scholarly journals On the International Court of Justice and the Determination of Rules of Law

2013 ◽  
Vol 26 (2) ◽  
pp. 243-251 ◽  
Author(s):  
SANTIAGO VILLALPANDO
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Mission Statement ◽  
Legal Theory ◽  
General Nature ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
International Dispute

In the process of selection of articles for the International Court of Justice section at the Editorial Board of the Leiden Journal of International Law (LJIL), we tend to be seduced by those manuscripts which are effective in making use of the jurisprudence of the Court as an instrument to engage in an in-depth examination of substantive legal issues of a general nature. This reflects our conviction – hardly an original one, since it appears to be shared by our entire legal community – that the Court has a fundamental role to play in the advancement of international law as a legal system. It also echoes an idea that is present in the mission statement of our journal, which is conceived as ‘a forum for two vital areas, namely international legal theory and international dispute settlement’, thus establishing an intrinsic link between them. But how is the Court's contribution to the development of international law to be assessed? And what do we expect from a scholarly piece examining its case law in this respect?

International Dispute Settlement

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roda Verheyen ◽  
Cathrin Zengerling
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
International Law ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Future Climate Change ◽  
Marine Resources ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
International Dispute ◽  
International Climate

This chapter discusses international dispute settlement in the context of climate change. It looks into where international disputes that relate to climate have been heard and those, such as the International Court of Justice (ICJ) and the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS), which have the potential to hear such disputes. As it forms as the backbone of the international climate change regime, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) is also analysed. The chapter gives special attention to the ITLOS as among its main potentials of becoming a forum for future climate change litigation are its jurisdiction on substantive international law with comparatively strong rules on use and protection of marine resources and the marine environment.

Reading RP Anand in the Post-Colony

2019 ◽  
pp. 297-317
Author(s):  
Prabhakar Singh
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Cultural Differences ◽  
Legal Theory ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Power Politics ◽  
Post Colonial ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
New States ◽  
Functional Inclusion

Professor RP Anand analysed the birth of new states and their theoretical and functional inclusion in the post-UN world. The 1947 Indian independence afforded Indian lawyers a choice between Nehruvian internationalism and Judge Pal’s Tokyo dissent. Essentially, Anand preferred state interest over cultural differences as the currency of international law while celebrating the UN Charter, the International Court of Justice, and the UN Convention of the Law of Sea as the achievements of the mankind. Anand saw the rejection of international law as synonymous with power politics. While optimistic, his universalism engendered a Western anti-thesis that an Asian approach to international law, if any, was otiose. Subsequently, post-colonial scholars responded with a synthesis that brought colonialism from periphery to the centre of international legal theory.

II. AVENA AND OTHER MEXICAN NATIONALS {MEXICO v UNITED STATES OF AMERICA), PROVISIONAL MEASURES, ORDER OF 5 FEBRUARY 2003

2004 ◽  
Vol 53 (3) ◽  
pp. 738-746 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sandy Ghandhi
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
Human Rights Treaties ◽  
Legal Contexts ◽  
Dispute Settlement Procedure ◽  
Rights Issues

The International Court of Justice is not a human rights court but it does hear human rights cases.1This is hardly remarkable. As Professor Ian Brownlie has pointed out ‘[h]uman rights problems occur in specific legal contexts. The issues may arise… within the framework of a standard-setting convention, or within general international law.’2Because human rights treaties normally have their own dispute settlement procedure, the situations in which the International Court of Justice is more likely to have to grapple with human rights issues lie within the realms of general international law or in non-human rights specific treaty provisions, which may, nevertheless, raise such issues. In addition, some human rights treaties, such as the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide 1948, contain provisions specifically referring disputes to the International Court of Justice.3Thus, it should come as no surprise that the Court has been involved in a number of cases involving human rights questions.

scholarly journals Notes on the International Court of Justice (Part 8)—Interim Accord (FYROM v. Greece) and the Settlement of the Macedonian Name Dispute: Knowing and Seizing upon Many Things or One Big Thing in Treaty Interpretation and International Dispute Settlement in General

2019 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
pp. 473-502
Author(s):  
Sienho Yee
Keyword(s):  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
State Party ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
International Dispute ◽  
The Icj ◽  
Treaty Interpretation ◽  
Final Agreement ◽  
The One

Abstract During the lead-up to the Final Agreement settling the Macedonian name dispute, apparently no or scant mention was made of the Interim Accord (FYROM v. Greece) case that FYROM brought in 2008 and won overwhelmingly in 2011 against Greece at the International Court of Justice (“ICJ” or the “Court”). This paper highlights the structure and main points of the ICJ judgment in the Interim Accord case and analyzes the part of the judgment on the main substantive issue. The paper argues that, even on its own terms, the Court’s judgment did not conduct the interpretation exercise to the full and further that the experience with the Court’s judgment in this case does flash a warning light to any decision-maker that it must not lose sight of “the one big thing”, which may vary from case to case, in a dispute settlement endeavor if it wants to have its decision implemented. This experience also teaches any State party in a dispute that it may have to know and unyieldingly seize upon the one big thing in the dispute settlement effort in order to achieve its goal.

Progress in International Maritime Boundary Delimitation Law

1994 ◽  
Vol 88 (2) ◽  
pp. 227-256 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonathan I. Charney
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Ad Hoc ◽  
Third Party ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Boundary Disputes ◽  
International Court ◽  
Maritime Boundary ◽  
Maritime Boundary Delimitation

Judgments of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) and awards of ad hoc arbitration tribunals carry special weight in international maritime boundary law. On its face, the international maritime boundary law codified in the 1982 Convention on the Law of the Sea is indeterminate. For the continental shelf and the exclusive economic zone, the legal obligation of coastal states is to delimit the boundary “by agreement on the basis of international law, as referred to in Article 38 of the Statute of the International Court of Justice, in order to achieve an equitable solution.” The article on the delimitation of maritime boundaries in the territorial sea is no more determinative despite the fact that it makes direct references to the equidistant line, special circumstances and historic title. In spite of this indeterminacy, if not because of it, coastal states have found that third-party dispute settlement procedures can effectively resolve maritime boundary delimitation disputes. As a consequence, there are more judgments and awards on maritime boundary disputes than on any other subject of international law, and this trend is continuing.

12. International dispute settlement and the ICJ

2019 ◽  
pp. 299-322
Author(s):  
Gleider Hernández
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Third Party ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Principal Characteristics ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
Prior Consent ◽  
International Dispute ◽  
The Icj

This chapter examines the various political or diplomatic methods available for international dispute settlement. These methods include negotiation, mediation or ‘good offices’, inquiry, and conciliation. The array of diplomatic techniques available to parties to resolve a dispute is complemented by various means of settling disputes through the application of binding solutions based on the law. Two in particular, arbitration and adjudication, principally developed from earlier forms of non-binding settlement. Though these are different, they are linked by two principal characteristics. Foremost, they allow for a third party to issue a decision that is binding on the parties. Second, resorting to these methods requires the prior consent of the parties. The chapter then considers the International Court of Justice, the ‘principal judicial organ’ of the United Nations. The ICJ’s structure was frequently utilized as a model for later judicial institutions, making an enormous contribution to the development of international law.

32. Third party settlement of international disputes

2019 ◽  
pp. 692-716
Author(s):  
James Crawford
Keyword(s):  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
International Investment ◽  
Third Party ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
The Third ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Wto Dispute Settlement ◽  
International Court ◽  
International Dispute ◽  
The Third Party

This chapter discusses the third party settlement of international disputes. It covers arbitration and the origins of international dispute settlement; the idea of judicial settlement of international disputes; the International Court of Justice, interstate arbitration, dispute settlement under UNCLOS, the WTO dispute settlement body, and international investment tribunals.

Conceptions of State Jurisdiction in the Jurisprudence of the International Court of Justice and the Permanent Court of International Justice

2019 ◽  
pp. 454-480
Author(s):  
Daniel Costelloe
Keyword(s):  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Legal Issues ◽  
International Justice ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
State Immunity ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
International Dispute ◽  
Domestic Jurisdiction

This chapter traces the manner in which the Permanent Court of International Justice (PCIJ) and the Jurisprudence of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) have understood and applied notions of state jurisdiction in response to a variety of legal issues in international dispute settlement. These have notably included the so-called ‘reserved domain’ of domestic jurisdiction, which certain states have invoked in an effort to challenge the jurisdiction of an international court or tribunal or the admissibility of claims. They have also included the foundational question, invariably associated with the PCIJ’s judgment in the case concerning the SS Lotus, whether a state must invoke a permissive rule before it may lawfully territorial adjudicatory jurisdiction. Finally, these issues have involved international legal limitations on the exercise of such jurisdiction in the context of state immunity.

Rights Adrift: Sexual Violence Against Rohingya Women on the Andaman Sea

2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. 96-114
Author(s):  
Natasha Yacoub ◽  
Nikola Errington ◽  
Wai Wai Nu ◽  
Alexandra Robinson
Keyword(s):  
Sexual Violence ◽  
International Law ◽  
Legal Theory ◽  
Gender Violence ◽  
Andaman Sea ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Feminist Legal Theory ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
The Future

Abstract Women fleeing Myanmar in 2015 were trapped on the Andaman Sea for months when States in the region closed off places of disembarkation. Among the horrors of starvation and unsanitary conditions experienced on the boats, they faced additional risks of sexual violence. These women fled from a situation in Myanmar that severely curtailed their rights, including gender violence, which is being tried as genocide at the International Court of Justice, and were exposed to further violations while fleeing. Through interviews with survivors of the journey and those who assisted them, this article describes the experiences of these women at sea. It outlines the failure of States to apply customary principles of international law and related regional standards to protect these women. From a feminist legal theory perspective, it explores the reasons for these failures and recommends reforms to guarantee better protection at sea for women in the future.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document