International Court of Justice Judges Election: The 2021 Vacancy

One might assume the universe pauses for such trivialities as judicial appointments, but alas, it does not. The relentless churn of global administration continued with the 2021 International Court of Justice election, a rather specific affair that unfolded on 5 November 2021. The stage for this exercise in international consensus-building was, predictably, the United Nations Headquarters in New York City. The task at hand was to fill a vacancy on the world's principal judicial organ, ensuring the continuity of its vital, if often overlooked, work.

In a process requiring concurrent majorities, both the General Assembly and the Security Council convened to elect a new judge. The chosen individual was Hilary Charlesworth from Australia, who was tasked with completing the unexpired portion of a nine-year term. This particular seat had been vacated following the unfortunate passing of Judge James Crawford, also of Australia. The election, therefore, wasn't for a full new term but rather to bridge a gap, a testament to the court's structured continuity even in the face of the inevitable.

The election saw two highly qualified candidates vying for this critical position. The vacancy, created by the death of Judge Crawford, necessitated an expedited process to ensure the full complement of judges on the International Court of Justice. This specific term of office commenced on 5 November 2021, the very day the votes were cast and tallied by both the Security Council and General Assembly, and was slated to conclude on 5 February 2024. The nominated individuals who put themselves forward for this demanding role were Hilary Charlesworth of Australia, and Linos-Alexander Sicilianos representing Greece. After what can only be described as a single, decisive round of voting, Ms. Charlesworth secured the necessary absolute majority in the Security Council. Her victory was further cemented by also receiving an absolute majority of votes in the General Assembly, thereby confirming her election to the esteemed bench.

The Election Process: A Dance of Dual Majorities

The election of judges to the International Court of Justice is not a simple popularity contest, nor should it be. It's a carefully orchestrated procedure, designed to ensure broad international backing for individuals who will ultimately interpret and apply international law. Under the terms enshrined in the Statute of the International Court of Justice, a candidate must achieve an absolute majority of votes in both the General Assembly and the Security Council concurrently to be declared elected. This dual requirement is a fundamental aspect of the court's organizational structure, reflecting the need for both universal and more concentrated political support.

In the General Assembly, the democratic ideal of the United Nations is on full display, or as full as it gets. All 193 Member States are considered electors, each holding a single vote. Consequently, to achieve an absolute majority within the Assembly, a candidate must secure at least 97 votes. This numerical threshold underscores the extensive support required from the global community.

Conversely, the voting mechanism within the Security Council operates with a different calculus, reflecting its unique structure and responsibilities. Here, a candidate needs to obtain eight votes to constitute an absolute majority. Crucially, and perhaps surprisingly to some, the Statute of the International Court of Justice makes no distinction between the votes cast by its five permanent members and its ten non-permanent members. This parity in voting power for ICJ elections within the Council ensures that even the most powerful nations cannot unilaterally impose their preferred candidate, fostering a degree of collective decision-making, at least on this particular matter. This intricate system is designed to ensure that elected judges possess not only legal acumen but also a broad foundation of international legitimacy, a detail often overlooked in the grander scheme of things.

Voting Results

The outcome of the single round of voting on 5 November 2021, while perhaps not a shock to those who follow these things, nonetheless demonstrated a clear preference from both the General Assembly and the Security Council.

Candidate	Round 1 5 November 2021	GA	SC
Hilary Charlesworth		119	11
Linos-Alexandre Sicilianos		71	4

As the numbers starkly indicate, Hilary Charlesworth secured a commanding lead in both voting bodies, far exceeding the required majorities. Her 119 votes in the General Assembly comfortably surpassed the 97-vote threshold, while her 11 votes in the Security Council similarly cleared the 8-vote requirement. The results left little room for ambiguity regarding the international community's choice for the vacant judicial seat.

Sources: [1] [2]