“Should political influence in the decision–making processes of international courts and tribunals be anticipated?”

Abstract

The terms ‘political considerations’; ‘political influence’ and ‘political interference’ mean different things to different people, so clarification of the meaning of these terms for the purpose of this article is useful. The most passive of the three terms is ‘political considerations’ because it connotes a legitimate and appropriate evaluation of the policies and principles of the actors be they states or non-state actors, affected by the outcome. Whereas ‘political influence’ suggests a more intrusive, yet not necessarily aggressive act of asserting power in an effort to affect a result. The term ‘political interference’ on the other hand suggests an aggressive act, which may be illegitimate, by imposing upon those invested with legal authority to exercise judicial power in a way that will achieve their desired outcomes, often irrespective of the merits of the case.