Case Concerning Maritime Delimitation and Territorial Questions Between Qatar

and
Bahrain

(Qatar v. Bahrain)

Facts:

The case between Qatar and Bahrain involved a longstanding territorial

sovereignty and maritime boundary dispute between the two gulf neighbors.Both
parties agreed on an international agreement for their said territories with binding
force in their relations, however Bahrain alleged that the minutes that held in their
agreement were no less than negotiations and was not deemed to be an
international agreement.The court then stated that in order for there to be a treaty
several objectives or requirements must be upheld and it furthermore reiterated
Article 2 paragraph 1 of the Vienna Convention that defined a treaty as an
international agreement concluded between states in writing and governed by
international law. In the said minutes,Bahrain refers to it as a consultation
between two foreign ministers providing for the good offices of certain states
while Qatar asserts otherwise as it was an agreement between the states on
their territories and jurisdiction on a formula that was proposed by Bahrain to
them.

Bahrain’s belief of these consultations was contrary to the court as it stated that
the minutes are not simple records of a meeting, that they don’t give just the
summary discussion of the parties and their agreements of disagreements but
also enumerates the commitment of one state to another, this then creates rights
and obligations between the parties in international law hence a International
Agreement. This was opposed by Bahrain, stating that its signing of the minutes
was not intended to legally bind themselves into an agreement and is against
their constitution as it was the minister’s understanding that he had signified as a
statement recording a political meeting not a binding agreement.Qatar further
said that their meeting or exchange of letters constitute an ‘express agreement’.

Issue:

Whether or not Bahrain is a party to an international agreement by being a

signatory for the meeting’s minutes?

Ruling:

Yes, the court then also sided with Qatar, pursuant to Article 2 of the Vienna
Convention Treaties are written legally binding instruments, setting out the rights
and obligations of parties that are governed by international law. Its requisites (a)
parties that entered the agreement has the capacity to do so; (b) that is was
entered by representatives; (c) it was entered without attendance of duress,
mistake or fraud; (d) that it has a lawful subject matter and object. These make a
valid treaty and; (e) that it must be ratified with the constitutional process.

In this case no treaty was made but an international agreement between parties
which is valid as per its recorded minutes and meetings. The court sided with
Qatar, finding that the exchanges of letters were international agreements
creating rights and obligations for the parties, and that under the terms of those
agreements, the parties had undertaken to submit to the court the whole of the
dispute between them, as circumscribed by the Bahrain formula.