Request for an Examination of the Situation in Accordance with Paragraph 63 of the Court's Judgment of 20 December 1974 in the Nuclear Tests (New Zealand v. France) Case - The Marshall Islands and the

JUSTICE
PeacePalace,2517 KJTheHague.TeL(070-302 23 23).CablesIntercour,heHague.

Communiqué

unofficial
for immdiats rslaass

No. 95/25
28 August 1995

I N ' S Remest for an gxrmination of the Sitw
63 of the Courtg# 1974 Judgnrant
ar Tee- (K@sZealaRd v. F m

Identical Applications for permission to intervene by the Governments
of the Marshall Islands and the Federated Statesof Micronesia have been
filed in the proceedings on New Zealand's Request for an Examination of

the Situation in accordance with Paragraph 63 of the Court's 1974
Judgment in the case concerningNuclear Tests (New Zealand v. France)
(see Press CommuniquéNo. 95/22of 21August 1995). These documents are
similar to those filed by Samoa and Solomon Islands on 24 August 1995
(see Press CommuniquéNo. 95/24of 24August 1995). The Applications are
based on Article 62, paragraphs 1 and 2, of the Statute of the Court,

which reads as follows:

"1. Should a State consider that it has an interest of a legal
nature which may be affected by the decision in the case, it may
submit a request to the Court to be permitted to intervene.

2. It shall be for the Court to decide upon this request."

The Governmentsof the Marshall Islands and the Federated Statesof
Micronesia indicatein their Applicationsthat the purpose of their
intervention is "to protect [their]legal interests under general

internationallaw and under applicable treaties by al1 means available in
conformity with the Statute of the Court. Those means include
intervention in cases where a legal interest of the State may be affected
by the decision." They seek "to inform the Court of [theirl interests
before any decision that might affect them is made, as well as to affirm
the collective characterof the obligationsinvolvedl'.The proposed

interventions also referto New Zealand's Further Request for the
Indicationof Provisional Measures.

The Governments of the Marshall Islands and the Federated Statesof

Micronesia each alsofiled identical declarationsof interventionunderArticle 63 of the Statute of the Court "to the extent that the

construction of any provision of the Convention for the Protectionof the
Natural Resourcesand Environment of the South Pacific Region, signed at
Noumea on 24 November 1986, is in questionu.

The declarationsof intervention also referto Article 82,
paragraph 3, of the Rules of Court which provides:

"3. Such a declarationmay be filed by a State that

considers itself a party to the convention the constructionof
which is in question but has not received the notification
referred to in Article 63 of the Statute."

Article 63 of the Statute of the Court reads as follows:

"1. Whenever the constructionof a convention to which
States other than those concerned in the case are parties is in
question, the Registrar shall notify al1 such States forthwith.

2. Every State so notified has the right to intervene in
the proceedings; but if it uses this right, the construction
given by the judgment will be equally binding upon it."