## Facts

- The Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) filed proceedings against Uganda alleging unlawful use of force, invasion and occupation of Congolese territory, and support for rebel groups.
- The DRC asserted that hostilities and Ugandan military presence affected multiple provinces and caused serious harm, including civilian killings, property destruction, and interference with the country’s economy and resources.
- Both states had declarations accepting the International Court of Justice’s compulsory jurisdiction under Article 36(2) of the ICJ Statute.
- While the case was pending, the DRC requested provisional measures under Article 41 seeking immediate orders to halt Ugandan military activities and related violations on Congolese territory.
- The ICJ held oral hearings and issued an order indicating provisional measures without deciding the merits.

## Issues

1. Whether the Court had prima facie jurisdiction based on the parties’ Article 36(2) declarations sufficient to indicate provisional measures.
2. Whether the rights asserted (sovereignty, territorial integrity, and protection under human rights and humanitarian law) were plausible and capable of interim protection.
3. Whether ongoing hostilities created urgency and a risk of irreparable prejudice, including through escalation of the dispute.

## Decision

- The Court found prima facie jurisdiction adequate to consider interim relief.
- The Court indicated binding provisional measures directed to both parties, requiring each to:
  - prevent and refrain from actions, including armed action, that could prejudice the other party’s rights in the eventual merits decision; and
  - prevent and refrain from actions that could aggravate or extend the dispute before the Court.
- The Court further ordered both parties to take all necessary steps to comply with their international-law obligations, including ensuring full respect for fundamental human rights and applicable international humanitarian law.
- The Court declined to order specific operational directives such as immediate troop withdrawal, and reserved all matters not necessary to decide the provisional-measures request.

## Legal Principles

- Provisional measures may be indicated where the Court has prima facie jurisdiction and the applicant’s claimed rights are plausible and linked to the measures sought.
- Urgency exists when ongoing conduct presents a real risk of irreparable prejudice, including loss of life and destruction of property, before the Court can decide the merits.
- The Court may order measures aimed at non-aggravation and preservation of rights and may impose obligations on both parties when necessary to prevent escalation and protect the judicial process.
- Orders requiring respect for international humanitarian law and fundamental human rights may be appropriate interim relief when armed hostilities threaten protected interests.

## Conclusion

The ICJ issued symmetrical, binding provisional measures requiring both the DRC and Uganda to refrain from conduct that could prejudice rights or aggravate the dispute and to ensure respect for human rights and humanitarian law while the Court considered jurisdiction, admissibility, and the merits.


Armed Activities on the Territory of the Congo (Dem. Rep. Congo v. Uganda), 2000 I.C.J. 111 (Int’l Ct. J. 2000)