DECLARATION OF JUDGE ROBINSON
Jurisdiction of the Court  Relationship between Article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and Article 36 (1) (c) of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations  Systemic Integration and Article 31 (3) (c) of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties  Interpretation of Subsequent Agreements under Article 73 (2) of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations  Relationship between Article 73 (2) of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations and the 2008 Agreement between India and Pakistan on Consular Access.

DECLARATION OF JUDGE SEBUTINDE

SEPARATE OPINION OF JUDGE CANÇADO TRINDADE
Table of Contents
Paragraphs
I. Prolegomena. .................................................................................................................. 1
II. Jurisprudential Construction: The Legacy of the Pioneering Advisory Opinion n. 16 (1999) of the IACtHR............................................................................................. 5
III. The Evolution with the Advisory Opinion n. 18 (2003) of the IACtHR........................ 10

DISSENTING OPINION OF JUDGE AD HOC COT
[Translation]
Vote against the operative part  Lis pendens  Essential elements of lis pendens — Relevance of the relief — Lis pendens and quasi-judicial bodies — Settlement of CERD-related disputes — Plausible interpretation of Article 22 — Other conditions for the indication of provisional measures — Suspension of the proceedings.
INTRODUCTION

DECLARATION OF JUDGE SALAM
1. I maintain my position on the Court’s lack of jurisdiction in these proceedings, as expressed in my dissenting opinion appended to the Court’s Order of 23 July 2018 indicating provisional measures in the present case. Consequently, I have voted in favour of the operative clause of the present Order rejecting the requested measures as I am of the view that it still lacks jurisdiction to do so.

SEPARATE OPINION OF JUDGE CANÇADO TRINDADE
Table of Contents
Paragraphs
I. Prolegomena. .................................................................................................................1
II. Provisional Measures of Protection Already Ordered to Secure Respect for Certain Rights Safeguarded under the CERD Convention.............................................5
III. The Problem of the Absence of Link in the Present Request.........................................9

SEPARATE OPINION OF JUDGE ABRAHAM
[Translation]

JOINT DECLARATION OF JUDGES TOMKA, GAJA AND GEVORGIAN
Dispute should prima facie fall within the scope of the treaty containing the compromissory clause  Discrimination based on nationality does not prima facie fall within the scope of CERD.

DECLARATION OF VICE-PRESIDENT XUE
1. I voted for the decision of the Court to reject the UAE’s Request for the indication of provisional measures. However, I disagree with some of the Court’s reasoning in rejecting the third and fourth measures requested by the UAE.

Our Reference; FA/SORG/LM/06/17/(61)
NOTE NO. 039
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Belize presents its compliments to the Embassy
of the Republic of Guatemala and has the honour to refer to the latter's Note No.
532-2010 dated October 10, 2010 regarding the approval by the Guatemalan
Congress of the Special Agreement betwcen Belize and Guatema.la to Submit
Guatemala's Territorial, Insular and Maritime Claim to the International Court of
Justice [the Special Agreement) signed on 8 December, 2008.