← Back to context Comment by ajb 1 year ago https://www.icj-cij.org/sites/default/files/case-related/192... 1 comment ajb Reply JumpCrisscross 1 year ago Hmm, the relevant meat appears in paragraph 43. One one point, he votes against because it’s redundant to the Convention. Fair enough. On the other, a question of “plausibility,” comes up, which seems a term of art I wasn’t able to quickly decipher.
JumpCrisscross 1 year ago Hmm, the relevant meat appears in paragraph 43. One one point, he votes against because it’s redundant to the Convention. Fair enough. On the other, a question of “plausibility,” comes up, which seems a term of art I wasn’t able to quickly decipher.
Hmm, the relevant meat appears in paragraph 43. One one point, he votes against because it’s redundant to the Convention. Fair enough. On the other, a question of “plausibility,” comes up, which seems a term of art I wasn’t able to quickly decipher.