| WHAT DID ROMANIA REQUEST IN THE HAGUE? 17/09/2008 |
| (2008-09-18) |
| Last updated: 2008-09-18 16:21 EET |
Romanian diplomats and their team mates, foreign experts in international law, presented in detail the delineation line suggested by Bucharest, a line which, they claim, takes into account the geographic context of the region and the relation between the two states’ relevant coasts.
The final hearing of Bucharest’s arguments took place precisely four years after Romania asked the Court to resolve the dispute, after over 20 rounds of failed bilateral negotiations. The issue under dispute is the status of the Serpent Island, which is key to the delineation of an area of close to 12 thousand square km. And what is actually on the line is a substantial natural gas and oil deposit, which according to expert opinions may meet Romania’s needs for the next 20 years.
Transferred to the Soviet Moscow in 1948 by the former communist regime in Bucharest, and taken over by Ukraine, as a successor state, the 17-hectare island, which is uninhabited and lacks drinkable water resources, is a mere cliff, in international law terms. As such, Kiev cannot extend its exclusive economic area around it. The lawsuit filed by Bucharest has economic reasons, and not for a moment did Romania reclaim the island.
Under a presidential decree, the Ukrainians recently set up the so-called White Village on the Serpent Island. The settlement is made up of a coast guard unit, a hotel, a bank office and scarce infrastructure. But Romania’s representative in The Hague, Bogdan Aurescu, emphasised that, quote “Ukraine’s attempts to artificially change the natural features of the island have no judicial significance or influence on this lawsuit. The Serpent Island must be ignored, otherwise the continental shelf line would be distorted.” Unquote. Ukrainian experts are to present their final arguments on Thursday and Friday, and then Court judges are to deliberate. Bogdan Aurescu explains:
“According to Court procedure, this takes three to six months after the two parties have presented their arguments. So we can estimate that early next year we will have a final and binding verdict of the Court on this matter.”
|
2025-04-03
Print
Listen again