44 JAMES AND OTHERS v. THE UNITED KINGDOM JUGDMENT CONCURRING OPINION OF JUDGES PETTITI AND RUSSO (ARTICLE 13 OF THE CONVENTION) (art. 13) CONCURRING OPINION OF JUDGES PETTITI AND RUSSO (ARTICLE 13 OF THE CONVENTION) (art. 13) (Translation) We recognise the difficulty of construing Article 13 (art. 13); indeed this difficulty explains the differences of opinion within the Court. Nevertheless, we continue to prefer the Court’s traditional doctrine on the interpretation of Article 13 (art. 13) (see especially the Silver and Others judgment, the Campbell and Fell judgment, and the Abdulaziz, Cabales and Balkandali judgment). If the Court had cause to change its doctrine on this point (which we do not consider necessary), more detailed reasons should have been given than those adopted in the present judgment.