Search
Close
Search
Advanced Search
Search Menu

Extract

I. INTRODUCTION

As Judge Simma wrote in his commentary on the UN Charter, and I quote, ‘the principle of the peaceful settlement of disputes occupies a pivotal position within a world order whose hallmark is the ban on force and coercion’.2 International adjudication has long played a critical role in advancing this principle. History is replete with examples where two parties resolved a dispute by referring the matter to an international court or tribunal. And the increasingly cluttered docket of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) and myriad international investment arbitrations today are testament to the continuing vibrancy of formal dispute resolution. In at least some instances, the decision to turn to judicial resolution avoided a war. In a very real sense, international law succeeds where headlines are not made.

At the same time, many of the most pressing challenges facing the international community—global and regional crises that threaten peace and security—present a somewhat uneasy fit with what you might call the traditional mode of international adjudication. A global crisis, almost by definition, is broader than a single dispute that can easily be broken down into a specific legal question. Rather, crises are often multi-headed, involving a combination of political, legal and economic conflicts. In an increasingly interconnected world, crisis scenarios may also involve a multitude of State and non-State participants and stakeholders.

You do not currently have access to this article.
Download all slides