Jurisdiction and the Power to Indicate Provisional Measures (From International Court of Justice at a Crossroads, P 323-354, 1987, Lori Fisler Damrosch, ed. -- See NCJ-122854)

• NCJ Number: 122867
• Author(s): B H Oxman
• Date Published: 1987
• Length: 32 pages
• Sale Source: Transnational Publisher Inc
• Publication Type: Legislation/Policy Analysis
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America

Annotation

This analysis of the power of the International Court of Justice to specify interim measures of protection prior to a final determination regarding jurisdiction concludes that changes are needed in the Court's procedures to provide greater equity in the balance of risks between the nation requesting such measures and the nation on which they are imposed.

Abstract

The 1984 case involving Nicaragua and the United States is a recent example of a case in which such measures have been requested. These cases all involve urgent circumstances and the possibility of irreparable injury if the measures are not granted. However, in all such cases since World War Two the nation against which the case has been brought has contested the Court's jurisdiction or the case's admissibility and, except for the United States in the preliminary phases of the Nicaragua case, has failed to appear before the Court. Currently, the nation requesting interim measures is not required to indemnify the other nation against injury or against the possibility that the Court might ultimately determine that it does not have jurisdiction. Provisional measures also pose problems in cases involving self-defense, in which measures could have implications for the balance of regional and global power relationships. Ways to address these issues would be for the Court to change its procedures, for the United Nations to amend the statute governing the Court, and for individual nations to amend their statements of consent to the Court's jurisdiction. 110 references.