Order of 17 February 1999

Document Number
087-19990217-ORD-01-00-EN
Document Type
Date of the Document
Document File
Bilingual Document File

COUR INTERNDE JUSTICE

RECUEIL DES ARRÊTS,
AVIS CONSULTATIFS

ET ORDONNANCES

INTERNATCOURT OF JUSTICE

REPORTS OF JUDGMENTS,
ADVISORY OPINIONS
AND ORDERS COUR INTERNATIONALE DE JUSTICE

RECUEIL DES ARRETS,
AVIS CONSULTATIFS ET ORDONNANCES

AFFAIRE DE LA DÉLIMITATION MARITIME

ET DES QUESTIONS TERRITORIALES
ENTRE QATAR ET BAHREÏN

ORDONNANCE DU 17 FÉVRIER 1999

INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE

REPORTS OF JUDGMENTS,
ADVISORY OPINIONS AND ORDERS

CASECONCERNING MARITIME DELIMITATION

AND TERRITORIAL QUESTIONS
BETWEEN QATAR AND BAHRAIN

(QATARr.BAHRAIN)

ORDER OF 17 FEBRUARY 1999 Mode officiel de citation:

entre Qatar et Bahreïn, ordonnance du17fgvrier 1999,
C.I.J. Recueil 199p. 3

Officia1citati:n
Muritime Delimitution und Territoriul Questions
bet,i,een Qut~rund Bahrain. Order 17 Fehruury 1999,
1C.J. report.1999, p.3

NOàevente: 719 /
ISSN 0074-4441 Sales number
ISBN 92-1-070788-5 17 FÉVRIER 1999

ORDONNANCE

DÉLIMITATION MARITIME ET QUESTIONS TERRITORIALES
ENTRE QATAR ET BAHREÏN

(QATAR c.BAHREÏN)

MARITIME DELIMITATIONAND TERRITORIAL QUESTIONS
BETWEENQATAR AND BAHRAIN

(QATAR Y.BAHRAIN)

17 FEBRUARY 1999

ORDER INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE

YEAR 1999 1999
17 February
General List
17 February1999 No. 87

CASECONCERNING MARITIME DELIMITATION
AND TERRITORIAL QUESTIONS

BETWEEN QATARAND BAHRAIN

(QATAR v.BAHRAIN)

ORDER

Present: PresidenSCHWEBEL Vice-PresidenWEERAMANTR udges
ODA,BEDJAOUG I,UILLAUMR E, NJEVAH,ERCZEGHSH, I,FLEISCH-
HAUERK , OROMA V,ERESHCHETH II, GINS,ARRA-ARANGUREN,
KOOIJMANR S,EZEK;Judge ad hoc TORRESBERNARDEZ Regis-
trarVALENCIA-OSPINA.

The International Court of Justice,

Composed as above,
After deliberation,

Having regard to Articles 48 and 49 of the Statute of the Court and to
Articles 44, 49 andof the Rules of Court,
Having regard to the Order dated 30 March 1998,whereby the Court,
taking into account the views of the Parties,

"Fi'c(ed130 September 1998 as the time-limit for the filing by
Qatar of an interim report, to be as comprehensive and specific as
possible, on the question of the authenticity of each of the docu-
ments challenged by Bahrain in the case;
DirectLedlthe submission of a Reply on the merits by each of the

Parties, andecide[d]that the Reply of Qatar [would] contain its detailed and definitive position on the question of the authenticity of
each of the documents challenged by Bahrain and that the Reply of
Bahrain [would] contain its observations on the interim report of
Qatar; andfix[ed] 30 March 1999as the time-limit for the filing of
[those] pleadings" ;

Whereas, on 30 September 1998, Qatar, referring to the above-
mentioned Order, submitted an "Interim Report", to whichwereappended,
infer uliu, four experts' reports prepared in the summer of 1998,the first
two of which concerned the material authenticity of the Qatari docu-
ments, while the other two dealt with the historical consistency of the
content of those documents; whereas, in that Report, Qatar, after explain-
ing the origin of the documents in question and the reasons which had led
it to submit those documents to the Court. stated on the one hand
that, on the question of the material authenticity of the documents, there
were differing views not only between the respective experts of the
Parties, but also between its own experts, and on the other hand that, as
far as the historical aspects were concerned, the experts that it had con-
sulted considered that Bahrain's assertions showed exaggerations and
distortions; and whereas Qatar ended its Report with a conclusion in the
following terms :

"As indicated above, after receiving its various expert's reports
and in the light of the conflicting views amongst the Parties' experts,
Qatar has decided that it will disregard al1the 82 challenged docu-
ments for the purposes of the present case so as to enable the Court
to address the merits of the case without further procedural compli-
cations. Itdoes so, however, with the proviso that it does not accept
Bahrain's distortions of the historical facts or its exaggerations of
the effect of the challenged documents on Qatar's case";

and whereas, on the same day, the Registrar transmitted a certified copy
of the said Report and its annexes to the Agent of Bahrain;
Whereas, under cover of a letter with annexes dated 27 November
1998,the Agent of Bahrain, referring to the "Interim Report" of Qatar,

supplied the Court with a list of the 82 documents challenged by its Gov-
ernment, together with certain comments which it wished to submit "on
the insufficiencyof Qatar's explanations"; and whereas, in that letter, the
Agent expressed himself as follows :
"The Order [of 30 March 19981does not require Bahrain to sub-
mit its observations on that Report before its Reply. However, in
view of the effective abandonment by Qatar of al1of the impeached
documents in the face of Bahrain's proof of forgery, Bahrain con-
siders it appropriate even now to note the situation resulting from

the terms of that Report. Although the Court's Order contemplated that Qatar could make
known its 'definitive' position in regard to the 82 documents in the
Reply due on 30 March 1999, the fact is that Qatar has already
taken a position which is as 'definitive'as it can possibly be. There is
thus no scope for any further definition of Qatar's position in its
Reply. The status of documents explicitly declared to be non-

existent leaves no room for amplification or qualification by any
subsequent statement.
It follows that Qatar cannot make any further reference to the 82
forged documents, that it will not adduce the content of these docu-
ments in connection with any of its arguments and that, in general,
the merits of the case will be adjudicated by the Court without

regard to these documents. (A list of the documents thus excluded
appears as Annex 1 to this letter.)";

and whereas a copy of this letter and its annexes was duly transmitted
to the Agent of Qatar by the Deputy-Registrar;
Whereas, by a letter dated 11 December 1998, the Agent of Qatar

informed the Court that its Government

"[was] . . . preparing its Reply on the merits [but that], in view of
the fact that until 30 September 1998its attention had been directed
principally to the preparation of its Interim Report on the docu-
ments challenged by Bahrain, Qatar consider[ed] that it [would] not
be possible to finalize its Reply by 30 March 1999"

and accordingly requested "a two-month extension of the time-limit for
the filing of a Reply by each of the Parties, to 30 May 1999"; and

whereas the Registrar, referring to Article 44,paragraph 3, of the Rules
of Court, transmitted a copy of this letter to the Agent of Bahrain;

Whereas, by a letter dated 15 December 1998, the Agent of Qatar,

referring to the letter with annexes, dated 27 November 1998, from the
Agent of Bahrain, stated the following:

"by setting out in its Interim Report the results of its forensic and
historical examination of al1 of the documents in question and by
indicating itsdecision to disregard al1the challenged documents for
the purposes of the present case, Qatar has given its position with
regard to those documents in advance of the time-limit of 30 March

1999that was fixed by the Court's Order. In effectively removing the
documents from consideration in the case, Qatar's intention was to
enable the Court to address the merits of the case and the Parties to
prepare their replies without further procedural complications";

and whereas, after challenging the terms of the letter from the Agent of
Bahrain, the Agent of Qatar concluded his letter as follows: MARITIME DELIMITATIONAND TERRITORIAL QUESTIONS (ORD.17 1199) 6

"As Qatar pointed out in its Interim Report, it goes without say-
ing that if Qatar had had doubtsas to the authenticity of these docu-
ments, it would not have introduced them into evidence in these
proceedings. However, so that there be no misunderstanding on this

point, Qatar would like to express here its regret at the situation that
has arisen and the inconvenience that this has caused to the Court
and Bahrain" ;

and whereas a copy of this letter was duly transmitted to the Agent of
Bahrain by the Deputy-Registrar;
Whereas, by a letter dated 13 January 1999, the Agent of Bahrain,
acknowledging receipt of the letters of 11 and 15 December 1998 from

the Agent of Qatar, stated that his Government "appreciate[d] Qatar's
expression of regret for the situation resulting from the submission of the
forged documents", and that, with regard to the request by Qatar for an
extension of the time-limit, its position was as follows:

"Bahrain has no objection to the modification of the Court's
Order of 30 March 1998to accommodate Qatar's request for a two-
month extension of the time-limit for the Replies. In connection
therewith, Bahrain recalls that the final paragraph of the Order

called for Qatar to provide its 'definitive position' on the documents
in its Reply, due on 30 March 1999. Since Qatar States that it has
'given its position with regard to these documents in advance of the
time-limit' to the effect that it is 'removing the documents fromcon-
sideration in the case', Bahrain respectfully requests that any modi-
fication of the Order take note of this development";

and whereas a copy of this letter was duly transmitted to the Agent of

Qatar by the Deputy-Registrar;
Whereas, in a letter dated 1 February 1999, the Agent of Qatar stated
that he was pleased to note that Bahrain had no objection to the two-
month extension of the time-limit for the filing of the Replies; whereas he

stressed that his Government could not accept the description of the
documents challenged by Bahrain as "forged"; whereas, referring to the
position adopted by Qatar with regard to those documents in its Interim
Report of 30 September 1998, he added:

"This is Qatar's definitive position. Qatar hereby confirms that it
will not rely on any of those documents in its Reply; nor will it make
any further observations as to their authenticity. In its Reply Qatar
will, however, address the consequences of Qatar's decision to dis-

regard the challenged documents with respect to its previous
written pleadings, and will provide a document to illustrate
such consequences" ;and whereas, as far asthe Order to be issued by the Court was concerned,
the Agent stated that his Government took the view that "the question of
the nature and substance of such an Order is a matter for the Court
alone"; and whereas a copy of this letter was duly transmitted to the
Agent of Bahrain by the Registrar;

Takinrr"into account the concordant views of the Parties on treatment
of the disputed documents and their agreement on the extension of time-
limits for the filing of Replies,

Plucrs on record the decision of Qatar to disregard, for the purposes of
the present case, the 82 documents challenged by Bahrain;

Decides that the Replies whose submission was directed by the Order
of 30 March 1998 will not rely on these documents;

Extends to 30 May 1999 the time-limit for the submission of those
Replies; and

Reseriws the subsequent procedure for further decision.

Done in French and in English, the French text being authoritative, at
the Peace Palace, The Hague. this seventeenth day of February, one

thousand nine hundred and ninety-nine, in three copies, one of which will
be placed in the archives of the Court and the others transmitted to the
Government of the State of Qatar and the Government of the State of
Bahrain, respectively.

(Signed) Stephen M. SCHWEBEL,

President.

(Signed) Eduardo VALENCIA-OSPINA,
Registrar.

Bilingual Content

COUR INTERNDE JUSTICE

RECUEIL DES ARRÊTS,
AVIS CONSULTATIFS

ET ORDONNANCES

INTERNATCOURT OF JUSTICE

REPORTS OF JUDGMENTS,
ADVISORY OPINIONS
AND ORDERS COUR INTERNATIONALE DE JUSTICE

RECUEIL DES ARRETS,
AVIS CONSULTATIFS ET ORDONNANCES

AFFAIRE DE LA DÉLIMITATION MARITIME

ET DES QUESTIONS TERRITORIALES
ENTRE QATAR ET BAHREÏN

ORDONNANCE DU 17 FÉVRIER 1999

INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE

REPORTS OF JUDGMENTS,
ADVISORY OPINIONS AND ORDERS

CASECONCERNING MARITIME DELIMITATION

AND TERRITORIAL QUESTIONS
BETWEEN QATAR AND BAHRAIN

(QATARr.BAHRAIN)

ORDER OF 17 FEBRUARY 1999 Mode officiel de citation:

entre Qatar et Bahreïn, ordonnance du17fgvrier 1999,
C.I.J. Recueil 199p. 3

Officia1citati:n
Muritime Delimitution und Territoriul Questions
bet,i,een Qut~rund Bahrain. Order 17 Fehruury 1999,
1C.J. report.1999, p.3

NOàevente: 719 /
ISSN 0074-4441 Sales number
ISBN 92-1-070788-5 17 FÉVRIER 1999

ORDONNANCE

DÉLIMITATION MARITIME ET QUESTIONS TERRITORIALES
ENTRE QATAR ET BAHREÏN

(QATAR c.BAHREÏN)

MARITIME DELIMITATIONAND TERRITORIAL QUESTIONS
BETWEENQATAR AND BAHRAIN

(QATAR Y.BAHRAIN)

17 FEBRUARY 1999

ORDER COUR INTERNATIONALE DE JUSTICE

1999 ANNÉE 1999
17 février
Rôle général
no 87 17 février1999

AFFAIRE DE LA DÉLIMITATION MARITIME

ET DES QUESTIONS TERRITORIALES
ENTRE QATAR ET BAHREÏN

(QATAR c. BAHREIN)

ORDONNANCE

Présents: M. SCHWEBE Lrésident;M. WEERAMANTR vi,e-préside;t
MM. ODA, BEDJAOUI,GUILLAUMER , ANJEVA,HERCZEGH,

SHI, FLEISCHHAUEK R, ROMA,VERESHCHETIM N, eHIGGINS,
MM. PARRA-ARANGUREN K,OOIJMANS,REZEK, juges;
M. TORRES BERNARDE u,e ad hoc; M. VALENCIA-OSPINA,
greJfier.

La Cour internationale de Justice,
Ainsi composée,

Après délibéré enhambre du conseil,
Vu les articles 48 et 49 du Statut de la Cour et les article5044, 49 et
de son Règlement,

Vu l'ordonnance en date du 30 mars 1998, par laquelle la Cour,
compte tenu des vues des Parties, a
(<Fis(é/au 30 septembre 1998 ladate d'expiration du délaipour le
dépôtpar Qatar d'un rapport provisoire, aussi complet et précisque

possible, sur la question de l'authenticitéde chacun des documents
mis en cause par Bahreïn dans l'instance;
Prescritla présentation d'unerépliquesur le fond par chacune des
Parties etécid[;]que la répliquede Qatar exposera[it] la position INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE

YEAR 1999 1999
17 February
General List
17 February1999 No. 87

CASECONCERNING MARITIME DELIMITATION
AND TERRITORIAL QUESTIONS

BETWEEN QATARAND BAHRAIN

(QATAR v.BAHRAIN)

ORDER

Present: PresidenSCHWEBEL Vice-PresidenWEERAMANTR udges
ODA,BEDJAOUG I,UILLAUMR E, NJEVAH,ERCZEGHSH, I,FLEISCH-
HAUERK , OROMA V,ERESHCHETH II, GINS,ARRA-ARANGUREN,
KOOIJMANR S,EZEK;Judge ad hoc TORRESBERNARDEZ Regis-
trarVALENCIA-OSPINA.

The International Court of Justice,

Composed as above,
After deliberation,

Having regard to Articles 48 and 49 of the Statute of the Court and to
Articles 44, 49 andof the Rules of Court,
Having regard to the Order dated 30 March 1998,whereby the Court,
taking into account the views of the Parties,

"Fi'c(ed130 September 1998 as the time-limit for the filing by
Qatar of an interim report, to be as comprehensive and specific as
possible, on the question of the authenticity of each of the docu-
ments challenged by Bahrain in the case;
DirectLedlthe submission of a Reply on the merits by each of the

Parties, andecide[d]that the Reply of Qatar [would] contain its détailléeet définitivede cet Etat sur la question de l'authenticitéde
chacun des documents mis en cause par Bahreïn, et que la réplique
de Bahreïn contiendra[it] ses observations sur le rapport provisoire
de Qatar; et jîx[é] au 30 mars 1999 la date d'expiration du délai
pour le dépôtde ces pièces)) ;
Considérant que, le 30 septembre 1998, Qatar, se référantà l'ordon-

nance sus-indiquée, a présentéun ((Rapport provisoire)) auquel étaient
notamment annexésquatre rapports d'expertise établisau cours de l'été
1998 et portant, pour ce qui est des deux premiers, sur la question de
l'authenticitématérielle desdocuments qatariens et, pour ce qui est des
deux derniers, sur celle de la cohérence,d'un point de vue historique, du
contenu de ces documents; que, dans ce Rapport, Qatar, après avoir
expliquél'origine desdits documents et lesmotifs qui l'avaient incitéa les
soumettre a la Cour, a exposéd'une part que, sur la question de l'authen-
ticité matérielle desdocuments, des divergences de vues étaientapparues
non seulement entre les experts des Parties mais aussi entre ses propres
experts, et d'autre part que, s'agissant desaspects historiques, lesexperts
qu'il avait consultés avaient estiméque les affirmations de Bahreïn ren-
fermaient des exagérationset des déformationsdes faits; et que, au terme
de son Rapport, Qatar a formulé les conclusions ci-après:

((Comme il est indiqué ci-dessus, après avoir reçu les différents
rapports d'expertise, et étant donnéles vues divergentes exprimées
par les experts des Parties, Qatar a décidé dene pas tenir compte,
aux fins de la présente affaire, des quatre-vingt-deux documents
contestés,de sorte que la Cour puisse examiner l'affaire au fond sans
rencontrer de nouvelles complications procédurales. Néanmoins,
Qatar n'accepte pas pour autant les déformations des faits histo-
riques effectuéespar Bahreïn, ni la manière dont celui-ci a présenté,
en lesexagérant,leseffets que lesdocuments contestésauraient sur la
thèse qatarienne));

et considérant que, lejour même,le greffier a transmis une copie certifiée
conforme dudit Rapport et de ses annexes a l'agent de Bahreïn;
Considérant que, par une lettre avec annexes datéedu 27 novembre

1998,l'agent de Bahreïn, se référantau ((Rapport provisoire)) de Qatar,
a fait tenir a la Cour une liste des quatre-vingt-deux documents mis en
cause par son gouvernement, ainsi que le texte de certaines observations
que celui-ci entendait présenter «sur l'insuffisance des explications de
Qatar)); et que, dans ladite lettre, l'agent s'est ainsi exprimé:
<<Bahreïn n'est pas obligé, selon[l']ordonnance[du 30 mars 19981,
de faire connaître sesobservations sur ce Rapport avant la soumission
de sa réplique.Cependant, en raison de l'abandon effectifpar Qatar
des documents incriminésa la suite de la preuve de l'inauthenticité
rapportéepar Bahreïn, Bahreïn considère qu'il convient d'ores et déjà

de prendre acte de la situation crééepar la teneur de ce rapport. detailed and definitive position on the question of the authenticity of
each of the documents challenged by Bahrain and that the Reply of
Bahrain [would] contain its observations on the interim report of
Qatar; andfix[ed] 30 March 1999as the time-limit for the filing of
[those] pleadings" ;

Whereas, on 30 September 1998, Qatar, referring to the above-
mentioned Order, submitted an "Interim Report", to whichwereappended,
infer uliu, four experts' reports prepared in the summer of 1998,the first
two of which concerned the material authenticity of the Qatari docu-
ments, while the other two dealt with the historical consistency of the
content of those documents; whereas, in that Report, Qatar, after explain-
ing the origin of the documents in question and the reasons which had led
it to submit those documents to the Court. stated on the one hand
that, on the question of the material authenticity of the documents, there
were differing views not only between the respective experts of the
Parties, but also between its own experts, and on the other hand that, as
far as the historical aspects were concerned, the experts that it had con-
sulted considered that Bahrain's assertions showed exaggerations and
distortions; and whereas Qatar ended its Report with a conclusion in the
following terms :

"As indicated above, after receiving its various expert's reports
and in the light of the conflicting views amongst the Parties' experts,
Qatar has decided that it will disregard al1the 82 challenged docu-
ments for the purposes of the present case so as to enable the Court
to address the merits of the case without further procedural compli-
cations. Itdoes so, however, with the proviso that it does not accept
Bahrain's distortions of the historical facts or its exaggerations of
the effect of the challenged documents on Qatar's case";

and whereas, on the same day, the Registrar transmitted a certified copy
of the said Report and its annexes to the Agent of Bahrain;
Whereas, under cover of a letter with annexes dated 27 November
1998,the Agent of Bahrain, referring to the "Interim Report" of Qatar,

supplied the Court with a list of the 82 documents challenged by its Gov-
ernment, together with certain comments which it wished to submit "on
the insufficiencyof Qatar's explanations"; and whereas, in that letter, the
Agent expressed himself as follows :
"The Order [of 30 March 19981does not require Bahrain to sub-
mit its observations on that Report before its Reply. However, in
view of the effective abandonment by Qatar of al1of the impeached
documents in the face of Bahrain's proof of forgery, Bahrain con-
siders it appropriate even now to note the situation resulting from

the terms of that Report. Bienque l'ordonnance de la Cour prévoieque Qatar pourrait faire
connaître sa position définitive relativeaux quatre-vingt-deux docu-
ments dans la réplique qu'il doit déposeravant le 30 mars 1999,
Qatar a d'ores et déjàpris une position qui est aussi ((définitive))
qu'elle puisse être.II n'ya,dèslors, plus place dans la répliquede
Qatar pour une définition complémentairede la position de Qatar.
Le statut des documents déclarés explicitemenc tomme inexistants ne
permet aucune amplification ou restriction ultérieures.
Il s'ensuit que Qatar ne pourra plus faire mention des quatre-
vingt-deux faux documents, qu'il n'invoquera le contenu de ces
documents pour aucun de ses arguments et que, d'une manièregéné-
rale, le fond de l'affaire serajugépar la Cour sans que lesdocuments
soient pris en compte. (Une liste de ces documents ainsi exclus se
trouve en l'annexe 1 à la présentelettre.)));

et considérant que copie de cette lettre et de ses annexes a dûment été
transmise à I'agent de Qatar par le greffier adjoint;

Considérant que, par lettre du 11 décembre 1998, I'agent de Qatar a
fait savoira la Cour que son gouvernement

«prépar[ait] ..sa répliquesur le fond [mais que], compte tenu de ce
que,jusqu'au 30 septembre 1998,Qatar s'[était]essentiellement con-
sacréà la rédaction-deson Rapport provisoire sur lesdocuments mis
en cause par Bahreïn, il estim[ait] ne pas êtreen mesure d'achever
sa répliquepour le 30 mars 1999))

et demandait en conséquence«que la date d'expiration du délaipour le
dépôt d'unerépliquepar chacune des Parties soit reportée de deux mois,
soit au 30 mai 1999));et considérantque le greffier, se référantau para-
graphe 3 de l'article 44 du Règlement de la Cour, a fait tenir copie de
cette lettre l'agent de Bahreïn;
Considérant que, par lettre du 15décembre1998,l'agent de Qatar, se
référant àla lettre avec annexes. en date du 27 novembre 1998,de I'agent
de Bahreïn, a préciséce qui suit:

«En énonçant dans son Rapport provisoire les résultats de son
expertise d'authenticité matérielleet de son expertise historique de
tous les documents en question et en indiquant sa décisionde ne
tenir compte, aux fins de la présente affaire,d'aucun des documents
contestés,Qatar a en fait formulé sa position au sujet desdits docu-

ments avant l'expiration, le 30 mars 1999,du délaifixépar la Cour
dans son ordonnance. En renonçant effectivement à faire valoir les
documents en l'espèce,Qatar a entendu permettre à la Cour d'exa-
miner l'affaire au fond et aux Parties de préparerleurs répliquessans
autre complication de procédure supplémentaire));
et que, ayant contestéles termes utiliséspar I'agent de Bahreïn dans sa

lettre,ila ainsi conclu: Although the Court's Order contemplated that Qatar could make
known its 'definitive' position in regard to the 82 documents in the
Reply due on 30 March 1999, the fact is that Qatar has already
taken a position which is as 'definitive'as it can possibly be. There is
thus no scope for any further definition of Qatar's position in its
Reply. The status of documents explicitly declared to be non-

existent leaves no room for amplification or qualification by any
subsequent statement.
It follows that Qatar cannot make any further reference to the 82
forged documents, that it will not adduce the content of these docu-
ments in connection with any of its arguments and that, in general,
the merits of the case will be adjudicated by the Court without

regard to these documents. (A list of the documents thus excluded
appears as Annex 1 to this letter.)";

and whereas a copy of this letter and its annexes was duly transmitted
to the Agent of Qatar by the Deputy-Registrar;
Whereas, by a letter dated 11 December 1998, the Agent of Qatar

informed the Court that its Government

"[was] . . . preparing its Reply on the merits [but that], in view of
the fact that until 30 September 1998its attention had been directed
principally to the preparation of its Interim Report on the docu-
ments challenged by Bahrain, Qatar consider[ed] that it [would] not
be possible to finalize its Reply by 30 March 1999"

and accordingly requested "a two-month extension of the time-limit for
the filing of a Reply by each of the Parties, to 30 May 1999"; and

whereas the Registrar, referring to Article 44,paragraph 3, of the Rules
of Court, transmitted a copy of this letter to the Agent of Bahrain;

Whereas, by a letter dated 15 December 1998, the Agent of Qatar,

referring to the letter with annexes, dated 27 November 1998, from the
Agent of Bahrain, stated the following:

"by setting out in its Interim Report the results of its forensic and
historical examination of al1 of the documents in question and by
indicating itsdecision to disregard al1the challenged documents for
the purposes of the present case, Qatar has given its position with
regard to those documents in advance of the time-limit of 30 March

1999that was fixed by the Court's Order. In effectively removing the
documents from consideration in the case, Qatar's intention was to
enable the Court to address the merits of the case and the Parties to
prepare their replies without further procedural complications";

and whereas, after challenging the terms of the letter from the Agent of
Bahrain, the Agent of Qatar concluded his letter as follows:6 DÉLIMITATION MARITIME ET QUESTIONSTERRITORIALES (ORD. 17II 99)

«Ainsi que Qatar l'a soulignédans son Rapport provisoire, il va
sansdire que s'ilavait eu le moindre doute quant à l'authenticitédes
documents considérési,l ne les aurait pas soumis en tant qu'éléments
de preuves en l'espèce.Pour qu'il n'y ait aucun malentendu sur ce
point, Qatar souhaite exprimer ici son regret de la situation qui en a
découléet des inconvénientsque cela a pu entraîner pour la Cour et
Bahreïn »;

et considérant que copie de cette communication a dûment été transmise
à l'agent de Bahreïn par le greffier adjoint;
Considérant que, par lettre du 13janvier 1999, l'agent de Bahreïn,
accusant réception des lettres, en date des 11 et 15 décembre 1998, de
l'agent de Qatar, a indiquéque son gouvernement avait «accueill[i]avec
satisfaction les regrets expriméspar Qatar au sujet de la situation résul-
tant de la soumission des faux documents)) et que, s'agissant de la

demande de prorogation de délai présentép ear celui-ci, sa position était
la suivante:
«Bahreïn ne voit aucune objection à ce que I'ordonnance de la
Courdu 30 mars 1998soit modifiéede façon à accéder à la demande
de Qatar tendant àfaire reporter la date d'expiration du délaipour
le dépôt des répliques.A cet égard,Bahreïn rappelle qu'au dernier
paragraphe de I'ordonnance la Cour a demandé àQatar d'exposer,

dans sa répliquequi doit êtredéposéeau plus tard le 30 mars 1999,
sa ((position définitive))sur ces documents. Puisque Qatar dit avoir
«en fait formulé sa position au sujet desdits documents avant I'expi-
ration ..du délai)),à savoir qu'il renonce «à faire valoir les docu-
mentsen l'espèce)),Bahreïn prie respectueusement la Cour de s'assu-
rer que toute modification apportéeau texte de son ordonnance tient
compte de ce fait nouveau));
et considérant que copie de cette lettre a dûment été transmiseà l'agent

de Qatar par le greffier adjoint;
Considérant que,par lettre du 1" février1999,l'agent de Qatar a noté
avec satisfaction que Bahreïn ne voyait pas d'objection à ce que la date
d'expiration du délaipour le dépôt des répliquessoit reportéede deux
mois; qu'il a soulignéque son gouvernement ne pouvait accepter que les
documents mis en cause par Bahreïn en l'instance soient qualifiésde
«faux»; que, se référant à la position adoptéepar Qatar au sujet desdits
documents dans son Rapport provisoire du 30septembre 1998,ila ajouté:

«C'est la la position définitivede Qatar. Qatar confirme par la
présente qu'il ne se fondera sur aucun de ces documents dans sa
réplique; et qu'il ne fera pas non plus de nouvelles observations
quant à leur authenticité. Dans sa réplique,Qatar traitera toutefois
des conséquences,en ce qui concerne les piècesde procédureprécé-
demment déposéespar lui, de la décisionqu'il a prise de ne pas tenir
compte des documents contestés et ilprésentera un document aux
fins d'illustrer ces conséquenc»s; MARITIME DELIMITATIONAND TERRITORIAL QUESTIONS (ORD.17 1199) 6

"As Qatar pointed out in its Interim Report, it goes without say-
ing that if Qatar had had doubtsas to the authenticity of these docu-
ments, it would not have introduced them into evidence in these
proceedings. However, so that there be no misunderstanding on this

point, Qatar would like to express here its regret at the situation that
has arisen and the inconvenience that this has caused to the Court
and Bahrain" ;

and whereas a copy of this letter was duly transmitted to the Agent of
Bahrain by the Deputy-Registrar;
Whereas, by a letter dated 13 January 1999, the Agent of Bahrain,
acknowledging receipt of the letters of 11 and 15 December 1998 from

the Agent of Qatar, stated that his Government "appreciate[d] Qatar's
expression of regret for the situation resulting from the submission of the
forged documents", and that, with regard to the request by Qatar for an
extension of the time-limit, its position was as follows:

"Bahrain has no objection to the modification of the Court's
Order of 30 March 1998to accommodate Qatar's request for a two-
month extension of the time-limit for the Replies. In connection
therewith, Bahrain recalls that the final paragraph of the Order

called for Qatar to provide its 'definitive position' on the documents
in its Reply, due on 30 March 1999. Since Qatar States that it has
'given its position with regard to these documents in advance of the
time-limit' to the effect that it is 'removing the documents fromcon-
sideration in the case', Bahrain respectfully requests that any modi-
fication of the Order take note of this development";

and whereas a copy of this letter was duly transmitted to the Agent of

Qatar by the Deputy-Registrar;
Whereas, in a letter dated 1 February 1999, the Agent of Qatar stated
that he was pleased to note that Bahrain had no objection to the two-
month extension of the time-limit for the filing of the Replies; whereas he

stressed that his Government could not accept the description of the
documents challenged by Bahrain as "forged"; whereas, referring to the
position adopted by Qatar with regard to those documents in its Interim
Report of 30 September 1998, he added:

"This is Qatar's definitive position. Qatar hereby confirms that it
will not rely on any of those documents in its Reply; nor will it make
any further observations as to their authenticity. In its Reply Qatar
will, however, address the consequences of Qatar's decision to dis-

regard the challenged documents with respect to its previous
written pleadings, and will provide a document to illustrate
such consequences" ;7 DELIMITATIONMARITIMEET QUESTIONS TERRITORIALES (ORD. 17II 99)

et que, s'agissant de l'ordonnance a rendre par la Cour, il a indiquéque
son gouvernement était d'avis que «la question de la nature et du
contenu d'une telle ordonnance [était]du ressort de la Cour seule»; et
considérant que copie de cette lettre a dùment été transmise àl'agent de
Bahreïn par le greffier;

Compte tenu de la coïncidence de vues entre les Parties sur la question
du traitement à réserveraux documents contestés et de leur accord sur
celle de la prorogation du délaipour le dépôtdes répliques,

Prend acte de la décisionde Qatar de ne pas tenir compte, aux fins de
la présente affaire, des quatre-vingt-deux documents contestés par
Bahreïn ;
Décide que lesrépliquesdont la présentation a étéprescrite par I'ordon-
nance du 30 mars 1998 ne s'appuieront pas sur ces documents;

Reporte au 30 mai 1999ladate d'expiration du délaipour ledépôtdes-
dites répliques;
RPserve la suite de la procédure.

Fait en français et en anglais, le texte français faisant foi, au Palais de
la Paix,a La Haye, le dix-sept févriermil neuf cent quatre-vingt-dix-neuf,
en trois exemplaires, dont l'un restera déposéaux archives de la Cour et
les autres seront transmis respectivement au Gouvernement de 1'Etatde
Qatar et au Gouvernement de 1'Etatde Bahreïn.

Le président,

(Signc;)Stephen M. SCHWEBEL.

Le greffier,
(Signé) Eduardo VALENCIA-OSPINA.and whereas, as far asthe Order to be issued by the Court was concerned,
the Agent stated that his Government took the view that "the question of
the nature and substance of such an Order is a matter for the Court
alone"; and whereas a copy of this letter was duly transmitted to the
Agent of Bahrain by the Registrar;

Takinrr"into account the concordant views of the Parties on treatment
of the disputed documents and their agreement on the extension of time-
limits for the filing of Replies,

Plucrs on record the decision of Qatar to disregard, for the purposes of
the present case, the 82 documents challenged by Bahrain;

Decides that the Replies whose submission was directed by the Order
of 30 March 1998 will not rely on these documents;

Extends to 30 May 1999 the time-limit for the submission of those
Replies; and

Reseriws the subsequent procedure for further decision.

Done in French and in English, the French text being authoritative, at
the Peace Palace, The Hague. this seventeenth day of February, one

thousand nine hundred and ninety-nine, in three copies, one of which will
be placed in the archives of the Court and the others transmitted to the
Government of the State of Qatar and the Government of the State of
Bahrain, respectively.

(Signed) Stephen M. SCHWEBEL,

President.

(Signed) Eduardo VALENCIA-OSPINA,
Registrar.

ICJ document subtitle

Decision regarding content of the Replies; extension of time-limit: Replies (Merits)

Document file FR
Document Long Title

Order of 17 February 1999

Links