Paragraph 1 of Article 33 of the UN Charter lists peaceful means of settling international disputes, one of which is litigation, namely the international court, functioning permanently.

This institute international law acquired special significance in connection with the prohibition of aggressive war, which became an obligatory norm of international law after the Second World War. The use of international justice in conjunction with other peaceful methods is called upon to serve the cause of peaceful coexistence and the development of international cooperation.

Since international justice is the consideration of disputes between subjects of international law, it is possible to trace the connection between the problems of the organization and activities of the International Court of Justice and the fundamental problems of international law and its institutions - state sovereignty, the basic rights and obligations of participants in international communication, the equality of states on international arena, mutual non-interference in internal affairs and a number of others.

This connection is manifested in the practical activities of the International Court of Justice. In my practice International Court faced with all these issues in solving specific cases. The same connection exists in the development of theoretical problems of international justice.

The ratio of the principles of international justice and the basic principles of international law, the compliance with it of the norms governing the activities and organization of the International Court of Justice - all this occupies one of the central places in the development of problems of international justice. And great importance to solve these problems is the question of the competence of the International Court of Justice.

Based on Article 92 of the UN Charter, the International Court of Justice is the main judicial body of the UN. Its establishment meant the implementation of paragraph 1 of Article 33 of the UN Charter in that part, which provided for the possibility of organizing court proceedings as one of the peaceful means of resolving international disputes.

Its main purpose is to resolve any international disputes that are submitted to it by the disputing states.

Consisting of 15 judges elected by the General Assembly and the Security Council, the International Court of Justice deals with the settlement of disputes between states. The participation of states in legal proceedings is voluntary, but if the state agrees to this, then it is obliged to comply with the decision of the Court. The Court also prepares advisory opinions at the request of the General Assembly and the Security Council.

The Statute of the International Court of Justice, together with Chapter XIV of the Charter of the United Nations, of which it is an integral part, was drafted at the Dumbarton Oaks Conference (1944), at the Jurists' Committee in Washington, and at the San Francisco Conference of 1945.

All members of the UN are simultaneously parties to the Statute of the Court, and non-members of the UN may become such parties under conditions determined by the UN General Assembly on the recommendation of the Security Council (Article 13 of the UN Charter). The Court is open to each individual case and to other States not parties to the Statute, under conditions determined by the Security Council (Article 35 of the Statute).

The court is located in The Hague, however, this does not prevent it from performing its functions in any other place. In accordance with article 23, paragraph 1, of the Statute, the Court shall sit continuously, except for judicial vacations, the dates and duration of which shall be fixed by the Court.

The competence of the International Court of Justice is defined in Chapter II (Articles 34-38), as well as in Chapter IV (Articles 65-68) of the Statute of the Court. These chapters of the Statute establish the limits of the competence of the International Court of Justice.

The jurisdiction of the Court extends only to disputes between States. The court cannot consider disputes between private individuals and the state, and even more so disputes between private individuals. But disputes between states can only be considered with the consent of all parties. Thus, the competence of the Court is not obligatory for the state, but optional.

The optional nature of the submission of disputes by states to the resolution of the court is manifested, in particular, in the fact that, according to paragraph 1 of Article 36 of the Statute of the International Court of Justice, "the jurisdiction of the Court includes all cases that will be submitted to it by the parties.". States parties to the Statute may, however, recognize for themselves the jurisdiction of the Court as binding in certain categories of cases.

It is generally accepted that the claimant State must substantiate the competence of the Court to consider the dispute on the merits. Moreover, it is on this state that the duty is assigned to prove the existence of the dispute and its legal nature. Violation of this provision renders the claim without merit and thus renders it impossible to exercise the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice.

Available a large number of treaties and conventions under which States have undertaken to accept the jurisdiction of the Court in the future. These include: bilateral treaties relating to all or some categories of disputes that may arise between two states, multilateral conventions relating to one or more categories of disputes, etc. (Article 36, paragraph 1, and Article 37 of the Statute).

The States Parties to the Statute may also assume very broad obligations under article 36, paragraph 2. They may at any time declare that they recognize, in respect of every State that has accepted such obligations, the jurisdiction of the Court as compulsory in all legal disputes concerning:

1) interpretation of contracts;

2) any issue of international law;

3) the existence of a fact which, if established, constitutes a breach of an international obligation;

4) the nature and amount of compensation due for violation of an international obligation.

In practice, the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice is somewhat broader. The court, with certain restrictions, can exercise indirect control over the legality of decisions of international organizations, act as an appellate instance and issue opinions on the review of decisions of international administrative tribunals. There are quite a lot of cases when the Court exercises these powers.

An example is the decision of 12 November 1991 in the case of the award of 31 July 1989 (Guinea-Bissau v. Senegal), by which it dismissed the claimant's claim that the award was invalid and not binding on the litigants.

An important role in the settlement of international disputes belongs to the Court of Justice of the European Union. It is competent to regulate interstate disputes, annul the effect of legislative acts and decisions taken by other main EU bodies, and also oblige EU member states to fulfill their obligations. The Court of Justice may also interpret EU law.

The principal feature of the EU Court of Justice is that all subjects of EU law, namely EU bodies, EU member states, their legal entities and individuals, national judicial authorities, can act as plaintiffs in it.

The court consists of 13 judges and 6 advocates general, elected for six years. Litigation consists of written and oral stages. Cases are discussed in closed sessions. Decisions are announced at open meetings and acquire binding force for the parties from the moment they are made.

European Court of Justice human rights is the main judicial body of the Council of Europe. It is authorized to consider disputes between the parties to the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms of November 4, 1950 regarding the interpretation and application of the provisions of the Convention and its Protocols. The compulsory jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice also extends to the right of the Court to consider individual petitions alleging violations of human rights.

However, individuals and non-governmental organizations do not have direct access to the European Court. Petitions are preliminarily considered by the European Commission on Human Rights, which decides whether these petitions should be accepted for consideration by the European Court or not.

The decisions of the European Court of Justice are binding on the state or states against which these decisions are directed.

An ill-defined mechanism for the peaceful resolution of disputes within the CIS is contained in the CIS Charter, adopted in Minsk on January 22, 1993. It has a special section entitled “Conflict Prevention and Dispute Resolution”, as well as Art. 32 "Economic Court". Their provisions apply to the following categories of conflict situations and disputes:

Conflicts on an inter-ethnic and inter-confessional basis, which may lead to a violation of human rights;

Disputes between Member States;

Disputes the continuation of which would threaten the maintenance of peace or security in the Commonwealth.

The first category of disputes is subject to settlement through negotiations or agreement on an appropriate alternative dispute resolution procedure (art. 17). Regarding the second category of disputes, the Council of Heads of State is empowered at any stage of the dispute to recommend to the parties the proper procedure or methods for its settlement (Article 18).

Although various international arbitration bodies, as a way of peacefully resolving disputes between states, are not international judicial bodies, however, they can be considered together with the latter as bodies for the application of international judicial procedure, the result of which is the issuance of legally motivated final decisions that have binding force.

International arbitration is an arbitral tribunal for the consideration of disputes in which states and international organizations are parties. The composition and procedure for its activities is determined by the agreement of the parties, called a compromise. There are also such ways of submitting a case to international arbitration as an arbitration clause in a contract and binding arbitration, i.e. general arbitration agreements between the parties.

Arbitration courts considering disputes in the field of trade and other economic relations arising between organizations and firms of different states should be distinguished from arbitration courts that can consider disputes between states as subjects of international law.

In international practice, two types of arbitration courts are known: the so-called isolated and permanent ones. An isolated arbitration court is created by the parties specifically to consider this particular dispute. The parties themselves determine the procedure for establishing an arbitration court and the rules for considering a case in it. After the decision on the case, such a court ceases to exist. It also received the name of the arbitration court adhoc (literally - “for this”, i.e. for the consideration of this case).

An arbitral tribunal is formed from members appointed by the parties and an umpire agreed by them. Multilateral treaties provide for the possibility of appointing an umpire by an international official, such as the UN Secretary General. In most cases, arbitration consists of three arbitrators. But cases of resolving disputes and one arbitrator are known.

The parties are represented in arbitration by their agents. To refer a dispute to arbitration, a so-called arbitration, or arbitration, agreement is required. This is an agreement by the parties that disputes that have already arisen or will arise in the future between the parties will be referred by them to arbitration.

In the main multilateral conventions on arbitration issues developed under the auspices of the UN - the New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards of 1958 and the European Convention on Foreign Commercial Arbitration of 1961 (Chapter 2) - an arbitration agreement is understood as a clause in written agreement, as well as a separate agreement signed by the parties or contained in the exchange of letters, telegrams, etc.

These conventions establish, irrespective of the law applicable to the underlying contract, specific conflict of law rules for determining the validity of an arbitration agreement.

A positive attitude towards arbitration as one of the appropriate means of resolving disputes was expressed in the Final Act of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe. The states participating in the meeting recommended that "organizations, enterprises and firms of their countries, in appropriate cases, provide for an arbitration clause in commercial transactions and industrial cooperation contracts or special agreements."

They also suggested that "arbitration provisions should provide for the conduct of arbitration on the basis of mutually acceptable rules and allow arbitration to be conducted in a third country, subject to existing intergovernmental and other agreements in this area."

According to international law, each state and other subjects of international law are obliged to resolve disputes among themselves by peaceful means in such a way as not to endanger international peace, security and justice. The principle of peaceful settlement of international disputes is an imperative principle of international law. It is enshrined in paragraph 3 of Art. 2 of the UN Charter, in the Declaration on Principles of International Law Concerning Friendly Relations and Cooperation among States in accordance with the UN Charter, 1970, the Final Act of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe in 1975, and in many other universal, regional and bilateral treaties .

The problem of using peaceful means of resolving international disputes was discussed at the Hague Peace Conferences of 1899 and 1907. The 1907 conference approved the Convention for the Peaceful Settlement of International Disputes. Article 1 of this Convention states: With a view to preventing, as far as possible, the recourse to force in relations between States, the Contracting Powers agree to make every effort to secure a peaceful solution of international disagreements. The Convention establishes a number of effective means for the peaceful resolution of disputes, including good offices and mediation, international commissions of inquiry, international arbitration courts, etc.

However, the Hague Peace Conferences did not raise the question of the prohibition of war as a means of settling disputes. Only the Paris Treaty on the Renunciation of War as a Weapon national policy 1928 denounced the resort to war to settle international disputes. The States Parties to the Treaty recognize that the settlement or resolution of all disputes or conflicts that may arise between them, of whatever nature or whatever origin they may be, must "always be sought only in peaceful means".

Under the Charter of the League of Nations, recourse to peaceful means of settling disputes "capable of causing a rupture" was mandatory, but the use of peaceful means did not preclude the recourse to force.

Article 12 of the Charter of the League of Nations provided that the members of the League would submit disputes arising between them, "which could lead to a break," to arbitration, either for judicial decision, or for consideration by the Council of the League. "They also agree," it was said further, "that they must in no case resort to war before the expiration of a period of three months after the decision of the arbitrators, or the judgment, or the report of the Council."

If a dispute between members of the League "which could lead to a break" was not submitted to arbitration or litigation, it could be submitted to the League for consideration at the request of one of the disputing parties. If, in considering a dispute, the Council does not come to a unanimous decision, or if the dispute is considered by the Assembly of the League and the relevant report is not approved by all the members of the League represented in the Council, and by a majority of the other members of the League (except in each case the representatives of the parties involved in the dispute), the members The leagues were free "to do as they see fit for the preservation of law and justice" 29 .

In this case, therefore, peaceful means directly turned into the first stage of the settlement of the dispute.

If the Council adopted the report unanimously, or the Assembly adopted the report with the approval of the representatives of all the members of the League represented in the Council, and of the majority of the other members of the League (except in each case the representatives of the parties to the dispute), the members of the League were obliged "not to resort to war against any Party which is consistent with the conclusions of the report" (Article 15 of the Charter of the League of Nations). The last provision in this case also legally and actually opened up the possibility of resorting to force and turning the peaceful procedure for resolving disputes only into the first stage of their settlement.

With regard to certain disputes, the Charter of the League of Nations seemed to provide for the principle of their obligatory peaceful settlement, but again did not carry this obligation to the end. In Art. Article 13 of the Covenant of the League of Nations states: "Disputes which relate to the interpretation of any treaty, to any question of international law, to the existence of any fact which, if established, would amount to a breach of international obligation, or to the amount and manner of reparation to be followed for such breach". However, the same article opened the way to non-peaceful ways to resolve disputes. It stated that the members of the League would not resort to war against a state in accordance with an arbitration or judicial decision, and that in case of non-compliance with the decision, the Council of the League proposed measures that should ensure its implementation. Consequently, here again the possibility of resorting to war is referred to in case of non-compliance with an arbitral or judicial decision, and the procedure for considering the issue by the Council of the League, as already indicated, did not exclude this.

Thus, the complex provisions of the Charter of the League of Nations on the settlement of disputes did not cover all possible disagreements between states and did not exclude non-peaceful methods of resolving disputes to which they extended.

Thus, the principle of peaceful settlement of international disputes was formed before the Second World War and was enshrined in a number of international treaties. However, later it was concretized and developed in the UN Charter (paragraph 2 of Article 2, Articles 33-38 of the UN Charter). The only legitimate way to resolve disputes and disagreements between states is declared to be peaceful means, a list of which is given in the UN Charter

International disputes are resolved on the basis of the sovereign equality of states and subject to the principle of free choice of means in accordance with the obligations under the UN Charter and the principles of justice and international law. The application of any procedure for the settlement of a dispute, or consent to such a procedure freely agreed between States in relation to existing or future disputes to which they are parties, should not be considered inconsistent with the principle of the sovereign equality of States.

States that are parties to a dispute must continue to comply in their mutual relations with their obligations under the basic principles of international law relating to the sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity of States, as well as other generally recognized principles and norms of modern international law.

The UN Charter divides disputes into two categories: a) especially dangerous, the continuation of which may threaten the maintenance of international peace and security (Article 34); b) any other disputes (clause 1 of article 33, clause 1 of article 35, clause 1 of article 36). Along with the term "disputes", the UN Charter uses the concept of "situation" (Article 34, paragraph 1 of Article 33). The situation also "may lead to international friction" or cause a "controversy".

The UN Charter does not contain criteria for dividing disputes and situations into these two categories, leaving the decision on this issue to the Security Council. In accordance with Art. 34 of the UN Charter "The Security Council is empowered to investigate any dispute or any situation which may give rise to international friction or give rise to a dispute, to determine whether the continuation of this dispute or situation may threaten the maintenance of international peace and security."

Thus, the division of international conflicts into "disputes" and "situations" is conditional and relative. The situation is a broader concept than an argument. Both disputes and situations can threaten peace and security, and because of this, their consideration falls within the competence of the Security Council, the General Assembly and other UN bodies.

The UN Charter, as well as other international treaties, do not contain a clear distinction between political and legal disputes. According to paragraph 3 of Art. 36 of the UN Charter, disputes of a legal nature must, as a general rule, be referred by the parties to the International Court of Justice. The Statute of the Court contains a list of legal disputes in which the jurisdiction of the Court is mandatory. This article deals with disputes concerning the interpretation of a treaty; any question of international law; the existence of a fact which, if established, would constitute a breach of an international obligation; nature and amount of compensation due for violation of international obligations, of course, this list of legal disputes is not exhaustive.

Political disputes, as the most important and complex (for example, over territorial issues, delimitation of borders), are resolved by political means.

The list of types of peaceful means provided for in the UN Charter is not exhaustive, and some of them are declarative and recommendatory. In this regard, the USSR, in its Memorandum on Enhancing the Role of International Law, presented to the 44th session of the UN General Assembly on September 29, 1989, proposed to develop and adopt a universal and comprehensive international legal act that would be an effective tool for strengthening the international legal order.

In this treaty document, the principle of resolving all disputes between states only by peaceful means, enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations, could be further developed and specified.

Such a document - the General Act for the Peaceful Settlement of Disputes - could contain the following obligations of states:

the obligation to take all measures in their power to prevent the outbreak of interstate conflicts, guided by the generally recognized principles and norms of international law;

the obligation of the states, if they still have disputes, conflicts with other states, to immediately enter into direct negotiations with them for the peaceful and as soon as possible and complete settlement of such differences in the spirit of mutual understanding and mutual compliance, resorting, in appropriate cases, to holding preliminary consultations and creating joint working arrangements;

the obligation of states, in conditions where it becomes obvious that the path of direct negotiations is difficult or there is no process in such negotiations and the continuation of the dispute may threaten the maintenance of international peace and security, to inform the Security Council, the General Assembly or the Secretary-General of the United Nations in an appropriate way, depending on the nature and substance of the differences , as well as other relevant universal or regional international organizations;

the obligation of States, pending the full resolution of disputes, to make every effort to reach an interim agreement during this period not to jeopardize or prevent the achievement of a final agreement and not to resort at all to any action capable of aggravating or widening the dispute;

obligation of States to favorably consider, as appropriate, the use of third-party means of pacific dispute resolution, such as good offices to facilitate the organization and success of direct negotiations, or mediation to help find compromise ways to resolve differences, while noting the very positive experience of good offices and mediation by the UN Secretary-General and non-disputing states;

the obligation of States to resort to conciliation as one of the means of resolving disputes. This section could provide for, in accordance with established practice, the formation, by agreement of the parties, of a conciliation commission from among the citizens of the disputing parties and the invitation, by common consent, of citizens of third countries, including from among the mediators included in the list of the UN Secretary General. A detailed procedure for organizing the work of conciliation commissions could be set out in an annex to the main document;

the obligation of states to make full use of the UN's capabilities to establish the facts of disputes and conflicts, including through the use of the capabilities of the Security Council, the General Assembly and the UN Secretary General;

an obligation providing that in the event that direct negotiations or good offices, mediation, conciliation did not lead within a reasonable time to an amicable settlement of the dispute, the disputing states must resort to procedures that entail binding decisions, i.e. submit the dispute at the request of any of the disputing parties to arbitration or litigation. In this regard, of course, the role of the main judicial body of the UN - the International Court of Justice - is growing.

The 1970 Declaration on the Principles of International Law indicates that international disputes are resolved on the basis of the sovereign equality of states and in accordance with the principle of free choice of means of peaceful settlement of disputes. The application of, or consent to, a dispute settlement procedure should not be considered inconsistent with the principle of sovereign equality.

According to Art. 33 of the Charter of the United Nations, states must seek the speedy and fair resolution of their international disputes through negotiation, inquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, litigation, recourse to regional bodies or agreements, or other peaceful means of their choice. In seeking such a settlement, the parties must agree on such peaceful means as are appropriate to the circumstances and nature of the dispute.

In their development, peaceful means of resolving disputes do not remain unchanged. They develop depending on the historical epoch and the peculiarities of the correlation of forces in the international arena. Some of the peaceful ways of resolving conflicts have been known since ancient times (good offices, mediation, etc.), while others were developed only in the 19th century. (conciliation procedure, arbitration), others arose during the second half of the 20th century. (international courts, conciliation commissions, dispute resolution with the help of international organizations). international negotiations. They are the most dynamic and effective means of dispute resolution. It is no coincidence that Art. 33 of the UN Charter, negotiations are named among the main means of settling international disputes and conflicts. They allow you to take a variety of options for resolving contentious issues. The recognition by states and intergovernmental organizations of this principle is reflected in many treaties and constituent acts of organizations. So, according to Art. 42 of the Vienna Convention on the Succession of States in Respect of State Property, Public Archives and Public Debts of 1983, in the event of a dispute between two or more parties to the Convention regarding its interpretation or application, they will, at the request of any of them, seek to resolve it through consultations and negotiations. In accordance with Art. 15 of the 1991 Treaty of Succession to the External Public Debt and Assets of the USSR, all disputes between two or more parties on the implementation and interpretation of the Treaty will be resolved through negotiations on the basis of filing an appropriate written claim.

During negotiations, states or international organizations can take a wide variety of options for resolving contentious issues. Negotiations are not only a means of settling an international dispute, but also serve as an auxiliary means. Almost all methods of resolving interstate conflicts always begin with direct negotiations on the use of these methods and very often end with such negotiations.

Negotiations can be bilateral and multilateral. The latter, as a rule, is given the form of an international conference.

International law does not establish a uniform procedure for negotiating. As practice shows, normal negotiations go through the following main stages: the speech of a state or a group of states (for example, the EU) or other subjects of international law with the initiative to conduct negotiations; reaching an agreement between the disputing parties on negotiations (time, place, level, etc.); development of a negotiation procedure; actual negotiations; adoption of an act agreed during the negotiations.

Negotiations differ: on the subject of the dispute - negotiations on political, economic, social and other issues; by the number of participants - bilateral and multilateral; on the status of participating officials - negotiations at the highest level (heads of state, heads of government), at the level of foreign ministers, ambassadors or specially authorized officials.

Consultations. This method of peaceful settlement of disputes developed at the beginning of the 20th century. The subject of consultations are usually matters of vital importance to states or international organizations. In international practice, two types of consultations are used: optional and mandatory. Optional are consultations, which the parties resort to by mutual agreement. The use of mandatory consultations is provided for in bilateral and multilateral international treaties. For example, Art. XXII of the General Agreement on Trade in Services of 1994 states that each Member shall favorably treat and make appropriate arrangements for consultation in connection with a representation which may be made by any other Member of the WTO on any matter affecting the operation of this Agreement. In such consultations, the Dispute Settlement Agreement (DRA) shall apply. The Council for Trade in Services or the Dispute Settlement Body may, at the request of a Member of the WTO, consult with any Member of the WTO or Members of the WTO in respect of any matter that cannot be satisfactorily resolved by consensus. In Art. 283 of the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea stipulates that States parties must exchange views without delay when the dispute settlement procedure has been terminated without reaching a settlement, or when the dispute has been settled and the circumstances require consultations as to the manner in which the settlement should be carried out. According to Art. IX of the 1967 Outer Space Treaty, if any State Party to the Treaty has reason to believe that an activity or experiment planned by that State Party or citizens of that State Party to the Treaty in outer space, including the Moon and other celestial bodies, will create potentially harmful interference with the activities of other States Parties to the Treaty in the peaceful exploration and use of outer space (including the Moon and other celestial bodies), it must, before embarking on such activity or experiment.

International Commissions of Inquiry. The competence and procedure for the creation of such commissions are determined by the UN Charter and Art. 9 - 35 of the Convention of 1907 Commissions are established on the basis of a special agreement between the disputing parties. The main task of the commissions is to facilitate the resolution of disputes by clarifying the question of fact through an impartial and conscientious investigation. For example, in 1904-1905. A commission of inquiry was working in connection with the incident at Dogger Bank, when Admiral Rozhdestvensky's squadron, passing by the coast of England, suspecting the presence of Japanese destroyers, opened fire on British fishing vessels. As a result of the conclusions of the commission of inquiry, Russia recognized the obligation to compensate for the damages caused and paid England 1,625,000 francs.

The parties have the right to appoint special agents at the commission with the task of representing them and serving as intermediaries between them and the commission. The parties may furthermore appoint advisers or lawyers appointed by them to represent and support their interests before the commission. Within the prescribed time limits, each party to the dispute shall communicate to the commission and to the other party the statement of facts and, in particular, the acts, papers and documents, as well as the list of witnesses and experts whom it wishes to hear. The interrogation of witnesses is directed by the chairman of the commission. Members of the commission have the right to ask each witness questions relating to the substance of the dispute. The meetings of the commission take place behind closed doors and are secret. Any decision of the commission is taken by a majority vote. The final report of the commission on the merits of the dispute considered is limited to establishing the facts and does not have the character of an arbitration award. The parties remain completely free to use these factual findings as they see fit.

Since 1937, the Permanent Court of Arbitration has acted as an international conciliation commission. This procedure is carried out in accordance with the 1996 Optional Rules.

Reconciliation commissions. So far, few international treaties provide for the creation of a conciliation commission to consider a dispute or conflict. The most detailed procedure for the formation and activities of such commissions, set out in Art. 85 of the Vienna Convention on the Representation of States in Their Relations with International Organizations of a Universal Character of 1975. In general terms, it boils down to the following.

If the dispute has not been resolved as a result of the consultations, then any state participating in the consultations may refer the dispute to the conciliation commission and notify the organization in which such state is represented (hereinafter referred to as the Organization) and other states participating in the consultations. Each conciliation commission consists of three members: two members appointed by each of the parties to the dispute, and a chairman. Each State Party to the Convention shall designate in advance a person called to act as a member of such a commission. It announces this assignment. The latter maintains a list of appointees. If the state does not do so in advance, it may make such an appointment during the conciliation procedure, up to the moment when the commission begins to draw up a report on the results of its activities.

The chairman of the commission is elected by the other two members. If no agreement has been reached between the other two members within one month after the notification has been given, or if one of the parties to the dispute has not exercised its right to appoint one of the members of the commission, the chairman shall, at the request of one of the parties to the dispute, be appointed by the chief officer of the Organization. This appointment must be made within one month of such request. The chief officer of the Organization shall appoint as chairman a qualified lawyer who must be neither an employee of the Organization nor a national of the State party to the dispute.

The Commission establishes its own rules of procedure and makes its decisions and recommendations by majority vote. It may recommend to the Organization, if the latter is authorized to do so by the UN, that it seek an advisory opinion from the International Court of Justice on the application or interpretation of the 1975 Convention.

If the commission is unable to reach an agreement between the parties to the dispute on the resolution of the dispute within two months from the appointment of the chairman, it shall prepare as soon as possible a report on its work and send it to the parties to the dispute. The report shall contain the conclusions of the commission on facts and points of law, as well as the recommendations it has made to the parties to the dispute in order to facilitate the resolution of the dispute. The recommendations of the commission are not binding on the parties to the dispute until all parties to the dispute accept them. However, any party to a dispute has the right to declare unilaterally that it will comply with the recommendations of the report that apply to it.

Unlike commissions of inquiry, which are concerned only with establishing the facts that are the subject of an international dispute, conciliation commissions interpret the facts and make recommendations in order to facilitate the resolution of the dispute.

Good offices and mediation. According to Art. 2 of the 1907 Convention, in the event of a serious disagreement between them, they are obliged to resort to the good offices or mediation of one or more friendly countries. The right to offer good offices or mediation belongs to states not involved in the dispute.

The task of the mediator is "to reconcile opposing claims and to calm the feeling of hostility, if it arose between the states in dispute" (Article 4 of the 1907 Convention), the duties of the mediator cease from the moment when one of the disputing parties or the mediator himself certifies that the proposed means of reconciliation were not accepted. Good offices and mediation are optional. They have the sole value of advice.

In the event of a dispute between states that poses a danger to peace and international security, the disputing states elect a state, which it instructs to contact the state chosen by another state in order to prevent the violation of peaceful relations. The conciliation period may not exceed thirty days. During this period, the disputing states terminate all direct relations between themselves on the subject of the dispute. The mediating States must make every effort to resolve the dispute.

Good offices or mediation can be provided by states (including collectively) or international organizations. A state or an international organization providing good offices does not itself participate in the course of negotiations, unless the disputing parties themselves ask for it. With mediation, a third party has the right to participate in the negotiation process and put forward oral or written proposals on the merits of the dispute.

International arbitration court. According to the largest international lawyer F.F. Martens, arbitration is "the most reasonable way of amicably resolving international conflicts" 30 . This institution of peaceful dispute resolution arose in ancient times. The international arbitrators were the recuperatores. In the Middle Ages, they were popes and the German emperor. In the 19th century More than 60 international arbitration courts have been established. According to Art. 38 of the Convention on the Peaceful Settlement of International Disputes of 1907, on issues of a legal nature (properties) and mainly on issues of interpretation or application of international treaties, the arbitration court is recognized by states as the most effective and at the same time the fairest means of resolving disputes not settled diplomatically. The Convention recommends that member states apply, if necessary, to an arbitration court. One of these bodies is the Permanent Court of Arbitration, established in 1899 (hereinafter referred to as the Chamber). It is located in The Hague and is competent for all cases of arbitration proceedings. Each State party to the 1907 Convention shall appoint no more than four persons who are known for their knowledge of matters of international law, who would enjoy the fullest personal respect and would be willing to accept the duties of an arbitrator. Members of the Chamber are appointed for a six-year term. Their powers may be renewed. The appointed persons are entered as members of the Chamber in a special list, which is communicated to all States parties to the 1907 Convention.

If the States wish to apply to the Chamber for a solution of a disagreement which has arisen between them, the choice of arbitrators called upon to form an appropriate tribunal for the resolution of this dispute shall be made from the general list of the members of the Chamber. The Chamber is competent to consider any dispute between States Parties to the 1907 Convention. The Chamber's jurisdiction may be extended to disputes between States Parties and non-Parties to the 1907 Convention.

After the states reach agreement on the establishment of an arbitration court, they report to the International Bureau, which is a kind of office of the Chamber, their decision to apply to the Chamber, the text of their arbitration record and the names of the judges. Members of the court, in the performance of their duties and outside their own country, enjoy diplomatic privileges.

An appeal to the Chamber cannot take place if, in the opinion of the state party to the dispute, such a dispute does not fall into the category of those disputes that are subject to compulsory arbitration.

Court deliberations take place behind closed doors and are secret. Any decision is made by majority vote and is final.

The consideration of disputes in the Chamber is carried out in accordance with the Optional Rules for the Consideration of Arbitration Disputes between Two States 1992, the Rules for the Consideration of Arbitration Disputes between Two Parties, One of which is a State 1993, the Rules for the Consideration of Disputes between States and International Organizations 1996 and optional Rules for Arbitration of Disputes between International Organizations and Legal Persons, 1996

From 1902 to 1996, the Chamber considered more than 30 disputes between states, for example, disputes between Norway and Sweden about maritime boundaries (1908 - 1909), between the USA and Great Britain - about fishing in the Atlantic Ocean (1909 - 1910) and on the use of Heathrow International Airport (1989 - 1992). As an international conciliation commission, the Chamber has considered three disputes.

international judiciary. The universal judicial body is the International Court of Justice. According to the Manila Declaration on the Peaceful Settlement of International Disputes, approved by the XXXVII UN General Assembly on November 15, 1982, states are fully aware of the role of the International Court of Justice, which is the main judicial body of the UN. States should bear in mind that disputes of a legal nature are, as a general rule, referred in accordance with the provisions of the Court's statute. It is desirable that States consider including in treaties, where appropriate, provisions providing for the submission to the International Court of Justice of disputes that may arise in the interpretation or application of such treaties. States should consider identifying cases for which the International Court of Justice can be used.

The organs of the United Nations and its specialized agencies should consider whether it is appropriate to use the opportunity to seek advisory opinions from the International Court of Justice on legal questions arising within their sphere of activity, provided that they are duly authorized to do so.

The International Court of Justice was established by the UN Charter in 1945 as the main judicial body of the United Nations. All UN member states, as well as Switzerland and Nauru, are parties to the Statute of the International Court of Justice. The Court is composed of a panel of independent judges, chosen, regardless of their nationality, from among persons of high moral character, who meet the qualifications of their countries for appointment to the highest judicial office, or who are jurists of recognized authority in the field of international law.

The Court consists of fifteen members, and it cannot include two citizens of the same state.

The members of the Court are elected by the General Assembly and the Security Council from among persons listed on the proposal of the national groups of the Permanent Court of Arbitration. As regards UN member states not represented in the House, candidates are nominated by national groups designated for this purpose by their governments, subject to the conditions established for members of the House by Art. 44 of the Hague Convention on the Peaceful Settlement of International Disputes of 1907. The conditions under which a state party to the Statute of the International Court of Justice, but not a member of the UN, may submit a dispute to the Court are determined by the UN General Assembly on the recommendation of the Security Council. In any case, no group may nominate more than four candidates, and no more than two candidates may be of the nationality of the State nominated by the group. The number of candidates nominated by a group may in no case exceed more than twice the number of seats to be filled. According to Art. 6 of the Statute of the International Court of Justice, each group, before nominating candidates, seeks the opinion of the highest judicial institutions, law faculties, law schools educational institutions and academies of their country, as well as national branches of international academies engaged in the study of law.

The Secretary-General of the United Nations shall compile, in alphabetical order, a list of all persons whose candidatures have been put forward for judicial office. Such a list is submitted to the General Assembly and the UN Security Council. The latter proceed to the election of members of the Court independently of each other. Candidates who receive an absolute majority of votes in both the General Assembly and the Security Council are considered elected.

The members of the Court are elected for nine years and may be re-elected, provided, however, that the terms of office of five judges of the first composition of the Court expire after three years, and the term of office of another five judges after six years. Members of the Court may not perform any political or administrative duties and may not devote themselves to any other occupation of a professional nature.

A member of the Court may not be removed from office unless, in the unanimous opinion of the other members, he no longer satisfies the requirements. The Registrar of the Court shall notify the UN Secretary General of this. Upon receipt of this notification, the position of a judge is considered vacant.

Members of the Court, in the performance of their judicial duties, shall enjoy diplomatic privileges and immunities.

In order to expedite the resolution of cases, the Court annually establishes a chamber of five judges, which, at the request of the parties, may consider and decide cases by summary procedure. Two additional judges are assigned to replace judges who recognize it is impossible for them to take part in the sessions.

Parties in cases before the Court are only states. Its jurisdiction includes all cases that will be referred to it by the parties, and all matters specifically provided for by the UN Charter or existing treaties and conventions.

The States Parties to the Statute of the International Court of Justice may at any time declare that they recognize, without special agreement, ipso facto, in respect of any other State which has accepted the same undertaking, the jurisdiction of the Court as compulsory in all legal disputes concerning: (a) the interpretation of a treaty; b) any question of international law; c) the existence of a fact that would constitute a breach of an international obligation; d) the nature and amount of compensation due for violation of international obligations.

The Court decides disputes submitted to it on the basis of international law and in doing so applies: a) international conventions, both general and special, establishing rules expressly recognized by the disputed states; b) international custom as evidence of a general practice recognized as a legal norm; c) general principles of law recognized by civilized nations; d) the judgments and doctrines of the most qualified publicists of the various nations as an aid to the determination of legal norms. However, these conditions do not limit the right of the Court to decide the case ex aequo et bono (in fairness and goodness), if the parties so agree.

Cases are brought before the Court, as the case may be, either by notification of a special agreement or by a written application addressed to the Registrar of the Court. In both cases, the subject of the dispute and the parties must be indicated. The Secretary immediately communicates the application to all interested persons. The Court has the power to take any provisional measures that must be taken to ensure the rights of each of the parties. Pending a final decision, the message on the proposed measures is immediately brought to the attention of the parties and the UN Security Council.

Litigation consists of two parts: written and oral proceedings. Written proceedings consist of communication to the Court and the parties of memorandums, counter-memorials and responses to them, as well as all papers and documents confirming them. Oral proceedings consist in the hearing by the Court of witnesses, experts, representatives of attorneys and lawyers. The hearing is held in public. However, the parties may request a closed hearing, If one of the parties fails to appear before the Court or does not present his arguments, the other party may ask the Court to decide the case in his favor. After the representatives, lawyers and attorneys have finished explaining the case, the Court retires to discuss the decision. Any decision on the dispute is taken by a majority vote of the judges present. The decision sets out the arguments on which it is based. Any judge has the right to present his dissenting opinion. The decision of the Court is final and not subject to appeal. A request for a review of a decision may be made only on the basis of newly discovered circumstances which, by their nature, may have a decisive influence on the outcome of the case and which, at the time of the decision, were not known to either the Court or the party requesting the review. No request for review may be made after ten years have elapsed from the date of the decision.

The International Court of Justice has ruled on many serious international conflicts. In particular, on May 9, 1973, Australia and New Zealand applied to the Court with statements of claim against France. They asked the Court to rule on following questions. The atmospheric testing of nuclear weapons by France in the South Pacific is illegal. Such tests cause radioactive fallout and thus damage Australia's and New Zealand's rights under international law. Since the continuation of the tests infringes on these rights, France is obliged to stop them. France soon announced its intention not to carry out nuclear tests in the atmosphere from 1975 onwards. The Court therefore held on 20 December 1974 that the French Application rendered the Australian and New Zealand complaints without merit and no further examination was necessary.

In November 1979, Iran seized American diplomats as hostages in response to the US refusal to meet Iran's legitimate demands. The US government has filed a complaint with the International Court of Justice. In May 1980, the Court unanimously ruled that the Government of Iran should immediately end the unlawful detention of US diplomatic and consular personnel and other US citizens and release each and every one of them and hand them over to the submitting state. Iran is obliged to provide all said persons with the necessary means to leave Iranian territory, including vehicles. The Iranian government must immediately transfer to the United States the premises, property, archives and documents of the US Embassy in Tehran and its consulates in Iran.

In addition to its function in resolving an international dispute, the Court may give advisory opinions on any legal question, at the request of any institution empowered to make such requests by or under the Charter of the United Nations. Matters on which an advisory opinion of the Court is sought shall be submitted to the Court in a written statement containing an exact statement of the matter on which an opinion is required. Advisory opinions may be requested by the General Assembly, the Security Council, the Economic and Social Council, the Trusteeship Council, the Secretary General of the United Nations, as well as the specialized agencies of the United Nations and the IAEA. With the permission of the General Assembly, advisory opinions may also be requested by other autonomous bodies of the United Nations.

Advisory opinions are not binding. However, according to some international treaties, they are recognized as decisive for the parties to the dispute. For example, in accordance with Art. VIII of the Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations of 1996, in case of disagreement between the UN and the members of the Organization, an advisory opinion is requested on any legal issue raised. The opinion of the Court is recognized by the parties as decisive.

Since its inception, the Court has issued more than 30 advisory opinions. For example, on 29 July 1970, the Security Council decided to ask the International Court of Justice for an advisory opinion on the legal consequences for States of the continued presence of South Africa in Namibia, contrary to Security Council resolution 276 (1970). The Court held that, given the unlawfulness of the continued presence South Africa in Namibia, South Africa is under an obligation to immediately withdraw its administration from Namibia and thus end its occupation of that territory. All Member States of the United Nations are under an obligation to recognize the illegality of South Africa's presence in Namibia and the nullity of its acts on behalf of or against Namibia and to refrain from any act, and in particular any transaction with the Government of South Africa, implying recognition of the lawfulness of such presence and such administration or rendering them support or assistance. In December 1994, the UN General Assembly asked the International Court of Justice to give an advisory opinion on the following questions: a) was Western Sahara at the time of Spanish colonization a territory that no one owned; b) if the answer to the first question is negative, what were the legal relations between this territory and the Kingdom of Morocco and the Mauritanian Unification. The Court unanimously concluded that Western Sahara was, at the time of colonization by Spain, territory that belonged to no one. On the second question, the Court held that there was no relationship of territorial sovereignty between the Territory and, respectively, the Kingdom of Morocco and the Mauritanian Unification, although the Territory maintained certain legal relations with them.

European court human rights- the only proper judicial body of the Council of Europe, established in accordance with the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms of 1950 and including 39 people. It is the court of last instance which decides on the compliance of member countries of the Council of Europe with their obligations under the 1950 Convention. Its headquarters are in Strasbourg.

The members of the Court are elected by the Parliamentary Assembly by a majority vote from a list of persons nominated by the members of the Council of Europe. Each member state of the Council of Europe nominates three candidates, of whom at least two must be citizens of that state. Candidates must be of high moral character and meet the requirements for appointment to high judicial offices or be jurists of recognized authority.

The members of the Court are elected for a term of six years. They may be re-elected.

For each case referred to it, the Court shall form a Chamber of nine judges. Member of the Chamber ex-officio becomes a judge - a national of any state that is a party to the dispute, or if there is none, then at the choice of that state - any person who acts as a judge. The names of the remaining judges are determined by the Chairman of the Court by lot before the hearing of the case. Cases can only be submitted to the Court by member states of the Council of Europe and the European Commission of Human Rights.

The jurisdiction of the Court extends to all matters relating to the interpretation and application of the 1950 Convention. Any Member State of the Council of Europe may at any time declare that it recognizes, ipso facto and without special agreement, the compulsory jurisdiction of the Court in respect of questions relating to the interpretation and application of the 1950 Convention G.

Any party to the 1950 Convention may refer to the Court any alleged violation of the provisions of the Convention and its protocols by the other party (art. 33).

The Court can accept the case for consideration only after the European Commission of Human Rights recognizes the futility of efforts to resolve the dispute amicably. The decision of the Court is final. The member states of the Council of Europe undertake to comply with the judgments of the Court in any case to which they are parties. The decision of the Court is sent to the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe, which supervises its implementation.

During the period of activity, the Court considered a huge number of cases. They, in particular, concerned the physical integrity and inviolability of the person; prohibition of forced labor; the right to freedom and security of the person; detention in the absence of a court decision; divorce ban; the right to life; the right to freedom and security of the person; excessive length of proceedings before the courts, etc.

In addition to these judicial bodies, there are other courts. For example, the Court of Justice of the European Union enforces the rule of law in the interpretation and application of the provisions of the European treaties of the EU, including the founding treaty of the EU itself. Its headquarters is in Luxembourg. The functions of the Court are not limited to law enforcement activities. Its decisions are sources of EU law. Besides. The EU Court of Justice issues advisory opinions.

We also note the existence of the Benelux Court (the customs and economic union of Belgium, the Netherlands and Luxembourg), the Court of the Organization of Central American States, the Common Market Tribunal of the East African Community. However, the practice of these international judicial institutions is very limited.

Dispute resolution procedure at the United Nations. According to the UN Charter, all states resolve their international disputes by peaceful means in such a way as not to endanger international peace, security and justice. To this end, the UN Charter establishes the basic means and the necessary framework for the peaceful settlement of international disputes, the continuation of which could threaten the maintenance of international peace and security.

Since its inception, the United Nations has played a leading role in the international legal system for the peaceful resolution of international disputes and the maintenance of international peace and security. The peaceful resolution of disputes in the UN is carried out mainly by four main bodies: the General Assembly, the Security Council, the International Court of Justice and the Secretariat.

The UN Charter assigns to the General Assembly an important role in the field of peaceful settlement of disputes, and it generally effectively performs its functions in this area. The General Assembly may discuss any situation, regardless of its origin, which, in the opinion of the Assembly, may violate the general welfare or friendly relations among nations, and may recommend measures for its peaceful settlement (Article 12 of the Charter). Member States of the United Nations, when they deem it appropriate, may bring to the attention of the General Assembly any dispute or situation which may give rise to international friction or give rise to a dispute. The General Assembly may be a forum for consultation with a view to facilitating the speedy resolution of a dispute, or to establish appropriate subsidiary bodies.

The central role in the system of bodies dealing with the problems of peaceful settlement of disputes belongs to Security Council. According to Art. 33(2) The Security Council, when it considers it necessary, shall require the parties to resolve their dispute by the means listed in the UN Charter (negotiation, inquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, litigation, recourse to regional bodies or agreements, etc.). d.). It is empowered to investigate any dispute or any situation which may give rise to international friction or give rise to a dispute, to determine whether the continuation of that dispute or situation may endanger the maintenance of international peace and security. Moreover, the Security Council is empowered at any stage of a dispute the continuation of which might threaten the maintenance of international peace and security, or in a situation of a similar nature, to recommend an appropriate procedure or methods of settlement. In doing so, it shall take into account any procedure for dispute resolution already chosen by the parties. In advising on the choice of procedure or method for settling a dispute, the Security Council also takes into account that disputes of a legal nature should, as a general rule, be referred by the parties to the International Court of Justice in accordance with the provisions of the Statute of the Court.

If the parties to the dispute do not resolve it with the help of those specified in paragraph 1 of Art. 33 of the UN Charter funds, they pass it on to the Security Council. In the event that the Security Council finds that the continuation of the dispute could in fact threaten the maintenance of international peace and security, it shall either recommend to the parties that appropriate procedure or methods be resorted to for the settlement of such dispute, or recommend such terms and conditions for the settlement of the dispute as it may deem appropriate.

The UN General Assembly at its XXXVII session on November 15, 1982 approved the Manila Declaration on the Peaceful Settlement of International Disputes. It recognizes the need to increase the effectiveness of the UN in the peaceful resolution of international disputes and the maintenance of international peace and security in accordance with the principles of justice and international law.

According to this declaration, the Member States of the United Nations should strengthen the central role of the Security Council so that it can fully and effectively fulfill its responsibilities under the UN Charter in the field of settling disputes or any situation, the continuation of which could threaten the maintenance of international peace and security. To this end, States should:

a) be fully aware of their obligation to refer to the Security Council such a dispute to which they are parties, if they have not resolved it by means of the means referred to in Art. 33 of the Charter;

b) to use more widely the possibility of bringing to the attention of the Security Council any dispute or any situation which may lead to international friction or give rise to a dispute;

c) to encourage the Security Council to use more widely the possibilities provided for by the Charter for the purpose of considering disputes or situations the continuation of which could threaten the maintenance of international peace and security;

d) consider making greater use of the powers of the Security Council to investigate the facts in accordance with the Charter;

e) to encourage the Security Council, as a means of promoting the pacific settlement of disputes, to make greater use of the subsidiary bodies established by it in the exercise of its functions under the UN Charter;

f) take into account that the Security Council is empowered at any stage of a dispute of the nature specified in Art. 33 of the Articles of Association, or situations of a similar nature, to recommend an appropriate procedure or methods of settlement;

g) Encourage the Security Council to act without delay in accordance with its functions and powers, especially in cases where international disputes escalate into armed conflicts.

international Court is the main judicial organ of the United Nations. The Manila Declaration recommends to states;

(a) Consider including in treaties, where appropriate, provisions providing for the referral to the International Court of Justice of disputes that may arise in the interpretation or application of such treaties;

b) to explore the possibility, in the free exercise of its sovereignty, of recognizing the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice as mandatory in accordance with Art. 36 of his Statutes;

c) consider the possibility of identifying cases for which the International Court of Justice can be used.

An important role in the settlement of disputes and conflict situations belongs to UN Secretary General. According to Art. 99 of the UN Charter, he has the right to bring to the attention of the Security Council any matter which, in his opinion, may threaten the maintenance of international peace and security. The Secretary-General, on behalf of the Security Council or the General Assembly, exercises mediation powers or provides good offices to States parties to a dispute. As a rule, he signs agreements with states to resolve the conflict. For example, in March 1998, UN Secretary General Kofi Annan signed an agreement between the UN and the Government of Iraq on the admission of international UN observers to inspect military installations in order to detect weapons of mass destruction in them. This action helped eliminate a possible armed conflict between Iraq and the United States.

The Declaration on the Prevention and Elimination of Disputes and Situations that May Threaten International Peace and Security, and on the Role of the United Nations in this Field, approved by the UN General Assembly on December 5, 1988, pays considerable attention to the role of the Secretary-General in resolving disputes and conflict situations. In particular, this paper notes that the Secretary-General, when approached by a State or States directly affected by a dispute or situation, should respond promptly to urge those States to seek a solution or settlement by peaceful means of their choice in accordance with the UN Charter and propose his good offices or such other means at his disposal as he thinks fit.

It should consider reaching out to States directly affected by the dispute or situation in order to prevent it from becoming a threat to the maintenance of international peace and security. The Secretary-General should, where appropriate, consider making full use of fact-finding opportunities, including sending a representative or fact-finding missions, with the consent of the host State, to areas where a dispute or situation exists. The Secretary-General should encourage, where appropriate, efforts made at the regional level to prevent or resolve a dispute or situation in the region concerned.

Dispute resolution within the OSCE. The commitment of the participating States of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) to the settlement of disputes between them by peaceful means is one of the cornerstones of OSCE activities. This commitment is reaffirmed in the Final Act of the 1975 Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe, the Concluding Document of the 1989 Vienna Meeting, and the 1990 Charter of Paris for a New Europe.

In accordance with the Helsinki Final Act, all ten principles of the Declaration of Principles, which will guide the participating States in their mutual relations, will apply equally and strictly when each of them is interpreted taking into account the others.

In the Outcome Document of the Vienna Meeting, the participating States reaffirmed their commitment to the principle of peaceful settlement of disputes, convinced that it is an essential complement to the duty of States to refrain from the threat or use of force, both of which are essential to the maintenance and consolidation of peace and security.

In the Charter of Paris for a New Europe, the participating States solemnly declared their full commitment to the ten principles enshrined in the Helsinki Final Act to maintain and strengthen democracy, peace and unity in Europe.

Appropriate dispute settlement procedures are required to implement the principle that all disputes must be settled exclusively by peaceful means. Such procedures within the OSCE have been developed and consolidated, in particular, in the following documents: Principles for the Settlement of Disputes and Provisions for the CSCE Procedure for the Peaceful Settlement of Disputes (Valletta, February 8, 1991); Results of the CSCE Conference on the Peaceful Settlement of Disputes (Geneva, 12-23 October 1992). In the event of a dispute, the OSCE participants shall pay particular attention not to allow any dispute between them to develop in such a way as to pose a threat to international peace and security. They take appropriate steps to properly bring their disputes to a resolution. To this end, participating States: (a) Deal with disputes at an early stage; b) refrain during the dispute from any action that may worsen the situation and make it more difficult or hinder the peaceful settlement of the dispute; c) strive, using all appropriate means, to reach agreements allowing them to maintain good relations, including taking provisional measures that do not prejudice their legal positions in the dispute. In order to agree on an appropriate dispute settlement procedure, the OSCE participating States concerned, in particular, shall consult with each other at the earliest possible stage. If it is not possible to resolve a dispute among themselves, the OSCE member states shall make efforts to agree on a settlement procedure appropriate to the nature and characteristics of the particular dispute. If a dispute is subject to submission to a dispute resolution procedure agreed upon by the parties, the states shall resolve the dispute through that procedure.

For the first time in the practice of resolving disputes at the regional level, the OSCE member states have assumed firmer obligations than they are established by the general norms of international law. In particular, they are making efforts to include in their future treaties provisions for the settlement of disputes that arise in connection with the interpretation or application of these treaties, and to consider whether a third party can play a mandatory or non-binding role. States have undertaken to refrain, as far as possible, from reservations to dispute settlement procedures. States are considering accepting compulsory ICJ jurisdiction through either a treaty or a unilateral declaration under Art. 36 of the Statute of the Court and minimizing, where possible, any reservations in connection with such a declaration. Members of the OSCE shall consider the possibility, on the basis of a special agreement, of referring to the International Court of Justice or to Arbitration, using the Permanent Court of Arbitration if necessary, such disputes that are subject to resolution through such procedures. Finally, states are considering accepting jurisdiction international bodies for the peaceful settlement of disputes or control mechanisms established under multilateral treaties relating, inter alia, to the protection of human rights, or the withdrawal of existing reservations (if any) to such mechanisms.

The participants in the CSCE Conference in October 1992 approved amendments to the Valletta Regulations on the CSCE Procedure for the Peaceful Settlement of Disputes and the Convention on Conciliation and Arbitration within the CSCE.

According to these documents, the OSCE dispute settlement mechanism consists of one or more members chosen by common agreement of the parties to the dispute from a list of qualified candidates maintained by the appointing institution. The list includes up to four names of individuals nominated by each participating State that has expressed a desire to become a participant in the mechanism. No member of the mechanism may be a citizen of any State involved in the dispute or permanently reside in its territory. By agreement between the parties, members may include persons whose names do not appear on the list.

If the parties to the dispute do not reach an agreement on the composition of the mechanism within two months of the original request by one of the parties to set up the mechanism, the senior officer of the appointing institution, in consultation with the parties to the dispute, shall select seven persons from the list.

The Convention on Conciliation and Arbitration within the CSCE of October 23, 1992 regulates the establishment of the Court, the Conciliation Commission and the Arbitration Tribunal.

The OSCE Court of Conciliation and Arbitration is established to settle by conciliation and, in appropriate cases, to arbitrate disputes submitted to it by OSCE member states. Decisions of the Court are taken by a majority vote of the members participating in the vote. The seat of the Court is Geneva. The costs of the Court shall be borne by the States parties to the 1992 Convention. The parties to the dispute and any intervening party shall bear their own legal costs.

Any State Party to the 1992 Convention may refer to the Conciliation Commission any dispute with another State Party which has not been settled within a reasonable period of time through negotiations. Any state party to the 1992 Convention may apply to the OSCE Secretary for the establishment of a Conciliation Commission for a dispute between it and another participating state or several participating states. A request for the establishment of a Conciliation Commission may also be submitted by agreement between two or more participating States, or between one or more States Parties to the Convention and one or more other OSCE participating States. Such an agreement shall be brought to the attention of the OSCE Secretary.

Each party to the dispute appoints one mediator from the list of conciliators to the Conciliation Commission. The Presidium of the Court appoints three more conciliators.

Conciliation proceedings are confidential and all parties to the dispute have the right to be heard. If, during the course of the proceedings, the parties to the dispute reach, with the assistance of the Conciliation Commission, a mutually acceptable settlement, they shall include the terms of that settlement in the summary of findings. With the signing of this document, the proceedings are completed. In the event that the Conciliation Commission considers that all aspects of the dispute and all possibilities for finding a solution have been studied, it draws up a final report. It sets out the proposals of the Commission for the Peaceful Settlement of Disputes (see below about it).

A request for the establishment of an Arbitration Tribunal may be submitted at any time by agreement between two or more States Parties to the 1992 Convention, or between one or more States Parties to that Convention and one or more other OSCE participating States.

The arbitral tribunal shall have, over the parties to the dispute, the fact-finding and investigative powers necessary for it to carry out its tasks. Hearings before the Tribunal shall take place in camera, unless the Tribunal decides otherwise at the request of the parties to the dispute.

The functions of the Arbitration Tribunal are to decide disputes submitted to it in accordance with international law. This provision does not limit the power of the Tribunal to decide a case ex aeguo et bono with the consent of the parties to the dispute.

The decision of the Arbitration Tribunal is final and not subject to appeal. However, the parties to the dispute, or one of the parties, may request the Tribunal to interpret its decision as to its meaning or scope. Upon receipt of the comments of the parties to the dispute, the Tribunal shall, as soon as possible, give its interpretation of the decision rendered by it.

A dispute between two OSCE participating States can be referred reconciliation commissions, if the parties to the dispute so agree. They appoint one conciliator from a list maintained for the purposes of the Valletta Amicable Dispute Settlement Procedure (the Valletta List). The Commission seeks to clarify the disputed issues between the parties and try to reach a resolution of the dispute on mutually acceptable terms. If the Commission considers that this may facilitate the achievement of an amicable settlement of the dispute, it may propose possible terms for a settlement and fix a time limit within which the parties must inform the Commission whether they agree with such recommendations. If both parties fail to notify such agreement within the time limit, the Secretary of the Commission shall forward the report of the Commission to the Committee of Senior OSCE Officials.

The Council of Ministers or the Committee of Senior Officials may order any two participating States to resort to a conciliation procedure (so-called directive conciliation) and refer the dispute to the Conciliation Commission.

Dispute resolution within the CIS. The agreement of December 8, 1991 on the creation of the CIS confirms the intention of its participants to settle disputed problems by means of conciliation. Disputes regarding the interpretation and application of the norms of the founding treaty of the CIS are subject to resolution through negotiations between the respective countries, and, if necessary, at the level of heads of government and states - members of the CIS. The Alma-Ata Declaration of 1991 confirms the striving of the CIS countries for the peaceful settlement of disputes. These general norms and intentions are detailed in the Charter of the CIS, adopted on January 22, 1993 at a meeting of the Council of Heads of State in Minsk.

In accordance with Section IV of the Charter, the CIS member states take all possible measures to prevent conflicts, primarily on an inter-ethnic and inter-confessional basis, which could lead to a violation of human rights. They provide each other, on the basis of mutual consent, assistance in settling such conflicts, including within the framework of international organizations.

The member states of the Commonwealth refrain from actions that could cause damage to other member states and lead to an aggravation of possible disputes. States shall, in good faith and in a spirit of cooperation, endeavor to achieve a just and peaceful settlement of their disputes through negotiation or agreement on an appropriate alternative dispute resolution procedure. If the Member States do not resolve the dispute by the above means, they may refer it to the Council, Heads of State.

Subsequently, the principle of peaceful settlement of disputes was enshrined and developed in a number of joint documents adopted by the CIS states. Thus, the Declaration on the non-use of force or threat of force in relations between the CIS member states of March 20, 1992 emphasizes that in the event of disputes, the states make efforts to resolve them fairly at international level. For this purpose, such means of peaceful settlement of disputes as negotiation, examination, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, litigation or other peaceful means of their own choice, including any settlement procedure agreed before the disputes arise, shall be used and shall apply the principles, regulations and rules of peaceful settlement of disputes developed within the framework of the UN about the OSCE.

In the Declaration on Observance of the Sovereignty, Territorial Integrity and Inviolability of the Borders of the CIS Member States, adopted on April 15, 1994, the members of the Commonwealth confirm their readiness to contribute to the settlement of disputes and conflicts through the use of mechanisms agreed in each specific case, provided for these purposes by the relevant documents adopted within the framework of the CIS, the UN and the CSCE (hereinafter referred to as the OSCE).

In accordance with the Memorandum on the maintenance of peace and stability in the CIS of February 10, 1995, the member states of the Commonwealth will resolve all disputes arising on issues of borders and territories only by peaceful means. In the event of a situation affecting the security interests of each state, it may turn to other CIS member states with a request to hold consultations without delay.

The Council of CIS Heads of State, at its meeting on January 19, 1996, adopted the Concept for the Prevention and Settlement of Conflicts on the Territory of the Commonwealth Member States. Prevention and resolution of conflicts should be the primary concern of the conflicting parties.

The CIS, as a regional organization, is taking the necessary steps to resolve conflicts on the territory of the Commonwealth states in accordance with Ch. VII of the UN Charter. Conflict resolution refers to a set of political, social, legal, and economic measures aimed at ending conflicts. Conflict resolution can include a wide range of means, including peacekeeping operations. The necessary conditions for such operations are:

the signing of a ceasefire agreement between the conflicting parties and the clearly expressed political will of the parties to resolve the conflict by political means;

the consent of the conflicting parties to conduct peacekeeping operations and the use of collective peacekeeping forces in accordance with the tasks assigned to them, as well as the establishment of close cooperation between the parties with the leadership of these forces for the implementation of such an operation;

acceptance by the parties to the conflict of obligations to respect the international status, neutrality, privileges and immunities of the personnel of the collective peacekeeping forces in accordance with international law;

the openness of peacekeeping operations, the neutral and impartial nature of this activity.

Collective peacekeeping forces are formed on a coalition basis with the participation of states that have agreed to participate in peacekeeping operations. At the same time, each Commonwealth state independently determines the forms of its participation in peacekeeping operations. The decision on the allocation of military contingents, military observers, police (militia) and civilian personnel to participate in peacekeeping operations is taken in accordance with national legislation.

Coercive actions in the settlement of conflicts (peace enforcement) are allowed only if there is the appropriate authority of the Security Council in accordance with the UN Charter 31 .

The growth of the integration process and the expansion of economic ties between the Commonwealth countries is impossible without a clear mutual use of the decisions of arbitration, economic and economic courts. The main arbitration body of the CIS is the Economic Court, established on the basis of Art. 32 of the Commonwealth Charter.

The Economic Court operates to ensure the fulfillment of economic obligations within the Commonwealth. The jurisdiction of the Court includes the resolution of disputes arising from the use of economic obligations. The Court may also resolve other disputes referred to its jurisdiction by agreements of the Member States. The Court has the right to interpret the provisions of agreements and other acts of the Commonwealth on economic issues.

The Economic Court carries out its activities in accordance with the Agreement on the Status of the Economic Court and its Regulations dated July 6, 1992.

According to Art. 3 of the Regulations, the jurisdiction of the Economic Court includes the resolution of interstate economic disputes arising from the fulfillment of economic obligations stipulated by agreements, decisions of the Council of Heads of State, the Council of Heads of Government of the Commonwealth and its other institutions; as well as on the conformity of normative and other acts of the member states of the Commonwealth, adopted on economic issues, agreements and other acts of the Commonwealth.

Based on the results of consideration of the dispute, the Economic Court makes a decision, which establishes the fact of violation by the state party of agreements, other acts of the Commonwealth and its institutions (or the absence of a violation) and determines the measures that are recommended to be taken by the relevant state in order to eliminate the violation and its consequences. The state in respect of which the decision of the Court is taken ensures its execution.

In addition to adjudicating disputes, the Court interprets the application of the provisions of agreements, other acts of the Commonwealth and its institutions. In addition, he is authorized to interpret the acts of the legislation of the former USSR for the period of their mutually agreed application, including the admissibility of the application of these acts, as not contradicting the agreements and other acts of the Commonwealth adopted on their basis. Interpretation is carried out when deciding on specific cases, as well as upon request. supreme bodies authorities and administrations of states, institutions of the Commonwealth, higher economic, arbitration courts and other higher bodies resolving economic disputes in states.

Judges of the Economic Court are elected (appointed) in accordance with the procedure established in the Member States for the election (appointment) of judges of higher economic, arbitration courts, for a period of ten years, from among economic, arbitration judges and other persons who are highly qualified specialists in the field of economic relations .

The highest collegial body of the Economic Court is the Plenum. It consists of the chairman of the Economic Court, his deputies and judges of this Court, as well as the chairmen of the highest economic, arbitration courts and other highest state bodies resolving economic disputes in the participating states.

Over the period of its activity, the Court has considered a number of fundamental disputes between the member states of the Commonwealth. Thus, at the request of the Arbitration of the Republic of Moldova, in 1996 the Court resolved the dispute between this Republic and Belarus regarding the collection of customs duties. At the request of the Government of Tajikistan, the Court ruled on the interpretation of Art. 1 and 2 of the Agreement on Mutual Recognition of Rights and Regulation of Property Relations dated October 9, 1992. Nizhny Novgorod region part of the undelivered grain.

International arbitration (arbitration) - dispute resolution

a third party whose decision is binding on the disputing parties.

Arbitration as a means of settling international disputes has been known since

times of the slave states. Of particular importance for modern

jurisdiction of the arbitral tribunals had a precedent set by the consideration

Alabama dispute between the United States and Great Britain in 1871-1872. In 1872

the arbitral tribunal awarded $15.5 million in favor of the United States, and the English

the government paid this amount as damages for the sale

to the southerners of the cruisers that destroyed more than 60 American ships during

American Civil War 1861-1865.

A significant contribution to the development of the international arbitration procedure was made by

The Hague Conventions for the Peaceful Settlement of International Disputes of 1899 and 1907

years, General Act for the Peaceful Settlement of International Disputes, 1928. In 1958

year, the General Assembly approved the Model Arbitration Rules

Modern international practice knows two types of arbitration bodies: ad

hoc and permanent arbitrage. Ad hoc arbitration is established by agreement of the parties in

regarding this particular dispute. Such an agreement is called

compromise, or arbitration record. In it, the parties determine the subject of the dispute,

subject to resolution by the arbitration tribunal, the competence of the court, the principles and

arbitration procedure, the composition of the court. The arbitration entry must

also include a mutual obligation of the parties to accept and

execution of the arbitration award.

Permanent arbitration is a permanent arbitration body to which the parties may

transfer disputes arising between them by mutual agreement. There are two

type of jurisdiction of permanent arbitration bodies - voluntary and mandatory.

When voluntary, the mutual consent of the parties is required to apply to

arbitral body, and if mandatory, the requirement of one of the parties to

dispute. Binding arbitration is formalized by including in one or another

international treaty the so-called arbitration clause.

The execution of the arbitral award is mandatory.

Under the Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907, revision is allowed

arbitral award if, after its issuance, new important

circumstances that may have a decisive influence on the outcome of the case.

The arbitral tribunal may consist of one person (necessarily a citizen

third country) or a group of persons (from citizens of third countries or from

citizens of the disputing parties and third countries). For example, Art. 22 of the General Act on


pacific settlement of international disputes, determines that the ad hoc arbitral tribunal

may consist of five members: one member appointed by each party, two

other arbitrator and umpire are elected by common consent of the disputing parties from

number of third country nationals.

In 1901, on the basis of the Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907, the

Permanent Court of Arbitration , based in The Hague

(Netherlands). The structure of the Chamber has two permanent bodies: the International

Bureau and Administrative Council. The bureau acts as an office: the parties

inform him of his decision to apply to arbitration. The Bureau carries out

liaison between the parties in disputes submitted to the Chamber.

The activities of the International Bureau are supervised by the Administrative

council consisting of diplomatic representatives accredited to The Hague

member states of the Hague Conventions. The chairman of the council is

Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Netherlands. The council decides all administrative matters, in

including financial, appoints and dismisses employees of the Bureau.

As for the arbitration court itself, it exists in the form of a list of persons from

number of which the disputing states may choose arbitrators. List of arbitration

judges is compiled as follows: each state party to the Hague

conventions (today there are more than 80 of them) appoints for a period of 6 years no more than 4 persons,

which, according to Art. 44, "would be known for their knowledge of

international law, would enjoy the fullest personal respect and express

willingness to assume the duties of an arbitrator. At present

time there are about 300 persons on the list (not all states appoint arbitrators).

The Russian Federation is represented by four well-known professors: K.A.

Bekyashev, A.L. Kolodkin, Yu.M. Kolosov, V.I. Kuznetsov. In addition to Yu.M.

Kolosova earlier and other representatives of the Moscow State

Institute of International Relations were appointed members of the Chamber: S.B. Krylov,

F.I. Kozhevnikov, G.P. Zadorozhny.

The Chamber is competent to hear any dispute between States -

parties to the Conventions, between them and states not party to the Conventions,

and between states and international organizations. During his

existence, the Chamber considered more than 30 disputes between states.

The disputing states wishing to apply to arbitration constitute

compromise, or arbitration record.

Arbitration, as a general rule, consists of two parts:

written investigation and debate. Court deliberations are held behind closed doors.

During the time that the dispute is the subject of arbitration,

parties are required to refrain from any action that could negatively

influence the dispute. The decision is made by majority vote and

must be motivated.

During 1992-1995, the Chamber adopted a number of documents establishing

optional dispute resolution rules, namely: Optional rules

arbitration of disputes between two states (effective from 20

December 1992); Optional Arbitration Rules

between two parties, of which only one is a state

consideration of disputes between international organizations and states

settlement of disputes between international organizations and individuals

6. INTERNATIONAL COURTS.

International litigation is a relatively new means

peaceful settlement of disputes, although its theoretical foundations were developed

back in the 19th century, and a significant contribution to this was made by the Russian lawyer L.A.

Kamarovsky. The first international court was created in 1921 as part of the League

Nations. They were the Permanent Court of International Justice, which stopped

creation of international courts has expanded significantly. Courts have been set up

universal level (International Court of Justice, International Tribunal for

maritime law) and at the regional level (European Court of Human Rights,

European Court, Economic Court of the CIS, etc.).

International litigation has many features in common with international

arbitration. The main thing that brings them together is the binding nature of decisions. At the same time, with

point of view of international law decisions of the international court and decisions

arbitral tribunal have equal force. The difference between them is mainly

organizational character: the composition of the arbitral tribunal depends on the will of the disputing

parties, and the composition of the international court is determined in advance; arbitration court

is formed when interested parties apply to it, and the international

the court sits permanently, and the judges must be at its disposal at all times.

time. International courts other than the International Court of Justice may

consider, like arbitration, disputes involving international organizations and

individual citizens.

The International Court of Justice (seat - The Hague) became the successor to the Permanent

chambers of international justice. This is one of the main organs of the UN, tasked

which includes the administration of international justice. Its composition and

competence is defined by the UN Charter and the Statute of the International Court of Justice.

According to paragraph 1 of Art. 34 of the Statute, parties in cases before the Court may

be only states. The jurisdiction of the Court shall be subject to all cases referred to it.

parties, all matters specifically provided for in the UN Charter or

existing treaties and conventions (Article 36, paragraph 1). However, the jurisdiction

The trial is optional. This means that the dispute can become an object

consideration in the Court only with the consent of all disputing parties. Such consent

is given in a special agreement between the disputing parties on the transfer of the case to

consideration of the Court.

The States Parties to the Statute may at any time, by making a declaration,

recognize the jurisdiction of the Court as compulsory in all legal disputes, categories

which are listed in Art. 36, para. 2: interpretation of the contract; any question

international law; the existence of a fact which, if established,

would constitute a breach of an international obligation; nature and size

compensation due for breach of an international obligation. IN

Currently, about 60 states recognize compulsory jurisdiction,

and of the permanent members of the Security Council - only Great Britain.

A number of universal international treaties contain a provision on the recognition

compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice in disputes,

affecting the interpretation and application of these treaties. There are about

300. The Russian Federation participates in some of them without reservations to

specified provision, for example, in the IAEA Statute

1956, b Convention against Discrimination in Education

1960, etc. In 1989, the Soviet Union withdrew its non-recognition reservations

compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice over the following

Treaties: Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide

1948, Convention on the Political Rights of Women 1952, International

conventions on the elimination of all forms racial discrimination 1965 Convention

against torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading forms

Treatment and Punishment of 1984, the Convention for the Suppression of Trafficking in Persons and

Exploitation of Prostitution by Third Parties 1949, Convention on the Elimination

all forms of discrimination against women 1979.

A quorum of nine judges is sufficient to form a judicial presence.

However, as a rule, the court sits in full composition. However,

provided that for the analysis of certain categories of cases,. for example, cases

relating to transit and communications, the Court may constitute one or more Chambers

composed of three or more judges. The Court may also, as necessary, create

chamber and for the analysis of individual cases (Article 26 of the Statute). In the practice of the Court such

The chamber was first created in 1982-1984 over a dispute between the United States and Canada over

maritime delimitation in the Gulf of Maine. In addition, for the purposes

Acceleration of Cases The Court shall annually form a chamber composed of five judges,

which, at the request of the parties, may consider and decide cases in the manner

summary proceedings (Article 29 of the Statute).

Proceedings before the Court shall be conducted in French or English. By

At the request of any party, the Court may grant it the right to use another

language (Article 39 of the Statute). Cases are brought before the Court in two ways:

notification of a special agreement concluded between the parties to the dispute,

or by filing a unilateral written application with the Registrar of the Court, In both

cases, the subject of the dispute and the parties must be indicated (Article 40, paragraph 1, Statute),

The order of proceedings is set out in the Rules of Court, adopted in 1946 and

revised in 1978.

The Court has the right to indicate what, in its opinion, measures should be taken to

securing the rights of each party. Communication of such proposed measures

immediately brought to the attention of the parties and the UN Security Council. So,

ruled on interim measures, ruling that the United States must immediately

stop mining Nicaraguan ports and any encroachment on

territorial integrity or the political independence of Nicaragua with

through any military or paramilitary action, use of force or threat

force in violation of the principles of international law.

Litigation is divided into two parts: written and oral. Court establishes

terms for the submission by the parties of memorandums, counter-memorials, responses to

them, as well as supporting documents. Oral proceedings are

hearing by the Court of witnesses, experts, representatives, attorneys and

lawyers. The hearing shall be held in public, unless the Court decides otherwise, or

unless the parties have requested that the public not be admitted.

At the end of the hearing of the case, the Court retires to the deliberation room for

decision discussion. The deliberations of the Court shall take place in closed session and

are kept secret. All issues are resolved by majority vote.

judges present. In the event of an equal division of votes, the vote of the Chairman

considered decisive. The decision must be reasoned, and it must contain

the names of the judges participating in its adoption are indicated.

Each judge has the right to present a dissenting opinion in writing.

(motivated disagreement with the decision), individual opinion (disagreement with

motives) or a declaration (a brief statement of disagreement).

The decision is announced in open session of the Court and is binding only

for the parties involved in the case and only in this case. The decision is final

and is not subject to appeal. A request for review may be made to

on the basis of newly discovered circumstances which, by their nature, may

have a decisive influence on the outcome of the case and which, when making a decision, did not

were known to either the Court or the party asking for a review. No requests for

revision can not be declared after ten years after the issuance

As stated in Art. 38, the Court decides disputes on the basis of international law,

applying international conventions expressly recognized as in dispute

states; international custom; general principles of law recognized

civilized nations. The court may also take into account judicial decisions and doctrines in

as an aid to the determination of legal norms. But the Court

may, if the parties so agree, decide matters on the basis of justice.

In the event that any party to the case fails to fulfill its obligations,

assigned to it by the decision of the Court, the other party has the right to apply to the Council

UN Security Council, which can make recommendations or decide which

take measures to enforce the decision (Article 94, paragraph 2, of the UN Charter).

During the period of its activity from 1946 to January 2000, the International

The Court considered about 70 contentious cases concerning the interpretation and application

international treaties, sovereignty over certain territories,

maritime delimitation and continental shelf etc. Essential

in the case of Nicaragua against the United States, in which the Court declared military and

U.S. paramilitary actions and obligated the U.S. to make amends to Nicaragua for the damage it caused.

The International Court of Justice is also empowered to give advisory opinions on any

legal matter at the request of the General Assembly and the Security Council

UN. Other UN bodies and specialized agencies may request

advisory opinions on legal matters with the permission of the General

Assembly. Such permission was given to more than 20 bodies and organizations on a permanent basis.

basis, while their requests should not go beyond their competence. So,

International Court of Justice refused to give an advisory opinion at the request of WHO

In 1996 regarding the legality of the use of nuclear weapons

state in an armed conflict, motivating its decision by the fact that this

the question is not within the competence of the WHO.

An advisory opinion means the expression of the opinion of the international judges on

this or that legal issue and, in principle, is a recommendation

character. However, nothing in the UN Charter or the Statute of the Court prohibits

bodies and organizations that have submitted a request to recognize as binding

advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice. So did, for example, the FAO

UNESCO, Administrative

ILO tribunal, etc.

The International Court of Justice issued 23 advisory opinions between 1946 and 2000.

conclusions, most of which are at the request of the General Assembly.

international law.

The advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice of 8

July 1996 at the request of the UN General Assembly on the legality of the threat to nuclear

weapons or their use. In it, the International Court of Justice held, inter alia,

unanimously that neither in international customary nor in international treaty

law, there is no specific resolution regarding the threat or

use of nuclear weapons. The Court also ruled unanimously that the threat

force or the use of force using nuclear weapons, which

contrary to the provisions of paragraph 4 of Art. 2 of the UN Charter and do not meet all the requirements

Art. 51 are illegal. The Court unanimously concluded that the threat

nuclear weapons or their use must comply with the requirements of international

law applicable to armed conflicts, especially to claims

international humanitarian law, as well as treaty obligations,

directly related to nuclear weapons.

International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea , created in 1996

year in accordance with the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea of ​​1982 is

a judicial body designed to resolve disputes in a special area of ​​cooperation

in maritime law. According to Art. 2 of the Statute (Annex VI to the UN Convention on

law of the sea), the International Tribunal is composed of 21 judges elected from among

individuals enjoying the highest reputation for impartiality and fairness and

are elected for nine years and can be re-elected (at the same time, at the first election

by lot it is determined which seven judges are elected for three years and seven more judges

for six years)

The Tribunal must be represented by the principal

legal systems of the world and equitable geographical distribution. In these

purposes, it is stipulated that it cannot include two citizens of one and the same

of the same state and there must be at least three members from each

geographical group established by the UN General Assembly (art. 3

statute).

Each State party to the 1982 Convention may nominate no more than

two candidates. Elections are held at the Meeting of the States Parties under

a two-thirds quorum. Candidates who have received

the largest number of votes, but not less than two-thirds of those present and

voting states. At the first election to the Tribunal

was elected Russian lawyer A.L. Kolodkin.

In accordance with the Statute, the Tribunal is called upon to settle disputes between

States parties to the 1982 Convention relating to the interpretation or

application of this Convention. In addition, the op has the right to consider disputes,

arising from the interpretation or application of any other international

agreements in the field of the law of the sea, if such agreements provide

the jurisdiction of the Tribunal.

The essential feature of the Tribunal is that it is empowered

consider disputes not only between states, but also between states and

Seabed Authority (i.e. an international organization), as well as between

individuals and legal entities. Indeed, this is only for

disputes related to the regime and use of the deep seabed.

The Tribunal may work in full composition or with a quorum of 11 judges. Tribunal

may form special chambers consisting of three or more

elected members to deal with specific categories of disputes. Created

Chambers for Fisheries and Environment.

Each year, the Tribunal forms a chamber of five judges for the purpose of expedited

resolution of cases by way of summary proceedings. In addition, the Tribunal

may form a Chamber for the trial of a specific

dispute at the request of the parties. The composition of such a chamber shall be determined by the Tribunal with

the approval of the parties.

The Statute provides for the obligatory establishment of a chamber for disputes concerning

seabed, consisting of 11 judges. Within this chamber can be created

an ad hoc chamber of three members to consider a specific

As in the International Court of Justice, disputes are referred to the Tribunal

either by special agreement between the parties to the dispute, or by

on the basis of a written application by one of the parties, provided that both parties

associated with the recognition of the compulsory jurisdiction of the Tribunal.

When considering cases, the Tribunal applies the 1982 Convention and other rules

international law that are not incompatible with the Convention, and

may decide the case on the basis of justice, if the parties so agree

(Article 293 of the Convention).

The decision of the Tribunal shall be final and shall be complied with by all parties in

dispute, and it is binding only on the parties to the dispute and only

By this case(Article 33 of the Statute).

The Tribunal is located in Hamburg (Germany).

European Court of Human Rights (Strasbourg, France)

established in 1959 on the basis of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and

fundamental freedoms in 1950. In accordance with Protocol No. 11 to this Convention,

adopted in May 1994 and entered into force in November 1998, the European

the court was reorganized and the functions of the European Commission for Human Rights were transferred to it

person.

The European Court of Human Rights is composed of a number of judges equal to the number

States Parties to the 1950 Convention. Today it is 40

person, including a judge from the Russian Federation. The 41st must be elected

Judge from Georgia Judges are elected by the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe

for a period of six years (previously nine years) by a majority of the

(Article 22 of the Convention).

Judges must be of high moral character and satisfy

qualifications for appointment to high judicial offices, or

be jurists of recognized authority. Members of the Court are not

representatives of States, they participate in the work of the Court in their personal capacity

(Article 21). They are eligible for re-election, but their term of office expires

they reach the age of 70.

It is envisaged that the Court works on a permanent basis (this is a change in the principle

functioning of the Court introduced by Protocol No. 11).

The jurisdiction of the Court is binding and extends to all

questions concerning the interpretation and application of the 1950 Convention and the Protocols

To her. Any State Party to the 1950 Convention may refer to the Court

question of alleged violation of the provisions of the Convention and its Protocols

another state party (art. 33 of the Convention). The court may also receive

complaints from any individual, non-governmental organization or any

groups of individuals who claim to be victims of a violation

Convention by one of the States Parties (Article 34). The court may also make

advisory opinions on legal questions concerning interpretation

Convention and its Protocols, at the request of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe.

The peculiarity of the European Court of Human Rights is that it does not

only resolves disputes between states, but also considers

individual complaints against states by individuals and

non-governmental organizations. Interstate disputes are referred to the Court for

unilateral basis.

When adjudicating cases, the Court sits in Committees, Chambers and the Grand Chamber.

The committees are composed of three judges, the Chamber of seven and the Grand Chamber of 17

The committees are the first instance for individual complaints. unanimous

by decision, the Committee may declare the application inadmissible. Such a solution is

final. If the Committee does not consider a complaint inadmissible, it will go to

Chamber, which decides on the admissibility of the case on the merits. Question about

admissibility of interstate disputes is decided only by the Chamber. Big

The chamber considers cases on the merits in exceptional cases. It may

take place when there are serious questions concerning the interpretation

Convention, or if the decision may be in conflict with an earlier

Court ruling. In that case, the Chamber, before making its ruling

may cede jurisdiction to the Grand Chamber (art. 30). This may take place

also if one of the parties to the dispute applies to the Grand Chamber with a request

on the review of the case (Article 47).

For the first time in the practice of international judicial bodies, it is possible to

revision of an earlier decision by the Court. A three-month period has been set

during which period, after the decision of the Chamber, either party may

ask for a rehearing in the Grand Chamber. Decrees Big

chambers are final. The rulings of either Chamber are

final if the parties have declared that they will not require the transfer

case to the Grand Chamber, or after a period of three months, within

which the parties did not apply to the Grand Chamber or the Grand Chamber rejected

such treatment (art. 44).

The judgment of the Court is communicated to the Committee of Ministers, which supervises

its implementation.

During its activity from 1959 to 1998, the Court considered about a thousand

cases, in most of which he has ruled. However, more than 60%

cases, the Court found the respondent States guilty of violating

international obligations imposed on them by the 1950 Convention.

The European Court has shown the possibility of using the judicial system not only

for the peaceful resolution of disputes, but also to monitor the observance of the rights

person.

Economic Court of the Commonwealth of Independent States is

is a specialized court designed to resolve disputes,

arising from the performance of economic obligations. It was created based on

Agreements on measures to ensure the improvement of settlements between economic

are Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Moldova, Russia, Tajikistan

court and the Regulations on the Economic Court. In the Charter of the CIS, Art. 32, the Court was fixed

as a permanent body. He started his activity in 1994.

The jurisdiction of the Court is limited to the resolution of interstate economic

disputes arising from the performance of obligations under

agreements and decisions of Commonwealth bodies, as well as disputes over compliance

normative and other acts of the CIS member states agreements and other acts

Commonwealth (clause 3 of the Regulations). The court may decide other disputes,

assigned to its jurisdiction by the agreements of the Member States, In addition, the Court

may interpret the provisions of agreements and other acts of the Commonwealth on

economic issues.

The Court is composed of two judges from each State Party

1992 Agreement, appointed or elected for ten years. Supreme

collegiate body is the Plenum of the Court, consisting of judges and

chairmen of the highest economic (arbitration) courts of the states-

participants. The Plenum considers complaints against decisions of the Court and makes

final decisions.

Disputes are subject to consideration with the consent of the States concerned and

Commonwealth authorities. Based on the outcome of the dispute, the Court

takes a decision establishing the fact of violation (or its

absence) by the state of an international agreement or decisions of the bodies

Commonwealth and defines the measures recommended to be taken

relevant state in order to eliminate the violation and its consequences

(clause 4 of the Regulations). Consequently, the judgments of the Court are advisory

character that distinguishes it from other international judicial bodies.

During its existence, the Court has considered about 30 cases, most

which constitute requests for interpretation.

  • Formation and development of international law
    • On the emergence of international law
    • The state and nature of modern international law
    • Prospects for the development of international law
    • International law and world legal order
  • The concept, features and system of international law
    • The concept of international law
    • Features of international law
    • International law system
  • Norms and principles of international law
    • Rules of international law
    • Principles of international law
  • Sources of international law
    • general characteristics sources of international law
    • International Treaties
    • international custom
    • Decisions of international organizations and conferences
    • Auxiliary tools for the definition of international legal norms
    • Codification of international law
  • Correlation between international and domestic law
    • Theories of the relationship between international and domestic law and practical difficulties in this area
    • The essence and mechanism of interaction between international and domestic law
    • Correlation of international public and international private law
    • Constitution and international law
    • International law in the activities of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation
    • Implementation of the norms of international law by courts of general jurisdiction and arbitration courts of the Russian Federation
  • Subjects of international law
    • General issues of international legal personality
    • International legal recognition
    • Succession in international law
  • Population and international law
    • International legal regulation of the situation of the population
    • International legal issues of citizenship
    • Legal regime of foreigners
  • Territory and international law
    • Types of territories in international law
    • State territory
    • Territorial acquisitions and changes
    • Territorial disputes
    • state border
    • demarcation lines
    • International rivers
    • International channels
    • Legal regime of the Arctic
    • International legal status of Svalbard
    • International Legal Regime of Antarctica
  • Coercion and responsibility in international law
    • Classification of measures of international legal coercion
    • Sanctions measures of international legal coercion
    • Unsanctioned measures of international legal coercion
    • Sanction liability in international law
    • Objective responsibility in international law
  • Law of international treaties
    • Law of international treaties as a branch of international law
    • national law and international treaties of the Russian Federation
    • International treaties as legal acts of international law
    • Conclusion of international treaties
    • Reservations and declarations to international multilateral treaties
    • Depositary of a multilateral treaty and its functions
    • Registration and publication of international treaties
    • Invalidity of international treaties
    • Compliance with, application, modification and interpretation of international treaties
    • Consequences of invalidity, termination, suspension of validity and amendment of international treaties
    • Interpretation of international treaties
    • Treaties and third (non-participating) states
    • International treaties in simplified form
    • Legal nature final act CSCE 1975
  • International human rights law
    • The international cooperation in the field of human rights
    • International Standards in the field of human rights and their reflection in international documents
    • The problem of increasing the effectiveness of interstate cooperation in the field of human rights
    • Treaty and non-treaty bodies for the protection of human rights and freedoms operating within the framework of the United Nations
    • Activities of the European Court of Human Rights and the legal system of the Russian Federation
    • Right of asylum
    • Refugees and displaced persons
    • Protection of Minorities and Indigenous Peoples
  • International maritime law
    • The concept, sources and subjects of international maritime law
    • Limits of application of the norms of international maritime law
    • Legal status and the regime of maritime spaces located within the territory of states
    • Legal status and regime of maritime spaces outside the territory of states
    • Maritime spaces with different legal status
    • International cooperation within maritime spaces
  • international air law
    • The concept and system of international air law
    • Sources of international air law
    • Basic principles of international air law
    • Legal regime of international flights
    • Legal regulation of scheduled and non-scheduled international air services
    • Legal regulation commercial activities in the air transport market
    • Responsibility of the carrier in international air transportation
    • Combating acts of unlawful interference with civil aviation
    • International aviation organizations
  • international space law
    • The concept, history of development and sources of international space law
    • Subjects and objects of international space law
    • Legal regime of outer space and celestial bodies
    • Legal status of astronauts and space objects
    • International cooperation in space exploration
    • Responsibility in the international space law
    • Perspective issues of international space law
  • International economic law
    • Origins, concept and system of international economic law
    • Subjects, sources and principles of the MEP
    • International economic integration and globalization
    • World Trade Organization (WTO)
    • International legal foundations of the international financial system
    • International Monetary Fund
    • The World Bank
    • Regional financial institutions
    • International clubs of creditors
    • International cooperation in the field of energy
    • International legal regulation of the activities of transnational corporations
  • International environmental law
    • The concept of international environmental law and its meaning
    • The role of international organizations and conferences in the formation and development of international environmental law
    • Sources and principles of international environmental law
    • International legal protection natural objects
    • Environmental protection as part of regulation certain types activities of states
  • International cooperation in combating crime. International criminal justice, national and international legal order
    • Methodology and conceptual apparatus
    • The main directions and forms of international cooperation in the fight against crime
    • UN bodies involved in combating crime
    • Interpol - International Criminal Police Organization
    • International counter-terrorism cooperation between states and international organizations
    • International Criminal Justice
  • Law of External Relations
    • Fundamentals of Diplomatic Law
    • Fundamentals of consular law
  • International conferences
    • The concept and classification of international conferences
    • Preparation and convening of international conferences
    • Work of international conferences
    • Decision mechanism
    • Types of acts of international conferences and their legal significance
  • Law of international organizations
    • The emergence of international organizations is an important stage in the international negotiation and rule-making process. Main features and classification of international organizations
    • General characteristics of the structure and activities of the UN and its main organs and their main features
    • The role and place of the UN and other international organizations in the creation of a system of collective security at the global and regional levels
    • UN specialized agencies and their role in the global management of the processes taking place in the world
    • Regional organizations and sub-regional structures and their interaction with the UN
    • International non-governmental organizations and forms of their cooperation with the UN
    • The process of updating and adapting the UN and its Charter to the new world realities and changes
    • Supranationality of international organizations
  • European Union Law
    • "European Law" ("EU Law") abroad and in Russia
    • Definition, concept and features of European law
    • The emergence and development of European law - from the Treaty of Paris to the Treaty of Lisbon
    • Legal nature of the European Communities and the European Union
  • International legal framework for the activities of the CIS and subregional groups
    • International legal framework for the functioning of the CIS
    • Union State of Russia and Belarus
    • Eurasian Economic Community (EurAsEC)
    • Common Economic Space of Russia, Belarus, Kazakhstan and Ukraine (CES of the Quartet)
    • GUAM (Organization for Democracy and Economic Development)
  • Peace settlement international disputes
    • Concept of international dispute
    • Legal Content of the Principle of Peaceful Resolution of International Disputes
    • Peaceful means of settling international disputes
    • The role of international organizations in the peaceful resolution of international disputes
    • Peaceful settlement of disputes within the pan-European process
    • Peaceful settlement of disputes within the Commonwealth of Independent States
  • International security law
    • The concept of "security". Security objects. Threats and challenges to the security of the state and the world community
    • Subjects and legal bases for ensuring the security of the state
    • Subjects, international law and international legal means of ensuring the security of the world community
    • Political and legal aspects of collective security of a universal nature
    • peacekeeping operations
    • Political and legal features regional collective security systems
    • Disarmament and arms limitation
  • Law of armed conflict
    • The concept, sources and subject of regulation of the law of armed conflicts
    • Legal consequences of the outbreak of war
    • Neutrality during the war
    • Legal status participants in armed conflicts
    • Legal regime of military occupation
    • Prohibited means and methods of warfare
    • Means and methods of naval warfare
    • Means and methods of air warfare
    • Protecting the rights of the individual during armed conflict
    • International legal regulation of the end of hostilities and the state of war
    • Problems of international legal regulation of relations arising during non-international armed conflicts
    • Law of armed conflict and Russian legislation
    • Law of armed conflict and international human rights law
  • International Law and Information Technology
    • General questions and basic concepts
    • The role and importance of international intergovernmental organizations in the international legal regulation of Internet governance
    • Forms of international legal cooperation of states in the field of Internet governance
    • International cooperation of states in the field of international information security
    • Prospects for the international legal regulation of information technology

Peaceful means of settling international disputes

The member states of the UN have committed themselves to "pursuing by peaceful means, in accordance with the principles of justice and international law, the settlement or resolution of international disputes or situations that may lead to a violation of the peace" (paragraph 1 of Article 1 of the UN Charter).

The mechanism for implementing the principle of peaceful resolution of international disputes exists in the form of a system of international legal means of such settlement. According to Article 33 of the UN Charter, states involved in any dispute the continuation of which could threaten the maintenance of international peace and security must first of all seek to resolve the dispute by "negotiation, inquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial proceedings, recourse to regional bodies or agreements or by other peaceful means of their choice." In the above article, almost all currently known means of peaceful dispute resolution are named. Only "good offices" are not mentioned. Some peaceful means that received their contractual and legal formalization as early as the end of the 19th - beginning of the 20th centuries are named in Art. 33 otherwise. Thus, under examination, the UN Charter refers to commissions of inquiry and investigative procedure, and under reconciliation - conciliation commissions.

Negotiation. This is the most accessible, flexible and effective means of peaceful dispute resolution, playing a leading role among other peaceful means. Such their role is due to the fact that specific goals, composition of participants, level of representation in the negotiations, their organizational forms and other procedural issues are agreed upon by the disputing parties themselves in accordance with the basic principles and norms of modern international law; negotiations should be conducted on an equal basis, excluding violation of the sovereign will of the parties concerned. Regardless of the subject of negotiations, they must begin and proceed without any preliminary ultimatum conditions, coercion, diktat and threats.

A positive outcome of the negotiations can be expressed either in the direct resolution of the dispute on the merits, or in reaching an agreement on the use of another peaceful means of resolving the dispute. However, if the negotiations do not lead to a definite agreement, the parties are obliged to continue the search for a mutually acceptable settlement of differences.

Parties consultations. As a means of peaceful settlement of disputes, consultations began to be used after the Second World War, having received international legal consolidation in a large number of bilateral and multilateral agreements. The consulting parties can pre-determine the frequency of meetings, create advisory commissions. These features of the consultations contribute to the search for compromise solutions by the disputing parties, the continuity of contacts between them, as well as the implementation of the agreements reached in order to prevent the emergence of new disputes and crisis situations. The procedure of mandatory consultations based on the voluntary consent of the parties makes it possible to use the dual function of consultation: as an independent means of resolving disputes and for preventing, preventing possible disputes and conflicts, and also, depending on the circumstances, as a means of reaching an agreement by the disputing parties on the use of other means of settlement. It can be considered that consultations are a kind of negotiations.

Consultations may be optional or mandatory. A number of multilateral agreements contain provisions obliging the parties to seek advice on the purpose of or in connection with the implementation of these agreements. Such provisions are contained, for example, in Art. V Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production and Stockpiling of Bacteriological (Biological) Weapons and Their Destruction of 1972 and the Convention of 1993 providing for similar measures in relation to chemical weapons.

Survey. This is a means of amicable settlement, which is resorted to in cases where the disputing parties differ in their assessment of the actual circumstances that caused the dispute. To carry out the examination procedure, the parties create an international commission of inquiry on an equal footing, sometimes headed by a representative of a third state or international organization. The commission of inquiry should be established on the basis of a special agreement between the disputing parties. The agreement defines the facts to be investigated, the procedure and term for the formation of the commission, the scope of the powers of its members, as well as the location of the commission, its right to move, the period in which the disputing party will have to submit its statement of facts, etc. The results of the commission's work are recorded in a report, which should be limited to establishing the facts. The parties remain completely free to use the findings of the commission of inquiry at their own discretion.

The establishment of the International Fact-Finding Commission is provided, in particular, by Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions for the Protection of Victims of War of 1949 (Article 90). The purpose of the Commission is to investigate any facts that constitute a serious violation of the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and Additional Protocol I, and to help, through good offices, to restore respect for them.

Attaching great importance to fact-finding activities. The General Assembly in 1991 adopted the UN Fact-Finding Declaration in the Field of Maintaining International Peace and Security. The Declaration proceeds from the fact that in the performance of its functions related to the maintenance of international peace and security. The Security Council and the General Assembly need to have detailed information in relation to any dispute or situation.

The Declaration defines the procedure for establishing fact-finding missions. Decisions to send such missions may be taken by the Council or the Assembly. The sending of such missions to the territory of any State requires the prior consent of that State. The Declaration recommends to organize and conduct missions to use, first of all, the services of the UN Secretary-General, who should compile and update lists of experts involved in missions. However, it is also possible to use some special subsidiary body of the Security Council or the General Assembly.

Reconciliation (conciliation procedure). As a means of peaceful settlement of disputes, conciliation, in contrast to the survey, includes not only the clarification of factual circumstances, but also the development of specific recommendations for the parties. When applying the conciliation procedure, the parties, as in the case of the survey, form an international conciliation commission on an equal footing, which develops its recommendations.

The conclusions of the conciliation commission are optional and are not legally binding on the parties to the dispute. The most detailed procedure for the creation and functioning of the conciliation commission is set out in the General Act for the Peaceful Settlement of International Disputes of 1928, revised by the UN General Assembly in 1949.

The act provides for the possibility of considering disputes both in permanent and temporary conciliation commissions created by the disputing parties. The USSR actively used conciliation commissions to resolve border incidents.

Various variants of the conciliation (conciliation) procedure are provided for in the Vienna Convention on the Representation of States in Their Relations with International Organizations of a Universal Character of 1975, in the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea of ​​1982. In 1995, the UN Model Rules for the Reconciliation of Disputes between states (General Assembly resolution 50/50 of December 11, 1995). These Rules may be used where States have agreed in writing to apply them. At the same time, at any stage of the conciliation process, the parties may ask the UN Secretary General to assist them in the implementation of the conciliation procedure. The results of the work of the reconciliation commission established on the basis of the Rules are advisory in nature.

good offices. These are the actions of a party not participating in the dispute (a state, an international organization, a well-known public or political figure) aimed at establishing contacts between the disputing parties. Good offices can be provided both in response to a request from one or both disputing parties, or at the initiative of a third party.

The offer of good offices should not be regarded as an unfriendly act towards the disputing parties. The person providing good offices does not directly participate in the negotiations to resolve the dispute. Good offices often develop into mediation.

Mediation. It involves the direct participation of a third party in the peaceful resolution of the dispute. Participating in the negotiations of the disputing parties, the mediator is called upon to contribute in every possible way to the development of a dispute resolution acceptable to these parties, has the right to offer his own options for such a resolution, although the mediator's proposals are not binding on the disputing parties.

The good offices of the USSR, which later turned into mediation, played a positive role in the settlement of the Indo-Pakistani conflict and led to the adoption by the conflicting parties of the Tashkent Declaration of January 10, 1966.

On the UN side, the good offices and mediator functions are usually performed by the UN Secretary-General or his special representatives, acting on the basis of resolutions of the UN Security Council or the UN General Assembly.

The regulation of the procedure for the implementation of mediation is contained in the Hague Conventions on the Peaceful Settlement of International Clashes of 1899 and 1907.

In modern conditions, the practice of applying the above means of resolving international disputes should be developed and actively used in order to prevent and resolve intrastate conflicts.

International Arbitration. The use of international arbitration to resolve disputes between states dates back to ancient times. Many cases of arbitration dispute resolution are known, one of which relates to the history of Ancient Greece. In 445 BC in the treaty of alliance between Sparta and Athens, the parties pledged not to resort to war if the other side wanted to submit the dispute to arbitration. In 432, Sparta accused Athens of violating this treaty. When Athens proposed that, in accordance with the treaty, the dispute be submitted to arbitration, Sparta rejected the proposal and invaded Athens. After Sparta was defeated, it was argued that this was due to her violation of a solemn oath, for which she was punished by the gods. After 10 years of war, in 421 BC, the so-called Peace of Nikia was concluded between the parties, in Cahors a mutual obligation was mentioned not to resort to war and to submit all future disputes to arbitration. But history repeated itself when a few years later this time Sparta demanded arbitration, citing a breach of the treaty of 421 BC, and Athens refused it. Sparta started fighting, as a result of which Athens was defeated. Since the latter refused to arbitrate, the gods, the ancients believed, were no longer on their side.

The modern history of arbitration disputes began with the formation of three mixed commissions based on the Anglo-American Treaty of Friendship, Trade and Navigation of 1794 (“Jay's Treaty”). In the 19th century More than 200 arbitration courts have already been formed.

In 1872, the arbitration court that dealt with the Alabama dispute between the United States and Great Britain, by its decision, ordered the British government to compensate the United States for damages in the amount of $ 15.5 million associated with the sale by the British to the southerners of warships that destroyed during the American Civil War (1861 -1865) several dozen American ships. This decision was important in determining the jurisdiction of the arbitral tribunals.

International arbitration is a voluntary agreement of the disputants to submit their dispute to a third party (arbitration), the decision of which will be binding on the parties to the dispute. The obligatory application and execution of the decision is the main thing that distinguishes the arbitration procedure from the above means of peaceful settlement of disputes.

There are two types of arbitration bodies: permanent arbitration and ad hoc arbitration. In contrast to permanent arbitration, ad hoc arbitration is created by an agreement of the parties, called a compromise, or arbitration record, to consider this particular dispute. This agreement contains a description of the subject matter of the dispute, the composition of the court, its competence, the principles and procedure for arbitration proceedings, as well as a provision on the recognition by the parties to the dispute of the binding nature of the arbitral award.

An important role in the development of the institute of arbitration was played by the Hague Conventions on the Peaceful Settlement of International Clashes of 1899 and 1907. In accordance with the first of these, in 1901, the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) was established in The Hague in order to “facilitate the possibility of applying without delay to arbitration in case of international disputes that could not be settled diplomatically” (Article 41) which formally still exists. However, only the Administrative Council and the Office of the Chancellery of the Chamber, headed by the Secretary General, are constantly functioning. Each of the states participating in the conventions (there are currently about 80 of them) appoints four competent persons from among its nationals as members of the Chamber (arbitrators). Russia is a member of the Chamber, and its four international lawyers form the national group of the Chamber. From the general list of members of the Chamber, the parties choose arbitrators. During its existence, the Chamber has considered about 30 interstate disputes.

In the first half of the 1990s, the Chamber adopted a number of current documents that define optional rules for adjudicating disputes. Among them are: Optional Rules for the Arbitration of Disputes between Two States; Optional rules for the arbitration of disputes between two parties, of which only one party is a State; Optional Rules for the Arbitration of Disputes between International Organizations and States; Optional rules of reconciliation, etc.

Arbitration practice knows two types of jurisdiction for permanent arbitrations: optional and mandatory. In the first case, for the transfer of the dispute to the arbitration body, the mutual consent of all parties is necessary, in the second case, the requirement of one of the parties is sufficient.

In the contractual practice of the USSR, there were cases of recognition of the compulsory jurisdiction of international arbitration. Thus, the Soviet Union was a party to such conventions and treaties containing an arbitration clause, such as the Convention on the World Meteorological Organization of 1947, the Convention on the Regime of Navigation on the Danube of 1948. The State Treaty on the Restoration of an Independent and Democratic Austria of 1955. The UN Convention on maritime law of 1982. Of the recent international acts, which enshrined the principle of mandatory application of arbitration, we can mention the Convention on the Safety of UN and Associated Personnel of 1994. The Convention against Transnational Crime of 2000, the UN Convention against Corruption of 2003. and etc.

There are three main ways to submit a case to international arbitration:

  • a special agreement (compromise) submitting an existing dispute to arbitration;
  • a special provision (arbitration clause) in various contracts providing for the submission to arbitration of disputes that may arise from the interpretation or application of the contract;
  • general arbitration treaties providing for the submission to arbitration of any disputes that may arise between the parties (binding arbitration). The parties often stipulate that disputes affecting the vital interests, independence or honor of the parties are not subject to arbitration.

Trial. At its core, litigation is similar to arbitration. The most significant factors that determine the similarity between the court and arbitration are the finality of the decision and its legally binding nature for the parties to the dispute. The difference between arbitration and an international court lies mainly in the order of their formation and concerns mainly the method of formation of the numerical and personal composition, functioning, etc.

The first permanent international court was the Permanent Court of International Justice. The statute of which was adopted with the formation of the League of Nations in 1920. The Chamber ceased to exist in 1946. Currently, the International Court of Justice is the main judicial body of the international community. The Court operates on the basis of the Statute of the International Court of Justice (the Statute is an integral part of the UN Charter), as well as the Rules of the Court, adopted in 1946 and revised in 1978.

The International Court of Justice is composed of 15 judges elected for a term of nine years by the General Assembly and the Security Council. The composition of the judges must ensure the representation major forms civilization and major legal systems of the world.

Only states can be parties in cases before the Court. The jurisdiction of the Court includes all cases that will be submitted to it by the parties, as well as all matters provided for by the UN Charter or existing treaties. At the same time, the jurisdiction of the Court is optional, meaning that a dispute can be considered in the Court only with the consent of all disputing parties.

At the same time, the states participating in the Statute may, at any time, by making an appropriate declaration, recognize the jurisdiction of the Court as mandatory in all legal disputes referred to in paragraph 2 of Art. 36 of the Statute: interpretation of the treaty; any question of international law; the existence of a fact which, if established, would constitute a breach of an international obligation; the nature and extent of the compensation due for the breach of an international obligation.

A quorum of nine judges is sufficient to form a judicial presence. However, as a rule, the Court sits in full composition. At the same time, the Court may, as necessary, create chambers composed of three or more judges for the consideration of individual cases (Article 26 of the Statute). Such a camera, for example, was created in 1982-1984. in connection with the dispute between the United States and Canada on the delimitation of maritime spaces in the Gulf of Maine. In addition, in order to expedite the resolution of cases, the Court annually establishes a chamber of five judges, which, at the request of the parties, can consider and resolve cases in summary proceedings (Article 29 of the Statute).

Cases in the Court are initiated in two ways: by notification of a special agreement concluded between the parties to the dispute, or by filing a unilateral written application with the Secretary of the Court. In both cases, the parties to the dispute and its subject must be indicated (clause 1, article 40 of the Statute).

The court has the right to indicate what measures, in its opinion, should be taken to ensure the rights of each of the parties. Such measures are immediately brought to the attention of the UN Security Council. Thus, having received on April 9, 1984, the complaint of Nicaragua against the United States, on May 10, 1984, the Court ruled on provisional measures, according to which the United States should immediately stop mining Nicaraguan waters and other encroachments on the territorial integrity or political independence of Nicaragua with the help of any military or paramilitary activities.

Litigation is divided into written and oral stages. The Court shall establish time limits for the submission by the parties of memorandums, counter-memorials, responses to them, as well as documents confirming them. Oral proceedings consist of listening by the Court of witnesses, experts, representatives and lawyers of the parties. The hearing of the case is held in public, unless a different procedure is determined by the decision of the Court or at the request of the parties. At the end of the hearing of the case, the Court retires to the deliberation room to discuss the decision. Meetings of judges take place in closed session and are confidential. Decisions are made by majority vote of the judges present. In the event of an equal division of votes, the chairman's vote is considered decisive.

Each judge has the right to submit in writing a dissenting opinion (reasoned disagreement with the decision), an individual opinion (disagreement with motives) or a declaration (brief statement of disagreement).

The decision is announced in an open session of the Court and is binding only on the parties involved in the case and only in this case. The decision of the Court is final and can only be appealed on the basis of newly discovered circumstances, which by their nature may have a decisive influence on the outcome of the case and which, at the time of the decision, were not known to either the Court or the party asking for review. No request for review may be made after 10 years from the date of the decision.

According to the previously mentioned Art. 38 of the Statute, the Court resolves disputes on the basis of international law, applying: international conventions expressly recognized by the disputing states; international custom: general principles of law recognized by civilized nations. The court may also take judicial decisions and doctrine into account as an aid in determining the rule of law. But the Court may, if the parties so agree, decide cases on the basis of justice (ex aequo et bono).

If any party in the case fails to fulfill the obligations imposed on it by the decision of the Court, the other party has the right to apply to the UN Security Council, which can make recommendations or decide what measures to take to enforce the decision (paragraph 2 of Article 94 UN Charter).

During its existence, the International Court of Justice has considered 90 controversial cases concerning the interpretation and application of international treaties, sovereignty over certain territories, the delimitation of maritime spaces and the continental shelf, etc. Its decision of June 27, 1986 on the suit of Nicaragua against the United States, has gained quite wide popularity. in which the Court declared the military and paramilitary actions of the United States illegal and ordered them to compensate Nicaragua for the damage caused.

The International Court of Justice is also empowered to give advisory opinions on any legal issue at the request of the General Assembly and the UN Security Council. Other UN bodies and specialized agencies may request advisory opinions on legal matters with the permission of the General Assembly. Such permission has been given to more than 20 bodies and organizations on a permanent basis. At the same time, requests should not go beyond their competence. For example, in 1996, the International Court of Justice refused to give an advisory opinion at the request of the World Health Organization (WHO) on the legality of the use of nuclear weapons by a state during an armed conflict, indicating that this issue is not within the competence of the WHO.

An advisory opinion is an opinion of international judges on a particular legal issue and. is usually advisory. However, the requesting party may be bound by the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice. Since 1946, the International Court of Justice has issued 25 advisory opinions.

The advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice of July 8, 1996, on the request of the UN General Assembly on the legality of the threat or use of nuclear weapons, caused a great resonance. In it, the International Court of Justice, inter alia, ruled unanimously that neither customary nor international treaty law contains any specific agreement regarding the threat or use of nuclear weapons. The Court will also unanimously hold that the threat or use of force using nuclear weapons, which is contrary to the provisions of paragraph 4 of Article 2 and Article 51 of the UN Charter, is unlawful.

The existence of the International Court of Justice does not exclude the possibility of creating special international courts on the basis of other agreements, both universal and regional. In this regard, we can name the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, the European Court of Human Rights, the American Court of Human Rights. EU Court of Justice, Court of the East African Community, etc.

The International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea was established in accordance with the 1982 UN Convention as a body designed to resolve disputes arising from the activities of states at sea. According to Art. 2 of the Statute (Appendix VI to the 1982 UN Convention) The International Tribunal consists of 21 judges who are elected for nine years and may be re-elected for a new term. At the same time, the composition of the Tribunal must ensure the representation of the main legal systems and equitable geographical distribution (Article 3 of the Statute).

Each state party to the UN Convention may nominate no more than two candidates. Elections shall be held at the Meeting of States Parties with a two-thirds quorum. During the first elections, the Russian lawyer A.L. was elected to the Tribunal. Kolodkin.

The tribunal is called upon to resolve disputes between states parties to the 1982 UN Convention concerning the interpretation or application of this Convention. In addition, it has the right to consider disputes arising from the interpretation or application of any other international agreements in the field of the law of the sea, if such agreements provide for the competence of the Tribunal.

The Tribunal (and this is its peculiarity) is competent to consider disputes not only between states, but also between states and the Seabed Authority (ie, an international Organization), as well as between individuals and legal entities. However, this applies only to disputes related to the regime and use of the deep seabed.

The Tribunal may serve at full strength or with a quorum of 11 judges, and may also form special chambers of three or more elected members to deal with specific categories of disputes. Each year, the Tribunal establishes a chamber of five judges for the purpose of expediting summary judgment. As in the International Court of Justice, disputes are submitted to the Tribunal either by special agreement between the parties to the dispute, or by a written application by one of the parties, provided that both parties have accepted the compulsory jurisdiction of the Tribunal.

When considering cases, the Tribunal applies the 1982 UN Convention and other norms of international law that are not incompatible with the Convention, and may also decide the case ex aequo et bono, if the parties so agree (Article 293 of the Convention).

The decision of the Tribunal is final and implemented by all parties to the dispute, while it is binding only on the parties to the dispute and only in this case (Article 33 of the Statute).

System of means for peaceful settlement of international disputes

Direct negotiations occupy a special place in the system of peaceful means of resolving disputes. Without negotiations on the merits, a peaceful settlement of international disputes is generally impossible, because the use of all peaceful means, one way or another, is connected with negotiations.

Consultations are essentially a type of negotiation. It's relative new way peaceful settlement of disputes, its appearance dates back to the 20th century. Differ optional and mandatory consultations.

Optional are consultations, which the parties resort to in each specific case by mutual agreement. TO compulsory include consultations, the conduct of which is stipulated in advance in the agreement in case of disagreements between its participants.

Good offices and mediation are peaceful means of resolving international disputes with the help of a third party. There are many similarities between them, but there are also differences.

The party providing good offices should not participate in the negotiations and influence their course. Mediation involves a more active involvement of a third party. Its purpose is not only to establish contacts between the disputing parties, but also to achieve reconciliation between them. Having broad rights, the mediator must comply with certain obligations: to refrain from assisting one party to the detriment of the other; respect sovereign rights, honor and dignity of the disputing states.

Good offices and mediation can be individual and collective. They can be provided by the state, an international organization, their officials, private individuals, as a rule, prominent public figures.

International investigative and conciliation commissions are bodies created by the disputing parties on a parity basis, sometimes with the involvement of a third party. In the UN Charter, these peaceful means are designated by the terms " survey" And " reconciliation».

The task of the commissions of inquiry is to accurately establish the facts related to the dispute. Conciliation commissions are not limited to clarifying the factual side of the case, they make efforts to resolve the dispute and make proposals for this purpose.

International Arbitration(arbitration) - dispute resolution by a third party, the decision of which is binding on the disputing parties. Arbitration as a means of settling international disputes has been known since the days of slave-owning states. A significant contribution to the development of the international arbitration procedure was made by the Hague Conventions on the Peaceful Settlement of International Clashes (1899 and 1907). General Act for the Peaceful Settlement of International Disputes (1928). In 1958, the General Assembly approved the Model Arbitration Rules. They are advisory in nature. Modern international practice knows two types of arbitration bodies: ad hoc and permanent arbitration.



ad hoc arbitration established by agreement of the parties in relation to this particular dispute. Such an agreement is called a compromise, or arbitration record. In it, the parties determine the subject of the dispute to be resolved by the arbitration court, the competence of the court, the principles and procedure for arbitration, the composition of the court. The arbitration entry must also include the mutual obligation of the parties regarding the adoption and execution of the arbitration award.

Permanent arbitration It is a permanent arbitration body to which the parties may, by mutual agreement, submit disputes that arise between them.

There are two types of jurisdiction of permanent arbitration bodies - voluntary and compulsory. With a voluntary one, the mutual consent of the parties to apply to an arbitration body is required, and with a mandatory one, the requirement of one of the parties to the dispute is sufficient. Mandatory arbitration is formalized by including a so-called arbitration clause in an international treaty.

The execution of the arbitral award is mandatory. According to the Hague Conventions, an arbitration award may be reviewed if, after its issuance, new important circumstances have emerged that could have a decisive influence on the outcome of the case.

The arbitral tribunal may consist of one person (necessarily a citizen of a third state) or a group of persons (citizens of third states or citizens of the disputing parties and third states).

In 1901, on the basis of the Hague Conventions, the Permanent Court of Arbitration was established, located in The Hague (Netherlands). The structure of the Chamber has two permanent bodies: the International Bureau and the Administrative Council. The Bureau performs the functions of an office: the parties inform it of their decision to apply to the arbitration court. The Bureau liaises between the parties in disputes referred to the Chamber. The activities of the International Bureau are supervised by the Administrative Council, which consists of diplomatic representatives of the states-participants of the Hague Conventions accredited in The Hague. The Council is chaired by the Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Netherlands. The Council decides all administrative matters, including financial ones, appoints and dismisses the employees of the Bureau. As for the arbitral tribunal itself, it exists in the form of a list of persons from among which the disputing states can choose arbitrators. The list of arbitrators is compiled as follows: each state party to the Hague Conventions appoints for a period of 6 years no more than 4 persons who, “would be known for their knowledge of international law, would enjoy the fullest personal respect and would express their readiness to assume the duties of an arbitrator judges". Currently there are about 300 persons on the list.

The disputing states that wish to apply to arbitration constitute a compromise, or an arbitration record. Arbitration, as a general rule, consists of two parts: a written investigation and debate. Court deliberations are held behind closed doors. During the time when the dispute is the subject of the arbitration procedure, the parties are obliged to refrain from any actions that could adversely affect the consideration of the dispute. The decision is made by a majority of votes and must be motivated.

International litigation has many similarities with international arbitration. The main thing that brings them together is the binding nature of decisions. At the same time, from the point of view of international law, the decisions of the international court and the decisions of the arbitration court have the same force. The difference between them is mainly of an organizational nature: the composition of the arbitral tribunal depends on the will of the disputing parties, while the composition of the international court is determined in advance; the arbitral tribunal is formed when interested parties apply to it, while the international court sits permanently and the judges must be at its disposal at all times.

International Court of Justice(seat - The Hague) is one of the main bodies of the UN, whose task is the implementation of international justice. Its composition and competence are determined by the UN Charter and the Statute of the International Court of Justice.

According to the Statute, only states can be parties in cases before the Court. The jurisdiction of the Court is subject to all cases referred to it by the parties, all issues specifically provided for by the Charter of the United Nations or existing treaties and conventions. The jurisdiction of the Court, however, is optional. This means that a dispute can become an object of consideration in the Court only with the consent of all the disputing parties. Such consent is given in a special agreement between the disputing parties to refer the case to the Court. States parties to the Statute may, at any time, by declaration, recognize the jurisdiction of the Court as compulsory in all legal disputes, the categories of which are listed in Art. 36: interpretation of the contract; any question of international law.