GUYANA-ICJ sets date to hear Guyana’s request regarding Venezuela’s planned referendum

HAGUE, CMC – The International Court of Justice (ICJ) Friday set November 14 as the date for holding public hearings into Guyana’s request to block several questions in Venezuela’s December 3, 2023 referendum on the border controversy.

“The hearings will be devoted to the request for the indication of provisional measures submitted by Guyana on October 30, 2023,” the ICJ said in a statement.

It said that Guyana, in its request, had been told that the Venezuelan government, through its National Electoral Council, has published a list of five questions that it intends to put before the people of Venezuela in a “Consultative Referendum” next month.

“According to the applicant, the purpose of this referendum is to “obtain responses that would support Venezuela’s decision to abandon [the current proceedings before the Court], and to resort instead to unilateral measures to ‘resolve’ the controversy with Guyana by formally annexing and integrating into Venezuela all of the territory at issue in these proceedings, which comprises more than two-thirds of Guyana,” the ICJ said.

The Court said the hearings will occur at the Peace Palace in The Hague.

Guyana had asked the ICJ to hear its application as a matter of urgency ahead of the planned December 3 referendum.

According to the ICJ, Guyana is requesting that the Court indicates that “Venezuela shall not proceed with the Consultative Referendum planned for December 3, 2023, in its present form,” and “in particular, Venezuela shall not include the First, Third or Fifth questions in the Consultative Referendum.

“Question 5 proposes the creation of the Venezuelan state of Guyana Essequibo and an accelerated plan for giving Venezuelan citizenship and identity cards to the Guyanese population.”

Guyana also wants the Court to indicate that “Venezuela shall not take any actions that are intended to prepare or allow the exercise of sovereignty or de facto control over any territory that was awarded to British Guiana in the 1899 Arbitral Award.

“Venezuela shall refrain from any action which might aggravate or extend the dispute before the Court or make it more difficult to resolve,” the ICJ said Guyana outlined in its request.

Venezuela’s planned referendum and its approved questions for the referendum later this year have set off a wave of criticisms, with the Guyana government accusing Venezuela of trying to annex parts of the country’s territory in contravention of international law.

The 15-member Caribbean Community (CARICOM), the London-based Commonwealth Secretariat, and the Organization of American States (OAS) have also rejected the referendum stating that international law strictly prohibits the Government of one State from unilaterally seizing, annexing, or incorporating the territory of another state and noted that the referendum would open the door to the possible violation of this fundamental tenet of international law.

Meanwhile, Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation Minister Hugh Todd said Friday that the bipartisan ministerial advisory committee on the Guyana-Venezuela border controversy is fully functional and fulfilling its mandate.

His comments followed the postponement of an extraordinary sitting of the National Assembly, which was set to pass a motion to solidify Guyana’s stance on the border controversy.

The parliamentary opposition had proposed within the motion that a non-partisan commission be established to ensure its participation.

“We have already established a bipartisan ministerial advisory committee on the Guyana/Venezuela controversy, which the President Ali Administration inherited from the (David) Granger administration, and we’ve left it intact,” Todd said, pointing out that the already-established mechanism includes two opposition Members of Parliament.

The advisory committee consists also of several seasoned diplomats who provide critical advice to the government.

“That committee meets on matters relating to the case itself before the ICJ and [other] related issues,” Todd said, noting that the creation of a commission will only duplicate that which already exists.

“So, what we’ve recommended to the opposition is that…we already have a mechanism in place, so we don’t need to duplicate it because it would be the same persons who are now on this ministerial advisory committee would also have to sit on this commission.”