Nicaragua: 25 Years Later

2012 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
pp. 131-133 ◽  
Author(s):  
CRISTINA HOSS ◽  
SANTIAGO VILLALPANDO ◽  
SANDESH SIVAKUMARAN
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Law School ◽  
Law Firm ◽  
Netherlands Society ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
International Courts ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
University College London ◽  
The Impact

The case concerning Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua, better known as the ‘Nicaragua case’ or simply Nicaragua, is arguably one of the most important and controversial cases ever to be heard by the International Court of Justice. Twenty-five years after the judgment on the merits was handed down, it is high time to reassess the impact of Nicaragua on international law. The joint efforts of the Grotius Centre of the Leiden Law School, the Centre on International Courts and Tribunals at University College London, the Netherlands Society of International Law, and the law firm Foley Hoag LLP resulted in a one-day conference, on 27 June 2011, the very day on which the judgment on the merits of the Nicaragua case was handed down, 25 years ago.

scholarly journals Systemic Judicial Authority: The “Fourth Corner” of “The Judicial Trilemma”?

AJIL Unbound ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 111 ◽  
pp. 349-353
Author(s):  
Gleider Hernández
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Judicial Decision ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Judicial Decision Making ◽  
International Courts ◽  
Judicial Decisions ◽  
The Past ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
Empirical Social Science

Jeffrey Dunoff and Mark Pollack's Judicial Trilemma is a refreshing challenge to prevailing narratives about judicial decision-making in international courts and tribunals and is part of a growing wave of scholarship deploying empirical, social science-driven methodology to theorize the place of judicial institutions in the international legal field. Seeking to peek behind the black robes and divine the reasoning behind judicial decisions without descending into speculation and actively trying to thwart considerations of confidentiality is a fraught endeavor on which I have expressed skepticism in the past. The Judicial Trilemma admirably seeks to overcome these challenges, and I commend the authors for tackling the hard question as to whether one can truly glance behind the black robe.

The International Court of Justice as a Guardian of the Unity of Humanitarian Law

2007 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. 593-611 ◽  
Author(s):  
FABIÁN O. RAIMONDO
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Stare Decisis ◽  
International Courts ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court

This article seeks to examine whether the International Court of Justicehas developed jurisprudence on international humanitarian law and whether this has exerted any influence on the decisions adopted by other international courts and tribunals. In so doing, it revisits the issue of the value ofjudicial decisions under international law. Finally, it reveals that despite the non-operation of the rule of stare decisis in international law, the Court's jurisprudence on international humanitarian law has been a persuasive precedent for other international courts and tribunals.

The Protection of Diplomatic Correspondence in the Digital Age

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patricio Grané Labat ◽  
Naomi Burke
Keyword(s):  
New Technology ◽  
Digital Age ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
International Courts ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
State Actors ◽  
International Tribunals ◽  
The Impact

This chapter considers the impact of new technology on compliance with obligations under the VCDR. It focuses on the provisions of the VCDR that establish the inviolability of diplomatic archives and correspondence and considers the challenges posed by technology that was not available at the time of the drafting of that treaty but which is now commonplace. It evaluates the ever-present risk of unauthorized digital access to diplomatic correspondence and archives, including by non-State actors (eg WikiLeaks), and examines whether the framework of the VCDR is still adequate to deal with those challenges. The chapter also addresses the submission of protected information obtained in violation of the VCDR as evidence in proceedings before international tribunals, including the International Court of Justice (ICJ). The chapter analyses the admissibility of that evidence and offers answers on how international courts should deal with that information.

The main approaches to the definition of the international courts’ competence

2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
pp. 128-143 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew Yu. Klyuchnikov
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
International Justice ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
International Courts ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Personal Jurisdiction ◽  
Interpretative Framework

The rules on the competence of international courts determine the nature of the cases they resolve and the conditions for their admission to proceedings. The possibility composition of the court considers each case individually following the principle of jurisdiction to decide the jurisdiction due to the lack of a clear regulatory framework. Each international court of justice, relying on the international law, is solely competent to resolve doubts as to its own jurisdiction. This study aims to identify the approach of courts to solving jurisdictional problems in practice. The material for the study includes the cases of international courts, doctrinal comments, and legal positions of prominent researchers of international justice. The author describes the basic interpretative framework procedure, restraint, activism in the justification, and the lack of personal jurisdiction. Thus, if the international court of justice has no confidence in the existence of competence on the subject of the dispute, it will not take measures to justify it. The brevity of the position on the issue will be due to interpretative restraint. Activism arises when the international court of justice seeks to achieve a procedural result, substantiate the rationality of the result of interpretation or the impossibility of achieving it. Science has not resolved the issue of factors that may affect the limits of interpretation by international courts of their own competence.

scholarly journals The Admissibility of Unlawfully Obtained Evidence before International Courts and Tribunals

2020 ◽  
Vol 19 (2) ◽  
pp. 147-176
Author(s):  
Sara Mansour Fallah
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Important Case ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
International Courts ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
General Principles Of Law ◽  
National Practice ◽  
Unlawfully Obtained Evidence

Abstract 70 years ago, the International Court of Justice decided its first and potentially most important case involving unlawfully obtained evidence. Despite clearly rejecting ‘discovery by intervention’, the judgment left many guessing as to the consequences for evidence obtained through such violations. As parties to international disputes have certainly not become less inclined to obtain evidence by unlawful means, the question arises: Was this old confusion ever unraveled? This article discusses whether today, there are international rules or principles governing the admissibility of unlawfully acquired evidence and applies a two-fold approach. First, it examines traditional sources of international law, including international jurisprudence, and second, it scrutinizes the frequently drawn analogy to national jurisdictions by surveying their treatment of illegally obtained evidence. Although a generally binding “inadmissibility rule” does not yet exist, practice demonstrates a tendency to consider such evidence in light of general principles of law. This article proposes handling unlawfully acquired evidence by applying a defined, yet flexible balancing test using criteria commonly applied in international and national practice.

scholarly journals Certain Activities Carried Out by Nicaragua in the Border Area (Costa Rica v. Nicaragua)

2018 ◽  
Vol 112 (2) ◽  
pp. 288-294 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jason Rudall
Keyword(s):  
Costa Rica ◽  
International Law ◽  
Environmental Damage ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
International Courts ◽  
Goods And Services ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
The Icj ◽  
First Time

Should trees have standing? The decision of the International Court of Justice (ICJ or Court) in its Question of Compensation (Costa Rica v. Nicaragua) case of February 2, 2018 provides a pioneering example of damage to the environment being litigated before an international tribunal. The judgment is the first time that the ICJ has adjudicated compensation for environmental damage, and it is only the third time the ICJ has awarded compensation at all. Nevertheless, the ICJ boldly asserted in this case that “damage to the environment, and the consequent impairment or loss of the ability of the environment to provide goods and services, is compensable under international law” (para. 42). That said, the reasoning employed by the Court leaves much to be desired. Given the increasing number of cases involving the environment, it is unfortunate that international courts and tribunals will garner only limited guidance from the methodology adopted by the ICJ in valuing environmental damage.

International Court of Justice

2018 ◽  
pp. 189-211
Author(s):  
Charlotte Ku
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
International Justice ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
International Courts ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
The Icj ◽  
Settlement Of Disputes

This article traces the development of the International Court of Justice from the establishment of its predecessor in 1919, the Permanent Court of International Justice. The article explores the place of the ICJ in the international settlement of disputes including issues relating to the proliferation of international courts and tribunals; the selection and impartiality of judges; provisional measures; the willingness of states to accept the jurisdiction of the ICJ; compliance with the Court’s rulings; and where the ICJ has seen the greatest success in developing its jurisprudence. Specific attention is paid to the ICJ’s advisory and contentious jurisdictions. The article concludes with an assessment of its contribution to international law.

The Participation of Nongovernmental Organizations in International Judicial Proceedings

1994 ◽  
Vol 88 (4) ◽  
pp. 611-642 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dinah Shelton
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Nongovernmental Organizations ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
International Courts ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
International Court ◽  
Judicial Proceedings ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Do So

Nongovernmental organizations are playing an increasingly important role in international litigation. This study will analyze the participation of nongovernmental organizations, primarily as amici curiae, in the proceedings of four permanent international courts: the International Court of Justice, the European Court of Justice, the European Court of Human Rights and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. After discussing the impact of amici in national and regional courts, it recommends that the International Court of Justice expand its acceptance of submissions from nongovernmental organizations in appropriate cases. The Court has a jurisdictional basis to do so and amici have usefully contributed to cases before other courts.

Reflections on the Territorial and Maritime Dispute between Nicaragua and Colombia before the International Court of Justice

2013 ◽  
Vol 26 (4) ◽  
pp. 909-931 ◽  
Author(s):  
YOSHIFUMI TANAKA
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
The Icj ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Impact

AbstractOn 19 November 2012, the International Court of Justice gave its judgment concerning the Territorial and Maritime Dispute between Nicaragua and Colombia. This judgment includes several important issues which need serious consideration, such the as legal status of maritime features, the interpretation and application of Article 121 of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, the methodology of maritime delimitations, the role of proportionality in maritime delimitations, and the impact of the judgment upon third states and effect of Article 59 of the ICJ Statute. Focusing on these issues, this contribution aims to analyse the judgment of 2012 from a viewpoint of the international law of the sea, in particular, the law of maritime delimitation.

The Continuing Impact of French Legal Culture on the International Court of Justice

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mathilde Cohen
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Legal Culture ◽  
International Justice ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
International Courts ◽  
Procedural Law ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
The Icj

This chapter proposes a reflection on comparative international courts rather than comparative international law more broadly understood. International courts are approached differently by various legal actors who may be influenced by their own national legal environments. Though there is a long tradition of scholarly thinking about the role of particular national traditions in shaping international law, be it substantive or procedural law, little attention has been paid to the influence of domestic legal cultures and languages on the design and internal organization of international courts. Yet, is there such a thing as a specifically international way of designing and running courts tasked with resolving international disputes? Focusing on the ICJ and its predecessor court, the Permanent Court of International Justice (PCIJ), this chapter aims to make the reach of domestic norms, in particular French legal culture, in the design and daily operation of international courts more salient.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document