(R)evolution of state immunity following 'Jurisdictional immunities of the state ('Germany v Italy')' - winds of change or hot air?

What the paper says

While the 2012 case of Jurisdictional Immunities of the State ('Germany v Italy: Greece intervening') was thought by many to be the opportunity for the International Court of Justice ('ICJ') to make a positive pronouncement on the development of an exception to immunity when a state breaches jus cogens or peremptory norms, the majority simply entrenched its position on the immunity from jurisdiction that states enjoy in those circumstances. This article will examine the majority's examination of state practice which it considered did not reflect an emergent exception to immunity when a state breaches jus cogens or peremptory norms. Further, it will consider ways in which past (and potentially future) jus cogens arguments have been or could be framed. Finally, the article will consider the future utility of the forum of 'last resort' argument proposed by Italy in Germany v Italy. While the ICJ was adamant regarding the present non-existence of an exception to immunity upon breaches of jus cogens by states generally, and more specifically, where victims of such breaches are left without viable 'avenues for redress', it is recommended that states who are disenchanted with the decision in Jurisdictional Immunities of the State continue to pass laws and decide cases withholding state immunity following breaches of jus cogens norms. Such actions will contribute to the state practice that future courts will be unable to ignore when posed with the question again of the development of an exception to immunity when a state breaches inviolable jus cogens norms.