The Paradox of Dissent

Mistry, Hemi

doi:10.1093/jicj/mqv019

Cited by 6 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 6 publications

(6 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Виклад матеріалу дослідження. У західній літературі палітра оцінок окремих думок у міжнародному правосудді набагато ширша, зокрема з'явилися серйозні дослідження, які аналізують причини появи окремих думок, їхній зміст та стиль, а також різні аспекти позитивного і негативного впливу окремих думок на процес судочинства, сприйняття рішень суду та діяльності самого суду загалом [1][2][3][4][5][6] Говорячи про можливі мотиви, які спонукають суддю написати окрему думку, А. Ван ден Берг наводить широкий їх перелік. Список починається з випадків, коли суддя чи арбітр публічно відстоює відмінну від більшості точку зору у своїх статтях чи виступах, або коли авторові окремої думки потрібно показати, що держава, яка його призначила, не помилилася у виборі і знову зробить це в майбутньому.…”

unclassified

Separate opinions in international justice: doctrine and practice

Kupianska¹

2023

АПП

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The article examines the institution of a separate opinion in international courts. Emphasis is placed on the activities of the International Court of Justice of the United Nations and its practice regarding the exercise by judges of the right to a separate opinion. Emphasis is placed on the positive approval of certain opinions by researchers, in favor of which several arguments are given. First, it is argued that the very fact of separate opinions leads to an improvement in the arguments and style of the decision made by the majority of judges. Secondly, the majority then makes decisions more responsibly. Third, dissent has a positive effect on the confidence of the parties in the process and the perception of the decision by the losing party, who sees that his arguments have been heard and convinced at least a minority. After all, separate opinions have a positive effect on the development of international law. In legal sources, three categories of separate opinions are distinguished: (1) «good», among which he includes opinions that are short, polite and restrained, that express reasons, not emotions; (2) «bad» - if the separate opinion states that the majority fundamentally erred in making a decision or showed ignorance; (3) «unpleasant» opinions in which the dissenting judge accuses the majority of misconduct. As the practice of the judges of the European Court of Human Rights shows regarding the writing of separate opinions, these opinions may have a format that is not laid down in the prescriptions of the mentioned international acts, and be marked not only as a «concurring» or «disagreeing» separate opinion of the judge, but also as a «partial concurring, partially dissenting» and «partially dissenting» separate opinion of the judge, as well as «separate opinion of the judge joined by the judge», «joint concurring opinion of the judges», «joint dissenting separate opinion of the judges». That is, the method of presenting a separate opinion is chosen by the judges who decided to express it.The right of judges to a separate opinion came to international justice from the countries of the common law system, although the latest studies of comparativists prove that this is far from the case. Separate opinions first spread in international commercial arbitration, and then penetrated into international courts and arbitrations created to resolve disputes involving states. In our national legal system, the right of a judge to express a separate opinion is a recognized tool for ensuring the internal independence of each judge of the Constitutional Court and is enshrined in Article 93 of the Law of Ukraine «On the Constitutional Court of Ukraine» and in § 74 of the Rules of Procedure of this Court. These provisions contain general requirements for the expression of a separate opinion by a judge of the Court and do not detail the types of separate opinions and the manner in which they are presented by a judge of the Court. It was concluded that the realities of modern international justice consist in the fact that there are no procedural mechanisms that separate «good» separate opinions from «bad», and everything is determined only by the restraint and character of the judge himself, who was in the minority, as well as by culture and traditions the court itself. The older and more authoritative the court, the more resistant it is to surprises that can bring bad and unsuccessful individual opinions, the higher its immunity to such opinions. And, on the contrary, the younger the court, the more damage it and its decisions can be caused by the separate opinions of the judges, if the authors (judges) do not approach this issue responsibly.

show abstract

unclassified