‘Venezuela’s referendum can compromise Court proceedings’- Attorney General tells Extraordinary Parliamentary sitting
Lawmakers from both sides of the House gathered for an Extraordinary Sitting of the National Assembly on Monday and Guyana’s Attorney General Anil Nandlall SC posited that Venezuela’s planned referendum can compromise the proceedings of the International Court of Justice (ICJ).
Consequently, he called on fellow lawmakers, Guyanese and the international community to denounce this referendum.
“Anyone familiar with the curial process would know that a party in a litigation has a right to seek appropriate legal remedies, interlocutorily, if the other party in the litigation is taking steps that can defeat, compromise or render negatory, the legal proceedings itself and/or its final outcome.
“Guyana is of the considered view, that the impending referendum slated for the 3rd of December, 2023 is intended to and will compromise the legal proceedings pending at the International Court of Justice, if not subvert the legal process altogether and prejudice its outcome,” Nandlall, who is also the Minister of Legal Affairs, said.
What Guyana is ultimately seeking from the ICJ is affirmation that the 1899 Arbitral Award which established the boundary between itself and Venezuela is valid. Guyana believes that an ICJ ruling will be final and binding, settling the decades-long controversy once and for all.
It is for this reason Guyana rejects the referendum and is asking the ICJ to block it.
Through this referendum, Venezuela’s government will seek the support of citizens in continuation of its claim of Guyana’s Essequibo region. There are fears that at least one question in that referendum seeks the support of Venezuelans for the annexation of two-thirds of Guyana’s territory; and some believe the Spanish-speaking country may use force to do so.
So Guyana has approached the ICJ, seeking an injunction to prevent Venezuela from taking action through its provocative referendum over Guyana’s territory – Essequibo. There will be a hearing on November 14.
The Extraordinary Parliamentary sitting was convened as a means of also denouncing that referendum and reaffirming that the ICJ is the only avenue for a final settlement of the border controversy after other avenues, including decades of bilateral talks, failed.
AG Nandlal has placed the emphasis on the potential negative impact and definite conflict with the juridical competence and locus standi of the ICJ’s current proceedings involving as parties both the litigants with one choosing right and the other choosing might (Consultative Referendum through domestic legislation what Todd calls being on the wrong side of International Law) as a means of dispute settlement that has been festering since even before Guyana’s independence in 1966 as the proverbial sword of Damocles intimidating a peace loving unarmed but patriotic people.
He is right that the ICJ now possesses exclusive jurisdiction on the bilateral border issue submitted to its remit by the S/G of the UN and will act to issue Guyana’s requested Moratorium and Interim Measures during its sitting on 14 November next week.
The ICJ cannot allow and permit a “pariah” aggressor litigant state from compromising and cheapening its hallowed reputation and bringing its image as the World Court into odium and disrepute as it suits Venezuela with its penchant for sporadic appearances at the Court and the pursuit of action at the domestic legislature to validate its forays into an imperialistic agenda so detrimental to Guyana’s sovereignty and Venezuela’s respect for international law and the UN Charter that establishes a corpus of customary international law from which there can be no deviation nor disrespect. by UN member Venezuela.
I agree with SC Nandlal.
‘…Guyana is of the considered view, that the impending referendum slated for the 3rd of December, 2023 is intended to and will compromise the legal proceedings pending at the International Court of Justice, if not subvert the legal process altogether and prejudice its outcome,”
The ICJ must not allow this to happen without putting down its strong legal feet on Venezuela and advising how to conduct its international affairs as a responsible member of the new normative world order that rejects the old outdated might is right template.