LI Network
Published on: January 16, 2024 at 19:11 IST
The International Court of Justice (ICJ), comprising 15 judges with nine-year terms elected through simultaneous processes at the UN General Assembly and the UN Security Council, has been spotlighted for the limitations in its ability to enforce judgments.
While any country can propose candidates, a key stipulation ensures that no two judges originate from the same nation. Currently, the bench includes judges from various regions, including France, Slovakia, Somalia, and India’s Dalveer Bhandari, a former Supreme Court judge and Chief Justice of the Bombay High Court.
The president and vice president are appointed through a secret ballot, with Joan E. Donoghue of the US leading as president and Kirill Gevorgian of Russia as vice president. Both terms are set to expire in February.
Despite the expectation of impartiality from ICJ judges, historical instances have seen judges aligning their decisions with their countries’ politics. Notably, in 2022, when the bench voted in favor of ordering Russia out of Ukraine, judges from Russia and China were the only dissenting votes.
Israel and South Africa, currently unrepresented, can each appoint an “ad hoc” judge to join the bench. Israel’s nominee, Aharon Barak, faced accusations of “legitimizing” the Israeli occupation of Palestine during his tenure as Supreme Court chief justice.
The ICJ, while rendering legally binding judgments that cannot be appealed, lacks the practical power to enforce them. If a country, like Israel, fails to comply, the aggrieved party, such as South Africa, can approach the UN Security Council for enforcement.
However, the US, a staunch supporter of Israel, holds veto power as a permanent member of the UNSC, potentially shielding Israel from repercussions.
Mai El-Sadany, the director of the Tahrir Institute for Middle East Policy, emphasized the importance of focusing on the ICJ process rather than the judgments issued, given the court’s limited enforcement capabilities.
While the provisional hearing concerning Israel’s alleged genocide in Gaza is expected to conclude shortly, the main case, determining Israel’s culpability, will involve multiple hearings and detailed arguments.
The ICJ judgments, renowned for their lengthy processes, are anticipated to take years for a full verdict to emerge, as evidenced by the ongoing 2019 case initiated by The Gambia against Myanmar’s military crackdown on Rohingya refugees.