WORLD COURT PROJECT
WORLD COURT DECLARES NUCLEAR WEAPONS THREAT AND USE ILLEGAL
[NEW YORK -- July 8, 1996] In a landmark decision today, the
International Court of Justice declared that the threat or use of
nuclear weapons would be "contrary to the rules of international
law applicable in armed conflict" in just about any imaginable
circumstance. The ruling was unveiled this morning at the Hague
and discussed in press briefings at the UN in Geneva and New
York, as well as press conferences in Seattle, Hawaii, Santa
Barbara, Berkeley, Australia, Costa Rica, Germany, Japan, New
Zealand, Malaysia, and the Philippines.
The only exception to this sweeping declaration of
illegality was the Court's holding that "in view of the current
state of international law and of the elements of fact at its
disposal, the Court cannot conclude definitively whether the
threat or use of nuclear weapons would be lawful or unlawful in
an extreme circumstance of self-defense, in which the very
survival of a State would be at stake."
The single vote on these two provisions was seven to seven,
with the President casting the deciding vote. However, since
three of the dissenting judges did so because they took the view
that not even "extreme circumstances" would justify the threat or
use of nuclear weapons, the vote for general illegality was, in
effect, ten to four.
The Court unanimously stressed that States have a legal
obligation not only to pursue "negotiations leading to nuclear
disarmament in all its aspects", in accordance with Article VI of
the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, but also to "bring to a
conclusion"such negotiations. The nuclear States have been
resisting such negotiations. According to World Court President
Bedjouai, the obligation to negotiate the elimination of nuclear
weapons has now achieved "customary force." This means that such
obligations apply to all States whether they are NPT signatories
or not, and obviates the nuclear states' argument that nuclear
disarmament must await the achievement of conventional, "general
and complete disarmament."
The Court was also unanimous that nuclear weapons, like any
weapons, are subject to the law of armed conflict protecting
civilians, combatants, the environment, neutral nations, and
succeeding generations from the effects of warfare, as well as
the United Nations Charter prohibitions of threat or use of force
except in self-defense.
Peter Weiss, co-president of the International Association
of Lawyers Against Nuclear Arms, welcomed the Court's opinion,
stating, "This was an appropriate sequel to Wimbledon, with a
group of unseeded states carrying the day against the world's top
seeds. The Court has charted a clear path toward nuclear
abolition, in terms both of its legal analysis and its appeal to
start taking Article VI of the NPT seriously."
Commander Robert Green, Royal Navy (ret.), of World Court
Project UK, said: "With this remarkable decision, I could never
have used a nuclear weapon legally. This places a duty on the
military to review their whole attitude toward nuclear weapons,
which are now effectively in the same category as chemical and
biological weapons."
The Court declined to rule on another question brought by
the World Health Organization as to whether using nuclear weapons
would be a breach of international law in view of environmental
and health effects, arguing that it lacked the jurisdiction to do
so. But Dr. Victor Sidel, co-president of International
Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War (IPPNW), commented
that "The Court still used the WHO data on the impact of nuclear
weapons on health, health services and the environment. So in
effect, the decision that nuclear weapons' use is generally
contrary to humanitarian international law answers the WHO's
question about legality of nuclear weapons."
The Court's opinion in the General Assembly case comes as a
blow to the United States, United Kingdom, France and Russia, all
of which urged the Court not to consider the case. At a press
conference this morning at the UN in New York, Pentagon Papers
author and defense analyst Daniel Ellsberg said the Court's
decision has a clear application in prohibiting specific actions
of the nuclear states, including the US which on occasion has
threatened first use of nuclear weapons. "The majority decision
of the Court clearly implies that nuclear first-use threats of
the kind Defense Secretary Perry and his deputy Kenneth Bacon
have made recently against Libya are illegal.
Whatever national interest US officials may see in threatening
non-nuclear states, by no stretch can it be seen as what the
Court calls 'extreme self-defense' and the Court has ruled such
threats effectively out of bounds."
The Court proceeding was initiated by international peace
and disarmament groups including the International Association of
Lawyers Against Nuclear Arms (IALANA), International Peace Bureau
(IPB) and International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear
War (IPPNW), which successfully petitioned the World Health
Assembly and the United Nations General Assembly to request the
opinions from the Court. Representatives of these groups
expressed their gratification at today's ruling, and the
understanding reflected in Court President Mohammed Bedjaoui's
conclusion. In it he argues, " the very nature of this blind
weapon has a destabilizing effect on humanitarian law, which
regulates discernment of the type of weapon used. Nuclear
weapons, the ultimate evil, destabilize humanitarian law which is
the law of the lesser evil, not to mention their long-term
effects of damage to the human environment, in respect to which
the right to life can be exercised."
NOTE TO THE MEDIA -- Video and audio footage of the UN press
conference on the World Court decisions, as well as wire photos
from the Hague and interviews with experts on the case from
inside the Hague, from the US, and from UN delegations, are
available on request. For further information, please contact
the numbers below.
Contacts:
US Contacts
Alyn Ware or Steve Kent, Lawyers' Committee on Nuclear Policy
phone (212) 674-7790 or (914) 424-8382
fax (212) 674-6199
IALANA secretariat
phone +31-(0)70-3634484
fax +31-(0)70-3455951
Phon van den Biesen, IALANA
phone +31-(0)20-6232605
fax +31-(0)20-6203559
phone +31-(0)20-6274442 (home)
Peter Weiss, IALANA, and Fredrik Heffermehl, IPB, can be reached
atthe IALANA secretariat. Rob Green, World Court Project UK, can
bereached at +31 70 360 8905.
ICJ Opinion Page