– CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY –

*In accordance with Resolution 65/276 (Participation of the European Union in the work of the United Nations).

Mr. President,

I have the honour to speak on behalf of the Europen Union.

At the outset, allow me to thank President Joan E. Donoghue for her presentation of the report to the General Assembly on the activities of the International Court of Justice between 1 August 2022 and 31 July 2023.

Mr. President,

The Court stands tall as a beacon of justice through the rule of law at the international level.

Since 22 May 1947, when the Corfu Channel (United Kingdom v. Albania) was the first case to enter in the Court’s General List, 190 cases have been registered on the Court’s roster. The Court’s docket is currently full. With the most recent cases summited, it reached 20 cases.

The large number of cases pending before the Court, as well as the recent increase in the Court’s caseload involving a wide variety of disputes demonstrate the crucial role of the Court in adjudicating legal disputes. This has only been possible by the dedication, and high ethical and professional standards of the judges. We thank the President of the Court, its judges, the registrar and all the staff of the Court for their unwavering commitment to delivering justice.

On 9 November, the General Assembly and the Security Council will elect five judges out of nine candidates for a period of nine years, beginning on 6 February 2024. These key elections will shape the bench of the Court for the decade to come.

Mr. President,

The ICJ has a preeminent position in the peaceful settlement of disputes at international level. By settling interstate disputes and rendering advisory opinions to the main organs of the United Nations and its specialized agencies, the ICJ has greatly contributed, alongside other organs of the United Nations, to the maintenance or restoration of international peace and security, and to the development of friendly relations and cooperation among States. 

However, the Court’s role in the maintenance of international peace and security through the peaceful settlement of disputes is only as effective as the parties to disputes understand to abide by its rulings. The European Union urges all States that submitted their disputes to international adjudication by the Court to comply with its judgements and orders.

The European Union deplores the fact that the legally binding order issued by the Court on 16 March 2022 requesting Russia to immediately suspend its military operations in Ukraine remains unimplemented. The case between Ukraine and Russia concerning Allegations of Genocide under the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide seeks to establish, inter alia, that Russia has no lawful basis to take unilateral military action against Ukraine on the basis of unsubstantiated allegations of genocide. As respective State Parties to the Genocide Convention, 26 Member States of the Union have intervened before the Court to share their views on the construction of the Convention under Article 63 of the Statute. This unprecedented move shows how important it is to uphold the integrity of the Convention.

The European Union looks forward to the ruling on jurisdiction and the merits in this case. It is equally awaiting all other rulings and advisory opinions of the Court that aim to clarify the legal obligations of States and international organisations under international law.

Mr. President,

Climate change is part of the triple planetary crisis, alongside biodiversity loss and air pollution. It is the existential crisis facing humanity today.

While all other principal organs of the UN have considered climate change, the Court has not yet had the opportunity to do so. The request for an Advisory Opinion submitted by consensus resolution co-sponsored by all the Member States of the EU to the Court in spring this year represents a landmark opportunity for the Court to clarify the legal obligations of States in relation to climate change, specifically with regard to those particularly affected by the adverse effects of climate change.

The European Union would like to stress its appreciation for the choice of engaging the Court through advisory proceedings. Its non-contentious nature avoids disputes and encourages the continued pursuit by the international community of further ambitious and effective action, including through international negotiations, to tackle climate change.

The European Union intends to submit written statements and to make oral statements at the hearing before the Court. The European Union is at the forefront of climate action, having taken determined and decisive action to tackle climate change through regulation, diplomacy, committed action and international cooperation. It supports the progressive development of international law and robust adherence to it, by promoting the individual and collective action of States to prevent and respond to the adverse effects of climate change and by showing solidarity with those particularly vulnerable to the impacts of climate change.

The European Union expects the Advisory Opinion to answer the legal questions on the basis of the current state of international law with regard to all States, and to clarify the obligations of States under applicable international law as well as the legal consequence for all States arising from a breach of such obligations. It will provide legal motivation for all nations, including emerging and high emitting developing countries, to build greater ambition into their Paris Agreement Nationally Determined Contributions, and take meaningful action to curb emissions and protect human rights.

Mr. President,

In the EU’s statement of last year, it also recalled the vast array of case law, in which European courts refer to the jurisprudence of the ICJ to interpret and apply international law within the Union’s legal order. From the year 2023, another important ruling can be added. In Venezuela v. Council,[1] the General Court recalled the procedural requirements flowing from the ICJ’s Gabčikovo case[2]. Moreover, the EU’s General Court made reference to the vast jurisprudence of the ICJ on erga omnes obligations since Barcelona Traction when addressing questions of jurisdiction[3]. This is another clear illustration of the nexus between international law and EU law, and the Court may wish to explore the possibility of regular exchanges with the Court of Justice of the European Union on issues of common interest.

Mr. President, let me come to a close.

The European Union holds the work of the Court in high regard. As the principle judicial organ of the United Nations, it greatly contributes through its authoritative decisions and opinions to the promotion of international justice globally. The European Union reaffirms its continuing support to the International Court of Justice.

I thank you.

[1] General Court, Venezuela v. Council, ECLI:EU:T:2023:529, paragraphs 83-104.

[2] Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros Project (Hungary v. Slovakia), judgment, ICJ Reports 1997, p. 7, para. 84.

[3] General Court, Venezuela v. Council, ECLI:EU:T:2023:529, paragraph 113.