Solution des différends internationaux
Le règlement des différends internationaux concerne les techniques et institutions qui sont utilisées pour résoudre les différends internationaux entre États et/ou organisations internationales. Les différends internationaux peuvent être résolus soit par la force (coercition) soit par des moyens pacifiques. Les techniques utilisées pour le règlement pacifique des différends internationaux sont la négociation, les enquêtes, la médiation, la conciliation, l'arbitrage, le règlement judiciaire, le recours à des agences régionales ou à des arrangements, ou à d'autres moyens pacifiques au choix des parties (Art.33 de la charte ONU).
Le présent guide de recherche se veut un point de départ pour mener des recherches sur la solution des différends internationaux. Il fournit les textes juridiques de base disponibles à la Bibliothèque du Palais de la Paix, qu'il s'agisse de documents imprimés ou de documents sous format électronique. La section intitulée "Bibliographie sélective" présente une sélection de manuels, d'articles importants, de bibliographies, de publications périodiques, de publications en série et de documents pertinents. Des liens permettent de rejoindre le catalogue PPL. Le code de classification de la bibliothèque 180. Solution pacifique en général, 185. Arbitrage et Tribunaux: Ouvrages généraux et le mot-matière (mot-clef) Règlement international des différends sont des instruments permettant de faire une recherche dans le catalogue. Une attention particulière est prêtée à nos inscriptions aux bases de données, revues électroniques, livres électroniques et autres ressources électroniques. Enfin, le présent guide de recherche contient des liens vers des sites Internet pertinents et d'autres ressources en ligne présentant un intérêt particulier.
- Mackenzie, R. (et al.), The Manual on International Courts and Tribunals (2nd ed.), Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2010. [e-book]
- Romano, C.P.R., K.J. Alter and Y. Shany (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of International Adjudication, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2014. [e-book]
- Schabas, W.A., and S. Murphy (eds.), Research Handbook on International Courts and Tribunals, Cheltenham, Edward Elgar Publishing, 2017.
- Alter, K.J., The New Terrain of International Law: Courts, Politics, Rights, Princeton, Princeton University Press, 2014.
- Alter, K.J. (et al.) (eds.), International Court Authority, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2018. [e-book]
- Andenas, M., and E. Bjorge (eds.), A Farewell to Fragmentation: Reassertion and Convergence in International Law, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2015. [e-book]
- Benvenisti, E., and G.W. Downs, Between Fragmentation and Democracy: The Role of National and International Courts, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2017.
- Bogdandy, A. von, and I. Venzke, In Whose Name? A Public Law Theory of International Adjudication, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2014.
- Brilmayer, L. (et al.), International Claims Commissions: Righting Wrongs after Conflict, Cheltenham, Edward Elgar Publishing, 2017.
- Buggenhoudt, C., Common Interests in International Litigation: A Case Study on Natural Resource Exploitation Disputes, Cambridge, Intersentia, 2017.
- De Baere, G., and J. Wouters (eds.), The Contribution of International and Supranational Courts to the Rule of Law, Cheltenham, UK, Edward Elgar Publishing, 2015.
- Follesdal, A., and G. Ulfstein (eds.), The Judicialization of International Law : A Mixed Blessing?, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2018. [e-book]
- Gallus, N., Temporal Jurisdiction of International Tribunals, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2017.
- Giorgetti, C. (ed.), The Rules, Practice, and Jurisprudence of International Courts and Tribunals, Leiden, Nijhoff, 2012.
- Giorgetti, C. (ed.), Challenges and Recusals of Judges and Arbitrators in International Courts and Tribunals, Leiden, Brill Nijhoff, 2015.
- Grossman, N. (et al.) (eds.), Legitimacy and International Courts, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2018. [e-book]
- Howse, R. (et al.) (eds.), The Legitimacy of International Trade Courts and Tribunals, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2018. [e-book]
- Johns, L., Strengthening International Courts: The Hidden Costs of Legalization, Ann Arbor, University of Michigan Press, 2015.
- Klein, N. (ed.), Litigating International Law Disputes: Weighing the Options, Cambridge New York, Cambridge University Press, 2014.
- Kotuby Jr., C.T., and L.A. Sobota, General Principles of Law and International Due Process: Principles and Norms Applicable in Transnational Disputes, New York, NY, Oxford University Press, 2017.
- Salles, L.E., Forum Shopping in International Adjudication, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2014.
- Shany, Y., Questions of Jurisdiction and Admissibility before International Courts, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2016.
- Squatrito, T. (et al.) (eds.), The Performance of International Courts and Tribunals, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2018. [e-book]
- Tanaka, Y., The Peaceful Settlement of International Disputes, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2018. [e-book]
- Vecchio, A. del, International Courts and Tribunals between Globalisation and Localism, 's-Gravenhage, Eleven International Publishing, 2013.
- Wehberg, H, The Problem of an International Court of Justice (transl. by C.G. Fenwick), Oxford, Clarendon, 1918 (2nd printing, Clark, NJ, The Lawbook Exchange, 2010).
- Wiik, A., Amicus Curiae Before International Courts and Tribunals, Baden-Baden, Nomos, 2018.
- Wind, M. (ed.), International Courts and Domestic Politics, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2018. [e-book]
- Wolfrum, R. and I. Gätzschmann (eds.), International Dispute Settlement: Room for Innovations?, Heidelberg, Springer, 2012.
- Seibert-Fohr, A., “The Independence of Judges and their Freedom of Expression: An Ambivalent Relationship” (April 19, 2019). [PDF]
- Alter, K.J. (et al.), “International Court Authority (Introduction)”, in ibid. (eds.), International Court Authority, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2018; iCourts Working Paper Series, No. 112; Northwestern Public Law Research Paper No. 17-33, 2018. [PDF]
- Alter, K.J. (et al.), “Theorizing the Judicialization of International Relations”, iCourts Working Paper Series; Duke Law School Public Law & Legal Theory Series, 2018. [PDF] Nov.
- Blair, C., and E. Vidak Gojković, “WikiLeaks and Beyond: Discerning an International Standard for the Admissibility of Illegally Obtained Evidence”, ICSID Review - Foreign Investment Law Journal, 33 (2018), No. 1, pp. 235-259. [e-article]
- Boisson de Chazournes, L. (et al.), “One Size does not Fit All: Uses of Experts before International Courts and Tribunals: An Insight into the Practice”, Journal of International Dispute Settlement, 9 (2018), No. 3, pp. 477-505. [e-article]
- Brosseau, J., “The Distinction Between Arbitration and Judicial Settlement in International Law: Three Characteristics and Why They Matter Reforms”, King’s Student Law Review, 9 (2019), No. 2, Forthcoming. [PDF]
- Cook, K., “Judging ‘Best Available Science’: Emerging Issues and the Role of Experts”, Journal of International Dispute Settlement, 9 (2018), No. 3, pp. 388-400. [e-article]
- De Brabandere, E., ‘To The Hague!’, International Dispute Settlement from Practice to Legal Discipline, Inaugural lecture, Leiden University, February 2018. [PDF]
- Dothan, S., “The Motivations of Individual Judges and how They Act as a Group”, German Law Journal, 19 (2018), Forthcoming; iCourts Working Paper Series, No. 132. [PDF]
- Dothan, S., “International Courts Improve Public Deliberation”, Michigan Journal of International Law, 39 (2018), No. 2, pp. 217-240. [PDF]
- Dunoff, J.L., and M.A. Pollack, “International Judicial Performances and the Performance of International Courts”, in T. Squatrito (et al.) (eds.), The Performance of International Courts and Tribunals, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2018. [e-article]
- Liao, S., “Fact-Finding in Non-Appearance Before International Courts and Tribunals”, January 2018. [PDF]
- Madsen, M., “Who Rules the World? The Educational Capital of the International Judiciary”, Forthcoming in University of California Journal of International, Transnational, and Comparative Law; iCourts Working Paper Series No. 127, 2018. [PDF]
- Odermatt, J., “Patterns of Avoidance: Political Questions Before International Courts”, International Journal of Law in Context, 14(2), Forthcoming; iCourts Working Paper Series No. 120 (March 2018). [PDF]
- Paine, J., “International Adjudication as a Global Public Good?” (October 8, 2018), Forthcoming in European Journal of International Law. [PDF]
- Pauwelyn, J., and R.J. Hamilton, “Exit from International Tribunals”, Journal of International Dispute Settlement, 9 (2018), No. 4, pp. 679-690. [e-article]
- Ridi, N., “'Mirages of an Intellectual Dreamland’? Ratio, Obiter, and the Textualization of International Precedent” (September 4, 2018), Forthcoming in Journal of International Dispute Settlement. [PDF]
- Shaffer, G.C., “A Tragedy in the Making?: The Decline of Law and the Return of Power in International Trade Relations”, Yale Journal of International Law Online, 2018; UC Irvine School of Law Research Paper No. 2018-64. [PDF]
- Schultz, T., and N. Ridi, "Comity and International Courts and Tribunals", LawArXiv (April 29, 2018). [e-article]
2017 and before
- Alter, K.J. (et al.), “How Context Shapes the Authority of International Courts”, Law and Contemporary Problems, 79 (2016), No. 1; iCourts Working Paper Series, No. 18, 2015; Duke Law School Public Law and Legal Theory Series, No. 2015-13. [PDF]
- Baetens, F., “Judicial Review of International Adjudicatory Decisions: A Cross-Regime Comparison of Annulment and Appellate Mechanisms”, Journal of International Dispute Settlement, (September 2016), pp. 1-28. [e-article]
- Becker, M.A., and C. Rose, “Investigating the Value of Site Visits in Inter-State Arbitration and Adjudication”, Journal of International Dispute Settlement, 8 (2017), No. 2, pp. 219-249.
- Bernstorff, J. von, “Hans Kelsen on Judicial Law-Making by International Courts and Tribunals: A Theory of Global Judicial Imperialism?”, European Society of International Law (ESIL) Annual Conference, Oslo, 2015. [PDF]
- Blokker, N., “The Governance of International Courts and Tribunals: Organizing and Guaranteeing Independence and Accountability - A Appeal for Research”, European Society of International Law (ESIL) Annual Conference, Oslo, 2015. [PDF]
- Bogdandy, A. von, and I. Venzke, "International Courts as Lawmakers", in R. Wolfrum and I. Gätzschmann (eds.), International Dispute Settlement: Room for Innovations?, Heidelberg, Springer, 2013, pp.161-213.
- Brabandere, E. de.,"Non-State Actors and the Proliferation and Individualization of International Dispute Settlement", in B. Reinalda (ed.), The Ashgate Research Companion to Non-State Actors, Farnham, Ashgate, 2011, pp. 347-359.
- Cohen, M., “On the Linguistic Design of Multinational Courts: The French Capture”,International Journal of Constitutional Law, 14 (2016), No. 2, pp. 490-517.
- Crawford, J., “The Place of the International Court in International Dispute Settlement”, in ibid. (et al.) (eds.), The International Legal Order: Current Needs and Possible Responses: Essays in Honour of Djamchid Momtaz, Leiden, Brill Nijhoff, 2017, pp. 95-116. [e-article]
- Crow, K., “A Taxonomy of Proportionality in International Courts”, iCourts Working Paper Series, No. 107 (2017). [PDF]
- Daly, T.G., “The End of Law's Ambition: Human Rights Courts, Democratisation and Social Justice”, iCourts Working Paper Series, No. 49, 2016. [PDF]
- d'Aspremont, J., “The Control Over Knowledge by International Courts and Arbitral Tribunals” (Sept. 2017), in T. Schultz, and F. Ortino (eds.), Oxford Handbook of International Arbitration, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2018, Forthcoming. [PDF]
- De Baere, G. (et al.), “International Courts as Keepers of the Rule of Law: Achievements, Challenges, and Opportunities”, New York University Journal of International Law and Politics, 48 (2016), No. 3, pp. 715-793.
- Dunoff, J.L., and M.A. Pollack, “The Judicial Trilemma”, American Journal of International Law, 111 (2017), No. 2, pp. 225-276.
- Giorgetti, C., “Between Legitimacy and Control: Challenges and Recusals of Judges and Arbitrators in International Courts and Tribunals”, George Washington International Law Review, 49 (2016), No. 2, pp. 205-258. [PDF]
- Goldstone, R., “International Judges: Is there a Global Ethic?”, Ethics and International Affairs, 29 (2015), No. 3, pp 249-258.
- Kassoti, E, “Fragmentation and Inter-Judicial Dialogue: The CJEU and the ICJ at the Interface”, European Journal of Legal Studies, 8 (2015), No. 2, pp. 21-49 [PDF]
- Kornfeld, I.E., “Are International Courts the Best Adjudicators of Environmental Disputes?”, in Encyclopedia of Environmental Law: Volume II, 2016. [PDF]
- Madsen, M.R., “The New Sociology of International Courts”, ESIL Reflections, 4 (2015), No. 10. [PDF]
- Olsen, H.P., “International Courts and the Doctrinal Channels of Legal Diplomacy”, iCourts Working Paper Series, No. 25, 2015. [PDF]
- Pauwelyn , J., “Defenses and the Burden of Proof in International Law”. Forthcoming in L. Bartels and F. Paddeu (eds.), Exceptions in International Law, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2017. [PDF]
- Reisman, W.M., and M.H. Arsanjani, “Legal Decisions and their Implementation in International Law”, in J. Crawford (et al.) (eds.), The International Legal Order: Current Needs and Possible Responses: Essays in Honour of Djamchid Momtaz, Leiden, Brill Nijhoff, 2017, pp. 149-161. [e-article]
- Romano, C.P.R., “International Judicialization in the Arab World: An Initial Assessment”, iCourts Working Paper Series, No. 49, 2016. [PDF]
- Schultz, T., and F. Ost, “Shakespearean Legal Thought in International Dispute Settlement”, 2017. [PDF]
- Singh, P., “Revisiting the Role of International Courts and Tribunals”, in P. Singh and B. Mayer (eds.), Critical International Law: Postrealism, Postcolonialism, and Transnationalism, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2014.
- Soave, T., “The Politics of Invisibility: Why Are International Judicial Bureaucrats Obscured from View?”, Book Project, Conference on the Legitimacy of Unseen Actors in International Adjudication (The Hague, 26 and 27 October 2017). [PDF]
- Strong, S.I., “General Principles of Procedural Law and Procedural Jus Cogens”, Penn State Law Review, 122 (2018 Forthcoming); University of Missouri School of Law Legal Studies Research Paper No. 2017-20. [PDF]
- Swinehart, M.W., “Reliability of Expert Evidence in International Disputes”, Michigan Journal of International Law, 38 (2017), No. 2, pp. 193-243.
- Wass, J., “Jurisdiction by Estoppel and Acquiescence in International Courts and Tribunals”, British Yearbook of International Law, 86 (2017), pp. 155-195.
- Wolfrum, R., "Advisory Opinions: Are they a Suitable Alternative for the Settlement of International Disputes?", in R. Wolfrum and I. Gätzschmann (eds.), International Dispute Settlement: Room for Innovations?, Heidelberg, Springer, 2013, pp. 35-67.
- O'Connell, M.E., International Dispute Resolution: Cases and Materials, Durham, NC, Carolina Academic Press, 2012.
- Tams, J.T. and A. Tzanakopoulos (comp.), Basic Documents on the Settlement of International Disputes, Oxford and Portland, Oregon, Hart Publishing, 2012.
Periodicals, serial publications
- Journal of International Dispute Settlement: Table of Contents
- Law and Practice of International Courts and Tribunals: Table of Contents
- McGill Journal of Dispute Resolution (Open access)
- Transnational Dispute Management: Table of Contents
The Peace Palace Library has a collection of over a million publications. Each week, about six hundred new titles are added to our collection: books, articles, documents, online publications, etc. On this page, access is provided to this week’s new titles on Settlement of international disputes. It covers both means, procedures and activities.As we are right in the middle of moving to a new library system, it is not yet possible to automatically collect new titles for this Research Guide.
Choix de bibliothécaire
Wind, M. (ed.), International Courts and Domestic Politics, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2018. [e-book]View this title in our discovery service
Most studies describing the evolution of international courts (ICs) have either drawn on classical legalistic approaches or been developed by constitutionalists. What has unified both strands of research is the often implicit description of a universal and unidirectional strengthening of legalization and judicialization in global affairs. The present volume puts the question in a different way. It does not from the outset normatively assume that ICs are important and powerful actors or that national actors without further ado cite, embrace or enter into a constructive dialogue with these supranational bodies. Rather what this book does is to ask - from a multidisciplinary perspective - how and to what degree do ICs actually influence, impose constraints on and create loyalty from those actors involved? It is our claim that rather little research has been occupied with the actual effects on the ground for those national courts, political institutions and citizens who are formally governed by the increased judicialization. International law in national courts, and among politicians and citizens, does not always have the desired effect at the domestic level. This volume is a genuinely interdisciplinary analysis of international law and courts, examining a wide range of courts and judicial bodies, including human rights treaty bodies, and their impact and shortcomings. By employing social science methodology combined with classical case studies, leading lawyers and political scientists move the study of courts within international law to an entirely new level. The essays question the view that legal dogmatics will be enough to understand the increasingly complex world we are living in and demonstrate the potential benefits of adopting a much broader outlook drawing on empirical legal research.
Follesdal, A., and G. Ulfstein (eds.), The Judicialization of International Law : A Mixed Blessing?, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2018.View this title in our discovery service
The influence of international courts is ubiquitous, covering areas from the law of the sea to international criminal law. This judicialization of international law is often lauded for bringing effective global governance, upholding the rule of law, and protecting the right of individuals. Yet at what point does the omnipresence of the international judiciary shackle national sovereign freedom? And can the lack of political accountability be justified? The editors bring together the creme de la creme of the legal academic world to ask the big questions for the international judiciary: whether they are there for mere dispute settlement or to set precedent, and how far they can enforce international obligations without impacting on democratic self-determination.
Alter, K.J. (et al.) (eds.), International Court Authority, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2018. [e-book]View this title in our discovery service
An innovative, interdisciplinary and far-reaching examination of the actual reality of international courts, International Court Authority challenges fundamental preconceptions about when, why, and how international courts become important and authoritative actors in national, regional, and international politics. A stellar group of scholars investigate the challenges that international courts face in transforming the formal legal authority conferred by states into an actual authority in fact that is respected by potential litigants, national actors, legal communities, and publics. The book provides a novel framework for conceptualizing international court authority that focuses on the reactions and practices of these key audiences. Eighteen scholars from the disciplines of law, political science and sociology apply this framework to study thirteen international courts operating in Africa, Latin America, and Europe, as well as on a global level. Together the contributors document and explore important and interesting variations in whether the audiences that interact with international courts around the world embrace or reject the rulings of these judicial institutions.
Wiik, A., Amicus Curiae Before International Courts and Tribunals, Baden-Baden, Nomos, 2018.View this title in our discovery service
Amicus curiae participation in international courts and investment arbitration tribunals is increasing despite lack of clarity on the concept's nature, function and added value in international dispute settlement. The book examines the laws and practices of amicus curiae to assess the concept's status quo, and to determine if it meets the many expectations. Does it infuse proceedings with alternative views and the public interest? Does it increase the legitimacy and transparency of international dispute settlement, or the coherence of international law? Or does it derail the proceedings at the expense of the parties to advance its agenda? The book argues that neither the expectations nor the concerns attached to amicus curiae have materialized. It shows a hesitation by courts with a strong adversarial tradition to consider the views of non-parties, and argues that amicus curiae is not the best vehicle to present a public interest or increase legitimacy. However, it can improve judicial decisions and decision-making if regulated and used properly.
Howse, R. (et al.) (eds.), The Legitimacy of International Trade Courts and Tribunals, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2018. [e-book]View this title in our discovery service
The recent rise of international trade courts and tribunals deserves systemic study and in-depth analysis. This volume gathers contributions from experts specialised in different regional adjudicators of trade disputes and scrutinises their operations in the light of the often-debated legitimacy issues. It not only looks into prominent adjudicators that have played a significant role for global and regional integration; it also encloses the newly established and/or less-known judicial actors. Critical topics covered range from procedures and legal techniques during the adjudication process to the pre- and post-adjudication matters in relation to forum selection and decision implementation. The volume features cross-cutting interdisciplinary discussions among academics and practitioners, lawyers, philosophers and political scientists. In addition to fulfilling the research vacuum, it aims to address the challenges and opportunities faced in international trade adjudication.
Squatrito, T. (et al.) (eds.), The Performance of International Courts and Tribunals, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2018. [e-book]View this title in our discovery service
International courts and tribunals now operate globally and in several world regions, playing significant roles in international law and global governance. However, these courts vary significantly in terms of their practices, procedures, and the outcomes they produce. Why do some international courts perform better than others? Which factors affect the outcome of these courts and tribunals? The Performance of International Courts and Tribunals is an interdisciplinary study featuring approaches, methods and authorship from law and political science, which proposes the concept of performance to describe the processes and outcomes of international courts. It develops a framework for evaluating and explaining performance by offering a broad comparative analysis of international courts, covering several world regions and the areas of trade, investment, the environment, human rights and criminal law, and offers interdisciplinary accounts to explain how and why international court performance varies.
Grossman, N. (et al.) (eds.), Legitimacy and International Courts, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2018. [e-book]View this title in our discovery service
One of the most noted developments in international law over the past twenty years is the proliferation of international courts and tribunals. They decide who has the right to exploit natural resources, define the scope of human rights, delimit international boundaries and determine when the use of force is prohibited. As the number and influence of international courts grow, so too do challenges to their legitimacy. This volume provides new interdisciplinary insights into international courts' legitimacy: what drives and undermines the legitimacy of these bodies? How do drivers change depending on the court concerned? What is the link between legitimacy, democracy, effectiveness and justice? Top international experts analyse legitimacy for specific international courts, as well as the links between legitimacy and cross-cutting themes. Failure to understand and respond to legitimacy concerns can endanger both the courts and the law they interpret and apply.
- Cambridge University Press: Studies on International Courts and Tribunals
- iCourts Working Paper Series
- Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law, European Convention for the Peaceful Settlement of Disputes (1957), by Lucius Caflisch.
- Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law, Judicial Settlement of International Disputes, by Alain Pellet.
- Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law, Peaceful Settlement of International Disputes, by Alain Pellet.
- Pluricourts: Research Data on International Courts
- Oxford University Press: International Courts and Tribunal Series
- United Nations Audiovisual Library of International Law, Lecture Series on Courts and Tribunals
- United Nations Audiovisual Library of International Law, Lecture Series on Peaceful Settlement of Disputes
Book Review: War, Peace and International Order?
This book attempts to assess the history and on-going relevance of the 1899 and 1907 Hague peace conferences, the conventions they brought into being, the institutions they established and the precedents they set. The exact legacies of the two conferences remain unclear. On the one hand, diplomatic and military historians, who cast their gaze to 1914, traditionally dismiss the events of 1899 and 1907 as insignificant footnotes on the path to the First World War. On the other, experts in international law posit that The Hague’s foremost legacy lies in the manner in which the conferences progressed the law of war and the concept and application of international justice.Read more
Building a 'Temple for Peace': the Choice of the Site
The Treaty for the Pacific Settlement of International Disputes, concluded on 29 July 1899, determined that the newly created Permanent Court of Arbitration was to be established at The Hague. As Andrew Carnegie’s gift of 1903 was meant primarily for the erection of a new and appealing court house and library to serve its arbiters, there could be no argument, as to where this ‘Temple for Peace’ was to be built. It should be at The Hague. But where in The Hague precisely was quite another thing.Read more
Bolivia’s Centenarian Maritime Claim before the International Court of Justice
Despite losing its maritime coast, the so-called Littoral Department, after the War of the Pacific, Bolivia has historically maintained, as a state policy, a maritime claim to Chile. The claim asks for sovereign access to the Pacific Ocean and its maritime space. The Political Constitution of 2009 established that Bolivia declares its right to access to the sea, and that its objective is to solve the problem peacefully. Therefore, on 24 April 2013, Bolivia instituted proceedings against Chile before the International Court of Justice. A guest blog by Elizabeth Santalla Vargas.Read more
Building a ‘Temple for Peace’: Inspired Advocates and a Philanthropist
Shortly after the 1899 Hague Peace Conference had ended, William T. Stead, a highly energetic and respected British journalist and pacifist who had followed the peace conference as an observer, and Andrew D. White, the American head of delegation and ambassador in Germany, convinced the Scottish-born American steel magnate and philanthropist Andrew Carnegie to finance the ‘Temple for Peace’ that was to become the Peace Palace in The Hague.Read more
ARGO and the Follow-Up: Iran and the United States
33 Years after the event, Hollywood has turned its attention to an episode that traumatized the United States for months: the seizure of the American Embassy in Tehran. As the US Embassy falls to a group of Islamist students and militants in support of the Iranian revolution and in retaliation for the USA’s sheltering of the recently deposed Shah, six diplomats slip out and seek sanctuary in the Canadian’s ambassador’s residence. It is up to the CIA’s Tony Mendez (Ben Affleck) to extract them from the country before they are discovered by the Revolutionary Guards. The plan? Create a fake movie, called Argo, and pretend they’re the crew.Read more
Shabtai Rosenne Memorial Lecture
On Thursday, 24 November the first Shabtai Rosenne Memorial Lecture, delivered by Professor Malcolm N. Shaw Q.C., Senior Fellow at the Lauterpacht Centre for International Law at the University of Cambridge, took place at the Peace Palace in The Hague, a little more than a year after Professor Rosenne’s death. In his lecture entitled, “The Peaceful Settlement of Disputes: Paradigms, Plurality and Policy”, Professor Shaw gave an overview of where he thought dispute resolution was at the moment.Read more
The Institute for Historical Justice and Reconciliation in The Hague
The Institute for Historical Justice and Reconciliation seeks to promote tolerance and reconciliation through helping scholars from different sides of a conflict work together to research and write narratives that can be shared among communities or peoples in conflict. Through this process of shared work, a better understanding of “the other” is gained by both sides.Read more
Abyei Arbitration Award
On Wednesday 22 July, the Arbitral Tribunal at the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague rendered its final Award [PDF] in the case between the Government of Sudan and the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement (SPLM) concerning the delimitation of the boundaries of the Abyei Area. The arbitration is based on an Arbitration Agreement between the Parties that was deposited with the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) on 11 July 2008.Read more
Maritime Delimitation in the Black Sea (Romania v. Ukraine)
On Tuesday 3 February 2009 the International Court of Justice (ICJ) rendered its Judgment in the case concerning Maritime Delimitation in the Black Sea (Romania v. Ukraine). A public sitting took place at 10 a.m. at the Peace Palace in The Hague, during which the President of the Court, Judge Rosalyn Higgins, read the Court’s Judgment.Read more