Yusuf criticizes the court's early termination

Abdulqawi Ahmed YusufJudge of the International Court of Justice

Condemned

Yusuf rejects the order, arguing that the parties were denied a proper hearing on jurisdiction and that the court conflated distinct procedural tests.

“It is a deeply flawed decision.”

Original text

Read the original text (opens in a new tab)Dissenting opinion of Judge YusufIntroductory remarks; sections on jurisdiction and removal from the General List

Original text

Read the original text (opens in a new tab)Sudan v. United Arab Emirates: Order of May 5, 2025Paragraphs 1-10 and 21-37, especially 35-37

Case updates

Want the next important update?

Follow this case and get an email when an important development changes the record.

Important updates only. Free. Confirm your email to start. Unsubscribe anytime. How we handle your email.

The Peace Palace in The Hague, with its tower, lawn and entrance in view.
Credit: Cbliu / Wikimedia Commons (CC BY-SA 4.0)

Where this statement fits

UAE wins dismissal of Sudan's ICJ case; dissenting judges dispute early closure

The ICJ rejected Sudan's request for interim measures and ended its case against the UAE because of the UAE's reservation to the Genocide Convention's jurisdiction clause. The UAE welcomed the outcome. Dissenting judges argued that the court should have heard jurisdictional arguments more fully before closing the case.

Read the full case

Source and context

Original text

Dissenting opinion of Judge Yusuf (opens in a new tab)Introductory remarks; sections on jurisdiction and removal from the General List

About this source

Yusuf opposes the order and argues that the parties were denied the proper opportunity to be heard on contested jurisdiction.

Archived copy (opens in a new tab)

Original text

Sudan v. United Arab Emirates: Order of May 5, 2025 (opens in a new tab)Paragraphs 1-10 and 21-37, especially 35-37

About this source

The order records the competing jurisdictional submissions, rejects provisional measures 14-2 and removes the case from the General List 9-7. It makes no finding on the merits of Sudan's allegations.

Archived copy (opens in a new tab)

Before the quotation

He voted against both operative paragraphs of the order.

After the quotation

His dissent argues for the jurisdictional procedures specified by the court's Statute and Rules. It is not a merits finding on the alleged support.

How this statement is classified

Condemned

The label describes this statement's response within the context above.

Why this label?

Yusuf expressly criticizes the decision to resolve jurisdiction and end the case at this procedural stage.

Recorded on
Published here

More from this case

Read the full case

Share or embed this statement

Quote card: Abdulqawi Ahmed Yusuf, Yusuf criticizes the court's early terminationDownload image (PNG)

The embed keeps its attribution link to The Dispute Index. Credit the image to The Dispute Index and link to the statement page.

Cite this record

Publisher
The Dispute Index
Title
Yusuf criticizes the court's early termination
First published
Last updated
Permalink
https://disputeindex.com/events/8297-yusuf-rejects-the-order-arguing-that-the-parties

Last updated marks the most recent saved version of this published statement.

The Dispute Index. "Yusuf criticizes the court's early termination". First published: 2026-11-06. Last updated: 2026-11-06. https://disputeindex.com/events/8297-yusuf-rejects-the-order-arguing-that-the-parties