Skip to main content

Legal Basis for the Establishment of International Courts

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
  • 946 Accesses

Abstract

Contemporary institutions of international cooperation are very diverse, a particular example of which are international courts and tribunals. The past few decades have seen a very dynamic development of such institutions of international cooperation. Not only do they take an active part in settling regular international disputes between states, but also play a role in implementing state obligations arising under their membership in international organisations. With respect to the latter role, judicial bodies act as not only international courts, but they also perform the functions of constitutional courts, administrative courts and labour tribunals. Moreover, the jurisdiction of international courts and tribunals is being extended onto the process of implementing the international law of human rights and international humanitarian law. From the point of view of international law, the legal status, structure and competence of contemporary international courts and tribunals are very diverse. This is due to the nature and content of their constituent instruments. The determining criterium of classifying a court as international is its formation by an international treaty, usually a multilateral one. Permanent courts formed by such treaties usually operate within the institutional framework of international organizations (ICJ, CJEU, ECHR) and do not have their own international legal personalities. However, it may happen that a permanent judicial body formed by an international treaty operates outside the framework of an international organisation and has its own international legal personality (ICC). This is different compared to the formation of ad hoc judicial bodies. Their legal basis can be both international treaties, including bilateral treaties (e.g. RSCSL-SCSL), and UN Security Council resolutions (e.g. ICTY, ICTR, IRMCT). Some of the international criminal tribunals are the so-called hybrid tribunals. They are specific in nature and are referred to as internationalized tribunals. Their status is clearly different than that of other tribunals, as is the legal basis for their formation and the degree of their internationalisation. Due to the above-mentioned issues, the legal status of international courts is diversified. They need to be analysed against the backdrop of the underlying issue of subjectivity of international law, and also with reference to the law of treaties and the law of the international organisations.

Dr. iur. Aleksander Gadkowski, Lawyer at the Research and Analyses Office of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Poland and Postdoctoral Researcher at the Faculty of Law and Administration at Adam Mickiewicz University in Poznań, Poland. Former Lawyer at the Registry of the European Court of Human Rights (2016–2018). Author of articles on human rights law and European social law.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   149.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Caminos (2013), pp. 55 et seq.

  2. 2.

    For details see e.g. Cała-Wacinkiewicz (2018), p. 334; Czapliński (2007), p. 130.

  3. 3.

    Szpak (2014), pp. 31 et seq.

  4. 4.

    See e.g. Abi-Saab (1999), p. 921.

  5. 5.

    Dupuy (2007), p. 2.

  6. 6.

    Sands (1999), p. XXVI.

  7. 7.

    Amerasinghe (2005), pp. 12 et seq.

  8. 8.

    Klabbers (2002), p. 10.

  9. 9.

    Gehring (1991), p. 35.

  10. 10.

    See Schmalenbach (2012), p. 872.

  11. 11.

    See, e.g., Gadkowski (2018), p. 48.

  12. 12.

    Text of the Rome Statute: UNTS, vol. 2187, p. 90; see: Lee (2002).

  13. 13.

    Romano et al. (2004).

  14. 14.

    Text of the Convention: UNTS, vol. 575, p. 159.

  15. 15.

    Schreuer (2001), pp. 67 et seq.

  16. 16.

    Buergenthal (2001), p. 267 et seq.

  17. 17.

    Tomuschat (2001), p. 1108.

  18. 18.

    Rosenne (2007), pp. XI et seq.

  19. 19.

    D’Aspremont and Besson (2017).

  20. 20.

    Schermers and Blokker (2011), p. 40.

  21. 21.

    The text of the Statute: UNTS, vol. 33, p. 993.

  22. 22.

    See: Certain Expenses of the United Nations (Article 17, paragraph 2 of the Charter), Advisory Opinion, ICJ Reports 1962, p. 157.

  23. 23.

    Text of the Convention: ETS 005.

  24. 24.

    Text of the Rome Statute: UNTS, vol. 2187, p. 90.

  25. 25.

    Text of the Convention: UNTS, vol. 1883, p. 3.

  26. 26.

    UN Doc. SC/RES/8087 (1993); for commentary see: Pickard (1995), pp. 435 et seq.

  27. 27.

    UN Doc. SC/RES/955 (1994); for commentary see: van den Herik (2005), pp. 27 et seq.

  28. 28.

    On December 22, 2010, the Security Council adopted resolution SC/RES/1966, which created a special Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals which “shall continue the jurisdiction, rights and obligations and essential functions of the ICTY and the ICTR”; for commentary see: Mbengue (2015), p. 201.

  29. 29.

    Cançado Trinidade (2014), p. 1 et seq.

  30. 30.

    Kent et al. (2019).

References

  • Abi-Saab, G. (1999). Fragmentation or unification: Some concluding remarks. New York University Journal of International Law and Politics, 31(4), 919–933.

    Google Scholar 

  • Amerasinghe, C. F. (2005). Principles of the institutional law of international organizations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Buergenthal, T. (2001). Proliferation of international courts and tribunals: Is it good or bad? Leiden Journal of International Law, 14(2), 267–275.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cała-Wacinkiewicz, E. (2018). Fragmentacja prawa międzynarodowego. Warsaw: C.H. Beck.

    Google Scholar 

  • Caminos, H. (2013). The growth of specialized international tribunals and the fears of fragmentation of international law. In N. Boschiero, T. Scovazzi, C. Pitea, & C. Ragni (Eds.), International courts and the development of international law. Essays in Honor of Tullio Treves (pp. 55–65). The Hague: T.M.C. Asser Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cançado Trinidade, A. A. (2014). Reflections on a century of international justice and prospects for the future. In G. Gaja & J. Grote Stoutenburg (Eds.), Enhancing the rule of law through the international court of justice (pp. 1–32). Leiden: Brill-Nijhoff.

    Google Scholar 

  • Czapliński, W. (2007). Multiplikacja sądów międzynarodowych – szanse czy zagrożenia dla jedności prawa międzynarodowego. In J. Kolasa & A. Kozłowski (Eds.), Rozwój prawa międzynarodowego – jedność czy fragmentacja (pp. 77–130). Wrocław: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Wrocławskiego.

    Google Scholar 

  • D’Aspremont, J., & Besson, S. (Eds.). (2017). The Oxford handbook on the sources of international law. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dupuy, P. M. (2007). A Doctrinal debate in the globalisation Era: On the “Fragmentation” of international law. European Journal of Legal Studies, 1(1), 1–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gadkowski, A. (2018). Treaty-making powers of international organizations. Poznań: Wydawnictwo Naukowe Uniwersytetu im. Adama Mickiewicza.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gehring, T. (1991). International environmental regimes: Dynamic sectoral legal systems. Yearbook of the International Law Commission, 1(1), 35–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kent, A., Nikos Skoutaris, N., & Trinidad, J. (Eds.). (2019). The future of international courts. Regional, institutional and procedural challenges. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klabbers, J. (2002). An introduction to international institutional law. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, R. S. (2002). The international criminal court. The making of the Roma Statute – Issues – Negotiations – Results. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mbengue, M. M. (2015). Challenges of judges in international criminal courts and tribunals. In C. Giorgetti (Ed.), Challenges and recusals of judges and arbitrators in international courts and tribunals (pp. 183–227). Leiden: Brill-Nijhoff.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pickard, D. B. (1995). Security council resolution 808: A step toward a permanent international court for the prosecution of international crimes and human rights violations. Golden Gate University Law Review, 25, 435–462.

    Google Scholar 

  • Romano, C. P. R., Nollkaemper, A., & Kleffner, J. K. (Eds.). (2004). Internationalized criminal courts: Sierra Leone, East Timor, Kosovo, and Cambodia. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenne, S. (2007). Interpretation, revision and other recourse from international judgments and awards. Leiden: Brill-Nijhoff.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Sands, P. (1999). Introduction. In P. Sands, R. Mackenzie, & Y. Shany (Eds.), Manual of international courts and tribunals (pp. ix–xxiii). London: Lexis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schermers, H. G., & Blokker, N. M. (2011). International institutional law. Leiden: Brill-Nijhoff.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Schmalenbach, K. (2012). International organizations or institutions, supervision and sanctions. In R. Wolfrum (Ed.), Max Planck Encyclopedia of public international law. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schreuer, C. H. (2001). The ICSID convention. A commentary. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Szpak, A. (2014). Proliferation of international courts and tribunals and its impact on the fragmentation of international law. The International Law Annual, 2, 31–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tomuschat, C. (2001). International courts and tribunals. In R. Bernhard (Ed.), Max Planck encyclopedia of public international law. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • van den Herik, L. J. (2005). The contribution of the Rwanda tribunal to the development of international law. Leiden: Brill-Nijhoff.

    Book  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Aleksander Gadkowski .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Gadkowski, A. (2019). Legal Basis for the Establishment of International Courts. In: Pinto de Albuquerque, P., Wojtyczek, K. (eds) Judicial Power in a Globalized World. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-20744-1_13

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-20744-1_13

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-20743-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-20744-1

  • eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics