C.Precautionary approach
Judge Wolfrum in his “Separate Opinion” attached to “The Mox Plant Case”…
Since the Tribunal in “The Mox Plant Case” Order of 03/12/2001 concluded that there was no ground for the application of the precautionary principle (para.75), it is possible to speculate that, the urgency element in provisional measures procedure prevailed the precautionary principle.…
In “Southern Bluefin Tuna Cases” Order of 27/08/1999 Judge ad hoc Shearer in his “Separate Opinion”…
In his “Separate Opinion” appended to the “Southern Bluefin Tuna Cases”…
In his “Separate Opinion” appended to the “Southern Bluefin Tuna Cases”…
With respect to Judge Laing’s argument that “instead of irreparability, the key to the UNCLOS provisional measures is the discretionary element of appropriateness” (Sep. Opi., para.4), here it may be noted that under International Human Rights Law when deciding on interim measures convention organs take into account not only the element of “appropriateness” but also other well established criteria, such as “urgency”, “irreparability” or “seriousness” without indicating that the latter elements have been regarded as less important. One may even question whether “appropriateness” amounts a new element in deciding interim/provisional measures since it is inherent in any judicial decision.Sayfa 362
EN
TR
