Separate Opinion of Judge Morozov

SEPARATE OPINION OF JUDGE MOROZOV

1. 1voted for the operative part of the Judgment in which the Court

"finds that the Application of the Italian Republic, filed in the Regis-
try of theCourt on 24October 1983,forpermissiontointervene under
Article 62 of the Statute of the Court, cannot be granted".
2. This is the second time in the course of thejudicial activity of the

Separate opinion of Judge Bastid (translation)

SEPARATE OPINION OF JUDGE BASTID

[Translation]

1. Approval must be given to the finding of inadmissibility reached in
respect of the request submitted by the Republic of Tunisia, under Article
61of the Statute of the Court,for the revisionof theJudgment givenby the
Court on 24 February 1982.
This decision is based upon lengthy considerations (paras. 28 ff.). Fur-
thermore, as regards the subsidiary request for interpretation, the Court
has at certain points referred back to the reasoning concerning revision

Separate opinion of Judge Ruda

SEPARATE OPINION OF JUDGE RUDA

1. 1have voted in favour of the operative clauses of the Judgment and 1
subscribe to most of its reasoning. However, 1am bound to dissent from
the conclusions reached in paragraphs 41,42 and 43, whch refer to what
the Court calls "a jurisdictional objection raised by Libya".
2. Tunisia submitted two requests for interpretation and one for cor-

Separate Opinion of Judge Shahabuddeen

SEPARATE OPINION OF JUDGE SHAHABUDDEEN

Its generalinterest apart, this case is one of importance to a hitherto
untested branch of the institutional structure of a major region. 1agree
withtheJudgment ofthe Court buthavesomeadditional viewsonmatters
of approach, analysis and reasoning.e issues involved would also, 1
think, admit of more specifictreatment and of someaccount beingtaken
of the regional literature cited by both sides.They relate to the questions

Subscribe to
Links