The World Court Project explained with three simple questions

Who are we?

 

We are a coalition of several Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs) working to abolish nuclear weapons by challenging their status under international law.
We worked to obtain the International Court of Justice’s 1996 advisory opinion on the legality of the threat or use of nuclear weapons, which confirmed that nuclear abolition is not just a political aspiration, but also a legal obligation.

 

Why the World Court?

 

When we first thought about approaching the International Court of Justice (the World Court) for an advisory opinion on the legal status of nuclear weapons, diplomatic negotiations were not making much progress. Our coalition was formed around the World Court’s special status as the legal branch of the United Nations and the chance it offered of reinvigorating the diplomatic process. 

Our campaign drew unprecedented support, collecting more than three and a half million signatures demanding nuclear abolition, and leading to the Court’s opinion which was unable to find any circumstance for the lawful the threat or use of nuclear weapons. The Nuclear-armed states have never convincingly shown that the nuclear weapons they possess could be used lawfully. 

Read more about the World Court and its Opinion…

 

Why a second Advisory Opinion?

 

At present, the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty is under serious strain and the nuclear-armed states have yet to honour their treaty obligation to start negotiations on global nuclear disarmament in good faith at an early date. 

To generate new momentum for total nuclear disarmament, we want to return to the World Court and ask what the obligation to negotiate nuclear disarmament “in good faith” exactly entails, and whether the nuclear weapon states are at present complying with this obligation.

This would create new pressure on nuclear-weapon states and give the advocates of disarmament an important new tool to promote disarmament.