The Function of Dissenting Opinions at the International Court of Justice

国际法院异议意见的作用

基本信息

批准号：
10620028
负责人：
SUGIHARA Takane
金额：
$ 0.9万
依托单位：
KYOTO UNIVERSITY
依托单位国家：
日本
项目类别：
Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (C)
财政年份：
1998
资助国家：
日本
起止时间：
1998 至 1999
项目状态：
已结题

项目摘要

The present research has examined functions of the system of dissenting and separate opinions which are attached to a judgment of the International Court of Justice. The system was first introduced at the Permanent Court of International Justice, the predecessor of the present Court, in overcoming a strong opposition to it. The opponents asserted that the system of dissenting opinions would inevitably undermine the moral force of the judgment (majority opinion), hence the judicial authority of the Court.The practice of the both Courts, however, has proved much usefulness of the system rather than its detrimental effect. First, the system of expressing separate and dissenting opinions contributes the dynamic development of international law by incorporating the diversity of approach in a judgment to be rendered by the Court. Second, it serves to clarify the substantial meaning of various portions of the judgment which are at times left in ambiguity.On the other hand, there is a problem to be considered. As far as the present Court concerned, there is a growing tendency in which dissenting judges are, through their individual opinions, inclined to making an attack on legal reasoning of the Court. This is a problem which the old Court had never experienced. It is to be noted that, as Article 57 of the Court's Statute suggests, the purpose of dissenting opinions is to solely indicate the reasons for which a judge is not in agreement with the majority, not to embark himself in expressing a reasoned criticism to the judgment to which his opinion attached.

本研究考察了国际法院判决所附的异议和单独意见制度的功能。该制度最初是在本法院的前身常设国际法院克服了强烈反对而引入的。反对者声称，不同意见制度将不可避免地损害判决的道德力量（多数意见），从而损害法院的司法权威。然而，两法院的实践证明，该制度的用处远不止于此。产生不利影响。首先，表达不同意见和不同意见的制度通过在法院作出的判决中纳入方法的多样性，有助于国际法的动态发展。其次，它有助于澄清判决书中有时含糊不清的各个部分的实质含义。另一方面，也存在一个需要考虑的问题。就本法院而言，持不同意见的法官通过个人意见攻击法院法律推理的趋势日益明显。这是旧法院从未遇到过的问题。值得注意的是，正如《法院规约》第 57 条所表明的那样，反对意见的目的只是表明法官不同意多数意见的原因，而不是对法官提出合理的批评。他的意见所依据的判断。