El tribunal indernacional del justicia

The International court of justice also known as the World Court is the primary judicial organ of United Nations. It is based in the peace palace in The Hague, Netherland, of all of the six principle organs of the United Nations; it is the only one that is not located in New York, or America as a whole. It was established in June 1945 by the charter of the United Nations and started work in April of 1946 as the successor to the permanent of international justice.

English and French are the two official languages. The court was created as a conclusion of a long development of methods for the pacific settlement of international disputes. The United Nations article 33 lists methods for the pacific settlement of disputes between the states such as; negotiation, enquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement, and resort to regional agencies or arrangements; as well good offices. Among these methods, certain involve appealing to third parties.

The main function of the court to settle, in accordance with international law, legal disputes submitted to it by States and to give advisory opinions on legal questions referred to it by authorized United Nations organs and specialized agencies. It is composed of

Lo sentimos, pero las muestras de ensayos completos están disponibles solo para usuarios registrados

Elija un plan de membresía
15 judges that are elected to 9 years terms by the United Nations, the general assembly, and the United Nations Security Council from a list nominated by the national groups in the permanent court of Arbitration.

The International Court of Justice acts as a world court. The Court has a dual jurisdiction : it decides, in accordance with international law, disputes of a legal nature that are submitted to it by States (jurisdiction in contentious cases); it gives advisory opinions on legal questions at the request of the organs of the United Nations or specialized agencies authorized to make such a request (advisory jurisdiction).

The Outbreak of war in September 1939 had serious consequences for the Permanent Court of International Justice; after the failure of the Permanent Court of International Justice, in 1942 the US secretary of state and the and the Foreign Secretary of the United Kingdom acknowledged themselves in support of the establishment, or re-establishment of an international court after the war that had taken place in September of 1939and the inter-American Judicial Committee recommended the extension of the Permanent Court of International Justice’s jurisdiction.

In 1943 the United State Secretary of State and United Kingdom’ s Foreign Secretary came up with the proposal of inviting a number of experts to London to compose an informal Inter-allied Committee to examine the matter. The Declaration led to exchange between Four Powers at Dumbarton Oaks April 1945, meeting in Washington to further completion of the International Court of Justice decision to create new court. With that being done the committee under the chairmanship of Sir William Malkin of the United Kingdom, eld 19 meetings, in which were attended by jurists from 11 countries. In the report that was published on February 10 of 1944 it recommended the; that the Statute of any new international court should be based on that of the Permanent Court of International Justice; * That advisory jurisdiction should be retained in the case of the new Court; * That acceptance of the jurisdiction of the new Court should not be compulsory; * That the Court should have no jurisdiction to deal with essentially political matters.

A conference took place on October 30, 1943 between China and the than USSR, The United Kingdom, and the United States of America, there a joint declaration was issued distinguishing the necessity «of establishment at the earliest practicable date a general international organization, based upon the principles of the sovereign equality of all peace-loving States, and open to membership by all such States, large and small, for the maintenance of international peace and security».

The declaration led to an exchange between the Four Powers at Dumbarton Oaks. A meeting was held in Washington, in April of 1945 to further the completion on the International Court of Justice, The conclusion of this meeting was The Conference decided against compulsory jurisdiction and in favor of the creation of an entirely new court, which would be a principal organ of the United Nations, on the same footing as the General Assembly, the Security

Council, the Economic and Social Council, the Trusteeship Council and the Secretariat, and with the Statute annexed to and forming part of the Charter. The main reasons as to why the Conference to decide to create a new court were they were many including; the court was to be the principal judicial organ of the United Nations, it was felt inappropriate for this role to be filled by the Permanent Court of International Justice, which had up until then been linked to the League of Nations, then on the point of dissolution.

The creation of a new court was more consistent with the provision in the Charter that all Member States of the United Nations would ipso facto be parties to the court’s Statute, while several States that were parties to the Statute of the Permanent Court of International Justice were not represented at the San Francisco Conference, and, conversely, several States represented at the Conference were not parties to the Statute;

There was a feeling in some quarters that the Permanent Court of International Justice formed part of an older order, in which European States had dominated the political and legal affairs of the international community, and that the creation of a new court would make it easier for States outside Europe to play a more influential role. This has in fact happened as the membership of the United Nations grew from 51 in 1945 to 192 in 2006. The elections for the International Court of justice are held in the United States of America in New York on the occasion of the annual session of the General Assembly.

On February 6 of the following year the judges are elected at triennial election enter upon their term of office in which the court proceeds to elect by secret ballot for a president and a vice-president who are allowed to hold office for three years. The Court cannot include more than one national of the same State. Moreover, the Court as a whole must represent the main forms of civilization and the principal legal systems of the world. All States parties to the Statute of the Court have the right to propose candidates.

These proposals are made not by the government of the State concerned, but by a group consisting of the members of the Permanent Court of Arbitration. Has 15 judges elected to 9 year terms; to ensure a measure of continuity, one third of the Court is elected every three years all States parties to the Statute of the Court have the right to propose candidates. The Judges must be elected from among persons of high moral character and posses certain qualifications in their countries the Court may not include more than one national of the same State.

Once elected, a Member of the Court is a delegate neither of the government of his own country nor of that of any other State; in order to guarantee his or her independence. No Member of the Court can be dismissed unless, in the unanimous opinion of the other Members, he or she no longer fulfils the required conditions. No Member of the Court may engage in any other occupation during his or her term. The members of the court goes as follows; President, Rosalyn Higgins from United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, the Vice-President Awn Shawkat Al-Khasawneh from Jordan.

While the judges are Raymond Ranjeva (Madagascar) Shi Jiuyong (China) Abdul G. Koroma (Sierra Leone) Gonzalo Parra-Aranguren (Venezuela) Thomas Buergenthal (United States of America) Hisashi Owada (Japan) Bruno Simma (Germany) Peter Tomka (Slovakia) Ronny Abraham (France) Kenneth Keith (New Zealand) Bernardo Sepulveda-Amor (Mexico) Mohamed Bennouna (Morocco) Leonid Skotnikov (Russian Federation). Finally there is the Registrar who is Philippe Couvreur (Belgium). Everyone that holds a seat has their special duties and functions.

The President and the Vice-President are elected by the Members of the Court every three years by secret ballot. President presides at all meetings of the Court; he or she directs their work and supervises its administration. The President is obliged to reside in The Hague President receives a special supplementary allowance, in addition to his or her annual salary. The Vice-President replaces the President in their absence on 6 February 2006 the Court elected Judge Rosalyn Higgins (United Kingdom) to be President and Judge Awn Shawkat Al-Khasawneh (Jordan) to be Vice-President.

There have been 22 presidents since its establishment. When it comes to the chambers and committee Court generally discharges its duties as a full Court (a quorum of nine judges, excluding judges ad hoc, being sufficient). But it may also form permanent or temporary chambers. The court has three types of chambers; • the Chamber of Summary Procedure, comprising five judges, including the President and Vice-President, and two substitutes, which the Court is required by Article 29 of the Statute to form annually with a view to the speedy despatch of business; chambers, comprising at least three judges, that the Court may form pursuant to Article 26, paragraph 1, of the Statute to deal with certain categories of cases, such as labour or communications; • chambers that the Court may form pursuant to Article 26, paragraph 2, of the Statute to deal with a particular case, after formally consulting the parties regarding the number of its members – and informally regarding their name – who will then sit in all phases of the case until its final conclusion, even if in the meantime they cease to be Members of the Court.

The Court entertains two types of cases; legal disputes between States submitted to it by them (contentious cases) and requests for advisory opinions on legal questions referred to it by UN organs and specialized agencies (advisory proceedings). Only States (States Members of the United Nations and other States which have become parties to the Statute of the Court or which have accepted its jurisdiction under certain conditions) may be parties to contentious cases.

States have no permanent representatives accredited to the Court. The date of the institution of proceedings, which is that of the receipt by the Registrar of the special agreement or application, marks the opening of proceedings before the Court. Advisory proceedings before the Court are open solely to five organs of the United Nations and to 16 specialized agencies of the United Nations family. There have been many cases that have come to the International Court of Justice.

The Court has a twofold role: to settle, in accordance with international law, legal disputes submitted to it by States (Contentious cases) and to give advisory opinions (Advisory proceedings) on legal questions referred to it by duly authorized United Nations organs and specialized agencies. In Contentious proceedings, when a dispute is brought before the Court by a unilateral application filed by one State against another State, the names of parties in the official title of the case are separated by the abbreviation v. for the Latin versus (e. g. , Cameroon v. Nigeria).

When a dispute is submitted to the Court on the basis of a special agreement between two States, the names of the parties are separated by an oblique stroke (e. g. , Indonesia/Malaysia). The Court has pending cases, such as Territorial and Maritime dispute (Nicaragua v. Colombia) there are also contentious cases, ex. 2006, Certain Questions of Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters (Djibouti v. France). There are many famous cases of the International Court of Justice but I’m going to get into more details about the case against Charles Taylor, former President of Liberia.

Although there are great things said about the International Court of justices there are many criticisms as well. There have been Criticisms of the International Court range from its rulings, its procedures, to its authority. Many of these criticisms refer more to the authority assigned to the body by member states through its charter rather than to problems with the specific composition of judges or their rulings. Compulsory» jurisdiction is limited to cases where both parties have agreed to submit to its decision, and, as such, instances of aggression tend to be adjudicated by the Security Council.

Organizations, private enterprises, and individuals cannot have their cases taken to the International Court, such as to appeal a national supreme court’s ruling. U. N. agencies likewise cannot bring up a case except in advisory opinions (a process initiated by the court and non-binding). Other existing international thematic courts, such as the ICC, are not under the umbrella of the International Court. The International Court does not enjoy a full separation of powers, with permanent members of the Security Council being able to veto enforcement of even cases to which they consented in advance to be bound