President Irfaan Ali has assured that Guyana will not abandon the judicial path it has undertaken to resolve the ongoing border controversy with Venezuela.
Ali gave the assurance on Wednesday while delivering his Independence Day address on the Essequibo Coast –a part of Guyana that Venezuela is claiming ownership of.
“Independence imposes [upon] us, the duty to safeguard Guyana’s territorial integrity and national sovereignty. On these issues, Guyanese must broker no division. We must continue to stand united in defending our motherland from external fronts.
“We will continue to marshal the best diplomatic efforts necessary to ensure respect for all our territorial space. We do not intend to deviate from the judicial path, which has been taken to address the controversy with the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela. Our path to peace is paved with good intentions,” Ali said.
He averred that his government is committed to good neighbourly relations and the expansion and deepening of relations with CARICOM member states and global partners.
In March 2018, Guyana filed its application with the Inter-national Court of Justice (ICJ) to confirm the validity and binding effect of the Arbitral Award of 1899 on the boundary between the two countries and the subsequent 1905 agreement. This followed the decision by the UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres to choose the ICJ as the next means of resolving the controversy which stems from Venezuela’s contention that the award was null and void.
In its Application before the ICJ, Guyana requested that the Court adjudge and declare that:
“(a) The 1899 Award is valid and binding upon Guyana and Venezuela, and the boundary established by that Award and the 1905 Agreement is valid and binding upon Guyana and Venezuela;
(b) Guyana enjoys full sovereignty over the territory between the Essequibo River and the boundary established by the 1899 Award and the 1905 Agreement, and Venezuela enjoys full sovereignty over the territory west of that boundary; Guyana and Venezuela are under an obligation to fully respect each other’s sovereignty and territorial integrity in accordance with the boundary established by the 1899 Award and the 1905 Agreement;
(c) Venezuela shall immediately withdraw from and cease its occupation of the eastern half of the Island of Ankoko, and each and every other territory which is recognized as Guyana’s sovereign territory in accordance with the 1899 Award and 1905 Agreement;
(d) Venezuela shall refrain from threatening or using force against any person and/or company licensed by Guyana or engaged in economic or commercial activity in Guyanese territory as determined by the 1899 Award and 1905 Agreement, or in any maritime areas appurtenant to such territory over which Guyana has sovereignty or exercises sovereign rights, and shall not interfere with any Guyanese or Guyanese-authorised activities in those areas;
(e) Venezuela is internationally responsible for violations of Guyana’s sovereignty and sovereign rights, and for all injuries suffered by Guyana as a consequence.”
Guyana’s recourse to the ICJ followed decades of stalemate in its border controversy with Venezuela. Venezuela is not participating in the process but took part in the case management process.
Venezuela had reiterated its historical position of non-recognition of the jurisdiction of the Court to hear the case and highlighted the validity of the 1966 Geneva Agreement to reach a practical and mutually satisfactory settlement for the parties, through friendly negotiations.
Despite the ruling by the ICJ that it had jurisdiction to hear the case, Venezuela has taken the position that there is no basis of jurisdiction for this case since it has never given its consent.
According to Venezuela, Guyana approaching the ICJ “damages the meaning, purpose and reason of the Geneva Agreement.” Further, according to Venezuela, the matter is being pursued with “unjustified haste” when the world is currently facing “the most serious pandemic in more than a century.”
In March of this year, Guyana submitted its Memorial on the Merits of its border controversy case against Venezuela – as required by the Court following its decision of 18 December 2020, confirming its jurisdiction to decide the merits of Guyana’s claims.
“Guyana seeks from the Court a decision that the Arbitral Award of 1899 determining the boundary is valid and binding upon Guyana and Venezuela, and that the boundary established by that Award and the 1905 Agreement demarcating it, is the lawful boundary between Guyana and Venezuela. The Court has agreed in its earlier decision that it has jurisdiction to do so. Guyana now looks to the Court’s judicial process and its settlement of the matter under the rule of law,” the Ministry of Foreign Affairs had said in a statement following the submission.
The Ministry noted that this year observes the 56th anniversary of the 1966 Geneva Agreement.
