ABSTRACT
International courts and t r i b u n a l s a r e flourishing. D e p e n d i n g o n how t h e s e b o d i e s are defined, they now n u m b e r b e t w e e n s e v e n t e e n a n d forty. 1I n r e c e n t y e a r s we h a v e witnessed the p r o l i f e r a t i o n o f new b o d i e s and as t r e n g t h e n i n g o f t h o s e t h a t a l r e a d y exist. " W h e n future i n t e r n a t i o n a l l e g a l s c h o l a r s l o o k b a c k at . . . the e n d o f the twentieth c e n t u r y , " one a n a l y s t has written, " t h e y p r o b a b l y will r e f e r to the e n o r m o u s expansion o f the i n t e r n a t i o n a l j u d i c i a r y as the s i n g l e m o s t i m p o r t a n t d e v e l o p m e n t o f the p o s t - C o l d War age. " 2 T h e s e c o u r t s and t r i b u n a l s r e p r e s e n t akey d i m e n s i o n o f l e g a l i z a t i o n . I n s t e a d o f resolving disputes t h r o u g h i n s t i t u t i o n a l i z e d b a r g a i n i n g , s t a t e s c h o o s e to d e l e g a t e the task to t h i r d - p a r t y t r i b u n a l s c h a r g e d w i t h a p p l y i n g g e n e r a l l e g a l p r i n c i p l e s . N o t all o f these tribunals are c r e a t e d alike, however. I n p a r t i c u l a r , we d i s t i n g u i s h b e t w e e n t w o ideal types o f i n t e r n a t i o n a l d i s p u t e r e s o l u t i o n : i n t e r s t a t e a n d t r a n s n a t i o n a l . O u r c e n - tral a r g u m e n t is t h a t the f o r m a l legal differenc~s b e t w e e n i n t e r s t a t e a n d t r a n s n a t i o n a l dispute r e s o l u t i o n h a v e s i g n i f i c a n t i m p l i c a t i o n s f o r t h e p o l i t i c s o f d i s p u t e s e t t l e m e n t and t h e r e f o r e for the e f f e c t s o f l e g a l i z a t i o n i n w o r l d p o l i t i c s . I n t e r s t a t e d i s p u t e r e s o l u t i o n is c o n s i s t e n t w i t h the view t h a t p u b l i c i n t e r n a t i o n a l law c o m p r i s e s as e t o f r u l e s a n d p r a c t i c e s g o v e r n i n g i n t e r s t a t e r e l a t i o n s h i p s . L e g a l resolution o f disputes, i n t h i s m o d e l , takes p l a c e b e t w e e n s t a t e s c o n c e i v e d o f as unitary actors. States are the s u b j e c t s o f i n t e r n a t i o n a l law, w h i c h m e a n s t h a t they control access to d i s p u t e r e s o l u t i o n t r i b u n a l s o r c o u r t s . T h e y t y p i c a l l y d e s i g n a t e the adjudicators o f such t r i b u n a l s . States a l s o i m p l e m e n t , o r fail to i m p l e m e n t , the d e c i - sions o f i n t e r n a t i o n a l t r i b u n a l s o r c o u r t s . T h u s i n i n t e r s t a t e d i s p u t e r e s o l u t i o n , s t a t e s act as g a t e k e e p e r s both to t h e i n t e r n a t i o n a l l e g a l p r o c e s s a n d f r o m t h a t p r o c e s s b a c k to the d o m e s t i c level.
