inter state dispute part 2 Flashcards
(12 cards)
What is the ICJ?
The main court of the UN, set up in 1945
Based in The Hague, Netherlands
Replaced the Permanent Court of International Justice
What does the ICJ do?
Contentious cases: Solves legal disputes between countries only
Advisory opinions: Gives advice (non-binding) to UN bodies on legal questions
HOW ICJ CASES WORK
3 Stages of a Case:
Provisional Measures – Emergency steps to protect rights
Preliminary Objections – Early legal issues raised
Merits – Final decision based on law and facts
Starting a Case:
Application: One country sues another (e.g., Ukraine v Russia)
Special agreement: Two countries agree to bring a case (e.g., Benin/Niger)A border dispute between Benin and Niger.
Both countries agreed to let the ICJ settle the disagreement.
It was about who owned certain river islands and border areas along the Niger River.
How It Works:
Written Phase – Countries file legal arguments
Oral Phase – Lawyers present in open court
Deliberation & Judgment – Judges decide in private and announce ruling
Outcome:
Judgment is final and binding
Can’t appeal, but can ask for clarification or revision
Provisional measures can be ordered to protect urgent rights
ADVISORY OPINIONS
Only UN bodies and agencies can ask for them
General Assembly & Security Council can ask about any legal issue
Other UN bodies must ask about legal issues within their job
What is “Genocide”?
Coined by Raphael Lemkin in 1944
Means: Destruction of a group (race, religion, etc.)
Became law in 1948 Genocide Convention
GENOCIDE CONVENTION (1948)
Article II: What Counts as Genocide?
Must have intent to destroy a group + any of these acts:
a) Killing
b) Serious bodily/mental harm
c) Living conditions to destroy group
d) Preventing births
e) Forcibly taking children
Article IX: Disputes go to the ICJ
GENOCIDE IN ICJ CASES
What do you need to prove?
Actus reus – The criminal acts (e.g., killing)
Mens rea – The specific intent to destroy the group (very hard to prove)
CASES TO REMEMBER (With Key Facts)
🇧🇦 Bosnia v Serbia (2007)
Srebrenica massacre = genocide
Serbia did not commit genocide, but failed to prevent and punish it
Couldn’t prove Serbia’s intent to destroy the group
🇭🇷 Croatia v Serbia (2015 judgment)
Serbs committed acts like killings and harm → actus reus = YES
Couldn’t prove intent to destroy Croats → mens rea = NO
ICJ dismissed the case
The Gambia v Myanmar (2019) –
Genocide against Rohingya
Gambia accused Myanmar of committing genocide against the Rohingya.
First time a State brought a case on behalf of people in another State.
Myanmar’s military (Tatmadaw) accused of mass killings, rape, and destruction of villages.
ICJ said Gambia can bring the case – now Gambia must prove genocidal intent.
Ukraine v Russia (2022–2024) – False Genocide Claims
Russia claimed it invaded to stop genocide in Donbas.
Ukraine said this was a lie and a misuse of the Genocide Convention.
Ukraine’s argument: Using false genocide claims to invade = violation of Article I duty to prevent genocide in good faith.
ICJ 2024 ruling: Ukraine lost – false genocide claims are not covered by the Genocide Convention.
South Africa v Israel (2023–2024) – Genocide in Gaza
South Africa accuses Israel of genocide in Gaza.
Argues intent to destroy Palestinians (based on actions + officials’ statements).
Israel denies the claim.
ICJ issued Provisional Measures in Jan 2024:
Israel must prevent acts listed in Article II Genocide Convention
Stop military from committing such acts
Stop incitement to genocide
Allow humanitarian aid into Gaza
Preserve evidence
RACIAL DISCRIMINATION – ICERD CASES
🇶🇦 Qatar v UAE (2018) – Blockade & Travel Ban
UAE banned Qatari nationals during a regional dispute.
Qatar claimed this was racial discrimination.
UN body (CERD) agreed “Qatari” = protected under ICERD.
ICJ disagreed: said nationality ≠ national origin, so ICERD doesn’t apply.
🇵🇸 Palestine v Israel (2018) – Segregation in OPT
Palestine claimed Israel violated ICERD in Occupied Territories.
Israel reserved Article 22, so ICJ can’t hear the case.
Only UN Committee on Racial Discrimination can handle it.
✅ TORTURE CASES – CONVENTION AGAINST TORTURE (CAT)
Belgium v Senegal (2012) – Hissène Habré
Habré (ex-Chad president) was in Senegal. Belgium wanted him tried for torture.
Senegal said no, but the ICJ ruled it must prosecute or extradite under CAT.
Habré was tried and jailed in Senegal in 2016.
🇨🇦 Canada & Netherlands v Syria (2023)
Accused Syria of mass torture and abuse since 2011.
ICJ issued Provisional Measures in 2023:
Prevent torture by Syrian forces
Preserve evidence of torture
