- Guyana parliament formally rejects Venezuela’s claim to Essequibo
In a rare display of national unity, the Guyana parliament publicly rejected Venezuela’s claims to control of the mineral and forest-rich county of Essequibo in a referendum on December 3, with both government and opposition MPs condemning Caracas’ proposal.
Gail Teixeira, Minister of Parliamentary Affairs and Governance, called on Venezuelans to vote against the referendum during an all-day session on Monday that finished with legislators rejecting Venezuela’s plan.
“I do not believe the Venezuelan people want to annex Guyana, and I use this forum to urge the Venezuelan people, the hardworking citizens of Venezuela, to vote no on questions three and five on the referendum.”
“Question Three does not recognise the International Court of Justice, and Question Five, as we all know, calls for the annexation of our new two-thirds of our country.”
“I believe the Venezuelan people are capable of reading between the lines, and the decision they are being asked to make will have a significant impact on their lives.”
It will not benefit or advance their country. It actually endangers their lives and security. And so we need to talk to the Venezuelan people, not only those with access to PR campaigns, and to be able to churn out psychological warfare 24 hours a day,” she stated.
Venezuela’s claim to Guyana’s territory, according to Prime Minister Mark Phillips, has produced division among people, loss of investments, and geopolitical tensions, all of which have impacted Venezuelan and Guyanan inhabitants.
“Decades of division among our people have resulted in social fragmentation caused by contradictory narratives.”
“As a result, economic development and investment between our neighbouring countries suffer.” “This is a conflict that incites geopolitical tension, which can have an impact on regional stability and international relations,” Phillips added.
He told lawmakers that Venezuela’s continuous pursuit of baseless territorial claims “not only affects our nation, but also undermines the cherished principles of justice and sovereignty, sovereignty held by the international community.”
He urged President Nicolas Maduro to stand for reelection in 2024 based on the record of his administration, which has resulted in the departure of more than seven million Venezuelans to other South American countries.
“The international and regional communities must not allow Companero Maduro to use Guyana’s Essequibo as a rallying point or a clarion call for his reelection in 2024.” “Essequibo belongs only to Guyana and Guyanese,” Phillips, a former Chief of the Guyana Defence Force, remarked. He stated that Guyana was under “clear and present danger” because it was generating oil.
In portraying Venezuela as a “regional bully” of minor states, Opposition Leader Aubrey Norton added, “I don’t think we can take on Venezuela, but it is critical that we keep a ready force that instills hope in our people.”
“Let us not act as if there is nothing we can do outside of diplomacy,” Norton urged, adding that “we will have to take measures not only to defend our territorial integrity and sovereignty, but also our place in the Latin American and Caribbean region.”
“Clearly, there is a need for a more robust and aggressive foreign policy, vis a vis Latin America and the Caribbean,” he said.
Norton questioned the logic behind Barbados’ Prime Minister Mia Mottley’s recent call on both Venezuela and CARICOM to ensure the region remains a zone of peace because Guyana is not claiming any territory and does not have the military might to breach the peace.
“To say Guyana and Venezuela must ensure a zone of peace is classic eye pass (disrespect) because we have always maintained that this matter must be resolved peacefully.” “It was really disturbing that a Caribbean nation could say that and implicate Guyana, when Guyana basically lacks the military means to even conceptualise, let alone implement, that approach, and so I think it is necessary that the opposition put on record that we completely disagree with that position,” he said.
Attorney General Anil Nandlall SC said that Venezuela’s scheduled vote could jeopardise the ICJ proceedings and urged parliamentarians, Guyanese nationals, and the international community to condemn it.
“Anyone familiar with the curial process would understand that a party in a litigation has the right to seek appropriate legal remedies, interlocutorily, if the other party in the litigation is taking steps that can defeat, compromise, or render negatory the legal proceedings themselves and/or their final outcome.”
“Guyana is of the considered opinion that the impending referendum scheduled for December 3, 2023, is intended to and will jeopardise the legal proceedings pending at the International Court of Justice, if not completely subvert the legal process and prejudice its outcome.”
“What Guyana ultimately seeks from the ICJ is confirmation that the 1899 Arbitral Award that established its border with Venezuela is valid.” Guyana believes that an ICJ verdict will be final and binding, putting an end to the decades-long dispute,” he continued.
Even as he referred to acts of eminent domain such as oil extraction and bilateral fishing agreements, opposition legislator Khemraj Ramjattan declared that “not a blade of grass” should be given up to Venezuela.
“We must ensure that this bonanza that is Essequibo is exploited, and we must avoid any confrontation from our western neighbour,” he stated, advising that Guyana diversify its foreign relations in order to “get the support of everyone in the world.” He urged the ambassadors present throughout the debate to give Guyana their full support.”
Hugh Todd, Minister of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation, stated earlier in Parliament that “the history and facts” regarding the boundary dispute are “overwhelming.”
The motion requested that parliamentarians “support the government and people of the Cooperative Republic of Guyana and reaffirm recognition of the 1989 Arbitral Award and the 1966 Geneva Agreement.”
“Whereas the Arbitral Award of an Arbitral Tribunal constituted under the Treaty of Arbitration signed in Washington on February 2, 1897, determined the boundary line between the Colony of British Guiana and the United States of Venezuela in 1899;”
Todd told lawmakers, “we the people of Guyana, we are extremely satisfied that the attorneys who were on the tribunal tried their utmost to ensure that they preserved decency, their character intact to guarantee that they did the best in the interests of both then British Guiana and Venezuela, and we are very…the fact that the International
The Court of Justice will win, and the world will stand with Guyana and her people.”
Guyana has already requested that the International Court of Justice (ICJ) prohibit many questions suggested by Venezuela, which is seeking a popular vote to endorse the South American government’s stance of refusing to recognise the ICJ in order to resolve the decades-old border dispute.
Venezuela’s planned referendum and approved referendum questions for later this year have sparked outrage, with the Guyana government accusing Venezuela of attempting to acquire parts of the country’s territory in violation of international law.
The 15-member Caribbean Community (CARICOM), the London-based Commonwealth Secretariat, and the Organisation of American States (OAS) have all rejected the referendum, stating that international law strictly prohibits one state’s government from unilaterally seizing, annexing, or incorporating the territory of another, and that the referendum will open the door to possible violations of this fundamental tenet of international law.
