International Court Of Justice - A brief history and its judgements enforceability

Voice of Truth Nov 2, 2022 0 Add to Reading List

ABSTRACT

This article is on the International Court Of Justice, one of the principal organs of the United Nation. It illustrates the need and importance of the International Justice Court after the failure of the League Of Nations and the Permanent Court Of International Justice.

This article examines the extent of the power which was bestowed upon it by the United Nations along with 51 other countries originally. The article also examines the case scenarios where the International Court Of Justice has used its power to uphold international human rights and provide resolution to trans-country conflicts.

INTRODUCTION

In its common parlance, justice means being just, fair, impartial and right. As we have moved towards civilisation justice has become more exhaustive. It now includes equality and liberty, the recognition of fundamental human rights and the implementation of such rights before the public. To recognise the law of the land to abide by the Constitution, laid down for the people and not give in to the evils of society has gradually become the components of living a just life.

With the growing recognition and importance of the terms ‘Justice’ and ‘Peace-building’ around the globe, an attempt to enforce fairness and righteous behaviour and a system to punish the wrongdoers, the concept of an international court of justice was thought of. A court that would oversee and settle the disputes that arise between the countries and states in accordance with the rules and regulations of international law. A court that would give its expert opinion and advice on global legal issues. To promote fairness, equality and righteousness, the International Court of justice was formed.

What is the International Court Of Justice?

The International Court of Justice, Cour Internationale de justice in French, is sometimes also known as the World Court. It came into effect after the second world war replacing the Permanent Court of International Justice. It represents one of the six main organs of the United Nations. The International Court Of Justice is the only international court that oversees and settles the disputes that arise between countries and states in accordance with the rules and regulations of international law.

The International Court of Justice is situated in The Peace Palace Hague, Netherlands, it is the only principal organ of the United Nations which is not in New York City. There are two official languages of the International Court Of Justice namely, English and French. The International Court Of Justice is a panel of 15 judges duly elected by the United Nations General Assembly and Security Council for a term of not more than nine-year. Each judge represents their nationality respectively and may be represented in court at the same time, and judges collectively reflect on the principal civilizations and legal systems of the globe.

Though there was a peacebuilding permanent body, governed by its statutory provisions known as the Permanent Court of International Justice, set up by the League of Nations, however, it proved to be unfruitful due to the unprecedented bloodshed in the second world war. With the peak of activities in 1933 continuous growing international tensions and the isolations, freedom movements in the colonies and worldwide non-acceptance, the Permanent Court of International Justice began to decline in its activities.

In 1944, a conference between the allied powers, the USSR, the U.K., the U.S. and China at Dumbarton Oaks, in the United States, where a proposal was published for the conception of a new governing body for an intergovernmental organisation with an international court of its own, for resolving disputes arising globally.

Followed by a subsequent meeting in 1945 convened in Washington D.C., with a board of 44 jurists from around the world for drafting the statute for the International court.

In 1946, the judges of the Permanent Court of International Justice (PCIJs) resigned and the first meeting of the International Court Of Justice (ICJ) took place, Sir José Gustavo Guerrero of El Salvador was elected the president of this body.

In 1947, the first case was registered by the United Kingdom against Albania over incidents in the Corfu Channel. There have been various many cases that have been taken up by the International Court Of Justice, to promote justice. The recent two cases have been listed below;

In 2017, the Republic Of India approached the International Court of Justice (ICJ), regarding the death penalty verdict against Kulbhushan Jadhav, an Indian citizen. Asserting that Pakistani authorities were denying India its right of consular access to Jadhav in violation of the Vienna Convention.

Pakistani military court that had falsely arrested Kulbhushan Jadhav based on alleged espionage and subversive activities, Pakistani military court also confirmed that Jadhav had sought clemency from the country's army chief following his conviction and released a new confessional video of Jadhav, in which he stated that he visited Karachi twice for gathering intelligence on naval facilities and admitted to supporting and funding, on behalf of India's RAW., which was refuted by the Indian foreign ministry stating it as false propaganda.

India then moved to the International Court of Justice (ICJ), which after deliberation stayed the execution sentence passed by the Pakistani military court. The ICJ also found a violation of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations by Pakistan and directed Pakistan to provide consular access to Kulbhushan Jadhav in its July 2019 verdict.

In 2022, Ukraine complained of Russia for violating the 1948 Genocide Convention. Ukraine alleged that on the false pretext of genocide, Russia invaded Ukraine. Russian representatives refused to appear before the Court.

On 16 March, the International Court Of Justice, rendered its order directing Russia inter alia to immediately suspend all military operations in Ukraine on a 13–2 vote with only the Chinese and Russian judges in opposition. The order was binding on Russia, but the International Court Of Justice could not enforce it as it neither has the means nor the mechanism to secure the enforcement of this judgement. Also, the possibility of the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) to take necessary measures to give effect to the judgement. in the present case was bleak given that Russia had veto power in the UNSC.

However, Russia’s non-appearance in the court proceedings reflected its disrespect for international law, which legitimised and justified countermeasures against Russia. Interestingly enough, Russia was removed from the Council of Europe with immediate effect on the same day as ICJ’s provisional measures were indicated.

CONCLUSION

The two case studies mentioned above help us understand the importance of the International Court Of Justice, As stated in article 94 every UN member needs to comply with the decisions of the court. Should the parties not comply, then the issue is to be taken before the Security Council for enforcement action.

If the judgement is not in favour of one of the five permanent members of the Security Council or its allies, then only voting helps decide any resolution on enforcement.

The Nicaragua case is the best example. After the Nicaragua case, when Nicaragua brought the issue of the United States' noncompliance with the court's decision before the Security Council. The International Court Of Justice could not force the state to comply with its decision.

Furthermore, if the United Nations Security Council refuses to enforce a judgement against any other state, there is no method of forcing the state to comply.

Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter is the most effective form to take action for the Security Council. Coercive action can only be justified if international peace and security are at stake, however, the United Nations Security Council has never done that so far.

AUTHOR - SHUBHANGI SHARMA