INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE
OBLIGATION TO NEGOTIATE ACCESS TO THE PACIFIC OCEAN
(BOLIVIA v. CHILE)
MEMORIAL OF THE GOVERNMENT OF THE PLURINATIONAL
STATE OF BOLIVIA
VOLUME I
17 APRIL 2014
I
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................ 1
SECTION I: OVERVIEW OF THE DISPUTE ............................................................................ 1
A. The key Episodes ..................................................................................................... 2
B. The Chile’s Obligation to Negotiate ....................................................................... 7
C. Subject matter of this dispute .................................................................................. 8
SECTION II: JURISDICTION ................................................................................................ 8
SECTION III. RELIEF SOUGHT ........................................................................................... 10
SECTION IV: OUTLINE OF THE MEMORIAL ....................................................................... 10
CHAPTER I ......................................................................................................................... 13
THE FACTS ......................................................................................................................... 13
I. INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................... 13
II. BOLIVIA’S COASTAL TERRITORY ON INDEPENDENCE (1825) .................................. 14
FIGURE I: BOLIVIA’S LOCATION IN SOUTH AMERICA ....................................... 15
FIGURE II: OFFICIAL MAP OF BOLIVIA (1859) ....................................................... 17
III. CHILE’S EXPANSIONIST POLICY .............................................................................. 19
IV. THE TERRITORIAL LIMITS TREATIES ...................................................................... 20
V. THE INVASION OF BOLIVIA’S COASTAL TERRITORY IN 1879 .................................. 23
VI. THE 1884 TRUCE PACT AND 1895 TRANSFER TREATY........................................... 26
VII. THE 1904 TREATY ................................................................................................... 39
VIII. 1920 ACT AND OTHER EXPRESSIONS OF CHILE’S AGREEMENT TO GRANT
BOLIVIA SOVEREIGN ACCESS TO THE SEA ............................................................... 41
A. The 1920 Act ........................................................................................................... 41
B. Events following the 1920 Act ................................................................................. 44
C. The 1926 Kellogg proposal ..................................................................................... 47
D. The 1926 Matte Memorandum ............................................................................... 49
E. The secret Supplementary Protocol of 1929 between Chile and Peru .................... 50
IX. THE 1950 EXCHANGE OF NOTES ............................................................................. 51
X. THE 1961 TRUCCO MEMORANDUM ......................................................................... 57
XI. THE 1975 JOINT DECLARATION OF CHARAÑA ........................................................ 59
A. The Ayacucho Declaration of 1974 ......................................................................... 59
B. The Joint Declaration of 1975 ................................................................................ 60
C. OAS Resolution of August 1975 ............................................................................. 61
D. Proposals in August 1975 ....................................................................................... 62
E. Proposals in December 1975 .................................................................................. 63
F. Events in 1977, including the Joint Declaration of June 1977 ............................... 68
XII. CHILE’S COMMITMENTS BEFORE THE OAS (1979-85) ............................................. 72
A. Events of 1979 ........................................................................................................ 73
B. Events of 1980 – 1983 ............................................................................................ 75
C. Events of 1984 ........................................................................................................ 77
D. Events of 1985 ........................................................................................................ 78
XIII. THE “FRESH APPROACH” TO NEGOTIATIONS (ENFOQUE FRESCO) (1986-1987) ..... 79
A. The new bilateral approach .................................................................................... 79
B. Meeting in April 1987 ............................................................................................. 80
II
C. Bolivia’s two memoranda ....................................................................................... 81
D. Chile’s Rejection of Further Negotiations in 1987 ................................................. 83
XIV. NEGOTIATIONS ATTEMPTS: 1995-2011 ................................................................... 87
A. 1995: Bolivian-Chilean mechanism of Political Consultation ................................ 87
B. Events From 2000 to 2005 ...................................................................................... 87
C. 2006: the 13-Point Agenda ..................................................................................... 89
D. 2011: Chile’s rejection of any further negotiations ................................................ 93
CHAPTER II ........................................................................................................................ 97
THE CHILEAN OBLIGATION ........................................................................................ 97
I. INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................... 97
II. THE NATURE OF THE OBLIGATION TO NEGOTIATE ................................................. 97
A. The Specific Nature of the Obligation to Negotiate Agreed upon by Chile ............ 97
B. Content of the Obligation to Negotiate ................................................................... 100
a. Negotiations must be conducted in Good Faith .................................................. 100
b. Negotiations must be Meaningful ....................................................................... 103
C. Specific Aspects of the Obligation to Negotiate ..................................................... 104
a. Obligation to Make Proposals in Good Faith ..................................................... 104
i. Reasonable proposal ..................................................................................... 106
ii. Take into account the other party’s interests ....................................................... 107
iii. Address the subject matter that the parties agreed to negotiate ........................... 108
b. Obligation to Receive and Consider Proposals in Good Faith .................................... 108
c. Obligation to be willing to negotiate over any and all legal modalities
which might be proposed ............................................................................................ 113
d. No Unreasonable Delay ............................................................................................... 114
e. The Continuing Obligation to Negotiate ...................................................................... 116
D. Conclusion .......................................................................................................................... 119
III. THE PROCESS OF FORMATION OF THE CHILEAN OBLIGATION ........................................ 120
A. Formation of Obligations in International Law ............................................................... 120
a. Obligation Created by Agreements .............................................................................. 120
b. Obligation Created by Conduct and Unilateral Declarations ...................................... 125
B. The Key Episodes in the Process in this Case................................................................... 135
a. The antecedent: the 1895 Transfer Treaty .................................................................. 136
b. The 1920 Act and the 1926 Matte Memorandum ...................................................... 138
c. The 1950 Exchange of Notes ....................................................................................... 142
d. The Nature and Content of the Notes Exchanged ...................................................... 143
e. The Circumstances that Preceded the exchange of Notes ......................................... 144
f. The Circumstances that Followed the 1950 Exchange of Notes (The 1961
Trucco Memorandum) ................................................................................................. 146
g. The 1975 Joint Declaration of Charaña ...................................................................... 148
h. The Subsequent Confirmation by Chile of its Agreement within the
Framework of the OAS ................................................................................................ 150
I. THE BINDING NATURE OF CHILE’S COMMITMENT ......................................................... 151
A. The Binding Nature of Agreements Entered into by Chile ............................................... 151
B. The Binding Nature of Unilateral Promises Made by Chile ............................................ 153
IV. CONCLUSION ..................................................................................................................... 154
CHAPTER III ................................................................................................................................. 157
CHILE’S BREACH OF ITS OBLIGATION ............................................................................. 157
I. INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................... 157
SECTION I: DEGRADATION OF THE NEGOTIATIONS TERMS....................................................... 157
A. Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 157
III
B. The failure to negotiate in good faith ................................................................................ 160
C. Chile’s Progressive Withdrawal from its Commitments .................................................. 160
a. Chile’s reversals concerning the 1895 Transfer Treaty ............................................... 160
b. Chile’s Conduct in the Period of the 1950 Exchange of Notes .................................. 164
c. Chile’s Conduct in 1975................................................................................................ 165
d. Conclusion Concerning the Key Episodes ................................................................... 167
D. Conclusion Concerning the Overall Pattern of Chile’s Conduct .................................... 168
SECTION II: THE REFUSAL OF CHILE TO NEGOTIATE A SOVEREIGN ACCESS TO THE SEA
AND ITS CONSEQUENCES.............................................................................................................. 170
A. The Refusal of Chile to Negotiate the Sovereign Access .................................................. 170
B. Consequences of the Breach by Chile of its Obligation to Negotiate .............................. 189
CONCLUSIONS .............................................................................................................................. 193
SUBMISSIONS AND PRAYER FOR RELIEF ................................................................ 195
INTRODUCTION
1. The Plurinational State of Bolivia (“Bolivia”) initiated these proceedings against the Republic of Chile (“Chile”) by its Application dated 24 April 2013. By its Order dated 18 June 2013, the Court fixed 17 April 2014 as the date for the filing Bolivia’s written pleadings. The present Memorial is submitted in accordance with that Order.
2. This Introduction is divided into four sections. Section I provides an overview of the dispute before the Court and summarizes Bolivia’s position. Section II explains the basis of the Court’s jurisdiction. Section III sets out the relief sought. Section IV provides an outline of the structure of this Memorial.
Section I: Overview of the dispute
3. The present dispute concerns the non-compliance by Chile with its obligation to negotiate in good faith a sovereign access for Bolivia to the Pacific Ocean, and its repudiation of that obligation. Bolivia was deprived of its coastal territories when they were occupied by Chile in the War of the Pacific in 1879. In agreements with Bolivia, as well as in its own unilateral declarations, Chile expressly recognized that Bolivia should not become perpetually landlocked, and bound itself to negotiate a sovereign access that would allow Bolivia to maintain its connection to the sea. But after more than a century Chile has not fulfilled that obligation. Indeed, after decades of prevarication, during which there was a steady degradation of the terms on which Chile had agreed to negotiate, Chile shifted its position and has now completely repudiated its obligation. Bolivia asks the Court to order the Parties to resume negotiations in good faith on such access, as they have agreed to do on many occasions since the nineteenth century. The two States themselves will negotiate the exact terms of that sovereign access.
2
4. Bolivia’s case is focused upon the continuing failure of Chile to fulfil its obligation to negotiate a sovereign access and upon its recent repudiation of that obligation. Chapter I of this Memorial sets out a detailed account of the historical evolution of the dispute from the occupation of Bolivia’s coastal territory up to the present. The following is an overview of the key episodes.
A. THE KEY EPISODES
5. In 6 August 1825 the independent State of Bolivia emerged from the administrative province of Audiencia de Charcas established in 1559 under the Spanish dominion. Bolivia inherited the coastal territory of this province in accordance with the uti possidetis principle; and no objection was raised to its territorial boundaries by Chile or by any other State1.
6. In the 1840s, Chile began making claims to Bolivia’s coastal area – the Department of Littoral (“Departamento Litoral”), aware of its rich natural resources2. After long negotiations, a decision was reached finally between Bolivia and Chile by a treaty dated 10 August 1866. By this treaty, Chile recognized that “the line of demarcation of boundaries between Chile and Bolivia in the desert… shall henceforth be the parallel of latitude 24 degrees south¨. And a subsequent treaty, signed at Sucre in 6 August 1874, confirmed the 24 parallel as the boundary between the two States. Another treaty, “respecting boundaries”, was signed at Sucre in 6 August 18743.
1 Chap. I paras. 37-41.
2 Chap. I paras. 47-48.
3 See MB Vol. II, Annex 96.
3
7. In 1877 an earthquake devastated the area and Bolivia ordained a tax to fund the relief effort. Chilean investors disputed that tax; and in 1879, despite Bolivia’s proposal to submit the controversy to arbitration, and the cancellation of the tax, Chile used the dispute to justify its invasion of Bolivia’s coastal territory4.
8. In the face of Chile’s threats of a further invasion, Bolivia signed at Valparaiso on 4 April, 1884 a Truce Pact5 providing that Chile would continue to govern the occupied coastal area of Bolivia6. The parties agreed, however, that the Truce Pact be complemented by another peace agreement providing for Bolivia’s sovereign access to the sea.
9. Accordingly, on 18 May 1895, Bolivia and Chile concluded a Treaty of Peace and Friendship, which confirmed the loss for Bolivia of its extensive and resource-rich Department of Littoral for the benefit of Chile, together with a Treaty on Transfer of Territory (the “1895 Transfer Treaty”), providing for the grant to Bolivia of an outlet to the Pacific Ocean7. These instruments, and the accompanying explanatory and additional protocols, provided that Chile’s right to govern the occupied coastal territories would be subject to Bolivia’s “free and natural access to the sea.”8 In particular, Chile expressly committed itself “to acquire the port and territories of Tacna and Arica”, then in dispute with Peru, “with the unavoidable purpose of ceding them to Bolivia.”9 Chile further undertook that if it did not succeed in obtaining this territory, it would give Bolivia an alternative sovereign access to the Pacific through “Vítor or another equivalent inlet” and recognized that its obligation “will not be regarded as fulfilled, until it cedes a port
4 Chap. I paras. 53-57.
5 Chap. I paras. 60-64.
6 See BM Vol. II, Annex 108, Article II.
7 See BM Vol. II, Annexes 99 and 98, Chap. I paras. 71-88.
8 See BM Vol. II, Annex 98. Preamble.
9 See BM Vol. II, Annex 105. Art. III.
4
and area that fully satisfies the current and future needs of Bolivian trade and industry.”10
10. The so-called relations of peace and friendship were re-established between Bolivia and Chile by the 20 October 1904 Treaty of Peace and Friendship,11 bringing an end to the regime established by the Truce Pact (Article I). Chile’s dominion over the occupied territories was recognised and a new boundary was established (Article II). Chile recognised that Bolivia had a right of free commercial transit through Chile’s territories and ports on the Pacific (Article VI) and provided for financial compensations (Article IV) and the building of a railroad from Arica to La Paz (Article III). Sovereign access to the sea was not addressed in the 1904 Treaty.
11. Chile affirmed its will to negotiate a sovereign access to the Pacific in declarations before the League of Nations and, in the Officially Approved Act of 10 January 1920 (“1920 Act”) pursuant to which it confirmed its willingness “to make all efforts for Bolivia to acquire an access to the sea of its own, by ceding a significant part of the area to the north of Arica.”12 A proposal to similar effect was made by American Secretary of State Frank B. Kellogg in 192613 and Bolivia subsequently accepted Chile’s offer (set out by the Chilean Minister of Foreign Affairs, Mr. Jorge Matte) to negotiate transfer of a strip of territory and a port to Bolivia. Nonetheless, in 1929 Chile concluded a boundary Treaty and a Complementary Protocol with Peru pursuant to which Chile acquired Arica while committing itself not to transfer this territory without Peru’s consent.14
10 Ibid., Art. IV.
11 See BM Vol. II, Annex 100.
12 See BM Vo
Memorial of Bolivia