Volume 3 - Annexes 40-76

INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE
DISPUTE OVER THE STATUS AND USE OF THE
WATERS OF THE SILALA
(CHILE v. BOLIVIA)
MEMORIAL OF THE
REPUBLIC OF CHILE
MEMORIAL AND EXPERT REPORTS
1 ANNEXES 40 - 76 TO THE MEMORIAL
VOLUME 3 OF 6
3 JULY 2017
INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE
DISPUTE OVER THE STATUS AND USE OF THE
WATERS OF THE SILALA
(CHILE v. BOLIVIA)
MEMORIAL OF THE
REPUBLIC OF CHILE
ANNEXES 40 - 76 TO THE MEMORIAL
VOLUME 3 OF 6
3 JULY 2017

Declaration of Judge ad hoc Daudet

256
49
DECLARATION OF JUDGE AD HOC DAUDET
[Original English Text]
1. I deeply regret that operative paragraph 3 of the Order, concerning
the obligation to refrain from any act that might aggravate or extend the
dispute, is addressed to Ukraine as well as to the Russian Federation. In
my view, this measure of non-aggravation
of the dispute should have
been directed solely at the Russian Federation, which I recall was designated
by the United Nations General Assembly 1 as the perpetrator of
aggression against Ukraine.

Declaration of Judge Nolte

254
47
DECLARATION OF JUDGE NOLTE
Jurisdiction prima facie under Article IX of the Genocide Convention —
Difference between the present case and the Legality of Use of Force cases —
Subject-matter
of the Application of Ukraine does not pertain to the question
whether the military operation by Russia amounts to genocide — Subject-matter
of the Application concerns the question whether a military operation undertaken
to prevent and punish an alleged genocide is in conformity with the Genocide
Convention.

Subscribe to
Links