 This week is entitled Seeking Justice. It is an ambitious title, and at the same time it conveys the idea that justice is still a task ahead when it relates to international law. And let me give a few words of explanation about this title and about the topics of this week. After having studied who makes international law during the second week of this course, after having closely considered how international law is made and how it is applied during respectively weeks 3, 4 and 5, and also after having studied in the course of last week what are the legal consequences in terms of international responsibility, what are the consequences for those who make international law when they do not respect it, it is time to take the latter question one step further, see how responsibility can be enforced and turn to an issue which is inseparable from the idea of any law that is justice. Justice for breaches of international law is one of the most crucial issues when addressing the effectiveness of international law and indeed much of the criticism about international law is that it very often fails to be real and to be effective, that international law is all nice and well on paper, but that it crucially lacks redress mechanisms when it is not respected and furthermore that double standard exists, that justice is not the same for all which actually is the very negation of the idea of justice. Unfortunately there is undoubtedly some truth in that criticism and it would be simply wrong and dishonest to pretend that international law is a perfect system and that international justice can always be achieved and is always achieved. But it would also be wrong to consider that international law is just a fiction that it is never applied and that its violations are never sanctioned and an honest assessment of reality requires both to admit that a lot of progress has been achieved over the last decades while at the same time to understand why it is very difficult if not impossible to have an international law justice system which is as efficient, as fair, effective and impartial as the one that exists in some rare national jurisdictions around the world. And it is also important to recognize that it is often the failures or the lack of justice at the national level that will stir the desire for international justice or for trying to find justice in foreign courts. So let me submit to you that it would be a mistake if the quest for justice in this world were to concentrate all hopes at the international level and stop there without addressing the immense needs of justice at the domestic level in many countries around the world and saying that I'm not contesting that international law has something to say about the obligation for states to provide judicial redress nor am I contesting that in certain circumstances international or foreign justice adequately remedies or supplements the lack of justice at the domestic level and as we shall see this is sometimes the case. But always and immediately jumping at the international level to improve it without first demanding much needed constitutional improvements could unduly encourage to shirk responsibilities while at the same time running the risk of back clashes and leading to even higher disappointments in a certain way. And of course this course cannot address the challenges facing domestic justice in many parts of the world and how to remedy them. But in order to have a sound judgment about justice in international law and about the relationship between justice and international law it is important to look into the matter a bit closer and see what are the redress mechanisms that are available, how they function and why they have limits. Seeking justice for breaches of international law can be done at the national level or at the international level and at both levels it can relate to criminal justice or not. Because of the limited scope of this course and because of its introductory character it will not be possible to cover all international courts and tribunals nor to detail all the legal issues and all the legal hurdles that may result from bringing claims for alleged breaches of international law before domestic courts in the various jurisdictions around the world. Therefore I shall concentrate on some essential elements. At the international level I'll address on the one hand what is usually called in textbooks the pacific settlement of disputes. After having said a few words about political means of settlement will quickly turn to arbitration before paying more attention to the international court of justice and today there are of course other standing courts and tribunals in the world and the course will name some of them but will take the ICJ as a model. It is the oldest standing international court it has a general jurisdiction not limited to a specific field of international law nor to a certain type of disputes and as you know the ICJ is the principal judicial organ of the UN and that is why we're going to look at it deeper. On the other hand always at the international level but turning now to criminal justice some basic elements about the international criminal court will be surveyed. Now at the domestic level and because the organization of the judiciary and the powers of national courts vary to a great extent from country to country I shall concentrate on the international law hurdles that exists when bringing a claim in domestic court against a state a foreign state or an international organization or when starting criminal proceedings against foreign officials. In other words immunities and the customary rules of international law relating to immunities will be studied.