THE INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE AND ITS POWERS TO JUDICIAL REVIEW OF THE UNITED NATIONS SECURITY COUNCIL RESOLUTIONS
Keywords:
Judicial review, Security Council, UN Charter, International Court of Justice, Advisory opinion, Lockerbie, international lawAbstract
The UNSC has under Chapter VII of the UN Charter broad powers to maintain international peace and security. The “primary responsibility” of the UNSC for this “maintenance” was expresiss verbiss embodied in the UN Charter (Art. 24). The only explicit limitation on the UNSC powers is in Art. 24(2), which states that the UNSC shall act in accordance with the purposes and principles of the United Nations. There is often raised a legitime question of judicial review of the Council’s decisions. Frankly to say this possibility was rejected already during negotations on the UN Charter. This study is dealing with contentions jurisdiction of the ICJ and its advisory opinions as well. The UNSC cannot act contrary to jus cogens. But the UN Charter does not explicitly authorize the ICJ to review the legality or validity of acts of the UNSC and other bodies of the UN. There is opinion that UNSC resolutions which are ultra vires or violate jus cogens norms are void and not legally binding. However, another opinion insists that the UNSC sole bears responsibility for determination of legality of its own acts.The members of the UN agree to acceps and carry out the decisions of the UNSC in “accordance with the present Charter”. This brief study endeavours to discuss the question of judicial control of acts adopted by the UNSC. The issue of judicial review has received extensive scale of discussion in the last years. But there are problems with the scope and implementation of judicial review.Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright and originality of the offered manuscript
1. It is assumed that the manuscript offered has not been previously published. It is expected that the authors will inform the editorial board of TLQ if the entire manuscript, its parts or some relevant results have been previously published in a different publication at the level of an article in a reviewed scientific magazine or monograph. Should the editorial board of TLQ conclude that this condition was not fulfilled the review process may be terminated.
2. It is assumed that the submitted manuscript is an original academic work. If that is not the case the author needs to provide information regarding all circumstances that could raise doubts whether the manuscript is the outcome of original research.
3. By submitting the manuscript the author acknowledges that after the publication in The Lawyer Quarterly her/his work will be made available online to the Internet users and also kept by the Library of the Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic. Author's rights to further use the work remain unabridged.