Costa Rica requests the Court to indicate new provisional measures in the case concerning Certain Activities Carried Out by Nicaragua in the Border Area (Costa Rica v. Nicaragua)

INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE
Peace Palace, Carnegieplein 2, 2517 KJ The Hague, Netherlands
Tel.: +31 (0)70 302 2323 Fax: +31 (0)70 364 9928
Website: www.icj-cij.org

Press Release
Unofficial

No. 2013/23
25 September 2013

Costa Rica requests the Court to indicate new provisional measures in the case concerning
Certain Activities carried out by Nicaragua in the Border Area
(Costa Rica v. Nicaragua)

THE HAGUE, 25 September 2013. On 24 September 2013, the Republic of Costa Rica filed
in the Registry of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) a document entitled “Request for the
Indication of New Provisional Measures” in the case concerning Certain Activities carried out by

Nicaragua in the Border Area (Costa Rica v. Nicaragua) (hereinafter the “Costa Rica v. Nicaragua
case”).

Costa Rica claims that its request is prompted by (i) Nicaragua’s continued presence on
Costa Rica’s territory; (ii) the recent and ongoing construction by Nicaragua of two new artificial
channels (or caños) in the “disputed territory” which is the subject of the Court’s Order of
8 March 2011 on provisional measures; and (iii) related dredging and dumping activities by
Nicaragua affecting that territory and detrimentally impacting upon its ecology.

Costa Rica contends that the construction of these “new channels”, which it states are located

on the right bank of the San Juan River and close to the mouth of that river, commenced between
June and September 2013; that it “first became aware of potential activity in the disputed territory
at the end of August [2013]”; and that it obtained satellite images on 13 September 2013
confirming the construction of these two new artificial caños.

Costa Rica recalls that, in the Order of 8 March 2011, the Court: requests the Parties to
refrain from sending to, or maintaining in the disputed territory, including the caño, any personnel,
whether civilian, police or security; authorizes Costa Rica, in certain specific circumstances, to
dispatch civilian personnel there charged with the protection of the environment; and calls on the

Parties not to aggravate or extend the dispute before the Court or make it more difficult to resolve.

Costa Rica also recalls that both Parties had previously requested the Court to modify its
Order of 8 March 2011, and that the Court declined those requests by an Order of 16 July 2013.

In its present request, Costa Rica explains that it does not seek the modification of the Order
of 8 March 2011, but rather that its request “is an independent [one] based on new facts”. It
contends that, since the Order of 16 July 2013, it has “found out about new and grave activities by
Nicaragua in the disputed territory”.

Costa Rica adds that it “immediately protested to Nicaragua” but that “Nicaragua refused to

immediately cease its construction activities”, even “going so far as to deny the existence of the
new artificial caños in the face of incon[tro]vertible evidence in satellite images”. - 2 -

In its request, Costa Rica further contends that “through its construction and ongoing
dredging of the caños, Nicaragua is attempting unilaterally to modify, to its own benefit, the

location and configuration of [the San Juan] River, the right bank of which constitutes a valid,
agreed and settled international boundary”.

Costa Rica explains that it seeks to protect “its rights to sovereignty, to territorial integrity
and to non-interference with its lands and environmentally protected areas”. It also asserts that
“[t]here is a real risk that Nicaragua’s continued activities in the disputed territory will cause
further irreparable prejudice to Costa Rica’s rights which are the subject of the present case”, and

that “the urgency of this Request is demonstrated by the continued damage inflicted by Nicaragua
on Costa Rican territory which is the subject of the present dispute”.

Costa Rica states in its request that “[i]f the Court does not take, with urgency, the requested
provisional measures, Costa Rica, which is unable to exercise its territorial sovereignty over the
disputed territory (a protected wetland) pending the resolution of this dispute, will only be able to
receive in the final judgment an area geographically altered and seriously damaged”.

For these reasons, Costa Rica

“respectfully requests the Court as a matter of urgency to order the following
provisional measures so as to prevent further breaches of [its] territorial integrity and
further irreparable harm to the territory in question, pending the determination of this
case on the merits:

(1) the immediate and unconditional suspension of any work by way of dredging or

otherwise in the disputed territory, and specifically the cessation of work of any
kind on the two further artificial caños . . .;

(2) that Nicaragua immediately withdraw any personnel, infrastructure (including
lodging tents) and equipment (including dredgers) introduced by it, or by any
persons under its jurisdiction or coming from its territory, from the disputed
territory;

(3) that Costa Rica be permitted to undertake remediation works in the disputed
territory on the two new artificial caños and the surrounding areas, to the extent
necessary to prevent irreparable prejudice being caused to the disputed territory;
and

(4) that each Party shall immediately inform the Court as to its compliance with the
above provisional measures not later than one week of the issuance of the Order”.

Costa Rica adds that it “reserves its right to amend this Request and the measures sought in
light of further information which may be received as to Nicaragua’s unilateral plans and actions”.

*

History of the proceedings

It is recalled that the proceedings in the Costa Rica v. Nicaragua case and in the case
concerning the Construction of a Road in Costa Rica along the San Juan River (Nicaragua v.
Costa Rica) were joined by the Court on 17 April 2013 “in conformity with the principle of the
sound administration of justice and with the need for judicial economy”. - 3 -

The history of those proceedings can be found in paragraphs 1 to 11 of the Order of
16 July 2013.

*

Full text of the request

The full text of Costa Rica’s request will be available shortly on the Court’s website under

the heading “Contentious cases”, in the documentation for the Costa Rica v. Nicaragua case.

*

The International Court of Justice (ICJ) is the principal judicial organ of the United Nations.
It was established by the United Nations Charter in June 1945 and began its activities in

April 1946. The seat of the Court is at the Peace Palace in The Hague (Netherlands). Of the six
principal organs of the United Nations, it is the only one not located in New York. The Court has a
twofold role: first, to settle, in accordance with international law, legal disputes submitted to it by
States (its judgments have binding force and are without appeal for the parties concerned); and,
second, to give advisory opinions on legal questions referred to it by duly authorized United
Nations organs and agencies of the system. The Court is composed of 15 judges elected for a
nine-year term by the General Assembly and the Security Council of the United Nations.
Independent of the United Nations Secretariat, it is assisted by a Registry, its own international

secretariat, whose activities are both judicial and diplomatic, as well as administrative. The official
languages of the Court are French and English. Also known as the “World Court”, it is the only
court of a universal character with general jurisdiction.

The ICJ, a court open only to States for contentious proceedings, and to certain organs and
institutions of the United Nations system for advisory proceedings, should not be confused with the

other mostly criminal judicial institutions based in The Hague and adjacent areas, such as the
International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY, an ad hoc court created by the
Security Council), the International Criminal Court (ICC, the first permanent international criminal
court, established by treaty, which does not belong to the United Nations system), the Special
Tribunal for Lebanon (STL, an independent judicial body composed of Lebanese and international
judges, which is not a United Nations tribunal and does not form part of the Lebanese judicial
system), or the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA, an independent institution which assists in
the establishment of arbitral tribunals and facilitates their work, in accordance with the Hague

Convention of 1899).

___________

Information Department:

Mr. Andrey Poskakukhin, First Secretary of the Court, Head of Department (+31 (0)70 302 2336)
Mr. Boris Heim, Information Officer (+31 (0)70 302 2337)
Ms Joanne Moore, Associate Information Officer (+31 (0)70 302 2394)
Ms Genoveva Madurga, Administrative Assistant (+31 (0)70 302 2396)