Monitorear los niveles de glucosa en sangre

160 Flowing from the above passage, it thus follows that the existence of a valid jurisdictional link between the would-be intervener and the parties is not a requirement for the success of the application. Rather the procedure for intervention is to ensure that a state with possibly affected interests may be permitted to intervene even though there is no jurisdictional link.¹⁹⁴ The onus of proof in intervention cases lie on the applicant to demonstrate what it asserts.¹⁹⁵ However, this burden of proof is just prima facie burden. The practice of intervention is closely defined and carefully circumscribed in terms of the protection of a states interest of a legal nature which may be affected by a decision in an existing case. A‘ priori, it cannot be used as a substitute for contentious proceedings.

161 After the conclusion of the written phase but just before the commencement of the oral pleadings, the Judges of the court hearing the case exchange views, usually during a private meeting of the court. The aim of this is to bring out any issue raised in this first phase which may necessitate calling on the parties to provide further insight during the oral hearing. This is repeated at the end of the first phase of the oral pleadings. By the time the oral proceedings are completed and the Judges have had sufficient period of time to study the case, a formal deliberation is then held. The purpose of this is to examine the case as it presents itself after the hearing and to bring out questions that need to be resolved. It is the duty of the president of the court to outline the issues which in his opinion will require subsequent discussion and decision by the court. Other Judges of the court have the right to comment or to call attention to any other issue or question which they may in their individual capacities consider relevant.

After the completion of this deliberation, each Judge prepares a draft which contains the Judge‘s views on the numerous questions or issues raised including his tentative answers and conclusions which is then circulated to all the Judges. This procedure enables members of the court to have a first inkling of where the majority opinion may lie and strictly for the use of members only as the draft notes are destroyed by the Registry at the end of the case. After this stage, another deliberation takes place wherein the Judges express their views orally and usually in inverse order of precedence or seniority ie, beginning with any Judge ad hoc as there are and ending with the vice president and president. They answer such questions as their colleagues may put to them. This practice it is to be noted has the effect of making more discernible the make-up of the future majority. At the end of this deliberation, a drafting committee of three members is constituted. Two of the Judges are elected by secret ballot from among members whose personal views most closely and effectively reflect the apparent majority. The third member is the president who sits therein ex-officio except where his views conflict with the majority opinion. In the latter instance, he yields the position to the

162 vice-president. Where however the vice-president‘s opinion does not tally with the apparent view of the majority, then the third member of the drafting committee is chosen by election.

The committee‘s preliminary draft of the decision is prepared in both languages of the court and circulated to members of the court. The Judges may also make amendments. After these have been considered, a draft decision is submitted by the drafting committee for discussion in the court. This takes the form of first reading. After the first reading, the texts of separate or dissenting opinions are circulated after which an amended draft is submitted for second reading. Upon conclusion of the second reading, a final vote is taken on the answers that have been proposed in the final draft judgment of the court on points raised by the parties in their submissions. Members of the court vote ―yes‖ or ―no‖ orally in inverse order of seniority. No abstentions are allowed on any point voted upon as decisions are taken by absolute majority of Judges present.

Should the votes be equally divided, as in where there is a judge ad hoc, the president or the acting president where there is one has a casting vote. By Article 56(1) of the Statute, it is mandatory for the court to state the reasons on which it bases its decision. When the final decision of the court is ready following the procedures highlighted above, notifications are sent to the parties as to the date of the public meeting at which the judgment will be delivered. This procedure it is to be noted is in keeping with the provisions of Article 58 of the Statute. The court‘s decisions are published in both English and French with the authoritative text appearing on the verso whilst the other appears on the recto.¹⁹⁹ The judgment is sealed and handed over to the Agents of the parties. A copy is sent to the

199 Note also the import of Article 96 of the Rules which is to the effect that when by reason of an agreement between the parties, the written and oral proceedings have been conducted in one of the court‘s two official languages and judgment is to be delivered in that language pursuant to Article 39 Paragraph 1 of the Statute, the text of the judgment in that language shall be the authoritative text.

163 archives of the court whilst the Registrar of the court sends officially one copy each to every member of the United Nations.