Chicago Journal of International Law


This Article attempts to do two things. First, it seeks to specify how inter- tribunal dialogues actually occur. Second, it explores whether dialogues or deliberations should properly raise identitarian anxieties. The Article concludes that identitarian anxieties are premised on faulty assumptions about how identities-communal or national-emerge. The Article further suggests that inter-tribunal dialogues might be a better way to understand the evolving identity of the nation-state which continues to occur in the context of a still-evolving international public space. One will not understand the nature of national identities if one does not fully understand the nature of international public space and vice versa. Identities-individual as well as communal-are shaped in the process of engaging the other. And as indicated below, nations, like individuals, are always growing, always becoming; they are never fully achieved. As such, inter-tribunal dialogues contribute to the development and depth of the community of character rather than undermining it. The Article also argues that refusing to engage others not only will lead to partial understanding of self, but also will result in diminished influence in the shaping of the international public space in which one inevitably will be forced to engage. The Article proceeds as follows. Section II discusses the salient features of inter-tribunal deliberative processes. Section III evaluates the goals of inter- tribunal deliberation and how deliberative processes are structured to try to achieve those goals.