Written Reply of Australia to the question put by Judge Cançado Trindade at the end of the hearing held on 5 September 2018

Australian Government
INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE
SEPARATION OF THE CHAGOS ARCHIPELAGO FROM MAURITIUS IN 1965
(REQUEST FOR ADVISORY OPINION)
QUESTION PUT BY JUDGE CANCADO TRINDADE
5 SEPTEMBER 2018
Question put by Judge Cancado Trindade:
"As recalled in paragraph (a) of the U.N. General Assembly's request for an Advisory
Opinion of the International Court of Justice (General Assembly resolution 71/292 of
22.06.2017), the General Assembly refers to obligations enshrined into successive pertinent
resolutions of its own, as from 1960, namely: General Assembly resolutions 1514 (XV) of
14.12.1960, 2066 (XX) of 16.12.1965, 2232 (XXI) of 20.12.1966 and 2357 (XXII) of
19.12.1967.
In the course of the present oral advisory proceedings, references were often made to such
resolutions by several delegations of participants.
In your understanding, what are the legal consequences ensuing from the formation of
customary international law, with the significant presence of opinio juris communis, for
ensuring compliance with the obligations stated in those General Assembly resolutions?"
Australia's response:
As outlined in its Written Statement of27 February 2018 and its oral submissions of
4 September 2018, Australia's arguments in this case are limited to the jurisdiction of the
Court and to its discretion to decline the advisory opinion requested by the General Assembly
in its resolution 71/292. As such, Australia makes no observations in response to the question
of Judge Trindade of 5 September 2018.
./. ~) . ,,
/4/.~~u:/(/
W. M. Campbell
Representative of Australia
6 September 2018