Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-pftt2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-23T13:47:33.826Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

A Note on the ICJ Advisory Opinion on Kosovo

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 March 2019

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

On 22 July 2010, the International Court of Justice (hereinafter the “ICJ”) delivered its advisory opinion on the accordance with international law of the unilateral declaration of independence in respect of Kosovo. The ICJ concluded that the declaration of independence dated 17 February 2008 did not violate any applicable rule of international law consisting of general international law, UNSC resolution 1244 (1999) (hereinafter the “Resolution 1244”) and the Constitutional Framework for Provisional Self-Government in Kosovo (hereinafter the “Constitutional Framework”). The ICJ delivered the advisory opinion in response to a question set out in resolution 63/3 dated 8 October 2008 of the General Assembly of the United Nations Organization (hereinafter the “General Assembly”), which asked if “the unilateral declaration of independence by the Provisional Institutions of Self-Government of Kosovo is in accordance with international law.”

Type
Kosovo in the ICJ – The Case
Copyright
Copyright © 2010 by German Law Journal GbR 

References

1 Advisory Opinion on the Accordance with International Law of Unilateral Declaration of Independence in Respect of Kosovo, 2010 I.C.J. 141 (July 22) [hereinafter Advisory Opinion].Google Scholar

2 Id. at ¶ 51.Google Scholar

3 Id. at ¶ 56.Google Scholar

4 Id. at ¶ 83.Google Scholar

5 See Uno-Gericht segnet Unabhöngigkeit des Kosovo ab, Financial Times Deutschland, July 22, 2010, http://www.ftd.de/politik/europa/:klage-von-serbien-uno-gericht-segnet-unabhaengigkeit-des-kosovo-ab/50147532.html.Google Scholar

6 Chiang Huang-chih, ICJ's Kosovo decision is vague and very limited, Taipei Times, July 28, 2010, at 8, available at http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/editorials/archi-ves/2010/07/28/2003478995.Google Scholar

7 Advisory Opinion at ¶ 24.Google Scholar

8 Id. at ¶ 25, 27.Google Scholar

9 Id. at ¶ 31.Google Scholar

10 Id. at ¶ 33.Google Scholar

11 Id. at ¶ 34.Google Scholar

12 Id. at ¶ 35.Google Scholar

13 Id. at ¶ 40.Google Scholar

14 Id. at ¶ 42.Google Scholar

15 Id. On GA resolution 377A (V), see Bowett's Law of International Institutions 33–36 (Philippe Sands & Peter Klein eds., 2001); Volker Epping, Internationale Organisationen, in Völkerrecht (Knut Ipsen ed., 1999).Google Scholar

16 Advisory Opinion on Certain Expenses of the United Nations, 1962 I.C.J. 162–164; Advisory Opinion on the Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, 2004 I.C.J 150.Google Scholar

17 Advisory Opinion at ¶ 44.Google Scholar

18 On July 28 2010, Serbia's Mission to the UN proposed a draft resolution to the General Assembly condemning one-sided secession as a means of resolving territorial issues and calling for a mutually acceptable solution for all disputed issues through peaceful dialogue, available at: http://www.srbija.gov.rs/vesti/vest.php?id=67879.Google Scholar

19 U.N. SCOR, 6367th mtg., U.N. Doc. S/10000 (Aug. 3, 2010) (Security Council Press Release), available at http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2010/sc10000.doc.htm.Google Scholar

20 Antonio Cassese, International Law 196 (2005).Google Scholar

21 Ian Brownlie, Principles of Public International Law 14–15 (2003).Google Scholar

22 Gazeta Express dated 30 July 2010, at: http://www.gazetaexpress.com.Google Scholar

23 Advisory Opinion at ¶ 52.Google Scholar

24 Id. at ¶ 50.Google Scholar

25 Id. at ¶ 53.Google Scholar

26 Id. at ¶ 54.Google Scholar

27 Id. at ¶ 105.Google Scholar

28 Id. at ¶ 109.Google Scholar

29 Id. at ¶ 91.Google Scholar

30 Id. at ¶ 85.Google Scholar

31 Id. at ¶ 88.Google Scholar

32 Id. at ¶ 89.Google Scholar

33 On a Constitutional Framework For Provisional Self Government in Kosovo, United Nations Interim Administration Mission in Kosovo, UNMIK/REG/2001/9 (May 15, 2001), available at http://www.unmikonline.org/regulations/unmikgazette/02english/E2001regs/RE2001_09.pdf.Google Scholar

34 Advisory Opinion (Declaration of Vice-President Tomka), ¶ 18–20, available at http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/141/15989.pdf.Google Scholar

35 Advisory Opinion (Dissenting Opinion of Judge Bennouna), ¶ 48–52, available at http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/141/15999.pdf.Google Scholar

36 Advisory Opinion (Dissenting Opinion of Judge Koroma), ¶ 4–5, available at http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/141/15991.pdf.Google Scholar

37 Advisory Opinion at ¶ 55.Google Scholar

38 Id. at ¶ 55.Google Scholar

39 Id. at ¶ 26.Google Scholar

40 Id. at ¶ 79.Google Scholar

41 James Crawford, The Creation of States in International Law 651 (2006).Google Scholar

42 Advisory Opinion (Declaration of Judge Simma), ¶ 2, available at http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/141/15993.pdf.Google Scholar

43 Id. at ¶ 3.Google Scholar

44 Id. at ¶ 3.Google Scholar

45 Id. at ¶ 8.Google Scholar

46 Lotus Judgment No. 9, 1927 P.C.I.J. (ser. A) No. 10, at 18.Google Scholar

47 Case Concerning Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (merits), 1986 I.C.J. 101, ¶ 269.Google Scholar

48 Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons, 1996 I.C.J. 226, ¶ 52.Google Scholar

49 Advisory Opinion at ¶ 85.Google Scholar

50 Id. at ¶ 94.Google Scholar

51 Id. at ¶ 97.Google Scholar

52 Id. at ¶ 97.Google Scholar

53 Id. at ¶ 98.Google Scholar

54 Id. at ¶ 99.Google Scholar

55 Id. at ¶ 104.Google Scholar

56 Id. at ¶ 104, 114.Google Scholar

57 Id. at ¶ 114.Google Scholar

58 Id. at ¶ 114.Google Scholar

59 Id. at ¶ 115.Google Scholar

60 Id. at ¶ 118.Google Scholar

61 Id. at ¶ 121.Google Scholar

62 Id. at ¶ 92.Google Scholar

63 Erika de Wet, The Governance of Kosovo: SC Res. 1244 and the Establishment and Functioning of EULEX, 103 Am. J. Int'l L 83 (2009).Google Scholar

64 Advisory Opinion at ¶ 98.Google Scholar

65 Id. at ¶ 80.Google Scholar

66 Advisory Opinion (Dissenting Opinion of Judge Koroma) ¶ 22. See also G.A. Res. 2625 (XXV), U.N. Doc. A/8082 (Oct. 24, 1970).Google Scholar

67 Cassese, supra note 20, at 63.Google Scholar

68 Advisory Opinion at ¶ 79.Google Scholar