How the International Court of Justice Decided on cases of non liquet

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 Assistant professor, Sciences and Researches Branch of Tehran

2 P.H.D of International Law, Allameh Tabataba'i University

Abstract

Some of the decisions and opinions of International Court of Justice have raised the question whether The Court can refuse to make a decision by declaring non liquet for reasons such as lack of clarification, adequacy or lack of applicable law? Some experts provide a positive answer to this question with reference to The Court's opinion in paragraph 105(2)(e) of the advisory opinion on the legality of the threat or use of nuclear weapons (1996). Given the crucial role of The Court in resolving the disputes as an effective means of peaceful dispute settlement between states, which undoubtedly contribute towards the maintenance of international peace and security, it would appear that the Court could not refuse to make a decision by declaring non liquet. The main question that this article deals with is whether, in accordance with the statute, rules and principles applicable in The Court as the principal judicial organ of the United Nations, and in accordance with its case law, The Court may refuse to make a decision by declaring non liquet?

Keywords

References

 
Aspremont, Jean D. (2018) “What Was Not Meant to Be: General Principles of Law as a Source of International Law,” Global Justice, Human Rights, and the Modernization of International Law - edited by Riccardo PisilloMazzeschi and Pasquale De Sena, Springer International Publishing, pp. 165-193.
Aznar-Gomez, Mariano J. (1999) “The 1996 Nuclear Weapons Advisory Opinion and Non Liquet International Law,” International and Comparative Law Quarterly, Vol. 48, pp. 3-19.
Badansky, Daniel (1999) “Non Liquet and Incompleteness of International Law,” International Law, the International Court of Justice and Nuclear Weapons - edited by Laurence Boisson de Chazournes, Philippe Sands, Cambridge University Press, pp. 153-170.
Baragwanat, David (2014) “The Interpretative Challenges of International Adjudication across the Common Law/Civil Law Divide,” Cambridge Journal of International and Comparative Law, Vol. 3, pp. 450-488.
Bartels, Lorand (2004) “The Separation of Powers in the WTO: How to Avoid Judicial Activism,” International and Comparative Law Quarterly, Vol. 53, pp. 861-895.
Beckett, Jason A. (2004) “Interim Legality: A Mistaken Assumption - An Analysis of Depleted Uranium Munitions under Contemporary International Humanitarian Law,” Chinese Journal of International Law, Vol. 3, pp. 43-86.
Begic, Taida (2005) Applicable Law in International Investment Disputes, Eleven International Publishing.
Burri,Thomas (2010) “The Kosovo Opinion and Secession: The Sounds of Silence and Missing Links,”,German Law Journal, Vol. 11, pp. 881-890.
Byers, Michael (2002) “Abuse of Rights: An Old Principle, A New Age,”,McGill Law Journal, Vol. 47, pp. 389-431.
Dekker, Ige F. and Werner, Wouter G. (1999) “The Completeness of International Law and Hamlet's Dilemma - Non Liquet, The Nuclear Weapons Case and Legal Theory,” Nordic Journal of International Law, Vol. 68, pp. 225-247.
Ege, Ergen (2012) “The Unclear Role Yet Inevitable Application of Domestic Law under Energy Charter Treaty Arbitration,” International Business Law Journal, Vol. 2012, p. 173-192.
Elias, TaslimOlawale (1983)The International Court of Justice And Some Contemporary Problems, MartinusNijhoff Publishers.
Enabulele, Amos O. (2010) “The Aura of Unilateral Statements in International Law: Nuclear Tests Cases Revisited,”,Hanse Law Review, Vol. 6, Issue. 1, pp. 53-70.
Fellmeth, Aaron X. and Horwitz, Maurice (2009) Guide to Latin in International Law, Oxford University Press.
Handeyside, Hugh (2007) “The Lotus Principle in ICJ Jurisprudence: Was the Ship ever Afloat,” Southern California Law Review, pp. 71-94.
Hansen, Patricia Isela. (1999) “Antitrust in the Global Market: Rethinking Reasonable Expectations,”, Michigan Journal of International Law, Vol. 72, pp. 1601-1650.
Heffernan, Liz (1998) “The Nuclear Weapons Opinions: Reflections on the Advisory Procedure of the International Court of Justice,”, Stetson Law Review, Vol. 28, pp. 133-170.
Kammerhofer, Jorg (2009) “Gaps, the Nuclear Weapons Advisory Opinion and the Structure of International Legal Argument between Theory and Practice,” British Yearbook of International Law, Vol. 80, pp. 333-360.
Korhonen, Outi (1999) “Legality or Otherwise? Nuclear Weapons and the Strategy of Non Liquet,” Finnish Yearbook of International Law, pp. 55-90.
Neff, Stephen C. (2009) “In Search of Clarity: Non Liquet and International Law,” International Law and Power Perspectives on Legal Order and Justice - edited by Kaiyan Homi Kaikobad and Michael Bohlander, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, pp. 63-84.
Oellers-Frahm, Karin (2011) “Lawmaking through Advisory Opinions,” German Law Journal, Vol. 12, pp. 1033-1056.
Ouchi, Kazuomi (1998) “The Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons: Discernible Legal Policies of the Judges of the International Court of Justice,” Connecticut Journal of International Law, Vol. 13, pp. 107-118.
Pauwelyn, Joost (2001) “The Role of Public International Law in the WTO: How Far Can We Go,” American Journal of International Law, Vol. 95, pp. 535-578.
Paz, Reut Yael. (2012) “Making It Whole: HerschLauterpacht's Rabbinical Approach to International Law,” Geottingen Journal International Law, Vol. 4, pp. 417-445.
Perez, Antonio F. (1997) “The Passive Virtues and the World Court: Pro-Dialogic Abstention by the International Court of Justice,” Michigan Journal of International Law, Vol. 18, pp. 399-444.
Peters, Anne (2011) “Does Kosovo Lie in the Lotus-Land of Freedom?,” Leiden Journal of International Law, Vol. 24, pp. 95-108.
Romano, Cesare P. (2009) “Deciphering the Grammar of the International Jurisprudential Dialogue,” N.Y.U Journal of International Law and Politics, Vol. 41, pp. 755-787.
Rossi, Christopher R. (2016) “Impaled on Morton's Fork: Kosovo, Crimea, and the Sui Generis Circumstance,” Emory International Law Review, Vol. 30, pp. 353-390.
Scobbie, Iain G. M. (1997) “The Theorist as Judge: HerschLauterpacht's Concept of the International Judicial Function,” European Journal of International Law, Vol. 8, pp. 264-298.
Shaffer, Gregory (2011) “Joel Trachtman, Interpretation and Institutional Choice at the WTO,” Virginia Journal of International Law, Vol. 52, pp. 103-153.
Skordas, Achilles (2001) “Epilegomena to a Silence: Nuclear Weapons, Terrorism and the Moment of Concern,” Journal of Conflict and Security Law, Vol. 6, Issue. 2, pp. 191-224.
Steinberg, Richard H. (2004) “Judicial Law Making at the WTO: Discursive, Constitutional, and Political Constraints,” American Journal of International Law, Vol. 98, pp. 247-275.
Sugihara, Takane (2012) “The Principle of Jura Novit Curia in the International Court of Justice: With Reference to Recent Decisions,” Japanese Yearbook International Law, Vol. 55, pp. 77-109.
Taniguchi, Yasuhei (2010) “WTO Dispute Resolution as Arbitration,” Contemp. Asia Arbitration Journal, Vol. 3, pp. 1-6.
Thurer, Daniel (2003) “Malcolm MacLaren, Might the Future of the ABC Weapons Control Regime Lie in a Return to Humanitarianism,” Swiss Review of International and European Law, Vol. 13, pp. 339-371.
Tricot, Roland and Sander, Barrie (2011) “Recent Developments: The Broader Consequences of the International Court of Justice's Advisory Opinion on the Unilateral Declaration of Independence in Respect of Kosovo,” Columbia Journal of Transnational Law, Vol. 49, pp. 321-363.
Weil, Prosper (1998) “The Court Can Not Conclude Definitively ... Non Liquet Revisited,” Columbia Journal of Transnational Law, Vol. 36, pp. 109-119.
Journal of Legal Studies
Volume 11, Issue 2 - Serial Number 32
September 2019
Pages 257-283

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics