Hürriyet Daily News (21 September 2020)
Teoman Ertuğrul TULUN*
In a tense environment posed by the recent developments in the Eastern Mediterranean, a plethora of reasonable ideas and suggestions have been raised by jurists and scholars to submit the problems between Greece and Turkey for settlement to the International Court of Justice (ICJ). Within the framework of these recommendations, it is worthwhile to briefly recall the position and reservations of Greece regarding the jurisdiction of the ICJ.
According to the Statute of the ICJ, the jurisdiction of the Court over international disputes is not compulsory. States are free to decide whether the ICJ would handle a dispute to which they are a party. The Statute stipulates that parties to the Statute of the Court may “at any time declare that they recognize as compulsory ipso facto and without special agreement, in relation to any other State accepting the same obligation, the jurisdiction of the Court.”
As per the ICJ website, Greece accepted the jurisdiction of the ICJ in 2015 with a long list of reservations which constitute the core problems of the Turkish-Greek dispute in the Aegean. In order to better understand the intention of these reservations, the relevant part of the Greek declaration of 14 February 2015 regarding the jurisdiction of the ICJ is cited below:
a) any dispute relating to military activities and measures taken by the Hellenic Republic for the protection of its sovereignty and territorial integrity, for national defense purposes, as well as for the protection of its national security;
b) any dispute concerning State boundaries or sovereignty over the territory of the Hellenic Republic, including any dispute over the breadth and limits of its territorial sea and its airspace;
c) any dispute in respect of which any other party to the dispute has accepted the compulsory jurisdiction of the Court only in relation to or for the purpose of that dispute; or where the acceptance of the Court's compulsory jurisdiction on behalf of any other party to the dispute was deposited or ratified less than twelve months prior to the filing of the application bringing the dispute before the Court.
Through these reservations, Greece excludes the disputes regarding the “breadth and limits of its territorial sea and its airspace” and the “military activities and measures taken by the Hellenic Republic for the protection of its sovereignty and territorial integrity, for national defense purposes, as well as for the protection of its national security.” By way of this declaration, Greece clearly excludes its illegal militarization of the demilitarized islands, and its strange unilateral claim of 10NM national airspace in Aegean despite claiming 6NM territorial waters in the list of disputes between itself and Turkey. Additionally, Greece implicitly announces its intention to extend its territorial waters in Aegean over 6NM, which has been considered as casus belli by the Turkish Grand National Assembly by its decision of 8 June 1995.
Greece, through this declaration, reduces all the disputes in the Aegean to one issue, namely the continental shelf delimitation. In fact, the Greek Ministry of Foreign Affairs website states in this respect the following: “… Within this framework, Greece is pursuing the resolution of the only outstanding difference between Greece and Turkey, namely the delimitation of the continental shelf, in accordance with regulations of international law and specifically the law of the sea…”
It is possible to say that this position of Greece makes it almost impossible to solve the problems in the Aegean through international legal means.
* Analyst, Center for Eurasian Studies (AVİM)
**Photo: Hürriyet Daily News
© 2009-2021 Avrasya İncelemeleri Merkezi (AVİM) Tüm Hakları Saklıdır
Henüz Yorum Yapılmamış.
FRANCE CEASELESSLY WEARING DOWN NATO - HÜRRİYET DAILY NEWS - 05.09.2020
Teoman Ertuğrul TULUN 07.09.2020
WHY IS MACRON SKEPTICAL ABOUT PLAYING ODE TO JOY FOR THE BALKANS? - HÜRRİYET DAILY NEWS - 01.05.2018
Teoman Ertuğrul TULUN 02.05.2018
80TH ANNIVERSARY OF ANSCHLUSS: EUROPEAN VALUES BEING TRAMPLED AS FAR RIGHT RISES - DAILY SABAH - 04.04.2018
Teoman Ertuğrul TULUN 05.04.2018
CRUCIAL CHOICE FOR INDIAN DEMOCRACY -DAILY SABAH - 02.01.2018
Teoman Ertuğrul TULUN 05.01.2018
THE ROHINGYA: VICTIMS OF HISTORICAL PREJUDICE AND CONFLICTING DEFINITIONS
Teoman Ertuğrul TULUN 28.10.2017
EKONOMİK İŞBİRLİĞİ TEŞKİLATI (EİT) KONSEYİ BAKANLARI TOPLANTISI
Numan HAZAR 02.12.2013
THE TURKISH-ARMENIAN CONFLICT AND THE WILDERSIZATION OF THE NETHERLANDS - DAILY SABAH - 06.03.2018
Maxime GAUIN 06.03.2018
TÜRKİYE-ERMENİSTAN: ÇÖZÜM BEKLEYEN KOMŞULUK
Oya EREN 21.12.2009
UKRAINE, YES. BUT REMEMBER AFGHANISTAN AND SOMALIA, TOO - EU OBSERVER - 15.03.2022
Shada ISLAM 17.03.2022
REGIONAL COMPREHENSIVE ECONOMIC PARTNERSHIP (RCEP): A FURTHER EXPLANATION - 10.02.2022
Deniz ÜNVER 10.02.2022