Larida, Elcah Myrrh A.

Public International Law

TERRITORIAL AND MARITIME DISPUTE Nicaragua vs. Colombia Judgment of 19 November 2012 FACTS: Colombia and Nicaragua, which both gained independence from Spain and obtained sovereignty over their respective territories in the 19th century, concluded a treaty in 1928 and an accompanying Protocol in 1930 purporting to put an end to their dispute concerning sovereignty over the San Andrs Archipelago and the Nicaraguan Mosquito Coast. However, following Nicaraguan protests concerning the signing by Colombia and the United States of the 1972 Vsquez-Saccio Treaty, whereby the U.S. renounced its claims to sovereignty over Quitasueo, Roncador, and Serrana, and Colombian protests triggered by Nicaraguas granting of oil exploration concessions in the Quitasueo area in 1969, Nicaragua denounced the 1928 Treaty as being null and void in 1980. Nicaragua instituted proceedings against Colombia with regard to a dispute which concerns the delimitation of the boundaries between, on the one hand, the continental shelf of Nicaragua beyond the 200-nautical-mile limit from the baselines from which the breadth of the territorial sea of Nicaragua is measured, and on the other hand, the continental shelf of Colombia. Nicaragua contended that it has sovereignty over the islands of Providencia, San Andres and Santa Catalina and all the appurtenant islands and keys, and also over the Roncador, Serrana, Serranilla and Quitasueo keys (in so far as they are capable of appropriation), and it asked the Court to further determine the course of the single maritime boundary between the areas of continental shelf and exclusive economic zone appertaining respectively to Nicaragua and Colombia, in accordance with equitable principles and relevant circumstances recognized by general international law as applicable to such a delimitation of a single maritime boundary. On the other hand, Columbia contended that the court is without jurisdiction to hear the controversy submitted to it by Nicaragua under Article XXXI, and prayed that the controversy be ended and that Nicaraguas Application should be dismissed.

ISSUES: 1) Whether the maritime features in dispute are capable of appropriation 2) Sovereignty over the maritime features in dispute

HELD: 1) It is well established in international law that islands, however small, are capable of appropriation. By contrast, low-tide elevations (features which are above water at low tide but submerged at high tide) cannot be appropriated, although a coastal State has sovereignty over low-tide elevations which are situated within its territorial sea, and these low-tide elevations may be taken into account for the purpose of measuring the breadth of the territorial sea. The Parties agree that Alburquerque Cays, ast-Southeast Cays, Roncador, Serrana, Serranilla and ajo Nuevo remain above water at high tide and thus, as islands, they are capable of appropriation. They disagree, however, as to whether any of the features on uitasue o qualify as islands. Taking into account the scientific evidence in the case file, in particular, an xpert Report on uitasue o relied on by Colombia, prepared by r. Robert Smith, the Court concludes that the feature referred to in the Smith Report as QS 32 is above water at high tide and is thus capable of appropriation. ith regard to the other maritime features at uitasue o, the Court considers that the evidence advanced by Colombia cannot be regarded as sufficient to establish that any of them constitutes an island, as defined in international law; it finds that they are lowtide elevations. 2) The Court finds that neither the 1928 Treaty nor the historical records is conclusive as to the composition of that Archipelago. Also, in the present case, the principle of uti possidetis juris affords inadequate assistance in determining sovereignty over the maritime features in dispute between Nicaragua and Colombia because nothing in the historical record clearly indicates whether these features were attributed to the colonial provinces of Nicaragua or of Colombia prior to or upon independence from Spain. The Court finds that for many decades Colombia continuously and consistently acted titre de souverain in respect of the maritime features in dispute. This exercise of sovereign authority was public and there is no evidence that it met with any protest from Nicaragua prior to 1969, when the dispute crystallized. Moreover, the evidence of Colombias acts of administration with respect to the islands is in contrast to the absence of any evidence of acts titre de souverain on the part of Nicaragua. The Court concludes that the facts provide very strong support for Colombias claim of sovereignty over the maritime features in dispute. Colombia, and not Nicaragua, has sovereignty over the islands at Alburquerque, ajo Nuevo, ast-Southeast Cays, uitasue o, Roncador, Serrana and Serranilla.

Summary of Ruling by the ICJ: 1) Republic of Colombia has sovereignty over the islands at Alburquerque, Bajo Nuevo, EastSoutheast Cays, uitasue o, Ronca- dor, Serrana and Serranilla; 2) The court finds admissible the Republic of Nicaraguas claim requesting the Court to adjudge

and declare that [t]he appropriate form of delimitation, within the geographical and legal framework constituted by the mainland coasts of Nicaragua and Colombia, is a continental shelf boundary dividing by equal parts the overlapping entitlements to a continental shelf of both Parties 3) The court cannot uphold the Republic of Nicaraguas claim contained in its final submission; 4) The line of the single maritime boundary delimiting the continent shelf and the exclusive economic zones of the Republic of Nicaragua and the Republic of Colombia shall follow geodetic lines connecting the points with co-ordinates: Latitude north . 3 46 35.7 2. 3 3

8.

3. 3

3 5.8 4. 2 5

2.8 5. 2

7 28.8 6. 2

4.5

Longitude west 8 29 34.7 8 45 59.4 8

46 22.7 8

59 22.6 82

7 27.7 8

57 57.8

From point 1, the maritime boundary line shall continue due east along the parallel of latitude co-ordinates 3 46 35.7 N) until it reaches the 2 -nautical-mile limit from the baselines from which the breadth of the territorial sea of Nicaragua is measured. From point 6 with co-ordinates 2 4.5 N and 8 57 57.8 ), located on a 2 -nautical-mile envelope of arcs around Alburquerque, the maritime boundary line shall continue along that envelope of arcs until it reaches point 7 (with co-ordinates 2 53.5 N and 8 38 6.6 ) which is located on the parallel passing through the southernmost point on the 12-nautical-mile envelope of arcs around East-Southeast Cays. The boundary line then follows that parallel until it reaches the southernmost point of the 12-nautical-mile envelope of arcs around East-Southeast Cays at point 8 (with coordinates 2 53.5 N and 8 28 29.5 ) and continues along that envelope of arcs until its most eastward point point 9 with co-ordinates 2 24 9.3 N and 8 4 43.9 ). rom that point the boundary line follows the parallel of latitude coordinates 2 24 9.3 N) until it reaches the 200-nautical-mile limit from the baselines from which the territorial sea of Nicaragua is measured; 5) The single maritime boundary around uitasue o and Serrana shall follow, respectively, a 2 nautical-mile envelope of arcs measured from QS 32 and from low-tide elevations located within 12 nautical miles from QS 32, and a 12-nautical-mile envelope of arcs measured from Serrana Cay and the other cays in its vicinity ; 6) The court rejects the Republic of Nicaraguas claim contained in its final submissions requesting the Court to declare that the Republic of Colombia is not acting in accordance with its

obligations under international law by preventing the Republic of Nicaragua from having access to natural resources to the east of the 82nd meridian.