Sala de Prensa
Usted está en:  Portada
Wednesday, July 13, 2016 
Foreign Minister Muñoz and Agent Insulza deliver Chilean Counter-Memorial before the International Court of Justice
Comparte :

Imagen foto_00000010

Earlier today Minister of Foreign Relations Heraldo Muñoz, accompanied by Agent José Miguel Insulza and Co-Agents María Teresa Infante and Claudio Grossman, delivered the Chilean Counter-Memorial before the International Court of Justice in The Hague, Netherlands.The document was delivered to the Secretary of the Court, Phillippe Couvreur, at 9:30 a.m. Chilean time (3:30 p.m. The Netherlands time). This act marks the end of the first written stage of the dispute over whether Chile has the obligation to negotiate sovereign access to the Pacific Ocean, just over three years after Bolivia initiated the claim.

The document was delivered to the Secretary of the Court, Phillippe Couvreur, at 9:30 a.m. Chilean time (3:30 p.m. The Netherlands time). This act marks the end of the first written stage of the dispute over whether Chile has the obligation to negotiate sovereign access to the Pacific Ocean, just over three years after Bolivia initiated the claim.Standing outside the Red Hall of the Peace Palace, Foreign Minister Muñoz highlighted the work led by Agent José Miguel Insulza and stated, "The most important thing is that neither national, territorial, nor maritime sovereignty has ever been at stake here, which was very clear in the preliminary objection presented by Chile at the time."

Standing outside the Red Hall of the Peace Palace, Foreign Minister Muñoz highlighted the work led by Agent José Miguel Insulza and stated, "The most important thing is that neither national, territorial, nor maritime sovereignty has ever been at stake here, which was very clear in the preliminary objection presented by Chile at the time.""The case now is about whether an obligation to negotiate without prejudice to the result of that possible negotiation has ever existed," The Secretary of State claimed. To that he added, "We are feeling calm about the work that's been done. The next steps will determined by the Court. What we have done is conduct solid, convincing work that defends our national interests." In addition, he stressed that "we have taken the first big step, which is to defend our interests so that the territorial and maritime sovereignty of our country is not at stake. Therefore, we will face what's coming ahead with the greatest calm."

"The case now is about whether an obligation to negotiate without prejudice to the result of that possible negotiation has ever existed," The Secretary of State claimed. To that he added, "We are feeling calm about the work that's been done. The next steps will determined by the Court. What we have done is conduct solid, convincing work that defends our national interests." In addition, he stressed that "we have taken the first big step, which is to defend our interests so that the territorial and maritime sovereignty of our country is not at stake. Therefore, we will face what's coming ahead with the greatest calm."Furthermore, Agent Jose Miguel Insulza explained, "The Bolivian claim is restricted only to whether Chile at some point made a commitment to negotiate with Bolivia, making it very clear that the Court will not decide the outcome of that negotiation, but only if there exists an obligation to negotiate or not. For this process we've had to dig up a number of records because Bolivia still has not said exactly when this obligation was negotiated. They've thus far only spoken about a series of events throughout history, all of which were quite unconnected and occurred under different circumstances." To that he added, "We have responded mainly to that point in our Counter-Memorial. Everything that Bolivia raised in its memorial is answered in the Chilean Counter-Memorial, which was the idea."

Furthermore, Agent Jose Miguel Insulza explained, "The Bolivian claim is restricted only to whether Chile at some point made a commitment to negotiate with Bolivia, making it very clear that the Court will not decide the outcome of that negotiation, but only if there exists an obligation to negotiate or not. For this process we've had to dig up a number of records because Bolivia still has not said exactly when this obligation was negotiated. They've thus far only spoken about a series of events throughout history, all of which were quite unconnected and occurred under different circumstances." To that he added, "We have responded mainly to that point in our Counter-Memorial. Everything that Bolivia raised in its memorial is answered in the Chilean Counter-Memorial, which was the idea."

Imagen foto_00000010

The Chilean Counter-Memorial was presented in English and French, the two official languages of the International Court of Justice. It contains the factual, legal and historical arguments that justify why Chile has no obligation to negotiate what is being requested by Bolivia. In addition to this text, those involved with the Counter-Memorial also submitted five notebooks with additional information, including diplomatic notes, maps, and other documents.

In the next steps of this judicial process, Bolivia will be able to exercise their right to present a Duplication before the Court, which would complete the second phase of written argumentation.

The next stage – with or without the presentation of the Replication and Duplication – is the presentation of oral arguments, after which the Court will set the date on which it will pass the sentence.