Analysis of the International Court of Justice's Reasoning Approach to Uphold the United States of America's Second Preliminary Objection in the Case of "Certain Iranian Assets"

Regarding “Certain Iranian Asset” case, International Court of Justice, faced with five preliminary objections with respect to the jurisdiction of ICJ and admissibility of the case which were raised by Respondent. As the second preliminary objection, the United States requested the Court to dismiss as outside the Court’s jurisdiction all claims, brought under the sovereign immunity as a customary international law. Iran relied on Article IV (2), Article X (1) and Article XI (4) of Treaty of Amity to support its claim. However ICJ upheld the second objection of USA based on its interpretation in accordance with the Treaty’s object and purpose and also its finding in “Immunities and Criminal Proceedings Case” and “Oil Platforms Case”. In contrary to ICJ’s opinion, a logic relationship can be seen between the object and the purpose of Treaty and the provisions which have been mentioned by Iran. Such conclusion could be reached by analogy and deductive method as well as analysis of separate opinion of judges.