A Change of Guard

សូមស្តាប់វិទ្យុសង្គ្រោះជាតិ Please read more Khmer news and listen to CNRP Radio at National Rescue Party. សូមស្តាប់វីទ្យុខ្មែរប៉ុស្តិ៍/Khmer Post Radio.
Follow Khmerization on Facebook/តាមដានខ្មែរូបនីយកម្មតាម Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/khmerization.khmerican

Wednesday, 8 June 2011

Thailand risks violating the U.N. Charter, article 94(2), if it defies the ICJ ruling

Thailand has said that it will defy any International Court of Justice's verdict that orders it to withdraw troops from Cambodian territory. The article below will analyse if Thailand can be forced to comply with the ruling.

Unknown author
Sent to Khmerization by L.C

"a state's failure to comply with the judgment violates the U.N. Charter, article 94(2). Noncompliance can be appealed to the U.N. Security Council, which may either make recommendations or authorize other measures by which the judgment shall be enforced."


The ICJ function is to resolve disputes between sovereign states. Disputes may be placed before the court by parties upon conditions prescribed by the U.N. Security Council. No state, however, may be subject to the jurisdiction of the court without the state's consent. Consent may be given by express agreement at the time the dispute is presented to the court, by prior agreement to accept the jurisdiction of the court in particular categories of cases, or by treaty provisions with respect to disputes arising from matters covered by the treaty.

The most common type of conflict presented to the ICJ is treaty interpretation. In these cases the ICJ is asked to resolve disagreements over the meaning and application of terms in treaties formed between two or more countries. Other cases range from nuclear testing and water boundary disputes to conflicts over the military presence of a foreign country.

ICJ has been maligned for the inconsistency of its decisions and its lack of real enforcement power. But its ambitious mission to resolve disputes between sovereign nations makes it a valuable source of support for many countries in their political interaction with other countries.

The judgment of the ICJ is binding and (technically) cannot be appealed (arts. 59, 60) once the parties have consented to its jurisdiction and the court has rendered a decision. However, a state's failure to comply with the judgment violates the U.N. Charter, article 94(2). Noncompliance can be appealed to the U.N. Security Council, which may either make recommendations or authorize other measures by which the judgment shall be enforced. A decision by the Security Council to enforce compliance with a judgment rendered by the court is subject to the Veto power of permanent members, and thus depends on the members' willingness not only to resort to enforcement measures but also to support the original judgment.

Article 94

1. Each Member of the United Nations undertakes to comply with the decision of the International Court of Justice in any case to which it is a party.
2. If any party to a case fails to perform the obligations incumbent upon it under a judgment rendered by the Court, the other party may have recourse to the Security Council, which may, if it deems necessary, make recommendations or decide upon measures to be taken to give effect to the judgment.(mostly guided missiles striking the airbase and follow by air-strike).

Conclusion

Mostly, France leads the pact of enforcing the UN charter and it is the time for France to tidy up loose end affair that France started since 1893 for its former colony (Cambodia) and Thailand is risking of being wiped out of its entire air force.

4 comments:

Anonymous said...

Thailand day of bullying are numbers its interesting to see if Thailand is risking 4.6km2 and the fleet of F16s.

Anonymous said...

siam, keep flip floping, acted tough to public..

but, the conclusion of ICJ verdict

saim, must to abide by law, no choice, no doubt...

Anonymous said...

The International Court of Justice

If we look at the International Court of Justice (ICJ),The Court decides in accordance with international treaties and conventions in force, international custom, and the general principles of law and, as subsidiary means, judicial decisions and the teachings of the most highly qualified publicists.

The Court Generally has been most successful resolving border delineation and the use of oceans and waterways. While the Court has, in some instances, resolved claims by one State espoused on behalf of its nationals, the Court has generally refrained from hearing contentious cases that are political in nature, due in part to its lack of enforcement mechanism and its lack of compulsory jurisdiction.

The UN Charter XIV, Article 94 of the UN Charter, there are some obvious problems; if the judgment is against one of the five permanent members of the Security Council or its allies, any resolution on enforcement would then be vetoed.

The Court's powers in practice, have been limited by the unwillingness of the losing party to abide by the Court's ruling, and by the Security Council's unwillingness to impose consequences. Simply, the ICJ does not enjoy a full separation of force, with permanent members of the Security Council being able to veto enforcement of even cases to which they consented in advance to be bound.

Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter sets out the UN Security Council's powers to maintain peace. It allows the Council to determine the existence of any threat to the peace, breach of the peace, or act of aggression, and to take military and non-military action to restore international peace and security.

Anonymous said...

Thailand threaten the World Court of Justice...You have no authority over Thailand? WOW!!