SEPARATE OPINION OF JUDGE SHAHABUDDEEN

1 agree with the Court in reaffirming, and in effect emphasizing, the
continued applicability of its previous Order to the deteriorating human
situation in Bosnia-Herzegovina. In support, 1give below my reasoning
on some of the issueswhich, in myview, merit the exercise of the right to
speak separately under Article 57of the Statute of the Court.

ForumProrogatum

DECLARATION OF VICE-PRESIDENT ODA

TheCourt shouldin myviewhaveresponded specificallyinthe opera-

tiveparagraphs to the request filed by Yugoslaviaon 10August 1993for
the indication of provisional measures. Whilethe Court responds to the
second request of Bosnia-Herzegovina by reaffirming the provisional
measuresindicated initsOrder of8April1993,itdoesnot,intheoperative
part ofthisOrder, take anyposition on the request of Yugoslavia.

DISSENTING OPlNION OF VICE-PRESIDENT
WEERAMANTRY

The jurisprudence of the Court in regard to counter-claims is not well

developed. There is no definition of the term "counter-claim" in the
Rules, nor in the Court's decisions and,as has been noted in this connec-
tion :

SEPARATE OPINION OF JUDGE LAUTERPACHT

1. This opinion is written in implementation of my statement made at
the provisional measures stage of this case regarding the role of an ad hoc
judge:

SEPARATE OPINION OF JUDGE KOROMA

It is not without considerable misgivings that 1have voted in favour of
the Court's Order, not least because of my concern regarding its effect
and perceived effect on the sound administration ofjustice particularly in
a case where allegations of grave breaches of the Genocide Convention
and other massive violation of human rights have been made.

Although 1voted in favour of the operative parts of the Court's Order,
1 shall also make some observations on and amplifications to some aspects

of the concept of a counter-claim and its application to this particular case.
1. The Order essentially qualifies a counter-claim as "independent",
"an autonomous legal act" (para. 27) though, it seems to me, this is with
a certain amount of caution (reservutio mentulis). That is to Say, the
Court states that the "counter-claim is independent of the principal claim

DISSENTING OPINION OF JUDGE EL-KOSHERI

1. Toany human being,what happened over Lockerbiewas a horrible
eventwhichrequires that those responsibleforitbe punished and justice
dulyrendered in conformitywiththe applicable legalrules.Withthatend

DISSENTING OPINION OF JUDGE AJIBOLA

DISSENTING OPINION OF JUDGE RANJEVA

[Translation]

1. Thepresentrequestforthe indication of provisional measures is,in
many respects, an unprecedented case in international adjudication.
Whilethe Court cannot rejectthe request (1),itcannotpassupon it owing
to the fundamental change of circumstances following the adoption of
SecurityCouncilresolution 748(1992)(II),withoutfor al1that refraining,
in principle,fromthe propriomotuexerciseofitspowers under Article41
ofthe Statute (III).

DISSENTING OPINION OF JUDGE WEERAMANTRY

This application for provisional measures was, as required by
Article 74 (1) of theRules of Court, given priority over al1other cases
pending before the Court. The oral submissions were concluded on
28 March 1992. Three days later, when the case was at the stage of deli-
berations, resolution 748 (1992) was adopted by the Security Council.
Resolution 748 (1992)covered matters of importance which were sub