 |
 |
Dear Mr. Galadunchi, The answer to your question is that Art. 94(1) of the UN Charter provides: ‘Each Member of the United Nations undertakes to comply with the decision of the International Court of Justice in any case to which it is a party’. You can have no higher legal authority than that: see Art. 103 of the Charter. Regards, Maurice Mendelson, Q.C. Blackstone Chambers Barristers Blackstone House Temple London EC4Y 9BW England. Tel. +44 20 7583 1770; fax +4420 7822 7350; email [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> This e-mail and any files transmitted with it may be confidential and legally privileged. This e-mail is intended to be read only by the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, you are notified that any review, dissemination or copying of this e-mail is prohibited and that privilege has not been waived. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender by replying by email or by telephone and then delete the e-mail. From: Bashir Galadunchi [mailto:[log in to unmask]] Sent: 11 September 2013 15:33 To: Maurice Mendelson QC; [log in to unmask] Subject: Re: Colombia / Nicaragua: ICJ decision of Noc 2012 "not applicable" Dear Nicholas and Prof. Mendelson, Thanks for this beautiful contribution as well as the insightful approach towards this new dimension that is trying to rear its head in International boundary dispute resolution. To be candid with you I have start to develop some fears if strong political figures would start to insinuate this kind of approach towards ICJ judgment, when judgments are not in there favour. If I may ask please, from a legalistic point of view 'coz am not a lawyer is there any Clause in ICJ Statute that allows for judgment to be binding on parties concerned? If there is none I think states have right to air out there displeasure about any judgment they feel to the contrary, bearing in mind the outcome of such court case. To me I feel approach to International boundary dispute and decisions are suppose to be in phases, i.e. Legal phase as well as the Political Phase because this is what has made the Cameroon-Nigeria example an excellent model with either of the two complementing each other. More so as it was noted that the Cameroon-Nigeria boundary dispute which was delivered on the 10th October 2002 by the ICJ would not be said to be 100% acceptable to both parties as a result of some technical flaws on both the land and maritime aspect of the court judgement, this does not stopped the two countries to initiate a round table dialogue to address this flaws, this culminated in the formation of the Cameroon-Nigeria Mixed Commission, to address some of this technical shortfalls not properly taken care of by the courts ruling which I suppose can equally serve for both Colombia and Nicaragua. Further more can one compare UN resolution 242 & 338 between some countries in the middle east that has boundary problem an example of this kind of precedence? However ever the situation may be or look like the would always be a political solution to boundary disputes and problems which can equally be used to solve some this disputes. Bashir Abubakar Galadunchi NBC Abuja-Nigeria . From: Maurice Mendelson QC <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> Sent: Wednesday, September 11, 2013 11:48 AM Subject: Re: Colombia / Nicaragua: ICJ decision of Noc 2012 "not applicable" Nicholas, Thank you for drawing attention to this. A couple of examples spring to mind, both from matters in which I was professionally involved. 1. The Río Protocol of 1942 established the boundary between Peru and Ecuador. Some of its provisions required interpretation, which was done by arbitration. One of the provisions required the boundary in the Cordillera del Condor to follow the watershed between the Santiago and Zamora Rivers, but in about 1947 it was discovered that there was a river between them, the Cenepa, which was more extensive than had previously been thought. Ecuador declared the provisions ‘inejecutable’ – impossible to execute. (In addition, Ecuador later claimed that the whole agreement was procured by duress and void.) This and other matters in dispute were finally settled by agreement in 1992. 2. Immediately following the Judgment of the ICJ in Cameroon-Nigeria, the President of Nigeria (I seem to recall it was) declared that, ‘as a country governed by the rule of law’, Nigeria could not comply with the Judgment (or at least that part relating to the Bakassi Peninsula), which would violate its constitution. It took a great deal of effort on the part of the UN Secretary-General and others to procure compliance with the Judgment. There are also quite a few examples of arbitral awards (and the like) settling boundaries being challenged by the losing party, on the grounds of manifest error, bias, procedural defects, etc. And more generally, there is of course a record of states repudiating third party decisions that they do not like. I hope this helps. Maurice Mendelson, Q.C. Blackstone Chambers Barristers Blackstone House Temple London EC4Y 9BW England. Tel. +44 20 7583 1770; fax +4420 7822 7350; email [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> This e-mail and any files transmitted with it may be confidential and legally privileged. This e-mail is intended to be read only by the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, you are notified that any review, dissemination or copying of this e-mail is prohibited and that privilege has not been waived. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender by replying by email or by telephone and then delete the e-mail. From: International boundaries discussion list [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Nicolas Boeglin Sent: 11 September 2013 00:14 To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> Subject: [INT-BOUNDARIES] Colombia / Nicaragua: ICJ decision of Noc 2012 "not applicable" Dear Colleagues / Estimad@s colegas A modest note on an inusual official declaration made by President of Colombia yesterday/ Les dejo modesta reflexión sobre inusual anuncio hecho ayer por parte del Presidente de Colombia: Text in Spanish for the moment http://derechointernacionalcr.blogspot.com/2013/09/colombia-declara-inaplicable-fallo-de.html Any idea of a precedent where a President, after long 11 years of ICJ proceedings declare that ICJ decision is "not applicable" ? / Alguna idea de un precedente en el que, despues de 11 años de largos procedimientos ante la CIJ, un Presidente nos salga con que "la decisión de la CIJ no es aplicable" ? Sinecerely yours/ Muy cordialmente Nicolas Boeglin This email has been scanned by Blackstone's Hosted Email Security. This email has been scanned by Blackstone's Hosted Email Security. This email has been scanned by Blackstone's Hosted Email Security. ________________________________ This email has been scanned by Blackstone's Hosted Email Security.