ICJ Advisory Opinion on Nuclear Weapons (1996)

As of 30 September 2026. Information only, not legal advice – see the disclaimer.

By resolution 49/75 K of 15 December 1994 the General Assembly asked the International Court of Justice whether the threat or use of nuclear weapons is in any circumstance permitted under international law. The request was communicated to the Court on 6 January 1995; according to the Court, 28 States filed written statements and 22 States took part in the oral proceedings held in October and November 1995. In its opinion of 8 July 1996 the Court examined the UN Charter rules on the use of force, international humanitarian law, neutrality, human rights and environmental law and specific treaties dealing with nuclear weapons. A separate request by the World Health Organization on the legality of the use of nuclear weapons in armed conflict (Case 93) was not answered: on the same day the Court found that it was not able to give the opinion requested by the WHO. The opinion's general statements on the Charter's use-of-force rules and on the applicability of humanitarian law to new weapons are referred to in debates on how international law applies to cyber operations. The written statement of the United Kingdom of 16 June 1995 describes the World Court Project, established in 1992 by the International Association of Lawyers Against Nuclear Arms (IALANA), the International Peace Bureau and International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War, as having campaigned for the WHO and General Assembly requests; the United Kingdom relied on this in arguing that the Court should decline to give an opinion.

• Charter rules on force (para. 39) – Articles 2(4), 42 and 51 of the Charter “do not refer to specific weapons. They apply to any use of force, regardless of the weapons employed.”
• Cardinal principles of humanitarian law (para. 78) – The Court identified the protection of the civilian population and civilian objects, with the distinction between combatants and non-combatants, and the prohibition of causing unnecessary suffering to combatants as the cardinal principles of humanitarian law.
• Application to new weapons (para. 86) – The Court rejected the view that humanitarian law does not apply to nuclear weapons because of their novelty; its principles apply to all forms of warfare and all kinds of weapons, “those of the past, those of the present and those of the future”.
• Neutrality (paras 88–89) – The principle of neutrality applies, subject to the relevant provisions of the Charter, to all international armed conflict, whatever type of weapons might be used.
• Dispositif, para. 105(1) – By thirteen votes to one, the Court decided to comply with the request.
• Para. 105(2)A (unanimously) – There is in neither customary nor conventional international law any specific authorization of the threat or use of nuclear weapons.
• Para. 105(2)B (eleven votes to three) – There is in neither customary nor conventional international law any comprehensive and universal prohibition of the threat or use of nuclear weapons as such.
• Para. 105(2)C (unanimously) – A threat or use of force by means of nuclear weapons that is contrary to Article 2(4) of the Charter and that fails to meet all the requirements of Article 51 is unlawful.
• Para. 105(2)D (unanimously) – A threat or use of nuclear weapons should also be compatible with the requirements of the international law applicable in armed conflict, particularly the principles and rules of humanitarian law, and with specific treaty obligations and other undertakings which expressly deal with nuclear weapons.
• Para. 105(2)E (seven votes to seven, by the President's casting vote) – The threat or use of nuclear weapons would generally be contrary to the rules of international law applicable in armed conflict, in particular humanitarian law; however, the Court could not conclude definitively whether the threat or use of nuclear weapons would be lawful or unlawful “in an extreme circumstance of self-defence, in which the very survival of a State would be at stake”.
• Para. 105(2)F (unanimously) – There exists an obligation to pursue in good faith and bring to a conclusion negotiations leading to nuclear disarmament in all its aspects under strict and effective international control.

The statement in para. 39 that the Charter's rules on force apply “regardless of the weapons employed” is cited in expert and academic works on cyber operations. According to M. N. Schmitt (Harvard International Law Journal Online, 2012), the International Group of Experts that drafted the Tallinn Manual applied this reasoning by analogy and concluded that the use of a computer rather than a more traditional weapon has no bearing on whether an operation amounts to a use of force (see tallinn_manual). The International Committee of the Red Cross, in its position paper “International humanitarian law and cyber operations during armed conflicts” (28 November 2019), relies on para. 86 to support its view that humanitarian law applies to cyber operations during armed conflict. The GGE and OEWG reports on the application of international law to ICTs reflect differing State views on the application of humanitarian law to cyber operations (see ict_norms).

• 2025-12-01: The General Assembly adopted resolution 80/33, “Follow-up to the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice on the Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons”, by 127 votes to 35, with 16 abstentions; resolutions under this title are adopted annually (A/RES/80/33; UN Project voting record).

• charter
• icj_nicaragua
• ap1
• tallinn_manual
• ict_norms
• nc3

• ICJ, Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons, case page, accessed 2026-09-30
• ICJ, Advisory Opinion of 8 July 1996, accessed 2026-09-30
• UN, Summary of the Advisory Opinion of 8 July 1996, accessed 2026-09-30
• ICJ, Written statement of the United Kingdom (16 June 1995), accessed 2026-09-30
• M. N. Schmitt, International Law in Cyberspace: The Koh Speech and Tallinn Manual Juxtaposed, Harvard International Law Journal Online 54 (2012), accessed 2026-09-30
• ICRC, International humanitarian law and cyber operations during armed conflicts (2019), International Review of the Red Cross No. 913, accessed 2026-09-30
• UN Project, A/RES/80/33 voting record, accessed 2026-09-30

• 2026-09-30: Entry created.