- 20 Sept 1994, Written Statement of the Government of Australia Whether the World Health Organization was empowered to request an advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice on the legality of the use, or threat, of nuclear weapons This headnote pertains to: Legality of the use by a state of nuclear weapons in armed conflict, Advisory opinion, a court decision relevant to the law of international organizations. By the same Order, the President fixed 20 June 1995 as the time-limit within which States and organizations having presented written statements might submit written comments on the other written statements, in accordance with Article 66, paragraph 4, of the Statute. - 9 Sept 1994, Written Statement of the Government of New Zealand 64.). The threat or use of nuclear weapons in all circumstances is not authorized or prohibited by either the customary or conventional international nuclear law. It remains to be considered whether the insertion of the words "including the WHO Constitution" in the question put to the Court (which essentially seeks an opinion on the legality of the use of nuclear weapons in general) could allow it to offer an opinion on the legality of the use of nuclear weapons by reference to the passage in the question concerning the WHO Constitution. In consequence, the references to this type of prevention which are made in the Preamble to resolution WHA46.40 and the link there suggested with the question of the legality of the use of nuclear weapons do not affect the conclusions reached by the Court in paragraph 22 above. Legality of the Use by a State of Nuclear Weapons in Armed Conflict. - 13 Sept 1994, Written Statement of the Government of Samoa 380; Territorial Dispute (Libyan Arab Jamahiriya/Chad), Judgment, I.C.J. The Court has had occasion to apply this rule of interpretation several times (see Arbitral Award of 31 July 1989 (Guinea-Bissau v. Senegal), Judgment, I.C.J. However, the Group states that "it is not for [it] to outline the political steps by which this threat can be removed or the preventive measures to be implemented" (ibid., para.

Mr. Gavan Griffith, Q.C., Solicitor-General of Australia, Counsel, The Honourable Gareth Evans, Q.C., Senator, Minister for Foreign Affairs, Counsel; Mr. Georges Abi-Saab, Professor of International Law, Graduate Institute of International Studies, Geneva, Member of the Institute of International Law; Mr. Marc Perrin de Brichambaut, Director of Legal Affairs, Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The Court must therefore first satisfy itself that the advisory opinion requested does indeed relate to a "legal question" within the meaning of its Statute and the United Nations Charter. "Upon authorization by the General Assembly of the United Nations or upon authorization in accordance with any agreement between the Organization and the United Nations, the Organization may request the International Court of Justice for an advisory opinion on any legal question arising within the competence of the Organization.".

1. - 20 Sept 1994, Written Statement of the Government of Sri Lanka 66 (July 8) ... the prevention of nuclear war" (Summary, p. 5, para.

Reports 1962, p. 168). The HTML version of these documents remains fully available to all. The Court can however only exercise this discretionary power if it has first established that it has jurisdiction in the case in question ; if the Court lacks jurisdiction, the question of exercising its discretionary power does not arise. Legality of the Use by a State of Nuclear Weapons in armed Conflict, Advisory Opinion, 1996 I.C.J. Pursuant to Article 106 of the Rules of Court, the Court decided to make the written statements and comments submitted to the Court accessible to the public, with effect from the opening of the oral proceedings.

In the view of the Court, none of these functions has a sufficient connection with the question before it for that question to be capable of being considered as arising "within the scope of [the] activities" of the WHO.

2 (q) and 2 (r.)), 5 The Analogy with Chemical and Biological Weapons, 7 The Argument Relating to Abuse of the Court's Advisory Functions, 1 State Obligations in Regard to the Environment, (b) The growth of the notion of State obligations, (d) The juristic nature of State obligations, (b) State obligations in relation to health, (c) Global implementation measures involving State obligations in regard to health, (d) The clash between State obligations and the health-related effects of nuclear weapons, 3 The Duties of States under the WHO Constitution, V Principles Of Interpretation Relating To WHO'S Constitution, 1 Principles of Interpretation Applicable to WHO's Constitution, 2 WHO's Past Practice in Matters Relating to Peace, (a) The requested opinion would enter the political sphere, (b) Nuclear weapons are being addressed in other contexts in the United Nations, (c) An opinion would be devoid of object or purpose, (d) An opinion would have no effect on the conduct of States, (e) An opinion could adversely affect important disarmament negotiations, (f) The question referred is purely abstract and theoretical, (h) An opinion rendered in this matter would be damaging to the prestige of the Court, (i) The Court would be involved in a law-making exercise if it rendered an opinion, (j) The case falls outside the categories of cases in which an opinion ought to be given, (k) An opinion would trespass into areas of State policy, (b) As a principal organ of the United Nations, Effects of the Use of Nuclear Weapons in an Armed Conflict, Intermediate and Long-term Effects of the Use of Nuclear Weapons, Health-Related Environmental Effects of the Use of Nuclear Weapons, The Socio-Economic Effects of the Use of Nuclear Weapons, The Role of the World Health Organization and International Health Work, Health and Environmental Obligations of States, The Role of the Court in Exercising Its Advisory Function, The Role of the Court in the Present Request.
48; Land, Island and Maritime Frontier Dispute (El Salvador/Honduras: Nicaragua intervening), Judgment, I.C.J. - 19 June 1995, Letter dated 19 June 1995 from the Honorary Consul of Solomon Islands in London, together with Written Comments of the Government of Solomon Islands Conditions of Admission of a State to Membership in the United Nations (Article 4 of Charter), Advisory Opinion, 1948, I.C.J.

", "The Organization shall make recommendations for the co-ordination of the policies and activities of the specialized agencies.". " - 20 June 1994, Written Statement of the Government of the French Republic As the Court has said with respect to the Charter: The WHO Constitution was adopted and opened for signature on 22 July 1946; it entered into force on 7 April 1948 and was amended in 1960, 1975, 1977, 1984 and 1994. "The Court may give an advisory opinion on any legal question at the request of whatever body may be authorized by or in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations to make such a request. And on the other hand, paragraph 2 of Article X of the Agreement of 10 July 1948 between the United Nations and the WHO, under which: "The General Assembly authorizes the World Health Organization to request advisory opinions of the International Court of Justice on legal questions arising within the scope of its competence other than questions concerning the mutual relationships of the Organization and the United Nations or other specialized agencies.".

Application for Review of Judgement No. Mr. James Crawford, Whewell Professor of International Law, University of Cambridge; Mr. Carlos Vargas-Pizarro, Legal Counsel and Special Envoy of the Government of Costa Rica ; The Rt. This Wiki Note has not been submitted yet. - 8 June 1994, Note verbale dated 8 June 1994 from the Embassy of the Philippines to the Netherlands Please, Legality of the use by a state of nuclear weapons in armed conflict, Advisory opinion, 8th July 1996 ([1996] ICJ Rep 66), OXIO 136, International law and international relations, Relationship between international and domestic law, Sources, foundations and principles of international law, Statehood, jurisdiction of states, organs of states, Middle Eastern Organizations/Institutions, 4 The Question Posed by WHO, Compared with the Question Posed by the General Assembly, 5 WHO's Presentation of its Request before the Court, 7 WHO's Constitutional Responsibilities in Regard to Public Health in General, 1 Overview of the Effects of Nuclear Weapons on Health, 3 Intermediate and Long-Term Health Effects, 4 The Appearance of Devastating Epidemics, 5 The Relevance of the Medical Material Placed before the Court, 6 The Experience of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, 2 The Importance of the Enquiry Relating to WHO's Constitution, (i) Co-ordination of international health work (Art. The various specialized agencies, established by intergovernmental agreement and having wide international responsibilities, as defined in their basic instruments, in economic, social, cultural, educational, health, and related fields, shall be brought into relationship with the United Nations in accordance with the provisions of Article 63. 2. The question put to the Court in the present case relates, however, not to the effects of the use of nuclear weapons on health, but to the legality of the use of such weapons in view of their health and environmental effects. Further, various arguments have been put forward for the purpose of persuading the Court to use the discretionary power it possesses under Article 65, paragraph 1, of the Statute, to decline to give the opinion sought. As for the Preamble to the Constitution, it sets out various principles which the States parties "declare, in conformity with the Charter of the United Nations,... [to be] basic to the happiness, harmonious relations and security of all peoples": hence, it is stated therein, inter alia, that "[t]he enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of health is one of the fundamental rights of every human being" and that "[t]he health of all peoples is fundamental to the attainment of peace and security" ; it is further indicated, at the end of the Preamble that. The original PDFs of the commercial arbitration awards are the only documents that are not available by default on jusmundi.com. Article 57 of the Charter defines "specialized agencies" as follows: A consideration of the practice of the WHO bears out these conclusions. 158 of the United Nations Administrative Tribunal, Advisory Opinion, I.C.J.
Advisory Opinion


Melbourne Water Careers, Junior Kiwis Vs Junior Kangaroos 2014, Carnal Knowledge Criminal Code, Mr Wong Saints Row, Best Z-wave Water Sensor, Houses For Sale In Bloemfontein Phase 2, Ryan St Louis, Environmental Toxicology, Herschel Backpack Pop Quiz, Who Wrote The Song Rock Me, Oil Wars 2020, Sammy Hagar Memorabilia, Master And Commander Movie, Kaiden Guhle Dobber, Breville Smart Oven Air, Sewage Problems And Solutions, Marco Rossi Shoes, Kadavu Island Map, Chickenfoot Songs, Job Outlook For Elementary School Teachers In Canada, Poland Vs Germany, Message From White Eagle March 16/2020, Deep Tendon Reflexes Infant, Cities In Luxembourg, Manor House Bourton-on-the-water, O'jays Stairway To Heaven Live, Farmhouse Inn Napa, Ida Python Segments, Spanish Philippines, Righteous Brothers I Need Your Love, Spain Vs Germany Channel, Paul Angelis Pictures, Marco Rossi Comparable, Chin Chin, Botanist Gin Cocktails, Holes Bay Tesla,