Laws of War and War Crimes

 The INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE (ICJ)

It is a long road that led to the formation of the International Court of Justice (ICJ), but all was done with one goal in mind: the elimination of the waste of war. 

The Conventions

Mikhail Nikolayevich Muravyov together with Tsar Nicholas II started the Hague Conventions in 1899. The conventions were started with the aim of maintaining peace and delineating circumstances under which war was to be conducted. The Permanent Court of Arbitrations  (PCA) was established; the predecessor of the ICJ. The rules of war were largely based on the Lieber Code used in the American Civil War.:

• The contracting Powers recognize that hostilities between themselves must not commence without previous and explicit warning, in the form either of a declaration of war, giving reasons, or of an ultimatum with conditional declaration of war.
• The existence of a state of war must be notified to the neutral Powers without delay and shall not take effect in regard to them until after the receipt of a notification, which may, however, be given by telegraph. Neutral Powers, nevertheless, cannot rely on the absence of notification if it is clearly established that they were in fact aware of the existence of a state of war..

These two articles relate to the opening of warfare . The rest of this section relates to how parties should register their assent and adherence. It is clear from these terms the degrees of civility that nations of the world come to expect
In other articles warfare on land and at sea are handled, as are the treatment of prisoners of war, protections for civilians and aid organizations such as the Red Cross.
What constitutes a just war, the jus ad bellum had already been established in the fifth century and as codified by St. Thomas Aquinas became the basis of all iterations of the court. These principles require that certain standards must be met before war is resorted to:

1. There must be a good reason for the war such as protecting human rights or restoring peace.
2. Destruction must be outweighed by good in terms of what the war will achieve.
3. The intention must be right. 
4. It must be entered into by the proper authority i.e., the government of that country.
5. There must be reason to believe that the aim of entering into the war will be achieved.

“We do not seek peace in order to be at war, but we go to war that we may have peace. Be peaceful, therefore, in warring, so that you may vanquish those whom you war against and bring them to the prosperity of peace.”

The PCA was followed by the Permanent Court of International Justice (PCIJ). However, the PCA continues to exist to this day and has issued decisions in recent times:

• Croatia v. Slovenia (2017) A case regarding disputed borders.
• United States v Iran which relates to the well-known events surrounding the dethroned Shah of Iran in 1979. Two declarations were issued, establishing the Iran-United States Claims Tribunal after several rounds of negotiations regarding the return of assets, the lifting of sanctions and the release of American hostages (retold in the movie Argo).

The International Court of Justice (ICJ) was only formed in 1945 after the second world war and after the formation of the United Nations Organization (UNO). It however benefited greatly from the PCIJ on whose statutes it was based:

• International law was greatly improved,
• Approved sources of international law were listed in its statute. 

Some of the cases 

SOME RECENT CASES BEFORE THE ICJ: SOME SETTLED, SOME PENDING

Most cases that come before the court involve the breaching of a convention and agreements and treaties: 

• Application of the INTERNATIONAL CONVENTION ON THE ELIMIATION OF ALL FORMS OF RACIAL DISCRIMINATION (Qatar v. United Arab Emirates) 2018 >2021
• Appeal relating to the Jurisdiction of the ICAO Council under Article II, Section 2, of the 1944 INTERNATIONAL AIR SERVICES TRANSIT AGREEMENT (Bahrain, Egypt and United Arab Emirates v. Qatar)
• These cases all relate to the TREATY ON NON-PROLIFERATION OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS 1970 (NPT), 

1. Obligations concerning Negotiations relating to Cessation of the Nuclear Arms Race and to Nuclear Disarmament (Marshall Islands v. United Kingdom) 2014 >2016. 
2. Obligations concerning Negotiations relating to Cessation of the Nuclear Arms Race and to Nuclear Disarmament (Marshall Islands v. India) 2014>2016.
3. Obligations concerning Negotiations relating to Cessation of the Nuclear Arms Race and to Nuclear Disarmament (Marshall Islands v. Pakistan). 

Some cases are brought seeking the services of the court in an advisory capacity:

• Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory 2003 2004
• Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons 1995 >1996

Two of the most interesting cases that have come before the court, simply in terms of their illustration of the turning point of a country and as a sign of the times - and strangely enough, just one of the spinoffs of that same previous decision are: 

• Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States of America) 1984 > 1991
• The circumstances surrounding this case began way back in 1979 and the facts around this case are well documented in many modern cinematic productions (Kill the Messenger, America Made). The United States was accused of funding and training a group opposed to the sitting government of this South American state against them. The court found against them, (the US) and ordered among other things reparation. The US did not comply, even though it had already decided for itself that some of its activities should be curtailed. 
• Aerial Herbicide Spraying (Ecuador v. Colombia) 2008 > 2013
• This case related to the growing of coca and poppy fields near the border of Ecuador using aerial herbicide which was causing damage to people, animals and property. This case was settled out of court.
• The ICJ has 15 judges from various backgrounds and they may take on assessors. Each country that brings a case may present as many experts and other evidence to support their cases. Several countries have undertaken to abide by their decisions with good reason.