President Dr Irfaan Ali on Saturday committed to pursuing a resolution of the Guyana-Venezuela border controversy case that is currently before the International Court of Justice (ICJ).
President Dr Irfaan Ali
He reminded that it was the People’s Progressive Party/Civic (PPP/C) Government in 2014 that had put an end to the interminable ‘good offices’ dialogue with Venezuela, after “it had become, for them, a strategy of prolonging contention rather than of seeking solution.”
The Guyanese Head of State contended that there is no policy more sacred than those relating to the country’s border for his Administration.
“As Guyanese, all of us stood with the previous Administration in defence of Guyana’s patrimony. For us, Guyana’s territorial integrity is never a matter for domestic division; it is always a matter for national cohesion,” the President posited.
Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro
He went on to say that Guyana must be loyal to the enduring vision of the country being truly “One Nation” and indivisible.
“Therefore, the PPP/C gave full support to the former Administration when, as initiated by us, they submitted the Venezuela contention to the International Court of Justice. We shall not descend. The sovereignty of our State, the integrity of our territory – both land and sea – is a sacred trust. We must defend, and we will do so in collaboration with our partners and allies,” he noted.
Following the swearing-in of Dr Ali as the ninth Executive President on Sunday last, Venezuela had expressed hopes to resume dialogue with Guyana’s new Government.
International Court of Justice
Venezuelan Foreign Minister, Jorge Arreaza had congratulated Guyana on the election of the new leader, saying in a statement on Monday that it was necessary “to reactivate the dialogue and negotiation mechanisms as soon as possible to reach a practical and satisfactory settlement”.
However, with his endorsement of the move to the ICJ on Saturday, President Ali has in effect rejected this extra-judicial approach.
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 judgement 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.
The Spanish-speaking nation is laying claims 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.
On June 30, the ICJ held its first public hearing of the border controversy case 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 that appeared via video conferencing before the 15 Judges of the ICJ argued 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 – 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.”
Meanwhile, the world court’s judgement on jurisdiction is pending. (G8)
