Volume 6 | INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE

Document Number

153-20160713-WRI-01-05-EN

Parent Document Number

153-20160713-WRI-01-00-EN

Document File

153-20160713-WRI-01-05-EN.pdf

INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE
OBLIGATION TO NEGOTIATE ACCESS TO THE
PACIFIC OCEAN
(BOLIVIA v. CHILE)
COUNTER-MEMORIAL OF THE
REPUBLIC OF CHILE
Volume 6 of 6
(Annexes 333 – 373)
13 JULY 2016

i
Index to Volume 6 of 6
Annexes 333 – 373
Annex
No
Title
S
ource
Page No
xlviAnnex noTitleSourcePAge noVolume 6 AnnexeS 333 - 373Annex 333 Concession Contract between the Empresa Portuaria Arica and Consorcio Portuario Arica S.A., 20 September 2004 (extract)(Original in Spanish, English translation)Archives of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Chile2447Annex 334 Letter from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Chile to the Bolivian Consulate General in Chile, attaching a document titled “Chile-Bolivia Work Proposal”, No 12045, 27 July 2005(Original in Spanish, English translation)Archives of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Chile2467Annex 335 Minutes of the Second Meeting of the Bolivia-Chile Working Group on Bilateral Affairs, 17 July 2006 (Original in Spanish, English translation)Archives of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Chile2479Annex 336 Joint Press Release issued by Bolivia and Chile, 18 July 2006(Original in Spanish, English translation)Archives of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Chile2505Annex 337 Minutes of the Fifteenth Meeting of the Political Consultations Mechanism, 25 November 2006 (Original in Spanish, English translation)Original submitted by Bolivia as Annex 118 to its Memorial2509Annex 338 Minutes of the Sixteenth Meeting of the Political Consultations Mechanism, 18 May 2007 (Original in Spanish, English translation)Archives of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Chile2517Annex 339 Minutes of the Seventeenth Meeting of the Political Consultations Mechanism, 19 October 2007 (Original in Spanish, English translation)Archives of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Chile2551
ii
xlviiAnnex noTitleSourcePAge noAnnex 340 Minutes of the Fourth Plenary Meeting of the Organization of American States General Assembly, 3 June 2008(English translation only)Organization of American States, General Assembly, Thirty-Eighth Regular Session, 2008, Proceedings, Vol. II, OEA/Ser.P/XXXVIII-O.2 (2008), pp 149-150 and 160-1722583Annex 341 Minutes of the Eighteenth Meeting of the Political Consultations Mechanism, 17 June 2008(Original in Spanish, English translation)Archives of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Chile2597Annex 342 Minutes of the Nineteenth Meeting of the Political Consultations Mechanism, 21 November 2008(Original in Spanish, English translation)<http://www.minrel.gov.cl/prontus_minrel/site/artic/20081121/pags/200811… 343 Minutes of the Tenth Meeting of the Working Group on Chile-Bolivia Free Transit, 29 May 2009(Original in Spanish, English translation)Archives of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Chile2663Annex 344 Minutes of the Twentieth Meeting of the Political Consultations Mechanism, 30 June 2009(Original in Spanish, English translation)Archives of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Chile2679Annex 345 Chilean National Customs Service, Resolution No 6153, 11 September 2009 (Original in Spanish, English translation)<http://www.aduana.cl/aduana/site/artic/20090914/asocfile/20090914103004…
xlviii iii
Annex
no
Title Source
PAge
no
Annex 346 Minutes of the Twenty-First Meeting of
the Political Consultations Mechanism,
13 November 2009
(Original in Spanish, English translation)
Archives of the
Ministry of Foreign
Affairs of Chile
2731
Annex 347 Minutes of the Fourth Plenary Meeting
of the Organization of American States
General Assembly, 8 June 2010
(English translation only)
Organization of
American States,
General Assembly,
Fortieth Regular
Session, 2010,
Proceedings, Vol. II,
OEA/Ser.P/XL-O.2
(2011),
pp 121 and 136-143
2759
Annex 348 Minutes of the Twenty-Second
Meeting of the Political Consultations
Mechanism, 14 July 2010
(Original in Spanish, English translation)
Archives of the
Ministry of Foreign
Affairs of Chile
2769
Annex 349 “Minister of Foreign Affairs and the
Bolivian enclave: ‘Any alternatives
that divide the country are not
beneficial’”, chile-hoy.blogspot.com,
6 December 2010
(Original in Spanish, English translation)
Original submitted by
Bolivia as Annex 142 to
its Memorial
2799
Annex 350 R. Prudencio Lizón, History of the
Charaña Negotiation (2011),
pp 18-19, 328-342, 355-374 (extract)
(Original in Spanish, English translation)
2805
Annex 351 Joint Press Release issued by Bolivia
and Chile, 17 January 2011
(Original in Spanish, English translation)
<http://www.minrel.
gob.cl/minrel/site/
artic/20110117/
pags/20110117191343.
html>
2873
iv
xlixAnnex noTitleSourcePAge noAnnex 352 “Bolivia and Chile open dialogue to discuss outlet to the sea”, La Razón (Bolivia), 18 January 2011(Original in Spanish, English translation)La Razón (Bolivia)2879Annex 353 “Bolivia and Chile engage in formal dialogue on maritime outlet”, Página Siete (Bolivia), 18 January 2011(Original in Spanish, English translation)Página Siete (Bolivia)2883Annex 354 “Bolivia’s Minister of Foreign Affairs says dialogue will be bilateral”, Página Siete (Bolivia), 18 January 2011(Original in Spanish, English translation)Página Siete (Bolivia)2887Annex 355 Joint Declaration of the Ministers of Foreign Affairs of Bolivia and Chile, 7 February 2011(Original in Spanish, English translation)Original submitted by Bolivia as Annex 166 to its Memorial2891Annex 356 “Evo requests Chile to submit a maritime proposal before 23 March for discussion”, Agencia Efe (Spain), 17 February 2011(Original in Spanish, English translation)Original submitted by Bolivia as Annex 145 to its Memorial2895Annex 357 Organization of American States, Permanent Council, Legal Opinion of the Department of International Law Regarding the Value of General Assembly Resolutions and of Documents Arising out of the Summits of the Americas, CAJP/GT/RDI-169/11, 28 February 2011(Official English translation)<http://www.oas.org/dil/CAJP-GT-RDI-169-11_eng.pdf>2901Annex 358 Speech delivered by President Evo Morales, 23 March 2011(Original in Spanish, English translation)<http://www.diremar.gob.bo/node/265>2905lAnnex
v
l
Annex
no
Title Source
PAge
no
Annex 359 Minutes of the Fourth Plenary Meeting
of the Organization of American States
General Assembly, 7 June 2011
(English translation only)
Organization of
American States,
General Assembly,
Forty-First Regular
Session, 2011,
Proceedings, Vol. II,
OEA/Ser.P/XLI-O.2
(2011), pp 139-140 and
156-167
2913
Annex 360 Chilean Minutes of the Meeting between
the Presidents of Chile and Bolivia,
28 July 2011
(Original in Spanish, English translation)
Archives of the
Ministry of Foreign
Affairs of Chile
2929
Annex 361 Terminal Puerto Arica S.A., Service
Manual for the Port of Arica,
1 December 2011 (extract)
(Original in Spanish, English translation)
<http://www.tpa.
cl/v1/appl/upload/
subidos/201112293911.
pdf>, pp 60-61, 74-76,
82 and 86-87
2935
Annex 362 Note from the Ministry of Foreign
Affairs of Bolivia to the Consulate
General of Chile in Bolivia, No VREDGRB-
UAM-002915/2012,
22 February 2012
(Original in Spanish, English translation)
Archives of the
Ministry of Foreign
Affairs of Chile
2953
Annex 363 Minutes of the Fourth Plenary Meeting
of the Organization of American States
General Assembly, 5 June 2012
(English translation only)
Organization of
American States,
General Assembly,
Forty-Second Regular
Session, 2012,
Proceedings, Vol. II,
OEA/Ser.P/XLI-O.2
(2013), pp 167-168,
196-209 and 218-219
2957
vi
liAnnex noTitleSourcePAge noAnnex 364 “Bolivia demands at Organization of American States that Chile renegotiate the 1904 Treaty”, La Razón (Bolivia), 6 June 2012(Original in Spanish, English translation)La Razón (Bolivia)2975Annex 365 Note from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Bolivia to the Consulate General of Chile in Bolivia, No VRE-DGRB-UAM-019765/2012, 3 October 2012(Original in Spanish, English translation)Original submitted by Bolivia as Annex 84 to its Memorial2979Annex 366 Note from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Bolivia to the Consulate General of Chile in Bolivia, No VRE-DGRB-UAM-019779/2012, 3 October 2012(Original in Spanish, English translation)Archives of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Chile2983Annex 367 Note from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Bolivia to the Consulate General of Chile in Bolivia, No VRE-DGRB-UAM-000179/2013, 8 January 2013(Original in Spanish, English translation)Archives of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Chile2987Annex 368 “García Linera: The adaptation of the 1904 Treaty to the [Political Constitution] will take place by December 2013”, Agencia de Noticias Fides (Bolivia), 15 February 2013(Original in Spanish, English translation)Agencia de Noticias Fides (Bolivia)2991Annex 369 Constitutional Tribunal of Bolivia, Plurinational Constitutional Declaration No 0003/2013, made in Sucre on 25 April 2013 (Original in Spanish, English translation)<http://www.tcpbolivia.bo/> 2995
Annex
No
Title
S
ource
Page No
Annex 364
“Bolivia demands at OAS that Chile renegotiate the 1904 Treaty”, La Razón (Bolivia), 6 June 2012
(Original in Spanish, English translation)
La Razón (Bolivia)
2975
vii
liiAnnex noTitleSourcePAge noAnnex 370 Terminal Puerto Antofagasta, List of Fees for the Period 2015-2016 (Original in Spanish, English translation)<http://www.abcpuertos.cl/documentos/Tarifas/Tarifas-ATI-Periodo-2015-20… 371 Letter from the Chilean Consulate General in Bolivia to the Bolivian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, No 15/13, 14 January 2015 attached to a Note from the Chilean Consulate General in Bolivia to the Chilean National Directorate of Frontiers and Limits of the State, No 33, 14 January 2015 (Original in Spanish, English translation)Archives of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Chile3025Annex 372 Client Letter from Terminal Puerto Arica S.A., 19 January 2015 (extract)(Original in Spanish, English translation)<http://www.tpa.cl/v1/appl/upload/subidos/24052016_Tarifas.pdf>3033Annex 373 “Morales wanted to denounce the 1904 Treaty”, La Razón (Bolivia), 24 December 2015(Original in Spanish, English translation)La Razón (Bolivia) 3045

Annex 333
Concession Contract between the Empresa Portuaria Arica and Consorcio Portuario Arica S.A., 20 September 2004 (extract)
(Original in Spanish, English translation)
Archives of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Chile
2447
2448
Annex 333
Annex 333
2449
[Seal:] Juan Antonio Retamal Concha. Notary Public.
Notarial Office No. 1. Arica. [Signed]
CONCESSION CONTRACT BETWEEN
EMPRESA PORTUARIA ARICA
AND
CONSORCIO PORTUARIO ARICA S.A.
NOTARIAL REGISTER No. 2293.- IN ARICA, REPUBLIC OF CHILE, on 20 September 2004.
[…]
2450
Annex 333
Annex 333
2451
Section 1.4: Definitions.
[…]
2452
Annex 333
Annex 333
2453
“Bolivian Cargo or Bolivian Cargo in Transit” means any cargo coming from third countries and declared in transit to Bolivia, as well as any cargo coming from Bolivia and bound for third countries, which is governed by all treaties and conventions in force applicable to the free transit regime.” “Exempt Bolivian Cargo” means any cargo declared in transit to or from Bolivia, exempted from the payment of storage fees under all applicable agreements and resolutions in force”.
[…]
2454
Annex 333
Annex 333
2455
Section 5.35. Services Provided to Bolivian Cargo.
One. Pursuant to the duties imposed on the Chilean State, and, particularly, on the Port of Arica, arising from the treaties and agreements in force entered into with the Republic of Bolivia, the Concessionaire shall have the following obligations: (a) To adopt all necessary measures to avoid impairing the right of free commercial transit enjoyed by Bolivian Cargo transferred through the Wharf Operated under a Concession Agreement. (b) To allow the normal development and discharge of duties of the Bolivian Customs Service and the Customs Officer appointed by the Bolivian Government to inspect and control Bolivian Cargo in free transit. (c) To comply with all administrative and operational procedures currently applicable to Bolivian goods in transit, whether they are included in the Operating Manual for the Port of Arica Integrated Transit System or have been incorporated into port operations on account of current trade and operating practices. (d) In all matters relating to services, fees, and, in general, in all matters relating to Bolivian Cargo transit not included in the above Operating Manual and/or this Section, the Concessionaire shall be bound by the general tariff and regulatory regime set forth in the Concessionaire Services Manual. (e) In compliance with the foregoing obligation, the Concessionaire
2456
Annex 333
Annex 333
2457
shall deliver a monthly report containing statistical information cargo in transit to Bolivia, both on a cumulative basis and for the current month, to the members of the C.I.C. (Information and Coordination Center), as part of the Integrated Transit System information system. Two. Services provided and maximum fees applicable to Bolivian Cargo by the Concessionaire. (a) Use of loading docks for cargo. The maximum fee for the use of loading docks for cargo shall be USD 0.85 per ton. This fee shall apply to all goods the freight for which has been booked FIO, or to goods in respect of which loading and/or unloading services are payable by the consignee. (b) Storage of General Cargo and Bulk Cargo. The storage service is that provided to goods or property to be loaded or unloaded which have been declared as goods in free transit and which are deposited in the warehouses authorized for such purposes, according to Annex CXXIV, Minimum Quality Standards for Storage Services. The Concessionaire shall be liable for any losses and damages sustained by the goods or property stored in such warehouses, in accordance with the legislation in force, from the time of receipt of such goods or property and their supporting documentation to the time of delivery thereof, in like manner, to the consignee, its legal representative or carrier. The storage service provided to the goods or property stored in port warehouses shall be computed from the date of receipt recorded in the relevant receipt slip. Goods in transit to Bolivia (import cargo) shall be exempt from the payment of storage service fees for up to 365 days. Upon expiration of such term, the goods shall pay the general fees for this service, as provided in the Concessionaire Services Manual. Goods in transit from Bolivia (export cargo) shall be exempt from the payment of storage service fees for up to 60 days. Upon expiration of such term, the goods shall pay the general fees for this service, as provided in the Concessionaire Services Manual. Pursuant to item (c) below, such goods or property classified as cargo for immediate collection or shipping shall not be exempt from the payment of the storage fees referred to herein. The Concessionaire
2458
Annex 333
Annex 333
2459
shall receive compensation for the storage services subject to exemption from payment by Bolivian goods, which shall be paid directly by the Chilean Treasury so that the storage terms and conditions may be met, regardless of the cargo quantity that must be stored. The Chilean government shall pay such annual compensation to the Concessionaire while the Concession remains effective. For the first year of the Concession, the compensation amount shall be one million United States dollars. For the second year, and for every year thereafter, the compensation for storage services subject to exemption from payment by Bolivian goods shall be determined on the basis of the amount paid for the previous year plus any changes in the US PPI index over such period, as per the Agreement contained in Annex C XIV. (c) Storage of cargo for immediate collection or shipping. Goods for immediate collection or shipping are those considered dangerous (IMO), the deposit of which is subject to conditions or prohibited, and which, on account of their nature, may not remain deposited at the Port. However, they may, exceptionally, be stored in special warehouses under special conditions. Maximum fees applicable to import cargo for immediate collection or shipping: From day 1 to day 5: USD 1.04 per ton. From day 6 to day 10: USD 2.10 per ton. From day 11 to day 15: USD 2.57 per ton. From day 16 to day 20: USD 3.27 per ton. From day 21 to day 25: USD 3.97 per ton. From day 26 to day 30: USD 5.60 per ton. For every 5-day period between day 31 and day 60: USD 7.70 per ton. For every 5-day period between day 61 and day 90: USD 10.96 per ton. For every 5-day period following day 90: USD 19.59 per ton. Maximum fees applicable to export cargo for immediate collection or shipping: From day 1 to day 5: USD 0.68 per ton. From day 6 to day 10: USD 1.37
2460
Annex 333
Annex 333
2461
per ton. From day 11 to day 15: USD 1.67 per ton. From day 16 to day 20: USD 2.13 per ton. From day 21 to day 25: USD 2.58 per ton. From day 26 to day 30: USD 3.64 per ton. For every 5-day period between day 31 and day 60: USD 5.01 per ton. For every 5-day period between day 61 and day 90: USD 7.12 per ton. For every 5-day period following day 90: USD 12.13 per ton. Storage fees applicable to goods for immediate collection or shipping shall be cumulative, so that when several periods are combined, the sum of all of them shall result in the amount to be paid. The Concessionaire shall charge 50% of the storage service fees applicable to goods for immediate collection or shipping in case such goods or property have been deposited in yards or open areas. (d) Goods in transit may not remain at the Port for a period exceeding one year from the date of filing of the Vessel Manifest. Upon expiration of such period, the Bolivian Customs Office shall order that such goods be shipped to Bolivia or delivered to the Chilean Customs Service for the Chilean Customs Service to auction them off as unclaimed goods. The Concessionaire shall be responsible for keeping such unclaimed goods under custody while they are under the authority of the Chilean Customs Service and until they have been auctioned off or returned to the Bolivian Customs Office. If the goods are auctioned off, the Chilean Customs Service shall pay the Concessionaire a percentage of the proceeds of the auction for the storage service, according to the applicable customs regulations. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Concessionaire shall be entitled to recover storage and custody costs directly from the successful bidder upon expiration of the collection period granted by the Customs Service. (e) Where collection of goods or property is required and such goods or property cannot be delivered due to a cause for which the Concessionaire is exclusive responsible, the duration of such impediment shall not be considered for the computation
2462
Annex 333
Annex 333
2463
of storage periods. (f) The maximum fees established for the services provided to Bolivian Cargo may be readjusted by the Concessionaire with the previous consent of Empresa Portuaria Arica (EPA) only, in compliance with the directives given by the applicable national authorities. Three. The Concessionaire shall allow Bolivian customs officials access to the Concession Area facilities. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Concessionaire may regulate and control access to such facilities, and, in exercising such power, the Concessionaire shall adopt no discriminatory measures that may restrict or affect the duties of such officials under the treaties and agreements in force. Four. Users must request from the Port Concessionaire the invoice(s) for the Services rendered, and, in turn, the Port Concessionaire shall be under the obligation to notify the User of the collection document generated as a result of the port Services rendered, which shall be paid within thirty Days from the date of issue of the relevant invoice.
[…]
2464
Annex 333
Annex 333
2465
[Signed] [Signed]
TEODORO WIGODSKI PATRICIO GUSTAVO
SIREBRENIK CAMPAÑA CUELLO
In rep. of EMPRESA PORTUARIA ARICA
[Signed] [Signed]
RICHARD HANS VON ALEJANDRO GARCÍA
APPEN LAHRES HUIDOBRO OCHAGAVÍA
p.p. CONSORCIO PORTUARIO ARICA S.A.
THIS COPY CONFORMS TO
ITS ORIGINAL
ARICA 25 FEB 2005
[Notary public stamp and signature]
2466
Annex 334
Letter from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Chile to the Bolivian Consulate General in Chile, attaching a document titled “Chile-Bolivia Work Proposal”, No 12045, 27 July 2005
(Original in Spanish, English translation)
Archives of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Chile
2467
2468
Annex 334
Annex 334
2469
REPUBLIC OF CHILE
MINISTRY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS
No. 12045 WITH ANNEX
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs – South America Division – presents its compliments to the Honorable Consulate General of Bolivia and is honored to refer it to the conversations held between the Deputy Ministries of Foreign Affairs of both countries in Belo Horizonte and Luxembourg.
In that regard, this Secretary of State hereby officially submits its “Chile-Bolivia Work Proposal.”
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs – South America Division – avails itself of this opportunity to renew to the Consulate General of Bolivia the assurance of its highest consideration.
SANTIAGO, 27 July 2005
[Signature]
[Seal:] MINISTRY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS, South America Division, Head of Division.
TO THE HONORABLE
CONSULATE GENERAL
OF BOLIVIA
Distribution
1. Consulate General of Bolivia w/ annex
2. National Archive of Chile
3. Diramesur – South America Division
2470
Annex 334
Annex 334
2471
Chile – Bolivia Work Proposal
[…]
2472
Annex 334
Annex 334
2473
2474
Annex 334
Annex 334
2475
Border Facilitation
Mechanism: Tambo Quemado–Chungará and Pisiga–Colchane
Frontier Committees
15. As for physical integration, the Government of Chile will continue implementing the road paving program effective until 2006 for the Arica-Tambo Quemado and Iquique-Colchane roads. Joint action is deemed convenient to move forward in the modernization of the road interconnection infrastructure for the bi-oceanic corridors to be operational.
[…]
22. Promoting legislative ratification of the Joint Border Controls Agreement signed on 17 February 2004 is deemed convenient. Furthermore, we hereby propose that joint border control simulations continue in order to create a knowledge base that facilitates future application of the Agreement.
23. The Government of Chile is currently developing the projects for the new Colchane and Chungará border crossings to apply joint border controls. In this regard, maintaining an active exchange of information with Bolivia concerning any projects it may be analyzing to that same end is also deemed convenient to adequately supplement each other’s efforts.
[…]
2476
Annex 334
Annex 334
2477
2478
Annex 334
Annex 335
Minutes of the Second Meeting of the Bolivia-Chile Working Group on Bilateral Affairs, 17 July 2006
(Original in Spanish, English translation)
Archives of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Chile
2479
2480
Annex 335
Annex 335
2481
MINUTES OF THE 2ND MEETING OF THE BOLIVIA-CHILE
WORKING GROUP ON BILATERAL AFFAIRS
As agreed by both Governments, the Bolivia-Chile Working Group on Bilateral Affairs met in the city of La Paz, Bolivia, on 17 July 2006, in order to move forward with a broad joint agenda without exclusions.
The Bolivian Delegation was chaired by Ambassador Edgar Pinto Tapia, Director General of Multilateral Relations, and the Chilean Delegation was chaired by Ambassador Juan Pablo Lira, Director of the South America. A list of the Delegations from both countries is attached to these Minutes.
The Bolivian Delegation welcomed the Chilean Delegation, emphasizing its interest in the treatment of the agenda without exclusions and in seeking common ground with the Chilean party in that regard.
The Chilean Delegation thanked them for the welcome, concurred with the criteria for moving forward in the mutual interest of both countries, within the framework of a broad agenda without exclusions.
The Bolivian Delegation indicated that the goal of this meeting is to discuss the different spheres of the bilateral agenda, without going into detail, as the details are discussed at the appropriate levels.
In this regard, the Consul General of Bolivia in Chile reported on the work to prepare the Agenda, and the Consul General of Chile in Bolivia agreed that this work was done in close coordination.
I. DEVELOPMENT OF MUTUAL TRUST
After exchanging views regarding the matter, both Delegations agreed that the development of mutual trust is the foundation for the discussion of all aspects of the bilateral relationship.
II. BORDER INTEGRATION
The Bolivian Delegation expressed its interest in strengthening coordination, between the Foreign Ministries of the two countries, of all matters relating to border integration. Additionally, it proposed stressing the social content in all these efforts, particularly with respect to border communities and municipalities.
2482
Annex 335
Annex 335
2483
The Chilean Delegation agreed that border integration necessarily involves social issues, such as health, the environment, education, and tourism, in which both countries’ border municipalities would participate.

Frontier Committee

Change of name of Frontier Committee to Frontier Integration Committee
After an exchange of views on the matter, both Delegations agreed to keep the name “Frontier Committee”.
The Chilean Delegation then proposed holding the 7th Meeting of the Bolivia-Chile Frontier Committee in October 2006, in Putre, which was accepted by Bolivia.

Agreement on Customs Cooperation and the Establishment of Anti-Smuggling Policies
Both Delegations agreed on strengthening border and customs cooperation to combat smuggling, which affects the development of both countries. In this regard, it was agreed that the matter should be addressed at the meeting between the Presidents of the National Customs Office of Bolivia and the National Director of the Chilean Customs Office, to be held on 19 and 20 July 2006, in La Paz, which will also be attended by the Consuls General of Bolivia and Chile.

Integrated Border Controls
Both Delegations were pleased with the results of an Integrated Border Control exercise that was held simultaneously, between 29 May and 2 June 2006, at the Charaña - Visviri, Tambo Quemado - Chungará and Pisiga - Colchane border crossing points, which had satisfactory results for the participating border services of the two countries. Moreover, they agreed to conduct another simultaneous, and longer, exercise at the same border crossing points during the month of August this year.
In relation to border infrastructure, the Chilean Delegation reported on the progress made in implementing the new border facilities of Colchane and Chungará, the construction of which will be completed in 2007 and 2008, respectively. Additionally, this Delegation proposed that, on the occasion of the next
2484
Annex 335
Annex 335
2485
Integrated Border Control exercise, the exchange of information on said facilities be further enhanced.

Border Development
Both Delegations agreed to continue encouraging cooperation on all those matters relating to border development, especially on health, production and trade within the framework of the Frontier Committee.

Cooperation among border communities and municipalities
The Bolivian Delegation reiterated its proposal for holding a workshop among border communities and municipalities. In this regard, it conveyed the interest of the following local communities and municipalities in participating in such workshop:
1.
Municipalities of Totora, Santiago de Callapa, Charaña de Andamarca, Calacoto, Charaña, Corque and La Paz, located in the Department of La Paz.
2.
Municipalities of Turco, Colque, Belén de Andamarca, Choquecota, Huachacalla, Toledo, Curahuara, Coipasa and Sabaya, located in the Department of Oruro.
3.
Municipalities in the Department of Potosí (to be defined).
4.
Municipalities of Padcaya and Bermejo, located in the Department of Tarija (non-border municipalities).
The Bolivian Delegation proposed addressing the following matters with its Chilean counterparts:
i.
Municipal management strategic alliances.
ii.
Cooperation for the region’s agriculture and livestock production.
iii.
Cooperation in education, facilitation of access to education.
iv.
Cooperation in border farmers’ markets.
v.
Cooperation in security and surveillance of the region’s communities.
vi.
Control of illegal and excessive hunting of vicunas and other protected species.
vii.
Cooperation and promotion of the area’s tourist appeal.
viii.
Improvement in trade.
ix.
Cooperation regarding camelid trafficking: meat, fiber and skin.
The Chilean Delegation agreed on the implementation of these initiatives, expressed the interest of various border municipalities in developing them, and
2486
Annex 335
Annex 335
2487
proposed holding the workshop before the meeting of the Frontier Committee. The list of the participating Chilean border municipalities will be sent shortly.
III. FREE TRANSIT

Free Transit Regime
Both Delegations proposed holding the 8th Meeting of the Working Group on Free Transit in the city of La Paz, tentatively in November of this year. To this end, the Bolivian Delegation will submit a proposed agenda.
With regard to the Seminar on dangerous cargo (IMO), agreed to at the 7th Meeting of the Working Group on Free Transit, the Chilean Delegation said that it was important to hold a meeting between the operators and the competent authorities of both countries. This practical Seminar could be held immediately prior to the 8th Meeting of the Working Group on Free Transit.
The Bolivian Delegation asked for a prior meeting between both Foreign Ministries in order to exchange information on the International Conventions on dangerous goods, and this proposal was accepted by the Chilean Delegation.
Both Delegations agreed to continue holding meetings of the Information and Coordination Center (CIC) as an effective mechanism for Bolivia cargo.

Enabling of the Port of Iquique
The Chilean Delegation discussed the framework in which the port of Iquique will be enabled for free transit. In this connection, both Delegations pointed to the agreements reached at the 5th and 6th Meetings of the Working Group on Free Transit, at which they approved the guidelines for harmonization of the customs procedures, which are part of the process of enabling the port. The Chilean Delegation also stated that storage could not be provided free of charge within the port, because of the condition of the infrastructure.
Furthermore, the Chilean Delegation stated that for internal purposes, a draft decree has been prepared, and it will propose to the Bolivian Party a text
2488
Annex 335
Annex 335
2489
for the exchange of Diplomatic Notes between both countries, so that the port enabling can be finalized in the month of October 2006.
Finally, with regard to the issue of storage, the Chilean Delegation said that it will provide the Bolivian Party with a site outside the port for this use, under an administration to be defined, the terms of which it will announce.

SIT [Integrated Transit System]
Both Delegations agreed to renew the mandate of the Ad-Hoc Commission to draw up the new SIT Operations Manual, after the meeting of the SIT board of directors is held, which was postponed several weeks ago.
IV. PHYSICAL INTEGRATION

Meeting of the Mixed Technical Group on Infrastructure (GTM)
It was agreed that the Mixed Technical Group on Infrastructure (GTM) should meet to study all aspects of transportation infrastructure between the two countries.

Arica - La Paz Railway
The Chilean Delegation reported that the State Railway Company, owner of the Chilean section, is taking action to assign it by law to the Arica Port Company (EPA), in order to create a useful chain of transport. They emphasized that the Chilean Foreign Ministry is fully cooperating in the work to transfer this ownership.
The Bolivian Delegation took due note of this information and reiterated the importance that it attaches to this Bolivian railway.

Meeting of the competent enforcement authorities for the Agreement on International Ground Transport of Southern Cone Countries (ATIT).
Both Delegations proposed holding a meeting of the competent enforcement authorities for the Agreement on International Ground Transport of Southern Cone Countries (ATIT), in the city of La Paz in the month of August. The Bolivian Party proposed the following agenda for that meeting:
1.
Evaluation of the minutes of the previous meeting
2.
Transit that does not call at the port
3.
Passenger transport
2490
Annex 335
Annex 335
2491
4.
Occasional permits
5.
Identification of tugboats
6.
Opening hours at the border
The Chilean Party proposed including the topic of taxation of international transport companies.

Revision of the border crossing points
It was agreed to keep the Enabling of Milestone LX or Milestone LII on the agenda of the Frontier Committee.
V. ECONOMIC COMPLEMENTATION

Economic Complementation Agreement No. 22
Both Delegations were pleased with the progress of the strengthening of the Economic Complementation Agreement (ACE No. 22), which is expected to come into force soon, after completing the procedure specified in the respective domestic laws of the two countries.
They also noted that the purpose of strengthening the preferences of ACE No. 22 is to increase bilateral trade, as well as to progress towards an actual increase in Bolivian exports, whether to Chile or other markets, using Chile as the platform. Both delegations expressed their strong willingness to start the cooperation program as soon as possible, the economic and commercial scope of which has already been defined.
Both Delegations agreed to bring about, as soon as possible, the visit of the Director of Prochile to La Paz to agree on the work plan under the Agreement signed between Prochile and Ceprobol with Bolivian authorities. The Chilean Delegation proposed the week beginning 14 August as a suitable date, to be confirmed by the Bolivian counterpart as soon as possible.
Likewise, for the purpose of moving forward in the Technical Commissions in the areas of plant and animal health, trade promotion, agroforestry, tourism, customs, cooperation and technical standards agreed upon within the framework of ACE No. 22, they proposed holding the next meeting of the ACE No. 22 Administrative Commission, in the city of Santiago de Chile, in October.
2492
Annex 335
Annex 335
2493
Both Delegations reiterated their interest in establishing, as soon as practicable, the Bolivia-Chile Business Council provided for in ACE No. 22. To that end, the respective consultations with the two countries’ private sectors will be held in order to define the council’s agenda and composition. The Chilean Delegation noted with interest the Bolivian proposal to include, under the auspices of this Council, a Commission on Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises from both countries.

Tourism
Both Delegations agreed that the issue of tourism in border zones should be discussed in the Frontier Committee.

Air Transportation
Both Delegations agreed to expedite the process to hold a meeting between the two countries’ civil aviation authorities. In this regard, the Chilean Delegation expressed, on behalf of its aviation authorities, its willingness to hold such meeting.
VI. MARITIME ISSUE
Both Delegations gave succinct reports on the discussions that they had had on this issue in the past few days and agreed to leave this issue for consideration by the Vice-Ministers at their meeting on the 18th of this month.
VII. SILALA AND WATER RESOURCES
It was agreed that the 3rd Meeting of the Working Group on the Silala issue should be held in order to unify criteria that would allow a final, practical and satisfactory solution for both Parties to be reached. Furthermore, it was agreed that this issue will be dealt with by the Vice Ministers.
VIII. Instruments to Fight Poverty
[…]
2494
Annex 335
Annex 335
2495
IX. Security and Defense
[…]
2496
Annex 335
Annex 335
2497
X. Cooperation for the Control of Illegal Trafficking of Drugs, Precursors and Essential Chemicals
[…]
XI. Education, Science and Technology
[…]
2498
Annex 335
Annex 335
2499
XII. Cultures
[…]
XIII. Other issues
[…]
2500
Annex 335
Annex 335
2501
Signed in La Paz, on this 17th day of July 2006.
[Signed] [Signed]
BY BOLIVIA BY CHILE
2502
Annex 335
Annex 335
2503
2504
Annex 336
Joint Press Release issued by Bolivia and Chile, 18 July 2006
(Original in Spanish, English translation)
Archives of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Chile
2505
2506
Annex 336
::: notas y comunicados de prensa ::: volverCOMUNICADO DE PRENSA CONJUNTO BOLIVIA Y CHILEConforme al mandato de los Presidentes Evo Morales y Michelle Bachelet, quienes han manifestado su propósito de desarrollar un diálogo amplio y constructivo, sin exclusiones, entre Bolivia y Chile, basado en la confianza mutua, la cooperación y el entendimiento, los Vicecancilleres de Relaciones Exteriores de ambos países, sostuvieron una reunión en La Paz, el día 18 de julio de 2006, precedida por un encuentro entre Delegaciones Técnicas.Como resultado de estas reuniones, ambas Delegaciones coincidieron en avanzar en los temas de interés mutuo de ambos países, en el marco de una Agenda amplia y sin exclusiones, sustentada en medidas efectivas de confianza mutua. En este contexto, acordaron que dicha agenda comprende todos los temas relevantes de la relación bilateral, destacando, entre otros, la Integración fronteriza, libre tránsito, integración física, tema marítimo, complementación económica, Silala y recursos hídricos. Cabe destacar que en la reunión se ha llegado a entendimientos por los cuales el Gobierno de Chile reitera que adoptará las medidas para que la habilitación del Puerto de Iquique para el libre tránsito, se pueda concretar el próximo mes de octubre. Asimismo, ambas Delegaciones, por las implicaciones sociales y económicas que tiene, acordaron fortalecer las medidas concretas y específicas para luchar frontalmente contra el contrabando, incluyendo el de precursores, para cuyo fin en los próximos días se reunirán las autoridades máximas de las Aduanas de ambos países.
Annex 336
2507
JOINT PRESS RELEASE
BOLIVIA AND CHILE
By mandate of Presidents Evo Morales and Michelle Bachelet, who have expressed their intention to develop a comprehensive and constructive dialogue, without exclusions, between Bolivia and Chile, based on mutual trust, cooperation and understanding, the Vice-Ministers of Foreign Affairs of both countries held a meeting in La Paz, on 18 July 2006, preceded by a meeting between the Technical Delegations.
As a result of these meetings, both Delegations agreed to move forward with the discussion of issues of mutual interest for the two countries, within the framework of a broad Agenda without exclusions, supported by effective measures of mutual trust.
In this context, they agreed that the said agenda comprises all issues relevant to the bilateral relationship, highlighting, among others, border integration, free transit, physical integration, the maritime issue, economic complementation, Silala and water resources.
It is worth stressing that understandings have been reached at the meeting, pursuant to which the Chilean Government reiterates that it will adopt measures so that the enabling of the Iquique Port for free transit could be accomplished by next October.
In addition, due to the social and economic implications involved, both Delegations agreed to strengthen the concrete and specific measures aimed at fighting smuggling, including precursors, for which purpose the highest Customs authorities of both countries will meet in the next few days.
2508
Annex 336
Para ello, y en el ánimo de avanzar en la Agenda sin Exclusiones, acordaron un cronograma de reuniones que tendrán lugar en el curso de los próximos meses, a objeto de tratar detalladamente todos los asuntos de la misma. La Paz, 18 de julio de 2006.Derechos Reservados (c) 2005 Ministerio de Relaciones Exteriores y Culto República de Bolivia
To that end, and in the spirit of moving forward with the Agenda without Exclusions, they have agreed upon a schedule of meetings to take place during the next few months, in order to thoroughly discuss all items on the agenda.
La Paz, 18 July 2006
Annex 337
Minutes of the Fifteenth Meeting of the Political Consultations Mechanism, 25 November 2006
(Original in Spanish, English translation)
Original submitted by Bolivia as Annex 118 to its Memorial
2509
2510
Annex 337
Annex 337
2511
Minutes of the
15th Meeting of the Chile-Bolivia Political Consultations Mechanism
The 15th Meeting of the Chile-Bolivia Political Consultations Mechanism was held on 25 November 2006 in Santiago. The delegations were headed by the Chilean Undersecretary of Foreign Affairs, Envoy Alberto van Klaveren, and by the Bolivian Vice-Minister of Foreign Affairs and Worship, Envoy Mauricio Dorfler.
Both delegations concurred that the development of mutual trust is the cement upon which the discussion of the issues of bilateral relations rests.
In an atmosphere of willingness and a constructive spirit, they considered and approved the content of the Minutes of the 3rd Meeting of the Working Group on Bilateral Affairs, held in Santiago on 31 October.
The delegations went over the agenda without exclusions:
1. Development of Mutual Trust
2. Border Integration
3. Free Transit
4. Physical Integration
5. Economic Complementation
6. Maritime Issue
7. Silala and Water Resources
8. Instruments to fight poverty
9. Safety and Defense
10. Cooperation for the control of Illegal Trafficking of Drugs, Precursors
and Essential Chemicals
11. Education, Science and Technology
12. Culture
13. Other matters
In this context, both delegations paid special attention to the following matters:
Development of Mutual Trust
The delegations emphasized the consolidation of the measures adopted to develop mutual trust, as evidenced by official visits paid by high-level officials from the areas of politics, defense, economics and culture of both countries.
Border Integration
The delegations corroborated the progress made on the coordinated work to set joint border controls, pursuant to the agreement signed between both countries, the current joint control and infrastructure projects of the respective border crossings. The delegations stated their
2512
Annex 337
Annex 337
2513
acceptance to the proposal to set a unique border crossing in Visviri-Charaña.
Free Transit
The Chilean delegation reiterated its complete willingness, in the near future, to fully enable the Port of Iquique under the free transit regime in force between the two countries, under the Treaty of Peace, Amity and Commerce of 1904.
Along these lines, the delegations took note of the progress made on this issue, and of the recent administrative and regulatory actions taken in this regard. They agreed that a Monitoring Committee will be set up for that enabling, under the framework of the Working Group on Free Transit.
The Bolivian delegation reiterated the need for better coordination of the rate issues and the related announcements. The Chilean delegation said that it would send these to the port companies.
Physical Integration
The Chilean delegation reported that the Chilean section of the Arica-La Paz railroad will be refurbished in 2007, and that they already have the proper funding for this.
Economic Complementation
The delegations stated their satisfaction with the meeting held in Santiago on last 22 October, by the Administrative Commission of the Economic Complementation Agreement (ACE No. 22) and the next international implementation of the Additional Protocols.
Maritime Issue
In the spirit of this broad bilateral agenda without exclusions, both delegations exchanged criteria on the maritime issue and concurred on the importance of continuing this dialogue in a constructive manner.
Silala and Water Resources
Both delegations agreed that the 3rd Meeting of the Working Group on Silala will take place in Calama. The agenda and date of the meeting will be defined soon.
Cooperation for the Control of Illegal Trafficking of Drugs, Precursors and Essential Chemicals
Both delegations stated their satisfaction with the next meeting of the 40th Regular Period of Sessions of the Inter-American Drug Abuse Control Commission (CICAD) to be held in Santa Cruz de la Sierra between 29 November and 1 December. The delegations agreed on holding a bilateral meeting on that date. Furthermore, they agreed to hold the 7th Meeting of the Binational Commission on Drugs during the first quarter of 2007 in Bolivia.
2514
Annex 337
Annex 337
2515
Education, Science and Technology
Both delegations emphasized the role of cooperation offered by the universities of both countries and their input for a better mutual understanding. In this sense, they stated their interest in holding meetings and seminars contributing to the increase of mutual trust.
They agreed to launch a progressive cooperation program whose first action would be to implement the “Bolivian Education Portal” and make progress in border cooperation environments through their municipalities, and with special emphasis on social issues.
Cultures
Both delegations highlighted the visit paid by the Chilean Minister of Culture to Bolivia within the framework of the second meeting of cultural managers of both countries and agreed to hold the Meeting of the Binational Commission on Culture in the city of Oruro during the first quarter of 2007, simultaneously with the Binational Commission on Education, Science and Technology.
Likewise, they highlighted the outcome of the 2nd Meeting of Cultural Managers Chile-Bolivia, recently held in La Paz.
Other matters
The Bolivian delegation requested Chilean government cooperation to facilitate the participation of Bolivian citizens in Chile in future elections. The Chilean delegation stated its entire willingness to contribute to this purpose.
Both delegations agreed to hold the 16th Meeting of the Chile-Bolivia Political Consultation Mechanism, in Bolivia, on a date and place to be agreed by diplomatic representatives.
The Bolivian delegation expressed thanks for the hospitality extended at the meeting.
Santiago, 25 November 2006.
[Signature]
BY THE CHILEAN DELEGATION
[Signature]
BY THE BOLIVIAN DELEGATION
2516
Annex 338
Minutes of the Sixteenth Meeting of the Political Consultations Mechanism, 18 May 2007
(Original in Spanish, English translation)
Archives of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Chile
2517
2518
Annex 338
Annex 338
2519
MINUTES OF THE 16TH MEETING
OF THE CHILE-BOLIVIA
POLITICAL CONSULTATIONS MECHANISM
The 16th Meeting of the Chile-Bolivia Political Consultations Mechanism was held in La Paz, Bolivia, on 18 May 2007, in order to analyze and monitor the progress made on the thirteen issues on the broad joint agenda without exclusions designed by both countries.
The Bolivian Delegation was chaired by the Vice-Minister of Foreign Affairs and Worship, Envoy Hugo Fernández, and the Chilean Delegation was chaired by the Undersecretary of Foreign Affairs, Envoy Alberto Van Klavaren.
This meeting was preceded, on 17 May, by the 4th Meeting of the Working Group on Bilateral Affairs, whose conclusions were submitted to the Heads of the Delegations for their consideration and approval. A list of the Delegations from both countries is attached to these Minutes.
The Head of the Bolivian Delegation warmly welcomed the Chilean Delegation and reiterated that the progress on the 13 issues on the bilateral agenda must be simultaneous, given that these issues are parts of a whole in the search for solutions under a broad agenda without exclusions, and with the goal of undertaking a process of integration and brotherhood between the Bolivian and Chilean peoples.
The Head of the Chilean Delegation thanked them for the welcome, stating that both countries have had a very positive experience on this important road, and pointing out that the 13-point agenda was set 10 months ago, highlighting that the first item on the agenda is precisely mutual trust. He emphasized the need to continue creating public confidence in both countries and expressed the importance of taking care of this dialogue.
In order to properly monitor the progress of the 13-point agenda, both Delegations agreed to maintain effective coordination for that purpose.
Having approved the methodology and the agenda for the meeting, the Delegations proceeded to hold it:
2520
Annex 338
Annex 338
2521
I. DEVELOPMENT OF MUTUAL TRUST
The Bolivian and Chilean Delegations highlighted the many activities performed and meetings held for the development of mutual trust which will become a solid base of support for the treatment of all matters on the broad Chilean-Bolivian agenda without exclusions.
In this context they highlighted the main activities carried out since the last meeting of this Working Group, among which the Meetings of the Presidents of Bolivia and Chile, held on 8 December 2006 in Cochabamba, during the Second Summit of Heads of State of the Union of South American Nations, as well as the meeting held on 16 April 2007, on the occasion of the South American Energy Summit, which took place on Isla Margarita, Venezuela, merited special attention.
The second official visit to Chile by the Bolivian Minister of Defense on 14 November 2006 was also highlighted.
This visit was repaid by the Chilean Minister of Defense to her Bolivian counterpart on 19 January 2007, when she was received by the Vice-President of the Republic, acting as President.
Likewise, on 19 January 2007, during the MERCOSUR Summit held in Rio de Janeiro, the Constitutional President of Bolivia, Evo Morales, together with the Chilean Minister of Foreign Affairs, Alejandro Foxley, led a symbolic act which reflected the rapprochement between both countries.
On 21 March 2007, Air General Ricardo Ortega, Commander in Chief of the Chilean Air Force invited General Luis Trigo, Commander General of the Bolivian Air Force, to attend the memorial ceremony for the 77th anniversary of the institution, in the city of Santiago.
The Chilean and Bolivian Delegations highlighted the Tribute paid by the Chilean Army on 10 April 2007, to the Bolivian hero in the War of the Pacific, Dn. Eduardo Abaroa Hidalgo, in the city of Calama, where the Topáter battle was fought. The Ministers of Defense of both countries, and their respective Vice-Ministers attended the Tribute. The Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces of Bolivia, General Commanders of the three Armed Forces of Bolivia and the Commander in Chief of the Chilean Army participated as well.
2522
Annex 338
Annex 338
2523
The Delegations also highlighted the official visit of Admiral Rodolfo Codina, Commander in Chief of the Chilean Navy, from 7 to 11 May 2007. This visit will be repaid in August by the General Commander of the Bolivian Navy, Vice-Admiral José Alba Arnez.
II. BORDER INTEGRATION
• Frontier Committee
Both Delegations acknowledged the development and deepening of this bilateral mechanism and its significant results. In this sense, and in continuation of these efforts, the Bolivian Delegation proposed to hold the 8th Meeting of the Bolivia – Chile Frontier Committee at the end of September this year, in La Paz. The invitation will be sent soon. The Chilean Delegation welcomed the invitation and stated that it will provide support for the meeting’s success.
In this context, the Chilean Delegation mentioned the proposal of the National Service for Minors (SENAME) for collaboration on human trafficking, in line with the social sensitivity of both Governments. The Chilean Delegation added that the International Cooperation Agency (AGCI) had provided resources to hold a workshop on the subject, and that it will transmit a proposal shortly.
• Agreement on Customs Cooperation and the Establishment of Anti-Smuggling Policies
Under the Cooperation Agreement on customs matters in force between both countries, the Delegations agreed to hold the 11th Meeting of Bolivia – Chile Bilateral Customs Authorities, during the second half of this year, in the city of Iquique. They agreed that this cooperation is a useful tool for the prevention and control of smuggling.
The Bolivian Delegation advised that in accordance with its internal rules, current import of used cloths is prohibited in the country, and requested the cooperation of the Chilean party to find the mechanisms for an effective control to prevent their illegal introduction into Bolivia.
The Chilean Delegation took note of this and stated that it will inform this to the customs authorities and law enforcement agencies.
2524
Annex 338
Annex 338
2525
• Integrated Border Controls
Both Delegations stressed the successful completion of the simultaneous long-term exercises between 11 November and 11 December 2006, at the crossings Visviri - Charaña; Chungara - Tambo Quemado and Colchane - Pisiga.
On this matter, Bolivia proposed to hold a new simultaneous long-term exercise, from 10 June to 31 July at the crossings Chungara – Tambo Quemado and Pisiga - Colchane. In this regard, the Chilean Delegation pointed out that it would consult the border services and the Ministry of Internal Affairs to provide a fast response and noted that, if it did not start on the date agreed upon, it would suggest a similar alternative covering the same months.
Regarding Bolivia’s initiative to immediately set a permanent control at the crossing Visviri-Charaña in the form of single facility in the Chilean territory, by installing a booth-station for its border control agencies, raised in the 3rd Meeting of the Chile - Bolivia Technical Commission on Integrated Border Controls, on last 26 April, the Chilean Delegation stated that it would respond upon receipt of the opinion of the competent authorities, and that it hoped to do so before the conclusion of the 4th Meeting of the Technical Commission on Integrated Border Controls.
With regard to infrastructure issues, it was recalled that the Technical Commission on Integrated Border Controls has met twice (9 November 2006 in La Paz and 26 April 2007 in Arica). At these meetings, the parties exchanged their knowledge on the respective projects in Bolivia and Chile to build integrated border control stations as double facilities as well as the infrastructure requirements from border agencies for the crossings Chungara - Tambo Quemado and Colchane - Pisiga. With relation to the crossing Charaña – Visviri, they approved the location of the border control stations of both countries that overlap at pillars 6 and 7 of the international political boundary.
Both Delegations agreed to hold the 4th Meeting of the Bolivia - Chile Technical Commission on Integrated Border Controls, in the city of La Paz, on 21 June 2007.
2526
Annex 338
Annex 338
2527
• Border Development
Both Delegations ratified the “1st Meeting on Health Without Borders” in Pisiga, Bolivia, on 28 and 29 May 2007, to be attended by the Ministries of Health of both countries, their Departmental/Regional Services and border Municipalities of both countries, namely:
Chile: Putre, Pica, General Lagos, Camarones, Camiña, Huara, Pozo Almonte, Colchane and Ollagüe.
La Paz: Calacoto, Charaña, Comanche, Coro Coro, Santiago de Callapa and Waldo Ballivián.
Oruro: Curahuara de Carangas, Turco, Totora, Corque, Sabaya, Huayllamarca, Coipasa, La Rivera and Carangas.
Potosi: Mojinete, San Pablo de Lípez, Colcha K, Tahua, San Agustín, L/ica, San Pedro de Quémez and San Antonio de Esmoruco.
Both Delegations agreed on the importance of having the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of each country make the necessary arrangements with local authorities so that the meeting reaches the expected success.
• Cooperation among border communities and municipalities
Both Delegations highlighted the celebration of the First Meeting between Municipalities and Border Communities of Bolivia and Chile, held in the city of La Paz, on 11 and 12 January 2007, in which they exchanged criteria on strategic partnerships for municipal management, trade, border fairs, cooperation in agricultural production, camelids trafficking, security, education, health and tourism. The Delegations indicated that this is a new field that enriches and expands the relations between the countries, and which comprises the local perspective. This initiative will hold its 11th Meeting soon, and the Ministries of Foreign Affairs will cooperate calling the meeting.
The head of the Bolivian Delegation said that these efforts allow the development of the People's Diplomacy in a highly constructive spirit.
2528
Annex 338
Annex 338
2529
III. FREE TRANSIT
• Free Transit Regime
Both Delegations pointed out the 8th Meeting of the Working Group on Free Transit, held in the city of Santiago, on 8 and 9 February 2007, at which the application of the free transit regime, port rates at the ports of Arica and Antofagasta, IMO cargo and other matters of port operations in connection with modernizing the ports were discussed.
With respect to the Bilateral Technical Groups established by the Working Group on Free Transit for the ports of Arica and Antofagasta, both Delegations emphasized the work that they have been doing on the analysis and the proposal of criteria for reconciling the port rates, taking into account the free transit regime, whose progress is reflected in the Minutes of the 1st Meeting of the Bilateral Technical Group of the Port of Antofagasta, on 22 March 2007 and of the 1st Meeting of the Bilateral Technical Group of the Port of Arica, on 3 May 2007.
Both groups are working on these issues, according to their respective agendas, the results of which will be referred to the Working Group on Free Transit in due time.
• Enabling of the Port of Iquique
The Bolivian Delegation reiterated the importance of having the Port of Iquique enabled as soon as possible, stating that in response to Note No. 114 from the Chilean Ministry of Foreign Affairs, of 30 October 2006, it issued Note CBCHS-289-06, of 20 November 2006, in which it repeated the basic elements of the free transit regime.
The Chilean Delegation explained that due to the Bolivian Note mentioned above, they were contemplating topics in addition to the focus that had been studied by the Working Group on Free Transit, and that in their opinion, these are not an integral part of that regime. They had had to spend time analyzing the issues included in the enabling, taking into account the features of the port. This study is near completion, and the Note will be answered in the near future. The Chilean Delegation mentioned that in the process carried out for this enabling a site outside of the port had been offered for free storage of Bolivian cargo.
2530
Annex 338
Annex 338
2531
• Integrated Transit System
Both Delegations agreed on the importance of the work being done by the Board of Directors of the Bolivia - Chile Integrated Transit System (SIT), at the meetings held on 5 December 2006, in the city of Arica and on 14 and 15 March 2007, in the city of La Paz, which resulted in the updates to the Operations Manual of the Integrated Transit System.
The Bolivian Delegation pointed out that they had proposed that export cargo be included in that Manual, which only applies to imports. In this regard, it was agreed that this proposal should be discussed at a special meeting of the Integrated Transit System to which Bolivian exporters would be invited so that their opinions could be heard.
The Delegations emphasized that it was useful to update the Manual and encouraged continuing work on the issue.
IV. PHYSICAL INTEGRATION
• Meeting of the Mixed Technical Group on Infrastructure (GTM)
Both Delegations agreed on the importance of advancing in the cooperation under this framework and agreed to hold the next meeting of the Mixed Technical Group on Infrastructure (GTM) and to perform the respective consultations to hold the meeting in the city of La Paz, on 22 June 2007.
• Arica - La Paz Railway
The Chilean Delegation reported that the refurbishment of the Chilean section of the Arica-La Paz railway was underway, and that studies are currently being conducted for the environmental impact declaration required by national law in such cases. Once the declaration has been filed and approved by the regulators, the refurbishment work will begin, for which 5.6 million dollars in funding are available. The Bolivian Delegation will be kept informed on this matter.
The Bolivian Delegation reiterated the priority that it attaches to the functioning of this section of the railroad.
2532
Annex 338
Annex 338
2533
• Meeting of the competent enforcement authorities for the Agreement on International Ground Transport of Southern Cone Countries (ATIT).
The Delegations exchanged ideas on the possibility of holding the next bilateral Bolivia-Chile meeting of the Agencies for Enforcement of the ATIT, on the same date as the Tourism Meeting in San Pedro de Atacama, on 23 and 24 July 2007, where they hope to have participation by the transport authorities of both countries.
• Revision of the border crossing points
Both Delegations agreed on prioritizing the border crossing points established at the 1st Meeting of the GTM in 2002, which includes the following crossing points: Visviri - Charaña, Chungara - Tambo Quemado, Colchane -Pisiga, Ollagüe - Estación Abaroa and Hito Cajón. They also agreed that this topic should be discussed by the Mixed Technical Group, the Frontier Committee and the meetings on integrated controls.
V. ECONOMIC COMPLEMENTATION
• Economic Complementation Agreement No. 22
Both Delegations agreed to highlight the progress made under the framework of ACE No. 22, and also surveyed all the activities that have been taken in order to further increase the bilateral trade and, in particular, the Bolivian exports to Chile.
To this end, the Delegations reviewed the progress of the various commissions and sub-commissions of ACE No. 22, analyzed the meetings held to date and agreed to promote the meetings that have not yet been held.
Both Delegations confirmed next 17 July as the date for the 19th Meeting of the Administrative Commission of the Economic Complementation Agreement (ACE No. 22), in La Paz, Bolivia. The meeting of the Business Advisory Council (CASE) will take place on the same date. Likewise, a Workshop is planned be held on the network of trade agreements signed by Chile and their potential opportunities for certain Bolivian products for export.
2534
Annex 338
Annex 338
2535
Similarly, it was reported that the Chilean Delegation invited the Vice-Minister of International Economic Relations of Bolivia to visit Santiago de Chile, between 25 and 26 June to prepare the meeting of the Administration Commission, scheduled for 17 July, in La Paz.
Finally, the Bolivian Delegation reported that the focal point of the Cooperation Committee will be the Bolivian Vice-Ministry of Public Investment and External Financing (VIPFE).
• Cooperation Agreement between CEPROBOL and PROCHILE
Both Delegations highlighted the good work done under the [Cooperation Agreement between the Bolivian Promotion Center] CEPROBOL)and [Chile's Exportable Goods Promotion Agency] PROCHILE, which has considered so far internship programs and market research. Similarly, it was reported that the 1st Construction Fair of Bolivia will be held in Iquique from 19 to 21 July. The fair will comprise, among other activities, a business conference that will be supported by PROCHILE.
In order to support the increase in Bolivian exports to Chile, PROCHILE is working with CEPROBOL and the National Chamber of Exporters of Bolivia, to send, at a date to be defined, a Commercial Mission of Bolivian exporters to Santiago to hold Business Conferences with Chilean buyers.
• Tourism
Within the framework of the Commission of Tourism under ACE No. 22 both Delegations agreed on conducting a meeting for cooperation between Tourism Authorities, in San Pedro de Atacama, on 23 and 24 July this year. At the Meeting, a strategy on tourism will be defined (Integrated Circuits). Efforts will be coordinated to invite representatives of the Ministries of Transport of both countries.
• Air transport
The Chilean Delegation proposed that air transport authorities meet in the interest of further developing air-commercial relations between the two countries. The Bolivian Delegation pointed out that it will forward the proposal to the authorities of the sector.
2536
Annex 338
Annex 338
2537
VI. MARITIME ISSUE
Both Delegations agreed that by instruction of the Presidents and Foreign Ministers of both countries, analysis of the maritime issue on this occasion is restricted to the Bolivian Vice-Minister of Foreign Affairs and the Chilean Undersecretary of Foreign Affairs at the 16th Meeting of the Political Consultations Mechanism.
Both authorities were satisfied with the cordiality, frankness and depth of the dialogue held, and that there was important common ground in the analysis of various aspects of this topic and that progress had been made in identifying points of common interest and shared criteria, which the Vice-Foreign Ministers will continue to monitor.
VII. SILALA AND WATER RESOURCES
Both Delegations agreed to hold the 3rd Meeting of the Working Group on Silala, on 12 and 13 July 2007, in the city of Iquique.
VIII. INSTRUMENTS TO FIGHT POVERTY
The Bolivian Delegation gave out a proposed text for the exchange of Diplomatic Notes in order to establish a Working Group to implement programs to fight poverty between the two countries. Further, it noted the need to frame the cooperation within the National Plan Development issued by the Government.
The Chilean Delegation expressed its satisfaction with the delivery of Diplomatic Notes and its willingness to give a prompt response to this proposal to define the technical counterparts in each country and formally start working with the competent organs.
Both Delegations highlighted the visit to Bolivia by the Director of the International Cooperation Agency of Chile and its participation in the inauguration of the Bolivian Education Portal, and agreed on the importance of a technical meeting under the framework of a Working Group to be created soon.
The Chilean Delegation reported on the program of scholarships and technical cooperation which will include several areas.
2538
Annex 338
Annex 338
2539
IX. SECURITY AND DEFENSE
Both Delegations highlighted the work plan prepared and approved by the Ministers of Defense of both countries on the occasion of the 2nd Meeting of their authorities, held in the city of La Paz, on 19 January 2007. They also expressed their willingness to contribute to the achievement of the goals. Furthermore, the disposition of the Armed Forces of both countries to deepen their relations was appreciated. Also, they reiterated the scheduled exchanges on the field of academic cooperation.
With regard to the Common Standardized Methodology for Measuring Defense Expenditure, the Chilean Delegation reported that a Workshop was held in Santiago, which was attended by a Bolivian delegation headed by the Bolivian Deputy Minister of Civil Defense and Cooperation. It was reminded that the Bolivian Delegation expressed its willingness to continue working on the matter, and to this effect it will provide a copy of the survey conducted by ECLAC.
• Border demining
The Bolivian Delegation requested the reports submitted by Chile to the United Nations on the implementation of the Ottawa Convention.
The Chilean Delegation stated that it has submitted the Transparency Reports to the United Nations, pursuant to Section 7 of the Convention, and that it would deliver a copy of the latest version of these reports to the Bolivian Party. Likewise, it reiterated that it is in compliance with the Convention, and reminded that Chile had eliminated the mines stored before the deadline. The Chilean Delegation also mentioned the difficulties experienced to demine areas under difficult geographical conditions and the need to obtain financing. It also indicated that the National Demining Commission was working on these issues according to the Plan established for this purpose.
• Cooperation on Natural Disasters
The Delegations reported that the “Workshop on Chilean and Bolivian Experiences in Natural Disasters”, was held in Santiago, on 10 May 2007, under the program designed by the Ministers of Defense of both countries for the current financial year. The Workshop was attended by a Bolivian Delegation headed by the Vice-Minister of Civil Defense and Cooperation to the Integral Development.
2540
Annex 338
Annex 338
2541
The Chilean Delegation recalled that the Director of the Chilean Office of National Emergency accepted the invitation from the Bolivian Party to participate in the next meeting of the Andean Committee for Disaster Prevention and Relief.
Also, the Bolivian Delegation noted that it would soon forward a proposal regarding the negotiation of a cooperation agreement in the field of natural disasters.
Also, the Bolivian Delegation expressed its appreciation for the humanitarian help sent by the Government of Chile, on the occasion of the floods that affected different regions of Bolivia in the early months of this year.
• Cooperation in combating cross-border crimes
The Bolivian Delegation suggested the possibility of conducting a Workshop on worst forms of child labor. The Chilean Delegation expressed its interest in this initiative and looked forward to receiving a proposal on the matter with a date and place for its execution.
X. COOPERATION FOR THE CONTROL OF ILLEGAL TRAFFICKING OF DRUGS, PRECURSORS AND ESSENTIAL CHEMICALS
The Bolivian Delegation proposed to hold the 7th Meeting of the Mixed Commission of the Agreement on Control and Repression of Illicit Trafficking in Narcotic Drugs, Psychotropic Substances, Precursors, and Essential Chemicals in the city of Cochabamba, on 10 and 11 July of this year.
The Chilean Delegation agreed on the importance of this issue and on the convenience to hold this meeting. It added that it will make the respective consultations.
XI. EDUCATION, SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
Both Delegations agreed to hold the meeting of the Binational Commission on Education, Science and Technology during the second half of 2007. The Chilean Delegation proposed that an official of the International Office of the Ministry of Education travels to Bolivia to meet with his counterpart, in order to fix the date and agenda of the meeting. It also emphasized the meeting of historians, held in Valparaiso between 2 and 6 May, and made reference to the interest in
2542
Annex 338
Annex 338
2543
launching a book containing the outcome of these meetings, at the Book Fair to be held in La Paz, in which Chile will participate as Honor Guest. The Delegation proposed that the Fair serve as an opportunity to develop activities with Bolivia.
The Bolivian Delegation reported on the progress in the organization of the 1st Meeting of Universities and Scholars of Bolivia and Chile, to be held during the first half of September 2007 in Santiago.
Moreover, the Bolivian Delegation informed that it will invite Media Directors and Influentials on Public Opinion of Chile to visit Bolivia during the first half of August 2007. This initiative is a continuation of the visit paid by Media Directors and Influentials on Public Opinion of Bolivia to Chile in November 2006. Both Delegations agreed on the positive results achieved during the visit.
XII. CULTURES
Emphasis was put to the visit of Mrs. Paulina Urrutia, Minister of Culture of Chile to the city of La Paz, between 15 and 17 November 2006, during the Inauguration of the 2nd Meeting of Cultural Managers of both countries.
The Delegations expressed their acknowledgment to a series of initiatives developed last year in terms of cultural matters in both countries. The Chilean Delegation highlighted the visit of the Urubichá Vocal Ensemble, which was accompanied by the Bolivian Deputy Minister of Culture and the visit by the Bolivian Folkloric Ballet to San Bernardo Festival, held in the city of Santiago, among other events, which fall within the spirit of mutual understanding and approach of both countries’ civil societies.
Both Delegations made reference to the importance of recognizing each country’s native intangible cultural heritage. In this sense, they pointed out that the presentations include a reference to the country of origin.
The Chilean Delegation transmitted a proposal to the Department of Cultural Affairs of its Ministry of Foreign Affairs to set the agenda and date to hold a meeting of the Binational Commission on Cultural Affairs.
2544
Annex 338
Annex 338
2545
XIII. OTHER MATTERS
• Agreements signed
- Agreement on Integrrated Border Controls.
Both Delegations reported that this Agreement is in force.
- Agreement to allow family members of the consular, administrative and technical
staff to find gainful employment.
The Bolivian Delegation stated that this agreement need not be ratified by the congress as it was signed through Diplomatic Notes.
The Chilean Delegation informed that the Agreement has been submitted to the Senate for its consideration.
• Agreements under negotiation
Both Delegations agreed on the importance of continuing to the negotiations of the following Agreements:
- Agreement on Social Security
- Agreement on Cooperation in natural disasters
- Agreement on Cooperation between the Chilean Uniformed Police Force
(Carabineros) and the Bolivian National Police Force
- Agreement on Return of Cultural Goods and Heritage.
• Inter-parliamentary Contacts
In order to strengthen and institutionalize inter-parliamentary contacts between both countries, the Delegations highlighted that representatives of the Chamber of Deputies’ and the Senate’s Commission on Foreign Relations of Chile will soon visit the city of La Paz.
• Various
The Chilean Delegation recalled the efforts that have been carried out to give a solution to the compensation claim by Bolivia’s former Autonomous Administration of Customs Warehouses’ employees (AADAA) which dates back to 1979. The Legal Directors of the respective Ministries of Foreign Affaires have held talks on this matter.
2546
Annex 338
Annex 338
2547
The Bolivian Delegation said that this issue should continue to be discussed between the Legal Directors of both Ministries of Foreign Affairs.
They agreed to hold the next meeting of the Political Consultations Mechanism and the Working Group on Chile-Bolivia Bilateral Affairs during the second half of this year.
On behalf of his Delegation, the Deputy Foreign Minister of Chile expressed to the Foreign Ministry of Bolivia his most sincere thanks and appreciation for the hospitality received during these meetings.
BY CHILE
[Signed]
Envoy Alberto Van Klaveren,
Undersecretary of Foreign Affairs
BY BOLIVIA
[Signed]
Envoy Hugo Fernández
Vice-Minister of Foreign Affairs and
Religion
2548
Annex 338
Annex 338
2549
2550
Annex 339
Minutes of the Seventeenth Meeting of the Political Consultations Mechanism, 19 October 2007
(Original in Spanish, English translation)
Archives of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Chile
2551
2552
Annex 339
Annex 339
2553
MINUTES OF THE 17TH MEETING OF
THE CHILE-BOLIVIA
POLITICAL CONSULTATIONS MECHANISM
The 17th Meeting of the Chile-Bolivia Political Consultations Mechanism was held in Coya, Región del Libertador General Bernardo O’Higgins, Chile, on 19 October 2007, in order to analyze and monitor the progress made on the thirteen issues on the broad joint agenda without exclusions designed by both countries.
The Chilean Delegation was headed by the Undersecretary of Foreign Affairs, Envoy Alberto van Klaveren, and the Bolivian Delegation was headed by the Vice-Minister of Foreign Affairs and Worship, Envoy Hugo Fernández Aráoz.
This meeting was preceded, on 18 October, by the 5th Meeting of the Working Group on Bilateral Affairs, whose conclusions were submitted to the Heads of Delegation for their consideration and approval. A list of the Delegations of both countries is attached to these minutes.
The Head of the Chilean Delegation warmly welcomed the Bolivian Delegation and stated his pleasure with the fact that this new meeting was being held and with the progress that has been made to date with the issues on the agenda. He also pointed out the need to continue generating public confidence in both countries and highlighted the importance of taking care of this dialogue.
The Head of the Bolivian Delegation thanked him for the welcome and emphasized the friendly atmosphere that he currently perceives in the relations between Bolivia and Chile. He concurred that it was important to continue working to develop mutual trust.
2554
Annex 339
Annex 339
2555
In order to properly monitor the progress of the 13-point agenda, both Delegations agreed to maintain effective coordination for that purpose.
Having approved the methodology and the agenda for the meeting, the Delegations proceeded to hold it:
I. DEVELOPMENT OF MUTUAL TRUST
Both Delegations highlighted the many activities that had been conducted in relation to the development of mutual trust, which represents the pillar that supports the treatment of all issues in the bilateral relationship.
Together with highlighting these activities, the Delegations concurred on the importance of achieving greater coordination and systematization of confidence-building events in order to give proper follow-up, ensuring that the generation of these initiatives continues to be spontaneous.
Within this context, the meetings held by the President of Chile, Michelle Bachelet, and the President of Bolivia, Evo Morales, on 14 June 2007 in Tarija, during the Presidential Summit of the Andean Community; and on 29 June 2007, in the city of Asuncion, on the occasion of the Summit of Heads of State Parties and Associated Members of MERCOSUR and the greeting that took place on 26 September 2007, in the city of New York, during the United Nations General Assembly, merited special attention.
Then the Delegations of Chile and Bolivia cited other events that took place since May 2007, which relate to mutual trust.
• Official visit to La Paz paid by the Senate Commission on Foreign Affairs, between 13 and 15 June.
• Visit to Santiago paid by the Bolivian Vice-Minister of Economic Relations and International Trade, Ambassador Pablo Guzmán, on 21 and 22 June.
2556
Annex 339
Annex 339
2557
• Official visit to La Paz and Santa Cruz paid by the Chilean Chamber of Deputies’ Commission on Foreign Affairs between 23 and 25 July.
• Visit to La Paz paid by the Chilean Minister of Energy, Marcelo Tokman, on 30 July.
• Visit to La Paz paid by the Chilean Minister of Culture, Paulina Urrutia, on the occasion of the opening of the “International Book Fair of La Paz”, in which Chile participated as guest of honor, on 8 August.
• Meeting between the Chilean Minister of Foreign Affairs, Alejandro Foxley, and his Bolivian counterpart, Ambassador David Choquehuanca, in Brasilia, on 22 August at the Forum for East Asia-Latin America Cooperation (FEALAC).
• Visit to La Paz paid by the Chilean Deputy Minister for Planning, Gonzalo Arenas, to participate, along with the Minister of Planning Development of Bolivia, Gabriel Loza, at the Seminar “Chile and Bolivia Social Policy” on 30 August.
• Visit to La Paz paid by the Executive Vice President of the National Mining Company of Chile (ENAMI), Jaime Perez de Arce, on 3 September.
• Visit to Santiago paid by the Minister of Planning Development of Bolivia, Gabriel Loza, from 26 to 30 September.
• Visit to Santiago paid by Bolivia’s Vice President, Alvaro Garcia Linera, for the 8th Meeting of the Biarritz Forum, on 8 October.
• Visit to Santiago paid by the Director General of Bilateral Relations and Worship of Bolivia, Ambassador Jean Paul Guevara, on 16 October.
2558
Annex 339
Annex 339
2559
• Visit to La Paz by the Chilean Minister of Labor, Osvaldo Andrade, on 19 October.
Meanwhile, the following visits were paid by defense officials:
• Visit by the Commander in Chief of the Chilean Air Force, Air General Ricardo Ortega, to Santa Cruz de la Sierra between 20 and 25 July, during the 47th Conference of Heads of the Armed Forces in America.
• Visit to Chile paid by the Commander General of the Bolivian Navy, Vice Admiral José Alba Arnez, from 9 to 11 August.
• Visit to Santa Cruz de la Sierra paid by the Minister of Defense of Chile, José Goñi, on 2 September.
• Visit to Santa Cruz paid by the Commander in Chief of the Chilean Air Force, Air General Ricardo Ortega, on 11 and 12 October, on the occasion of the 50th anniversary of the Air Force of Bolivia.
Both Delegations considered it desirable to make special mention of the next visit to Bolivia by Media Directors and Opinion Makersfrom Chile, to be held during the month of November this year, due to its significance for the area of mutual trust.
II. BORDER INTEGRATION
• Frontier Committee
Both delegations welcomed the 8th Meeting of the Frontier Committee, on 2 and 3 October 2007, in the city of La Paz. At the meeting, the offices of the various Commissions and Sub-commissions were renewed, and important agreements were achieved, among others:
2560
Annex 339
Annex 339
2561
• Municipalities and Border Communities
The Delegation of Chile suggested that the next Meeting of Municipalities and Border Communities be held during the first half of 2008, following up the recommendations contained in the 8th Meeting of the Frontier Committee. The Delegation of Bolivia recalled the municipalities and border communities’ wish to incorporate the 11 items of their agenda into the Frontier Committee’s agenda and into agendas of other-level entities of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
• 2nd Bilateral Meeting of Customs Authorities
Both Delegations highlighted the 2nd Bilateral Meeting of Customs Authorities held on 25 and 26 September in the city of Valparaiso. The minutes were incorporated into the Minutes of the 8th Meeting of the Frontier Committee.
Regarding customs cooperation, the Bolivian Delegation recalled that according to its internal regulations, there is a prohibition on importing used clothes. In this sense, the Delegation reiterated the importance and needs to continue strengthening border control mechanisms to avoid the introduction of these products into Bolivia.
In this regard, the Chilean delegation reaffirmed its willingness to cooperate in this matter.
• Workshop on Worst Forms of Child Labor with an emphasis on prevention on human and minor trafficking
Both delegations highlighted the conclusions reached at the Workshop held between 17 and 20 July 2007, in the cities of La Paz, Oruro and Potosi; and agreed on holding the next workshop in the first quarter of 2008, in Iquique.
2562
Annex 339
Annex 339
2563
• Border Development
Both delegations made reference to the First Meeting on Health Without Borders, on 28 and 29 May in Pisiga, Oruro, and proposed that the next meeting take place during the first half of 2008, in Chile. The respectives Ministries of Foreign Affairs will provide appropriate support.
• Integrated Border Controls
The Chilean and Bolivian Delegations noted that the bilateral technical visit to the facilities to be used by Bolivian services in Visviri was carried out as planned at the 8th Meeting of the Frontier Committee, held on the 12th day of this month. The Chilean Delegation reported that the findings of that visit were being considered by the appropriate organs. This crossing is expected to start operating as an Integrated Complex in the form of a single facility from November this year.
Pursuant to the statements made at the 8th Meeting of the Frontier Committee concerning the Integrated Control at the crossings Chungara-Tambo Quemado and Colchane-Pisiga, the Chilean Delegation made the relevant consultations to implement the same exercise at the last crossing, in conformity with the one at Chungará-Tambo Quemado and Visviri-Charaña.
The Bolivian Delegation reiterated the importance of completing this Simultaneous Exercise this year.
Both delegations, in consideration of the future increases in border economic activities provided for, recommended to the Chile-Bolivia Technical Committee on Integrated Border Controls to include in its works those studies leading to implement Integrated Controls at the crossings Abaroa and Ollagüe and Hito Cajon or Cajones.
2564
Annex 339
Annex 339
2565
III. FREE TRANSIT
• Arica
Bearing in mind the agreements reached in the Working Group on Free Transit, the Chilean and Bolivian Delegations discussed the result achieved between the Arica Port Company and the Administration of Port Services—Bolivia applicable to the Arica Port Terminal at the meeting on the 12th of this month in that city, and took due note of the memorandum of understanding signed on that occasion and endorsed their agreements.
• Seminar on Dangerous Cargo
Both Delegations reiterated the importance of conducting this Seminar in the first half of 2008, in the City of La Paz.
• Integrated Transit System (SIT)
The Chilean and Bolivian Delegations recommended that the Integrated Transit System meet in the near future to continue analyzing the new Operations Manual.
• Enabling of the Port of Iquique
The Chilean Delegation reported that they are still working on the issue of free storage for Bolivian cargo in the port of Iquique and, as they have agreed, that are making progress on setting up a site away from the port for that storage, which is expected to be ready, in principle, by June 2008.
With regard to the installation of the Bolivian customs agent, it was confirmed that this will occur immediately after the port is enabled.
The Bolivian Delegation expressed the importance of reaching concrete results on this issue.
2566
Annex 339
Annex 339
2567
Both Delegations recommended that 9th Meeting of the Working Group on Free Transit be held soon so that the issues for which it is responsible can be monitored.
IV. PHYSICAL INTEGRATION
• Mixed Technical Group on Infrastructure (GTM)
The Delegations highlighted the 2nd Meeting of the Mixed Technical Group on Infrastructure (GTM) held in the city of La Paz, on 22 June 2007.
It was also recalled that a reaffirmation had been made at the 8th Meeting of the Frontier Committee to hold the 3rd Meeting of the GTM in December in Santiago de Chile. The development of common technical specifications was entrusted for roads of Arica – Tambo Quemado – La Paz and Iquique – Colchane – Pisiga – Oruro, a part of the Central Interoceanic Corridor and of the path through the crossing Visviri - Charaña.
Both delegations concurred that the GTM agenda should include the treatment of connection road sections through the crossings Ollagüe - Abaroa and Hito Cajon or Cajones.
• Bilateral Meeting of Competent Enforcement Authorities of the ATIT
The Delegations accepted the draft agenda proposed at the 8th Meeting of the Frontier Committee for the next meeting of the Competent Enforcement Authorities of the ATIT and took note of the suggestion made by Bolivia to hold the meeting in La Paz, on 28 and 29 November 2007.
They reiterated the convenience of having this meeting before the Meeting of the ATIT so that the transport authorities may participate in the meeting held by the tourism authorities of both countries.
2568
Annex 339
Annex 339
2569
• Arica-La Paz Railway
As agreed at the 8th Meeting of the Frontier Committee, the Chilean Document submitted a document with the status of the actions taken to refurbish the Chilean section of this Railway. In the same way, they reported that on 10 October 2007, the Environmental Impact Declaration was filed with the Regional Environmental Commission in Tarapacá. The next stage is the approval of this declaration, and then the mitigation measures that it proposes must be added to the project. The Delegations pointed out that the railway will be refurbished in 2008, for which they have an approved budget of 5.6 million dollars.
The Bolivian Delegation took note of the document and reiterated the importance that it attaches to the refurbishment of this section, asking that it be informed of the stages of the project as it progresses.
V. ECONOMIC COMPLEMENTATION
• Economic Complementation Agreement No. 22
Both delegations concurred on the need to hold, as soon as possible, the 19th Meeting of the Administrative Commission of the Economic Complementation Agreement (ACE No. 22). The meeting will take place in the City of La Paz at a date proposed by Bolivia.
The Delegations expressed their concurrence regarding the need to review the progress of the work plans already agreed upon in each of the various existing Commissions and Sub-commissions and on the need to analyze trade flows.
The Bolivian Delegation stated that, while it recognized the progress made on the matters listed below, it will raise the following issues at the meeting of the Administrative Commission: the development a Joint Strategic Plan to Fight Smuggling; the establishment of another Plan to reduce Bolivian’s trade deficit; and the inclusion of a special and
2570
Annex 339
Annex 339
2571
differentiated treatment to the commercial rules in force between both countries, based on the existing asymmetries. The Chilean Delegation stated its willingness to address these issues considered by Bolivia as priorities.
Both delegations agreed to promote the work of the Commission on Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises as well as the Business Advisory Council (CASE) with the purpose of enriching the economic and trade agenda.
• Cooperation Agreement between CEPROBOL – PROCHILE
During the period from May – October 2007, according to the agenda approved under the Cooperation Agreement between CEPROBOL and PROCHILE, various activities were carried out aimed at increasing Bolivia exports; among others, internships of CEPROBOL’s officials on trade promotion, the development of ten Product-Market profiles, the organization of the First Construction Fair that took place in Iquique from 19 to 21 July 2007 and plans to hold fairs in Arica, Calama and Antofagasta.
• Tourism
The Delegations agreed to make the necessary arrangements to hold a meeting between the Tourism authorities of both countries in La Paz on 27 November , to allow the Vice-Ministers of Transport of both countries, who will meet on November 28 and 29 of the current year in that city, to join the meeting.
VI. MARITIME ISSUE
On this issue, the Chilean Undersecretary of Foreign Affairs and the Bolivian Vice-Minister of Foreign Affairs exchanged in a broad, frank and realistic manner criteria regarding the continuation and deepening of the dialogue.
After taking stock of the progress made in bilateral relations since the last discussions, and taking into account the conditions prevailing in Chile and Bolivia with respect to the issue andpossible approaches to it, both delegations concurred on the need to
2572
Annex 339
Annex 339
2573
keep the bilateral dialogue constructive, with the goal of deepening the lines of work that effectively take into consideration the criteria that were shared.
VII. SILALA AND WATER RESOURCES
The Delegations agreed that the 3rd Meeting of the Working Group on Silala be held before the end of the year in La Paz.
VIII. INSTRUMENTS TO FIGHT POVERTY
The Delegations highlighted the joint progress made concerning technical cooperation in health, education, export promotion and overcoming poverty, and reiterated the importance having the Working Group analyze and consider projects of mutual interest. On this point, the parties stated their agreement to the draft of the Diplomatic Note exchanged and agreed to make the formal exchange of notes as soon as possible.
IX. SAFETY & DEFENSE
The Delegations highlighted the progress made in this area and noted that the Bolivian Minister of Defense will pay a visit to his Chilean counterpart during the first week of December. They will conduct a thorough analysis of the work plan launched in January, 2007.
The Chilean Delegation reiterated the offer of several courses in the field of security and defense, among which it highlighted the course offered by the Peace Operations Joint Center (CECOPAC) and the National Academy of Political and Strategic Studies (ANEPE). The Delegations agreed that such academic offerings will be transmitted through their Ministries of Foreign Affairs.
• Border Demining
As agreed at the 16th Meeting of Political Consultation Mechanism, the Chilean Delegation reported that it delivered a note to the Bolivian authorities with the last Transparency Report, under
2574
Annex 339
Annex 339
2575
Article VII of the Ottawa Convention. It also communicated the start of demining works at Campo de Cancosa, located in the region of Tarapaca, on 15 October.
• Standardized Methodology in Defense Expenditure
Similarly, the Chilean delegation made reference to the compliance of its commitment to send a copy of the study “Methodology for Comparison of Military Expenditure”, which evaluates to what extent it is possible to apply the standardized methodology developed by CEPAL for Argentina and Chile to comparisons among other countries. The Bolivian Delegation reported that the study was sent to the authorities of the Ministry of Defense of their country.
• Natural disasters
In relation to a Cooperation Agreement in Natural Disasters, the Bolivian Delegation reiterated that it will send a proposal to Chile for its consideration.
• Police Cooperation Agreement
In relation to this Agreement, the Delegations stressed the relevance to sign it soon, as agreed, at the 8th Meeting of the Frontier Committee.
The Delegation of Bolivia indicated that the appointment of police links should be subject to further analysis to clarify roles and functions, and should be realized through an exchange of Notes.
X. COOPERATION FOR THE CONTROL OF ILLEGAL TRAFFICKING OF DRUGS, PRECURSORS AND ESSENTIAL CHEMICALS
The Delegations highlighted the 7th Meeting of the Mixed Commission on Drugs and related Issues, held on 4 and 5 September in La Paz. The Delegations created a mechanism for permanent monitoring of the implementation of the
2576
Annex 339
Annex 339
2577
agreements and commitments reached at that meeting. To this purpose, the contact points will be based on both Ministries of Foreign Affairs.
It was also agreed that the 7th Meeting take place in 2009 in Chile. The meeting will be called by the Ministries of Foreign Affairs.
XI. EDUCATION, SCIENCE and TECHNOLOGY
Both delegations concurred that the meeting of the Mixed Commission of Education, Science and Technology be conducted during the first quarter of 2008, in Bolivia.
The Delegations acknowledged the importance of the forthcoming publication of the book “Chile-Bolivia, Bolivia-Chile: 1820-1930”, jointly written by historians of both countries, in the cities of Santiago and La Paz.
XII. CULTURES
Both delegations concurred on holding the meeting of the Mixed Culture Commission during the first quarter of 2008 in Bolivia.
The Delegations highlighted the success of Chile's participation as guest of honor in the International Book Fair in La Paz and the desirability of continuing encouraging such activities.
Regarding the Draft Agreement on Return of Cultural Goods and Heritage, the Bolivian Delegation offered to send its comments soon, having stressed that within this framework, it will adequately address the problem cultural assets smuggling.
Moreover, both countries reiterated the commitment to conduct studies and research of archaeological and historical heritage within the Multilateral Project “Qhapac Ñan” - Inca Trail – and advance on the UNESCO’s proposal to declare it as Cultural Heritage.
2578
Annex 339
Annex 339
2579
XIII. OTHER MATTERS
The Delegations exchanged information on the analysis of the progress status in their respective countries of the following agreements:
A. Agreement to allow family members of the consular, administrative and technical staff to find gainful employment.
The Delegations noted that, since domestic formalities have been complied with by each country, the agreement is about to enter into force and immediately implemented.
B. Agreement on social security
The Bolivian Delegation stated that it would forward its comments in the shortest possible time.
• Chile’s collaboration to implement Bolivian elections abroad
In relation to the Bolivian request to receive assistance in this matter, the Chilean Delegation reiterated its willingness to contribute to this purpose.
• Autonomous Administration of Customs Warehouses (AADAA)
The Delegations ratified what had been agreed upon in the previous Minutes in the sense of continuing the talks between the respective Legal Departments of the Ministries of Foreign Affairs in order to find a solution to this matter.
They agreed to hold the next Meetings of the Political Consultations Mechanism and the Working Group on Bilateral Affairs in Bolivia, at a date to be agreed upon through diplomatic channels.
The Bolivian Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs and Religion expressed, on behalf of his delegation, the most sincere thanks and appreciation
2580
Annex 339
for the attention received during these meetings from the Chilean Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
Signed in Coya, on 19 October 2007.
FOR CHILE
[Signed]
Envoy Alberto van Klaveren Stork,
Undersecretary of Foreign Affairs
FOR BOLIVIA
[Signed]
Envoy Hugo Fernández Aráoz,
Vice-Minister of Foreign Affairs and
Worship
Annex 339
2581
2582
Annex 339
Annex 340
Minutes of the Fourth Plenary Meeting of the Organization of American States General Assembly, 3 June 2008
(English translation only)
Organization of American States, General Assembly, Thirty-Eighth Regular Session, 2008, Proceedings, Vol. II, OEA/Ser.P/XXXVIII-O.2 (2008), pp 149-150 and 160-172
2583
2584
Annex 340
[p 149]
MINUTES OF THE FOURTH PLENARY MEETING
Date: 3 June 2008
Time: 3:10 p.m.
Venue: Plaza Mayor Convention and Exhibition Center
Chairman: Fernando Araújo Perdomo
Minister of Foreign
Affairs of Colombia
In attendance: Abigaíl Castro de Pérez (El Salvador)
Héctor E. Morales, Jr. (United States of America)
Denis G. Antoine (Grenada)
Jorge Skinner-Klée (Guatemala)
Carolyn Rodrigues -Birkett (Guyana)
Jean Rénald Clérismé (Haiti)
Carlos Sosa Coello (Honduras)
Ronald Robinson (Jamaica)
Gerónimo Gutiérrez Fernández (Mexico)
Denis Ronaldo Moncada Colindres (Nicaragua)
Aristides Royo Sánchez (Panama)
Elisa Ruiz Díaz (Paraguay)
María Zavala Valladares (Peru)
José Manuel Trullols (Dominican Republic)
Izben Williams (Saint Kitts and Nevis)
Clenie Creer-Lacascade (Saint Lucia)
La Celia Prince (Saint Vincent and the Grenadines)
Lygia Louise Irene Kraag-Keteldijk (Suriname)
Glenda Morean Phillip (Trinidad and Tobago)
Gonzalo Fernández (Uruguay)
Nicolás Maduro Moros (Venezuela)
Winston Williams (Antigua and Barbuda)
Victorio Taccetti (Argentina)
Brent Symonette (The Bahamas)
Joyce Bourne (Barbados)
Nestor Mendez (Belize)
David Choquehuanca Céspedes (Bolivia)
Osmar Chohfi (Brazil)
Alexandra Bugailiskis (Canada)
Alejandro Foxley (Chile)
Adriana Mejía Hernández (Colombia)
Edgar Ugalde Álvarez (Costa Rica)
Peter St. Jean (Dominica)
María Isabel Salvador (Ecuador)
Annex 340
2585
[p 150]
José Miguel Insulza (OAS Secretary General)
Albert R. Ramdin (Assistant Secretary General)
[...]
[p 160]
2. Report on the maritime problem of Bolivia
THE PRESIDENT: We will now move on to discuss the next item on the agenda, the “Report on the maritime problem of Bolivia.”
As the Delegations are well aware, Resolution AG/RES. 989 (XIX-O/89), adopted in 1989, provided that this matter would be addressed during any of the forthcoming regular periods of meetings of the General Assembly, if any of the parties involved required so.
In this regard, last February 13, the Government of Bolivia asked the Subcommittee on Agenda and Procedures of the Preparatory Committee to include this matter on the agenda of the General Assembly. In addition, Chile’s Delegation to the OAS presented its statement on this matter in document AG/doc.4778/08 rev. 1.
[p 161]
In view of the foregoing, and for the purposes of the relevant presentation, it is with great pleasure that I now give the floor to Minister of Foreign Affairs David Choquehuanca Céspedes, the Head of the Bolivian Delegation.
The HEAD OF THE DELEGATION OF BOLIVIA: Thank you.
Mr. President, Foreign Ministers, Mr. Secretary General, Permanent Observers:
First of all, the Delegation of Bolivia would like to thank the people and Government of Colombia for their hospitality, and on behalf of the people and the Government of Bolivia, would like to express its solidarity and condolences for the tragedy that has caused loss of life in this city of Medellin.
Mr. President, a year ago in Panama, during the 37th regular meeting of the General Assembly of the Organization of American States, on presenting the report on the maritime problem of Bolivia, I expressed our deep desire that this issue should find a satisfactory solution on the merits as soon as possible.
During the last two years we have made substantial progress in building mutual trust between Chile and Bolivia to address the issue of the outlet to the sea with sovereignty, which my country has been justly and lawfully demanding for more than a century, in the framework of the peaceful desire for integration between our peoples.
In order to build this mutual trust and, in particular, thanks to the efforts of
2586
Annex 340
President Michelle Bachelet and President Evo Morales, several meetings have been held at the level of officials, armed forces, congressmen, businessmen, students, journalists and representatives of organizations of our civil society.
Our Foreign Ministries have maintained fluid communication and have held several meetings at which our maritime claim has been officially discussed. Thus, in the context of the institutional framework, in which both countries are working bilaterally and within the framework of developing mutual trust, the 17th Meeting of the Bolivia-Chile Political Consultations Mechanism was held on 19 October 2007, in the town of Coya, Chile.
The greatest achievement of this period is undoubtedly the fact that we can now talk to Chile about Bolivia’s return to the sea at all levels of State and society, and that there is recognition that this is an unavoidable problem that must be addressed seriously, with transparency and with genuine effectiveness.
In this context, we welcomed the recent statements by Foreign Minister Alejandro Foxley, calling the Chilean people to show solidarity with Bolivia’s maritime claim. These statements show signs that Chile is recognizing the existence of a pending issue in our bilateral relationship and is encouraging a solution.
Progress over these two years has been important, but not sufficient, in putting together the 13 point agenda without exclusions. Now efforts must be duplicated and that spirit of understanding must be embodied in real, visible facts for our peoples.
[p 162]
Mutual trust is the atmosphere, the context and the essential scenario for dialogue between Chile and Bolivia. Now the dialogue must produce real, concrete and tangible results regarding the 13 point agenda without exclusions.
With this new basis of achieving mutual trust on concrete facts and achievements, assistance by the OAS will be important so that we can promptly obtain real results that reinforce that trust and allow us to definitively resolve Bolivia’s just and unwavering vindication.
I do not intend to recount the 13 points raised in the agenda without exclusions, but I do want to develop some of the issues on which we need to achieve real and effective results as soon as possible. Some of these key issues are:
•
the enabling of the port of Iquique;
•
the repair of the Arica-La Paz railroad;
•
the demining of our common border; and
•
the issue of recognition for the use of Silala spring water.
With regard to enabling the port of Iquique, I want to begin by recalling that we are talking about the fulfillment of an obligation contracted by Chile under the terms of the Treaty of 1904, and that the accomplishment of this goal will not require an additional agreement but, above all, political will and management efficiency for the realization of the commitments made.
I also want to note that enabling the Port of Iquique is an essential part of the free transit regime established in the Treaty of 1904 and involves:
•
the presence of a Bolivian customs agent in the port, appointed by the
Annex 340
2587
National Customs of Bolivia and ASP-B;
•
Bolivian jurisdiction over its cargo in transit to and from Bolivia;
•
free port storage for one year for Bolivian imports and for 60 days for Bolivian exports;
•
non-payment of duties, taxes and other charges of the Chilean State.
In the framework of the 17th Meeting of the Political Consultations Mechanism, Chile reported that it is still working on the topic of free storage for Bolivian cargo and enabling the port of Iquique. We welcome the progress made by Chile but, honestly, Bolivia would have liked to inform this General Assembly that this obligation has already been fully met.
[p 163]
I want to emphasize that the enabling of the port of Iquique and the effective implementation of free transit to Bolivia are obligations of Chile that emerge from the Treaty of 1904 and, although they do not replace or satisfy our just maritime demand, they are essential measures in this process of building mutual trust between Chile and Bolivia.
As for the repair of the Arica-La Paz railroad, I would point out that the maintenance and operation of the portion of the Arica-La Paz railroad in Chile is an obligation of Chile emanating from the Treaty of 1904. Consequently, the deterioration caused by the shutdown of the rail section in Chile must be corrected by Chile as soon as possible.
The Government of Bolivia, in fulfillment of its rights and bilateral obligations, reiterates its claim to the Government of Chile so that the Chilean Government can move ahead with the proper action, so that the railroad can continue normal operation, as established in the agreements signed between our two countries.
As for the demining of the border, the Republic of Chile, pursuant to the Treaty of Ottawa of 1997, by virtue of which this is not a bilateral commitment, began the process of demining the border with Bolivia. Chile has noted that, despite the high costs and technical efforts that this involves, it estimates that this will be completed in 2010.
Bolivia has consistently stated that, in the context of mutual trust being built by both countries, border integration at a minimum requires safety and care of the humans and the wildlife that inhabit our common frontier.
With regard to the issue of recognition for the use of Silala spring water, the Government of Bolivia has made progress with holding various meetings with local authorities, social organizations and peasant communities in the department of Potosí, to continue agreeing on criteria on the Bolivian side. Now it is essential that the Chilean side should also make concrete proposals that could result in a definitive, practical and satisfactory solution for both parties.
Despite the difficulties and setbacks we have encountered in the past year, our desire to move ahead with this process continues unabated, because it is fueled by the will of the Bolivian people and the commitment of their Government to reach a just and lasting solution to its geographical confinement.
2588
Annex 340
To move more expeditiously and effectively in the realization of the 13 point agenda , it is important to have the support of the General Secretariat of the Organization of American States.
We are in the middle of a river from which we can see the other side, but we still need to cross the deepest part. As we do so, it is essential that the OAS assists with the bilateral dialogue to address the resolution of the underlying issue of Bolivia’s maritime demand, to help steer, once and for all, the resolution of this dispute which, agonizingly, has been a burden for our people and for the hemispheric community for over a hundred years.
[p 164]
I wish to emphatically express and reiterate to the illustrious delegations present that the confinement imposed on Bolivia is not just a bilateral issue that is solely up to Chile and Bolivia; instead, it is a matter of hemispheric interest. Therefore, we demand the commitment and actions necessary to contribute to this process of dialogue that Bolivia and Chile are engaged in.
The plundering that resulted from the unjust war of 1879 can only be erased with a just, harmonious and sustainable solution for Bolivia and Chile. We believe that the Government of Chile must fully assume the challenge of finding a solution to our maritime claim and the implications this will have for our neighborhood and for the Hemisphere as a whole.
To accept this challenge means that both nations must be able to hold an historic meeting that will ultimately overcome the unfortunate incident that occurred more than a century ago.
I believe we are at a point where it is essential to put our genuine political will ahead of the conservatism of the state bureaucracies that unnecessarily delay the actual answers that our people want.
We are obligated to achieve mutually beneficial results, especially when it comes to keeping peace and a stable balance between our peoples. This will test the strength and sincerity of our purpose.
Mr. President and esteemed Delegates, in these important historic moments for the region, Bolivia wants to renew and reaffirm its commitment to the process of South American integration. Today, more than ever, the events we are experiencing allow me to confirm the message that the South American Presidents sent from the city of Cochabamba in December 2006 to make South America an area of integration, peace, justice, democracy and equality, as a specific response to the demands of our people.
This effort to build the Union of South American Nations (UNASUR) is not only necessary to solve the great scourges affecting the region, such as poverty, social exclusion and persistent inequality, which in recent years have become a central concern of all national governments, but it is also a decisive step towards a multipolar world, one that is balanced, fair and based on a culture of peace.
Achieving this purpose includes overcoming all the conflicts that still survive within South America, such as the maritime confinement affecting my country. In that perspective and taking into account Bolivia’s invariable position,
Annex 340
2589
which is supported by unquestionable historical and legal facts, it is essential to solve our maritime claim.
Mr. President and distinguished Delegates, we will not waiver in this purpose and our desire will remain constant, as it has been for over a hundred years. We only hope that Chile fully understands the scope of our demand today and the circumstances surrounding it, and that it will also interpret the will of our peoples, who have shown that they want to assist with this process in hopes of overcoming our disagreements for the sake of peace, good coexistence and perpetual brotherhood.
[p 165]
Clearly our bilateral relationship has overcome, to some extent, a long period of sensitivities and even animosity. President Bachelet and President Morales have shown us the way so that our diplomats can work to put an end to lingering disputes. I believe that we should not fail to comply with the mandate given by our Presidents, who are the true and legitimate representatives of our people.
Mr. President and Foreign Ministers, at our last General Assembly I urged all OAS Member States to support this process of dialogue and negotiation between Chile and Bolivia. Now I ask you, through dynamic and active support by the General Secretariat of our Organization, to help us realize the mandate set out in the successive resolutions issued by this Assembly since 1979, which have established that it is of permanent hemispheric interest that an equitable solution be found whereby Bolivia will obtain sovereign and useful access to the Pacific Ocean.
We hope that our hemisphere and democratic Organization of solidarity will show strong signs of commitment to peace, friendly coexistence and integration between our peoples.
Thank you very much. [Applause.]
THE PRESIDENT: We thank Foreign Minister Choquehuanca, Head of the Delegation of Bolivia, for his presentation. We have received Chile’s request to initiate its presentation. We therefore give the floor to Foreign Minister Alejandro Foxley.
The HEAD OF THE DELEGATION OF CHILE: Thank you, President.
I would like to start by addressing some of the points just mentioned by Foreign Minister Choquehuanca, particularly at the beginning of his speech, and I will quote them almost verbatim because what he said seems to me to correspond to reality.
The Bolivia Foreign Minister said that there has been substantial progress between Chile and Bolivia over two years, with a shared agenda of thirteen points. We fully agree with that statement. He also said that a climate of mutual trust has been created, which at first did not exist, and that, in fact, is central to addressing fully and integrally the thirteen points we agreed as a shared agenda—a statement with which we also agree.
The other statement made by the Foreign Minister of Bolivia was to recognize the efforts—in my opinion remarkable and even extraordinary—made by Presidents Evo Morales and Michelle Bachelet in just over two years, precisely to change that historical climate, that long period of misunderstandings and even
2590
Annex 340
enmity, as Foreign Minister Choquehuanca said at the end of his speech. On the basis of recognizing the desire to move ahead with the agenda and to build a stable, positive long-term relationship between Bolivia and Chile, the Presidents have been willing to meet on numerous occasions.
The meetings have always been positive and have also led to a series of dialogues held not only at the level of the government, ministries, etc., but also at the
[p 166]
level of universities, including the armed forces and institutions of civil society. Therefore, I also agree with Foreign Minister Choquehuanca on that point.
Another point on which I also fully agree is that during these past two years there has been fluid communication between the two Foreign Ministries. And I want to recognize it here, because our relationship with the Foreign Minister present here and his team and our team has been frank and direct, for neither of us is a professional diplomat. We like to say things simply, straightforwardly and to the point, and that is what we have done. Last night we had a long talk again, and I am glad that this tone has prevailed so far in the relationship.
And for the same reason and in the same style of frankness, I want to highlight some points of disagreement with what Foreign Minister Choquehuanca stated today. We have differences that I think need to be clarified.
The first thing I want to point out is that the relationship between Bolivia and Chile, although it seems obvious to say, the agenda that both countries have defined to carry out, including all issues that have been referred to, is a matter that is essentially bilateral. As we have said on other occasions, I have to insist that from the point of view of the Government of Chile, all the issues raised by the Bolivian Foreign Minister are strictly bilateral matters. Therefore, I also have to say that Chile directly expresses its disagreement, actually its rejection, of the involvement of multilateral organizations in matters that are strictly bilateral in scope; which, incidentally, includes this Organization in which we find ourselves, which is multilateral in nature.
I say this also because I feel it is not justified to even raise that issue at this time—neither from a legal point of view nor from the point of view of the road we have traveled. I say this sincerely, but that is what we think, that is what we feel, and that will be our position on this matter. This is a permanent position of Chile in a matter that is governed by existing treaties and that does not give third parties any right of initiative or intervention.
A proposal for support, such as the one presented by Foreign Minister Choquehuanca, in our view does not constitute progress, but is instead a setback that contradicts the effort we have been making to advance a constructive relationship, in a broad dialogue and with a view to the future. Again, I want to say that I, at least, have great confidence and optimism regarding the substantial progress on the thirteen points of this agenda.
I also want to clarify, as I said, that the agenda of thirteen points is effective and it is obvious that one of the issues included is the so-called maritime issue. At
Annex 340
2591
this point it is a question of exploring, constructively and creatively, formulas that make possible a better access to the Pacific Ocean for Bolivia, Chile reserving its legal and political positions on the matter. Therefore, the goal of this process cannot be a sovereign outlet to the sea, because if that were the case, my country would not have agreed to include this item in the agenda.
[p 167]
However, we believe that it is necessary to emphasize again, as we have done in the Permanent Council of the OAS, the efforts by President Evo Morales to preserve and strengthen democratic institutions in Bolivia. Not only did we say this in the Permanent Council of the OAS, but we have also indicated it in statements made by President Bachelet and by me personally in Chile on that subject.
It was clearly the will of President Morales to promote dialogue, social inclusion and to expand the public participation process. Just as we strongly support the preservation of the democratic regime in Bolivia, the Chilean Government will continue to support the principle of the territorial integrity of that sister country, shared throughout Bolivian society.
Along those lines, I must say, because it is something I also stated publicly in Chile recently, and I want to reaffirm it here in the exact sense in which we said it: we are in solidarity with the Bolivian people. That is the true scope of words we said in a public statement in Santiago. I did not say in that statement, because it is not my place to do so, that we are in solidarity with Bolivia’s maritime claim. Again, it is not my place to do so.
That is an issue that is discussed by the relevant binational Commission, where each government has clearly expressed its view. Therefore, if you want to know our views and mine in particular, they are expressed through the official channels. But I insist on solidarity with the Bolivian people. You must understand, as I have said, the situation that Bolivians have experienced and are experiencing as a result. We also have experienced natural disasters and internal political problems this year like the ones they have and like the ones experienced throughout the world. We have to stress the word solidarity at these levels and we reiterate it today, not at other levels where we have not said so.
For us, the relationship with Bolivia is one of the important priorities of our foreign policy. I dare say that it is one of the top priorities of our foreign policy. This has been reflected—it is not mere words—in each of the meetings held recently, as I said before, between President Bachelet and President Morales, the most recent being just fifteen days ago.
These meetings have undoubtedly been a real boost to further encourage the process of generating mutual trust, which has been supported—as I said—by mutual visits by Ministers, other authorities, the armed forces, etc.
This dynamic and effective process has allowed us to get to know each other more deeply, and to consolidate a fruitful relationship between the two countries through a dialogue of great content. That explains why the bilateral relationship has been showing points of agreement, which in turn has allowed us to move forward gradually but permanently and positively, in all matters that are of interest to both
2592
Annex 340
countries.
This willingness of both Governments, the understanding and mutual solidarity and desire to keep moving steadily have also allowed us to recognize the true situations of each country, including their political situations, and to build mutual respect.
[p 168]
Now, lest this seem a purely general statement, I want to mention the progress made in the various mechanisms of political cooperation, economics and integration that are generating very concrete results, in my opinion.
First, the Working Group on Bilateral Affairs and the Political Consultations Mechanism, made up of our Vice-Ministers, has done quality work to systematize and develop all the issues on the agenda of thirteen points, including the matters that are essential for each country. In the next two or three weeks a new set of meetings of these mechanisms will be held in Bolivia.
For the first time in the history between the two countries, we have included the maritime issue in our official bilateral agenda. That is so; I say it here because it is so. It is a step that was rightly described as an historic step in both Bolivia and Chile.
As a second topic, Chile has taken all measures and all the necessary steps to bring about the enabling in the coming weeks, I emphasize, in the coming weeks, the enabling of the Port of Iquique, in accordance with the free transit system that our neighbor already enjoys in the ports of Arica and Antofagasta, as was agreed in the Treaty of 1904.
This is an important and concrete achievement that responds to a specific request from the Government of Bolivia. It involves, as I would emphasize, the enabling of a third Chilean port within the spirit of that Treaty, a Treaty which governs the relations of peace and friendship between our countries.
A third point. Presidents Morales, Bachelet and Lula signed the Declaration of La Paz last December in La Paz. This Declaration is an instrument by which Bolivia, Brazil and Chile agreed that the bioceanic corridor would be inaugurated in 2009, the central section of which will pass through Bolivia and connect different areas of the country to the port of Santos on the Atlantic and the ports of Iquique and Arica on the Pacific.
This bioceanic corridor, which we are working on together with Bolivia and Brazil in order to finish it next year, will play a very important strategic role in including our people in the process of integration and sustainable development, which is a priority.
It is important to remember that this was agreed as part of the ILSA Plan, about eight or nine years ago, and none of these bioceanic corridors is yet complete. This will be the first one to allow the entire interior of the southern part of South America to have a much more expeditious, faster and lower-cost access to the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans and the entire area of the Pacific Ocean, thereby constituting a huge market, especially for agricultural and agro-industrial products throughout the interior of South America: Bolivia, Brazil, Paraguay and northern Argentina, and so on.
Annex 340
2593
Chile reiterates its commitment to improving the state of the international routes that connect us to Bolivia, for which we plan to carry out major infrastructure projects.
Another point to remember is that under Economic Complementation Agreement No. 22, Chile asymmetrically gave to Bolivia a 100% tariff preference on imports of any of its products, with the sole exception of
[p 169]
three products that are subject to the price band system: sugar, wheat and wheat flour. All other Bolivian products have zero tariffs.
We hope this collaboration in terms of trade continues to deepen, in the promotion of exports as well, which is central to the competitiveness of our economies. This program of mutual cooperation in export promotion also covers exports from Bolivia and Chile to third destinations, through the preparation of market profiles for Bolivian products; in this case, Bolivian government officials are doing an internship in our offices in Santiago and also in other countries.
We have organized Bolivian trade fairs in Chile and Chilean trade fairs in Bolivia, in connection with the construction works in Arica and Iquique, and soon facilities for the installation of factories and marketing of products in Antofagasta.
We have also established a wide range of Bilateral Cooperation Program in customs, tourism, infrastructure, education, culture, and in gender and municipal sectors. We have taken concrete actions to promote implementation mechanisms, which it is not necessary to discuss in detail here because it would take too long.
Although it was perhaps not as fast as we would have liked, we have also made progress in repairing the railroad from Arica to La Paz, with determination; although as I myself have publicly acknowledged in Chile, we did cause trouble for some of my Minister colleagues. So there is no claim in this regard. A public tender was held for this railroad years ago, and the bid and administration were awarded to a Bolivian company that unfortunately did not operate it properly, causing it to go bankrupt.
Because of the Treaty of 1904 and because we always honor those commitments, we will invest about $10 million in order to make this service viable again. I want to clarify that delay, among other things, occurs (and I suppose it also occurs in other countries) because in order to repair and rebuild the railroad, an environmental impact study had to be conducted, and those studies are not immediate—it unfortunately took a few months, but now it is complete—and then simply an engineering study was conducted for the purpose of the call for bids to rebuild the railroad. In any event, the request for bids will be made this year and the railroad will be fully in place, we hope, in early 2010.
Foreign Minister Choquehuanca mentioned another issue that concerns the demining process and the Ottawa Convention. Regarding this, I have here a detailed report from the people who have been working on this issue; today they can state, for example, with regard to the progress of the demining process on the Bolivia-Chile border, a survey of four minefields has been completed to date—some 4800 mines installed in an area very difficult to access, at more than 4000 meters altitude.
I can also announce that in mid-July, work will begin in the minefields of
2594
Annex 340
Chapiquiña numbers 1 and 2, and it is expected to be completed this year, with which we will have completed six minefields. And we hope to get closer to the goal of the Ottawa Convention in terms of being done with this age-old problem we inherited. We feel a
[p 170]
responsibility to the international community to fulfill the obligation that both Chile and other bordering countries have assumed with regard to this issue.
There are two groups of engineers currently working on the border with Bolivia, and they are doing so as quickly as the difficult terrain allows.
I would also like to add another area of work in which we are moving forward. As a means of physical integration and in particular, as a suitable mechanism for border facilitation, I would highlight the agreement on integrated border controls that came into force between Bolivia and Chile in 2006.
To show that we are really working and that it is not just that an agreement has been signed, I can say that last 12th of December the integrated control was inaugurated at the Charaña and Biviri crossing, with a single customs house in Biviri. Chile has also completed the construction of a new integrated border post in the town of Colchane, which we hope to inaugurate together early in the second half of this year. This complex will serve the international transoceanic route Iquique-Guara-Colchane, which then reaches Santos, and is part of the bioceanic corridor already mentioned, along with the Arica-Tamboquemado route.
On the subject of the Silala river mentioned by the Bolivian Foreign Minister, I want to say that Chile is waiting for Bolivia to promptly provide us with a proposal that allows us to reach a settlement on this matter.
The Chilean President has evaluated this integration process in which we are engaged and I can say it is a topic that we discuss often. She has told us that there may be differences, but the most important thing is what we have been building. I quote her words verbatim: “We have been building processes of trust to help eradicate all forms of prejudice that have done so much damage to the relationship between our countries in the past.”
The Chilean Government, and particularly the administration of President Bachelet, although it seems almost superfluous to repeat it, will always be willing to continue strengthening these bonds with a neighboring country, with which we can and should face the challenges of the 21st century with a shared forward-looking vision.
The fates of Chile and Bolivia are united; our dialogue, without exception, has been fruitful and shows significant points of agreement. In my opinion: let us strengthen what unites us and not what divides us; let us work on the points at which we have yet to build agreements; let us move forward in building mutual trust; let us consolidate the progress to date and let us renew our efforts so that we will not move backwards. And this is a very important issue: that each of us promote the proper national consensus that our purposes in the thirteen points require.
And it is very important for us to understand this because in politics progress is made not only by a voluntary act of the executive, but also by the political will
Annex 340
2595
of the people expressed through their respective institutions. We are determined to do so in the
[p 171]
direction indicated, and we have to take the time necessary so that this has adequate political support and can materialize within a reasonable time for both parties.
I therefore would like to conclude, Mr. President, by saying that in our relationship with the Government of Bolivia up until now, I have many more reasons for optimism than pessimism. I have many more reasons to believe that there is a future within our reach, that we think with tremendous ambition towards shared integration. We need only think of the Asia Pacific region, where there are billions of people and where the producers in these countries, not only the large ones but also the medium-sized and small ones, are able to face a common challenge.
Let us believe that we have very similar sensitivities with respect to the need to build more democratic and more egalitarian societies, with more social inclusion, without ethnic or gender discrimination or discrimination based on national origin, or discrimination of any other type.
We have many values, principles, tasks, and government programs in common, and our desire is to continue building on that basis. We hope and trust that we will do so, also respecting our differences—I have mentioned some of them today; I think that they should be respected, just as we respect the other points of view that the Government of Bolivia has expressed today and that we do not necessarily share.
Thank you. [Applause.]
THE PRESIDENT: We thank the intervention by His Excellency Alejandro Foxley, Minister of Foreign Affairs of Chile.
We have another request by Foreign Minister Choquehuanca to take the floor. I ask him to limit his intervention to two minutes as we are running out of time.
The HEAD OF THE DELEGATION OF BOLIVIA: Thank you, Mr. President.
I salute the relationship we have been building between Bolivia and Chile over the past two years, a positive relationship at all levels. We must recognize that great progress has been made; we are working to generate a climate of mutual trust and believe that it is time for us to achieve concrete results. To accomplish this, Bolivia considers the support of the OAS important.
We are not proposing multilateralization. For us it is important for the OAS to assist so that we can reach a solution that satisfies both sides, Chile and Bolivia. On several occasions the OAS said that this issue is of permanent hemispheric interest, as is the search for a solution to this issue.
I totally agree with the distinguished Foreign Minister of Chile that we must move forward to achieve national consensus and this will allow us to reach a solution. Therefore once again, I salute this construction of mutual trust but, again, we are not suggesting any
2596
Annex 340
[p 172]
multilateralization. For us it is essential for the OAS to assist in achieving a durable solution for both countries.
Thank you very much.
THE PRESIDENT: I thank very much the intervention of Foreign Minister Choquehuanca. Foreign Minister Foxley wishes to make a final intervention. I ask again that it be limited to two minutes.
The HEAD OF THE DELEGATION OF CHILE: Mr. President, I will be very brief.
I repeat what I have already indicated about emphasizing the positive aspects and not what divides us. In the matters that divide us, we have a very clear position and due to the recent speech by Foreign Minister Choquehuanca, I feel the need to reiterate that for Chile it is neither appropriate nor necessary, or even acceptable, for the OAS to be involved.
For an involvement of this nature, the will of both parties would be required, and I think the will of both parties is present in our dialogue, the various mechanisms we have for advancing the agenda of 13 points and for resolving our differences. This is a bilateral issue that is up to our two countries. I hope we are able to maintain the calendar of meetings we have already scheduled, because I believe that is the only truly fruitful way for us to complete the agenda of 13 points with the broad satisfaction of both countries. That is my deepest conviction.
Annex 341
Minutes of the Eighteenth Meeting of the Political Consultations Mechanism, 17 June 2008
(Original in Spanish, English translation)
Archives of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Chile
2597
2598
Annex 341
Annex 341
2599
MINUTES OF THE 18TH MEETING
OF THE CHILE-BOLIVIA
POLITICAL CONSULTATIONS MECHANISM
The 18th Meeting of the Bolivia-Chile Political Consultations Mechanism was held in La Paz, Bolivia, on 17 June 2008, in order to analyze and monitor the progress made on the thirteen points on the broad joint agenda without exclusions designed by both countries.
The Bolivian Delegation was chaired by Envoy Hugo Fernández Aráoz, Vice-Minister of Foreign Affairs and Worship, and the Chilean Delegation was chaired by Envoy Alberto van Klaveren Stork, Undersecretary of Foreign Affairs.
This meeting was preceded, on 16 June, by the 6th Meeting of the Working Group on Bilateral Affairs, whose conclusions were submitted to the Heads of Delegation for their consideration and approval. A list of the Delegations of both countries is attached to these minutes.
The Head of the Bolivian Delegation warmly welcomed the Chilean Delegation, stating that this relationship has grown closer since the last meeting of this mechanism, which shows its vitality, and pointing out that the 13-pointAgenda guides bilateral relations and that the progress with each one of these items means that the entire Agenda can be advanced.
The Head of the Chilean Delegation thanked him for the welcome and said that one of the main priorities of Chilean foreign policy is to strengthen bilateral relations with its neighboring countries, especially with Bolivia, by means of a broad agenda without exclusions. He added that currently bilateral relations are fluid, and are going well, which perception is shared by the Governments of Chile and Bolivia.
In order to properly monitor the progress of the 13-point Agenda, both Delegations agreed to maintain effective coordination for that purpose.
Having approved the methodology and the agenda for the meeting, the Delegations proceeded to hold it:
I. Development of Mutual Trust
The delegations emphasized the various activities that the two governments have carried out since the last Meeting of the Mechanism, and agreed to continue encouraging meetings of different sectors of civil society from Bolivia and Chile, in order to progressively deepen the mutual trust that is the pillar that supports the treatment of all issues in the bilateral relationship.
2600
Annex 341
Annex 341
2601
Most notable among the main activities in this context are the following:
Three presidential meetings, three meetings of the Foreign Ministers, and five meetings of other Ministers. Presidents Evo Morales and Michelle Bachelet met in Santiago, in November 2007, on the occasion of the Ibero-American Summit. In La Paz, in December that same year, on the occasion of the signing of the “La Paz Declaration,” which supports the Chile-Bolivia-Brazil Interoceanic Corridor, that confirms the commitment to the process of regional integration in the field of physical infrastructure. In Lima, on the occasion of the 5th EU-CELAC Summit held in May 2008.
The Ministers of Foreign Affairs held talks in Cartagena de Indias, in the context of the Meeting of the Council of Delegates of UNASUR, in January 2008; in Santo Domingo, on the occasion of the Meeting of the Río Group, in March 2008; and in Medellin, during the General Assembly of the OAS, in June 2008.
The Ministers of Defense, Health, Labor, Public Works, and Chile’s Minister of Culture and Bolivia’s Vice-Minister of Cultures were able to hold bilateral meetings on several opportunities.
As regards the work done alongside civil society, most notable were the visits to Santa Cruz and La Paz of media directors and opinion makers from Chile, in March 2008, at the invitation of the Government of Bolivia; they had an opportunity to meet with the President and Vice President of the Republic of Bolivia, other authorities and social groups. Moreover, a visit to Santiago has been scheduled for the second half of June 2008, by a select group of representatives of social organizations from Bolivia. Plans have also been made for a Meeting of University Presidents and a Meeting of Women Leaders from Chile and Bolivia, both to be held in Santiago in September 2008, as well as the second Meeting of Media Directors and Opinion Makers, to be held in Santiago in October this year, at the initiative of the Government of Chile.
The very high number of meetings reflects the interest, on the part of both governments and their respective civil societies, in enriching the bilateral relationship in several fields, and is clear evidence of the mutual trust that has been reached.
II. Border Integration
•
Frontier Committee
The Delegations agreed to hold the 9th Meeting of this Committee in the city of Iquique this September. The Chilean Delegation proposed, in principle, 22 and 23 September.
2602
Annex 341
Annex 341
2603
•
Border Municipalities and Communities
The Delegations were informed of the positive results of the II Meeting of the Bolivia-Chile Border Municipalities, held in Arica on 13-14 March 2008. At said Meeting, various issues of interest were discussed, including, most notably, those concerning training at different levels; support for health-related initiatives; security and surveillance for peaceful borders, with a proposal, in this context, to consider the possibility of implementing the Border Residents Card. Special mention should be made of the project to recover, promote and revamp the Aymara cultural and natural heritage, supported by IBD funding, agreed on 26 May 2008.
The Delegations also acknowledged the Minutes of the Meeting of Mayors on Tourism that was held in Potosí this past 27 May; an agreement was reached to progressively implement their recommendations at the relevant levels of the Frontier Committee.
•
Bilateral Meeting of Customs Authorities
The Delegations agreed to promote the upcoming 3rd Bilateral Meeting between the two countries’ Customs agencies.
•
Workshop on the Worst Forms of Child Labor
The Delegations concurred on the importance of holding the 2nd Seminar-Workshop, which will take place in the city of Iquique, tentatively in the second half of August 2008.
•
Border Development
The Chilean Delegation undertook to propose a date and a place for the 2nd Health without Borders Meeting, within the coming two weeks.
•
Integrated Border Controls
The Delegations noted the 5th Meeting of the Technical Commission on Integrated Border Controls that was held in Iquique on 28 May 2008, and duly noted the results of the meeting.
In order to prepare for the implementation of a joint Pisiga-Colchane dual-manager control, they agreed that, in principle, a trial run will start in the second week of September, the results of which will be revealed at the 9th Meeting of the Frontier Committee, with a view to final implementation. The Heads of the Delegations agreed on the importance of having the Complexes be officially jointly inaugurated by the Presidents of Bolivia and Chile.
2604
Annex 341
Annex 341
2605
As regards Bolivia’s proposal for a joint single-manager control exercise in Ollagüe, intended to extend for a period of four weeks, the Chilean Delegation will confirm the duration period and the date of implementation.
As to the Cajones Marker, the Bolivian Delegation reiterated that the design has been completed to build an integrated center, with construction set to begin within 6 months. Moreover, Chile reiterated it is assessing the possibility of moving its facilities from San Pedro de Atacama to a location closer to the border crossing.
III. Free Transit
Both Delegations addressed the agreements reached on the occasion of the 9th Meeting of the Working Group on Free Transit, which was held in the city of La Paz, on 27 May 2008. They also agreed on the need to hold meetings of the Bilateral Technical Committees for the ports of Arica and Antofagasta.
They also emphasized the importance of the recommendations of the Seminar on Handling, Storage and Transport of Dangerous Goods in the Context of Bilateral Relations between Bolivia and Chile, which was held on 26 May 2008, in the city of La Paz. Along these lines, the Chilean Delegation reported that it will soon present a schedule of activities for monitoring the recommendations cited above, although not discarding the possibility of holding a second seminar.
• Integrated Transit System (SIT).
Both Delegations agreed on the need to continue working on the revision of the Operations Manual for the Integrated Transit System and recommended that the next meeting of the Ad-Hoc Group be held in August 2008, in the city of La Paz.
• Enabling of the Port of Iquique
The Bolivian Delegation reported that it had officially received the verbal note from the Chilean Government regarding the enabling of the Port of Iquique under the Free Transit Regime, and indicated that this note is being analyzed and studied by the proper authorities in Bolivia and that an answer will be given in due course.
2606
Annex 341
Annex 341
2607
IV. Physical Integration
•
Technical Group on Infrastructure (GTM)
The Delegations agreed to hold the 3rd Meeting of the GTM in July this year, in the city of Iquique, to exchange information on, among other issues, the progress made in the construction of the Interoceanic Corridor defined in the “La Paz Declaration” of December 2007. In addition, they agreed to include railway-related issues in the agenda for that meeting.
The Bolivian Delegation reported that the schedule established in the “La Paz Declaration” to build the Paraíso-El Tinto-San José de Chiquito sections is in the process of being reworked, and the works are now expected to extend to November 2009.
•
Bilateral Meeting Competent Enforcing Authorities of the ATIT
The Delegations duly noted the Minutes of the 8th Meeting of the Enforcement Authorities of the Bolivia-Chile Agreement on International Ground Transport (ATIT), which was held in La Paz on 28-29 November 2007.
The Chilean Delegation is to confirm the time and place for the 9th ATIT Meeting.
•
Arica-La Paz Railway
The Bolivian Delegation summarized the information it has since the last meeting of this Mechanism, at which the Chilean Delegation announced that the railroad would be refurbished in 2008.
The Chilean Delegation reported that the Environmental Impact Declaration had been approved and that the refurbishment plan is currently being drawn up, as it has incorporated the remediation measures provided for by the declaration. They added that the project has also included a substantial improvement to the standard of the railway, which has led to a delay from the original deadlines. The project will be awarded in the second half of 2008 and the work will be performed in 2009.
The Bolivian Delegation expressed its concern with the rescheduling and reiterated how important the progress and completion of this project within the new deadlines is.
The Chilean Delegation pointed out that their Government considers this refurbishment project to be a top priority.
2608
Annex 341
Annex 341
2609
V. Economic Complementation
Both parties took note of the Minutes of the 19th Meeting of the Administrative Commission for ACE 22, held in La Paz on 5 June 2008, comprising meetings of the technical commissions for trade, forestry and agriculture, tourism, customs, trade promotion and cooperation, as well as the sub-commissions on forestry, standardization and sanitary and phytosanitary measures. Each such body defined its work schedule for the coming months.
The Delegations agreed on the importance of the implementation of the CEPROBOL – PROCHILE Agreement, and congratulated each other, in particular, on the success of the Bolivian Construction Fairs held in Arica and Iquique, and the one that will open in Antofagasta on 26 June 2008.
The Chilean Delegation mentioned the fact that, at the Administrative Commission for ACE 22, Bolivia agreed to provide an answer to Chile’s request to restore the previous tariff levels to a list of 34 products within 15 days. It also mentioned its promise to have an answer, within 15 days as well, to Bolivia’s request that Chile support Bolivia’s involvement in the various trade promotion efforts to take place in Santiago in 2009.
Both Delegations highlighted the importance that the cooperation actions and activities they may agree upon have in terms of strengthening the economic-trade agenda. Moreover, they noted that the economic-trade context is an important component of the Work Plan mentioned in item VIII of these Minutes.
Chile’s Delegation conveyed the interest of Chile’s Civil Aviation Board in holding a meeting with its Bolivian counterpart agency in Santiago. The Chilean Delegation announced that a letter of invitation to the meeting will be sent in the next few days.
The Chilean Delegation reported that, in the context of the Chilean Government’s commitment to make the economic-trade agenda with Bolivia more dynamic, this year it will be participating in the Santa Cruz Fair with its own sector for the first time.
VI. Maritime Issue
With a view to deepening the dialogue on this topic, in accordance with the guidelines from their respective Governments, and considering the existence of important achievements in mutual trust, they exchanged ideas and criteria on specific ways to address this topic and concrete approaches to the issue.
Having analyzed the various existing options, they then deepened those that are more viable in the short term. To move ahead with this analysis, they undertook to commission the appropriate technical studies.
2610
Annex 341
Annex 341
2611
The Vice-Ministers reiterated their conviction that the necessary agreements could be reached through this process of dialogue, with a realistic and future-oriented approach.
The Vice-Ministers agreed to continue this dialogue, for which they deem it necessary to rely on their respective internal teams.
VII. The Silala River and Water Resources
In this regard, the Delegations pointed out the agreements that were reached at the 3rd Meeting of the Working Group on the issue of the Silala River, recorded in the Minutes signed on 10 June 2008.
Following an extensive discussion, during which the parties verified they were in agreement as to taking action on this issue, the Delegations agreed that, within the next 60 days, they will be exchanging a draft of the contents for an immediate basic agreement that will take into consideration the water resource as currently used, each country’s rights and the ways and mechanisms to use such resource in a manner that will yield economic benefits for Bolivia, considering the sustainability of the water resource. In this period, a Bilateral Commission will be set up to study the aforementioned elements to conclude the agreement before the end of the year.
At the same time, the parties will be coordinating on the measures to be taken to implement the agreements reached in the Minutes of the 3rd Meeting, as far as the technical side of this is concerned.
VIII. Instruments to Fight Poverty
The Delegations set up the Cooperation Working Group coordinated by the respective Ministries of Foreign Affairs, consisting of the Vice-Minister of Public Investment and Foreign Financing of Bolivia (VIPFE) and Chile’s International Cooperation Agency (AGCI). The Delegations exchanged congratulations on the execution of the “2008/2009 Cooperation Program for Strengthening Capacities and Sharing Experiences” Work Plan signed by both institutions, attached as Annex II hereto.
The Delegations expressed their satisfaction with the significant increase in the amount of cooperation work during the past two years, which efforts they expect to continue and be functional to the goals set in the 13-Point Agenda.
The Chilean Delegation announced a significant increase in the number of scholarships for Master programs in 2009, with the number of Bolivian slots rising from 21 to 40, which the Bolivian Delegation expressed its appreciation for.
They also highlighted the expansion of cooperation to include civil society by supporting the Volunteers for Haiti Program. The first
2612
Annex 341
Annex 341
2613
team of Bolivian and Chilean volunteers for Haiti is expected to be set up in the second half of 2008.
On the other hand, both Delegations concurred on the importance of having the relevant institutions sign a Cooperation Agreement with a view to strengthening and facilitating collaboration in areas of mutual interest.
The Delegations will be proposing a date to arrange a follow-up meeting for the aforementioned Work Plan in the second half of this year.
IX. Security and Defense
The Delegations verified that the institutional visits by authorities from both countries’ Ministries of Defense and Armed Forces have continued, which represents concrete transparency and trust and security promotion measures.
In this context, they noted the importance of the Bolivian Minister of Defense, Mr. Walker San Miguel’s official visits to Chile on 5-6 December 2007, and 14 May 2008, the latter one as a demonstration of solidarity in the face of the Chaitén disaster.
They further noted the importance of the Chilean Minister of National Defense, Mr. José Goñi’s official visit to Bolivia on 15-17 June 2008, during which it was signed the “Memorandum of Understanding between the Ministry of National Defense of the Republic of Chile and the Ministry of National Defense of the Republic of Bolivia on Defense Cooperation.”
•
Border Demining
The Bolivian Delegation pointed out that it has consistently expressed that, in the context of the mutual trust both countries are in the process of building, border integration calls for increased security and care for human life, as well as the wild life along the common border.
The Chilean Delegation provided the Bolivian Delegation with a copy of the latest Transparency Report, submitted to the United Nations on 30 April 2008, pursuant to Article 7 of the Ottawa Convention on the Prohibition of Anti-Personnel Mines and the 2007 Annual Report of the National Demining Commission. Moreover, it reported that the demining works in Cancosa, which had begun in October 2007, were completed in late May 2008. It also informed that demining works in Chapiquiña started on 9 June 2008.
The Chilean Delegation expressed the National Demining Commission’s wishes to hold a meeting with its Bolivian counterpart agency to discuss, in particular, the issue of border demining.
2614
Annex 341
Annex 341
2615
The Delegations recognized the value of the “1st Basic Course in Humanitarian Demining,” which took place at the Demining Center of the School of Military Engineers of the Chilean Army from 24 March to 3 April 2008, with 5 officers and 10 non-commissions officers from the Bolivian Army in attendance.
•
Draft Agreement on Cooperation between the Chilean Uniformed Police [Carabineros] and the Bolivian National Police
As regards this draft Agreement, both Delegations noted that the draft is ready, and therefore agreed it should be signed soon, as was agreed at the 8th Meeting of the Frontier Committee. They agreed to include the Liaison Officer rank in the Agreement.
•
Natural Disasters
The Bolivian Delegation presented the draft Agreement for Cooperation on Natural Disasters and submitted it to the Chilean’s Delegation consideration.
The Delegations recalled that consultations are necessary regarding the course of action to be taken in connection with the agreement by the Ministers of Defense for a natural disaster monitoring exercise to be carried out in 2008, run by the Joint Chiefs of Staff of Bolivia and Chile’s National Defense Chief of Staff.
The Bolivian Delegation expressed the Bolivian Government’s thanks for the Republic of Chile’s cooperation during the floods in the Department of Beni during the early months of this year.
Moreover, the Chilean Delegation also expressed its appreciation for Bolivia’s Minister of Defense’s show of solidarity by visiting the area affected by the eruption of the Chaitén volcano.
•
Discussion of Other Security and Defense Issues
The Delegations agreed on the need to expand the security and defense discussion, addressing coincidences in these areas at multilateral fora. In this regard, the Bolivian Delegation agreed to submit an updated agenda.
2616
Annex 341
Annex 341
2617
X. Cooperation for the Control of Illegal Trafficking of Drugs, Precursors and Essential Chemicals
Both Delegations verified the progress made during the “7th Meeting of the Mixed Bolivia-Chile Commission on Drugs and Related Issues” that took place in La Paz in September 2007, at which it was established a mechanism for permanent monitoring at both countries’ Ministries of Foreign Affairs. The 8th Meeting of said Mixed Commission will take place in Chile in 2009, to be convened by said Ministries.
The Bolivian Delegation mentioned that both Ministries of Foreign Affairs have been making arrangements for a Seminar on Judicial and Police Cooperation and Money Laundering to be held next year, preferably in a border location.
As regards the draft “Agreement on the Exchange of Information on Criminal Records for Trafficking of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances and Related Money Laundering Crimes” that was submitted by the Chilean Delegation at the aforementioned 7th Meeting of the Mixed Commission, the Bolivian Delegation reported it is preparing a counterproposal to be made official in the near future.
XI. Education, Science and Technology
The Delegations highlighted the preparatory meeting for the Mixed Commission on Education, Science and Technology between representatives of both countries’ Ministries of Education, at which, among others, the following issues were identified:
•
Support for the second stage of the Educabolivia.bo website
•
Meeting of Academia and Universities
•
Intercultural education
•
Annual meeting of historians
•
Chilean cooperation in El Alto, Oruro and Tarija schools
•
Schools without Borders Program
•
Qhapaq Ñam
•
Offering of cooperation concerning experiences in educational fields
The Bolivian Delegation will confirm the date for the meeting of the Mixed Commission, which will take place this year in the city of La Paz.
XII. Cultures
The Delegations agreed that the Mixed Commission on Cultures is to meet in the third quarter of the current year in Santiago, then for the Inter-institutional Memorandum of
2618
Annex 341
Annex 341
2619
Understanding for a Cultural Exchange Program between the relevant authorities of the Governments of the Republic of Chile and the Republic of Bolivia for 2008-2011, which is being considered by Bolivia’s Office of the Vice-Minister of Cultural Development, to be signed in La Paz.
The Chilean Delegation provided an account of the cultural activities carried out in the first half of 2008, and those scheduled for the rest of the year.
Both Delegations exchanged congratulations on the busy agenda that has been worked through.
As regards the Draft Agreement on the Protection and Restitution of Cultural Heritage Assets, the Bolivian Delegation offered to provide its feedback shortly.
XIII. Other Business
•
Inter-Parliamentary Contacts
The Delegations noted that the 2nd Official Meeting of the Bolivian and Chilean Senate Commissions on Foreign Affairs has been scheduled to take place on 8 July, this year, in Valparaíso.
•
Social Security Agreement
The Chilean Delegation brought up, once again, the importance of signing an Agreement in the near future that will favor a significant number of Bolivian citizens in Chile and Chilean citizens in Bolivia, and is awaiting an answer on the proposed draft.
The Bolivian Delegation noted that it is in the process of obtaining congressional approval for the Ibero-American Convention on Social Security, which will allow advances towards a bilateral social security agreement with Chile.
•
Autonomous Administration of Customs Warehouses (AADAA)
The Delegations decided that the Directors of Legal Affairs of their respective Ministries of Foreign Affairs will soon meet in order to continue to discuss this issue and present alternative formulas to define a definitive solution in this regard.
•
Visas for Chilean Students in Bolivia
The Chilean Delegation expressed its concern over the fact that the regional offices of Bolivia’s National Immigration Services in the Departments of Cochabamba and Santa Cruz have been charging Chilean citizens for student visas, which is not in line with the reciprocity agreed in the Andrés Bello Convention.
2620
Annex 341
Annex 341
2621
The Bolivian Delegation agreed to contact the National Immigration Service to resolve the issue.
•
Framework Agreement for Cooperation between Chile’s National Women’s Service and Bolivia’s Deputy Minister of Gender and Generational Issues
The Chilean Delegation stated that Chile’s National Women’s Service (SERNAM) submitted the draft Agreement to Bolivia’s Office of the Deputy Minister of Gender and Generational Issues in January 2008, and was awaiting an official reply. Moreover, it undertook to send the draft Agreement to the Bolivian Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
As the meeting ended, the Delegations agreed that the coming meetings of the Political Consultations Mechanism and the Working Group on Bilateral Affairs will be held in Chile, on such dates as will be agreed upon via diplomatic channels.
Chile’s Undersecretary of Foreign Affairs expressed the Chilean Delegation’s most sincere thanks and appreciation for the courtesies extended by the Bolivian Ministry of Foreign Affairs on the occasion of these meetings.
Done in La Paz, on 17 June 2008.
FOR BOLIVIA
[Signed]
Envoy Hugo Fernández Aráoz
Vice-Minister of Foreign Affairs and Worship
FOR CHILE
[Signed]
Envoy Alberto van Klaveren Stork
Undersecretary of Foreign Affairs
2622
Annex 341
Annex 341
2623
2624
Annex 341
Annex 342
Minutes of the Nineteenth Meeting of the Political Consultations Mechanism, 21 November 2008
(Original in Spanish, English translation)
<http://www.minrel.gov.cl/prontus_minrel/site/artic/20081121/pags/200811…;
2625
2626
Annex 342
Inicio | Mapa del Sitio | Atención Ciudadana | FAQ | Intranet - Webmail - SIGEPER- E-learning - Ev. Desempeño | Acceso discapacitados | English VersionBUSCAR EN EBúsqueda AvanzadaMinisterioPolítica ExteriorPolítica Económica ComercialAsuntos ConsularesSala de PrensaAcademia DiplomáticaAtención CiudadanaSala de Prensa Usted está en: Portada > Sala de Prensa > Informaciones > Noviembre 2008 Sala de Prensa InformacionesPosición OficialDiscursos del Ministro Alfredo MorenoIntervenciones SubsecretarioGalería de FotosCancillería en mediosSolicitud Material de PrensaTemas BilateralMultilateralDerechos HumanosAsuntos CulturalesEnergía, Ciencia y TecnologíaMedio AmbienteAntárticaAsuntos GlobalesCoordinación Regional
Annex 342
2627
FundamentosPrincipios de la Política ExteriorPrioridades de la Política ExteriorIntereses de la Política ExteriorDirección General de Política ExteriorArchivo y Biblioteca Archivo General HistóricoAcademia DiplomáticaViernes 21 de noviembre de 2008 Chile y Bolivia realizaron la XIX Reunión del Mecanismo de Consultas Políticas El Subsecretario de Relaciones Exteriores, Alberto van Klaveren, encabezó la XIX Reunión del Mecanismo de Consultas Políticas Chile - Bolivia En un ambiente de profunda cordialidad y de amistad se llevó a cabo en la ciudad de Santiago, el 21 de noviembre de 2008, la XIX Reunión del Mecanismo de Consultas Políticas entre Chile y Bolivia, presidida por el Subsecretario de Relaciones Exteriores de Chile, Embajador Alberto van Klaveren Stork, y por el Viceministro de Relaciones Exteriores y Cultos de Bolivia, Embajador Hugo Fernández Aráoz.
2628
Annex 342
Dicho encuentro fue precedido por la VII Reunión del Grupo de Trabajo sobre Asuntos Bilaterales, que se celebró el jueves 20 del mes en curso. En la ocasión, las delegaciones constataron los importantes avances que se han evidenciado en cada uno de los temas de la Agenda de los 13 Puntos, dando así cumplimiento al deseo mutuo de continuar profundizando el proceso de acercamiento entre Chile y Bolivia. Asimismo, se comprobó que este mecanismo constituye una importante herramienta para dinamizar el seguimiento de los temas de la Agenda, verificar su conclusión y, a su vez, incorporar nuevas iniciativas de interés mutuo. En esta oportunidad, con satisfacción las delegaciones coincidieron en que el trabajo desarrollado a partir de la anterior reunión de este mecanismo, celebrada en La Paz en junio pasado, ha sido muy fructífero y ha permitido comprobar las fortalezas alcanzadas a la fecha en las relaciones entre Chile y Bolivia. Lo anterior es posible consignar en el Acta de este encuentro, cuya copia se anexa al presente comunicado. ACTA DE LA XIX REUNIÓN DEL MECANISMO DE CONSULTAS POLÍTICAS CHILE-BOLIVIA En la ciudad de Santiago, República de Chile, el día 21 de noviembre de 2008, se celebró la XIX Reunión del Mecanismo de Consultas Políticas Chile-Bolivia, con el propósito de realizar un análisis y seguimiento sobre los avances en los trece temas de la agenda común amplia y sin exclusiones, diseñada por ambos países.
Annex 342
2629
MINUTES OF THE 19TH MEETING OF THE CHILE-BOLIVIA POLITICAL CONSULTATIONS MECHANISM
The 19th Meeting of the Chile-Bolivia Political Consultations Mechanism was held in Santiago, Chile, on 21 November 2008, in order to analyze and monitor the progress made on the thirteen issues on the broad joint agenda without exclusions designed by both countries.
2630
Annex 342
La Delegación de Chile estuvo presidida por el Embajador Alberto van Klaveren Stork, Subsecretario de Relaciones Exteriores y la Delegación de Bolivia estuvo presidida por el Embajador Hugo Fernández Aráoz, Viceministro de Relaciones Exteriores y Cultos. Esta reunión fue precedida, el día 20 de noviembre, por la VII Reunión del Grupo de Trabajo para Asuntos Bilaterales, cuyas conclusiones fueron sometidas a consideración y aprobación de los Jefes de Delegación. La nómina de las Delegaciones de ambos países se anexa a la presente Acta. El Jefe de la Delegación de Chile dio la más cordial bienvenida a la Delegación de Bolivia y destacó que es muy positivo revisar semestralmente el estado de avance de los distintos temas que componen la referida agenda bilateral, lo que constituye una motivación para la labor de este Grupo de Trabajo. A partir de la última reunión de este Mecanismo en la ciudad de La Paz, constató que se han evidenciado importantes logros en la agenda común, dando así cumplimiento al deseo de nuestros Gobernantes de avanzar en el proceso de acercamiento entre nuestros pueblos. El Jefe de la Delegación de Bolivia agradeció la bienvenida así como la recepción de la Cancillería chilena y manifestó estar seguro que el trabajo a desarrollar en esta ocasión será fructífero y se constatarán las fortalezas que han alcanzado nuestras relaciones bilaterales que hacen a la agenda común. Asimismo, señaló que el avance efectivo en algunos temas permitirá darlos por concluidos e incorporar nuevas iniciativas. Habiendo aprobado la metodología y agenda de la reunión, ambas Delegaciones procedieron al análisis de la misma: I. Desarrollo de la Confianza Mutua.
Annex 342
2631
The Chilean Delegation was chaired by Envoy Alberto van Klaveren Stork, Undersecretary of Foreign Affairs and the Bolivian Delegation was chaired by Envoy Hugo Fernández Aráoz, Vice-Minister of Foreign Affairs and Worship.
This meeting was preceded, on 20 November, by the 7th Meeting of the Working Group on Bilateral Affairs, whose conclusions were submitted to the Heads of Delegation for their consideration and approval. A list of the Delegations of both countries is attached to these minutes.
The Head of the Chilean Delegation warmly welcomed the Bolivia Delegation, pointing out that it is very positive to hold a biannual review of the progress made with the various issues on the bilateral agenda, which is a motivation for the labor of this Working Group. At the last meeting of this Mechanism in the city of La Paz, it was found that significant achievements had been made with the joint agenda, thereby fulfilling the desires of our Leaders to make progress with the process of rapprochement between our two peoples.
The Head of the Bolivian Delegation thanked him for the warm welcome and reception by the Chilean Ministry of Foreign Affairs, stating that he was certain that the work to be done on this occasion would be fruitful and that we would notice how strong our bilateral relations have become with respect to our joint agenda. He also said that we have made so much progress with certain issues that they can be considered complete, so that we can add new initiatives.
Having approved the methodology and the agenda for the meeting, the Delegations proceeded to analyze it:
I. Development of Mutual trust.
2632
Annex 342
Ambas delegaciones reiteraron su complacencia por los numerosos encuentros de alto nivel que se produjeron durante el segundo semestre de este año y coincidieron en continuar fomentando el desarrollo de estos encuentros, así como de otros representantes de la sociedad civil de Chile y Bolivia que permitan profundizar cada vez más el desarrollo de la confianza mutua, pilar que sustenta un mejor tratamiento de todos los temas de la relación bilateral. Ambas Delegaciones constataron con satisfacción los sucesivos encuentros entre Presidentes y Cancilleres e hicieron un recuento de las visitas registradas últimamente. En efecto, en los últimos cinco meses se verificaron cinco encuentros a nivel presidencial, hecho que no tiene precedentes o similitud con otro país. Dichas reuniones se verificaron con ocasión de: -Cumbre de Jefes de Estado y de Gobierno de MERCOSUR y Asociados (Tucumán, 01.Jul.08) -Cumbre Extraordinaria de UNASUR (Santiago, 15.Sep.08) -Cumbre Extraordinaria de UNASUR (Nueva York, 24.Sep.08) -Reunión de Parlamentarios de UNASUR (Cochabamba, 17.Oct.08) -XVIII Cumbre Iberoamericana (San Salvador, 30-31.Oct.08) La Delegación de Bolivia agradeció la iniciativa de la Presidenta Michelle Bachelet, en su calidad de Presidenta Pro Tempore de UNASUR, por haber convocado a una reunión extraordinaria de Jefes de Estado de los países miembros de dicho organismo para respaldar el proceso democrático en Bolivia, hecho de singular importancia para su país y en lo que compete a la proyección del trabajo de UNASUR.
Annex 342
2633
Both Delegations reiterated how pleased they were with the numerous high-level meetings that were held during the second half of this year, and agreed to continue promoting these meetings, as well as meetings with other representatives of civil society in Chile and Bolivia, in order to deepen even more the development of mutual trust, as it is the pillar that supports better treatment of all issues in the bilateral relationship.
Both Delegations noted with satisfaction the successive meetings between the Presidents and Foreign Ministers and recounted the visits recently made. In the past five months, five meetings at the presidential level have been held, which is unprecedented and has not happened with other countries. These meetings were held on the following occasions:
- Summit of Heads of State and Government of MERCOSUR and Associates (Tucumán, 1 July 2008)
- Extraordinary UNASUR Summit (Santiago, 15 Sep 2008)
- Extraordinary UNASUR Summit (New York, 24 Sep 2008)
- Meeting of UNASUR Parliaments (Cochabamba, 17 Oct 2008)
- 18th Ibero-American Summit (San Salvador, 30-31 Oct 2008)
The Bolivian Delegation thanked President Michelle Bachelet for her initiative as President Pro Tempore of UNASUR for calling a special meeting of the Heads of State of the members of that organization to support the democratic process in Bolivia, which is an event of singular importance for his country and in terms of the projected work of UNASUR.
2634
Annex 342
Asimismo, ambas Delegaciones coincidieron en los exitosos resultados que tuvieron las visitas de distintas organizaciones representativas de la sociedad civil, refiriéndose a las de Líderes de Movimientos Sociales de Bolivia a Santiago, el Primer Encuentro de Rectores Chile-Bolivia, el Primer Encuentro de Mujeres Líderes Chile-Bolivia y el Segundo Encuentro de Directores de Medios, Periodistas y Formadores de Opinión Chile-Bolivia. Destacaron también la próxima realización del III Encuentro de las Comisiones de Relaciones Exteriores de los Senados de Chile y Bolivia, programada entre los días 14 y 16 de diciembre en La Paz. La frecuencia de reuniones, tanto a nivel gubernamental como de los otros sectores de la sociedad civil, es una clara señal del interés que existe por fortalecer las relaciones bilaterales en los distintos ámbitos y es una muestra efectiva de la confianza mutua que se ha alcanzado. Con la finalidad de brindar permanente seguimiento y coordinar adecuadamente las actividades que se desarrollan en el marco de la Agenda de los 13 puntos, ambas Delegaciones acordaron celebrar reuniones mensuales entre las Cancillerías y los Consulados en ambas capitales. II. Integración Fronteriza. Comité de Frontera. Ambas Delegaciones resaltaron la realización de la IX Reunión del Comité de Frontera Chile-Bolivia que se celebró en Iquique durante los días 29 y 30 de septiembre del presente año. En la ocasión, en un ambiente de trabajo muy positivo y de colaboración, se trató una nutrida agenda en las distintas comisiones y subcomisiones que conforman dicho Comité,
Annex 342
2635
Moreover, both Delegations agreed on the successful results of the visits by various organizations representing civil society, i.e., the visit by the Leaders of Social Movements of Bolivia in Santiago, the First Chile-Bolivia Meeting of Rectors, The First Chile-Bolivia Meeting of Women Leaders and the Second Chile-Bolivia Meeting of Media Directors, Journalists and Opinion Makers.
They also noted the upcoming 3rd Meeting of the Foreign Affairs Commissions of the Senates of Chile and Bolivia, scheduled for 14 to 16 December in La Paz.
The frequency of the meetings, both at the level of the government and at the level of other sectors of civil society, is a clear signal of the interest in strengthening bilateral relations in the various areas and is an effective demonstration of the mutual trust that has been reached.
In order to provide ongoing monitoring and properly coordinate the activities held in connection with the 13-point Agenda, both Delegations agreed to hold monthly meetings between the Foreign Ministries and the Consulates in both capitals.
II.
Border Integration.
•
Frontier Committee.
Both Delegations emphasized the 9th Meeting of the Chile-Bolivian Frontier Committee, which was held in Iquique on 29 and 30 September of this year. On that occasion, in a very positive and collaborative atmosphere, a lengthy agenda was discussed by the various commissions and sub-commissions that are part of that Committee,
2636
Annex 342
obteniéndose diversos acuerdos y proposiciones en materia de facilitación fronteriza, cooperación, desarrollo e integración. Municipios y Comunidades FronterizosHubo consenso en impulsar la realización del III Encuentro entre Municipios Fronterizos y, en este ámbito, avanzar hacia la implementación de la Tarjeta Vecinal Fronteriza. Desarrollo FronterizoSe tomó conocimiento que en el marco de la reunión del Sistema de Referencia y Contra Referencia para Tuberculosis y VIH SIDA, celebrada en La Paz los días 12 y 13 de noviembre, se analizó la realización del II Encuentro Salud sin Fronteras, que se materializará en una fecha próxima a coordinar con las autoridades correspondientes de salud y con los respectivos municipios. Reunión bilateral de autoridades aduanerasHabiendo verificado que aún no existe fecha y propuesta de agenda para la III Reunión Bilateral de Autoridades Aduaneras, recomendaron su próxima programación. Taller sobre las peores formas del trabajo infantilAmbas Delegaciones tomaron nota de la realización del II Taller durante los días 28 y 29 de agosto en Iquique. En la ocasión, se profundizó el análisis de la explotación infantil y se acordaron acciones para promover la toma de conciencia sobre este problema,
Annex 342
2637
and various agreements and proposals were obtained with respect to border facilitation, cooperation, development and integration.
•
Municipalities and Border Communities
There was agreement to promote the holding of the 3rd Meeting between Border Municipalities and to make progress at that meeting with implementing the Border Resident Card.
•
Border Development
They took note that at the meeting of the System of Reference and Cross Reference for Tuberculosis and HIV AIDS, held in La Paz on 12 and 13 November, the delegates discussed holding the 2nd Meeting of Health without Borders, which will be held at a future date, to be coordinated with the proper health authorities and the respective municipalities.
•
Bilateral meeting of customs authorities
After verifying that there is not yet a date and proposed agenda for the 3rd Bilateral Meeting of Customs Authorities, they recommended that it be scheduled for the near future.
•
Workshop on the worst forms of child labor
Both Delegations took note that the 2nd Workshop was held on 28 and 29 August in Iquique. At that meeting, they further analyzed the exploitation of children and agreed to actions to promote awareness of this problem,
2638
Annex 342
principalmente en la frontera, a través de una campaña mediática y se tiene programado un III Encuentro binacional para el mes de septiembre de 2009, en Potosí. Controles Integrados de Frontera.Visviri-Charaña: Se ratificó la decisión de construir un complejo fronterizo de cabecera única en el límite internacional. Para ese fin, el equipo técnico de arquitectos se reunió los días 20 y 21 de octubre de 2008, en La Paz, como estaba previsto en el programa de trabajo conjunto acordado en la IX Reunión del Comité de Frontera. Chungará-Tambo Quemado: La Delegación boliviana informó que se han recibido las obras del Complejo de Tambo Quemado y consecuentemente se acordó que se podría iniciar el período de prueba (marcha blanca) de Control Integrado a contar de marzo de 2009, cuando se hayan realizado las adecuaciones necesarias en el actual Complejo de Chungará. Asimismo se tomó nota de la imposibilidad de contar con un funcionario de la Aduana de Chile como avanzada en el nuevo complejo boliviano antes que se inicie la marcha blanca proyectada. Colchane-Pisiga: Se tomó nota de que están terminados los complejos chileno y boliviano y que se debe esperar la conclusión de las obras de acceso vial en el lado boliviano. Se estima que la inauguración e inicio de la marcha blanca podrá programarse para marzo del próximo año. Ollagüe-Avaroa: Se constataron los positivos resultados alcanzados en el marco del ejercicio de control integrado entre los días 13 y 17 de octubre, habiéndose expresado la disposición de realizar en el futuro otros ejercicios similares en este paso. III. Libre Tránsito
Annex 342
2639
principally on the border, through a media campaign, and noted that a 3rd Binational Meeting is scheduled for the month of September 2009, in Potosí.
•
Integrated Border Controls.
Visviri-Charaña: The decision to build a single-manager border complex on the international border was ratified. To this end, the technical team of architects met on 20 and 21 October 2008, in La Paz, as provided for in the joint working plan agreed at the 9th Meeting of the Frontier Committee.
Chungará-Tambo Quemado: The Bolivian Delegation reported that the work at the Tambo Quemado Complex has been accepted and consequently it was agreed that the trial period (trial run) of Integrated Control could begin in March 2009, when the necessary arrangements have been made in the current Chungará Complex. They also took note of the impossibility of having a Chilean Customs Official as proposed in the new Bolivian complex before the scheduled trial run is held.
Colchane-Pisiga: The Delegations took note that the Chilean and Bolivian complexes are complete but the roadwork on the Bolivian side is not yet complete. It is estimated that the inauguration and trial run can be scheduled for March of next year.
Ollagüe-Avaroa: The Delegations noted the positive results reached in the exercise of integrated control between 13 and 17 October, and the statement of willingness to engage in similar exercises in the future.
III. Free Transit
2640
Annex 342
Puertos de Antofagasta y AricaAmbas Delegaciones tomaron nota de la realización de la Reunión de Comité Técnico Bilateral Puerto Antofagasta, que se llevó a cabo el 28 de octubre de 2008 en la ciudad del mismo nombre, en cumplimiento a la recomendación de la IX Reunión del Grupo de Trabajo de Libre Tránsito. La Delegación de Bolivia expresó su preocupación por el cobro del almacenamiento de la carga boliviana en el frente concesionado del Puerto de Antofagasta. Asimismo, confirmaron la realización de la Reunión del Comité Técnico Bilateral Puerto Arica, el 27 de noviembre de 2008. Al respecto, la Delegación de Chile comunicó la intención de realizar una reunión técnica e interna con las empresas de los Puertos de Arica, Antofagasta e Iquique, a fin de analizar los resultados de las reuniones de los Comités Técnicos y de estudiar las peticiones formuladas por la Delegación de Bolivia a fin de avanzar en su solución. Seminario de Cargas PeligrosasAmbas Delegaciones convinieron en realizar un segundo Seminario sobre Cargas Peligrosas, en la ciudad de Arica, con el fin de continuar profundizando el estudio de esta materia, así como avanzar en la implementación de las medidas derivadas de las conclusiones del primer Seminario. La Delegación chilena propondrá fecha y programa para el mismo. Sistema Integrado de Tránsito (SIT).
Annex 342
2641
•
Ports of Antofagasta and Arica
Both Delegations took note of the holding of the Meeting of the Bilateral Technical Committee for the Port of Antofagasta, which was held on 28 October 2008 in the city of the same name, in compliance with the recommendation of the 9th Meeting of the Working Group on Free Transit. The Bolivian Delegation expressed its concern with the cost of storing Bolivian cargo in the area under concession at the Port of Antofagasta.
They also confirmed that the Meeting of the Bilateral Technical Committee for the Port of Arica would be held on 27 November 2008.
In this regard, the Chilean Delegation communicated the intention of holding an internal technical meeting with the companies of the Ports of Arica, Antofagasta and Iquique, in order to analyze the results of the meetings of the Technical Committee and to study the petitions made by the Bolivian Delegation in order to make progress with the solution.
•
Dangerous Cargo Seminar
Both Delegations agreed to hold a second Seminar on Dangerous Cargo, in the city of Arica, in order to continue studying this issue and to make progress with the implementation of measures derived from the conclusions of the first Seminar. The Chilean Delegation will propose a date and schedule for it.
•
Integrated Transit System (SIT).
2642
Annex 342
Ambas Delegaciones coincidieron en la necesidad de continuar trabajando en la revisión del Manual Operativo del Sistema Integrado de Tránsito y recomendaron la celebración de la próxima reunión del grupo Ad-Hoc, en lo posible antes de fin de año. Habilitación del Puerto de Iquique.Ambas Delegaciones destacaron los alcances de la reunión sobre el particular realizada el 17 y 18 de noviembre de 2008 en la ciudad de Iquique, ocasión en la que se procedió a elaborar conjuntamente un borrador de Nota Reversal, la cual permitirá, una vez hechas las consultas internas pertinentes, poner en práctica la habilitación del puerto de Iquique al régimen de libre tránsito para Bolivia. IV. Integración Física Grupo Técnico Mixto sobre Infraestructura (GTM).Ambas Delegaciones destacaron la realización de la III Reunión del GTM el 24 de julio del presente año, en la ciudad de Iquique. En la oportunidad, se intercambió información, entre otras materias, sobre el avance del estado de las rutas de conexión y actualización de las fichas técnicas, los programas de inversión de las mismas, y en particular, en lo relativo a la construcción del Corredor Interoceánico definido en la "Declaración de La Paz", de diciembre de 2007. Asimismo recomendaron realizar una nueva reunión del GTM en Bolivia durante el primer trimestre de 2009.
Annex 342
2643
Both Delegations agreed on the need to continue working on the revision of the Operations Manual for the Integrated Transit System and recommended that the next meeting of the Ad-Hoc Group be held soon, and by the end of the year, if possible.
•
Enabling of the Port of Iquique.
Both Delegations emphasized the achievements of the meeting on this issue held on 17 and 18 November 2008 in the city of Iquique, where a joint draft of the Diplomatic Note was prepared, which will allow the port of Iquique to be enabled under the free transit regime for Bolivia, once the relevant internal consultations have been made.
IV. Physical Integration
•
Mixed Technical Group on Infrastructure (GTM)
The Delegations noted the 3rd GTM Meeting that was held on 24 July this year, in the city of Iquique. At the meeting, information was exchanged on, among other issues, the progress made regarding the connecting roads and the updating of the technical files, related investment programs and, in particular, the construction of the Interoceanic Corridor defined in the “La Paz Declaration” of December 2007.
Additionally, they recommended holding a new GTM meeting in Bolivia in the first quarter of 2009.
2644
Annex 342
Reunión Bilateral de los Organismos Competentes de Aplicación del ATIT.La Delegación de Chile confirmará el lugar y fecha para la realización de la IX Reunión del ATIT. Ferrocarril Arica - La Paz. La Delegación chilena informó que el día 8 de noviembre se publicaron en los diarios "La Estrella" de Arica y "El Mercurio" de Santiago, los llamados a licitación para la ejecución, la gerencia y la inspección técnica del proyecto de rehabilitación y remediación de la vía férrea de la sección chilena del Ferrocarril de Arica a La Paz. Agregó que la inversión del proyecto ha sido aprobada por el Ministerio de Planificación y que contempla un mejoramiento sustancial de la vía, de modo que tenga un estándar apropiado para la carga internacional. La Delegación de Bolivia consideró muy importante el llamado a licitación que figura como anexo a la presente acta. V. Complementación Económica. Ambas Delegaciones coincidieron en concretar una reunión entre el Viceministro de Relaciones Económicas y Comercio Exterior de Bolivia y el Director General de Relaciones Económicas Internacionales de Chile en la ciudad de Santiago en una fecha a convenir durante el mes de marzo de 2009, con la finalidad de avanzar en los temas pendientes de la agenda comercial bilateral, particularmente aquellos reflejados en el acta de la última reunión de la Comisión Administradora del ACE 22.
Annex 342
2645
•
Bilateral Meeting of the Competent Enforcement Authorities of the ATIT.
The Chilean Delegation will confirm the time and place for the 9th Meeting under the Agreement on International Ground Transport (ATIT).
•
Arica-La Paz Railway.
The Chilean Delegation reported that on 8 November the calls for bids for the performance, management and technical inspection of the project to refurbish and remediate the Chilean section of the Railway from Arica to La Paz were published in the newspapers “La Estrella” in Arica and “El Mercurio” in Santiago.
They added that the investment in the project has been approved by the Ministry of Planning, and that it contemplates a substantial improvement in the railway, so that it can carry international cargo.
The Bolivian Delegation also considered the call for bids, which is attached to these minutes, to be very important.
V. Economic Complementation.
Both Delegations agreed to hold a meeting between the Bolivian Vice-Minister of Foreign Affairs and Foreign Trade and the Chilean Director General of International Economic Relations in the city of Santiago on a date to be agreed during the month of March 2009, in order to move ahead with the outstanding items on the bilateral commercial agenda, particularly those reflected in the minutes of the last meeting of the Administrative Commission of the ACE 22.
2646
Annex 342
VI. Tema Marítimo. Los Vicecancilleres continuaron profundizando el intercambio de puntos de vista sobre el tema marítimo, destacando la voluntad de sus Gobiernos de mantener el diálogo en este nivel, con la incorporación de los aportes proporcionados por los correspondientes equipos técnicos. Se coincidió en que existe un avance en el tema marítimo, el cual forma parte de un proceso de construcción de confianzas en que los países están empeñados, que debe constituirse en el marco fundamental de sus relaciones y de la construcción de intereses convergentes y compartidos que cuenten con los necesarios respaldos internos. VII. Silala y Recursos Hídricos. Ambas Delegaciones destacaron la realización de la IV Reunión del Grupo de Trabajo sobre el tema Silala, la que se llevó a cabo en Santa Cruz de la Sierra el 14 de noviembre de 2008. Resaltaron también el espíritu positivo en que se desarrolló la reunión, en la que se aprobó el Programa de Estudios Técnicos en el Silala a ser ejecutado durante 4 ciclos hidrológicos (4 a 5 años) mediante la instalación de una red de 6 estaciones hidrometeorológicas con el objeto de registrar conjuntamente caudales, precipitaciones, temperatura del aire, velocidades de viento, radiación solar y humedad. Igualmente, se avanzó en consensuar las premisas que sostendrán un acuerdo preliminar sobre el Silala. En este orden de cosas, se convino llevar a cabo una visita técnica, a la brevedad, a la zona para hacer mediciones de caudal de modo de contar con este parámetro para la V Reunión del Grupo de Trabajo programada para fines de enero de 2009, en Chile. Con anterioridad a esta reunión, se intercambiará un borrador para el mencionado acuerdo.
Annex 342
2647
VI. Maritime issue.
The Deputy Foreign Ministers continued deepening the exchange of points of view on the maritime issue, emphasizing their Governments’ willingness to keep the dialogue at this level, with the addition of the contributions provided by the technical teams.
They concurred that progress has been made on the maritime issue, which is part of the trust-building process in which the countries are involved, which must be constituted within the fundamental framework of their relations, and the building of converging and shared interests, which rely on the necessary internal support.
VII. The Silala River and Water Resources.
Both Delegations mentioned the 4th Meeting of the Working Group on the issue of the Silala River, which was held in Santa Cruz de la Sierra on 14 November 2008. They also emphasized the positive spirit at the meeting, which approved the Program of Technical Studies in the River Silala to be held during four hydrological cycles (4 to 5 years) by installing a network of six hydrometeorology stations in order to jointly record the water levels, precipitation, air temperature, wind speed, solar radiation and moisture.
Progress has also been made with respect to agreeing to the premises for a preliminary agreement on the River Silala. Along these lines, it was agreed to hold a technical visit of the area, as soon as possible, to take water flow measurements in order to have this information for the 5th Meeting of the Working Group scheduled for late January 2009, in Chile. Prior to that meeting, a draft of the agreement will be exchanged.
2648
Annex 342
El acuerdo preliminar y los resultados técnicos antes mencionados servirán de base para la conclusión de un acuerdo definitivo sobre la materia. VIII. Instrumentos de lucha contra la pobreza. Ambas Delegaciones manifestaron su satisfacción por los avances logrados en la implementación del Plan de Trabajo de Cooperación Técnica suscrito en la última Reunión del Mecanismo de Consultas Políticas. Se tomó conocimiento que en este período se realizó un trabajo en los componentes de Fortalecimiento Institucional y de Apoyo a Cooperación de la Sociedad Civil, cuyo detalle se anexa al acta. Ambas Delegaciones acordaron programar la Primera Reunión del Grupo de Trabajo de Cooperación en la segunda quincena de marzo de 2009, en La Paz, a fin de evaluar la cooperación realizada y convenir nuevas orientaciones. Ratificaron a su vez, que la coordinación para avanzar los temas de cooperación debe ser canalizada a través de las Cancillerías.Además, acordaron analizar las legislaciones vigentes para encontrar mecanismos, que permitan otorgar a las personas que participen en programas de cooperación, una categoría migratoria acorde a la función que van a desarrollar en los respectivos países y llegar a un acuerdo sobre esta materia. La Delegación de Bolivia transmitió el interés de los Ministerios de Planeamiento del Desarrollo y de Hacienda de su país para recibir cooperación técnica en materias de
Annex 342
2649
The preliminary agreement and the technical results mentioned above will serve as a basis for entering into a final agreement on this issue.
VIII. Instruments to Fight Poverty
The Delegations expressed their satisfaction with the progress made in implementing the Technical Cooperation Work Plan agreed at the last Meeting of the Political Consultation Mechanism.
The Delegations took note of the work done in this period in the areas of Institutional Strengthening and Support for Civil Society Cooperation, a detailed description of which has been annexed to the minutes.
Both Delegations agreed to schedule the 1st Meeting of the Cooperation Working Group for the second half of March 2009, in La Paz, with a view to assessing the cooperation work performed so far and charting new courses of action.
Moreover, they confirmed that coordination to advance cooperation issues is to be channeled through the Ministries of Foreign Affairs.
Additionally, they agreed to analyze the legislation in place to find mechanisms that will allow those who are involved in cooperation programs to be granted immigration status in line with the role they will be performing in the respective countries, and then reach an agreement on the subject.
The Bolivian Delegation expressed the interest of the Bolivian Ministry of Development Planning and Ministry of Finance in obtaining technical cooperation in
2650
Annex 342
inversión pública. La implementación de este acuerdo se realizará a través de las instancias técnicas correspondientes. IX. Seguridad y Defensa. Ambas Delegaciones destacaron la implementación del Memorando de Entendimiento firmado por los Ministros de Defensa en junio pasado. Se destacó, a su vez la asistencia del Ministro de Defensa de Bolivia en ocasión de la Parada Militar en honor a las Glorias del Ejército de Chile y la participación de militares bolivianos en la realización del ejercicio conjunto de entrenamiento "Charlie 2008", en agosto de 2008, en la I y II Región de Chile. Asimismo se comentó que el intercambio de información efectuado en la reunión sobre Desminado Humanitario en la Frontera fue fructífero, porque permitió abordar los trabajos de desminado realizados en Campo de Cancosa y la continuación de los mismos en el Campo de Chapiquiña. La Delegación boliviana indicó su interés de que se pueda dar mayor celeridad a este proceso. Expresaron su complacencia por la suscripción, el día de hoy, del Acuerdo entre la República de Chile y la República de Bolivia para la Cooperación entre Carabineros de Chile y la Policía Nacional de Bolivia, que permitirá iniciar una nueva etapa entre estos organismos en el ámbito de la seguridad y la lucha contra el delito. Con relación al proyecto de Convenio de Cooperación en Materia de Desastres Naturales, que fuera presentado anteriormente por Bolivia, la Delegación de Chile informó que realizará gestiones ante la Oficina Nacional de Emergencias del Ministerio del Interior (ONEMI) para acelerar su respuesta.
Annex 342
2651
public investment areas. This agreement is to be implemented through the appropriate technical agencies.
IX. Security and Defense
The Delegations noted the implementation of the Memorandum of Understanding signed by the Ministers of Defense last June. They also noted the assistance provided by Bolivia’s Minister of Defense on the occasion of the Military Parade in honor of the Glories of the Chilean Army, and the participation of Bolivian military personnel in the “Charlie 2008” joint training exercise in August 2008, in Chile’s Regions I and II.
Moreover, it was mentioned that a positive exchange of information took place at the meeting on Humanitarian Demining at the Border, as it made it possible to discuss the demining works performed at Campo de Cancosa and the continuation of those works at Campo de Chapiquiña. The Bolivian Delegation expressed its interest in the possibility of speeding up this process.
They expressed their satisfaction with today’s execution of the Agreement between the Republic of Chile and the Republic of Bolivia for Cooperation between Chile’s Uniformed Police and Bolivia’s National Police, which will usher in a new stage between these two agencies in the area of security and the fight against crime.
As regards the draft Agreement for Cooperation in Natural Disasters that had been submitted by Bolivia, the Chilean Delegation stated it will be taking steps before the National Emergencies Office of the Ministry of Internal Affairs (ONEMI) to ensure a prompt reply.
2652
Annex 342
X. Cooperación para el control del tráfico ilícito de drogas y de productos químicos esenciales y precursores Ambas Delegaciones confirmaron que la próxima reunión de la Comisión Mixta de Drogas se realizará en Santiago en 2009, para lo cual Chile propondrá oportunamente la fecha y la agenda. Reiteraron la conveniencia de celebrar un Seminario sobre Cooperación Judicial, Policial y Lavado de Activos, a llevarse a cabo en Iquique, en una fecha a convenir durante el año 2009. Concordaron en realizar los contactos respectivos para la programación de una reunión sobre sustancias químicas controladas y/o precursores. En relación a la anterior propuesta de Chile para suscribir un Convenio sobre Intercambio de Información de Antecedentes Penales por Delitos de Tráfico Ilícito de Estupefacientes y Sustancias Sicotrópicas y Lavado de Dinero asociado a estos Delitos, la Delegación de Bolivia informó que transmitirá una respuesta, una vez que el Consejo de la Judicatura reinicie sus actividades. La Delegación de Bolivia se refirió a la posibilidad de contar con una instancia regional que permita trabajar en la lucha contra el narcotráfico, indicando que ésta podría radicar en el ámbito de UNASUR. Recalcó que la lucha contra el narcotráfico va más allá de un país, por lo que requiere la colaboración de todos los países.
Annex 342
2653
X. Cooperation for the Control of Illegal Trafficking of Drugs, Precursors and Essential Chemicals
The Delegations confirmed that the next meeting of the Mixed Commission on Drugs will take place in Santiago in 2009, with Chile proposing the date and agenda for that meeting in due course.
They again suggested holding a Seminar on Judicial and Police Cooperation and Money Laundering to take place in Iquique, on a date to be agreed in 2009.
They agreed to make the necessary arrangements to schedule a meeting on controlled substances and/or precursors.
As regards Chile’s previous proposal to sign an Agreement on the Exchange of Information on Criminal Records for Trafficking of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances and Related Money Laundering Crimes, the Bolivian Delegation stated it will provide an answer once the Council of the Judiciary reconvenes.
The Bolivian Delegation mentioned the possibility of having a regional body to be able to work on the fight against drug trafficking, perhaps in the context of UNASUR. It stressed the fact that the fight against drug trafficking exceeds just one country, and calls for collaboration by every single country.
2654
Annex 342
La Delegación de Chile tomó nota de la referida propuesta boliviana y comentó que debían estudiarse los mecanismos a seguir en el ámbito de UNASUR, sin perjuicio que existe una instancia hemisférica, como la CICAD. XI. Educación, Ciencia y Tecnología. La Delegación de Bolivia lamentó la suspensión de la Primera Comisión Mixta sobre Educación, Ciencia y Tecnología, originada por el cambio de autoridades en el Ministerio de Educación y Culturas de Bolivia, programada para el 11 de noviembre de 2008, en Santiago. Junto con reiterar sus disculpas, se comprometió a hacer las consultas pertinentes para proponer su realización durante el mes de abril de 2009. Se recomendó programar esta Comisión Mixta consecutivamente con la de Culturas y mantener, en principio, los temas ya consensuados. XII. Culturas. La Delegación de Bolivia lamentó la suspensión de la Primera Comisión Mixta de Culturas programada para el día 10 de noviembre de 2008, en Santiago y que iba a realizarse previo a la Comisión Mixta de Educación, Ciencia y Tecnología. Se llevaría a cabo durante el mes de abril de 2009, con una modalidad similar a la que fue suspendida. En relación al proyecto de Convenio de Protección y Restitución de Bienes del Patrimonio Cultural, se verificó que ha sido incluido en la agenda de esta Comisión Mixta. XIII. Otros Temas Convenio en materia de seguridad social
Annex 342
2655
The Chilean Delegation took note of the Bolivian proposal and stated that it was necessary to study the mechanisms to be followed in the UNASUR context, without prejudice to the existence of a body in the Americas, such as the Inter-American Drug Abuse Control Commission (CICAD).
XI. Education, Science and Technology
The Bolivian Delegation regretted the suspension of the 1st Meeting of the Mixed Commission on Education, Science and Technology as a result of the change in authorities at the Bolivian Ministry of Education and Cultures, which meeting was scheduled to be held in Santiago on 11 November 2008. In addition to expressing its apologies once again, it promised to make the necessary consultations to propose that the Commission meet in April 2009.
A recommendation was made to schedule the meeting of the Mixed Commission consecutively with the Cultures Commission and, in principle, to maintain the agreed-upon issues for the meeting.
XII. Cultures
The Bolivian Delegation regretted the suspension of the first meeting of the Mixed Commission on Cultures scheduled to be held in Santiago on 10 November 2008, which was to take place before the meeting of the Mixed Commission on Education, Science and Technology. Apparently it will be taking place in April 2009, in a manner similar as originally planned.
As to the draft Agreement on the Protection and Restitution of Cultural Heritage Assets, it was confirmed that it had been included in the agenda for this Joint Commission.
XIII. Other Business
•
Social Security Agreement
2656
Annex 342
Las Delegaciones coincidieron en la importancia de instar a una primera reunión entre la Subsecretaría de Previsión Social de Chile y su contraparte boliviana con el propósito de identificar los términos de un Convenio en esta materia. AADAA.Ambas Delegaciones decidieron que los respectivos Directores Jurídicos de las Cancillerías se reúnan durante el primer trimestre de 2009, con el fin de evaluar distintas alternativas que permitan dar una solución a los temas pendientes relativos a esta materia. Visas a estudiantes de educación superiorAmbas Delegaciones estimaron conveniente lograr un acuerdo, a través del intercambio de Notas Reversales, que permita establecer un régimen migratorio favorable para los estudiantes de educación superior. Con dicho fin, Bolivia hará llegar una propuesta. Coordinación sobre materias multilateralesRespecto a la propuesta de Agenda sobre materias multilaterales, presentada anteriormente por Bolivia, la Delegación de Chile reiteró su interés en efectuar una reunión bilateral de coordinación en el mes de abril de 2009, para lo cual presentará una contrapropuesta de agenda temática. Al término del encuentro, las Delegaciones acordaron que las próximas reuniones del Mecanismo de Consultas Políticas y del Grupo de Trabajo sobre Asuntos Bilaterales se realicen en Bolivia, en fecha a convenir por canales diplomáticos.
Annex 342
2657
The Delegations concurred on the importance of fostering a first meeting between the Office of the Undersecretary of Social Security of Chile and its Bolivian counterpart in order to identify the terms of an Agreement in this area.
•
AADAA [Autonomous Administration of Customs Warehouses]
The Delegations decided that the Directors of Legal Affairs of their respective Ministries of Foreign Affairs will meet in the first quarter of 2009 in order to assess different alternatives to provide a solution for unresolved issues in this area.
•
Visas for Higher-Education Students
The Delegations found it appropriate to reach an agreement, via an exchange of Notes, which will allow the creation of an immigration regime that is favorable to higher-education students. For such purpose, Bolivia will be submitting a proposal.
•
Coordination of Multilateral Issues
As regards the proposed Agenda on multilateral issues that had been submitted by Bolivia, the Chilean Delegation once again expressed its interest in holding a bilateral coordination meeting in April 2009, for which it will be countering with its own proposed Agenda.
As the meeting ended, the Delegations agreed that the coming meetings of the Political Consultations Mechanism and the Working Group on Bilateral Affairs will be held in Bolivia, on such dates as will be agreed upon via diplomatic channels.
2658
Annex 342
El Viceministro de Relaciones Exteriores y Cultos de Bolivia expresó en nombre de su Delegación, los más sinceros agradecimientos y aprecio por las atenciones recibidas con ocasión de estas reuniones, de parte de la Cancillería de Chile. Suscrita en Santiago, a veintiún días del mes de noviembre del año 2008. POR CHILE POR BOLIVIA Embajador Alberto van Klaveren Stork Embajador Hugo Fernández Aráoz Subsecretario de Relaciones ExterioresViceministro de Relaciones Exteriores y CultosDELEGACION DE CHILE 1. Embajador Alberto van Klaveren, Subsecretario de Relaciones Exteriores2. Embajador Jorge Montero, Director de América del Sur 3. Embajador Roberto Ibarra, Cónsul General de Chile en La Paz 4. Embajadora María Teresa Infante, Directora Nacional de Fronteras y Límites del Estado5. Embajador Juan Eduardo Eguiguren, Director de Política Especial
Annex 342
2659
Bolivia’s Vice-Minister of Foreign Affairs and Worship expressed the Bolivian Delegation’s most sincere appreciation for the courtesies extended by the Chilean Ministry of Foreign Affairs on the occasion of these meetings.
Done in Santiago, on 21 November 2008.
FOR CHILE
Envoy Alberto van Klaveren Stork
Undersecretary of Foreign Affairs
FOR BOLIVIA
Envoy Hugo Fernández Aráoz
Vice-Minister of Foreign Affairs and Worship
2660
Annex 342
6. Sr. Anselmo Pommes, Director de Fronteras 7. M.C.E. Enrique Soler, Director Oficina Comercial en La Paz 8. Sr. Sebastián Herreros, Jefe del Departamento de América Latina. Dirección de Asuntos Económicos Bilaterales9. Consejero Jaime Bascuñan, Jefe Unidad Bolivia, Dirección de América del Sur.10. P.S. Rodrigo Olsen, Jefe de Gabinete del Subsecretario de RR.EE. 11. P.S. Oscar Fuentes, Unidad Bolivia, Dirección de América del Sur 12. Sr. Eugenio Pössel, Coordinador AGCI Cooperación con Bolivia. 13. T.S. Fernando Morales, Unidad Bolivia, Dirección de América del Sur. DELEGACION DE BOLIVIA 1. Embajador Hugo Fernández Araóz, Viceministro de Relaciones Exteriores y Cultos2. Embajador Jean Paul Guevara, Director General de Relaciones Bilaterales3. Embajador Freddy Bersatti Tudela, Cónsul General de Bolivia en Chile 4. MC. María Estela Mendoza, Directora Unidad América5. Juan Carlos Alurralde, Asesor del Ministro de Relaciones Exteriores y Cultos6. MP. Fernando Calderón, Cónsul de Bolivia en Santiago 7. PS. Gustavo Invernizzi, Viceministerio de Relaciones Económicas y Comercio Exterior8. TS. Paola Soux, Encargada del Escritorio Chile.9. Cónsul Ruddy Cayoja, Agregado Comercial en Chile.
Annex 342
2661
DABDescargarAACTA DE LA XBOLIVIAArchivosXIX REUNIÓN DCDEL MECANISTeatinos 18Fono (5PolíticaContáctProgramViCreative CommonSMO DE CONSU80, Santiago, C56-2) 2827 420as de Privacidadtenos | Descargmas Plug-In y disualizaciónns Atribución 2.0 ULTAS POLÍTIChile | 0d | gardeOrientaConsulaChileICAS CHILE-subir | volación Telefónicares en Chile 8lverca Trámites 800 487 600
2662
Annex 343
Minutes of the Tenth Meeting of the Working Group on Chile-Bolivia Free Transit, 29 May 2009
(Original in Spanish, English translation)
Archives of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Chile
2663
2664
Annex 343
Annex 343
2665
MINUTES OF THE TENTH MEETING OF THE WORKING GROUP
ON FREE TRANSIT CHILE-BOLIVIA
On May 29, 2009, the X Meeting of the Chile-Bolivia Free Transit Working Group was held in the city of Arica.
The Chilean delegation was led by Ambassador María Teresa Infante Caffi, National Director of Frontiers and Limits of the State of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The Bolivian delegation was led by Ambassador Jean Paul Guevara Ávila, Director General of Bilateral Relations of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The list of members of both countries’ delegations is included in Annex I hereto.
After the welcome greetings, and once the work methodology was agreed upon, the agenda for the meeting was approved and the delegations set about dealing with it:
1. Port Modernization and Application of the Free Transit Regime at the Ports of Arica and Antofagasta
Port of Arica
The Chilean delegation reported on the improvements being made at the Port of Arica, especially at the earthquake-resistant site, the construction of which is now complete and is currently being tested for approval by the Maritime Authority. The last test is scheduled for the first half of June 2009. This site is designed for a depth of 12 to 12.5 meters.
They also reported that the repaving of the 30,000 m2 container yard was complete. This work to establish physical infrastructure, improve operations and protect the environment will allow this port to compete well at the international level. They emphasized the fact that during 2008, the port mobilized 1.7 million tons, while the number of ships bound for the port increased significantly.
They then announced that that the process of rehabilitating and remediating the Chilean portion of the Arica-La Paz railway is fully under way. The repair work is expected to begin in September 2009 and to be completed within two years.
The Bolivian delegation welcomed this information and was pleased to hear that the modernization process is continuing.
Regarding the commitments assumed at the Ninth Meeting of this Working Group, both delegations noted that the third shift had already begun to operate and that it will be fully effective in the first half of June
2666
Annex 343
Annex 343
2667
2009, once the Bolivian National Customs Agency has been equipped. Regarding the meetings of the Information and Coordination Center (ICC), it was shown that this system is being strengthened and the fact was emphasized that the parties need to work together on a consensual basis in this system in order to plan the work sites on the basis of the Port’s capacity.
Port of Antofagasta
The Chilean delegation reported that Empresa Portuaria Antofagasta is carrying out a plan to update the Master Plan for the development of the Port and that the concessionaire is also working on a similar modernization program that contemplates expanding the current infrastructure. In this regard, the delegates announced that Mooring Site No. 7 will be expanded to meet the needs of longer ships, with recovery of esplanades to generate space for containers and intermediate services. They also said that the infrastructure of Warehouse No. 1 for the storage of ulexite and of Warehouse No. 2 is being improved. Improvements will be made for 2010 in the transit warehouse for Bolivian cargo.
The Chilean delegation also indicated that work is being done on a project to build a walled warehouse for storage of Bolivian mineral concentrates in Portezuelo, in accordance with the environmental demands for this type of cargo.
Both delegations agreed on the need for the CIC to function fully in Antofagasta, since the representative of ASP-B [Bolivia’s Port Services Administration] has already been appointed.
2. Port Tariffs in Arica and Antofagasta
Port of Arica
Both delegations learned that the Bilateral Technical Group for the Port of Arica will meet during the first fortnight of June 2009 in the city of La Paz, in order perfect a new tariff agreement for the next two years.
Port of Antofagasta
The Bolivian delegation reiterated its concern over the charges imposed at the Port of Antofagasta for the storage of Bolivian cargo at the facilities operated under a concession agreement. In that regard, such delegation relied on the existing free transit agreements in force and their application.
2668
Annex 343
Annex 343
2669
With respect to cargo storage on the premises operated under a concession agreement, Empresa Portuaria Antofagasta stated that it is an issue that it must analyze jointly with the concessionaire.
In addition, the Bolivian delegation expressed the need for review of both the charges imposed on trucks and individuals entering the Multi-operator-exploited and Single-operator-exploited terminals and the parking charges applied after a 4-hour stay at the Port.
Both delegations urged the Port of Antofagasta Bilateral Technical Group to convene as soon as practicable in order to continue dealing with such issues and those addressed at the II Technical Group Meeting, with the aim of seeking ways of solving such issues. Such proposals, where necessary, will be submitted to the XX Meeting of the Chile-Bolivia Mechanism of Bilateral Political Consultations to be held on 26 June 2009 in the city of La Paz.
3. Authorization for the Port of Iquique to Operate
Both delegations stated that an exchange of Diplomatic Notes will soon take place for the purpose of putting into effect the authorization for the Port of Iquique to operate under a free transit regime.
4. IMO Cargo
•
II Seminar on Handling, Storage, and Transportation of Dangerous Goods
Both delegations mentioned with satisfaction the II Seminar on Handling, Storage, and Transportation of Dangerous Goods held in this city on 28 May within the Context of Bolivia-Chile Bilateral Relations.
In that regard, they agreed on the validity of the recommendations included in the Minutes of the X Free Transit Working Group Meeting, especially those concerning the creation of an ad hoc mechanism for solving, preventing, and handling emergency situations. Further, as a result of this Seminar, a recommendation was made that work be done on sea and land transportation regulations as well as on insurance regulations across the entire transportation chain, and that these topics be included in the Integrated Transit System (SIT) Operating Manual.
• Cargo Not Collected by Consignees After the Expiration of the 365-Day Maximum Allowed Time Period.
The Chilean delegation expressed its concern over dangerous goods in transit to Bolivia, which, because they cannot be admitted into Chile upon expiration of
2670
Annex 343
Annex 343
2671
all maximum time periods allowed for cargo to remain at Port, are not collected by the consignee or importer and remain abandoned in Port warehouses. In that regard, the authorities involved were requested to seek a formula providing alternative solutions.
5. Miscellaneous
• Appointment of the Antofagasta ASP-B Manager
The Bolivian delegation informed that it will make the appointment of Mónica Charobi Daza as Port Manager of Antofagasta ASP-B.
• Unloading of Containers Holding Ferrous Sulfate in Transit to Minera San Cristóbal through Antofagasta
Empresa Portuaria Antofagasta explained that 14 containers originally unloaded at Puerto Angamos still remain at the Antofagasta multi-operator-exploited terminal containing ferrous sulfate. Such containers have developed ferrous sulfate leaks that have both contaminated their exterior and affected the surface on which they are deposited. Although the cargo they hold is not dangerous, prolonged exposure thereto might affect people and the environment, even though the exterior of each module has been cleaned. The company has stressed the need for a prompt solution to this problem.
The delegations agreed on the importance of the CIC (Information and Coordination Center) functioning properly with the aim of following up and resolving such issues as soon as practicable.
• Emergency Action Concerning Dangerous Goods at Ports. Costs and Procedures.
In connection with this issue, reference was made to the II Seminar on Handling, Storage, and Transportation of Dangerous Goods, which provided important background information on practical ways of dealing with emergencies, on the authorities involved, and on their costs.
In relation to the ad hoc coordination and intervention mechanism for emergency cases, Empresa Portuaria Arica explained the current procedure, which involves the Maritime Authority, the Fire Department, the ASP-B, the Bolivian Customs Service, and the TPA participating in a coordinated fashion upon the announcement of an emergency by the TPA.
Given that this mechanism is presumably operational, it is recommended that it be supplemented with another mechanism for evaluating this contingency, with
2672
Annex 343
Annex 343
2673
the same participants, where consideration is given to such aspects as procedures, implements used and their costs.
The delegations pointed out that there are gaps in the knowledge and handling of insurance, which might cover the expenses arising from such contingencies and would facilitate cost recovery.
In this respect, it was recommended that contingency handling-related topics be included in the SIT Operating Manual. Further, it was recommended that Bolivian authorities and cargo consignees gain insight into insurance coverage in order to be able to rely on instruments that may allow them to defer the risks associated with handling and responding to emergencies at ports and during the transportation of goods to Bolivia.
• Collection of Value Added Tax (VAT)
The Bolivian delegation claimed that a number of shipping companies are applying value added tax to services provided to Bolivian cargo in transit.
In that respect, the Chilean delegation pointed out that under the tax system applicable to services directly provided to goods under a free transit regime, as defined by the Internal Revenue Service, such services are exempt from VAT. In addition, the Chilean delegation requested a copy of the relevant background information to hold conversations with operators and clarify the type of services included in the relevant invoices.
• Additional Permits Required of Bolivian Carriers
The Bolivian delegation raised the issue of the additional permits that have started to be required for international Bolivian cargo transportation at border crossings, and claimed that the original permits issued as provided in the Agreement on International Land Transportation [ATIT] are sufficient, for such cargo transportation is covered by the free transit regime.
In that regard, the Bolivian delegation suggested that transportation authorities from both countries provide information on applicable regulations concerning the requirements demanded for obtaining such permits, in order to analyze the requirements needed to obtain the original and additional permits.
The Chilean delegation recalled that the additional permits, the appointment of a representative and the procurement of transportation insurance were topics that had been raised for some time, in order to provide increased safety in emergency situations affecting transportation through the country, and also recalled that, for that reason, the issue had been dealt with at the level
2674
Annex 343
Annex 343
2675
of an ATIT bilateral enforcement authority. In that regard, the Chilean delegation suggested analyzing this issue by applying a modern approach that in no way affects the free transit regime but upholds International Transportation in furtherance of its mission.
It was agreed that the applicable bilateral authorities from both countries analyze this issue after exchanging information on their rules and regulations governing such issue.
6. Next Meeting
Both delegations agreed to hold the next Free Transit Working Group Meeting in Bolivia during the first semester next year.
The Bolivian delegation thanked the Chilean delegation for their attention.
[Signature]
FOR CHILE
Ambassador María Teresa Infante
National Director of Frontiers and
Limits of the State
[Signature]
FOR BOLIVIA
Ambassador Jean Paul Guevara
Director General of Bilateral Relations
2676
Annex 343
Annex 343
2677
2678
Annex 344
Minutes of the Twentieth Meeting of the Political Consultations Mechanism, 30 June 2009
(Original in Spanish, English translation)
Archives of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Chile
2679
2680
Annex 344
Annex 344
2681
MINUTES OF THE 20TH MEETING OF THE
BOLIVIA-CHILE POLITICAL CONSULTATIONS MECHANISM
The 20th Meeting of the Chile-Bolivia Political Consultations Mechanism was held in La Paz, the Plurinational State of Bolivia, on 30 June 2009, in order to analyze and monitor the progress made on the thirteen issues on the broad joint agenda without exclusions designed by both countries.
The Bolivian Delegation was chaired by Envoy Hugo Fernández Aráoz, Vice-Minister of Foreign Affairs, and the Chilean Delegation was chaired by Envoy Alberto van Klaveren Stork, Undersecretary of Foreign Affairs.
This meeting was preceded, on 29 June, by the 8th Meeting of the Working Group on Bilateral Affairs, whose conclusions were submitted to the Heads of Delegation for their consideration and approval. A list of the Delegations of both countries is attached to these minutes.
The Head of the Bolivian Delegation warmly welcomed the Chilean Delegation, pointing out the progress achieved in these past three years of constructive dialogue, as well as the activities carried out in the first half of 2009, which evidences the closer ties between our peoples.
The Head of the Chilean Delegation expressed his thanks for the warm welcome, mentioning the richness of the agenda, its systematization, as well as the progress made since the last meeting held under this Mechanism. He also took the opportunity to congratulate Bolivia on its Bicentennial celebrations.
Having approved the methodology and the agenda for the meeting, the Delegations proceeded to discuss it:
I. Development of Mutual Trust
The Delegations reiterated their satisfaction over the many top-level meetings that took place following the 19th Meeting of the Political Consultations Mechanism, and agreed to continue encouraging such activities, as well as others carried out by civil society in Bolivia and Chile that make it possible to keep strengthening mutual trust.
Most notable among the main activities are the bilateral meetings between Presidents Evo Morales and Michelle Bachelet in the context of the presidential
2682
Annex 344
Annex 344
2683
summits held in Costa do Sauipe, San Salvador de Bahía, Brazil, on 16 December 2008, as well as during the 5th Summit of the Americas, held in the city of Puerto España, Trinidad and Tobago, on 17-19 April 2009.
Moreover, the following meetings took place between top Executive Branch authorities:
•
On 9-10 March 2009, the Ministers of Defense of Bolivia and Chile held a bilateral meeting in Santiago in the context of the First Meeting of UNASUR’s South American Council of Defense Ministers.
•
On 26 March, there was a meeting of the Ministers of Public Works of Bolivia and Chile in the town of Colchane, Chile.
•
The Ministers of Education of Bolivia and Chile met as part of the Meeting of Education Ministers under the Andrés Bello Convention that took place on 27 March in the city of Santiago.
•
The Minister of Cultures of Bolivia and the President of Chile’s National Council for Culture and the Arts met on 14 May in the city of Santiago, on the occasion of the 1st Meeting of the Joint Commission on Culture.
The 3rd and 4th Official Meetings of the Senate Commissions on Foreign Affairs were held on 15 December 2008 and 9 June 2009, in the cities of La Paz and Valparaíso, respectively. In this regard, both Delegations noted the contribution of inter-parliamentary dialogue to the Bilateral Agenda.
On 27-28 April, the President of Bolivia’s Senate, Oscar Ortiz, paid an official visit to the Chilean Senate. On 11-12 June, the President of Chile’s Senate, Jovino Novoa, visited the City of Santa Cruz de la Sierra during the meeting of Latin American Senate Presidents.
On 20 March, the Bolivian Air Force Commander visited Puerto Montt on the occasion of another anniversary of the Chilean Air Force.
On 23-28 April, the Commander General of the Bolivian Police visited Santiago on the occasion of the anniversary of Chile’s Police.
On 25-29 April, the 1st Meeting of Diplomatic Academies of Bolivia and Chile was held in the city of Santiago.
On 27-29 May, the 2nd Bolivia-Chile Seminar on Mutual Perceptions and Trust Strengthening took place in the City of La Paz.
2684
Annex 344
Annex 344
2685
II. Border Integration
•
Frontier Committee
The Delegations mentioned with satisfaction the 9th Meeting of the Frontier Committee, which was held in Iquique on 29 and 30 September, and the agreements and agreed recommendations, stressing the importance of directly and effectively following up on the issues on the agenda. In this context, the Bolivian party proposed that the 10th Meeting of the Committee be held in La Paz, in the second half of August, on a date to be defined.
•
Border Municipalities and Communities
Both Delegations emphasized the 3rd Meeting between Bolivia-Chile Border Municipalities, which took place in the city of Oruro on 6-7 April 2009, at which the parties had discussed issues relating to the strategic alliance for municipal management; cooperation for agricultural production, and camelid trafficking controls; trade exchange and border fairs; cooperation in education-related issues, facilitating access to education; cooperation in security and surveillance for peaceful borders; cooperation and publicizing of tourist attractions in the area, and cooperation in health-related issues.
Moreover, they stressed the importance of having the border Municipalities participate in the next Meeting of the Frontier Committee, in their respective working groups.
•
Border Development
The Delegations agreed that it was important to hold the 2nd Health without Borders Meeting in the city of Putre, Chile, in the second half of 2009.
•
Bilateral Meeting of Customs Authorities
The Delegations took note of the 3rd Bilateral Meeting of Customs Authorities of the Control Areas that took place on 4-5 December 2008 in the City of Cochabamba, during which the parties assessed the existing agreements.
The Chilean Delegation highlighted the importance of holding the 4th Bilateral Meeting this August in Chile, prior to the 10th Meeting of the Frontier Committee.
•
Workshop on the Worst Forms of Child Labor
The Delegations expressed their interest in holding the 3rd Workshop in the City of Potosí, Bolivia, during September 2009.
2686
Annex 344
Annex 344
2687
•
Integrated Border Controls
The Bolivian Delegation proposed doing a trial run (trial period) at the border passes of Tambo Quemado – Chungará and Pisiga – Colchane, starting on 27 July 2009 and extending for a period of two weeks, at the end of which the 6th Meeting of the Technical Commission on Integrated Border Controls will be held in the town of Pisiga, Bolivia. The Chilean Delegation will undertake the necessary consultations and advise as soon as possible on the suggested dates and the trial run.
Charaña - Visviri: The Delegations agreed on the importance of speeding up the works related to the architectural design of the single-manager border complex at the international boundary.
Tambo Quemado - Chungará: The Bolivian Delegation reported that, starting on 1 July 2009, its national services will be taking over the facilities in order to conduct the trial run on the proposed date. In this regard, the Chilean Delegation will soon report on the possibility of carrying out provisional adaptations at the current complex in order to begin the trial run.
Pisiga - Colchane: The Bolivian Delegation reported that construction of the building in Pisiga is complete, as are also the road works. The expectation is that a tentative date can be discussed at the 6th Meeting of the Technical Commission on Integrated Controls to inaugurate the complexes, if possible with the Presidents of Bolivia and Chile in attendance.
Avaroa Station - Ollagüe: The Bolivian Delegation proposed a new single-manager integrated control exercise in Ollagüe for November 2009, to extend for a period of seven days. The Chilean Delegation will make the necessary consultations.
Cajones Marker – Cajón Marker: The Bolivian Delegation proposed the first single-manager integrated control exercise at the Cajones marker for November 2009, over a period of seven days. The Chilean Delegation will consult as necessary.
III. Free Transit
The delegations took note of the Tenth Meeting of the Working Group on Free Transit held in Arica on 29 May 2009, and of the conclusions reached at that meeting. The next meeting will be held during the second half of the year in Bolivia, preferably before the 21st Meeting of this Mechanism is held.
•
Ports of Antofagasta and Arica
With regard to the Port of Antofagasta, the delegations took note of the 3rd Meeting of the Bilateral Technical Group held on 23 June 2009, and of
2688
Annex 344
Annex 344
2689
the various topics discussed at the meeting, where it was agreed to refer the issue of “Charges for storage service in the terminal operated under concession” to the Political Consultation Mechanism. Because of its scope, this issue needed to be discussed at a higher political level.
After a discussion on this topic, the Chilean delegation stated that possible formulas were being analyzed to overcome the current situation, which involved different interpretations of the scope of the rules applicable to the port, and the complete application of the free transit regime to Bolivia’s benefit. It is expected that this analysis will soon be complete with the cooperation of the port companies.
The Bolivian delegation hopes that the solution to this problem will be found in the current agreements on free transit, taking into account the indivisibility of the port.
With respect to Arica, the delegations expressed their confidence that the Bilateral Technical Committee would meet promptly, as indicated in the Minutes of the Working Group on Free Transit.
•
Hazardous Cargo Seminar
The delegations noted with satisfaction that this seminar had been held in Arica on 28 May 2009, and this Mechanism accepts the recommendations that resulted from it and proposes maintaining active a program of meetings and work in order to continue meeting the objectives that were in view when the seminar was called. One highlight is the creation of an ad hoc prevention and handling mechanism for the prompt resolution of emergency situations that arise in connection with the handling and transfer of this cargo.
•
Enabling of the Port of Iquique
On this occasion, the delegations agreed on the terms of the Exchange of Notes so that the Port of Iquique could be enabled for the free transit regime, by virtue of the Treaty of Peace, Amity and Commerce of 1904, so that these Notes can be signed as soon as possible. It is expected that the enabling will take place within 30 days following the Exchange of Notes, during which period the proper coordination will take place.
Others
The delegations agreed on the need to continue working to revise the Operating Manual for the Integrated Transit System (SIT), and thus called for the next ordinary meeting of the System, preceded by the ad hoc Group in charge of this matter. Both meetings should be held within 60 days.
2690
Annex 344
Annex 344
2691
IV. Physical Integration
•
Mixed Technical Group on Infrastructure (GTM)
The Delegations recognized the meeting of the Ministers of Public Works of Bolivia and Chile, which took place on 26 March 2009 in the town of Colchane, during which the parties assessed the progress made on the respective international roads that make up the Interoceanic Corridor that will connect the Pacific and Atlantic Oceans.
They also took note of the next meeting of the Ministers of Public Works of Bolivia, Chile and Brazil, set to take place in the City of Cochabamba on 4 July 2009; among other business, the meeting will include a review of the progress made in the construction of the Interoceanic Corridor.
Likewise, both Delegations noted the execution of the Memorandum of Understanding on cooperation in the area of infrastructure by the Ministers of Public Works of Bolivia and Chile during the Cochabamba meeting.
They also recommended holding the 4th GTM Meeting in La Paz during the second half of 2009.
•
Bilateral Meeting of the Competent Enforcement Authorities of the ATIT
The Chilean Delegation expressed its interest in soon holding the 9th Meeting of the Enforcement Authorities of the Bolivia-Chile Agreement on International Ground Transport ( ATIT) in Chile, for which purpose Bolivia has yet to suggest a date.
•
Arica – La Paz Railway
The Chilean Delegation announced that no award was made in the bidding process for the overhaul and remediation works in the Chilean section of the Arica – La Paz Railway. It further noted on the subject that a new invitation to bid was issued this past 14 June.
Moreover, the Bolivian Delegation reported that the railway section from Viacha to Charaña is usable for trains and rails, with light maintenance works due to a lack of regular freight-train traffic. Once the railroad service resumption date is set, Empresa Ferroviaria Andina S.A. will perform intensive maintenance work on the rails, ensuring they are up to standard for regular train traffic.
Moreover, both Delegations took note of the upcoming meeting between the National Concessions Coordinator of Chile’s Ministry of Public Works
2692
Annex 344
Annex 344
2693
and the Office of the Vice-Minister of Transportation of Bolivia, to be held in the City of La Paz on 8-10 July for discussions in connection with the future operation of the railway.
V. Economic Complementation
Both Delegations took note of the upcoming meeting of the Administrative Commission for ACE 22 (Economic Complementation Agreement No. 22), to be held in Santiago on 8 July 2009.
In this context, the Bolivian Delegation reiterated its concern over the smuggling issue, which has adverse effects and a severe impact on its national production sectors, given the large amount of goods that are smuggled into its territory. The Chilean Delegation shared that concern and again mentioned that it has focused its policy on preventing such practices and, for that purpose, actions are being developed in the context of the Integrated Border Controls Agreement, the Customs Cooperation Agreement and the execution of a police cooperation agreement.
Moreover, the Delegations concurred on the importance of continuing to work to ensure a strengthening of economic and trade relations between the two countries, and expressed their willingness to undertake actions intended to bridge the existing trade gap. For such purposes, both countries have been carrying out a number of economic and trade activities, including, most notably:
•
The 1st Bolivia – Chile Business Round, which was held in Iquique on 18 June 2009. This was recognized as a very positive activity, with emphasis on the convenience of continuing to further this type of tool in the North of Chile. There have been discussions between Promueve Bolivia [the directors of Bolivia’s Exports and Tourism Promotion Agency] ) and ProChile [Chile’s Exportable Goods Promotion Agency] for a new Business Round to take place in Antofagasta between August and September this year.
•
The “How to do business with China” Seminar, held in La Paz on 25 June 2009, with the Director of ProChile’s Trade Office in Beijing as its keynote speaker;
•
The identification of training areas in phytosanitary and zoosanitary matters as an issue for cooperation, with emphasis on the meeting of SAG [the Chilean Agricultural and Livestock Agency] with SENASAG [the Bolivian National Agricultural Health and Food Safety Agency] in Trinidad in May 2009; and
•
The Seminar held by the Bolivia - Chile Business Advisory Board in Santiago on 5 June 2009, with a coming meeting to be possibly held in mid-July.
2694
Annex 344
Annex 344
2695
VI. Maritime Topic
The Undersecretaries of Foreign Affairs exchanged points of view on the technical work performed by each of their teams with the intention of continuing to develop constructive and realistic approaches, based on the desire for understanding and strengthening the mutual confidence shown by the Governments of Bolivia and Chile.
The Undersecretaries of Foreign Affairs emphasized that they will seek to realize these ideas, through additional consultations with their governments and the institutions involved. Along these lines, they emphasized the consideration of various formulas to give continuity to the treatment of this topic, as well as to receive new contributions from their respective teams, taking into account an integrationist approach between both countries.
VII. The Silala River and Water Resources
The delegations took note of the progress made by the Silala Working Group, which presented its final report on the draft of an initial agreement on this issue. The heads of the delegations congratulated the Working Group for the work performed and recommended the adoption of the draft at a later date.
VIII. Instruments to Fight Poverty
The Delegations expressed their satisfaction over the 1st Meeting of the Cooperation Working Group, which was held in La Paz on 23-24 June 2009.
They noted the implementation and results of the cooperation initiatives agreed upon in the context of the Technical Cooperation Work Plan that was signed in June 2008 between the Vice-Minister of Public Investment and Foreign Financing of Bolivia and Chile’s International Cooperation Agency, in coordination with the respective Ministries of Foreign Affairs. This instrument has facilitated the creation of work networks to tackle development challenges, in particular the fight against poverty, and, specifically, has contributed to our peoples’ closer ties and stronger trust. The Delegations emphasized the actions taken in the areas of health, justice, education and public management, as well as the number of scholarships granted by Chile to Bolivia for graduate studies, which is triple the number for 2007.
Moreover, they agreed to continue the work under the existing Cooperation Program for 2009-2010, seeking to consolidate actions in the areas of Institutional Strengthening, Support for Civil Society Cooperation, and Cooperation in the context of ACE 22. These issues will take the form of technical support
2696
Annex 344
Annex 344
2697
to the La Paz Children’s Hospital; advisory assistance to design an agricultural insurance system; the consolidation of volunteering initiatives for young professionals; a new version of the Diploma in Territorial Planning for municipal officers; initiatives to fight severe and acute malnutrition, and the development of strategies to fulfil the Millennium Development Goals regarding maternal and child health.
The Bolivian Delegation expressed its interest in adding new initiatives to the joint Work Plan, dealing with public management issues such as transparency, multiple-year budget preparation processes, and good practices in tax collection, which issues, given their importance, the Chilean Delegation has agreed to examine feasibility-wise. The next meeting of the Cooperation Working Group has been scheduled to take place in the first half of 2010.
IX. Security and Defense
The Delegations noted the Memorandum of Understanding that was signed by the Ministers of Defense in June 2008. They also stressed the coordination in place between Bolivia’s Ministry of Defense, through the Bolivian Air Force, and the Chilean Air Force for the “Cooperation I” Exercise for the Integration of American Air Forces, to take place in Chile in October 2010, which will comprise air missions as part of operations during natural disasters.
As regards humanitarian demining along the border, the Chilean Delegation noted that there are plans to carry out the certification processes for manually-cleared mined areas in the Tambo Quemado and Cancosa sector, which guarantees that these areas are free of anti-personnel mines, as per the standards set by Chile’s National Humanitarian Demining Commission (CNAD). This activity, which is currently underway, will continue through December this year, unless barred by climate, atmospheric or technical factors.
When discussing this issue, the Chilean Delegation provided the Bolivian Delegation with a copy of the “Update on Chile’s Transparency Measures Report,” provided for in the Convention on the Prohibition of the Use, Stockpiling, Production and Transfer of Anti-Personnel Mines and their Destruction.
The Delegations were in agreement as to the importance of the Agreement for Cooperation between Chile’s Uniformed Police [Carabineros] and Bolivia’s National Police, which, among other issues, covers citizen security and the fight against crime. In this regard, the Bolivian Delegation reported that the Agreement has been submitted to Congress for processing. The Chilean Delegation noted that the Agreement will be soon submitted to the National Congress for discussion and approval.
2698
Annex 344
Annex 344
2699
•
Agreement for Cooperation in Natural Disasters
The Chilean Delegation presented a counterproposal to Bolivia’s draft Agreement on the occasion of the 18th Meeting of the Political Consultation Mechanism.
In this context, on 28 May, a Chilean specialist in water infrastructure works visited La Paz and performed an assessment of the technical assistance needs for flood works and defenses, in coordination with the Office of the Vice-Minister of Civilian Defense’s General Office for Prevention and Reconstruction.
X. Cooperation for the Control of Illegal Trafficking of Drugs, Precursors and Essential Chemicals
It was agreed that the 8th Meeting of the Bolivia-Chile Mixed Commission on Drugs and Related Issues will be held in Santiago in October 2009.
In this context, the Delegations took note of the “Experiences with Mutual Legal Assistance in Illicit Drug Trafficking and Money Laundering Seminar” that was held in Arica on 23-24 June 2009, on Bolivia’s initiative, intended for judges, prosecutors and police officers of Chile and Bolivia. Minutes will be soon sent to Bolivia containing the Seminar’s findings.
As regards Chile’s proposal to sign an Agreement on the Exchange of Information on Criminal Records for Trafficking of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances and Related Money Laundering Crimes, Bolivia stated that it is currently being analyzed by the relevant authorities.
The Delegations expressed their satisfaction with the submission of the Draft Decision for the creation of a South American Council on the Fight against Drug Trafficking at UNASUR.
As regards Bolivia’s proposal to examine the possibility of amending Article 49 (1c) and (2e) of the 1961 Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs as regards coca leaves and the prohibition of coca-leaf chewing (akulliku), the Chilean Delegation took note of the proposal, which will be conveyed to the relevant authorities.
XI. Education, Science and Technology
Both Delegations took note of the meeting held by the Ministers of Education of Bolivia and Chile during the Meeting of Ministers of Education under the Andrés Bello Convention, which took place in the City of Santiago on 27 March 2009, at which they discussed the proposed work agenda for the 1st Meeting of the Mixed Commission on Education, and agreed for work to continue on those issues.
2700
Annex 344
Annex 344
2701
They further noted the importance of holding the 1st Meeting of the Mixed Commission on Education in La Paz in the second half of 2009. They recommended that it be preceded by a technical meeting to agree on a final agenda.
XII. Cultures
It was noted that the 1st Meeting of the Chile-Bolivia Mixed Commission on Cultures was held in the City of Santiago in May, headed by the Ministers of Cultures of both countries, at which a Memorandum of Understanding was signed for a Cultural Exchange Program between the Republic of Chile’s National Council for Culture and the Arts and the Plurinational State of Bolivia’s Ministry of Cultures for the period 2009-2012.
During this visit, Minister Pablo Groux invited Ms. Nivia Palma, Director of Libraries, Archives and Museums and a member of the National Monuments Council, to visit La Paz in August during the International Book Fair, which will provide an opportunity for rapprochement in heritage issues and to resume discussion of the projects under analysis by both countries for the protection of tangible and intangible cultural heritage.
At this meeting of the Mechanism, the Delegations emphasized the participation of Chilean artists, cultural managers and specialists in Bolivia’s Bicentennial activities.
XIII. Others
•
Social Security Agreement
The Delegations agreed on the importance of holding a meeting between the Vice-Minister of Pensions and Financial Services of Bolivia and Chile’s Office of the Undersecretary of Social Security. The Bolivian Delegation proposed that such meeting be held in the City of La Paz on 27-28 July, to identify the terms of an Agreement on the subject. The Chilean Delegation stated that it is still awaiting a reply from the Office of the Deputy Secretary of Social Security.
•
AADAA [Autonomous Administration of Customs Warehouses]
The Delegations expressed their satisfaction over the coming meeting of the Directors of Legal Affairs of their Ministries of Foreign Affairs, to take place in the City of La Paz on 17 July.
2702
Annex 344
Annex 344
2703
•
Consular Issues
Both Delegations emphasized the 1st Bilateral Meeting of Consular Directors that was held in La Paz on 5 May. Among other things, this meeting allowed the parties to learn of the immigration situation for citizens from both countries, and jointly undertake their search for solutions.
Moreover, the Bolivian Delegation reported on the steps taken at the General Immigration Office in connection with the issues that arose as a result of certain Regional Immigration Offices charging for student visas, as well as the granting of a 90-day period for Chilean citizens to remain within Bolivian territory. A decision by the immigration agency is still pending on both issues.
As regards the identification documents required for the regularization of immigration status in the Republic of Chile, the Bolivian Delegation stated that it had provided the Chilean authorities with the documents on the relevant requirements that apply to Bolivian citizens in the Republic of Argentina and the Federative Republic of Brazil for the same purposes, in order that an agreement can be reached on an identification document that will take the place of a passport requirement on the part of Chile’s immigration authorities. In this regard, the Chilean Delegation stated that said information had been conveyed to the relevant authorities for their consideration.
In addition, the Delegations agreed on the need for the activities of the Working Commission agreed upon at the Bilateral Meeting of Consular Directors of both Ministries of Foreign Affairs to begin in a coming date to be defined.
The Chilean Delegation brought up the problems faced for Bolivia to accept the Criminal Record Certificates provided to immigration authorities by Chilean consulates abroad, and the Bolivian Delegation suggested that this issue be addressed by the aforementioned Working Commission.
•
Coordination on Multilateral Issues
As regards the proposal that the multilateral directors of both Ministries of Foreign Affairs meet, the Delegations expressed shared their interest in such meeting taking place in late August, prior to the coming General Assembly of the United Nations.
As the meeting ended, the Delegations agreed that the coming meetings of the Political Consultations Mechanism and the Working Group on Bilateral Affairs will be held in Chile, on such dates as will be agreed upon via diplomatic channels.
2704
Annex 344
Annex 344
2705
Chile’s Undersecretary of Foreign Affairs expressed the Chilean Delegation’s most sincere appreciation for the courtesies extended by the Bolivian Ministry of Foreign Affairs on the occasion of these meetings.
Done in La Paz, on 30 June 2009.
FOR BOLIVIA
[Signed]
Envoy Hugo Fernández Aráoz
Vice-Minister of Foreign Affairs
FOR CHILE
[Signed]
Envoy Alberto van Klaveren Stork
Undersecretary of Foreign Affairs
2706
Annex 344
Annex 344
2707
2708
Annex 344
Annex 344
2709
2710
Annex 345
Chilean National Customs Service, Resolution No 6153, 11 September 2009
(Original in Spanish, English translation)
<http://www.aduana.cl/aduana/site/artic/20090914/asocfile/20090914103004…;
2711
2712
Annex 345
 VALPARAISO, 11.09.2009  RESOLUCION N° 6153  VISTOS:Tratado de Paz, Amistad y Comercio, suscrito por Chile con la República de Bolivia en el año 1.904, mediante el cual nuestro país reconoce a favor de Bolivia y a perpetuidad el más amplio y libre derecho de tránsito comercial por su territorio y puertos del pacífico. La Convención sobre Tránsito suscrita por ambos países en el año 1.937. El Tratado de Complementación Económica, suscrito con Bolivia, materializado mediante Decreto N° 368, publicado en el Diario Oficial de fecha 10.09.1957. El Decreto de Hacienda N° 141, publicado en el Diario Oficial con fecha 28.06.08, mediante el cual se habilitó el Puerto de Iquique para el libre tránsito de mercancías de ultramar y que vengan manifestadas en libre tránsito a Bolivia y para aquellas provenientes de Bolivia a terceros países, bajo el mismo régimen. CONSIDERANDO: Que resulta necesario establecer un procedimiento uniforme para las Aduanas de Arica, Iquique y Antofagasta, bajo cuya jurisdicción se encuentran los Puertos habilitados actualmente para el tránsito de mercancías. TENIENDO PRESENTE: Lo dispuesto en los numerales 7 y 8 del artículo 4° del D.F.L. N° 329 de 1979, Ley Orgánica del Servicio Nacional de Aduanas, R E S O L U C I O N: I. ESTABLEZCASE el siguiente procedimiento uniforme para las Aduanas de Arica, Iquique y Antofagasta para la recepción, despacho, almacenamiento y salida de la carga acogida al Libre Tránsito Chile – Bolivia, según el Tratado de 1.904: 1. CARGAS DE IMPORTACION A BOLIVIA 1.1 Recepción de carga 1.1.1 Las mercancías deberán venir manifestados en tránsito hacia Bolivia, en forma separada de las que vienen con destino a Chile, de acuerdo a la Convención de Tránsito de 1.937. Los bultos que contengan las mercancías deben traer una anotación que señale que vienen en tránsito a Bolivia. 1.1.2 La Aduana chilena deberá recepcionar el manifiesto de carga en los términos señalados precedentemente y entregar una copia a la Empresa Portuaria del Puerto respectivo o al Concesionario de los Terminales Portuarios y a la Agencia Aduanera boliviana (AAB), con la numeración correspondiente.
Annex 345
2713VALPARAISO, 11.09.2009
RESOLUTION No 6153
IN VIEW OF: The Treaty of Peace, Amity and Commerce signed by Chile and the Republic of Bolivia in 1904, whereby Chile recognized in favor of Bolivia in perpetuity, the broadest and most unrestricted right of commercial transit in its territory and its Pacific ports.
The Convention on Transit signed by both countries in 1937;
The Treaty of Economic Complementation, signed with Bolivia, embodied in Decree No. 368, published in the Official Gazette of 10 September 1957; and
Finance Decree No. 141, published in the Official Gazette of 28 June 2008, whereby the Port of Iquique was authorized to handle the free transit of goods from overseas and declared as goods in free transit to Bolivia, and those coming from Bolivia to third countries, under the same regime.
WHEREAS: It is necessary to establish a uniform procedure for the Arica, Iquique and Antofagasta customs offices, under whose jurisdiction the ports currently authorized to handle the transit of goods operate.
IN CONSIDERATION OF: Article 4, paragraphs (7) and (8) of Decree No. 329 of 1979, the Organizational Law of the National Customs Service,
RESOLUTION:
I. BE IT ESTABLISHED the uniform procedure specified hereinbelow, which is to be followed by the Arica, Iquique and Antofagasta customs offices for the reception, forwarding, storage and shipping of cargo falling within the scope of the Chile – Bolivia Free Transit, pursuant to the 1904 Treaty.
1. CARGO IMPORTED INTO BOLIVIA
1.1 Reception of Cargo
1.1.1 Pursuant to the Convention on Transit of 1937, all goods in transit bound for Bolivia shall be identified in a manifest separately from those coming into, and the destination of which is, Chile. The packages containing the goods shall bear a note indicating that they are goods in transit bound for Bolivia.
1.1.2 The Chilean Customs Service shall receive the cargo manifest in the terms aforementioned and deliver a copy thereof to the Port Company at the relevant Port or to the Port Terminal Concessionaires, and to the Bolivian Customs Agency (AAB), with the appropriate identification number.
CHILEAN GOVERNMENTNATIONAL CUSTOMS SERVICETECHNICAL OFFICECUSTOMS PROCEDURES DIVISION
2714
Annex 345
 - 2 - Lo anterior se aplicará igualmente cuando se implemente el manifiesto electrónico, en cuyo caso la entrega de dicha información deberá efectuarse electrónicamente. 1.1.3 Una vez numerado el Manifiesto de Carga y recepcionado por la Agencia Aduanera boliviana y entregadas las mercancías por la compañía naviera en el área de stacking (almacenamiento o depósito) dentro del recinto portuario, estas podrán descargarse y la Empresa Portuaria o los Concesionarios de los Terminales portuarios deberán emitir la respectiva Papeleta de Recepción (DPU) y la entregarán a la Agencia Aduanera boliviana, para que proceda a su despacho inmediato o a su almacenaje. Lo anterior, es sin perjuicio de lo dispuesto en la letra e) del artículo IV de la Convención de Tránsito, referido a cargas que sean recibidas con mermas. 1.1.4 En el evento que el manifiesto requiera aclaración, las solicitudes pertinentes por parte del usuario se deben presentar ante la Aduana respectiva, en el plazo que corresponda. De corresponder, la Aduana deberá numerar la solicitud y la Agencia Aduanera boliviana la deberá registrar en forma previa a la continuación del tránsito hacia Bolivia. 1.1.5 El registro de taras y sellos así como la verificación de carga general, no deben interferir con aspectos tales como la velocidad de transferencia de carga de acuerdo con los tiempos máximos establecidos en los contratos existentes, la operativa del puerto y la seguridad del personal. 1.1.6 Los documentos portuarios de recepción de ambos países (DPU, en el caso de Chile y DPUB, en el caso de Bolivia) serán generados en forma simultánea y paralela, basados en la información consignada en el manifiesto marítimo, siendo la Papeleta de Recepción (DPU u otro) el documento que ampara la permanencia y el estado de las mercancías en puerto hasta su salida del recinto portuario, y darán lugar al cálculo de costos de los servicios portuarios antes de dicha salida. 1.2 Despacho de carga 1.2.1 Cuando se trate de despacho inmediato o retiro directo de las mercancías, vía terrestre, éstas deberán retirarse con el documento MIC/DTA, el que debe ser confeccionado previamente, en forma electrónica, por la Empresa Transportista o su representante legal en Chile y posteriormente ser numerado por la Agencia Aduanera boliviana, debiendo contar para tales efectos, en forma previa con las Papeletas de recepción y despacho respectivas.
Annex 345
2715
The foregoing shall likewise apply to electronic manifests, in which case delivery of such information shall be made electronically.
1.1.3 Once the Cargo Manifest has been numbered and received by the Bolivian Customs Agency, and the goods have been delivered by the shipping company at the stacking (storage or deposit) area within the port premises, they may be unloaded, and the Port Company or the Port Terminal Concessionaires shall issue the relevant Goods Receipt Note (DPU) and deliver the same to the Bolivian Customs Agency for it to immediately dispatch or store the goods.
The foregoing is without prejudice to letter e) of Section IV of the Convention on Transit on loss or shortfall of goods received.
1.1.4 Where the manifest requires clarification, the relevant user requests shall be submitted to the appropriate Customs Service within the appropriate time period. Where appropriate, the Customs Service shall number the request and the Bolivian Customs Agency shall register it before the goods in transit may proceed to Bolivia.
1.1.5 Registration of tare weight and stamps, as well as verification of general cargo, must not interfere with aspects such as cargo transfer speed, according to the maximum time periods established under existing agreements, port operations, and personnel safety.
1.1.6 Port documents from both countries for the receipt of goods (DPU in the case of Chile and DPUB in the case of Bolivia) shall be generated simultaneously and in parallel, based on the information included in the sea cargo manifest, the Goods Receipt Note (a DPU or another document) as the document supporting the merchandise, and the condition thereof, being kept at port pending exit of it from the port premises, and shall be used to calculate the relevant port service costs before such exit occurs.
1.2 Dispatch of Cargo
1.2.1 Where immediate dispatch or direct withdrawal of goods by land is required, such goods shall be withdrawn with a MIC/DTA [International Cargo Manifest / Customs Transit Declaration] document, which shall have been prepared previously by the Carrier or its legal representative in Chile, and subsequently numbered by the Bolivian Customs Agency, for which purpose they shall have been previously furnished with the appropriate Goods Receipt and Dispatch Notes.
2716
Annex 345
 - 3 - 1.2.2 Cuando se trate de despacho inmediato o retiro directo de las mercancías, vía ferroviaria, desde o hacia Bolivia, por la Aduana de Antofagasta, éstas deberán retirarse con el documento TIF/DTA, el que debe cumplir con las mismas exigencias y formalidades del documento utilizado para el transporte terrestre. 1.2.3 Los DPU y DPUB-Despacho deberán generarse en forma simultánea para la salida de las mercancías del recinto portuario y serán intercambiados por las entidades que los emiten. 1.2.4 El DPUB emitido por la Agencia Aduanera boliviana tendrá el carácter de carta de reclamo ante las empresas de seguro internacional que operan con carga boliviana, en el caso que la carga arribara con mermas. 1.3 Almacenamiento de carga 1.3.1 El traslado de mercancías a recintos extra-portuarios deberá realizarse con un documento que sirva de guía de traslado, que será diseñado por ambas Aduanas, fijándose un plazo para el mismo. En este caso, los concesionarios de los Terminales Portuarios deberán emitir los DPU Retiro Directo, como consecuencia de la descarga y del estado de la carga desembarcada. En el caso de almacenes concesionados, que se conectan a través de una interzona con un almacén portuario, y se produjesen traslados de cargas entre ambos sin salir de la Zona Primaria, bastara la emisión de las papeletas para verificar el traslado y recepción de la carga, entre uno y otro Almacén. 1.3.2 Acorde con el régimen de los Tratados, las mercancías tienen un plazo de permanencia de un año en el país. Al término del mismo, la Agencia Aduanera boliviana deberá comunicar a la Aduana chilena que corresponda, el vencimiento del mismo. 1.3.3 En el contexto anterior, la Agencia Aduanera Boliviana deberá informar si dicha entidad ordenará el despacho de la mercancía a Bolivia, previo pago de los costos de servicios portuarios si procediere por encontrarse en el recinto portuario, su entrega a la Aduana chilena para su remate como carga rezagada o bien la intención que continúe hacia un tercer país. La Agencia Aduanera boliviana solicitará la verificación de esta información a las empresas portuarias si correspondiere. 1.3.4 Las Aduanas chilenas intervinientes, por disposiciones aduaneras internas, otorgarán a dicha carga un plazo de 90 días conforme al régimen general de almacenaje, informando a la Agencia Aduanera boliviana al vencimiento de dicho plazo, respecto de las mercancías que se encuentran en condiciones de ser subastadas.
Annex 345
2717
1.2.2 Where immediate dispatch or direct withdrawal of goods by rail to or from Bolivia is required by the Antofagasta Customs Service, such goods shall be withdrawn with a TIF/DTA [International Rail Transportation / Customs Transit Declaration] document, which shall comply with the same requirements and formalities as the document used for land transportation.
1.2.3 The DPU and DPUB-Dispatch notes shall be generated simultaneously for the exit of goods from the port premises and shall be exchanged by their issuers.
1.2.4 A DPUB issued by the Bolivian Customs Agency shall serve as a claim note before international insurance companies that work with Bolivian cargo in case of loss or wastage of the goods delivered.
1.3 Storage of cargo
1.3.1 Transportation of goods to out-of-port facilities shall be made with a document serving as waybill, which shall be designed by both Customs Services within an agreed-upon time period. In this case, the Port Terminal concessionaires shall issue the Direct Withdrawal DPUs, as a result of the unloading and condition of the cargo placed ashore.
In case of warehouses operated under a concession that are connected to a port warehouse through an inter-zone, where cargo is transported between such warehouses within the boundaries of the Primary Zone, the issuance of the notes referred to shall suffice to verify the transportation and receipt of such cargo between both warehouses.
1.3.2 In accordance with the regime set forth in the Treaties, goods may remain in the country for a maximum term of one year. Upon expiration of said term, the Bolivian customs agency shall inform the relevant Chilean customs office of such expiry.
1.3.3 In this context, the Bolivian Customs Agency shall inform whether it will order the dispatch of the goods to Bolivia, after payment of the costs of port services payable on account of storage of the goods at the port; deliver the goods to the Chilean customs office for auction purposes as goods not claimed; or, forward the goods to a third country. The Bolivian customs agency shall request confirmation of this information from port companies, if applicable.
1.3.4 The intervening Chilean customs office, following internal customs rules, shall grant such cargo a period of 90 days, pursuant to the general regime for storage. Upon expiration of said period, the Bolivian customs agency shall be informed of any goods that are eligible for auction purposes.
2718
Annex 345
 - 4 - 1.3.5 Los procedimientos señalados precedentemente también serán aplicables a las exportaciones. 1.4 Salida de carga 1.4.1 En el momento de salida del puerto o del recinto extra-portuario, las Aduanas chilenas deberán tomar conocimiento del hecho para cancelar sus registros. 1.4.2 Cuando las mercancías salen del recinto portuario o del lugar de depósito extra-portuario (en caso de utilizarse), las Aduanas chilenas harán revisión documental y exterior del vehículo que transporta la carga, debiendo realizar el registro del MIC/DTA correspondiente en el sistema de SIROTE. 1.4.3 Las cargas transportadas en transporte terrestre deberán salir hacia la frontera con un MIC/DTA tramitado por la empresa de transporte y con el DPUB-Despacho que reemplaza a la Guía de Salida. En caso que dichas cargas sean transportadas hacia la frontera vía ferroviaria, deberán salir amparadas por el correspondiente TIF/DTA, debiendo cumplir las mismas exigencias establecidas para el transporte terrestre. 1.4.4 El funcionario de la Aduana chilena que se encuentre habilitado en la Avanzada fronteriza deberá registrar en el sistema SIROTE la salida de la carga amparada por MIC/DTA. En el evento que la carga se presente con un TIF/DTA, el funcionario de la Aduana deberá registrar en dicho documento su nombre, firma, rol, fecha y hora de la operación. 1.4.5 El procedimiento señalado precedentemente también es aplicable a las exportaciones. 2. CARGAS DE EXPORTACION DE BOLIVIA 2.1 Recepción de carga 2.1.1 Las mercancías en exportación deberán llegar a la frontera con el MIC/DTA debidamente aceptado y numerado por la Aduana de Bolivia, debiendo informarse a la Aduana chilena respectiva, a efectos que el funcionario de la Aduana chilena lo registre en el sistema SIROTE. En el evento que las mercancías arribaren a la frontera amparadas por un TIF/DTA, la Agencia aduanera boliviana deberá comunicar a la Aduana chilena respectiva para su conocimiento y registros pertinentes al momento del arribo efectivo de la carga.
Annex 345
2719
1.3.5 The aforementioned procedures shall also apply to exports.
1.4 Exit of Cargo
1.4.1 Upon exit from the port or out-of-port premises, the Chilean Customs Offices shall be informed of such event so that they may cancel out their records.
1.4.2 When the goods leave the port premises or the out-of-port storage site (if used), the Chilean Customs Offices shall review the documents and inspect the exterior of the vehicle transporting the cargo, and shall record the relevant MIC/DTA on the SIROTE system [Land Transportation Operations Recording System].
1.4.3 Cargo transported by land shall leave for the border with a MIC/DTA furnished by the carrier and with a DPUB-Dispatch Note replacing the Exit Waybill.
In case such goods are transported to the border by rail, they shall be accompanied by the relevant TIF/DTA, which shall comply with the same requirements applicable to land transportation.
1.4.4 An authorized Chilean Customs official at the border checkpoint shall record the cargo exit supported by the MIC/DTA on the SIROTE system.
In the event that the cargo arrives with an accompanying TIF/DTA, the Customs official shall affix thereto his name, signature, title, and date and time of the operation.
1.4.5 The foregoing procedure shall also apply to exports.
2. CARGO EXPORTED FROM BOLIVIA
2.1 Reception of Cargo
2.1.1 Exported goods shall arrive at the border with a MIC/DTA duly accepted and numbered by the Customs Service of Bolivia, and proper notice thereof shall be given to the relevant Chilean Customs Office, so that a Chilean Customs official can record this event on the SIROTE system.
In the event that the goods arrive at the border with a TIF/DTA, the Bolivian Customs Agency shall communicate this to the appropriate Chilean Customs Office for information and record-keeping purposes upon effective arrival of the cargo.
2720
Annex 345
 - 5 - 2.1.2 De corresponder, los organismos sanitarios harán una revisión exterior de la carga y su embalaje, y verificarán los certificados correspondientes. 2.1.3 El funcionario de la Aduana respectiva, al momento de la recepción de la carga en el recinto de depósito aduanero deberá registrar la salida del MIC/DTA en el sistema SIROTE. Si la carga recepcionada se encuentra amparada por un TIF/DTA, el funcionario aduanero deberá estampar su nombre, firma, rol, fecha y hora de la operación. 2.2 Despacho de carga 2.2.1 La Aduana de Bolivia hará un trámite formal de autorización de embarque, sobre la base del MIC/DTA o TIF/DTA, según corresponda, numerado en forma previa al ingreso de la carga a Chile, sirviendo de base dicho documento para ambas Aduanas. De dicho trámite interno, deberá tomar conocimiento la Aduana chilena, reservándose el derecho de hacer una inspección externa de la carga. 2.2.2 Una vez embarcada la carga, el naviero deberá presentar a la Aduana chilena respectiva el manifiesto de salida que ampara todas las mercancías embarcadas en ese puerto, el que será numerado por dicha Aduana. La Aduana deberá entregar el Encabezado del Manifiesto y la información correspondiente a los conocimientos de embarque de carga boliviana a la Agencia Aduanera boliviana. 2.3 Cambio de Destino de carga 2.3.1 Conforme al sistema de libre elección de los operadores de comercio, la carga puede sufrir un cambio de destino, debiendo informarse de dicho evento por la vía más rápida a la Agencia Aduanera boliviana, en el marco del Acuerdo de Cooperación e Intercambio de Información en materia de cooperación aduanera Chile-Bolivia. 2.3.2 No obstante lo anterior, bajo ninguna circunstancia las mercancías bolivianas que hayan sido ingresadas a la Zona Franca de Iquique podrán ser reexpedidas a las zonas primarias de los puertos de Arica, Iquique, Antofagasta, que operan con el sistema de libre tránsito hacia y desde Bolivia, bajo las modalidades contempladas en tratados, convenciones y/o acuerdos bilaterales suscrito entre ambas naciones, que regulan sobre la materia en comento.
Annex 345
2721
2.1.2 Where appropriate, public health agencies shall conduct a visual inspection of the cargo and its packaging, and shall verify the relevant certificates.
2.1.3 Upon receipt of the cargo at the customs warehouse premises, the respective Customs official shall record the exit of the MIC/DTA on the SIROTE system.
Where the received cargo is supported by a TIF/DTA, the customs official shall affix thereto his name, signature, title, and date and time of the operation.
2.2 Dispatch of Cargo
2.2.1 The Bolivian Customs Service shall conduct a formal shipment authorization process based on the MIC/DTA or the TIF/DTA, as appropriate, which shall have been previously numbered before the cargo is admitted into Chile and which shall serve as evidence for both Customs Services.
The Chilean Customs Service shall be informed of such internal process, and shall reserve the right to conduct a visual inspection of the cargo.
2.2.2 Once the cargo has been loaded, the ship operator shall submit to the appropriate Chilean Customs Office the exit manifest supporting all goods loaded at such port, which shall be numbered by that Customs Office. The Customs Office shall deliver the Manifest Header and all information relating to the bills of lading pertaining to the Bolivian cargo to the Bolivian Customs Agency.
2.3 Change of Cargo Destination
2.3.1 Pursuant to the freedom of choice of foreign trade operators system, the destination of cargo may be changed, and such event shall be informed through the most rapid means available to the Bolivian Customs Agency, under the Agreement for Cooperation and Exchange of Information on Chilean-Bolivian Customs Cooperation.
2.3.2 Notwithstanding the foregoing, under no circumstances may Bolivian goods be admitted into the Iquique Tax-Free Area be forwarded to primary zones at the ports of Arica, Iquique, Antofagasta, which operate under a system of free transit to and from Bolivia, under the modalities contemplated in bilateral treaties, conventions and/or agreements entered into by both nations, which regulate this subject matter.
2722
Annex 345
 - 6 - 2.4 Carga Boliviana con embarque indirecto 2.4.1 En el evento que por motivos de cambio en la programación de naves, itinerarios especiales, situaciones comerciales, situaciones de fuerza mayor u otra contingencia, que impida que se materialice el embarque de la carga en tránsito por el puerto habilitado para el libre tránsito, se deberán adoptar las siguientes medidas: 2.4.1.1 Mercancías transportadas vía marítima desde un puerto habilitado para el libre tránsito a uno no habilitado 2.4.1.1.1 Si se presentare alguna de las condiciones señaladas precedentemente y la carga se despachará a un puerto distinto, por vía marítima a otro que no esté autorizado para el libre tránsito, dicho puerto se constituirá para estos efectos sólo en un Terminal de embarque. 2.4.1.1.2 Para el efecto anterior, la compañía naviera responsable del transporte de la mercancía en tránsito hacia el exterior, deberá tramitar una Declaración de Transbordo, debiendo en dicho documento señalar el N° y fecha del MIC/DTA que ampara las mercancías, consignando que se trata de mercancía en tránsito internacional y el N° y fecha del Documento Único de Exportación (D.U.E.), extendido por la Aduana de Bolivia. 2.4.1.1.3 Dicha Declaración de Transbordo deberá ser visada por la Agencia Aduanera boliviana. 2.4.1.1.4 La Declaración de Transbordo podrá amparar más de un MIC/DTA, cuando las mercancías que amparan estén destinadas al mismo puerto de salida al exterior y sean embarcadas hacia dicho puerto en la misma nave. 2.4.1.1.5 La Aduana de control del MIC/DTA, sólo para efectos del cumplimiento de los plazos, otorgará el cumplido provisorio de dicho documento, debiendo mantenerse vigente hasta el embarque definitivo de las mercancías en la nave que las transportará hasta el exterior.
Annex 345
2723
2.4 Indirect Shipment of Bolivian Cargo
2.4.1 In the event that, by reason of change in vessel schedules, special itineraries, trade situations, force majeure or any other contingency that impedes the shipping of in-transit cargo through a port authorized for free transit, the following measures shall be adopted:
2.4.1.1 Goods transported by sea from an enabled port to a port not enabled for free transit
2.4.1.1.1 If any of the above situations occur and the cargo is dispatched by sea to another port not enabled for free transit, that port shall serve as a loading Terminal for such purpose only.
2.4.1.1.2 For the above purposes, the shipping company responsible for carrying the goods in transit to a foreign destination shall file a Transshipment Declaration in which the shipping company shall specify the number and date of the MIC/DTA supporting the goods, and shall further state both that such goods are goods in international transit and the number and the date of the Sole Export Document (DUE) issued by the Bolivian Customs Service.
2.4.1.1.3 That Transshipment Declaration shall be validated by the Bolivian Customs Agency.
2.4.1.1.4 A Transshipment Declaration may support more than one MIC/DTA, provided the goods supported by such documents are bound for the same port of exit and shipped to that port on the same vessel.
2.4.1.1.5 The Customs control for the MIC/DTA, and only for the purpose of meeting the applicable deadlines, shall grant a provisional approval to such document, which shall be kept in full force and effect until the goods have been finally loaded onto the vessel that shall transport them to a foreign destination.
2724
Annex 345
 - 7 - 2.4.1.1.6 Una vez que las mercancías estén en condiciones de ser embarcadas, la Compañía transportista procederá a consignar el N° y fecha del o los MIC/DTA que las ampara en el respectivo Manifiesto de salida, debiendo para tales efectos confrontar las marcas, números y cantidad de bultos consignados en el o los MIC/DTA y la respectiva Declaración de Transbordo, salvo que detectare irregularidades graves y debidamente fundadas que ameritare una fiscalización. 2.4.1.1.7 Producido el embarque de las mercancías hacia el exterior, la Compañía transportista deberá presentar ante la Aduana de Salida, una copia del o los MIC/DTA con la constancia del embarque. 2.4.1.1.8 La Aduana de salida deberá efectuar los registros respectivos en el sistema SIROTE para el cierre de la operación emanada del o los MIC/DTA, debiendo informar a la Aduana de Origen cuando se haya concretado el embarque. 2.4.1.1.9 La Aduana de Origen deberá informar a la Agencia Aduanera boliviana del cumplido definitivo de la operación. 2.4.1.2 Mercancías transportadas vía terrestre desde un puerto habilitado para el libre tránsito a uno no habilitado, 2.4.1.2.1 La mercancía que hubiere arribado en régimen de libre tránsito a un puerto habilitado para tales efectos y, se presentare alguna de las condiciones señaladas en el numeral 2.4.1 precedente, para ser despachada a un puerto no habilitado deberá ser transportada en un camión chileno, por tener la calidad de transporte interno. 2.4.1.2.2 La mercancía deberá salir del puerto habilitado hacia el puerto no habilitado con la Póliza de Tránsito a que se refiere la Convención de Tránsito de 1.937, ó el Documento Único de Exportación (D.U.E.).
Annex 345
2725
2.4.1.1.6 Once the goods are ready for shipment, the Carrier shall specify the number and date of the MIC/DTA supporting such goods in the appropriate exit manifest. For such purpose, the Carrier shall compare the brands, identification numbers and number of packages specified in the MIC/DTA(s) and the relevant Transshipment Declaration, except to the extent that serious, properly established irregularities are detected, which may warrant further inspection and control.
2.4.1.1.7 Once the shipment of goods bound for a foreign destination has been completed, the Carrier shall file a copy of the MIC/DTA(s) with a proof of shipment with the Exit Customs Office.
2.4.1.1.8 The Exit Customs Office shall record the relevant entries on the SIROTE system to complete the operation originated in the MIC/DTA(s), and shall inform the Customs Office of Origin when the shipment has been completed.
2.4.1.1.9 The Customs Office of Origin shall inform the Bolivian Customs Agency of the final completion of the operation.
2.4.1.2 Goods transported by land from an enabled port to a port not enabled for free transit
2.4.1.2.1 Goods that have arrived under a free transit regime at a port enabled for free transit, and provided any of the situations set forth in paragraph 2.4.1 above has occurred, may only be transported on a Chilean truck to be dispatched to a port not enabled for free transit, as it is considered domestic transportation.
2.4.1.2.2 The goods shall depart the enabled port to the port that has not been enabled accompanied with the Transit Policy referred to in the Convention on Transit of 1937 or with the Sole Export Document (DUE).
2726
Annex 345
 - 8 - 2.4.1.2.3 La Aduana chilena deberá visar la respectiva Póliza ó el DUE para que las mercancías que se encuentran físicamente en territorio chileno, puedan iniciar su viaje hacia el puerto donde se embarcarán en definitiva hacia el exterior. 2.4.1.2.4 La Aduana bajo cuya jurisdicción se encuentre el puerto por donde se embarcarán las mercancías hacia el exterior deberá dar cumplimiento a las mismas exigencias y formalidades estipuladas en el numeral 2.4.1.1 precedente, que incluye, entre otros, el registro de las operaciones en el sistema SIROTE, la exigencia al transportista del o los MIC/DTA y los documentos que amparen las mercancías a ser embarcadas. 3. PRESUNCION DE ABANDONO 3.1 Acorde a los términos contemplados en la Convención de Tránsito, las mercancías bolivianas procedentes de ultramar podrán permanecer hasta por el plazo máximo de un año en los almacenes de la Agencia Aduanera boliviana, a contar de la fecha de presentación del respectivo manifiesto y una vez vencido este plazo, acorde a las normas vigentes en la normativa interna chilena, se le concederán 90 días corridos, en régimen general de almacenaje. 3.2 Cumplido los plazos anteriormente señalados las mercancías incurrirán en presunción de abandono, debiendo en este contexto las Empresas Portuarias del país o concesionarios de los terminales portuarios notificar a las Aduanas respecto del cumplimiento de los plazos. 3.3 A partir de la notificación anterior, la Aduana de Bolivia deberá adoptar las medidas que resulten necesarias para ordenar la partida hacia ese país de las mercancías que se encontraren en presunción de abandono o, en su defecto la entrega de las mismas a la Aduana chilena para su remate. 3.4 En el evento que la Aduana boliviana no adoptare ninguna medida al respecto, la Aduana chilena comunicará oficialmente la inclusión de las mercancías en remate.
Annex 345
2727
2.4.1.2.3 The Chilean Customs Service shall validate the appropriate Policy or DUE, so that the goods lying physically within Chilean territory may start their travel to the port where they shall be ultimately shipped to a foreign destination.
2.4.1.2.4 The Customs Office that has jurisdiction over the port where the goods shall be shipped to a foreign destination shall comply with the same requirements and formalities set forth in paragraph 2.4.1.1 above, including, but not limited to, the recording of operations on the SIROTE system, the MIC/DTA requirements for carriers, and the documents supporting goods to be shipped.
3. PRESUMPTION OF ABANDONMENT
3.1 In accordance with the terms contemplated in the Convention on Transit, Bolivian goods coming from overseas may remain for a maximum term of one year in the warehouses of the Bolivian Customs Agency from the date of submission of the relevant manifest. Upon expiration of such term, and according to the applicable Chilean internal rules and regulations in force, an extra period of 90 calendar days shall be granted under the general storage regime.
3.2 Upon expiration of the above terms, the goods shall be presumed to have been abandoned. In such case, the Port Companies in the subject country or the port terminal concessionaires shall notify the relevant Customs Offices of the expiration of such terms.
3.3 From the time of delivery of the above notice, the Bolivian Customs Service shall adopt all such measures as are necessary to order that the goods presumed to have been abandoned be shipped to Bolivia or delivered to the Chilean Customs Service for auction.
3.4 In the event no such measures are adopted by the Bolivian Customs Service, the Chilean Customs Service shall officially inform that the goods shall be put up for auction.
2728
Annex 345
 - 9 - 4. FISCALIZACION DE LAS MERCANCIAS EN TRANSITO DESDE Y HACIA BOLIVIA Las Aduanas de Arica, Iquique y Antofagasta, bajo cuya jurisdicción se encuentren los puertos habilitados para el libre tránsito, podrán fiscalizar las mercancías que ingresen, salgan o transiten por sus zonas, debiendo ser asociadas estas en forma previa a un análisis de riesgo en el área de drogas o contrabando, sin perjuicio que se trate de cargas acogidas al Tratado de Paz, Amistad y Comercio, suscrito en el año 1.904, debiendo para tales efectos coordinarse con la Agencia Aduanera boliviana. 5. No obstante las instrucciones impartidas, las Aduanas intervinientes deberán establecer los procedimientos administrativos y operativos que permitan la fluidez de las operaciones, dependiendo de la situación geográfica que presente cada una de ellas. II. Las presentes instrucciones regirán a contar de la publicación en el Diario Oficial. ANOTESE, COMUNIQUESE Y PUBLIQUESE EN EL DIARIO OFICIAL Y EN LA PAGINA WEB DEL SERVICIO KARL DIETERT REYES DIRECTOR NACIONAL DE ADUANAS GFA/RB/EVO/VCC/vcc. REG: 72023 20.08.2009 64809
Annex 345
2729
4. INSPECTION OF GOODS IN TRANSIT TO AND FROM BOLIVIA
The Arica, Iquique and Antofagasta Customs Offices, which have jurisdiction over the ports enabled for free transit, may inspect any goods entering, exiting, or being transported across their areas, which shall have been previously subject to drug or smuggling risk analysis, regardless of whether such goods are covered by the Treaty of Peace, Amity and Commerce signed in 1904. For such purpose, coordination shall be required between the above Customs Offices and the Bolivian Customs Agency.
5. Notwithstanding any directives given, the Customs Offices involved shall lay down all such administrative and operating procedures as may be necessary to ensure that operations are carried out smoothly, depending on the geographical location of each of them.
II. These directives shall become effective upon publication thereof in the Official Gazette.
LET IT BE RECORDED, NOTIFIED AND PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL GAZETTE AND ON THE WEBSITE OF THE NATIONAL CUSTOMS SERVICE
KARL DIETERT REYES
HEAD OF CHILEAN CUSTOMS OFFICE
2730
Annex 346
Minutes of the Twenty-First Meeting of the Political Consultations Mechanism, 13 November 2009
(Original in Spanish, English translation)
Archives of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Chile
2731
2732
Annex 346
Annex 346
2733
MINUTES OF THE 21ST MEETING OF THE
CHILE-BOLIVIA
POLITICAL CONSULTATIONS MECHANISM
The 21st Meeting of the Chile-Bolivia Political Consultations Mechanism was held in Santiago de Chile on 13 November 2009, in order to analyze and monitor the progress made on the thirteen issues on the broad joint agenda without exclusions, designed by both countries.
The Chilean Delegation was headed by Envoy Alberto van Klaveren Stork, Acting Minister of Foreign Affairs, and the Bolivian Delegation was headed by Envoy Hugo Fernández Aráoz, Vice-Minister of Foreign Affairs.
The meeting was preceded by the 9th Meeting of the Working Group on Bilateral Affairs on 12 November, whose conclusions were submitted to the Heads of Delegation for their consideration and approval. A list of the Delegations of both countries is attached to these minutes as Annex 1.
The Head of the Chilean Delegation warmly welcomed the Bolivian Delegation, pointing out the progress made over the more than three years of constructive dialogue, as well as the joint activities carried out in the second half of 2009, which evidence a rapprochement, and close ties between our peoples and the high levels of mutual trust achieved.
The Head of the Bolivian Delegation thanked him for the warm welcome, expressing his Delegation’s greetings, as well as their optimism about the meeting yielding positive results for both Delegations. In addition to a recount of the bilateral relationship, he emphasized the importance of exchanging criteria to foster, strengthen and consolidate the achievements made in the context of the 13-Point Agenda, an agenda that has been developing naturally and has made the entire relationship between the two Ministries of Foreign Affairs more dynamic.
Having approved the methodology and the agenda for the meeting, the Delegations proceeded to discuss it:
I. Development of Mutual Trust
The Delegations reiterated their satisfaction over the many top-level meetings that took place following the 20th Meeting of the Political Consultations Mechanism, and concurred that it is important that they continue encouraging such activities, as well as others carried out by civil society in both countries that make it possible to keep strengthening mutual trust.
2734
Annex 346
Annex 346
2735
Most notable among the main activities are the bilateral meeting of Presidents Michelle Bachelet and Evo Morales on the occasion of the Special Meeting of UNASUR held in San Carlos de Bariloche, Argentina, on 28 August 2009, and the visit of Mariano Fernández, Chile’s Minister of Foreign Affairs, to La Paz on 16 July 2009, to participate in the Official Events in celebration of the Bicentennial of the La Paz Independence Movement.
The Bolivian Delegation thanked Minister of Foreign Affairs Mariano Fernández for his visit and the gifts he presented, namely two Mapuche sculptures, sent by President Michelle Bachelet to the city of La Paz on the occasion of the festivities in honor of the Bicentennial.
Moreover, the following meetings and visits by top Executive Branch authorities took place:
•
On 3 July, the Minister of Economy and Finance of Bolivia met with the Chilean Minister of Finance in the city of Viña del Mar, in the context of the Meeting of Ministers of Finance of the Americas.
•
On 4 July, a meeting of the Ministers of Public Works of Chile and Bolivia was held in Cochabamba to assess the status of the progress of the Interoceanic Corridor works.
•
In the context of the 20th Meeting of the Administrative Commission for the Chile-Bolivia ACE 22, the Minister of Productive Development and Plural Economy visited Santiago on 8 July.
•
In the context of the 9th Ibero-American Forum of Ministers of the Environment, Bolivia’s Vice-Minister of the Environment, Biodiversity and Climate Change visited Santiago on 9-11 September.
•
On the occasion of the 6th Ibero-American Week on Security and Defense, the Bolivian Minister of Defense visited the City of Santiago on 4-6 October, and was granted a meeting by the Minister of Foreign Affairs.
•
On 19-21 October, Bolivia’s Deputy Minister of Civilian Defense visited Santiago to participate in the “Hermandad 2009” exercise.
•
On 9-10 November, Chile’s Minister of National Assets visited the city of La Paz.
On the other hand, on 27-29 July, the Commander General of the Bolivian Army traveled to Chile on an Official Visit and, on 7 August, Chile’s Deputy Secretary of Aviation visited Oruro for the festivities in celebration of another Anniversary of Bolivia’s Armed Forces.
Moreover, on 14-15 September, the President of Bolivia’s Central Bank visited Santiago; during his visit, he held several public as well as private meetings.
2736
Annex 346
Annex 346
2737
Meanwhile, other activities also took place, most notably:
•
Chile’s participation in the International Book Fair and the Expocruz 2009 Fair in August and September, in the cities of La Paz and Santa Cruz de la Sierra, respectively.
•
The 9th Meeting of Political Scientists, Historians and Intellectuals of both countries that was held in La Paz on 24-26 September.
•
A visit by Bolivian Journalists and Media Directors to the cities of Arica, Iquique and Antofagasta on 18-23 October.
•
Pairing of Bolivian food and Chilean wines – Bicentennial Tasting Event, held in La Paz on 5 November.
II. Border Integration
•
Frontier Committee
The Delegations duly noted the 10th Meeting of the Frontier Committee, held in La Paz on 27 and 28 August, and the agreements and agreed recommendations, mentioning the importance of directly and effectively following up on the issues on the agenda. In this context, they agreed to hold the 11th Meeting of the Committee in Chile, in the third quarter of 2010.
Following on what was agreed at said meeting, the Delegations formally changed the name of said Committee, which will now be known as the “Frontier and Integration Committee.”
•
Border Municipalities and Communities
The Delegations mentioned the importance of holding a 4th Meeting of Border Municipalities in Chile, on a date to be defined during the first half of 2010.
•
Border Development
The Delegations were informed of the discussions held by the Health authorities. In this regard, there are plans to hold the 2nd Health without Borders meeting in the City of Putre, Chile, in May 2010.
•
Bilateral Meeting of Customs Authorities
The Delegations noted the 4th Bilateral Meeting of Customs Authorities, which was held in Iquique on 24 July, at which the parties assessed the existing agreements.
2738
Annex 346
Annex 346
2739
They also mentioned a meeting of technical customs authorities (computer-related fields) in mid-September, and the meeting between the Directors of both countries’ Customs Services in Iquique in late October 2009.
The Delegations concurred on the importance of holding the 5th Bilateral Meeting, in Bolivia, in 2010.
•
Workshop on the Worst Forms of Child Labor
The Delegations mentioned the upcoming 3rd Workshop on the Worst Forms of Child Labor organized by Chile’s National Minors Service (SENAME) and Bolivia’s Vice-Minister of Equal Opportunities, to be held in the City of Potosí on 17-18 November.
•
Integrated Border Controls
Both Delegations positively assessed the trial run periods at the Chungará – Tambo Quemado and Colchane – Pisiga border crossings between 27 July and 9 August, and complimented each other on the implementation of dual-manager integrated border control on a permanent basis at the latter border crossing.
Moreover, they took note of the 6th Meeting of the Technical Commission on Integrated Border Controls that took place in La Paz on 11 August, and agreed that it is necessary for the negotiations for the Rules of the Agreement on Integrated Border Controls and the Operating Manual for the Integrated Control Area to come to be concluded soon, such that both instruments can be approved in early 2010; for this purpose, the Chilean Delegation committed to soon provide its feedback on the aforementioned drafts, which were submitted by Bolivia in the context of the 6th Meeting of the Technical Commission on Integrated Border Controls.
The Bolivian Delegation emphasized the importance of having those instruments approved by the time of a possible meeting of the Presidents on the occasion of the launching of the Colchane – Pisiga Integrated Control.
Visviri - Charaña: The Delegations mentioned the technical progress made with a view to developing a “twin” complex on the international border. Moreover, they concurred on the importance of speeding up the works related to the architectural design of the new border complex.
Chungará – Tambo Quemado: They Delegations positively assessed the trial run period for the dual-manager integrated border control that ended on 9 August.
2740
Annex 346
Annex 346
2741
The Bolivian Delegation mentioned, once again, that the Tambo Quemado works and facilities are ready to operate on an integrated control basis. In this regard, the Chilean Delegation reported that the adaptation works at the Chungará Complex should be completed by March 2010. The Delegations concurred on starting a new trial run period in March 2010, once the provisional works at the existing complex (Chungará) have been completed.
The Chilean Delegation reported that works at the new Chungará complex will begin in March 2010, and are expected to be completed in a period of two years.
Colchane – Pisiga: The Delegations stated the importance of discussing a provisional date for the formal inauguration of the complexes with the Presidents of Bolivia and Chile in attendance.
Ollagüe – Avaroa Station: The Delegations exchanged congratulations on a new single-manager integrated control exercise carried out at Ollagüe, which started on 9 November and is set to extend to 15 November.
They also expressed their willingness to perform a new exercise for a longer period in 2010.
Cajón Marker - Cajones Marker: The Delegations agreed to postpone the first single-manager integrated control exercise at the Cajones Marker to a still-undefined date, due to there being no adequate facilities or infrastructure.
III. Free Transit
The Bolivian delegation proposed holding the 11th Meeting of the Working Group on Free Transit in the city of La Paz during May 2010.
Ports of Antofagasta and Arica
With regard to the “Charges for storage service in the terminal operated under concession” in the Port of Antofagasta, which was referred to the Political Consultation Mechanism for consideration in June 2009, the Chilean Delegation stated that work was being done on possible formulas to resolve this situation, such as granting free storage in the Port sector operated under concession for Bolivian cargo in special condition, and confirmed that full capacity is being maintained for free storage of Bolivian cargo in the multi-operated sector of the said Port.
Along these same lines, the Chilean delegation reported that the consultations on this topic are not yet complete, and that Bolivia will be informed in due course as soon as the analysis process is finished. In this regard, the Bolivian Delegation indicated the importance of reaching an answer to this issue as soon as possible.
2742
Annex 346
Annex 346
2743
With regard to the port of Arica, both delegations emphasized the agreement reached between the Arica Port Company and the Port Services Administration of Bolivia in the framework of the Bilateral Technical Committee for that Port, with respect to signing a Memorandum of Understanding on the adjustment of tariffs for port services provided by concessionaire Terminal Portuario Arica S.A. (TPA). This agreement will also remain in effect for two years and will replace the Memorandum signed on 7 October 2007.
The Chilean Delegation also asked the Bolivian Delegation to use its good offices to have the Memorandum signed as quickly as possible, the text of which has already been agreed to. In this respect, the Bolivian Delegation stated that it would take care of this.
•
Hazardous Cargo Seminar
Both delegations concurred on the importance of implementing the recommendations made at the Second Seminar on Handling, Storage and Transport of Hazardous Goods.
•
Enabling of the Port of Iquique
The Chilean Delegation indicated that the enabling of the Port of Iquique under the Free Transit Regime in favor of Bolivia is of prime importance for the bilateral relationship. Both delegations reiterated their interest in having this process completed as soon as possible in the context of the agreements reached in the Minutes of the 20th Meeting of the Political Consultation Mechanism.
Others
The delegations reiterated that it was advisable to continue working on the revision of the Operating Manual for the Integrated Transit System, and to this end, they urged holding the next ordinary meeting of the System in La Paz in the first quarter of 2010, preceded by a meeting of the ad hoc Working Group in charge of this issue.
IV. Physical Integration
•
Mixed Technical Group on Infrastructure (GTM)
The Delegations noted the results of the 4th GTM Meeting that was held in the City of La Paz on 22 October.
Moreover, they mentioned the meeting of the Ministers of Public Works of Bolivia and Chile that was held in the City of Cochabamba on 4 July, at which they signed a Memorandum of Understanding on Cooperation in the Area of Infrastructure, in the context of the 2nd Chile – Bolivia – Brazil Interoceanic Corridor Meeting.
2744
Annex 346
Annex 346
2745
•
Arica – La Paz Railway
The Chilean Delegation reiterated that no award was made as a result of the first bidding round for the overhaul and remediation works in the Chilean section of the Arica – La Paz Railway. It also reported that the second bidding round is underway, with a definition on the subject expected in the next few days.
The Bolivian Delegation expressed its concern over and wish for a soon conclusion of the bidding process, and reiterated that the Charaña – Viacha section is usable for trains and rails, with light maintenance work.
Moreover, both Delegations concurred on the need for a meeting between the National Concessions Coordinator of Chile’s Ministry of Public Works and the Office of the Vice-Minister of Transportation of Bolivia to be held, in principle, in the first quarter of 2010, once a definition is available as a result of the bidding process.
V. Economic Complementation
The Delegations emphasized and took note of the agreements reached at the 20th Meeting of the Administrative Commission for Economic Complementation Agreement No. 22 (ACE 22), held in Santiago on 8 July 2009.
Moreover, they mentioned the Cooperation Agreement signed between ProChile [Chile’s Exportable Goods Promotion Agency] and Promueve Bolivia [Bolivia’s Exports and Tourism Promotion Agency], with a Work Plan drawn up in that context for 2009-2010.
As regards the issue of smuggling, they confirmed their concern and mentioned the implementation of a Control Plan by the relevant Chilean authorities (Customs and the Internal Tax Service, or SII) on 3 September, which will allow them to collaborate with Bolivia.
Additionally, they concurred on continuing to work on strengthening the economic and trade relations between both countries, and also concurred on the importance of creating the necessary driving factors to reverse the existing asymmetric trade. For such purpose, the Bolivian Delegation noted the importance of maintaining the promotional activities for Bolivian products in Chile.
The Chilean Delegation expressed its interest in starting investment-related talks and emphasized the need to publicize the mutual benefits the Interoceanic Corridor will create.
They mentioned an upcoming Business Round to be held in Antofagasta on 17 November this year, and a meeting – workshop between tourism authorities from both countries set to take place in Arica this 26 November.
2746
Annex 346
Annex 346
2747
In the area of cooperation, they mentioned the training of a group of officers from SENASAG [the Bolivian National Agricultural Health and Food Safety Agency] by SAG [the Chilean Agricultural and Livestock Agency] in the area of Fruit Fly Control, this past August in Santiago.
Lastly, they duly noted the execution of a Memorandum of Understanding in October between Chile’s Agricultural Research Institute (INIA) and Bolivia’s National Institute for Agricultural and Forestry Innovation (INIAF), for the purpose of promoting greater cooperation in the areas of research and training and the perfecting of agricultural production technology.
VI. Maritime Issue
The Undersecretaries of Foreign Affairs concurred on highlighting the importance of the dialogue process performed to date, and emphasized the usefulness of the contributions that have been made by the technical teams of both countries.
They also highlighted their conviction regarding the necessity of continuing this process on the basis of realistic and practical approaches, as a contribution to realizing the opportunities for integration and future cooperation that are offered to both countries, which will also strengthen their bilateral relations.
VII. The Silala River and Water Resources
The delegations took note that the Working Group on the Silala River had incorporated each party's proposed clarifications and additions to the initial agreement and agreed to submit the amended document to the proper authorities for their consideration.
VIII. Instruments to Fight Poverty
The Delegations expressed their satisfaction with the smooth execution of the Cooperation Work Plan signed in June 2008, as a result of which work networks have been set up in various areas of interest such as health, justice, education, public management and civil society. Such achievements are listed in Annex 2.
Moreover, they mentioned the achievements in the three spheres of activity defined in said Plan as regards support for Institutional Strengthening and Human Resource Training, Civil Society Initiatives and ACE 22 Process Strengthening.
The Delegations confirmed their interest in exchanging information in preparation for the 2nd Meeting of the Working Group to be held in the first half of 2010, when they will be working on long-term programs, whether new ones or continuing from existing ones, that are functional to Bolivia’s Development Plan.
2748
Annex 346
Annex 346
2749
In this context, both Delegations highlighted the meeting between Chile’s Minister of National Assets and Bolivia’s Minister of Development Planning that was held in the City of La Paz on 9 and 10 November.
IX. Security and Defense
The Delegations discussed the excellent status of the bilateral relation as to Defense-related issues and the growing dynamic in that relationship, noting the busy schedule of reciprocal visits between authorities from the Ministries of Defense and the Armed Forces of both countries. Moreover, they mentioned the positive results of the “Hermandad 2009” exercise that took place on 19-23 October at the Chilean Army’s War Academy’s Center for Tactical Operating Training, using the north of Chile as the simulation area.
The Chilean Delegation valued the presence of Bolivian observers during the “Salitre II 2009” Exercise that was carried out in October.
As regards humanitarian demining at the border, the Chilean Delegation reported that it is still in the process of securing certification for the manually-cleared mined areas in the Tambo Quemado and Cancosa sector, which guarantees that these areas are free of anti-personnel mines, as per the standards set by Chile’s National Humanitarian Demining Commission (CNAD). It also mentioned that such works should be completed in December 2009, unless barred by climate, atmospheric or technical factors.
Moreover, the Chilean Delegation stated that the Ministry of Defense is ready to offer Bolivia a new humanitarian demining course. For such purpose, the request should be made one year in advance, to accommodate organizational needs regarding budget and logistics. In this regard, the Bolivian Delegation undertook to convey this invitation to the relevant authorities.
The Chilean Delegation reiterated that the internal requirements have been satisfied for the Agreement for Cooperation between Chile’s Uniformed Police [Carabineros] and Bolivia’s National Police to come into effect internationally, which agreement covers, among other things, matters related to citizen security and the fight against crime. In this regard, the Bolivian Delegation reported that the Agreement is currently undergoing legislative processing.
•
Agreement for Mutual Cooperation and Assistance For Risk Management and Natural Disasters
The Delegations agreed to continue their work to perfect the final version of the Agreement for Mutual Cooperation and Assistance for Risk Management and Natural Disasters, with a view to it being executed soon.
2750
Annex 346
Annex 346
2751
X. Cooperation for the Control of Illegal Trafficking of Drugs, Precursors and Essential Chemicals
As regards the 8th Meeting of the Mixed Bolivia-Chile Commission on Drugs and Related Issues, the Chilean Delegation requested that it be scheduled for the first half of 2010. The Bolivian Delegation stated it will convey the request to the relevant authorities.
As regards the “Agreement on the Exchange of Information on Criminal Records for Trafficking of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances and Related Money Laundering Crimes” proposed by Chile, the Bolivian Delegation stated the agreement will not be signed as its domestic laws call for such information to be privileged. This notwithstanding, it added it will be analyzing alternatives to make the exchange of information possible.
As regards Bolivia’s proposal that the parties consider the possibility of amending Article 49 (1c) and (2e) of the 1961 Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs as regards coca leaves and the prohibition of coca-leaf chewing (akulliku), the Chilean Delegation stated it has conveyed the proposal, which is currently being analyzed by the relevant authorities.
XI. Education, Science and Technology
The Delegations reiterated the importance of holding the 1st Meeting of the Mixed Commission on Education as soon as possible, at a venue to be defined, and recommended that it be preceded by a technical meeting to agree on a final agenda.
The Chilean Delegation proposed that the Science and Technology issues also be addressed at said meeting.
XII. Cultures
The Delegations emphasized the smooth relations in this area, as well as the importance and full force and effect of the Memorandum of Understanding for a Cultural Exchange Program between the Republic of Chile’s National Council for Culture and the Arts and the Plurinational State of Bolivia’s Ministry of Cultures, signed in May 2009.
Moreover, they highlighted Chile’s participation in the La Paz International Book Fair, held in July and August, which is an initiative that was part of the activities planned in celebration of the city’s Bicentennial.
2752
Annex 346
Annex 346
2753
As regards the Agreement on the Protection and Restitution of Cultural Heritage Assets, the Chilean Delegation reported that the contents of Bolivia’s counter-proposed draft is being analyzed by the relevant domestic agencies.
The Delegations concurred on convening the 2nd Meeting of the Mixed Commission on Cultures to be held in Bolivia in the first half of 2010.
XIII. Others
•
Social Security Agreement
The Chilean Delegation informed that the Office of the Undersecretary of Social Security is available for a meeting with the Vice-Minister of Pensions and Financial Services of Bolivia in order to move forward in the negotiations over said Agreement in the first half of 2010, during which meeting the parties could share their experiences with social security reforms and the potential scope of the Ibero-American Social Security Convention in their respective countries.
•
AADAA [Autonomous Administration of Customs Warehouses]
The Delegations took note of the meeting of the Directors of Legal Affairs of their Ministries of Foreign Affairs held in the City of La Paz on 24 July, when they shared their opinions on the subject of the former AADAA workers.
In view of this, the Chilean Delegation submitted a draft agreement on the subject, which the Bolivian Delegation accepted for its consideration.
•
Consular Issues
As regards the issues that arose as a result of certain Regional Immigration Offices (Santa Cruz and Cochabamba) charging for student visas, as well as the granting of a 90-day period for Chilean citizens to remain within Bolivian territory, the Chilean Delegation requested to be informed of the relevant Bolivian authority’s decision and the acceptance, by the Government of Bolivia, of the Criminal Record Certificates provided to immigration authorities by Chilean consulates abroad.
As regards the identification documents required for the regularization of Bolivian citizens’ immigration status in the Republic of Chile, and the Bolivian Delegation’s request that the document requirements for such process be relaxed, the Chilean Delegation reported that the Ministry of Internal Affairs informed it that no Bolivian citizen has been denied regularization of their immigration status or a resident’s visa on account of not having a passport,
2754
Annex 346
Annex 346
2755
and it therefore views this situation as having been settled.
The Delegations concurred on the need to hold the 2nd Bilateral Meeting of Consular Directors of both Ministries of Foreign Affairs in La Paz during the first quarter of 2010, in order to be able to address these and other situations of mutual interest in the area of immigration, as well as the convening of the 1st Meeting of the Working Commission agreed upon in May 2009.
•
Coordination on Multilateral Issues
The Delegations expressed their satisfaction with the first Multilateral Consultation Meeting that was held in La Paz on 4 September 2009.
They agreed that the respective Multilateral Directors will make use of the various international fora to exchange information and, later on, coordinate common positions regarding matters on the international agenda.
Following an exhaustive review of the achievements made from 2006 to date, and with a view to giving continuity to and strengthening the work on the issues on the “13-Point Agenda,” both Delegations agreed to set up a bilateral Working Group in charge of drawing up a draft Agreement for the Strengthening of Bolivia – Chile Bilateral Relations, which will systematize the achievements relating to said agenda.
As the meeting ended, the Delegations exchanged their congratulations on the work performed, and agreed to hold their next meeting in the city of La Paz in June 2010.
At the close of the meeting, the Vice-Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Plurinational State of Bolivia, acting on behalf of his Delegation, expressed his most sincere appreciation for the cordiality and courtesy extended by Chile’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs on the occasion of these meetings.
Done in Santiago, on 13 November 2009.
FOR CHILE
[Signature.]
Envoy Alberto van Klaveren Stork
Acting Minister of Foreign Affairs
FOR BOLIVIA
[Signature.]
Envoy Hugo Fernández Aráoz
Vice-Minister of Foreign Affairs
2756
Annex 346
Annex 346
2757
2758
Annex 347
Minutes of the Fourth Plenary Meeting of the Organization of American States General Assembly, 8 June 2010
(English translation only)
Organization of American States, General Assembly, Fortieth Regular Session, 2010, Proceedings, Vol. II, OEA/Ser.P/XL-O.2 (2011), pp 121 and 136-143
2759
2760
Annex 347
[p 121]
MINUTES OF THE FOURTH PLENARY MEETING
Date: 8 June 2010
Time: 3:10 p.m.
Venue: Museo de la Nación (Museum of the Nation)
President: Envoy José Antonio García Belaúnde
Minister of Foreign
Affairs of Peru
In attendance: Antonio de Aguiar Patriota (Brazil)
Graeme C. Clark (Canada)
Alfredo Moreno (Chile)
Clemencia Forero Ucros (Colombia)
Enrique Castillo Barrantes (Costa Rica)
Judith-Anne Rolle (Dominica)
Francisco Proaño (Ecuador)
Joaquín Maza Martelli (El Salvador)
Carmen Lomellin (United States of America)
Peter C. David (Grenada)
Jorge Skinner-Klée (Guatemala)
Marie-Michèle Rey (Haiti)
L. Ann Scott (Jamaica)
Salvador Beltrán del Río Madrid (Mexico)
Denis Ronaldo Moncada Colindres (Nicaragua)
Guillermo A. Cochez (Panama)
Jorge Lara Castro (Paraguay)
Néstor Popolizio Bardales (Peru)
Alejandra Liriano de la Cruz (Dominican Republic)
Sam Condor (Saint Kitts and Nevis)
Michael Louis (Saint Lucia)
Louis H. Straker (Saint Vincent and the
Grenadines)
Michiel G. Raafenberg (Suriname)
Gerard Greene (Trinidad and Tobago)
Luis Almagro Lemes (Uruguay)
Roy Chaderton Matos (Venezuela)
Jorge E. Taiana (Argentina)
Cornelius A. Smith (The Bahamas)
Maxine McClean (Barbados)
Nestor Mendez (Belize)
David Choquehuanca Céspedes (Bolivia)
Annex 347
2761
[…]
[p 136]
2. Report on the maritime problem of Bolivia
The PRESIDENT: Item 2 on the agenda for this afternoon is the Report on the Maritime Problem of Bolivia. I invite the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Bolivia to initiate the discussion on this point.
The HEAD OF THE DELEGATION OF BOLIVIA: Thank you, Mr. President.
I want to start the presentation of this report by stating on behalf of the Bolivian people and government our solidarity with the victims of the earthquake suffered in February by a large
[p 137]
part of the territory of our Chilean brothers. I wish to highlight the Chilean people’s ability to overcome with so much strength the natural disaster that they experienced.
Mr. President and Representatives, a year ago in the city of San Pedro Sula, Honduras, on the occasion of the 39th regular meeting of the General Assembly of the Organization of American States, when presenting the report on the maritime problem of Bolivia, I expressed a renewed fraternal invitation to the Government of Chile so that together we can find a speedy definitive solution to Bolivia’s maritime confinement, considering that this unresolved situation is at odds with the current scenario of regional integration and with the spirit of resolving a historical injustice.
I made this proposal interpreting the deepest and purest conviction of the people of Bolivia of their unwavering and imprescriptible right of sovereign access to the Pacific Ocean and its maritime space, expressing the most fervent desire of my country’s Government to find an effective solution to the maritime dispute through peaceful means.
For more than four years now, through a joint agenda, Bolivia and Chile have been making an effort to build a climate of mutual trust which has achieved positive results, expressed through meetings of officials from both countries, including at the level of our leaders, expressing a firm political will.
Mr. President and Representatives, it is clear that today we are facing a new stage in bilateral rapprochement. The Government of Bolivia salutes the statements of the new Chilean Government that it will continue our work in the framework of the existing bilateral agenda. It is within this context that the resolution of the maritime problem of Bolivia is the primary element of my country’s foreign policy, interpreted accurately by this forum on 31 October 1979 when the General Assembly of the OAS adopted resolution AG/RES 462 (IX-0/79), which states that “it is of permanent hemispheric interest that an equitable solution be found whereby Bolivia will obtain appropriate sovereign access to the Pacific Ocean.”
It is not the aim of the Plurinational State of Bolivia to reaffirm every year the importance of this issue without being able to inform this House about concrete
2762
Annex 347
progress on the maritime issue. Thirty-one years after the first resolution, Bolivia’s maritime problem remains a topic of hemispheric interest, which of course prevents the full development of my country, as has been demonstrated on many occasions, but it also has consequences for the integration of the entire region.
Bolivia and Chile participate in various integration mechanisms and I believe that the relationship in these areas could be more beneficial at different levels and scopes, to the extent that both countries could lay a solid foundation for negotiating the resolution of the oldest historical wound that remains in our continent.
Bolivia today, as on other occasions, fraternally proposes that Chile make historical reparation by restoring its maritime quality in a context in which a democratic system governs the Continent and is committed to building and strengthening integration processes that span different areas, from the simplest ones, such as those developed between
[p 138]
populations in the border areas of our countries, to other more complex areas that were probably unimaginable 31 years ago.
Bolivia, with its deep integrationist desire, brought about the signing in 2007 of the Declaration of Peace between the presidents of Chile, Bolivia and Brazil, which reflects the decision of the three countries to conclude the work of the east-west interoceanic corridor, which will improve the connection between the Atlantic and the Pacific.
The Delegation of my country does not intend to enter into discussions that do not help get to the substantive aspects of whether Bolivia’s maritime problem is a strictly bilateral issue or whether it should be discussed in a bilateral environment. In any event, Bolivia values, highlights and follows the 11 resolutions that the General Assembly has issued to date, recognizing that the settlement of the Bolivian maritime problem is an issue of hemispheric interest. One of these resolutions, the one from 1983, was co-sponsored by Chile, which certainly was cause for deep satisfaction to Bolivia, which desires to see the issue of its forced confinement resolved.
Bolivia is very grateful to the sister nations that are part of this regional body for stating, on several occasions, their proposals, willingness and opinions in order to contribute, sometimes with exhortations and other specific initiatives, to the commencement of talks and negotiations between Bolivia and Chile with the aim of finding a solution to Bolivia’s maritime problem, by providing sovereign and useful access to the Pacific Ocean.
My country welcomes and particularly highlights the position expressed by the sister Republic of Peru, host of this 40th General Assembly of the OAS, in the Joint Declaration signed by the presidents of Bolivia and Peru in August 2007, that Peru will not be an obstacle if an agreement on Bolivia’s access to the sea is reached by means of bilateral discussions between Bolivia and Chile.
The evolution of international law and the international experiences that in numerous situations have provided solutions, even under conditions of extreme conflict, mean that we can think optimistically about the importance of Bolivia
Annex 347
2763
and Chile agreeing to find imaginative solutions to allow my country’s maritime reintegration, reflected in the recovery of its maritime quality, which it lost 131 years ago.
Mr. President, Latin America is faced with the challenge of designing an integration scenario that covers a number of activities based on solidarity, complementarity and balance. The privileged geographical location of Bolivia and its commitment to integration mean that we can consider playing a major role in the process of integration in the region.
My country participates in the most generous way in all areas of integration, but demands, with deep conviction, that it be understood that integration in the region will only be complete when Bolivia and Chile find a fair formula to restore Bolivia’s maritime quality.
As of 17 July 2006, Bolivia and Chile are related through the so-called Agenda of 13 Points, whose content has been ratified by the current Government of Chile. The
[p 139]
Agenda was conceived as an expression of the political will of both countries to include the maritime issue in paragraph 6 thereof. This is a clear indication that there is an explicit recognition by both countries of the existence of an issue that must be addressed and solved.
Let me make a small digression on the maritime problem, since it is also important that everyone see the current status of the relationship between Bolivia and Chile.
The State policy being conducted by my Government in relation to another issue of great relevance and significance for the Bolivian population is linked to the spring waters of the Silala. We have been working to solve another historic dispute over these waters, with the goal of establishing their potential use, considering alternatives for local development and assessing the economic impact on the area of the Canton of Quetena, Department of Potosí, where those spring waters are located.
We have come to an initial agreement to be considered and validated by both parties. The issue of water resources is certainly a central element of the international agenda. Bolivia ranks fifteenth in the world for its reserves of fresh water and has a vast potential that can, from a vision of complementarity and cooperation, become an element that strengthens the relationship with Chile.
There is an additional issue that I want to mention. As you all know, there is a particular transit regime between Bolivia and Chile. During the last four years we have addressed issues related to port modernization and implementation of free transit regime at the ports of Arica and Antofagasta; port charges in Arica and Antofagasta; treatment of dangerous cargoes and the enabling of the port of Iquique for the free transit regime.
Unfortunately for Bolivia, so far the port of Iquique has not yet been enabled, even though it should have been as part of the fulfillment of an obligation by Chile under the terms of the Treaty of Peace, Amity and Commerce of 1904, as an essential part of the free transit regime, as there was undoubtedly not enough
2764
Annex 347
efficiency in the management of its implementation.
We hope that during this year we can count on the essential elements and conditions that allow Chile to comply with the obligation of free transit, as established by the Treaty of Peace, Amity and Commerce of 1904. The demand for free transit as a right that the Treaty gives my country has not always been met in the most timely and effective manner, much less on the basis of unilateral concessions for private entities from Chilean ports. I must also say that merely improving free transit is an obligation of the Chilean State and does not in itself solve the problem of Bolivia’s maritime confinement.
I make these remarks because I understand that there is a clear and manifest will by the new Government of Chile to advance the framework of our bilateral agenda. The willingness to dialogue repeatedly expressed by the Bolivian people and Government had been received positively by the new Government of Chile.
[p 140]
If we were to summarize where we are today after already four years of work, we could say that there is some progress and some difficulties in 12 of the items on the Agenda of 13 Points, while resolution of the fundamental issue in my Government’s report today is still pending.
Mr. President and Representatives, Chile’s obligation under the Treaty of Peace, Amity and Commerce of 1904 to recognize the right of free transit through its territory and Pacific ports can result in situations of protracted negotiations and in many cases, can leave the feeling that the provisions of the Treaty on this point are not fully being complied with, which I am sure is far from being the real political will of Chile.
The leaders of our two countries in almost the past four years and particularly in recent months, have expressed unequivocally their direct interest in dialogue that covers the entire contents of the Agenda of 13 Points, including, of course, the maritime issue, which is addressed in the Political Consultations Mechanism, the highest policy-making body at the bilateral level, by the Vice-Foreign Ministers of both countries.
At the last meeting of the Political Consultations Mechanism on 13 November last year, the Vice-Foreign Ministers stressed their conviction regarding the need to continue this process, based on realistic and practical approaches as a contribution to implementing the opportunities for integration and future cooperation offered to both countries, which will also strengthen their bilateral relations.
We hope that at the next Meeting of the Political Consultations Mechanism, to be held during the first week of July, we can find a greater conviction to carry forward the dialogue. The recent inauguration of President Sebastian Piñera in Chile and the start of a new presidential term of President Morales in Bolivia constitute a crucial historical moment for our two countries to build a future of brotherhood and friendship.
Bolivia warmly welcomes the willingness expressed by President Sebastian Piñera to President Morales at the Summit held in Madrid in the context of the Latin America-Caribbean-European Union (EU-LAC), when he stated his decision
Annex 347
2765
to move forward with bilateral discussion of the Agenda of 13 Points.
Mr. President and Representatives, Bolivia fraternally asks Chile for a concrete proposal for a definitive solution that enables the resolution of Bolivia’s maritime claim through dialogue and negotiation. Therefore, Mr. Chilean Foreign Minister, let me extend a warm invitation so that from July we can make progress on analyzing alternatives that can provide a definitive solution to Bolivia’s maritime problem.
I propose, on behalf of the Government of Bolivia, to establish a roadmap for point 6 of the Agenda of 13 Points, to further concrete steps in negotiating on this issue that will lead us to an agreement. Bolivia once again expresses its willingness and awaits a positive signal from Chile on this road, which will certainly have the support and backing of all parties that have an interest in the settlement of this historical dispute. Only after a clear statement to that effect will we be able to make real progress towards full integration of our peoples.
[p 141]
Thank you very much.
The PRESIDENT: Thank you, Mr. Foreign Minister of Bolivia. I call on the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Chile, Alfredo Moreno.
The HEAD OF THE DELEGATION OF CHILE: Thank you, Mr. President.
I would like to begin by evaluating the speech by the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Plurinational State of Bolivia, David Choquehuanca. Your words, Mr. Minister, are an incentive and a reflection of the perspective of the constructive dialogue that the Chilean Government aims to develop in its relationship with Bolivia.
As the central point of my speech I want to state, with the greatest clarity, that the relationship with Bolivia is a central point of our Government’s foreign policy. Our efforts will be to deepen the level of political dialogue, maintaining a clear and firm position regarding the maritime issue, which we believe belongs in a strictly bilateral environment and therefore falls outside the jurisdiction of this organization, as we noted on 7 April before the Subcommittee on Agenda and Procedures, when the issue was presented.
Along with that, Mr. Minister, I would take this important platform to reiterate the respect and affection that the Government of Chile has for the Government of President Evo Morales and all the Bolivian people. That is why we will not cease in the firm intention to guide our efforts and actions to expand the levels of trust and understanding between our countries.
It is that same feeling of brotherhood and fraternity which millions of Bolivians, led by President Morales himself, endorsed after one of the greatest disasters in our country throughout its history occurred, the earthquake and tsunami of 27 February this year. I would therefore like to take this opportunity to express, on behalf of the Government of Chile, our sincere gratitude to the Government and people of Bolivia for the generous displays of affection and for their support and help, of particular importance for the many victims of this painful tragedy.
I would also like to remember and value the auspicious results of the survey
2766
Annex 347
published in an important Bolivian publication, completed in March this year by CIES International, whose purpose was to measure the Bolivian people’s perception of Chile.
According to that poll, 46% of respondents said that they did not perceive any conflict between our countries, and the vast majority of respondents also said that they had a positive and friendly image of the Chilean people, which is certainly clear and noticeable progress in building mutual trust.
The speech by Foreign Minister Choquehuanca reflects the spirit of improvement and the perspective of future harmony that our people expect from our relationship as neighboring countries. We will therefore work enthusiastically to boost an increasingly fruitful relationship through dialogue with actual content and thus believe that the extended cordial meetings held this year between Presidents Sebastian Piñera and Evo Morales are very
[p 142]
auspicious. Also, we believe that transparency and a sense of responsibility are the foundation needed to build levels of trust, friendship and understanding.
We will seek, esteemed Foreign Minister, to demonstrate with concrete facts that our interest towards your country is genuine and a priority. To that end, we will identify and take actions with special emphasis on improving free transit and Bolivia’s access to the Pacific Ocean through Chilean ports, as required by the Treaty of Peace, Amity and Commerce of 1904. Thus, we will be able to give this relationship a clear projection towards a tomorrow of greater understanding. Similarly, with this forward-looking perspective, we will advocate for deepening the trade and economic relationship of physical integration and we will advocate decisively for the creation of new areas of cooperation.
It is our genuine will to work together for a progressive and significant increase in these flows of bilateral trade, which in 2009 totaled 390 million dollars. Similarly, we will promote actions in order to increase investment flows and reduce the existing trade gap between the two countries, which today is reflected in a deficit balance for Bolivia of 230 million dollars. We will continue to drive rounds of business, we will seek to identify new market opportunities and actively cooperate with Bolivia in promoting its exports, not only to our country but also to other markets.
Similarly, we will give special attention to deepening and expanding bilateral technical cooperation, prioritizing the promotion of initiatives in support of customs and border areas, the sanitary and phytosanitary areas, health, governance and social issues, among others. Also, in the area of education, we will seek to expand scholarships for Bolivian students to pursue studies in our educational institutions as a way of bringing our people together through the development of knowledge.
We will also insist on further actions and projects in other areas of interest such as culture and tourism, in addition to continuing with further actions to strengthen mutual trust in the area of defense and security. We will also work to continue the progress made with bilateral dialogue in recent times, which we will seek to deepen and promote for the development and welfare of our people.
Annex 347
2767
Consistent with the foregoing, it is our strong interest to make progress in implementing and monitoring actions today included in the bilateral agenda, whose success depends on the efforts and joint perseverance of our Governments. Just to name a few, I would like to mention:
•
The definitive enabling of the Port of Iquique for the free transit regime;
•
The implementation and opening of new integrated border controls;
•
The final commissioning of the central interoceanic corridor; and
[p 143]
•
The signing of an initial agreement on the Silala or Siloli, as mentioned by Foreign Minister Choquehuanca.
After five years of unsuccessful attempts, we have in recent days fulfilled the commitment to move forward in the works for rehabilitation and remediation of the Chilean section of the railway from Arica to La Paz. Contracts for the performance of this work were signed in Arica in late April of this year, which will allow that to be fully up and running in the first half of 2012, thanks to a Government investment of 32 million dollars.
I also emphasize the importance of supporting and monitoring the work of the Working Group on Bilateral Affairs and the Bilateral Political Consultations Mechanism, instruments that have made it possible to systematize the bilateral relationship in a broad agenda without exclusions. During the month of June this year, we will hold future meetings of this mechanism in Bolivia, and I am sure that we will keep moving to deepen our bonds.
As neighboring countries, our people expect us to be able to generate a real process of integration and development. Only through this process can we overcome perceptions, feelings and prejudices that are still alive in some sectors of our societies, but are thankfully dwindling, and facilitate the success of our efforts and wills with clear benefits for our countries.
Let me conclude my remarks by reiterating my belief that we can and should address the challenges presented to us by the bicentennial of our Republic, strengthening confidence levels and areas of cooperation, acting together on issues of mutual interest and giving this dialogue I have already mentioned a clear projection towards future issues. In this regard, the words of Minister Choquehuanca summarize such purposes unequivocally, which also have been endorsed by our own Presidents at their initial meetings and in their subsequent statements.
Mr. President, the fates of Chile and Bolivia as neighboring countries are united. I have discussed a broad and constructive agenda that we intend to continue carrying out with Bolivia at a strictly bilateral level. It is our resolved interest to generate sincere, ample and responsible dialogue, to multiply the points on which we agree and thus be able to meet the challenges of the present and future demands of friendship and prosperity that our people long for.
Thank you very much.
2768
Annex 348
Minutes of the Twenty-Second Meeting of the Political Consultations Mechanism, 14 July 2010
(Original in Spanish, English translation)
Archives of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Chile
2769
2770
Annex 348
Annex 348
2771
MINUTES OF THE 22ND MEETING OF THE
BOLIVIA-CHILE
POLITICAL CONSULTATIONS MECHANISM
The 22nd Meeting of the Chile-Bolivia Political Consultations Mechanism was held in La Paz, Bolivia, from 12 to 14 July 2010, in order to analyze and monitor the progress made on the thirteen issues on the broad joint agenda without exclusions designed by both countries.
The Bolivian Delegation was headed by Envoy Mónica Soriano López, Vice-Minister of Foreign Affairs, and the Chilean Delegation was headed by Envoy Fernando Schmidt Ariztía, Undersecretary of Foreign Affairs.
This meeting was preceded by the 10th Meeting of the Working Group on Bilateral Affairs whose conclusions were submitted to the Heads of Delegation for their consideration and approval. A list of the Delegations of both countries is attached to these Minutes.
The Head of the Bolivian Delegation warmly welcomed the Chilean Undersecretary of Foreign Affairs and the Chilean Delegation, hoping for a productive work day. She mentioned both Delegations’ willingness to move forward with the bilateral agenda.
The Head of the Chilean Delegation thanked her for the warm welcome, mentioning the constructive atmosphere and interest in reaching agreements in areas of mutual benefit. He mentioned the recent meetings held by top-level authorities from both countries, which reflected the spirit of understanding and cooperation behind them. Chile’s Undersecretary of Foreign Affairs stated he was sure that this meeting would yield highly positive results beneficial to both parties.
Having approved the methodology and the agenda for the meeting, the Delegations proceeded to discuss it:
I. Development of Mutual Trust
Both Delegations reiterated their satisfaction with the various high-level meetings that have been held since the 21st Meeting of the Political Consultations Mechanism, and concurred that it is important that they continue encouraging such activities, as well as civil-society projects from both countries that make it possible to keep strengthening mutual trust.
2772
Annex 348
Annex 348
2773
Most notable among the main activities are former President Michelle Bachelet’s visit on 22 January on the occasion of the Inauguration of President Evo Morales’ second term in office; President Evo Morales’ participation in the handover ceremony in Chile on 10-11 March 2010, during which he had a cordial meeting with President Sebastián Piñera; as well as the informal meetings between both Presidents in the context of the Unity Summit of Latin America and the Caribbean in Cancun on 23 February 2010, and in the context of the EU-LAC Summit held in Madrid on 19 May 2010. Also noteworthy are the visit of Bolivia’s Vice President, Álvaro García Linera, to Chile, and his meeting with President Sebastián Piñera on 24 June 2010.
The Chilean Delegation reiterated the invitation extended by President Piñera to Bolivia’s President and Vice President to attend Chile’s Bicentennial celebrations in September this year, while noting that President Morales’ presence during the festivities would be a gesture of true symbolism and importance for strengthening the mutual trust and fraternal ties between our countries.
Likewise, both Delegations emphasized the meetings held between the Ministers of Foreign Affairs, Alfredo Moreno and David Choquehuanca, one in early March 2010, when the Bolivian Minister visited Chile to provide humanitarian aid from his country in solidarity with the victims of the earthquake of this past 27 February, and then in the context of the UNASUR Ministerial Meeting held in Argentina on 3 May 2010. At this meeting, the Chilean Delegation reiterated its appreciation for the Bolivian Government’s many gestures in solidarity over the earthquake.
Also notable was the visit of Bolivia’s Minister of Defense, Rubén Saavedra, to Chile to attend the inauguration of the International Air and Space Fair (FIDAE 2010); he held a work meeting with Chile’s Minister of Defense, Jaime Ravinet, on 25 March 2010.
Noteworthy as well is the visit to Bolivia of the then Commander-In-Chief of the Chilean Army and current Undersecretary of Defense, General Oscar Izurieta Ferrer, who visited the cities of La Paz and Cochabamba between 9 and 12 December 2009, following up on the visit of the Commander General of the Bolivian Army, General Ramiro de la Fuente Bloch, to Santiago, Chile in July 2009.
Meanwhile, a number of other activities also took place, including, most notably, the following:
•
1st Bolivia-Chile Meeting of Women and Social Organizations of the Northern Area, in Arica, on 17 December 2009.
2774
Annex 348
Annex 348
2775
•
1st Meeting of Young Bolivian and Chilean Poets, held in the City of La Paz from 24 to 27 February 2010.
The following upcoming events, among others, are highlighted:
•
Chile – Bolivia Business Round: construction and household materials, to be held in Santiago on 29 July.
•
1st Binational Bolivia-Chile Youth Meeting, in Putre, on 22-23 October.
•
2nd Bolivia-Chile Meeting of Diplomatic Academies, in La Paz, in the first half of October.
II. Border Integration
•
Frontier and Integration Committee
The Delegations took note of the upcoming 11th Meeting of the Frontier and Integration Committee, initially scheduled to be held in the City of Iquique in the first half of September 2010.
•
Mixed Boundaries Commission
The Delegations emphasized the importance of resuming the marker reinstallation, repair and geo-referencing works of the Chile-Bolivia Mixed Boundaries Commission and, in connection with this, they agreed to hold a meeting of said bilateral Commission in Santiago, on 6-9 September 2010.
•
Border Municipalities and Communities
Both Delegations agreed to hold a 4th Meeting of Border Municipalities in the City of Arica, in the first week of September 2010, prior to the 11th Meeting of the Border and Integration Commission.
•
Border Development
The Delegations agreed to hold the 2nd Health without Borders Meeting in order to further the inter-regional health agenda. The Chilean Delegation proposed that it be held in the City of Iquique on 7-8 October. The Bolivian Delegation will make the necessary consultations on the suggested dates.
•
Bilateral Meeting of Customs Authorities
The Delegations emphasized the importance of holding the 5th Bilateral Meeting of Customs Authorities in Bolivia in the second half of 2010.
2776
Annex 348
Annex 348
2777
•
Workshop on the Worst Forms of Child Labor.
The Delegations mentioned the 3rd Workshop on the Worst Forms of Child Labor that was held in the City of Potosí on 17-18 November 2009. In this regard, they concurred on supporting efforts intended to define a sub-regional Bilateral Cooperation Program to fight child labor.
•
Integrated Border Controls.
The Delegations praised the intense work that has been carried out to further an ambitious program to implement the Integrated Control System at major border crossings.
They noted that, upon the inauguration of the Integrated Control System at the Tambo Quemado – Chungará Crossing on 13 July, such mechanism will be operational at the three main border crossings between the two countries, thus joining the Charaña – Visviri and the Pisiga – Colchane border crossings.
Moreover, they concurred on the need for the negotiations process over the Rules of the Agreement on Integrated Border Controls and the Operating Manual for the Integrated Control Area to soon come to a mutually satisfactory close, such that both instruments can be approved in the course of this year. For this purpose, the Chilean Delegation will be soon convening the 7th Meeting of the Technical Commission on Integrated Border Controls in Santiago.
Charaña – Visviri:
The Delegations mentioned the technical progress made with a view to developing a “twin” complex on the international border. Moreover, they concurred on the importance of speeding up the works related to the architectural design of the new border complex. The Chilean Delegation presented a preliminary architectural design plan for the complex, for consideration by the Bolivian authority and future adaptation to that country’s facilities.
Tambo Quemado – Chungará:
The Delegations mentioned as extremely important the start of the trial run period for the Integrated Border Controls system at this complex on 9 July 2010.
They also exchanged congratulations on the inauguration of the adaptation works at Chungará and the formal implementation of the Integrated Controls System at this Border Complex on 13 July 2010, with both Vice-Ministers of Foreign Affairs, among other authorities, attending the ceremony.
2778
Annex 348
Annex 348
2779
The Chilean Delegation reported that it will be starting construction of the new Complex in Chungará in 2011.
Pisiga – Colchane:
The Delegations stated the importance of discussing a provisional date for the inauguration of this complex, in an attempt to secure attendance by the Presidents of Bolivia and Chile.
Avaroa Station – Ollagüe:
The Delegations exchanged congratulations on a new single-manager integrated control exercise carried out in Ollagüe, Chile, which started on 9 November and extended through 15 November.
They also concurred that it is important to perform a new exercise extending for a longer period in the second half of 2010. The Chilean Delegation suggested it should be carried out in the first two weeks of October, extending for fifteen days.
Cajón Marker – Cajones Marker:
Due to there being no adequate infrastructure in place, the Delegations once again agreed to postpone the first single-manager integrated control exercise.
III. Free Transit
Both Delegations highlighted the results and took note of the agreements resulting from the 11th Meeting of the Working Group on Free Transit, which was held in the city of La Paz, on 11 June 2010.
•
Ports of Arica and Antofagasta
The Chilean Delegation emphasized the importance of the process of port modernization that has been taking place in the Ports of Antofagasta and Arica with respect to infrastructure and port equipment, pointing out that approximately 60 million dollars has been invested in the Port of Arica in the past three years, which have been primarily used to build an earthquake-proof dock and two sheds for loading and storage of Bolivian minerals, and have also been used for the environmental remediation of the Port.
With regard to the issue of rates in the Port of Arica, both Delegations noted the signing of the Memorandum of Understanding between the Empresa Portuaria Arica and the Bolivian Port Services Administration, by which an agreement was reached on a preferential rate framework for Bolivian cargo in transit, which will remain in effect for two years beginning 21 May 2009.
2780
Annex 348
Annex 348
2781
They also reiterated the importance of formalizing the establishment of the ad hoc mechanism for the solution, prevention and management of emergency situations in the Port of Arica as part of the recommendations resulting from the 11th Seminar on Handling, Storage and Transport of Dangerous Goods.
In this regard, the Chilean Delegation reported that the Empresa Portuaria Arica has indicated that it will soon formalize this mechanism, for which it will work with the Port’s Information and Coordination Center, on a protocol or procedure that must provide for formal participation by the Bolivian entities.
The Chilean Delegation also reported that the Portezuelo Terminal, in Antofagasta, which is used for storage of Bolivian minerals in transit, has budgeted for this year a plan to improve the administrative areas, which will provide solid constructions for the offices, thus replacing the former containers.
The Bolivian Delegation welcomed this information while at the same time indicating its interest in having improvements made to the roof of that Terminal to avoid contamination and losses.
With respect to overseas cargo in transit to Bolivia affected by the prohibitions on entry to that country, the Chilean Delegation requested an agreement that these goods are no longer considered “in transit” and are covered by the general regime granted by Chilean Customs. They also stated their concern about cargo that is not removed by consignees after 365 days in storage. In this respect, they concurred that the topic would be discussed, as soon as possible, in the framework of the Integrated Transit System.
With regard to the “Charges for storage service in the terminal operated under concession” in the Port of Antofagasta, which was referred to the Political Consultation Mechanism for consideration in June 2009, the Chilean delegation stated that work continues to be done on formulas to resolve this situation, such as granting free storage in the Port sector operated under concession for Bolivian cargo in special condition, and confirmed that full capacity is being maintained for free storage of Bolivian cargo in the multi-operated sector of the Port.
•
Enabling of the Port of Iquique
Both Delegations again indicated that the enabling of the Port of Iquique under the Free Transit Regime in favor of Bolivia is of prime importance for the bilateral relationship.
The Bolivian and Chilean Delegations stated their interest in signing Diplomatic Notes on the basis of the concurred text from the 20th Meeting of the
2782
Annex 348
Annex 348
2783
Political Consultation Mechanism, in order to establish a formula for implementing free storage for containers in transit with Bolivian cargo, under the “mobile area” system, with 300 m2 of space in addition to the 1,000 m2 already agreed to in the port area. This space is in addition to the 4 hectare area outside the port in Alto Hospicio.
The Bolivian and Chilean Delegations agreed to the composition of a high-level technical commission from both countries, to be established in the Port of Iquique, in order to coordinate technical and operating aspects for enabling the Port of Iquique in the coming weeks.
•
Integrated Transit System (SIT)
The delegation reiterated the advisability of continuing working for the revision of the Operations Manual of the Integrated Transit System, and took note that the Chairman of the Integrated Transit System will call a meeting of the Board of Directors for the month of August, in Bolivia.
•
Ground Transportation of Bolivian Overseas Cargo
In the context of the Free Transit Regime, the Bolivian Delegation reiterated that the permits granted by the relevant authority to Bolivian operators providing transportation services for Bolivian overseas cargo are sufficient for the transportation of said cargo. Moreover, it said that, with a view to streamlining the system, the transportation authority is working on new insurance regulations providing for greater coverage.
On the other hand, the Chilean Delegation yet again requested that Bolivian carriers obtain the additional permissions under the Agreement on International Ground Transport (ATIT)
IV. Physical Integration
•
Mixed Technical Group on Infrastructure (GTM).
The Delegations agreed to hold the 5th GTM Meeting in Santiago, on a date to be specified in the third week this August.
The Delegations noted the progress made on the international routes making up the Central Inter-oceanic Corridor and confirmed their interest in having the Presidents inaugurate the Corridor once all pending works have been completed. Moreover, they expressed their interest in holding a three-party meeting with Brazil soon to address issues related to the corridor’s future operation.
2784
Annex 348
Annex 348
2785
The Chilean Delegation expressed that the Ministry of Public Works is available to meet with its Bolivian counterpart in Santiago this coming August.
•
Arica-La Paz Railway.
The Chilean Delegation pointed out that contracts have been signed and processed with the respective companies that will perform the environmental remediation and repair of the Chilean section of the Arica – La Paz Railway. This investment will be US$ 34 million and will take 24 months to perform, and is expected to be completed by mid-2012.
The Bolivian Delegation reiterated that the portion of the Arica – La Paz Railway on its territory is in a usable condition and that periodic maintenance is performed on it.
In this regard, both Delegations concurred on the need for the relevant Ministers and the rail transport authorities to meet during the second half of the year in order to exchange ideas about the future operations of that railway.
V. Economic Complementation.
The Delegations took note of the proposal to hold the next meeting of the Administrative Commission for the Agreement on Economic Complementation (ACE 22) in La Paz on 24 August, and once again stressed the importance of this Commission, as well as the issues addressed by it.
They expressed their intention to continue working to find a greater trade balance between Bolivia and Chile.
In this regard, with a view to strengthening economic and trade relations between the two countries, they placed particular emphasis on their interest in continuing to carry out actions intended to promote Bolivian exports to the Chilean market, as well as to explore exports to third countries via joint actions.
The Delegations exchanged congratulations on the initiatives that have been implemented in the context of the Cooperation Agreement between Promueve Bolivia [Bolivia’s Exports and Tourism Promotion Agency] and ProChile [Chile’s Exportable Goods Promotion Agency], mentioning the good results of the Business Round held in Antofagasta this past 17 November, and the interest in and expectations generated by the upcoming Business Round on Household and Construction Materials scheduled to be held in Santiago on 29 July.
The Chilean Delegation confirmed its offer to allow Bolivia to use its external trade promotion network, in particular in the Asia-Pacific region. They agreed to work on a “Plan to
2786
Annex 348
Annex 348
2787
Cooperate with Bolivia to commercially promote Bolivian Exports” at the next Meeting of the ACE 22 Commission, which plan will promote Bolivian exports worldwide. In this regard, it was agreed to hold a meeting prior to the Meeting of the ACE 22 Managing Commission, in the City of La Paz.
They agreed to continue coordinating actions jointly to fight smuggling and, in particular, the smuggling of second-hand clothes.
The Delegations reiterated that, in the context of ACE 22, it is necessary to hold a meeting-workshop on a date to be defined, between the tourism authorities from both countries, to arrange a working agenda for tourism issues, with special emphasis on “Integrated Circuits.”
VI. Maritime Issue.
The Vice-Ministers of Foreign Affairs highlighted the importance of bilateral dialogue as a mechanism of understanding between the governments of Bolivia and Chile.
They reaffirmed that the process reflects a concerted Policy between both governments and, considering the high levels of mutual trust reached at the present meeting, they confirmed that they would preserve this climate in order to stimulate bilateral dialogue in order to address the broad issue under Item 6 on the 13-point Agenda in that context, and thus propose how to reach concrete, feasible and useful solutions at the next and subsequent meetings of the Political Consultations Mechanism, which would benefit the understanding and harmony of both countries.
VIl. The Silala River and Water Resources.
Both Delegations discussed the process of socialization of the Initial Silala Accord in Bolivia, with Bolivia raising the matter of a historical debt. Given that there are no agreements in this respect, both Delegations agreed that the Working Group on the issue of the Silala River should meet again with the goal of determining, analyzing and responding to all the proposals made as a result of the socialization of the Initial Accord. This Working Group must submit a report to the next meeting of the Political Consultations Mechanism.
VIII. Instruments to Fight Poverty
The Delegations expressed their satisfaction over the smooth and continued development of the Cooperation Work Plan signed in June 2008 between Chile’s International Cooperation Agency (AGCI), and the Ministry of Development Planning, acting through the Office of the Vice-Minister of Public Investment and Foreign Financing (VIPFE), under which specific progress was made in the first half of 2010 that has allowed the creation of work networks in various areas of interest. Such achievements are listed in the Annex to these Minutes.
2788
Annex 348
Annex 348
2789
In this context, the Delegations placed special emphasis on advances made in health-related issues, as a result of the continued running of the Hospital Twinning project between the Exequiel Gonzáles Cortés Hospital and the Children’s Hospital in La Paz. The latter hospital was donated anesthesiology equipment by the Government of Chile this past January.
As to the addition of young participants to international cooperation efforts, the Delegations emphasized the creation and implementation of the Bolivia foundation Un Techo Para Mi País, set up by Bolivian university students who volunteer to build transitional houses, and the participation of young Chilean professional volunteers from the América Solidaria foundation in local social projects in Cochabamba, Bolivia, and of Bolivian youth in Chiloé, Chile.
The Chilean Delegation noted that, in 2010, a total of 30 Bolivian students are pursuing their graduate studies in Chile, in the context of the AGCI scholarships.
The Delegations reiterated the importance of continuing with the cooperation program and remarked on the relevance of the new health-related cooperation initiatives: the second stage of the hospital twinning plan, which is intended to develop the intensive care, outpatient surgery, and nutrition units; and the implementation project for a university course of studies in speech therapy and audiology and occupational therapy at Universidad Mayor de San Andrés, to train specialists in rehabilitation for people with disabilities.
The Parties expressed their interest in seeking co-funding from traditional cooperation for development donors, to pool resources into cooperation and/or projects in priority areas of common interest at both the bilateral and sub-regional levels.
The Delegations confirmed their interest in sharing information in preparation for the 2nd Meeting of the Working Group, which will take place in Santiago in the first half of October 2010. For such purpose, a new 2011-2013 Cooperation Work Plan will be prepared that will account for the new priorities of Bolivia’s Government Plan.
IX. Security and Defense.
The Delegations discussed the smooth bilateral relations as to Defense-related issues and the growing dynamic, remarking on the mutual visits by authorities from the Ministries of Defense and Armed Forces of both countries.
As regards humanitarian demining at the border, in the context of the Ottawa Convention, the Chilean Delegation reported that the process of securing certification for the manually-cleared mined areas in the Tambo
2790
Annex 348
Annex 348
2791
Quemado sector is in its final stages, which guarantees that these areas are free of anti-personnel mines, as per the standards set by Chile’s National Humanitarian Demining Commission (CNAD). The Delegations noted that both Ministers of Defense will be meeting in Tambo Quemado on 29-30 July 2010 to go over the bilateral agenda for defense-related issues and participate in the closing ceremony for the demining works carried out in the area.
Moreover, the Delegations mentioned a new humanitarian demining course to be organized in the future for Bolivian officers and non-commissioned officers, for which purpose the Bolivian Delegation will soon be sending a list of the candidates.
As to the Agreement for Cooperation between Chile’s Uniformed Police [Carabineros] and Bolivia’s National Police, the Bolivian Delegation reported that the legislative ratification process has been completed, with the agreement thus being ready for promulgation. The Chilean Delegation reiterated that all domestic requirements for this bilateral instrument to come into force have been satisfied.
The Delegations noted, as an important measure in the context of mutual trust, that, during the second half of the current year, an Officer of the Bolivian Army – a Major or a Lieutenant Colonel – will be joining the Chile-Ecuador Engineer Company (Horizontal) at MINUSTAH (Haiti).
At the same time, they expressed their interest in finding a formula that will allow for the standardization of Defense Expenditures. They also noted that such standardization is an important step in deepening the parties’ mutual trust.
•
Agreement for Mutual Cooperation and Assistance For Risk Management and Natural Disasters
The Delegations concurred on continuing their work to perfect the final version of the Agreement for Mutual Cooperation and Assistance for Risk Management and Natural Disasters, with a view to it being executed soon.
X. Cooperation for the Control of Illegal Trafficking of Drugs, Precursors and Essential Chemicals
The Delegations concurred on holding the 8th Meeting of the Mixed Commission on Drugs and Related Issues in Santiago, this 19-20 August.
They agreed to make their best efforts to shut the borders off to drug trafficking.
2792
Annex 348
Annex 348
2793
They concurred on the importance of continuing to further an increase in information sharing and cooperation between the police forces and prosecutorial agencies, as well as of continuing to develop joint training initiatives for judges, prosecutors, and police officers through bilateral or three-party programs or projects involving traditional cooperation for development donors.
The Chilean Delegation committed to submit for the Bolivian Delegation’s consideration a proposal of the content of this year’s seminars for judges, prosecutors and police officers.
The Chilean Delegation expressed its interest in signing the “Agreement on the Exchange of Information on Criminal Records for Trafficking of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances and Related Money Laundering Crimes.” In this regard, having made the necessary consultations, the Bolivian Delegation reiterated its statements at the 21st Meeting of the Political Consultation Mechanism, and, because its domestic rules call for the information in the Judicial Register of Criminal Records (REJAP) to be privileged, no alternative has been identified that would allow the execution of the Convention.
This notwithstanding, the Chilean Delegation expressed its interest in assessing other ways to address the issue.
As regards Bolivia’s proposal to consider the possibility amending Article 49 (1c) and (2e) of the 1961 Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs as regards coca leaves and the prohibition of coca-leaf chewing (akulliku), the Chilean Delegation stated it has conveyed the proposal, which is currently being analyzed by the relevant authorities.
XI. Education, Science and Technology.
The Delegations agreed to hold the 1st Meeting of the Mixed Commission on Education in the second half of August, in Santiago, and recommended that it be preceded by a preparatory meeting the day before, in addition to both technical teams being able to share information on the issues on the Agenda.
XII. Culture.
The Delegations exchanged congratulations on the cooperation and active cultural exchange in the context of the “Memorandum of Understanding for a Cultural Exchange Program between the Republic of Chile’s National Council for Culture and the Arts and the Plurinational State of Bolivia’s Ministry of Culture for 2009-2012.”
2794
Annex 348
Annex 348
2795
Moreover, both Delegations agreed to hold the 2nd Meeting of the Mixed Cultural Commission between Chile’s National Council for Culture and the Arts and Bolivia’s Ministry of Culture. The Bolivian Delegation proposed that it be held in the City of La Paz on 9-10 August.
They agreed that the commission should, among other issues, focus on the draft Agreement on the Protection and Restitution of Cultural Heritage Assets between Chile and Bolivia, as well as the draft Agreement on Cultural Heritage.
XIII. Other Topics
•
Social Security Agreement
The Delegations stated that both the Office of the Vice-Minister of Pensions and Financial Services of Bolivia and the Office of the Undersecretary of Social Security of Chile are available for a meeting to move forward with the negotiations over the Agreement in the second half of 2010, during which meeting the parties could share their experiences with social security reforms and the potential scope of the Ibero-American Social Security Convention in their respective countries.
•
AADAA [Autonomous Administration of Customs Warehouses]
As to the former AADAA workers, the Bolivian Delegation noted that, having completed a legal analysis of the applicable legislation, as well as the necessary internal consultations, it cannot approve the draft Agreement submitted by Chile’s Delegation in November 2009.
•
Consular Issues
The Delegations took note of the agreement reached in late May 2010 to apply the free-of-charge status for student visas to citizens of both countries pursuant to the Memorandum of Understanding signed in 1994.
They noted that, with this new understanding in place, charges on visas for Chilean and Bolivian students no longer applies since this past 14 June.
•
Coordination on Multilateral Issues
The Delegations agreed to hold a second Multilateral Consultation Meeting in Chile in August, prior to the next General Assembly of the United Nations.
2796
Annex 348
As the meeting ended, the Delegations exchanged their congratulations on the work performed, the coordination and planning done by both teams and their excellent organization, and agreed to hold their next meeting in the city of Arica in November 2010.
At the close of the meeting, the Undersecretary of Foreign Affairs of Chile, acting on behalf of his Delegation, expressed his most sincere appreciation for the cordiality and courtesy extended by the Plurinational State of Bolivia’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs on the occasion of these meetings.
Done in La Paz, on 14 July 2010.
FOR BOLIVIA
[Signed]
Envoy Mónica Soriano López
Vice-Minister of Foreign Affairs
FOR CHILE
[Signed]
Envoy Fernando Schmidt Ariztía
Undersecretary of Foreign Affairs
Annex 348
2797
2798
Annex 348
Annex 349
“Minister of Foreign Affairs and the Bolivian enclave: ‘Any alternatives that divide the country are not beneficial’”,
chile-hoy.blogspot.com, 6 December 2010
(Original in Spanish, English translation)
Original submitted by Bolivia as Annex 142 to its Memorial
2799
2800
Annex 349
Annex 349
2801
http://chile-hoy.blogspot.com/2010/12/canciller-y-enclave-boliviano.html
Monday, 6 December 2010
Minister of Foreign Affairs and the Bolivian enclave: “Any alternatives that divide the country are not beneficial.”
The Minister of Foreign Affairs explained why he ruled out the enclave formula proposed to Bolivia by Bachelet.
“Any alternatives that would mean splitting the country in two, we do not think these are alternatives that would benefit Chile,” stated Minister of Foreign Affairs Alfredo Moreno yesterday when explaining the reasons why early this year Sebastián Piñera’s Administration ruled out the formula for a Bolivian coastal enclave that had been discussed by Bachelet and Evo Morales.
Yesterday, when asked about the mechanisms that the government is looking into, Minister Moreno pointed out during an interview with TVN that “we want to seek all the solutions that will help Bolivia get better access to the ocean, while always keeping Chile’s interests in mind, and anything that would split the country up in two will never be in Chile’s interests.”
Since mid-2007, as reported yesterday by La Tercera, Vice-Ministers of Foreign Affairs Alberto van Klaveren and Hugo Fernández had been working on the possibility of a Bolivian enclave in the First Region’s coastal area, more precisely south of the Camarones ravine and north of Iquique. In mid-2009, Bolivia sent a technical team to the area to check out the enclave’s conditions on site, expressing its interest to move forward with this mechanism. The Bolivian government was asking for an area of about 400 km2, a wharf to export minerals, and the possibility of building an urban and tourism zone there.
In October 2009, and given the imminent change in Chile’s
2802
Annex 349
Annex 349
2803
administration, La Paz urged the Chilean Ministry of Foreign Affairs to sign a document expressly stating the progress made in the discussions regarding the maritime issue, and establishing the steps to be completed in the coming years.
The document reached Santiago in late December, following the first ballot in the presidential elections. In that context, Bachelet’s Administration chose not to sign it, but rather wait for the new authorities to be in place. In February, the then Minister of Foreign Affairs Mariano Fernandez showed the document to the Foreign Affairs team of the new administration, and that team halted the discussions. According to sources in the current administration, the document was thought to be excessive. Sources close to Piñera stated that the President believes the enclave formula is not a definitive solution to Bolivia’s maritime aspirations; on the contrary, it could even become a new thorn in the side. Piñera’s view is that the ideal solution to Bolivia’s maritime issue is still a corridor north of the Lluta River that would not divide Chile in two.
In this regard, Chile’s chief diplomat declined to provide specifics but emphasized that a formula providing sovereignty to Bolivia is not on the table. “What we are looking for is a way to improve its access to the sea, seeking all solutions that would be possible for us, concrete for them and, most importantly, useful,” said Moreno.
Senators in La Paz
These new revelations were made while the members of the Senate’s Foreign Affairs Commission are in La Paz.
The senators will be meeting at 9:00 a.m. today with Foreign Minister David Choquehuanca and later on with their counterparts from the Bolivian Senate, after which they will have lunch with Vice-President Alvaro García Linera. Led by Hernán Larraín, the Chilean delegation expects to be addressing the maritime issue at all three encounters. “It is reasonable to continue to look for formulas while issues move forward at The Hague, but between Chile and Bolivia, without including Peru,” stated Senator Larraín.
Senator Eugenio Tuma (PPD) favors “shortening the deadlines for giving Bolivia a maritime outlet.” He believes the only alternative is a corridor north of Arica. “Looking for temporary formulas consisting of enclaves or loans does not settle the underlying issue,” he said.
Meeting in Paris
“No resource will be spared in defending Chile’s interests at
2804
Annex 349
The Hague,” said Foreign Minister Alfredo Moreno yesterday shortly before travelling to Paris to join the meetings of the team charged with defending Chile from the maritime application filed by Peru.
Chilean agents Alberto van Klaveren and María Teresa Infante have been in Paris since Thursday for their meetings with the foreign attorneys hired by Chile, to discuss the reply Peru filed this past November in response to Chile’s counter-memorial.
The meeting venue is the offices of French lawyer Pierre-Marie Dupuy’s law firm. International experts James Crawford, David Colson, Jan Paulsson, and Luiggi Condorelli were invited to attend. Condorelli recently joined Chile’s defense team.
http://chile-hoy.blogspot.com/2010/12/canciller-y-enclave-boliviano.html
Annex 350
R. Prudencio Lizón, History of the Charaña Negotiation (2011), pp 18-19, 328-342, 355-374 (extract)
(Original in Spanish, English translation)
2805
2806
Annex 350
Annex 350
2807
Ramiro Prudencio Lizón
“History of the Charaña Negotiation”
[Prologue by Armando Loaiza Mariaca]
As proven by the successive diplomatic negotiations between Bolivia and Chile, from 1895, 1920, 1950, 1975 and 1987, the best way for Bolivia to reach an agreement for its own sovereign access to the Pacific can be no other than direct, frank, and amicable negotiations between the two States and, in due course, with Peru as well.
As recognized by renowned writer and diplomat, Mr. Walter Montenegro, in his day, in order to engage in bilateral negotiations, knowing all past efforts is critical so as to avoid making the same mistakes that caused such efforts to fail. Specifically, Prudencio would like the Charaña Negotiation, the most important negotiation undertaken in the second half of the past century, to be known in detail, in order for any future negotiation to rest upon a more solid foundation and that it may end with a solution that is satisfactory to the parties, based on a sovereign outlet to the Pacific Ocean of its own for Bolivia.
As demonstrated by Prudencio, the Charaña Negotiation had several stages, which are described in earnest and impartially in his book. The first of these begins with the Act of Charaña document, signed in the town of Charaña on eight February 1975. The Act states, verbatim, that the dialogue will continue “at various levels, to seek formulas for solving the vital matters that both countries face, such as the landlocked situation that affects Bolivia, taking into account their reciprocal interests and addressing the aspirations of the Bolivian and Chilean peoples.”
The second stage is based on the Aide-Mémoire submitted to Chile by Bolivia in August that year. The third, and most important, revolves around Chile’s proposal, made through a note dated 19 December, to surrender a corridor north of Arica based on an exchange of territories.
As recounted by Prudencio, following such proposal, at a point in time when it was believed that the negotiation was accomplishing its goal already, Peru presented its counter-proposal, then followed by, in the long run, the opposition of a major portion of the Bolivian population to a territorial exchange. These two factors slowly undermined the negotiation, which went through a long period of tension and a lack of understanding between the parties that ultimately brought such an important effort to an end.
The last stage, which Prudencia calls “The end of the Negotiation”, begins when President Banzer proposes to his Chilean and Peruvian colleagues,
2808
Annex 350
Annex 350
2809
Generals Pinochet and Morales Bermúdez, respectively the establishment of “Special Representatives”, one per country, to meet and be dedicated to clearing the obstacles that were disrupting the progress of the negotiations. This meeting was held on September of 1977. While the Chilean and Peruvian Presidents elected their representatives, Bolivia, who had proposed the idea in the first place, never made the nomination. Instead, Bolivia preferred to break off diplomatic relations with Chile and put an end to such an important operation.
In March 1978, as is known, the Government of Bolivia abruptly decided to end the negotiation. Prudencio is harshly critical of that act, which he believes was rash and irresponsible.
The distinguished historian, Alfonso Crespo, quotes a commentary by Prudencio that summarizes his position as regards the breakdown of relations. In it, Prudencio states that, by breaking off relations, Bolivia did the same as a gravely-ill person who, desperate for a cure, prefers suicide.
The book we are discussing, however, does not end on a pessimistic note; on the contrary, it posits that the Charaña Negotiation is not permanently dead, as its underlying terms can always be used for a new, more effective negotiation that will finally cause Bolivia to leave its landlocked status behind and obtain its own, sovereign outlet to the ocean.
Armando Loaiza Mariaca
[…]
2810
Annex 350
Annex 350
2811
2812
Annex 350
Annex 350
2813
15. Meeting of the three foreign affairs ministers
In accordance to what was established in the Presidential meeting in Washington, the foreign affairs ministers of Bolivia, Chile and Peru held a meeting in the city of New York in the Peruvian Diplomatic Mission to the UN on 29 September 1977.
The meeting of the three ministers was very cordial and constructive. At the end of it, a press release was issued containing the following:
“In fulfillment of the mandate given to them by the Presidents of Bolivia, Chile and Peru at their meeting in Washington on 8 September, the Foreign Ministers of the three countries met
[…]
The Foreign Ministers, without prejudice to the meetings they will hold on the subject and to facilitate ongoing dialogue, plan to appoint Special Representatives. They also emphasized the importance of staying continuously informed of the development and status of the discussions”.
With the efforts of the Bolivian President in Washington, the cooling-off of the negotiation regarding the maritime issue came to an end. Banzer had accomplished the designation of Representatives from the three countries to meet and study the issues that were bringing the negotiation to a standstill.
Chile fulfilled its commitment and named as its representative the prominent diplomat Enrique Bernstein. Peru acted accordingly, designating the Secretary General of Foreign Affairs, Luis Marchant, as its representative. Strangely, Bolivia did not appoint its own. It was mentioned that the Undersecretary of Exterior Policy, Javier Murillo, would be designated, but this never took place.
As was to be expected, Peru agreed to participate in the Special Representatives meetings, but had no intention to become involved in the Bolivia-Chile bilateral negotiation. Accordingly, on 29 September, Peru’s foreign minister, de la Puente, made the following statement at the Assembly General of the United Nations:
2814
Annex 350
Annex 350
2815
“In this Assembly, the Bolivian Foreign Minister has referred to the need for Peru’s consent to make any solution possible. We understand that, logically, for Peru to consider the possibility of its consent, it needs to see a basis of agreement between Bolivia and Chile that as of this time has not been reached. When this is achieved, Peru will establish contact with Chile on the subject in order to reach the prior agreement required between those parties, as established in the Supplementary Protocol of 1929”.
On the other hand, during his speech at the UN, foreign minister Adriázola reiterated that his Government hoped that Chile would be able to obtain Peru’s consent in order to simplify the negotiation, such that the expectations of the Bolivian people could be satisfied and international justice would prevail.
Obviously enough, his speech was primarily intended for the people of Bolivia, as Adriázola was well aware that any issues relating to the territorial exchange and Peru’s proposal would be discussed by the three Special Representatives.
[…]
2816
Annex 350
Annex 350
2817
1. Recalling of ambassador Violand from Santiago
As an expression of Chile’s unease, Banzer’s Administration decided to recall home its ambassador to Santiago, Adalberto Violand. This took place in mid-October [1977]. The Embassy in Santiago received an encrypted telegram notifying the Ambassador that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs found it advisable to end his mission to Santiago. However, the telegram also stated that he would be receiving an official letter containing a more in-depth explanation of such decision via diplomatic correspondence, whereby Violand would also be thanked for and congratulated on his meritorious performance in Chile. The note never arrived and, in the meantime, while waiting, Violand decided not to notify the Chilean government of his recall.
But, on the 15th of that month, minister of foreign affairs Adriázola gave an announcement to the local press: “The return of our Ambassador in Santiago has been decided”. General Banzer, stationed in Cochabamba, tried to smooth out this succinct and rough communiqué and declared that the return of ambassador Violand did not hinder the ongoing negotiation with Chile. Furthermore, Adriázola himself clarified that that the ambassador’s departure was only due to a rotation and that another ambassador would promptly be sent to Santiago. Lies and hypocrisy! The national ministry of foreign affairs did not have the slightest wish to send a new diplomatic agent to Santiago.
Even though ambassador Violand knew no replacement was on the way, he still had to announce to the Chilean press that relations between both countries remained normal and,
2818
Annex 350
Annex 350
2819
to prove this, he emphasized the appointment of the commission of special representatives, “which would bring new momentum to the maritime negotiation”.
However, as Violand correctly points out: “the instructions I received ‘for a rushed return, but observing the applicable protocol,’ betrayed the opposite.”
Tired of Chile’s insistence on an exchange of territories, the national Mministry of foreign affairs decided to manifest its displeasure by recalling home its ambassador to Santiago, leaving the mission in the hands of just one Chargé d’Affaires. Fortunately, that office was filled by a distinguished diplomat, Agustín Saavedra Weise. Early on, it was thought that a new head of mission would soon be on the way. But this is not precisely what those in charge of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs had in mind. They intended to freeze the negotiation in preparation for breaking off diplomatic relations in the future.
Violand himself has acknowledged that, “in 1977, the negotiation got off track. Peru had left Chile and Bolivia without an initiative. Chile had left Bolivia to its own devices. And I felt that I was representing a national effort that neither revived nor finished dying out”.
It is clear that Violand considered his withdrawal as a demonstration that the negotiation was falling apart. And he said so: “A remark by the Chilean foreign minister, uttered at the wrong time, hastened the end of the negotiation. I always felt that Admiral Carvajal was hiding some tormenting malady underneath his cordiality and his manners, ever the perfect gentleman, which stood in contrast with his blunt, sometimes harsh, statements.”
Also worth mentioning are Violand’s words at the end of that same paragraph, where he acknowledged Carvajal’s integrity: “I will, however, do him justice by acknowledging that he has candid and believed, to his very end, that Chile had to resolve Bolivia’s landlocked status”.
Violand also recounts his farewell to Foreign Minister Carvajal, whom he thought seemed “cold, polite, and distant.” No longer was he the kind negotiator, always willing to keep the negotiation going. As regards Pinochet, he mentions he subsequently granted him a meeting in which he told him he regretted his departure and “conveyed to him his special greetings to President Banzer”.
After the abovementioned exit meetings, he hastily tried to say his goodbyes to other Chilean political figures who had been very kind to him, to finally return to Bolivia on 14 November.
[…]
2820
Annex 350
Annex 350
2821
2. Letter from Pinochet to Banzer
While the Chilean government waited for Bolivia to appoint its Special Representative, in order to continue with the progress of the negotiation, surprisingly, a sort of disillusion regarding the maritime issue started to emerge in the country. There was traversal apathy in national public opinion on the fundamental maritime issue, which paralyzed Banzer’s administration on this issue. This became even more complicated since President Banzer had expressed his wish to run for re-election on 1978. Naturally, the maritime negotiation was able to hurt his chances.
2822
Annex 350
Annex 350
2823
Specifically, in light of Banzer’s desire to continue as President, but this time as a democratic ruler, it was indispensable for him to name Bolivia’s Special Representative. But he did not. One issue was holding him back: the issue of territorial compensation. Apparently, he realized that, even if the special representatives did meet, the Chilean government would not back down on its demands for an exchange of territories.
In the meantime, in order to show the Chilean government’s interest in continuing to negotiate, President Augusto Pinochet decided to address a letter to general Banzer on 23 November 1977. The most notable portions read as follows:
“On the various occasions on which we have met, I have indicated to you the priority that I attach to our relations with your country and my decision to seek formulas for cooperation that will promote the mutual interests of our two Nations.
“The current state of the relations between Chile and Bolivia makes it advisable to reiterate those purposes of cooperation, and to be faithful to our responsibility in the search for specific formulas that will make it effective.
“My Government appreciates the special importance that the current negotiations to give Bolivia a sovereign outlet to the Pacific Ocean have in the context of our relations.
“My Government maintains unchanged the political will that gave rise to these negotiations and is willing to move ahead with them in accordance with the desires and the with the intensity that Your Excellency deems advisable.
“At the United Nations Assembly in New York, our Ministers of Foreign Affairs agreed to appoint Special Representatives to activate the negotiations. In this regard, my Government is also prepared to agree, if Your Excellency deems it proper and expedient, to accelerate the action of the Special Representatives of our two countries.
“I consider that at the current stage of the negotiations it would be advisable to evaluate what has taken place, to specify the problems that must be overcome and to suggest future action. The Special Representatives could perform useful work in this regard.
“Having acknowledged the importance of these negotiations, I believe that it is necessary to point out possibilities for cooperation that exist in other areas. At the present time the relations between our two countries could be enriched substantially if we aimed to seek formulas to intensify our economic relations, to promote cultural, scientific and technological cooperation, to overcome contingent problems, to increase and improve the communications systems and make the free transit system that our two Nations have agreed in favour of Bolivia more fluid and more effective.
2824
Annex 350
Annex 350
2825
“I am convinced that if our Governments apply themselves to seeking means and formulas that make this cooperation possible, a lasting work in our mutual interest can be advanced”.
Pinochet’s note was warm and demonstrated Chile’s desire to continue the negotiation with Bolivia. In it, he insisted on the meeting of the three Special Representatives as a crucial element to stimulate the negotiations. This meeting was the basis to reactivate the negotiation since it also included the Peruvian delegate. He also addressed the possibility of establishing closer ties between both countries in other areas, such as improved free transit and increased trade exchange. And, oddly enough, no progress had been made in this regard over the three years of negotiations.
One of the issues that should have been dealt with over those years was giving greater autonomy to Bolivia in Arica. Naturally, this is apart from the future Corridor. Because the idea was that the country was to continue using the Port of Arica until such time as a new one was built on the Corridor’s coast. Moreover, in order to avoid competition that could create friction between the residents of Arica and the residents of the Corridor, the logical thing was to devise the Corridor port as supplementary to Arica’s. This would vastly improve the ports’ efficiency, all to Bolivia’s benefit.
3. Banzer’s reply to Pinochet
General Banzer waited a month to reply to Pinochet. His note was dated 21 December 1977. It was a long, very well-drafted note, but it no longer maintained the cordial tone between the two leaders, as Banzer, even if in very polite terms, harshly rebuked Chile, accusing it of not having contributed to any progress in the negotiations, which had been halted as a result of the territorial compensation issue and Peru’s counterproposal.
The most salient portions are worth highlighting. First, Banzer recounts the negotiations, from the very beginning:
“As part of a plan of harmonious coexistence, integration and shared development, my Government proposed, in August 1975, to start negotiations aimed to obtain a strip of sovereign territory, in the North of Arica, with geographic continuity.
“As Your Excellency well knows, additional conditions were also required that could make such access through the strip, a minimally acceptable solution to Bolivia’s confinement by searching together for an additional instrument to
2826
Annex 350
Annex 350
2827
ensure my country an appropriate rhythm of economic and social development. Obviously, in this vision the extension of the maritime front and the capability for full sovereignty that Bolivia would exercise over the territory the subject of the diplomatic negotiations represented a fundamental character.
“Your Government formally responded to the Bolivian proposal on 19 December 1975, conditioning the eventual arrangement on factors that hindered “ab initio” the negotiating process. Despite that, the Bolivian and Chilean documents constituted general terms, and it was understood that on that global basis it would be possible to move forward with seeking an agreement that would promote an arrangement based on reciprocal conveniences, but also with a high sense of international justice”.
In these first opening paragraphs, general Banzer sought to address the fact that both the Aide-Memoire of August 1975 and Chile’s reply of 19 December 1975 were elements that would still be in force. And, as we know, Chile only considered its note to be a basic point in the negotiation. Bolivia’s request for an enclave south of Arica had been ruled out outright by Chile, and it being reconsidered was out of the question.
The note also points out that conditions were set that hindered the negotiation “ab initio”. It is possible that it refers to the “three prongs” (demilitarization of the Corridor, territorial compensation for the territorial sea, use and enjoyment of the Lauca waters). However, it may also refer to the requirement of a territorial exchange for the offered Corridor. And there was no chance that Chile would backtrack on this.
It then mentions Peru’s proposal of November 1975 for the creation of a tri-national zone north of Arica. A harsh rebuke is then made to Chile over its attitude in connection with Peru:
“Your Government, Mr. President, limited itself to decline to consider the Peruvian proposal, arguing that it impacted on matters within the exclusive sovereignty of Chile. However, Bolivia was expecting Chile to make subsequent efforts to establish such situation; clarification which is critical, as demonstrated, for the Government of Chile to be able to give Bolivia a territory which is the specific and legal subject of the negotiation”.
Further on, Banzer brings Bolivia’s new proposal, announced on 24 December 1976, to Pinochet’s attention, where it asked that Chile “modify its proposal to eliminate the condition regarding an exchange of territory”. And it asked Peru “to modify its proposal regarding the establishment of a territorial area under shared sovereignty”. And as compensation, “Bolivia offers in exchange, consistently with the original proposal of August 1975, such contributions as may be necessary, on equitable terms, to the establishment of a great
2828
Annex 350
Annex 350
2829
tripartite development hub in the coastal zone that would be transferred to Bolivian sovereignty, which would result in mutual benefits for Bolivia, Chile and Peru”.
He also addresses Pinochet’s suggestion to organize a meeting of the Special Representatives. In this regard, he writes:
“However, I ask myself, under which framework of significant projections would be made this task? Wouldn’t an assessment of the actions to date lead us to recognize the same obstacles we face today? I repeat, it is necessary that new factors are included into our dialogue to overcome the current stage, factors that must necessarily embody a spirit of widening of the conditions required for the settlement under which the unanimous decision of my Country can be reached.
“The establishment of new conditions to overcome the current stage and lead us to the aims we set at the meeting of Charaña is not in the hands of Bolivia.
“Only under these new circumstances would the meeting of Special Representatives make sense, and such circumstances will determine the rhythm and intensification of the negotiations.
“Otherwise, I fear that despite good intentions, we can enter into another phase of delay, to which I do not want to expose my people who are waiting for 99 years, for the solidarity of other of nations to seek fair and stable understandings, as an imperative of the neighbourliness” .
The most important part of Banzer’s note is his refusal to appoint Bolivia’s delegate for the meeting of the Special Representatives. This is unusual, since it was Banzer himself who suggested the benefit of appointing those representatives to Pinochet and Morales Bermúdez.
Why did General Banzer take such a bizarre decision? What was happening in the Bolivian Ministry of Foreign Affairs at the time? Was there no one in Bolivia as capable as Bernstein and Marchant to attend the meetings? Most probably, it is because a feeling of frustration and defeat regarding the negotiation that prevailed in it. Public opinion, from the beginning, had strongly criticized the negotiation and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs was unable to contest that position. On the contrary, the constant criticism ended up affecting its government officials, starting with the Minister himself, and Bolivia was no longer focused on insisting in the strengthening of the negotiation.
It seems that during that time (in December of 1977), ending the negotiation to get rid of all the problems and setbacks associated with it was seriously considered. As Chilean politician Diego Portales said well, Bolivians and Peruvians are more educated and smarter than Chileans, but less tenacious. Here’s the proof! The most important negotiation to return to the sea, as was the present one, ended in a complete failure due to the actions of Bolivians themselves!
2830
Annex 350
Annex 350
2831
4. Second note from Pinochet to Banzer
President Pinochet replied to Banzer’s note through communication dated 18 January 1978.
He starts off the note by mentioning Chile’s interest in continuing the negotiations. He then goes on to recount what had been done in the negotiations thus far. He mentions that, in his opinion, Banzer’s note contained an accusation against Chile that he found it appropriate to rebut. He was referring to Chile’s reply to Peru’s counterproposal. His words are precisely as follows:
“It seems to be a charge on Chile in a paragraph of Your Excellency’s letter, which I consider essential to dispel: Chile limited itself to decline to consider the Peruvian proposal made on November 1976, without performing any further action, as expected by Bolivia. It is true that my Government rejected the aforementioned proposal because it considered issues unrelated to the matter and part of its own sovereignty. If it did not make subsequent actions, it was not aware of any initiative by Bolivia in this sense, or received any suggestion of its Government to promote it either. By the way, negotiations were not stopped then. Proof of this was the successive trips made by the Bolivian Foreign Minister to Lima and Santiago in June 1977, the interviews we had with Your Excellency in the city of Washington in September, and those meetings subsequently held by the Foreign Ministers of Bolivia, Chile and Peru in New York, also during September of the same year. In all of those meetings an agreement to continue negotiations was reached”.
Pinochet then addresses Banzer’s remark that his government had doubts “Together with expressing doubts about the results that these Representatives (the Special Representatives) could reach. And about something of greater importance: that Banzer believed that: “it is not in the hands of Bolivia to establish new conditions that would allow the negotiations to continue”.
In this regard, Pinochet’s writes the following:
“The view of my Government is that the bases of the Chilean proposal and accepted in general terms by Bolivia, are the only viable and realistic way to satisfy the longing of the brother country. I could not, therefore, propose a different alternative. But I am confident that on these bases it would be possible to achieve an agreement capable of being accepted by Peru. I rely on the statements of the Foreign Minister of such brother and friend country, who has declared twice that the November 1975 proposals ‘are not necessarily a final solution formula but an alternative, an element of dialogue’.
2832
Annex 350
Annex 350
2833
Then, the Chilean President insisted on the need for the Special Representatives to meet. He stated that “if they come to an evaluation of the points of agreement and those that must be overcome, and make suggestions for future action to be taken by our Governments, the negotiations will progress.” He then adds that “This is not a ‘delaying phase’ as Your Excellency seems to think, but a way to avoid the stagnation of the dialogue”.
He ends his note by mentioning an important issue, that “The negotiation in which we are engaged is not easy. It will demand patience and reciprocal goodwill, as we knew when we started it.” And then he makes a fundamental point: “The importance of the final result will compensate the time we devote to clarify doubts and difficulties which are inherent to diplomatic efforts of this magnitude.” Perhaps, at the time, Pinochet had in mind Chile’s negotiation with Peru over the Tacna and Arica issue, a protracted, difficult negotiation that, however, succeeded in putting an end to that lengthy dispute. This started in 1921, when former invited the latter to engage in discussions concerning the dispute, which had existed between them since 1883. From then on, and with much difficulty, the negotiations moved on based on the arbitration of the United States, and it was only in 1929, i.e. eight years later, that a final solution was achieved.
[…]
2834
Annex 350
Annex 350
2835
8. Banzer’s last note to Pinochet
As a corollary to all the nonsense that took place that March, General Banzer decided to reply to President Pinochet’s letter of 18 January 1978. He did so on the very same day diplomatic relations were broken off, i.e. 17 March. As will be recalled, Pinochet’s note was very cordial from the start, where it referred to Banzer as his dear friend.
On the contrary, Banzer’s note is cold and abrupt, blaming Pinochet for the failure of the Negotiations. It reads, verbatim:
Dear President,
I am writing in response to your letter of 18 January of this year, in circumstances that, despite my best will, concludes the dialogue we resolved to resume on 8 February 1975, under such promising auspices.
Many explanations were absent until a very few days ago. Since they were indispensable for entering a new phase of bilateral dialogue (between the Special Representatives, as agreed to in September of last year), I made an effort to obtain them, going so far as to send a Confidential Envoy to Santiago.
2836
Annex 350
Annex 350
2837
Unfortunately, the doubts that we sought to dissipate by that means were indeed dissipated, but in a negative manner and contrary to my deepest desires. In the discussion that Ambassador Vargas had as Confidential Envoy with the Chilean Foreign Minister, the terms of which were personally reported to me in recent days, concepts were clarified and fears were confirmed that had been hovering all these years like a nebula, despite the insistent actions taken by our diplomats.
Personally, I have wondered on more than one occasion how, notwithstanding the optimistic statements by Your Excellency, it could be possible to overcome problems and make progress with future actions. I am convinced that this is possible only when there is firm political will, that is clearly expressed and fully resolved, to reach an objective, particularly if it is of an international nature, and the coinciding motivation of the sovereign parties involved becomes indispensable.
The Confidential Envoy brought very discouraging news that confirmed the concerns that I had sent to Your Excellency, with total candour, in my letter of 21 December of last year. Among other minor concerns, I was surprised to learn that Foreign Minister Carvajal had told Ambassador Vargas that his Government had not made or even considered any efforts to seek Peru’s prior agreement, as set forth in the Chilean-Peruvian Protocol of 1929; and that all the conditions for granting us a sovereign outlet to the sea through the North of Arica, as indicated in the response dated 19 December 1975, particularly with respect to the exchange of territory, would remain unchanged and would not be subject to further negotiations.
Although this rigid stance would turn the Chilean proposal from a basis for reconciling criteria into a non-negotiable “diktat”, I still ask myself: how can I encourage further steps without deceiving my people with useless meetings that are a waste of time?
The clarifications given have thus made it clear that the situation is painfully pointless. They have shown us, once and for all, that the Chilean Government has abandoned the spirit that guided the meeting in Charaña and in so doing, is destroying the key foundation for the dialogue that, with the greatest good faith on my part, we re-established three years ago.
Consequently, my Government has no other path than to suspend diplomatic relations with the Government presided over by Your Excellency, as I am informing your representative Foreign Minister Adriázola today. We Bolivians must take this stance until Chile understands that it in no way benefits from keeping an entire people indefinitely asphyxiated, as they will reintegrate to the Pacific Ocean someday, despite any adversity. We are encouraged by the hope that that day will arrive, not only because Chile will revise its radical position to date, but also because we count on an international consensus that endorses the fairness of our cause and because, with a noble and peaceful desire, my people have the virtue of valour, which makes them even greater as their difficulties increase.
I salute Your Excellency
(Hugo Banzer Suárez – General of the Army – President of the Republic of Bolivia)
2838
Annex 350
Annex 350
2839
With this letter from Banzer to Pinochet, the Charaña Negotiation comes to an end. The letter in question gives the strong impression that Chile was the one interested in resolving Bolivia’s geographic confinement, while our country considered it a secondary issue. It insists that the territorial exchange is not a part of the Negotiation, even though Banzer’s Administration had approved it, and more importantly, knowing that Pinochet’s government could not give away territories without receiving an equivalent one in return. Absurdly, Banzer’s administration decided to kill a negotiation that could have resolved the maritime problem more than 30 years ago, doing so by giving unjustified explanations since no country agrees to cede territories to another.
However, it should also be recalled that a meeting between three Special Representatives had been established at Bolivia’s request. The other two countries, Chile and Peru, designated their representatives, while our country, instead of doing so, broke diplomatic relations. It could be said that something was wrong in the mind of the drivers of national foreign policy. The logical thing would have been to proceed with the meeting between the three representatives, and only if they did not come to a concrete solution, there would have been a justification for such unreasonable rupture.
The issue of the rejection of any exchange of territories also poses the following conundrum: Does Bolivia desire to obtain an outlet to the sea via sovereign territory of its own to satisfy a practical need, i.e. because it urgently needs its full freedom to conduct foreign trade, or, on the contrary, does the country give priority to the idea of receiving moral, historical reparation from Chile?
It appears that for Banzer’s administration, the latter option seems to have been more important. We should not, however, deceive ourselves. The answer was not even that latter option. We know that the reason behind the diplomatic breakdown was the intention of Government officials to maintain Banzer’s figure active for the elections taking place that year. They were afraid that the negotiations with Chile could prejudice him. Thus, as previously stated, it was a matter of internal politics that decided the unhappy and ungraceful rupture of diplomatic relations, which put an end to such an important negotiation.
[…]
2840
Annex 350
Annex 350
2841
10. Responsibility for the failure of Charaña
The failure of the most important negotiation of the XX Century, which was the Charaña one, is evidently attributable to the government of general Banzer. However, he is not the only one. The politicians, international experts and members of the written and verbal media who constantly criticized and tenaciously opposed the progress of it are also [to blame].
First of all, it should be recalled the subscription to a document from 6 March 1976 by five former Bolivian presidents: Víctor Paz Estenssoro, Hernán Siles, Luis Adolfo Siles, Alfredo Ovando y Juan José Torres. In that document, they proclaimed that “our attitude is an expression of repudiation and condemnation to
2842
Annex 350
Annex 350
2843
the Acts that the Government of General Hugo Banzer performed behind closed doors and under the influence of foreign forces, betraying the interest of the Bolivian people…”
There is also a publication by the name of “Crisis Issues,” issue no. 4 of which refers to Bolivia’s maritime policy. This edition is titled “From Charaña to general Pereda,” and was printed seven months after diplomatic relations were broken off.
That publication poses a list of questions to well-known internationalists and politicians regarding the aforementioned Charaña negotiation. We will make reference to the answers offered by the principal of those figures.
The questionnaire had been sent to the main chiefs of the armed forces, but they did not reply. It was also sent to former foreign minister Oscar Adriázola, but no reply was forthcoming either. Unbelievably, the main players in the government were avoiding taking responsibility for such an important move.
a) Guillermo Gutiérrez Vea Murguía
With regard to the former ambassador, Guillermo Gutiérrez Vea Murguía, his answer was as follows: “I deeply regret not being able to answer your questionnaire, which will have a strong response in a publication that, under my responsibility, will be distributed soon.”
Indeed, years later and after he had already passed away, Mr. Guillermo’s book, titled “Diplomatic Negotiations with Chile, 1975” was published. The following paragraph has been extracted from his book:46
“It is worth making clear that the efforts aimed at eliminating and modifying the unacceptable aspects of the Chilean Counterproposal, required permanent attention and intense activity. Such efforts, which I had to start, on April 1976, were already well underway. The issues related to the waters of the Lauca River, the demilitarization of the territorial strip and the unacceptable compensation for the territorial sea, were moving forward but had not materialized in a document. Things changed later: Santiago’s ministry of foreign affairs hardened its position, thus resulting in negotiations coming to a standstill. Intransigent sectors who proposed what for the time being is the unrealistic recovery of the lost Coast, took advantage of this circumstance. Conflicting versions, some of them completely false, frightened the public opinion, and nothing was done to clarify the matter and dispel doubts”.
[...]
46 GUTIERREZ V.M. GUILLERMO: op.cit., pages 222-223
2844
Annex 350
Annex 350
2845
As we can see, at the end of the abovementioned paragraph, former ambassador Gutiérrez Vea Murguía condemns the rigid position of the national ministry of foreign affairs, who, in almost all of the course of the negotiations, chose to remain silent and not answer any of the constant negative comments against it. This absurd and cowardly position was what made negotiations get weaker and finally brought them to an end.
b) Ricardo Anaya
Then, the questionnaire was sent to the well-known politician, the PIR [Leftist Revolutionary Party] leader, then minister of foreign affairs of the Republic, Ricardo Anaya. He did not answer it either. He said he could not do so “due to his heavy burden of work”. But the editorial office of “Issues in the crisis” decided to publish some of his past works on the matter.
In those works, Ricardo refers to every issue related to the Charaña negotiation. That is why it is very interesting to share his thoughts in this regard.
With respect to the corridor at the north of Arica, doctor Anaya says that “The strip only is not a solution. It is hindered by the Chilean diplomacy to destabilize Bolivia, to weaken the Bolivian-Peruvian relations and undermine the international support to our country”. This paragraph already shows the core of the thoughts of the well-known PIR politician: the desire not to bother Peru. And therefore, the one to find a solution including the three countries involved in the department of Arica.
It is worth noting that Ricardo Anaya and Walter Guevara are the two great theorists of what we could call “the Cochabambian understanding” of the maritime issue. This understanding is based on the creation of a tri-national zone in the port of Arica. In this way, Peru will not remain isolated from the solution, and a development hub could also be created in such a controversial zone.
He then continues his reasoning about the corridor by saying that “in accordance with the Chilean proposal, the strip leads into the sea in a point that, according to the information available, is unsuitable for a port”. He asserts that “it is true that in our times it is possible to build a port at any point of the sea. Even a floating port can be built. The problem is not the technical impossibility but its cost. Bolivia is not in a condition to buy its own rights to the sea at a prohibitive price, which would make impractical having what it needs: a port and a coast.”
Possibly, Mr. Ricardo’s left-wing and statist mind prevented him from understanding that Bolivia did not need to incur any expenses in building a port. It would be enough to call for international bids so that a private company would build and administer a port for fifty or a hundred years. Such was the case with the Antofagasta-Bolivia Railway. The railway did not cost a single cent to the country because, its promoter, Mr. Aniceto Arce, could secure English and
2846
Annex 350
Annex 350
2847
Chilean capitalist take charge of its building and administration for one hundred years. In this way, without incurring any expense, Bolivia could finally get an exit to the sea in a specific and practical way. Before the existence of such railway, the country was locked in between mountains, with very limited connection to the coast.
As regards the territorial compensation, Mr. Ricardo states that “as practical as we might be, we can only feel disgust for the desire to get compensation for the redress owed to Bolivia”. This proves that even the most intelligent people who, although they believed territorial compensation to be practical, condemned it as a true abomination.
Thus, he concludes that “a new, practical and at the same time respectable solution should be sought. Not a humiliating one. A solution of interest to Bolivia, Chile and Peru guaranteeing peace, development and integration”. To that end he points out that “What should be achieved is that the territories over the Pacific Ocean, between 17 and 19 degrees south latitude were freely accessible to Bolivia, Chile and Peru, and that those countries agree to establish an ‘area of regional development’ in such zone, where the three countries could use the rivers and lakes within the area, in a management system that equitably takes into account, each country’s contributions and their reciprocal interests.”
But he mentions in advance that “in no case the waters of the Titicaca Lake should be involved, as they must be the reserve for the irrigation of the Altiplano”. So, what national internal rivers did he make reference to?
Two essential questions should be raised against this fanciful understanding. Firstly, the enormous question: what would the country get with such a tripartite solution when it is very complicated now to get an exit to the sea because it depends on another country, Chile, for so doing? What would the case be when it would be necessary to ask permission not only to Chile but also to Peru for our foreign trade? Rather than solving the maritime problem, sharing sovereignty among three parties would make the situation much more complex. And secondly, it is necessary to bear in mind that Chile will never accept a Peruvian intervention in Arica. Thus, every effort in this regard is doomed to failure. In conclusion, a tri-national solution in Arica is not only detrimental for Bolivia but impossible due to the Chilean refusal.
c) Walter Guevara Arze
It is now time to mention what was expressed by Walter Guevara Arze, twice minister of foreign affairs of the Republic and president a year later. As a good Cochabambian, Mr. Walter proposes the internationalization of Arica, as Ricardo Anaya does, based on the setting-up of a tri-national sovereignty and administered by the United Nations.
2848
Annex 350
Annex 350
2849
In the questionnaire, Mr. Walter makes reference to his cited book, “Radiography of the Negotiation with Chile”. He points out that in that book he made a specific proposal in this regard. Such proposal is based on that “from the point in which the Bay of Arica penetrates more deeply into the Continent, a circle of 5 km radius could be traced, which would result in an area of 76 km2. This is a purely arithmetical issue. This circle would cover much of Arica and some territory surrounding Arica”. Then he adds: “I think that if we are dealing with the Internationalization of Arica, there should be a sector in which industries could be established, a sector where a city could grow, etc.”
In this incredible thought, at least he makes some reference to the Chilean stance when he mentions that: “On the other hand, it should be borne in mind that the Chilean territory cannot be used without limitation for this purpose”. Yet, it seems he does not realize how much territory that 76 km2 encompasses. Such area covered almost all the city of Arica at that time. It is worth considering: Why should Chile surrender such important city for Peru to participate in it? Chile would have only surrendered Arica if it would have been defeated in a war against the other two countries. And despite being a very intelligent man, Mr. Walter could not understand such a situation.
Following his line of thought, Mr. Walter adds: “That territory would be internationalized so that it neither belonged to Bolivia, Chile or Peru. It would be a territory administered exclusively by the United Nations. The three countries would establish a Hub of Economic Development there and at the same time, Bolivia could reach the sea, together with Peru and Chile, using the international area”.
In any case Mr. Walter reiterates the difficulty in convincing Chile about this particular project: “It should be acknowledged that the greatest difficulty for the acceptance of this proposal lies in the Chilean position, as Chile has to cede its territory”. Up until now, Chile deems such territory to be its own. Surrendering this territory must be a very difficult decision. Thus, convincing Chile to do so is really a major undertaking”.
If convincing Chile would really be “a major undertaking”, why does Mr Walter insist on imposing such proposal, which is useless to Bolivia as it takes it farther from the sea and, besides, there is no likelihood of Chile accepting such an incredible solution? Those are the dilemmas of our foreign policy.
d) Mario Gutiérrez Gutiérrez
Another personality surveyed was another former minister of foreign affairs Mario Gutiérrez Gutiérrez. As may be recalled, he was the first minister of foreign affairs of the Banzer administration. Unfortunately, he was removed from office when Banzer decided to constitute a more militarized administration and set aside the two parties that had supported him: the MNR and Falange.
2850
Annex 350
Annex 350
2851
In the questionnaire, Mr. Mario mentions a project he had submitted before, which he calls “Project 50”, and which is perhaps related to the negotiations that took place that year. He states that in that project, he had sketched “a geographical area of 12,000 km2 to the north of the Bay of Arica, covering the valleys of Llura and Azapa, based on “non-territorial” compensation.
To support his understanding of such area, Dr. Gutiérrez categorically asserts that: “The Arica region, whether you want to see it this way or not, is Bolivia’s natural and historical path to the Pacific Ocean”. He continues by saying: “The ports with which we were born to the republican life are disconnected from the major lines of our international traffic.”
As previously expressed, Mr. Mario envisages an area of 12,000 km2 to the north of Arica that Chile should cede to us. But it is unlikely that the territory to the north of that port may cover such an area. Besides, he desires Chile to grant it to us without any territorial compensation. In its note dated December 1975, the Corridor covered only 3,600 km2. What compensation might this distinguished politician and internationalist have been thinking of for Chile to accept to cede a territory three times as big as the one offered in the Charaña negotiation?
He then makes reference to the impossibility of revising the 1904 Treaty of Peace and Amity. He points out that “the international bodies have been constituted, despite reasoning and the law, to establish the validity of treaties. Please refer to the Charter of the Organization of American States, or the Covenant of the League of Nations or the Charter of the United Nations, to convince yourselves about it. Furthermore, experience so shows. We failed in the League of Nations, we failed in the UN when constituted in San Francisco in 1945, and we failed in the OAS, in the Lauca issue.”
As a solution, he deems that “Bolivia should resort to a multilateral action based on the fact that its geographical confinement creates ‘international strain’ in South America’s Southern Cone that could alter international peace. Under this factual situation, our maritime claim falls under the jurisdiction of both the General Assembly and the Security Council”.
Yet, Mr. Mario forgets that it must be proved that, actually, Bolivia’s geographical confinement does create “international strain” in South America. Our country could never convince any international organ that this was the case.
e) Eduardo Arze Quiroga
Then we have Eduardo Arze Quiroga. He also was Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Republic in 1961, a year before the interruption of the diplomatic relations as a result of the deviation of the Lauca river. It should be recalled that during his term in office, the Chilean ambassador in La
2852
Annex 350
Annex 350
2853
Paz, Manuel Trucco, sent a Memorandum to the Bolivian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, dated 10 July 1961, in which the Chilean note No. 9 dated 20 June 1950 was transcribed, during ambassador Ostría Gutiérrez’s negotiation, which stated that Chile was “open formally to enter into a direct negotiation aimed at searching for a formula that would make it possible to give Bolivia its own sovereign access to the Pacific Ocean …”. It also mentioned that “it would seem particularly untimely and inconvenient to unsettle public opinion in both countries with the announcement of resorting to international organisations to deal with a problem that the government of Bolivia has not specified in its direct relations with the government of Chile.”
Unbelievably, an outstanding diplomatic and internationalist as Mr. Eduardo did not dare answer the Memorandum during the six months he continued to be in charge of the foreign relations of the country. The Memorandum was answered only by his successor, José Fellman Velarde, by note dated 9 February 1962, where he absurdly mixed the Lauca river issue with the sea issue, spoiling any possible intent to address the latter directly.
With regard to the abovementioned questionnaire, Dr. Arze Quiroga refers in first place to the revision of the treaties. After a long analysis, he concludes: “A purely legal system is not attractive, when the principle of justice is absent. This system, in international matters, is generally born from victory. Seldom does the winner take into account the laws of humanity and rather takes a firmer stance in the hard rules of the Law.”
He then states that a similar domestic policy in both countries, Bolivia and Chile, was what made possible the Charaña understanding. In this sense, he says: “Those ideological links finalized in the meetings in Brasilia and Charaña”. Its logical result was the strengthening of Pinochet and the subsequent weakening of general Velasco Alvarado, whose decline occurs six months after the resumption of relations between Bolivia and Chile”.
As regards the area north of Arica, he points out that: “The philosophy of the ‘Corridor’ is to affirm the long-awaited Chilean longing to put Bolivia between Peru and Chile”. He later comments that “Even on the assumption that Peru would accept its existence, the ‘Corridor’ solution would in no way satisfy Bolivia let alone if it is based on territorial compensations”.
Unfortunately, such an expert in maritime issues as Arze Quiroga does not submit a solution in this regard. He simply rejects the idea of a Corridor but does not propose any alternative outlet to the sea.
f) Jorge Escobari Cusicanqui
When Escobari Cusicanqui was interviewed, he had not served as Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Republic yet, but he had already been Undersecretary of
2854
Annex 350
Annex 350
2855
Foreign Affairs twice. He had also written several books and brochures on international issues, mainly on the maritime one.
In his answer to the questionnaire, Escobari mentions that the Declaration of Charaña was “the eighth commitment taken on by Chile in this respect…” He then adds “that Chile had no intention of honouring such eighth commitment”. In proof thereof, he considers that the Chilean proposal of December 1975 entailed “inadmissible demands for all types of compensation among which, besides those economic in nature and the surrendering of natural resources, was precisely the cession of Bolivian territory to Chile by way of exchange, barter, or swap of territories”.
In another section of the questionnaire, Escobari conducts an analysis of the causes leading to the Chilean proposal and expresses that such country did not intend to solve the issue of Bolivia’s confinement but the following problems affecting Chile, namely: “a) To create a security strip between Chile and Peru by means of a ‘buffer corridor’ which, according to Chile, would stop Peru’s war preparations, b) To improve the tarnished ‘image’ of the Pinochet administration abroad, c) To move a little further into the Bolivian Plateau, where it has set foot since the Treaty of 1904, and d) To put an end, once and for all, to the Bolivian demand for maritime reintegration, which has been a source of annoyance for Chile since the War of 1879”.
With regard to the question of how the maritime problem will be resolved, Escobar confines himself only to providing some trivial advice such as to resort to international assemblies and organizations, to seek the “wholehearted cooperation of Venezuela, Argentina and the United States of America”, “to encourage” Peru’s assent, and only “if the circumstances so require, to resume the direct negotiations with Chile”.
In other words, Escobari, just like the rest of the figures interviewed, expects to leave the negotiations with Chile for a distant future, without thinking that time always passes by to the detriment of Bolivia. In fact, in his “Diplomatic History”, Escobari himself acknowledges that as time goes by, Chile’s territorial offers on the coast become more and more restricted: first, it was willing to cede Tacna and Arica, then only a corridor to the north of Arica, and possibly in the future, such corridor would be deemed in Chile as too large a cession in favour of Bolivia.
g) Franz Ruck Uriburu
Franz Ruck Uriburu was an old and very distinguished career diplomat. He was Director General of Foreign Policy and also served as Undersecretary of Foreign Affairs for a while. He was further appointed Consul General in Chile by the government of general Ovando, a position from which he was removed with the advent of the revolution led by general Banzer in 1971. As a result,
2856
Annex 350
Annex 350
2857
Mr. Franz shall be considered to have opposed to the Banzer administration and, therefore, to the Charaña negotiation.
It was his belief that having negotiated with the Pinochet administration was a mistake as Pinochet relied on the support of the most patriotic and hostile-to-Bolivia politicians and thinkers in Chile. In this respect, he recalls that during the governments of the Christian Democracy and the Popular Unit, while he was serving as consul in Santiago, “confidential negotiations had been conducted leading to exciting possibilities in Bolivia’s domestic policy”. There seems to have been a mistake when his words were published as what he meant by such assertion remains unclear.
But then he points out, as a possible solution, that “within the narrow limits of what is practicable”, the Corridor might be complemented with an enclave in “territory which belonged to Bolivia before the War of 1879” and also “with an economic enterprise of great reciprocal interest for both Chile and Peru”. He mentions that he would prefer this to be located in Mejillones as he deems such area “an excellent region therefor”.
He was not satisfied with a simple corridor to the north of Arica either. He suggests that this should be complemented “with a railway and a road” as well as with “the lease of a wharf and self-managed warehouses at the port of Arica”.
And as the Peruvian veto was to be lifted, he proposes that “a multinational economic enterprise be created, the so-called Development Hub, which by natural gravitation seems to be located in Arica”.
In this regard, it can be observed that, deep down, Mr. Franz fully agrees with the position adopted by the Banzer administration from the end of 1976 on, that is to say, with the refusal to exchange territories and with the setup of a tripartite development hub and an enclave to the south of the territory subject to the Treaty of 1929. What Ruck fails to mention, however, is that such position was rejected outright by Chile. As a result, Banzer, in his desperation, broke off the maritime negotiations.
Finally, ambassador Ruck points out that with the suspension of the diplomatic relations, the negotiations over the maritime issue “have not only returned to the start but also placed our country at a disadvantage”. Proof thereof was the introduction of the exchange of territories as a new element in the negotiation and the fact that a hostile atmosphere had emerged in Chile with regard to the relations with Bolivia.
Clearly, Ruck Uriburu was partially right as the suspension of the negotiations and diplomatic relations created a deep sense of unease in Chile. As for the exchange of territories, this would occur sooner or later as Bolivia has no other way in which to compensate Chile for the territory to be ceded in its favour.
2858
Annex 350
Annex 350
2859
h) Remo di Natale
This distinguished Bolivian politician, leader of the Christian Democratic Party, was also professor at the University of San Andrés in La Paz. At the time of the questionnaire he was residing in Venezuela, where he delivered lectures at the University of Carabobo.
Remo di Natale begins by pointing out that it was a mistake to have negotiated with Pinochet as it was known he had always been an enemy of Bolivia, endorsing the view that Bolivia never had sea during colonial times. He then mentions that in accordance with the Bolivian notes of 26 August 1975 and 16 December, as well as with the Chilean note of 19 December of that same year, both countries carried out “an exchange of territories which was repudiated by the Bolivian people, forcing Banzer to back down and ask for a new agreement, which was never reached”. He further adds that “by means of such territorial exchange, Pinochet sought to introduce a bastion in the heart of the Bolivian Plateau which would constitute a threat against any of Chile’s neighbouring countries: Argentina, Bolivia and Peru”.
In the most important part of his version, he states that he has submitted, “in the international sphere, a realistic, possible solution to the core issue in my book ‘Bolivia, Chile, Peru, and the Sea’, published in Venezuela”. He then points out that his theory “envisages the real needs of the country by proposing the incorporation, into the Bolivian territory and sovereignty, of an area encompassing half of Arica’s port facilities; a coastal strip stretching therefrom up to 10 km to the north of Concordia Line, in Peruvian territory, a corridor around the Arica-La Paz railway and between the coastal strip and the corridor, a territory the sovereignty over which will be exclusively shared with Peru. In turn, this country shall recover the Morro de Arica”. He concludes by mentioning that “as compensation, Chile shall receive water and money”.
In order to attain such objective, Mr. Remo argues that his proposed strategy would entail immediately seeking an understanding with Peru and, at the same time, entering into new negotiations with Chile, but without “establishing at any time official relations with its government”.
There is a point worth mentioning in such strategy: the launching of a campaign “through different media, and especially through all shortwave radio stations, directly addressed to the Chilean people… demanding a fair and peaceful solution which can avert the possibility of a war among the three countries involved in the emergencies of the War of 1879 forever”. Such campaign would be directly conducted among people of the same status. He adds that in such manner “our students would be the ones addressing Chilean students, our workers the ones addressing Chilean workers, our military men the ones addressing Chilean military men, our artists the ones addressing Chilean artists, a Bolivian mother the one addressing a Chilean mother”.
2860
Annex 350
Annex 350
2861
Mr. Remo further states that such campaign should be left “in the hands of professors, psychologists and experts in advertising of the country” and concludes by saying that a study should be conducted, “as seriously as possible, of the lawsuit contesting the Treaty of 1904, whereby Chile forced us to cede our littoral”.
It is evident that Mr. Remo was influenced by the BBC Radio of London, which, during the Second World War, transmitted messages to the peoples oppressed by the Nazis. It was his intention that the same be done from Bolivia to Chile, perhaps because he believed the Chileans were subjugated to the Pinochet dictatorship. What Mr. Remo failed to understand, however, is that the Chileans are very patriotic and will never be in disagreement with their rulers over international issues. On the contrary, the more patriotic their government’s position becomes, the more support it will receive from its people.
Mr. Remo was an idealist who was unaware of the policy of power of the States. He naively believed that a day would come when the peoples from Latin America would embrace one another and become one beyond their governments. That has not happened yet and never will.
i) Gonzalo Romero Alvarez García
The last figure to be interviewed was Gonzalo Romero Alvarez García, who served as representative, lecturer at the University of San Andrés and the Bolivian Catholic University in La Paz, and adviser to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. He was also ambassador in Brazil and before the General Assembly of the Organization of American States in Bolivia in 1979. A few years following the Charaña Negotiation, in 1981, he was appointed Minister of Foreign Affairs.
As an opponent of Banzer, just like the rest, he could not be objective about his negotiation. Therefore, he begins by expressing that “since the meeting in Brasilia, the Charaña embrace has opened negotiations which were about to compromise, in a disastrous way, the national rights and interests”.
He points out that “in principle, we Bolivians wish to be returned what is and has always been a part of our territory”. He then adds that “a corridor may be a transitive solution, good or bad, depending on how and where it is located. For instance, the last counteroffer made by Chile was more like a joke than a desire to contribute to valid solutions”.
What did Mr. Gonzalo mean by such comment? Was he opposing to the corridor to the north of Arica? Did he believe this should be situated in Bolivia’s former coast? And how could Chile grant a corridor in such area without dividing its territory?
With regard to Peru, he states that this country “has expressed its consent to the possibility of an access to the sea for Bolivia for the first time since it was proposed, through the coasts and territories of Tarapacá”. He further states that “the
2862
Annex 350
Annex 350
2863
internationalization of Arica through tripartite administration is a positive move if provided with a profile which shows it as a part of a broader negotiation”. And he concludes by pointing out that “the agreement would be detrimental if Bolivia accepted limited sovereignty at a shared port depriving us of our inchoate rights over the coasts of Atacama”.
Which inchoate rights did he refer to? We know that we have no legal right to the Atacama desert. Perhaps he thought we might have a moral right over such territory.
Mr. Gonzalo concludes his comment as follows: “The free transit agreed upon with Chile in 1904 is a myth. It does not exist. The countless difficulties encountered by Bolivia as a result of its port dependence encourage it to seek sovereignty with a port of its own”. And in order to overcome such difficulties, he proposes that the ministry of foreign affairs seek access to ports of other neighbouring countries for the import and export of cargo coming to and from Bolivia. It was his deepest wish “to obtain, by relying upon such good neighbours, the facilities of an infrastructure which can make it possible definitively to deviate our trade from the ports occupied by Chile”.
j) Other national figures who addressed the maritime issue
Even though former Minister of Foreign Affairs and Diplomat Raúl Botelho Gosálvez was not interviewed by the magazine, his opinion on the maritime issue is worth mentioning. In this regard, the Chilean diplomat and internationalist, José Rodríguez Elizondo, states that:47
“On this basis (he refers to the ‘fresh Approach’), Paz Estenssoro created the conditions to put an end to a period of routine secret conventions and, fundamentally, to forget the promise of 1979, of former Bolivian Minister of Foreign Affairs Raúl Botelho. Having learned his lesson from the process of Charaña, he had sworn Bolivia would not be interested in Arica again, out of respect for the ‘justified distrust of the Peruvians who are our allies’”.
k) Conclusions
In summary, all of those who answered the aforementioned questionnaire, despite being the most distinguished personalities of the country at the political and international level, appeared not to have understood the negotiations initiated in Charaña. Their antipathies to Banzer were so great that they clouded their vision on the maritime issue. None of them provided a practical solution to the problem. They limited themselves to criticizing Banzer’s negotiation and to demonstrating their satisfaction upon its failure. Moreover,
47 RODRÍGUEZ ELIZONDO, JOSÉ; “From Charaña to The Hague” (“Chile between Bolivia’s maritime aspiration and Peru’s maritime claim”), page 108. (Printed in Naval Limitada, Santiago de Chile, 2009).
2864
Annex 350
Annex 350
2865
there is a naive aspect to their comments, which demonstrate how little they knew Chile. Almost all of them believed that Bolivia could at any time restore the conversations with this country on the maritime issue. As if Chile were desperate to put an end to the national maritime confinement! And not understanding that while such confinement lasts, Chile obtains great economic advantages from Bolivia. Suffice it to mention the port fees, the Arica-La Paz railway fees, the Bolivian tourism on the Chilean coast, and something much more significant that started many years later: the creation of the Commercial Free Zone in Iquique, intended to import into Bolivia overseas products, which provides the province of Iquique with significant gains at the cost of the Bolivians.
As regards what has been affirmed by Botelho Gosálvez, one could say that it was the fruit of the deep antipathy towards Chile that ensued immediately after the rupture of diplomatic relations. When this author asked Raúl Botelho about what the solution to the maritime problem would be, he answered that it should be a territory located at the old national littoral, which would be connected to the country by means of highways and pipelines that would be fully free for Bolivia. Including, also, the railway from Antofagasta to Bolivia. After this author mentioned to him that Chile had already rejected outright said enclave, Mr Raúl stated that international organizations, such as the UN and the OAS, could well “twist the arm” of Chile.
11. Analysis of Charaña’s Failure
To analyse the failure of the Charaña Negotiation, it is important to keep in mind the final diplomatic actions that were taken before diplomatic relations with Chile were broken off.
As can be recalled, on 21 December 1977, President Banzer replied to general Pinochet’s letter of 23 November. In it, he notes that the meeting of special representatives would not make much sense unless the obstacles that were keeping the negotiations from positively moving forward were changed. In other words, he was asking to establish new conditions, such as leaving out the demand for an exchange of territories, which Bolivia as a whole was rejecting outright.
General Pinochet responded on 18 January 1978, insisting that the basic terms proposed by Chile in December 1975, and accepted “in general terms and without objections by Bolivia” were “the only viable and realistic way to satisfy the longing of the brother country”.
He then insisted that it would be “useful to appoint the Special Representatives, as was agreed just four months ago,” noting that “this is not a ‘delaying phase’ as Your Excellency seems to think, but a way to avoid the stagnation of the dialogue”.
2866
Annex 350
Annex 350
2867
The commemoration of the taking of Antofagasta was held a few days later, on 14 February 1978. It motivated the publication of many articles and commentaries on the relationship with Chile. Most of them highlighted Chile’s unyielding demands for territorial compensation as an essential requirement to settle the national maritime problem.
The Bolivian people seemed to have summoned courage upon learning that the situation between Chile and Argentina had cooled off and Chile would now stand on its own faced with Bolivia’s friendship with Peru and Argentina. The negative reaction in Bolivia was such that Banzer’s administration even announced that no new ambassador to Santiago would be appointed, leaving the mission in the hands of the Chargé d’Affaires a.i, Agustín Saavedra Weisse.
Foreign minister Adriázola himself, faced with public pressure, once again blamed Chile for not making any efforts to get Peru to drop its demands for a tripartite territory north of Arica. The odd thing is that he believed Peru’s tripartite formula to have complicated matters, but that that country was willing to change it if Chile were to consider it as part of the negotiations. In other words, not even Peru’s proposal was so badly received in Bolivia as the demand for a territorial exchange.
It is hard to understand why Adriázola thought that Chile needed to make efforts to get Peru to withdraw its proposal, considering it was Bolivia that was interested in getting this to happen. It must be sadly reiterated that the Bolivian ministry of foreign affairs was so weak and incapable of understanding the negotiations it was engaged in that it looked for ways to blame others for the halt in the discussions and, in the end, it found that the best step was to break off relations and get rid of these “hot potato” negotiations that were getting its hands scorched.
The following question is posed in “Charaña; a Bolivian negotiation; 1975-1978” [J. Granier, F. Padilla and F. Paredes]: “Should we continue to use political or emotional arguments to discuss the possibility of obtaining a port, a possibility that, as is known, can be achieved through technical means?” That work does not, however, provide a definite answer. It asks, if this is feasible, “can the country afford its construction?” Here, we go back to something as ridiculously traditional as Bolivia’s deep-seated desire, as a fundamentally statist country, to have the State of Bolivia bear the cost of building the port. It is as though nobody remembers how the first railway to enter Bolivia, the railway from Antofagasta to Oruro, was built. That railway was built by a company funded by English, Chilean and even Bolivian capital. However, when Bolivia has its own sovereign coast, it could do the same. Organize a major international bidding process to award a concession for the construction and management of the Bolivian port for a period of thirty or fifty years. The port would thus be much larger and more modern, and better managed, than the port of Arica.
It should also be recalled that, once construction of the Arica to La Paz railway was completed, the Bolivian government decided to build several railroad lines
2868
Annex 350
Annex 350
2869
within the national territory, at the State’s expense. Naturally, such lines were funded via loans obtained under usury and, in addition, at an exorbitant cost.
It also brings up again the possibility of tripartite management of the port of Arica, “as it was suggested by Peru in its proposal of 1976”.
To further emphasize this solution, the aforementioned book mentions that, in Arica, Peru has a pier built by Chile pursuant to the 1929 Treaty. (Construction of this pier had not yet been completed at the time of the Charaña Negotiation). It then poses the question: “Would it be possible in the early next century (the 21st) to have a three-party management of a port where the interests of all three countries converge?”
To support this theory, it quotes the opinion of a Peruvian diplomat, Jorge Morelli Pando, who “still believes it is possible”. It also provides the opinions of two renowned Bolivians, Walter Guevara Arze and Ricardo Anaya, whose thoughts on this specific issue we have already discussed. It does not, however, provide any argument by a Chilean citizen. It merely wonders: “Will Chile be wise enough to accept this option?” And the answer is categorical: Chile will never agree, as it does not wish for Peru to be any more involved in Arica than agreed in the aforementioned 1929 Treaty.
Another important question posed in the book has to do with Bolivia’s use of the Corridor: “What strategic use of the corridor does Bolivia claim, beyond its use as a connection between the sea and port and its territory?” And, as a corollary, it asks: “is it possible to devise a creative formula that would give Bolivia a sovereign outlet to the sea which, when interrupting the Chile-Peru border, allows preserving any modes of political and economic connection between those two countries?”
It is not clear why we, Bolivians, insist that Peru must border Chile. In the eighty years that the 1929 Treaty has been in place, this border has been shown to be the cause of a situation of instability and mistrust between the two countries. Specifically, were that border to be severed by a Bolivian corridor, Chile and Peru will finally be able to achieve a relationship of true friendship and brotherhood. When Bolivia was locked in by its mountains under this treaty, the situation of Arica became unstable, because Peru dreamed (and, I believe, still dreams) of getting that territory back. A dream became a nightmare, as supporting a powerful army that in the end only managed to delay the development of a country so wealthy as Peru cost a lot of money.
In any event, a settlement could be reached. There would be established a “no-man’s-land” zone at the Corridor (subject to Bolivian sovereignty, however), about five
2870
Annex 350
Annex 350
2871
kilometres wide, covering the road and the railroad from Arica to Tacna. Peruvian citizens would be able to cross that no-man’s-land without being subject to any paperwork or goods checks up to the Chilean border. And Chile’s citizens would be able to do the same up to the Peruvian border. This zone would be controlled by Bolivian border patrols that would only perform criminal enforcement tasks or cooperate in the event of any accidents.
It is clear that the Peruvian response complicated the Charaña negotiation. However, we cannot accuse it of harming the negotiation to such an extent as to lead it to failure. The big problem, it must be reiterated, was the blunt opposition of the Bolivian people to the exchange of territories.
[...]
2872
Annex 351
Joint Press Release issued by Bolivia and Chile, 17 January 2011
(Original in Spanish, English translation)
<http://www.minrel.gob.cl/minrel/site/artic/20110117/pags/20110117191343…;
2873
2874
Annex 351
Ministerio de Relaciones Exteriores de Chile - Comunicado de prensa conjunto emitido por las Cancillerías de Chile y Boliviafile:///H|/...ores%20de%20Chile%20-%20Comunicado%20de%20prensa%20conjunto%20emitido%20por%20las%20Cancillerías%20de%20Chile%20y%20Bolivia.html[22-01-2015 11:53:58]Noticias AnterioresUsted está en: Portada > Noticias AnterioresSala de PrensaNoticias AnterioresInformacionesComunicados de PrensaDiscursos Ministro deRR.EE.Discursos Subsecretario deRR.EE.Galería de FotosCancillería en MediosSolicitud Material dePrensaTemasBilateralMultilateralDerechos HumanosAsuntos CulturalesEnergía, Ciencia yTecnologíaMedio AmbienteAntárticaAsuntos GlobalesCoordinación RegionalFundamentosPrincipios de la PolíticaExteriorIntereses de la PolíticaExteriorArchivo General HistóricoSantiago, 17 de enero 2011 Comunicado de prensa conjunto emitido por las Cancillerías deChile y BoliviaComparte :TwittearCon fecha 17 de enero de 2011 se efectuó en la ciudad Santiago una reunión de trabajoentre los Sres. Ministros de Relaciones Exteriores de Chile y Bolivia, Alfredo Moreno y DavidChoquehuanca, respectivamente. En el encuentro, ambos Cancilleres manifestaron su interés de seguir impulsando yprofundizando el diálogo bilateral, enmarcado en la Agenda de los 13 Puntos.En este sentido, atendiendo al mandato expreso de los Presidentes Sebastián Piñera y EvoMorales, los Cancilleres de Chile y Bolivia confirmaron la decisión de establecer unaComisión Binacional de Alto Nivel, la que será presidida por ambos, cuyo objetivo seráavanzar en los diversos temas de la ambiciosa agenda bilateral. Dicha Comisión, que tendrá carácter permanente, estará también integrada por losrespectivos Vicecancilleres y contará con dos Secretarios Ejecutivos que se encargarán deejecutar y coordinar los trabajos de la misma. Los Cancilleres analizaron también los temas más relevantes de la agenda bilateral yacordaron las orientaciones para el trabajo de la Comisión. Los Cancilleres concordaron en que la Comisión se reúna periódicamente y tantas vecescomo las partes lo acuerden, siendo la primera reunión el próximo 7 de febrero en la ciudadMinisterio de Relaciones Exterioresde ChileFAQIntranetWebmailSIGEPERCapacitación E-learningEv. DesempeñoCuenta Pública 2013Acceso discapacitadosMinisterioPolítica ExteriorPolítica Económica ComercialAsuntos ConsularesSala de PrensaAcademia DiplomáticaAtención CiudadanaEnglish
Annex 351
2875
Santiago, Chile, 17 January 2011.
PRESS RELEASE ISSUED BY THE MINISTRIES OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS OF CHILE AND BOLIVIA
On 17 January 2011, a work meeting held by Alfredo Moreno and David Choquehuanca, the Ministers of Foreign Affairs of Chile and Bolivia, respectively, took place at the City of Santiago.
During the meeting, the Ministers expressed their interest in fostering and deepening the bilateral dialogue under the framework of the 13-point Agenda.
In this respect, and in furtherance of Presidents Sebastián Piñera’s and Evo Morales’ express instructions, the Ministers of Foreign Affairs of Chile and Bolivia confirmed the decision to establish a Binational High-Level Commission, which will be presided over by both of them, to deal with the matters on the ambitious bilateral agenda.
That Commission, which will have a permanent character, will also include the respective Vice-Ministers of Foreign Affairs and two Executive Secretaries, who will be in charge of conducting and managing the Commission’s agenda.
The Ministers went on to discuss the most relevant matters on the bilateral agenda and agreed upon the Commission’s action plan.
They agreed that the Commission should meet regularly, as many times as agreed by the parties, with the first such meeting to take place next 7th of February
2876
Annex 351
Ministerio de Relaciones Exteriores de Chile - Comunicado de prensa conjunto emitido por las Cancillerías de Chile y Boliviafile:///H|/...ores%20de%20Chile%20-%20Comunicado%20de%20prensa%20conjunto%20emitido%20por%20las%20Cancillerías%20de%20Chile%20y%20Bolivia.html[22-01-2015 11:53:58]de La Paz.Finalmente, coincidieron en que el establecimiento de esta nueva instancia de diálogo esotra muestra del mutuo interés de ambos gobiernos de seguir impulsando acciones paralograr próximamente soluciones concretas, factibles útiles, en beneficio de ambos países ypueblos.subir | volverMapa del sitioEn esta sección podrá encontrar los contenidos ordenados temáticamente:subirPOLÍTICA EXTERIORAsuntos BilateralesAsuntos ConsularesAsuntos CulturalesAsuntos GlobalesAsuntos MultilateralesCoordinación RegionalDerechos HumanosEnergía, Ciencia, Tecnología e InnovaciónMedio AmbienteAntárticaTRÁMITES Y SERVICIOSDIRECCIÓN GENERAL ADMINISTRATIVADirección General AdministrativaDirección de Personas y Desarrollo OrganizacionalDirección de Asuntos AdministrativosDirección de Finanzas y PresupuestoDirección de Informática y ComunicacionesDirección de Compras y ContratacionesDirección de Atención Ciudadana y TransparenciaPOLÍTICA ECONÓMICA COMERCIALMINISTERIOPortal de reclutamiento y selecciónACADEMIA DIPLOMÁTICAPortal Academia DiplomáticaProceso de IngresoCentro de PublicacionesCoordinación Académica y ExtensiónGRUPO DE RÍO - SPT CHILE 2010-2012Declaraciones OficialesDeclaraciones Oficiales 2011Declaraciones Oficiales 2010CANCILLERÍA BICENTENARIOActividades Bicentenario PresidenciaDocumentos HistóricosImágenes HistóricasNoticias BicentenarioVínculos BicentenarioCEREMONIAL Y PROTOCOLOPrecedencia Nacional y RegionalLista del Cuerpo Diplomático y OO.II. enChileARCHIVO GENERAL HISTÓRICOAcceso a portada y bases de datosInformación GeneralGalería BicentenarioBIBLIOTECA MINISTERIO DE RR.EEHistoria de la BibliotecaSala Santiago BenadavaCatálogo en LíneaDIRECCIÓN DE PRENSA Y DIFUSIÓNNoticias AnterioresDiscursos Ministro de RR.EECancillería en MediosTeatinos 180, Santiago, Chile | Fono (56-2) 2 827 4200Políticas de Privacidad | Contáctenos | Descargar Programas Plug-In y deVisualizaciónCreative Commons Atribución 2.0 ChileOrientación Telefónica Trámites Consulares en Chile800 364 600Lunes a Jueves de 9:00 a 18:00 hrsViernes de 9:00 a 17:00 hrsGobierno TransparenteCita para registro y Reconocimiento de TítuloPortal de Reclutamientodel Ministerio de RREESolicitud de Información Ley de Transparencia
Annex 351
2877
in La Paz.
Finally, the Ministers agreed that the establishment of this new forum for dialogue is another demonstration of both governments’ mutual interest in continuing to promote actions to soon achieve concrete, feasible and useful solutions, for the benefit of both countries and their peoples.
2878
Annex 352
“Bolivia and Chile open dialogue to discuss outlet to the sea”, La Razón (Bolivia), 18 January 2011
(Original in Spanish, English translation)
La Razón (Bolivia)
2879
2880
Annex 352
Annex 352
2881
A8 NACIONAL
LA
RAZÓN TUESDAY, 18 JANUARY 2011
Bolivia and Chile open dialogue to discuss outlet to the sea
Agreement. The first meeting will be held in La Paz, on 7 February.
LA RAZÓN - LA PAZ
Yesterday the governments of Bolivia and Chile opened a formal dialogue in Santiago to resolve Bolivia's historical demand for an outlet to the sea. The first meeting to move ahead with ‘concrete’ solutions will begin on 7 February in La Paz.
Foreign Minister David Choquehuanca and his counterpart Alfredo Moreno met in Santiago yesterday and agreed to create a Permanent Commission on the issue, by direct mandate of Presidents Evo Morales and Sebastián Piñera.
“In furtherance of Presidents Sebastián Piñera’s and Evo Morales’ express instructions, the Ministers of Foreign Affairs of Chile and Bolivia confirmed the decision to establish a Binational High-Level Commission, which will be presided over by both of them”, the two Foreign Ministers stated in a joint press release.
The Commission will be permanent and will meet “as many times as agreed by the parties, with the first such meeting to take place next 7th of February in La Paz”, according to AFP.
At the meeting, agreed to in December by Morales and Piñera at the meeting in Foz de Iguazú in Brazil, the two Foreign Ministers stated that they were interested in continuing to promote and strengthen bilateral dialogue, in the framework of the 13-point agenda agreed to in 2006.
The Bolivian Consul in Chile, Walker San Miguel, said on Sunday that the establishment of the Permanent Commission shows the level of mutual trust achieved between Santiago and La Paz. “It has even moved past the consultations, which were held twice a year,” he commented on that day.
The last meeting of the consultation mechanism between the two countries was held in July 2010. The Bolivian Vice-Foreign Minister, Mónica Soriano, and the Chilean Vice-Foreign Minister, Fernando Schmidt, signed minutes establishing the need to “materialize concrete, feasible and useful solutions in relation to the maritime problem.”
FOREIGN MINISTER. Yesterday, the Bolivian Foreign Minister told reporters in Santiago that the Permanent Commission would seek a solution to his country’s maritime problem, but without entering into “speculations”.
“We must find a useful, feasible and concrete solution,” Choquehuanca pointed out.
Meanwhile, Moreno stated that the rapprochement between the two nations and governments has been increasing and that this has made the talks easier, according to EFE.
The Permanent Commission will be made up of the Foreign Ministers, the Vice-Foreign Ministers and two executive secretaries. The Chilean Foreign Minister praised the efforts
2882
Annex 352
and achievements made. “The rapprochement between the two nations and governments has been increasing and this has made the talks easier,” he said.
Last Saturday, Morales acknowledged that there are no deadlines for resolving the maritime issue, but did require “political will” to move ahead towards a solution. “Obviously, we cannot keep waiting for more than 100 years, simply revising treaties without any results,” he added.
Piñera said that 2012 will be a crucial year for resolving the maritime issue.
The meeting of Foreign Ministers comes shortly after an impasse was overcome resulting from a statement made by Choquehuanca to the effect
that he does not rule out the possibility of taking the issue of the sea to an international court. Moreno demanded an explanation, and after receiving it, the bilateral meeting that was held in Santiago yesterday was scheduled.
Bolivia, through Consul San Miguel, also requested information from the Court in The Hague on the border dispute between Chile and Peru. Neither country expressed objections to Bolivia’s interest.
The maritime territory in dispute between the neighboring countries is adjacent to the corridor to the north of Arica, a formula which originated in 1975 as a means for Bolivia to access the Pacific. The former Peruvian Foreign Minister and presidential candidate Manuel Rodríguez said that the dispute must be resolved with Santiago.
Annex 353
“Bolivia and Chile engage in formal dialogue on maritime outlet”, Página Siete (Bolivia), 18 January 2011
(Original in Spanish, English translation)
Página Siete (Bolivia)
2883
2884
Annex 353
Annex 353
2885
The Ministers of Foreign Affairs of the two countries created a Binational Commission
Bolivia and Chile engage in formal dialogue on maritime outlet
• NEGOTIATIONS Choquehuanca said they need to "find and act upon a solution" to Bolivia's landlocked situation. Moreno highlighted signs of rapprochement.
Mauricio Weibel, special correspondent for Página Siete/Santiago
Chile and Bolivia have engaged in formal and technical dialogue in a move to meet the historical demand of La Paz to gain an outlet to the Pacific Ocean. This is the first time in 33 years since the Charaña negotiation failed that the two countries have discussed concrete matters concerning a potential outlet to the sea.
The agreement sealed by Minister of Foreign Affairs Choquehuanca and his Chilean counterpart Alfredo Moreno provides for the work team to meet for the first time next 7th of February in the city of La Paz.
"We need to find a useful, feasible and concrete solution," Choquehuanca said as he left the 8-hour work meeting at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Chile, located next to government house La Moneda.
After pointing to signs of "rapprochement between the two governments and peoples," Moreno praised both President Evo Morales and Chilean President Sebastián Piñera for promoting the initiative.
In turn, Choquehuanca said that there are no deadlines to reach an agreement, adding that the commission will need to "find and act upon a solution" to Bolivia's landlocked situation.
The commission, which is to be made up by the Ministers of Foreign Affairs, the Vice-Ministers of Foreign Affairs, and two dedicated executive secretaries, is charged with analyzing each and every matter of consequence to the bilateral relationship. "We went over all matters on the agenda," Choquehuanca revealed. At the meeting, he was accompanied by Vice-Minister of Foreign Affairs Mónica Soriano, and consul and former Minister of Defense Walker San Miguel.
For Chile, from the armed forces to political leaders, an agreement is inconceivable in the
7
FEBRUARY
The date that will mark the first step by the Binational Commission in La Paz
absence of a broad pact for integration that will grant strategic stability to a relationship that has been strained since the War of the Pacific in 1879.
Leaders of the ruling party, those of the opposition, and former high-ranking members of the armed forces were of the same opinion at an extraordinary seminar held in December at the seat of the former Chilean Congress.
"I have always shown my support for a sovereign corridor for Bolivia along the border with Peru," said former Minister of Foreign Affairs Mariano Fernández from opposition political party Democracia Cristiana.
"We need to work out a sweeping integration agreement, not just an outlet to the sea", added former Commander-in-Chief of the Army Juan Emilio Cheyre.
Cheyre's statements seemed to be linked to some Chilean companies' interest in tapping into the Bolivian market, the way they did in Peru, where they have invested around 7 billion dollars since 1990.
Meanwhile, Minister of Foreign Affairs Moreno, a former manager of international business for Chilean economic groups, stressed that an agreement would be "a very important development for Chile."
The political agreement, which points to a cession of territory without sovereignty, will take its first step next 7 February, when the commission is slated to convene in La Paz to agree on a work methodology.
The agreement, which the Government of Peru is keeping a close eye on, was actually struck before President Alan García paid a visit to Santiago on Wednesday and Thursday. "Pessimists will say that this is not the perfect timing (to visit Chile)," García stated on Sunday, pointing to the fact that his country is in the middle of a dispute over a maritime border with Chile in The Hague (DPA).
2886
Annex 354
“Bolivia’s Minister of Foreign Affairs says dialogue will be bilateral”, Página Siete (Bolivia), 18 January 2011
(Original in Spanish, English translation)
Página Siete (Bolivia)
2887
2888
Annex 354
Annex 354
2889
Bolivia's Minister of Foreign Affairs says dialogue will be bilateral
Minister of Foreign Affairs David Choquehuanca ruled out that Bolivia’s claim for an outlet to the sea could go to the International Court in The Hague, because "we are giving priority to the bilateral space and a solution under the framework of a bilateral dialogue."
These were the statements by the head of Bolivian diplomacy to agency ANSA yesterday. He thus dismissed turning to the International Court as a possibility, which he had affirmed in the past few weeks and which had not sat well with Chile.
It was only recently, however, that Bolivia asked The Hague to give it access to the documents exchanged between Peru and Chile in the litigation for a maritime area, in order to find out about the developments in the procedure that could possibly come to an end in 2012 or 2013.
Bolivia believes that whatever the decision of the Court, it will definitely affect the prospects for dialogue between Santiago and La Paz.
The agreement, which at the outset of the government of Chilean President Sebastián Piñera seemed to be a long distance away, gained ground after both parties said they were interested in a rapprochement.
"Like never before, we have been establishing the conditions and setting in the area of diplomacy between peoples (...) the technical conditions, for Bolivia to take a strong stand with respect to Chile," Vice-President Álvaro García said on January 9.
"We need to push forward with the 13-point agenda," Chilean Minister of Foreign Affairs Alfredo Moreno retorted yesterday. (DPA and ANSA)
2890
Annex 355
Joint Declaration of the Ministers of Foreign Affairs of Bolivia and Chile, 7 February 2011
(Original in Spanish, English translation)
Original submitted by Bolivia as Annex 166 to its Memorial
2891
2892
Annex 355
Annex 355
2893
JOINT DECLARATION OF BOLIVIA’S AND CHILE’S MINISTERS OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS
On 7 February 2011, the 2nd meeting of the Binational High-Level Commission was held in the city of La Paz, Bolivia, chaired by the Ministers of Foreign Affairs of Bolivia and Chile, David Choquehuanca and Alfredo Moreno. This Commission also consists of the Vice-Ministers of Foreign Affairs and Messrs. Rogel Mattos and Jorge Bunster, for Bolivia and Chile, respectively.
The Foreign Ministers of Bolivia and Chile concurred that this new work forum is yet another expression of the will that drives both governments to advance progressively and creatively in building greater complementarity and benefit for our nations, which will enable us to forge a bilateral relationship for mutual enrichment, on the basis of the respect, diversity and trust we have been developing.
The Binational High-Level Commission analyzed the progress of the 13-point agenda, especially the maritime and water resources issues and the Arica - La Paz railway, as well as the legal and economic development issues. Additionally, the Foreign Ministers instructed on future work which, by properly taking into account both governments’ viewpoints, will seek to achieve results as soon as possible, on the basis of concrete, feasible and useful proposals for the whole agenda.
Finally, the two Ministers of Foreign Affairs agreed to help coordinate a future meeting of the Presidents of Bolivia and Chile, Evo Morales and Sebastian Piñera.
2894
Annex 356
“Evo requests Chile to submit a maritime proposal before 23 March for discussion”, Agencia Efe (Spain), 17 February 2011
(Original in Spanish, English translation)
Original submitted by Bolivia as Annex 145 to its Memorial
2895
2896
Annex 356
Annex 356
2897
EVO REQUESTS CHILE TO SUBMIT A MARITIME PROPOSAL BEFORE 23 MARCH FOR DISCUSSION
Agencia Efe 17/02/2011
[...]
President Evo Morales urged his Chilean counterpart, Sebastian Piñera, to address a concrete proposal on the maritime claim of La Paz before 23 March, when the Bolivians remember that they lost a war against Chile in the 19th century, as well as their access to the Pacific.
Morales stated in a press conference that “it is about time that there are concrete proposals for discussion” now that both countries have established mutual trust and laid the foundations for a dialogue on the Bolivian demand of an outlet to the sea, and, for the first time, he set a deadline.
2898
Annex 356
Annex 356
2899
“It would be good to have a concrete proposal by 23 March. I take this opportunity to respectfully request the President, the Government, the Chilean people, and I will wait until 23 March for a concrete proposal that may act as a basis for a discussion.” He added that “this would bring tremendous satisfaction for the Bolivian people”.
Morales stated that in the meetings held by his Minister of Foreign Affairs, David Choquehuanca and his Chilean counterpart Alfredo Moreno, in January, in Santiago and last week in La Paz, there have been “grounds to move forward.”
132 years ago Bolivia lost her access to the Pacific in a war along with Peru against Chile, and on account of this fact diplomatic relations, at the ambassadorial level, with Santiago have been broken off since 1962, except for an intermission between 1975 and 1978.
Each 23 March, Bolivia commemorates the defeat of its troops in the definitive battle of the conflict, the Calama defence, formerly Bolivian territory.
In 2006 Morales and the Chilean President, Michelle Bachelet, set an agenda of 13 points, which included the Bolivian maritime aspiration for the first time, and in which framework they have developed the bilateral dialogue in the last years.
The Bolivian Consul in Santiago, Walker San Miguel, said last weekend that “the most desirable would be to have written proposals” from Chile, because it is “the international diplomatic rule” that countries that reach trust standards put “the cards on the table” and they start a “negotiation process”.
Morales said that regardless of the maritime claim, Bolivian and Chile have to dialogue to complement each other in several areas.
“We need them but they also need us. Perhaps we need more from them, perhaps they do not need too much from us, but in the end we need each other”, he stated.
Morales left in his Foreign Minister Choquehuanca’s “hands” the decision on the dismissal of San Miguel from the Consulate in Santiago in March to fulfil advisory functions at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
2900
Annex 357
Organization of American States, Permanent Council,
Legal Opinion of the Department of International Law Regarding the Value of General Assembly Resolutions and
of Documents Arising out of the Summits of the Americas, CAJP/GT/RDI-169/11, 28 February 2011
(Official English translation)
<http://www.oas.org/dil/CAJP-GT-RDI-169-11_eng.pdf>
2901
2902
Annex 357
LEGAL OPINION OF THE DEPARTMENT OF INTERNATIONAL LAW REGARDING THE VALUE OF GENERAL ASSEMBLY RESOLUTIONS AND OF DOCUMENTS ARISINGOUT OF THE SUMMITS OF THE AMERICAS On February 23, 2010, the Chair of the Working Group to Prepare a Draft Inter-American Convention against Racism and All Forms of Discrimination and Intolerance wrote to the Department of International Law regarding a request made at the meeting of the Working Group on February 22 concerning the drafting of a legal opinion that would “provide a technical assessment of the value of the resolutions adopted at the Summits of the Americas and by the General Assembly in recent years that referred to the process of negotiating the [aforementioned] draft Convention” and that “at the same time established the Working Group’s mandates.” The Department of International Law understands that the question refers in a general manner to the legal value of both the resolutions of the OAS General Assembly and the documents arising out of the Summits (which are basically declarations and action plans, not resolutions) as international instruments, and not to their contents, inasmuch as competence for interpreting the scope of the specific mandates contained in said instruments pertains to the Organs and bodies that adopted them, and not to any unit of the General Secretariat, not even the Department of International Law itself. As regards the Summits of Heads of State and Government and the documents they give rise to (declarations and action plans), while we should bear in mind that said meetings do not constitute Organs of the Organization such as those established under Article 53 of the OAS Charter and are, moreover, directed at a wider universe of entities of the inter-American system than just the Organization, they do carry fundamental political weight for the activity of the institutions of the inter-American system because of the high rank of the participants in those meetings. For that reason it has been argued that the commitments and political mandates arising out of the Summits are converted into legal commitments and mandates within the Organization when its General Assembly endorses them by adopting the corresponding resolution. Thus, at the last Summit held in Port of Spain in 2009, paragraph 85 of the Declaration, which establishes the commitment of the Heads of State and Government to continue their “efforts to conclude negotiations on the draft Inter-American Convention Against Racism and All Forms of Discrimination and Intolerance,” is matched by operative paragraph 1 of resolution AG/RES. 2606, which, in the same words, reaffirms “the will and the resolute commitment of the member states to continue making efforts to conclude negotiations on the Draft Inter-American Convention against Racism and All Forms of Discrimination and Intolerance.”At its current stage of development, international organization law acknowledges the existence of organs competent to issue general regulations, almost always with internal effect within those organizations. Thus the treaties establishing them envisage the possibility of some organs created by them being able to regulate the acts of other organs within the wider structure. Implicitly or explicitly, all international organizations are endowed with the decision-making powers they need to achieve the objectives established in their charter and to guarantee continuity of their operations. According to these jurists, the right to adopt mandatory acts is extended and firmer when it is a matter of ensuring that the organization functions properly, that it is internally functional and its procedures effective, in scenarios in which the goal is effective participation of the organization in PERMANENT COUNCIL OF THE OEA/Ser.G ORGANIZATION OF AMERICAN STATES CAJP/GT/RDI-169/11 28 February 2011 COMMITTEE ON JURIDICAL AND POLITICAL AFFAIRS Original: Spanish Working Group to Prepare a Draft Inter-American Convention against Racism and All Forms of Discrimination and IntoleranceLEGAL OPINION OF THE DEPARTMENT OF INTERNATIONAL LAW REGARDING THE VALUE OF GENERAL ASSEMBLY RESOLUTIONS AND OF DOCUMENTS ARISING OUT OF THE SUMMITS OF THE AMERICAS
Annex 357
2903
- 2 - international relations. Thanks to those regulations, the organization can achieve its purposes and objectives, even though they do not constitute external decisions from which obligations may be derived that are legally binding upon the member states. Under Article 53 of the OAS Charter, the General Assembly is an Organ of the Organization and, what is more, according to Article 54, its supreme organ. The General Assembly issues its decisions through resolutions. The practice has been to regard General Assembly resolutions as expressions of a decision of a political nature that do not, in and of themselves, generate international responsibility for the member states: for instance, when member states are urged to consider the ratification of or accession to certain international treaties. Nevertheless, there are different kinds of resolution. They may take the form of a recommendation, an invitation, or an exhortation to pursue a certain form of conduct, and they are addressed to very different actors. Some are directed at the member states themselves, in which case the above assertion (that they are not legally binding) applies, but others address other organs, agencies, or entities of the Organization, including different areas of the General Secretariat, or even other international organizations. The resolutions addressing specific areas of the General Secretariat do have to be regarded as mandates to be complied with, given the standing that the General Assembly possesses as the supreme organ of the OAS. One such resolution, for example, is AG/RES. 2590 (XL-O/10), which urges the General Secretariat to continue holding workshops on topics of interest in the field of international law. That is a mandate that said Department has to abide by. The same is true when the resolution’s mandate is directed at another Organ of the Organization, given, as we have already mentioned, the status of the General Assembly as the supreme organ and by virtue of Article 54 a. and b. of the OAS Charter, which establishes as one of the General Assembly’s functions the power to determine the structure and functions of the Organs of the Organization and to establish measures for coordinating the activities of the organs, agencies, and entities of the Organization among themselves. That is the case with resolution AG/RES. 2606 (XL-O/10), which instructs the Working Group to continue negotiations on the Draft Inter-American Convention against Racism and All Forms of Discrimination and Intolerance, taking into consideration a number of factors contained in the same resolution. That is a mandate for which the Working Group will be accountable to the General Assembly, via the appropriate channels (the Committee on Juridical and Political Affairs and, subsequently, the Permanent Council) and a mandate that may only be modified by said Organ, that is to say, the General Assembly itself. This applies to all General Assembly resolutions, so that, in this Department’s view, the query regarding “General Assembly resolutions of recent years” has already been answered above. CP25730E05
2904
Annex 358
Speech delivered by President Evo Morales, 23 March 2011
(Original in Spanish, English translation)
<http://www.diremar.gob.bo/node/265>
2905
2906
Annex 358
H|/...EVO%20MORALES%20-%2023%20marzo%20de%202011%20%20DIREMAR%20-%20Dirección%20Estratégica%20de%20Reivindicación%20Marítima.InicioDISCURSO PRESIDENTE EVO MORALES - 23marzo de 2011 Mié, 23/03/2011 - 00:00Discurso inextenso del presidente de Bolivia, Evo Morales, pronunciado el miércoles en La Paz, en laconmemoración del 132 aniversario de la pérdida del litoral boliviano.Compatriotas:Hoy 23 de marzo, recordamos 132 años de la heroica Defensa de Calama en la que brindó su vidaEduardo Avaroa y junto a esta acción recordamos también a héroes de la talla de los valientesColorados de Bolivia, el coraje de Juancito Pinto y otros patriotas que derramaron su sangre yofrendaron su vida por la Patria en la defensa de nuestro Litoral.Volver la mirada atrás, es encontrarnos con una realidad que hoy día debemos recordarla y explicarlapara poder enmendar la injusticia de este enclaustramiento.El conquistador de Chile, Pedro de Valdivia, en su carta de 15 de octubre de 1550, afirma,textualmente, el paralelo 25 como el límite más al norte de lo que hoy es Chile.El territorio costero de la Audiencia de Charcas, sobre la cual se conformó nuestra República, abarcabadesde el Río Loa hacia el norte, y el Río Salado en el sur.La organización territorial y administrativa de la Audiencia de Charcas, estaba conformada por cuatrointendencias, la de La Paz, la de Santa Cruz, la de Charcas y la de Potosí, que estaba dividida en seispartidos: Porco, Chayanta, Lípez, Chichas, Tarija y Atacama, que tenía por límite contiguo a Chile alRío Salado, junto al Río Paposo.Bolivia nació con su litoral soberano en el Océano Pacífico, así lo demuestra la Convocatoria de 9 defebrero de 1825 que hizo el Mariscal José Antonio de Sucre para que los habitantes del Alto Perúdefinan sobre su independencia, documento en el que se consignó la población de Atacama, ademásque, el Acta de Independencia de Bolivia, de 6 de agosto de 1825, se encuentra firmada por elrepresentante de Atacama.Luego de constituida la República de Bolivia, se creó el Departamento del Litoral, compuesto de lasprovincias La Mar, con su capital Cobija, y Atacama, con su capital San Pedro de Atacama.En la costa boliviana estaban los puertos de Antofagasta, Cobija y Tocopilla, y las bahías de Mejillones,Algodonales y Herradura.Las constituciones políticas de Chile de los años 1822, 1823 y 1833 reconocen que el límite norte deChile era el desierto de Atacama.El primer Tratado de Límites entre Chile y Bolivia fue suscrito el 10 de agosto de 1866 que fijó comolímite el paralelo 24° de latitud sur. Este límite fue confirmado el 6 de agosto de 1874 por el segundoTratado de Límites entre Bolivia y Chile.En estos dos Tratados de Límites se acordó que Chile y Bolivia podían explotar en la zona denominadade medianería el guano, los metales y minerales en el territorio comprendido entre los paralelos 23° y25° de latitud meridional. Sin embargo quedó claro que el límite entre ambos Estados era el Paralelo24.El año de 1877 se produjo un terremoto seguido de Tsunami que sembró muerte y devastó los puertosde Tocopilla y Cobija por lo que el Estado Boliviano tuvo que efectuar el cobro de impuestos aempresas que explotaban los recursos naturales que existen en aquella región: guano, salitre yminerales.Estos cobros no establecían nuevos impuestos y por tanto no violaban el Tratado de 1874.A esta decisión boliviana, Chile expresó unilateralmente que el Tratado de 1874 estaba roto, pese aque el Protocolo de 1875 establecía que cualquier mal entendido sobre la aplicación del Tratado debíaresolverse por la vía del Arbitraje.Chile, financiado con capitales imperiales, aprovechando de la desgracia, de la catástrofe naturalsufrida por Bolivia, invadió militarmente el puerto de Antofagasta el 14 de febrero de 1879. Después detomar Antofagasta, Chile tomó sucesivamente los puertos de Cobija, Mejillones y Gatico, laspoblaciones de Calama y San Pedro de Atacama y los yacimientos mineros de Caracoles.Como consecuencia de la guerra, el país vio cercenado su territorio y su acceso soberano al OcéanoInicioInstitucionalMarco NormativoSímbolos Patrios
Annex 358
2907
Speech by President Evo Morales – 23 March 2011
Full transcript of the speech of the President of Bolivia, Evo Morales, delivered on Wednesday in La Paz, during the commemoration of the 132nd anniversary of the loss of the Bolivian Littoral.
Countrymen:
Today, March 23, we commemorate the 132nd anniversary of the heroic defense of Calama where Eduardo Avaroa gave his life and, together with that act, we also pay tribute to heroes such as the brave Colorados of Bolivia, and to the courage of Juancito Pinto and other patriots who spilled their blood and gave their lives for our nation in the defense of our Littoral.
When we look back, we see a reality that today must be remembered and examined in order to redress the injustice of this landlocked condition.
The conquistador of Chile, Pedro de Valdivia, in his letter of 15 October 1550, explicitly established the 25th parallel as the northernmost boundary of what is now Chile.
The coastal territory of the Audiencia of Charcas, on which our Republic was founded, went from the Loa River in the north to the Salado River in the south.
The territorial and administrative organization of the Audiencia of Charcas was made up of four municipalities – La Paz, Santa Cruz, Charcas, and Potosí, which was divided into six districts, Porco, Chayanta, Lípez, Chichas, Tarija, and Atacama, whose boundary adjacent to Chile was the Salado River, next to the Paposo River.
Bolivia was born with its sovereign Littoral on the Pacific Ocean, as shown by the call made by Marshal José Antonio de Sucre on 9 February 1825, to the inhabitants of Alto Peru to decide on their independence; an invitation that encompassed the town of Atacama. In addition, Bolivia’s Declaration of Independence of 6 August 1825, is signed by the representative of Atacama.
After the Republic of Bolivia was born, the Department of the Littoral was created, which was made up of the provinces of La Mar, with its capital Cobija, and Atacama, with its capital San Pedro de Atacama.
Along the Bolivian coast there were the ports of Antofagasta, Cobija, and Tocopilla, and the bays of Mejillones, Algodonales, and Herradura.
The political constitutions of Chile of 1822, 1823, and 1833 recognize that Chile’s northern boundary was the Atacama desert.
The first Treaty of Limits between Chile and Bolivia was signed on 10 August 1866, which fixed the 24th parallel south as the boundary. This boundary was confirmed on 6 August 1874, by the second Treaty of Limits between Bolivia and Chile.
These two Treaties of Limits set forth that Chile and Bolivia could mine guano, metals, and minerals in a so-called shared area – the territory between the 23rd and 25th parallels south. However, it was clearly established that the boundary between both nations was the 24th parallel.
In 1877 there was an earthquake followed by a deadly tsunami that devastated the ports of Tocopilla and Cobija, on account of which the Bolivian Government had to levy taxes on companies that were exploiting the natural resources of that region: guano, nitrate, and minerals.
These charges did not constitute new taxes and, therefore, did not violate the 1874 Treaty.
In response to this decision by Bolivia, Chile unilaterally declared that the 1874 Treaty had broken down, although the 1875 Protocol set forth that any misunderstanding regarding the application of the Treaty had to be referred to arbitration.
Chile, backed by imperial funds and taking advantage of the calamity, the natural catastrophe suffered by Bolivia, made a military incursion into the port of Antofagasta on 14 February 1879. After taking Antofagasta, Chile successively took the ports of Cobija, Mejillones, and Gatico, the towns of Calama and San Pedro de Atacama, and the mineral deposits of Caracoles.
As a result of the war, part of our territory and our sovereign access to the Pacific
2908
Annex 358
DISCURSO PRESIDENTE EVO MORALES - 23 marzo de 2011 | DIREMAR - Dirección Estratégica de Reivindicación Marítimafile:///Pacífico. En el territorio usurpado a Bolivia se descubrieron los yacimientos cupríferos deChuquicamata, que son los más importantes de esos territorios y uno de los más grandes del mundo.También fueron usurpadas significativas reservas de guano y salitre que, durante décadas,contribuyeron al desarrollo chileno.El 13 de agosto de 1900, Abraham Koning, ministro Plenipotenciario de Chile enviado a Bolivia, remitióuna nota que expresaba:'"Chile ha ocupado el Litoral y se ha apoderado de él, con el mismo titulo que Alemania anexó alImperio la Alsacia y la Lorena, nuestros derechos nacen de la victoria, la ley suprema de las naciones"'El Tratado de 1904 se forjó bajo la presión chilena y la fuerza, cuya expresión es la carta de AbrahamKoning, el anuncio de tropas chilenas apostadas en la frontera, sumado a la complicidad e interesesinternos antipatrias.El injusto Tratado de 1904, no se cumple ni ha sido cumplido por Chile. El régimen de libre tránsito nosólo fue afectado por la privatización de los puertos que utiliza Bolivia, sino que no funciona comodebería.Los daños, económicos, comerciales, financieros de la invasión y la usurpación son incalculables. Cadaaño, cada mes, cada día de los últimos 132 años Bolivia pierde y se limita en sus capacidades dedesarrollo.No solamente eso, sino que se ha provocado al pueblo boliviano un sentimiento de aislamiento ydesventaja. No podemos permitirnos condenar a las futuras generaciones a ese destino.Bolivia recibió múltiples muestras de apoyo en diversos foros y encuentros internacionales, así comopor personalidades y jefes de Estado, gobiernos, movimientos sociales del mundo, en cuanto a lanecesidad de reivindicación marítima.Un hito importante lo marca la Organización de Estados Americanos, que el año 1979, a través de laResolución Nº 426, resuelve: "Recomendar a los Estados, a los que este problema conciernedirectamente, que inicien negociaciones encaminadas a dar a Bolivia una conexión territorial libre ysoberana con el Océano Pacífico y asimismo tener en cuenta el planteamiento boliviano de no incluircompensaciones territoriales".Saludamos los esfuerzos que hicieron presidentes de las anteriores gestiones de Gobierno.En nuestra gestión logramos iniciar un diálogo bilateral entre Bolivia y Chile, sin exclusiones sobre trecepuntos entre los que se encuentra el tema del mar. Gracias a este diálogo se ha logrado lasensibilización en diferentes estamentos de parte de la población de Chile, en particular susmovimientos sociales, que ven como una injusticia que Bolivia esté cercenada sin acceso al Pacífico.Se ha construido un clima de mutuo diálogo entre diferentes instituciones, y hemos sostenido variasreuniones a todo nivel con las autoridades de Chile, conformando una Comisión de Alto Nivel, paraacelerar propuestas concretas, útiles y factibles.No obstante, a pesar de 132 años de diálogo y esfuerzos, Bolivia no tiene una salida soberana alPacífico.Frente a esta realidad es necesario dar un paso histórico por la esperanza y el bienestar de losbolivianos.Compatriotas:Es importante mencionar que la Constitución declara a Bolivia como un Estado pacifista que busca lasolución de sus controversias por métodos pacíficos, sin renunciar a su derecho a defenderse de todotipo de agresiones.La misma Constitución aprobada por el pueblo, establece con suma claridad la reivindicación marítimacon soberanía, como una de las bases de la política internacional de nuestro país. Es deber de nuestroGobierno cumplir el mandato constitucional.El Derecho Internacional, en estas últimas décadas y particularmente estos últimos años, ha dadograndes avances, ahora existen tribunales y cortes a los cuales pueden llegar los Estados soberanos areclamar y demandar lo que en derecho les corresponde.Ahora es factible y posible lograr que estos organismos internacionales hagan justicia y reparen losdaños causados a los países, sin necesidad de recurrir a ninguna forma de violencia.
Annex 358
2909
Ocean were severed. The copper fields of Chuquicamata – the most important ones in the region and one of the largest in the world – were discovered in the seized territory. Significant reserves of guano and nitrate, which contributed to Chile’s development for decades, were also seized.
On 13 August 1900, Abraham Koning, Chilean Minister Plenipotentiary to Bolivia, sent a note that read as follows:
“Chile has occupied the Littoral and taken possession of it by the same right that Germany annexed to the Empire Alsace and Lorraine; our rights are the outcome of victory, the supreme law of nations.”
The 1904 Treaty was signed due to pressure and duress from Chile, as evidenced by Abraham Koning’s letter, the announcement that there were Chilean troops deployed on the border, in addition to complicit and unpatriotic internal factions in Bolivia.
The unjust 1904 Treaty is not observed now, nor has it been observed by Chile in the past. The regime of free transit was not only affected by the privatization of the ports used by Bolivia, but also does not operate as it should.
The economic, commercial, and financial damage of the invasion and seizure is incalculable. Each year, each month, each day of the last 132 years Bolivia has suffered loss and its ability to develop has been limited.
Not only that, but the Bolivian people have felt isolated and at a disadvantage as a result. We cannot afford to condemn our future generations to this fate.
Bolivia has received many manifestations of support in several international fora and meetings, as well as from various figures and heads of State, governments, and social movements across the world, regarding the need for maritime vindication.
One important milestone was Resolution No. 426 issued by the Organization of American States in 1979, which resolved to “recommend to the states most directly concerned with this problem that they open negotiations for the purpose of providing Bolivia with a free and sovereign territorial connection with the Pacific Ocean as well as consider the Bolivian proposal that no territorial compensation be included.”
We commend the efforts undertaken by Presidents of previous administrations.
During our administration, we managed to engage in bilateral dialogue with Chile in relation to thirteen issues, without exclusions, among which was the maritime problem. Thanks to this dialogue, we have raised awareness across several sectors of Chile’s population, particularly their social movements, which consider it unfair that Bolivia is severed from and does not have access to the Pacific Ocean.
We have created a climate of mutual dialogue among several institutions, held numerous meetings with the Chilean authorities at all levels, and created a High-Level Commission to expedite concrete, useful, and feasible proposals.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, in spite of 132 years of dialogue and efforts, Bolivia still has no sovereign outlet to the Pacific Ocean.
Faced with this reality, we must take a historic leap in furtherance of the hopes and the welfare of the Bolivian people.
Countrymen:
It is important to mention that the Constitution declares that Bolivia is a peaceful State, seeking a solution to its disputes by peaceful means, without renouncing its right to defend itself from all kinds of aggression.
This very Constitution, approved by the people, very clearly establishes maritime vindication with sovereignty as one of the bases of the foreign policy of our country. It is the duty of our Government to comply with our constitutional mandate.
2910
Annex 358
H|/...EVO%20MORALES%20-%2023%20marzo%20de%202011%20%20DIREMAR%20-%20Dirección%20Estratégica%20de%20Reivindicación%Es importante mencionar que la Constitución declara a Bolivia como un Estado pacifista que busca lasolución de sus controversias por métodos pacíficos, sin renunciar a su derecho a defenderse de todotipo de agresiones.La misma Constitución aprobada por el pueblo, establece con suma claridad la reivindicación marítimacon soberanía, como una de las bases de la política internacional de nuestro país. Es deber de nuestroGobierno cumplir el mandato constitucional.El Derecho Internacional, en estas últimas décadas y particularmente estos últimos años, ha dadograndes avances, ahora existen tribunales y cortes a los cuales pueden llegar los Estados soberanos areclamar y demandar lo que en derecho les corresponde.Ahora es factible y posible lograr que estos organismos internacionales hagan justicia y reparen losdaños causados a los países, sin necesidad de recurrir a ninguna forma de violencia.Por todo ello, la lucha por nuestra reivindicación marítima, lucha que ha marcado nuestra historia por132 años, ahora debe incluir otro elemento fundamental: el de acudir ante los tribunales y organismosinternacionales, demandando en derecho y en justicia, una salida libre y soberana al océano pacifico.Bolivia es un país digno, respetuoso y respetado en la comunidad internacional. Somos un país que enlos últimos años se ha hecho conocer en el mundo entero, por la determinación de su pueblo y sugobierno de buscar para sí mismos un futuro mejor con igualdad y equidad.La comunidad internacional debe entender ahora que ha llegado el momento, para que esta inmensaherida que tenemos los bolivianos por nuestro enclaustramiento marítimo sea cerrada en base a unproceso de connotaciones históricas que con un fallo justo y certero, le devuelva la cualidad marítima anuestro país.Es en función de ello que he planteado al Gabinete de Ministros que mediante un Decreto Supremo secree la Dirección General de Reivindicación Marítima, que será la instancia dentro de la cualjurídicamente se preparen las acciones por la causa marítima boliviana, y a la cual todos los bolivianos,gobernantes y gobernados, ayudaremos a que cumpla eficazmente su trabajo.Asimismo he solicitado a la Asamblea Legislativa Plurinacional, apruebe a la brevedad posible todos lostratados y convenios internacionales que nos posibiliten esta misión que hoy empezamos los bolivianos.DISCURSO PRESIDENTE EVO MORALES - 23 marzo de 2011 | DIREMAR - Dirección Estratégica de Reivindicación Marítimafile:///Hermanas y hermanos:Los derechos nacen del respeto, la solidaridad, la complementariedad y la hermandad de los pueblos,esa es la ley suprema de las naciones.Muy pocos pueblos han sufrido una injusticia tan grande como la que sufre el pueblo boliviano. Lamemoria de nuestros mártires, la historia, la conciencia de la comunidad internacional, la razón y lajusticia acompañan al Pueblo de Bolivia en su demanda marítima.Este es un momento de la historia en el que debemos despojarnos de cualquier interés personal,sectario y partidario, y anteponer los intereses de la patria. Les convoco a sumar nuestros esfuerzos eneste desafío.Somos un país en vías de desarrollo, pero soberano. Somos un país pequeño pero digno. Por ahorasomos un país sin mar, pero volveremos al mar con soberanía.Juan Evo Morales AymaPresidente Constitucional del Estado Plurinacional de BoliviaMapa del SitioCorreo Electronico ContáctenosEnlacesVisitante Estratégica de Reivindicación MarítimaDirección: Calle F. Guachalla edificio VICTOR Piso 8Teléfonos: (591) 2-2145880 2-2145890 Fax: (591) 2-2141719Casilla de correo: 2003La Paz - Bolivia
Annex 358
2911
International law, in these last decades and in particular in these last years, has made important progress. There are now tribunals and courts that sovereign States can approach to complain and claim what they are entitled to.
Now, it is feasible and possible to make these international bodies deliver justice and repair the damage caused to countries, without the need to have recourse to any form of violence.
For all these reasons, the fight for our maritime claim, a fight that has marked our history for 132 years, now has to include another fundamental element: to go before international tribunals and bodies, claiming, in accordance with law and justice, a free and sovereign outlet on the Pacific Ocean.
Bolivia is a dignified country, respectful and respected within the international community. We are a country that in the last years has made itself known to the entire world, thanks to the determination of its people and its Government to seek for themselves a better future with equality and equity.
The international community must understand that the moment has now come for this huge wound – that we Bolivians carry as a result of our landlocked situation – to be healed, through a process with historical connotations that, with a fair and certain decision, gives back to our country our maritime quality.
On this basis, I have proposed to the Cabinet of Ministers to establish through a Supreme Decree the General Office for Maritime Vindication, which will constitute the authority within which the legal actions for the Bolivian maritime claim will be planned, and which all Bolivians, governing and governed, will help to efficiently accomplish its job.
Likewise, I have requested the Plurinational Congress to approve as soon as possible all the international treaties and conventions that will make this mission, that we Bolivians start today, possible.
Brothers and sisters:
Rights originate from respect, solidarity, cooperation, and brotherhood between peoples. That is the supreme law of nations.
Very few peoples have suffered an injustice as great as the one suffered by the Bolivian people. The memory of our martyrs, history, the awareness of the international community, reason, and justice will accompany the Bolivian people in their maritime demand.
This is a moment in history when we must set aside any personal, sectarian, or partisan interests and prioritize the interests of our nation. I call upon you to join our efforts to face this challenge.
We are a developing, but sovereign, country. We are a small, but dignified, nation. For now, we are a country without sea, but we will return to the sea with sovereignty.
Juan Evo Morales Ayma
Constitutional President of the Plurinational State of Bolivia
2912
Annex 359
Minutes of the Fourth Plenary Meeting of the Organization of American States General Assembly, 7 June 2011
(English translation only)
Organization of American States, General Assembly, Forty-First Regular Session, 2011, Proceedings, Vol. II, OEA/Ser.P/XLI-O.2 (2011), pp 139-140 and 156-167
2913
2914
Annex 359
[p 139]
MINUTES OF THE FOURTH PLENARY MEETING
Date:
7 June 2011
Time:
3:01 p.m.
Place:
Centro Internacional de Ferias y Convenciones (CIFCO)
President:
Mr. Hugo Martínez
Minister of Foreign Affairs of El Salvador
Present:
Carolyn Rodrigues-Birkett
(Guyana)
Duly Brutus
(Haiti)
Jorge Ramón Hernández Alcerro
(Honduras)
Kenneth Baugh
(Jamaica)
Rubén Beltrán Guerrero
(Mexico)
Denis Ronaldo Moncada Colindres
(Nicaragua)
Guillermo A. Cochez
(Panama)
Jorge Lara Castro
(Paraguay)
Luzmila Zanabria Ishikawa
(Peru)
Alejandra Liriano
(Dominican Republic)
Jacinth Henry-Martin
(Saint Kitts and Nevis)
Michael Louis
(Saint Lucia)
La Celia A. Prince
(Saint Vicente and Grenadines)
Subhas Ch. Mungra
(Surinam)
Surujrattan Rambachan
(Trinidad and Tobago)
Milton Romani Gerner
(Uruguay)
Roy Chaderton Matos
(Venezuela)
Deborah-Mae Lovell
(Antigua y Barbuda)
Héctor Timerman
(Argentina)
CorneliusA. Smith
(Bahamas)
Maxine O. McClean
(Barbados)
Nestor Mendez
(Belize)
David Choquehuanca Céspedes
(Bolivia)
Vera Lúcia Barrouin Crivano Machado
(Brazil)
Allan Culham
(Canada)
Alfredo Moreno
(Chile)
María Ángel Holguín Cuéllar
(Colombia)
Enrique Castillo
(Costa Rica)
Hubert John Charles
(Dominica)
Déborah Salgado
(Ecuador)
Carlos Castaneda
(El Salvador)
Arturo Valenzuela
(United States)
I. J. Karl Hood
(Grenada)
Haroldo Rodas Melgar
(Guatemala)
Annex 359
2915
[p 140]
José Miguel Insulza
(OAS Secretary General)
[…]
[p 156]
2. Report on Bolivia’s maritime problem
The PRESIDENT: We will move on to Item 2 on the order of business, which refers to the report on Bolivia’s maritime problem. As you will recall, General Assembly resolution AG/RES. 989 (XIX-O/89), approved in 1989, provided that the consideration of this issue would remain open for any of the regular sessions of the General Assembly, if one of the parties involved so requested.
In this regard, on 4 March 2011, the Government of the Plurinational State asked the Subcommittee on Agenda and Procedure of the Preparatory Committee to include this matter on the agenda of this regular session of the General Assembly. The Chilean Representation to the OAS also recorded its statement on this matter, which is found in Document AG/doc.5218/11.
To make this presentation I am pleased to give the floor to His Excellency Mr. David Choquehuanca Céspedes, the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Plurinational State of Bolivia.
The HEAD OF THE BOLIVIAN DELEGATION: Thank you very much, Mr. President.
Representatives, I would like to begin this presentation of my report by expressing my profound gratitude to the Government and people of El Salvador for their hospitality and
[p 157]
warmth. I greet this important forum that allows us to jointly face the global problems in our hemisphere.
On the occasion of the 40th regular session of the General Assembly of the OAS, held last year in Lima, when I presented the report on Bolivia’s maritime problem, I again repeated the invitation to the Chilean Government for us together to find a prompt and definitive solution to Bolivia’s landlocked situation, with the full conviction of the spirit of mutual trust that my country believes has been consolidated.
2916
Annex 359
My invocation was presented, interpreting the deepest, unchanging and permanent conviction of the people of Bolivia that they have an inalienable, indefeasible right to recover sovereign access to the Pacific Ocean and its maritime space.
As you know, on 17 July 2006, i.e., almost five years ago, Bolivia and Chile commenced a relationship through the so-called 13-Point Agenda, which was conceived as the expression of the decision of President Bachelet and President Morales, which permitted the mutual recognition of the existence of a problem and of the political will of both presidents and countries to include the maritime issue in Point VI of that Agenda, with the firm decision to reverse the history that has been written between Bolivia and Chile during the past 132 years.
With this century-old problem that wounds the very heart of South America, I must let you know, Mr. President and Representatives, that on repeated occasions Chile has not only explicitly acknowledged the existence of an outstanding problem with Bolivia, but has even negotiated Bolivia’s return to the Pacific Ocean.
Those negotiations began in 1895, and then in 1896, and were repeated in 1920, then in 1923, in 1946, in 1950, in 1961, in 1975 and in 1987. On the last occasion, as I already mentioned, in July 2006, the maritime issue was added to the 13-Point Agenda so that it could be discussed and resolved.
In July 2010, on the occasion of the 22nd Political Consultations Mechanism, in connection with the maritime issue, the Ministers of Foreign Affairs emphasized the importance of bilateral dialogue as a means of understanding between the Governments of Bolivia and Chile, providing as follows:
They reaffirmed that the process reflects a concerted Policy between both Governments and, considering the high levels of mutual trust reached at the present meeting, they confirmed that they would preserve this climate in order to stimulate bilateral dialogue in order to address the broad issue under Point VI on the 13-Point Agenda in that context, and thus propose how to reach concrete, feasible and useful solutions at the next and subsequent meetings of the Political Consultations Mechanisms, which would benefit the understanding and harmony of both countries.
This significant text undoubtedly indicated the path to follow in what could have been a solution to the maritime problem through direct negotiations.
Unfortunately, the next meeting of the Consultations Mechanism that was supposed to be held in Santiago in November 2010 – the date that was set and recorded in
Annex 359
2917
[p 158]
advance in the minutes signed by both countries – was unilaterally suspended by the Chilean Government without indicating an alternative date on which to hold it, which, given the situation, indicated to my country that Chile was refusing to submit or consider concrete, useful and feasible proposals to resolve the maritime issue.
As a result of the unilateral cancellation of the meeting of the Consultations Mechanism, the Presidents of Bolivia and Chile, at the 40th MERCOSUR Summit held in December 2010 in Foz de Iguaçu, Brazil, decided to establish the High-Level Binational Commission, headed up by the two Foreign Ministers, which would allow them to accelerate the achievement of concrete, useful and feasible proposals. That Commission met on two occasions without meeting the objective proposed by the Presidents, because the Chilean Government did not submit a formal proposal for negotiations.
In the broadest desire to reach results that would allow both countries to move ahead, the President of my country asked the Chilean President, publicly and in a respectful and fraternal context, to submit a proposal “by 23 March”, stating that this proposal “will not be the solution” but will make it possible to enter into negotiations. The answer that Bolivia received was that “Chile works on the basis of results, not dates”.
Mr. President, the dates are probably not determinative, but the time that has passed without any results whatsoever is important. My country has been asking for concrete results for more than 100 years, without receiving an answer.
The historical events of the past 132 years show that Chilean leaders have maintained and unfortunately continue to maintain a rigid, inflexible position on Bolivia’s maritime question, probably with the sole purpose of justifying an unjust invasion by force, in the interest of foreign oligarchies and capital. Bolivia, on the other hand, has always maintained a peaceful, firm stance on its vindication, in the conviction that this will make it possible to return to the sea with sovereignty.
Historically, in the infinite number of negotiations to resolve the Bolivian maritime problem, the most important event occurred in 1895 when Bolivia and Chile signed three Treaties: a Treaty of Peace and Friendship, a Treaty on Transfer of Territory and a third treaty with regulatory provisions for Bilateral Trade, all of which were ratified. The most significant part includes Chile’s commitment to cede territory to Bolivia that would ensure its access to the Pacific Ocean.
2918
Annex 359
Mr. President, the manner in which Chile reneged on the commitments it assumed in 1895 is self-explanatory. Chile sent Mr. Abraham Koning to Bolivia as a plenipotentiary. On behalf of his Government, and through a simple note, he withdrew his country from the commitment of 1895, dismissing the possibility of an agreement with the argument that: “... Chile has occupied the Littoral and taken possession of it by the same right Germany annexed to the Empire Alsace and Lorraine...” and that Chile’s rights “... are the outcome of victory, the supreme law of nations …” and he went on to say that “... the littoral is rich and worth many millions, that we already know. We keep it because it is valuable; should it not be valuable, then there would be no interest in keeping it …”
It is difficult to try to understand how Chile can claim that the Treaty of 1904 is inviolable when it had no legal grounds (much less any moral grounds) for
[p 159]
renouncing the Treaties of 1895 through a simple diplomatic note. I wonder whether in Chile’s opinion, the inviolability of Treaties only applies in cases where inviolability is in its interest, to the detriment of other States.
Mr. President and Representatives, in 1904 Chile imposed an arrangement on Bolivia by means of force, after 25 years of military occupation of Bolivian territory, the total takeover of its customs houses, ports and trade, in addition to a threat to return to a state of war and reinitiate military hostilities, without considering the fact that there was already a clear awareness in Latin America that the use of force in international relations is prohibited.
At the First Pan-American Conference, held in Washington in 1889, it was proclaimed that there were no res nullius territories in Latin America and that the wars of conquest between American nations were unjustified acts of violence. It was also established that any cession of territory made under the threat of war or in the presence of armed force would not be recognized and would be considered null and void; and finally, that any nation that was a victim of this type of plundering could demand that the validity of the cession be submitted to arbitration.
Well, Bolivia was forced to sign the Treaty of 1904 after the Pan-American Conference of 1889, when Chilean Armed Forces occupied Bolivia’s coastal territory, and Bolivia as a country under military on that occasion therefore lacked the freedom to consent.
With a clearly insufficient recognition of the loss of Bolivia’s maritime territory, the legal regime imposed on my country grants to Bolivia, theoretically, the most extensive system of free transit through Chilean territory and ports, but in practice and in reality, this system is not provided.
Annex 359
2919
The Free Transit system has not been honored in accordance with the obligations assumed by Chile in 1904, which means and has meant in the past a unilateral position taken by Chile, expressed in limitations on transit of people and merchandise. Contrary to what was established, the Republic of Chile has granted concessions to private companies in recent years, without consulting Bolivia, to administer and operate the ports of Arica and Antofagasta, causing the transport rates to increase continuously and considerably, with regulations that are not only increasingly severe, but are also constantly being modified, with resulting harm.
How can there be free transit if one of the countries that committed to provide it takes obstructionist actions to endanger it? Clear examples of this are those showing that despite the fact that there are mandatory clauses, to date Chile has not completed and perfected the enabling of the Port of Iquique under the free transit regime, in spite of the six years that have passed since the formal request from Bolivia, and for the past 16 years, the railway from Arica to La Paz has not been in operation. Now my country must negotiate the rights granted to it by the Treaties, which Chile is applying at its discretion.
Mr. President, the history between Bolivia and Chile has been marked by a constant, unceasing defense by Bolivia of its natural resources against Chile’s interests.
[p 160]
The desire of private interests for the rich deposits of nitrate, borax and copper resulted in the War of the Pacific. Thereafter, the diversion of the waters of the River Lauca, which was carried out unilaterally by Chile to provide water to the northern part of that country, has gradually caused the Andean highlands in Bolivia to become a desert. Faced with the refusal to seek a joint solution, Bolivia broke off diplomatic relations with Chile in 1962. To the present day, the Chilean Government has not cured this flagrant violation of international law.
Another indication of Chile’s lack of interest in finding arrangements with Bolivia that are consistent with international law is the waters of the Silala River, which are located in Bolivian territory, but are diverted towards Chile through engineering works to guarantee the supply of water to an important region in the north of Chile, which has not acknowledged the historic debt or the current compensation generated by its use in various economic activities, which happen to be very profitable.
Not only are there violations of a bilateral nature, but I must also mention the fact that despite the obligations assumed by Chile in the Ottawa Convention of 1997, to which Bolivia is also a party, to remove the mines along its border with Bolivia, I can report that 14 years later, Chile still has not complied with this. In this case Bolivia is also patiently waiting for compliance with the Ottawa commitment
2920
Annex 359
to remove the mines on the binational border, while it is being fenced in from the other side of the border. I thus ask you whether this is the way that countries that belong to the international community understand peace and friendship.
Mr. President and Representatives, our peoples must be integrated on a solid basis of unity, complementarity, trust and mutual cooperation. A military victory does not grant unlimited rights when such rights are the result of force, just as an international treaty or agreement signed under pressure and threats cannot be considered invariable over time.
Mr. President, the specific fact that Bolivia has not been able to find a final solution to its landlocked situation over the course of 132 years through diplomacy, through direct negotiations, as recommended by OAS Resolution AG/RES. 426 (IX-O/79), of 31 October 1979, clearly leads us to Bolivia’s sovereign opportunity to explore other alternatives granted by international law in the multilateral context, and if applicable, to go before judicial bodies providing peaceful dispute resolution mechanisms to achieve a fair solution to its just claim. Or does the Chilean Delegation think that my country must wait for another 132 years?
If Chile really believes in the ability to dialogue with Bolivia, why in the last 132 years has Chile not made any concrete, feasible and useful written proposals that can be announced to everyone? Why is it violating what was agreed between the two countries in 2010? If there is a real desire to reach a solution to Bolivia's landlocked situation, I fraternally call upon the Foreign Minister of the Republic of Chile to establish immediately, today in fact, a formal process of bilateral negotiation on a written, concrete, feasible and useful proposal, with all the Member States of the Organization of American States as witnesses.
[p 161]
For 132 years, we have claimed our right to return to the sea through the power of dialogue and reason. All of the countries present here have been witnesses to the great number of encounters that we have had, both on the presidential level and at the level of government officials. What no one can doubt is the openness and capacity to engage in dialogue that we Bolivians have shown for a long time. However, the Government of Chile has felt that a foreign policy with Bolivia limited to encounters between senior officials for media purposes and evasive diplomacy will resolve the problems. To the contrary, the only thing that they achieve is to exacerbate them.
Bolivia in no event renounces, nor will it renounce, dialogue with Chile, as stated by President Evo Morales on 23 March 2011. Therefore, here, today, in this hemispheric forum, Bolivia proposes that the maritime problem can be resolved by direct dialogue, but also wishes to state its absolute rejection of the false argument that there can be no dialogue while other procedures, even those established by international law itself, are being utilized. International case law confirms this.
Annex 359
2921
Mr. President, can we possibly deny that, in the past and the present, Chile has had and still has disputes for which mechanisms established by international law, either through a Papal arbitration or by the court in The Hague, were available to it to resolve them? This has not prevented it, nor does it currently prevent it, from being able to maintain direct dialogue and negotiations in order to achieve solutions to them.
In the most fundamental sense of justice and equity, I ask: If Chile is capable of sustaining a relationship in a civilized manner with other brother States, within the framework of international law, why is it incapable of doing so with Bolivia? Is there really any reason that justifies that position by Chile? And, moreover, is there any reason that can justify the reference to the Armed Forces?
Bolivia, as a peaceful State which, through its Constitution, promotes the culture of peace and the right to peace, clearly states its right to appear in the appropriate international legal fora to resolve its century-old maritime claim, without this being grounds for threats or samples of the display of force.
Therefore, Bolivia firmly reiterates its adherence to the Manila Declaration on the Peaceful Settlement of International Disputes, unanimously approved by Resolution 37/10 of the United Nations General Assembly of 1982, which expressly provides that: “Recourse to judicial settlement of legal disputes, particularly referral to the International Court of Justice, should not be considered an unfriendly act between States.”
Bolivia calls on the Government of Chile, based on the guarantee of the member States of the Organization of American States present at this General Assembly, not to raise the banners of new aggression, rather, on the contrary, to deal with this issue in an atmosphere of justice, to close an old wound and an old historical debt in the interest of consolidating a continent that looks forward to the unfolding of the 21st century, which would allow us to build a zone of peace and complementarity, as our Presidents agreed to in the various mechanisms of integration.
Regional integration will not be possible as long as this open wound affecting all of South America is not healed. Bolivia is a country that by nature, location and decision is convinced of the need for integration, but how can we integrate if we cannot accept that we must
[p 162]
overcome our differences with the only weapons that my country knows: international law, dialogue and justice?
2922
Annex 359
Bolivia will not shut the door to dialogue and, therefore, it proposes today, once again, with the utmost good faith among States, the possibility of embarking on formal bilateral negotiations this very day. Bolivia will propose to Chile, as a brother, as many times as necessary, as we have done throughout history, to undertake direct negotiation for the restoration of its status as a maritime nation.
Precisely, last year, on the occasion of the 40th regular session of the OAS General Assembly in Lima, Peru, it proposed the establishment of a Roadmap, based on Item VI on the Agenda of 13 Points, pertaining to the Maritime Issue, for the purpose of going through concrete formal phases in direct negotiations with Chile, through the establishment of a formal process to find concrete, feasible and useful solutions to the maritime issue. Unfortunately, Chile did not understand the historic dimension of the proposal. I hope that it can today.
Mr. President, in the multilateral environment of this hemispheric forum, Bolivia praises the intent of the 11 resolutions issued up to now by the OAS General Assembly, in which the ongoing hemispheric interest in finding a fair solution was declared and reiterated, including those established in Resolutions AG/RES. 686 (XIII-0/83), AG/RES. 701 (XIV-O/84), AG/RES. 873 (XVIII-0/87) and AG/RES. 901 (XVIII-0/88), of 1983, 1984, 1987 and 1988, respectively, to agree on a formula that will make it possible to give Bolivia a sovereign outlet to the Pacific Ocean, on the basis of mutual convenience and the rights and interests of the parties involved.
Within the same framework, Bolivia makes a brotherly call to the Member States of the OAS to express, in an act of democratic justice and generosity, with no room for doubt, its conviction that solutions and agreements should be sought as soon as possible, not only through direct dialogue but also through the mechanisms that international law offers to States.
Expressing the feeling and thinking of my people, of their children, of young people, senior citizens, men and women, of all Bolivians, that we are not giving up, nor will we give up, our right to access to the Pacific Ocean, I would like to thank the Member States of the OAS for their continuing support, the Secretary General, Dr. José Miguel Insulza, for his declarations last year calling for a solution to Bolivia’s maritime confinement, the various officials and former officials of Chile who have participated in seeking a solution and, of course, the Chilean people, who, in their greatness, have expressed support for Bolivia’s just claim to an outlet to the sea.
Mr. President, I again request the Organization of American States, through its President, to institute, within the framework of the principles established in its Charter, in this hemispheric organization, a guarantee of the efforts aimed at, and in support of, achieving the purposes laid down in Resolution AG/RES. 426 (IX-0/79) and the subsequent 10 resolutions of this General Assembly, becoming a lasting source of law and meaningful jurisprudence in the Organization.
Annex 359
2923
[p 163]
There is no way to try to ignore the hemispheric interest in a solution to Bolivia’s maritime problem by appealing to the false argument that it is not a multilateral problem, thereby attempting to deny the form and the substance of 11 OAS resolutions. Or do we also think that the OAS is a valid regional forum only when it meets our own interests?
International law, peaceful dispute resolution and direct dialogue with all the stakeholders in a problem are valid, consistent paths to resolve the geographical confinement imposed on Bolivia. We must not try to deny reality itself.
Until Nairapacha becomes Jichapacha again!
Jallalla the Organization of American States!
Thank you very much.
The PRESIDENT: Thank you very much. The Presidency decided not to put a time limit on these presentations. However, as a point of reference I would like to point out that Foreign Minister Choquehuanca spoke for 28 minutes and 27 seconds. Therefore, given the parameter and the scope of the topic that we are discussing, that will be the maximum amount of time for the speech by Chilean Foreign Minister Alfredo Moreno, as well. Obviously if he is willing to make a shorter speech, he is welcome to do so.
The Chilean Foreign Minister, Mr. Alfredo Moreno, now has the floor.
The HEAD OF THE CHILEAN DELEGATION: Thank you very much, Mr. President. I am going to be more brief.
Part of the nations that are members of this Organization have already commemorated the bicentennial of their independence, and another part will do so soon. I think that all of us feel proud when we see how we have put behind us the last border disputes that occurred during the numerous delimitation problems with which all of the new independent States in the Americas were born.
On some occasions, these problems were resolved peacefully, but many times, they resulted in armed conflicts during the 19th century and part of the 20th century. This is how our borders were delineated—they were expressed in treaties and the fact that they are has allowed us to commemorate our bicentennial in peace and peaceful coexistence with our fellow nations.
In 1904, i.e., two decades after the armed conflict of the War of the Pacific had ended, and 25 years after the last battle in which Bolivia participated, Chile and Bolivia signed the Treaty of Peace and Amity that established the definitive
2924
Annex 359
borders between the two countries. This Treaty describes in detail the line along the common border between Chile and Bolivia, and there are no territories subject to a cancelation clause or to a precarious status.
By means of the Treaty, Chile agreed to obligations of compensation and facilities, with which it has strictly complied, and therefore I must unfortunately reject, with great energy and complete clarity, what Foreign Minister Choquehuanca has said, because it is not true. Among those
[p 164]
obligations I can mention the most extensive right to free transit through Chilean ports for Bolivian trade, the payment of various Bolivian debts and the construction of a railway from Arica to La Paz, at Chile’s expense.
Thereafter, and in order to strengthen their bonds of friendship, Chile and Bolivia signed various agreements that expanded and increased the rights granted to Bolivia. Just to mention one example, in terms of free transit, in 1937, both States signed the Transit Convention that even included free transit of armaments. The guarantees that Chile now gives to Bolivia are greater than those recommended by the United Nations Convention for Landlocked Countries.
With respect to the resolutions of the OAS General Assembly adopted from 1979 to 1989, to which Bolivia has alluded in this forum, Chile has consistently stated that matters affecting the territorial integrity of Member States are strictly bilateral. No Member State can arrogate to itself the authority to intervene in bilateral matters without the consent of the affected countries. Therefore, once again, as the President mentioned at the beginning of this meeting, we have objected every year to the inclusion of this item on the agenda, as is shown in the minutes of each of them.
This is the same position that Chile and the remaining member States have taken when the border issues of other countries have arisen in the Assembly. There has never been any intervention in matters that are up to the countries involved to resolve, and they must do so using, and in compliance with, the treaties in force between them.
Along these same lines, in the case of Bolivia and Chile, for more than 20 years the situation has been radically different from the one in the 1980s, when these resolutions were adopted. The recommendations made by this Assembly have only been a call to dialogue between these countries, and I want to tell you that Chile fully agrees with this objective. My country, in a context of solid, stable and robust democracy, has given sufficient signs of its spirit of solidarity and integration.
It is in this spirit that we invite Bolivia, now when our two countries and the Continent are celebrating democracy, to return to the path of dialogue and to
Annex 359
2925
comply with the treaties in force between us for more than 100 years.
Mr. President, States are sovereign to establish the legal framework that they deem appropriate for governing their internal order. We respect that independence and the freedom of each country to define its own destiny. Nevertheless, Bolivia enacted a new Constitution in 2009 that gives its Government the constitutional mandate of denouncing, or potentially renegotiating, all treaties that obstruct that country’s sovereign access to the sea.
Indeed, I am going to mention article 267 and the ninth transitional article of the Bolivian Constitution, which, as I have already explained, was not enacted until 2009 and which states the following:
•
Article 267 of the new Constitution, called “Maritime Vindication,” indicates that: “The Bolivian state declares its unwaivable and imprescriptible right over the territory giving access to the Pacific Ocean and its maritime space”; and
[p 165]
•
The ninth transitional provision of the same Constitution indicates: “International treaties preceding the Constitution, the provisions of which are not inconsistent with the Constitution, will remain in the domestic legal system, with force of law. Within 4 years of its appointment, the new Executive Branch will denounce and, if necessary, renegotiate those international treaties that are contrary to the Constitution”.
Naturally Chile stated its objection to those constitutional provisions as early as 2009. No State may rely on internal rules to unilaterally denounce a border treaty, much less if those internal rules were created a century after the treaty. This is a basic principle that has been amply recognized and adopted in international law.
Mr. President, it is Chile’s desire to have better relations with Bolivia. In spite of the fact that Bolivia suspended its diplomatic relations with Chile in 1978, and this situation remains in effect today, until last 23 March we had a working agenda with Bolivia, as the Bolivian Foreign Minister has indicated, known as the 13-point Agenda, with visible and productive results.
The Government of President Sebastián Piñera took office little over a year ago. During that period the contacts and ties with Bolivia were increased, and important rapprochement was celebrated. Suffice it to say that the Presidents of the two countries met eight times last year. During this period important progress has been made, especially with respect to rehabilitating the railway from Arica to La Paz; in the process for enabling the Port of Iquique, as requested by Bolivia; and in the distribution of the waters of the Silala River, in spite of the fact that the latter
2926
Annex 359
was subsequently rejected by Bolivia even though it had been approved by the Bilateral Commission of which Bolivia is a member, and that it was approved in that Commission by Bolivia itself.
Last December the Presidents agreed to elevate the level of bilateral dialogue to a Special Commission headed by the Foreign Ministers accompanied by permanent technical teams. This agreement explains why, without any need for further explanation, the meetings at the level of Vice-Foreign Minister were not continued as they were replaced by a meeting at a higher level, by agreement of both Presidents.
This Commission met for the first time in January this year in Santiago and then in February 2011 in La Paz; this was the first time in decades that a Chilean Foreign Minister had made a bilateral visit to Bolivia. And I want to tell you that I did so with sincerity and with the conviction that this is the way to resolve any dispute between us.
Evidence of this positive climate and the progress made are the statements made by President Morales himself until 23 March, praising the process of bilateral dialogue. Even on 23 March, in an interview in a Santiago newspaper, he said that his discourse regarding Chile “will be to continue strengthening trust”, and that “a problem that has existed for so many years, the maritime claim, cannot be resolved in such a short time”.
When asked about the idea of filing suit in an international court, President Evo Morales answered, as I said, on the morning of 23 March: “I don't believe in that so much”. Astonishingly, later that same day, the President of Bolivia announced in La Paz that he would make the
[p 166]
maritime claim multilateral and bring it before a court, thus interrupting the dialogue and climate of trust that had been built up to that time.
Bolivia’s claim that it must obtain a useful and sovereign access to the Pacific Ocean through territory that is an integral and indivisible part of Chile and that was legally recognized as such by the Treaty of 1904, as such claim was set forth in Bolivia’s new Constitution, which I have already mentioned, unfortunately cannot be accepted by my country or by the international legal system. Chile has indicated very clearly that it is not in a position to grant Bolivia sovereign access to the Pacific Ocean, much less without any compensation. There is no example of other countries in the world that have done any such thing.
Chilean territory, which was consolidated more than 100 years ago, has no reason to be divided. Implementing this claim through territory with respect to which any dispute was resolved more than a century ago would interrupt Chile’s
Annex 359
2927
territorial continuity and would affect consolidated areas with a massive Chilean population.
Mr. President, in closing I would like to state that what is needed is a new effort to continue the dialogue that was unexpectedly interrupted, as I mentioned, and focus it again on useful solutions for the Bolivian people—feasible, concrete and mutually satisfactory solutions, as Foreign Minister Choquehuanca pointed out. Only then will we be able to find the paths for the effective benefit and progress of our peoples. We believe that any other path would be useless and would not lead to the expected benefits.
Any attempt related to Bolivia’s maritime claim must naturally be based on current treaties, and constitutes a strictly bilateral matter, and therefore, is beyond the jurisdiction of this Organization. As I mentioned earlier, this is the very thing that the OAS has indicated in every single one of the border disputes between any of its members.
Moreover, the decision to go to court would mean that Chile would assert its arguments, because international law and jurisprudence support those arguments with perfect clarity. Bolivia may take that path, but then the dispute would be in the hands of the judges.
Chile has stated, and wishes to repeat on this occasion, its desire to continue a dialogue to reach mutually acceptable solutions, as it has indicated, and that would result in benefits for both nations, that looks towards the future and reflects the spirit of integration and solidarity that must prevail between nations that are brothers and neighbors. With this spirit in mind, Chile has the greatest willingness to continue exploring with Bolivia the concession of land and facilities to engage in the activities that it requires and to improve its maritime status. Moreover, we have stated our position clearly and publicly from the very start, and it is up to Bolivia to decide the way forward.
For our part, I would take this occasion to repeat our invitation to work together towards mutual progress, based on respect for our countries, with the inviolability of the treaties that we have concluded, and in search of agreements within a framework of true integration, and to which we as of now commit all our efforts and all our energy.
[p 167]
Thank you very much, Mr. President.
2928
Annex 360
Chilean Minutes of the Meeting between the Presidents of Chile and Bolivia, 28 July 2011
(Original in Spanish, English translation)
Archives of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Chile
2929
2930
Annex 360
Annex 360
2931
Meeting of Presidents Sebastian Piñera and Evo Morales
(Lima, 28 July 2011, 8:00 a.m., Country Hotel)
1.
Together with both Presidents, the Ministers of Foreign Affairs of Chile and Bolivia, Alfredo Moreno and David Choquehuanca, respectively, were in attendance.
2.
Following the customary greetings, (in a formal tone) President Morales asked to raise two pre-existing issues:
1.2. Treatment afforded to 14 Bolivian soldiers in Chile: Morales claimed for the arrest of soldiers who fight smuggling and drug trafficking in what he described as regular authorized patrol rounds; and he further affirmed that although the treatment up to Colchane was correct, subsequently and with reference to conversations with the lieutenant responsible for the Bolivian patrol, the officers were supposedly tormented (subjected to mistreatment and torture, and restrained with chains). He also claimed for the return of the weapons.
1.3. The President of Chile, along with Minister Moreno, expressed that this was not so, a group of uniformed officers carrying military weapons was arrested in Chilean territory on board of civilian automobiles with Chilean license plates. The Bolivian nationals were very well treated, subjected to medical checks, in accordance with the applicable laws in force for any person under arrest. They were promptly released, after the factual circumstances were elucidated. During all such time, both Ministers of Foreign Affairs remained in contact and the individuals were afforded full consular facilities, until they were finally released after two days, even in spite of the accusations of theft from the owners of the vehicles, which involved identification parades of the suspects. All of this was appreciated by the Bolivian Consul. President Piñera, noted, with regard to this incident, the harshness and inaccuracy of the public statements made, and said it was offensive to learn that the officers were commended. Minister Moreno further affirmed that no such regular transit authorization actually existed for Bolivian patrols within Chilean territory.
1.4. As regards this issue, finally no significant accord resulted. The President offered to send the background of the case file and, with respect to the weapons, he said they had to wait for the court’s decision.
1.5. The Sanabria Case: President Morales claimed that he had not been warned about the criminal situation regarding Sanabria, and represented that he would have adopted the relevant measures, but the authorities cooperated with the DEA instead. Such agency was repeatedly accused of being an instrumentality of imperialism, which is not interested in fighting drugs but is determined to destabilize his government.
1.6. The President described the actual circumstances of the cooperation of Chile’s Uniformed Police with the DEA, and stated that he likely would have informed him had he been afforded an opportunity, but he had learnt about the facts through the press.
1.7 As regards this matter, Morales said he accepted such explanation.
3.
As to the underlying issues in connection with the interrupted talks, President Piñera raised certain specific issues prior to starting their conversation:
3.1 The 1904 Treaty: First of all, President Piñera stated that the 1904 Treaty needed to be observed. Should it be deemed invalid as claimed
2932
Annex 360
Annex 360
2933
by Bolivia, there is nothing else to add in this regard. President Morales hesitantly stated that Bolivia observes all treaties, but failed to expressly refer to the 1904 Treaty.
3.2. Statements by Morales: President Piñera claimed that he, knowing that it was not true, had accused him of being a liar, of not honoring his commitments and breaking off dialogue. He further stated that there were misrepresentations in his version and regarding issues on which Bolivia was delaying, such as the issue of the Port of Iquique. Morales had allegedly stated that he was upset with the lack of progress and of a written proposal.
3.3 President Piñera insisted that this was not the case and that a meeting had been held in December, when a proposal had been explained and a high-level committee had been created; and that he had interrupted the process on 23 March. He reiterated that we were willing to negotiate based on the observance of the 1904 Treaty, not ceding sovereignty and the general proposal outlined in December. Regarding matters such as vehicle smuggling and drug trafficking, President Morales suggested that delegations from both countries should meet to address these issues, which was accepted. President Morales insisted that any stolen vehicles were to be sent back to Chile.
4.
Maritime issue: President Piñera reiterated that a concrete proposal had been made in December, and briefly explained again its terms and conditions. President Piñera added that the proposal was based on:
•
Observance of the 1904 Treaty
•
No sovereignty
•
A solution for the Bolivian Constitution’s provision mandating vindication.
4.1 President Morales requested that the proposal be submitted in writing. President Piñera said the proposal was to be the result of their joint work and, once agreed upon, and only then, would it be put in writing. He added that the proposal had to be previously agreed to, suggesting that President Morales otherwise submit a proposal to which he would say yes or no. Morales stated that he wanted a sovereign outlet, to which President Piñera answered no.
4.2 President Morales claimed that the Treaty had not been complied with. In turn, President Piñera replied that even if that were the case, which it is not, this in no way affected the validity of the Treaty. Should that be true, compliance with it should be perfected , but the Treaty remains in full force and effect, regardless of the moment in history when it was signed.
4.3. President Piñera urged President Morales to express whether he was interested in continuing negotiating based on the proposed conditions (no sovereignty, full observance of the 1904 treaty and the elimination of the constitutional provision on vindication), otherwise, there would be nothing to discuss. President Morales stated that he wished to keep the talks open to fine-tune the proposal.
5.
Format: It was agreed to resume conversations, but only informally and to clarify the various positions and proposals. The Director General of Economy, Mr. Jorge Bunster, would represent Chile and Mr. Walker San Miguel would represent Bolivia. It was agreed that the Vice-Minister of Foreign Affairs, Mr. Alurralde, would not participate in the negotiations with a view to maintaining discussions at an informal level.
2934
Annex 361
Terminal Puerto Arica S.A., Service Manual for the Port of Arica, 1 December 2011 (extract)
(Original in Spanish, English translation)
<http://www.tpa.cl/v1/appl/upload/subidos/201112293911.pdf>,
pp 60-61, 74-76, 82 and 86-87
2935
2936
Annex 361
Manual de Servicios Terminal Puerto Arica S.A. Versión actualizada a Noviembre de 2011
Annex 361
2937
Manual de Servicios Página 60 de 89Terminal Puerto Arica S.A. Publicado en nuestro sitio web www.tpa.cl, el 01 de diciembre de 2011 El servicio Incluye: Trasladar el material por un medio de transporte desde las bodegas del Terminal hasta al lugar destinado para la faena donde se utilizaran los materiales en las cargas y/o embalajes que lo requieran o bien hasta el área destinada para atender la emergencia IMO. También considera el personal necesario para poder ejecutar las faenas de recepción y entrega de los materiales. Capítulo VIII: TSA-300 Servicio de Almacenamiento Articulo 70º El Servicio de ALMACENAMIENTO o ACOPIO consiste en la permanencia y custodia al interior TPA S.A., de carga de importación, exportación u otra sujeta a destinación aduanera, incluyendo todos los recursos y actividades necesarios para la prestación de tales servicios. El Servicio de DEPOSITO COMERCIAL consiste en la permanencia y custodia dentro de TPA S.A., de carga no sujeta a destinación aduanera, incluyendo todos los recursos y actividades necesarios para la prestación de dichos servicios. Las tarifas de almacenaje se cobran de acuerdo al tonelaje de las mercaderías y a los días de permanecía de estas en puerto, para lo cual se han definido valores en US$ por tonelada para día de permanencia. Ver Titulo VI, Capítulo II: Listado de tarifas de almacenajeArticulo 71º El Terminal será responsable de la custodia de la carga, conforme a la legislación vigente, desde el momento en que ésta sea recibida física y documentalmente y hasta su entrega en la misma forma al consignatario o su representante. Articulo72ºComo consecuencia de lo anterior, la carga será recibida por TPA S.A., y entregada por el transportador sus agentes o representantes, en condiciones tales que a simple vista no demuestre daño o deterioro en sus envases o embalajes, o que evidencie alteración o perjuicio en su contenido. TPA S.A. reparará los bultos en mal estado, de acuerdo a disposiciones aduaneras, por cuenta del Armador o su representante o del consignatario, y realizará, si es preciso, el reembalaje en bolsas u otros receptáculos debidamente sellados cuidando que las marcas y demás señas que identifican el bulto sean visibles a simple vista. Además procederá al pesaje de la carga al momento de ser entregada. Por disposición aduanera, la carga deberá ser recepcionada dentro del plazo de 24 horas contado a partir de la fecha de zarpe de la nave, cuando se trate de desembarque. En los embarques la carga deberá ser entregada al Terminal al momento de su depósito en puerto. TPA S.A., emitirá un documento formal numerado denominado documento portuario único, cada vez que se reciba carga en el terminal, dicho documento tendrá la información necesaria para identificar la carga su peso, marcas números fecha de ingreso y salida, consignatario, medio de transporte, puerto de origen, de descarga y destino final entre otros. Articulo73ºEl almacenaje se clasifica para carga en contenedores, carga general, carga a granel y carga peligrosa de retiro o embarque directo o indirecto.
Chapter VIII: TSA-300 Storage Service
[…]
2938
Annex 361
Manual de Servicios Página 61 de 89Terminal Puerto Arica S.A. Publicado en nuestro sitio web www.tpa.cl, el 01 de diciembre de 2011 Constituye carga de retiro o embarque directo aquellas consideradas como peligrosas de depósito prohibido por las Autoridades competentes (EPA y AAMM), además de las normas establecidas en el programa de prevención de riesgos del Terminal. Articulo74ºTPA S.A., determinará el lugar en que deba depositarse la carga y no podrá atribuírsele responsabilidad cuando por falta o insuficiencia de información, ésta se vea afectada por su decisión. No obstante, sus dueños o representantes podrán solicitar que, por razones de seguridad, ella sea depositada en bodegas, almacenes o galpones. Artículo 75º Las cargas de importación nacional serán recepcionadas al momento de ser descargadas, cuando la vía sea indirecta, para cumplir con la normativa aduanera de plazo de depósito máximo, 90 días. El tiempo de permanencia de la carga en almacenaje, comenzará a computarse a contar del momento que es descargada de la nave, y para la exportación, desde el momento que ésta es depositada en los lugares de depósito de TPA S.A. Por disposición aduanera, el plazo máximo de permanencia de la carga en la zona primaria aduanera es de 90 días,pudiendo el Terminal restringirlo cuando las características y condiciones de embalaje de la carga así lo amerite. Articulo76ºVencido el plazo de permanencia permitido, la carga se considerará en presunción de abandono, y será entregada por TPA S.A. al Servicio Nacional de Aduanas. Sin perjuicio de esta disposición, el Terminal podrá proponer al Servicio Nacional de Aduanas, la venta, remate o destrucción de aquellas mercancías que sean manifiestamente perjudiciales a los lugares de almacenamiento portuario o cuando su almacenaje le produzca a TPA S.A. gastos desproporcionados o, por último, cuando haya fundado temor a que en razón de su naturaleza, estado o embalaje, se desmejoren, destruyan o perezcan. Articulo77ºCuando se requiera el retiro de la carga y esta no pueda entregarse por razones de la exclusiva responsabilidad de TPA S.A., no se considerará para el cálculo de la tarifa de almacenamiento el tiempo que dure este impedimento. Articulo78ºLas operaciones correspondientes a la entrega de las mercancías al Consignatario, serán ejecutadas por personal y equipos de TPA S.A. Articulo79º Para el retiro de la carga, el Agente de Aduanas o su representante, deberán presentar a TPA S.A. el documento aduanero respectivo autorizado por el Servicio Nacional de Aduanas .El Terminal entregará la carga, emitiendo el documento respectivo (DPU), el cual debe ser refrendado por ambas partes. Articulo80° Son Cargas de Retiro o Embarque Forzoso aquellas consideradas como peligrosas, de depósito prohibido o condicionado por las Autoridades competentes; y aquellas respecto de las cuales la autoridad competente determine que por su naturaleza no pueden quedar depositadas en los recintos portuarios. Las cargas clasificadas como peligrosas o de depósito prohibido en el Terminal se contienen en el “Reglamento de Seguridad para la Manipulación de Explosivos y otras Mercaderías Peligrosas en los Recintos Portuarios”, aprobado por el D.S. (M) N° 618 del 23 de Julio de 1970 y el “Reglamento de Manipulación y Almacenamiento de Cargas Peligrosas en Recinto Portuario”, aprobado por la Resolución N° 96 (EMPORCHI-MTT) de fecha 11 de diciembre de 1996, publicado en el Diario Oficial N° 35.670 del 20 de enero de 1997. Por lo tanto, TPA S.A. no realizará el desembarque de tales cargas mientras no se certifique dicha autorización, con la presentación de la documentación correspondiente.
Annex 361
2939
Article 75 Cargo for national import, when transported through an indirect route, shall be received upon the unloading thereof, and comply with the customs regulations that provide for a maximum storage period of 90 days. The term of storage of the cargo shall start running from the moment the cargo is unloaded from the vessel, and in the case of exports, from the moment the cargo is deposited at TPA S.A.’s warehouses.
According to customs regulations, the maximum period for storage of the cargo in the primary customs zone is 90 days. The Terminal may restrict such period when the characteristics and packing conditions of the cargo so require.
Article 76 Upon expiration of the permitted maximum time period, the cargo shall be presumed to have been abandoned and shall be delivered by TPA S.A. to the National Customs Service. Notwithstanding this provision, the Terminal may suggest that the National Customs Service sell, auction off or destroy goods that are manifestly detrimental to port storage sites, or when their storage causes TPA S.A. to incur disproportionate expenses, or, finally, when there is well-founded concern that, on account of their nature, condition, or package, they may deteriorate, be destroyed or expire.
[…]
2940
Annex 361
Manual de Servicios Página 74 de 89Terminal Puerto Arica S.A. Publicado en nuestro sitio web www.tpa.cl, el 01 de diciembre de 2011 TÍTULO V: CARGAS BOLIVIANAS EN TRANSITOArtículo 88º En atención a los deberes que para el Estado de Chile, y particularmente para el Puerto de Arica, emanan del Tratado y acuerdos vigentes, suscritos con la República de Bolivia, TPA S.A. actuará de la siguiente manera: a) Adoptará todas las medidas necesarias para no afectar el derecho de libre tránsito comercial que asiste a la carga boliviana que se transfiera a través de TPA S.A. b) Permitirá el normal desarrollo y desempeño de la Aduana Nacional de Bolivia y del Agente Aduanero designado por el Gobierno de Bolivia, en funciones de fiscalización sobre la carga boliviana en libre tránsito. c) Realizará los procedimientos administrativos y operacionales actualmente aplicables respecto de las mercaderías en tránsito bolivianas, sea que éstos se encuentren contenidos en el Manual Operativo del Sistema Integrado de Tránsito del Puerto de Arica o que hayan sido incorporados a las operaciones portuarias en relación a los usos comerciales y operativos vigentes (Ventanilla Única). d) En todo lo relacionado con los servicios, tarifas y, en general, en todas las materias relacionadas con el tránsito de la carga boliviana, no comprendidas en el Manual Operativo o en acuerdos comerciales y operativos vigentes, les será aplicable el régimen general tarifario y reglamentario, establecido en este Manual de Servicios de TPA S.A. Articulo 89º Servicios y tarifas máximas del Concesionario a la Carga Boliviana. a) Servicio de uso de muelle a la carga. La tarifa máxima por el servicio de uso de muelle a la carga será de 0,85 dólares por tonelada. Esta tarifa se aplicará a todas las mercancías cuyos fletes hayan sido pactados en condiciones F.I.O., o bien, a las mercancías en que el pago del servicio de cargue y/o descargue sea de cargo del consignatario. b) Servicio de Almacenamiento de Carga General y Carga Granel. El servicio de almacenamiento es el que se presta a las mercancías o cosas de embarque o desembarque manifestadas en libre tránsito, que se depositen en los recintos habilitados para este efecto. TPA S.A. será responsable de las pérdidas y daños que sufran las mercancías o cosas almacenadas en dichos recintos, de conformidad con la legislación aduanera vigente, desde el momento en que se reciba física y documentalmente de ellas, hasta su entrega, en la misma forma, al consignatario, su representante legal o transportista. El servicio de almacenamiento que se presta a las mercancías o cosas que se depositan en los recintos portuarios, comenzará a computarse a partir de la fecha de recepción, registrada en la respectiva boleta de recepción. Las mercancías en tránsito hacia Bolivia (cargas de importación), estarán liberadas del pago del servicio de almacenamiento hasta por 365 días, cumplido este plazo, las mercancías pagarán las tarifas generales de este servicio, contempladas en este Manual de los Servicios de TPA S.A.
Annex 361
2941
TITLE V: BOLIVIAN CARGO IN TRANSIT
[…]
Article 89 Concessionaire’s services and maximum fees for Bolivian Cargo
a) Service for use of pier for loading and unloading of cargo.
The maximum fee for the use of a pier for the loading and unloading of cargo shall be 0.85 dollars per ton.
This fee shall apply to all goods with freight booked F.I.O., or to goods in respect of which the loading and/or unloading services are payable by the consignee.
b) Service for storage of General Cargo and Bulk Cargo.
The storage service is provided in respect of goods or things to be shipped or landed which have been declared as goods of free transit and which are deposited in the warehouses authorized for such purposes. TPA S.A. shall be liable for any losses and damage sustained by the goods or things stored at such warehouses, in accordance with the customs laws in force, from the moment of physical and documented receipt thereof, until delivery in the same manner to the consignee, its legal representative or carrier.
The storage service provided in respect of goods or things stored in port warehouses shall start running as from the date of receipt recorded in the respective receipt slip.
Goods in transit to Bolivia (import cargo) shall be exempt from the payment of storage service fees for up to 365 days. Upon expiration of such period, the goods shall be subject to payment of the general fees for this service, as provided in this TPA S.A. Service Manual.
2942
Annex 361
Manual de Servicios Página 75 de 89Terminal Puerto Arica S.A. Publicado en nuestro sitio web www.tpa.cl, el 01 de diciembre de 2011 Las mercancías en tránsito desde Bolivia (cargas de exportación), estarán liberadas del pago del servicio de almacenamiento hasta por 60 días. Cumplido este plazo, las mercancías devengarán las tarifas generales de este servicio, contempladas en este Manual de los Servicios de TPA S.A. Las mercancías o cosas catalogadas como carga de retiro o embarque inmediato, en los términos señalados en la letra siguiente de este numeral, no se encuentran afectas a la liberación de pago de almacenaje mencionada en este capitulo c) Servicio de almacenamiento de cargas de retiro o de embarque inmediato.Constituyen cargas de retiro o embarque inmediato, aquellas consideradas como peligrosas (IMO), de depósito condicionado o prohibido, que por su naturaleza no pueden quedar depositadas en el Puerto. En forma excepcional podrán almacenarse, en recintos especiales y condiciones especiales. d) Permanencia. Las mercancías en tránsito no podrán permanecer en el Puerto por un período mayor de un año, contado desde la fecha de presentación del manifiesto de la nave, a cuyo vencimiento el Gerente General de Aduana Nacional de Bolivia ordenará su envío a dicho país o su entrega a la Aduana de Chile, para que proceda a su remate como carga rezagada. TPA S.A. mantendrá la carga rezagada en su custodia mientras se encuentre bajo la potestad de la Aduana de Chile y hasta que se proceda a su remate. En caso que se verificara el remate, la Aduana pagará al Concesionario por el servicio de almacenamiento un porcentaje del producto rematado, de acuerdo a las normas aduaneras respecto a esta materia. Sin perjuicio de lo anterior el Concesionario estará facultado para cobrar directamente a quien se haya adjudicado dichas mercaderías, los costos de almacenamiento y custodia, una vez vencido el plazo de retiro otorgado por la Aduana. Articulo 90º Retiro de cargas. Cuando se requiera el retiro de mercancías o cosas y éstas no puedan entregarse por razones de la exclusiva responsabilidad de TPA S.A., no se considerará para el cómputo de los períodos de almacenamiento, el tiempo que dure este impedimento.
Annex 361
2943
Goods in transit from Bolivia (export cargo) shall be exempt from the payment of storage service fees for up to 60 days. Upon expiration of such period, the goods shall be subject to payment of the general fees for this service, as provided in this TPA S.A. Service Manual.
The goods or things categorized as immediate collection or immediate shipping cargo, pursuant to the terms of item c) below, are not subject to the exemption from the payment of storage fees referred to in this chapter.
c) Storage service for cargo for immediate collection or shipment.
Goods for immediate collection or shipment are those that are considered dangerous (IMO), the storage of which is subject to certain conditions or prohibited, and which, on account of their nature, may not remain stored at the Port. However, as an exception, they may be stored in special enclosures and under special conditions.
d) Cargo remaining at the Port.
Goods in transit may not remain at the Port for a period exceeding one year, counted from the date of submission of the Vessel Manifest. Upon expiration of such period, the General Manager of the Bolivian National Customs Service shall order that they be shipped to that country or delivered to the Chilean Customs Service for this Service to auction them off as abandoned goods.
TPA S.A. shall keep such abandoned goods under custody while they are under the authority of the Chilean Customs Service and until they have been auctioned off.
If the goods are auctioned off, the Chilean Customs Service shall pay the Concessionaire a percentage of the auction proceeds for storage services, in compliance with applicable customs regulations. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Concessionaire shall be entitled to recover storage and custody costs directly from the successful bidder upon expiration of the collection period granted by the Customs Service.
Article 90 Cargo collection.
Where collection of goods or items is required and such goods or items cannot be delivered due to causes for which TPA S.A. is exclusively responsible, the duration of such an impediment shall not be considered for computing storage periods.
2944
Annex 361
Manual de Servicios Página 76 de 89Terminal Puerto Arica S.A. Publicado en nuestro sitio web www.tpa.cl, el 01 de diciembre de 2011 Anexo I: Listado de Tarifas1.- Listado de tarifas de servicios En este capítulo se muestran las tarifas asociadas a cada servicio en forma somera ya que se encuentran definidas y debidamente acotadas en el manual de tarifas y descripción de los servicios. TSM–100. Tarifa servicios uso de muelle TSM-101 Uso de Muelle a la NaveUsd/Metro-loa-hora 2.79 TSM-102 Uso de Muelle a la carga Usd/Ton 1.95 TSM-103 Uso de Muelle para Embarcaciones Menores Usd/Metro-loa-hora 1.95 TSM-104 Uso de Muelle a la carga de cabotaje Usd/Ton 1.95 TSM-105 Uso de Muelle a la carga granel Usd/Ton 1.95 TSM-106 Uso de Muelle a la Carga FIO Boliviana Usd/Ton 0.85 TST-110. Tarifa servicios de transferencia de carga TST-111 Desembarque/Embarque de Contenedores llenos 20 pies Usd/Cont. 102.00 TST-112 Desembarque/Embarque de Contenedores llenos 40 pies Usd/Cont 153.00 TST-113 Desembarque/Embarque de Contenedores vacíos 20 pies Usd/Cont 102.00 TST-114 Desembarque/Embarque de Contenedores vacíos 40 pies Usd/Cont 153.00 TST-115 Desembarque/Embarque de Carga General Fraccionada Usd/Ton 13.31 TST-116 Desembarque/Embarque de Vehículos y Automotores Usd/Ton 13.31 TST-117 Desembarque/Embarque de Graneles Limpios Usd/Ton 6.60 TST-118 Desembarque/Embarque de Graneles Sucios Usd/Ton 6.60 TSE – 120. Tarifa servicios especiales TSE-121 Reestibas vía nave de contenedores de 20 pies full/mty Usd/Cont 111.00 TSE-122 Reestibas vía nave de contenedores de 40 pies full/mty Usd/Cont 210.00 TSE-123 Reestibas vía muelle de contenedores de 20 pies full/mty Usd/Cont 215.00 TSE-124 Reestibas vía muelle de contenedores de 40 pies full/mty Usd/Cont 320.00 TSE-125 Trabajadores para servicios especialesUsd/Hom/Turno 115.00 TSE-126 Manejo de cargas extradimensionadas (Cargas de Proyecto o Pesadas) Usd/Ton o M3 38.00 TSE-127 Tiempo Muerto, tiempo en espera y no provisión de trabajo en la nave Usd/Hora/Cuadrilla 245.00 TSE-128 Fumigación cubiertas de las naves a convenirTSE-129 Ciclo completo o full cycle Usd/Cont. 285.00 TSE-130 Reestibas vía nave de carga general fraccionada Usd/Ton 13.00 TSE-131 Reestibas vía muelle de carga general fraccionada Usd/Ton 26.00
Annex 361
2945
Annex I: List of Fees
1. List of service fees
This chapter provides a summary list of the fees for each service, as they are defined and properly described in the manual of fees and descriptions of services.
TSM-100. Service fees for use of pier
TSM-101 Use of Pier for mooring of Vessel USD/Meter-per-hour 2.79
TSM-102 Use of Pier for loading and unloading of cargo USD/Ton 1.95
TSM-103 Use of Pier for Minor Vessels USD/Meter-per-hour 1.95
TSM-104 Use of Pier for loading and unloading of cabotage cargo USD/Ton 1.95
TSM-105 Use of Pier for loading and unloading of bulk cargo USD/Ton 1.95
TSM-106 Use of Pier for Bolivian FIO Cargo USD/Ton 0.85
[…]
2946
Annex 361
Manual de Servicios Página 82 de 89Terminal Puerto Arica S.A. Publicado en nuestro sitio web www.tpa.cl, el 01 de diciembre de 2011 2.- Listado de tarifas de almacenaje para cargas de exportación e importación Nacional, otros países e importación boliviana (excepto carga de exportación y peligrosa boliviana) Nota 1: En caso que la carga sea programada como retiro directo un turno antes del arribo de la nave y retirada dentro de las primeras 24 horas siguientes al momento en que se complete el desamarre de la nave, no estará afecta a pago de almacenaje. Nota 2: El embarque tiene 72 horas libres del pago de Almacenaje antes del amarre de la nave mas el tiempo de ocupación de la misma. Nota 3: Las cargas de exportación bolivianas tienen un tiempo libre del pago de almacenamiento de 60 días Nota 4: Las cargas de importación bolivianas tienen un tiempo libre del pago de almacenamiento de 365 días Nota 5: Las tarifas expresadas en esta tabla son cobradas por toneladas/día Nota 6: Las tarifas TSA-305 y 306 No se aplican a la cargas IMO Boliviana, para estas ver punto 3, Listado de tarifas de almacenamiento de carga peligrosa boliviana DIAS Cargas TSA-301 TSA-302 TSA-304 TSA-303 TSA-305 TSA-306 TSA-307 TSA-308 Gral. Gral Granel Granel Peligrosa Peligrosa Vehículos Cont FCL Sitio Sitio Sitio Sitio Sitio Sitio Sitio Sitio Cub Desc Cub Desc Cub Desc Desc Desc 11.62 0.81 3.88 2.29 4.64 3.10 8.00 1.55 23.23 1.62 5.82 3.43 9.29 7.74 16.00 6.19 38.08 4.84 7.77 4.58 23.23 18.58 24.00 10.84 412.94 9.69 9.72 5.72 37.17 30.97 32.00 17.03 517.77 14.53 11.67 6.86 46.44 46.44 40.00 24.77 618.26 14.77 12.13 7.14 56.03 51.19 48.00 24.98 718.76 15.00 12.59 7.41 57.97 52.16 56.00 25.21 819.27 15.25 13.12 7.71 60.00 53.16 64.00 25.44 919.79 15.50 13.62 8.01 62.16 54.22 72.00 25.69 1020.34 15.73 14.17 8.34 64.41 55.33 80.00 25.92 1120.91 16.00 14.72 8.66 66.83 56.51 88.00 26.17 1221.55 16.32 15.25 8.97 69.33 57.76 96.00 26.44 1322.20 16.65 15.85 9.32 71.99 59.09 104.00 26.69 1422.89 16.98 16.40 9.65 74.77 60.45 112.00 26.97
Annex 361
2947
2. List of storage fees for National export and import cargo, other countries’ cargo, and Bolivian import cargo (excluding Bolivian export and dangerous cargo)
Note 1: Where cargo has been scheduled for direct collection one shift before vessel arrival and collected within 24 hours from the time vessel undocking is complete, such cargo shall be exempted from paying storage rates.
Note 2: Shipments shall enjoy a 72-hour free-Storage period prior to vessel docking plus dock usage time.
Note 3: Bolivian export cargo shall enjoy a 60-day free-storage period.
Note 4: Bolivian import cargo shall enjoy a 365-day free-storage period.
Note 5: All rates herein shall be charged on a ton/day basis.
Note 6: TSA-305 and TSA-306 rates shall Not apply to Bolivian IMO cargo. For this cargo, see “3. List of storage fees for dangerous Bolivian cargo.”
DAYS
Cargo
TSA-301
TSA-302
TSA-304
TSA-303
TSA-305
TSA-306
TSA-307
TSA-308
General Cargo
-
Covered Site
General Cargo
-
Uncovered Site
Bulk Cargo
-
Covered Site
Bulk Cargo
-
Uncovered Site
Dangerous Cargo
-
Covered Site
Dangerous Cargo
-
Uncovered Site
Vehicles
-
Uncovered Site
FCL Containers
-
Covered Site
1
1.62
0.81
3.88
2.29
4.64
3.10
8.00
1.55
2
3.23
1.62
5.82
3.43
9.29
7.74
16.00
6.19
3
8.08
4.84
7.77
4.58
23.23
18.58
24.00
10.84
4
12.94
9.69
9.72
5.72
37.17
30.97
32.00
17.03
5
17.77
14.53
11.67
6.86
46.44
46.44
40.00
24.77
6
18.26
14.77
12.13
7.14
56.03
51.19
48.00
24.98
7
18.76
15.00
12.59
7.41
57.97
52.16
56.00
25.21
8
19.27
15.25
13.12
7.71
60.00
53.16
64.00
25.44
9
19.79
15.50
13.62
8.01
62.16
54.22
72.00
25.69
10
20.34
15.73
14.17
8.34
64.41
55.33
80.00
25.92
11
20.91
16.00
14.72
8.66
66.83
56.51
88.00
26.17
12
21.55
16.32
15.25
8.97
69.33
57.76
96.00
26.44
13
22.20
16.65
15.85
9.32
71.99
59.09
104.00
26.69
14
22.89
16.98
16.40
9.65
74.77
60.45
112.00
26.97
2948
Annex 361
Manual de Servicios Página 86 de 89Terminal Puerto Arica S.A. Publicado en nuestro sitio web www.tpa.cl, el 01 de diciembre de 2011 3.- Listado de tarifas de almacenamiento de carga peligrosa boliviana Constituyen cargas de retiro o embarque inmediato, aquellas consideradas como peligrosas (IMO), de depósito condicionado o prohibido, que por su naturaleza no pueden quedar depositadas en el Puerto y que en forma excepcional podrán almacenarse, en recintos especiales y condiciones especiales. Cargas de importación de retiro o embarque inmediato Por el período del 1º al 5º día: 1,04 USD/TON Por el período del 6º al 10º día: 2,10 USD/TON Por el período del 11º al 15º día: 2,57 USD/TON Por el período del 16º al 20º día: 3,27 USD/TON Por el período del 21º al 25º día: 3,97 USD/TON Por el período del 26º al 30º día: 5,60 USD/TON Por cada período de 5 días que exceda entre los treinta días y hasta los sesenta días: 7,70 USD/TON Por cada período de 5 días que exceda entre los sesenta días y hasta los noventa días: 10,96 USD/TON Por cada período de 5 días que exceda de los noventa días: *19,59 USD/TON Cargas de exportación de retiro o embarque inmediato Por el período del 1º al 5º día: 0,68 USD/TON Por el período del 6º al 10º día: 1,37 USD/TON Por el período del 11º al 15º día: 1,67 USD/TON Por el período del 16º al 20º día: 2,13 USD/TON Por el período del 21º al 25º día: 2,58 USD/TON Por el período del 26º al 30º día: 3,64 USD/TON Por cada período de 5 días que exceda entre los treinta días y hasta los sesenta días: 5,01 USD/TON Por cada período de 5 días que exceda entre los sesenta días y hasta los noventa días: 7,12 USD/TON Por cada período de 5 días que exceda de los noventa días: *12,13 USD/TON La tarifa de almacenaje de las cargas de retiro o embarque inmediato es acumulativa, de manera que cuando concurran varios períodos, la suma de todos ellos será la cantidad que corresponderá pagar. **Las tarifas para el servicio de almacenamiento de cargas de retiro o embarque de inmediato, cuando las mercancías o cosas hayan sido depositadas en patios o explanadas descubiertas cancelaran el 50% de las tarifas arriba mencionadas.
Annex 361
2949
3. List of storage fees for dangerous Bolivian cargo
Immediate collection or immediate shipping cargo is cargo that is considered dangerous (IMO), or the storage of which is restricted or prohibited, and which due to its nature may not be kept in storage at the Port and may exceptionally be stored in special warehouses and under special conditions.
Immediate collection or immediate shipping import cargo
For the period from the 1st to the 5th day: 1.04 USD/TON
For the period from the 6th to the 10th day: 2.10 USD/TON
For the period from the 11th to the 15th day: 2.57 USD/TON
For the period from the 16th to the 20th day: 3.27 USD/TON
For the period from the 21st to the 25th day: 3.97 USD/TON
For the period from the 26th to the 30th day: 5.60 USD/TON
For each 5-day period in excess between the 30th day and until the 60th day: 7.70 USD/TON
For each 5-day period in excess between the 60th day and until the 90th day: 10.96 USD/TON
For each 5-day period in excess after the 90th day: *19.59 USD/TON
Immediate collection or immediate shipping export cargo
For the period from the 1st to the 5th day: 0.68 USD/TON
For the period from the 6th to the 10th day: 1.37 USD/TON
For the period from the 11th to the 15th day: 1.67 USD/TON
For the period from the 16th to the 20th day: 2.13 USD/TON
For the period from the 21st to the 25th day: 2.58 USD/TON
For the period from the 26th to the 30th day: 3.64 USD/TON
For each 5-day period in excess between the 30th day and until the 60th day: 5.01 USD/TON
For each 5-day period in excess between the 60th day and until the 90th day: 7.12 USD/TON
For each 5-day period in excess after the 90th day: *12.13 USD/TON
Storage fees for immediate collection or immediate shipping cargo are cumulative, such that if several periods apply, the sum of all of them shall be the amount payable.
** The fees for the storage service of cargo for loading or immediate shipment, when the merchandise or goods have been deposited in patios or uncovered esplanades, shall cancel out 50% of the fees mentioned above.
2950
Annex 361
Manual de Servicios Página 87 de 89Terminal Puerto Arica S.A. Publicado en nuestro sitio web www.tpa.cl, el 01 de diciembre de 2011 PERIODODESEMBARQUE EMBARQUE (Importación) (Exportación) TARIFA TARIFA TARIFA TARIFA Depósito Depósito Depósito Depósito Cubierto Descubierto Cubierto Descubierto 1° al 5° día 1,040,520,680,34 6° al 10° día 3,141,572,051,03 11° al 15° día 5,712,863,721,86 16° al 20° día 8,984,495,852,93 21° al 25° día12,956,488,434,22 26° al 30° día 18,559,2812,076,04 31° al 35° día 26,2513,1317,088,54 36° al 40° día 33,9516,9822,0911,05 41° al 45° día 41,6520,8327,1013,55 46° al 50° día 49,3524,6832,1116,06 51° al 55° día 57,0528,5337,1218,56 56° al 60 día 64,7532,3842,1321,07 61° al 65° día 75,7137,8649,2524,63 66° al 70° día 86,6743,3456,3728,19 71° al 75° día 97,6348,8263,4931,75 76° al 80° día 108,5954,3070,6135,31 81° al 85° día 119,5559,7877,7338,87 86° al 90° día 130,5165,2684,8542,43 91° al X día (*) 19,599,8012,736,37 4.- Listado de tarifas de almacenamiento para las cargas de exportación boliviana, transcurridos los 60 días libres del pago de almacenaje. TSAB - 601 Carga general depositada en almacén Ton/día 0.090TSAB - 602 Carga general depositada en sitio descubierto Ton/día 0.046TSAB - 603 Carga granel depositada en almacén Ton/día 0.084TSAB - 604 Carga granel depositada en sitio descubierto Ton/día 0.042TSAB - 605 Carga general depositada en sitio semidescubierto Ton/día 0.067TSAB - 606 Carga granel depositada en sitio semidescubierto Ton/día 0.063TSAB - 607 Carga granel mineral depositada en sitio descubierto Ton/día 0.022
Annex 361
2951
PERIOD
UNLOADING (Import)
LOADING (Export)
RATE
Covered Warehouse
RATE
Uncovered Warehouse
RATE
Covered Warehouse
RATE Uncovered Warehouse
Day 1 to 5
1.04
0.52
0.68
0.34
Day 6 to 10
3.14
1.57
2.05
1.03
Day 11 to 15
5.71
2.86
3.72
1.86
Day 16 to 20
8.98
4.49
5.85
2.93
Day 21 to 25
12.95
6.48
8.43
4.22
Day 26 to 30
18.55
9.28
12.07
6.04
Day 31 to 35
26.25
13.13
17.08
8.54
Day 36 to 40
33.95
16.98
22.09
11.05
Day 41 to 45
41.65
20.83
27.10
13.55
Day 46 to 50
49.35
24.68
32.11
16.06
Day 51 to 55
57.05
28.53
37.12
18.56
Day 56 to 60
64.75
32.38
42.13
21.07
Day 61 to 65
75.71
37.86
49.25
24.63
Day 66 to 70
86.67
43.34
56.37
28.19
Day 71 to 75
97.63
48.82
63.49
31.75
Day 76 to 80
108.59
54.30
70.61
35.31
Day 81 to 85
119.55
59.78
77.73
38.87
Day 86 to 90
130.51
65.26
84.85
42.43
Day 91 to X (*)
19.59
9.80
12.73
6.37
4.- List of storage fees for Bolivian exports after the 60 day free storage period has expired
TSAB - 601 General cargo deposited in storage Ton/day 0.090
TSAB - 602 General cargo deposited in uncovered site Ton/day 0.046
TSAB - 603 Bulk cargo deposited in storage Ton/day 0.084
TSAB - 604 Bulk cargo deposited in uncovered site Ton/day 0.042
TSAB - 605 General cargo deposited in semi-uncovered site Ton/day 0.067
TSAB - 606 Bulk cargo deposited in semi-uncovered site Ton/day 0.063
TSAB - 607 Mineral bulk cargo deposited in uncovered site Ton/day 0.022
2952
Annex 362
Note from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Bolivia to the Consulate General of Chile in Bolivia,
No VRE-DGRB-UAM-002915/2012, 22 February 2012
(Original in Spanish, English translation)
Archives of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Chile
2953
2954
Annex 362
Annex 362
2955
PLURINATIONAL STATE OF BOLIVIA
MINISTRY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS
VRE-DGRB-UAM-002915/2012
THE MINISTRY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS – General Office of Consular Affairs extends its respectful greetings to the Honorable Consulate General of the Republic of Chile, and addresses it in connection with the tariff issue at the Port of Arica, which was discussed at the 4th Meeting of the Port of Arica Technical Group and the 12th Meeting of the Working Group on Free Transit, both held in August and September 2011, as well as the meetings between representatives of the Port Services Administration – Bolivia (ASP-B) and Empresa Portuaria Arica (EPA), in January 2012.
In this regard, considering that the technical analysis of the tariff adjustment seems to have been completed, the Government of the Plurinational State of Bolivia hereby invites the Government of the Republic of Chile to an extraordinary meeting of the Bolivia-Chile Political Consultations Mechanism to specifically address this issue, to be held on 29 February 2012 in the City of La Paz.
THE MINISTRY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS – General Office of Consular Affairs takes this opportunity to renew to the Honorable Consulate General of the Republic of Chile its assurances of its highest consideration.
La Paz, 22 February 2012
[Stamped:]
MINISTRY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS
OFFICE OF THE VICE-MINISTER OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS
La Paz – Bolivia
[Stamped]
To the Honorable
CONSULATE GENERAL OF THE REPUBLIC OF CHILE
HAND DELIVERED.–
2956
Annex 363
Minutes of the Fourth Plenary Meeting of the Organization of American States General Assembly, 5 June 2012
(English translation only)
Organization of American States, General Assembly, Forty-Second Regular Session, 2012, Proceedings, Vol. II, OEA/Ser.P/XLI-O.2 (2013), pp 167-168, 196-209 and 218-219
2957
2958
Annex 363
[p 167]
MINUTES OF THE FOURTH PLENARY MEETING
Date: 5 June 2012
Time: 3:30 p.m.
Place: Hotel Regina Tiquipaya
President: David Choquehuanca Céspedes
Minister of Foreign Affairs of Bolivia
In attendance: Roy Chaderton Matos (Venezuela)
Héctor Timerman (Argentina)
Cornelius A. Smith (The Bahamas)
John Beale (Barbados)
Wilfred Elrington (Belize)
Juan Carlos Alurralde Tejada (Bolivia)
Vera Barrouin Machado (Brazil)
Allan Culham (Canada)
Alfredo Moreno (Chile)
María Ángela Holguín Cuéllar (Colombia)
Enrique Castillo Barrantes (Costa Rica)
Hubert Charles (Dominica)
Ricardo Patiño (Ecuador)
Carlos Castaneda (El Salvador)
Carmen Lomellin (United States of America)
Gillian Bristol (Grenada)
Harold Caballeros (Guatemala)
Carolyn Rodrigues-Birkett (Guyana)
Azad Belfort (Haiti)
Roberto Ochoa Madrid (Honduras)
Arnaldo Brown (Jamaica)
Alejandro Negrín Muñoz (Mexico)
Denis Ronaldo Moncada Colindres (Nicaragua)
Mayra Arosemena (Panama)
Jorge Lara Castro (Paraguay)
Rafael Roncagliolo Orbegoso (Peru)
César Dargam Espaillat (Dominican Republic)
Jacinth L. Henry-Martin (Saint Kitts and Nevis)
Michael Louis (Saint Lucia)
Andreas Wickham (Saint Vincent and the Grenadines)
Niermala Hindori-Badrising (Suriname)
Neil Parsan (Trinidad and Tobago)
Roberto Conde Carreras (Uruguay)
[p168]
José Miguel Insulza (OAS Secretary General)
Albert R. Ramdin (Assistant Secretary General)
Annex 363
2959
[...]
[p 196]
3. Report on the maritime problem of Bolivia
The PRESIDENT: We will now move on to item 2 on the agenda, the “Report on the maritime problem of Bolivia.” The Deputy Secretary General tells me that item 9 on the agenda has been included next to item 2, so that we will actually address it as item 3, following our discussion of the Report on the maritime problem of Bolivia.
As the Delegations are well aware, Resolution AG/RES. 989 (XIX-O/89), adopted in November 1989, provided that this matter would be addressed during any of the forthcoming regular sessions of the General Assembly, if any of the parties involved so required.
In this regard, it should be noted that, on 2 April 2012, the Government of the Plurinational State of Bolivia asked the Subcommittee on Agenda and Procedures of the Preparatory Committee to include this matter on the agenda established for this regular session of the General Assembly, in accordance with Resolution AG/RES. 426 (IX-O/79) of 1979: “Access by Bolivia to the Pacific Ocean,” which “recommend[ed] to the states most directly concerned with this problem that they open negotiations for the purpose of providing Bolivia with a free and sovereign territorial connection with the Pacific Ocean,” and Resolution AG/RES. 989 (XIX-O/89) of 1989 concerning the report on the maritime problem of Bolivia, which
... reaffirm[ed] the importance of finding a solution to the maritime problem of Bolivia on the basis of what is mutually advantageous to the parties involved and their rights and interests, for better understanding, solidarity, and integration in the Hemisphere, urging the parties to engage in dialogue and leaving the subject open for consideration.
[p 197]
In addition, Chile’s Representation to the OAS presented its objection to the inclusion of this matter, and asked to have its statement in that regard entered in the relevant minutes drafted by the Preparatory Committee, the meeting minutes of the Subcommittee on Agenda and Procedures, and in the report of the Preparatory Committee of the General Assembly, document AG/doc.5241/12.
For the discussion of this issue, it is with great pleasure that I now give the floor to David Choquehuanca, Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Plurinational State of Bolivia. Please come forward.
The HEAD OF THE DELEGATION OF BOLIVIA: Thank you very much, Mr. President.
Distinguished Ministers of Foreign Affairs; distinguished Secretary General, distinguished Deputy Secretary General, esteemed Cabinet Ministers; esteemed Permanent Observers; brothers and sisters:
2960
Annex 363
Almost 33 years ago, in the city of La Paz, during the ninth regular session of the General Assembly of the Organization of American States, all of the Member States of the OAS, with the exception of a single country that left the room, approved Resolution AG/RES. 426 (IX-O/79), of 31 October 1979, which declared that it is of permanent hemispheric interest to find an equitable solution to allow Bolivia to obtain sovereign and useful access to the Pacific Ocean, without territorial compensation.
On that occasion, the countries in the Hemisphere expressed a political will to contribute to the sincere search for solutions, appealing to the spirit of brotherhood that has most often prevailed among the peoples and governments of our continent.
After the ignominious War of 1879, which Bolivia neither sought nor provoked, and which had unforeseeable consequences except for the party who planned it, on 4 April 1884, Chile deliberately imposed a truce and not a formal peace, with the intention of wearing Bolivia down, thus subjecting it to an outrageous dependence on customs clearance for its exports, which resulted in economic conditions that for 20 years led to economic suffocation, until it was forced to sign the unjust and imposed 1904 Treaty.
With military occupation of the usurped territory and under the threat that hostilities would start up again, how could my country refuse to sign an imposed treaty? This time what reason could not justify was imposed by force. International law and civilized coexistence between States have permanently rejected force as a source of law in the international order.
This was precisely the essence of the independence of our people from the colonial power. The 1904 Treaty was imposed when in the Americas there was already awareness of the prohibition on the use of force in relations between countries.
In 1889, just 10 years after the start of the invasion of Bolivian territory and 21 years prior to 1904, the Pan-American Conference in Washington proclaimed that the wars of conquest between American nations were unjustified acts of violence and that territorial insecurity would lead to a system of armed peace.
[p 198]
This Pan-American Conference, long before the 1904 Treaty, rejected conquest by any American State and established that any cession of territory under the threat of war or in the presence of armed forces would be considered null and void. Moreover, that same conference established that any nation that is the victim of this type of plundering could demand that the validity of the cession be subject to arbitration.
These criteria which even at that time, within the Pan-American Conference, were accepted by all the American States and were disavowed only by Chile, remain in full force and effect in international law in the Americas and are fully accepted by all American States, with the exception of Chile.
Annex 363
2961
Contrary to what the Chilean Government states, Bolivia’s maritime problem, which is included in this meeting, has solid legal grounds.
First, the Charter of the OAS establishes as its principal objective to achieve an order of peace and justice, to promote solidarity, to strengthen collaboration among States and to defend their sovereignty, their territorial integrity, and their independence. Article 2 of the Charter aims to prevent possible causes of difficulties and to ensure the pacific settlement of disputes that may arise among the Member States; and to provide the solution to political, legal, and economic problems that may arise between them.
Bolivia’s confinement, in light of the peace and the security of the Continent, delays the development and the progress of a people. As can be clearly seen, there are underlying factors that disrupt the peace and harmony of the region based on a situation imposed by force. The advances and progress of international law give fundamental consistency, today more than ever, to Resolution 426, which is also based on the implementation of the Charter of the Organization of American States, as consecration for achieving an order of peace and justice and to promote solidarity, supporting the genuine meaning of inter-American solidarity and good neighborliness.
Resolution 426 implicitly expresses the idea that legal situations that arise from violence possess the seed of injustice. It therefore recommends that negotiations be opened for the purpose of giving Bolivia a free and sovereign territorial connection with the Pacific Ocean.
From 1979 to the present, no member State of the OAS has failed to express, whether it be in the form of an exhortation, a claim, solidarity or an initiative, its support for the maritime demand of the Bolivian people, which has received the solidarity of the Continent with special feeling and the right to justice.
Bolivia states once again its recognition and appreciation to the Members of the Organization of American States for their continuing solidarity and interest, reflected in 11 resolutions of the General Assembly, in support of Bolivia’s just maritime demand, resolutions that recognize the existence of a pending issue in the region that prevents Presidents from fulfilling the desires of our peoples.
Mr. President and distinguished Heads of Delegation, the confinement imposed on Bolivia, which is unprecedented in the history of the Continent, if understood in its full legal, moral and economic proportions, and the lack of will of one of the countries to seek concrete solutions throughout
[p 199]
history, mean that the topic has become an important part of the hemispheric interest, which also affects the balance and the progress of the integration of our region.
A people cannot be condemned to conditions of inequality and economic
2962
Annex 363
strangulation in the 21st century, when the world is at another level of cultural development. It is not acceptable when the world is a witness to the insurmountable problems in other regions that have been resolved on the basis of dialogue and the desire to make amends for historical and legal injustices, on the basis of contemporary international law.
Mr. President and distinguished Representatives, Bolivia never desired or sought to be the object of an invasion that set off an unjust war between brothers, a war encouraged by oligarchies and financed by imperial interests. Bolivia was originally an independent State, with free and sovereign access to the Pacific Ocean, with a coastline and continental territory that was taken away from it. With the 1904 Treaty, Chile imposed on Bolivia what it considers to be an armed peace, which currently governs the inequalities and inequitable relationship to which they are bound by that agreement.
Our neighbor’s foreign policy has shown us a climate of ongoing aggressiveness, as shown by specific hostile acts such as the placing of antipersonnel mines on the border with Bolivia during the 1970s and, in spite of the commitment made under the framework of the Ottawa Convention, they have not been deactivated or removed, which is a violation of international law.
These actions reflect policies that keep fueling opinions such as those expressed by Abraham Collin [sic] in 1900, who justified conquest on the basis of military victory, which he considered the supreme law of nations, and who, of course, justified invasion on the basis of the value of the territories that were seized.
For years Chile has benefited from the guano and nitrate that it seized from the Bolivian territories of Atacama. That was the cause of an unjust war motivated by greed and the desire to seize the natural resources of another country.
But that was not all. There were also the Chuquicamata copper deposits, which are considered among the most important in the world, and which to the present day have allowed Chile to be the largest producer of this mineral, which a well-known democratic Chilean President in the 1970s called “Chile’s salary”, referring to the resources generated by the exploitation of copper from the mines located in territory that used to be Bolivian and that paradoxically allows it, among other things, to develop an untempered arms race in the region.
In ethical and moral terms, and on the basis of the trust that we must have in the greatness of the human spirit, I wonder whether the Chilean Government really feels that it has no debts and no outstanding matters to attend to with Bolivia.
I quote the words spoken by Representative Abraham Collin [sic] in 1900, who had no reservations about officially saying that:
Chile has occupied the littoral and taken possession of it by the same right that Germany annexed to the Empire Alsace and Lorraine. Chile’s rights are the outcome of victory, the
Annex 363
2963
[p 200]
supreme law of nations. That the littoral is rich and worth many millions, that we already know. We keep it because it is valuable; should it not be valuable, then there would be no interest in keeping it.
These statements bear the seeds of the injustice of a war of conquest. Mr. Collin’s [sic] mentality has prevailed in Chile throughout history and has been a constant threat to peace in the region.
Mr. Collin’s [sic] mentality has prevailed in Chile throughout history and has been a constant threat to peace in the region [sic].
It is not surprising, but it is deeply striking, when in the current day, as in the past, threats are made against my country, when the very head of the Ministry of Defense reminds Bolivians, in connection with the possibility of bringing claims before international courts to resolve disputes by peaceful means, that:
Chile has very solid strength, and it is a country that ultimately has prestigious, professional and well-prepared armed forces, who are in a position to ensure respect of international treaties and properly protect their territorial integrity.
Statements of this type are threats that are unacceptable to my country, because they are contrary to a climate in which good neighborliness is supposed to prevail.
Mr. President and distinguished Heads of Delegation, Chile’s imposition of a free transit regime on Bolivia that is not complied with due to severe interference with exports and imports, isolates my country from navigation and international trade, thus affecting Bolivian industry and commerce, and therefore affecting our economy in a relevant manner.
The port facilities are insufficient for Bolivia’s development and are not keeping up with the situation that was imposed. Violations of free transit are frequent and there is a severe and unacceptable interference with the cargo that enters and exits the country. The commercial costs of imports, exports and insurance are 13% higher in landlocked developing countries, as compared with 5.8% in countries with a free outlet to the ocean.
To date the Chilean Government has not enabled the Port of Iquique, even though this was required to be done in order to fulfil the obligations undertaken in the 1904 Treaty as an essential part of the free transit regime; an enabling that undoubtedly lacks the political will necessary to implement it.
The facts show that the 1904 Treaty was not only imposed, but also constitutes an instrument that has not been complied with and is not being complied with by Chile.
To date, the violations by Chile are evident, as it has not only denied the historical facts, but continues to violate Bolivian interests. Article 6 of the 1904
2964
Annex 363
Treaty states: “The Republic of Chile recognizes in favor of Bolivia in perpetuity the fullest and most unrestricted right of commercial transit through its territory and its Pacific ports.” Both
[p 201]
governments will agree, in special acts, upon the method suitable for securing, without prejudice to their respective fiscal interests, the object indicated above.
The fact that Chile has imposed unilateral measures that it did not confer on or agree to with Bolivia, that affect free transit, is one of the principal violations of the 1904 Treaty. Chile has imposed measures related to the cost of movement of Bolivian cargo in Chilean ports, thereby violating free transit, free storage in ports, imposing restrictive vehicular transit rules and unilateral environmental regulations, among many other things.
On top of that, in 2004, the Chilean Government again violated the 1904 Treaty, dealing another hard blow to Bolivia when it unilaterally privatized the Chilean ports used by it, outsourcing its obligations with Bolivia to private monopolistic companies that attempt to make the Bolivian State dependent on private business interests.
These companies are profiting from this situation, and are ultimately passing on the costs and difficulties, via commercial intermediation, to poor Bolivian consumers, who must pay more for imported goods and services.
All these measures were taken unilaterally and therefore, as we have explained, violate the 1904 Treaty. Likewise, Article 3 of the 1904 Treaty obliges Chile to build a railway from Arica to La Paz, which is an important part of connectivity with the port. However, we regret to say that this railway has not been in operation since 2005, thus again affecting our transit of goods and people.
According to independent economic studies and other studies by the United Nations Economic Commission for Latin America, Bolivia’s maritime confinement costs the country at least 190 million dollars per year, which is between 0.6 and 1% of Bolivia’s GDP, because of the costs of transporting imports and exports. Other studies show that in the past decade, Bolivia has apparently lost between 2 and 4 billion dollars at the macroeconomic level.
The loss of the territorial sea has caused incalculable economic harm to Bolivia accumulated over 133 years. From a commercial standpoint, Bolivia is one of the main drivers of the economy of northern Chile. Four out of every ten Bolivian products have to pass through Chile. That means that approximately 4 billion dollars of the Bolivian economy are forced to pass through the ports of Tambo Quemado, Pisiga and Icharaña when bound for other countries.
The violations that Chile committed and continues to commit make it disgraceful to maintain a situation that is not consistent with the will demonstrated to date by Bolivia.
Annex 363
2965
Mr. President, distinguished Heads of Delegation, my Government in the past six years has firmly trusted in the possibility of building an environment of bilateral relations with Chile, based on mutual trust and the 13-point agenda, agreed between Bolivia and Chile on 17 July 2006. The thirteen points on that agenda include, at point six, the maritime problem as an expression of the political will of both countries.
[p 202]
To the satisfaction of Bolivia and its century-old maritime demand, this inclusion signified an implicit recognition by both countries of the existence of an outstanding issue that must be addressed and resolved. From the establishment of the 13-point agenda and during the ensuing five years, Bolivia endeavored to construct high levels of mutual trust with Chile, with the purpose of properly channeling the comprehensive treatment of that agenda, with Bolivia particularly highlighting the maritime problem along with the problem of the Silala River and the issue of water resources.
At the meeting of the Chile-Bolivia Consultations Mechanism held in the city of La Paz on 12, 13 and 14 July 2010, the delegations of both countries, headed by their respective Vice-Ministers of Foreign Affairs, who are responsible for that mechanism, reaffirmed with respect to the maritime problem that the process reflects a concerted policy between both Governments, and considering the high levels of mutual trust reached, they proposed reaching concrete, feasible and useful solutions.
At this meeting, Chile undertook to present at the next and subsequent meetings a concrete, feasible and useful proposal. Almost two years have passed since this undertaking, and the Chilean Government has not only failed to present that proposal, but has also suspended the meetings of the Political Consultations Mechanism, which is the primary mechanism of the agenda of dialogue.
The Chilean Government never tires of saying that it is willing to talk, but if there is good faith and genuine willingness to find solutions with its neighbor Bolivia, how can Chile’s unilateral suspension of a bilateral meeting on the agenda for November 2010 be explained? In spite of the trust pledged, once again no substantial progress was made that would reflect a formal proposal by Chile and would give clear, unequivocal indications of an initial concrete step towards an official stage in the negotiation.
Faced with the finding that it was not possible to make any progress whatsoever, on 23 March 2011, Bolivia announced that, in legitimate exercise of its right, it had decided to start exploring possible solutions to its maritime demand in multilateral fora.
President Morales announced on 23 March of that year that Bolivia would turn to international courts to seek a solution to its claim for a sovereign outlet to the Pacific, but would not suspend direct dialogue with the Chilean authorities, inasmuch as the abundant mutual trust built in recent years has not yielded any concrete progress by Chile.
2966
Annex 363
Our country has stated via its President its right to explore the possibility of recourse to international courts, institutions which are open to the claim through the peaceful, civilized means, which international law provides to nations. International courts are a legitimate mechanism based on international law and recognized by the community of civilized nations.
Bolivia is not closing any path to dialogue, but will keep open the channels provided to it and all other civilized nations by international law. To that end, on 5 April of last year, the Strategic Office for Maritime Vindication and the National Council for Maritime Vindication were created for the purpose of vindicating Bolivia’s sovereign access to the Pacific
[p 203]
Ocean, in compliance with constitutional principles that establish the unwaivable and imprescriptible right to territory that gives it access to the Ocean and its maritime space.
Since Bolivia’s announcement that it would call upon legal bodies to determine its maritime claim, in Chile a strategy of defense of the 1904 Treaty was activated, seeking to strengthen the standard of compliance with that agreement, regardless of the aspects mentioned above and the fact that it is the Chilean Government that is really violating the Treaty.
On 23 March of this year, when we commemorated the 133rd anniversary of the Defense of Calama, Bolivia again confirmed its intention to seek a solution to its maritime claim before international courts, appealing to mechanisms recognized between States to resolve their differences in a peaceful manner, without closing the dialogue.
Mr. President and distinguished Heads of Delegation, Bolivia is a peace-loving country, and the solution to its just claim passes through roads governed by international legal rules and by the principle of good faith. Therefore, our country will continue seeking a solution to its century-old claim through bilateral means and before international courts, in order to regain what it is entitled to by justice and right.
It is not possible in the 21st century, from any point of view, to accept disproportionately dilatory behavior, or even worse, warnings and threats, in view of Bolivia’s justified claim before bilateral and multilateral authorities to find solutions to its century-old maritime problem.
Fortunately, times have changed, at least for the majority of the world, and international law and the rules of peaceful coexistence provide us with the framework to assert our claim regarding the injustice committed against my country and the subsequent enforcement of an imposed Treaty, which questions its inviolability.
Today Bolivia, as on other occasions, within the framework of the rules of peaceful coexistence between peoples, vehemently demands that Chile makes
Annex 363
2967
historical reparation by restitution of its maritime quality, in a context where the Continent is governed by democracy and is committed to the construction and consolidation of processes of integration among American States.
Bolivia fraternally asks Chile for a concrete proposal for a definitive solution that will make it possible to resolve Bolivia’s maritime claim through dialogue and negotiations, but not futile negotiations that prolong my people’s postponed, legitimate right.
We know that the Chilean Government will state today once again that its doors are open and that it is willing to dialogue to find a solution to Bolivia’s demand, within the provisions of the 1904 Treaty. However, I must mention with profound regret that the words and promises of the Chilean Government are only that: empty words that do not reflect concrete solutions, words that do not have the backing of political necessity, words that only seek to delay, distract and take advantage, for 130 years, of Bolivia’s undeniable call for dialogue.
[p 204]
The goals of integration, cooperation, facilitation, friendship or complementation and manifestations of will and commitments made in this Assembly and before the international community are nothing but statements.
Bolivia’s sovereign access to the Pacific Ocean is not only of permanent hemispheric interest, but also represents the touchstone for this Organization to be able to prove to the international community its effectiveness, its ability to handle pending matters, and above all, the consistency between the letter of its decisions and the efforts that it is called upon to make in order to implement the will of the hemisphere.
That is why today, on this historic occasion when we are defining the future of the Organization of American States, without renouncing other international mechanisms for the peaceful resolution of disputes, before the international community of our continent, before dozens of sister nations, in view of the obvious fact that the 1904 Treaty is not only unjust and imposed, but has also been widely violated, as we reliably demonstrated, in view of the suffocation that Bolivia experiences every day, in view of the need for the OAS to comply with the resolutions that this august institution has issued, and above all, in view of the challenges and the desire for integration that we have stated in the OAS, in the Union of South American Nations (UNASUR), and the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC), Bolivia demands the Government of the Republic of Chile to renegotiate the 1904 Treaty.
The goal of these renegotiations will be to comply with the imperative set forth in the 11 Resolutions of this Inter-American forum and with the Bolivian right to a sovereign outlet on the Pacific Ocean – in particular Resolution AG/RES. 426, Resolution AG/RES. 989 and especially Resolution AG/RES. 686, subscribed to by the Chilean Government itself.
2968
Annex 363
We invite the member States to join us, as they have throughout these years, in our common objective of overcoming the final stumbling blocks that prevent the full integration of our beloved continent.
Thank you very much, Mr. President
The PRESIDENT: Now that we have heard Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Plurinational State of Bolivia David Choquehuanca, let us give the floor to the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Chile, Alfredo Moreno. Please come forward.
The HEAD OF THE CHILEAN DELEGATION: Thank you very much, Dear President.
Mr. President, Ministers of Foreign Affairs, Secretary General of the OAS, Permanent Representatives, ladies and gentlemen:
I am required to intervene on behalf of the Government of Chile after the lengthy address by Minister of Foreign Affairs David Choquehuanca, who has presented us with his take on the relationship with my country, which I cannot leave without a response before all of you.
[p 205]
As I expressed last year in this forum, our region enjoys peace, the most valuable asset that nations can have, and a very important role in this situation is played by a set of boundary treaties between our States, several of which were signed after conflicts—certainly the vast majority of them. Many of these agreements are defined as treaties of friendship, which symbolizes the desire to leave behind a sometimes painful past and move ahead towards a future of hope and good understanding.
Our current generation that has received this legacy from many generations ago must honor the commitments undertaken along with those that assumed them.
In his speech the Bolivian Foreign Minister has presented his interpretation of the causes of the War of the Pacific of 1879, I repeat 1879. This version is not supported by history, nor is it consistent with the circumstances that gave rise to the conflict, which Chile tried to avoid.
In 1904, i.e., 20 years after the armed hostilities concluded, both states signed the Treaty that established the definitive boundary between the two States. The Bolivian Defense Minister at the time, Mr. Ismael Montes, used the very draft of this Treaty as the banner for his presidential campaign in 1904, and he was elected by an overwhelming majority of the citizens, with 76.4% of the vote.
Since when we entered this room for this meeting we were given lavish background information, including the publication called “Graphic Memory,
Annex 363
2969
Maritime Vindication of Bolivia,” published this year by the Ministry of Defense of the Plurinational State of Bolivia, and distributed to the delegations at this Assembly, we would like to point out that it includes a segregated and mistaken view of the history of relations between our two countries and we would like to make a general reservation to its content.
Also, before entering, at lunch time, we received another publication, the magazine entitled “Sea for Bolivia,” published in May 2012 by Diramar and distributed just outside this room moments before the meeting began. It discusses the same elements that I have already mentioned, and we also wish to make a general reservation to its content.
Distinguished Heads of Delegation, Chile has demonstrated in its history that it will be open to seeking formulas to allow the improvement of Bolivia’s access to the sea, and several talks and diplomatic negotiations have been held over the last century to try to meet this aspiration, the failure of which cannot be attributed to our country.
Bolivia has broken off relations with Chile twice in the last fifty years and to date we do not have normal diplomatic relations. However, when they took office, the current Chilean authorities invited Bolivia to establish a dialogue on very clear bases. The talks should be held with full respect for the Treaty of Peace and Amity of 1904, and therefore initiatives involving a cession of Chilean sovereignty would be not considered.
On these principles, Presidents Morales and Piñera met eight times during 2010 and additionally we Foreign Ministers held numerous meetings. Our intent was to move ahead with the search for what we call concrete, useful and feasible measures for the benefit of both peoples, as Foreign Minister Choquehuanca has pointed out.
[p 206]
Both Governments believed that we were making great positive progress in strengthening our relationships through better forms of integration, focused on leveraging the tremendous benefits of a harmonious neighborhood between countries that share a very long border.
We cannot ignore reality: our countries need each other and have developed an agenda that identifies the areas we want to work on, and, above all, to dialogue and where we have already made some significant progress. Chile’s will has been complete in this area; we can provide evidence of this effort and have never evaded the issues of the present and future.
In this regard, we reiterate the call to Bolivia to continue the journey where we can deepen our dialogue, better understanding our needs and strengthening our relationship. This positive climate and these developments were reflected in statements that President Evo Morales made on 23 March 2011, praising the bilateral dialogue process that we were holding. In an interview with the Chilean newspaper El Mercurio he said that his discourse regarding Chile “will be to
2970
Annex 363
continue strengthening trust” and that “a problem that has existed for so many years, the maritime claim, cannot be resolved in such a short time.”
In response to a question about recourse to an international court, President Morales said, “I don’t believe so much in that.” However, in an inexplicable contradiction, on that same day, 23 March 2011, President Morales announced in La Paz that Bolivia would take its maritime claim to court.
This year he has reiterated that same intention. This decision is unfortunate because it calls into question the validity of a treaty that has been in force for over a hundred years, which has given us a peaceful coexistence and mutual benefits. We are convinced that compliance with international law and, in particular, with treaties gives values to States, guarantees peace and also promotes friendly relations and cooperation between peoples.
The Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties establishes a universal principle: pacta sunt servanda (agreements must be kept), and also indicates that such agreements can only be amended by agreement of the parties.
Mr. President, in 1920 Bolivia appealed to the League of Nations, the predecessor to the United Nations, to have the Treaty of 1904 revised. A committee of jurists appointed by it unanimously determined that the Bolivian demand was inadmissible because the League of Nations lacked jurisdiction to modify any treaty. The commission stated, and I quote, that “the modification of treaties is within the sole jurisdiction of the Contracting States.”
Just as the League of Nations acknowledged its lack of jurisdiction in such a delicate matter, Chile has consistently pointed out that the Organization of American States has no jurisdiction to intervene in matters affecting territorial integrity, not only of Chile but of all Member States, or matters compromising border treaties in force.
Mr. President, I also need to add that it is inconsistent for Bolivia to attribute regional consequences to what it describes as its maritime problem. It has never even occurred
[p 207]
to Chile to ignore its commitment, much less to violate a peace that demanded so many years of commitment and dedication from our ancestors to obtain it.
Chile’s will for dialogue has been stated and reiterated. However, I must bring to the attention of this Assembly that what Bolivia has been claiming by constitutional mandate since 2009 is a vindication, i.e., sovereign access to the Pacific Ocean through territories that are an integral and indivisible part of Chile.
Indeed, the Constitution adopted in 2009 by the Plurinational State of Bolivia under the heading “Maritime Vindication” in Article 267 states that “The Bolivian state declares its unwaivable and imprescriptible right over the territory giving access to the Pacific Ocean and its maritime space.”
Annex 363
2971
And then the ninth transitional provision states:
International treaties preceding the Constitution —I repeat, this Constitution is from the year 2009— International treaties preceding the Constitution will remain in the domestic legal system, with force of law. Within 4 years of its appointment, the new Executive Branch will denounce and, if necessary, renegotiate those international treaties that are contrary to the Constitution.
These provisions are unenforceable in Chile and therefore have been subject to reservation by our country. No State may rely on rules of domestic law to unilaterally denounce a border treaty, much less if the institutional rules serving as a basis were created a century later. Ladies and gentlemen, we are dealing with basic principles of international law.
As we have pointed out before this Assembly in the past, Chile has provided free transit for Bolivia and will continue to work to implement it, committing all its service and diplomacy so that it will always exist. Bolivia knows that it can count on Chile to facilitate its trade with other countries through benefits, assurances and economic advantages.
The facilities granted by my country to Bolivian cargo in transit through Chilean territory far exceed the United Nations Convention on Transit Trade of Landlocked States and other conventions governing free transit, including privileged and exclusive port rates for Bolivian cargo in Chilean ports subject to free transit; free storage for one year for import cargo from that country in such port areas; tax exemptions applied to all services provided to Bolivian cargo in transit, etc. I must point out that perhaps this is the reason why the information brought here by the Bolivian Foreign Minister generally refers to countries that do not have sea access and does not address the specific economic conditions in Bolivia.
Moreover, in the north of our country, the Chilean Government has committed significant resources to facilitating Bolivian trade through our ports. We are renovating the main road linking the port of Arica to Bolivia, through
[p 208]
which 1.8 million tons of Bolivian cargo were transferred last year. We are enabling a new path for the foreign trade of Bolivia that is headed to the same port.
We have built border complexes and we are about to complete the refurbishment of the railway Arica-La Paz, as mentioned by Foreign Minister Choquehuanca, which will be able to operate in the second half of this year, as he well knows.
All of the above is recognized by Bolivian exporters and importers themselves, which they emphasize in Chile’s yielding to Bolivia. Bolivian users enjoy positive discrimination vis-à-vis our own nationals by receiving preferential
2972
Annex 363
exceptional treatment for the cargo from its country that uses Chilean ports, and which goes beyond the right of free transit laid down by the Treaty of Peace and Amity of 1904, as already mentioned.
Extensive unilateral and exclusive trade benefits have also been granted by Chile through the recent Economic Complementation Agreement of 2008, which is in effect between our countries. As a point of background illustrating the above, I just want to point out the following: more than 60% of Bolivia’s total foreign trade in 2010 with non-neighboring countries, measured in tons, circulated through Chilean ports. Let me ask, if this is the case, chosen by Bolivian importers and exporters, is this a country strangling another, if Bolivian exporters and importers choose it willingly? We think this is the path towards true integration.
I can say, Mr. President and Foreign Ministers, that even though Chile does not have normal relations with Bolivia, and despite the Bolivian Government’s announcements, Chile has continued to promote bilateral dialogue with profitable initiatives. President Piñera has met twice this year with President Morales, and you yourself, Foreign Minister Choquehuanca, are perfectly familiar with the meetings that we have had, what we have done to move ahead together, and also the high-level meetings we have organized together to discuss all issues in our relationship.
This is the way to move ahead. Beyond any rhetoric and beyond a contingent policy what we need is a strong will and realism to reach a relationship that leads to useful, concrete and feasible measures to directly promote the development of our people.
Mr. President, Foreign Ministers and Heads of Delegation, in conclusion I only want to reiterate that Chile will continue to implement, with the best and most sincere spirit, its desire to strengthen ties with Bolivia, because it is convinced that cooperation benefits both peoples. And I say this despite the words of mistrust I’ve heard today, that I had not heard before.
We have been clear in our relations with Bolivia from the beginning and have publicly expressed this to its Government. Chile will always keep open the roads to move ahead with Bolivia with the development and progress of our peoples, but such cooperation and broad dialogue, for which Chile is always available, must be based first on mutual respect and on the validity and full recognition of the Treaty of Peace and Amity
[p 209]
signed by both countries as far back as the year 1904, and its complementary instruments, on which we have built more than a century of peace, stability and integration with Bolivia.
I think that what we have heard from Bolivia’s proposal today is at least a step forward. I see at least that both countries recognize a very clear reality: that we have the Treaty of 1904 and that based on it we can talk and see what we can
Annex 363
2973
do. That is the basis on which we need to talk.
Thank you very much.
[...]
[p 218]
The HEAD OF THE DELEGATION OF BOLIVIA: Thank you, Mr. President.
When we bring a solution, a report to this forum, when we resolve our problem, surely the entire forum, all countries in the Americas will congratulate us, will be happy and may even give Chile and Bolivia a standing ovation.
I want to thank them for the statements made in this forum by all delegations in the Hemisphere. Historians know very well who started the war. The objective is not to discuss this issue in this forum. I have made a concrete proposal; I have proposed the renegotiation of the 1904 Treaty. I would have preferred to hear a clear and concrete answer.
Thank you very much.
[...]
The HEAD OF THE DELEGATION OF CHILE: I think that what stands out in all your presentations is your love and appreciation for our countries, for which I thank you.
But I would also like to thank you for the maturity of the comments that we have heard. Virtually everyone who has spoken here has pointed out that this is a bilateral issue. And I want to translate this word: it means that it is our responsibility, that this is an issue between Chile and Bolivia. It cannot be resolved by the OAS; it cannot be resolved by the United Nations, nothing else can
[p 219]
resolve it. We have to talk and see what we can do together that is positive. I think this is an important step forward.
Virtually all of you have also referred to international law, respect for treaties, which is nothing other than complying with what we have agreed to before. Put another way, how could we make a new agreement if we do not respect the agreements that we already have? Only if we have agreements that we respect can we consider doing something new. I think that in order to enter into agreements that make sense, we must also know that when they are made, they will be complied with. That is what it means to say that we respect treaties.
Regarding the proposal by David Choquehuanca, I would say that it seems a bit light. To be able to mention something like the thing you are mentioning and demand an answer to it is a bit rushed, isn’t it? Because renegotiations can
2974
Annex 363
be anything at all. So what I do want to explain and reiterate to him is what I have said from the beginning: Chile is a country that has been established in its boundaries for many years. That reality of what Chile is today will not change, it will not change.
Thank you very much.
[...]
The HEAD OF THE DELEGATION OF BOLIVIA: Thank you.
Indeed, it is a problem that must be resolved between Bolivia and Chile. We would not want to bring this problem, this headache, to our brothers in this Organization.
As established not only by one resolution but by several, this issue has been declared of permanent Hemispheric interest. When we make the specific proposal of renegotiation, under the framework of our Political Constitution of the State, we do so not only because we are willing to dialogue but also because we have the ability to carry it forward so we can solve this problem peacefully through dialogue.
Thank you very much.
[...]
Annex 364
“Bolivia demands at OAS that Chile renegotiate the 1904 Treaty”, La Razón (Bolivia), 6 June 2012
(Original in Spanish, English translation)
La Razón (Bolivia)
2975
2976
Annex 364
Bolivia demands at OAS that Chile renegotiate the 1904 Treaty
IVÁN PAREDES. COCHABAMBA
At the 4th Meeting of the OAS Assembly, Bolivia demanded that Chile renegotiate the 1904 Treaty. The Government has announced that, should this attempt fail, it will resort to international courts to denounce the breach of the treaty. The Chilean Foreign Ministry did not respond to the proposal.
The Cochabamba Assembly yesterday mostly focused on the maritime dispute between Bolivia and Chile. In the morning, in reply to the Chilean Foreign Minister, Alfredo Moreno (who brought up the full force and effect of the 1904 Treaty), President Evo Morales stated that every treaty is subject to review.
A few hours later, during his report to the
Annex 364
2977
Assembly on the maritime issue, Foreign Minister David Choquehuanca went over the history of the conflict and claimed that Bolivia’s landlocked situation has caused “major” economic damage to the country.
“Bolivia demands that the Government of the Republic of Chile renegotiate the 1904 Treaty in order to fulfill the mandate established in the 11 resolutions issued by this Inter-American Assembly and the sovereign right to an outlet to the Pacific; in particular, Resolution 426, Resolution 989 and, especially, Resolution 686, signed by the Chilean Government itself,” stated the Bolivian Minister of Foreign Affairs.
Lending support to Choquehuanca’s position, the Vice-Minister of Foreign Affairs, Juan Carlos Alurralde, explained that the Political Constitution of the State of Bolivia compels that any treaties which are incompatible with the said Constitution be renegotiated or denounced. Given such constitutional imperative, he asked that Chile state whether it is willing to renegotiate the treaty.
“We are asking for a renegotiation as required by our Constitution. In the event of this renegotiation, provided we have correctly understood (Chile’s) Foreign Minister Alfredo Moreno, if Chile is unwilling to renegotiate, we will then be resorting to an international court of justice, a multilateral forum for peaceful dispute resolution, which is where Bolivia’s complaint will be filed,” said Alurralde.
The Constitution confirms the unwavering right to obtain an outlet to the Pacific, while the Treaty blocks the possibility of achieving this goal. Bolivia’s constitutional provisions order that any international treaties that are incompatible with that law be denounced.
The ninth transitional provision of the Constitution provides that any treaties that pre-date said instrument and are not in conflict with it shall remain a part of Bolivia’s legal system, while, “Within 4 years of its appointment, the new Executive Branch (in 2009) will denounce and, if necessary, renegotiate those international treaties that are contrary to the Constitution.”
THE DISPUTE. As early as September 2011, the President of Chile, Sebastián Piñera, notified the member states of the United Nations (UN) of Chile’s observations on the article of the Bolivian Constitution that mandates the renegotiation or denunciation of the 1904 Treaty.
The treaty fixed the territorial boundaries that left Bolivia without sovereign access to the sea. It was signed 25 years after the War of the Pacific, a conflict that started in the wake of Chile’s invasion of Bolivian land.
In his speech yesterday, Choquehuanca reiterated that, in parallel to looking for a solution through a process of renegotiation of the 1904 Treaty, Bolivia will continue to take steps intended to resort to international courts.
In this regard, Chile’s Foreign Minister, Alfredo Moreno, stated that giving an official reply (at the Assembly) to Bolivia’s demand to renegotiate the treaty “would be somewhat rushed.”
In his speech, Moreno warned that “agreements are to be performed,” in reference to the 1904 instrument. To conclude, he went one step further: “Chile is a country that has been established in its boundaries for many years. That reality of what is now Chile will not change, it will not change,” he insisted.
Moreno said his government will continue to rely on dialogue to improve bilateral integration and find ways for Bolivia to access the Pacific. He noted that any potential solution must be based on the full force and effect of the 1904 Treaty.
Both Choquehuanca and Alurralde complained that Chile is in violation of the 1904 Treaty.
Among other things, the Foreign Minister explained that his neighboring country is not enforcing the free transit of Bolivian citizens at the border, and one of the most important violations was the privatization of the port of Arica, awarded to Terminal Puerto Arica (TPA).
Alurral said that Bolivia’s petition is in line with both domestic and international law: “The international legal system authorizes the renegotiation of treaties; on the other hand, they may be denounced in court,” he explained.
2978
Annex 365
Note from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Bolivia to the Consulate General of Chile in Bolivia,
No VRE-DGRB-UAM-019765/2012, 3 October 2012
(Original in Spanish, English translation)
Original submitted by Bolivia as Annex 84 to its Memorial
2979
2980
Annex 365
Annex 365
2981
PLURINATIONAL STATE OF BOLIVIA
MINISTRY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS
VRE-DGRB-UAM-019765/2012
THE MINISTRY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS – General Office of Consular Affairs, extends its respectful greetings to the Honorable Consulate General of the Republic of Chile, and addresses it in connection with Notes Verbales Nos. 317/130 and 341/144, whereby it proposed that the “13th Meeting of the Bolivia-Chile Borders and Integration Committee” be held in the City of Antofagasta, Chile, in November 2012.
In this regard, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs would like to emphasize the importance of holding such meeting in order to resume work on the Bilateral Agenda on border-related issues to foster the region’s development; however, because, since 2010, the Government of Chile has postponed the biannual Political Consultations Mechanism meetings, and because it is through such high-level Mechanism that the political guidelines to move forward with each issue on the Bilateral Agenda in an integral manner should be laid down, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs finds it necessary to restore and prioritize meetings of the Mechanism such that other agreements can subsequently be developed in other fora.
THE MINISTRY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS – General Office of Consular Affairs takes this opportunity to renew to the Honorable Consulate General of the Republic of Chile its assurances of its highest consideration.
La Paz, 3 October 2012
[Stamped:]
MINISTRY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS
OFFICE OF THE VICE-MINISTER OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS
La Paz – Bolivia
To the Honorable
CONSULATE GENERAL OF THE REPUBLIC OF CHILE
Hand delivered.–
2982
Annex 366
Note from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Bolivia to the Consulate General of Chile in Bolivia,
No VRE-DGRB-UAM-019779/2012, 3 October 2012
(Original in Spanish, English translation)
Archives of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Chile
2983
2984
Annex 366
Annex 366
2985
PLURINATIONAL STATE OF BOLIVIA
MINISTRY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS
VRE-DGRB-UAM-019779/2012
THE MINISTRY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS – General Office of Consular Affairs extends its respectful greetings to the Honorable Consulate General of the Republic of Chile, and addresses it in connection with Official Verbal Communication No. 322/132, whereby it proposed that the “13th Meeting of the Working Group on Free Transit” be held in the City of Iquique, Chile, in the first half of October 2012.
In this regard, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs assesses the Government of Chile’s proposal to consider the enabling of the Port of Iquique for the free transit regime, among other issues that this working group is concerned with. However, because, since 2010, the Administration of the Government of Chile has postponed the biannual Political Consultations Mechanism meetings, and considering that it is such Mechanism’s mandate to integrally work through the Bilateral Agenda between both countries, the Ministry finds it a priority to resume such high-level meetings such that work can thereafter continue in other fora.
On the subject, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs notes that on 6 December 2011, through Note Verbale VRE-DGRB-UAM-028043/2011, it reiterated the need to have the issue of tariffs at the Port of Arica, which concerns the free-transit in force between both countries, addressed by said Political Consultations Mechanism. Moreover, for the same purpose, through Note Verbale VRE-DGRB-UAM-002915/2012, dated 22 February 2012, the Government of the Republic of Chile was invited to an extraordinary meeting of the Mechanism to be held in the City of La Paz on 29 February 2012, an invitation that was not accepted.
THE MINISTRY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS – General Office of Consular Affairs takes this opportunity to renew to the Honorable Consulate General of the Republic of Chile its assurances of its highest consideration.
La Paz, 3 October 2012
[Stamped:]
MINISTRY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS
OFFICE OF THE VICE-MINISTER OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS
La Paz – Bolivia
To the Honorable
CONSULATE GENERAL OF THE REPUBLIC OF CHILE
Hand delivered.–
2986
Annex 367
Note from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Bolivia to the Consulate General of Chile in Bolivia,
No VRE-DGRB-UAM-000179/2013, 8 January 2013
(Original in Spanish, English translation)
Archives of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Chile
2987
2988
Annex 367
Annex 367
2989
PLURINATIONAL STATE OF BOLIVIA
MINISTRY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS
VRE-DGRB-UAM-000179/2013
THE MINISTRY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS – General Office of Consular Affairs, extends its respectful greetings to the Honorable Consulate General of the Republic of Chile, and addresses it in connection with Note Verbale No. 591/208, whereby it reiterated the Government of Chile’s invitation to hold the “13th Meeting of the Bolivia-Chile Borders and Integration Committee” in the City of Antofagasta, and the “13th Meeting of the Working Group on Free Transit” in the City of Iquique, to examine and analyze specific issues of interest to both countries, at dates to be defined by mutual agreement.
In this regard, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs assesses the Government of Chile’s proposal for continuing the bilateral dialogue on border-related issues in order to promote the region’s development, as well as for discussing issues on the Free Transit group’s agenda. However, the Government of Bolivia considers that such dialogue should be resumed via the Political Consultations Mechanism.
THE MINISTRY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS – General Office of Consular Affairs takes this opportunity to renew to the Honorable Consulate General of the Republic of Chile its assurances of its highest consideration.
La Paz, 8 January 2013
[Stamped:]
MINISTRY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS
OFFICE OF THE VICE-MINISTER OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS
La Paz – Bolivia
To the Honorable
CONSULATE GENERAL OF THE REPUBLIC OF CHILE
Hand delivered.–
2990
Annex 368
“García Linera: The adaptation of the 1904 Treaty to the [Political Constitution] will take place by December 2013”, Agencia de Noticias Fides (Bolivia), 15 February 2013
(Original in Spanish, English translation)
Agencia de Noticias Fides (Bolivia)
2991
2992
Annex 368
Annex 368
2993
15 February 2013 | Politics
GARCÍA LINERA: THE ADAPTATION OF THE 1904 TREATY TO THE CPE WILL TAKE PLACE BY DECEMBER 2013
President Evo Morales has asked all sectors of society and politics in Bolivia to stand in unity in order to return to the sea with sovereign, and made the commitment that Bolivia will never stop asserting its right to a sovereign outlet to the Pacific Ocean. On 23 March 2011 he announced that his Administration will be filing a complaint before international tribunals to enforce Bolivia’s maritime rights.
La Paz, 14 Feb. (ANF). Vice-President Álvaro García Linera affirmed on Friday that the adaptation of the 1904 Treaty between Bolivia and Chile to the Political Constitution of the State (CPE) will take place by December 2013, given that the Fundamental Law of the Plurinational State establishes Bolivia’s sovereign access to the Pacific Ocean as a unwaivable right.
At a press conference held at the Vice-President’s offices, García said: “Concerning the topic of the 1904 Treaty, the Political Constitution of the State obviously provides for a period up to year-end to adapt all treaties signed by Bolivia with other governments on any subject-matter, to adapt them to the Political Constitution of the State, and most certainly this will be done with the 1904 Treaty.”
Of the ten Transitional Provisions in the Constitution, the ninth provides as follows: “International treaties preceding the Constitution, the provisions of which are not inconsistent with the Constitution, will remain in the domestic legal system, with force of law. Within 4 years of its appointment, the new Executive Branch will denounce and, if necessary, renegotiate those international treaties that are contrary to the Constitution.”
Moreover, Article 267 of CPE Chapter 4, concerning Maritime Vindication, reads: “The Bolivian state declares its unwaivable and imprescriptible right over the territory giving access to the Pacific Ocean and its maritime space. The effective solution to the maritime dispute by pacific means and the full enjoyment of sovereignty over said territories constitute permanent and unwaivable objectives of the Bolivian State.”
2994
Annex 368
The deterioration of relations between the Administrations of Evo Morales and Sebastián Piñera became complete after the Bolivian leader decided to undertake an international campaign to enforce the Bolivian people’s right to return to the sea with sovereignty, arguing that Chile breached the 1904 Treaty, to Bolivia’s detriment. However, even though the Chilean President stated that treaties are to be respected and complied with, he was open to the possibility of perfecting them.
Annex 369
Constitutional Tribunal of Bolivia, Plurinational Constitutional Declaration No 0003/2013, made in Sucre on 25 April 2013
(Original in Spanish, English translation)
<http://www.tcpbolivia.bo/>
2995
2996
Annex 369
DECLARACIÓN CONSTITUCIONAL PLURINACIONAL 0003/2013 Sucre, 25 abril de 2013 SALA PLENA Magistrado Relator: Dr. Zenón Hugo Bacarreza Morales Consulta sobre la constitucionalidad de proyecto de ley Expediente:02856-2013-06-CCPDepartamento:La Paz En la consulta sobre la constitucionalidad del proyecto "Ley de Aplicación Normativa" formulada por Álvaro Marcelo García Linera, en su calidad de Vicepresidente del Estado Plurinacional de Bolivia y Presidente de la Asamblea Legislativa Plurinacional. I. ANTECEDENTES CON RELEVANCIA JURÍDICA I.1. Contenido de la consulta Por memorial presentado el 22 de febrero de 2013, cursante a fs. 5 y vta., se señala que el 15 del mismo mes y año, la Cámara de Senadores de la Asamblea Legislativa Plurinacional, a través de Resolución Camaral 010/2013-2014, resuelve por voto favorable de más de dos tercios de sus miembros presentes: "remitir en Consulta al Tribunal Constitucional Plurinacional, el Proyecto de Ley C.S. Nº082/2013-2014 `Ley de Aplicación Normativa´, a objeto de confrontar el texto de ese Proyecto de Ley con la Constitución Política del Estado", razón por la cual, en cumplimiento a lo establecido en el art. 112.2 del Código Procesal Constitucional (CPCo), se remite dicho proyecto adjuntándose además la correspondiente exposición de motivos, documento legislativo en el que se encuentran los fundamentos que sustentan la constitucionalidad del proyecto de ley de referencia, más la correspondiente Resolución Camaral antes citada. I.2. Trámite Procesal en el Tribunal Constitucional Plurinacional Ante la excusa presentada por el Magistrado Gualberto Cusi Mamani el 1 de marzo de 2013, (fs. 22 y 24), la Sala Plena del Tribunal Constitucional Plurinacional, mediante AC 0007/2013, de 5 de marzo, declaró legal la excusa del Magistrado Cusi, disponiendo su separación definitiva del conocimiento de la causa, convocándose a efecto de conocer el trámite de la consulta al Magistrado Macario Lahor Cortez Chávez (fs. 26 a 29). El 5 de marzo de 2013, la Magistrada Soraida Rosario Chánez Chire formuló excusa dentro de la presente causa, misma que fue declarada legal mediante AC 0008/2013, de 7 de marzo emitido por la Sala Plena (fs. 32 a 34), disponiendo además la separación definitiva del conocimiento de la causa, convocándose a efecto de conocer el trámite de la consulta a los Page 1Resolución 0003/2013 -Tribunal Constitucional de Bolivia16-05-2013http://www.tribunalconstitucional.gob.bo/modules/ver_resolucion/indexne…...
Annex 369
2997
PLURINATIONAL CONSTITUTIONAL DECLARATION 0003/2013 Sucre, 25 April 2013
[…]
2998
Annex 369
Magistrados Macario Lahor Cortez Chávez y Zenón Hugo Bacarreza Morales. Por AC 0076/2013-CA de 8 de marzo (fs. 36 a 37), la Comisión de Admisión del Tribunal Constitucional Plurinacional, admitió la consulta sobre la constitucionalidad del proyecto de "Ley de Aplicación Normativa", ordenándose se proceda al correspondiente sorteo de acuerdo a lo establecido por el art. 114 del CPCo. II. CONCLUSIONES II.1.Cursa Resolución Camaral 010/2013-2014, mediante la cual, se resuelve en el punto Primero, remitir en consulta al Tribunal Constitucional Plurinacional, el Proyecto de Ley C.S. 008/2013-2014, "Ley de Aplicación Normativa", a objeto de confrontar el texto de este proyecto de ley con la Constitución Política del Estado, determinando además a través de su punto Segundo, la suspensión del procedimiento de aprobación del citado proyecto (fs. 7). II.2.Cursa también en antecedentes la exposición de motivos referente al proyecto de Ley de Aplicación Normativa (fs. 8 a 14). II.3.Cursa de fs. 15 a 16, en antecedentes Anteproyecto de Ley de Aplicación Normativa, con el siguiente tenor literal: "LEY DE APLICACIÓN NORMATIVA ARTÍCULO 1. OBJETO La presente ley tiene por objeto determinar la aplicación normativa de cinco preceptos establecidos en la Constitución Política del Estado vigente, a fin de establecer su correcto ámbito de validez, respetando el tenor literal así como el espíritu de la norma fundamental. ARTÍCULO 2. CONSEJO DE LA MAGISTRATURA El Control Administrativo de Justicia, establecido en el artículo 159 inciso 13) de la Constitución Política del Estado, lo ejerce el Consejo de la Magistratura, cuyos miembros son preseleccionados de conformidad a lo establecido en el Artículo 158.I inciso 5) de la Ley Fundamental.ARTÍCULO 3. ELECCIÓN DEL CONTRALOR GENERAL DEL ESTADO El Contralor General del Estado será elegido por dos tercios de votos de los miembros presentes de la Asamblea Legislativa Plurinacional, previa convocatoria pública, y calificación de capacidad profesional y méritos a través de concurso público, de conformidad al Artículo 214 de la Constitución Política del Estado. ARTÍCULO 4. REELECCIÓN DEL PRESIDENTE Y VICEPRESIDENTE DEL ESTADO I.De conformidad a lo establecido en el Artículo 168 de la Constitución Política del Estado, el Presidente y Vicepresidente elegidos por primera vez a partir de la vigencia de la Constitución, están habilitados para una reelección por una sola vez de manera continua. Page 2Resolución 0003/2013 -Tribunal Constitucional de Bolivia16-05-2013http://www.tribunalconstitucional.gob.bo/modules/ver_resolucion/indexne…...
Annex 369
2999
II.La prescripción contenida en la Disposición Transitoria Primera, parágrafo II de la Constitución Política del Estado es aplicable a las autoridades que después del 22 de enero de 2010, continuaron ejerciendo cargos públicos, sin nueva elección, designación o nombramiento.ARTÍCULO 5. PRESUPUESTO GENERAL DEL ESTADO De conformidad a lo establecido en el artículo 158.I numeral 11 y 321.III de la Constitución Política del Estado, el Pleno de la Asamblea Legislativa Plurinacional podrá considerar, en el término de sesenta días el Presupuesto General del Estado presentado por el Órgano Ejecutivo, quien lo remitirá al menos dos meses antes de la finalización de cada año fiscal. ARTÍCULO 6. TRATADOS INTERNACIONALES ANTERIORES A LA CONSTITUCIÓN La obligación de denunciar los Tratados Internacionales contrarios a la Constitución, establecida en la Disposición Transitoria Novena de la Constitución Política del Estado, implica la posibilidad de denunciarlos o, alternativamente, demandarlos ante Tribunales Internacionales, a fin de precautelar los altos intereses del Estado". III. FUNDAMENTOS JURÍDICOS DEL FALLO El Vicepresidente del Estado Plurinacional de Bolivia, consulta la constitucionalidad del proyecto de ley denominado: "Ley de Aplicación Normativa". En consecuencia, corresponde someter a control previo de constitucionalidad el proyecto de ley consultado, a objeto de determinar su compatibilidad o incompatibilidad con la Constitución Política del Estado, para que en su mérito, la Asamblea Legislativa Plurinacional, pueda continuar con el proceso de aprobación. III.1.Naturaleza jurídica del control previo de constitucionalidad Conforme a la norma prevista por el art. 196.I de la Constitución Política del Estado (CPE), el Tribunal Constitucional Plurinacional vela por la supremacía de la Constitución, ejerce el control de constitucionalidad y precautela el respeto y vigencia de los derechos y garantías constitucionales; conforme a ello, el ejercicio de la justicia constitucional por el Tribunal Constitucional Plurinacional, abarca tres ámbitos de acción: a) El control normativo de constitucionalidad; b) El control competencial de constitucionalidad; y c) El control tutelar de constitucionalidad; es decir, la protección de los derechos y garantías fundamentales. En ese orden, del contenido de las atribuciones del Tribunal Constitucional Plurinacional, establecidas por la Norma Suprema en su art. 202, se constata que en el ámbito del control normativo de constitucionalidad; éste puede ser previo, preventivo o a priori y correctivo, posterior o a posteriori. El primero se realiza antes de la aprobación de la ley, a instancia de las autoridades que tienen legitimación, con el objeto de que el órgano que ejerce el control de constitucionalidad, contraste el texto del proyecto de ley con la Constitución Política del Estado, a objeto de establecer que sus preceptos no sean contrarios al sistema de normas, principios y valores contenidos en la Norma Suprema. El control correctivo, posterior o a posteriori es el que se realiza con el mismo objeto, una vez que la norma legal ha sido Page 3Resolución 0003/2013 -Tribunal Constitucional de Bolivia16-05-2013http://www.tribunalconstitucional.gob.bo/modules/ver_resolucion/indexne…...
3000
Annex 369
aprobada y se encuentra en vigencia. Respecto al control previo, la norma prevista por el art. 202.7 de la CPE, establece como atribución del Tribunal Constitucional Plurinacional, absolver las consultas del Presidente o Presidenta del Estado, de la Asamblea Legislativa Plurinacional, del Tribunal Supremo de Justicia o del Tribunal Agroambiental sobre la constitucionalidad de los proyectos de ley. Asimismo, el precepto constitucional determina que la decisión del Tribunal Constitucional Plurinacional es de cumplimiento obligatorio. En concordancia con aquello, el art. 112 del CPCo, precisa quiénes ostentan legitimación para formular consultas sobre la constitucionalidad de proyectos de ley, señalando: "1. La Presidenta o Presidente del Estado Plurinacional, cuando se trate de proyectos cuya iniciativa tienen su origen en el Órgano Ejecutivo; 2. La Presidenta o Presidente de la Asamblea Legislativa Plurinacional, tratándose de Proyectos de Ley, cuando fuere aprobada por Resolución del Pleno de la Asamblea Legislativa Plurinacional o una de sus Cámaras, por dos tercios de los miembros presentes; 3. Para Proyectos de Ley de Materia Judicial, la Presidenta o Presidente del Tribunal Supremo de Justicia o del Tribunal Agroambiental, previa aprobación por la Sala Plena respectiva." Al respecto, conviene aclarar y precisar que la atribución conferida al Tribunal Constitucional Plurinacional para efectuar control previo de constitucionalidad, conlleva una labor objetiva del proyecto de ley en consulta, efectuando los juicios de constitucionalidad requeridos para determinar la compatibilidad o incompatibilidad de los preceptos sometidos a consulta, con el sistema de valores, principios y normas de la Constitución, limitando su actuación a dicha tarea, pues el ir más allá proponiendo formas de redacción o contenidos, constituiría desnaturalizar el control previo y asumir facultades y atribuciones propias del legislador.III.2.Alcances de la parte dogmática y orgánica de la Constitución Política del Estado vigente en Bolivia La SCP 1227/2012 de 7 de septiembre, en forma precisa desarrolló la existencia y contenido de las dos partes esenciales que componen la Norma Suprema, estableciendo que: "En el marco de lo señalado, de acuerdo a postulados propios de teoría constitucional, es menester señalar que esta Constitución axiomática, como Norma Suprema del Estado, tiene dos partes esenciales: 1) La parte dogmática; y, 2) La parte orgánica de la Constitución. La parte dogmática de la Constitución, plasma los valores supremos; principios rectores; derechos fundamentales y garantías normativas, jurisdiccionales y de defensa. Asimismo, la parte orgánica de la Constitución, estructura como ya se dijo precedentemente la ingeniería institucional que en el Estado Plurinacional de Bolivia, deberá responder al pluralismo, la interculturalidad y a los postulados propios del Estado Constitucional de Derecho. En el contexto antes señalado, debe precisarse que en todo Estado Constitucional de Derecho, que es un elemento que caracteriza al Estado Plurinacional de Bolivia, la parte dogmática de la Constitución, se caracteriza por su directa aplicación, es decir, que su materialización y por ende el fenómeno de constitucionalización en el ordenamiento jurídico no necesita ley de desarrollo previa; por el contrario, a la luz del principio de legalidad, que Page 4Resolución 0003/2013 -Tribunal Constitucional de Bolivia16-05-2013http://www.tribunalconstitucional.gob.bo/modules/ver_resolucion/indexne…...
Annex 369
3001
constituye uno de los pilares para el ejercicio de la función pública y merced al principio de seguridad y certeza jurídica, como ejes esenciales del Estado Constitucional de Derecho, la parte orgánica de la Constitución, para su aplicación necesita leyes orgánicas de desarrollo, las cuales, para asegurar la garantía de `reserva de ley´, deben ser emanadas de la Asamblea Legislativa Plurinacional, por cuanto, la parte orgánica -a diferencia de la dogmatica-, una vez en vigencia de la normativa orgánica de desarrollo, podrá ser aplicada. Este criterio fue utilizado y desarrollado por el Tribunal Constitucional, que en el periodo de transición inter-orgánico, (…) a través de la SC 0044/2010-R de 20 de abril, entre otras, de manera uniforme consolidó el principio de aplicación directa de la Constitución en cuanto a su parte dogmática". Conforme el entendimiento jurisprudencial glosado precedentemente, la Constitución estaría conformada por los valores supremos, principios rectores, derechos fundamentales y garantías normativas, jurisdiccionales y de defensa, aspectos que desde una óptica de técnica legislativa, se encuentran insertos en el Preámbulo de la Constitución y la primera parte de ésta que abarca hasta su art. 144. Ahora bien, siguiendo los ejes rectores establecidos en la parte dogmática de la Constitución, a su vez, su parte orgánica plasma la organización del ejercicio del poder destinada esencialmente a cumplir con los fines esenciales del Estado Plurinacional de Bolivia. En el orden de ideas señalado y con la finalidad de realizar el pertinente test de compatibilidad constitucionalidad en el caso concreto, debe establecerse taxativamente que de acuerdo a la teoría constitucional, existe una diferencia sustancial entre la parte dogmática de la Constitución y su parte orgánica, en se orden, debe precisarse que la parte dogmática de la Constitución, se caracteriza por su directa aplicación; es decir, que su materialización no necesita ley de desarrollo previa; por el contrario, merced al principio de legalidad, que constituye uno de los pilares esenciales para el ejercicio de la función pública, la parte orgánica de la Constitución, para su aplicación, necesita leyes expresas de desarrollo, las cuales deben emanar de la Asamblea Legislativa Plurinacional. III.3.Los alcances del bloque de constitucionalidad y el orden jurídico infra-constitucional El órgano contralor de constitucionalidad, en cuanto a la temática referente al bloque de constitucionalidad, a través de la SC 0110/2010-R de 10 de mayo, en mérito a una labor hermenéutica armónica con los roles del Sistema Interamericano de Protección de Derechos Humanos, estableció que forman parte del bloque de constitucionalidad, la Constitución, los Tratados internacionales referentes a derechos humanos y los Acuerdos de Integración, pero además, estableció que deben también ser incorporados a éste, todas las sentencias, opiniones consultivas y demás decisiones emergentes del referido sistema protectivo supranacional de Derechos Humanos. En coherencia con el entendimiento jurisprudencial antes señalado, debe precisarse que el bloque de constitucionalidad, se encuentra expresamente establecido en el art. 410.II de la Constitución, disposición que en su tenor literal establece lo siguiente: "La Constitución es la norma suprema del ordenamiento jurídico boliviano y goza de primacía frente a cualquier otra disposición normativa. El bloque de constitucionalidad está integrado por los Tratados y Page 5Resolución 0003/2013 -Tribunal Constitucional de Bolivia16-05-2013http://www.tribunalconstitucional.gob.bo/modules/ver_resolucion/indexne…...
3002
Annex 369
Convenios Internacionales en materia de Derechos Humanos y las normas de Derecho Comunitario, ratificados por el país…". Ahora bien, en armonía a la pauta exegética o gramatical de interpretación constitucional, se tiene que el bloque de constitucionalidad imperante en el Estado Plurinacional de Bolivia, está compuesto por los siguientes compartimentos: 1) La Constitución como norma positiva; 2) Los tratados internacionales referentes a Derechos Humanos; y 3) Las Normas Comunitarias; sin embargo, en el marco de una interpretación progresiva, acorde al principio de unidad constitucional y enmarcada en las directrices principistas del Estado Plurinacional de Bolivia, debe establecerse además que los valores plurales supremos del Estado Plurinacional de Bolivia, como ser el vivir bien, la solidaridad, la justicia, la igualdad material, entre otros, forman parte del bloque de constitucionalidad en un componente adicional, el cual se encuentra amparado también por el principio de supremacía constitucional. Así también, en el marco de la nueva visión del constitucionalismo del Estado Plurinacional de Bolivia, formarán parte de este compartimento del bloque de constitucionalidad todos los principios generales del derecho. Por lo expuesto, se colige que la interpretación del bloque de constitucionalidad, en una concepción extensiva y en armonía con los mandatos constitucionales establecidos en el art. 13.IV y 256 de la CPE, en tópicos vinculados a Derechos Humanos, comprende además la pauta de interpretación "desde y conforme al bloque de convencionalidad", razón por la cual, en mérito a una interpretación progresiva, los derechos amparados por el principio de supremacía constitucional, están integrados por los expresamente disciplinados en el texto constitucional y todos aquellos reconocidos por el bloque de convencionalidad, en el ámbito de una aplicación siempre guiada a la luz del principio de favorabilidad. De acuerdo a lo señalado, es pertinente precisar que a partir de la concepción del bloque de constitucionalidad, se genera en el Estado Plurinacional de Bolivia, un orden jurídico infraconstitucional, en relación al cual, debe operar lo que en teoría constitucional se denomina "fenómeno de constitucionalización del ordenamiento jurídico", en mérito del cual, el bloque de constitucionalidad, se materializará en la vida social a través de la irradiación de su contenido (En ese mismos sentido Ricardo Guastini en "La Constitucionalización del ordenamiento jurídico: El caso italiano"). III.4.La aplicación normativa como herramienta legislativa Al respecto, partiremos recogiendo algunas consideraciones efectuadas por Konrad Hesse: "La Fuerza normativa de la Constitución", respecto a la norma constitucional, que -a su criterio-"carece de existencia propia, independiente de la realidad. Su naturaleza estriba en que pretende tener vigencia, es decir, realizar en la realidad el estado por ella normado. Esta pretensión de vigencia no puede desvincularse de las condiciones históricas de su realización que, manteniéndose en una interdependencia múltiple crean los condicionamientos específicos de los que no puede hacer abstracción. Entre ellos se cuentan las condiciones naturales, técnicas, económicas y sociales de cada situación, frente a las cuales la pretensión de vigencia de la norma jurídica sólo tiene éxito cuando toma en cuenta estas condiciones". Concordante con el referido criterio y precisándolo, Francisco Fernández Segado (en su obra "Aproximación a la Ciencia del Derecho Constitucional"), sostiene que sólo desde la Page 6Resolución 0003/2013 -Tribunal Constitucional de Bolivia16-05-2013http://www.tribunalconstitucional.gob.bo/modules/ver_resolucion/indexne…...
Annex 369
3003
comprensión de los condicionamientos sociales y de todo orden que inciden sobre la vigencia de una norma constitucional, podrá entenderse su eficiencia y efectos. El texto constitucional se constituye en la Norma Suprema que -por voluntad del constituyente-recoge además los valores sociales, políticos y en el caso de Bolivia con particular incidencia los principios y valores ético morales en los que se sustenta el Estado y que buscan la armonía y el "vivir bien" de la sociedad plural, por lo que por regla general su contenido es uniforme, concordante, coherente, integrado y funcional; sin embargo, pueden presentarse situaciones excepcionales que sin resultar necesariamente antinomias dentro del texto constitucional, se evidencie normas que al momento de su aplicación puedan parecer contrarias al contenido de otros preceptos constitucionales o más que contrarias, su materialización no parecería estar contextualizada con todo el contenido y el espíritu de la Constitución Política del Estado. Surge en consecuencia la necesidad de establecer la aplicación normativa como una herramienta legislativa que posibilite la eficaz y correcta materialización de preceptos constitucionales, dado que en un Estado Constitucional de Derecho, todas las normas tienen que ser acordes a la Norma Suprema, teniendo como finalidad esencial el posibilitar que las normas constitucionales sean eficaces, en términos de ser materialmente verificables. En ese orden, la Asamblea Legislativa Plurinacional, que expresa y ejecuta legislativamente la voluntad del soberano, tiene la obligación de hacer efectivas las normas constitucionales y materializar el contenido de la Constitución Política del Estado, no otra cosa significa la labor legislativa de leyes de desarrollo, que en esencia son normas que cristalizan y encarnan los preceptos orgánicos en el marco de los valores y principios instituidos por la Constitución Política del Estado. En este punto de análisis, cabe referirse a la autolimitación de la soberanía, que el constitucionalista Ignacio De Otto "Derecho Constitucional, Sistema de Fuentes" desarrolla de la siguiente forma: "En términos de teoría jurídica la doctrina del poder constituyente del pueblo no es sino la formulación de una norma básica del ordenamiento, esto es, de una norma de la que deriva la validez de todas las demás (…) Según la teoría del poder constituyente del pueblo, éste, en cuanto es soberano, tiene un poder absoluto para determinar lo que es derecho, y lo ejerce dando una Constitución en la que determina los procedimientos y los límites de la creación de normas. Establecida la Constitución el propio poder del pueblo queda sujeto a ella, pues la voluntad popular de reformarla sólo podrá expresarse válidamente siguiendo los procesos de reforma que la propia Constitución establece. Con la Constitución el pueblo no sólo constituye poderes del Estado, que deben su existencia a la voluntad popular, sino que, además, se autolimita en el sentido de que, en el futuro, su propio poder acerca de la Constitución sólo podrá ejercerse en los términos que la propia Constitución establece". Del razonamiento expresado deriva entonces la evidencia de que el constituyente originario recogiendo la voluntad del soberano, instituye una Norma Suprema que -como se expresó en fundamentos precedentes-contiene una parte dogmática y otra orgánica que son la expresión de la autoidentificación del pueblo, la visión y concepción del tipo de Estado imperante, todo ello en el marco de los valores y principios supremos que rigen a esa sociedad. Luego está que el constituyente derivado, que de igual forma representa la voluntad del soberano, debe Page 7Resolución 0003/2013 -Tribunal Constitucional de Bolivia16-05-2013http://www.tribunalconstitucional.gob.bo/modules/ver_resolucion/indexne…...
3004
Annex 369
no sólo enmarcar las normas que emite al contenido de la Constitución Política del Estado, sino que su función implica también el materializar dicho contenido y el espíritu de la Norma Suprema a través de leyes, y en los casos excepcionales de presentarse una aparente antinomia o fricción de normas constitucionales, el legislativo puede -en ejercicio de la facultad conferida por el soberano-dilucidar dicha antinomia o roce de preceptos constitucionales a través de una ley, a efectos de una aplicación contextualizada y sistémica de la Constitución Política del Estado, sin que dicha tarea, de ninguna manera, importe una presunta ley de interpretación de la Constitución, sino únicamente cumplir y materializar la soberanía popular que no puede ser limitada ni restringida por ninguna norma, ni autoridad. En ese sentido, cuando el art. 4.III de la Ley del Tribunal Constitucional Plurinacional (LTCP) establece que: "El Tribunal Constitucional Plurinacional en su labor de guardián de la Constitución Política del Estado es el intérprete supremo de la Ley Fundamental sin perjuicio de la facultad interpretativa que tiene la Asamblea Legislativa Plurinacional como órgano depositario de la soberanía popular", debe entenderse que simplemente reconoce una competencia implícita en la Constitución, para el ejercicio de sus competencias; es decir, para elaborar leyes concretas, pero no para sustituir al legislador constituyente y menos aún menoscabar la competencia del Tribunal Constitucional Plurinacional constituido conforme al art. 196.I de la CPE, en último y máximo intérprete de la Norma Suprema, cuyas decisiones además son vinculantes y obligatorias también al propio legislador ordinario por mandato popular. III.5La refundación del Estado Plurinacional de Bolivia y su génesis en la función constituyente que aprobó la Constitución de 2009 En el caso de nuestro país, el proceso constituyente que se desarrolló desde el 2006, concluyendo el 2009, tuvo inequívocamente un carácter originario, con una génesis directa en la voluntad democrática popular, característica a partir de la cual, se entiende su autonomía, en mérito de la cual, el nuevo orden trazado, es diferente al pre-existente, ya que la función constituyente, por su naturaleza jurídica, generó una nueva era jurídico-política basada en la refundación del Estado, en el marco de los criterios del pluralismo, la interculturalidad y la descolonización, como ejes esenciales del nuevo modelo de Estado. En ese marco, es imperante establecer también, que el ámbito y límite de la función constituyente originaria y del nuevo orden generado por ella misma, son los derechos humanos reconocidos por acuerdos y tratados internacionales, los cuales a su vez, formarán parte del bloque de constitucionalidad. El órgano contralor de constitucionalidad, definió a través de su uniforme línea jurisprudencial las características de la refundación del Estado, en ese orden, el primer hito fundamental a ser resaltado, constituye la SC 0168/2010-R de 17 de mayo, la cual, en su Fundamento Jurídico III.3, desarrolló la naturaleza jurídica de la función constituyente y la Asamblea Constituyente, señalando que el elemento esencial para establecer la naturaleza jurídica de la función constituyente, es su carácter soberano; en ese orden, dicho entendimiento ya estableció que la teoría del "Poder Constituyente", consagró el carácter soberano de la función constituyente, la cual no está vinculada a ninguna norma jurídica previa, toda vez que por su naturaleza es un poder pre-jurídico. Page 8Resolución 0003/2013 -Tribunal Constitucional de Bolivia16-05-2013http://www.tribunalconstitucional.gob.bo/modules/ver_resolucion/indexne…...
Annex 369
3005
III.5 The re-founding of the Plurinational State of Bolivia and its genesis in the constitutional function that approved the Constitution of 2009
In our nation’s case, the constitutional process that took place from 2006, concluding in 2009, had an unequivocally original character, arising from the democratic will of the people, a characteristic that explains its autonomous character, and therefore, the new order outlined is different from the pre-existing one, because the constitutional function, by its juridical nature, created a new political and legal era, based on re-founding the State on criteria of pluralism, diversity of cultures and decolonization as essential axes of the new State model.
Within that framework, it is important to establish that the scope and limit of the original constitutional function and its new resulting order, are the human rights recognized by agreements and international treaties, which will in turn form part of the body of constitutional law.
The body in charge of constitutional review, in uniform jurisprudence, has defined the characteristics of the process of re-founding the State. The first milestone in this regard is SC 0168/2010-R of 17 May, which, in Legal Ground III.3, explained the legal nature of the constitutional function and the Constitutional Assembly, pointing out that the essential element of the constitutional function is its sovereign character; in that respect, that authority has already established that the theory of “Constitutional Power” enshrines the sovereign character of the constitutional function, which is not tied to any previous legal norm, because it predates the legal order.
3006
Annex 369
La Sentencia Constitucional referida, estableció de manera expresa la denominada "Tesis de la función constituyente", precisando que la voluntad democrática popular, constituye la génesis democrática legítima para modificar un orden anteriormente establecido, sustituyéndolo por uno nuevo en casos de profundas crisis estructurales. El referido entendimiento jurisprudencial, señala además que en los Estados contemporáneos, la función constituyente es pre-existe en relación al nuevo Estado a ser creado, caracterizándose por esta razón su naturaleza extraordinaria, extra-jurídica y autónoma. Así, estableció el entendimiento ahora invocado, reconociendo que la función constituyente, en mérito a su rasgo autónomo, es una fuente y esencia del nuevo orden jurídico, diferente y completamente independiente del orden pre-constituido. Además, es necesario señalar que el Tribunal Constitucional Plurinacional, en entendimientos anteriores, desarrolló también el tema referente a la refundación del Estado, tal como lo hizo en la SCP 1227/2012 de 7 de septiembre, entre otras. III.6.Test de compatibilización del art. 1 de la Ley de Aplicación Normativa La norma contenida en el art. 1 del proyecto de ley en consulta, establece que ésta tiene por objeto determinar la aplicación normativa de cinco preceptos establecidos en la Constitución Política del Estado vigente, a fin de establecer su correcto ámbito de validez, respetando el tenor literal así como el espíritu de la norma fundamental. Al respecto, los cinco preceptos objeto de la aplicación normativa responden al control administrativo de justicia encomendado al Consejo de la Magistratura; la elección del Contralor General del Estado; la re-elección del Presidente y Vicepresidente del Estado y la continuidad de gestión para autoridades electas, designadas o nombradas que después del 22 de enero de 2010, hubieren continuado en el ejercicio de sus cargos; el Presupuesto General del Estado; y la denuncia o demanda ante Tribunales Internacionales de Tratados internacionales. En ese orden y en el marco de los razonamientos desarrollados en los Fundamentos Jurídicos III.2, III.3 y III.4 de la presente Declaración Constitucional, existe una diferencia sustancial entre la parte dogmática de la Constitución y su parte orgánica, lo que a su vez implica que la parte dogmática se caracteriza por su directa aplicación; es decir, que su materialización no necesita ley de desarrollo previa, por el contrario, en razón al principio de legalidad, que constituye uno de los pilares para el ejercicio de la función pública, se estableció también que la parte orgánica de la Norma Suprema, para su aplicación, necesita leyes expresas de desarrollo, las cuales, deberán emanar de la Asamblea Legislativa Plurinacional, en cumplimiento de la atribución conferida por el art. 158.I.3 de la CPE, que establece dictar leyes, interpretarlas, derogarlas, abrogarlas y modificarlas. Dentro de ese marco, al evidenciarse que los cinco preceptos de aplicación normativa desarrollados en el proyecto de ley, constituyen elementos que hacen a la parte orgánica de la Constitución, sus contenidos no sólo que pueden, sino que deben ser desarrollados mediante ley que emane del órgano de legitimidad popular, como es la Asamblea Legislativa Plurinacional; es decir, el constituyente derivado, aspecto absolutamente armónico con el orden constitucional, no sólo porque responde a la naturaleza jurídica de las disposiciones Page 9Resolución 0003/2013 -Tribunal Constitucional de Bolivia16-05-2013http://www.tribunalconstitucional.gob.bo/modules/ver_resolucion/indexne…...
Annex 369
3007
The aforementioned constitutional judgment expressly set out the so-called “constitutional function theory”, specifying that the democratic will of the people is the legitimate democratic basis to modify a previously established legal order and to substitute it for a new one in cases of a deep structural crisis.
The jurisprudence referred to above further explains that, in modern States, the constitutional function predates the to-be-formed State; that is why it is of an extraordinary, extra-legal and autonomous nature. Hence, as established in the aforementioned understanding, the constitutional function, due to its autonomous character, is the source and essence of the new legal order; it is different and completely independent from the pre-existing order. In addition, it is important to highlight that the Plurinational Constitutional Tribunal, in previous decisions, has also elaborated on this matter, in decision SCP 1227/2012 of
7 September, among others.
[…]
3008
Annex 369
insertas en la parte orgánica de la Norma Suprema, sino porque materializa sus contenidos cumpliendo con la voluntad del constituyente originario. En el orden de ideas señalado, la aplicación normativa de disposiciones expresas insertas en la parte orgánica de la Constitución, destinadas a establecer un correcto ámbito de validez, se encuentra enmarcada dentro de los roles propios de la Asamblea Legislativa Plurinacional, para la disciplina de aspectos propios de la parte orgánica de la Constitución. En consecuencia, el objeto del proyecto de ley en consulta, no implica un exceso, ni menos aún una contradicción con el orden constitucional imperante, sino por el contrario, el objeto del proyecto de ley, responde a la atribución conferida por la Norma Suprema a la Asamblea Legislativa Plurinacional, de desarrollar disposiciones orgánicas de la Constitución, cumpliendo a su vez la obligación del constituyente derivado de encarnar los valores y principios constitucionales, materializando el contenido de la Norma Suprema en leyes que efectivicen su contenido y que respondan a la voluntad del soberano. Conforme lo expuesto, no se evidencia incompatibilidad alguna del contenido del art. 1 del proyecto de ley en consulta y por ende del objeto de la ley, con el texto constitucional, en tanto se trate de una norma de desarrollo de la parte orgánica de la Constitución. III.7.Sobre el art. 2 del proyecto de la Ley de Aplicación Normativa El denominado control administrativo de la justicia es una potestad constitucionalmente asignada al Consejo de la Magistratura del Estado Plurinacional de Bolivia, según el art. 193.I de la CPE, al establecer que "El Consejo de la Magistratura es la instancia responsable del régimen disciplinario de la jurisdicción ordinaria, agroambiental y de las jurisdicciones especializadas; del control y fiscalización de su manejo administrativo y financiero; y de la formulación de políticas de su gestión. El Consejo de la Magistratura se regirá por el principio de participación ciudadana". Nótese que la norma glosada refiere un principio sustancial para la convivencia democrática, cual es la de división de órganos de poder, la primera involucra la autonomía a la que hace referencia el art. 7 de la Ley del Órgano Judicial (LOJ), e implica que este Órgano administra y controla su gestión administrativa de manera autónoma, en relación a los otros Órganos del Estado (Legislativo, Ejecutivo y Electoral), y la segunda dimensión, una intra-orgánica en el Órgano Judicial, pues han discriminado la función de gestión administrativa a cargo de la Dirección Administrativa Financiera (DAF) del aludido Órgano, de la función de control de la gestión administrativa financiera, la misma que reside en el Consejo de la Magistratura. En ese sentido, el proyecto de norma legal se limita a desarrollar cuál es el Órgano al que se refiere el art. 159.13 de la Norma Suprema -referido a la preselección de los postulantes al Control Administrativo de Justicia y remisión al Órgano Electoral Plurinacional de la nómina de los precalificados, para la organización única y exclusiva del proceso electoral-por ende la preselección de sus miembros se acomoda al art. 158.I.5) de la misma CPE, que establece que son atribuciones de la Asamblea Legislativa Plurinacional, además de las que determina la Norma Suprema y la ley, entre otras la de preseleccionar a las candidatas y a los candidatos para la conformación del Tribunal Constitucional Plurinacional, Tribunal Supremo de Justicia, Tribunal Agroambiental y Consejo de la Magistratura. Page 10Resolución 0003/2013 -Tribunal Constitucional de Bolivia16-05-2013http://www.tribunalconstitucional.gob.bo/modules/ver_resolucion/indexne…...
Annex 369
3009
Ello implica que el art. 2 del proyecto de ley en consulta, no sólo que se constituye en una norma de desarrollo, sino que es necesaria su existencia y vigencia, por cuanto su contenido se ajusta al principio de separación de funciones, respetando la voluntad del constituyente, en sentido de quién debe ejercer el control administrativo de la justicia, impulsando y coadyuvando al mismo tiempo a la vigencia del principio de separación de funciones de los Órganos del Estado Plurinacional, la misma que se halla establecida en el art. 12 de la CPE, que señala: "I.El Estado se organiza y estructura su poder público a través de los órganos Legislativo, Ejecutivo, Judicial y Electoral. La organización del Estado está fundamentada en la independencia, separación, coordinación y cooperación de estos órganos. II.Son funciones estatales la de Control, la de Defensa de la Sociedad y la de Defensa del Estado.III.Las funciones de los órganos públicos no pueden ser reunidas en un solo órgano ni son delegables entre si". En el marco de los razonamientos expuestos, el art. 2 del Proyecto de ley en control previo de constitucionalidad, resulta compatible con el texto de la Norma Suprema, dado que se acomoda al espíritu del constituyente y al principio de separación de órganos, manteniendo el equilibrio inter-orgánico e intra-orgánico. III.8.Respecto al art. 3 del proyecto de la Ley de Aplicación Normativa El proyecto de ley sometido a control de constitucionalidad previo en su art. 3 prevé: "El Contralor General del Estado será elegido por dos tercios de votos de los miembros presentes de la Asamblea Legislativa Plurinacional, previa convocatoria pública, y calificación de capacidad profesional y méritos a través de concurso público, de conformidad al Artículo 214 de la Constitución Política del Estado". El artículo propuesto por en el proyecto de ley reitera lo establecido por el texto constitucional en el art. 214 de la CPE, que determina que la Contralora o Contralor General del Estado se designará por dos tercios de votos de los presentes de la Asamblea Legislativa Plurinacional y que dicha elección requiere de convocatoria pública previa, y calificación de capacidad profesional y méritos a través de concurso público. Por otra parte debe considerarse que la norma constitucional también ha previsto en el art. 172.15 que es atribución del Presidente del Estado nombrar, de entre las ternas propuestas por la Asamblea Legislativa Plurinacional, a la Contralora o al Contralor General del Estado. Conforme a lo desarrollado a lo largo de la presente Declaración Constitucional, respecto a la existencia de antinomia que pueda presentarse al interior del texto constitucional, es posible que el órgano legislativo, en esta su labor de materializar la constitución, pueda dictar leyes que hagan posible la materialización de la constitución, con la finalidad de evitar que las normas antinómicas se tornen ineficaces. El desarrollo e interpretación que realice el legislativo en este caso, está condicionada a que la misma responda a la parte orgánica de la Constitución; corresponde en el caso analizar si la labor efectuada por la Asamblea Legislativa Plurinacional sobre la elección de la Page 11Resolución 0003/2013 -Tribunal Constitucional de Bolivia16-05-2013http://www.tribunalconstitucional.gob.bo/modules/ver_resolucion/indexne…...
3010
Annex 369
Contralora o Contralor General del Estado por parte del Órgano Legislativo y no por la Presidenta o Presidente del Estado responde a la parte orgánica de la constitución. Así, el texto constitucional en el art. 1 de la CPE, a tiempo de definir el modelo de Estado, reconoce el carácter eminentemente democrático de éste, garantizando una forma de convivencia social que necesariamente implica la concurrencia de libertades e igualdades, donde las relaciones sociales se establecen de acuerdo a mecanismos de participación ciudadana sin distinciones ni discriminación, este carácter democrático del Estado determina que la titularidad del poder político descansa en el pueblo y no en el gobernante, quien ejerce el poder por delegación conferida por el pueblo a través del voto directo y de la participación directa en las decisiones políticas. Es así que conforme al principio democrático aludido, el gobierno encuentra en el voto un factor de legitimación, en coherencia con lo manifestado por el art. 7 de la CPE, donde refiriéndose a la soberanía, indica que la misma reside en el pueblo, además que es inalienable e imprescriptible, lo que determina que el pueblo es el origen de todo poder concluyéndose que el poder del Estado emana del Pueblo, este potestad democrática en su ejercicio puede por un lado ser ejercida a través de la delegación a los mandatarios y representantes mediante elecciones libres, plurales, igualitarias y ampliamente informadas; y, por otro, interviniendo en la toma de decisiones expresando su voluntad política ante las consultas efectuada por el gobierno, a través de los mecanismos de participación que establece la Constitución Política del Estado. La Asamblea Legislativa Plurinacional es el órgano que por su concepción, naturaleza democrática y plural representa de mejor manera la voluntad del pueblo, por ello la aplicación normativa planteada en el proyecto de ley, referida a que la Contralora o Contralor del Estado sea elegida por esa instancia, es una interpretación que responde al texto constitucional, pues la decisión del órgano político colegiado involucra un mayor grado de discusión, garantiza la participación plural de sus miembros en el proceso decisorio, respondiendo de mejor manera al carácter democrático del Estado, razones por las cuales la norma en consulta y objeto de análisis resulta ser constitucional. III.9.Con relación a la Ley de Aplicación Normativa, referente al art. 4 El art. 4 del proyecto de ley establece: "I. De conformidad a lo establecido en el Artículo 168 de la Constitución Política del Estado, el Presidente y Vicepresidente elegidos por primera vez a partir de la vigencia de la Constitución, están habilitados para una reelección por una sola vez de manera continua. II. La prescripción contenida en la Disposición Transitoria Primera, parágrafo II de la Constitución Política del Estado es aplicable a las autoridades que después del 22 de enero de 2010, continuaron ejerciendo cargos públicos, sin nueva elección, designación o nombramiento". Al respecto, la norma objeto de análisis determina dos aspectos que deben ser analizados a fin de realizar el contraste de constitucionalidad, el primero determina que el Presidente y el Vicepresidente se encuentran habilitados para la reelección por una sola vez de forma continua desde el momento de haber sido elegidos por primera vez, a partir de la vigencia de la Constitución; y el segundo, establece que el parágrafo de la Disposición Transitoria Primera de la Constitución Política del Estado, es aplicable a las autoridades que después del 22 de enero de 2010, continuaron ejerciendo cargos públicos, sin nueva elección, designación o nombramiento. Page 12Resolución 0003/2013 -Tribunal Constitucional de Bolivia16-05-2013http://www.tribunalconstitucional.gob.bo/modules/ver_resolucion/indexne…...
Annex 369
3011
Sobre este particular y en lo referente al ámbito personal de aplicación regulado por el citado proyecto, debe señalarse que tanto el Presidente como el Vicepresidente, en el marco del Estado Unitario Social de Derecho, Plurinacional Comunitario, libre, independiente, soberano, democrático, intercultural, descentralizado y con autonomías, tal cual reza el art. 1 de la CPE, son autoridades cuya fuente de poder tiene su origen en una forma democrática de gobierno mediante el voto universal, obligatorio, directo, libre y secreto, tal como lo señala el art. 166.1 de la CPE; en este sentido, por la naturaleza jurídica de su mandato, que tal como se dijo, emerge del voto popular, en el contexto del sistema de gobierno adoptado por el Estado Plurinacional de Bolivia, que se plasma en el art. 11 de la CPE y al estar regulado su mandato en la parte orgánica de la constitución, se colige que no existe incompatibilidad alguna del desarrollo normativo mediante ley expresa de este elemento fáctico-normativo de la disposición objeto de análisis con el orden constitucional. En ese sentido, se advierte que la norma en análisis destaca la figura de la reelección, refiriéndose únicamente al caso del Presidente y Vicepresidente, sosteniendo además que si éstos fueron elegidos en vigencia del nuevo régimen constitucional se encuentran habilitados para la reelección, dado que de una interpretación literal de la Disposición Transitoria Primera, se extrae que los mandatos anteriores a la vigencia de la Constitución, seguirán computándose hasta la posesión de las nuevas autoridades, desprendiendo el mismo resultado si se considera la interpretación sistemática de la referida Disposición Transitoria, así su parágrafo I acorta los mandatos de autoridades nacionales hasta "…la elección de la Asamblea Legislativa Plurinacional, Presidente y Vicepresidente de la republica…", posteriormente el parágrafo IV prorroga el mandato de las autoridades municipales y en ese contexto el parágrafo II, refiriéndose a todos los mandatos sean de nivel nacional, departamental o municipal en ese momento vigentes, prorroga el computo de sus funciones hasta el nuevo periodo de las nuevas autoridades, de forma que no hace mención expresa, sobre si el periodo constitucional que desarrollaba constituía o no su primer periodo constitucional.Asimismo, para este Tribunal la Disposición Transitoria Primera de la CPE, debe interpretarse conforme a las normas definitivas contenidas en la misma Constitución y específicamente por la parte dogmática constitucional. Por otra parte, conforme al Fundamento Jurídico III.5 de la presente Declaración Constitucional, es necesario rememorar que la Asamblea Constituyente en Bolivia, cuyo proceso fue iniciado el 2006, concluyendo el 2009, tuvo inequívocamente un carácter originario, con origen en la voluntad democrática popular, característica a partir de la cual, se entiende su autonomía, en mérito de la cual, el nuevo orden es diferente al pre-existente, el nuevo orden implica una nueva era jurídico-política basada en la refundación del Estado, por ello se concluye que es absolutamente razonable y acorde con la Constitución, realizar el computo del plazo para el ejercicio de funciones tanto del Presidente como del Vicepresidente del Estado Plurinacional de Bolivia, desde el momento en el cual la función constituyente refundo el Estado y por ende creo un nuevo orden jurídico -político.El art. 168 de la CPE, prevé que el Presidente y Vicepresidente elegidos por primera vez a partir de la vigencia de la Constitución, están habilitados para una reelección por una sola vez de manera continua. Al respecto, la precisión normativa realizada por el art. 4.I. del Page 13Resolución 0003/2013 -Tribunal Constitucional de Bolivia16-05-2013http://www.tribunalconstitucional.gob.bo/modules/ver_resolucion/indexne…...
3012
Annex 369
finalización de cada año fiscal. Con la finalidad de realizar el test de constitucionalidad del art. 5 propuesto debe precisarse que el tenor literal del art. 158.I.11 de la CPE, establece como atribución de la Asamblea Legislativa Plurinacional, además de las que determina esta Constitución y la ley: "Aprobar el Presupuesto General del Estado presentado por el Órgano Ejecutivo. Recibido el proyecto de ley, éste deberá ser considerado en la Asamblea Legislativa Plurinacional dentro del término de sesenta días. En caso de no ser aprobado en este plazo, el proyecto se dará por aprobado".Por su parte el tener literal del art. 32.1.III de la CPE, dispone que "El Órgano Ejecutivo presentará a la Asamblea Legislativa Plurinacional, al menos dos meses antes de la finalización de cada año fiscal, el proyecto de ley del Presupuesto General para la siguiente gestión anual, que incluirá a todas las entidades del sector público". En el caso analizado salta a la vista que el legislador ordinario en el art. 5 del proyecto de ley en consulta determina como una obligación facultativa de la Asamblea Legislativa Plurinacional el aprobar el Presupuesto General del Estado, así el referido artículo señala "…el Pleno de la Asamblea Legislativa Plurinacional podrá considerar,…", cuando el texto constitucional manda de manera imperativa a la Asamblea aprobar el presupuesto general del Estado, este cambio del verbo -deberá por podrá-implica un reforma constitucional, que no es posible de ser realizada a través de una ley, en ese sentido, al no ser viable cambiar un deber constitucional por una facultad legal, la norma planteada en el proyecto resulta ser inconstitucional.III.11.Respecto al art. 6 sometido a consulta El art. 6 del proyecto de ley establece: "La obligación de denunciar los Tratados Internacionales contrarios a la Constitución, establecida en la Disposición Transitoria Novena de la Constitución Política del Estado, implica la posibilidad de denunciarlos o, alternativamente, demandarlos ante Tribunales Internacionales, a fin de precautelar los altos intereses del Estado". La norma propuesta tiene su origen constitucional en la Disposición Transitoria Novena de la Constitución Política del Estado que determina: "Los tratados internacionales anteriores a la Constitución y que no la contradigan se mantendrán en el ordenamiento jurídico interno, con rango de ley. En el plazo de cuatro años desde la elección del nuevo Órgano Ejecutivo, éste denunciará y, en su caso, renegociará los tratados internacionales que sean contrarios a la Constitución".De las normas glosadas se tienen dos elementos relevantes, el primero referido a la disquisición de Tratados internacionales que contradicen la constitucional y aquello que no lo hacen, facultando al Órgano Ejecutivo a denunciar los Tratados internacionales o alternativamente demandarlos ante Tribunales Internacionales, por lo que en esa labor corresponderá diferenciar los Tratados internacionales que contradicen la Constitución de los que no lo hacen y fundamentalmente los que forman parte de ella. Respecto del primer supuesto referido a los Tratados internacionales que contradicen la Page 15Resolución 0003/2013 -Tribunal Constitucional de Bolivia16-05-2013http://www.tribunalconstitucional.gob.bo/modules/ver_resolucion/indexne… de ley objeto del presente test de constitucionalidad, en cuanto al momento para el cómputo del plazo para la reelección de autoridades a través del voto popular, no desborda el contenido normativo del citado artículo constitucional menos lo contradice, ya que el desarrollo se encuentra inserto en la parte orgánica de la constitución. Efectuada la compatibilización de la primera parte del art. 4 del proyecto de ley en consulta, corresponde ahora realizar dicha labor en cuanto al ámbito personal de aplicación de la misma, contenido en el segundo presupuesto del citado art. 4 en estudio que refiere: "La prescripción contenida en la Disposición Transitoria Primera, parágrafo II de la Constitución Política del Estado es aplicable a las autoridades que después del 22 de enero de 2010, continuaron ejerciendo cargos públicos sin nueva elección, designación o nombramiento". En este orden, el ámbito de aplicación temporal inserto en el art. 4.II del proyecto de ley objeto del presente contraste de constitucionalidad, contempla a las autoridades que después del 22 de enero de 2010, continuaron ejerciendo cargos públicos, autoridades distintas al Presidente y Vicepresidente del Estado Plurinacional de Bolivia, es así que la regulación diferenciada del ámbito personal de aplicación, en cuanto a autoridades públicas diferentes al Presidente y Vicepresidente del Estado, no implica una contradicción con el orden constitucional vigente. En efecto, conforme se precisó antes, el carácter soberano de la función constituyente no está vinculado a ninguna norma jurídica previa, toda vez que por su naturaleza es un poder pre-jurídico; así la función constituyente, en mérito a su rasgo autónomo, es una fuente y esencia del nuevo orden jurídico, diferente del orden pre-constituido, en mérito de la cual, como se dijo, el nuevo orden diseñado, es diferente al pre-existente. En ese contexto, si bien es cierto que la función constituyente refundó el Estado (2009) y creó un nuevo orden jurídico-político, no es menos evidente que el cumplimiento de los fines esenciales del Estado, implica el reconocimiento de mecanismos idóneos, para asegurar una eficaz gestión pública en el periodo inter-orgánico de transición hacia la implementación plena de la nueva estructura estatal. En consecuencia, de acuerdo a una interpretación teleológica se tiene que la función pública ejercida por servidores públicos, que después del 22 de enero de 2010, hubieren continuado en el ejercicio de sus cargos sin nueva elección, designación o nombramiento, asegura la continuidad y consiguiente eficacia de la gestión pública destinada al cumplimiento de los fines esenciales del Estado, por tanto, en este marco, el contenido del art. 4.II del proyecto de Ley de Aplicación Normativa, no sólo que es razonable y coherente, sino también compatible con el orden constitucional vigente. III.10.Compatibilización del art. 5 del proyecto de ley en consulta El proyecto de ley sometido a control de constitucionalidad prevé que de conformidad a lo establecido en el art. 158.I.11 y 321.III de la CPE, el pleno de la Asamblea Legislativa Plurinacional podrá considerar, en el término de sesenta días el Presupuesto General del Estado presentado por el Órgano Ejecutivo, quien lo remitirá al menos dos meses antes de la Page 14Resolución 0003/2013 -Tribunal Constitucional de Bolivia16-05-2013http://www.tribunalconstitucional.gob.bo/modules/ver_resolucion/indexne…...
Annex 369
3013
III.11 Regarding Art. 6 submitted to consultation
Article 6 of the draft bill states: “The obligation to denounce International Treaties that are contrary to the Constitution, as provided for under Transitional Provision Nine of the Political Constitution of the State, entails the possibility of denunciation or, alternatively, challenge of such treaties before International Tribunals, in order to safeguard the supreme interests of the State.”
The proposed provision has its constitutional roots in Transitional Provision Nine of the Political Constitution of the State, which provides that: “International treaties preceding the Constitution, the provisions of which are not inconsistent with the Constitution, will remain in the domestic legal system, with force of law. Within four years of its appointment, the new Executive Branch will denounce and, if necessary, renegotiate those international treaties that are contrary to the Constitution.”
The aforementioned provisions reveal two important points; the first in relation to those international Treaties that are inconsistent with the Constitution and those that are not, empowering the Executive Branch to denounce international Treaties or alternatively challenge them before International Tribunals. In this endeavor, the Executive Branch will have to differentiate the international Treaties that are inconsistent with the Constitution from those that are not and, fundamentally, from those that are part of the Constitution.
With respect to the first case regarding international Treaties that are inconsistent with
3014
Annex 369
constitucional, debe aclararse que no es potestativo del Órgano Ejecutivo denunciar o alternativamente demandarlos ante Tribunales Internacionales, así el art. 108 de la CPE, establece como deber fundamental el "conocer, cumplir y hacer cumplir la Constitución y las leyes" (el resaltado no corresponde), luego es posible la denuncia o demanda de Tratados internacionales que se contrapongan al interés estatal. Sin embargo, es preciso aclarar que la denuncia o demanda de Tratados internacionales de Derechos Humanos que integran la Constitución, por su rango normativo y su especial consideración por parte del legislador constituyente, debe enmarcarse al cumplimiento de requisitos y en los presupuestos establecidos por la misma Norma Suprema, lo que implica no sólo efectuar la denuncia en el marco del art. 260 de la CPE, sino también el determinar con precisión el objeto y alcance de la denuncia, en atención a la protección de derechos humanos y en consideración a que uno de los fines esenciales del Estado Plurinacional es su protección y la materialización de su ejercicio pleno. En merito a lo señalado, debe establecerse que el contenido del art. 6 del proyecto de ley objeto de la presente test de constitucionalidad, se encuentra conforme al bloque de constitucionalidad en tanto y en cuanto asuma la interpretación plasmada en el presente fundamento.POR TANTO El Tribunal Constitucional Plurinacional, en su Sala Plena; en virtud de la autoridad que le confiere la Constitución Política del Estado Plurinacional de Bolivia y el art. 12.8 de la Ley del Tribunal Constitucional Plurinacional; resuelve declarar: 1ºLa CONSTITUCIONALIDAD de los arts. 1, 2, 3 y 4 del proyecto de "Ley de Aplicación Normativa", por hallarse conforme al contenido de la Constitución Política del Estado. 2ºLa INCONSTITUCIONALIDAD del art. 5 del proyecto de "Ley de Aplicación Normativa".3ºLa CONSTITUCIONALIDAD condicionada del art. 6 del proyecto de "Ley de Aplicación Normativa", a los razonamientos expuestos en el Fundamento Jurídico III.11. Fdo. Dr. Ruddy José Flores Monterrey PRESIDENTEFdo. Dr. Zenón Hugo Bacarreza Morales MAGISTRADO Fdo. Dr. Efren Choque Capuma MAGISTRADO Page 16Resolución 0003/2013 -Tribunal Constitucional de Bolivia16-05-2013http://www.tribunalconstitucional.gob.bo/modules/ver_resolucion/indexne…...
Annex 369
3015
the Constitution, it must be clarified that it is not optional for the Executive Branch to denounce or, alternatively, challenge them before International Tribunals. In this regard, Article 108 of the PCE establishes as a fundamental duty to “know, comply with and enforce the Constitution and laws”, therefore it is possible to denounce or challenge those international Treaties that are contrary to the interests of the State.
However, it is important to clarify that, due to their legal status and their special character recognized by the constitutional drafters, the denunciation or challenge of international Treaties on Human Rights that are part of the Constitution, must comply with the requirements and provisions set out in the Constitution. It involves not only denouncing them under Article 260 of the Constitution, but also determining with precision the object and scope of the denunciation, in order to protect Human Rights and in consideration that one of the main purposes of the Plurinational State is to protect and fully enforce them.
In light of the aforementioned, it must be established that the provisions of Article 6 of the draft bill are consistent with the body of constitutional law, provided the interpretation set out in this decision is followed.
THEREFORE
The Plurinational Constitutional Tribunal, in plenary; by virtue of the authority vested in it by the Political Constitution of the Plurinational State of Bolivia and Article 12.8 of the law of the Plurinational Constitutional Tribunal; declares:
[...]
3rd The conditioned CONSTITUTIONALITY of Article 6 of the draft “Law on Normative Application”, as per the reasoning set out in Legal Ground III.11.
3016
Annex 369
Fdo. Dra. Mirtha Camacho Quiroga MAGISTRADA Fdo. Dr. Macario Lahor Cortez Chávez MAGISTRADOFdo. Dra. Neldy Virginia Andrade Martínez MAGISTRADA Fdo. Dra. Ligia Mónica Velásquez Castaños MAGISTRADA Page 17Resolución 0003/2013 -Tribunal Constitucional de Bolivia16-05-2013http://www.tribunalconstitucional.gob.bo/modules/ver_resolucion/indexne…...
Annex 370
Terminal Puerto Antofagasta, List of Fees for the Period
2015-2016
(Original in Spanish, English translation)
<http://www.abcpuertos.cl/documentos/Tarifas/Tarifas-ATI-Periodo-2015-20…;
3017
3018
Annex 370
LISTADO DE TARIFAS ATI PERIODO 2015-2016Vigencia: Desde el 1° de Abril de 2015 al 31 de Marzo de 2016ITEMUnidad de cobro Nivel Tarifario I. TARIFAS DE SERVICIOS USO DE MUELLESERVICIOS DE TRANSFERENCIATAR 101 Transferencia de contenedores llenos 20 piesUsd/Teu90,80TAR 102 Transferencia de contenedores llenos 40 piesUsd/Teu76,43TAR 103 Transferencia de contenedores vacíos 20 piesUsd/Teu90,80TAR 104 Transferencia de contenedores vacíos 40 piesUsd/Teu76,43TAR 105 Transferencia de carga fraccionadaUsd/T.M.4,46TAR 106 Transferencia de automotoresUsd/T.M.12,45TAR 107 Transferencia cargas a granelUsd/T.M.6,79TAR 108 Transferencia Cargas a Granel BoliviaUsd/T.M.6,79TAR 896 Transferencia de Carga de ProyectoUsd/T.M o M328,42SERVICIOS DE USO DE MUELLES NAVE Y CARGATAR 111 Uso de Muelle a la Nave Sitio 4-5, 6 y 7Usd/Metro Eslora Hora2,15TAR 113 Uso de Muelle Naves Menores.Usd/Nave/Día29,04TAR 114 Uso de Muelle Naves de Guerra o CientíficasUsd/Metro Eslora Hora0,60TAR 115 Uso de Muelle a la Carga GeneralUsd/T.M.5,62TAR 116 Uso de Muelle a la Carga GranelUsd/T.M.5,62TAR 117 Uso de Muelle a la Carga CabotajeUsd/T.M.5,62TAR 118 Uso de Muelle a la Carga FIO BolivianaUsd/T.M.0,85II. TARIFAS DE SERVICIOS TERMINALESSERVICIOS ESPECIALESTAR 121 Reestibas vía nave de contenedores de 20 piesUsd/Teu99,93TAR 122 Reestibas vía nave de contenedores de 40’ pies Usd/Teu84,11TAR 123 Reestibas vía muelle de contenedores de 20 pies Usd/Teu199,86TAR 124 Reestibas vía muelle de contenedores de 40 pies Usd/Teu168,24TAR 125 Trabajador extra, por labores no incluidas en la transferencia (movilizador)Usd/Hombre/Turno124,93TAR 126 Carga de Proyecto Tandem Grúas GottwaldUsd / MovimientoA convenirTAR 127 Tiempo muerto, tiempo en espera y no provisión de trabajo en la naveUsd/Hora967,60TAR 130 Reestibas vía nave de carga fraccionadaUsd/T.M.9,38TAR 131 Reestibas vía muelle de carga fraccionadaUsd/T.M.18,77TAR 132 Reestibas vía nave automotoresUsd/T.M.13,23TAR 133 Reestibas vía muelle automotoresUsd/T.M.26,46TAR 134 Reestibas vía nave de carga proyectoUsd/T.M.25,77TAR 135 Reestibas vía muelle de carga proyectoUsd/T.M.51,54SERVICIO A CONTENEDORES REFRIGERADOSTAR 201 Conexión, desconexión y monitoreo a contenedores refrigeradosUsd/Box123,72TAR 203 Monitoreo contenedores refrigeradosUsd/Box/Turno147,72TAR 204 Suministro de Energía EléctricaDemandaMáxima+Consumo USD/KWH + 30%A convenir
Annex 370
3019
LIST OF ATI FEES FOR 2015-2016
Port of Antofagasta
Effective from 1 April 2015, to 31 March 2016
ITEM
Collection unit
Rate Level
I. RATES FOR DOCKING SERVICES
TRANSFER RATES
TAR 101 Transfer of loaded 20-feet containers
USD/TEU
90.80
TAR 102 Transfer of loaded 40-feet containers
USD/TEU
76.43
TAR 103 Transfer of empty 20-feet containers
USD/TEU
90.80
TAR 104 Transfer of empty 40-feet containers
USD/TEU
76.43
TAR 105 Transfer of break-bulk cargo
USD/MT
4.46
TAR 106 Transfer of motor vehicles
USD/MT
12.45
TAR 107 Transfer of bulk cargo
USD/MT
6.79
TAR 108 Transfer of Bolivian bulk cargo
USD/MT
6.79
TAR 896 Transfer of project cargo
USD/MT or M3
28.42
VESSEL AND CARGO DOCKING SERVICES
TAR 111 Vessel docking at Sites 4-5 and 6-7
USD/Meter-length-hour
2.15
TAR 113 Minor vessels docking
USD/Vessel/Day
29.04
TAR 114 Battleships and research vessels docking
USD/Meter-length-hour
0.60
TAR 115 General cargo docking
USD/MT
5.62
TAR 116 Bulk cargo docking
USD/MT
5.62
TAR 117 Domestic cargo docking
USD/MT
5.62
TAR 118 Bolivian FIO cargo docking
USD/MT
0.85
II. RATES FOR TERMINAL SERVICES
SPECIAL SERVICES
TAR 121 Re-stowage through 20-feet container vessel
USD/TEU
99.93
TAR 122 Re-stowage through 40-feet container vessel
USD/TEU
84.11
TAR 123 Re-stowage through 20-feet container dock
USD/TEU
199.86
TAR 124 Re-stowage through 40-feet container dock
USD/TEU
168.24
TAR 125 Extra worker for tasks not included in the transfer (lumper)
USD/Man/Shift
124.93
TAR 126 Project cargo in tandem with Gottwald cranes
USD/Movement
To be arranged
TAR 127 Downtime, stand-by time and idle time on vessel
USD/Hour
967.60
TAR 130 Re-stowage through break-bulk cargo vessel
USD/MT
9.38
TAR 131 Re-stowage through break-bulk cargo dock
USD/MT
18.77
TAR 132 Re-stowage through motor vehicle vessel
USD/MT
13.23
TAR 133 Re-stowage through motor vehicle dock
USD/MT
26.46
TAR 134 Re-stowage through project cargo vessel
USD/MT
25.77
TAR 135 Re-stowage through project cargo dock
USD/MT
51.54
SERVICES FOR REEFER CONTAINERS
TAR 201 Connection, disconnection and monitoring of reefer containers
USD/Box
123.72
TAR 203 Monitoring of reefer containers
USD/Box/Shift
147.72
TAR 204 Electric power supply
Maximum demand + Consumption USD/kWh + 30%
To be arranged
3020
Annex 370
RECEPCIÓN DE CARGAS FUERA DE PLAZOTAR 211 Recepción de contenedores fuera del horario establecidoUsd/Box75,13TAR 212 Carga fraccionada fuera del horario establecidoUsd/T.M.23,85SERVICIOS DE CONSOLIDACIÓN Y DESCONSOLIDACIÓNTAR 221 Consolidación o desconsolidación de contenedores 20’Usd/Teu371,38TAR 222 Consolidación o desconsolidación de contenedores 40’ Usd/Box401,62TAR 223 Consolidación o desconsolidación de contenedores especiales (OT/FR)Usd/Box690,00TAR 224 Consolidación de contenedores con concentrado a granelUsd/Box764,57SERVICIOS ESPECIALESTAR 241 Aforo simpleUsd/Box42,21TAR 244 Remanejo o selección de contenedores en TerminalUsd/Movimiento42,12TAR 246 Aforo o reconocimiento de carga fraccionadaUsd/T.M.34,84TAR 247 Aforo o reconocimiento de carga en contenedoresUsd/Teu650,00TAR 248 Inspección SAG de carga en contenedoresUsd/Box650,00TAR 249 Servicio de fumigación exterior contenedorUsd/Teu650,00TAR 250 Habilitación de terminalUsd/Habilitación650,00TAR 251 Traslado de contenedores entre 2 puntos del terminalUsd/Box160,52TAR 252 Sellado o resellado de contenedoresUsd/Box37,55TAR 258 Confección mamparo granelesUsd/Mamparo3.900TAR 259 Confección mamparo cobreUsd/Mamparo1.900III. TARIFAS DE SERVICIOS DE ALMACENAMIENTO, ACOPIO Y DEPÓSITO COMERCIALTAR 331 Almacenaje de Contenedores Llenos, Vacíos o General Descubierta 01 a 02Usd/T.M./Día7,50TAR 332 Almacenaje de Contenedores Llenos, Vacíos o General Descubierta 03 a 10Usd/T.M./Día8,31TAR 333 Almacenaje de Contenedores Llenos, Vacíos o General Descubierta 11 a 20Usd/T.M./Día9,13TAR 334 Almacenaje de Contenedores Llenos, Vacíos o General Descubierta 21 a 30Usd/T.M./Día10,75TAR 335 Almacenaje de Contenedores Llenos, Vacíos o General Descubierta 31 en AdelanteUsd/T.M./Día14,00TAR 341 Almacenaje de contenedores con carga extra dimensionada desde el día 1 al 30Usd/T.M./Día14,00TAR 342 Almacenaje de contenedores con carga extra dimensionada desde el día 31 en adelanteUsd/T.M./Día40,00IV. TARIFAS DE SERVICIOS COMPLEMENTARIOS AL ALMACENAJETAR 401 Carguío y descarguío de carga general fraccionadaUsd/T.M.5,70TAR 402 Carguío y descarguío de contenedores llenos o vacíosUsd/Box53,32TAR 421 Copia de documentos de recepción de cargaUsd/Unidad22,29TAR 424 Pesaje Unitario de bultos (carga suelta)Usd/T.M.15,28TAR 425 RomaneoUsd/T.M.2,50TAR 426 Emisión de documentos de recepción de cargaUsd/DRES24,52TAR 427 Recargo por no presentación de documentos de carga peligrosaUsd/Documento900,00TAR 428 Reconfección de facturasUsd/Factura35,00TAR 429 Recepción y despacho de contenedores con carga extradimensionadaUsd/Box89,69
Annex 370
3021
AFTER-HOURS RECEIPT OF CARGO
TAR 211 After-hours receipt of containers
USD/Box
75.13
TAR 212 After-hours break-bulk cargo
USD/MT
23.85
CONSOLIDATION AND DECONSOLIDATION SERVICES
TAR 221 Consolidation or deconsolidation of 20-feet containers
USD/TEU
371.38
TAR 222 Consolidation or deconsolidation of 40-feet containers
USD/Box
401.62
TAR 223 Consolidation or deconsolidation of special containers (OT/FR)
USD/Box
690.00
TAR 224 Consolidation or deconsolidation of bulk concentrate containers
USD/Box
764.57
SPECIAL SERVICES
TAR 241 Simple assessment
USD/Box
42.21
TAR 244 Container re-handling or selection at the Terminal
USD/Movement
42.12
TAR 246 Assessment or acknowledgement of break-bulk cargo
USD/MT
34.84
TAR 247 Assessment or acknowledgement of container cargo
USD/TEU
650.00
TAR 248 SAG inspection of container cargo
USD/Box
650.00
TAR 249 External fumigation services for containers
USD/TEU
650.00
TAR 250 Terminal authorization
USD/Authorization
650.00
TAR 251 Transportation of containers between 2 points within the terminal
USD/Box
160.52
TAR 252 Container sealing or re-sealing
USD/Box
37.55
TAR 258 Manufacture of bulk bulkhead
USD/Bulkhead
3.900
TAR 259 Manufacture of copper bulkhead
USD/Bulkhead
1.900
III. RATES FOR COMMERCIAL DEPOSIT, STOCKPILING AND STORAGE SERVICES
TAR 331 Uncovered storage of loaded, empty or general containers 01 to 02
USD/MT/Day
7.50
TAR 332 Uncovered storage of loaded, empty or general containers 03 to 10
USD/MT/Day
8.31
TAR 333 Uncovered storage of loaded, empty or general containers 11 to 20
USD/MT/Day
9.13
TAR 334 Uncovered storage of loaded, empty or general containers 21 to 30
USD/MT/Day
10.75
TAR 335 Uncovered storage of loaded, empty or general containers 31 onwards
USD/MT/Day
14.00
TAR 341 Storage of over-dimensional cargo containers from day 1 to 30
USD/MT/Day
14.00
TAR 342 Storage of over-dimensional cargo containers from day 31 onwards
USD/MT/Day
40.00
IV. RATES FOR SERVICES SUPPLEMENTAL TO STORAGE
TAR 401 Loading and unloading of general break-bulk cargo
USD/MT
5.70
TAR 402 Loading and unloading of loaded or empty containers
USD/Box
53.32
TAR 421 Copy of cargo receipt documents
USD/Unit
22.29
TAR 424 Unit weigh-in of bulks (loose cargo)
USD/MT
15.28
TAR 425 Weigh-in
USD/MT
2.50
TAR 426 Issuance of cargo receipt documents
USD/DRES
24.52
TAR 427 Surcharge for failure to submit hazardous cargo documents
USD/Document
900.00
TAR 428 Re-invoicing
USD/Invoice
35.00
TAR 429 Receipt and dispatch of over-dimensional cargo containers
USD/Box
89.69
3022
Annex 370
V. OTROS SERVICIOSTAR 501 Reamarra de navesUsd/Faena515,42TAR 503 Suministro de aguaConsumo Usd/M3 + 35%A convenirTAR 504 Permanencia de vehículos de cargaUsd/Hora/Vehículo25,57TAR 506 Permiso provisorio de ingreso de vehículos / personasUsd/Unidad11,61TAR 508 Servicio de terminal intermodalUsd/Box75,13TAR 511 Permiso permanente de vehículosUsd/Vehículo17,67TAR 522 Retiro de basura InorgánicaUsd/m3250,00TAR 523 Uso de vías férreasUsd/Carro4,34TAR 780 Uso de grúa móvil de puerto para carga general (Gottwald)Usd/Hora1.149,64TAR 781 Uso de grúa móvil de puerto para carga general (Stacker, mínimo 3 horas)Usd/Hora230,18TAR 782 Habilitación InterzonaUsd / Evento64,45TAR 783 Emisión de tarjetas (pases) permanente para personasUsd / Unidad9,87TAR 787 Arriendo de utilería para descarga de granelesUsd/ Turno2.500,00TAR 789 Jaula para movilizar personalUsd/ Turno700,00TAR 790 Estrobos para carga livianaUsd/ Turno700,00TAR 791 Maniobra completa para bultos pesadosUsd/ Turno2.200,00TAR 792 Plataforma para Desconsolidado / ConsolidadoUsd/ Turno700,00TAR 793 Uso de portalónUsd / nave1.000,00TAR 798 Escala real cortaUsd/ Turno500,00TAR 799 Estructura para Desencarpado / EncarpadoUsd/ Turno2.000,00TAR 800 Material de Trinca adicionalUsd/TEUA convenirVI. SERVICIOS AL COBRE METÁLICO Y CONCENTRADOS MINERALESTAR 321 Acopio de Cobreusd /m2/día0,05TAR 601 Recepción de cobre en zona de almacenajeUsd/T.M.1,34TAR 602 Carguío de cobre en zona de almacenaje y porteo al ganchoUsd/T.M.0,92TAR 603 Estiba / desestiba de cobreUsd/T.M.4,00TAR 604 Porteo y recepción de cobre en zona de almacenajeUsd/T.M.0,92TAR 605 Carguío de cobre desde zona de almacenaje para despachoUsd/T.M.2,66TAR 606 Uso de TEGM desde día 1 al 2, terminadas las 72 horas liberadas.Usd/día6.066,50TAR 607 Uso de TEGM desde día 3 al 9Usd/Día11.133,00TAR 608 Uso de TEGM desde día 10 al 20Usd/Día21.266,00TAR 609 Uso de TEGM desde día 21 al 30Usd/Día51.665,00TAR 610 Uso de TEGM desde día 31 en adelanteUsd/Día56.732,00TAR 870 Derrames al Interior del TerminalUsd / Evento2.136,06Teu: Twenty equivalent unitT.M.: Tonelada Métrica. Carga proyecto: carga heavy lift >20 ton. O sobredimensionada: volumen > Teu.
Annex 370
3023
V. OTHER SERVICES
TAR 501 Re-docking of vessels
USD/Task
515.42
TAR 503 Water supply
Consumption USD/M3 + 35%
To be arranged
TAR 504 Parking of cargo vehicles
USD/Hour/Vehicle
25.57
TAR 506 Provisional permit for the admission of vehicles/persons
USD/Unit
11.61
TAR 508 Intermodal terminal service
USD/Box
75.13
TAR 511 Permanent vehicle permit
USD/Vehicle
17.67
TAR 522 Collection of inorganic waste
USD/M3
250.00
TAR 523 Use of railways
USD/Cart
4.34
TAR 780 Use of mobile harbor crane for general cargo (Gottwald)
USD/Hour
1,149.64
TAR 781 Use of mobile harbor crane for general cargo (Stacker, 3-hour minimum)
USD/Hour
230.18
TAR 782 Interzonal authorization
USD/Event
64.45
TAR 783 Issuance of permanent permits (passes) for persons
USD/Unit
9.87
TAR 787 Lease of supplies for unloading bulk cargo
USD/Shift
2,500.00
TAR 789 Man cage
USD/Shift
700.00
TAR 790 Cable slings for light cargo
USD/Shift
700.00
TAR 791 Complete handling of heavy bulks
USD/Shift
2,200.00
TAR 792 Deconsolidation/Consolidation platform
USD/Shift
700.00
TAR 793 Use of gangway
USD/Vessel
1,000.00
TAR 798 Short accommodation ladder
USD/Shift
500.00
TAR 799 Detarping/Tarping structure
USD/Shift
2,000.00
TAR 800 Additional lashing material
USD/TEU
To be arranged
VI. SERVICES FOR METALLIC COPPER AND MINERAL CONCENTRATES
TAR 321 Stockpiling of copper
USD/M2/Day
0.05
TAR 601 Receipt of copper in storage area
USD/MT
1.34
TAR 602 Loading of copper from storage area and carriage to hook
USD/MT
0.92
TAR 603 Stowage/Unstowage of copper
USD/MT
4.00
TAR 604 Carriage and receipt of copper in storage area
USD/MT
0.92
TAR 605 Loading of copper from storage area for dispatch
USD/MT
2.66
TAR 606 Use of Shipping Terminal for Mineral Bulks (TEGM) from day 1 to 2, upon expiration of the free 72 hours
USD/Day
6,066.50
TAR 607 Use of TEGM from day 3 to 9
USD/Day
11,133.00
TAR 608 Use of TEGM from day 10 to 20
USD/Day
21,266.00
TAR 609 Use of TEGM from day 21 to 30
USD/Day
51,665.00
TAR 610 Use of TEGM from day 31 onwards
USD/Day
56,732.00
TAR 870 Spillage inside the Terminal
USD/Event
2,136.06
TEU: Twenty-foot equivalent unit
MT: Metric Ton
Project cargo: Heavy lift cargo > 20 ton. Or over-dimensional: Volume > TEU
3024
Annex 371
Letter from the Chilean Consulate General in Bolivia to the Bolivian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, No 15/13,
14 January 2015 attached to a Note from the Chilean Consulate General in Bolivia to the Chilean National Directorate of Frontiers and Limits of the State, No 33, 14 January 2015
(Original in Spanish, English translation)
Archives of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Chile
3025
3026
Annex 371
Annex 371
3027
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Government of Chile
No. : 33
DATE : 14 JANUARY 2015
FROM : CONSULATE GENERAL OF CHILE IN LA PAZ
TO : NATIONAL DIRECTORATE OF FRONTIERS AND LIMITS OF THE STATE
INFO : MINGAB, SUBSEC, DIJUR, AGENTE CIJ, DIRAMESUR, E. PAÍSES BAJOS.
SUBJECT : Verbal Official Communication on the enabling of Port Iquique and the free transit regime
PRIORITY : P1 MINUTES: POLITICAL
CLASSIFICATION: CONFIDENTIAL
Brief Res. No. 5 of 13 January 2015
COMINF [Inter-ministerial Committee on Infrastructure]
+++ INCLUDES ANNEX +++
As instructed in the message referred to, please find enclosed a copy of Verbal Official Communication No. 15/13 of this Mission, delivered today, regarding the enabling of the Port of Iquique under the free transit regime, pursuant to the Treaty of Peace and Amity of 1904.
[Signed]]
CARVAJAL
BCN
++++ [Seal:] Consulate General of Chile. La Paz.
3028
Annex 371
Annex 371
3029
GOVERNMENT OF CHILE
MINISTRY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS
Consulate General of Chile
La Paz – Bolivia
[Seal:] Plurinational State of Bolivia. RECEIVED. 14 January 2015. Ministry of Foreign Affairs. OROC. La Paz – Bolivia.
No. 15/13
The Consulate General of Chile in La Paz gives its best regards to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Plurinational State of Bolivia - General Office of Consular Affairs and is pleased to refer to its Diplomatic Note VRE-DGRB-ULC-Cs-815/2014 of 29 December 2014, regarding the enabling of the Port of Iquique under the free transit regime, pursuant to the Treaty of Peace and Amity of 1904.
In this respect, it must be noted that the Government of Chile enabled the Port of Iquique for free transit to benefit Bolivia by means of Supreme Decree No. 141 of 13 May 2008, in compliance with the Treaty of Peace and Amity of 1904. Moreover, said decree establishes an out-of-port site as an enabled area to store Bolivian cargo under that regime, the costs of which are borne by the Chilean Treasury.
In this context, the Government of Chile is willing to discuss with Bolivia the entry into force of the free transit regime in the Port of Iquique, considering the conditions and regulations of the conditions of that port and the port regulations applicable thereto, and pursuant to the agreement reached by Chile and Bolivia at the XX Bilateral Political Consultations Mechanism Meeting held in La Paz on 30 June 2009, when both countries stipulated the terms of the Exchange of Notes for the Port of Iquique to start operating under this regime.
For this purpose, the Government of Chile invites the Government of the Plurinational State of Bolivia to resume the efforts made together at the XXII Bilateral Political Consultations Mechanism Meeting held in La Paz between 12 and 14 July 2010. The minutes of that meeting express the interest of both nations to sign the Exchange of Notes based on the text agreed upon during the XX Bilateral Political Consultations Mechanism Meeting. In this vein, the Working Group on Free Transit is tasked with establishing a formula for implementing free storage for containers in transit with Bolivian cargo under the mobile meterage modality within a zone of 300 m2 in addition to the already agreed upon 1,000 m2 in the port area, a space that supplements the out-of-port area of Alto Hospicio.
3030
Annex 371
Annex 371
3031
At that meeting, the creation of a high-level technical commission was also agreed upon to verify the technical-operating aspects for the enabling of the Port of Iquique, which was promptly achieved. The commission visited the Iquique port facilities on 16 and 17 August 2010, and agreed to conduct a reassessment based on the customs proceedings guidelines recommended at the V Meeting of the Working Group on Free Transit held on 22 March 2005.
In order to commission the enabling of the Port of Iquique for the free transit regime pursuant to the Treaty of Peace and Amity of 1904, the Government of Chile suggests that the Working Group on Free Transit meet on a date to be agreed upon by the parties in order to perform the task entrusted at the XXII Bilateral Political Consultations Mechanism Meeting. Likewise, the Government of Chile suggests that the High-Level Bilateral Technical Commission conduct its assessment on customs proceedings on a date to be determined.
The Consulate General of Chile in La Paz would like to avail itself of this opportunity to reiterate to the General Office of Consular Affairs of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs the assurances of its highest consideration.
La Paz, 14 January 2015
[Signed]
[Seal:] CONSULATE GENERAL OF CHILE. LA PAZ.
TO THE HONORABLE
MINISTRY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS
GENERAL DIRECTORATE OF CONSULAR AFFAIRS
HAND DELIVERED
3032
Annex 372
Client Letter from Terminal Puerto Arica S.A., 19 January 2015 (extract)
(Original in Spanish, English translation)
<http://www.tpa.cl/v1/appl/upload/subidos/24052016_Tarifas.pdf>
3033
3034
Annex 372
__________________________________________________________________________________________ TERMINAL PUERTO ARICA S.A. AV. Máximo Lira N° 389 Arica - Chile Tel. (56-58) 2 202000 - Fax. (56-58) 2 202005 Arica, 19 de Enero del 2015. Estimado Cliente: Junto con saludar, informamos a usted que a contar del día Lunes 26 de Enero, siguientes serán los valores por tarifas para los servicios especiales que ofrece Terminal Puerto Arica, los cuales complementan a los servicios ajustados el 17 de Noviembre. Se despide atentamente a usted. Gerencia General Terminal Puerto Arica S.A. Tarifas publicadas en nuestro sitio www.tpa.cl el 19/01/2015
Annex 372
3035
TPA
Terminal Puerto Arica
Arica, 19 January 2015
Dear Client,
We hereby inform you that from Monday, 26 January the following rates will apply for the special services offered by Terminal Puerto Arica, which supplement the services adjusted on 17 November.
Sincerely,
General Manager’s Office
Terminal Puerto Arica S.A.
3036
Annex 372
__________________________________________________________________________________________ TERMINAL PUERTO ARICA S.A. AV. Máximo Lira N° 389 Arica - Chile Tel. (56-58) 2 202000 - Fax. (56-58) 2 202005 Listado de tarifas de servicios. Código Descripción de Faena Unidad de Cobro USD TSM-100 Tarifa servicios uso de muelle TSM-101 Uso de Muelle a la Nave Usd/Metro-loa-hora 3.32 TSM-102 Uso de Muelle a la carga Usd/Ton 2.02 TSM-103 Uso de Muelle para Embarcaciones Menores Usd/Metro-loa-hora 2.02 TSM-104 Uso de Muelle a la carga de cabotaje Usd/Ton 2.02 TSM-105 Uso de Muelle a la carga granel Usd/Ton 2.02 TSM-106 Uso de Muelle a la Carga FIO Boliviana Usd/Ton 0.85 TST-110 Tarifa servicios de transferencia de carga TST-111 Desembarque/Embarque de Contenedores llenos 20 pies Usd/Cont. 111.30 TST-112 Desembarque/Embarque de Contenedores llenos 40 pies Usd/Cont 166.95 TST-113 Desembarque/Embarque de Contenedores vacíos 20 pies Usd/Cont 111.30 TST-114 Desembarque/Embarque de Contenedores vacíos 40 pies Usd/Cont 166.95 TST-115 Desembarque/Embarque de Carga General Fraccionada Usd/Ton 11.63 TST-116 Desembarque/Embarque de Vehículos y Automotores Usd/Ton 11.63 TST-117 Desembarque/Embarque de Gráneles Limpios Usd/Ton 6.16 TST-118 Desembarque/Embarque de Gráneles Sucios Usd/Ton 6.16 TSE-120 Tarifa servicios especiales TSE-121 Reestibas vía nave de contenedores de 20 pies full/mty Usd/Cont 139.60 TSE-122 Reestibas vía nave de contenedores de 40 pies full/mty Usd/Cont 263.50 TSE-123 Reestibas vía muelle de contenedores de 20 pies full/mty Usd/Cont 269.60 TSE-124 Reestibas vía muelle de contenedores de 40 pies full/mty Usd/Cont 401.70 TSE-125 Trabajadores para servicios especiales Usd/Hom/Turno 147.00 TSE-126 Manejo de cargas extradimensionadas (Cargas de Proyecto o Pesadas) Usd/Ton o M3 47.60 TSE-127 Tiempo Muerto, tiempo en espera y no provisión de trabajo en la nave Usd/Hora/Cuadrilla 313.00 TSE-128 Fumigación cubiertas de las naves A convenir TSE-129 Ciclo completo o full cycle Usd/Cont. 357.30 TSE-130 Reestibas vía nave de carga general fraccionada Usd/Ton 16.60 TSE-131 Reestibas vía muelle de carga general fraccionada Usd/Ton 33.20 TSE-132 Reestibas vía nave de carga a granel Usd/Ton 19.20 TSE-133 Reestibas vía muelle de carga a granel Usd/Ton 22.80 TSE-134 Apertura /cierre pontones Usd/Movimiento 114.20 TSE-135 Stacking continuo para contenedores Usd/Teu-Día 12.70 TSE-136 Manipuleo de contenedores abiertos de 20 pies con cargas extradimensionadas Usd/Cont. 188.20 TSE-137 Manipuleo de contenedores abiertos de 40 pies con cargas extradimensionadas Usd/Cont. 275.90 TSE-138 Provisión de materiales de estiba adicionales Usd/Faena A convenir TSE-139 Uso de grúa Tierra Usd/Hora 1,998.00
Annex 372
3037
List of service fees
Code
Description of Work
Collection Unit
USD
TSM-100
Docking Services Rate
TSM-101
Vessel Docking
USD/Meter-length-hour
3.32
TSM-102
Cargo Docking
USD/Ton
2.02
TSM-103
Minor Vessels Docking
USD/Meter-length-hour
2.02
TSM-104
Domestic Cargo Docking
USD/Ton
2.02
TSM-105
Bulk Cargo Docking
USD/Ton
2.02
TSM-106
Bolivian FIO Cargo Docking
USD/Ton
0.85
3038
Annex 372
__________________________________________________________________________________________ TERMINAL PUERTO ARICA S.A. AV. Máximo Lira N° 389 Arica - Chile Tel. (56-58) 2 202000 - Fax. (56-58) 2 202005 Listado de tarifas de almacenaje para cargas de exportación e importación Nacional e internacional (Otros Países). Nota 1: En caso que la carga sea programada como retiro directo un turno antes del arribo de la nave y retirada dentro de las primeras 24 horas siguientes al momento en que se complete el desamarre de la nave, no estará afecta a pago de almacenaje. Nota 2: El embarque tiene 72 horas libres del pago de Almacenaje antes del amarre de la nave mas el tiempo de ocupación de la misma. Nota 3: Las cargas de exportación bolivianas tienen un tiempo libre del pago de almacenamiento de 60 días, Cumplido este plazo, las mercancías pagaran las tarifas generales de este servicio, contempladas en punto 2 del manual de servicios. Nota 4: Las cargas de importación bolivianas tienen un tiempo libre del pago de almacenamiento de 365 días, Cumplido este plazo, las mercancías pagaran las tarifas generales de este servicio, contempladas en punto 2 del manual de servicios. Nota 5: Las tarifas expresadas en esta tabla son cobradas por toneladas/día Nota 6: Las tarifas TSA-305 y 306 No se aplican a la cargas IMO Boliviana, para estas ver punto 3, Listado de tarifas de almacenamiento de carga peligrosa boliviana TSA-301 TSA-302 TSA-304 TSA-303 TSA-305 TSA-306 TSA-307 TSA-308 Días General Sitio Cubierto General Sitio Descubierto Granel Sitio Cubierto Granel Sitio Descubierto Peligrosa Sitio Cubierto Peligrosa Sitio Descubierto Vehículos Sitio Descubierto Cont FCL Sitio Descubierto 1 1.92 1.15 1.10 0.77 7.56 4.91 8.14 2.31 2 3.85 2.31 2.21 1.55 15.12 9.82 16.28 4.63 3 5.77 3.46 3.31 2.32 22.67 14.74 24.42 6.94 4 7.69 4.62 4.42 3.09 30.23 19.65 32.56 9.26 5 9.62 5.77 5.52 3.87 37.79 24.56 40.69 11.57 6 13.87 8.32 5.93 4.15 45.35 29.47 48.83 13.88 7 16.18 9.71 6.92 4.84 52.90 34.39 56.97 16.20 8 18.49 11.09 7.91 5.53 60.46 39.30 65.11 18.51 9 20.80 12.48 8.89 6.23 68.02 44.21 73.25 20.82 10 23.11 13.87 9.88 6.92 75.58 49.12 81.39 23.14 11 25.42 15.25 10.87 7.61 83.13 54.04 89.53 21.38 12 27.74 16.64 11.86 8.30 90.69 58.95 97.67 23.33 13 30.05 18.03 12.85 8.99 98.25 63.86 105.81 25.27 14 32.36 19.41 13.84 9.69 105.81 68.77 113.94 27.21 15 34.67 20.80 14.82 10.38 113.36 73.69 122.08 29.16
Annex 372
3039
List of storage fees for National and international export and import cargo (Other Countries).
Note 1: Where cargo has been scheduled for direct collection one shift before vessel arrival and collected within 24 hours from the time vessel undocking is complete, such cargo shall be exempted from paying storage rates.
Note 2: Shipments shall enjoy a 72-hour free-Storage period prior to vessel docking plus dock usage time.
Note 3: Bolivian export cargo shall enjoy a 60-day free-storage period. Upon expiration of that term, the goods are subject to the general rates for this service, as set out in Section 2 of the Services Manual.
Note 4: Bolivian import cargo shall enjoy a 365-day free-storage period. Upon expiration of that term, the goods are subject to the general rates for this service, as set out in Section 2 of the Services Manual.
Note 5: All rates herein shall be charged on a ton/day basis.
Note 6: TSA-305 and TSA-306 rates shall Not apply to Bolivian IMO cargo. For this cargo, see “3. List of storage fees for dangerous Bolivian cargo.”
TSA-301
TSA-302
TSA-304
TSA-303
TSA-305
TSA-306
TSA-307
TSA-308
Days
General Cargo, Covered Storage
General Cargo, Uncovered Storage
Bulk Cargo, Covered Storage
Bulk Cargo, Uncovered Storage
Hazardous Goods, Covered Storage
Hazardous Goods, Uncovered Storage
Vehicles, Uncovered Storage
FCL
Containers, Uncovered Storage
1
1.92
1.15
1.10
0.77
7.56
4.91
8.14
2.31
2
3.85
2.31
2.21
1.55
15.12
9.82
16.28
4.63
3
5.77
3.46
3.31
2.32
22.67
14.74
24.42
6.94
4
7.69
4.62
4.42
3.09
30.23
19.65
32.56
9.26
5
9.62
5.77
5.52
3.87
37.79
24.56
40.69
11.57
6
13.87
8.32
5.93
4.15
45.35
29.47
48.83
13.88
7
16.18
9.71
6.92
4.84
52.90
34.39
56.97
16.20
8
18.49
11.09
7.91
5.53
60.46
39.30
65.11
18.51
9
20.80
12.48
8.89
6.23
68.02
44.21
73.25
20.82
10
23.11
13.87
9.88
6.92
75.58
49.12
81.39
23.14
11
25.42
15.25
10.87
7.61
83.13
54.04
89.53
21.38
12
27.74
16.64
11.86
8.30
90.69
58.95
97.67
23.33
13
30.05
18.03
12.85
8.99
98.25
63.86
105.81
25.27
14
32.36
19.41
13.84
9.69
105.81
68.77
113.94
27.21
15
34.67
20.80
14.82
10.38
113.36
73.69
122.08
29.16
3040
Annex 372
__________________________________________________________________________________________ TERMINAL PUERTO ARICA S.A. AV. Máximo Lira N° 389 Arica - Chile Tel. (56-58) 2 202000 - Fax. (56-58) 2 202005 Tarifas de Almacenamiento de carga peligrosa Boliviana Constituyen cargas de retiro o embarque inmediato, aquellas consideradas como peligrosas (IMO), de depósito condicionado o prohibido, que por su naturaleza no pueden quedar depositadas en el Puerto y que en forma excepcional podrán almacenarse, en recintos especiales y condiciones especiales. La tarifa de almacenaje de las cargas de retiro o embarque inmediato es acumulativa, de manera que cuando concurran varios períodos, la suma de todos ellos será la cantidad que corresponderá pagar.
Annex 372
3041
Bolivian Hazardous Cargo Storage Rates
Immediate collection or immediate shipping cargo is cargo that is considered dangerous (IMO), or the storage of which is restricted or prohibited, and which due to its nature may not be kept in storage at the Port and may exceptionally be stored in special warehouses and under special conditions.
Immediate Shipping Import Cargo
From day 1 to 5
1.04
USD/TON
From day 6 to 10
2.10
USD/TON
From day 11 to 15
2.57
USD/TON
From day 16 to 20
3.27
USD/TON
From day 21 to 25
3.97
USD/TON
From day 26 to 30
5.60
USD/TON
For each 5-day period in excess between the 30th day and until the 60th day: 7.70 USD/TON
For each 5-day period in excess between the 60th day and until the 90th day: 10.96 USD/TON
For each 5-day period in excess after the 90th day: *19.59 USD/TON
Immediate Shipping Export Cargo
From day 1 to 5
0.68
USD/TON
From day 6 to 10
1.37
USD/TON
From day 11 to 15
1.67
USD/TON
From day 16 to 20
2.13
USD/TON
From day 21 to 25
2.58
USD/TON
From day 26 to 30
3.64
USD/TON
For each 5-day period in excess between the 30th day and until the 60th day: 5.01 USD/TON
For each 5-day period in excess between the 60th day and until the 90th day: 7.12 USD/TON
For each 5-day period in excess after the 90th day: *12.13 USD/TON
Storage fees for immediate collection or immediate shipping cargo are cumulative, such that if several periods apply, the sum of all of them shall be the amount payable.
3042
Annex 372
__________________________________________________________________________________________ TERMINAL PUERTO ARICA S.A. AV. Máximo Lira N° 389 Arica - Chile Tel. (56-58) 2 202000 - Fax. (56-58) 2 202005 **Las tarifas para el servicio de almacenamiento de cargas de retiro o embarque de inmediato, cuando las mercancías o cosas hayan sido depositadas en patios o explanadas descubiertas cancelaran el 50% de las tarifas arriba mencionadas. Tarifas publicadas en nuestro sitio www.tpa.cl el 19/01/2015
Annex 372
3043
** The fees for the storage service of cargo for loading or immediate shipment, when the merchandise or goods have been deposited in patios or uncovered esplanades, shall cancel out 50% of the fees mentioned above.
PERIOD
UNLOADING
(Import)
LOADING
(Export)
RATE
Covered Warehouse
RATE
Uncovered Warehouse
RATE
Covered Warehouse
RATE
Uncovered Warehouse
Day 1 to 5
1.04
0.52
0.68
0.34
Day 6 to 10
3.14
1.57
2.05
1.03
Day 11 to 15
5.71
2.86
3.72
1.86
Day 16 to 20
8.98
4.49
5.85
2.93
Day 21 to 25
12.95
6.48
8.43
4.22
Day 26 to 30
18.55
9.28
12.07
6.04
Day 31 to 35
26.25
13.13
17.08
8.54
Day 36 to 40
33.95
16.98
22.09
11.05
Day 41 to 45
41.65
20.83
27.10
13.55
Day 46 to 50
49.35
24.68
32.11
16.06
Day 51 to 55
57.05
28.53
37.12
18.56
Day 56 to 60
64.75
32.38
42.13
21.07
Day 61 to 65
75.71
37.86
49.25
24.63
Day 66 to 70
86.67
43.34
56.37
28.19
Day 71 to 75
97.63
48.82
63.49
31.75
Day 76 to 80
108.59
54.30
70.61
35.31
Day 81 to 85
119.55
59.78
77.73
38.87
Day 86 to 90
130.51
65.26
84.85
42.43
Day 91 to X (*)
19.59
9.80
12.73
6.37
3044
Annex 373
“Morales wanted to denounce the 1904 Treaty”, La Razón (Bolivia), 24 December 2015
(Original in Spanish, English translation)
La Razón (Bolivia)
3045
3046
Annex 373
Psicología a DistanciaExcelentes Programas 100% Online. Continúa tus estudios ¡Postula hoy!Ediciones anteriores |Servicios |Promociones |Club de lectores |Mapa del sitioSíguenos en:NACIONAL CIJ La Razón (Edición Impresa) / Mauricio Quiroz / La Paz02:57 / 24 de diciembre de 2015El presidente Evo Morales reveló ayer que en un primer momento quiso denunciar el Tratado de 1904, suscrito entre Bolivia y Chile, pues consideró que la normativa está basada en una injusticia. “El Tratado de 1904 fue impuesto, (es) injusto, además de ser incumplido (por parte deChile). ‘Todavía podemos demandar’, decía. Era un punto de vista personal. Ahí, los compañeros del equipo jurídico me explicaron que no era el camino y (de esta manera) retiré mi posición”, afirmó el gobernante, quien además contó que se registró un intenso debate antes de elegir el camino judicial que se tomó con la demanda que se planteó en 2013 ante la Corte Internacional de Justicia (CIJ), con sede en La Haya (Holanda).Explicó que halló en la reversión del tratado que Panamá y Estados Unidos firmaron en 1903, sobre la soberanía en el Canal de Panamá, las bases para sustentar un eventual proceso legal internacional contra elTratado de 1904, el pacto que establece los actuales límites fronterizos entre Bolivia y Chile. “Ese era el antecedente”, dijo.El Mandatario exteriorizó los detalles de la preparación del litigio planteado aChile durante una entrevista con radio Compañera, la emisora que le eligió como Personaje del Año, precisamente, por el logro nacional de llevar adelante esta acción legal enLa Haya.Proceso. Como producto del debate interno, Bolivia optó por demandar a Chile en la CIJ para que este tribunal declare que hay una obligación de imprimirreducirenviaraumentarcomentarcompartirCIJ, Morales, quiso, denunciar, Tratado 1904 6Me gustaMe gustaTwittear􀀔EtiquetasMorales quiso denunciar el Tratado de 1904Litigio. Chile debe presentar su contramemoria hasta julioLeídoComentado09:1809:0008:4708:2708:24Diciembre2015LUNMARMIEJUEVIESABDOM123456Lo másEl gobierno sirio dispuesto a participar en negociaciones de paz en GinebraVíctor Aguilar y Salomé Mendoza ganan última Carrera Pedestre 10K del año en el ChaparePekín en alerta por presuntas amenazas a extranjeros en Nochebuena Incendio en hospital deja al menos 25 muertos en Arabia Saudita Noveno detenido en Bélgica por su presunta relación con los ataques de París + ver todosEdiciones anterioresIngrese palabraBuscarNacionalPortadaOpinionEconomíaCiudadesSociedadMundoLa RevistaSocialesMarcasSuplementosMultimediaNacionalDemanda MarítimaLa Haya. La sede de la CIJ, en Holanda, donde se tramita la demanda. CIJ.ORG-Archivo. RecienteSé el primero de tus amigos en indicar que te gusta esto.La Razón Bolivia90 103 Me gustaMe páginaMe gusta esta páginaVer videoVer videoPágina 1 de 3Morales quiso denunciar el Tratado de 1904 -La Razón24-12-2015http://www.la-razon.com/nacional/CIJ-Morales-quiso-denunciar-Tratado_19…...
Annex 373
3047
Morales wanted to denounce the 1904 Treaty
Litigation. Chile has until July to file its counter-memorial.
La Razón (Print Edition) / Mauricio Quiroz / La Paz
02:57 a.m. / 24 December 2015
President Evo Morales revealed yesterday that he initially wanted to denounce the 1904 Treaty between Bolivia and Chile, as he found the settlement to be based on an injustice. “The 1904 Treaty was imposed on us, (it is) unfair; in addition, it is being violated (by Chile). ‘We can still sue’, he said.
“This was my personal opinion. Then, my people from the legal team explained to me that this was not the way and I (in this way) withdrew my position,” stated the President, who also said that an intense debate took place prior to choosing the judicial process that started with the application filed in 2013 with the International Court of Justice (ICJ), with its seat in The Hague (Holland).
He explained that the denunciation of the treaty signed by Panama and the United States in 1903 on sovereignty over the Panama Canal provided him with the basis for a potential international legal proceeding against the 1904 Treaty, which is the pact that establishes the current boundary between Bolivia and Chile. “That was our precedent,” he said.
The President recounted the details of the preparations for the lawsuit filed against Chile during an interview by radio Compañera, the radio station that chose him as Person of the Year, precisely because of the national achievement of taking legal action at the Hague.
Proceedings. As a result of the internal debate, Bolivia elected to sue Chile before the ICJ, seeking to have this tribunal declare that there is an obligation to
3048
Annex 373
comentariosNombre y apellidoCorreo electrónico􀀀􀀀Comentario1.000 caracteres disponiblesLa 􀀀inalidad de este servicio es sumar valor a las noticias y establecer un contacto m􀀀s 􀀀luido con nuestros lectores. Los comentarios deben acotarse al tema de discusión. Se apreciar􀀀 la brevedad y claridad de los textos, y el buen uso del lenguaje: las malas palabras y los insultos no ser􀀀n publicados.Acepto los términos y condicionesIntroduzca el código captcha que aparece en la imagenEnviarnegociar “de buena fe” una salida al mar, pero sobre la base de propuestas presentadas por el país demandado a lo largo de la historia bilateral. Por eso es que la demanda no cuestionó el Tratado de 1904 que nació como consecuencia de laGuerra delPacífico (1879-1883) que estalló con la invasión del Ejército chileno al antiguo puerto boliviano de Antofagasta.Tras la conflagración, Bolivia perdió 120.000 kilómetros cuadrados de territorio y 400 kilómetros de costa.Tras ser demandado, Chile objetó la competencia del tribunal, el más importante de la Organización de las Naciones Unidas (ONU), pero el 24 de septiembre la CIJ se declaró competente en el caso y pidió que el proceso continúe con la fase de alegatos escritos: Chile debe presentar su contramemoria hasta julio de 2016.El Canciller hablará con asesores de la estrategiaLuis MeallaEl canciller David Choquehuanca anunció que se reunirá con el equipo jurídico que defendió la demanda marítima ante laCorte Internacional deJusticia (CIJ) para hablar sobre la estrategia que se desarrollará en la segunda fase del litigio que se planteó contra Chile.“Para hablar de estos temas estratégicos los hemos convocado (...). Cuando estamos hablando de estrategias, estrategias son estrategias, para eso nos vamos a reunir”, afirmó ayer el jefe de la diplomacia. Se prevé que en la reunión el equipo, compuesto por cuatro abogados extranjeros, será ratificado por el Gobierno. Se espera que el encuentro sea en febrero, pero aún no hay fecha. Escri􀀀e tu comentario78910111213141516171819202122232425262728293031Suplementos MARCASM􀀀AANIMAL POL􀀀TICOEL 􀀀INANCIEROTENDENCIASESCAPEPágina 2 de 3Morales quiso denunciar el Tratado de 1904 -La Razón24-12-2015http://www.la-razon.com/nacional/CIJ-Morales-quiso-denunciar-Tratado_19…􀀀ctenos |􀀀Quiénes somos􀀀 |Publicidad |Términos y condiciones |Mapa del sitio |RSS􀀀 LA RA􀀀ON 􀀀 201􀀀Colinas de Santa Rita, Alto Auquisamaña 􀀀􀀀ona Sur􀀀 - La Paz, BoliviaPágina 3 de 3Morales quiso denunciar el Tratado de 1904 -La Razón24-
Annex 373
3049
negotiate in “good faith” over an outlet to the sea, but based on proposals submitted by the respondent State throughout their bilateral history.
It is for this reason that the application did not challenge the 1904 Treaty, which came about as a result of the War of the Pacific (1879-1883) that broke out due to the Chilean Army’s invasion of the old Bolivian port of Antofagasta. Following the conflict, Bolivia lost 120,000 km2 of its territory, and 400 km of coastline.
Once the application was filed, Chile objected to the jurisdiction of the tribunal, which is the most important tribunal of the United Nations (UN); however, on 24 September, the ICJ declared that it had jurisdiction to hear the case and allowed the case to proceed to the written phase: Chile is to submit its counter-memorial by July 2016.
The Foreign Minister will talk strategy with his advisors
Luis Mealla
Foreign Minister David Choquehuanca announced that he will be meeting with the legal team that is in charge of defending the maritime complaint before the International Court of Justice (ICJ) to discuss the strategy to be followed during the second stage of the lawsuit against Chile.
“To discuss these strategic issues, we have called them (…). When we are talking strategy, strategies are strategies, this is what we are meeting for,” said the head of diplomacy yesterday. The team, consisting of four foreign lawyers, is supposed to be confirmed by the Government during the meeting. The meeting is expected to be held in February, but no date has yet been set.
3050

Document file FR

153-20160713-WRI-01-05-FR.pdf

Document Long Title

Volume 6