•  
  •  
 

Abstract

Procedural defenses refer to tactical devices that object to either a court’s jurisdiction or to the admissibility of an application, aimed at stopping a court from deciding on the merits of a case or, at least, at limiting the scope of its decision. From its creation in June 1945 and up to the end of 2024, the International Court of Justice (“ICJ”) has adjudicated 101 cases, with almost 80% of them featuring procedural defenses raised by states. These defenses have not only been plentiful, but have been extremely effective, leading to the ICJ’s refusal to decide on the merits of twenty-nine disputes, while restricting the scope of the Court’s rulings on twenty-one occasions. Although an effective tactical device, the use of procedural defenses by states has also been marked by its inefficiency, with just over 20% of the objections raised being upheld by the Court. Through the examination of the ICJ’s judgments and states’ written and oral pleadings, this article analyses the 486 procedural defenses raised in all the cases decided by the ICJ throughout almost eighty years and explores the behavior of a selected group of ‘insistent’ objectors: Ten states that have interposed more than 50% of the total number of procedural defenses raised before the Court. The article reflects on the reasons behind, and the consequences of, the effective but inefficient use of procedural defenses before the ICJ.

Download

Share

COinS