Monday, December 19, 2011

First of all: the ICJ is only enabled to give advisory opinions, not binding resolutions.

Contributed by VAA
Sometimes the comments on are more informative than the posts themselves . I came across this comment by Hostage on December 18, 2011 at 10:25 pm

"First of all: the ICJ is only enabled to give advisory opinions, not binding resolutions."
That's totally incorrect, but beside the point. The applicable international laws aren't non-binding and neither are the legal determinations made by any of the primary UN organs made within the area of their competence.
FYI, the General Assembly acknowledged that both Israel and Palestine had made declarations in-line with their acceptance of resolution 181(II) and its minority protection plan. See General Assembly resolutions 273/3; 43/177; and the discussion about the resolution 181(II) guarantees in Chapter “III The United Nations Charter and the treaties concluded after the war”, starting on page 22, in E/CN.4/367
Resolution 181(II) contained a compromissory clause which gives the ICJ compulsory jurisdiction to settle any dispute between Israel or Palestine concerning the rights of the people that were placed under the protection of the UN. Palestine introduced the request for the Emergency Session that resulted in the referral to the ICJ and that emergency session endorsed the ICJ findings in resolution ES-10/15, 2 August 2004. Here is the applicable portion of resolution 181(II):
Chapter 4: Miscellaneous Provisions
The provisions of chapters 1 and 2 of the declaration shall be under the guarantee of the United Nations, and no modifications shall be made in them without the assent of the General Assembly of the United Nations. Any Member of the United Nations shall have the right to bring to the attention of the General Assembly any infraction or danger of infraction of any of these stipulations, and the General Assembly may thereupon make such recommendations as it may deem proper in the circumstances.
Any dispute relating to the application or interpretation of this declaration shall be referred, at the request of either party, to the International Court of Justice, unless the parties agree to another mode of settlement.


  1. Very very interesting. Now this is the type of stuff that needs to be analyzed. Will take some time to study this.

  2. What's very intersting , and need to be analyzed anan ? you're being a prick, I'm still waiting for many things you've promissed to research , DU and it's birth defects in Iraq is one , it's being over 2 years.  >:o

  3. " Will take some time to study this." Translates as "Am awaiting programming by the Guardians of the Brain-Dead".

  4. Vaa, you are praised for posting a very relavent piece of scholarly work, and your reaction is . . .   sigh.

    I like detailed granular research and data driven analysis.

    On Iraqi birth defects, I have yet to see conclusive medical research. Some possible causes are:
    1) Uranium that wasn't completely depleted. [Completely depleted Uranium doesn't have radiation.] Many Iraqi vehicles have depleted Uranium shells [which form strong armor against enemy projectiles]. When this armor is penetrated, there is the possiblity of depleted uranium [that isn't completely depleted] being exposed. Although the radius of the exposure shouldn't be more than a few feet.

    2) Al Qaeda chemical weapon attacks against Iraqi civilians, including in Falluja

    3) Industrial plant pollution [this is my suspicion]. But if so, what industrial plant did it?

    4) Many other possible causes.

    The difficulty with the DU hypothesis is that I haven't seen evidence that radiation lasts for more than a few feet from the damaged vehicle. This said, there should be regulation that Depleted Uranium needs to meet more than nine nines purity. In other words more than 99.99999999% should be depleted. Which would end risk of radiation even a few feet away.

    Many countries around the world use depleted uranium armor for their vehicles. It is cheap armor. The Israelis make big business selling it to countries around the world. Israel tried to convince the Government of Iraq [which I like :) ] to let Israel add DU armor to hundreds or thousands of Iraqi vehicles.

    If DU armor were harmful, would we be hearing more about medical problems in Russia, China, India, Korea, Japan, Europe, Turkey, KSA, UAE, Egypt, Jordan, South Africa etc.?

    This said, the answer in Iraq isn't obvious and needs a lot more research. If the culprit is (are) industrial plant(s), then they need to be identified ASAP.

    Maliki and the Government of iraq need to move fast on this.

  5. What authority does the ICJ have to adjudicate property rights disputes or to determine the market value of property confiscated by the Israeli government using eminent domain type laws?

    Does ICJ have any authority inside the Israeli 1967 borders? Or only in Gaza and the West Bank?

    This brings up a lot of questions for me. I hope that England pays compensation to Palestine. This would need to be paid for with large increases in English taxes and large cuts in English spending.