The ICJ statutes provide for a state party to a case, which doesn't have a judge

[tufguy]

The ICJ statutes provide for a state party to a case, which doesn't have a judge of its nationality on the bench, to choose a person to sit on an ad-hoc judge in that case.

Could you please tell its meaning to me? An extract from a newspaper. Especially this par "The ICJ statutes provide for a state party to a case".

 

[emsr2d2]

The ICJ statutes provide for a state party to a case, which doesn't have a judge of its nationality on the bench, to choose a person to sit on an ad-hoc judge in that case.

Could you please tell me its meaning​? [STRIKE]to me?[/STRIKE] It is an extract from a newspaper. [STRIKE]Especially[/STRIKE] This part: "The ICJ statutes provide for a state party to a case" is particularly confusing.

The ICJ statutes = the statutes of the ICJ
provide for = allow
a state = a state
party to case = which is one of the participants in a case

Does that help?

 

[GoesStation]

I don't think the state party appoints a person to sit on a judge. If the original says that, it's a typo. Does it perhaps say the person sits as a judge?

 

[tufguy]

The ICJ statutes = the statutes of the ICJ
provide for = allow
a state = a state
party to case = which is one of the participants in a case

Does that help?

Sorry but I couldn't understand this line "party to case = which is one of the participants in a case". "Party to a case" means one of the participants in a case.

 

[tufguy]

In your sentence, the 'which is' is understood. ems supplied the words for you to make the sentence easier to understand.

The ICJ statutes allow a state which is one of the participants in the case, which doesn't have a judge of its nationality on the bench, to choose a person to sit on an ad-hoc judge in that case.

I am confused about "to a case".

 

[emsr2d2]

If you are "party to" something, it means you have access to it, or are a participant in it, or are involved in some other way. It doesn't work in all contexts.

 

[GoesStation]

The ICJ statutes allow a state which is one of the participants in the case, which doesn't have a judge of its nationality on the bench, to choose a person to sit on an ad-hoc judge in that case.

"To sit on a judge" means that you physically sit atop the learned justice. The judge is unlikely to react well to such an action. The sentence should say "to sit as​ a judge".