OBLIGATION TO NEGOTIATE ACCESS TO THE PACIFIC OCEAN (BOLIVIA v. CHILE) –OR- OBLIGATION DE NÉGOCIER UN ACCÈS À L’OCÉAN PACIFIQUE (BOLIVIE c. CHILI):-
On 24 April 2013, the Government of the Plurinational State of Bolivia (hereinafter “Bolivia”) filed in the Registry of the Court an Application instituting proceedings against the Republic of Chile (hereinafter “Chile”) with regard to a dispute “relating to Chile’s obligation to negotiate in good faith and effectively with Bolivia in order to reach an agreement granting Bolivia a fully sovereign access to the Pacific Ocean”. In its Application, Bolivia seeks to found the jurisdiction of the Court on Article XXXI of the American Treaty on Pacific Settlement signed on 30 April 1948, officially designated, according to Article LX thereof, as the “Pact of Bogotá”. In the Application, the following claims were made by Bolivia: “For the above reasons Bolivia respectfully requests the Court to adjudge and declare that: (a) Chile has the obligation to negotiate with Bolivia in order to reach an agreement granting Bolivia a fully sovereign access to the Pacific Ocean; (b) Chile has breached the said obligation; (c) Chile must perform the said obligation in good faith, promptly, formally, within a reasonable time and effectively, to grant Bolivia a fully sovereign access to the Pacific Ocean.” The term “sovereign access” as used in Bolivia’s submissions could lead to different interpretations. When answering a question raised by a Member of the Court at the end of the hearings on Chile’s preliminary objection, Bolivia defined sovereign access as meaning that “Chile must grant Bolivia its own access to the sea with sovereignty in conformity with international law”. In its Reply, Bolivia further specified that a “sovereign access exists when a State does not depend on anything or anyone to enjoy this access” and that “sovereign access is a regime that secures the uninterrupted way of Bolivia to the sea the conditions of this access falling within the exclusive administration and control, both legal and physical, of Bolivia”. According to Chile, estoppel plays a role only in situations of uncertainty. Chile argues that when it is clear that a State did not express an intent to be bound, estoppel cannot apply. The court held that (1) By twelve votes to three, Finds that the Republic of Chile did not undertake a legal obligation to negotiate a sovereign access to the Pacific Ocean for the Plurinational State of Bolivia and (2) By twelve votes to three, Rejects consequently the other final submissions presented by the Plurinational State of Bolivia.
ALLEGED VIOLATIONS OF THE 1955 TREATY OF AMITY, ECONOMIC RELATIONS, AND CONSULAR RIGHTS (ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF IRAN v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA) (Order):-
On 16 July 2018, the Islamic Republic of Iran (hereinafter referred to as “Iran”) filed in the Registry of the Court an Application instituting proceedings against the United States of America (hereinafter referred to as the “United States”) with regard to alleged violations of the Treaty of Amity, Economic Relations, and Consular Rights between Iran and the United States of America, which was signed at Tehran on 15 August 1955 and entered into force on 16 June 1957 (hereinafter the “Treaty of Amity” or the “1955 Treaty”). Iran requests the Court to adjudge, order and declare that: “a. The USA, through the 8 May and announced further sanctions referred to in the present Application, with respect to Iran, Iranian nationals and companies, has breached its obligations to Iran under Articles IV (1), VII (1), VIII (1), VIII (2), IX (2) and X (1) of the Treaty of Amity; b. The USA shall, by means of its own choosing, terminate the 8 May sanctions without delay; c. The USA shall immediately terminate its threats with respect to the announced further sanctions referred to in the present Application. The USA shall ensure that no steps shall be taken to circumvent the decision to be given by the Court in the present case and will give a guarantee of non-repetition of its violations of the Treaty of Amity; e. The USA shall fully compensate Iran for the violation of its international legal obligations in an amount to be determined by the Court at a subsequent stage of the proceedings. Iran reserves the right to submit and present to the Court in due course a precise evaluation of the compensation owed by the USA.” The court Indicates the following provisional measures: (1) Unanimously held that the United States of America, in accordance with its obligations under the 1955 Treaty of Amity, Economic Relations, and Consular Rights, shall remove, by means of its choosing, any impediments arising from the measures announced on 8 May 2018 to the free exportation to the territory of the Islamic Republic of Iran of (i) medicines and medical devices; (ii) foodstuffs and agricultural commodities; and (iii) spare parts, equipment and associated services (including warranty, maintenance, repair services and inspections) necessary for the safety of civil aviation; (2) Unanimously held that the United States of America shall ensure that licences and necessary authorizations are granted and that payments and other transfers of funds are not subject to any restriction in so far as they relate to the goods and services referred to in point (1); (3) Unanimously, Both Parties shall refrain from any action which might aggravate or extend the dispute before the Court or make it more difficult to resolve. Done in English and in French, the English text being authoritative, at the Peace Palace, The Hague, this third day of October, two thousand and eighteen, in three copies, one of which will be placed in the archives of the Court and the others transmitted to the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran and the Government of the United States of America, respectively. The court Indicates the following provisional measures: (1) Unanimously, The United States of America, in accordance with its obligations under the 1955 Treaty of Amity, Economic Relations, and Consular Rights, shall remove, by means of its choosing, any impediments arising from the measures announced on 8 May 2018 to the free exportation to the territory of the Islamic Republic of Iran of (i) medicines and medical devices; (ii) foodstuffs and agricultural commodities; and (iii) spare parts, equipment and associated services (including warranty, maintenance, repair services and inspections) necessary for the safety of civil aviation; (2) Unanimously, The United States of America shall ensure that licences and necessary authorizations are granted and that payments and other transfers of funds are not subject to any restriction in so far as they relate to the goods and services referred to in point (1); (3) Unanimously, Both Parties shall refrain from any action which might aggravate or extend the dispute before the Court or make it more difficult to resolve. Done in English and in French, the English text being authoritative, at the Peace Palace, The Hague, this third day of October, two thousand and eighteen, in three copies, one of which will be placed in the archives of the Court and the others transmitted to the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran and the Government of the United States of America, respectively.
References:- https://www.icj-cij.org/en
Treasury of English Laws 