Hospitals & Asylums
The ICJ responds HA-12-1-05
12/1/05 5:40:37 AM EST a message was received from email@example.com that stated in its entirety;
In reply to your E-mail, we have to inform you that the International Court of Justice is not authorized, in view of its functions strictly defined by its Statute (Article 34) and Rules, to give advice or make observations on questions such as those raised in your communication.
The Court's activity is limited to rendering judgments in legal disputes between States submitted to it by the States themselves and giving advisory opinions when it is so requested by UN organs or specialized agencies of the UN system.
It follows that neither the Court nor its Members can consider applications from private individuals or groups, provide them with legal advice or assist them in their relations with the authorities of any country.
That being so, you will, we are sure, understand that, to our
regret, no action can be taken on your communication.
It is therefore given to the democratically elected government officials to make the Will of the Palestinian People (Abbas) HA-11-11-04 a reality. Once signed by the national parties this dispute is referred to the International Court of Justice in the principle of self determination espoused in Art. 55 of the UN Charter.
The Court is of course recommended to take responsibility for compensating the author for his contribution to the court even before any settlement is forthcoming out of respect for the principle of equality in light of the relative wealth of the International Court of Justice that is very real and the wealth of Hospitals & Asylums although the largest consolidation of legal capital in the planet frighteningly doesn’t benefit the author, one penny. Although Koffi Annan called the Report the most sweeping reforms to the UN since its foundation for the applause of the General Assembly the author remains without recognition and Art. 68 of the Rules of Court grants the International Court of Justice the liberty to reward the author for his expert opinion thereby lending legitimacy to the Palestinian Settlement that they could claim to have bought from the author.
The settlement requested is the size of a Palestinian welfare settlement - $1,000 a year with possibility for advancement to $1,000 a month should the Court wish to pass judgment in Anthony J. Sanders v. AOL HA-15-12-04. Mr. Sanders would also like a similar settlement from the AMS Treasurer should any settlement be forthcoming in the Advisory Opinion regarding the naming of Comet A’Hearn HA-12-1-05. While it would be ideal for this money to come directly out of the State settlement, there has so far been no fiscal settlement in the direction of the author in either case. The author is reliant upon the assumption that the Court does indeed have the discretion Art. 68 of the Rules of Court to settle the writer from their own treasury in which case they would have a credit for reimbursement from the appropriate settlement for the individual claim when the state parties consent to settle. Let the principle of conference be granted to individuals as espoused in the Draft European Constitution. There is no need for the UN to stay in an ivory tower of states and institutions when individuals are not only cheaper but worth more.
Anthony J. Sanders
Hospitals & Asylums