Separate Opinion of Judge Jessup

SEPARATE OPINION OF JUDGE JESSUP

1 agree with the decision of the Court that it has jurisdiction
to hear the present cases on the merits and that the four preliminary
objections are not well founded and should be dismissed. Since,
however, the Opinion of the Court doesnot embrace al1the questions
of fact and of law which 1 find essential to reaching the decision, 1

find it my duty to deliver this separate Opinion.

Declaration by Judge Spiropoulos (as appended immediately after the judgment)

The Court concludes that Article 7 of the Mandate is a treaty or
convention still in force within the meaning of Article 37 of the
Statute of the Court and that the dispute is one which is envisaged
in the said Article7 and cannot be settled by negotiation. Conse-
quently the Court is competent to hear the dispute on the merits.

For these reasons,

by eight votes to seven,

finds that ithas jurisdiction to adjudicate upon the merits of the
dispute.

Dissenting Opinion of Vice-President Wellington Koo

DISSENTING OPINION OF VICE-PRESIDENT

WELLINGTON KOO

1 regret to be unable to concur in the Judgment of the Court which
"finds that the Applicants cannot be considered to have established any
substantive right or legalinterest appertaining to them in the subject-
matter of the present claims". Nor am 1 able to agree with the reasons
upon which it is based. Pursuant to Article 57 of the Statute 1propose
to state the grounds for my dissent.

Subscribe to
Links