Colombia will not lose its maritime boundaries in San Andres and other islands as a result of The Hague ruling

July 14, 2023

Colombia celebrates victory in the maritime boundaries dispute after the historic ruling of the international tribunal in The Hague. Nicaragua cannot appeal.

On July 13, 2023, the tribunal in The Hague surprised by issuing its ruling in favor of Colombia. After decades of dispute over maritime boundaries that would affect the area of the San Andres archipelago and other keys and atolls, it is declared that Colombia will not lose sovereignty over the continental shelf.

| You may be interested in: Alarming! Traveling to Mexico has become a headache for Colombians

Carlos Arévalo, dean of the Faculty of Law and Political Sciences of the Universidad de La Sabana, affirms that the ruling saved Colombia from a really complex panorama.

What does the Hague ruling say about the maritime boundaries of Colombia and Nicaragua?

On the morning of July 13, the reading of the verdict began with a contextualization of the litigation from the origin of the dispute to the present day. The arguments of the parties were presented, the aspects to be taken into account in the maritime boundaries dispute were clarified, and similar cases that could be taken as a reference were named.

The Court emphasized that this was a case of characteristics that had not been presented previously, and proceeded to issue the judgment that puts an end to a dispute that originated in 2001.

After declaring that the arguments put forward by the plaintiff were unfounded, the International Court of The Hague issued a judgment in favor of Colombia and reaffirmed its rights over the disputed continental shelf.

Judge and President of the Court, Joan Donoghue, stated that “The Court, by 13 votes to 4, rejects the petition of the Republic of Nicaragua”, in a historic moment that exceeded the expectations of Colombians.

What did Nicaragua want?

Arevalo states that the Central American country’s claims are based on the premise that Nicaragua was entitled to an extended continental shelf. To date, the real motives behind the dispute had been kept confidential.

The first claim has to do with the delimitation of the zone, with which the Nicaraguan government sought extended maritime boundaries. In other words, Nicaragua proposed to draw an equidistant line between its extended continental shelf and the 200 miles from the Colombian coast.

For the international Court, this request lacked legal support, since no basis was presented that would dictate that Nicaragua, or any other state, could demand that it be granted an extended continental shelf that would affect the right of other countries over the 200 miles included in its maritime boundaries.

The second claim is related to the San Andres archipelago. Nicaragua claimed that it would have maritime rights over the area, which would have left Colombia with rights over the commercial zone and Nicaragua with rights to the use of the maritime soil and subsoil. This claim was also denied.

In the case of the third claim, the Court affirmed that the decision taken in the 2012 judgment was reiterated and clarified that it was not necessary to go further into the matter. This ruling would have reaffirmed and clarified the maritime boundaries of both countries, understanding that they reach 200 miles from the coastal zone.

| You may also be interested in: Everything about the tax filing deadline 2023

What does the ruling mean for Colombia?

The historic ruling reaffirms Colombia’s rights over the continental shelf, as well as the line that draws the maritime boundaries. In other words, Colombia has the right not only to the exploitation and administration of the resources available in the 200 miles that correspond to it, but its sovereignty over the soil and subsoil of the area is confirmed.

This means, according to Arevalo, that the country retains all rights over the continental shelf.

Although the claim issued by the Central American country did not put at risk the area comprising the exploitation and administration of natural resources, nor the area for scientific research, if Nicaragua’s claim had been granted, experts affirm that Colombia would have had to face gigantic challenges.

In the event of a contrary ruling, Nicaragua would have rights to the soil and subsoil that could only be accessed through the Colombian sea, which experts qualify as a scenario prone to political tensions.

Historical background

The dispute between the Central American country and Colombia dates back to 2001, the year in which the Republic of Nicaragua filed a lawsuit before the international tribunal claiming a maritime area of more than 50,000 square kilometers.

These maritime boundaries included the island of San Andres and several nearby islets and atolls such as Santander, Rocoso, and Acuario.

In response to this first claim, Colombia filed preliminary objections pending a favorable ruling.

At the end of 2007, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) reaffirmed Colombian sovereignty over the archipelago of San Andres, Providencia and Santa Catalina, although the Nicaraguan government decided to continue the dispute.

The maritime boundaries dispute took another turn when on November 19, 2012, a ruling was read in which the international tribunal leaned in favor of Nicaragua. The ruling ordered Colombia to cede about 75 thousand square kilometers of sovereignty in the Caribbean Sea to the Republic of Nicaragua.

After the 2012 ruling, then President Juan Manuel Santos responded that Colombia would abide by the decision without actually implementing it, supported by the constitutional regulations governing the establishment of land and maritime boundaries (according to Article 101 of the 1991 Political Constitution of Colombia).

It should be noted that the ruling issued by The Hague this July 13 is conclusive in nature, so the Central American country will not be able to file any appeal. Therefore, it is the end of the maritime boundaries dispute between the two countries.

Arévalo affirms that the ruling “completely puts an end to the possibility that Nicaragua could have rights in the soil and subsoil beyond what was recognized in the 2012 ruling, so it is a very important ruling for our country that demonstrates the effectiveness of having a State policy in international matters”.