THE HAGUE, Netherlands (CN) — Bolivia told the U.N.’s high court on Monday that Chile has “no reasonable basis” to claim access to a cross-border waterway.
Lawyers for La Paz told the International Court of Justice, or World Court, that human intervention is the only reason a 5.3-mile long Silala River exists in its current form and denied Chile’s right to access it, contradicting claims made by Santiago in its opening arguments last Friday.
“There is no reasonable basis for Chile hastily bringing its claim over the waters of the Silala before this court,” Bolivia’s agent, Roberto Calzadilla Sarmiento, told the court in his opening statement.
Chile wants The Hague-based court to declare the Silala River, which flows through the extremely arid Atacama Desert, an “international watercourse.” That would give Santiago access to the river and force the neighbors, who haven’t had diplomatic relations since 1978, to work together on related projects.
“Chile ignores and makes no mention of Bolivia’s fundamental rights,” Calzadilla Sarmiento told the 15-judge panel. The Silala River starts in Bolivia and flows through Chile into the Pacific Ocean. Prior to the War of the Pacific, a 19th-century conflict between Bolivia, Chile and Peru, the region was completely within Bolivia’s borders. But Santiago was victorious in that conflict and took possession of the area, which cut La Paz off from the Pacific Ocean and left the two with bitter relations.
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, amid worsening relations, La Paz revoked the agreement and demanded Chile pay not only for its water usage going forward, but also provide retroactive compensation, setting off a series of legal disputes over the area.
The railway company built a series of canals in the area to better access the water. Bolivia argued that construction increased the amount of water located above ground.
“That’s the reason we consider the Silala an artificially enhanced watercourse,” said Alain Pellet, a member of Bolivia’s legal team. La Paz claims that the Silala is really a series of ground-fed springs that belongs entirely to Bolivia.
The Bolivian delegation refused to speak to reporters after the hearing, but the Chileans did. Ximean Fuentes, Chile’s vice-minister for foreign affairs, agreed that the parties could agree on more now compared to when Chile first filed the case in 2016, but said the water flow issue had yet to be resolved.
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.”
Hearings continue for the rest of the week.
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.
