DISSENTING OPINION OF JUDGE ODA

1.1regret that 1am unable to agree with any of the three points in the
operative part of the Judgment as 1 see the whole case from a different
viewpoint to that of the Court.

2. The crux of the case before usis simplein that, to use the expression
used by Libya in its Application, the United Kingdom "continues to
adopt a posture of pressuring Libya into surrendering the accused" and
"is rather intent on compelling the surrender of the accused".

DISSENTING OPINION OF PRESIDENT SCHWEBEL

1regret that 1am unable to agree with the Judgment of the Court. It is
arguable that the challenge of the Respondent to the jurisdiction of the
Court should not carry. But the reasons so terselystated by the Court are
conclusory rather than elucidatory, and, at most, are barely persuasive in
a subsidiary respect. In my view, the Court's conclusions on the admis-
sibilityof Libya'sApplication, and as to whether it has become moot, are
unpersuasive.

SEPARATE OPINION OF JUDGE REZEK

[Translation]

SEPARATE OPINION OF JUDGE KOOIJMANS

DECLARASION OF JUDGE HERCZEGH

[Translation]

Having voted against paragraphs 2 (a) and (b) and 3 of the operative
part, 1feel obliged to supply the explanations that follow:

JOINT DECLARATION OF JUDGES GUILLAUME AND
FLEISCHHAUER

[English Original Text]

Article79, paragraph 7, of the Rules of Court - Objection of mootness
having an exclusively preliminary character.
Actions of the United Kingdom in order to obtain the surrenderof the sus-
pects - Last substantivesubmissionof Libya directed againstthese action-
Jurisdiction of the Court in this respect only to the extent that the actionsin
questionwouldbe contrary to the Montreal Convention.

JOINT DECLARATION OF JUDGES BEDJAOUI, RANJEVA
AND KOROMA

[Translation]

JOINT DECLARATION OF JUDGES BEDJAOUI, GUILLAUME
AND RANJEVA

[Translation]

Article 31,paragraph5, of the Statut- UnitedKingdomand UnitedStates
parties in thesame interest- UnitedKingdom not being entitled to choosea
judge ad hoc.

SEPARATE OPINION OF JUDGE FORTIER

Challenge of eighty-two (82) Qatari documents by Bahrain - Decision by

Qatar to disregard "non-authentic documents" - History of eighty-two (82)
documents including impact on Qatari claim to Hawar Islands - Qatar's new
argument - Potential damage to administration of internationaljustice.

DISSENTING OPINION OF JUDGE TORRES BERNARDEZ

Introduction: Territoriul und tllaritir~zeaspects ($the case - Applicuhility of

gen(.ral internutionul 1ai.i - B~~hruin'srcft.renc,eto quieta non movere and ils
contrudiction.~ - Drtcrt~litiutionof the c1c~menf.o sf'fuct - Hi.storica1,fact.sus
source qf originul title - Fuc.t.sulleged to generate u title ofeffectivités - Fuil-
urc to defrtzeu criticuI dut~l,for ~dllli.~~fhilitjo'f effectivités - 0hservution.s on