Article 63 of the ICJ Statute and the Legal Effects of Judgments on Intervening States – an Attempt for More Clarity

Abstract Article 63(2) of the ICJ Statute foresees that the construction of a convention contained in a judgment will be “equally binding” upon intervening States. While it is clear that the object and purpose of this provision is to facilitate a coherent interpretation of multilateral conventions, the extent of its binding force is contested. This article seeks to explore the possible interpretations of Article 63(2). The construction of this provision’s legal effects could impact States’ decisions whether to intervene and on which basis. This article argues that its binding force needs to be construed narrowly. It contends that any binding force is limited by Article 59 resulting in the intervening States and the parties being bound between themselves and in respect of the particular case only. As a result, while such narrowly construed binding force has modest effects, it causes fewer frictions with the ICJ Statute and other rules of international law.