Legal Alternatives to War: Successes & Possibilities of the ICJ Accounts from the International launch of LAW not War on October 23

Posted: 26th October 2023

On October 23, UNFOLD ZERO joined with the World Federalist Movement, Citizens for Global Solutions, World Future Council and other organizations in New York to launch Legal Alternatives to War (LAW not War). This is a new global campaign to enhance the jurisdiction and use of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in order to assist countries resolve international disputes peacefully rather than through recourse to the threat or use of force.

The ICJ is established as a principle organ of the United Nations under Chapter 14 of the UN Charter. All Members of the United Nations are ipso facto parties to the ICJ Statute. The court provides a primary legal mechanism to resolve international conflicts through the application of international law.

This hybrid launch event included experts in international law and international courts/tribunals (ICJ, International Criminal Court, International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea and others), as well as representatives of like-minded countries that have released a Declaration on promoting the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice, leaders of more than 60 civil society organizations involved in the LAW not War campaign, and over 200 others from around the world interested in possibilities to achieve peace and justice through international law.

An edited video of the Law not War launch event (20 minutes) produced by Peace News TV is available at International Court Forum, former international judges & other experts at 866 UN Plaza (scroll down) or on Youtube.

Successes and better use of the ICJ

The LAW not War launch event included reference to numerous examples of ICJ cases that have successfully resolved international conflicts, as well as discussion on:

how to encourage governments to enhance their use of the ICJ through acceptance of jurisdiction for any dispute unable to be resolved by other peaceful means;
increasing the use of the ICJ through clauses in international treaties providing for jurisdiction;
making greater use by UN bodies of the option to request ICJ Advisory Opinions;
ensuring sufficient financial and political support for the ICJ to enable it to more effectively fulfil its mandate.

A number of the speakers commented on the numerous ICJ successes. These include some cases which have resulted in negotiated settlements between the disputing parties without the need to conclude the case, and many other cases in which the decisions have been implemented by all parties including by the ‘losing’ states. (‘Losing’ is in quotes, as in many cases the ICJ decisions affirm differentiated legal rights and obligations of each of the parties, so that everyone ‘wins’ to some degree).

Like-minded countries promote the ICJ and its jurisdiction

Prof. Bogdan Aurescu, Member of the UN International Law Commission and former Foreign Minister of Romania, spoke at the event about the implementation of ICJ decisions. He noted that most decisions, including the decision of the Maritime Delimitation in the Black Sea case in which he served a Romania’s Agent before the ICJ, are implemented by all concerned including the ‘losing’ parties.

He also outlined the calls made in the Declaration of like-minded countries promoting acceptance of ICJ jurisdiction, which he initiated in 2021 as Foreign Minister, and which is now endorsed by 33 countries.

On his right is Jutta Bertram Nothnagel (USA), Vice-President of Lawyers Committee on Nuclear Policy and co-moderator of the LAW not War launch event.

Current ICJ cases and further possibilities

The event included discussion of some of the current cases in the ICJ such as those on climate change, genocide (Ukraine v Russia and The Gambia v Myanmar), the Israel/Palestine conflict (Legal Consequences arising from the Policies and Practices of Israel in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem) and others.

The ICJ case on climate change was highlighted as vital to affirm and ensure implementation of legal obligations to protect the climate in the light of the failure of the Paris Agreement and Conferences of States Parties to cut Greenhouse Gas emissions sufficiently to prevent current climate disasters and an impending climate catastrophe. States are encouraged to participate in the case, firstly by making written submissionsbefore the deadline of January 22, 2024.

With regard to addressing aggression and the use of force, there was reference to some successful contentious cases involving armed conflict such as Libya v Chad.

There were also suggestions that the Advisory Opinion process could be used more often in cases where one or more of the disputing parties does not accept the compulsory jurisdiction of the ICJ, e,g, in the Russia-Ukraine conflict. This would be complementary to other processes to address aggression including reference to the International Criminal Court (which unfortunately has limited jurisdiction on the Crime of Aggression), use of the UN General Assembly ‘Uniting for Peace’ procedure and the proposal for a Tribunal on Aggression.

The ICJ as an alternative to armed conflict

“The UN Charter provides not only a moral compass toward the vision of a world without war, but also offers an alternative to conflict – the institution of the ICJ. This is an under-utilized means for pacific resolution of disputes among States without recourse to the threat or use of violence.”

Rebecca Shoot, Executive Director of Citizens for Global Solutions, launching the LAW not War campaign on October 23

The LAW not War campaign

LAW not War is co-sponsored by Aotearoa Lawyers for Peace, Basel Peace Office, Citizens for Global Solutions, UNFOLD ZERO, World Federalist Movement-Institute for Global Policy and World Future Council.

The co-sponsoring organizations will be organizing additional events and undertaking advocacy to enhance the use of the ICJ and acceptance of its jurisdiction. UNFOLD ZEROwill post updates on the campaign.

In addition, LAW not War is growing as a global coalition similar to the Coalition for the International Criminal Court, in order to increase political momentum and encourage all UN Member States to accept the compulsory jurisdiction of the ICJ. Civil society organizations are invited to join the campaign as participating organizations. More than 60 have already done so.

Value of ICJ jurisdiction through treaties and advisory opinions

“My region (Latin America) is referring to the ICJ on many issues including territoral disputes, environmental issues, asylum cases and others. Many of these are possible through the Pact of Bogota which provides for ICJ jurisdiction. This has been incredibly valuable for resolving such disputes. Also of value is the ICJ Advisory Opinion process for international disputes. This could be enhanced by giving the UN Secretary-General the authority to request ICJ Advisory Opinions.”

H.E. Mr. Juan Manuel Gómez Robledo Verduzco
Deputy Permanent Representative of Mexico to the United Nations in New York. In-person. Member, International Law Commission (2012-2022). Agent for Mexico in the ICJ Avena case (Mexico v USA)

Online speakers for the October 23 event:

Sir Kenneth Keith (New Zealand)
Judge of the International Court of Justice (2006-2015). Emeritus Professor, Victoria University of Wellington Faculty of Law. Member of the New Zealand Court of Appeal (1995-2006) and NZ Supreme Court (2001,2003).
Neshan Gunasekera (Sri Lanka)
Research Fellow, Raoul Wallenberg Institute. Member, World Future Council. Former assistant to Christopher Weeramantry, ICJ Judge from 1990-2002.
Tadashi Inuzuka (Japan)
Co-President, World Federalist Movement- Institute for Global Policy. Former Senator from Nagasaki.