Abstract

The significance of temporary restraining orders, sometimes known as provisional measures of protection, is rising in international law. These steps are intended to safeguard the parties' rights until a dispute is settled definitively. It has been disputed whether the Court has the authority to issue temporary remedies since the Permanent Court of International Justice was established in 1921 until it was replaced by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in 1945. By ruling that it imposes binding responsibilities on the parties and that non-compliance might result in an instance of state responsibility and a cause of action, the ICJ put an end to that issue in 2001. However, there have still been lingering doubts on the overall efficacy of such interim orders. This article makes an attempt to understand the binding value of such measures and their efficacy.

Keywords