With its obiter dicta
decision in the Barcelona
Traction case, the International
Court of Justice (ICJ) confirmed the existence of erga omnes obligations in international law and thus took an
important step towards the recognition of the general interest in international law.
However, the Court did not fur- ther pronounce on these obligations in terms of their content,
ascertainment, or legal consequences. The author contends, that even
though the Barcelona Tractions’s obiter dicta established a Potemkin village
in international law, the
Court’s pronouncement in this case was nevertheless significant as it acted as
a driving force for the development of secondary rules
on the enforcement of erga omnes (partes) obligations as
enshrined in the Articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally
Wrongful Acts (ARSIWA). Moreover, the Court importantly clarified erga omnes (partes) obligations through
its subsequent practice. One of the most significant pronouncements relates to the confirma-
tion, that standing for the invocation of responsibility of states in cases of erga omnes
(partes) obligations includes
a standing of not directly
injured states to initiate proceedings against the wrongdoing state before the ICJ, provided
that conditions for the jurisdiction of the Court are met. The most recent confirma-
tion of this was provided
for in the Application of the Convention on the Preven-
tion and Punishment of the Crime
of Genocide (The
Gambia v. Myanmar)
case.
Key words: erga omnes
obligations, erga omnes partes
obligations, general interest, responsibility of states,
International Court of Justice, jurisdiction.