Scientific Issues at the International Court of Justice: Utilizing Court-Appointed Expert Assistance in Complex Scientific Disputes

Abstract Disputes involving complex scientific issues expose a fundamental tension between law and science. Although the International Court of Justice increasingly confronts such disputes, it continues to address scientific evidence on an ad hoc basis, leading to inconsistent practice and repeated missed “golden opportunities” to adopt a procedurally-sound framework. However, the Climate Change advisory proceedings offered a renewed opportunity, yet the Court instead informally consulted the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and grounded its factual conclusions almost exclusively in their findings. This article examines two questions: whether this approach constituted another missed opportunity to establish a structured method for assessing evidence outside the judges’ expertise; and whether a viable evidentiary tool exists to address the challenges posed by the Court’s ad hoc approach. It argues that court-appointed experts acting as intermediaries between the judges and the scientific record would provide such a mechanism while also preserving the Court’s judicial function.