DISSENTING OPINION OF JUDGE AD HOC MAHIOU

[Translation]

Human rights violations — Arrest and detention of 1988-1989 — Admissibil-
ity of the claim — New claim — Late claim — Claim implicit in the Application
— Claim arising out of the subject-matter of the Application — Jurisprudence
of the Court.
Congolese company law and the specific characteristics of the companies in
which Mr. Diallo is the sole shareholder — Mr. Diallo’s rights and rights of the

SEPARATE OPINION

OF JUDGE CANÇADO TRINDADE

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Paragraphs

I. PROLEGOMENA: THE SUBJECT OF THRIGHTS AND THEO BJECT OF
THE CLAIM 4-10

II. REFLECTIONS ON THAPPLICABLELAW IN THECAS D’ESPÈCE 11-32
1. Invocation and incidence of the 1966 UN Covenant on Civil

DISSENTING OPINION OF JUDGE BENNOUNA

[English Original Text]

Link between the arrest, detention and expulsion of Mr. Diallo and the viola-
tion of his direct rights as associé — Recovery of debts — Sole associé — Con-
straints on the exercise of rights — Exercising the functions assigned to the

JOINT DECLARATION OF JUDGES KEITH AND
GREENWOOD

1. While, as our votes indicate, we agree with the Court’s conclusions,
we do not agree with one of the reasons the Court gives in support of its
conclusion that the arrests and detentions of Mr. Diallo in 1995-1996
violated the Covenant and the African Charter (Judgment, para. 165 (3)).
That reason is that the arrests and detentions preceding his expulsion
were arbitrary and in breach of Article 9 (1) of the Covenant and Arti-

JOINT DISSENTING OPINION
OF JUDGES AL-KHASAWNEH AND YUSUF

Unable to accept paragraph 6 ofdispositif —Violation of Diallo’s rights as sole

JOINT DECLARATION OF JUDGES
AL-KHASAWNEH, SIMMA, BENNOUNA,
CANÇADO TRINDADE AND YUSUF

[English Original Text]

Admissibility of an additional claim — Subject of the dispute — Legal secu-
rity and good administration of justice — Continuity between the arrest and
detention of Mr. Diallo in 1988-1989 and 1995-1996, and their connection with
the attempts to recover the debts.

DECLARATION OF JUDGE AD HOC GUILLAUME

[Translation]

SEPARATE OPINION OF JUDGE SKOTNIKOV

1. I voted in favour of most of the operative paragraphs of the Judg-
ment. However, I do not share the Court’s reasoning on a number of key
points and disagree with some of its conclusions.

INTERPRETATION OF THE TERM “C OMERCIO ”

2. I agree that Costa Rica’s right of free navigation under the

SEPARATE OPINION OF JUDGE SEPÚLVEDA-AMOR

I find myself in full agreement with most of the reasoning of the Court
in the present Judgment. The same is true of almost all the conclusions
reached by the Court in the operative clause of the Judgment. However,
as regards the legality of Nicaragua’s imposition of visa requirements, the

293

SEPARATE OPINION OF JUDGE AD HOC YUSUF

[Translation]

I. Jurisdiction of the Court — II. Violation by France of the 1986 Conven-
tion on Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters (CMACM) — A. Violation by
France of Article 1, paragraph 1, of the Convention on Mutual Assistance in
Criminal Matters — B. Violation by France of Articles 2 and 3, paragraph 1,
and Article 17 of the Convention on Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters —
III. Attacks on the immunity from jurisdiction and inviolability of the Head of