Is the International Court of Justice Biased?
43 Pages Posted: 4 Jan 2005
Date Written: December 2004
Abstract
The International Court of Justice has jurisdiction over disputes between nations, and has decided dozens of cases since it began operations in 1946. Its defenders argue that the ICJ decides cases impartially and confers legitimacy on the international legal system. Its critics argue that the members of the ICJ vote the interests of the states that appoint them. Prior empirical scholarship is ambiguous. We test the charge of bias using statistical methods. We find strong evidence that (1) judges favor the states that appoint them, and (2) judges favor states whose wealth level is close to that of the judges' own state; and weaker evidence that (3) judges favor states whose political system is similar to that of the judges' own state, and (4) (more weakly) judges favor states whose culture (language and religion) is similar to that of the judges' own state. We find weak or no evidence that judges are influenced by regional and military alignments.
Keywords: international court of justice, ICJ, international law
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation
Here is the Coronavirus
related research on SSRN
Paper statistics
Recommended Papers
-
Adjudicating in Anarchy: An Expressive Theory of International Dispute Resolution
By Tom Ginsburg and Richard H. Mcadams
-
Almost Consistent Estimation of Panel Probit Models with 'Small' Fixed Effects
By Francois Laisney and Michael Lechner
-
The International Court of Justice and the World's Three Legal Systems
-
Somber Reflections on the Compulsory Jurisdiction of the International Court
-
International Dispute Settlement and the Role of International Adjudication
-
Past Experience and Methods of Territorial Dispute Resolution
-
Judicial Behavior Behind Mask and Shield: Modeling the European Court of Justice
