The Protection of Diplomatic Correspondence in the Digital Age

International Courts ◽

Court Of Justice ◽

International Court ◽

State Actors ◽

International Tribunals ◽

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 Participation of Nongovernmental Organizations in International Judicial Proceedings

The American Journal of International Law ◽

10.2307/2204133 ◽

1994 ◽

Vol 88 (4) ◽

pp. 611-642 ◽

Cited By ~ 37

Author(s):

Dinah Shelton

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

Nongovernmental Organizations ◽

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.

Nicaragua: 25 Years Later

Leiden Journal of International Law ◽

10.1017/s0922156511000616 ◽

2012 ◽

Vol 25 (1) ◽

pp. 131-133 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

CRISTINA HOSS ◽

SANTIAGO VILLALPANDO ◽

SANDESH SIVAKUMARAN

Keyword(s):

International Law ◽

Law School ◽

Law Firm ◽

Netherlands Society ◽

International Courts ◽

Court Of Justice ◽

International Court ◽

University College London ◽

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.

Book V International Disputes and Courts, 25 The International Court of Justice

10.1093/law/9780198739104.003.0025 ◽

2016 ◽

Author(s):

Wilmshurst Elizabeth

Keyword(s):

United Nations ◽

International Affairs ◽

International Courts ◽

Court Of Justice ◽

International Court ◽

The Hague ◽

The United Nations ◽

United Nations Charter ◽

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.

National Judges and Judges Ad Hoc of the International Court of Justice

International and Comparative Law Quarterly ◽

10.1017/s0020589300063727 ◽

1999 ◽

Vol 48 (4) ◽

pp. 889-900 ◽

Cited By ~ 6

Author(s):

Stephen M. Schwebel

Keyword(s):

Advisory Committee ◽

Ad Hoc ◽

Fundamental Problem ◽

International Justice ◽

State Party ◽

International Courts ◽

Court Of Justice ◽

International Court ◽

The World

When the Statute of the Permanent Court of International Justice was drafted by an Advisory Committee of Jurists in 1920, a paramount question was, should a judge of the nationality of a State party to the case sit?The sensitivity of the issue was encapsulated by a report of a committee of the Court in 1927 on the occasion of a revision of the Rules of Court. It observed that: “In the attempt to establish international courts of justice, the fundamental problem always has been, and probably always will be, that of the representation of the litigants in the constitution of the tribunal. Of all influences to which men are subject, none is more powerful, more pervasive, or more subtle, than the tie of allegiance that binds them to the land of their homes and kindred and to the great sources of the honours and preferments for which they are so ready to spend their fortunes and to risk their lives. This fact, known to all the world, the [Court's] Statute frankly recognises and deals with.”1

Legal Perspectives

The Oxford Handbook on the United Nations ◽

10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198803164.013.4 ◽

2018 ◽

pp. 78-103

Author(s):

José E. Alvarez

Keyword(s):

International Law ◽

Third World ◽

Legal Positivism ◽

Scholarly Work ◽

Soft Or ◽

Court Of Justice ◽

International Court ◽

State Actors ◽

Legal Frameworks

This chapter surveys how international legal scholars have catalogued and sought to explain the legal impact of the UN even though its political and judicial organs have not been delegated the power to make law. It explains how the UN attempts to adhere to, but also challenges, the traditional sources of international law—treaties, custom, and general principles—contained in the Statute of the International Court of Justice. It enumerates how the turn to UN system organizations—amidst newly empowered non-state actors, increasing resort to ‘soft’ or ‘informal’ norms, and recourse to institutionalized processes—have led to distinct legal frameworks such as process or deliberative theories, interdisciplinary ‘law and’ approaches, feminist and ‘Third World’ critiques, and scholarly work that renews attention to or revises legal positivism.

Crimea in International Courts and Tribunals: Matters of Jurisdiction

Max Planck Yearbook of United Nations Law Online ◽

10.1163/13894633_021001013 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 21 (1) ◽

pp. 378-403

Author(s):

Gaiane Nuridzhanian

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

Use Of Force ◽

Territorial Integrity ◽

International Courts ◽

Preliminary Examination ◽

Court Of Justice ◽

European Court ◽

International Court ◽

Inter State

The events taking place in Crimea since early 2014 have given rise to a number of international disputes currently pending before international courts and tribunals. Ukraine instituted inter-State proceedings against Russia before the International Court of Justice, the European Court of Human Rights and an unclos Annex vii Tribunal. Seven investor-State cases have been commenced against Russia. The Prosecutor of the icc is conducting preliminary examination into the crimes allegedly committed in Crimea in 2014 and afterwards. Foreign courts have also had to deal with cases related to the annexation of Crimea. This article provides an overview of cases pending before international courts and tribunals in relation to events in Crimea. The focus is on the questions related to jurisdiction of the international courts and tribunals seized in Crimea-related cases. The study explores the limits of the jurisdiction of international courts to adjudicate disputes concerning the interpretation and application of a treaty arising in connection with a larger dispute regarding the use of force, respect for sovereignty and territorial integrity. The article also discusses novel and debated jurisdiction-related matters that arise in cases brought in relation to events in Crimea. A brief description of cases heard in foreign courts is provided as well.

Case Analysis: The Nicaragua Case and the Denunciation of Declarations of Acceptance of the Compulsory Jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice

Leiden Journal of International Law ◽

10.1017/s0922156598000089 ◽

1998 ◽

Vol 11 (1) ◽

pp. 97-121 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Juan José Quintana

Keyword(s):

Case Analysis ◽

Good Faith ◽

Legal Regime ◽

Reasonable Time ◽

Court Of Justice ◽

International Court ◽

This paper is concerned with the denunciation of declarations of acceptance of the compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice under the Optional Clause and the impact that the 1984 Judgment of the Court in the jurisdictional phase of the Nicaragua case may have had upon it. In this decision the Court found that the principle of good faith is of paramount importance in the legal regime of the Optional Clause and introduced in that regime the element of a ‘reasonable time’ for the denunciation of declarations of indefinite duration and silent as to termination. The relevant passage of the Judgment is discussed with a view to determine the contours of this requirement and the ways it may operate in practice.

Additional Opinions and Judicial Diversity at the International Court of Justice

Identity and Diversity on the International Bench ◽

10.1093/oso/9780198870753.003.0013 ◽

2020 ◽

pp. 246-262 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Hemi Mistry

Keyword(s):

Gender Diversity ◽

Personal Characteristics ◽

The Public ◽

Court Of Justice ◽

International Court ◽

The Public Sphere ◽

The Individual ◽

Additional opinions—that is, dissenting opinions, separate opinions, and declarations—are, by definition, the primary institutional mechanism through which judges can express their individual views on a particular decision, as distinct from the judgment or decision proclaimed on behalf of the institution. Therefore, within the public sphere they are the principal institutional manifestation of the individual—and thus the individuality—of the judge. Consequently, for those who seek to understand the impact of certain personal characteristics upon how a judge discharges their professional functions and, in turn, the wider institutional and systemic implications of the participation of individuals bearing those characteristics, the study of additional opinions would seem a useful analytical enterprise. Using gender diversity at the International Court of Justice as a case study, the purpose of this chapter is twofold: first, to explain the relationship between diversity and additional opinions, and second, to explore the methodological potential, and challenges, that the study of additional opinions entails.

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

AJIL Unbound ◽

10.1017/aju.2017.81 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 111 ◽

pp. 349-353

Author(s):

Gleider Hernández

Keyword(s):

International Law ◽

Judicial Decision ◽

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

Leiden Journal of International Law ◽

10.1017/s092215650700427x ◽

2007 ◽

Vol 20 (3) ◽

pp. 593-611 ◽

Cited By ~ 5

Author(s):

FABIÁN O. RAIMONDO

Keyword(s):

International Law ◽

International Humanitarian Law ◽

Humanitarian Law ◽

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.