The Place of Treaties in the Codification and Progressive Development of International Law

2019 ◽  
pp. 86-100
Author(s):  
Georgio Gaja
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Good Reason ◽  
General Assembly ◽  
Present Contribution ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Progressive Development ◽  
Advantages And Disadvantages ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court

Codification of international law may be pursued by various methods. This contribution analyzes advantages and disadvantages of codification conventions. Treaties defined as codification conventions express customary rules in a revised form. They often contain provisions that cover matters not previously regulated or that supplement or specify existing rules. Whether a treaty displaces a customary rule in the relations between the states that are parties generally is a matter of interpretation of the relevant treaty. The limited number of ratifications of codification conventions that have entered into force raises problems concerning the relations between these conventions and customary rules. The present contribution also examines the consideration by the International Court of Justice of the relations between codification conventions and customary rules. In many cases, the Court has not provided reasons for concluding that the content of the customary rule corresponds to that of a provision in the codification convention. In recent years, the General Assembly has often chosen not to promote a codification convention, but there is no good reason for abandoning recourse to an instrument that has significantly contributed to the development of international law in several areas.

A Note on the ICJ Advisory Opinion on Kosovo

2010 ◽  
Vol 11 (7-8) ◽  
pp. 867-880 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Muharremi
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
International Law ◽  
General Assembly ◽  
Advisory Opinion ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Declaration Of Independence ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
Unilateral Declaration ◽  
The Icj

On 22 July 2010, the International Court of Justice (hereinafter the “ICJ”) delivered its advisory opinion on the accordance with international law of the unilateral declaration of independence in respect of Kosovo. The ICJ concluded that the declaration of independence dated 17 February 2008 did not violate any applicable rule of international law consisting of general international law, UNSC resolution 1244 (1999) (hereinafter the “Resolution 1244”) and the Constitutional Framework for Provisional Self-Government in Kosovo (hereinafter the “Constitutional Framework”). The ICJ delivered the advisory opinion in response to a question set out in resolution 63/3 dated 8 October 2008 of the General Assembly of the United Nations Organization (hereinafter the “General Assembly”), which asked if “the unilateral declaration of independence by the Provisional Institutions of Self-Government of Kosovo is in accordance with international law.”

The Ban on the Use of Force in the UN Charter

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nico Schrijver
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
International Law ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Use Of Force ◽  
The Other ◽  
General Assembly ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
History Of

This chapter focuses on Article 2(4) of the UN Charter, which prohibits the use of force in international relations. After discussing pre-Charter attempts to restrict states’ freedom to resort to warfare, it examines the emergence of a normative doctrine on a bellum justum. It considers the history of Article 2(4) and the other articles of the Charter that touch on the use of force and outlines exceptions to the prohibition on the use of force, including the so-called Uniting for Peace procedure. It examines the interpretation of Article 2(4) in the practice of the General Assembly, Security Council, and International Court of Justice), together with its inclusion in a number of multilateral treaties. Finally, it assesses the question whether the use of force after 1945 conforms to the object and purpose of Article 2(4), as well as the legal status of the prohibition to use force in contemporary international law.

I. INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE, ACCORDANCE WITH INTERNATIONAL LAW OF THE UNILATERAL DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE IN RESPECT OF KOSOVO, ADVISORY OPINION OF 22 JULY 2010

2011 ◽  
Vol 60 (3) ◽  
pp. 799-810 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dov Jacobs
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
International Law ◽  
General Assembly ◽  
Advisory Opinion ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Declaration Of Independence ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
Unilateral Declaration ◽  
The Icj

‘Is the unilateral declaration of independence by the Provisional Institutions of Self-Government of Kosovo in accordance with international law?’ It is to answer this question that the General Assembly of the United Nations (‘UNGA’) requested an advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice (‘ICJ’). The request, adopted in October 20081 and initially sponsored by Serbia, was triggered by the declaration of independence of Kosovo issued on the 17 February 2008.2 Some two years later, on the 22 July 2010, the ICJ delivered its Advisory Opinion.3 By a 10–4 vote, the ICJ found that the declaration of independence of Kosovo did not violate international law.

Preparation of a New Treaty for the Settlement of International Disputes

1990 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 51-57
Author(s):  
Louis B. Sohn
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
International Law ◽  
General Assembly ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Peaceful Settlement ◽  
International Court ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
Settlement Of Disputes

In declaring the period 1990–1999 as the United Nations Decade of International Law, the General Assembly of the United Nations listed among the main purposes of that decade the need “to promote means and methods for the peaceful settlement of disputes between States, including resort to and full respect for the International Court of Justice”.

The Kosovo Advisory Opinion: Conflict Resolution and Precedent

2011 ◽  
Vol 105 (1) ◽  
pp. 50-60 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard Falk
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
General Assembly ◽  
Advisory Opinion ◽  
Political Movements ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Sovereign State ◽  
Declaration Of Independence ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
The Icj

The somewhat surprising majority view in the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) assessing Kosovo's declaration of independence has some bearingon prospects for an eventual end to the bitter conflict between Kosovo and Serbia. It may also have some relevance for a variety of political movements around the world whose leaders might be more inclined than previously to tempt fate by declaring their people and territory to be internationally independent of the sovereign state within which they are now geographically located. Significantly,the ICJ majority sidestepped the question put to it by the General Assembly, in a move objectionable to the four dissenting judges,recasting it in such a way as to limit its response to whether Kosovo's declaration of independence, issued on February 17,2008, was “in accordance with international law” to the rather bland assertion that the declaration did not violate international law. The Court did not say, and explicitly ruled out any interpretation suggesting, that Kosovo's declaration was acceptable under international law, although by Lotus reasoning, what a state is not expressly prohibited from doing is permitted.3 The majority also expressed its view that the declaration was not to be viewed as decidingupon Kosovo's final status in world diplomacy.

Review of the Rôle of the International Court of Justice

1972 ◽  
Vol 66 (3) ◽  
pp. 479-490 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leo Gross
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
International Law ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Progressive Development ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
Substantive Law ◽  
International Law Commission ◽  
Law Commission

The stagnation in the functioning of the International Court of Justice is only one of several indicators of the neglect by Members of the United Nations of the development and modernization of adjective law. There has been gratifying progress in the codification and progressive development of substantive law through the International Law Commission and other bodies, but substantive law without an adequate adjective law is bound to lack in effectiveness and uniform and predictable application.

scholarly journals Humanity Bounded and Unbounded: The Regulation of External Self-determination under International Law

2013 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 155-184 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Howse ◽  
Ruti Teitel
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
International Law ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
General Assembly ◽  
Legal Doctrine ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Legal Norms ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
Recent Developments

Abstract One of the most complex and uncertain areas of international legal doctrine concerns how to deal with the aspiration of a people to achieve self-determination through the establishment of a new state and the related claim to a specific territory over which statehood is to be exercised. Recently, when the General Assembly of the United Nations referred to the International Court of Justice the question of the legality of the declaration of independence by Kosovar Albanians, the Court was given an opportunity to clarify and develop the law on external self-determination. Instead, the Court answered extremely narrowly, confining its analysis to the legality of the act of declaration without determining any consideration of international legal norms applicable to the act of secession that was being proposed. This article intends to fill the gap left by the ICJ’s decision: first by critiquing the inadequacy and tensions visible in the existing doctrine and second by examining how recent developments in international law may allow for a more normatively coherent approach to the problem.

The Kosovo Advisory Opinion and UNSCR 1244 (1999): A Declaration of ‘Independence from International Law’?

2011 ◽  
Vol 24 (1) ◽  
pp. 109-126 ◽  
Author(s):  
MARCELO G. KOHEN ◽  
KATHERINE DEL MAR
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Security Council ◽  
United Nations Security Council ◽  
General Assembly ◽  
Advisory Opinion ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Declaration Of Independence ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
Unilateral Declaration

AbstractThis article focuses on the reasoning employed by the International Court of Justice in its Advisory Opinion rendered on 22 July 2010 with respect to the most formidable legal impasse of the accordance with international law of the unilateral declaration of independence: the lex specialis that applied at the critical date, and which the Court affirmed continues to apply to Kosovo, as established by the United Nations Security Council in its Resolution 1244 (1999). The Court's analysis of the applicable lex specialis is questionable. Its analysis was coloured by the narrow approach it took to answering the question it was asked to address. It queried an unambiguous factual qualification made by the General Assembly, and it disregarded factual qualifications made by the Secretary-General, his Special Representative, and indeed all relevant actors. It failed to uphold the legally binding provisions of Security Council Resolution 1244, and it did not qualify as unlawful or invalid an act of a subsidiary body of the Security Council that was undertaken in excess of authority and contrary to the fundamental provisions of that Resolution. The resolute conclusion of the majority of the Court that the unilateral declaration of independence did not violate international law seems to read as a declaration of ‘independence from international law’.

The General Assembly's Request for an Advisory Opinion From the International Court of Justice on the Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons

1995 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 401-429 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martin Lailach
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Nuclear Weapons ◽  
General Assembly ◽  
Advisory Opinion ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
Un General Assembly

On 15 December 1994, the UN General Assembly adopted Resolution 49/75K by which it decided:to request the International Court of Justice urgently to render its advisory opinion on the following question: ‘Is the threat or use of nuclear weapons in any circumstance permitted under international law?’

Metamorphoses: Judge Shigeru Oda and the International Court of Justice

1996 ◽  
Vol 33 ◽  
pp. 185-221 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Reisman
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Significant Role ◽  
Strategic Choices ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Progressive Development ◽  
Unique Character ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
Made In ◽  
The Way

SummaryA series about the judges of the International Court must be based on two postulates: first, that the unique character and, of course, “value-structure” of each judge ü a variable of some importance in the application, if not incremental formation, of international law; and second, that the International Court is an important institution and has played a significant role in “the progressive development of international Law.” While welcoming the idea of thü series, the reviewer has reservations about the way these postulates have been embraced and adopted by the author and outlines his reservations about key jurisprudential assumptions and strategic choices that were made in designing the idea and about the ways those assumptions and strategies have been implemented.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document