With seven judges and two chairs, the ICJ has been all hands on deck with the case tendered by the Republic of Aldburg and Rivendell. Rivendell has continued to insist that their no-fly zone and small-scale ground operations in Aldburg were necessary on the grounds of Humanitarian intervention.
Reaching an agreement was not that difficult, but getting it written up has proven challenging. The atmosphere was quite serious, portraying the level of mental work being done. With reference to provisions in the rules and principles of international law and the United Nations Charter, the learned Judges debated on the issue of coercion and mentioned that sending a huge number of troops to a country with an average of three operations weekly was tantamount to the use of force. Thus, while trying to assess whether Rivendell is justified under the principle on the responsibility to protect, it was established that the integrity of Aldburg has been violated.
It is all seriousness, and no time for humour, in the International Court Of Justice. After another moderated caucus of thirty minutes, it was established that necessity cannot be used to exert force and military action on another nation. Hence, overruling the state of Rivendell’s claim that it was necessary to send troops to the state of Aldburg.
One would think coming up with a judgement is simple considering the fact that statutory provisions are made available, but the technicalities of the case are most challenging. The violations on Aldburg by Rivendell was established, yet putting down judgement with the right words—and several people’s opinion—was the issue.
According to Her Excellency Florence Gypens, progress is being made, as they were in the process of discussing highly important parts of their judgement on the case. They attempted to fit every argument under the element of an article. Likewise, the use of vocabulary is crucial, because one word could actually change the entire meaning of a sentence.