{"title":"War in Ukraine and the International Court of Justice: Provisional Measures and the Third-Party Right to Intervene in Proceedings","authors":"Dai Tamada","doi":"10.1163/18719732-12341494","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"At the time of writing, the war in Ukraine was the subject of <jats:sc>ICJ</jats:sc> proceedings in the <jats:italic>Allegations of Genocide</jats:italic> case. As the case title suggests, however, the key issue before the <jats:sc>ICJ</jats:sc> is not Russia’s use of force, but the question of genocide. Restrictions on its jurisdiction have led to the <jats:sc>ICJ</jats:sc> facing a serious dilemma between, on the one hand, having to meet unprecedented high levels of expectation and political pressure to stop Russia’s military action and, on the other, inherent legal constraints in maintaining its judicial character. This article elucidates how the <jats:sc>ICJ</jats:sc> has overcome procedural hurdles, including the requirements for provisional measures and intervention, to reach conclusions in favour of Ukraine. It also highlights the procedural challenges arising from the acrobatic reasoning adopted by the <jats:sc>ICJ</jats:sc> in the present case.","PeriodicalId":43487,"journal":{"name":"International Community Law Review","volume":"12 9 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Community Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/18719732-12341494","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
At the time of writing, the war in Ukraine was the subject of ICJ proceedings in the Allegations of Genocide case. As the case title suggests, however, the key issue before the ICJ is not Russia’s use of force, but the question of genocide. Restrictions on its jurisdiction have led to the ICJ facing a serious dilemma between, on the one hand, having to meet unprecedented high levels of expectation and political pressure to stop Russia’s military action and, on the other, inherent legal constraints in maintaining its judicial character. This article elucidates how the ICJ has overcome procedural hurdles, including the requirements for provisional measures and intervention, to reach conclusions in favour of Ukraine. It also highlights the procedural challenges arising from the acrobatic reasoning adopted by the ICJ in the present case.
期刊介绍:
The Journal aims to explore the implications of various traditions of international law, as well as more current perceived hegemonic trends for the idea of an international community. The Journal will also look at the ways and means in which the international community uses and adapts international law to deal with new and emerging challenges. Non-state actors , intergovernmental and non-governmental organisations, individuals, peoples, transnational corporations and civil society as a whole - have changed our outlook on contemporary international law. In addition to States and intergovernmental organizations, they now play an important role.