Attorney General urges ICJ to directly, explicitly and unambiguously affirm the validity of the 1899 Arbitral Award

Attorney General urges ICJ to directly, explicitly and unambiguously affirm the validity of the 1899 Arbitral Award

Guyana’s Attorney General, Senior Counsel Anil Nandlall, in his address to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) on Friday said “clarity” and “specificity” in the Court’s ruling on the validity of the 1899 Arbitral Award are vital to the effective resolution of the longstanding controversy between Guyana and Venezuela.

“Any ambiguity or qualification in the Court’s judgment will inevitably be seized upon by Venezuela as a basis for continuing to lay claim to vast swathes of Guyana’s sovereign territory,” the Attorney General told the World Court.

Minister Nandlall, along with a battery of international lawyers and Guyanese officials, addressed the ICJ on the merits of the case brought against Venezuela more than eight years ago.

He said the Government and people of Guyana want the ICJ to affirm the validity and binding effect of the 1899 Arbitral Award, which established the land boundary between the two countries.

Under the pretext that the 1899 Arbitral Award is null and void, Venezuela has laid claim to more than 70% of Guyana’s sovereign territory. The Attorney General said generations of Guyanese have grown up under Venezuela’s threat.

 “Venezuela’s claim has blighted, bedevilled and burdened Guyana for the entirety of its life as a sovereign State. It is hard to overstate the impact that this has had on Guyana’s development and on the security, prosperity and wellbeing of its people,” he said.

Attorney General Nandlall warned that the loss of the territory claimed by Venezuela would dismember Guyana.

“Indeed, the country as we know it would cease to exist. Guyana’s Foreign Minister was not exaggerating when he described this case as having an existential quality for Guyana. For Guyana and its people, the stakes could scarcely be higher. But while the stakes of this dispute could not be higher, nor could Guyana’s faith in international law, as the means for fairly and finally resolving it,” the Attorney General told the ICJ.

 Noting that Guyana remains committed to the rule of international law, Nandlall said when the country submitted its application to the Court in 2018, it did so with unwavering confidence in the validity of the 1899 Award, and the court’s ability to deliver a just outcome based on the fair-minded and even-handed application of international law.

He said Guyana is confident that the Court will now proceed to carefully consider the merits of the case.

In his final remarks, underscoring the importance of bringing an end to the controversy, Mr. Nandlall reminded the Court that for more than six decades Venezuela has repeatedly denied and violated Guyana’s sovereignty over its Essequibo region.

“Venezuela has invaded and illegally occupied Guyana’s territory on Ankoko Island for six decades. It has conducted numerous other military incursions into Guyana’s land and maritime territory – incursions which are intended to menace and intimidate Guyana and its people. During the pendency these proceedings – and in contumacious defiance of this Court’s provisional measures Orders –  Venezuela has enacted legislation which purports to incorporate our Essequibo region as a new Venezuelan state; to subject it to the jurisdiction of Venezuela’s legislative, executive and judicial organs; and to depict it in official maps as an integral part of Venezuela. Venezuela has also sought to rename the territory as “Guayana Esequiba”. It has even falsely claimed at this hearing that the Essequibo River was named after a Spanish explorer. The name of the Essequibo River is, in fact, derived from an indigenous word, dishikibo, meaning “fireside”, which was later adopted by the Dutch and British,” the Attorney General detailed.

He said Venezuela’s attempt to annex Guyana’s territory, and erase the history of Guyana’s Essequibo, are all redolent of colonialism.

Against that background, AG Nandlall said it is essential that the Court’s judgment directly, explicitly and unambiguously affirms the validity of the 1899 Award in its integrity, and the boundary which it established.

You must be logged in to post a comment Login