Critical Evaluation Of Judicial Independence Question In The International Court Of Justice

Author:

Bektaş M. H. Mustafa1ORCID

Affiliation:

1. BURSA ULUDAĞ ÜNİVERSİTESİ

Abstract

In view of developments in world politics in recent years, such as an upsurge in nationalism, doubts about multilateralism, the Covid pandemic and the Russia-Ukraine war, an inquiry concerning the peaceful resolution of international disputes is in order. How capable are international dispute resolution mechanisms of satisfying demands and preserving their reputations at such a critical time? The fundamentally political entities involved are likely to remain very disparate, a fact that can only worsen their widely acknowledged poor image in this respect without instituting any remedial measures. As a judicial body, however, the ICJ would hardly be allowed such latitude. Concerns about the impartiality of ICJ judges have already been expressed on the grounds of their perceived allegiance to their home countries, an issue that the existing political zeitgeist only makes more controversial. No solutions are readily available to alleviate all concerns. The current article takes several normative assessments into consideration, arguing that these can devalue the authority of the ICJ’s judgments. It then provides insight into how to recognise and deal with the persistent problem of judicial independence within the ICJ.

Publisher

Ankara Haci Bayram Veli University

Reference18 articles.

1. Advisory Committee of Jurists, Proces-Verbaux of the Proceedings of the Committee, 16 June-24 July 1920.

2. Akipek, Ö İ, Milletlerarası Adalet Divanı, Ankara, 1974.

3. Allegations of Genocide under the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Ukraine v. Russian Federation), Request for the Indication of Provisional Measures, Order, 16 March 2022, General List No. 182.

4. Allegations of Genocide under the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Ukraine v. Russian Federation) – Intervention, https://www.icj-cij.org/en/case/182/intervention, Accessed on 22 July 2023.

5. Alter K J, “Critical Junctures and the Future of International Courts in a Post-Liberal World Order” in Avidan Kent, Nikos Skoutaris and Jamie Trinidad (eds.), The Future of International Courts Regional, Institutional and Procedural Challenges, Routledge, 2019.

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3