text: UnitedStatesmadeitknownthat,notwithstanding the Judgment of26November 1984,intheviewoftheUnited States"theCourtiswithoutjurisdiction toentertain the disputeandthattheNicaraguan Application of9April1984 isinadmissible" andthataccordingly "theUnitedStates intendsnottoparticipate inanyfurtherproceedings in connection withthiscase".On22January1985,theAgent ofNicaragua informed thePresident thathisGovernment maintained itsapplication andavaileditselfoftherights.. ..... !i!i'II ~iiI .liIlilllilliillilliiMi.---~""',~1'!#'t~,ilIiI1lIiIi-.Ii!!I!!!!-I!II· __1 1 Iprovided forinArticle53oftheStatutewhenever oneofthe PartiesdoesnotappearbeforetheCourtorfailstodefend itscase. 29.ByanOrderdated22January1985(I.C.J.Reports 1984,p.3),thePresident fixedtime-limits forthefilingof pleadings onthemerits.TheGovernment ofNicaragua fileditsMemorial withintheprescribed time-Hmit (30April 1985).NoCounter-Memorial hasbeenfiledbytheGovern­ mentoftheUnitedStateswithinthetime-limit allottedtoit, whichexpiredon31May1985,andnoextension ofsuch time-limit wasrequested bythatGovernment. Theoral proceedings willstarton12September 1985. 2.COlllinelltal Shelf(LibyanArabJamalziriya/Malta) 30.On26July1982.theGovernments oftheLibyan ArabJamahiriya andMaltanotifiedjointlytotheRegistrar aSpecial ..Lgreement concluded between themon23May 1976andinforcesincetheexchange on20March1982of theinstruments ofratification. TheSpecialAgreement rC"l~~sts theCourttodecidethefollowing question: "Whatprinciple" andrulesofinternational laware. applicable tothedelimitation oftheareaofthecontinen­ talshelfwhichappertains totheRepublic ofMaltaand theareaofcontinental shelfwhichappertait.3 tothe LibyanArabRepublic. andhowinpracticesuchprinci­ plesandrulescanbeappliedbythetwoPartiesinthis particular caseinorderthattheymaywithoutdifficulty delimitsuchareasbyanagreement asprovided inArti­ clelilT' TheArticleIIIreferredtoprovides fornegotiation afterthe casewithaviewtoreaching agreement onthedelimitation inaccordance withtheCourt'sdecision. 31.On27July1982.theVice-President oftheCourt madeanOrderwhereby. havingregardtoaprovi~,ion ofthe SpecialAgreement between theParties.hefixed26April 1983asthetime-limit forthefilingofaMemorial byeach Party(1.e.J.Reports1982,p.554).TheMemorials were filedwithintheprescribed time-limit and.byanOrderof 26April1983.thePresident fixed26October 1983asthe time-limit forthefilingoftheCounter-Memorials (I.C.J. Reports 1983,p.3).Thelatterwerefiledwithinthe prescribed time-limit. 32.EachStateappointed aJudgeadhocinaccordance withArticle31oftheStatuteoftheCourt. Th~LibyanArab Jamahiriya choseMr.E.Jimenez deArechaga, andMalta choseMr.J.Castaneda. 33.On24October 1983,theItalianGovernment filed anapplication forpermission tointervene underArticle62 oftheStatute.ThatArticlereadsasfollows: "I.ShouldaStateconsider thatithasaninterestofa legalnaturewhichmaybeaffectedbythedecision inthe case,itmaysubmitarequesttotheCourttobepermitted tointervene. "2.ItshallbefortheCourttodecideuponthis request." TheGovernment ofItalyindicated initsapplication thatthe objectofitsintervention inthecaseconcerning delimitation ofthecontinental shelfbetweentheLibyanArabJamahiriya andMaltawastoenableittoparticipate intheproceedings tothefullextentnecessary todefenditsrightsovercertain areasclaimedbytheParties,sothattheCourtmightbeable totakethoserightsintoaccount initsdecision. 34.Inaccordance withArticle83oftheRules.the Governments oftheLibyanArabJamahiriya andMalta 4~ubmitted writtenobservations onthisapplication. As objections wereraisedtoItaly'srequestforintervention, the Courtheld,inaccordance withArticle84oftheRules, sevenpublicsittingsduringwhichspeeches weremadeon behalfofItaly,theLibyanArabJamahiriya andMalta. 35.On21March1984,theCourtdelivered atapublic sittingaJudgment findingbyelevenvotestofivethat Italy'sapplication couldnotbegranted(I.C.J.Reports 1984,p.3).JudgesMorozov, Nagendra SinghandMbaye andJudgeadhocJimenez deArechaga appended separate opinions totheJudgment (ibid.,pp.30-70).Vice-President Sette-Camara andJudgesOda,Ago,Schwebel and Sir RobertJennings appended dissenting opinions totheJudg­ ment(ibid.,pp.70-160). 36.Afterthedecision refusing Italypermission to intervene, theproceedings continued. On21March1984, thePresident madeanOrderfixingat12July1984thetime­ limitforthefilingofRepliesbytheLibyanArabJamahiriya andMalta(I.e.J.Reports1984,p.162),bothStateshaving expressec' thewishtosubmitafurtherpleading asprovided intheirSpecialAgreement. TheAgentsofthePartieseach filedtheirrespective Replies within thetime-limi~ andthe casethusbecamereadyforhearing. Thedocumentation whichthePartieshavesubmitted totheCourtinordertosub­ stantiatetheirclaimsisveryvoluminous (some3,400pages). 37.Following theresignation forhealthreasonsof JudgeadhocMr.J.Castaneda, appointed byMalta,Malta appointed Mr.N.Valticosasitsm~wjudgeadhoc. 38.Between 26November and14December 1984and 4and24February 1985,theCourtheld25publicsittings duringwhichspeeches weremadeonbehalfoftheLibyan ArabJamahiriya andMalta. 39.On3June1985.theCourtdelivered itsJudgment at apublicsitting(I.e.J.Reports1985.p.13).The operative partoftheJudgment readsasfollows: "TheCourt. "byfourteen votestothree. "findsthat,withreference totheareasofcontinental shelfbetween thecoastsofthePartieswithinthelimits definedinthepresentJudgment. namelythemeridian 13°50'Eandthemeridian 15°10'E: "A.Theprinciples andrulesofinternational law applicable fDrthedelimitation. tobeeffected byagree­ mentinimplementation ofthepresentJudgment. ofthe areasofcontinental shelfappertaining totheSocialist •People'sLibyanArabJamahiriya andtotheRepublic of
analysis: The text appears to be related to international law and territorial disputes, specifically concerning the delimitation of the continental shelf between two countries, Libya and Malta. The case involves a Special Agreement between the two countries, and the International Court of Justice (ICJ) has been involved in the proceedings. The text also mentions the appointment of judges ad hoc, written observations, and public sittings. The subject matter seems to be more focused on international law and territorial disputes rather than economic development or other categories.