Under Article 35, any country is allowed to bring a dispute to the attention of the UN Security Council or the General Assembly.
In such cases non-recognition regimes or other sanctions can be implemented under the provisions of the laws of the individual member states.
"[15] The repertory cites the remarks made by the representative of Israel, Mr Eban, regarding a Chapter VI resolution.
[16] Secretary General Boutros Boutros-Ghali related that during a press conference his remarks about a "non-binding" resolution started a dispute.
It said that the Secretary had only meant to say that Chapter VI contains no means of ensuring compliance and that resolutions adopted under its terms are not enforceable.
When the Secretary finally submitted the question to the UN Legal Advisor, the response was a long memo the bottom line of which read, in capital letters: "NO SECURITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION CAN BE DESCRIBED AS UNENFORCEABLE."
"[17] Prof. Jared Schott explains that "Though certainly possessing judicial language, without the legally binding force of Chapter VII, such declarations were at worst political and at best advisory".
Resolution 260(1970) was indeed adopted in terms of Chapter VII, even though the ICJ went to some length to give the opposite impression.