reports of international arbitral awards recueil des...

REPORTS OF INTERNATIONALARBITRAL AWARDS

RECUEIL DES SENTENCESARBITRALES

Eritrea-Ethiopia Claims Commission - Final Award - Eritrea's Damages Claims

17 August 2009

XXVI pp. 505-630VOLUME

NATIONS UNIES - UNITED NATIONSCopyright (c) 2009

ParT XVii

Final Award Eritrea’s Damages Claims

Decision of 17 August 2009

Sentence finale Réclamations de dommages de l’Érythrée

Décision du 17 août 2009

partxvii—FinalAWARD eritrea’sdamagesclaims 507

FinalAward,Eritrea’sDamagesClaimsDecisionof17August2009

Sentencefinale,Réclamationsdedommagesdel’Érythrée,Décisiondu17août2009

Thefinalawardsonclaims fordamagescomplete theCommission’swork—exceptforadministrati�ematters,dispositionofitsarchi�esandpotentialpost-Awardmatters .

Compensationcanonlybeawardedwhere there is e�idence sufficient in thecircumstancestoestablishtheextentofdamagecausedbyconducttheCommissionpre�iouslyfoundtoha�e�iolatedinternationallaw .TheawardsprobablydonotreflectthetotalityofdamagessufferedbyeitherPartybutratherthedamagesthatcouldbeestablishedwithsufficientcertaintythrougha�ailablee�idenceincomplexinterna-tionallegalproceedingsbetweenPartieswithmodestresourcesandlimitedtime .

E�idenceofphysicaldamage tobuildingsand infrastructure ismorereadilygatheredandpresentedthane�idenceoftheextentof injuries, includingphysical,economicandmoralinjuries,tolargenumbersofindi�iduals .Thereisnosharpdis-tinctionbetweenlossofpropertyanddeathorpersonalinjuryinpoorcountrieswheresecurityofpropertyisoften�italtosur�i�al .Awardsforlossordestructionofpropertyfrequentlystemfromseriousthreatstophysicalintegrity .

Thecompensationclaimsarealmostentirelyfor�iolationsoflawsufferedbytheStatepartyratherthanclaimsonbehalfofitsnationals .Thecompensationawardedreflectstheseriousnessofthose�iolationsandtheireffectsontheClaimantStatePartyratherthanappropriatecompensationforindi�idual�ictims .

On13April2006,theCommissionestablishedasimplified“fast-track”dam-agesphase,in�ol�ingalimitednumberoflegalpleadingsande�idenceaswellasatightscheduleofhearings,tolimitthesignificantfinancialandotherburdensimposeduponbothParties .TheCommissionalsoreiterateditsrecurringconcernthatproceedsaccruingfromthedamagesproceedingsbeusedbythePartiestoassistci�ilian�ictimsoftheconflict .

The Parties’ limited economic capacity is rele�ant in determining damagesclaims .ThereisanintersectionofthelawofStateresponsibilitywithfundamentalhumanrightsnorms .ThefundamentalhumanrightslawruleofcommonArticle1(2)oftheInternationalCo�enantsisapplicabletothePartiesnotwithstandingthedele-tionofthisqualificationbytheInternationalLawCommission(ILC)intheArticlesonStateResponsibility .Thereisnoneedtodecidethequestionofapossiblecapondamages in lightof thePartiesobligationsunderhumanrights lawinthepresentcircumstances .

TheParties’o�eralleconomicpositionisalsorele�anttodeterminingcompensa-tionfor�iolationsofjus in bello.ThepurposeofcompensationpayablebyaresponsibleStateistowipeoutallconsequencesoftheillegalactandreestablishthepreexistingsit-uation(Chorzów FactoryandILCArticlesonStateResponsibility,art .31) .DiplomaticprotectionclaimsbyaStateonbehalfofitsnationalsarebasedoninjurytotheState,

508 ERITREA/ETHIOPIA

buttheextentofinjurytoaffectedindi�idualscanplayasignificantroleinassessingtheState’sinjury .Compensationhasalimitedrolewhichisremedial,notpuniti�e .Insituationsin�ol�ingdiplomaticprotection,compensationmustbeassessedinlightofthesocialandeconomiccircumstancesoftheinjuredindi�idualsinrespectofwhomtheStateisclaiming .Compensationdeterminedinaccordancewithinternationallawcannotremedytheworld’seconomicdisparities .

Theinternationallawrulegi�ingbindingeffecttomattersalreadyauthoritati�elydecided(res judicata)hasparticularrele�anceatthisstageoftheproceedings .TheCommission’spre�iousfindingsonclaimsof�iolationsofinternationallawarefinalandbinding,anddefinetheextentofpossibledamages .CompensationcanonlybeawardedforinjurieswhichbearasufficientlyclosecausalconnectionwithconductthattheCommissionpre�iouslyfoundto�iolateinternational law .ThetaskoftheCommissionatthisphaseisnottore�iseorexpanditspriorfindingsonliability,buttoapplythosefindingsindeterminingappropriatecompensation .

TheCommissionrequiredclearandcon�incinge�idencethatdamageoccurred,butlessrigorousproofforpurposesofthequantificationofdamageswhichrequiresexercisesofjudgmentandapproximation .Incommercialarbitration,lackofe�idencemaywarrantdismissalofadamagesclaimforfailureofproof .Incontrast,whenseri-ous �iolations of international law, causing harm to many indi�iduals, ha�e beendetermined,itwouldbeinappropriatetodismisstheclaimoutright .TheCommissionrecognizeditsobligationtodetermineappropriatecompensation,e�eniftheprocessin�ol�esestimationorguessworkwithintherangeofpossibilitiesindicatedbythee�idence .TheCommissionfurthertookintoaccountatrade-offfundamentaltorecentinternationaleffortstoaddressinjuriesaffectinglargenumberof�ictims .Compensa-tionle�elswerethusreduced,balancinguncertaintiesflowingfromthelowerstandardofproof .

Compensationcanonlybeawardedinrespectofdamagesha�ingasufficientcausalconnectionwithconductthat�iolatesinternationallaw .Thenecessarycon-nectioncharacterizedbytheterm“proximatecause”requiresachainofcausationsufficientlycloseinaparticularsituation,takingintoaccountwhethertheparticulardamageshouldha�ebeenreasonablyforeseeabletoanactorcommittingtheinterna-tionaldelictinquestion .

Determiningcompensationinlargeinter-Stateclaimsisnotamechanicalproc-ess .TheCommissionconsideredmultiplefactors,includingthenature,seriousnessandextentofparticularunlawfulacts,whethertheactswereintentional,aswellasanymitigatingorextenuatingcircumstances .Italsoconsideredthenumberofpersonswhowere�ictimsofparticular�iolationsandtheimplicationsfortheirfutureli�es .

TheCommissiondecidednottoawardinterestsincetheclaimsandawardsarebroadlysimilar;interestonthecompensationwouldnotmateriallyaltertheParties’eco-nomicpositions;theamountsawardedinmanycasesreflectestimatesandapproximateswhichmilitatesagainstinterest;andthePartiesha�ebeendiligentandcooperati�ewithnoprejudiceresultingfromdilatoryconduct .

Theconceptofconsequentialdamageshasasignificantroleinsomenationallegalsystems,butdoesnotexistinothers,andsocannotbe�iewedasageneralprincipleoflaw .Internationallawdoesnotrecognizeaseparatecategoryofcompensable“conse-quentialdamages”in�ol�ingdifferentstandardsoflegalcausationorotherdistincti�e


legalelements .Eritrea’sclaiminthisregardwasthusexaminedinaccordancewiththeprinciplesgenerallyapplicableindeterminingdamagesininternationalclaims .

Generalizedconditionsofwar-relatedeconomicdisruptionanddeclinedonotconstitutecompensableelementsofdamage,e�eninthecaseofsometypesofinjurybearingarelati�elycloseconnectiontoillegalconduct .

Internationalhumanitarianlawaccordsspecialprotectiontomedicalfacilitiesandpersonnel,andci�ilianswhodependonthem .Wheretherearewidespreadunlaw-fuldamagestomedicalfacilities,particularlywheretheyarefewinnumber,itshouldbereasonablyforeseeablethatinjurywillresulttoprotectedpersons .Thecausalcon-nectionthusestablished,theCommissionwasrequiredtoestimatetheextentofinjurytoci�iliansduetolossofaccesstohealthcare,onaccountofdamagetoordestructionofhospitalsandothermedicalfacilities,andlossofmedicalsupplies .

Serious damage to a significant object of cultural patrimony warrants someawardofcompensationgoingbeyondthemerecostofattemptingtorestoretheobjecttoitsearlierappearance .

The2000AgreementestablishedthejurisdictionoftheCommission,butdidnotcreatesubstanti�erights .TheParties’claimsfor�iolationsofinternationallawgener-allyremainsubjecttoanyqualificationsorlimitationsapplicableundercustomaryinternationallaw .TheCommissionrecognizedthecontinuedforceoftheruleofdomi-nantandeffecti�enationalityinmanycircumstances,butheldthatitmustbequalifiedincertainsituations .Article5(9)ofthe2000AgreementisacompellingindicationthatthePartiesdidnot�iewthegeneralrulesofdiplomaticprotectionasapplyingintheunusualcircumstancesthatledtotheAgreement .Itcannotbethat,insuchsitu-ations,internationallawwouldallowaState,ha�ingwrongfullyexpelledpersonsordepri�edthemoftheirnationality,todenyresponsibilitybecauseofthe�erysocialconnectionsorbondsofnationalitythatwereendedbythatsameState .

AsrecognizedbytheInternationalCourtofJusticeintheCorfu Channel case,whereaninjuryisnon-materialandhencenotcompensablebyrestitutionorcom-pensation,theappropriateformofreparationissatisfaction .TheappropriateformofreparationforEthiopia’sseriousbutnon-materialinterferencewithanuncertainnumberofdepartingEritreandiplomatswasthereforefoundtobesatisfactionintheformofadeclarationofwrongfulness .

Lestra�auxdelaCommissionsesontache�ésparlasentencefinalesurlesrécla-mationsdedommages, àl’exceptiondequestionsadministrati�es,desdispositionsrelati�esàsesarchi�esetd’é�entuellesquestionsseposantunefoislasentencepro-noncée .

Uneindemnisationnepeutêtreallouéequedanslecasoùl’étenduedudom-mage,causéparuncomportementpréalablementconsidéréparlaCommissioncom-mecontraireaudroit,aétésuffisammentprou�éeenl’espèce .LessentencesnereflètentassurémentpaslatotalitédesdommagessubisparchacunedesParties,maisplutôtlesdommagesquiontpuêtreétablisa�ecsuffisammentdecertitudeaumoyendespreu�esdisponiblesdanslecadredeprocéduresjudiciairesinternationalescomplexesentrePartiesnedisposantquederessourcesmodestesetdetempslimité .


Lapreu�edudommagematérielinfligéauxbâtimentsetinfrastructuresestplusaisémentréunieetprésentéequelapreu�edel’étenduedespréjudices,ycompriscor-porels,économiquesetmoraux,subisparungrandnombred’indi�idus . Iln’existepasdedistinctionclaireentrelapertedelapropriétéetledécèsoulepréjudicecorporeldanslespayspau�res,paysdanslesquelslagarantiedelapropriétéestsou�entindis-pensableà lasur�ie . Les indemnisationsaccordéespour laperteou ladestructiond’unepropriétédécoulentfréquemmentdemenacesgra�esàl’encontredel’intégritécorporelle .

Lesréclamationsd’indemnisationrelè�entpourlaplupartde�iolationsdudroitsubiesparl’EtatPartie,plutôtquederéclamationsintroduitesaunomdesesnationaux .L’indemnisationoctroyéereflèteda�antagelecaractèregra�edeces�iolationsainsique leurs effets sur l’EtatPartiedemandeurqu’une indemnisationappropriéedes�ictimesindi�iduelles .

Le13a�ril2006,laCommissionamisenplaceunephasesimplifiéeetaccéléréerelati�eauxdommages, impliquantunnombrelimitédeplaidoiriesetpreu�esainsiqu’unelisterestreinted’auditions,afindelimiterl’importantechargefinancièreetlesautreschargesimposéesauxdeuxParties . LaCommissionaégalementréitérésacon-stantepréoccupationquelesproduitsdécoulantdesprocéduresd’indemnisationsoientutilisésparlesPartiespour�enirenaideaux�ictimesci�ilesduconflit .

La capacité économique limitée des Parties est un élément important àl’é�aluationdesréclamationsdedommages . Ledroitdelaresponsabilitédel’Etatetlesnormesfondamentalesdesdroitsdel’hommeserecoupent .Larègledesdroitsdel’hommefigurantàl’article1(2)communauxPactesinternationauxs’appliqueauxParties,nonobstantlefaitquelaCommissiondudroitinternational(CDI)n’yfaitpasréférencedanssesarticlessurlaresponsabilitédesEtats .Iln’estpasnécessairedeseprononcersurlaquestiondel’é�entualitéd’unplafonnementdesdommagesau�udesobligationsdécoulantdudroitdesdroitsdel’hommedanslescirconstancesdel’espèce .

LasituationéconomiquegénéraledesPartiesestégalementunélémentpertinentàladéterminationdel’indemnisationrelati�eaux�iolationsdujus in bello.Lebutdel’indemnisationexigibled’unEtatresponsableestd’effacertouteslesconséquencesdel’acteillégaletrétablirlasituationpréexistante(Affaire relative à l’usine de ChorzówetArticlesdelaCDIsurlaresponsabilitédesEtats,art .31) . Bienquelesréclamationsdepro-tectiondiplomatiqueintroduitesparunEtataubénéficedesesnationauxsefondentsurledommagecauséàl’Etatmême,l’étenduedupréjudicecauséauxindi�idusaffectéspeutjouerunrôlesignificatifdansl’é�aluationdudommagecauséàl’Etat . L’indemnisationselimiteàunrôlecorrectif,etnonpunitif . Danslessituationsimpliquantlaprotec-tiondiplomatique,l’indemnisationdoitêtreé�aluéed’aprèslescirconstancessocialesetéconomiquesdesindi�iduslésésaunomdesquelsl’Etatréclameuneindemnisation .L’indemnisationdéterminéeen�ertududroitinternationalnepeutremédierauxdis-paritéséconomiquesdecemonde .

Larèglededroitinternationalconférantuneffetcontraignantauxaffairesbéné-ficiantdel’autoritédelachosejugée(res judicata)re�êtuneimportanceparticulièreàcestadedelaprocédure .LesconclusionsantérieuresdelaCommissionsurlesrécla-mationsde�iolationsdudroitinternationalsontdéfiniti�esetcontraignantes,etdéfi-nissentl’étenduedesé�entuelsdommages . Uneindemnisationnepeutêtreattribuée


quepourlesdommagesprésentantunliendecausalitésuffisammentétroita�eclecomportementquelaCommissionaprécédemmentjugé�iolantledroitinternational . Acestade,latâchedelaCommissionn’estpasdere�oiroud’étendresesprécédentesconclusionssurlaresponsabilité,maisd’appliquercesconclusionsdansladétermina-tiond’uneindemnisationappropriée .

LaCommissionaexigédespreu�esclairesetcon�aincantesdel’occurrencedudommage,maisdespreu�esmoinscontraignantespourcequiestdelaquantificationdudommage,quiappelleàdesexercicesdejugementetapproximation .Danslecadredel’arbitragecommercial,l’absencedepreu�epeutjustifierlerejetd’unedemanded’indemnisationpourfautedepreu�e .Parcontre,lorsquedes�iolationsgra�esdudroitinternational,causantdommageàungrandnombredepersonnes,ontétédéter-minées,ilseraitinappropriédedéboutersansréser�elarequêted’indemnisation .LaCommissionareconnusonobligationdedétermineruneindemnisationcon�enable,mêmesileprocédéimpliqueuneestimation,oumêmeuntra�aildesupposition,dansl’é�entaildescasdefigureindiquésparlapreu�e .LaCommissionaégalementprisencompteuncompromisfondamentalauxrécentseffortsinternationauxdepriseenconsidérationdespréjudicesaffectantungrandnombrede�ictimes .Ainsi,lesni�eauxd’indemnisation ont été réduits, pondérant les incertitudes découlant de critèresd’établissementdespreu�esmoinséle�és .

Uneindemnisationpeutuniquementêtreaccordéepourcequiestdedommagesprésentantunliendecausalitésuffisammentétroita�eclecomportement�iolantledroitinternational . Leliennécessaire,caractériséparlanotionde«causedirecte»,requièreunechaîne decausessuffisammentprochesdansunesituationdonnée, pre-nantenconsidérationsiledommagespécifiqueauraitraisonnablementdûêtrepré�is-iblepourunacteurcommettantledélitinternationalenquestion .

Ladéterminationdel’indemnitédanslecadredelargesréclamationsinteréta-tiques nes’effectuepasparunprocédémécanique .LaCommissionaconsidéréplu-sieursfacteurs,ycomprislanature,lagra�itéetl’étenduedecertainsactesillégaux,l’intentionnalitédecesderniers,ainsiquetoutecirconstanceatténuante .Elleaégale-mentconsidérélenombredepersonnes�ictimesde�iolationsparticulièresetlescon-séquencespourleur�iefuture .

LaCommissionadécidédenepasaccorderd’intérêtétantdonnéquelesréclama-tionsetlesréparationssontlargementsimilaires; unintérêtsurl’indemnitén’altéreraitpasmatériellementlasituationéconomiquedesParties;dansplusieurscas,lessom-mesattribuéesreflètentdesestimationsetapproximationsquimilitentàl’encontred’unintérêt;etlesPartiesontfaitpreu�edediligenceetdecoopérationsanspro�o-queraucunpréjudicerésultantd’uncomportementdilatoire .

Leconceptdedommagesindirectsjoueunrôlesignificatifdanscertainssys-tèmesjuridiquesnationaux,maisn’existepasdansd’autres,etparconséquentnepeutêtreconsidérécommeunprincipegénéraldedroit . Ledroitinternationalnereconnaîtpasunecatégoriedistinctede«dommagesindirects»donnantlieuàindemnisationet impliquantdifférentsni�eauxdecausalitésouautresélémentsjuridiquesdistincts .Ainsi, la réclamationde l’Érythréeàcetégardaétéexaminéeconformémentauxprincipesgénérauxapplicablesàladéterminationdesdommageslorsderéclamationsinternationales .


ERITREA ETHIOPIA CLAIMS COMMISSION

FINAL AWARD Eritrea’s Damages Claims

between The State of Eritrea

and The Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia

BytheClaimsCommission,composedof:

Hans�anHoutte,PresidentGeorgeH .AldrichJohnR .CrookJamesC .N .PaulLucyReed

TheHague,August17,2009

FINAL AWARD––Eritrea’s Damages Claims between the Claimant,

The State of Eritrea, represented by:

Government of EritreaH .E .Mr .MohammedSuliemanAhmed,AmbassadoroftheStateofEri-

treatoTheNetherlandsProfessorLeaBrilmayer,Co-Agent,LegalAd�isortotheOfficeofthe

PresidentofEritrea;HowardM .HoltzmannProfessorofInternationalLaw,YaleLawSchool

Ms .LorraineCharlton,DeputyLegalAd�isortotheOfficeofthePresi-dentofEritrea

Counsel and AdvocatesProfessorJamesR .Crawford,SC,FBA,WhewellProfessorofInterna-

tionalLaw,Uni�ersityofCambridge;MemberoftheAustralianandEnglishBars;MemberoftheInstituteofInternationalLaw

Counsel and ConsultantsMs .HidatBerheMs .AuroraBewicke,Esq .


Mr .GeoffreyChepigaMs .AnnaEngelmannMs .HelenFisseha,Esq .Ms .HillaryForden,Esq .Ms .JulieFreyMs .ChiaraGiorgetti,Esq .Ms .JenniferHanson,Esq .Mr .JamesHookMs .JohannaKlein-Kranenberg,Esq .Ms .AmandaCostikyanJonesMr .JeffreyJordanMr .YohannesSiumMr .IsaiasYemaneTesfalidet,Esq .Mr .ParkerWise,Esq .

and the Respondent, The Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia, represented by:

Government of EthiopiaH .E .AmbassadorFissehaYimer,PermanentRepresentati�eoftheFed-

eralDemocraticRepublicofEthiopiatotheUnitedNations,Gene�aMr .RetaAlemu,FirstSecretary(LegalAd�isor),Coordinator,Claims

Team,MinistryofForeignAffairsoftheFederalDemocraticRepublicofEthi-opia,AddisAbaba

Mr .GirmaKassaye,FirstSecretary,MinistryofForeignAffairsoftheFederalDemocraticRepublicofEthiopia,AddisAbaba

Ms .FirdosaAbdulkadir,ThirdSecretary,MinistryofForeignAffairsoftheFederalDemocraticRepublicofEthiopia,AddisAbaba

Mr .AddisBarega,Attaché,MinistryofForeignAffairsoftheFederalDemocraticRepublicofEthiopia,AddisAbaba

Mr .EphremBezuayhue,Attaché,MinistryofForeignAffairsoftheFed-eralDemocraticRepublicofEthiopia,AddisAbaba

Counsel and ConsultantsMr .B .Dono�anPicard,PicardKentz&RoweLLP,Washington,D .C .;

Memberof theBarof theDistrictofColumbia;Memberof theBarof theSupremeCourtoftheUnitedStates

ProfessorSeanD .Murphy,GeorgeWashingtonUni�ersitySchoolofLaw,Washington,D .C .;MemberoftheStateBarofMaryland


Mr .EdwardB .Rowe,PicardKentz&RoweLLP,Washington,D .C .;Mem-beroftheBaroftheDistrictofColumbia;MemberoftheStateBarofColo-rado

Mr .ThomasR .Snider,Dewey&LeBoeufLLP,Washington,D .C .;Mem-beroftheBaroftheDistrictofColumbia;MemberoftheStateBarofMas-sachusetts

Mr .WonKidane,Pennsyl�aniaStateUni�ersityDickinsonSchoolofLaw,Uni�ersityPark,Pennsyl�ania;MemberoftheBaroftheDistrictofColumbia;MemberoftheStateBarofIllinois

Mr .Da�idG .McConkie,Washington,D .C .,ConsultantMr .BijanGanji,Washington,D .C .,ConsultantMr .BrianBurnor,Washington,D .C .,InformationTechnologyConsultantMs . Donna Edmonds, Picard Kentz & Rowe LLP, Washington, D .C .,

CoordinatorMs .LeylaMyers,Hunton&WilliamsLLP,Washington,D .C .,Profes-

sionalAssistantMs .ElizabethRghebi,Dewey&LeBoeufLLP,Washington,D .C .,Profes-

sionalAssistant

Table of ConTenTs

I . INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 516

II . PROCEDURALASPECTSOFTHEDAMAGESPHASE . . . . . . . 518

III . THEPARTIES’SITUATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 521

IV . APPLICABLELEGALPRINCIPLES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 525

A . Res Judicata . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 525

B . E�idenceandtheBurdenofProofattheDamagesPhase . . . . . 527

C . Causation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 529

V . ASSESSINGCOMPENSATIONANDTECHNICALFINAN-CIALISSUES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 530

A . CurrencyCon�ersion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 530

B . Interest . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 531

C . OtherTechnicalIssues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 532

VI . ERITREA’SGROUPNUMBERONEDAMAGESCLAIMS . . . . . 532

A . TheCommission’sLiabilityFindings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 532


B . LossofPersonalandBusinessProperty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 534C . DamagetoorDestructionofBuildings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 540D . ClaimforConsequentialDamages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 573E . DamagetoCulturalProperty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 579F . PrisonersofWar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 580G . Rape . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 582H . DisplacementofthePopulationofAwgaro . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 584

VII .ERITREA’SGROUPNUMBERTWODAMAGESCLAIMS . . . . 586

A . TheCommission’sLiabilityFindings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 586B . Non-Responsibility for Claims of Nationals; Dominant and

Effecti�eNationality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 586C . Depri�ationofNationality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 587D . WrongfulExpulsion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 595E . HarshConditionsofDeparture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 599F . PropertyLossesByPersonsPre�iouslyResidinginEthiopia . . . . 601G . PropertyLossesByNon-Residents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 608H . OtherNon-ResidentProperty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 614I . UnlawfulDetentionofEritreanCi�ilians . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 614J . DiplomaticClaim . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 617

VIII .INDIVIDUALCLAIMS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 621

A . Claims27and28,HiwotNemariamandBelayRedda . . . . . . . . 622B . Claim29,SertzuGebreMeskel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 624C . Claim30,FekaduAndemeskal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 625D . Claim31,MebrahtuGebremedhin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 627E . Claim32,MebratGebreamlak . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 627

IX . AWARD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 629


i. inTroduCTion1 . WiththisFinalAwardinEritrea’sclaimsfordamages,anditscom-

panionFinalAwardinEthiopia’sdamagesclaims,theEritrea-EthiopiaClaimsCommission largely completes its work .1 The Commission appreciates thecooperationithasrecei�edfrombothPartiesandtheircounselthroughoutthedamagesphaseoftheseproceedings,asintheearlierliabilityphase .Ne�-ertheless,thisphasehasin�ol�edenormouschallenges .Throughtheircounsel,theStatesofEritreaandEthiopiaha�esoughttoquantifytheextentofdamageresultingfrom�iolationsofinternationallawpre�iouslyfoundbytheCom-mission .Asdiscussedbelow,theCommissionhassoughttoapplyproceduresandstandardsofe�idence that takeaccountof thechallenges facingbothParties .Ne�ertheless, theseare legalproceedings .TheCommission’sfind-ingsmustrestone�idence .AstheCommissionhasemphasizedthroughout,compensationcanonlybeawardedwherethereise�idencesufficientinthecircumstancestoestablishtheextentofdamagecausedbyconducttheCom-missionpre�iouslyfoundtoha�e�iolatedinternationallaw .2

2 . Accordingly,theCommissionnotesthatitsawardsofmonetarycom-pensationfordamagesareless—probablymuchless—thanthePartiesbelie�etobedue .TheCommissionthusstandsinthetraditionofmanyotherpastclaimscommissionsthatha�eawardedonlyafractionofthetotalamountsclaimed .3ItsawardsprobablydonotreflectthetotalityofdamagesthateitherPartysufferedin�iolationofinternationallaw .Instead,theyreflectthedam-agesthatcouldbeestablishedwithsufficientcertaintythroughthea�ailablee�idence,inthecontextofcomplexinternationallegalproceedingscarriedoutbythePartieswithmodestresourcesandundernecessarypressuresoftime .

3 . Inthatconnection,theCommissionnotesthate�idenceoftheextentofphysicaldamagetobuildingsandinfrastructureismorereadilygatheredandpresentedthanise�idenceoftheextentofinjuries,includingphysical,economicandmoralinjuries,tolargenumbersofindi�iduals .Thatfactmaywellha�eledtothelesserextentofe�idencethatoftenwasofferedinsupportofclaimsbasedoninjuriestoindi�iduals .Moreo�er,astheclaimsaddressedinthisAwardarealmostentirelyclaimsbytheStatePartyforcompensationfor�iolationsoflawthatithassuffered,ratherthanclaimsonbehalfofitsnationals,theCommissionhasbeencompelledtomakejudgmentsnotastoappropriatecompensationforindi�idual�ictims,butinsteadastotherelati�e

1 Variousadministrati�ematters,includingthefinaldispositionoftheCommissionArchi�e,aswellasanypost-AwardmatterspotentiallyarisingundertheCommission’sRulesofProcedure,remaintobecompleted .

2 See Eritrea-EthiopiaClaimsCommissionDecisionNo .4(“E�idence”)(July24,2001)(“ThePartiesareremindedthatunderArticle5(13)oftheAgreementofDecem-ber12,2000,theCommissionisboundtoapplytherele�antrulesofinternationallawandcannotmakedecisionsex aequo et bono.TherulesthattheCommissionmustapplyincludethoserelatingtotheneedfore�idencetopro�eordispro�edisputedfacts .”)

3 ManleyO .Hudson,InternationalTribunalsp .197(1944) .


seriousnessofthose�iolationsoflawandtheeffectstheyhadontheClaimantStateParty .

4 . TheCommission’sAwardspro�idecompensationinrespectofclaimsbothforlossesofpropertyandfordeathsand�ariousformsofpersonalinjury .Howe�er,itwouldbewrongtodrawasharpdistinctionbetweenthetwotypesofclaims .InpoorcountrieslikeEritreaandEthiopia,withlowincomesandlifeexpectancies,securityofpropertyoftenis�italtosur�i�al .Propertysuchasli�estock,farmers’tools,utensilsandhouseshasadirectimpactonone’spossibilitytosur�i�e .Thus,awardsofcompensationforlossordestructionofpropertyfrequentlystemfromseriousthreatstophysicalintegrity .

5 . AsdescribedinitsearlierPartialAwards,thisCommissionwascre-atedbyArticle5oftheAgreementbetweentheGo�ernmentoftheFederalDemocraticRepublicofEthiopiaandtheGo�ernmentoftheStateofEritreaofDecember12,2000(“theAgreement”or“December2000Agreement”) .4TheAgreementwasawide-rangingdocumentconcludedbytheParties tobring about a comprehensi�e settlement of the May 1998-June 2000 warbetweenthem .UnderArticle5(1),“[t]hemandateoftheCommissionistodecidethroughbindingarbitrationallclaimsforloss,damageorinjurybyoneGo�ernmentagainsttheother”relatedtothe1998–2000conflictthat“resultfrom�iolationsofinternationalhumanitarianlaw,includingthe1949Gene�aCon�entions,orother�iolationsofinternationallaw .”

6 . Beginningin2001,andcontinuingthroughouttheproceedings,theCommissionengagedinextensi�econsultationswiththeParties .Followingsuchconsultations, itdecidedatanearlystagefirsttodecidethemeritsoftheParties’ liabilityclaims .Then, if liabilitywereestablishedandthePar-ties,oreitherofthem,wishedtodoso,theCommissionwouldholdfurtherproceedingsregardingtheamountofdamages .Accordingly,theCommissionheldfourroundsofhearingsonthemeritsofbothParties’claimsbetweenNo�ember2002andApril2005 .BetweenJuly1,2003andDecember19,2005,itissuedfourgroupsofPartialandFinalAwardsaddressingclaimsofbothParties .TheCommissionrenderedthefollowingAwardsonEritrea’sclaims: – PrisonersofWar(Eritrea’sClaim17)(PartialAward,July1,2003); – CentralFront(Eritrea’sClaims2,4,6,7,8&22)(PartialAward,

April28,2004); – Ci�iliansClaims(Eritrea’sClaims15,16,23&27–32)(Partial

Award,December17,2004);

4 TheCommission’spre�iousworkisdescribedinitsAwards,a�ailableontheweb-siteofthePermanentCourtofArbitration,www .pca-cpa .org .Throughoutthisprocess,theSecretary-Generalandstaffof thePermanentCourtofArbitrationha�epro�idedhighlyprofessionalandefficientsupportfortheCommission,whichrecordsitssincereappreciationforallthathasbeendoneonitsbehalf .TheCommissionexpressesparticularthankstoMs .BelindaMacmahon,whohasser�edasitsRegistrarsince2004withunstint-ingefficiencyandprofessionalism .


– WesternFront,AerialBombardmentandRelatedClaims(Eritrea’sClaims1,3,5,9–13,14,21,25&26)(PartialAward,December19,2005);

– Pensions(Eritrea’sClaims15,19&23)(FinalAward,December19,2005);

– LossofPropertyinEthiopiaOwnedbyNon-Residents(Eritrea’sClaim24)(PartialAward,December19,2005);and

– DiplomaticClaim(Eritrea’sClaim20)(PartialAward,December19,2005) .

7 . TheCommission’s liabilityfindingsonEritrea’s claimsare repro-ducedatrele�antpointsinthetextbelow .TheAwardslistedabo�eresol�edtheextentofEthiopia’sliabilitywithrespecttoallofEritrea’sclaims .TheamountsofcompensationappropriateforthemaredecidedinthisAward .

ii. ProCedural asPeCTs of THe damaGes PHase8 . Beginninginthesummerof2005,theCommissionandtheParties

consultedfurther,utilizingcorrespondence,conferencecallsandaninformalmeeting,regardingthepossibilityoffurtherproceedingsfollowingcompletionofthemeritsoftheParties’claims .WhilethePartiesindicatedthattheydidnotwanttheproceedingstoendfollowingtheAwardsonliability,thesecon-sultationshighlightedafundamentalchallenge .Adamagesphasein�ol�ingpreciseassessmentoftheextentofinjuriesallegedlysufferedbylargenumbersofpersons,entitiesandgo�ernmentbodieswouldrequireyearsofadditionaldifficult,burdensomeandexpensi�eproceedings .

9 . ThePartieschosetoproceeddespiteconcernsairedbytheCommis-sion .Amongotherpossibilities,thePartiesandtheCommissiondiscussedaproposalbyEthiopiathat,inlieuoffurtherlegalproceedingsondamages,theCommissionshouldbecon�ertedintoamechanismworkingtoincreasetheflowofreliefandde�elopmentfundsfrominternationaldonorstoalle�iatetheconsequencesofthewarinbothcountries .Eritreaexpressedseriousreser�a-tionsregardingthisproposal .TheCommissionalso�ieweditasunlikelytobeproducti�einthecircumstances,asitcameatthecompensationphaseoftheproceedings,followingformalfindingsofliabilityagainstbothPartiesfor�iolationsofinternationallaw .IntheabsenceofagreementbytheParties,thisproposaltochangetheCommission’smandatewasnotpursued,anditwasnotpossibletoterminatetheproceedingswithoutadamagesphase .

10 . AstheCommissionconsideredoptionsforproceedingstoassessdamages,ittookaccountofitsresponsibilitiesunderArticle5(12)oftheAgree-ment,requiringtheCommissiontoendea�ortocompleteitsworkwithinthreeyearsofthefilingoftheParties’claims,thatis,byDecember2004 .(ThiswasextendedinFebruary2003inresponsetobothParties’requestsforadditionaltime .)TheCommissionwasalsomindfulofthecomplexityandcostofthe


proceedingstodate,andofthesignificantfinancialandotherburdenstheyimposeduponbothParties .5Followingcarefulconsideration, inanOrderdatedApril13,2006,theCommissiondirectedthePartiestoproceedwithasimplified“fast-track”damagesphase,in�ol�ingalimitednumberoffilingsoflegalpleadingsande�idence,andatightscheduleofhearings .ThisOrderindicatedtheCommission’srecurringconcernthatproceedsaccruingfromthedamagesproceedingsbeusedbythePartiestoassistci�ilian�ictimsoftheconflict .

11 . BecauseofthesignificanceoftheApril13,2006Ordertothesubse-quentproceedings,itsoperati�eportionsaresetouthere:

1 .Inordertopermittheearliestpossibleassistancetoindi�idualswhoha�esufferedinjuryorlossandtoreducethecostoftheproceedings,theCom-missionwillseektocompletethedamagesphasebeforetheendof2008 .In�iewofthehumanitarianpurposessetforthinArticle5(1)oftheDecember12Agreement,theCommissionrequeststhatthePartiesinformitintheirfirstfilingshowtheyintendtoensuredistributionofdamagesrecei�edtoci�ilian�ictims,includingpresentlya�ailableinformationonexistingoranticipatedstructuresandproceduresforthispurpose .

2 .TheCommissionwelcomesthefactthatthePartiesareingeneralagree-mentonaconsiderablenumberoftheissuestheyha�ediscussed .

3 .TheCommissionrecognizesthatthereareafewlegalissues,suchasthescope of damages for breach of the jus ad bellum, that could usefully beaddressedaspreliminaryissuestobedecidedpriortothefilingofbriefsonanycategoryofclaimeddamages .Howe�er,theCommissionhasdecidedthattheadditionalmonthsrequiredforseparateproceedingstohearanddecidethosepreliminary issueswouldundulyextend the timerequired tocom-pletetheCommission’sworkondamages .Consequently,theCommissionhasdecidedthatallsuchissuesshouldbebriefedaspartofthefirstgroupofclaimeddamages .

4 .Again,forreasonsofexpeditiousresolutionofallclaimeddamages,theCommissionhasdecidedtodi�idetheclaimeddamagesintotwogroupsonly .GroupNumber1includestheWarFrontClaims,thePrisonerofWarClaims,theDisplacedPersonsClaimsandthepreliminaryissuesthePar-tiesmayraise,includingthescopeofdamagesforbreachofthejus ad bel-lum,whichisanelementofallofEthiopia’sclaims .Thus,GroupNumber1comprisesEritrea’sClaims1,3,4,5,7,9,13,17,21and22,Ethiopia’sClaims1,2,3and4,aswellasanypreliminaryissuesraisedbyeitherParty .GroupNumber2iscomposedofallremainingclaims,includingtheCi�iliansorHomeFrontclaims .Thus,GroupNumber2comprisesEritrea’sClaims15,

5 Allof thecostsof theseproceedings, includingthecostsofbothParties’ legalteams,ha�ebeenbornebythePartiesthemsel�es .TheCommissionhassoughttolimititsowncostsbyminimizingtra�elandPCAsupport,bymakingextensi�euseoftheInternet,andthroughothermeasures .Ne�ertheless,itismindfulthattheproceedingsha�ebeenafinancialburdenforbothParties .


16,20,23,24,27,28,29,30,31and32andEthiopia’sClaims5,6(jus ad bel-lum aspectsonly),7and8 .

5 . The Parties shall file their briefs and supporting e�idence on GroupNumber1ClaimsbyNo�ember15,2006andtheirreplybriefsande�idencebyFebruary15,2007 .ThePartiesmayfileanyadditionaldocumentsande�idence,togetherwithabrief(nottoexceed10pages)explanationoftherele�anceoftheadditionalmaterialfiled,atleast21dayspriortotheHear-ing .TheHearingwilltakeplaceontheGroup1ClaimsassoonaspossibleafterApril15,2007,ondatestobesetfollowingconsultationsbetweentheCommissionandtheParties .TheCommissiondoesnoten�isageauthor-izingadditionalpleadingsorextendingthesefilingdeadlines .

6 .AsimilarschedulewillbeestablishedforGroupNumber2Claimsfollow-ingtheHearingonGroupNumber1Claims .

7 .AsinglefinalAwardwillbeissuedonallClaimsfollowingthesecondHearing .Ne�ertheless,theCommissionwillissueguidanceonpreliminaryissuesandonotherissuesasappropriate,followingtheHearingonGroupNumber1Claims, inorder toassist theParties inpreparing theGroupNumber2Claims .

8 .TheCommissionintendstoconsultcloselywiththePartiesregardingimplementationofthisOrderthroughthePresident’sconferencecallswiththePartiesandothermeans,andmaycreateaWorkingGroupforthispur-pose .Themodalitiesandscheduleinthisregardwillbeestablishedfollow-ingconsultationsbetweentheCommissionandtheParties .

12 . Asen�isioned in thisOrder, theCommissioncreatedaworkinggroupof threemembers (CommissionersCrook,PaulandReed)whometinformallywiththeParties’representati�esonJuly29,2006regardingpro-ceduralquestions .Atthatmeeting,thePartiesbothaskedtodefertoalaterstagecertainissuestheycharacterizedasin�ol�ingtechnical,financialandaccountingmatters .Asrequested,onAugust16,2006theCommissionissuedthefollowinginstruction:

TakingaccountoftherecentdiscussionsbetweentheCommissionandtheParties,thefollowingmatterswillnotbeaddressedattheApril2007hear-ingandshouldnotbeaddressedintheParties’writtensubmissionspriortothathearing:

(a) Effectofthirdpartydonationsforreplacementorrebuilding:thelegaleffecttobegi�entothirdpartypayments(includinggrants,loans,andinsurancepayments) tocompensate fordamage illegallycausedduringthewar .

(b) Technicalfinancialquestions .Thiscategorymightincludechoos-inganapproachtowardcurrencycon�ersion,thelegaleffect(ifany)ofinflation,interestcalculations,etc .

(c) Attorney’s fees (whether they were to be allowed, disallowed,capped,nettedout,etc .)


Asappropriate,theCommissionwillpro�ideguidanceregardingthehan-dlingofthesemattersatalatertime .13 . TheGroupNumberOnedamagesproceedingstookplaceasspeci-

fiedintheCommission’sApril13,2006Order .HearingsontheGroupNumberOnedamagesclaimswereheldatthePeacePalacefromApril16to27,2007 .OnApril28,2007,theCommissionmetinformallywithcounselforthePar-ties,andofferedinformalguidanceintendedtoassistinpreparationoftheirGroupNumberTwodamagesclaims .

14 . OnJuly27,2007, theCommissionpro�idedfurtherguidancebymeansofDecisionNumber7(“GuidanceRegardingJus Ad Bellum Liability”)andDecisionNumber8(“RelieftoWarVictims”) .

15 . OnMay16,2007,theCommissionsettheschedulefortheGroupNumberTwodamagesclaims,culminatinginhearingsheldatthePeacePal-ace fromMay19 toMay27,2008 .After thosehearings,onMay28,2008,theCommissionagainmetinformallywithcounselforthePartiestodiscussremainingprocedural issues .ThePartiesaddressedall thedeferred issuesnotedinparagraph12abo�einwrittenororalsubmissions .

16 . TheCommissionwaskeenlyawarethattheexpeditedproceduresestablishedforthetwogroupsofdamagesclaimswouldputgreatpressureonthePartiesandtheircounsel .ItalsorecognizedthattheParties’prepara-tionandpresentationoftheirclaims,anditsownassessmentofthoseclaims,wouldlikelybelessinformedandprecisethanmightbepossiblefollowinglonger,moreelaborate,andmoreexpensi�eproceedings .Ne�ertheless, theCommissionbelie�edthattheseprocedureswereappropriateinthecircum-stances,gi�entheParties’situationsandtheCommission’sobligationtocom-pleteitstaskwithinareasonablyshortperiod,asindicatedintheDecember2000Agreement .

17 . TheCommissionispleasedtorecordthatbothPartiesdidwhatwasaskedofthem .Allpleadingswerefiledontime,andbothsetsofhearingswereconductedinaprofessionalandefficientmanner .Notwithstandingthegreatdifficultiestheyfaced,bothParties’legalteamscarriedouttheGroupNumberOneandGroupNumberTwodamagesproceedings,likepre�iousCommissionproceedings,with�igorandinfullcooperationwiththeCom-mission .TheCommissionrecordsitsappreciationtobothPartiesandtheirlegalteamsfortheircontinuedgoodwillandcooperationinthisfinalstageofitswork .

iii. THe ParTies’ siTuaTions18 . InassessingbothParties’damagesclaims,theCommissionhas

beenmindfuloftheharshfactthatthesecountriesareamongthepoorestonearth .Inbothroundsofdamagesproceedings,bothPartiessoughtamountsthatwerehuge,bothabsolutelyandinrelationtotheeconomiccapacityof


thecountryagainstwhichtheyweredirected .EthiopiacalculateditsGroupNumberOnedamagesclaimsagainstEritreatoequalnearly7 .4billionU .S .dollarsanditsGroupNumberTwodamagesclaimstoequalapproximately6 .9billionU .S .dollars .TheseamountsaremorethanthreetimesEritrea’sestimatedtotalnationalproductin2005,measuredonapurchasingpowerparitybasis .6Eritrea’sclaimsagainstEthiopia,whilelessdramaticinrelationtoEthiopia’slargersizeandeconomy,approached6billionU .S .dollars .

19 . ThesizeoftheParties’claimsraisedpotentiallyseriousquestionsin�ol�ingtheintersectionofthelawofStateresponsibilitywithfundamentalhumanrightsnorms .BothEritreaandEthiopiaarepartiestotheInterna-tionalCo�enantonEconomic,SocialandCulturalRights(“ICESCR”)7andtheInternationalCo�enantonCi�ilandPoliticalRights .8BothCo�enantspro�ideinArticleI(2)that“[i]nnocasemayapeoplebedepri�edofitsownmeansofsubsistence .”Duringthehearings,itwasnotedthatearlydraftsoftheInternationalLawCommission’s(“ILC”)DraftArticlesonStateResponsibil-ityincludedthisqualification,butthatitwasnotretainedintheArticlesasadopted .Thatdoesnotalterthefundamentalhumanrightslawruleofcom-monArticleI(2),whichunquestionablyappliestotheParties .

20 . Similarly,Article2(1)oftheICESCRobligesbothPartiestotakestepstoachie�ethe“fullrealization”ofrightsrecognizedbythatinstrument .TheCommissionismindfulthatinitsGeneralComments,theCommitteeonEconomic,SocialandCulturalRightshasidentifiedarangeofstepstobetakenbyStateswherenecessary,inter alia,toimpro�eaccesstohealthcare,education(particularlyforgirls)andresourcestoimpro�etheconditionsofsubsistence .TheseGeneralCommentsha�ebeenendorsedandtakenasguidestoactionbymanyinterestedobser�ersandtheUnitedNations’de�elopment

6 See HumanDe�elopmentReport2007/2008(UnitedNationsDe�elopmentPro-gramme),available at www .undp .org .TheReportincludesanindexofhumande�elop-menttrends(“HumanDe�elopmentIndex”)inallcountries .The“indicators”measure,forexample,“publicspending,”“commitments” torealize the“right toeducation,”orimpro�ementsinthe“standardofli�ingmeasuredbythePPP[purchasingpowerpar-ity] .”Eachcountryisrankedinaccordancewithaprocessthatcombinestheseandotherindices .

7 InternationalCo�enantonEconomic,SocialandCulturalRights,Dec .16,1966,993U .N .T .S .p .3 .

8 InternationalCo�enantonCi�ilandPoliticalRights,Dec .16,1966,999U .N .T .S .p .171 .


agencies .9Suchmeasuresareparticularlyrele�anttotheneedsoftheruralpoorincountrieslikeEritreaandEthiopia .Thesemattersareconsideredfur-therintheCommission’sDecisionNumber7,10andinitsdiscussionofcom-pensationowedtoEthiopiaforEritrea’s�iolationofthejus ad bellum inthecompanionFinalAwardinEthiopia’sdamagesclaim .

21 . Awardsofcompensationof themagnitudesoughtbyeachPartywouldimposecripplingburdensupontheeconomiesandpopulationsoftheother,notwithstandingtheobligationsbothha�eacceptedundertheCo�e-nants .EthiopiaurgedtheCommissionnottobeconcernedwiththeimpactof�erylargead�erseawardsontheaffectedcountry’spopulation,becausetheobligationtopaywouldfallonthego�ernment,notthepeople .TheCom-missiondoesnotagree .Hugeawardsofcompensationbytheirnaturewouldrequirelargedi�ersionsofnationalresourcesfromthepayingcountry—anditscitizensneedinghealthcare,educationandotherpublicser�ices—totherecipientcountry .Inthisregard,thepre�ailingpracticeofStatesintheyearssincetheTreatyofVersailleshasbeentogi�e�erysignificantweighttotheneedsoftheaffectedpopulationindeterminingamountssoughtaspost-warreparations .11

22 . Article5(13)oftheDecember2000Agreementdirectsthat,“[i]nconsideringclaims,theCommissionshallapplyrele�antrulesofinterna-

9 UnitedNationsCommitteeonEconomic,SocialandCulturalRights,GeneralCommentNo .3,TheNatureofStatesPartiesObligationsunderArt .2(1)oftheInterna-tionalCo�enantonEconomic,SocialandCulturalRights[ICESCR],U .N .Doc .E/1991/23,AnnexIII,atp .86(1991) .AnumberofsubsequentGeneralCommentsspellouttheobliga-tionsofStatesPartiestoachie�e“progressi�erealization”oftheparticularrightsguaran-teedbyotherarticlesoftheICESCR,suchas“therighttoeducation .”AllofthesecanbefoundinTheCompilationofGeneralCommentsAdoptedbyHumanRightsTreatyBod-ies,U .N .Doc .HRI/GEN/1/Re� .9(2006) .ExamplesoftheseGeneralCommentsincludeGeneralCommentNo .16,Theequalrightofmenandwomentotheenjoymentofalleconomic,socialandculturalrights(ICESCR,art .3);GeneralCommentNo .15,Therighttowater;GeneralCommentNo .14,Theright to thehigheststandardofhealth(ICE-SCR,art .12);andGeneralCommentNo .13,Therighttoeducation(ICESCR,art .13) .See also MAGDALENASEPULVEDA,THENATUREOFTHEOBLIGATIONSUNDERTHEINTERNATIONALCOVENANTONECONOMIC,SOCIALANDCULTURALRIGHTS(2003);COREOBLIGATIONS:BUILDINGAFRAMEWORKFORECONOMIC,SOCIALANDCULTURALRIGHTS(AudreyChapman&SageRusselleds .,2002);MAT-THEWCRAVEN,THEINTERNATIONALCOVENANTONECONOMIC,SOCIALANDCULTURALRIGHTS:APERSPECTIVEONITSDEVELOPMENT(IanBrownlieed .,1995);JudithV .Welling,International Indicators and Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights,30(4)HUM .RTS .Q .p .933(2008) .TheSecretary-GeneralurgedallUNde�elop-mentagenciestoadoptacommon“HumanRightsBasedApproach”totheirde�elopmentmissionsand,workingtogether,commonrights-focusedcountryplans .See StrengtheningoftheUnitedNations:AnAgendaforFurtherChange,ReportoftheSecretary-General,U .N .GAOR,57thSess .,U .N .Doc .A/57/387(2002) .

10 Eritrea-EthiopiaClaimsCommissionDecisionNo .7(“GuidanceRegardingJus ad Bellum Liability”)(July27,2007) .

11 Id.,pp .6–7 .


tionallaw,”whichincluderulesofhumanrightslawapplicableasbetweentheParties .Accordingly,theCommissioncouldnotdisregardthepossibil-itythatlargedamagesawardsmightexceedthecapacityoftheresponsibleStatetopayorresultinseriousinjurytoitspopulationifsuchdamageswerepaid .12Itthusconsideredwhetheritwasnecessarytolimititscom-pensationawards insomemanner toensure that theultimate financialburdenimposedonaPartywouldnotbesoexcessi�e,gi�enitseconomicconditionanditscapacitytopay,astocompromiseitsabilitytomeetitspeople’sbasicneeds .

23 . Inthecircumstances,theCommissionconcludedthatitneednotdecidethequestionofpossiblecappingoftheawardinlightoftheParties’obligationsunderhumanrightslaw .

24 . TheParties’o�eralleconomicpositionsarerele�anttodetermin-ingcompensationinanothermanneraswell .InconsideringbothParties’claimsfor�iolationofthejus in bello,theCommissionhasbeenmindfuloftheprinciple,setoutbythePermanentCourtofInternationalJusticeinChorzów Factory,thatthepurposeofcompensationpayablebyaresponsi-bleStateis“toseektowipeoutalltheconsequencesoftheillegalactandreestablishthesituationwhichwould,inallprobability,ha�eexistedifthatacthadnotbeencommitted .13ThisnotionunderliesArticle31oftheILC’sArticlesonStateResponsibility,that“[t]heresponsibleStateisunderanobli-gationtomakefullreparationfortheinjurycausedbytheinternationallywrongfulact .”

25 . Chorzów Factory offersanimportantreferencepointforassessingbothParties’compensationclaims .Forreasonsthatarereadilyunderstand-able,gi�enlimitsoftimeandresources,bothPartiesfiledtheirclaimsasinter-Stateclaims .AlthoughEritreafiledclaimsonbehalfofsixindi�iduals,neitherPartyutilizedtheoption,a�ailableunderArticle5(8)oftheAgree-mentandtheCommission’sRulesofProcedure,ofpresentingclaimsdirectlyonbehalfoflargenumbersofindi�iduals .Ne�ertheless,someofbothStates’claimsaremadeintheexerciseofdiplomaticprotection, inthattheyarepredicated upon injuries allegedly suffered by numbers of the Claimant

12 See WilliamW .Bishop,General Course of Public International Law, 1965,in IlRecueildesCours,Tome115p .403(1965);RichardFalk,Reparations, International Law, and Global Justice,in TheHandbookofReparationsp .492(PablodeGreiffed .,2006);ChristianTomuschat,Reparations in Favour of Individual Victims of Gross Vio-lations of Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law,in PromotingJustice,HumanRightsandConflictResolutionThroughInternationalLaw/La Promo-tion de la justice, des droits de l’homme et du reglement des conflits par le droit international,LiberAmicorumLuciusCaflischp .569,atpp .581et seq.(MarceloG .Kohened .,2007) .

13 FactoryatChorzów,Merits,1928P .C .I .J .(Ser .A .)No .17,p .47 .


State’snationals .14WhiletheinjuryinsuchcasesisinjurytotheState,theextentofinjurytoaffectedindi�iduals—insofarasitcanbequantified—canplayasignificantrole inassessingtheState’s injury . Inthisregard, in itsDecisionNumber815andelsewhereinthisFinalAward,theCommissionhasencouragedthePartiestoconsiderhow,intheexerciseoftheirdiscretion,compensationcanbestbeusedtoaccomplishthehumanitarianobjecti�esofArticle5(1)oftheAgreement .

26 . Chorzów Factory teachesthatcompensationhasalimitedfunction .Itsroleistorestoreaninjuredparty,insofaraspossible,tothepositionitwouldha�eoccupiedbutfortheinjury .Thisfunctionisremedial,notpuni-ti�e .Accordingly,insituationsin�ol�ingdiplomaticprotection,compensationmustbeassessed in lightof theactualsocialandeconomiccircumstancesoftheinjuredindi�idualsinrespectofwhomtheStateisclaiming .Thedif-ficulteconomicconditionsfoundintheaffectedareasofEritreaandEthiopiamustbetakenintoaccountinassessingcompensationthere .Compensationdeterminedinaccordancewithinternationallawcannotremedytheworld’seconomicdisparities .

27 . BothPartiesrecognizedthis,andgenerallyframedtheirclaimsinwaysthat,inthefirstinstanceatleast,tookaccountofthelowincomesandlimitedpropertyofmostofthoseaffectedbythewar .

iV. aPPliCable leGal PrinCiPles28 . UnderArticle5(13)oftheAgreement,theCommissionmust“apply

rele�antrulesofinternationallaw”and“shallnotha�ethepowertomakedeci-sionsex aequo et bono.”Thefollowingsectionsconsiderthreeelementsofgen-eralinternationallawaffectingtheseproceedings:(a)thepreclusi�eeffectoftheCommission’searlierdecisionsonliability(res judicata);(b)theroleofe�idenceandtheburdenofproof;and(c)therequirementofalegallysufficientconnec-tionbetweenwrongfulconductandinjuryforwhichdamageisclaimed .

a. Res Judicata29 . Theinternationallawrulegi�ingbindingeffecttomattersalready

authoritati�elydecided(res judicata)hasparticularrele�anceatthisstageoftheproceedings . In itsearlierPartialAwards, theCommission foundthat

14 UnderArticle5(9)oftheAgreement,“[i]nappropriatecases,eachpartymayfileclaimsonbehalfofpersonsofEthiopianorEritreanoriginwhomaynotbeitsnationals .SuchclaimsshallbeconsideredbytheCommissiononthesamebasisasclaimssubmittedonbehalfofthatparty’snationals .”Thisunusualpro�isionwasnotutilized .WhileEritreasoughttobringclaimspredicateduponinjuriestoEthiopiannationals,itdidsoonbehalfoftheStateofEritrea,andnotonbehalfoftheinjuredindi�iduals .

15 Eritrea-EthiopiaClaimsCommissionDecisionNo .8(“RelieftoWarVictims”)(July27,2007) .


someclaimsof�iolationsofapplicableinternationallawhadbeenpro�ed,anditdismissedotherclaims .Thesefindingsarefinalandbinding,anddefinetheextentofpossibledamages . It isnotpossibleat thisstage tore-litigateclaimsthattheCommissionhasdecided,ortopresentnewones .Compensa-tioncanonlybeawardedforinjuriesnowifthoseinjuriesbearasufficientlyclosecausalconnectionwithconductthattheCommissionpre�iouslyfoundto�iolateinternationallaw .

30 . TheCommission’saffirmati�efindingsofliabilityaresetoutinthedispositifs attheendofeachPartialAward .Whilesomeargumentaboutthescopeandmeaningofthosefindingsisine�itableinthecontextofabifur-catedproceeding,bothPartiesha�esometimessoughttolimittheirpotentialliability(ortobroadentheother’s liability)byconstruingthedispositifs inartificialways,ad�ancingtechnicalorrestricti�einterpretationstonarrowtheCommission’sfindings,orurgingbroadandflexiblereadingstoexpandthem .ThetaskoftheCommissionatthisphaseoftheproceedingsisnottore�iseorexpanditspriorfindingsonliability,buttoapplythosefindingsindeter-miningtheappropriatecompensationtobeawarded .Indoingso,theCom-missionisguidedprincipallybythedispositifs ofthoseAwards,construedinaccordancewiththeordinarymeaningofthetermscontainedtherein,16tak-ingaccountoftheParties’claimsandargumentsleadingtothefindingsandtheCommission’sappreciationofthefactsandlegalreasoningasexplainedinthebodyoftheAwards .17

31 . Inpleadingtheirdamagesclaims,thePartiesfiledabroadrangeofnewe�idencebearingonthequantumofdamageassociatedwiththeCommis-sion’sliabilityfindings .AlthoughthePartiespresentedthesedamagesclaimsinbroadtermsthatdidnotalwayscorrespondtotheCommission’sliabilityfindings,theCommissionhasconsideredthise�idencestrictlywithinthescopeofitsliabilityAwards .Insomecases,theCommissionhasfounditnecessarytomeasurethedamagesphaseclaimsalsoagainste�idenceofferedattheliabil-ityphase,leadingtodiscussionofthee�idenceunderlyingtheliabilityAwardsthroughoutthisAward .TheCommissionhasbeencautioustoremainwithinthelimitsofitsliabilityfindingsinmakingitsawardsofcompensation .

16 See, e.g.,TheLaguna del Desierto Arbitration(Arg ./Chile),(Award),113I .L .R .1,194,atpara .70(1995)(“Internationallawpro�idesrulesforinterpretationofanylegalinstrument,whetheritbeatreaty,aunilateralact,anarbitralawardoraresolutionofaninternationalorganization .Theyinclude:thenaturalandordinarymeaningofthewordsused;theircontext;andtheireffet util.”) .

17 AsnotedinarecentjudgmentoftheInternationalCourtofJustice,“ifanyques-tionarisesastothescopeofres judicata attachingtoajudgment,itmustbedeterminedineachcaseha�ingregardtothecontextinwhichthejudgmentwasgi�en .”ApplicationoftheCon�entiononthePre�entionandPunishmentoftheCrimeofGenocide(Bosn .&Herz .� .Serb .&Mont .),2007I .C .J .p .48,atpara .125(Feb .26) .See also ShabtaiRosenne,IIItheLawandPracticeoftheInternationalCourt1920–2005p .1603(4thed .2006)(discussingtheimportanceattachedtowrittenandoralpleadingsinascertainingthescopeofres judicata) .


32 . Unlike the Commission’s findings of liability, its dismissals ofclaims,exceptdismissalsforlackofjurisdiction,arenotrestatedinthedis-positifs.Ne�ertheless,theyalsoaredefiniti�eresolutionsofthoseclaims,withres judicata effect .

33 . TheCommissiondismissedclaims,bybothParties, for failureofproof .Thesedismissalsareconclusi�edispositionsoftheseclaimsforthepur-poseoftheseproceedings,buttheireffectisotherwiselimited .BothPartiessometimesha�eurgedthatthesedismissalsreflectedanaffirmati�edecisionbytheCommissionthatcertaine�entsdidnotoccur .Thisisnotcorrect .ExceptasindicatedinitsAwards,theCommissiondidnotmakesuchfactualjudgments,findinginsteadonlythattheclaimantPartyhadnotpresentedsufficiente�i-dencetopro�eitsclaim .Thesefindingsdonotreflectaffirmati�efactualdeter-minationsbytheCommissionthatparticulare�entsdidordidnotoccur .

b. evidence and the burden of Proof at the damages Phase34 . E�idencenecessarilyhasplayedacentralroleintheseproceedings .

Keyissuesoftenha�eboileddowntoproofoffacts,notissuesoflaw .Itisfun-damentaltothelegalprocessthatjudgmentsregardingfactsmustbebaseduponsufficiente�idence .Thisposedspecialchallengesintheseproceedings .BoththePartiesandtheCommissionrecognizethatconclusi�eproofoffactsinawarthatbeganele�enyearsagooftenisnotfeasible .Howe�er,thedifficul-tiesofproofdonotrelie�etheCommissionofitsobligationtomakedecisionsonlyonthebasisofsufficiente�idence .

35 . Attheliabilityphase,theCommissionrequiredclearandcon�inc-ingproofofliability .ItdidsobecausetheParties’claimsfrequentlyin�ol�edallegationsofserious—indeed,sometimesgra�e—misconductbyaState .AfindingofsuchmisconductisasignificantmatterwithseriousimplicationsfortheinterestsandreputationoftheaffectedState .Accordingly,anysuchfindingmustrestuponsubstantialandcon�incinge�idence .ThisiswhytheInterna-tionalCourtofJusticeandotherinternationaltribunalsrequirethatfactsbeestablishedwithahighdegreeofcertaintyinsuchcircumstances .18

36 . InthehearingsontheGroupNumberOnedamagesclaims,EritreaurgedthattheCommissioncontinuetoutilizeastandardof“clearandcon-�incing”e�idence .Ethiopiaarguedthatdecisionsrelatingtodamagesshouldinstead be based on the preponderance of the e�idence . Like some othercourtsandtribunals,theCommissionbelie�esthatthecorrectpositionlies

18 See, e.g.,ApplicationoftheCon�entiononthePre�entionandPunishmentoftheCrimeofGenocide,2007I .C .J .pp .76–77,paras .209–210(“TheCourthaslongrecognizedthatclaimsagainstaStatein�ol�ingchargesofexceptionalgra�itymustbepro�edbye�i-dencethatisfullyconclusi�e . . . .InrespectoftheApplicant’sclaimthattheRespondenthasbreacheditsundertakingstopre�entgenocideandtopunishandextraditepersonschargedwithgenocide,theCourtrequiresproofatahighle�elofcertaintyappropriatetotheseriousnessoftheallegation .”) .


inanamalgamofthesepositions .19TheCommissionhasrequiredclearandcon�incinge�idencetoestablishthatdamageoccurred,withintheliabilityparametersofthePartialAwards .Howe�er,forpurposesofquantification,ithasrequiredlessrigorousproof .Theconsiderationsdictatingthe“clearandcon�incingstandard”aremuchlesscompellingforthe lesspoliticallyandemoti�elychargedmattersin�ol�edinassessingthemonetaryextentofinjury .Moreo�er,theCommissionrecognizestheenormouspracticalproblemsfacedbybothPartiesinquantifyingtheextentofdamagefollowingthe1998–2000war .Requiringproofofquantificationofdamagebyclearandcon�incinge�idencewouldoften—perhapsalmostalways—precludeanyreco�ery .ThiswouldfrustratetheCommission’sagreedmandatetoaddress“thesocio-eco-nomicimpactofthecrisisontheci�ilianpopulation”underArticle5(1)oftheAgreement .20

37 . ThepresenttaskisnottoassesswhetherthetwoStatePartiescom-mittedserious�iolationsofinternationallaw .Thathasbeendone .Now,theCommissionmustdetermine,insofaraspossible,theappropriatecompen-sation foreachsuch�iolation .This in�ol�esquestionsofadifferentorder,requiringexercisesofjudgmentandapproximation .Asdiscussedbelowinconnectionwithparticularclaims, thee�idenceregardingsuchmattersastheegregiousnessorseriousnessoftheunlawfulaction,thenumbersofper-sonsinjuredorpropertydestroyedordamagedbythataction,andthefinan-cialconsequencesofsuchinjury,destructionordamage,isoftenuncertainorambiguous . Insuchcircumstances, theCommissionhasmade thebestestimatespossibleonthebasisofthea�ailablee�idence .Likesomenationalcourts21andinternationallegislators,22ithasrecognizedthatwhenobligatedtodetermineappropriatecompensation,itmustdosoe�eniftheprocessin�ol�esestimation,ore�enguesswork,withintherangeofpossibilitiesindicatedbythee�idence .Ne�ertheless,insomecasesthee�idencehasnotbeensufficienttojustifyanyawardofcompensation .

38 . TheCommissionalsohastakenaccountofatrade-offfundamen-taltorecentinternationaleffortstoaddressinjuriesaffectinglargenumbersof�ictims .InstitutionssuchastheUnitedNationsCompensationCommis-

19 Mark Kantor, Valuation for Arbitration: Compensation Standards,ValuationMethodsAndExpertEvidencepp .72–73(2008) .

20 See ChittharanjanAmerasinghe,EvidenceinInternationalLitigationpp .241–242(2005) .

21 See Chaplin� .Hicks[1911]2K .B .786,972C .A .(whereprecisionoraccuracyisnotpossibleinassessingcontractdamages,“thejurymustdothebesttheycan,anditmaybethattheamountoftheir�erdictwillreallybeamatterofguesswork .Butthefactthatdamagescannotbeassessedwithcertaintydoesnotrelie�ethewrongdoerofthenecessityofpayingdamagesforhisbreach . . . .”) .

22 See UNIDROIT Principles of International Commercial Contracts, available at www .unidroit .org, art . 7 .4 .3, para . (3) (“Where the amount of damages cannot beestablishedwithasufficientdegreeofcertainty,theassessmentisatthediscretionofthecourt .”) .


sion(“UNCC”)and�ariouscommissionscreatedtoaddressbank,insuranceandsla�elaborclaimsstemmingfromtheNazieraha�eadoptedlessrigorousstandardsofproof,eithertoshowthatanindi�idualsufferedinjuryorregard-ing theextentof that injury .Asa trade-off,compensation le�elsalsoha�ebeenreduced,balancingtheuncertaintiesflowingfromthelowerstandardofproof .23WhiletheclaimsaddressedinthisAwardareStateclaims,notmassclaims,theCommissionhasinsomeinstancesappliedsimilaranalysiswithrespecttoclaimsforinjuriesordamagesthatweresufferedbylarge,butuncer-tain,numbersof�ictimsandwherethereislimitedsupportinge�idence .

C. Causation39 . Compensationcanonlybeawardedinrespectofdamagesha�ing

asufficientcausalconnectionwithconductthat�iolatesinternationallaw .Intheirwrittenpleadings,andintheGroupNumberOnedamageshearingsinApril2007,thePartiesaddressedthenatureofthecausalconnectionrequiredby international lawbetweenadelictandcompensable injury .InDecisionNumber7ofJuly2007,theCommissionaddressedtheissueofcausation,andhasbeenguidedinthecurrentproceedingsbytheprinciplesarticulatedthere .InthatDecision,theCommissiondeterminedthat:

thenecessaryconnectionisbestcharacterizedthroughthecommonlyusednomenclatureof“proximatecause .”Inassessingwhetherthistestismet,andwhetherthechainofcausationissufficientlycloseinaparticularsituation,theCommissionwillgi�eweighttowhetherparticulardamagereasonablyshouldha�ebeenforeseeabletoanactorcommittingtheinternationaldelictinquestion .Theelementofforeseeability,althoughnotwithoutitsowndif-ficulties,pro�idessomedisciplineandpredictabilityinassessingproximity .Accordingly,itwillbegi�enconsiderableweightinassessingwhetherpar-ticulardamagesarecompensable .TheCommissionnotesthat,inmanysituations,thechoiceof�erbalfor-

mulatodescribethenecessarydegreeofconnectionwillresultinnodifferenceinoutcomes .Inthisregard,bothPartiesagreedthatasignificantrangeofpos-sibledamagesrelatedtowarliebeyondthepaleofStateresponsibility . . . .24

23 See JacomijnJ .�anHaersolte-�anHof,Innovations to Speed Mass Claims, New Standards of Proof,in RedressingInjusticesThroughMassClaimsProcesses:Inno-vativeResponsestoUniqueChallengesp .13(PermanentCourtofArbitrationed .,2006) .

24 DecisionNo .7,supra note10,atparas .13–14 .


V. assessinG ComPensaTion and TeCHniCal finanCial issues

40 . Astheirclaimsdemonstrate,bothPartiesrecognizedthatthe�iola-tionsofinternationallawidentifiedbytheCommissiongi�erisetoanobliga-tiontopaycompensation .25Determiningtheamountofsuchcompensation,particularlyinlargeinter-Stateclaimssuchasthese,cannotbeamechanicalprocess .Inweighingitsawardsofcompensationfordamages,theCommis-sionhashadtotakeintoaccountmultiplefactors,oftennotsubjecttoprecisequantification .Ithasweighedthenature,seriousnessandextentofparticularunlawfulacts .Ithasexaminedwhethersuchactswereintentional,andwheth-ertheremayha�ebeenanyrele�antmitigatingorextenuatingcircumstances .Ithassoughttodetermine,insofaraspossible,thenumbersofpersonswhowere�ictimsofparticular�iolations,andtheimplicationsofthese�ictims’injuriesfortheirfutureli�es .

a. Currency Conversion

41 . ThePartiesagreedthattheFinalAwardsrenderedbytheCommis-sionshoulddenominatecompensationinUnitedStatesdollars,andmanyoftheirclaimsforcompensationareexpressedsolelyintermsoftheU .S .currency .26Inotherinstances,theParties’claimsande�idenceha�ereflectedamountsdenominatedinEthiopianbirr,Eritreannakfaand,occasionally,other currencies . In those circumstances, the Commission generally hasmadecon�ersionstoU .S .dollarsutilizingtheexchangeratepre�ailingatthetimeoftheinjuryunderlyingthecompensationclaim .Inafewcases,wheredocumentsquantifyinglosses(forexample,estimatesofrebuildingcosts)werepreparedsometimeaftertheinjury,andwherethereweresignifi-cantchangesinexchangerates,theCommissionhasutilizedtheexchangeratepre�ailingwhenthequantificationwasprepared .Thishasbeenneces-sary inorder topre�entwindfalls toeitherPartyresulting fromchanges

25 See HagueCon�ention(IV)RespectingtheLawsandCustomsofWaronLand,Oct .18,1907,36Stat .p .277,1Be�ansp .631,art .3(“Abelligerentpartywhich�iolatesthepro�isionsofthesaidRegulationsshall,ifthecasedemands,beliabletopaycompensa-tion”);ProtocolAdditionaltothe1949Gene�aCon�entionsofAug .12,1949,andRelatingtotheProtectionofVictimsofInternationalArmedConflicts,June8,1977,1125U .N .T .S .p .3,art .91(“APartytotheconflictwhich�iolatesthepro�isionsoftheCon�entionsorofthisProtocolshall,ifthecasedemands,beliabletopaycompensation”)[hereinafterProtocolI] .

26 AnyreferenceinthisAwardtoamountsclaimedinU .S .dollars,wheretheunder-lyingclaimin�ol�esamountsdenominatedinnakfaorbirr,issolelyforpurposesofillus-tration .Exceptwhereotherwisestated,con�ersionsofclaimedamountsintoU .S .dollarsarethosepro�idedbyaParty,anddonotreflectanyjudgmentbytheCommissionregard-ingtheappropriatenessoftheexchangerateemployedorrelatedmatters .


inexchangerates .Asapracticalmatter,thismadeseparateassessmentsofinflationunnecessary .

42 . InthecaseofEritrea’sclaims,theCommissionhasutilizedthefol-lowingexchangeratesbetweenEritreannakfa(“ERN”)andU .S .dollars .27

YearAnnualA�erageERN:US$ExchangeRate

1998 ERN7 .36=US$11999 ERN8 .15=US$12000 ERN9 .63=US$12001 ERN11 .31=US$12002 ERN13 .96=US$12003 ERN13 .88=US$12004 ERN13 .79=US$12005 ERN15 .37=US$12006 ERN15 .38=US$1

b. interest43 . Article5(14)oftheDecember2000Agreementpro�ides“interest

. . .maybeawarded .”Thus,theCommissionhasdiscretionwhetherornottoawardinterest .BothPartiesaskedtheCommissiontodoso .Howe�er,theCommissionhasdecided,intheexceptionalcircumstancespresentedbytheseclaims,nottocalculateandawardinterestontheamountsawardedtoeitherParty .

44 . TheCommissionhasparticularlytakenintoaccountthefactthattheParties’claims,andtheamountsawardedinrespectofthoseclaims,arebroadlysimilar .Accordingly,thisisararecaseinwhichinterestonthecom-pensationawardedwouldnotmateriallyaltertheParties’economicpositionsfollowingthetimelypaymentbyeachoftheamountsduetheother .Further,theamountsawardedinmanycasesreflectestimatesandapproximations,notprecisecalculationsrestinguponcleare�idence .Likesomeothercommis-sions,theCommissionbelie�esthatthiselementofapproximationreinforcesthedecisionagainstawardinginterest .Finally, theCommissionnotes thattheseproceedingsha�etakense�eralyears,reflectingthemagnitudeandcom-plexityofthetask .BothPartiesha�ebeendiligent,andtheperiodrequireddoesnotreflectalackofcooperationonthepartofeither .Accordingly,thereisnoneedforpre-awardinteresttoprotecteitherPartyfromprejudiceresultingfromdilatoryconductbytheother .

27 Aspro�idedinEthiopia’sReplyBriefonTechnicalIssues(Aug .15,2008),AnnexA(fromWorldBank,WorldDe�elopmentIndicatorsOnline) .


C. other Technical issues45 . ThePartiesagreednottorequestpaymentofattorneys’feesorcosts

againsteachother .46 . TheCommissionhasaddressedtheeffectofthirdpartydonations

orotherthirdpartypaymentsforreplacementorrebuildingwheresuchissuesariseinspecificclaims .Withfewexceptions,theCommissionhasnotaward-edamountsreflectingdonationsorpaymentsnotrequiredorexpectedtoberepaid .

Vi. eriTrea’s GrouP number one damaGes Claims

a. The Commission’s liability findings47 . InitsPartialAwardsrenderedduringtheearlierliabilityproceed-

ings,theCommissiondecidedtheextentofEthiopia’sliabilitytoEritreawithrespecttothelatter’sclaims .Onthebasisofthosedecisions,thisFinalAwarddecidesthedamagesappropriatetocompensateEritreaforeachoftheCom-mission’s findings of liability . The following discussion addresses Eritrea’sdamagesclaimsinGroupNumberOne,heardfromApril16to27,2007 .

1. The Central Front

48 . InitsPartialAwarddatedApril28,2004,theCommissiondecidedEthiopia’sliabilitywithrespecttoEritrea’sCentralFrontClaimsNos .2,4,6,7,8and22 .ItfoundEthiopialiabletoEritreaforeightspecific“�iolationsofinternationallawbyitsmilitarypersonnelorbyotherofficialsoftheStateofEthiopia:”

1 . ForpermittingthelootingandstrippingofbuildingsinTseronaTownwhileitoccupiedthetownfromlateMay2000untillateFebruary2001,itisliablefor75%(se�enty-fi�epercent)ofthetotaldamagecausedbylootingandstrippinginthetown;2 . ForpermittingthelootingandstrippingoftheadjacentTseronaPatri-otsCemetery,itisliablefor75%(se�enty-fi�epercent)ofthetotaldamagecausedbylootingandstrippingofthecemetery;3 . ForthedestructionoftheSub-ZobaAdministrati�eBuilding,theSub-ZobaHealthCenter,andtheWarsaiHotelinTseronaTown;4 . Forinflictingdamageontheinfrastructureofthe�illageofSerhadur-ingitsoccupationofthat�illage,itisliablefor70%(se�entypercent)ofthetotaldamageinflictedonSerhafromMay1998throughFebruary2001;5 . Forfailuretotakeeffecti�emeasurestopre�entrapeofwomenbyitssoldiersduringitsoccupationofSenafeTown;


6 . ForpermittinglootingandstrippinginSenafeTownduringitsoccu-pation,itisliablefor75%(se�enty-fi�epercent)ofthetotaldamagefromlootingandstrippingsufferedinthetownbetweenMay26,2000andJune2001;7 . Fortheunlawfuldestructionoforse�eredamagetothefollowingthir-teenmajorstructuresinSenafeTownduringtheEthiopianoccupationofthetown:

a . TheElectricalAuthority(two buildings);b . TheMinistryofAgriculture(two buildings);c . TheNewTownAdministrati�eHeadquarters;d . TheOldTownAdministrati�eHeadquartersandOfficesWest;e . TheOldTownAdministrati�eHeadquartersandOfficesEast;f . SenafeSecondarySchool;g . SenafeHospital;h . Sub-ZobaAdministrati�eandResidential(three buildings);andi . TelecommunicationsBuilding .

Theliability is for100%(onehundredpercent)ofthedamagetoeachofthesestructures,exceptforthehospital,wheretheliabilityis90%(ninetypercent);and8 . Forpermitting,whileoccupyingthearea,deliberatedamagebyexplo-siontotheStelaofMatara,anancientmonumentintheSenafeSub-Zoba .

2. The Western Front

49 . In its Partial Award dated December 19, 2005, the CommissiondecidedEthiopia’sliabilitywithrespecttoEritrea’sWesternFrontClaimsNos .1,3,5and9–13 .TheCommissionfoundEthiopialiabletoEritreaforele�enspecific“�iolationsofinternationallawcommittedbyitsmilitarypersonnelorbyotherofficialsoftheStateofEthiopia:”

a . Forpermittinglootingandburningofbuildingsanddestructionofli�estockinthetownofTeseneyduringMayandJune2000;b . Forpermittinglootingandburningofhousesanddestructionofli�estockinthe�illageofAlighidirandtheburninganddetonationofthenearbycottonfactoryanditsstoredcottonduringMayandJune2000;c . Forpermittinglootingandburningofstructuresanddestructionofli�estockinthetownofGulujduringMayandJune2000,Ethiopiaisliablefor90%(ninetypercent)ofthetotallossanddamagetopropertyinGulujduringthattime;d . Forpermittinglootinginthe�illageofTabaldiaduringJune2000;e . Forpermittinglootinginthe�illageofGergefduringJune2000;


f . Forpermittinglootingandstrippingofbuildingsanddestructionofli�estockinOmhajerfromMay16,2000untilthedepartureofthelastEthiopianforcesinSeptember2000,Ethiopiaisliablefor75%(se�-enty-fi�epercent)ofthetotalpropertydamageinOmhajerduringthattime;g . Forpermittingbreaking,enteringandlootingofhouses,businessestablishmentsandgo�ernmentbuildingsinthetownofBarentudur-ingitsoccupationfromMay18to26,2000;h . Forthedestructionofthepolicestation,thecourthouse,theGash-SetitHotelandConferenceCenter,andabakeryinthetownofBarentuduringitsoccupation;i . Forpermittinglootingofbuildingsanddestructionofthepolicesta-tioninthetownofTokombia,andthedestructionofthenearbyRoth-mantobaccoplant,duringitsoccupationinMay2000;j . ForpermittinglootingofbuildingsinMolkiSub-ZobaonMay15to16,2000;andk . Forfailuretotakeeffecti�emeasurestopre�enttherapeofwomeninthetownsofBarentuandTeseney .

50 . InthesamePartialAward,theCommissiondecidedEthiopia’slia-bilitywithrespecttoEritrea’sClaim21,concerningtheDisplacementofCi�il-ians .ItfoundEthiopialiabletoEritrea“fortheunlawfuldisplacementofalltheresidentsofAwgaroin�iolationofArticle49ofGene�aCon�entionIV .”

b. loss of Personal and business Property

1. Eritrea’s Claim

51 . Asnotedabo�e,theCommissionmadeliabilityfindingsin�ol�inglooting,stripping,burning,killingli�estockorotherdestructionofordamagetoindi�idualandbusinesspropertyinMolkiSub-Zobaandele�enspecifiedtownsand�illagesontheCentralandWesternFronts .(Zobasandsub-zobasareEritreanlocalgo�ernmentalentities .MolkiSub-ZobaisontheWesternFront .)Theseliabilityfindingsin�ol�eddestructionordamageoccurringdur-ingEthiopia’sin�asionofEritreainMay2000anditssubsequentoccupationofsomeareasinEritrea .Eritreaclaimedmorethan5 .5billionnakfaforfixed-sumdamagesinrespectoftensofthousandsofpersonsandbusinessesthatallegedlyexperiencedpropertylossesduringthesee�ents .Thisamountwasdi�idedbetweenhouseholds(68%)andbusinesses(32%) .Mostofthebusi-nessclaimsin�ol�edlocalmerchants,cafésandbars,andothersimilarsmallbusinesses

52 . EritreadidnotstructurethesepropertylossclaimstocorrespondtotheCommission’sspecificliabilityfindingsintheCentralandWesternFrontPartialAwards .Instead,theclaimineffectgroupedtogetherandsoughtcom-pensationforalloftheCommission’sfindingsin�ol�inglossofpropertyonthe


CentralandWesternFronts,exceptforEritrea’sseparateclaimsfordestructionordamagein�ol�ing201identifiedstructures,whicharediscussedinSectionVI .Cbelow .Eritreathenclaimedforallofthesecombinedlosses,calculatingtheamountclaimedonthebasisofdatafromclaimsformscollectedfrommorethan28,000affectedhouseholdsandbusinessesintherele�antareasofEritrea .Thecompletedclaimsforms(whichwerenotintroducedintotherecord),anddataderi�edfromsamplegroupsofthem,wereusedtoestimateboththeclaimednumberof�ictimsandthea�eragepercapitaamountsoftheirinjuries .Eritreathenmultipliedtheestimatednumberof�ictimsbytheestimatedpercapitaamountstodetermineitstotalclaim .Theclaimreflecteda�eragelossessaidtobemorethan148,000nakfaperhouseholdsur�eyed,andmorethan543,000nakfaperbusiness .

53 . Eritreamaintainedthatthisapproachwasappropriate,gi�enthelargenumbersofpersonsharmedbyEthiopia’smisconductandthesimilar-ityoftheirinjuries .InEritrea’s�iew,itsuseofclaimsformswasinharmonywiththeCommission’sDecisionsNumbers2and5 .28ThoseDecisions,takenin2001beforetheParties’claimswerefiled,establishedcertainelementsofapossiblemassclaimssystemutilizingclaimsformsfilledoutbyindi�idualclaimantsandsubmittedontheirbehalf .Asmattersde�eloped,bothPartieselectedtofiletheirclaimsasState-to-Stateclaims,andnottopursuetheoptionoffilingmassclaimsonbehalfofindi�iduals .Accordingly,theCommissiondidnotpursuefurtherworkonapossiblemassclaimssystem .

54 . Eritrea’s Office of the Legal Ad�isor designed the claims forms,whichwerefilledoutbyorforindi�idualclaimantsparticipatinginlocalcol-lectionprogramsadministeredbylocalofficialsworkingincooperationwithEritrea’slawyers .Claimantssworetothetruthoftheinformationcontainedintheforms,withilliterateclaimantsbeingaskedtoaffirmthattheirstatementsweretruthful .Eachcompletedformrecei�edanidentifyingnumber .

55 . Forms were collected first in the area of Eritrea’s Central Frontclaims,focusingonthetownsofSenafe,TseronaandSerha,wheretheCom-missionhadfoundseriouslootinganddestruction .Atotalof8,445formswerecollectedfortheCentralFront .EritreausedadifferentclaimsformintheareaoftheWesternFront,modifiedtoreflecttheCommission’sliabilityfindingsontheWesternFrontclaims,aswellasrecommendationsbyEritrea’stechnicalad�iser .Here,20,370formswerecollected .

56 . Inall,28,815claimsformswerecollected:25,595claiminglossordamagetopersonalproperty,and3,220claimingdamagetobusinesses .Indi-�idualscouldfilebothhouseholdandbusinessclaims .Eritreacontendedthatthetotalnumberofclaimsrepresentedbytheformswasconsistentwiththe

28 Eritrea-Ethiopia Claims Commission Decision No . 2 (“Claims Categories,FormsandProcedures”)andDecisionNo .5 .(“MultipleClaimsintheMassClaimsProc-ess,Fixed-SumCompensationatthe$500and$1500Le�els,MultiplierforHouseholdClaims”)(bothdatedAugust2001) .


EritreanNationalStatisticsOffice’sestimatesin2000ofapopulationof29,682familiesand115,867peopleintheareasconcerned,estimatesthatitthoughtwerelikelylowerthanthepopulationatthetimeofEthiopia’sin�asion .

57 . Eritreauseddatafromwhatitdeterminedtoberepresentati�esam-plesizesof548businessand540residentialclaimsformstodeterminefixedamountsreflectinga�erageamountsofinjuryclaimed .Eritreadidsobecauseitregardedthepoolofmorethan28,000claimsformstobetoolargetoper-mittheParties,ortheCommission,toassessindi�idualclaims .Accordingly,utilizingaconsultant’sad�ice,Eritreadeterminedthesamplesizesthoughttorepresentthepopulationsof�ictimsfortheCentralandWesternFronts .Itthenusedarandom-numbergeneratortoselectindi�idualclaimsformstopopulatethesesamples .PersonnelfromEritrea’sOfficeoftheLegalAd�isorthenanalyzedtheamountsclaimedintheselectedforms .

58 . Theanalysisofresidentialclaimsformsincludedamountsclaimedtorepairorreplacelostassets,totallostincome,andexpensesduringdisplace-ment .Forbusinessforms,theanalysisincludedthegreaterofthebusiness’s�aluewhenthedamageoccurredmultipliedbythea�erageofthepercentageofthein�entorydestroyedandthestructuredestroyedplusthecashlooted,or totalreplacementcostpluslostincomepluslootedcash .Theanalysisexcludedresidentialclaimso�ertwomillionnakfaandsomeclaimsforlostincome,and�aluedunresponsi�eorob�iouslyincorrectanswers(forexample,claimsforlossofmorethan100%ofaclaimant’sproperty)atzero .ThequestionsposedintheclaimsformswerenotcorrelatedtotheCommission’sspecificliabilityfindings,andtherecorddoesnotindicatethatanythingwasdoneintheanalysisprocesstorelateclaimedamountstothosefindings .Therealsoisnoindicationthattheamountsclaimedwere�erifiedthroughsamplingoftheunderlyinge�idence(ifany)oranyothermeans .

59 . Baseduponitsanalysisofthesampleclaimsforms,Eritreaderi�edcommon a�erage claim amounts for the Central and Western Fronts andappliedthea�eragestothetotalclaimsformpopulationsforthoseregions .Reflectingatotala�erageclaimedamountof543,846nakfaforbusinessclaims,Eritreaarri�edattheestimatedtotalof1,751,183,196nakfaforthoseclaims .Itcalculatedatotalof3,805,065,870nakfaforresidentialclaims,reflectingana�erageclaimedamountof148,664nakfa .

60 . Asapartialcheckontheaccuracyofthefixedamountsclaimed,Eritrea’sOfficeoftheLegalAd�iserde�elopedhypothetical“representati�epricelists”ofthehouseholdfurniture,furnishingsandothergoodstypicallyfoundinpoorandmiddleclasshomesinEritreaandinthehomesofmoreaffluentpersons .“Shoppers”fromtheOfficeoftheLegalAd�isorthendeter-minedtheretailpricesofthesegoodsinAsmara .Theresultinghypothetical�aluesofhouseholdfurnitureandfurnishingssubstantiallyexceededthea�er-age�aluesestimatedbasedupontheclaimsforms .


2. Ethiopia’s Response

61 . EthiopiaobjectedtoEritrea’sforms-basedclaimsforpersonalandbusinesspropertyonmultiplegrounds .EthiopiastressedthatthequestionsontheclaimsformswerenotcorrelatedtotheCommission’sliabilityfindings,andthattheformssolicitedclaimsfortypesofdamageforwhichtheCom-missiondidnotfindliability .Inthisregard,EthiopianotedthattheCommis-sion’srele�antliabilityfindingsprimarilyin�ol�edlossesfromlooting,butthattheclaimsformsalsoin�itedclaimsforothertypesofpropertyloss,forlostincomeandbusinessprofits,andforothertypesofdamagesforwhichtheCommissiondidnotfindliability .Italsoarguedthatsomequestionswereleading,andthatthewordingofthequestionsandthestructureoftheformin�ited(ande�enencouraged)inflatedanswersanddoublecounting .

62 . Ethiopia pointed out that the amounts claimed were extremelyhighinrelationtopercapitaincomesinEritrea,contendingthatthea�erageresidentialclaimwasse�enty-fi�etimespercapitagrossnationalincome .ItstressedthatEritreamadenoeffort tochecktheclaimedamountsagainstsupportinge�idence; indi�idualclaimantswerenote�enasked topro�idedocumentationorsupportfortheirclaims .InEthiopia’s�iew,thelackofanyrequirementtopro�idesupportingdocumentation,andtheabsenceofanyapparenteffortbyEritreanofficialsto�erifytheamountsclaimed,furtherencouragedclaimantstoinflatetheirclaims .

63 . EthiopiaalsocalculatedEritrea’sclaimstobetheequi�alentofapercapitaawardamountofUS$5,072withthebusinessclaimsincludedandUS$3,911withoutthoseclaims,whichEthiopia�iewedasexorbitant .EthiopiafurthermaintainedthattheclaimformsrepresentedapopulationgroupthatdidnotrealisticallycorrespondtoEritrea’scensusdata .

64 . EthiopianotedthattheCommission’sfindingswereusuallystatedintermsofspecifictownsorotherlocations,andcontendedthatthosefindingsshouldbeconstruedinalimitedandpreciseway,toapplyonlytothenumbersofpersonsshownbyEritrea’scensustoli�ewithinthepoliticalboundariesofthosespecifictownsor�illages .

3. The Commission’s Conclusions

65 . Forcompellingreasons,includingtheshortnessoftimeandresourc-es,bothPartieselectedtofiletheirclaimsinDecember2001asState-to-Stateclaims,andnottoutilizethemassclaimsproceduresen�isionedasapossibleoptionintheCommission’sDecisionsNumbers2and5 .Howe�er,theCom-missiondidindicateinitscommunicationswiththeParties,forexampleinitsletterofAugust29,2001,andattheJuly2006WorkingGroupmeeting,thatatthedamagesphaseitwaspreparedtoauthorizeaPartytoutilizeelementsofamassclaimsprocessinappropriatesituations .


66 . Ne�ertheless,theclaimsformsprocessthatEritreadesignedandimplementedforthesepropertylossclaimshassignificantweaknesses .Inspec-tionoftheformsconfirmsthattheyarenotcorrelatedtotheCommission’sfindingsof liability,andthat theyaddresssignificantelementsofdamagesforwhichtheCommissiondidnotfindliability .Somequestionsarephrasedinwaysthatmayha�ein�itedinflateddamageclaimsorotherwiseelicitedunreliableinformation .

67 . Theprocessfordeterminingthesepropertylossclaimsalsoseemstoha�ebeenlargelydi�orcedfromanyunderlyinge�idence .Personswhofilledoutclaimsformswerenotrequiredtopro�idesupportinge�idenceordocu-mentation,andanynarrati�einformationtheydidofferapparentlywasnotconsideredinassessingtheamountsclaimed .(IntheformusedfortheWest-ernFront,narrati�ematerialwasrelegatedtotheendoftheform .)Thus,therecorda�ailabletotheCommissionoffersnomeanstotestor�erifythe�erylargeamountsclaimed .This isofparticularconcernbecauseEritreaseekspercapitaamountssaidtoreflectthea�erageofthousandsofpersons’actualdamages(subjecttoafewmodestcaps),notareducedamountoffixed-sumcompensation .

68 . Eritrea’s“representati�epricelists”donotofferameaningfulcheckontheamountsclaimed .Theselistsreflecttheimpressionsandpersonalobser-�ationsofEritrea’slegalstaff,notanysystematicstudyofhouseholditemsortheircostintheaffectedareas .Further,thepricesutilizedarethoseofnewgoodsatretailinAsmarashops,whichseemlikelytobeappreciablyhigherthanthe�aluesofusedgoodsintheaffectedareas .

69 . AsEritreaobser�edduringtheproceedings,theUNCCandotherpastmassclaimsprocessesha�eusedclaims forms to identifyandcollectinformationabout�ictimsofparticulartypesofinjuryforwhomfixed-sumcompensationmaybeappropriate .Howe�er,thistypicallyhasbeendoneinclaimsprogramscombiningareducedburdenofproofwithcorrespondinglyreducedfixed-sumcompensationle�els .Theseprogramsalsoha�eincorporat-edmeasurestotesttheunderlyinge�idence,atleastonastatisticalsamplingbasis,asacheckonspuriousorinflatedclaims .Incontrast,Eritreaclaimshigha�eragepercapitaamountssaidtoreflectactuallosses,withoutanysupport-inge�idence .Thisisnotsufficienttosustainaclaimfor5 .5millionnakfa .

70 . Thislea�estheCommissioninadifficultposition .Thee�idenceattheliabilityphasepro�edthatmanyEritreansdidsuffersignificantlossesofpropertyatthehandsofEthiopianforcesduringandafterEthiopia’s2000in�asion .Howe�er,neitherthate�idencenorthee�idencepresentedfromtheclaimsformprocessquantifiedtheextentofinjuryorpro�edentitlementtothelargeamountsEritreanowclaims .Inacommercialarbitrationbetweentwopri�ateparties,thismightwarrantdismissalofadamagesclaimforfailure


ofproof .TheCommissionisnotpreparedtotakethatstep .JustaswithsomelargeclaimsbyEthiopia,wheretheCommissionalsohasidentifiedseriousdifficulties,therewaswidespreadinjuryhere .Thereweresignificant�iolationsofinternationallawcausingharmtomanyindi�idual�ictims .Insuchcircum-stances,itisnotappropriatetodismisstheclaimoutright .Ethiopia’scounselrecognizedattheApril2007hearingthat“Eritreaisentitled[to]compensationbasedonyourawards .”29

71 . Atthehearing,counselforEritreaindicatedthattheclaimsformsareinstorage,andthat,iftheCommissiondidnotacceptEritrea’sanalysis,theCommissioncouldanalyzethedata intheformsinanyothermannerthoughtsatisfactory .TheCommissiondoesnotha�e timeorresources forsuchafundamentalre-assessmentofaParty’sclaim .ItisnottheUNCC,with(atpeak)staffofse�eralhundredpersonsandextensi�efinancialresources .Moreo�er,fortheCommissiontoacceptEritrea’sclaimsformsase�idenceandcommencetoanalyzethemafterthehearingwouldraiseseriousdueprocessquestionsoffairnessandequaltreatmentoftheParties .

72 . In the circumstances, the Commission has sought to de�elop areasonableestimateofthelossesresultingfromtheinjuriesitfound,takingaccountofthelikelypopulationoftheaffectedareasandestimatesofthefre-quencyandextentofloss .Thisprocesswasuna�oidablyimpreciseanduncer-tain,butitwasnecessarygi�enthelimitationsoftherecord .

73 . Inonerele�antrespect,theParties’positionsdidnotdiffergreatly .Bothofferedbroadlysimilarfigures—rangingfromroughly99,000to114,000persons—forthepopulationsoftheareasco�eredbytheCommission’slia-bilityfindings(MolkiSub-Zobaandele�enspecifiedtownsand�illages) .Inthe Commission’s �iew, losses should be assessed by households, becausetheylargelyfelluponhouseholds,notindi�iduals .Therefore,theCommis-siondi�idedthepopulationfiguresbytheapproximatenumberofpersonsperhousehold,toestimatethenumberofhouseholdspotentiallyaffectedbyconductforwhichtheCommissionfoundliability .

74 . Therecord ismuch less clear regarding the frequencyandextentoflosses .Eritreaclaimeda�eragehouseholdlossesof148,664nakfa,butthisamountissomuchgreaterthanthea�eragepercapitaincomeinEritreathattheCommissionfindsitunrealisticandunpersuasi�e .Inassessingpossiblelosses,theCommissiontookaccountof,amongotherthings,theamountsclaimedforsimilarlossesfromlootingofhouseholdsinZalambessaandruralTigray,asindicatedbyEthiopia’se�idence .(Withrespecttothelatter,theCommissionnotesthatEritrea’sclaimin�ol�edlossesin�illagesandtowns,whereresidentswerelikelytoownmoregoodspotentially�ulnerabletolooting,forexample,furniture, shop in�entory, sewingmachines, smallelectricalappliancesandsheetmetalroofing .)Althoughnotlegallycontrolling,theCommissionalso

29 TranscriptoftheEritrea-EthiopiaClaimsCommissionHearingsofApril2007,PeacePalace,TheHague,atp .862(Mr .Picard)(April25,2007) .


consideredtheamountsestablishedin2001asappropriatele�elsoffixed-sumcompensation,shouldthePartieselecttoutilizeamassclaimssystem .

75 . TheCommissionalso took intoaccount theseriousnessof theselossestothepersonswhosufferedthem .Manyofthoseinjuredwerepeopleofmodestmeanswholostalltheyhad,includingtheirmeansofsustenance .Particularlygi�enmany�ictims’limitedresources,thelossoftheirresidentialand/orbusinesspropertyleftmanyofthemfacingprotracteddestitutionanddependency .

76 . Takingtheforegoingconsiderationsintoaccount,theCommissionsoughttoestimatetheappropriatecompensationforlootinglossesutilizingse�eraldifferentapproaches,allofwhichsuggestedasimilarresult .Basedonitsassessmentoftherecord,theCommissionawardsEritreathesumofUS$13,500,000ascompensationforlossesofresidentialandbusinesspropertyattributabletolootingorotherdamageforwhichEthiopiawasfoundliableinMolkiSub-Zobaandtheele�entownsand�illageslistedintheCommission’sPartialAwardsforliability .

C. damage to or destruction of buildings77 . TheCommissionfoundEthiopialiabletoEritreafortheunlawful

destructionofordamagetobothpublicandcommercialbuildingsontheCentralandWesternFrontsduringEthiopia’slarge-scalemilitaryincursionintoEritreabeginninginMay2000 .Thedestructionanddamageranthegam-utfromthedetonationofbuildings,tothestrippingofdoorsandwindowsandotherbuildingmaterialsfromstructures,tothedestructionorlootingofbuildingcontents .WheretheCommissionconcludedthatdamageinparticu-larlocationsresultedfrommultiplecausesoperatingatdifferenttimes,includ-ingcausesforwhichtherewasStateresponsibilityandothercauses(suchasshellingorothercombatdamage)forwhichtherewasnot,theCommissionfoundEthiopialiableforanapproximatepercentageofthedamagebasedontheCommission’sbestassessmentofthee�idence .Inse�eralcases,theCom-missionidentifiedspecificbuildings,includinganumberoflargepublicbuild-ings,initsliabilityfindings;inothercases,thefindingsrelatedmoregenerallytobuildingsinatown,�illageorsub-zoba .


78 . Eritrea claimed compensation exceeding two billion nakfa plusUS$38millioninconnectionwithitsclaimfordamagedanddestroyedstruc-turesontheCentralandWesternFronts(the“BuildingClaims”) .30Forindica-ti�epurposesonly,aftercon�ertingthenakfaamountattherounded2005

30 MemorialoftheStateofEritrea,Damages(PhaseOne)filedonNo�ember15,2006[hereinafterERDamagesGroupOneMemorial],SpreadsheetAnnex .


exchangerateofERN15:US$1,thegrandtotalofEritrea’sBuildingClaimsisapproximatelyUS$180million .31

79 . Specifically,initsDamagesGroupOneMemorial,EritreasoughttotalcompensationofERN406,600,878plusUS$1,918,104forfifty-fouralleg-edlydamagedstructuresontheCentralFront,andERN1,762,735,857plusUS$35,576,750for147allegedlydamagedstructuresontheWesternFront .32

80 . Eritreade�otedextensi�eattention in itswrittensubmissions tosupportingandquantifyingitsclaimsforactualamountcompensationfordestroyedanddamagedbuildings .Eritrea’sDamagesGroupOneMemorialcontaineda520-pagechapteronitsBuildingsClaims,withspecificdiscus-sionoftheliabilitybasisande�idenceforeachof201indi�idualbuildings .Thee�idence,which�ariedwidelyfrombuildingtobuilding,includedwit-nessstatements,propertyin�entories,blueprints,constructioncontracts,andrepair/reconstructionestimates .Thee�idencecumulati�elyconsistedoftwo�olumesofwitnessstatementsandsix�olumesofdocumentarye�idence .

81 . Thedocumentaryexhibitsincludedpropertysur�eysconductedbyEritreango�ernmententitiesduringorshortlyafterEthiopia’soccupationofcertainareas .Theseincludedregionalsur�eys,suchastheJuly2000reportassessingdamagesinGash-Barkatoinstitutionsandfacilitiesintheadmin-istrati�e,educational,health,watersupplyandagriculturalsectors,andsec-tor-specificreports,suchastheSeptember2000sur�eydonebytheEritreaElectricAuthorityoftheMinistryofEnergyofMinesinBarentu,Teseney,AdiQuala,AdiKeihandSenafe .

82 . Eritreamadeseparateclaimsforthetwenty-threeindi�idualstruc-turesidentifiedintheCentralandWesternFrontPartialAwards(excludingtheTseronaPatriotsCemeteryandtheStelaofMatara) .33AstotheCommis-sion’smoregeneralfindingsregardingbuildingdestructionanddamageinele�ennamed�illagesandtowns,Eritreaassertedthatithadtopro�efour

31 In the course of the Group Number One damages hearings, Eritrea reduceditstotaldamagesclaimsbyapproximately450millionnakfaafterwithdrawingcertaine�identiarydocumentsandconfirmingthatothersweremissingfromtherecord .ThereductionsaffectedEritrea’sclaimsregardingtheBarentuZobaandSub-ZobaMinistryofAgriculture,BarentuTownAdministrationBuilding,BarentuZobaGash-BarkaMinis-tryofHealthOfficesandWarehouse,BarentuHospital,TeseneyMinistryofAgriculture,TokombiaMinistryofAgricultureandMolkiSub-Zobaschools .

32 TheCentralFronttotaldoesnotincludeEritrea’sclaimsfordestructionoftheStelaofMataraortheTseronaPatriotsCemetery,whichareaddressedseparatelyatSec-tionVI .E .NordoesthetotalincludeEritrea’sclaimfordamagesforninebuildingsinAwgaro,whichtheCommissionaddressesatSectionVI .H .

33 Eritreacombineditsclaimsonse�eralofthese23structuresinSenafe .EritreaaddressedthetwoSenafeElectricalAuthoritybuildingsinoneclaim;thethreeSenafeOldandNewTownAdministrati�eHeadquartersbuildingsinoneclaim;thetwoSenafeMin-istryofAgriculturebuildingsinoneclaim;andthethreeSenafeSub-ZobaAdministrati�eandResidentialbuildingclaimsinoneclaim .Accordingly,ofthetotalof201separateBuildingClaims,onlyse�enteenareforthe23separatelyidentifiedstructures .


elementstobeeligibleforcompensation:(a)beforethewar,thestructuredidinfactexist;(b)thestructurewasdestroyedordamagedduringthewar;(c)itsdamage,destruction,etc .,wasunlawful;and(d)theamountclaimedisappropriatetomakethe�ictimwhole .

83 . Eritreadidnotattempttoquantify itsBuildingClaimsasoftheactualorapproximatedateofdamage .Instead,Eritreaquantifieditsclaimsforparticularbuildingsasof�arioustimes,basedone�idencerangingfromtheoriginalconstructioncost(typicallymultipliedby�aryingpost-warinflationrates)topost-warreconstructionorrepairestimatesatthen-currentprices .ThemajorityoftheEritreannakfaquantumfiguresdatefrom2005and2006,whenEritreawaspreparingitsBuildingClaimsforsubmissiontotheCom-missionandobtainingactualandestimateddamagefigures .The�astmajorityofthefigurespresentedbyEritreaareestimates,asthego�ernmentexplainedithasnotbeenabletoaffordthecostsofreconstructing,repairingandrestock-ingthebuildings .Asnotedpre�iously,Eritreadidnotcon�ertitsBuildingClaimsmadeinEritreannakfatoU .S .dollars .


84 . EthiopiaobjectedgenerallytothescopeandmagnitudeofEritrea’sBuildingClaims,andchallengedEritrea’srelianceonpropertyin�entoriesandreconstructionestimatespreparedpost-warwithaneyetowardlitigationandpresentedwithoutsupportingdocumentation .

85 . Ethiopiachosetosubmitspecificdefensestoonlythefifteenhigh-est-�alue structures claimed by Eritrea, to “illustrate the e�identiary andanalyticalproblemswiththeseclaims .”34AccordingtoEthiopia,thesefifteenstructurestogetheraccountedfor83%ofthetotalindi�iduallyassesseddam-agesclaimedbyEritrea .Amongitsillustrati�eobjections,EthiopiacriticizedEritrea’sclaimsforcompensationfor100%ofthe�alueofpropertyallegedlylootedfromadamagedbuilding,forexampleinSenafe,wheretheCommis-sionlimitedlootingcompensationtoalowerpercentageandwhereEritreaadmittedthatlootinghadoccurredbeforedestructionofthebuildingitself .EthiopiaalsoobjectedtoEritrea’srequestsforthecostsofrepairingbuild-ingsthathadbeenlootedorstripped,inadditiontothe�alueofthelootedorstrippeditems .AstoEritrea’sestimates,Ethiopiaofferedexamplesofthefarlower�aluesitclaimedforEritrea’sdestructionofallegedlycomparablebuild-ingsinitsparallelCentralandWesternFrontclaims .

34 Ethiopia’sCounter-MemorialtoEritrea’sDamagesPhaseOneMemorial(Febru-ary15,2007),para .3 .5 .Thefifteenstructures includedtheStelaofMatara,addressedseparatelyinthisawardatSectionVI .E .



86 . In quantifying compensation for Eritrea’s Building Claims, theCommissionhasre�iewedthebasisande�idenceforeachofthe201indi-�idualclaims .Asforthetwenty-threestructuresspecificallyidentifiedandincludedintheCentralandWesternFrontPartialAwards,theCommissionbrieflyaddressesbelowtheclaims,defensesande�idenceonabuilding-by-buildingbasis .Ethiopia’sCounter-Memorialcontainedspecificdefensesforsixofthesetwenty-threestructures .

87 . Asforthemorethan175additionalbuildingsforwhichEritreapre-sentedclaimsundertheCommission’sbroadergeographicliabilityfindings,theCommissionisabletoincludeanamountforcompensationonlywhereEritreasubmittedreasonableandcredibleproofthattherele�antbuildingfallswithintherele�antliabilityfinding .Thisrequirede�idencethat:(a)therel-e�antbuildingexistedbeforethewar,intherele�anttown,�illageorsub-zoba;(b)thebuildingwasdamagedordestroyedduringthewar,inthetimeperioddesignatedintherele�antpro�isionoftheaward;(c)thedamageordestruc-tionwasunlawful,withinthefourcornersoftherele�antliabilityfinding;and(d)theamountwouldapproximatelycompensateforactualdamagesattherele�anttime,i .e .,applyingtheChorzów Factory testdiscussedabo�e .35

88 . Inre�iewingthee�idencesubmittedbyEritrea,theCommissionfoundawide�ariationinbothquantityandquality .Mostuseful—and,per-hapsunderstandably,mostrare—wasdocumentation,intheformofin�oicesorprofessionalbids,fortheactualorestimatedcostsofreconstruction,repairand restocking of damaged buildings . As in Ethiopia’s parallel claims forpropertydamage,theCommissionreliedongo�ernmentsur�eysundertakenduringorjustafterthewartoassessthedamagetoandfacilitatetherestora-tionofci�ilianser�ices(forexample,health,education,waterandelectricitysupply),ratherthantosupportpotentiallitigation .Anotherformofgenerally(butnotalways)crediblee�idencewasadetailedstatementfromawitnesswithfirst-handknowledge(forexample,aschoolofficialoracourtadministra-tor)describingtherele�antbuildingandthedestruction,lootingorstripping(whethertheactsortheresults),andattachingadetailedlistoflostpropertywith�alues .Incomparison,theCommissioncouldgi�elittleornoe�identiaryweighttopropertylistsorin�entoriesthatwereunsigned,undatedorother-wiselackingauthentication,ortopatentlyexaggerated�aluations .

89 . Aparticularnoteiswarrantedastocompensationfordamagetoordestructionofchurches,mosquesandotherreligiousbuildings .TheCommis-sionismindfulofthecentralroleofreligiousinstitutionsinthelifeofEritre-ans,andrecognizestheconcernanddistressmanycongregationsexperiencedfromthedesecrationofthoseinstitutions .Withregardtotheassessmentofthe�aluesofreligiousitemsdestroyedorlootedwhichmayha�euniquecul-tural�alue,theCommissiongenerallyacceptsthatthereligiousofficialswho

35 See para .24supra.


attestedtothe�aluesoftheseitemswouldbebestpositionedtomakethose�aluations .

90 . WhileEthiopia’sdecisiontoofferspecificdefensestoonlyfifteenofEritrea’sindi�iduallyassessedclaims(includingonlysixofthetwenty-threebuildingsidentifiedintheliabilityAwards)isperhapsunderstandable,ithasmadetheCommission’staskofe�aluatingEritrea’s201BuildingClaimssig-nificantlymoredifficult .TheCommissionisleftwithonlythemostgeneralofdefenses,andnodefensi�ee�idence,forthe�astmajorityoftheseclaims .

91 . TotheextentEthiopia’sillustrati�edefensesraisedwithregardtothefifteenstructuresapplytootherBuildingClaims,theCommissionhastak-ensuchdefensesintoaccountinitsre�iew .Forexample,inappropriatecases,theCommissionacceptsEthiopia’sillustrati�eobjectiontoEritrea’spracticeofseeking100%ofthe�alueofpropertylootedorstrippedfromabuildingbeforethatbuildingwasdamagedordestroyed .WheretheCommissionlimitedEthi-opia’sliabilitytoapercentageofthedamagecausedbylootingorstrippingofbuildings,itwasbecausethee�idencedidnotpermittheexactapportionmentofresponsibility .Inafewinstances,discussedbelow,Eritreadidclaimforthe�alueofcontentslostwhenabuildingwasdestroyedordamaged,butforthemostpartEritreaexpresslyallegedthatEthiopiahadconductedorpermittedlootingandstrippingofstructuresbeforetherele�antdestructionordamage .Underthecircumstances,theCommissionhasappliedthepercentagefactorforlootingandstrippingintherele�antlocation,forexample,75%inTseronaTown,ratherthanaward100%ofthe�alueofthecontentsofasubsequentlydestroyedordamagedbuilding .

92 . Inmanyofitslootingandstrippingclaims,Eritreaincludedadam-agecomponentforrepairore�enreconstructionoftherele�antstructure,towhichEthiopiaobjected .Ontheonehand,EthiopiaiscorrectthatEritreacan-notfairlyusethedamagesphasetocon�ertaliabilityfindingforlootingandstrippingofabuildingintoliabilityforoutrightdestructionorseriousdam-age .TheCommissionwascarefultodistinguishitsliabilityfindingsinloca-tionswheresubstantialpropertydestructionanddamageoccurred,suchasSenafeTownandBarentuTown,fromlocationswherethee�idencesupportedliabilityonlyforlooting,suchasthe�illagesofTabaldiaandGergef .Ontheotherhand,thephotographic(andtestimonial)e�idenceatboththeliabilityanddamagesphasesshowedthatlootingandstrippingofroofs,doors,windowframesandotherstructuralelementsofabuildingcouldandoftendidcom-promisethestructuralintegrityofthebuilding .Inre�iewingthee�idenceinindi�idualclaimsforlootingandstripping,theCommissionhaslookedwithparticularcareatwhetherEritrea’sclaimsforestimatedbuildingrepaircostsarelinkedtothenatureandscopeofthelootingandstrippingthatoccurred .So,forexample,thecostsofre-roofingabuildingaftertheoriginalroofwasstripped,orthecostsofre-framingandplasteringwallsaftertheoriginalwin-dowsanddoorframeswererippedout,areallowable .Fartherremo�ed,andnotallowable,arecostsclaimedforexpandingorupdatingabuilding,adding


newwaterreser�oirsoutsidethebuilding,orreconstructingabuildingthathade�entuallycollapsedbecauseithadbeenexposedtotheelementswithoutrepair .

93 . As discussed abo�e at paragraph 30, the Commission does notacceptEthiopia’sdefensesbasedonanunreasonablynarrowinterpretationofwordssuchas“looting”and“stripping”intheCentralandWesternFrontliabilityfindings .TheCommissionwasnotexactandcouldnotha�ebeenexact in, forexample,distinguishingbetweenthe lootingandstrippingofbuildingcomponents .Wherethee�idenceshowedfrequentlootingofroofs,doors,windowframesandotherbuildingmaterials,theCommissiontendedtousetheword“stripping,”butitdidnottherebyexcludesuchactionswhenusingtheword“looting .”“Burning”ofastructureisonemethodofdamageanddestruction,butitdoesnotexcludeothermethods .

94 . Nor does the Commission accept, with the exception of SenafeHospital(discussedbelow),Eritrea’sclaimsforcompensationforthecostofbuildingorrentingsubstitutespacefollowingunlawfuldestructionofordam-agetoabuilding .In�irtuallyallsuchcases,thee�idenceregardingallegedlyleasedpropertywasnotfirmlyconnectedtothefunctionorser�icespre�i-ouslypro�idedinthedestroyedordamagedbuilding .Further,bynotinclud-ingamountsforsubstituterealestateintheFinalAwardsforeitherEritrea’sorEthiopia’sbuilding-relatedclaims,theCommissiontreatsthePartiesequally .

95 . Apreliminarywordisnecessaryoncon�ersionofEritrea’ssuccess-fulBuildingClaims fromEritreannakfa toU .S .dollars .TheCommissionhasfollowedadifferentpracticeherethanforEritrea’sothercompensationclaims .Thisisbecause,asnoted,Eritreadidnotsubmite�idenceofthe�alueofspecificbuildingsasofthedateofactualdamageordestruction,orsubmite�idencethatwouldallowtheCommissiontoestimatethat�alue .Instead,Eri-treainmostcasespro�idede�idenceoftheestimatedcostsinnakfatorepairorreconstructspecificbuildingsbetween2003and2006 .ThisisconsistentwithEritrea’spositionthatitlacked—and,inmostcases,stilllacks—sufficientfundstorepairorreconstructthosebuildings,orreplacelootedproperty .

96 . Accordingly,ratherthanapplyaflatpre-warERN:US$exchangeratetoEritrea’scompensationestimatesforlateryears(whenthenakfawasdepreciating),theCommissionhascon�ertedtheclaimstodollarsonabuild-ing-by-buildingbasisasoftheyearforwhichtherepair,reconstructionorreplacementcostisestimated .Todoso,theCommissionhasusedthea�erageannualofficialexchangerates,assetoutinparagraph42 .

97 . Thismathematicalprocess,whiletime-consumingtoapplytoeachofEritrea’s201BuildingClaims,ser�estwopurposes .First,ita�oidsthewind-falltoEritreathatwouldha�eresultedifasinglewartimeexchangerateof8 .8nakfaor9 .36nakfatotheU .S .dollarhadbeenusedtocon�ertestimatescalculated(contemporaneously)innakfainlateryearswhentheexchangerateexceededfifteennakfatotheU .S .dollar .Second,lookingtotheChorzów Fac-tory test,thisprocessbetterapproximatestheamountnecessarytoputEritrea


inthepositionitwouldha�ebeeninbutforEthiopia’sunlawfuldestruction,damageandlootingofproperty,inlightofEritrea’spost-wareconomicinabil-itytorepair,reconstructandreplacethatproperty .Inthecurrencycon�er-sionprocess,aswellasinothercalculations,theCommissionhasroundedamountstoa�oidsuggestinggreaterprecisionthanthee�idenceallowed .

98 . The Commission first addresses the Central Front and then theWesternFrontBuildingClaims .TheCommissionsetsoutrelati�elyfullanal-ysesofEritrea’sclaimsonthetwenty-threespecificstructuresidentifiedintheCentralandWesternFrontPartialAwards,inparticulartheSenafeTownbuildings,aswellasotherbuildingclaimsthatser�easmodelsforbroadcat-egoriesofclaims .TheCommissionhasusedthesameanalyticalstructureinre�iewingalloftheotherindi�idualclaims,mostofwhicharediscussedingroupsforthesakeofeconomy .Withinthegroups,theCommissionoffersexamplesofsuccessful,unsuccessfulandpartiallysuccessfulclaimsbasedonthee�idence .

4. The Central Front

99 . OntheCentralFront, theCommissionfoundEthiopia liableforinflictingorpermittingdamagetobuildingsinTseronaTown,Serha�illageandSenafeTown:

—For75%ofthetotaldamagecausedbythelootingandstrippingofbuild-ingsinTseronaTownpermittedwhileitoccupiedthetownfromlateMay2000untillateFebruary2001;

—ForthedestructionoftheSub-ZobaAdministrationBuilding,theSub-ZobaHealthCenter,andtheWarsaiHotelinTseronaTown;

—For70%ofthetotaldamageitinflictedontheinfrastructureofthe�illageofSerhaduringitsoccupationfromMay1998throughFebruary2001;

—For75%ofthetotaldamagecausedbythelootingandstrippingofbuild-ingsinSenafeTownpermittedduringitsoccupationbetweenMay26,2000andJune2001;and

—Forthedestructionoforse�eredamagetothirteenmajorstructuresinSenafeTownduringitsoccupationofthetown:theElectricalAuthor-ity(twobuildings);theMinistryofAgriculture(twobuildings);theNewTownAdministrati�eHeadquarters;theOldTownAdministrati�eHead-quartersandOfficesWest;theOldTownAdministrati�eHeadquartersandOfficesEast;theSenafeSecondarySchool;theSenafeHospital(at90%ofthedamage);theSub-ZobaAdministrati�eandResidentialcom-pound(threebuildings);andtheTelecommunicationsBuilding .36

36 PartialAward,CentralFront,Eritrea’sClaims2,4,6,7,8&22betweentheStateofEritreaandtheFederalDemocraticRepublicofEthiopia(April28,2004)[hereinafterPartialAwardinEritrea’sCentralFrontClaims],dispositif,SectionV .D,quotedinfullabo�eatpara .48 .


100 . Eritreaclaimeddamagesofapproximately413millionnakfaplusUS$3millioninconnectionwithitsCentralFrontBuildingClaims .Forindic-ati�epurposesonly,aftercon�ertingthenakfaamountattherounded2005exchangerateofERN15:US$1,thetotalclaimedisapproximatelyUS$30mil-lion .

101 . Tserona Town.ForTseronaTown,theCommissionfoundEthiopialiableforthedestructionoftheSub-ZobaAdministrati�eBuilding,theSub-ZobaHealthCenter,andtheWarsaiHotel,aswellasfor75%ofthetotaldam-agecausedbylootingandstrippingofbuildingsinTseronaTownduringEthi-opia’soccupationfromlateMay2000untillateFebruary2001 .Afterapplyingthe75%factor,Eritreasoughta totalofERN70,617,456plusUS$11,719incompensationforitsTseronaTownBuildingClaims .

102 . Sub-Zoba Administrative Building.EritreasoughtcompensationofERN13,583,136forthedetonationandlootingoftheSub-ZobaAdministra-ti�eBuilding,whichwasthemainadministrati�ecenterforTseronaTownandfifteenkebabisser�ing36,000inhabitants .Insupportoftheclaim,Eritreaofferedestimatesdatingfrom2005forrubbleclearing,repairingdamagetothedetonatedadministrati�ebuildingandse�eralstrippedstaffresidences,replac-ingbuildingcontents,andtherentalofatemporarysubstituteoffice .Eritreaalsoincludedaconstructioncontractandplansreflectingthattheadministra-ti�ebuildingwasconstructedin1996–1997for583,896birr .Ethiopiaofferednospecificdefense .Onbalance,theCommissionispreparedtoawardcom-pensationfor100%oftherubbleclearing;only50%oftheestimatedcostofrebuildingtheadministrati�eofficebuilding,because,e�enwithreasonableinflation, theestimate isexcessi�elygreater thantheoriginalconstructioncost;and,applyingthepercentageforlootingandstrippinginTseronaTownfromtheCentralFrontPartialAward,75%ofthe�alueoflootedproperty,includingdesksandchairsactuallyreplacedin2002 .TheCommissionawardsnocompensationfortemporaryofficerentalorforallegedstrippingdamagetostaffresidences,asthee�idenceofrepaircostswasnotsufficientlylinkedtolootingorstripping .Applyingthe2005exchangerateforallamountsawardedexceptthedesksandchairsreplacedin2002,forwhichthe2002exchangerateapplies,theawardequalsUS$305,000 .

103 . Sub-Zoba Health Center. Eritrea sought compensation of ERN18,153,295forthedetonationandlootingoftheSub-ZobaHealthCenter,whichser�edacatchmentareaof50,000persons .Basedonthecontractputintoe�i-dence,theHealthCentercost1 .6millionbirrtoconstructin1996 .TheheadofengineeringfortheMinistryofHealthpro�idedanestimateforrebuildingcostsofERN14,065,895,whichhebasedonthecostsofbuildingastandardhealthcenterin1998ofERN4,688,631andthetriplingofconstructioncostsby2006 .Thee�idencealsoincludeda2006in�entoryof lootedequipmentwithestimated�alues,leadingtoatotallootingclaimofERN3,307,400 .Theestimatesdatefrom2005and2006,atwhichtimeEritreahadnotyetbeenabletostartreconstruction .Ethiopiaofferednospecificdefense .Onbalance,


theCommissionispreparedtoawardcompensationfor100%oftheestimatedcostofrubbleclearing;only50%ofthecostofreconstruction,because,e�enwithreasonableinflation,theestimateisexcessi�elygreaterthantheorigi-nalconstructioncost;and75%oftheestimated�alueofthelootedcontents .Applying2005and2006exchangerates,theawardequalsUS$670,000 .

104 . Warsai Hotel.TheWarsaiHotelwasoriginallybuiltin1997–1998with a loan from the Eritrean Disabled Fighters’ Association for approxi-mately467,000birrforconstructionand97,000birrforfurnishings .EritreasoughtERN3,925,493forthelooting,strippinganddetonationoftheHotel:ERN2,189,938forclearingrubbleandrebuilding,basedon2001specifica-tionsfromtheFightersAssociation;ERN543,455toreplacefurnishingsandkitchenequipmentasof1998–1999;andERN1,192,100forlostre�enuefrom2000to2006 .Eritreasubmittedsubstantiale�idence,includingblueprintsandreceipts,supportingtheoriginalcostsofbothconstructionandfurnishings,includinga28,000birrItalianespressomachine .Ethiopiaofferednospecificdefense .TheCommissionconsiderstherebuildingclaimreasonable;theesti-mateforreconstructionin2001isfourtimesgreaterthantheoriginalcostin1997–1998,whichisamorerealisticinflationfactorthanthefactoroftenusedinotherinstances .TheCommissionalsoconsidersthepropertyreplacementclaimreasonable;Eritreapresentedin�oicesfortheactualreplacementin2001ofthehotelo�enandmixeratERN366,980,whichisalargepercentageofthetotalERN543,455claimed .Thelimitedeconomice�idencedidnotsupporttheclaimforlostre�enue .Afterapplyingthe75%TseronaTownlootingandstrippingpercentagetothepropertyreplacementclaim,andthenapplyingtherele�ant1998and2001exchangerates,theawardequalsUS$270,000 .

105 . Other Tserona Town Building Claims.TheCommissionnextexam-inesEritrea’scompensationclaims,totalingapproximatelyERN35millionplusUS$12,000,for75%ofthedamageallegedlycausedbythelootingandstrippingoffourteenotherbuildingsinTseronaTownpermittedbyEthiopiafromlateMay2000untillateFebruary2001 .Theseconsistofclaimsfordam-agetotheTownAdministrationBuilding,PoliceStation,Courthouse,WaterSupply,GeneratorHouse,BerheTsaedaElementarySchool, junior school,Faith(Imnet)MissionElementarySchool,MinistryofAgriculture,EritreanReliefandRefugeeCommission(“ERREC”)office,marketplace,Shell/Agipstation,GamiaMosqueandDebreMichaelOrthodoxChurch .EthiopiaofferednospecificdefensetoEritrea’sclaimsonthesebuildings .

106 . Aswithothertownsand�illages,discussedbelow,theCommis-sionhasdeterminedtoawardall,noneorsomeoftheamountsclaimedbyEritreaforeachofthesefourteenbuildings .Atoneendofthespectrum,theCommissionfindstheclaimsforthePoliceStation,Courthouse,Faith(Imnet)MissionElementarySchool,ERRECofficeandShell/Agipstationreasonablysupportedbywitnessstatementsanddocumentarye�idence .Ha�ingdeniedtheclaimfordetonationoftheCourthouseattheliabilityphase,theCom-missionnotesthatEritrea’sclaiminthisdamagesphasewaslimitedtoERN


325,316(US$32,062at1997and2005exchangerates)forlooteddoors,win-dowsandfurnishings .

107 . Attheotherendofthespectrum,theCommissiondisallowstheclaims for theTseronaTownAdministrationBuildingandDebreMichaelOrthodoxChurch .AsfortheAdministrationBuilding,EritreasoughtERN12,697,125forlooting,strippingandallegedlyassociateddamage,anamountsomefourhundredtimestheoriginalcostofthebuildingin1996(33,281birr)basedonEritrea’sdocuments .Theclaimwasclearlyonefortotalreconstruc-tionandimpro�ementofanoriginallymodestbuilding,withEritreamak-ingnoefforttoconnectthereconstructioncoststotheeffectsoflootingandstripping .E�enthelootingclaimsappearedexaggerated:threephotocopiersatERN350,000each,andtwotypewritersatERN250,000each .AsfortheDebreMichaelOrthodoxChurch,whichEritreadescribedastheonlybuildingremainingintactinTseronaaftertheEthiopianoccupation,Eritreaproducednoe�idenceastothe�alueoflooteditems,butinsteadoffered“suggestions”basedontheestimated�aluesofthecontentsofOrthodoxchurchesinSenafeandSerha .

108 . In the middle of the spectrum, the Commission discounts theclaimsfortheMinistryofAgriculture,juniorschoolandGamiaMosqueby50%(aswellasapplyingthe75%factorforlootingandstrippingintheliabil-ityAward) .TheCommissionconsidersthee�idenceofferedtosupporttheclaimfortheMinistryofAgriculture—in�entorylistspreparedin2005withnounderlyingdocumentarysupportwhatsoe�er—tobeinsufficienttosup-portthecomparati�elylargeclaimformorethansixmillionnakfa .TheCom-missionisnotcon�inced,inthecaseofthejuniorschool,thatpost-strippingrepairswouldcosttwicethetotalcostofconstructingtheschoolin1999or,inthecaseoftheMosque,thatrepaircostswouldequalthoseforthesubstan-tiallylargerAlsadiaqMosqueinSenafe .TheCommissionhasalsocorrectedtheamount for theTseronaBerheTsaedaElementarySchool,because thedocumentarye�idencecombinedclaimsforthatschoolandtheFaithMissionElementarySchool .TheCommissionincludescompensationfortheclaimsfor the Water Supply and Generator House facilities only in the amountsdirectlyattributabletolooting(lootedpipesandpumps,andelectricitypolesandwire,respecti�ely)andnotdonatedbyUNICEFandUNMEEinpost-warreconstructionprojects,apparentlyonanon-reimbursablebasis .Asforthedestroyedmarketplace,theUnitedNationsDe�elopmentProgram(“UNDP”)pro�idedasubstantialrehabilitationgrant;absentanyindicationthatEritreahadtoreimbursetheUNDP,theCommissionlimitscompensationto75%oftheamountcarriedbytheSub-Zoba .

109 . TheCommissionawardsEritreacompensationintheamountofUS$775,000for75%ofthetotaldamagecausedbythelootingandstrippingofthebuildingsinTseronaTownlistedabo�eduringtheEthiopianoccupa-tion .Addingtheamountsawardedforthethreestructuresidentifiedinthe


liabilityAward, thetotalawardedforEritrea’sBuildingClaimsinTseronaTownisUS$2,020,000 .

110 . Serha Village.TheCommissionfoundEthiopialiablefor70%ofthetotaldamageinflictedontheinfrastructureofthe�illageofSerhadur-ingitsoccupationfromMay1998throughFebruary2001 .Afterapplyingthe70%factor,EritreasoughtcompensationofERN21,860,300plusUS$54,777fordamageinflictedontenstructuresinSerha:theHealthStation,Admin-istrationBuilding,Police and ImmigrationCompound,GeneratorHouse,elementaryandjuniorschool,MaiTerraElementarySchool,DisabledFight-ersBakeryandMarket,openairmarket,Shell/AgipstationandSt .Mary’sOrthodoxChurch .EthiopiaofferednospecificdefensetoEritrea’sclaimsonanyofthesebuildings .

111 . TheCommissionfindstheclaimsfortheAdministrationBuild-ing,elementaryandjuniorschool,openairmarket,Shell/AgipstationandSt .Mary’sOrthodoxChurchreasonablysupportedbythewitnessstatements,claimformsanddocumentarye�idence .TheCommissiondiscountstheclaimsforthePoliceandImmigrationCompoundandreconstructionoftheHealthStationbyapproximately50%(aswellasapplyingthe70%factorintheliabilityAward),becauseofunreasonablyinflatedreconstructioncosts .InthecaseoftheHealthStation,Eritrea’sowne�idenceshowedthattheoriginalconstruc-tioncostswereERN323,650andthecostsofbuildingahealthstationtripledafterthewar,whichwouldsupportcompensationofERN970,950ratherthantheERN1,986,600sought .TheCommissionalsodiscountstheERN6,090,000claimfor the lootedGeneratorHouseby50%,because theCommission isnotcon�incedthatthecostsofreplacingageneratorand800telephonepoleswouldincreasebytentimesbetween1997and2005 .AsforEritrea’sclaimforERN1,374,327for70%ofthecostsforrehabilitationandreplacementoffurniturefortheMaiTerraElementarySchool,theCommissionreducescom-pensationbytheERN790,436donatedbytheLutheranWorldFederation,apparentlywithoutanyrequirementofrepayment .Finally,turningtoErit-rea’sclaimforlooting-relateddamagestotheDisabledFightersBakeryandMarket,theCommissiondisallowstheclaimforERN734,623worthoflooteditemsbelongingtoMerkebConstructionCo .forfailureofproof:thewitnessstatementfromtheFightersAssociationidentifiedanothercontractor,andtheMerkebin�entorylistwasnotauthenticatedinanyway .

112 . TheCommissionawardsEritreacompensationintheamountofUS$990,000for70%ofthedamageinflictedonthebuildingslistedforSerhaduringtheEthiopianoccupation .

113 . Senafe Town.SenafeTownwasamajorfocusoftheCommission’sfindings of property destruction and damage in the Central Front PartialAward .TheCommissionfoundEthiopialiablefortheunlawfuldestructionoforse�eredamagetothirteenspecificmajorstructuresduringitsoccupationofthetownbetweenMay26,2000andJune2001,aswellasfor75%ofthetotaldamagesufferedinthetownfromlootingandstrippingofbuildingsin


thetownduringtheoccupation .Afterapplyingthe75%factor,EritreasoughtatotalofERN320,375,509plusUS$2,494,009incompensationforitsSenafeTownBuildingClaims .

114 . TheCommissionturnsfirsttothethirteenspecificmajorstruc-tures,assetoutintheCentralFrontPartialAward:theElectricalAuthority(twobuildings),MinistryofAgriculture(twobuildings),NewTownAdmin-istrati�eHeadquarters,OldTownAdministrati�eHeadquartersandOfficesWest,OldTownAdministrati�eHeadquartersandOfficesEast,SenafeSec-ondarySchool,SenafeHospital(at90%),Sub-ZobaAdministrati�eandResi-dentialcomplex(threebuildings)andTelecommunicationsBuilding .

115 . Electrical Authority.EritreasoughtUS$500,000 for thecostsofrestoringthetwobuildingsoftheSenafeElectricAuthorityandrelatedequip-ment .Thisamountwasbasedona2000reportbyanEritreaElectricAuthoritydamageassessmentteam,andisalsotheamountofa2001WorldBankloantorestoreelectricser�icesandstructuresinSenafe .Ethiopiadidnotpro�ideaspecificdefense .Inlightofthedocumentarysupportpro�idedbyEritrea,theCommissionawardsthefullUS$500,000 .Eritrea’sunliquidatedclaimforcompensationforunspecifieden�ironmentaldamageisdenied .

116 . Ministry of Agriculture. Consistent with the importance of theagriculturalsectorinEritrea(aswellasinEthiopia),EritreaputsubstantialemphasisonitsclaimsforlossofMinistryofAgriculturebuildingsandfacili-ties .ForSenafeTown,EritreasoughtcompensationtotalingERN52,128,765forthedestructionandlootingofthetwoMinistryofAgriculturebuildingsidentifiedintheCentralFrontPartialAward,namelythecentralofficeandthe�eterinaryclinic,aswellasforanurserystation,mainwarehouseandsatellitewarehouses,poultryfarm(actuallyastoragefacility),meetinghallandforesta-tionoffice .Eritrea’smaine�idencewasapaperpreparedinAugust2005byanofficialoftheMinistryofAgricultureforSenafeSub-Zoba,listingdestroyedanddamagedbuildingsanditemsandtheirprices;noreceiptsorotherdocu-mentswereattached .Ethiopiadidnotpro�ideaspecificdefense .

117 . Turning first to the two Ministry of Agriculture buildings sin-gledoutintheCentralFrontPartialAward,theCommissionispreparedtoaward100%ofthereconstructioncostsestimatedbyEritreaasof2005:ERN2,760,915forthecentralofficeandERN3,760,915forthe�eterinaryclinic .Although Eritrea’s quantum e�idence was slim, these amounts were con-sistentwiththosepro�idedandsupportedforbuildingsofsimilarsizeandimportance .Asforthelootedcontents,whichEritreadescribedasha�ingbeen“remo�edbeforethebuildingsweredetonated,”37theCommissionawards75%ofthe�alueclaimed,inthecombinedamountofERN4,798,817 .TheCom-missionconsiderstheitemsandpriceslistedbytheMinistryofAgricultureofficialinhiswitnessstatementtobereasonable,includingfourtractorsworthERN500,000eachlootedfromthecentraloffice .

37 ERDamagesGroupOneMemorial,p .II-49 .


118 . Eritrea’sclaimsrelatedtotheadditionalMinistryofAgriculturebuildingsposese�eralproblems .Gi�enthatthesebuildingsarenotalllocat-edinthe�icinityofthecentralofficeand�eterinaryclinic,theCommissionappreciatesthatEritrealimiteditsclaimsto75%ofdamagesallegedlycon-nectedtolootingandstrippingoftheadditionalbuildings .Howe�er,thereareproblemswithproofofbothcausationandquantum .InsofarasEritreasoughtcompensationforthecostsofrepairingthebuildings,whichcostsweresup-portedonlybysinglelineitemsintheMinistryofAgriculturereport,Eritreafailedtoconnectstructuraldamagetolootingandstripping .Theamountswerealsohigh:EritreaclaimedERN2,720,600(equaltotheclaimforthecen-traloffice)torepairthepoultryfarm/storagefacility,describedbyEritreaasacementblockandplywoodbuilding .TherearealsolimitstoEritrea’slootingclaimsforthecontentsoftheadditionalbuildings .AlthoughtheCommis-sionacceptsEritrea’sexplanationthattheMinistryofAgriculturehadfilleditsmainwarehouseastherainyseasonapproachedinMay2000andsohadrentedpri�atewarehousesaroundSenafeTown,thefactremainsthatErit-readidnote�enindicatehowmanysuchwarehousesexisted,muchlesswhattheircontentswereorwhathappenedtothosecontents .Onbalance,theCom-missionispreparedtoawardanadditionalERN8,400,000forthelootingofMinistryofAgriculturefacilitiesinSenafeTown,whichrepresents50%oftheestimated�alueofcontentslootedfromthemainwarehouse,nurserystationandpoultryfarm/storagefacility .

119 . The total compensation awarded for the Ministry of Agricul-turebuildingsinSenafeTown,whencon�ertedatthe2005exchangerate,isUS$1,300,000 .

120 . Old Town and New Town Administration Buildings.Atthedamag-esphase,EritreacombineditsclaimsfortheNewTownAdministrati�eHead-quarters,OldTownAdministrati�eHeadquartersandOfficesEast,andOldTownAdministrati�eHeadquartersandOfficesWest,whichwereseparatelyidentifiedintheCentralFrontPartialAward .EritreasoughtatotalofERN108,351,929forthedestructionofthesebuildingsandthelootingoftheOldTownbuildingsand,separately,thelootingoftheWaterFacilityOfficeinsidetheOldTowncomplex .NeithertheOldTownnortheNewTowncomplexhasbeenrebuilt .Inwitnessstatements,theheadengineerforDebubZobaand his predecessor pro�ided per meter estimates for rubble clearing andreconstruction,leadingtoestimatesfortheentirecomplexofERN632,000forrubbleclearingandERN20,040,000forreconstruction .Althoughblue-printsandotheroriginalconstructiondocumentswerenolongera�ailablefortheOldTownbuildings,whichwerebuiltintheItaliancolonialstyleintheearly1900s,Eritreaestimatedrebuildingcostsbasedonsquarefootage .ConstructiondocumentsreflectedthattheNewTowncompoundwasunderconstructionandwas75%completewhendemolishedduringtheEthiopianoccupation . Eritrea pro�ided �arious in�entories supporting its claims forapproximatelyERN55millionforthecontentsoftheOldTownbuildings


andERN27millionforthecontentsoftheWaterFacilityOffice .Initsspecificdefense,EthiopiachargedEritreawithinflatingitsclaimsforrebuildingcosts(EthiopiacompareditsclaimforrebuildingacomparablebuildinginZal-ambessaforUS$38,314)andreplacinglostitems(EthiopianotedthatEritrea�aluedaUS$8,000LeicaTotalStationopticalinstrumentatsomeUS$80,000) .EthiopiaalsoobjectedtoEritrea’sseeking100%ofrebuildingcostsforthe75%completeNewTownbuildings,aswellas100%ratherthan75%oflootingandstrippinglosses .

121 . TurningfirsttotheNewTownAdministrati�eHeadquarters,theCommissionfinds therebuildingestimateofERN8milliontobereason-able,andsoispreparedtoawardEritrea75%orERN6,000,000 .Therewasno claim for looting associated with the New Town complex, presumablybecauseitwasunderconstructionandnotinuse .TheCommissionawardsERN11,180,000forrebuildingtheOldTownAdministrati�eHeadquarters,recognizingthatitshistoriccharactercannotberecreated .Thelootingclaimswerepatentlyexcessi�e .Forexample,examinationofthein�entoryoflootedelectricalgoodsre�ealedthatthepreparerapparentlyconflatedunitpricesandtotalprices, leadingtoa�aluationofERN30,000,000for60040-wattlamps;whencorrected,thetotalforelectricalgoodsisclosertoERN200,000ratherthanERN49,000,000 .Aseparatein�entoryoflooteditems,preparedbytheSenafeTownAdministrator,didnotsufferfromsuchasystematicmis-take .Indeed,theCommissionappreciatesthattheadministratortookcarenottoincludeentriesforstrippedroofsanddoors,whichwereincludedintheestimateofrebuildingcosts .TheCommissioncanonlyconcludethattheERN800,000priceonthisin�entoryfortheLeicaTotalStation(byfarthehighestunitpriceonthefour-pagein�entory)wasatypographicalmistake,andreducethetotalbyERN720,000 .Thethirdin�entoryofferedbyEritrea,whichlistedand�aluedthepipes,�al�es,toolsandotherequipmentlootedfromtheWaterFacilityOfficewarehouse,alsoappearsreasonable .TheCom-missionispreparedtoacceptthetotal�aluationofERN6,769,543basedon2001prices,butnottomultiplyitbyfourasEritrearequestedbeforeapplyingthe75%lootingfactor .

122 . TheCommissionawardstotalcompensationforthedestruction,lootingandstrippingoftheNewTownandOldTownAdministrati�eHead-quartersandOffices,includingcostsofrebuildingat100%fortheOldTownbuildingsand75%fortheNewTownbuildings,andcostsofreplacinglooteditemsat75%,ofUS$2,100,000,whencon�ertedattheapplicable2000and2005exchangerates .

123 . Senafe Secondary School.Justbeforetheoccupation,theSenafeSec-ondarySchoolser�ed2,500–3,000highschoolstudentsandwasintheprocessofexpandingtohouseajuniorschool .EritreasoughtERN14,831,230ascompen-sationforEthiopia’sdestruction,lootingandstrippingofthecomplex,includingamountsfortheactualrepairoftheseniorschoolandestimatedreconstructionofthejuniorschool .Ethiopiadidnotpresentaspecificdefense .


124 . TheCommissionfindsthee�idencesupportingthisclaimtobeofmixedquality .EritreasubmittedacertificateofpaymentfortherepairstotheSecondarySchool,whichwerecompletedin2004atareasonablecostofERN372,628;thecertificatereflectedthattheworkfocusedonreplacingstrippedwindows,doorsandroofingandrelatedstructuraldamage .EritreaalsosoughtERN1,579,822forfurnitureandsuppliesactuallyreplacedbetween2002and2004,andanotherERN2,678,100astheestimatedcostin2006ofcompletingthereplacementprocess .Lessreasonablewasthecomparati�elylargeclaimofERN7,000,000torebuildthejuniorschoolexpansion;thewitnessstate-mentsreflectedthatconstructionwasonlyapproximately75%complete,yettheestimatewasfortwicetheoriginalfullcontractpriceofERN3,572,252 .TheCommissionlimitsthecompensationforthejuniorschoolprojectto75%oftheoriginalprice,orERN2,679,189 .TheCommissiondeniesEritrea’sERN3,105,650claimforpropertyallegedlyleftbythecontractoratthesite,because,e�enassuminganecessarylinkwiththeliabilityfindings,thedocumentarye�idencedidnotsupporttheamountclaimed .Intotal,aftercon�ersionofnakfaamountsattheapplicable2000,2003,2004and2006exchangerates,theCommissionawardsEritreacompensationofUS$520,000forthedestruction,lootingandstrippingoftheSenafeSecondarySchool .

125 . Senafe Hospital.SenafeHospitalwasanimportanthealthfacility,whichser�ed,accordingtoEritrea,acatchmentof100,000people .Eritreawasnotabletoreconstructthehospital,butdidbuildatemporaryhospitalin2003 .EritreasoughtERN70,120,652plusUS$460,369for90%oftheesti-matedcostsofrebuildingandrestockingthehospitalandconstructingthetemporaryhospital .Eritreapresenteddocumentarye�idencesupportingtheactualcostsofthetemporaryhospitalandthepreparatoryrubbleclearingforrebuildingthehospitalproper .Eritrea’se�idenceforthecostsofrebuildingconsistedonlyoftwoestimatesofsixty-fi�eandse�enty-fi�emillionnakfainwitnessstatements,onefromtheheadofengineeringoftheMinistryofHealthandonereportedlyfromaconstructioncompany;neitherestimatewassupportedbyanybidorcontractdocuments,ore�enabreakdown .Ethio-piaputforwardastrongdefense,arguingthattherebuildingestimateswere�astlyinflatedcomparedtoEritrea’s1995constructioncostsofapproximately1,000,000birrtobuildanextensionofSenafeHospitalandtoEthiopia’sownclaimofUS$363,586forreconstructionofthehospitalinZalambessa .Ethio-piaalsochargedEritreawithfailingtomitigate itsdamagesbyexpendingERN2,451,836forthetemporaryhospitalratherthanbuildinganewone,andobjectedtoEritrea’sclaiming90%ratherthan75%ofthecostsofreplacinglootedproperty .

126 . As in other instances, the Commission agrees with Ethiopiathattheproperdiscountrateforlooting,whichEritreadescribesasha�ingoccurredbeforedestructionofthebuilding,is75%ratherthan90% .TheCom-missiondoesnot,howe�er,agreethatEritreafailedtomitigateitsdamagesbyconstructingthetemporaryhospitalforsometwomillionnakfa .E�enif,as


discussedbelow,Eritrea’sestimatesforrebuildingthecomprehensi�efacili-tiesofSenafeHospitalweretoohigh,theCommissioncannotfaultEritreaforspendingERN2milliontopro�idehealthser�icesurgentlyneededbyalargecommunity .Inlightofthisspecialneed,theCommission,inthisoneinstance,awardsEritrea’scostsofpro�idingtemporarysubstitutefacilitiesforadestroyedordamagedbuilding .

127 . Ha�ingjustnotedtheimportanceofhealthser�icesintheSenaferegion,theCommissionfindsitselfinadifficultpositioninassessingcom-pensationfordamagetoSenafeHospital .Absentanydocumentarye�idenceunderlyingEritrea’sestimatesofERN65,000,000andERN75,000,000,theCommissionreturnedtothefactorssetoutinthewitnessstatementoftheMinistryofHealth’sheadofengineering .Asdiscussedabo�einconnectionwiththeTseronaTownhealthcenter,hetestifiedthatthecostsofbuildingastandardhealthcenterin1998wereERN4,688,631andconstructioncosts(at least inhissector)hadtripledby2006 .AssumingthatSenafeHospitalhadtwicethecapacityofahealthcenter(theTseronaTownhealthcenterhadacatchmentof50,000,comparedtoSenafeHospital’s100,000),reasonablerebuildingcostswouldbetwicethatfortheTseronaTownhealthcenter,orapproximatelyERN28,000,000 .

128 . In sum, the Commission awards compensation of 90% of theactualcostsofbuildingthetemporaryhospitalandclearingrubbleforrecon-struction,90%oftheestimatedreconstructioncosts,and75%oftheexpenseof post-looting restocking . Applying the applicable 2003, 2005 and 2006exchangerates, theCommissionawardsEritrea totalcompensation in theamountofUS$2,575,000 .

129 . Sub-Zoba Administrative and Residential Complex. The SenafeSub-ZobaAdministrati�eOfficeconsistedofse�eraladministrati�ebuildingsaroundapublicsquareandaseparateresidence,allbuiltintheoldItalianstyleliketheOldTownAdministrati�ebuildings .Eritrea’sclaimforERN17,514,713for thedestruction, lootingandstrippingof theSub-ZobaAdministrati�ebuildingswasbasedone�idencesimilartothatfortheTownAdministrati�ebuildings .EritreabaseditsestimateforERN9,296,000inreconstructioncostsonsquaremeterfigurespro�idedbytheheadengineerforDebubZoba .Erit-reaalsosubmittedin�entoriesoflooteditemspreparedbyanadministrati�eofficer,andbyrepresentati�esofERRECandtheNationalUnionofEritreanWomen(“NUEW”),whichhadoffices inthecomplex .Ethiopiaofferednospecificdefense .Onbalance,theCommissionispreparedtoawardcompensa-tionofERN730,000forrubbleclearingandERN8,632,000forrebuildingtheSub-ZobaAdministrati�ecomplex,recognizingitshistoriccharactercannotberecreated,aswellas75%oftheERN1,598,450estimateforlootedproperty .Toa�oiddouble-counting,theCommissionawards75%ofonlyone-halfofthe�alueclaimedfortheitemsonthein�entoriespreparedbyERRECandNUEW,whichincludedbuildingmaterials .ThetotalawardfortheSenafeSub-


ZobaAdministrati�eOfficeisUS$815,000,aftercon�ersionattheapplicable2005exchangerate .

130 . Telecommunications Building.ThelastSenafeTownbuildingsin-gledoutintheCentralFrontPartialAwardwasthenewtwo-storyTelecom-municationsBuilding,whichwasbeinghandedo�ertotheTelecommunica-tionsSer�iceofEritrea(“TSE”)bythecontractorinMay2000 .Constructionof thebuildinghadtakeneighteenmonthsatacostofERN3,520,000 .AstheCommissionrecallsfromthemanyphotographspro�idedintherecordanddisplayedattheliabilityhearing,theTelecommunicationsBuildingwasdestroyedbydetonation,strippedandlooted .Inthedamagesphase,Eritreasubmittedextensi�ee�idencesupportingitsclaimforERN24,276,412andUS$1,441,241 .Inadditiontothecostsofrebuildingandre-fittingthebuilding,Eritreasoughtcompensationforthecostsofreplacingthedestroyednetworkinfrastructureandcompletingthelootedlocalloopupgrade,forlostre�enue,andforthe�alueofcontractorpropertyleftatthesite .EthiopiaobjectedtoEritrea’sinfrastructureclaims,ongroundsthattheyfelloutsidetheCommis-sion’sliabilityfinding .EthiopiaalsochargedEritreawithinflatingboththerebuildingandpropertyreplacementcosts .

131 . TheCommissionfindsEritrea’sclaimforrebuildingcoststobecredibleandreasonable .Eritreapresentedtwosimilarestimatesforrebuildingcosts:onefromtheoriginalcontractorhimself,whotestifiedthathewouldchargenolessthanERN8,000,000–9,000,000forrebuildingthestructureasof2005;andtheestimateofERN7,617,500plusUS$130,000fromtheTSE .Bothwereapproximatelydoublethepre-warcostofERN3,520,000,whichtheCommissionconsidersreasonable .Accordingly,theCommissionispreparedtoawardthefullERN7,617,500plusUS$130,000soughtforrebuildingcosts,aswellasthefullERN1,700,000ofestimatedrubbleclearingcosts .

132 . Theremainingclaimsare less straightforward .First, as for the�alue of the contents looted from the Telecommunications Building, theestimatedreplacement�aluespro�idedbytheTSEestimationwereinflated .AspointedoutbyEthiopia,EritreaspecificallyclaimedUS$148,841as thereplacement�aluein2000ofcertainradiotransmissionequipmentpurchasedforonlyUS$5,000oneortwoyearsearlier,andotheritemsinthesame�alu-ationlistalsoshowedsimilar,iflessdrastic,disparities .Tocompensateforthisinflation,theCommissionreducesEritrea’slootingclaimbyhalfbeforeapplyingthe75%lootingfactor .Second,asforEritrea’sclaimsfordamagetothenetworkinfrastructureandthelocalloopupgrade,neitherofwhichwassituatedintheTelecommunicationsBuilding,theCommissionagreeswithEthiopiathatthesefalloutsideoftheTelecommunicationsBuildingclaim .TheCommissiontreatsthemasseparatelootingandstrippingclaims .Findingthatthesetwoclaims,liketheTelecommunicationsBuildinglootingclaim,reflectedunreasonableinflation,theCommissionagainreducesthembyhalfbeforeapplyingthe75%lootingfactor .Thirdandfourth, theCommission


deniesEritrea’sclaimsforlostre�enueandforthecontractor’spropertyalleg-edlyleftatthesiteasnotsufficientlysupportedbythee�idence .

133 . TheCommissionawardscompensationforthedestruction,loot-ingandstrippingoftheSenafeTelecommunicationsBuilding,andtheloot-ingandstrippingofrelatedinfrastructureandthelocalloopupgrade,inthetotalamountofUS$1,735,000,aftercon�ersionattheapplicable2000and2005exchangerates .

134 . Other Senafe Town Claims.Abo�eandbeyondthethirteenstruc-turesspecificallyidentifiedintheCentralFrontPartialAward,Eritreasoughto�erERN33millionandUS$90,000for75%oftheallegeddestructionoforse�eredamagetoanothertwentybuildingsinSenafeTownduringtheEthio-pianoccupation:theBranchPoliceDepartment,Courthouse,RuwietElemen-tarySchool,SenafeElementarySchool,TishaElementarySchool,FortoSenafeElementarySchool,MehadElementarySchool,MinistryofEducationBranchOffice,MinistryofLand,WaterandEn�ironment,PostOffice,slaughterhouse,marketplace,gasstations,RedSeaCorporation,AbubekerAlsadiaqMosque,AnwarMosque,DaughtersofCharity,St .JosephCatholicChurch,ComboniSistersClinicandOrthodoxChurches .EthiopiaofferednospecificdefensetoEritrea’sclaimsonanyofthesebuildings .

135 . ThestrengthofthesetwentySenafeTownBuildingClaims�ariedconsiderably .Se�eralsufferedfromanabjectlackofe�idence .Forexample,EritreasoughtERN941,077for75%ofthepropertyallegedlylootedfromtheRedSeaCorporationwarehouse,onthebasisofonlyaone-page,undated,unsignedandotherwiseunauthenticatedpropertylist;thelineitemsrangefrom “Building (Damaged)” at ERN 250,000 to “Cassette” at ERN 28 .60 .Absentanyattempttopro�ethatthewarehouseexistedinSenafeTownandwaslootedduringtheoccupation,ortodocumentthecontentswithauthen-ticatedin�entories,theCommissioncannotawardanycompensation .Otherclaimswereatbestcontradictoryandatworstmisleading .Forexample,intheclaimforERN1,225,875for75%oftheallegedlootingdamagetotheAnwarMosque,itwasnotpossibletoseparateestimatedamountsforshellingdamageandlootingdamageintherele�antwitnessstatementandClaimForm .TheCommissiondeniesanycompensationforsuchclaims .

136 . OtherSenafeTownBuildingClaimsclearlyarebothcredibleandreasonable .OneexampleisEritrea’sclaimforERN998,090for75%oftheallegedlootingandstrippingdamagetothefour-buildingTishaElementarySchool .Eritreapresentede�idenceintheformofaConstructionAgreementandCertificateofPaymentforERN439,312(at100%)foractualrepairstotheschoolin2002,whichin�oicereflectedstripping-relatedrehabilitationratherthannewconstruction .EritreabasedtheestimateofERN891,474(at100%)forreplacinglootedfurnitureandsuppliesonauniformMinistryofEducationelementaryschoolstandard,whichtheCommissionfindsreasonable .AnotherexampleisEritrea’sclaimforERN495,728for75%oftheallegedlootingandstrippingdamagetotheele�en-roomComboniSistersClinic .Eritreasubmit-


tedawitnessstatementfromtheheadoftheClinic(withattachedin�entory)andarelati�elydetailedClaimForm,whichdescribedboththeextensi�eloot-ingandstrippingof theClinicandtheexpense incurred inrepairingandrestockingit(withCatholicChurchfunds)in2005 .Inyetanotherexample,EritrealimiteditsclaimfordamagetotheCourthouseto75%oftheMinis-tryofJustice’sestimatesofERN172,103(at1997prices)toreplacethirteenstrippedwindowsandfifteenstrippeddoorsandERN284,916(at2005prices)toreplacelootedfurnitureandequipment .TheCommissionispreparedtoawardtheamountssoughtforsuchclaimsinfull .

137 . Mostcommonly,theCommissiondiscountedtheamountawardedonthebasisofthee�idencepro�ided .Eritreasoughtalmosttenmillionnakfaforrepairs totheBranchPoliceDepartment,as towhichtheCommissionexplicitlydeniedEritrea’sclaimforunlawfuldestructionintheCentralFrontPartialAward .Eritreasupporteditslootingandstrippingclaimprimarilywitha“SpecificationandBillofQuantitiesforConstructionDestroyedbyWeyaneTroopsatSenafe,”whichreflectedthatthecontractorperformedsubstantialnewconstructionwork .Althoughdenyingthatcomponentoftheclaim,theCommissiondoesawardtheERN83,052soughtforlootedfurnitureandsup-plies,whichwassupportedbyanitemizedlistpreparedbytheheadoftheSenafeSub-Zobapoliceforce .InEritrea’sclaimforERN751,688for75%ofthelootingandstrippingdamagetotheOrthodoxChurches,EritreapresentedawitnessstatementfromtheheadoftheChurcheswhodescribedthestrippingandlootingandattachedarelati�elydetailed2001listofthelostproperty,includingreligiousbooksbyauthor .Howe�er,inhiswitnessstatement,theKeshialsotestifiedthattheroof,doorsandwindowsofonechurch—whichwereincludedonhislist—weredestroyedbyhea�yshelling .TheCommissionreducesthecompensationawardedbythe�alueofthosedestroyeditems .Inotherinstances,wheretheestimated�aluesforcommonitems,suchastables,chairs,computersandothersmallelectrical items,aresignificantlyhigherthana�erage,theCommissionhasawardedapercentageofthetotalclaimed .

138 . TheCommissionawardsEritreacompensationintheamountofUS$585,000for75%ofthetotaldamagefromthelootingandstrippingofthebuildingslistedforSenafeTownduringEthiopia’soccupationbetweenMay26,2000andJune2001,aftercon�ersionattheapplicableexchangerates .Add-ingtheamountsawardedforthethirteenstructuresidentifiedintheCentralFrontPartialAward,thetotalawardedforEritrea’sBuildingClaimsinSenafeTownisUS$10,130,000 .

139 . In sum, the total compensation awarded for Eritrea’s BuildingClaimsfortheCentralFrontisUS$13,140,000 .

5. The Western Front

140 . On the Western Front, the Commission found Ethiopia liableforinflictingorpermittingdamagetobuildingsinthetownsand�illagesof


Teseney,Alighidir,Guluj,Tabaldia,Gergef,Omhajer,BarentuandTokombia,andMolkiSub-Zoba:

—ForpermittingthelootingandburningofbuildingsinTeseneyTownduringMayandJune2000;

— For permitting the looting and burning of houses in the �illage ofAlighidirandtheburninganddetonationofthenearbycottonfactoryandstoredcottonduringMayandJune2000;

—For90%ofthetotaldamagecausedbythelootingandburningofstruc-turesanddestructionofli�estockpermittedinthetownofGulujduringMayandJune2000;

—Forpermittinglootinginthe�illageofTabaldiaduringJune2000;—Forpermittinglootinginthe�illageofGergefduringJune2000;—For75%ofthetotaldamagecausedbythelootingandstrippingofbuild-

ingspermittedinOmhajerfromMay16,2000untilthedepartureofthelastEthiopianforcesinSeptember2000;

—Forpermittingthebreaking,enteringandlootingofhouses,businessestablishmentsandgo�ernmentbuildingsinBarentuTownduringitsoccupationfromMay18to26,2000;

—Forthedestructionofthepolicestation,thecourthouse,theGash-SetitHotelandConferenceCenter,andabakeryinBarentuTown;

—Forpermitting the lootingofbuildingsanddestructionof thepolicestationinTokombiaTown,andthedestructionofthenearbyRothmantobaccoplant,duringitsoccupationinMay2000;and

—ForpermittingthelootingofbuildingsinMolkiSub-ZobaonMay15–16,2000 .38

141 . Eritreaclaimeddamagesofapproximately1 .8billionnakfaplusUS$36million inconnectionwith itsWesternFrontBuildingClaims .Forindicati�epurposesonly,aftercon�ertingthenakfaamountattherounded2005exchangerateofERN15:US$1,thetotalclaimedisapproximatelyUS$153million .

142 . Teseney Town.TheCommissionfoundEthiopialiableforpermit-tinglootingandburningofbuildingsinTeseneyTownduringMayandJune2000 .AssetoutintheWesternFrontPartialAward,thetowndidnotsuf-fermuchdamageduringthefirstoccupation,althoughEthiopiantroopsdidlootlargestocksofsugarthathadbeenstoredthereandstoleflourfromatleastonebakery .39Itwasduringthesecondoccupationthatlootingandburn-

38 PartialAward,WesternFront,AerialBombardmentandRelatedClaims,Eritrea’sClaims1,3,5,9–13,14,21,25&26betweentheStateofEritreaandtheFederalDemocraticRepublicofEthiopia(December19,2005)[hereinafterPartialAwardinEritrea’sWesternFrontandRelatedClaims],dispositif,Section .IX .A .2,quotedinfullabo�eatpara .49 .

39 Id.,para .29 .


ingwaswidespread .40EritreasoughtcompensationofERN271,625,913plusUS$3,397,148inrelationtothirtybuildingsorgroupsofbuildingsinTeseneyTown:thehospital,MotherandChildHealthCenter,Sub-ZobaAdministra-tionOffice,TreasuryOffice,Sub-ZobaCourtandShariaCourtandPublicProsecutor’s Office, Sub-Zoba Police Station, Telecommunications facility,Water Authority, Electric Authority, schools, Sub-Zoba Ministry of Agri-culture,MinistryofFinanceInlandRe�enueandBudgetOffices,Sub-ZobaPeople’sFrontforDemocracyandJustice(“PFDJ”)Office,CustomsOffice,ERRECfacilities,LandTransportOffice,MiningDepartment,RedSeaCor-poration,Sub-ZobaOfficeforNationalUnionofEritreanYouthsandStudents(“NUEYS”),NationalUnionforEritreanWomen,ZulaImport/ExportFacilityandGashAgriculturefarm,TeseneyBarkaFarmingEnterprise,marketplace,CommercialBankofEritreaTeseneyBranch,HousingandCommerceBank,gasstations,EritruckoShareCompany,hotels,CatholicChurchandMosque .

143 . Ethiopia raised specific objections to three of Eritrea’s TeseneyBuildingClaims .WithrespecttoEritrea’sclaimforo�er128millionnakfa(aftertheadjustmentmadeatthehearing)fortheallegedlossofcropsandcropassistancein2000followingdestructionofMinistryofAgriculturefacili-ties,Ethiopiaobjectedthatthiswasanewclaimoraclaimduplicati�eofErit-rea’sconsequentialdamagesclaimand,inanye�ent,thatanysuchlosseswerecausedbythewar .TheCommissionissatisfiedthatEritreafailedtolinkitsallegedcropandcrop-relatedlossestotheburningandlootingoftheMinis-tryfacilities,ascomparedtothedisruptioncausedbythewar,andsodeniestheclaiminfull .Similarly,theCommissionacceptsEthiopia’sobjectiontoEritrea’slostprofitsclaimofapproximatelythirteenmillionnakfainconnec-tionwithdamagetotheZulaImport/ExportFacilityandGashAgriculturefarm,findingthatlostprofits(iftheycouldbepro�en)wereattributabletothewarandpost-wareconomy .TheCommissionalsodisallowsthetwomil-lionnakfaclaimforfruittreeslostduetolackofirrigation,findingnopro�engeographicalnexusbetweentheorchardsandlootinginTeseneyTown .TheCommissiondoes,howe�er,awardcompensationofUS$600,000(con�ertedatthe2000exchangerate)forEritrea’swell-documentedproofofthedestructionofsubstantialstoresofgrainandfeedandli�estockatthatfacility .

144 . Ethiopiaalsoobjected,ongroundsof lackofproof, toEritrea’sclaimforsomeeighteenmillionnakfaplustwomilliondollarsfortheallegedlootingandburningofpropertyownedbytheRedSeaCorporation .Ethiopiawascorrectthattheonlye�idenceforthislargeclaimwasanundatedandunauthenticatedchartsettingoutthetype,unitcostsandtotalcostsofitemsallegedlylooted .Asinothersuchinstances,theCommissioncannotawardanycompensationforthisclaim .ItiscertainlycrediblethattheRedSeaCor-porationhadstockedwarehousesatthetimeofthetwooccupations,andtherecordwasclearthatlootingoccurred,butanawardofcompensationmust

40 Id.


restonsomethingother thananunauthenticatedbare-bones in�entoryofallegedlylootedgoodsandtheir�alue .Se�eralofEritrea’sotherTeseneyBuild-ingClaims(forexample,inconnectionwiththecourts,Telecommunicationsfacility,ElectricAuthorityandCommercialBankofEritreabranch)sufferedfromsimilarlyconclusoryandhenceinsufficiente�identiarysupport .

145 . Incomparison,otherEritreanclaimsforTeseneyTowndamag-eswerestrong .Forexample,EritreasupporteditsclaimforERN71,633forthelootingoftheSub-ZobaPoliceStationwithadetailedwitnessstatementdescribingtheconditionofthefacilitybothbeforeandaftertheoccupations,andanitemizedlist(circa2005)supportingthemodestandcrediblelootingdamagessought .TheCommissionawardstheamountinfull,atapproximatelyUS$4,500atthe2005exchangerate .Thesamepro�edtobethecaseforthelargerclaim,atapproximatelyERN3 .3million,forthelootingandburningoftheTeseneyHospital .

146 . AlsostrongwereTeseneyTownBuildingClaimsthat,likeclaimsinotherregions(discussedbelow),werereinforcedbytheMinistryofLocalGo�ernment’sJuly2000“ReportofaRapidAssessmentontheWar-InducedDamagesofGashBarkaRegion”(“Gash-BarkaRapidAssessmentReport”) .Thestatedobjecti�esoftheReportwere“toconductarapidassessmentonthedamagesdonebythethirdroundEthiopianoffensi�eongo�ernmentoffices,socialser�icespro�idinginstitutionsandtheirfacilities;andtoidentifypriori-tiesandmeasuresthatha[�e]tobetakenintheshort-runandthelong-run .”AteamfromtheMinistryofLocalGo�ernmentmadepreliminaryassessmentsofthedamagetospecificgo�ernmentoffices,educationalinstitutions,healthinstitutions,watersupplyandsanitationandagriculturalinstitutions,aswellaselectricsupply,pri�atesectorfacilities,marketplacesanddrainagestruc-tures .Annexessetoutestimated�aluesin2000ofsometwohundredstruc-turesandestimateddamagestothosestructures,brokendownforthebuild-ing,furnitureandequipment .AlthoughtheReportdidnotcontainback-updocumentationfortheestimatesintheAnnexes,theCommissionconsidersthelackofsuchdocumentationtobebalancedbythefactthattheassessmentwasnotpreparedforlitigation,andbytheconsistencyandreasonablenessoftheestimatesforthe�ariouscategoriesofstructures .

147 . Eritrea’sclaimforERN208,000forlooting-relatedrepairstotheTeseneyMotherandChildHealthCenter,forexample,wasconsistentwiththefigureintheGash-BarkaRapidAssessmentReport .Inotherinstances,forexampleinconnectionwiththeTeseneyschools,theCommissionrelieduponthebuildingrehabilitationestimatesintheGash-BarkaRapidAssess-mentReportratherthanhigherestimatesmadelater,whichreflectedplansforschoolexpansionorimpro�ementinadditiontocirca2000repairneeds .

148 . In total, the Commission awards Eritrea compensation in theamountofUS$2,375,000forthelootingandburningofthebuildingslistedabo�einTeseneyTownduringEthiopia’soccupationinMayandJune2000 .


149 . Alighidir Village.Forthe�illageofAlighidir,theCommissionfoundEthiopialiableforpermittinglootingandburningofhouses,andtheburninganddetonationofthenearbycottonfactoryanditsstoredcotton,duringMayandJune2000 .EritreasoughtatotalofERN698,928,601plusUS$29,293,572incompensationforitsAlighidirBuildingClaims,allbutapproximatelyfourmillionnakfaofwhichwasattributabletothecottonfactory .

150 . Cotton Factory.Eritrea’se�idencereflectedthattheAlighidircot-tonfactory(technically,theAlighidirAgriculturalDe�elopmentProject)wasanextremelysignificantenterpriseintheGash-Barkaregion .AccordingtoEritrea,thecottonsectionoftheprojectwasthelargestindustrialagriculturalandhandicraftemployerinthecountryandthesinglelargestcontributortothegrossdomesticproduct .Inadditiontocottonfarmingandprocessing,theprojectfeaturedabriquettingfactoryandcropsofsorghumandpeanuts .Con-structiontookplaceafterindependenceinthe1990s,startingwiththepro�i-sionofsmallplotsoffarminglandtodemobilizedfightersandrehabilitationofa1923di�ersionweirfromtheGashRi�er .Eritreain�estedapproximatelyUS$600,000toconstructthebriquettingfactoryandanotherUS$40,000formachinery .Thecontractpricetoconstructtheexpansi�ecottonprocessingfacilities,consistingofdozensofbuildingsandsupportinginfrastructure,wasapproximatelythirtymillionbirr .EritreapurchasedUS$4,000,000worthofmachineryandsuppliesforthecottonprocessingfacilitiesand,justbeforetheEthiopianoccupationinJune2000,wasawaitingthearri�alofrepresentati�esofaU .S .contractortotestthemachineryandtrainemployees .Eritreaantici-patedsubstantialre�enues,inadditiontofarmingandbriquettingre�enues,oncethecottonprocessingfacilitieswentonline .

151 . Gi�enthisbackground,itisnotsurprisingthatEritrea’ssinglelarg-estBuildingClaim—byalargeorderofmagnitude—wasitsclaimforERN694,810,142plusUS$29,281,572forEthiopia’sdetonationandburningofthecottonfactoryanditscotton .AsemphasizedbyEthiopia, thisrepresentedsome40%ofEritrea’stotalBuildingClaims .

152 . Theclaimconsistedofsixcomponents,thefirsttwofordamagesconnectedtothedestructionofthefacilitiesandthecotton,andtheremainingfourfor“otherlosses”:(a)ERN110,515,860,asestimatedin2003,toreplaceallofthemachinery,storedcottonandothergoodsthatweredestroyedorlooted;(b)ERN191,053,141,alsoestimatedin2003,toreconstructallofthefacilitiesandrepairlootingdamage;(c)US$2millionascompensationforlandprepara-tionforthe2000cropyear,whichcouldnotbeusedduetolootingofseedsandfarmequipment;(d)US$5,392,400foraidtofactoryfarmersandemployeeswhobecameunemployedafterthedestruction;(e)ERN318,241,140forlostre�enuethrough2006;and(f)US$21,889,172andERN75,000,000ascompen-sationforen�ironmentaldamagecausedbythereleaseofpesticidesandchem-icals,whichallegedlykilledthousandsofli�estockandsickenedhumans .Insupportoftheclaim,EritreasubmittedadamageassessmentreportpreparedbyAlighidirAgroIndustry(“AAI”)inJuly2000,se�eralwitnessstatements,


originalcontractorbid formsandotherconstructioncontractdocuments,engineeringreports,andareportonen�ironmentalcontaminationpreparedbytheEritreanOfficeoftheLegalAd�isorin2006 .

153 . Ethiopiapresentedse�eralspecificdefensestothisclaim .Astothedestructionofthefacilitiesthemsel�es,EthiopiasubmittedthatEritreawouldbefairlycompensatedwithpaymentattheoriginalconstructionprices .Ethio-piaobjectedtoanycompensationforthedestructionofthedi�ersionweir,whichislocatedattheGashRi�erfarfromthecottonfactoryandthe�illageofAlighidir .AsforEritrea’sclaimsforotherlosses,Ethiopiachallengedthemforlackofbothpro�encausationande�identiaryproof .Ethiopiaalso�iewedthefarmers’assistanceclaimasbeinganewclaimand,inanye�ent,fallingwithinEritrea’sseparateclaimforconsequentialdamages .

154 . Ha�ingcarefullyre�iewedandweighedthesubstantiale�idenceforthisimportantclaim,aswellasEthiopia’sdefenses,theCommissionagreeswithEthiopiathattheallegeddamagetothedi�ersionweirfallsoutsidetheliabilityAward,butdoesnotagreeto limit thecompensationforthemas-si�edestructionofthefacilitiestotheamountsoftheoriginalconstructioncontractdatingfromthe1990s .TheCommissionconsidersthebestapproachtobetouse,toalargedegree,thefiguresintheJuly2000AAIAssessmentReport,whichcomprehensi�elyre�ieweddamagetoallofthebuildingsinthecomplexandtotheirmachineryandothercontents .Thisreportestimatedthetotalcostsofrebuildingandre-fittingthecomplexatERN216,573,159 .Deductingamountsforlostre�enue,forrepairofthedi�ersionweirandfora25%contingency,whichtheCommissiondisallows,thetotalawardablecostsfordestructioncometoapproximatelyUS$12,640,000,con�ertedatthe2000exchangerate .

155 . TheCommissiondeniesallofEritrea’sclaimsforotherlosses .First,Eritreafellfarshortofpro�ingthenecessarycausationforitsUS$2millionclaimforlostfarmlandpreparationforthe2000crop .EritreaitselfadmittedthatitwastheEthiopianin�asionthatcausedAlighidirfarmerstofleetheirlandinMay2000 .Second,andsimilarly,Eritreadidnotshowthattheunem-ploymentunderlyingitslargeclaimforsomeUS$5millionforaidtofarmersandworkersin2000wasconnectedtothecottonfactoryratherthantopost-occupationandpost-wareconomicconditions .Third,Eritreafailedtosupportitshugeclaim—ato�er300millionnakfa,greaterthantheclaimstorebuildandre-fitthecottonfactoryfacilities—forlostre�enuesbetween2000and2006 .Eritreafailedtoseparatelostprofitsfromlostre�enuesortoseparateallegedlylostprofitsfortheoperatingelementsoftheproject(farmingandbriquetting)fromthepurelyanticipatedlostprofitsfortheuntestedcottonprocessingfacilities .Finally,althoughitisentirelycrediblethatthedetona-tionandburningofthecottonfactorycausedthereleaseoftoxicchemicals,andalthoughtheCommissionappreciatestheneedtoamelioratetheresultanten�ironmentaldamage,theCommissionmustdenythiscomponentoftheclaim .Regardlessofwhethertheclaimisanewclaim,thefactremainsthatit


issupportedsolelybyareportpreparedbyEritrea’sad�ocates,whoareneitherneutralnoren�ironmentalexperts .

156 . In sum, the Commission awards Eritrea compensation in theamountofUS$12,640,000 for theunlawfuldetonationandburningof theAlighidircottonfactoryanditsstoredcottonduringEthiopia’soccupation .

157 . Other Alighidir Building Claims. Eritrea sought approximatelyERN4millionforthelootingandburningoftenotherbuildingsinAlighidir,consisting of: the Alighidir Project Health Center, Town AdministrationOffice,PoliceStation,WaterSupply,FenkalElementaryandSecondarySchool,MinistryofAgricultureBranchOffice,NUEYSBranchOffice,BaseUnionOfficeoftheNationalConfederationofEritreanWorkers,MobilOilstationandAlighidirmatchfactory .EthiopiaofferednospecificdefensetoEritrea’sclaimsonthesebuildings .

158 . Se�eralofEritrea’sclaimsforallegedlylootedandburnedbuild-ingsinAlighidirfellshortonproof .Forexample,theCommissiondisallowstheERN590,396claimfordamage to theAlighidirmatch factory,which,althoughallegedlyamajoremployerintheregion,wasnotincludedintheexperts’reportsattheliabilityphaseordescribedinwitnessstatementsatthedamagesphase;theroughlumpsumestimatebyaconstructioncompanyin2000contemplatedimpro�ementsaswellasrepairs .Similarly,theCommis-sionreducestheERN1,372,655claimfordamagetotheTownAdministrationBuildingbyhalf,becausetheestimateappearedexcessi�eforanadministra-ti�ecenterforatownofonlysome1,100residents .Otherclaims,forexamplethoseforrepairstothePoliceStationandtoreplacealootedwaterpump,wereadequatelysupported .

159 . The Commission awards Eritrea compensation in the amountofUS$170,000forthelootingandburningofthebuildings listedabo�einAlighidir during Ethiopia’s occupations in May and June 2000 . The totalawardedforEritrea’sBuildingClaimsinAlighidir,includingthecottonfac-tory,isUS$12,810,000 .

160 . Guluj Town.Ha�ingfoundthatEthiopiapermittedlootingandburningofstructuresinthetownofGulujduringMayandJune2000,theCommissionfoundEthiopialiablefor90%ofthetotal lossanddamagetoproperty inGulujduring that time .Afterapplying the90%factor,EritreasoughtcompensationofERN9,688,554plusUS$39,502inrelationtofifteenbuildings or groups of buildings in Guluj: the Health Center, Ministry ofHealthWarehouse,Sub-ZobaAdministration,TownAdministrationBuild-ing,PoliceStation,Courthouse,WaterAuthority,schools,Sub-ZobaMinis-tryofAgriculture,Sub-ZobaPFDJOffice,LandTransportOffice,Sub-ZobaNUEYSOffice,NUEWfacilities,gasstationsandCatholicChurch .EthiopiaofferednospecificdefensetoEritrea’sclaimsonanyofthesebuildings .

161 . WiththeexceptionofitsclaiminconnectionwiththeCatholicChurch,Eritreagenerally supported itsGulujBuildingClaims for looting


and burning . Compared to claims for other religious institutions, EritreabaseditsGulujCatholicChurchclaimonlyonaskeletalpropertylistwithadollaramountofestimatedlosses .TheCommissiondisallowsthatclaim,andreducescertainotherswherethequantume�idencedidnotmatchtheamountsclaimedintheMemorial(forexample,theclaimforrepairstotheCourthouse) .Asinotherlocations,theCommissionreliedontheGash-BarkaRapidAssessmentReportfor�aluationof90%oftheallowabledamagetotheGulujschools .

162 . TheCommissionawardsEritreacompensationintheamountofUS$900,000for90%ofthetotallossanddamagetothebuildingsorgroupsofbuildingslistedabo�einGulujfromlootingandstrippingofbuildingsduringEthiopia’soccupationsinMayandJune2000 .

163 . Tabaldia and Gergef Villages and Molki Sub-Zoba .TheCommissionfoundEthiopialiableforpermittingthelootingofbuildings,butnotpropertydestruction,inthe�illagesofGergefandTabaldiainGulujSub-ZobainJune2000,andalsoinMolkiSub-ZobaonMay15to16,2000 .ForTabaldia,Erit-reasoughtcompensationofERN545,526plusUS$900forthelootingoffi�ebuildings:theHealthStation,TownAdministrationBuilding,WaterSupply,elementaryschoolandNUEYSBranchOffice .ForGergef,EritreasoughtERN1,914,224plusUS$62,250forthelootingofthesamefi�ecategoriesofbuild-ing:theHealthStation,TownAdministrationBuilding,WaterSupply,elemen-taryschoolandNUEYSOffice .EritreasoughtcompensationofERN5,376,644plusUS$138,000forthelootingofele�enbuildingsorgroupsofbuildingsinMolkiSub-Zoba:theDerabushHealthStation,EndaGaborHealthStation,JejaHealthStation,MolkiTownHealthStation,Sub-ZobaAdministrator’sResidence,WaterSupply,schools,MinistryofAgriculture,Sub-ZobaPDFJOffice,Sub-ZobaNUEYSOfficeandSub-ZobaNUEWoffice .Ethiopiaofferednospecificdefensetoanyofthesetwenty-oneEritreanBuildingClaims .

164 . Ingeneral,Eritreapresentedsufficientproofoflootingandloot-ing-relateddamagestothesebuildings .WheretheCommissionisnotsatisfiedthatrepairswerenecessitatedbylooting(forexample,repairstotheTabaldiaHealthStation)orthatthereplacementestimateswerereasonable(forexam-ple,estimatesforsolarpanelsandgeneratorslootedfromtheGergefWaterSupply,andforpumpslootedfromtheMolkiWaterSupply),theCommissionreducesordisallowscompensation .Asinotherinstances,theCommissiondenies compensation for claimsbasedonunsigned,undatedorotherwiseunauthenticatede�idence(aswiththeclaimfortheGergefNUEYSoffice)oronmissinge�idence(aswiththeclaimsfortheMolkiNUEWofficeandtheTabaldiaTownAdministrationBuilding) .

165 . In sum, the Commission awards Eritrea compensation in theamountsofUS$30,000andUS$225,000forpermittingthelootingofthespeci-fiedbuildingsinTabaldiaandtheindicatedbuildingsinGergef,respecti�ely,inJune2000;andUS$405,000forpermittingthelootingofthelistedbuildingsinMolkiSub-ZobaonMay15to16,2000 .


166 . Omhajer Town.Ha�ingfoundEthiopialiableforpermittingloot-ingandstrippingofbuildingsinOmhajerfromMay16,2000untilthedepar-tureofthelastEthiopianforcesinSeptember2000,theCommissionfoundEthiopialiablefor75%ofthetotalpropertydamageinOmhajerduringthattime . After applying the 75% factor, Eritrea sought compensation of ERN19,872,834plusUS$18,000inrelationtothirteenbuildingsorgroupsofbuild-ingsinOmhajer:theHealthCenter,TownAdministrationBuilding,Sub-ZobaOffice,PoliceStation,Courthouse,WaterSupply,TelecommunicationsOffice,schools,MinistryofAgriculture,MinistryofFinanceandInlandRe�enue,ImmigrationandCustomsBuildings,marketplaceandgasstations .EthiopiaofferednospecificdefensetoEritrea’sclaimsonanyofthesebuildings .

167 . Again,thee�idencesupportingEritrea’sOmhajerclaims�ariedfrombuildingtobuilding .TheCommissionawardsthefullERN1,193,923claimfor75%ofthedamagetotheHealthCenter,whichwasbasedontheGash-BarkaRapidAssessmentReport .Incomparison,theCommissionisnotpreparedtoawardtheapproximatelyERN2 .5millionclaimfortheCourt-house,becauseEritreapresentednoe�idenceoftheexistenceoftheCourt-housebeforetheoccupationandoneofitswitnessesindicatedtherewasnotacourthouseinOmhajer .Inse�eralotherinstances,theCommissiondiscountstheamountsawardedbecausethee�idencereflectedestimatesforbuildingimpro�ementsratherthanrepairs(forexample,inconnectionwiththePoliceStationandmarketplace)ore�idencewasmissingorotherwiseinsufficient(forexample, inconnectionwiththeschools,MinistryofAgricultureandWaterSupply) .

168 . TheCommissionawardsEritreacompensationintheamountofUS$810,000for75%ofthepropertydamageinOmhajerfromthelootingandstrippingofthelistedbuildingsfromMay16,2000untilthedepartureofthelastEthiopianforcesinSeptember2000 .

169 . Barentu Town.TheCommissionfoundEthiopialiableforpermit-tingbreaking,enteringandlootingofhouses,businessestablishmentsandgo�ernmentbuildingsinBarentuTownduringitsoccupationfromMay18to26,2000,andforthedestructionofthePoliceStation,Courthouse,Gash-SetitHotelandConferenceCenterandDisabledFightersBakery .EritreasoughtatotalofERN570,782,532plusUS$971,388incompensationforitsBarentuTownBuildingClaims .

170 . Police Station.EritreasoughtcompensationofERN5,560,283fordestructionandlootingoftheZobaGash-BarkaCentralPoliceStationandadjacentpolice conferencebuilding .Eritreabased its rebuildingclaim forERN4,199,897onconstructioncontractdocumentsfromtheZobaInfrastruc-tureDepartment(allegedlydatingfrom2006)anditslootingclaimforERN1,360,385onaNo�ember2006Gash-BarkaPoliceListoflootedmaterialssaidtobeincludedinEritrea’se�idence .Ethiopiaofferednospecificdefense .TheCommissiondeniesthelootingclaimforlackofe�identiaryproof,becausethePoliceList ismissingfromtherecord .Asfortherebuildingclaim,the


Commissionnotes that theZoba InfrastructureDepartmentconstruction(“maintenance”)documentswereneitherdatednorsigned,anddidnotspecifywhethertherele�antworkwasperformedontheSub-ZobaorZobaPoliceStation .Howe�er,theCommissionlocatedasecondsetofconstructiondocu-mentsintherecordexpresslyforthe“maintenanceandrehabilitationcon-struction”oftheZobaPoliceheadquarters,datedOctober2005,indicatingtotalcostsofERN1,435,102 .Takingthismorespecificandlowerestimateandapplyingthe2005exchangerate,theCommissionawardsUS$95,000ascompensationforthedestroyedZobaPoliceStationcompound .

171 . Courthouse.AccordingtoEritrea,theBarentuCourthousecon-tainedse�eraldifferentcourts,includingtheZobaCourt,theSub-ZobaCourtandtheShariaCourt,ser�ingo�er55,000people .TheCourthousewasatwo-storystructurethathadbeencompletedandoutfittedshortlybeforetheEthio-pianoccupation,duringwhichitwasdestroyed .EritreasoughtERN3,000,000fortheestimatedrestorationofthebuilding,basedona2000MinistryofLocalGo�ernmentassessment,andERN111,198forthereplacementofthelootedcontents,basedondetailedin�entoriesforwardedbyajudgein2001 .Ethiopiadidnotpresentaspecificdefense .

172 . The Commission relied on the Gash-Barka Rapid AssessmentReport inassessingEritrea’sclaim inconnectionwith theBarentuCourt-house .Basedontheco�erageoftheCourthouseintheReport,theCommis-sionawardscompensationofUS$310,000(atthe2000exchangerate)forthedestructionoftheCourthouse .Ha�ingfoundanapparentcalculationerrorinthelostpropertyin�entories,theCommissionawardsUS$7,000(atthe2001exchangerate)forthelootedcontents .ThetotalawardforthedestroyedBaren-tuCourthouseisUS$317,000 .

173 . Gash-Setit Hotel and Conference Center.Eritreadescribedthepri-�ately-ownedGash-SetitHotelandConferenceCenteras“themostimportanteconomicasset”ofBarentuTown .Thetwo-storyhotel,whichwascompletedin1999ataconstructioncostof8 .5millionnakfa,hadforty-twoguestrooms,a large conference center, a restaurant and bar, and recreational facilities,aswellasitsowngenerator,watertank,andstorageandlaundryfacilities .Not surprisingly, Eritrea pursued a large claim—ERN 42,8711,401 [sic] intotal—forthedestructionandlootingofthehotel,brokendownintose�eralcomponents .Beyondtheestimatedcostsofrebuilding(ERN28,025,914)andreplacinglootedanddetonatedmo�ableproperty(ERN5,363,979),Eritreapursuedfouradditionaldamagesclaims:(a)lostprofitsthrough2006(ERN3,607,532);(b)fi�emonthsofwagesandse�erancepaidtoemployees(ERN245,000);(c)economiclosstothecommunity(ERN4,283,578);and(d)losttaxre�enuethrough2005(ERN1,345,398) .Eritreasubmitteda“ValuationforReconstruction”reportpreparedbyaconstructionmanagementconsult-anthiredbythehotel’sownerin2006,asupplementalwitnessstatementfromtheowner,andin�entoriesoflostfurnishingsandothermo�ableproperty .Ethiopiachallengedthemagnitudeoftherebuildingclaims,emphasizingErit-


rea’sowne�idencethatthebuildinghadcostonlyERN8,500,000toconstructshortlybeforetheoccupation,andtheexceedinglyhighamountssoughttoreplaceitemssuchasthegenerator .Ethiopiaalsoobjectedtoalloftheaddi-tionaldamagesdemandsasnewclaims,duplicati�eclaimsforconsequentialdamages,orspeculati�eclaims .

174 . Turningfirsttotheadditionaldamagesclaims,theCommissiondoesnotagreethattheyarenewclaims .Gi�entheeconomicimportanceoftheGash-SetitHotelandConferenceCentertoBarentuTown,whichispre-sumablywhy itwasoneof thepri�ateenterprises targeted fordetonation,damagessuchaslostprofitsandse�erancepaymentobligationsfortheowner,lostopportunitiestothecommunity,andlosttaxre�enuetothego�ernmentwerereasonablyforeseeable .Howe�er,theCommissionisunabletoawardtheadditionaldamagesforlackofe�identiaryproof .Thefiguresforallfouroftheseadditionaldamagesclaims(includingEritrea’sdirectclaimforlosttaxre�enue)camefromthetwo-pagewitnessstatementofthehotelowner,whoofferedneitherdetailnorsupportingdocuments .Hestatedthatthehotelhadnotyetearnedaprofitbeforeitwasdestroyedandindicatedatotalnumberofemployees(withoutspecificnames)differentthanthatincludedinEritrea’sclaim .Ademandforalmostonemillionnakfamustbebasedonmorethanthistowarrantcompensation .

175 . ThesituationisdifferentwithrespecttoEritrea’sclaimsforthecostsofrebuildingthehotelandreplacingthelootedcontents .TheValuationforReconstructionreportwasaprofessionalanddetailedestimateofthecosts,in2006nakfa,ofdemolishingandreconstructingthecomplex .ThetotalofapproximatelyERN28million,ascomparedtooriginalconstructioncostsofERN8 .5million,wasconsistentwithotherestimatesthatconstructioncostshadtripled(atleastformajorstructures)afterthewar .TheCommissiondoesfindtheestimatesforreplacingthecontents,inparticularthelargemo�ablessuchasthegenerator,pumps,atruckandfurniture,tobehighcomparedtootherclaims,andsoreducestheamountclaimedbyhalf .TheCommissionawardscompensationintheamountofUS$1,985,000,aftercon�ersionatthe2006exchangerate,forthedestructionandlootingoftheGash-SetitHotelandConferenceCenter .

176 . Disabled Fighters Bakery.LiketheGash-SetitHotel,Eritreahigh-lightedthefateoftheDisabledFightersBakery,orSesonaBakery,inBarentu .AccordingtoEritrea,thiswasoneofthemanyprojectsfundedbytheEritreanWarDisabledFighters’Association,whichwascreatedin1978 .TheSesonaBakerypreparedandsoldlargequantitiesofbreadandotherbakedgoods,andalsorananattachedbarandrestaurant .Thebakerywassosuccessfulthatasecondonewasplanned,andconstructionmaterialswerereportedlystoredinthebakeryoffice .Eritreapresentedsubstantiale�idence,includingse�eralphotographs,ofthelootinganddestructionofthebakeryattheliabil-ityphase .


177 . Eritrea claimed ERN 2,859,435 in damages: ERN 1,047,543 forthelootingofmo�ables;ERN772,200fortherepairofthebuilding,includ-ingdamagedoneduringlooting;andERN1,039,692forlostincomethrough2004 .Theownersreportedlywereable toreopenin2004,ha�ingreplacedbasicequipment .Ethiopiaofferednospecificdefense .

178 . ConsideringthesignificanceoftheSesonaBakeryclaimtoEritrea,thesupportinge�idencewassurprisinglyweak .First,Eritreaputinnoe�i-dencetosupportitsERN772,200reconstructionclaim;thefigureappearedasalineitem(“Building/1/772,200 .17”)onanunsignedandundatedlistlinkedtotheDisabledFighters’Association .Second,Eritrea’slostprofitsclaimcon-sistedofsimplecalculationsattachedto thewitnessstatementof theheadoftheAssociation;hemultipliedtheunsupportedmonthlypre-warprofitsamountofERN21,660byforty-eightmonths,withnodiscounting,toreachfouryearsoflostprofitsatERN1,039,692 .Third,thee�idencesupportingtheERN1,047,543lootingclaimwasconfusing .Eritreaputinthreein�entories:theAssociationin�entoryoflootedbakeryitemsnotedabo�e(ERN682,870afterdeductionofthereconstructionamount);anin�entoryofbakeryitemsreplacedbeforethereopeningofthebakeryin2004(ERN165,735)attachedtothewitnessstatementoftheheadoftheAssociation;andanin�entoryofitemsbelongingtotheAssociationproperthatwerelootedfromtheoffice,estimatedatERN21,900 .41Gi�enapparento�erlapastoclaimsforofficefurniture,theCommissionreducesthelootingawardbyone-halfoftheestimated�alueofthe Association bakery in�entory . The Commission awards compensationrelatedtotheSesonaBakeryonlyforlootingdamages,andthatintheamountofUS$60,000,atthe2002exchangerate .

179 . Other Barentu Town Building Claims.TheCommissionnextexam-inesEritrea’scompensationclaims,totalingapproximatelyERN500millionplusUS$1million,for75%ofthedamageallegedlycausedbyEthiopia’sper-mittingthebreaking,enteringandlootingofanadditionalthirty-eightbuild-ingsorgroupsofbuildingduringitsoccupationofBarentuTown .Thesecon-sistofclaimsfordamagetothehospital,SosonaHealthStation,ZobaGashBarkaMinistryofHealthOfficesandwarehouse,ZobaGashBarkaAdmin-istrationOffice,ZobaGashBarkaAssemblyOffice,ZobaGashBarkaTreas-ury Office, Town Administration Office, Go�ernor’s Residence, Sub-ZobaPoliceStation,Telecommunicationsfacility,ElectricAuthority,WaterSupply,schools,MinistryofEducation,ZobaandSub-ZobaMinistryofAgriculture,ZobaGashBarkaMinistryofFinanceandInlandRe�enue,MinistryofLaborandHumanWelfare,MinistryofLand,WaterandEn�ironment,MinistryofTransportandCommunicationandLandTransportOffice,MinistryofTradeandIndustry,ZobaGashBarkaMinistryofInformation,ZobaGashBarkaGeneralSer�iceDepartment,BusinessLicenceOffice,ZobaGashBarkaMin-

41 Eritreareferencedafourththatisnotintherecord:ReportofdamagestoBarentuBakeryfiledbytheEritreanWarDisabledFighters’Association,13September2000,citedinERDamagesGroupOneMemorial,note767 .


ingDepartment,PostOffice,RedSeaCorporation,ERRECfacilities,ZobaGashBarkaandBarentuSub-ZobaNUEYSfacilities,NationalConfederationofEritreanWorkersOffice,ZobaandSub-ZobaNEUWOffices,marketplace,hotels other than Gash Setit Hotel, Commercial Bank of Eritrea, WejebaBakery,gasstations,CatholicOfficesandSt .Michael’sChurch,MosqueandAdministrati�eOffice .

180 . Ethiopia raised specific objections to three of Eritrea’s claims,which were moderated by Eritrea’s withdrawal of missing e�idence andamendmentstoclaimsinthecourseofthehearing .Initsremainingdefenses,EthiopiaobjectedtothemagnitudeoftheclaimsinconnectionwiththeZobaGash-BarkaAdministrationOfficeandtheZobaandSub-ZobaMinistryofAgricultureongroundsthatEritreasoughtcompensationforrepairsandloot-inghigherthantheestimatesintheGash-BarkaRapidAssessmentReport,whichEritreafailedtocitease�idence .Intheseinstances,andinotherssuchasEritrea’sclaimsinconnectionwiththeBarentuHospitalandZobaGash-BarkaMinistryofHealthOfficesandWarehouse,theCommissionreliesupontheestimatesintheGash-BarkaRapidAssessmentReportinassessingcom-pensation .

181 . Se�eralofEritrea’sBarentuBuildingClaimsfailforlackofproof .OnesuchclaimwasEritrea’sERN10,267,850claimforlootingoftheBarentuHealthStation,whichwasbasedsolelyonthesamedocumentationthatEri-treaagreedtowithdrawfromthee�identiaryrecordinamendingitsclaimforthelootingofBarentuHospital .Foranothercategoryofrejectedclaims,Eritreaofferednoe�idenceofthestatusandcontentsofrele�antbuildingsbeforetheoccupation,andreliedentirelyonlistsofallegedlylooteditemstoshowthatlootinghadinfactoccurred;examplesincludedclaimsrelatedtotheZobaGash-BarkaGeneralSer�iceDepartmentandMiningDepartment .TheCommissionalsodeniesclaimswheretherewasnoproofofquantum,forexample,Eritrea’sclaimforalmostUS$600,000foritemsallegedlylootedfromtheTelecommunicationsfacility,whichwassupportedonlybyafewlineitemsina2000listpreparedbytheTSE .NoristheCommissionpreparedtoawardcompensationforallegeddamagesfallingclearlyoutsidethebreaking,enter-ingandlootingacti�itiesforwhichEthiopiawasfoundliableintheWesternFrontPartialAward,forexample,Eritrea’sclaimforMinistryofLand,WaterandEn�ironmentequipmentsuchasraingaugesandflowwatermetersalleg-edlylootednotfrombuildingsbutfromthefield .

182 . The Commission discounts other claims where the amountsclaimedappearedinflated,forexample,inEritrea’sclaimofmorethanonemillionnakfaforlooteditems(includingpensionpaymentdocuments)fromthesmallTreasuryOfficeinthePoliceStation .

183 . AmodestnumberofEritrea’sBarentuBuildingClaimswerewell-supported .Toofferafewexamples,theCommissionawardsUS$135,000(con-�ertedatthe2002exchangerate)forEritrea’sclaimsfordamagescausedbythebreaking,enteringandlootingofBarentuschools,whichweresufficiently


documented both as to looting and quantum of damages . (The Commis-siondiddeducttheERN1,574,587contributedbyUNICEFforreconstruc-tionofNugusBazenElementarySchool .)Similarly,theCommissionawardsUS$80,000(con�ertedatthe2000exchangerate)forreplacementoflooteditemsandrepairofmajordamagestothewallandroofoftheWejebaBakerythatoccurredwhenano�enwaslootedbyuseofacrane,ase�idencedgraphi-callybyphotographsandwitnesstestimonyattheliabilityphase .

184 . TheCommissionawardsEritreacompensationintheamountofUS$2,083,000forthebreaking,enteringandlootingofthebuildingsorgroupsofbuildingslistedinBarentuTownduringEthiopia’soccupationfromMay18to26,2000 .AddingtheamountsawardedforthefourstructuresidentifiedintheliabilityAward,thetotalawardedforEritrea’sBuildingClaimsinBarentuTownisUS$4,540,000 .

185 . Tokombia Town. For Tokombia Town, the Commission foundEthiopialiableforpermittinglootingofbuildingsandthedestructionofthepolicestationandthenearbyRothmantobaccoplantduringitsoccupationinMay2000 .EritreasoughtatotalofERN184,001,029plusUS$1,655,990incompensationforitsTokombiaTownBuildingClaims .

186 . Police Station.EritreasoughtERN705,552forthedamagetoandlootingoftheTokombiaLalaiGashSub-ZobaPoliceStation,whichconsist-edofadministrati�eoffices,a jailandaresidenceforthepolice .AlthoughtheCommissionfoundEthiopialiableforthedestructionofthestructure,Eritreasoughtonlytheestimatedcosts(ERN625,242)ofreplacingstrippedroofs,doorsandwindows;repairingthewalls,floorsandceilings;andreplac-ingsanitaryandelectricalfixtures .EritreaalsosoughtERN80,310toreplacelooteditems,includingfurniture,tools,bicycles,andofficeandkitchenequip-ment .Thesetwocategoriesofdamagesweresupportedbyasetofconstructionspecificationsandadetailedin�entory,respecti�ely,datingfrom2005 .Ethio-piaofferednospecificdefense .Findingthedamagesclaimbothreasonableandsupportedbythee�idence,theCommissionawardsfullcompensationofUS$45,000,aftercon�ersionatthe2005exchangerate .

187 . Rothman Tobacco Plant.AccordingtoEritrea,theRothmanTobac-coProcessingPlantwasthelargestemployerintheTokombiaregion .Itwasalargeagriculturalandprocessingfacilitycomprisedoftobaccogrowingfields,buildingsandequipmentforthecommercialsaleoftobaccoandcigarettes .PhotographsofthedestroyedplantfeaturedprominentlyattheWesternFrontliabilityhearing,andtheCommissionfoundEthiopialiableforthedestruc-tionoftheplant .Atthedamagesphase,EritreasoughtERN2,024,178plusUS$1,453,490forthedetonationandlootingofthefacility .Ethiopiapresent-ednospecificdefense .Surprisingly,gi�entheeconomicimportanceoftheRothmanplant inTokombia,Eritreabaseditsdestructionclaimonlyonahalf-page,unsignedandundateddocument,reportedlysettingoutthebook�alue—US$1,453,490–oftheplantwhenBritishAmericanTobacco(Eritrea)ShareCompanypurchaseditfromGashCigaretteFactoryinMarch1998 .The


Commissiondeniesthecompensationclaimfordestructionofthefacilitiesforlackofe�idence .Incomparison,Eritreabaseditslootingclaimonthedetailedandsignedin�entorypreparedbythegeneralmanageroftheplantin2000 .TheCommissionawardscompensationforlootedpropertyattheplantintheamountofUS$210,000,aftercon�ersionatthe2000exchangerate .

188 . Other Tokombia Town Building Claims.TheCommissionnextexam-inesEritrea’scompensationclaims,totalingapproximatelyERN180millionplusUS$200,000,for75%ofthedamageallegedlycausedbythelootingofthirteenotherbuildingsorgroupsofbuildingsinTokombiaTown:theHealthCenter,LalaiGashSub-ZobaAdministrationOffice,Sub-ZobaCourthouse,WaterSup-ply,schools,MinistryofAgriculture,ERRECfacilities,Sub-ZobaPDFJOffice,ShemshemiaFarm,NationalConfederationofEritreanWorkersHandiworksShop,NUEYSBranchOffice,Totalstationand�egetablemarket .

189 . The Commission finds �irtually all of Eritrea’s Tokombia Build-ingClaimsseriouslydeficient .Eritrea’slargestclaim—fi�etimestheamountsoughtfordamagetotheRothmanTobaccoPlant—wasforo�ertenmillionnakfaforphysicalandeconomicdamagetoShemshemiaFarm,amajorfarmprojectsponsoredbytheNationalConferenceofEritreanWorkersontheGashRi�er .E�enassumingEritrea’sclaimsforallegedlylooting-relatedbuildingrepairsandlostprofitswouldbecompensable,theShemshemiaFarmitselfisoutsideofTokombiaTownandhenceoutsideofthescopeoftheWesternFrontPartialAward .TheCommissionawardsonlyUS$15,000forthereplacementin2001ofwindowsanddoorslootedfromthefarmtrainingfacilitylocatedinTokombiaTown .

190 . EthiopiaobjectedtoEritrea’sclaimforalmostfi�emillionnakfaforlootinganddamagetotheLalaiGashSub-ZobaAdministrati�eOffice,includingthecostsofrepairingbuildingsinAwgarotoser�eastemporaryadministrati�e offices and house employees, on grounds that Eritrea wasindirectlyseekingcompensationfordamagetobuildingsinAwgarodespitetheCommission’srefusaltofindliabilityforsuchdamage .TheCommissionagrees,andsoawardsonlyUS$45,000forreplacementoflootedmo�ableprop-ertyintheTokombiaAdministrati�eOffice,consistentwiththeamountintheGash-BarkaRapidAssessmentReport .Inotherinstances(forexample,fortheMinistryofAgricultureandschools),theCommissionalsoawardscompensa-tionforlootingandlooted-relatedpropertyrepairamountsconsistentwiththatReport .

191 . WhereEritrea’se�idencereflectedestimatedconstructioncostsonlydistantlyconnectedtowartimelooting,theCommissiondisallowsthem;forexample,EritreacandidlystatedthatsomefourmillionnakfawouldbenecessarytorebuildtheTokombiamarketplacebecause“exposuretotheele-mentshadexacerbatedthedamage[ofstripping]o�ertime .”42Asinse�eralother regions, the Commission limits compensation for the Water Supply

42 ERDamagesGroupOneMemorial,AnnexC,p .3063 .


structuretotheestimatedcostofreplacingpumps,pipesandfittingsthatwerelooted .

192 . Based on its detailed re�iew of the e�idence, the CommissionawardsEritreacompensationintheamountofUS$475,000forthe lootingof the listedbuildings inTokombiaTownduringEthiopia’soccupation inMay2000 .AddingtheamountsawardedforthePoliceStationandRothmanTobaccoPlant,thetotalawardedforEritrea’sTokombiaTownBuildingClaimsisUS$730,000 .

193 . In sum, the total compensation awarded for Eritrea’s BuildingClaimsfortheWesternFrontisUS$22,825,000 .

6. Total Award for Building Claims

194 . To conclude this section of the Award, the total compensationawardedforEritrea’sBuildingClaimsfortheCentralandWesternFrontsisUS$35,965,000 .

d. Claim for Consequential damages


195 . Inthedamagesphase,EritreaclaimedUS$400millionasconse-quentialdamages,reflectingUS$500perpersonfor800,000indi�idualsalleg-edlyinjuredbyEthiopianconductforwhichtheCommissionfoundliability .EritreacontendedthatEthiopiacarriedoutaconcertedanddeliberatepro-gramtodestroyci�ilianinfrastructureinareasthatEthiopianforcestransitedoroccupiedduringoraftertheir2000in�asionofEritrea,causingextensi�econsequentialinjurytoe�eryresidentintheseareas,andtosomepeopleinadjoiningareas .AsexplainedbyEritrea’scounsel:“Wearepositingthat�irtu-allye�eryoneintheoccupiedterritories,�irtuallye�eryoneontheperipheryoftheoccupiedterritories,e�eryonewithintheser�iceareaoftheseessentialfacilitieswereinjured .”43

196 . Eritreaclaimedfourtypesofdamage .First,itclaimedthatmanychildren, and their families, were injured by destruction of or damage toschoolsandothereducationalfacilities .Second,Eritreacitedeconomicinjuryresultingfromthedestructionoftelecommunicationsandotherinfrastruc-ture .Third,itmaintainedthatpeopleinaffectedareassufferedfromunem-ployment,po�ertyandotherinjuriesfromthede�astationofthelocaleconomycausedbyEthiopianmisconduct .Finally,itclaimedthatitscitizenssufferedfromlossofaccesstohealthcareduetoEthiopia’sdestructionorlootingof

43 TranscriptoftheEritrea-EthiopiaClaimsCommissionHearingsofApril2007,PeacePalace,TheHague,atp .789(ProfessorBrilmayer)(April24,2007) .


hospitals,clinics,localmedicalcenters,pharmacies,safewatersuppliesandotherinfrastructurerelatedtomedicalcareandpublichealth .

197 . Eritreacontendedthat,gi�enthisper�asi�edamageaffectinghun-dredsofthousandsofpeople, itwasnotfeasibletoquantifyinjurytoeachindi�idual .ItthereforeaskedtheCommissiontoawardUS$500inrespectofeachresidentoflargeareasofEritrea .EritreaemphasizedinthisregardArticle5(10)oftheDecember2000Agreement,authorizingtheCommission“toadoptsuchmethodsofefficientclaimsmanagementandmassclaimsprocessingasitdeemsappropriate . . . .”Eritreacontendedthatforthisclaim,theCommissionshouldauthorizeareducedstandardofproofofindi�idualharm,asatrade-offforasignificantlyreducedle�elofcompensation .

198 . Eritreacontendedthatthecharacterandextentofthedestructionofci�ilianinfrastructurebyEthiopianforcespro�edboththatthedestruc-tionwasintentional,andthatitwasintendedtoinjuretheci�ilianpopula-tion .InEritrea’s�iew,thisestablishedaproximatecausalconnectionbetweentheclaimedinjuriesandEthiopia’sdelicts,becauseanyinjuryintentionallyinflictedmustbeproximatelycaused .Eritrea’scounselcontendedthatitwasnotnecessaryfortheCommissiontoha�efoundsuchintentionattheliabilityphase,andthatitcouldnowdrawtherequisiteinferencesregardingEthiopia’sintentionsatthedamagesphase .

199 . Eritreaalsoarguedthatmuchofthedamagetoci�ilianinfrastruc-ture�iolatedArticle54ofAdditionalProtocolItotheGene�aCon�entions(“ProtocolI”),44prohibitingattackingordestroying“objectsindispensabletothesur�i�aloftheci�ilianpopulation,suchasfoodstuffs,agriculturalareas . . .crops,li�estock,drinkingwaterinstallationsandsuppliesandirrigationworks,forthespecificpurposeofdenyingthemfortheirsustenance�aluetotheci�ilianpopulation .”(WhileProtocolIwasnotinforcebetweenthePar-ties,theCommissionhasfoundthatitlargelyreflectscustomaryinternationallaw .45)InEritrea’s�iew,theelementsofthisclaim,especiallydamagetomedi-calser�ices,fellwithintheambitofArticle54and,cumulati�ely,Ethiopia’sconductcausedabreakdownofsystemsrequiredtosustainhumanlifein�io-lationofArticle54 .


200 . In Ethiopia’s �iew, Eritrea’s consequential damages claim waslargelyareassertionofEritreanclaimsthattheCommissionrejectedattheliabilityphase .Howe�er,someofEritrea’sarguments,particularlyitsin�oca-

44 Supra note25 .45 E.g.,PartialAwardinEritrea’sCentralFrontClaims,para .23;PartialAward,

CentralFront,Ethiopia’sClaim2BetweentheFederalDemocraticRepublicofEthiopiaandtheStateofEritrea(April28,2004)[hereinafterPartialAwardinEthiopia’sCentralFrontClaims],para .17 .


tionofArticle54ofProtocolI,weresaidtobenewclaimsinadmissibleatthedamagesphase .(UnderArticle5(8)oftheDecember2000Agreement,allclaimshadtobefiledbyDecember12,2001 .)EthiopiaalsocontendedthatEri-treadidnotpresente�idencepro�ingthatanycompensabledamageresultedfromtheconductalleged .

201 . Ethiopiaalsocontendedthattherele�antpopulationscouldnotexceedthe98,619personsidentifiedinEritrea’scensusasli�ingintheele�entownsand�illagesandthepartialsub-zobacitedintheCommission’sliabilityfindings,ratherthanthe800,000personsEritreaclaimed .Ethiopiaempha-sizedinthisregardthatEritreaclaimedconsequentialdamagesforlargeareasforwhichtheCommissionmadenoliabilityfindings,includingsomesub-zobaswheretheCommissionrejectedEritrea’sclaims .


202 . Admissibility.TheCommissiondoesnotconsiderEritrea’srequestforconsequentialdamagestobeanewclaimofliability .Instead,theCom-missionunderstandsEritreatorequestthat,whendeterminingcompensationforsomeofitspriorfindingsofEthiopia’sliability,theCommissionshouldincludecompensationfortheselossesasreasonablyforeseeableconsequencesoftheunlawfulactsinquestion .

203 . Eritrea presented this as a claim for “consequential damages .”Howe�er,internationallawdoesnotrecognizeaseparatecategoryofcompen-sable“consequentialdamages”in�ol�ingdifferentstandardsoflegalcausationorotherdistincti�elegalelements .Theconceptofconsequentialdamageshasasignificantroleinsomenationallegalsystems,butdoesnotexistinothers,andsocannotbe�iewedasageneralprincipleoflaw .Similarly,theconcepthasnotbeenrecognizedininternationalproceedingsasaseparateformofcom-pensableinjuryasEritreaad�ocates .TheCommissionthusdoesnotassignparticularlegalsignificancetoEritrea’scharacterizationofcertaintypesofdamagesas“consequential .”Itinsteadexaminesthisclaiminaccordancewiththeprinciplesgenerallyapplicableindeterminingdamagesininternationalclaims .TheCommissionnotesinthisregardthatthisclaimseekslargesumsin addition tothoseEritreaclaimsforthecostsofrepairingorreplacingdam-agedordestroyedbuildingsorotherinfrastructureforwhichtheCommissionhasfoundliability .

204 . Education.As toEritrea’sclaimforadditionaldamagesreflect-ingdisruptionofitseducationsystem,theCommissionrecognizesthatmanychildren’seducation,andtheirfamilies’plans,weredisruptedbydamagetoschoolsattributabletoEthiopia .(Therecordalsoincludese�idencethatEri-treaneducatorsandtheirpupilsoftendisplayedadmirableinitiati�eandresil-ienceinthefaceofad�ersity .)Howe�er,Eritrea’sDamagesMemorialmadenoseriousattempttoidentifythenumberofstudentsaffected,toquantifytheextentofdisruption,ortoassessanyfinancialorotherconsequences .The


argumentationande�idencesubmittedtosupportthisportionoftheclaimwasanecdotalorconclusory .Atthehearing,Eritreaacknowledgedthedif-ficultiesanduncertaintiesofattemptingtoassessanyquantumofdamagesassociatedwithdisruptionofeducation .

205 . Gi�enthepaucityoftherecord,andtheuncertaintiesofquanti-fyinginjuryofthekindEritreaasserts,thiscomponentofEritrea’sclaimforfixed-sumdamagesinrespectofhundredsofthousandsofpeoplefails forlackofproof .TheCommissionalsonotesthat,incontrastwithitsargumentsregardingmedicalcarediscussedbelow,Eritreadidnotcontendthatinterna-tionallawrulesextendspecialprotectiontoeducationinthecontextofarmedconflictoritsaftermath .

206 . Damage to Electrical and Telecommunications Infrastructure. Eri-treaalsoclaimedadditionaldamagesonaccountofinjuryallegedlyexperi-encedbyhundredsofthousandsofpersonsduetothedestructionofelectricalandtelecommunicationsinfrastructure .Thesupportingargumentationande�idence,presentedinlessthanthreepagesofEritrea’sDamagesMemorial,againwasconclusoryoranecdotal .Thee�idencewasnotsufficienttoestablishentitlementtocompensationgoingbeyondtheamountsdueforthedestruc-tionofthefacilitiesthemsel�espursuanttoEritrea’sotherclaims .Thiscom-ponentalsofailsforlackofproof .

207 . Adverse Economic Conditions.Eritrea’sclaimforadditionaldam-agesstemmingfromthegeneralizeddeclineineconomicconditionsattrib-utedtoEthiopia’sdestructionofinfrastructurealsomustfail .Pasttribunalsha�enotfoundgeneralizedconditionsofwar-relatedeconomicdisruptionanddeclinetoconstitutecompensableelementsofdamage,e�eninthecaseofsometypesofinjurybearingarelati�elycloseconnectiontoillegalconduct,suchastheincreaseinmaritimeinsuranceratesrejectedbytheAlabamaTribunal .CounselforEritreaacknowledgedinthisregardthattheGene�aCon�entionsandProtocolIdonotencompassprotectionoftheeconomywritlarge .46

208 . Loss of Access to Medical Care. Eritrea’sclaimforadditionalcom-pensationforinjurytotheci�ilianpopulationonaccountofdamagetoordestructionofmedicalfacilitiesforwhichtheCommissionfoundEthiopialiable requires fuller consideration . The Commission found such liabilityregardingnumerousmedicalfacilitiesinEritrea,includingsubstantialdam-agetoallthreeregionalhospitalsintheaffectedareasandtoothersignificantfacilities .Ethiopiawasfoundliablefor90%oftheextensi�edamagetothefifty-bedregionalhospitalatSenafe .Itwasfoundliableforallowing“breaking,enteringandlooting”ofgo�ernmentbuildingsinthetownofBarentu,includ-ingasecondregionalhospital thatwas lootedandpartiallyburned .TherewasliabilityforallowinglootingandburningofthethirdregionalhospitalinTeseney .TheCommissionalsoexplicitlyfoundEthiopialiablefordestruction

46 TranscriptoftheEritrea-EthiopiaClaimsCommissionHearingsofApril2007,PeacePalace,TheHague,atpp .773–774(ProfessorCrawford)(April24,2007) .


oftheSub-ZobaHealthCenterinTseronaTown .ThethreeregionalhospitalsweretheonlyfacilitiesinalargeareaofEritreathatcouldtreatseriouscondi-tionsrequiringinpatientsurgeryorotherad�ancedcare .

209 .TheCommissionalsomadefindingsofliabilitythatembracedloot-ingordestructionofhealthcentersandclinicsinotherlocations .ItfoundliabilityforpermittinglootinginTabaldia(wherethePartialAwardcitede�i-dencedescribinglootingofappliances,bedsandmedicinesfromthemedicalclinic) .ItfoundliabilityfordestroyingmostofthestructuresinGuluj,wheretherewasahealthcenter .ComparablefindingsweremadewithregardtotheentireMolkiSub-Zoba,tothebordertownofOmhajer,andtothe�illagesofGulujandSerha,allofwhichhadhealthcentersorclinicspriortothewar .

210 . The Commission belie�es that, in these factual circumstances,injuriestoEritrea’snationalsresultingfromlossofaccesstomedicalcareonaccountofunlawfuldestructionordamagetomedicalfacilitiesshouldbecon-sideredinassessingcompensation .Inreachingthisconclusion,theCommis-sionhasgi�enweighttotheextenttowhichinternationalhumanitarianlawaccordsspecialprotectiontomedicalfacilitiesandmedicalpersonnel,andtopatientsneedingmedicalcare .TheseprotectionswerepresumablyfamiliartoEthiopia’smilitarycommanders,who,Ethiopiamaintained,werealltrainedintheprinciplesofhumanitarianlaw .Theyshouldha�eledcommanderstorecognizethelikelyconsequencesforci�iliansofwidespreaddamagetomedi-calfacilitiesandlossofmedicalsupplies .

211 . Numerouspro�isionsofhumanitarianlawhighlighttheimpor-tanceofprotectingmedicalfacilitiesandser�ices,andofassuringtheirabil-ity tooperate .Article18of theFourthGene�aCon�ention47pro�ides that“[c]i�ilianhospitalsorganizedtogi�ecaretothewoundedandsick,theinfirmandmaternitycases,mayinnocircumstancesbetheobjectofattack,butshallatalltimesberespectedandprotected . . . .”Article20requiresrespectandprotectionforpersonssolelyengagedinoperatingandadministeringci�il-ianhospitals .Article23requirespartiestoallowfreepassageofmedicalandhospitalstoresintendedforci�ilians .Article55requiresanOccupyingPowertoensurethea�ailabilityofmedicalsuppliestotheci�ilianpopulation“tothefullestextentofthemeansa�ailabletoit,”andbarsrequisitioningofsuchsup-pliesexceptunderlimitedconditions .Article12ofProtocolIdirectsthatmed-icalunits“berespectedandprotectedatalltimesandshallnotbetheobjectofattack .”(“Medicalunits”arebroadlydefinedtoincludeci�ilianhospitals,pre�enti�emedicinecenters,andothertypesofci�ilianfacilities .)Article15ofProtocolIlikewiserequiresthatci�ilianmedicalpersonnelbe“respectedandprotected .”

212 . Thesetreatypro�isionsprotectingmedicalfacilities,andotherslikethem,appearininstrumentsconcludedbetweenStates .Howe�er,theydo

47 Gene�aCon�entionRelati�etotheProtectionofCi�ilianPersonsinTimeofWar,Aug .12,1949,6U .S .T .p .3516,75U .N .T .S .p .287[hereinafterGene�aIV] .


notexistprimarilytoprotectStates’interestsorproperty .Instead,theirfun-damentalpurposeistopro�ideprotectiontoindi�idualscaughtupinarmedconflictoritsaftermath .Theycumulati�elyaimtoassurethatthewoundedandsick“recei�e,tothefullestextentpracticableandwiththeleastpossibledelay,themedicalcareandattentionrequiredbytheircondition .”48

213 . Eritreasoughttoreinforceitsclaimbyin�okingArticle54ofPro-tocolI,dealingwithprotectionoffoodstuffs,drinkingwatersupplies,andotherobjectsindispensabletothesur�i�aloftheci�ilianpopulation .Ethiopiaresponded,inter alia,thatthiswasaninadmissiblenewclaim .Eritreainturninsistedthatithadpre�iouslyidentifiedArticle54asabasisforitsclaims .WhetherornottheearlierpleadingsmentionedArticle54,theCommissiondidnotpre�iouslyfindEthiopialiablefor�iolatingthatarticle,andcannotatthislatestageassignadditionalliabilitybasedonsuchabreach .Inanycase,otherpro�isionsofhumanitarianlawcitedabo�econfirmtheprotectionofmedicalfacilitiesmoreexplicitlythandoesArticle54,andtheCommissionneednotdecidewhetherthatarticlemightpro�ideanadditionallayerofpro-tection .Thisisparticularlysoastherehasbeennoconsideredbriefingorargu-mentbythePartiesregardingStatepractice,negotiatinghistory,commenta-tors’�iewsandotherconsiderationspotentiallybearingupontheissue .

214 . Asnotedabo�e,Eritreaarguedthatanyinjuriesapartyintendsareproximatelycaused,thatthecharacterofthedamagetoci�ilianinfrastructureshowedthatEthiopiaintendedtoharmci�iliansandthatEthiopiathereforewasliableforalltheresultinginjurytoci�ilians .Ethiopiadeniedanysuchintent .Again,itisnotnecessaryfortheCommissiontopassuponthislineofargument .Internationalhumanitarianlawprotectshospitalsandothermedi-calfacilitiesandtheci�ilianswhodependonthem .Wherethereiswidespreadunlawfuldamagetosuchfacilities,particularlyinanareawheretheyarefewinnumber,itshouldbereasonablyforeseeabletotheforcesoftheoffendingpartythatinjurywillresulttoprotectedpersons .Thechallengeliesinassess-ingtheextentofthatinjury,notinfindingtherequisitecausalconnection .

215 . Therewase�idenceshowingthatEritreanhospitalsdrewpatientsfrombroadareas,extendingwellbeyondthecommunitieswheretheywerelocated . Howe�er, the record did not pro�ide much detail regarding thenumberofpatientswhopre�iouslyusedthedamagedfacilitiesor(exceptinthecaseofthehospitalatSenafe)thelengthoftimetheywereoutofser�iceoroperatedatreducedcapacity .TheCommissionheardtestimonyfromaseniorhospitaladministratorthatduringmanymonthswhilethehospitalatBarentuwasoutofser�ice,manypatientshadtomakedifficultjourneystoanalternatelocation,includingmanypersonswhowerequiteill,womenexperiencingdif-ficultbirths,andlandmine�ictims .Howe�er,thewitnesscouldnotquantifyhowmanypersonswereaffected .

48 ProtocolI,supra note25,art .10 .


216 . Theselimitationsoftherecordha�erequiredtheCommissiontoestimatetheextenttowhichEritreanci�ilianswereinjuredonaccountoflossofaccesstomedicalcare .Takingaccountofalltherele�antcircumstances,theCommissionawardsEritreaUS$1,500,000ascompensationinrespectofinjuriestoci�iliansduetolossofaccesstohealthcareonaccountofdamagetoordestructionofEritreanhospitalsandothermedicalfacilitiesandlossofmedicalsupplies .

e. damage to Cultural Property

1. Stela of Matara

217 . Attheliabilityphase,theCommissionfoundEthiopialiable“[f]orpermitting,whileoccupyingthearea,deliberatedamagebyexplosiontotheStelaofMatara,anancientmonumentintheSenafeSub-Zoba .”49

218 . TheStelaisastoneobelisk,perhaps2,500yearsold,car�edwiththesymbolofthesuno�erthecrescentmoonandaninscriptioninGe’ez .TheStela,apparentlytheonlysuchartifactinEritrea,islocatedinthearcheologi-calsiteofMatara(orMetera),nearSenafe .Itwaslocatedclosetoaroad,andwasnothea�ilyfencedorotherwiseprotected .TheCommissionfoundthattheobeliskwasseriouslydamagedbyexplosi�echargesplacedatitsbaseduringEthiopia’sMay2000offensi�e .

219 . TheexplosiondestroyedalloftheStelabelowgroundle�elanditslowerportionabo�eground .Thedestroyedsectionwasreplacedwithlocallyquarriedstonecuttomatchthepre�iousmaterial,someofwhichwasnotorig-inal,buttheresultofearlierrepairs .TheStela’sintactupperportion,contain-ingthehistoricinscriptions,thenwasattachedtothenewlycutlowerportion .Localandinternationalartisanscarriedoutthiswork,assistedbyUNESCO .ThisworkrestoredtheStelatosubstantiallyitspre�iousappearance,butasignificantportionoftheoriginalstonewaslost .

220 . The repair and restoration work cost 450,106 nakfa . Ethiopiaacceptedthisasanappropriatemeasureofcompensation,althoughitreser�editspositionregardingthetreatmentofaUS$25,000donationfromUNESCOandaUS$6,000WorldBankloanusedtosupportthework .Italsoexpressedreser�ationsregardingcostsofsomeworkrequiredtorepairearlierrepairs .

221 . EritreaalsoclaimedUS$8,000,000asadditionalcompensationfordamagetoasignificantculturalmonument .EritreachosethisamountbecauseitwastheamountexpendedbyEthiopiainitsmulti-yearefforttoreco�erthetwenty-fourmetertallObeliskofAxumfromRome .Ethiopia�igorouslydis-putedthisadditionalclaim,maintainingthatithadnolegalbasisandwasinfactaclaimforpuniti�edamages .

49 PartialAwardinEritrea’sCentralFrontClaims,dispositif,SectionV .D .8 .


222 . TheCommissiondoesnotbelie�ethatEthiopia’sexpendituresforthereturnoftheObeliskofAxumpro�ideananalogousmeasureforassess-ingcompensation .Atthesametime,theCommissionbelie�esthatseriousdamagetoasignificantobjectofculturalpatrimonywarrantssomeawardofcompensationgoingbeyondthemerecostsofattemptingtorestoretheobjecttoitsearlierappearance .Thisissoe�enthoughthereisnoe�idencethatthedecisiontodamagetheStelain�ol�edanyoneotherthanoneormorelow-rankingsoldiers .

223 . Accordingly,theCommissionawardsEritreatheamountsexpend-edtoattempttorestoretheStela,plusanadditionalamounttoreflect,inpart,theuniqueculturalsignificanceoftheStela,foratotalawardofUS$50,000 .

2. Tserona Patriots Cemetery

224 . TheCommissionfoundEthiopiaresponsibleforpermittingthelooting and stripping of the Tserona Patriots (or Martyrs) Cemetery, andfounditliablefor75%ofthetotaldamagecaused .50

225 . Eritreapresentedsubstantiale�idenceof thedesecrationof theTseronaPatriotsCemeteryattheliabilityphase .Inthedamagesphase,Erit-reaquantifiedtheallowable75%ofthisdamageat750,000nakfa,forlootingandstrippingthefence,metal�aults,themetalcemeterybuilding(whichcol-lapsed),onethousandmangotreesthathadbeenplantedasmemorials,andthecaretaker’stools .The2005estimateofthenecessaryrepairandreplace-mentcostswasskeletal,anddocumentarye�idenceshowedthattheNationalUnionofEritreanWomenfundedreconstructionofthefenceforERN150,896in2003 .Ethiopiadidnotpresentaspecificdefense .

226 . Balancingtherelati�elyweake�identiaryrecordagainstthese�er-ityofthe�iolationofinternationallaw,andnotingthattotalcompensationhas already been reduced by 25% in the liability Award, the CommissionawardsthefullERN750,000claimed,con�ertedatthe2005exchangeratetoUS$50,000 .

f. Prisoners of War

1. The Commission’s Liability Findings

227 . InitsPartialAwarddatedJuly1,2003inEritrea’sPrisonersofWarClaim17,theCommissionfoundEthiopialiableforthefollowingeight�io-lationsof international lawcommittedby itsmilitarypersonnelandotherofficialsoftheStateofEthiopia:

50 Id.,SectionV .D .2 .


1 . Forfailingtotakeeffecti�emeasurestopre�entincidentsofbeatingorotherunlawfulabuseofEritreanPOWsatcaptureoritsimmediateafter-math;2 . Forfrequentlydepri�ingEritreanPOWsoffootwearduringlongwalksfromtheplaceofcapturetothefirstplaceofdetention;3 . ForfailingtoprotectthepersonalpropertyofEritreanPOWs;4 . For subjecting Eritrean POWs to enforced indoctrination from July1998toNo�ember2002inthecampsatBilate,MaiChew,MaiKenetalandDedessa;5 . ForpermittinghealthconditionsatMaiKenetaltobesuchasseriouslyandad�erselytoaffectorendangerthehealthoftheEritreanPOWsconfinedthere;6 . Forpro�idingallEritreanPOWspriortoDecember2000adietthatwasseriouslydeficientinnutrition;7 . For failingtopro�idethestandardofmedicalcarerequiredforEri-treanPOWs,particularlyatMaiKenetal,andforfailingtopro�iderequiredpre�enti�ecarebysegregating fromtheoutsetprisonerswith infectiousdiseasesandbyconductingregularphysicalexaminations,fromMay1998untilDecember2000;and8 . Fordelayingtherepatriationof1,287EritreanPOWsin2002forse�-enty-se�endayslongerthanwasreasonablyrequired .51


228 . WhilebothPartiesrequestedfixed-sumdamagesascompensa-tionforcertain�iolationsofinternationalhumanitarianlawthattheCom-missionfoundduringtheliabilityphaseinrelationtoPOWs,theCommissionhasdecidedonadifferentmannerofassessingtheappropriatecompensation .Toaconsiderableextent,thisdecisionflowsfromtheCommission’sgeneralapproachtoitsdeterminationsofliability .TheCommissionseesitstasknotasbeingtodetermineliabilityforeachindi�idualincidentofillegalitysuggestedbythee�idence,butratherasbeingtodetermineliabilityforserious�iolationsofthelaw .Theseareusuallyillegalactsoromissionsthatwerefrequentorper�asi�eandconsequentlyaffectedsignificantnumbersof�ictims .

229 . TheclaimsbeforetheCommissionaretheclaimsoftheParties,nottheclaimsofindi�idual�ictims .ParticularlywhendecidingdamagesowingforunlawfultreatmentofPOWs,thosedamagescanappropriatelybeassessedonlyfortheClaimantState,becausefixed-sumdamagesdesignedtobedistrib-utedtoeachindi�idualwhowasaprisonerofwarwouldnotreflectthepropercompensationforthatindi�idual .DifferentPOWswereheldunderdifferentconditionsat�ariouscampsfor�ariousperiodsoftime .Somewereinjuredin

51 PartialAward,PrisonersofWar,Eritrea’sClaim17betweentheStateofEritreaandtheFederalDemocraticRepublicofEthiopia(July1,2003),dispositif,SectionV .D .


thecamps,andsomediedofthoseinjuries .Otherswereaffectedad�erselyinotherwaysthat�ariedfromindi�idualtoindi�idual .WhiletheCommissionencouragesthePartiestocompensateappropriatelytheindi�idual�ictimsofwarfare,itcalculatesthedamagesowedbyonePartytotheother,includingformistreatmentofPOWs,onthebasisofitse�aluationofthee�idencewithrespecttotheseriousnessoftheunlawfulactsoromissions,thetotalnumbersofprobable�ictimsofthoseunlawfulactsoromissions(wherethosenumberscanbeidentifiedwithreasonablecertainty)andtheextentoftheinjuryordamagesufferedbecauseofthoseunlawfulactsoromissions .

230 . SeriousnessoftheViolations.WhiledamagesmustbeawardedforallPOW�iolations,theCommissionfindsthat�iolationnumbers1,4,5,6and7werethemostseriousandrequirethehea�iestdamages .Withrespectto�iolationnumber1,thee�idencefellshortofshowingthatsuchunlawfulabusewaspermittedbyEthiopia,butEthiopiawasheldliableforfailingtotakeeffecti�emeasurestopre�entit,afailurethathadseriousad�ersecon-sequencesforthe�ictims .Withrespectto�iolationnumber4,thee�idenceindicatedthatthesegregationofdifferentgroupsofPOWs,accompaniedbytheenforcedindoctrinationofEritreanPOWsandtherelatedpressurestomakeself-criticisms,had long-lastingad�erseeffectson thementalhealthofmanyPOWs .Withrespectto�iolationnumbers5,6and7,thefailuretopro�ideadequatedietandhealthcareforPOWswereserious�iolationsthatad�erselyaffectedallPOWs .WhiletheextremelyunsatisfactoryconditionsatMaiKenetalexistedforalimitedtime,theotherinadequaciescontinuedthroughoutthelongdetentionofmanyPOWs .

231 . NumbersofVictims.Approximately2,600EritreansweredetainedasPOWsduringthearmedconflict .PriortoMay2000theirnumberstotaledonlyafewhundred,butbetweenAugust2000andNo�ember29,2002largenumberswereheldbyEthiopia .Thefinal1,287werereleasedse�enty-se�endayslaterthantheyshouldha�ebeenheld .

232 . SeriousnessofInjuries.Thee�idenceindicatesthatmanyPOWssufferedlong-lastingdamagetotheirphysicalandmentalhealthasaresultofthe�iolationsofinternationallawfromwhichtheysuffered .

233 . Award .WhilethePOW�iolationsforwhichEthiopiaisliablewerenot,asawhole,asseriousaswerethoseforwhichtheCommissionfindsErit-realiable,thegreaternumberofEritrean�ictimsmustbetakenintoaccount .On the basis of the abo�e considerations, the Commission awards EritreaUS$4,000,000fortheunlawfultreatmentofEritreanPOWs .

G. rape234 . AsitdidinconnectionwithitslimitedfindingsinbothParties’

claimsof liability forrape, theCommissionconsiders that thequestionofdamagesconnectedtoincidentsofrapedeser�esseparategeneralcomment .AlthoughtheCommissionreiteratesitsgratificationthat“therewasnosug-


gestion,muchlesse�idence,thateitherEthiopiaorEritreausedrape,forcedpregnancyorothersexual�iolenceasaninstrumentofwar,”52theCommis-siondidfinde�idencethatbothPartiesfailedtoimposeeffecti�emeasures,asrequiredbyinternationalhumanitarianlaw,topre�ent“se�eral”rapesofci�il-ianwomenandgirlsincertainareas .TheCommission,whichacknowledgedtheculturalsensiti�itiessurroundingrapeinbothcountriesandtheunwill-ingnessof�ictimstocomeforward,hasnoillusionthattherecordbeforeitre�ealsthefullscopeofrapeduringtheextendedarmedconflict .TheCom-missionisacutelyawarethatthefullnumberof�ictimsandthefullmagnitudeoftheharmtheysufferedcannotandwillnote�erbeknown .

235 . ItisthereforeperhapspredictablethateachPartyfailedtopro�eitsdamagesclaimforrape,eitherastoareasonablenumberof�ictimsorastoareasonablemeasureofeconomicharm .NordidthePartiespro�idetheCom-missionwithanagreedorusefulmethodologyforassessingcompensation .

236 . IntheEritreanCentralFrontandWesternFrontPartialAwards,respecti�ely,theCommissionfoundEthiopialiablefor“failuretotakeeffec-ti�emeasurestopre�entrapeofwomenbyitssoldiersduringtheoccupationofSenafeTown”53and“failuretotakeeffecti�emeasurestopre�enttherapeofwomeninthetownsofBarentuandTeseney .54Ratherthanproposing�ic-tim-specificdamages,EritreaoriginallyproposedthateachPartysetasideUS$500,000toUS$1,000,000foritsownlocallyadministeredprogramsforwomen’shealthcareandsupportser�icesintheareaswheretheCommissionfoundliabilityforrape .Ethiopiadidnotagreetoself-administeredprogramsand,instead,useditsgeneralmethodologytoclaimmaterialandmoraldam-agestotalingUS$6,739,641,estimatingthat1%ofthepre-warfemalepopula-tionsufferedrapeintheaffectedareasand,asaresult,lost50%ofa�eragelifetimeearningsandsufferedmoraldamage .EritreasubsequentlyrequestedanawardofUS$6,750,000 .

237 . TheCommissioncannotassessEritrea’sfinal request for relief,becauseEritreapresenteditsnumberwithoutexplanation .TheCommissionhadquestionedEritreaastotheadequacyofamountsaslowasUS$500,000-$1,000,000tosupportrape�ictims .TheCommissioncanonlyassumethatEritrea made its request for US$6,750,000 to match the number Ethiopiareachedwithitsmathematicalmethodology,whichtheCommissionrejectsinEthiopia’sparallelAward .

238 . DespitetheshortcomingsoftheParties’damagesmethodologies,theCommissionconsidersthatthisserious�iolationofinternationalhumani-tarianlawdemandsseriousrelief .Neithersymbolicnornominaldamageswill

52 E.g.,PartialAwardinEthiopia’sCentralFrontClaims,para .34;PartialAwardinEritrea’sCentralFrontClaims,para .36 .

53 PartialAwardinEritrea’sCentralFrontClaims,dispositif,SectionV .D .5 .54 PartialAwardinEritrea’sWesternFrontandRelatedClaims,dispositif,Section

IV .M .2 .k .


sufficeinthefaceofthephysical,mentalandemotionalharmknowntobesufferedbyrape�ictims .

239 . Accordingly,theCommissionawardsEritrea(asitdoesEthiopiainitsparallelAward)US$2,000,000indamagesforfailingtopre�enttherapeofknownandunknown�ictimsinthetownsofSenafe,BarentuandTeseney .Insodoing,theCommissionexpressesthehopethatEritrea(andEthiopia)willusethefundsawardedtode�elopandsupporthealthprogramsforwomenandgirlsintheaffectedareas .

H. displacement of the Population of awgaro


240 . In itsPartialAwardofDecember19,2005 inEritrea’sWesternFront,AerialBombardmentandRelatedClaims,theCommissionfoundEthi-opialiablefortheforcibledisplacementofthepopulationofAwgaroduringEthiopia’sMay2000attackonEritrea:

TheRespondentisliabletotheClaimantfortheunlawfuldisplacementofalltheresidentsofAwgaroin�iolationofArticle49ofGene�aCon�entionIV .55

Pursuanttothisfinding,EritrearequestedafixedamountofUS$500perper-sonfor3,100personsallegedlyexpelled,whichtotalsUS$1,550,000,plustheadditionalfixed-sumamountofUS$500perpersonforlostproperty .


241 . Ethiopiaagreedthatitwasappropriatetoutilizeafixedpercapitasumtodeterminecompensationinthissituation,whereadefinedgroupofpeopleallsufferedsimilarlegalinjury .Howe�er,itcontendedthatcompen-sationshouldbedeterminedwithreferencetoamuchsmallergroupofper-sons,andthatthepercapitasumshouldbesmaller .InEthiopia’s�iew,theCommission’sfindingofliabilityappliedonlytopersonsresidingwithinthelegalboundariesofthe�illageofAwgaro,notthesurroundingarea .EthiopiacitedEritreancensusfiguresgi�ingthe�illage’s2000populationas1,154,notthe3,100personsclaimedbyEritrea .Itmultipliedthisnumberbythea�er-ageannualincomeofpersonsinnearbyareasofEthiopia(US$182),slightlyincreasedbecausethea�erageexpelleewasabsentforaboutthirteenmonths .Onthisbasis,Ethiopiacontended thatcompensationshouldbe limited toapproximatelyUS$231,000 .

242 . EthiopiaalsoobjectedtoEritrea’sseekingadditionalfixed-sumamountsforlostpropertyforthefirsttimeatthedamagesphase .Ethiopia

55 PartialAwardinEritrea’sWesternFrontandRelatedClaims,dispositif,SectionVIII .E .2 .b .


contendedthatallofEritrea’sproperty-relatedclaimswereearlierconsideredanddismissedbytheCommission,whenitdismissedEritrea’sclaimsforlootinganddestructionofpropertyinLalaiGashSub-Zoba,whereAwgaroislocated .


243 . TheCommissiondoesnotagreethatitsPartialAwardshouldbereadinthenarrowmannersuggested .Intheearlierproceedings,theargu-mentspresentedwerenotframedinprecisetermsmatchingpoliticalbounda-riesofAwgaro�illage .Indeed,astheAwardnoted,Ethiopiadidnotpresentrebuttale�idenceregardingthee�entatAwgaro .56Inlightoftheuncontestede�idence, the Commission understood the term “Awgaro” to describe thegeneralareafromwhichEritreanswereforciblyandwrongfullyexpelled,asreflectedintheCommission’sestimateinthePartialAwardthat“600fami-lies”pre�iouslyli�edinAwgaro .57ItisnotappropriatetoconstruetheCom-mission’sPartialAwardnowinanarrowmannernotbasedonargumentsore�idencepre�iouslypresented .

244 . TheCommissionfindsthemostpersuasi�ee�idenceofthenumberofpersonsaffectedbytheillegalexpulsionofEritreansfromAwgarotobethedeclarationofthereliefofficialwhoregisteredtheexpelledpersonsinthedisplacedpersonscamptowhichmostofthemwentafterbeingdri�enoutoftheirhomes .Onthisbasis,theCommissionconcludesthatatleast3,100personswerewrongfullyandforciblyexpelled .

245 . AsforEritrea’sclaimsregardingtheAwgaroexpellees’lostprop-erty,includingrealproperty,theCommissionconcludesthatEritreadidnotraisetheseseparateclaimsattheliabilityphase,andtheclaimsarenowpre-cluded .

246 . TheCommission�iewstheforcibleexpulsionoftheresidentsofAwgaroasaseriousanddeliberatebreachofinternational law,warrantingsignificantcompensation .Thatissowhethertheexpulsiondecisionwasmadebytheindi�idualcommanderoftheEthiopianarmedforcesthatoccupiedthetownorbyhigherEthiopianauthority,anissueonwhichtheCommissionhasnoe�idence .TheCommissionthereforeawardsthefullamountsoughtbyEritreaascompensationforthis�iolation,US$1,550,000 .

56 PartialAwardinEritrea’sWesternFrontandRelatedClaims,para .140 .57 Id.,para .139 .


Vii. eriTrea’s GrouP number TWo damaGes Claims

a. The Commission’s liability findings247 . Eritrea’sGroupNumberTwoclaimscompriseEritrea’sClaims15,

16,20,23and24,aswellasfi�eindi�idualclaims(Claims27,28,29,30,31and32) .TheCommission’sspecificliabilityfindingsinthefirstfi�eclaimsarereproducedbelowinconnectionwiththeCommission’sdiscussionsofthosefindings .Theindi�idualclaimsalsoarediscussedinaseparatesectionbelow .TheGroupNumberTwoclaimsin�ol�etwogeneralissuesaffectingse�eralliabilityfindings .

b. non-responsibility for Claims of nationals; dominant and effective nationality

248 . The December 2000 Agreement established this Commission’sjurisdiction,butdidnotcreatesubstanti�erights .TheParties’claimsfor�io-lationsofinternationallawgenerallyremainsubjecttoanyqualificationsandlimitationsapplicableundercustomaryinternationallaw .EthiopiacontendedthatEritrea’sclaimsin�ol�ingse�erallargegroupsofpeopleshouldfailonaccountoftwosuchlimitations .Itfirstcontendedthatclaimsin�ol�ingmanypersonswerebarredbythecustomaryinternationallawrulesprecludingaStatefromclaimingintheexerciseofdiplomaticprotectioniftheinjuredindi-�idualhasthenationalityoftheStateagainstwhichtheclaimismade .Italsocontendedthatclaimsin�ol�ingpersonswhomtheCommissionfoundweredualnationalsatrele�anttimeswerebarredbecausethosepersons’dominantnationalitywasEthiopian .Ethiopiacontendedinthisregardthatmostofthedualnationalsin�ol�edinEritrea’sclaimshadtheirstrongestfamily,socialandeconomictiesinEthiopiaattherele�anttimes .Accordingly,theirdomi-nantnationalitywasEthiopian,andtheirclaimsshouldthereforebebarred .

249 . Ethiopiain�okedtheselinesofargument,inter alia,againstErit-rea’sclaimsforwrongfuldepri�ationofnationality,wrongfulexpulsion,andresidents’lossesofproperty .

250 . Eritrearesponded,inter alia,thatinthecontextoftheDecember2000Agreement(whichincertaincircumstancesauthorizedEritreatopursueclaimsonbehalfofpersonswhoarenotEritreannationals),theruleofdomi-nantandeffecti�enationalitycouldonlyoperatetobaraclaimiftheinjuredperson’snon-Eritreannationalitywascontinuousfromthedateoftheinjurytothedateoftheclaim .Italso�igorouslyarguedthatEthiopiashouldnotbeabletoin�oketheselimitationsondiplomaticprotectionandStateresponsibil-itywhereEthiopiaitselfactedtose�erthebondofEthiopiannationality .

251 . The Commission recognizes the continued force of the rule ofdominant and effecti�e nationality in many circumstances . Howe�er, it


belie�esthatapplicationoftherulemustbequalifiedinsituations,suchasthosepresentedhere,in�ol�ingclaimscenteredonexpulsionordepri�ationofnationalitybytherespondentState .Itcannotbethat,insuchsituations,internationallawallowsaStatewrongfullytoexpelpersonsordepri�ethemofitsownnationality,butthendenyStateresponsibilitybecauseofthe�erysocialconnectionsorbondsofnationalityitwrongfullyended .ThePartiesreflectedthisinArticle5(9)oftheDecember2000Agreement,wheretheyagreedthat“[i]nappropriatecases,eachpartymayfileclaimsonbehalfofpersonsofEthiopianorEritreanoriginwhoarenotitsnationals .”Thispro�i-sionisacompellingindicationthatthePartiesdidnot�iewthegeneralrulesofdiplomaticprotectionasapplyingintheunusualcircumstancesthatledtothatAgreement .

C. deprivation of nationality

1. Introduction

252 . InitsPartialAwardofDecember17,2004inEritrea’sCi�iliansClaims,theCommissionfoundEthiopialiableforunlawfullydepri�ingfourgroupsofpersonsoftheirEthiopiannationality:

1 . Forerroneouslydepri�ingatleastsomeEthiopianswhowerenotdualnationalsoftheirEthiopiannationality;2 . Forarbitrarilydepri�ingdualnationalswhoremainedinEthiopiadur-ingthewaroftheirEthiopiannationality;3 . Forarbitrarilydepri�ingdualnationalswhowerepresentinthirdcoun-triesduringthewaroftheirEthiopiannationality;4 . Forarbitrarilydepri�ingdualnationalswhowereexpelledtoEritreabutwhowerenotscreenedpursuanttoEthiopia’ssecurityre�iewprocedureoftheirEthiopiannationality .58

253 . EritreaclaimedalmostUS$2 .4billionascompensationforthese�iolations .ItdidnotdirectlycorrelateitsclaimtotheCommission’sliabilityfindings,insteadseekingUS$10,000percapitainrespectofeachpersoninfourgroupsofdualnationals:

– 43,319whoallegedlywereunlawfullydepri�edofEthiopiannationalityinconnectionwiththeirexpulsiontoEthiopia(US$433,190,000);– 428whoallegedlyweredepri�edofEthiopiannationalityinconnectionwiththeirexpulsiontothirdcountries(US$4,280,000);– 36,207whoallegedlywereunlawfullydepri�edofEthiopiannationalitywhiletheyremainedinEthiopia(US$360,270,000);and

58 PartialAward,Ci�iliansClaims,Eritrea’sClaims15,16,23&27–32BetweentheStateofEritreaandTheFederalDemocraticRepublicofEthiopia(Dec .17,2004)[herein-afterPartialAwardinEritrea’sCi�iliansClaims],dispositif,SectionXIII .E .


– 156,567whoallegedlywereunlawfullydepri�edofEthiopiannational-itywhiletheywerepresentinthirdcountries(US$1,565,670,000) .

254 . Eritreacannotclaimcompensation for itsownaccount for thefirstoftheliabilityfindingslistedabo�e(for“erroneouslydepri�ingatleastsomeEthiopianswhowerenotdualnationalsoftheirEthiopiannationality”) .Attheliabilityphase,theCommissionfoundthatEritrea’sclaimspredicateduponinjuriesinflicteduponpersonsholdingonlyEthiopiannationalitydidnotconformtothejurisdictionalrequirementsoftheDecember2000Agree-ment,andcouldnotbethebasisforcompensationaccruingdirectlytotheStateofEritrea .59

2. Persons Remaining in Ethiopia—“Yellow Card People”

255 . TheCommissionfoundEthiopialiable“[f]orarbitrarilydepri�ingdualnationalswhoremainedinEthiopiaduringthewaroftheirEthiopiannationality .”Thisfindingin�ol�edalargegroupofpersonsresidinginEthio-piawhoremainedthereforthedurationofthewar,butwhomtheGo�ernmentofEthiopiacametoregardassolelyEritreannationals .

256 . Thesepersonswerenotexpelled,buttheywererequiredtoregisterwithEthiopia’ssecurityauthoritiesandtosurrendertheirpassports,identitycardsandotherofficialdocumentsidentifyingthemasEthiopians .Theyweregi�endistincti�eyellowidentitycards,andwerereferredtobybothPartiesthroughout the proceedings (and are referred to here) as the “yellow cardpeople .”Ethiopiadidnotcontendthatthesepersonswerethesubjectofanysortofindi�idualizedre�iewprocess,orwerejudgedtothreatenEthiopia’ssecurity .Thee�idenceattheliabilityphaseindicatedthat24,018yellowcardswereissued .Atthedamagesphase,Eritreacontended(withoutsupportinge�idence)thatthenumberofpersonsinthisgroupshouldbeincreasedby50%,to36,000,reflectingpersonswhowereobligedtoregister,butdidnot .EthiopiadidnotdisputeEritrea’sunsupportedclaimtothisincreaseofthenumberto36,000becausethelargerfiguresupportedEthiopia’sdefenses(dis-cussedbelow)regardingthenumberofpersonswhowerewronglyexpelledfromEthiopia .

257 . EritreaclaimedUS$10,000withrespecttoeachoftheyellowcardpeople,ormorethanUS$360million .ItallegedthatsubstantialcompensationwaswarrantedbecausethesepeopleexperiencedsubstantialinjuryonaccountoftheirlossofEthiopiannationality .ItreferredtotheCommission’sfindinginthePartialAwardthatlosingEthiopiannationalitycouldha�ead�ersecon-sequencesintermsoftherighttoholdlandandbusinesslicensesandobtainpassports .Eritreaalsocitedawitnessstatementfromayellowcardholder,allegingthatheandhisfamilywerebarredfromlea�ingthetownofMekelewheretheyli�ed,andfacedotherdifficultiesanddiscriminations .

59 Id.,paras .19,20&90 .


258 . Ethiopiarespondedthattheyellowcardpeoplehaddominantandeffecti�eEthiopiannationality,sothatEritreacouldnotmakeaclaimwithrespecttothem .(TheCommissionaddressedandrejectedthislineofargu-mentabo�e .)EthiopiaalsoarguedthatitwouldbeanomalousandimpropertoawardcompensationtoEritreainrespectofpeoplewhowerenote�eninEritreaandthat,inanye�ent,Eritreafailedtopro�ethattheyellowcardpeo-pleactuallysufferedinjury .EthiopiaarguedthatEritreapresentedonlytwodeclarationssupposedtoshowinjury .Ethiopiadismissedtheonereferredtoabo�eas“dubious;”theotherdeclarant,a“Mr .Doe,”wassaidnottobeayel-lowcardperson .EthiopiaalsomaintainedthattheyellowcardpeoplehadsignificantrightsandprotectionsunderEthiopianlaw .Inthisregard,itintro-ducede�idencethatEthiopia’spost-warlegislationallowedthemtoreestablishtheirEthiopiannationality,andthatabout2,900personsinAddisAbabahaddoneso .

259 . As theCommissionconcluded in itsPartialAward inEritrea’sCi�iliansClaims,abelligerentinwartimemay“lawfullyassignsignificantandsometimespainfulconsequencestoeitherofadualnational’snationali-ties .”SomeoftheinjuriescomplainedofinEritrea’ssparsee�idenceaddress-inginjury,suchasthelossofpublicemploymentbydualnationalsholdingthenationalityofanenemyStateinwartime,werenotunlawfulinthecir-cumstances .

260 . Eritreadidnotproducee�idencesufficienttoestablishthattheyellowcardpeopleexperiencedanyeconomicorsocialburdensordisloca-tionsjustifyinganawardofcompensation,certainlynottheUS$360millionEritreaclaimed .Accordingly,Eritrea’sclaimforcompensationwithrespecttotheyellowcardpeopleisdismissed .

3. Deprivation of Nationality of Persons Outside of Ethiopia

261 . The Commission found Ethiopia liable “for arbitrarily depri�-ing dual nationals who were present in third countries during the war oftheirEthiopiannationality .”Pursuanttothisfinding,Eritreasought,inoneparagraphofitsDamagesGroupTwoMemorial,o�erUS$1 .56billion .ThisreflectedUS$10,000perpersonwithrespecttoeachof156,567persons .Eritreacalculatedthisnumberbytaking66 .1%(theproportionofdualnationalsindi-catedinEritrea’sclaimsforms)ofthe236,864personswhomtheInternationalOrganizationforMigrationtalliedasha�ing�otedinthirdcountries .Abouttwothirdsofthesepeople(155,314)�otedinSudanandtheremainderinSaudiArabia(37,777)orothercountries .

262 . Eritreamaintainedthatallofthesepeoplewerewronglydepri�edoftheirEthiopiannationality,andfellundertheCommission’sliabilityfind-ingdealingwithlossofnationalitybypersonsoutsideofEthiopia .Howe�er,itdidnotexplainits�iewthattheyalllostEthiopiannationalityorsubmitanye�idenceinthisregard .TheCommissioninfersthatEritreahadinmind


Ethiopia’sargumentattheliabilityphase,totheeffectthatallpersonswhoqualified to participate in the referendum lost their Ethiopian nationalityasaresult .Howe�er, initsPartialAwardinEritrea’sCi�iliansClaims,theCommissionrejectedthisargument .Instead,takingaccountoftheuniquecircumstancesofEritrea’sbecomingindependent,andofthemannerinwhichEthiopiacontinuedtotreatreferendumparticipantsasitsnationals,theCom-missionfoundthatEthiopianswhoparticipatedinthereferendumprocessbecamedualnationalsofbothcountries .60

263 . Ethiopiarespondedtothisclaimbyarguing,inter alia,thatEritreaunjustifiablyexpandedthescopeoftheCommission’sliabilityfindingtoco�erahugeclassofpeoplethatwasnotdiscussedattheliabilityphase,andthatwasnotcontemplatedbythePartiesortheCommissionatthattime .Ethiopiacon-tendedthatEritreahadoriginallypleadeditsclaimtoco�erarelati�elylimitednumberofpersons—strandedinternationalbusinessmenandthelike—whofoundthemsel�esoutsideofEthiopiawhenthewarbegan .InEthiopia’s�iew,theCommissionadoptedEritrea’snarrowdescriptionoftheclassofco�eredpersonsinitsPartialAward .

264 . Asnoted,Eritreapresentednoe�idenceshowing thatEthiopiaregarded156,000personswho�otedinthereferendumoutsideofEthiopiaasha�inglostEthiopiannationalityastheresult .Norwasthereanye�idenceshowingthattheysufferedanyactualeconomicorotherinjuryonaccountoftheirsupposedlossofnationality .

265 . Accordingly,theportionofEritrea’sclaimin�ol�ingthesupposedlossofnationalityby156,000personswho�otedinthereferenduminloca-tionsoutsideofEthiopiafailsforlackofproof .

266 . InframingitsliabilityAward,theCommissionwasguidedbytheclaimasEritreapresentedit .Eritreaindicatedatthattimethatitcouldnotquantifythenumberofpersonsco�eredbythisclaim .Howe�er itcitedasillustrationsbusinessmenandotherresidentsofEthiopiawhoweretempo-rarilypresentinthirdcountrieswhenwarbegan,andwhomEthiopiathenrefusedtorecognizeasitsnationals .Therewase�idenceshowingthatafewsuchindi�idualsdidsufferdifficultiesandincon�enienceonaccountofEthi-opia’sactions .Eritreasubmitteddeclarationsbypersonswhowererefusedassistancewhentheysoughtad�iceorpassportsorotherconsularser�icesatEthiopianembassiesinthirdcountries,includingsomewhoseEthiopianpassportsweretakenandnotreturned .Howe�er,therecorddidnotpro�ideabasisforestimatinghowextensi�esuchoccurrencesmayha�ebeen .

267 . Gi�enthese�erelimitationsoftherecord,theCommissionawardscompensationintheamountofUS$50,000inrespectoftheunknown,butapparentlysmall,numberofdualnationalswhowerearbitrarilydepri�edoftheirEthiopiannationalitywhilepresentinthirdcountries .

60 Id.,para .51 .


4. Other Deprivations of Nationality

a. The Parties’ Claims

268 . Finally, the Commission found Ethiopia liable for arbitrar-ilydepri�ingdualnationalswhowereexpelledtoEritreabutwhowerenotscreenedpursuanttoEthiopia’ssecurityre�iewprocedureoftheirEthiopiannationality .

269 . Atthedamagesphase,Eritreaad�ancedabroadly-framedclaimwithrespectto43,319dualnationalswhoallegedlylosttheirEthiopiannation-alityinconnectionwithwhatEritreasawastheirallegedlywrongfulexpulsionfromEthiopia .Eritreacalculatedthisnumber(andthenumberco�eredbyitscloselylinkedclaimforwrongfulexpulsions,discussedbelow)startingwithinformationfromadatabasede�elopedbyERREC .

270 . The Parties’ arguments and e�idence regarding this portion ofEritrea’sclaimfrequentlyconflatedEritrea’sclaimsin�ol�ingdepri�ationofnationalityanditsclaimsallegingwrongfulexpulsion .Thisisnotsurprising .Manypeopleexperiencedbothlossofnationalityandexpulsion(eitherlawfulorunlawful),andthesamefactsarerele�anttobothtypesofclaims .BothPar-tiesde�otedmucheffortandargumentatthehearingtodebatingalternati�ewaysofcalculatingthenumberofpersonsfallingintothesetwogroups .(InEritrea’s�iew,thegroupswereidentical,so43,319personsexperiencedbothwrongfulexpulsionandwrongfuldepri�ationofEthiopiannationality .)Thefollowingdiscussionregardingthenumbersofpersonsaffectedthusisrel-e�antbothtothepresentclaimfordepri�ationofnationality,andtotheclaimaddressedinthenextsectionforwrongfulexpulsion .

271 . TheERRECdatabase includedinformationon65,535EritreanswhoregisteredaftercrossingintoEritreafromEthiopiabetweenMay1998andDecember2000 .ERRECenteredregisteredindi�iduals’personalinforma-tionintothedatabase,includingbirthdates,namesofaccompanyingfamilymembers,educationalstatus,meansoftransporttotheborder,andeconomicloss .ThedatabaseoriginallyincludedpersonswholeftEthiopiabothbeforeandaftertheCommission’sjurisdictionalperiod .Howe�er,Eritreacontendedthatthedatawasadjustedtoremo�ethelattercategorybeforeitcalculateditsdamagesclaim .

272 . EritreacontendedthatthetotalsindicatedbytheERRECdata-baseprobablywerelow,becausetheydidnotincluderuralexpelleesinremoteregionswhodidnotregister .Howe�er,Eritreapointedoutthatitsclaimedtotalof65,535personsenteringEritreafromEthiopiawasbroadlycomparablewithestimatesbyoutsidehumanrightsgroupsandobser�ers,citinginthisregardse�eralobser�ers’estimatesrangingfrom50,000to75,000persons .

273 . Eritreacalculateditsclaimednumberof43,319wrongfuldepri�a-tionsofnationalitybeginningwiththe65,535personsintheERRECdatabase .Thisnumberthenwasreducedby14 .4%,theproportionofpersonswhoiden-


tifiedthemsel�esonEritrea’sclaimsformsasha�ingleftEthiopia�oluntar-ily .(ThiswasnecessarybecausetheCommissionpre�iouslyheldthatitwaslawfulforEthiopiatodepri�edualnationalswho�oluntarilywenttoEritrea,anenemyStateinwartime,oftheirEthiopiannationality .61)Thisresultedin56,098persons .

274 . Eritrea’sDamagesGroupTwoMemorialindicatedthatthatthisnumber should thenha�ebeen further reduced, toeliminatepersonsEri-treaestimated(againbasedonitsclaimsforms)toha�ehadonlyEritreannationality .ThesepersonshadtobeeliminatedbecausetheyhadnoEthiopiannationalitytobetakenaway .Eritreaestimatedthat66 .1%ofthepersonsinthedatabaseweredualnationals,sothatthetotalshouldha�ebeenreducedbyabouttwo-thirds .66 .1%of56,098is37,081,whichwouldseemtobethecorrectnumberofpersonswronglydepri�edoftheirEthiopiannationality,gi�enEritrea’spremises .Howe�er,37,081is14 .4%lessthanthe43,319Eritreaactuallyclaimed .ThissuggeststhatEritreamayha�eapplieditspercentagereductionfordualnationals(66 .1%)to the totalpopulation in theERRECdatabase,butdidnotfurtherreducethisnumbertoreflectpersonswholeftEthiopia�oluntarily .

275 . Eritreaalsoclaimedcompensationwithrespecttoanotheresti-mated331personswhowereunlawfullyexpelledbyEthiopiatoKenyaandDjibouti,withassociatedlossofnationality .EritreacitedanAmnestyInter-nationalreportthattherewere“hundreds”ofsuchpersons,andestimatedtheactualnumbertobeabout500 .Eritrea’sMemorialindicatedthatthisesti-matewasalsoreducedtoeliminatepersonswholeft�oluntarilyandwhohadonlyEritreannationality .Howe�er,Eritreaagainappearstoha�ereducedtheamounttoeliminateonlythosewhohadsolelyEritreannationality,andtoha�eleftintheproportionthatsaidtheydeparted�oluntarily .

276 . EthiopiacontendedthatthenumbersaffectedbyanywrongfullossofnationalityweremuchsmallerthanEritreaclaimed,andthatEritreafailedtopro�eactualdamagefollowingfromanysuchlossesofnationalitythatdidoccur .

b. The Commission’s Conclusions

277 . TheCommissionconcludedattheliabilityphasethatlocalauthori-tiesinEthiopiawronglyexpelledaconsiderablenumberofdualnationalswhowerenotidentifiedthroughindi�idualizedsecurityre�iewsundertheauthor-ityofEthiopia’sstatesecurityagency,theSecurity,ImmigrationandRefugeesAffairsAuthority(“SIRAA”);thoseexpelledapparentlythenlosttheirEthio-piannationalityonaccountoftheirpresenceinEritrea .Howe�er,therecordisnotclearastohowmanypersonsfellintothisgroup .Inassessingtheextentofthis�iolation,ithasbeennecessaryfortheCommissiontoexcludese�eral

61 Id.,para .73 .


groupsofpersonsastowhomEritreacouldnotclaimcompensationforlossofnationality .

278 . SIRAA Expellees. Attheliabilityphase,theCommissionheldthatasubstantialnumberofdualnationalswerelawfullyexpelledanddepri�edofEthiopiannationalityfollowingtheSIRAAscreeningprocess .62(Thesepersonsarereferredtohereinafteras“SIRAAexpellees .”)TheSIRAAprocesssoughttoidentifypersonsposingpotentialthreatstoEthiopia’swartimesecurity .Ethio-piaseizedtheSIRAAexpellees’passportsandotherdocumentsindicatingEthiopiannationalitywhentheywereexpelled,andthereafterregardedthemasha�inglostEthiopiannationality .Themajorityofthesee�entsoccurredduringtheearlymonthsofthewar .

279 . InitsPartialAward,theCommissionnotedthatabelligerenthasthelegalrighttoexpelenemynationalstotheirhomecountriesinwartime,includingpersonswhomayholddualnationality .ItfoundthattheSIRAAexpellees—saidbyEthiopiatonumber15,475—werelawfullyexpelledanddepri�edoftheirEthiopiannationalityafterbeingidentifiedthroughthesecu-rityre�iewprocess .63Asthesedualnationalswerenotunlawfullydepri�edoftheirEthiopiannationality,nocompensationisduewithrespecttothem .

280 . Eritreaacknowledgedthatitsclaimednumberofwrongfuldepri-�ationsofnationalitymightbereducedtoreflectSIRAAexpellees .Howe�er,EritreacontendedthatEthiopiapresentede�idencedocumentingtheresultsofSIRAAre�iewsinjustahandfulofcases .Absentadditionale�idencedoc-umentingtheoutcomeofsuchre�iews ineachof the15,475cases,Eritreaassertedthatthoseexpulsions(andtheirassociateddepri�ationsofnational-ity)mustberegardedasunlawful .

281 . Whilethee�idencesupportingthefigureof15,475SIRAAexpel-leeswaslimited,itwasbroadlyconsistentwithstatementsbyEthiopiansecu-rityofficialsregardingthenumberofexpulsionsintherecord,andindeedwaslowerthanindicatedbysomeofthosestatements .Thefigureof15,475SIRAAexpelleeswasconsistentlycitedbyEthiopiathroughouttheseproceedings,e�enthoughlargerfiguressuggestedbysomeofficials’statementswouldha�ebeenmoretoitsad�antage .Thefigureappearsplausibleinthecircumstances;itreflectsabout3%ofthe500,000personsofEritreanextractioninEthiopia,afigurecitedbybothParties .Takingtherecordasawhole,whiletheCommis-sionisnotpersuadedthatthefigureof15,475ispreciselycorrect,itappearsareasonableindicationofthescaleofthelawfulexpulsionsandlossesofnation-alitythatfollowedSIRAAsecurityre�iews .

282 . TheCommissionwasnotpersuadedbyEritrea’sargumentthatEthiopiawasobligedtoproducee�idenceregardingthespecificsof15,475indi�idualsecurityre�iews .Atleastsomeofthesedocumentscouldin�ol�eproblematic issues of state security . Eritrea’s argument also raises a more

62 Id.,para .72 .63 Id.,paras .72&82 .


importantpointaswell .Throughout theseproceedings,bothPartiesha�eregularlycitedthelimitationsimposedbythelackofresourcesandtimeindesigningandpresentingtheirclaims,andtheCommissionhasbeensensi-ti�etotheseconcerns .Ithasnotrequirede�idenceregardingthousandsofindi�iduale�ents,e�idencethatthePartiescouldnotassembleandpresent,andtheCommissioncouldnotaddress,withoutunacceptablecostanddelay .TheCommissiondoesnotseeareasontoadopta fundamentallydifferentapproachwithrespecttotheSIRAAsecurityre�iews .

283 . Voluntary Departures. The Commission next considered thenumberofpersonswholeftEthiopia�oluntarily .Asnotedabo�e,thePartialAwardinEritrea’sCi�iliansClaimsheldthatterminationoftheEthiopiannationalityofdualnationalswhowent�oluntarilytoEritreawasnotarbitraryandunlawful .64TheCommissiondidnotdeterminehowmanypersonsfellintothiscategory,andtherecordisparticularlyunclearinthisregard .

284 . Initscalculationsdescribedabo�e,Eritreaestimated,basedonitsclaimsforms,that14 .4%ofthepersonsintheERRECdatabase,or9,437per-sons,leftEthiopiaforEritrea�oluntarily .Ofthese,abouttwo-thirdsweresaidtobedualnationalswhostoodtolosetheirEthiopiannationalitybecauseoftheirdecision .Foritspart,Ethiopiacontendedthat21,905familymembers�oluntarilyaccompaniedtheSIRAAexpellees;thatbydoingsothey�oluntar-ilychosetose�ertheirconnectionsofnationality;andthatEthiopiawasjusti-fiedinregardingthemasnolongeritsnationals .Ethiopiaalsomaintainedthatmanyotherdualnationalsfreelychosetolea�eEthiopiaforEritrea .Eritreadisagreed,contendingthatmanyfamilymemberswereforciblyexpelledalongwithSIRAAexpellees,andthatotherfamilymemberswholeftforeconomicreasonsafterexpellees’propertywasseizedorsealedshouldalsoberegardedasha�ingbeencompelledtolea�e,sothattheensuinglossofEthiopiannation-alitywasunlawful .

285 . Thesparseandconflictinge�idenceintherecorddoesnotpermitasureassessmentofthenumberofdualnationalswholeftEthiopiaforEritrea�oluntarilyduringthewar .ThenumberiscertainlylargerthanthaturgedbyEritrea,andsmallerthanthaturgedbyEthiopia .Inanycase,manythousandsofdualnationalsdidlea�eEthiopiaforEritrea�oluntarily .Theirresultinglossofnationalitywasnotarbitraryandunlawful,andnocompensationiswar-rantedwithrespecttoit .

286 . PersonsofSoleEthiopianNationality.Finally, theCommissionconsideredtheextent towhichpersonswhoweresolelyEthiopiannation-alsweredepri�edof thatnationality .These included, inter alia,manyper-sonsexpelledfromruralareasneartheborderandsomespousesandfamilymembersofotherexpelleeswhowerethemsel�eslaterexpelled .Astheywerenotdualnationals,allthesepersonsbecamestatelessastheresult .Howe�er,asnotedabo�e,becauseofthemannerinwhichEritreapresenteditsclaims

64 Id.,para .73 .


in�ol�ingpersonswithsoleEthiopiannationality,itcannotclaimcompensa-tionbaseduponinjuriestothem .65

287 . ProofofInjury.Consideringthetotalityofthee�idence,theCom-missionconcludesthatsomethingontheorderof15,000dualnationalswerearbitrarilydepri�edoftheirEthiopiannationalityinconjunctionwiththeirunlawfulexpulsion fromEthiopia .Howe�er, therewas little in the recordregardingthepracticalconsequencesofthisforthoseaffected .Forcedexpul-sionfromEthiopiawasformanyawrenchingandlife-changinge�ent .TheassociatedlossofEthiopiannationalityseemstoha�ebeenamatteroflesspracticalconsequence .Eritreaappearstoha�erecei�edmostexpelleesasitsnationals,pro�idingsupportandidentitydocuments,sofewbecamestateless .E�enthosepersonsofsoleEthiopiannationality,suchastheruralexpellees,seemtoha�ebeenassistedandgi�enEritreanidentitydocuments .Inthecir-cumstances,thesumofUS$10,000percapitaforlossofEthiopiannationalityrequestedbyEritreaclearlyisexcessi�eandunwarranted .

288 . Takingintoaccountthelimitationsoftherecord,andinparticularthepaucityofe�idenceregardingthepracticalconsequencesfollowingfromlossofEthiopiannationality,theCommissiondecidesthatsatisfactionintheformoftheCommission’searlierliabilityfindingsconstitutessufficientrepa-rationforEritrea’sclaimsforcompensationforunlawfuldepri�ationofsomedualnationals’Ethiopiannationality .

d. Wrongful expulsion


289 . InitsPartialAwardinEritrea’sCi�iliansClaims,theCommissionfoundEthiopialiableforthewrongfulexpulsionofthreegroupsofpeople .Itwasfoundliable: 5 . Forpermittinglocalfarmers,militiaorpoliceforciblytoexpelrural

people,manyormostofwhomweresolelyEthiopiannationals,fromruralareasneartheborder;

6 . ForpermittingtheforcibleexpulsiontoEritreaofsomemembersofexpellees’familieswhodidnotholdEritreannationality;

7 . For permitting local authorities forcibly to expel to Eritrea anunknown,butconsiderable,numberofdualnationalsforreasonsthatcannotbeestablished .66

290 . Withrespect to thefirstandsecondof thesegroups, theCom-missionfoundattheliabilityphasethatEritreacannotclaimcompensationfortheirwrongfulexpulsion,butonlyfordirectcostsincurredbyEritreaasa

65 Id.,paras .19&90 .66 Id.,dispositif,SectionXIII .E .


resultofthoseexpulsions .TheCommissionaddresseseachofthethreegroupsbelow,startingwiththedualnationals .

2. Dual Nationals Wrongfully Expelled

a. Number of Expellees

291 . Eritreaappearedtoclaimcompensationinrespectof43,319peopleallegedlywronglyexpelledfromEthiopiatoEritrea,andthesamesumwithrespectto331additionalpersonsexpelledtoDjiboutiandKenya .67Thesenum-berswerecalculatedinthesamemannerasitsclaimsforwrongfuldepri�ationofnationality,asexplainedabo�e .

292 . Ethiopia contended that Eritrea’s method of calculating thenumberofpersonswronglyexpelledwasflawed,becauseitdidnotreflecttheCommission’sactualliabilityfindings .ItrecalledinthisregardtheCommis-sion’sholdingattheliabilityphasethatEritreacouldnotclaimcompensationinitsownrightonaccountofinjuriessustainedbypersonswhoweresolelyEthiopiannationals .68InEthiopia’s�iew,therecouldnotha�ebeenmorethan7,250wronglyexpelleddualnationals,andtheactualnumberprobablywasmuchlower .(Ethiopia’sdescriptionofthemaximumnumberofdualnationalswhomightha�ebeenwrongfullyexpelledwas�ariouslydescribedas7,250and7,260,reflectingslight�ariationsinthemethodofcalculation .)

293 . Incalculatingthenumberofpersonswhomightha�ebeenwrong-fullyexpelled,EthiopiatookasitsstartingpointthenumberofpersonstheInternationalOrganizationforMigrationidentifiedasha�ingparticipatedinthe1993referenduminEthiopia,andwhocouldha�eacquireddualnation-alityasaconsequence(66,022) .Fromthisnumber,EthiopiasubtractedthenumberoflawfulSIRAAexpellees(15,475)andthenumberofyellowcardpeople(36,027—thenumberofyellowcardsissued,asincreasedby50%byEritrea) .Thisleftabout14,500people .Ethiopiaestimatedthatabouthalfofthesepeopleleft�oluntarily,whiletheotherhalfmightha�ebeensubjecttounlawfulexpulsion .

294 . Eritrea did not accept this method of calculation . Howe�er, itcontendedthat,shouldtheCommissionadoptEthiopia’sapproach,thebasenumberofdualnationalsinEthiopiapotentiallysubjecttoexpulsionwouldha�etobesignificantlyincreased .Thelargestsuchincreasein�ol�edchildrenof

67 Eritrea’sGroupNumberTwoDamagesMemorialwasnotconsistentregardingthenumbersofpersonsco�eredbythisclaim .Thenumbersofpersonscitedabo�earefromtheMemorialoftheStateofEritrea,Damages(GroupTwo)filedonDecember15,2007,para .1 .100[hereinafterERDamagesGroupTwoMemorial] .Howe�er,inaseparatetableattheendoftheMemorial,EritreaappearedtoclaimUS$10,000percapitainrespectof56,098personsreflectedintheERRECdatabase,plusanadditional428personsexpelledtothirdStates .

68 See para .286 .


dualnationalsborninEthiopia .Eritreacontendedthatthesechildren,claimedtonumberabout70,000,wouldthemsel�esha�eacquiredEritreannationalitybyoperationofEritreanlaw,andalsowouldha�ebeendualnationals .Eritreamaintainedthatthebasenumberalsoshouldbeincreasedtoinclude1,554personsinEthiopiawhorecei�edEritreanidentitycardsafterthereferendum,and5,278personswhorecei�edEritreanidentitycardsbutdidnot�oteinthereferendum .Ethiopia�igorouslydisputedinclusionofallofthesegroups .

295 . TheCommissiondoesnotaccepteitherParty’sproposedmethodforcalculatingthenumberofdualnationalswhowerewronglyexpelled .Basedonitsbestassessmentofthee�idence,theCommissionconcludesthatapprox-imately15,000dualnationalswerewronglyexpelled .

b. The Parties’ Claims

296 . Astotheamountofcompensationforthewrongfulexpulsionofdualnationals,EritreaappearedtoclaimUS$10,000perwrongfulexpellee,withoutpro�idingsupportinge�idence .Ethiopiacontendedthatthisamountwasexcessi�eandunjustified .

297 . Eritreaalsoclaimedsignificantamountsinrespectofitsexpensesinrecei�ingandcaringforallthreeofthegroupsofpersonsdescribedabo�e .Eritreapresentedthisclaiminbroad-brushterms,describinggenerallytheplightofallexpelleesarri�inginEritreaandtheformsofassistancetheyweregi�enforuptoeightyears .Eritreareportedthatitpro�idedone-timecashsubsidies,temporaryfoodandhousing,emergencyhealthcare,educationandtransportation .

298 . EritreadidnotrelateitsclaimstotheCommission’sspecificliabil-ityfindings,butinsteaddi�idedtheexpelleesintotwobroadcategories:28,000ruralexpellees,acategory(withoutatotalnumber)forwhichtheCommissionfoundliabilityinSectionXIII .E .5ofitsCi�iliansClaimsPartialAward,andsome43,187“urbanexpellees,”acategorynotusedinthePartialAward .Eri-treadidnotquantifytheactualamountsclaimedexceptinatableattheendofitsDamagesGroupTwoMemorial,whichdidnotconsistentlydistinguishbetweenexpensesclaimedfor“urbanexpellees”andruralexpellees .

299 . Ethiopiadeniedliability,disputingEritrea’sclaimsforcompensa-tionrelatingtotheexpulsionofdualnationals .Itdisputedthesufficiencyofthee�idence,andcontendedthatEritreaclaimedgrosslyexaggeratedamountso�eranundulylongperiodforallofthegroupsitcaredfor,andclaimedforexpensesthatEritreadidnotactuallyincur .

c. The Commission’s Conclusions

300 . TheCommissionnotes theexceptionalbasisof the liability forwrongfullyexpelleddualnationalsinSectionXIII .E .7ofitsPartialAwardin


Eritrea’sCi�iliansClaims .AlthoughtheStateofEthiopiacouldha�elawfullyexpelledenemyEritreannationals,includingdualEritrean-Ethiopiannation-als,duringthewar,thisisnotwhathappenedtothislargegroupofpersons .Instead,theCommissionfoundthatEthiopiaallowedlocalauthoritiestoexpelanunknown,butconsiderable,numberofdualnationalsin�iolationofinter-nationallaw,therebyengagingStateresponsibility .

301 . AlthoughEritreasoughttoassistthesedualnationalexpellees,andsomewereassistedbyfamilyorfriendsinEritrea,itisclearthattheexperiencewastraumaticandlifechangingformanyexpellees .

302 . Inlightoftheseunusualcircumstances—ahighlydisputedrecordregardingtheextentofwrongfulexpulsion,imperfecte�idence,theunusu-alcharacterofthedelict,andtheseriouscharacterofthee�entformanyofthoseaffected—theCommissionawardscompensationinthetotalamountofUS$15,000,000inrespectofthewrongfulexpulsionofanunknown,butconsiderable,numberofdualnationalsbylocalEthiopianauthorities .

3. Rural Expellees

303 . EritreaclaimedapproximatelyERN1 .4billionandtwenty-eightmillionbirrforitsallegedexpendituresinresettlingalargegroupofruralEthiopiansfoundbytheCommissiontoha�ebeenwrongfullyexpelledfromEthiopia .TherecordindicatedthatEritreatooksubstantialmeasurestoassistthesepeople,includingcreatingthenewtownofGerenfittohousethem,andpro�idedsubstantialamountsoflandtoallowthemtoresumetheiragricul-turalwayoflife .Howe�er,whilerecognizingEritrea’slaudableresponsetotheplightoftheruralexpellees,theCommissionisnotpreparedtoawardcompensationatsuchhighle�els,forse�eralreasons .

304 . Firstandmostimportantly,Eritreapresented�erylimitedsup-porting e�idence regarding the amount of this huge compensation claim .The�aluesthatEritreasetoutinthetableattheendofitsDamagesGroupTwoMemorialweredrawnfromthestatementofoneformerERRECofficial .AlthoughtheCommissionhasnoreasontodoubtthe�eracityofthiswitness,hisstatementcontainedonlybottom-lineamountsforgo�ernment-incurredexpensesforsocialser�icesandinfrastructureimpro�ements .Thewitnessdidnotattach,andtherecordwasotherwisede�oidof,typicaldocumentationforsuchsignificantexpenses,forexample,ERRECbudgets,procurementcon-tracts,receiptsorconstructionplans .

305 . Second,theCommissionconsidersthatEritreadidnotsupportits claim for expenses incurred to recei�e and resettle 28,000 rural expel-lees .Therewasnoe�idencesupportingthisfigure,whichfellwelloutsidethe10,000–15,000rangeoriginallysuggestedbyEritreaattheliabilityphase .NordidEthiopiapro�idesupportforitsapparentcompromisenumberof12,500ruralexpellees .


306 . TheCommissionislefttomakethemostreasonableestimateitcanusingthemeagere�idencebeforeit .Gi�enthese�erityofthe�iolationofinternationallaw,theCommissionacceptstheupperlimitofEritrea’soriginalestimateof15,000ruralexpellees .Thisfigureissupportedbywitnessstate-mentsthatputthenumberofexpelleesattheresettlement�illageofGerenfitat11,000to13,900persons,acknowledgingthatsomeexpelleessettledinloca-tionsotherthanGerenfit .

307 . Turningnexttothespecificcategoriesofexpensesclaimed,theCommissionispreparedtoacceptthosereasonablysupportedbytherecord .Forexample,basedonwitnessstatementsfromanumberofruralexpellees,theCommissionacceptsthatEritreapaidapproximately230nakfaasaone-timecashsubsidytoruralexpellees .Wherethee�idenceofferedminimaldoc-umentationtosupportacategoryorle�elofexpense,forexample,theclaimforo�er435millionnakfafortemporaryhousingthatwasdescribedbyawitnessas“makeshift,”theCommissionhasreducedthepercapitarateproportion-ately .Whereacategoryappearedtobespeculati�eorbasedonprojectedfutureexpenses,forexamplefortheopportunitycostofagriculturallandgi�entoexpelleesandcostsanticipatedinimpro�ingaccessroads,theCommissionawardsnocompensation .Inthisregard,theCommissionconsidersthateightyearsof“temporary”pro�isionofsocialser�ices,e�entoagrarianexpellees,isexcessi�elylong,andfindstwotothreeyearstobeamorereasonabletransi-tionperiod .

308 . Onthebasisoftheconsiderationsabo�e,theCommissionawardsEritreacompensationofUS$11,000,000forexpensesitincurredinrecei�ing,caringforandresettlingruralEthiopiannationalswrongfullyexpelledfromEthiopia .

4. Family Members of Expellees

309 . At no stage of the proceedings was the Commission pro�idedwithanyestimatewhatsoe�erofhowmanynon-Eritrean familymembersofSIRAAexpelleeswerealso forciblyexpelled fromEthiopia .Neither theERRECdatabasenorthesummaryoftheclaimsformssupportedafigure .Norwereestimatesintherecordofthenumberoffamilymemberswhomayha�e�oluntarilydeparted,acategorywhichincludeddualnationalsaswellassolelyEthiopiannationals,ofanyassistance .Withoutanybasisfore�enaroughestimate,theCommissiondismissesEritrea’sclaimfordirectcostsincurredinrecei�ingthiscategoryofwrongfulexpellees .

e. Harsh Conditions of departure310 . TheCommissionfoundEthiopialiablefor“frequentlyfailingto

pro�idehumaneandsafetreatmenttopersonsbeingexpelledtoEritreafromEthiopia .”Ethiopianauthoritiesrequiredthousandsofpersonstoridestifling


andcrowdedbuses,underarmedguard,onjourneysoftenlastingse�eraldays,throughextremelyhotregions,oftenwithfewstopsandlittlefoodandwater .Somehadtotra�erseminedareasbetweenthetwoarmies .Thesepersonsthenhadtocrosstheborderzoneonfoot,carryingwhate�ertheycould .Bordercrossingsoftenoccurredinthehoursofdarkness .

311 . EritreaclaimedUS$92,728,000ascompensationwithrespecttothisliabilityfinding .Itcontendedthat46,364personsexperiencedthesecon-ditions,basingthisnumberondatafromtheERRECdatabasereflectingper-sonswhoarri�ed“by�ehicle”andwhoreportedthemsel�estoha�e“sufferedfromunlawfulconditionsoftransport .”EritreasoughtUS$2,000foreachoftheseindi�iduals .

312 . EthiopiarespondedthattheCommission’sliabilityfindingshouldberead literallyandrestricti�ely, toco�eronlypersonswhowereexpelledfollowingSIRAAre�ieworwhomEthiopiaacknowledgedmightha�ebeenexpelledillegally .InEthiopia’s�iew,thetotalof thesetwogroups(22,735)shouldbereducedby25%,sincemanyexpelleesdidnotexperienceharshcon-ditions .Thisleftapotentiallyaffectedgroupofapproximately15,700people .

313 . WhiletheCommission’sliabilityfindingspokeofthetreatmentofpersons“expelledfromEthiopia,”theParties’discussionofconditionsofdeparturewasframedbyEritrea’scontentionthatthosewholeftEthiopiawereexpelled,andtheCommissionreflectedthisinitsliabilityfinding .Howe�er,itdidnotintendbythistoexcludeotherpersonswhoweremadetosufferharshandpotentiallydangerousconditionsofdeparture .Forexample,thethou-sandsofspousesandchildrenwhoaccompaniedpersonslawfullyexpelled(saidbyEthiopiatoha�enumberedabout22,000,allofwhomitsaidleft�ol-untarily)sufferedthesesameharshconditionsonaccountofEthiopia’sfailuretoassurehumaneandsafeconditions .PersonswholeftEthiopia�oluntarilydidnotwai�etheirrighttohumaneandsafetreatment .Theactofboardingthebusesdidnotabsol�eEthiopiaofitsresponsibilityunderinternationallawtotrytoassuredecenttreatmentandsafepassage .

314 . Eritrea’sDamagesGroupTwoMemorialalsoclaimedo�erUS$60millionascompensationfor“consequentialdamages,”reflectinginjuryallegedtoresultonaccountofthe“wrongfulimprisonment”ofmanypersonspriortotheirexpulsionordeparture .Asdiscussedpre�iouslyinconnectionwithEritrea’sGroupNumberOnedamagesclaims,theCommissiondoesnotrec-ognize “consequential damages” as a separate category of damages underinternationallaw .69Moreo�er,theCommissionheldattheliabilityphasethatEthiopia’sbriefdetentionofpersonswhowerenationalsofanenemyStatepriortotheirexpulsionor�oluntarydeparturedidnot�iolateinternationallaw .70Thisadditionalclaimisunfoundedinlawandbarredbyres judicata,andisaccordinglydismissed .

69 See SectionVI .D .3supra.70 PartialAwardinEritrea’sCi�iliansClaims,para .110 .


315 . Althoughtheharshtransportstotheborderwerelimitedindura-tionandgenerallydidnotappear toha�ecaused lasting injury,Ethiopia’sfailuretoassurehumaneandsafeconditionsoftransportationortoa�oidfrequentandhazardouscrossingsbetweenthearmiesonfootwereseriousmatters,warrantingappropriatecompensation .Accordingly,theCommissionawardsUS$2,000,000ascompensationforfailuretopro�idehumaneandsafetreatmentintransport .

f. Property losses by Persons Previously residing in ethiopia


316 . TheCommissionfoundliabilityforaseriesofinterconnectedEthi-opianactionsimpairingthepropertyofpersonswholeftEthiopiaduringthewar .InthePartialAwardinEritrea’sCi�ilianClaims,theCommissionfoundEthiopialiable:

11 . Forlimitingtoonemonththeperioda�ailableforthecompulsorysaleofEritreanexpellees’realproperty;

12 . Forthediscriminatoryimpositionofa100%“locationtax”onproceedsfromsomeforcedsalesofEritreanexpellees’realestate;

13 . FormaintainingasystemforcollectingtaxesfromEritreanexpelleesthatdidnotmeettherequiredminimumstandardsoffairandreasonabletreatment;and

14 . Forcreatingandfacilitatingacumulati�enetworkofeconomicmeas-ures,somelawfulandothersnot,thatcollecti�elyresultedinthelossofallormostoftheassetsinEthiopiaofEritreanexpellees,contrarytoEthiopia’sdutytoensuretheprotectionofaliens’assets .71

317 . TheCommissionmustfirstconsideradifferencebetweenthePar-tiesregardingthescopeoftheseliabilityfindingsin�ol�ingresidents’prop-erty .Thefindingswereframedintermsofactionsaffecting“Eritreanexpel-lees .”Ethiopiacontendedthattheythereforeappliedonlytothepropertyofthe15,475personsitacknowledgedwerelawfullyexpelled,plussomenumberofadditionalpersonswhomightha�ebeenunlawfullyexpelled .InEthiopia’s�iew,thislattergroupcouldha�enumberedatmostabout7,250persons .Incontrast,Eritreacontendedthathere,aswithpersonssubjectedtounlawfulconditionsofdeparture,theCommission’sfindingsmustbeinterpretedinlightoftheargumentspresentedtotheCommissionandastowhichitsfind-ingsresponded .Accordingly,inEritrea’s�iew,theCommission’sliabilityfind-ingsshouldapplytoallEritreanswholeftEthiopia,includingthosewholeft�oluntarily .

71 Id.,dispositif,SectionXIII .E .


318 . Regardingthis threshold issue, theCommissionconcludes thatits liabilityfindingsareproperlyunderstoodtorelateonly todualnation-alswhowereindeedexpelledbyEthiopiannationalorlocalauthorities—themorethan15,000SIRAAexpellees,plusanothergroupofroughlysimilarsizewrongfullyexpelledbylocalauthoritieswithoutsuchre�iew .Membersofbothgroupstypicallywereforcedtolea�eEthiopiaprecipitouslyandunderconditionsthatdidnotallowthemtodisposeoforprotecttheirpropertyfairlyandeffecti�ely .TheystandincontrastwithpersonswholeftEthiopia�olun-tarily .These�oluntarydeparteesincludedsomesignificant,althoughdisput-ed,numberofSIRAAexpellees’spouses,childrenorotherfamilymembers .(Ethiopiaclaimedthatalmost22,000suchfamilymembersleft�oluntarily,anumberEritreaclaimedwasfartoohigh .)Whate�ertheirnumber,itappearsthat property losses affecting expellees’ family members would largely bereflectedintheclaimsofindi�idualexpellees,whotypicallyweretheprinci-palfamilybreadwinners .Manyotherpersonswhomadethedecisiontolea�eEritrea�oluntarilyhadtimeandopportunitytomakearrangementsforthedispositionorprotectionoftheirproperty .


319 . Eritreadidnotdi�ideitse�idenceandargumentsamongtheCom-mission’sfourseparatepropertyfindingslistedabo�e,orbetweenthosefind-ingsin�ol�ingpersonspre�iouslyresidentinEthiopiaandtheCommission’sseparatefindingsin�ol�ingnonresidents’property .(Thelatterarediscussedseparatelybelow .) Instead,Eritreamadea singleextremely largeclaimforpropertylosses,seekingo�ertenbillionbirr,US$47million,andadditionalamountsinnakfaandSaudirials,fordepartees’andnon-residents’propertylossescombined .Thiscombinedclaimemphasizedthefinalliabilityfindingabo�e,regardingtheeffectofthecumulati�enetworkofEthiopianmeasures .

320 . ThemeasuresundertakenbyEthiopiatodepri�eEritreannation-alsofpropertyincludedstrictenforcementofprohibitionsonalienownershipofproperty, limitationsintheperiodofmandatorysale,rapidforcedsalesofimmo�eableproperty,discriminatoryandconfiscatorytaxationmeasures,and�igorousloancollections,amongothers .TheforcedsalesoftheEritreans’propertyweregenerallyconductedeitherbytheexpellee’sagent,throughtaxforeclosureproceedings,orundertheauspicesoftheEritreanPropertyHan-dlingCommittee,aninstitutioncreatedbyEthiopiatoo�erseethesaleofEri-treans’property .Ethiopiamaintainedattheliabilityphaseoftheseproceed-ingsthatanyresidualproceedsfromthesesales,afterdeductionsfortaxes,rentsorloanamounts,wereplacedintorestrictedaccountsinthenameofthepropertyowner .

321 . ThefollowingdiscussionaddressesEritrea’sclaimsforcompen-sationforpropertylossesbypersonswhoresidedinEthiopiapriortotheirdepartureduringthewar .InitsDamagesGroupTwoMemorial,Eritreacon-


tendedthattheEthiopianactionsandmeasuresin�ol�ingexpellees’propertyforwhichtheCommissionfoundliabilityga�eriseto“amassi�etransferofwealth”fromthesepersons .Itcontendedthatinits�iew,“thedocumentaryrecordsofthisfinancialfree-for-allareinEthiopianhands,”sothattheburdenshouldfalluponEthiopiatopro�eitscontentionsthatEritreans’propertywasproperlytreatedordisposedofthrough“routineandlegitimateprocedures .”EritreaalsomaintainedthattherestrictedaccountscitedbyEthiopiaarenota�ailabletotheexpelleesortheirlegalrepresentati�es,andthatinternationallawrequiresthatEthiopia’srestrictionsonexpellees’accesstotheaccountsbeliftedfollowingthecessationofhostilities .

322 . Eritrea’sDamagesGroupTwoMemorialre�iewedmaterialintherecordsaidtoshowthattheexpelleesincludedmanypersonsofsubstantialmeans,andsur�eyedindetailtheEthiopianmeasuresagainstEritreans’prop-ertyunderlyingtheCommission’sliabilityfindings .EritreacontendedthattheextentofEthiopia’smeasures,anditscontrolofinformationregardingthedispositionofexpellees’property,compelledapresumptionthatEthiopiawasresponsible,astheCommissionearlierfound,forthelossofallormostoftheassetsinEthiopiaofEritreanexpellees .

323 . Howmuchwerethoseassetsworth?Eritreacalculatedmostofitsclaimbyaddingtogetherthefullamountsofpropertylossesshownonthou-sandsofclaimsformsfilledoutbypersonsinEritrea .Theseincluded22,372formsfilledoutbypersonswhomEritreasaidpre�iouslyli�edinEthiopiaandwereexpelled,and2,244formssubmittedbyotherswhosaidtheyleft�oluntar-ily .Eritreaindicatedthat,togetherwiththeiraccompanyingminorchildren,thesegroups(expellees,�oluntarydeparteesandbothgroups’minorchildren)totaled49,278ofthe65,535personsintheERRECdatabase .72(Eritreaalsocited1,422claimsformsfilledoutbypersonswholi�edoutsideofEthiopiaatthetimeofthewar;theseareconsideredseparatelybelow,inconnectionwiththeCommission’sliabilityfindingsin�ol�ingnon-residents’property .)

324 . Eritreacontendedthat thereshouldalsobecompensationwithrespecttopersonswhodidnotfilloutERRECformsandtheirdependents .Accordingly,Eritreasoughtadditionalfixed-sumcompensationofUS$2,000foreachoftheremaining16,257indi�idualsintheERRECdatabase(65,535lessthe49,278personsdescribedabo�e),orapproximatelyUS$32 .5million .

325 . Eritrea’s Damages Group Two Memorial contained a fi�e-pagedescriptionofitsproceduresforcollectingandanalyzingtheclaimsofthethousandsofpersonswhoallegedtheylostpropertyonaccountofEthiopia’smeasures .Inbrief,aclaimsformwasdesignedandre�isedbyagroupofEri-

72 Therewasanunexplainedarithmeticaldiscrepancyofabout1,100persons inEritrea’spresentationofthenumberofexpelleesandtheirchildrenco�eredbytheclaimsforms .Eritreaclaimedthat22,374expelleesfilledoutclaimsforms,andthatthisgrouphadwiththem23,027minorchildren .Thiswouldsuggestthatexpelleesandtheirchildrentotaled45,401persons .Howe�er,Eritrea’sDamagesGroupTwoMemorialclaimedtherewere46,547personsinthesegroups .


trean lawyersworkingwitha“focusgroup”ofexpellees .Formsthenweredistributedtoindi�idualsclaiminglossesbyEritreanlegalpersonnelworkinginse�eralEritreantownsandinanofficeinAsmara .AnEritreanattorneyinter�iewedeachclaimantsubmittingaformtoenhanceaccuracyandcom-pleteness .Someclaimantspro�idedsupportingdocuments,buttherewasnorequirementtodoso .Therewasnoindicationthatamountsclaimedontheformswerecheckedagainstsupportinge�idence,orthattherewasanysystemofqualitycontrolontheamountsclaimed,otherthantheinter�iewatthetimetheformwassubmitted .Eritreasummarizedthetotalamountsclaimedonmorethan26,000claimsformsonamassi�espreadsheetsubmittedwithitsDamagesGroupTwoMemorial .Eritreainitiallycontendedthatthisdocu-ment(whichwasa�ailableinbothpaperandelectronicform),togetherwithadeclarationbymembersofitslegalstaffexplainingtheclaimsformsproc-ess,constitutedsufficiente�idencetosupportthefullamountsclaimed .Initsrebuttale�idencepriortotheMay2008hearing,Eritreasubmittedaboutfortyoftheclaimsforms,togetherwithsomesupportingdocumentationforthoseforms .

3. Ethiopia’s Position

326 . AswithEritrea’sclaimsformsforlootinglosses,EthiopiaraisedmultipleobjectionstoEritrea’sclaimsformsprocess .Tobegin,itmaintainedthatundocumentedanduntestedclaimsoflossbyindi�idualsonclaimsformswere inherentlyunreliable,andwerenotcrediblee�idenceof theamountsclaimed .EthiopiarecalledinthisregardEritrea’s�igorousobjectionstoEthio-pia’sclaimsformsatearlierstagesoftheclaimsprocess,andtheCommis-sion’spastreser�ationsregardingsuchforms .73ItnotedthatEritrea’sDamagesMemorialanditssupportinge�idencedidnotincludeanyoftheclaimsformsoranysupportingdocumentationfortheamountstheyclaimed .InEthiopia’s�iew,Eritrea’sspreadsheetsummarizingdatafromitsformswassimplynote�idenceoftheclaimedamountsofloss .

327 . As indicated abo�e, Ethiopia contended that the Commission’sliabilityfindingswerelimitedtolossesbyexpellees,andthatclaimsoflossbyotherswholeft�oluntarilywerenotcompensable .Inits�iew,compensa-blepropertylosseshadtobelimitedtoadequatelydocumentedlossesbythe15,475personslawfullyexpelledfollowingSIRAAre�iewandbythesmallergroupwhomightha�ebeenunlawfully expelled .Ethiopiacontended thatthislattergroupcouldcontainatmost7,250persons,andprobablywasmuchsmaller .

328 . EthiopiacontendedthatthetypesofpropertylossidentifiedontheformsdidnotcorrespondtotheCommission’snarrowliabilityfindings,and

73 PartialAward,PrisonersofWar,Ethiopia’sClaim4BetweentheFederalDemo-craticRepublicofEthiopiaandtheStateofEritrea(July1,2003),para .41 .


thattheformsaskedclaimantstoincludetypesoflossforwhichtheCommis-siondidnotfindliabilityandforwhichEthiopiawasnotresponsible .Itarguedfurtherthatsomequestionsontheformswereleadingorotherwisein�itedself-ser�ingandunreliableanswers .

329 . Ethiopiamaintainedfurther thatEritrea’scalculations improp-erlyincludedse�eralhundredduplicateclaimsforms(Ethiopiacitedwhatitbelie�edtobeabout850ofthese),aswellas547filedbypersonswhoobtainedEritreanidentitycardsafterthereferendumandwho, inEthiopia’sunder-standing,couldnotha�ebecomedualnationalspursuanttothereasoningoftheCommission’sdecisiononEritrea’sCi�iliansClaim .

330 . Finally,EthiopiarepresentedthattheproceedsfromforcedsalesandotherassetdispositionswereplacedinaccountsintheCommercialBankofEthiopiacreatedforthebenefitoftheexpelleesanddepartees,andthatEri-treanshadbeencompensatedthroughthoseaccounts .Ethiopiadidnotpro-�ideanye�idenceorinformationregardingtheexistenceofthoseaccounts,theiraccessibility,ortheamountssaidtoha�ebeendeposited .Withrespecttothepri�atebankaccountsofexpelleesthatexistedwhentheywereexpelled,Ethiopiaarguedthattheyremaineda�ailabletotheexpelleeowners .


331 . Expellees’EconomicCircumstances.InassessingEritrea’sclaimsforresidents’propertylosses,theCommissionfirstconsideredEritrea’sargu-mentthatexpellees’o�erallsocialandeconomiccircumstancespro�idedsub-stanceandcredibilitytothe�erylargeamountsclaimedbasedontheclaimsforms .Thee�idencedidnotpro�idewhollycon�incingsupportforEritrea’sargumentsinthisregard .EritreaoffereddatafromtheERRECdatabaseindi-catingthatabouttwo-thirdsoftheexpelleescamefrommajorurbanareas,including56%fromAddisAbaba .E�idencefrom�arioussourcesindicatedthattheexpelleesincludedsomebusinessmen,merchants,professionalper-sonsandotherswhomightha�ehadrelati�elysubstantialincomesandassets .Ne�ertheless,thesemoreaffluentpersonsapparentlywereamodestpropor-tionofallthosein�ol�ed .Forexample,EritreacontendedthattheERRECdatabaseincluded28,860headsofhouseholdsamongitsregisteredpopulationof65,535persons .Theseincluded2,182personswhodescribedthemsel�esasmerchants(about7 .6%oftheheadsofhouseholdandabout3 .3%ofthetotalpopulation) .Therewere245healthcareprofessionals(doctors,dress-ers,nursesandpharmacists—fewerthan1%oftheheadsofhousehold),andjust114engineers,programmersandotherspecializedtechnicalexperts .TheCommissionacceptsthatsomeofthesepersonshad—andlost—substantialassets .Howe�er,itisnotclearthat,takenwiththemuchlargerproportionofpersonsontheERRECdatabasewhowerenotincomeearnersorwhoengagedinlessremunerati�eoccupations,theyhadandlostpropertyworthmorethanonebillionU .S .dollars .


332 . Othere�idencereinforcedthe�iewthattheaffectedpopulationwasmoreeconomicallydi�erse,andlessaffluento�erall, thanEritreacon-tended .Eritrea’se�idenceincludedanAugust1998excerptfromanEthio-piannewspaperlistingse�eralhundredEritreanpersonsandbusinesseswhoseassetswerefrozen .Eritreasuggestedthatthisshowedtheaffectedpopulationtoha�ebeenhea�ilyweightedwithpersonsofmeans .Howe�er,thelistalsoincludedasignificantproportionofpersonssuchasgasstationemployees,teachers,barberandshoeshopowners,go�ernmentemployeesandotherswhoseemunlikelytoha�ehadextensi�ewealth .EritreacitedERRECstatisticsshowingthatexpelledheadsofhouseholdtendedtobebettereducatedthantheEthiopianpopulationatlarge .Howe�er,thesesamestatisticsshowedthat34%oftheseindi�idualswereilliterateandfewerthan9%hadanypost-sec-ondaryeducation .EritreaalsocitedERRECdataindicatingthatthea�erageheadofhouseholdexpelledfromAddisAbabaandfourother largeEthio-piancitieshadana�erageincomeofjust263birramonth .Thisisappreciablyhigherthana�erageincomesinEthiopiaasawhole,butdidnotindicategreatpersonalwealthonthepartofthepopulationo�erall .Takenasawhole,therecordindicatedthatexpelleesprobablyweresomewhatbetteroffeconomical-lythanmostpersonsinEthiopia,butitdidnotsupporttheamountsclaimedbyEritreabasedonitsclaimsforms .

333 . TheCommissionalsohasseriousreser�ationsregardingthereli-abilityoftheamountsoflossclaimedthroughEritrea’sclaimsformsproc-ess .TheCommissionnotedearlier in thisAward itsdoubts regarding theclaimsformprocessEritreausedtoquantifylossesfromlootingandpropertydestruction in itsGroupNumberOnedamagesclaims .74Similarconcernsapplyhere .Anyprocessthatin�itesinjuredpersonstoestimatetheirlossesallowsthemtodosoinwaysthatbenefittheirinterests .Otherrecentclaimsprocessesin�ol�ingmultipleclaimsforindi�idualinjuryha�eadopted�ariousmeasurestocontrolthis .First,theamountofcompensationpro�idedhasbeensubstantiallyreduced,oftentoamuchsmallerfixed-sum .Alternati�ely,orinaddition,someprocessesha�escrutinizedsampleclaimsandtheirunderly-inge�idencetocheckthereliabilityofmuchlargergroupsofclaims .Eritreadidnotutilizeeitherapproachhere .Instead,itessentiallyclaimedforthefullamountsoflossesindicatedonitsclaimsformswithoutscrutinizingsampleclaims .

334 . ThislefttheCommissionwithnomeanstotesttheaccuracyofthelargeamountsEritreaclaimed .Eritrea’sDamagesGroupTwoMemorialstatedthatindi�iduals’statementsoflosswere“supportedby”�ariousformsofdocumentsande�idence .Howe�er,therecorddidnotshowthatpersonsfillingoutclaimsformswererequiredtopro�idesupportingdocumentationorthatamountsstatedontheformswerecheckedagainstanydocumentationthatwasoffered .Eritreasubmittedonlyasmall,non-randomlyselectedand

74 See SectionVI .B .3supra.


statisticallyinsignificantnumberofclaimsformsandtheirsupportingdocu-ments,andthenonlyasrebuttale�idence .

335 . TheCommission’sreser�ationsregardingtheclaimsformproc-esswerereinforcedbythesizeofresultingclaims .Forexample,the22,372formsfilledoutbypersonsallegedlyexpelledfromEthiopiaapparentlygener-atedlossestotalingabout8 .23billionbirr,plussmalleradditionalamountsdenominatedindollarsandnakfa .Thisequalsatleast368,000birrperform .The2,248 formsfilledoutbypersonswho identifiedthemsel�esasha�ingdeparted�oluntarilyclaimede�enhighera�eragelosses,about456,000birrperform .(Theselatteramountsarenotinanye�entcompensable,asEthiopiais liableonlyforexpellees’ losses .)Someindi�idualsamongthethousandswhofilledoutformsdoubtlessexperiencedlossesoftheseore�enmuchlargermagnitudes .Howe�er,theCommissiondoesnotregardthesele�elsoflossperformasacrediblemeasureofEritreandamagesinthecontextofthelargeanddi�ersepopulationofformerresidentsofEthiopia .

336 . Gi�enthelimitationsofEritrea’sclaimsformsasthefoundationofitsclaimsforexpellees’propertylosses,theCommissionhashadtomakeitsbestapproximationofexpellees’aggregatepropertylosses .Thisapproxima-tionmaynotfullyreflectthelossesofthesmallnumberofpersonswhohadandlostsignificantwealth .Someoftheseapparentlyhadthemeanstodocu-menttheirlosses,asthesmallgroupofclaimsformsandsupportingdocu-mentsfiledwithEritrea’srebuttale�idencesuggests .Howe�er,intheabsenceofastructuredpresentationoftheselossesandofthesupportinge�idenceforthem,theCommissionhasnobasistoassesshowmanytrulywealthypersonsmayha�ebeenexpelled,andtheextentoftheircompensablelosses .

337 . Inestimatingtheamountofcompensation,theCommissionhasbeenguidedbyitsearlierassessmentsofthenumbersofdualnationalsexpelledbyEthiopia,boththroughtheSIRAAprocessandunlawfullyatthehandsoflocalofficials .Italsohastakenaccount,inter alia,ofthee�idenceintherecordregardingthe�alueoflossesofhousingandhouseholdpropertyfromwar-relatedcausesinZalambessaandotherlocationsinEthiopia .Howe�er,inthisregard,ithasbeenmindfulthatsomeofthoseotherlossesoccurredinloca-tionsthatwerelessde�elopedandexpensi�ethanAddisAbabaandtheotherurbanlocationsoftwo-thirdsoftheexpellees’homes .

338 . Thebankaccountsat issue in thisclaimgenerally fell into twogroups:restrictedaccountssetupbyEthiopiatodeposittheproceedsofliqui-datedpropertybelongingtoexpellees,andpre-existingaccountsthatconsti-tutedpartoftheexpellees’propertywhentheywereexpelledbeginninginMay1998 .Withrespecttotherestrictedaccounts,Eritrea’sclaimsweredenied .75Therewasfurthermorenoproofofthetotalnumberoftheseaccountsoroftheamountstheysupposedlyhold .Norwasthereproofthatexpelleesnowha�eaccesstothem;thee�idencewastothecontrary .Accordingly,theCommis-

75 PartialAwardinEritrea’sCi�iliansClaims,para .146 .


siondidnottakethemintoaccountindeterminingthecompensationduetoexpelleesfortheirpropertylosses .

339 . Astothepersonalbankaccountsthatconstitutedpartoftheexpel-leepropertyatthetimeofexpulsion,Ethiopiahadadutyunderthejus in bello toreturntheseaccountsafterthewar .While,asindicatedintheCommission’sPartialAwardinEritrea’sCi�iliansClaims,Statesin�ol�edinarmedconflictha�etherighttofreezeenemyassetswithintheir jurisdictionandpre�enttheirtransfertoanenemy,itremainstheirobligationtoprotectsuchassetsforreturntotheirownersorotheragreeddisposition .76Howe�er,exceptforthesixindi�idualclaimsaddressedinSectionVIIIofthisAward,andacom-parati�elytinyhandfulofindi�idualsidentifiedinEritrea’srebuttale�idence,therewasonlyasmallamountofanecdotale�idenceregardingtheamountsin�ol�ed .Accordingly,theCommissionhassoughttoincludeexpellees’bankaccountsasanelementoftheaggregateofexpelleepropertyforwhichitispro�idingcompensation .

340 . Basedonitsanalysisofthee�idencea�ailableintherecord,theCommissionawardsEritreaUS$46,000,000ascompensation in respectofexpellees’lossesofpropertyonaccountofEthiopia’sunlawfulactions .

G. Property losses by non-residents

1. The Commission’s Liability Findings and Eritrea’s Claim

341 . In its Claim 24, Eritrea sought compensation for (a) “seizureof�ehiclesandothermo�ablepersonalproperty”ownedbypersonsli�ingoutsideofEthiopia,(b)“thegoingconcern�alueofallbusinessesownedbynon-residentEritreansthatsufferedeconomiclossasaresultoftheEthiopianexpulsionsofEritreannationalsandpersonsofEritreannationalorigin,”and(c)“lossresultingfromtemporarydepri�ations,or,inthealternati�e,topayfullmarket�alueforalltherealpropertyitexpropriated .”Eritrea’sclaimwaslimitedtolossesin�ol�ingnon-residents’�ehicles,businessesorrealproperty .(Attheliabilityphase,Eritreaexpandedthisclaimtoincludelossesresult-ingfromthedi�ersionofEritrean-ownedcargotoDjibouti .TheCommissionfoundthedi�ersionclaimwasoutsideofitsjurisdiction,becauseitwasnotincludedinEritrea’sclaimsasfiledinDecember2001 .77)

76 Id.,paras .151&152 .See also Article46ofGene�a IV, supra note47, requir-ingthatrestricti�emeasuresaffectingprotectedpersons’property“shallbecancelled,inaccordancewiththelawoftheDetainingPower,assoonaspossibleafterthecloseofhostilities .”

77 PartialAward,LossofPropertyinEthiopiaOwnedbyNon-Residents,Eritrea’sClaim24 .BetweentheStateofEritreaandtheFederalDemocraticRepublicofEthiopia,para .14 .


342 . InitsPartialAwardofDecember19,2005inEritrea’sClaim24forlossofPropertyinEthiopiaOwnedbyNon-Residents,theCommissionfoundEthiopialiable:

1 . Forfailingtopro�idefullcompensationfortrucksandbusesownedbyEritreansthatwererequisitionedbyEthiopiaduringtheconflictandwerenotreturnedtotheirowners .2 . Forcreatingandfacilitatingacumulati�enetworkofeconomicmeas-ures,somelawfulandothersnot,thatcollecti�elyresultedinthelossofallormostofthebusinessesandimmo�ablepropertyinEthiopiaofnon-resi-dentEritreans,contrarytoEthiopia’sdutytoensuretheprotectionofaliens’assets .78

343 . Asnotedabo�e,Eritrea’sGroupNumberTwocompensationclaimsdidnotdistinguishbetweenclaimsforresidents’andnon-residents’propertyorconformtotheCommission’sspecificliabilityfindings .Inparticular,theclaim for compensation of nonresidents’ losses was not confined to lossesof�ehicles,businessesandimmo�ableproperty .Instead,Eritreacontended(withoutexplanation)that“thepropermeasureofdamagesunderthecircum-stancesisthetotal value oftheindi�idualexpellee’sornonresidentpropertyowners’lostassets .”Thus,Eritreasoughtcompensationforsometypesofloss-esnotincludedinitsoriginalclaim,andforwhichtheCommissiondidnotfindliability .Theclaimforcompensationforthe“total�alue”oflostassets,insofarasitembracesnon-residents’non-businesspersonalpropertyorotherlossesnotco�eredbytheCommission’sfindingsofliability,wasnottimelyandisherebydismissed .

2. Claims Involving Trucks and Other Vehicles

344 . Beforethewar,hea�ytruckscarryingdryandliquidcargoweremainstaysofEritrea’sandEthiopia’stransportationsystems .Eritreans,typi-cally indi�idualentrepreneursor small familybusinesses,ownedmanyofthesetrucks .Thetrucksoftenwereboththeowners’principalassetandtheirsourceofli�elihood .TherecordcontainedmultipleaccountsbyEritreanswhobeganasdri�ersorassistantdri�ers,andwhograduallyassembledthemeanstobuyprogressi�elynewerandbettertrucksortoaddtrailers .Thelossofatruckbroughtse�ereeconomicconsequencesforadri�erandhisfamily .

345 . Beforethewar,muchofEthiopia’simportandexporttradepassedthroughtheEritreanportsofMassawa(primarilyser�icingTigray)andAssab(ser�ingAddisAbabaandotherareas) .Freightmo�edtoandfromtheseportsontrucks .TruckstoorfromAssabcrossedtheborderatBure;truckstoorfromMassawacrossedatZalambessa/Serha .Bothcrossingssawhea�yfightingduringthewar .ThePartiesdidnotdisputethesignificanceoftrucktranspor-tationortheroleofEritrean-ownedtrucks .ThedeclarationofaseniorEthio-

78 Id.,dispositif,SectionV .B .


piantransportationofficialconfirmedthat“[p]riortotheconflict,thereweremanyEritreanownersoftruckswhowereengagedintransportoperationsinEthiopia .Thiswasparticularlysointhefreightandoiltransportsector .”

346 . Eritreapresentedasubstantialamountofcrediblee�idenceregard-ingtheseizuresofEritrean-owned�ehicles,includingmorethanse�entydec-larationsbydri�ersandowners,contemporaneouscorrespondenceandlistsidentifyingseized�ehicles,andEthiopiannewspaperaccounts .Mostdri�ers’declarationsincludedcopiesofregistrationdocumentspro�ingtheexistence,typeandEritreanownershipoftheseized�ehicles .Participants’accountsofthesee�entssometimes�ariedregardingprecisedatesandthenumbersof�ehi-clesassembledortakenbyEthiopianauthoritiesatparticularplaces,buttheaccountscon�ergedoncorepointsandwerecorroboratedbyothere�idence .

347 . The e�idence showed that Ethiopian authorities systematicallyseizedmanyEritreanownedtrucksandbusesinAddisAbabaandothercit-iesandontheroadstothebordercrossingsatBure,Zalambessa/SerhaandintoDjibouti .Thee�idencealsoestablishedthat,afterthewar,thesetruckswerenotreturnedtotheirowners,norwascompensationofferedorgi�en .Howe�er,thee�idencedidnotdirectlyaddressacentralquestion—thetotalnumberoftrucksseizedwithoutcompensation .Accordingly,theCommissionwasrequiredtoresorttoestimateandapproximationonthiskeyissue,guidedbyitsre�iewofe�idencepre�iouslyadduced .

348 . EthiopiaacknowledgedthatitrequisitionedmanyEritrean-ownedhea�y�ehiclestomeetwartimetransportationneeds,althoughitcontendedthatthiswastemporaryandthat�ehicleslaterwerereturnedtotheirown-ersorwerea�ailableforownerstocollectinEthiopia .ItalsocontendedthatonlyEthiopian-registeredtruckswererequisitioned .Attheliabilityphase,theCommissionrejectedthesecontentionsasunpro�en .

349 . Ethiopia’sCounter-MemorialattheliabilityphaseinoppositiontoEritrea’sClaim24setoutits�iewofthematter:

61 . . . .Ethiopia,amidstanunexpectedwar,wasforcedtorequisitiontruckstobeusedtotransportgoodstoEthiopiaandforuseindefenseofthecoun-try .It isnotanaccidentthat the�ehiclesrequisitionedaretrucks,andoften,asparticularlystressedbyEritrea,fueltrucks .AsstatedbyEritreaitself,“[t]hetransportationmarketinEthiopiawasfordecadeslargelydominatedbypersonsofEritreanextractionandthispatternchangedlittleafterEritreanindependence .” . . .

65 .InsupportofEritreaandinoppositiontoEthiopia,manyoftheownersrefusedtopermittheirfueltruckstobeusedandhidtheirtrucksingaragesandpri�atecompounds .EthiopiawasforcedtoapplyRegulationNo .14/84“Pro�iding forRegulationof theRoadSector”permitting theEthiopianRoadsAuthorityduringanemergencycrisistofacilitatethepro�isionoftransportser�icesinthecountry .


66 .Ethiopiarequisitioned4000trucksthatwereregisteredinEthiopiatotransportoilandfoodaid .350 . The e�idence showed that Ethiopian soldiers, customs officials

orpoliceseizedsignificantnumbersofEritreantrucksatse�erallocations .BeginninginlateMay1998,manyweretakenatEthiopiancheckpointsontheroadstoAssabandDjibouti .TherewerenumerousaccountsofEritreantrucks,bothinboundandoutbound,beingstoppedandheldatDicheotto .LoadedinboundtrucksoftenwereallowedtoproceedtoAddisAbabawiththeircargoes,manyunderguard,andthenwereseizedafterunloadingorsubsequently .TherealsoweremultipleaccountsofgroupsofoutboundtrucksbeingheldunderguardinornearDicheotto .Theseaccountsdescribedgroupsoftrucksandtheirdri�ers,�aryinginnumbersfromaroundtwentytoforty,beingheldatEthiopianmilitarycampsfor�aryingperiods .Thedri�ersthenwerecompelledtosurrendertheirtrucks,afterwhichtheywereallowedtomaketheirwaytoAddisAbaba .

351 . EthiopiansoldiersandfinancepolicealsostoppedandheldEri-treantrucksatMille(or“Mile”) .InboundloadedtrucksoftenwereallowedtoproceedtoAddisAbaba,sometimesunderguard .Howe�er,sometruckswereseizedatMille,anddri�erssawtheirlicenseplatesbeingchangedtomilitaryplates .AtleasttwotruckswereforciblyusedtohaulfreightforofficialsoftheAfarregionbeforebeingtakeno�erbytheEthiopianmilitary .

352 .Othertrucks,includingmanythathadcarriedWorldFoodProgram(“WFP”)reliefgrainfromMassawatoMekele,wereseizedatAdigrat,thefirstlargetownsouthofZalambessa .Therecordincludedthirteenlargelyconsist-entaccountsoftrucksandtheirdri�ersbeingheldthereunderguardearlyinthewar .Theseaccountsdescribed�aryingnumbersoftrucksinthisgroup;mostplacedthenumberbetweenthirtyandforty .Se�eralof thesedri�ersdescribedbeingforcedtohaultroopsandmilitarymaterialtoZalambessaduringthisperiod .Later,allofthedri�ersweremadetoturno�ertheirkeys,transportedtoamilitarycampatAgbe,andheldforaboutsixweeksbeforebeingallowedtoreturntoEritrea .TherecordincludedanOctober1998letterfromEritrucko,oneoftheWFP’sEritreanprimetruckingcontractors,seekingWFP’sassistanceinreco�ering22ofthesetrucksseizedaftercarryingWFPgrainfromMassawatoMekele .

353 . TherewerealsofouraccountsofEritreantrucksandbusesbeingtakenbymilitaryorpoliceatGondorandatRama .

354 . The largestnumberofEritrean�ehiclesappeared toha�ebeenseizedwhileparkedinornearAddisAbaba .Asnotedabo�e,manyloadedinboundtruckswereallowedtoproceedtoAddisAbaba,oftenunderguard .Afterunloading,trucksthatwerenotseizedwereorderedtoremainparkedinpublicorpri�ategarages .Otherdri�ersparkedingarages�oluntarilyaftertheylearnedofthe�ehicleseizures .Inaddition,earlyinthewar,Eritrean-licensed�ehicleswerebannedfromdri�inginEthiopia,abanlaterextendedtoEthiopian-licensed�ehiclesownedbyEritreans .AtleastonelargeEritrean


truckingassociationcounseleditsmemberstogaragetheirtruckswhilemat-tersclarified .Dri�ersfrequentlyremainedwiththeirstored�ehiclesforweeksore�enmonths .

355 . Therecord included thirty-eight largely consistent accountsbydri�ersorownersdescribinghowtheir�ehicles,andothersownedbyEri-treans,wereseizedfromgarages .Theseaccountsoftenincludedeyewitnessdescriptions .Theywereconsistentregardingthemethodsusedtolocateandseize�ehicles,andoftendescribedmultiple�ehiclesbeingtakenfromapartic-ulargarage .Multipleaccountsdescribedhowsoldiersreplacedexistinglicenseplateswithmilitaryplatesbeforeremo�ingthetrucks .

356 . How Many Trucks?Somedri�erswhoremainedwiththeir�ehi-clesinAddisAbaba,andotherswith�ehiclesseizedelsewhere,unsuccessfullypetitionedEthiopia’sMinistryofTransportandotheragenciesforrelief .TherecordincludedapetitiontotheMinistryofTransport,signedbyse�enty-fi�eownersanddri�ers,referringtotheconfiscationofo�er140trucks .Theseincludedninety-fourinAddisAbaba,forty-sixinAfar(twenty-threeatDiche-ottoandtwenty-oneatMille),and“anunspecifiednumber”inTigray .Nineofthese�enty-fi�epetitionerswereamongEthiopia’sse�enty-plusdeclarants .

357 . Takentogether,theaccountsofindi�idualdri�ersandownersinEritrea’sdeclarationsdescribed the seizureof approximately twohundredtrucksandbuses,butitappearsthatthetotalnumberwasmuchlarger .Asnotedabo�e,Ethiopia’sliabilityphasee�idenceincludedthedeclarationoftheGeneralManagerofEthiopia’sRoadTransportAuthoritystatingthat“closeto4,000”truckswithEthiopianlicenseplateswererequisitioned,althoughthisofficialalsomaintainedthat“[t]herewasnoEritreanregistered�ehicle . . .in�ol�edinthisprogram .”(ManyEritrean-ownedtruckswereregisteredinEthiopia .)ThefirstofhisstatementsshowedthemagnitudeofEthiopia’swar-timeeffortstoobtainhea�y�ehicles .Thesecondcouldbetrue,iftheseizureofEritrean-registered�ehicleswasconductedunderanadditional,separatego�ernmentprogram .

358 . TherecordalsoincludedtwoarticlesfromtheEthiopiannewspa-perEthiop suggesti�eofthenumberofseized�ehicles .One,datedNo�ember25,1998,referredtoongoingsearchesforhiddenEritreantrucks,andto2,000Ethiopiandri�ersbeingcalleduptoreplaceEritreandri�ers .Ofthese,“[t]hetransportandcommunicationsdepartmenthasstated that ithasaccepted1,200Ethiopiandri�ersamongthosewhowereregistered .”Assumingthatmanytruckscarriedadri�erandanassistant(asapparentlywascommon),thissuggeststhatlatein1998—aftermanyEritreantruckshadbeenseized—EthiopiawaslookingtoreplaceEritreandri�ersinatleastsixhundred�ehi-cles .AsecondEthiop article,datedDecember3,1998,describedeffortsby2,000EthiopianpolicetosearchforconcealedEritreantankertrucks .Thisarticleallegedthatfrom350tofi�ehundredsuchEritreantankertruckshadbeenhidden,andthatthego�ernmenthadlocatedallbutforty-four .


359 . Anotherhint,althoughofatbestlimitedprobati�e�alue,canbederi�edfromEritrea’sanalysesofdatafromitsclaimsforms .Eritreaindicatedthatnon-residentsclaimedlossesofabout314millionbirrfor“mo�eableprop-erty,”whichincludedlost�ehicles .TheEritreantruckdri�ers’declarationssuggestedthattherewasasteadyandpredictablemarketforlargetrucks;theirdeclarationswerelargelyconsistentregardingthe�aluesoftrucksofparticularmakes,modelsandages .Asdiscussedfurtherbelow,Eritreaestimatedthatthea�erage�alueoftheseizedtruckswasabout327,000birr .EthiopiadidnotrebutthisamountanditappearedreasonabletotheCommission .Arbitrarilyassumingthatthe314millionbirrclaimedfor“mo�eableproperty”ontheclaimsformswastwicethe�ehicles’actual�alue,anddi�iding157millionbirrbyaper-�ehicle�alueof327,000birr,theresultsuggeststhattheclaimsformsreflectedlossofabout480�ehicles .

360 . Despitetheseindicators,therecorddidnotclearlyestablishtheactualnumberofseizedtrucksandbuses .Eritreadidnotsuggestaspecificnumber,ore�enarange .Eritrea’sClaim24Memorialbrieflycontended,with-outanalysisorexplanation,that“hundreds”oftruckswerestoppedontheroadstoAssabandDjibouti,andthatthetotaltakenwas“manytimeslarger”thanthe“approximately500”citedintheDecemberEthiop article .Howe�er,Eritreadidnotfurtherexplainorsupportthiscontention .

361 . Gi�enthelimitationsoftherecord,theCommissionhastomakeitsbestestimateofthenumbersof�ehiclesin�ol�ed .Takingaccountofallofthee�idence,itconcludesthatEthiopiaseizedatleastsixhundredtrucksandbusesthatwereinEthiopiaandwereownedbyEritreans .Theactualnumbermayha�ebeenhigher,perhapsmuchhigher .Howe�er,asEritreacouldnotindicateorsubstantiatetheactualnumberin�ol�ed,itmustbeartheconse-quencesiftheCommission’sestimatefallsshort .

362 . Eritrea’swrittenpleadingsalsofailedtocalculatethe�alueoftheseized�ehicles .Accordingly,theCommissionaskedEritreaattheMay2008hearingtoidentifye�idencealreadyintherecordregardingtheir�alue .Eri-trearespondedbycalculatingthea�erage�alueofasubstantialnumberofindi�idual�ehiclesidentifiedinitswitnessdeclarations,determiningthea�er-age�aluetobe327,875birrasofthetimethe�ehicleswereseized .Ethiopiaobjectedtothiscalculationasnewe�idence,butdidnototherwiserebutit .TheCommissionconsidersthatthisa�erage�alueappearsreasonablyrepresenta-ti�eoftherangeof�ehiclethatEthiopiaseized .ItalsoappearsreasonableinlightofEthiopia’sclaimfor850,000birrforahea�ygraintruckofacommonsizeandmakethatwasdestroyedintheAdigratgrainwarehousefire .Accord-ingly,theCommissionaccepts327,000birrasreflectingthea�erage�alueofthe�ehiclesEthiopiaseized .

363 . Accordingly, the Commission awards Eritrea compensation ofUS$24,525,000fortheunlawfulfailurebyEthiopiatoreturnorcompensateEri-treaafterthewarforthe�ehiclesitrequisitionedfromnon-residentEritreans .


H. other non-resident Property

364 . Inadditiontoseekingcompensationfor�ehicles,Eritreaclaimedabout625millionbirr forother lossesbynon-residentson thebasisof itsclaimsforms .ThisportionofEritrea’sclaimposedmanyproblems .Itwassubject to thesignificantuncertainties inEritrea’sclaims formprocess,asdescribedabo�e .Itincludedalltheclaimedlossesofnon-residents,andthusincludedpotentiallylargelossesnotincludedinEritrea’soriginalformulationofitsclaimandforwhichtheCommissiondidnotfindliability .And,unlikethecaseoftrucksandbuses,therewasnotasubstantialbodyofe�idenceintheliabilityrecordtoaidinestimatingtheextentofloss .

365 . Thee�idencedidsuggestthatse�eralhundrednon-residentEri-treanssufferedlossesofpropertyinEthiopiaonaccountofEthiopia’sactionsduringthewar .Accordingly,theCommissionisreluctanttorejectthisrequestforcompensationoutofhand .Gi�enthelimitationsoftherecord,theCom-missiondeterminedtotreattheseclaimslikeclaimsin�ol�ingexpellees’lossesofproperty .Takingaccountofitsbestestimateofthenumberofnon-resi-dentswholostpropertyco�eredbytheCommission’sliabilityfindings,andadjustingforthosewhoclaimedfor�ehicles,theCommissionawardsEritreaUS$1,500,000ascompensationforthisgroup .

i. unlawful detention of eritrean Civilians

1. The Commission’s Findings and Eritrea’s Claim

366 . InitsPartialAwardinEritrea’sCi�iliansClaims,theCommissionfoundEthiopialiable:

9 . ForholdingEritreanci�iliansonsecurityrelatedchargesinprisonsandjailsunderharshandunsanitaryconditionsandwithinsufficientfood,andforsubjectingthemtobeatingsandotherabuse;

10 . FordetainingEritreanci�ilianswithoutapparentjustification,hold-ingthemtogetherwithprisonersofwar,andsubjectingthemtoharshandinhumanetreatmentwhilesoheld .79

367 . Eritreatreatedthesetwofindingstogether,claimingUS$40mil-lionascompensationinrespectofthewrongfuldetentionof2,000Eritreanci�ilians .ThisincludedUS$20million(US$10,000perperson)forinjurythatEritreaclaimedtoresultfromtheenforcedindoctrinationofall2,000ci�il-ians .EritreaclaimedanotherUS$6million(US$3,000perperson),reflectinginjuryattributabletoinhumaneconditionsaswellasadditionalpercapitaamountsreflectingthe�aryinglengthsoftimethatEritreanci�iliansweredetainedorincarcerated .

79 PartialAwardinEritrea’sCi�iliansClaims,dispositif,SectionXIII .E .


368 . Eritrea’scompensationclaimin�ol�edse�eralseparategroupsofci�iliansallegedlywrongfullydetainedwithinthescopeoftheCommission’sliabilityfindings .Thesewereall identifiedinEritrea’sclaimsat the liabili-typhase,andtheCommission’sPartialAwardsnotedthattheirdetentionsmightentitleEritreatocompensationatthedamagesphase,dependingonthefacts .Eritrea’sDamagesGroupTwoMemorialthusincluded�ariouspersonsaddressedinEritrea’searlierclaims,includingtruckdri�ersandtheirassist-antsdetainedduringtheearlymonthsofthewar,animprisonedguardanddri�erontheser�icestaffofEritrea’sEmbassyandtheguard’steenageson,andci�ilianswronglyheldasprisonersofwar .

369 . ThepresentationofthisclaiminEritrea’sDamagesMemorialseemedlargelyintendedtoremindtheCommissionofitsearlierliabilityAwardsandof the e�idenceunderlying them .Eritrea’s claim that2,000Eritreanci�ilianswereunlawfullydetainedrestedprimarilyontworeportspublishedin2000,onebyAmnestyInternationalandtheotherbytheU .S .DepartmentofState .Theseindicatedthat1,200ci�ilianswereheldincus-todybyEthiopiaduringthewarand,accordingtotheStateDepartmentreport,that“hundredsofothers”wereheldinpolicestations .Insupportof itsclaimed largernumberof2,000,Eritreacitedprisonerofwardataandabroadrangeofwitnessstatements fromthe liabilityphase in�ol�-ingPOWs,thewarfronts,ci�ilians,non-residentpropertyandtreatmentofdiplomats .Eritreaalsoarguedthatitsestimateofthelargenumberofci�iliansheldwithPOWswas�alidatedby itsanalysisofEthiopia’s“ERPOW”website,whichpostedpicturesandinformationregardingnumerousEritreansheldbyEthiopia .InEritrea’s�iew,theinformationonthewebsiteregardingmanyindi�iduals(age,placeofinitialdetention,descriptionsofsupposedmilitaryunitsandthelike)showedthattheywereci�iliansandnotlegitimateprisonersofwar .


370 . Ethiopiaresponded,inter alia,thatEritreaimproperlyconflateditsdetentionclaimsand,indoingso,failedtorespectimportantdistinctionsdrawnbytheCommissionandthenarrowscopeofitsliabilityAwards .Ethio-piadisputedthenumbersofpersonsdetained,contendingthatEritrea’sreli-anceontheStateDepartment’ssolitaryreferenceto“hundredsofothers”indetentionatpolicestationswasinsufficienttosupportaclaimforcompensa-tionin�ol�ingeighthundredpeople .Ethiopiaarguedthatthe“indi�idualizede�idence”ofPOWreportsandliabilityphasewitnessdeclarationsEritreausedtocorroborateitsclaimartificiallyinflatedthenumbersactuallydetained .ItalsocontendedthatthelargeamountsEritreaclaimedascompensationwereunwarrantedandunsupportedbye�idence .



371 . TheCommission’sliabilityfindingsaddressedtwodistinctgroupsofci�ilianswhomEthiopiaheldandtreatedasci�ilians .Thefirstcomprisedci�iliansdetainedinprisonsandjailsonsecuritychargesunderunacceptablyharshconditions .TheCommission’sPartialAwardindicatedthatthenumbersaffectedwerenotclear,butitnotedtheICRC’sreportthatithadregistered664ci�iliandetaineesandtheStateDepartmentreport,referredtoabo�e,that1,200werebeingheld .Thesecondgroupcomprisedotherci�iliansheldinotherlocationswithoutapparentjustification,againunderunacceptablyharshconditions .Astothisgroup,theCommissionnotedmultipleaccountsofci�il-iansheldasPOWsorinfacilitiesalongsidePOWs .Howe�er,theCommissiondidnotdeterminehowmanypersonsfellwithinthereachofitsfinding .

372 . Analysis of the claim was complicated because some ci�ilianscapturedbyEthiopianmilitary forceswereheld in thesamebarracksandcampsasprisonersofwar,andweretreatedbyEthiopiainallotherrespectsasPOWs .TheICRCapparentlyregisteredthemasprisonersofwar,andtheywereincludedamongthosereleasedwhenEthiopiareleasedthePOWs .Therecorddidnotindicatewhyorhowfrequentlythisoccurred .Theaccountsofsomeci�ilianswhowereheldasPOWssuggestedthatEthiopiaregardedtheirpastmilitaryser�iceasjustificationtoholdthemascapturedcombatants .Inothercases,Ethiopia’sreasonswerenote�ident .

373 . Theliabilityphasetestimonyindicatedthatmanyci�iliandetain-eeswereheldinlocationswherePOWswerealsoheld .Therewereaccountsofci�iliansheldatFiche,thenmo�edtoBlateande�entuallytoDedessa .Se�-eralwitnessestestifiedthattheci�iliandetaineeswerekeptseparate,althoughsomeofthemwererequiredtoworkincaringforprisonersofwar .

374 . Inanycase,alloftheci�ilianswhowereheldasPOWswereinclud-edamongtheapproximately2,600personsco�eredintheCommission’sawardofcompensationforprisonersofwarinSectionVI .Fabo�e .Indeterminingthatawardofcompensation,theCommissionwasmindfulofandtookintoaccounttheunlawfulnessofEthiopia’sdetentionofci�iliansasprisonersofwar .TheCommissiondoesnotincludethesepersonsasecondtimeinassess-ingcompensationinthecurrentclaim .

375 . Thedamagesphasedidnotgreatlyincreasethea�ailableinforma-tiononthenumberofci�iliansEthiopiaimprisonedordetained .Howe�er,takingtherecordasawhole,theCommissionfindsthetotalof1,200ci�iliansreportedbyAmnestyInternationalandtheStateDepartmentintheirrespec-ti�e2000reportsonhumanrightsissuestobebothcredibleandthebesta�ail-ablee�idenceofthetotalnumberaffected .ThisfigurewaslargelycorroboratedbythewitnessdeclarationsofferedbyEritreaattheliabilityphase,inwhichbothdetainedci�iliansandPOWstestifiedthatci�iliansweredetainedat�ari-ousPOWcamps .TheliabilityphasedeclarationsofferedbyEritreaasproofoffurtherdamagesdidnotpro�ideabasisforahighernumber .


376 . Basedonthetotalityofe�idence,theCommissionawardsEritreacompensationofUS$2,600,000inrespectofEritreanci�ilianswhowereheldonsecuritycharges,orforunknownreasons,underharshandunacceptableconditions .

J. diplomatic Claim


377 . EritreaandEthiopiaeachfiledextensi�eclaimsforinjuriessus-tainedbyitsdiplomaticmissionandconsularpostandpersonnelasaresultoftheother’salleged�iolationsoftheinternationallawofdiplomaticandcon-sularrelations .80

378 . In its Partial Awards in the Diplomatic Claims, the Commis-sionnotedtheParties’commendabledecisionsnottose�erdiplomatictiesthroughoutthearmedconflict,“despiteuna�oidablefrictionande�engreatpersonalriskfordiplomatsandstaff .”Furthernotingthat“thisunusualsitu-ationhascreatedunusualchallengesfortheapplicationofdiplomaticlaw,”theCommission,inassessingliability,lookedtothe“foundationalprincipleofdiplomaticreciprocity”andappliedthecriticalstandardof“theimpactofthee�entscomplainedaboutonthefunctioningofthediplomaticmission .”Onthisbasis,theCommissionmadelimitedfindingsofliabilityagainsteachPartyfor“serious�iolationsimpedingtheeffecti�efunctioningofthediplo-maticmission .”

379 . InthecaseofEritrea,theCommissionfoundEthiopialiablefortwosuchserious�iolations:

1 . . . .for�iolatingArticles36and29oftheViennaCon�entiononDip-lomaticRelationsinthecourseofthedepartureofEritreandiplomaticper-sonnelfromtheAddisAbabaairportinMay1998byattemptingtosearchtheAmbassador’sperson,searchinghishandluggage,confiscatingpapersfromhisbriefcaseandinterferingwithhischeckedluggage,andalsobysearchingotherdepartingdiplomatsandtheirluggage,withoutregardtotheirdiplomaticimmunities;

2 . . . . for�iolatingArticle22of theViennaCon�entiononDiplomat-ic Relations by entering, ransacking, searching and seizing the EritreanEmbassyResidence,aswellasofficial�ehiclesandotherproperty,withoutEritrea’sconsent .81

80 PartialAward,DiplomaticClaim,Eritrea’sClaim20BetweentheStateofEritreaandtheFederalDemocraticRepublicofEthiopia(December19,2005)[hereinafterPartialAwardinEritrea’sDiplomaticClaim];PartialAward,Ethiopia’sClaim8BetweentheFed-eralDemocraticRepublicofEthiopiaandtheStateofEritrea(December19,2005) .

81 PartialAwardinEritrea’sDiplomaticClaim,dispositif,SectionIV .D .1&2 .



380 . InitsDamagesGroupTwoMemorial,Eritrealargelyrepeatedthebackgroundandargumentsunderlyingitsdiplomaticliabilityclaims .Ase�i-dence,Eritreapresentedsixnewwitnessstatementssupplementingthosefiledearlier .Se�eralofthedepartingdiplomatsrecountedsearchesandseizuresofpropertynotonlyattheairportbutalsoattheirhomes,andemphasizedemotionaltraumaandlossofpersonalitemssuchasfamilyphotographs .Inasecondwitnessstatement,Eritrea’sAmbassadordescribedtheResidenceandhisbelongings,andestimatedthe�alueoflostofficialandpersonalproperty,withoutsupportingin�entoriesorotherdocumentation .

381 . Eritreaconcludedtherele�antchapterofitsDamagesGroupTwoMemorialwithaclaimforunspecifiedmonetarydamagesforEthiopian�iola-tionsthatwere“systematic,deliberate,andentirelywithoute�enapretenseoflegality .”Thechartentitled“DiplomaticCalculations”attheendoftheMemo-rialreflectsthatEritreasoughttotalmonetarycompensationofUS$2,611,500and77,500birr .Inrelationtotheunlawfulentering,ransacking,searchingandseizureoftheEmbassyResidencecompound,EritreasoughtUS$237,000forfurnitureandappliances(US$200,000forthemainResidence,US$25,000fortheguesthouse,andUS$12,000fortheser�antsquarters);US$50,000forthree�ehicles;US$20,000forequipmentpertainingtoEmbassyfunction;US$95,000fortheAmbassador’sartcollection;US$17,600fortheAmbassador’spersonalitems(US$17,000toUS$20,000forhiswardrobe);andUS$1,000,000forthe“premeditated”andongoingseizure .Inrelationtotheairportsearchandsei-zureoftheAmbassador,EritreasoughtUS$100,000forsearchofhisperson;US$5,000forsearchofhisluggage;US$43,800forseizureofhisfi�echeckedsuitcases;andUS$20,000forcashandUS$500forpersonalitemsseizedfromhishandluggage .Finally,fortheunlawfulsearchandseizureofsixteennameddiplomats,apparentlynotlimitedtoe�entsattheairportduringtheirdepar-ture,Eritreasoughtfixed-sumsofUS$50,000forthesearchandseizureofeachpersonand$5,000forthesearchandseizureofeachperson’sluggage,aswellaseitherthefixed-sumofUS$10,000oraspecificamountforseizedproperty .

3. Ethiopia’s Position

382 . Consistent with its own Diplomatic Claim, Ethiopia took thepositionthatsatisfactionisasufficientformofreparationforEritrea’sclaim,because theharmtodiplomatic representati�esandpropertywas suffereddirectlybyEritreaoritsofficialsand,incomparisontotheharmsaddressedintheCi�iliansClaims,wasrelati�elyminor .Inthealternati�e,EthiopiaarguedthatthequantumsoughtbyEritreawasunwarrantedanddisproportionatetotheCommission’stwolimitedfindingsofliability .Ethiopiaobjectedinpar-ticulartoEritrea’sclaimsforUS$1,000,000forthe“premeditated”seizureoftheEmbassyResidenceandforhighfixed-sumdamagesforeachdeparting


diplomat, the latterbeingbasedonalleged“physicalabuseanddetention”rather thanontheCommission’s limitedfindingsas to theattemptedandactualsearchesofthediplomats .

383 . AttheMay2008hearing,arepresentati�eofEthiopiaexpressedregretforthe�iolationsofEritrea’sdiplomaticimmunitiesfoundbytheCom-mission .82


384 . AswithalloftheParties’damagesclaims,theCommissionhascarefullyre�iewedthesubmissionsandsupportinge�idenceinEritrea’sDip-lomaticClaim .Differentelementsoftheclaimwarrantdifferentawardsofreparation .

385 . Turningfirsttotheclaimsforthewrongfulsearchesofdepartingdiplomaticpersonnel(otherthantheAmbassador)attheairport,theCom-missionfindsthatthepro�endamagewasnon-material .ItbearsreiteratingthattheCommissiondidnotfindEthiopialiableforseizingpropertyofthesediplomats in thecourseof thewrongfulsearchesat theairportorat theirhomesbeforetheirdeparture .Withoutunderminingtheseriousnessofanysuchsearches,whichtheCommissiondescribedas“blatantbreaches”ofdip-lomaticimmunityinthePartialAward,83thefactremainsthattherewaslittlee�idenceoftheexactnumberorscopeofsuchsearches .Althoughthee�idencereferredtointerferencewithsomese�enteentothirtydepartingdiplomats,Eritreapresented�ery fewwitnessstatementswithdetailsas towhathap-penedattheairportandwhatpropertywasseized .Eritreamadenoattempttojustifythefixed-sumsclaimed,which—atsomeUS$65,000perdepartingdiplomat—farexceedthefixed-sumsclaimedformanycategoriesofinjuredci�ilians .

386 . AsrecognizedbytheInternationalCourtofJusticeintheCorfu Channel case,whereinjuryisnon-materialandhencenotcompensablebyrestitutionorcompensation,theappropriateformofreparationforaState’swrongfulactissatisfaction .84Intheinstantcase,gi�enEthiopia’sseriousbutnon-materialinterferencewithanuncertainnumberofdepartingEritrean

82 TranscriptoftheEritrea-EthiopiaClaimsCommissionHearingsofMay2008,PeacePalace,TheHague,atpp .44–47(May22,2008) .

83 PartialAwardinEritrea’sDiplomaticClaim,para .36 .84 CorfuChannelCase(U .K .� .Alb .),Merits,1949I .C .JREP .p .4,atp .35 .See also

RainbowWarriorCase(N .Z .� .Fr .),Award,Apr .1990,20ReportsofInternationalArbitralAwardsp .215,para .122 .


diplomats,theappropriatereliefissatisfactionintheformofadeclarationofwrongfulness .85

387 . The Commission turns next to the claims based on Ethiopia’streatmentoftheAmbassadorashedepartedEthiopiafromtheairport .TheattemptedsearchoftheAmbassador’sperson,fortunatelypre�entedbyhim,wasanextremelyserious�iolationofhisdiplomatic immunity .Almostasseriousa�iolationwasEthiopia’sactualsearchofandseizureofpapersandpersonalpropertyfromhisbriefcaseandhandluggage .Reliefintheformofsatisfaction,specificallyintheformofastrongdeclarationofwrongfulness,iswarranted .

388 . Monetaryrelief,howe�er,isnotequallywarranted .AlthoughtheEritreanAmbassador’stestimonywashelpful,theCommissionwouldexpectclaimsfortheseizureofUS$20,000worthofEritreango�ernmentcashandUS$500forpersonalitemsinhishandluggagetobesupportedwithdocumen-tationgoingbeyondhisownstatements .NoristheCommissionabletoawardmonetarydamagesfortheUS$40,000claimfortheAmbassador’sfi�echeckedsuitcases,whichdidnotappearathisdestination .E�eniftheCommissionwereable toassumeintheabsenceofdirecte�idencethatEthiopiaseizedthesuitcases,Eritreaagaindidnotpro�ideanycorroboratingdocumentationsupportingtheAmbassador’sestimated�aluationofhispersonalwardrobeandjewelry .

389 . The Commission turns to the last and most serious �iolation,theEmbassyResidenceclaim .Ethiopiahasappropriatelyconceded,withitsexpressionofregretatthehearing,thatEritreaisentitledtosatisfactionintheformofadeclarationoftheseriouswrongfulnessofEthiopia’sactionsinentering,ransacking,searchingandseizingEritrea’sEmbassyResidenceandseizingbothdiplomaticpropertyandtheAmbassador’spersonalproperty .

390 . ThemoredifficultquestioniswhetherEritreaisalsoentitledtomonetary compensation for these extremely serious �iolations of Eritrea’sdiplomaticpremisesandproperty .Ontheonehand,theCommissionfindsthatthequantume�idencepresentedissparse .OtherthantheAmbassador’stwowitnessstatements,Eritreapresentednoofficialorunofficialin�entoriesofeither thediplomaticorpri�ateproperty in theResidence;nopurchasereceipts;notestimonyotherthanafewgeneralstatementsinwitnessstate-mentssuchastheresidence“wasahugeplaceandthethingsinsidewere�eryexpensi�e”and“theAmbassador . . .hadagreattasteforartandagoodcol-lectionofantiquesandrelatedobjects .”Gi�enthenatureandmagnitudeoftheclaims,forexample,US$200,000worthofResidencefurnishingsinclud-ingimportedItalianandSwedishfurniture,andaUS$95,000pri�ateartcol-

85 ReportoftheInternationalLawCommissionontheWorkofitsFifty-ThirdSes-sion(theDraftArticlesonStateResponsibility),Apr .23-June1,2001andJuly2-Aug .10,2001,U .N .Doc .A/56/10,CommentarytoArticle37oftheInternationalLawCommis-sion’sDraftArticlesonStateResponsibility,2001,pp .105–107 .


lection,theCommissionwouldexpectatleastinsurancein�entories .EritreamadenoattempttoexplainorjustifytheUS$1,000,000claimedfor“premedi-tated”seizureinadditiontoallegedactuallosses .Ontheotherhand,theCom-missionappreciatesthatsuchdocumentation(atleastinpart)couldha�ebeenlostwiththeseizureoftheEmbassyResidence .TheCommissionalsoacceptsthattheResidencecompound,whichconsistedofthreebuildings,wouldha�econtainedasuitablecomplementofgo�ernment-pro�idedfurniture,electron-ics,appliancesand�ehicles,aswellastheAmbassador’spersonalbelongings .Therewerese�eralsupportingwitnessstatementsastotheextent,ifnotthe�alue,ofthefurnishings,�ehiclesandotherpropertyintheEmbassyResi-dencecompound .

391 . On balance, weighing the extreme seriousness of the �iolationagainstthepaucityofthe�aluatione�idenceforsuchlargeclaims,theCom-missiondeterminestoawardEritreaUS$155,000,whichisapproximately50%ofthetotalamountofUS$307,000claimedforthecontentsofthethreebuild-ingsintheEmbassyResidencecompoundandthree�ehicles .

392 . To summarize, the Commission awards Eritrea US$155,000 inmonetarycompensation for�iolationofEritrea’sdiplomaticpremisesandpropertyand,asappropriatesatisfaction,reiteratesitsliabilityfindingsanddeclaresthatEthiopia�iolatedtheViennaCon�entiononDiplomaticRelationsby(1)attemptingtosearchtheAmbassador’sperson,searchinghishandlug-gage,confiscatingpapersfromhisbriefcaseandinterferingwithhischeckedluggage,andalsobysearchingotherdepartingdiplomatsandtheirluggage,inthecourseoftheirdeparturefromtheAddisAbabaairportinMay1998,withoutregardtotheirdiplomaticimmunities,and(2)entering,ransacking,searchingandseizingtheEritreanEmbassyResidence,aswellasofficial�ehi-clesandotherproperty,withoutEritrea’sconsent .

Viii. indiVidual Claims393 . UnliketherestofEritrea’sclaims,whichwereclaimsonbehalf

ofEritreaitself,sixclaims,numbered27–32,werefiledbyEritreaonbehalfofnamedindi�iduals .Consequently,it isnecessaryfortheCommissiontoinformthePartiesoftheamountsofanydamagesitawardswithrespecttoeachoftheseclaims .

394 . Asageneralmatter,itshouldberecalledthat,initsPartialAwardinEritrea’sCi�iliansClaims,theCommissiondeterminedthetypesofclaimsbasedoninjurytoEritreanci�iliansforwhichEthiopiawasliable,and,inparagraph160ofthatAwarditheld:

ThisPartialAwardappliestoalloftheclaimsbeforeitintheseproceedings,includingClaims27–32 .TheCommission’sfindingsofliabilityapplyfullytothoseclaimstotheextentindicatedbytheirparticularfacts .Theapplica-tionoftheCommission’sfindingstothefactsofeachoftheseclaimswillbeassessedinthefuturedamagesphaseoftheseproceedings .


395 . Ha�ingexaminedthememorialsandsupportingdocumentationsubmittedbyEritreafordamagesinthesesixclaims,theCommissionmakesthefindingsbelow .

a. Claims 27 and 28, Hiwot nemariam and belay redda

396 . Thesetwoclaimsareconsideredtogether,astheyarebyhusbandandwifeandarebasedtoaconsiderableextentonpropertyjointlyownedbetweenthem .

397 . Theclaimof thehusband(Claim28),whoisnowdeceased, fordamagesfortheallegedlyunlawfuldepri�ationofhisEthiopiannationalitymust failbecausehewasadualnationalwhoclearlywas interrogatedanddeported by Ethiopian authorities for security reasons . Consequently, hisdepri�ationofEthiopiannationalitywasnotarbitraryandcontrarytointer-nationallaw .86Thesimilarclaimofthewife(Claim27),whowasalsoadualnational,wasslightlydifferentinthatsheassertedthat,abouttendaysafterherhusband’sdeportation,shewasarrestedbyse�enoreightEthiopianmili-taryofficersandtakentoakebeledetentioncenterwhereshewasdetainedandinterrogatedaboutherallegedin�ol�ementwiththeEritreango�ernmentand,afteraboutthreedays,wasdeportedtoEritreabybus,alongwithse�-entyothers .AlthoughnotassertedbyEritrea,thosedifferentcircumstancesmightindicatethatshewasdeportedbylocalauthorities,ratherthanbytheEthiopiango�ernmentandwithoutha�ingbeenfounddeportableforsecurityreasons,inwhiche�enttheresultingdepri�ationofherEthiopiannationalitywouldha�ebeenarbitraryandunlawfulpursuanttotheCommission’sear-lierholding .87Howe�er,thein�ol�ementofmilitaryofficers,theinterrogationaboutsecurityissues,andtheuseoffifteenbusesfordeportationwerefactsconsistentwiththein�ol�ementoftheEthiopiango�ernmentanditsscreen-ingprocess .Herclaimforarbitrarydepri�ationofherEthiopiannationalitythereforefailsforlackofproof .

398 . TheirclaimsfordamagesfortheirallegedlyunlawfulexpulsionfromEthiopiafailforthesamereason .88

399 . Theirclaimsfordamagesforunlawfulconditionsoftheirdeten-tionpendingexpulsionfailforthereasonsgi�eninthePartialAward .89

400 . InrecognitionthatthephysicalconditionsoftheirtransporttoEritreafailedtocomplywiththeinternationallawrequirementsofhumaneandsafetreatment,eachClaimantisawardedUS$100 .

86 PartialAwardinEritrea’sCi�iliansClaims,para .72 .87 Id.,para .78 .88 Id.,para .82 .89 Id.,para .110 .


401 . Theirclaimsfordamagesforlackofaccesstotheirbankaccountsaftertheendofthewararemeritorious .While,as indicatedinthePartialAward,90Statesin�ol�edinarmedconflictha�etherighttofreezeenemyassetswithintheirjurisdictionandpre�enttheirtransfertoanenemy,itremainstheirobligation,asindicatedinthatPartialAward,91toprotectsuchassetsforreturntotheirownersorotheragreeddisposition .Theseclaimantssubmittede�idenceoftheexistenceofsubstantialbankaccountssubsequenttotheendofthewarinDecember2000,aswellase�idenceofunsuccessful,post-warrequeststodrawonthoseaccounts .Thelatesttotalofthoseaccountsine�i-denceis455,322 .93birr,whichequalsUS$56,915atan8:1exchangerate .In�iewofEthiopia’sfailuretopermittheseclaimantstowithdrawthatamount,theCommissionawardsdamagesintheamountofUS$56,915toClaimants27and28jointly .

402 . Claimant28’sclaimfordamagesrelatingtothelossofhisin�est-mentintheHornInternationalBank,likeallsuchclaims,isdismissed .92

403 . Claimant28’sclaimfordamagesforfamilyseparationisdismissedforfailureofproof .93

404 . Claimant28’sdamageclaimwithrespect tohispensionisdis-missedforthereasonsgi�enintheCommission’sFinalAwardinEritrea’sPensionClaims .

405 . WithrespecttotheclaimsofthesetwoClaimantsfordamagesfortheunlawfuldepri�ationoftheirotherproperties,thee�idenceindicatedthatEthiopiauseditstaxcollectionprocessesinarbitrarywaysthatunlawfullycausedthelossoftheClaimants’drycleaningandlaundrybusiness .Conse-quently,Ethiopiaisliableforthatloss .94TheClaimantsassertedthatthe�alueofthatbusinesspropertywastwomillionbirr,orapproximatelyUS$250,000atan8:1exchangerate .TheCommissionfacestheproblemthatthis�aluation,likealloftheClaimants’property�aluations,wassubjecti�eandwasmadesubsequenttotheirexpulsion .Ne�ertheless,inlightofthee�idenceasawhole,theCommissioniscon�incedthattheClaimants’drycleaningandlaundrybusinesswasworthatleast50%ofthesubjecti�eestimate .Consequently,theCommissionawardscompensationintheamountofUS$125,000fordepri�a-tionofbusinesspropertytoClaimants27and28jointly .

406 . TheClaimants’otherpropertydamageclaimswereforpersonalproperty, includinga residence,householdgoodsand twomotor�ehicles,whichtheyestimatedhadatotal�alueof2,200,000birr,orapproximatelyUS$275,000 .Therewasadequatee�idenceoftheexistenceofthesepropertiesand,inlightofthee�idenceasawhole,theCommissioniscon�incedthat

90 Id.,para .146 .91 Id.,paras .151&152 .92 Id.,para .150 .93 Id.,para .157 .94 Id.,para .144anddispositif,SectionXIII .E .13 .


thesepropertieswereworthatleast50%ofthatsubjecti�eestimate .Conse-quently,theCommissionawardscompensationintheamountofUS$137,500forlossofotherpersonalpropertytoClaimants27and28jointly .

407 . In total, the Commission awards Claimants 27 and 28US$319,615 .

b. Claim 29, sertzu Gebre meskel408 . LikeClaimants27and28,Claimant29wasadualnationalwho

losthisEthiopiannationalityandwasexpelledtoEritreaforsecurityreasonspursuanttotheSIRAAsecurityprocess .UnlikeClaimant28,hiswifeisnotaclaimant,althoughheassertedthatshewasaco-ownerofsomeoftheprop-ertiesforwhichheclaimedandthatherclaimsshouldbeincludedwithhis .Howe�er,theStatementofClaim,whilesummarizinglossessufferedbytheClaimantandhiswife,explicitlynamedhimasthesoleclaimant .Inthosecircumstances,claimsbyhiswifecannotbeaddressedaspartofthisindi-�idualclaim .

409 . Claimant29’sclaimsfordamagesfortheallegedlyunlawfuldep-ri�ationofhisEthiopiannationalityandexpulsionfromEthiopiafailforthesamereasonsasthoseclaimsbyClaimants27and28 .

410 . Claimant29’sclaimfordamagesforunlawfulconditionsofdeten-tionpendingexpulsionfailsforthesamereasonsasthoseclaimsbyClaimants27and28 .

411 . Claimant29’sclaimfordamagesforunlawfulconditionsoftrans-portduringhisexpulsionfailsbecausethee�idenceindicatedthat,whilehefeltcrampedduringthreedaysofbustra�el,hespentonenightinahoteland,ingeneral,appearstoha�ehadbettertransportconditionsthanmostexpellees .

412 . Claimant29’sclaimfordamagesforinaccessiblebankaccountsfailsbecausethee�idenceshowedthatallwereaccountsheldbyhiswife .Thee�idenceandsubmissionsdidnotaddressorestablishwhethertheClaimantmightha�eanyrighttoaccessheraccountsunderEthiopianlaw .

413 . Claimant29’sclaimforlostin�estmentsintheHornInternationalBankfailsforthesamereasonsasthoseclaimsbyClaimants27and28 .

414 . Inseekingdamagesforlostproperty,Claimant29submittede�i-dencethat,priortohisexpulsion,hehadbeentheGeneralManagerofNileConstructionCo .inEthiopia,andheassertedthathewasthemajorityownerofthatcompanyatthetimeofhisexpulsion .Hiswifeassertedthatshewasaminorityownerofthecompanyanditsfinancialmanager .Claimant29indi-catedthatanotherrelati�e,whomhedidnotname,owned“afewshares .”Heestimatedthe�alueoftheassetsofNileConstructionCo .atthetimeofhisexpulsionasapproximatelyUS$7 .8million,withroughlyone-thirdofthattotalbeingforequipmentandmachinery,one-thirdforimmo�ableassets,andone-thirdforaccountsrecei�able .Insupportofthisclaim,hesubmittedtrans-


lateddocumentslistingtheequipmentownedbyNileConstructionCo .anddocumentsindicatingcontractualbusinesswithanEthiopianhospital .Se�eralotherdocumentswerealsosubmittedrele�anttose�eralothercompaniesthatClaimant29assertedwereowned,inwholeorinpart,byhimandhiswife .

415 . Othere�idencefurnishedbyClaimant29indicatedthatthehead-quartersofNileConstructionCo .subsequentlyweretakeno�erbyanEthio-pianbankthathadmadealoantothecompany,thatthebuildinghadbeen�aluedatapproximatelyone-thirdofthe�alueascribedtoimmo�ableprop-ertiesbyClaimant29,andthatthebalanceofthatnew�aluelesstheunpaidbalanceoftheloanhadbeenputintoabankaccountintheClaimant’sname,whichheassertedheisunabletoaccess .ClaimsforsuchrestrictedaccountsweredismissedbytheCommissioninthePartialAward .95

416 . WhileClaimant29pro�idedmoree�idencethantheotherindi�id-ualclaimantsastoboththenatureandthe�aluesofpropertyleftinEthiopia,thefactremainsthatthe�aluesassertedwereproposedsolelybytheClaimanthimself .Howe�er,bylistingtheassetsofNileConstructionCo .,theClaimantdidshowthatitwasasubstantialandprofitablebusiness .Heestimatedthe�alueofthatcompanyatnearly55millionbirr .Healsoclaimedforhisresi-denceandhouseholdgoods,whichheestimatedtobeworth2,750,000birr .

417 . TheClaimantfailedtopro�etheextentofhisownershipinterestsinalloftheclaimedproperties .Heappearedtoclaimforwhate�erwasownedbyeitherhiswifeorhimself .Hecannotdothat,ashiswife,whoapparentlyhandledthefinancesforherhusband,isnotaclaimantonwhosebehalfEritreahaspresentedaclaim .Anyclaimsforhiswifeoranyoneelse,iftheyotherwisemeetthejurisdictionalrequirements,maybeconsideredclaimsbyEritrea,butnotclaimsonbehalfofthisindi�idualClaimant .Howe�er,itappearedundisputedthattheClaimantownedatleasthalfofNileConstructionCo .,forwhichheshouldbeentitledtoclaim .Althoughlackingobjecti�ee�idenceofthat�alue,asidefromthelistofequipmentandsuppliespro�idedbytheClaimantandthebank’sindicationofalower�alue,theCommissionisne�er-thelesssatisfiedfromthee�idenceasawholethatitwasanentityofsubstantial�alue .Consequently,theCommissionawardsClaimant29compensationintheamountofUS$1,500,000forlossofhisinterestinNileConstructionCo .

418 . TheremainingclaimsfordamagesforpropertylossbyClaimant29aredismissedforfailureofproof .

C. Claim 30, fekadu andemeskal419 . LikeClaimant29,Claimant30wasadualnationalwholosthis

EthiopiannationalityandwasexpelledtoEritreaforsecurityreasonspursuanttotheSIRAAprocess .Also,likeClaimant29,hebroughtclaimsforpropertiesthatbelongedpartlytohiswife,whoisnotaclaimant .

95 Id.,paras .145&146 .


420 . Claimant30’sclaimsfordamagesfortheallegedlyunlawfuldep-ri�ationofhisEthiopiannationalityandexpulsionfromEthiopiafailforthesamereasonsasthoseclaimsbyClaimant’s27and28 .

421 . Claimant30’sclaimfordamagesforunlawfulconditionsofdeten-tionpendingexpulsionfailsforthesamereasonsasthoseclaimsbyClaimants27and28 .

422 . Claimant30’sclaimfordamagesforunlawfulconditionsoftrans-portduringhisexpulsionfailsforfailureofproof .WhileEritreaallegedsuchconditions,Claimant30statedonlythathewasdeportedbybusandmadenocomplaintabouttheconditions .

423 . Claimant30’sclaimforlackofaccesstohisbankaccountsfailsbecausethee�idencesubmittedindicatedthataccesswaspermittedtothoseaccounts—andtheywereemptied—bya formeremployeeof theClaimantwhose claim to ha�e been authorized by the Claimant to such access wasacceptedinAugust1998bythebank .Claimant30didassertthathedidnotsigntheauthorizationforthatindi�idual,whichwasdatednearlytwomonthsafterhisexpulsionandacopyofwhichwaslatersenttohimbytheCom-mercialBankofEthiopia .TheCommission,howe�er,isnotinapositiontodeterminethe�alidityunderEthiopianlawofthatallegedauthorization,but,ifitwasin�alid,theClaimantwasthe�ictimofafraudforwhichEthiopiaisnotresponsiblehere .

424 . Claimant30’slostpropertyclaim,otherthanbankaccounts,co�-eredpropertiesjointlyownedwithhiswife,whichallegedlyincludeda�ideoshop,threephotoshops,twohouses,cars,musicalinstrumentsandhouseholdgoods,withatotalestimated�alueofUS$3,750,000–$4,000,000 .AsClaimant30’swifeisnotaclaimantand,astheextentofherownershipoftheclaimedpropertiesisunknown,theCommissionfacesdifficultyindeterminingwhatpercentageofanytotaldamageawardwouldproperlybeowedtotheClaim-ant .Greaterdifficulty,howe�er,arisesfromthealmostcompletelackofe�i-dencefromwhichactualdamagescanreasonablybeassessedbytheCommis-sion .Neitherthenetincome,ifany,actuallyobtainedfromthefourshops,northe�alueoftheirfurnishings,equipmentandsupplies,wasindicated,letalonesupportedbye�idence .WhethertheshopswererentedorownedbytheClaimantwasnotindicated .Instead,Claimant30simplyproposedasubjec-ti�eproperty�aluationofUS$750,000foreachof theshops .Similarly, the�aluesascribedtotheotherpropertieswerenotsupportedbye�idenceoftheiracquisitioncost,market�alueorotherindicia .

425 . WhiletheCommissiondoesnotdoubtthattheClaimant’slawfulexpulsionfromEthiopiacausedhimfinanciallosses,itcannotholdEthiopialiabletopayhimanarbitraryamountofdamagestheextentofwhichisutterlyunsupportedbye�idence .Consequently,Claimant30’sclaimforcompensa-tionforpropertylossisdismissedforfailureofproof .


d. Claim 31, mebrahtu Gebremedhin

426 . Claimant31’ssituationissomewhatdifferentfromtheotherindi-�idualclaimants inthatheandhiswife(whoisnotaclaimant)weredualnationalswhowerenotexpelled .TheywereU .S .permanentresidentswhowere�isitingEthiopia,andattheairportlea�ing�oluntarily,whentheyweredetainedand interrogatedandhad theirEthiopiannationality re�oked . ItseemsclearthattheyweretoldbyEthiopianofficialsthattheywouldha�ebeenarrestedandexpelledtoEritrealikeotherdualnationalswithsimilarbackgroundsiftheyhadnothadU .S .permanentresidencecardsandticketsforaflightoutofEthiopia .TheyhadtheirEthiopianpassportsconfiscated,andtheywereinformedthattheycouldnotreturntoEthiopia .

427 . Claimant31’sclaimsfordamagesfortheallegedlyunlawfuldep-ri�ationofhisEthiopiannationalityandexpulsionfromEthiopiafailsforthesamereasonsasthoseclaimsbyClaimants27and28 .

428 . Claimant31’sclaimforapproximately40,000birr,whichheassert-edwereintwobankaccounts,oneinhisnameandoneinhiswife’sname,werenotsupportedbydocumentarye�idence,buthisassertionsweresufficientlyconsistentandcredibletopermittheCommissiontoawardhimUS$2,500forhisbankaccountclaim .

429 . Withrespecttolossofpropertyotherthanbankaccounts,Claim-ant31claimed forahouse thathehadrentedout,onecarandhouseholdgoods,withanestimatedtotal�alueofUS$75,000 .Heacknowledgedthathiswifewasco-ownerofthehouseandcar .Thee�idenceshowedthatthehousewassealedandputupforsalebyEthiopia .TheClaimantacknowledgedthathedidnotknowwhetherthehousewassoldorwhathappenedtothecarandhouseholdeffects .Onthebasisofthee�idenceasawhole,theCommissioniscon�incedthatthesepropertieswereworthatleast50%ofthesubjecti�eestimate .Consequently,in�iewofhishalfownershipofthem,itawardstheClaimantUS$18,750 .

430 . Intotal,theCommissionawardsClaimant31US$21,250 .

e. Claim 32, mebrat Gebreamlak

431 . Claimant32claimedasasur�i�ingwidowonherownbehalfandonbehalfofherlatehusband,whodiedonOctober23,2001 .TheClaimantsubmittedanEritreanjudicialdecreedeclaringherrightsofinheritanceofhisproperties,whichtheCommissionaccepts .Howe�er,theCommissiondoesnotacceptherrighttoclaimforpersonalinjuriesallegedlysufferedbyherlatehusband .AsneitherEritreanorClaimant32assertedotherwise,theCommis-sionassumesthatsheandherhusbandweredualnationals .Hewasarrested,depri�edofhisEthiopiannationality,andexpelledfromEthiopiaforsecurityreasons .Claimant32andherchildrenleftEthiopiasoonthereafterbyairto


Djibouti,becauseshehadbeentoldbyofficialsthatshewouldsoonbeexpelledlikeherhusbandandthatsheshouldsellherproperty .

432 . Claimant32’sclaimsfordamagesfortheallegedlyunlawfuldep-ri�ationofherEthiopiannationalityandexpulsionfromEthiopiafailbecausesheleftEthiopia�oluntarily,albeitafterthreatsofexpulsion .96

433 . The claim for damages for inaccessible bank accounts is meri-torious, although the e�idence was unclear as to the amounts in�ol�ed .TheCommission is satisfied that at least800,000birr is in threepersonalaccounts .Applyingan8:1exchangerate,theCommissionawardsClaimant32US$100,000forinaccessiblebankaccounts .

434 . Claimant32’slostpropertyclaim,otherthanforbankaccounts,co�eredtheassetsoftheFeruthInternationalTradingCompany,whichtheClaimantandherhusbande�identlyformedin1983,aswellascertainper-sonalproperty .Theystatedthat,together,theyowned100%ofFeruth,whichapparentlyimportedtruckpartsandwasoneofthebiggestexportersofci�et,aperfumefixingagent .Theyalsoclaimedpartialownershipsinse�eraloth-erEthiopiancompanies .Beforehedied,theClaimant’shusbandestimatedthe�alueoftheirassetsasfollows:Feruth,approximatelyUS$250,000;their45%interestinLionTra�elandTourSafaris,approximatelyUS$96,000;andotherproperty,approximatelyUS$45,000 .TheClaimantstatedthatshehadauthorizedanagentinEthiopiatoselloneoftheirtwocars,buthadnotheardwhetherthathadhappened .

435 . WhileitseemsclearthatClaimant32hadtherighttoclaimdam-ageswithrespecttoallpropertyinEthiopiaownedbyeitherherorherlatehusband,theCommissionisne�erthelessleftwiththeproblemthatthe�alua-tionswereallsubjecti�eonesmadebyherlatehusbandafterhisexpulsion .TheCommissionconcludesthatthee�idencewasinsufficienttojustifyanawardofdamageswithrespecttoallbutoneoftheseproperties .TheexceptionistheclaimforlossoftheassetsoftheFeruthInternationalTradingCompany,whichwaswholly-ownedbytheClaimantandherhusband .TheCommissioniscon�incedthattheassetsofthatcompanywereworthatleast50%ofthesubjecti�eestimate .Consequently,theCommissionawardsClaimant32com-pensationofUS$125,000forthelostinterestinthatcompany .

436 . Intotal,theCommissionawardsClaimant32US$225,000 .

96 Id.,paras .73,94&95 .


iX. aWardTheCommissionawardsEritreathefollowingcompensationforEthio-

pia’s�iolationsofthejus in bello:1 . US$13,500,000forlossesofresidentialandbusinesspropertyontheCen-

tralandWesternFrontsinSerha,Senafe,Teseney,Alighidir,Guluj,Tabal-dia,Gergef,Omhajer,BarentuandTokombia,andMolkiSub-Zoba;

2 . US$35,965,000fordamagetoanddestructionofbuildingsontheCentralandWesternFrontsinSerha,Senafe,Teseney,Alighidir,Guluj,Tabaldia,Gergef,Omhajer,BarentuandTokombia,andMolkiSub-Zoba;

3 . US$1,500,000inrespectofinjuriestoci�iliansduetolossofaccesstohealthcareonaccountofdamagetoordestructionofEritreanhospitalsandothermedicalfacilitiesandlossofmedicalsupplies;

4 . US$100,000fordamagetoculturalproperty,specificallyUS$50,000fordamagetotheStelaofMataraandUS$50,000fordamagetotheTseronaPatriotsCemetery;

5 . US$4,000,000formistreatmentofprisonersofwar;6 . US$2,000,000forfailingtopre�enttherapeofknownandunknown�ic-

timsinthetownsofSenafe,BarentuandTeseney;7 . US$1,550,000forforcibleexpulsionofthepopulationofAwgaro;8 . US$50,000inrespectoftheunknown,butapparentlysmall,numberof

dualEritrean-Ethiopiannationalswhowerearbitrarilydepri�edoftheirEthiopiannationalitywhilepresentinthirdcountries;

9 . US$15,000,000inrespectofthewrongfulexpulsionofanunknown,butconsiderable,numberofdualnationalsbylocalEthiopianauthorities;

10 . US$11,000,000forrecei�ing,caringforandresettlingruralEthiopiannationalswrongfullyexpelledfromEthiopia;

11 . US$2,000,000forfailuretopro�idehumaneandsafetreatmentforper-sonsbeingexpelledfromEthiopia;

12 . US$46,000,000forexpellees’lossesofpropertyonaccountofEthiopia’swrongfulactions;

13 . US$24,525,000forEthiopia’s failuretoreturnorpro�idecompensationafterthewarfor�ehiclesitrequisitionedfromnon-residentEritreans;

14 . US$1,500,000forotherpropertylossesofnon-residentEritreans;15 . US$2,600,000forimprisoningEritreanci�iliansonsecuritychargesor

detainingthemforunknownreasons,underharshandunacceptablecon-ditions;and

16 . US$155,000for�iolationofEritrea’sdiplomaticpremisesandproperty;


17 . Asdeterminedattheliabilityphase,theCommissionconsidersitsfind-ingthatEthiopiaunlawfullydepri�eddualEritrean-EthiopiannationalsoftheirEthiopiannationalitytobeappropriatereparationforthe�iolation .

18 . Asdeterminedattheliabilityphase,theCommissionconsidersitsfind-ingthatEthiopiaunlawfullyinterferedwithEritrea’sdepartingdiplomatstobeappropriatereparationforthe�iolation .

19 . AllofEritrea’sotherclaimsonitsownbehalfaredismissed .20 . ForclaimsfiledbyEritreaonbehalfofnamedindi�iduals,theCommis-

sionawardsthefollowingamounts:a . US$319,615forHiwotNemariamandBelayRedda,forfailureto

pro�idehumaneandsafetreatmentintransportfromEthiopia,lackofaccesstobankaccounts,andunlawfuldepri�ationofproperty;

b . US$1,500,000forSertzuGebreMeskel,forunlawfuldepri�ationofproperty;

c . US$21,250forMebrahtuGebremedhin,forlackofaccesstobankac-countsandunlawfuldepri�ationofproperty;and

d .US$225,000forMebratGebreamlak,forlackofaccesstobankac-countsandunlawfuldepri�ationofproperty .

e . TheclaimofFekaduAndremeskalisdismissed .21 . Inaddition to theawardofsatisfaction toEritrea forallof theCom-

mission’s liabilityfindings, thetotalmonetarycompensationawardedtoEritreainrespectof itsownclaimsisUS$161,455,000 .Theamountawardedinrespectofclaimspresentedonbehalfofindi�idualclaimantsisUS$2,065,865 .Attheconclusionoftheselengthyproceedingsandtheissuanceofthis

FinalAward,andtheparallelFinalAwardinEthiopia’sclaimsagainstErit-rea,theCommissionreiteratesitsconfidencethatthePartieswillensurethatthecompensationawardedwillbepaidpromptly,andthatfundsrecei�edinrespectoftheirclaimswillbeusedtopro�iderelieftotheirci�ilianpopula-tionsinjuredinthewar .

[Signed]PresidentHansvanHoutte

[Signed]GeorgeH .Aldrich

[Signed]JohnR .Crook

[Signed]JamesC .N .Paul

[Signed]LucyReed

reports of international arbitral awards recueil des...

Documents