Authors: Halil Rahman Basaran
Addresses: Law Faculty, Ozyegin University, Ku?bak??? Cad. No. 2 34662 Altunizade, Üsküdar, ?stanbul, Turkey
Abstract: This paper|s focus is on a certain aspect of the Advisory Opinion: The Consistency of the Court with Regard to Judicial Propriety. Apart from the Eastern Carelia and the Legality of the Use by a State of Nuclear Weapons in Armed Conflict cases, the Court has always issued its opinion on request. The Court has, whatever the objections, opted for the issuance of opinions. It has consistently followed its own precedent of never finding an obstacle concerning judicial propriety. In that regard, some indications about the term judicial propriety have been given by some advisory opinions. Still, it is not exactly defined. In that connection, the paper engages in that definition and the argument is advanced that judicial propriety is a broad umbrella-concept.
Keywords: advisory opinions; judicial propriety; judges; judiciary; legal precedents; International Court of Justice; ICJ; United Nations; UN; public interest; legal frameworks; consistency; Eastern Karelia; Russian Karelia; Eastern Carelia; Finland; Russia; Russian Federation; peace treaties; international relations; Morocco; Mauritania; Spain; Western Sahara; Africa; Israel; Palestinian territories; Palestine; occupied territories; separation barriers; West Bank; Jerusalem; security fences; apartheid wall; Kosovo; international law; nuclear weapons; armed conflicts; war; state legality; public law; public policy.
International Journal of Public Law and Policy, 2011 Vol.1 No.3, pp.264 - 283
Published online: 24 Nov 2011 *Full-text access for editors Access for subscribers Purchase this article Comment on this article