Ethical Conflict of Decisions of the International Court of Justice and the Security Council on the Peaceful Settlement of International Disputes

In the present study the structure, some considerations on the respective rolls of the security council and the internationalcourt of justice with respect to the “The revention of aggravation of disputes” in the domain of the pacific settlementof international disputes or situations, according to the United Nations charter through comparing their functions and functionalities. Special focus is on the International Court of Justice (ICJ) as the sole United Nations judicial institution that carries not only the responsibility of peaceful resolution of international disputes between states and other subjects of international law but also has contributed to the expansion of international law. ICJ has a responsibility to supervise other organs of the United Nations but has failed to observe the resolutions of the Security Council despite the freedoms it enjoys to do so. The authority of the Security Council is still derived from the will of powers, not the international law which has resulted in silence and inaction of the ICJ with regard to the decisions of the Security Council in the cases of Lockerbie, Namibia, Bosnia and Herzegovinian and Montenegro; all out of political considerations. The study ends with a conclusion and a set of recommendations to minimize the adverse effects of the discussed contradictions including legal observations supported by some international principles and procedures as well as acceptance of the superiority of the decisions of the ICJ over decisions of other main UN bodies particularly the Security Council.