Logo BSU

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://elib.bsu.by/handle/123456789/30023
Title: Проблемные аспекты понятия "юрисдикция Международного Суда ООН"
Other Titles: Problematic Aspects of the Definition of the Notion "Jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice" (Andrey Velichkovsky)
Authors: Величковский, Андрей Владимирович
Keywords: ЭБ БГУ::ОБЩЕСТВЕННЫЕ НАУКИ::Государство и право. Юридические науки
Issue Date: 2000
Citation: Белорусский журнал международного права и международных отношений. — 2000. — № 4
Abstract: The article surveys various theoretical problems related to defining the essence of jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice. These problems arise from certain ambiguity of the term "jurisdiction" and abundance of legal theories that propose different approaches to determining the scope of the Court's jurisdiction. At the beginning of the article the author explains the importance of jurisdictional issues in the practice of the Court. It is emphasized that, whereas in the domestic field, always excepting the case of the federal States, jurisdictional issues are relatively unimportant and infrequent, the exact opposite is the case in the international field. The complexity of the issue of jurisdiction, and the far-reaching ramifications of the results of a decision on a question of jurisdiction, are reflected in the prominent place which these questions occupy in the general practice of the Court. The prominence of the jurisdictional issues before the Court is illustrated by the fact that, with few exceptions, in all cases in which a defendant State has been brought before the Court by unilateral application, it has pleaded to the jurisdiction of the Court. The body of the article focuses on different approaches to the definition of the term "jurisdiction" and its correlation with the terms "competence" and "admissibility". The author provides detailed analysis of jurisdiction of the court in its broad and restricted sense. Further, he also addresses the question of the doctrinal division of the jurisdiction of the Court into principal jurisdiction (or jurisdiction to decide a dispute on the merits) and ancillary jurisdiction that includes the powers of the Court to indicate provisional measures of protection, to entertain third-party interventions, to admit and adjudicate counterclaims and to determine the questions of its own jurisdiction. It should be noted that in his analysis the author uses multiple examples from the decisions of the Court to explain theoretical problems examined in the article. Finally, the author contends that the uniformity of terminology in international legal instruments and, in particular, the exclusive usage of the term "jurisdiction" for designation of the powers of the court to decide a dispute between States on the merits and to exercise its ancillary functions connected with its main proceedings on contentious case, precludes numerous doctrinal controversies and practical difficulties in application of these instruments. The article concludes with the observation that the majority of recently adopted international legal instruments, documents of the Court and scientific works of late years witness to a tendency to uniform usage of the terminology with regard to jurisdictional issues of the Court's work.
Description: Раздел - "Международное право", рубрика - "Вопросы теории"
URI: http://elib.bsu.by/handle/123456789/30023
Appears in Collections:Белорусский журнал международного права и международных отношений. — 2000. — № 4

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
2000_4_JILIR_velichkovsky_r.pdf897,73 kBAdobe PDFView/Open


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.