557
DISSENTING OPINION OF PRESIDENT OWADA
With regret, I had to vote against the most cardinal section (subpara -
graph (B) (1)) in the operative part of the Order (para. 69). With a
view to clarifying my position as to why I had to vote against this most
cardinal part of the Order, I wish to state the reasons for my dissent iffn
60
SEPARATE OPINION OF JUDGE AD HOC DUGARD
54
DECLARATION OF JUDGE AD HOC GUILLAUME
[Translation]
Dredging of the San Juan River — Interpretation of Article 6 of the Cleveland
Award — Activities of the two States on the disputed territory — Protection of the
environment — Co‑operation required between Costa Rica and Nicaragua.
1. I subscribe to a number of the conclusions reached by the Court.
Nevertheless, I would like to make some observations and explain why I
disagree with one of the points in the adopted Order.
52
DECLARATION OF JUDGE XUE
I regret that I could not find myself in full agreement with the majoritfy
of the Court on the second provisional measure rendered by the Court in f
its Order on the Request for the indication of provisional measures sub -
mitted by Costa Rica and would like to clarify my position on the vote.
46
DECLARATION OF JUDGE GREENWOOD
Provisional measures of protection —Criteri — Requirement that there be a risk
of irreparable prejudice to rights which might be adjudged to belong to one of the
Parties— Requirement that rights for which protection sought must be plausible —
Meaning of plausibility in this context —Application to the present case —
Appropriate measure to guard against risk of environmental harm to w▯ d.n
42
DECLARATION OF JUDGE SKOTNIKOV
1. I fully support the Court’s decision directing both Parties to “reffrain
from sending to, or maintaining in the disputed territory, including thef
caño, any personnel, whether civilian, police or security” (Order, operaf -
tive clause (1)).
2. However, I am unable to concur in the second provisional measure
indicated by the Court, which reads as follows :
35
SEPARATE OPINION
OF JUDGE SEPúLVEDA-AMOR
29
SEPARATE OPINION OF JUDGE KOROMA
Misgivings regarding plausibility as a criterion for indication of provi▯sional
measures — Assertion introduced in Questions relating to the Obligation to
Prosecute or Extradite (Belgium v. Senegal) — Not part of settled jurisprudence
— Meaning different in English and French — Introduction problematic —
Vagueness regarding law or facts or both — Basis on which parties’ claims
evaluated — If new standard introduced must be transparent.
217
DECLARATION OF JUDGE AD HOC GUILLAUME
[Translation]
Counter-claims — Direct connection, in fact and in law, with the principal
claims — Admissibility.
1. After ruling on the admissibility of Nicaragua’s first counter-claim,
the Court declared the second and third counter-claims inadmissible. I
41
DECLARATION OF JUDGE GAJA