other_document

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

INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE

APPLICATION OF THE INTERNATIONAL CONVENTION ON TE-ffi
ELIMINATION OF ALL FORMS OF RACIAL DISCRIMINATION
(GEORGIA v.RUSSIAN FEDERATION)

COMMENTS OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION
ON THE WRITTEN REPLIES OF GEORGIA TO THE QUESTIONS

PUTTO THE PARTIES DURING THE ORAL HEARING
BY JUDGES KOROMA AND CANÇADO TRINDADE

1 October 2010

Annex 1toOP 2003/30

CASE CONCERNING OIL PLATFORMS
(Islamic Republic of Iran v. United States of America)

RESPONSE TO THE ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF IRAN TO THE QUESTIONS OF

JUDGE RIGAUX ADDRESSED TO BOTH PARTIES

FIRST QUESTION:

"What is the legal status of oil platforms constructed by a State on its continental shelf?

CORRESPONDENCE 475

2. The Exchange of Notes of 13 November 1973 between Jceland and the
United Kîn~gdom, the Arrangement relating to fisheries in waters surrounding
the Faroe Islands of 18 Deccntber 1973 and the Agreement of 15 March 1974
between Norway, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and the United

Kingdom on the Regulation of the Fishing of North East Arctic (Arcto­
Norwegian) Cod have been registered with the Secretariat of the United
Nations.