The Latin American Contribution to International Adjudication: The Case of the International Court of Justice

1992 ◽  
Vol 39 (01) ◽  
pp. 127 ◽  
Author(s):  
Juan José Quintana
Keyword(s):  
Latin American ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
International Adjudication ◽  
American Contribution

Beyond Compliance: Law-Making through Latin American Cases before the World Court

2017 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 245-263
Author(s):  
Paula Wojcikiewicz Almeida
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Latin American ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
American States ◽  
International Court ◽  
The World ◽  
Traditional Function ◽  
International Adjudication

Abstract Departing from a contemporary approach to international adjudication, this article aims to evaluate, firstly, the limits of compliance and its residual character when assessing the effectiveness of the International Court of Justice with regards to Latin American states. Secondly, it deals with the importance of going beyond the traditional function of inter-state dispute settlement to assess the contribution of Latin American states to international law through cases submitted to the Court, independently from case-specific compliance. This is because a judgment that has not been complied with may substantially contribute to international law and produce important impacts on domestic authorities. Latin American cases constitute an example of this phenomenon.

Stained Glass Windows, the Great Hall of Justice of the Peace Palace

2018 ◽  
pp. 463-477 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel Litwin
Keyword(s):  
Stained Glass ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
Invented Tradition ◽  
The Hague ◽  
International Adjudication ◽  
Justice Of The Peace

This chapter critically examines The Evolution of the Peace Ideal (1914), a series of four monumental stained glass windows inside the largest courtroom at the Peace Palace in The Hague that now houses the International Court of Justice. It uses the stained glass windows to explain three structuring beliefs held by international lawyers about international adjudication. First, the ethereal effect of the stained glass and its vivid iconography signals international adjudication as essential to the achievement of peace and thus a matter of professional faith. Second, a highly structured evolutionary narrative across the four windows depicts the idea of international adjudication as progress which serves to distinguish ‘civilized’ and ‘uncivilized’ states. Third, the windows’ historicism links international adjudication to an immemorial past, an invented tradition that obfuscates significant changes to its practice and meaning over the last century.

A Legal Journey Through the UN, Academia, and the ICJ: Conversations with Dame Rosalyn Higgins DBE, JSD, FBA, QC

2015 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 86-94 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lesley Dingle
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Formative Period ◽  
International Affairs ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
Depth Interview ◽  
The Icj ◽  
Global Peace ◽  
International Adjudication

AbstractThis article, written by Lesley Dingle, is based upon an in-depth interview with Dame Rosalyn Higgins in March 2014. It highlights particular elements that characterise her contribution to legal scholarship and international adjudication, and should be read in the context of the biography presented in the Eminent Scholars Archive: http://www.squire.law.cam.ac.uk/eminent_scholars/dame_rosalyn_higgins.php. Dame Rosalyn Higgins was born in Kensington in 1937. She grew up in London during the Blitz and her matter-of-fact account of these times epitomised her later career: application to the task in hand, and a lack of a sense of expectation. After the War, she passed successively through grammar school, Girton College, Yale and the Royal Institute of International affairs, steadily immersing herself over fifteen years in the work of the United Nations during its formative period. It was on the UN's role as the global peace-keeper and international law-maker that she became the acknowledged authority. There followed a long period of formal academia (1978–95: Kent and LSE), during which she rose to high office. This experience further honed her scholarly and administrative instincts, and she was honoured in 1995 with a DBE. Later that year Dame Rosalyn was appointed to the Bench of the International Court of Justice – the first woman to rise to this position, and in 2006 was elected its President. She retired in 2009.

Commentary: The International Court of Justice and the Adjudication of Territorial and Boundary Disputes

2000 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 873-901 ◽  
Author(s):  
J.G. Merrills
Keyword(s):  
Major Part ◽  
Political Context ◽  
The Political ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Boundary Disputes ◽  
International Court ◽  
The Law ◽  
International Adjudication

Territorial and boundary disputes provide a major part of the work of the International Court. The author considers how cases of this kind come to the Court and the issues of jurisdiction and justiciability they represent; explains how, when the Court decides such cases, it establishes the facts and applies the law; and, finally, discusses the question of implementation and the factors which determine the effectiveness of judgments. He concludes that in territorial and boundary cases, as elsewhere, the Court's decisions serve both to resolve specific disputes and to develop the law, while also highlighting the political context of international adjudication.

scholarly journals Precarious Finality? Reflections on Res Judicata in the Question of the Delimitation of the Continental Shelf Case

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Niccolo Ridi
Keyword(s):  
Continental Shelf ◽  
Nuclear Weapons ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Res Judicata ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
The World ◽  
The Icj ◽  
International Adjudication ◽  
Rare Situation

This article considers the approach to the res judicata principle taken by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) and, specifically, its application in its 2016 judgment on preliminary objections in the latest dispute between Nicaragua and Colombia. The judgment joins the small number of ICJ decisions in which the Court was evenly split, an altogether rare situation, which, at the time of the decision, had not occurred since the Nuclear Weapons Avisory Opinion. Intriguingly, such a fracture seems to have been prompted by differences over the operation of a procedural principle the understanding of which is comparatively uncontroversial. Upon closer analysis, however, the disagreement reveals that more significant questions were at stake, with members of the minority issuing a vocal joint dissent and several individual declarations. This study will move in three parts: first, it will provide an overview of the nature and purpose of the principle of res judicata, its application in international adjudication, and its use by the ICJ; second, it will analyse the Court’s reading of the principle in the case at issue; third, it will expose the broader implications of one such approach for the role and authority of the World Court and the international judiciary.

Functional Justiciability and the Existence of a Dispute: A Means of Jurisdictional Avoidance?

2019 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 599-621
Author(s):  
Manuel Casas
Keyword(s):  
National Security ◽  
International Law ◽  
Arms Race ◽  
Nuclear Disarmament ◽  
Private International Law ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
Nuclear Arms Race ◽  
International Adjudication

Abstract In the recent Obligations concerning Negotiations relating to Cessation of the Nuclear Arms Race and to Nuclear Disarmament string of cases the International Court of Justice declined jurisdiction by holding that there was no dispute between the parties. This Article examines the Court’s treatment of the existence of a dispute (‘EoD’) jurisdictional objection; it does not purport to analyze the Court’s broader reliance on jurisdictional doctrines as a general means of avoiding cases. From a doctrinal perspective, this Article argues that the Court's interpretation of the EoD objection in those cases is unpersuasive. Instead, the Article contends that the Court has relied on the existence of a dispute objection as a covert or functional justiciability doctrine. That is, as a ground for discretionarily declining jurisdiction or, to borrow a term from private international law, as an escape device. The Article considers that such jurisdictional avoidance may be normatively justified as a form of principled avoidance. Normatively, the decision to rely on a procedural technicality to avoid going into the merits of a potentially explosive case may be seen as a valid exercise of judicial self-restraint—something that can aid the Court navigate the tensions created by increased skepticism of international adjudication. And policy-wise, avoiding a case on a sensible subject-matter, that touches on core aspects of defense and national security, could be accepted as a way of side-stepping potential backlash.

scholarly journals Precarious Finality? Reflections onRes Judicataand theQuestion of the Delimitation of the Continental ShelfCase

2018 ◽  
Vol 31 (2) ◽  
pp. 383-401 ◽  
Author(s):  
NICCOLÒ RIDI
Keyword(s):  
Nuclear Weapons ◽  
Advisory Opinion ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Res Judicata ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
The World ◽  
The Icj ◽  
International Adjudication ◽  
Rare Situation

AbstractThis article considers the approach to theres judicataprinciple taken by the International Court of Justice (ICJ or the Court) and, specifically, its application in its 2016 judgment on preliminary objections in the latest dispute between Nicaragua and Colombia. The judgment joins the small number of ICJ decisions in which the Court was evenly split, an altogether rare situation, which, at the time of the decision, had not occurred since theNuclear WeaponsAdvisory Opinion. Intriguingly, such a fracture seems to have been prompted by differences over the operation of a procedural principle the understanding of which is comparatively uncontroversial. Upon closer analysis, however, the disagreement reveals that more significant questions were at stake, with members of the minority issuing a vocal joint dissent and several individual declarations. This study will move in three parts: first, it will provide an overview of the nature and purpose of the principle ofres judicata, its application in international adjudication, and its use by the ICJ; second, it will analyze the Court's reading of the principle in the case at issue; third, it will expose the broader implications of one such approach for the role and authority of the World Court and the international judiciary.

Voting Behavior of National Judges in International Courts

1969 ◽  
Vol 63 (2) ◽  
pp. 224-236 ◽  
Author(s):  
Il Ro Suh
Keyword(s):  
Voting Behavior ◽  
International Justice ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
International Courts ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
History Of ◽  
International Adjudication

It has been assumed in international adjudication that each state in the litigation should be permitted to have a judge of its own nationality on the bench. This practice of employing national judges in international courts is deeply rooted in the history of arbitration and judicial settlement. Responding to a demand for it, the Committee of Jurists in 1920–1921 embodied the plan in Article 31 of the Statute of the Permanent Court of International Justice. This article was transferred intact to the Statute of the present International Court of Justice in 1945. Whether judges of the nationality of the parties, either in arbitration tribunals or in courts of justice, can be counted upon to be as “independent” as the processes of justice require, and as Article 2 of the present Statute stipulates, is a question of some moment to present-day international justice. It has been suggested as an alternative that a judge on the International Court of the nationality of the litigant should abstain; thus a state with no judge of its nationality on the Court would not be at a disadvantage.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document