453

DISSENTING OPINION OF JUDGE KREéA

The Order of 13 September 1993 constitutes the reaffirmation of the
Court's earlier decision of 8 April 1993, both in the formai and in the
material sense.
Noteworthy for an assessment of such a decision is the fact that the
Court bas rejected the proposed provisional measures requested by the

DISSENTING OPINION OF JUDGE TARASSOV

SEPARATEOPINIONOFJUDGELAUTERPACHT

OUTLINE

Paragraphs
1. INTRODUCTION 1-13

1. Theunprecedented human dimension ofthiscase 2
2. TheCourt's concernwith the gravityand urgency ofthe case 3

3. Theposition ofthe ad hocjudge
4. The nature of requests for provisionalmeasures

II. JURISDICTION 14-37

SEPARATE OPINION OF JUDGE AJIBOLA

SEPARATE OPINION OF JUDGE WEERAMANTRY

Thiscasefocuses attention on the question ofthe binding nature ofpro-
visional measuresmore sharply and urgently than almost anyother in the
history of this Court or of the Permanent Court of International Justice.
As the Court stressesin its Order delivered today, "the present perilous
situation demands . ..immediate and effective implementation" of the
measurescontained in its Order of 8April 1993(para. 59).Today'sOrder
also has my full support.

SEPARATE OPINION OF JUDGE SHAHABUDDEEN

1 agree with the Court in reaffirming, and in effect emphasizing, the
continued applicability of its previous Order to the deteriorating human
situation in Bosnia-Herzegovina. In support, 1give below my reasoning
on some of the issueswhich, in myview, merit the exercise of the right to
speak separately under Article 57of the Statute of the Court.

ForumProrogatum

DECLARATION OF VICE-PRESIDENT ODA

TheCourt shouldin myviewhaveresponded specificallyinthe opera-

tiveparagraphs to the request filed by Yugoslaviaon 10August 1993for
the indication of provisional measures. Whilethe Court responds to the
second request of Bosnia-Herzegovina by reaffirming the provisional
measuresindicated initsOrder of8April1993,itdoesnot,intheoperative
part ofthisOrder, take anyposition on the request of Yugoslavia.

DISSENTING OPlNION OF VICE-PRESIDENT
WEERAMANTRY

The jurisprudence of the Court in regard to counter-claims is not well

developed. There is no definition of the term "counter-claim" in the
Rules, nor in the Court's decisions and,as has been noted in this connec-
tion :

SEPARATE OPINION OF JUDGE LAUTERPACHT

1. This opinion is written in implementation of my statement made at
the provisional measures stage of this case regarding the role of an ad hoc
judge:

SEPARATE OPINION OF JUDGE KOROMA

It is not without considerable misgivings that 1have voted in favour of
the Court's Order, not least because of my concern regarding its effect
and perceived effect on the sound administration ofjustice particularly in
a case where allegations of grave breaches of the Genocide Convention
and other massive violation of human rights have been made.