Part 4 Adjudication Within the United Nations System, 29 The International Court of Justice

Author(s):  
Higgins Dame Rosalyn, DBE, QC ◽  
Webb Philippa ◽  
Akande Dapo ◽  
Sivakumaran Sandesh ◽  
Sloan James

This chapter begins by discussing the International Court of Justice (ICJ) as a principal organ of the UN. The ICJ is the only UN principal organ that has its seat in The Hague. It consists of a Bench, a Registry, and a modest but important staff. All judges, who have to be able to work in French or English, are expected to sit on one of the Court’s two major committees, the Rules Committee, and the Budgetary and Administrative Committee. The chapter covers the Bench of the ICJ, the Court’s functions, the ICJ as distinct from other principal organs; ICJ financing and the UN; the ICJ and other courts and tribunals; methods of work of the ICJ; and ICJ efficiency.

1965 ◽  
Vol 19 (3) ◽  
pp. 518-536
Author(s):  
Shabtai Rosenne

A Point of departure for considering the evolution of t!he judicial function in the United Nations system can be found in three interrelated decisions of principle incorporated in the UN Charter itself, of which the Statute of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) forms an integral part.


1991 ◽  
Vol 85 (2) ◽  
pp. 374-375
Author(s):  
Renata Szafarz

On September 25, 1990, Poland deposited a declaration with the Secretary-General of the United Nations accepting the compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice in accordance with Article 36, paragraph 2 of the Statute of the Court. It is the first country from Central or Eastern Europe to have done so and the fifty-second state now maintaining an effective declaration.


2005 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 237-255 ◽  
Author(s):  
SIMON OLLESON

The ICJ in its judgments on the preliminary objections in the Legality of Use of Force cases held that it had no jurisdiction to hear the claims. Despite the unanimous concurrence in that result, it is clear that there were deep divisions within the Court as to the ground on which that decision should have been reached; only a bare majority subscribed to the reasoning that the Court was required to rule on the question of its jurisdiction ratione personae in relation to Serbia and Montenegro's uncertain status within the United Nations prior to 2000. The minority judges were highly critical of the choice of that basis of decision, in particular given its apparent implications for other cases pending before the Court.


2007 ◽  
Vol 56 (1) ◽  
pp. 185-198 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jean D' Aspremont

Any observer of the practice of the International Court of Justice (hereafter the ICJ or the Court) may have noticed the growing tendency of the United Nations judicial body to formulate recommendations to the parties that have appeared before it. Indeed, the Court is more and more inclined to recommend that the parties allay their dispute and alleviate all ensuing human sufferings. This leaning is particularly observable when the Court simultaneously dismisses a request for the indication of provisional measures. For instance, in the recent order rendered by the Court in the case concerning the Armed Activities on the Territory of Congo (Democratic Republic of the Congo v Rwanda), the Court made the following declaration:


1995 ◽  
Vol 89 (3) ◽  
pp. 493-505 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Y. Jennings

The International Court of Justice was brought into being by the Charter of the United Nations (Articles 7(1), 36(3), and 92-96), and by the Statute of the Court which was made an integral part of the Charter; both of which instruments were signed at San Francisco on June 26, 1945. The most important difference between the Statute of the new Court and that of its predecessor, the Permanent Court of International Justice, on which the new Statute was based, was that the new Court was to be one of the “principal organs” of the United Nations. The Charter and the new Statute entered into force on October 24, 1945. After the election of the Court’s first members the new Court met for the first time in the Peace Palace at The Hague on April 1, 1946, under the presidency of Judge Guerrero, with Judge Basdevant as Vice-President.


2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 67-78
Author(s):  
Novena Clementine Naomi

Abstract It can be argued that in facing the paramount problems of the twenty first century, one of the core elements of establishing a world with friendly relation among States is by the constitution of a healthy judicial field considering the fact that disputes among States are in no way can be avoided. For more than seven decades the International Court of Justice has served the world and the Member States of the United Nations in particular with judicial service as it bears the function as the principal judicial organ of the United Nations. However, by analyzing the development of international law, while the ICJ has contributed to improving the relation between States by way of providing States with the proper settlement of disputes, the current system—mostly designed at a time of different global challenges and priorities—seems to have exceeded its capacity to be nimble and responsive to the needs of today’s world. This article seeks to offer recommendations on how to optimize the Court’s function by means of reforming its contentious jurisdiction. The purpose of this article is to open more possibilities to optimize the Court, by making the Court’s jurisdiction mandatory and compulsory to all States and offer a possibility of expansion of jurisdiction as to include ratione materiae jurisdiction. Keywords: Jurisdiction, International Court of Justice, Reform   Abstrak Dapat dikatakan bahwa dalam menghadapi masalah terpenting di abad dua puluh satu, salah satu unsur utama dalam menciptakan dunia dengan hubungan baik antar negaranya adalah melalui terciptanya ranah peradilan yang sehat, menimbang sengketa antar negara yang merupakan sebuah keniscayaan. Selama lebih dari tujuh dekade, Mahkamah Internasional telah melayani dunia dan negara anggota dari Perserikatan Bangsa-Bangsa terkhusus dalam hal penyediaan pelayanan peradilan terkait dengan fungsinya sebagai organ peradilan utama Perserikatan Bangsa-Bangsa. Bagaimanapun, dengan menganalisa perkembangan hukum internasional, walaupun Mahkamah Internasional telah berkontribusi dalam meningkatkan hubungan baik antar negara dengan cara menyediakan cara penyelesaian sengketa yang memadai, sistem yang ada sekarang ini—sebagian besar dirancang pada masa dengan tantangan dan prioritas global yang berbeda—tampaknya telah tidak efektif dalam menanggapi kebutuhan dunia zaman ini. Tulisan ini bertujuan menawarkan rekomendasi-rekomendasi perihal optimalisasi dari fungsi Mahkamah Internasional dengan cara reformasi yurisdiksi kasus kontensius yaitu diantaranya dengan menjadikan yurisdiksi Mahkamah sebagai wajib bagi setiap negara anggota, serta memperluas jangkauan yurisdiksi Mahkamah berdasarkan prinsip ratione materiae. Kata Kunci: Mahkamah Internasional, Reformasi, Yurisdiksi


Author(s):  
Wilmshurst Elizabeth

This chapter showcases the International Court of Justice. Located in the Peace Palace at The Hague, the Court was established by the United Nations Charter as a forum for settling international disputes. It is now one of a number of international courts, but it remains the principal judicial organ of the United Nations. Most of the detailed provisions relating to its functions and powers are to be found in the Statute of the Court which is annexed to the UN Charter and forms an integral part of it. While few diplomats in the course of their careers are likely to appear before the Court as representatives of their governments, the use of the Court to settle disputes, and the impact of the Court’s decisions more generally, are significant features of the conduct of international affairs.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document