SETTLEMENT OF INTERNATIONAL DISPUTES

A dispute may be defined as a specific disagreement concerning a matter of fact, law, or

policy in which a claim or assertion of one party is met with refusal, counterclaim, or denial by
another. In the broadest sense, an international dispute can be said to exist whenever such a
disagreement involves governments, institutions, juristic persons (corporations), or private
individuals in different parts of the World.

PACIFIC SETTLEMENT OF DISPUTES

Article 2, paragraph 3 of the UN Charter requires that: All Members shall settle their
international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and
security and justice are not endangered.
Chapter VI (Articles 33-37) of the UN Charter, entitled Pacific Settlement of Disputes
establishes further obligations of the parties and various dispute settlement powers of the
Security Council. The UN charter provides the following pacific means of dispute settlement:

1. Negotiation: The settlement of international disputes by the disputant states

themselves by discussion or by adjusting the disagreement is called as negotiation. In
other words, when there a dispute arises between two or more states then to avoid the
chances of war or violence they tend to negotiate for the matters to be settled. The
negotiation is to be taken by the political representatives of the disputant countries,
without involving any third or non-concerned country. The success of this method
depends largely upon the degree of acceptability of the claims of one party by the
other.

2. Good-offices: The act or arrangements taken by a third party to bring disputant parties
for negotiation or to settle a dispute between them by any peaceful means is said to be
Good-offices. In the case of Good-offices, the third merely renders services to bring the
disputant parties to peace full means of settlement of disputes. Here the third party
does not give any suggestions or take part in the meetings as to be held between the
disputant parties. Shortly speaking, in case of good offices whenever the parties to
dispute come to peace full of the settlement of dispute the duty of the third party
finishes.

3. Mediation: The act of participating in the discussions and giving suggestions to settle a
dispute between two parties by a third party is said to be Mediation. In other words,
mediation is the method to settle a dispute where any third party actively takes part in
the sessions of dialogues or negotiations held between the disputant party to resolve
 the dispute. In the case of mediation, the mediator should consider the matter of
compromise between the parties rather than encourage the strict letter of the law.

4. Conciliation: The process of referring a dispute to a commission; to find out facts and
prepare a report containing proposals for the settlement of that dispute, is called
conciliation. In case of conciliation, the commission is to take two tasks, at first, it shall
ascertain the facts of the dispute and secondly, it shall prepare a report which shall
reveal the possible measures to settle the dispute. But the proposals prepared by the
commission have no binding force upon the parties. The parties can disagree with the
proposals.

5. Inquiry: The process of ascertaining the facts of disputes by a commission of imperial

investigators is said to be an inquiry. One of the most common obstacles that prevent
the successful settlement of disputes in International Law is the ascertainment of the
facts, as it has been observed for the years that different views are put forward by the
disputant parties. A majority of International disputes get stuck because of the
unwillingness and inability of the parties to agree to the facts. The only function of the
commission is to bring in light those facts, which are the root cause for the alleged
dispute, and to investigate the question of law and mixed questions of law and fact.

6. Arbitration: The process of referring the dispute; by the mutual consent of the parties
to a body of persons or a tribunal for a legal decision is called arbitration. The essential
ingredient of arbitration is the consent of disputant parties to the dispute. In other
words, the referring of the dispute to a Court of Arbitration is dependent on the sweet-
well of the parties. International law recognizes a court for arbitration known as the
Permanent Court of Arbitration. But in fact, it is neither permanent nor a court.

7. Judicial Settlement: The process of settling a dispute; by the International Tribunal in

the light of the provisions of International Law, is said to be Judicial Settlement. For
Judicial Settlement, there is a judicial organ in international law, known as the
International Court of Justice. Both the award given by the arbitration tribunal and the
decision given by the International Court of Justice comes in the ambit of Judicial
Settlement. Like in arbitration, in case of referring the dispute to the International Court
of Justice the consent of both the parties are necessary to be given. International Court
of Justice shall take its proceeding in the light of the rules of International law, and its
procedure is governed by the statute known as the Statute of the International Court of
Justice. International Court of Justice plays a very important rule in the settlement of
international disputes.
 8. By General Assembly: Despite the fact that the Assembly has not been empowered to settle
the disputes using any specific means, it holds a wide range of powers to discuss the same under
Article 11 para 2 and may make recommendations under Article 14 to the parties in dispute
which may help them to arrive at peaceful and friendly conclusions. Thus, in simpler words, it
can be said that has the power to discuss and to suggest better means for the peaceful
settlement of the disputes.
9. Security Council: Chapter VI of the Charter provides the various modes by which the
Council settles disputes peacefully. Under Article 35 of the UN charter any state may
bring any dispute to the attention of the Security Council or the General Assembly.
Under Article 36, the SC may, at any stage of a dispute the continuance of which is
likely to endanger the maintenance of international peace or security, recommend
appropriate procedures or methods of adjustments; in doing so, the SC should take into
consideration that legal disputes should be as a general rule be referred by the parties
to the International Court of Justice.
Article 37 provides that, should the parties to a dispute of nature referred to in
Article 33 fail to settle it by the means indicated in Article 33, they shall refer it to SC
which, if it deems that the continuance of the dispute is, in fact, likely to endanger the
maintenance of international peace and security, shall decide whether to take action
under Article 36 or to recommend such terms of settlement as it may consider
appropriate.
Article 38 provides that: Without prejudice to the provisions of Article 33 to 37, the
Security Council may, if all the parties to any dispute so request, make
recommendations to the parties with a view to a pacific settlement of the dispute.

COMPULSIVE OR COERCIVE MEANS

Compulsive or coercive means for the settlement of disputes are non-peaceful methods.
Such measures involve pressure or force on a State to settle the dispute. However, the use of
compulsive measures does not mean the use of armed forces in all cases. Normally, they
include the measures which are just predecessor to war, or short of war.
1. Retorsion: Retorsion is the technical term for retaliation. It is based, to some extent, on
the principle of tit for tat. When an act is done by a State similar to that done earlier by
another state, it is called Retorsion. The purpose of Retorsion is to take retaliation. The
acts which are done by a State in Retorsion are not illegal. In other words, they are
permitted under International Law. However, it is an unfriendly act and in given
circumstances, it may be an effective tool of law enforcement.
This is acknowledged in practice when international conventions sometimes provide
for the employment of an unfriendly act as a reaction to the breach of obligation. The
cases where Retorsion are employed as a means to settle the disputes may be
 numerous. For instance, if the citizens of a State are given unfair treatment in another
State through rigorous passport regulations, the former may also make similar rigorous
rules in respect of the citizens of the latter State.
One of the cases of the Retorsion took place in December 1992, when two Pakistani
High Commission officials were declared persona non grata by India, Pakistan also
expelled three Indian officials and declared them persona non grata. The action of
Pakistan can be termed as Retorsion.

2. Reprisals: The term reprisals includes the employment of any coercive measures by a
State to secure redress. Thus, the main purpose of the reprisals is to compel the
delinquent State to discontinue the wrongdoing, or to pursue it, or both. If a dispute has
arisen due to an unjustified or illegal act of a State, the other state may take any
coercive measure against that State to settle the dispute. Formerly, Reprisals were
restricted only to the seizure of property or persons, but later, it included other
methods as well such as bombardments, the occupation of territories of a State, seizure
of ships, freezing of assets of its citizens and taking any kind of property belonging to it.
After the creation of the United Nations, the use of force in reprisals has been
prohibited (Article 2 para 4 of the Charter). Also, article 33 of the Geneva Convention
forbids reprisals against persons protected therein. Actions taken in reprisals are illegal
and are taken exceptionally, by a State to obtain justice. In reprisals, a State takes law
into its own hands.

3. Embargo: The term Embargo is of Spanish origin. Ordinarily, it means detention, but in
International Law, it has the technical meaning of detention of ships in port. Hyde
defines embargo as the detention within the national domain of ships or other property
otherwise likely to find their way to foreign territory. The embargo may be applied by a
State in respect of its vessels or to the vessels of other States. When a state confines the
operation of the embargo to its vessels, it is known as a civil or pacific embargo. Such an
operation is initiated by an order issued by State authorities to limit or interrupt or
terminate its trade and economic relations with another state. The purpose is to exert
financial or economic pressure on the other state.
Embargo at present may be applied by a State, individually, or collectively, under the
Authority of the United Nations. If an embargo is applied by a state, it should not
endanger international peace and security. If it does so, it would become illegal. The
collective embargo may be applied under the authority of the Security Council against a
delinquent State.
4. Blockade: When the coast of a state is blocked by another state to prevent ingress or
egress of vessels of all nations by the use of warships and other means to exercise
economic and political pressure on that State, the act is called blockade. When applied
during peacetime, it is known as the Pacific blockade. The essential requirements are
that the blockade should be declared and notified; the blockade must be effective.
As to the validity of the pacific blockade, in international law, there was a difference
of opinion among jurists, but after the creation of the United Nations, application of the
pacific blockade has become illegal because it threatens peace and security. Collective
blockades, when applied under the authority of the Security Council are not illegal. It
was applied against Iraq in 1990.

5. Intervention: It is another compulsive means of settling disputes between states, short

of war. According to Professor Oppenheim, it is the dictatorial interference by a State in
the affairs of another State to maintain or alter the actual condition of things