Document Type : Research Paper

Author

• Abdollah Abedini

Faculty Member of the Institution for Research and Development in the Humanities (SAMT)

Abstract

In most of the cases filed with the International Court of Justice concerning the Genocide Convention, the Applicants have sought an interim order to cease the Respondent’s military operations. While the Court’s case law shows that in most cases these requests have been dismissed by the Court due to their lack of subject-matter relevance to the Genocide Convention, in some cases this request has also been granted. The only reason expressed in the separate opinions of the judges in these cases is the humanitarian crisis, which in previous cases also existed, perhaps even more severely. Another point that the Court’s case law has established in these cases is the lack of subject-matter relevance of the use of force or self-defense to the provisions of the Genocide Convention. Although the requested interim order must be related to the alleged rights contained in the instrument granting jurisdiction to the Court, in some cases the Court, despite acknowledging the lack of connection between the use of force and the provisions of the Genocide Convention, has referred to the cessation of military operations in the interim order.

Keywords

• "
• Military Operations"
• Obligation to Prevent Genocide"
• General International Law "
• Independence of Interim Order"
• ،"
• Self-defense"

Main Subjects

• International Law