Connect with us


Mechanisms For Settlement Of International Disputes



The above topic necessarily provokes the evaluation of arbitration vis-à-vis other pacific mechanism for settlement of disputes of International Law. It will also examine how often the various methods have been put into use in the international scene. It will among other things consider the merits and demerits of a particular pacific mechanism in line with the success recorded so far.

In this vein, we shall consider each of the means of settlement one by one. Negotiation, Good Offices, Mediation, Conciliation, Arbitration and Judicial settlement among others are the main pacific mechanisms for the settlement of International Disputes.

Negotiation: parties to a dispute usually attempt to settle dispute through dialogue. It is the precursor to other means of settlement. Negotiation does not involve the use of third party. Through discussions the issues on dispute can be settled. Parties to a dispute may negotiation either through regular or officials specially designated. It should be noted that most States have Legal Advisers who know enough about International Law to recognise a vital claim when they see one and who can usually be relied upon to advise their own states to give way when their legal position is weak.

Good Offices: Another pacific mechanism for settling international disputes is that of good offices. Good offices “refers to a process of intercession by a third party, a group of states or even an individual of such standing as the secretary-general of the United Nations, in an effort to bring the disputants together and induce them to start negotiation”. Good offices is only possible if there is an agreement between the disputing parties.

Mediation: The third means of settlement is mediation. Here, a third party helps to bring out the facts of the dispute through investigations and makes a report which helps in the resolution of the matter. The mediation makes the proposal for the settlement of the disputes instead of contending himself with inducing negotiation.

Conciliation: The process of conciliation involves a third party investigation of the basis of the dispute and the submission of a report embodying suggestions for a settlement. Conciliation involves elements of both inquiry and mediation. This mode of settlement evolved from treaties providing for permanent inquiry commission. Conciliation reports are proposals and do not constitute binding decisions.

Arbitration: According to the Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary, arbitration is the process of having a dispute settled by a person or a group not involved in the dispute”. The International Law Commission defined Arbitration “as a procedure for the settlement of disputes between states by a binding award on the basis of law and as a result of an undertaking voluntarily accepted”.

Arbitration appears to be one of the eldest mechanisms of settling international Disputes. The Creek City states had already evolved not only comprehensive procedural details used in the settlement of various disagreement, but had concluded many treaties under which parties agreed in advance to submit either all or specific categories of disputes to arbitrations. The medieval period witnessed a handful utilisations of arbitration procedures. Some were in the form of Papal Arbitrations and most classical writer on International Law from Victoria and Sorez through Gratius to Vattel endorsed Arbitration.

The procedure of Arbitration is such that the disputants set out in a compromise the issues to be decided, the jurisdiction of the tribunal, the applicable law and procedure. The tribunal may be a single person.

However, an arbitral award is binding on the parties.

Modern arbitration emerged from the Treaty of Amity, Commerce and Navigation between Britain and U.S.A. (Jay Treaty) of 1794, under which three mixed commissions were appointed in equal numbers by both parties with the power to refer to an umpire in the event of a disagreement. They were to settle the outstanding issue that had not been resolved.

The procedure was utilised in the Alabama claims Arbitration of 1872 between America and the United Kingdom. The success recorded encouraged further arbitrations. For example, the Benring Sea and British Guiana and Venezuela Boundary Arbitration at the close of the nineteenth century.

The 1899 Hague Convention for Pacific settlement of dispute embodies some provisions on international arbitrations, the object of which was deemed to be under Article x.

Nevertheless, Arbitration is a method of dispute settlement which combines elements of both diplomatic and judicial procedures. A large part of arbitration depends on negotiation since the disputing parties have to agree on the compromise. On the other hand, it is an adjudicative technique in that the award is final and binding and the arbitrators are required to base their decision on law.

In recent years, there has been a rise in the number of inter-state arbitrations. The Rarm of Kutch case, the Anglo-French Continental Shelf Case, the Beagle Channel Case, and Taba case were all the subjects of arbitral award, usually successful.

Having considered other mechanisms of settling disputes of International Law, it will be proper to assert that arbitration is the most pacific mechanism for the settlement of International Disputes. Arbitration is the most utilised in the International Plane, judging from the success recorded by this mode of dispute settlement. A great number of cases have been settled through arbitration than any other mechanism.

On the other hand, because of combinations, both diplomatic and legal techniques, arbitration has become the favourite of most states in the settlement of international disputes.

Also, arbitration has been very useful in the settlement of boundary issues. It may be that further boundary issues may be determined through this method.

Arbitration is an extremely useful process where some technical expertise is required, or where greater flexibility than is available before the court is required”. Another point to be noted is that arbitration is handled with dispatch much more than the court would offer.

Arbitration may be very useful in disputes arising between States and International Organisations, since only states may appear before the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in contentions proceedings.

Arbitration is employed in order to deal with issues relatively quietly and cheaply. All in all, a number of cases has been dealt with successfully through the medium of arbitration, the Iran-United States Claim Tribunal, the treatment of dual nationality and preponderance of other varied cases have recorded amazing success through this procedure.

Consequently, there is no gain-saying the fact that arbitration is the most utilised pacific mechanism for settlement of disputes of International Law.

Chidi Enyie

Continue Reading
Click to comment

You must be logged in to post a comment Login

Leave a Reply


Judiciary As Last Hope Of The Common Man



The judiciary is said to be the last hope of the common man. If there is no judiciary or where the judiciary is shut, the hope of the common man is dashed. If the saying is anything to go by, one is shocked that for nearly two months, the last bastion of hope of the masses was shut by striking workers, yet it has been business as usual. Both the government and the workers union are not bothered about the ugly situation.
Judiciary Staff Union of Nigeria (JUSUN) is on indefinite strike nationwide to protest the inability of both the federal and some state governments to grant financial autonomy to the judiciary. The independence of the judiciary is contained in Nigeria’s grundnorm, the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 as amended.  Just as the positions of President and Governors of states are creations of the constitution, so also is the independence of the judiciary.
The truth of the matter is that JUSUN does not need to go on strike before the two tiers of government can implement the financial autonomy of the judiciary. It is a constitutional provision and political office holders swore to implement the spirit and letters of the Constitution.
Indeed, the judiciary and legislature are supposed to be independent as provided in the Constitution. When the three arms of government are independent, separation of powers is assured. This is because it will prevent fusion of powers which leads to tyranny. Fusion of powers smacks of dictatorship. In many states of the federation, governors have become absolute rulers.
It is becoming common that some state governors find it easy to shut the judiciary in order to have their way when unfavourable conditions tend to persist in their states.
For eight months, Rt. Hon. ChibuikeAmaechi shut the judiciary following an indefinite strike embarked upon by JUSUN. The closure of the courts caused a lot of hardship for both practising lawyers and litigants. Some lawyers who could not make ends meet died as a result. Litigants suffered lack of access to justice.
The indefinite strike embarked upon by JUSUN to demand financial autonomy is commendable because of its insistence on propriety obviously intended to prevent state chief executives from ruling on their whims and caprices.
But pathetically, many governors are unwilling to allow an independent judiciary that they will no longer hoodwink or coerce to do their biddings.  The delay in implementing the autonomy is predicated on the fact that most of our leaders are bigger than the country’s institutions.
Hence, we have strong leaders and weak institutions. At the federal and state levels, the suppression of the country’s main institution has aided tyranny.
Consequently, the governors and even the president can afford to do anything unconstitutional and go scot-free with it.
The national and some state Houses of Assembly have become rubber stamps ready for the masters’ use anytime. Therefore, one hardly finds meaningful debates in the legislature except in states that have strong opposition. In the states, where all the members of the legislature come from the ruling party, meaningful debate is moonshine.
The fashionable term is “Carry go”. The term “Carry go” literally means treat as requested. There is obviously no alteration or modification. The application of “Carry go” has continued to worsen the state of our democracy. The governors or the president can afford to do anything he likes without any compunction. Consequently, the masses and indeed the electorate do not have a voice anymore. The voices of the electorate are lost in the legislators’ inefficiency and cowardice.
The country is worse for it. What we have in most states of the skewed Nigerian federation are monarchs, who brook no challenges. They rule howsoever they like, for themselves and their various families. They have goons all over their states whose duty it is to defend them. If not for the state of our nation where rust is ripeness, do the President and Governors have no choice in implementing the constitution?
Many state chief executives implement and execute projects that would facilitate corruption yet any project that would better the lot of the people is either treated with levity or left undone. The question that readily comes to the mind is: whose interest are the leaders working for? Is it for themselves or the populace?


By: Chidi Enyie

Continue Reading


Elele OSPAC Seeks Govt’s Assistance



Elele Security Planning and Advisory Committee has appealed to the state government to come to their aid.
The local vigilante often called ESPAC said the call became imperative following its key role in sustaining peace in the communities.
In a chat with newsmen in his office yesterday, the commander, Daniel Wosa disclosed the unbearable situation his men faced on daily basis without anything to take home.
Wosa said some of his men had threatened to quit the voluntary job since nobody appreciated them.
The commander expressed regret that ESPAC members had volunteered to sacrifice their lives for the society yet nobody appreciated them.
“Some struggle to feed their families. It is unfair …”
“We appeal to governor Nyesom Wike to consider us because of the key role we have been playing in Rivers state.
“Today communities,road users and business men can attest to our untiring effort since we came on board.”
“No more kidnapping, killing and other vices which threatened the peace of the land,” he noted.
“Boys under me who volunteered to sacrifice for the wellbeing of others need recognition,” he stated.
Wosa said there was no security challenge the group could not contend if only government could give them support.
He specifically commended the executive Chairman, Ikwerre Local Government Area, Hon Samuel Nwanosike for his assistance and said if not Ikwerre Council boss the situation would have degenerated.
Wosa said some time now he had been using his hard-earned money to appease his men.
Wosa said it was on record Elele OSPAC had never been found wanting in the cause of its duty and explained that the group worked in collaboration with the conventional police to achieve desired objective
Meanwhile,a youth leader in Ikwerre Local Government, Comrade Eleonu Chukwuka says Hon Samuel Nwanosike’ s achievement in security has given him the second term ticket.
Comrd Chukwuka said Ikwerre Council Boss had written his name in gold by surmounting the security situation in Ikwerre.
The youth leader while chatting with newsmen said the introduction of OSPAC by Nwanosike led to other infrastructural and human capital development and pointed out that peace was key to development.
It is a thing of joy that farmers can return to farm. Normal life has returned.

It is the greatest achievement which snowballed to what we are seeing today in Ikwerre.

Ikwerre people are proud of him and will back till eternity.

Continue Reading


Legal Departments In LGAs And Justice Dispensation



Lawyers at the Local Government (LG) Legal Department would supervise and undertake prosecu-torial activities in magistrate courts, and represent their respective local governments in area courts, Magistrates Courts, High Courts, among others.
They would be on hand to render necessary legal advisory services to their local governments.
They could be in charge of advising their LG Chairmen on legal issues relating to issuance of the Customary Right of Occupancy at the LG level, thereby playing roles similar to those being played by the ministries of Justice and Lands at the State level in the Statutory Right of Occupancy. Section 6 of the Land Use Act, 1978 provides: “It shall be lawful for a Local Government in respect of land not in an urban area. (a) to grant customary rights of occupancy to any person or organi-sation for the use of land in the Local Government areas for agricultural, residential and other purposes. (b) to grant customary right of occupancy to any person or organisation for the use of land for grazing purposes and such other purposes ancillary to agricultural purposes as may be customary in the local government area concerned”.
They could take steps to set up (citizens) ADR/Mediation centres at the LG level, as well as render other legal aid/advisory services aimed at helping the local community or to make justice more affordable and easily accessible by local inhabitants.
Establishing a legal department at the LG level will tremendously reduce the pressure of having all lawyers striving to settle down only in major cities, such as Lagos, Port Harcourt, Kano, Onitsha, Aba, Ibadan, Jos, Abuja, Enugu City, Uyo, Warri, Calabar, Kaduna City, etc; lawyers employed by the various local governments would have to relocate to the local council headquarters where they’d live and operate from, with their families.
Establishing a legal department at the LG Level would bring lawyers and legal services closer to the people at the grass-root; residents of local communities will no longer need/have to travel to the major cities in order to get the services of lawyers to draft their various agreements, contracts, or to render other legal services.
Lawyers in the LG Legal Departments will, apart from attending to the legal needs of the local government councils, assist in prosecution of some cases, especially in courts located within the local council areas. This will minimise involvement of law prosecutors in criminal prosecution. Lay police officers‘ and non-lawyers’ continued involvement in criminal prosecution in Nigeria, is partly responsible for the worsening cases of awaiting trial cases and prison congestion in the country.
This is because of their professional limitations in this area, so many of the so-called police prosecutors are not able to match or withstand the legal firework of professionally qualified lawyers who act as defence counsel in courts during criminal prosecutions; these lay police officers and non-lawyers hardly understand the intricacies of formal courtroom proceedings and trial procedure, and more often than not, have very little or no preparation prior to their court appearances.
It may therefore be seen that the clamour for extrication of lay policemen from criminal prosecution is primarily not targeted at creating more jobs for lawyers, but rather at leaving criminal prosecution in the hands of qualified personnel (lawyers) who alone understand the law and are well able to match the expertise of defence counsel in court, in order to ensure that justice was dispensed in good time and more effectively.
Gradually, from among these lawyers, who are LG legal officers, some magistrates or even judges are appointed, just as it is done at the state level.
Establishing a legal department at the LG level would provide huge job/employment opportunities for lawyers in Nigeria.
Imagine, if all the 774 local government areas in Nigeria could create and have legal departments, and each local government (depending on capacity) employs an average of 10-20 lawyers in its legal department, we’d have at least 7,740 to 15,480 lawyers or much more immediately gainfully employed at the local government level.
Establishing a legal department at the LG level would redress the existing inequity and unfairness at the local government level. The following departments already exist in all the LGAs in Nigeria: Education, Health, Agriculture, Finance, Information, and Works. It’s gross marginalisation against the legal profession that there’s not yet a legal department in all LGAs in Nigeria. This obvious anomaly, which has wreaked huge havoc, considering the undeniable importance of law and lawyers in society, needs to be be urgently corrected to provide the needed balance that would make lawyers more relevant to society and move society forward.
B) Stakeholders To Make This All-Important Project A Reality:
The Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) at both the National and Branch levels:  NBA has responsibility to set the ball rolling. Indeed, if the NBA does nothing,  nothing happens.
The Attorney-General of the Federation of Nigeria, considering that he is the  Chief Law officer of the Federation.
Attorneys-General of the various states in Nigeria.
The Chief Justice of Nigeria.
The President of the Court of Appeal.
The Chief Judge of the Federal High Court and the President of the National  Industrial Court of Nigeria.
The Chief Judge of the Federal capital High Court and the High Courts of the  various States in Nigeria.
The House of Assembly of the various States in Nigeria.
The Nigerian Governors‘ Forum and the Governors of the various States in  Nigeria.
The Body of Senior Advocates of Nigeria (BOSAN), the Egbe Amofin Lawyers,  the Body of Benchers (BOB), the Eastern Bar Forum (EBF), the Muslim Lawyers’ Association of Nigeria (MULAN), the Mid-West Bar Forum (MBF), the Christian Lawyers’Association of Nigeria (CLASFON), the National Association of Catholic Lawyers (NACL), etc.
C) Conclusion: What Does This Take As A First Step?
It starts with an amendment to the Local Government Law of each State, to create a legal department in the LGAs in the state.
This is long overdue. Provision of necessary logistics and support infrastructure would then follow.
This writer believes that there would be business enough for lawyers in Nigeria, only if the lawyers could, by themselves and working hand in hand with their Bar Associations, put their acts together and stand up to do something concrete and constructive for themselves and their profession.
Time for action is now; there is no time to wait or waste, because time will never be right. Barack Obama said, “the change we desire will not come if we wait for some other person or some other time. We are the ones we’ve been waiting for. We are the change that we seek.  A stitch in time saves nine.”
It would be recalled that lawyers under the employment of Local Government Authorities in Rivers state, penultimate week, demonstrated for full recognition and salary increment to match that of their counterparts in the employment of the State Government, while the Authorities are against such on the ground that they (lawyers), are first and foremost, not employed as lawyers by the authorities, thus, may be making an unlawful request.
Udemezue is of the Civil Litigation Department with the Nigeria Law School.


By: Sylvester Udemezue with reports from King Onunwor

Continue Reading