Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-m42fx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-21T06:37:34.713Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Obligation to Negotiate Access to the Pacific Ocean (Bolivia v. Chile): Preliminary Objection (I.C.J.)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Julian G. Ku
Julian G. Ku*
Affiliation:
Julian G. Ku is the Maurice A. Deane Distinguished Professor of Constitutional Law at Hofstra University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

On September 24, 2015, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) released its judgment on the preliminary objection filed by Chile in Obligation to Negotiate Access to the Pacific Ocean.1 Chile had objected to the ICJ’s jurisdiction arguing that Bolivia’s application raises a dispute that had already been settled by the 1904 Peace Treaty Between Bolivia and Chile. The ICJ, however, rejected this jurisdictional objection and agreed to consider the merits of Bolivia’s claim that Chile has an obligation to negotiate in good faith the issue of Bolivia’s sovereign access to the Pacific Ocean.

Type
International Legal Materials
Information
International Legal Materials , Volume 55 , Issue 1 , February 2016 , pp. 74 - 91
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 2016

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

* This text was reproduced and reformatted from the text available at the International Court of Justice website (visited January 12, 2016), http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/153/18746.pdf.

1 Obligation to Negotiate Access to the Pacific Ocean (Bolivia v. Chile), Judgment, Preliminary Objection (Sept. 2015), http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/153/18746.pdf [hereinafter Judgment].

2 Obligation to Negotiate Access to the Pacific Ocean (Bolivia v. Chile), Application (Apr. 2013), > docket/files/153/17338.pdf [hereinafter Application].

3 Id.

4 Judgment, supra note 1, ¶¶ 15–17.

5 Application, supra note 2, ¶ 31.

6 Obligation to Negotiate Access to the Pacific Ocean (Bolivia v. Chile), Preliminary Objection of the Republic of Chile (July 2014), http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/153/18616.pdf.

7 Judgment, supra note 1, ¶¶ 22–24.

8 Id. ¶¶ 25–36

9 Id. ¶¶ 18–22.

10 Id. ¶¶ 37–53.

11 Id. ¶¶ 54–55.

12 In a separate declaration, Judge Bennouna stated that he found this part of the judgment redundant because whenever the Court upholds or rejects an objection, it implicitly regards the objection as preliminary.

13 The following were listed as co-agents for Chile: Sir Daniel Bethlehem, Q.C., Barrister, Bar of England and Wales, 20 Essex Street Chambers; Mr. Pierre-Marie Dupuy, Professor at the Graduate Institute of International Studies and Development, Geneva, and University of Paris II (Panthéon-Assas), member of the Institut de droit international; Mr. Ben Juratowitch, Solicitor admitted in Queensland and in England and Wales, Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer; Mr. Harold Hongju Koh, Sterling Professor of International Law, member of the Bars of New York and the District of Columbia; Ms Mónica Pinto, Professor and Dean of the Law School of the Universidad Nacional de Buenos Aires, Argentina; Mr. Samuel Wordsworth, Q.C., member of the English Bar, member of the Paris Bar, Essex Court Chambers,

1 The original language of the 1904 Peace Treaty is Spanish. All provisions from the Treaty that are quoted in this Judgment have been translated into English by the Registry.