Legality of Use of Force (Serbia and Montenegro v. Canada) - The respondent States challenge the Court's jurisdiction and the admissibility of Yugoslavia's Applications

INTERNATIONAL COURTOFJUSTICE
Peace Palace, 2517 KJ The Hague. Tel.(31-70-302 23 23). Cables: Intercourt, The Hague.

Telefax (31-70-364 99 28). Telex 32323. Internet address: http: Il www.icj-cij.org

Communiqué
unofficial
for immediaterelease

No. 2000125

7 July 2000

Legalityof Use of Force
(Yugoslavia v. Belgium) (Yugoslavia v. Canada) (Yugosla!ja v. France)
(Yugoslavia v. Germany) (Yugoslavia v. Italy) (Yugoslayia v. Netherlands)

(Yugoslayia v. Portugal) (Yugoslayia v. United Kingdom)

The respondent States challenge the Court's jurisdiction
and the admissibility ofYugoslavia's Applications

THE HAGUE, 7 July 2000. On 5 July 2000, within the time-limit for the filing of their
Counter-Memorials, the respondent States in the eight above-mentioned cases (Belgium, Canada,
France, Gennany, ltaly, Netherlands, Portugal and United K.ingdom) raised certain preliminary
objectionsof lack ofjurisdiction and inadmissibility.

In each of the eight cases, the proceedings on the merits of the dispute are accordingly
suspended pursuant to Article 79, paragraph 3, of the Rules of Court. The Court will decide on the
preliminary objections at the end of a special procedure, which will comprise the filing of written
observations by the Applicant (Yugoslavia) and an oral phase on the issues of jurisdiction and

admissibility.

The time-limits for the filing of those written observations in each of the eight cases will be
fixed Iater.

Histrn:yof the proceedings

On 29 April 1999 the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia instituted proceedings before the Court
against Belgium, Canada, France, Gennany, Italy, the Netherlands, Portugal,Spain, the United

Kingdoru and the United States of America, accusing those States of bombing Yugoslav territory in
violation oftheir obligation not to use force against another State.

In its Applications, Yugoslavia maintained that the above-mentioned States bad conunitted
by which [they] bave violated [theîr] international obligation[s] not to use force against another State,

not ta intervene in [that State's]internai affairs" and "not ta violate [its] sovereignty", "the obligation to
protect the civilian population and civilian abjects in wartime, [and] ta protect the environment; the
obligation relating to free navigation on international rivers"; the obligation "regarding the fundamental
rights and freedoms; and the obligation[s] not use prohibited weapons [and] not to deliberately
inflict conditions life calculated to cause the physical destruction of a national group".

Accordingly, Yugoslavia requested the Court ta adjudge and declare inter alia that the ten States
against which it instituted proceedings were "responsible for the violation above[·mentioned]
international obligations", that they were "obliged ta stopediately" that violation and that they
were "obliged to provide compensation for the damage done".

1
1 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 arder 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
Republîc ofYugoslavia".

Hearings on provîsional measures were held on 10 to 12 May 1999 and the Court handed dawn
its decision in each of the cases on 2 June 1999. In two cases (Yugoslavia v. Spain and Yugoslavîa v.
United States of America), the Court held that it manifestly lacked jurisdiction and 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 a prerequisite for the issue of provisional measures- and that ittherefore
could not indicate such measures. The Court, however, stated that it rernained seised of those cases and
stressed that its fmdings, 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 Govemrnents of

Yugoslavia and [of the respondent States] to submit arguments in respect ofthose questions.

By Orders of30 June 1999, the Court decided that Yugoslavia should submit a Memorial in each
of the eight cases by not later tha5 January 2000 and that the respondent States (Belgium, Canada,

France, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Portugal and United K:ingdom) should each submit a
Counter-Memorial by not later than 5 July2000 (see Press Communiqué 99/39).

Yugoslavia's Memorials were filed within the prescribed time-limits and, as stated above, the
respondent States raised preliminary objections within the time-limit for the filing of the
Co unte Mremorial.

NOTE FOR THE PRESS

The preliminary objections filed by Belgium, Canada, France, Germany, ltaly, the Netherlands,
Portugal and the United Kîngdom in the eight above-mentioned cases are not yet in the public domain.

They will be at the opening of the hearings on the issues of jurisdiction and admissibîlîty if the Court
so decides, after ascertaining the views of the Parties. •

Website of the Court: 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: [email protected]