Abstract

The article assesses some of the theoretical and practical implications arising out of some recent changes in the fi eld of international dispute settlement: the rise in the number of international courts, the expansion of their jurisdictional powers, their increased invocation by state and non- state parties, and the growing inclination of national courts to apply international law. Argu- ably, these developments point to the emergence of a new judiciary the operation of which is governed by a new ethos (international norm-advancement and the maintenance of co-operative international arrangements), which is different from the traditional ethos of international courts (confl ict resolution). The article then moves on to discuss some of the ' blind spots ' of the present judicial institutional landscape, which includes a consideration of the remaining diffi culties associated with addressing politically-charged confl icts before international courts (especially those relating to war and terror), and problems relating to the enforcement of judicial orders and judgments. While national courts can, in theory, fi ll some of these remaining gaps, their actual ability to do so remains unclear. In addition, the article addresses in brief some concerns that the emergence of the new institutional judiciary may actually exacerbate: co-ordination problems, and concerns relating to the effectiveness and legitimacy of international adjudication.

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 call

Disclaimer: 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.