Bahrain-Qatar sovereignty & maritime boundary case
The Bahrain-Qatar case was perhaps the longest and one of the most complicated
to have come before the International Court of Justice. It was referred to the
ICJ in 1991 by Qatar, with Bahrain originally contesting the court's
jurisdiction.
Previous attempts to reach a solution through the mediation efforts of the
Kingdom of Saudi Arabia had failed.
The court was asked to decide both on sovereignty and maritime delimitation
issues. In its submission, the government of Qatar asked the court to adjudge
that:
• Qatar had sovereignty over a small group of islands (the Hawar islands), which
were closer to Qatar, but over which Bahrain had a historical claim;
• That Dibal and Qit'at Jaradah shoals were low-tide elevations under Qatar's
sovereignty
• That Bahrain had no sovereignty over the island of Janan
• That Bahrain had no sovereignty over Zubarah
• That any claim by Bahrain concerning archipelagic baselines and areas for
fishing for pearls and swimming fish would be irrelevant for the purpose of
maritime
delimitation.
Qatar also asked the Court to draw a single maritime boundary “between the
maritime areas of sea-bed, subsoil, and superjacent waters appertaining
respectively
to the State of Qatar and the State of Bahrain” on the basis that the Hawar
islands and the island of Janan belonged to Qatar.
For its part, Bahrain asked the Court to adjudge and declare that: Bahrain was
sovereign over Zubarah, the Hawar Islands, including Janan and Hadd Janan, and
that in view of the state's sovereignty over all insular and other features,
the
maritime boundary should be delimited accordingly.
In arriving at its conclusion the court was obliged to take into account a host
of complicating factors related to historical claims to the territory by
various
sheikdoms and dynasties, the relevance of historical pearling rights, and
agreements with colonial powers, notably the Ottomans and the British. With
regards to
maritime delimitation issues, the case set a precedent to the extent that the
court
drew an equidistance line between the relevant baselines, emphasizing the
relevance of equidistance over equitable principles. The sovereignty of the
island of
Hawar, one of the most contentious elements in the case, was decided on the
basis of a decision made in 1939 by the British power in the region, which the
court
interpreted as being tantamount or equivalent to, an arbitral award.
Full summary of ICJ Judgement
|