We turned to the amazing self-styled ‘procedure goblin’ Juliette McIntyre, senior lecturer in law at the University South Australia, to get our heads around various things happening at the International Court of Justice.

Of course the cases under the Genocide Convention – Gambia v Myanmar (past episodes here) and South Africa v Israel (ditto here) are the main focus of our journalistic attention. And in that vein, Juliette gives us the skinny on the purpose and effects of the plethora of interventions by states in both cases under Articles 63 and 62 of the court’s statute. Are they useful, posturing, showing solidarity or just delaying everything?

So, of course, we discuss how quick and slow the court can seem. The Gambia v Myanmar case started way back in 2019 and had a relatively quick provisional measures decision. But we are still a while away from the actual case. We discuss what the interesting issues Juliette will be looking out for in hearings – what is genocide and what evidence does the court like to consider – and how the results of that case will affect the Israel case.

But we kick off with Mali’s application about a dispute with Algeria over a reconnaissance drone (just a press release and no case number). So Juliette takes us back in the court’s history in the 1940s or 50s where states bombarded it with what became ‘ghost case’ applications. And we discuss why small states launch different proceedings at the ICJ. Want to know more – listen to the pod!

For recommendations, do listen to Juliette’s own pod Called to the Bar, explore Ecco shoes that she used to sell in Cambridge, and watch a time-travelling Michelin chef in the K-drama Bon Appetit Your Majesty.

This podcast has been produced as part of a partnership with JusticeInfo.net, an independent website in French and English covering justice initiatives in countries dealing with serious violence. It is a media outlet of Fondation Hirondelle, based in Lausanne, Switzerland.