Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-94fs2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T02:21:40.139Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The 2007 Judicial Activity of the International Court of Justice

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 February 2017

D. Stephen Mathias
D. Stephen Mathias*
Affiliation:
Of the U.S. Department of State
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Current Developments
Information
American Journal of International Law , Volume 102 , Issue 3 , July 2008 , pp. 588 - 609
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 2008 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

The views expressed in this report are those of the author, and do not necessarily reflect those of the Department of State or the U.S. government. The author thanks Jacob Cogan and David K. Mathias for their assistance.

References

1 Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Bosn. & Herz. v. Serb. & Mont.) (Int’l Ct. Justice Feb. 26, 2007) [hereinafter Application of the Genocide Convention]. All of the Court’s materials cited in this report are available on its Web site, <http://www.icj-cij.org>.

2 Ahmadou Sadio Diallo (Guinea v. Dem. Rep. Congo), Preliminary Objections (Int’l Ct. Justice May 24,2007).

3 Territorial and Maritime Dispute Between Nicaragua and Honduras in the Caribbean Sea (Nicar. v. Hond.) (Int’l Ct. Justice Oct. 8, 2007) [hereinafter Nicaragua-Honduras Caribbean Sea Dispute].

4 Territorial and Maritime Dispute (Nicar. v. Colom.), Preliminary Objections (Int’l Ct. Justice Dec. 13, 2007) [hereinafter Nicaragua-Colombia Territorial and Maritime Dispute].

5 Pulp Mills on the River Uruguay (Arg. v. Uru.), Provisional Measures (Int’l Ct. Justice Jan. 23, 2007).

6 The Court noted that, after the close of oral proceedings in the case, by letter dated June 3, 2006, the president of the Republic of Serbia informed the Court that following the Declaration of Independence adopted by the National Assembly of Montenegro on June 3, 2006, “in the United Nations the name ‘Republic of Serbia’ [was] to be henceforth used instead of the name ‘Serbia and Montenegro,’” and added that the Republic of Serbia “remain[ed] responsible in full for all the rights and obligations of the state union of Serbia and Montenegro.” Application of the Genocide Convention, supra note 1, para. 67. The Court concluded that Serbia was the “only Respondent” and that “any findings that the Court may make in the operative part of the present Judgment are to be addressed to Serbia.” Id, para. 77.

7 Id., para. 471.

8 The judgment has been widely discussed in academic publications. See, for example, symposiums in 18 Eur. J. Int’l L. No. 4 (2007)Google Scholar, and 5 J. Int’l Crim. Just. 827 (2007)Google Scholar, and articles in 21 Leiden J. Int’l L. (2008).Google Scholar

9 Application of the Genocide Convention, supra note 1, paras. 166–69, 179.

10 Id, paras. 180–82.

11 Id, para. 190.

12 Id., para. 194. The issue arose in connection with the applicant’s use of the phrase “the non-Serb national, ethnical or religious group within, but not limited to, the territory of Bosnia and Herzegovina, including in particular the Muslim population.” Id., para. 191. The Court concluded that “the essence of the intent is to destroy the protected group, in whole or in part, as such. It is a group which must have particular positive characteristics—national, ethnical, racial or religious—and not the lack of them.” Id., para. 193.

13 Id, paras. 297, 199.

14 Id, paras. 420, 421.

15 Id, para. 430.

16 Id, paras. 442–46.

17 Id., para. 66.

18 Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Bosn. & Herz. v. Yugo.), Preliminary Objections, 1996 ICJ Rep. 595, 623, para. 47(2)(a) (July 11).

19 Application for Revision of the Judgment of 11 July 1996 in the Case Concerning Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Bosnia and Herzegovina v. Serbia and Montenegro), Preliminary Objections (Yugo. v. Bosn. & Herz.), Application Instituting Proceedings (filed Apr. 24, 2001).

20 Id., 2003 ICJ Rep. 7, 30–31, para. 69 (Feb. 3).

21 Application of the Genocide Convention, supra note 1, para. 82.

22 See, e.g., Legality of Use of Force (Serb. & Mont. v. Belg.), Preliminary Objections, 2004 ICJ Rep. 279,310–11, para. 79 (Dec. 15).

23 Id. at 311, para. 82.

24 Id. at 309, para. 74.

25 Application of the Genocide Convention, supra note 1, para. 122.

26 Id, para. 138.

27 Id., para. 118 (quoting Appeal Relating to the Jurisdiction of the ICAO Council (India v. Pak.), 1972 ICJ Rep. 46, 52, para. 13 (Aug. 18)).

28 Id., para. 117.

29 Id., paras. 119–20.

30 Id., para. 132 (citation omitted).

31 Yehuda, Z. Blum, Was Yugoslavia a Member of the United Nations in the Years 1992–2000? 101 AJIL 800 (2007)Google Scholar; Stephan, Wittich, Permissible Derogation from Mandatory Rules? The Problem of Party Status in the Genocide Case, 18 Eur. J. Int’l L. 591 (2007)Google Scholar; Richard, Graving, Casenote, The International Court of Justice Muddles Jurisdiction in Yugoslav Genocide Case, 15 Tulsa J. Comp. & Int’l L. 29 (2007).Google Scholar

32 Armed Activities on the Territory of the Congo (Dem. Rep. Congo v. Uganda) (Int’l Ct. Justice Dec. 19, 2005).

33 Application of the Genocide Convention, supra note 1, para. 204 (quoting Military and Paramilitary Activities in andAgainst Nicaragua (Nicar. v. U.S.), Jurisdiction and Admissibility, 1984 ICJ Rep. 392, 407, para. 101 (Nov. 26)).

34 Id.

35 ICJ Statute, Art. 49.

36 See, e.g., RuthWedgwood, Op-Ed Wedgwood, Op-Ed, Slobodan Milosevic’s Last Waltz , N.Y. Times, Mar. 12, 2007, at A23.Google Scholar

37 Application of the Genocide Convention, supra note 1, para. 413.

38 Id., paras. 207, 376.

39 Id, para. 209 (citing Corfu Channel (UK v. Alb.), 1949 ICJ Rep. 4, 17 (Apr. 9) (citation omitted)).

40 Id., para. 210.

41 Id., paras. 211, 212.

42 Id., para. 216.

43 Id., para. 223.

44 Id., para. 395.

45 Id.

46 Id, para. 276.

47 Id., pans. 370, 376.

48 Id., paras. 277–97.

49 Articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts, GA Res. 56/83, annex (Dec. 12, 2001) [hereinafter Articles on State Responsibility].

50 Application of the Genocide Convention, supra note 1, paras. 385–98.

51 Id., para. 413.

52 Id., paras. 235–36.

53 Id., paras. 237–40.

54 Id., para. 402 (citing Prosecutor v. Tadić, Appeals Judgment, No. IT–94–1–A (July 15, 1999)); see also Marco, Sassòli & Laura, M. Olson, Case Report: Prosecutor v. Tadić (Judgement), in 94 AJIL 571 (2000)Google Scholar. For the Nicaragua judgment, see supra note 33.

55 Id., para. 406.

56 Id., para. 414.

57 Id., paras. 414–15. The applicant made no claim under Article 111(d) in its final submissions in the case.

58 Id., para. 419.

59 Id., para. 421.

60 Id., paras. 421–22.

61 Id., para. 429.

62 Id., para. 430.

63 Id.

64 Id., para. 431.

65 Id., para. 432.

66 Id., para. 438.

67 Id., para. 442.

68 Id., paras. 444–45.

69 Id., para. 446.

70 Id., para. 447.

71 Id., para. 448.

72 Id.

73 Id, para. 459.

74 Id., para. 460 (quoting Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Project (Hung./Slovk.), 1997 ICJ Rep. 7, 81, para. 152 (Sept. 25)).

75 Id., para. 462.

76 Id.

77 Id., para. 463.

78 Id., para. 464.

79 See, e.g., Andrea, Gattini, Breach of the Obligation to Prevent and Reparation Thereof in the ICJ’s Genocide Case , 18 Eur. J. Int’l L. 695 (2007).Google Scholar

80 Ahmadou Sadio Diallo, supra note 2, para. 14.

81 Id., para. 25 (explaining that “[u]nder Congolese law, holders of parts sociales (‘not freely transferable’ shares) in [private limited liability companies], like Mr. Diallo, are termed ‘associés’”).

82 Draft Articles on Diplomatic Protection, in International Law Commission, Report on the Fifty-eighth Session, UN GAOR, 61st Sess., Supp. No. 10, at 16, UN Doc. A/61/10 (2006).

83 Ahmadou Sadio Diallo, supra note 2, para. 88.

84 Id., para. 39.

85 Id., para. 47.

86 Id., para. 76.

87 Id., para. 82 (quoting Barcelona Traction, Light & Power Co. (Belg. v. Spain), New Application, 1970 ICJ Rep. 4, 48, para. 93 (Feb. 5)).

88 Id., para. 89.

89 Id., para. 91 (quoting ILC Draft Articles on Diplomatic Protection, supra note 82, Art. \\(b)).

90 Id., para. 90.

91 Rosalyn Higgins, ICJ President, Speech to the Legal Advisers of the Ministries of Foreign Affairs, at 3 (Oct. 29, 2007), available at <http://www.icj-cij.org/presscom/files/7/l4097.pdf> [hereinafter Higgins, Legal Advisers Speech].

92 Nicaragua-Honduras Caribbean Sea Dispute, supra note 3.

93 Coalter, G. Lathrop, Case Report: Territorial and Maritime Dispute Between Nicaragua and Honduras in the Caribbean Sea (Nicaragua v. Honduras), in 102 AJIL 113 (2008)Google Scholar.

94 Nicaragua-Honduras Caribbean Sea Dispute, supra note 3, para. 268 (quoting Maritime Delimitation and Territorial Questions Between Qatar and Bahrain (Qatar v. Bahr.), 2001 ICJ Rep). 40, 94, (para. (176 (Mar. 16)).

95 Id., para. 272.

96 Id., paras. 287–88.

97 Id., paras. 290–92.

98 Nicaragua-Colombia Territorial and Maritime Dispute, supra note 4, para. 1.

99 American Treaty on Pacific Settlement, Art. XXXI, Apr. 30, 1948, 30 UNTS 55 [hereinafter Pact of Bogota]:

In conformity with Article 36, paragraph 2, of the Statute of the International Court of Justice, the High Contracting Parties declare that they recognize in relation to any other American State, the jurisdiction of the Court as compulsory ipso facto, without the necessity of any special agreement so long as the present Treaty is in force, in all disputes of a juridical nature that arise among them concerning:

  1. a)

    a) The interpretation of a treaty;

  2. b)

    b) Any question of international law;

  3. c)

    c) The existence of any fact which, if established, would constitute the breach of an international obligation;

  4. d)

    d) The nature or extent of the reparation to be made for the breach of an international obligation.

100 Nicaragua-Colombia Territorial and Maritime Dispute, supra note 4, para. 60 (quoting Pact of Bogotá, supra note 99, Art. VI).

101 Id., para. 126.

102 Id., para. 75.

103 Id., para. 78.

104 Id., para. 79 (citation omitted).

105 Id., para. 76 (citing Arbitral Award Made by the King of Spain on 23 December 1906 (Hond. v. Nicar.), 1960 ICJ Rep. 192, 213–14 (Nov. 18)).

106 Id.

107 Id., Dissenting Opinion of Vice-President Al-Khasawneh, paras. 5, 6.

108 See Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, An. 45, opened for signature May 23, 1969, 1155 UNTS 331.

109 Nicaragua-Colombia Territorial and Maritime Dispute, supra note 4, para. 89 (quoting Territorial Dispute (Libya/Chad), 1994 ICJ Rep. 6, 35, para. 73 (Feb. 3)).

110 Id., para. 88.

111 Id., paras. 97, 104, 142.

112 Pulp Mills on the River Uruguay, supra note 5, para. 1.

113 Id., para. 4.

114 Id., para. 8.

115 Id, para. 13.

116 This point was noted by President Higgins in her speech at the fifty-ninth session of the International Law Commission. Rosalyn Higgins, ICJ President, Speech at the 59th Session of the International Law Commission, at 2 (July 10, 2007), available at <http://www.icj-cij.Org/presscom/files/9/13919.pdf> [hereinafter Higgins, ILC Speech]. In Frontier Dispute (Burkina Faso/Mali), both parties requested provisional measures, but that case was brought by special agreement. Frontier Dispute (Burk. Faso/Mali), Provisional Measures, 1986 ICJ REP. 3 (Jan. 10).

117 Pulp Mills on the River Uruguay, supra note 5, para. 9.

118 Id, para. 12.

119 Id, para. 30.

120 Id, para. 33.

121 Id, paras. 40–43.

122 Id, paras. 45–47.

123 Id, para. 48.

124 Id., Declaration of Judge Buergenthal, para. 11.

125 Higgins, ILC Speech, supra note 116, at 3.

126 Rosalyn Higgins, ICJ President, Speech to the General Assembly, at 1 (Nov. 1, 2007), available at <http://www.icj-cij.org/presscom/files/3/l4113.pdf> [hereinafter Higgins, General Assembly Speech].

127 Id. at 5.

128 The composition of the Court remained unchanged in 2007.

129 Higgins, General Assembly Speech, supra note 126, at 6.

130 Id. at 7.

131 Id.

132 Id.

133 Rosalyn Higgins, ICJ President, Speech to the Sixth Committee of the General Assembly, at 1 (Nov. 2,2007), available at <http://www.icj-cij.Org/presscom/files/3/14123.pdf>.

134 Id. at 2.

135 Higgins, Legal Advisers Speech, supra note 91.

136 Id. at 2–3 (quoting Draft Articles on Diplomatic Protection, supra note 82, Commentary, at 26).

137 Id. at 4 (citing Tadić judgment, supra note 54).

138 Id. at 5.

139 Higgins, ILC Speech, supra note 116.