JiscMail Logo
Email discussion lists for the UK Education and Research communities

Help for INT-BOUNDARIES Archives


INT-BOUNDARIES Archives

INT-BOUNDARIES Archives


INT-BOUNDARIES@JISCMAIL.AC.UK


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

INT-BOUNDARIES Home

INT-BOUNDARIES Home

INT-BOUNDARIES  2002

INT-BOUNDARIES 2002

Options

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password

Subject:

ICJ Ruling on Land and Maritime Boundary between Cameroon and Nigeria

From:

"Charles Gurdon, Menas Associates" <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Charles Gurdon, Menas Associates

Date:

Fri, 11 Oct 2002 04:38:26 -0400

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (531 lines)

Dear Colleagues,

Those of you who have been following the Cameroon-Nigeria case 
will know that the ICJ's binding decision was announced yesterday.

For those of you who are interested, below is 

a). The press release
b). The statement to the press by ICJ President Guillaume
      explaining the decision
c). The relevant paragraphs on the all important maritime boundary
d). The final court decision

While it appears that Cameroon has won on both Lake Chad and 
the Bakassi peninsula, the method of measuring the equidistance
line for the extension of the maritime boundary was won by Nigeria. 

I don't yet know what this means yet in terms of existing and future oil 
concessions. We'd be interested in any thoughts or observations.
Perhaps Clive Schofield, who was working on the Nigerian side, can 
shed some light on the implications of the judgement.

Best wishes - Charles  

Charles Gurdon
Menas Associates
T: +44-(0)1442-872-800
[log in to unmask]

======================================
Land and Maritime Boundary between Cameroon and Nigeria 
(Cameroon v. Nigeria: Equatorial Guinea intervening)

PRESS RELEASE

The Court determines the boundary between Cameroon and Nigeria from Lake
Chad to the sea. 
It requests each Party to withdraw all administration and military or
police forces present on territories falling under the sovereignty of the
other Party.

THE HAGUE, 10 October 2002. The International Court of Justice (ICJ),
principal judicial organ of the United Nations, has today given Judgment in
the case concerning the Land and Maritime Boundary between Cameroon and
Nigeria (Cameroon v. Nigeria: Equatorial Guinea intervening).

In its Judgment, which is final, without appeal and binding for the
Parties, the Court determines as follows the course of the boundary, from
north to south, between Cameroon and Nigeria:

· In the Lake Chad area, the Court decides that the boundary is delimited
by the Thomson-Marchand Declaration of 1929-1930, as incorporated in the
Henderson-Fleuriau Exchange of Notes of 1931 (between Great Britain and
France); it finds that the boundary starts in the lake from the
Cameroon-Nigeria-Chad tripoint (whose co-ordinates it defines) and follows
a straight line to the mouth of the River Ebeji as it was in 1931 (whose
co-ordinates it also defines) and thence runs in a straight line to the
point where the river today divides into two branches. 

· Between Lake Chad and the Bakassi Peninsula, the Court confirms that the
boundary is delimited by the following instruments: 
i) from the point where the River Ebeji bifurcates, as far as Tamnyar Peak,
by the Thomson-Marchand Declaration of 1929-1930 (paras. 2-60), as
incorporated in the Henderson-Fleuriau Exchange of Notes of 1931;
ii) from Tamnyar Peak to pillar 64 referred to in Article XII of the
Anglo-German Agreement of 12 April 1913, by the British Order in Council of
2 August 1946;
iii) from pillar 64 to the Bakassi Peninsula, by the Anglo-German
Agreements of 11 March and 12 April 1913.

The Court examines point by point 17 sectors of the land boundary and
specifies for each one how the above-mentioned instruments are to be
interpreted (paras. 91, 96, 102, 114, 119, 124, 129, 134, 139, 146, 152,
155, 160, 168, 179, 184 and 189 of the Judgment).

· In Bakassi, the Court decides that the boundary is delimited by the
Anglo-German Agreement of 11 March 1913 (Arts. XVIII-XX) and that
sovereignty over the Bakassi Peninsula lies with Cameroon. It decides that
in this area the boundary follows the thalweg of the River Akpakorum
(Akwayafe), dividing the Mangrove Islands near Ikang in the way shown on
map TSGS 2240, as far as a straight line joining Bakassi Point and King
Point. 

· As regards the maritime boundary, the Court, having established that it
has jurisdiction to address this aspect of the case ¾ which Nigeria had
disputed ¾ , fixes the course of the boundary between the two States'
maritime areas. 

In its Judgment the Court requests Nigeria expeditiously and without
condition to withdraw its administration and military or police forces from
the area of Lake Chad falling within Cameroonian sovereignty and from the
Bakassi Peninsula. It also requests Cameroon expeditiously and without
condition to withdraw any administration or military or police forces which
may be present along the land boundary from Lake Chad to the Bakassi
Peninsula on territories which pursuant to the Judgment fall within the
sovereignty of Nigeria. The latter has the same obligation in regard to
territories in that area which fall within the sovereignty of Cameroon.

The Court takes note of Cameroon's undertaking, given at the hearings, to
"continue to afford protection to Nigerians living in the [Bakassi]
peninsula and in the Lake Chad area".
Finally, the Court rejects Cameroon's submissions regarding the State
responsibility of Nigeria. It likewise rejects Nigeria's counter-claims.

Composition of the Court
The Court was composed as follows: President Guillaume; Vice-President Shi;
Judges Oda, Ranjeva, Herczegh, Fleischhauer, Koroma, Higgins,
Parra-Aranguren, Kooijmans, Rezek, Al-Khasawneh, Buergenthal, Elaraby;
Judges ad hoc Mbaye, Ajibola; Registrar Couvreur.

Judge Oda appends a declaration to the Judgment of the Court; Judge Ranjeva
appends a separate opinion to the Judgment of the Court; Judge Herczegh
appends a declaration to the Judgment of the Court; Judge Koroma appends a
dissenting opinion to the Judgment of the Court; Judge Parra-Aranguren
appends a separate opinion to the Judgment of the Court; Judge Rezek
appends a declaration to the Judgment of the Court; Judge Al-Khasawneh and
Judge ad hoc Mbaye append separate opinions to the Judgment of the Court;
Judge ad hoc Ajibola appends a dissenting opinion to the Judgment of the
Court.
___________
A fuller summary of the Judgment is given in Press Communiqué 2002/26bis,
to which is annexed a summary of the judges' declarations and opinions. The
full text of the Judgment, declarations and opinions, together with the
press communiqués, is available on the Court's Internet site
(www.icj-cij.org).

=================================================================

Statement to the press by President Guillaume
The Hague, 10 October 2002

1. The Court has just delivered its Judgment in the case concerning the
Land and Maritime Boundary between Cameroon and Nigeria (Cameroon v.
Nigeria: Equatorial Guinea intervening). As you have seen, this Judgment is
a long one, exceeding 150 pages. Thus, it might be helpful if I provide you
with a brief summary.

2. The Court first decided that the land boundary between the two countries
had been fixed by treaties entered into during the colonial period and it
upheld the validity of those treaties. It moreover rejected the theory of
historical consolidation put forward by Nigeria and accordingly refused to
take into account the effectivités relied upon by Nigeria. It ruled that,
in the absence of acquiescence by Cameroon, these effectivités could not
prevail over Cameroon's conventional titles.
Accordingly, the Court decided that, pursuant to the Anglo-German Agreement
of 11 March 1913, sovereignty over Bakassi lies with Cameroon. Similarly,
the Court fixed the boundary in the Lake Chad area in accordance with the
Henderson-Fleuriau Exchange of Notes of 9 January 1931 between France and
Great Britain and rejected Nigeria's claims to the Darak area and the
neighbouring villages.

3. Further, the Court drew an extremely precise boundary between the two
States. In this respect, in Lake Chad it reached the same conclusions as
the Lake Chad Basin Commission.
As requested by Nigeria, it then turned to 17 sectors of the land boundary
between Lake Chad and pillar 64. In many cases, the solutions adopted in
this respect are favourable to Nigeria. This is so for the Keraua River,
the Mandara Mountains, the Maio Senche, Jimbare and Sapeo, between Namberu
and Banglang, and in respect of the boundary between the Akbang River and
Mount Tosso. The adopted solutions are closer to Cameroon's positions in
respect of the Kohom River, the area between Mount Kuli and Bourha, the
village of Kotcha, the Hambere Range area and the Sama River. The Court
adopted intermediate or neutral positions in respect of Limani, the sources
of the Tsikakiri, the course from Beacon No. 6 to Wamni Budungo, at Tipsan,
and from the Hambere Range to the Mburi River.
Finally, the Court indicated the precise course of the boundary channel of
the Akwayafe to the west of the Bakassi Peninsula.

4. The Court also fixed the maritime boundary between the two States. Here,
the Court, accepting Cameroon's contention, began by upholding the validity
of the Declarations of Yaoundé II and Maroua, pursuant to which the Heads
of State of Nigeria and Cameroon had in 1971 and 1975 agreed upon the
maritime boundary between the two countries from the mouth of the Akwayafe
to a point G situated at 8° 22' 19" longitude east and 4° 17' 00" latitude
north.
Next, in respect of the maritime boundary further out to sea, the Court
essentially endorsed the delimitation method advocated by Nigeria. As the
line of delimitation, it adopted the equidistance line between Cameroon and
Nigeria, which in its view produced an equitable result in this case as
between the two States, namely a loxodrome having an azimuth of 187° 52'
27". Noting, however, that the line so adopted was likely rapidly to
encroach on rights of Equatorial Guinea, the Court confined itself to
indicating its direction without fixing the Cameroon/Nigeria/Equatorial
Guinea tripoint.
The delimitation thus effected for the most part respects existing oil
installations. It preserves Equatorial Guinea's rights, as well as those of
Cameroon and Nigeria in regard to their delimitation with Equatorial
Guinea.

5. Drawing the consequences of its determination of the land boundary, the
Court first held that Nigeria is under an obligation expeditiously and
without condition to withdraw its administration and its military and
police forces from the Bakassi Peninsula, and from the Lake Chad area
falling within the sovereignty of Cameroon.
The Court further decided that Cameroon, for its part, is under an
obligation expeditiously and without condition to withdraw any
administration or military or police forces which may be present on
Nigerian territory along the land boundary between Lake Chad and Bakassi.
Nigeria bears the same obligation in respect of any territory in this
sector which falls within the sovereignty of Cameroon.
In the reasoning of its Judgment, the Court further noted that the
implementation of the Judgment would afford the Parties a beneficial
opportunity to co-operate in the interests of the populations concerned, in
order notably to enable them to continue to have access to educational and
health services comparable to those they currently enjoy. Such
co-operation, the Court added, would be especially helpful, with a view to
the maintenance of security, during the withdrawal of the Nigerian
administration and military and police forces.

6. The Court also took note of the commitment undertaken at the hearings by
Cameroon that, "faithful to its traditional policy of hospitality and
tolerance", Cameroon would "continue to afford protection to Nigerians
living in the Bakassi Peninsula and in the Lake Chad area".

7. Finally, the Court rejected Cameroon's submissions seeking to have
Nigeria ordered to repair the injury suffered by Cameroon, in particular as
a result of the occupation of Bakassi. In this respect, the Court noted
that Cameroon had secured recognition of its sovereignty over the peninsula
and the disputed area of Lake Chad. It found that the injury suffered by
Cameroon by reason of the Nigerian occupation was sufficiently addressed by
the very fact of that recognition and of the evacuation of those
territories. 
It also rejected, for lack of proof, the submissions of Cameroon concerning
the implementation of its Order of 15 March 1996 indicating provisional
measures and those relating to various border incidents complained of by
the two Parties. 

8. In sum, the Court finds in favour of Cameroon in respect of Bakassi and
Lake Chad. Its Judgment also settles the other issues concerning the land
boundary. It places each of the Parties under an obligation to evacuate the
areas falling within the sovereignty of the other, and to do so
expeditiously and without condition, and at the same time issues a call for
co-operation. It fixes the maritime boundary beyond the territorial sea in
accordance with the method advocated by Nigeria. Finally, it rejects both
Parties' submissions concerning responsibility.

9. I would add that the Court was happy to learn that the Heads of State of
Cameroon and Nigeria met on 5 September last in the presence of the United
Nations Secretary-General. It welcomed the result of that meeting and hopes
that the Judgment which it has delivered today will contribute to friendly
relations between the two brother countries.
___________
10 October 2002

====================================================

RELEVANT PARAGRAPHS ABOUT MARITIME BOUNDARY

306. The Court accordingly decides that the equidistance line represents an
equitable result
for the delimitation of the area in respect of which it has jurisdiction to
give a ruling.
307. The Court notes, however, that point G, which was determined by the
two Parties in the
Maroua Declaration of 1 June 1975, does not lie on the equidistance line
between Cameroon and
Nigeria, but to the east of that line. Cameroon is therefore entitled to
request that from point G the
boundary of the Parties' respective maritime areas should return to the
equidistance line. This
Cameroon seeks to achieve by drawing a delimitation line at an azimuth of
270° from point G to a
point situated at 8° 21' 16" longitude east and 4° 17' 00" latitude north.
The Court, having
carefully studied a variety of charts, observes that the point on the
equidistance line which is
obtained by following a loxodrome having an azimuth of 270° from point G is
located at
co-ordinates slightly different from those put forward by Cameroon. The
Court accordingly
considers that from point G the delimitation line should directly join the
equidistance line at a point
with co-ordinates 8° 21' 20" longitude east and 4° 17' 00" latitude north,
which will be called X.
The boundary between the respective maritime areas of Cameroon and Nigeria
will therefore
continue beyond point G in a westward direction until it reaches point X at
the above-mentioned
co-ordinates. The boundary will turn at point X and continue southwards
along the equidistance
line. However, the equidistance line adopted by the Court cannot be
extended very far. The Court
has already stated that it can take no decision that might affect rights of
Equatorial Guinea, which is
not a party to the proceedings. In these circumstances the Court considers
that it can do no more
than indicate the general direction, from point X, of the boundary between
the Parties' maritime
areas. The boundary will follow a loxodrome having an azimuth of 187° 52'
27"

==================================================

FINAL COURT DECISION

Decides that the land boundary between the Republic of Cameroon and the
Federal Republic
of Nigeria is delimited, from Lake Chad to the Bakassi Peninsula, by the
following instruments:
(i) from the point where the River Ebeji bifurcates as far as Tamnyar Peak,
by paragraphs 2
to 60 of the Thomson-Marchand Declaration of 1929-1930, as incorporated in
the
Henderson-Fleuriau Exchange of Notes of 1931;
(ii) from Tamnyar Peak to pillar 64 referred to in Article XII of the
Anglo-German
Agreement of 12 April 1913, by the British Order in Council of 2 August
1946;
(iii) from pillar 64 to the Bakassi Peninsula, by the Anglo-German
Agreements of 11 March
and 12 April 1913;
IN FAVOUR: President Guillaume; Vice-President Shi; Judges Oda, Ranjeva,
Herczegh,
Fleischhauer, Higgins, Parra-Aranguren, Kooijmans, Rezek, Al-Khasawneh,
Buergenthal,
Elaraby; Judges ad hoc Mbaye, Ajibola;
AGAINST: Judge Koroma;

(B) Unanimously,
Decides that the aforesaid instruments are to be interpreted in the manner
set out in
paragraphs 91, 96, 102, 114, 119, 124, 129, 134, 139, 146, 152, 155, 160,
168, 179, 184 and 189 of
the present Judgment;


(A) By thirteen votes to three,
Decides that the boundary between the Republic of Cameroon and the Federal
Republic of
Nigeria in Bakassi is delimited by Articles XVIII to XX of the Anglo-German
Agreement of
11 March 1913;
IN FAVOUR: President Guillaume; Vice-President Shi; Judges Oda, Ranjeva,
Herczegh,
Fleischhauer, Higgins, Parra-Aranguren, Kooijmans, Al-Khasawneh,
Buergenthal, Elaraby;
Judge ad hoc Mbaye;
AGAINST: Judges Koroma, Rezek; Judge ad hoc Ajibola;

(B) By thirteen votes to three,
Decides that sovereignty over the Bakassi Peninsula lies with the Republic
of Cameroon;
IN FAVOUR: President Guillaume; Vice-President Shi; Judges Oda, Ranjeva,
Herczegh,
Fleischhauer, Higgins, Parra-Aranguren, Kooijmans, Al-Khasawneh,
Buergenthal, Elaraby;
Judge ad hoc Mbaye;
AGAINST: Judges Koroma, Rezek; Judge ad hoc Ajibola;

(C) By thirteen votes to three,
Decides that the boundary between the Republic of Cameroon and the Federal
Republic of
Nigeria in Bakassi follows the thalweg of the Akpakorum (Akwayafe) River,
dividing the
Mangrove Islands near Ikang in the way shown on map TSGS 2240, as far as
the straight line
joining Bakassi Point and King Point;
IN FAVOUR: President Guillaume; Vice-President Shi; Judges Oda, Ranjeva,
Herczegh,
Fleischhauer, Higgins, Parra-Aranguren, Kooijmans, Al-Khasawneh,
Buergenthal, Elaraby;
Judge ad hoc Mbaye;
AGAINST: Judges Koroma, Rezek; Judge ad hoc Ajibola;

IV. (A) By thirteen votes to three,
Finds, having addressed Nigeria's eighth preliminary objection, which it
declared in its
Judgment of 11 June 1998 not to have an exclusively preliminary character
in the circumstances of
the case, that it has jurisdiction over the claims submitted to it by the
Republic of Cameroon
regarding the delimitation of the maritime areas appertaining respectively
to the Republic of
Cameroon and to the Federal Republic of Nigeria, and that those claims are
admissible;
IN FAVOUR: President Guillaume; Vice-President Shi; Judges Ranjeva,
Herczegh,
Fleischhauer, Higgins, Parra-Aranguren, Kooijmans, Rezek, Al-Khasawneh,
Buergenthal,
Elaraby; Judge ad hoc Mbaye;
AGAINST: Judges Oda, Koroma; Judge ad hoc Ajibola;

(B) By thirteen votes to three,
Decides that, up to point G below, the boundary of the maritime areas
appertaining
respectively to the Republic of Cameroon and to the Federal Republic of
Nigeria takes the
following course:
¾ starting from the point of intersection of the centre of the navigable
channel of the Akwayafe
River with the straight line joining Bakassi Point and King Point as
referred to in point III (C)
above, the boundary follows the "compromise line" drawn jointly at Yaoundé
on 4 April 1971
by the Heads of State of Cameroon and Nigeria on British Admiralty Chart
3433 (Yaoundé II
Declaration) and passing through 12 numbered points, whose co-ordinates are
as follows:
Longitude Latitude
point 1: 8° 30' 44" E, 4° 40' 28" N
point 2: 8° 30' 00" E, 4° 40' 00" N
point 3: 8° 28' 50" E, 4° 39' 00" N
point 4: 8° 27' 52" E, 4° 38' 00" N
point 5: 8° 27' 09" E, 4° 37' 00" N
point 6: 8° 26' 36" E, 4° 36' 00" N
point 7: 8° 26' 03" E, 4° 35' 00" N
point 8: 8° 25' 42" E, 4° 34' 18" N
point 9: 8° 25' 35" E, 4° 34' 00" N
point 10: 8° 25' 08" E, 4° 33' 00" N
point 11: 8° 24' 47" E, 4° 32' 00" N
point 12: 8° 24' 38" E, 4° 31' 26" N;
¾ from point 12, the boundary follows the line adopted in the Declaration
signed by the Heads of
State of Cameroon and Nigeria at Maroua on 1 June 1975 (Maroua
Declaration), as corrected
by the exchange of letters between the said Heads of State of 12 June and
17 July 1975; that
line passes through points A to G, whose co-ordinates are as follows:
Longitude Latitude
point A: 8° 24' 24" E, 4° 31' 30" N
point A1: 8° 24' 24" E, 4° 31' 20" N
point B: 8° 24' 10" E, 4° 26' 32" N
point C: 8° 23' 42" E, 4° 23' 28" N
point D: 8° 22' 41" E, 4° 20' 00" N
point E: 8° 22' 17" E, 4° 19' 32" N
point F: 8° 22' 19" E, 4° 18' 46" N
point G: 8° 22' 19" E, 4° 17' 00" N;
IN FAVOUR: President Guillaume; Vice-President Shi; Judges Oda, Ranjeva,
Herczegh,
Fleischhauer, Higgins, Parra-Aranguren, Kooijmans, Al-Khasawneh,
Buergenthal, Elaraby;
Judge ad hoc Mbaye;
AGAINST: Judges Koroma, Rezek; Judge ad hoc Ajibola;

(C) Unanimously,
Decides that, from point G, the boundary line between the maritime areas
appertaining
respectively to the Republic of Cameroon and to the Federal Republic of
Nigeria follows a
loxodrome having an azimuth of 270° as far as the equidistance line passing
through the midpoint
of the line joining West Point and East Point; the boundary meets this
equidistance line at a
point X, with co-ordinates 8° 21' 20" longitude east and 4° 17' 00"
latitude north;

(D) Unanimously,
Decides that, from point X, the boundary between the maritime areas
appertaining
respectively to the Republic of Cameroon and to the Federal Republic of
Nigeria follows a
loxodrome having an azimuth of 187° 52' 27";

V. (A) By fourteen votes to two,
Decides that the Federal Republic of Nigeria is under an obligation
expeditiously and
without condition to withdraw its administration and its military and
police forces from the
territories which fall within the sovereignty of the Republic of Cameroon
pursuant to points I and
III of this operative paragraph;
IN FAVOUR: President Guillaume; Vice-President Shi; Judges Oda, Ranjeva,
Herczegh,
Fleischhauer, Higgins, Parra-Aranguren, Kooijmans, Rezek, Al-Khasawneh,
Buergenthal,
Elaraby; Judge ad hoc Mbaye;
AGAINST: Judge Koroma; Judge ad hoc Ajibola;
(
B) Unanimously,
Decides that the Republic of Cameroon is under an obligation expeditiously
and without
condition to withdraw any administration or military or police forces which
may be present in the
territories which fall within the sovereignty of the Federal Republic of
Nigeria pursuant to point II
of this operative paragraph. The Federal Republic of Nigeria has the same
obligation in respect of
the territories which fall within the sovereignty of the Republic of
Cameroon pursuant to point II of
this operative paragraph;

(C) By fifteen votes to one,
Takes note of the commitment undertaken by the Republic of Cameroon at the
hearings that,
"faithful to its traditional policy of hospitality and tolerance", it "will
continue to afford protection
to Nigerians living in the [Bakassi] Peninsula and in the Lake Chad area";
IN FAVOUR: President Guillaume; Vice-President Shi; Judges Oda, Ranjeva,
Herczegh,
Fleischhauer, Koroma, Higgins, Kooijmans, Rezek, Al-Khasawneh, Buergenthal,
Elaraby;
Judges ad hoc Mbaye, Ajibola;
AGAINST: Judge Parra-Aranguren;

(D) Unanimously,
Rejects all other submissions of the Republic of Cameroon regarding the
State responsibility
of the Federal Republic of Nigeria;

(E) Unanimously,
Rejects the counter-claims of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

Done in French and in English, the French text being authoritative, at the
Peace Palace,
The Hague, this tenth day of October, two thousand and two, in four copies,
one of which will be
placed in the archives of the Court and the others transmitted to the
Government of the Republic of
Cameroon, the Government of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, and the
Government of the
Republic of Equatorial Guinea, respectively.
(Signed) Gilbert GUILLAUME,
President.
(Signed) Philippe COUVREUR,
Registrar.
Judge ODA appends a declaration to the Judgment of the Court; Judge RANJEVA
appends a
separate opinion to the Judgment of the Court; Judge HERCZEGH appends a
declaration to the
Judgment of the Court; Judge KOROMA appends a dissenting opinion to the
Judgment of the Court;
Judge PARRA-ARANGUREN appends a separate opinion to the Judgment of the
Court; Judge REZEK
appends a declaration to the Judgment of the Court; Judge AL-KHASAWNEH and
Judge ad hoc MBAYE append separate opinions to the Judgment of the Court;
Judge ad hoc AJIBOLA appends a dissenting opinion to the Judgment of the
Court.
(Initialled) G.G.
(Initialled) Ph.C.
___________

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

JiscMail Tools


RSS Feeds and Sharing


Advanced Options


Archives

March 2024
February 2024
January 2024
December 2023
November 2023
October 2023
September 2023
August 2023
July 2023
June 2023
May 2023
April 2023
March 2023
February 2023
January 2023
December 2022
November 2022
October 2022
September 2022
August 2022
July 2022
June 2022
May 2022
April 2022
March 2022
February 2022
January 2022
December 2021
November 2021
October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
2001
2000
1999
1998


JiscMail is a Jisc service.

View our service policies at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/ and Jisc's privacy policy at https://www.jisc.ac.uk/website/privacy-notice

For help and support help@jisc.ac.uk

Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager