THE United Nations Secretary-General (SG) António Guterres through spokesperson Stéphane Dujarric, has reiterated his position regarding the International Court of Justice (ICJ) as a solution to the ongoing border Guyana-Venezuela border controversy.

“…in the exercise of the power and responsibility conferred on him by the 1966 Geneva Agreement, chose the International Court of Justice as the means that was next to be used for the solution of the border controversy between the two countries,” Dujarric said on behalf of the SG.
Despite the ongoing case before the ICJ, in its most recent attempt to disregard the rule of law, the Nicolás Maduro government plans to put forward a referendum on Guyana’s Essequibo.

The Government of Guyana has since rejected Venezuela’s action and filed a request with the International Court of Justice for provisional measures to prevent any attempt by the Bolivarian Republic to annex Guyana’s territory

The international community has also released strong statements condemning Venezuela’s aggressive claims over the Essequibo region. CARICOM, the OAS, and the Commonwealth have published multiple statements in favour of Guyana’s territorial sovereignty.
In April of this year, the World Court ruled that the case Guyana brought before it seeking to affirm the validity of the 1899 Arbitral Award settling the boundaries between it and Venezuela was admissible.

This meant that the court could move forward with hearing the substantive case on its merits, of whether the1899 arbitral award settling the boundaries of the two countries is valid and binding.

The ruling marked the second time that the international court has rejected jurisdictional objections raised by Venezuela.
Guyana moved to the ICJ with its case in March 2018, challenging the non-participating Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela over its disagreement on the legal validity and binding effect of the 1899 Award.

Venezuela maintained that the ICJ was without jurisdiction to hear the case and refused to participate in the court proceedings.
The Spanish-speaking country had claimed that it is the “sole indisputable inheritor” of the Essequibo region and the Monetary Gold Principle.
Although Venezuela had claimed that the ICJ did not have jurisdiction to hear the substantive case, it made a U-turn following the court’s December 2020 ruling on that aspect of the case. Venezuela, on that occasion, contended that Guyana had no standing in the matter. The court unanimously rejected Venezuela’s objection.
Guyana is seeking a final and binding judgement that the 1899 Arbitral Award, which established the location of the land boundary between then British Guiana and Venezuela, remains valid, and that the Essequibo region belongs to Guyana and not Venezuela.