Shahid Beheshti University Legal Research Quarterly 1024-0772 23 90 2020 08 22 The Legal Binding of the Statements of States’ Agent in the ICJ Proceedings The Legal Binding of the Statements of States’ Agent in the ICJ Proceedings 81 106 87493 10.29252/lawresearch.23.90.81 FA Sattar Azizi Law, Faculty of Humanities,Bu-Ali Sina University,Hamedan,Iran Siamak Karimi Lecturer at University of Tehran (Farabi Campus) Journal Article 2020 03 12 "The Agent" is a person appointed by a state to represent it in the proceedings before the International Court of Justice (ICJ). The agent leads the state delegation team before the ICJ and manages legal activities of the state during the course of litigation. The main function of the agent is to defend the appointing state. However, in proceeding before the ICJ, the agent may declare statements that its effect can leads to new obligation for the principal state. These statements are frequently declared without previous apparent consent of appointing state. The aim of this article is to assess these statements of the agent and to specify its legal effects. In other words, this essay tries to determine whether the agent of state before the ICJ is competent authority to declare new obligation for appointing state or not. There are conflicting theories to answer this question. However, it seems that legal logic gives a positive answer to this question. In addition, the case law of the ICJ and its predecessor, the PCIJ, confirm this approach. "The Agent" is a person appointed by a state to represent it in the proceedings before the International Court of Justice (ICJ). The agent leads the state delegation team before the ICJ and manages legal activities of the state during the course of litigation. The main function of the agent is to defend the appointing state. However, in proceeding before the ICJ, the agent may declare statements that its effect can leads to new obligation for the principal state. These statements are frequently declared without previous apparent consent of appointing state. The aim of this article is to assess these statements of the agent and to specify its legal effects. In other words, this essay tries to determine whether the agent of state before the ICJ is competent authority to declare new obligation for appointing state or not. There are conflicting theories to answer this question. However, it seems that legal logic gives a positive answer to this question. In addition, the case law of the ICJ and its predecessor, the PCIJ, confirm this approach. https://lawresearchmagazine.sbu.ac.ir/article_87493_98270134ec903f1a573bbd78da881e8c.pdf