Jump to content
Amicus Curiae before International Courts and Tribunals / Methodology
Amicus Curiae before International Courts and Tribunals / Methodology
Contents
Chapter
Expand
|
Collapse
Page
1–24
Titelei/Inhaltsverzeichnis
1–24
Details
25–40
Chapter § 1 Introduction
25–40
Details
A. Structure
B. Methodology
C. Scope of the study
41–174
Part I The ‘international’ amicus curiae
41–174
41–72
Chapter § 2 Great expectations? Presumed functions and drawbacks of amicus curiae participation
41–72
Details
A. Presumed functions of amicus curiae
I. Broader access to information
II. Representation of ‘the’ public interest
III. Legitimacy and democratization
IV. Contribution to the coherence of international law
V. Increased transparency
B. Presumed drawbacks
I. Practical burdens
II. Compromising the parties’ rights
III. Politicization of disputes, de-legitimization and lobbyism
IV. Overwhelming developing countries
V. Unmanageable quantities of submissions
VI. Denaturing of the judicial function
C. Conclusion
73–122
Chapter § 3 An international instrument
73–122
Details
A. Amicus curiae before national courts
I. The origins of amicus curiae
II. Amicus curiae before the English courts
III. Amicus curiae before the United States Federal Courts and the Supreme Court
IV. Internationalization: amicus curiae in civil law systems and in inter- and supranational legal instruments
V. Comparative analysis
B. Emergence and rise of amicus curiae before international courts and tribunals
I. International Court of Justice
II. International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea
III. European Court of Human Rights
IV. Inter-American Court of Human Rights
V. African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights
VI. WTO Appellate Body and panels
VII. Investor-state arbitration
C. Conclusion
123–174
Chapter § 4 Characteristics, status and function of amicus curiae before international courts
123–174
Details
A. Characteristics of the international amicus curiae
I. A procedural instrument
II. A non-party and a non-party instrument
III. Transmission of information
IV. An interested participant
V. An instrument of non-state actors?
B. Functions of the international amicus curiae
I. Information-based amicus curiae
II. Interest-based amicus curiae
1. International Court of Justice and International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea
2. European Court of Human Rights
3. Inter-American Court of Human Rights
4. WTO Appellate Body and panels
5. Investor-state arbitration
6. Comparative analysis
III. Systemic amicus curiae
IV. Analysis
1. The myth of ‘the’ international amicus curiae
2. An evolving concept
3. Are there limits to the functions amici curiae may assume?
C. Amicus curiae and other forms of non-party participation
I. International Court of Justice and International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea
II. WTO Appellate Body and panels
III. Investor-state arbitration
IV. Comparative analysis
D. Conclusion
175–428
Part II Commonalities and divergences: the procedural laws of amicus curiae participation
175–428
175–316
Chapter § 5 Admission of amicus curiae to the proceedings
175–316
Details
A. Legal bases for amicus curiae participation
I. International Court of Justice
II. International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea
III. European Court of Human Rights
IV. Inter-American Court of Human Rights
V. African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights
VI. WTO Appellate Body and panels
1. Panels
2. Appellate Body
VII. Investor-state arbitration
1. Clauses in investment treaties
2. Clauses in institutional procedural rules
3. Implied powers
4. Ad hoc agreements
VIII. Comparative analysis
1. Codification and informal doctrine precedent?
2. Common regulatory approaches
B. Conditions concerning the person of amicus curiae
I. International Court of Justice
II. International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea
III. European Court of Human Rights
IV. Inter-American Court of Human Rights
V. African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights
VI. WTO Appellate Body and panels
VII. Investor-state arbitration
1. Legal standards
2. Application
VIII. Comparative analysis
C. Request for leave procedures
I. Formal requirements
1. Timing
2. Form and length
II. Substantive requirements concerning the application
1. International Court of Justice
2. European Court on Human Rights
3. African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights
4. WTO Appellate Body and panels
5. Investor-state arbitration
a) Legal standards
b) Application
aa) Special knowledge or insight
bb) Within the scope of the dispute
cc) Significant interest in the arbitration
dd) Public interest in the subject matter of the arbitration
c) Assessment
III. Full discretion: decision on admissibility
IV. Comparative analysis
D. Conclusion
317–428
Chapter § 6 Amici curiae in the proceedings
317–428
Details
A. Oral and written participation
I. International Court of Justice
II. International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea
III. European Court of Human Rights
IV. Inter-American Court of Human Rights
V. African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights
VI. WTO Appellate Body and panels
VII. Investor-state arbitration
VIII. Comparative Analysis
1. Confidential and/or private nature of the dispute settlement mechanism
2. Regulatory reasons
3. Efficiency, costs and control
4. Personal views of judges
B. Recorded participation
C. Formalization of participation
I. Form of written submissions
1. Length
2. Language
3. Authentification
4. Failure to comply
II. Comparative analysis
D. Substantive requirements and the content of submissions
I. International Court of Justice and International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea
II. European Court of Human Rights
III. Inter-American Court of Human Rights
IV. African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights
V. WTO Appellate Body and panels
VI. Investor-state arbitration
1. Legal standards
2. Particular knowledge or perspective: human rights and EU law?
3. Within the scope of the dispute
4. Applicable law and its limits
VII. Comparative analysis
E. Submission of evidence
F. Access to documents
I. International Court of Justice and International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea
II. European Court of Human Rights, Inter-American Court of Human Rights and African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights
III. WTO Appellate Body and panels
IV. Investor-state arbitration
V. Comparative analysis
G. Conclusion
429–574
Part III The added value of the international amicus curiae
429–574
429–488
Chapter § 7 Does content matter? Substantive effectiveness of amicus curiae submissions
429–488
Details
A. An obligation to consider?
B. International Court of Justice
C. International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea
D. European Court of Human Rights
E. Inter-American Court of Human Rights
F. African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights
G. WTO Appellate Body and panels
H. Investor-state arbitration
I. Comparative analysis
I. Why the hesitation?
II. Elements of successful briefs
III. Limits to the consideration of briefs
J. Conclusion
489–568
Chapter § 8 Effects on the international dispute settlement system
489–568
Details
A. Effect on the relationship between the court, the disputing parties and the member states: amici curiae as evidence of an assertive international judiciary?
I. International Court of Justice
II. International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea
III. European Court of Human Rights and African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights
IV. Inter-American Court of Human Rights
V. WTO Appellate Body and panels
VI. Investor-state arbitration
VII. Comparative analysis
B. Public interest: amicus curiae as motor and evidence of an expanding judicial function?
I. International Court of Justice
II. International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea
III. European Court of Human Rights
IV. Inter-American Court of Human Rights
V. WTO Appellate Body and panels
VI. Investor-state arbitration
VII. Comparative Analysis
1. The right agent?
2. Denaturation of judicial proceedings?
C. Amicus curiae as a tool to increase the legitimacy of international adjudication?
I. Procedural legitimacy
II. Substantive legitimacy
III. Conditions: representativity and accountability
D. Increased coherence? Impact on international law
E. Transparency: demise of confidentiality and access to the proceedings and case documents?
F. Impact on locus standi: amicus curiae as a precursor to international legal standing?
G. And the drawbacks?
I. Parties’ rights
1. Due process
2. Procedural fairness and equality between the parties
II. Practical burdens
1. Right to a speedy trial and undue delay?
2. Exploding costs?
H. Conclusion
569–574
Chapter § 9 Conclusion
569–574
Details
A. What is it?
B. Added value of amicus curiae participation in international dispute settlement
575–704
Annex I: Cases with amicus curiae involvement
575–704
Methodology
Details
705–706
Annex II
705–706
Details
707–734
Bibliography
707–734
Details
Durchsuchen Sie das Werk
Geben Sie ein Keyword in die Suchleiste ein
CC-BY
Access
Amicus Curiae before International Courts and Tribunals , page 575 - 704
Methodology
Autoren
Astrid Wiik
DOI
doi.org/10.5771/9783845275925-575
ISBN print: 978-3-8487-3240-1
ISBN online: 978-3-8452-7592-5
Chapter Preview
Share
Current chapter
Complete document
Download citation
RIS
BibTeX
Copy DOI link
doi.org/10.5771/9783845275925-575
Share by email
Video schließen
Share by email Nomos eLibrary
Recipient*
Sender*
Message*
Your name
Send message
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy
and
Terms of Service
apply.
