Treatment of individual as subject of International Law both in the Permanent Court of International Justice and in the International Court of Justice until 2004

Abstract

States are the only subjects of International Law that can be parties before the International Court of Justice. However, it has not prevented from hearing cases involving rights of individuals, who were relegated to a secondary role when positivist postulates were put into practice in the 18th century. The atrocities committed during the Second War World caused great changes in the way of treating individuals in the international arena, but these failed to permeate the wording of article 34 of the Statute of the
International Court of Justice. Nonetheless, the way in which the individual is treated in the principal judicial organ of the United Nations has been changed. To be able to determine this evolution, it is necessary to begin with the analysis of the Mavrommatis, Servian Loans judgments and the Jurisdiction of the Court of Danzig advisory opinion issued by the Permanent Court of International Justice. Subsequently, with an analysis of the Nottebohm, Barcelona Traction, LaGrand, and Avena judgments handed
down by the International Court of Justice. In this way, we can observe that, even though individuals are not able to present a case before the International Court by themselves, it has incorporated human rights in its judgments when resolving cases involving individuals.