ACIJ authority

The ACIJ’s authority and legitimacy are based in hitherto unused provisions of international law, which give the court statutory authority.  Specific provisions of international law, enacted by the UN General Assembly as binding upon all UN member countries, fully authorize and empower an independent non-governmental Court to exercise universal jurisdiction over all matters of international law.

International judge, Prince Judge Matthew discusses with Kerry Cassidy of Project Camelot the international laws which give statutory authority and global jurisdiction to the newly-formed Arbitration Court of International Justice.

To meet the requirements which trigger that statutory authority, a Court must:

  1. Have official licensed status as a non-governmental Court from a national Ministry of Justice of a UN member country,
  2. Have formal UN registered status as an NGO, and
  3. Have an infrastructure and foundational basis which is fully consistent with all details of the relevant body of international law.

The traditional human rights Courts and international law Courts are based upon the “treaty principle”, by which countries agree to voluntarily submit to the jurisdiction of the Court. While the treaty-based charter system allows for the easy creation and immediate official funding of a Court, it is severely limited by allowing countries to avoid its jurisdiction at their will and convenience.

Although a treaty-based charter is one way to establish a Court of international Justice, it is certainly not the only way. Specific provisions of international law, enacted by the UN General Assembly as binding upon all UN member countries, fully authorize and empower an independent non-governmental Court to exercise universal jurisdiction over all matters of international law.

International human rights laws are binding on all members of the United Nations. The existing global courts are severely hampered by the “treaty system” on which they were built. The International Court of Justice, The International Criminal Court, The European Court of Human Rights, and the United Nations Human Rights Commission all have significant limitations which prevent them from effectively prosecuting the massive human rights violations being committed by governments, banks, and corporations.