The ICJ's recent judgment in State of Maldoria v. Republic of Crestonia provides important guidance on the scope of the Genocide Convention's compromissory clause and the conditions for invoking the Court's jurisdiction.
The International Court of Justice's judgment on preliminary objections in State of Maldoria v. Republic of Crestonia (ICJ 2023) represents a significant contribution to the jurisprudence on the Genocide Convention's compromissory clause. The court's analysis of the conditions for invoking its jurisdiction under Article IX of the Convention has clarified several previously uncertain points.
This article examines the court's reasoning on three key issues: the scope of the compromissory clause; the standing of a state to bring claims on behalf of its nationals; and the relationship between the Convention's obligations and customary international law. It also considers the implications of the judgment for the merits phase of the proceedings and for future cases under the Convention.
Topics
About the Author
Eleanor Pemberton KC
King's Counsel
Eleanor Pemberton KC is a leading silk with a dual practice in commercial litigation and public international law. She has appeared before the International Court of Justice, the European Court of Human Rights, and the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, as well as in the Commercial Court and Court of Appeal. Eleanor is a Visiting Professor at the London School of Economics and a member of the UN International Law Commission. She is described by The Legal 500 as 'one of the finest minds at the Bar — intellectually rigorous, strategically astute, and a compelling advocate.'