54th Regular Session of the General Assembly of OAS: 54th Regular Session of the General Assembly of OAS

… reiterates Region must remain zone of peace

Guyana’s Minister of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation Hugh Todd has informed the Organisation of American States (OAS) that his country continues to depend on its support amid the ongoing border controversy with neighbouring Venezuela.
Minister Todd was at the time addressing the Second Plenary Session of the 54th OAS General Assembly in Paraguay.
Referencing Article 1 of the OAS Charter – which states that “The American States establish by this Charter the international organisation that they have developed to achieve an order of peace and justice, to promote their solidarity, to strengthen their collaboration, and to defend their sovereignty, their territorial integrity, and their independence” – Minister Todd expressed that “Guyana holds these purposes in high esteem.”
“As many of you know, Venezuela lays claim to 5/8ths of Guyana’s territory, despite the full, final, and binding Arbitral Award of 1899 which delimited the land boundary between our two States.”
“This claim and the actions by the Venezuelan Government in furtherance therefore in violation of the most fundamental principles of international law, pose a significant threat to Guyana’s sovereignty, territorial integrity, and political independence as well as the security and stability of the hemisphere.”
In this regard, Guyana’s International Affairs Minister posited that “We will continue to count on the support of the OAS as we seek to implement the December 1, 2023 order of the International Court of Justice and the Joint Declaration of Argyle for Dialogue and Peace between Guyana and Venezuela agreed upon on December 14, 2023, even as we await the ruling of the court on the validity of the Award.”
Last year, Guyana had asked the International Court of Justice (ICJ) to provide provisional measures in light of the December 3 referendum by the Venezuelan Government, saying questions in the referendum sought to annex the Essequibo region, which makes up two-thirds of the country.
On December 1, the World Court ruled unanimously, insisting that Venezuela comply with international law as it is legally binding, preventing Venezuela from taking any action upon Guyanese territory.
The ICJ’s ruling states that “The Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, shall refrain from taking any action, which would modify the situation that currently prevails in the territory in dispute, whereby the Cooperative Republic of Guyana administers and exercises control over that area” and that “Both parties must refrain from any action that can aggravate or extend the dispute before the court or make it more difficult to resolve”.
Then on December 14, Guyana’s President Dr Irfaan Ali and his Venezuelan counterpart Nicolas Maduro met in St Vincent and the Grenadines for peace talks – which were brokered largely by Prime Minister Ralph Gonsalves in his role as President Pro Tempore of the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC). Those talks culminated with the two Presidents signing the Joint Declaration of Argyle, agreeing to, among other things, ‘not threaten or use force against one another’. They also agreed to good neighbourliness, peaceful coexistence, and unity between Latin America and the Caribbean.
Minister Todd, speaking before the international gathering, reaffirmed that, “Guyana remains committed to the peaceful resolution of any controversies or disputes in the region based on the provisions of the United Nations Charter and the principles of international law including the respect for sovereignty and territorial integrity and the right to self-determination.”
Just last month, agents of Guyana and Venezuela met with the President of the ICJ Judge Nawaf Salam regarding the border controversy case, where it was agreed that both sides would make a second round of submissions. The World Court will now issue an order setting appropriate timelines for both parties to submit their respective second round of pleadings.
Venezuela maintains that the border with Guyana, a former colony of The Netherlands and the United Kingdom (UK), was fraudulently imposed by the British, which it has denounced as a “land grabber”. Guyana, on the other hand, maintains that the line was determined on October 3, 1899, by an arbitration panel (Arbitral Award of 3 October 1899).
The Anglo-Venezuelan Arbitral Tribunal met in Paris, France, and on October 3, 1899 — 122 years ago — gave its award defining the border between Venezuela and then-British Guiana.
After abiding by the 1899 Arbitral Award for over half a century, Venezuela in 1962 claimed that the Essequibo area of Guyana belonged inside its borders. The debate heated up after ExxonMobil found oil in Guyana in 2015, and has intensified in recent months, with Venezuela holding a referendum on December 3 in which it was voted to purportedly annex the Essequibo; however, the country’s Opposition has since reported that 89 per cent of eligible voters did not vote.
Nevertheless, following the referendum, Maduro claimed that, among other things, he would now authorise oil exploration in Guyana’s Essequibo River.
Maduro also claimed that he has announced the activation of a human and social care plan for the population of Guyana’s Essequibo that includes censuses and identity cards.
He also claimed to have announced the creation of the “High Commission for the Defense for Guyana’s Essequibo region”; and the creation of the Comprehensive Defense Zone for Guyana’s territory.

The Venezuelan President also announced that in addition to oil, he would be issuing licences for mining and other activities to be conducted in Guyana’s Essequibo County.
The Maduro regime has been untruthfully claiming that Venezuela demonstrated that the award issued in 1899 by the Paris Arbitration Court was “null and void”, and that the controversy under the Geneva Agreement must be amicably resolved in a manner that is acceptable to both parties, while ignoring that such discussions had failed for over 30 years and that the Geneva Agreement provided for the Secretary General of the United Nations to choose another path for the settlement of the controversy, if not settled by discussion between the two countries.
Maduro also ignores the fact that the Secretary-General, in accordance with the Agreement, on January 30, 2018, had advised both Venezuela and Guyana that “having carefully analysed the developments in the good office’s process during the course of 2017” and “significant progress not having been made toward arriving at a full agreement for the solution of the controversy”, he had “chosen the International Court of Justice as the means now to be used for its solution”.
Within the framework of the 1966 Geneva Agreement between the two countries, the Secretary-General conducted Good Office processes from 1990 to 2017 to find a solution to the border controversy. On January 30, 2018, Secretary-General António Guterres, following a careful analysis of developments in 2017, chose the ICJ as the means to be used for the solution of the controversy.
As a consequence, Guyana, on March 29, 2018, filed its application to the World Court. In the substantive case, Guyana seeks, among other things, to obtain from the ICJ a final and binding judgement that the 1899 Arbitral Award, which established the location of the land boundary between then-British Guiana and Venezuela, remains valid and binding; and a declaration that Essequibo belongs to Guyana.