Details emerge of ICJ statements

Venezuela became the 37th country on Saturday to officially join the International Court of Justice (ICJ) debate on Kosovo. A resolution adopted by the UN General Assembly last year ordered the ICJ to provide an advisory opinion on whether the unilateral proclamation of independence by Kosovo's ethnic Albanians in February 2008 was in line with international law. Details emerge of ICJ statements Now B92's sources with the court say that the judges decided to accept Venezuela's opinion, even though the deadline for submitting the written statements had expired. Like most Latin American countries, Venezuela has not recognized Kosovo. Although the content of the statements remains confidential, based on the publicly expressed stance of the states participating, 22 are expected to back the proclamation of independence, while 15 will stand against it. Unofficially, B92 has learned that beside Serbia, the most extensive arguments against the secession were given by Argentina, Spain, Russia, and Cyprus. They call on international law and say it does not allow for Kosovo to secede, while Cyprus adds a list of Europe's regions that, should the court decide to support ethnic Albanians' proclamation, can be expected to follow suit and announce similar separatist moves. Moscow further adds that not a single condition had been met to treat Kosovo as a "unique case". Several countries, led by Slovenia, claim the exact opposite. Their statements are very similar in content, written on only a couple of pages and come down to interpreting the Kosovo case as "unique, without precedent in the history of international relations" and without legal consequences "for other countries" in the future. But China – which for the first time decided to take part in an ICJ debate – also says that the secession declaration was in breach of international law. Libya has submitted one of the shortest statements consisting of only several items, simply demanding that Kosovo be returned under Serbia's jurisdiction "immediately". Our reporter says that the most serious arguments in favor of Kosovo's independence came from the United States and Britain, and the Kosovo Albanian government in Pristina, represented by Britain's Michael Wood. The court also invited UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon to send his statement. The document contains three parts, with the first reminding of the process that led to the ICJ case. The second explains the establishment of the UN mission in Kosovo and cites "two relevant dates": March 1998 as the beginning of UN engagement in Kosovo, and February 2008, which is mentioned as the "closing date", i.e., the date when the proclamation was made. Ban writes about provisions of international law relevant to the case in the third part of his written statement, without expressing his position in favor or against the province's independence. Now those taking part in the debate have until July 17 to comment on other countries' statements, once again, in written form. Before it gives its "advisory opinion", the court will organize a debate, most likely at the start of next year.

Details emerge of ICJ statements

Now B92's sources with the court say that the judges decided to accept Venezuela's opinion, even though the deadline for submitting the written statements had expired.

Like most Latin American countries, Venezuela has not recognized Kosovo.

Although the content of the statements remains confidential, based on the publicly expressed stance of the states participating, 22 are expected to back the proclamation of independence, while 15 will stand against it.

Unofficially, B92 has learned that beside Serbia, the most extensive arguments against the secession were given by Argentina, Spain, Russia, and Cyprus.

They call on international law and say it does not allow for Kosovo to secede, while Cyprus adds a list of Europe's regions that, should the court decide to support ethnic Albanians' proclamation, can be expected to follow suit and announce similar separatist moves.

Moscow further adds that not a single condition had been met to treat Kosovo as a "unique case".

Several countries, led by Slovenia, claim the exact opposite. Their statements are very similar in content, written on only a couple of pages and come down to interpreting the Kosovo case as "unique, without precedent in the history of international relations" and without legal consequences "for other countries" in the future.

But China – which for the first time decided to take part in an ICJ debate – also says that the secession declaration was in breach of international law.

Libya has submitted one of the shortest statements consisting of only several items, simply demanding that Kosovo be returned under Serbia's jurisdiction "immediately".

Our reporter says that the most serious arguments in favor of Kosovo's independence came from the United States and Britain, and the Kosovo Albanian government in Priština, represented by Britain's Michael Wood.

The court also invited UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon to send his statement. The document contains three parts, with the first reminding of the process that led to the ICJ case.

The second explains the establishment of the UN mission in Kosovo and cites "two relevant dates": March 1998 as the beginning of UN engagement in Kosovo, and February 2008, which is mentioned as the "closing date", i.e., the date when the proclamation was made.

Ban writes about provisions of international law relevant to the case in the third part of his written statement, without expressing his position in favor or against the province's independence.

Now those taking part in the debate have until July 17 to comment on other countries' statements, once again, in written form.

Before it gives its "advisory opinion", the court will organize a debate, most likely at the start of next year.