SEPARATE OPINION OF JUDGE ODA
1. Although 1would agree with the Court in its conclusions regarding
the grounds of objection to thejudgement of the United Nations Admin-
istrative Tribunal (UNAT), 1 regret to Say that 1cannot agree that the
Court, in thecircumstances, ought to havecomplied with the request for an
advisory opinion.
SEPARATE OPINION OF JUDGE MOSLER
While sharing the viewof the Court as expressedin theoperative part of
the Advisory Opinion, and agreeing to a large extent with the reasons, 1
nevertheless feel bound to raise some points which seem to me to require
either additional explanation or a different kind of argument.
SEPARATE OPINION OF JUDGE RUDA
368
SEPARATE OPINION OF JUDGE NAGENDRA SINGH
DISSENTING OPINION OF JUDGE KOROMA
The Court, in this Advisory Opinion in which it declines to grant the
request of the WHO for an opinion as to whether
"in view of the health and environmental effects, . .. the use of
nuclear weapons by a State in war or other armed conflict [would]be
a breach of its obligations under international law including the
WHO Constitution",
DISSENTING OPINION OF JUDGE WEERAMANTRY
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1
1. PRELIMINARY
1. The genesis of WHO's request
DISSENTING OPINION OF JUDGE SHAHABUDDEEN
The reason for mv dissent is that. in mv reswectful view. the Court's
decision proceeds on a mistaken appreciation of the question presented by
SEPARATE OPINION OF JUDGE ODA
DECLARATION OF JUDGE FERRARI BRAVO
[Translation]
DECLARATION OF JUDGE RANJEVA
[Tvanslation]
1have voted in favour of the Court's decision as I consider it to be in
accordance with the relevant law. 1should nonetheless have preferred the
Court to have been more explicit in respect of the problem of its advisory
jurisdiction, by laying stress on the fact that the structure of the question
put by the World Health Assembly did not permit it to exercisethe juris-
diction that it had, in any case.
(Signed) Raymond RANJEVA.