Rethinking the Legal Effects of the ICJ Advisory Opinions in the Light of 2021 ITLOS Judgment in the Mauritius/Maldives Case

There is almost a consensus, in the case-law of the International Court of Justice and the opinions of its Judges, as well as in the doctrine, regarding the non-binding nature of the Advisory Opinions of the Court. However, for a variety of reasons, including the position of the Court as the principal judicial organ of the United Nations, similar process for Judgments and Advisory Opinions to be taken into account by the Judges, the weight and credibility of the Judges of the Court, and putting the status of Advisory Opinions to no avail providing they are invalid, there is a disagreement about the legal effects of the Advisory Opinions of the International Court of Justice. The very recent ruling by the Special Chamber of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea in the Mauritius/ Maldives case in the preliminary objections, which relied on the International Court of Justice's 2019 Advisory Opinion’s findings in the “Legal Consequences of the Separation of the Chagos Archipelago from Mauritius in 1965”, led to the rejection of one of the Maldivian government's preliminary objections which bring about the effect of Advisory Opinion’s topic to the center of international law once again.