DistantNews
Support us
๐Ÿ‡ป๐Ÿ‡ช Venezuela /Conflict & Security

Venezuela doubts ICJ process in Esequibo dispute after Guyana's claims

From El Nacional · () Spanish

Translated from Spanish, summarized and contextualized by DistantNews.

At a glance

News Sources not specified Context piece
  • Venezuela's Foreign Ministry expressed "well-founded doubts" about the International Court of Justice (ICJ) process regarding the Esequibo territorial dispute with Guyana.
  • Caracas questioned Guyana's premature claims that the court will validate the 1899 arbitral award, viewing it as a disregard for international law.
  • Venezuela maintains it never consented to the ICJ's jurisdiction, insisting the 1966 Geneva Agreement and direct negotiations are the only valid mechanisms for resolution.

Venezuela's government has voiced "well-founded doubts" regarding the International Court of Justice (ICJ) proceedings concerning the territorial dispute over the Esequibo region with Guyana. The Venezuelan Foreign Ministry stated that Guyana's assertions about the court's impending decision are premature and demonstrate a "lack of respect" for international law. Guyana's Prime Minister Mark Phillips had previously expressed confidence that the ICJ would uphold the validity of the 1899 arbitral award, which established the international border between the two nations. Phillips stated this after oral hearings concluded on May 11 in The Hague. The Venezuelan ministry found it "highly striking" that Guyanese authorities would "magically take for granted the content of a future decision" from the ICJ. Venezuela has consistently argued that it never granted its consent for the ICJ to resolve this territorial controversy. Caracas maintains that the 1966 Geneva Agreement is the sole legitimate framework for addressing the dispute, advocating for a resolution through direct negotiations that lead to a practical and mutually acceptable arrangement.

DistantNews Editorial

Originally published by El Nacional in Spanish. Translated, summarized, and contextualized by our editorial team with added local perspective. Read our editorial standards.