ation
of
All
Forms
of
Racial
Discrimination and
the
Convention
PrevThe International Court of Justice (ICJ) has seen a sharp rise in cases, reflecting both increased reliance on judicial mechanisms and a strategic shift in how states use the Court. While some cases solely aim to resolve legal disputes, particularly in territorial and immunity matters, others-especially those involving politically charged conflicts-suggest a broader function. In such cases, litigation serves as a tool for shaping international narratives, exerting diplomatic pressure, and reinforcing legal norms rather than achieving a definitive legal resolution. This article examines the ICJ's evolving role as a forum for lawfare, where legal proceedings utilized to advance political, moral, or diplomatic goals. It assesses whether this instrumentalization aligns with the ICJ's foundational purpose or necessitates a reassessment of its role in international dispute settlement framework. The article, after analysing the definitional discussion on lawfare and tracing its evolution from military strategy to broader international law applications, explores how the ICJ has become a battleground for lawfare, particularly in disputes under the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination and the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. Next, it weighs benefits and risks of such a utilization, contrasting views on normreinforcement with concerns over politicization. The article concludes by examining how differing concepThe International Court of Justice (ICJ) has seen a sharp rise in cases, reflecting both increased reliance on judicial mechanisms and a strategic shift in how states use the Court. While some cases solely aim to resolve legal disputes, particularly in territorial and immunity matters, others-especially those involving politically charged conflicts-suggest a broader function. In such cases, litigation serves as a tool for shaping international narratives, exerting diplomatic pressure, and reinforcing legal norms rather than achieving a definitive legal resolution. This article examines the ICJ's evolving role as a forum for lawfare, where legal proceedings utilized to advance political, moral, or diplomatic goals. It assesses whether this instrumentalization aligns with the ICJ's foundational purpose or necessitates a reassessment of its role in international dispute settlement framework. The article, after analysing the definitional discussion on lawfare and tracing its evolution from military strategy to broader international law applications, explores how the ICJ has become a battleground for lawfare, particularly in disputes under the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination and the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. Next, it weighs benefits and risks of such a utilization, contrasting views on normreinforcement with concerns over politicization. The article concludes by examining how differing conceptions of the ICJ's function may shape perspectives on lawfare's impact on the ICJ's legitimacy and role in global governance.tions of the ICJ's function may shape perspectives on lawfare's impact on the ICJ's legitimacy and role in global governance.ention
and
Punishment
of
the
Crime
of
Genocide.
Next,
it
weighs
benefits
and
risks
of
such
a
utilization,
contrasting
views
on
normreinforcement
with
concerns
over
politicization.
The
article
concludes
by
examining
how
differing
conceptions
of
the
ICJ's
function
may
shape
perspectives
on
lawfare's
impact
on
the
ICJ's
legitimacy
and
role
in
global
governance.
ation
of
All
Forms
of
Racial
Discrimination
and
the
Convention
PrevThe International Court of Justice (ICJ) has seen a sharp rise in cases, reflecting both increased reliance on judicial mechanisms and a strategic shift in how states use the Court. While some cases solely aim to resolve legal disputes, particularly in territorial and immunity matters, others-especially those involving politically charged conflicts-suggest a broader function. In such cases, litigation serves as a tool for shaping international narratives, exerting diplomatic pressure, and reinforcing legal norms rather than achieving a definitive legal resolution. This article examines the ICJ's evolving role as a forum for lawfare, where legal proceedings utilized to advance political, moral, or diplomatic goals. It assesses whether this instrumentalization aligns with the ICJ's foundational purpose or necessitates a reassessment of its role in international dispute settlement framework. The article, after analysing the definitional discussion on lawfare and tracing its evolution from military strategy to broader international law applications, explores how the ICJ has become a battleground for lawfare, particularly in disputes under the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination and the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. Next, it weighs benefits and risks of such a utilization, contrasting views on normreinforcement with concerns over politicization. The article concludes by examining how differing concepThe International Court of Justice (ICJ) has seen a sharp rise in cases, reflecting both increased reliance on judicial mechanisms and a strategic shift in how states use the Court. While some cases solely aim to resolve legal disputes, particularly in territorial and immunity matters, others-especially those involving politically charged conflicts-suggest a broader function. In such cases, litigation serves as a tool for shaping international narratives, exerting diplomatic pressure, and reinforcing legal norms rather than achieving a definitive legal resolution. This article examines the ICJ's evolving role as a forum for lawfare, where legal proceedings utilized to advance political, moral, or diplomatic goals. It assesses whether this instrumentalization aligns with the ICJ's foundational purpose or necessitates a reassessment of its role in international dispute settlement framework. The article, after analysing the definitional discussion on lawfare and tracing its evolution from military strategy to broader international law applications, explores how the ICJ has become a battleground for lawfare, particularly in disputes under the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination and the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. Next, it weighs benefits and risks of such a utilization, contrasting views on normreinforcement with concerns over politicization. The article concludes by examining how differing conceptions of the ICJ's function may shape perspectives on lawfare's impact on the ICJ's legitimacy and role in global governance.tions of the ICJ's function may shape perspectives on lawfare's impact on the ICJ's legitimacy and role in global governance.ention
and
Punishment
of
the
Crime
of
Genocide.
Next,
it
weighs
benefits
and
risks
of
such
a
utilization,
contrasting
views
on
normreinforcement
with
concerns
over
politicization.
The
article
concludes
by
examining
how
differing
conceptions
of
the
ICJ's
function
may
shape
perspectives
on
lawfare's
impact
on
the
ICJ's
legitimacy
and
role
in
global
governance.