We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 27 February 2017
This above all—to thine own self be true, And it must follow, as the night the day, Thou canst not then be false to any man.
Hamlet, 1.3.78
On two occasions in the recent past, the International Court of Justice has misstated its own prior holdings by selective quotation. In each instance, the partial quotation was invoked as authority for the opposite of what the previous Court had said. Neither matter was de minimis: in each instance, the issue for which authority was being sought was central either to the case at bar or to an important aspect of the Court’s role. The consequences for the future of international adjudication and the stability of authoritative expectation, which is such an important strut of international law, are serious and merit examination.
1 For legislative history, practice and comments on Article 53, see J. Elkind, Non-Appearance before the International Court of Justice: Functional and Comparative Analysis, especially at 79–102 (1984).
2 Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicar. v. U.S.), Merits, 1986 ICJ Rep. 14 (Judgment of June 27) [hereinafter Nicaragua].
3 Id. at 24, para. 28.
4 Fisheries Jurisdiction (UK v. Ice.; FRG v. Ice.), Merits, 1974 ICJ REP. 3, 9, and 175, 181 (Judgments of July 25).
5 Nicaragua, 1986 ICJ Rep. at 24, para. 29.
6 But cf. the Judgment of the Chamber in Frontier Dispute (Burkina Faso/Mali), 1986 ICJ Rep. 554, 557 (Judgment of Dec. 22).
7 Nicaragua, 1986 ICJ Rep. at 25, para. 30.
8 Id.
9 Corfu Channel (UK v. Alb.), 1949 ICJ Rep. 244, 248 (Judgment of Dec. 15) (emphasis added).
10 Applicability of the Obligation to Arbitrate under Section 21 of the United Nations Headquarters Agreement of 26 June 1947, 1988 ICJ Rep. 12 (Advisory Opinion of Apr. 26) [hereinafter Mission].
11 Agreement Regarding the Headquarters of the United Nations, U.S.-UN, June 26, 1947, 61 Stat. 3416, TIASNo. 1676, 11 UNTS 11, 22 U.S.C. §287 note (1982).
12 Mission, 1988 ICJ Rep. at 29, para. 39 (emphasis added). Despite the fact that the case was largely briefed and pleaded in English, the Court designated French as the authentic language. Id. at 35, para. 58. The translation of this part of the judgment is not felicitous. The statement “we do not believe arbitration would be appropriate” is rendered in the authentic version as “nous pensons qu'un arbitrage ne serait pas opportun.” Id. at 29, para. 39. Five lines later, the word “opportunité” in the important quotation from the 1930 Free Zones case (see note 14 infra) was rendered in English as “expediency.” That is an accurate translation, but the translation of “appropriate” in the U.S. pleading as “opportun,” viz. “expedient,” in this setting does not capture the implication of the U.S. pleading. This interlinguistic adjustment, however, does make Free Zones quotable in this context.
13 Mission, 1988 ICJ Rep. at 29, para. 40.
14 Free Zones of Upper Savoy and the District of Gex, 1930 PCIJ (ser. A) No. 24, at 15 (Order of Dec. 6) (emphasis added). The authentic language of the judgment was French and read as follows:
Considérant … qué si la Cour, etant une Cour de justice, ne peut faire abstraction de droits reconnus par elle pour se déterminer seulement par des considérations de pure opportunité, rien ne l'empêche, vu les avantages que pourrait presenter une solution de ce genre, d'offrir aux Parties, qui, seules, peuvent la réaliser, une nouvelle occasion d'at-teindre ce but.
15 Reisman, Private Armies in a Global War System, 14 Va. J. Int'l L. 1, 46–47 (1973), reprinted in Law and Civil War in the Modern World 252, 297–98 (J. N. Moore ed. 1974), and M. S. McDougal & W. M. Reisman, International Law Essays 142, 182 (1981).
