Separate opinion of Judge Tomka

SEPARATE OPINION OF J UDGE T OMKA

Jurisdiction of the Court under Article 36 (2) of Statute  Existence of a dispute  No prior

negotiations or notice necessary before seising Court  Existence of a dispute a condition for
exercise of jurisdiction  Dispute in principle to exist at date of Application  Court has applied
condition flexibly and taken into account subsequent events  Proceedings clarified that a dispute

Separate opinion of Judge Owada

SEPARATE OPINION OF JUDGE O WADA

1. I concur with the conclusions of the Judgment as contained in its operative part (dispositif)
(Judgment, paragraph 59). Yet I am particularly sensitive to the tragic history of the Republic of
the Marshall Islands (hereinafter the “RMI”), which as a nation suffered as a consequence of the
extensive nuclear testing that took place on its territory. As recognized in the present Judgment,
this experience has created reasons for special concern about nuclear disarmament on the part of

Dissenting opinion of Judge Crawford

D ISSENTING OPINION OF JUDGE C RAWFORD

Jurisdiction of the Court under Article 36 (2) of Statute  Existence of a dispute 
Awareness or objective awareness not a legal requirement  No prior negotiations or notice
necessary before seising the Court  Dispute in principle to exist at the time of Application 

Flexible approach  Finding of dispute may be based on post-Application conduct or evidence 
Mavrommatis principle  Existence of multilateral dispute  Existence of dispute between
Marshall Islands and Pakistan.

Links