SEPARATE OPINION OF JUDGE REZEK

[Translation]

SEPARATE OPINION OF JUDGE KOOIJMANS

DECLARATION OF JUDGE HERCZEGH

[Translation]

1voted against paragraphs 2 (a) and (b), and 3 of the operative part,
for reasons similar tohose which werethe subject-matter of the declara-
tion which 1appended to the Judgment delivered today in the case con-
cerning Questionsof Interpretation and Application of the 1971Montreal
Conventionarisingfrom the Aerial Incident ut Lockerbie (Libyan Arab
Jamahiriya v. UnitedKingdom).
1therefore request the reader to refer to the text of that declaration.

JOINT DECLARATION OF JUDGES GUILLAUME AND
FLEISCHHAUER

[English Original Text]

Article 79, paragraph 7, of the Rules of Court - Objection of mootness
havingan exclusively preliminary character.
Actions ofthe UnitedStates in order to obtainthe surrenderof the suspects
- Last substantivesubmissionof Libya directed againsttheseactions - Juris-
diction ofthe Courtinthis respect onlyto theextent that theactionsinquestion
would becontrary tothe Montreal Convention.

JOINT DECLARATION OF JUDGES BEDJAOUI, RANJEVA
AND KOROMA

[Translation]

DISSEN'TING OPINION OF JUDGE TARAZI

(Translation]

DISSENTING OPINION OF JUDGE MOROZOV

1voted against paragraphs 1,2, 5 and 6 and in favour of paragraphs 3
and 4 of the operative part of the Judgment.Furthermore. there were some
points in the reasoning which 1 could not accept. and 1 would like to

explain the reasons for this.
1. 1consider that the long-established rules of generalinternational law
relating to the privileges, inviolabilities and immunities of diplornatic and

SEPARATE OPINION OF JUDGE LACHS

1wishto make somecomments regarding theJudgment and the solution
of the outstanding issuesbetween the two States concerned. First I wishto
express somepreoccupation over the inclusion of the decision recorded in
subparagraph 5 of the operative part.

DISSENTING OPINION OF JUDGE S0RENSEN

To my great regret 1 find myself unable to concur in the decision of
theCourt,and 1wish to avail myself of the right under Article 57of the
Statute to state the reasons for my dissent.
On certain points 1 agree with the Court. 1 do not think that the
equidistance principle-even subject to modification in special circum-
stances-is inherent in the legal concept of the continental shelf or part
of that concept by necessary implication.