Did The Esguerra-Bárcenas Treaty (1928-1930) End The Territorial And Maritime Dispute Between Colombia And Nicaragua?

Abstract

The purpose of this article is to analyze the competence of the International Court of Justice in the case Territorial and Maritime Dispute (Nicaragua v. Colombia), since there has been a constant argument sustained by the Colombian agents in The Hague and Colombian scholars, saying that the Court would not have competence since the Esguerra-Bárcenas Treaty and its Protocol (1928-1930) had already settled that dispute, having as consequence that the Court would not be able to base its jurisdiction in neither the Pact of Bogotá nor the optional clause of the ICJ Statute. The thesis of this essay is that the Treaty did put an end to the controversy in respect to the Colombian sovereignty over the San Andrés, Providencia and Santa Catalina Islands; sovereignty over Roncador, Quitasueño and Serrana Keys were expressly excluded from the scope of the Treaty, which could show that Nicaragua did not have any pretension over the Keys at the time –although the Court did consider it that way–; maritime delimitation and the extension of the San Andrés Archipelago were left unsolved by the Treaty and thus the Court did in fact have jurisdiction to settle this dispute.