reports of international arbitral awards recueil des...

REPORTS OF INTERNATIONALARBITRAL AWARDS

RECUEIL DES SENTENCESARBITRALES

Eritrea-Ethiopia Claims Commission - Statement by the Eritrea-Ethiopia Boundary Commission with Annex (List of Boundary Points and Coordinates)

27 November 2006

XXVI pp. 771-799VOLUME

NATIONS UNIES - UNITED NATIONSCopyright (c) 2009

ParT XiX

Statement by the Eritrea-Ethiopia Boundary Commission with Annex (List of Boundary Points and Coordinates)

27 November 2006

Déclaration de la Commission de délimitation des frontières entre l’Érythrée et l’Éthiopie avec Annexe (Liste

des points de la frontière et des coordonnées)

27 novembre 2006

Eritrea-ethiopiaBoundaryCommissionStatementbytheCommissionof27November2006

Commissiondedélimitationdesfrontièresentrel’Érythréeetl’Éthiopie

DéclarationdelaCommissionendatedu27novembre2006

CommissionestablishedpursuanttotheAlgiersAgreementof12December2000betweenEthiopiaandEritrea .ThetermsoftheAgreement,anditsobjectandpurpose,precludelea�ingtheboundarybetweenEritreaandEthiopiaundemarcatedforalongperiodorindefinitely .

Commissionlacksauthorityto�arydelimitedboundarylineasprescribedintheDelimitationDecisionof13April2002exceptincasesof“manifestimpracticability” .

TheapproachoftheCommissiontoitsmandateasrequiringtoactuallyemplacepillarsattheboundarypointsassumedthatthenecessarycooperationofthePartieswouldbeforthcomingandthattheUnitedNationsMissioninEthiopiaandEritreawouldnotbepre�entedfrompro�idingessentialassistance .

TheAlgiersAgreementisaconstitutionalinstrumentcreatinganinternationalinstitutionandconferringuponitfunctionsandpowers .Itsinterpretationmustbeapproachedinthesamewayastheconstituentinstrumentsofinternationalorgani-sations,thatis,bywayoftheconceptofinstitutional“effecti�eness” .E�enthoughago�erningtextmaynotexplicitlyempoweranorganisationtoactinaparticularman-ner,internationallawauthorizes,indeedrequirestheorganisation,ifnecessaryfortheeffecti�edischargeofitsfunctions,tointerpretitsproceduresinaconstructi�emannerdirectedtowardsachie�ingtheobjecti�ethePartiesaredeemedtoha�ehadinmind .Thesameistrueofinternationaljudicialorgans,asfoundbytheInternationalCourtofJustice(ICJ)intheTerritorial Dispute(Libyan Arab Jamahiriya/Chad)case .

Themanifestobjecti�eoftheAlgiersAgreementwastobringtheborderdisputetoanendattheearliestpossibledatebymeansoftheidentificationofaboundaryestablishedbytheprescribedcolonialtreatiesandapplicableinternationallawwithasmuchprecisionascouldbeachie�edwithoutdecidingex aequo et bono .

ThefactthattheCommissionbeganitsdemarcationacti�ityinonemannerdoesnotmeanthatitisprecludedfromfollowinganothercoursewhenconfrontedbythelackofnecessarycooperationbytheParties .TheCommissionconsideredthatthemostpracticalwayinwhichitcouldperformitsmandatewastopro�idetothePartieswithalistofboundarypointsidentifiedbymoderntechniquesofimageprocessingandterrainmodelling .

Theconsistencyoftheterm“demarcation”withthismethodissupportedbytheUnitedNationsSecretary-GeneralandtheUnitedNationsSecurityCouncil intheprocessofdemarcationoftheIraq-Kuwaitborderin1993 .ItisfurtheraffirmedbythemannerinwhichtheUnitedNationsCon�entionontheLawoftheSeadealswiththelimitsofmaritimeclaimsbyStates .

774 ERITREA/ETHIOPIA

ProposalbytheCommissionthattheParties,o�erthefollowingtwel�emonths,terminatingattheendofNo�ember2007,considertheirpositionsandseektoreachagreementontheemplacementofpillars .IfthePartiesha�enotreachedtheneces-saryagreementandproceededsignificantlytoimplementit,orha�enotrequestedandenabledtheCommissiontoresumeitsacti�ity,bytheendofthatperiod,theboundarywouldautomaticallystandasdemarcatedbytheboundarypointslistedintheAnnex,andthemandateoftheCommissioncouldberegardedasfulfilled .

LaCommissionaétéétablieconformémentàl’Accordd’Algerdu12décembre2000,concluentrel’Éthiopieetl’Érythrée .Lesdispositionsdel’Accord,sonobjetetsonbut,nepermettentpasdelaisserlafrontièreentrel’Érythréeetl’Éthiopienondélimitée,quecelasoitpourunelonguepériodeouindéfiniment .

ConformémentàlaDécisiondedélimitationdu13a�ril2002,laCommissionn’apaslacompétencepourmodifierunelignefrontalièredélimitée,àl’exceptiondescasd’«impraticabilitémanifeste» .

L’approchequelaCommissionaadoptée�is-à-�isdesonmandat,impliquantleplacementdepiliersauxpointsdefrontière,supposaitquelesPartiessoientdisposéesàcoopérerdanslamesuredunécessaireetquelaMissiondesNationsUniesenÉthiopieetenÉrythréenesoitpasempêchéedefourniruneassistanceessentielle .

L’Accordd’Algerestuninstrumentconstitutionnelquicréeuneinstitutioninter-nationaleetconfèrefonctionsetpou�oirsàcettedernière .Ildoitêtreprocédéàsoninterprétationdelamêmemanièrequepourlesinstrumentsconstitutifsdesorgani-sationsinternationales,c’est-à-dire,selonleconceptdel’«effecti�ité»institutionnelle .Mêmes’ilsepeutqueletextequirégituneorganisationneluidonnepasexplicite-mentlemandatd’agird’unecertainefaçon,ledroitinternationalautorise,oumêmeexigede l’organisation,s’ils’a�èreessentielà l’exécutioneffecti�edeses fonctions,d’interprétersesprocéduresd’unemanièreconstructi�eafind’atteindrelesobjectifsauxquelslesPartiesontsupposémentpensé .Cecis’appliqueégalementauxorganesjudiciairesinternationaux,telquereconnuparlaCourInternationaledeJusticedansl’Affairedudifférendterritorial(Jamahiriya arabe libyenne/Tchad) .

L’objectifmanifestedel’Accordd’Algerétaitdemettrefinaudifférendfrontalier,leplusrapidementpossible,parl’identificationd’unefrontièreétablieparlestraitéscoloniauxpertinentsetledroitinternationalapplicable,etcecia�ecautantdeprécisionqu’ilestpossibled’atteindresansa�oirrecoursàunedécisionex aequo et bono .

LefaitquelaCommissionait,d’unecertainemanière,commencésonacti�itédedémarcationnesignifieenaucuncasqu’ellenepuisseemprunteruneautre�oielorsqu’elleestconfrontéeàunmanquedecoopérationdelapartdesparties .LaCom-missionaconsidéréquelamanièrelapluspratiqued’exécutersonmandatétaitdefournirauxpartiesunelistedepointsdefrontièreidentifiéspardestechniquesmod-ernesdetraitementd’imageetdemodélisationduterrain .

Laconsistanceduterme«démarcation»a�eccetteméthodeaétésoutenueparleSecrétairegénéraletleConseildesécuritédesNationsUniesdansleprocédédedémarcationdelafrontièreentrel’IraqetleKoweïten1993 .Ceciaégalementétécon-firméparlamanièredontlaCon�entiondesNationsUniessurledroitdelamerrègleleslimitesdesréclamationsdesEtatsrelati�esauxfrontièresmaritimes .

PartXIX—Statementof27November2006 Eritrea-EthiopiaBoundaryCommission 775

LaCommissionaproposéquelesParties,pendantlesdouzemoisàsui�re,etcejusqu’àlafindumoisdeno�embre2007,considèrentleurspositionsets’efforcentdepar�eniràunaccordsurl’emplacementdespiliers .Si,àl’expirationdelapériodementionnée,lesPartiesn’ontpasconclul’accordnécessaire,niprocédéàsonapplica-tioneffecti�e,ousiellesn’ontpasdemandéetpermisàlaCommissiondereprendresonacti�ité,letracédelafrontièrecorrespondraitautomatiquementauxpointsdefrontièreénumérésdansl’Annexe,etlemandatdelaCommissionpourraitainsiêtreconsidérécommeaccompli .

1 . ThisStatementisissuedbytheEritrea-EthiopiaBoundaryCommission(“theCommission”)followingitsmeetinginpri�atesessioninTheHagueon20No�ember2006toconsiderthefurtherprocedurestobefollowedinconnectionwiththedemarcationoftheboundarybetweenEritreaandEthiopia .In�itationstothePartieswereissuedbye-mailon8No�ember2006 .BothPartiesdeclinedtheCommission’sin�itation .Partofthemeetingwasattendedbyrepresentati�esofthefollowingWitnessestotheAlgiersAgreementof12December2000:theSecretary-GeneraloftheUnitedNations,theEuropeanUnion,theUnitedStatesofAmericaandthePeople’sDemocraticRepublicofAlgeria .

2 . BytheAlgiersAgreement,thePartiesestablishedtheCommissiontodelimitanddemarcatetheborderbetweenthemonthebasisofthepertinentcolonialtreatiesandapplicableinternationallaw .ThePartiesstipulatedthat“thedelimitationanddemarcationdeterminationsoftheCommissionshallbefinalandbinding”andagreedthat“eachPartyshallrespectthebordersodetermined,aswellastheterritorialintegrityandso�ereigntyoftheotherParty” .

3 . ThePartiese�identlyconsideredthecompletionofthetaskofdelimi-tationasurgent,becausetheypro�idedinArticle4(12)oftheAgreementthatthedelimitationshouldbecompletedwithinsixmonthsofthefirstmeetingoftheCommission .TheCommissionrecognisedthatasimilarsenseofurgencyattachedtothedemarcationprocess;Article4(13)oftheAlgiersAgreementcalledupontheCommissiontoarrangefor“expeditiousdemarcation” .ThetermsoftheAlgiersAgreement,anditsobjectandpurpose,precludelea�ingtheboundaryundemarcatedforaprolongedperiodorindefinitely .1

4 . Theconstitutionof theCommissionwascompletedon20Febru-ary2001andtheCommissionimmediatelyentereduponitstask .Afterthereceiptandstudyofsubstantialwrittenpleadings,andha�ingheardtheoral

1 TheCommissionrecallstheobser�ationoftheCourtofArbitrationintheBeagle Channelcase–albeitinasomewhatdifferentcontext:“Itisnotadmissiblethat,becauseofthetotalnon-cooperationofoneoftheParties,contrarytoitsobligationundera�alidAward,theCourtshouldbecompelledtoremainindefinitelyinexistenceinastateofsuspendedanimation” .(See52International Law Reports284 .)Thepresentcaseisnotonein�ol�ingthetotalnon-cooperationofoneParty,butratherthenon-cooperationofbothParties,thoughindifferingwaysanddegrees .Thus,theobser�ationoftheBeagle Channeltribunalappliesa fortiori .


argumentsoftheParties,theCommissiondeli�eredtheDelimitationDecisionof13April2002 .Thisidentifiedtheprincipalfeaturesoftheboundaryline,accompaniedbyalistofcoordinatesidentifyingthepointsthroughwhichtheboundaryruns .WhentheDelimitationDecisionwasrendered,bothPar-tiespromptlyannouncedtheiracceptanceofit .Thereupon,theCommissionundertookthestepsnecessarytoinitiatetheprocessofdemarcation .

5 . On8July2002,inaccordancewithArticle30(1)ofitsRulesofProce-dure,theCommissionpromulgatedtheDemarcationDirections .Thesewerere�isedinNo�ember2002andinMarchandJuly2003 .InimplementationoftheirobligationsundertheseDirections,thePartiesappointedLiaisonRep-resentati�esandFieldLiaisonOfficerstofacilitatetheparticipationbyeachPartyinidentifyingsitesfortheemplacementofboundarypillars .TheCom-missionestablisheditsFieldOfficesinAsmaraandAddisAbabainNo�ember2001andinAdigratinJuly2002 .ItalsoappointedaChiefSur�eyorinOcto-ber2001andaSpecialConsultantinMay2002topro�idetechnicalad�iceandassistancetotheCommission .TheChiefSur�eyortookupresidenceinAsmaraon15No�ember2001 .Sur�eyingstaffwererecruitedtoassisthim .

6 . Initially, it was en�isaged by the Commission, as reflected in theDemarcationDirectionsof8July2002,thatthetaskofdemarcationwouldentailtheemplacementofpillarsasmarkersofthelineoftheboundaryspeci-fiedintheDelimitationDecision .Onthisbasis,theDemarcationInstructionswereissuedon21Marchand22August2003 .Stepsweretakentowardsthenegotiationofcontractsfortheconstructionandemplacementofpillars .

7 . On24January2003,inresponsetoarequestbytheCommissionforcommentsonthedraft1:25,000maps,Ethiopiafiledamemorandumsettingoutatlengthits�iewsontheprocessofdemarcation .Itemphasisedthenecessityofconductingthedemarcationinamannerthattakesintoconsiderationthehumanandphysicalgeographythroughthestudyofthefactsontheground .2Itcontendedthat,intheprocessofdemarcation,alterationsoradjustmentsofthedelimitedboundaryshouldbemadesoasprincipallytoeliminatethosesituationsinwhich�illagesweredi�idedorroadswerecutbytheboundary .TheCommissionlaterruledthatmostofthesecontentionswereinadmissible .Eritrea,foritspart,insistedthatthelinedescribedintheDelimitationDecisionshouldbeappliedwithoutanychange .Inparagraph20ofthe“Obser�ations”whichtheCommissioncon�eyedtothePartieson21March2003,theCommis-sionstatedits�iewthat,intheabsenceofexpressauthorisationbytheParties,itlackedtheauthorityto�arythedelimitedboundarylineexceptincasesof“manifestimpracticability” .ItalsoindicatedthatthedescriptionofcertainpartsoftheboundaryintheDispositifoftheDelimitationDecisionwouldneedtobecompletedwhen,asforeseeninthatDecision,theCommissionhadrecei�ed

2 Submissionby theFederalDemocraticRepublicofEthiopia,24 January2003,CommentsPursuanttotheDecember2000Agreement,theCommission’sRulesofProce-dure,theCommission’sDemarcationDirectionsandInstructionspro�idedattheBound-aryCommission’sMeetingon6and7No�ember2002,p .61-74 .


necessaryinformationfromtheSpecialConsultantandtheChiefSur�eyor,inparticularinrelationtoTserona,ZalambessaandBure .

8 . Onthebasisofthecolonialtreaties,theapplicationofwhichwasprescribedintheAlgiersAgreement,thedemarcationoftheboundarywasapproachedinthreesectors(Western,CentralandEastern),ashadbeenthedelimitation .DemarcationbeganintheEasternSectorinMarch2003andthelocationofpillarswasestablishedthroughfieldassessmentwiththecoopera-tionofbothPartiesbyAugust2003 .AsetofmarkedmapsshowingproposedboundarypillarsitesinthisSectorwassenttothePartiesforcomment .EritreaacceptedthesemarkedmapsoftheEasternSectorbutEthiopiadidnotrespond .AsthefailureofaPartytoparticipatecouldnotpre�enttheCommissionfromperformingitsfunction,aftertheexpiryoftheperiodwhichtheCommis-sionga�etothePartiesforcommentonthesemapstheCommissionadoptedspecificboundarypointsthatcouldser�easlocationsfortheemplacementofpillarsinthatSector .TheselocationsextendedfromtheDjiboutiborderintheeasttotheSaltLakeinthenorth-west .SomeoftheselocationsdepartedfromtheboundarylineasprescribedintheDelimitationDecision .Thepossibilityofsuch�ariationwasforeseeninthe1908TreatyrelatingtotheEasternSec-tor(aloneamongthethreetreatieswithsuchapermissi�epro�ision)andwasnecessaryin�iewoftheexceptionalnatureoftheterrain .Despitethese�aria-tions,eachPartystillendedupineffectwiththesameamountofterritoryashadbeenawardedtoitbytheDelimitationDecision .

9 . TheCommissionencountereddifficultiesthatwereposedbythePar-tieswhenitwasabouttocommencedemarcationintheCentralandWesternSectors .AlthoughEthiopiaagreedthattheCommissioncouldcontinuewithpillaremplacementintheEasternSector,itwasnotpreparedtoallowdemar-cationtobeginintheCentralandWesternSectors .EritreawouldnotagreetopillaremplacementintheEasternSectorunlessdemarcationworkwasbegunsimultaneouslyintheCentralandWesternSectors .

10 . Moreparticularly,theobstaclesfromtheEthiopiansidetook�ari-ousforms:prohibitingfield-workwithintheterritoryunderitscontrol,thusimpedingthesur�eyofgroundcontrolpointsfortheaerialphotographyandthesecondarydatumsur�ey(ApriltoJuly2002);filingextensi�ecommentsontheDelimitationDecision,amountingtoanattempttoreopenelementsofthesubstanceofthatDecision,insteadoflimitingitselftotherequestedcommentsonthedraft1:25,000maps(January2003);allegingthattheFieldLiaisonOfficersappointedbyEritreawereintelligenceofficersandrefusingtoallowfieldworktocontinueinEthiopianterritory,thenfailingtoappointadhocFieldLiaisonOfficerswithintheprescribedtimelimitfollowingtheCom-mission’sOrderof9February2003soastoallowfieldworktoresumewithoutfurtherdelay(JanuarytoFebruary2003);failingtoappointnewFieldLiaisonOfficersfortheremainingdemarcationacti�itiesfollowingtheCommission’sDecisionpursuanttoArticle15BoftheDemarcationDirections(July2003toMarch2006);failingtopro�ideassurancesforthesecurityofalldemarcation


personnel(August2003tothepresent);failingtocommentonmapswhichindicatedthepillarlocationsintheEasternSector(September2003);repeat-edlyrefusingtoauthorisenecessaryflightrequestslodgedbytheChiefSur-�eyor;e�entuallylimitingtheCommission’sfieldworktotheEasternSectorbystatementsthattheadhocFieldLiaisonOfficerswouldonlybepermittedtooperateintheEasternSector;complainingtotheSecretary-GeneraloftheUnitedNationsofwhatEthiopiatermed“illegal,unjustandirresponsibledeci-sions”oftheCommissioninrespectofBadmeandpartsoftheCentralSector,andproposingthattheSecurityCouncilsetupan5alternati�emechanismtodemarcatethepartsoftheboundaryitcontested(September2003);denounc-inginthatsamelettertheCommission’sDelimitationDecisionbystatingthatitwouldonlyrecognisethesouthernboundaryof theTemporarySecurityZone(“TSZ”)astheinternationalboundary;failingtopro�ideassurancesforthesecurityofthecontractorsselectedfortheemplacementandas-builtsur-�eyoftheboundarypillars(SeptembertoOctober2003);rejectingtheCom-mission’sin�itationtoattendameetingon5No�ember2003,claimingthatthenoticewastooshortandthattherewasnolikelihoodofanythingbeingachie�ed(October2003);refusingtopermitanyworktobecarriedoutbytheCommission’sfieldstaffintheWesternandCentralSectorsuntiltheboundaryintheEasternSectorhadbeendemarcatedandsubjecttoEthiopia’sappro�aloftheCommission’smethodofdemarcation(No�ember2003);failingtomakepromptpaymentofitsshareoftheCommission’sexpenses(February2004toFebruary2005);rejectingtheCommission’sin�itationtoameetingtobeheldon22February2005onthegroundthatthemeetingwaspremature,wouldbeunproducti�eandcouldha�eanad�erseimpactonthedemarcationprocess,asaresultofwhichtheCommissionwasobligedtocancelthemeeting(February2005);failingagaintomeetitsfinancialobligations(May2006tothepresent);introducingqualificationstoitspre�iouslyunqualifiedacceptanceofthefinalandbindingqualityoftheDelimitationDecision(17May2006);failingtorespondtotheCommission’srequestforassurancesoffreedomofmo�ementandsecurityforitsstafftra�ellingtotheregiontoreopentheCommission’sFieldOffices(JulytoAugust2006);andfailingtorespondtotheCommission’sin�itationtoarescheduledmeetingon24August2006 .

11 . After initial cooperation, Eritrea also began to raise obstacles .InOctober2003,itinformedtheChiefSur�eyorthatitwouldwithdrawitsarrangementsforthepro�isionofsecurityintheEasternSectorifthecon-tractthenundernegotiationfortheemplacementofpillarsdidnotco�ertheentireboundaryasdeterminedintheDelimitationDecision;itrepeateditspositionatthemeetingoftheCommissionon19No�ember2003,objectingtothecontinuanceofdemarcationintheEasternSectorunlessatthesametimetheworkforeseenintheWesternandCentralSectorwouldcontinueconcurrently;itimpededinanumberofwaystheabilityoftheUnitedNationsMissioninEthiopiaandEritrea(“UNMEE”)topro�idenecessaryassistancetotheCommission’sstaffinthefield;itsconductinOctober2005occasioneda6referenceinSecurityCouncilresolution1640toEritrea’srestrictionof“all


typesofUNMEEhelicopterflightswithinEritreanairspaceorcomingtoErit-rea,effecti�easof5October2005,andtheadditionalrestrictionsonUNMEE’sfreedomofmo�ementimposedsincethen,whichha�eseriousimplicationsforUNMEE’sabilitytocarryoutitsmandate . . .”;on6December2005,EritreasentalettertoUNMEErequestingmembersofUNMEEwhowerenationalsoftheUnitedStatesofAmerica,CanadaandEurope,aswellastheRussianFederation,tolea�ethecountrywithintendays,ameasurewhichoccasionedacondemnatorystatementbythePresidentoftheSecurityCouncil .InDecem-ber2005,theSecurityCouncilwasledtorelocatemilitaryandci�ilianstaffofUNMEEfromEritreatoEthiopia“solelyintheinterestsofthesafetyandsecu-rityofUNMEEstaff .ThelackofcooperationwithUNMEEbytheEritreanauthoritieshasproducedconditionsonthegroundwhichpre�entUNMEEimplementingitsmandatesatisfactorily” .(StatementbythePresidentoftheSecurityCouncil,14December2005) .Thismandateincludedthepro�isionofnecessaryassistancetotheCommission’sstaffontheground;intheSpringof2006,Eritreaimposedfar-reachingrestrictionsonUNMEEthathadtheeffectofseriouslyimpedingtheresumptionofoperationsbytheCommission’sfieldstaff;itrejectedtheCommission’sin�itationtoattendameetingon15June2006;instead,itsentalettertotheCommissionstatingthatitwasnotpreparedtocontinueitsengagement,implyingthatthedemarcationprocesswasbiasedinfa�ourofEthiopia;inJuly2006,itrefused�isastotheCommission’sfieldstaffwhohadbeeninstructedtoreturntoEritreatoreopentheFieldOfficethere .LikeEthiopia,EritreadidnotrespondtotheCommission’srequestforittoattendameetingon24August2006 .Theforegoingcourseofconducthas,regrettably,alsocontributedsignificantlytothepresentimpasse .

12 . Thesedifficultiesha�epersisted,notwithstandingthattheCommis-sionhasheldmeetingswiththePartiesonse�eraloccasionswitha�iewtosecuringtheiragreementtotherenewalofthefieldworkinthedemarcationprocess .ThemostrecentmeetingsoftheCommissionwiththePartieswereheldon10March2006and17May2006 .The15June2006meetingwascan-celledduetoEritrea’srefusaltoattend .ThePartieswerein�itedtoameetingtoha�ebeenheldon24August2006andtheParties’repliestothein�itationwererequestedby10August .NoreplieswereforthcomingandattemptstocontactthePartiesbytheRegistraroftheCommissionelicitednoresponses .Inthemeantime,theCommissionhaddecidedtoreopentheFieldOfficesafterobtainingtheParties’agreementatthe10March2006meeting .TheseofficeshadbeenoperatingwithareducedstaffsinceJanuary2004andweree�entuallyclosedon31March2005 .Howe�er,whentheDeputySecretaryoftheCommissionwasdispatchedtoAddisAbabainearlyAugust2006witha�iewtointroducingthenewlyrecruitedFieldOfficestafftothelocalofficials,shewasunabletogainaccesstoanyrele�antEthiopianofficials .TheCommis-sionhadalsoinstructedhertoproceedtoEritrea,butshewasad�isedbytheEritreanauthoritiesnottoattempttoenterEritrea .Itthuspro�edimpossibletoimplementtheCommission’sdecisiontoreopenalltheFieldOfficesorreac-ti�atethedemarcationprocessasoriginallycontemplated .


13 . Thesede�elopments,includingtheproblemsconfrontingtheCom-missionasaresultoftheattitudesoftheParties,ha�eallbeenreportedtotheSecretary-GeneraloftheUnitedNationsatthree-monthlyinter�alsandha�ebeenpassedonbyhimtotheSecurityCouncil .TheSecurityCouncilhasonnolessthanfourteenoccasionscalleduponthePartiestomeettheirobligationsbuthasachie�ednomoresuccessthantheCommission .3

14 . Thefrustrationofthedemarcationprocessasoriginallyconcei�edhascontinuedfornearlyfouryears .ThereisnopresentsignthatthePartieswillchangetheirpositionsinthereasonablyproximatefuture .TheUnitedNationsSecurityCouncilbyresolution1710calledonthePartiesto“cooperatefullywiththeEEBC”and“toimplementcompletelyandwithoutfurtherdelayorpreconditionsthedecisionoftheEEBCandtotakeconcretestepstoresumethedemarcationprocess” .TheSecurityCouncilspecificallydemandedthat“Eritreare�erse,withoutfurtherdelayorpreconditions,allrestrictionsonUNMEE’smo�ementandoperations”andthatEthiopia“acceptfullyandwithoutdelaythefinalandbindingdecisionoftheEritrea-EthiopiaBoundaryCommissionandtakeimmediatelyconcretestepstoenable,withoutpreconditions,theCommis-siontodemarcatethebordercompletelyandpromptly .”TheCommission,on6October2006,wrotetothePartiesaskingthemwhatstepstheyintendedtotaketoimplementtheforegoingrequestsoftheSecurityCouncil .TheCommissionaskedforrepliesby22October2006 .Eritrearepliedon22Octoberreiteratingthepositionthatithadpre�iouslytakentotheeffectthatnoprogresscouldbemadeuntilEthiopiastatedwithoutqualificationthatitacceptedtheboundaryasdeterminedbytheCommissioninitsDecisionof13April2002 .Asyet,Ethiopiahasnotrepliedtothatrequest .BothPartiesdeclinedtoattendthemeetingoftheCommissioncalledfor20No�ember2006 .

15 . Thepresentsituationis,therefore,that,intheEasternSector,theboundarypoints for thepillaremplacementsha�ebeenestablishedbutnopillarsha�ebeenemplaced;intheCentralandWesternSectorsnopillarsiteassessmenthasbeenconductedandthePartiesha�enotenabledtheCom-missiontomeetthedeadlinessetoutinthe�ariousschedulesofworkithaspromulgatedforthosesectors .

16 . Uptothetimeof,andimmediatelyfollowing,thedelimitationoftheborderinApril2002,theCommissionapproacheditsmandatetodemar-catetheboundaryasrequiringitactuallytoemplacepillarsattheturningpointsoftheboundary .ThisassumedthatthenecessarycooperationofthePartieswouldbeforthcomingandthatUNMEEwouldnotbepre�entedfrompro�idingessentialassistance .

3 S/RES/1398 (15 March 2002), S/RES/1430 (14 August 2002), S/RES/1466(14March2003), S/RES/1507 (12 September 2003), S/RES/1531 (12 March 2004),S/RES/1560(14September2004),S/RES/1586(14March2005),S/RES/1622(13Septem-ber2005),S/RES/1640(23No�ember2005),S/RES/1661(14March2006),S/RES/1670(13April2006),S/RES/1678(15May2006),S/RES/1681(31May2006andS/RES/1710(29September2006) .


17 . TheAlgiersAgreement,inestablishingtheCommission,isacon-stitutionalinstrumentcreatinganinternationalinstitutionandconferringonitfunctionsandpowers .Assuch, its interpretationmustbeapproachedinthesamewayasinternationalorganisationsha�eregularlyapproachedtheinterpretationoftheirconstituentinstruments,thatis,bywayoftheconceptofinstitutional“effecti�eness” .E�enthoughthego�erningtextmaynotexplic-itlyempowertheorganisationtoactinaparticularmanner,internationallawauthorises, indeedrequires, theorganisation,should itfinditnecessary, ifitistodischargeallitsfunctionseffecti�ely,tointerpretitsproceduresinaconstructi�emannerdirectedtowardsachie�ingtheobjecti�ethePartiesaredeemedtoha�ehadinmind .Thesameistrueofinternationaljudicialorgans .(Territorial Dispute (Libyan Arab Jamahiriya/Chad) Judgment,ICJ Reports 1994,pp .6,25andthecasestherecitedinsupportof“oneofthefundamental9principlesoftheinterpretationoftreaties,consistentlyupheldbyinterna-tionaljurisprudence,namely,thatofeffecti�eness . . . .”)

18 . Inthepresentcase,themanifestobjecti�ewastobringtheborderdisputetoanendattheearliestpossibledatebymeansoftheidentificationofaboundaryestablishedbytheprescribedcolonialtreatiesandapplicableinter-nationallawwithasmuchprecisionascouldbeachie�edinthecircumstancesandwithoutdecidingex aequo et bono .

19 . Ha�ing carefully sur�eyed the alternati�es now a�ailable to theCommissionandha�ingstudiedanewthewrittenandoralpresentationsmadetoitbytheParties,theCommissionfeelsobligedtoadoptanotherapproachtoeffectthedemarcationoftheboundary .

20 . Moderntechniquesofimageprocessingandterrainmodellingmakeitpossible,inconjunctionwiththeuseofhighresolutionaerialphotography,todemarcatethecourseoftheboundarybyidentifyingthelocationofturningpoints(hereinaftercalled“boundarypoints”)bybothgridandgeographicalcoordinateswithadegreeofaccuracythatdoesnotdiffersignificantlyfrompil-larsiteassessmentandemplacementundertakeninthefield .TheCommissionhasthereforeidentifiedbythesemeansthelocationofpointsfortheemplace-mentofpillarsasaphysicalmanifestationoftheboundaryontheground .4Althoughthesetechniquesha�ebeena�ailableforsometime,theCommissionhasnotresortedtothembecausetheactualfixingofboundarypillars,ifatallpossible,wasthedemarcationmethodoffirstchoice .Howe�er,itisonlypossibletodemarcateaboundarybythefixingofboundarypillarswiththefullcoop-

4 Acomparable,thoughnotidentical,situationaroseintheArgentina-Chile Frontier Case(1966)(38International Law Reports10),whereaerialphotographywasusedtoidentifypointsontheboundary .IntheDispositifoftheReportoftheTribunal,theboundarywasdescribedinpartasfollowingthethalweg“oftheEncuentrotoPointAattheConfluence” .Thefollowingisattachedtothetextatthispoint:“ThelocationofPointAandsubsequentPointsisshownonthediagramandairphotographsincorporatedinthisReport .Thedia-gramisnotintendedasanauthoritati�emap .Itisonlyanindextotheairphotographs .Thesephotographsarethesoleauthorityfortheexactlocationofthepoints .”(p .98) .


erationofboththeStatesconcerned .ThishasbeencompletelylackingintheCentralandWesternSectorsandtosomeextentintheEasternSector .

21 . Inthesecircumstances,theCommissionconsidersthatthemostpracticalwayinwhichitcanad�anceperformanceofitsmandateistopro�idethePartieswiththelistofboundarypointsthattheCommissionhasidentifiedbythetechniquesjustmentionedalongthewholelengthoftheboundary .Thislistrepresentsthelocationsatwhich,iftheCommissionweresoenabledbytheParties,itwouldconstructpermanentpillars .Thislistandsomeexplana-torycommentsareannexedtothisStatementwhichisalsoaccompaniedbyforty-fi�emapsillustratingtheboundarypoints .*1Itmaybenotedthattheboundarysoillustrateddoesnotdiffersignificantlyfromtheboundaryidenti-fiedintheDelimitationDecision .TheareasofTseronaandZalambessaha�ebeenclarified,ascontemplatedintheDelimitationDecision,bydeterminingtheen�ironsofthosetwoplacesandtakingintoaccount,insofarasrele�ant,manifestimpracticabilities .

22 . AstheCommissione�identlycannotremaininexistenceindefi-nitely,itproposesthatthePartiesshould,o�erthenexttwel�emonths,ter-minatingattheendofNo�ember2007,considertheirpositionsandseektoreachagreementontheemplacementofpillars .If,bytheendofthatperiod,the Parties ha�e not by themsel�es reached the necessary agreement andproceededsignificantlytoimplementit,orha�enotrequestedandenabledtheCommissiontoresumeitsacti�ity,theCommissionherebydeterminesthattheboundarywillautomaticallystandasdemarcatedbytheboundarypointslistedintheAnnexheretoandthatthemandateoftheCommissioncanthenberegardedasfulfilled .Untilthattime,howe�er,itmustbeemphasisedthattheCommissionremainsinexistenceanditsmandatetodemarcatehasnotbeendischarged .Untilsuchtimeastheboundaryisfinallydemarcated,theDelimitationDecisionof13April2002continuesastheonly�alidlegaldescriptionoftheboundary .

23 . Inadoptingthisapproach,theCommissionhasbeenguidedbysig-nificantauthorityinStatepractice,followingtheuseoftheword“demarca-tion”bytheUnitedNationsSecretary-GeneralandUnitedNationsSecurityCouncilwhentheIraq-Kuwaitborderwas“demarcated”in1993 .

24 . Following Security Council resolution 687 (1991), the UnitedNationsSecretary-GeneralestablishedtheIraq-KuwaitBoundaryDemarca-tionCommission(“theIKBDC”) .ThetermsofreferenceoftheIKBDCwere“todemarcateingeographicalcoordinatesoflatitudeandlongitude”theinter-nationalboundary:

“The coordinates established by the [IKBDC] Commission will constitute the final demarcation of the international boundary . . . .ThedemarcationoftheboundarybetweenIraqandKuwaitwillbeaccomplishedbydrawingupon

*1 ThemapsarecontainedonaDVDinthebackpocketofthis�olume .—Lescartessetrou�entsurunDVDclasséaudosdeladernièrepagedecou�erturedece�olume .


appropriatematerial,includingthemaptransmittedbySecurityCouncildocumentS/22412, andbyutilizingappropriate technology .” (Emphasissupplied .)52

25 . TheSecurityCouncilexpressedsupportfortheSecretary-General’sreport .63Nodoubtwasexpressedastothelegalacceptabilityofa“demarca-tion”bymeansofalistofcoordinates .Althougharrangementsforthephysicalrepresentationoftheboundarywerealsomade,thisphysicalrepresentationdidnotreplacethedemarcationintheformofgeographiccoordinatesbutsimplyrepresenteditontheground .InitsFinalReport,theIKBDCstated:

“ . . .[It]hassimplycarriedoutthetechnicaltasknecessarytodemarcateforthefirsttimetheprecisecoordinatesoftheinternationalboundaryreaf-firmedinthe1963AgreedMinutes .Tothisend,thecoordinatesestablishedbytheCommission,asreproducedinSectionXIIIbelow,constitutethefinaldemarcationoftheinternationalboundarybetweenIraqandKuwait .”74

26 . Moreo�er,thefeasibilityandacceptabilityoftheuseofcoordinatesaloneasameansofidentifyinginternationalboundariesisclearlyaffirmedbythemannerinwhichtheUnitedNationsCon�entionontheLawoftheSeadealswiththelimitsofmaritimeclaimsbyStates .

27 . ThefactthatthepresentCommissionbeganitsdemarcationacti�ityintermsofthelocationandconstructionoffixedpillarsdoesnotmeanthatitisprecludedfromfollowinganothercoursewhenconfrontedbythelackofnec-essarycooperationbytheParties,nor,inthecircumstancesdescribed,dotheCommission’sRulesofProcedure,DemarcationDirectionsandDemarcationInstructions,originallyadoptedontheassumptionoffullcooperationofbothParties,remaincontrolling .Totheextentofanyincompatibilitybetweenthoseproceduraltextsandtheapproachnowtobeadopted,thelatterwillpre�ail .

28 . Duringthecomingtwel�emonths,theCommissionwillremainwillingtopro�ideassistanceinemplacingtheboundarypillarsifthePartiesjointlysorequestandpro�ideassurancesofcooperationandsecurity .

[Signed]SirElihuLauterpachtCBEQCPresidentoftheCommission27No�ember2006

52 U .N .doc .S/22558,Reportof theSecretary-General regardingparagraph3ofSecurityCouncilresolution687(1991),paras .3-4,2May1991 .

63 FinalReportontheDemarcationoftheInternationalBoundarybetweentheRepub-licofIraqandtheStateofKuwaitbytheUnitedNationsIraq-KuwaitBoundaryDemarcationCommission,S/25811,para .13;alsoreproducedin94International Law Reports 1 .

74 Ibid.,para .112 .


anneX To THe Commission’s sTaTemenT of 27 noVember 2006

LIST OF BOUNDARY POINTS AND COORDINATES

1 . Theboundarypointslistedbelow,andasillustratedontheaccompany-ing1:25,000maps,fallintotwocategories:fixedpointsandmo�ablepoints .11

2 . Thefixedboundarypointsarelocatedonland .Eachisidentifiedbyitsgridandgeographicalcoordinatesaccuratetoonemetreandisillustratedonthemapsbythecon�entionalsignofasmallsquareenclosingadot .Fixedpointsadjacenttori�ersarelocatedashortdistancefromtheri�erbanksoastoa�oidtheeffectsoffloodingorri�ermo�ements .

3 . The mo�able boundary points represent the turning points of theboundarywhichfallwithinri�ers .Astheboundaryinri�ersfollowsthemid-dleofthemainchannelandmaymo�efromtimetotime,theseturningpointscannotbefixedpermanently .Theyaremarkedontheillustrati�emapsbysmallcircleswhichindicatethelocationofthesepointsatthetimeoftheaerialpho-tography .

4 . Thesemo�ablepointsaretobefoundattheconfluenceoftwori�ers,orattheintersectionbetweenthemiddleofthemainchanneloftheri�erandtheextensionri�erwardsofthestraightlinebetweenthenearestfixedbound-arypointandthenextorprecedingfixedboundarypoint .

5 . Thelistofcoordinatesispresentedineightcolumns .Column1containsthenumbersoftheboundarypointswhichareco�-

eredbyeachsetofcoordinatesorareotherwisedescribed .Column2containsthenumbersofthepointsidentifiedinMaps10,11

and12thatillustratetheDelimitationDecisionof13April2002 .Thesearereferredtobelowsimplyas“Points” .

Columns3and4containtheUni�ersalTrans�erseMercator(“UTM”)gridcoordinatesofeachboundarypoint,nototherwisedescribed,inthefol-lowingprojection:

Projection: UTMZone37extendedeastwardGeodeticDatum: Eritrea Ethiopia Boundary Datum

2002(EEBD2002)LongitudeofOrigin: 39°ELatitudeofOrigin: 0°NLatitudeofOrigin: 0°NFalseEasting: 500,000mE

11 Asimplifiedmaponly forcon�enienceofreferenceappearsat theendof thisAnnex .


FalseNorthing: 0mNUnitofMeasurement: Metre

Columns 5 and 6 contain the geographical coordinates in degreesof latitude and longitude in terms of the Commission’s geodetic datum,EEBD2002 .

Column7containsoccasionaldescriptionsofthelocationoftheparticu-larboundarypointandanindicationofthecourseoftheboundarytothenextboundarypoint .

Column8containsthenumberofthe1:25,000mapsheetonwhichtheboundarypointislocated .


LIST OF BOUNDARY POINTS AND COORDINATES

Col 1 Col 2 Col 3 Col 4 Col 5 Col 6 Col 7 Col 8

UTM Grid Latitude/Longitude Boundary Point Point

East North North East

Onward Course of Boundary

1:25,000 Sheet

1 1 Setit opposite Western Tripoint Boundary continues along middle of main channel of Setit to BP2.

1

2 6 Confluence of Setit and Tomsa Middle of main channel of Setit is connected to BP3 by straight-line extension of the line from BP4 to BP3.

8

3 341211 1568706 14°11'06.6" 37°31'42.8" Short distance from north bank of Setit at its confluence with Tomsa. Boundary continues in a straight line to BP4.

8

4 382976 1646771 14°53'34.6" 37°54'43.5" Short distance from south bank of Mareb at its confluence with Mai Ambessa. Boundary continues to middle of main channel of Mareb by straight-line extension of the line from BP3 to BP4.

13

5 9 Confluence of Mareb and Mai Ambessa Boundary continues along middle of main channel of Mareb to BP6.

13

6 11 Confluence of Mareb and Belesa Boundary continues along middle of main channel of Belesa to BP7.

20

7 12 Confluence of Belesa A and Belesa B Boundary continues along middle of main channel of Belesa B to BP8.

20

8 Intersection of Belesa B and straight-line extension from BP9

Boundary turns inland to BP9.

21

9 518200 1619525 14°38'56.9" 39°10'08.4" Boundary continues in a straight line to BP10.

21


21


21


21






1:25,000 Sheet


21


21


21


21


21


21


21


21


21


21


21


21

25 525826 1610053 14°33'48.3" 39°14'23.1" Boundary continues to middle of main channel of Belesa B by straight-line extension of the line from BP24 to BP25.

21

26 Intersection of Belesa B and straight-line extension from BP25

Boundary continues along middle of main channel of Belesa B to BP27.

21

27 14 Confluence of Belesa B and the tributary flowing from BP28

Boundary continues along middle of main channel of the tributary to BP28.

22

28 15 526864 1599914 14°28'18.3" 39°14'57.4" Source of the tributary mentioned in BP27. Boundary continues in a straight line to BP29.

22






1:25,000 Sheet

29 16 526401 1599206 14°27'55.2" 39°14'41.9" Source of a tributary of Belesa A. Boundary continues along middle of main channel of the tributary to BP30.

22

30 17 Confluence of Belesa A and the tributary flowing from BP29

Boundary continues along middle of main channel of Belesa A to BP31.

22

31 Confluence of Belesa A and the tributary flowing from BP32

Boundary continues along middle of main channel of the tributary to BP32.

22

32 529176 1594815 14°25'32.2" 39°16'14.4" Source of the tributary mentioned in BP31. Boundary continues in a straight line to BP33.

22

33 529308 1595256 14°25'46.6" 39°16'18.9" Source of a tributary of Belesa B. Boundary continues along middle of main channel of the tributary to BP34.

22

34 530761 1597627 14°27'03.7" 39°17'07.5" On edge of east bank of Belesa B opposite the tributary mentioned in BP33. Boundary continues in a straight line to BP35.

22


22


22


22


22


23


23


23


23


23






1:25,000 Sheet


23


23


23


23


23


23


23


23


23


23


23


23


23


23


23


23


23


23


23


23


23


23






1:25,000 Sheet


23


23


23


23


23


23


23


23


23


23


23


23


23


23


23

103 553435 1601320 14°29'02.6" 39°29'45.1" Boundary continues to middle of main channel of Muna/Berbero Gado by straight-line extension of the line from BP102 to BP103.

23

104 Intersection of Muna/Berbero Gado and straight-line extension from BP103

Boundary continues along middle of main channel of Muna/Berbero Gado to BP105.

23

105 21 Confluence of Muna/Berbero Gado and Enda Dashim

Boundary continues along middle of main channel of Enda Dashim to BP106.

24






1:25,000 Sheet

106 22 Confluence of Enda Dashim and the tributary flowing from BP107

Boundary continues upstream along middle of main channel of the tributary to BP107.

24

107 24 557018 1610448 14°33'59.5" 39°31'45.5" Source of the tributary mentioned in BP106. Boundary continues in a straight line to BP108.

24

108 25 557309 1612351 14°35'01.4" 39°31'55.4" Source of a tributary of Endeli. Boundary continues along middle of main channel of the tributary to BP109.

24

109 26 Confluence of Endeli and the tributary flowing from BP108

Boundary continues along middle of main channel of Endeli/Ragali to BP110.

24

110 Middle of main channel of Ragali nearest BP111

Boundary continues to BP111 by the shortest line.

28

111 30 623635 1607676 14°32'21.3" 40°08'51.1" Boundary continues in a straight line to BP112.

28

112 31 630815 1590835 14°23'12.0" 40°12'48.0" Point at which the boundary under the 1900 Treaty reaches the Salt Lake and where the boundary under the 1908 Treaty starts. Boundary continues in a straight line to BP113.

29


29


30


30


31


31


32


33


33






1:25,000 Sheet


33


34


35


35


36


36


36


37


37


38


38


39


39


39


40


40


41


41


42


42






1:25,000 Sheet


43


43


43

144 40 856238 1399036 12°38'07.1" 42°16'43.4" Between the two checkpoints of Eritrea and Ethiopia at Bure. Boundary continues in a straight line to BP145.

44


44

146 41 870133 1380752 12°28'07.1" 42°24'15.4" Summit of Mt. Musa’ali, Primary Monument No. 90 of the Ethiopia-Djibouti boundary.

45


COMMENTS

A. The Western Terminus

6 . ThisPoint isdescribed inparagraph8 .1,A(1)of theDispositifoftheDelimitationDecisionasfollows:“TheboundarybeginsatthetripointbetweenEritrea,EthiopiaandtheSudanandthenrunsintothecentreoftheSetitopposite thatpoint(Point1)” .Thisdeterminationhasnotbeenques-tionedbyeitherParty .

7 . Inin�estigatingthematter,theCommission’sexpertswerenotabletoseeanypre�iouslyestablishedmonumentmarkingthetripointbetweenErit-rea,EthiopiaandtheSudan .Inthesecircumstances,theCommissionadherestothedescriptionofPoint1(designatedasPoint1intheDelimitationDeci-sion)andwhichitnowdesignatesasBP1(seeMapNo .1) .

B. The Line from the Setit to the Mareb (from Point 6 to Point 9 in the Delimitation Decision)

8 . TheDelimitationDecisiondeterminedthatastraightlinerunsfromtheSetitstartingatPoint6(theconfluenceoftheSetitandtheTomsa)toPoint9(theconfluenceoftheMarebandtheMaiAmbessa) .ThesePointsarenowjoinedbyastraightlinedrawnbetweenthemonland .Theonlychangesthatmayoccurinthefuturearetheminoronesatthenorthernandsouthernter-miniofthatlineiftherearemo�ementsinthemiddleofthemainchannelsofthetwori�ers .Point6isnowBP2anditsfixedpointonlandisBP3(seeMapNo .8) .Point9isnowBP5anditsfixedpointonlandisBP4(seeMapNo .13) .

C. Tserona and Zalambessa

9 . TheCommissiondirectedthedemarcationteamtotakefullaccountoftheproposedboundaries intheParties’commentsonTseronaandZal-ambessa .2Assimilarconsiderationsaffectthedemarcationlinearoundbothplaces,thesetwoitemsaredealtwithtogether .

1. Tserona10 . TheDispositifoftheDelimitationDecision,paragraph8 .1,B .(i�),

pro�idesinpartthattheboundaryshould“lea�eTseronaanditsen�ironstoEritrea .TheboundaryrunsroundTseronaatadistanceofapproximatelyonekilometrefromitscurrentouteredge,inamannertobedeterminedmorepreciselyduringthedemarcation” .

11 . TheCommissionhasconsideredthesubmissionsofthePartiesandhasnotedinparticularthecommentbyEthiopiathatthe“outeredgeanden�i-ronsofTseronashouldbedeterminedusingpreciselythesameprinciplesas

2 DemarcationInstructions,22August2003,p .1,para .1 .


areusedforthedetermination”oftheouteredgeanden�ironsofZalambessa3(seeparagraph12below) .Eritreaexpressedthesamewish .4TheCommissionhasidentifiedtheseen�ironsbyalinethatlea�estheBelesaBatBP8andpro-ceedsbyaseriesofstraightlinestoBP26whereitreturnstotheBelesaB(seeMapNo .21) .BP8islocatedattheintersectionofthemiddleofthemainchan-neloftheBelesaBandthestraightlineextensionofthelinefromBP10toBP9 .BP26islocatedattheintersectionofthemiddleofthemainchanneloftheBelesaBandthestraightlineextensionofthelinefromBP24toBP25 .Thence,theboundaryfollowstheBelesaBsouthwardstoBP27whereitlea�esthatri�ertorunsouth-westwardstowardsBP28(seeMapNo .22) .

2. Zalambessa12 . TheCommissionin�itedEritreatocommentonEthiopia’sproposed

boundaryforthetownofZalambessaandtosubmititsownproposal .Ethiopiaidentifiedaboundarywhichwasinfluencedbyphysicalobstaclestotheuseofcertainlandsaroundtheen�ironsofZalambessa .Eritreaaskedthatwhate�erstandardorproceduresappliedtoZalambessashouldalsobeappliedtoTse-rona .5Eritreaalsosubmittedthat“Anyalterationsshould,additionally,bebal-ancedsothatgainstoonepartyareequalledbygainstotheother .”6ThereisaclosesimilaritybetweentheEritreanandEthiopianproposalsforthebound-aryaroundZalambessaexceptthattheEthiopianproposalalsoincludestheplateaulandtotheeast .

13 . IndemarcatingtheboundaryaroundZalambessa,theCommissionhasborneinmindthe�iewsoftheParties,thenatureofitsen�ironsandtheextentofmanifestimpracticabilityinpartsofthearea .TheboundarythereforecontinuesfromBP41throughBP42toBP103whereitmeetstheMuna/BerberoGadoatBP104(seeMapNo .23) .

D. The boundary between Points 15 and 16

14 . Paragraph8 .1 .B .(�)oftheDispositifpro�idesinpartthatthebound-arycontinuestothesource,atPoint15,ofanunnamedtributary:“FromthatpointitcrossesthewatershedbyastraightlinetothesourceofatributaryoftheBelesaAatPoint16 . . . .”

3 Submissionby theFederalDemocraticRepublicofEthiopia,24 January2003,CommentsPursuanttotheDecember2000Agreement,theCommission’sRulesofProce-dure,theCommission’sDemarcationDirectionsandInstructionspro�idedattheBound-aryCommission’sMeetingon6and7No�ember2002,p .65,para .1 .181 .

4 TheStateofEritrea’sCommentsonthePreliminaryOrthophotoMaps;Bounda-rieswithinRi�ers;TheBoundaryatTserona,ZalambessaandBure;andtheEasternSector,24January2003,p .14 .

5 Id .6 TheStateofEritrea’sCommentsontheEritrean-EthiopiaBoundaryintheProx-

imityofTseronaandZalambessaandontheSpecificPro�isionsofEthiopia’sCommentsof24January2003,15April2003,p .5 .


15 . TheCommissionhasdeterminedthat“Referencestotheheadwatersorsourcesofri�ersorstreamsmeanthehighestpointatwhichtheflowofwatercanbeidentifiedor,ifthestreambedhasbecomepermanentlydry,thenthehighestpointatwhichthestreambedcanbeidentified” .7Points15and16arenowidentifiedasBP28andBP29(seeMapNo .22) .Theboundaryrunsasastraightlinebetweenthesetwopoints .Ifeitherofthesepointsisfoundnottolieexactlyatthesourceoftherele�anttributary,itshallnonethelessbetreatedasifitwerethesource .Ifnecessary,thispointshallbelinkedtothenearestpositionoftherele�anttributarybytheshortestline .

E. The Eritrean claim line (Points 17 to 18 of the Dispositif)

16 . Paragraph8 .1 .B .(�)oftheDispositifpro�idesinpartthat,fromPoint17,theboundary“continuesuptheBelesaAtofollowtheEritreanclaimlinetoPoint18soastolea�eFortCadornaanditsen�ironswithinEritrea .TheEritreanclaimlineismorepreciselydepictedonthe1:100,000So�ietmapreferredtobyEritreainitsfinalsubmissionon20December2001 .Point18lies100metreswestofthecentreoftheroadrunningfromAdigrattoZalambessa .”

17 . TheEritreanclaimlineisnowidentifiedasBP30toBP41 .RegardingBPs32and33,ifeitherofthesepointsisfoundnottolieexactlyatthesourceoftherele�anttributary,itshallnonethelessbetreatedasifitwerethesource .Ifnecessary,thispointshallbelinkedtothenearestpositionoftherele�anttributarybytheshortestline .

18 . InitsDemarcationInstructionsof22August2003,theCommissioninstructedthatpillarsitesshouldbe“locatedwithinapproximately200metresofthecoordinatesextractedfromtheSo�ietmap” .8ThepositionsofBPs35–41(seeMapsNos .22and23)ha�ebeendeterminedonthisbasis .

F. Boundary between Points 24 & 25

19 . Seeparagraph15abo�e .Points24and25arenowmarkedasthehighestpointsatwhichthestreambedcanbeidentified .Theboundaryrunsasastraightlinebetweenthem .ThesepointsarenowBPs107and108(seeMapNo .24) .Ifeitherofthesepointsisfoundnottolieexactlyatthesourceoftherele�anttributaryitshallnonethelessbetreatedasifitwerethesource .Ifnecessary,thispointshallbelinkedtothenearestpositionoftherele�anttributarybytheshortestline .

G. Points 29, 30 and 31

20 . TheDispositifpro�idesinParagraph8 .1 .B .(xii)that,“FromPoint28,thelinecontinuesdowntheMuna/Endeli/RagalitoPoint29,northwest

7 DemarcationDirections,8July2002(asre�isedinNo�ember2002,MarchandJuly2003),para .14D .

8 DemarcationInstructions,22August2003,p .2,para .11 .


oftheSaltLake,andthencebystraightlinestoPoints30and31,atwhichlastpointthissector[i .e .theCentralSector]oftheboundaryterminates .”

21 . TheCommissionhasfoundthatmaintenanceofPoint29asafixedpointcouldleadinthee�entofachangeinthemainstreamoftheri�ertodepri�ingoneorotherPartyofaccesstotheri�er’swater .TheCommissionhasthereforedecidedthatPoint29mustbeabandonedandthat,consistentwiththeprinciplesenunciatedintheDelimitationDecision,thecourseoftheboundaryinthisareashallfollowthemiddleofthemainchanneloftheRagaliRi�eruntilitreachesapointnearesttoBP111(Point30)whichisthepointatwhichequalaccesstotheri�er’swaterisnolongersignificant .ThemiddleofthemainchanneloftheRagaliislinkedtoBP111bytheshortestline .Astraightlineisthendrawnsouth-eastwardstoBP112(Point31) .

22 . BP112iswheretheRagaliRi�erreachestheSaltLake .Becauseofgroundconditions,ithasnotbeenpossibletodeterminetheexactlocationofthisPointeitherfromfieldinspectioncarriedoutduringpillarsiteassessmentoftheEasternSectororfromtheimageryoftheaerialphotography .IthasthereforebeennecessarytoestimatewheretheRagaliRi�erreachestheSaltLakeandtoidentifyBP112accordingly .

H. The Eastern Sector

23 . TheDelimitationDecisiondescribed thisboundaryasa seriesofstraightlinesconnectingPoint31toPoint41attheboundarywithDjibouti .Thislinewastoser�easthebasisforthedemarcation,lea�ingopenthepos-sibilityatthatstageof“adaptingittothenatureand�ariationoftheterrain”ascontemplatedinArticleIIofthe1908Treaty .9DemarcationInstructionsfortheidentificationofpillarsitesinthisSectorincludedtherequirementthatmain-tenanceofanareabalancebetweenthelinesjoiningthePointsfinallychosencomparedtotheoriginaldelimitationlineof13April2002shouldbeintheorderofthreepercent .TheseInstructionsalsorequiredthedeterminationofthemid-pointbetweentheEritreanandEthiopiancustomspostsatBureandthereinstatementoftheoriginalpillaremplacementonMusa’aliatPoint41 .

24 . TheCommission’sfieldstaffwasabletoundertaketheselectionofallpillarsitesintheEasternSectorinearly2003 .Thesiteschosenwerebased,wherepossible,onthesubmissionsoftheParties intheir24January2003memorandaandwereassessedaccordingtotherequirementssetoutbytheCommissionintheDemarcationInstructionsof21March2003 .InMay2003,theCommissionsubmittedaninitialreportofthisworktothePartiesforcomment .TheParties’commentswererecei�edon11June2003andindi-catedacceptanceoftheproposalsinprinciple .TheDemarcationTeam,afterconsideringthesecomments,madefurtheradjustments,andpresentedafinalreporttotheCommissioninAugust2003 .Thisreportsetoutthecoordinates

9 DelimitationDecision,13April2002,p .93,para .6 .34 .


assur�eyedofallboundarypositionsintheEasternSectorandachie�edanalmostexactareabalance .Thepositionofthemid-pointbetweentheEritreanandEthiopiancustomspostsatBurewasidentified .AtMusa’ali,theremainsoftheoldmonumentwerelocatedanditspositionwasfixed .

25 . TheboundaryintheEasternSectoristhereforenowdefinedaspass-ingthroughtheboundarypointsfromBP112toBP146 .

I. The boundary in rivers

26 . TheCommissionhasdeterminedintheDemarcationDirectionsthat,“UnlesstheCommissionshoulddecideotherwiseafterrecei�ingarequestfromaPartythattheboundaryinari�errequiresdemarcation,theCommissioncon-sidersthattheidentificationofari�erasaboundaryshouldnormallysufficewithoutactualdemarcationtherein,sa�easregardstheidentificationofconflu-ences,turningpointsthatmaygi�erisetodoubts,andheadwatersorsources .”10TheDemarcationInstructionspro�idethattheri�er“boundaryisinthemiddleofthemainchannel(thechannelofgreatest�olume)andwillmo�einaccord-ancewithanychangeinpositionofthemiddleofthemainchannel .”11

27 . TheDemarcationInstructionsfurtherpro�idethat“islandsshallfallwithintheterritoryofeitherPartyaccordingtotheirlocationinrelationtothemainchannel” .12WhereislandsareidentifiedbythePartiesintheircomments,“thedemarcationteamshalldeterminebyappropriatemethodsthepositioninrelationtothemainchannelofthoseislands” .13AlthoughthereweregeneralcommentsfromthePartiesonsomeislands,thesecommentsdidnotpro�idesubstantialorspecifice�idencerequiringa�ariationfromtheCommission’sdelimitationformulaforboundariesinri�ers;accordingly,allislandsaredistributedinaccordancewiththisformula .

10 DemarcationDirections,July2003re�ision,para .14B .11 DemarcationInstructions,22August2003,p .3,para .20(b) .12 Ibid.,para .20(d) .13 Ibid.,para .21 .

reports of international arbitral awards recueil des...

Documents