"This vicinity is defined in the Annex I map," Hor Namhong told reporters after the session on Thursday.
Supalak Ganjanakhudee
The Nation
The Hague April 20, 2013 1:00 am
Thailand yesterday rebuffed Cambodia's use of the Annex I map, saying it could only be used to indicate Cambodia's sovereignty over the Preah Vihear Temple and that it never marked a clear boundary between the two countries.
Thai agent Virachai Plasai said Cambodia had discredited all other maps used in the hearing about the 1962 World Court judgement on the issue and insisted on sticking with the 1:200,000-scale Annex I map for its own benefit.
Thailand and Cambodia are caught in a conflict over the Preah Vihear Hindu temple. In 1962, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruled that the temple complex came under the sovereignty of Cambodia and ordered Thailand to withdraw its troops from the temple and its vicinity.
Now, Phnom Penh is asking the ICJ to interpret its ruling, saying the vicinity of the temple should match the pre-existing boundary in accordance with the French-made Annex I map.
Cambodian Foreign Minister Hor Namhong said the operative clause in the 1962 judgement suggested that the temple and its vicinity came under the sovereignty of his country. After Wednesday's session, Judge Abdulqawi Ahmed Yusuf asked both sides to define - either in maps or graphics - the "vicinity" of Preah Vihear that they have been debating about over the past few days.
"This vicinity is defined in the Annex I map," Hor Namhong told reporters after the session on Thursday.
He went on to say that the 1962 judgement indicated that both sides had already accepted the boundary line between the two countries.
The court requires a written reply from both sides by April 26 and expects them to provide the definition by May 3.
On Thursday, Cambodian counsel Rodman Bundy rejected the map presented by Romanian expert Alina Miron on Thailand's behalf, saying it was misconceived.
Bundy said the map in Annex 85d, presented to the court by Miron on Wednesday, only indicated the location of the temple and was not used in the 1962 judgement. He then raised the Annex I map that was used in the court 50 years ago, saying this was the one that Cambodia was seeking an interpretation of.
Hor Namhong told reporters that Thailand had produced several maps to show to the court, when in reality the court had based its 1962 judgement on the Annex 1 map only.
Bundy also told the court that the line drawn in a Thai Cabinet resolution in 1962 had no rationale as to the temple's vicinity nor did it have any connection to the border marked in the Annex 85d map presented by the Thai counsel.
He went on to say that Cambodia had never accepted the boundary drawn in the 1962 Thai Cabinet resolution and that unlike Thailand's Prince Damrong in 1930, the late King Norodom Sihanouk never recognised Thai sovereignty in the territory near Preah Vihear. In fact, then-Prince Norodom protested against the resolution.
He was referring to a comment made by the Thai counsel saying that the 1930 visit to Preah Vihear by then-interior minister Prince Damrong could be regarded as a recognition of French sovereignty over the temple.
The Nation
The Hague April 20, 2013 1:00 am
Thailand yesterday rebuffed Cambodia's use of the Annex I map, saying it could only be used to indicate Cambodia's sovereignty over the Preah Vihear Temple and that it never marked a clear boundary between the two countries.
Thai agent Virachai Plasai said Cambodia had discredited all other maps used in the hearing about the 1962 World Court judgement on the issue and insisted on sticking with the 1:200,000-scale Annex I map for its own benefit.
Thailand and Cambodia are caught in a conflict over the Preah Vihear Hindu temple. In 1962, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruled that the temple complex came under the sovereignty of Cambodia and ordered Thailand to withdraw its troops from the temple and its vicinity.
Now, Phnom Penh is asking the ICJ to interpret its ruling, saying the vicinity of the temple should match the pre-existing boundary in accordance with the French-made Annex I map.
Cambodian Foreign Minister Hor Namhong said the operative clause in the 1962 judgement suggested that the temple and its vicinity came under the sovereignty of his country. After Wednesday's session, Judge Abdulqawi Ahmed Yusuf asked both sides to define - either in maps or graphics - the "vicinity" of Preah Vihear that they have been debating about over the past few days.
"This vicinity is defined in the Annex I map," Hor Namhong told reporters after the session on Thursday.
He went on to say that the 1962 judgement indicated that both sides had already accepted the boundary line between the two countries.
The court requires a written reply from both sides by April 26 and expects them to provide the definition by May 3.
On Thursday, Cambodian counsel Rodman Bundy rejected the map presented by Romanian expert Alina Miron on Thailand's behalf, saying it was misconceived.
Bundy said the map in Annex 85d, presented to the court by Miron on Wednesday, only indicated the location of the temple and was not used in the 1962 judgement. He then raised the Annex I map that was used in the court 50 years ago, saying this was the one that Cambodia was seeking an interpretation of.
Hor Namhong told reporters that Thailand had produced several maps to show to the court, when in reality the court had based its 1962 judgement on the Annex 1 map only.
Bundy also told the court that the line drawn in a Thai Cabinet resolution in 1962 had no rationale as to the temple's vicinity nor did it have any connection to the border marked in the Annex 85d map presented by the Thai counsel.
He went on to say that Cambodia had never accepted the boundary drawn in the 1962 Thai Cabinet resolution and that unlike Thailand's Prince Damrong in 1930, the late King Norodom Sihanouk never recognised Thai sovereignty in the territory near Preah Vihear. In fact, then-Prince Norodom protested against the resolution.
He was referring to a comment made by the Thai counsel saying that the 1930 visit to Preah Vihear by then-interior minister Prince Damrong could be regarded as a recognition of French sovereignty over the temple.
13 comments:
"This vicinity is defined in the Annex I map," Hor Namhong told reporters after the session on Thursday.
=Now what part the Siem thieves don't understand? These Siem thieves show up in court used a simple oral argument without proper documents to prove their case? This is so ridiculous! For Siem thieves have no shame and no character and all the Siem thieves want to do is to steal even in broad daylight where everybody can see them! Shame on the Siem criminals!
`Vicinity' clarification due April 26
• Published: 18 Apr 2013 at 10.37
• Online news:
Thailand and Cambodia have been given a deadline of April 26 by an International Court of Justice judge to submit documents backing up each country's view of the meaning of "vicinity" around the Hindu Preah Vihear temple, Thai delegation chief Virachai Plasai said Thursday.
The two countries must then provide counter-arguments within another week, by May 3. The deadline was imposed by a single judge, not the court, said Ambassador Virachai. Submissions can include old and new maps, or a description of the coordinates.
He described the request by Somalian Judge Abdulqawi Ahmed Yusuf as normal procedure in international courts and tribunals, including the World Trade Organisation and other arbitration processes. Both sides get time to make written submissions.
"This offers a good opportunity for Thailand to give more information (to the court), and Thai people should not panic" at this request, he said.
The presentation on maps on Wednesday lasted around 40 minutes, and was the result of thorough research for three years by Romanian lawyer Alina Miron. She was inexperienced at the ICJ, he said, but she deserves trust because of her skill in pointing out to the court the several versions of the map presented by Cambodia. Mr Virachai, as a result, told the judges Cambodia had "fabricated" a key map during its testimony on Monday.
Mr Virachai said the court had used two maps - the Annex I map known as the 1:200,000 scale map to prove the temple is under Cambodian sovereignty, and a second map, called the 85D map, which is used to identify the disputed area.
"The 85D map is the only map created by the court," he said. "We presented the large 4.5-by-3 metre map but the court cut out just a tiny part to make a new map, which is different from other maps complied in the documents. It is important that we have pointed out to the court," he noted.
Mr Virachai, who is Thai ambassador to The Hague, said he was satisfied with the oral statement by the Thai team on Wednesday. He described it as well sequenced, and said it reached the conclusion that the ICJ has no authority to consider the case brought by Cambodia.
http://www.bangkokpost.com/breakingnews/345855/vicinity-clarification-due-april-26
Thailand: ICJ has 'nothing to consider'
• Published: 17 Apr 2013 at 21.52
• Online news:
Thailand asked the International Court of Justice (ICJ) Wednesday to ignore the dispute with Cambodia over the land around the Preach Vihear temple or else rule there is nothing to interpret in the case.
Surapong Tovichakchaikul, Thai Foreign Minister and Deputy Prime Minister attending the trial on the temple dispute, rejected the claim there is a dispute between Thailand and Cambodia on the rights over what is the "vicinity" of the Preah Vihear temple.
At a briefing at The Hague after Thailand wound up its first session of oral statement to the panel, he summarised the Thai position in six points.
1. Cambodia's interpretation of the 1962 ruling on Preah Vihear distorted the court's procedure, and attempted to make the current case into a kind of an appeal, where the court should rule, even though it specifically refused to rule on "vicinity" in its ruling of more than 50 years ago.
2. Cambodians demand that the court consider the 4.6-sq km of disputed land did not arise in the original case, but Cambodia is bringing it up now only because it wants to register the area as a World Heritage site.
3. The 4.6-sq km now brought up at the court is not the "vicinity” addressed in the 1962 ruling, but much larger. The "vicinity" in the old ruling was only 0.35 sq km.
4. The Thai cabinet’s resolution of 1962, which Thailand always has upheld, dealt with the old “vicinity”. Cambodia never opposed that Thai government resolution, and never protested that Thailand kept troops in the area. Clearly, both sides have a mutual understanding, and there is no need for a new interpretation.
5. Thailand has exhibited to the court problems with the documents presented by Cambodia. Cambodia has several maps cited as “the map in Annex 1”. The map presented in the old case is different from the Annex 1 presented in this case. Cartographic lines on Cambodia's map do not match actual land. Cambodia even has changed the map that the Thai side presented to the court in the old case.
6. Thailand has scrupulously followed the temporary measures ordered by the court on July 18, 2011. There has been no armed clashes along the border since then, and no deaths. Cambodia and Thailand have discussed and agreed on operational procedure. Moreover, the relationship between the two countries is going well, as there are other channels to solve problems. Regarding the border issue which Cambodia has tried to seek the interpretation, there still exists negotiation mechanisms under the Memorandum of Understanding on the Thai-Cambodia border signed in 2000.
http://www.bangkokpost.com/breakingnews/345772/thailand-icj-has-nothing-to-consider
by law, siem can say whatever they want, but at the end, it is the court that finds that is just and and legal and what is not! this is why cambodia sought the icj for clarification and interpretation in the first place. who is siem think they are telling the court not to do their job? the question now is: should the court listen to siem's rankling and contempt of court or should the court procede with cambodia's request to find justice? what do you think? sound more and more like siem have political problem in their own country than it is the problem of cambodia, you know. when the court decided to procede with the case, cambodia will get justice, watch. i say the court should procede with this case as requested by cambodia. we know siem is desperate and rankling with contempt of court and violation of the 1962 ruling. everything siem said is their last attempt to steal cambodia's preah vihear, that's the whole point underneath it all, you know. siem committed too much illegal activities like created their illegal maps and violated the 1962 icj ruling and rankling on with the ruling by allowing their handful of small, extremist people in bangcock to conduct their illegal activities and show contempt of court, etc. the court do not side with the thieves although the thieves will try to do everything to defend themselves. cambodia will gave evidence and tell the court so the court will know exactly what is going. the court knows that in the center of this all is the preah vihear temple which is forever cambodia's temple. the court can tell siem that the annex I map is the legal map, not any other maps. of course, siem can present to the court many of their unilateral maps, but the court can toss those maps out and take into consideration the annex I map only as they ruled based on the annex I map in 1962. the case is about the interpretation and clarification of the 1962 ruling, not about any new claim of 4.6km2 like the siem thief claim to be. the annex I map is what cambodia always use as the vicinity of the preah vihear temple, never siem's illegal/unilateral maps. for your information, it's funny how siem brought up the 85d map which the court tossed out as it was the unilateral/illegal map claim by siem. the 85d map they refer to was only use for illustration as illegal map; only the annex I map was the official map from the french era. in reality siem is fighting a losing battle here, really! maybe that's why they don't want cambodia to request the court to interpret and clarify the map they used in their 1962 ruling.
we'll get the final judgment decission in around september or october later this year. the court is inclined to serve justice for cambodia as request by cambodia from the look of it all.
with this clarification, cambodia and siem can use the correct map to redemarcate the neglected old borderlines created and ratified from the french era. this way siem cannot use their own maps to claim from cambodia because if it's not the same as the annex I map, cambodia can never accept that, you know. it's a matter of the legal map, not the siem many unilateral maps we see today, really!
His Excellency Hor Nam Hong is doing an excellent job sticking his gun about the Annex I Map used in 1962 decision made by ICJ. Other maps proposed by Thailand ought to be rejected as it did during the proceed back in 1959 to June 1962. If Annex I Map was the map used in 1962 judgement, the same Annex I Map ought to be used in the same form of evidential hearing at this present time. Mr. Bundy who represents Cambodia in this matter is also doing a great job by asking the court to use the same Annex I Map which was used in 1962. If Thailand is trying to find to find the guilty party Thailand ought to look toward Prince Domrong who visited Preah Vihear with King Sihanouk at the time and yet Prince Domrong has never once mentioned or objected the 1962 ruling rendered by ICJ. This alone will tell the world that Prince Domrong realized that Preah Vihear is indeed belongs to Cambodia whom is its righteous owner of this great Empire.
Phnom Penh Post
according to the 1907 treaty, the annex I map was the official map agreed by both countries, so any map diferent from this map is illegal and unilateral by siem. cambodia can only accept the map that is legal. siem can just print up any map they want to stake claim to cambodia's lands and territories and temples, etc, that doesn't change the 1907 map, you know! 85d map was only used for illustration to the court that it was siem's unilateral map. only the 1907 map or annex I map as referred to by cambodia is accepted as official and legally binded, period! if siem can't accept the 1907 map, then siem is wrong, only the official map from 1907 is accepted. can't compare sihanouk's silent to damrong's visit to preah vihear, for siem information, 1907 came before 1930, you know! and the map was legally binded in 1907 that created the present-day cambodia international boundary lines, you know. without this 1907 map or annex I map, there would be no international boundary lines on the southeast asia pensinula, you know. the 85d map does not create the boundary line of cambodia, it was the 1907 map or the annex I map that created cambodia's borders and was the only one legally binded, period!
on the 85d map above, the red line is siem unilateral claim, whereas the blue line above it is the legal annex I map of cambodia. 85d map was used for illustration purpose only, it's not the legally binding map like the annex I map! i have no doubt that the 85d map brought up by siem team was tossed out by the court in 1962. siem is desperate, they will try to bring up anything in their desperate and final attempt to steal from cambodia, you know. this court case is nothing new, it's cambodia's request for the court to clarify and interpret the 1962 for record so siem can stop violate and show contempt of court from 1962 ruling, that's all!
cambodia can only accept the annex I map only as vicinity of our preah vihear temple!
Agree, but to be exact it was the 1904 Map that led to the 1907. However, France ought to offer some insights about Cambodian territory since France was the only nation that entered into the agreement with Cambodia as the Protectorate State which approved by Napoleon. In addition, France must tell the world that France was the country that awarded Civil Administration to Vietnamese without Cambodian Consent during its occupation over Corchinchina. Before France left Cambodia, France ought to return Corchinchina back to its rightful owner. I strongly believe Corchinchina will become apart of Cambodia once more when the world knows the truth about Vietnamese's evil plan to annihilate Cambodia.
Vietnam has never respect Cambodia as a sovereignt nation with great civilization. Vietnam has always think that Vietnam itself is more superior than that of Cambodia, but Vietnam has nothing to show for when it comes to great monuments built by their ancestors, unlike Cambodia as a nation that has left her marks on planet earth for all to see. Although Cambodia as a Kingdom is on a losing streak, but the next wave of Cambodian children are more educated than their predecessors, thus this next wave can think and become a very proactive toward rebuilding Cambodia into Great Pearl of Asia and not depending on Communist China and Vietnam. Once we have our house clean, illegal immigrants will have a tougher time to find their refuge in Cambodia. Our network of laws and database system designed with strict infrastructures that will capture those who violate Cambodian laws and be forced to either reform or extradite and or exile.
Phnom Penh Post
Khmer not accepted anything these day from this government is not represent for Khmer it for Hanoi ,if Thai do something with this story ,we Khmer not agree at all unless Hanoi leave our country first .Khmer around the world.
12:38am, i know. khmer people in the next generation to come are wiser, more educated and more open and more knowledgeable and more intelligent and know more about the world than say the previous generation of khmer people. this is the cycle of civilization as we know it. greatness of a nation does come and go because the old people die, the young people are being born, thus the cycle of civilization again and again. remember cambodia existed for about 2000 years already and within that 2000 years cambodia and its people saw the both the weakness and greatness of our country we called cambodia. so whose to say cambodia's bad time stay the same. i believe can change for the better and will be so in the near future despite all the past tragedy and suffering our parents and grandparents had to endure and went through. the future of cambodia and khmer people will be better and better as the cycle of civilization moves on and on. may god bless my beloved, beloved cambodia country on earth.
also vicinity in cambodia view is siem cannot block access to our preah vihear temple like they claim when they and their media kept writing to say the the temple belongs to cambodia but easy access to it is in siem country. i say not! easy access to it is in accordance to the annex I map, the official map of cambodia, really!
why siem want to be a part of cambodia's preah vihear? the world now know more about preah vihear temple of cambodia, why siem thief still want to steal it from cambodia by blocking easy access and then stake unilateral claim to the vicinity of the preah vihear temple in order to block easy access to our temple, why? didn't they know that the whole of siem country was once in the khmer empire of angkor era? i though siem was supposed to be more educated than cambodia because they never have war and killing fields in their country, so why then siem behave uncivilized and primitive like this, why? why can't siem keep their own political infighting in their own country, why they have to drag cambodia and our preah vihear for them to use as an excuse to make themself look bad, why? maybe siem think cambodia and the world was too stupid and ignorant to see or know that. i'm wonder what do other educated people of the world think about all this siem rankling about and contempt of court, etc. what you think of siem people or country nowadays? they must be heading to a decline, you know.
my country cambodia is beautiful and rich. don't you love my country cambodia? i do!
Post a Comment