Subject: International Court of Justice - Press Release 2000/5 - Legality of Use of Force
    Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 19:18:52 +0100

23 February 2001

Legality of Use of Force (Yugoslavia v. Belgium) (Yugoslavia v. Canada) (Yugoslavia v. France) (Yugoslavia v. Germany) (Yugoslavia v. Italy) (Yugoslavia v. Netherlands) (Yugoslavia v. Portugal) (Yugoslavia v. United Kingdom)

The Court extends by one year the time-limits for the filing by Yugoslavia of written statements on the preliminary objections made by the Respondent States

THE HAGUE, 23 February 2001. The International Court of Justice (ICJ) has extended by one year the time-limits originally fixed for the filing by Yugoslavia of written statements of its observations and submissions on the preliminary objections raised by the eight Respondent States in the cases concerning Legality of Use of Force (Yugoslavia v. Belgium) (Yugoslavia v. Canada) (Yugoslavia v. France) (Yugoslavia v. Germany) (Yugoslavia v. Italy) (Yugoslavia v. Netherlands) (Yugoslavia v. Portugal) (Yugoslavia v. United Kingdom).

By letter dated 18 January 2001, Yugoslavia referred inter alia to recent diplomatic initiatives and requested the Court, for reasons stated in that letter, "to grant a stay of the proceedings or . . . to extend the time-limit for the submission of observations of Yugoslavia, for a period of twelve months" in each case. The Respondent States indicated that they were not opposed to a stay of proceedings or, if a stay was not possible, to an extension of the time-limit for the filing of the observations and submissions of Yugoslavia on their preliminary objections.

By Orders of 21 February 2001, the Court, taking account of the agreement of the Parties and the circumstances of the cases, fixed 5 April 2002 as the new time-limit. The subsequent procedure was reserved for further decision in each case.

History of the proceedings

On 29 April 1999, the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia instituted proceedings before the Court against Belgium, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Portugal, Spain, United Kingdom and United States of America, accusing those States of bombing Yugoslav territory in violation of their international obligations.

In its Applications, Yugoslavia pointed out that the above-mentioned States had committed "acts . . . by which [they] have violated [their] international obligation[s] banning the use of force against another State, not to intervene in the internal affairs of [that State]" and "not to violate [its] sovereignty"; "[their] obligation[s] to protect the civilian population and civilian objects in wartime [and] to protect the environment"; "[their] obligation[s] relating to free navigation on international rivers"; "[their] obligation[s] regarding fundamental human rights and freedoms"; and "[their] obligation[s] not to use prohibited weapons [and] not to deliberately inflict conditions of life calculated to cause the physical destruction of a national group". Yugoslavia requested the Court to adjudge and declare inter alia that the States referred to above were "responsible for the violation of the above[-mentioned] international obligations" and that they were "obliged to provide compensation for the damage done".

On the same day Yugoslavia also filed, in each of the ten cases, a request for interim measures of protection (provisional measures), asking the Court to order the States involved to "cease immediately [their] acts of use of force" and to "refrain from any act of threat or use of force against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia". Hearings on provisional measures were held on 10 to 12 May 1999 and the Court handed down its decision in each of the cases on 2 June 1999. In two cases (Yugoslavia v. Spain and Yugoslavia v. United States of America), the Court concluded that it manifestly lacked jurisdiction and it accordingly ordered that the cases be removed from its List. In the other eight (Yugoslavia v. Belgium; Yugoslavia v. Canada; Yugoslavia v. France; Yugoslavia v. Germany; Yugoslavia v. Italy; Yugoslavia v. Netherlands; Yugoslavia v. Portugal; Yugoslavia v. United Kingdom), the Court found that it lacked prima facie jurisdiction - which is one of the prerequisites for the indication of provisional measures - and that it therefore could not indicate such measures; the Court, however, added that it remained seised of those cases and stressed that its findings, at that stage, "in no way prejudge[d] the question of the jurisdiction of the Court to deal with the merits" of the cases and left "unaffected the right of the Governments of Yugoslavia and [of the respondent States] to submit arguments in respect of those questions".

By Orders of 30 June 1999, the Court decided that Yugoslavia should submit a Memorial in each of the eight cases no later than 5 January 2000 and that the Respondent States (Belgium, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Portugal and United Kingdom) should each submit a Counter-Memorial by not later than 5 July 2000.

Within the time-limits thus fixed, Yugoslavia filed its Memorials and the eight Respondent States then raised preliminary objections to jurisdiction and admissibility. By Orders of 8 September 2000, the Vice-President of the Court, Acting President in the eight proceedings, taking account of the views of the Parties and the special circumstances of the cases, fixed 5 April 2001 as the time-limit for the filing of written statements of its observations and submissions on those preliminary objections.



The full text of the eight Orders will shortly be available on the Court's website at the following address: http://www.icj-cij.org


Information Department:
Mr. Arthur Witteveen, First Secretary (+ 31 70 302 23 36)
Mrs. Laurence Blairon, Information Officer (+ 31 70 302 23 37)
E-mail address: information@icj-cij.org