International Court of Justice:

The International Court of Justice heard oral arguments Sunday night regarding the construction of pulp mills by Uruguay on the River Uruguay. Argentina brought this case before the Court asking for the Court to enjoin Uruguay’s construction of the pulp mills and determine if Uruguay is in violation of the Statute of River Uruguay (Statute). The purpose of the Statute is “to establish the common mechanisms necessary for the optimal and rational use of the Uruguay River.” Statue of the River Uruguay (1975), Chapter 1, Article 1.

Argentina asserts Uruguay is in violation of Articles 27 and 41a of the Statute, in that Uruguay failed to properly notify Argentina of the planned construction of the pulp mills and failed to properly investigate the environmental effects of the mills on the river. Uruguay began their arguments with an objection that the jurisdiction of the Court established by the Statute would preclude the Court addressing any environmental damages claims brought by Argentina and must be limited to the question if Uruguay provided proper and sufficient notice under the Statute. Uruguay argued the notice and environmental assessment they completed was sufficient under the Statute. 

Justice Robson asked Argentina if what they are asking for “. . . is a halt forever or a halt & go through proper channels?” Argentina agreed it would not be a halt forever, but rather a halt until Uruguay went through the proper procedures under the Statute. Justice Kazor questioned Uruguay on the implications of Article 56 of the Statute governing environmental concerns in a larger sense. Uruguay responded they believed that applied only to the river itself, rather than the surrounding environment. Justice Gibson followed up with a question if pollution from the surrounding environment could not affect the river. Uruguay agreed that there may be a limited effect from pollution surrounding the river, but that the effect would be negligible.  The Court’s opinion can be read here.