Intervention is an incidental proceeding as one judicial procedure in theInternational Court of Justice (ICJ). Two types of intervention are provided in theArticle62and63of the Statute of the Court, the former of which is being discussed inthis research. According to the Statute, a third party may request to intervene toproceedings when it considers the legal interest of which may be affected by decisionsand then the Court may decide on that request. The institution is established duringthe period of the Permanent Court of International Justice while judicial practice israre. There was no request of intervention as a third party until the1970s. The Courtrejected some intervention requests in the early stage, however, a substantial changehas been made in1990, which Nicaragua was permitted to intervene for the first timeand since then, the Court has opened the door of the intervention.After the success of Nicaragua, the Court permitted or rejected requests indifferent cases. The institution has been improved gradually in recent40years;standards related to third party intervention are created, nonetheless practice on somespecific issues is still open to discuss in the Court. The essential condition for a thirdstate to intervene is that the decision made by the Court may affect the legal interestof the third state besides precise objects of intervention offered by that state. TheCourt, through the intervention case of Nicaragua, definitely recognized both non-party intervention and party-intervention. Under the circumstance of party-intervention, jurisdictional basis of the third state is necessary otherwise it doesn’tmeet the criteria of the Court on permission of intervention. The development of theIntervention ruled by Article62propels the Court to play a positive role in balancingthe contradicts between party autonomy and interests of third parties, expanding itsinfluence, realizing the judicial value of justice and promoting the international rule oflaw.China has deep historical relation with the ICJ. Presently Chinese judge is alsoon the bench of the Court, and by participation in the advisory case concerning onKosovo’s issue China has made a big progress. All these backgrounds andpreconditions make it possible for China to use intervention when proper. As far asthe choosing of case type and intervention identity, it should be confined to cases without any relation to China’s political and security interests and it may intervene asa non-party. For one thing, it will contribute to protecting China’s legal interests ininternational affairs, for another China’s discourse power and its great image may bemaintained by means of holding legal opinions and claims on the forum of the ICJ.This research is composed of five chapters. Chapter I introduces concept,historical development and legal resources of intervention in a general way. AsArticle62and63of the Statute share some common characters in these areas andthere’re specific connections between the two, the analysis in this chapter has to berelated to institution origin and historical development of Article63although thefocus of which is still on Article62.As the key part, Chapter II, on the basis of the Statute and the Rules of the ICJand judicial practice in the Court, points out that the legal interests and the purposesare general conditions for third party intervention as well as non-party intervention. Inthe case of party-intervention, the third state should have jurisdictional basis, i.e.jurisdictional link with the original party states in order to be consistent with theprinciple of state consent, the fundamental principle of the Court’s jurisdiction. Non-party intervention is recognized by the Court but presently it is only a theory.Chapter III discuses some procedure issues such as the timing of the interventionclaim and the subject of decision. In addition, some rights of the third state to beaccessible to case documents, to participate in oral proceedings and to assign ad hocjudges are also under discussion in different situations. All the three rights are notenjoyed absolutely by intervening states. Whether the application of intervention ispermitted by the Court and whether the third state applies as a non-party or party mayaffect the above rights.Chapter IV takes Jurisdictional Immunities of the State intervened by Greece as acase study with a deeper analysis on the concentration of the Court towardsintervention recently and the real effects brought by Greece’s intervention. The casehas drawn much attention because of the international law issues of the merits itselfand the successful intervention of Greece has caught more focus on details ofjudgment on the legal interest.Chapter V narrates from the perspective of value. The system of intervention hasmade positive contributes to both individual intervening states and the whole Court.Meanwhile, based on the relationship between China and the ICJ in many aspects andthe background of China’s participation in the Court, this part does some research on the possibility of China to intervene so as to provoke deeper thoughts on theinstitution.Above all, it concludes that the intervention provided in Article62of the Statuteof the ICJ has opened the door to third states with relatively precise criteria.Nevertheless, it is developing at the moment and some issues like the judgment of therequirement of legal interest of the third state still need to be clarified andstrengthened by further judicial practice. As to China, intervention is one part ofjudicial proceedings of the Court and it is another way to participate in internationaljudicial process that China may take some consideration. |