A critical Analysis of the ICJ’s Identification of Customary International Law in the 2023 Judgment of <i>Nicaragua v. Colombia</i>

Abstract In the 2023 judgment of Nicaragua v. Colombia , the International Court of Justice ruled that, under customary international law, a State’s entitlement to a continental shelf beyond 200 nautical miles from its baselines is not permitted to extend within 200 nautical miles from the baselines of another State. In identifying this customary rule, the Court did not apply the two-element approach. The state practice relied upon by the Court to identify the general practice is not sufficiently widespread, representative, or consistent. The opinio juris is inferred from such state practice, which is not necessarily driven by a sense of legal obligation. The Court’s assertion of the customary rule constitutes, in effect, a rewriting of the relevant provisions of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, amounting to a legislative exercise.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Asian Journal of International Law
Published
2025-05-22
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1017/s2044251325000062
Primary Topic
International Environmental Law and Policies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

A critical Analysis of the ICJ’s Identification of Customary International Law in the 2023 Judgment of Nicaragua v. Colombia

Long Chen, Lingjie Kong
Asian Journal of International Law
International Environmental Law and Policies
article

A critical Analysis of the ICJ’s Identification of Customary International Law in the 2023 Judgment of Nicaragua v. Colombia

Long Chen, Lingjie Kong
article en

Abstract

Abstract In the 2023 judgment of Nicaragua v. Colombia , the International Court of Justice ruled that, under customary international law, a State’s entitlement to a continental shelf beyond 200 nautical miles from its baselines is not permitted to extend within 200 nautical miles from the baselines of another State. In identifying this customary rule, the Court did not apply the two-element approach. The state practice relied upon by the Court to identify the general practice is not sufficiently widespread, representative, or consistent. The opinio juris is inferred from such state practice, which is not necessarily driven by a sense of legal obligation. The Court’s assertion of the customary rule constitutes, in effect, a rewriting of the relevant provisions of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, amounting to a legislative exercise.

Asian Journal of International LawVol. 15(2)
Wuhan University (CN)
Openalex Percentile: Top 84%
International Environmental Law and Policies
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

A critical Analysis of the ICJ’s Identification of Customary International Law in the 2023 Judgment of <i>Nicaragua v. Colombia</i> — Long Chen, Lingjie Kong · Asian Journal of International Law (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS