Pulp mill conflict: Argentina summons Uruguay: roll back latest decision or see you in The Hague

Wednesday, October 16th 2013 - 00:26 UTC

Full article 15 comments

In a formal presentation Argentina summoned Uruguay ‘to leave without effect’ its latest controversial decision allowing the Botnia/UPM pulp plant to increase its annual production and accused Uruguay of ‘unilateral violation’ of the River Uruguay statute which rules over the neighbouring countries shared-border waterway. Read full article

Comments

Disclaimer & comment rules

redp0ll
A short answer “Fook off Timmy”
I hope counterclaims will be filed on Argentine breaches of the treaty by Uruguay
Oct 16th, 2013 - 12:58 am - Link - Report abuse 0
-+
Be serious
Argyland is all talk. When was the last time Argyland ever abided by a Court Judgement. If they want this sorting they should invade and take over Uruguay.
Oct 16th, 2013 - 08:03 am - Link - Report abuse 0
-+
Idlehands
How long would a fresh case take - and can they bring an injunction to stop the extra production in the meantime?
Oct 16th, 2013 - 08:17 am - Link - Report abuse 0
-+
stick up your junta
Why don't they take their “strong” case for the Falklands, to the ICJ.
Oct 16th, 2013 - 09:17 am - Link - Report abuse 0
-+
Conqueror
@3 The original “dispute” took 4 years at the ICJ. And argieland lost. Worth noting that, unless it agrees at the outset, Uruguay will be under no obligation to comply with any “judgement” given by the ICJ. Mind you, as I read it, the ICJ is under no obligation to even consider the matter.
Oct 16th, 2013 - 11:28 am - Link - Report abuse 0
-+
Faz
Someones feeling in Gollums ear to see if he really does have a brain. And, I wonder what she is whispering to the old fella.... nod nod wink wink. ? :-) “no more Tango!”

Constant free entertainment... Bertram Mills would employ this lot in a shot!
Oct 16th, 2013 - 11:34 am - Link - Report abuse 0
-+
GeoffWard2
Timerman is just blustering to make noise whilst CFK is out of the ring.
UPM will build new plant in the meantime.
Oct 16th, 2013 - 11:55 am - Link - Report abuse 0
-+
redp0ll
@5 Thanks for your analysis.Yes Argentina lost with a vote of 14 to one at the ICJ.The one dissenting judge? From Argentina of course. Which goes to show that perhaps some judges are more influenced by political instructions than straight legal considerations
From what I can discover Argentina has never abided by any decision of the Court not in thier favour and sometimes even denied that the ICJ had jurisdiction
Oct 16th, 2013 - 12:31 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
-+
Brit Bob
@4 Argie-land will never take their 'Great Malvinas Lie' to the ICJ because they know that the court recognises the Falkland Islander's right to self-determination.

International Court of Justice Advisory Opinion 21.6.71

Paragraph 52

'Furthermore, the subsequent development of International Law in regard to non-self-governing territories, as enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations, made the principle of self-development applicable to all of them.'

www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/53/5595.pdf
Oct 16th, 2013 - 02:37 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
-+
ChrisR
I do hope that Mujica does not waiver on this, I suppose it depends on what La Tronca tells him to do.

As far as Gollum is concerned he is trying to look “statesmanlike” but he has neither the persona, the balls and certainly not the intellect to carry it off, so nothing need be done other than to ignore him.
Oct 16th, 2013 - 03:24 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
-+
Pete Bog
@10 Chris R
Referring to the speedy way Gollum has 'taken the Falkland oil companies to court'(proclamation in 2010/2012 and still waiting in late 2013), Pepe need not hold his breath over the ICJ
Argentines are allergic to international courts.
Oct 16th, 2013 - 07:40 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
-+
redp0ll
Courts are allergic to Argentina, particularly when judges are told publicly by Argentina what thier judgement should be while matters are sub judice. Judge Griesa certainly didnt like that attitude
Oct 16th, 2013 - 11:26 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
-+
Frank
Why does Gollum always look like he is about to burst into tears???
Oct 17th, 2013 - 12:04 am - Link - Report abuse 0
-+
slattzzz
@13 because he is?
Oct 17th, 2013 - 04:48 am - Link - Report abuse 0
-+
Pete Bog
@12 Redpoll
A good subversion of my point-and so humorous!

@13
He's wet his diapers?
Oct 17th, 2013 - 09:08 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
-+

Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!