The Uses of Dissenting Opinions of the International Court Of Justice on the ‘Changri- Lá’ Case by the Brazilian Supreme Court

Abstract

The present article aims to analyze the way in which individual and dissenting opinions of judges of the International Court of Justice can be used by other courts and tribunals for the development of international law. To this end, a case study is made of the references made by the Brazilian Supreme Court in the judgment of the "Changri-lá" case to the dissenting opinion of Judge Cançado Trindade in the case of the Jurisdictional Immunities of States (Germany v. Italy). It is identified, from this, two distinct forms of strategic use: a formal use - focused on the authority of the pronouncement - and a material use - focused on the reproduction of the legal reasoning of the opinion. It is concluded that the vote of Minister Edson Fachin outlines a material detachment in relation to the reasoning of the opinion, favoring its formal use. Finally, the implications of this strategy are questioned.