the implications of taking the belize-guatemala differendum to the i.c.j.

1. The Implications of taking the Belize-Guatemala Differendum to the I.C.J. Pros, Cons, Risks, Precedents Presented at the 17th Annual Signa Yorke Memorial Lecture, April 23rd, Holy Redeemer Parish Hall, Belize City

2. 2

3. 3 The Options Do nothing: launch no new round of negotiations Continue to launch new rounds of negotiation Seek alternative means of pressuring Guatemala to reach a negotiated settlement Go to the ICJ or arbitration

4. 4 Weighing the Options Suspending further negotiations saves time, considerable money and human energy. But: In the absence of a treaty settling the border limits there is unlikely to be a physical clearing of the boundary creating a real risk of occupation by stealth, e.g., Santa Rosa, Xateros,

5. 5 Weighing the Options The Belize-Guatemala dispute is a zero-sum negotiation. Belize will not yield territory or sea; Guatemala needs something to save face at home. There is therefore little or no room for compromise. Absent a �cultural shift� on the ground in Guatemala, further zero-sum negotiations are non-starters.

6. 6 Weighing the Options The prevailing culture in negotiation eclectics is for compromise rather than zero-sum results. The only states or entities (the USA or the UN-P5) capable of pressuring Guatemala to settle the dispute, will be guided by the principle of compromise.

7. 7 Arguments for going to ICJ We should win: Leading international lawyers say iron-clad case; A decision of the ICJ in Belize�s favor will most likely bring about final settlement; Lead to a clearing of the border ending incursions, illegal settlements Strengthen regional unity

8. 8 Arguments against going to ICJ Costly No guarantee of favorable result; No guarantee that Guatemala will abide decision Clearing of boundary can�t stop incursions and illegal settlements Could leave Belize worse off

9. 9 Risks The most poignant risk of taking the differendum to the ICJ is that the court could make a decision that is not in favour of Belize, that results in the boundary or title to the territory as it exists, being adjusted

10. 10 Precedents Before the ICJ, Belize would argue that its title to territory is based on: Treaties: 1859 and 1931; Customary international law; and Right to self-determination All of which is supported by precedents in the ICJ.

11. 11 The Treaty Basis The 1859 and 1931 treaties clearly established the boundaries of Belize. The judicial precedent of the cases establish that a boundary once established is not dependent for its continuing force upon the maintenance in being of the treaty from which it is derived

12. 12 Libya/Chad Case �the establishment of this boundary is a fact which�has had a legal life of its own independently of the fate of the 1955 treaty. Once agreed, the boundary stands, for any other approach would vitiate the fundamental principle of the stability of boundaries, the importance of which has been repeatedly emphasized by the Court.

13. 13 Customary International Law The current title of Belize flows from the presence on the ground of Britain & Belize continuously for 175 years. This is founded on historical consolidation and acquisitive prescription. It does not depend upon conquest. It stems from the facts of long-standing and continuous British and Belizean governmental presence and activity.

14. 14 Eritrea/Yemen Case historic title �is a title that has been created or consolidated by a process of prescription or by possession so long continued as to become accepted by law as title. The law of acquisition of territory requires that there be an intentional display of power and authority over the territory by the exercise of jurisdiction and state functions on a continuous and peaceful basis.

15. 15 Right to Self-Determination The right of Belize to its territory is confirmed by the principle of self-determination, a well-established norm of modern international law. The people of Belize were entitled to determine their future. They did so in 1981. Their right was recognized virtually unanimously by the members of the UN and Belize was admitted as a member in the full knowledge by the members of Guatemala�s claim.

16. 16 East Timor Case In the Court�s view, Portugal�s assertion that the right of peoples to self-determination, as it evolved from the Charter and from UN practice, has an erga omnes character, is irreproachable. The principle of self-determination of people has been recognized by the United Nations Charter and in the jurisprudence of the Court.

17. 17 Guatemala�s Case The area of Belize was originally included in the domains of Spain. Upon independence the United Provinces of Central America, and subsequently Guatemala, succeeded to the sovereignty of Spain by operation of uti possidetis. Britain�s failure to comply with the 1859 treaty entitled Guatemala to unilaterally terminate it.

18. 18 The Validity of the 1859 Treaty Guatemala�s claim that Britain�s failure to comply with article 7 of the 1859 treaty entitled it to unilaterally terminate the treaty thereby rendering in invalid is in any event answered by the Libya/Chad case.

19. 19 Cases on Uti Possidetis Beagle Channel Arbitration- boundary settlement established in an treaty prevailed over any claim based on uti possidetis; El Salvador/Honduras � evidence as to possession and control of territory and the display and exercise of sovereignty prevails over uti possidetis juris.

20. 20 Conclusion The strong likelihood that Belize would win before the ICJ thereby ending the long dispute and causing the boundary to be clearly demarcated outweighs the remote possibility that court would rule against Belize, cost considerations and questions of Guatemala�s compliance with the decision.