Memorial of the Government of Nicaragua

INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE TERRITORIAL AND MARITIME DISPUTE (NICARAGUA v. COLOMBIA) MEMORIAL OF THE GOVERNMENT OF NICARAGUA VOLUME I 28 APRIL 2003 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................... 1 PART I:THE ISSUE OF SOVEREIGNTY............................................... 13 CHAPTER I:THE MOSQUITO COAST AND ADJACENT ISLANDS THE UTI POSSIDETIS IURIS AS A NORMATIVE PRINCIPLE........... 15 I. Introduction ......................................................................................15 II. Preliminary Observations................................................................16 A. THE MOSQUITO COAST AND ITS ISLANDS ........................................16 B. THE ORIGIN OF THE DISPUTE OVER THE MOSQUITO COAST..............18 C. APPLICATION OF THE UTI POSSIDETIS IURIS TO THE SETTLEMENT OF THE DISPUTE: THE MOLINA-GUAL TREATY OF 15 MARCH 1825..........20 III. Consideration of the Titles.............................................................25 A. THE TITLES OF THE PARTIES BEFORE THE ROYAL ORDER OF 20 NOVEMBER 1803 ...............................................................................25 B. THE ROYAL ORDER OF 20 NOVEMBER 1803: POSITIONS..................29 C. THE ROYAL ORDER OF 20 NOVEMBER 1803 DID NOT IMPLY A TRANSFER OF TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION OF THE MOSQUITO COAST TO THE VICEROYALTY OF SANTA FE .........................................................31 D. THE NON-EXECUTION AND POSTPONEMENT OF THE ROYAL ORDER OF 1803 .................................................................................................35 E. THE ROYAL EXPLANATORY ORDER OF 13 NOVEMBER 1806.............39 F. THE ATTITUDE OF THE FORMER SOVEREIGN....................................43 G. THE DIFFERENCE IN HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE ...............................46 IV. Conclusions ...................................................................................57 CHAPTER II:THE LEGAL STATUS OF THE 1928 TREATY.............. 59 Section I:Historical Background and Contemporaneous Events Leading to the Signature and Ratification of the Barcenas-Esguerra Treaty of 1928......................................................................................60 PART A. HISTORICAL BACKGROUND....................................................60 PART B. THE CONCLUSION OF THE 1928 TREATY ................................98 Section II:The Invalidity of the 1928 Treaty .....................................108 I PART A. THE 1928 TREATY WAS CONCLUDED IN MANIFEST VIOLATION OF THE NICARAGUAN CONSTITUTION THEN IN FORCE .............................108 PART B. THE NICARAGUAN GOVERNMENT WAS DEPRIVED OF ITS INTERNATIONAL CAPACITY DURING THE PERTINENT PERIOD SINCE IT COULD NOT FREELY EXPRESS ITS CONSENT TO BE BOUND BY INTERNATIONAL TREATIES .................................................................116 Section III:Content and Juridical Analysis of the 1928 Treaty..........125 A. EXCLUSION OF CERTAIN INSULAR FEATURES: RONCADOR, SERRANA, QUITASUEÑO ...................................................................................125 B. REFERENCE TO THE MERIDIAN OF 82° WEST IN RELATION TO THE ALLOCATION OF ISLANDS..................................................................146 Section IV:Even if the 1928 Treaty ever entered into force, it has been terminated as a consequence of its breach by Colombia ...................178 PART II:MARITIME DELIMITATION ................................................ 183 CHAPTER III:MARITIME DELIMITATION ....................................... 185 I. Introduction ....................................................................................185 II. The Delimitation Requested and the Applicable Law ..................185 III. The General Geographical Framework........................................189 IV. The Delimitation Area.................................................................191 V. The Relevant Legislation and Claims of Nicaragua .....................197 VI. The Relevant Legislation and Claims of Colombia.....................202 VII. The Delimitation Between the Mainland Coasts of Nicaragua and Colombia............................................................................................204 A. INTRODUCTION............................................................................204 B. THE PRINCIPLE OF EQUAL DIVISION OF THE AREAS OF CONVERGENCE ................................................................................205 C. THE PRINCIPLE OF EQUAL DIVISION APPLIES IN DELIMITATION OF A SINGLE MARITIME BOUNDARY ..........................................................208 D. THE COURSE OF THE BOUNDARY .................................................212 E. NO LEGAL BASIS FOR THE ADJUSTMENT OF THE MEDIAN LINE ......213 F. THE RELEVANCE OF GEOLOGY AND GEOMORPHOLOGY ................215 VIII. The Delimitation Between the Mainland Coasts of Nicaragua and Colombia: Equitable Criteria confirming the Equitable Result.........216 A. INTRODUCTION............................................................................216 II B. THE INCIDENCE OF NATURAL RESOURCES IN THE DISPUTED AREA: A RELEVANT CIRCUMSTANCE...............................................................216 C. THE PRINCIPLE OF EQUITABLE ACCESS TO THE NATURAL RESOURCES OF THE DISPUTED AREA...................................................................220 D. SECURITY CONSIDERATIONS.........................................................224 E. THE FACTOR OF PROPORTIONALITY .............................................226 F. THE INTERESTS OF OTHER STATES IN THE REGION ........................236 IX. The Delimitation in the Region of San Andres: the Nicaraguan Position on the Basis of Nicaraguan Title .........................................237 A. INTRODUCTION............................................................................237 B. THE COASTAL RELATIONSHIPS......................................................237 C. THE SAN ANDRES GROUP: ITS RELATION TO THE MEDIAN LINE DIVISION OF THE AREA OF DELIMITATION.........................................238 X. The Delimitation in the Region of San Andres: the Nicaraguan Position on the Basis of the Alleged Colombian Title.......................238 A. INTRODUCTION............................................................................238 B. THE NICARAGUAN POSITION ........................................................238 C. THE SAN ANDRES GROUP DOES NOT FORM PART OF THE COASTAL FRONT OF COLOMBIA.......................................................................239 D. THE PREDOMINANT INTEREST OF NICARAGUA IN THE RELEVANT AREA .......................................................................................................240 E. THE PRINCIPLE OR FACTOR OF PROPORTIONALITY .......................241 F. STATE PRACTICE..........................................................................243 G. CONCLUSION: THE PRESUMPTION IN FAVOUR OF A FULL ENCLAVE .......................................................................................................246 XI. The Presence of Small Cays in the Maritime Delimitation Area 248 A. INTRODUCTION............................................................................248 B. POLITICAL GEOGRAPHY ...............................................................248 C. THE WEIGHT OF THE CAYS IN THE MARITIME DELIMITATION BETWEEN NICARAGUA AND COLOMBIA.............................................................254 XII. Conclusions ................................................................................261 SUBMISSIONS....................................................................................... 265 LIST OF MAPS AND FIGURES............................................................ 269 LIST OF DOCUMENTS DEPOSITED WITH THE REGISTRY.......... 270 LIST OF ANNEXES ............................................................................... 271 III MEMORIAL OF THE GOVERNMENT OF NICARAGUA INTRODUCTION 1. The Order of the Court of 26 February 2002 fixed 28 April 2003 as the time limit for the filing of the Nicaraguan Memorial in the case concerning the Territorial and Maritime Dispute (Nicaragua v. Colombia). This Memorial is filed pursuant to that Order. 2. This case was brought before the Court on 6 December 2001 by means of an Application filed by the Republic of Nicaragua against the Republic of Colombia concerning a dispute over title to territory and maritime delimitation in the Caribbean Sea. In its Application the Government of the Republic of Nicaragua has asked the Court to adjudge and declare: “First, that the Republic of Nicaragua has sovereignty over the islands of Providencia, San Andres and Santa Catalina and all the appurtenant islands and keys, and also over the Roncador, Serrana, Serranilla and Quitasueño keys (in so far as they are capable of appropriation); Second, in the light of the determinations concerning title requested above, the Court is asked further to determine the course of the single maritime boundary between the areas of continental shelf and exclusive economic zone appertaining respectively to Nicaragua and Colombia, in accordance with equitable principles and relevant circumstances recognized by general international law as applicable to such a delimitation of a single maritime boundary.” 3. Jurisdiction is based on Article 36, paragraphs 1 and 2 of the Statute of the Court. Firstly, in accordance with the provisions of Article 36, paragraph 1, of the Statute, jurisdiction exists by virtue of Article 1 XXXI

Load more