WAR OR LAW?

Evening Post, Volume CV, Issue 126, 30 May 1928, Page 17

WAR OR LAW?

WOBLD COURT OE j JUSTICE WHAT IT WILL DO The problem of the 19th century was how to make war most efficiently. That of- the 20th century is to be how to make peaco most effective. Some people shout for this cure-all, others ..for. that panacea. But human nature, or human practice over tho a.ges is hiot to be cured .overnight. Docs that imply that little cau be done, and that j little very slowly? Not at all. But it does nioau that all must depend on working on some plan which, is both founded in the past and framed for tho future, which has its roots deep down in human custom, and yet can shoot up to unknown heights under the sunlight of vigorous public opinion. Most peaco plans realise that something liko this must be so, states an article published by the . League of Nations ■on tho composition of the World Court. But not a few are inexplicably blind to tho fact that there is already in existence such a working alternative, to ordeal by battle, that there is already growing up a habit among tho nations of using it, that it is founded in the traditions and hopes of the past, and yet would poem to have an unlimited future, if it is only recognised and fully mado use of by men and women, by tho peoples of good will. This existing alternative to war is the.Permanent Court of International Justice at The Hague. The Permanent Court consists of eleven Judges and four Deputy-Judges appointed iv a special way by all the members of tho League, some tlireefifths of the world, for nine years. They hold a regular session every June, and as many more as the cases require. Sonio years the Judges sit very nearly, the whole year round. The Court is always ready—there is no longer a need to create some ad hoc Court in. the.sudden hour of crisis—just when it is almost impossible to get it done. And the Judges are some of tho best men on international and various national laws in the world. Judges Moore (American), Lord JPinlay (British), Loder (Dutch), Huber (Swiss), Weiss (French), Anzilotti, the President of the Court, at the moment (Italian) are well known all over tho world. Theso and the other members of tho Bench are always ready to give judgment or advice (in all cases by a majority of vote?) upon any matter of international importance. .The Court is thus "Permanent" in the true sense; it cau be used before a dispute gets to tho flash point. At the same timo it is a World Court in . the proper sense of tho word. Any State, big or small, insido or outside tho League, can if it chooses make use of this Court on terms of absoluto equality. For the first time in.history there is a "World Court which brings the rules of law into direct touch with tho relations between one State and another. Peacemakers and great lawyers, British, American, and others, worked hard to get an organisation' liko this in tho 19th century and before the war. But the war-mentality and warmachines wero too strong. The League, to its undying credit, has at least given a start to such a World Court which has functioned successfully for nearly six years. Tho Court brings law into international politics in three ways: (1) By a number of Treaties and Conventions (over 200 now) it is able to give decisions promptly on a wholo mass of disputes and vexed questions which before 1914 might have helped to set Europe on' fire. These disputes now must be referred to the Court for settlement. There can be no decision by "force" here. (2) All the time it is building up a cumulative body of international case law, bit by bit nar^ rowing the gap through which a future war can possibly break. (3) It is a real help—quite a new thing this—by means of jrtiat are called "Advisory Opinions" (not binding'in themselves), in the settling of problems directly handled by Foreign Offices. The importance of having the Court for this is significant. For, as a rule, international disputes have legal foregrounds and political backgrounds. Tho real contest may be political; but if tho legal difficulties are got out of the way, and the political difficulties can be then handled in a better; atmosphere, there is much surer hope of satisfactory settlement all round. Nor should it be forgotten that there is great publicity shed on the work of tho Permanent Court. Man • sessions and all the decisions of tho Court are held in public, and full minutes of proceedings are quickly published. There is little excuse for people- not being properly awake to* the great instrument for international peace that there is to hand Tit Tho Hague. During its short existence —nearly six years —the Court has handed down eleven judgments and fourteen advisory opinions, and there is a heavy list of cases for 1928. Great Britain, true to'her practice of being willing to go to law when the dispute arrives, however shy she may be of general theories about such a thing, has been party to at least, eight of theso cases. The total output Of the Court compares more than favourably with the 21 cases of the Old Hague Arbitration Court in 25 years (this Court still goes on, under the same roof, the Peace Palace at The Hague, and sharing the same Registrar as tho Permanent Court). Looking back on the last five years, there can be littlo doubt that the Court has won a real reputation, not only among the legal profession but in the foreign offices and with informed public opinion. Many of tho disputes settled had created much bad feeling and might easily have led to worse. Soino of them are sure to have important reactions on future international relations. . Their very" ■ variety speaks volumes for the experience of the Court. But, perhaps, tho most vital and significant thing is tho definite growth' of the compulsory jurisdiction of the.Court. That is the true beginning of the reign of law in international politics, Tho surest and quickest way towards world peace lies in the strengthening by tho Governments of this side of the Court's activities, and for this much depends upoira thoughtful and active body of public opinion. IK"!? for a few "cases." In 1923 : djreat Britain and Franco had an awkward quarrel over certain laws in Tunis and Morocco, which affected British subjects. But a satisfactory solution was reached through tho Court—tho French Jtidgo himself, bo it noted, concurring in tho main British point of view, which the Court adopted. In tho samo year, for the first time in his tory, some States summoned another State before a Court of Law. The Allied Powers summoned Gormany to The Hague for abuse of tho Kiel Canal (tho s.b Wimbledon case). The verdict of tho Court vent against Germany, who paid the damages. There have boon one or two cases dealing with 1 tho international organisation of labour, which may be of great service to peace in the future.. The rights of certain Gorman minorities were brought before the Court—and, though. Germany was on the beaten side ill 191S—those minorities won their caso before the Judges. In 1925 a very ticklish boundary dispute between Turkey and Great Britain (tho "7tosul" ease) was referred by the latter to the Court—a Great Empire and a small Oriental State meeting as equals before the bar j

ol! law. In 1027 there was the "Lotus" caso between Franco and Turkey where tho verdict, by the casting_vote of the. Judge, went .in favour of the small State; and.a most important case it was, involving tho jurisdiction^ or national cuimhial Courts over foreigners, and not unlikely to lead in tlic future to new international law on tins hotly debated problem. . The Court also gave judgment in a dispute botweon 'Rumania, and Great Britain, supported by Franco and Italy, over the rights of free traffic on tho internationalised river Danube, a matter of deep importance for European commerce.- '.Rumania lost her case.