Should Japan Apply To The International Court Of Justice?
(3) To appeal to international society
The final scenario is that not to fight and not to shelve. Japan appeal to international society. More concretely, Japan should apply to the International Court of Justice (ICJ).
The International Court of Justice, also known as the World Court, is the main judicial organization of the UN. There are fifteen judges elected by the General Assembly and the Security Council. This special court of justice decides disputes between countries, based on the voluntary participation of the States concerned.
If a State agrees to participate in a proceeding, it is obligated to comply with the Court's decision. Japan has agreed compulsory jurisdiction and China have never agreed.
The problem of ICJ is lacking …show more content…
As Japan has already been valid under control over the Senkaku Islands, from a strategic standpoint, Japan decided that there is no need to take a risk to lose a judge. Nevertheless, Japanese government should bring the Senkaku dispute into the ICJ. It mean that Japan discard the stance that there is no territorial dispute over the Senkaku Islands. Even though appealing to the ICJ would change Japan's original stance, there are certain advantages for Japan to appeal to the ICJ. Then the pros to appeal to the ICJ will be examined. There are small disadvantage to apply the ICJ. In contrast, there are at least five advantages to apply the …show more content…
If China will refuse international legal solvent and will continue to increase military expenses, government of Japan would justify the movement, such as strengthening the defense of the Senkakus Islands and nationalization.
Last one is that taking the case to the ICJ would be coherent with the strategic approach to international relations. The Japanese government has taken an action that appealing the territorial dispute over the Takeshima against South Korea to the ICJ, while South Korea has denied. It is inconsistent that refusing to submit the Senkaku Island dispute and seeking to take Takeshima simultaneously. If Japan submitted the Senkakus issue to the ICJ it would match with the present stance on Takeshima and promote the future use of international legal mechanisms in resolving territorial
The final scenario is that not to fight and not to shelve. Japan appeal to international society. More concretely, Japan should apply to the International Court of Justice (ICJ).
The International Court of Justice, also known as the World Court, is the main judicial organization of the UN. There are fifteen judges elected by the General Assembly and the Security Council. This special court of justice decides disputes between countries, based on the voluntary participation of the States concerned.
If a State agrees to participate in a proceeding, it is obligated to comply with the Court's decision. Japan has agreed compulsory jurisdiction and China have never agreed.
The problem of ICJ is lacking …show more content…
As Japan has already been valid under control over the Senkaku Islands, from a strategic standpoint, Japan decided that there is no need to take a risk to lose a judge. Nevertheless, Japanese government should bring the Senkaku dispute into the ICJ. It mean that Japan discard the stance that there is no territorial dispute over the Senkaku Islands. Even though appealing to the ICJ would change Japan's original stance, there are certain advantages for Japan to appeal to the ICJ. Then the pros to appeal to the ICJ will be examined. There are small disadvantage to apply the ICJ. In contrast, there are at least five advantages to apply the …show more content…
If China will refuse international legal solvent and will continue to increase military expenses, government of Japan would justify the movement, such as strengthening the defense of the Senkakus Islands and nationalization.
Last one is that taking the case to the ICJ would be coherent with the strategic approach to international relations. The Japanese government has taken an action that appealing the territorial dispute over the Takeshima against South Korea to the ICJ, while South Korea has denied. It is inconsistent that refusing to submit the Senkaku Island dispute and seeking to take Takeshima simultaneously. If Japan submitted the Senkakus issue to the ICJ it would match with the present stance on Takeshima and promote the future use of international legal mechanisms in resolving territorial