142

SEPARATE OPINION OF JUDGE BENNOUNA

[Translation]

Relationship between the principal proceedings and the request for the indica-
tion of provisional measures — Safeguard of rights and preservation of status

quo — Violation of rights and risk of irreparable prejudice — Parties’ agree-
ment to a prima facie examination by the Court of the existence of the rights
at issue — Circumstances authorizing the Court to rule prima facie on the
existence of the rights at issue — The Court avoided a debate on the rights.

137

SEPARATE OPINION OF JUDGE ABRAHAM

[Translation]

Agreement with the dispositif of the Order — Reasoning insufficiently explicit
on one point — Relationship between the merit of the requesting party’s claims
and the ordering of the provisional measures — Writers’ view as to a clear sepa-
ration between issues regarding the existence and extent of the disputed rights
and issues concerning the need for provisional measures — Misguided nature of

136

DECLARATION OF JUDGE RANJEVA

[Translation]

I agree with the conclusion of the Court that there is no reason to
indicate the provisional measures requested by the Applicant. However,
I am not entirely satisfied with the approach adopted by the Court,
which emphasizes the limits of the Applicant’s arguments and criticizes
it for not providing sufficient supporting evidence. While such an observa-

SEPARA'TE OPINION OF JUDGE MAVUNGU

[Translation]

1. The Court's findings on the request for the indication of provisional
measures submitted by the Democratic Republic of the Congo show - if
that were needed - how complex this case is. There are those who may

SEPARATE OPINION OF JUDGE DUGARD

Circumstcincesto he cor7sirlered in decidingivhento ren?oilecasejrom the List
- Manij2st luck ofjurisdiction wurrunting reniovuljrom List tchenno reason-

ablepossibility thutjurisdiction muy be estublishedinsuh.sequentproceedings -
Groundsuadvunced,for juriscliction iripresent proceedings marzij2stlyunfiunciecl
- Need to renzoi,eApplicutionjrorn List - E.xpressionqf'concernthut Court's
even-hurzu'ed coniments on situution rnight he irnproperlyinterpreted.

DECLARATION OF JUDGE ELARABY

1. 1have voted against the rejection of the request for the indication of
provisional measures submitted by the Democratic Republic of the
Congo, mainly because, in accordance with its Statute and its present
jurisprudence, the Court should, in principle grant a request for provi-
sional measures once the requirements of urgency on the one hand and

DECLARATION OF JUDGE BUERGENTHAL

Language of'paragraphs 54 through 56 and 93 inappropriate - Absence of

jurisdiction to address subject-matter- Text gives credence, whether intended
or not, to c1aim.sof'one Party - Court's poi.t3erslimited to exercise of judicial
functions - "Feel-good" provisions not ivithin scope of,jurisdiction.

1. 1agree with the Court's decision rejecting the Democratic Republic

DECLARATION OF JUDGE HIGGINS

DECLARATION OF JUDGE KOROMA

1.1 have voted in favour of the Order because, in my view, it has

attempted to address some of the concerns at the heart of the request.

2. In its request for the indication of provisional measures and during
the public hearings, the Congo invoked various legal instruments, includ-
ing inter alilthe United Nations Charter, the Charter of the Organiza-
tion of African Unity, the International Bill of Human Rights, the Geno-

DISSENTING OPINION OF JUDGE DE CARA

Distinctivent>s.O~L'LIS~- Riglzts to hepreserved - Di iision (fjurisdiction-
Itnnmunity jrom jurisdiction - Inviolability-- Dignity oj Heud ifStore - Risk
oj'prcjudice -- lrreparubility - Urgency - Risk of ag::ravation of dispute -
Stuteruieritsby a pcrrtj,ut lzeuri~~g s Good,filitlz - Oh'igation tu i~zfoïtn,judi-
ciu/ uut/~ority,