Abstract
The international court of justice was established by Charter of the United Nations and is considered as one of its integral parts in which only experienced and knowledgeable judges and lawyers can be employed. In fact, it consists of several independent judicial institutions. Marshall Islands, a country which was cruelly imposed to nuclear tests, was brave enough to sue powerful countries with nuclear weapons. In 1996, nuclear weapons case was considered by the international court of justice for the first time. All the court’s members came to this conclusion that these countries should stop their nuclear activities and they are not permitted to use any nuclear weapon. As a result they ratified a bill. Then, Marshall Islands’ petition was considered by the international court of justice in The Hague. This country also took legal action against U.S.A. and the federal judiciary of the United States accepted to take it into consideration. This paper aims at analyzing the petition of Marshall Islands against Britain in the international court of justice. According to the content of this petition, countries can’t develop their nuclear weapons which threat men and the world. As a result, the destruction of present nuclear weapons is the only effective way to achieve this goal.
Highlights
Analyzing the role of International law in inhibiting countries from developing their nuclear weapons is considered very important especially when a country decides to take legal actions against these threats
In the provision of nuclear weapons (1968) which is referred to as NPT provision, it has been mentioned that non-nuclear countries are not allowed to use nuclear weapons and nuclear countries should take legal actions regarding the discontinuance of the nuclear weapons development
In fourth paragraph of this provision, the international court of justice has emphasized on the countries good will and negotiations about the process of discontinuing the development of nuclear weapons and the efficient control of the international court of justice
Summary
Analyzing the role of International law in inhibiting countries from developing their nuclear weapons is considered very important especially when a country decides to take legal actions against these threats The International Law Dictionary, Oxford, Clio PressLtd, 1987) Those who believe that it is not legal to use nuclear weapons believe that this inhibition can be in form of using force by countries to enforce the law in international relations. The international court of justice came to this conclusion that some of the sources of law are not related to this issue These groups who think that usage of nuclear weapons is illegal believe that any use of these weapons can threat human right and increase fatality. All the court’s members came to this conclusion that these countries should stop their nuclear activities and they are not permitted to use any nuclear weapon. This country took legal actions against U.S.A. and the federal judiciary of the United States accepted to take it into consideration
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
