INTERNATIONALCOURTOFJUSTICE

ACCORDANCEWITHINTERNATIONALLAWOF
THE UNILATERALDECLARATIONOFINDEPENDENCEBYTHE
PROVISIONALINSTITUTIONSOFSELF-GOVERNMENTOFKOSOVO
(REQUESTFORANADVISORYOPINION)

ANSWEROFTHE REPUBLICOFSERBIATOTHE QUESTIONSPUTTO

THEPARTICIPANTSIN THEORALPROCEEDINGSBYJUDGESKOROMA,

BENNOUNAANDCANÇADOTRINDADE

1. QUESTIONPUTBYJUDGEKOROMA

The question:

"Ithas been contended that international law does not prohibit the secession of a

384 BORDERANDTRANSBORDERARMEDACTIONS

rcply gitcn Ii? Your E~cel1r.n~~ai the sanie sittii(<,<pro p. 141) cvcn ihoush
iiw:i~thcn dcscribcd as "3 parii:ll answer". andiiu,a,furihcr stated ai ihe<II-
ting i~i14Junr. 1988that ihc question< put w<~ulrh lc :lnsu,crcd in writing

104. THE AGENT OF HONDURAS TO THE REGISTRAR

The Hague, 19July 1988.

INTERNATIONCOURTOFJUSTICE

CASECONCERNINAGRMED
ACTIVITIES

ONTHETERRITORY
OFTHECONGO

DEMOCR TICREPUBLIOFTHECONGO
v.

UGANDA

UGANDA'OBSERVATIONOSNTHEDRC'SRESPONSESOJUDGESQ' UESTIONS
13MAY20051. Uganda's Observations on the DRC's Response to the Question of Judge Vereshchetin

NO .32 P. 2

QUESTIONSFROMTHECOURT-WRITTEN REPLYBVTHEREPUBLJC OFCYPRUS

1. "lt has been contended that international law does not prohibit the secession of a
territory from a sovereign State.Could participants inthese proceedings address the

Court on the principles and rules of international law, ifany, which, outside the
colonial context, permit the secessionof a territory from a sovereignState without the
latter's consent?" [JudgeKoroma]

INTERNATIONALCOURTOFJUSTICE

ACCORDANCEWITHINTERNATIONALLAW OFTHEUNILATERAL
DECLARATIONOFINDEPENDENCEBYTHEPROVISIONAL
INSTITUTIONSOFSELF-GOVERNMENTOFKOSOVO
(REQUESTFORADVISORYOPINION}

RESPONSESUBMITTEDBY FINLAND
TO QUESTIONSOFJUDGEKOROMAANDJUDGECANÇADOTRINDADE

29 June 2000

QATAR'S RESPONSE TO THE QUESTION PUT BY JUDGE VERESHCHETIN TO

QATARANDBAHRAIN

On 15 June 2000, Judge Vereshchetinput the following question to the Parties:

"Before 1971, were there any international agreements concluded by the United

K.ingdom with Qatar and Bahrain respectively other than those establishing their
relationshipf protection?

INTERNATIONAL COURT OF füSTICE

ACCORDANCE WITH INTERNATIONAL LAW OF THE

UNILATERAL DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE BY

THE PROVISIONAL INSTITUTIONS OF SELF­
GOVERNMENT OF I(OSOVO

Request for Advisory Opinion

Response by the Republic of Albania

to the Questions Asked by the Judges

21 December 2009 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Answer to the Question Asked by Judge Koroma

I. General Remarks

II. History ofInternational Law

BELGIUM S RESPONSE TO J UDGE C ANÇADO T RINDADE

1. The questions put by Judge Cançado Trindade may be set out as follows:

1. For the purposes of a proper understanding of the rights to be preserved (under Article41 of
the Statute of the Court), are there rights corresponding to the obligations set forth in Article 7,
paragraph1, in combination with Article5, paragraph2, of the 1984 United Nations

Convention Against Torture?”

2. “[. . .] if so, what are their legal nature, content and effects?”

CASE CONCERNING OIL PLATFORMS

(Islamic Republic oflran v. United States of America)

COMMENTS OF THE ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF IRAN ON THE REPLIES
OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA TO THE QUESTIONS PUT
BY JUDGE AL-KHASA WNEH AND JUDGE AD HOC RIGAUX

FIRST QUESTION OF JUDGE AL-KHASA WNEH TO THE UNITED STATES OF

AMERICA:

"ln the opinion of counsel of the United States, arc the concepts of lex specialis, on the
one band, and self-contained régimes, on the other, synonymous? If not, what are the