/
International Dispute Resolution and Judicial Mechanisms
Save to my account
Sign up
International Dispute Resolution and Judicial Mechanisms
International Dispute Resolution and Judicial Mechanisms
Study
1
Question
What does international justice refer to in the context of state disputes?
Page 1
Answer
Resolution of disputes between two states through a third-party mechanism such as arbitration or adjudication.
2
Question
How does arbitration differ from other dispute resolution methods?
Page 1
Answer
States voluntarily choose arbitrators, shape the procedure, and establish flexible rules for their dispute.
3
Question
What characterizes adjudication in international dispute resolution?
Page 1
Answer
Formal court process where a permanent court decides disputes using the law with already appointed independent judges and fixed rules.
4
Question
What does ad hoc mean for a tribunal or arbitration?
Page 1
Answer
Temporary, case-specific tribunal or arrangement created by parties to resolve a particular dispute, offering greater flexibility and party control.
5
Question
How does an international court or tribunal function?
Page 1
Answer
Judicial body that resolves disputes for sovereign states or non-state actors with binding decisions based on international law and state consent.
6
Question
Why do international courts like the ICJ and PCIJ differ from UN organs or the PCA?
Page 1
Answer
They deliver binding judgments with judicial independence, applying law uniformly unlike recommendations or ad hoc facilitation.
7
Question
How do UN organs and the PCA differ from international courts?
Page 1
Answer
They provide recommendations or arbitration facilitation, applying law case-dependently in ad hoc settings without fixed benches.
8
Question
In what ways do international courts differ from domestic courts?
Page 1
Answer
Require state consent for jurisdiction based on treaties or agreements; state-centric with sovereign equals, broad scope but no individual crimes.
9
Question
What role does the ICJ play in the UN system?
Page 1
Answer
Principal judicial organ with political context and consent-based jurisdiction.
10
Question
How did international dispute settlement evolve from ad hoc arbitration to permanent mechanisms?
Page 1
Answer
Driven by need to prevent war and create stable systems; progressed from Greek city-states ad hoc, 19th-century treaties, PCA (1899), PCIJ (1920s League), to ICJ post-WWII UN.
11
Question
Why were formalized dispute settlement mechanisms needed historically?
Page 2
Answer
To prevent war and manage conflicts peacefully amid rising 19th-20th century geopolitical tensions like arms races, nationalism, mass conscription.
12
Question
What are the core roles of international judicial settlement mechanisms?
Page 2
Answer
Neutral arbitration for legal disputes (treaties, boundaries, reparations) as war alternatives; ICJ/PCIJ handle four types per Statute art.36; develop law via precedents; UN peace/advisory functions.
13
Question
What four types of disputes does the ICJ handle under Statute Article 36?
Page 2
Answer
Treaty interpretation, any PIL question, existence of breach fact, nature/extent of reparation.
14
Question
What structural limits affect international dispute settlement mechanisms?
Page 2
Answer
State consent-based optional jurisdiction; no direct enforcement relying on compliance or UNSC; state-centric unable to bind non-consenters or non-states fully.
15
Question
What principal approaches exist for studying international courts and tribunals?
Page 2
Answer
Institutional/Historical (evolution, structures); Political/Relational (interactions with states/UN); Theoretical/Conceptual (reality vs court-image).
16
Question
How are international courts and tribunals established?
Page 2
Answer
Through treaty-based consent reflecting state sovereignty, defining powers, mandate, dispute scope, and binding authority.
17
Question
What determines the design elements of international courts and tribunals?
Page 2
Answer
Institutional framework (ad hoc/permanent), procedural rules/practice directions, financial resources/facilities from state/IO contributors.
18
Question
What two models govern composition of international courts and tribunals?
Page 2
Answer
State party representation (each has seat, small courts); just party representation (elected judges for equitable distribution, large courts).
19
Question
What criteria determine choice of composition model for ICTs?
Page 2
Answer
Number of member states; practical considerations prioritizing judicial functioning; equitable geographical distribution.
20
Question
What core guarantees shape international courts and tribunals?
Page 3
Answer
Judges' independence (institutional, personal, financial); equality between parties; privileges/immunities protecting from state interference for fairness.
21
Question
What foundational principles underpin organization of international courts and tribunals?
Page 3
Answer
State consent, sovereign equality, peaceful settlement of disputes.
22
Question
How does the principle of peaceful settlement of disputes operate?
Page 3
Answer
States obligated to resolve disputes through peaceful means (legal or diplomatic) without strict hierarchy between methods.
23
Question
What distinguishes lex scripta from lex non scripta in international law?
Page 3
Answer
Lex scripta is written law (statutes, rules); lex non scripta is unwritten (custom, principles, inherent powers).
24
Question
Why do international courts rely on both lex scripta and lex non scripta?
Page 3
Answer
Balances certainty from written rules with flexibility from unwritten principles for fair, adaptable procedures.
25
Question
How do privileges, immunities, and judicial independence interrelate?
Page 3
Answer
Privileges/immunities protect judges/court from state interference, supporting independence for impartial decisions and proper functioning.
26
Question
What differentiates principles from rules in international procedure?
Page 3
Answer
Principles: broad flexible norms from unwritten sources applying across questions; rules: narrow specific directives from written sources; together shape law development.
27
Question
What core procedural principles influence ICT design and practice?
Page 3
Answer
Judicial function (kompetenz-kompetenz, jura novit curia, ne ultra petita); litigation integrity (good faith, no abuse); evidence handling; process rights (fair trial, equality of arms).
28
Question
What common principles apply across all international courts and tribunals?
Page 3
Answer
Finality (res judicata); balance flexibility/certainty; sound administration of justice covering procedural standards.
29
Question
What does the principle of finality mean in international courts?
Page 3
Answer
Once decided, binding decision cannot be relitigated, ensuring stability and legal certainty.
30
Question
Why is the principle of finality important for international law?
Page 3
Answer
Avoids repeated litigation, ensures certainty in PIL, reinforces authority of judicial decisions.