ahead of Venezuela’s planned referendum on Guyana’s Essequibo

GUYANA is set to address the International Court of Justice (ICJ) today, urgently seeking provisional measures which would address specific questions in Venezuela’s planned referendum for December 3, 2023.
Guyana is also seeking from the court, an order preventing Venezuela from taking any action to seize, acquire or encroach upon, or assert or exercise sovereignty over the Essequibo region or any other part of Guyana’s national territory, pending the court’s final determination of the validity of the 1899 Arbitral Award that established the land boundary between the two states, and the final and binding nature of that boundary.
The hearing today at the Peace Palace in The Hague, Netherlands, is devoted to oral arguments for the request for the indication of provisional measures submitted by Guyana on October 30, 2023.

Venezuela will present its case on the following day, Wednesday, November 15, 2023, during the same time frame.
The genesis of the controversy traces back to the 1899 Arbitral Award, a landmark decision that delineated the land boundary between British Guiana (now Guyana) and Venezuela.
However, despite the historic arbitration, tensions have persisted, with Venezuela repeatedly challenging the validity of the award.
Fast forward to 2018, and Guyana took a decisive step by approaching the ICJ, seeking affirmation of the 1899 Arbitral Award’s legitimacy.
Venezuela, taking a defiant stance, initially claimed the ICJ lacked jurisdiction, a contention flatly rejected by the international court in a crucial ruling in December 2020. The door was thus opened for the ICJ to delve into the substantive case’s merits.

Recent developments have heightened the geopolitical situation, as Venezuela, through its National Electoral Council, unveiled plans for a “Consultative Referendum” on December 3, 2023.

Guyana contends that this move is a thinly veiled attempt by Venezuela to gather support for abandoning the ongoing ICJ proceedings, and unilaterally assert control over the Essequibo region.

In response, Guyana swiftly approached the ICJ, seeking urgent provisional measures to prevent any actions by Venezuela that could jeopardise the status quo until the court reaches a final verdict on the matter.

Guyana’s legal team is expected to argue that the urgency of the situation necessitates immediate intervention by the ICJ.
Thus, the English-speaking country is seeking an order that would restrain Venezuela from seizing, acquiring, or encroaching upon the Essequibo region, or asserting sovereignty over any part of Guyana’s national territory.

Crucially, Guyana asserts that Venezuela’s proposed referendum goes beyond seeking public opinion; it aims to facilitate a unilateral annexation of territory that constitutes more than two-thirds of Guyana.

This, Guyana contends, violates established principles of international law, specifically the prohibition of one state unilaterally seizing or annexing the territory of another.
The urgency of the situation prompted Guyana’s National Assembly to pass a motion strongly denouncing Venezuela’s referendum plans.
In a display of unity, both government and opposition representatives affirmed that Guyana’s sovereignty is paramount and a matter on which the nation stands entirely united.
This unity extends beyond domestic politics, as reflected in a joint statement from government and opposition officials condemning Venezuela’s actions as flagrant violations of the Rule of Law.

The statement pointed out the need for a robust diplomatic effort to counteract Venezuelan propaganda and misinformation.
The Caribbean Community (CARICOM) has not remained silent on the unfolding developments. CARICOM publicly rejected Venezuela’s latest claims and denounced the proposed referendum.

In a strong statement, the regional body underscored that international law strictly prohibits unilateral actions by one state to seize or annex another’s territory.
CARICOM said that two of the questions in Venezuela’s proposed referendum, if answered affirmatively, could result in a possible annexation of territory constituting part of Guyana, creating a state within Venezuela known as Guyana Essequibo.

This, CARICOM contends, is a clear violation of fundamental international legal principles.
The ICJ, as the principal judicial organ of the United Nations, faces the intricate task of adjudicating on the urgent provisional measures sought by Guyana.
The court’s decision will have far-reaching implications not only for the current controversy but for the broader principles of international law governing territorial issues between sovereign nations.

Guyana and Venezuela will present their oral arguments after which the ICJ will rule. The substantive case involving the border controversy is still before the ICJ.