The Nuclear Disarmament Cases: Is Formalistic Rigour in Establishing Jurisdiction Impeding Access to Justice?

Clicks: 305
ID: 108858
2017
Free PDF
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality Improving Quality
0.0 /100
Combines engagement data with AI-assessed academic quality
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Abstract
Nuclear disarmament falls within the purview of the purposes envisaged in Article 1 of the United Nations Charter. The International Court of Justice (ICJ) in 1996 delivered an advisory opinion on legality of use of nuclear weapons and has stated that the states in good faith must strive towards nuclear disarmament. In the 'Marshall Islands Cases', 20 years later the ICJ had the opportunity to address questions relating to cessation of the nuclear arms race and nuclear disarmament. However, the ICJ has failed to foster nuclear disarmament within the international community. The ICJ dismissed Marshall Islands’ application on jurisdictional grounds because there was no legal dispute between the parties. The ICJ in determining the existence of a dispute introduced a subjective 'awareness' test. In this case note, we aim to examine the awareness test and its politico-legal effects in the development of international law. While doing so, we also argue that the test has further rendered the enforcement of nuclear disarmament obligations arduous.
Reference Key
ramkumar2017theutrecht Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Ramkumar, Meenakshi;Singh, Aishwarya;
Journal utrecht journal of international and european law
Year 2017
DOI
DOI not found
URL
https://www.utrechtjournal.org/articles/422
Keywords
law political science political science (general) philosophy (general) international relations military science nuclear engineering. atomic power law of europe

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.