SINGAPORE / NEW YORK — November 3, 2026
Singapore is making an unprecedented push for a seat on the world’s highest court, with Foreign Affairs Minister Vivian Balakrishnan and Law Minister Edwin Tong in New York to support Ambassador for International Law Rena Lee as voting begins for five positions on the International Court of Justice (ICJ).
Lee, 57, is the first Singaporean ever nominated for election to the ICJ. If successful, she would become the first female ICJ judge from Southeast Asia and one of the first judges from a small state in the region to serve on the 15-member World Court.
The election begins on Nov. 3 at United Nations headquarters in New York, with the five successful candidates elected to nine-year terms covering 2027 to 2036.
For Singapore, however, the contest is about much more than one diplomatic appointment.
It is a test of whether a small state can translate decades of advocacy for international law into a direct role inside one of the world’s most important judicial institutions.
Singapore’s Top Ministers Are Personally Supporting the Bid
Balakrishnan and Tong travelled to New York specifically to support Lee’s candidature.
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Ministry of Law said the Singapore Government fully supports her election and that the two ministers would host a reception in her support.
Their presence reflects the importance Singapore places on the contest.
The ICJ is the United Nations’ principal judicial organ. It resolves legal disputes between states and provides advisory opinions on questions of international law referred to it by authorised UN bodies.
The court has 15 judges, with elections held every three years to fill five seats. Each judge serves a nine-year term.
Singapore is therefore not simply seeking recognition for Lee.
It is seeking a position at the institution where major questions involving territory, maritime boundaries, treaties and state responsibility can ultimately be decided.
Why Singapore Wants a Seat on the ICJ
For a large power, international law is one instrument among many available for advancing national interests.
For a small state such as Singapore, it can be much more fundamental.
Singapore has consistently argued that international rules help ensure that countries cannot simply use size or military strength to dictate outcomes.
Tong made that point directly during his address to the UN General Assembly on Oct. 29, arguing that international law and the UN Charter are critical in ensuring that “might does not make right.”
That philosophy is not new.
WWC ONE MEDIA recently examined Singapore’s broader approach to international institutions in “Singapore Pushes Stronger Multilateralism and Global AI Rules at UN General Assembly.” The article explored how Balakrishnan has argued that international rules remain essential even as geopolitical competition, conflicts and technological change place increasing pressure on the existing multilateral system.
The Rena Lee campaign fits directly into that broader diplomatic strategy.
Rena Lee Brings More Than Three Decades of International-Law Experience
Lee’s professional background is one of Singapore’s strongest arguments for her candidature.
She has spent more than three decades working across international law, government, diplomacy and negotiations.
Her areas of expertise include:
- Law of the sea
- Environmental law
- International humanitarian law
- Human rights law
- International negotiations
- Government legal advisory work
She also served as Singapore’s Ambassador for International Law.
One of her most significant international achievements came through the United Nations negotiations on marine biodiversity beyond national jurisdiction.
As president of the UN Intergovernmental Conference on Marine Biodiversity of Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction, known as the BBNJ process, Lee helped steer five years of negotiations that culminated in the adoption of the landmark high-seas agreement in 2023.
That experience is particularly relevant because the law of the sea has long been central to Singapore’s international legal interests.
Her Maritime Experience Could Matter on the World Court
Singapore’s geographic position makes maritime law especially important.
The country sits at the crossroads of some of the world’s busiest shipping routes and has consistently defended freedom of navigation and predictable international rules governing maritime activity.
Lee’s experience negotiating the high-seas treaty therefore gives her a professional record that goes beyond academic legal expertise.
She has experience bringing countries with competing interests toward a negotiated outcome.
That could be valuable on a court whose cases often involve disputes in which countries have deeply conflicting interpretations of international law.
Singapore Already Has a Major ICJ Case in Its History
Singapore is not a stranger to the World Court.
In 2003, Singapore and Malaysia jointly submitted their dispute over Pedra Branca, Middle Rocks and South Ledge to the ICJ.
Five years later, the court ruled that sovereignty over Pedra Branca belonged to Singapore, while sovereignty over Middle Rocks belonged to Malaysia. South Ledge was determined to belong to whichever state owned the territorial waters in which it was located.
The case remains one of the most important examples of Singapore using international law to resolve a major sovereignty dispute peacefully.
That history gives Singapore a particularly direct connection to the institution it is now seeking to join.
The Pedra Branca Case Explains Why the Election Matters
The 2008 Pedra Branca judgment demonstrated how international courts can provide a legal mechanism for disputes that could otherwise become politically difficult or destabilising.
The ICJ’s ruling was final and binding on the parties.
Singapore’s successful outcome over Pedra Branca also showed the importance of evidence, historical records, state conduct and legal argument in determining territorial sovereignty.
For Singapore, having a judge from the country on the ICJ bench would not mean that Singapore would receive favourable treatment in future cases.
ICJ judges are required to exercise independent judgment.
Instead, Singapore’s argument is that Lee’s experience could contribute to the court while giving Southeast Asia and small states greater representation in the institution.
Lee Would Not Be Singapore’s Advocate on the Court
This point is crucial.
If Lee were elected, she would not serve as Singapore’s representative in the sense of advocating for Singapore’s national interests.
ICJ judges are expected to act independently and impartially.
The court’s institutional design deliberately separates the role of a judge from that of a national government representative.
CNA noted that ICJ judges are required to make a solemn declaration to act impartially and conscientiously.
Therefore, Singapore’s campaign should not be understood as an attempt to place a national advocate inside the court.
Rather, it is an attempt to have a Singaporean international-law expert participate in the development and application of international law at the highest judicial level.
The Competition Is Serious
Lee is one of 10 candidates competing for five seats.
According to publicly available nomination figures reported by The Straits Times and CNA, the leading candidates by national-group nominations include:
- Dapo Akande — United Kingdom: 43
- François Alabrune — France: 40
- Rena Lee — Singapore: 33
- Phoebe N. Okowa — Kenya: 26
- Jin-Hyun Paik — South Korea: 21
The nomination figures are useful indicators of support, but they do not guarantee election.
The actual election will depend on voting in both the UN General Assembly and the UN Security Council.
The Asian Seat Could Be Especially Competitive
One of the biggest challenges for Lee is the informal regional balance traditionally associated with the ICJ.
Although the court’s statute does not establish formal regional quotas, the composition of the bench has historically reflected broad geographical representation.
The Asia-Pacific group is generally allocated three seats on the 15-member court.
This election is particularly competitive because Lee is facing candidates from countries including Jordan and South Korea who have substantial international judicial experience.
Jordan’s Mahmoud Daifallah Hmoud is already serving as an ICJ judge.
South Korea’s Jin-Hyun Paik is a former judge and former president of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea.
Lee therefore has to persuade governments that her experience as a negotiator, diplomat and international-law practitioner is as valuable to the court as traditional judicial experience.
Her Biggest Strength May Be Consensus-Building
That is where Lee’s BBNJ experience could become especially important.
The high-seas treaty negotiations involved countries with very different economic interests, legal traditions and strategic priorities.
Reaching consensus required compromise.
It also required maintaining trust among participants who did not necessarily agree on the underlying policy questions.
Supporters of Lee argue that these experiences demonstrate skills that are highly relevant to judicial work: neutrality, careful listening, legal analysis and the ability to bridge competing positions.
Law Minister Tong has highlighted precisely those qualities, describing Lee as someone capable of bringing breadth, fairness, integrity and attention to different perspectives to the court.
Singapore’s Campaign Is Part of a Bigger Diplomatic Strategy
The ICJ campaign is not occurring in isolation.
Singapore has spent years promoting itself as a strong supporter of multilateralism and international law.
Balakrishnan has repeatedly argued that small and medium-sized countries depend on functioning international institutions because they cannot rely solely on economic or military power.
That position was again visible during his September UN General Assembly visit.
WWC ONE MEDIA reported at the time that Balakrishnan was pushing for stronger multilateralism and global rules on emerging technologies while also defending international law and open sea lanes.
The Rena Lee candidacy therefore represents a practical extension of a diplomatic philosophy Singapore has been promoting for years.
Why the Election Comes at a Difficult Time for the International System
The ICJ election takes place during a period of serious pressure on international institutions.
Wars and territorial disputes continue to challenge the UN system.
Major powers increasingly disagree over the interpretation and enforcement of international rules.
The credibility of multilateral institutions has also been questioned when states disregard or contest international decisions.
For smaller countries, that creates a difficult dilemma.
They may have fewer military and economic tools with which to protect their interests, making international law more important.
But international law is only useful if states continue to recognise the legitimacy of the institutions responsible for interpreting and applying it.
That is why Singapore is placing such emphasis on strengthening the rules-based system.
The ICJ Is Different From the International Criminal Court
The distinction is important because the two institutions are often confused.
The International Court of Justice deals primarily with disputes between states and advisory questions involving international law.
The International Criminal Court, by contrast, prosecutes individuals for certain international crimes.
The ICJ therefore does not function as a criminal court trying individual defendants.
Its cases can nevertheless have enormous geopolitical consequences because they may involve sovereignty, borders, maritime rights, treaty obligations and state responsibility.
Recent ICJ Cases Show How Much Is at Stake
The court has recently dealt with some of the world’s most politically sensitive legal questions.
Its work has included issues involving climate change, humanitarian assistance and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
That means an ICJ judge may be required to consider disputes with consequences far beyond the courtroom.
A judge must interpret international law while operating within a deeply political international environment.
For Singapore, Lee’s experience working between law and diplomacy could therefore be particularly relevant.
What a Lee Victory Would Mean for Southeast Asia
If Lee wins, the symbolism would extend beyond Singapore.
She would become the first female ICJ judge from Southeast Asia.
Southeast Asia has historically had limited representation on the court, with the last judge from the region being former Philippine Chief Justice Cesar Bengzon, who served from 1967 to 1976.
A successful Lee candidacy would therefore represent a significant regional milestone.
It would also give Southeast Asia a stronger voice in an institution dealing with questions increasingly relevant to the region, including maritime boundaries, environmental obligations and international disputes.
For Singapore, It Is Also About Small-State Representation
The Singapore Government has repeatedly framed the campaign through the lens of small-state interests.
Singapore argues that international law provides a framework in which countries of different sizes can interact according to common rules.
That principle becomes especially important when major powers are involved.
A world in which powerful states can simply override legal norms would leave small countries more vulnerable.
A functioning international legal system gives smaller countries another avenue for protecting their sovereignty and interests.
That is one reason Singapore has invested so heavily in international legal expertise.
The Vote Will Not Be a Simple Popularity Contest
The election mechanism itself makes the contest complicated.
Candidates must secure an absolute majority in both the UN General Assembly and Security Council.
That means receiving strong support in one institution is not enough.
The process can require multiple rounds of voting until the same five candidates obtain the necessary majorities in both bodies.
As a result, national-group nominations provide only part of the picture.
Diplomatic relationships, regional support, candidate qualifications and voting strategies can all matter.
What Happens If Lee Is Elected?
If Lee wins, she would begin a nine-year term in 2027.
Her responsibilities would include hearing cases submitted by states and participating in decisions and advisory opinions involving international law.
Her election would also give Singapore a direct institutional connection to one of the most important judicial bodies in the UN system.
But the government would not control her decisions.
Once elected, she would serve as an independent judge.
That independence is fundamental to the legitimacy of the court.
What Happens If She Loses?
A defeat would not necessarily mean Singapore’s international-law strategy had failed.
The country would still have its diplomatic and legal expertise, its participation in international institutions and its established record of supporting peaceful dispute settlement.
But a loss would mean Singapore had missed an opportunity to place one of its most experienced international lawyers on the ICJ bench.
It would also delay Southeast Asia’s return to direct representation on the court.
The Bigger Test for Singapore
The Rena Lee campaign ultimately reflects a larger question about Singapore’s place in the international system.
Can a small country remain influential by investing in rules, institutions and diplomacy while major powers compete for greater strategic influence?
Singapore’s answer has historically been yes.
The country has built its foreign policy around the idea that predictable rules and strong international institutions provide essential protection for a small, highly connected state.
That approach is now being tested in a world where international institutions face greater political pressure.
The ICJ election is therefore more than a personnel decision.
It is a vote on the kind of international system Singapore believes should survive.
The Bigger Question: Can Singapore Break Through?
Rena Lee enters the election with substantial international-law experience, a strong record in maritime negotiations and the full backing of Singapore’s government.
But the contest remains competitive.
She must secure majorities in both the General Assembly and Security Council, while navigating regional dynamics and competition from candidates with their own impressive judicial and diplomatic credentials.
If she wins, Singapore will gain its first judge on the World Court, Southeast Asia will gain a historic female representative and the country’s long-standing commitment to international law will take on a new institutional dimension.
If she loses, Singapore will still have demonstrated its willingness to compete for a place at the centre of global legal governance.
The bigger question now is whether Singapore’s reputation as a champion of international law — combined with Rena Lee’s record as a negotiator and legal expert — will be enough to secure the country’s first-ever seat on the International Court of Justice.
