Kenya iyo Soomaaliya Waxaa Dhici karta in Dagaal ku Dhexmaro Dhul-badeedka (muranka
la geliyey)
- Faafin: SomaliTalk.com | November 9, 2014
Warbixin ay qortay Jariidadda Standard ee ka soo baxda Nairobi (Axad November
9, 2014) ayaa si bareer ah waxay u qeexday in Kenya ay awooddo in dhul-badeedka
ay ku haysato Soomaaliya ee ay hore muranka u gelisey ay ku qaadan karto awood
dagaal, dhulbadeedkaas oo baaxad ahaan ka badan 100,000 kiilomiter oo
laba-jibbaaran.
Waxaa qoraalka Jariidaddu muujiyey in dacwadda ay Soomaaliya u gudbisey
Maxkaamadda Hague ay Keenya isaga difaacayso si xooggan ayadoo ayadoo
adeegsanaysa qaybo kala duwan. Haddiise laga xakumo in ay awoodo dagaal iyo xoog
in ay dhul-badeedkaas ku qaadato - maadaama ayey tiri jariidadu - ay Dawladda
Soomaaliya tahay mid taag daran oo aan xitaa awoodi karin in ay ilaaliso
xornimada dhulkeeda berriga, iskaba dhaaf badda'e.
Warbaahinta Kenya ayaa in dhaweydba wadey qoraalo la xiira badda Soomaaliyeed
ee Kenya ku soo xad gudubtey in ay shacabka reer Kenya u tusaan si taas ka duwan.
Arrimahan dardar gelinta ah ee ka socda Kenya ayaa ku soo beegmaya maxkamadda
Hague oo waqti (13 July 2015) u qabatay bilowga
dhagaysiga dacwadda badda ee ay Soomaaliya u gudbisey iyo xilli ay gorodda
iskula jiraan madaxdii DFS ee dacwadda u gudbiyey maxkamadda.
October 16, 2011 ayaa ciidanka Kenya waxay ka tallaabeen xuduud-beenaadka u
dhexeeya dhulka Soomaaliyeed ee NFD iyo Soomaaliya inteeda kale, ilaa haddana
ciidamadaasi waxay ku jiraan gobolka Jubbada Hoose ee Soomaaliya. (Suldaan
Deeqow: Kenya Waxay Jubbaland u Gashay in muran la geliyo Kismaayo, si markaas
loo ilaawo NFD)
Qoraalkii Standard oo ay cinwaan uga dhigtay "Kenya and Somalia could
go to war on territorial row" hoos ka akhri (English)...
Weriyaha oo farta ku fiiqaya dhagax yaal "xad beenaadka", dhinaca kalena uu ka
muuqdo gaari milatari.
Weriyaha: "The truck is actually the other side on the border, that is Somalia"
- "...given the weakness of the Somalia government and its inability to
exercise sovereignty over the mainland, let alone the maritime belt, Kenya
can acquire the disputed territorial waters by manifesting power and
authority over the contested territorial waters on a continuous basis."
standardmedia.co.ke
Kenya and Somalia could go to war on territorial row
www.standardmedia.co.ke
Sunday November 9, 2014
Nairobi; Kenya: On August 28, this year, Somalia took Kenya to the
International Court of Justice to resolve a long-standing dispute over the
maritime boundary in the Indian Ocean. Kenya’s view has been the maritime
boundary should run east from the point where it touches the Indian Ocean,
whereas, Somalia differs and argues that if its border with Kenya runs
continuously from land into the ocean, it would take a south-east direction.
If Somalia had its way, Kenya would be worse off and would lose over 100,000
square kilometres of territorial waters, leaving a small triangle of a marine
belt in Indian Ocean without free access to the high seas. Thus, the case is not
a small matter for Kenya, and, thus, it deserves serious legal defence by
drawing on multi-disciplinary insights.
Based on the previous decisions by the ICJ and other international tribunals on
disputes of similar nature, several considerations will be brought to bear on
the matter. One primary consideration will be the “equidistance/special
circumstances rule”. Article 15 of the 1982 Convention on the Law of the Sea
that stipulates, where the coasts of two states are opposite or adjacent to each
other, neither of two states is entitled, failing agreement between them to the
contrary, to extend its territorial sea beyond the median line every point of
which is equidistant from the nearest point on the baselines from which the
breadth of the territorial seas of each of the two states is to be measured. The
above provision does not apply, however, where it is necessary by reason of
historical title or other special circumstances to delimit the territorial seas
of the two states in a way which is at variance therewith.
Going by what the Somalia officials have been fulminating in their media about
the issue, Somalia wants the “equidistance/special circumstances rule” applied
because it would definitely support its claim. However, such an approach would
be mistaken because the ICJ has previously used other methods to resolve such
disputes. Indeed, the court has argued that the rule may be applicable if it
leads to an equitable solution; if not, other methods should be employed. In
other words, the rule is not a mandatory legal principle or is it better than
other methods. What other relevant considerations may the ICJ take into account
to resolve the Kenya-Somalia dispute? Firstly, there may be a recourse to equity
and equitable principles. Articles 74 and 83 of the Law of the Sea Convention
provide for the delimitation by agreement, in accordance with the international
law, in order to achieve an equitable result. Nonetheless, the Articles do not
prescribe the manner of achieving an equitable result. So each party in a
dispute is free to argue out its case on what would constitute an equitable
outcome.
Secondly, the drawing of a line perpendicular to the coastline has also been
employed to determine the border between two adjacent states, where the coast of
the states is more or less straight. Such a line is a simplified form of the
median line mentioned above.
Thirdly, the proportionality in terms of ratios of the water and continental
shelf areas attributed to each state and the length of the their coastlines have
been considered in the delimitation of some maritime boundaries. This is
designed to ensure equitable access to maritime resources for such states. It is
also a good method to test whether the delimited border is equitable.
Finally, there are other relevant circumstances that the ICJ may consider such
as the configuration of the coasts, islands, coastal length, geology and
geomorphology, socio-economic circumstances, security/political considerations
and the interest of third states. Given that a number of considerations could
determine the outcome, it may be difficult to predict the kind of decision the
court will make in the Kenya-Somalia case, and surprises should be anticipated
as each delimitation of a maritime border by the court is unique.
What options do the parties have if the decision by the ICJ turns out to be
unfavourable?
Firstly, a recourse to the court would only be a solution to the Kenya-Somalia
dispute if both parties agree with the court’s decision.
If either party disagrees, the dispute would remain unresolved since there are
no mechanisms to enforce such a decision.
Secondly, given the weakness of the Somalia government and its inability to
exercise sovereignty over the mainland, let alone the maritime belt, Kenya can
acquire the disputed territorial waters by manifesting power and authority over
the contested territorial waters on a continuous basis.
Thirdly, Kenya and Somalia may go to war in the long run to militarily resolve
their irreconcilable claims over the territorial waters.
Source: www.standardmedia.co.ke | Nov 9, 2014
Maxkamadda Hague ayaa Waqti Go'an u Qabatay Bilowga Dhagaysiga Dacwadda
Badda ee Soomaaliya iyo Kenya (Waqtigaas oo ah 13 July 2015 iyo 27 May 2016)
|
Daabaco
Boggan | Print
