ICC INTERNATIONAL COURT OF ARBITRATION

The International Court of Arbitration (“the Court”) was created in 1923 as the arbitration body
of the International Chamber of Commerce (“ICC”), an international business organization
independent of any State or government. The founders of ICC considered international dispute
resolution to be essential to the growth of international trade as a source of world peace. The
dispute resolution services initially offered by ICC consisted of conciliation and arbitration. They
have since expanded and now encompass amicable dispute resolution of all kinds, expertise and
Dispute Boards. Arbitration, however, remains the prime service.
Underlying each of ICC’s dispute resolution services is a set of rules defining and regulating the
conduct of the proceedings. The Rules of Arbitration are the oldest: since they were first
launched in 1922, they have undergone successive changes to keep them attuned to
developments in business needs and arbitration law and practice, without losing their distinctive
characteristics. The current version of the ICC Rules of Arbitration (“the Rules”) dates from 1
January 1998. A process of revision has been initiated within the ICC Commission on
Arbitration. Following widespread consultations both within and outside ICC, a committee has
begun preparing amendments to the current Rules, with a view to reform in 2010.
Although part of ICC, the International Court of Arbitration is an autonomous body, with its own
statutes and internal rules. Its function is to apply the procedure set out in the ICC Rules of
Arbitration to the resolution of disputes submitted to ICC. For this purpose it meets every week
throughout the year to make all necessary decisions. These decisions are of an administrative
nature and concern such matters as the appointment of arbitrators, challenges against arbitrators,
the place of arbitration, the approval of awards and the fixing of costs. In short, the Court’s role
is to ensure the progress, integrity, neutrality and quality of the arbitration process.
European Court of Human Rights
The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR or ECtHR; French: Cour européenne des
droits de l’homme), frequently referred to as the Strasbourg Court, is a supranational or
international court established by the European Convention on Human Rights. The court hears
applications alleging that a contracting state has breached one or more of the human
rights provisions concerning civil and political rights set out in the convention and its protocols.
An application can be lodged by an individual, a group of individuals, or one or more of the
other contracting states. Aside from judgments, the court can also issue advisory opinions. The
convention was adopted within the context of the Council of Europe, and all of its 47 member
states are contracting parties to the convention.
The court is based in Strasbourg, France near the European Parliamen
The court was established on 21 January 1959 on the basis of Article 19 of the European
Convention on Human Rights when its first members were elected by the Consultative Assembly
of the Council of Europe. The convention charges the court with ensuring the observance of the
engagement undertaken by the contracting states in relation to the convention and its protocols,
that is ensuring the enforcement and implementation of the European Convention in the member
states of the Council of Europe.
The jurisdiction of the court has been recognized to date by all 47 member states of the Council
of Europe. On 1 November 1998, the court became a full-time institution and the European
Commission of Human Rights, which used to decide on admissibility of applications, was
abolished by Protocol 11.
The accession of new states to the European Convention on Human Rights following the fall of
the Berlin Wall in 1989 led to a sharp increase in applications filed in the court. The efficiency of
the court was threatened seriously by the large accumulation of pending applications.
In 1999, 8,400 applications were allocated to be heard. In 2003, 27,200 cases were filed and the
number pending rose to approximately 65,000. In 2005, the court opened 45,500 case files. In
2009, 57,200 applications were allocated, with 119,300 pending. At the time, more than 90 per
cent of applications were declared to be inadmissible, and the majority of cases decided—around
60 per cent of the decisions by the court—related to what is termed repetitive cases: where the
court has already delivered judgment finding a violation of the European Convention on Human
Rights or where well established case law exists on a similar case.
Protocol 11 was designed to deal with the backlog of pending cases by establishing the court and
its judges as a full-time institution, by simplifying the procedure and reducing the length of
proceedings. However, as the workload of the court continued to increase, the contracting states
agreed that further reforms were necessary and in May 2004, the Council of Europe Committee
of Ministers adopted Protocol 14 to the European Convention on Human Rights.
Protocol 14 was drafted with the aim of reducing the workload of the court and that of the
Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe, which supervises the execution of judgments,
so that the court could focus on cases that raise important human rights issues
Kosovo specialist chambers
Almost five years since Kosovo’s parliament approved the establishment of the Kosovo
Specialist Chambers and Prosecutor’s Office, chief prosecutor Jack Smith has notified the
president of the Specialist Chambers of his intention to initiate proceedings before the Hague-
based ‘special court’, it was announced on Monday.
“The President has therefore assigned a Pre-Trial Judge in accordance with the Law and the
Rules of Assignment of Specialist Chamber Judges from the Roster of International Judges to
review indictments filed by the Specialist Prosecutor. The content of indictments remains
confidential, unless and until confirmed by the Pre-Trial Judge,” said a press release issued by
the Kosovo Specialist Chambers.
Over the past year, more than 100 people, mostly former Kosovo Liberation Army members,
have been summoned by the Specialist Prosecution for questioning as suspects or witnesses in
relation to crimes allegedly committed between January 1, 1998 and December 31, 1999 in
Kosovo.
Those questioned included former KLA guerrillas who have become high-profile politicians like
Ramush Haradinaj, who resigned as Kosovo’s prime minister after being summoned.
The Specialist Chambers will hear cases arising from an EU task force report which said that
unnamed Kosovo Liberation Army officials could face indictments for a “campaign of
persecution” against Serbs, Roma and Kosovo Albanians.
The alleged crimes include killings, abductions, illegal detentions and sexual violence.
The report was commissioned after the Council of Europe published an inquiry in 2011 which
alleged that some senior Kosovo officials, including current President Hashim Thaci, were
responsible for various human rights abuses.
Thaci strongly denied the allegations.
International judges and prosecutors staff the new court, although it operates under Kosovo’s
laws.
The negotiations to establish the court lasted from 2011 until 2015.
Since the Kosovo war ended, the international community has been administrating justice in
Kosovo, but its results have been poor – fewer than 20 final verdicts in war crimes cases.
However it was believed that the Kosovo prosecution couldn’t handle sensitive cases against
senior officials, which was one of the reasons why the international community decided to
establish the new court.
Kosovo MPs voted to set the court up as part of the country’s justice system under pressure from
the US and EU.
In Kosovo itself, the court is seen as biased as it will try former KLA fighters – people perceived
as liberators by the majority of the country’s ethnic Albanian population – while in Serbia, the
court has wide support due to hopes that it will prosecute crimes against Serbs.