On 14 November, the International Labour Organization (ILO) requested an advisory opinion from the International Court of Justice (ICJ) on the interpretation of ILO Convention No. 87 with respect to the right to strike (see the ILO’s and the ICJ’s websites).

Beneath its technical formulation (‘Request for Advisory Opinion pursuant to Resolution Adopted by the Governing Body of the International Labour Organization at its 349th bis (Special Session)’), the move represents more than a search for a non-binding interpretation of an international treaty. As will be shown, this request is an urgent demand for solving a dispute between the non-governmental constituents of the ILO, on the right to strike, that is blocking the functioning of the Organization, through a pronouncement which is understood to be binding under ILO law.

Edoardo Stoppioni, Max Planck Institute Luxembourg In three judgments rendered on 5th October 2016, the International Court of Justice decided for the first time that it could not entertain an entire case for absence of dispute between the parties at the time of the application. In doing so, the Court