MEZINÁRODNÍ SOUDNICTVÍ: NOVÉ ÚKOLY A VÝZVY

CHAPTER 5 The Contribution of the International Court of Justice to the Understanding of International Sanctions Zuzana Trávníčková In chapter five the author explores the contribution of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) to the understanding of international sanctions focusing on the linguistic and legal treatment of the term “sanctions” in written documents, available on the ICJ’s website. First, the chapter surveys ICJ case law where the term “sanctions” appears. It identifies 14 relevant cases, noting that the term is used inconsistently and often refers to different types of measures (penalties based on national law, foreign policy tools, UN Security Council sanctions, measures offered by the Vienna convention on diplomatic relations). Second, the author examines alternative terminology used in ICJ decisions and party submissions, such as “restrictive measures,” “coercive measures,” “enforcement measures,” “unilateral measures,” and “countermeasures.” She finds out, that these terms are often used interchangeably or strategically, depending on the legal framing of the dispute. A frequency analysis shows that “sanctions” remains the most commonly used term, though its meaning varies by context. Third, through corpus-based linguistic analysis of ICJ judgments and party submissions in Alleged Violations of the 1955 Treaty of Amity (Iran v. United States) the chapter reveals that while the term “sanctions” appears frequently in documents submitted by the parties of the discpute, the Court itself uses it sparingly and cautiously, usually opting for more neutral alternatives like “measures.” The analysis concludes that the ICJ has not yet provided a definitive interpretation of “sanctions,” and its jurisprudence does not currently offer clear guidance on their legal status or classification. CHAPTER 6 Importance of the judgments of the International Criminal Court in the Ongwen and Al Hassan cases Lukáš Mareček The judgments of the International Criminal Court (ICC) in the cases of Ongwen and Al Hassan are groundbreaking for the definition and prosecution of gender-based crimes in international law. The Ongwen case defined forced marriage as a crime against humanity in the form of other inhumane act, distinct from sexual crimes such as rape or sexual slavery. This crime emphasizes gendered harm caused by imposing societal expectations on the victim, regardless of their consent. The Al Hassan case focused on gender-based persecution, marking the first time this crime was defined in the ICC’s Rome Statute. However, the Trial Chamber concluded that only religious motivation for persecution was proven, a position contested by the prosecution on

177