DECLARATION OF JUDGE KOROMA

1 have voted in favour of the Order and it is my clear understanding

DECLARATION OF JUDGE RANJEVA

(Translation]

The present Order confirms - if any confirmation was needed - the
jurisprudence of the Chamber in the case concerning the Frontier Dispute
(Provisional Measures, Order of 10 January 1986, I.C.J. Reports 1986,
pp. 3 et seq.). The operative part does not confine itself to the indication
of measures preserving rights in the traditional sense; it directly invites

DECLARATION OF JUDGE SHAHABUDDEEN

The Order made by the Court today should help to maintain friendly
relations between two fraternal and neighbouring States. 1have voted for
paragraphs 1, 2, 4 and 5 of the dispositif. If I thought that there was a
sound juridical basis for paragraph 3 of the dispositif, 1 should have

DECLARATION OF JUDGE ODA

In this declaration 1 would like to make clear two reservations that
1have to the text of the Order.

1. 1 voted in favour of paragraph 3 of the operative part, albeit with
some hesitation. In my view, the date given in the passage reading
"the presence of any armed forces in the Bakassi Peninsula does not
extend beyond the position in which they were situated prior to
3 February 1996"

DISSENTING OPINION OF JUDGE TORRES BERNARDEZ

[Translation]

453

DISSENTING OPINION OF JUDGE KREéA

The Order of 13 September 1993 constitutes the reaffirmation of the
Court's earlier decision of 8 April 1993, both in the formai and in the
material sense.
Noteworthy for an assessment of such a decision is the fact that the
Court bas rejected the proposed provisional measures requested by the

DISSENTING OPINION OF JUDGE TARASSOV

SEPARATEOPINIONOFJUDGELAUTERPACHT

OUTLINE

Paragraphs
1. INTRODUCTION 1-13

1. Theunprecedented human dimension ofthiscase 2
2. TheCourt's concernwith the gravityand urgency ofthe case 3

3. Theposition ofthe ad hocjudge
4. The nature of requests for provisionalmeasures

II. JURISDICTION 14-37

SEPARATE OPINION OF JUDGE AJIBOLA

SEPARATE OPINION OF JUDGE WEERAMANTRY

Thiscasefocuses attention on the question ofthe binding nature ofpro-
visional measuresmore sharply and urgently than almost anyother in the
history of this Court or of the Permanent Court of International Justice.
As the Court stressesin its Order delivered today, "the present perilous
situation demands . ..immediate and effective implementation" of the
measurescontained in its Order of 8April 1993(para. 59).Today'sOrder
also has my full support.