The Chagos request: Does it herald a rejuvenation of the International Court of Justice’s advisory function?

The International Court of Justice has been open for business for over seventy years and has given twenty six advisory opinions. There have been peaks and troughs of activity and at times the issues the Court has addressed have seemed ill-matched to its position as the principal judicial organ of the United Nations. This factor, taken together with periods of low activity, could foster the perception that the advisory jurisdiction is increasingly irrelevant, particularly in the context of a proliferation of other international and also regional courts.
In June 2017, the General Assembly asked the Court’s opinion on the legal consequences of the separation of the Chagos Archipelago from Mauritius in 1965. This request offers the stimulating prospect of the Court turning its attention back to substantive matters of real weight and importance: inter alia sovereignty, self-determination, territorial integrity and human rights.
Now is an opportune moment to take stock and this article will assess the scope of the Court’s advisory opinion process, how it has been used to date and whether it can be better used in the future. It will conclude that change in itself is not needed and that the Court’s response to the Chagos request, with its focus on fundamental questions of international law, could revitalise the Court’s advisory function and help to reinforce its standing in the international community.