Separate Opinion of Judge ad hoc Abi-Saab

Document Number
069-19861222-JUD-01-02-EN
Parent Document Number
069-19861222-JUD-01-00-EN
Document File
Bilingual Document File

SEPARATE OPINION OF JUDGE ABI-SAAB

[Translation]

1. While having voted in favour of theJudgment's operative provisions
taken asawhole,1find myselfobliged to append thisopinion because 1am
unable to associate myselfwith certain aspects of the Chamber's reasoning
and of its final conclusions.
2. The Chamber's reasoning is structured around three documents :
Order 2728 AP of 27 November 1935forms the basis of the line in the
western region,described asthe regionof the four villages ;letter 191CM2
of 19February 1935forms thebasis of theline in thecentre and to theeast,
in the Beliregion (these two lines coexist but do not coincide in the region
of Fayando-Toussougou) ;and, finally, the Order of 31 August 1927and
"erratum" of 5 October 1927, which forms the basis for the eastern
terminus of the line, in the region of mounts N'Gouma/Kabia ford.
3. This latter Order of 1927isthe only element ofwhich the relevance as
a legaltitle for the territorial boundary, as it was on the critical date, isnot
disputed between the Parties, although they differ in their interpretations
of it.
By contrast, the relevance of Order 2728 AP and of letter 191 CM2
depends whollyon whether they are descriptive (or declaratory) in charac-
ter, or whether instead they modify the pre-existing territorial boundar-
ies.Thisquestion has led the Chamber intoan excessivelydetailed analysis
of French colonial law,a task which isnot,in my view,afitting one for an
international court and was largely superfluous.

4. In that connection, 1am in total agreement with both the spirit and
the letter of what the Judgment statesin paragraph 30concerningthe sense
of the Chamber's examination of colonial law and, in particular, with the
denial ofany renvoiby international lawto colonial lawor of the existence
between them of any legal crossover or continuumjuris. Along that road
there can therefore be no question of even circuitously finding in contem-

porary international law any retroactive legitimation whatever of coloni-
alism as an institution.
The Judgment further specifies that colonial law may play a role

"not in itself... but only as onefactual element among others, or as
evidence indicative of .. .the 'photograph of the territory' at the
critical date".

1consider that in the event the Judgrnent has overstepped the limits of thiswiseproviso bybasing its reasoning on thiselementalmost exclusively
and in abundant detail.
5. As regards Order 2728AP and its application to the so-called region
of thefour villages,in the West,1consider the Chamber's Judgment amply
demonstrates how it is descriptive or declaratory of the pre-existing boun-
daries. But, evenin theabsence of this instrument, administrative practice,
i.e., the exercise of public authority and governmental functions both
before and after the adoption of the Order, proves that in the eyes of the
colonial authorities this region belonged to Sudan, and did so until the
independence of Mali, the critical date for the fixingof the "photograph of

the territory" constituting Mali's "colonial heritage".

6. However, this is not the case with the eastern region, that of the Béli.
In this area, lying between the region covered by Order 2728 AP and the
terminus of the frontier as covered by the 1927Order, we have only two
reliablepoints of reference :the pool of Soumand the pool of InAbao. But
there is no regulative instrument of a general description, and the admini-
strativepractice relied upon by the Parties is much too fluctuating, sparse
and interpenetrative (this being chieflyan area of nomadic movement and
transhumance) to disclose any visible administrative boundary.

7. To fil1this gap, the Chamber's Judgment brings into play letter 191
CM2 of 19February 1935.In this letter, the Governor-General of French
West Africa makes a proposa1to the Lieutenant-Governor of Sudan for a
definition of the boundaries between the colonies of Sudan and Niger in
textual form, suggestinga linewhichis merelya verbal transcription of the
one shown on the 1:500,000Blondella Rougery map of 1925.Hence this is
merely a proposal, not an administrative decision ; and it did not ma-
terialize, as would normally be the case, in the form of a regulative in-

strument.
8. 1agree with the Judgment's demonstration that neither the forma1
status of the letter nor the fate of the proposa1preclude the possibility that
what it contained may have been descriptive or declaratory of the pre-
existing territorial boundaries. But where 1can no longer follow the rea-
soning is where the Judgment draws from this negative argument the
positive conclusion that, sincethis possibility exists, it must necessarily be
the only one ; in other words, from the possibility that the letter may be
descriptive, it draws the conclusion that it actually is.
There is here a logical hiatus that can be repaired only by positive
evidence, but no such evidence has in my view been supplied. For it is
equally possible that the Govemor-General's aim on this occasion was
further to rationalizethe line,or to render it compatible with themap most
widely used at the time.
9. The Judgment itself, having concluded that the letter was descriptive
in character, nonetheless betrays some hesitation when it States,in para-
graphs 110and 144,that wherever the description of the boundary in the
letter by means of CO-ordinatesdoes not correspond with the reference- FRONTIER DISPUTE (SEP. OP. ABI-SAAB) 661

points derived from other titles or evidence, thelatter areto havepriority ;
this implies, at least for those CO-ordinateswhich do not so correspond,
that the Judgment does not consider the letter to be declaratory of the
pre-existing situation.

10. Similarly,whereas the linedescribed in Order 2728APcoversa part
of the boundary also covered by that described in letter 191CM2 but the
two lines diverge in this part, they cannot both be declaratory of the
pre-existing situation. Yet the Chamber asserts that Order 2728 AP is
declaratory, which implies that the letter is not, at least for the common
part of the boundary.

11. In fact, to basethe linein the Béliregionon letter 191CM2 (whichis
simply a verbal transcription of the line shown on the 1:500,000 scale
Blondel la Rougery map of 1925)without offering positive proof that this
line matches the pre-existing boundary is tantamount to indirectly con-
ferring on that map the status of a subsidiary legal title.

12. Now although 1completely endorse theJudgment's general analysis
of thestatus of maps in frontier questions(paras. 53-56),and especiallyits

conclusion that they have value only "as evidence of an auxiliary or
confirmatory kind" "endorsing a conclusion at whch a court has arrived
by other means unconnected with the maps", 1consider that here too the
Judgment has failed to apply in practice what it has stated as a general
principle. For, as the Judgment very clearly explains - reflecting the
settled international case-law - maps inthemselvesneverconstitutea legal
title of any kind, either principal or subsidiary. Yet via letter 191CM2,
whichhas no intrinsic legalvalue andis merelyaverbal transcription of the
1925Blondella Rougery map, the Judgment manages to promote thatmap
into a subsidiary title (what is more, it comes close in paragraph 62 to a
similar result in respect of the 1960IGN map).

13. The purpose of this frantic search for a "written legal title", turning
anything and everything into account, isto satisfy a particular conception

of the uti possidetis principle.
However, this principle, like any other, is not to be conceived in the
absolute ;it has always to be interpreted in the light of itsfunction within
the international legal order.
At first sight, it may indeed seem paradoxical that peoples that have
struggled for their independence should set so much store by their "co-
lonial heritnge". At the beginning, however, at the time when the Latin
American countries were achieving independence, the principle of uti
possidetiswas formulated to serve a dual purpose :first, a defensive pur-
pose towards the rest of the world, in the form of an outright denial that
there was any land without a sovereign(or terra nullius)in the decolonized
territories, even in unexplored areas or those beyond the control of the
colonizers ;secondly, a preventive purpose : to avoid or at least to mini- FRONTIER DISPUTE (SEP. OP. ABI-SAAB) 662

mize conflict occurring in the relationships among the successors, by
freezingthe carved-upterritory in the format it exhibited at the moment of
independence.
14. These two objectives therefore postulate the existence of a boun-

dary, an impermeable territorial division, at the moment of indepen-
dence.This hypothesis can only be factually verifiedin each caseif aboun-
dary is taken to mean a "line" in the geometric sense of the word. Other-
wiseit willbe the inevitable fate of theprinciple of utipossidetis to operate
as a mere fiction that jars with reality.
This is because a minimum of two points will always suffice for the
definition of a line if one starts from the geometric concept of a "line" as
"generated by the motion of apoint" (EncyclopaediaBritannica, Il th ed.).
In this sensethere would alwaysbealine to satisfy the logicalrequirements
for the functioning of the utipossidetis principle. But if onestartsfrom the
common idea of a line as a concrete trace every point on whch is speci-
ficallyidentifiable, it isfar from likelythat thepostulate couldbe shown as
realized in everv instance.
15. Byproceeding from the geometric concept of a line, which is alone
capable of reconciling the principle of utipossidetis with the facts, we can
state that there is always a line which defines the outer limit of lawful

possession. But the scope of a court's role in identifying that line willVary
inversely to the extent of its having taken concrete shape. The fewer the
points (or points of reference) involved in its definition, the greater the
court's "degrees of freedom" (in the statistical sense). And it is here that
considerations of equity infra legem (mentioned in paragraph 28 of the
Judgment) come into play, to guidethe court in the exerciseof thisfreedom
when interpreting and applying the law and the legal titles involved.

16. As regardsthefrontier line whichconcerns us,between the region of
Toussougou/Féto Maraboulé in the West and the eastern terminus
(mounts N'Gouma/Kabia ford), wehave only twopoints of reference, the
pools of Soum and In Abao.
In this region, largely traversed by the Béli,no visible outline of the

"photograph of the territory" on the critical date can in my view be
discerned, as 1have said above, either from regulative texts, or from any
sufficiently conspicuous body of administrative practice. It was up to the
Chamber to giveconcrete shape to the line - which, defined as it is by the
above-mentioned reference-points, does as such exist - on the basis of
considerations of equity infra legem.
17. The Judgment has chosen a line coinciding with that of the maps,
which do not in themselves constitute a legal title or rest upon any such
genuine title, where letter 191CM2 is concerned.
This is admittedly one possible legal solution withn the degrees of
freedom obtaining in the circumstances of the case ;and that is why 1
consider it legally acceptable. But it is not the only solution which would
have been legally possible, nor in my opinion the best. 1 would havepreferred another :one which, while respecting the points of reference
(and it is not by chance that both are watering-places), would have been
more deeply impregnated with considerations of equity infralegemin the
interpretation and application of law, given that the region concerned is a
nomadic one, subject to drought, so that access to water is vital.

(Signed) Georges ABI-SAAB.

Bilingual Content

OPINION INDIVIDUELLE DE M. ABI-SAAB

1. Ayant votéen faveur du dispositif de l'arrêtdans son ensemble,je me
trouve cependant obligéde joindre cette opinion individuelle, carje ne

peux m'associer àcertainsaspectsduraisonnement de laChambre etde ses
conclusions finales.
2. Le systèmede raisonnement de la Chambre est construit sur trois
piliers: l'arrêté2728AP du 27 novembre 1935,qui fonde la ligne dans la
régionoccidentale,dite desquatre villages ;lalettre 191CM2 du 19février
1935,qui fonde la ligneau centre et àl'estdans la régiondu Béli(cesdeux
lignes coexistent mais ne coïncident pas dans la région de Fayando-
Toussougou) ; et enfin l'arrêtédu 31 août 1927 et son ((erratum ))du
5 octobre 1927,qui fondent le point culminant de la ligne àl'est dans la
régiondes monts N'Gouma-guéde Kabia.
3. Seul ce dernier arrêtéde 1927n'est pas sujet à controverse entre les

Parties quant à sa pertinence en tant que titre juridique de la limite
territoriale telle qu'elle se présentait la date critique, bien qu'elles ne
soient pas d'accord sur son interprétation.
En revanche la pertinence de l'arrêté 2728 AP et de la lettre 191CM2
dépend entièrementde leur caractère descriptif (ou déclaratoire) ou au
contraire modificatif deslimites territoriales préexistantes. Celaaamenéla
Chambre àentreprendre une analyse par trop détailléedu droit colonial
français qui, à mon avis, est une tâche qui ne convient guère àun organe
juridictionnel international etdont elleaurait pu faire l'économiedans une
large mesure.
4. A cet égard,je souscris complètement à l'esprit età la lettre de

l'énoncé de l'arrêatu paragraphe 30concernant la significationde l'examen
du droit colonial par la Chambre et plus particulièrement àla négationde
tout renvoi par ledroit international audroit colonial, ou de l'existencede
tout relais juridique ou continuumjuris entre eux. On ne saurait, par
conséquent,trouver par ce biais, en droit international contemporain -
mêmede manière indirecte - une quelconque légitimation rétroactivede
l'institution coloniale.
L'énoncé préciseencore que si l'on fait appel au droit colonial ce n'est
Pas

((en tant que tel...mais seulement comme un élémentde fait, parmi
d'autres, ou comme un moyen de preuve et de démonstration ..de
<<l'instantané territoria))à la date critique)).

Je considèrequ'en l'espècel'arrêt estallé au-delàdes limites de ce sage SEPARATE OPINION OF JUDGE ABI-SAAB

[Translation]

1. While having voted in favour of theJudgment's operative provisions
taken asawhole,1find myselfobliged to append thisopinion because 1am
unable to associate myselfwith certain aspects of the Chamber's reasoning
and of its final conclusions.
2. The Chamber's reasoning is structured around three documents :
Order 2728 AP of 27 November 1935forms the basis of the line in the
western region,described asthe regionof the four villages ;letter 191CM2
of 19February 1935forms thebasis of theline in thecentre and to theeast,
in the Beliregion (these two lines coexist but do not coincide in the region
of Fayando-Toussougou) ;and, finally, the Order of 31 August 1927and
"erratum" of 5 October 1927, which forms the basis for the eastern
terminus of the line, in the region of mounts N'Gouma/Kabia ford.
3. This latter Order of 1927isthe only element ofwhich the relevance as
a legaltitle for the territorial boundary, as it was on the critical date, isnot
disputed between the Parties, although they differ in their interpretations
of it.
By contrast, the relevance of Order 2728 AP and of letter 191 CM2
depends whollyon whether they are descriptive (or declaratory) in charac-
ter, or whether instead they modify the pre-existing territorial boundar-
ies.Thisquestion has led the Chamber intoan excessivelydetailed analysis
of French colonial law,a task which isnot,in my view,afitting one for an
international court and was largely superfluous.

4. In that connection, 1am in total agreement with both the spirit and
the letter of what the Judgment statesin paragraph 30concerningthe sense
of the Chamber's examination of colonial law and, in particular, with the
denial ofany renvoiby international lawto colonial lawor of the existence
between them of any legal crossover or continuumjuris. Along that road
there can therefore be no question of even circuitously finding in contem-

porary international law any retroactive legitimation whatever of coloni-
alism as an institution.
The Judgment further specifies that colonial law may play a role

"not in itself... but only as onefactual element among others, or as
evidence indicative of .. .the 'photograph of the territory' at the
critical date".

1consider that in the event the Judgrnent has overstepped the limits of énoncé,en fondant son raisonnement presque exclusivement et avec
abondance de détailssur cet élément.
5. Pour ce qui est de l'arrêté2728 AP et de son application à la
régiondite des quatre villages, à l'ouest, l'arrêt e la Chambre démontre
amplement, à mon avis, son caractère descriptif ou déclaratoire des
limites préexistantes. Mais même en l'absence de cet acte, la pratique
administrative, c'est-à-dire l'exercicedu pouvoir public et des fonctions
gouvernementales, aussi bien avant qu'après l'adoption de l'arrêté,
prouve que pour les autoritéscoloniales cette région relevaitdu Soudan ;
et cela jusqu'à l'indépendance du Mali, date critique pour l'établis-

sement de ]'<instantané territorial ))constituant le ((legs colonial r)de
celui-ci.
6. Lasituation n'esten revanchepas lamêmepour cequiestde larégion
orientale du Béli.En effet, dans cette zone qui se situe entre la région
couverte par l'arrêté 2728AP et lepoint culminant de la frontièrecouvert
par l'arrêté de 1927,nous n'avons que deux points de repèresûrs :la mare
de Soum et celle d'In Abao. Mais il n'existe aucun acte réglementairede
caractèregénéralet la pratique administrative invoquéepar les deux Par-
ties est par trop fluctuante, éparse et interpénétrante des deux côtés
(s'agissant surtout d'une zonede nomadisation et de transhumance) pour

dégagerune limite administrative visible.
7. C'est pour combler cette lacune que l'arrêtde la Chambre fait inter-
venir la lettre 191CM2 du 19février1935.Par cette lettre, le gouverneur
généralde l'Afrique occidentale française propose au lieutenant-gouver-
neur du Soudan defixerleslimitesentre lescoloniesdu Soudanet du Niger
par un texte et suggèreun tracé quine fait que transcrire en mots le tracé
figurant sur la carte Blondel la Rougery au 1/500 000 de 1925.Il s'agit
donc d'une simple proposition et non d'une décision administrative ;
proposition qui n'a pas abouti à son issue normale en forme d'acte régle-

mentaire.
8. Je suis d'accord avec la démonstration de l'arrêtque ni le statut
formel de la lettre ni l'issuede la démarchene font obstacle àla possibilité
que son contenu soit descriptif ou déclaratoire des limites territoriales
préexistantes.Mais là oùje ne peux plus suivreleraisonnement de l'arrêt,
c'est quand il tire de cette démonstration négativela conclusion positive
qu'étantdonnéque cette possibilité existeelle est nécessairementla seule
possible ;en d'autres termes de tirer de la possibilitéque la lettre soit
descriptive la conclusion qu'elle l'est effectivement.
Il manque iciune étapelogique qui requiert une preuve positive pour la

combler ;preuve qui, àmon avis,n'apas été apportée.Carilest tout autant
possible qu'à cette occasion le gouverneur généralait voulu rationaliser
davantage le tracé.ou le rendre compatible avec la carte la plus utilisée
alors.
9. L'arrêtde la Chambre lui-mêmea ,yant conclu au caractèredescriptif
de la lettre, reflète néanmoins quelques hésitations à ce sujet quand il
prévoit, auxparagraphes 110et 144,quelàoùladescription delalimite par
des points géodésiquesdans la lettre ne concorde pas avec les points de thiswiseproviso bybasing its reasoning on thiselementalmost exclusively
and in abundant detail.
5. As regards Order 2728AP and its application to the so-called region
of thefour villages,in the West,1consider the Chamber's Judgment amply
demonstrates how it is descriptive or declaratory of the pre-existing boun-
daries. But, evenin theabsence of this instrument, administrative practice,
i.e., the exercise of public authority and governmental functions both
before and after the adoption of the Order, proves that in the eyes of the
colonial authorities this region belonged to Sudan, and did so until the
independence of Mali, the critical date for the fixingof the "photograph of

the territory" constituting Mali's "colonial heritage".

6. However, this is not the case with the eastern region, that of the Béli.
In this area, lying between the region covered by Order 2728 AP and the
terminus of the frontier as covered by the 1927Order, we have only two
reliablepoints of reference :the pool of Soumand the pool of InAbao. But
there is no regulative instrument of a general description, and the admini-
strativepractice relied upon by the Parties is much too fluctuating, sparse
and interpenetrative (this being chieflyan area of nomadic movement and
transhumance) to disclose any visible administrative boundary.

7. To fil1this gap, the Chamber's Judgment brings into play letter 191
CM2 of 19February 1935.In this letter, the Governor-General of French
West Africa makes a proposa1to the Lieutenant-Governor of Sudan for a
definition of the boundaries between the colonies of Sudan and Niger in
textual form, suggestinga linewhichis merelya verbal transcription of the
one shown on the 1:500,000Blondella Rougery map of 1925.Hence this is
merely a proposal, not an administrative decision ; and it did not ma-
terialize, as would normally be the case, in the form of a regulative in-

strument.
8. 1agree with the Judgment's demonstration that neither the forma1
status of the letter nor the fate of the proposa1preclude the possibility that
what it contained may have been descriptive or declaratory of the pre-
existing territorial boundaries. But where 1can no longer follow the rea-
soning is where the Judgment draws from this negative argument the
positive conclusion that, sincethis possibility exists, it must necessarily be
the only one ; in other words, from the possibility that the letter may be
descriptive, it draws the conclusion that it actually is.
There is here a logical hiatus that can be repaired only by positive
evidence, but no such evidence has in my view been supplied. For it is
equally possible that the Govemor-General's aim on this occasion was
further to rationalizethe line,or to render it compatible with themap most
widely used at the time.
9. The Judgment itself, having concluded that the letter was descriptive
in character, nonetheless betrays some hesitation when it States,in para-
graphs 110and 144,that wherever the description of the boundary in the
letter by means of CO-ordinatesdoes not correspond with the reference- repère tirésd'autres titres ou preuves, ce sont les derniers qui prime;ce
qui implique que du moins pour ce qui est de ces points de non-concor-
dance l'arrêtne considèrepas la lettre comme déclaratoirede la situation
préexistante.
10. De même,étantdonné que le tracé indiquédans l'arrêté 2728 AP
couvreune partie de lalimitecouverte égalementpar letracéindiquédans
la lettre 191CM2, mais quedans cette partie les deux tracés divergent,ils
ne peuvent êtretous deux déclaratoiresde la situation préexistante. Or, la
Chambre affirme quel'arrêté 2728 AP estdéclaratoirecequi impliqueque,
du moins pour cequi est de lapartie commune de la limite, lalettre ne l'est
pas.

11. En fait, fonder la ligne dans la régiondu Bélisur la lettre 191CM2
(qui n'est qu'une transcription en mots de la ligne figurant sur la carte
BlondellaRougeryau 1/500 000de 1925)sansapporter lapreuvepositivede
la concordance de son tracéavec la limite préexistante revient à conférer
de manière détournéeune valeur de titre juridique subsidiaire à cette
carte.
12. Or, si je souscris entièrement à l'analyse générale qu'entreprend
l'arrêtde la valeur des cartes en matière de frontières (par. 53-56) et
notamment à la conclusion que les cartes n'ont de valeur << que comme
preuve à caractère auxiliaire ou confirmatif>), qui conforte une conclu-
sion à laquelle lejuge est parvenu par d'autres moyens indépendants des
cartes O,je considèreque là aussi l'arrêtn'a pas suivi dans l'application

concrète ce qu'il a énoncéde manière généraleC . ar ainsi que le dit très
clairement l'arrêt- reflétant encela lajurisprudence internationale cons-
tante en la matière - lescartesne constituentjamais àellesseules un titre
juridique quelconque, qu'il soitprincipal ou subsidiaire. Mais par le tru-
chement de la lettre 191CM2, qui n'aaucune valeurjuridique intrinsèque,
et qui n'est que la représentation écritede la carte Blondel la Rougery de
1925,l'arrêt arriveà érigercette carte en titre subsidiaire (il s'approche
d'ailleurs de cette conclusion égalementpar rapport a la carte IGN de
1960,dans son paragraphe 62).
13. Cette quêteeffrénéed'un ((titrejuridique écritO,au prix de faire
flèchedetout bois,vise à satisfaireune certaineconception du principe de
l'utipossidetis.

Ceprincipe, comme toutautre, ne saurait êtreconçu de manièreabsolue
mais doit êtretoujours interprété àla lumièrede sa fonction dans l'ordre
juridique international.
Eneffet, ilpeut paraîtreàpremière vueparadoxal que despeuples ayant
luttépourleur indépendancetiennent tant àleur <<legscolonial ))Cepen-
dant, à ses origines, au moment des indépendances latino-américaines,
l'élaborationdu principe de l'utipossidetis servaitun double objectif : un
objectif défensif,vis-à-visdu reste du monde, en la forme d'une négation
radicale de toute vacance de souveraineté (ou de terra nullius) dans les
territoires décolonisés,mêm dans leszones qui n'étaientpas exploréesou
contrôléespar lecolonisateur ; et un objectif conservatoire, visant a éviter

ou du moins minimiser les conflits dans les rapportsentre les successeurs, FRONTIER DISPUTE (SEP. OP. ABI-SAAB) 661

points derived from other titles or evidence, thelatter areto havepriority ;
this implies, at least for those CO-ordinateswhich do not so correspond,
that the Judgment does not consider the letter to be declaratory of the
pre-existing situation.

10. Similarly,whereas the linedescribed in Order 2728APcoversa part
of the boundary also covered by that described in letter 191CM2 but the
two lines diverge in this part, they cannot both be declaratory of the
pre-existing situation. Yet the Chamber asserts that Order 2728 AP is
declaratory, which implies that the letter is not, at least for the common
part of the boundary.

11. In fact, to basethe linein the Béliregionon letter 191CM2 (whichis
simply a verbal transcription of the line shown on the 1:500,000 scale
Blondel la Rougery map of 1925)without offering positive proof that this
line matches the pre-existing boundary is tantamount to indirectly con-
ferring on that map the status of a subsidiary legal title.

12. Now although 1completely endorse theJudgment's general analysis
of thestatus of maps in frontier questions(paras. 53-56),and especiallyits

conclusion that they have value only "as evidence of an auxiliary or
confirmatory kind" "endorsing a conclusion at whch a court has arrived
by other means unconnected with the maps", 1consider that here too the
Judgment has failed to apply in practice what it has stated as a general
principle. For, as the Judgment very clearly explains - reflecting the
settled international case-law - maps inthemselvesneverconstitutea legal
title of any kind, either principal or subsidiary. Yet via letter 191CM2,
whichhas no intrinsic legalvalue andis merelyaverbal transcription of the
1925Blondella Rougery map, the Judgment manages to promote thatmap
into a subsidiary title (what is more, it comes close in paragraph 62 to a
similar result in respect of the 1960IGN map).

13. The purpose of this frantic search for a "written legal title", turning
anything and everything into account, isto satisfy a particular conception

of the uti possidetis principle.
However, this principle, like any other, is not to be conceived in the
absolute ;it has always to be interpreted in the light of itsfunction within
the international legal order.
At first sight, it may indeed seem paradoxical that peoples that have
struggled for their independence should set so much store by their "co-
lonial heritnge". At the beginning, however, at the time when the Latin
American countries were achieving independence, the principle of uti
possidetiswas formulated to serve a dual purpose :first, a defensive pur-
pose towards the rest of the world, in the form of an outright denial that
there was any land without a sovereign(or terra nullius)in the decolonized
territories, even in unexplored areas or those beyond the control of the
colonizers ;secondly, a preventive purpose : to avoid or at least to mini- en gelant le découpage territorial en l'étatdans lequel il se présentaitau
moment de l'indépendance.

14. Ces deux objectifsprésupposent donc l'existenced'une limite, d'un
découpageterritorial étanche,au moment de l'indépendance,postulat qui

ne peut sevérifierdans les faits dans tous lescas que si I'oncomprend par
limite une tligne 1)dans l'acception géométriquede ce terme. Et c'est
seulement à ce prix que le fonctionnement du principe de l'utipossidetis
peut éviter lesort d'une pure fiction qui fait violence à la réalité.
Eneffet, siI'onprocèdede la notion géométriqued'une t<ligne)>comme
étant engendréepar un <(point qui se déplace ))(Petit Larousse illustré,
1986),une ligne sedéfinitminimalement par deux points. Dans ce sens,il
existerait toujours une ligne qui satisferait aux exigences logiques de
l'opérationdu principe de I'utipossidetis. MaissiI'onprocèdede lanotion

courante de ligne comme un tracé concretdont chaque point est spécifi-
quement identifiable, le postulat serait loin de pouvoir êtrevérifiédans
tous les cas.
15. En procédantde la notion géométriquede ligne, qui est la seule à
pouvoir concilier leprincipe de I'utipossidetis aveclesfaits, nous pouvons
affirmer qu'il existetoujoursune lignequi définit lalimite de la possession
légale.Mais le rôle de l'organejuridictionnel dans l'identification de cette
ligne est fonction du niveau de concrétisation de la ligne en question.
Moins il y a de points (ou points de repère) qui interviennent dans la

définitionde la ligne, plus grande est la marge de liberté (ou degrees of
freedom )>au sensstatistique du terme) de l'organejuridictionnel. Et c'est
là qu'interviennent les considérations d'équitéinfra legem, que l'arrêt
mentionne au paragraphe 28, pour guider l'organe juridictionnel dans
l'exercicede cette margede libertédans l'interprétationet l'application du
droit et des titresjuridiques en présence.
16. En ce qui concerne la ligne de frontière qui nous occupe, au-delà
de la régionde Toussougou/Féto Maraboulé à l'ouest et jusqu'au point

culminant à l'est (monts N'Gouma-gué de Kabia), nous ne disposons
que de deux points de repère, les maresde Soum et d'In Abao.
Dans cette région, traversée engrande partie par le Béli,1'<i< nstantané
territorial))à ladate critique n'ade profil visibleà mon avis,cornmeje I'ai
mentionnéplushaut, ni à travers des textesréglementaires, nià travers une
pratique administrative suffisamment évidente.11revenait à la Chambre
deconcrétiserlaligne - qui existeen tant que telle,définiepar lespoints de
repère susmentionnés - en s'inspirant des considérations d'équité infra
legem.

17. L'arrêt achoisi une ligne qui coïncide avec celle des cartes, cartes
quine constituent pas en elles-mêmesuntitrejuridique ni ne reposent sur
un tel titreà proprement parler, s'agissant de la lettre 191CM2.
Certes il s'agità d'une solutionjuridique possible dans les limites de la
marge de liberté existant en l'espèce ;et c'estla raison pour laquelleje la
considèrejuridiquement acceptable. Mais elle n'est pas la seule qui soit
juridiquement possible, ni à mon avisla meilleure.J'en aurais préféré une FRONTIER DISPUTE (SEP. OP. ABI-SAAB) 662

mize conflict occurring in the relationships among the successors, by
freezingthe carved-upterritory in the format it exhibited at the moment of
independence.
14. These two objectives therefore postulate the existence of a boun-

dary, an impermeable territorial division, at the moment of indepen-
dence.This hypothesis can only be factually verifiedin each caseif aboun-
dary is taken to mean a "line" in the geometric sense of the word. Other-
wiseit willbe the inevitable fate of theprinciple of utipossidetis to operate
as a mere fiction that jars with reality.
This is because a minimum of two points will always suffice for the
definition of a line if one starts from the geometric concept of a "line" as
"generated by the motion of apoint" (EncyclopaediaBritannica, Il th ed.).
In this sensethere would alwaysbealine to satisfy the logicalrequirements
for the functioning of the utipossidetis principle. But if onestartsfrom the
common idea of a line as a concrete trace every point on whch is speci-
ficallyidentifiable, it isfar from likelythat thepostulate couldbe shown as
realized in everv instance.
15. Byproceeding from the geometric concept of a line, which is alone
capable of reconciling the principle of utipossidetis with the facts, we can
state that there is always a line which defines the outer limit of lawful

possession. But the scope of a court's role in identifying that line willVary
inversely to the extent of its having taken concrete shape. The fewer the
points (or points of reference) involved in its definition, the greater the
court's "degrees of freedom" (in the statistical sense). And it is here that
considerations of equity infra legem (mentioned in paragraph 28 of the
Judgment) come into play, to guidethe court in the exerciseof thisfreedom
when interpreting and applying the law and the legal titles involved.

16. As regardsthefrontier line whichconcerns us,between the region of
Toussougou/Féto Maraboulé in the West and the eastern terminus
(mounts N'Gouma/Kabia ford), wehave only twopoints of reference, the
pools of Soum and In Abao.
In this region, largely traversed by the Béli,no visible outline of the

"photograph of the territory" on the critical date can in my view be
discerned, as 1have said above, either from regulative texts, or from any
sufficiently conspicuous body of administrative practice. It was up to the
Chamber to giveconcrete shape to the line - which, defined as it is by the
above-mentioned reference-points, does as such exist - on the basis of
considerations of equity infra legem.
17. The Judgment has chosen a line coinciding with that of the maps,
which do not in themselves constitute a legal title or rest upon any such
genuine title, where letter 191CM2 is concerned.
This is admittedly one possible legal solution withn the degrees of
freedom obtaining in the circumstances of the case ;and that is why 1
consider it legally acceptable. But it is not the only solution which would
have been legally possible, nor in my opinion the best. 1 would haveautre qui, tout enrespectant lespoints de repère(et cen'estpas par hasard
s'ilssont tous lesdeux despoints d'eau), soitplus imbue de considérations
d'équitéinfra legem dans l'interprétation et l'applicationdu droit, s'agis-
sant d'une zonede nomadisation qui souffre de lasécheresseetoù l'accèsa
l'eau estdonc d'une importance vitale.

(Signé)Georges ABI-SAAB.preferred another :one which, while respecting the points of reference
(and it is not by chance that both are watering-places), would have been
more deeply impregnated with considerations of equity infralegemin the
interpretation and application of law, given that the region concerned is a
nomadic one, subject to drought, so that access to water is vital.

(Signed) Georges ABI-SAAB.

Document file FR
Document Long Title

Separate Opinion of Judge ad hoc Abi-Saab

Links