An International Law expert said Friday that Guyana and Venezuela could share or exploit oil reserves that cross their borders if the International Court of Justice (ICJ) upholds the 1899 Arbitral Tribunal Award of the land boundary between the neighbouring South American nations.
At Hughes, Fields and Stoby’s symposium on the Guyana v Venezuela Border Controversy: A Legal Perspective, Dr. Alicia Elias-Roberts, Dean of the University of the West Indies Faculty of Law, said that good relations and scientific analysis would be crucial to sharing oil reserves and cross-border oil wells.
“If there is potential for friendly relations and compromise in border delimitation and sharing…Having reservoirs that span territories and properly documenting resources could lead to a different relationship in the future, according to Dr. Elias-Roberts, representing herself on the panel. She was almost certain Venezuela will ignore the ICJ ruling.
Trinidad and Tobago and Venezuela have a natural gas utilisation agreement that requires the US to allow Dragon field extraction. Dr. Elias-Roberts asked Guyana if it has geological data, if the reservoir straddles both countries, what Venezuela’s legitimate zone is, and if Guyana wants to enter into a utilisation agreement or jointly develop the area even if the border dispute is not resolved.
Worried that Venezuela would not abide by an ICJ ruling because it does not respect the jurisdiction of that United Nations (UN) judicial body, Senior Lecturer at the University of Guyana’s Department of Law, Mr. Neville Bissember, noted that the UN Charter explicitly binds member states to respect that court’s decisions or face UNSC action to enforce them.
Mr. Bissember said Guyana would need the UNSC and its own diplomatic efforts, such as China’s mid-December announcement that it respects borders, “saying things in our favor”. In the 2024 National Budget, Venezuela allocated a large amount of money for research, so “it might be a positive sign that that they are actually going to come to the court and defend their position.” When asked if Venezuela would ignore the ICJ’s judgement, he said the country was on “shaky ground” and could not ignore the UNSC like Russia or the US. “Venezuela has powerful friends in the Security Council but so do we,” he told the packed Cara Lodge event.
He believed the ICJ would rule before Guyana’s non-permanent UNSC membership expired in 2025.
Guyana’s Agent in the ICJ dispute on the legality of the 1899 Arbitral Award, Mr. Carl Greenidge, spoke from the floor and urged his country to “redouble” its diplomatic and public relations efforts. “I don’t think we treat this seriously. As an alternative to military action, PR and diplomatic assault require more human and financial resources. We must do more, he said. Mr. Greenidge advised Guyana to take diplomatic and political action when Venezuela announced its intention to join the BRICs. Venezuela wants to join the BRICs. Working on that grouping? Our goal is to raise awareness of lawbreakers and a state that disregards inked agreements, he stated.
Mr. Bissember, a former Guyana diplomat, agreed with Venezuela that the Geneva Agreement is the framework for peaceful border resolution. According to that Agreement, the UN Secretary General referred the case to the ICJ after intensified mediation. “Don’t worry with Caracas noise,” he replied.
He stopped short of accusing Venezuela of double-standards by engaging in “jingoism” against Guyana while serving as the three-year-old Chair of the Group of Friends in Defence of the UN Charter, which respects the UN Charter as a code of conduct that includes respect for sovereign equality of States, self-determination, non-interference in internal affairs, and refraining from the threat of force. The same folks that want to invade Guyana… “They call us the aggressor,” he said.
