The significance of the major international decisions on the meaning of self-determination – the 1975 International Court of Justice Western Sahara advisory opinion, Opinion No. 2 issued in 1992 by the European Communities Conference on Yugoslavia Arbitration Commission and the 1995 ICJ judgment in East Timor (Portugal v. Australia) – goes beyond their importance as building blocks in the different accounts of external self-determination discussed in Part I. The larger significance of these cases lies in the actors, the arguments and the judicial reasoning and values. This chapter shows in some detail how the interpretation of self-determination in the cases has served as a point of entry into international law for newcomers, the newly returned and even the absent, and for their challenges to international law's marginalization of them. What emerges from the decisions is not a uniform judicial method, but a pattern of creativity that may be seen as responsive to these challenges. In particular, concepts are broadened so as to make room for the inclusion of new identities and relationships within international law. The approach to their interpretation attempts not only to include, but also to equalize, whether by mediating between insider and outsider perspectives or by expanding participation through the choice of sources, doctrine of interpretation over time or determination of meaning. While the method of interpretation may vary from one judgment to another, the commitment in them to identity and participation as dimensions of equality is constant.