Study On The Principle Of Consent Of State To Advisory Jurisdiction Of The International Court Of Justice

From the period of the League of Nations to the time of the United Nations,there has been controversy between the International Court of Justice and interested countries on the application of the principle of consent of the state in the field of advisory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice.The existence of this dispute is not conducive to the exercise of the advisory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice,affecting the recognition of advisory opinions and the judicial authority of the International Court of Justice.This article takes the principle of consent of the state in the advisory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice as the main research object.Based on the study of cases involving the principle of consent of the state accepted by the International Court of Justice,it analyzes the application of the International Court of Justice’s attitude to the principle of consent of the state and whether it should The principle of consent of the state applies in its advisory jurisdiction.Based on respect for the judicial nature of the International Court of Justice and respect for the principle of national sovereignty,it is recommended that the International Court of Justice should apply the principle of consent of the state in its advisory jurisdiction and make a preliminary judgment on the prospects for the application of the principle of consent of the state.This article mainly covers four parts:The first part is the elaboration of the principle of consent of the state in the advisory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice.Sort out the cases involving the principle of consent of the state accepted by the International Court of Justice,and analyze the consulting jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice from the perspective of the relationship between the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice and the principle of consent of the state,the types of cases,the value of case studies and the current situation of practice.Lay the foundation for the following research.The second part explores the attitude of the International Court of Justice to the principle of consent of the state in the advisory jurisdiction of the Court.The detailed analysisof the consulting cases sorted out in Part I concludes the International Court of Justice’s attitude to the principle of consent of the state in it’s advisory jurisdiction,whether it is the International Court of Justice or its predecessor,the Permanent International Court of Justice,to this issue is not clear..However,in view of the International Court of Justice’s discussions in accepting cases related to the principle of consent of the state,the attitude of the International Court of Justice towards this issue has gone from the establishment of the principle of consent of the state in the advisory jurisdiction of the Permanent Court to the previous period The International Court of Justice denied the application of the principle of consent of the state in advisory jurisdiction,and the change of the principle of consent of the state by the International Court of Justice as an important factor affecting the appropriateness of its advisory opinion.The third part explores whether the International Court of Justice should apply the principle of consent of the state in its advisory jurisdiction.Regarding this issue,there has always been a confrontation between the two views that should or should not be applied.Based on the analysis of the reasons underlying the two views,the author concludes that the focus of the controversy behind them is actually the conflict between national sovereignty and the powers of the International Court of Justice,and the responsibility for assisting the activities of the United Nations and the responsibility for maintaining the judicial nature of the international judicial organs..On this basis,the author carried out reasons such as the influence of advisory jurisdiction,the qualitative issue of the advisory request,the court’s lack of valid arguments for the reason why the principle of consent of the state did not constitute an refusal to issue an advisory opinion,and the maintenance of the authority of the International Court of Justice.According to analysis,the International Court of Justice should apply the principle of consent of the state in the area of ??advisory jurisdiction.The fourth part is prejudgment of the application of the principle of consent of the state in the advisory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice.Although from a practical point of view,the International Court of Justice has never refused to issue an advisory opinion based on the principle of consent of the state,but in recent years,the International Court ofJustice has repeatedly emphasized the importance of the principle of consent of the state in its accepted cases.There is a tendency to strengthen the application of the principle of consent of the state in advisory jurisdiction.In order to maintain the judicial nature and judicial authority,the author believes that the principle of consent of the state has great application space in cases involving the substantial settlement of disputes between states.At the same time,the strengthening trend in which the states agree to apply the principle will inevitably promote a deeper participation of the states in the advisory jurisdictional process of the International Court of Justice.