ICJ hearings: Guyanese public servants bring Essequibo to life

On the opening day of oral hearings at the International Court of Justice (ICJ), Guyana’s case was not only argued through legal principles, but it was also brought to life through the voices of two long-serving public servants whose work and personal ties reflect the deep national significance of the Essequibo region.

Ambassador and Director of the Frontiers Division at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs & International Cooperation Donnette Streete and Agent for Guyana, Carl Greenidge, delivered presentations that went beyond maps and treaties, grounding the case in the lived reality of Guyanese people and the country’s history.

Addressing the court, Streete underscored what is at stake if Venezuela’s claim were to succeed, not just territory, but the essence of Guyana itself.

“Venezuela’s claim is not directed at some remote frontier land… it is directed at the heart of my country,” she said.

She explained that the area being claimed represents over 70% of Guyana’s landmass, describing it as integral to the country’s geography, economy and identity.

“For a small developing nation, the loss of nearly three-quarters of its territory would not be a border adjustment… it would be the dismemberment… the effective destruction of the country,” she told the court.

Streete’s presentation walked judges through the physical and ecological richness of the Essequibo region, from the vast Essequibo River and its tributaries to the Pakaraima Mountains and the Iwokrama rainforest.

But it was her shift from geography to people that resonated deeply.

“The Essequibo is not merely territory. It includes the people who inhabit it… including my own family,” she said.

According to Streete, more than one-third of Guyana’s population lives in the region, representing Indigenous communities and the country’s broader ethnic diversity.

“These are not abstractions,” she added, pointing to elections, schools, and public services as evidence of Guyana’s continuous governance.

Following Streete, Carl Greenidge, a veteran diplomat and former Foreign Minister, took the court through the historical foundations of the dispute, tracing Guyana’s roots back to Dutch settlement in the 16th century.

“The Dutch were the first Europeans to establish themselves in what is now Guyana,” he said, noting that they founded the colony of Essequibo as early as 1616.

Greenidge emphasised that there was no Spanish and, by extension, Venezuelan presence in the territory.

“What Venezuela does not say, and cannot say, is that there was any Spanish settlement or administration in this territory,” he stated.

He outlined how the territory later passed to Britain through formal treaties, with continuous administration leading up to Guyana’s independence in 1966.

Greenidge also detailed how the boundary dispute emerged in the 19th century, eventually leading to the 1897 Treaty of Washington and the 1899 Arbitral Award, which Guyana argues definitively settled the border.

“The history is clear,” he said, adding that it was Venezuela itself that pushed for arbitration to resolve the dispute.

Both presentations reflected more than legal preparation, they highlighted the decades of work by Guyanese public servants who have shaped and defended the country’s position.

For Streete, a career diplomat, and Greenidge, who has spent years at the centre of Guyana’s foreign policy, the case carries both professional and personal weight.

Their contributions on Monday underscored how the Essequibo controversy is not distant or abstract for Guyanese, but deeply tied to identity, livelihood and national development.

From families living in riverine communities to indigenous villages and economic hubs, the region represents a living, functioning part of Guyana.

Their presentations formed a critical foundation for Guyana’s legal team, which is expected to build on these arguments in subsequent sessions by addressing the validity of the 1899 Arbitral Award and countering Venezuela’s claims.

The hearings, which continue this week and resume again from May 8 to May 11, will ultimately lead to a final judgment by the ICJ on the boundary controversy. [Kurt Campbell]