Aspecte generale privind practica statelor în acceptarea jurisdicţiei obligatorii a Curţii Internaţionale de Justiţie: o opţiune politică sau una cult
General aspects of the practice of states in accepting the compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice: a political choice or a cult

Summary/Abstract: The idea behind such an attempt came into being while reading a series of articles debating on the possible existence of cultural implications of reservations and/or declarations to treaties (in those particular papers, the research was conducted on human rights treaties). The central question of this paper is if and to what extent the reservations and/or declarations that states make, when signing and/or ratifying a treaty could be seen as true cultural option or it is just a political one. In this paper I will focus on a particular type of declaration and on a specific treaty, respectively the declaration that is made in order to accept the compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice (ICJ). Any discussion about states' attitude towards the acceptance of the compulsory jurisdiction of the ICJ, including the cultural or political background of such an option, is to start from some general remarks on the role and jurisdiction of the Court, then I will go on and try to identify if there is a "European cultural pattern" of such declarations on the acceptance of ICJ 's jurisdiction and, finally, I will conclude by saying that these declarations also have an important cultural attachment beside, obviously, the political one.

• Details
• Contents