NCJ Number
122856
Date Published
1987
Length
39 pages
Annotation
This analysis of the legal framework for compulsory jurisdiction by the International Court of Justice and of the attitudes of the United States government and other governments toward the Court concludes that the United States should not have terminated its acceptance of compulsory jurisdiction and that changes are needed in the system for selecting judges.
Abstract
The "optional clause" that defines compulsory jurisdiction has its origins in the Hague Peace Conferences of 1899 and 1907. During that period the United States actively advocated a permanent tribunal with compulsory jurisdiction. Most of the nations accepting the optional clause have also defined their specific reservations to the clause. If the United States had amended its 1946 declaration supporting the clause and included some of the reservations adopted by the United Kingdom and other nations, it could have avoided the 1985 situation in which it was taken to court by Nicaragua. Its withdrawal from compulsory jurisdiction represents an abandonment of longstanding principles. However, changing the system for selecting judges to consider factors other than geographic balance would be desirable. Tables, footnotes, and summaries of cases brought under specific clauses.