Memorial of Niger

12379

INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE

CASE CONCERNING THE FRONTIER DISPUTE

(BURKINA FASO/NIGER)

MEMORIAL OF THE REPUBLIC OF NIGER

APRIL 2011

[Translation by the Registry] T ABLE OF CONTENTS

List of principal abbreviations ........................................................................
.............................. 1

INTRODUCTION ........................................................................
........................................................... 1

Burkina Faso........................................................................
......................................................... 2

The Republic of Niger........................................................................
........................................... 4

C HAPTER I T HE LAWS AND REGULATIONS GOVERNING THE STRUCTURE OF THE COLONIES

CONCERNED ........................................................................
........................................................... 6
Section 1 ⎯ The dismemberment of French Sudan .............................................................. 10

A. The organization of the First Military Territory .......................................................... 10

B. The creation of a Third Military Territory in FWA ..................................................... 10

C. The incorporation of the Territory of Say into the cercle of Moyen-Niger ................. 12

D. The Territories of Senegambia and Niger (1902 to 1904)........................................... 12

E. The creation of the Colony of Haut-Sénégal et Niger (1904-1920)............................. 14

F. The division of the Military Territory of Niger into three regions............................... 16

G. The incorporation of the cercles of Fada N’Gourma and Say into the Colony of
Haut-Sénégal et Niger ........................................................................
........................ 18

H. The four Regions of the Military Territory of Niger.................................................... 18

I. The detachment of the Military Te rritory of Niger from the Colony of
Haut-Sénégal et Niger ........................................................................
........................ 21

J. The creation of the Colony of Upper Volta (1919 to 1932).......................................... 21

K. The abolition of Téra Subdivision following the creation of the Colony of Upper
Volta (1919 to 1932).................................................................
.................................. 23

L. The Military Territory of Niger becomes the Territory of Niger................................. 23

M. The disappearance of the Colony of Ha ut-Sénégal et Niger and the resurrection
of the Colony of French Sudan........................................................................
........... 23

Section 2 ⎯ The conversion of the Civil Territory of Niger into an autonomous
Colony........................................................................
....................................................... 25

A. The transfer of the administrative cent re of the Colony of Niger from Zinder to
Niamey and the subsequent territorial changes .......................................................... 25

B. The territorial changes to the Colonies of Niger and Upper Volta .............................. 27

C. The preparatory works for the delimitation between the Colonies of Niger and
Upper Volta ........................................................................
........................................ 27

D. The Arrêté of 31 August 1927 and its Erratum of 5October1927, fixing the

boundary between the Colonies of Niger and Upper Volta........................................ 29

E. Arrêté local No. 126 of 3 November 1928 reconstituted Téra Subdivision within
Tillabéry cercle........................................................................
................................... 32

F. The dissolution and dismemberment of the Colony of Upper Volta and the
incorporation of Dori and Fada N’Gourma cercles into the Colony of Niger
(1932 to 1947) ........................................................................
.................................... 32 - ii -

G. Law No. 47-1707 of 4 September 1947 r econstituted the Colony of Upper Volta

with its 1932 boundaries; the cercles of Dori and Fada N’Gourma were
reincorporated into the Colony........................................................................
........... 34

H. The Arrêté of 30March1956 creating seven cercles within the territory of
Niger........................................................................
...................................................34

C HAPTER II THE DIFFICULTIES AND INCIDENTS IN THE DISPUTED AREA ......................................... 37

Section 1 ⎯ The difficulties encountered during the period prior to independence ............. 37

Section 2 ⎯ The difficulties encountered during the period subsequent to
independence ........................................................................
............................................44

C HAPTER III T HE ATTEMPTS BY N IGER AND BURKINA F ASO TO SETTLE THE FRONTIER
DISPUTE PEACEFULLY ........................................................................
......................................... 48

Section 1 ⎯ The work of the Joint Technical Commission on Demarcation of the
Frontier ........................................................................
..................................................... 48

Section 2 ⎯ The attempts to settle the frontier dispute peacefully at diplomatic level......... 51

Section 3 ⎯ The Special Agreement seising the Court of 24 February 2009....................... 52

A. Negotiation of the Agreement........................................................................
.............. 52

B. Content........................................................................
................................................. 53

C HAPTER IV C ARTOGRAPHIC MATERIAL RELATING TO THE DISPUTED AREA ................................ 55

C HAPTER V T HE LEGAL BASES FOR DETERMINATION OF THE FRONTIER ........................................ 63

Section 1 ⎯ The legislative texts ........................................................................
.................. 64

A. Content of the 1927 texts........................................................................
..................... 64

B. Methods of interpreting the 1927 texts ........................................................................
68

(a) Interpretation using cartographic material.......................................................... 68

(b) Textual interpretation........................................................................
................... 70

(c) Interpretation based on the travaux préparatoires................................................ 72

(d) Interpretation based on the practice of the local colonial authorities ................. 74

Section 2 ⎯ The 1:200,000 map of the Institut géographique national de France,
1960 edition........................................................................
.............................................. 75

Section 3 ⎯ The relevant documents accepted by joint Agreement of the Parties ............... 76

C HAPTER VI D ETERMINATION OF THE FRONTIER IN THE T ÉRA SECTOR ......................................... 78

Section 1 ⎯ Physical and human description of Téra sector................................................. 78

Section 2 ⎯ The course of the frontier in the Téra sector..................................................... 81

A. Methodology adopted ........................................................................
.......................... 81

B. The course of the frontier in the Téra sector................................................................ 88

(a) From Tong-Tong to Tao, the boundary consists of two straight lines.................. 88 - iii -

(b) From the Tao astronomic marker to Bangaré, the line of the frontier

basically follows the IGN line ........................................................................
...... 89
(c) From Bangaré to the boundary of Say cercle, the frontier follows the IGN

line........................................................................
................................................ 92

C HAPTER VII D ETERMINATION OF THE FRONTIER IN THE S AY SECTOR ......................................... 95

Section 1 ⎯ Physical and human description of the Say sector............................................ 95

Section 2 ⎯ The course of the frontier in the Say sector ...................................................... 97

A. There was no justification for continuing the inter-colonial boundary to the
village of Bossébangou........................................................................
....................... 99

B. The frontier line in the sector of the four villages can be identified with
precision ........................................................................
........................................... 107

C. The representation of the course of the frontier in two straight lines between the
point where it leaves the “salient” and enters the Botou Loop is entirely

justified........................................................................
............................................. 112

SUBMISSIONS ........................................................................
.......................................................... 116

Summary of sketch-maps and maps illustrating the Memorial...................................................... i

Sketch-maps (in chronological order)........................................................................
.......... i

Maps ........................................................................
...........................................................ii

List of documents in the annexes to the Memorial of Niger........................................................iii

S ERIES A ⎯ Diplomatic documents........................................................................
..........iii

S ERIES B ⎯ Legislative and regulatory documents .......................................................... iv

S ERIES C ⎯ Administrative documents and correspondence ........................................... vi

S ERIES D ⎯ Maps ........................................................................
....................................xii LIST OF PRINCIPAL ABBREVIATIONS

FWA French West Africa

ICJ International Court of Justice

IGN Institut géographique national

OJ Official Journal

OJFWA Official Journal of French West Africa

OJFR Official Journal of the French Republic

OJRN Official Journal of the Republic of Niger

MN Memorial of the Republic of Niger INTRODUCTION

0.1. By a joint letter of 12 May 2010, filed in the Registry of the Court on 20 July 2010 1, the

Ministers for Foreign Affairs of Burkina Faso and the Republic of Niger notified to the Court a
certified copy of the Special Agreement seising the International Court of Justice of the frontier
dispute between Burkina Faso and the Republic of Niger, signed in Niamey on 24 February 2009,

together with a copy of the Protocol of Exchange of the Instruments of Ratification of the Special
Agreement, signed in Ouagadougou on 20 November 2009 . At the same time, the two Parties also
transmitted to the Court a certified copy of the exchange of notes embodying the agreement

between the two States on the delimited sectors of their joint frontier, dated 29October and
2 November 2009.

0.2. Under Article2 of the Special Agreement, concerning the subject of the dispute, the
Parties request the Court to:

“1. determine the course of the boundary between the two countries in the
sector from the astronomic marker of Tong-Tong (latitude14°250 ' 4"N;

longitu0de47) to the beginning of the Botou bend
(latitude 12° 36' 18" N; longitude 01° 52' 07" E);

2. place on record the Parties’ agreement on the results of the work of the Joint
Technical Commission on Demarcation of the Burkina Faso-Niger boundary with
regard to the following sectors:

(a)the sector from the heights of N’Gouma to the astronomic marker of
Tong-Tong;

3
(b) the sector from the beginning of the Botou bend to the River Mekrou.”

0.3. Article 3 of the same document provides that the Parties request the Court to authorize
the following procedure for the written pleadings:

“(a) a Memorial filed by4each Party not later than nine (9) months after the seising of
the Court; [. . .]” .

0.4. By Order of 14 September 2010, the Court set 20 April 2011 as the date for the filing of
a Memorial by each of the Parties. This Memorial is filed pursuant to that Order.

0.5. The structure of the Memorial is as follows. It sets out the historical and legal
background to the frontier between Burkina Faso and Niger (Chap.1), before describing the

1
Joint notification of the Special Agreement seising International Court of Justice of the frontier dispute
between Burkina Faso and the Republic of Niger, letter dated 12May2010, filed in the Registry of the Court on
20 July 2010; MN, Anns., Series A, No. 20.
2
Protocol of Exchange of the Instruments of Ratification of the Special Agreement seising the International Court
of Justice of the frontier dispute between Burkina Faso and the Republic of Niger signed on 24 February 2009 in Niamey,
Ouagadougou 20 November 2009; MN, Anns., Series A, No. 18.
3Certified copy of the Special Agreement seising the International Court of Justice of the frontier dispute between

Burkina Faso and the Republic of Niger, signed in Niamey on 24 February 2009; MN, Anns., Series A, No. 13.
4Ibid. - 2 -

difficulties to which the course of the boundary betw een the two Colonies, and then of the frontier
between the two States, gave rise (Chap.2). Deta ils are then given of the attempts to achieve a

peaceful settlement of the frontier dispute, which culminated in the conclusion of a protocol of
agreement and of the Special Agreement seising the International Court of Justice in 2009
(Chap. 3). The cartographic material relating to the disputed area is analysed (Chap. 4), after which
the legal bases for the determination of the frontier in this case are set out (Chap. 5). Finally, the

position of the Republic of Niger on the determinati on of the frontier in this area is presented,
distinguishing between the Téra sector (Chap. 6) and the Say sector (Chap. 7). Before commencing
these Chapters, we shall give a brief description of the Parties to the dispute.

BURKINA F ASO

0.6. Burkina Faso is a landlocked country, with a total surface area of approximately

274,200 sq km. It is bounded on the north and west by Mali, to the east by Niger, and to the south
by Benin, Togo, Ghana and Côte d’Ivoire.

Burkina Faso has a hydrographic network consisting of three main basins: those of the

Volta, the Comoé and the Niger. The country is traversed by three watercourses: the Mouhoum
(formerly the Black Volta), the Nakambé (Wh ite Volta) and the Nazinon (Red Volta). The
Mouhoum is the only permanent river, and flows towards Ghana.

0.7. The population of Burkina Faso was es timated in 2009 at approximately 16million
inhabitants. The territory of the country is divided into 13regions and subdivided into
45 provinces, 350 départements, 359 independent communes and some 8,000 villages.

0.8. During the colonial period this West Africa n territory had a variety of colonial statuses.
The Colony of Upper Volta was created in 1919 as part of French West Africa (FWA), a grouping
of French colonies in West Africa, but was th en abolished in 1932. Between 1932 and 1947 the

administrative divisions which composed it were distributed among the neighbouring Colonies of
French Sudan (today Mali), Niger and Côte d’I voire. Upper Volta was re-established as an
Overseas Territory from 1947 to 1958. On 11 December1958 it became the Republic of Upper
Volta, and was a member of the “Community” established by the French Constitution of 1958,

before becoming independent on 5August1960. Subsequently, on 4August1984, it took the
name of Burkina Faso, meaning “the country of honest men”.! - 4 -

T HE R EPUBLIC OF N IGER

0.9. The Republic of Niger is a landlocked Sahelo-Saharan country situated in West Africa,

with a surface area of 1,267,000 sq km.

It is bounded to the east by Chad, to the west by Burkina Faso and Mali, to the south by

Nigeria and Benin, and to the north by Algeria and Libya.

The country is basically watered by the river Niger over a distance of 550km, with a few
seasonal tributaries to the west, the Magia and the Goulbin-Maradi in the south-central area, the

river Komadougou Yobé, and Lake Chad to the extreme east.

5
0.10. In 2010 the population of Niger was estimated at over 15million inhabitants . It is
divided into the eight regions and 36 départements which today make up the territory of the
Republic of Niger. The territory’s over 10,000 villages and tribes are grouped into
6
266 communes .

0.11. During the colonial period, Niger ha d a variety of administrative statuses as a

component part of French West Africa (FWA). It was, inter alia, a Military Territory, before
becoming a Colony in 1922 and an Overseas Terr itory from 1946-1958. Niger became a Republic
in 1958 as a member of the Community established by the French Constitution of 1958, and

obtained its independence on 3 August 1960.

5
Projection by the Niger National Statistical Office from the first quarter of 2010.
6National Atlas of Niger, December 2002 edition.! C HAPTER I

THE LAWS AND REGULATIONS GOVERNING THE STRUCTURE
OF THE COLONIES CONCERNED

1.1. In West Africa, in line with the prin ciple of effective occupation as set out in the
General Act of the Berlin Conference of 1885, the French settlements situated on the Atlantic coast
gradually spread towards the interi or of the continent. The conquest and occupation of the region

were carried out by a series of expeditions, in Senegal and French Sudan, in Guinea, in Côte
d’Ivoire and in Dahomey. In order to prepare th e ground for future penetration and to outdistance
the expeditions of other competing European powers in what is now the western part of Niger and

the eastern area of Burkina Faso, the French colonial authorities first sent various exploratory
expeditions to reconnoitre the region. These enabled treaties of protection to be concluded with the
local rulers so as to enable the river Niger to be reached. Subsequently, having concluded the

reconnaissance period, the French authorities proceeded to the colonial occupation phase.

1.2. Following the effective occupation, in 1897, of the Gourma, and of the areas extending

from Aribinda to Say, including Dori, the Yagha and the Torodi, all of these territories were
incorporated into the Colony of Sudan (Eastern Re gion and Macina). This was part of a larger
whole constituting a union institute d by a Decree of 16June1895 7, which lasted until the end of
the colonial period: French West Africa (FWA). In establishing a Government-General for FWA,

this decree sought to create an organ responsible for co-ordinating activities and resolving conflicts
among the various Colonies composing it, whose in terests sometimes differed. FWA was headed
by a Governor-General (then later by a High Commissioner), while the Colonies were administered

by Lieutenant-Governors.

1.3. In 1957, FWA consisted of territories distributed along the Atlantic coast on the one

hand, and in the Sahel-Sudan region on the other. The first category, in addition to the Colony of
Senegal, which was the oldest, included Guinea, Côte d’Ivoire, Dahomey and Mauritania. The
territories of Upper Volta, Niger and French Sudan belong to the second category.

1.4. Within the Colonies, the basic administrative unit was the cercle, headed by a Colonial
Administrator. Thus, in the disputed area, four cercles are involved, in the territory of Niger the
8
cercles of Say and Tillabéry , and in the Colony of Upper Volta the cercles of Dori and Fada
N’Gourma. The cercle could be a single unit, or include territorial subdivisions. These
subdivisions consisted either of cantons (for the sedentary population) or groupements (for the
nomadic and Bellah peoples). The cantons were composed of villages and hamlets, and the

groupements of tribes.

1.5. Throughout the colonial period, the territories involved in the present dispute underwent

numerous changes, as a result of the frequent reorganizations of the constituent elements of FWA
in this region. Thus in the following pages we shall analyse the laws and regulations concerning
the structure of the Colonies covered by the dispute, as well as the creation and development of the

cercles concerned.

7
Decree of 16 June 1895 establishing a Government-General of French West Africa; MN, Anns., Series B, No. 1.
This name has changed its spelling over the years, some times “Tillabéry” as shown in the original (generally
during the colonial period), sometimes “Tillabéri” (particularly after independence); in this Memorial, the Republic of

Niger has decided to reproduce the spelling as it appears in the reference documents cited. - 8 -

1.6. As indicated above, following the colonial occupation of the Gourma region and the area
9
extending from Dori to Say, these territories were in corporated into the Colony of French Sudan .
The dismemberment of that Colony, in October 1899, would result in major territorial changes in
French West Africa.

9
See above, para. 1.2. - 10 -

Section 1 ⎯ The dismemberment of French Sudan

1.7. The Decree of 17October1899 10 dismembered French Sudan, incorporating its

component parts into Senegal, Côte d’Ivoire , French Guinea and Dahomey and two Military
Territories. Article 1 of the Decree provided:

“[ . . .] The cantons of Kouala or Nebba south of Liptako and the Territory of Say,
comprising the cantons of Djennaré, Diongoré, Fiolmongani and Botou, are hereby
incorporated into Dahomey.

The cercles or résidences of the administrative division known as the ‘northern
and north-eastern region of French Sudan’, namely Timbuktu, Jumpi, Goudam,
Bandiagra, Dori and Ouahigouya, as well as the cercles or résidences of the

administrative division known as the Volta region [...], shall form two Military
Territories, under the authority of the Governor-General and governed by two Military
Commanders [ . . .]”.

A. The organization of the First Military Territory

1.8. Pursuant to that Decree, the Governor-General of FWA adopted an arrêté in order to
organize the Military Territories. Thus Article 1 of the Arrêté of 25 December 1899 11incorporated
Sinder cercle and Dori residence into the First Military Territory:

“The cercles of Timbuktu, Sumpi, Bamba, Gao, and Sinder and the résidences
of Dori, Macina, and Yatenga shall, with effect from 1January 1900, shall constitute

the First Military Territory.”

A Second Military Territory was created on the sa me date, with a command post at Timbuktu, and

its administrative centre at Bobo Dioulasso (capital of the Second Military Territory).

B. The creation of a Third Military Territory in FWA

12
T1he. Arrêté of the Governor-General of FWA of 23 July 1900 created a Third Military
Territory. Article 1 of that text provided:

“This territory shall encompass the areas on the left bank of the Niger, from Say
to Lake Chad, which were placed under th e French sphere of influence by the

Convention of 14 June 1898.”

10
Decree of 17October1899 reorganizing the territorihaving constituted the possessions of French Sudan,
OJFWA, No. 212 of 9 November 1899; MN, Anns., Series B, No. 2.
1Arrêté général of 25December1899 organizing the Military Terr itories of French West Africa; MN, Anns.,

Series B, No. 3.
1Arrêté général of 23July1900 creating a Third Military Territory, with its administrative centre at Zinder,
OJFWA, undated, 1900, p. 313; MN, Anns., Series B, No. 4. - 12 -

13
This Arrêté was confirmed by a Decree of the French Republic of 20December1900 , which
provides:

“there is hereby constitute d between the Niger and Lake Chad a Third Military
Territory having its administrative centre at Zinder, under the authority of the
14
Governor-General of West Africa and governed by a Military Commander” .

These two texts created the entity whose territory would form the basis of what would subsequently
become the Colony, then the State of Niger.

C. The incorporation of the Territory of Say into the cercle of Moyen-Niger

1.10. Following the Decree of 17October1899 allocating the Territory of Say to the
Government of Dahomey, Article1 of Arrêté No.149 of 20March1901 15 of the Governor of

Dahomey and Dependencies incorporated the Territory of Say into the cercle of Moyen-Niger
(Kandi cercle):

“The Territory of Say, whose precise boundaries will be fixed subsequently, is
hereby incorporated into the cercle of Moyen-Niger [ . . .].”

D. The Territories of Senegambia and Niger (1902 to 1904)

16
1.11. By a Decree of 1October1902 of the President of the French Republic, the list of
territories composing French West Africa was amended as follows:

“the protectorate areas which are currently dependencies of Senegal, and the
Territories of Haut-Sénégal and Moyen-Niger, shall henceforth be grouped in a single

new financial and administrative unit, under the name ‘Territories of Senegambia and
Niger’” .17

This new administrative division encompassed, inter alia, the First and Second Military Territories.

13
Decree of 20December1900 confirming the Arrêté of the Governor-General of 23July1900 and creating a
Third Military Territory in French West Africa ( Bulletin officiel du Ministère des colonies , 14th year ⎯ 1900, Vol.14,
Nos. 1-12, pp. 1087-1088; MN, Anns., Series B, No. 5.

14Care should be taken not to confuse Sinder, located on the River Niger 15 km north-west of Tillabéry, with the
town of Zinder, located over 1,000 km to the east.

15Arrêté No.149 of 20March1901 incorporating the Territory of Say into the cercle of Moyen-Niger (original
manuscript text); MN, Anns., Series B, No. 6.

16Decree of 1October1902 reorganizing the Government-General of French West Africa ( Official Journal of
Senegal and Dependencies, undated, 1902, pp. 582-583); MN, Anns., Series B, No. 7.
17
Ibid., Article 1 (5). - 14 -

E. The creation of the Colony of Haut-Sénégal et Niger (1904-1920)

1.12. Two years later, a Decree of 18October1904 18 once more reorganized the

Government-General of French West Africa. Under this text, a part of the Territories of
Senegambia and Niger took the name Haut-Sénégal et Niger and became a separate Colony:

“The Colony of Haut-Sénégal et Niger [...] shall encompass the former
Territories of Haut-Sénégal and Moyen-Niger, as well as those forming the Third
Military Territory. Its administrative centre shall be at Bamako. This Colony
comprises:

(a) the cercles under civil administration, which shall include those currently
comprising the Second Military Territory;

(b) a military territory, called ‘Military Territory of Niger’, which shall comprise the
current administrative divisions of the First and Third Military Territories”.

1Decree of 18October1904 reorganizing the Gove rnment-General of French West Africa, Renseignements
coloniaux, No. 11/1904; MN, Anns., Series B, No. 8. - 16 -

F. The division of the Military Territory of Niger into three regions

1.13. The second paragraph of Article 5 of this Decree provided that:

“the Governor-General shall determine in government council on a proposal from the
Lieutenant-Governors concerned the administrative divisions within each of the

Colonies of French West Africa”.

On the basis of this provision, the first paragraph of Article 6 of the Arrêté of 26 December 1904 19
of the Governor-General of French West Africa di vided the military territory of Niger into three

Regions, having as their respective administrative centres Niamey, Timbuktu and Zinder. The first
paragraph of Article 7 of that Arrêté further provided:

“Each Region shall be divided into cercles, namely: [...] Niamey Region:
Djerma, Dounzou and Dori.”

1Arrêté général of 26 December 1904 organizing the Military Territory of Niger (Official Journal of Senegal and
Dependencies, 31 December 1904); MN, Anns., Series B, No. 9. - 18 -

G. The incorporation of the cercles of Fada N’Gourma and Say into the Colony of
Haut-Sénégal et Niger

1.14. The Decree of the President of the Republic of 2 March 1907 20detached the cercles of

Fada N’Gourma and Say from the Colony of Dahomey and incorporat ed them into the Colony of
Haut-Sénégal et Niger. In his report to the President of the Republic, justifying this transfer of
territory, the Minister for the Colonies gave the following reasons:

“My attention has been drawn a number of times to the disadvantages of the
incorporation into our Colony of Dahomey of the cercles of Fada N’Gourma and Say.

Ethnic considerations of genuine im portance, as well as administrative
requirements, make it necessary, on the contrary, that these cercles be incorporated in
our Colony of Haut-Sénégal et Niger, which had moreover already possessed them in
part prior to the Decree of 17 October 1899. [. . .]”.

H. The four Regions of the Military Territory of Niger

21
1.15. Arrêté général No.1277 of 31 December 1907 of the Governor-General of French
West Africa defined the various administrative units of the Military Territory of Niger. It was
composed of four Regions: Timbuktu, Gao, Ni amey and Zinder. Article3 of that document

provided:

“The Gao Region shall consist of the current territories of the cercles of Dori,
Dounzou and Gao and the secteur of Bourem.

It includes: [. . .]

Till.béry cercle within its current boundaries;

Do3ri. cercle, consisting of the current cercle minus Torodi”.

Article 4 of the arrêté further provided:

“The Niamey Region shall comprise the current territories of the cercles of
Djenna [Djerma], Tahoua and Say, together with Torodi.

It shall include:

Dje[Dnerma] cercle, formed by Niamey district, Karma, Diamaré and

Torodi cantons, Say cercle [ . . .]”.

Thus, within the Military Territory of Niger, Say be came part of the Niamey Region. This was not
a change of colony, but simply an incorporation into a different entity within the Colony of

Haut-Sénégal et Niger. Thus, pursuant to the fifth subparagraph of Article1 of the
above-mentioned Decree of 18Oc tober1904 reorganizing the Government-General of French

20
Decree of 2 March 1907 incorporating into the Colony of Haut-Sénégal et Niger the cercles of Fada N’Gourma
and Say, OJFWA of 30 March 1907; MN, Anns., Series B, No. 10.
2Arrêté général No.1277 of 31 December 1907 defining the various administrative divisions of the Military

Territory of Niger (OJFWA, No. 158 of 11 January 1908, p. 12); MN, Anns., Series B, No. 11. - 19 -

22
West Africa , the Military Territory of Niger containing the administrative divisions of the First
and Third Military Territories was an integral part of the Colony of Haut-Sénégal et Niger.

An Arrêté No23241 bis, adopted by the Governor-General of French West Africa on
14 December 1908 , reorganized the administrative divisions of the Military Territory of Niger. It
maintained the four above-mentioned Regions. Article 3 provided:

“The Gao Region shall include: [. . .]

Tilla.béry cercle ;

Do3 ri. cercle ”.

Article 4 further provided:

“The Niamey Region shall consist of the current territories of Djerma cercle

[which since 31 December 1907 included the territory of the former Say cercle],
Dosso cercle and the Tahoua cercle [. . .]”.

Article 1 of the Arrêté of 21 June 1909 24 integrated Dori cercle into the Civil Territory of

Haut-Sénégal et Niger:

“Dori cercle, being part of the Military Territory of Niger, is hereby

incorporated within its current boundaries into the Civil Territory of Haut-Sénégal et
Niger with effect from 1 August 1910.”

25
Similarly, Article 1 of the Arrêté of the Governor-General of French West Africa of 22 June 1010
removed from the Military Territory of Niger the Timbuktu Region, as well as the parts of Gao,
Tillabéry and Djerma cercles situated on the right bank of the Niger and incorporated them, with

effect from 1 January 1911, into the Civil Territory of Haut-Sénégal et Niger.

Article 2 of that document provided:

“These territories shall form (. . .)

Th4e. cercle of Say, consisting of the cantons on the right bank detached from
Djerma cercle;

Finatlley, cantons of Tillabéry on the right bank shall be incorporated into

Dori cercle.”

It should be emphasized that Say cercle, consisting of the cantons on the right bank of the

Niger detached from Djerma cercle, at that point, like Dori cercle a year earlier, left the Military
Territory of Niger. From that date onwards, th ere would no longer be any territories belonging to
the Military Territory of Niger on the right bank of the river.

22
See above, para. 1.11.
23
Arrêté No. 1241 bis of 14 December 1908 reorganizing the administra tive divisions of the Military Territory of
Niger (OJFWA, No. 209 of 2 January 1909); MN, Anns., Series B, No. 12.
24Arrêté No.673 of 21 June1909 incorporating Dori cercle into the Civil Territory of Haut-Sénégal et Niger;
MN, Anns., Series B, No. 13.

25Arrêté général of 22 June 1910 incorporating the Region of Tim buktu into the Civil Territory of Haut-Sénégal
et Niger (OJ Haut-Sénégal et Niger, 1 September 1910); MN, Anns., Series B, No. 14. - 21 -

26
Following the preceding administrative text, a second Arrêté of 22 June 1910 , also adopted
by the Governor-General of Fren ch West Africa and reorganizing the Military Territory of Niger,
the administrative centre of which became Zinder wi th effect from 1 January 1911, divided it into

seven cercles, namely Gao, Niamey, Madaoua, Zinder, N’guigmi, Agadez and Bilma. Niamey
cercle consisted of the secteurs of Tillabéry, Gaya, Dosso, Yeni and the district of Dogondoutchi,
all situated on the left bank.

I. The detachment of the Military Territory of Niger from the Colony of Haut-Sénégal et

Niger

1.16. Subsequently, a Decree of 7 September 1911 27detached the Military Territory of Niger

from the Colony of Haut-Sénégal et Niger. The Military Territory of Niger was to be governed by
a senior officer under the direct authority of the Governor-General of French West Africa.

28
Following that Decree, Arrêté No. 1728 of 23 November 1912 of the Governor-General of
French West Africa reorganized the internal administration of the Military Territory of Niger. It
was divided into seven cercles, namely Niamey, Madaoua, Zinder, Gouré, Mainé-Soroa, Agadez

and Bilma. Thus Niamey cercle consisted of the central secteur of Niamey and the secteurs of
Tillabéry, Dasso, Dogondoutchi and Gaya.

The creation of the Colony of Upper Volta in March 1919 would cause a significant change
in the territorial configuration of the region.

J. The creation of the Colony of Upper Volta (1919 to 1932)

1.17. In 1919 certain southern and western cercles of the Colony of Upper Volta and Niger
were detached from it in order to make up the new Colony of Upper Volta. Article 1 of the Decree
of 1 March 1919 29 provided:

“The cercles of Gaoua, Bobo-Dioulasso, Dédougou, Ouagadougou, Dori, Say
and Fada-N’Gourma, currently part of Haut -Sénégal et Niger, shall form a new

separate Colony called Upper Volta.

The administrative seat shall be at Ouagadougou.”

It should be emphasized that the creation of this new Colony was not accompanied by a description
of the boundaries of the entities composing it. The procedure, as usual, was to list the cercles that

it contained. The boundary between the Military Territory of Niger and the Colony of Upper Volta
ran between Niamey cercle on one side and Dori and Say cercles on the other. Thus the boundary
between this new entity and the Military Territo ry of Niger, which would later become the

Territory of Niger and then the Colony of Niger, was fixed at that time at the River Niger.

2Arrêté général No.672 of 22June1910 reorganizing the Military Territory of Niger ( OJFWA, undated, 1910,
p. 475); MN, Anns., Series B, No. 15.

2Decree of 7September1911 incorporating the Military Te rritory of Niger into the Government-General of
French West Africa with ef fect from 1January1912, and Arrêté promulgating that Decree in French West Africa
(OJ Haut-Sénégal ⎯ Niger, 1911, pp. 511-512); MN, Anns., Series B, No. 16.

2Arrêté général No. 1728 of 23 November 1912 reorganizing the internal administration of the Military Territory
of Niger (OJ FWA, 11 January 1913); MN, Anns., Series B, No. 17.

2Decree of 1 March 1919 dividing the Colony of Haut-Sénégal et Niger and creating the Colony of Upper Volta,
and Arrêté promulgating that Decree in French West Africa (OJFWA, No.768, 1919, pp.550-551); MN, Anns.,
Series B, No. 18. - 23 -

K. The abolition of Téra Subdivision following the creation of the Colony of Upper Volta
(1919 to 1932)

1.18. Following the Decree of 1March1919 creating the Colony of Upper Volta, Arrêté
No. 384 of 16 August 1920 30 of the Governor of Upper Volta abolished Téra Subdivision.

Article 1 provided:

“Téra Subdivision (Dori cercle) is hereby abolished and shall be directly

administered from Dori.”

L. The Military Territory of Niger becomes the Territory of Niger

1.19. The Decree of 4December1920 31 converted the Military Territory of Niger into the

Territory of Niger. Article 1 provided:

“With effect from 1 January 1921, the Military Territory of Niger shall take the

name ‘Territory of Niger’.”

The Territory remained divided into seven cercles: Agadez, Gouré, Kaouar-Tibesti (administrative
centre at Bilma), Madaoua, N’guigmi, Niamey and Zinder.

M. The disappearance of the Colony of Haut-S énégal et Niger and the resurrection of the

Colony of French Sudan

1.20. A further Decree of 4December1920 32naming the Colonies and Territories

composing the Government-General of French West Africa reconstituted the Colony of French
Sudan, into which part of the territories wh ich had previously composed the Colony of
Haut-Sénégal et Niger were incorporated.

3Arrêté No. 384 of 16 August 1920 abolishing Téra Subdivision; MN, Anns., Series B, No. 19.

3Decree of 4 December 1920 reorganizing the Military Territo ry of Niger and converting it into a Colony of the
Civil Territory of Mauritania, and Arrêté promulgating that Decree (OJFWA, u ndated, 1921, pp.81-82); MN, Anns.,
Series B, No. 20.

3Decree of 4 December 1920 naming the Colonies and Territories composing the Government-General of French
West Africa, and Arrêté promulgating that Decree (OJFWA, 1921); MN, Anns., Series B, No. 21. - 25 -

Section 2 ⎯ The conversion of the Civil Territory of Niger
into an autonomous Colony

33
1.21. Article 1 of the Decree of 13 October 1922 raised the Territory of Niger to the status
of an autonomous Colony:

“The Territory of Niger is hereby converted, with effect from 1 July 1922, into a
Colony, which shall take the name of Colony of Niger [ . . .]”.

A. The transfer of the administrative centre of the Colony of Niger from Zinder to Niamey
and the subsequent territorial changes

1.22. Following the conversion of the Terr34ory of Niger into an autonomous Colony,
Article 1 of the Decree of 28 December 1926 transferred the administrative centre of the Colony
from Zinder to Niamey:

“The administrative centre of the Colony of Niger is hereby established at
Niamey.”

Article 2 of the Decree continued:

“The following territories, which are currently part of the Colony of Upper

Volta, shall be incorporated in the Colony of Niger with effect from 1 January 1927:

1. Say cercle, with the exception of Gourmantché Botou canton;

2. The cantons of Dori cercle which were formerly part of the Military Territory of
Niger in the Téra and Yatacala regions, and were detached from it by the Arrêté of
the Governor-General of 22 June 1910.

An Arrêté of the Governor-General in Standing Committee of the Government
Council shall determine the course of the boundary of the two Colonies in this area.”

In his report to the President of the Republic, th e Minister for the Colonies gave the following
reasons justifying the incorporation of Say cercle and the Téra and Yatacala regions into the

Colony of Niger.

“For political, economic, and administrative reasons, the Governor-General of
French West Africa proposes that the administ rative centre of the Colony of Niger be

transferred from Zinder to Niamey. This measure will have inter-colonial
consequences, in that the head of the Colo ny of Niger will take up residence close to
territories which are currently very remote from their administrative centre and over

which it will now be easy for him to exercise immediate direction and control. These
administrative divisions were formerly part of the Territory of Niger when its

3Decree of 13October1922 converting the Civil Terrtory of Niger into an autonomous Colony OJFWA,
No. 955, 20 January 1923, p. 58); MN, Anns., Series B, No. 22.

3Decree of 28December1926 transferring the administrativ e centre of the Colony of Niger and providing for
territorial changes in French West Africa, Arrêté promulgating that Decree ( OJFWA, No.1167, undated, 1927,
p. 92); MN, Anns., Series B, No. 23. - 27 -

administrative centre was at Niamey. They were only removed at a time when

military concerns required that Zinder be chosen as administrative centre of the
Colony. It is thus logical that they should be returned to it at a time when the
government will again be moved to Niamey.

As the administrative areas in question lie along the Niger, which will become
the administrative and economic axis of the Colony of Niger, it will be possible to

give this area 35unity and cohesion which will be essential factors in its future
development.”

B. The territorial changes to the Colonies of Niger and Upper Volta

1.23. Following this Decree, an Arrêté providing for territorial changes to the Colonies of

Upper Volta and Niger adopted by the Gove rnor-General of French West Africa on
22 January 1927 36provided:

“Ar1ticle ⎯ That part of Dori cercle assigned to the Colony of Niger shall be
incorporated into the territory of the current Tillabéry Subdivision (Niamey cercle),
and shall constitute the cercle of Tillabéry.

Art2icle ⎯ That part of Say cercle assigned to the Colony of Niger shall
constitute, under the same name, a cercle of that Colony.

Ar3ticle ⎯ The canton of Gourmantché-Botou, previously part of Say cercle
and remaining in the Colony of Upper Volta, shall be incorporated into Fada cercle.”

C. The preparatory works for the delimit ation between the Colonies of Niger and
Upper Volta

1.24. The Decree of 28 December 1926 further provided that an arrêté of the
Governor-General in standing committee of the Government Counsel would determine the course

of the boundary of the two Colonies in that area. That arrêté was adopted on 22 January 1927 and
the Lieutenant-Governors of Niger and Upper Volta were made responsible for its execution. In
order to secure material for that delimitation, the two Colonies agreed on three texts:

⎯ a Record of Agreement of 2 February 1927 betw een Mr.Brévié, Governor of the Colony of
Niger and Mr. Lefilliatre, Inspector of Administ rative Affairs, Representative of the Governor
37
of Upper Volta . This Agreement listed the cantons having belonged on 22 June 1910 to the
former Tillabéry cercle, which were to be reincorporated into Niger, and defined the boundary
between these cantons and that part of Dori cercle remaining in Upper Volta;

⎯ a Record of Agreement of 10 February 1927 between MrL . efilliatre, Inspector of
Administrative Affairs, Representative of the Governor of Upper Volta, and Mr.Choteau,

35
Report of the Minister for the Colonies to the President of the French Republic concerning the treatment of the
administrative centre of the Colony of Nigand territorial changes in French West AfriOJFR, 5January1927,
p. 198; MN, Anns., Series B, No. 24.
3Arrêté of 22 January 1927 providing for territorial change s to the Colonies of Upper Volta and Niger, OJFWA,

No. 1169, 12 February 1927; MN, Anns., Series B, No. 25.
3Record of Agreement of 2 February 1927 between BréviéGovernor of the Colony of Niger, and Lefilliatre,
Inspector of Administrative Affairs, representative of the Governor of Upper Volta; MN, Anns., Series C, No. 7. - 28 -

38
Chief Colonial Administrator, representing the Governor of the Colony of Niger . That
Agreement listed the cantons constituting Say cercle which were to be incorporated in the

Colony of Niger, defined the boundaries of Say cercle and listed the villages forming the
canton of Botou;

⎯ a Record of Agreement of 9 May 1927 between the Administrator of Fada cercle
39
(Mr.deCoutouly) and the Administrator of the cercle (Mr. Lesserteur) . This document
defined the boundaries of Gourmantché Botou canton.

1.25. On 27 April 1927, the Lieutenant-Gover nor of Upper Volta, Hesling, wrote to the
Commanders of Dori and Fada cercles, asking them to provide him as soon as possible with

accurate material to enable him to prepare an arrêté général fixing the new boundaries between the
Colonies of Niger and Upper Volta. He emphasize d that it was essential that the course of the

boundary should be determined on the ground by fu ll agreement between the administrators of the
administrative divisions concerned . Pursuant to that instruction, in June 1927 the Administrators

of the two cercles concerned, Messrs.Delbos (Dori) and Prudon (Tillabéry), carried out a field
mission. We do not have the report of Administrator Delbos on the route followed on that occasion
together with Administrator Prudon, but we do have a sketch-map prepared by him 41, and a
42 43
detailed draft delimitation, both dated 27August 1927 , accompanied by a further sketch-map .
For his part, the Commander of Tillabéry cercle, Prudon, reported on his mission in his Tour
44 45
Report dated 4 August 1927 , to which he also attached a sketch-map .

These documents did not, however, reach Dakar in time to be taken into account in the
preparation of the Arrêté of 31 August 1927 fixing the boundary between the two Colonies.

38
Record of Agreement of 10February1927 between Le filliatre, Inspector of Administrative Affairs,
representative of the Governor of Upper Volta, and Choteau, Ch ief Colonial Administrator, representing the Governor of
the Colony of Niger; MN, Anns., Series C, No. 8.

39Record of Agreement of 9 May 1927 between the Administrator of Fada cercle (deCoutouly) and the
Administrator of Say cercle (Lesserteur); MN, Anns., Series C, No. 9; sketch-map on a scale of 1:50,000 attached to the
Agreement; MN, Anns., Series C, No. 10.

40Telegram/letter No.1166/AG from the Lieutenant-Governor of Upper Volta , Hesling, to the Commanders of
Dori and Fada cercles, dated 27 April 1927; MN, Anns., Series C, No. 11.

41Sketch-map of Administrator Delbos following a field mission carried out in June 1927; MN, Anns., Series C,
No. 14.

42Draft delimitation prepared by Admi nistrator Delbos following a field mi ssion carried out in June1927, dated
27 August 1927; MN, Anns., Series C, No. 16.

43Ibid.
44
Extract from Tour Report No. 25 of Administrator Prudon, dated 4 August 1927; MN, Anns., Series C, No. 15.
45
Sketch-map of Administrator Prudon, attached to hi s Tour Report of June1927, dated 4August1927; MN,
Anns., Series D, No. 3. - 29 -

D. The Arrêté of 31 August 1927 and its Erratum of 5October1927, fixing the boundary
between the Colonies of Niger and Upper Volta

1.26. It was thus solely on the basis of the three Records of Agreement of 2February,

10February and 9May1927 that the new boun daries of the two Colonies resulting from t46se
territorial changes were subsequently described in Arrêté No. 2336 of 31 August 1927 . That
Arrêté of the Governor-General fixed the boundaries of the Colonies of Upper Volta and Niger as
follows:

Article 1

“1. Boundaries between the Tillabéry cercle and Upper Volta:

This boundary is determined to the north by the current boundary with Sudan (Gao
cercle) as far as the heights of N’Gourma, and to the west by a line passing

through the Kabia ford, Mount Darouskoy and Mount Balébanguia, west of the
ruins of the village of Tokébangou, an d Mount Doumafondé, which then turns
towards the south-east, leaving the ruins of Tong-Tong to the east and descending
in a north-south direction, cutting the Téra -Dori motor road to the west of the

Ossolo Pool, until it reaches the River Sirba (boundary of Say cercle), near to and
to the south of Boulkalo.

2. Boundaries between the Say cercle and Upper Volta:

The villages of Botou canton are excluded from this boundary.

To the north and to the east, by the current boundary with Niger (Niamey cercle),
from Sorbohaoussa to the mouth of the River Mekrou;

To the north-west, by the River Sirba from its mouth as far as the village of

Bossébangou. From this point a salient, including on the left bank of the Sirba the
villages of Afassi, Kouro, Takalan and Tankouro;

To the south-west, a line starting approxim ately from the Sirba at the level of the
Say parallel and running as far as the Mekrou;

To the south-east, by the Mekrou from that point as far as its confluence with the

Niger.”

4Arrêté général No.2336 of 31August1927 fixing the boundaries of the Colonies of Upper Volta and Niger

(OJFWA, No. 1201 of 24 September 1927); MN, Anns., Series B, No. 26. - 31 -

This Arrêté général contained a drafting error, for it described the boundaries of the entire
Say cercle, instead simply of that part of those boundaries which constituted the frontier with
47
Upper Volta. It was therefore the subject of an Erratum No. 2602/APA of 5 October 1927 , which
read as follows:

“Article 1 of the Arrêté of 31 August 1927 fixing the boundaries of the Colonies
of Niger and Upper Volta, publis hed in the Official Journal of French West Africa
No. 1201, of 24 September 1927, page 638, should read as follows:

Article 1

The boundaries of the Colonies of Niger and Upper Volta are determined as
follows:

A line starting from the heights of N’G ouma, passing through the Kabia ford
(astronomic point), Mount Arounskoye and Mount Balébanguia, to the west of the
ruins of the village of Tokebangou, Mount Doumafende and the Tong-Tong

astronomic marker; this line then turns towards the south-east, cutting the Téra-Dori
motor road at the Tao astronomic marker located to the west of the Ossolo Pool, and
reaching the River Sirba at Bossebangou. It almost immediately turns back up
towards the north-west, leaving to Niger, on the left bank of that river, a salient which

includes the villages of Alfassi, Kouro, Tokalan, and Tankouro; then, turning back to
the south, it again cuts the Sirba at the level of the Say parallel.

From that point the frontier, following an east-south-east direction, continues in

a straight line up to a point located 1,200 m to the west of the village of Tchenguiliba.

From that point it turns back up in a straight line that runs in a marked

SSW-NNE direction; it passes approximately 2km west of the village of Birniouoli
and, approximately 2km to the south of the south of the village of Vendou Mama,
reaches the top of the northernmost spur of the Heni-Djouri (Gourma) massif or Jackal
Mountain.

Running then in a west-east direction, it passes 1 km south of Mount Tambado
Djoaga, follows the course of the Dantiabonga marigot, passes south of Dantiandou,
follows the line of the Yoga Djoaga hills as far as the confluence of the Dantiabonga

and Diamongou marigots, and runs along the latter as far as the confluence of the
Dialongou and Boulelfonou marigots approximately 5 km north of the latter village.

From that point, the boundary follows the crests of the Djoapionga hills as far as

the source of the Boulolfonou marigot, runs up the northern slope of the Tounga and
Djoaga massif and terminates at the point known as Niobo-Farou (Caiman Pool), a
sort of broad basin, which is traversed during the dry season by the track from Botou

to Fombonou.

It is then determined by the eastern crests of the Tounga Djoaga massif, before
running towards the River Tapoa in a precise north-south direction. It passes

approximately 5 km east of the village of Kogori and reaches the Tapoa approximately
4 km south of the aforementioned village.

47
Erratum No. 2602/APA of 5 October 1927 to the Arrêté général of 31 August 1927 fixing the boundaries of the
Colonies of Niger and Upper Volta (OJFWA, No. 1205 of 15 October 1927, p. 718); MN, Anns., Series B, No. 27. - 32 -

It then follows the course of the Tapoa upstream until it meets the former
boundary of the Fada and Say cercles, which it follows as far as the point where it
intersects with the course of the Mekrou.

Dirat, Acting Governor-General.”

E. Arrêté local No. 126 of 3 November 1928 reconstituted Téra Subdivision within Tillabéry
cercle

48
1.27. Article1 of the Arrêté of 3November1928 recreated Téra Subdivision within
Tillabéry cercle and established its administrative centre at Téra.

Article 2 provided that Téra Subdivision:

“[ . . .] shall comprise the cantons of: Téra, Diagourou, Kokoro and Logomaten, and
the two independent nomad fractions of the Gaobé Peulhs and the Doufarafara
Tuareg”.

F. The dissolution and dismemberment of the Colony of Upper Volta and the incorporation

of Dori and Fada N’Gourma cercles into the Colony of Niger (1932 to 1947)

1.28. The Colony of Upper Volta was dissolved by a Decree of 5September1932 49. The
Minister for the Colonies justified this measure for financial and economic reasons. Upper Volta

having been dissolved, it remained to decide what would happen to its former administrative
divisions. The colonial authorities decided that

“in light of the findings on trade flows, [...] the administrative divisions of the
former Colony should be distributed among the neighbouring Colonies of Niger,
50
French Sudan and Côte d’Ivoire” .

Thus the first paragraph of Article2 of the Decree of 5September1932 incorporated into the

Colony of Niger the cercles of Fada N’Gourma and Dori, with the exception of Aribinda canton.

4Arrêté local No.126 of 3November1928 creating Téra Subdivision within Tillabércercle; MN, Anns.,
Series B, No. 28.

4Decree of 5September1932 dissolving the Colony of Upper Volta and distributing its territory among the
Colonies of Niger, French Sudan and Côte d’Ivoire, OJFWA, 15 October 1932, p. 902; MN, Anns., Series B, No. 29.

5See Report from the Minister for the Colonies, Mr. Albert Sarraut, to the President of the French Republic for
purposes of adoption of the Decree of 5 September 1932, ibid. - 34 -

G. Law No.47-1707 of 4September1947 reconstituted the Colony of Upper Volta with its
1932 boundaries; the cercles of Dori and Fada N’Gourma were reincorporated into the
Colony

51
1.29. Article2 of Law No.47-1707 of 4September1947 , which reconstituted the Colony
of Upper Volta as a new entity within the French Union, defined its boundaries as those of the
former Colony of Upper Volta as at 5 September 1932:

“The re-established territory of Uppe r Volta shall have administrative and
financial autonomy under the sa me conditions as the other territories of the French

West African group.

Its administrative centre shall be at Ouagadougou and its boundaries shall be
those of the former Colony of Upper Volta on 5 September 1932.”

In consequence, the cercles of Dori and Fada N’Gourma, whic h had been incorporated into the
Colony of Niger in 1932, were reincorporated into the reconstituted Upper Volta.

H. The Arrêté of 30 March 1956 creating seven cercles within the territory of Niger

52
1.30. Arrêté No. 2690 of 30 March 1956 created within the terr itory of Niger seven new
cercles, including Téra cercle. Article 2 provided:

“Téra cercle shall comprise the territories having previously belonged to Téra

Subdivision (Tillabéry cercle) together with Dargol canton , which is hereby detached
from the territories administered directly by Tillabéry cercle.”

The creation of these new cercles, in particular Téra cercle, which bordered on Dori cercle, had no
impact whatever on the territorial boundaries be tween Niger and Upper Volta. The territories of
the two Colonies, now Member States of the co mmunity created by the French Constitution of

1958, underwent no changes in regard to the dis puted area up to the time when they acceded to
independence, on 3 August 1960 in the case of Niger, and on 5 August of the same year for Upper
Volta.

*

1.31. It is thus clear from the foregoing account that, following their occupation by French

troops, the territories which would come to constitute Upper Volta were initially incorporated into
the Colony of French Sudan. S ubsequently, the majority of those territories were attributed to the
Colony of Haut-Sénégal et Niger. The Decree of 1 March 1919 detached the southern and western
cercles from that Colony in order to create the Co lony of Upper Volta. Having been abolished by

the Decree of 5September1932, the Colony of Upper Volta was re-established in 1947 by the
French National Assembly. As regards Niger, the entity initially created as the third Military
Territory in 1900, which extended from the left bank of the River Niger as far as Lake Chad,

51
Law No. 47-1707 of 4 September 1947 reconstit uting the Colony of Upper Volta, and a rrêté promulgating that
Law, OJFWA, 27 September 1947; MN, Anns., Series B, No. 30.
5Arrêté général No.2690 of 30March1956 creating seven cercles within the territory of NigOJFWA,
14 April 1956, p. 1658; MN, Anns., Series B, No. 32. - 35 -

became, successively, the Military Territory of Nige r in 1904, the Territory of Niger in 1920, and
finally the Colony of Niger in 1922.

1.32. The boundary between the two Colonies was fixed by the Erratum No.2602/APA of
5 October 1927, rectifying Arrêté No. 2336 of 31 August 1927. The boundary established by those

two instruments was never changed until the accession of the two Colonies to independence. Thus
the Agreement signed in Ouagadougou on 28 Marc h 1987 between the Revolutionary Government
of Burkina Faso and the Government of the Republic of Niger on the demarcation of the frontier
between the two countries provided that the 1927 text s were to remain the bases for determining

the frontier between the territories of Upper Volta and Niger. C HAPTER II

T HE DIFFICULTIES AND INCIDENTS IN THE DISPUTED AREA

2.1. Examination of the relevant documents from the colonial period discloses persistent
difficulties as a result of the uncertainty regarding the boundary between the Colonies of Niger and
Upper Volta as shown in the Erratum of 5October1927 53 correcting the Arrêté général of
54
31 August 1927 . We will confine ourselves here to outlining a brief summary of these, both for
the period prior to independence (Sec. 1) and for the subsequent period (Sec. 2).

Section 1 ⎯ The difficulties encountered during the period

prior to independence

2.2. Shortly after the adoption of the Arrêté général of 31August 1927 determining the

boundaries of the Colonies of Upper Volta and Niger, the Acting Governor of the Colony of Upper
Volta sent telegram/letters dated the same day 55to the Commanders of Dori and Fada cercles
asking whether the “demarcation [sic] line” as determined by the arrêté in fact corresponded to the

result of the operations conducted with their colleagues from Tillabérry and Say cercles in Niger.

In reply, the Commander of Dori cercle stated that the Erratum of 5 October 1927 ⎯ which
had been adopted in the meantime ⎯ and the copy of the 1:1,000,000 map which had been sent to
him included “ errors”, which he listed in his letter. He pointed out that he and Prudon,

Commander of the Tillabéry cercle, had agreed on the course of the boundary, which had been
communicated to the Governor, and he expressed his surprise at the fact that “there could be any

dispute betwe56 the two Colonies”, since the two Administrators had “carried out the work by joint
agreement” .

Thus already in 1927 a dispute was apparent over the boundaries fixed by the Erratum of
5 October 1927 correcting the Arrêté of 31 August 1927.

2.3. Throughout the colonial period, local officials constantly complained about the lack of
precision in the boundary as adopted. Thus on 26 February 1930 57the Commander of Dori cercle

proposed that a new delimitation be carried out. On 19 March 1930 the Gove58or of Upper Volta
asked him to prepare a report and to submit proposals as appropriate .

59
In a letter of 10 April 1932 , the Commander of Dori cercle wrote as follows to the
Governor of Upper Volta: “common sense and reality require that this boundary be modified”. He

5Erratum No. 2602/APA of 5 October 1927; MN, Anns., Series B, No. 27.

5Arrêté général No. 2336 of 31 August 1927; MN, Anns., Series B, No. 26.

5See telegram/letter No. 2713 A.G. fro m the Acting Governor of Upper Volta to the Commander of Dori cercle
dated 20 October 1927; MN, Anns., Series C, No. 18; see also telegram/letter No. 2714 A.G. from the Acting Governor
of Upper Volta to the Commander of Fada cercle,dated 20 October 1927; MN, Anns., Series C, No. 19.

5Letter No. 731 from Administrato r Delbos, Commander of Dori cercle, to the Governor of Upper Volta dated
17 December 1927, MN, Anns., Series C, No. 20, regarding the work of Delbos and Prudon in 1927; see also para. 1.25
above.

5Letter No.135 from the Commander of Dori cercle to the Governor of Upper Volta dated 26February1930;
MN, Anns., Series C, No. 32.

5Telegram No. 687 from the Governor of Upper Volta to the Commander of Doricercle dated 19March1930,
MN, Anns., Series C, No. 33.
59
Letter No. 112 and Tour Report from Roser, Ci vil Service Deputy, Acting Commander of Dori cercle, to the
Governor of Upper Volta dated 10 April 1932; MN, Anns., Series C, No. 45. - 38 -

proposed what he called “[p]ossible solutions to the problem arising out of the inadequate and
defective drafting of the official texts” . He proposed a “further erratum”, which would determine

a “natural boundary”, which would be particularly relevant in his view, since he and the Head of
Téra Subdivision were in agreement on its course . 61

62
In a Political Report of 30 June 1934 , the Commander of Dori cercle noted that, to the
north at Falagountou and to the south at Sinibella bé, “the boundary between the two administrative
63
divisions is theoretical and extremely imprecise”. The report of 6July1951 from the
Commander of Tillabéry cercle stated that “the boundaries fixed by the Arrêté général of
10 August 1927 are extremely imprecise”. In a letter to the Commander of Tillabéry cercle dated
64
10 July 1951 , the Governor of Niger stated the following:

“Indeed as you point out, the lack of precise boundaries means that the
jurisdiction ratione loci of the courts cannot be determined with certainty.”

65
And similarly again, in a letter of 11 July 1951 to the Tillabéry cercle, Larue, Head of Téra
Subdivision , notes that

“[t]he inaccuracy and imprecision of the Erratum have moreover been pointed out
numerous times”.

66
19I52 , the same official continued to point out the inadequacies of the Arrêté général of
31 August 1927 and its Erratum,

“whose imprecision is matched only by its inaccuracy, the source of constant
argument between Yagha and Diagourou farmers [. . .]”.

In a letter of 17April1953 67, the Governor of Niger wrote to the Commander of Tillabéry

cercle:

“However, I must draw your attention to the imprecision of the Arrêté of

31August1927 and its Erratum, in particul ar regarding the line from the Tong-Tong
astronomic marker, which crosses the Téra-Dori road at the Tao marker and continues
to Bossébangou. The tendency of the Dori authorities has at certain times been to

regard this as a straight line, the result of which has been the annexation by Dori of
certain territories manifestly belonging to Téra, reopening old disputes. This

delimitation should thus be undertaken with great care, village by village, hamlet by
hamlet.”

6Ibid.

6Ibid., p. 6.
62
Colony of Niger, Dori cercle, Political Report, Second Quarter 1934, 30 J une 1934, p. 1; MN, Anns., Series C,
No. 55.
63
Joint Report of the Commanders of Dori cercle and of Tillabéry cercle at Téra, dated 6 July 1951; MN, Anns.,
Series C, No. 72.
64
Telegram/letter of 10 July 1951 from the Gove rnor- General of Niger to the Tillabérycercle, MN, Anns.,
Series C, No. 72.
65
Official telegram/letter No. 70 from the Head of Téra Subdivision to Tillabéry cercle dated 11 July 1951; MN,
Anns., Series C, No. 73.
66
Report of the census tours of Téra canton, carried out from 28 July to 22 August and 20 to 21 September 1952
by the Head of Téra Subdivision, Annex: Territorial Organisation of Moyen Niger, Establishment of Téra Outpost, p. 13;
MN, Anns., Series C, No. 74.
67
Letter No.1511/APA from the Governor of Niger to the Commander of Tillabéry cercle dated 17 April 1953;
MN, Anns., Series C, No. 75. - 39 -

68
In a letter of 22 December 1953 , whereby he transmitted a field mission report to the Governor of
Niger, the Commander of Tillabéry cercle referred to the joint operation carried out by

Deputy-AdministratorLacroix with the Commander of Dori cercle regarding the boundary
between Téra and Dori:

“Mr.Lacroix’s report has enabled the boundaries in a little visited region to be
clarified and has demonstrated the deficiencies in the relevant official texts”.

69
Finally, a Note apparently dating from 1955 , entitled “Geographical Survey of Téra Subdivision”,
again observes notes that

“the lack of precision of the Arrêté général of 31August1927 fixing the boundaries
between the Colonies of Upper Volta and Niger, a source of frequent argument

between natives of Dori and Téra, has necessitated a series of survey missions,
conducted jointly by Dori and Tillabéry cercles”.

70 71
2.4. Throughout this period, the conc lusions of the Delbos/Prudon Agreement of 1927
continued to serve as a reference basis. They were often cited or recommended. Thus we find

them mentioned for example:

72
⎯ on 10 October 1929 , in telegram/letter No.815 from the Commander of Tillabéry cercle to
Dori cercle:

“[h]onour to inform you that, after approva l GovernorNiger, following instructions
given to Téra Subdivision : maintain status quo, namely tolerance zone accepted in
1927 without encroachment or spoliation”;

⎯ in a report from the Commander of Dori cercle dated 7July1930 73, where it is noted in

particular that the Arrêté général of 31August1927 reproduced the Record of Agreement
signed in Téra on 2 February 1927 “and took no account of the delimitation carried out on the
ground by the two cercles Commanders of Dori and Tillabéry”;

⎯ in a letter of 10April1932 74 to the Governor of Upper Volta, in which Roser, Acting
Commander of Dori cercle, indicated the agreement secured with Commander Boyer of

Tillabéry cercle to accept as boundary between the two cercles the Delbos/Prudon line
described in the letter of 17 December 1927;

⎯ the Record of Agreement between Garnier and Lichtenberger of 15 April 1935:

68
Telegram/letter No.710 from th e Commander of Tillabéry cercle to the Governor of Niger dated
22 December 1953; MN, Anns., Series C, No. 17.
69Geographical survey of Téra Subdivision, extract from the Monographie de Téra, National Archives of Niger,

Ann. 19-1.1bis; MN, Anns., Series C, No. 85.
70See above, paras. 1.24 and 1.25.

71Record of Agreement between the Commander of Dori (Garnier) and the Head of Téra Subdivision
(Lichtenberger) dated 13 April 1935; MN, Anns., Series C, No. 56.

72Telegram/letter No.815 from the Commander of Tillabéry cercle to the Commander of Dori cercle dated
10 October 1929; MN, Anns., Series C, No. 31.

73Report No. 416 from the Commander of Dori cercle on the difficulties created by the delimitation established in
1927 between the Colonies of Niger and Upper Volta ( Arrêté of 31 August 1927) regarding the boundaries between Dori
cercle and Tillabéry cercle, 7 July 1930; MN, Anns., Series C, No. 38.

74Letter No. 112 of 10 April 1932; MN, Anns., Series C, No. 45. - 40 -

“in principle, this boundary [between Do ri and Téra] shall be determined in
accordance with the indications given in letter No. 438 from the Commander of [Dori]

cercle to the Governor of Upper Volta of 3 April [read August] 1927”;

75
⎯ on 9May1935 , in a letter from the Commander of Dori cercle to the Governor of Niger,
referring to the Garnier-Lichtenberger meeting:

“[a]t Sinibellabé, we confirmed the boundary agreed in 1927 by administrators Delbos
and Prudhon [sic] (see letter 3August1927 Commander Dori cercle to Governor
Upper Volta)”;

⎯ in a letter of 10 May 1935 76from Téra Subdivision to Tillabéry cercle, where it was stated that

administrators Garnier and Lichtenberger were proposing to mark out the boundary described
in the letter of 27 August 1927;

77
⎯ on 19 May 1943 , in a telegram/letter, in which Delmond, Commander of Dori cercle, refers
also to the Delbos-Prudon boundary;

⎯ on 11 July 1951 , in a letter from Larue, Head of Téra Subdivision , to Tillabéry cercle, to
which was appended the Delbos sketch-map;

⎯ a Record of Agreement of 17May1953 79 concerning a dispute between the localities of

Alfassi and Kokoloko;

⎯ on 24 December 1953 80, in the report of Commander Lacroix on the survey of the boundary

between Dori and Tillabéry cercles, where reference was again made to the work of 1927.

2.5. The boundary resulting from the 1927 texts raised problems for the nomadic
populations, who were accustomed to travelling with in a unitary area, which was now divided into

two separate colonies. In order to retain their customary transhumant routes, or even to cultivate
their croplands which overlapped the boundary, they had to pass from one Colony to the other.

The colonial officials complained about this. Thus in a letter of 14August1929 81to the

Governor of Upper Volta, the Commander of Dori cercle wrote:

“the territories to which the native groupements lay claim, in particular in semi-desert

savannah areas, have traditional boundaries which are somewhat imprecise. There are

75Letter No.168 from the Commander of Dori cercle to the Governor of Niger dated 9May1935; MN, Anns.,
Series C, No. 58.

76Letter No.140 from the Head of Téra Subdivision to the Commander of Tillabéry cercle dated 10 May 1935;
MN, Anns., Series C, No. 59.

77Official telegram/letter No.231 from the Commander of Dori cercle to the Commander of Tillabéry cercle
dated 19 May 1943; MN, Anns., Series C, No. 67.
78
Official telegram/letter No. 70 from the Head of Téra Subdivision to the Commander of Tillabéry cercle dated
11 July 1951; MN, Anns., Series C, No. 73.
79
Record of Settlement of a Front ier Dispute, signed by the Co mmanders of Niamey and Dori cercles, dated
17 May 1953; MN, Anns., Series C, No. 76.
80
Report of a tour carried out from 16 to 23 Novemb er 1953 by Deputy-Administrator Lacroix (Tillabéry cercle)
dated 24 December 1953; MN, Anns., Series C, No. 79.
81
Letter No.411 from the Commander of Dori cercle to the Governor of Upper Volta dated 14August1929;
MN, Anns., Series C, No. 25. - 41 -

areas where they interlock or overlap: they are not drawn with the precision of urban
concessions.”

Right up to the eve of independence, quite si zeable groups sometimes settled without authorization
on the other side of the boundary and caused problems for the local villages. Thus, on
82
14 May 1959 the Head of Say Subdivision (Niger) complained about a Peulh group, estimated at
over 200individuals, from Seba, Yagha canton , Dori cercle (Upper Volta) which had settled on

Alfassi croplands without being registered in that village and without a permit.

On the other hand, very quickly, the nomadic or semi-nomadic populations became aware of

the advantages that they could derive from the s ituation in order to escape taxes or other services
required by the colonial power, or enlistment in the armed forces. The Commander of Dori cercle
83
constantly complained about this. Thus on 31July1929 , following registration by Téra
subdivision (Niger) of semi-nomads who had gone to Ossolo Pool (part of Téra) in order to water
their flocks and herds, and again on 23 April 1929 , he wrote:

“Dori taxpayers who have settled in Téra, and who, this year only, have refused to pay
taxes to their traditional chiefs are delighted: no taxes, no services;
no recruitment”.

We see similar references in the letter of 11 June 1930 85 and in the Report of 7July 1930 86

of the Commander of Dori cercle to the difficulties created by the 1927 delimitation regarding the
boundaries between Dori and Tillabéry cercles.

This situation thus posed problems for the colonial officials, who could not force the
nomadic tribes to settle in one place, and were en countering difficulties in registering them and
87
assigning them a territory of origin, or accusing the other cercle of “taking” its nationals .

2.6. The Lieutenant-Governors of Upper88o lta and Niger endeavoured to alleviate the
problems. Thus on 14 August 1929 the Lieutenant-Governor of Upper Volta proposed the
following specific measures to the Governor of Niger:

“1. Official declaration of residence, including registration for tax purposes, Dori and
Téra to afford one another mutual and vigorous assistance in collecting taxes on

behalf of the Colony of registration.

82
Letter No.104 from the Head of Sa y Subdivision to the Overseas-France Chief Administrator, Commander of
Niamey cercle, dated 14May1959; and, similarly, the Annual Report of Say cercle for the year1959, dated
20 January 1961, p. 7; MN, Anns., Series C, No. 86.
83
Letter No. 367 from the Commander of Dori cercle to the Governor of Upper Volta dated 31 July 1929; MN,
Anns., Series C, No. 23.
84
Letter No. 96 from the Commander of Dori cercle to the Governor of Upper Volta dated 23April1929; MN,
Anns., Series C, No. 21.
85
Letter No. 362 from the Commander of Dori cercle to the Governor of Upper Volta dated 11 June 1930; MN,
Anns., Series C, No. 37.
86
Report No.416 of the Commander of Dori cercle on the difficulties created by the delimitation established in
1927 between the Colonies of Niger and Upper Volta ( Arrêté of 31 August 1927) regarding the boundaries between Dori
and Tillabéry cercles, dated 7 July 1930; MN, Anns., Series C, No. 38.
87
See, for example, telegram/letter No. 196 from the Commander of Dori cercle to the Commander of Tillabéry
cercle dated 22 March 1930; MN, Anns., Series C, No. 34.
88
Letter No.275 AP from the Chief Colonial Administrato r, Acting Lieutenant-Governor of Upper Volta, to the
Governor of Niger dated 14 August 1929; MN, Anns., Series C, No. 26. - 42 -

2. A right for all users in possession of a laissez-passer from Dori or Téra to follow
their traditional routes, free of all taxes, charges or fees, including free access to

customary communal watering places.

3. In the event of significant departures of herders to the more favoured region of

Téra, facilities for livestock purchases (. . .).”

89
The Governor of Niger replied on 27 September 1929 , in which he stressed the importance
of freedom of movement, the right to allow livestock to graze on croplands and the need to require
the use of family cards. In early October1929 90 he gave the following instructions to Téra

Subdivision:

“⎯ No registration to be carried out in the di sputed area, that is to say the boundaries
of Tagha and Diagourou;

⎯ all pending disputes to be settled personally in situ between Dori and Tillabéry
administrators.”

2.7. Thus administrators had to meet frequently in order to settle disputes over the ownership
91
of croplands ⎯ a practice accepted or recommended by the respective Governors . In this regard,
mention may be made of:

92
⎯ the Agreement of May1929 on the registration of nomads, mentioned in correspondence
between the Commander of Tilabéry cercle and the Dori Commander;

⎯ the instructions given in July 1931 93by the Governor of Niger to the Commander of Tilabéry

cercle regarding Sénébellabé;

⎯ the meeting on 30 June 1934 between the Commanders of Tillabéry and Dori cercles regarding
94
various disputes ;

95
⎯ the Record of Agreement of 17 May 1953 in a dispute between the villagers of Alfassi and
Kokoloko.

In the first years of implementation of the 1927 texts, the Commander of Dori cercle asked
his counterpart in Tillabéry cercle “to mitigate the rigour of the official texts”, to interpret the texts
flexibly, or establish a tolerance zone, in order to deal with the problems that they were both

89Letter No. 2259 AGI from the Lieutenant-Governor of Nige r to the Lieutenant-Governor of Upper Volta; MN,
Anns., Series C, No. 30. The Governor of Upper Volta reminded the Commander of Dori cercle of this exchange of
letters in his letter No. 2954 AP of 10 November 1931; MN, Anns., Series C, No. 42.

90See telegram/letter No.815 from the Commander of Tillabéry cercle to the Commander of Dori cercle dated
10 October 1929; MN, Anns., Series C, No. 31.

91See letter E/251 AP from the Chief Colonial Administrato r to the Governor of Niger dated 31 July 1929; MN,
Anns., Series C, No.22, and reply from the Governor of Niger No.2087 AGI dated 26 August1929; MN, Anns.,
Series C, No. 28.

92Letter No. 100 from the Commander of Tillabéry cercle to his Dori counterpart dated 19 September 1929; MN,
Anns., Series C, No. 29.

93Letter No. 748 to the Commander of Tillabéry cercle dated 31 July 1931; MN, Anns., Series C, No. 40.

94Tour Report from the Commander of Tillabéry cercle dated 30 June 1934; MN, Anns., Series C, No. 54.
95
Record of settlement of a boundary dispute,signed by the Commanders of Niamey and Dori cercles, dated
17 May 1953; MN, Anns., Series C, No. 76. - 43 -

encountering. This request was repeated inter alia in his letters of 31July1929 96, 9
97 98 99
August 1929 , 14 August 1929 and 19 August 1929 .

2.8. The officials also had to meet frequently in order to attempt to determine the boundaries
between the two Colonies on the ground. A large nu mber of agreements were concluded in order

to define those boundaries:

⎯ the Record of Agreement of 12March1931, signed at Ossolo between the Commanders of

Dori and Tillabéry cercles, appended to the Tour Report of the Commander of Dori cercle of
31 March 1931 100. It was, however, understood that this record defining territorial boundaries
101
would have to be submitted to the higher authorities ;

102
⎯ the Roser-Boyer Agreement of 10 April 1932 , which would also require the approval of the
Governors;

103
⎯ the agreement reached following a tour conducted from 22 to 24 October 1933 by the Head
of Téra Subdivision and the Commander of Dori cercle on the location of the Tao marker, and

of the status of the villages of Sénébellabé and Tingou.

104
⎯ the Record of Agreement of 13 Apri1 l 935 between Administrators Garnier and
Lichtenberger recording the placing of a marker at Ouiboriels;

105
⎯ the Record of Agreement of 25 April 1935 with a view to “settl[ing] the disputes between
natives of the two cantons of Diagourou (Téra) and Yagha (Dori)” concerning rights in respect

of croplands claimed by the parties in question, which in reality concealed a boundary dispute;

106
⎯ the Record of Agreement of 8 December 1943 , which describes the delimitation operations
between Dori and Tillabéry carried out by Administrators Delmond (Dori cercle), Texier
(Tillabéry cercle) and Garat (Téra Subdivision ). This record was approved by the Governor of

Niger on 7 June 1944;

96
Letter No.367 from the Commander of Dori cercle to the Governor of Upper Volta dated 31July1929; MN,
Anns., Series C, No. 23.
97
Letter No. 399 from the Commander of Dori cercle to the Commander of Tillabéry cercle dated 9 August 1929;
MN, Anns., Series C, No. 24.
98
Letter No.411 from the Commander of Dori cercle to the Governor of Upper Volta dated 14August1929;
MN, Anns., Series C, No. 25.
99
Letter No.418 from the Commander of Dori cercle to the Commander of Tillabéry cercle dated
19 August 1929; MN, Anns., Series C, No. 27.
100
Tour Report No.108 from the Administrator of Dori cercle to the Governor of Upper Volta dated
31 March 1931; MN, Anns., Series C, No. 41.
101
On this question, see generally para. 5.10 below.
102
Tour Report from Roser, Civil Servi ces Deputy, Acting Commander of Dori cercle to the Governor of Upper
Volta dated 10 April 1952; MN, Anns., Series C, No. 45.
103
Tour Report from the Head of Téra Subdivision to the Commander of Tillabéry cercle dated
8 November 1933; MN, Anns., Series C, No. 52.
104
Record of Agreement of 13 April 1935 between Garnier, Commander of Dori cercle and Lichtenberger, Head
of Téra Subdivision; MN, Anns., Series C, No. 56.
105
Record of Agreement of 25 April 1935 between Messrs. Garnier and Lichtenberger; MN, Anns., SeriesC,
No. 57.
106
Record of Delimitation Operations between Dori and Tillabéry cercles by the officials concerned, dated
8 December 1943; MN, Anns., Series C, No. 69. - 44 -

107
⎯ the agreement given in 1953 by the Governor of Niger to a project for marking the boundary
between Téra Subdivision and Dori cercle. However, as was noted in the report of the tour

conducted from 16 to 23 November 1953 by Administ rator Lacroix, the purpose of which was
to “survey the boundary between the cercles of Dori (Upper Volta) and Tillabéry (Niger)”, this
marking operation “was not carried out”, for the reasons set out i
n the report 10.

Thus, at the dawn of independence, the two Colonies were encumbered with a dispute dating
back to 1927. Independence, as we shall see, would not improve matters.

Section 2 ⎯ The difficulties encountered during the period

subsequent to independence

2.9. With independence, certain of the difficulties described in the previous section would

continue. This was thus the case regarding:

109
⎯ complaints concerning the lack of precision in the boundaries. In a note of 3 February 1961 ,
the Internal Affairs Department of the Republic of Niger recalled that

“Téra has for long indicated that, not withstanding an Arrêté of 31 August 1927,
which determines the frontier on paper, it is in fact unclear on the ground because the
linking points in the frontier, the astronomic markers of Tong-Tong and Tao, have

disappeared”;

⎯ a prejudice in favour of the Delbos-Prudon Agreement of 1927. The note from the Internal
110
Affairs Department of the Republic of Niger cited above continues as follows:

“Moreover, a survey carried out by Ad ministrator Delbos in 1927, which gives

a precise description of the frontier, was not accurately reproduced by the Arrêté of
31 August 1927”;

⎯ problems of registration caused by certain differences in the regulations ⎯ particularly in
regard to the taxation of livestock ⎯ which continued to encourage nomads to change their
111
territory of origin .

2.10. But certain problems also changed in charact er as a result of the fact that the disputed
boundary lines were no longer boundaries between two Colonies ruled by the same sovereign
power, but frontiers between two separate independ ent States. This resulted in a series of new

problems.

⎯ thus from now on a dispute over whether a piece of land belonged to what formerly had been a
Colony became a territorial dispute, and a dis pute over land occupation could also constitute a

107Letter 1511/APA from the Governor of Niger to the Commander of Tillabéry cercle dated 17 April 1953; MN,
Anns., Series C, No. 75; see also letter No. 87 from the Head of Téra Subdivision to the Commander of Tillabéry cercle
dated 3 June 1953; MN, Anns., Series C, No. 77.

108Report of a tour conducted from 16 to 23 November 1953 by Deputy Administrator Lacroix (Tillabéry cercle)
dated 24 December 1953; MN, Anns., Series C, No. 79.

109Note on the frontier issues between the Republic of Niger and Upper Volta (Téra cercle and Say Subdivision
⎯ Dori cercle and Oudalen Subdivision ) dated 3Fe bruary1961; MN, Anns., Series C, No.88; this is restated in
identical terms in a note from the same department dated 22 June 1961; MN, Anns., Series C, No. 90.

110Ibid.

111See, for example, letter No.62/A1 from the Minister of th e Interior to the President of the Republic of Niger
dated 16 January 1961; MN, Anns., Series C, No. 87. - 45 -

territorial dispute. An example was a dispute over land clearance activities in Komanti, which
resulted in a formal record of a meeting between the Head of Téra Subdivision (Niger) and the
Head of Sebba Outstation (Upper Volta) dated 21 March 1963 112:

“It was merely a pretext for raising the real problem, which calls into question
the very ownership of Komanti Territory.”

⎯ residence within a particular State can ⎯ under certain conditions ⎯ result in attribution of
nationality under the operation of the jus soli . In this regard we would cite the letter of
113
16 January 1961 from the Minister of the Interior to the President of the Republic of Niger

“These questions of population movements between Téra and Dori have now
taken on a particular aspect: the nationality of those involved is in issue; even in the

absence of a code, nationality exists under the general law, and it is a privilege
enjoyed by all citizens having been born in this country, having lived there as their

forbears did, and possessing links of tribal attachment and tradition.

That nationality is not repudiated because an individual settles on the other side
of the frontier and a chief enters him in his register. And even that simplified

administrative approach, which was acceptable previously, should no longer be
permitted.

The two issues, nationality and registration, must not be confused; foreign
nationals, having settled or immigrated, may be registered, but on individual lists and
only if they are in fact resident, a notion which in the case of nomads is often

interpreted in a tendentious manner; that is why, in our relations with our neighbours,
it remains necessary that the prior agreement of the administrative division of origin
be obtained, and that the emigrant should continue to retain his nationality of origin.”;

⎯ similarly in a letter of February1961 114, the Commander of Téra cercle wrote to the
Commander of Dori cercle:

“Nomads are registered ‘jure sanguinis’ and not ‘jure soli’: they cannot be
registered in a sedentary canton and remain in principle attached to their groupement,

wherever they may temporarily settle.”

⎯ in a similar vein, the Note of 22June 1961 115 from the Internal Affairs Department of the

Republic of Niger on the frontier problems between the Republics of Niger and
Upper Volta stated:

“The definition of nationality given in Niger’s code does not resolve the
situation[ . . .]. The presumption of nationality results from residence in Niger, hence
for nomads, from their parentage; this precludes the possibility of changes of

registration from one State to the other, without the question of nationality being
raised. An individual leaving Niger to be registered in Dori retains his nationality. It

112
Record of the meeting between the Head of Téra Subdivision and the Head of Sebba Outstation dated
21 March 1963; MN, Anns., Series C, No. 93.
11Letter No.62/A1 from the Minister of the Interior to the President of the Republic of Niger dated

16 January 1961; MN, Anns., Series C, No. 87.
11Confidential letter No.22/cf from the Commander of Téra cercle to the Commander of Dori cercle dated
11 February 1961; MN, Anns., Series C, No. 89.

11Note on the frontier issues between the Republics of Niger and Upper Volta (Téra cercle and Say
Subdivision ⎯ Dori cercle), dated 22 June 196; MN, Anns., Series C, No. 90. - 46 -

is now from this perspective that we have to address the issue and establish an
agreement.”

⎯ in a letter of 1 June 1962 116 to the President of the Republic of Niger, the President of the

Republic of Upper Volta suggested a solution to smooth out the difficulties resulting from
nationality disputes:

“As you observe in your letter, registration does not involve a presumption of
individual nationality, which is governed by the provisions of the States’ nationality

codes. It follows that, if the inhabitants in question habitually live on the territory of
Niger or of Upper Volta, they are presumed to be nationals of Niger or of

Upper Volta, the burden being on them or on the Governments concerned to prove the
contrary.”

If an official of one State crosses the frontier w ithout special authorization from the other State,
that is a breach of international law. Thus, numerous disputes arose where border guards crossed
117
the frontier (26September1961 118) or performed acts outs119 the territory of the State to120ich
they belonged (23January1964 and 20March1964 ). In his letter of 1June1962 to the
President of the Republic of Niger, the President of the Republic of Upper Volta noted that

“[t]he lack of precision in the frontiers be tween our two States results in overlapping

areas of authority”.

The result was that no arrest could take place on the territory of the other country without

authorization, and that the person arrested could not be transferred without extradition proceedings
(29 March 1964 121). Similarly, a summons to appear before a judge of one of the States addressed
to a person present on the territory of the other now had to pass through official national channels
122
(13 March 1964 ).

2.11. In order to smooth out these various local disputes, the practice of meetings between
the heads of the administrative divisions concerned of the two States was maintained during the
123
initial years of independence. This was thus the case, for example, on 7January1964 ,
5 March 1964 124 and 10 April 1964 12. But from 22 April 1964 126, the authorities of the two States

116
Letter No.82Pres/IS from the President of the Republic of Upper Volta to the President of the Republic of
Niger dated 1 June 1962; MN, Anns., Series B, No. 92
117
Letter No.297Ai from the Commander of Dori cercle to the Commander of Téra cercle dated
26 September 1961; MN, Anns., Series C, No. 91.
118
Letter No.00013/CONF from the Commander of Dori cercle to the Commander of Téra cercle dated
23 January 1964; MN, Anns., Series C, No. 95.
119
Letter No.31/CF from the Head of Téra administrative division to the Niger Minister of the Interior dated
20 March 1964; MN, Anns., Series C, No. 98.
120
Letter No.82 Pres/IS from the President of the Republic of Upper Volta to the President of the Republic of
Niger dated 1 June 1962; MN, Anns., Series B, No. 92.
121
Letter No.31/CF from the Head of Téra administrative division to the Niger Minister of the Interior dated
20 March 1964; MN, Anns., Series C, No. 98.
122
Letter No.49/CT from the Head of Téra administrative division to the Niger Minister of the Interior dated
13 March 1964; MN, Anns., Series C, No. 97.
123
Letter No.25/MI/AI/CF from the Minister of the Interior to the Commander of Téra cercle dated
7 January 1964; MN, Anns., Series C, No. 94.
124
Letter No.4/CD from the Commander of Diapaga cercle to the Head of Say Subdivision as representative of
the Commander of Niamey cercle dated 5 March 1964; MN, Anns., Series C, No. 96. - 47 -

became aware that it would now be better to have recourse to diplomatic channels. This marked
the start of a new era: that of diplomatic re lations between sovereign States and of the peaceful

settlement of disputes, and will be dealt with in the following chapter.

125
Record of the meeting between Upper Volta and Niger with a view to harmonizing relations between frontier
populations dated 10 April 1964; MN, Anns., Series B, No. 99.
126
Letter No.445/AI from the Niger Minister of the Interior to the Niger Minister for Foreign Affairs dated
22 April 1964; MN, Anns., Series C, No. 100. CHAPTER III

T HE ATTEMPTS BY N IGER AND B URKINA F ASO TO SETTLE THE
FRONTIER DISPUTE PEACEFULLY

3.1. Ever since their accession to independence the Republic of Niger and Burkina Faso have

endeavoured to settle their frontier dispute peacefully . Several meetings were held during the first
half of the 1960s between the local authorities of the two States. Those authorities sought to find a
solution to the various practical difficulties descr ibed in the preceding chapter by clarifying the

course of the common frontier. In 1964 an agreemen t was concluded between the two States in an
attempt to settle these practical issues2, and in particular the delimitation issue. To that end, the
agreement established a joint commission charged with undertaking the work of demarcation of the

frontier. The text provided that the parties had:

“decided to take as the basic documents for the determination of the frontier

Arrêté général2336 of 31August1927, as clarified by Erratum2602APA of
5October1927, and the 1:200,000-scale map of the Paris Institut Géographique
National” 12.

However, the Joint Commission whose establishment was provided for in that agreement was never
able to carry out its mission, and it was only some 20years later that initiatives to this end were

recommenced.

3.2. These more recent attempts at a settleme nt have been conducte d on the one hand at
technical level, within the framework of the Joint Technical Commission set up in 1987
(Section1), and on the other at diplomatic level, between the political representatives of the two
129
States (Section2). The work of the Join t Commission led to the signature, in 2009 , of an
agreement between the two States on the course of certain sectors of their common frontier, but not
on all of it. The relative lack of success in bringing these efforts at delimitation and demarcation to

fruition led the two Parties to sign the Special Agr eement whereby they entrusted the International
Court of Justice with settlement of the frontier issues which remained in dispute between them
(Section 3).

Section 1 ⎯ The work of the Joint Technical Commission

on Demarcation of the Frontier

3.3. The negotiation process between the two States over the course of the common frontier

was relaunched in the mid-1980s. Thus, at the meeting in February1985 between the Niger
Minister-Delegate of the Interior and the Minister for Territorial Administration and Security of
Burkina Faso,

“[i]t was recommended that the frontier between the territories of the two States be
demarcated on the basis of the Protocol of Agreement of 23 June 1964” 130.

127
See above, paras. 2.9 and 2.10.
128
Protocol of Agreement signed at Niamey on 23June196OJRN, 1April1966, pp.150-151; MN, Anns.,
Series A, No. 1.
12See below, paras. 3.15 ff.

13Report of the meeting between the Niger Minister-Delegate for the Interior and the Minister for Territorial
Administration and Security of Burkina Faso, Ouagadougou, 12 to 14 February 1985, p 5; MN, Anns., Series A, No. 2.

eBFN_Memorial_Niger_complete_AlmostFinal/laa xxx includes footnotes - 49 -

In accordance with that recommendation, a meeti ng between technical experts of the Republics of
131
Niger and Burkina Faso was held in May 1986 in Ouagadougou . The only point on the agenda
of that meeting was the evaluation of the costs of the demarcation work s for the Niger/Burkina
frontier. In order to provide those works with a current framework, an Agreement and Protocol of

Agreement were signed on 28March1987 in Ouagadougou between the Governments of the
Republic of Niger and Burkina Faso on the demarcation of the frontier between the two countries.
Article 3 of the Agreement created a Joint Tec hnical Commission on Demarcation of the Frontier,

composed of equal numbers from each side, w hose powers were defined by the Protocol of
Agreement. That Commission enjo yed full autonomy in the execution of the demarcation works.
However, any difficulties liable to hinder the conduct of the works, as well as important decisions

with potential financial consequences or involvi ng additional costs, had to be submitted to the
Governments of the two countries (Art. 5).

3.4. In March 1988 the technical experts of the Commission met at Téra, in Niger, in order to
set up technical field teams, to discuss wo rking methods and to launch the effective
commencement of the works. Then, between 1988 and 1990, the Joint Technical Commission

conducted a campaign which notably resulted in the placing of 23 markers out of the 45 envisaged,
in particular:

⎯ six markers between Kabia Ford and Tong Tong;

⎯ one marker at Tao;

⎯ 16 markers around the Botou Loop 132.

However, differences persis ted between the Parties regarding the location of the other
markers and the course of the frontier in the area s concerned. Therefore, in accordance with
Article 5 of the Protocol of Agreement of 1987, the Commission decided to submit the difficulties

encountered to the two Governments.

3.5. It was in pursuance of that decision of the Joint Technical Commission on Demarcation

that a Ministerial consultative and working me eting was convened betw een Niger and Burkina
Faso and held in May1991 in Ouagadougou 133. The Minister of the Interior of Niger and the
Minister for Territorial Administration of Burkina Faso, having found that there were lacunae in

relation to the implementation of the Arrêté of 1927 and its Erratum, took the following decision
on behalf of their respective Governments:

“1. From the Tong-Tong astronomic marker to the River Sirba at Bossebangou,
passing through the Tao astronomic marker, the frontier shall consist of a series of
straight lines.

2. From the River Sirba at Bossebangou to the River Mekrou, the course of the
frontier adopted shall be that shown on the map to a scale of 1:200,000 of

IGN/France, 1960 edition.

131
Report of the meeting between technical experts of the Republics of Niger and Burkina Faso, Ouagadougou, 21
to 23 May 1986; MN, Anns., Series A, No. 3.
13Report of the second ordinary session of the Joit Technical Commission on the Demarcation of the
Niger-Burkina Faso Frontier, held in Ou agadougou from 23 to 28July1990, Ann.2, Summary of the Work of the

1989-1990 Season; MN, Anns., Series A, No. 5.
13Joint communiqué on the Ministerial c onsultative and working meeting between Niger and Burkina Faso held
on 14 and 15 May 1991 in Ouagadougou; MN, Anns., Series A, No. 6. - 50 -

To that end, two extracts from the 1:200,000 map of IGN/France, 1960 edition, on
which that course is shown have been initialled by both Ministers.

The Joint Technical Commission on Demarcation has accordingly been authorized
to continue its work forthwith on that basis.”

3.6. However, on the Niger side, serious doubts were raised as to the advisability of adopting
the compromise solution that the Ministry of the Interior had approved. It was considered that the
solution proposed did not comply with the conditions laid down by Articles1 and 2 of the

Agreement of 28 March 1987. It was accordingly d ecided not to submit the text to the ratification
procedure required by Article 7 of the Agreement in order to secure its final approval.

3.7. This led to a deadlock, which lasted until 2001. It was only in that year that the Joint
Technical Commission met again for its fourth session, in Ouagadougou in July2001, when the
question of the course of the frontier once again became a matter of prime concern in the work of

the Commission. A joint committee of 12memb ers was established in order to study the
theoretical course of the frontier in light of the basic documents, namely: the Agreement and
Protocol of Agreement of 28March1987 on the one hand, and the Erratum of 5October1927
correcting the Arrêté of 31 August 1927 on the other.

3.8. After discussing the work of the joint committee, the Joint Technical Commission came
to the following conclusions:

⎯ it was decided to send a survey team into the field in order to identify the ruins of the village of
Tokébangou;

⎯ the survey team had found that the frontier from Tchenguilibà to the River Mekrou was clearly
defined, subject to verification of the position of the village of Kogori;

⎯ there were differing interpretations of the passage “this line then turns towards the south-east,
cutting the Téra-Dori motor road at the Tao astronomic marker located to the west of the
Ossolo Pool, and reaching the River Sirba at Bossebangou” , as contained in the 1927 text.
The Commission decided to continue its documenta ry research in order to clarify the course of

the frontier in the area concerned;

⎯ it was found that, from Bossébangou to Tchenguiliba, there were difficulties of interpretation

connected with the failure to identify the villag es cited in the Erratum and in identifying the
point where the frontier line again cuts the Sirba at the level of the Say parallel. The technical
survey team was requested to visit the area in order to identify the villages of Alfassi, Kouro,
Tokalan and Tankouro, or their sites in 1927 134.

3.9. At the close of its fifth session, held in Niamey in September2004, the Joint
Commission produced the following results: neither of the two Parties had presented new

documents; regarding the survey mission reco mmended at the fourth session, which it had not
been possible to carry out, the Commission decided to engage a team of specialists (archaeologists,
historians, topographers), who w ould be responsible, according to their mission statement, as
appended in Annex 1 to the report of the session:

134
See the report of the fourth ordinary session oe Joint Technical Commission on Demarcation of the
Burkina-Niger Frontier, held in Ouagadougou from 18 to 21 July 2001; MN, Anns., Series A, No. 8. - 51 -

“for informing the Joint Commission regardi ng the identification and location of the
sites of the villages and ruins in 1927, as referred to in the Arrêté général of
31 August 1927, as clarified by its Erratum of 5 October 1927” 135.

3.10. Regarding the study of the basic texts as agreed between the Parties,

“the Commission noted the lack of any development in the differences over the
interpretation of those texts, as well as the lack of new documents which might help to
136
resolve those differences” .

It accordingly recommended that the two States provide the necessary means

“for the conduct of joint missions to seek out new documents capable of throwing
137
further light on the course of the frontier line where those differences persist” .

3.11. In short, it appears that the work of the Joint Technical Commission and, in general, the
technical attempts at settlement subsequent to the independence of the two countries, namely the
proposals put forward by the experts, were mere ly provisional positions, in view or hope of

reaching a negotiated settlement of the dispute which the parties have committed themselves to
seeking.

Section 2 ⎯ The attempts to settle the frontier dispute
peacefully at diplomatic level

3.12. It being no longer possible to continue th e work of demarcation in the disputed frontier
areas, various incidents continued to affect relations between the two Parties. In February 2006 the

proliferation of these incidents led the PrimeMinister of Niger to propose to his counterpart in
Burkina Faso that they recommence the work of demarcation of the frontier and revive the work of
138
the Joint Technical Commission .

3.13. The response from the Prime Minister of Burkina Faso was positive, expressing his

agreement in principle to a reopening of the dial ogue over the delimitation of the frontier. He
added:

“However, and without prejudice to the results of these new discussions, it
seems to me important that we initiate action aimed at a definitive solution. It is for

that reason that we have already sought your views on the option of jointly putting the
matter before the International Court of Jus tice, so that it may rule on the persisting
differences of interpretation in regard to the colonial texts.” 139

135
Ibid. The sites in question were: (a)the ruins of Tokebangou village; (b)the villages of Kouro, Alfassi,
Tokalan, and Tankouro; (c) Kogori village.
136
Ibid., p. 3.
137Ibid., p. 4.

138Letter No.000082 from the Prime Minister of Niger to the Prime Minister of Burkina Faso dated
2 February 2006; MN, Anns., Series A, No. 10.

139Letter No.2006.039/PM/CAB from the Pr ime Minister of Burkina Faso to the Prime Minister of Niger dated
9 February 2006; MN, Anns., Series A, No. 11. - 52 -

Subsequently, the Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Niger indicated his State140
positive response in principle to this proposal to place the matter jointly before the Court .

3.14. From the preceding account of the attempts to delimit and demarcate the frontier
between Niger and Burkina Faso, the following conclusion can be drawn: the two countries have

made constant efforts to determine the precise course of their common frontier and to demarcate it.
They have done so with a remarkable concern to maintain their friendly and neighbourly relations,
and to preserve the peace between them and al so, on the ground, between the peoples of the

frontier areas concerned. However, while signifi cant progress has been made, enabling part of the
frontier to be marked, a dispute persists between th e two countries in regard to the interpretation of
the instruments for delimitation of the common frontier dating from the colonial period.

Section 3 ⎯ The Special Agreement seising the Court of

24 February 2009

3.15. The agreement of principle expressed by the representatives of the two States regarding

seisin of the Court resulted in a meeting of their plenipotentiaries in February 2009 in Niamey, at
which they negotiated and signed the Special Agre ement seising the Court, of which we will now
give a brief summary.

A. Negotiation of the Agreement

3.16. The delegations of Niger and Burkina Faso met in Niamey from 22 to
24February2009, led respectively by the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Co-operation of the

Republic of Niger and the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Regional Co-operation of Burkina Faso,
with a view to “negotiating and signing the Special Agreement to seise the International Court of
Justice of the frontier dispute between the two countries” 141, on the “instructions” of the Presidents

of Niger and Burkina Faso. In parallel with th e work on the draft Special Agreement, the two
parties also sought place on record their agreem ent on the sectors of their common frontier over
which there was no dispute.

3.17. To this end, from 23 June to 3 July 2009 the experts of the two countries conducted a

joint survey mission to record the co-ordinates of the mark ers constructed on the Burkina
Faso-Niger Frontier. They “laid down their agreement” in a record signed at Diapaga (Burkina
Faso) on 3 July 2009 142. A second joint mission to ascertain the co-ordinates of the unmarked

points in SectorB was carried out in October2009. Here again, the experts “laid down their
agreement” in a report signed at Kantchari (Burkina Faso) on 15 October 2009 143. Following those
missions, a total of 22markers had been identifie d and their co-ordinates noted. Furthermore the

co-ordinates of two unmarked points in Sector B were ascertained from the 1:200,000 IGN/France

14Letter No.06-006/MAECR/SG/DAJC/SA J from the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Burkina Faso to the
Minister for Foreign Affairs of Niger dated 27 January 2006; MN, Anns., Series A, No. 9.

14Joint communiqué of the meeting of the Ministers forForeign Affairs for negotiation and signature of the
Special Agreement seising the ICJ of the frontier dispute between Niger and Burkina Faso, dated 24 February 2009; MN,
Anns., Series A, No. 12.

14Record of the work of the joint survey mission to de termine the co-ordinates of the boundary markers erected
along the frontier between Burkina Faso and the Republic of Niger, conducted from 23June to 3July2009, dated
3 July 2009; MN, Anns., Series A, No. 14.

14Report of the meeting to determine the co-ordinat es of the unmarked points in Sector B, dated
15 October 2009; MN, Anns., Series A, No. 15. - 53 -

144
maps of 1960 (Kirtachi sheet). In a letter of 29October2009 , the Burkina Faso Minister-
Delegate responsible for regi onal co-operation and Acting Minister for Foreign Affairs and
Regional Co-operation, proposed to his Niger coun terpart that those two reports be formally

embodied in an agreement between the two Governme nts. The Niger Minist145for Foreign Affairs
and Co-operation replied in a letter dated 2 November 2009 , in which she confirmed “the
agreement of the Government of Niger to this proposal” , so that the above-mentioned letter from

the Burkina Faso Minister and her own letter “constitute[d] an agreement placing on record the
understanding between Burkina Faso and the Repub lic of Niger on the delimited sectors of the
frontier between the two countries” . That accord was submitted to the Court together with the

Special Agreement, under the title “[E]x146nge of notes embodying the agreement of the Parties on
the delimited sectors of the frontier” .

3.18. A Protocol of Exchange of the Instru ments of Ratification of the Special Agreement
was signed on 20November2009 in the capital of Burkina Faso by the Minister for Foreign
Affairs and Co-operation of the Republic of Ni ger and the Minister for Foreign Affairs and
147
Regional Co-operation of Burkina Faso, on behalf of their respective Governments . The Special
Agreement itself was signed on 24 February 2009 and notified to the Court on 20 July 2010.

B. Content

3.19. The Special Agreement seising the Court contains ten articles, preceded by a preamble
which cites the legal instruments governing delimita tion of the frontier between Niger and Burkina
Faso and specifies the sectors of the frontier on the delimitation of which the parties have agreed.

3.20. Articles 1 and 3 to 9 deal with the classi c issues contained in every agreement of this

type, namely, respectively: each party’s right to seise the Court (Art.2); the rules governing the
written proceedings (Art.3) and the oral proceedings (Art.4), as well as the language of the
proceedings (Art.5); the applicable law (Art.6); the binding force, implementation, and any

difficulties of implementation, in respect of the Co urt’s future judgment (Art. 7); entry into force
(Art. 8); registration and notification (Art. 9).

3.21. Article10 contains a special undertaking by the parties, which is not a classic clause,
although similar provisions are to be found in certain special seisin agreements. Under that
provision, which reflects remarkably well the frie ndly atmosphere and spirit of brotherhood which

prevail in relations between the two countries, as well as their desire to preserve the climate of calm
which characterizes those relations,

“the parties undertake to maintain peace, security and tranquillity among the
populations of the two States in the frontier region, by refraining from any act of
incursion into the disputed areas and organizing regular meetings of administrative

officials and the security services”.

144
Letter No.2009/OO4874/MAECR/SG/DGAJC from the Minist er for Foreign Affairs of Burkina Faso to the
Minister for Foreign Affairs of Niger, dated 29 October 2009; MN, Anns., Series A, No. 16.
145
Letter No. 007505/MAE/C/DAGC/DIR from the Minister fo r Foreign Affairs of Niger to the Minister for
Foreign Affairs of Burkina Faso of 2 November 2009; MN, Anns., Series A, No. 17.
14Exchange of notes embodying the agreement of the parties on the delimited sectors of the frontier; MN, Anns.,

Series A, No. 21.
14MN, Anns., Series A, No. 19. - 54 -

3.22. The core of the Special Agreement re mains, however, Article2, which describes the
subject of the dispute. It is on that Article th at the Court is called upon to focus its attention in

relation to the merits, in order, first, to determin e the course of the frontier in the sectors where the
Parties have been unable to reach final agreement on a line, and secondly, to place on record the
Parties’ agreement on the results of the work of the Joint Technical Commission on Demarcation of
the Burkina Faso-Niger Frontier and, in so doing, to confer on that bilateral agreement between the

two States the force of res judicata.

3.23. The frontier in the disputed area havi ng been delimited and demarcated by agreement

between the Parties in the other sectors, the only stretch of the frontier concerned by the present
dispute runs from the astronomic marker of T ong-Tong to the beginning of the Botou bend, of
which the geographical co-ordinates are respectively: 14°25'04"N; 00°12'47"E; and
12° 36' 18" N; 01° 52' 07" E. It is accordingly that stretch of the frontier between the Republic of

Niger and Burkina Faso that the Parties respectfully request the Court to delimit, on the basis of the
texts indicated in the Special Agreement signed by both Parties. C HAPTER IV

C ARTOGRAPHIC MATERIAL RELATING TO THE

DISPUTED AREA

4.1. Although the sector of the frontier involved in the present dispute is relatively restricted,

the region where it is located has been the s ubject of a very large number of surveys and
cartographic representations since the beginnings of colonial penetration into the area. There is
thus available an abundance of cartographic material, dating back in certain cases to the very

beginning of the twentieth century, which illustra tes the development of the territories concerned
and their boundaries.

4.2. Maps or sketch-maps of all kinds relating to the area concerned by the present dispute
have been produced over the years 14. These include, inter alia:

⎯ sketch-maps produced by soldiers, explorers or colonial administrators;

⎯ sketch-maps of geographical surveys, prepared by soldiers and geographers attached to

scientific missions;

⎯ sketch-maps from compilations of the available documents concerning the areas in question;

⎯ semi-official maps resulting from direct surveys or from the first aerial photographs;

⎯ official maps, prepared from aerial photographs from the 1950s.

4.3. However, for purposes of the present Memorial, only sketch-maps and maps of real

interest, whether from the point of view of their scale or of the detail represented, will be relied on.
The representation of the administrative boundaries th at they depict will also determine the choice
of certain documents, even if their technical quality is not as good as it might be. Moreover,

certain maps and sketch-maps are only of interest in terms of their toponymy.

In the following pages we will make a chronological examination of a sample of the maps or

sketch-maps relating to the disputed area.

4.4. Sketch-map of the course of the Niger through Djerma cercle, scale 1:1,000,000,

appended to report No. 20 of 18 June 1909 of Captain Boutiq, Commander of Djerma cercle,
with reference to the possible conversion of th e military régime to a civil régime for the right
bank of the Niger 149.

This sketch-map, which shows the boundaries of Say cercle, has an inset showing the point
where Tillabéry, Say and Dori cercles join.

14Because of the methodological and scientific diffein the preparation of the maps and sketch-maps, it
was considered preferable to classify them in different ways . Thus the maps will appear in SeriesD of the Annexes,

while the sketch-maps have been treated as administrative documents and therefore appear in Series C, except when their
size has required them to be treated as Series D documents for logistical reasons.
14MN, Anns., Series D, No. 1.

eBFN_Memorial_Niger_complete_AlmostFinal/laa xxx includes footnotes - 56 -

4.5. Say cercle, sketch-map drawn by cercle Administrator Truchard, scale 1:500,000;
150
Say, 1 April 1915 .

All of the boundaries of Say cercle are shown on this sketch-map, in particular in the area of

Bossébangou and in that of the four villages cited in the Erratum of 5 October 1927, three of which
are shown (Alfassi, Kouro and Tankourou). This sketch-map was drawn before Botou canton was
detached from that cercle.

4.6. Africa 1:2,000,000: French Sudan, provisional edition, drafted, heliographed and
published by the Army Geographical Section in 1925 151.

Despite its date (1925), this is probably a more recent edition, since it includes data
subsequent to 1927 (Botou canton in Fada, and a roughly draw n boundary between Dori and

Tillabéry). In 1925, Say cercle still included Botou canton , and all of the territories on the right
bank of the River Niger were at that time part of the Colony of Upper Volta.

4.7. Atlas of Cercles: FascicleIV ⎯ Upper Volta, Map No.60 ⎯ Say cercle ,
Geographical Department of French West Africa, scale1:500,000, published by Forest,
152
17 rue de Buci, Paris 1, January 1926 printing .

This map clearly shows the boundaries of Say cercle as they were before Botou canton was
detached. We see the salient encompassing the four villages cited in the Erratum of

5October1927. Three of those villages are s hown (Alfassi, Kouro and Tokalan). The boundary
continues along a broken line until it intersect s with the roughly drawn outline of the River
Mékrou.

4.8. Atlas of Cercles: FascicleIV ⎯ Upper Volta, Map No.53 ⎯ Dori cercle ,

Geographical Department of French West 153rica, scale1:100,000, published by Forest,
17 rue de Buci, Paris 1, January 1926 printing .

The boundaries of Dori cercle shown on this map are those ex isting before the areas on the
right bank of the River Niger were incorporated into the Colony of Niger by the Decree of
28 December 1926. At that time, Niamey cercle (Niger Colony) bordered on Dori and Say cercles

(Colony of Upper Volta).

4.9. Atlas of Cercles: FascicleIV ⎯ Upper Volta, Map No.54 ⎯ Fada cercle,

Geographical Department of French West Af rica, scale1:1,00,000, published by Forest,
17 rue de Buci, Paris 1, January 1926 printing 154.

This map shows the boundaries between Say and Fada cercles.

150
MN, Anns., Series D, No. 4.
15MN, Anns., Series D, No. 5.

15MN, Anns., Series D, No. 6.
153
MN, Anns., Series D, No. 7.
15MN, Anns., Series D, No. 8. - 57 -

4.10. Map of the Colonies of French West Africa to a scale of 1:500,000: Upper Volta,
Niger, Dahomey, Niamey, Survey MapD31SW , drawn and published by the Geographical

Department of French West Afri ca in Dakar under the direction of 155
Commander de Martonne, heliographed by éd. Blondel la Rougery, Paris, June 1926 .

This map clearly shows the boundaries of Say cercle, which at that time still included Botou

canton.

4.11. Sketch-map of the Sahara and Neighbouring Regions on a scale of 1:1,000,000,
Niamey ND 31, prepared by the Geographical Department of French West Africa at Dakar in
1926, drafted, heliographed and printed by the Army Geographical Section in 1927 156.

This map shows the boundaries of the cercles composing the Colonies. The boundary
between Say and Fada cercles is indicated. The Yatacala region had at that time not been

incorporated into Tillabéry cercle. The tripoint between Dori, Tillabéry and Say cercles isata
point located to the north-west of Bossébangou and thus falls outside that locality. Before the
Botou Loop, the boundary between Fada and Say cercles is shown by a broken line.

4.12. Dori cercle, route taken in June 1927 by Administrator Delbos for the purpose of
157
delimiting the boundary between Dori and Tillabéry cercles .

This sketch-map shows the route followed by this official and his proposal for the boundary
between the two Colonies.

4.13. Sketch-map on a scale of 1:200,000 ⎯ course of the boundary as surveyed in
158
June 1927 by Chief Administrator Prudon, Commander of Tillabéry cercle .

This sketch-map indicates the villages and groupements located in Tillabéry cercle and

asking to be incorporated in Niger. It also shows the route followed from the Kabia ford passing
through the Tao astronomic marker and reachi ng the River Sirba in the neighbourhood of
Nababori. It also shows the draft boundary of the Colonies.

4.14. Government-General of French West Africa: Colony of Upper Volta, road map,

prepared by the Geographical Department of Fr ench West Africa, Dakar, according to the
information provided by the Government of Upper Volta as well as the surveys and
route-maps of the officers and NCOs of th e Geographical Section, Mr.Carde being

Governor-General of FWA and MrH . essling Lieutenant-Governor of Upper Volta, 159
scale 1:1,000,000, E. Girard, publisher/geographer, 17-18 rue de Buci, Paris, 1927 edition .

While the main purpose of this map was not th e inter-colonial boundary, it is interesting to
note that that boundary does not pass through Bossébangou. It should be noted in the northern part
that the Yatacala region had not yet been incorporated into the Colony of Niger.

15MN, Anns., Series D, No. 9.

15MN, Anns., Series D, No. 10.
157
MN, Anns., Series D, No. 2.
158
MN, Anns., Series D, No. 3.
15MN, Anns., Series D, No. 11. - 58 -

160
4.15. Map of Botou canton, 1:500,000, May 1927 .

Prepared by Lieutenant Billidenty of the French West African Geographical Department, this

map was appended to the Record of Agreement of 9May1927 to show the boundaries of Botou
canton, as incorporated into Fada cercle (Upper Volta) by the Decree of 28 December 1926.

4.16. French West Africa: new frontier betw een Upper Volta and Niger (according to
the Erratum of 5 October 1927 to the Arrêté of 31 August 1927), scale 1:1,000,000 161.

This was an illustration to the Erratum of 5October1927 produced by the FWA
Geographical Department. Neither the frontier line of small crosses nor the tripoint touches

Bossébangou.

4.17. French West Africa: general political and administrative map (semi-mural type),
to a scale of 1:2,500,000, Second Edition 1928, showing the division into cercles of the eight
Colonies, autonomous and mixed communes, chambers of commerce, railway stations, post

and telegraph offices, wireless telegraph stations , military outposts, etc. (information as at 162
1 January 1928); prepared and published by the FWA Geographical Department, Dakar .

The interest of this map lies in the fact th at it shows, in addition to the administrative
boundaries, the numbers of the sheets relating to the cercles of the various Colonies.

4.18. Map of French West Africa to a scale of 1:3,000,000 prepared by A.Meunier,
geographer with the Ministry for the Colonies, 1930, Third Edition 16.

The boundaries of the Colonies shown on this map do not pass through Bossébangou.

4.19. Road map of Niger to a scale of 1:2,500,000, 1936 Edition, prepared, drawn,
heliographed and printed by the FWA Geographical Department, Dakar 16.

This map shows the boundaries of the Colonies and cercles at the time when Upper Volta
was dissolved.

4.20. French West Africa: general political and administrative map (semi-mural type),
on a scale of 1:2,500,000, Fourth Edition 1939, showing the division into cercles of the eight

Colonies, autonomous and mixed communes, chambers of commerce, railway stations, post
and telegraph offices, wireless telegraph stations , military outposts, etc. (information as at
1January1939); prepared and published by the French West Africa Geographical
165
Department, Dakar .

This map shows the sheet num bers relating to the various cercles of the Colonies and the

administrative boundaries at a time when the Colony of Upper Volta no longer existed.

16MN, Anns., Series D, No. 12.

16MN, Anns., Series D, No. 13.

16MN, Anns., Series D, No. 14.
163
MN, Anns., Series D, No. 15.
16MN, Anns., Series D, No. 17.

16MN, Anns., Series D, No. 18. - 59 -

4.21. Africa 1:1,000,000, Niamey (Second Edition) ND31, map prepared by the FWA
Geographical Department, Dakar, in 1926, draw n, heliographed and printed by the Army
Geographical Section in 1927 (Third Edition, 1934), geographical section, General Staff
166
No. 2465, War Office 1940, heliographed at O.S. .

This map is based on an original French ma p of 1926. The sheets and projection are those of

the international map. The boundaries of Dori, Tillabéry, Say and Fada cercles are clearly shown.
The tripoint Téra, Say, Dori appears quite clear ly. The boundary between the two Colonies, from
the end of the salient encompassing the four villag es to the start of the Botou Loop is represented

by a line in two straight sections.

4.22. Sketch-map of French Africa on a scale of 1:1,000,000, Niamey ND 31, prepared,
167
drawn and published by the Institut géographique national in 1946 .

Since Upper Volta did not exist at this tim e, this map’s legend shows only provincial,

departmental or territorial boundaries. The bounda ry between Dori and Tillabéry on the one hand,
and between Fada and Say on the other, is clearly shown. The tripoint is located well to the west of
Bossébangou. The boundary is significantly curved from just after Tong-Tong to a point located in

the neighbourhood of Alfassi. The boundary at th e level of the Say parallel runs towards
Tchenguilita (sic), following a broken line.

168
4.23. Diagourou canton on a scale of 1:250,000, produced in 1954 .

This sketch-map shows us the boundaries of Diagourou canton, as well as the names of the
villages composing it (including Bangaré).

Kamanti Village, which is shown, and indicated as a hamlet belonging to Dori, is located

deep inside, and surrounded by, other villages of Diagourou canton.

This sketch-map is appended to the census report for Diagourou canton prepared at Téra on

10 August 1954 by the Head of Subdivision, Marc Perret, Overseas Administrator.

4.24. Map No 1.: surface fo169tions and hydrology, scale 1:200,000,
BURGEAP 219-R.178, Nov. 1954 .

This map shows the boundary between the two Colonies as far as Tao. From the Tong-Tong
astronomic marker to the Tao marker, the boundary is significantly curved.

4.25. Maps of West Africa on a scale 1:200,000, drawn and published by the Institut
géographique national ⎯ Paris (Dakar Annex), 1955 and subsequent editions.

These are topographical maps produced from ae rial photographs taken in the years 1955 and
1956. Field completion surveys were carried out during the 1958-1959 seasons.

16MN, Anns., Series D, No. 19.
167
MN, Anns., Series D, No. 20.
168
MN, Anns., Series D, No. 21.
16MN, Anns., Series D, No. 22. - 60 -

The maps have two grid systems (geographi cal and kilometric), enabling distances and
co-ordinates to be calculated. This is the only series of medium-scale (1:200,000) maps covering
the whole of the territory of the two States. The disputed area is covered by four sheets of one

square degree each, roughly 110 km by 110 km. The sheets concerned are, from north to south, as
follows:

⎯ map of West Africa at 1:200,000: Republic of Mali, Republic of Niger, Republic of Upper
Volta, Téra, sheetND31XIII, drawn and published by the Institut géographique national,
Paris (West Africa branch, Dakar), First Edition July 1960, reprinted September 1969 170;

⎯ map of West Africa at 1:200,000: Republic of Niger, Republic of Upper Volta, Sebba,
sheet ND31 VII, drawn and published by the Geographical Department, Dakar, 1960 17;

⎯ map of West Africa at 1:200,000: Republic of Niger, Republic of Upper Volta, Gothèye,
sheet ND 31 VIII, drawn and published by the Geographical Department, Dakar, 1960 172;

⎯ map of West Africa at 1:200,000: Republic of Niger, Republic of Upper Volta, Diapaga,
sheet ND 31 II, drawn and published by the Geographical Department, Dakar, 1960 173.

4.26. Basically, preparation of the final map in paper format comprised the following stages:

⎯ photogrammetric reconstitution so as to obtain a stereomodel or planimetric outline;

⎯ completion on the ground;

⎯ cartographic preparation and laboratory work, resulting in a series of master negatives

(planimetry, hydrography, orography, toponymy);

⎯ printing on paper, production of final map.

4.27. The division and designation of the planimetric outlines obtained by photogrammetric

reconstitution will correspond to those of the fina l map. The reconstituted details (villages,
watercourses, mountains, roads, etc.) may be clear or hidden, because of anomalies in the
photographic images. Use of survey and astronomic points enables accuracy in the planimetric

outline to be obtained in both vertical and horizontal planes.

4.28. The following stage, field completion, is carried out on the ground by topographers

using the planimetric outlines. The purpose of this stage is to:

⎯ check the reconstituted data;

⎯ identify hidden details;

⎯ gather toponyms;

17MN, Anns., Series D, No. 23.
171
MN, Anns., Series D, No. 24.
172
MN, Anns., Series D, No. 25.
17MN, Anns., Series D, No. 26. - 61 -

⎯ obtain additional information from the local and customary authorities relating to
administrative boundaries, status of localities, transcription of toponyms, etc.

All of this information is entered on the ster eomodel in accordance with a prepared table of
conventional signs and will be shown in legend form on the final map.

The completed planimetric outline is then p assed to the mapmakers for preparation of the
final sheet.

4.29. Completion surveys for production of the IGN France maps on a scale of 1:200,000,
1960edition, covering the region were carried out during the 1958-1959 season. The completion
sheets show, inter alia, draft textual data, as well as planimet ric corrections and other information,

including the draft frontier line to be shown on the final sheets.

Most of the completion sheets used in the prep aration of the maps concerned here have been

found in the archives of IGN France. The comp letion sheets which are of significance for the
interpretation of the final map are those relating to textual data and other information. They are the
following:

⎯ Téra, Textual Data/Other Information, sheet ND-31-XIII, map of French West Africa,
1:200,000 174; the draft frontier line is marked by a continuous yellow line. That line does not

pass through the Tong-Tong astronomic marker, wh ich it leaves to the west. It does pass
through the site of the Tao astronomic ma rker, which is represented on the sheet by
triangulation pillar 268. In general, the draft frontier line follows the rare watercourses in the

area.

⎯ Sebba, Other Information, sheet ND-31-VII, map of French West Africa, 1:200,000 175; the

draft frontier on this sheet appears as a continuous yellow line, marked in red in several places
“boundary uncertain”. This line follows the existing watercourses or watersheds in the area.

176
⎯ Gotheye, Other Information, sheet ND-31-VIII, map of French West Africa, 1:200,000 ; the
draft frontier is shown as a continuous yellow line following the natural ground features:
including relief and watercourses.

⎯ Diapaga, Other Information, sheet ND-31-II, map of French West Africa, 1:200,000 177; two
draft frontier lines appear on this sheet:

⎯ an initial draft line, shown as a broken yellow line, following the watercourses and marked

“territorial boundary according to Niger cercles Commanders and local inhabitants. To be
deleted”;

⎯ a second broken yellow line, running alongside a broken red line, which is then extended
by a continuous yellow line marked: “terr itorial boundary according to the Protocol of
Agreement (not surveyed on the ground) ⎯ uncertain boundary to be maintained”.

At the intersection of federal highway No.36, Bamako-Niamey, with this second line, a
frontier post is marked.

17MN, Anns., Series D, No. 27.
175
MN, Anns., Series D, No. 28.
176
MN, Anns., Series D, No. 29.
17MN, Anns., Series D, No. 30. - 62 -

4.30. These maps from 1960 are of particular significance. First, they were prepared with

particular care, combining the most up-to-date techniques of the time with detailed work on the
ground. They are thus highly reliable, in terms both of accuracy in the representation of local detail
and of the wealth of information in regard to toponyms. Secondly, they represent the cartographic

material closest to the date of independence of the two Colonies. For this reason, these maps are
the most relevant for purposes of determining the colonial heritage of the two Parties.

4.31. Upper Volta: road map, scale 1:1,000,000, drawn and published by th178 Institut
géographique national, Paris (Dakar Annex, First Edition, May 1963) .

This map is based on the 1:200,000 IGN maps which have just been discussed. It groups
together, on a scale of 1:1,000,000, the sheets for Téra, Sebba, Gothèye and Diapaga. The frontier
line shown there is identical to that on those sheets.

4.32. The cartographic material covering the disputed area also includes a number of
sketch-maps of various kinds, whose dates and authors ⎯ and sometimes even the scale ⎯ are not

always known. These sketch-maps can, however, provide useful information on certain points.
They will accordingly be referred to a number of times in this Memorial.

17MN, Anns., Series D, No. 31. CHAPTER V

T HE LEGAL BASES FOR DETERMINATION OF THE FRONTIER

5.1. Under Article 6 of the Special Agreement signed on 24 February 2009, the rules of law

applicable to resolve the dispute are the following:

“The rules and principles of international law applicable to the dispute are those
referred to in Article38, paragraph1, of the Statute of the International Court of

Justice, including: the principle of the intangibility of boundaries inherited from
colonization; and the Agreement of 28 March 1987.”

The Agreement of 28 March 1987 is that whereby the two Governments agreed to demarcate their
common frontier and, as we have seen, proceeded fo r that purpose to establish a Joint Technical
Demarcation Commission 179. That Agreement of 28March1987 provides as follows in its
Articles 1 and 2:

“Article 1

The frontier between the two States sh all run from the heights of N’Gouma,

situated to the north of the Kabia ford, to the intersection of the former boundary of
the cercles of Fada and Say with the course of the Mekrou, as described in the Arrêté
of 31 August 1927.”

“Article 2

The frontier shall be demarcated by boundary markers following the course
described by Arrêté2336 of 31August1927, as clarified by Erratum2602/APA of

5 October 1927. Should the Arrêté and Erratum not suffice, the course shall be that
shown on the 1:200,000-scalemap of the Institut Géographique National de France ,
1960edition, and/or any other relevant doc ument accepted by joint agreement of the

Parties.”

5.2. These various provisions state very precisely what is to be understood in this case by the
application of the principle of “the intangibility of boundaries”, that is to say thuti possidetis at

the date of independence of the two States in 1960. As we have seen in Chapter I of this Memorial,
independence took place on, respectively, 3August1960 for Niger and 5August1960 for Upper
Volta. The date to be taken for the application of the uti possidetis principle is thus the latter,

namely 5 August 1960.

For purposes of the practical application of that principle, the text of the 1987 Agreement, as
referred to in the Special Agreement, relies on thre e criteria, which will be examined in detail in

this Chapter. The Agreement begins by citing two pieces of legislation from 1927 (Section 1). It
then goes on to refer to the 1960 IGN map, in the following terms:

“Shthueld Arrêté and Erratum not suffice, the course shall be that shown on

the 1:200,000-scalemap of the Institut Géographique National de France , 1960”
(Section 2);

179
Agreement between the Revolutionary Government of Bu rkina Faso and the Government of the Republic of
Niger on the demarcation of the frontier between the two countries; MN, Anns., Series A, No. 4; see above para. 3.3. - 64 -

finally it refers to “any other relevant docum ent accepted by joint agreement of the Parties”
(Section 3).

Section 1 ⎯ The legislative texts

5.3. In order to determine what were the boundaries of the territory of the two States as at

5August1960, it is necessary to seek out the most recent legislative or regulatory acts of the
colonial power having determined those boundaries. The only ones to have been found are the
Erratum2602/APA of 5October1927 correcting Arrêté 2336 of 31August1927, which has,

moreover, been consistently cited by the parties. We shall examin e in turn the content of those
texts (A), before dealing with the issue of how they should be interpreted (B).

The question is doubtless complicated by the fact that Upper Volta was dismembered and
shared out among the neighbouring Colonies on 5September1932 180. However, the Law of
4 September 1947 181reconstituted the Colony of Upper Volta within the boundaries that it had

possessed at the time of its abolition by the Decree of 5 September 1932:

“Article 1

The Decree of 5 September 1932 dissolving the Colony of Upper Volta is, and
shall remain, abrogated.

Article 2

[...] Its administrative centre shall be at Ouagadougou and its boundaries shall be
those of the former Colony of Upper Volta on 5 September 1932.

Article 3

The territorial boundaries defined in Article2 may be modified following
consultation with the local assemblies concerned.”

Neither of the two Parties contends that ther e was any change to the legal situation existing
between 4 September 1947 and 5 August 1960, the date of the accession of Upper Volta to

independence. It follows that we have to go back to see what was th e instrument which, on
5September 1932, governed the boundaries of the two Colonies. That instrument was in fact the
Erratum of 5October1927 to the Arrêté of 31August1927 fixing the boundaries of the Colonies

of Upper Volta and Niger.

A. Content of the 1927 texts

5.4. These two texts originated in the Decree of 28December1926 transferring the

adminis182tive centre of the Colony of Niger and pr oviding for territorial changes in French West
Africa :

18Decree of 5September1932 dissolving the Colony of Upper Volta and distributing its territory among the
Colonies of Niger, French Sudan and Côte d’Ivoire; OJFWA, 15October1932, p.902. See MN, Anns., Series B,

No. 29.
18Law 47-1707 of 4September1947 reconstituting the Colo ny of Upper Volta; OJFWA, 27September1947.
See MN, Anns., Series B, No. 30.

18That Decree was promulgated in French West Africa by an Arrêté of the Governor-General of French West
Africa of 21January1927 and published in OJFWA, No.1167, undated, year 1927, p.92. See MN, Anns., SeriesB,
No. 23. - 65 -

“[Art.2] The following territories, whic h are currently part of the Colony of

Upper Volta, shall be incorporated in the Colony of Niger with effect from
1 January 1927:

1. Say cercle, with the exception of Gourmantché Botou canton;

2. The cantons of Dori cercle which were formerly part of the Military Territory of
Niger in the Téra and Yatacala regions, and were detached from it by the Arrêté of
the Governor-General of 22 June 1910.

An Arrêté of the Governor-General in Standing Committee of the Government
Council shall determine the course of the boundary of the two Colonies in this area.”

An Arrêté providing for territorial changes to the Colonies of Upper Volta and Niger was
subsequently adopted by the Governor-Gener al of French West Africa on 22January1927 183. It
provided as follows:

“Ar1ticle ⎯ That part of Dori cercle assigned to the Colony of Niger shall be
incorporated into the territory of the current Tillabéry Subdivision (Niamey cercle),

and shall constitute the cercle of Tillabéry.

Article ⎯ That part of Say cercle assigned to the Colony of Niger shall
constitute, under the same name, a cercle of that Colony.

Ar3ticle ⎯ The canton of Gourmantché-Botou, previously part of Say cercle
and remaining in the Colony of Upper Volta, shall be incorporated into Fada cercle.”

184
As we have seen , several records of agreement were adopted by the colonial authorities of
Niger and Upper Volta in order to prepare the deli mitation between the two Colonies in that area.
It was on the basis of those documents that, a few months later, the Arrêté of 31August1927,

subsequently corrected by the Erratum of 5 October 1927, was adopted.

5.5. On 31 August 1927, Arrêté No.2336 of the Governor-General of French West Africa
fixed the boundaries of the Colonies of Upper Volta and Niger as follows:

“[Article 1]

1. Boundaries between the Tillabéry cercle and Upper Volta:

This boundary is determined to the north by the current boundary with Sudan (Gao

cercle) as far as the heights of N’Gourma, and to the west by a line passing
through the Kabia ford, Mount Darouskoy and Mount Balébanguia, west of the
ruins of the village of Tokébangou, an d Mount Doumafondé, which then turns

towards the south-east, leaving the ruins of Tong-Tong to the east and descending
in a north-south direction, cutting the Téra -Dori motor road to the west of the
Ossolo Pool, until it reaches the River Sirba (boundary of Say cercle), near to and
to the south of Boulkalo.

2. Boundaries between the Say cercle and Upper Volta:

183
Arrêté of 22 January 1927 providing for territorial changes to the Colonies of Upper Volta and Niger; OJFWA,
No. 1169, 12 February 1927. See MN, Anns., Series B, No. 25.
184
See above, para. 1.24. - 66 -

The villages of Botou canton are excluded from this boundary.

To the north and to the east, by th e current boundary with Niger (Niamey cercle),
from Sorbohaoussa to the mouth of the River Mekrou;

To the north-west, by the River Sirba from its mouth as far as the village of

Bossébangou. From this point a salient, including on the left bank of the Sirba the
villages of Afassi, Kouro, Takalan and Tankouro;

To the south-west, a line starting approximat ely from the Sirba at the level of the

Say parallel and running as far as the Mekrou;

To the south-east, by the Mekrou from that point as far as its confluence with the

Niger.”

We have already drawn attention 185 to the confusion resulting from the Arrêté of
31August1927, which had led to the adoption of th e Erratum of 5October that same year. The

Arrêté général contained a manifest drafting error. Instead of that part of the boundaries of Say
cercle which from then on was to constitute the frontier with Upper Volta, it described the cercle’s
entire boundaries ⎯ which are indicated in italics in the above extract.

The Arrêté was accordingly the subject of an Erratum No.2602/APA of 5October1927.
The full text of the Erratum is as follows:

“Article 1 of the Arrêté of 31 August 1927 fixing the boundaries of the Colonies

of Niger and Upper Volta, published in the Official Journal of French West Africa
No. 1201, of 24 September 1927, page 638, should read as follows:

Article 1

The boundaries of the Colonies of Niger and Upper Volta are determined as
follows:

A line starting from the heights of N’G ouma, passing through the Kabia ford
(astronomic point), Mount Arounskoye and Mount Balébanguia, to the west of the
ruins of the village of Tokebangou, Mount Doumafende and the Tong-Tong

astronomic marker; this line then turns towards the south-east, cutting the Téra-Dori
motor road at the Tao astronomic marker located to the west of the Ossolo Pool, and
reaching the River Sirba at Bossebangou. It almost immediately turns back up
towards the north-west, leaving to Niger, on the left bank of that river, a salient which

includes the villages of Alfassi, Kouro, Toka lan, and Tankouro; then, turning back to
the south, it again cuts the Sirba at the level of the Say parallel.

From that point the frontier, following an east-south-east direction, continues in

a straight line up to a point located 1,200 m to the west of the village of Tchenguiliba.

From that point it turns back up in a straight line that runs in a marked
SSW-NNE direction; it passes approximately 2km west of the village of Birniouoli

and, approximately 2km to the south of the south of the village of Vendou Mama,
reaches the top of the northernmost spur of the Heni-Djouri (Gourma) massif or Jackal
Mountain.

185
See above, para. 1.26. - 67 -

Running then in a west-east direction, it passes 1 km south of Mount Tambado
Djoaga, follows the course of the Dantiabonga marigot, passes south of Dantiandou,
follows the line of the Yoga Djoaga hills as far as the confluence of the Dantiabonga

and Diamongou marigots, and runs along the latter as far as the confluence of the
Dialongou and Boulelfonou marigots approximately 5 km north of the latter village.

From that point, the boundary follows the crests of the Djoapionga hills as far as
the source of the Boulolfonou marigot, runs up the northern slope of the Tounga and
Djoaga massif and terminates at the point known as Niobo-Farou (Caiman Pool), a

sort of broad basin, which is traversed during the dry season by the track from Botou
to Fombonou.

It is then determined by the eastern crests of the Tounga Djoaga massif, before

running towards the River Tapoa in a precise north-south direction. It passes
approximately 5 km east of the village of Kogori and reaches the Tapoa approximately
4 km south of the aforementioned village.

It then follows the course of the Tapoa upstream until it meets the former
boundary of the Fada and Say cercles, which it follows as far as the point where it
186
intersects with the course of the Mekrou.”

In relation to the previous text, the description of the boundary was also modified in its

northern part ⎯ not relevant here ⎯ and to the south-west, where the boundary of Tillabéry cercle
meets that of Say cercle. Finally the description of the boundary between Say cercle and Upper
Volta was supplemented by a description of the internal boundaries of Botou canton. However, as
187
will be explained later , this new draft contained another error in the area of Bossébangou, where
it continued to include in the inter-colonial boundary a part of the internal boundaries of Say cercle.

5.6. Despite the new draft, this text remains particularly rudimentary. That part of the text of
the Erratum which concerns the boundary still in dispute between the two Parties is the following:

from the Tong-Tong astronomic marker,

“this line then turns toward s the south-east, cutting the Téra-Dori motor road at the

Tao astronomic marker located to the west of the Ossolo Pool, and reaching the River
Sirba at Bossebangou. It almost immediat ely turns back up towards the north-west,
leaving to Niger, on the left bank of that ri ver, a salient which includes the villages of

Alfassi, Kouro, Tokalan, and Tankouro; then, turning back to the south, it again cuts
the Sirba at the level of the Say parallel”.

Thus in the Tillabéry cercle sector, for the stretch of the frontier which remains in dispute
between the two Parties, we have only two certa in points: the Tong-Tong astronomic marker and
the Tao astronomic marker. The point wh ere the line reaches the boundary of Say cercle in the
188
vicinity of Bossébangou remains, as we shall see, problematic .

Thus, as has already been explained, this text was criticized from the outset by the colonial
189
officials and authorities of the two Colonies . From all sides there was a chorus of complaints
over the lack of precision in the boundaries and the constant disputes to which those shortcomings

18Erratum No.2602/APA of 5 October 1927 to the Arrêté général of 31 August 1927 fixing the boundaries of
the Colonies of Niger and Upper Volta (OJFWA, No. 1205 of 15 October 1927, p. 718); MN, Anns., Series B, No. 27.
187
See below, paras. 7.14 ff.
188
Ibid.
18See above, paras. 2.3 ff. - 68 -

gave rise on the ground. The text was full of the kind of errors to be avoided in the description of a

frontier, as was pointed out, in general terms, by the Head of the French West Africa Geographical
Department in a letter of 8May1942 to the Director of Political and Administrative Affairs in
Dakar:

“Any description of a frontier which includes language like ‘the north-south
line..., the line leaving to the east the villages of..., the line running in a
south-easterly direction . . .’ is so imprecise that in Europe, an area that is well known,

it would require meetings of bilateral comm issions and a great deal of demarcation
work.

In the present case, for the cercles of French West Africa, (...) the territorial
boundaries need to be indicated by using the many existing marigots or thalwegs, or
clear ridgelines.

This can only be done if the authorities concerned ( cercle or subdivision
Commanders) go out and follow the line of the boundary which they are seeking to
determine and, on returning, provide a sketch-map, even a rough one, but including

the real names of the rivers ⎯ streams ⎯ thalwegs ⎯ ridgelines chosen as natural
boundaries.

A work of this kind, carried out in the office on a small-scale map, gives only
very rough indications, opening the door to all kinds of challenges, disputes and
arguments.” 190

It follows from the summary and imprecise na ture of the description of the boundary in
several sectors that the practical scope of the Arrêté and its Erratum remains extremely limited. It
is therefore necessary to consider the possibiliti es for interpreting these texts by having recourse to

cartographic or textual criteria, preparatory work or the practice.

B. Methods of interpreting the 1927 texts

(a) Interpretation using cartographic material

5.7. The first question is whether reliance can be placed, in order to interpret these texts, on
the 1:1,000,000 map entitled “French West Africa ⎯ new frontier between Upper Volta and Niger
(according to the Erratum of 5 October 1927 to the Arrêté of 31 August 1927)”, itself published in
191
1927 . This map was in fact examined by the Chamber of the International Court of Justice in its 192
Judgment of 22December1986 in the Frontier Dispute (Burkina Faso/Republic of Mali) case .
The Chamber expressed itself with great caution in re lation to this map, which was relevant to the

frontier between Mali and Burkina Faso in rega rd to the location of Mount N’Gouma, which
constitutes the tripoint between Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger;

“As regards Order2336 of 1927 and its erratum, Mali has produced a map

bearing the inscription ‘new frontier of Upper Volta and Niger (according to the
Erratum of 5October1927 to the Order dated 31August1927)’; however, the

19Letter No.1144.C.M.2 from the Head of the Geographical Department of Fr ench West Africa to the Director
of Political and Administrative Affairs at Dakar, dated 8 May 1942; MN, Anns., Series C, No. 66.
191
MN, Anns., Series D, No. 13; for an analysis of this map, see above, para. 4.16.
19Frontier Dispute (Burkina Faso/Republic of Mali), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1986, p. 554. - 69 -

document offers no information as to which official body compil193it or which
administrative authority approved the line shown on it.”

Moreover, Mali had drawn attention to the fact that

“in 1975 the Bureau des frontières of the Fren ch Institut géographique national stated:

‘to the best of our knowledge there is no specific map which interpret194the General
Order of 31 August 1927 and its erratum of 5 October 1927’” .

This had ultimately had led the Chamber,

“while not ascribing to this map submitted by Mali the authoritative status of a

document explaining the Order and erratum, i.e., one issued with the colonial
administration’s stamp of approval [to hold] nevertheless that it cannot be overlooked
as a piece of evidence; for ev en if it cannot be shown to have been drawn up by that

administration, it remains certain that the map’s compiler, having perused the
governing texts, and possibly the accessible maps, had acquired a very clear
understanding of the intention behind the texts, which enabled him afterwards to lend

that intention cartographic expression. Th at does not mean that the map necessarily
conveyed the correct interpretation of the erratum, but it does at least tend to confirm
that the difficulties of interpretation which Mali perceives in the text of the Order did

not exist at the time, having arisen from the perusal of certain maps published
subsequently.” 195

The Judgment of the Chamber of the Court is, as we can see, very tentative: the map in
question is in no sense an instrument of authentic interpretation. There is nothing to show that it
might have accompanied the Erratum. Nonetheless, it constitutes a significant piece of evidence.

This view is confirmed by the fact that, contrary to what the Chamber of the Court believed, the
map is undoubtedly an official one; it had indeed been published by the administrative authorities.

It was sent under cover of a transmission note by the military Chef du cabinet (Second Section) to
the Director of Political and Administrative Affair s in Dakar on 6 October 1927, with “copy to the
Department and to the two Colonies concerned” 196. Even if the map was not appended to the text,

there is every indication that the administration of the Government-General of French West Africa
regarded it as reflecting the course of the boundary that it had just promulgated.

However, as we shall see, while the map in question relied largely on many old maps and
sketch-maps concerning Say cercle ⎯ modified by the removal of Botou canton ⎯ it did not enjoy
the same support as regards the boundaries of the cantons of Tillabéry cercle. We will discuss
197
later to what extent it is permissible to have recourse to it in interpreting the 1927text (in
particular as regards the point where the southern boundary of Tillabéry cercle meets the boundary
of Say cercle).

193Ibid., p. 583, para. 57.
194
Ibid., p. 646, para. 171.
195Ibid.

196This is noted on the transmission note accompanying the map, sent by the militaChef du cabinet (Second
Section) to the Director of Political and Administrative A ffairs at Dakar dated 6Octobe r1927; MN, Anns., SeriesC,
No. 17.

197See below, paras. 7.17 ff. - 70 -

(b) Textual interpretation

5.8. On the basis of their interpretation of the texts, both Parties have proposed, between
Tong-Tong and the boundary of Say cercle, a frontier line in geometric form: a concave curve
according to Niger, two separate straight lines according to Burkina F aso. These two positions

were described as follows in the report of 28 Ju ly 1990 of the Joint Technical Commission on the
Demarcation of the Boundary.

Acc Notoen:g

“From the Tong-Tong astronomic marker, the frontier line turns in a uniform
direction (south-east) and following a unifo rm course as far as the River Sirba at

Bossébangou, passing through the Tao astronomic marker.

The only geometric form that would enable the frontier to pass through these
three points, which are clearly not aligned, is a curve. That curve is the arc of a circle,
198
with a well-defined centre and radius.”

That view was based on the text of the Arrêté , which states that the line “turns”
[“s’infléchit”], and on the rough boundary line shown on the 1:1,000,000 map published in 1927

which has just been discussed.

On the contrary, for its part:

“Burkina Faso asserts that, from its starting point to its endpoint, the frontier is
composed of a succession of straight lines, other than the waterways and the
ridgelines, and that this is also the case between Tong-Tong and Tao and between Tao

and Bossébangou.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

The Burkina Faso delegation contends that the meaning given to the word
‘s’infléchir’ must be understood as a ‘change of direction’, and that if it had involved a
curve the author would have made this clear by expressly so stating. Furthermore,

given the means of transport at that time (horses, motor vehicles) and the technical
specialists employed, neither the author nor the technical specialists would have
considered configuring the frontier line in that way.” 199

These two opposed positions were defended thr oughout the work of the Joint Commission
on the Demarcation of the Boundary. The lines resulting from them are shown on the sketch-map
on the facing page. Thus on that sketch-map the following appear:

⎯ the line claimed by Niger during the negotiations (shown in black);

⎯ the line claimed by Burkina Faso during the negotiations (shown in red);

⎯ the IGN boundary shown on the 1960 1:200,000 map (shown in yellow).

198
Report of 28July1990 of the Joint Technical Commission on Demarcation of the Boundary; MN, Anns.,
Series A, No. 5.
199
Ibid. - 72 -

5.9. At all events, both views are debatable, for a number of reasons.

In practical terms, there would seem to be little doubt that the overall shape of the boundary

is necessarily concave, and that the concave side of the curve faces east on a small-scale map. But
when this position is reflected on a larger scale ma p, it has to be adapted to the demands of the
topography (hilltops, ridgelines, thalwegs), as well as to canton boundaries and the existence of

villages. Burkina Faso’s argument can be turned against it, inasmuch as, if straight lines had been
intended, “the author would have made this clear by expressly so stating”. Nor is the reference to
contemporary means of transport persuasive; thus, while vehicles could not travel in curved lines,

nor could they do so in straight lines. The st raight-line technique appears feasible only for Say
cercle, where many maps are available da ting back to the origins of that cercle and confirming its
geometrical configuration. That is not case for Tillabéry cercle.

(c) Interpretation based on the travaux préparatoires

5.10. These 1927 texts were preceded by prep aratory works which shed a certain light on
their meaning. Thus we should not lose sight of the essential point: the purpose of the 1927 Arrêté
and its Erratum was to transfer from one Colony to the other a cercle composed of cantons. The

texts confirm this. The 1927 Arrêté and its Erratum were adopted pursuant to the Decree of
28 December 1926 “transferring the administrative centre of the Colony of Niger and providing for
territorial changes in French West Africa” 200.

It will be recalled that Article 2 of that text read as follows:

“The following territories, which are currently part of the Colony of Upper

Volta, shall be incorporated in the Colony of Niger with effect from 1 January 1927:

1. Say cercle, with the exception of Gourmantché Botou canton;

2. The cantons of Dori cercle which were formerly part of the Military Territory of
Niger in the Téra and Yatacala regions, and were detached from it by the Arrêté of
the Governor-General of 22 June 1910.” 201

As has also already been mentione d, for purposes of preparation of the Arrêté, two Records
of Agreement were drafted 202. Thus, for Tillabéry cercle, the Record of Agreement signed at Téra

on 2 February 1927 between the Governor of the Co lony of Niger and Inspector of Administrative
Affairs Lefilliatre, representative of the Governor of Upper Volta, read as follows:

“Having regard to the Decree dated the twenty-eighth of December, one
thousand nine hundred and twenty-six.

The following was agreed:

The cantons belonging to the former Tillabéry cercle on 22 June 1910 shall be
incorporated in the Colony of Niger.

The cantons are:

200
Decree of 28December1926 transferring the administrativ e centre of the Colony of Niger and providing for
territorial changes in French West Africa, OJFWA, No. 1167, 1927, p. 92); See MN, Anns., Series B, No. 23.
201
Emphasis added.
20See above, para. 1.24. - 73 -

1. Dargol Sonrhais )

K2o.kodt)to

3. Diagourou Peuhls ) (former subdivision of Téra)

4. Téra Sonrhais )

5. Goroual ditto

6. Logomaten (nomads and Bellahs) . . .” 203

Saoyrd cercle, the Record of Agreement incorporating into the Colony of Niger the
cantons composing Say cercle, drafted at Say on 10 February 1927 by Inspector of Administrative

Affairs Lefilliatre, representative of the G overnor of Upper Volta, and Chief Colonial
Administrator Choteau, representative of the Governor of the Colony of Niger, provided:

“ohlleowing cantons composing Say cercle are hereby incorporated into

Niger Colony . . . Namaro . . . Lamordé . . . Torodi . . . Gueladio . . . Diongoré . . .
Say . . . Tamou . . . Tiala . . . independent villages of Sarakolés, Dantiandou, [Colo],
Dar-es-Salam.” 204

There was thus no question of drawing geometric lines but of incorporating cantons into the
territory of each Colony. Where the boundaries of those cantons reflected occupation on the

ground by the local people (in villages), they did no t follow straight lines. That was the case in
particular for Tillabéry cercle, contrary to Say cercle, which was largely uninhabited at the time.

5.11. It is significant that, although their views were not taken into account, because they
arrived after publication of the Arrêté 205, the work of the Administrators of the two cercles
concerned (Delbos and Prudon) c onsisted in determining on th e ground the boundaries of their

respective cantons. Delbos and Prudon based themselves in particular on a sketch-map of the
former boundary of Tillabéry, prepared several years before by CaptainCoquibus, on which no
indication could be seen of any geometric boundaries 206.

As soon as the texts of the Arrêté and its Erratum of 1927 were published, it was apparent to
the Administrators of the cercles that these texts were inadequate as regards the Tillabéry sector. It

was quite clear from an examination of the disputes between the inhabitants of their cercles that the
traditional boundaries of the cantons did not follow regular geometric lines. At all times, the

203
Record of Agreement of 2February1927 between Brévié, Governor of the Colony of Niger, and Lefilliatre,
Inspector of Administrative Affairs, representative of the G overnor of Upper Volta; MN, Anns., SeriesC, No.7. See
above, Chap. I, para. 1.24.
204
Record of Agreement of 10February1927 between Lefilliatre, Inspector of Administrative Affairs,
representative of the Governor of Upper Volta, and Choteau, Ch ief Colonial Administrator, representing the Governor of
the Colony of Niger; MN, Anns., Series C, No. 8. See above, Chap. I, para. 1.24.
205
See above, Chap. I, para. 1.25.
206It should be noted that CaptainCoquibus’s sketch-maphas not been found, but a reference to the route
followed by him appears on the sketch-map drawn by Delbos. See below, para. 6.12. - 74 -

Administrators sought to determine the boundaries of their cantons. The continuing influence of
the spirit, if not of the text, of the Delbos/Prudon Agreement confirms this 207.

(d) Interpretation based on the practice of the local colonial authorities

5.12. During the colonial period, the local colonial authorities often had to deal wi
th disputes
over the occupation and use of land in the frontier area, or disputes over the colonial boundaries.

Local agreements were frequently made between the Commanders of different cercles in order to
resolve these problems. The question is, what effect should be given to those agreements?

It is true that the Commanders of cercles had no power to replace the competent colonial
authorities in order to modify or clarify the boundaries between Colonies. This principle was

recalled on a number of occasions:

⎯ telegram of 10 October 1929 from the Commander of Tillabéry cercle:

“Honour inform you that after approval Governor of Niger, following
instructions given to Téra subdivision: ‘M aintain status quo, namely tolerance zone

accepted in 1927 by Delbos and Prudon [sic] without encroachment or spoliation . ..
All pending disputed issues will be settled personally on the spot between
208
Administrators Dori and Tillabéry” ;

⎯ the agreement reached at Ossolo Pool on 12March1931 regarding Pételkalkallé or

Fétokarkalé, which had to be submitted for approval by the Governors of the Colonies of Niger
and Upper Volta 209. Upper Volta insisted on this 210. For his part, the Governor of Niger asked
the Governor of Upper Volta to inform the Do ri Commander whether he had indeed approved
211
that Agreement .

⎯ the agreement between Commanders Roser a212Boyer of April1932, partially accepting the
Delbos/Prudon position of 1927 . In the absence of authority to treat this agreement as an
authentic interpretation of the 1927 texts, the two officials recommended the promulgation of a

new erratum. According to the Bulletin de renseignements politiques of 11 October 1932, “at
the present time” no text had been issued 213;

⎯ in a circular of 22March1933, addressed to all Lieutenant-Governors of the Colonies of
French West Africa, Governor-GeneralBrévié recalled that “[a]ny boundary of a cercle or a

subdivision merely deriving from a practice, not yet endorsed by an official text , should be

207This was the case even after independence. Thus for example, a “Note on the problems of the frontier between
the Republics of Niger and Upper Volta (Téra cercle and Say subdivision ⎯ Dori cercle and Oudalen and Diapaga
subdivisions)”, dated 3February 1961, maintains this view: “A topographic mission is required in order to restore the

missing boundary markers and mark the frontier in accordance with the Arrêté in force, and if possible the ‘Delbos line’.
The frontier would be established by a boundary commission, which would not modify it but determine its course.” See
MN, Anns., Series C, No. 88.
208
Telegram/letter No.815 from the Commander of Tillabéry cercle to the Commander of Dori cercle dated
10 October 1929; MN, Anns., Series C, No. 31; emphasis added.
209Agreement of 12March1931 appended to the Tour Report of 31March1931 forwarded by the cercle

Administrator to the Governor of Upper Volta. MN, Anns., Series C, No. 41.
210Tillabéry Bulletin de renseignements politiques, dated 27 January 1932; MN, Anns., Series C, No. 43.

211Letter No. 40 A.G.I., dated 6 February 1932; MN, Anns., Series C, No. 44.

212See letter No.112 and the Tour Report from the Commander of Dori cercle to the Governor of Upper Volta,
dated 10 April 1932. MN, Anns., Series C, No. 45.
213
Bulletin de renseignements politiques of Tillabéry cercle, dated 11October1932. MN, Anns., SeriesC,
No. 46. - 75 -

confirmed as soon as possible by a local arrêté in the cas214f subdivision boundaries, and by a
draft Arrêté général in the case of cercle boundaries” ;

⎯ since the cercles concerned had not yet been modified following the dissolution of Upper 215
Volta, it was agreed between the Co mmanders of Tillabéry and Dori cercles that, once the
harvest was over, “a precise delimitation would be carried from the Tong Tong astronomic

marker to Bossébangou at the same time as preci se censuses of the local inhabitants between
whom disputes have arisen”. This signifies that at that time there had been no change to the
text of the 1927 Erratum.

The only agreement from the colonial period which appears to have been regarded as
determining the boundary of Tillabéry cercle was that adopted by the Record of Agreement of
216
13 April 1935 (concerning the Ouiboriels marker), which was incorp217ted in the boundaries of
the cercle in the description of Tillabéry cercle prepared in 1941 . That Agreement was approved
by the Governor of Niger.

5.13. Despite the wish frequently expressed by officials of the two Colonies for the course of
the boundary to be clarified by a new text so as to accord more closely with the true boundaries of

the cantons in practice, this was never done. Thus the two States, aware of the limitations of the
colonial texts, provided in the Agreement of 28 Ma rch 1987 for recourse to two subsidiary criteria,
which will now be examined in turn.

Section 2 ⎯ The 1:200,000 map of the Institut géographique

national de France, 1960 edition

5.14. The text of the 1987 Agreement leaves no doubt as to the intention of the Parties; the

language is mandatory:

“Sho tueld Arrêté and Erratum not suffice, the course shall be that shown on

the 1:200,000-scale map of the Institut Géographique National de France ,
1960 edition.”

That map, or rather that collection of sheets, is indeed particularly relevant. It dates quite
precisely from 1960; one could not be closer to the critical date in order to establish a
“photograph” of the uti possidetis. It is on an appropriate scal e: 1:200,000. Moreover, as has

already been 218lained, it rests, at least from the cartographic point of view, on solid technical
foundations . The toponymy, which was of a notably summary nature in the preceding maps of
the Army Geographical Section, and then of th e IGN, is as complete as knowledge of occupation

on the ground could make it. The hydrographic and orographic detail, prepared from aerial
photographs and refined by field surveys, is of ex cellent quality. Finally the indications of the
boundaries are clear ⎯ even if they are sometimes tentatively represented by discontinuous lines of

crosses, inasmuch as the information on which they were based could not necessarily be fully relied
on ⎯ and their sinuous nature suggests that they were pr epared with some care. It is clear that, in
the absence of reliable information from the local authorities, the drafters of the map followed the

21Circular from Governor-General Brévié, addressed to all Lieutenant-Governors of the Colonies of French West
Africa, dated 22 March 1933. MN, Anns., Series C, No. 48; emphasis added.

21See Tour Report from the Commander of Tillabéry cercle dated 30 June 1934; MN, Anns., Series C, No. 54.
216
Record of Agreement of 13April 1935 between the Commander of Dori cercle and the Head of Téra
subdivision; MN, Anns., Series C, No. 56.
217
Description of Tillabéry cercle, prepared in 1941 by Mr. Leca; MN, Anns., Series C, No. 65.
21See above, para. 4.27 - 76 -

rivers, marigots and ridgelines, which together represent mo re than 50percent of the boundaries
for the Téra sector.

All of this implies that, far from relying on the old sketch-maps, which showed straight or
curved lines connecting isolated points, the drafters of the 1960 map based themselves on a whole

body of pertinent data in order to represent the probable boundaries of the cantons as they were
applied in practice at the critical date.

Unless we find abnormal deviations in relation to the texts, or manifest lacunae in the

information on the canton boundaries, and subject to the neces sary caution where the hesitation of
the map’s drafters is reflected in gaps in the li nes of crosses, these results should in principle be
followed.

Section 3 ⎯ The relevant documents accepted by joint
Agreement of the Parties

5.15. In regard to this subsidiary criterion provided for in Article2 of the Agreement of
28March1987, there is little to be said. In th e context of the negotiating procedure between the
two States at that time, this expression referred to documents discovered by either side which might
provide evidence as to the course of the frontier between the two Colonies. In the practice of the

Joint Demarcation Commission, documentary resear ch was carried out independently, with each
Party conducting its own research, and at its ow n discretion. A Party which had discovered a
document which it considered rele vant would submit it for approval to the other Party at the

following meeting of the Commission. If the document was approved, it became relevant “by joint
Agreement of the Parties” and could be cited as a reference in the subsequent work of delimitation
of the frontier line. In the course of the Jo int Commission’s work, no document was accepted on
this basis. Thus, for example, the map “Frenc h West Africa: new frontier between Upper Volta

and Niger (according to the Erratum of 5October1927 and the Arrêté of 31August1927)”,
proposed by Niger, was not accepted by Burkina and thus was not retained as a “relevant document
accepted by joint Agreement of the Parties” 219.

5.16. Independently of the procedure within the Joint Commission, the two sovereign States
involved were clearly free to enter into agreements on frontier issues, provided that these were
concluded by the authorities competent to bind the two countries internationally. The only

agreement subsequent to independence concerning frontier issues and binding on the two States
under their respective laws, are

⎯ first, that which the Court is requested to place on record in Article2(2) of the Special
Agreement:

“The Court is requested to . . .

2. place on record the Parties’ agreement on the results of the work of the Joint
Technical Commission on Demarcation of th e Burkina Faso-Niger boundary with
regard to the following sectors:

(a) the sector from the heights of N’Gouma to the astronomic marker of Tong-Tong;

(b) the sector from the beginning of the Botou bend to the River Mekrou”.

219
Report of the Third Ordinary Session of the Joint T echnical Commission on the Demarcation of the Frontier
between Niger and Burkina Faso, held at Niamey from 2 to 4 November 1994; MN, Anns., Series A, No. 7. - 77 -

⎯ secondly, the exchange of letters of 29Oc tober 2009 and 2 November 2009 between the
Minister for Foreign Affairs and Regional Co-ope ration of Burkina Faso and the Minister for
Foreign Affairs and Co-operati on of the Republic of Niger 220. That exchange of letters

enshrines the Agreement between the two States concerning th e report on the work of the joint
mission on the ground for purposes of reaching ag reement on the co-ordinates of the boundary
markers in the sectors running from the heights of N’Gouma to the Tong-Tong astronomic
marker, and from the beginning of the Botou bend to the River Mékrou.

The other work of the Joint Commission w as unable to produce a similar international
agreement 221.

However, apart from the Commission’s work, agreem ents can relate to specific points: such
as those resulting from construction work on international highways connecting the two Parties, for

example at Petelkolé, at the point with co-ordinates 14° 00' 04.2" N; 00° 24' 16.3" E.

*

5.17. According to the terms of the Special Agreement of 24February2009, the Court is
requested to determine the course of the boundary between the two States in a sector which in
reality covers two separate sectors. These, as a result both of geographical and of human and

historical factors, require separate treatment. The sectors in question are, respectively, those of
Téra and of Say, in relation to which the position of Niger regarding the course of the frontier line
will be set out in the two final chapters of this Memorial.

220
Letter No.2009-004874 of 29October2009; MN, Anns., Series A, No.16, and letter No.007505 of
2 November 2009; MN, Anns., Series A, No. 17.
22See above, paras. 3.3 ff. C HAPTER VI

D ETERMINATION OF THE FRONTIER IN THE T ÉRA SECTOR

6.1. The first section of boundary concerned by the present dispute is that where the frontier
separates the current département of Téra (Gorouol, Téra , Diagourou, and Dargol cantons), on the
Niger side, from the provinces of Oudalan, Seno (D ori) and Yagha (Sebba), on the Burkina Faso

side. These current administrative divisions correspond to the former colonial divisions 222
constituted, at the time of accession of the two States to independence, by Téra cercle in Niger
and Dori cercle in Upper Volta. This section is some 150 km long and runs from the Tong-Tong

astronomic marker to the junction of the boundary with Say cercle.

We will begin by presenting a physical and human description of the Téra sector (Section 1),
before setting out Niger’s position on the determination of the frontier in this sector (Section 2).

Section 1 ⎯ Physical and human description

of Téra sector

6.2. In physical terms, the area traversed by the frontier between the two States in this sector

consists of a rocky plateau made up of slabs in the northern part (Téra/Dori boundary). Along the
middle reaches of the River Sirba, there are bluffs forming rocky barriers: the Sirba heights, the
Grand Cessara 223and the Petit Cessera. The plateau slopes gently down towards the River Niger in
a west-east direction. It is irrigated by tributari es of the River Niger, of which the main one is the

River Sirba, which, in its lower part, serve d until 1927 as the boundary between Say and Dori
cercles.

6.3. In climatic terms, the Téra/Dori region is influenced by two air masses: the harmattan, a
hot, dry wind from the east, blowing from October to May, and the wet Atlantic monsoon, which
blows from April to October. The climate is characterized by a long dry season of eight months

and a short rainy season of four months. Evaporation/transpiration varies between 2 and 3 metres
per year. Relative to precipitation, the hydric balance is heavily negative.

6.4. The vegetation in the area is of the typical Sahelo-Saharan type, consisting of tiger bush
on the plateaux and hillsides and gallery-forests al ong the wet river-banks. Because of the low
precipitation and excessive heat, both herbaceous and ligneous cover are subject to heavy human

and animal pressure (population growth, overgrazing, clearing of bush, soil degradation, etc.).
Water, land and vegetation are a vital resour ce, placing humans, domestic animals and wild
animals in competition for natural resources. Ther e are significant quantities of wildlife: gazelle,

deer, warthog, ostrich, wildfowl, etc. The pools and rivers are well stocked with fish.

6.5. This section of the frontier is of an unusual nature, being an agro-pastoral area. The land

is basically favourable to both agriculture and an imal husbandry, which explains the density of the
population along the frontier. The area is not affected by the serious endemic health problems,
such as sleeping sickness and malaria, which characterize the Say sector.

222
It had been detached from Tillabéry cercle in 1956 (see above, para. 1.30).
22Sometimes also “Sessera”, meaning, in the local language, a range or chain of mountains. - 80 -

6.6. We have seen that Téra subdivision 224 had been detached from the former Dori cercle,
which then extended as far as the River Niger , and incorporated into Tillabéry cercle. The result
of this transfer was to disorientate the local popul ation, both sedentary and nomadic, in relation to
their tribal, ethnic, territorial and administrative homelands 225. Before the partition of Dori cercle,

the territorial matrix had been the same for all: nomads, semi-nomads and sedentary peoples; all
lived under the same administration within the same territory, where each had their own homeland.

The new boundary was defined as a series of juxtaposed cantonal boundaries, themselves

composed of a series of village and/or hamlet boundaries. In sparsely populated areas, the canton
boundaries were quite vague: for example on rock y hillsides and infertile plateaux, and in open
pastureland.

The territorial partition did not create problems for the villages, which were concentrated in a
relatively confined space (a few hectares). Howe ver, for peoples whose homelands were spread
over more extended areas (covering dozens, if not h undreds, of square kilometres), their partition

was socially disruptive and provoked population movements motivated by the preservation of
communal or cultural identities, or the safeguard of interests. Each cercle, now wishing to know
the precise number of its inhabitants, was impelle d to carry out censuses. The instability of the

populations of areas close to the shared boundaries or territories resulted in multiple registrations
and the use of contradictory criteria for defining administrative links (place of temporary settlement
or village of origin).

Apart from traditional nomadic movements or the search for new land, there were various
factors impelling populations to change from one te rritory to another: differences in régime as
between colonies in the matter of compulsory service or of human or livestock taxation, the

existence of basic infrastructure in the neighbouring territory (access to water, vaccination facilities
for livestock, schools, health centres, etc.,), power relationships within tribes, etc. Thus, all along
the frontier, a game of cat-and-mouse developed between colonial administrators and frontier
populations.

6.7. The Téra/Dori frontier area is entirely Sahelian in nature and inhabited by:

⎯ sedentary peoples, living in villages or hamlets and carrying on their agricultural activities
within the boundaries of their own homeland. Human activities are conducted within the
framework of administrative territorial units (villages, cantons);

⎯ nomadic peoples, whose territorial movements ar e constrained only by natural possibilities of
access to pastureland and water and by temporar y health and security conditions (epizootic

diseases, wild animals, etc.);

⎯ semi-nomadic peoples living in hamlets, whose range of movement is more limited.

The problems of the frontier area are conditioned by various dominant forms of production,
namely: itinerant nomadism; seasonal trans -frontier pastoral transhumance, conducted on a
pendular basis; semi-nomadism; sedentary field agriculture; itinerant agriculture; gold prospection

and extraction.

The expansion and dispersal of villages makes it more difficult to determine the course of the
frontier. The exhaustion of the soil on the platea ux is another movement factor. This frequently

causes the inhabitants of a village to transfer to a new site, situated a few kilometres from the

224
See above, para. 1.27.
225
See above, para. 2.3. - 81 -

previous one. It is not unusual, in such cases, for the hamlets attach ed to the main village of origin

to have similar or identical names to the latter.

Section 2 ⎯ The course of the frontier in the Téra sector

6.8. Before setting out the position of the Re public of Niger regarding the course of the

frontier in this sector (SubsectionB), some expl anations are required regarding the methodology
adopted for this purpose (Subsection A).

A. Methodology adopted

6.9. The only text from the colonial period determining the boundaries of the two Colonies in

this area is the Erratum No. 2602/APA of 5 October 1927, which corrected Arrêté No. 2336 of the
Governor-General of French West Africa of 31 A ugust of the same year. Regarding the Tillabéry
sector, the original text of the Arrêté read as follows:

Article 1

“1. Boundaries between the Tillabéry cercle and Upper Volta:

This boundary is determined to the north by the current boundary with Sudan (Gao
cercle) as far as the heights of N’Gourma, and to the west by a line passing

through the Kabia ford, Mount Darouskoy and Mount Balébanguia, west of the
ruins of the village of Tokébangou, an d Mount Doumafondé, which then turns
towards the south-east, leaving the ruins of Tong-Tong to the east and descending

in a north-south direction, cutting the T éra-Dori motor road to the west of the
Ossolo Pool, until it reaches the River Sirba (boundary of Say cercle), near to and
to the south of Boulkalo” 226.

Erratum No. 2602/APA of 5 October 1927 reads as follows regarding the same area:

“ A line starting from the heights of N’Gouma, passing through the Kabia ford

(astronomic point), Mount Arounskoye and Mount Balébanguia, to the west of the
ruins of the village of Tokebangu, Mount Doumafende and the Tong-Tong astronomic
marker; this line then turns towards the south-east, cutting the Téra-Dori motor road

at the Tao astronomic marker located to the west of the Ossolo Pool, and reaching the
River Sirba at Bossebangou.” 227

Given the Parties’ agreement on the course of the 228ntier in “the sector from the heights of
N’Gouma to the astronomic marker of Tong-Tong” , the only stretch still in dispute for the Téra
sector is that indicated in italics in the two preceding quotations.

In the sector from the Tong-Tong astronomic marker to the boundary of Say cercle, the
Arrêté of 31August1927, as corrected by the Erratum of 5October1927, identifies only two
frontier points: the Tong-Tong astronomic marker and the Tao astronomic marker. The point

226
Arrêté général No.2336 of 31August 1927 fixing the boundaries othe Colonies of Upper Volta and Niger
(OJFWA, No. 1201 of 24 September 1927); MN, Anns., Series B, No. 26; emphasis added.
22Erratum No.2602/APA of 5October1927 to the Arrêté général of 31August1927 fixing the boundaries of

the Colonies of Niger and Upper Volta ( OJFWA, No.1205 of 15October1927, p.718; MN, Anns., Series B, No.27;
emphasis added.
22Article 2 of the Special Agreement seising the ICJ of 24 February 2009, MN, Anns., Series A, No. 13. - 82 -

where the frontier reaches the boundary of the Say cercle, in the area of Bossébangou, remains
problematic, as we shall see later 229.

As a description of the frontier over a distance over some 150 km, it has to be said that the
official text is particularly succinct.

6.10. The question whether reliance can placed on the 1:1,000,000 map entitled “French

West Africa ⎯ new frontier between Upper Volta and 230 Niger (according to the Erratum of
5 October 1927 to the Arrêté of 31August1927)” in order to interpret the above texts has
already been raised previously 231. Even though this was not a map appended to the text of the

Erratum, its official nature and the intention of the FWA authorities to use it to illustrate the new
boundary between Upper Volta and Niger is not in doubt. It was sent on 6 October 1927, the day
following the date of the Erratum , by the Military Chef du Cabinet of the Government-General of

French West Africa to the Director of Political and Administrative Affairs, with copies to the two
Colonies concerned 232. Nonetheless, in the stretch of the frontier under discussion here, that map,

given its scale, is of no great help. It shows the two points mentioned in the Erratum (the Tong-
Tong and Tao astronomic markers, before joining the boundary of Say cercle). The shape of the
line connecting these three points is slightly curved , with the concave side facing east. This shows
233
that, for this sector ⎯ contrary to the Say sector ⎯ the cartographic service of the FWA
Government had no sketch-map available to it showing the boundaries of the former Tillabéry
cercle at the time when the part constituting Té ra subdivision was absorbed by Dori cercle in
234
1910 , and that the drafters of the 1927 map conf ined themselves to illustrating the rudimentary
indications given in the Erratum.

6.11. It is therefore necessary to look elsew here in order to identify this stretch of the
boundary between the two territories. The history of its origins offers such a possibility, which

should now be explored. It will be re called that the justification for the Arrêté of 31 August 1927
lay in the Decree of the President of the French Republic of 28December1926, “transferring the

administr235ve centre of the Colony of Niger and pr oviding for territorial changes in French West
Africa” . Article 2 of that text provided:

“The following territories, which are currently part of the Colony of Upper
Volta, shall be incorporated in the Colony of Niger with effect from 1January 1927:
[ . . .]

2. The cantons of Dori cercle which were formerly part of the Military Territory of
Niger in the Téra and Yatacala regions, and were detached from it by the Arrêté of
236
the Governor-General of 22 June 1910 [ . . .]” .

229
See below, para. 7.13.
230See above for the analysis of this map, para. 4.13.

231See above, para. 5.7.
232
See the Dispatch Note of 6 October 1927, MN, Anns., Series C, No. 17.
233
See below, para. 7.19.
234See above, para.1.15, Article1 of Arrêté No.675 of the Governor-General of French West Africa, dated

22 June 1910; MN, Anns., Series B, No. 15.
235See above, para. 1.22.

236OJFWA, No. 1167, 1927, p. 92; MN, Anns., Series B, No. 23; emphasis added. - 83 -

It was on the basis of this Decree that, a few months later, the Arrêté of 31 August 1927 and

its Erratum of 5October1927 were adopted. The purpose of these texts could only have been to
transfer the above-mentioned cantons.

An Arrêté of 22January1927 providing for territorial changes to the Colonies of Upper
237
Volta and Niger was in turn published by the Governor-General of French West Africa , and read
as follows:

“Ar1ticle ⎯ That part of Dori cercle assigned to the Colony of Niger shall be
incorporated into the territory of the current Tillabéry Subdivision (Niamey cercle),
and shall constitute the cercle of Tillabéry [ . . .].

Ar4ticle ⎯ The Lieutenant-Governors of Niger and Upper Volta shall be
responsible, in their respective areas, for the implementation of this Arrêté, which
shall take effect from 1 January 1927.”

In preparation for the implementing Arrêté, two Records of Agreemen t were established in
the cercles concerned (Tillabéry and Say). Thus, for the Tillabéry cercle the agreement signed at
Téra on 2February1927 between the Governor of the Colony of Niger and Inspector of

Administrative Affairs Lefilliatre, representative of the Governor of Upper Volta, provided:

“Having regard to the Decree dated the twenty-eighth of December, one

thousand nine hundred and twenty-six.

The following was agreed:

The cantons belonging to the former Tillabéry cercle on 22 June 1910 shall be
incorporated in the Colony of Niger.

The cantons are:

1. Dargol Sonrhais )

K2o.kodt)to

3. Diagourou Peuhls ) (former subdivision of Téra)

4. Téra Sonrhais )

5. Goroual ditto

6. Logomaten (nomads and Bellahs).

They are bounded to the north by the current boundary with Sudan (Gao cercle)
as far as the heights of N’Gourma, and to the west by a line passing through the Kabia

ford, Mount Darouskoy and Mount Balébanguia, west of the ruins of the village of
Tokébangou, and Mount D oumafondé, which then turns towards the south-east,
leaving the ruins of Tong-Tong to the east a nd descending in a north-south direction,
cutting the Téra-Dori motor road to the west of the Ossolo Pool, until it reaches the
238
River Sirba (boundary of Say cercle), near to and to the south of Boulkalo.”

237
See above, para. 1.23, OJFWA, No. 1169, 12 February 1927; MN, Anns., Series B, No. 25.
238
Record of Agreement of 2 February 1927; MN, Anns., Series C, No. 7. - 84 -

Thus, independently of the two or three points designated by the Arrêté of 31 August 1927 as
amended by the Erratum of 5 October 1927, and of the curved line on the 1927 1:1,000,000 map,
we know the names of the cantons which were transferred. This can give two valuable indications.

The first concerns the content of those cantons (names of villages, names of nomad tribes and
topographical indications), where these can be found on the administrative documents of the
colonial era. As will be seen later 239, indications of this kind, although few in number, can

supplement the summary description in the Arrêté and Erratum of 1927.

The second indication is a presumption that the areas composing these cantons, occupied by

indigenous peoples, and the villages, fields or pastures and nomad routes, did not in principle
follow abstract lines (whether curved or straight), but were based on la nd occupation and followed
the configuration or nature of the ground.

6.12. It is symptomatic that the Governor of Upper Volta, who was attentive to this aspect of
matters, had made the following request to the Commanders of Dori and Fada cercles, who were

going to be affected by these boundary changes:

“Request send me soon as possible precise information to enable preparation

Arrêté général fixing new boundaries between Colonies Niger and Upper Volta.

Solely to avoid error and need subse quent correction, essential that course be

determined on ground with full agreement Administrators Divisions concerned.

Results work recognized and accepted by Heads both adjacent Colonies to be
240
forwarded Dakar for action definitive text.”

A Note from the Chef du cabinet of the Governor of Upper Volta dated 2 June 1927 gave the

following instructions to Dori cercle:

“Could you commence work with Admini strator Tillabéry simply following
Coquilin line 241 and examine population situation as you suggest.” 242

The work of the Administrators of the two cercles concerned consisted in determining on the
ground the boundaries of the cantons of their respective cercles. For this purpose, they based

themselves on a sketch-map of the former boundary of Tillabéry prepared previously by
CaptainCoquibus. Two reports followed, one from Prudon, Commander of Tillabéry cercle, the
other from Delbos, Commander of Dori cercle. These reports are similar, even though they do not

totally coincide. However, both have the merit of showing that the boundary was a sinuous one.
Prudon’s report of 4 August 1927 to the Governor of Niger reads as follows:

“From Nababori, we travelled in a northerly direction following the natural
boundary traced by hills of some 50 to 60 m in height.

According to the information given by the local inhabitants and by the Chiefs of
the Dorgol (Tillabéry) and Yaga(Dori) cantons, the range of hills that we were
following is indeed the boundary between the two cantons and hence of the two

239
See, for example, below, para. 6.11.
240
Telegram-letter No. 1166/A.G. of 27 April from the Governor of Upper Volta; MN, Anns., Series C, No. 11.
24This clearly refers to sketch-map prepared by Capitain Coquibus, as is apparent from the references or partial
descriptions of it in the subsequent correspondence. Capitain Coquibus’s sketch-map has not been found in the archives.
See already above, para. 5.11.

24Note BL/HV No. 1393/AE from the Chef de cabinet to the Commander of Dori cercle dated 2 June 1927; MN,
Anns., Series C, No. 12. - 85 -

colonies. This boundary has existed for many years and no dispute has ever arisen

between the two cantons over possession of the land.

The ideal boundary line drawn by LieutenantCoquibus crosses the hills, but

according to the wishes [reports] of the local people, the Lieutenant did not follow the
boundary but travelled over country further east.

Furthermore, the boundary that we ha ve established joins the line marked by
Lieutenant Coquibus at the end of this ch ain of hills and follows it until the boundary
with the Gao cercle.

Apart from this slight modification, fo llowing natural frontiers, the delimitation
of the cercle made by Lieutenant Coquibus is indeed the line that we followed and the
line recognized by the various chiefs of the frontier cantons in the two colonies

concerned.

Moreover we climbed all of the hills, wh ich enabled us to have a much wider

view and helped us to locate the villages that we could see.

Political considerations

From Nababori, on the boundary of the Say and Dori cercles, as far as
Doulgou 24, no dispute (the farmlands of the Niger natives do not extend beyond the
hills to the west of the path which we fo llowed [...] From Doulgou to Tao, no
244
dispute [ . . .] .

The report from Delbos on the joint reconnaissance carried out in June, sent on

3 August 1927 to the Governor of Upper Volta under cover of a Note bearing the No. 438 has not
been found. However, there are frequent references to it in the subsequent correspondence. On the
other hand, we do have the sketch-maps drawn at the time by Administrator Delbos, as well as a
245
supplementary report of 27August1927 , which contains a draft delimitation for submission to
the Government-General of French West Africa, in the following terms:

“[ . . .] the cercles of Dori and Tillabéry will henceforth be delimited as follows:

In the north by the current boundary with Sudan (Gao cercle), as far as the
N’Gouma Heights, then to the west by a line starting from Kabia ford and running to

the south towards the Yatakala-Falagountou road, which it cuts 7.5km to the
north-east of Falagountou.

From this point the boundary, descending on a bearing of 156°, crosses the
Téra-Dori road 5.75km from Tao (Soum Pool); on reaching Tao it descends on a
bearing of 135° for 27.5 km, then for 26.5 km on a bearing of 147°, until it reaches a

point 5 km to the north of the Iga Pool.

It then turns back up in a north-easterly direction on a bearing of 79° for

31.5 km, before redescending on a bearing of 127° for a distance of 13.5 km, and then
on a bearing of 190° for 25.5km, before finally following a bearing of 170° until it
reaches the boundary of Say cercle to the west of Alfassi on the River Cirba.

243
In Diagourou canton (Tillabéry cercle).
24Tour Report No.25 from administrator Prudon, Commander of Tillabéry cercle, dated 4August1927; MN,

Anns., Series C, No. 15; and sketch-map, MN, Anns., Series D, No. 3.
24Letter from the Commander of Dori cercle to the Governor of Upper Volta, dated 27August1927; MN,
Anns., Series C, No. 16; and Delbos sketch-map of the June tour; MN, Anns., Series C, No. 14. - 86 -

No opposition on the part of the local inhabitants having been encountered, this
246
report was closed and signed by the Parties. Signed Prudhon [sic]” .

In any event, the proposals from the two o fficials reached Dakar too late, after the Arrêté of

31August1927 had been published, and could have no effect on its text, or on the text of the
Erratum.

6.13. When he learnt of the content of the Arrêté, Delbos protested vigorously on
17 December 1927:

“The boundaries as described in Official Journal No.1021 are an exact copy

from the Report signed in my presence at Téra by GovernorBrévié and
InspectorLefilliatre. They had been estab lished on the basis of the map prepared by
CaptainCoquibus, which only showed theoretical lines and points which do not

appear to have been visited, since two of them do not exist, Mounts Balabanguia and
Dourouskoy [ . . .]

From there, CaptainCoquibus travelled in a S OUTH -EASTERLY direction and
finished south of Boulkabo and not Bossébango.

However, following the survey carried out together with MrP . rudon,

Commander of the Tillabéry cercle, we had by joint agreement settled the boundaries
between the two Colonies, as I had the honour of reporting to you in my letter No. 438
of 3 August 1927.

The Erratum of 6October1927 and the copy of the map to a scale of
1:1,000,000, which you were kind enough to send me, contain the following errors.

The frontier starting from the N’Gouma Heights passes through the Kabia Ford,
then runs in a south-westerly direction where, after 2.6km, it meets the astronomic
marker (Dori Pool), then runs in a southerly direction towards the road between

Yatakala and Foulagountou (the village where the astronomic marker is located).

From that point, it runs for some 55 km towards the Iga Pool, before turning to

the north-east and then, as my letter 438 st ates, running southward as far as Nababori,
reaching the Say cercle to the west of Alfassi and not at Bossébangou, which is further
up.

While we can accept the Kabia-Iga section, despite certain differences due
either to mistakes in the reduction of a 1:200,0 00 map to a scale of 1:1,000,000, or to
an over-hasty copy of that map, it seems to me that it would be difficult to abandon the

area which I have marked in red, since this area, which is surrounded by hills forming
natural boundaries, has always belonged to the Yagha canton without ever being
challenged by any of the neighbouring peoples.

I end by asking that the boundaries indicated in my letter438 be maintained,
and I am surprised that there could be an y dispute between the two Colonies, since
Mr. Prudon and I carried out the work by joint agreement.” 247

246
The reference to the signature of Prudon seems to be by Delbos, doubtless in order to indicate the agreement of
the Commander of Tillabéry cercle to this draft text.
24Letter from the Commander of Dori cercle to the Governor of Upper Volta dated 17December1927; MN,
Anns., Series C, No. 20, and appended sketch-map. - 87 -

6.14. However, this urgent plea had no effect, and no change was made to the legislative text
up to the time of independence. It should, nonetheless, be borne in mind that the spirit in which the
two cercles Commanders had worked in 1927 remained present throughout the colonial period.

References were frequently made to their work in order to resolve disputes between the cercles
concerned by the boundary. In this rega rd, we would cite the agreement between
Commanders Roser (Dori) and Boyer (Tillabéry) of 21 March 1932. These two officials envisaged

having an erratum adopted to the 1927 text, in order better to reflect the true situation on the
ground. Their proposal was as follows:

“Going from south to north, the boundary between Tillabéry and Dori cercles is
as follows: it starts at Alfassi, passes through Nabambori (Yagha crop-growing
village), follows the line of the watershed of the mountain known as the Great Sesséra,

as far as its northern extremity, then a line joining that extremity to the eastern
extremity of the mountain known as the Little Sesséra, follows the line of the
watershed of the Little Sesséra to its wester n extremity, then the prolongation of that

mountain chain as far as a point situated 5km to the north-west of Higa Pool; from
there, the line shown on the Delbos map, passing through Bangaré . . ., to Houssaltane,
which it leaves to the east, to Petelkarkalé, which it leaves to the west, to Petelkolé

which it leaves to east, and from there it runs in a stra248t line to the frontier marker
situated 5.75 km from the Tao astronomic marker” .

It is apparent that human settlements in the cantons and natural boundaries a249 constituted
the basis for the completion works of the IGN during the 1958-1959 season .

6.15. In view of the fact that the Presidential Decree of 28December1926 and the
preparatory works for the Arrêté of 31 August 1927 show that the operation effectively consisted in
a transfer of cantons, it may reasonably be considered that the lists of villages of those cantons up

to independence give an indication of the composition of the cercles concerned, and hence of their
boundaries. In examining the course of the boundary, we will consider the ⎯ modest ⎯
possibilities offered by this approach.

6.16. As has already been pointed out, notw ithstanding the wish frequently expressed by

officials of the two Colonies, the course of the boundary was never clarified by a new text so as to
correspond more closely with the actual boundaries of the cantons in practice 250. Conscious of the
limitations of the colonial texts, Burkina Faso and Niger provided in the Agreement of

28March1987 for recourse to subsidiary cr iteria, among which the 1:200,000 map of the Institut
géographique nationale, 1960 edition, plays a pivotal role 25.

We have already explained the extent to which the drafters of the 1960 map based
themselves on a body of relevant data in or der to represent the probable boundaries of the cantons
as these were applied in practice at the critical date 25. In consequence, unless we find abnormal

deviations in relation to the texts or ma nifest lacunae in the information on the canton boundaries,
and subject to the necessary caution where the hesitati on of the map’s drafters is reflected in gaps
in the line of crosses, these results should in pr inciple serve as a guide to determine the course of

the inter-colonial boundary in 1960.

24Tour Report from the Commander of Dori cercle to the Governor of Upper Volta, dated 10 April1932; MN,
Anns., Series C, No. 45.

24See the IGN sheets “Textual Data/Other Information”, MN, Anns., Series D, Nos. 27-30.
250
See above, para. 5.13.
251
See above, paras. 5.14 ff.
25Ibid. - 88 -

B. The course of the frontier in the Téra sector

6.17. In the following paragraphs, the course of the frontier in the Téra sector will be

examined by being subdivided into three sections: from Tong-Tong to Tao (a), from Tao to
Bangaré (b), and from Bangaré to the boundary of Say cercle (c).

(a) From Tong-Tong to Tao, the boundary consists of two straight lines

6.18. It will be recalled that between Tong-Tong and Tao the Erratum determines the
boundary in the following terms:

“[after] the Tong-Tong astronomic marker [,] this line then turns towards the
south-east, cutting the Téra-Dori motor road at the Tao astronomic marker”.

253 254
The sketch-maps prepared in 1927 by Delbos and Prudon , as well as the map, “New
frontier of Upper Volta and Niger”, published the same year 255, connect these two points with a

straight line.

The 1960 IGN map adopts a shape broadly incurvated to the west. That incurvation is new.

We will now examine step-by-step whether it is justified.

6.19. Tong-Tong astronomic marker

The starting point of the boundary, at the Tong-Tong astronomic marker, is not in dispute
256
between the Parties. Its position was established as far back as 1927 by CaptainNevière .
According to the letter from IGN/France to th e authorities of the Republic of Niger of
23 June 1988 257, its co-ordinates were the following: latitude 14° 25' 04" N, longitude 0° 12' 47" E.

The report of 18 March 1989 of the Joint Technical Commission on Demarcation ascribes the same
co-ordinates to that marker. Its co-ordinates are given as the starting point for the frontier sector in
dispute in Article 2 of the Special Agreement of 24 February 2009.

The starting point indicated on the IGN map, located further east, is thus incorrect.

6.20. The Vibourié marker

Geographical co-ordinates: 14° 21' 44" N, 0° 16' 25" E.

Since the colonial era, the next point on the boundary is the Vibourié marker. The origin of
258
this point is a Record of Agreement of 13April1935 between AdministratorGarnier (Dori
cercle) and Assistant Deputy Lichtenberger (Téra cercle) following the settlement of a dispute over
the occupation of cropland:

25MN, Anns., Series D, No. 2.
254
MN, Anns., Series D, No. 3.
255
MN, Anns., Series D, No. 13.
25See the reference in letter DEC/934 from France IGN to the Niger Fina nce Ministry date 23June1988; MN,

Anns., Series C, No. 105.
25Ibid.

25Record of Agreement of 13 April 1935; MN, Anns., Series C, No. 56. - 89 -

“Furthermore, in order to prevent any si milar further territorial dispute in this
area, we have established a marker designed to fix the boundary between Dori and
Téra, the boundary in principle following a notional straight line starting from the

Tong-Tong astronomic marker and running to the Tao marker.

The Ouiboriels marker [Vibourié on the 1960 IGN Téra map] being located on

this notional line, on a ridgeline some 10 km to the east of Falagountou and 2km to
the east of Ouiboriels.

This delimitation, having been effected on an adversarial basis, has not been

disputed by the parties involved.”

This arrangement, citing the 1927Erratum, was approved by the Governor of Niger by

Official Telegram-Letter 693AP of 17May 1935, as stated in the Description of Tillabéry Cercle
of 1941 259in the paragraph devoted to a description of the boundaries of that cercle. In reality, this
was the only agreement between cercles, subsequent to 1927, which was approved by a higher

authority. It is true that this agreement da tes from after the disappearance of Upper Volta and
hence its retention following the reconstitution of the Colony could be regarded as debatable 260.

However, Niger in any event regards this agreement as a simple interpretation of the
1927Erratum and accordingly recognizes that the Vibourié marker has the status of a frontier
point. On the other hand, there is nothing to justify a boundary moved further to the east as shown

on the IGN map. It follows that, from the Vibourié marker, the frontier runs in a straight line to
join the IGN line at the Tao astronomic marker. Th is sector is thus considered to consist of two
straight lines.

(b) From the Tao astronomic marker to Bangaré, the line of the frontier basically follows the

IGN line

6.21. From the Tao astronomic marker, which is cited in the Erratum of 5 October 1927, the

official text gives no further indication until the point where the inter-colonial boundary rejoins the
boundary of Say cercle. It is therefore reasonable to rely fo r this section, subject to any justified
exception, on the 1960 IGN line.

6.22. The Tao astronomic marker

The Tao astr261mic marker is located, according to the above-mentioned letter from the IGN
of 23 June 1988 , at a point with the following co-ordinates: latitude14°022 ' 1"N,
longitude 0° 19' 55" E. This point is shown as a frontier point on the 1960 IGN map. However the

frontier marker is situated slightly further south and east, at the following co-ordinates:
14° 03' 02" N, 00° 22' 52" E. It is this latter point which should be taken as a frontier point.

From this point, the IGN line passes to the w est of Petelkolé (the village’s co-ordinates are
14° 00' 35.7" N, 00° 24' 52.6" E), which it leaves to Niger. This is in accordance with the
administrative information from the colonial period. Petelkolé was already regarded as belonging
262
to Niger at the time of the Roser/Boyer agreement of April1932 . Similarly, in the report in

25Description of Tillabéry cercle; MN, Anns., Series C, No. 65.
260
Regarding the implications in relation to boundariesof the dissolution of Upper Volta in 1932 and its
reconstitution in 1947, see above, para. 5.3.
261
Letter No. DEC/934 of 23 June 1988; MN, Anns., Series C, No. 105.
26See above, 6.22. - 90 -

which Administrator Lacroix, of Tillabéry cercle, gave an account of the tour which he had made
in order to survey the boundary between the two Colonies in this sector 263, we find the following:

“the permanent hamlets of Petelkarkalé and Pete lkolé, between which the boundary passes”. A
sketch-map shows the village of Petelkolé as part of that canton 264. The village is shown as
265
belonging to Niger on the 1960IGN map . It has remained under Niger authority since
independence, is administratively attached to the rural municipality of Bankilaré and numbers

2654inhabitants. This village is the site of the frontier control post between Niger and Burkina
Faso. That post is situated entirely within Nige r territory. Its co-ordinates are the following:
14° 00' 10.4" N, 00° 24' 34.4" E.

The frontier line follows the IGN line as far as th e outskirts of Petelkolé. It then deviates

slightly to the west so as to meet the endpoint of the upgraded stretch of the Téra-Dori road
constructed by Niger (co-ordinates: 14° 00' 04.2" N, 00° 24' 16.3" E). It then rejoins the IGN line
at the point having co-ordinates 13° 59' 39" N, 00° 25' 12" E.

The frontier then follows the I GN line, leaving Fetokarkale (Bur kina Faso) to the west. It
then passes through a frontier point known as Baobab (13° 58' 38.9" N, 00° 26' 03.5" E), and

through Tindiki (13° 57' 15.4.9" N, 00° 26' 23.6" E), as far as the break in the line of crosses in the
vicinity of Ihouchaltane (Oulsalta on the 1960 IGN map, Sebba sheet).

6.23. Ihouchaltane or Ouchaltan, Ousaltan, Oulsalta

Geographical co-ordinates: 13° 54' 41.4" N, 00° 27' 34.8" E.

266
Although its ownership has been disputed , this village was regarded as belonging to Niger
by the Roser/Boyer Agreement of April1932 26, cited by the authorities of Niger Colony on
268 269
24 May 1935 and 11July1951 . The locality is shown on the sketch-map of Diagourou
canton in 1954 under the name of Ousselta ⎯ Oussaltane 270.

It is an encampment, or more precisely a group of encampments, of the Kel Tamajirt tribe, of
the Tinguéréguédesch groupement of the rural municipality of Bankilaré. Its population is

estimated at 296 inhabitants, of whom the majority are of Niger nationality and regularly pay their
taxes at Bankilaré (Oussaltan is indicated as a dependent settlement
[lougan] of Logomaten Kel
271 272
Timijirt in the directory of villages of Téra subdivision dating from 1941 ). The frontier passes

263Report of a tour conducted from 16 to 23 November 1953 by Deputy Administrator Lacroix, (Tillabéry cercle),
dated 24 December 1953; MN, Anns., Series C, No. 79.

264Ibid.

265MN, Anns., Series D, No. 27.

266It appears on the frontier according to the sketch-map pr epared by Delbos in June 1927; MN, Anns., Series C,
No. 14.
267
Tour Report of the Dori cercle Commander (Roser) to the Governor of Upper Volta, dated 10April1932;
MN, Anns., Series C, No. 45.
268
Letter No. 161 from the Head of Téra subdivision to the Commander of Tillabéry cercle; MN, Anns., Series C,
No. 60.
269
Official telegram/letter No.70 from the H ead of Téra subdivision to Tillabéry cercle; MN, Anns., SeriesC,
No. 73.
270
Sketch-map of Diagourou; MN, Anns., Series D, No. 21. This sketch-map was appended to the report of the
Head of Téra subdivision on the census of Diabourou canton, dated 10 August 1954; MN, Anns., Series C, No. 84.
271
See the Record of Agreement of 2February1927, which mentions the Logomaten as a canton of Tillabéry;
MN, Anns., Series C, No. 7.
272
See MN, Anns., Series C, No. 64. - 91 -

through a point situated on the river to the w est of the encampment, whose co-ordinates are

13° 55' 36.4" N, 00° 27' 07.2" E.

The area of Ihouchaltane encampments encomp asses lands situated be neath the arm of the

river to the west, as far as the encampment of Débé ré Bagna or Débéré Siri N’Gobé located to the
south, which has belonged to the Peulh tribes of Téra subdivision since at least 1933. The
boundary passes through the point having co-ordinates 13° 53' 12.8" N, 00° 28' 13.5" E located on
the Kalsatouma-Sidibébé road. It then rejoin s the IGN line at the point having co-ordinates

13° 53' 24" N, 00° 29' 58" E. From that point the boundary follows the 1960 IGN line as far as the
point having co-ordinates 13° 52' 04" N, 00° 31' 00"E, where the area of Komanti encampments
(Kamanti or Comanti on certain documents) commences.

In reality this is a vast area, comprising several encampments with id entical names situated
to either side of the frontier.

Among the encampments administered by Niger since the colonial period we would cite:

⎯ Komanti, an encampment of the Kel Tamaguit tribe of the Tuareg Tinguereguedesh

groupement (former Logomaten canton) of Bankilaré rural municipality, described as a
dependent settlement of the Assadek Logomaten 273in the 1941 directory of villages of Téra
subdivision;

⎯ Kamanti (Ourou Toupé), place of residence of the Kel Tamaguit tribe, of the Tuareg
Tinguereguedesh groupement (former Logomaten canton) of Bankilaré rural municipality; its

population is estimated at 236 inhabitants, who regularly pay their taxes at Bankilaré;

⎯ Zongowaétan (Fété Tao), Kel Tamaguit tribe, 500inhabitants, who pay their taxes at
274
Bankilaré ;

⎯ Ouro Tambella (Dingui Dingui), Peulh tribe of Diagourou municipality.

The frontier marked on the 1960IGN sheets is drawn with many gaps, to indicate that its
course is particularly problematic in this sector ; that is moreover confirmed by the completion
sheets of the 1958-1959 season 275 relating to this area, on which can be read the comment

“boundary uncertain”.

From the point having co-ordinates 13° 52' 04" N, 0° 31' 00" E, where there is a break in the
line of crosses on the 1960IGN map, the boundary passes through the point having co-ordinates

13° 48' 55" N, 0° 30' 23" E, then reaches the point with co-ordinates 13° 46' 31" N, 0° 30' 27" E. It
then runs to the point with co-ordinates 13°46'18" N, 0°32'47"E located to the north of Ouro
Sabou on the tributary arm of the River Tyekol Dyongoltol. The frontier then follows that tributary

until its confluence with the Tyekol Dyongoltol at the point with co-ordinates 13°46'51"N,
00°35'53"E; from there, it follows the IGN line as far as the point with co-ordinates
13° 46' 22.5" N, 0° 37' 25.9" E, located at the level of Bangaré on the River Folko, thus leaving

Ouro Boulé (Komanti) to Burkina and Ourou Toupé (Kamanti) to Niger.

This boundary leaves to Burkina Faso the lo calities of Ouro Boulé, also called Komanti,
Ouro Sabou, Débildani and Tonguel as shown on th e IGN/France map, and to Niger the localities

27Ibid.
274
Zongowaetan is shown on the 1954 sketch-map of Diagourou canton; see MN, Anns., Series D, No. 21.
27MN, Anns., Series D, sheets Nos. 27-30. - 92 -

of Komanti, Kamanti, also called Ouro Toupé, Zongouweitan, also called Kamanti Fété Tao, and
Dingui-Dingui, also called Ouro Tanbella 276.

(c) From Bangaré to the boundary of Say cercle, the frontier follows the IGN line

6.24. Bangaré has always been located in the territory of Niger. It was a dependency of

Diagourou, which had existed since the beginning of the twentieth century. On the sketch-map
drawn by Prudon in 1927, Bangaré was, however, shown in Upper Volta territory 277. In the
278 279
sketch-maps prepared by Delbos in June and August 1280, this name appears on the
boundary. The locality acquired the status of a village in 1945 . The frontier passes through it,
according to the Lacroix Report of November 1953 281. The village was part of Diagourou canton
282
in 1954. It is shown on the sketch-map of Diagourou canton prepared the same year , as well as
in the list of villages voting in Nige r for the National Assembly in 1956 283 and in 1959 284. It is
285
located in Niger by the IGN map of 1960 .

Today, Bangaré is a large, cosmopolitan villa ge of over 1,000souls. The frontier with

Burkina Faso is located at the level of Goro Bandé. This is an arm of one of the main tributaries of
the River Niger, the Dargol, which is known locally as the Folko. At this point, the frontier line

takes a clear south-west orientation. The co-ord inates of the point where the frontier line changes
direction are the following: 13° 46' 22.5" N, 00° 37' 25.9" E.

To the south of Bangaré, the boundary returns to the IGN line. Following the watercourses,
where there are no crosses, it passes between Ko langoldagabé, in Burkina Faso (co-ordinates

13° 43' 52.3" N, 00° 36' 14.5" E) and Lolnando, in Niger (co-ordinates 13° 435'0.3N,
00°36'49.0"E). The line leaves the locality of Kolmangol Nore Ole to Niger, Gourel Manna to
Burkina Faso and Pate Bolga to Niger.

6.25. The frontier then passes through the locality of Sénobellabé (geographical co-ordinates:

13° 36' 52.6" N, 00° 50' 00.8" E). This crop-growing area was the subject of numerous disputes in
the past: it was regarded as belonging to Up per Volta by the Roser/Boyer Agreement of
286
April 1932, in reliance on the Delbos line of 1927 . This view was confirmed by the tour report
of the Head of Téra subdivision dated 8November 1933, forwarded to the Governor of Niger by
287
the Commander of Tillabéry cercle . The same view was taken in the Record of Agreement

276Toponyms such as Ouchaltane, Koman ti, Kamanti, Herou and Haïni designa te plateaux or valleys in which
there are a number of localities or hamlets whose name is associated with the topony m in question. As a result, on either
side of the frontier line we find a number of different localities called Komanti, Kamanti, Haïni, Herou or Ouchaltane.

277Prudon sketch-map; MN, Anns., Series D, No. 3.
278
Delbos sketch-map, June 1927; MN, Anns., Series C, No. 2.
279
Delbos sketch-map, August 1927; MN, Anns., Series C, No. 16.
280
Report from the Head of Téra subdivision on the census of Diagourou canton, dated 10August1954, p.9;
MN, Anns., Series C, No. 84.
281
Report of a tour conducted from 16 to 23 November 1953 by Deputy Administrator Lacroix (Tillabéry cercle),
dated 24 December 1953; MN, Anns., Series C, No. 79.
282
Ibid.
283Ibid.

284Ibid.

285MN, Anns., Series D, No. 28.
286
Letter No.112 of 10April1932; MN, Anns., SeriesC, No. ... Mistake! Source of reference could not be
found.
287
Tour Report of 8 November 1933; MN, Anns., Series C, No. 52. - 93 -

between the Administrators of Dori and Téra of 25April1935 28. The result was a transfer of

population of Niger origin to the localities of Taka and Yolo, situ289d in Niger territory. The same
happened with the Record of Agreement of 8 December 1943 .

However, this position was never confirmed by the competent higher authority. Sénobellabé
(or Sénébellabé, depending on the documents) re mained cited among the villages of Diagourou
canton (Niger) in 1933 and in 1948 29. This locality was located in Niger on the 1960 IGN map
(Sebba sheet). However, these are farming hamlets, which do not remain in the same place. The

sites change according to the seasons and retain the same toponyms. Before 1960, Sénobellabé
was further north. Today, the former site has been abandoned and the hamlets which continue to
bear that name are to be found on the Burkina si de of the IGN line. Th eir co-ordinates are as

follows: 13° 36' 52.6" N, 00° 50' 00.8" E.

The current site of Sénobellabé must be regard ed as being located on the Burkina side of the

frontier, just as Hérou Bouleba is.

The IGN line meets the line which at the time constituted the boundary of Say (tripoint for
the cantons of Tillabéry, Dori and Say) at the point with co-ordinates 13° 29' 08" N, 01° 01' 00" E.

6.26. In conclusion, for all of the reasons set out in this Chapter, the course of the frontier
between the two States in the Téra sector should be the following:

⎯ starting from the Tong-Tong astronomic marker (co-ordinates: 14° 25' 04" N, 00° 12' 47" E);

⎯ from that point: a straight line as far as the Vibourié marker (co-ordinates: 14°21'44"N,
0° 16' 25" E);

⎯ from that point: a straight line as far as the Tao astronomic marker (co-ordinates:
14° 03' 02.2" N, 00° 22' 52.1" E);

⎯ from that point the frontier follows the 1960IGN line (Téra sheet) as far as the point having
co-ordinates 14° 01' 55" N, 00° 24' 11" E;

⎯ from that point, it runs in a straight line to the frontier point on the new Téra-Dori road
(co-ordinates: 14° 00' 04.2" N, 00° 24' 16.3" E);

⎯ it then meets a river arm at the point with co -ordinates 13° 59' 03" N, 00° 25' 12" E. The

frontier then passes through a frontier point calle d Baobab (13° 58' 38.9" N, 00° 26' 03.5" E),
then follows the IGN line, leaving Tindiki (13° 57' 15.4" N, 00° 26' 23.6" E) to Niger, as far as
the break in the line of crosses north of Ihouc haltane (Oulsalta) on the 1960 IGN map (Sebba

sheet), at the point with co-ordinates 13° 55' 54" N, 00° 28' 21" E. From this point the frontier
follows the loop formed by the river to the w est as far as the point having co-ordinates
13°55'32"N, 00°27'07"E, and passes through a point situated on the Sidibébé-Kalsatouma

road having co-ordinates 13° 52' 32.8"N, 00° 28' 13.5" E. From that point, it rejoins the IGN
line at the point having co-ordinates 13°53'24" N, 00°29'58"E, as far as the break in the
crosses at the point having co-ordinates 13°52'04" N, 0° 31' 00" E. The frontier then runs

south as far as the point having co-ordinates 13° 48' 55" N, 00° 30' 23" E situated on the arm of
the river to the west of Komanti, passes through a point south-west of Ouro Toupé (Kamanti)

28Record of Agreement of 25 April 1935; MN, Anns., Series C, No. 57.
289
Record of Agreement of 8 December 1943; MN, Anns., Series C, No. 69.
29List of villages of Téra subdivision, documents 6July1933 and 1948, undated; MN, Anns., SeriesC,
Nos. 50 and 71. - 94 -

with co-ordinates 13°46'31"N, 00°30'27"E, then to the north of Ouro Sabou to a point on
the arm of the tributary of the Tyekol Dyon goytol whose co-ordinates are 13°46'18"N,

00°32'47"E. The frontier then follows this tributary until its confluence with the Tyekol
Dyongoytol at the point having co-ordinates 13°46'51"N, 00°35'53"E. From there it
follows the 1960IGN line until it reaches the level of Bangaré (Niger) on the River Folko at
the point having co-ordinates 13° 46' 22.5" N, 00° 37' 25.9" E.

From that point the frontier follows the IGN line, following the watercourses where there are
no crosses, passing between Kolangoldagabé (BF) (co- ordinates 13° 43' 52.3" N, 00° 36' 14.5" E)
and Lolnando (N) (co-ordinates 13°43'50.3"N, 00°36'49.0"E). The line leaves the hamlet

known as Kolnangol Nore Ole to Niger, Gourel Manma to Burkina Faso and Pate Bolga to Niger.

⎯ The frontier then follows the 1960 IGN line (Sebba sheet) as far as the point with co-ordinates
13° 37' 20" N, 00° 50' 47" E and then to the point with co-ordinates 13° 34' 47" N,

00°58'20"E, leaving to Burkina Faso the current site of Hérou Bouléba and to Niger that of
Hérou Boularé.

⎯ From there it follows the IGN line, connecting the gaps between sections with straight lines, as

far as the tripoint of the former boundaries of the cercles of Say, Tillabéry and Dori
(co-ordinates 13° 29' 08" N, 01° 01' 00" E). C HAPTER VII

DETERMINATION OF THE FRONTIER IN THE S AY SECTOR

7.1. The second section of the frontier concerned by the present dispute is that which

separates the current département of Say (Tillabéry region) on the Niger side from the provinces of
Yagha, Komandjari and Tapoa (Eastern region) on the Burkina side. These current administrative
subdivisions correspond to the former colonial administrative divisions constituted, at the time of
the accession of the two States to independence, by Say cercle in Niger and Fada N’Gourma cercle

in Upper Volta. This section is some 160 km long. It runs from the boundary between the Say and
Tillabéry départements as far as the Botou Loop, where the two parties have reached agreement on
the course of their common frontier (this la tter sector being identified in subparagraph (b) of
Article (2) of the Special Agreement seising the Court).

7.2. The present Chapter includes a physi cal and human description of the Say sector
(Section 1), as well as the statement of the claims of the Republic of Niger regarding the course of

the frontier in this area (Section 2).

Section 1 ⎯ Physical and human description

of the Say sector

7.3. In physical terms, the area traversed by the frontier between the two States in this sector
consist of a rocky plateau, which slopes gently down towards the River Niger in a west-east

direction, before ending in steep cliffs. To the south, in the area of the WRegional Park, this
plateau is drained by the Rivers Tapoa and Mekrou.

7.4. Climatically, the Say/Fada area forms part of a climatic strip situated at the interface of

continental and maritime climates. The climate is characterized by a dry season of seven months
and a rainy season of five months. This alte rnation produces a hydric balance in overall
equilibrium, favouring substantial vegetative growth.

7.5. The vegetation in this area consists ofdry, low-growing forests on the plateaux, clear
forests on the hillsides, gallery-forests along the damp riverbanks and arboreal savannah in the dry
valleys. Thanks to the extensive hydrographic netw ork and the nature of the soil, the vegetation is

rich and very varied. The ligneous vegetation provi des the local people with a major part of their
domestic needs (timber) and food requirements (leave d plants, flowers, grain, fruit, edible roots)
and furnishes significant pharmacopoeia and handicraft resources. Forest resources are, however,
under threat from illegal logging, land clearance, overgrazing and bushfires. - 97 -

7.6. The area is characterized by the presence of abundant wildlife. Its southern part
291
includes one of the most important wildlife reserves in West Africa: the Niger W Regional Park ,
which covers 1million hectares on the territories of Niger, Burkina Faso and Benin. Outside the
area of the park, towards the River Sirba, herds of elephant, buffalo and warthog can be met with,

as well as groups of lion, hyena and leopard, which makes the conduct of human activity
problematic in the area. The region’s watercourses and pools were long infested with tsetse flies,
causing blindness among humans and animals. This pa rasite was eradicated several decades ago.
But previously, the presence of tsetse fly and poiso nous snakes resulted in the relocation of many

villages, or even their disappearance.

7.7. In human terms, the Say/Fada region is lightly populated. It is subject to constant

regional transhumance. This is of three kinds:

⎯ major transhumance, which consists of move ments over very long distances, generally
practiced by the Bororo and related Peulhs;

⎯ minor transhumance, a movement over short and medium distances, generally carried out in
order to exploit the pastureland beside rivers and pools;

⎯ commercial transhumance, involving small fl ocks, for the purpose of increasing milk
production and taking advantage of the pasturage provided by fallow croplands.

This activity, which dates back to the mists of time, is today regulated within the Economic
Community of West African States (ECOWAS), of which Niger and Burkina are both members.

7.8. As has been observed in the Téra sect or, these phenomena of migration linked to crop
farming or stock-raising have had the effect, in this area too, of causing relocations of villages,
many of which have subsequently been abandoned in favour of other settlements. This situation
has on a number of occasions resulted in disputes between the authorities of the two States

regarding sovereignty over certain of these villag es. The exploitation of gold deposits has also
given rise to disputes in this area. However, gene rally speaking, these disputes have turned out to
be far less serious than those affecting the Téra sector, because of the generally low habitation

levels in the areas concerned.

Section 2 ⎯ The course of the frontier in the Say sector

7.9. As was the case for the Téra sector, the only text from the colonial period determining
the boundaries of the two Colonies in the Say sector is the Erratum No.2602/APA of
5 October 1927, correcting Arrêté No.2336 of the Governor General of French West Africa of

31 August of the same year. Regarding the Say sector, the text of Article 1 of the Arrêté originally
read as follows:

“2. Boundaries between the Say cercle and Upper Volta:

The villages of Botou canton are excluded from this boundary.

To the north and to the east, by the current boundary with Niger (Niamey

cercle), from Sorbohaoussa to the mouth of the River Mekrou;

291
This official name of the park is due to the fact that th e course of the River Niger in this area takes the form of
the letter “W”. - 98 -

To the north-west, by the River Sirba from its mouth as far as the village of

Bossébangou. From this point a salient, including on the left bank of the Sirba the
villages of Afassi, Kouro, Takalan and Tankouro;

To the south-west, a line starting approx imately from the Sirba at the level of

the Say parallel and running as far as the Mekrou;

To the south-east, by the Mekrou from that point as far as its confluence with
the Niger.” 292

7.10. As has already been explained 29, that Arrêté in reality manifestly went beyond the

scope of its initial object. Instead of confini ng itself to describing the boundary between the
Colonies of Niger and Upper Volta in this area, it described the entire boundaries of Say cercle
(thus including those separating it from other neighbouring cercles belonging either to the Colony
of Niger or to that of Dahomey). That error was corrected ⎯ although not entirely, we will come

back to that ⎯ by the above-mentioned Erratum, according to which the boundary between the two
Colonies was constituted by

“[a] line starting at the heights of N’Gouma, passing through the Kabia ford
(astronomic point), Mount Arounskoye and Mount Balébanguia, to the west of the
ruins of the village of Tokebangou, Mount Doumafende and the Tong-Tong

astronomic marker; this line then turns towards the south-east, cutting the Téra-Dori
motor road at the Tao astronomic marker located to the west of the Ossolo Pool, and
reaching the River Sirba at Bossebangou. It almost immediately turns back up
towards the north-west, leaving to Niger, on the left bank of that river, a salient which

includes the villages of Alfassi, Kouro, Tokalan, and Tankouro; then, turning back to
the south, it again cuts the Sirba at the level of the Say parallel.

From that point the frontier, following an east-south-east direction, continues in
a straight line up to a point located 1,200 m to the west of the village of Tchenguiliba.
[…]”

7.11. This description of the boundary was thus extremely succinct for the sector of the
frontier with which we are concerned in the presen t Chapter, which stretches from the point where
the line “reach[es] the River Sirba at Bossebangou” to the village of Tchenguiliba. The section

described in the first part of the Erratum (before reaching the Sirba) in fact concerns the Téra
sector. Its latter part, beyond the village of Tc henguiliba, goes from the start of the Botou Loop to
the point where the frontier between Burkina F aso and Niger meets the territory of Benin ⎯ a

sector which, as already stated above, is not in disp ute between the Parties. In reality, all that we
have available to us is a text of five lines to identify the course of the frontier between the two
States in this area over a distance of almost 160 km.

7.12. This text was, however, never the subj ect of any addition, amendment or correction
during the colonial period. It remained, at the time when the two States became independent, the

only reference text for the determination of their common frontier. In accordance with the general
approach of the Republic of Niger regarding the pr inciples applicable through the determination of
the frontier in the present dispute ⎯ and in accordance with the terms of the 2009 Special

Agreement and of the 1987 Agreement between the two States ⎯ it is thus the text of the

292
Arrêté of 31 August 1927; MN, Anns., Series B, No. 26.
293
See above, para. 1.26. - 99 -

1927 Erratum which will constitute the primary basis for determination of the course of the frontier

between the two States in this second sector. It is clear, however, in the first place, that certain
parts of that text are problematic, in that it describes not the inter-colonial bo undary (but in fact a
section of the boundary between two administrative divisions both belonging to the Colony of

Niger). Secondly, the course of the boundary shown on the 1960 IGN map in part deviates
markedly from that described in the Erratum. It is therefore essential to consider separately the
three sections identified in this part of the 1927 Erratum, in order to determine as precisely as

possible the boundary which it describes, but also in order to show that there are well-established
reasons for not following it in certain respects.

7.13. We shall therefore show in turn in the present Section that there was no justification for
continuing the inter-colonial boundary to the village of Bossébangou, as stated in the text of the
Erratum (A), and that the “salient” comprising four villages defined in the Erratum can be clearly

identified (B) and, finally, that a course consisting of a series of straight lines for the part of the
frontier which runs from the Say parallel to the village of Tchenguiliba is fully justified (C).

A. There was no justification for continuing th e inter-colonial boundary to the village of
Bossébangou

7.14. According to the text of the 1927 Arrêté, the route whereby the inter-colonial boundary

reached the Say sector is the following: from the nor th, it arrived at the “River Sirba (boundary of
Say cercle), near to and to the south of Boulkalo”. While this text was then supposed to go on to
define the boundary between Say cercle and Upper Volta, it included the entire perimeter of Say

cercle. The Erratum modified the text of the Arrêté by indicating that the inter-colonial boundary
reached the Say sector by running from “the Tao astronomic marker located to the west of the
Ossolo Pool, and reaching the River Sirba at Bossébangou”. In this way it partially perpetuated the

error which it was supposed to correct, by making the line which it described end at a point which
constituted a purely internal boundary between the cercles of Tillabéry and Say, which belonged to
one and the same Colony. This appears very clear ly from the series of stages which led to the

adoption of the Erratum of October 1927.

7.15. As was recalled earlier 29, the need to define the new inter-colonial boundaries between

Upper Volta and Niger resulted from the incorporation into the latter Colony of various cantons of
Dori cercle, as well as Say cercle (which the exception of Botou canton), carried out in
December 1926 295. Whereas at that date the Colony of Ni ger was confined to the left bank of the

River Niger, this incorporation had the effect of extending it to include territories situated on the
river’s right bank. The text of the Decree e ffecting that incorporation provided that “[a]n Arrêté of
the Governor-General in Standing Committee of the Government Council shall determine the
course of the boundary of the two Colonies in th is area”. It was in this context that on

10 February 1927 a Record of Agreement between Le filliatre, Inspector of Administrative Affairs,
representative of the Governor of Upper Volta, and Choteau, Chief Colonial Administrator,
representing the Governor of the Colony of Niger, was signed at Say incorporating into the Colony
296
of Niger the cantons constituting the Say cercle . Under the terms of that Agreement:

“folleowing cantons composing Say cercle are hereby incorporated into

Niger Colony . . . Namaro . . . Lamordé . . . Torodi . . . Gueladio . . . Diongoré . . .

29See above, paras. 1.22, 5.4 ff. and 6.11 ff.
295
Decree of 28December1926 transferring the administrative centre of the Colony Niger and providing for
territorial changes in French West Africa, and Arrêté promulgating that Decree; MN, Anns., Series B, No. 23.
29Record of Agreement of 10 February 1927; MN, Anns., Series C, No. 8. - 100 -

Say . . . Tamou . . . Tiala . . . independent villages of Sarakolés, Dantiandou, [Colo],
Dar-es-Salam.

These territories are bounded: to the north and east, by the current boundary
with Niger... To the north-west, by the River Sirba from its mouth as far as the
village of Bossébangou. From this point a salient, including on the left bank of the

Sirba, the villages of Alfassi, Kouro, Tokalan and Tankourou.

To the south-west, a line starting approx imately from the Sirba at the level of
the Say parallel and running as far as the Mekrou.

To the south-east, by the Mekrou from that point as far as its confluence with
the Niger.

Excluded from this boundary are the villages forming the canton of Botou listed

below . . .”. - 102 -

7.16. It is thus indeed the entire boundaries of Say cercle (not including Botou canton) which
are described in this text. And it is quite clearly on that basis that the Arrêté général of

August 1927 was prepared, since it reproduces it prac tically word for word and describes the entire
boundaries of the cercle. The text of that document thus describes both the boundaries separating

that cercle from the neighbouring Colonies (Upper Volta and Dahomey) and those separating it
from other cercles within the Colony of Niger. Ho wever, only the boundaries between the
Colonies of Niger and Upper Volta should have been described there. The Erratum of

October1927 almost completely corrected this mistake, except in one respect: in making the
inter-colonial boundary run as far as the village of Bossébangou. While this locality was indeed
located on the boundary between Say cercle and the cantons of Dori cercle incorporated into Niger

in 1926, it was, however, no longer on the boundary with Upper Volta after that incorporation had
been carried out.

7.17. This appears very clearly on the many maps of the period. The map entitled “French

West Africa ⎯ New frontier between Upper Volta and Niger”, published in 1927 (and expressly
referring, which should be stressed, to the Arrêté and the Erratum) thus indicated very clearly the
difference between these two types of bounda ry. Thus the boundary between the two cercles now

belonging to Niger was indicated by a line •―•―•―•―•, whilst that separating the two Colonies
was indicated by +―+―+―+―+. Whilst the first of these lines clearly passes through
Bossébangou, the second runs some 20 km away from th at locality. This is very far from being an

isolated case and is repeated on a large number of maps of the colonial period. These include:

⎯ the road map of the Colony of Upper Volta on a scale of 1:1,000,000, 1927 edition,
297
Geographical Department of French West Africa, Dakar ;

⎯ the Niamey sheet of the “Sketch-Maps of th e Sahara and Neighbouring Regio298on a scale of
1:1,000,000” (ND-31), Army Geographical Section, 1926-1927 ;

299 300
⎯ the 1:2,500,000 road maps of the Colony of Niger, 1934 and 1936 editions;

⎯ French West Africa: General Political and Administrative Map to a scale of 1:2,500,000,
301
second edition 1928, FWA Geographical Department, Dakar ;

⎯ the map entitled “French West Africa” to a scale of 1:3,000,000, third e302ion, 1930, prepared
by A. Meunier, Geographer with the Ministry for the Colonies ;

⎯ road map of the Colony of Upper Volta to a scale of 1:1,000,000, 1936 edition, FWA
Geographical Department, Dakar 303.

None of these maps shows the inter-colonial boundary running as far as Bossébangou. On
the contrary, in each case the boundary is represen ted as clearly changing direction towards the
south-west well before reaching that locality. It is this point, and not the village of Bossébangou,

29MN, Anns., Series D, No. 11.

29MN, Anns., Series D, No. 10.

29MN, Anns., Series D, No. 16.
300
MN, Anns., Series D, No. 17.
301
MN, Anns., Series D, No. 14.
30MN, Anns., Series D, No. 15.

30MN, Anns., Series D, No. 17. - 103 -

which is systematically presented as the “tripoint” between the cercles of Tillabéry, Say and Dori.
The same applies to the sketch-maps of the area prepared during the colonial period 304.

304
See inter alia the 1:1,000,000 sketch-map entitled “Colony of Niger ⎯ Niamey cercle ⎯ Links between
Niamey and Fada N’Gourma”, prepared by Administrator Duranteau, cercle Commander, Niamey, 29May1933; MN,
Anns., Series C, No. 49. - 105 -

7.18. The mistake on this point contained in the Erratum of October 1927 thus continued to
have no effect on the representation of the inte r-colonial boundary in this area throughout the

colonial period. Likewise, there is no evidence at all that, in the eyes of the colonial authorities
themselves, Bossébangou was regarded as a border locality during that period. A large number of
documents confirm this.

7.19. This is the case in particular for the reports prepared by the colonial officials on the

various tours or missions conducted by them in order to identify the boundaries of the cercles and
Colonies in this sector. The first of these are the reports prepared in 1927 by the Commanders of
the cercles concerned, with a view to the adoption of the arrêté intended to fix the new boundaries

between the two Colonies in this sector. In a letter of 27 August 1927, Administrator Delbos wrote
in this regard that the boundary between the two cercles “follow[s] a bearing of 170° until it
reaches the boundary of Say cercle to the west of Alfassi on the River Cirba” 305. There was thus

no question of a boundary reaching Bossébangou. Still more explicitly, on 17 December 1927, in
reaction to the text of the Erratum adopted in October in order to correct the text of the Arrêté, the
same official wrote: “[the frontier] runs,... as my letter438 states... southward as far as

Nababori, reaching the Say cercle to the west of Alfassi and not at Bossébangou, which is further
up” 306. The two explanatory sketch-maps appended to his reports are very eloquent in this
regard 307. In his Tour Report of 4 August 1927, the Commander of Tillabéry cercle, Prudon, stated
308
much the same: “[f]rom Nababori, we travelled in a northerly direction” . His sketch-map shows
that the boundary coming from the north and passi ng through Nababori joins the Sirba at the level

of Alfassi. A supplementary report by Admi nistrator Delbos, date d 27 August 1927, was
accompanied by a draft delimitation for submission to the Government-General of French West
Africa, which quite explicitly confirmed this lin e. The boundary as described there, coming from

the north after Tao,

“descends on a bearing of 135° for 27.5km, then for 26.5km on a bearing of 147°,

until it reaches a point 5 km to the north of Iga Pool.

It then turns back up in a north-easterly direction on a bearing of 79° for

31.5 km, before redescending on a bearing of 127° for a distance of 13.5 km, and then
on a bearing of 190° for 25.5km, before finally following a bearing of 170° until it
reaches the boundary of Say cercle to the west of Alfassi on the River Cirba.

No opposition on the part of the local inhabitants having been encountered, this
report was closed and signed by the parties.” 309

This draft thus shows very clearly that, both in the eyes of the officials concerned, and in
those of the local population, there was no justification for having the inter-colonial boundary run

through Bossébangou.

30Letter from the Commander of Dori cercle to the Governor of Upper Volta dated 27 August 1927; MN, Anns.,
Series C, No. 16.
306
Letter No. 731 of 17 December 1927; MN, Anns., Series C, No. 20; emphasis added.
307
Ibid.
30Report No. 25 of 4 August 1927; MN, Anns., Series C, No. 15.

30Letter from the Commander of Dori cercle to the Governor of Upper Volta dated 27 August 1927; MN, Anns.,
Series C, No. 16. - 106 -

7.20. This view of the course of the inter-c olonial boundary in this sector was also very
strongly maintained after 1927. Thus, following their meeting of 10 April 1932, the Commander of
Dori cercle (Roser) and the Head of Téra subdivision (Boyer) wrote to the same effect:

“Going from south to north, the boundary between Tillabéry and Dori cercles is

as follows:310 starts at Alfassi, passes through Nabambori (Yagha crop-growing
village).”

The Record of Agreement of 8December 1943 describing the delimitation operations
between Dori and Tillabéry carried out by Administrators Delmond (Dori cercle), Texier and Garat
(Tillabéry cercle) arrived at similar conclusions:

“Description of the stretch of boundary adopted

[...] the undersigned... decided to visit the place which, according to certain
information, was said to be the meeting point of the three territories of Dori (Yagha
canton), Tillabéry (Dargol canton ) and Say (Torodi canton), and had moreover been

proposed as such by Administrators Prudhon [sic] and Delbos during their joint tour
of the area in 1927. This point is a small platform situated 6.5 km (as the crow flies)
to the north-east of the hamlet of Nabambori, at the source of one of the streams which

form the Tiekol Nabambori, tributary of the Sirba, and lying between the massifs of
Samkyilga to the west and Fisso to the east. This platform, known as Fisso, is

recognizable from the alignment o311aterite rocks of probably very ancient origin
which occupy its upper part.”

Here again, it is not Bossébangou whic h is taken as “tripoint” between the cercles of Dori,
Tillabéry and Say, but a point close to the hamlet of Nabambori, not far from Alfassi. This thus
appears to be the consistent position during the colonial period.

7.21. Finally, the 1960 IGN map is the first document of this type which makes the boundary

between Upper Volta and Niger descend as far as Bossébangou. It thus reproduces the mistake
contained in the Erratum of 1927. In so doing, the IGN called into question the traditional course
of the boundaries of Say cercle, which had, however, never changed throughout the colonial
312
period. We have seen above that this had been the case for the period subsequent to 1927 . But
this traditional course was also already apparent on various sketch-maps and maps prior to that
date. These included:

⎯ the sketch-map of Captain Boutiq, Commander of Djerma cercle, to a scale of 1:1,000,000 of
313
19 June 1909 ;

⎯ the sketch-map of Commander Truchard to a scale of 1:500,000 of 1 August 1915 31;

⎯ map No. 80 of the Atlas of Cercles ⎯ Say cercle, to a scale of 1:500,000 of January 1926 315;
and

31Letter No. 112 of 10 April 1932; MN, Anns., Series C, No. 45, p. 6.

31Record of Agreement of 8 December 1943; MN, Anns., Series C, No. 69.
312
See the various maps mentioned above, para. 7.17.
313
MN, Anns., Series D, No. 1.
31MN, Anns., Series D, No. 4.

31MN, Anns., Series D, No. 6. - 107 -

⎯ the map Volta-Niger-Dahomey 1926 (Blondel la Rougery) to a scale of 1:500,000 of
316
June 1926 .

7.22. The first of these sketch-maps is of fundamental importance. This is the sketch-map

appended to the report of Captain Boutiq, Commander of Djerma cercle , on the possible transition
of the military régime to a civil one for the right bank of the Niger. Prepared in 1909 (the date-
stamp for its arrival in the Military Territory of Niger shows 19 June), this is thus a sketch-map of

the region showing the cercles of Say, Tillabéry and Dori before the part of Tillabéry cercle
situation on the right bank of the River Niger was joined to Dori cercle in 1910. This sketch-map
shows very clearly the boundaries between Tillabéry cercle, Say cercle and Dori cercle. The
tripoint is indicated there quite precisely at the point of the salient, and not at Bossébangou. This

position was restored by the 1926Decree, of which the 1927 Arrêté was an implementing text,
which could not conceivably have been in contradiction with that Decree, since it was from it that it
derived its legitimacy.

7.23. This boundary is thus not in accordance with the representations of the inter-colonial
boundary in this area, as it appears on numerous documents from the colonial period. As has been

shown above, it has no basis either in the colonial practice subsequent to 1927.

7.24. It is thus from the point identified on these various maps as the meeting-point of the

cercles of Tillabéry, Say and Dori, and not from the village of Bossébangou itself, that the
identification of the following section of boundary must start, which, according to the Erratum of
1927, creates a “salient” of four villages before meeting the River Sirba further south. This

“tripoint” (in the context of the colonial period, in any event) is situat ed at the place where the
boundary between Dori and Tillabéry cercles joins the traditional boundary of Say cercle; its
co-ordinates are as follows: 13° 29' 08" N, 1° 1' 00" E.

B. The frontier line in the sector of the four villages can be identifie
d with precision

7.25. The next section of the inter-colonial bounda ry is defined as follows in the Erratum of

1927: “It almost immediately turns back up toward s the north-west, leaving to Niger, on the left
bank of that river, a salient which includes the v illages of Alfassi, Kouro, Tokalan and Tankouro;
then, turning back to the south, it again cuts the Sirba at the level of the Say parallel.”

7.26. Before going any further, it should be not ed that, in light of the conclusions just
reached regarding the correctness of the course of the boundary described in the 1927 text in this

area, the word “salient” used therein becomes probl ematic. The course of the line implied by that
expression only makes sense in relation to the boundary between Dori and Say cercles , which is
internal to the Colony of Niger. However, it makes no sense in relation to the inter-colonial
boundary. Given that this boundary came not from Bossébangou but ran directly from the Tao
317
marker to the “tripoint” between the cercles of Dori, Tillabéry and Say, as identified above , the
frontier cannot create a salient in this area. It si mply turns in a south-westerly direction from that
“tripoint”. But the fact remains that, under the text of the Erratum ⎯ but also in light of the

cartographic representations of the boundary during the colonial period ⎯ the course of the frontier
in this sector must necessarily leave to Niger the sites corresponding to the villages of Alfassi,
Kouro, Tokalan and Tankouro.

316
MN, Anns., Series D, No. 9.
317
See above, para. 6.25. - 108 -

7.27. With this clarification, it is now possible to pass to the interpretation of this part of the
Erratum, which raises difficulties of two kinds. First, it is necessary to identify the four villages
mentioned and their exact location and also, in dir ect relation to this question, the depth of the

“salient” so described. Secondly, we need to dete rmine the arrival point of the line in this sector
(the place where it reaches the Sirba “at the level the Say parallel”, before turning east-south-east).

7.28. The 1927Erratum lists four villages, wh ich it locates on the left bank of the River
Sirba in this area and includes in the territory of Say cercle. These are the villages of Alfassi,
Kouro, Tokalan and Tankouro. The first problem in this respect results from the fact that the last of

these localities, Tankouro, appears on only a very limited number of documents from the colonial
period. One of the very rare references to it is to be found on the sketch-map of Say cercle,
prepared in 1915 by Administrator Truchard 318. On the other hand, there is no mention of it on the
319
map illustrating the “new frontier between Upper Volta and Niger” , prepared following the
adoption of the 1927 Arrêté and its Erratum. Similarly, this locality is nowhere mentioned in the
lists of the villages of the relevant canton of Say cercle (Torodi canton). Nor do these lists mention

the village of Tokalan, whose name never app ears. That locality is, however, shown on the
above-mentioned map of 1927 (although w ith a slightly different spelling: Takalan). It is thus
very likely that these two latter villages simply disappeared during the period contemporary with

the adoption of the 1927 Erratum, doubtless as a result of the very unfavourable health conditions
prevailing at the time in this sector.

7.29. In effect, a number of documents from th is period show that various villages located in
this area were severely hit by sl eeping sickness. This led the colonial authorities to order their

relocation some distance from their original sites. This was in particular the case for Kouro and
Alfassi — and even, it would also seem, for Bossébangou — at the start of the year 1927 320. In a
Tour Report dated 26 November 1930, the Administra tor of Say subdivision thus mentions the fact

that all inhabitants of Kouro and Alfassi were then residing in their new villages. He notes,
however, in regard to this latter locality, that “[ d]uring the rainy season, several families settled in
an area west of Faga to plant. The area is infest ed with tsetse fly and is apparently located on the
321
other side of the frontier” . A sketch-map is appended to this report, illustrating very clearly the
former and new locations of each of the villages concerned.

7.30. These relocations, however, had no effect on the determination of the inter-colonial
boundary in this sector. This was done ⎯ it should be recalled ⎯ on the basis of a Record of
322
Agreement adopted right at the beginning of 1927 , at a time when the relocations in question had
not yet been carried out. It is clear that it was in fact the initial locations of these villages that the
authors of the agreement took into account in their description of Say cercle. The best evidence of

this is surely the fact that, according to the sk etch-maps prepared by the Administrator of Say
subdivision in 1930, the new locations of the villages of Alfassi and Kouro were situated on the
right bank of the Sirba, whereas the 1927 texts quite explicitly place them on the left bank of that

river. This situation is shown clearly on the maps from 1915 and 1927 mentioned above, and it is
thus on these that reliance should be placed in order to determine the precise course of the “salient”

31MN, Anns., Series D, No. 4.
319
MN, Anns., Series D, No. 13.
320
See the Tour Report of the Administrator of Say subdi vision, dated 26 November 1930 (MN, Anns., Series C,
No.39); for Bossébangou, see letter No.1049 from th e Governor of Niger to the Commander of Niamey cercle dated
17 May 1936 (MN, Anns., Series C, No. 62).
32Tour Report of the Administrator of Say subdivision, dated 26 November 1930, incl. sketch-map; MN, Anns.,

Series C, No. 39.
32See above, para. 1.24. - 109 -

as defined by the Erratum of October1927. It is for this reason that we should disregard the
representation of the “salient” as it appears on the 1960 IGN maps, which makes the frontier in this
area run significantly further to the east than that shown on the previous maps. Here again, this line

does not correspond to the traditional shape of Say cercle, as it was consistently represented during
the colonial period 323.

32See above, para. 7.21. - 111 -

7.31. In order to interpret this text, we do ha ve available to us an additional indication to
determine the depth of the “salient” at its poi nt. In a telegram/letter sent in 1935 by Say

subdivision to Dori cercle, we find the following:

“ABfotsrseibangou [sic], Say Subdivision encroaches on the left bank [of the

River Sirba] to a depth of some 15 km ⎯ the village of Alfassi (Torodi canton) is the
only Say village located on that bank. Moreover the ‘Niamey’ sheet of the

1:1,000,000 map mistakenly shows that village in Dori cercle ⎯ the frontier then
passes close to the village of Takatami, which belongs to Dori cercle. Its direction is
roughly NNE/SSW and it forms a right angle where it joins the Niamey Say-Fada
324
boundary.”

On this basis, it may accordingly be asserted that the frontier must be located 15 km from the

Sirba at the point where the course of the latter bends to the south. The location of Takalan (which
has disappeared) would be very close to that of the village of Tangangari, to the east of
Takatami 32, beside the Foga, a tributary of the River Sirba, to the south of the site of the village of
326
Kouro .

7.32. Certain difficulties have also arisen in determining the point where the boundary
changes direction in order to run in an east-sout h-east direction. According to the Erratum of
October 1927, this is the point where, “turning back to the south [on leaving the salient], [the line]

again cuts the Sirba at the level of the Say parallel”. The work of the Joint Commission revealed
the problems of interpreting these words too strictly. Niger thus observed in this regard that “[t]he
frontier line, in creating the salient, cannot cut th e Sirba at its exact intersection with the Say

parallel and at the same time encompass the four villa327. This shows that the expression ‘at the
level of the Say parallel’ was merely indicative.” This view can undoubtedly find support in the
fact that the Record of Agreement of 10February1927, which served as a preparatory document

for the Arrêté général of August 1927 and for the Erratum which corrected the latter, was evidently
less precise on the matter. Thus it stated that the boundary of Say cercle in this area consisted in
“[t]o the south-west, a line starting approximately from the Sirba at the level of the Say parallel and
328
running as far as the Mekrou” . This clearly can but confirm that the text of the Erratum should
not be read too literally on this point.

7.33. As regards this lower part of the “sa lient”, the solution adopted above is supported by
two elements dating from the colonial period. The first is that deriving from the location of the

frontier on the road from Bossébangou to Fada N’Gourma. Thus, according to documents from the
colonial period, the boundary is located 4km south of Boborgou Saba 329, which confirms the
correctness of the thesis put forward by Niger. More over, it is clear that reference has to be made

to the representations of the Say parallel as it was shown on the maps of the period ⎯ and not on
modern maps ⎯ in order to determine the point where the frontier changes direction in this sector.

In this regard, the Blondel-LaRougery map of 1926 appears to represent a reliable reference

32Telegram/letter No. 47 of 18 june 1935; MN, Anns., Series C, No. 61.

32IGN/France map of 1960, 1:200,000, Sebba sheet; MN, Anns., Series D, No. 28.
326
Map of the Colonies of French West Africa; MN, Anns., Series D, No. 9.
32Report of the Second Ordinary Session of the Joint Technical Commission on the Demarcation of the Frontier

between Niger and Burkina Faso held at Ouagadougou from 23 to 28 July 1990; MN, Anns., Series A, No. 5.
32Emphasis added.

32Report of the tour conducted from 9 to 23 March 1930 by Sergeant Labitte, including 1:500,000 sketch-map;
MN, Anns., Series C, No. 35. - 112 -

330
document . It is thus from this point where the line changes direction, situated on the Sirba at the
level of the Say parallel, as it can, for example, be identified on the 1926 map, that the final stretch
of the boundary in the Say sector runs. The co -ordinates of this point are the following:

13° 04' 52" N, 0° 55' 45" E.

C. The representation of the course of the fr ontier in two straight lines between the point
where it leaves the “salient” and enters the Botou Loop is entirely justified

7.34. The final section of boundary in the Say sector is described in the 1927Erratum in a
particularly lapidary manner: “from that point [the point where the boundary, leaving the salient,
cuts the River Sirba at the level of the Say pa rallel] the frontier, following an east-south-east

direction, continues in a straight line up to a poi nt located 1,200m to the west of the village of
Tchenguiliba”.

7.35. This description appears to be of great simplicity. However the straight-line boundary
which it establishes appears to have no basis in th e situation prior to the adoption of the Erratum

and was never confirmed in the subsequent practi ce. Thus, both before and after 1927, we find
numerous representations of the boundary in this ar ea in the form of a line divided into two
sections, as is shown, inter alia, on the 1960 IGN map.

7.36. It is indeed a line in two sections which appears on various maps prior to the adoption

of the Arrêté général and the Er331um of 1927 (including Blondel-LaRougery1926; FWA Map,
1:500,000, Niamey, D31 SW ). There is nothing to explain how the Erratum came to define the
boundary in this area as a single straight line.

7.37. It should, moreover, be noted that neither is a straight line of this kind to be found on a

number of maps prepared during the colonial period, which also represent the boundary in this area
as two lines. Such a representation can be found, inter alia, on the following documents:

⎯ the Niamey sheet of the “Sketch-Maps of th e Sahara and Neighbouring Reg332s to a scale of
1:1,000,000” (ND-31), Army Geographical Section, 1926-1927 ;

⎯ Government-General of French West Africa, Colony of Niger, road map to a scale of
1:2,500,000, 1934 edition 333;

⎯ French West Africa, General Political and Admi nistrative Map, at 1:2,500,000, 4th edition
1939, FWA Geographical Department, Dakar 33.

The same applies to a large number of sketch -maps of the area prepar ed during the colonial
period. We would cite, for example, the following:

⎯ the 1:1,000,000 sketch-map entitled “Colony of Niger ⎯ Niamey Cercle ⎯ Links between
Niamey and Fada N’Gourma”, prep ared by AdministratorDuranteau, cercle Commander,
335
Niamey, 29 May 1933 ;

33MN, Anns., Series D, No. 9.

33Ibid.
332
MN, Anns., Series D, No. 10.
33MN, Anns., Series D, No. 16.

33MN, Anns., Series D, No. 18. - 113 -

⎯ the 1:500,000 sketch-map entitled “Say Cercle”, with no mention of the author or of the
date 33;

⎯ the 1:500,000 sketch-map entitled “Say Cercle”, no author or date 337;

⎯ the 1:500,000 sketch-map entitled “Villages Seen [during] Tours”, prepared by
Sergeant Labitte, undated 338;

339
⎯ the 1:400,000 sketch-map entitled “Tour of 17 to 27 May 1943”, no author or date ; and

340
⎯ a 1:500,000 sketch-map showing Say cercle, no title, author or date .

7.38. Moreover the point where the frontier changes direction, which appears, inter alia, on
the 1960 IGN map, is an undisputed frontier point between the two States. The fact that this was

already the case during the colonial period is, for example, confirmed by a telegram/letter sent in 341
1954 by the Head of Say subdivision to the Commander of Niamey cercle . That
communication, the purpose of which was to provide a description of the roads and tracks within

the subdivision, indicates that the distance between Tamou and the frontier of Upper Volta is 8 km.
It also states that the boundary of Upper Volta on the federal highway from Niamey is located

127km from Niamey and 14km from Mossipaga and 17km from Kantchari. This corresponds
very precisely with the point where the line in two sections changes direction in order to connect
with the start of the Botou Loop. That point is, moreover, very clearly identified on the completion

surveys carried out by the IGN during its 1958-1959 season. The survey entitled “Diapaga
Information” corresponding to this sector of the frontier does in fact include the indication “frontier
marker” at the precise place where the line chang es direction before subsequently connecting with
342
the start of the Botou Loop . There can thus be no doubt that, throughout the colonial period, it
was indeed by a line in two sections, changing direction at the place where it crossed the road from

Niamey to Ouagadougou, that the boundary between the two Colonies was defined and not
according to the single straight line described in the 1927Erratum on the basis of information
which to this day remains unknown. Moreover this fact appears always to have been clearly

accepted by Burkina Faso.

7.39. The correctness of this line is moreover again confirmed by the fact that various
villages located in the portion of territory lying between the two-section line claimed by Niger and

the straight line described in the 1927 Erratum have always been regarded as belonging to Niger ⎯
and administered by the latter ⎯ both during the colonial period and following accession to
independence. Thus a number of these localities are mentioned in official documents (lists of the

composition of cantons or cercles, censuses, lists of polling stations). This is in particular the case
for:

335MN, Anns., Series C, No. 49.

336MN, Anns., Series C, No. 1.

337MN, Anns., Series C, No. 2.
338
MN, Anns., Series C, No. 36.
339
MN, Anns., Series C, No. 68.
340MN, Anns., Series C, No. 3.

341Telegram/letter No.106 from the Head of Sa y subdivision to the Commander of Niamey cercle, dated
16 June 1954; MN, Anns., Series C, No. 82.

342MN, Anns., Series D, No. 30. - 114 -

343
⎯ Dissi (or Dissirire) ;

344
⎯ Fombon (or Fombongou, or Fambangou) ;

345
⎯ Latti ;

⎯ Tabaré (or Taboura) 346;

⎯ Tiaboungou 347.

Conversely, none of these localities has ever been shown as belonging to Upper Volta ⎯ or

to Burkina Faso ⎯ in documents of the same type describing the composition of cantons or
subdivisions of that Colony ⎯ and then of that State 348. There is thus nothing in the practice to
challenge the presentation of the course of the frontier in this sector as two straight lines.

7.40. We would, however, make it clear that the frontier line claimed by Niger, as regards
the first of the sections, is not the same as th at which appears on the 1960 IGN map, even though it
is very close to it. The reason for this is quite simply that the line shown by the IGN after the point

where the frontier crosses the road from Borgou-Saba runs in a generally easterly direction, before
turning back to the south-east a few kilometres further on until it reaches the frontier point located
on the Niamey-Ouagadougou road. Here again, nothing in the practice of the colonial authorities,

or in the representations of this part of the fr ontier on the maps and sketch-maps of the colonial
period appears to justify this deviation. Niger accordingly maintains its claim here to a frontier in

two straight-line sections, as it appears on those maps and sketch-maps of the colonial period.

34Directory of the villages of Say subdivision, Tamou canton, 1941 (MN, Anns., SeriesC, No.63); Census of

Tamou canton, 1947 (MN, Anns., SeriesC, No.70); Census tour of Tamou canton by the Head of Say subdivision,
25March1954 (MN, Anns., SeriesC, No. 81); Record of tax receipts, Tamou canton, 3 September 1971(MN, Anns.,
Series C, No. 101); Localities of Tamou canton, 1987, 1991 and 2001 (MN, Anns., Series C, Nos. 104, 107 and 108).
344
List of cercle villages by canton, prepared on 1 October 1921 ⎯ Torodi canton (MN, Anns., Series C, No. 4);
List of localities of Torodi canton, extract from General Directory of the Localities of French West Africa , 1927 (MN,
Anns., Series C, No. 6); Tour Report, Say subdivision, 13 to 27 September 1933 (MN, Anns., Series C, No. 51); List of
Niger cantons and villages forwarded in 1948 to the Minister for Overseas France (MN, Anns ., Series C, No. 71);
Alphabetical list of villages by canton, Torodi canton, updated 1January1954 (MN, Anns., SeriesC, No.80); List of
villages of Torodi canton, 19 August 1973 (MN, Anns., Series C, No. 103).

34List of cercle villages by canton prepared on 1October1921 ⎯ Torodi canton (MN, Anns., SeriesC, No.4);
List of localities of Torodi canton, extract from the General List of Localities of French West Africa , Upper Volta,

fascicle IV, 1927 (MN, Anns., Series C, No. 6); List of Niger cantons and villages forwarded in 1948 to the Minister for
Overseas France (MN, Anns., Series C, No. 71); Arrêté No. 2794/APA establishing polling stations and districts for the
elections to the National Assembly, 1955 (MN, Anns., Seri esB, No.31); Record of tax receipts, Torodi canton, 1971
(MN, Anns., SeriesC, No.102); Republic of Niger, Tillabéry département, Say District, list of Say polling stations,
1 November 1989, p. 8 (MN, Anns., Series C, No. 106).

34List of cercle villages by canton prepared on 1October1921 ⎯ Torodi canton (MN, Anns., SeriesC, No.4);
List of localities of Torodi canton, extract from the General List of Localities of French West Africa , Upper Volta,
fascicle IV, 1926 (MN, Anns., Series C, No. 6); List of Niger cantons and villages forwarded in 1948 to the Minister for
Overseas France (MN, Anns., SeriesC, No .71); Alphabetical list of villages by canton, Torodi canton, updated

1January1954 (MN, Anns., SeriesC, No.80); Arrêté No.2794/APA establishing polling stations and districts for the
elections to the National Assembly, 1955 (MN, Anns., Seri es B, No. 31); Record of tax collection, Torodi canton, 1971
(MN, Anns., SeriesC, No.102); List of localities of Torodi canton, Say District, Tillabéry département, 2001 (MN,
Anns., Series C, Nos. 108).
347
List of localities of Torodi canton, Say District, Tillabéry département, 1991 and 2001 (MN, Anns., Series C,
Nos. 107 and 108).
348
Subject, of course, to their being mentioned in the documents of the Colony of Upper Volta for the period
during which Say cercle was part thereof. - 115 -

7.41. The above frontier marker constitutes the point where the frontier line changes
direction and turns towards the start of the Botou Loop. Its co-ordinates are as follows:

12° 37' 55" N, 1° 34' 40" E. The endpoint of this latter section of the frontier line has, for its part,
been precisely defined by Agreement between the Parties. Its co-ordinates are as follows:
12° 36' 18" N, 01° 52' 07" E.

7.42. In conclusion, for all of the reasons set out in the present Chapter, the course of the
frontier between the two States in the Say sector should be the following:

From the tripoint with co-ordinates 13°29'08"N, 01°01'00"E, the frontier runs in a
straight line as far as the point having co-ordinates 13°04'52"N, 00°55'47"E, then from that
point a straight line passing through a point situ ated 4km to the south-west of Dogona with
co-ordinates 13° 01' 44" N, 01° 00' 25" E, as far as the frontier marker with co-ordinates

12° 37' 55.7" N, 01° 34' 40.7" E, and finally from there to the point fixed by agreement between the
Parties, the co-ordinates of which are the following: 12° 36' 18" N, 01° 52' 07" E. S UBMISSIONS

The Republic of Niger requests the Court to adjudge and declare that the frontier between the
Republic of Niger and Burkina Faso in the Téra sector takes the following course:

⎯ starting from the Tong-Tong astronomic marker (co-ordinates: 14° 25' 04" N, 00° 12' 47" E);

⎯ from that point: a straight line as far as the Vibourié marker (co-ordinates: 14°21'44"N,
0° 16' 25" E);

⎯ from that point: a straight line as far as the Tao astronomic marker (co-ordinates:
14° 03' 02.2" N, 00° 22' 52.1" E);

⎯ from that point the frontier follows the 1960IGN line (Téra sheet) as far as the point having
co-ordinates 14° 01' 55" N, 00° 24' 11" E;

⎯ from that point, it runs in a straight line to the frontier point on the new Téra-Dori road

(co-ordinates: 14° 00' 04.2" N, 00° 24' 16.3" E);

⎯ it then meets a river arm at the point with co -ordinates 13° 59' 03" N, 00° 25' 12" E. The

frontier then passes through a frontier point calle d Baobab (13° 58' 38.9" N, 00° 26' 03.5" E),
then follows the IGN line, leaving Tindiki (13° 57' 15.4" N, 00° 26' 23.6" E) to Niger, as far as
the break in the line of crosses north of Ihouc haltane (Oulsalta) on the 1960 IGN map (Sebba
sheet), at the point with co-ordinates 13° 55' 54" N, 00° 28' 21" E;

⎯ from this point the frontier follows the loop formed by the river to the west as far as the point
having co-ordinates 13°55'32"N, 00°27'07"E, and passes through a point situated on the
Sidibébé-Kalsatouma road having co-ordinates 13°52'32.8"N, 00°28'13.5"E. From that

point, it rejoins the IGN line at the point having co-ordinates 13°53'24"N, 00°29'58"E,
which it follows as far as the break in the lin e of crosses at the point having co-ordinates
13° 52' 04" N, 0° 31' 00" E;

⎯ the frontier then turns to the south again as far as the point having co-ordinates 13° 48' 55" N,
00°30'23"E situated on the arm of the river to the west of Komanti, passes through a point
south-west of Ouro Toupé (Kamanti) with co-ord inates 13° 46' 31" N, 00° 30' 27" E, then to
the north of Ouro Sabou to a point on the arm of the tributary of the Tyekol Dyongoytol whose

co-ordinates are 13° 46' 18" N, 00° 32' 47" E. The frontier then follows this tributary until its
confluence with the Tyekol Dyongoytol at the point having co-ordinates 13°46'51"N,
00°35'53"E. From there it follows the 1960IGN line until it reaches the level of Bangaré

(Niger) on the River Folko at the point having co-ordinates 13° 46' 22.5" N, 00° 37' 25.9" E;

⎯ from that point the frontier follows the IGN line, following the watercourses where there are no
crosses, passing between Kolangoldagabé (Burki na Faso) (co-ordinates 13°43'52.3"N,

00°36'14.5"E) and Lolnando (Niger) (co-ordina tes 13° 43' 50.3" N, 00° 36' 49.0" E). The
line leaves the hamlet known as Kolnangol Nore Ole to Niger, Gourel Manma to Burkina Faso
and Pate Bolga to Niger;

⎯ the frontier then follows the 1960 IGN line (Sebba sheet) as far as the point with co-ordinates
13° 37' 20" N, 00° 50' 47" E and then to the point with co-ordinates 13° 34' 47" N,
00°58'20"E, leaving to Burkina Faso the current site of Hérou Bouléba and to Niger that of
Hérou Boularé; - 117 -

⎯ from there it follows the IGN line, connecting the gaps between continuous sections with
straight lines, as far as the tripoint of the former boundaries of the cercles of Say, Tillabéry and

Dori (co-ordinates 13° 29' 08" N, 01° 01' 00" E);

⎯ from that point, the frontier runs in a straight line as far as the point having co-ordinates
13°04'52"N, 00°55'47"E, then from that point a straight line passing through a point

situated 4km to the south-west of Dogona with co-ordinates 13° 01' 44" N, 01° 00' 25" E, as
far as the frontier marker with co-ordinates 12°37' 55.7" N, 01° 34' 40.7" E, and finally from
there to the point fixed by agreement between the Parties, the co-ordinates of which are the

following: 12° 36' 18" N, 01° 52' 07" E.

(Signed) His Excellency Abdou A BARRY ,

[Stamp and coat-of-arms
of Republic of Niger, Deputy Agent of Niger.
Brussels Embassy] [Siillatirle]

___________ S UMMARY OF SKETCH MAPS AND MAPS

ILLUSTRATING THE M EMORIAL

Sketch-maps (in chronological order) Page

Sketch-map illustrating the territories of French West Africa .....................................................7, 9

Sketch-map illustrating the dismemberment of French Sudan and the creation of two
initial Military Territories by the Decree of 17 October 1899..................................................11

Sketch-map illustrating the creation of a th ird Military Territory by the Decree of
20 December 1900........................................................................
............................................13

Sketch-map illustrating the creation of the Colony of Haut-Sénégal et Niger by the

Decree of 18 October 1904........................................................................
...............................15

Sketch-map illustrating the division of the Milita ry Territory of Niger into three regions
by the Arrêté of 26 December 1904........................................................................
..................17

Sketch-map illustrating the four regions of the Military Territory of Niger at the date of
the Arrêté of 14 December 1908........................................................................
.......................20

Sketch-map illustrating the creation of the Co lony of Upper Volta by the Decree of
1 March 1919........................................................................
....................................................22

Sketch-map illustrating the division of the Military Territory of Niger into seven cercles

by the Decree of 4 December 1920........................................................................
...................24

Sketch-map illustrating the territories detached from the Colony of Upper Volta by the
Decree of 28 December 1926 and incorporated into the Colony of Niger........................26, 101

Sketch-map illustrating the new frontier of the Colonies of Upper Volta and Niger
according to the Erratum of 5 October 1927.....................................................................30, 104

Sketch-map illustrating the territories incorporated into the Colony of Niger following the

disappearance of the Colony of U pper Volta pursuant to the Decree of
5 September 1932....................................................................
..................................................33

Sketch-map illustrating the reconstitution of the Colony of Upper Volta within its 1932

boundaries by Law 47-1707........................................................................
.............................. 36

Sketch-map illustrating the course of th e boundaries and frontiers fixed by the Arrêté of
30 March 1956........................................................................
..................................................36

Sketch-map illustrating the respective claims of Burkina Faso and Niger in the 1990s by
comparison with the course of frontier as shown on the 1960 map of IGN France..................71

Sketch-map illustrating the Special Agreement seising the International Court of Justice......79, 96 - ii -

Maps

General map of Burkina Faso........................................................................
...................................3

General map of the Republic of Niger ........................................................................
.....................5

Sketch-map illustrating the difference between the course of the frontier as shown on the
1960 map of IGN France and the traditional frontier in the Kouro/Alfassi sector .................110

Map illustrating Niger’s frontier claims.................................................................At end of volume - iii -

L IST OF DOCUMENTS IN THE ANNEXES

TO THE M EMORIAL OF N IGER

SERIES A ⎯ Diplomatic documents

A1. Protocol of Agreement signe d in Niamey on 23June1964, OJRN, 1 April 1966,
pp. 150-151.

A2. Report of the meeting between the Niger Minister Delegate for the Interior and the

Minister for Territorial Administration a nd Security of Burkina Faso, Ouagadougou,
12-14 February 1985.

A3. Report of the meeting between technical experts of the Republics of Niger and Burkina

Faso, Ouagadougou, 21 to 23 May 1986.

A4. Agreement and Protocol of Agreement of 28March1987 between the Revolutionary
Government of Burkina Faso and the Government of the Republic of Niger on the
demarcation of the frontier between the two countries.

A 5. Report of the second ordinary session of the Joint Technical Commission on Demarcation
of the Niger-Burkina Faso Frontier, held in Ouagadougou from 23 to 28July1990,
and annexes. Annex 2, Summary of the Work of the 1989-1990 Season.

A6. Joint Communiqué on the Ministerial consultative and working meeting between Niger
and Burkina Faso, held on 14 and 15 May 1991 in Ouagadougou.

A 7. Report of the third ordinary session of the Joint Technical Commission on Demarcation of
the Niger-Burkina Frontier, held in Niamey from 2 to 4 November 1994.

A 8. Report of the fourth ordinary session of the Joint Technical Commission on Demarcation

of the Niger-Burkina Frontier, held in Ouagadougou from 18 to 21 July 2001.

A 9. Letter No. 06-006/MAECR/SG/DAJC/SAJ from the Minister for Foreign Affairs and
Regional Co-operation of Burkina Faso to the Minister for Foreign Affairs,

Co-operation and African Integration of Niger, dated 27January2006 (forwarded
under cover of letter No.0034/ABFM/BKO/DC/AB from the Embassy of Burkina
Faso in Mali to the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Niger, dated 2 February 2006).

A10. Letter No.000082 from the Prime Minister of Niger to the Prime Minister of Burkina
Faso dated 2 February 2006.

A11. Letter No.2006.039/PM/CAB from the Prime Minister of Burkina Faso to the Prime

Minister of Niger dated 9 February 2006.

A12. Joint Communiqué of the meeting of Foreign Ministers for negotiation and signature of
the Special Agreement seising the ICJ of the frontier dispute between Niger and

Burkina Faso, dated 24 February 2009.

A13. Certified copy of the Special Agreement seising the International Court of Justice of the
frontier dispute between Burkina Faso and the Republic of Niger, signed in Niamey on

24 February 2009. - iv -

A14. Record of the work of the Joint Survey Mission to determine the co-ordinates of the
boundary markers erected along the frontier between Burkina Faso and the Republic

of Niger, conducted from 23 June to 3 July 2009, Diapaga, 3 July 2009.

A15. Report of the meeting to determine the co-o rdinates of the unmarked points in SectorB,
Kantchari, 15 October 2009.

A16. Letter No.2009-004874/MAECR/SG/DGAJC from the Minister for Foreign Affairs of
Burkina Faso to the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Niger, dated 29 October 2009.

A17. Letter No.007505/MAE/C/DAJC/DIR from the Mi nister for Foreign Affairs of Niger to
the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Burkina Faso, dated 2 November 2009.

A18. Protocol of exchange of instruments of ratification of the Special Agreement seising the
ICJ of the frontier dispute between Burkina Faso and the Republic of Niger signed on

24 February 2009 in Niamey, Ouagadougou, 20 November 2009.

A19. Joint Communiqué of the Foreign Mini sters of Burkina Faso and Niger, dated
20November2009, following the solemn cer emony of exchange of instruments of

ratification of the Special Agreement seising the ICJ of the frontier dispute between
the two countries.

A20. Joint Notification of the Special Agreemen t seising the International Court of Justice of

the frontier dispute between Burkina Faso and the Republic of Niger, letter of
12 May 2010, filed at the Registry of the Court on 20 July 2010.

A 21. Letter [reference uncertain] from the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Niger to the Minister

for Foreign Affairs of Burkina Faso concerning the draft exchange of Notes
embodying the Agreement of the Parties on the delimited sector of the frontier, dated
[date uncertain; July 2009?].

SERIES B ⎯ Legislative and regulatory documents

B1. Decree of 16June1895 establishing a Government-General of French West Africa, and

Arrêté promulgating that Decree.

B 2. Decree of 17 October 1899 reorganizing the territories having constituted the possessions
of French Sudan, OJFWA, No. 212, 9 November 1899.

B 3. Arrêté général of 25December1899 organizing the Military Territories of French West
Africa.

B 4. Arrêté général of 23 July 1900 creating a Third Military Territory, with its administrative
centre at Zinder, OJFWA, undated, 1900, p. 313.

B5. Decree of 20December1900 confirming the Arrêté of the Governor-General of

23July1900 and creating a Third Militar y Territory in French West Africa, Bulletin
officiel du ministère des colonies , 14thyear ⎯ 1900, Vol.14, Nos.1 to 12,
pp. 1086-1089.

B 6. Arrêté No.149 of 20March1901 incorporating the Territory of Say into the cercle of
Moyen-Niger (original manuscript text). - v -

B7. Decree of 1October1902 reorganizing the Government-General of French West Africa,
and Arrêté promulgating that Decree ( Official Journal of Senegal and Dependencies ,

undated, 1902, pp. 582-583).

B 8. Decree of 18 October 1904 reorganizing the Government-General of French West Africa,
Renseignements coloniaux, No. 11/1904, pp. 279-279.

B 9. Arrêté général No. 896 of 26 December 1904 organizing the Military Territory of Niger,
Official Journal of Senegal and Dependencies, 31 December 1904, pp. 718-719.

B10. Decree of 2March1907 incorporating into the Colony of Haut-Sénégal et Niger the
cercles of Fada N’Gourma and Say (OJFWA of 30 March 1907, p. 135).

B 11. Arrêté général No.1277 of 31December1907 defining the various administrative
divisions of the Military Territory of Niger ( OJFWA, No.158 of 11January1908,

pp. 12-13).

B 12. Arrêté général No.1241 bis of 14December1908 reorganizing the administrative
divisions of the Military Territory of Niger (OJFWA, No. 209 of 2 January 1909).

B 13. Arrêté No.673 of 21June1909 incorporating Dori cercle into the Civil Territory of
Haut-Sénégal et Niger (OJFWA, undated, 1909).

B 14. Arrêté général of 22June1910 incorporating the Region of Timbuktu into the Civil
Territory of Haut-Sénégal et Niger (Official Journal of Haut-Sénégal et Niger, No. 29,
1 September 1910, p. 419).

B 15. Arrêté général No.672 of 22June1910 reorganizi ng the Military Territory of Niger
(OJFWA, undated, 1910, p. 475).

B 16. Decree of 7 September 1911 incorporating the Military Territory of Niger into the

Government-General of French West Africa with effect from 1January1912, and
Arrêté promulgating that Decree in French West Africa ( Official Journal of
Haut-Sénégal et Niger, No. 128 of 15 November 1911, pp. 511-512).

B 17. Arrêté général No. 1728 of 23 November 1912 reorganizing the internal administration of
the Military Territory of Niger (OJFWA, 11 January 1930).

B18. Decree of 1March1919 dividing the Colony of Haut-Sénégal et Niger and creating the

Colony of Upper Volta, and Arrêté promulgating that Decree in French West Africa
(OJFWA, No. 768, 1919, pp. 550-551).

B 19. Arrêté No. 384 of 16 August 1920 abolishing Téra Subdivision (signed certified copy).

B 20. Decree of 4 December 1920 reorganizing the Military Territory of Niger and converting it
into a Colony of the Civil Territory of Mauritania, and Arrêté promulgating that
Decree (OJFWA, undated, 1921, pp. 81-82).

B21. Decree of 4December1920 naming the Colonies and Territories composing the
Government-General of French West Africa, and Arrêté promulgating that Decree
(OJFWA, 1921).

B22. Decree of 13October1922 converting the Civil Territory of Niger into an autonomous
Colony (OJFWA, No. 955, 20 January 1923, p. 58). - vi -

B 23. Decree of 28 December 1926 transferring the administrative centre of the Colony of Niger
and providing for territorial changes in French West Africa, and Arrêté of

21 January 1927 promulgating that Decree (OJFWA, No. 1167, undated, 1927, p. 92).

B 24. Report of the Minister for the Colonies to the President of the French Republic concerning
the treatment of the administrative centre of the Colony of Niger and territorial

changes in French West Africa (OJFR, 5 January 1927, p. 198).

B 25. Arrêté of 22 January 1927 providing for territorial changes to the Colonies of Upper Volta
and Niger (OJFWA, No. 1169,12 February 1927).

B 26. Arrêté général No.2336 of 31August1927 fixing the boundaries of the Colonies of
Upper Volta and Niger (OJFWA, No. 1201, 24 September 1927).

B 27. Erratum No. 2602/APA of 5 October 1927 to the Arrêté général of 31 August 1927 fixing

the boundaries of the Colonies of Niger and Upper Volta ( OJFWA, No.1205,
15 October 1927, p. 718).

B 28. Arrêté local No.126 of 3November1928 creating Téra Subdivision within Tillabéry

cercle.

B29. Decree of 5September1932 dissolving the Colony of Upper Volta and distributing its
territory among the Colonies of Niger, French Sudan and Côte d’Ivoire ( OJFWA,

No. 1471, 15 October 1932, p. 902).

B30. Law No.47-1707 of 4September1947 for the re-establishment of the territory of Upper
Volta, and Arrêté promulgating that Law (OJFWA, 27 September 1947).

B 31. Arrêté No.2794/APA establishing polling stations a nd districts for the elections to the
National Assembly (Official Journal of Niger, No. 304, 1 January 1956).

B 32. Arrêté général No. 2690 of 30 March 1956 creating seven cercles within the Territory of
Niger (OJFWA, 14 April 1956, p. 1658).

SERIES C ⎯ Administrative documents and correspondence

C 1. 1:500,000 sketch-map entitled “Say Cercle” (1), no author or date.

C 2. 1:500,000 sketch-map entitled “Say Cercle” (2), no author or date.

C 3. 1:500,000 sketch-map representing Say cercle, no title, author or date.

C 4. List of cercle villages by canton, Torodi canton (extract), prepared on 1 October 1921.

5. Extract from the Annual General Report of Dori cercle for the yea1924;
1:500,000 sketch-map of Dori cercle, by the cercle Commander.

C6. List of localities of Torodi canton, extract from the General List of Localities of French
West Africa, Upper Volta, fascicle IV (extract), undated, 1927.

C7. Record of Agreement between Mr.Brévié , Governor of the Colony of Niger, and

Mr. Lefilliatre, Inspector of Administrative Affairs, representative of the Governor of
Upper Volta, Téra, 2 February 1927. - vii -

C8. Record of Agreement between Mr.Lefilliatre, Inspector of Administrative Affairs,
representative of the Governor of Upper Volta, and Mr.Choteau, Chief Colonial

Administrator, representing the Governor of the Colony of Niger, Say,
10 February 1927.

C9. Record of Agreement of 9May1927 betw een Mr.deCoutouly, Administrator of Fada

cercle, and Mr. Lesserteur, Administrator of Say cercle.

C10. Sketch-map of 27May1927 of the Botou region, prepared by Commander deCoutouly,
Administrator of Fada cercle, in connection with the a bove document and forwarded

to the Governor of Upper Volta.

C11. Telegram/letter No.1166/AG from the Lieute nant-Governor of Upper Volta, Hesling, to
the Commanders of Dori and Fada cercles, dated 27 April 1927.

C12. Correspondence between the Governor of Upper Volta and the Commander of Dori
cercle: telegram/letter No.344 from the cercle Commander dated 1June1927, and
reply by NoteBLHV No.1.393 from the Chef de cabinet of the Governor of Upper

Volta dated 2 June 1927.

C13. Note1040/AG/I [ref. uncertain] from Admini stratorChoteau to the Governor-General of
French West Africa dated 27 June 1927.

C14. Sketch-map prepared by Administrator Delbos of the route followed by the
Administrators of Dori and Tillabéry on a mission in June1927 with a view to
delimitation between Dori and Tillabéry cercles.

C 15. Extract No. 25 from the Tour Report of Administrator Prudon dated 4 August 1927.

C16. Letter from Delbos, Commander of Dori cercle, to the Governor of Upper Volta dated
27 August 1927, inc. two sketch-maps.

C17. Transmission Note No.99213 for the 1:1, 000,000sketch-map entitled “New Frontier
Upper Volta-Niger”, sent by the military Chef de cabinet (2nd section) to the Director
of Political Administrative Affairs in Dakar, dated 6 October 1927.

C18. Telegram/letter No.2713AG from the Acting Governor of Upper Volta to the
Commander of Dori cercle dated 20 October 1927.

C19. Telegram/letter No.2714AG from the Acting Governor of Upper Volta to the
Commander of Fada cercle dated 20 October 1927.

C 20. Letter No. 731 from Administrator Delbos, Commander of Dori cercle, to the Governor of

Upper Volta dated 17 December 1927, inc. two sketch-maps.

C21. Letter No.96 from the Commander of Dori cercle to the Commander of Upper Volta
dated 23 April 1929.

22. Letter NoE./21P from Fousset, Chief Colonial Administrator, to the
Lieutenant-Governor of Niger dated 31 July 1929. - viii -

C 23. Letter No. 367 from the Commander of Dori cercle to the Governor of Upper Volta dated
31July1929 and previous correspondence (telegram/letter No.244 from Téra

Subdivision to Dori cercle dated 27July1929; telegram/letter No.359 from Dori
cercle to Téra Subdivision dated 29July1929; telegram/letter No.364 from Dori
cercle to Téra Subdivision dated 30 July 1929).

C 24. Letter No. 399 from the Commander of Dori cercle to the Commander of Tillabéry cercle
dated 9 August 1929.

C 25. Letter No. 411 from the Commander of Dori cercle to the Governor of Upper Volta dated

14 August 1929.

C 26. Letter No. E.275 AP from the Chief Colonial Administrator, Acting Lieutenant-Governor
of Upper Volta, to the Governor of Niger, dated 14 August 1929.

C 27. Letter No. 418 from the Commander of Dori cercle to the Commander of Tillabéry cercle
dated 19 August 1929.

C 28. Letter No. 2087 AG.I from the Governor of Ni ger to the Governor of Upper Volta dated

26 August 1929.

C 29. Letter No. 100 from the Commander of Tillabéry cercle to the Commander of Dori cercle
dated 19 September 1929.

C 30. Letter No. 2259 A.G.I. from the Lieutenant Governor of Niger to the Lieutenant-Governor
of Upper Volta dated 27 September 1929.

C31. Telegram/letter No.815 from the Commander of Tillabéry cercle to Dori cercle dated
10October1929 (certified copy forwar ded under cover of letter No.623 of
23 October 1929).

C 32. Letter No. 135 from the Commander of Dori cercle to the Governor of Upper Volta dated
26 February 1930.

C33. Telegram No.687 from the Governor of Upper Volta to the Commander of Dori cercle

dated 19 March 1930.

C34. Telegram/letter No.196 from the Commander of Dori cercle to the Commander of
Tillabéry cercle dated 22 March 1930.

C35. Report of the tour conducted from 9 to 23 March 1930 by Sergeant Labitte, inc. a
sketch-map on a scale of 1:500,000.

C 36. 1:500,000 sketch-map entitled “Villages seen [during] Tours”, drawn by Sergeant Labitte,
undated.

C 37. Letter No. 362 from the Commander of Dori cercle to the Governor of Upper Volta dated
11 June 1930.

C38. Report No.416 from the Commander of Dori cercle on the difficulties created by the
delimitation established in 1927 between th e Colonies of Niger and Upper Volta
(Arrêté of 31August1927) regarding the boundaries between Dori cercle and

Tillabéry cercle, 7 July 1930. - ix -

C39. Tour Report from the Administrator of Say Subdivision dated 26November1930, inc. a
sketch-map on a scale of 1:500,000.

C 40. Letter No. 748 A.G.I. to the Commander of Tillabéry cercle dated 31 July 1931.

C 41. Tour Report from the Administrator of Dori cercle to the Governor of Upper Volta dated

31 March 1931.

C 42. Letter No. 2954 A.P. from the Office of Political Affairs to the Commander of Dori cercle
dated 10 November 1931.

C 43. Bulletin de renseignements politiques of Tillabéry cercle dated 27 January 1932.

C 44. Letter No. 40 A.G.I. from the Chef de cabinet of the Lieutenant-Governor of Upper Volta
dated 6 February 1932.

C45. Letter No.112 of 10April1932 and Tour Report from Civil Service Deputy Roser,
Acting Commander of Dori cercle, to the Governor of Upper Volta (Political Office).
Certified copy of 15 September 1943.

C 46. Bulletin de renseignements politiques of Tillabéry cercle dated 11 October 1932.

C47. Sketch-map with no date (but subseque nt to 1932) or title, to a scale of 1:1,000,000

showing the boundaries of Téra Subdivision.

C 48. Circular from Governor-General Brévié, addressed to all Lieutenant-Governors of the
Colonies of French West Africa, dated 22 March 1933.

C 49. 1:1,000,000 sketch-map entitled “Colony of Niger ⎯ Niamey cercle ⎯ Links between
Niamey and Fada N’Gourma”, prepared by Administrator Duranteau, cercle
Commander, Niamey, 29 May 1933.

C 50. List of villages in Téra Subdivision, 6 July 1933.

C 51. Tour Report, Say Subdivision (extract), 13-27 September 1933.

C52. Tour Report from the Head of Téra S ubdivision to the Governor of Niger dated
8 November 1933, forwarded by the Commander of Tillabéry cercle under cover of a
letter of 17 November 1933.

C53. Extract from the Tour Report of the Commander of Dori cercle from 25 to
31 December 1933, sketch-map of Téra Subdivision.

C 54. Tour Report from the Commander of Tillabéry cercle dated 30 June 1934.

C 55. Niger Colony, Dori cercle, Political Report, Second Quarter 1934, 30 June 1934.

C56. Certified copy of 14April of Record of Agreement of 13April1935 between

Administrator Garnier (Dori cercle) and Deputy Lichtenberger (Téra Subdivision).

C57. Certified copy of 30April of the Record of Agreement of 25April1935 between
Administrator Garnier (Dori cercle) and Deputy Lichtenberger (Téra Subdivision).

C58. Letter No.168 from the Commander of Dori cercle to the Governor of Niger dated
9 May 1935. - x -

C 59. Letter No. 140 from the Head of Téra Subdivision to Tillabéry cercle dated 10 May 1935.

C 60. Letter No. 161 from the Head of Téra Subdivision to Tillabéry cercle dated 24 May 1935.

C61. Telegram/letter No.47 from the Head of Say Subdivision to Dori cercle dated
18 June 1935.

C62. Letter No.1049AG/SS from the Governor of Niger to the Commander of Dori cercle
dated 17May1936, inc. reports from two ar my doctors requesting the relocation of
the village of Bossébangou for health reasons.

C 63. Directory of villages of Say Subdivision, Tamou canton (extract), undated, 1941.

C64. Directory of villages of Téra Subdivisi on, villages of KelTamared, KelTinijirt,
Logomaten Assadek, Logomaten Allaban, undated, 1941.

C 65. Description of Tillabéry cercle, prepared in 1941 by Mr. Leca.

C66. Letter No.1.144C.M.2. from the Head of the Geographical Department of French West

Africa to the Director of Political and Administrative Affairs, Dakar, dated
8 May 1942.

C 67. Certified copy of 11 June 1943 of official telegram/letter No. 231 from the Commander of

Dori cercle to the Commander of Tillabéry cercle dated 19 May 1943.

C68. 1:400,000 sketch-map entitled “Tour of 17 to 27May1943, Route followed”, no author
or date.

C 69. Transmission Note No. 959 to the Commanders of Dori and Tillabéry cercles, and to the
Head of Téra Subdivision, dated [1944, date uncertain]; and Report of delimitation
operations between Dori and Tillabéry cercles by the Administrators of Dori cercle

(Delmond) and Tillabéry cercle (Texier and Garat), dated 8 December 1943.

C 70. Census tour of Say Subdivision, Tamou canton, dated 23 March 1947.

C71. List of Niger cantons and villages forwarded to th e Minister for Overseas France

(Diagourou, Tamou and Torodi cantons), undated, 1948.

C72. Correspondence between the G overnor of Niger and Tillabéry cercle (telegram/letter
No. 339/APA of 10 July 1951; confidential report and notice of meeting between the

Commanders of Dori and Tillabéry cercles at Téra on 6July1951; confidential
telegram/letter No. 64 c of 6 July 1951; notice of meeting of 29 June 1951).

C73. Official telegram/letter No.70 from the Head of Téra Subdivision to Tillabéry cercle

dated 11July1951, inc. reproduction on a scale of 1:500,000 of a sketch-map by
Mr. Delbos.

C 74. Report of the census tours of Téra canton conducted from 28 July to 22 August and 20 to

21September,1952, by the Head of Téra Subdivision; Annex: Territorial
Organization of Moyen Niger, Establishment of Téra Station, pp. 10-13.

C 75. Letter No. 1511/APA from the Governor of Niger to the Commander of Tillabéry cercle

dated 17 April 1953. - xi -

C 76. Record of settlement of a frontier dispute signed by the Commander of Niamey cercle and
the Commander of Dori cercle, dated 17 March 1953.

C77. Letter No.87 from the Head of Téra Subdivision to the Commander of Tillabéry cercle
dated 3 June 1953.

C 78. Telegram/letter No. 710 from the Commander of Tillabéry cercle to the Governor of
Niger dated 22 December 1953.

C9. Report of a tour conducted from 16 to 23 November 1953 by

Deputy-Administrator Lacroix (Tillabéry cercle), dated 24 December 1953.

C80. Alphabetical list of villages by canton , Torodi canton (extract), updated to
1 January 1954.

C 81. Census tour of Tamou canton by the Head of Say Subdivision (extract), 25 March 1954.

C 82. Telegram/letter No. 106 from the Head of Say Subdivision to the Commander of Niamey
cercle dated 16 June 1954.

C83. Report of census tour of Torodi canton by the Head of Say Subdivision, dated
25 March 1954.

C84. Report from the Head of Téra Subdivision on the census of Diagourou canton, dated
10 August 1954.

C85. Geographical study of Téra Subdivision, extract from Monographie de Téra , National

Archives of Niger, Ann. 19-1.1bis; presumed date 1955.

C 86. Certified copy of 19 January 1961 of letter No. 104 from the Head of Say Subdivision to
the Overseas France Chief Administrator, Commander of Niamey cercle, dated

14May1959; appended thereto: extract from the annual Report of the Head of
Subdivision for the Year 1959, dated 20 January 1961.

C 87. Letter No. 62/A1 from the Minister of Internal Affairs to the President of the Republic of

Niger dated 16 January 1961.

C88. Note on the frontier problems between the Republics of Niger and Upper Volta (Téra
cercle and Say Subdivision ⎯ Dori cercle and Oudalen Subdivision), dated

3 February 1961.

C89. Confidential letter No.22/Cf from the Commander of Téra cercle to the Commander of
Dori cercle dated 11 February 1961.

C90. Note on the frontier problems between the Republics of Niger and Upper Volta (Téra
cercle and Say Subdivision ⎯ Dori cercle and Oudalen and Diapaga Subdivisions),
dated 3 February 1961.

C 91. Letter No. 297 Ai from the Commander of Dori cercle to the Commander of Téra cercle
dated 26 September 1961.

C 92. Letter 82 PRES/IS from the President of the Republic of Upper Volta to the President of
the Republic of Niger dated 1 June 1962. - xii -

C93. Report of the meeting between the Head of Téra Subdivision (Niger) and the Head of
Sebba Administrative Station (Upper Volta) dated 21 March 1963.

C94. Confidential letter No.25/MI/AI/CF from th e Minister for the Interior of Niger to the
Head of Téra Division dated 7 January 1964.

C 95. Certified copy of 24 January 1964 of confidential letter No.00013/CONF from the
Commander of Dori cercle to the Head of Téra Division dated 23 January 1964.

C96. Certified copy of 12March1964 of le tter No.4/CD from the Commander of Diapaga

cercle to the Head of Say Subdivision c/o the Commander of Niamey cercle, dated
5 March 1964.

C 97. Letter No. 49/CT from the Head of Téra Division to the Minister of the Interior of Niger
dated 13 March 1964.

C98. Confidential letter No.31/CF from the Head of Téra Division to the Minister of the
Interior of Niger dated 20 March 1964.

C99. Report of the meeting between Upper Vo lta and Niger with a view to harmonizing
relations between frontier peoples, dated 10 April 1964.

C100. Letter No.445/AI/cf from the Niger Minister of the Interior to the Minister for Foreign

Affairs, dated 22 April 1964.

C 101. Record of tax receipts, Say District, Tamou canton, dated 3 September 1971.

C 102. Record of tax receipts, Torodi canton (extract), undated, 1971.

C 103. List of villages in Torodi canton (extract), 19 August 1973.

C 104. Localities in Tamou canton (extract), undated, 1987.

C 105. Letter DEC/934 from IGN France to the Secretary-General of the Niger Minister of State
for Finance, dated 23 June 1988.

C106. Republic of Niger, Tillabéry département, Say District, list of polling stations in Say
District (extract), 1 November 1989.

C 107. List of villages and localities in Tamou and Torodi cantons, undated, 1991.

C 108. List of villages and localities in Tamou and Torodi cantons, undated, 2001.

SERIES D ⎯ Maps

D 1. Djerma cercle, 1:1,000,000 sketch-map prepared by CaptainBoutiq, cercle Commander,
dated 19 June 1909.

D 2. Dori cercle, sketch-map by Administrator Delbos following a field mission conducted in
June 1927.

D 3. Tillabéry cercle, 1:200,000 sketch-map prepared by Administrator Prudon, June 1927. - xiii -

D 4. Say cercle, scale 1:500,000; Say,A1pr1il915, prepared by cercle
Administrator Truchard.

D5. Africa 1:2,000,000: French Sudan, Pr ovisional Edition, drafted, heliographed and
published by the Army Geographical Section in 1925.

D 6. Atlas of Cercles: Fascicle IV ⎯ Upper Volta, Map No.60 ⎯ Say cercle, Geographical
Department of French West Africa, scale 1:500,000, published by Forest, 17rue de
Buci, Paris, first printing, January 1926.

D 7. Atlas of Cercles: Fascicle IV ⎯ Upper Volta, Map No. 53 ⎯ Dori cercle, Geographical
Department of French West Africa, scale 1:1,000,000, published by Forest, 17 rue de
Buci, Paris, first printing, January 1926.

D 8. Atlas of Cercles: Fascicle IV ⎯ Upper Volta, Map No. 54 ⎯ Fada cercle, Geographical
Department of French West Africa, scale 1:1,000,000, published by Forest, 17 rue de
Buci, Paris, first printing, January 1926.

D 9. Map of the Colonies of French West Africa to a scale of 1:500,000: Upper Volta, Niger,
Dahomey, Niamey, survey map D31SW, drawn and published by the Geographical
Department of French West Africa in Dakar under the direction of

Commander de Martonne, heliographed and printed by éd. Blondel la Rougery, Paris,
June 1926.

D10. Sketch-map of the Sahara and neig hbouring regions on a scale of 1:1,000,000,
NiameyND31, prepared by the Geographical Department of French West Africa,

Dakar, 1926, drafted, heliographed and prin ted by the Army Geographical Section in
1927.

D 11. Government-General of French West Africa: Colony of Upper Volta, road map, prepared

by the Geographical Department of French West Africa, Dakar, according to the
information provided by the Government of Upper Volta as well as the surveys and
route maps of the Officers and NCOs of the Geographical Section, Mr.Carde being

Governor-General of FWA and Mr.Hessli ng Lieutenant-Governor of Upper Volta,
scale 1:1,000,000, EG. irard, publisher/ geographer, 17-18 rue de Buci, Paris,
1927 edition.

D 12. Map of Botou canton, May 1927.

D13. French West Africa: new frontier betw een Upper Volta and Niger (according to the
Erratum of 5 October 1927 to the Arrêté of 31 August 1927), scale 1:1,000,000.

D14. French West Africa: general political and administrative map (semi-mural type), to a
scale of 1:2,500,000, Second Edition 1928, showing the division into cercles of the
eight Colonies, autonomous and mixed communes, chambers of commerce, railway
stations, post and telegraph offices, wireless telegraph stations, military outposts, etc.

(information as at 1 January 1928); prepared and published by the FWA Geographical
Department, Dakar.

D 15. Map of French West Africa to a scale of 1:3,000,000 prepared by A. Meunier, Geographer

with the Ministry for the Colonies, 1930, Third Edition.

D16. Government-General of French West Africa, Niger Colony, road map to a scale of
1:2,500,000, 1934 Edition. - xiv -

D 17. Road map of Niger to a scale of 1:2,500,000, 1936 Edition, prepared, drawn, heliographed
and printed by the FWA Geographical Department, Dakar.

D18. French West Africa: general political and administrative map (semi-mural type), to a
scale of 1:2,500,000, Fourth Edition 1939, showing the division into cercles of the
eight Colonies, autonomous and mixed communes, chambers of commerce, railway

stations, post and telegraph offices, wireless telegraph stations, military outposts, etc.
(information as at 1 January 1939); prepared and published by the FWA Geographical
Department, Dakar

D19. AFRICA 1:1,000,000, Niamey (Second Edition) ND31, map prepared by the FWA
Geographical Department, Dakar, in 1926, drawn, heliographed and printed by the
Army Geographical Section in 1927 (Thi rd Edition, 1934), geographical section,
General Staff No. 2465, War Office 1940, heliographed at O.S

D 20. Sketch-map of French Africa on a scale of 1:1,000,000, Niamey ND 31, prepared, drawn
and published by the Institut géographique national in 1946.

D 21. Diagourou canton: scale 1:250,000, 1954.

D22. Map No.1: Surface formations and hydrology, scale 1:200,000, BURGEAP219-R.178,
November 1954.

D23. Map of West Africa at 1:200,000: Republic of Mali, Republic of Niger, Republic of
Upper Volta, Téra, sheet D31XIII, drawn and published by the Institut
géographique national, Paris (West Africa Branch, Dakar), First Edition July1960,

reprinted September 1969.

D24. Map of West Africa at 1:200,000: Republic of Niger, Republic of Upper Volta, Sebba,
sheet DN 31 VII, drawn and published by the Geographical Department, Dakar, 1960.

D 25. Map of West Africa at 1:200,000: Republic of Niger, Republic of Upper Volta, Gothèye,
sheetND31VIII, drawn and published by the Geographical Department, Dakar,
1960.

D 26. Map of West Africa at 1:200,000: Republic of Niger, Republic of Upper Volta, Diapaga,
sheet ND 31 II, drawn and published by the Geographical Department, Dakar, 1960.

D27. TERA, Textual Data/Other Information, Sheet ND-31-XIII, map of French West Africa,

1:200,000.

D 28. SEBBA, Other Information, Sheet ND-31-VII, map of French West Africa, 1:200,000.

D29. GOTHEYE, Other Information, Sheet ND-31-VIII, map of French West Africa,
1:200,000.

D 30. DIAPAGA, Other Information, Sheet ND-31-II, map of French West Africa, 1:200,000.

D31. Upper Volta: road map, scale 1:1,000,000, designed and published by the Institut
géographique national, Paris (Dakar Branch, First Edition, May 1963).

___________