ICJ to deliver ruling on jurisdiction to hear case next Friday

Guyana-Venezuela border controversy

The International Court of Justice (ICJ) has set December 18, 2020, to deliver a ruling on whether it has jurisdiction to hear the case filed by Guyana, asking for a final pronouncement on the validity of the Arbitral Award of 1899 as it relates to the border between Guyana and Venezuela.

This was indicated in a press statement from the ICJ. It was noted that the decision will be handed down by ICJ President, Justice Abdulqawi Ahmed Yusuf during a public sitting at the Peace Palace in The Hague next Friday at 15:00h.
The hearing will be live-streamed on the court’s website and the UN Web TV as only limited persons will be allowed in court due to the COVID-19 pandemic.
On June 30, 2020, the ICJ, which has its headquarters in the Netherlands, heard oral arguments via video conference from Guyana’s legal team headed by Sir Shridath Ramphal on the question of its jurisdiction to adjudicate in the matter.
The case is premised on a border controversy between Guyana and Venezuela in which the Spanish-speaking country has laid claim to more than two-thirds of Guyana’s landmass in the Essequibo region and a portion of its exclusive economic zone (EEZ) in which more than eight billion barrels of oil have been discovered.
After a failed good offices process between the two neighbouring countries, Secretary General of the United Nations, António Guterres, in 2018, had referred the border controversy matter to be resolved by the World Court.
Shortly after, Guyana filed a case seeking a final and binding judgment to reinforce that the 1899 Arbitral Award remains valid and binding on all parties, and legal affirmation that Guyana’s Essequibo region, which contains much of Guyana’s natural resources, belongs to Guyana and not Venezuela.
On June 30, 2020, the ICJ held its first public hearing of the border controversy case via video conference on whether it has jurisdiction to adjudicate the case on the long-standing border controversy between the neighbouring states.
However, Venezuela has since indicated that it does not accept the jurisdiction of the court.
In fact, Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro had written the World Court and at the hearing, the correspondence was read out. Maduro contended in the letter that the UN Secretary General exceeded his authority under the Geneva Agreement, and therefore, the court lacks jurisdiction to adjudicate the lawsuit filed by Guyana. As such, he noted that they will not be participating in the proceedings.
Nevertheless, during the hearing, Guyana’s legal team argued before the ICJ’s 15-Judge panel that Venezuela has contended since 1962 that the 1899 Arbitral Award confirming Essequibo as part of Guyana was null and void but in the 58 years since, it has failed to provide a shred of evidence to show why the arbitral award should be vacated.
In fact, international lawyer and author, Professor Payam Akhavan – one of the lawyers on Guyana’s legal team – had noted that the treaty that led to the Arbitral Award of 1899 was clear in that it was a binding agreement.
“In 1895, under threat of war with the United States, Britain agreed to arbitration to resolve the boundary. The Washington treaty between the Great Britain and Venezuela was concluded on February 2, 1897. The preamble set out its purpose, as an amicable settlement,” he told the court.
Akhavan had pointed to Article 1 of the treaty, which provided for the creation of an arbitral tribunal. Article 3, meanwhile, set out its jurisdiction to decide the boundary line between British Guiana and Venezuela. Article 8 of the Washington treaty also described the Tribunal of Arbitration “as a full, perfect and final settlement of all the questions referred to the arbitrators.”