To determine whether URC has broken the law, it is important to use sources such as international customs, treaties signed by URC and other counterparts, decisions of national and lower courts, scholarly writings, and finally the general principles of the law as understood by different civilized countries involved in the case and directly involved with URC.
Some of these sources can take priority over the others. Treaties and the principles of the laws can take priority over the other sources considering the fact that they are well detailed in constitutions and documented as structured laws that guide in determining whether a country has broken any law.
To understand the relevance and application of the law in URC, it is good to clearly study the details of the law and understand what countries it affects. In addition, it is important to consider the influence of the law in URC. If the influence and the involvement of URC are zero considering its region, then the law does not apply to URC.
The best options of settling disputes before using the international court of justice mainly include negotiations, enquiry, and mediation or conciliations. The three are diplomatic modes of settling disputes. If these methods fail, the best option that follows is the use of the International Court of Justice.
If the three methods fail, ICJ exercises jurisdiction over the case only if it is contentious and the states involved are members of the UN. The states should have agreed or should have previously agreed to work with the ruling of the court when issues arise. The case should be as well aligned with the reasoning of international law. The countries should have delivered a request to the United Nations General Assembly of the need to resolve the issue.
The political factors that can interfere with the ability to get URC to comply with the judgment mainly include the view of the URC government and the need to implement the path to work with the ruling. Instead of resettling the dispute, this political factor can catalyze the dispute and create more disputes with the favored country.