The document discusses three international courts: 1. The International Court of Justice settles disputes between states and gives advisory opinions. It is the primary judicial organ of the UN. 2. The International Criminal Court prosecutes individuals for genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes and crimes of aggression. It is intended to complement national courts. 3. The European Court of Justice ensures the uniform application and interpretation of EU law across the European Union.

1. UNIT - 7
INTERNATIONAL
ENFORCEMENT OF HUMAN
RIGHTS

2. Contents under Unit - 7
■ International Court of Justice
■ International criminal Court
■ Role of European Court of Justice

3. International Court of Justice
■ The International Court of Justice(ICJ), sometimes known as the World Court, is one of the
six principal organs of the UN. It settles disputes between states in accordance with
International and gives advisory opinions on international legal issues. The ICJ is the only
International Court that adjudicates general disputes between countries, with its rulings and
opinions serving as primary sources of international law.
■ The ICJ is the successor of the Permanent Court of International Justice(PCIJ), which was
established in 1920 by the League of Nations. After the second world war, both the League
and the PCIJ were replaced by the United Nations and ICJ, respectively.
■ The statute of the ICJ, which sets forth its purpose and structure, draws heavily from that of
its predecessor, whose decisions remain valid. All Member states of the UN are party to the
ICJ Statute and may initiate contentious cases; however, advisory proceedings may only be
submitted by certain UN organs and agencies.

4. Composition
Headquarters and official language:
■ Seated in the peace Palace in The Hague at Netherlands,the ICJ is the only principal UN organ not
located in New York City.
■ Its official working languages are English and French.
■ Joan Donoghue is the current president and he is from USA.
Composition:
■ The ICJ consistsof a panel of 15 judges elected by theUN General Assembly and Security Council for
nine-year terms. No more than one judge of each nationality may be represented on court at the same
time, and judges collectively must reflect the principal civilizations and legal systems of the world.
■ Since the entry of its first caseon 22 May 1947,the ICJ has entertained 179cases throughMarch 2021.

5. ■ The election process is set out in Articles 4–19 of the ICJ Statute. Elections are
staggered, with five judges elected every three years to ensure continuity within the
court. Should a judge die in office, the practice has generally been to elect a judge in a
special election to complete the term. Judges of the International Court of Justice are
entitled to the style of His/Her Excellency.
■ the seats will be distributed by geographic regions so that there are five seats for
Western countries, three for African states, two for Eastern European states, three for
Asian states and two for Latin American and Caribbean states.
■ the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council (France, USSR,
China, the United Kingdom, and the United States) have always had a judge serving to
the court.

6. ■ Article 6 of the Statute provides that all judges should be "elected regardless of their
nationality among persons of high moral character" who are either qualified for the
highest judicial office in their home states or known as lawyers with sufficient
competence in international law.
Ad hoc judges:
■ Article 31 of the statute sets out a procedure whereby ad hoc judges sit on contentious
cases before the court. The system allows any party to a contentious case (if it
otherwise does not have one of that party's nationals sitting on the court) to select one
additional person to sit as a judge on that case only. It is thus possible that as many as
seventeen judges may sit on one case.

7. Chambers:
■ Articles 26–29 of the statute allow the court to form smaller chambers, usually 3 or 5
judges, to hear cases. Two types of chambers are contemplated by Article 26: firstly,
chambers for special categories of cases, and second, the formation of ad
hoc chambers to hear particular disputes. In 1993, a special chamber was established,
under Article 26(1) of the ICJ statute, to deal specifically with environmental matters
(although it has never been used).

8. Jurisdiction
■ As stated in Article 93 of the UN Charter, all 193 UN members are automatically
parties to the court's statute. Once a state is a party to the court's statute, it is entitled
to participate in cases before the court. However, being a party to the statute does not
automatically give the court jurisdiction over disputes involving those parties.
■ The issue of jurisdiction is considered in the three types of ICJ cases:
1. contentious issues
2. incidental jurisdiction
3. advisory opinions.

9. Contencious cases
■ In contentious cases (adversarial proceedings seeking to settle a dispute), the ICJ
produces a binding ruling between states that agree to submit to the ruling of the
court. Only states may be parties in contentious cases;
■ Individuals, corporations, component parts of a federal state, NGOs, UN organs, and
self determination groups are excluded from direct participation, although the court
may receive information from public international organizations.

10. Incidental jurisdiction
■ Until rendering a final judgment, the court has competence to order interim measures
for the protection of the rights of a party to a dispute. One or both parties to a dispute
may apply the ICJ for issuing interim measures.
■ In the Frontier Dispute Case, both parties to the dispute, Burkaina faso and Mali,
submitted an application to the court to indicate interim measures.Incidental
jurisdiction of the court derives from the Article 41 of the Statute of it.
■ Such as the final judgment, the order for interim measures of the court are binding on
state parties to the dispute. The ICJ has competence to indicate interim measures only
if the prima facie jurisdiction is satisfied.

11. Advisory opinions
■ An advisory opinion is a function of the court open only to specified United Nations
bodies and agencies. The UN Charter grants the General Assemblyor the Security
Council a power to request the court to issue an advisory opinion on any legal question.
Other organs of the UN rather than GA and SC may not request an advisory opinion of
the ICJ unless the General Assemblyauthorizes them.
■ An advisory opinion derives its status and authority from the fact that it is the official
pronouncement of the principal judicial organ of the United Nations.
■ Advisory opinions have often been controversial because the questions asked are
controversial or the case was pursued as an indirect way of bringing what is really a
contentious case before the court.

12. Procedure:
■ The ICJ is vested with the power to make its own rules. Court procedure is set out in the Rules of
Court of the International Court of Justice 1978.
■ Cases before the ICJ will follow a standardpattern. The case is lodged by the applicant,which
files a written memorial setting out the basis of the court's jurisdictionand the merits of its
claim. The respondent may accept the court's jurisdictionand file its own memorial on the
merits of the case.
Preliminaryobjections:
■ A respondent that does not wish to submit to the jurisdictionof the court may raise preliminary
objections. Any such objectionsmust be ruled upon before the court can address the merits of
the applicant'sclaim. Often, a separate public hearing is held on the preliminaryobjectionsand
the court will render a judgment.
■ If the court decides it has jurisdictionand the case is admissible, the respondent then is required
to file a Memorialaddressing the merits of the applicant'sclaim. Once all written arguments are
filed, the court holdsa public hearing on the merits.

13. Judgment and remedies
■ Once deliberation has taken place, the court issues a majority opinion. Individual
judges may issue concurring opinions (if they agree with the outcome reached in the
judgment of the court but differ in their reasoning) or dissenting opinions (if they
disagree with the majority). No appeal is possible, but any party mayask for the court
to clarify if there is a dispute as to the meaning or scope of the court's judgment.

14. International criminal court
■ The International Criminal Court (ICC or ICCt)is an intergovernmentalorganization and
International tribunal that sits in The Hague, Netherlands. The ICC is the first and only
permanent international court with jurisdiction to prosecute individuals for
the International crimes of genocide, crimes againsthumanity, war crimes and the
crime of aggression.
■ It is intended to complement existing national judicial systems,and it may, therefore,
exercise its jurisdiction only when national courts are unwilling or unable to prosecute
criminals. The ICC lacks universal territorial jurisdiction and may only investigateand
prosecute crimes committed within member states, crimes committed by nationals of
member states, or crimes in situations referred to the Court by the United Nations
Security Council.

15. ■ The ICC has four principal organs:
the Presidency,
the Judicial Divisions,
the Office of the Prosecutor and
the Registry.
■ The President is the most senior judge chosen by his or her peers in the Judicial Division,
which hears cases before the Court.
■ The Officeof the Prosecutor is headed by the Prosecutor who investigates crimes and
initiates criminal proceedings before the Judicial Division.
■ The Registry is headed by the Registrar and is charged with managing all the administrative
functions of the ICC, including the headquarters, detention unit, and public defense office.

16. History
■ In June 1989, the Prime Minister of Trinidad and Tobago, A.N.R Robinson, revived the
idea of a permanent international criminal court by proposing the creation of such a
court to deal with the illegal drug trade.
■ Following Trinidad and Tobago's proposal, the General Assembly tasked the ILC with
once again drafting a statutefor a permanent court.While work began on the draft, the
United Nations Security Council established two ad hoc tribunals in the early 1990s:
The International criminal tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, created in 1993 in
response to large-scale atrocities committed by armed forces during YugoslavWars,
and the International criminal tribunal for Rwandan, created in 1994 following the
RwandanGenocide. The creation of these tribunals further highlighted to many the
need for a permanent international criminal court.

17. ■ In 1994, the ILC presented its final draft statute for the International Criminal Court to the
General Assembly and recommended that a conference be convened to negotiate a treaty
that would serve as the Court's statute.
■ To consider major substantive issues in the draft statute, the General Assembly established
the Ad Hoc Committee on the Establishment of an International Criminal Court, which met
twice in 1995. After considering the Committee's report, the General Assembly created the
Preparatory Committee on the Establishment of the ICC to prepare a consolidated draft text.
■ From 1996 to 1998, six sessions of the Preparatory Committee were held at the UN
headquarters in Newyork city during which NGOs provided input and attended meetings
under the umbrella organisation of the Coalition for the International criminal court (CICC).
In January 1998, the Bureau and coordinators of the Preparatory Committee convened for
an Inter-Sessional meeting in Zutphen in the Netherlands to technically consolidate and
restructure the draft articles into a draft.

18. ■ Finally, the General Assemblyconvened a conference in Rome in June 1998, with the
aim of finalizing the treaty to serve as the Court's statute. On 17 July 1998, the Rome
Statute of the Criminal Court was adopted by a vote of 120 to seven, with 21 countries
abstaining. The seven countries that voted againstthe treaty were China, Iraq, Israel,
Libya, Qatar, the US, and Yemen.
■ Following 60 ratifications, the Rome Statute entered into force on 1 July 2002 and the
International Criminal Court was formally established.
■ The first bench of 18 judges was elected by the Assembly of States Parties in February
2003. They were sworn in at the inaugural session of the Court on 11 March 2003.

19. Organs of the Court
■ The Court has four organs: the Presidency, the Judicial Division, the Office of the
Prosecutor, and the Registry.
Presidency
■ The Presidency is responsible for the proper administration of the Court (apart from
the Office of the Prosecutor).It comprises the President and the First and Second Vice-
Presidents—three judges of the Court who are elected to the Presidency by their fellow
judges for a maximum of two three-year terms.
■ As of March 2021, the President is Photo Hofmnski from Poland, who took office on 11
March 2021, succeeding Chile Eboe- Ossuji. His first term will expire in 2024.

20. Judicial Divisions:
■ The Judicial Divisions consist of the 18 judges of the Court, organized into three
chambers—the Pre-Trial Chamber, Trial Chamber and Appeals Chamber—which carry
out the judicial functions of the Court. Judges are elected to the Court by the Assembly
of States Parties.
■ They serve nine-year terms and are not generally eligible for re-election. All judges
must be nationals of states parties to the Rome Statute, and no two judges may be
nationals of the same state.
■ They must be "persons of high moral character, impartiality and integrity who possess
the qualifications required in their respective States for appointment to the highest
judicial offices".

21. ■ The Prosecutor or any person being investigatedor prosecuted may request the
disqualification of a judge from "any case in which his or her impartiality might
reasonably be doubted on any ground".
■ Any request for the disqualification of a judge from a particular case is decided by an
absolute majority of the other judges.A judge may be removed from office if he or she
"is found to have committed serious misconduct or a serious breach of his or her
duties" or is unable to exercise his or her functions. The removal of a judge requires
both a two-thirds majority of the other judges and a two-thirds majority of the states
parties.

22. Office of the Prosecutor:
• The Office of the Prosecutor (OTP) is responsible for conducting investigations and
prosecutions.It is headed by the Chief Prosecutor, who is assisted by one or externalmore
Deputy Prosecutors.The Rome Statute provides that the Office of the Prosecutor shall act
independently; as such, no member of the Office may seek or act on instructions from any
external source, such as states, International organizations, non-governmental organisations
or individuals.
• The Prosecutor may open an investigation under three circumstances:
1. when a situation is referredto him or her by a state party;
2. when a situation is referredto him or her by the UN Security Council acting to address a
threat to international peace and security; or
3. when the Pre-Trial Chamber authorises him or her to open an investigation on the basis
of information received from other sources, such as individuals or non-governmental
organisations.

23. Registry:
■ The Registry is responsible for the non-judicial aspects of the administration and
servicing of the Court.
■ This includes, among other things, "the administration of legal aid matters, court
management, victims and witnesses matters, defence counsel, detention unit, and the
traditional services provided by administrations in international organisations, such as
finance, translation, building management, procurement and personnel".
■ The Registry is headed by the Registrar, who is elected by the judges to a five-year
term.The previous Registrar was Herman von Hebel who was elected on 8 March
2013. The current Registrar is Peter Lewis, who was elected on 28 March 2018.

24. Jurisdiction and admissibility
■ The Rome Statute requires that several criteria exist in a particular case before
an individual can be prosecuted by the Court.
■ The Statute contains three jurisdictional requirements and three admissibility
requirements. All criteria must be met for a case to proceed. The three
jurisdictional requirements are
(1) subject-matter jurisdiction (what acts constitute crimes),
(2) territorial or personal jurisdiction (where the crimes were committed or
who committed them),
(3) temporal jurisdiction (when the crimes were committed).

25. ■ To initiate an investigation, the Prosecutor must
(1) have a "reasonable basis to believe that a crime within the jurisdiction of
the Court has been or is being committed",
(2) the investigation would be consistent with the principle of
complementarity(Court will only prosecute an individual if states are unwilling or
unable to prosecute),
(3) the investigation serves the interests of justice(TheProsecutor will initiate
an investigation unless there are "substantial reasons to believe that an
investigation would not serve the interests of justice)

26. Jurisdiction
■ Subject-matter jurisdiction requirements
■ The Court's subject-matter jurisdiction means the crimes for which individuals can be
prosecuted. Individuals can only be prosecuted for crimes that are listed in the Statute. The
primary crimes are listed in article 5 of the Statute and defined in later
articles: genocide(defined in article 6), crimes against humanity (defined in article 7),War
crimes (defined in article 8), and Crimes of aggression (defined in article 8 bis) (which is not
yet within the jurisdiction of the Court; see below).
■ Genocide – group killing, Killing members of a group, Causing serious bodily or mental harm
to members of the group, Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group,
Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.
■ Crimes against humanity – murder, torture, rape, sexual violence,sexual slavery, Apartheid

27. ■ War crimes- Willful killing, Torture, Inhumane treatment, Destructionand appropriationof property
■ Crimesof aggression- for territorial gain without justificationof self defence of another.
Offencesagainst the administrationof justice:
■ Article 70 criminalizes certain intentional acts which interfere with investigationsand proceedings
before the Court, including giving false testimony, presenting false evidence, corruptly influencing a
witness or official of the Court, retaliating againstan official of the Court, and soliciting or accepting
bribes as an official of the Court.
Temporal jurisdiction
■ Temporal jurisdiction is the time period over which the Court can exercise its powers.
Judgement:
■ The court will give the judgement and that decision is final

28. ■ The European court of human rights(ECtHR) is a regional human rights judicial body
based in Strasbourg, France, created under the auspices of the Council of Europe. The
Court began operating in 1959 and has delivered more than 10,000 judgments regarding
alleged violations of the European Convention on Human Rights.
■ In 1998, the European human rights system was reformed to eliminate the European
Commission of Human Rights, which previously decided the admissibility of complaints,
oversaw friendly settlements, and referred some cases to the Court – in a manner similar
to the current Inter-American System. Now, individual victims may submit their
complaints directly to the European Court of Human Rights.
■ The European Court, or “Strasbourg Court” as it is often called, serves a complementary
role to that of the European Court of Social Rights, which oversees European States’
respect for social and economic rights.
Role of European court of justice

29. ■ The Inter-AmericanSystemforthe protectionof humanrightsisaregionalhumanrightssystem,
andisresponsibleformonitoring,promoting,andprotectinghumanrightsin the35 independent
countriesof the Americasthataremembersof the OrganisationofAmericanStates (OAS).
■ The Inter-AmericanSystemiscomposedof two principalentities:
1. the Inter-AmericanCommissiononHumanRights(IACHR)and
2. Inter-AmericanCourtof HumanRights(IACtHR).
Bothbodiescan decideindividualcomplaintsconcerningallegedhumanrightsviolationsandmayissue
emergencyprotective measureswhenanindividualorthe subjectof a complaintisinimmediateriskof
irreparableharm.
■ The Commissionalsoengagesinarangeof humanrightsmonitoringandpromotion activities
(includingthrough itsvariousrapporteurships),whiletheCourtmay issueadvisoryopinionson
issuespertainingtotheinterpretationofthe Inter-Americaninstrumentsattherequestof an
OAS organor MemberState.

30. Jurisdiction
■ The Court has jurisdiction to decide complaints (“applications”) submitted by individuals
and States concerning violations of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights
and Fundamental Freedoms (commonly referred to as the “ European Convention on
Human Righst”), which principally concerns civil and political rights. It cannot take up a
case on its own initiative. Notably, the person, group or non-governmental organization
submitting the complaint (“the applicant”) does not have to be a citizen of a State party.
■ However, complaints submitted to the Court must concern violations of the Convention
allegedly committed by a State party to the Convention and that directly and significantly
affected the applicant.
■ As of November 2018, there are 47 State parties to the Convention; these include the
Member States of the Council of Europe and of the European Union. Some of these States
have also ratified one or more of the Additional protocols to the Convention, which
protect additional rights.

31. ■ As of August1, 2018, the Court also hasadvisory jurisdiction.Under Protocol 16 to
the European Convention,whichentered into force on August1, the highest
domestic courts in the States thatare a party to the Protocol may request European
Court advisoryopinionson questionsof interpretationof the European Convention
and its protocols. The questionsmust arise out of cases pendingbefore the domestic
court.

32. Structure
■ In order to resolve many cases simultaneously,theECtHR is organizedinto five
sections, or administrativeentities, which each havea judicialchamber. Each section
hasa President, Vice President, anda number of judges. The Court’s 47 judgesare
selected by the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe from a list of
applicantsproposed by the Member States.
■ Withinthe Court, the judgeswork in four differentkinds of groups,or “judicial
formations.”Applicationsreceived by the Court will be allocatedto oneof these
formations:
■ 1. Single Judge: only rules on the admissibilityof applicationsthatare clearly
inadmissiblebased on the material submitted by the applicant

33. ■ 2. Committee: composed of 3 judges, committees rule on the admissibility of cases as
well as the merits when the case concerns an issue covered by well-developed case law
(the decision must be unanimous).
■ 3. Chamber: composed of 7 judges, chambers primarily rule on admissibility and merits
for cases that raise issues that have not been ruled on repeatedly (a decision may be
made by a majority). Each chamber includes the Section President and the “national
judge” (the judge with the nationality of the State against which the application is
lodged).
■ 4. Grand Chamber: composed of 17 judges, the Grand Chamber hears a small, select
number of cases that have been either referred to it (on appeal from a Chamber decision)
or relinquished by a Chamber, usually when the case involves an important or novel
question. Applications never go directly to the Grand Chamber. The Grand Chamber
always includes the President and Vice-President of the Court, the five Section presidents,
and the national judge.

34. Submittingan Application
■ Applicationsto the European Court of Human Rightsmust comply with the
requirements described in Article 47 of the rules of court. Applicantsshouldbe aware
thatthe Court periodicallymodifiesits rules and procedures; in 2014, it began
applying stricter requirements for individualapplications.
■ To submitan application, applicantsshoulduse the applicationform, which is
availableonlineandmust be filledoutin its entirety. Copies of all relevant
documentsmust be includedalongwith the application,whichmust be submittedby
postal mail.
■ A substantialmajorityof the applicationssubmittedto the Court are struck from the
list or declared inadmissiblebecause they fail to meet one or more of the
admissibilitycriteria. The Court may choose notto examinean applicationthatdoes
notfulfill all of the requirements.

35. Proceedings before the Court
■ Proceedingsbefore the Court are conductedprimarily in writing. Whilea lawyer is
notnecessary to lodge a complaint, applicantsshouldhaverepresentation after the
case is declared admissible, andmust be represented by a lawyer in any hearing
before the Court.
■ Applicationsto the ECtHR go through two phases:admissibility and merits. The
specific natureof the case will dictatethe speed andcourse of the proceedings.
However, it may be monthsor years before an applicantreceives a decision or
judgment.

36. Admissibility
■ When the Court receives an application, the Court must determine if it meets all of the
admissibility requirements. An admissibility decision may be made by a single judge, a
three-judge committee, or a seven-judge chamber. To be declared admissible, an
application must meet the following criteria:
■ Exhaustion of domestic remedies
■ Four-month application deadline (from the final domestic judicial decision)
■ Complaint against a State party to the European Convention on Human Rights
■ Applicant suffered a significant disadvantage
■ If an application fails to meet any of these requirements, it will be declared inadmissible
and cannot proceed any further. There is no appeal from a decision of inadmissibility.

37. Merits
■ If an application isnotstruck from the list or declared inadmissibleat an earlier
stage, it will be assignedto oneof the ECtHR’s fivesections andthe State will be
notifiedof the complaint.
■ At this time, both parties will havethe opportunityto submit observationsto the
Court. These observationsmay containspecific informationrequested by the
Chamber or President of the Section, or any other material that the parties decide is
relevant.
■ The Chamber has the optionto consideradmissibilityandmerits separately or
concurrently, butit must notify the partiesif it plansto consider admissibilityand
merits together.

38. Judgement
■ When a Chamber issues a judgment on the merits, there is a three-month period before
the decision becomes final. During this period, either or both of the parties may request
that the application be referred to the Grand Chamber. However, the Grand Chamber only
hears a limited number of exceptional cases.
■ If the Court ultimately decides a case in favor of the applicant, it may award just
satisfaction (monetary compensation for the damages suffered) and require the State to
cover the cost of bringing the case. If the Court finds that there has been no violation, then
the applicant is not liable for the State’s legal expenses.
■ The Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe is responsible for enforcing the
Court’s judgments. States are bound by the decisions of the Court and must execute them
accordingly. Often this means amending legislation to ensure that the violation does not
continue to occur. However, the Court does not have the authority to overrule a national
decision or annul national laws.

39. Friendly Settlement and Interim
Measures
■ Prior to a decision on the merits, the Court will try to facilitatethe arrangement of
a friendly settlement. If a friendly settlement cannotbe reached, the Courtwill then
deliver a judgmenton the merits. In instances where the Chamber hearing the case
decides to issue an admissibilitydecisionin conjunctionwith a judgmenton the
merits, the parties may includeinformationaboutfriendly settlements in the
observationthey submit to the Court.
■ In exceptionalcases, the Courtmay grantapplicants“interim measures”, which are
designed to protect the applicantfrom further harmwhile the case proceeds before
the Court. Requests for interim measures are only granted when there is an imminent
risk of irreparable harmsuch as death or torture. They are most often granted in
extraditionanddeportation cases.