Reflexiones sobre el derecho internacional y la delimitación marítima. Comentario del fallo de la Corte Internacional de Justicia en el caso de Perú c. Chile

Abstract

accordance with the subsidiary solution prescribed by International Maritime Law as the Court has interpreted it. Moreover, the judgment recognized the starting-point of the agreed boundary as the intersection of the geographical parallel passing through Boundary Marker nº 1 with the low-water line. Five declarations, five dissenting opinionsone individual and another common to four judges-and two separate opinions were enclosed to the judgment. The proliferation of individual positions makes evident the existence of irreconcilable differences in the Court's reasoning, which seem to indicate the adoption of a compromise solution without solid legal bases.