Abstract
The International Court of Justice has contributed significantly to developing and interpreting different legal aspects concerning reparations which are due to states or individuals for internationally wrongful acts committed against them. This paper will analyze a number of decisions by this Court that provide for either state or individual reparations for violations of international human rights and humanitarian law. That analysis is structured according to the four types of reparations applied in the relevant decisions, notably restitution, compensation, satisfaction and guarantees of non-repetition. Although these decisions generally provide a limited discussion on the implementation or specific modalities of reparations, the fundamental rules and principles of the applicable types of reparations establish legal obligations vis-a-vis states, or natural and legal persons affected by such violations. This article has been retracted
Highlights
This article examines the case law of the International Court of Justice (ICJ or the Court) which is relevant to the issue of reparations that are due to individuals or states for violations of international human rights and humanitarian law.[1]
The right to reparation is firmly embedded under both international human rights[3] and international humanitarian law,[4] its enforcement remains difficult
The objective of restitution in the ILC Articles is ‘to re-establish the situation which existed before the wrongful act was committed.’[13] as noted in the Commentary to the ILC Articles, restitution is the first form of reparation that is always considered.[14]
Summary
This article examines the case law of the International Court of Justice (ICJ or the Court) which is relevant to the issue of reparations that are due to individuals or states for violations of international human rights and humanitarian law.[1]. The ILC Articles list the following as forms of reparation: restitution, compensation and satisfaction, either singly or in combination,[7] whereas the Basic Principles Resolution lists five reparation types: compensation, rehabilitation, satisfaction and guarantees of non-repetition.[8] The distinctions between the forms of reparation indicated under these two documents are discussed before analyzing the relevant ICJ case law. The most recent case which hinges on the issue of whether jurisdictional state immunity can serve as a barrier to individual claims for reparation concerning international humanitarian law violations highlights the legal complexity and the increasing occurrence of requests combining state reparations and individual reparations.[12] The article is divided according to the four types of reparations applied in those decisions, notably restitution, compensation, satisfaction and guarantees of non-repetition. As mentioned above, those decisions provide a limited discussion on the implementation mechanism or modalities of reparations, the emphasis on the obligation to make full reparations for injuries, whether material or moral, caused by the internationally wrongful acts of a state is present in each of them
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 call
