Separate opinion of Judge ad hoc Franck

SEPARATE OPINION OF JUDGE FRANCK

Intervention under Article 62 of'the Stututr of the Inferriutionul Court of Jus-
tice - Interest of'u legul nuturr ~t,hirlzmuy bc [iffected bj the decision in the
case - Scope of Court's role in determining tlie "legul nature" of flic interest
adi~ancedby the Applicunt - Whether Philippine claint of historic title oiler
North Borneo aniount.s to a "legul" interest - In7puc.tof'.reif-determinufion q/

the people of'North Borneo on Izistoric title.

Declaration of Judge Kooijmans

"the Philippines may not introduce a new case before the Court nor
make comprehensive pleadings thereon, but must explain with suj$-
cient clurity its o1c.nclaimof sovereignty in North Borneo and the
legal instruments on which it is said to rest" (emphasis added).

This requirement is in conformity with the objects of the intervention

Separate opinion of Judge Koroma

SEPARATE OPINION OF JUDGE KOROMA

Doiiht ubo~if Court's interpretationof'"clc~c~i.sioinn" Article 62 to irrc.luc/~>
"reasoning". S1ic.hhrou(1crintcrprctcition nluy prclvcnt Cour,fio/per:firrning
jzidiciul filnctioti \vit11respclc,tto pur~icruse h<fii.rit- No cornpc~lling
reuson to trciopf)vider intcrpt.rtution (?/'Art62.e

1. Although 1 have voted in favour of the Judgment, 1 cannot, how-
ever, express unqualified adherence to some of the positions taken in the

Subscribe to
Links