people suspected of worst crimes regardless of whether there was any connection to Belgium. The law provided a useful vehicle rehabilitation of Belgium’s reputation after the fiasco of the Rwandan withdrawal.
In 1993, Belgium adopted a imiversal jurisdiction law that permitted Belgian courts to try persons accused of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes, regardless of whether there was any link between Belgium and the criminal act, the perpetrator or the victim.
b. Using that law, Belgium prosecuted Congo’s Foreign Minister Yerodia, who was thought of encouraging people to commit genocide in speeches made in 1998.
c. Congo brought the case to ICJ, arguing Belgium had violated its sovereignty.
d. ICJ used customary law and Belgium lost. Ruled that Belgium has violated the righrs of Congo by not respecting the rights of Congo by not respecting the traditional rule that gives foreign ministers immunity from criminal jurisdiction while traveling the world.
ICJ understood the case to about the rules of international diplomacy that states have agreed to, implicitly or explicitly, among themselves.
Resume:
Belgium created a domestic law that has universal applicability (according to
Belgium)
b. Using that law, Belgium prosecuted Congo’s President Yerodia
c. Congo brought the case to ICJ, arguing Belgium had violated its sovereignty
d. ICJ used customary law and Belgium lost
ICJ CASE STUDY 2: JAPAN VS AUSTRALIA”
a. Japan and Australia are part of ICRW (International Convention on the Regulation of Whaling) which banned whaling for commercial purposes in order to prevent their extinction
b. Japan kept on whaling under ‘scientific purposes’ under its (Institute for Cetacean Research)
c. Australia found out and brought this to the ICJ because ICRW included ICJ in its treaty
d. Japan lost, and the requirements for ‘scientific purposes’ got stricter. In December 2018, Japan withdrew from the International Whaling Commission.
e. Ironic end: Japan whaling industry demand was declining nevertheless.
The Yerodia and whaling cases show how hot disputes in international relations can be redefined as legal disputes for the purposes of ICJ jurisdiction.
Resume:
Japan and Australia are part of ICRW which banned whaling
b. Japan kept on whaling under ‘scientific purposes’
c. Australia found out and brought this to the ICJ because ICRW included ICJ in its
treaty
d. Japan lost, and the requirements for ‘scientific purposes’ get stricter
e. Ironic end: Japan whaling industry demand is declining
ICJ CASE STUDY 3:
ICJ: Iran - US (lecture)
a. The US accused Iran of having nuclear weapons
b. Iran brought the case to ICJ, unanimously deciding the US must lift sanctions
c. ‘Order of provisional measures’
ICJ CASE STUDY 4:
ICJ: Canada optional clause
a. Canada wanted to decrease fishing in the international water close to its EEZ
b. Canada amended its domestic law, omitting the optional clause of the ICJ
c. When Spain fisherman came close to Canada’s EEZ, Canada deployed its
warships and airforce to Spanish boats
d. Spain complained to the ICJ but they can’t bring Canada to ICJ because of the
amendment earlie
ICJ CASE STUDY 5:
