SEPARATE OPINION OF JUDGEODA

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Paragruphs

1. INTRODUCTION 1-2
II. THESTATUSOF THEFEDERAR LEPUBLIOFYUCOSLAV IAA PRELI-

MINARY ISSUE 3-4
III. LACKOF THECOURT'S JURISDICTIOUNDER ARTICLE 36, PARA-
CRAPH 2,OF THESTATUT AND ARTICL3 E8, PARAGRAP 5,OF THE

DECLARATION OF JUDGE VERESHCHETIN

DECLARATION OF JUDGE KOROMA

These are perhaps the most serious cases to come before the Court for
injunctive relief. Under Article 41 of the Statute of the Court, a request
for provisional measures should have as its purpose the preservation of
the respective rights of either party to a dispute pending the Court'seci-
sion. Jurisprudentially, the granting of such relief is designed to prevent
violence, the use of force, to safeguard the peace, as well as serving as an

DECLARATION OF JUDGE SHI

DECLARATION OF VICE-PRESIDENT WEERAMANTRY

DISSENTING OPINION OF JUDGE SIR GEOFFREY PALMER

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Pages

382

382
385

A history of consistent opposition 385
Intervenors 388

DISSENTING OPINION OF JUDGE KOROMA

In the presentOrder the Court, responding to a Request for an Exami-
nation of the Situation filed by New Zealand on 21 August 1995,and a
Further Request for the Indication of Provisional Measures to direct
France not to carry out further nuclear tests in the South Pacific region,
also filed on 21 August 1995,found that:

DISSENTING OPINION OF JUDGE WEERAMANTRY

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Pages
INTRODUCT~ON 320
Unusual nature of New Zealand's Request 320
Background to the Court's Judgment in 1974

Questions of jurisdiction and admissibility
SOME PRELIMINAR QYUESTIONS 322

SEPARATE OPINION OF JUDGE SHAHABUDDEEN

The growing recognition of the need to protect the natural environ-
ment is striking. Contemporary international law has been developing

DECLARATION OF JUDGE RANJEVA

[Translation]