' 1 7 U N N M M PROCEDURAL GUIDE INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE The table of contents in a book will help you to find the names of the chapters of the book and the page number where each chapter begins. Each chapter of the book will have a name and usually has a chapter number.
PROCEDURAL GUIDE FOR THE INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE LETTER FROM THE PRESIDENT Greetings, justices, counsels, and everyone in between! It gives me great pleasure in welcoming you to the International Court of Justice on behalf of the entire NMMUN 17 Secretariat, and in particular, the Executive Board of ICJ. I won t paint you a misleading, albeit pretty, picture of the world: the world is a frightening place; it always has been and always will be. We don t need to look beyond our neighbors to see why. Right next door, the Burmese army is waging a ruthless war against an ethnic minority the Rohingya Muslims while Nobel laureate and de facto head of the Burmese government Aung San Suu Kyi remains silent. Many consider it nothing less than a genocide that has left the Rohingya Muslims a stateless people. Moving a little further, to the heart of the Middle East, is the epicenter of the biggest refugee crisis since the Second World War. In a war that is far from over, 11 million people have been forced to leave their comfortable lives behind and attempt dangerous journeys to relatively peaceful countries. Sure, the world is a mess, but don t give up hope just yet. During the three days of the NMMUN, you will be the torchbearers of hope as Lady Justice, blindfolded, torch and sword in hand, smiles down on you. You must ensure that the scales are always even, that the sword metes out punishment to the guilty, and not the innocent. You must take justice into your hands. Now, a little less rhetoric, and a little more about me. I m an eternally sleep-deprived 12 th grader who is struggling to balance the IB and life. When I m not obsessively reading anything I can get my hands on, I can be found staring at my laptop, with 20 tabs open in 6 different windows, ranging from Reuters to Wikipedia. I study a unique combination of subjects, with my pick from the Science and Humanities streams. Although I can never resist the charm of any subject that comes my way, my heart belongs to Literature and Economics. If you re ever caught in a quagmire, or just need someone to talk to, you can always count on me. My co-president, Rohit, is in every way a Rockstar. The only thing greater than his love for music is his infectious charm. So, make sure to get vaccinated (Did I mention I crack the lamest jokes known to humankind?). He defies the very laws of the universe by being a Science student with a thriving social life. All fun apart, Rohit, deep, deep down, is a sweetheart who brings the party with himself wherever he goes. Tanay, our faithful Vice-President, is the bed-rock of ICJ. A hard-working Commerce student, he spends his free-time analyzing anything he can, from current affairs to life. If you ever need someone to lend you an ear late at night, Tanay is your guy!
To end this letter off the way I started: the world is a scary place, but you have the power to make it better. I hope to see you, well-researched, in Committee this September! Until then, Pavas Gupta President International Court of Justice, NMMUN 17 INTRODUCTION TO THE ICJ THE COURT The International Court of Justice (ICJ) is the principal judicial organ of the United Nations (UN). It was established in June 1945 by the Charter of the United Nations and began work in April 1946. The Court s role is to settle, in accordance with international law, legal disputes submitted to it by States and to give advisory opinions on legal questions referred to it by authorized United Nations organs and specialized agencies. ROLE OF STAFF AND DELEGATES President (Moderator) The President is the Presiding Justice of the ICJ, who is elected every 3 years by his/her fellow Justices (i.e. judges). At NMMUN, the committee Moderator will assume the role of the President. However, the Moderator who is a staff member will neither interfere in substantive debate nor take part in voting. The Presiding Justice is responsible for chairing the Court s proceedings and moderating debate. He or she ensures that the committee operates in a smooth and efficient manner. The Moderator shall be addressed as President and referred to as Presiding Justice while the Court is in session. Vice-President (Director)
The Vice-President is an ICJ Justice who is elected from among his/her peers every 3 years. At NMMUN, the committee Director will assume the role of the Vice- President. Like the Moderator, the Director will neither interfere in substantive debate nor take part in voting. The Director is an additional Justice beyond the normal fifteen. The Director is responsible for managing the substantive work of the Court during Conference. He or she will also edit drafts of the Court s judgment, helping delegates structure their ideas for the sake of clarity and persuasion. The Director will ensure that all delegates accurately play their respective roles, whether as Counsel for a State or as an impartial Justice. The Director shall be addressed as Vice-President and referred to as Justice while the Court is in session. Justices The Justices are responsible for passing judgment on each of the cases presented to the Court. Delegates will assume the roles of the Justices. Before the conference, the Justices will thoroughly research the facts and relevant law of the two cases to write a Preliminary Opinion on each case, which shall take the place of a position paper. During the Conference, they will assess the evidence and arguments presented to the Court, and ask questions of the Counsel. After the Counsel have been heard, the Justices will debate the merits of each case and find in favor of or against either party. They will prepare a written judgment, which shall state the facts of the case and outline the legal reasoning behind the Court s decisions. The Justices judge the cases on the strength of the arguments and evidence presented to the Court, and do not represent the interests or policy positions of Member States. Counsel Working in teams, the Counsel will provide legal representation to the States that are party to the cases before the Court. Delegates will assume the roles of the Counsel. Before the conference, the Counsel will thoroughly research the cases on the Court s docket and prepare the arguments that they will present to the Court. They will also draft Memoranda, which shall take the place of position papers. During the conference, the Counsel will present evidence and oral arguments at length to the Court and take questions from the Justices. They will also respond to requests made by the Court for written submissions. DOCUMENTS Position Papers Both the Justices and the Counsel will write a 1-3 page Position Paper. Position Papers should be Times New Roman, font size 12, single-spaced, 1 margins, with MLA citation.
Both the Preliminary Opinions and the Memoranda should include the following: I. The full name of the committee; II. The full name of the court case and its parties; III. The State the Counsel represents (write Justice if you are a Justice); IV. The full name of your school; V. Your full name; VI. A Works Cited page including references to any outside sources used. Preliminary Opinions (Justices ONLY) The Justices Position Papers take the form of Preliminary Opinions. These should not reflect any member State s position on a case, but rather an objective opinion based on reading, research, and legal assessment of the issues in each case. The Preliminary Opinions should be written with utmost objectivity, based exclusively on fact and law. The Justices Preliminary Opinions should reflect the following: I. A statement of facts (What are the facts of the case?); II. A statement of the applicable law (What laws, customs, precedents or treaties apply?); III. An application of the law to the facts (How does the law view the situation?); IV. A conclusion (How should the various issues be resolved?). Memoranda (Counsel ONLY) Counsel will produce a Position Paper that will serve as both the Memorandum and Counter- Memorandum for the respective State party, and will outline the arguments of both sides. The Counsel s Memoranda should reflect the following for each case: I. A statement of facts (What are the facts of the case, as viewed in the light most favorable to your position?); II. A statement of the applicable law (What laws, customs, precedents or treaties apply?); III. A detailed argument section (How do the law and facts support your position?); a. A counter-argument to the anticipated arguments of the opposing Counsel (How will the opposing Counsel portray the law and facts? How can you counter their arguments?); IV. A summary and request for remedy (What do you want the Court to do?). Stipulations
A type of agreement between the two parties, Stipulations consist of a list of general facts that both parties agree upon, which is signed prior to the conference. The stipulation will be in the format of bullet points and will only consist of facts mutually understood by both parties, such as: Ø Ø Ø Ø Definition of key terms in the case Important historical events Activities by both countries Relevant treaties and agreements between the two parties Stipulation Process Both advocacies will communicate with each other before the conference begins by any medium suitable to both parties and will agree on a stipulation document. It should be submitted to the Presidents on the first day of the conference. 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. A treaty between the Sultan of Johor and the British was signed on Feb. 6 th, 1819, acknowledging British rule over Singapore. B. 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.
C. Singapore and the 10 nautical miles of sea around it were lawfully given to the British East India Company D. Malaysia and Singapore were under Japanese rule in the earlier 1940 s during war, until the British rule resumed in 1945. E. The Rendel Constitution, introduced in 1955, granted Singapore self-independent governance. F. The Malaysia Agreement was signed in 1963, establishing the Federation of Malaya, which included Sabah, Sarawak, and Singapore. G. 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. H. The Separation Agreement between Singapore and Malaysia, in 1965, did not address the issue of sovereignty over Pedra Branca. I. The construction of the Horsburgh Lighthouse on Pedra Branca was rightfully granted by the Sultan of Johor in 1844, and established in 1851. J. Malaysia began publishing maps that indicated Pedra Branca as Malaysian territory in 1979. K. Malaysian maps in 1974 indicated Pedra Branca as Singaporean territory. L. Radar communication facility and helipad were built on the island in 1989 and 1991 respectively. M. 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 N. Both Singapore and Malaysia have agreed to conditions set forth by the International Convention on the Law of the Sea. O. 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. P. Sovereignty will be defined as a nation s right to full independent control of a specific area Q. Status Quo will be defined as the existing state of affairs R. 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. S. The Johor Sultanate gave permission to the British to construct a lighthouse in 1844.
T. Singapore was given administration over the Horsburgh Lighthouse on Pedra Branca/Pulau Batu Puteh by the British Straits Settlement. U. Singapore, Malacca and Penang, became the British Straits Settlements in 1826, under the jurisdiction of British India, and a Crown Colony in 1867. V. On 16 September 1963, Malaysia was formed, made up of the Federation of Malaya, Singapore, Sarawak and North Borneo. W. Both governments have signed unto the Special Agreement and recognize the articles within. X. Any previous actions by either Malaysia or Singapore were taken in the belief that it was exercising its sovereign right in its own territory. Stages of Committee Special Rules for Debate & Caucusing Stage I II III IV V VI VII May Suspend Yes Varies Yes Yes Yes NO Yes the Sitting? Who can Justices, Counsel Counsel, Justices Justices Counsel Justices speak? Counsel Witnesses Time Limit? -- 15min (x2) 60min (x2) -- 4min 15min -- (x5) (x2) May justices No No Yes No No No No interrupt for Questioning? Counsel Permitted In Room? Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes No Stage One Convening the Court
Once the Presiding Justice has made his/her introduction, he or she will open the first sitting of the Court. The Presiding Justice will then conduct the Administration of the Oath to the Justices. The Oath is a declaration to carry out one s duties per certain personal and professional standards. Both Justices and Counsel will remain standing while this takes place. Once declarations are over, either Counsel or Justices may move to set the docket of the Court. After the docket has been set, Justices should suspend the sitting in order to consider: 1. The Counsel and witnesses may converse in informal speech. 2. Suspension of the sitting is permitted only after both opening statements are completed. 3. Counsel may respond to questions from the Justices. 4. Counsel may respond to questions from the Justices. 5. Each Counsel may request one 15-minute extension. 6. Justices may collectively request one 15-minute extension for open questioning without a round-robin. This requires a simple majority vote of the justices. 7. Counsel may re-enter the room for the reading of the judgment. During that time, the Counsel teams may meet to make final preparations for their opening statements and arguments. Stage Two Opening Statements The Presiding Justice will return the Court to formal session and invite the Applicant State to deliver their opening statements for the first case. After the Applicant Counsel has rested, the Respondent State will deliver their opening statements to the Court. Lasting 10-15 minutes each, the opening statements will preview the evidence and highlight the main points of law that are contended. It is strongly recommended that the Counsel prepare these statements prior to the conference and practice delivering them in public. Stage Three Presentation of the Case The Applicant Counsel will be invited to deliver their full arguments to the Court. Both team members are encouraged to speak. After the applicant has rested, the Respondent Counsel will be invited to deliver their full arguments to the Court. Each Counsel will be allowed up to ONE HOUR to present their arguments, evidence, and witnesses. Each Counsel may request a single 15-MINUTE extension. Both Counsel and Justices may motion to suspend the sitting as necessary. Time spent a suspension of the sitting does not count against the Counsel s presentation time limit. Neither does time spent in cross-examination, nor time that the Justices spend asking questions. During the presentation of the case, Counsel should present the facts of the case as viewed by the State they are representing, as well as
explain any law relevant to the case. The arguments should focus on the points of law that most divide the parties. The Justices will listen carefully to the arguments, taking notes on points that might shape their judgment. Justices may also interrupt the Counsel to ask questions. Evidence Counsel may submit written evidence only during the presentation of the case. No motion is required to submit evidence, which may be submitted either en masse or piecewise. However, Counsel should introduce and contextualize any evidence. Two types of written evidence are recognized at NMMUN 15. First, Counsel may submit original Memorials that summarize key parts of their oral arguments namely, the Counsel s position paper Memorials. Second, Counsel may submit excerpts from relevant treaties or other documents that might guide the Justices decision. Stage Four Initial Deliberations After the Counsels arguments have been heard, the Justices will begin debate of the issues. The Justices should focus on the key issues they outlined in their Preliminary Opinions, taking into consideration the oral proceedings. This is also the time to review evidence and testimony. The Justices should formulate a rough list of questions to put to the Counsel. These questions should be intended to help the Justices reach a final decision. This will be the Justices opportunity to clarify the Counsels arguments and address issues that were poorly covered. Stage Five Justice Questioning This phase will be conducted in a round robin. Each individual Justice will have 4 MINUTES for a total of ONE HOUR to ask questions of the Counsel to clarify issues, facts, and points of law. Questions should be directed to one Counsel or the other. Justices should not be confrontational, and should not engage the Counsel in informal conversation. One 15-MINUTE extension of the questioning period is allowed upon request - the extension will not use a round robin. Justices and Counsel may motion to suspend the sitting as necessary. Stage Six Closing Arguments The Respondent Counsel will be invited to deliver their closing arguments to the Court. After the Respondent Counsel has rested, the Applicant Counsel will deliver their closing arguments to the Court. Each Counsel will be allowed a maximum of 15 MINUTES to make
final remarks. Counsel should summarize their case, review the evidence & witness testimony, review their arguments, and request remedy from the Court. Witnesses Witness testimony (i.e. verbal evidence) shall be conducted during the presentation of the case. Counsel shall motion to present each witness. Counsel shall be afforded a brief period in which to prepare each witness just prior to testimony. The order and timing of witness testimony is at the discretion of the Counsel. The opposing Counsel may motion to cross-examine the witness, if desired, following each witness s testimony. If a witness is cross-examined, then the original Counsel may redirect. Only one crossexamination and redirection is permitted per witness. The list of expert witnesses will be provided to delegates before the conference, but sometime after the release of the background guides. NMMUN Staff will act as the witnesses. Witness Examination The human counterpart to documents of evidence in the field of law, witnesses add the key element of human experience to the process and their examination allows judges to delve into matter which is otherwise not readily available. The witness is first administered an oath. Witness examination has four parts: witness testimony direct examination, where the party that has introduced the witness questions the witness cross examination, where the opposing party will question the witness judge examination, where both the judges and the Presidents will be allowed to question the witnesses. Choosing Witnesses Each advocacy may have a maximum of three witnesses. Before the conference, advocacies will be assigned three people who will act as their witnesses (these will usually be members of the Secretariat. Advocates are advised to get in touch with them as soon as possible, to begin preparing them. Preparing Witnesses The first step in preparing your witness is to assign them an actual role, or person. It is important to remember that the witness cannot be made-up, i.e.- the witness s identity must exist in real life, and any witnesses whose identities are found to be fraudulent in nature will not be allowed to testify. Advocates are advised to coach their witnesses well witnesses should know what they will say during the witness testimony, what they will be asked on direct
examination, and what answers are expected, so long as they are truthful. Witnesses should also be prepared for cross examination, where the other party will aim to create a dispute over the witness s statements and will also aim to place the witness s credibility into question. Thus, it is important that even witnesses are well versed in the matter they are concerned with, and it is the advocacy s job to ensure that they are. Also, note, that witness can be of two types: Expert Witnesses and Regular Witnesses. An Expert Witness is a qualified expert in the field their testimony is regarding. They must be well prepared, as the judges and the opposing counsel may ask them questions about their field, to establish their credibility as expert witnesses. A few other key differences between the two kinds of witnesses are explained in the following sections. Witness Testimony Immediately after the oath has been administered, the witness will have around 1-2 minutes to simply talk about his/her role in the case, and mention the key evidence or facts they wish to bring forward. They should take care to be as accurate as possible, as the opposing counsel may try to find faults in the witness testimony during cross examination. In case they are an expert witness, they may also talk about what qualifies them to be an expert. During the testimony, judges are advised to take down notes. Objections During direct or cross examination, the advocacy not examining the witness at the time may object to certain questions or to testimony of a witness on the given grounds. Each type of objection is discussed below depending on the objection made, the Presidents will decide whether to accept the objection or not. If the objection is held as valid, the counsel questioning the witness must ask a different question or rephrase their question (in the case of objections to portions of testimony, judges will be asked not to take the portion of the testimony into consideration). However, the decision of the Presidents regarding an objection will be final, and there will be no further discussion or protest on the matter of the objection. If an important objection is not brought up by the concerned Advocacy, the Presidents themselves may bring up this objection. Hearsay: This objection can be raised if the advocate questioning the witness has asked a hearsay question- that is to say, a witness cannot be asked about an out-of-court statement or act allegedly made by someone other than the witness in question. 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: This objection can be raised if the advocate questioning the witness has asked a leading question. Leading questions are defined as questions which suggest the answer by the very nature of the question, a simple example being You saw him, didn t you? This is valid during direct examination and if the witness is not an expert witness. Speculation: If the witness attempts to predict the possible outcome of an event during his/her testimony, the advocates not questioning the witness may object to this portion of the witness s testimony. Irrelevance: If the advocates not questioning the witness at the time feel that a portion of the witness s testimony is irrelevant to the case at hand, said advocates may object to this portion of the witness s testimony. Badgering: If the advocates not questioning the witness at the time feel that the witness is being unduly intimidated by the questions being asked or by the way they are asked, they may object to such questions. Competence: If the advocates not questioning the witness at the time feel that the witness is asserting a fact that he/she is not qualified to make, said advocates may object to the statement made by the witness. Direct Examination Direct examination is the examination of a witness by the party who has introduced the witness. The fundamental rule of direct examination is that leading questions cannot be asked. 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 be subject to a dire 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. Cross Examination Cross examination, following direct examination, is the examination of a witness by the other party in the case. The main aim of cross-examination is to make the witness seem not credible and to create a dispute over the witness statements. The fundamental rule in the case of cross examination is that questions must only pertain to the testimony offered by the witness during direct examination that is to say, an advocate cannot ask the witness about events outside of those described during cross examination. However, advocates conducting cross examination of a witness can ask leading questions in fact, it is advised that advocates use the tool of leading questions to the fullest.
Judge Examination After both direct and cross examination have been completed, the judges are then free to ask any questions of the witnesses to gather information relevant to the case however, given time constraints, judges are advised to wisely select the most important questions as there may not always be enough time to ask every question possible. Judges can ask leading questions, but are not permitted to ask hearsay questions. However, it is to be noted that judges are not limited by the testimony of the witness during direct examination indeed, they may ask any relevant question to establish the credibility or bias of the witness. Stage Seven Deliberation & Judgment The Justices now consider their judgment. Final deliberations will be closed to Counsel, other delegates, and Sponsors everyone except the Justices and the Dais. Justices should begin final deliberations by identifying the key issues that must be decided upon before a judgment can be reached. Justices should then move to considering relevant points of law and legal documents, as well as discussing the arguments, evidence, and testimony that the Counsel presented. The Court should intermittently make use of straw poll votes during final deliberations to verify whether a consensus has been reached on key points and issues. When ready, a Justice will motion for the closing of deliberations. The Court will formally vote on whether it is ready to draft a final judgment. This is not a vote of support for the majority opinion, but rather merely a statement that all Justices have reached a final opinion of some sort. Following a successful vote, the President Justice will suspend the sitting for the Court to draft its opinion. Each Justice with a dissenting opinion should write a brief explanation of his/her position. The majority opinion MUST be sponsored by a simple majority of the Court. If a simple majority does not exist, the Presiding Justice will not permit the Court to close deliberations. Once the judgment is complete, the Justices will sign it and the formal decision shall be read to the Court. The President shall begin the reading with a summary of the proceedings, followed by one Justice reading the judgment, and concluding with each of the dissenting Justices briefly explaining their opinion. Resolutions ICJ produces opinions / decisions / judgments in lieu of resolutions. The standard Model UN format is not used. Instead, the judgment is written in paragraph form and is
divided into the following sections. The first part of the judgment will be prepared by the Vice-President, and shall contain: I. The date on which it is read; II. The names of the justices and counsel; III. The names of the parties; IV. A summary of proceedings; and V. The submission of the parties as contained within the memoranda. The second part of the judgment will be drafted by the Justices, and shall contain: I. A statement of the facts; II. The legal reasoning behind the Court s decision; and III. The Court s formal decisions on each contested point and the names of those Justices that found in favor or against. Format of Judgment The International Court of Justice, Regarding the case of [subject of dispute] between the [Applicant] and the [Respondent] We have found the following statements of fact: (Here, clauses and statements from pieces of evidence will be directly quoted and cited as follows) Clause [X] of the [Treaty of Y] states: [Quote clause here] Hence, we, the majority opinion judges, find that: (Here, the Court would state and evaluate the arguments of the advocates in several numbered clauses, stating what arguments they determined valid and what they did not consider valid pertaining to this case) For these reasons, we believe that: (Here, the Court will state its conclusion and conditions in several numbered clauses)
Special Points & Motions Set the Docket Either Counsel or Justices may motion to set the docket of the court. This motion is equivalent to setting the agenda. Passage of this motion requires a simple majority of the Justices. Suspend the Sitting of the Court Either Counsel or Justices may motion to suspend the sitting of the Court. Whoever motions must include the purpose and duration of the suspension. This motion is equivalent to suspending debate, although ICJ makes no distinction between moderated / unmoderated caucuses. Passage of this motion requires a simple majority of the Justices. Present the Witness During the presentation of the case, Counsel must motion to present each witness to the Court. Counsel should then introduce the witness and provide questions for the witness to answer. Counsel is free to argue their case, as long as questions are not leading. This motion requires only the consent of the Presiding Justice to pass. Objection An Objection is used in place of a Point of Order. Objections may draw attention to procedural mistakes, challenge leading questions to the witness, and address the Court when the Opposing Counsel is presenting irrelevant information. Counsel should not overuse this point, at risk of being judged dilatory. This point requires only the judgment of the Presiding Justice. Cross-Examine the Witness The opposing Counsel may motion to cross-examine the witness to ask the witnesses questions, following the presentation of a witness by the presenting Counsel. The opposing Counsel may not choose to cross-examine the witness at a later time. This motion requires only the consent of the Presiding Justice to pass. Redirect The presenting Counsel may motion to redirect to continue examining the witness following a cross-examination; otherwise, the cross-examination will conclude the presentation of that witness. This motion requires only the consent of the Presiding Justice to pass. Extend Each Counsel may motion once to extend the presentation of the case by 15 minutes. Also, the Court may motion once to extend the justices questioning period by 15 minutes. Passage of this motion requires a simple majority of the Justices in a vote. Straw Poll Vote A Justice may motion for the Court to conduct a straw poll vote in order to get an unofficial census concerning a issue or question. The vote is nonbinding. This motion requires only the consent of the Presiding Justice to pass. A motion for a straw poll vote must be accompanied by a question or topic to vote on. Close Deliberations A Justice may motion to close deliberations only during the Deliberation & Judgment stage. Closing of deliberations instantly moves the Court into the final writing phrase of the judgment. Closing of deliberations requires a unanimous vote of approval from the Justices. As such, no formal debate is required.
Debate & Caucusing Model UN typically recognizes three levels of debate: formal debate, moderated caucus, and unmoderated caucus. However, ICJ only recognizes two levels of debate. Formal Session Formal debate takes place while the Court is sitting in formal session. However, ICJ does not utilize a Speakers List delegates may speak in any order, but must raise their placards to be recognized. The default speaking time is unlimited, unless otherwise Noted. Justices may change the speaking time if necessary. Suspension of the Sitting Informal debate may take place after the Court has approved a motion to suspend the sitting. However, Counsel and Justices may NOT interact during a suspension of the sitting. Unrecognized Points & Motions -- Point of Order -- Point of Information -- Set the Agenda -- Open the Speakers List -- Suspend Debate -- Table/Resume Debate -- Close Debate -- Roll Call Vote -- Vote by Clause -- Amend Glossary Administration of the Oath The Administration of the Oath is given to each new Justice before they can serve on the ICJ. This is a standard judicial procedure for any court. The oath is a pledge to uphold certain professional and personal standards before the law, such as impartiality and objectivity. Applicant The Applicant is the state that initiated the court case against the Respondent State the Applicant is the plaintiff/claimant/complainant. Applicant may also refer to the Counsel representing the Applicant State. Convening the Court Convening the Court is the first stage of committee for ICJ. This is equivalent to bringing the committee to session. The administration of the oath, setting of the docket, discussion of preliminary opinions, and Counsel s final preparations take place during this stage. Close Deliberations A motion by the Justices to close deliberations and begin writing the judgment. Closing Arguments Closing Arguments are the sixth and next-to-last stage of committee for ICJ. Each Counsel presents their final arguments during this stage, starting with the Respondent State Counsel.
Closing of Deliberations Closing of Deliberations is equivalent to adjourning the committee session. This occurs at the end of the conference with a motion to Close Deliberations. Counsel Counsel represent state parties in court cases before the ICJ. Counsel are equivalent to lawyers representing the plaintiff and defendant. Delegates in teams of two assume the role of Counsel. Cross-examination Cross-examination is when the opposing Counsel questions ( examines ) the witnesses of the presenting Counsel to undermine the opponent s case and strengthen one s own. The opposing Counsel has the option to motion to examine each witness, but this is not required. The Respondent Counsel is the opposing Counsel when the Applicant is presenting, and vice-versa. Cross-examine A motion by the opposing Counsel to cross-examine the witness. Debate Debate refers to discussion, debate, and conversation on the topics at hand while in committee. NMMUN has two types of debate in ICJ: Formal Session and Suspension of the Sitting. Deliberation & Judgment Deliberation & Judgment is the seventh and final stage of committee for ICJ. This is loosely equivalent to the draft resolution debate and voting stages of standard Model UN committees. During this stage, Justices consider all the evidence, arguments, and testimony in process of debating the merits of the case, with the goal of a reaching a simple majority consensus on the Court s judgment. Following that, the Court will suspend the sitting to write the judgment. Director A member of the dais that oversees the creation of the judgment, acts as an expert on the topics, makes sure Counsel and Justices stay in character, and ensures that decorum is maintained throughout the conference. The Director assumes the role of the Vice-President for ICJ. Dissenting Opinion One or more justices but less than half of the total number of Justices who fundamentally disagree with the majority opinion are said to hold a dissenting opinion. There may be multiple dissenting opinions. During the Deliberation & Judgment stage, the Dissenting Justices should each write a short explanation of their position in lieu of a judgment. Docket The docket of the Court is equivalent to the committee agenda. The docket contains the cases under consideration at this conference, as well as the order in which they will be considered (As opposed to the General List of the Court). Expert Testimony Another term for witness testimony. Expert testimony refers specifically to testimony by relevant experts to the topic, rather than injured parties, eyewitnesses, etc. Extend A motion by Counsel or Justices to grant a 15-minute extension for the presentation of the case or justice questioning, respectively. Evidence Evidence refers to any written or visual materials presented in support of one s case, or in opposition against the case of the opposing Counsel. NMMUN recognizes two types of evidence: original, written Memorials as well as excerpts from relevant treaties or other documents. Formal Formal speech does not use personal pronouns, and formal debate does not permit direct conversation. Comments must be addressed to the Dais. Counsel should address Justices with formal language. Justices should address each other in formal language.
Formal Session Formal Session is equivalent to formal debate. However, ICJ does not use a Speakers List, and has different rules regarding time. General List of the Court The General List of the Court is equivalent to the agenda of the Court. The General List contains all cases currently before the Court. (As opposed to the docket of the Court) ICJ The International Court of Justice is the principle judicial organ of the United Nations. Initial Deliberations Initial Deliberations are the fourth stage of committee for ICJ. Justices begin debate of the merits of the case during this stage, taking into account their Preliminary Opinions, oral proceedings, evidence, and testimony all in preparation for the Justice Questioning stage. Initial deliberations may take place either in Formal Session or during a suspension of the sitting of the Court. Informal Informal or conversational speech is equivalent to everyday speech. Informal speech is only permitted during a suspension of the sitting, and between Counsel and witnesses. Judgment The judgment of the Court is the final decision of the Court on the case, in accordance with the majority opinion. The written judgment is equivalent to a committee resolution. Justice(s) The Justices are responsible for passing judgment on each of the cases presented to the ICJ. Delegates will assume the roles of Justices. There are fifteen Justices in ICJ, including the President and Vice-President however, the President and Vice- President are not among the Justices for NMMUN. Justice Questioning Justice Questioning is the fifth stage of committee for ICJ. Using a round robin format, Justices may question Counsel to clarify issues, facts, or points of law during this stage. Majority Opinion The majority opinion is a consensus held among a simple majority of the Justices for the judgment of the Court. The majority opinion is the basis of the Court s final judgment. Memorandum A memorandum is equivalent to the position paper for Counsel. Literally, a memorial is simply a summary of key parts of the Counsel s oral arguments, which may be submitted as evidence. Counsel may prepare additional memorials to submit as further evidence, if desired. Moderator A member of the dais who moderates debate, keeps time, rules on points and motions, and enforces the rules of procedure. Also known as Chair. The Moderator assumes the role of the President of ICJ. Motion A request made by a delegate that the committee do something. Some motions might be to suspend the sitting of the Court, cross-examine a witness, or conduct a straw poll, inter alia. Objection An objection is equivalent to a Point of Order. Objections may draw attention to procedural mistakes, challenge leading questions to the witness, and address the Court when the Opposing Counsel is presenting irrelevant information. Opening Statements Opening Statements are the second stage of committee for ICJ. The Applicant State Counsel, followed by the Respondent State Counsel, gives opening statements that preview the evidence and highlight the main points of law that are contended opening
statements are intended to support one s own case and peremptorily counteract the case of the opposing Counsel. Point A request raised by a delegate for information or for an action relating to that delegate. Examples include a point of inquiry, an objection (only in ICJ), and a point of personal privilege. Point of Information This point is not used in ICJ. Preliminary Opinion A preliminary opinion is equivalent to the position paper for Justices. Literally, a preliminary opinion is simply a Justice s preliminary opinion on the case, based on an objective reading, research, and legal assessment of the issues in the case. Presentation of the Case The Presentation of the Case is the third stage of committee in ICJ. The Applicant State Counsel, followed by the Respondent State Counsel, presents their full arguments to the Court during this stage. The presentation includes any evidence and witness testimony. Presentation of the Witness The presentation of the witness occurs the presentation of the case. At this time, the presenting Counsel presents a witness and questions him/her pertaining to the case. A witness may either be an expert or may be personal affected by the case somehow. Present the Witness A motion by the Counsel to present a witness for expert testimony. President The President is the Presiding Justice of the ICJ, who is elected every 3 years by his/her fellow Justices. The President is responsible for running the substantive aspects of the ICJ, including chairing the Court s proceedings. For NMMUN, the Moderator will assume the role of President. Presiding Justice The President is the Presiding Justice of the ICJ, who is among the fifteen Court Justices. The Presiding Justice is responsible for chairing the Court s proceedings, moderating debate, and facilitating consensus. For NMMUN, the Moderator will assume the role of the Presiding Justice. Redirect A motion by the presenting Counsel to continue examining the witness following a cross-examination. Request Remedy Counsel requests remedy from the Court at the end of closing arguments. A request for remedy is asking the Court to pass judgment on the case in favor of a Counsel s state party. Remedy Remedy is equivalent to the judgment of the Court. Respondent The Respondent is the state that receives the court case from the Applicant State the Respondent is the defendant / defender. Respondent may also refer to the Counsel representing the Applicant State. Rested The term rested refers to the completion of a Counsel s statement, speech, or presentation. Resume Debate This motion is not used in ICJ. Round Robin A format in the Justice Questioning stage, in which each Justice consecutively can question either Counsel. The order of Justices proceeds in a circular fashion, either clockwise or counter-clockwise. Rules of Procedure The rules by which a Model UN committee is run.
Semi-Formal Semi-formal speech permits limited use of personal pronouns and allows back and forth dialogues, as long as they do not become informal conversation. Delegates must still be recognized to speak. Counsel may address Justices with semi-formal language. Justices may address the counsel with semi-formal language. Set the Docket A motion to set the docket fixes the order in which the Court will hear the cases. Stages of Committee ICJ progresses through seven formal stages of committee, each of which have different rules and purposes. State The term state is equivalent to standard Model UN term country. Straw Poll Vote A Justice may motion for the Court to conduct a straw poll vote in order to get an unofficial census concerning a particular issue or question. The vote is nonbinding. Suspend the Sitting A motion to suspend the sitting allows the Court to enter informal debate. Suspension of the Sitting Suspension of the sitting for ICJ is equivalent to an unmoderated caucus. The Court may only conduct informal debate after the sitting of the Court (i.e. Formal Session ) has been suspended. Counsel and Justices may not interact during a suspension of the sitting. Vice-President The Vice-President is an ICJ Justice who is elected from among his/her peers every three years. For NMMUN, the Director will assume the role of the Vice- President. Witness Testimony Witness testimony is verbal evidence that a Counsel may bring forth during the presentation of the case. Witness testimony may either be expert testimony, or testimony by someone personally affected by the case (whether an eyewitness or not).