| |
| | International Court of Justice |
 | | The Court considers that the accepted practice of the Assembly, as it has evolved, is consistent with Article 12, paragraph 1; it is accordingly of the view that the General Assembly, in adopting resolution ES?10/14, seeking an advisory opinion from the Court, did not contravene the provisions of Article 12, paragraph 1, of the Charter. |
 | | The Court points out that, in the present instance, if the General Assembly requests the Court to state the “legal consequences” arising from the construction of the wall, the use of these terms necessarily encompasses an assessment of whether that construction is or is not in breach of certain rules and principles of international law. |
 | | The Court recalls its previous case law, which emphasized that current developments in “international law in regard to non?self?governing territories, as enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations, made the principle of self?determination applicable to all [such territories]”, and that the right of peoples to self?determination is today a right erga omnes. |
| www.infomideast.com /arch1/ajul019.html (8377 words) |
|