The Way to Impartial Justice: Carving an Approach to Effective Decision Making Process, the Role of Individual Judges and Problems Faced by the International Court of Justice

Abstract

International Law has been dynamic in nature throughout the last half of the century. With the advent of the United Nations, the International decision making process has been completely revamped. To ensure the legitimacy and effectiveness of this decision making process, the International Court of Justice came into existence as an impartial, justifiable and equitable authority. Even though the International Court of Justice has been fundamental in establishing compliance with substantive rule of law and international legal standards, the perceived biasness and lack of appropriateness has been questioned several times in the academic circles. This antipathy stems from the fact that the International Court of Justice does not exist in ignorance of the individual decision makers who give the shape to the systematic setup of the court. It has been well accepted notion that the institutional legitimacy of the judiciary still depends on the quality of the judgments that judges make (Keeton 1999). These judgments are a concomitant of the behavioral patterns and attitudinal characters of the individual elements of the process. Such attributes give rise to the most debatable proposition of the modern judicial process, the ‘Independence of the Judiciary’. Could this freedom be the answer to ‘Effective Justice’ on an International scale? This research has raised some aspersions and doubts over this far reaching argument. Judges as individual decisions makers are marred and limited by their cognitive abilities. Prior research work has shown strong evidence that judges have a tendency to show natural inclination towards states which are economically and strategically strong within their regional territories and diplomatically strong in International forums(Posner et al. 2005). This paper concords with the available empirical data and statistical framework to this effect but tries to answer the distortions in the decision making process by utilizing an approach suitable to the psychological analysis and legal ramifications.