Prof Madya Rohani Mohd Shah/ LAW 583/Public International Law Ii/UiTM/Mac 2012

CHAPTER 7 PEACEFUL SETTLEMENT OF DISPUTES An international dispute is a contest of specificity, the resolution of which has some practical effect on the relations between the states involved. 1. Role of the UN: Charter (Art 2, 3): the UN Charter includes several provisions calling for peaceful settlement of disputes, particularly through negotiation, enquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement, resort to regional agencies or arrangements, or other peaceful means of their own choice. 1. General Assembly (Art. 10, 11, 12, 14): deal with ability of General Assembly to hear disputes. General Assembly is limited to fact-finding missions and making recommendations. The recommendations are nonbinding. 2. Security Council: upon request of any member (Art. 35(1) which is a party to a dispute or agrees to the obligation of a peaceful pacific dispute settlement. Art. 10, 11,(2-3), for the General Assembly, and Art. 99 for the Secretary General. A. Recommendations: the Security Council may make factfinding and exert political influence but no legal obligations unless they make a ruling. B. Deny request: The Security Council has discretion to deny a request for dispute settlement or accede to it by placing a dispute on its agenda. 3. Prohibition on use of force (UN Chart. 2(4)): (with certain exceptions, to be discussed in Chapter 19) and requires that all member states to "settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security, and justice are not endangered. 4. Chapter VI, Art 33: devoted to setting international disputes, but is limited to those which "the continuance of which is likely to endanger the maintenance of international peace and security. Art. 33(1). 2. Other Treaty Obligations of Peaceful Settlement: Since the UN Charter, the treaties calling for peaceful settlement of disputes. a. Multilateral instruments: A. Hague Convention for the Peaceful Settlement of International Disputes: revised by the Second Hague Peace Conference in 1907. 1. 88 states: bound under the 1899 or 1907 convention. 2. General Act for the Pacific Settlements of Disputes: only 23 states accepted it and later denounced by 4. B. Regional: Like the Bogota Pact, the 1948 American Treaty on Pacfiic Settlement. 2. Bilateral: there are many bilateral conventions between countries.

Prof Madya Rohani Mohd Shah/ LAW 583/Public International Law Ii/UiTM/Mac 2012

3. Non Judicial Methods: methods of non-judicial dispute resolution are (1) negotiation, a face-to-face discussion between the disputing parties; (2) inquiry, an attempt to clarify the facts in the hopes that agreement on factual matters will facilitate a final resolution; (3) mediation/good offices, the use of a third party to aid in the discussion; and (4) conciliation, a non-binding proposal by a fact-finding third party. Each method may be used alone or in any combination with the other methods. 1. Negotiation (Art. 2(3)): implied in Article 2(3) of the UN Charter and from the duty listed in the Friendly Relations Declaration of 1970 to select "means as may be appropriate to the circumstances and nature of the dispute." A. Neutral party problems; there are no neutral parties which can take part in negotiations. Thus, parties will put for extreme positions (especially if they have great bargaining power). 1. First step: most treaties, conventions, hold negotiations as the first step in a line of settlement tactics. 2. Fact finding and inquiry: is a method for establishing facts. A. Disputed facts: most problems are caused by disputed nature of facts, and an imparital body could stop the problem and produce and imparital finding of facts. B. Combining: sometimes the finders of fact is combined with making recommendations for settlement (payment, etc.). 1. Dogger Bank incident: where Russia fired upon a British ship in the North Sea alleging that it had been provoked by a Japanese sub during the Russian/Japanese War. After a fact-finding missing (senior naval officers of Britain, Russia, US, France, etc.), the commission imposed a degree of fault on Russia, stopped the Russian Admiral from being punished by the UK and ordered Russia to pay UK, 16,000.00 pounds. 3. Mediation: more active and actually takes part in negotiations and may even suggest terms of settlement to the disputing states (a characteristic of conciliation). A. Conciliation: Conciliation Rules of the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) deals with commerical disputes and not inter-state disputes. 1. Rules: leave it to the conciliator whether or not to make settlement proposals. 2. Beagle Channel award: the dispute between Argentina and Chila, wher ethey accepted Cardinal Antionio Samore as mediator, upon proposal by the Pope. 3. Algeris Accords: between the United States and Iran after the hostage crisis. This started the establishment of the Iran-United States Claims Tribunal in the Hague in 1981.

Prof Madya Rohani Mohd Shah/ LAW 583/Public International Law Ii/UiTM/Mac 2012

4. World Bank: in the Pakistan and India war dispute on the waters of the Indus basin, the World Bank used financial aid as a mediating power. B. Disfavored Mediator: the party mediating has a threat of being disfavored by either party. C. Leverage: Bigger states have greater leverage (more resources, greater power) but push their own interests too. Smaller states have no leverage but are less prone to push their interests. 1. Best chances for mediation: Mediation has most chances in settlement of smaller issues or local conflicts, in stalemate situations where escalation threatens to occur, or when the dispute has already in fact been decided and consequences have to be drawn. 4. Good Offices: When a third party (go between) tries to persuade disputing states to enter into negotiations, passing messages back and forth and when negotiations start, its function ends. 5. Conciliation: Institut de droit international in 1961: "A method of settlement of international disputes of any nature according to which a Commission set up by the Parties, either on a permanent basis or an ad hoc basis to deal with a dispute, proceeds to the impartial examination fo the dispute and attempts to define the terms of a settlement susceptible of being accepted by them or of affording the Parties, with a view to its settlement, such aid as they may have requested. A. Appointed: Conciliators may be appointed. 4. 1928 General Act for the Pacific Settlement of International Disputes: basically the only global instrument to provide for compulsory conciliation (and adjudication and arbitration). A. Recent: now, parties usually just include conciliation as part of treaties, it is not the entire focus of the treaty itself. B. General Practice: states nominate a one or two of their own nationals of other states in order to provide a neutral majority, then the states agree on a certain number of impartial and independent nationals of other states in order to provide a neutral majority. C. Appointed and Actions: appointed by agreement between the parties, investigates the facts of the dispute and suggests the terms of settlement. 1. Mediator: the mediator, if his report is not accepted, can formulate other proposals, the conciliator only issues one report. D. Conciliation Commission: same basic functions as a conciliator (examine the dispute and make non-binding recommendations for possible settlement). 1. Formality: procedures are kept highly flexible in the interest of being able to deal with the specific type of dispute. 3

Prof Madya Rohani Mohd Shah/ LAW 583/Public International Law Ii/UiTM/Mac 2012

2. Confidentiality: a key to the disputes. 3. Acceptance: if the parties accept the proposal, the commission drafts a proces-verbal which records the fact of conciliation and the agreed terms of settlement. E. Disputes: conciliation is most accepted where disputes are minor and the central issues are of legal nature, but the solutions requests an equitable compromise in the eyes of both parties. 1. Hans von Mangoldt: "Nearly all of them involved legal questions, the majority of which were submitted under a general undertaking to conciliate. Eight of these were settled on the basis of the recommendations of the commission. This success may be due to the fact that in all but one case, failing conciliation, compulsory arbitration had been provided for." F. Yugoslavia: while the UN has adopted agreements on conciliation, the Yugoslavian incident has shown that conciliation has failed to stop the slaughter of persons, because the positions of the parties are irreconcilable. 5. Quasijudicial Methods/Arbitration: some treaties provide for arbitration and/or judicial means of settlement which are legally binding on both parties. 1. Gabicikovo-Nagymaros Project Case: The treaty was a 1977 treaty between Hungary and Czechoslovakia about a system of dams and locks, as a joint investment. To improve hydroelectric power, navigation and protection against flooding. A. Agreement: basically its a financial and systematic agreement of how the docks and dam are to be built, maintained and financed. B. State of necessity: is grounds for terminating a treaty under international law, but is only allowed under exceptional circumstances. C. Essential interest: it is allowed when a states essential interests are threatened by a grave and imminent peril, the act being challenged must have been the only means of safeguarding that interest, the act must not have seriously impaired an essential interest of the other state obligated and the state (authority of the act) must not have contributed to the occurrence of the state of necessity. D. Environment: of Hungry is related to an essential interest of the State. However, the danger was invoked by Hungry were not established in 1989 nor were they "imminent" 1. Extension: the project could have been extended without abandoning it, just as long as they review the project under the articles to make sure that it does not "affect the environment."

Prof Madya Rohani Mohd Shah/ LAW 583/Public International Law Ii/UiTM/Mac 2012

2. Articles 15, 19, 20: These are articles which ensure the quality of the water of the Danube is not impared and the nature is protected. 3. Adapt: these articles are open for interpretation and adaptation so that there are not any significant environmental impacts on Czech and Hungary. 6. Carrying out a treaty Relationship between countries: determined by the rules of other relevant conventions to which the two States are a party, by the rules of general international law, and in the rules of State responsibility. A. Pacta sun servanda: Article 26 of the Vienna Convention on Treaties, is that Parties must enforce a treaty toward its original intentions. "Every treaty is binding upon the parties to it and must be performed by them in good faith." B. Treaty: the treaty is still in force between both parties (Czech and Hungary). C. Damages: the court then goes through a tally of the different damages afforded to each and caused by each. 7. Arbitration: unlike any other method of conciliation results in a legally binding settlement. A. Advantages: 1. Conclusive: the procedure is more conclusive than other forms of non-judicial dispute settlement because the decisions of the arbitral panels are binding upon the parties. 2. Greater control: the disputing parties remain in greater control in the arbitration process because they appoint the arbitrators. 3. Procedures: the parties designate the procedures and the laws to be applied. The countries pick two arbiters and the arbiters pick a third (or more), who decide by majority vote. 4. Less formal: arbitration is less formal and less contentious than adjudication. 5. Confidentiality: the procedures and outcome can be kept confidential (a great advantage when dealing with sensitive matters). B. Disadvantages: 1. Procedures: if parties do not specify the procedures, the process can be cumbersome. 2. Discovery/evidence: arbitration devices do not have the same power as courts to require discovery and take witness testimony. 3. Pay for arbitration: the parties must pay the entire cost of arbitration.

Prof Madya Rohani Mohd Shah/ LAW 583/Public International Law Ii/UiTM/Mac 2012

8. Permanent Court of Arbitration: Hague Convention for the Pacific Settlement of International Disputes set up PCA. Each party may nominate 4 persons on the panel of arbitrators. It just set up the machinery for ending disputes. A. Economic: Bilateral arbitration has been more accepted for limited fields of economic cooperation where the cooperation in the interest of all participating states can only be assured if disputes are not left open but brought to a final decision in due course. B. ICSID: International Center for the Settlement of Investment Disputes, to deal with the complicated arbitrations between a state and a party. This is under the World Bank. C. Iran/United States Claims Tribunal: has decided more than 3,800 cases for $50 billion. 1. Algiers Declaration: the tribunal created by Algiers Declaration as a solution to Tehran hostages crisis. 2. Jurisdiction for: (1) Nationals: claims of nationals of the US against Iran and claims of Iran against US. (2) Official claims: of US and Iran against each other out of contractual agreements between them for the purchase and sale of goods and services. (3) Disputes: on whether US has met obligations to return property of family of former Shah of Iran, Reza Pahlevi. (4) Interpretation: disputes of interpretation or application of the Algiers Accord. 3. Substantive law: "The Tribunal shall decide all cases on the basis of respect for law, applying such choice of law rules and principles of commercial and international law as the Tribunal determines to be applicable, taking into account relevant usages of the trade, contract provisions and changed circumstances. 4. Members: 3 Iranians and US, 3 from other states (neutrals) total of 9. 2. Types of International Arbitral Clauses: arbitration can be mandated by a treaty clause, many be the main subject of a treaty on dispute settlement, or may be agreed upon after the dispute has arisen. A. Clause Inserted in Treaty : an arbitration clause may be inserted in treaty dealing with one more substantive issue. B. Treaty Itself Establishes Settlement Symbol: the treaty may exist solely to create a dispute resolving form. (Hague Convention for Pacific of International Disputes). C. "After-the-Fact" Arbitral Agreement: arbitration agreements may be concluded after dispute has arisen. (Iran/US Claims Tribunal). 3. Consent to arbitrate and the compromise: there is no international law requirement to arbitrate. Parties may consent to arbitrate. The

Prof Madya Rohani Mohd Shah/ LAW 583/Public International Law Ii/UiTM/Mac 2012

subsequent agreement on the details of the arbitration procedure is called the compromis darbitrage. 4. Composition of the arbitral tribunal: Normally, a tribunal has a tripartite structure, in which each party selects on member independently an then the third member is selected by a joint decision of the parties. If they fail, then the final member is chosen by an outside party. 5. Choice of Location: Choice of location can be important because some countries laws provide that their courts have jurisdiction over arbitration proceedings. To avoid problems, neutral country location is advisable. 6. Rules of Arbitration/Ad Hoc v Institutional Arbitration: Parties may choose between the established sets of rules for arbitration or may develop their own "ad hoc" rules. A. Settlement of disputes under the Law of the Sea Convention: 1. Binding: the procedure ends in a binding third-party decision in one form or another, with arbitration as the default procedure, if other mechanisms of dispute settlement fail. 2. Method: states are free to select the method of dispute settlement in a case (Article 280). 3. If it does not success: Parties must return to the basic procedures of Section 1 of Part XV (Art. 281). Which gives priority to dispute settlement procedures the parties have agreed to in general, regional or bilateral instruments leading to binding decisions, including acceptance of the optional clause of the International Court of Justice. 4. Section 1 fails, then go to Section 2: Section 2 gives 4 options of a compulsory settlement procedure which they may choose by written declaration. (1) International Tribunal of Law of the Sea in Hamburg, (2) International Court of Justice, (3) an aribtral tribunal established in accordance with Annex VII to the convention, (4) a special arbitral tribunal for the settlement of disputes concerning fisheries, protection and preservation of the marine environment, marine scientific research, or navigation and pollution by vessels. 5. Other procedure: if the parties choose another procedure, then the dispute is submitted to arbitration in accordance with annex VII. 6. Excluded: Article 298, permit states to except certain types of dispute from the rules on compulsory jurisdiction. (1) disputes concerning interpretation of Articles 15, 74, 83 (relating to sea boundary deliminations). (2) disputes "involving historic bays or 7

Prof Madya Rohani Mohd Shah/ LAW 583/Public International Law Ii/UiTM/Mac 2012

titles," (3) disputes concerning military activities, government ships, etc., (4) disputes on law enforcement concerning exercise of sovereign rights or jurisdiction under Article 297(2) and (3), (5) disputes in which Security Council is exercising functions under UN Charter. B. Rules of the International Center for the Settlement Investment Disputes (ICSID): this Center is affiliated with World Bank and deals with investment disputes. C. Rules of Conciliation and Arbitration of the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC): ICC Rules and Court of Arbitration are widely used (Trade). D. Rules of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law Arbitration (UNCITRAL): set rules governs the Iran/US Claims Tribunal. E. Commercial Arbitration Rules of the American Arbitration Association (AAA): promotes domestic and international arbitration in many fields. 7. Applicable Law: the Compromise usually sets forth the governing rules to be applied by the arbitrators and those rule in turn stipulate the choice of law. 8. Arbitral Award: as a general rule, arbitral awards are binding on the parties and are not subject to appeal. Certain defenses to enforcement of an award do exist. Some include: A. Defenses to Arbitral Award: (1) arbitral tribunal exceeded its powers, (2) the enforcement of the award is contrary to the public policy of the forum country, (3) the award resulted from arbitration of matters considered incapable of settlement by arbitration under the laws of the forum country, (4) the defendant proves that he was "not given proper notice or was otherwise unable to present his case," (5) the award is in "manifest disregard" of the law. B. Additional basis: the challenging of the award are: (1) corruption on the part of a member of the arbitral panel, (2) failure to state the reasons for the award, (3) serious departure from a fundamental procedural rule, (4) the agreement to arbitrate or the compromis are a nullity, (5) the tribunal exceeded its powers.

9. International Courts: (1) International Court of Justice, (2) Court of Justice of the European Communities, (3) Benelux Court of Justice, (4) European Court of Human Rights, (5) Inter-American Court of Human Rights.

Prof Madya Rohani Mohd Shah/ LAW 583/Public International Law Ii/UiTM/Mac 2012

10. INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE: the ICJ only accepts disputes which are agreements on points of law or fact, a conflict of legal views or interests between two persons. a. Methods: (1) diplomatic means of dispute settlement, (2) legal (or judicial) means of dispute settlement, (3) dispute settlement procedures among the member states of international organizations. Other below b. Diplomatic means; negotiations, good offices, mediation, inquiry and conciliation. A. Third party: must be involved without having the power to decide or create a legally binding agreement. B. Legal means: arbitration and adjudication, legally binding third party decision. C. Dispute settlement: the UN, organizations dealing with interstate conflicts. c. Preferred method: the preferred method is diplomatic in nature because states have most control rather than giving it to third parties which basically can do nothing. 1. Characteristics of ICJ: International Court of Justice (ICJ) is the principle judicial organ of the UN. Sees relatively little cases because only states may be parties in contentious proceedings before the court. Further, states must consent to the jurisdiction. 2. Structure and composition (Art. 3, 1): the ICJ is composed of fifteen judges elected by both the Security Council and the General Assembly. a. Members: most states who are members of the UN are members of the ICJ. However, some members are only members of the ICJ (Switzerland and Nauru). b. Functions: to settle legal disputes submitted to it by states in accordance with international law and to give advisory opinions on legal questions referred to it by international organs and agencies duly authorized to do so. c. Composition: the court has 15 judges, 5 elected every three years for office of nine years. d. Absolute Majority: the judges on the ICJ require an absolute majority from the Security Council and General Assembly. e. Judge: at least one member of the Security Council is a judge at all times. 3. Evaluation of the Court: the court has addressed less than 60 cases from 1946 to 1990. a. European Community Treaty, Art 177: European states, organizations, etc., can ask the European Court of Justice to rule on a question involving interpretation of Community law, or 9

Prof Madya Rohani Mohd Shah/ LAW 583/Public International Law Ii/UiTM/Mac 2012

the validity of an act of the Community institution. Then transmitted back to the country, and is binding on the national court. 4. Security Council and the court: the court was never meant to concern itself with the Security council but this might change. (1) the broadness and scope of security council decisions, (2) whether there is judicial review of security council decisions. a. International Community concern of Security Council: the International Community has an interest in keeping the Security Council in bounds. 5. Arbitrary: States feel that the decisions of the International Courts are arbitrary and not predictable. The fact that cases cannot be negotiated means that the law is unclear or unworked in that area leading to distrust. 6. Contentious and Advisory Jurisdiction: the Court may only hear cases governed by international law. Contentious jurisdiction is based on either the express or implied consent of the parties Decisions in contentious cases are binding on the parties. The Court also may issue non-binding, advisory opinions. a. Article 36(1): jurisdiction comprises all cases which the parties refer to it and all matters specially provided for in the UN Charter or in treaties and conventions in force. b. Procedure: English and French are the two official languages and everything written or said in one is translated into the other. Judgement is final, there is no appeal. 7. Ad hoc chambers (Art. 26(2)): The use of chambers gives the parties influence as regards the number of judges to decide a case (Article 17(2) of Rules of Court) and regards the composition of the chamber. 1. Matters: Corfu Channel Case: the United Kingdom argued that such a recommendation, addressed to the United Kingdom and Albania, was sufficient to give the Court jurisdiction to thear a British complaint against Albania. The court held that there were "no matters speically provided for in the Charter of the United Nations." (contrary to the UK argument). d. Compulsory Jurisdiction Under Optional clause: emerged as a compromise between advocates and opponents of compulsory jurisdiction 1. Acceptance, Art. 36, para. 2 and 3: "The states parties to the present Statute may at any time declare that they recognize as compulsory ipso facto and without special agreement, in relation to any other state accepting the same obligation, the jurisdiction of the Court in all legal disputes." "The declaration referred to above may and 10

Prof Madya Rohani Mohd Shah/ LAW 583/Public International Law Ii/UiTM/Mac 2012

may unconditionally or on condition of reciprocity on the part of several or certain states, or for a certain time." 2. Problem with # of Countries Accepting Jurisdiction: at the end of the commission, no communist state accepted jurisdiction by the Court, eleven West European and five South American countries, as well as Switzerland and Liechtenstein. Now only 59 accept jurisdiction. a. United States: After the Nicaragua v US case, the US withdrew compulsory jurisdiction on US. 2. Reciprocity: States which accept jurisdiction of the Court under the optional clause do so, only "in relation to any other state accepting the same obligation." a. Effect: The respondent may only assert any jurisdiction is has declared with the Court and any jurisdiction of the petitioner state. b. Duration of Declaration (Art 36 2): some declarations state no limits, others remain for specific periods. Some include the right to terminate effective upon receipt by the UN Secretary-General. 3. Reservations: the United States has made reservations so that it must consent to cases (genocide convention of 1986) where the United States is a party of the case and with the Connolly reservation stating that all matters judged by the US to be within its domestic jurisdiction is within the domestic jurisdiction of the US. 1. Norwegian Loans case: the British claimed that unilateral reservations which determine the scope of the reservation were not allowed by Article 36(6) which provides "In the event of a dispute as to whether the Court has jurisdiciton, the matter shall be settled by the decision of the Court." Reservation was created by France and was invoked by Norway. 2. Fisheries Jurisdiction case: Spain brought against Canada before the Court on 28 March 1996. Canada contested the jurisdiction fo the Court which Spain based on the declarations made by the two parties under Article 36(2). 3. Jennings observed: "The optional clause remains an underused and less than satisfactory method for augmenting the competence of the Court. It remains true, as it was when Waldock made his family study of the optional clause, that despite the principle of reciprocity, states may well decide that there is some political advantage n remaining outside a system which permits states to join more or less on their own terms at an 11

Prof Madya Rohani Mohd Shah/ LAW 583/Public International Law Ii/UiTM/Mac 2012

opportune moment. It would be difficult if not practically impossible to change the system, given the difficulties fo amending the Statute of the Court." 4. East Timor Case: in deciding whether to adjudicate the issue of the administration of the continental shelf between East Timor and Australia, Portugals case against Australia was not accepted because Indonesia did not consent to the case. a. Not a member: Whatever the nature of the obligations invoked, the Court could not rule on the lawfulness of the conduct of a State when its judgment would imply an evaluation of the lawfulness of the conduct of another State which is not a party to the case. Where this is so, the Court cannot act, even if the right in question is a right erga omnes. b. Consent: the dependent of the court upon the consent principle curtails its capacity to act which in its results is often unfortunate with regard to justice. 4. Reservations to Compulsory Jurisdiction (Art 36 3): authorizes reservations conditioned on other states accepting the courts compulsory jurisdiction for a certain time. A wide variety of reservations have been utilized. 1. Disputes to be settled by other means: most common reservation, exclude disputes which parties had already agreed to settle in other tribunals or by other means. 2. Disputes within Domestic Jurisdiction (Connelly Amendment): This excluded from ICJ jurisdiction any disputes which are essentially within domestic jurisdiction of the USA. This might violate the ICJs jurisdiction under Art. 36, 3. 3. Disputes under Multilateral Treaties: reservations which exclude disputes arising out of multilateral treaties unless all parties are also parties before the court or all parties agree. 4. Specific Disputes: maybe those which concern a specific area of law (law of sea, space, etc.). 5. Reservations for National Security and Self Defense: some states modified acceptance to exclude matters related to national defense and security. e. Effect and enforcement of judgments: Judgements of the ICJ are binding upon the parties. The Security Council makes recommendations or decides upon measures to be taken to give effect of the judgment. 1. Enforcement of Judgements (Ch. VI and VII): Judgments of the court are binding (as are judgments of 12

Prof Madya Rohani Mohd Shah/ LAW 583/Public International Law Ii/UiTM/Mac 2012

all international courts and tribunals). Article 94 of the United Nations Charter authorizes the Security Council to make recommendations or decide upon measures to be taken to give effect to the judgment. 2. Security Council: the only measures that the Security Council may respect are those under Chapter VI of the Charter, dealing with the settlement of disputes, and not the stronger measures under Chapter VII which require an immediate threat to the peace before sanctions can be adopted. f. Advisory jurisdiction (Art 65): the Court may give advisory opinions on any legal question at the request of a body authorized by the UN. Although advisory opinions are legally non-binding, they are, nevertheless, very influential in the development of international law. g. Advisory opinions (Art. 96): Court has power to give advisory opinions. "The General Assembly or the Security Council may request the International Court of Justice to give an advisory opinion on any legal question. (2) Other organs of the United Nations and specialized agencies which may at any time be so authorized by the General Assembly, may also request advisory opinions of the Court on legal questions within the scope of their activities. 1. Organizations: the advisory is only open to organizations and not states. (United Nations and 16 other organizations). 2. Invitation: after request filed (by organization), ICJ may require written or oral statements. 3. Consultative: advisory opinions are only consultative and not binding on the requesting parties. 4. Political weight: but the advisory opinion does have political weight in the court and development of international laws. a. Example: Territorial Status of Nambia and Western Saharar, Expenses of Certain UN operations. 5. Rarely used: this is because organizations have their own legal staff which they use. B. Legal Effect: although non-binding, advisory opinions influence international law. C. Preliminary relief (Art 41): the ICJ may provide preliminary relief if "circumstances so require to preserve the respective rights of either party."

11. Other International Courts: there are also a number of regional and specialized tribunals, particularly in Western Europe. Three regional courts sitting in Europe are

13

Prof Madya Rohani Mohd Shah/ LAW 583/Public International Law Ii/UiTM/Mac 2012

the Court of Justice of the European Communities, the Benelux Court of Justice, and the European Court of Human Rights. A. Court of Justice of the European Communities: the European Court of Justice, sole judicial organ of the European Community. B. Benelux Court of Justice: modeled after the European Court of Justice. Primary function to ensure uniformity with Benelux treaties (interpretation). C. European Court of Human Rights: established under European Convention on Human Rights, enforces European Human Rights law.

14