2

The Charter of the United Nations states in Article 49 Par 2:

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

My question is essentially whether this provision is exhaustive or whether a ruling by the court can be construed to establish additional rights, for example the right to an armed intervention by a third party where international law would not provide such a right without the ruling.

Peter - Reinstate Monica
  • 7,460
  • 4
  • 32
  • 59

1 Answers1

4

As a practical matter, the ICJ is almost exclusively resorted to in circumstance where all parties agree in advance to honor the decision if it is entered. The ICJ has no meaningful means of enforcing its judgments.

An ICJ ruling can be used as part of the justification for a country's actions, but that is only as relevant as other international actors deem it. International law isn't mostly an arena of binding enforceable decisions the way that domestic law is. Instead, it is mostly part of the rhetoric of international relations. The whole notion of calling international law "law" is somewhat misleading.

ohwilleke
  • 257,510
  • 16
  • 506
  • 896