Los requisitos procesales en serio: la existencia de una «controversia internacional» en la jurisprudencia de la Corte Internacional de Justicia

Abstract

The notion of «international dispute» has become increasingly relevant in the determination of the ICJ’s jurisdiction, but it has been in the judgments rendered in the cases Obligations Concerning Negotiations Relating to Cessation of the Nuclear Arms Race and to Nuclear Disarmament (Marshall Islands v. India, Pakistan and United Kingdom) that the term has been most decisive. Following the allegations of «formalism» made against these decisions, this work aims first to put the notion into historical perspective by identifying two opposing tendencies in the Court’s case law: one prioritising flexibility and another one prioritising rigorousness. Next, this work will try to explain the rationale of the most recent decisions on the matter through the prism of the protection of the judicial function of the Court.