IIMUN 17 PROCEDURAL GUIDE FOR THE INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE

IIMUN 17 PROCEDURAL GUIDE FOR THE INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE

Procedural Guide for the International Court of Justice In this guide, you will find important information about International Court of Justice (ICJ). Also, rules of procedure are provided specifically in this guide. In International Court of Justice, the official language is English and it is prohibited to speak any other language in the committee. In the ICJ, there are 19 judges (including the court officers) who examine the cases and give decisions for the disputes during the sessions. In addition, using third-person pronouns is not allowed. Introduction: 1) Structure of the Court: a) The President: The President is the person who leads the court. The President has some duties like opening/closing the session and recognizing parties to present their arguments. Also, the President can give some suggestions if it is necessary to ensure the fairness. The judgements must be approved by the President. The President may yield his/her duties to the Vice-President at any moment. b) The Vice-President: The Vice-President is in charge of keeping a record of the hearings and assigned to help the President. The Vice-President is the moderator of the hearings. The Vice-President may assume the duties of the President in case of an absence of the President. Also, the Vice-President has the power of giving procedural decisions. c) The Registrar: The Registrar is the person who is responsible for keeping the registry of the Court and classification numbers of the all documents and also from the evidences. The Registrar should also prepare a report of the hearings to add to the case file. d) Judges: Judges are responsible for deliberations regarding the disputes. Before they start the hearings, they will take an oath. They ask advocates and witnesses questions and analyze the arguments and the evidence. At the end, they make the final decision together. e) Advocates: Each party is represented by no more than two advocates. Advocates need to have a great knowledge about the topic. Advocates represent a country to defend a case. f) Applicant and Respondent: Applicant is the party who brings a claim to other party. Respondent is the party who was being faced with the lawsuit. In the opening speeches, firstly the applicant side makes the speech.

g) Modes of Address: The judges must be addressed as Your Honor or Judge (Surname) The Presidents must be addressed as Mr./Madam President. The advocates may be called as Advocate or Counsel if it is referred to specific advocates. The Registrar is called The Registrar Witnesses may be called Ms./Mr. (Surname) 2) Rules of Procedure: a) Quorum: The President declares the start of the session. After the declaration, he/she proceeds with the role-call. b) Opening Speeches: Advocates make opening speeches regarding the case. The speech must consist of general arguments about the case. First, the Applicant Party makes their opening speech and after that the Respondent Party makes their opening speech. The time limit of the speeches is 15 minutes. c) Pre-Hearing: Hearings are presented by the advocates. The advocates are informed about the time so that they could prepare their defense of the case. The court should provide information about the case and the facts of the case. A memorial has to be delivered to the court by the advocates according to the information which is given to them. The facts of the case, arguments on the issue and the explanation of the law must be included into the memorial. The memorials must be delivered to the court no later than the day of the first hearing. The times of the hearings are announced by the court. d) Stipulations: If there are agreements on specific issues between the two parties, the parties can write stipulations. Stipulations are the facts that the both parties agree on. In the stipulations, the definition of key terms, historical events, activities that occurred so far and treaties/agreements which are signed between the two countries should be indicated. Sample Stipulation International Court of Justice Beijing Model United Nations 2007 Sovereignty over Pedra Branca/Pulau Batu Puteh, Middle Rocks and South Ledge (Malaysia vs Singapore) Advocates of Singapore: Richard Yeung, Emily Cho Advocates of Malaysia: Philip Mar, Henry Sackville-Hamilton.

A treaty between the Sultan of Johor and the British was signed on Feb. 6th 1819, acknowledging British rule over Singapore. Both the British and Dutch held joint occupation of the Malay region (including Malaysia, Singapore, and Indonesia) until the Anglo-Dutch treaty was signed in 1824 in which the Dutch withdrew all objections to British rule over Singapore. Thus Singapore and the 10 nautical miles of sea around it were lawfully given to the British East India Company Malaysia and Singapore were under Japanese rule in the earlier 1940 s during war, until the British rule resumed in 1945. The Rendel Constitution, introduced in 1955, granted Singapore self-independent governance. The Malaysia Agreement was signed in 1963, establishing the Federation of Malaya, which included Sabah, Sarawak, and Singapore. The Republic of Singapore Independence Act of 1965, the Constitution of Singapore Act, and the Constitution of Malaysia Act finalized the full independence of Singapore. The Separation Agreement between Singapore and Malaysia, in 1965, did not address the issue of sovereignty over Pedra Branca. The construction of the Horsburgh Lighthouse on Pedra Branca was rightfully granted by the Sultan of Johor in 1844, and established in 1851. Malaysia began publishing maps that indicated Pedra Branca as Malaysian territory in 1979. Malaysian maps in 1974 indicated Pedra Branca as Singaporean territory. Radar communication facility and helipad were built on the island in 1989 and 1991 respectively. On Feb. 6th 2003 Malaysia signed the Special Agreement for Submission to the International Court of Justice of the Dispute between Malaysia and Singapore Concerning Sovereignty over Pedra Branca/Pulau Batu Puteh, Middle Rocks and South Ledge in Putrajaya, Malaysia. Both Singapore and Malaysia have agreed to conditions set forth by the International Convention on the Law of the Sea. The use of the names Pedra Branca/Pulau Batu Puteh or vice versa, or the use of only one or the other by any party will not have any bearing on the judgment or argument of either party or judge before, during or after the Court session. Sovereignty will be defined as a nation s right to full independent control of a specific area Status Quo will be defined as the existing state of affairs. Pedra Branca also known as Pulau Batu Puteh in Malaysia, is a small island located where the Straits of Johor and South China Sea meet, Latitude 1 19' 48" and Longitude 104 24' 28", and has the area of 2,000 m2. The Johor Sultanate gave permission to the British to construct a lighthouse in 1844. Singapore was given administration over the Horsburgh Lighthouse on Pedra Branca/Pulau Batu Puteh by the British Straits Settlement. Singapore, Malacca and Penang, became the British Straits Settlements in 1826, under the jurisdiction of British India, and a Crown Colony in 1867. On 16 September 1963, Malaysia was formed, made up of the Federation of Malaya, Singapore, Sarawak and North Borneo.

Both governments have signed unto the Special Agreement and recognize the articles within. Any previous actions by either Malaysia or Singapore were taken in the belief that it was exercising its sovereign right in its own territory. e) Presenting Evidence: Each party will present their evidence to the court. When the parties are presenting their evidence, they should be careful about the format. They have to state the title, author, summary and date of the evidence. Evidence has to be given in detail to the court. The opposite party can agree or disagree with the evidence. Advocates may object the evidence due to one or more of these reasons: authenticity, undue bias, relevance, reliability, accuracy. The Registrar will record all the evidence presented by both parties. The evidence submitted by the Applicant Party will be marked with numbers 1, 2, 3 and the evidence submitted by the Respondent Party will marked with letters a, b, c by the Registrar. f) Weighing of Evidence: After the parties finish presenting their evidence, court start a closed session. In the closed session only judges and Presidents remain in the committee room. Each judge has to summarize the evidence and explain its connection to the case to the court. After that, the judges make the classification of the evidence as high, medium, or low depending on the accuracy, relevance, and its significance. Each evidence will be evaluated. g) Witnesses: Advocates have the right to choose witnesses. Witnesses may be selected from any other committee but the advocates have to inform the President about the number of witnesses they will call in order not to disturb other committees. The President makes the decision about the number of the witnesses. h) Direct Examination: Direct examination is the process of interrogation of witnesses by the party which has introduced the witness. i) Cross Examination: Cross examination is the process of interrogation of the witnesses by the opposite party advocates. Advocates from the opposite party questions the witnesses but only about the case considered. They may not ask questions which are not connected to the case. j) Judge Examination: After the process of direct and cross examination, it is time for the judge examination. Judge examination is the process of interrogation of the witnesses by judges. The judges ask the witnesses questions about the case.

During direct or cross examination, the advocates from the other party have the right to object to the question which is being asked to the witness. The Presidents decide whether to accept it or not. Different types of objections may be given; these are: - Hearsay - Leading Question - Speculation - Irrelevance - Badgering - Competence Hearsay: Out of court statements or acts that are allegedly made by someone other than the witness in question. In this case an objection should be given. The exception to this is if the person who made the statement is also a witness however, given the fact that advocates usually try and bring in varied perspectives through each witness, the probability of this situation is remote. Leading Question: Questions which suggest the answer by the very nature of the question, a simple example being You saw him, didn t you?. In this case an objection should be given. An exception to this rule is if the witness is an expert witness however, if a party wishes to introduce a witness as an expert witness in a field relevant to the case, the witness will first be subject to a different examination by the judges who will ask the witness several questions regarding his/her expertise in the field, such as years of practice, publications, etc. The judges will then decide whether to admit the witness as an expert or not. Speculation: If the witness tries to predict an outcome of an event during his/her examination and advocate is not questioning the witness, objection may be given. Irrelevance: If the witness s testimony does not have a connection to the case and the advocates are not questioning the witness, an objection may be given. Badgering: If the witness is put enormously under pressure from the questions that an advocate asks, this objection may be given. Competence: If the witness is asserted for a fact which he/she is not qualified from, this objection may be given. k) Closing Statements: After the process of examination of the witnesses, time is given to the advocates in order to make their closing remarks for 20 minutes. While advocates making their closing remarks, the advocates have to state their main arguments and give supporting points by the evidence. l) Deliberation: After advocates make their closing statements, advocates leave the committee room and then closed session begins. Only judges and Presidents remain in the committee

room and judges discuss. After the discussion, judges will announce the final decision they made. m) Judgement: After the process of deliberation, judges are required to write a verdict together.