Marshall Islands, ICJ Day 6 part 2

Day Six at the ICJ (Part Two): Appealing to Sentiment

Facebook
<http://org2.salsalabs.com/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=H%2BfVHzPqEfJyncrQKBUBfaLWlhi7bu9N>
Twitter
<http://org2.salsalabs.com/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=yHFxBdCi1DU4cd22cfqlgqLWlhi7bu9N>
Addthis
<http://org2.salsalabs.com/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=x%2FsUYRkxPgyJGp5WVQP6mqLWlhi7bu9N>

Sir Daniel Bethlehem

Yesterday afternoon, the United Kingdom completed its oral arguments
<http://org2.salsalabs.com/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=5S92e31gYYtiAkiymJocU6LWlhi7bu9N>
in the case brought against it by the Marshall Islands at the
International Court of Justice. Sir Daniel Bethlehem, Counsel for the
United Kingdom, opened his pleadings on a seemingly conciliatory note.
He recognized the Marshall Islands’ “special interest that is borne of
an historical legacy [of nuclear weapons testing] that is not of their
making, and with consequences that are shocking to us all.”

Sir Bethlehem continued: “I make these observations to underline that we
take the Marshall Islands seriously and would not wish the fact of our
objections to jurisdiction and admissibility to be taken for
dismissiveness or a lack of regard for the issues that they raise. We
are neither dismissive nor do we minimize the seriousness of the issues
that they highlight.”

He quickly changed his tone, however, when he told the Court, “The
relief that [the Marshall Islands] would wish from the Court does not
become more consonant with the judicial function simply because it comes
with an appeal to sentiment.”

Last Friday after the Marshall Islands finished its first round of oral
arguments against the UK, Judge Mohamed Bennouna of Morocco asked both
sides to prepare a response – to be delivered this week – about the
position of each country regarding the interpretation and application of
Article VI of the Non-Proliferation Treaty. Sir Bethlehem recounted many
instances of the UK stating that it takes its Article VI obligations
seriously and that it believes in a “step-by-step” approach to nuclear
disarmament. Judge Bennouna was clear in asking each side to answer
“each for its own part,” or to speak only about its own position and not
to speculate on the other side’s.

Nevertheless, Sir Bethlehem engaged in lengthy speculation about what
the Marshall Islands might say in its response to the question on
Wednesday. Some of the 16 Judges on the bench appeared quite annoyed at
his disregard for the clear order of Judge Bennouna.

In its final submissions to the Court on Monday, “The United Kingdom
requests the Court to adjudge and declare that it lacks jurisdiction
over the claim brought against the United Kingdom by the Marshall
Islands, or that the claim brought against the United Kingdom by the
Marshall Islands is inadmissible.”

The Marshall Islands will present its final oral arguments in the case
against the UK tomorrow, 16 March, starting at 3:00 pm CET. The hearings
can be livestreamed on the ICJ website at www.icj-cij.org
<http://org2.salsalabs.com/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=awuRziewakTJWuAdgQJYR6LWlhi7bu9N>.

Also tomorrow, starting at 10:00 am CET, India will present its final
oral arguments at the ICJ.

————————————————————————

/Rick Wayman is Director of Programs at the Nuclear Age Peace
Foundation. He is tweeting about the ICJ hearings at //@rickwayman/
<http://org2.salsalabs.com/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=yWDYkOcQ5lGs5TJelCWOhKLWlhi7bu9N><http://org2.salsalabs.com/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=GSB0L1dectFBLXo%2FvQ77waLWlhi7bu9N>/.
You can also get updates from the NAPF //Facebook/
<http://org2.salsalabs.com/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=kz%2F8Y1naKQUtVPJFSksAaqLWlhi7bu9N>/and
//Twitter/
<http://org2.salsalabs.com/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=J%2BNZ%2FPytFd70l%2BqBnOpEAqLWlhi7bu9N>/feeds,
and video of the oral arguments is available on the//ICJ website/
<http://org2.salsalabs.com/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=gHtxWl0bxKXcCvSuC6cXAaLWlhi7bu9N>.