The Glasgow Centre for International Law and Security (GCILS) at the University of Glasgow is organising the sixth Scottish Conference on International Law, following the conferences hosted by the University of Edinburgh in April 2019, the University of Glasgow in May 2021, the University of Aberdeen in June 2022, the University of Dundee in 2023, and the University of Stirling in September 2024.The theme is:
“The International Court of Justice at 80”
In-person registration is now closed. You can register to attend online here.
Programme and abstracts booklet.
Practical Information – getting to Glasgow, hotels etc.
Theme
In a collection published to mark 50 years of the International Court of Justice, Georges Abi-Saab described a series of crises that have befallen the Court since its inception. The first is the crisis relating to the Court’s failure to achieve compulsory jurisdiction due to States’ reluctance to deposit optional clause declarations (‘the decline of the optional clause’, in Waldock’s words). This crisis Abi-Saab ascribed to the influence of the Soviet Union and its allies who were suspicious of the Court’s potential to impinge upon their sovereignty. This was followed by a crisis of confidence in the Court among states who had regained sovereignty during decolonisation in the 1960s and 1970s, brought about by a general distrust in what was perceived as a Western bias in international law, epitomised by the disastrous South West Africa cases. The third crisis, perhaps somewhat paradoxically, Abi-Saab described as encompassing the concerns of Western States regarding an activist Court following the Nicaragua judgment in which the Court had found against the United States. To these ‘crises’ one could add the perceived threat to the Court’s position as the ‘World Court’ in the 1990s during the proliferation of courts and tribunals which brought with it concerns regarding the fragmentation of international law.
In contrast to this crisis narrative, it appears that thirty years later, as the Court approaches its 80thanniversary, we are living through what one of the busiest periods for the Court. Not only has the Court’s docket been consistently full for a number of years, the Court is also now being tasked with hearing cases related to fundamentally important, even existential issues, such as the use of force, genocide and the effects of man-made climate change. States are not only consistently bringing important cases to the Court, they are utilising various different facets of its jurisdiction, including most notably its incidental and advisory jurisdictions. That said, dissatisfaction with the outcome of the high-profile cases before the Court could very easily lead to the next crisis to add to Abi-Saab’s list.