• ..



Nicaragua brought a claim against the United States alleging certain unlawfully military and paramilitary activities against Nicaraguan territory, including the mining of Nicaraguan ports and support for Nicaraguan rebels, the Contras guerrillas against the Nicaraguan government. The United States claimed that the court has no jurisdiction because they had entered a reservation to the jurisdiction of the ICJ excluding a matter from the court if the dispute concerned the application of a multilateral treaty. The relevant treaty here was the UN Charter itself, particularly Article 2(4) on the non-use of force. Nicaragua argued, however, that the court had jurisdiction because its claim against the US was also based on rules of customary law, which although similar in content to the law of the UN Charter, had not been suspended by it. The United States had argued that the rules of general and customary law and those of United Nation Charter are identical.

The Court thus finds that both Parties take the view that the principles as to the use of force incorporated in the United Nations Charter correspond to those found in customary international law employed in Article 2(4) of the United Nations Charter. The Court has however to be satisfied that there exists an opinio juris as to the binding character of such abstention deduced from the attitude of States towards certain General Assembly resolutions, and particularly resolution 2625 (XXV) entitled 'Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations'. The effect of consent to the text of such resolutions cannot be understood as merely that of a 'reiteration or elucidation' of the treaty commitment undertaken in the Charter but it may be understood as an acceptance of the validity of the rules declared by the resolution by themselves.

The court further cited the International Law Commission commentary that 'the law of the Charter concerning the prohibition of the use of force in itself constitutes a conspicuous example of a rule in international law having the character of jus cogens'.

The court, by a vote of 15 to 1 decided that it has jurisdiction to entertain the case brought by Nicaragua against the United States, charging the United States with violation of its obligation under customary international law through use of military force and intervention in Nicaragua’s internal affairs in violation of her sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence.