On behalf of the Jazz Hub Competition 2021, I extend a very cordial welcome to Professor Bruno Simmer and Professor Georg Nolte, who are joining us on the final day of the German National Rounds.

The German Jazz Hub Competition 2021 is hosted by the Friedrich Alexander Universität Erlangen Nürnberg and I want to thank Professor Krajewski and Martin Kronemann for making this event possible.

My name is Patricia Nacimiento and it is my privilege and honor to welcome you.

The Jessup Moot Court is modeled around the International Court of Justice, the ICJ. The problem, the memorials and the pleadings all aim to reproduce the reality as closely as possible.

It is therefore a real thrill to have two ICJ judges with us. I'm tempted to call this a historic opportunity to have a current and a former German ICJ judge willing to give us some insights of the ICJ to the Jessup participants.

It is certainly a unique opportunity and I'm extremely grateful to Professor Simmer and Professor Nolte for having accepted this invitation.

Professor Simmer served at the ICJ from 2003 to 2012 and Professor Nolte started his term of nine years just a few days ago.

Both are amongst the most distinguished experts of international law globally.

Instead of attempting to introduce Professor Simmer and Professor Nolte in a way that would do justice to the many accomplishments, we rather want to use this special occasion and hear directly from you.

Let's start by speaking about the ICJ.

Professor Simmer, you served until 2012. How do you see the position and the significance of the ICJ? How has it developed in your time as a judge and since then?

Well, let me start with saying a few words about the position and significance. Of course, the ICJ is a very impressive institution.

It is first of all the oldest international permanent international court.

On the other hand, of course, age as such is probably not a great achievement.

Maybe in the case of an international court in unruly times, it is an achievement that it still has survived two world wars.

Well, one world war and all kinds of problems.

It is an impressive court. It is certainly the court with the highest, let's say, the highest solemnity.

It is also impressive because it is the only court in the world to which every state can come, every state in theory, every state in the world about every legal problem, every problem of international law.

So that is its singularity. On the other hand, one must not forget that this could only happen if the states involved have agreed to the jurisdiction of the court.

That is, of course, the great the great challenge of the International Court of Justice.

Well, that's probably it. Let me start with this. The development between 2003 to 2012. I mean, there hasn't been any qualitative leap, so to speak.

What was remarkable was that the court rendered a judgment on the accusation of genocide committed by a state.

And maybe in a German audience that I was also in charge at the time when Germany brought the case against Italy, which had to do with German atrocities and violations of international law during World War Two.

Thank you, Professor Simm.

Professor Malte, you have started your term this month. What is your view on the position and the significance of ICJ today?

Do you think that any changes are needed?

Well, thank you very much for the question and for the invitation to speak to you and to the audience, to the students who are doing the moot court this year. It's a great honor and privilege for me to be here.

Well, I can only agree with what Bruno Zimmer has said about the ICJ and I don't want to lecture the students who know about the ICJ, what the ICJ is about.

What I can perhaps say about the current position and significance of the ICJ, I have paid particular attention at the end of last year to the report of the president of the ICJ to the General Assembly and the Security Council.

And the president reported that the docket of the court is full or relatively full in comparison to previous times, that judgments have been favorably received and that the court has also managed to change its procedures in order to cope with the COVID-19 pandemic,

to hold virtual hearings. And he asserted that the court was in good shape.

And the states who had listened to the report, they then issued statements and almost without any criticism, the court was commended. Courts declared themselves to be satisfied with the state of the court in the moment.

So that was an interesting glimpse into the current view among states with respect to the International Court of Justice.

And I think it is significant that in our times where other international courts are sometimes quite heavily criticized that the ICJ is in a relatively comfortable and legitimate position.

I hope that this position can be maintained. I will try to do my best to contribute in that respect.

Now, do you think that changes are needed?

It's very difficult to change the statute of the ICJ.

And therefore, one should not speculate too much about changes, but of course at a lower level, changes occur anytime and should occur or should always be contemplated.

There is perhaps one aspect which was also part of the debate and not an unimportant part of the debate in the Security Council and the General Assembly this year, and which may interest the Moot Court students.

It's about the judicial fellowship program of the court.

The judges of the court have one regular assistant, an associate legal officer, and then they have one more assistant, but it is not a regular employee or official of the UN, but these 15 additional assistants are financed by major universities.

And there was a debate among states whether it is appropriate that some rich universities, mostly from rich countries, preselect, so to speak, the judicial fellows, the additional judicial fellows for the court, or whether it should not be better to have a trust fund,

so that there could be a publicly more accountable procedure, which would also give young people from states who are not privileged to have been or to be members of this university to become judicial fellows.

And so there's a process now going on with respect to this judicial fellowship program, and I'm mentioning this also to direct the attention of the Moot Court students to this possibility,

which is a very exclusive one, I admit, but I suppose also very interesting.

Thank you. Certainly the right audience to also provide this kind of information.

Professor Simma, you just mentioned that the ICJ has the highest solemnity.

And I was wondering, so how is everyday life at the ICJ? Are there any routines? Is it a full time job? Is it also for you personally? Is it different from sitting as an arbitrator?

Well, there are people, I mean, I think it's a bit a matter of personality and of character, whether you are somebody who enjoys solemnity, then maybe join the Catholic Church and try to become a cardinal.

So that is actually a position within the Church that the position of a judge was compared to by members of the Munich Law Faculty, for instance.