✓ verbatim from the press
Venezuela's Acting President Delcy Rodríguez personally appeared before the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in The Hague on Monday (May 11, 2026) to defend Venezuelan claims over the Essequibo territory — a 160,000-square-kilometer area representing more than 70% of Guyana's current territory. The hearing marks the final phase of proceedings that Guyana unilaterally initiated in 2018 at the international court. ✓
Press quotes (2)
"Accompanying the Acting President Rodríguez on this diplomatic mission are Solicitor General Arianny Seijo, Venezuelan Representative to the ICJ Samuel Moncada, and a renowned team of international jurists: Professors Paolo Palchetti, Christian Tams, Jean-Marc Thouvenin, Andreas Zimmermann, and Makane Mbengue."
"The loss of the territory claimed by Venezuela would eviscerate Guyana. Indeed, the country as we know it would cease to exist," he declared. He said generations of Guyanese have lived under what he described as the "long and threatening shadow" of Venezuela's claim to more than 70 per cent of Guyana's territory."
Venezuela argues that the 1966 Geneva Agreement is the only valid legal framework for resolving the dispute, claiming this agreement recognizes that the 1899 Arbitral Award is "null and void." Rodríguez was accompanied by a team of international jurists including Professors Paolo Palchetti, Christian Tams, Jean-Marc Thouvenin, Andreas Zimmermann, and Makane Mbengue. ✓
Press quotes (1)
"While Guyana urges the International Court of Justice (ICJ) to uphold the 1899 award to resolve the land border controversy, the 1966 Geneva Agreement clearly stipulates that the 1899 award is null and void. The 1966 agreement stipulates that a practical, mutually acceptable solution must be sought through direct negotiation between the two countries."
Guyana, for its part, requested the ICJ to affirm the legal validity and binding effect of the 1899 Arbitral Award, arguing it constitutes a full, perfect and final settlement of the issue under international law. Guyana's Attorney General Anil Nandlall argued that the boundary determined by the 1899 decision was recognized and implemented by Venezuela for more than 60 years before its belated challenge. ✓
Press quotes (2)
"Guyana requested the Court to affirm the legal validity and binding effect of the Arbitral Award which established the land boundary between Guyana and Venezuela. Guyana argued that the Award constitutes a full, perfect and final settlement of the issue under international law"
"the boundary it determined was recognized and implemented by Venezuela for more than 60 years before its belated challenge to it. Guyana argued that Venezuela's claim to the territory west of the Essequibo River is thus without legal foundation."
On April 6, 2023, the ICJ rejected Venezuela's preliminary objection concerning the exercise of the Court's jurisdiction and found it could adjudicate upon the merits of Guyana's claims. The court's final decision may take months to announce but will have definitive character under international law, according to the legislation governing the tribunal. ✓
Press quotes (1)
"In its Judgment of 6 April 2023 (hereinafter the "2023 Judgment"), the Court rejected Venezuela's preliminary objection concerning the exercise of the Court's jurisdiction and found that it could adjudicate upon the merits of the claims of Guyana, in so far as they fell within the scope of the operative clause of the 2020 Judgment."
The dispute involves the Essequibo territory, an area of approximately 160,000 square kilometers
Covered by only some sources, or where the accounts diverge.
Covered by only some sources (2)
Venezuela does not recognize the ICJ's binding jurisdiction to decide the merits of the dispute
Conflicting versions (1)
Characterization of the 1899 Arbitral Award
-
When should the ICJ announce its final decision on the validity of the 1899 Arbitral Award?
Why it's still unknown: Sources only indicate the decision 'may take months to announce', without specific timeline
-
What is Brazil's position on the territorial dispute between its neighbors?
Why it's still unknown: No source mentions Brazil's diplomatic stance on the border conflict
-
What are the specific natural resources at stake in the Essequibo region?
Why it's still unknown: Sources generically mention 'gold, diamonds, timber' and 'coastal oil deposits', but without quantification of reserves