The Commission for the Defense of Esequibo and its Atlantic Facade of the National Assembly (CODEFA-AN) held Nicolás Maduro’s dictatorship and its “clumsy peace diplomacy” responsible for the lack of defense of the Esequibo territory in recent years.
“CODEFA-AN once again calls on the Bolivarian National Armed Forces to reestablish the rule of law and protect the territorial integrity of the Republic in accordance with the Constitution, and to support the formation of a National Emergency Government,” reads part of the communiqué.
Full declaration by Parliament:
1) Article 10 of the Constitution of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela establishes that the territory of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela corresponds to that which the Captaincy General of Venezuela had before the political transformation that began on April 19th, 1810, at which time the Esequibo was part of the province of Guayana, with the modifications resulting from the treaties and arbitration awards that are not vitiated by nullity in clear reference to the nullity and invalidity of the Paris Arbitration Award of 1899.
2) Since its creation in 2018, CODEFA-AN has reaffirmed the defense of the rights of Venezuela over the territory of Esequibo and the Atlantic Facade, which is based on a State policy developed through the Geneva Agreement of 1966, with a nationalist and integrationist approach.
3) The CODEFA-AN has categorically rejected the fact that Guyana has granted concessions to international oil companies in the Atlantic Facade, in the Venezuelan Exclusive Economic Zone generated by the Orinoco River Delta, in clear disregard of the spirit of the Geneva Agreement. This position has been fully endorsed by the National Assembly since 2018, as reflected in seven (7) Parliamentary Agreements approved since that date. We reject the publication made today by the Guyana Department of Energy of a list of companies that would be pre-selected to commercialize oil that they have begun to exploit in marine and submarine areas yet to be delimited.
4) CODEFA-AN has made a systematic call to maintain the controversy in the field of mechanisms for the resolution of controversies of a political-diplomatic nature, which it reiterates on this occasion, and has communicated its position to the Diplomatic Corps accredited in Venezuela.
5) The regime headed by Nicolás Maduro and its clumsy “peace diplomacy”, has incurred in a series of errors and omissions, weakening in recent years the defense of the Esequibo and its Atlantic Facade. Now, once again, in an irresponsible and reactive manner, Guyana and only one of the many transnational oil companies operating in that country are being blamed for an alleged “imperial compromise”, when in reality they have not been sufficiently forceful in their actions in defense of our claim, which have also been surrounded by total hermeticism and opacity.
6) Maduro’s regime, widely rejected by Venezuelans when condemning us to suffer a complex humanitarian emergency, together with its Judicial Office and spurious deputies, has recently made a cynical call to all sectors of the country for the defense of the sovereignty of Esequibo and its Atlantic Facade, a few days before the oral hearings at the International Court of Justice and has also announced the convening of the Council of State. It is worth recalling that CODEFA-AN promoted the approval by the legitimate National Assembly of the “Parliamentary Agreement to reject the pretension of the Cooperative Republic of Guyana to litigate in court the controversy and the reaffirmation of the national sovereignty over Anacoco Island and the Atlantic Façade”, which in its resolution point five (5) requested the convocation of the National Defense Council to analyze the different scenarios and determine a national strategy to defend the inalienable rights of the Republic in the legitimate claim of Esequibo understood as a matter of State”. All which the regime ignored, obviating that this is an issue that required the hard work and solidarity of the whole Nation, since it is an issue of national interest of a vital nature.
7) The defense of the Esequibo and its Atlantic Facade has been a legacy of democratic governments, while dictatorships have been characterized by their leniency. This makes more valid the need to implement the proposal of a National Emergency Government with the participation of all sectors, which will be in a better position to properly defend our territorial integrity, taking the Republic out of the pitiful situation that takes us back to the end of the so-called “Yellow Liberalism”: inverterate, sick, and ungoverned by corrupt tyrants and incapable of defending one single inch of the sacred soil of the Homeland.
8) The CODEFA-AN of the legitimate National Assembly will continue to express its rejection of the judicialisation of the controversy, of the unilateral and unfriendly actions that Guyana has been carrying out by granting oil concessions and authorizing exploration campaigns in maritime zones to be delimited from the Esequibo and even in the Exclusive Economic Zone of Venezuela, as well as calling for a return to the diplomatic path within the framework of the Geneva Agreement of 1966. However, what has been said by regime officials about the alleged sending of “NOTAS DE PROTESTA A LAS TRANSNACIONALES”, shows their clumsiness and lack of expertise, given that the Notes of Protest are addressed to the Governments of the Nation States involved, while communications can be sent notifying such companies of the legal uncertainty of the concession contracts under which they operate.
9) CODEFA-AN again calls on the Bolivarian National Armed Forces to restore the rule of law and to protect the territorial integrity of the Republic in accordance with the Constitution, and to support the formation of a national emergency government.
10) CODEFA-AN reiterates its commitment to the historical and incontrovertible position of Venezuela, namely:
(a) The International Court of Justice has no jurisdiction to hear the claim unilaterally attempted by the Cooperative Republic of Guyana on March 29th, 2018. Venezuela is not a signatory to the Optional Clause on Compulsory Jurisdiction, enshrined in Article 36 of the Court’s Statute, nor is it a party to multilateral treaties that recognize the jurisdiction of the Court.
b) The Geneva Agreement of 1966 does not contain any express provision on the acceptance of the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice, since its purpose is to seek an amicable settlement of the dispute and the Secretary General of the United Nations cannot substitute for the clear and free consent that Venezuela must give to the jurisdiction of the Court.
(c) Guyana should return to good offices to resolve the dispute or agree with Venezuela on another means of peaceful settlement of a political-diplomatic nature which is appropriate under the provisions of the Geneva Agreement of 1966.
(d) Once the land dispute between the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela and the Cooperative Republic of Guyana has been resolved, the maritime delimitation, which is another pending dispute, will have to be dealt with, as provided for in international public law and in the 1966 Geneva Agreement itself.