By Daisy Ayliffe - 11th April 2006
The EU and UN wished the International Court of Justice in The Hague a happy 60th birthday on Wednesday.
Since the end of the second world war, the “world court” has been used to resolve conflicts and arbitrate in cross-border disputes.
The court of justice was set up in 1945 under the charter of the UN to be the principal judicial organ of the organisation.
But Wednesday’s birthday greetings were accompanied by serious advice as UN secretary general Kofi Annan urged countries to take the court’s rulings more seriously.
“I would particularly encourage all states that have not yet done so to consider recognising the compulsory jurisdiction of the court,” the UN chief told an audience in The Hague.
“These rules - international law - play an increasing role in our global society. They regulate relations between states. They provide frameworks for cooperation and coexistence. They encourage multilateral action to address multifaceted problems.”
In 1980, Iran rejected a judgment holding it responsible for the seizure of the US embassy in Tehran and disregarded an order to release American hostages.
The US has also ignored Hague rulings. In 1986 it refused to respond or appear before the court when the tribunal ruled in favour of Nicaragua’s complaint that the CIA had illegally mined its ports to support Sandinista rebels.
But more recently Washington has followed the court’s will.
Last year, President Bush ordered a review of 51 death penalty cases against Mexicans who had been denied the right to see Mexican diplomats during their trial.
The court ruled the convictions violated the Vienna Convention - ratified by the US in 1969 - by not providing the Mexicans with consular access.
The court is often confused with other judicial bodies based in The Hague: the Yugoslav war crimes tribunal and the International Criminal Court.
But while the latter are criminal courts that try individuals, the "world court" hears disputes among countries and has no power to imprison anyone.
Over the last few months, the court has made a number of rulings that have implications for international diplomacy, in particular concerning invading other countries, supporting armed groups and how the principles of the Genocide Convention are binding on all states - even when a state has not signed the convention.
Such far-reaching decisions may well have implications for the Bosnia versus Serbia case.
Bosnia has charged Serbia with the genocide of Muslims during the 1992-95 war, and is seeking damages that could amount to billions of euros.
It is the first suit by one state against another for the worst crime in the international statutes.
In a statement on Wednesday, the EU affirmed its commitment to the principal judicial organ of the UN.
“The court has proven to be a cornerstone of the international legal order today. It has created a corpus of judicial decisions and advisory opinions of the highest quality, which has become an indispensable and reliable means for the determination of the rules of international law,” the European commission said in a statement.
Have your say...
Please enter your comments below.