1 For lack of space I note but a few references to such discussions. I choose some problems concerning the content of the standard of international accountability which, of course, became a linchpin of the amended pleadings and arguments of counsel for Ethiopia and Liberia. See on these pp. 224–71 (esp. pp. 244ff. on the restructuring by these parties of their whole case in reaction to South Africa’s inspection proposal); pp. 272–77 (“from Nuremberg to Brown”); pp. 296–98 (relation of the res judicata controversy as between 1962 and 1966 to a sound appreciation of the course of pleadings); pp. 302 ff. (“barely one judge of the fourteen endorsed Applicant’s norm thesis”); pp. 306–09 (tactics for “conservatism” or “radicalism” of the Court); pp. 338ff. (Namibia, the Court, and the General Assembly’s his disponendi).

2 Emerson, R., The United Nations and Colonialism, 3 International Relations 779 (1970)Google Scholar.