Partijen en gegevens

(a)

the interpretation of a treaty;

(b)

any question of international law;

(c)

the existence of any fact which, if established, would constitute a breach of an international obligation;

(d)

the nature or extent of the reparation to be made for the breach of an international obligation;

(a)

in regard to which the parties thereto have agreed or shall agree to have recourse to some other method of peaceful settlement;

or

(b)

which the Republic of the Philippines considers to be essentially within its domestic jurisdiction; or

(c)

in respect of which the other party has accepted the compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice only in relation to or for the purposes of such dispute; or where the acceptance of the compulsory jurisdiction was deposited or ratified less than 12 months prior to the filing of the application bringing the dispute before the Court; or

(d)

arising under a multilateral treaty, unless (1) all parties to the treaty are also parties to the case before the Court, or (2) the Republic of the Philippines specially agrees to jurisdiction; or

(e)

arising out of or concerning jurisdiction or rights claimed or exercised by the Philippines-

(i)

in respect of the natural resources, including living organisms belonging to sedentary species, of the sea-bed and subsoil of the continental shelf of the Philippines, or its analogue in an archipelago, as described in Proclamation No. 370 dated 20 March 1968 of the President of the Republic of the Philippines; or

(ii)

in respect of the territory of the Republic of the Philippines, including its territorial seas and inland waters;

1.

It recognizes as compulsory ipso facto and without special agreement, in relation to any other State accepting the same obligation, the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice in all legal disputes concerning:

(a)

The interpretation of a treaty;

(b)

Any question of international law;

(c)

The existence of any fact which, if established, would constitute a breach of an international obligation;

(d)

The nature and extent of the reparation to be made for the breach of an international obligation.

2.

This Declaration shall not apply, however, to any of the following disputes to which the Republic of Honduras is a party:

(a)

Disputes in respect of which the parties have agreed or may agree to resort to other means for the pacific settlement of disputes;

(b)

Disputes concerning matters subject to the domestic jurisdiction of the Republic of Honduras under international law;

(c)

Disputes relating to facts of situations originating in armed conflects or acts of a similar nature which may affect the territory of the Republic of Honduras, and in which it may find itself involved directly or indirectly;

(d)

Disputes referring to:

(i)

Territorial questions with regard to sovereignty over islands, shoals and reefs; internal waters, bays and the legal status and limits of the territorial sea;

(ii)

All rights of sovereignty or jurisdiction concerning the legal status and limits of the contiguous zone, the exclusive economic zone and the continental shelf;

(iii)

The airspace over the territories, waters and zones referred to in this subparagraph.

3.

The Government of Honduras also reserves the right at any time to supplement, modify or withdraw this Declaration or the reservations contained therein by giving notice to the Secretary-General of the United Nations.

4.

This Declaration replaces the Declaration made by the Government of Honduras on 20 February 1960.

a.

The interpretation of a treaty;

b.

Any question of international law;

c.

The existence of any fact which, if established, would constitute a breach of an international obligation;

d.

The nature or extent of the reparation to be made for the breach of an international obligation;

a.

Disputes the solution of which the parties shall entrust to other tribunals by virtue of agreements already in existence or which may be concluded in the future; or

b.

Disputes relating to questions which by international law fall exclusively within the domestic jurisdiction of Pakistan;

c.

Disputes arising under a multilateral treaty unless

1.

All parties to the treaty affected by the decision are also parties to the case before the Court, or

2.

The Government of Pakistan specially agree to jurisdiction; andprovided further, that this Declaration shall remain in force till such time as notice may be given to terminate it.

a)

disputes the resolution of which the parties shall entrust to other tribunals by virtue of agreements already in existence or which may be concluded in the future; or

b)

disputes relating to questions which fall essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan;

c)

disputes relating to or connected with any aspect of hostilities, armed conflicts, individual or collective self-defence or the discharge of any functions pursuant to any decision or recommendation of international bodies, the deployment of armed forces abroad, as well as action relating and ancillary thereto in which Pakistan is, has been or may in future be involved;

d)

disputes with regard to which any other party to a dispute has accepted the compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice exclusively for or in relation to the purposes of such dispute; or where the acceptance of the Court's compulsory jurisdiction on behalf of a party to the dispute was deposited or ratified less than 12 months prior to the filing of the application bringing the dispute before the Court;

e)

all matters related to the national security of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan;

f)

disputes arising under a multilateral treaty or any other international obligation that the Islamic Republic of Pakistan has specifically undertaken unless:

i)

all the parties to the treaty affected by the decision are also parties to the case before the Court, or

ii)

the Government of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan specifically agrees to jurisdiction, and

iii)

the Government of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan is also a Party to the treaty.

g)

any dispute about the delimitation of maritime zones, including the territorial sea, the exclusive economic zone, the continental shelf, the exclusive fishery zone and other zones of national maritime jurisdiction or the exploitation of any disputed area adjacent to any such maritime zone;

h)

disputes with the Islamic Republic of Pakistan pertaining to the determination of its territory or the modification or delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries;

i)

all disputes prior to this Declaration although they are filed before this Court hereafter.

a.

The interpretation of a treaty;

b.

Any question of international law;

c.

The existence of any fact which, if established, would constitute a breach of an international obligation;

d.

The nature or extent of the reparation to be made for the breach of an international obligation.

(a)

The interpretation of a treaty;

(b)

Any question of international law;

(c)

The existence of any fact which, if established, would constitute a breach of an international obligation;

(d)

The nature or extent of the reparation to be made for the breach of an international obligation.

(a)

Any dispute in respect to which the parties have agreed or shall agree to have recourse to another means of peaceful settlement and any dispute or matter which is in any manner related to any such dispute;

(b)

Any dispute relating to matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of the State of Israel;

(c)

Any dispute between the State of Israel and any other State whether or not a member of the United Nations which does not recognize Israel or which refuses to establish or to maintain normal diplomatic relations with Israel and the absence or breach of normal relations precedes the dispute and exists independently of that dispute;

(d)

Disputes arising out of events occurring between 15 May 1948 and 20 July 1949;

(e)

Without prejudice to the operation of subparagraph (d) above, disputes arising out of, or having reference to, any hostilities, war, state of war, breach of the peace, breach of armistice agreement or belligerent or military occupation (whether such war shall have been declared or not, and whether any state of belligerency shall have been recognized or not) in which the Government of Israel are or have been or may be involved at any time;

(f)

Any dispute in respect of which any other party thereto has accepted, or amended, a previous acceptance of the compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice, only in relation to or for the purpose of the dispute; or where the acceptance or the amendment of a previous acceptance of the Court's compulsory jurisdiction, on behalf of any other party to the dispute, was deposited or ratified less than 12 months prior to the filing of the application bringing the dispute before the Court.

(1)

I give notice that I hereby terminate the acceptance by Canada of the compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice hitherto effective by virtue of the declaration made on 7 April 1970 in conformity with paragraph 2 of Article 36 of the Statute of that Court.

(2)

I declare that the Government of Canada accepts as compulsory ipso facto and without special convention, on condition of reciprocity, the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice, in conformity with paragraph 2 of Article 36 of the Statute of the Court, until such time as notice may be given to terminate the acceptance, over all disputes arising after the present declaration with regard to situations or facts subsequent to this declaration, other than:

(a)

disputes in regard to which parties have agreed or shall agree to have recourse to some other method of peaceful settlement;

(b)

disputes with the Government of any other country which is a member of the Commonwealth, all of which disputes shall be settled in such manner as the parties have agreed or shall agree;

(c)

disputes with regard to questions which by international law fall exclusively within the jurisdiction of Canada.

(3)

The Government of Canada also reserves the right at any time, by means of a notification addressed to the Secretary-General of the United Nations, and with effect as from the moment of such notification, either to add to, amend or withdraw any of the foregoing reservations, or any that may hereafter be added.

(1)

I give notice that I hereby terminate the acceptance by Canada of the compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice hitherto effective by virtue of the declaration made on 10 September 1985 in the conformity with paragraph 2 of Article 36 of the Statute of the Court.

(2)

I declare that the Government of Canada accepts as compulsory ipso facto and without special convention, on condition of reciprocity, the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice, in conformity with paragraph 2 of Article 36 of the Statute of the Court, until such time as notice may be given to terminate the acceptance, over all disputes arising after the present declaration with regard to situations or facts subsequent to this declaration, other than:

a)

disputes in regard to which the parties have agreed or shall agree to have recourse to some other method of peaceful settlement;

b)

disputes with the government of any other country which is a member of the Commonwealth, all of which disputes shall be settled in such manner as the parties have agreed or shall agree;

c)

disputes with regard to questions which by international law fall exclusively within the jurisdiction of Canada; and

d)

disputes arising out of or concerning conservation and management measures taken by Canada with respect to vessels fishing in the NAFO Regulatory Area, as defined in the Convention on Future Multilateral Co-operation in the Northwest Atlantic Fisheries, 1978, and the enforcement of such measures.

(3)

The Government of Canada also reserves the right at any time, by means of a notification addressed to the Secretary-General of the United Nations, and with effect as from the moment of such notification, either to add to, amend or withdraw any of the foregoing reservations, or any that may hereafter be added.

(1)

I give notice that I hereby terminate the acceptance by Canada of the compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice hitherto effective by virtue of the declaration made on 10 May 1994 in conformity with paragraph 2 of Article 36 of the Statute of the Court.

(2)

I declare that the Government of Canada accepts as compulsory ipso facto and without special convention, on condition of reciprocity, the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice, in conformity with paragraph 2 of Article 36 of the Statute of the Court, until such time as notice may be given to terminate the acceptance, over all disputes arising after 10 May 1994, with regard to situations or facts subsequent to the same date, other than:

(a)

disputes in regard to which the parties have agreed or shall agree to have recourse to some other method of peaceful settlement;

(b)

disputes with the government of any other country which is a member of the Commonwealth, all of which disputes shall be settled in such manner as the parties have agreed or shall agree;

(c)

disputes with regard to questions which by international law fall exclusively within the jurisdiction of Canada;

(d)

disputes in respect of which any other party to the dispute has accepted the compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice only in relation to or for the purpose of the dispute; or where the acceptance of the Court’s compulsory jurisdiction on behalf of any other party to the dispute was deposited or ratified less than twelve months prior to the filing of the application bringing the dispute before the Court;

(e)

disputes or claims in respect of which the dispute or claim in question has not been notified to Canada by the State or States concerned in writing, including of an intention to submit the dispute or claim to the Court failing an amicable settlement, at least six months in advance of the submission of the dispute or claim to the Court; and

(f)

disputes arising out of or concerning conservation and management measures taken by Canada with respect to vessels fishing in the NAFO Regulatory Area, as defined in the Convention on Future Multilateral Co-operation in the Northwest Atlantic Fisheries, 1978, and the enforcement of such measures.

(3)

The Government of Canada also reserves the right at any time, by means of a notification addressed to the Secretary-General of the United Nations, and with effect as from the moment of such notification, either to add to, amend or withdraw any of the foregoing reservations, or any that may hereafter be added.

(a)

The interpretation of a treaty;

(b)

Any question of international law;

(c)

The existence of any fact which, if established, would constitute a breach of an international obligation;

(d)

The nature or extent of the reparation to be made for the breach of an international obligation.

(i)

disputes which the parties have agreed or may agree to submit to other means of peaceful settlement;

(ii)

disputes which, under international law, fall exclusively within the domestic jurisdiction of El Salvador;

(iii)

disputes with El Salvador concerning or relating to:

(1)

the status of its territory or the modification or delimitation of its frontiers or any other matter concerning boundaries;

(2)

the territorial sea and the corresponding continental slope or continental shelf and the resources thereof, unless El Salvador accepts the jurisdiction in that particular case,

(3)

the condition of its islands, bays and gulfs and that of the bays and gulfs that for historical reasons belong to it or are under a system of joint ownership, whether or not recognized by rulings of international tribunals;

(4)

the airspace superjacent to its land and maritime territory;

(iv)

disputes relating to or connected with facts or situations of hostilities, armed conflicts, individual or collective actions taken in self-defence, resistance to aggression, fulfilment of obligations imposed by international bodies, and other similar or related acts, measures or situations in which El Salvador is, has been or may at some time be involved;

(v)

pre-existing disputes, it being understood that this includes any dispute the foundations, reasons, facts, causes, origins, definitions, allegations or bases of which existed prior to this date, even if they are submitted or brought to the knowledge of the Court hereafter; and

(vi)

disputes that may arise over the interpretation or implementation of a multilateral treaty unless (i) all the parties to the treaty are also parties in the case before the Court, or (ii) El Salvador expressly accepts the Court's jurisdiction in that particular case.

1.

The Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran while reaffirming its commitment to strengthen and support the International Court of Justice to discharge its duty of pacific settlement of disputes as the principal judicial organ of the United Nations, accepts as compulsory ipso facto and without special agreement, on condition of reciprocity, the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice, in conformity with Article 36, Paragraph 2, of the Statute of the Court, until such time as notice may be given to terminate the acceptance, only in relation to the following disputes:

(i)

the jurisdictional immunities of the State and State property;

(ii)

immunity from measures of constraint against State or State property.

2.

Except as provided for in sub-paragraphs 1 (i) and/or 1 (ii), no other dispute shall be entertained by the Court, in particular:

(i)

disputes relating to questions which fall essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of the Islamic Republic of Iran;

(ii)

disputes relating to sovereignty, sovereign rights or jurisdiction over land or maritime areas;

(iii)

disputes with any State not recognized by the Islamic Republic of Iran.

3.

The Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran reserves the right at any time, by means of a written notification addressed to the Secretary-General of the United Nations, and with effect as from the moment of such notification, either to amend, change or withdraw the present declaration.

[...]

1.

The Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland accept as compulsory ipso facto and without special convention, on condition of reciprocity, the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice, in conformity with paragraph 2 of Article 36 of the Statute of the Court, until such time as notice may be given to terminate the acceptance, over all disputes arising after 1 January 1974, with regard to situations or facts subsequent to the same date, other than:

(i)

any dispute which the United Kingdom has agreed with the other Party or Parties thereto to settle by some other method of peaceful settlement;

(ii)

any dispute with the government of any other country which is or has been a Member of the Commonwealth;

(iii)

any dispute in respect of which any other Party to the dispute has accepted the compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice only in relation to or for the purpose of the dispute; or where the acceptance of the Court's compulsory jurisdiction on behalf of any other Party to the dispute was deposited or ratified less than twelve months prior to the filing of the application bringing the dispute before the Court.

2.

The Government of the United Kingdom also reserve the right at any time, by means of a notification addressed to the Secretary-General of the United Nations, and with effect as from the moment of such notification, either to add to, amend or withdraw any of the foregoing reservations, or any that may hereafter be added. ’

1

(i)

any dispute which the United Kingdom has agreed with the other Party or Parties thereto to settle by some other method of peaceful settlement;

(ii)

any dispute with the government of any other country which is or has been a Member of the Commonwealth;

(iii)

any dispute in respect of which any other Party to the dispute has accepted the compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice only in relation to or for the purpose of the dispute; or where the acceptance of the Court's compulsory jurisdiction on behalf of any other Party to the dispute was deposited or ratified less than twelve months prior to the filing of the application bringing the dispute before the Court;

(iv)

any dispute which is substantially the same as a dispute previously submitted to the Court by the same or another Party.

2

1.

The Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland accept as compulsory ipso facto and without special convention, on condition of reciprocity, the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice, in conformity with paragraph 2 of Article 36 of the Statute of the Court, until such time as notice may be given to terminate the acceptance, over all disputes arising after 1 January 1987, with regard to situations or facts subsequent to the same date, other than:

(i)

any dispute which the United Kingdom has agreed with the other Party or Parties thereto to settle by some other method of peaceful settlement;

(ii)

any dispute with the government of any other country which is or has been a Member of the Commonwealth;

(iii)

any dispute in respect of which any other Party to the dispute has accepted the compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice only in relation to or for the purpose of the dispute; or where the acceptance of the Court's compulsory jurisdiction on behalf of any other Party to the dispute was deposited or ratified less than twelve months prior to the filing of the application bringing the dispute before the Court;

(iv)

any claim or dispute which is substantially the same as a claim or dispute previously submitted to the Court by the same or another Party;

(v)

any claim or dispute in respect of which the claim or dispute in question has not been notified to the United Kingdom by the State or States concerned in writing, including of an intention to submit the claim or dispute to the Court failing an amicable settlement, at least six months in advance of the submission of the claim or dispute to the Court;

(vi)

any claim or dispute that arises from or is connected with or related to nuclear disarmament and/or nuclear weapons, unless all of the other nuclear-weapon States Party to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons have also consented to the jurisdiction of the Court and are party to the proceedings in question.

2.

The Government of the United Kingdom also reserves the right at any time, by means of a notification addressed to the Secretary-General of the United Nations, and with effect as from the moment of such notification, either to add to, amend or withdraw any of the foregoing reservations, or any that may hereafter be added.

(1)

disputes in regard to which the parties to the dispute have agreed or shall agree to have recourse to some other method or methods of settlement;

(2)

disputes with the Government of any State which is or has been a Member of the Commonwealth of Nations;

(3)

disputes in regard to matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of the Republic of India;

(4)

disputes relating to or connected with facts or situations of hostilities, armed conflicts, individual or collective actions taken in self-defence, resistance to aggression, fulfilment of obligations imposed by international bodies, and other similar or related acts, measures or situations in which India is, has been or may in future be involved;

(5)

disputes with regard to which any other party to a dispute has accepted the compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice exclusively for or in relation to the purposes of such dispute; or where the acceptance of the Court's compulsory jurisdiction on behalf of a party to the dispute was deposited or ratified less than 12 months prior to the filing of the application bringing the dispute before the Court;

(6)

disputes where the jurisdiction of the Court is or may be founded on the basis of a treaty concluded under the auspices of the League of Nations, unless the Government of India specially agree to jurisdiction in each case;

(7)

disputes concerning the interpretation or application of a multilateral treaty unless all the parties to the treaty are also parties to the case before the Court or Government of India specially agree to jurisdiction;

(8)

disputes with the government of any State with which, on the date of an application to bring a dispute before the Court, the Government of India has no diplomatic relations or which has not been recognized by the Government of India;

(9)

disputes with non-sovereign States or territories;

(10)

disputes with India concerning or relating to:

(a)

The status of its territory or the modification or delimitation of its frontiers or any other matter concerning boundaries;

(b)

the territorial sea, the continental shelf and the margins, the exclusive fishery zone, the exclusive economic zone, and other zones of national maritime jurisdiction including for the regulation and control of marine pollution and the conduct of scientific research by foreign vessels;

(c)

the condition and status of its islands, bays and gulfs and that of the bays and gulfs that for historical reasons belong to it;

(d)

the airspace superjacent to its land and maritime territory; and

(e)

the determination and delimitation of its maritime boundaries.

(11)

disputes prior to the date of this declaration, including any dispute the foundations, reasons, facts, causes, origins, definitions, allegations or bases of which existed prior to this date, even if they are submitted or brought to the knowledge of the Court hereafter.

This declaration revokes and replaces the previous declaration made by the Government of India on 14th September 1959.

(1)

disputes in regard to which the parties to the dispute have agreed or shall agree to have recourse to some other method or methods of settlement;

(2)

disputes with the government of any State which is or has been a Member of the Commonwealth of Nations;

(3)

disputes in regard to matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of the Republic of India;

(4)

disputes relating to or connected with facts or situations of hostilities, armed conflicts, individual or collective actions taken in self-defence, resistance to aggression, fulfilment of obligations imposed by international bodies, and other similar or related acts, measures or situations in which India is, has been or may in future be involved, including the measures taken for protection of national security and ensuring national defence;

(5)

disputes with regard to which any other party to a dispute has accepted the compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice exclusively for or in relation to the purposes of such dispute; or where the acceptance of the Court’s compulsory jurisdiction on behalf of a party to the dispute was deposited or ratified less than 12 months prior to the filing of the application bringing the dispute before the Court;

(6)

disputes where the jurisdiction of the Court is or may be founded on the basis of a treaty concluded under the auspices of the League of Nations, unless the Government of India specially agree to jurisdiction in each case;

(7)

disputes concerning the interpretation or application of a multilateral treaty to which India is not a party; and disputes concerning the interpretation or application of a multilateral treaty to which India is a party, unless all the parties to the treaty are also parties to the case before the Court or the Government of India specially agree to jurisdiction;

(8)

disputes with the Government of any State with which, on the date of an application to bring a dispute before the Court, the Government of India has no diplomatic relations or which has not been recognized by the Government of India;

(9)

disputes with non-sovereign States or territories;

(10)

disputes with India concerning or relating to:

a)

the status of its territory or the modification or delimitation of its frontiers or any other matter concerning boundaries;

b)

the territorial sea, the continental shelf and the margins, the exclusive fishery zone, the exclusive economic zone, and other zones of national maritime jurisdiction including for the regulation and control of marine pollution and the conduct of scientific research by foreign vessels;

c)

the condition and status of its islands, bays and gulfs and that of the bays and gulfs that for historical reasons belong to it;

d)

the airspace superjacent to its land and maritime territory; and

e)

the determination and delimitation of its maritime boundaries.

(11)

disputes prior to the date of this declaration, including any dispute the foundations, reasons[,] facts, causes, origins, definitions, allegations or bases of which existed prior to this date, even if they are submitted or brought to the knowledge of the Court hereafter.

(12)

This declaration revokes and replaces the previous declaration submitted by the Government of India on 18 September, 1974.

(13)

The Government of India reserves the right at any time, by means of a written notification addressed to the Secretary-General of the United Nations, and with effect as from the moment of such notification, either to amend or terminate the present declaration.

(a)

The interpretation of a treaty;

(b)

Any question of international law;

(c)

The existence of any fact which, if established, would constitute a breach of an international obligation;

(d)

The nature or extent of the reparation to be made for the breach of an international obligation.

(a)

To any dispute which the Republic of Liberia considers essentially within its domestic jurisdiction;

(b)

To any dispute in regard to which the parties have agreed or may agree to bring before other tribunals as a result of agreements already existing or which may be made in the future.

1)

The present declaration covers disputes arising out of events both prior and subsequent to the declaration of acceptance of the ‘optional clause’ which Portugal made on December 16, 1920, as a party to the Statute of the Permanent Court of International Justice.

2)

The present declaration enters into force at the moment it is deposited with the Secretary-General of the United Nations; it shall be valid for a period of one year, and thereafter until notice of its denunciation is given to the said Secretary-General.

3)

The Portuguese Government reserves the right to exclude from the scope of the present declaration, at any time during its validity, any given category or categories of disputes, by notifying the Secretary-General of the United Nations and with effect from the moment of such notification.

1.

The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany declares that it recognizes as compulsory ipso facto and without special agreement, in relation to any other state accepting the same obligation, the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice, in conformity with paragraph 2 of Article 36 of the Statute of the Court, until such time as notice may be given to the Secretary-General of the United Nations withdrawing the declaration and with effect as from the moment of such notification, over all disputes arising after the present declaration, with regard to situations or facts subsequent to this date other than:

(i)

any dispute which the Parties thereto have agreed or shall agree to have recourse to some other method of peaceful settlement or which is subject to another method of peaceful settlement chosen by all the Parties.

(ii)

any dispute which

(a)

relates to, arises from or is connected with the deployment of armed forces abroad, involvement in such deployments or decisions thereon,

or

(b)

relates to, arises from or is connected with the use for military purposes of the territory of the Federal Republic of Germany, including its airspace, as well as maritime areas subject to German sovereign rights and jurisdiction;

(iii)

any dispute in respect of which any other Party to the dispute has accepted the compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice only in relation to or for the purpose of the dispute; or where the acceptance of the Court's compulsory jurisdiction on behalf of any other Party to the dispute was deposited or ratified less than twelve months prior to the filing of the application bringing the dispute before the Court.

2.

The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany also reserves the right at any time, by means of a notification addressed to the Secretary-General of the United Nations, and with effect as from the moment of such notification, either to add to, amend or withdraw any of the foregoing reservations, or any that may hereafter be added.

1.

Disputes in regard to which the Parties to the dispute have agreed or shall agree to have recourse to some other method of peaceful settlement;

2.

Disputes with regard to questions which by international law fall exclusively within the jurisdiction of the Kingdom of Cambodia;

3.

Disputes relating to any matter excluded from judicial settlement or compulsory arbitration by virtue of any treaty, convention or other international agreement or instrument to which the Kingdom of Cambodia is a party.

(a)

The interpretation of a treaty concluded or ratified by the Republic of the Sudan on or after the first day of January 1956;

(b)

Any question of International Law;

(c)

The existence of any fact, which, if established, would constitute a breach of an international obligation; or

(d)

The nature or extent of the reparation to be made for the breach of an international obligation;

(i)

Disputes in regard to which the parties to the dispute have agreed or shall agree to have recourse to some other method of peaceful settlement;

(ii)

Disputes in regard to matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of the Republic of the Sudan as determined by the Government of the Republic of the Sudan;

(iii)

Disputes arising out of events occurring during any period in which the Republic of the Sudan is engaged in hostilities as a belligerent.

1.

Disputes in regard to which the parties to the dispute have agreed or shall agree to have recourse to some other method or methods of settlement;

2.

Disputes with the Government of any State which, on the date of this Declaration, is a member of the Commonwealth of Nations or may so become subsequently;

3.

Disputes with regard to questions which by general rules of International Law fall exclusively within the jurisdiction of Kenya;

4.

Disputes concerning any question relating to or arising out of belligerent or military occupation or the discharge of any functions pursuant to any recommendation or decision of an organ of the United Nations, in accordance with which the Government of the Republic of Kenya have accepted obligations.

(i)

disputes in respect of which any party to the dispute has accepted the jurisdiction of the Court by a Declaration deposited less than Twelve Months prior to the filing of an Application bringing the dispute before the Court after the date of this amended Declaration;

(ii)

disputes in respect of which any party has filed an Application in substitution for or in lieu of all or any part of any Application to which sub-paragraph (i) refers;

(iii)

disputes relating to matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of the Federal Republic of Nigeria;

(iv)

disputes in respect of which any other party to the dispute has accepted the jurisdiction of the Court only in relation to or for the purposes of the dispute;

(v)

disputes in regard to which the parties have agreed or agree to have recourse to any other method of peaceful settlement;

(vi)

disputes relating to or connected with facts or situations of hostilities or armed conflict, whether internal or international in charac-ter;

(vii)

disputes with any State with which the Government of Nigeria does not have diplomatic relations;

(viii)

disputes concerning the allocation, delimitation or demarcation of territory (whether land, maritime, lacustrine or superjacent air space) unless the Government of Nigeria specially agrees to such jurisdiction and within the limits of any such special agreement;

(ix)

disputes in relation to matters which arose prior to the date of Nigeria's independence, including any dispute the causes, origins or bases of which arose prior to that date.

(a)

The interpretation of a treaty;

(b)

Any question of international law;

(c)

The existence of any fact which, if established, would constitute a breach of an international obligation;

(d)

The nature or extent of the reparation to be made for the breach of an international obligation;

(a)

Disputes in regard to which the parties have agreed to a settlement other than by recourse to the International Court of Justice;

(b)

Disputes with any country in the Commonwealth;

(c)

Disputes which, by international law, fall exclusively within the juris-diction of the Gambia.

(a)

The interpretation of a treaty;

(b)

Any question of international law;

(c)

The existence of any fact which, if established, would constitute a breach of an international obligation;

(d)

The nature or extent of the reparation to be made for the breach of international obligation.

(i)

Disputes with regard to matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of the Republic of Malawi as determined by the Government of Malawi;

(ii)

Disputes in regard to which the parties of the dispute have agreed or shall agree to have recourse to some other method of peaceful settlement; or

(iii)

Disputes concerning any question relating to or arising out of bel-ligerent or military occupation.

(i)

disputes in regard to which the Parties to the dispute have agreed or shall agree to have recourse to some other method of peaceful settlement;

(ii)

disputes with the Government of any other country which is a Member of the British Commonwealth of Nations, all of which disputes shall be settled in such manner as the parties have agreed or shall agree;

(iii)

disputes with regard to questions which by international law fall exclusively within the jurisdiction of Malta;

(iv)

disputes concerning any question relating to or arising out of bel-ligerent or military occupation or the discharge of any functions pursuant to any recommendation or decision of an organ of the United Nations, in accordance with which the Government of Malta have accepted obligations;

(v)

disputes arising under a multilateral treaty unless

(1)

all Parties to the treaty affected by the decision are also Parties to the case before the Court, or

(2)

the Government of Malta specially agrees to jurisdiction;

(vi)

disputes relating to any matter excluded from compulsory adjudication or arbitration under any treaty, convention or other international agreement or instrument to which Malta is a party;

(vii)

disputes in respect of which arbitral or judicial proceedings are taking, or have taken place with any State which, at the date of the commencement of the proceedings, had not itself accepted the compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice; and

(viii)

disputes in respect of which any other Party to the dispute has accepted the compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice only in relation to or for the purposes of the dispute; or where the acceptance of the Court's compulsory jurisdiction on behalf of any other Party to the dispute was deposited or ratified less than twelve months prior to the filing of the application bringing the dispute before the Court.

1.

I have the honour, on behalf of the Government of Malta, to declare that Malta accepts as compulsory ipso facto, without special convention, without the condition of reciprocity and without reservation, the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice, in conformity with paragraph 2 of Article 36 of the Court's Statute — until such time as notice may be given to terminate this acceptance — in respect of any dispute concerning the question of what principles and rules of international law are applicable, or may be applied, and/or how they are to be applied, to the delimitation of areas of the continental shelf in the Mediterranean Sea appertaining respectively to Malta on the one hand, and, conversely, to any other State, as the case may be.

2.

The Government of Malta reserves the right at any time, by means of a notification addressed to the Secretary-General of the United Nations, and with effect as from the moment of such notification, either to add to, amend or withdraw the present Declaration, or any of its provisions, or any that may hereafter be added to it.

(1)

the disputes mentioned in paragraphs (i) to (viii), both inclusive, of the said Declaration; and

(2)

the following categories of disputes, that is to say:

‘disputes with Malta concerning or relating to:

(a)

its territory, including the territorial sea, and the status thereof;

(b)

the continental shelf or any other zone of maritime jurisdiction, and the resources thereof;

(c)

the determination of delimitation of any of the above;

(d)

the prevention or control of pollution or contamination of the marine environment in marine areas adjacent to the coast of Malta.’

(i)

Disputes in regard to which the Parties to the dispute have agreed or shall agree to have recourse to some other method of peaceful settlement;

(ii)

Disputes with the Government of any other country which is a Member of the British Commonwealth of Nations, all of which disputes shall be settled in such manner as the parties have agreed or shall agree;

(iii)

Disputes with regard to questions which by international law fall exclusively within the jurisdiction of Mauritius;

(iv)

Disputes concerning any question relating to or arising out of belligerent or military occupation or the discharge of any functions pursuant to any recommendation or decision of an organ of the United Nations, in accordance with which the Government of Mauritius has accepted obligations;

(v)

Disputes relating to any matter excluded from compulsory adjudication or arbitration under any treaty, convention or other international agreement or instrument to which Mauritius is a party;

(vi)

Disputes in respect of which arbitral or judicial proceedings are taking, or have taken place with any State which, at the date of the commencement of the proceedings, had not itself accepted the compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice; and

(vii)

Disputes in respect of which any other Party to the dispute has accepted the compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice only in relation to or for the purposes of the dispute; or where the acceptance of the Court's compulsory jurisdiction on behalf of any other Party to the dispute was deposited or ratified less than twelve months prior to the filing of the application bring-ing the dispute before the Court.

(a)

To disputes in respect of which the parties have agreed to have recourse to another means of peaceful settlement; or

(b)

To disputes relating to matters which, by international law, are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of the Kingdom of Swaziland. The Government of the Kingdom of Swaziland also reserves the right to add to, amend or withdraw this Declaration by means of a notification addressed to the Secretary-General of the United Nations, with effect as from the moment of such notification.

(a)

to disputes in respect of which the parties have agreed or shall agree to have recourse to another means of peaceful settlement; or

(b)

to disputes relating to matters which, by international law, are essen-tially within the domestic jurisdiction of the Republic of Botswana.

(a)

The interpretation of a treaty;

(b)

Any question of international law;

(c)

The existence of any fact which, if established, would constitute a breach of an international obligation;

(d)

The nature or extent of the reparation to be made for the breach of an international obligation.

(a)

disputes in regard to which parties have agreed or shall agree to have recourse to some other method of peaceful settlement;

(b)

disputes with the Government of any other country which is a member of the Commonwealth of Nations, all of which disputes shall be settled in such manner as the parties have agreed or shall agree;

(c)

disputes with regard to questions which by international law fall exclusively within the jurisdiction of Barbados;

(d)

disputes arising out of or concerning jurisdiction or rights claimed or exercised by Barbados in respect of the conservation, management or exploitation of the living resources of the Sea, or in respect of the prevention or control of pollution or contamination of the marine environment in marine areas adjacent to the coast of Barbados.’

—

the interpretation of a treaty;

—

any question of international law;

—

existence of any fact which, if established, would constitute a breach of an international obligation;

—

the nature or extent of the reparation to be made for the breach of an international obligation.

—

disputes concerning which the parties have agreed to have recourse to some other method of settlement;

—

disputes with regard to questions which by international law fall within the exclusive competence of Senegal.

A.

disputes, which have arisen or may arise with respect to or in relation with the borders of the Republic of Suriname;

B.

disputes in respect of which the parties, excluding the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice, have agreed to settlement by means of arbitration, mediation[lees: meditation] or other methods of conciliation and accomodation[lees: accommodation].

a)

the interpretation of any treaty —

(i)

to which the Republic of Cyprus became a Party on or after 16 August 1960 or

(ii)

which the Republic of Cyprus recognises as binding on it by succession;

b)

any question of international law;

c)

the existence of any fact which, if established, would constitute a breach of an international obligation;

d)

the nature or extent of the reparation to be made for the breach of an international obligation.

a)

to disputes relating to questions which fall within the domestic jurisdiction of the Republic of Cyprus;

b)

where the declaration recognizing the compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice on behalf of any other Party to the dispute was deposited with the Secretary General of the United Nations less than six months prior to the filing of the application bringing the dispute before the Court.

1.

I have the honour on behalf of the Government of the Republic of Cyprus to declare, in conformity with paragraph 2 of Article 36 of the Statute of the International Court of Justice, that the Republic of Cyprus accepts as compulsory ipso facto and without special agreement, on condition of reciprocity, the jurisdiction of the Court, in relation to any other State accepting the same obligation, over all legal disputes concerning:

(a)

the interpretation of any treaty

I.

to which the Republic of Cyprus became a party on or after 16 August 1960 or

II.

which the Republic of Cyprus recognizes as binding on it by succession;

(b)

any question of international law;

(c)

the existence of any fact which, if established, would constitute a breach of an international obligation.

(d)

the nature or extent of the reparation to be made for the breach of an international obligation.

Provided that this declaration shall not apply:

i.

To disputes in respect of which any other Party to the dispute has accepted the compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice only in relation to or for the purpose of the dispute; or where the acceptance of the Court's compulsory jurisdiction on behalf of any other Party to the dispute was deposited or ratified less than twelve months prior to the filing of the application bringing the dispute before the Court.

ii.

To disputes relating to questions which fall within the domestic jurisdiction of the Republic of Cyprus.

2.

The Government of Cyprus also reserves the right at any time, by means of a notification addressed to the Secretary-General of the United Nations, and with effect as from the moment of such notification, either to add to, amend or withdraw this Declaration or any of the foregoing reservations or any that may hereafter be added.

(a)

The interpretation of a treaty;

(b)

Any question of international law;

(c)

The existence of any fact which, if established, would constitute a breach of an international obligation;

(d)

The nature or extent of the reparation to be made for the breach of an international obligation.

a)

disputes prior to the date of this declaration or disputes arisen out of facts or situations prior to the same date,

b)

disputes with regard to the territory or State boundaries,

c)

disputes with regard to pollution of the environment unless the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice results from the treaty obligations of the Republic of Poland,

d)

disputes with regard to foreign liabilities or debts,

e)

disputes with regard to any State which has made a declaration accepting the compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice less than twelve months prior to the filing of the application bringing the dispute before the Court,

f)

disputes in respect whereof parties have agreed, or shall agree, to have recourse to some other method of peaceful settlement,

g)

disputes relating to matters which, by international law, fall exclusively within the domestic jurisdiction of the State.

a)

disputes prior to 25 September 1990 or disputes arisen out of facts or situations prior to the same date,

b)

disputes with regard to the territory and State boundaries,

c)

disputes with regard to environmental protection,

d)

disputes with regard to foreign liabilities or debts,

e)

disputes with regard to any State which has made a declaration accepting the compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice less than twelve months prior to the filing of the application bringing the dispute before the Court,

f)

disputes in respect whereof the parties have agreed or shall agree to have recourse to other method of peaceful settlement,

g)

disputes relating to matters which, by international law, fall exclusively within the domestic jurisdiction of the Republic of Poland.

1.

the interpretation of a treaty;

2.

any question of international law;

3.

the existence of any fact which, if established, would constitute a breach of an international obligation;

4.

the nature or extent of the reparation to be made for the breach of an international obligation,

1.

the interpretation of a treaty;

2.

any question of international law;

3.

the existence of any fact which, if established, would constitute a breach of an international obligation;

4.

the nature or extent of the reparation to be made for the breach of an international obligation,

—

the interpretation of a treaty;

—

any question of international law;

—

the existence of any fact which, if established, would constitute a breach of an international obligation;

—

the nature or extent of the reparation to be made for the breach of an international obligation.

to disputes in respect of which the parties have agreed to have recourse to another means of settlement;

to disputes relating to matters which, by international law, are within the exclusive jurisdiction of Madagascar.

a)

disputes in regard to which the parties to the dispute have agreed or shall agree to have recourse to some other method of peaceful settlement;

b)

disputes in regard to matter which by international law fall exclusively within the domestic jurisdiction of the Republic of Hungary;

c)

disputes relating to, or connected with, facts or situations of hostilities, war, armed conflicts, individual or collective actions taken in self-defense or the discharge of any functions pursuant to any resolution or recommendation of the United Nations, and other similar or related acts, measures or situations in which the Republic of Hungary is, has been or may in the future be involved;

d)

disputes in respect of which any other party to the dispute has accepted the compulsory jurisdiction of the Court only in relation to or for the purpose of such dispute; or where the acceptance of the Court's compulsory jurisdiction on behalf of any other party to the dispute was deposited less than twelve months prior to the filing of the application bringing the dispute before the Court.

a)

any dispute relating to military activities and measures taken by the Hellenic Republic for the protection of its sovereignty and territorial integrity, for national defense purposes, as well as for the protection of its national security;

b)

any dispute concerning State boundaries or sovereignty over the territory of the Hellenic Republic, including any dispute over the breadth and limits of its territorial sea and its airspace;

c)

any dispute in respect of which any other party to the dispute has accepted the compulsory jurisdiction of the Court only in relation to or for the purpose of that dispute; or where the acceptance of the Court's compulsory jurisdiction on behalf of any other party to the dispute was deposited or ratified less than twelve months prior to the filing of the application bringing the dispute before the Court.

(a)

any dispute in regard to which the parties thereto have agreed or shall agree to have recourse to some other method of peaceful settlement;

(b)

any dispute concerning or relating to the delimitation of maritime zones, including the territorial sea, the exclusive economic zone and the continental shelf, or arising out of, concerning, or relating to the exploitation of any disputed area of or adjacent to any such maritime zone pending its delimitation;

(c)

any dispute in respect of which any other party to the dispute has accepted the compulsory jurisdiction of the Court only in relation to or for the purpose of the dispute; or where the acceptance of the Court's compulsory jurisdiction on behalf of any other party to the dispute was deposited less than 12 months prior to the filing of the application bringing the dispute before the Court. ’

(a)

The interpretation of a treaty;

(b)

Any question of international law;

(c)

Existence of any fact which, if established, would constitute a breach of an international obligation;

(c)

The nature or extent of the reparation to be made for the breach of an international obligation.

(a)

Disputes for which the parties have agreed to have recourse to some other method of settlement;

(b)

Disputes with regard to questions which by international law fall within the exclusive competence of the Republic of Guinea.

(a)

The interpretation of a treaty;

(b)

Any question of international law;

(c)

The existence of any fact which, if established, would constitute a breach of an international obligation;

(d)

The nature or extent of the reparation to be made for the breach of an international obligation; with the exception of:

1.

Disputes concerning which the parties have agreed to have recourse to some other method of settlement;

2.

Disputes with regard to questions which by international law fall within the exclusive competence of Côte d'lvoire.

1.

International law does not give Nicaragua the right to formulate reservations a posteriori to its unconditional declaration of acceptance of the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice.

In the judgement on the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice pronounced in the Military and Paramilitary Activities In and Against Nicaragua case, the Court indicated that States could not modify their acceptance of the Court's compulsory jurisdiction as they pleased, but were bound by the terms of their declarations.

The Court noted, in particular, that the right to terminate declarations with indefinite duration was far from established in international law.

Nicaragua itself has recognized that contemporary international law does not give States the power to modify unilaterally their optional declarations of acceptance of the compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice when such declarations are unconditional.

In its written pleadings in the Border and Transborder Armed Actions case between Nicaragua and Honduras, Nicaragua stated categorically that a State bound by an optional declaration could not modify or denounce that declaration. Nicaragua claimed that the declaring State was bound by the terms of the optional declaration and that, by virtue of the principle of good faith, it could not seek to disengage unilaterally from the obligations it had acquired in making that declaration.

Nicaragua argued that that rule arose from an analogous application of the customary principles of the law of treaties. Nicaragua indicated that the principles incorporated into the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties were applicable to voluntary declarations of acceptance of the Court's jurisdiction in respect of denunciation and reservation, meaning that such declarations could not be modified unless the declaring State had previously reserved that right. Lastly, Nicaragua maintained that State practice showed that a State could modify an optional declaration only when it reserved the right to do so at the time it made the original declaration.

In its written pleadings in the jurisdictional phase of the Military and Paramilitary Activities case, Nicaragua argued that the legality of a purported modification depended on the intention of the declaring State at the time of making the original optional declaration. If the declaring State did not expressly reserve the right to make modifications, that State did not have the power to change its declaration or to formulate reservations.

Insofar as the declaration of acceptance of the compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice made by Nicaragua in 1929 does not include any conditions or time limits, nor does it expressly reserve the right to modify its content, Nicaragua has no right to formulate reservations to its acceptance of the Court's compulsory jurisdiction.

2.

Nicaragua, by virtue of its public unilateral declarations before the Court with respect to the nature of its optional declaration and the possibility of modifying it, cannot formulate any reservations.

In a number of unilateral declarations, Nicaragua has recognized that its own declaration of acceptance of the Court's compulsory jurisdiction cannot be modified in any way.

In its written pleadings in the Military and Paramilitary Activities case, Nicaragua pointed out that its 1924 declaration could not be terminated or modified without prior notice and that any withdrawal or modification of the declaration must be based on the principles of the law of treaties. What is more, Nicaragua indicated categorically that the assumption that its declaration could be modified without prior notice was unfounded in the law relating to consensual legal obligations arising from optional declarations. In the same case, Nicaragua argued against the possibility of unilaterally modifying declarations of acceptance of the Court's compulsory jurisdiction. Nicaragua based its arguments both on the writings of the most distinguished legal experts and on considerations of principle. Nicaragua noted that the existence of a universal right of unilateral modification of optional declarations would violate the system of optional clauses in the Statute and would essentially eliminate the compulsory nature of the Court's jurisdiction.

These arguments demonstrate both Nicaragua’s intention that its 1929 declaration of acceptance of the Court's compulsory jurisdiction should not be subject to any modification or denunciation and its repeated contention that the unilateral modification of such declarations, in the absence of a previous reservation, is contrary to international law. This acknowledgement of the legal situation is binding on Nicaragua. Under the principles of estoppel and good faith, Nicaragua cannot, at this time, reverse those positions.

Accordingly, Costa Rica considers that Nicaragua cannot now claim to modify unilaterally its unconditional acceptance of the voluntary jurisdiction of the Court by means of a purported ‘reservation’.

Even if Nicaragua had the right to formulate a reservation to its optional declaration, which it does not, the lack of a reasonable time period for its entry into force renders such a ‘reservation’ null and void.

In the Military and Paramilitary Activities case, the International Court of Justice indicated that, while the right to denounce declarations without limit of time was far from established in international law, if such a right existed, then any denunciation would, by analogy with the law of treaties, have to provide for a reasonable time period before it entered into force. This principle applies, by analogy, to the introduction of changes to the voluntary acceptance of the Court's compulsory jurisdiction. Consequently, even if Nicaragua could modify its optional declaration by means of a reservation, which is not the case, then such a modification would have to be subject to a reasonable time period, by virtue of the principle of good faith.

It should be noted that, in the Border and Transborder Armed Actions case, Nicaragua argued that only a period of at least 12 months could be considered reasonable for any modification of a declaration of voluntary acceptance of the Court's jurisdiction.Nicaragua’s purported ‘reservation’, which my Government has analysed in this note, provides for a period of only eight days from the time of its signature by the President of Nicaragua to the time of its purported entry into force. Even if Nicaragua were legally in a position to modify its acceptance of the Court's compulsory jurisdiction, which it is not, a period of eight days would not meet the requirement of a reasonable time period for the entry into force of such a modification.

What is more, Nicaragua, by virtue of its declarations in the Border and Transborder Armed Actions case, would be obligated, under the principles of good faith and estoppel, to provide for a period of at least 12 months before the purported ‘reservation’ could enter into force. Accordingly, the purported ‘reservation’ formulated on 24 October 2001 cannot be considered to meet the minimum requirements imposed by the principle of good faith.Jurisdiction of the Court and the Pact of Bogotá:

Moreover, in the case of Nicaragua, as in the case of any other Latin American State party to the Pact of Bogotá, the denunciation of the Statute of the Court would not disengage it from the obligation to recognize the competence of that Court as a respondent, for the following reason:

In April 1948, the American Treaty on Pacific Settlement, better known as the Pact of Bogotá, was adopted. Costa Rica ratified it on 27 April 1949, and Nicaragua, in turn, ratified it on 26 July 1950. Accordingly, the Pact of Bogotá has been in force between Costa Rica and Nicaragua as from the latter date.The Pact contains a definitive declaration of recognition of the compulsory jurisdiction of the Court for all disputes of a juridical nature among the States parties to the Pact. Article XXXI of the Pact says:

‘In conformity with Article 36, paragraph 2, of the Statute of the International Court of Justice, the High Contracting Parties declare that they recognize in relation to any other American State, the jurisdiction of the Court as compulsory ipso facto, without the necessity of any special agreement so long as the present Treaty is in force, in all disputes of a juridical nature that arise among them …’

Therefore, since both Costa Rica and Nicaragua are ratifying parties to the Pact of Bogotá, there can be no doubt that both parties have recognized the compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice to settle any legal dispute between them. The above-mentioned article XXXI has the legal effect of transforming the vague juridical relations arising from unilateral declarations made by the parties under the optional clause into contractual relations which have the force and stability characteristic of an obligation arising directly from a treaty.

Dr. Eduardo Jimenez de Aréchega, a distinguished Uruguayan jurist who had the honour to serve as President of the International Court of Justice, maintained that there were substantial differences between the exercise of the optional clause and the fact of being a party to a convention. In an opinion which he provided to Costa Rica in his capacity as adviser to our country in the 1986 Nicaragua v. Costa Rica case, he gave the following explanation:

‘The fundamental difference between the recognition of the Court's jurisdiction expressed by the parties to the Pact of Bogotá and that expressed by other States under the optional clause is as follows: (a) once the Pact of Bogotá has been ratified by an American State, the recognition of the Court's jurisdiction may be withdrawn only by denunciation of the Pact itself, which must be effected with at least one year’s notice; and (b) the States which ratified the Pact could have introduced reservations to their recognition of the Court's jurisdiction if they had done so at the time of signature. As they did not do so with respect to the recognition of the compulsory jurisdiction of the Court, article XXXI became a mechanism for accepting fully the Court's jurisdiction, and is completely different in this regard from the very conditional acceptance which the majority of States have expressed through the application of the optional clause.

‘From these substantial differences, it follows that the American States parties to the Pact of Bogotá have established a legal system among themselves whereby the optional clause has been replaced by the categorical declaration contained in article XXXI of the Pact. The declarations made by American States in exercise of their prerogative under Article 36, paragraph 2, of the Statute of the Court only have the legal effect of establishing the tenuous relations under that clause exclusively with States which are not Contracting Parties to the Pact of Bogotá, but not the contractual obligation created by article XXXI to recognize, with the force of a treaty, the obligation to grant the American States parties to the Pact of Bogotá the right to bring claims against other American States before the Court at The Hague’.

Consequently, even if Nicaragua’s Presidential Decree revoking the unilateral declaration of 1929 in which Nicaragua recognized the jurisdiction of the Court at The Hague to settle legal disputes with any other State having expressed the same recognition were valid, which it is not, that nation would still be bound to recognize the competence of the Court at The Hague to settle legal disputes with any other Latin American State party to the Pact of Bogotá.

In light of the above, so long as the Pact of Bogotá is in force, Nicaragua cannot deny the competence of the International Court of Justice to hear and settle any legal dispute brought before it by Costa Rica.

For all the foregoing reasons, the Government of Costa Rica hereby presents a formal objection to the ‘reservation’ formulated by the Government of Nicaragua, and declares that, for all intents and purposes, it will consider such reservation to be non-existent.

I should be grateful if you would transmit this document to the secretariat of the International Court of Justice and to the States parties to its Statute. Likewise, I should be grateful if you would have it circulated to the General Assembly as a document of the Assembly under the agenda item relating to the consideration of the report of the International Court of Justice to the General Assembly.

1.

Under Article 36, paragraph 2, of the Statute of the International Court of Justice, the Portuguese Republic recognizes the jurisdiction of the Court as compulsory ipso facto and without special agreement, in relation to any other State accepting the same obligation (and to the extent it accepts it), until such time as notice may be given to terminate the acceptance, in all legal disputes other than:

(i)

any dispute which Portugal has agreed or shall agree with the other party or parties thereto to settle by some other method of peaceful settlement;

(ii)

any dispute with any State that has deposited or ratified the acceptance of the Court's compulsory jurisdiction or an amendment thereto so that the dispute became included in its scope less than twelve months prior to the filling of the application bringing the dispute before the Court;

(iii)

any dispute, unless it refers to territorial titles or rights or to sovereign rights or jurisdiction, arising before 26 April 1974 or concerning situations or facts prior to that date;

(iv)

any dispute with a party or parties to a treaty regarding which the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice has, under the applicable rules, been explicitly excluded, irrespective of whether the scope of the dispute refers to the interpretation and application of the treaty provisions or to other sources of international law.

2.

The Portuguese Republic also reserves the right at any time, by means of a notification addressed to the Secretary-General of the United Nations, and with effect as from the moment of such notification, either to add to, amend or withdraw any of the foregoing reservations, or any that may hereafter be added.

(1)

Which the parties have agreed to settle by some other method of peaceful settlement;

(2)

in respect of which any other Party to the dispute has accepted the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice only in relation to or for the purpose of the dispute; or when the declaration recognizing the jurisdiction of the Court on behalf of any other Party to the dispute was deposited less than twelve months prior to the filing of the unilateral application bringing the dispute before the Court;

(3)

with regard to the protection of environment;

(4)

with regard to questions which by international law fall exclusively within the domestic jurisdiction of the Slovak Republic.

(a)

The interpretation of a treaty;

(b)

Any question of international law;

(c)

The existence of any fact which, if established, would constitute a breach of an international obligation;

(d)

The nature and extent of the reparation to be made for the breach of an international obligation;

1.

Disputes in regard to which the parties to the dispute have agreed or shall agree to have recourse to some other method or methods of settlement;

2.

Disputes in regard to matters which are exclusively within the domestic jurisdiction of the Republic of Djibouti, under international law;

3.

Disputes relating to or connected with facts or situations of hostilities, armed conflicts, individual or collective actions taken in self-defence, resistance to aggression, fulfilment of obligations imposed by international bodies and other similar or related acts, measures or situations in which the Republic of Djibouti is, has been or may in future be involved;

4.

Disputes concerning the interpretation or application of a multilateral treaty unless all the parties to the treaty are also parties to the case before the Court or the Government of Djibouti specially agrees to jurisdiction of the Court;

5.

Disputes with the Government of any State with which, on the date of an application to bring a dispute before the Court, the Government of Djibouti has no diplomatic relations or which has not been recognized by the Government of Djibouti;

6.

Disputes with non-sovereign States or territories;

7.

Disputes with the Republic of Djibouti concerning or relating to:

(a)

The status of its territory or the modification or delimitation of its frontiers or any other matter concerning boundaries;

(b)

The territorial sea, the continental shelf and the margins, the exclusive fishery zone, the exclusive economic zone and other zones of national maritime jurisdiction including for the regulation and control of marine pollution and the conduct of scientific research by foreign vessels;

(c)

The condition and status of its islands, bays and gulfs;

(d)

The airspace superjacent to its land and maritime territory; and

(e)

The determination and delimitation of its maritime boundaries.

(1)

any dispute which the parties thereto have agreed or shall agree to refer for final and binding decision to arbitration or judicial settlement;

(2)

any dispute in respect of which any other party to the dispute has accepted the compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice only in relation to or for the purpose of the dispute; or where the acceptance of the Court’s compulsory jurisdiction on behalf of any other party to the dispute was deposited or notified less than twelve months prior to the filing of the application bringing the dispute before the Court;

(3)

any dispute arising out of, concerning, or relating to research on, or conservation, management or exploitation of, living resources of the sea.

a)

Disputes in regard to which the Kingdom of Spain and the other party or parties have agreed or shall agree to have recourse to some other method of peaceful settlement of dispute;

b)

Disputes in regard to which the other party or parties have accepted the compulsory jurisdiction of the Court only in relation to or for the purposes of the dispute in question;

c)

Disputes in regard to which the other party or parties have accepted the compulsory jurisdiction of the Court less than 12 months prior to the filing of the application bringing the dispute before the Court;

d)

Disputes arising prior to the date on which this Declaration was deposited with the Secretary-General of the United Nations or relating to events or situations which occurred prior to that date, even if such events or situations may continue to occur or to have effects thereafter.

2.

The Kingdom of Spain may at any time, by means of a notification addressed to the Secretary-General of the United Nations, add to, amend or withdraw, in whole or in part, the foregoing reservations or any that may hereafter be added. These amendments shall become effective on the date of their receipt by the Secretary-General of the United Nations.

3.

The present Declaration, which is deposited with the Secretary-General of the United Nations in conformity with Article 36, paragraph 4, of the Statute of the International Court of Justice, shall remain in force until such time as it has been withdrawn by the Span-ish Government or superseded by another declaration by the latter.

1.

The Republic of Lithuania declares that it recognizes as compulsory ipso facto and without special agreement, in relation to any other State accepting the same obligation, the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice, in conformity with paragraph 2 of Article 36 of the Statute of the Court, until such time as notice may be given to the Secretary-General of the United Nations withdrawing the declaration and with effect as from the moment of such notification, over all disputes arising after the present declaration, with regard to situations or facts subsequent to this date, other than:

(i)

any dispute which the parties thereto have agreed or shall agree to have recourse to some other method of peaceful settlement or which is subject to another method of peaceful settlement chosen by all the parties;

(ii)

any dispute relating to any matter excluded from compulsory adjudication or arbitration under any treaty, to which the Republic of Lithuania is a party, or other instrument imposing international obligations to the Republic of Lithuania;

(iii)

any dispute which arises from or is connected with a military operation carried out in accordance with a decision taken by consensus or unanimity by international security and defence organisation or organisation implementing common security and defence policy, to which the Republic of Lithuania is a member;

(iv)

any dispute in respect of which any other party to the dispute has accepted the compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice only in relation to or for the purpose of the dispute; or where the acceptance of the Court's compulsory jurisdiction on behalf of any other party to the dispute was deposited or ratified less than twelve months prior to the filing of the application bringing the dispute before the Court.

2.

The Republic of Lithuania also reserves the right at any time, by means of a notification addressed to the Secretary-General of the United Nations, and with effect as from the moment of such notification, either to add to, amend or withdraw any of the foregoing reservations, or any that may hereafter be added.