任何聯合國會員國均是「國際法院規約」當事國，並可依單方聲明、雙邊協議或多邊條約等方式，接受國際法院之管轄權。非聯合國會員國亦可依類似方式而具備國際法院之當事國適格性。但是國際法院最近判決卻限縮其獨立管轄權之範疇，因而此後實質上非聯合國會員國具備國際法院當事國適格性之方式只有單方行為。對於台灣而言，成為「國際法院規約」當事國或是接受國際法院管轄權應該至少有兩項意義，一者是確認國家之主權，另一者是國際爭端之和平解決。只要是一主權國家，即使是非聯合國會員國，亦可成為「國際法院規約」之當事國或是接受國際法院之管轄權，進而取得國際法院之當事國適格性。但是因為台灣國際地位特殊，要成為「國際法院規約」之當事國，必須歷經由聯合國大會決定之實質難題，而提出聲明接受國際法院之管轄權，亦可能面對另一層面之「確認」效果，特別是如果秘書處及國際法院確認台灣之聲明不符合相關國際法規範的話，反而是負面之傷害。因此應該審慎斟酌這些負面影響，如無保握，似不應莽撞為之，這可能是台灣現今必須面對之無奈。

All member states of the UN are parties to the Statute of the ICJ. They can accept the ICJ's jurisdiction by declarations, bilateral agreements or multilateral treaties. Non-UN members can also obtain their locus stnadi before the ICJ through similar ways. However, the ICJ's recent judgments limit its own jurisdiction ambit. The result of which is that in reality the ICJ may accept cases from non-UN members only when they accept its jurisdiction by declarations. For Taiwan's being a party to the Statute of the ICJ or accepting jurisdiction of the ICJ, it at least holds two senses: one is to be affirmed as a sovereign state; the other is to settle international disputes peacefully. Every sovereign state, even though not a member state of the UN, may become a party to the Statute of the ICJ and declare its acceptance of the jurisdiction of the ICJ. However, due to her unique international status, Taiwan, if wishing to become a party of the Statute of the ICJ, has to go through difficulties to win in the General Assembly. Moreover, Taiwan's declaration of accepting jurisdiction of the ICJ may also face a kind of "confirmation" effect. When the Registrar of the ICJ publicly rejects or the ICJ rules by judgment that Taiwan's declaration is not acceptable, it will offer negative input. It is therefore suggested that a cautious attitude should always be bear in mind before submitting an acceptance instrument or declaration of accepting jurisdiction.