Secretary General of the United Nations, Antonio Guiterres, has sent the December 1 Provisional Measures handed down by the International Court of Justice in relation to the ongoing Guyana/Venezuela border controversy, to the UN Security Council for that body to deliberate on the way forward, in wake of the actions by Venezuela.

Spokesperson for the UN Chief, Stéphane Dujarric, told a media briefing that the Secretary-General strongly supports the use of solely peaceful means to settle international disputes such as the one that currently obtains between Guyana and its Western Neighbor, Venezuela.

He said it is the hope of the Secretary General that pursuant to the Charter and to the Statute of the International Court of Justice (ICJ), decisions of the Court are binding and he trusts that both States will duly comply with the Order from the Court.

“The Secretary-General recalls the Order of the International Court of Justice, issued on 1 December 2023, indicating provisional measures in the case of Guyana against Venezuela concerning Arbitral Award of 3 October 1899,” his spokesperson said.

The spokesperson said, the Secretary-General also notes the Court’s unanimous decision to order Venezuela to “refrain from taking any action that would modify the situation that currently prevails in the territory in dispute”; and the order which compel both parties to refrain from any action, which might aggravate or extend the dispute or make it more difficult to resolve.

“In accordance with the Statute of the Court, the Secretary-General transmitted the notice of the provisional measures ordered by the Court to the Security Council,” the UN Spokesperson noted.

Related posts:

Guyana to intensify precautionary measures to safeguard its territory -Pres. Ali Commonwealth, OAS and CARICOM call on Venezuela to respect ICJ’s Ruling on Provisional Measures ICJ grants provisional measures prohibiting Venezuela from taking any action on the Essequibo region ICJ to rule on Friday on Guyana’s request for provisional measures in border controversy case