The International Court and the Maintenance of Peace and Security: The Nicaragua Decision and the United States Response

purely objective manner. Now, however, a more subjective attitude may be justified. Clearly the extent to which a court may wish to distance itself from a revolution will depend upon all the circumstances. It might well be undesirable for a newly appointed expatriate puisne judge to approach such an issue otherwise than objectively; yet, where a judge has greater experience in and a greater allegiance to a country, he may be justified in taking certain wider considerations into account, such as the record of the pre-revolutionary government in relation to fundamental rights in comparison with the prospects held out by the new, revolutionary regime. Thus, although Mitchell v. D.P.P. is of interest as it establishes that popular support is an essential requirement of revolutionary legality, the more interventionist attitude of the Chief Justice, not without support in the Court of Appeal, may prove to be of greater relevance and value as a precedent in many Commonwealth countries.