bitral Award of 31 July 19

uinea-Bissau vs. Senega

Marcos - Reyes
Guinea-Bissau

Senegal
tement of the Facts
26 April 1960 an agreement by
nge of letters was concluded b
e and Portugal
r the accession to independen
gal and Guinea-Bissau a dispu
between the two States conce
elimitation of their maritime a
 3 August 1989, Guinea-Bissau
a unilateral application institu
edings against Senegal in the
ational Court of Justice
ea-Bissau contended that the
al Award of 1989 was inexiste
be considered as null and vo
ble of Arguments
ISSUES REPUBLIC OF REPUBLIC OF
GUINEA-BISSAU SENEGAL
Whether or not The Republic of Senegal asserts that it
the Agreement of Guinea-Bissau had always been aware
26 April 1960 has contends that when, of the Franco-
Portuguese
the force of law in in September 1977,
negotiations which
the relations negotiations culminated in the
between the between the Parties Agreement of 26 April
Republic of were, on its 1960, since the French
Senegal and the initiative, begun for delegation included a
Republic of the purpose of Senegalese member,
Guinea-Bissau. settling the question that it has constantly
of the determination relied on the 240
of the maritime maritime boundary
defined by the 1960
boundary between
Agreement, and that
them,
Guinea-Bissau was Guinea-Bissau had
not even aware of also respected the
the existence of the Agreement, that for
Franco-Portuguese many years it has
exchange of letters not protested
of 26 April 1960, and against it and that
it was only from the proclamation of
1978 on that the independence 05
Republic of Senegal Guinea-Bissau, in its
invoked it in the reference to the
course of the boundaries of the
negotiations. territorial waters,
tacitly recognized I
the 240" limit.
 Whether or not the Guinea-Bissau claims
Arbitral Award of 31 that the Award is not
July 1989 is supported by a real
inexistent and majority. It does not
should be dispute the fact that
considered as null the Award was
and void. expressed to have
been adopted by the
votes of President
Barberis and Mr.Gros;
it contends however
that President
Barberis declaration
contradicted and
invalidated his vote,
thus leaving the
award unsupported
by a real majority,
In this regard,
Guinea-Bissau drew
attention to the
terms of operative
clause of the award
and on the
language advocated
by President
Barberis in his
declaration.
Ruling
The Tribunal had stated
clearly in the
present award that the
1960 agreement
was valid, wholly valid
The court rejected the
submissions of Guinea-
Bissau that the Arbitral