Return To: 2024 Handbook
2024 Handbook International Court of Justice
Topics
The International Court of Justice (ICJ), sometimes referred to as the World Court, is the primary judicial organ of the United Nations. It sits in The Hague, Netherlands, and is composed of fifteen independent Justices from around the world. The ICJ is the only court in the world with general and near-universal jurisdiction. Countries may bring cases before the Court even without becoming United Nations Member States as long as both countries have consented to be subject to the Court’s jurisdiction. It may entertain any question of international law, subject to the provisions of its founding statutes.
The Court’s role is to examine international law and to settle legal disputes submitted to it by states. It also dispenses advisory opinions on legal questions referred to it by authorized United Nations organs and specialized agencies. Since 1946, the Court has heard more than 160 cases, including more than 25 advisory proceedings. ICJ opinions, unlike most national legal systems, do not create binding legal standards for other United Nations Member States, and each cases is treated independently. The Court does not create legal precedent in its cases.
The Justices are nominated by regional groups and elected by the General Assembly and Security Council for nine-year terms. Justices must receive a majority vote in each body to be named to the Court, and one-third of the Court is elected every three years. When a state is party to a case before the ICJ, it enjoys the right to appoint an ad hoc justice. The ad hoc Justice does not need to be from that State. The ad hoc Justice enjoys the same privileges and responsibilities as the other Justices, but his or her obligation is limited to proceedings in that case.
Unlike most other international organizations, the members of the Court are not representatives of governments; they are independent judges whose first duty is to exercise their powers impartially and conscientiously by applying relevant international law and conventions to the facts of each case before the Court.
Proceedings before the Court can last for several years, involving complex issues of international law and difficult political questions. The States party to the case submit pleadings, or Memorials, in writing along with extensive records supporting their cases.
The States also participate in oral arguments, which allows them to emphasize their key points and respond to questions from the Justices. The Justices deliberate in private, then read the judgment in an open forum.
Common Types of Cases Common Types of Cases
Contentious Cases Contentious Cases
The Court hears two types of cases. First, there are contentious cases between two States where there is a legal dispute and the States parties are bound to the Court’s decision. States may institute proceedings by mutual agreement or by unilateral application against a respondent State. This is different from the International Criminal Court, which hears cases against individuals for crimes such as genocide.
Many of the Court’s cases—historical and contemporary—are border or territorial disputes, where two States agree to let the ICJ decide where the border should be. Other cases are highly charged and quite political in nature. While the Court hears only legal questions, and Justices are charged to objectively consider relevant law, it is rare that the interpretation and application of the law operates entirely outside of the realm of political discourse, and in the international arena, this is especially true.
Advisory Opinions Advisory Opinions
Second, the Court can issue advisory opinions on legal questions referred to it by other agencies, such as the Security Council or the General Assembly. This opportunity is open to the other five major organs of the United Nations and 16 specialized agencies. Unlike the rulings in contentious cases, advisory opinions are not binding on the parties that request the opinion; the organization is under no legal obligation to follow the Court’s recommendation. The Court requests written and oral proceedings for the case, although these processes may be truncated compared to those used for contentious cases.
Structure of the AMUN ICJ Structure of the AMUN ICJ
In keeping with AMUN’s philosophy of simulating United Nations bodies as closely as possible, the AMUN ICJ closely resembles the ICJ in the Hague. The ICJ at AMUN is composed of student Justices who hear oral arguments, deliberate on the cases before them and collaboratively develop opinions of the Court. Students also participate as Advocates, presenting their case first in a written memorial and then in oral arguments, where they present their case in person and respond to questions from the Justices.
The AMUN Secretariat Members are composed of the Director-Registrar and Registrars, who prepare the relevant materials for each case, guide the simulation’s logistical operations, act as topic experts for the Justices on the year’s cases and provide legal research for the body upon request. It is important to note the ICJ is a Justice-led simulation, and the Secretariat Members’ goal is to play a supporting role rather than a leading role in the functions of the Court.
The cases preselected by the AMUN Secretariat form the Court’s docket. This year the Court is deliberating three cases:
- Territorial and Maritime Dispute (Nicaragua v. Colombia; Honduras and Costa Rica)
- Questions relating to the Obligation to Prosecute or Extradite (Belgium v. Senegal)
- Certain Phosphate Lands in Nauru (Nauru v. Australia)
Additionally, the General Assembly or the Security Council may submit a request to the Court for an Advisory Opinion on a topic of international law. The Secretary-General, with the advice of the Director-Registrar of the ICJ, will decide whether to include additional cases on the Court’s docket. The Court is in session to hear arguments and develop opinions throughout the Conference.
The Justices should expect to spend the first session setting the docket, electing officers, determining the final procedures of the Court and reviewing the substantive issues in each case. The rest of the Conference will be spent hearing cases, deliberating and rendering opinions on those cases.
Although the Secretariat strives to give the Justices as much freedom as possible in setting the docket, some restraints do exist in the interest of promoting a fair and equal experience for the Advocates as well as the Justices. All advocates will receive an equal amount of time in the docket to present their arguments, and respond to questioning from the Justices. Although Advocates will not know the order of the cases and arguments prior to the first evening of the simulation, the Secretariat, in conjunction with the Justices, will strive to communicate the order as soon as it is set to the Advocates. The docket is also published in the AMUN Chronicle. After the docket is set, the Court elects a President and Vice President by secret ballot. Their duties are to moderate and time the oral arguments and facilitate the closed deliberations.
Joining the International Court of Justice Joining the International Court of Justice
Permanent Justices Permanent Justices
Justice positions are assigned by application on a first-come, first-served basis until the fifteen seats on the Court are filled. It is not a requirement for Justices to be a member of a delegation. Permanent Justices are full-time Conference assignments and representatives serving as Justices shall not be assigned to another simulation.
Ad Hoc Justice Application and Role at Conference Ad Hoc Justice Application and Role at Conference
States involved in a case before the Court are strongly encouraged to place an Ad Hoc Justice on the Court if they do not already have a permanent Justice. States wishing to do this may do so in two ways: (1) they may apply to be a permanent Justice (see above); or (2) they may appoint an ad hoc Justice. Ad hoc Justices sit on the Court only for the case in which their country is involved and must be assigned to another simulation. If States wish to appoint an ad hoc justice they must contact the Secretary-General and the Director of the International Court of Justice by 1 October by e-mailing icj@amun.org. Ad hoc Justices should, whenever possible, be paired with another representative in their committee so their country is fully represented while the ad hoc Justice participates in the Court’s proceedings.
Advocates Advocates
Advocate positions are not full-time Conference assignments. ICJ Advocates are assigned as members of the delegations who have cases before the Court. Generally, Advocates should expect to spend two to three hours presenting their case and hearing the Court’s opinion during the Conference. Advocates must also serve as representatives in another AMUN simulation or as a delegation’s permanent representative. ICJ Advocate teams are limited to two people. ICJ Advocates should, whenever possible, be paired with another representative in committee, so the State is fully represented in the committee while the Advocate participates in the Court’s proceedings.
Preparation Preparation
Preparing as a Justice Preparing as a Justice
Familiarizing yourself with the information provided in this handbook and on AMUN’s website is a key starting point for your preparations. Justices should familiarize themselves with the factual and legal disputes at hand, as well as the international treaties involved. Another helpful resource is previous ICJ opinions that are similar. While reading opinions, note the tone and style used by the Justices. Pay special attention to the way the Court addresses questions of jurisdiction; this can often be the crux of the winning argument for the Court. Memorials written by the Advocates will be made available on the AMUN website in November as soon as Memorials from all sides of a case are received by AMUN staff. Reviewing these resources is key to a successful experience.
Each Justice, while independent, will still have a roleplaying function. ICJ Justices retain citizenship with the country their school represents at the Conference. Justices not affiliated with a delegation will be assigned citizenship with a state; while ICJ Justices are supposed to be independent advocates for the law, they often come to the Court with inherent biases based on their home country’s history, culture, religion and laws. Similar to the ICJ in The Hague, a Justice’s citizenship is important as it can sometimes cause a Justice to favor for the position advocated by their country of origin when that State comes before the Court.
All Justices will be expected to hear arguments and question the Advocates in all cases on the docket. Any Justice not present during the Court’s Oral Arguments may not participate in the subsequent deliberations and opinion writing for that case. After each case is argued, the Justices retire behind closed doors to deliberate and draft the opinion of the Court. As per Article 25, paragraph 3, of the Statute of the Court, 60% of all Justices present for oral arguments shall suffice as a quorum for deliberations. This number may be adjusted by the Director of the International Court of Justice as appropriate to facilitate the simulation. Justices discuss the case in-depth, pulling from their research prior to the Conference, the Advocates’ memorials and the points raised during oral arguments to draft an Opinion or Opinions. If the Justices require any additional information, they are encouraged to request it from the Registrars. Justices collaborate to write a majority opinion and as many concurring and dissenting opinions as the body requires. Justices use their persuasive writing and speaking skills to sway additional Justices to their position throughout the drafting process.
Preparing as an Advocate Preparing as an Advocate
Advocates’ opportunity to present their case is twofold: written memorials and oral arguments. Memorials are the written pleadings submitted to the Court prior to the Conference and delineate the facts, relevant international law, and preferred outcome requested by the Advocates. Oral Arguments are the in-person, verbal presentation of the case before the Justices and occur at the Conference. Advocates must thoroughly understand the legal principles that support, and those that oppose, their position and be able to articulate them in their Memorials And Oral Arguments as they will face strict scrutiny from the Justices. The research and creation of an Advocate’s Memorial is one of the most important parts of preparation for an Advocate’s at-Conference role. Time spent thoroughly researching the Advocate’s State’s positions and arguments provides Advocates with the vital information necessary to respond to questions at Conference and helps them effectively craft a memorial to present their arguments to the court before the Conference.
Prior to oral arguments, Advocates have the opportunity to consult with an ICJ Registrar about their oral argument. To take advantage of the opportunity, Advocates should attend the Advocate meeting on the first evening of the Conference, where the Registrars will share information about the simulation timeline and give Advocates the opportunity to set up a practice session.
Written Memorials Written Memorials
ICJ memorials should contain:
- Jurisdictional statement and arguments (outlining whether your country recognizes the Court’s jurisdiction in this case)
- Statement of facts (what are the relevant facts in the case?)
- Statement of law (what treaties, customs or laws apply?)
- Argument section (detailing how the law and facts apply to the merits of the case – how do the laws and facts support your case?)
- Summary and prayer for relief (what do you want the Court to do?)
The Court does not require these sections to be in any particular order, although they are typically laid out in the order shown. As you draft your memorial, think carefully about how best to use these sections to your advantage to advocate your position.
The party bringing the case is called the Applicant. The defendant is called the Respondent. In an Advisory Opinion, each country is known as a Party. Due to time constraints, all Parties in any AMUN ICJ case must prepare their memorials without seeing the memorial of their opponent. However, each side should anticipate and seek to counter the arguments opposing Advocates might make. All memorials must be submitted by 25 October to the AMUN Secretariat at icj@amun.org.
Oral Arguments Oral Arguments
Oral arguments provide Advocates with an opportunity to explain to the Justices the factual and legal merits of their case. In adversarial cases, the Applicant will argue first. The Respondent will then have the same amount of time to reply. Finally, the Applicant will have the opportunity to present a brief rebuttal. In Advisory Opinion cases, each Party will have a set amount of time to present their argument to the Court and for rebuttal, the order for which will be determined by the Justices on the first evening. Advocates presenting amicus curiae arguments will then be accorded no more than five minutes each to speak. The Justices will create the docket and define the amount of time for oral arguments. Advocates, with the exception of amicus curiae, should prepare between 10 to 20 minutes for arguments. The oral argument is not simply an opportunity to give a prepared speech; Justices often interject with multiple questions throughout the presentation. At least the first five minutes of each Advocate’s presentation will be uninterrupted, to allow each side the opportunity to freely present the key issues of their arguments. After the initial five minutes, the Advocates may continue with their presentations, but the Justices may also interject and question the Advocates on the merits of their case. Therefore, Advocates must be prepared to both answer questions and defend their positions. The following steps should be taken to prepare for oral arguments:
- Identify the critical issues in the case. You should try to have at least three main points to your argument.
- Develop a theme which incorporates your best arguments on the critical issues. Keep it simple. Remember, the best arguments are structured around a story with a unified theme, which explains why your country has been wronged, and what the Court can do to provide a fair and just solution.
- Prepare an outline. The outline should include your theme, your best arguments on the critical issues, your responses to your opponent’s best arguments and ideas about answers to any other questions you think the Justices might ask. Try to make your memorial and oral argument outline consistent, so the first issue addressed in the memorial is the first issue addressed in the oral argument. Your Oral Argument should not, however, only restate the contents of your Memorial as Justices will be familiar with this document prior to the simulation.
- Practice, practice, practice! There is no substitute for practicing oral arguments: your presentation will be smoother and more persuasive. Have your Faculty Advisor or other students fire questions at you. Learn to field those questions and then transition back to the point you were making prior to the question.
- Learn proper courtroom demeanor. Remember to be polite and deferential to the Justices at all times. While argument is the method, persuasion is the goal.
Though each Advocate will have more than five minutes to present oral arguments, keep in mind that only the first five minutes of the presentations will be uninterrupted. Focus on the main points and key issues during the first five minutes. AMUN suggests you follow a pyramid format in your oral arguments: present the crux of the argument first and then use the remainder of the allotted time to expand on the subsequent issues of the case. This format can also allow for a quick means of referencing issues during the remaining period of the presentation and questions. It is also wise to conclude the presentation by summarizing the key points again.
Try to anticipate questions the Justices might ask and develop answers. Do not write out answers verbatim. Do, however, write out key phrases or legal terms you will want to remember precisely. Simple, concise answers that repeatedly stress the same points are persuasive and will be remembered by the Justices. Oral arguments will involve extemporaneous speaking and responses, not the presentation of a memorized speech.
Outline the specific names of conventions, treaties and cases in your memorial and your outline. Your oral argument requires these citations to maintain your credibility with the Justices and articulate the reasons your side of the case is stronger.
Note: Remember that the AMUN ICJ is a simulation. No one expects participants, who are not lawyers or Justices, to make presentations, decisions or render opinions with the same level of sophistication as actual ICJ Justices or Advocates. The participants’ duty is to gain a basic understanding of what considerations are taken into account when presenting or presiding over a case and to prepare to argue their cases before the Court.
Topics
The International Court of Justice (ICJ), sometimes referred to as the World Court, is the primary judicial organ of the United Nations. It sits in The Hague, Netherlands, and is composed of fifteen independent Justices from around the world. The ICJ is the only court in the world with general and near-universal jurisdiction. Countries may bring cases before the Court even without becoming United Nations Member States as long as both countries have consented to be subject to the Court’s jurisdiction. It may entertain any question of international law, subject to the provisions of its founding statutes.
The Court’s role is to examine international law and to settle legal disputes submitted to it by states. It also dispenses advisory opinions on legal questions referred to it by authorized United Nations organs and specialized agencies. Since 1946, the Court has heard more than 160 cases, including more than 25 advisory proceedings. ICJ opinions, unlike most national legal systems, do not create binding legal standards for other United Nations Member States, and each cases is treated independently. The Court does not create legal precedent in its cases.
The Justices are nominated by regional groups and elected by the General Assembly and Security Council for nine-year terms. Justices must receive a majority vote in each body to be named to the Court, and one-third of the Court is elected every three years. When a state is party to a case before the ICJ, it enjoys the right to appoint an ad hoc justice. The ad hoc Justice does not need to be from that State. The ad hoc Justice enjoys the same privileges and responsibilities as the other Justices, but his or her obligation is limited to proceedings in that case.
Unlike most other international organizations, the members of the Court are not representatives of governments; they are independent judges whose first duty is to exercise their powers impartially and conscientiously by applying relevant international law and conventions to the facts of each case before the Court.
Proceedings before the Court can last for several years, involving complex issues of international law and difficult political questions. The States party to the case submit pleadings, or Memorials, in writing along with extensive records supporting their cases.
The States also participate in oral arguments, which allows them to emphasize their key points and respond to questions from the Justices. The Justices deliberate in private, then read the judgment in an open forum.
Common Types of Cases Common Types of Cases
Contentious Cases Contentious Cases
The Court hears two types of cases. First, there are contentious cases between two States where there is a legal dispute and the States parties are bound to the Court’s decision. States may institute proceedings by mutual agreement or by unilateral application against a respondent State. This is different from the International Criminal Court, which hears cases against individuals for crimes such as genocide.
Many of the Court’s cases—historical and contemporary—are border or territorial disputes, where two States agree to let the ICJ decide where the border should be. Other cases are highly charged and quite political in nature. While the Court hears only legal questions, and Justices are charged to objectively consider relevant law, it is rare that the interpretation and application of the law operates entirely outside of the realm of political discourse, and in the international arena, this is especially true.
Advisory Opinions Advisory Opinions
Second, the Court can issue advisory opinions on legal questions referred to it by other agencies, such as the Security Council or the General Assembly. This opportunity is open to the other five major organs of the United Nations and 16 specialized agencies. Unlike the rulings in contentious cases, advisory opinions are not binding on the parties that request the opinion; the organization is under no legal obligation to follow the Court’s recommendation. The Court requests written and oral proceedings for the case, although these processes may be truncated compared to those used for contentious cases.
Structure of the AMUN ICJ Structure of the AMUN ICJ
In keeping with AMUN’s philosophy of simulating United Nations bodies as closely as possible, the AMUN ICJ closely resembles the ICJ in the Hague. The ICJ at AMUN is composed of student Justices who hear oral arguments, deliberate on the cases before them and collaboratively develop opinions of the Court. Students also participate as Advocates, presenting their case first in a written memorial and then in oral arguments, where they present their case in person and respond to questions from the Justices.
The AMUN Secretariat Members are composed of the Director-Registrar and Registrars, who prepare the relevant materials for each case, guide the simulation’s logistical operations, act as topic experts for the Justices on the year’s cases and provide legal research for the body upon request. It is important to note the ICJ is a Justice-led simulation, and the Secretariat Members’ goal is to play a supporting role rather than a leading role in the functions of the Court.
The cases preselected by the AMUN Secretariat form the Court’s docket. This year the Court is deliberating three cases:
Additionally, the General Assembly or the Security Council may submit a request to the Court for an Advisory Opinion on a topic of international law. The Secretary-General, with the advice of the Director-Registrar of the ICJ, will decide whether to include additional cases on the Court’s docket. The Court is in session to hear arguments and develop opinions throughout the Conference.
The Justices should expect to spend the first session setting the docket, electing officers, determining the final procedures of the Court and reviewing the substantive issues in each case. The rest of the Conference will be spent hearing cases, deliberating and rendering opinions on those cases.
Although the Secretariat strives to give the Justices as much freedom as possible in setting the docket, some restraints do exist in the interest of promoting a fair and equal experience for the Advocates as well as the Justices. All advocates will receive an equal amount of time in the docket to present their arguments, and respond to questioning from the Justices. Although Advocates will not know the order of the cases and arguments prior to the first evening of the simulation, the Secretariat, in conjunction with the Justices, will strive to communicate the order as soon as it is set to the Advocates. The docket is also published in the AMUN Chronicle. After the docket is set, the Court elects a President and Vice President by secret ballot. Their duties are to moderate and time the oral arguments and facilitate the closed deliberations.
Joining the International Court of Justice Joining the International Court of Justice
Permanent Justices Permanent Justices
Justice positions are assigned by application on a first-come, first-served basis until the fifteen seats on the Court are filled. It is not a requirement for Justices to be a member of a delegation. Permanent Justices are full-time Conference assignments and representatives serving as Justices shall not be assigned to another simulation.
Ad Hoc Justice Application and Role at Conference Ad Hoc Justice Application and Role at Conference
States involved in a case before the Court are strongly encouraged to place an Ad Hoc Justice on the Court if they do not already have a permanent Justice. States wishing to do this may do so in two ways: (1) they may apply to be a permanent Justice (see above); or (2) they may appoint an ad hoc Justice. Ad hoc Justices sit on the Court only for the case in which their country is involved and must be assigned to another simulation. If States wish to appoint an ad hoc justice they must contact the Secretary-General and the Director of the International Court of Justice by 1 October by e-mailing icj@amun.org. Ad hoc Justices should, whenever possible, be paired with another representative in their committee so their country is fully represented while the ad hoc Justice participates in the Court’s proceedings.
Advocates Advocates
Advocate positions are not full-time Conference assignments. ICJ Advocates are assigned as members of the delegations who have cases before the Court. Generally, Advocates should expect to spend two to three hours presenting their case and hearing the Court’s opinion during the Conference. Advocates must also serve as representatives in another AMUN simulation or as a delegation’s permanent representative. ICJ Advocate teams are limited to two people. ICJ Advocates should, whenever possible, be paired with another representative in committee, so the State is fully represented in the committee while the Advocate participates in the Court’s proceedings.
Preparation Preparation
Preparing as a Justice Preparing as a Justice
Familiarizing yourself with the information provided in this handbook and on AMUN’s website is a key starting point for your preparations. Justices should familiarize themselves with the factual and legal disputes at hand, as well as the international treaties involved. Another helpful resource is previous ICJ opinions that are similar. While reading opinions, note the tone and style used by the Justices. Pay special attention to the way the Court addresses questions of jurisdiction; this can often be the crux of the winning argument for the Court. Memorials written by the Advocates will be made available on the AMUN website in November as soon as Memorials from all sides of a case are received by AMUN staff. Reviewing these resources is key to a successful experience.
Each Justice, while independent, will still have a roleplaying function. ICJ Justices retain citizenship with the country their school represents at the Conference. Justices not affiliated with a delegation will be assigned citizenship with a state; while ICJ Justices are supposed to be independent advocates for the law, they often come to the Court with inherent biases based on their home country’s history, culture, religion and laws. Similar to the ICJ in The Hague, a Justice’s citizenship is important as it can sometimes cause a Justice to favor for the position advocated by their country of origin when that State comes before the Court.
All Justices will be expected to hear arguments and question the Advocates in all cases on the docket. Any Justice not present during the Court’s Oral Arguments may not participate in the subsequent deliberations and opinion writing for that case. After each case is argued, the Justices retire behind closed doors to deliberate and draft the opinion of the Court. As per Article 25, paragraph 3, of the Statute of the Court, 60% of all Justices present for oral arguments shall suffice as a quorum for deliberations. This number may be adjusted by the Director of the International Court of Justice as appropriate to facilitate the simulation. Justices discuss the case in-depth, pulling from their research prior to the Conference, the Advocates’ memorials and the points raised during oral arguments to draft an Opinion or Opinions. If the Justices require any additional information, they are encouraged to request it from the Registrars. Justices collaborate to write a majority opinion and as many concurring and dissenting opinions as the body requires. Justices use their persuasive writing and speaking skills to sway additional Justices to their position throughout the drafting process.
Preparing as an Advocate Preparing as an Advocate
Advocates’ opportunity to present their case is twofold: written memorials and oral arguments. Memorials are the written pleadings submitted to the Court prior to the Conference and delineate the facts, relevant international law, and preferred outcome requested by the Advocates. Oral Arguments are the in-person, verbal presentation of the case before the Justices and occur at the Conference. Advocates must thoroughly understand the legal principles that support, and those that oppose, their position and be able to articulate them in their Memorials And Oral Arguments as they will face strict scrutiny from the Justices. The research and creation of an Advocate’s Memorial is one of the most important parts of preparation for an Advocate’s at-Conference role. Time spent thoroughly researching the Advocate’s State’s positions and arguments provides Advocates with the vital information necessary to respond to questions at Conference and helps them effectively craft a memorial to present their arguments to the court before the Conference.
Prior to oral arguments, Advocates have the opportunity to consult with an ICJ Registrar about their oral argument. To take advantage of the opportunity, Advocates should attend the Advocate meeting on the first evening of the Conference, where the Registrars will share information about the simulation timeline and give Advocates the opportunity to set up a practice session.
Written Memorials Written Memorials
ICJ memorials should contain:
- Jurisdictional statement and arguments (outlining whether your country recognizes the Court’s jurisdiction in this case)
- Statement of facts (what are the relevant facts in the case?)
- Statement of law (what treaties, customs or laws apply?)
- Argument section (detailing how the law and facts apply to the merits of the case – how do the laws and facts support your case?)
- Summary and prayer for relief (what do you want the Court to do?)
The Court does not require these sections to be in any particular order, although they are typically laid out in the order shown. As you draft your memorial, think carefully about how best to use these sections to your advantage to advocate your position.
The party bringing the case is called the Applicant. The defendant is called the Respondent. In an Advisory Opinion, each country is known as a Party. Due to time constraints, all Parties in any AMUN ICJ case must prepare their memorials without seeing the memorial of their opponent. However, each side should anticipate and seek to counter the arguments opposing Advocates might make. All memorials must be submitted by 25 October to the AMUN Secretariat at icj@amun.org.
Oral Arguments Oral Arguments
Oral arguments provide Advocates with an opportunity to explain to the Justices the factual and legal merits of their case. In adversarial cases, the Applicant will argue first. The Respondent will then have the same amount of time to reply. Finally, the Applicant will have the opportunity to present a brief rebuttal. In Advisory Opinion cases, each Party will have a set amount of time to present their argument to the Court and for rebuttal, the order for which will be determined by the Justices on the first evening. Advocates presenting amicus curiae arguments will then be accorded no more than five minutes each to speak. The Justices will create the docket and define the amount of time for oral arguments. Advocates, with the exception of amicus curiae, should prepare between 10 to 20 minutes for arguments. The oral argument is not simply an opportunity to give a prepared speech; Justices often interject with multiple questions throughout the presentation. At least the first five minutes of each Advocate’s presentation will be uninterrupted, to allow each side the opportunity to freely present the key issues of their arguments. After the initial five minutes, the Advocates may continue with their presentations, but the Justices may also interject and question the Advocates on the merits of their case. Therefore, Advocates must be prepared to both answer questions and defend their positions. The following steps should be taken to prepare for oral arguments:
- Identify the critical issues in the case. You should try to have at least three main points to your argument.
- Develop a theme which incorporates your best arguments on the critical issues. Keep it simple. Remember, the best arguments are structured around a story with a unified theme, which explains why your country has been wronged, and what the Court can do to provide a fair and just solution.
- Prepare an outline. The outline should include your theme, your best arguments on the critical issues, your responses to your opponent’s best arguments and ideas about answers to any other questions you think the Justices might ask. Try to make your memorial and oral argument outline consistent, so the first issue addressed in the memorial is the first issue addressed in the oral argument. Your Oral Argument should not, however, only restate the contents of your Memorial as Justices will be familiar with this document prior to the simulation.
- Practice, practice, practice! There is no substitute for practicing oral arguments: your presentation will be smoother and more persuasive. Have your Faculty Advisor or other students fire questions at you. Learn to field those questions and then transition back to the point you were making prior to the question.
- Learn proper courtroom demeanor. Remember to be polite and deferential to the Justices at all times. While argument is the method, persuasion is the goal.
Though each Advocate will have more than five minutes to present oral arguments, keep in mind that only the first five minutes of the presentations will be uninterrupted. Focus on the main points and key issues during the first five minutes. AMUN suggests you follow a pyramid format in your oral arguments: present the crux of the argument first and then use the remainder of the allotted time to expand on the subsequent issues of the case. This format can also allow for a quick means of referencing issues during the remaining period of the presentation and questions. It is also wise to conclude the presentation by summarizing the key points again.
Try to anticipate questions the Justices might ask and develop answers. Do not write out answers verbatim. Do, however, write out key phrases or legal terms you will want to remember precisely. Simple, concise answers that repeatedly stress the same points are persuasive and will be remembered by the Justices. Oral arguments will involve extemporaneous speaking and responses, not the presentation of a memorized speech.
Outline the specific names of conventions, treaties and cases in your memorial and your outline. Your oral argument requires these citations to maintain your credibility with the Justices and articulate the reasons your side of the case is stronger.
Note: Remember that the AMUN ICJ is a simulation. No one expects participants, who are not lawyers or Justices, to make presentations, decisions or render opinions with the same level of sophistication as actual ICJ Justices or Advocates. The participants’ duty is to gain a basic understanding of what considerations are taken into account when presenting or presiding over a case and to prepare to argue their cases before the Court.