Guyana and Venezuela both presented their cases during two days of hearings at the ICJ concerning the 1899 Arbitral Award. Guyana asserted that the Venezuelan government, via its National Electoral Council, had released a list of five questions for a “Consultative Referendum”.
“According to the applicant, the purpose of this referendum is to “obtain responses that would support Venezuela’s decision to abandon [the current proceedings before the Court], and to resort instead to unilateral measures to ‘resolve’ the controversy with Guyana by formally annexing and integrating into Venezuela all of the territory at issue in these proceedings, which comprises more than two-thirds of Guyana,” the ICJ said.
The 15-member CARICOM grouping, the London-based Commonwealth Secretariat, and the Organization of American States (OAS) have also rejected the referendum stating that international law strictly prohibits the Government of one State from unilaterally seizing, annexing, or incorporating the territory of another state. According to them, the referendum will open a door to the possible violation of this fundamental tenet of international law.
ICJ President, Judge Joan Donoghue informed the parties that they would be advised in due course as to the day on which the court will deliver its ruling.
“I shall request both agents to remain at the court’s disposal to provide any additional information the court may require. The court will render its order on the request for the indication of provisional measures submitted by Guyana as soon as possible,” she said.
In 2018, Guyana submitted an application to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) seeking the confirmation of the legal enforceability of the 1899 Arbitral Award. This award had originally established the border between Venezuela and what was then known as British Guiana. Guyana emphasized that the 1899 ruling was considered a 'full, perfect, and final settlement' of all matters related to the delineation of borders between Venezuela and the British Guiana province.