The difference between two UN courts

It is easy to confuse the International Criminal Court with the International Court of Justice. Both are creations of the United Nations, but that is more or less where the similarities end. The ICC is a "human rights" court, with the power to place individuals on trial, and claims a "universal" jurisdiction, meaning its decisions not only overrule national law, but apply even to countries that did not ratify the 1998 Rome Statute on the International Criminal Court.

The ICJ is a very different kettle of fish. Sitting at the Peace Palace in The Hague, the ICJ's function is "to settle in accordance with international law the legal disputes submitted to it by states, and to give advisory opinions on legal questions referred to it by duly authorized international organs and agencies." The ICJ was established in 1946 in order to replace the Permanent Court of International Justice.

Only states may apply to, and appear before the ICJ, while individuals are excluded. Decisions by the court are final and without appeal, but depend upon the co-operation of all parties involved. Should one state fail to comply with a judgment, the other party has recourse to the Security Council of the United Nations.

Cases currently before the ICJ include a dispute between Cameroon and Nigeria over land and maritime boundaries, a similar dispute between Indonesia and Malaysia regarding sovereignty over two Pulaus, and a case between the Democratic Congo and Rwanda regarding armed activity on the territory of the Congo by Rwandan forces.