| I. | Substantive International Law - First Part |
| 2. | SOURCES OF INTERNATIONAL LAW |
| 2.1. | General Questions |
| 2.1.4. | Ius cogens / Obligations erga omnes |
¤
Maritime Delimitation in the Area
between Greenland and Jan Mayen,
Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1993, p. 38
[p. 109 S.O. Oda] 68. It may be contended that there can be a legal
framework within which - and only within which - the content of an agreement is
justifiable under international law and that any agreement contrary to jus
cogens should be regarded as invalid. For example, an agreement obtained by
duress might be open to challenge. Except in that very general sense, there does
not in my view exist any jus cogens governing the delimitation of
overlapping maritime titles. The parties can freely negotiate and can reach an
agreement on whatever they wish, employing all possible elements and factors to
strengthen their own position. In other words, there is no legal
constraint, hence no rule, which guides the negotiations on delimitation, even
though the negotiations should be directed "to achiev[ing] an equitable
solution". Disagreement over the points arising during the effort to reach
agreement cannot constitute a "legal dispute", because law is not
involved in choosing the line among infinite possibilities.
