HAGUE, Netherlands, CMC – The International Court of Justice Thursday delivered its judgment on the preliminary objection raised by Venezuela in the case concerning the Arbitral Award of October 3, 1899, with Guyana, saying the United Kingdom (UK) is not an indispensable third party to consider Guyana’s case that the award is a complete, final and perfect settlement of the boundary between the two neighboring South American countries.
Last November, Venezuela said the ICJ could not hear the case and that the 1899 Arbitral Award is a complete, final, and perfect settlement of the land boundary between the two countries because Britain is not a party to the proceedings.
“We submit that this court would not be in a position to resolve Guyana’s application because the United Kingdom, an indispensable party to settle such a matter of the dispute requested by Guyana, is not participating,” she told the judges.
But in its ruling, the ICJ, the principal judicial organ of the United Nations, based its decision on the 1966 Geneva Agreement, which had considered then British Guiana becoming independent, and which was done three months later on May 26, 1966.
Further, the court found that it was for Venezuela and British Guiana to have “the sole role in settlement of the dispute through the mechanism of the mixed commission.”
“The court concludes that the Geneva Agreement specifies particular roles for Guyana and Venezuela and that its provisions, including Article Eight, do not provide a role for the United Kingdom in choosing or participating in the means of settlement of the dispute. Under Article Four,” the ICJ ruled.
Guyana had urged the ICJ to dismiss as “both legally unstoppable and entirely without foundation” Venezuela’s preliminary objections regarding the border dispute.
“Guyana will demonstrate …that Venezuela’s preliminary objections are both legally unsupportable and entirely without foundation,” said Carl Greenidge, the Agent of Guyana in the case concerning the Arbitral Award.
In its ruling, the ICJ states that the court considers that the scheme established by Articles Two and Four of the Geneva Agreement reflects a common understanding of all parties to that agreement, that the controversy which existed between the United Kingdom and Venezuela on February 17, 1966, would be settled by Guyana and Venezuela through one of the Dispute Settlement Procedures envisaged in the agreement.
and then 