INTEFWATIONAL COURTOF JUSTICE
CASECONCERNINPULPMlLLONTHERIVER
URUGUAY
(ARGENTINA V. URUGUAY)
REQUESFTOR THINDICATINF
PROVISIONALMEASURES
SUBMITTEDBYURUGUAY
30 NOVEMBER2006 1 1'~irsiiai1i0Articlc 4 I ol'theSiatuteof tlicCoiiitliiidAi.ticle 73 ol'tlicliiiles,I
havcilieIioiio~i r0 siibniittliisRccliiestlbr tlieIndicatioiiol'I'ro\isioii¿ilMeasureson behulfol'
tlieOri~iitiilI<e~)iiblicf U~LL~LI 7'.~t'171.i~ioiiill~iieiis~irIicrei~i.ecli~esteadre ~irgently
nccdcdto piotccltlierighisol'[li.iigiiayihatareni issue iiitliesepi.ocecdii1gls'roniiiliiiiiiieiitaiicl
irrcl7;11,¿ii1.iLII.iliidto pi.e\cnt tlie;~pgra\~iaotnoí'tliepieseniciispiitc.
l. Tlie licasons forl'his liey uest
3
0sgani;cedgioiips01' Aigciitiiiecitizei~sIiaveblocl,adeda vitalinteriialional
bridgeo\er tlieUriigiiayKiver,sliiittingol't'coiiinierciaa liidtoiiristtrüvel liom Argeiitiiicito
Ilri~gi~aj.rllcyllaveproclaiinedtlinttlicywillIwepit blockadedcoiitiiiuouslyfoi-at Itiasttl~e
nexi ~liit-niontlis,tliiouglitl~eeiid cifI'ebi.uary2007.Tliestatedpiisposeof tlicblockadeisio
COIIII~ II~.~Iigii1y0acccdc toArgentina'sdcii~andtliat itpernianentlyeiidcoi~sii.~iciio oiti'tlie
13oliiiacc.lluloscplaiittliaiistliesukjectoftliislitigatioii.aiidto pi.eveiittlieplaiitfi.oiiiebcr
coii~ingiiilooperation.
-3
.. L3ccause tlie periodlioiiinowtlirough17cbriiary spniistlicSoiitliAiiierieaii
siiiilnierto~ii.istcasoii,tlieblockadcOS \iiiutransportatioiiaiieries iiiio 1Jr~iguay willdeliri\ic
1Jsiigiioq01' liiiiidredsof ii~illioiol'dollaisin foregonetradeaiid toiisismrevenLic.'I'liisilleg~il
~ictisesprcssly intcndeciio IbrceIlsiipiio!to give iito Argeiltiiia'sdciiiaiid iliritloavoidtlic
e~treiiielyscriousIiainito itseconoinjfaiicidcvelopiiieiittliaiiscaiicedbytlieblocl,acic.l Iriigiiiiy
siirrcndcilileright itseelís lo \lii~ciic,iiiihesepsoceediiigs:thc siglit lo carryon nith tlie
coiislr~iciioiaind operatioiiol'tlicI3vtiiiaplaiitinconlbrniitywilhtlieeiivironnieiitalstaiidasds cciuhlislieciiiiiclcitlicI->i-iiutioiiialgrc'c~iieiIi,iio\ciiiisilicIlstatiitodel liio I ii.iigiio!
(-1:si¿li~lio~-).
4. Iq\acllyas lial,peiiedinilicrcceiitpast\\Iicii \iiiiil:iblocl,;idcs\vereiiiiposccl.thc
(;o\ ~I.IIII~CI~I',Argciltiiii Iliasiiottal\ciia114aciionng~iiiistlhc iicwhlocliiidc,aiicl it~il~licailshat
iiliabno iiiiciiiioiiio iisetliciiieíliisat itsdisl.>os¿ais l a so\lcieigiiStateto slo17 ii. Siicliaiiattitiidc
ciiiioiil~be iiitcipi,cicdas ciicoiirageiiiei~u iiidsiipl)oitol'111icllegalhclia\~ioiio il'ilicgioiips
coiiceiiied,aiidcleaily iiiiplies ni1 ciidoi-seiiiciioifihai heIi:i\~ioiib i-! i21.geiitiiia.~1i.iigiiasyiibrnits
iliiitAi-geiitiiia'scoiidiictcoiisiitiiiesa tlagraiitviolatioiiol'i~sobligationsas a IJ;iityto
pioceediiigs iiiliis('oiist,\\~liiclii*c.cliiireto rel'raiiiI'raiiiaiiyactioiioi oi~iissioit iliaiiiiiglii
iiicparabl~~ liaiiii[heriglitsclaimedby IJi-iigiiay tlialthc C'oiirlI-iasbeeiicalled iipoiiro
ii~iiidicaie,oi-lliatiiiiglitaggi+avate ilieexistiiigdispiite. Aigentiiiaqsallobaiice of a haiiiifiil
t7locl,adciigainstI!iiigiiaj -- 1brtlieelpiess piii-postol'compelling it loaccede ic,tlieIeiy sailie
dciiiaiiclstliatAigentiiiais piii.sliiiig iiiiliisCourt --willgiie\lo~isly aiid ii-icpaiabl~ li;iiiii
I Iiiig~iay's iight iiiideitlic 1;ctatiiioloajiidicial iesolutionol'tlieI'ai-tics' contlictiiigclaiiiiswith
iegaicilo tlie Hotiiiaplaiit. Moi-eo\*eiA . rgentiiia'sconiliiciiiidisplitablyaggiavaics tlitexisti~ig
dis],iite,aiidtliusopenlydisicgaidsthc Order issuedto tliePartiesbytlieC'oiirtoii 13 .Iiily2006
--loief'raiiiíi.olliaiij actionscvliicliinightrci-icien iioredifficulttlicrcsoliition01' ilicprcsciit
dispiite. rlie indicalionbyihe C'oiiitofprovisioiinliiieusiiiesis tlici.cfoi.c iii'geiitlyiieccled"witli
a \ ie\clo preveiiiiiigtlieaggravaiionor exteiisioiiol'tlicdisliiitc" (Lotid LIII~/A~III+~I ~I!IIL.~~II:)'
I>e/ii~cc~/i('l~11l~1.0017 IIh1i,qc~~. j'.o~~i\io17ill I\~L'LI.\\,OII/LJI of 13A IIII~C 10II0 1 ('.l Kel~o~'/5
199(í3 /)/) 22-23, /?~ll.l41'l.
A l. I'lic hstaliilii\va\ iiicltiilrcl iii tliecioctiiiiriilos~licCoiii.h!;botli I)ai.iirsiii ~o~iil~'l .itli~
Ar~ciiliiia'sRcqiicstIBrI'iovisioiiiil Measui.t.ItwasIlriigii~iy's1:sliihNo.S aiitl Argeiitiiinqs1:sliibiiNl. 5. Argentinafíledits ApplicationinitiatingthiscaseinMay2005claiming that
Uruguayhasno right under the Estatu ttopermittheconstmction or operatio oftwocellulose
plants:the Botnia plant and anoththrat wasbeing builtby ENCE.The Applicationsough by
wayofrelief a decisionfromthe Courtstating that Uruguay shall haltal1construction activities
andprevent the plantfsromenteringinto operation. Togetherw itsApplicationA, rgentina
fíleda Request for ProvisionMaleasuresseekingan immediate suspensionof construction
pendingtheCourt's finaladjudicatio onthe dispute on the merits. its order of13July2006,
theCourt rejected Argentina's Requestbya vote of 1-1. The Courf toundthat"Argentina has
notprovidedevidenceatpresent thas tuggeststhat any pollution resultingfrom the
commissioning ofthemillswouldbeofa character tocause irreparabledamag tetlieRiver
~ru~ua~.~ Theorder leftUruguayfreetooverseetheconstruction and operationof the plain nts
amannerconsistent with its obligatiou nsderthe Estatuto pending the Coura tsjudicatioon
themerits.
6. Unwillingto waitthatlongtostop constructionof the plants,or to tr inshe
Court's judgment, Argentinaresortedto defacto measuresto achieve thesame reliiteafsked for
inits Applicationand Requestfor ProvisionalMeasb ureasl,lowingandencouragingits
citizenstoimplementand maintain morb elockadesofcomrnerciaa lnd non -commerciatlravel
intoUruguay untiU l ruguaysurrenders toits demand thactonstructionof the planbte
terminated without waitingfto hredisputeto be resolvedby the CouIrn t.the faceofArgentina's
pressure,ENCEdecided not to completeconstructo ifnitsplant.Thus, only theBotnia plant
remainsunderconstmction.
2 Orderof13July2006,para.5. 7. The blockade thatisnowin effectandthat is planned to continweithout
interruptionfortleastthenextthree months isnotthefirstoneallowedor encourageb dy
Argentina. One yearago,Argentina allowed a similarlockadebythesame Argentinecitizen
groups,and fotrhesamestatedpurpose --to forceUruguayto terminateconstructioofthe
celluloseplants. Thatlockadewasimposedduring anb deyondthe last summertouristseason,
between8December 2005 and20March 2006, and again from5April to2May. Itresultedin
severeeconomiclossestoUruguay,includinglosttrade,losttourismand lost jobs associated
withtheseactivities.Despiterepeatedprotestsfrom UruguayA, rgentinatook no actionto stop
the blockadeand refusedd teployitslawenforcementauthoritie tsend it.
Argentina'Isnternational ResponsibilfitrtheBlockades
8. Argentina's internationalresponsibilitytforeblockades-- resultingfroits
allowanceof them, itsacquiescencein them, anisfailureto act against th--is manifest.On
6September 2006,aninternationalarbitralibunalconvenedunder the auspices of Mercosur
unanimously found thA atrgentina's refutl preventor relieve the blockadesagaiUstuguay
betweenDecember 2005and May2006was aviolationof its obligations under the Treatyof
Asuncióntoguaranteethe freedomof transportndcommercebetweenMercosur countries. The
arbitraltribunalheldinitsDispositg
TheabsenceofduediligencethattheRespondent[Argentina]shouh lave
adoptedtoprevent,control or,asappropriate,orrectthe blockadesof the
routesthatconnecttheArgentine Republiw ciththe Oriental Republicf
Uruguay...isnotcompatiblewith thc eommitmena tssumedbythe States Partiesinthefoundational treaty MfERCOSUR [i.e.,theTreatyof
Asunción]....
9. The Dispositifaddressed only the blockadesw thatcarriedout prior tthe
filingof Argentina's ApplicatiinthisCourton4May2006.However,initswritten opinion
the Mercosurarbitral tribunal expressedconcernthat, givenwhatitfound tobe Argentina's
"policyoftolerance"toward the blockades, there wob uldmoreofthem:
The truthisthatthepennissiveattitude exhibitedytheRespondent
[Argentina]cannob teconsidered tohavebeenabandonedi ,nspiteoftheplea
oftheComplainant [Uruguay] that it reestabtlhietransitroutes.The
repeatedandcontinuing characteroftheRespondent Scomplaisant attitude
conformstoastandardofbehaviourtoward theproblem thatleavesopenthe
expectationthatitwouldberepeatedinthefuturefthe sumeorsimilar
circumstancesoccur.4
10. Fulfillingtheprediction ofheMercosurtribunal,Argentina allowed and
encouraged subsequent blockades that cut off transporttaUtrnguayfrom13-15Octoberand
againfrom3-5November, leadinu gptothecurrentblockadewhichbeganon20November.
Argentina's actionandomissionswithrespecttotheseblockaden sotonlyviolateitsobligations
under the Treaty of Asunción, balsoitsobligationasalitigantinthis Courtnottoactina
manner thaitrreparablyprejudicetherights of Uruguay that wbilladjudicatedinthese
proceedingsorthataggravates thepresent dispute.
11. Theblockade condemneb dytheMercosur tribunal wa lisftedonlywhen
Argentina fíledits ApplicatiinthisCourt. Argentinh aopedthatitsRequestforProvisional
Measurese ,speciallyfor thimmediatesuspension of constructw ionrk ontheplants,would
3
Annex2(ArbitralAwardofMercosurAdHocTribunal,p.39(6Sept.2006)).
4
Ibid.atp.35,pa172.achievethe samreesult as thastoughtbythe blockades. But after Argentina's provisional
rneasuresrequestwasdeniedbytheCourton13July,itlost faithinshuttingdownthe plantsby
legalmeans,andallowed its citizensthreatenand plannewblockadesto compel Urugutao y
halt constructionof the plans.henconstructioncontinued, the threats were carriedout and
newblockadeswereimpose wdith theacquiescenceotfheArgentinegovernmenA t.s predicted
bytheMercosur tribunal, Argentin"policyoftoleranc"e anditscccomplaisaantttit"de
encouraged newblockadesof theintemational bridges,with the reshltttraffictoUruguay
wascutofffrom13-15October2006, from 3-5November2006, and since 20 November.
12. Onal1occasionstheGovernmeno tfArgentinaallowed the blockadesto take
place. Argentinatoonkoactiontopreventor relieve these blockadesenthough (i)they were
announced inadvance and widelypublicized;ii) theyvioIatedArgentinedomesticlaw;(iii)the
Mercosur tribunal haalreadyruledthatArgentina'spolicyoftolerance'a'nd failureprevent
theearlier blockadeviolatidsobligationunderthe TreatyofAsunción;(ivi )nthe past
Argentinaregularly useitslawenforcementpowerstp oreventor terminateother illegal
blockadesofroadsand bridges(;v) Uruguayprotestedtheblockadesand insistethatArgentina
prevent thern; anvi)Argentinais obligedas a litigit thisCourtnot to cause irreparable
prejudicetothe rightof Uruguaythatareatissueinthis case or to aggravate the presentdispute.
Uruguay's RepeateP drotestsandArgentina'SRejection ofThem
13. Uruguayhas repeatedlyprotestedthe blockai dnesublicstatementsand
diplomaticcorrespondence. Argentina's responshavebeeneither to ignoreorreject
Uruguay's protestsI.nnocasedid Argentinraespondbydeploying,or alteastgivingassurancesthat it wouldeploy,themeansatitsdisposal toprevent or relieve any of these blockadb esits
citizens.
14. Uruguay's recen ptroteststoArgentinaincludethe following DiplomaN tctesto
Argentina:(i) 11October 2006, insistin hat Argentinp areventthe bridge seizure an blockade
plannedfor13-150ctober;'(ii)30October 2006, protestingArgentina's faitlo uperevent or
relievethe blockadecarriedouton13-15~ctober;~ (iii)31October 2006, insisting that
Argentina preven ttebridgeseizureand blockadp elannedfor3-5November2006;~ (iv)9
November 2006 p,rotestingArgentina's failureptreventor relieve the blockade carrioeudton
3-5 Novembe2 r006;'and (v)20November2006 insistingthat Argentina preven rtorovethe
blockadethat began on tha dtate and which is stil effe~t.~
15. Inthese DiplomaticNoteU s,ruguayrepeatedlypointed out that Argentw inas
requiredbyits internationatlreatyobligations, y generalinternationallaw, anbdyitsstatusasa
litigantinthisCourt to takeal1necessarymeasures,includingappropriate police action, to
maintain freedom oftransitacross theinternationablridges,torefrainfrom actsoromissions that
prejudicetherightsofUruguayatissuein this lawsuit,and to avoid any acts or omisstih oants
mightaggravate thependingdisputebetween th Parties.Uruguay's Diplomatic No otfe30
October2006said,in pertinentpart:
5
Annex3(DiplomaticNote from Uruguay to Argent11Oct. 2006)).
6
Annex4(Diplomatic Note fromruguay to Argenti30Oct. 2006)).
7Annex5(DiplomaticNote from Uruguay to Argent31Oct. 2006)).
8 Annex6(DiplomaticNotefromUruguay to Argenti(a Nov. 2006)).
Annex 7(DiplomatiNote from UruguatoArgentina(20Nov. 2006)). TheMinistryofForeign Affairp sresentsitshighest compliments to the
EmbassyoftheRepublicofArgentina witt hhe purposeofmakingreference
toNoteno.1020/2006d ,ated11October2006, inwhichitmanifested its
concernsaboutthe announcement, byArgentinecitizens t,hatroad blockades
would takeplace duringthe weekend of13to15October.
Onthistopic,withthe blockadeh savingoccurred on the announceddate
withoutthe Argentin Geovernmena tdopting the necessary measuresto avoid
them ortomakethemstop,theOrientalRepublic of Uruguay desiresto
manifest thattheseactions,inadditionto constitutingiolationofthe
principieoffree circulationestablishidtheTreatyofAsunciónand other
normsof InternationaLlaw,failtocomply with the ArbitrA alwardofthe
MERCOSUR AdHocTribunalof 6September 2006.
Furthermore,thO e rientalRepublicof Uruguay would like to emphatsh iat
theomissionof the ArgentineGovernmenitntaking necessary measures
constituteanaggravation ofthe disputetodaypending before the
InternationalCour otfJustice,inviolationof paragraph 82 of the Order
provisionalmeasure osf3Julypast,and the obligation s posedonal1the
litigantsbefortheCourt,andconsequently,considers thia ttrightsarebeing
threatenedbythe omission ofArgentinaofcompliance with itsinternational
obligations.
16. Argentinaresponded tothisNote,as well as Uruguay's No ote9Novernber
2006,byrejectingUruguay's contentions anits request for preventiveactiondoterfuture
blockades.SpecificallyA, rgentina respondedUruguay's Noto ef30 October,quotea dbove,
bydismissingUruguay's contentt iontArgentina's allowance of t1heto15October blockade
violated the Mercosaurrbitralaward ortheTreatyofAsunciónbecause,inArgentina's view,the
September 2006arbitral award onlfyoundArgentinaresponsiblefor the blockatd hast took
place priotothe Awardand not any futureblockades ": ArgentinaalsorejectedUruguay's
contention thaitts allowanceotfheblockadeaggravates thedispute before theourt,in
10
Annex8(DiplomatiNote fromArgentinatoUruguay(1Nov.2006)):"Inthatcontext, the ifpublo
ArgentinallowsitselftoremindtheGovernmtfUruguaythattheArbitralAwardoftheAdHocMercosur
Tribunalof6September past, mentioniendthereferredtonote, exprst,numeral3ofitsDispositift;hat
'inthecircumstansfthiscase,itisnotlegallyapprofor the Ad HocTribunladoptorpromote
determinatiosboutthefutureconductofthe Respondent('Argentina").contradictionoftheCourt'sOrderof 13July 2006,on the ground that (according tArgentina)
theblockades areirrelevitntothedis ute." Argentinaresponded insimilar fashion to
Uruguay's Diplomatic Noto ef9November 2006, protestingArgentina's allowancteho ef
blockadethat took placoen3 -5November.Argentina again dismissedUruguay's complaintas
"irrelevan"tinits NotetoUruguaydated15November 2006:
Argentina reiteratesandaffimsitsnote of1November past,infull.
Specificallyi,trejectsonceagaiansirrelevanttheallusionsinNote598106
[Uruguay's Noteof 9 Novembert]hte oOrderdictated bythe International
CourtofJusticeon 13July past.Further,itrecallsthat the proceedings before
theInternationalCourtof Justic r, m which thOe rderof13July past arose,
concernsexclusivelty he controversoyfbothcountriesovet rheconstruction
oftwo pulp millsand theirassociatedinstallations.12
17. Fivedayslater,on20November, Argentinaallowteh decurrent blockadteo
commencewithout making an effort to prevenitt. Argentina's inactionled Uruguaysetod
anotherprotest,on20Novemberi,nsistingthatArgentinahonourits obligatioan ssa litigant
beforethisCourtbyendingthe blockade taking actiotoavoid the grave and irreparab iljury
the blockadecausets othe rightsofUruguay thattheCourthasbeencalled upon toadjudicate.
Uruguay wrote:
[TlheOrientalRepublicof Uruguay would liketo emphasizeone more time
that theomissionoftheGovernmeno tfArgentina intakingnecessary
rneasures toavoidorstoptheblockadesconstitutesan aggravato ifthe
disputetodaypendingbeforethe InternationalCourtof Justice.
11
Zbid."ArgentinarejectsasirrelevanttliereferenteintheNotetotheInternatfJustice'sOrder of13
July past, whichconcems excluslyecontroversythatboth countrieshavebecauseofthe constructionprojects
oftwoindustrial pulpmandstheir connected install.heaggravatiinthis controversyt,hatis
discouragedbyparagraph82ofsaid Order, are being pebyUruguay,incontinuing totakeunilateral
actions with respect ttohecited projectsi,nflagofthe1975Statute."
''Annex9(DiplomaticNote from ArgentitnoaUruguay(15Nov.2006)). Shouldthesenew blockades take place withto hetadoptionofnecessary
measurestoavoidthem or maktehemstop,theOrientalRepublicof Uruguay
willsufferirreparablharmtoits rightsthatare currentlysubjetothe
jurisdiction otfheCourt,anditwillconstitutea violationthepartof the
RepublicofArgentina ofthe obligations imposeodn litigantsbefore teourt
underits jurisdiction.
18. Again, Argentina too noaction,allowingthecurrentblockade to begianndto
continue.Thisblockade,likethe prior oneosn13-15October2006 and3-5November2006,is
specifically intendtoaccomplish througc oerciveaction what Argentin couldnot achieve
throughlegal meani snthisCourtatthe provisional measurpesase --toforce Uruguay tohalt
construction otfheBotnia plantndterminate theproject.Byits failuretodeteror relievethese
blockadesa,ndbyits rejectionofUruguay's request for preventive acitithe faceofthem,
Argentina hams adeitclearthat, absent the provisional meastrastUruguayisrequesting
from theCourt,itwillcontinuetoallow, encouraga endfacilitatetheillegalactions of its
citizens.
ThelndependentExperts' Report Tha tteBotniaPlant
WillNotHarmtheRiverorArgentina
19. Theblockades oO f ctoberandNovember2006 followedthepublicationbythe
International Finance Corporation (IFC a)ofmprehensivCeumulativeImpact Study(CIS)
producedbyits independenetxpertsonthe environmental impao cfttheBotniaplant. The
independentexpera tnd theirtems ofreferencewere approvedbyArgentinapriorto the
initiation theirstudy. Theirfinal report, publisbythe IFCon12October2006,
demonstrated conclusively th"neitherits[theBotniamill's]constructionor itsoperationwillcauseappreciableharm tAorgentina througwhater deprivationor pollutorotherwise."IThe
experts'reportemphasizedthat the Botnia pl"willemploystat-eof-the-artprocess
technologiesneveryrespect;"1thatitwill"performatorbetterinalrnostal1cases,than the
IPPC -BAT(2001) and Tasmania -nMT(2004)standarda s, dwill perforatworld-classlevels
withregardstowaterand air emissionrates;"1thatitseffiuentflows"complywith IPPC-BAT
(2001) range and areongthebestintheworld;"1t hat"bleaching,effluent floC,ODcontent
and colorwillbeamongthebestinthe ~orld;"'and that"[tlhemil1operations wilomplywith
thewater qualitstandardsprovidebdyCARU "(the agency establishedyUruguayand
Argentina pursuanttthe Estatut"fortheoversightof the protection and monitooingater
qualitywithintheRío~ni~ua~'').'~ heexperts'reportalsoconcluded that Uruguay's
commitmena tnd capacitytregulateand monitotrhe operationof the Botnia plansrfficient
toassurethatitwillbeoperatedinan environmentallysafe and responsimblenner:
The permi-settingprocesssedbyDINAMA[the Uruguayan environmental
protectionagencyw]asevaluated andfound tobe practic1nd rigorousand,
throughDINAMA's receivingenvironmentmonitoring programp anrmit
renewal process,witillbeensuredthat theproposedpulp millswillhavea
minimum impact on the receivegvironment.When benchmarked against
13
Annex10(Letter from Ls.Thuneli,ExecutiveVice PresidenFeC,and Yukiko Omura, Executive Vice
Presidentof theMultilateral InvestmentGuaratctyh,eAmbassadsfArgentinaandUruguay(16Oct.
2006)).
14
Annex11(CumulativImpactStudy,ExecutiveSumma, .ES.v.)
ISIbidp.2.30.
''Ibid .2.21.
l7Ibidp..,S.v.
18Ibidp.4.56. other jurisdictionD s,INAMA 'Sstandards were foun tdbeamongstthe
world S moststringent.I9
20. Notjustinspiteof,butactuallybecauseofthese conclusionc sonfirmingthatthe
Botnia plant posen soriskofharrntoArgentinaortheRíoUruguay, the Argentineblockadewas
resumed on 13October,onedayafterthereportwaspublished. Instead o efxpressingrelieafnd
satisfactionthatthe independentstudy determinte hdatconstructionand operatio oftheplant
posednodangerofenvironmental ham, Argentina criticised th IFC for publishingthr eeport,
andeventriedtoplaceresponsibility onthe WorldBank(theIFC'sparentorganization) forthe
resultingblockadethattookplaceon13-15 October.Althoughitwas Argentinan ,ottheBank,
that allowed andencouraged theblockade,Argentina's Secretaryfo treEnvironment
complained that the principal responsible party theorewblockadeistheWorldBank, calling
theBank'spublication of the report"negligent."20Thefollowingmonth,aftertheIFC'ssenior
managemenr tecommended,baseo dntheexperts'report,thatfínancingfor the Botnia plant
shouldbeapprovedbytheBoard of~irectors?~ theArgentines imposea dnotherblockade,on3-
19Ibid.,p.2.30(emphasisadded). As indicated abnei,tsOrder of 13 July 200hourt foundthat Argentina
failed to produceany evid"thatsuggests that any pollution resulting from the commofnngmillswould
be of acharactertocause irreparabledatethe River Uruguay..Thereport of the independent experts
confirmsthat there isi,nfact,noevidence that the Botnnitllhaveany adverse effect on human health or
welfareor the Rioruguay.Seeibid.,p.4.57. Sotoodoesthe final Hatfield report, suethe International
Finance Corporationn14October 2006, which reviewedCthS. An earlier Hatfield rerta,ted27 March
2006, was submittenevidencebyboth PartiesattheJune hearing on provisional measei.ethe CISitself,
the final Hatfideportconcluded tha"tthatthe mills are denaccordance with modern, environmentally
sustainable practic,conformity witBAT,asdefined by IPPC and othregulatoryagencies experienced with
pulp industryssues.Thecurrentdesignandplanning procesissappropriate for sustainable, environlndtsaolu
operations, winoimpactsonthehealth of the peopnthearea,on eithersideof theRioUruguay". SeeAnnex
12(Letter froL.WayneDwernychukP ,h.D.,R.P.BioandNeiIMcCubbinBSc.,ARCST,P.Eng.toMr.Dimitris
TsitsiragoandMs. RacheKl yte,IFCDirectors,p.2(14Oct. 2006)).
20
Annex 13("PicolottiresponsabilalBanco Mundial por nuevoscordtesruta" (11Oct. 2006)).
2I
Annex10(LetterfromLarsH.Thunell, ExecutiveVice PresidentthoefIFC,andYukiko Omura, ExecutiVeice
PresidentoftheMultilateraIlnvestmt uaranteeAgencytothe Ambassadorsof Argentina aUntduguay(16Oct.
2006)).5November. Itn hewake of that blockade, betw6eeand10November, the Argentine
Secretary for the Environmweetntto Washingtonersonally to lobby membe orfstheBoard of
Directors not to finance the project, and the PsiAegtentina wrote to the Presonfthe
World Bank demanding thattheproject noteapproved.Thiswasfollowedbythecurrent
blockade, commencin ogn20November, the da beforetheBank'sBoardofDirectorsmet to
give final considerattnthe project.Theblockadecoordinatosaid:"If,asitappears, the
WorldBank approvetshe financing t,hepeople wil ant toliveonthe route...wearegoing to
stay theral1summerandwhatever timetia tke" to shutdowntheBotniaplant.22
21. On21Novembert,heBoardofDirectors voted 2 -1toapprovethefinancing for
the Botnia projecO. nlythe Argentine boademberdissented.The public statement
announcing theBoard'sdecision emphasized thtat World Bank Group,
aftercompleting a thorough review offtcts,[is]convinced thatthemill
willgeneratesignificatconomic benefitsforUruguay and causneo
environmentalharm.
The Orionmill,majority owned by FinncishmpanyOyMetsa -Botnia Ab,
willbeoperated to the highest glbtalndards and comply wiIhC and
MIGA'S respective environmental socialstandards. A recently issued
independent report provided conclusiveencethatthelocalarea, including
theArgentine cityfGualeguaychu , illnot experience adverse
environmentalimpacts.23
22. Argentina responded tshamedaybypubliclydenouncing the Bank.The
statementreleasedbythe Argentine MinistorfForeignAffairs condemned the Baf nkrits
22Annex18(statementbyGustavoRivoll,LoscréditselBancoMundialamenazanconelevar latensión",La
Nacion(21Nov.2006)).
23Annex19(PressRelease,Intemational Finance CoronNov.2006))."decision whose environrnene taflectswillbeserious for the local riveripe~~ulation.'"~
Immediately following th aisnouncementt,he"localriverine populatio"nresolved to continue
"indefinitel"ytheblockade thah tadbeencommenced theprevious dayo , n20~overnber.~~
Accordingtooneofthe blockade leaders:"thepeopleunderstandthat ths itruggleisenteringa
harsherstage.Wehavebeentoo good,andweare gettingangry ...this is going to keep
increasinguntil theylistentoUS."'~ 0n 22November,President Nestor Kirchner of Argentina
attackedthe World Bank'd secision,callingit"lamentablethat they keep sayin thgatthe position
ofArgentinawaswrong;the interestsof Botnia andtheWorld Bankhavewonagain.'"'
PresidentKirchner publicly declared thatG thevernmentof Argentina woun lot takeany
actiontointerferewith the blockades: "there will benorestraint against our brothefrrsom
~uale~u~achú."~~
23. Theharsh public criticismof theWorldBankbyArgentina's President,Foreign
MinistryandSecretaryfor theEnvironment,among othersenior Argentine oficials,inevitably
carryingout these blockades.
encouragedthe Argentine citizen groupsdirectlyresponsiblefor
Asoneoftheblockadeleaders said:"Certainly there wib lle blockadesthis summerafter the
24 Annex 20 (Press elease,Argentine MinisyfForeign Affairs, quin"Papeleras:lGobierno critila
decisión del Banco Munddiaelaprobarelcrédito para B" Clarin.co(21Nov. 2006)).
25
Annex21(resolution by the EnvironmentalAssernblyof Gualeguaychú,iqn"oPedeleras:los ambientalistas
deGualeguaychú endurecenpso ustura,iarin.com(21Nov. 2006)).
26Annex22(statement by Jorge Fritzer,epreven más pérdiqdasenelverano pasado",UltimasNoticias(22
Nov. 2006)).
2Annex 23 (statement by President Nestor Kircoergentin,Kirchnerdefendilapostura argentina contra
las paste"DiarioEpoca(22 Nov.2006)).
2Ibid. 3729
perversityfromtheWorldBank, there will bm eanymoremeasures... Accordingtoanother
blockade leader,"thepeoplearereadytotakeinternational highwa 136[theprincipal bridge
acrosstheUruguayRiver]and neverleave.Wearenotgoing toleaveuntilthe plantsare
gone.... Wehavetokeepdoing thingsto keem p obilizedand keep attacking oa nl1fr~nts."~
11. TheConsequenceo sfa DenialofThis Request
24. There can be no questionthatthevery rights ofUruguaythat areatissueinthese
proceedingsare threatened with imminentand irreparabiln ejurybyArgentina's allowanceof
andacquiescence in thesecoerciveactions.Atthe meritsphase,the Court will adjudicate
whether Uruguah yadthe righttoauthorizeconstructioa nndoperationof the Botnia cellulose
plantor whether (as Argentin claims) Uruguay's actiov nsolateenvironmentao lrother
provisionsoftheEstatuto.The Argentine blockadesareexpresslyintendetd obe so painful to
Uruguay thaittisforcedtoterminatethe Botnip arojectinadvanceofthe Court'sruling.
Accordingly, theiyndisputably threatengraveandirreparableinjury to the rigth otbuildand
operatetheplant that Uruguas eekstodefendinthiscase.
25. Moreovert ,hePartieshaveagreedin Article60oftheEstatuto that any disputes
thattheycannot themselves resolvemaybesubmittedtotheCourt for finar lesol~tion.~I't is
29Annex14(statementbyJuan Veronesi",Levantancorderutaperoaseguran bloqueos nerano", ElPais(14
Oct. 2006)).
30Annex 15(statementbyJorgeFritzler,"Gualeguaychúvolvarutapor casi cuatro hora"s,LaNacihn(13Nov.
2006)).Thesame spokesperson for the blockadesadded:uayexpects much from tourism this ar,we are
going toavetoblockade.. for theUniguayanstoreactandanalyzewhat is most to their advantage: Argentine
tourism or the pulpls."[bid.
31Annex1. Article60provides:"Anydisputeconcerningthe interpretationor apofthe Treaty andthe
Statutewhich cannotbesettled by direct negotiations may beeeitherPartytothe Intemational Court of
Justice.underArticle60thatArgentinaitself invoked thC eourt's jurisdiction to hear this cse.its
provisional measure rsquest,Argentina claimed that tChourt was"givena central roleby
Articles12and60oftheStatute,"and argued on thb isasisthat"the Court should be allowtod
settlethedisputewithowf tinaljudgmentonthemeritshaving beenprejudicedbyUruguay's
unilateraacts.." Thus,it cannotbecontestedbyArgentina that Uruguay has a rigtothavethis
disputeresolvedbythe CourtpursuanttoArticle 60,ratherthanbyArgentina's unilateralac otfs
an extrajudicialand coercivnature, which are intendtodforce Uruguay toabandon itsright
under theEstatutotoa judicialresolutioofitsclaimsand defences.
26. Norcantherebeany question that th Aergentineseizures and blockad ofsthe
internationalridgesaggravatethe present dispute between thParties.Theeconomic damage
sufferedbyUruguayto dateasaresultofthe blockades has beenenormous, and thh eannwill
only growunlessArgentinaisrequiredbytheCourttotakeal1thelawful and reasonable
measuresto avoid furthh earmtoUruguay.The blockadesthat havetaken place thus fahrave
alreadyraisedtensionsbetween the twoStates,andhaveimpededdialogua enda diplomatic
solutiontothecontroversy. Threaf romblockadeleaders,emboldenedtb he Argentine
government's attitudean statements, are steadiiycreasing"Nowisthe time to intensiftyhe
struggle,to gointo the finbattle,"to"pressuretheUruguayan government until itunderstands
that itmustchoose between its relationshpith Argentinoarthe celluloseplants."3According
to blockadeleaders t,eyareplanningto extendtheblockadesbeyond the bridges to the river
itself,toprevent rivetrrafficwithsupplies for Botni...Themaritime blockadein sotfarfrom
32Annex16(statementbyJorgeFritzl, Comenzó el bloqyofueron vanlosintentos pfrenarlo,"ElPais
(14Oct. 2006)).beingrealized,since wheavestudied the differentplacesana lterna ti ve I^i"cl^ar that
relationsbetween the twSotateswillonly deterioratefurtherif the current blockade is allowed to
continue,and thatArgentina's allowanceof thanisd priorblockadescontravenes theurt's13
July2006injunction tothePartiesto"refrain from anayctionswhichmight render mord eifficult
theresolutionof thepresent dispute.
27. Withouta changeinattitudeand behaviou byArgentina,Uruguay wib e forced
toendureanother prolongedand punitib vlockade.Provisionalrneasuresarethusurgently
requiredtocompelArgentina toabideby itsinternationalobligations, including its obligationsas
a litigantbefore thCourt,and takeal1lawful andreasonablemeasure o end the current
blockadeand preventfutureblockadesfrombeingcarriedout.
111. TheSpecificMeasuresRequested
28. For theforegoing reasons, Uruguaryespectfullyrequests that the Court orher
followingprovisional measures pendi igal resolutioon themerits of thcase:
Whileawaitingthe final judgmeno tf theCourt, Argentina
(i) shalltakeal1reasonabland appropriatestepastitsdisposaltopreventor endthe
intemptionoftransit between Urugua ayd Argentina,including the blockado ifg
bridgesandroads betweet nhetwoStates;
(ii) shall abstfrom anymeasurethat migha tggravate,extend o mr ake more difficult
thesettlementofthis dispute;nd
33Annex17(statemenby MartinAlazar, Cortelrío,la nueva propuaeloambientalistaElObservador
(19Oct.2006)).
- 17- (iii) shallabstain from yther measurethat might rejudicethe rights of Uruguniy
disputebefore theourt.
IV. OfferofWithdrawao lfThisRequest
29. ItisUruguay'sstrongpreferencethatthismatter beresolved diplomatically and
arnicablybetween thtwoParties.What Uruguay seeksisArgentina's agreemente todthe
currentblockadeandprevent anyfurtherblockades a,nditsfulfillmeofthat agreement.If
Argentina wilml akesuch a commitmenU t,ruguaywillaccept itingood faithandwillno longer
haveaneedfor judicialinterventioon,fortheprovisionalmeasuresrequested hereIinn.such
circumstancesU, ruguay woulbdepleasedtowithdrawthisrequest. Respectfullysubmitted,
Ambassador Carlos AlberGoianelli
..._ Agent
TheHague
30November2006 1certify that the annexes arteruecopies of the documents referre tdandthat the
translations provided are accurate.
, A ,.'*
Ambassador Carlos Alberto Gianelli
..- Agent
Je soussigné certifieque les annexes sond tescopies conformes desdocuments originaux
etque leurs traductions sont exactes.
Ambassadeur Carlos Alberto Gianelli
Agent
Request for the Indication of Provisional Measures submitted by Uruguay