Preah-Vihear.com Unesco's World Heritage site
THE NATION November 20, 2013 1:00 am
IT IS ABSOLUTELY wrong to say that the International Court of Justice (ICJ)’s judgement caused Thai territory to be lost to Cambodia, since the court said nothing new last week when it confirmed that Phnom Penh has sovereignty over the whole promontory of Preah Vihear.
Even the use of the term “promontory” is not exactly a new concept for Thais. The court made clear when it ruled more than half a century ago that Preah Vihear means the whole area where the temple stands.
In the court’s own words – on page 15 of the 1962 judgement – the temple “stands on a promontory of the same name, belonging to the eastern sector of the Dangrek range of mountains which, in a general way, constitutes the boundary between the two countries in this region – Cambodia to the south and Thailand to the north. Considerable portions of this range consist of a high cliff-like escarpment rising abruptly above the Cambodian plain.”
The court quoted these words again in the 14th paragraph of the judgement delivered last week to the parties.
Therefore, when the court ruled in 1962 that the Preah Vihear Temple was situated on territory under the sovereignty of Cambodia it meant the whole of Preah Vihear hill.
In fact, Thai people misperceived for at least 50 years that the area adjacent to the Hindu temple of Preah Vihearbelongs to Thailand, in accordance with the line unilaterally determined by a Thai cabinet resolution in 1962.
For at least one generation, the Thai nationalist intellectual elite misled the public by claiming that the World Court ruled that only the ruined temple belongs to Cambodia, but that the piece of land where it is standing belongs to Thailand.
The 1962 cabinet, under dictator Field Marshal Sarit Thanarat (1908-1963), decided that this country would give Cambodia only the “ruined sandstone temple and a small piece of land where it stands”.
To relinquish as small a “vicinity of the temple” as possible, the Thai cabinet gave only a 0.25-square-kilometre area on which the temple stands. Thailand then claimed Cambodia had already accepted that determination and the rest of the area adjacent to the temple belonged to Thailand.
The court said many times in its judgement last week, such as in the 11th, 41st, 42nd and 88th paragraphs, that the unilateral line making a quadrangle surrounding the temple did not represent the correct interpretation of the 1962 judgement. “The record before to the court [42nd paragraph] shows that Cambodia did not accept Thailand’s [troop] withdrawal as fully implementing the 1962 judgement.”
The ICJ last week simply gave a further explanation on the limits of the Preah Vihear promontory, offering no right for any party to exploit the 1962 judgement to claim any piece of land beyond the limits.
Of course, some parts of the explanation, notably on the territory to the north of the temple, might not be so precise, therefore the court urged both sides to deal with it “in good faith”, and prohibited either party from doing so unilaterally (the 99th paragraph).
The ICJ judgements in 1962 and 2013 were not licences for any party, either Thailand or Cambodia, to claim anything beyond their right. As long as Thailand has no rights over the land, this country has no land to lose, either.