Ireland has become the 67th country to voluntarily accept the compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice. Addressing the court in The Hague on Tuesday, the Irish President Mary McAleese said that, "As a country with a tradition of military neutrality, Ireland has brought its unique voice to issues such as disarmament, peacekeeping, human rights and development." But does Ireland honour international standards?

By Geraldine Coughlan, The Hague

McAleese said Ireland accepted the court’s compulsory jurisdiction as part of its policy to enhance the country’s role in the international community. The ICJ is the principal judicial organ of the United Nations established as part of its charter and set up in 1946.

William Schabas, Director of the Irish Centre for Human Rights, said Ireland’s acceptance is long overdue, but marks its "commitment to the international world order".

By accepting the court’s jurisdiction, Ireland joins 66 other countries out of 192 members who have voluntarily accepted its compulsory jurisdiction, including 19 EU member states.

The acceptance of compulsory jurisdiction by states is the most effective basis for the court’s jurisdiction because the parties concerned want the dispute to be resolved by the court and so are more likely to comply with the court’s judgement.

Limited powers
Since the 1980s there has been an increase in willingness to use the court. But the US has rejected compulsory jurisdiction and only accepts it on a case-by-case basis.

After the ICJ ruled in Nicaragua v. USA, that the covert war by the US against Nicaragua was in violation of international law, the US withdrew from compulsory jurisdiction in 1986. The ICJ ordered the US to pay reparations, although it never did.

Chapter XIV

Chapter XIV of the UN Charter authorises the UN Security Council to enforce World Court rulings. However, such enforcement is subject to the veto power of the five permanent members of the Council.

Theory

In theory, a judgement of the court is binding, final and without appeal. If either party fails to obey, the Security Council may be called upon to "make recommendations or decide upon measures" if the Council deems it necessary.

Practice

In practice, however, the court's powers have been limited by the unwillingness of losing parties to abide by the court's ruling, and by the Security Council's unwillingness to enforce consequences.

Coercive action
If the Security Council refuses to enforce a judgement against any other state, there is no way to force the state to comply. The most effective form of action for the Security Council is coercive action under Chapter VII of the UN Charter. But this can only be justified if international peace and security are at stake. The Security Council has never done this so far.

Degrading treatment

William Schabas said that Ireland’s acceptance of compulsory jurisdiction is mainly a symbolic gesture, as “scores of States won’t be lining up to sue a country as small as Ireland.”

However, the fifth report on Ireland from the Council of Europe Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Degrading Treatment (CPT), is not so symbolic. It is the most critical yet. And a damning indictment of a prison system that is failing to meet the most basic human rights standards of safe and humane custody.