Effectiveness of International court of justice in solving International disputes: a case study of Chagos Archipelago

Abstract

This study examines the role of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in resolving international disputes, focusing specifically on the case of the Chagos Archipelago between the United Kingdom (UK) and Mauritius. In 2019, the ICJ issued an advisory opinion requiring the UK to end its administration of the Chagos Archipelago, a pivotal moment in Mauritius' decolonization process. Despite this ruling, the lack of significant progress has raised questions about the ICJ's effectiveness in enforcing its decisions. The case highlights the broader challenges faced by the ICJ, particularly in enforcing international law when powerful states are involved. This research explores the intersection of international law, colonial legacies, and territorial disputes. The study employed a qualitative methodology, utilizing semi-structured interviews with six key informants, including international law experts and conflict analysts, to gather insights on the ICJ's enforcement limitations. The findings underscore the systemic challenges international justice institutions face, revealing that the protracted nature of the Chagos case reflects broader issues in international law enforcement rather than a singular failure of the ICJ. Additionally, the study found that the effectiveness of the ICJ is significantly constrained when powerful states challenge its rulings, emphasizing the dependency of international law on state compliance. The research concludes that without strong enforcement mechanisms, the ICJ’s impact remains limited, recommending that alternative conflict resolution methods be considered alongside litigation.