scholarly journals Precarious Finality? Reflections on Res Judicata in the Question of the Delimitation of the Continental Shelf Case

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Niccolo Ridi
Keyword(s):  
Continental Shelf ◽  
Nuclear Weapons ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Res Judicata ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
The World ◽  
The Icj ◽  
International Adjudication ◽  
Rare Situation

This article considers the approach to the res judicata principle taken by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) and, specifically, its application in its 2016 judgment on preliminary objections in the latest dispute between Nicaragua and Colombia. The judgment joins the small number of ICJ decisions in which the Court was evenly split, an altogether rare situation, which, at the time of the decision, had not occurred since the Nuclear Weapons Avisory Opinion. Intriguingly, such a fracture seems to have been prompted by differences over the operation of a procedural principle the understanding of which is comparatively uncontroversial. Upon closer analysis, however, the disagreement reveals that more significant questions were at stake, with members of the minority issuing a vocal joint dissent and several individual declarations. This study will move in three parts: first, it will provide an overview of the nature and purpose of the principle of res judicata, its application in international adjudication, and its use by the ICJ; second, it will analyse the Court’s reading of the principle in the case at issue; third, it will expose the broader implications of one such approach for the role and authority of the World Court and the international judiciary.

scholarly journals Precarious Finality? Reflections onRes Judicataand theQuestion of the Delimitation of the Continental ShelfCase

2018 ◽  
Vol 31 (2) ◽  
pp. 383-401 ◽  
Author(s):  
NICCOLÒ RIDI
Keyword(s):  
Nuclear Weapons ◽  
Advisory Opinion ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Res Judicata ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
The World ◽  
The Icj ◽  
International Adjudication ◽  
Rare Situation

AbstractThis article considers the approach to theres judicataprinciple taken by the International Court of Justice (ICJ or the Court) and, specifically, its application in its 2016 judgment on preliminary objections in the latest dispute between Nicaragua and Colombia. The judgment joins the small number of ICJ decisions in which the Court was evenly split, an altogether rare situation, which, at the time of the decision, had not occurred since theNuclear WeaponsAdvisory Opinion. Intriguingly, such a fracture seems to have been prompted by differences over the operation of a procedural principle the understanding of which is comparatively uncontroversial. Upon closer analysis, however, the disagreement reveals that more significant questions were at stake, with members of the minority issuing a vocal joint dissent and several individual declarations. This study will move in three parts: first, it will provide an overview of the nature and purpose of the principle ofres judicata, its application in international adjudication, and its use by the ICJ; second, it will analyze the Court's reading of the principle in the case at issue; third, it will expose the broader implications of one such approach for the role and authority of the World Court and the international judiciary.

A Legal Journey Through the UN, Academia, and the ICJ: Conversations with Dame Rosalyn Higgins DBE, JSD, FBA, QC

2015 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 86-94 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lesley Dingle
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Formative Period ◽  
International Affairs ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
Depth Interview ◽  
The Icj ◽  
Global Peace ◽  
International Adjudication

AbstractThis article, written by Lesley Dingle, is based upon an in-depth interview with Dame Rosalyn Higgins in March 2014. It highlights particular elements that characterise her contribution to legal scholarship and international adjudication, and should be read in the context of the biography presented in the Eminent Scholars Archive: http://www.squire.law.cam.ac.uk/eminent_scholars/dame_rosalyn_higgins.php. Dame Rosalyn Higgins was born in Kensington in 1937. She grew up in London during the Blitz and her matter-of-fact account of these times epitomised her later career: application to the task in hand, and a lack of a sense of expectation. After the War, she passed successively through grammar school, Girton College, Yale and the Royal Institute of International affairs, steadily immersing herself over fifteen years in the work of the United Nations during its formative period. It was on the UN's role as the global peace-keeper and international law-maker that she became the acknowledged authority. There followed a long period of formal academia (1978–95: Kent and LSE), during which she rose to high office. This experience further honed her scholarly and administrative instincts, and she was honoured in 1995 with a DBE. Later that year Dame Rosalyn was appointed to the Bench of the International Court of Justice – the first woman to rise to this position, and in 2006 was elected its President. She retired in 2009.

The International Court of Justice: Territorial and Maritime Dispute (Nicaragua v. Colombia)

2013 ◽  
Vol 52 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-71 ◽  
Author(s):  
David P. Riesenberg
Keyword(s):  
Continental Shelf ◽  
Caribbean Sea ◽  
Foreseeable Future ◽  
Outer Continental Shelf ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Territorial Sovereignty ◽  
International Court ◽  
Western Caribbean ◽  
The Icj

In 2012, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) rendered its fourth judgment in Nicaragua v. Colombia. The case was first initiated by Nicaragua under the Bogotá Pact in 2001. The fourth judgment affirmed Colombia’s territorial sovereignty over a group of islands in the western Caribbean Sea and delimited a boundary between the two states’ zones of maritime jurisdiction. Even after eleven years of complicated proceedings, however, the parties’ conflicting claims are not yet completely resolved. The ICJ explicitly declined to address Nicaragua’s potential entitlement to the continental shelf beyond 200 nautical miles from its coastal baselines, including the portion of Nicaragua’s ‘‘outer’’ continental shelf that allegedly overlaps with Colombia’s maritime entitlements. For the foreseeable future, this aspect of the controversy will likely remain unresolved. One week after the ICJ rendered its fourth judgment, Colombia withdrew from the Bogotá Pact and thereby terminated its consent to the ICJ’s jurisdiction.

scholarly journals Protection Rohingyas through International Adjudication-Decoding Provisional Measures of International Court of Justice in The Gambia vs. Myanmar.

2020 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-9
Author(s):  
Swargodeep Sarkar
Keyword(s):  
The Gambia ◽  
Genocide Convention ◽  
Special Focus ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Security Forces ◽  
Language And Culture ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
The Icj ◽  
International Adjudication

United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres acknowledged Rohingya, “one of, if not the, most discriminated people in the world”. In Myanmar, a country with a Buddhist majority, around a million Rohingya who is the minority having their language and culture, have been persecuted for decades. In the year 2014 census, Myanmar excluded Rohingya by denying basic citizenship. Thousands of Rohingya have fled to neighbouring States after facing persecution orchestrated by Myanmar security forces with the help of local Buddhist mobs. In this background, the Gambia with the help of Organisation of Islamic Cooperation filed the case in the International Court of Justice, alleging that the actions perpetrated by Myanmar violated the provisions of Genocide Convention 1948 to which both States are the parties. Myanmar rightly questioned the standing of Gambia as the interest of Gambia was not threatened or at stake. So, in the absence of a cause of action or rights of the Gambia not affected even remotely, the International Court of Justice should not entertain the case. One of the major issues before the Court whether the Gambia has stood without being affected directly from the violations alleged to have been committed on the Rohingya. The present author will discuss the provisional measures rendered by the ICJ on 23rd January 2020 and the challenges such as jurisdiction, admissibility, urgency or irreparable prejudice condition, faced by the Court with a special focus on the “Plausibility requirement” in provisional measures.

scholarly journals The international court of justice at the crossroad between law and politics the example of the caselaw on nuclear weapons

Eudaimonia ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 37-62
Author(s):  
Irene Miano
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Nuclear Weapons ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Law And Politics ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
The World ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
United Nations Charter ◽  
The Guardian

The International Court of Justice is identified by Article 92 of the United Nations Charter as the “principal judicial organ of the United Nations”. This definition has consecrated the International Court of Justice as the World Court, as the guardian of the application of international law. Is this picture still actual? Is the International Court of Justice currently performing a guardian role? What does it happen when highly politically sensitive issues, like nuclear proliferation and nuclear disarmament, arrive before this Court? To address these questions, this work will analyse the case-law of the International Court of Justice on nuclear weapons. Retracing the jurisprudence of this Court on this issue will shade a light on many characteristics of the World Court and its members, questioning its concrete role in the present international arena.

The History of Article 38 of the Statute of the International Court of Justice

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ole Spiermann
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Historical Records ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
The World ◽  
The Icj ◽  
History Of

This chapter takes a look at Article 38 of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) Statute. This article intends to define so-called sources or origins of international law to be used by the World Court. The text dates back to 1920, before the predecessor of the ICJ, i.e. the PCIJ, took up its activities. The chapter notes that since 1920, Article 38 has featured prominently in the theory on so-called sources of international law, while the provision has been of little relevance in the case law of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) and its predecessor. Based mainly on historical records, the chapter seeks an explanation, which in turn may shed new light on sources theory.

The International Court of Justice and the Law of the Sea-Some Reflections

1996 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 491-532 ◽  
Author(s):  
Barbara Kwiatkowska
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
The World ◽  
The Law ◽  
International Adjudication

Abstract"On the whole, the World Court has a distinguished record of achievement-even if that record is not as extensive or exemplary as one might wish. It is one of the principal tasks of the student and practitioner of international law, and, for that matter, of people the world over who are concerned with promoting a more peaceful and less lawless world, to give their critical but constructive support to the strengthening of the institutions of international adjudication, and especially the only universal such institution, the International Court of Justice." S.M. Schwebel, Justice in International Law-Selected Writings of Judge Stephen M. Schwebel (1994)

Res judicata, Jurisdiction ratione materiae and Legal Reasoning in the Dispute between Nicaragua and Colombia before the International Court of Justice

2017 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 224-244
Author(s):  
Matteo Sarzo
Keyword(s):  
Continental Shelf ◽  
International Law ◽  
Legal Reasoning ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Binding Force ◽  
Res Judicata ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court

Abstract With the aim of barring Nicaragua’s fresh request for the delimitation of the continental shelf beyond 200 nautical miles, Colombia raised the issue of the res judicata effect of the previous decision of 2012, rendered in the Territorial and Maritime Dispute, whereby the icj had apparently settled the case and dismissed on the merits the same request. In the Judgment on preliminary objections of 2016, relating to the “new” case Question of the Delimitation of the Continental Shelf between Nicaragua and Colombia beyond 200 nautical miles from the Nicaraguan Coast, the icj held that no binding force attached to the operative part of the 2012 ruling. The outcome of the incidental proceedings was not predictable as one might have expected, given that the decision was taken with the casting vote of the President and prompted a strong dissent among some judges. This occurrence gives clear evidence of the interplay between several intertwined issues of international law, which the majority was called upon to deal with and balance in the present case, such as the interpretation of Article 76, paragraph 8 of the unclos, the principles of res judicata and jurisdiction ratione materiae and the duty to give reasons. The article aims to demonstrate that the Court dismissed Colombia’s third preliminary objection for underlying reasons of judicial policy, namely to secure its previous judgment of 2012 from any potential claim relating to inadequate reasoning, if construed as a final rejection on the merits.

Islamic Law States and the International Court of Justice

2019 ◽  
pp. 202-238
Author(s):  
Emilia Justyna Powell
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Islamic Law ◽  
Court System ◽  
Legal Tradition ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
The Icj ◽  
International Adjudication ◽  
Advisory Opinions

This chapter focuses on the main judicial organ of the United Nations, the International Court of Justice (ICJ), and its relation to the Islamic milieu. It examines the Islamic milieu’s views of the Court’s compulsory and compromissory jurisdictions. The Court has been constructed according to the secular Western legal logic, and its jurisprudence rarely refers to the Islamic legal tradition. The chapter presents an analysis of the ICJ’s jurisprudence—judgments and advisory opinions—and the position of Islamic law-based arguments in the Court. Empirical analyses show that the Islamic milieu does not project a uniform attitude toward the ICJ. Depending on their domestic legal systems, some ILS are likely to accept the jurisdiction of the Court and some shy away from international adjudication. In particular, the presence of a secular court system and constitutional mentions of peaceful resolution of disputes promote a favorable attitude toward the ICJ among its Islamic audience.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document