Monetary Gold Principle and the Case of Nicaragua v. Germany

Abstract

Nicaragua instituted proceedings before the International Court of Justice (ICJ or Court) against Germany for violation of its obligations under Article I of the Genocide Convention, international humanitarian law (IHL) embodied in Article 1 of the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949 and its Additional Protocols, and other peremptory norms of international law.1 Nicaragua asserts that a State party has “a duty under the Convention to do everything possible to prevent the commission of genocide” (Application, para.16). It argues that there exists “a recognised risk of genocide” against the Palestinians and that Germany, by providing political, financial and military support to Israel and by defunding the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA), “is facilitating the commission of genocide and, in any case, has failed in its obligation to do everything possible to prevent the commission of genocide” (emphasis added) (ibid.). Nicaragua further requests the Court to indicate provisional measures (PMs) as a matter of “extreme urgency”, concerning Germany’s “participation in the ongoing plausible genocide and serious breaches of IHL” (ibid., para.101).