A Study On Reservation Of Optional Compulsory Jurisdiction Of The International Court Of Justice

The issue of optional compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice is one of the issues of procedural jurisdiction.The jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice includes litigation jurisdiction and advisory jurisdiction.Optional compulsory jurisdiction in litigation jurisdiction is a controversial issue.The optional compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice embodies the principle of respecting the sovereignty of States.The Court’s jurisdiction is limited to a certain extent.States accepting the optional compulsory jurisdiction clause limit the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice through declarations of reservations to the optional clause.Most States accepted the optional clause statement and made reservations.What are the criteria for identifying a reservation,the criteria for the validity of a reservation,and making a reservation is beneficial for the Court to expand its jurisdiction.But too many reservations make it difficult for the International Court of Justice to play a role in dispute settlement.This paper will analyze the experience of some States in accepting the declaration of optional jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice and making reservations.At the same time,it puts forward the view that China should accept the optional compulsory jurisdiction clause and make reservations to create positive conditions for China to use the platform of the International Court of Justice for legal settlement of disputes.Whether or not to accept the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice,countries make arrangements according to their own needs.Countries generally take a cautious attitude towards the issue of jurisdiction.At present,74 countries have declared that they accept the optional clause,and there are different opinions on whether reserving the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice is beneficial or harmful.While safeguarding its own interests,a country should take into account a balanced international order of fairness and justice.On the issue of optional jurisdiction reservation,China should make full use of the reservation clause and accept the optional clause in order to safeguard the national interests.The first chapter is mainly about the theoretical issues of the optional jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice which has been developed in practice.The ICJ’s dispute settlement functions are limited.The second chapter is about China’s theoretical understanding of the optional reservation clause in the Statute of the International Court of Justice,and are mainly about the experience of some countries’ reservations.The summary of the types of reservations is helpful to grasp the essence and rules of reservations,and analyze the common practice of some countries in the practice of reservations.The fourth chapter focuses on the suggestions,reasons and strategies for China to accept the reservation of the optional clause of the International Court of Justice.The conclusion part is the response to the problem of optional jurisdiction,the key is the understanding of optional jurisdiction.