DISSENTING OPINION OF VICE-PRESIDENT BADAWI
AND JUDGES BASDEVANT, HSU MO, ARMAND-UGON
-AND MORENO QUINTANA
,We regret that we are unable to concur in the Opinion of the
Court and we believe it necessaqr to state the main grounds upon
which we dissent.
*
SEPARATE OPINION OF SIR HERSCH LAUTERPACHT
While 1 am in general agreement with the Opinion of the Court,
1have concurred in it subject to reservations both with regard to
the scope of the operative part of the Opinion and the reasons
adduced in support of it. Moreover, 1 feel it my duty to elaborate
in more detail certain questions relating to the main problem
confronting the Court.
Judge WINIARSK Ihile voting in favour of the Opinion of the
Court, makes the following declaration :
1 regret that 1 am unable to accept the whole of the reasoning
on which the Court has based its reply. In particular 1think that
as the Opinion of 1950 was not based on the idea of the United
Nations as a successor in title of the League of Nations, the question
of a devolution of the powers of the Council of the League of
Nations to the General Assembly does not arise.1am in agreement
Judge WINIARSK Ihile voting in favour of the Opinion of the
Court, makes the following declaration :
1 regret that 1 am unable to accept the whole of the reasoning
on which the Court has based its reply. In particular 1think that
as the Opinion of 1950 was not based on the idea of the United
Nations as a successor in title of the League of Nations, the question
of a devolution of the powers of the Council of the League of
Nations to the General Assembly does not arise.1am in agreement
DISSENTING OPINION OF M. ALVAREZ
1
[Translationj
DISSENTING OPINION OF JUDGES GUERRERO,
SIR ARNOLD McNAIR, READ, HSU MO
DISSENTING OPINION OF JUDGE MORENO QUINTANA
[Translation]
To my great regret 1 am unable to agree in this case, either with
LIISSENTING OPINION OF PRESIDENT KLAESTAD
1 am to my regret unable to agree with the Court and shall state
my different view as briefly as possible.
1. The task of the Court is to interpret the IMCO Convention,
SEPARATE OPINION OF JUDGE LAUTERPACHT
In the present case the General Assembly has asked the Court
for an Advisory Opinion on the questionwhether the special Rule F,
which, 011 II October, 1954, the Assembly adopted with regard
to the voting procedure to be followed by it in taking decisions on
questions relating to reports and petitions concerning the Terntory
of South-West Africa is a correct interpretation of the Opinion
SEPARATE OPINION OF JUDGE KLAESTAD
1 have arrived at the same final conclusion as the Court ; but as
my approach to the matter is entirely different, 1 consider it my
duty to state as briefly as possible the reasons upon which 1 base