Critical Analysis on the Ineffectiveness of the ICJ in the Settlement of Disputes between States: The Example of Nicaragua Case

Critical Analysis on the Ineffectiveness of the ICJ in the Settlement of Disputes between States: The Example of Nicaragua Case
David TUYISHIME

Abstract
In principle, the charter of the United Nations provide that all Members shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security, and justice, are not endangered.the charter of the united nations determine the international court of justice as the principal judicial organ of the United Nations (UN).
The court has a twofold role of settlement in accordance with international law, the legal disputes submitted to it by States and to give advisory opinions on legal questions referred to it by duly authorized United Nations organs and specialized agencies.The establishment of ICJ could be the solution of conflict which raised between the state but basing on its statute it has lose the capacity of being response to those conflicts basing on its decision taken by it in different cases. Those who criticize the court argue that the members of the ICJ vote the interests of the states that appoint them. Politicians and diplomats from states that have recently lost their cases argue that the ICJ’s rulings are politically motivated
In its statute and from the article 59 it is said that the decision of the Court has no binding force except between the parties and in respect of that particular case. With regarding to its missions, this can be seen as the weakness of the statute to the settlement of the dispute between the states.
In the article 36(2) a state at any time can stop to collaborate with the ICJ. This is the case of Nicaragua against the United States of America, where the USA has encouraging, supporting and aiding military and paramilitary activities in and against, the USA refused to comply with the ruling, and withdrew its consent to compulsory jurisdiction.
Considering the article 26(1) of the Vienna convention on law of treaties, it is said that ‘’the treaty in force is binding upon the parties to it and must be performed by them in good faith. The art 36(2) of the statute bring contradictions with this provision of the Vienna convention on law of treaties. The fact that the states are given choice in recognizing the court, breach the principle of the pacta sunt sevanda.
The present study will focus will show the necessity to recourse to the ICJ in order to settle disputes between States in international law, precise the limitation of the competences reserved to the ICJ in settling disputes between States and will indicate how the Statute of the ICJ is used by the States in order to escape sometimes on the international justice.

Key words
ICJ, International law, Jurisdictions, Justice, settlement, Disputes.

Critical Analysis on the Ineffectiveness of the ICJ in the Settlement of Disputes between States The Example of Nicaragua Case