Preliminary Objections: Article 22 of CERD

Hi Delegates!

     Preliminary objections are an important facet of international law and the ICJ. According to the Oxford Scholarly Authorities on International Law, a preliminary objection is “a formal step by which a respondent raises a question which it contends should be dealt with separately, before any other issue in the proceedings is examined.” Preliminary objections are submitted prior to the start of the case; if the Court rules to uphold these objections, the case will not proceed. One of the most common types of preliminary objections is questioning the jurisdiction of the Court, as seen in our case Georgia v. Russian Federation. Interestingly, the ICJ uses treaties and international law as a basis for establishing whether or not they have jurisdiction in their own cases.
    
     The preliminary objections in Georgia v. Russian Federation, submitted by Russia, are centered around Article 22 of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (CERD). Countries that are party to CERD commit to eliminating racial and ethnic discrimination. Article 22 requires two states disputing over the application of CERD to negotiate with each other before turning to the ICJ for mediation. In the case of Georgia v. Russian Federation, Russia contended in its preliminary objections that Georgia had not engaged in the negotiations required by CERD before submitting a claim to the ICJ. Although the ICJ upheld these objections in real life, our committee will be proceeding as if it had not. However, Article 22 will still be very important to our committee because it can help determine Russia's level of culpability. 

For more information about CERD and Article 22: https://www.ohchr.org/en/professionalinterest/pages/cerd.aspx

We encourage you to start thinking about how you will interpret the rules and regulations laid out in CERD, including Article 22. Feel free to comment below if you have any questions or reflections you would like to share!


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Tensions in South Ossetia

Image
Hi delegates! This blog post will be reviewing the role of South Ossetia in the conflict between Georgia and Russia, specifically focusing on the events of 2008 and ethnic conflict within the region.                 For reference, South Ossetia is located along the Georgian-Russian border. Separatist sentiments have been brewing within South Ossetia since the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991. The region of Ossetia, as seen in the map, is split between Georgia and Russia. Both North and South Ossetia are primarily occupied by Ossetians, a unique ethnic group which speaks neither Georgian nor Russian. However, South Ossetia had a significant population of ethnic Georgians living within the region before the conflict; the treatment of ethnic Georgians in the region is one of the central issues which our case will be studying.                 While South Ossetia and Abkhazia are both contested territories, South Ossetia is unique because it is located near the Georgia
Read more

Legal Terms for Georgia v. Russia

Hi Delegates!  I hope your February has gotten off to a spectacular start.  By now, you've hopefully begun perusing materials related to Georgia v. Russia , and more likely than not have been encountering a thick web of legalese to sort through while you research.  Have no fear--below is a short list of a few of the most relevant legal terms to know to make your reading a bit easier and your understanding of the case a bit better. Prima facie: based on the first impression.  This is generally a fact or circumstances that are accepted as established unless proven otherwise.  Example: "...the Court explains that it is for it to determine prima facie whether a dispute within the meaning of Article 22 of CERD exists." ( Request for the indication of provisional measures, ICJ Summary of the Order , 4)  Provisional measures: Provisional measures for protection are interim, or temporary orders issued by the ICJ that are roughly analogous to restraining orders.  Issued orde
Read more

Verdicts: What are they and how do they work?

Image
One of the key differences between the ICJ and other committees is that the ICJ does not concern itself with resolutions. Instead, as judges of the court, you will be expected to formulate Verdicts at the end of debate. Verdicts are documents that judges of the ICJ use to declare their ruling on the case. Just as a resolution is a reasoned reflection of one’s stance in committee, so too is the Verdict the culmination of arguments and evidence made throughout the course of the conference. In order to form your Verdicts, you will form a group of 4 or 5 with other fellow judges and write your Verdicts during unmoderated caucus sessions in the latter part of committee. Verdicts in the ICJ at BMUN should be comprised of three primary sections: Overall Ruling, Evidence, and Legal Precedent and Implications. The Overall Ruling section deals with presenting your group’s ruling in terms of the four Levels of Guilt**. Here, explicitly address the Levels of Guilt your group has chosen to app
Read more