279
JOINT DECLARATION OF JUDGES SHI AND KOROMA
Serious doubts regarding interpretation of the Genocide Convention “by
implication” that a State could be held directly to have committed crime of
genocide — Convention envisages the trial and punishment of individuals for the
276
SEPARATE OPINION OF JUDGE RANJEVA
[Translation]
T HE D UTY TO P REVENT
Duty to prevent — Erga omnes obligation based on international solidarity
— Enduring duty of vigilance and co-operation applying to all States parties —
International responsibility of States for omission — Concerted diplomatic
action.
1. In law, international responsibility for omission is recognized in
order to safeguard the fundamental interests of the international commu-
266
JOINT DISSENTING OPINION OF JUDGES RANJEVA, SHI
AND KOROMA
Serious misgivings about Judgment’s application of res judicata of 1996 Judg-
ment on Preliminary Objections to include by “necessary implication” jurisdic-
tion ratione personae — Membership in the United Nations as a criterion for
241
DISSENTING OPINION OF VICE-PRESIDENT
AL-KHASAWNEH
The Court’s jurisdiction is established — Serious doubts that already settled
question of jurisdiction should have been re-examined — SFRY’s United Nations
membership could only have been suspended or terminated pursuant to Articles
DISSENTING OPINION OF JUDGE FRANCK
The 1891 Convention determined the allocation of territorial sovereignty
between the Parties - Pulau Ligitan and PulaiiSipadan clearly locatedsouth
of 4'10' allocational line therein establislled - Presumption that 4"10' line
DECLARATION OF JUDGE ODA
DISSENTING OPINION OF JUDGE AJIBOLA
Introduction - Procedural issue - Parties and theneed to allowfor second
round of pleadings - Agreement with the CourtSJudgment onjzrrisdictionand
costs - Need for the Court to interpret - Distinction betweenfacts and inci-
dents - Court should have granted Nigeria's request - Article 36 (2) of the
Statute and meaning of "dispute".
DISSENTING OPINION OF JUDGE KOROMA
Inadmissibility of request seemingly casuistic - Interpreting while not inter-
preting the Judgment - Nigeria's submissions - Cameroon'ssubmissions -
Existence of dispute - Acknowledgment of Court'sjurisdiction - Relevant
DISSENTING OPINION OF VICE-PRESIDENT
WEERAMANTRY
Judgment on preliminary objections - Applicability of Article 60 - Inter-
pretation may not be sought to seek revisionor reopenmatter ivhichis resjudi-
cata, orfor gaining time - Substantial nature of Nigeria's request - Need to
DISSENTING OPINION OF JUDGE AD HOC KATEKA
Disagreement with the Judgment on its key findings — Treatment of evidence
not even-handed — Decision on Respondent’s defences of consent and selfdefence
mistaken — Kisangani events — Serious accusations of violations
of human rights and international humanitarian law need higher standard of
proof — Reliance on United Nations reports concerning alleged exploitation
of DRC’s natural resources — Ruling on violation of provisional measures
unnecessary — Unjustified treatment of Uganda’s counter-claims.