FUNCTIONS OF THE ICJ

Judge Lachs refers to the ICJ as the, ‘the guardian of legality for the international community as
a whole, both within and without the United Nations.’1Currently, there is a proliferation of
judicial organs at the international and regional level, such as the ICC, the International Tribunal
for the Law of the Sea, the ECHR and the ECJ, to name a few. Some of these dispute resolution
systems focus on a special field and also most of them govern disputes between individuals and
rather than inter-state disputes. Therefore, it is clear that the ICJ plays the most important role
in the international judicial system for matters falling outside the jurisdiction of specialized
tribunals.
Before the establishment of the ICJ, the PCIJ’s function was to decide on the interstate disputes
on the basis of international law, as well as to provide legal advice to the League of Nations
upon request. At the end of World War II, with the disbanding of the League of Nations, the
PCIJ had also to go, but the International Court of Justice (ICJ) was created to continue as its
successor.

The International Court of Justice (ICJ) plays a part in the peaceful settlement of international
disputes, in furtherance of the first purpose of the United Nations: "to bring about by peaceful
means and in conformity with the principles of justice and international law, adjustment or
settlement of international disputes or situations which might lead to a breach of the peace".
The Court fulfils this role not only by its function of adjudication of international disputes -
disputes which, if unresolved, might lead to a breach of the peace but, far more often, disputes
which are an element of the routine interaction of international relations. On occasion, the
Court's judicial activity is complemented by political methods of dispute settlement by the
parties to the dispute and by UN organs other than the Court, which is "the principal judicial
organ of the United Nations".

Its function is to pass judgement on disputes between states, as such only states may bring
their cases before the court. It is open to all states that are party to the statute and those who

1
See Lockerbie (Libya v. U.S.), 1998 I.C.J. 115 (Preliminary Objections of Feb. 27); Lockerbie (Libya v.
UK), 1998 I.C.J. 9 (Preliminary Objections of Feb. 27).
agree to the conditions laid down by the SC. The proceedings of the court are carried out in
French and English; either may be used by the parties. Written pleading and oral presentations
presented in one language are translated into the other. The judgments and opinions are both
in French and English.2
The Court may also hear witnesses and appoint commissions of experts to make investigations
and reports when necessary. These procedures were used in the Corfu Channel, Temple of
Preah Vihear and in South West Africa(1966). The deliberation of the court are held in private,
but the judgements, which are by majority vote, are read in open court. In the case of a tie, the
President may cast a deciding vote; this was done in the South West Africa Case where a 7-7
vote was cast. Any judge may file a separate opinion if he does not agree in whole or part with
the judgement. The decision of the court is final and without appeal.

Although the ICJ has no enforcement powers, Article 94 of the Charter incorporates an
undertaking on the part of each member of the UN "to comply with the decision of the ...
court...in any case to which it is a party" and a further provision that:

IF any party to a case fails to perform the obligations incumbent upon it under a judgement
rendered by the court, the other party may have recourse to the Security Council, which may, if
it deem necessary, make recommendations or decide upon measures to be taken to give effect
to the judgement.

The court is authorised by Article 65 of the Statute to give advisory opinions on any legal
questions at the request of whateverbody may be authorised by or in accordance with the UN
Charter to make such a request. Article 96 of the Charter provides that such opinions may be
requested by the General Assembly or the SC and by other organs of the UN and specialized
agencies, when authorised by the GA. Such requests must be made by means of a written
request containing an exact statement of the questions, accompanied by all documents likely to

2
Retrieved from: http://www.studyworld.com/newsite/reportessay/science/Social
%5CInternational_Court_of_Justice-127.htm Friday 5th November 2010.
shed light upon them. >From this point on, the procedure before the court is somewhat
analogous to contentious cases.

In its role as and advisory body, the court has given some important opinions with regard to
the costs of peacekeeping, which could be reckoned as normal expenses. It also gave opinions
concerning admissions into the UN. Because of the ICJ's limited powers, its strict need to
adhere to its charter and its impotency of action unless approached we must consider its ability
to resolve cases brought before it successfully, its failures to do so when approached and its
shortcomings, in accessing its effectiveness, keeping in mind its role in maintaining World
peace.

Since its founding in 1946, the ICJ has dealt with 41 contentious cases between states and has
also delivered 21 advisory opinions. It has a mixed record of successes and failures, with a
surprisingly high degree of compliance with the verdict of the ICJ.
(Only two cases involving the Corfu Channel Case and the US-Nicaragua case did the countries
refuse to comply with the ICJ judgement.) One reason for this compliance is the use of the ICJ
on a voluntary basis.
Hence States would not seek the ICJ's verdict without having first accepted the court's verdict in
advance, be it in their favour of not, as a matter of obligation.

An example of a successful case where the ICJ is effective is in territorial waters and fishing
rights in the "Fisheries" case (1951). In it, the ICJ verdict in favour of Norway settled a long-
standing Dispute between the United States and Norway involving British fishing vessels
operating inside Norwegian claimed waters. Another success of the ICJ were the "North Sea
Continental Shelf" cases (1969) involving Denmark, the Netherlands, and West Germany.
This successful settlement was crucial to the drilling of oil and gas in the North Sea later. A
further example is the "Fisheries Jurisdiction" case between the UK and Iceland (1974). In this
case, the ICJ contributed to the development of the Law of the Sea in that it advocated the
Conservation of the 'living resources of the sea".3

3
Retrieved from http://www.studyworld.com/newsite/reportessay/science/Social
%5CInternational_Court_of_Justice-127.htm Friday 5th November 2010