Advisor on Borders and Guyana’s Co-agent in the border case against Venezuela, Carl Greenidge has indicated that Guyana stands ready to defend its request for the ICJ to block Venezuela from including any question in its planned referendum on the border controversy, that infringes on Guyana’s territorial integrity.

Mr. Greenidge who is a former Vice President and Minister of Foreign Affairs under the APNU+AFC Government, while speaking to reporters during a break at today’s Extraordinary Sitting of the National Assembly, said while Guyana does not intend to have the referendum blocked in its entirety, the provisional measures being sought at the level of the ICJ, deal specifically with three of the five questions proposed for the Referendum.

“In the first instance, you are calling upon the public to make a determination about the International Court of Justice. Venezuela is a member of that Court; it has obligations to uphold the processes and decisions of the Court. The questions are contrary to those obligations. You have a suggestion that the public should pronounce on what Venezuela does in relation to Guyanese and what Venezuela does in relation to territory it has never governed. It isn’t as though Essequibo, even in 1899 was part of some unnamed space, and then handed over to Guyana. It had always been part of Guyana,” Greenidge said.

The Advisor on Borders said the historical records would show that for more than six decades, Venezuela repeatedly affirmed its boundaries with Guyana as outlined in the 1899 Arbitral Award. He said Venezuela cannot now unilaterally alter the border that it shares with Guyana.

“The borders have been agreed by a variety of bodies and states, and it is the obligation of any State to honour it. If, they would like it changed, then there is a process, and that process is not a unilateral process. That is the issue. That is what is before the court. The court is being asked not so much to stop them having a referendum but to ensure they know, and to ensure that the referendum doesn’t have provisions which give the Venezuelan public, the mistaken belief that they have the right to decide on other citizens’ fate, citizens outside of the borders of Venezuela, in defiance of world opinion, in defiance of world practice, and in defiance of the obligations that Venezuela as a signatory to an agreement that still exist,” Greenidge explained.

Greenidge said the referendum is just one of the acts of threats and aggression towards Guyana, as he alluded to the build-up of Venezuelan military troops near Guyana’s borders.

“If you look at what has been happening over the last few months, you will find that the referendum is one of many things that we are concerned about. And including amongst those things is the arrangements being made along the Venezuelan side, along with very hostile language for movement of troops on our borders, actions which affect the stability and also the wellbeing of Guyanese, especially those in the areas bordering Venezuela,” Greendige said.

The ICJ has set November 14 for public hearings in the Guyana v Venezuela Case to deal specifically with the request from Guyana for provisional measures intended to safeguard the country’s territorial integrity. but the hearing and determination of the substantive case.

Related posts:

Guyana asks International Court to block questions in Venezuela’s planned referendum on Essequibo controversy CARICOM stands by Guyana and rejects Venezuela’s planned referendum on border controversy Government and Opposition meet and reject Venezuela’s planned referendum on Essequibo Guyana Government rejects Venezuela’s referendum seeking to make Guyana’s Essequibo a Venezuelan state; International Community alerted