40

DTSSENTING OPTNTON OF JUDGE ELARABY

29

DISSENTlNG OPINION OF JUDGE KOOIJMANS

471

DISSENTING OpINION OF JUDGE DONOGHUE

Disagreement with outcome and approach of the Court in rejecting Honduras’s
Application to intervene — Maritime claims overlapping area at issue sufficient to
show an interest of a legal nature that may be affected — Court’s practice of using
a directional arrow demonstrates its appreciation that its decisions “▯may affect”

466

JOINT DECLARATION
OF JUDGES CANçADO TRINDADE AND YUSUF

458

DECLARATION OF JUDGE KEITH

1. I agree with the conclusions the Court reaches, essentially for the
reasons it gives. This declaration addresses one aspect of those reasonso.

2. For nearly 90 years, the International Court of Justice and its prede-

447

DISSENTING OpINION OF JUDGE ABRAHAM

[Translation]

Conditional right of third States to intervene in the principal proceedi▯ngs —

446

DECLARATION OF JUDGE AL-KHASAWNEH

I concur in finding that the Application filed by Honduras to intervoene
in the proceedings, either as a party or a non-party, cannot be granted
(Judgment, para. 76). I am likewise in basic agreement with the reasoning
on which this finding was reached.

DISSENTING OPINION OF JUDGE REZEK

DISSENTING OPINION OF JUDGE PARRA-ARANGUREN

The Anglo-German Agreement of1890 - The Parties' dijfering interpreta-
tions of the 1890 Treaty - Subsequent practice as a rule of treuty interpreta-
tion - Subsequent practice of the Parties in the applicationof the 1890 Agree-
ment - The Mandate for South West Africa (Numibia) - Relevant evidencr
suhmitted to the Court - Cuptain H. V. Euson's Report (1912) - Joint
Report of 1948 (Trollope-Redmun) und Exchange of Lerters between 1948 and