Page 1 of 20

Filter category

Feature post image

Decoding Nicaragua’s Historic Request to Intervene in South Africa v Israel

Days before anyone could even read it, Nicaragua’s application to intervene under Article 62 of the ICJ Statute in South Africa v Israel made headlines around the world. To most observers, this intervention may recall those filed in Ukraine v Russia, another Genocide Convention case in which third States have attracted much attention. Yet there are two fundamental distinctions between that “mass intervention” (¶116)—a vaguely pejorative term accidentally coined in this blog—and Nicaragua’s request to the Court. Firstly, Nicaragua seeks intervention under Article 62, whereas all interventions in Ukraine v Russia (and those sought in another Genocide Convention case, The Gambia v Myanmar) have been filed under Article 63. Secondly, Nicaragua seeks to intervene “as a party”, whereas every State admitted to intervene in ICJ proceedings has done so as a non-party. As explored below, the value of Nicaragua’s recourse to Article 62—rather than the more limited form…

Read more

“Not All Scripts Come with One Voice”: Variations in State Responses to South Africa v Israel

This post examines responses to the ICJ 26 January Order on provisional measures (‘Order’) in South Africa v Israel by States in the West that regularly claim to subscribe to a so-called “rules-based international order”, a concept coined to replace the much more precise concept of international law, explained to the point by John Dugard…

Read more

Appeals Judgment in Case concerning the Shipment from the Netherlands of Parts for F-35 Fighter Aircraft to Israel

Introduction On 12 February, the Appeals Court of the Hague in the Netherlands handed down its judgment in a case concerning the shipment of U.S. owned spare parts for F-35 fighter aircraft from a warehouse in the Netherlands to Israel (see here, only available in Dutch). The Court of Appeal held that the…

Read more

When the Reasons are More Telling than the Ruling: The Order of the ICJ in South Africa v. Israel

A veil of discontent wraps the order of the ICJ of January 26. The Court disappointed those who consider that the determination prima facie of the violation of the Genocide Convention should have logically entailed the more radical measure of the cessation of military actions, as in the Ukraine v. Russia case; they presented the operative part of…

Read more

Erga Omnes Partes Standing and Procedural Issues in South Africa v. Israel

On 26 January, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) indicated provisional measures in a case brought under the Genocide Convention by South Africa against Israel concerning allegations of genocide related to the ongoing armed conflict in Gaza. South Africa relies on the theory of erga omnes partes standing which asserts that obligations…

Read more
  • Page 1 of 20
  • Last