MODEL COURTS OF JUSTICE 2013
HANDBOOK FOR ICJ
Legal claim: This document is a work of Model CJ Secretariat and shall not be inspired, copied or
used without the consent of the Secretariat.
HOW THE INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE PROCEEDS
In order to be authorized to try the case, the ICJ needs to have a jurisdiction on the dispute.
This jurisdiction should be established pursuant to Articles 36 and 40 of the ICJ Statute.
International Court of Justice has trigger mechanisms regarding the Article 36 of ICJ Statute.
According to this article the jurisdiction of the Court comprises all cases the parties refer to it
and all matters specifically provided in the Charter of the United Nations or in treaties and
conventions in force. The states who are parties to the present Statute may at any time declare
that they recognize as compulsory ipso facto and without special agreement, in relation to any
other state accepting the same obligation, the jurisdiction of the Court in all legal disputes
concerning:
“a. the interpretation of a treaty;
b. any question of international law;
c. the existence of any fact which, if established, would constitute a breach of an international
obligation;
d. the nature or extent of the reparation to be made for the breach of an international
obligation.”
In addition, Article 40(1) of the Statute is set forth as: “Cases are brought before the Court, as
the case may be, either by the notification of the special agreement or by a written application
addressed to the Rapporteur. In either case the subject of the dispute and the parties shall be
indicated.” Model CJ trial proceedings are quite similar with the real International Court of
Justice. Once the jurisdiction of the Court has been established, the proceedings immediately
commence with the written proceedings and the Secretariat fixes the deadlines for the written
pleadings. Written proceedings include Memorial - Counter Memorial and evidence
submission. In our conference, advocates are expected to specify their witnesses before the
conference and inform the Secretariat as mentioned below. During the conference, oral
proceedings start with opening statements and continues pursuant to the ICJ Rules of
Procedure 2013. For further information please visit the website and download the Rules of
Procedure.
THE CASE
One of the two court simulations that we established is International Court of Justice. Last
year we had “Peru v. Chile: Maritime Boundary Dispute” and this year’s case is called
“Japan v. Russia at Northern Territories/Kuril Islands”. It is a border dispute which does not
only stand as a legal case but it also has political and historical aspects. The case requires at
least basic knowledge of International Public Law in order to participate because it is mostly
about territorial dispute, however, it also involves Law of the Seas and maybe even Conflict
of Laws within its context concerning the people living on the islands and their status.
Furthermore knowledge on Law of the Treaties is one of the most essential fields that we will
discuss about.
Model CJ 2013 Academic Team recommends you to read the whole Study Guide and the
Model CJ Rules of Procedure of the International Court of Justice.
The preparation of the advocates and the judges will be different. This handbook will first
give the advocates the way to prepare their memorials, the flagging issues they should know
about and second, it will enlighten the trial process and the phase of verdict for judges.
Since the advocates represent a state, they should not just confine themselves with the study
guide but also do further reading to dig out the treasure to build their arguments on. They
have to follow the most recent developments about the region and the dispute to evaluate their
knowledge and strengthen their case in order to defense it better before the judges and the
counter party.
Advocates have to be aware of the fact that their arguments should be legal based and solid.
One of the duties as an advocate is to rebut the evidence of the other side apart from finding
evidences to make the state you represent win the lawsuit before the ICJ. Most importantly,
their memorials should be written in a precise and persuasive manner because when they are
well-prepared in advance and stick to their arguments, they can answer all the questions that
directed by the judges about their arguments.
Since the jurisdiction of the Court in our case is assumed as established beforehand, advocates
do not need to write about and argue it in detail. Once the proceedings have been instituted,
the Court moves onto the first phase which is called the written proceedings.
WRITTEN PROCEEDINGS
ADVOCATES
Written Proceedings starts with the submission of the Memorial of the Applicant to the
secretariat. Secretariat reviews the memorial and sends it to the Respondent who is expected
to write a counter memorial and submit it to the Secretariat before the deadlines. A memorial
is a pleading that is submitted by the Applicant which contains a statement of the relevant
facts and law and the prayer on the other hand; a counter memorial is also a pleading that is
submitted by the Respondent which contains an admission or denial of the facts which stated
in the memorial, additional facts, a statement of law in answer, (if deemed necessary)
observation the statement of law in the memorial, and lastly a prayer..
Within the same time limits and if the Court deems necessary, it may authorize the
presentation of Replies. However, in the Model Courts of Justice, the procedure of replies
will not be applied
How to Prepare Memorial/Counter- Memorial
A Memorial and a Counter- Memorial differs by the content. However, the form of pleadings
is essentially the same. Although there is not any official Memorial/Counter-Memorial form,
generally both pleadings include:
Heading
Introduction
Statement of Jurisdiction
Statement of Relevant Facts
Statement of Law (Legal Issues)
Legal Arguments
Prayer
Advocates are expected to prepare their Memorial/Counter- Memorial compatible with this
traditional form.
It may be beneficial to examine and detail abovementioned parts of the pleadings one by one
in order to make it more specific and a helpful guide for advocates;
Heading
The heading of a pleading should include the name of the case, the names of those arguing the
case with their title, the names of the advocates who submit the pleading, whether the
document is a Memorial or a Counter-Memorial. It shall be formulated as follows:
“ Northern Territory Dispute
Japan v. Russia
Applicant: Japan
Respondent: Russian Federation
On behalf of the Applicant/Respondent, the advocates: ……
Memorial of Japan/ Counter Memorial of Russian Federation”
After the applicant advocates submit their memorial to the secretariat, it is sent to the
respondent advocates to provide information for their counter memorial. Start writing your
memorials before the deadline. Remember, both parties are given the same amount of time as
a deadline to be prepared and both of the parties may consult with the Academic Team of
Model CJ 2013 if any questions occur during their memorial, evidence and witness
preparation before the conference date.
While stating the name of the dispute, it should be noticed that the Applicant’s name is always
written first, and the Respondent’s name is listed second. Since Japan is the Applicant in the
case at hand, the case should be named as “Japan v. Russia”
Introduction
Under this chapter, a brief summary of the case should be written. It is the part that parties
refer to the previous developments regarding the case such as the date and the institution of
proceedings before the Court and/or state the structure and content of their Memorial/
Counter- Memorial.
Statement of Jurisdiction
In this chapter, the grounds for jurisdiction of the Court should be clearly stated and if seems
necessary, should be explained in details.
Memorials and counter-memorials which are submitted to the ICJ include a section named
“Statement of Jurisdiction” where the Advocates argue if the Court’s jurisdiction on the case
at hand is well established pursuant to Articles 36 and 40 of the Statute of ICJ.
Respondent has two options: First one is to recognize the Court jurisdiction and expresses it
explicitly in its Counter-Memorial; second one is to raise a preliminary objection to the
Court’s jurisdiction. In this case, the Respondent needs to indicate reasons of they argue that
the Court does not have the relevant jurisdiction to consider the merits of the case at hand, by
specifying the facts and law which the objection is based.
The reason why such a section needed is: In cases which the Court has no jurisdiction on the
case, a judgment cannot be rendered on the merits of the case and such a case must be
dismissed on grounds of lack of competence before any deliberation of the Court on the
merits. Moreover, if a party to the case (usually and logically, the Respondent) decides to
pursue a defense that the Court has no jurisdiction on the case, the lack of jurisdiction should
be their only argument stipulated in their first written pleading, otherwise, arguments
presented on the merits may be considered as an implicit acceptance of the Court’s
jurisdiction on the Case. However, between the time of submissions of the first and the second
pleadings, the Court may decide it has jurisdiction on the case. Subsequently, this party has to
change their strategy and to present other arguments regarding the merits of the case, within
their second written pleading.
However, in the ICJ of Model Courts of Justice 2013, the parties will only submit one written
pleading; thus, arguing that the Court lacks competence may be problematic for the parties.
Considering this fact and for the sake of the Conference, the Secretariat decided that the
Court will be presumed as competent. Therefore the parties are not required to stipulate such
section in their written pleadings.
Statement of Facts
Facts are the events which lead to the dispute pending before the Court, that’s why, a research
through the historical, political or legal background of the dispute may be helpful to state the
relevant facts. Facts should be briefly outlined in this part of the pleading.
In its Counter-Memorial, the Respondent may admit or deny the facts which stated in the
Memorial and may add other facts to their Counter-Memorial.
While preparing the statement of facts part of the Memorial/ Counter-Memorial, the best way
is the inclusion of the facts which have relevance with the case before the court. Never forget,
the aim of a Memorial/Counter-Memorial is to persuade the Court to render its decision in
favor of the state you represent by preparing your pleadings. Although they are the objective
aspects of the case and should be stated truthfully, the parties may present by phrasing those
in an advantageous way to support their position.
Statement of Law
Advocates should specify the law and principles which they claim that those are applicable to
the case before the Court, in their Memorial/Counter-Memorial. This law and principles may
be relevant articles of international treaties and conventions, customary law, general
principles of law, precedents, works and teachings of noted international law jurists or studies
by international organizations such as the UN. Since the law that is cited in this chapter will
be the grounds of the arguments , advocates are also welcome to mention domestic law which
is related to the case, however it should be kept in mind that domestic law does not carry out
the same weight with international law, so it may be used to support the main arguments.
While preparing statement of law section, we recommend you to fully comprehend the
sources of the court to give its decision and put the claimed sources of international law set
forth in Article 38 of the Statute of the ICJ which is a part of the Charter of UN , in the best
order so that you may take attention to the applicable law to your claims. As stated in this
article, you may refer to scholarly works or previous judicial decisions which states or renders
that it is a rule of customary international law and provide their point by this way. Make sure
that you state your references and make no plagiarism in this regard.
While stating relevant law, you may choose to specify and write down the relevant articles of
the applicable international conventions and treaties in the Memorial/ Counter Memorial,
rather than citing only the name of the treaty or convention. Judges may need and/or want to
analyze the exact phrase which is stipulated in the convention or treaty, while considering oral
arguments of the advocates and rendering their decision on the case.
Memorial and Counter Memorial will be sent via e-mail to the Judges so that they can be
prepared. Copies of those will be provided to Judges right before the commencement of the
proceedings.
When deemed necessary or upon the request of the Judges, evidences which are mostly
relevant parts of treaties or conventions mentioned in the written pleadings submitted by the
advocates may be provided to Judges in print by the Academic and Organization Teams of
Model CJ at any time, to enable Judges for analyzing those instruments better and for
determining the applicable law correctly. Keep in mind that the stipulations the parties will
prepare during the proceedings also count as evidence. Further information can be found in
Rules of Procedure.
Nevertheless, the relevant law stipulated in your written pleadings will not be your only
assertion of law, since you will present such legal instruments as evidences and their relation
with your claims during the “Presentation of Evidence” phase of the oral proceedings. Hence,
do not try to cover all the law found relevant in your written pleadings; instead, concentrate
on explaining your case clearly and state the law which you find necessary to ground your
arguments persuasively.
Make sure that you are well prepared for evidence presentation and used accurate sources,
not made up ones, remember that you are expected to submit your evidences in advance
before the conference so that Academic and Organization Teams of Model CJ can print them
and make them present before the Court. In this way, Judges can be prepared and can easily
follow the references to your evidences while you are presenting those. The deadline for
“Evidence Submission” will be announced on the website of Model CJ (www.modelcj.org)
Legal Arguments
This chapter contains the legal arguments that will support your submissions. In this part,
advocates need to reflect the legal arguments of the party which they represent on the case.
While making their arguments, advocates may use the facts and the relevant law that they
cited in the “Statement of Facts” and “Statement of Law” and discuss how those apply to the
particular case.
It is the most important part of the memorial, that’s why you should be sure your arguments
are written down in a logical, understandable and accurate manner with using a
comprehensible language.
Your arguments should involve enough examination about the facts and should be based on
the legal documents; political aspect of the dispute cannot be considered as an argument
which is adequate to present to the Court. Moreover, advocates should be certain about the
arguments they have cited address all legal questions arises from the case. Make sure that you
put down in writing exactly what you want to communicate to the judge.
Prayer
In your submissions you put down what you want the Court to decide upon your case. It can
be, for example, a prohibition or a declaratory judgment.
A submission contains the request of the parties from the Court to act and decide in their
favor; parties to the case should briefly describe what conclusion they hope the Court will
reach. Applicants usually seek a declaration of the rights or duties they think exists between
disputing parties, or ask the Court to direct the Respondent to reinstate the justice. They may
ask the Court to render or a judgment that orders a compensation to be paid by the
Respondent, while Respondents requests dismissal of the case or seek counter relief against
the Applicant.
A Memorial/Counter-Memorial should be concluded with the phrase “Submitted
respectfully”. It shall be formulated as follows:
“Submitted respectfully
by the advocates of the Government of … (fill in the blanks with your country)
(Name of Advocate) (Name of other Advocate)”
While preparing their written pleadings, advocates should keep in mind that the main aim of
these pleading is to persuade the Court to decide in their favor; however there will be oral
proceedings in which you present your arguments in a more detailed way. In this regard, a
concise pleading will be enough to underlie your position. Remember, when you write your
written pleadings with unnecessary extensions, it will not help you nor justify your claims.
Significant Issues for Advocates
Written proceeding is completed beforehand and followed by the oral proceedings--which
will take place during the Conference.. Other than the written proceedings, there are certain
things that you should do before the date of the Conference. as it is stated and governed by the
Rules of Procedure specifically stipulated for International Court of Justice not only the
written proceedings, but also the processes of evidences and witness submission start before
the Conference,. In this regard, Academic Team recommends you to pay extra attention to
following points:
At the first day of the Conference, you will be giving a procedural briefing regarding
the rules which will be following during the Conference; however, reading and
analyzing the Rules of Procedure beforehand and trying to comprehend the structure,
the nature and the way how the Court proceeds will be of benefit to you. While doing
so, should you have any question, please do not hesitate to ask to our Secretariat via e-
mail.
As it is implied above, you are obliged to submit your evidences beforehand. The
Secretariat will determine a deadline for the “Evidence Submission” an announce it on
the website. We strongly advise you to check our website on daily basis to obtain the
information regarding the deadline.
In addition to the written evidence advocates submit to the secretariat and present
before the Court, they are also entitled to bring two witnesses and question them
during the Witness Questioning phase. Witness testimonies are also considered and
treated as evidence. In order to do so, you should conduct a research and select a real
person who witnessed the event or process of a certain aspect or time period
concerning the case. (As an example, advocates of Japan may choose to bring former
Prime Minister of Japan who signed the San Francisco Peace Treaty and question him
about the atmosphere of the time when the Treaty was concluded to point out and
convince the Judges that Japan was not forfeit its alleged rights on the Islands. In the
meantime, advocates of Russian Federation may bring Former Deputy of Foreign
Minister who represented USSR in the San Francisco Conference, as a witness to
rebut Japan’s claims.)
After determining such a person, you should inform the Secretariat about the witnesses
you want to bring with stating their names and their positions and their relation to the
case In a nutshell, you should submit your witnesses beforehand. Deadline for
“Witness Submission” will be announced by the Secretariat. Then the Secretariat will
appoint someone from the Model CJ team as the witness you need and give you the
contact information of that person so that you will be able to inform and prepare this
person for his/her testimony.
ICJ JUDGES
The difficult part for the judges is not the preparation but the processing of the case.
Academic Team advises judges to keep an equal distance to the advocate parties during the
proceedings not to compromise their reliability and neutrality. Judges are expected be open-
minded and impartial. They shall not have positive or negative opinions beforehand neither of
the advocates nor of the case itself. They are also not allowed to give any information to the
advocates about the process while still discussing and composing their decision. Judges have
to listen to the advocates very carefully and examine their memorials in order to ask the right
questions which will lead us to the best possible solution of the case.
Before the conference the only preparation judges can do is to study the case via the Study
Guides. Study Guides are written in the best possible impartiality and they also show you the
references where you can do further reading when needed. However, you should not come to
the conference with a strong pre-opinion about the case, so as to be open-minded and on a
persuadable attitude during the conference. The matter you should not appease is the
applicable law.
As stated in the Statute of the ICJ/Article 38-1, the Court shall apply:
a. international conventions, whether general or particular, establishing rules expressly
recognized by the contesting states;
b. international custom, as evidence of a general practice accepted as law;
c. the general principles of law recognized by civilized nations;
d. subject to the provisions of Article 59, judicial decisions and the teachings of the most
highly qualified publicists of the various nations, as subsidiary means for the determination of
rules of law,
in accordance with the international law.
You should read the International Court of Justice Statute in the UN Charter in order to be
well informed and equipped and we advise you to do some further reading on the Public
International Law, Maritime Law and maybe specifically on International Law concerning
Islands. Knowledge on these is necessary if you want to find a solution to the dispute and true
application of your knowledge will give you advantage also make a more fruitful debate. You
may want to go through some doctrine and judicial opinions as well. Such knowledge may
enable you to interpret the provided evidence and sources of law better and may be helpful for
further understanding of the case. At the same time, it may provide you the necessary
knowledge and perspective to decide on the case where the abovementioned three could not
be applied; however, we strongly emphasize the fact that you must be impartial and fair.
Besides, you shall follow the order of the sources and go through every detail that is in front
of you.
Heed the advocates and question them. When they are open to the questions it is your only
chance to comprehend and evaluate the case and their arguments better and decide
accordingly. This point is just as desired during the witnesses’ questioning. Evidences will be
given to you to inspect, try to ask incisive questions which will indicate to you whether the
evidence is credible and accurate or not.
How to Prepare a Verdict
The form of the Verdict used in Model CJ Conference includes:
Heading
Introduction
Jurisdiction of the Court
Statement of Relevant Facts
Questions Raised
Evaluation of Claims
Applicable law
Decision
Judges are expected to prepare their decision on the case in compliance with this traditional
form.
To be more specific and guide the judges better, it may be beneficial to examine and detail
abovementioned parts of the verdict one by one;
Heading
The heading of a verdict shall be formulated as follows:
“Date of the judgment
JUDGMENT
INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE
NORTHERN TERRITORY/KURIL ISLANDS DISPUTE
(JAPAN v. RUSSIA)
Parties and the Submission
In case concerning the land and maritime border dispute
between
Japan,
represented by the agents
(names of the advocates)
and
Russia,
represented by the agents
(names of the advocates)
Introduction
Under this chapter, a brief summary of the case and dispute should be written, previous
developments regarding the case such as the date and the institution of proceedings before the
Court should be mentioned. Furthermore, the legal issues relevant to the case such as some
general principles and sovereignty issues of both parties, regulations and main treaties may be
mentioned.
At the end, if the claim is admissible, it should be depicted. Since it is an island dispute, brief
information about the disputed islands or territory should be given and the applicable law and
method of resolution to the case should be specified. Judges do not need to extend the
introduction because in the further chapters, they will give detailed information under related
parts.
Jurisdiction of the Court
In this chapter, the grounds for jurisdiction of the Court for this specific case should be clearly
stated and if deem necessary, also explained.
Statement of the facts
The facts about the case and the dispute should be explained here. Remember, the facts
according to the parties may be mentioned in their written and oral submission and be found
convincing however, the Court may find further facts or have interpretations on submitted
facts whether such facts are relevant to the case at hand or are to be recognized as the
reflection of the “truth” by the Court, if so, those should also be pointed out and explained.
If there was a stipulation made by the state parties during the stipulation phase, judges need to
specify it in their verdicts, so as to read:
“The Stipulation concluded by the parties of the dispute on 16.02.2013 reads as;”
The geography of the region may be explained with the location of the disputed lands/islands,
descriptions, historical background and their relation to the disputed states. The islands should
be subject to review one by one under the sub clauses.
Position taken by third States may be mentioned as long as it is related to the dispute.
Accepted evidence by the Court may also be named here since it is considered to reflect or
point out the truth. Evidentiary value of maps may be examined. If the court has reached to a
conclusion as to sovereignty over the islands, they should write it to the conclusion part
however they can here state the tangible information regarding to the case and therefore
establish the ground for their sentence.
The Questions Raised
This chapter follows the facts because it is the part where the demands, specifically claims of
the parties are examined and evaluated so as to ground the final verdict of the Court by
underlining the reasons of why the Court reached such a verdict.
Judges should list the claims of the parties in a logical and/or chronological order, while
evaluating each one of them separately and juristically. They should then briefly state the
reasons of accepting or denying the submission of such parties’ claim. While doing so, they
may specify some court decisions, treaties etc., by “recalling” them. After you are done with
the claim of one party, you may consider other party’s claims in the same manner, by using
phrases such as “the Court now turns to the question whether…”
Since the legal grounds are crucially important for your decision, the court must determine the
applicable law. You are expected to write them down under asub-clause, namely “Applicable
Law”. Every related issue, especially the applicability of international customary law, the
international bi/multilateral treaties, if so, whether the parties are part of the treaty or not,
shall be expressed. The parties may agree on some points, if so, it should be specified as well.
The Court should then turn to the methodology to be implied in effecting the delimitation.
Judges may also mention precedence or the legal grounds alike. Then Judges should write
down the solution they find for the dispute. If the parties invoke several different
considerations which they found relevant to the achievement of an equitable solution, the
Court examines each of the considerations invoked by the Parties in turn and states if in the
Court’s opinion, an equitable result is achieved. The Court may illustrate maps if needed any.
Judges may also refer to the previous judgments of the court. Referrals are preferred to be
detailed such as the number, the date of the previous verdict etc. However if the detailes are
not known, mere names can also be referredwhen content is considered accurate.
Decision
Before the mere decision part, judges may specify a brief form of the decision/s such as “X’s
request for a declaration”. Here they need to indicate the observations and the core of their
discussion in paragraphs. This part can be in detail and continue with the phrase “the Court
considers that” followed by an explanation hereby.
After the court comes to a conclusion, they need a phrase before stating the decision such as
“The Court concludes that,” should be written at the beginning of the main decision as a
commencement phrase and the rest of the decision should be clear, precise and expected to be
a whole sentence. If there is more than one decision, any other one should also be in the same
format except the beginning since it is sort of an oppositional decision to the first.
The final decision shall be in its traditional format (the content below is just an example and
should not be directly copied):
“For these reasons,
THE COURT,
1. Unanimously,
Finds that
2. By thirteen votes to two,
Finds
IN FAVOUR: (name of the judges)
AGAINST: (name of the judges)
3. Unanimously,
Decides
4. Unanimously,
Rejects
Respectively. (Signed)(name of the judges and title if the presidents involved)
(Signed) (name of the judges)
Rapporteur.
Judge A appends a dissenting opinion to the Judgment of the Court;
(Initialled) P. T.
Judge B appends a concurring opinion;
(Initialled) P. T.”
Dissenting and Concurring Opinions
The dissenting opinion which isthe opinion written by the judge or judges who voted against
the verdict and disagrees with the Court's disposition of the case
The concurring opinion which is opinion written by one or more judges of a court which
agrees with the decision made by the majority of the court, therefore initially voted in favor of
the verdict but states different reasons than the ones that verdict includes, as the basis for his
or her decision.
Dissenting and concurring opinions should be added at the end of the verdict, respectively.