skipper wrote:Kifeas wrote:Serbia wins right to challenge Kosovo at ICJSerbia can challenge the legality of Kosovo’s independence in the highest court of international law, the United Nations General Assembly decided on Tuesday.
The Serbian resolution requesting an opinion from the International Court of Justice won approval by a wide margin thanks to numerous abstentions, including by European Union member states that have recognised Kosovo.
Serbia’s Foreign Minister hailed the UN General Assembly’s move to question the legality of Kosovo’s independence at the World Court saying it was a victory for international law.
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/040b1848-9567 ... ck_check=1This is also a victory for Cyprus, for we now have the option to force Turkey to appear in front of the ICJ, as soon as things come to a head, thought the EU and the UN General Assembly. "Mama Turka, you want to become an EU member country? Fine! Before discussing further on the issue, let’s see first how legal was your 1974 invation, and the subeseqent up to this date occupation of more than 1/3 of the RoC. If you do not accept the ICJ verdict, then it means you do not accept international law, which means that you do not also have a place among the civilised nations of this planet –more so among the EU the UN and the Council of Europe!" Let’s see if our (GC) politicians have guts!
The ICJ will issue a non binding opinion which will not alter anything. You are confusing International Law, the UN and the ICJ although they are all related to each other. A country can be recognised and not be a member of member of the UN within International Law as was the case of Switzerland for a long time. The whole issue is just hot air.
The Cyprus issue will never be taken up by the ICJ since Turkey would have to agree to it. If you think that that the EU has the leverage to force Turkey to do so than I suggest you go ask Greece if they ended up at the ICJ in 2004 or not and if the EU applied sancations on Turkey for not doing so.
Hey kipper, don't you think that because the 1974 Turkish "peace operation" and the subsequent "liberation" of "Turkish Cyprus" from its Greek Cypriot "illegal occupiers" was a perfectly "legal" undertaking under international law, Turkey should or will have no real problem or reason in accepting the jurisdiction and verdict of the ICJ?
Since Turkey’s undertakings in Cyprus were and are all “legal” and “legitimate” (at least that is what Turkey says,) why would it (Turkey) have any reason not to accept the ICJ’s ruling? Please, kipper, do enlighten us! And you, VP!