Ruptly
"The Venezuelan delegation focused its arguments this Wednesday on questioning the validity of the 1899 arbitral award that set the border with Guyana during the hearing at the International Court of Justice in The Hague. The Venezuelan lawyers argued that the ruling was made under external pressures and in a context of institutional weakness in the country. "At the end of the 19th century, Venezuela feared new annexations by Great Britain. It was a common pattern of imperial behavior in the region," stated lawyer Danae Azaria, adding that "their fear was well-founded." Azaria argued that British expansion prior to the 1899 arbitration conditioned Venezuela's ability to negotiate freely. The defense also rejected the idea that both parties negotiated on equal terms, and according to the lawyer, "Venezuela had no choice but to comply with the award." The delegation insisted that Caracas never gave up challenging the award, and that it could only do so decades later, in a context of decolonization that led to the Geneva Agreement of 1966. Other lawyers from the Venezuelan team reinforced this position. "An arbitral award without reasons is inconceivable. The only explanation is that it was not a decision based on law," stated lawyer Paolo Pacchetti, from the Venezuelan legal team. The case before the court seeks to determine the validity of the 1899 award over the Essequibo territory, a region rich in natural resources and the focus of the dispute between both countries."
Go to News Site