The Proliferation of International Tribunals and Its Impact on the Unity of International Law

当前国际社会最突出的现象之一是国际司法机构的激增，如国际海洋法法庭、国际刑事法院等。设立这种法庭的原因在于政治领域和实际必要性。与国际法院(国际法院)一样，所有这些法庭都是孤立存在的，没有支配它们相互关系的等级制度或制度。这一事实引起了人们的关注，即法庭可能作出相互矛盾的裁决，从而增加国际法支离破碎的危险。一些国际律师强调了这种危险。与此同时，也有一种相反的观点。一些评论者指出，如果法庭之间的竞争有什么不同的话，那就是法庭之间的竞争将加强判例，并将有益于法律程序，这一主张是可信的。他们还指出，即使不同法庭就同一国际法问题作出了一连串不可调和的裁决，“最大事实和最大限度”原则仍将占上风。虽然到目前为止，这种危险尚未迫在眉睫，但将尼加拉瓜案件和前尤吉斯拉维亚国际刑事法庭(上诉分庭)的塔迪克案件中的司法裁决进行比较，可以排除上述乐观观点。随着各种法庭的激增和活动的增加，国际法面临的危险可能会变得严重。如果这种趋势真的随着时间的推移而出现，那么肯定需要一个法律手段来对抗这种情况。授权国际法院承担上诉法院的职能，就像国际社会的最高法院一样，以确保国际法的统一，才能最好地满足这一要求。

One of the most outstanding phenomena in the current international community is the proliferation of international judicial organs, such as the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, the International Criminal Court and others. The reason for the creation of such tribunals lies in the political domain and in practical necessity. All these tribunals, in common with the International Court of Justice (ICJ), exist in isolation, having no kind of hierarchy or system that governs their mutual relations. This fact caused concern that the tribunals might make contradictory decisions, thus entailing increasing dangers of fragmentation of international law. A number of international lawyers emphasize this danger. At the same time, there is an opposing view to this. Some commentators point out that there is plausibility in the proposition that competition between tribunals will if anything strengthen the jurisprudence and will be healthy for legal process. They also suggest that, even if there arises lines of irreconcilable decisions among different tribunals on the same subject of international law, the principle "magna est veritas et praevalebit" will prevail.Although, so far, danger of this kind has not become imminent, a comparison between judicial decisions, for example, in the Nicaragua case of the ICJ and in the Tadic case of the International Criminal Tribunals for the Former Yugislavia (Appeals Chamber) on the same subject matter expels the optimistic point of view referred to above. With the proliferation and increasing activities of various kind of tribunals, the danger for international law may be expected to become serious. If such a tendency really comes with times, a legal device will surely be required to combat this situation. This requirement will be best met by authorizing the ICJ to assume the function of a court of appeal, just as a supreme court in the international community, to ensure the unity of international law.