INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE Maritime Delimitation in the Indian Ocean (Somalia v Kenya) COUNTER-MEMORIAL OF THE REPUBLIC OF KENYA VOLUME I 18 DECEMBER 2017 Table of Contents INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................... 4 A. Summary of Kenya’s Case .................................................................................................. 4 B. Structure of the Counter-Memorial ...................................................................................... 6 CHAPTER I. THE OFFICIAL CLAIMS AND CONDUCT OF THE PARTIES ............ 8 A. Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 8 B. 1924–79: Events leading to Kenya’s Maritime Boundary Claim at the Parallel of Latitude in the 1979 EEZ Proclamation ........................................................................................... 12 1. The land boundary terminus and territorial sea delimitation under the 1924 Anglo- Italian Treaty: 1924–33 ............................................................................................... 12 2. Somalia’s repudiation of the land and sea boundary with Kenya under the 1924 Anglo-Italian Treaty and the 1972 maritime laws of the Parties: 1963–75 ................ 15 3. Kenya–Tanzania maritime boundary agreement: 1975–6 .......................................... 19 4. Kenya’s 1979 EEZ Proclamation: 1975–9 ................................................................. 22 C. Somalia’s Absence of Protest against Kenya’s 1979 EEZ Proclamation and Maritime Boundary Claim at the Parallel of Latitude ....................................................................... 27 1. First notification to Somalia: 1979 ............................................................................. 27 2. Kenya and Somalia’s support for equitable delimitation during UNCLOS negotiations: 1980–2 ................................................................................................... 30 3. Ratification of UNCLOS and implementing legislation on maritime zones: 1989 .... 33 D. Kenya’s 2005 EEZ Proclamation and Somalia’s Continuing Absence of Protest to Kenya’s Maritime Boundary Claim at the Parallel of Latitude ......................................... 36 1. Kenya’s 2005 EEZ Proclamation ............................................................................... 37 2. Second notification to Somalia: 2006 ......................................................................... 38 E. Kenya’s 2009 CLCS Submission and Extension of the Maritime Boundary at the Parallel of Latitude in the Outer Continental Shelf beyond 200M ................................................. 41 1. Kenyan 2009 CLCS submission extending the parallel of latitude to the outer limits of the continental shelf ................................................................................................ 41 2. Third notification to Somalia: 2009 ............................................................................ 44 3. Kenya–Tanzania maritime boundary agreement: 2009 .............................................. 46 F. Further Conduct of the Parties Consistent with the Parallel of Latitude: 1979–2013 ....... 47 1. The Survey of Kenya .................................................................................................. 47 2. Maritime patrols and enforcement by the Kenyan Navy ............................................ 47 3. Fisheries and marine scientific research ..................................................................... 51 4. Oil concession practice ............................................................................................... 60 G. 2014: Somalia’s First Official Claim to an Equidistance Line .......................................... 79 1. January 2014: Fourth notification by Kenya .............................................................. 79 2. March 2014: Somalia’s first claim to an equidistance line ......................................... 81 3. May 2014: Somalia’s extension of Soma Oil’s Offshore Evaluation Area south of the parallel of latitude ................................................................................................. 85 4. June–July 2014: Somalia’s EEZ Proclamation and CLCS submission claiming an equidistance line ......................................................................................................... 87 2 5. August 2014: Somalia’s Application to the Court and the Parties’ subsequent conduct ........................................................................................................................ 88 H. Conclusion ......................................................................................................................... 89 CHAPTER II. SOMALIA’ S ACQUIESCENCE IN THE PARALLEL OF LATITUDE AS THE MARITIME BOUNDARY .................................................................................... 91 A. The Absence of Protest by Somalia following Kenya’s 1979 and 2005 EEZ Proclamations and the 2009 CLCS Submission until 2014 ............................................... 92 1. Under international law the absence of protest when a reaction is called for constitutes acquiescence ............................................................................................. 93 2. The legal effect of Somalia’s acquiescence ................................................................ 96 3. The context of Somalia’s acquiescence in Kenya’s 1979 EEZ Proclamation .......... 109 B. The Other Conduct of the Parties between 1979 and 2014 is Consistent with Acquiescence in the Parallel of Latitude as the Maritime Boundary .............................. 114 C. Conclusion: Somalia has Consented to the Maritime Boundary at the Parallel of Latitude118 CHAPTER III. EQUITABLE DELIMITATION OF THE MARITIME BOUNDARY BASED ON THE PARALLEL OF LATITUDE .............................................................. 119 A. The Objective of Maritime Boundary Delimitation ........................................................ 120 1. Equitable solution ..................................................................................................... 120 2. Relevant equitable principles .................................................................................... 122 B. No Mandatory Methodology ........................................................................................... 125 1. UNCLOS .................................................................................................................. 125 2. State practice ............................................................................................................. 127 3. Jurisprudence ............................................................................................................ 131 C. Where the Parties have Indicated what they regard as an Equitable Solution, this must be Respected ......................................................................................................................... 136 D. The Parties’ Indication of an Equitable Solution ............................................................. 138 1. Regional context ....................................................................................................... 140 2. Kenya–Somalia ......................................................................................................... 143 E. The Parallel of Latitude is an Equitable Solution ............................................................ 145 F. Conclusion ....................................................................................................................... 150 CHAPTER IV. REBUTTAL OF ALLEGATIONS OF ILLEGAL ACTIVITIES IN THE DISPUTED AREA...................................................................................................... 152 A. There was no “Disputed Area” until 2014 ....................................................................... 153 B. The Correct Legal Test for the Lawfulness of Activities in the “Disputed Area” ........... 154 C. The Transitory Nature of Kenya’s Activities and Somalia’s Rejection of Provisional Arrangements ................................................................................................................... 158 SUBMISSIONS .................................................................................................................... 161 3 INTRODUCTION 1. In response to the Memorial of the Federal Republic of Somalia of 13 July 2015, the Republic of Kenya submits this Counter-Memorial in accordance with the Order of the Court dated 2 February 2017 fixing 18 December 2017 as the time-limit for the filing of this written pleading. As provided in Article 49(2) of the Rules of Court, this Counter-Memorial addresses points of agreement and disagreement regarding the factual and legal statements made in Somalia’s Memorial. 2. This case concerns a dispute in regard to the delimitation of a “single maritime boundary between Somalia and Kenya in the Indian Ocean delimiting the territorial sea, exclusive economic zone … and continental shelf, including the continental shelf beyond 200 nautical miles”.1 Somalia’s case is that absent an agreement between the Parties, equidistance is the applicable method for delimitation of the maritime boundary, and that there are no special circumstances requiring its adjustment. Kenya’s case is that from at least 1979 until