The International Court of Justice (ICJ) on Tuesday ruled that it has jurisdiction to hear competing racial discrimination allegations raised by Armenia and Azerbaijan against each other under the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination. Armenia alleges that Azerbaijan has committed acts of murder, torture and inhuman treatment, arbitrary detention, and enforced disappearances, while Azerbaijan accuses Armenia of ethnic cleansing.

Regarding Armenia’s complaint against Azerbaijan, the court found that negotiations over the claims between the two countries had become deadlocked. The court concluded that a bilaterally negotiated settlement is not “realistically possible” between Azerbaijan and Armenia, citing their unchanged positions after the negotiations. Accordingly, the court held that Armenia has genuinely attempted to resolve the dispute by negotiation and satisfied the precondition under Article 22 of the convention.

The court also rejected Azerbaijan’s contention that Armenia failed to demonstrate that the alleged acts were based on the alleged victims’ national or ethnic origin. The court affirmed that state parties remain obligated under the convention even in an armed conflict and held that Armenia’s allegation is capable of constituting racial discrimination. Accordingly, the court will hear Armenia’s complaint relating to Azerbaijan’s alleged convention violations.

On the other hand, the court will also hear Azerbaijan’s ethnic cleansing claims. The court accepted that Azerbaijan’s contention relating to Armenia’s alleged placement of landmines and booby traps could be evidence of the alleged practices of ethnic cleansing, even though the contention in itself may not constitute a violation of the convention.

Nonetheless, the court will not hear Azerbaijan’s claims based on alleged acts that occurred before the convention came into force in the country on September 15, 1996. The court held that even though Armenia has been a party to the convention since July 1993, it did not impose obligations on Armenia towards Azerbaijan until 1996.

The court also dropped Azerbaijan’s allegations relating to environmental harm, finding that the alleged acts were commercially motivated or neglect and mismanagement of the environment instead of a differential treatment motivated based on ethnic background.

Hostilities between Armenia and Azerbaijan occurred due to the competing sovereignty claims in the region, which Armenia calls Nagorno-Karabakh and Azerbaijan calls Garabagh. There was once a ceasefire agreement in May 1994. However, armed conflicts erupted once again in September 2020, and the countries have held ceasefire negotiations.

The court previously ordered provisional measures on Azerbaijan to fulfill its convention obligations by allowing Armenians to return to or leave the disputed region. The order comes after 100,000 Armenians fled the region following the disbandment of the ethnic-Armenian government in the region. The court has also ordered both countries to prevent the incitement of racial hatred against Armenians and Azerbaijanis.