MinisterideRelacioneE sxteriores
RepûblicaeColombia
Liberodrden
COLOMBIA'C SOMMENTO SNNICARAGUAW 'SRITTENREPL YTOTHEQUESTION PUTBYJUDGE
BENNOUNO AN4MAY2012(AFTERNOON)
1. Attheoutset,Colombia wishesto reaffiitspositioonthematter,asexpressed initswrittenreplyto
JudgeBennouna'q suestiont,ransmitteto youundercoverofmyletterdated10May2012,andorallyat the
hearingsonthemeritsheldfrom23Aprilto4May2012,inparticulaa rtthe16thpublisittingheldon4May.1
2. Nicaragua'Ws rittenReplymustbereadinthecontextofthepresenc tase,inwhichtherearenoareasof
continentaslhelflyingmorethan200nautical ilesfromthenearesltandterritory.lnanyevent,Nicaraguaslaim
inthepresenctaseignores theArchipelagoo'wncontinenta slhelfentitlement.hisiswhyColombia'psroposed
delimitatioiesintheareawheretherespectiveentitlementsfthePartiebegintomeetandoverlap.4
3. Moreover c,ontrartowhatNicaraguac 'laimandarguments suggestt,hereis- tosaytheleast- noruleof
customariynternationllwthatgivesprioritoacontinenta slhelfbasedongeomorphologa y,compared withthat
ofa coastaSl tateonthebasisofthe200nmentitlemena tppertaininoitsEEZandcontinenta slhelfbyvirtueof
UNCLOS Article76(1).
4. lndeed,thereverseisthecaseasStatepractice shows(withhardlyanyexception -none,infact,inthe
regionconcerned in thepresentproceedingst)hat.acoastalStatehasnoentitlementto thegeomorphological
extensionofitsshelfwithin200nmofanotheerligibcoast.Thisisreflectinthewell-knowd nictuoftheCourtin
Libya!Malta:
"TheCourthowevec ronsiderhatsincethedevelopmen otfthelawenablesaStatetoclaimthat
thecontinentaslhelfappertainioit extendsuptoasfaras200milesfromitscoast,whatever
thegeologicac/haracteristisf thecorrespondinsgea-bedandsubsoi/, thereis no reasonto
ascribeanyrotetogeologicao/rgeophysicaflctorwithinthatdistaneitherinverifyithelegal
tit/eof theStatesconcerneor inproceedingto a delimitatiasbetween theirc/airn. hisis
especiallclearwhereverificatiofthevalidityoftitleisconcerneds,ince,at!eastinsofaras
thoseareasaresituatedatadistanceofunder200milesfromthecoasts inquestiont,itledepends
CR2012/16,pp.42-3,paras.38-9andpp.43-5,paras.40-50(Bundy).Seealso,CR2012/17,p. 35,para.16
(Crawford).
z CR2012/11p,.24,para.21(Crawfor);R2012/16,.52,para.83(Bundy).
CR2012/11p,.24,para.21(Crawford;R2012/12p,.14,para.24;p.15,para.27;p.18,para.42;p.25,para.74;
p.48,para.23;p.60,para.76;p.63,para.89(Bundy).Also,CR2012/13p, .50,para.49;p.53,para.60(Crawfor;RC
2012/16p,.15,para.28(Londofio)p;.49,para.68(Bun;ndCR2012/17p,p.22andff,paras.2andff.(Bundy,sweilas
p.38,para.28(4)(Crawford).
4 CR2012/12p,.12,para.13;p.24,para.70;pp.24-5,para.73;p.25,para.75;p.63,para.92(Bundy).Also,CR
2012/13p,.47,para.43;p.49,para.48(Crawfo);ndCR2012/17,.30,para.32(Bundy),.38,para.28(5)(Crawford).
s CR2012/11,p. 25,para.23 andpp. 27-8,para.34 (Crawfor; R2012/17,pp. 32-4,paras.6-14andp. 38,
para.28(2)(Crawford).
s CR2012/11,p. 24,para.21 (Crawford; R2012/12,pp. 60-1,para.78 (Bundy);CR2012/13,p. 53,para.60
(Crawford);R2012/16p,.52,paras.83,85(Bundy; R2012/17,.34,para.14(Crawford).
1 MinisteriodeRelaciones Exteriores
RepûblicaeColombia
überydOrden
solelyonthedistance fromthecoastsoftheclaimanS t tatesofanyareasofsea-bed claimedby
wayofcontinenta slhelf,andthegeologicaolrgeomorphologic chlaracterisosfthoseareasare
7
completelimmaterial."
5. TherelevantStatepracticein thisrespectwaslaidoutduringoralargumenb ty Mr.Bundy,s andthe
consequentiallogiccaolnsideratiobyProfesseC rrawford.lt shouldbestressethatNicaraguma adenoattempt
atalitorespond toMr.Bundy, anditsresponse toProfesseC r rawforinthesecondroundofOralPleadings was
incorrectndunconvincing.1o
6. Asto thesubstance ofNicaraguaW 's rittReply,itmustbenotedthat,whileJudgeBennounaq 'suestion
onlyreferstowhether therulesrelatintothedeterminatioonftheouterlimitsofthecontinentaslhelfbeyond200
nauticaml ilessetoutin Article76ofthe.UNCLOS i.,e.,paragraphs4)to (9),maybeconsidered to possessa
customarc yharactert,heWrittenReplyitselfandtheStatepractiNicaragua invokesfocusmoreon"thedefinition
ofthecontinentaslhelf',thanonthedeterminatiofitsouterlimits.
7. lndeedw, hileNicaragua'sritteReplyacceptsthedistinctioa,tthebasisofColombia'psositio,etween
conventionoabl ligatisndobligationusndercustomariynternationlalw,earlyonitcontendtshat"thedefinitiof
thecontinentaslhelfsetoutin article76 (1)-(7)of the1982[UNCLOSh ]asthestatusof a ruleof customary
internationlalwandnotonlyofaruleoftreatylaw".11
8. Nicaraguaattempts to justifyits basicassumption thegroundthatthedefinition itfindsreflectein
12
paragraph( s4)-(7)of article76is generasupportedin Statepractice. Howevera ,sexplainedfurtherbelow,
Nicaragua'sself-servingecountinofStatepracticew, hichisdevotedalmostexclusiveltothepracticeofStates
partytotheUNCLOSi,shighlyimprecise andtentativeasweilascontradictory t, suchanextentthatit failsto
substantiattheassertioitisintendedtoconfirm.
9. WhileNicaragudaoesnotdenythatColombia isnotapartytotheUNCLOSit,neverthelesp sointsoutthat
Colombia is oneof the 119signatories of the Convention.1Obviouslyt,he factthatColombia signedat the
conclusionofthe1982Montego BayConferencd eoesnot,inandof itself,transforColombia intoa partytothe
UNCLOSO . blivioofthisbasictenetoftheLawof TreatiesN , icaragupersistthroughouittsWrittenReplyin
1
assimilatingignaturtoratificatinsameans ofbuttressintsrecountinogfStatepractice.
7 ContinentSlhelf(LibyanArabJamahiriya/MalJu,dgment,.C.J.Reports1985,p. 13,at 33,para.33(emphasis
added).
s CR2012/12p,p.60-1,paras.77-8(Bundy).
9 CR2012/13p,p.27-8,para.34;CR2012/17,p.32-4,paras.6-14(Crawford).
1o CR2012/9p, .30,paras.46-48;CR2012/1,p.23-5,paras.36-44(Lowe).
11 Nicaragua's rittenReply(hereafte"rWReply"),ara.1.
12 WritteReply,para.10.
13 WritteReply,para.7.
14 See,e.g.,WrittenReply,paras.11, 12, 13.
2 MinisteriodeRelacionesExteriores
RepûblicaeColombia
Liberadrden
10. Firstly,it is usefulto revisitthecommentyftheCourtontheconversion ofa treatynormto a ruleof
customaryinternational w.Severau!sefulpronouncemen -tsdemonstratinhedifficultofsuchaconversion by
virtueofStatepracticeandopiniojuris- weremadebytheCourtintheNorthSeaContinenta lhelfcases. The
Courtsaidfirstthatwhilstsucha resultispossible",[a]tthesametimethisresultisnotlightlyto beregardas
havingbeenattained".16
11. Secondlyt,heCourtclearlyestablishehatthemerefactthataStatehasrefused toratifyaconventiofor
reasonsotherthantheactivedisapprova olfthenormscontained thereindoesnotmeanthattheStateinquestion
approveosftheserules.TheCourtsaid
"Thatnon-ratificatinaysometimes bedueto factorsotherthantheactivedisapprovao lf the
conventionconcerned canhardlyconstituta basisonwhichpositiveacceptanco efitsprinciples
17
canbeimpliedt:hereasons arespeculativt,efactsremain."
TheCourtwentontheconfirm that:
"Asregards thoseStates...whichwerenot,andhavenotbecome partiestotheConvention t, e
18
basisoftheiractioncanonlybeproblematicaal dmustremain entirespeculative."
12. Havingestablished that non-ratificator whateverreason,otherthanthe activedisapprovao l f a
convention c,annotwithoutmorebeconsideretdacitapprovaol fa treaty-basdorm,theCourtengaged inwider
commentara ysto themeaning of opiniojuris,theconvictiof a rule'scustomarnaturewhichalongside State
practicsufficetoconvertatreaty-basen dormintoaruleofgenerailnternationlalw.Thesemustamounttomore
thanjust"settlepractice.aidtheCourt:
"[Theacts]mustalsobesuch,orbecarried outinsuchawayastobeevidence ofabeliefthatthis
practiceis rendereobligatorbytheexistence ofa ruleoflawrequiringit.Theneedforsucha
belief,i.e.,theexisteofasubjectiveelementi,simpliciitntheverynotionoftheopinjurissive
neccessitatiT.heStatesconcerned mustthereforfeelthattheyareconformintgowhatamounts
toalegalobligation."19
13. lnthepresenctontextt,hefollowiisclear:
a. Thetransmutatioo nfatreaty-basendormsoastoreflectaruleofcustomariy nternationallwisnota
common occurrenceandoughtnotto beproclaimed lightly.Thus,Nicaraguwasfacedwitha heavy
burdenif it wasto provethatUNCLOS Article76 codifiesa customaryruleof internatioll w,a
burdenthatasshownbelowi,thasfailedtodischarge.
15 NorthSeaContinentalhelfCases(Federal epublof Germanyv. Denmark;ederaRl epublicof Germav. The
Netherlands),udgmentI,.C.J.Repo1969p.3.
16 Ibid.,p.41,para.71.
11 Ibid,p.42,para.73.
1s Ibid,p.43-4,para.76.
1s Ibid.,p.44,para.77.
3 MinisteriodeRelacioneE sxteriores
RepublicdaeColombia
UberoOrden
b. Colombia's non-ratificatinfUNCLOSforreasonsunconnectetd oitsviewoftheConvention'm s erits
cannatbetakenastacitapprovao l f theirsubstance.lndeed,for 30yearsColombiahaschosento
refrainfromratifyitheConventioansitswillisnotto beboundbysorneconventiona rl lessuchas
thoseinparagraph(s4)to(9)ofArticle76.
c. Opiniojuriswhereit istobeidentifie, ustdemonstrateaconvictionastothelegalcharacteo r fthe
normin question.Asexplained hereinaftert,heinformatireferredto by Nicaraguin its Response
doesnotdemonstratte hattherulescontainedin UNCLOS Article76(4)-(reflecttheopiniojuriof
States,particulanon-signatoritosUNCLOS.
14. ThestatisticsprovidebyNicaraguainitsWrittenReplywithregardtoallegedStatepracticeareimprecise
anddeceptive inthattheydonotidentifbynametheStatesconcerned orthecontentsoftheprovisionsofdomestic
legislatiitdeemslegallyrelevantl.nthisrespec, icaragua'sseoflanguage ismostrevealingN. icaragubegins
itsdemonstratiobnyreferrintoaUNwebsite carryinthelegislatioof151States, withoutdistinguishinghichof
thoseStatesarepartiesto theUNCLOS andwhicharenot.lt thenreduces theinitialfigureto "approximaty0"
States,whoselegislationit considersrelevant.ln its words,"the approximatiois necessarybecausesorne
referencesto thecontinentalhelfareobliqueandsornelawsarenotreadilyavailable".Nicaragua continuesby
usingexpressionssuchas"those90orsoStates"";itappears thatapproximate5ly0[States]"";sorne[6],[gofurther],
2
[refer]".2ln thesamevein,in paragraphs2 and 13 of itsWrittenReply,Nicaragurepeatsitsfindingthat"sorne
[States]or ali of themmayeitherhaveadoptedlegislationto implemenU t NCLOS domesticallor havea legal
systemwhichgivesdirecteffecttotreaties".
15. Followinga demonstratioenssentiallbasedon assumptionsN , icaraguconcludes that "morethan 80
Statesof the 90 thathavecontinentaslhelflegislatiappear to acceptthedefinitionin article76 (4)-(7)either
explicitlyin their lawsimplicit/by theiracceptanceof the UNCLOS".2 H3owever,Nicaragua'sconclusionis
disprovedbyitsownanalysisN . owhere initsrecountindoesNicaragua mentiona singleStatewhoselegislation
makesspecifiereferencetothosefourparagrapha ssconstitutin,sawhole,the"definitioofthecontinentaslhelf'.
16. Accordingtoparagraph11 oftheWrittenReply:
"sorne6[Statesm] erelyprovifordelimitatio..onthebasisofagreementw sithneighborinSgtates";
"ltappearsthatapproximate5ly0...[Stat] doptintheirdomestilawadefinitio...thatisinlinewith76(1)
UNCLOS";
"sorne[States] ofurtherindefinithemargininlinewith76 (3)UNCLOS";
"sorne[States]efertotheprovisionsfarticle76ingeneratlerms".
20 WrittenReply,para.10.
21 Ibid.
22 WrittenReply,para.11.
23 WrittenReply,para.14.
4 MinisteriodeRelacioneE sxteriores
RepûblicdaeColombia
LibeyOrden
Andfurthermore:
"Afurther19Statesadheretothe'200nmisobath + exploitabilc'riteriusedinarticle1 ofthe1958
2
ContinentaSlhelfConventioonrsimpltoanexploitabilityriterio;"
"Afurther16Stateslimittheirassertiosfjurisdictioverthecontinentaslhelfto200nm".2
17. ThesumtotaloftheStatesthatNicaragua itselfexcludesfromitslistofStatesexpresslyacceptingthat
paragraph(s4)- (7)ofarticle76encompasts he"definition"fthecontinentaslhelf,considerabeduces thefigure
of"morethan80States" towhichNicaragua arrivesatinparagraph 14ofitsWrittenReply,purportedtobethatof
Statesthatacceptthatdefinition.
18. Nicaraguaalsoreferstothe.practiceoftwonamedStates,Ecuadoa rndtheUnitedStates,whicharenot
partietotheUNCLOSH . owevera,sfarasEcuadoirsconcernedN ,icaraguaimplymentions withouct orroboration
6
thatcountry'useofthe"detailed criteriundertheprovisionosfparagraph(s5)-(6).2RegardingheUnitedStates,
Nicaraguaquotesa US1987statemena tsproofthattheUnitedStateshas"explicitaccepted thedefinition".But
Nicaragua overlooksthetactthatin thequotedstatementt,he UnitedStatesclearlydifferentiatebsetween "the
properdefinitio.. as reflectin article76,paragraphs(1),(2)and(3)"and the"meansof delimitationt"o be
"carrieoutinaccordancw eithparagraph(s4),(5),(6)and(7)"8
19. TheUnitedStatesStateDepartmen BtureaofOceans andInternationaalndScientifAffairshassaidthat
"[o]nlyasa partytotheConventioc nantheUnitedStatessecureitssovereign rightstothevastresources ofour
continentaslhelfbeyond200nm fromshore."29
20. lnparagraph 18ofitsWrittenReply,Nicaraguadrawsattentiontothefactthatnon-signatorietsUNCLOS
maysubmitcommenttsotheCommissioo nntheLimitsoftheContinenta Slhelf(CLCSw) ithrespecttosubmissions
madebypartiestoUNCLOS. Thispossibiliyoesnotmeanthatsuchnon-signatorie csonsider NCLOS Article76
(4)-(7)tobereflectivofcustomariynternationllw;atmost,suchcomments suggestthatthesubmittingStatehas
notcomplied withitsconventionlobligatiosndertheseparagraphs.
21. ln paragraph19ofitsWrittenReply,Nicaragua purportsto relyona passage fromtheNicaragua-United
1
Statescase.3l°nthefirstplace,thecitatiprovidedbyNicaragua isincorrect.lnthesecondi,tisinappositea,sit
24 WrittenReply,para.12.
2s WrittenReply,para.13.
26 WrittenReply,para.11.
27 WrittenReply,para.10.
2a WrittenReply,paras.12and13.
2s UnitedStatesStateDepartmeBtureaofOceans andInternationalndScientAffairFactSheet:Wh y theUnited
States Needs to Join the Law of the Sea Convention Now, 21 March 2012,
http://www.State.gov/e/oes/lawofthesea/factsheets/6c605sht14May2012].
3° MilitaryandParamilityctivitinandagainstNicaragu(Nicaraguv.UnitedStatesofAmerica),urisdictand
AdmissibiliJ,udgmentI,.C.J.Reports19p.392.
5 MinisteridoeRelacioneE sxteriores
RepublicdaeColombia
libeyOrden
isconcernew dithextantrulesofcustomarinternationallwwhich,followintheirformatioassuch,werecodifiedin
conventionafolrm.ltdoesnotapplytosituationinwhichatreatyprovisioncornestoembody acustomarr yulewhich
didnotexistpriorto theconclusion oftherelevantconventiona ,sNicaraguaarguesisthecasewithrespectto
UNCLOS Article76.Thus,thereisnoquestiohereofpriorprincipleofcustomariynternationallwceasingtoapply
byvirtueofUNCLOS.
22. Nicaragua'Ws rittenReplyrepresentsnemoreproofofthedistortion offactswhichhascharacterizeid ts
approach tolitigatiinitswrittenandoralpleadingintheinstantcase.But,asColombia emphasizeid nitsWritten
ReplytoJudgeBennouna'q suestionp,racticthatis limitedtothatoftheStatespartyto UNCLOS,regardleso sf
howitmaybepresented c,onstitutsvidenceonlyoftheapplicatioonfconventionablutnotcustomary international
law.AsoneofNicaragua'c sounseilnthepresenpt roceedingsutitelsewheraetarecentseminar:
"Coulda Statethatis nota partyto the [1982]Convention applythe formulaof article76
ascustomary internationllwwithoutgoingtothe[CLCS]?T .hatwouldbe,tosaythe!east,an
unfortunateresult...Butcanthedetailedprovisionof article76beconsidered to becustomary
internationllw?Probabln yot."32
23. lnsum,Nicaragua'w srittenreplyfailstoestablthatUNCLOS Article76(4)-(9r)eflectrulesofcustomary
internationllw.
31 Thecorrectcitationis ibid.,p.424,para.730:"[Wideratofa treatynorm]doesnotmeanthattheyceaseto
existandto applyas principlof customarinternationallaw,evenas regardscountriesthatareparties[to thetreatyin
question]."
32 A.G.OudeElferink,Theouter/imitsofthecontinentaslhe/fbeyond200nau/ i/esundertheframewoofArticle
76of theUnitedNationsConventionontheLawof the Sea(LOSC), at p. 10.Presentatioo the OPRFSeminaronthe
EstablishmenotftheOuterLimitsoftheContineSlhelfbeyond200nauticl ilesunderUNCLOST,okyo,27February2008.
http://www.sof.or.jp/en/topics/p[acpdsfse17May2012]
6
Comments in writing of the Republic of Colombia on the written reply by the Nicaraguan Government to the question put by Judge Bennouna at the public sitting held on the afternoon of 4 May 2012