The International Court of Justice (ICJ) has issued its decision regarding Azerbaijan's preliminary objections to Armenia's claim. The objection refers to the Convention on the Elimination of All Kinds of Discrimination.

Azerbaijan had submitted two objections, arguing that there had been negotiations on the subject of the dispute and that some of Armenia's demands were beyond the ICJ's jurisdiction.

The ICJ noticed that the parties started communication. It considers that the discussions between the parties are part of the negotiations regarding the possible resolution of the dispute. The parties met twice in 2021. However, the positions of the parties remain unchanged; Azerbaijan rejects the demands of Armenia. At the same time, the court sees that in the same year, Azerbaijan presented concrete proposals to Armenia. Against this background, the Court finds unconvincing Azerbaijan's assurances that the continuation of negotiations can produce results, and finds that Armenia has made sufficient efforts to resolve the dispute.

The negotiations became fruitless because it was not possible to resolve the existing dispute, and the court considers that the objection presented by Azerbaijan should be rejected.

The second objection refers to the substantive functions of the Court. At this stage, the Court must be convinced that the alleged acts can be considered a violation of the aforesaid convention. In order for the claims to fall within the scope of the Court's jurisdiction, the claimant must establish that it is discriminatory and the purpose is to eliminate or reduce the rights of a group of people—in this case, ethnic Armenians.

The ICJ examined whether the alleged acts against an ethnic group specifically related to ethnic origin and whether the crimes were committed for that reason. As a result, the Court determined that Armenia's claims were within the scope of the Court's functions and could be considered discrimination on ethnic grounds within the scope of the Convention. At the same time, the Court considers that the evidence presented by Armenia cannot be examined at this stage and should be considered at another stage.

The ICJ recorded that Azerbaijan did not object to Armenia's claims regarding public hate speech in Azerbaijan.

The ICJ decided that Azerbaijan's second objection should also be rejected. The court decided to reject Azerbaijan's first objections—by 15 votes to 1—and the preliminary objections—by 16 votes to 1. The court decided that it has the right to examine the claim of Armenia against Azerbaijan.