Basic HTML Version
and court action, which settles dis–
putes
within
nations, has not been
inculcated into this world "Supreme
Court."
I mentioned earlier the case of
France's planned nuClear tests in
the South Pacific. In May 1973,
Australia and New Zealand ap–
pealed to the World Court
in
an
attempt to halt the nuclear tests.
France did not agree to submit the
dispute to the Court, on the grounds
that the Court's jurisdiction ex–
cluded disputes involving
matte~s
·of
national defense.
This lack of compulsory jurisdic–
tion - lack of force - causes nations
to resort to the World Court only
when it appears to their advantage.
Most decisions rendered by the
Court have been on matters of rela–
tively minor consequence.
Further, the Court has
no power
to enforce
its judgments once a deci–
síon is rendered, even when both
nations have agreed to take their
case to the Court.
The World Court, as a result, has
unfortunately had little impact on
the behavior of nations. It is gener–
ally regarded as the weakest limb of
the United Nations - but not
through any fault of its own.
It
was
set up by its founding nations so
that it is powerless to frustrate the
designs of a superpower, or, for that
matter, of any power.
The Status Now
So now, where do we stand?
After thousands of years of
human efforts to
STOP WARS -
to
usher in world peace - we have a
United Nations - as helpless and
lacking in "teeth" as its predecessor,
the League ofNations. And we have
its judiciary arm, the International
Court ofJustice- the World Court.
Mankind has advanced to the
point of having judiciary machinery
to settle disputes. In spite of its lirni–
tations and lack ofpower, the World
Court has made definite contribu–
tions to the maintenance of world
peace. The submission of differ–
ences to the Court for decision has,
at times, taken the heat out of dis-
PLAIN TRUTH December 1973
putes which rnight otherwise have
erupted into something much big–
ger. Also, sorne long-standing dis–
putes have been resolved . through
negotiation, after one party threat–
ened to take the case to the Court.
And the decisions of the Court have
served to clarify and strengthen
existing international law.
What of the Future?
Surely
a beginning has been made.
But from this
b~ginning,
will the
World Court ever grow into a full–
fledged supreme coutt of the world,
as many suggest? Sorne say that as
the body of internationallaw grows,
nations will gain experiences in
being governed by it and allow it to
grow even further and expand into
more critica! areas. Even so, that
would take time - a long time. And
with nuclear weapons threatening
human survival, we don't have that
kind of time.
And would
it
find its way into
those critica! areas which spell the
Simply from the
common consent
of nations. This common consent
comes out of their
mutual self-inter–
est
in seeing such laws on the books.
Nations observe these laws because
it's in their own seJf-interest.
But what happens in areas where
mutual interest is not served? Then
there is no mutual consent, and con–
sequently, no international law in
those areas. And it is in these areas
of confiict of national interest that
wars generate.
What it aU boils down to is this:
The United Nations and the World
Court can be only as powerful and
effective as the nations of the world
allow them to be. Sovereignty and
nationalism are still potent.
Former Secretary-General of the
U.N. , U Thant, puts it succinctly:
If the United Nations is to
grow into a really effective in–
strument for maintaining the
rule of law, the first step must
be the willingness of the
W
hat many scientists are saying is
our only hope, the Bible reveals
wi/1 come not by man's initiative
but by God's. And it further reveals that
the world soon wi/1 be RULED BY INTER–
NA TIONAL LAW, but not through the
efforts of mortal man.
difference between war and peace?
The answer lies
in the origin ofinter–
nationa/ /aw.
There is no World Congress,
World Parliament, Reichstag or
Diet today making international
law, and no "world executive
branch"
Of WORLD GOVERNMENT
with its own police and super–
military force with power to force all
nations to submit their disputes to
the World Court, or to compel all
nations to submit to its decisions.
Many had hoped that the U.N.
General Assembly would evolve
into a world legislature. It has not.
From where, then, dici inter–
national law come?
member states to give up the
concept of the absolute sover–
eign state in the same manner
as we individuals give up our
absolute right to do just as we
please, as an essential condi–
tion of living in an organized
society. .. .
This world - humanity as a
whole - is still geared to the way of
human nature.
This is the point where we need to
understand!
There are, as
1
have said repeat–
edly and expect to continue saying
as long as God allows me to draw
breath, just two broad, general ways
9