 |
 |
Dear colleagues. State practices is extremely diverse: some agreements consider that the boundary line will be "fixed" to the original thalweg, as it was when the agreement was signed, others that the boundary line will follow the new configuration of the thalweg, and others simply do not include any disposition referring to changes of thalweg. In the South hemisphere, large rivers tend to look for the meridional channel, due to what physicians hace called "Loi de Ferrel". I refer to a very usefull course of The Hague Academy of International Law Collected Courses, done by my former and "regretté" thesis Director, Professor Daniel Bardonnet: *recueil des Cours de l´Académie de Droit International TOME 153 (1976) *Bardonnet, D. : Les frontières terrestres et la relativité de leur tracé (Problèmes juridiques choisis), 9-166. Mainly pp. 90 on "Les changements du cours des fleuves frontières", and an explicative note 417 on the Loi de Ferrel referred (p. 152) and references to bibliography concerning Rio de la Plata between Argentina and Uruguay. And a very modest contribution I made in 2005 at The Hague ** *BOEGLIN-NAUMOVIC N., *“De l´usage des cours d´eau comme frontières”, in Boissons de Chazournes L / S. M.A. Salman (Editors), Les ressources en eau et le droit international / Water Resources and International Law / , Hague Academy of International Law, The Hague, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 2005, pp. 130-165 Sincerely yours Nicolas Boeglin International Law Professor Universidad de Costa Rica 2010/9/22 Jeffress, Gary <[log in to unmask]> > Dear Gbenga, > > Using the definition of a thalweg as “the middle of the chief navigable > channel of a waterway that forms the boundary line between states”, one must > assume that the original intention of the thalweg boundary is to allow both > adjoining states to receive the benefit and use of the navigable channel. If > the channel changes its location through natural means or through dredging > (here one also assumes both states agree to the dredging) then the boundary > moves with the location of the thalweg. This allows the original intention > of shared use to be maintained. > > Regards, > Gary > > On 9/22/10 3:29 AM, "Gbenga Oduntan" <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > > Dear Colleagues, > > A Court judgment refers to the thalweg of a river as the boundary between > two countries based on a Century old treaty. In the determination of that > boundary does a demarcation team look for the thalweg as it was a century > ago or is it the thalweg of the river today that applies? My instinct says > thalweg boundaries are dynamic but are there contrary views or am I plain > wrong? > > Best regards > Gbenga > > Dr. Gbenga Oduntan > Lecturer in International Commercial Law, > Kent Law School, > Eliot College, > University of Kent, > Canterbury, > Kent CT2 7NS, UK. > > Phone: > Switchboard 0044 (0)1227 764000 (ext 4817) > Direct Line 0044 (0)1227 824817 > Fax: 0044 (0) 1227 827831 > > Email: [log in to unmask] > http://www.kent.ac.uk/law/people/index.htm > > > Dr. Gary Jeffress, RPLS > Professor of Geographic Information Science > Department of Computing Sciences > Director, Conrad Blucher Institute for Surveying and Science > Texas A&M University-Corpus Christi > 6300 Ocean Drive, Corpus Christi, Texas 78412-5868 > Phone 361-825-2720 > Mobile 361-438-6584 > Fax 361-825-5848 > > *Please consider the environment before printing this email. > * > * * * DISCLAIMER * * * > This e-mail is intended for the stated addressee and may contain > information that is privileged and confidential. If you have received this > message in error, please inform us immediately and delete it from your > computer. Unauthorized disclosure or dissemination of this e-mail, either > whole or partial, is prohibited. All views or opinions in this transmission > belong to the author and are not necessarily endorsed by the University or > its affiliates, and the organization may not be held responsible for any > misuse. This e-mail and its attachments are believed to be free of any > virus, or defect, but it is the responsibility of the recipient to ensure > this. The University and its affiliates does not accept responsibility or > liability for any loss or damage arising in any way from this e-mail's or > use or for any errors or omissions in its contents. >