In: Max Planck Yearbook of United Nations Law Online
Search for other papers by Paula Wojcikiewicz Almeida in
Current site
Google Scholar
Search for other papers by Giulia Tavares Romay in
Current site
Google Scholar
Abstract
Over the last decades, the participation of State and non-State actors (NSAs) in the process of international law-making has become one of the basic features of international law. As multifunctional actors, the role of international courts and tribunals (ICTs) encompasses the protection and development of the international community. Together with ICTs’ role in the promotion, recognition and application of community interest norms, the growing participation of State and NSAs in international dispute settlement mechanisms also plays an increasingly important role in ensuring and facilitating compliance and enforcement of community interest norms. Whereas the non-party participation of State and NSAs has only very exceptionally been recognized, their influence in international dispute settlement cannot be ignored. By applying empirical research methodology for mapping the practice of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) concerning the participation of State and NSAs under the ICJ Statute and Rules of Court, this paper addresses the existing mechanisms of non-party participation in both contentious cases and advisory proceedings. There is no doubt that ICJ procedural law remains outdated and disconnected from the contemporary developments characterizing the international community nowadays. Broadening the possibilities for participation by State and NSAs would imply the recognition of the plurilateral nature of international disputes. In this context, the paper also discusses the challenges and possible alternatives for expanding participation via teleological interpretation of the ICJ Statute and potential amendments to the Rules of Court and Practice Directions.
Purchase
Buy instant access (PDF download and unlimited online access):
Institutional Login
Log in with Open Athens, Shibboleth, or your institutional credentials
Personal login
Log in with your brill.com account
| All Time | Past Year | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 307 | 285 | 10 |
| Full Text Views | 95 | 41 | 2 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 226 | 141 | 4 |
In: Max Planck Yearbook of United Nations Law Online
Search for other papers by Paula Wojcikiewicz Almeida in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Giulia Tavares Romay in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Abstract
Over the last decades, the participation of State and non-State actors (NSAs) in the process of international law-making has become one of the basic features of international law. As multifunctional actors, the role of international courts and tribunals (ICTs) encompasses the protection and development of the international community. Together with ICTs’ role in the promotion, recognition and application of community interest norms, the growing participation of State and NSAs in international dispute settlement mechanisms also plays an increasingly important role in ensuring and facilitating compliance and enforcement of community interest norms. Whereas the non-party participation of State and NSAs has only very exceptionally been recognized, their influence in international dispute settlement cannot be ignored. By applying empirical research methodology for mapping the practice of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) concerning the participation of State and NSAs under the ICJ Statute and Rules of Court, this paper addresses the existing mechanisms of non-party participation in both contentious cases and advisory proceedings. There is no doubt that ICJ procedural law remains outdated and disconnected from the contemporary developments characterizing the international community nowadays. Broadening the possibilities for participation by State and NSAs would imply the recognition of the plurilateral nature of international disputes. In this context, the paper also discusses the challenges and possible alternatives for expanding participation via teleological interpretation of the ICJ Statute and potential amendments to the Rules of Court and Practice Directions.
| All Time | Past Year | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 307 | 285 | 10 |
| Full Text Views | 95 | 41 | 2 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 226 | 141 | 4 |