![](\"https:\/\/stage3.rnv.gob.ve\/wp\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/01\/COMUNICADO-1200x600-1.jpg\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
The Minister of Foreign Affairs, Jorge Arreaza, pointed out that Venezuela reiterates its demand on the telematic summons of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) on the Esequibo case.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n Foreign Minister Arreaza published a statement through the <\/span><\/span>Twitter <\/span><\/span>social network in which he highlights that Venezuela considers that this <\/span><\/span>sentence <\/span><\/span>is not in accordance with the law, and contravenes the Statute of the Court, \u00ab<\/span><\/span>A<\/span><\/span>nd its historical practice and at the request of Guyana, errs in the identification of the disputed object accepting to know about the validity of the Arbitral Award of 1899, with which it misrepresents the provisions of the Geneva Agreement\u00bb.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n In this sense, Arreaza expressed that \u00abVenezuela considers to be outrageous the <\/span><\/span>upcoming <\/span><\/span>telematic convening of the International Court of Justice on the Esequibo case and reiterates its demand that it be postponed until April 2021 and that it be organized in <\/span><\/span>a presential manner<\/span><\/span>\u00ab.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n Following <\/span><\/span>is the full text of the communiqu\u00e9:<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n \u201cLast December 18, 2020, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) made known its decision to consider itself competent to hear the unilateral claim filed by the Cooperative Republic of Guyana on the Arbitral Award of October 03, 1899 and the related issue to the definitive solution of the territorial border dispute between the Cooperative Republic of Guyana and the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela.<\/i><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n As the international community is aware, the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela has asserted that this judgment is not in accordance with the law, inasmuch as the arguments put forward by the Court to support its decision are not only insufficient to establish the consent of the Parties, but it also contravenes the Statute of the Court and its historical practice and, at the request of Guyana, it errs in the identification of the object of the dispute, accepting to know about the validity of the 1899 arbitration award, thus misrepresenting the provisions of the Geneva Agreement.<\/i><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n The International Court of Justice, ignoring what has been expressed by Venezuela, has insisted on proposing that a video-conference with the parties be held on January 25, 2021. Venezuela wishes to reiterate once again that it considers this to be an untimely call, which does not provide the country with the necessary time to carry out the considerations and consultations that the Venezuelan State demands, before taking a position on an issue of vital importance.<\/i><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n For weeks now, Venezuela has requested the Court to postpone the convening of the video-conference until April 2021, and to hold it in a <\/i><\/span><\/span>presential<\/i><\/span><\/span> format. Today we reiterate once again this legitimate demand.<\/i><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n The disowning <\/i><\/span><\/span>of the compelling reasons that lead Venezuela to demand attention to its request could be considered a bad sign in light of the due guarantees that must be provided for the preservation of the rights of both parties, in accordance with their Statute and in accordance with the principle of legal equality of States, established in the Charter of the United Nations.<\/i><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n The sun of Venezuela rises in the Essequibo.\u201d<\/i><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n Caracas, January 21, 2021<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" The Minister of Foreign Affairs, Jorge Arreaza, pointed out that Venezuela reiterates its demand on the telematic summons of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) on the Esequibo case. Foreign Minister Arreaza published a statement through the Twitter social network in which he highlights that Venezuela considers that this sentence is not in accordance with […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":305283,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[450],"tags":[764,2224,1329,8839,1991,24666],"class_list":["post-315282","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-english","tag-chancellor","tag-charter","tag-essequibo","tag-geneva","tag-guyana","tag-icj"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n