The Principle of the Obligation to Notification in the light of the ICJ's environmental Decisions

Document Type : ISI

Authors

1 professor of law in Faculty of Law, University of Tehran, Iran

2 Phd Candidate in International law, Faculty of Law, University of Tehran, Iran,

Abstract

Introduction
The principle of the obligation to notify and provide information is one of the fundamental principles of international environmental law. It refers to the general obligation of a state to communicate relevant information on one or more issues in a timely manner to another state, particularly regarding scientific data or specific technical activities. In other words, in international law, the obligation to provide information is considered a basic duty of states in their international relations, especially significant in the field of transboundary environmental protection. This obligation requires states to furnish necessary information to other interested states when their activities may cause harm to the environment of other countries or to areas under international jurisdiction.
The obligation to provide information may relate either to general and undefined matters or to specific and well-defined issues. The growing international recognition of this principle was first highlighted in the arbitration between Spain and France in the Lake Lanoux Case. It has since been explicitly affirmed in numerous binding and non-binding instruments of international law, the earliest of which can be traced back to the 1972 Stockholm Declaration.
This article examines the recognition and application of the principle of notification by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) and its place in the Court’s jurisprudence. Through a library-based legal analysis of ICJ judgments and advisory opinions, it seeks to answer the key question: How has the principle of the obligation to notify been recognized in international law and ICJ jurisprudence, and what role does it play in emerging ICJ disputes and cases?
In the Corfu Channel case, the ICJ highlighted the connection between the duty to inform and fundamental humanitarian considerations. Similarly, other cases analyzed in this article demonstrate the relationship between the notification obligation and environmental protection — such as the Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons advisory opinion and the Nuclear Tests case — as well as its link to the principles of cooperation and good neighborliness in the Gabčíkovo–Nagymaros Project and Pulp Mills on the River Uruguay cases. The Court has also emphasized this obligation in relation to state sovereignty in disputes such as the Nicaraguan Coast, and in various boundary and transboundary cases between Costa Rica and Nicaragua. Across all these opinions, the Court consistently affirms that the duty to notify constitutes a key element of international environmental law, requiring states to provide relevant information to affected or potentially affected states whenever their activities may harm the environment of other states or areas under international jurisdiction.
Methodology
This study employs a library-based research method to collect and analyze information on the ICJ’s decisions concerning the principle of the obligation to notify. These decisions are examined through comparative legal analysis alongside related international instruments and scholarly works. The research aims to promote transparency, access to environmental information, and public participation in decision-making processes at both national and international levels. The authors argue that combining analytical and comparative methods leads to more accurate and effective outcomes, while also benefiting from the insights of previous academic studies and relevant case analyses.
Conclusions
Examining the ICJ’s treatment of the principle of notification contributes to strengthening transparency, access to environmental information, and public participation in environmental decision-making processes at both domestic and international levels. A review of ICJ jurisprudence shows that this obligation is not limited to international environmental law; it is also closely linked to general principles of international law such as good neighborliness, cooperation, and precaution. The findings of this research help clarify the environmental responsibilities of states and contribute to reinforcing the legal regime governing international environmental protection.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

منابع
الهویی نظری، حمید (1389). رویکرد انسانی در آرای دیوان بین‌المللی دادگستری. تهران، انتشارات دادگستر.
البرزی ورکی، مسعود (1383). «نقد و بررسی نظر مشورتی دیوان بین‌المللی دادگستری راجع‌به تهدید یا توسل به سلاح‌های هسته‌ای». مجلة حقوقی بین‌المللی، شمارة 31، ص87-5.   DOI:10.22066/CILAMAG.2004.18001
پورهاشمی، سید عباس؛ زارعی، سحر؛ خلعتبری، یلدا (1392). «بررسی جایگاه اصل همکاری در حقوق بین‌الملل محیط‌زیست». فصلنامة پژوهش حقوق عمومی، سال پانزدهم، شمارة 39، ص90-60. در:
    http://qjpl.atu.ac.ir/article_2331.html  (5 بهمن 1403)
جم، فرهاد (1387). «حقوق بین‌الملل محیط‌زیست و تبادل اطلاعات زیست‌محیطی». پایان‌نامة کارشناسی‌ارشد حقوق محیط‌زیست، دانشکدة حقوق دانشگاه شهید بهشتی.
جمالی، حمیدرضا (1389). «میراث مشترک بشریت: مفهوم و کاربرد آن در حقوق بین‌الملل». دانشنامة حقوق و سیاست، شمارة 14، پاییز و زمستان، ص89-55. در:   https://sid.ir/paper/127698/fa  (5 بهمن 1403)
دقیقی، مائده؛ دربندی، شهروز (1402). «نگاهی بر رأی دیوان بین‌المللی دادگستری در قضیة دعوی آرژانتین علیه اروگوئه- کارخانة خمیر کاغذ». سومین کنفرانس بین‌المللی در مدیریت و علوم انسانی، ص14-1. در: https://civilica.com/doc/1667796 (10 بهمن 1403)
رابینسون، نیکلاس؛ کولاسوریا، لال کورو (1390). مبانی حقوق بین‌الملل محیط‌زیست». ترجمة سیدمهدی حسینی، تهران، انتشارات میزان.
رضوی‌نژاد، سید محمدرضا (1401). «اصل پیشگیری در پرتو آرای زیست‌محیطی دیوان بین‌المللی دادگستری». مجلة پژوهش‌های حقوقی، دورة 21، شمارة 51، ص 175-141.  DOI: 10.48300/JLR.2021.284066.1639
رمضانی قوام‌آبادی، محمدحسین (1388). «بررسی محتوای اصل مشارکت در حقوق بین‌الملل محیط‌زیست». فصلنامة پژوهش حقوق، سال 12، شمارة 29، ص114-87. در:    https://qjpl.atu.ac.ir/article_2503.html  (10 بهمن 1403)
عبداللهی، محسن؛ معرفی، سعیده (1389). «اصل مسئولیت مشترک اما متفاوت در حقوق بین‌الملل محیط‌زیست». فصلنامة پژوهش حقوق، سال 12، شمارة 29، ص224-199.  در: 
 https://qjpl.atu.ac.ir/article_2508.html ( 10 بهمن 1403)
عزیزی، ستار؛ موسوی، سیدمهدی (1395). «پروندة گابچیکوو-ناگیماروس: نقش دیوان بین‌المللی دادگستری در برجسته‌سازی مفهوم توسعة پایدار». مجلة حقوقی بین‌المللی، شمارة 55، ص134-109. DOI:10.22066/CILAMAG.2016.23526
کوک دین، نگوین و همکاران (1386). حقوق بین‌الملل عمومی. جلد دوم، ترجمة حسن حبیبی، چاپ دوم، تهران، انتشارات اطلاعات.
موسوی، سیدفضل‌الله؛ آرش‌پور، علیرضا (1394). «جایگاه اصل احتیاطی در حقوق بین‌الملل محیط‌زیست». فصلنامة مطالعات حقوق عمومی، دورة 45، شمارة 2، ص179-167. DOI: 10.22059/jplsq.2015.54817
مشکات، سیدمصطفی؛ رمضانی، احمد؛ صلاحی، سهراب (1398). «نظام حقوقی حاکم بر ممنوعیت آزمایش‌های هسته‌ای در حقوق بین‌الملل». مطالعات حقوق انرژی، دورة 5، شمارة اول، ص193-175. DOI: 10.22059/JRELS.2019.252787.187 
موسوی، سیدفضل‌الله؛ حسینی، سیدحسین؛ موسوی‌فر، سیدحسین (1394). «اصول حقوق بین‌الملل محیط‌زیست در پرتو آرای مراجع حقوق بین‌المللی». فصلنامة پژوهش حقوق عمومی، سال هفدهم، شمارة 48، ص25-9.  DOI:10.22054/qjpl.2015.1752
References
Abdollahi, mohsen; Moarefi, saeede (1389). “Common but differentiated responsibility principle in environmental law International”. Public Law Research, Volume 12, Issue 29.  (29 January 2025).   [In Persian]
Aerial Herbicide Spraying (Ecuador v. Colombia), ICJ Reports, 2008.
Alborzi Verki, Masoud (1383). “Advisory Opinion of the International Court of Justice on the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons: A Critical Study”. International Law Review and Academic Journal (Quarterly), Volume 21, Issue 31. [In Persian]
Azizi, Sattar; Mousavi, Seyyed Mahdi (1383). “Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros Project Case: The Role of the International Court of Justice in Highlighting the Concept of Sustainable Development”. International Law Review and Academic Journal (Quarterly), Volume 33, Issue 55, (1383) [In Persian]
Birnie, P, Boyle, A, Redgwell, C (2009). International law and the Environment. Oxford University Press.
Coc Dinh, Nguyen et al. (1386). Public International Law. translated by Dr. Hassan Habibi, Etelaat Publications, Second Edition. [In Persian]
Construction of a Road in Costa Rica along the San Juan River (Nicaragua v. Costa Rica and Costa Rica v. Nicaragua), ICJ Reports, 2015.
Corfu Channel Case , ICJ Reports, 1949.
Craik, N (2008). The International Law of Environmental Impact Assessment: Process, Substance and Integration. Cambridge University Press.
Daghighi, Maedeh; Darbandi, Shahrooz (1402). “A look at the ruling of the International Court of Justice in the case of Argentina against Uruguay in the Pulp and Paper Mill case”. The third international conference on advanced research in management and humanities papers. [In Persian] (29 January 2025).
Elohi Nazari, Hamid (1389). Human approach in the case law of the international court of justice. Dadgostar Publication, First edition. [In Persian]
Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Project (Hungary V. Slovakia) (Judgment), ICJ Reports, 1997.
Ghavam Abadi Ramezani, Mohamad Hossein (1388). “Participation rights in the context principle examine environmental”. Public Law Research, Volume 12, Issue 29. [In Persian] (29 January 2025).
Gupta, Aarti; Mason, Michael (2014). Transparency in Global Environmental Governance: Critical Perspectives.  Published by The MIT Press.
Hunter, D; Salzman, J; Zaelke, D (2015). International Environmental law and Policy. Foundation Press.
Jamali, Hamid Reza (1389). “The Common Heritage of Mankind: The Concept and Application in international law”. Journal of law and politics, Volume 6, Issue14. [In Persian] (24 January 2025).
Kiss, A; Shelton, D (2007). Guide to International Environmental Law. Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.
Koivurova, T (2014). Introduction to International Environmental. Routledge.
Lake Lanoux Arbitration Award (France,Spain), Reports of International Arbitral Awards, 1957.
Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons, ICJ Reports, 1996.
Louka, E (2006). International Environmental Law: Fairness, Effectiveness and World Order. Cambridge University Press.
Meshkat, Seyed Mustafa; Ramezani, Ahmad; Salahi, Sohrab (1398). “The legal regime of the nuclear tests ban in international law”. Journal of Researches Energy law studies, Volume 5, Issue 1. [In Persian]
Mousavi, Seyd Fazlolah; Hosseini, Seyd Hossein; Mousavi far, Seyd Hossein (1394).  “Principles of International Environmental Law in Light of International Case Law”. Public Law Research, Volume 17, Issue 48. [In Persian]
Mousavi, Seyed Fazllolah; Arashpour, Alireza (). The “Principle of Prevention” in international environmental law, The Public Law Studies Quarterly, Volume 45, Issue 2. [In Persian]
Nuclear Test Case (Australia V. France).
Nuclear Test Case (New Zealand V. France).
Poorhashemi, Seyed Abbas; Zarei, Sahar; Khalatbari, Yalda (1392). “The Cooperation Priciple in International Environmental Law”. Public Law Research, Volume 15, Issue 39. [In Persian] (24 January 2025).
Pulp Mills on the River Uruguay (Argentina V. Uruguay), (Judgment), ICJ Reports, 2010.
Razavi Nezhad, Seyed Mohammad Reza (1401). “Principle of prevention in the light of the environmental judgments of the International Court of Justice”. The Journal of Legal Research, Volume 21, Issue 51. [In Persian]
Ramazani CHavamAbadi, MohamadHossein (2010). “Participation rights in the context principle examine environmental Jones”. Public Law Researsh, 10(29), pp. 87-114.    https://qjpl.atu.ac.ir/article_2503.html] (29 January 2025) [in Persian]
Robinson, Nicholas A, Kurukulasuriya, Lal (1390). Training manual on international environmental law. translate by Seyed Mehdi Hosseini, Mizan Publication. [In Persian]
Sands, F (2003). Principles of International Environmental law. Second Edition, Cambridge University Press.
Shaw, Malcolm N (2003). International law. Fifth edition, Cambridge University Press.
Territorial and Maritime Dispute (Nicaragua V. Colombia), (Judgment), ICJ Reports, 2012.
Territorial Dispute (Costa Rica V. Nicaragua), (Judgment), ICJ Reports, 2015.
Trail Smelter Case (United State, Canada) Reports of International Arbitral Awards, 1941.
 
 
Journal Of Researches Energy Law Studies
Volume 10, Issue 2
March 2025
Pages 159-194

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics