ICJ Interview - Alexia Gheorghe

The prestigious International Court of Justice, known for its long robes and complicated trials, is becoming increasingly present at MUN conferences all over Romania and the rest of the world, and its vastly different procedure and niche subject matters make it a promising attraction for delegates that want to try something new. Or, if you’re like Alexia Gheorghe, you already consider it your area of expertise. Alexia has done MUN for 4 years, attending 14 conferences during this time, many of them in the ICJ, so she has agreed to sit down with me and offer some insight into her experience, albeit online and while navigating the highs and lows of Zoom and my poor Wi-Fi connection.

Q: To begin with, could you tell us a bit about your ICJ experience so far?

Alexia: I started my whole MUN journey as a judge in the ICJ committee. I was a very shy 7th grader, so I was just discovering the world of MUNs and it was the committee that made me fall in love with MUN as a whole. It was quite amazing for me because the attorneys were so involved in the debating; that’s what fascinated me the most, how the most experienced debaters were doing their thing. And then, a few MUNs later, I joined ICJ again in VianuMUN 2019, where I was the attorney of Croatia alongside another attorney. Then, I also chaired an ICJ at GalMUN 2020, which was a very interesting experience, because I believe, as an ICJ chairperson (or president actually), you get to be more involved in the debate than you would as a regular MUN chairperson.

Q: And why did you choose it for your first MUN, what attracted you to it from the very beginning? Alexia: I’ll be completely honest, I actually didn’t know that much about MUNs, so it was kind of a surprise for me when I attended my second MUN and found out that actually, ICJ is completely different to the other committees. I didn’t know the procedure and how it was going to be, but I liked the fact that you had no opinion to defend at first as a judge; you go there without knowing anything about the case or the two parties. You get there completely unprepared and without research, and then you get to decide on the spot who you believe and who you support as a judge, and who you vote for in the end.

At this point, Zoom had had enough of me and kicked me out :(. Nevertheless, we tried to persevere despite the technical issues.

That’s what felt or seemed easier to me, so I thought that as a young first timer, it would be nice for me to start this way. And I’m actually glad I did, because usually attorneys are more experienced debaters and they were really cool; I got to meet people that inspired me a lot at my first MUN.

Q: I feel like it’s really good that you started with this committee, but do you think that there is any difference in skills that you need to possess to be a president, an attorney, or a judge, and which one do you prefer out of the three?

Alexia: It’s very hard to choose, because they are so very different. The judge and the president do basically the same thing, because the president is also a judge. In the end, they vote as well, but don't ask as many questions. Your opinion still matters a lot, and you also influence other judges when you vote, since they kind of look up to you. As a judge or president, you have to be very impartial, and I think that that’s difficult, especially for people who already know something about the subject. It was very hard for me to only look at the facts that the attorneys provided me with and to vote only taking into consideration what they told me.

And as an attorney, it requires a lot of preparation. Even if you compare the job with a regular delegate, it’s still very different, because you have to work in a team; you work alongside one or two other attorneys. I got kind of lucky, because I ended up in a team with somebody I already knew and was friends with. But at some point this was also difficult because I had one strategy and he had another, and we had to decide which one to use to convince the judges.

Q: I understand. Which do you think was your favourite topic that you debated in the past and why?

Alexia: The one I debated when I was an attorney, so Croatia vs Serbia. I’m kind of biased, because it’s the one that I researched the most on and I know most about. I now find the first topic that I had as a judge very interesting too, Iran vs USA, but at that time I wasn’t that aware of as many things so maybe I wasn’t able to fully understand the conflict.

Q: Now that we’ve moved into talking more about topics that would be discussed in the ICJ, what impact does it have on the world today? I mean, for us MUNers it can kind of feel like they’re just some topics that we just came up with on the spot.

Alexia: It’s interesting because when I was president, we chose a topic that was still pending in the ICJ, that’s currently not solved. The judges and presidents weren’t influenced by the result of the case in the actual ICJ. Now, the committee itself creates solutions that aren’t as ideal for implementation as the other committees, but it shapes your way of thinking, and it makes you better understand how the ICJ works. I believe it shapes future leaders, to say so, or future attorneys, judges, in a way that other committees don’t, and it makes people impartial and good team-workers.

Q: So then, you know that there’s a bit of controversy with all of these cases taking so long to be judged and that maybe it’s not quite as impartial as it should be, so what can be done to improve the functioning of the real ICJ? Alexia: That’s an interesting question and I haven’t really thought about it. I would say that it’s very hard to change something. I know it sounds pessimistic, but changing the ICJ procedure to make it shorter isn’t something I think is really realistic. But the part with impartiality, that’s something that I believe could definitely be improved, maybe by making it more difficult to become a judge in the ICJ, so that hopefully people that are actually unbiased will preside.

Q: I get that. What lessons have you learned from your experience so far that you can use as advice for future judges, advocates, or even presidents?

Alexia: I’ve got two pieces of advice; one is for attorneys and one is for judges. To begin with, judges, the only advice I can give you is to try not to research before the conference. I know it sounds strange, I know you want to know what you’re going to talk about, but the attorneys, if they’re doing their job, are going to present the situation in the memorandum, and it’s the best way one can actually avoid being partial or biased. And then for attorneys, keep in mind that you are always right, no matter what the other attorneys say. Never lose your stance on the matter, because if you do, all your credibility is gone. Nobody is going to believe you ever again if you contradict yourself, or if you don’t pay attention to the very small details.

I have one more piece of advice actually, also for attorneys. At the end of the conference, what matters is if you manage to convince the judges. Even if the presidents say that you were the best delegate, at the end of the conference, the ICJ debate is won by the attorneys that manage to convince the judges. It’s strange, once again, but try to be nice to the judges: amongst yourselves, during the conference, and outside of it, because it turns out that people are influenced by how they’re treated.

Q: That’s actually really good advice! What would you say to someone to convince them to join the ICJ, if they’re reluctant or hesitant?

Alexia: If they are MUNers that have joined other committees before, I’d tell them that the ICJ is completely different; it has almost nothing to do with the others, except for the fact that you’re in a committee and you have placards and chairpersons, but it’s an entirely different experience. And to first timers, I’d say that it's an interesting way to start your MUN journey, because you have to decide and think only on the spot, and you don’t have to research a lot before, which could be a very big advantage.

Q: Yeah, I get that. Is there anything else that you want to add before we finish?

Alexia: I would really recommend the ICJ experience to any MUNer, be they first timers or not, because it’s very unique and interesting. That’s all!