INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE
DISPUTE OVER THE STATUS AND USE OF THE
WATERS OF THE SILALA
(CHILE v. BOLIVIA)
COUNTER-MEMORIAL OF THE
PLURINATIONAL STATE OF BOLIVIA
ANNEXES 17 - 18
VOLUME 5
3 SEPTEMBER 2018

INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE
DISPUTE OVER THE STATUS AND USE OF THE
WATERS OF THE SILALA
(CHILE v. BOLIVIA)
COUNTER-MEMORIAL OF
THE PLURINATIONAL STATE OF BOLIVIA
ANNEX 17
VOLUME 4
3 SEPTEMBER 2018

INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE
DISPUTE OVER THE STATUS AND USE OF THE
WATERS OF THE SILALA
(CHILE v. BOLIVIA)
COUNTER-MEMORIAL OF
THE PLURINATIONAL STATE OF BOLIVIA
ANNEX 17
VOLUME 3
3 SEPTEMBER 2018

INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE
DISPUTE OVER THE STATUS AND USE OF THE
WATERS OF THE SILALA
(CHILE v. BOLIVIA)
COUNTER-MEMORIAL OF
THE PLURINATIONAL STATE OF BOLIVIA
ANNEXES 1 - 17
VOLUME 2
3 SEPTEMBER 2018

STATUS AND MEMORIAL OF CHILEMEMORIAL AND EXPERT REPORTSVOLUME 1OF INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICEDISPUTE OVER THE STATUSAND USE OF THE WATERS OF THE SILALA(CHILE v. BOLIVIA)MEMORIALOF THEREPUBLIC OF CHILEANNEXES IV-XTO THE EXPERT REPORTSVOLUME 5OF 63 JULY 2017

INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICEDISPUTE OVER THE STATUS AND USE OF THE WATERS OF THE SILALA(CHILE v. BOLIVIA)MEMORIAL OF THEREPUBLIC OF CHILEANNEXES I-IIITO THE EXPERT REPORTS VOLUME 4OF 63 JULY 2017

INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE
DISPUTE OVER THE STATUS AND USE OF THE
WATERS OF THE SILALA
(CHILE v. BOLIVIA)
MEMORIAL OF THE
REPUBLIC OF CHILE
MEMORIAL AND EXPERT REPORTS
1 ANNEXES 40 - 76 TO THE MEMORIAL
VOLUME 3 OF 6
3 JULY 2017
INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE
DISPUTE OVER THE STATUS AND USE OF THE
WATERS OF THE SILALA
(CHILE v. BOLIVIA)
MEMORIAL OF THE
REPUBLIC OF CHILE
ANNEXES 40 - 76 TO THE MEMORIAL
VOLUME 3 OF 6
3 JULY 2017

INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICEDISPUTE OVER THE STATUS AND USE OF THE WATERS OF THE SILALA(CHILE v. BOLIVIA)MEMORIAL OF THEREPUBLIC OF CHILEANNEXES 1-39TO THE MEMORIAL VOLUME 2OF 63 JULY 2017

256
49
DECLARATION OF JUDGE AD HOC DAUDET
[Original English Text]
1. I deeply regret that operative paragraph 3 of the Order, concerning
the obligation to refrain from any act that might aggravate or extend the
dispute, is addressed to Ukraine as well as to the Russian Federation. In
my view, this measure of non-aggravation
of the dispute should have
been directed solely at the Russian Federation, which I recall was designated
by the United Nations General Assembly 1 as the perpetrator of
aggression against Ukraine.