Abstract

This study delves into the role of the International Court of Justice in resolving interstate conflicts. The International Court of Justice serves as the primary judicial body of the United Nations. It explores the Bakassi Peninsula dispute, which commenced in 2006, following the post-independence period, where the Cameroon-Nigeria borderland remained unsettled. This contentious issue eventually led to a resolution process at the International Court of Justice, culminating in the awarding of the Bakassi Peninsula to Cameroon on September 25, 2009.The research illuminates the combination of judicial and diplomatic strategies employed in resolving this dispute, underscoring the remarkable achievement of the International Court of Justice in settling interstate conflicts.

Chapter One: General Introduction

1.1 Background to the Study

The International Court of Justice (ICJ) serves as the principal judicial organ of the United Nations. It is the legal successor to the Permanent International Court of Justice (PCIJ), whose legal precedents remain relevant to this day. Like its predecessor, the ICJ has a dual mandate: to settle legal disputes between states according to international law and to provide advisory opinions on legal matters referred to it by the UN General Assembly, the Security Council, and other authorized entities.

The ICJ is often referred to as the “World Court” and was established in 1946 under the auspices of the United Nations. It is headquartered at the Peace Palace in The Hague and conducts its proceedings in English and French. The Court operates under its Statute, which is an integral part of the UN Charter.

The origins of the ICJ can be traced back to the early 19th century when forward-thinking individuals believed that international disputes could be resolved through judicial means rather than armed conflict. This vision found expression in treaties like the Hague Convention for the Peaceful Settlement of International Disputes, which called for peaceful dispute resolution. The Permanent Court of International Justice (PCIJ) was established in 1920 alongside the League of Nations and addressed numerous contentious cases and provided advisory opinions until World War II. The ICJ, governed by its Statute and part of the UN Charter, began its operations in June 1945.

The ICJ has two primary roles. First, it handles contentious cases submitted by states that have accepted its jurisdiction, which has been increasingly busy over the years. Second, it provides advisory opinions to UN institutions. These opinions are not binding on the requesting institutions or states, and no country is obligated to adhere to them.

The Court comprises 15 Judges elected for nine-year terms by the UN General Assembly and the Security Council, ensuring diversity in representation. Judges serve in their individual capacity and do not represent their respective governments.

The main focus of this study is to examine the settlement of interstate disputes by the International Court of Justice.

1.2 Statement of the Research Problem

The International Court of Justice has made considerable progress, surviving the ideological struggles of the Cold War and the decolonization era. It has regained relevance and has a growing workload to demonstrate its impact. The key challenge facing the ICJ pertains to its jurisdiction, a fundamental requirement for the exercise of judicial powers. A common global philosophy underpinning respect for a single system of international law is lacking. The issue of national sovereignty has hindered the Court’s automatic jurisdiction. The ICJ can only hear cases brought by nation-states and against nation-states, and there is no inherent enforcement mechanism for ICJ decisions. Some states may be reluctant to subject certain disputes to international court systems. In addition to these general problems, there are four specific issues relating to the ICJ’s operations.

1.3 Research Questions

General Research Question

What is the role of the International Court of Justice in the peaceful settlement of interstate conflicts?

Specific Research Questions

1. What is the composition and jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice in the settlement of interstate disputes?
2. What is the procedure before the International Court of Justice?
3. Was the procedure respected by the International Court of Justice in the settlement of the conflict between Cameroon and Nigeria over the Bakassi Peninsula?
4. Are there policy recommendations for the effective management of interstate conflicts by the International Court of Justice?

1.4 Objectives of the Study

General Objective

The general objective of the study is to examine the role of the International Court of Justice in the settlement of interstate conflicts.

Specific Objectives

The specific objectives of the study include:

1. To explore the composition and jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice in the settlement of interstate disputes.
2. To analyze the procedure followed before the International Court of Justice.
3. To investigate whether the procedure before the International Court of Justice was adhered to in the resolution of the conflict between Cameroon and Nigeria over the Bakassi Peninsula.
4. To propose policy recommendations for the effective management of interstate conflicts by the International Court of Justice.