Nuclear disarmament falls within the purview of the purposes envisaged in Article 1 of the United Nations Charter. The International Court of Justice (ICJ) in 1996 delivered an advisory opinion on legality of use of nuclear weapons and has stated that the states in good faith must strive towards nuclear disarmament. In the Marshall Islands Cases, 20 years later the ICJ had the opportunity to address questions relating to cessation of the nuclear arms race and nuclear disarmament. However, the ICJ has failed to foster nuclear disarmament within the international community. The ICJ dismissed Marshall Islands’ application on jurisdictional grounds because there was no legal dispute between the parties. The ICJ in determining the existence of a dispute introduced a subjective awareness test. In this case note, we aim to examine the awareness test and its politico-legal effects in the development of international law. While doing so, we also argue that the test has further rendered the enforcement of nuclear disarmament obligations arduous.

中文翻译：

---

核裁军案件：建立管辖权的形式主义严谨是否妨碍诉诸司法？

核裁军属于《联合国宪章》第一条规定的宗旨范围之内。1996年，国际法院就使用核武器的合法性发表了咨询意见，并指出，真诚的国家必须努力实现核裁军。在20年后的马绍尔群岛案件中，国际法院有机会解决与停止核军备竞赛和核裁军有关的问题。但是，国际法院未能促进国际社会内部的核裁军。国际法院以管辖权为由驳回了马绍尔群岛的申请，因为双方之间没有法律争端。国际法院在确定是否存在争议时引入了主观意识测试。在这种情况下，我们旨在研究意识测验及其在国际法发展中的政治法律作用。在这样做的同时，我们还认为，该测试进一步使核裁军义务的执行变得艰巨。