Connect with us

Hi, what are you looking for?

top

Kenya

Kenya asks International Court of Justice to dismiss Somalia’s maritime boundary claim

According to international lawyer Prof Payam Akhavan Kenya’s activities at the disputed sea were only transitory and furthermore had been temporarily suspended.

It was his submission that Kenya had no interest in stealing Somalia’s oil.

“Oil has yet to be discovered let alone exploited and even if it were to be discovered tomorrow, production would be at least a decade away,” he said.

The court further heard that there was a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) signed by the two parties on April 7, 2009 committing that the two countries would resolve the boundary row through negotiations.

“All that Kenya asserts is that the agreements must be performed in good faith. Somalia cannot re-repudiate its obligations and then portray itself as a victim of Kenya. The MOU sets out the agreed procedure of settling this dispute. It must be followed,” Muigai opined.

If the MOU failed to resolve the dispute, he explained that part 15 of the Procedures and the UN Convention of the Law of the Sea would then be employed.

It was an argument supported by the rest of the six submissions made by lawyers representing Kenya including Kenyan Ambassador to the Netherlands Rose Makena who appeared as Kenya’s co-agent.

Akhavan argued that there were two agreements reached between Kenya and Somalia detailing that the maritime dispute would be resolved through negotiations.

Moving to court over the dispute, he submitted was not stated anywhere in the two agreements – the MOU and Part 15 of the Procedures that safeguard contracting by negotiation.

Advertisement. Scroll to continue reading.

“They both categorically exclude the court’s jurisdiction. The case before you is as simple as that,” he stated.

About The Author

Pages: 1 2 3

Comments
Advertisement

More on Capital News