Case Concerning East Timor (Portugal v. Australia) ICJ 1995

Summary

The ICJ held it lacked jurisdiction to rule on Australia's obligations regarding East Timor (as Indonesia was a necessary party not before the court). However, the Court unanimously affirmed that 'the right of peoples to self-determination, as it evolved from the Charter and from United Nations practice, has an erga omnes character.' This affirmation of self-determination as an erga omnes norm is of universal significance.

Relevance to the diaspora

The ICJ's affirmation that self-determination is an erga omnes obligation — one owed to the international community as a whole, which any state can enforce — supports Tamil diaspora arguments that the international community has not merely a discretion but a legal interest in ensuring Tamil self-determination rights are respected.

Key provisions

• Para 29 — self-determination as erga omnes norm
• Para 29 — 'the right of peoples to self-determination... has an erga omnes character'
• ICJ declined jurisdiction — Australia/Indonesia necessity of parties

Primary source

Related entries

• → East Timor Self-Determination — UNGA Resolutions, UNSC, Referendum 1999 (UN)
• → ICCPR Article 1 — Right of Self-Determination (UN)
• → ICJ Advisory Opinion on Kosovo — Accordance with International Law of Declaration of Independence (2010) (UN)