09 January 2026
The Rohingya Case Gets a Hearing
On 12 January 2026, the International Court of Justice will commence the oral proceedings in Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (The Gambia v Myanmar). Over the course of three weeks, the ICJ will hear arguments concerning The Gambia’s claim that Myanmar’s treatment of the Rohingya ethnic minority within its territory has breached Myanmar’s obligations under the 1948 Genocide Convention. The Gambia v Myanmar provides the ICJ with a key and timely opportunity to clarify the law of genocide, especially in situations of armed conflict or counter-insurgency. Continue reading >>
1 
03 December 2024
The Return of Not-Quite “Phantom Experts”?
On Monday, 2 December 2024, the much anticipated hearing began in the Obligations of States in respect of Climate Change advisory proceedings before the International Court of Justice. Less than a week before the start of the hearing, the Court issued a brief and unusual press release about a meeting that it held with scientists from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). The Court’s decision to meet privately with the scientists raises questions about the Court’s procedures and its approach to evidence. Above all, it is unclear why the Court decided to consult with the IPCC scientists in a closed meeting rather than eliciting testimony from these individuals as part of the formal, public hearing. Continue reading >>01 May 2024
Nicaragua Comes Up Empty
On 30 April 2024, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) rejected a request by Nicaragua for the indication of provisional measures in connection with claims relating to Germany’s support for Israel in the ongoing Gaza conflict. In a terse, sparsely-reasoned decision, the Court decided 15-1 that the circumstances were ‘not such as to require the exercise of its power under Article 41 of the Statute to indicate provisional measures’. While this outcome was not necessarily surprising to those who had followed the proceedings, the Court’s approach—in which it declined to address the usual requirements for the indication of provisional measures—was unusual. Continue reading >>14 February 2024