Belize Mulls Icj To Resolve Border Dispute

Belize is considering going to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) to resolve a territorial dispute with Guatemala. The roots of the dispute go back to the 17th century, but it has taken many twists and turns during Belize's periods of colonial control and independence. In 1859, Britain and Guatemala signed a treaty that defined the borders between the two countries. However, there was an article in the treaty that stated both parties would make their best efforts to build a road from Guatemala City to the Atlantic Coast. The road was never built, and Guatemala blamed Britain for it, claiming that the treaty was null and void. Since then, there have been failed negotiations and proposals to resolve the dispute, but it remains unresolved. In 2018, Guatemala held a referendum and voted yes to going to the ICJ. Belize is now considering whether to do the same, with a referendum scheduled for April 10, 2019.

The 1859 Treaty

The treaty was based on effective occupation, with the boundary derived from the Belizean magistrates' declaration in 1834. The boundary line was stated in Article I as:

> Beginning at the mouth of the River Sarstoon in the Bay of Honduras, and proceeding up the mid-channel thereof to Gracias á Dios Falls; then turning to the right and continuing by a line drawn direct from Gracias á Dios Falls to Garbutt's Falls on the River Belize, and from Garbutt's Falls due north until it strikes the Mexican frontier.

Article VII of the treaty also mentioned a mutually beneficial road to be built from "Guatemala to the Atlantic Coast, near the settlement of Belize". However, the ambiguity of this article led to an Additional Convention being signed in 1863, which clarified that the British government would pay £50,000 towards the cost of a road or "other line of communication". Guatemala failed to ratify this Convention by the agreed date, and the British government refused an extension, causing the Convention to lapse. Despite this, both sides continued to uphold the 1859 treaty as valid and made efforts to demarcate the shared boundaries over the following decades.

In 1939, the Guatemalan government unilaterally abrogated the 1859 treaty, citing a breach of Article 7 by the United Kingdom. This led to a threat of invasion and the establishment of a British military presence in Belize. Diplomatic efforts to resolve the dispute continued, with Belizean politicians becoming involved from 1961 onwards. However, these efforts proved futile, and Belize gained independence in 1981 without a resolution to the dispute.

Guatemala's non-compliance

One key issue of non-compliance relates to the Wyke-Aycinena Treaty of 1859, which was negotiated between Guatemala and Britain. This treaty recognised British sovereignty over the region and established the modern-day boundary lines of Belize. However, tensions flared throughout the 20th century, with Guatemala periodically renewing its claims on the area. In the 1930s, Guatemala used the broken promise of building a mutually beneficial road as justification for voiding the 1859 treaty. Britain responded by stationing troops in Belize to secure the region against Guatemalan invasion, leading to decades of negotiations attempting to resolve the dispute.

In 1981, Belize gained independence, but the dispute remained unresolved. Guatemala recognised Belize's independence in 1991 but continued to assert its claim on Belizean territory. In 1999, Guatemala shifted its stance back to inheriting claims from the Spanish Empire and the Federal Republic of Central America, leading to both countries stationing troops at the border.

In 2008, Guatemala and Belize agreed to hold simultaneous referendums to decide whether to send the issue to the ICJ. While the referendums passed in both countries, Guatemala initially did not proceed with the process. It was only in 2019, after several delays, that the referendum took place in Belize, with 55.4% of voters agreeing to let the ICJ resolve the dispute.

In recent years, there have been incidents of border standoffs and fatal shootings of Guatemalan individuals by Belizean forces, further escalating tensions. Despite these challenges, the ICJ is expected to rule in Belize's favour, given the historical recognition of its boundaries and the lack of Guatemalan occupation of Belizean territory.

Belize's security

Belize is considering going to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) to resolve a territorial dispute with neighbouring Guatemala. The roots of the dispute date back to the 17th century, but the immediate cause is the 1859 Anglo-Guatemalan Treaty, which defined the borders between the two countries. Guatemala has long contested the validity of this treaty, and in 1939, it unilaterally abrogated the treaty, citing a breach of Article 7 by the UK. This article stipulated that both parties should work together to establish a means of communication from Guatemala City to the Atlantic Coast.

The ICJ process offers Belize a peaceful means to resolve the dispute and secure its borders. Without fully demarcated borders, it becomes challenging to manage border problems, protect natural resources, and ensure the overall security of the nation. The ICJ's decision will be binding and enforceable under the United Nations Charter, providing a definitive solution to the conflict.

Belize's decision to pursue the ICJ route is also influenced by the support of the international community, including the United Nations and the Commonwealth Heads of Government. These international allies have consistently reiterated their backing for Belize's sovereignty and territorial integrity while encouraging both Belize and Guatemala to resolve their differences peacefully.

Additionally, Belize has a strong legal case, as demonstrated by the work of its international legal team. The country's sovereignty and territorial integrity are supported by the 1859 and 1931 Treaties, customary international law, general principles of international law, and past judicial decisions. By upholding established international law, the ICJ is expected to rule in Belize's favour and reaffirm its borders.

In conclusion, Belize's consideration of going to the ICJ is primarily driven by the need to enhance its security by resolving the long-standing territorial dispute with Guatemala. Through a peaceful, legal process, Belize seeks to protect its territory, people, and natural resources, thereby ensuring its national security and stability.

The ICJ's authority

Belize is considering going to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) to resolve a territorial dispute with Guatemala. The roots of Guatemala's claim on Belize go back to the 17th century, but the dispute has evolved during Belize's periods under colonial control and as an independent state. In 2008, the two sides reached a Special Agreement to resolve the dispute via the ICJ.

The ICJ is the principal judicial organ of the United Nations (UN). It was established in June 1945 by the UN Charter and began its work in April 1946. The Court is based in The Hague, Netherlands, and is composed of 15 judges who are elected for nine-year terms by the UN General Assembly and Security Council. The ICJ's official languages are English and French.

The ICJ has the authority to settle, in accordance with international law, legal disputes submitted to it by States. The Court may entertain two types of cases: legal disputes between States (contentious cases) and requests for advisory opinions on legal questions referred to it by UN organs and specialised agencies (advisory proceedings).

Only States (UN Member States and other States that have become parties to the Statute of the Court or accepted its jurisdiction under certain conditions) may be parties to contentious cases. For the Court to entertain a dispute, the States concerned must have accepted its jurisdiction in one or more of the following ways:

• By entering into a special agreement to submit the dispute to the Court.
• By virtue of a jurisdictional clause, i.e., when they are parties to a treaty containing a provision whereby, in the event of a dispute, one of them may refer the dispute to the Court.
• Through the reciprocal effect of declarations made under the Statute, whereby each State has accepted the jurisdiction of the Court as compulsory in the event of a dispute with another State having made a similar declaration.

The ICJ's decisions are final, binding on the parties to a case, and without appeal. However, any judge may append an opinion to the judgment. A State that considers that another State has failed to perform the obligations incumbent upon it under an ICJ judgment may bring the matter before the UN Security Council, which can recommend or decide upon measures to give effect to the judgment.

In addition to its role in settling disputes, the ICJ also gives advisory opinions on legal questions referred to it by authorised UN organs and specialised agencies. These advisory opinions are not binding, but they carry the authority and prestige of the Court.

The referendum

The people of Belize will soon be voting in a referendum to decide whether the country should go to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) to resolve Guatemala's longstanding claim on Belizean territory and waters. The referendum has proven to be a divisive issue in Belize, with political parties and families split on the question. While Guatemalans have already voted in favour of going to the ICJ with a huge 95% majority, opinion polls in Belize consistently give a majority to opponents of going to the ICJ.

The roots of the dispute between Belize and Guatemala go back to the 17th century when British settlers and their slaves came to the coasts of Central America to cut logwood. The Spanish Crown considered these settlers to be mere pirates, and while the British Crown initially did nothing to protect them, it eventually agreed to give them the right to cut logwood within a small area that remained subject to Spanish sovereignty. Over time, the boundaries of the British settlement were expanded beyond what had been agreed with Spain, and in 1859, the Anglo-Guatemalan Treaty was signed, with the country becoming known as British Honduras in 1862.

However, in 1939, the Guatemalan government unilaterally abrogated the treaty, claiming that the UK was in breach of Article 7, which related to the construction of a means of communication from the highlands of Guatemala to the Caribbean coast. A threat of invasion followed, and a British military presence was established. Despite Belize gaining independence in 1981, Guatemala continued to claim the territory, only recognising the independent state of Belize in 1991 while still not accepting its boundaries.

In 2008, the two sides reached a Special Agreement under which they undertook to resolve the dispute via the ICJ. However, it has taken a long time to implement the agreement due to the need to overcome constitutional obstacles and prepare the electorates of both sides for referendums. While Guatemala held its referendum in 2018, with a large majority voting in favour, Belize's referendum has been put on hold due to a last-minute legal challenge by opposition parties. The Belizean government remains confident that the poll will go ahead soon.

If Belize votes against going to the ICJ, the claim by Guatemala will persist, and Guatemala will likely become more assertive in pushing it. However, if the dispute does go to the ICJ, the Court is likely to recognise the existing territorial and maritime limits of Belize, as past precedent, the opinion of former judges, and research by international legal experts all suggest that Belize has a very strong case.

Frequently asked questions