English
 
Help Privacy Policy Disclaimer
  Advanced SearchBrowse

Item

ITEM ACTIONSEXPORT

Released

Contribution to Collected Edition

Teaching the World Court Makes a Bad Case: Revisiting the Relationship Between Domestic Courts and the ICJ

MPS-Authors
/persons/resource/persons236827

Kunz,  Raffaela
Max Planck Institute for Comparative Public Law and International Law, Max Planck Society;

External Resource
Fulltext (restricted access)
There are currently no full texts shared for your IP range.
Supplementary Material (public)
There is no public supplementary material available
Citation

Kunz, R. (2021). Teaching the World Court Makes a Bad Case: Revisiting the Relationship Between Domestic Courts and the ICJ. In V. Volpe, A. Peters, & S. Battini (Eds.), Remedies against Immunity? Reconciling International and Domestic Law after the Italian Constitutional Court’s Sentenza 238/2014 (pp. 259-280). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-3-662-62304-6_14.


Cite as: https://hdl.handle.net/21.11116/0000-000D-D21B-8
Abstract
Sentenza 238/2014 once more highlights the important role domestic courts play in international law. More than prior examples, it illustrates the ever more autonomous and self-confident stance of domestic courts on the international plane. But the ruling of the Italian Constitutional Court (ItCC) also shows that more engagement with international law does not necessarily mean that domestic courts enhance the effectiveness of international law and become ‘compliance partners’ of international courts. Sentenza 238/2014 suggests that domestic courts, in times of global governance and increased activity of international courts, see the role they play at the intersection of legal orders also as ‘gate-keepers’, ready to cushion the domestic impact of international law if deemed necessary. The judgment of the ItCC thus offers a new opportunity to examine the multifaceted and complex role of these important actors that apply and shape international law, while always remaining bound by domestic (constitutional) law. This chapter does so by exploring how domestic courts deal with rulings of the World Court. It shows that despite the fact that in numerous situations domestic courts could act as compliance partners of the International Court of Justice, in reality, more often than not, they have refused to do so, arguing that its judgments are not self-executing and thus deferring the implementation to the political branches. Assessing this practice, the chapter argues that domestic courts should take a more active stance and overcome the purely interstate view that seems at odds with present-day international law. While it seems too far-reaching to expect domestic courts to follow international courts unconditionally, the chapter cautions that there is a considerable risk of setting dangerous precedents by openly defying international judgments. Domestic courts should carefully balance the different interests at stake, namely an effective system of international adjudication on the one hand and the protection of fundamental domestic principles on the other hand. The chapter finds that the ItCC’s attempt to reintroduce clear boundaries between legal orders lacks the openness and flexibility needed to effectively cope with today’s complex and plural legal reality.