The International Court is only open to the "country".Only the country has the question of "resorting to the court".But whether a certain entity is a country involves both facts and politics and laws, it is not a question of "non -black or white".
Palestine submitted a statement to the Secretary of the International Court on May 31, saying that it was decided to accept the jurisdiction of the International Court.All disputes that may be generated or generated.This statement takes effect immediately.What is the real purpose of Palestine?To understand this, two backgrounds need to be understood.
The first background was that Palestine's statement was issued based on the No. 9 resolution passed by the Security Council 1946. The resolution of the Security Council is closely related to the provisions of Article 35, paragraph 2, paragraph 2 of the International Court.Article 35, paragraph 2 of the International Court of International Court stipulates that "the court accepts the conditions for other countries in other countries. In addition to the current treaty, the Security Council is determined by the Security Council, but in any caseBased on this regulation, the Security Council made a decision on October 15, 1946.In the resolution, the Security Council stipulates that if a country of non -international courts, if the country of the country's regulations wants to resort to the international court, it should pay a statement to the Secretary of the International Court in advance to declareThe terms of the rules, as well as the conditions of the international courts and the rules of the international court, accept the jurisdiction of the International Court; the country must also promise to comply with the judgment made by the court with good faith, and accept all the UN member states in Article 94 of the United Nations Charter of the United Nations Charter.obligation.
The second background is that on the same day of submitting the statement, Palestine also submitted the application to the International Court.In the application, Palestinian requests to participate in the "Applicable Case of the Convention on Extinction" by the International Court of Find Article 62 and Article 63, and requests to participate in South Africa.Based on Article 62 and 63, a country requests to participate in a procedural lawsuit. Palestine is the first.
The aforementioned two backgrounds are interactive and are highly intertwined.In other words, if Palestine wants to participate in the international court's ongoing lawsuits, you must first obtain the qualifications of the "participation" lawsuit. This qualification is based on Article 35, paragraph 2, paragraph 2 of the International Court and 946th, 1946.Based on the decision.If Palestine does not issue a statement accepted by the international court in accordance with the regulations and the requirements of the Security Council's resolution, it is not qualified to request to participate in a lawsuit in the international court in the international court.
However, Palestine issued a statement that accepts the jurisdiction of the international court. The main purpose is to participate in South Africa to complain about Israel's "applicable to the Convention on Extinction"?The answer is obviously not.
The main purpose is to join the United Nations
Palestine submits not only the statement, but also submitted an application. Of course, the main purpose is not to "help" for the identity of the "United Nations Member State".Why do you say that?
So far, due to the influence of Israel's action against Hamas, Palestine has inspired widespread sympathy worldwide and acknowledged that Palestine's national camps are continuously expanding.So far, Palestine has been recognized by 143 countries, which does not include the Vatican and Sahara.Nevertheless, it has not yet made a breakthrough on the issue of joining the United Nations. As long as the American attitude has not been loosened, it wants to successfully join the United Nations. I am afraid there is no hope in the short term.
In this context, pressure to the United Nations Conference, especially the Security Council through the "curve saving the country", is probably the main purpose of Palestine submitted the aforementioned statement and participating in the request.This kind of "curve saves the country" is the "country" identity, whether it is legal or de facto.After all, in Palestine's view, once the international court determines that it is acceptable to participate in the request, and in fact, the "national" legal identity is equivalent to being recognized by the international court of the six major United Nations agencies.Considering that the International Court is the main judicial organs in the United Nations system, it is extremely authoritative in the interpretation and application of international law. Of course, this determination is of course a pressure for other United Nations agencies.Through the International Court of "pressure" to the Security Council, maybe it was Palestine's Ruyi abacus.
However, can this abacus of Palestine succeed?The author thinks it is not very optimistic.The international court is unlikely to advance in this regard, especially in the context of the Security Council to join the UN issue on the Palestinian Council to form a deadlock.The mystery of this is that the "country" in Article 35 of the International Court of Finding is not a question you want to explain, and the international court will give you a "step" problem.
As we all know, the international courts are only open to "national".Only the country has the problem of the so -called "Access to the Court".But whether a certain entity is a country involves both facts and politics and laws, it is not a question of "non -black or white".Judging from the existing cases in the past, the international court attaches great importance to the importance of the United Nations to exercise the right to "resort to the court".
In other words, the international court's attitude in this regard is very cautious and will not explain its important jurisprudence.The reason is simple. Once it is really explained, I agree with Palestine's participation requests. How should Cosovo and other similar issues or situations respond?Did it open the Pandora box because of this?Considering the importance of such situations for the stability of the existing international relations system, the international court may not agree with Palestine's participation requests.
The author is a professor of international law at the School of Law School of Zhejiang University of Technology
