A Thought Experiment on Plausibility and ICJ Provisional Measures – EJIL: Speak! – Nexus Vista

The current provisional measures orders of the Worldwide Court docket of Justice within the South Africa v. Israel and Nicaragua v. Germany circumstances have provoked a lot dialogue of the notion of plausibility within the Court docket’s jurisprudence (see, e.g., yesterday’s put up by Roy Schondorf and likewise Mike Becker’s feedback to that put up; … Read more

The That means of “Plausibility” within the ICJ’s Provisional Measures  – EJIL: Speak! – Nexus Vista


In its Order of 26 January 2024 within the case of South Africa v. Israel (introduced beneath Article IX of the Conference on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (“the Genocide Conference”)), the Worldwide Courtroom of Justice (“ICJ”) indicated a lot of provisional measures.  

As a part of its evaluation, the Courtroom discovered that “the info and circumstances talked about [in the Order] are ample to conclude that at the least a few of the rights claimed by South Africa and for which it’s looking for safety are believable” (¶54). The Courtroom’s willpower on “plausibility” seems to have given rise to vital confusion; at the least in a few of the commentaries analysing the Order, the Courtroom’s discovering on “plausibility” has been rephrased in a way which departs from the way in which “plausibility” is historically understood within the Courtroom’s jurisprudence. The obvious muddle brought on by the Courtroom’s reference to plausibility shouldn’t come as an entire shock. Seemingly little has been written on the plausibility requirement and the edge thereof, in addition to on its precise utility within the current case and its repercussions for the Courtroom shifting ahead. This publish seeks to broach exactly these questions.

Read more