The Geneva Protocol — John Stuart Mill — John Shaqi
The Geneva Protocol
John Stuart Mill · en
Looking at these provisions in their entirety, it will be seen that the
engagements taken by the Members of the League relate to "any dispute
likely to lead to a rupture." This is the language of both Articles 12
and 15. We may say that this means any dispute whatever, any serious
dispute from the point of view of international peace. We may lay
aside trifling disputes which cannot lead to serious differences
between States, whether or not they drag on through years of diplomatic
negotiation. Accordingly, we may say that the Covenant in these
provisions covers any international dispute whatever as to
international questions in the sense above mentioned.
Further examining the provisions above quoted, we see that {20} the
Members of the League agree in every such possible case to do one of
three things: they agree to submit all disputes either (a) to
arbitration or (b) to judicial settlement or (c) to the Council. They
do _not_ agree to submit any particular case or any particular class of
cases to arbitration; they do _not_ agree to submit any particular case
or any particular class of cases to judicial settlement; but they do
specifically agree that all cases that are not submitted to the one or
to the other, go to the Council. The effect of such submission to the
Council will be discussed hereafter; at the moment it is only necessary
to point out that under these provisions the submission to the Council
is _obligatory_. That submission _must_, under Article 15, take place,
in the absence of submission to arbitration or to the Court. But the
submission to arbitrators or to the Court is voluntary.
The first change made in this scheme of the Covenant is that Parties to
the Protocol agree to accept the so-called "compulsory" jurisdiction of
the Permanent Court of International Justice in the cases mentioned in
paragraph 2 of Article 36 of the Statute of the Court. Thus, in such
cases the dispute between the Parties would go, as a matter of right,
at the demand of either one of them, to the Court, where it would be
finally determined. To that extent the jurisdiction of the Council is
lessened.
Under the Protocol, this acceptance of the so-called compulsory
jurisdiction of the Permanent Court of International Justice is to take
place by the signatory States within a month after the coming into
force of the Protocol, which, as we have seen, would mean within a
month after the adoption by the Conference on Reduction of Armaments of
the plan for such reduction.
The Parties to the Protocol thus agree to accept this so-called
compulsory jurisdiction of the Permanent Court; but it is provided that
they may do so with appropriate reservations.
Accordingly, it is desirable to consider summarily just what this
so-called compulsory jurisdiction of the Permanent Court of
International Justice is.