44 MEDVEDYEV AND OTHERS v. FRANCE JUDGMENT – SEPARATE OPINIONS framework of international cooperation and the fight against international drug trafficking. It was in that same framework that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Cambodia, the flag State, replied by diplomatic note on the same day. It is important to remember the wording used in that note (quoted in paragraph 10): “The Ministry of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation ... has the honour formally to confirm that the royal government of Cambodia authorises the French authorities to intercept, inspect and take legal action against the ship Winner, flying the Cambodian flag ...” The message is very clear, for both States. 7. It can, of course, be argued that Cambodia’s diplomatic note did not explicitly mention the fate of the ship’s crew; this is pointed out in paragraph 99 of the judgment. It would not be logical, however, to interpret this note so narrowly as to exclude the possibility for the French authorities to take control of the ship and its crew were the inspection to reveal (as it did) the presence of a consignment of drugs. A less literal interpretation was not only confirmed by Cambodia in an explanatory note in 2008 – which there is no reason to believe was mendacious or spurious – but it also seems to be the most reasonable in our opinion, in the context of cooperation between States in the fight against drug trafficking. Besides, it is scarcely possible to dissociate the crew from the ship itself when a ship is boarded and inspected on the high seas. The actions expressly authorised by Cambodia (interception, inspection, legal action) necessarily concerned the crew members. 8. The notion of international cooperation is very important in the Court’s case-law (see, mutatis mutandis, Öcalan v. Turkey [GC], no. 46221/99, §§ 97-99, ECHR 2005-IV). It may be too soon to affirm that new principles of customary international law exist in the field of international drug trafficking (see paragraph 85 of the judgment). But all civilised nations clearly agree that drug trafficking is a scourge, that States must work together to combat it, and that offenders must be arrested and punished, at least where the applicable domestic law so provides, which is evidently the case here. Cambodia’s diplomatic note reflects this will to cooperate and to take legal action against a ship flying its flag but sailing a long way from its coastline (off Cape Verde). 9. It may still be said, it is true, that the diplomatic note did not meet all the conditions laid down in the case-law regarding the quality of the “law” (in particular that of accessibility). But an exchange of diplomatic notes is usually confidential, and must be so if it is to be effective in circumstances such as those in the present case. Nor can foreseeability be appraised in the ordinary manner. The attitude of the Winner (described in paragraph 13), shows that the crew, or at least their leaders, knew the risks they were running in view of the cargo they were carrying: the ship was flying no flag; it suddenly changed course and began steering a course that was dangerous