Statue of International Court of Justice

In: Historical Events

Submitted By lucas
Words 5113
Pages 21
ternational Court of JusticeARTICLE 1.
The International Court of Justice established by the Charter of the United Nations as the principal judicial organ of the United Nations shall be constituted and shall function in accordance with the provisions of the present Statute.
The Court shall be composed of a body of independent judges, elected regardless of their nationality from among persons of high moral character, who possess the qualifications required In their respective countries for appointment to the highest judicial offices, or are juris-consults of recognized competence in international law.
1. The Court shall consist of fifteen members, no two of whom may be nationals of the same state.
2. A person who for the purposes of membership in the Court could be regarded as a national of more than one state shall be deemed to be a national of the one in which he ordinarily exercises civil and political rights.
1. The members of the Court shall be elected by the (general Assembly and by the Security Council from a list of persons nominated by the national groups in the Permanent Court of Arbitration, in accordance with the following provisions.
2. In the case of Members of the United Nations not represented in the Permanent Court of Arbitration, candidates shall be nominated by national groups appointed for this purpose by their governments under the same conditions as those prescribed for members of the Permanent Court of Arbitration by Article 44 of the Convention of The Hague of 1907 for the pacific settlement of international disputes.
3. The conditions under which a state which is a party to the present Statute but is not a Member of the United Nations may participate in electing the members of the Court shall, in the absence of a special agreement, be laid down by the General…...

Similar Documents


...Leilani Stertz Jane Zunkel Writing 121 29 April 2013 Justice The word justice evokes passion in the people who speak it but what is Justice and where did it come from? Justice is a noun and the word has origins in Middle English, from the Anglo-French word justise, further in Latin justitia, from justus. The current definition according to the Merriam-Webster Dictionary is: 1(a) The maintenance or administration of what is just especially by the impartial adjustment of conflicting claims or the assignment of merited rewards or punishment. (b) Judge (c) the administration of law; especially the establishment or determination of rights according to the rules of Law or equity. 2 (a) the quality of being just, impartial, or fair (b) 1. The principal or ideal of just dealing or right action. 2. Conformity to this principal or ideal: righteousness. (c) The quality of conforming to law. 3. Conformity to truth, fact, or reason: correctness. Justice can only be satisfied through law, legislation, and impartial judgment. Without justice a society cannot survive. In modern society the very system who decides how to serve justice is the only system not ruled by it. (Merriam-Webster ) In 1215, a document giving birth to the English legal system, which grants rights to 'freemen' or non-serfs, was enacted. The Magna Carta limited the power of King John and provided legal securities only allowing prosecution through the 'Law of the land'. "No free man shall be seized or imprisoned,......

Words: 1320 - Pages: 6

Theory of Justice Analysis

...Theory of Justice Analysis Conception and reality often clash when applied to everyday. In the most optimal society justice is served by punishing criminals so that law abiding citizens can live their lives in peace. The reality is that criminals receive punishments that are less than justice demands and the non-criminals are cheated. This short paper examines justice theories, the utilitarian view, modern justice view and the security based justice. It is important to consider individual justice, mob justice and societal justice as separate institutions. To better understand these institutions the next section explains justice theories. Justice Theories In this section two types of justice will be discussed: Rawl's Theory of Justice as Fairness and Libertarianism. Rawls focused on a hypothetical model in order to describe his form of justice. In this hypothetical model individuals are required to choose fundamental principles of basic institutions of a given society (Ilstu). The result choices made by the members of this society will be both fair and just. The two principles are as follows: Equal Liberty and Difference. "The Equal Liberty Principle states each person is to have the maximum civil liberties compatible with the same liberty for all (Ilstu)". These would be the principles of the United States Constitution; all American citizens are privileged to receive full civil liberties based on the laws of the land. "The Difference Principle states......

Words: 1221 - Pages: 5

Statue of Liberty

...The Statue of Liberty (Liberty Enlightening the World; French: La Liberté éclairant le monde) is a colossal neoclassical sculpture on Liberty Island in the middle of New York Harbor, in Manhattan, New York City. The statue, designed by Frédéric Auguste Bartholdi and dedicated on October 28, 1886, was a gift to the United States from the people of France. The statue is of a robed female figure representing Libertas, the Roman goddess of freedom, who bears a torch and a tabula ansata (a tablet evoking the law) upon which is inscribed the date of the American Declaration of Independence, July 4, 1776. A broken chain lies at her feet. The statue is an icon of freedom and of the United States: a welcoming signal to immigrants arriving from abroad. The statue is situated in Upper New York Bay on Liberty Island, south of Ellis Island. Both islands were ceded by New York to the federal government in 1800.[149] As agreed in an 1834 compact between New York and New Jersey that set the state border at the bay's midpoint, the original islands remain New York territory despite their location on the New Jersey side of the state line. Land created by reclamation at Ellis is New Jersey territory.[150] A universal symbol of freedom and democracy, the Statue of Liberty also celebrates the international friendship of the United States and France. It was given to us as a gift from France. Built to commerate an alliance during the American Revolution, the Statue was dedicated on October 28,......

Words: 509 - Pages: 3

Extracts from Statue of International

...EXTRACTS FROM THE STATUTEOF THEINTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE Article 1 The International Court of Justice established by the Charter of the United Nations as the principal judicial organ of the United Nations shall be constituted and shall function in accordance with the provisions of the present Statute. CHAPTER I - ORGANIZATION OF THE COURT Article 3 1. The Court shall consist of fifteen members, no two of whom may be nationals of the same state. … Article 13 1. The members of the Court shall be elected for nine years and may be re-elected; provided, however, that of the judges elected at the first election, the terms of five judges shall expire at the end of three years and the terms of five more judges shall expire at the end of six years. Article 31 1. Judges of the nationality of each of the parties shall retain their right to sit in the case before the Court. 2. If the Court includes upon the Bench a judge of the nationality of one of the parties, any other party may choose a person to sit as judge. Such person shall be chosen preferably from among those persons who have been nominated as candidates as provided in Articles 4 and 5. 3. If the Court includes upon the Bench no judge of the nationality of the parties, each of these parties may proceed to choose a judge as provided in paragraph 2 of this Article. … CHAPTER II - COMPETENCE OF THE COURT Article 34 1. Only states may be parties in cases before the Court. 2. The Court, subject to and in conformity with......

Words: 504 - Pages: 3


...CRIMINAL JUSTICE Course Start Date: 10/22/2013 Course End Date: 11/25/2013                   Please print a copy of this syllabus for handy reference. Whenever there is a question about what assignments are due, please remember this syllabus is considered the ruling document. Copyright Copyright ©2010 by University of Phoenix. All rights reserved. University of Phoenix© is a registered trademark of Apollo Group, Inc. in the United States and/or other countries. Microsoft©, Windows©, and Windows NT© are registered trademarks of Microsoft Corporation in the United States and/or other countries. All other company and product names are trademarks or registered trademarks of their respective companies. Use of these marks is not intended to imply endorsement, sponsorship, or affiliation. Edited in accordance with University of Phoenix© editorial standards and practices. Course Description This course examines both the principle issues in contemporary criminal justice as well as the extrapolation of such issues toward possible futures within the criminal justice field. Students will focus upon relevant research in policing, courts, and corrections that reflect key elements of current conditions and what may be expected in the years to come. Students will apply critical review and engage in in-depth discussion of these concepts as a basis for comprehensive understanding at local, state, national, and global levels of criminal justice......

Words: 2364 - Pages: 10

Should Us Supreme Court Justices Continue to Be Appointed for Life?

...The issue of U.S. justices serving in the Supreme Court for life has been debated for years. While our forefathers who crafted the constitution had reasons for the lifetime service, Americans have had varying positions regarding the issue. This essay discusses the two sides of the lifetime tenure of American justices serving in the Supreme Court, seeking to gain ground on whether the term should be retained or amended. The U.S. President is constitutionally allowed to appoint justices to serve in the country’s Supreme Court. However, he or she does not do this independently, but seeks the assent and counsel of the Senate before the justices are appointed. From history, most presidents give preference to judges who appear to rhyme with them in terms of ideological views. However, this does not rule out the fact that serving justices may have opposing opinions to those shared by the president. Importantly, there are no qualifications for justices defined by the constitution, leaving room for the president to make his appointments, which are confirmed by the Senate (Patterson, 2010). Nevertheless, the confirmation process has always drawn significant attention, with lobby groups pushing for the rejection of some candidates with questionable track records. In rare cases, the president is allowed to withdraw the names of some candidates, especially when he is convinced beyond reasonable doubt that the names are likely to be rejected by the Senate. In recent years, the......

Words: 1572 - Pages: 7

Courts in Our Criminal Justice System: Plea Bargains

...The Courts in Our Criminal Justice System: Plea Bargains Class: CJS220 Instructor: College: University of Phoenix, Axia College The purpose of plea bargains are for defendant's to plea guilty to a lesser charge/offense or to a least one charge especially if there are multi-indictments. Pleading guilty for a lighter sentence that what a defendant could get with out the plea bargain. Defendant's will plea guilty in hopes of leniency, and at least 90 percent of criminal cases end in a plea bargains. The main three plea bargains involves in a reduction, but the reductions are not done the same way. The first type of plea bargain. is called charge bargaining. This is where the defendant pleads guilty for an exchange in reduction to the severity of the crime and charges. The second type of plea bargains is called sentence bargaining this is where a defendant pleads guilty and are promised a lighter or alternative sanctions. This type of plea bargaining is most common in murder trials where the defendant will plea guilty to avoid the death penalty. The third type of plea bargains is called count bargaining, this is where a defendant can have the number of charges reduced when he or she is being charged with separate counts. Charge bargaining positive would be in order to get a confession out of the offender you would offer a reduction of the crime and charges. A positive would also be if the prosecution wanted to find a body of the victim. The negative is having......

Words: 740 - Pages: 3

Juvenile Justice Supreme Court Cases

...Juvenile Justice Supreme Court Cases | Project 2 | | Latisha Lipsey | 7/30/2012 | | Juveniles have been committing crimes since the beginning of time, and they were punished has needed. The problem in today’s world is the youths are starting to commit more crimes, then decades ago, and another issue is how to punish a juvenile for the crime they committed. There are several landmark juvenile cases that were decided by the U.S. Supreme Court. The first three cases, Kent v. United States (1966), In re Gault (1967), and In re Winship (1970), are considered to be three biggest cases which opened the doors for the juvenile litigation before the U.S. Supreme Court (Champion, 2010,2007,2004,2001,1998). When the Kent case was decided in 1966, it was much easier for the U.S. Supreme Court to impose its vast precedent setting powers on juvenile courts in all jurisdictions. Then there was other cases including Breed v. Jones that granted various constitutional rights to juveniles (Champion, 2010,2007,2004,2001,1998). In today’s world juvenile courts in all jurisdictions have moved away from traditional approaches to juvenile offending and punishment and onto due process commensurate with adult offenders. The presence of an attorney in juvenile courts is more of a rule then an exception (Champion, 2010,2007,2004,2001,1998) . The history of the evolution of the legal rights of juvenile offenders began in the 1960’s, the Supreme Court required juvenile courts to......

Words: 2279 - Pages: 10

The Supreme Court

...The Supreme Court The purpose of the Supreme Court is to review or address cases that involve issues on a federal level or of constitutional law, just as appellate courts hear cases on a state level. Their responsibilities include deciding how to apply the principles of constitutional law to new matters and issues that arise in today’s day to day legal process; they also play the role of the “parent” to lower federal appellate courts when their decisions on legal issues are contradicting to one another, overlap, goes against constitutional rights, or allows room for confusion as to whose decision takes precedent. Bottom line the purpose of the Supreme Court is to provide the rules and statues for state level courts to abide by when they involve federal or constitutional matters, making them the highest court of law. The Supreme Court is made up of nine judges or justices of the peace that are appointed by the President of the United States and the advice of the senate, their titles include one chief and eight associates that serve a life term. By law there are no particular requirements, educational experience or background, or law degrees necessary to become a Supreme Court judge, but because the advice of senate is used by the President of the United States to select the justices their experience and background is taken into consideration. These nine justices makeup what is considered a full court, however it only takes six justices to makeup a lawful bench and in some......

Words: 951 - Pages: 4

History of the International Criminal Court

...establishment of an international tribunal to judge political leaders accused of war crimes was first made during the Paris Peace Conference in 1919 by the Commission of Responsibilities. The issue was addressed again at conference held in Geneva under the League of Nations on 1–16 November 1937, but no practical results followed. The United Nations states that the General Assembly first recognized the need for a permanent international court to deal with atrocities of the kind committed during World War II in 1948, following the Nuremberg and Tokyo Tribunals. At the request of the General Assembly, the International Law Commission drafted two statutes by the early 1950s but these were shelved as the Cold War made the establishment of an international criminal court politically unrealistic. Benjamin B. Ferencz, an investigator of Nazi war crimes after World War II and the Chief Prosecutor for the United States Army at the Einsatzgruppen Trial, one of the twelve military trials held by the U.S. authorities at Nuremberg, later became a vocal advocate of the establishment of an international rule of law and of an International Criminal Court. In his first book published in 1975, entitled Defining International Aggression-The Search for World Peace, he argued for the establishment of such an international court. The idea was revived in 1989 when A. N. R. Robinson, then Prime Minister of Trinidad and Tobago, proposed the creation of a permanent international court to deal with......

Words: 448 - Pages: 2

International Court of Justice.

...Explain International Court Of Justice Ans: The International Court of Justice (French: Cour internationale de justice; commonly referred to as the World Court or ICJ) is the primary judicial branch of the United Nations. It is based in the Peace Palace in The Hague, Netherlands. Its main functions are to settle legal disputes submitted to it by states and to provide advisory opinions on legal questions submitted to it by duly authorized international branches, agencies, and the UN General Assembly. The International Court of Justice (ICJ) was established under Chapter XIV of the United Nations Charter. It replaced the Permanent Court of Justice, which existed under the UN’s predecessor, the League of Nations. The ICJ is the only major UN body whose headquarters is not in New York City; the Court sits in The Hague, Netherlands. The Court is the principal judicial organ of the UN, and all members of the UN are ipso facto parties to the Statute of the ICJ. Fifteen independent justices, elected by the General Assembly and the Security Council, each serve on the Court for nine-year terms. The primary purpose of the ICJ is to render opinions on international legal disputes between States. These cases may only be submitted by States that have accepted the jurisdiction of the ICJ. Another purpose of the ICJ is to clarify significant international legal questions brought to it by the UN General Assembly and the Security Council. When a UN body brings an issue before the Court,......

Words: 4510 - Pages: 19

The Courts in Our Criminal Justice System

...The Courts in Our Criminal Justice System Wednesday, August 10, 2011 After reviewing the difference between the Texas Court System and The Federal Court System, I have learned that each function quite differently, but in the end have a common ground to what is expected of the Laws of The Land. For instance, the structure is different in various way such as: the Federal Court System in Article III indicates how the Constitution devote the legal power of the United States in the Federal Court System - as well as -Congress using its power to institute the thirteen U.S. Court of Appeals, the 94 U.S. District Courts, and more. Whereas, in Article V, the Texas Constitution devotes the legal power of the state in the Supreme Court, Court of Criminal Appeals, Courts of Appeals; along with other courts. Moreover, parties that are disgruntled with the choice of the trial court, may forward their cases to the intermediate Court of Appeals for additional assistance. Additionally, the Court of Criminal Appeals, levers equally obligatory and unrestricted affairs. (Texas Courts Online). The types of cases that are heard in a Federal Court are: Constitutionsl Law, Laws and treaties of the U.S., Ambassadors and public ministers, Disputes between two or more states, Admiralty law, and Bankruptcy. Cases heard in the Texas Court System are: Probate, Personal Injuries, Nearly all Criminal Cases. Family Law, Juvenile cases, Small claims, and traffic cases.(Texas Courts Online). As a......

Words: 304 - Pages: 2

Supreme Court Justices

...Supreme Court justices are just politicians in black robes Supreme court justices are politicians. They are politicians alongside their duties of judges of the highest court in the land. The most basic definition of a politician is, a person that achieves a position of policy making over an organized community. Judges, in theory, should be fair, unbiased, neutral, impartial and not based or linked to any political party or movement. However, decisions made by the Supreme Court judges have had huge political significance. While it’s not the standard in lower courts, the United States Supreme Court is forced to make political and judicial decisions. A judicial decision is based on the question was a law broken. However, because the Supreme Court is the highest court of the land, they also must make political decisions some of which have been more powerful that the actual laws congress had written. The Supreme Court is in charge of making sure congress and the president don’t overstep their authority, and to do this job of keeping these branches accountable it would be impossible for the justices to not be politicians yielding real power. One of the examples of the supreme courts political power the court case Griswold v. Connecticut (1965). Estelle Griswold was the executive director of Planned Parenthood in Connecticut; she and Dr. Buxton of Yale Medical School opened a clinic in Waterbury and after only serving 10 patients Griswold and Buxton were arrested and......

Words: 2189 - Pages: 9

Role of the Courts

...University of Phoenix Role and Functions of Law Paper Federal courts and Florida state courts systems are similar in some ways, but also very different in many ways. Both systems function with specific process of order, and a chain of command to adhere to. Neither the Federal Court nor Florida Court has seniority over the Constitutional Laws that our Country has in place. Federal Vs Florida The federal courts consist of a three part structure that combines the Supreme Courts, the Courts of Appeal, and the District Courts. The Supreme Court is the highest level court in the federal court system, with nine justices ("Florida Supreme Court ", n.d.). The Supreme Court’s original jurisdiction is limited over some cases, but appeals jurisdiction through certiorari process. The Courts of Appeal is considered the medium level courts in the federal system, including twelve regional circuit courts. The Courts of Appeal is specifically appellate court and does not have an original jurisdiction because of that. The District Courts are the lowest level courts in the federal system, combining a total of ninety four judicial districts over fifty states and territories. These lower level courts have no appellate jurisdiction, but have original jurisdiction over most cases. The Supreme Court is the highest level court for Florida as well, only containing seven justices. The Supreme Court is required by jurisdiction to review final orders resulting in death,......

Words: 764 - Pages: 4

Why Does the European Union Have Such a Strong Court of Justice?

...1- Introduction The aim of this paper is to provide an explanation why nowadays the European Union has such a strong Court of Justice (the Court). The paper is composed of four main parts. In the first part we will present a brief overview of the evolution of the Court of Justice through time. The second part deals with the creation of the legal doctrines as a means of empowerment of the Court. In the third part we will discuss the cooperation between the national courts and the Court, and finally the last part is dedicated to the relations between Member States and the Court. It should be noted that in each part of the paper we will bring arguments and various examples to develop a structured and complete answer. 2- The Court of Justice through time The European Court of Justice (Court of Justice under the Treaty of Lisbon ) was created in 1951 as the judicial body of the European Coal and Steel Community. It is based in Luxembourg and is composed of 27 judges, one from each Member State. They are appointed by their Member States for a renewable period of 6 years. The judges are assisted by eight Advocates-General whose main task is to deliver legal opinions. At the beginning the Court of Justice had only three limited functions: • To ensure the administrative compliance of the Member States with the rules of the treaties, • To resolve the disputes in case the EU laws are vague, • To keep the Commission and the Council of Ministers from exceeding their......

Words: 3293 - Pages: 14