Bolivia and Chile dispute river rights before World Court

THE HAGUE, Netherlands (CN) — Bolivia and Chile kicked off an expected two weeks of hearings over water access before the U.N.’s high court Friday. 

Chile is asking the International Court of Justice, sometimes called the World Court, to declare the Silala River an “international watercourse,” giving it access to the 5.3-mile waterway which originates across the border in Bolivia, flows through Chile and empties into the ocean. 

“[Bolivia’s case] lacks any basis in international law, but it also lacks any coherent factual basis,” said Ximean Fuentes, Chile’s vice-minister for foreign affairs, in her opening statements to the court. The river flows through the Atacama Desert, one of Earth’s most arid regions, providing it water for drinking, agriculture and industry.

Prior to the War of the Pacific, a 19th-century conflict between Bolivia, Chile and Peru, the region was within Bolivia’s borders. But Santiago was victorious in that conflict.

Chile took possession of Bolivia’s only coastal area, cutting La Paz off from the Pacific Ocean and causing bitter relations between the South American countries. The neighbors haven’t had diplomatic relations since 1978.

In 1908, Bolivia gave permission to the Chilean Antofagasta-Bolivian Railway Company to use the waters of the Silala to power steam engines. But in 1997, La Paz revoked the agreement, demanding Chile pay not only for its water usage going forward, but also provide retroactive compensation. 

“That position, with all due respect, is untenable,” Fuentes said. Her government argues that, under a 1997 U.N. convention on water rights, the Silala River should be considered an international watercourse, which would force both countries to share the water equally and work together on projects involving the river. La Paz claims that it isn’t a river at all, but rather a ground-fed spring that belongs entirely to Bolivia. 

Johanna Klein Kranenberg, a member of Chile’s legal team, told the court that only Chile is using the water and Bolivia has done nothing to maintain the area’s fragile ecosystem.

“Bolivia has not used the waters since 1997,” she says. According to her, Chilean towns use the river for drinking water and local mining operations also need the water. 

After the hearing, Fuentes told reporters she was confident that Chile’s case would prevail.

“This is very important for our country,” she said. 

It isn’t the first time the countries have argued over water rights before the court. Landlocked Bolivia hauled Santiago before The Hague-based court in 2013, arguing that Chile should give it access to the Pacific Ocean. However, the International Court of Justice sided with the coastal country, concluding in 2018 that it was “not legally obligated to negotiate such a move.” 

Bolivia will give its opening statements on Monday.

Follow @mollyquell

Subscribe to Closing Arguments

Sign up for new weekly newsletter Closing Arguments to get the latest about ongoing trials, major litigation and hot cases and rulings in courthouses around the U.S. and the world.

Email *

Submit