Kiel registrite je 19:44, 24 jan. 2016 redakti Kani (diskuto \| kontribuoj) Patrolantoj, Administrantoj 273 540 redaktoj Neniu resumo de redakto ← Iru al antaŭa ŝanĝo		Kiel registrite je 19:59, 24 jan. 2016 redakti malfari Kani (diskuto \| kontribuoj) Patrolantoj, Administrantoj 273 540 redaktoj →‎Kompono Iru al sekvanta ŝanĝo →
Linio 16: Ne povas esti du juĝistoj samlandanoj. Laŭ la Artikolo 9, la membreco de la Kortumo estas supozita reprezentanta la "ĉefajn formojn de civilizo kaj la ĉefajn jurajn sistemojn de la mondo". Esence, tio signifas aludojn nur al [[Anglasaksa juro]], [[Romiĝermana juro]] kaj al [[Socialisma juro]] (nuntempe post-socialisma juro). {{redaktata}}▼ There is an informal understanding that the seats will be distributed [[United Nations Regional Groups\|by geographic regions]] so that there are five seats for Western countries, three for [[Africa\|African states]] (including one judge of [[francophone]] [[Civil law (legal system)\|civil law]], one of Anglophone [[common law]] and one [[Arab]]), two for [[Eastern Europe]]an states, three for Asian states and two for [[Latin America]]n and [[Caribbean]] states.<ref>Harris, D. ''Cases and Materials on International Law, 7th ed.'' (2012, London) p. 839.</ref> The five permanent members of the [[United Nations Security Council]] ([[France]], [[Russia]], [[China]], the [[United Kingdom]], and the [[United States]]) always have a judge on the Court, thereby occupying three of the Western seats, one of the Asian seats and one of the Eastern European seats. The exception was China, which did not have a judge on the Court from 1967 to 1985 because it did not put forward a candidate. Estas neformala subkompreno ke la sidlokoj estu distribuataj laŭ geografiaj regionoj (ŝtataroj) tiele ke estas kvin sidlokoj por okcidentaj landoj, tri sidlokoj por [[Afriko\|afrikaj ŝtatoj]] (nome unu juĝisto el [[Franca lingvo\|franclingva]] [[civila juro]], unu sidloko de anglalingva [[komuna juro]] kaj unu sidloko [[Araba]]), du sidlokoj por ŝtatoj de [[Orienta Eŭropo]], tri sidlokoj por Aziaj ŝtatoj kaj du sidlokoj for ŝtatoj de [[Latinameriko]] kaj [[Karibio]].<ref>Harris, D. ''Cases and Materials on International Law, 7th ed.'' (2012, London) p. 839.</ref> La kvin permanentaj membroj de la [[Konsilio de Sekureco de Unuiĝintaj Nacioj]] (nome [[Francio]], [[Rusio]], [[Ĉinio]], [[Unuiĝinta Reĝlando]], kaj [[Usono]]) ĉiam havis po unu juĝiston en la Kortumo, tiele okupante tri el la okcidentaj sidlokoj, unu el la aziaj kaj unu el la orienteŭropaj sidlokoj. La escepto estis Ĉinio, kiu ne havis juĝiston en la Kortumo el 1967 al 1985 ĉar ĝi ne prponis kandidaton. Article 6 of the Statute provides that all judges should be "elected regardless of their nationality among persons of high moral character" who are either qualified for the highest judicial office in their home states or known as lawyers with sufficient competence in international law. Judicial independence is dealt with specifically in Articles 16–18. Judges of the ICJ are not able to hold any other post or act as [[counsel]]. In practice, Members of the Court have their own interpretation of these rules and allow them to be involved in outside arbitration and hold professional posts as long as there is no conflict of interest. A judge can be dismissed only by a [[unanimity\|unanimous]] vote of the other members of the Court.<ref>ICJ Statute, Article 18(1)</ref> Despite these provisions, the independence of ICJ judges has been questioned. For example, during the ''[[Nicaragua v. United States\|Nicaragua Case]]'', the United States issued a communiqué suggesting that it could not present sensitive material to the Court because of the presence of judges from [[Eastern bloc]] states.<ref name="ReferenceA">''Case Concerning Military and Paramilitary Activities In and Against Nicaragua'' (Nicaragua v USA), [1986] ICJ Reports 14, 158–60 (Merits) per Judge Lachs.</ref>▼ ▲{{redaktata}} ▲~~Article~~Artikolo 6 ofde ~~the~~la ~~Statute~~Statuto provides that all judges should be "elected regardless of their nationality among persons of high moral character" who are either qualified for the highest judicial office in their home states or known as lawyers with sufficient competence in international law. Judicial independence is dealt with specifically in Articles 16–18. Judges of the ICJ are not able to hold any other post or act as [[counsel]]. In practice, Members of the Court have their own interpretation of these rules and allow them to be involved in outside arbitration and hold professional posts as long as there is no conflict of interest. A judge can be dismissed only by a [[unanimity\|unanimous]] vote of the other members of the Court.<ref>ICJ Statute, Article 18(1)</ref> Despite these provisions, the independence of ICJ judges has been questioned. For example, during the ''[[Nicaragua v. United States\|Nicaragua Case]]'', the United States issued a communiqué suggesting that it could not present sensitive material to the Court because of the presence of judges from [[Eastern bloc]] states.<ref name="ReferenceA">''Case Concerning Military and Paramilitary Activities In and Against Nicaragua'' (Nicaragua v USA), [1986] ICJ Reports 14, 158–60 (Merits) per Judge Lachs.</ref> Judges may deliver joint judgments or give their own separate opinions. Decisions and [[Advisory Opinion]]s are by majority, and, in the event of an equal division, the President's vote becomes decisive, which occurred in the ''Legality of the Use by a State of Nuclear Weapons in Armed Conflict'' (Opinion requested by WHO), [1996] ICJ Reports 66. Judges may also deliver separate dissenting opinions.

Internacia Kortumo: Malsamoj inter versioj