Categorized | Features

Demystifying the ICJ

By: Saanjh Gupta

 

From the perspective of a MUNITY reporter often told to quieten down to allow for smoother International Court of Justice (ICJ) proceedings next door, the ICJ’s reputation as a THIMUN committee is one of notorious intensity and specialized knowledge. Apart from its agenda, however, the ICJ remains an enigma to most delegates, despite its current president at THIMUN urging new delegates to attempt it as an unforgettable experience.

 

Procedure for witness testimonies – an element of proceedings vastly different from General Assembly agendas – is understandably strict and controlled. Today, advocates for Nicaragua within the Nicaragua v. Costa Rica case procure Peak Sen Chua – otherwise known as the President of the General Assembly – to testify for them. Within seconds of the witness being sworn in by the Registrar, the room – or courtroom – falls silent, as questioning from both sides commences.

 

Initially short and direct, these questions soon develop into inquiries on intensely technical information, readings from documents and discussions on previous treaties. Briefed beforehand by the advocates, the witness’ knowledge of treaties and past events, such as the 1940 Costa Rican dredging of the San Juan river, is paramount to determining each case’s verdict, information that is not divulged until the conclusion of the conference. Tension escalates in the courtroom when Peak Sen dismisses an article procured by Costa Rican advocates on the grounds of its subjectivity; as with all ICJ proceedings, however, the advocate questioning Peak Sen remains composed. Knowledge of the case itself is not sufficient – the registrar also poses a question pertaining to the United Nations Charter.

 

These proceedings, however, would not have been executed as smoothly without the input of THIMUN’s ICJ director, Mr. Robert Stern, who frequently punctuates the testimony urging advocates to ‘lead’ questions into their favor. As THIMUN directors wished to truly emulate the workings of the United Nations, the creation of a model ICJ alongside the regular committees was paramount; Mr. Stern’s twenty years of practicing law and teaching experience, combined with this agenda, saw the first appearance of the ICJ at THIMUN in the early 1990s.

 

Mr. Stern notes that students have increasingly arrived as better prepared judges and advocates from the years between the ICJ’s inception and the one we see today. Due to his efforts in creating ICJs at conferences in Beijing and Johannesburg, amongst other locations, many students have been coached by Stern previously and thus arrive at their ICJ conferences with greater confidence (reaffirmed by our ‘ASB kids’ in Issue 2).

 

“Sometimes the evidence just isn’t on your side,” Mr. Stern remarks, “but for me, if you’re well prepared, you win anyway.” The preparation both Stern and ICJ participants (many of whose applications Mr. Stern personally screens) undertake for conferences is remarkable; from welcome emails to working with officers on Skype, and requiring advocates to submit memoranda detailing their arguments and evidence, the events at the conference itself are the result of months of hard work.

 

Does it pay off? Mr. Stern reflects on a previous verdict that was sent to the real ICJ after a conference, which exhibited a remarkable similarity to the eventual real verdict of the case, formulated on similar reasoning. While the verdicts of both cases will be revealed tomorrow, and are still pending in the real ICJ, it’s evident that the delegates’ preparation is a victory in itself.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Calendar

March 2024
M T W T F S S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031

Additional Links:

www.bestdelegate.com