I think it’s a mistake to characterize this ICJ decision as an “advisory opinion”. That goes to the nature of international law. International legal obligations are considered “binding as a matter of international law” whether or not there are effective enforcement mechanisms, which frequently are absent. However, an ICJ decision is, strictu sensu, binding only on the parties to that particular dispute, and carries only persuasive weight in subsequent international adjudications or in the domestic courts of any country. Nonetheless, international lawyers, legal scholars, most governments, and subsequent arbitral tribunals tend to take ICJ decisions very seriously as evidence of applicable legal standards. They are thus more than mere “advice”; they’re about as weighty as international law ever gets. The lack of enforceability of international law is, however, a chronic and pervasive limitation on its effectiveness.
Correction: i see that this was, in fact, an Advisory Opinions. Nonetheless, most of what I said still applies. A number if the ICJ’s most important statements of international law have been in the form of Advisory Opinions, and yet they are taken seriously indeed.
Re: What you can do (support startups) - I like this because it goes beyond donating, clicking, or writing decision-makers. Importantly, it can get activists personally involved with one or more small startups - a wonderful spirit-lifter.
Any more on how we can get involved with appropriate startups and offer resources (test space, skills, etc.)?
Thank you for this helpful note. Just a small correction. The buildings shown are not the ICJ, but the so-called Binnenhof, which houses the Dutch Parliament as well as the office of the Prime Minister (the little tower on the left of the photo is know as the “Torentje” and is the office of the Prime Minister. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binnenhof The ICJ is also in The Hague, but in a different location.
I think it’s a mistake to characterize this ICJ decision as an “advisory opinion”. That goes to the nature of international law. International legal obligations are considered “binding as a matter of international law” whether or not there are effective enforcement mechanisms, which frequently are absent. However, an ICJ decision is, strictu sensu, binding only on the parties to that particular dispute, and carries only persuasive weight in subsequent international adjudications or in the domestic courts of any country. Nonetheless, international lawyers, legal scholars, most governments, and subsequent arbitral tribunals tend to take ICJ decisions very seriously as evidence of applicable legal standards. They are thus more than mere “advice”; they’re about as weighty as international law ever gets. The lack of enforceability of international law is, however, a chronic and pervasive limitation on its effectiveness.
Correction: i see that this was, in fact, an Advisory Opinions. Nonetheless, most of what I said still applies. A number if the ICJ’s most important statements of international law have been in the form of Advisory Opinions, and yet they are taken seriously indeed.
Re: What you can do (support startups) - I like this because it goes beyond donating, clicking, or writing decision-makers. Importantly, it can get activists personally involved with one or more small startups - a wonderful spirit-lifter.
Any more on how we can get involved with appropriate startups and offer resources (test space, skills, etc.)?
Thank you, as always, for concrete ideas on actions!
How sad.
Thank you for this helpful note. Just a small correction. The buildings shown are not the ICJ, but the so-called Binnenhof, which houses the Dutch Parliament as well as the office of the Prime Minister (the little tower on the left of the photo is know as the “Torentje” and is the office of the Prime Minister. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binnenhof The ICJ is also in The Hague, but in a different location.