GEORGETOWN, Guyana, CMC – The National Assembly will meet on Monday to debate a motion proposed by Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation Minister Hugh Todd on the border dispute with Venezuela.
The 65-member legislature was originally due to have met last Friday to debate the motion after Caracas announced plans to hold a “Consultative Referendum” on December 3 this year.
One of the questions being proposed by Caracas “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.”
The debate in the National Assembly follows meetings between President Irfaan Ali and Opposition Leader Aubrey Norton as well as by the bipartisan parliamentary committee on Foreign Relations.
Guyana has already asked the International Court of Justice (ICJ) to block several questions proposed by Venezuela, seeking a popular vote to support the South American government’s stance of not recognizing the ICJ to settle the decades-old border issue.
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.
According to the motion released by the National Assembly on Sunday, lawmakers will be asked to provide “support for the government and people of the Cooperative Republic of Guyana and Reaffirm the recognition of the 1989 Arbitral Award and the 1966 Geneva Agreement.
“Whereas the Arbitral Award of an Arbitral Tribunal constituted under the Treaty of Arbitration signed in Washington on February 2, 1897, determined the boundary line between the Colony of British Guiana and the United States of Venezuela in 1899;
“AND WHEREAS by the 1897 Treaty, the United Kingdom and Venezuela agreed that the results of the Arbitration would be a complete, perfect and final settlement of the questions referred to the Arbitrators, and in 1905 signed the Agreement about the Map of the Boundary which outlined the boundary and accepted the coordinates thereof;
“AND WHEREAS, for over six decades, the boundary was internationally recognized, accepted, and respected by Venezuela, Guyana, and the international community as being the land boundary between the two States;
“AND WHEREAS the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela arbitrarily and unilaterally sought, from 1962, to challenge and impugn the 1899 Arbitral Award, thus giving rise to a controversy over the validity of the Award,” the motion reads in part, Georgetown is asking its legislators to “affirm the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the State of the Cooperative Republic of Guyana.”
The motion also calls for the legislators to denounce “as provocative, unlawful, void, and of no international legal effect the purported referendum in Venezuela scheduled for December 3, 2023”.
They are also to support “the Government in its pursuit to ensure a peaceful and lawful resolution of the controversy before the International Court of Justice and rejects the proposal to return to any form of dialogue with Venezuela on the controversy outside of The motion also “calls for the deepening of engagements among all national stakeholders on issues relating to the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Cooperative Republic of Guyana, particularly within the context of the meetings of the bipartisan Ministerial Advisory Committee on the Guyana/Venezuela Controversy.”
It also encourages the citizens of Guyana to “remain fully engaged on developments surrounding the controversy.” It expresses “appreciation to the partners and friends of the Cooperative Republic of Guyana for their support and expressions of affirmation of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Guyana.”
and then 