‘Armed Attack’ after the Oil Platforms Case

2004 ◽  
Vol 17 (4) ◽  
pp. 719-735 ◽  
Author(s):  
DOMINIC RAAB
Keyword(s):  
Legal Framework ◽  
Armed Attack ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Oil Platforms ◽  
International Court ◽  
Islamic Republic Of Iran ◽  
The Right ◽  
Settlement Of Disputes ◽  
The Impact

The International Court of Justice rendered its judgement on the merits in the case concerning Oil Platforms (Islamic Republic of Iran v. United States of America) on 6 November 2003. This article reviews the judgement, focusing on the Court's substantive legal determinations on the scope of ‘armed attack’ under the right of self-defence. The review further considers the implications of the judgement as regards the role of the Court in the judicial settlement of disputes. It concludes by considering the impact of the judgement on the legal framework for international peace and security as applied in the maritime context.

The invocation of the right to self-defence in response to armed attacks conducted by armed groups: Implications for attribution

2018 ◽  
Vol 32 (01) ◽  
pp. 91-110 ◽  
Author(s):  
Erika de Wet
Keyword(s):  
Due Diligence ◽  
Armed Groups ◽  
Armed Attack ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
State Actors ◽  
The Right ◽  
United Nations Charter ◽  
Territorial States ◽  
Self Defence

AbstractThe right to self-defence in Article 51 of the United Nations Charter is increasingly being invoked in response to armed attacks conducted by armed groups located in a territory of another state, with or without the (direct) assistance of such a state. This article examines the implications of the invocation of the right to self-defence under these circumstances for the principles of attribution within thejus ad bellumparadigm. First, it illuminates how the threshold requirements for indirect armed attacks (that is, the state acting through a private actor) have been lowered since the 1986Nicaraguadecision of the International Court of Justice. In so doing, the article suggests that in order to prevent a complete erosion of the benchmarks of an indirect armed attack, the notions of ‘substantial involvement’ in an armed attack, ‘harbouring’, and ‘unwillingness’ should be interpreted as manifestations of due diligence. Thereafter, the article illustrates that there is also an increasing attribution of armed attacks directly to non-state actors, notably those located in areas over which territorial states have lost control. Such states could be depicted as being ‘unable’ to counter the activities of non-state actors. The article further submits that particularly in these instances, the principle of necessity within the self-defence paradigm can play an important role in curbing the potential for abuse inherent in the vague notion of ‘inability’, if interpreted in light of Article 25 of the Articles on State Responsibility for Internationally Wrongful Acts.

Innate Cosmopolitan Dialectics at the ICJ: Changing Perceptions of International Community, the Role of the Court, and the Legacy of Judge Álvarez

2014 ◽  
Vol 27 (2) ◽  
pp. 309-330
Author(s):  
GEOFFREY GORDON
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
International Community ◽  
Public Order ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
The Icj ◽  
Dialectical Process ◽  
The Right

AbstractTraditional conceptions of the international community have come under stress in a time of expanding international public order. Various initiatives purport to observe a reconceived international community from a variety of perspectives: transnational, administrative, pluralist, constitutional, etc. The perspectives on this changing dynamic evidenced by the International Court of Justice, however, have been largely neglected. But as the principal judicial institution tasked with representing the diversity of legal perspectives in the world, the Court represents an important forum by which to understand the changing appreciation of international community. While decisions of the Court have been restrained, an active discourse has been carried forward among individual judges. I look at part of that discourse, organized around one perspective, which I refer to as innate cosmopolitanism, introduced to the forum of the ICJ by the opinions of Judge Álvarez. The innate cosmopolitan perspective reflects an idea of the international community as an autonomous collectivity, enjoying a will, interests, or ends of its own, independent of constituent states. The application of that perspective under international law is put most to test in matters of international security, in particular where the interest in a discrete, global public order runs up against the right to self-defence vested in states. The innate cosmopolitan perspective has not, in these cases, achieved a controlling position – but, over time, it has been part of a dialectical process showing a change in the appreciation of international community before the Court, and a changing perception from the bench of the role of the Court in that community.

The Case Concerning Oil Platforms (Islamic Republic of Iran v. United States of America) – Preliminary Objection

1997 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 541-551
Author(s):  
Roger S. Clark
Keyword(s):  
United States Of America ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Advisory Opinion ◽  
Islamic Republic ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Oil Platforms ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
Islamic Republic Of Iran

The case-law of the International Court of Justice (Court) is replete with arguments about whether the Court has jurisdiction to entertain the particular dispute (or request for advisory opinion) with which the Court is faced. These arguments are framed at one level as matters of interpretation of the relevant instruments. But they typically play out as well a multiplicity of variations on the overlapping themes of sovereignty (the extent to which states have been prepared to concede decision-making to third-party settlement mechanisms) and justiciability (the extent to which they will accept that an issue may be governed by ‘law’ and thus be susceptible to resolution by judicial actors).

Russia, the Right to Self-Determination and Secession

2021 ◽  
pp. 95-145
Author(s):  
Johannes Socher
Keyword(s):  
Case Studies ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Declaration Of Independence ◽  
South Ossetia ◽  
International Court ◽  
State Practice ◽  
Independent States ◽  
The Right

Chapter 3 is the second of three chapters analysing Russia’s post-Soviet state practice with regard to the right to self-determination. It argues that prior to Kosovo’s declaration of independence in 2008, Russia’s state practice in the four major secessionist conflicts outside the Russian Federation’s territory (Abkhazia and South Ossetia in Georgia, Nagorno-Karabakh in Azerbaijan, and Transnistria in Moldova) was relatively consistent, notwithstanding valid critique of hypocrisy. With the recognition of Abkhazia and South Ossetia as independent states shortly after Kosovo’s declaration of independence, Russia’s approach arguably changed, although the underlying legal view was consistent with its position in the Kosovo case in front of the International Court of Justice, where Russia did not deny Kosovo recognition because of a different view on self-determination and secession but because it refused to accept the logic of some states which viewed Kosovo as a ‘special’ or ‘unique’ case that cannot be compared with other secessionist conflicts. The case studies furthermore show that Russia started to construct its own legal framework to justify its actions.

The International Court of Justice and Peoples

2007 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 157-180
Author(s):  
Timo Koivurova
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Collective Rights ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
The Icj ◽  
The Right

AbstractThe article examines how the International Court of Justice (ICJ) has dealt with the concept of peoples and peoples' rights in its jurisprudence. Most prominent has been the Court's role with respect to the right of self-determination and it is this issue that forms the core of the article. A second important question dealt with is the role of indigenous peoples in ICJ case practice, as the struggle by those peoples to gain collective rights is a recent development in international law. Drawing on this analysis, the discussion proceeds to consider the role that the ICJ has played in the development of the rights of peoples in general and what its future role might be in this sphere of international law. The article also examines the way in which the Court has allowed peoples to participate in its proceedings and whether and how its treatment of peoples' rights has strengthened the general foundations of international law.

IV. OIL PLATFORMS (ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF IRAN v UNITED STATES OF AMERICA), MERITS, JUDGMENT OF 6 NOVEMBER 2003

2004 ◽  
Vol 53 (3) ◽  
pp. 753-761 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexander Orakhelashvili
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
United States Of America ◽  
Islamic Republic ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Oil Platforms ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
Islamic Republic Of Iran ◽  
Treaty Interpretation ◽  
The Persian Gulf

On 6 November 2003 the International Court of Justice delivered its judgment in the Case Concerning Oil Platforms,1 which involves multiple aspects of international law, most notably the issues of treaty interpretation, use of force, hierarchy of norms and the nature of international judicial competence. The case arose out of forcible action by US naval forces in the Persian Gulf against certain Iranian oil platforms.

Oil's Well that Ends Well? Critical Comments on the Merits Judgement in the Oil Platforms Case

2004 ◽  
Vol 17 (4) ◽  
pp. 695-718 ◽  
Author(s):  
JÖRG KAMMERHOFER
Keyword(s):  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Oil Platforms ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
Substantive Law ◽  
Very High ◽  
Self Defence

The recent judgement on the merits in the Oil Platforms case has brought a long-standing dispute before the International Court of Justice to a close. This article critically analyzes some of the most interesting topics raised in this judgement, not least the fact that it was harshly criticized by a very high number of judges in their individual opinions. The issues discussed – such as the role of self-defence law within the confines of an ‘FCN treaty’ or the notion of ‘freedom of commerce’ – merely point to higher-level problems of a theoretical nature which cause our confusion as to substantive law.

scholarly journals The Doctrine’s Role in the Field of Legal Regulation of Public Relations: Problems and Prospects

2019 ◽  
Vol 12 (5) ◽  
pp. 42
Author(s):  
Adel Abdullin ◽  
Ainur Gilmullin
Keyword(s):  
Public Relations ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
International Treaties ◽  
Legal Doctrine ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
The Right ◽  
Advisory Opinions ◽  
Domestic Law

The paper contains a comprehensive analysis of the legal doctrine’s role in the field of legal regulation of public relations arising in modern public law practice. The theoretical and legal features of the legal doctrine are revealed. In particular, conclusions are drawn confirming the arguments that the legal doctrine allows building clear guidelines for the practice of lawmaking, enforcement of the right, and especially law enforcement and that the doctrine acts as a scientifically based criterion for the legitimacy, rationality, and effectiveness of states. Special attention is paid to the historical aspects of the legal doctrine development which have significance and influence on the formation and development of international and domestic law. Particular attention of the authors of the paper is drawn to the place and role of legal doctrine in international legal practice. The paper notes that the legal doctrine manifestation in the activities of modern states can be observed in such functions as prognostic, evaluation, regulatory, methodological, world outlook and ideological function. In addition, it is noted that the doctrine plays an important role in the activities of the UN International Court of Justice, where the doctrines of the most qualified specialists are often used in making decisions and drawing up advisory opinions; in the development of international treaties at international conferences and in international organizations, etc. Specific examples of the legal doctrine manifestations in the activities of the ECHR are given.

scholarly journals EXAMINING THE INTERNATIONAL LAW RIGHT OF SELF-DEFENCE: THE CASE OF RUSSIA AND GEORGIA; ISRAEL AND GAZA

Obiter ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 31 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
FT Abioye
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Use Of Force ◽  
International Peace ◽  
Armed Attack ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Oil Platforms ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
Recent Developments ◽  
Self Defence

Article 2(4) of the UN Charter establishes the doctrine of the prohibition of the use of force amongst member states of the UN. Article 51 lays down exceptions to this rule in terms of the fact that there can be an individual and/or collective use of force in self-defence in the case of an armed attack. This individual or collective use of force is permitted to continue until such a time as the Security Council takes such actions as are necessary for the maintenance of international peace and security. The International Court of Justice (ICJ) has further confirmed this prohibition of the use of force in the Nicaragua case, Congo v Uganda and Oil Platforms cases. This area ofinternational law has seen a lot of discussions and developments over the years. The purpose of this article is to examine the efficacy of the use of force between Russia and Georgia; and Israel and Gaza in 2008. It would be examined if these armed attacks are justifiable by the doctrine of self-defence and the recent developments in the field in international law, or if they in fact constitute a breach of the international law prohibition on the use of force. 

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document