Joint sharing of oil resources an option after ICJ ruling on Guyana-Venezuela boundary dispute- International Law expert

Last Updated on Saturday, 6 January 2024, 14:08 by Denis Chabrol

There is potential for Guyana and Venezuela to jointly share or exploit oil reserves that that straddle both countries, after the International Court of Justice (ICJ) most likely rules that the 1899 Arbitral Tribunal Award of the land boundary between the neighbouring South American nations is valid, an International Law expert said Friday.

Dean of the University of the West Indies’ Faculty of Law, Dr Alicia Elias-Roberts told a symposium titled ‘Guyana v Venezuela Border Controversy: A Legal Perspective, which was organised by the law firm- Hughes, Fields and Stoby- that the sharing of oil reserves and from cross-border oil wells would depend heavily on the two countries enjoying good relations and scientific analysis.

“If there is any potential for friendly relations and compromise with how you delimit the borders, how you share…If you have reservoirs that straddle the territories; to document the resources properly …so there is the possibility if you have the proper data to meet with them on that front and then we have a different relation in the future so that would be a utopian dream,” said Dr Elias-Roberts who appeared on the panel in her personal capacity. She was almost sure that Venezuela would not respect the ICJ decision.

Trinidad and Tobago, and Venezuela have a natural gas utilisation agreement which had required the United States (US) t0 grant permission to exploit that hydrocarbon from the Dragon field.  Earlier in her presentation, Dr Elias-Roberts questioned whether Guyana has data on the geology of the area and if the reservoir straddles both countries, what would be Venezuela’s legitimate zone and whether Guyana wants to enter into a utilisation agreement or jointly develop the area even if the border dispute is not resolved.

Should Venezuela refuse to 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 measures through the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) to enforce judgements of the court.

Mr Bissember said Guyana would not only have to rely on the UNSC but also on its own diplomatic efforts such as the Chinese issuance of a statement in mid-December that it respects borders, “saying things in our favour”. With Venezuela allocating a substantial amount of money in the 2024 National Budget to do research, he said “it might be a positive sign that that they are actually going to come to the court and defend their position.” On the issue of Venezuela likely disregarding the ICJ’s decision, he said that South American nation was on “shaky ground” and could not operate like Russia or the United States and ignore the UNSC. “Venezuela has powerful friends in the Security Council but so do we,” he told the well-attended event at Cara Lodge.

He was confident that the ICJ would hand down its decision before Guyana’s non-permanent membership on the UNSC ends in 2025.

Speaking from the floor, as an attendee, Guyana’s Agent in the ICJ case on the validity of the 1899 Arbitral Award, Mr Carl Greenidge issued a stirring appeal for his country to “redouble” its diplomatic and public relations efforts. “I don’t think we take this matter seriously enough. You have to invest more resources- human and financial resources- in both PR (public relations) and the diplomatic offensive as an alternative to military action. We have to do a lot more,” he said. Mr Greenidge specifically recommended that Guyana embarks on diplomatic and political initiatives to address the fact that Venezuela was preparing to join the BRICs, a grouping of Brazil, Russia, India and China. “Venezuela, itself, is seeking entry into the BRICs. Are we working on that grouping? We have to work on them so that everybody is aware that here is a lawbreaker, here is a State that has no respect for agreements that have been signed…,” he said.

Mr Bissember, who is a former Guyana diplomat, agreed with Venezuela’s position that the Geneva Agreement is the basis for resolving the border controversy peacefully. In keeping with that Agreement, the UN Secretary General had referred the matter to the ICJ after enhanced mediation. “Don’t worry with the noise you hear from Caracas,” he said.

He stopped short of accusing Venezuela of double-standards by engaging in “jingoism” against Guyana while being the three-year old Chair of the Group of Friends in Defence of the Charter of the United Nations which respects the UN Charter as a code of conduct that includes respect for sovereign equality of States, self-determination and non-interference in the internal affairs of States, refrainment from the threat of use of force. “The same people who want to invade in Guyana… and they are calling us the aggressor,” he remarked.