Studies On Publication Of Minority Opinion Of International Judicial Judgements

The greatest characteristic of the ordo judiciorum of international judicial institutions is that judges in numerous institutions could attach their individual opinions in judgments. Those judgments not only show the final decision based on majority rules, but also include minority opinions. One can speculate on the deliberation of the court by all these opinions. We may find that minority opinions diffusely exist in the judgments of international judicial institutions which include International Court of Justice, International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, European Court of Human Rights, International Criminal Court, International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, etc. It is true that minority opinion plays an important role in international juridical practice, which means it is necessary to study the value of minority opinions.The system of minority opinions was of Common Law origin and was adopted by international judicial system. We believe that this system is suited to the international judicial institutions because of the character of international law whose structure has close affinity with the Common Law system in which the institution of minority opinions functions. International law like Common Law is not codified. To a considerable degree, it is an unsettled state and all sorts of controversies exits in numerous areas. Moreover, in order to resolve a problem, a Common Law judge very often invokes general principles which are neither available in a systematic form nor crystallized. International law is in a similar state. The international judicial institutions accepted publication of minority opinion after the Hague Peace Conferences. It is very useful in ensuring judges'independence and enhancing their sense of responsibility, and collegiate body of judges in seeking a more just, more accurate, more circumspect decision, and leading to explore new issues. So to speak, this valuable system has been adopted and widely used. However, there are still countries which have not adopted, which means its execution needs particular situations. It could be actualized under circumstances of High Courts in which the independence of judges can be protected better and the cases with constitutional significance. Although it has high value and widely accepted by the international institutions, there are still several countries and international institutions which did not accept this system. It means that its implementation requires specific conditions: firstly, the independence of judges needs to be protected; secondly, it should be implemented in the higher courts; thirdly, it is more useful to make minority opinion known to public in those constitutional judicial judgments. It will be useful to provide a reference for those counties which did not accept this system.As a result, this international justice system has had an impact at the international level which means it promoted the reform process of European Court of Justice, and the Civil Law countries, Germany and Japan, have adopted this system in their Federal Constitutional Court and the Supreme Court. As for China, we can implement it gradually. Currently, it could be started in the Supreme Court of People's Republic of China and High People's Court on those intellectual property, financial, commercial, marine, and foreign-related cases.Literature analysis and comparative analysis are the main research methods. The former focus on the basis of the documents of international judicial institutions- the Convention or Statute, as well as the theory of domestic and foreign scholars; the later has been used several times in the article, comparing the backgrounds, manners and extensions of the publication of minority opinion, which makes the nature of the object more clearly and promotes the development of this field.In the context of globalization of law, the legal transplant is inevitable. The system of minority opinions is accepted by most international institutions gradually and its influence has extended to some civil law countries. We have reasons to believe that there will be a positive impact on domestic and international judicial practice.