The Geneva Protocol, by David Hunter Miller

CHAPTER XX. 113
by the Council.
In any event, as in the case where the Council alone intervenes, a definitive and binding solution of the
dispute is reached.
7.--DOMESTIC JURISDICTION OF STATES.
Article 5.
The present Protocol in no way derogates from the rule of Article 15, paragraph 8, of the Covenant, which
protects national sovereignty.
In order that there might be no doubt on this point, it appeared advisable to say so expressly.
Before the Council, whatever be the stage in the procedure set up by the Protocol at which the Council
intervenes, the provision referred to applies without any modification.
The rule is applied also to both cases of compulsory arbitration. If one of the States parties to the dispute
claims that the dispute or part thereof arises out of a matter which by international law is solely within its
jurisdiction, the arbitrators must on this point take the advice of the Permanent Court of International Justice
through the medium of the Council, for the question thus put in issue is a legal question upon which a judicial
opinion should be obtained.
The Court will thus have to give a decision as to whether the question in dispute is governed by international
law or whether it falls within the domestic jurisdiction of the State concerned. Its functions will be limited to
this point and the question will in any event be referred back to the arbitrators. But, unlike other opinions
requested of the Court in the course of a compulsory arbitration--opinions which for the arbitrators are purely
{184} advisory--in the present case the opinion of the Court is compulsory in the sense that, if the Court has
recognised that the question in dispute falls entirely within the domestic jurisdiction of the State concerned,
the arbitrators will simply have to register this conclusion in their award. It is only if the Court holds that the
question in dispute is governed by international law that the arbitrators will again take the case under
consideration in order to give a decision upon its substance.
The compulsory character of the Court's opinion, in this case, increases the importance of the double question
referred to above, in connection with Article 4, relating to the calling-in of national judges, and the application
of Article 24 of the Statute of the Court in matters of advisory procedure.
While the principle of Article 15, paragraph 8, of the Covenant is maintained, it has been necessary, in order
to make its application more flexible, to call in aid the rule contained in Article 11 of the Covenant, which
makes it the duty of the League of Nations, in the event of war or a threat of war, to "take any action that may
be deemed wise and effective to safeguard the peace of nations," and obliges the Secretary-General to
summon forthwith a meeting of the Council on the request of any Member of the League. It is in this way
understood that when it has been recognised that a dispute arises out of a matter which is solely within the
domestic jurisdiction of one of the parties, that party or its opponent will be fully entitled to call upon the
Council or the Assembly to act.
There is nothing new in this simple reference to Article 11. It leaves unimpaired the right of the Council to
take such action as it may deem wise and effectual to safeguard the peace of nations. It does not confer new
powers of functions on either the Council or the Assembly. Both these organs of the League simply retain the
powers now conferred upon them by the Covenant.
In order to dispel any doubt which may arise from the {185} parallel which has been drawn between Article