DECLARATION OF JUDGE EVENSEN

The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea signed at
Montego Bay,Jamaica, on 10December 1982endeavoun to formulate in
its text of 320Articles,9Annexes and a Final Actthe prevailing(to some
extent emerging) principles of the modem law of the sea. Article 308,
paragraph 1,of the Convention provides:

"ThisConvention shallenterinto force 12months afterthe date of
deposit ofthe sixtiethinstrument of ratification or accession."

DECLARATION OF VICE-PRESIDENT ODA

Myview,asappears inmyseparate opinion,isthat the DanishApplica-

SEPARATEOPINION OF JUDGE AD HOC SEPULVEDA

Thzrdcase before the Court clarmzngbreaches rn the applicatronand inter-
pretatlon of VzennaConventionon ConsularRelations - Basrcagreement with
thefindrngsof the Court, butreservatronsabout certurnconclusrons - Untimely
objections onjurzsdzctronand adrnrsszbzhty - Restrzcted interpretatronof the
responszbzlityof States

SEPARATEOPINION OF JUDGE TOMKA

Diplomatic protection - Distinciiun between rights of the Srare and indi-
vlrdu righ~s - Invocafion ofindil~iduurlights h&re un iniurnutionnl court by
Stare of nutimalily - Objection based on nun-exhau.rtir~onj'lr~cnlrunedies.

SEPARATEOPINION OF JUDGE PARKA-ARANGUREN

The CO~.WII[of lhe Unilud Stales nol to ruise prel~rnirtaryobjeclion-
Mextcn did not discharge ilYburdenof proving theMP-Y~CU nHiionnlity oj~hc
52 persons illdicated In it.$ e~norial- Mul~rple r~uiii~ttulcases - Tlte
exhaustion 14 1r)culretnpdiasrul- Ohl~goliilto rcj11ytoull thcquestlnnsrrs
slated hy Mesicu in its$nrrlcubnlissions- Final consideroions.

SEPARATEOPINlON OF JUDGE VERESHCHETIN

TWOheud~ uqflhr Mexican claims- Trwtmenf by heCourt of the ruleof
exh~u.stionoflocal remedies - "Mixed" claims in the jurisprudeirceof he
Cvurt nnd in the ILU Drajt A~r6icde .n DiplornoticProtection- Rea.~onsfor
the applicationof')rrpnndernnce" srundurdandfor non-applicationnj'ihelocrii
remediesreguir~menrin rhespeciul uircurnslnncesof t11ecase.

DECLARATION OF VICE-PRESIDENT RANJEVA

DECLARATION OF PRESIDENT SH1

In voting in favour of opcralive paragraph 153 ol' Ihc Judgment, I
should liketo make it clear that I stillmaintain myviews ascxprcssed in
my separate opinion annexed to the Lacrand Judgment (I. C.J Reporrs

DISSENTING OPINION OF JUDGE SCHWEBEL

SEPARATE OPINION OF JUDGE ODA

1have voted in favour of the Judgment because 1have concludedthat
Italy has not committed any breach either of the 1948 FCN Treaty or
of the 1951 Supplementary Agreement, and that the United States of