1 THE PRESIDENT: Dr Plender, you may continue.

2

3 DR PLENDER: Mr President, Members of the Tribunal. This morning, I addressed two of

4 the Guinean objections to admissibility in this case.; the objection based on the principle of

5 effective link and the objection based upon the principle of nationality of claims. I now turn

6 to the third main Guinean objection, that based on the principle of exhaustion of local

7 remedies.

8

9 We submit that the rule on exhaustion of local remedies would not apply in this case,

10 even if it were open to Guinea to raise objections to admissibility at this stage.

11

12 Where a State acts in breach of international law, in relation to a person or property

13 beyond its territorial jurisdiction, the State cannot demand that the individuals who have

14 suffered damage should exhaust local remedies, for such a demand would reinforce that

15 State's wrongful assertion of jurisdiction. It would be plainly unjust to compel a person to

16 submit to the jurisdiction of the court's of a State where his complaint is that the State has

17 acted without jurisdiction. An individual is obliged by international law to exhaust local

18 remedies only where he has put himself within the jurisdiction of the State by some voluntary

19 act. In the expression commonly used by writers, the requirement of exhaustion of local

20 remedies applies only where there is a jurisdictional connection between the State against

21 which the claim is brought and the person in respect of whom it is advanced.