– Sir Shridath Ramphal
At a time when it matters the most, Guyana is being denied the opportunity for global respect along with regional and international approval owing to the ongoing fiasco in relation to the March 2 General and Regional Elections.
This was related by longstanding statesman and local voice of reason, Sir Shridath Ramphal when he issued a statement on Wednesday.
“In the darkness of disagreement, Caricom’s helpful intervention in trying to resolve the general elections process at the request of both President Granger and Opposition Leader Bharrat Jagdeo, was a ray of light. All Guyana should have welcomed it, as most Guyanese did. It is a wholly legitimate role of Community that must not be smothered under any pretext whatever,” he said.
Sir Shridath went on to add, “It is utterly regrettable that despite the highest-level agreement between the political leaders of Guyana and five Caricom Heads of Government acting for the Community, the invited Caricom team to oversee the recount of the votes has had to withdraw. Guyana is being deprived of regional and international approval and the opportunity for global respect at a time when it matters most.”
However, he explained that all hope is not lost, since Caricom has not yet closed the door to proving the preciousness of its familial ties with Guyana, adding that the regional body could still play the role Guyana’s two political leaders agreed it should.
“What is required now is for all to place the interest of the nation above other narrow considerations that could mar the country’s prospects and retard the strides that the people of Guyana have made collectively. I urge that peace and progress be pursued lawfully and transparently,” he urged.
Ramphal is one of the legal minds on Guyana’s team for the International Court of Justice case against Venezuela on the border controversy. The public hearings in the case were set to commence on March 23, but were postponed owing to the COVID-19 pandemic. Ramphal, a former Commonwealth Secretary General and Foreign Minister of Guyana, has consistently stressed Venezuela’s claims to two-thirds of Guyana’s territory are simply “baseless”, The boundary between the countries was decided by an international tribunal on Venezuela’s insistence in 1899. Between 1901 and 1905, a mixed boundary commission appointed by the two countries then carried out a survey and demarcation of the boundary.
The claim centres on the Essequibo region, which is rich in resources that have driven some key economic sectors in Guyana over the years. On March 29, 2018, Guyana filed an application requesting the ICJ confirm the legal validity and binding effect of the 1899 Arbitral Award.
Venezuela did not submit a response signalling its participation in the proceedings. The hearings will be held at The Hague in the Netherlands.
In June 2018, the Venezuelan Government issued an official statement outlining its decision not to participate in the United Nations Secretary General-chosen procedure regarding its claim.
This announcement followed several months after the decision was made by the UN Secretary General, Antonio Guterres, to refer the matter to the ICJ as a means of resolving the ongoing controversy.
According to Guyana’s application to the World Court, for more than 60 years, Venezuela had consistently recognised and respected the validity of the binding force of the 1899 Award and the 1905 Map was agreed by both sides in furtherance of the Award.
“Venezuela had only changed its position formally in 1962 as the United Kingdom was making final preparations for the independence of British Guiana and had threatened not to recognise the new State, or its boundaries, unless the United Kingdom agreed to set aside the 1899 Award and cede to Venezuela all of the territories west of the Essequibo River, amounting to some two-thirds of Guyana’s territory,” Guyana submitted in its application to the World Court.
The court document further noted that while Venezuela has never produced any evidence to justify its belated repudiation of the 1899 Award, the neighbouring country has used it as an excuse to occupy territory awarded to Guyana, to inhibit Guyana’s economic development, and to violate Guyana’s sovereignty and sovereign rights.
The UN Secretary General’s authority to choose the ICJ as the means for resolving the controversy is rooted in the Geneva Agreement of 1966, negotiated just before Guyana attained independence.
