Periodic Reporting for period 1 - CaPE (The International Court of Justice and the Preservation of Peace in the 21st Century: Global Governance in Action)
Reporting period: 2016-09-01 to 2018-08-31
My project is important for society, because it has the ambition of bringing the society closer to the Court. First, the ICJ is not a ‘regular’ Court deciding routine disputes, but it is the World Court. Awareness of its functions and performance is necessary for decision-makers and the public at large. Second, my analysis takes a forward-looking perspective and indicates the future possibilities of the Court’s action. Third, by exploring the geopolitical and policy-related dimensions of the Court’s jurisprudence, my analysis is also an invitation to the mass media to reflect more and be more attentive to the signals given by the Court. Fourth, CaPE raises the profile of a core institution of the international community in an era of populism and may dispel some of the prejudice against international institutions.
The core objective of the project is to review the position of the ICJ under the conditions of the 21st century. Other objectives of the project are the following: First, to analyze the hidden dimensions of the jurisprudence, in particular the role of geopolitics and how the Court responds to it. Second, to dispel the prejudice of a ‘conservative’ ICJ, which allegedly loses its relevance by ceding ground to the new international courts and tribunals. Third, to prove that the ICJ determines the form of the core principles of international law with universal validity. Fourth, to assess the jurisprudence with regard to its contribution to peace and security. Fifth, to assess the authority of the Court.
Other initiatives for the dissemination of the ideas linked to my project: Presenting the drafts of my publications at the Universities of Copenhagen and Lund; giving a talk in the Greek Parliament for the potential contribution of the ICJ in the management of migration flows, which will be published soon in a book under the aegis of the Parliament; convening a conference at the University of Copenhagen on various dimensions of the ICJ jurisprudence; co-convened a conference at the same University on the judicial response to the migration crisis, including the potential contribution of the ICJ; engaging in a public discussion in Copenhagen with Sir Michael Wood, Special Rapporteur of the International Law Commission (ILC), on the function of the ICJ; discussing the objectives of my research at the Max Planck Institute for International Law in Heidelberg; joining the Max Planck Institute as a result of the research; receiving a proposal to edit the Research Handbook on the International Court of Justice, on which I am working on now (Elgar Publ).
In the second study of the project, I introduce the discussion of geopolitics in the analysis of Court’s jurisprudence on negative peace and security. This is a major turn in scholarship, which has so far ignored this dimension. Here, I provide evidence that the change of the geopolitical balance and the emergence of new actors. The suppression of the threats to the peace as understood by the UN Security Council has become the core interest that steers the Court’s jurisprudence in the field of security.
The third study is about territorial governance, positive peace, and self-determination. Here, I develop the idea that self-determination is not merely a ‘right’ in international law, but rather a principle that fulfils specific functions. I explore the decisions of the Court that relate to self-determination and I conclude that the Court is hesitant to adopt a certain model for governance, but that its concern is rather the governability of a territory and its stability.
The fourth and last study reflects on the authority of the Court. The authority depends on the unique function that the ICJ performs, which is to relate international law to the diplomatic and geopolitical environment. How this linkage takes place, is a matter of judicial policy and interpretation of the pertinent norms. The authority of the Court is maximized, if it succeeds in finding the right balance between these two poles. Success or failure depend on many factors, in particular on whether the Court is able to distinguish between the power of States, in particular of Great Powers, and the power of function systems, which define the structural conditions and constraints, under which States interact with each other.
The impact of CaPE will be long-term. I hope to contribute to a turn in the analysis of the ICJ that includes sociological and theoretical aspects. There are so far two encouraging signals for the impact my research will have. First, I realized during my research that the publication of four separate journal articles on this theme, as originally planned, is not fit for purpose and decided to proceed with the publication of the four studies in the SSRN series of iCourts, and then to develop them into a book at the Max Planck Institute for Comparative Public Law and International Law. Second, I am editing the Research Handbook on the ICJ, following a contract with Elgar Publ.