Max Planck Institute for Comparative Public Law and International Law Logo Max Planck Institute for Comparative Public Law and International Law

You are here: Publications Archive World Court Digest

World Court Digest



III. The International Court of Justice
3. THE PROCEDURE OF THE INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE
3.10. Provisional Measures
3.10.3. Provisional Measures and Jurisdiction

¤ Arbitral Award of 31 July 1989
Provisional Measures
Order of 2 March 1990,
I.C.J. Reports 1990, p. 64

[pp. 68-69] Whereas the Republic of Guinea-Bissau claims to found the jurisdiction of the Court to entertain the present case upon declarations made by the Parties accepting the compulsory jurisdiction of the Court under Article 36, paragraph 2, of the Statute of the Court; and whereas such declarations were made, by the Republic of Senegal on 22 October 1985, deposited with the Secretary-General of the United Nations on 2 December 1985, and by the Republic of Guinea-Bissau on 7 August 1989, deposited the same day with the Secretary-General of the United Nations; whereas the declaration made by Guinea-Bissau is without reservations, while the declaration of Senegal is subject to reservations, but Guinea-Bissau contends that none of them is relevant to the present dispute;
Whereas on a request for provisional measures the Court need not, before deciding whether or not to indicate them, finally satisfy itself that it has jurisdiction on the merits of the case, yet it ought not to indicate such measures unless the provisions invoked by the Applicant appear, prima facie, to afford a basis on which the jurisdiction of the Court might be founded;
Whereas the Court takes note of the statement made at the hearing by the Agent of Senegal that Senegal makes every reservation at this stage as to the jurisdiction of the Court with respect to the substance of the Application, and the statement of the Co-Agent of Senegal that it is not satisfied that the Court has jurisdiction to entertain the main Application, but does not wish to broach the issue of jurisdiction over the main Application at this stage; and whereas Senegal, while contending that the Court should decline to indicate provisional measures, has accordingly not based that contention on the ground of lack of jurisdiction on the merits of the case;
Whereas the Court considers that the two declarations made under Article 36, paragraph 2, of the Statute appear, prima facie, to afford a basis on which the jurisdiction of the Court might be founded;
Whereas the decision given in the present proceedings in no way prejudges the question of the jurisdiction of the Court to deal with the merits of the case or any questions relating to the merits themselves and leaves unaffected the right of the Respondent to submit arguments against such jurisdiction or in respect of such merits;