100%(7)7 out of 7 people found this document helpful
This preview shows page 80 out of 80 pages.
citing Art 24 of the Montreal Convention which allowed it the right to choose whether to extradite or not. While it was clear in this case that Art 103 of the UN Charter would make the obligation on Libya to extradite as a result of the UNSC Resolutions trump any obligation under any other treaty, the court never determined whether it has the jurisdiction to rule on the legality of a UNSC Resolution according to international law.b.Principles - as the highest body in international law, it would be remiss for ICJ to not have the ability to make decisions about the legality of UNSC actions.i.The ICJ and SC are recognised as having concurrent jurisdiction over international disputes. For ICJ to fulfil its role as protector of international law, it must be able to determine legality of SC action. ii. Question: would the ICJ in other cases have the power to determine whether the UNSC made a correct appraisal of a situation as constituting a threat tointernational peace, breach of the peace or an act of aggression? Further, should the ICJ be able to determine whether certain acts, e.g. the redrawing of states' borders (Legal Consequences Case), are beyond the power of the UNSC.Distributing prohibited | Downloaded by rtha tha ([email protected])lOMoARcPSD|1981913