A Changing Attitude Towards International Adjudication in the Soviet Union

1990 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 59-66
Author(s):  
G. Shinkaretskaya

Russia (at that time still Tsarist Russia), its science and its government played a special role in the preparation of the two Hague Peace Conferences. One cannot but appreciate what Russian scientists, like Kachenovski, Nezabitovsky and others have done for the development of the idea to apply formalized, juridical methods in disputes between nations; one cannot but see that it was Kamarovsky who suggested that very scheme of building an international court of justice which is used up to now.Let us also give F.F. Martens, who took part in the preparation of the acts adopted by the Conferences, his due.

1955 ◽  
Vol 49 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-15 ◽  
Author(s):  
Manley O. Hudson

The history of the International Court of Justice in its thirty-third year is contained in narrow compass. It is chiefly confined to one judgment rendered by the Court in the Case of the Monetary Gold Removed From Borne in 1943, and to the advisory opinion given by the Court on the Effect of Awards Made By the United Nations Administrative Tribunal. Apart from these, in the Nottebohm Case between Liechtenstein and Guatemala, the time for the rejoinder of Guatemala to be filed was extended for one month, to November 2, 1954. Action was taken by the Court ordering that the “Électricité de Beyrouth” Company Case be removed from the list at the request of the French Government; the Court also ordered that two cases brought by the United States against Hungary and the Soviet Union, relating to the Treatment in Hungary of Aircraft and Crew of United States of America, should be removed from the list for lack of jurisdiction.


1959 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 630-634 ◽  

Case concerning the Aerial Incident of November 7, 1954 (United States v. Soviet Union): On July 7, 1959, an application instituting proceedings against die Soviet Union was filed in the Registry of the Court by the government of the United States. In its application the government of the United States alleged that on November 7, 1954, one of its aircraft was attacked and destroyed over the Japanese island of Hokkaido by fighter aircraft of the Soviet Union. It requested the Court to find that the Soviet Union was liable for the damages caused and to award damages in the sum of $756,604. It also stated that it had submitted to the Court's jurisdiction for the purposes of this case and that it was open to the government of the Soviet Union to do likewise. In accordance with Article 40 of the Statute of the Court, the application was thereupon communicated by the Registry to the government of the Soviet Union.


Arena Hukum ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 349-367
Author(s):  
Taufik Nugraha

It has been 50 years since the Non-Proliferation Treaty was made by America, England, and the Soviet Union to prevent the nuclear arms race in the future. However, Article VI of NPT consisted of ambiguity and has sparked long-lasting debate questioning NPT electiveness. Article VI at least has been examining twice by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in 1996 and 2014. Unfortunately, those examinations were unsatisfied regarding when Nuclear Weapon State (NWS) should cease and disarmament their nuclear weapon? If referring to “an early date,” it should be done years long ago and not taking more than 50 years with pathetic achievement. Finally, this article will examine the current development of NWS using a normative juridical method according to existing nuclear regulation, ICJ Commentary, which resulting in a suggestion when NPT 1968 parties should fulfil their obligation under Art VI NPT 1968.


1954 ◽  
Vol 8 (4) ◽  
pp. 555-557

Treatment in Hungary of Aircraft and Crew of United States of America: On March 3, 1954, the United States filed with the Registry of the International Court of Justice Applications dated February 16, 1954, instituting proceedings against the governments of Hungary and the Soviet Union in the matter of the treatment in Hungary of aircraft and crew of the United States. In two orders of July 12, 1954, the Court removed the cases from its list, since neither Hungary nor the Soviet Union had accepted the jurisdiction of the Court in the matter.


1960 ◽  
Vol 54 (3) ◽  
pp. 632-672 ◽  
Author(s):  
Denys P. Myers

The press release issued by the Department of State in announcing the filing of an application with the International Court of Justice on July 7, 1959, in a damage suit for the destruction of an aircraft by a fighter aircraft of the Soviet Union stated:The present proceedings have been instituted in accordance with the well-established United States policy of resolving such disputes, whether of fact or law, in the International Court of Justice. The Court is the judicial organ of the United Nations for this purpose and is the appropriate international body before which such cases can be heard and decided.


2018 ◽  
pp. 463-477 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel Litwin

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.


2015 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 86-94 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lesley Dingle

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.


2000 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 873-901 ◽  
Author(s):  
J.G. Merrills

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.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document