384 BORDERANDTRANSBORDERARMEDACTIONS
rcply gitcn Ii? Your E~cel1r.n~~ai the sanie sittii(<,<pro p. 141) cvcn ihoush
iiw:i~thcn dcscribcd as "3 parii:ll answer". andiiu,a,furihcr stated ai ihe<II-
ting i~i14Junr. 1988that ihc question< put w<~ulrh lc :lnsu,crcd in writing
104. THE AGENT OF HONDURAS TO THE REGISTRAR
The Hague, 19July 1988.
INTERNATIONCOURTOFJUSTICE
CASECONCERNINAGRMED
ACTIVITIES
ONTHETERRITORY
OFTHECONGO
DEMOCR TICREPUBLIOFTHECONGO
v.
UGANDA
UGANDA'OBSERVATIONOSNTHEDRC'SRESPONSESOJUDGESQ' UESTIONS
13MAY20051. Uganda's Observations on the DRC's Response to the Question of Judge Vereshchetin
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