Kulick: Between Advice and Miracle: Expectations and Persuasiveness of ICJ Advisory Opinions

Andreas Kulick (Johannes Gutenberg Univ. Mainz - Law) has posted Between Advice and Miracle: Expectations and Persuasiveness of ICJ Advisory Opinions. Here's the abstract:

This contribution submits that, in light of the Court’s judicial function (Part 2), stakeholders initiating advisory proceedings seek advice with one or several of six types of expectations in mind (Part 3), ranging from advice as advice to advice as miracle (3.1-3.6). The type, management and failure of these expectations (4.1), in turn, impact on what legal relevance the Court’s pronouncements in advisory opinion may have in other proceedings before international courts and tribunals. While they cannot be formally legally binding, they are also not devoid of legal effect. To explore this in-between space, I develop the concept of ‘persuasiveness’. It establishes a combination of content-dependent and content-independent reasons for why and under which conditions other courts and tribunals may regard the Court’s specific pronouncement in an advisory opinion as determinative for deciding their case (4.2). Employing these analytical tools developed in Parts 3 and 4, Part 5 concludes with tying back these insights to the relationship of the ICJ’s judicial function and international law-development as well as an outlook at the advisory proceedings currently pending before the Court.