Role of the International Court of Justice: Example of the Genocide Case

Over the last two decades international law of state responsibility has been somewhat obscured by different views provided by International Court of Justice and International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia on issue of attribution of wrongful acts. However, this intriguing debate over effective and overall control has not only fuelled discussions on law of state responsibility but also on the effects of multiplication of courts and tribunals. This article tries to give an overview of this debate and then explores this diversification by analyzing ICJ's ruling in the Genocide case from 7 February 2007. By looking at different pronouncements made by the ICJ this article argues that World Court has proposed a specific purview test to overcome the lack of legal ties between different courts and tribunals. One the one hand, the Court has acknowledged judgments within specific jurisdictions as authoritative in their own sphere but on the other hand, it has increased its own role in issues of general international law. The Court has also been very clear in separating the effective and overall control and has clarified rules of law on state responsibility. With this broader approach the Court has acted as the most authoritative judicial body in international sphere.