Midterm sections 4-6 Flashcards
(151 cards)
Adjudication
Solving dispute relying on law, by judicial means
- It is the application of the facts and international law to the case
Arbitration
ad hoc authority created for a one-time use (specifically for the dispute) issuing legally binding decisions
Examples of Arbitration
Yugoslavia, Rwanda, Nuremberg, Tokyo
What is the Consistency problem of interpreting international law?
- same treaty interpreted differently between different tribunals or courts
- However inconsistencies rarely arise because of informal links between tribunals and courts
Who are the interpreters of the law?
tribunals and law
What is the Permanent Court of Arbitration?
-1st global mechanism for judicial settlement of disputes
-Pool of potential arbitrators that states could turn to
- Court would coordinate with states the arbitration of disputes
When did Arbitration loose its relevance?
After the implementation of Permanent Court
What was the purpose of the Permanent Court of International Justice
Hear contentious cases between states and give advisory opinions on judicial questions
Who makes up the ICJ and who is it for
- 15 judges elected by General Assembly of the UN
-Hear disputes from States and NGOs
Who can bring a case to the ICJ
Parties to the statute of the court
How To Become Member of ICJ
-By becoming member of the UN
-For non-UN members, by ratifying the Statute of the Court as a separate treaty
What determines the jurisdiction of the Court
Consent- states consent to the court to hear cases involving them
How do states give consent to the court
-Optional Clause (Article 36)
-Core-by-core basis
-compromissory clause
What is Article 36
-Optional Clause
-states can endorse to give the Court jurisdiction over any case that may arise in the future in which they are involved
What is the limitation of Article 36?
-Has to be subject to reciprocity (both parties have to endorse optional clause)
What is the Compromissory Clause?
-Any dispute relating to the interpretation or application of the treaty in question may be referred to the Court unilaterally by any party to the treaty
-When dispute arises in the future, parties undertake obligation to consult ICJ
-Very limited jurisdiction
What is Article 39?
States legally obligated to comply with the ICJ Court Decisions
What was the context of Yugoslavia vs Canada & US
-Brought to court by Yugoslavia
-Denouncing NATO’s bombing of Serbia
-Against NATO (mostly Canada and US)
-Asked court to provide provisional measure
–> US stop bombing territory
–> Refrain use of force
-Court had to establish case jurisdiction
-Court did not have jurisdiction
–> denied Serbia’s request for a provisional measure
What was Yugoslavia’s case against the US?
-Yugoslavia argued that bombings = violation of Genocide Convention–> Compromissory clause
-Article 9: compromissory clause states that if a dispute arises the parties undertake the commitment to take that dispute to the ICJ for adjudication
What was the Court’s process for determining lack of jurisdiction in US vs Yugoslavia?
-US had not given consent to the Court’s jurisdiction:
-Ratified the Genocide Convention but had placed a reservation on Article 9
–> Any dispute brought to Court
-US would have to give explicit consent for specific case
What Was the Conclusion of the Yugoslavia vs US Case?
-Lack of Jurisdiction
-Court Dropped the Case
What would have happened if the Court had assessed the Yugoslavia vs US case’s merit?
-only applicable law was Genocide convention
-only basis of jurisdiction was compromissory clause contained in Genocide Convention
-US had not violated Genocide Convention
-US had violated UN Charter but was not applicable by the court in this case
What is the genocide convention?
-Establishes obligation to take measures to prevent and to punish the crime of genocide,
–>enacting relevant legislation
–> punishing perpetrators
Did the US violate the Genocide Convention in the Yugoslavia case?
-certainly not, one of the conditions of genocide is intent to destroy a whole or in part a protected group
–> (national, regional, ethnic, religious group)
–> No intent of the US