– De Armas-Archbold says

SHEDDING light on the brewing tensions between Guyana and Venezuela, People’s Progressive Party/Civic (PPP/C) Georgetown Councillor, Alfonso De Armas-Archbold, maintained his stance that Venezuela has no claim over Essequibo and President Nicolas Maduro is trying to score political points with the upcoming referendum.

Given the public’s concern on the border/controversy, De Armas-Archbold told the Guyana Chronicle that now, more than ever, Guyanese need to be very vocal about this.

Speaking more on Maduro weaponising the referendum in order to promote Anti-Guyanese rhetoric and score political points, De Armas-Archbold said: “I believe, [it] is closely related to the internal political machinations surrounding Venezuela’s upcoming 2024 election,” adding that Maduro has been at the helm through several elections marred by accusations of rigging and suppression of opposition candidates.

He then referenced the agreement signed on October 17 between Venezuela’s government officials and their main Opposition, which laid groundwork for their 2024 elections.
Given this, the PPP/C Councillor underscored that this move by the Maduro administration is significant especially with the rising popularity of Opposition Leader, Maria Corina Machado, who won a resounding 90 per cent in the primaries.

“For the first time, Maduro faces a real threat to his power,” De Armas-Archbold stated.
As Maduro clings to power, according to the PPP/C Councillor, the Guyana-Venezuela border controversy takes on new meaning.

“Maduro seems to be using this issue to rally nationalistic support ahead of the general elections. This is in contrast to Maria Machado’s preference for a World Court resolution to the dispute, further highlighting the differences between the incumbent and the opposition,” he said.

INTERNATIONAL LAW
Moreover, on Tuesday, Guyana’s representatives, urgently appealed for provisional measures to address the “imminent threat” occasioned by Venezuela’s upcoming referendum and called for the International Court of Justice (ICJ) to act now to prevent “incalculable and irreparable injury” to Guyana’s rights.

Renowned international legal counsel Paul Reichler, during his submissions at the Peace Palace in The Hague, Netherlands, explained that the referendum, as outlined by President Nicolas Maduro, aims to solidify Venezuela’s rejection of the 1899 Arbitral Award.

Additionally, it also challenges the ICJ’s jurisdiction in a move that could have profound consequences on the ongoing territorial controversy between the two nations.

As such, Reichler stressed the urgency of seeking the court’s assistance to prevent “incalculable and irreparable injury” to Guyana’s rights, particularly concerning the Essequibo region.
The territory, awarded to British Guiana in the 1899 Arbitral Award, is now at the centre of a revived territorial claim by Venezuela.

According to Reichler, the impending referendum is not merely a gauge of public opinion but a strategic move by Spanish-speaking nation to gain popular support for decisions that have already been made at the highest levels of its government.

Reichler pointed to the deliberate crafting of referendum questions, designed to leave no outcome other than an overwhelming mandate for the Venezuelan government’s predetermined actions.

The questions, as analysed by Reichler, not only reject the Arbitral Award but also challenge the ICJ’s jurisdiction, paving the way for the annexation of Guyana’s territory and its incorporation into Venezuela as a new state.

The legal counsel raised concerns about the impact of the referendum on Guyana’s rights, particularly in the event of the rejection of the 1899 Arbitral Award and the court’s jurisdiction.
Reichler further questioned the viability of the ICJ’s role after a popular mandate to reject the award, leaving Guyana’s rights in jeopardy.

“Will there be any role left for you to decide upon the validity of the award? After the referendum produces an overwhelming popular mandate to reject it, and the boundary is fraudulently imposed so that Venezuela can take back the territory that was stripped from it,” he said.

Reichler also highlighted Venezuela’s intentions to reject the court itself, as indicated by President Maduro’s explicit statement that Venezuela “will never recognise the International Court of Justice as an instance for the attention or resolution of this matter.”

“How can the President of Venezuela declare a month before the referendum is held that the outcome will be a rejection of the court as a means for the resolution of the territorial controversy with Guyana?” Reichler later questioned.