Dissenting state immunity - ICJ'S tryst with the 'sovereign immunity' myth

Babu, Parthiban

Abstract

The concept of state immunity has been through a severe process of development in the recent past. State immunity initially accorded to the states in recognition of their sovereign character, and the concept later underwent a series of fine-tuning to reach where it is today. In line with the modern-day relevance of the subject matter, the world court asked to decide upon the case concerning the jurisdictional immunities of a state (Germany V. Italy; Greece Intervening) in the year 2012. The court was put to some severe test in matters relating to norms conflict, the hierarchical character of obligations in International law, the evolving nature of the jus gentium about the rights of the State V. Individual. The court significantly falls short of its mandate in this case wherein the dissenting judges took up the responsibility in explaining the lex ferenda regarding the concept of state immunity and its practical limitations.

Citation

Babu, P. (2018). Dissenting state immunity - ICJ'S tryst with the 'sovereign immunity' myth. Zanzibar Yearbook of Law, 8, 27-62

• Journal Article Type: Article
• Publication Date: Oct 10, 2018
• Deposit Date: Dec 6, 2022
• Journal: Zanzibar Yearbook of Law
• Print ISSN: 2591-6785
• Peer Reviewed: Peer Reviewed
• Volume: 8
• Pages: 27-62
• Series ISSN: 2591-6785
• Keywords: The ICJ, Sovereign Immunity, jus cogens, norm conflict, law
• Public URL: https://uwe-repository.worktribe.com/output/10223947
• Publisher URL: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3642563